1.43.3.1 2009 Hartland Landfill Groundwater Surface Water and Leachate Monitoring Program Report

Environment
Capital Regional District
Hartland Landfill Groundwater, Surface

Water and Leachate Monitoring Program
Annual Final Report (April 2009 to March
2010)
Prepared by:
AECOM
3292 Production Way, Floor 4 604 444 6400 tel
Burnaby, BC, Canada V5A 4R4 604 294 8597 fax
www.aecom.com
Project Number:
60158830
Date:
December 2010
AECOM Capital Regional District Hartland Landfill Groundwater, Surface Water and
Leachate Monitoring Program Annual Final Report
(April 2009 to March 2010)
Statement of Qualifications and Limitations
The attached Report (the “Report”) has been prepared by AECOM Canada Ltd. (“Consultant”) for the benefit of the
client (“Client”) in accordance with the agreement between Consultant and Client, including the scope of work
detailed therein (the “Agreement”).
The information, data, recommendations and conclusions contained in the Report (collectively, the “Information”):
 is subject to the scope, schedule, and other constraints and limitations in the Agreement and the
qualifications contained in the Report (the “Limitations”)
 represents Consultant’s professional judgement in light of the Limitations and industry standards for the
preparation of similar reports
 may be based on information provided to Consultant which has not been independently verified
 has not been updated since the date of issuance of the Report and its accuracy is limited to the time
period and circumstances in which it was collected, processed, made or issued
 must be read as a whole and sections thereof should not be read out of such context
 was prepared for the specific purposes described in the Report and the Agreement
 in the case of subsurface, environmental or geotechnical conditions, may be based on limited testing and
on the assumption that such conditions are uniform and not variable either geographically or over time
Consultant shall be entitled to rely upon the accuracy and completeness of information that was provided to it and has
no obligation to update such information. Consultant accepts no responsibility for any events or circumstances that may
have occurred since the date on which the Report was prepared and, in the case of subsurface, environmental or
geotechnical conditions, is not responsible for any variability in such conditions, geographically or over time.
Consultant agrees that the Report represents its professional judgement as described above and that the
Information has been prepared for the specific purpose and use described in the Report and the Agreement, but
Consultant makes no other representations, or any guarantees or warranties whatsoever, whether express or
implied, with respect to the Report, the Information or any part thereof.
The Report is to be treated as confidential and may not be used or relied upon by third parties, except:
 as agreed in writing by Consultant and Client

 as required by law
 for use by governmental reviewing agencies
Consultant accepts no responsibility, and denies any liability whatsoever, to parties other than Client who may
obtain access to the Report or the Information for any injury, loss or damage suffered by such parties arising from
their use of, reliance upon, or decisions or actions based on the Report or any of the Information (“improper use of
the Report”), except to the extent those parties have obtained the prior written consent of Consultant to use and rely
upon the Report and the Information. Any damages arising from improper use of the Report or parts thereof shall be
borne by the party making such use.
This Statement of Qualifications and Limitations is attached to and forms part of the Report and any use of the
Report is subject to the terms hereof.
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx

AECOM
3292 Production Way, Floor 4 604 444 6400 tel
Burnaby, BC, Canada V5A 4R4 604 294 8597 fax
www.aecom.com
December 21, 2010
Capital Regional District

Environmental Sustainability
625 Fisgard St.
P.O. Box 1000
Victoria, BC V8W 2S6
Attention: Ms. Mary Anne Fillipone, M.Sc., P.Geo.

Program Manager, GeoEnvironmental Programs
Project No: 60158830

Regarding: Hartland Landfill Groundwater, Surface Water and Leachate Monitoring
Program Annual Final Report (April 2009 to March 2010)
Dear Ms. Fillipone,
We are pleased to present our final report on the 2009/10 Hartland landfill groundwater, surface water
and leachate monitoring program. The report presents our interpretation of the impact of the Hartland
landfill on surface and groundwater resources based on monitoring data collected in 2009 and the
early part of 2010. Our main findings are outlined in an executive summary at the front of the report.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to provide this report. If you have any questions please
contact Ryan Mills in our Burnaby office at 604-444-6498.
Yours very truly,

AECOM Canada Ltd.
Robert C. Dickin, M.Sc., P.Geo.

Technical Director – Hydrogeology
Rob.Dickin@aecom.com
RM:gc
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt B.Docx

Distribution List
# of Hard Copies PDF Required Association / Company Name

8 1 Capital Regional District
2 1 AECOM
AECOM Signatures
Report Prepared By:

Ryan D. Mills, M.Sc.
Hydrogeologist
Stephen Dickin, B.Sc.

Hydrogeology and Geosciences Assistant
May Quach, M.Sc.

Aquatic Ecologist
Report Reviewed By:

Robert C. Dickin, M.Sc., P.Geo.
Technical Director and Senior
Hydrogeologist
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt B.Docx

Executive Summary
Groundwater and surface water quality in the vicinity of Hartland landfill has been monitored since 1983. Annual
monitoring reports have been issued since 1988. This report presents interpretation of the groundwater and surface
water quality, as well as the leachate containment and collection systems, based on monitoring data collected
between April 2009 and March 2010. As in previous years, the data set covering this period is referred to as the
2009/10 data throughout this report. The 2009/10 monitoring data are presented and compared to previous
monitoring results to identify important trends and evaluate compliance with water quality criteria.
Based on our review of historical data and interpretation of groundwater, surface water and leachate quality data
collected between April 2009 and March 2010, the annual monitoring program provides an effective assessment of
landfill performance and compliance related to groundwater, surface water and leachate flow and quality. The
following conclusions are drawn based on our interpretation of the 2009/10 data:
Quality Assurance and Quality Control
 Relative percent differences (RPD’s) and relative standard deviations (RSD’s) calculated for groundwater,
surface water and leachate analyses in 2009/10 indicate that the data is acceptably precise for the purposes of
this report. Standard operating procedures (SOP) for groundwater, surface water and leachate quality sampling
should be developed to ensure that data integrity is maintained. The development of an SOP for groundwater
level collection should also be considered. CRD is currently in the process of reviewing SOP’s and updating
them as necessary.
Groundwater Flow
 Groundwater flow in 2009/10 generally followed previously established patterns. Regional groundwater flows
from Mount Work northeast to the north-south trending valley that underlies the northern portions of the Phase 1
and Phase 2 landfill. The majority of groundwater flow is northward. Most of the northward groundwater flow in
the bedrock below the landfill is captured by the Phase 2 basin leachate collection system, springs discharging
to the lower lagoon and the Phase 1 north purge well system (wells 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8).
 There is a small amount of southeastward groundwater flow from the south end of the Phase 1 landfill toward
Killarney Lake. Southeastward groundwater flow below the landfill is constrained by a clay berm and a bedrock
grout curtain installed at the south end of the landfill and by pumping of the south purge wells (P1, P2, P3 and
P4). Higher pumping elevations in P1 as a result of changes in the hydraulic behaviour of the well resulted in
reduced leachate capture between 2006 and 2009, and again from December 2009 through 2010. An additional
purge well (P10) has been installed adjacent to P1 and is anticipated to augment leachate collection in this area
of the landfill once it is operational.
 Groundwater monitors east of Phase 1 (locations 76 and 18) confirm flow from east to west toward the landfill,
preventing off-site migration to the east.
 Groundwater elevations north of the Phase 2 landfill remained within seasonal ranges. Inward hydraulic
gradients toward the Phase 2 basin were maintained throughout 2009/10. The effectiveness of the hydraulic
trap needs to be assessed as Phase 2 refuse extends further north and additional lifts are constructed.
Additional leachate containment measures may need to be implemented at the north end of the Phase 2 landfill
to mitigate the potential for off-site leachate migration. In future phases of development, leachate levels within
Phase 2 need to be monitored on a regular basis.
 Pressure transducers installed in wells 40-1-1, 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8 help delineate the size of the drawdown
cone surrounding the purge wells and will provide long-term monitoring of purge well performance at the north
end of Phase 1.
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx i

 Leachate mounding continues to be present in Phase 1 of the landfill. Strong downward gradients are present
within the refuse. Similar leachate mounding conditions occur in the Phase 2 landfill as indicated by groundwater
elevations at locations 82 and 83. Both wells at location 84 were damaged and were replaced with permanently
installed pressure transducers in October 2010. Together with information collected from wells at locations 82
and 83, this should provide adequate monitoring of leachate levels in Phase 2 in its current configuration.
Groundwater Quality
The groundwater quality results for 2009/10 were similar to those measured in 2008/09 and landfill leachate-
impacted groundwater is contained within the landfill property. At the north end of the landfill, leachate-affected
groundwater extends just north of the unlined lower leachate lagoon and the lined upper leachate lagoon. South of
the landfill, leachate-affected groundwater extends approximately 200 m south. Leachate impacts are confined to the
landfill footprint on the east side of Phase 1 and are inferred to extend to the west side of the Phase 2 landfill.
Groundwater affected by historical composting and yard waste processing and current aggregate stockpiling
activities at the Hartland North Pad is inferred to extend just beyond the footprint of the Hartland North pad and
extend slightly north of Willis Point Road. Land use north of Willis Point Road consists of Mt. Work Regional Park
and the Dominion Government Property rifle range.
Our review of the 2009/10 groundwater quality data revealed the following:
North of the Landfill
 Operation of the north purge well system (wells 80-1-0-P8 and 52-4-0-P7) continues to mitigate leachate impacts
north of the landfill, as indicated by relatively stable or slowly decreasing concentrations of leachate indicator
parameters at locations 20, 21 and 40. The operation of purge well 80-1-0-P8 since 2008 and rehabilitation of
well 52-4-0-P7 in 2008 has reinforced leachate containment and conveyance measures north of Phase 1. These
wells should continue to be operated in conjunction with one another and water quality should continue to be
closely monitored for leachate impacts at locations 20 and 21. Water quality northwest of the lower leachate
lagoon (well 40-1-1) remained impacted by leachate during 2009/10 and should continue to be closely
monitored. Recent improvements to the north purge well system combined with regular well and pump
maintenance is anticipated to further improve water quality in this area.
 Well 36-3-1 and 37-3-1 continue to exhibit elevated concentrations of leachate indicator parameters in 2009/10.
The slightly impaired water quality at these locations is likely related to the Phase 2 leachate storage test
conducted in September 2008 and ongoing waste deposition in the area upgradient of locations 36 and 37.
Shallow groundwater quality should continue to be closely monitored at these locations to verify the
effectiveness of leachate containment. Cement used during well construction continues to impact well water
quality in wells 36-2-1 and 37-2-1, as it has since these wells were installed.
 Significantly elevated conductivity, ammonia, chloride, nitrite, iron and manganese concentrations were
observed at location 38 in February 2008, indicating possible leachate impacts at this location. Follow-up
sampling during 2008, 2009 and the early part of 2010 indicates that all parameters have returned to
concentrations near background levels and that leachate is not impacting groundwater quality at this location.
The historically elevated concentrations are likely related to the remains of dead amphibians found in well 38.
 In the shallow well located at the base of the Toutle valley (27-1-2), sulphate continues to be present at
concentrations above historical (background) concentrations throughout the year. This is likely related to
ongoing quarrying, aggregate stockpiling and road building activities in this area. The deep well at this location
(27-1-1) shows no signs of impacts from aggregate production or stockpiling.
 Water quality along Willis Point Road north of the landfill at locations 29, 30 and potentially 31 continues to be
impacted by road salt application on Willis Point Road. Concentrations of conductivity and chloride show
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx ii

seasonal fluctuations and exhibit highest concentrations in winter months, while ammonia concentrations remain
relatively low.
 Water quality at location 78, located on the bedrock ridge north of Phase 2, continued to report slightly elevated
concentrations of conductivity, nitrate, sulphate and manganese in 2009/10. Additional well development efforts
were focused on this well in 2008 and water quality at this location appears to be slowly improving. The
presence of mineralized bedrock near the well may be the cause of some elevated parameters, but elevated
concentrations of conductivity, nitrate and sulphate could also be related to aggregate stockpiling within the
Phase 2 basin.
Hartland North Pad
 Groundwater quality downgradient of the Hartland North Pad continues to be affected by historical composting
and aggregate stockpiling activities with elevated concentrations of conductivity, ammonia, nitrate, sulphate and
chloride at locations 41, 42, 43, 55 and 56. Elevated concentrations of conductivity, sulphate and nitrate at
locations 41, 43, 55, and potentially 56 indicate continued increasing groundwater impacts associated with the
aggregate storage and stockpiling on the Hartland North pad. Water quality exceeded British Columbia Water
Quality Guidelines for: conductivity on all sampling dates in wells at locations 41, for manganese at locations 41
and 42; and for iron at location 42. Conductivity concentrations at locations 43 and 55 were also above
guidelines on all sampling dates. A statistical trend analysis for data collected between 2005 and 2010 indicated
an increasing trend in sulphate concentrations at locations 41, 55 and 56, increasing conductivity at location 55
and decreasing chloride concentrations at location 42. Overall, this indicates slowly declining impacts from
historical composting activities and increased impacts from aggregate stockpiling on the Hartland north pad.
Water quality in the vicinity of the Hartland North Pad should continue to be monitored closely for any impacts
associated with the storage of large quantities of aggregate.
South of the Landfill
 Water quality south of the landfill continued to exhibit elevated concentrations of some leachate indicator
parameters (conductivity, chloride and ammonia) in 2009/10, as it has for nearly two decades. Groundwater
quality appears to be relatively stable or gradually improving at locations 4, 19, 71, 72 and 73. Improvements in
water quality are largely the result of leachate collection and containment measures put in place in 2001 and
prior.
 Water quality at locations 3 and 85, 60 and 7 degraded in 2009/10. Following a large precipitation event in
2006/07, the behaviour of the most productive south purge well (P1) changed, resulting in higher water levels
and inadequate drawdown and leachate collection south of the landfill between 2007 and 2009, and migration of
leachate southward from Phase 1 toward wells 60 and 7. In 2009, a higher capacity 1.26 L/s (20 gpm)
submersible pump was installed to increase drawdown in P1. While the submersible pump was effective in
drawing down water levels, it required more maintenance than the lower capacity bladder pumps in the adjacent
purge wells. In 2010, an additional purge well (P10) was added to increase pumping capacity and augment the
south leachate collection system. Over the past five years, there have been statistically significant increasing
trends in leachate indicator parameters in wells 60-3-1 (conductivity and chloride), 60-2-1 (chloride) and 4-2-1
(chloride). Some groundwater quality parameters have decreased slightly in wells 60-2-1 (ammonia and
sulphate), 71-1-1 (conductivity and sulphate), 72-2-1 (chloride and sulphate), 73-1-1 (conductivity), 73-2-1
(ammonia and sulphate) and 4-4-1 (chloride). An increasing trend in sulphate concentrations was also observed
in well 72-3-1. Overall, this suggests slightly greater impacts due to leachate migrating south from Phase 1, and
slowly declining impacts related to aggregate placement during construction of the bin facility in 2009 or road salt
application on Hartland Avenue.
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx iii

East of the Landfill
 Leachate impacts are confined to the landfill footprint on the east side of Phase 1. Measured groundwater
elevations have consistently indicated flow from the bedrock ridge along the east side of the site towards the
landfill at locations 18 and 76.
Domestic Well Water Quality
As part of the CRD’s groundwater quality monitoring program, eleven domestic drinking water wells within 2
kilometres of the landfill were sampled in 2009/10. The water quality monitoring program showed:
 One domestic well (53) was above the drinking water criterion for total iron (0.3 mg/L), with a concentration of
0.339 mg/L. The iron concentrations in domestic well 53 have been reported as elevated for many years;
 One well (61) was above the drinking water criterion for total lead in one field replicate collected during July
2009. Subsequent samples exhibited concentrations of lead that were well below drinking water guidelines
(0.00088 mg/L), indicating that elevated lead concentrations may be a result of stagnant water that was not
completely purged from household plumbing or the well prior to sampling;
 Overall, the groundwater quality in the domestic wells sampled in 2009/10 was similar to previous years and
landfill leachate did not impact the eleven domestic wells sampled by the CRD in 2009/10.
Surface Water Quality
The surface water quality data collected in 2009/10 revealed that:
 Surface water quality at boundary compliance stations along the northern property boundary north of Phase 1
and Phase 2 generally met water quality criteria in 2009/10, with the following exceptions:
 Total iron concentrations exceeded guidelines at Sw-N-16 (March 2010) and was above water quality
guidelines at Sw-N-47 (November 2009), Sw-N-53 and Sw-N-18 (November 2009);
 Total suspended solids exceeded guidelines at Sw-N-53 (November 2009); and
 Sulphate concentrations exceeded guidelines at Sw-N-05 (November 2009).
 At station Sw-N-07, located in Durrance Creek downstream of the confluence with Heal Creek and upstream of
the confluence with Tod Creek, water quality criteria were met in 2009/10. No detectable leachate impacts to
Tod Creek have been observed for many years.
Hartland North Pad
 Surface water quality at boundary compliance stations north of the Hartland North pad generally met water
quality criteria on all dates sampled in 2009/10, with the exception of the following:
 Sulphate concentrations exceeded guidelines at Sw-N-41s1 (six out of six sampling dates) and were
elevated at Sw-N-41s3 (one out of four sampling dates).
 Elevated sulphate concentrations appear to be related to quarrying and stockpiling of aggregate north of the
Phase 2 landfill. Statistically significant increasing trends in conductivity (Sw-N-41s1) and sulphate (Sw-N-41s1
and Sw-N-42s1) are present in data collected between 2005 and 2010, suggesting that the impacts of aggregate
stockpiling on the Hartland North pad have continued to worsen since stockpiling began in 2006. Elevated
sulphate concentrations were present at Sw-N-42s1 throughout 2009/10, where impacts of both historical
composting and aggregate stockpiling are evident. CRD is currently investigating options to manage site runoff
to reduce sulphate peaks. Data collected from sampling locations downstream of Sw-N-41-S1 showed an
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx iv

improvement in water quality with distance from the Hartland North Pad. Water quality in Durrance Lake is not
affected by the Hartland North Pad or the landfill.
 Surface water quality at boundary compliance stations south of the landfill generally met water quality criteria on
all dates sampled in 2009/10, with the exception of the following:
 Total iron concentrations exceeded guidelines at Sw-S-03 (two out of six sampling dates) and Sw-S-04
(one out of six sampling dates); and
 Total suspended solids exceeded guidelines at Sw-S-03 (November 2009) and Sw-S-04 (November
2009 and January 2010). This is likely a short term issue related to runoff and erosion of the clay cover
material installed on the southeast portion of Phase 1 prior to establishment of vegetation. Vegetation
has since been established by CRD.
 Surface water quality immediately south and southeast of the landfill (Sw-S-03 and Sw-S-04) continued to
improve during 2009/10. Concentrations were similar to previous years and minimal effects were seen further
downstream to the south of the landfill.
 Water quality in Killarney Lake (Sw-S-10) in 2009/10 met water quality guidelines and showed no measurable
impacts from leachate.
Leachate
The leachate flow and quality data collected in 2009/10 indicates that:
 Leachate discharges remained in compliance with Regional Source Control Program (RSCP) permit
requirements during 2009/10. Two samples reported values above the permit criterion: oil and grease
concentrations marginally exceeded the 15 mg/L guideline with a value of 16 mg/L in October 2009 and total
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons marginally exceeded the 50 μg/L guideline with a concentration of 56 μg/L in
February 2010. This is the first time either of these constituents have been reported at a value above the permit
criteria. A second sample collected late in October 2010 reported and oil and grease value that was less than
the permit criteria and within the range of historical values at this station. The concentrations of most leachate
constituents at the Hartland valve chamber in 2009/10 were generally within the range of historical values.
 Average leachate flow in 2009/10 was 13.62 L/s, with a maximum monthly flow of 75,489 m3 (28.18 L/s) for
January 2010. This is significantly lower than the flows observed during 2006/07, but similar to flows observed in
2007/08 and 2008/09 and the long-term (1997 to 2010) average of 12.21 L/s).
 The concentrations of leachate constituents measured in 2009/10 were similar to previous measurements.
Lower precipitation in 2009/10 appears to have resulted in leachate with similar strength compared to 2008/09,
but stronger than 2006/07 and 2007/08.
 A total of 16 trace organic compounds out of the 103 analyzed were detected in 50% or more of the samples
during 2009/10, similar to previous years. Reported concentrations in leachate were generally very low for a
municipal waste landfill. The types of compounds that were detected were typical of leachate from other landfills
AECOM is familiar with. Concentrations of all trace organic parameters were in compliance with the RSCP
permit criteria.
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx v

Recommendations
Based on the findings of this report the following recommendations are proposed:
Leachate Collection System
 The north and south purge wells should continue to operate, as these wells help control the movement of
leachate impacted groundwater. The operation of both purge wells (52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8) located at the
north end of the landfill is anticipated to continue to improve leachate containment north of Phase 1. The
following guidelines should be followed:
a) Pumping levels in wells 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8 should continue to be maintained at 113.5 m ASL.
Pumping levels in P1, P10 and the remainder of the south purge wells (P2, P3 and P4) should be
maintained at an elevation below 140 m ASL to maximize leachate collection.
b) Leachate purge wells should be operated on a continuous basis except for periods when the leachate
conveyance and storage facilities are at capacity. Regular maintenance and replacement of pumps and
wells as a result of ongoing biofouling and encrustation is very important.
c) Pumping levels and the extent of the drawdown cones surrounding the purge wells should be validated twice
annually to confirm the proper functioning of the wells.
d) Water levels in the south purge wells and water quality south of Phase 1 (location 85, 60 and 7) should be
closely monitored to confirm that the drawdown cone around P1 has been restored following the installation
of an additional purge well (P10) to provide additional pumping capacity.
e) A standard operating procedure should be developed for verification of drawdown and the extent of the
drawdown cone surrounding both the north and south purge well systems during both wet and dry months.
Runoff from Aggregate Stockpiles
 Groundwater and surface water quality downgradient of the northwest sedimentation pond and the Hartland
North Pad should continue to be monitored closely for impacts related to aggregate production and stockpiling.
 A long-term strategy for managing runoff from aggregate stockpiles should be given serious consideration. This
may include minimizing the volume of aggregate stored on the Hartland North pad and installing tarps to
minimize infiltration and recharge below aggregate stockpiles.
Groundwater Flow North of Phase 2
Further investigation is recommended to define the groundwater flow system north of the western unfilled portion of
the Phase 2 landfill during 2011. Defining seasonal water table fluctuations and groundwater flow paths in this area
is important for assessing the potential for northward leachate migration from this area as the landfill footprint and
height of refuse increases to the northwest. Specific recommendations include:
a) Installation of pressure transducers connected to the SCADA system at monitoring well locations 78 and 79
to provide continuous daily records of water level variation north of Phase 2, to better define the
groundwater divergence and to verify leachate containment as landfilling progresses in Phase 2. A pressure
transducer has already been installed in well 79-1-1, but data is currently downloaded to a laptop as no
SCADA infrastructure is available at this location at this time.
b) Two new nested monitoring wells should be installed at locations upgradient and downgradient of location
79 as access permits to better define the groundwater flow pathways north of the landfill. Water levels
should be recorded at least six times annually and samples collected quarterly from each of the wells;
c) Newly installed pressure transducers at location 86 should be connected to the SCADA system to record
leachate levels within Phase 2 at least once per day; and
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx vi

d) The leachate management design for the area north of Phase 2 should be reviewed and assessed from a
hydrogeological perspective. The existing three-dimensional groundwater model could be used to validate
the hydrogeological conditions surrounding the landfill. The model would enable the evaluation of
groundwater flow and potential contaminant migration pathways under various landfill design scenarios to
support long-term leachate containment planning.
Monitoring Program
Monitoring of groundwater, surface water and leachate quality and flow should continue and include the following:
 Groundwater quality changes observed in well 40-1-1 located between the upper and lower lagoons should
continue to be closely monitored to ensure that the extent of the drawdown cone associated with the purge wells
is sufficient to capture leachate-impacted groundwater near location 40;
 Groundwater quality at locations 36 and 37 should be closely monitored to ensure that the effects of the leachate
storage tests conducted in 2007 and 2008 continue to diminish. Even short term exceedences of the hydraulic
trap could have multi-year implications on nearby groundwater quality. Continued monitoring will help to
understand the sensitivity of groundwater quality in wells 36 and 37 to water levels within Phase 2.
 Additional well development employing inertial pumps and surge blocks should be conducted at locations 76, 78,
79 and 85 to improve hydraulic connection to the aquifer and reduce suspended sediment in samples. This has
been shown to improve the quality of samples collected at other wells on site.
 The sampling frequency at surface water station Sw-N-45 should be increased from four to six times annually.
 Based on water levels recorded in 2009/10, monitor 74-1-1 appears to be blocked or damaged. Because the
deep bedrock groundwater flow system underlying Phase 1 has remained relatively stable for a long time and is
well understood, well 74-1-1 does not need to be replaced at this time. It should be removed from the monitoring
program.
 For water quality exceedences reported in domestic wells CRD staff should continue to report results to the well
owner.
 The results of the annual monitoring program should continue to be reviewed and interpreted by a qualified
professional experienced in assessing the impacts of landfill leachate at large municipal landfills similar to
Hartland.
 Standard operating procedures (SOP’s) should be reviewed or developed for sampling groundwater, surface
water and leachate to ensure consistency between measurements and sampling events and maintain data
integrity. An SOP for domestic well sampling should also be developed to help reduce the potential for sampling
bias and interferences associated with lead solder, copper pipe and galvanized plumbing.
 Quality assurance laboratory analyses and laboratory precision should be evaluated quarterly, and any
discrepancies should be resolved with the laboratory and sampling personnel within a month of receiving the
laboratory results. The appropriate notation should be added to the data files that explain the reason for the low
precision and the steps taken, if any, to improve the sampling or laboratory procedures.
Construction Management
 Appropriate erosion control measures should be put in place to minimize total suspended solids in runoff from
construction areas for all projects involving excavation or soil relocation.
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx vii

Table of Contents
Statement of Qualifications and Limitations

Letter of Transmittal
Distribution List
Executive Summary
page
1. Introduction .....................................................................................................................................1

2. Site Description...............................................................................................................................4
2.1 Physiography ....................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Geology ............................................................................................................................................... 4
2.3 Climate ................................................................................................................................................. 4
3. Methodology....................................................................................................................................5
3.1 Field Techniques ................................................................................................................................. 5
3.2 Sample Analysis and Quality Assurance ............................................................................................. 6
3.2.1 Relative Percent Difference – Groundwater and Surface Water ............................................ 6
3.2.2 Relative Standard Deviation and Relative Percent Difference - Leachate ........................... 10
3.3 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 10
4. Groundwater Flow ........................................................................................................................15
4.1 Data ................................................................................................................................................... 15
4.2 Regional Groundwater Flow in the Bedrock ...................................................................................... 15
4.3 Groundwater and Leachate Flow – Phase 1 ..................................................................................... 19
4.4 Groundwater and Leachate Flow – Phase 2 ..................................................................................... 28
4.5 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 29
5. Groundwater Quality in Monitoring Wells Near the Landfill .....................................................31
5.1 Data ................................................................................................................................................... 31
5.2 Average Electrical Conductivity ......................................................................................................... 34
5.3 Monitors North of the Phase 1 Landfill .............................................................................................. 38
5.4 Monitors West and North of the Phase 2 Landfill and Near the Hartland North Pad ........................ 42
5.4.1 Background Wells ................................................................................................................. 42
5.4.2 Wells North of Phase 2 Landfill ............................................................................................ 43
5.4.3 Hartland North Pad ............................................................................................................... 46
5.5 Monitors South of the Phase 1 Landfill .............................................................................................. 48
5.6 Monitors East of the Phase 1 Landfill ................................................................................................ 53
5.7 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 55
6. Groundwater Quality in Domestic Wells.....................................................................................57
6.1 Data ................................................................................................................................................... 57
6.2 Domestic Well Quality........................................................................................................................ 57
6.3 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 59
7. Surface Water Flow and Quality Near the Landfill .....................................................................61
7.1 Data ................................................................................................................................................... 61
7.2 Surface Water Flow and Quality North of the Landfill ....................................................................... 66
7.2.1 Surface Water Quality North of Phase 1 and Phase 2 ......................................................... 66

7.2.2 Surface Water Quality Near the Hartland North Pad............................................................ 69
7.3 Surface Water Flow and Quality South of the Landfill ....................................................................... 73
7.4 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 76
8. Leachate ........................................................................................................................................77
8.1 Data ................................................................................................................................................... 77
8.2 Leachate Generation and Discharge ................................................................................................. 77
8.3 Leachate Quality ................................................................................................................................ 77
8.3.1 Routine Monthly Leachate Analyses and Sewer Use Bylaw Comparison ........................... 78
8.3.2 Quarterly Trace Organic Analysis at Hartland Valve Chamber ............................................ 81
8.4 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 82
9. Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................83
9.1 Quality Assurance and Quality Control.............................................................................................. 83
9.2 Groundwater Flow ............................................................................................................................. 83
9.3 Groundwater Quality .......................................................................................................................... 84
9.4 Domestic Well Water Quality ............................................................................................................. 86
9.5 Surface Water Quality........................................................................................................................ 86
9.6 Leachate ............................................................................................................................................ 87
10. Recommendations ........................................................................................................................88
11. Disclaimer ......................................................................................................................................90
12. Qualifications of the Authors.......................................................................................................91
13. References.....................................................................................................................................92
List of Figures
Figure 1-1. Site Location Map....................................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 4-1. Bedrock Groundwater Elevations and Flow Directions in Plan................................................................ 16
Figure 4-2. Groundwater Flow in Cross Section A-A’ ................................................................................................. 17
Figure 4-3. Groundwater Flow in Cross Section B-B’ ................................................................................................. 18
Figure 4-4. Groundwater Elevations East of Phase 1 ................................................................................................ 20
Figure 4-5. Leachate and Groundwater Elevations Within Phase 1 .......................................................................... 22
Figure 4-6. Groundwater Elevations Surrounding the North Purge Wells .................................................................. 24
Figure 4-7. Groundwater Elevations in South Purge Wells ........................................................................................ 26
Figure 4-8. Water Elevations Within the Leachate Conveyance System and Surrounding the Phase 2 Basin ......... 27
Figure 5-1. Electrical Conductivity in Plan .................................................................................................................. 35
Figure 5-2. Electrical Conductivity in Cross Section A-A’ ........................................................................................... 36
Figure 5-3. Electrical Conductivity in Cross Section B-B’ ........................................................................................... 37
Figure 5-4. Groundwater Quality North of Phase 1 .................................................................................................... 39
Figure 5-5. Groundwater Quality North of Willis Point Road ...................................................................................... 41
Figure 5-6. Groundwater Quality North of Phase 2 .................................................................................................... 44
Figure 5-7. Groundwater Quality North of Hartland North Pad .................................................................................. 47
Figure 5-8. Groundwater Quality South of Landfill ..................................................................................................... 49
Figure 5-9. Groundwater Quality Southeast of Landfill .............................................................................................. 50

Figure 5-10. Groundwater Quality East of Landfill........................................................................................................ 54

Figure 6-1. Domestic Well Locations .......................................................................................................................... 58
Figure 7-1. Surface Water Bodies and Sampling ....................................................................................................... 62
Figure 7-2. Surface Water Quality North of Phase 1 .................................................................................................. 68
Figure 7-3. Surface Water Quality North of Phase 2 .................................................................................................. 70
Figure 7-4. Surface Water Quality Downstream of the Hartland North Pad............................................................... 72
Figure 7-5. Surface Water Quality South of Landfill ................................................................................................... 75
Figure 8-1. Hartland Valve Chamber Leachate Chemistry (Conductivity, Ammonia and Chloride)........................... 79
Figure 8-2. Hartland Valve Chamber Leachate Chemistry (Sulphide, BOD and COD) ............................................. 80
List of Tables
Table 3-1. Ground Water Chemistry QA/QC – Relative Percent Difference ............................................................... 8
Table 3-2. Surface Water Quality QA/QC – Relative Percent Difference ................................................................... 9
Table 3-3. Hartland Valve Chamber Leachate Chemistry QA/QC – Relative Standard Deviation ........................... 11
Table 3-4. Hartland Valve Chamber Leachate Chemistry QA/QC – Relative Percent Difference ............................ 13
Table 5-1. Groundwater Quality Exceedences.......................................................................................................... 32
Table 7-1. Hartland - Surface Water Quality – Exceedences – 2009 / 2010 ............................................................ 63
Appendices
A. Water Level Data
1. Monitoring Well Co-ordinates
2. Monitoring Well Details
3. Water Level Data
4. Surface Water Station Co-ordinates
B. Landfill Chemistry Data

1. Quarterly Landfill Groundwater Chemistry– 2009/10
Annual Landfill Groundwater Chemistry – 2009/10
2. Domestic Well Chemistry – 2009/10
3. Quarterly Surface Water Chemistry – North and South – 2009/10
Annual Surface Water Chemistry – North and South – 2009/10
4. Monthly Leachate Chemistry – Hartland Valve Chamber – 2009/10
5. Quarterly Leachate Chemistry – Trace Organics– 2009/10
6. Monthly Leachate Chemistry– Phase 2 Cleanout – 2009/10
7. Monthly Leachate Chemistry– North Purge Well – 2009/10
8. Monthly Leachate Chemistry– Controlled Waste Ditch – 2009/10
9. Monthly Leachate Chemistry– Markham Valve Chamber – 2009/10

C. Hartland Climate Data

1. Daily Rainfall Data Collected from the Hartland Weather Station – 1997 to 2010
2. Monthly Rainfall Data Collected from the Hartland Weather Station – 1997 to 2010
D. Leachate Flow Data

E. Hartland Landfill Site Plan
F. Hartland Landfill Leachate Pipeline Plan
G. Results of Statistical Analysis 2009/10

1. Introduction
Hartland landfill is located at the end of Hartland Avenue approximately 14 km north of Victoria (Figure 1-1). Filling
with waste commenced at the site in the 1950s. The site was owned and operated by a private company until 1975
when the property was purchased by the Capital Regional District (CRD). The landfill is currently owned and
operated by the CRD and is the primary solid waste disposal site for the 13 member municipalities of the Capital
Region.
The CRD initiated a ground and surface water monitoring program for the landfill in 1983. Gartner Lee Limited (GLL)
was retained in February 1987 to interpret the monitoring data and provide hydrogeological input into the design and
operation of the landfill. A comprehensive report titled "Hartland Landfill, 1986-1987 Hydrogeological Monitoring
Report" (GLL, 1987) was issued, based on an initial review of monitoring data and the results of a drilling and
hydrogeological testing program carried out during 1987. Annual monitoring reports have been prepared and issued
by Gartner Lee and AECOM since 1988. A summary of data collected between 1983 and 1995 is provided in the
“1995 Hartland Landfill Monitoring Report”. Since that time, annual reports have presented data summaries for the
reporting year and evaluated historic data trends at key locations. The present Hartland Monitoring Program is part
of an "Operating Plan" for the site that is required and approved by the BC Ministry of Environment.
The Hartland landfill site is divided into two distinct areas referred to as Phase 1 and Phase 2. Initially, waste was
deposited in Phase 1, which reached its capacity in 1996. Capping of Phase 1 was completed during the summer of
1997 and Phase 2 is currently receiving waste. Filling of Phase 2 Cell 1 was completed in 2004. During the summer
of 2004, the west face of Phase 2 Cell 1 was capped with a geomembrane to reduce passive gas venting and
provide an internal leachate collection system for future development of Phase 2 Cell 2. This area is referred to as
the West Face closure. Leachate and surface runoff from the active landfill areas are directed to two leachate
lagoons at the north end of the landfill. The water from these lagoons is then transported by a pipeline to the
Northwest Trunk sewer system and ultimately, the Macaulay Point deep ocean outfall. Leachate discharge to sewer
is authorized by a permit issued by the CRD Regional Source Control Program and is subject to the CRD Sewer Use
Bylaw.
Diversion of clean surface water runoff is important to minimize potential inflow to the leachate collection system and
to maintain natural baseflow in existing creeks. Clean surface water runoff from the eastern slopes of Mt. Work is
intercepted in lined diversion ditches located west of Phase 2 and directed off-site. Precipitation falling on the
capped area of Phase 1 is directed to a lined sedimentation pond at the north toe of Phase 1 and then discharged
into a wetland that eventually connects to Heal Creek at the north end of the landfill. The surface water sampling
program routinely tests water quality at property boundary stations.
60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx 1

The CRD ceased operation of a yard waste site at the Hartland North Pad on January 31, 2006 that was formerly
used to store, grind and sell yard waste material. All ground yard waste was removed from the Hartland North Pad
by March 15, 2006. Since July 2006, the Hartland North Pad has been used for aggregate stockpiling. Surface water
from this site generally flows to the northwest into Durrance Lake, which connects with Heal Creek via Durrance
Creek. Another drainage flows southeast parallel to Willis Point Road, connecting directly to Heal Creek. Surface
and groundwater monitoring has been conducted in the vicinity of the yard waste composting site (Hartland North
Pad) since 1994.
This 2009/10 monitoring report presents our interpretation of water quality results and groundwater flow conditions
to:
 assess the potential impact of landfill leachate and operational activities on groundwater and surface water
quality;
 evaluate the effectiveness of the leachate containment and collection systems; and
 determine if leachate flow and leachate quality are changing over time.
Portions of the text contained in this document were extracted from previous reports.

2. Site Description
2.1 Physiography
Hartland landfill is located in the Tod Creek watershed, in the bedrock highlands of the Gowland Range northwest of
Victoria. The terrain is moderately rugged with relief of up to 446 m in the area. Undeveloped CRD property (about
320 hectares in total) lies to the west and south of the landfill site. Mount Work Regional Park lies to the west and
the Department of National Defence rifle range to the north. Private residential properties exist to the east and
southeast of the landfill.
The landfill is situated in a north-south trending bedrock saddle. Mount Work lies to the west of the landfill and a bedrock
ridge lies to the east. The crest of the landfill forms a drainage divide between the Heal Creek drainage basin to the north
and the Killarney Creek drainage basin to the south.
2.2 Geology
The bedrock geology in the area surrounding the landfill mainly comprises Wark Diorite Gneiss with Colquitz Gneiss
outcropping in the northern and eastern margins of the landfill site. The Wark Diorite Gneiss is dark green to black in
colour. It is competent, except locally in shear zones, where it has been chloritized and weathered into soft, sand size
grains and clay. Discontinuities, including joints, shear zones and altered veins have been observed on the bedrock
outcrops.
A thin veneer of glacial till composed of silty, gravelly sand, with interspersed cobbles and boulders mantles the bedrock in
areas of gentle slopes and in valley bottoms. Fluvial deposits consisting of well sorted sands and gravels are also present
in localized bedrock depressions and channels.
2.3 Climate
The climate of this area is classified as "cool Mediterranean". Long-term (1971-2000) average climatic data is available for
the Victoria International Airport Climatological Station located approximately 9 km from the landfill. Average annual
temperature is 9.7ºC and mean monthly values range from a low of 3.8ºC in January to a high of 16.4ºC in July. Mean
annual precipitation is 883.3 mm.
Water balance calculations presented previously (GLL, March 1991a) indicated an annual water surplus of 723 mm based
on long term historical data (1951 to 1980). The surplus occurs primarily in the cool, wet winter months (November,
December and January) with water deficit conditions occurring in the warm, dry summer months (May, June and July).
In 1994, the CRD established a climate station (Victoria Hartland CS) at the landfill office. Both manual and automatic
readings of precipitation are recorded and the data is provided to Environment Canada on a daily basis. The 2009/10 daily
precipitation measurements are provided in Appendix C.
The precipitation measured at Hartland Landfill for April 2009 to March 2010 was 1,157.3 mm, which is greater than the
30 year average of 883.3 mm/yr reported for Victoria International Airport. A study completed by Golder (January 2010)
found that the precipitation data collected at the Victoria International Airport did not accurately reflect precipitation at
Hartland landfill, and underestimated it by approximately 25%. In addition, CRD recognized that there were problems with
the equipment and location of the original weather station. While annual fluctuation may account for some of the
difference, the majority of the difference is likely the result of a malfunctioning precipitation gauge. The Hartland climate
station was replaced in 2009/10 with new equipment at a location on top of Phase 1.The station is now regularly
maintained to ensure accurate data collection. The new weather station records temperature, precipitation, wind direction,
wind speed, barometric pressure and relative humidity directly to CRD’s SCADA system.

3. Methodology
3.1 Field Techniques
Sampling locations are shown on Figure 5-1. Boreholes and monitors are identified using a standard system
adopted by the CRD consisting of three numbers (e.g., 02-02-01). The first number refers to the site, the second to
the borehole at that site (there may be more than one) and the third number refers to the monitor in that borehole
(there may be two or three at different depths in older installations). If the third number is a zero it indicates an open
borehole where no PVC monitoring well has been installed. Several leachate purge wells have been installed at
Hartland. Each purge well is designated with a “P” in front of the purge well number (e.g., P1).
Monitor construction details including location coordinates and elevations are summarized in Appendix A.1.
Appendix A.1 also lists the status of all the groundwater monitors at the site together with comments describing any
problems associated with each monitor, as described by CRD staff. Monitors are categorized as active (fully
functioning) or inactive (non-functioning or destroyed). In 2009/10 there were 118 active groundwater monitors at
58 locations in the vicinity of Hartland landfill. There were also 14 landfill gas wells that were regularly used to
measure leachate levels in Phase 1 during 2009/10.
The methods used to develop and sample each monitor are indicated in Appendix A.2. A variety of techniques are
used depending on the depth of the monitor, the water level elevation in the monitor and the permeability of the
surrounding geologic formation. Where possible, check valve pumps are used to avoid aerating the groundwater,
which can potentially affect water chemistry. A number of dedicated submersible pumps have been installed by CRD
in the deeper monitors and open boreholes at the landfill to facilitate more efficient sampling. The use of these
pumps has resulted in improved data quality. CRD is in the process of reviewing its groundwater and surface water
sampling protocols as part of ongoing quality assurance and quality control measures, and updating them as
required.
The monitoring program at Hartland landfill commenced in 1983. In 2009/10, the program consisted of the following:
 groundwater level measurements four times per year; and five times per year in selected wells;
 continuous water level monitoring with pressure transducers at north end of Phase 2;
 continuous water level monitoring with pressure transducers at the north and south purge well systems;
 quarterly monitoring of wells near the property boundary and key locations to assess the effectiveness of
leachate containment;
 semi-annual monitoring of stations with relatively stable long-term historical data;
 annual sampling for 11 residential wells within a 2 km radius of the landfill;
 four times per year sampling of non-boundary surface water stations;
 six times per year sampling of all surface water stations at property boundary points Sw-S-4, Sw-N-5, Sw-N-16,
Sw-N-41-S-1, Sw-N-42-S-1 and other key locations Sw-S-3, Sw-S-12 and Sw-N-18;
 quarterly testing of the leachate discharge for trace organic compounds; and
 monthly testing of the leachate for conventional parameters and metals at the point of discharge and selected
locations within the leachate collection system.
As in previous years, CRD staff carried out surface water, groundwater and leachate sampling and groundwater
level measurements. Further information on the monitoring program field procedures is contained in the CRD
Monitoring Procedure Manual.

3.2 Sample Analysis and Quality Assurance
In 2009/10, routine surface water, groundwater and domestic well water laboratory analyses were performed by
Maxxam Analytics in Vancouver. Leachate chemistry samples were analyzed by Cantest Laboratories and Maxxam
Analytics. Maxxam Analytics also analyzed leachate samples for trace organic compounds.
A quality assurance program to assess the validity of the chemical analysis results was implemented in 1990. This
has involved the submission of randomly selected field replicate samples and "reference" Victoria municipal water
samples to the laboratory for analysis. In addition, 15 surface water and 27 groundwater samples were submitted in
duplicate between April 2009 and March 2010. One landfill leachate collection system sample (Hartland Valve
Chamber) was submitted in triplicate during this same period for analysis of conventionals, organics, metals,
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), phthalate esters, ketones, aromatics, phenols, ethers, nitrosamines,
alkanes, alkenes and other select organic parameters. One sample from each station in the leachate collection
system was also submitted in duplicate during the year for analysis of conventional parameters, organics and
metals. In this report, each set of replicates was taken from the same source and/or site, and under the same
conditions. In all cases, the field replicates were submitted ‘blind’ to the laboratory. At the Hartland Valve Chamber
point of compliance, Hartland Environmental Programs coordinates with the Marine Monitoring Program to evaluate
QA/QC on a quarterly basis. At this point, the coordinated QA/QC data is evaluated by CRD internally.
The submission of duplicate or triplicate samples provides an estimate of the total uncertainty associated with the
data. Total uncertainty is the variability (precision plus bias) associated with the sample collection and sample
analyses. An allowable upper limit on total uncertainty (or data quality objective) of 25% has been established by the
Ministry of Environment (MOE) as a ‘rule of thumb’ criteria for analytical precision on aqueous samples. Data
exceeding the 25% criteria should be viewed with caution.
3.2.1 Relative Percent Difference – Groundwater and Surface Water
The CRD has used a number of different statistical methods for checking the precision and accuracy of its
monitoring program. In 2005/06, the CRD started using the relative percent difference (RPD) method, as
recommended by MOE, which uses duplicate analyses to determine precision of the analytical results. This method
expresses percent of difference between two values as the ratio of their absolute difference to the average value of
the sample and the duplicate, expressed as a percent. CRD has historically used relative standard deviation (RSD)
to assess the precision and accuracy of leachate analyses. The RSD, which requires triplicate samples, is calculated
as the standard deviation of the analyses divided by the average of the results and is usually expressed as a
percent. To be consistent with the groundwater and surface water programs, CRD started assessing precision and
accuracy of leachate results using the RPD method on a quarterly basis starting in the summer of 2009.
The relative expression of precision is influenced by how close the analytical value is to the method detection limit
(MDL). The MDL is the level above which there is a high probability (e.g., >95%) that a substance can be detected.
However, there is a range of analytical concentrations just above the MDL where the precision is known to be poor.
This range is generally taken to be three times the MDL and is called the “limit of quantification”. Consequently, the
use of RPD should be limited to values that are over the limit of quantification. RPDs for parameter concentrations
between the MDL and the limit of quantification are often above 25% due to the lack of precision at those
concentrations.

Tables 3-1 and 3-2 present the calculated RPDs for replicate groundwater and surface water samples collected near
the landfill. In all three tables, RPDs and RSDs were highlighted if they were above 25% and it was noted if the
parameter concentrations were below the limit of quantification.
Table 3-1 indicates the following for groundwater samples collected at the landfill in 2009/10:
 RPDs for pH and nitrite did not exceed the maximum acceptable relative percent difference of 25%. However,
RPDs for conductivity, iron, manganese, ammonia, nitrate, sulphate and chloride exceeded 25% for 14 out of
243 analyses when concentrations were above the limit of quantification.
 Overall, field replicates showed fair to good precision, with the exception of one sample from well 16-1-1
(chloride), one sample from well 19-2-1 (iron), one sample from 25-1-1 (iron), one sample in well 36-3-1 (iron,
and ammonia), one sample collected from well 39-2-1 (nitrate), one sample collected from well 51-1-1
(manganese), one sample collected from well 54-2-1 (iron), one sample collected from well 56-1-1 (manganese),
one sample collected from well 62-2-1 (manganese), one sample from well 71-1-1 (iron) and one sample
collected from well 71-2-1 (conductivity, iron, ammonia, nitrate and sulphate). These samples had RPDs ranging
from 26.4% to 162.5%. Other RPDs for the 2009/10 monitoring year were within the acceptable range, or had
concentrations below the limit of quantification. Sampling results from wells 36-3-1 (October 2009) and 71-2-1
(February 2010) revealed RPDs of greater than 25% for multiple parameters and should be interpreted with
caution. Based on the results of this analysis, the groundwater quality data appears to be acceptably precise.
QA/QC data should be reviewed immediately after receipt of the data from the laboratory such that corrective
actions can be made in the event of a systemic problem.
Table 3-2 indicates the following for surface water samples collected at the landfill in 2009/10:
 RPDs for temperature, alkalinity, conductivity, nitrate, nitrite, pH, sulphate and total suspended solids did not
exceed the maximum acceptable relative percent difference of 25% for samples with concentrations greater than
the limit of quantification. RPDs for total iron, dissolved iron, total manganese, dissolved manganese, dissolved
organic carbon, ammonia, chloride and dissolved ortho-phosphate exceeded 25% for 13 out of 240 analyses
when concentrations were above the limit of quantification.
 Overall, field replicates showed fair to good precision, with the exception of one sample from Sw-N-05 (dissolved
iron, dissolved manganese, dissolved organic carbon, chloride and dissolved ortho-phosphate), one sample
collected from Sw-N-08 (chloride and dissolved ortho-phosphate), one sample collected from Sw-N-09
(ammonia), one sample collected from Sw-N-15 (dissolved iron and dissolved ortho-phosphate), one sample
collected from Sw-N-41s6 (dissolved manganese and dissolved ortho-phosphate), one sample collected from
Sw-N-42s1 (dissolved ortho-phosphate), one sample collected from Sw-N-43 (total and dissolved iron), one
sample from Sw-N-CSs2 (dissolved iron and total manganese), one sample from Sw-S-03 (total suspended
solids), one sample from Sw-S-27 (ammonia) and one sample collected from Sw-S-52 (total manganese and
dissolved organic carbon). These duplicates exhibited RPDs ranging from 27.5% to 143.7% for each parameter.
Other RPDs for these samples were either within the acceptable range, or were calculated for parameters with
concentrations below the limit of quantification. With the exception of the samples discussed above, calculated
RPDs are considered to be acceptably precise for the purposes of this report. All sampling protocols should be
strictly adhered to in order to ensure the quality of the data is maintained.

Table 3-1. Ground Water Chemistry QA/QC - Relative Percent Difference
Maximum Acceptable Relative Percent Differenc 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25%
Method Detection Limit (MDL) 1. 0.001 0.0001 0.005 0.005 0.02 0.5 0.5 0.1
Limit of Quantitation (3 x MDL) 3. 0.003 0.0002 0.015 0.015 0.06 1.5 1.5 0.3
Conductivity - Nitrogen -
Iron Manganese Nitrogen - nitrite Nitrogen - nitrate Sulphate Chloride pH
electrical ammonia
Station Replicate Date Sampled Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Comments
µS/cm mg/L mg/L mgN/L mgN/L mgN/L mg/L mg/L pH
Gw-04-3-1 RPD 2009 Nov 25 0.7% na na na na 0.0% 8.0% 2.9% 1.3%
FR1 2009 Nov 25 534. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 39. 35. 7.8
FR2 2009 Nov 25 538. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 36. 34. 7.9 ---
Gw-16-1-1 RPD 2010 Feb 19 0.0% na na na na 4.4% 3.4% 36.6% a 1.3%
FR1 2010 Feb 19 311. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.021 < 0.005 0.22 29. 4.2 7.6
FR2 2010 Feb 19 311. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 30. 2.9 7.7 ---
Gw-17-1-3 RPD 2010 Feb 23 0.0% 7.7% 8.0% na na 0.0% 2.2% 15.1% 1.4%
Very brown purge water at 5L, then light brown/grey. No
FR1 2010 Feb 23 414. 0.025 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.47 46. 6.4 7.2 odour.Filtered clear and did not clog.
FR2 2010 Feb 23 414. 0.027 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.47 45. 5.5 7.3 ---
Gw-18-2-2 RPD 2009 Jul 16 2.7% na 0.0% na na 0.0% 0.0% 4.7% 1.3%
FR1 2009 Jul 16 370. < 0.005 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 17. 4.2 7.9
FR2 2009 Jul 16 360. < 0.005 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 17. 4.4 7.8 ---
Gw-19-2-1 RPD 2009 Sep 28 0.2% 84.4% a 24.7% na na na 7.2% 0.0% 2.7%
FR1 2009 Sep 28 510. 0.032 0.263 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 80. 10. 7.3
FR2 2009 Sep 28 509. 0.013 0.337 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 86. 10. 7.5 ---
Gw-20-1-1 RPD 2010 Feb 24 0.0% 8.7% 0.0% na na na 15.4% 2.0% 1.2%
FR1 2010 Feb 24 186. 0.024 0.004 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 14. 5. 8.1
FR2 2010 Feb 24 186. 0.022 0.004 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.02 12. 4.9 8.2 ---
Gw-21-1-2 RPD 2009 Jul 21 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% 2.9% na na 0.0% 0.0% 1.3%
FR1 2009 Jul 21 600. 1.58 2.46 7.1 < 0.005 < 0.02 23. 45. 7.6
FR2 2009 Jul 21 600. 1.58 2.43 6.9 < 0.005 < 0.02 23. 45. 7.5 ---
Gw-25-1-1 RPD 2010 Feb 26 0.6% 41.4% a 11.0% na na 13.3% 3.3% 1.6% 0.0%
FR1 2010 Feb 26 472. 0.14 0.096 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 59. 6.5 8.1
FR2 2010 Feb 26 475. 0.092 0.086 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 61. 6.4 8.1 ---
Gw-29-1-2 RPD 2009 Jul 29 4.3% 24.2% 15.9% na na na 5.0% 6.2% 0.0%
FR1 2009 Jul 29 470. 0.297 0.034 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 39. 50. 7.7
FR2 2009 Jul 29 450. 0.233 0.029 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 41. 47. 7.7 ---
Gw-31-1-1 RPD 2009 Dec 04 1.3% na 8.7% na na 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 2.6%
FR1 2009 Dec 04 318. < 0.005 0.011 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 11. 6.8 7.7
FR2 2009 Dec 04 322. < 0.005 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 11. 6.9 7.9 ---
Gw-36-3-1 RPD 2009 Oct 06 2.3% 58.3% a 5.3% 51.4% a 66.7% b 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 2.6%
FR1 2009 Oct 06 1340. 0.017 0.0116 0.013 0.005 1.46 130. 31. 7.6
FR2 2009 Oct 06 1310. 0.031 0.011 0.022 0.01 1.46 130. 30. 7.8 ---
Gw-37-3-1 RPD 2009 Dec 01 19.7% 2.4% 3.0% 0.5% na na 5.3% 1.2% 0.0%
FR1 2009 Dec 01 614. 1.63 0.426 0.815 < 0.005 < 0.02 58. 8.1 7.6
FR2 2009 Dec 01 504. 1.67 0.439 0.819 < 0.005 < 0.02 55. 8.2 7.6 ---
Gw-39-2-1 RPD 2009 Jul 22 0.0% 0.0% 3.4% 5.5% na 28.6% a 0.0% 7.1% 3.8%
FR1 2009 Jul 22 330. 0.006 0.03 0.113 < 0.005 0.03 21. 4.1 8.1
FR2 2009 Jul 22 330. 0.006 0.029 0.107 < 0.005 0.04 21. 4.4 7.8 ---
Gw-40-1-1 RPD 2009 Dec 01 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 1.3% 1.4% 2.2% 0.0% 2.2% 0.0%
FR1 2009 Dec 01 1040. 0.01 1.36 7.01 0.285 4.7 85. 47. 7.8
FR2 2009 Dec 01 1040. 0.01 1.37 6.92 0.289 4.6 85. 46. 7.8 ---
Gw-42-1-1 RPD 2010 Mar 02 0.0% 8.8% 0.7% 5.1% na na 0.0% 0.0% 2.6%
FR1 2010 Mar 02 506. 0.691 0.134 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.02 35. 19. 7.5
FR2 2010 Mar 02 506. 0.633 0.133 0.057 < 0.005 < 0.02 35. 19. 7.7 ---
Gw-51-1-1 RPD 2009 Sep 30 3.1% na 85.7% a na na 19.6% 3.6% 8.7% 5.1%
FR1 2009 Sep 30 356. < 0.005 0.004 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.28 28. 12. 7.6
FR2 2009 Sep 30 345. 0.006 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 27. 11. 8. ---
Gw-54-2-1 RPD 2009 Sep 24 0.0% 40.0% a 3.5% na na na 0.0% 1.2% 0.0%
FR1 2009 Sep 24 524. 0.012 0.0262 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 28. 8.7 8.
FR2 2009 Sep 24 524. 0.008 0.0253 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 28. 8.6 8. ---
Gw-56-1-1 RPD 2009 Oct 09 0.9% 4.7% 72.0% a na na na 3.8% 8.7% 2.5%
FR1 2009 Oct 09 452. 0.022 0.017 0.006 0.005 < 0.02 53. 12. 7.8
FR2 2009 Oct 09 456. 0.021 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 51. 11. 8. ---
Gw-58-1-0 RPD 2009 Jul 31 0.0% 24.6% 1.2% 9.1% 2.7% 17.8% 1.2% 4.8% 0.0% Yellow, amber colour and slightly foamy
FR1 2009 Jul 31 5300. 0.83 6.53 49.3 0.144 9.8 85. 820. 7.2 Yellow, amber colour and slightly foamy
FR2 2009 Jul 31 5300. 0.648 6.45 54. 0.148 8.2 84. 860. 7.2 ---
Footvalve & tube clogged with clay (light brown like
bentonite). Replaced footvalve &removed 6cm of tubing.
Water very slightly light grey-brown. Sample filtered with
Gw-62-2-1 RPD 2009 Oct 09 0.0% 15.4% 26.4% a 14.3% na 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% no problem.
FR1 2009 Oct 09 300. 0.014 0.0951 0.013 < 0.005 0.08 12. 4.9 8.1
FR2 2009 Oct 09 300. 0.012 0.124 0.015 < 0.005 0.08 12. 4.9 7.8 ---
Gw-63-2-1 RPD 2010 Feb 25 0.9% na na 9.5% na na 7.4% 2.0% 6.1%
FR1 2010 Feb 25 331. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.02 13. 4.9 7.9
FR2 2010 Feb 25 328. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.011 < 0.005 < 0.02 14. 5. 8.4 ---
Gw-71-1-1 RPD 2010 Feb 16 0.0% 78.3% a 4.1% na na na 1.5% 1.3% 0.0%
FR1 2010 Feb 16 478. 0.016 0.024 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 66. 7.7 8.
FR2 2010 Feb 16 478. 0.007 0.025 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.02 65. 7.8 8. ---
Gw-71-2-1 RPD 2010 Feb 16 40.8% a 103.4% a na 122.0% b na 162.5% b 84.9% a 9.5% 3.9%
FR1 2010 Feb 16 463 0.022 0.024 0.008 < 0.005 0.03 24 9.9 7.9
FR2 2010 Feb 16 306 0.007 < 0.001 0.033 < 0.005 0.29 9.7 9 7.6
Gw-73-1-1 RPD 2009 Jul 28 2.0% 0.0% 6.7% na na na 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
FR1 2009 Jul 28 510 0.004 0.0108 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 48 25 8 ---
FR2 2009 Jul 28 500 0.004 0.0101 0.008 < 0.005 0.03 48 25 8 Slightly turbid. Filtered clear.
Gw-76-3-1 RPD 2009 Sep 28 1.2% 7.2% 4.3% na na na 3.8% 0.0% 1.2%
FR1 2009 Sep 28 425 0.04 0.045 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 51 2.8 8 ---
FR2 2009 Sep 28 430 0.043 0.047 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 53 2.8 8.1
Gw-77-2-1 RPD 2009 Dec 08 0.2% 0.0% 3.1% na na na 0.0% 7.4% 0.0%
FR1 2009 Dec 08 402 0.011 0.033 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 29 5.2 8 ---
FR2 2009 Dec 08 403 0.011 0.032 0.018 < 0.005 < 0.02 29 5.6 8 Turbid, muddy brown-yellow colour Filtered clear
Gw-85-1-1 RPD 2009 Sep 22 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.8% na 0.0% 9.1% 0.0% 1.3% Turbid, muddy brown-yellow colour Filtered clear
FR1 2009 Sep 22 990 0.005 1.43 3.2 < 0.005 4.7 69 170 7.7 ---
FR2 2009 Sep 22 1020 0.005 1.43 2.99 < 0.005 4.7 63 170 7.8 ---
Notes:
na - Not applicable, some replicates less than the detection limit.
a - Coefficient of variation greater than 25% and all replicates greater than the limit of quantitation.
b - Coefficient of variation greater than 25% with some replicates less than the limit of quantitation.
60158830_TBL-3-1b_2010-08-31_Groundwater - QC Replicates.xls:Replicates (2) Page 1 of 1

Table 3-2. Surface Water Chemistry QA/QC - Relative Percent Difference
Maximum Acceptable Relative Percent Differenc25% 25% 25% 25% fc 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25%
Method Detection Limit ( MDL ) 0.1 0.001 0.001 0.0001 0.0001 0.5 0.5 0.005 0.5 1. 0.02 0.005 0.001 0.1 0.5 4.
Limit of Quantitation ( 3 x MDL ) 0.3 0.003 0.003 0.0002 0.0002 1.5 1.5 0.015 1.5 3. 0.06 0.015 0.003 0.3 1.5 12.
Dissolved Organic Nitrogen - Conductivity - Phosphorus - Total Suspended

Temperature Iron Iron Manganese Manganese Alkalinity Chloride Nitrogen - Nitrate Nitrogen - Nitrite pH Sulphate
Carbon Ammonia Electrical Ortho Phosphate Solids
Station Replicate Date Sampled Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Total Comments
ºC mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mg/L µS/cm mgN/L mgN/L mgP/L pH mg/L mg/L
SW-N-05 RPD 2010 Mar 24 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2010 Mar 24 n/a 0.055 0.0053 0.001 1.6 88. 0.013 4.1 354. 1.49 < 0.005 0.001 7.9 83. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
FR2 2010 Mar 24 n/a 0.051 0.012 0.0059 0.0007 2.3 88. 0.011 5.7 355. 1.44 0.006 0.002 7.9 69. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-08 RPD 2009 Jun 29 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2009 Jun 29 12.5 3.26 1.73 0.997 1.1 18.3 85. 0.232 42. 300. 0.13 0.021 0.047 7.5 29. 9. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow-brown.
FR2 2009 Jun 29 12.5 3.18 1.66 0.999 1.08 18.2 86. 0.229 21. 310. 0.13 0.022 0.03 7.8 28. 8. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow-brown.
SW-N-09 RPD 2009 Nov 12 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2009 Nov 12 7.7 0.466 0.262 0.0313 0.0298 10. 52. 0.048 18. 227. 0.29 0.011 0.083 7.7 23. < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and slightly yellow-brown.
FR2 2009 Nov 12 7.7 0.415 0.259 0.0304 0.0293 10.2 51. 0.293 18. 223. 0.29 0.01 0.082 7.7 22. < 4.
SW-N-09 RPD 2010 Feb 08 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2010 Feb 08 0.661 0.432 0.0493 0.0442 7. 49. 0.033 14. 170. 0.22 < 0.005 0.025 7.6 9.9 5. Flow moderate. Clear and slightly yellow-brown.
FR2 2010 Feb 08 7.2 0.621 0.453 0.0475 0.0444 6.3 49. 0.029 14. 172. 0.22 < 0.005 0.025 7.6 9.7 6. Flow moderate. Clear and slightly yellow-brown.
SW-N-14 FR1 2009 Nov 13 7.8 0.282 0.018 0.0485 0.0018 5.8 97. < 0.005 22. 402. 1.76 < 0.005 0.066 7.9 62. 13. Flow moderate. Clear and slightly brown.
FR2 2009 Nov 13 7.8 0.271 0.019 0.0487 0.002 5.3 97. < 0.005 20. 403. 1.73 < 0.005 0.068 7.9 54. 13. Flow moderate. Clear and slightly brown.
SW-N-15 RPD 2010 Mar 23 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2010 Mar 23 n/a 0.006 0.004 0.0016 0.0006 1.3 73. < 0.005 9. 214. 0.09 < 0.005 0.001 8. 18. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
FR2 2010 Mar 23 n/a 0.007 0.007 0.0015 0.0006 1.3 73. < 0.005 8.8 213. 0.08 < 0.005 0.002 8. 18. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s6 FR1 2009 Jul 02 20.6 0.029 0.005 0.0165 0.0037 3.3 78. < 0.005 12. 240. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.001 8. 13. < 4. Flow very low. Very slightly turbid and colourless.
FR2 2009 Jul 02 20.6 0.03 0.006 0.0168 0.0026 4.1 79. 0.008 15. 240. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 16. < 4. Flow low. Very slightly turbid and colourless.
SW-N-42s1 RPD 2009 Dec 11 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2009 Dec 11 2.9 0.02 0.0108 0.0074 4.2 130. 0.025 16. 460. 0.43 0.037 0.007 7.9 91. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
FR2 2009 Dec 11 2.9 0.021 0.01 0.0076 4.2 130. 0.026 15. 458. 0.44 0.044 0.008 8. 81. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-42s1 RPD 2010 Jan 08 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2010 Jan 08 6.9 0.05 0.015 0.0343 0.0071 4.2 100. 0.014 12. 376. 0.61 < 0.005 0.008 7.7 65. < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
FR2 2010 Jan 08 6.9 0.044 0.015 0.0311 0.0065 4.2 100. 0.015 11. 377. 0.62 < 0.005 0.006 7.6 58. < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-43 RPD 2009 Nov 13 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2009 Nov 13 7.1 0.036 0.015 0.0061 0.0054 1.5 75. < 0.005 12. 445. 3.17 < 0.005 0.058 7.6 93. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
FR2 2009 Nov 13 7.1 0.016 0.036 0.0051 0.0067 1.4 74. < 0.005 12. 445. 3.14 < 0.005 0.059 7.7 110. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-CSs2 RPD 2010 Feb 10 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2010 Feb 10 0.007 0.002 0.0007 0.0004 1.1 69. < 0.005 4. 161. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.008 8. 6.6 < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
FR2 2010 Feb 10 6. 0.006 0.003 0.0004 0.0005 1.3 67. < 0.005 4. 162. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.008 8. 6.5 < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
SW-S-03 RPD 2009 Jun 30 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2009 Jun 30 12.8 0.111 0.041 0.262 0.263 5.5 190. 0.326 66. 690. 1.46 0.024 0.002 8. 47. 9. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow colour.
FR2 2009 Jun 30 12.8 0.122 0.036 0.269 0.265 5.6 190. 0.335 64. 690. 1.49 0.024 0.002 8. 39. 5. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow colour.
SW-S-20 RPD 2009 Nov 12 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2009 Nov 12 7.7 0.05 0.047 0.0008 0.0008 11.7 32. < 0.005 7.5 111. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.055 7.5 5.8 < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and moderately yellow-brown.
FR2 2009 Nov 12 7.7 0.045 0.046 0.0007 0.0007 11.2 33. 0.006 7.1 111. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.055 7.6 5.4 < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and moderately yellow-brown.
SW-S-27 RPD 2010 Feb 19 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2010 Feb 19 7.2 0.103 0.015 0.0518 0.0116 3.6 110. 0.013 25. 365. 0.21 < 0.005 0.008 8.1 31. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
FR2 2010 Feb 19 7.2 0.124 0.019 0.0572 0.0096 4.6 110. 0.02 27. 368. 0.21 < 0.005 0.007 8.1 31. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-S-52 RPD 2010 Mar 25 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FR1 2010 Mar 25 n/a 0.005 0.004 0.0002 0.0003 2.1 64. < 0.005 4.4 160. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.001 8. 5.8 < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
FR2 2010 Mar 25 n/a 0.005 0.004 0.0001 0.0003 0.7 67. < 0.005 4.3 158. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.001 8. 5.9 < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Notes:
b - Coefficient of variation greater than 25% with some replicates less than the limit of quantitation.
60158830_TBL-3-2_2010-08-24_Surface Water-QC Replicates.xls Page 1 of 1

3.2.2 Relative Standard Deviation and Relative Percent Difference - Leachate
The relative standard deviation is a statistical measure of the precision of a data set. CRD used relative standard
deviation (RSD) to assess the precision of triplicate leachate analyses and the reliability of laboratory analyses until
April 2009. RSD is widely used in analytical chemistry to describe the precision of an assay. Table 3-3 presents
RSDs for triplicate samples collected from the Hartland flow detection valve chamber in April 2008. Starting in April
2009, RPDs have been used to assess the repeatability of analyses as described in Section 3.2.1 and shown in
Table 3-4.
Calculated RSD’s for five out of 174 parameters including fecal coliform, cadmium, chromium VI, acenapthene and
fluorine exceeded the maximum acceptable relative standard deviation of 25%, with RSDs of 96%, 29%, 35%, 43%
and 60%, respectively, where concentrations in all three replicates were above the limit of quantitation.
As shown in Table 3-4, calculated RPD’s for a total of 15 out of 273 analyses exceeded 25% for BOD, fecal coliform,
nitrite, total sulphide, naphthalene, phenanthrene, 2-methylnapthalene, fluoranthene, total high molecular weight
PAH’s, total uranium and total zinc concentrations on one out of three sampling dates when all concentrations were
above the limit of quantitation. Total PAH’s and total low molecular weight PAH’s exceeded RPD objectives on two
of three sampling dates. Overall, the RPD’s indicate that leachate quality data is acceptable for the current purposes.
PAH concentrations should be interpreted with caution on the June and November 2009 sampling dates. Efforts to
improve the repeatability of leachate analyses should be implemented in the future. This may involve the
development of a leachate sampling standard operating protocol and accompanying data quality objectives.
Leachate analyses that exceed RPD objectives should be reviewed with the laboratory immediately following receipt
of the analyses.
The remainder of parameters showed fair to good precision, with RSDs and RPDs generally below 25% for analytes
that were detected in all three samples. Given that landfill leachate is a complex analytical matrix, leachate analyses
are considered to be acceptably precise for the purposes of the monitoring program.
3.3 Summary
In summary, the 2009/10 quality assurance (QA) analysis indicates the water sampling and laboratory analysis have
produced reliable results. The QA sample analyses included 43 replicate groundwater and surface water samples
and the calculation of RPDs for 9 to 16 parameters per sample site, for a total of 483 RPDs. Of the 483 RPDs, there
were 27 RPDs that exceeded the 25% value where parameter concentrations were above the limit of quantification.
By comparison, 31 out of 451 RPD’s exceeded 25% in 2008/09 and only 11 of 451 RPDs exceeded the 25% limit in
2007/08. This indicates that although the analytical results are acceptable for this monitoring report, close attention
should be given to the groundwater and surface water sampling protocol to ensure high quality analytical data.
When parameter concentrations were above the limit of quantification, leachate RSDs were below the 25% limit for
all but five out of 190 parameters analyzed as part of the triplicate leachate analysis. Leachate RPD’s for 15 out of
273 analyses exceeded the 25% objective, where parameter concentrations were above the limit of quantitation in
2009/10. Therefore the laboratory analytical results for leachate are considered acceptable for the purposes of this
monitoring report.
Quality assurance laboratory analyses and laboratory precision should be evaluated monthly, and any discrepancies
should be resolved with the laboratory and sampling personnel within a month of receiving the laboratory results.
The appropriate notation should be added to the data files that explain the reason for the low precision and the steps
taken, if any, to improve the sampling or laboratory procedures.

Table 3-3. Hartland Valve Chamber Leachate Chemistry QA/QC - Relative Standard Deviation
Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve
State Parameter Units Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber
% MDL LOQ 2009 Apr 27 2009 Apr 27 2009 Apr 27 2009 Apr 27 2009 Apr 27 2009 Apr 27
FRM Number of Samples RSD FR1 FR2 FR3
CONVENTIONALS
Total Temperature °C 25% 0.1 0.3 16. 3 0% 15.9 15.9 15.9

Total Oxidation reduction potential mV 25% 0.1 0.3 124. 3 0% 124. 124. 124.
Total pH pH 25% 0. 0. 7.7 3 0% 7.7 7.7 7.7
Total Electrical conductivity µS/cm 25% 1. 3. 4 500. 3 0% 4 500. 4 500. 4 500.
Total Total suspended solids mg/L 25% 4. 12. 16. 3 4% 15. 16. 16.
Total Biochemical oxygen demand mg/L 25% 10. 30. 20. 3 3% 22. 21. 22.
Total Chemical oxygen demand mg/L 25% 10. 30. 310. 3 3% 308. 305. 320.
Total Fecal Coliform CFU/100 ml 25% 1. 3. 53. 3 96% a 10. 40. 110.
Total Alkalinity - total mg/L 25% 0.5 1.5 1 700. 3 0% 1 700. 1 700. 1 700.
Total Total organic carbon mg/L 25% 1. 3. 95. 3 6% 97. 99. 89.
Total Oil and grease - total mg/L 25% 1. 3. 2. 3 0% 2. 2. 2.
Total Oil and grease - mineral (silica gel) mg/L 25% 2. 6. 2. 3 0% < 2. < 2. < 2.
Total Nitrogen - total kjeldahl mg/L 25% 4. 12. 240. 3 4% 247. 244. 229.
Total Nitrogen - ammonia mg/L 25% 3. 9. 222. 3 3% 221. 216. 229.
Total Nitrogen - nitrite mg/L 25% 0.005 0.015 0.96 3 5% 1.01 0.92 0.95
Total Nitrogen - nitrate mg/L 25% 0.04 0.12 5.9 3 2% 5.8 5.9 6.
Total Nitrogen - nitrate plus nitrite mg/L 25% 0.04 0.12 6.9 3 2% 6.8 6.8 7.
Total Nitrogen - total mg/L 25% 4. 12. 247. 3 4% 254. 251. 236.
Dissolved Chloride mg/L 25% 0.5 1.5 387. 3 1% 390. 390. 380.
Dissolved Sulphate mg/L 25% 0.5 1.5 27. 3 8% 25. 29. 28.
Total Sulphide - total mg/L 25% 0.005 0.015 0.21 3 25% 0.27 0.18 0.18
Dissolved Sulphide - dissolved mg/L 25% 0.005 0.015 0.15 3 15% 0.18 0.14 0.14
Total Cyanide - SAD (total) mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.012 3 2% 0.011 8 0.012 1 0.011 7
Total Cyanide - WAD mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.004 5 3 3% 0.004 6 0.004 3 0.004 5
Total Phenols mg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 0.069 3 4% 0.066 0.072 0.069
Total Hardness - total (as CaCO3) mg/L 25% 0.5 1.5 492. 3 4% 471. 493. 511.
ORGANICS
Total Benzene mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.001 3 3 4% 0.001 4 0.001 3 0.001 3
Total Ethylbenzene mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.001 2 3 10% 0.001 3 0.001 1 0.001 1
Total Toluene mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.000 9 3 18% 0.001 0.000 9 0.000 7
Total Xylenes mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.005 3 3 11% 0.006 0.005 0.005
Total m & p Xylenes mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.003 3 3 17% 0.004 0.003 0.003
Total o-Xylene mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.001 7 3 3% 0.001 7 0.001 7 0.001 6
Total Styrene mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.000 5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total Methyl tertiary butyl ether mg/L 25% 0.004 0.012 0.004 3 0% < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004
METALS
Total Aluminum mg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 0.092 3 3% 0.089 0.092 0.094
Total Antimony mg/L 25% 0.000 1 0.000 3 0.001 1 3 5% 0.001 1 0.001 0.001 1
Total Arsenic mg/L 25% 0.000 1 0.000 3 0.005 2 3 2% 0.005 1 0.005 3 0.005 3
Total Barium mg/L 25% 0.000 1 0.000 3 0.15 3 4% 0.145 0.15 0.156
Total Beryllium mg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 0.000 05 3 0% < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05
Total Bismuth mg/L 25% 0.000 03 0.000 09 0.000 03 3 0% < 0.000 03 < 0.000 03 < 0.000 03
Total Boron mg/L 25% 0.3 0.9 3.5 3 4% 3.36 3.49 3.63
Total Cadmium mg/L 25% 0.000 03 0.000 09 0.000 09 3 29% a 0.000 07 0.000 08 0.000 12
Total Calcium mg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 127. 3 4% 122. 127. 131.
Total Chromium mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.027 3 3% 0.026 2 0.027 4 0.027 6
Total Chromium III mg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 0.02 3 11% 0.019 0.019 0.023
Total Chromium VI mg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 0.007 3 35% a 0.008 0.008 0.004
Total Cobalt mg/L 25% 0.000 03 0.000 09 0.011 3 2% 0.011 0.011 3 0.011 5
Total Copper mg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.004 9 3 2% 0.004 9 0.005 0.004 8
Total Iron mg/L 25% 0.005 0.015 2.1 3 4% 2.21 2.03 2.1
Total Lead mg/L 25% 0.000 03 0.000 09 0.000 7 3 7% 0.000 75 0.000 65 0.000 69
Total Lithium mg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 0.003 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total Magnesium mg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 43. 3 5% 40.6 43.1 44.7
Total Manganese mg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 1.5 3 3% 1.41 1.47 1.5
Total Mercury mg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 0.000 05 3 0% < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05
Total Molybdenum mg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.001 6 3 9% 0.001 6 0.001 8 0.001 5
Total Nickel mg/L 25% 0.000 1 0.000 3 0.044 3 4% 0.042 1 0.044 5 0.045 7
Total Phosphorus mg/L 25% 0.01 0.03 1.9 3 4% 1.79 1.88 1.92
Total Potassium mg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 136. 3 4% 130. 138. 140.
Total Selenium mg/L 25% 0.000 2 0.000 6 0.000 4 3 0% 0.000 4 0.000 4 0.000 4
Total Silicon mg/L 25% 0.5 1.5 14. 3 3% 14.8 13.9 14.7
Total Silver mg/L 25% 0.000 03 0.000 09 0.000 03 3 62% 0.000 04 < 0.000 03 < 0.000 03
Total Sodium mg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 305. 3 4% 291. 309. 316.
Total Strontium mg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.78 3 3% 0.754 0.775 0.798
Total Sulphur mg/L 25% 3. 9. 17. 3 9% 16. 17. 19.
Total Thallium mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.000 01 3 0% < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01
Total Tin mg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 0.006 4 3 14% 0.006 29 0.005 59 0.007 43
Total Titanium mg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 0.059 3 3% 0.058 0.061 0.058
Total Uranium mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.000 09 3 7% 0.000 08 0.000 09 0.000 09
Total Vanadium mg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 0.031 3 5% 0.029 0.031 0.032
Total Zinc mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.014 3 6% 0.013 0.014 2 0.014 7
Total Zirconium mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.005 6 3 5% 0.005 3 0.005 6 0.005 8
POLYCYCLIC AROMATICS - LOW WEIGHT
Total acenaphthene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 1.4 3 43% a 0.000 9 0.001 3 0.002 1
Total acenaphthylene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.2 3 0% < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Total anthracene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.13 3 87% a < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 0.000 2
Total fluorene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.6 3 60% a 0.000 3 0.000 5 0.001
Total naphthalene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total phenanthrene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.2 3 0% < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Total 2-chloronaphthalene µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total 2-methylnaphthalene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.33 3 108% a < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 0.000 6
Total Total LMW-PAH's µg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
POLYCYCLIC AROMATICS - HIGH WEIGHT
Total benzo(a)anthracene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.1 3 0% < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1
Total dibenzo(a,h)anthracene µg/L 25% 0.000 02 0.000 06 0.2 3 0% < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Total chrysene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.2 3 0% < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Total fluoranthene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.2 3 0% 0.000 2 0.000 2 0.000 2
Total benzo(b)fluoranthene + benzo(j)fluoranthen µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 3 0% < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Total benzo(k)fluoranthene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.2 3 0% < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Total pyrene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.2 3 0% < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Total benzo(a)pyrene µg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene µg/L 25% 0.000 02 0.000 06 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total benzo(g,h,i)perylene µg/L 25% 0.000 02 0.000 06 0.2 3 0% < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Total Total HMW-PAH's µg/L 25% 0.000 02 0.000 06 1.5 3 155% a < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 0.004
Total total PAHs µg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 3.3 3 17% < 0.003 < 0.003 0.004
PHTHALATE ESTERS = TOT
Total dimethyl phthalate µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total diethyl phthalate µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total di-n-butyl phthalate µg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total di-n-octyl phthalate µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total butylbenzyl phthalate µg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate µg/L 25% 0.005 0.015 5. 3 0% < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005
KETONES = TOT
Total methyl ethyl ketone µg/L 25% 0.01 0.03 10. 3 0% < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01
Total dimethyl ketone µg/L 25% 0.02 0.06 20. 3 0% < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02
Total methyl isobutyl ketone µg/L 25% 0.01 0.03 10. 3 0% < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01
AROMATICS - NON HALOGENATED = TOT
Total Benzene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 1.3 3 4% 0.001 4 0.001 3 0.001 3
Total Ethylbenzene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 1.2 3 10% 0.001 3 0.001 1 0.001 1
Total Toluene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.9 3 18% 0.001 0.000 9 0.000 7
Total Xylenes µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 5.3 3 11% 0.006 0.005 0.005
Total m & p Xylenes µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 3.3 3 17% 0.004 0.003 0.003
Total o-Xylene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 1.7 3 3% 0.001 7 0.001 7 0.001 6
Total Styrene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total Methyl tertiary butyl ether µg/L 25% 0.004 0.012 4. 3 0% < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004
Total nitrobenzene µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total 2,4-dinitrotoluene µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total 2,6-dinitrotoluene µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
60158830_TBL-3-3_2010-08-24_Relative Standard Deviation - Hartland Valve Chamber.xlsx Page 1 of 2

Table 3-3. Hartland Valve Chamber Leachate Chemistry QA/QC - Relative Standard Deviation
Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve
State Parameter Units Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber
% MDL LOQ 2009 Apr 27 2009 Apr 27 2009 Apr 27 2009 Apr 27 2009 Apr 27 2009 Apr 27
FRM Number of Samples RSD FR1 FR2 FR3
AROMATICS - HALOGENATED = TOT
Total chlorobenzene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 1.2 3 5% 0.001 2 0.001 2 0.001 3
Total 1,2-dichlorobenzene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,3-dichlorobenzene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,4-dichlorobenzene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 2. 3 0% < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002
Total 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene µg/L 25% 0.000 2 0.000 6 0.2 3 0% < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
PHENOLS - NON HALOGENATED = TOT
Total phenol µg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total 2-nitrophenol µg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total 4-nitrophenol µg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total 2,4-dimethylphenol µg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total 2,4-dinitrophenol µg/L 25% 0.007 0.021 30. 3 0% < 0.03 < 0.03 < 0.03
Total 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol µg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
PHENOLS - HALOGENATED = TOT
Total 2-chlorophenol µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 2,4 + 2,5 dichlorophenol µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 2,4,6-trichlorophenol µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total pentachlorophenol µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 6. 3 0% < 0.006 < 0.006 < 0.006
Total 4-chloro-3-methylphenol µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
ETHERS - HALOGENATED = TOT
Total 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether µg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 0.05 3 0% < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05
Total 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total bis(2-chloroethyl)ether µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
NITROSAMINES = TOT
Total N-nitrosodimethylamine µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total N-nitrosodiphenylamine µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
OTHER ORGANICS
Total acrolein µg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total acrylonitrile µg/L 25% 0.004 0.012 4. 3 0% < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004
Total benzidine µg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 50. 3 0% < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05
Total 3,3-dichlorobenzidine µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,2-diphenylhydrazine µg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 0.05 3 0% < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05
Total hexachlorobutadiene µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total hexachlorocyclopentadiene µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total alpha-terpineol µg/L 25% 0.005 0.015 5. 3 0% < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005
Total isophorone µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
ALKANES - HALOGENATED = TOT
Total chloromethane µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total dichloromethane µg/L 25% 0.002 0.006 2. 3 0% < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002
Total trichloromethane µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total tetrabromomethane µg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 50. 3 0% < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05
Total tetrachloromethane µg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 3. 3 0% < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total chlorodibromomethane µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total bromodichloromethane µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total bromomethane µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total tribromomethane µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total trichlorofluoromethane µg/L 25% 0.004 0.012 4. 3 0% < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004
Total chloroethane µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total 1,1-dichloroethane µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,2-dichloroethane µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total dibromoethane µg/L 25% 0.000 2 0.000 6 0.2 3 0% < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Total 1,1,1-trichloroethane µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,1,2-trichloroethane µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total dibromomethane µg/L 25% 0.000 9 0.002 7 0.9 3 0% < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9
Total hexachloroethane µg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0.3 3 0% < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3 < 0.000 3
Total 1,2-dichloropropane µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
ALKENES - HALOGENATED = TOT
Total chloroethene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,1-dichloroethene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total trans-1,2-dichloroethene µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total trichloroethene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total tetrachloroethene µg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0.5 3 0% < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total cis-1,2-dichloroethene µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total cis-1,3-dichloropropene µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total trans-1,3-dichloropropene µg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 1. 3 0% < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Notes:
(1) MDL - method detection limit.
(2) LOQ - limit of quantification.
(3) RSD - relative standard difference.
a - Relative Standard Difference greater than 25% and all replicates greater than the limit of quantitation.
b - Relative Standard Difference greater than 25% with some replicates less than the limit of quantitation.
60158830_TBL-3-3_2010-08-24_Relative Standard Deviation - Hartland Valve Chamber.xlsx Page 2 of 2

Table 3-4. Hartland Landfill - Relative Percent Difference for Field Replicates - Hartland Valve Chamber - 2009/2010
Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve
State Parameter Units Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber
Coefficient
of Variation MDL LOQ 2009 Jun 05 2009 Nov 04 2010 Feb 23 2009 Jun 05 2009 Jun 05 2009 Nov 04 2009 Nov 04 2010 Feb 23 2010 Feb 23
(1) (2) RPD RPD RPD FR1 FR2 FR1 FR2 FR1 FR2
(3) (3) (3)
CONVENTIONALS
Total Temperature °C 25% 0.1 0.3 0% 0% 0% 20.9 20.9 15.8 15.8 15.6 15.6
Total Oxidation reduction potential mV 25% 0.1 0.3 0% 0% 0% 108 108 163 163 84 84
Total pH pH 25% 1. 3. 1% 0% 1% 8.1 8 7.6 7.6 7.8 7.7
Total Electrical conductivity µS/cm 25% 1. 3. 2% 0% 0% 5000 5100 4290 4270 5000 5000
Total Total suspended solids mg/L 25% 4. 12. 11% 0% 10% 29 26 12 12 11 10
Total Biochemical oxygen demand mg/L 25% 10. 30. 32% a 15% na 77 106 24 28 13 < 10
Total Chemical oxygen demand mg/L 25% 10. 30. 1% 17% 3% 364 360 314 265 563 547
Total Fecal Coliform CFU/100 mL 25% 1. 3. 20% 8% 67% a 780 640 360 390 20 10
Total Alkalinity - total mg/L CaCO3 25% 0.5 1.5 5% 0% 0% 1900 2000 1700 1700 2000 2000
Total Total organic carbon mg/L 25% 3. 9. 0% 0% 1% 222 223 108 108 119 118
Total Oil and grease - total mg/L 25% 1. 3. 0% 0% 40% b 3 3 4 4 3 2
Total Oil and grease - mineral (silica gel) mg/L 25% 2. 6. na na na < 2 2 3 < 2 < 2 < 2
Total Nitrogen - total kjeldahl mg/L N 25% 20. 60. 1% 0% 9% 291 288 257 258 321 293
Total Nitrogen - ammonia mg/L N 25% 3. 9. 6% 17% 1% 310 291 238 200 297 293
Dissolved Nitrogen - nitrite mg/L N 25% 0.005 0.015 55% a 2% 4% 0.67 0.379 1.67 1.63 0.25 0.24
Dissolved Nitrogen - nitrate mg/L N 25% 0.1 0.3 5% 0% 3% 6.2 5.9 5 5 3.3 3.2
Total Nitrogen - nitrate plus nitrite mg/L N 125% 0.1 0.3 9% 2% 3% 6.9 6.3 6.7 6.6 3.6 3.5
Total Nitrogen - total mg/L N 225% 20. 60. 1% 0% 9% 297 294 264 264 325 297
Dissolved Chloride mg/L 25% 5. 15. 7% 4% 0% 410 440 250 260 400 400
Dissolved Sulphate mg/L 25% 0.5 1.5 4% 5% 18% 24 25 89 85 26 31
Total Sulphide - total mg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 27% a 20% 24% 0.19 0.25 0.11 0.09 0.23 0.18
Dissolved Sulphide - dissolved mg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 45% b 22% 48% b 0.19 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.11 0.18
Total Cyanide - SAD (total) mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 1% 1% 2% 0.0161 0.0159 0.0149 0.0147 0.0171 0.0167
Total Cyanide - WAD mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 6% 6% 8% 0.0071 0.0067 0.0052 0.0049 0.0067 0.0062
Total Phenols mg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 11% 4% na 0.067 0.06 0.024 0.025 < 0.1 < 0.1
Total Hardness - total (as CaCO3) mg/L 25% 0.5 1.5 2% 2% 3% 554 541 453 463 494 511
ORGANICS
Total Benzene mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 8% 0% 6% 0.0013 0.0012 0.0017 0.0017 0.0016 0.0017
Total Ethylbenzene mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0% na 0% 0.0012 0.0012 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 0.0032 0.0032
Total Toluene mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 29% b 5% 0% 0.0006 0.0008 0.0018 0.0019 0.0009 0.0009
Total Styrene mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 na na na < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005
Total Xylenes mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0% 5% 1% 0.0033 0.0033 0.0074 0.0078 0.007 0.0069
Total m & p Xylenes mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 5% 8% 2% 0.0022 0.0021 0.0046 0.005 0.0047 0.0046
Total o-Xylene mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0% 0% 0% 0.0011 0.0011 0.0028 0.0028 0.0023 0.0023
Total Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) mg/L 25% 0.004 0.012 na na na < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004
PAH'S
Total Total Polycyclic Aromatics mg/L 25% 0.000 07 0.000 21 136% a 58% a 2% 0.00057 0.003 0.0083 0.015 0.056 0.055
Total Acenaphthene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na 24% 2% < 0.00001 0.0014 0.0037 0.0047 0.0052 0.0053
Total Acenaphthylene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na na na < 0.00001 < 0.00008 0.00012 < 0.00009 < 0.00007 < 0.00007
Total Anthracene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na na 4% < 0.00003 < 0.00007 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 0.00028 0.00027
Total Fluorene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na 20% 0% < 0.00003 0.00074 0.0018 0.0022 0.0027 0.0027
Total Naphthalene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na 190% a 0% < 0.00001 0.00012 0.00008 0.003 0.04 0.04
Total Phenanthrene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na 45% a 4% < 0.00001 0.00014 0.0012 0.0019 0.0025 0.0024
Total 2-Methylnaphthalene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na 108% a 0% < 0.00003 < 0.0001 0.00093 0.0031 0.0037 0.0037
Total Total LMW-PAH's mg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 143% a 60% a 0% 0.00047 0.0028 0.0081 0.015 0.055 0.055
Total Benzo(a)anthracene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na na 29% b < 0.00002 < 0.00002 0.00002 < 0.00003 0.00004 0.00003
Total Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene mg/L 25% 0.000 02 0.000 06 na na na < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002
Total Chrysene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na na 0% < 0.00001 < 0.00001 0.00001 < 0.00002 0.00002 0.00002
Total Fluoranthene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 33% a 13% 3% 0.0001 0.00014 0.00021 0.00024 0.00031 0.0003
Total Benzo(b,j)fluoranthene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na na na < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 0.00001 < 0.00001
Total Benzo(k)fluoranthene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na na na < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001
Total Pyrene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na na 11% < 0.00008 < 0.00007 < 0.0001 < 0.0002 0.0002 0.00018
Total Benzo(a)pyrene mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na na na < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001
Total Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene mg/L 25% 0.000 02 0.000 06 na na na < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002
Total Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/L 25% 0.000 02 0.000 06 na na na < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002
Total Total HMW-PAH's mg/L 25% 0.000 02 0.000 06 33% a 0% 13% 0.0001 0.00014 0.0002 0.0002 0.00059 0.00052
60158830_TBL-3-4_2010-10-12_ Hartland valve chamber - Relative Percent Difference for Field Replicates.xls:Relative % Diff Page 1 of 2
Table 3-4. Hartland Landfill - Relative Percent Difference for Field Replicates - Hartland Valve Chamber - 2009/2010
Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve
State Parameter Units Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber
Coefficient
of Variation MDL LOQ 2009 Jun 05 2009 Nov 04 2010 Feb 23 2009 Jun 05 2009 Jun 05 2009 Nov 04 2009 Nov 04 2010 Feb 23 2010 Feb 23
(1) (2) RPD RPD RPD FR1 FR2 FR1 FR2 FR1 FR2
(3) (3) (3)
METALS
Total Aluminum mg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 7% 7% 5% 0.113 0.105 0.097 0.104 0.139 0.146
Total Antimony mg/L 25% 0.000 1 0.000 3 0% 0% 0% 0.0013 0.0013 0.0012 0.0012 0.0012 0.0012
Total Arsenic mg/L 25% 0.000 1 0.000 3 3% 7% 3% 0.0066 0.0064 0.0058 0.0062 0.0077 0.0075
Total Barium mg/L 25% 0.000 1 0.000 3 3% 1% 1% 0.186 0.181 0.129 0.13 0.173 0.175
Total Beryllium mg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 na na na < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Bismuth mg/L 25% 0.000 03 0.000 09 na na na < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Boron mg/L 25% 0.3 0.9 2% 1% 3% 3.85 3.94 3.17 3.2 4.18 4.07
Total Cadmium mg/L 25% 0.000 03 0.000 09 0% 40% b na 0.00008 0.00008 0.00012 0.00008 < 0.00003 0.00005
Total Calcium mg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 2% 3% 4% 141 138 118 121 122 127
Total Chromium mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 0% 1% 1% 0.0286 0.0286 0.0266 0.0268 0.0358 0.0354
Total Chromium III mg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 0% 8% 6% 0.024 0.024 0.025 0.023 0.033 0.035
Total Chromium VI mg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 22% 120% b na 0.004 0.005 0.001 0.004 0.003 < 0.001
Total Cobalt mg/L 25% 0.000 03 0.000 09 1% 3% 5% 0.0136 0.0134 0.0113 0.0117 0.013 0.0124
Total Copper mg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 11% 1% 0% 0.0047 0.0042 0.0098 0.0097 0.003 0.003
Total Iron mg/L 25% 0.005 0.015 4% 3% 1% 2.85 2.75 1.18 1.21 1.67 1.65
Total Lead mg/L 25% 0.000 03 0.000 09 9% 0% 2% 0.00084 0.00077 0.00076 0.00076 0.00117 0.00119
Total Lithium mg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 29% b na 0% 0.003 0.004 < 0.003 < 0.003 0.003 0.003
Total Magnesium mg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 3% 3% 2% 49.2 47.8 38.3 39.3 46 47
Total Manganese mg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 3% 3% 2% 1.47 1.43 1.39 1.43 1.22 1.25
Total Mercury mg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 na na na 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Molybdenum mg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 0% 0% 10% 0.0014 0.0014 0.0011 0.0011 0.0011 0.001
Total Nickel mg/L 25% 0.000 1 0.000 3 5% 8% 3% 0.0532 0.0506 0.0456 0.0492 0.0535 0.0552
Total Phosphorus mg/L 25% 0.01 0.03 0% 3% 3% 2.18 2.17 1.98 2.05 2.62 2.7
Total Potassium mg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 3% 2% 5% 160 156 127 129 162 171
Total Selenium mg/L 25% 0.000 2 0.000 6 0% 29% b 0% 0.0004 0.0004 0.0003 0.0004 0.0003 0.0003
Total Silicon mg/L 25% 0.5 1.5 1% 3% 1% 14 14.2 14.3 14.8 13.3 13.5
Total Silver mg/L 25% 0.000 03 0.000 09 na na 50% b < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 0.00005 0.00003
Total Sodium mg/L 25% 0.05 0.15 3% 3% 3% 382 371 282 290 395 408
Total Strontium mg/L 25% 0.000 3 0.000 9 4% 2% 2% 0.932 0.895 0.726 0.744 0.813 0.827
Total Sulphur mg/L 25% 3. 9. 5% 11% 0% 20 21 33 37 15 15
Total Thallium mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 na na na < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001
Total Tin mg/L 25% 0.000 05 0.000 15 0% 2% 3% 0.00194 0.00194 0.00227 0.00222 0.00235 0.00228
Total Titanium mg/L 25% 0.003 0.009 4% 5% 5% 0.053 0.055 0.058 0.061 0.04 0.038
Total Uranium mg/L 25% 0.000 01 0.000 03 22% 8% 46% a 0.0001 0.00008 0.00012 0.00013 0.00016 0.0001
Total Vanadium mg/L 25% 0.001 0.003 3% 3% 0% 0.036 0.035 0.031 0.032 0.037 0.037
Total Zinc mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 57% a 16% 1% 0.0271 0.0151 0.0146 0.0171 0.0185 0.0186
Total Zirconium mg/L 25% 0.000 5 0.001 5 2% 4% 3% 0.006 6 0.006 7 0.005 4 0.005 6 0.006 9 0.006 7
Notes:
(1) MDL - method detection limit.
(2) LOQ - limit of quantification.
(3) RPD - relative percent difference.
b - Coefficient of variation greater than 25% with some replicates less than or equal to the limit of quantitation.
60158830_TBL-3-4_2010-10-12_ Hartland valve chamber - Relative Percent Difference for Field Replicates.xls:Relative % Diff Page 2 of 2
4. Groundwater Flow
4.1 Data
The groundwater flow interpretation presented in this section is based on the following data:
 groundwater elevations were measured four times per year in most groundwater monitoring wells and five times
per year in landfill gas monitoring wells and selected groundwater monitoring wells;
 continuous water levels and leachate elevations monitoring using the SCADA system for the lower leachate
lagoon, upper leachate lagoon, Phase 2 basin and wells 36-1-1 and 37-1-1;
 continuous water level monitoring in four purge wells south of Phase 1;
 continuous water level and flow monitoring in or near two purge wells (80-1-0-P8 and 52-4-0-P7) and water level
monitoring in one monitoring well (40-1-1) located north of Phase 1;
 presence and elevation of topography and surface water bodies; and
 daily precipitation data.
Groundwater elevations for 2009/10 are presented in Appendix A.3. The data indicate that there are two separate
hydrogeological flow systems at Hartland landfill. One is a regional groundwater flow system in the bedrock
surrounding and underlying the landfill. The second is contained within the waste itself. Although the two flow
systems are separate, the presence of the leachate mound within the waste influences groundwater flow in the
bedrock underlying the waste. Understanding these two flow systems is important for evaluating the effectiveness of
leachate control and containment measures. The groundwater flow patterns are interpreted based on groundwater
elevations measured in September 2009.
4.2 Regional Groundwater Flow in the Bedrock
Figure 4-1 presents regional groundwater flow based on groundwater elevations in bedrock wells and deep wells in
refuse for September 2009. Several wells (47-1-1, 74-1-1, 75-1-1, 82-1-1, VLGW-02-D, VLGW-03-D, VLGW-08-D,
VLGW-15-D, VLGW-16-D and VLGW-17-D) are screened at or near the bottom of the waste and their water levels
are interpreted as being representative of the regional groundwater flow system within bedrock underlying the
landfill. Figure 4-2 is a north-south cross-section that extends from north of the leachate lagoons to south of Phase 1
through the refuse. Figure 4-3 is an east-west cross-section extending from the bedrock ridge located north and west
of Phase 2 eastward to the eastern property boundary.
Groundwater flow patterns were similar to those observed in previous years. Regional groundwater flow in the
vicinity of Hartland landfill is strongly influenced by bedrock geometry and topographic relief. Regional groundwater
flows from southwest to northeast from Mount Work and toward the north-south trending valley that underlies the
northern portions of the Phase 1 and Phase 2 landfill.

Groundwater flow in the bedrock valley that holds the landfill is predominantly northward as shown in Figure 4-1.
Most of the northward groundwater flow in the bedrock below the landfill reports to the leachate lagoons via the
Phase 2 basin leachate collection system, springs discharging to the lower lagoon and the Phase 1 north purge
wells (52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8).
As shown on Figure 4-1, a small portion of groundwater below the southern portion of the Phase 1 landfill flows to the
southeast. There is a groundwater flow divide located near the southern end of the landfill. This flow divide roughly
corresponds to a bedrock high in the valley floor beneath the landfill. Southeastward groundwater flow below the landfill is
constrained by a clay berm/bedrock grout curtain installed at the south end of the landfill in the 1980’s, and by four south
purge wells (P1, P2, P3 and P4) which commenced pumping leachate in 2001.
Groundwater flow in the vicinity of the Hartland North Pad northwest of Phase 2 is also presented in Figure 4-1. In
2009/10, the groundwater flow was essentially unchanged from previous years. Groundwater flow from this area is
generally northeastward toward Willis Point Road. Groundwater flow is divergent from the topographic high, with flow to
the northeast (towards Heal Creek) and to the north (towards Durrance Lake).
A divergence of groundwater flow has also been inferred north of Phase 2. Six monitoring wells were installed at
three locations (77, 78 and 79) in 2006/07 to better define the location of the divergence in groundwater flow.
Historically, the bedrock ridge north of Phase 2 has been assumed to represent a divergence in groundwater flow
based on topography and the Phase 2 hydraulic trap was inferred to induce an inward hydraulic gradient to capture
leachate from within Phase 2. However, the landfill has expanded to the northwest and further from the microtunnel
draining the Phase 2 basin. The ability of the hydraulic trap to maintain an inward gradient north and west of Phase 2
in the future has not been assessed from a hydrogeological perspective. Confirming the location of the divergence in
groundwater flow has important implications for evaluating the effectiveness of the hydraulic trap as the landfill
expands in the future and refuse is deposited closer to the northern property boundary.
East of the landfill boundary there is a bedrock ridge, which runs roughly north-south between the Hartland landfill and
Kiowa Place road. Groundwater in the shallow bedrock along the landfill boundary flows to the northwest (inwards toward
the northern portion of Phase 1). East of the landfill boundary, the topography begins to slope eastward towards Tod
Creek valley and the groundwater flow direction is also likely eastward towards Tod Creek.
4.3 Groundwater and Leachate Flow – Phase 1
East of Phase 1
Figure 4-4 shows groundwater elevations at locations 18 and 76, located on the bedrock ridge east of Phase 1.
Dramatic changes in water levels at location 18 have occurred since 2001. The 2005 to 2010 data from monitoring
location 76 confirms the presence of a strong downward vertical gradient. Groundwater levels at location 76 are
higher than at location 18 and indicate a westward component of groundwater flow at this location (towards the
landfill). During 2009/10, water level measurements indicate a strong downward gradient persisted at monitoring
locations 18 and 76 throughout the year. This indicates that this area is behaving as a recharge area and is the
location of an inferred groundwater divide. As seen in Figure 4-4, the groundwater elevation in the deepest well at
monitoring location 76 is 3.6 to 7 metres higher than groundwater elevations in the deepest wells at monitoring
location 18, confirming groundwater flow toward the landfill.

100
Precipitation (mm)
75 Hartland
50
25
168
18-1-1 (60 m)
18-1-2 (48 m)
18-2-1 (33 m)
164
18-2-2 (16 m)
Groundwater Elevation (m ASL)
160
156
152
148
168
76-1-1 (54 m)
76-2-1 (43 m)
76-3-1 (29 m)
164
160
156
152
Jan-2005 Jan-2006 Jan-2007 Jan-2008 Jan-2009 Jan-2010 Jan-2011 Jan-2012
Figure 4-4. Groundwater Elevations East of Phase 1

Phase 1
Groundwater monitors installed at varying depths in Phase 1 provide water level data to confirm leachate levels and
flow directions within the refuse. In addition to the monitors, water level data is collected from selected landfill gas
wells in Phase 1.
September 2009 groundwater levels, equipotential lines and inferred groundwater flow directions are shown on a
north-south cross-section through the Phase 1 landfill on Figure 4-2 (see Figure 4-1 for cross-section line). During
the operating years of the Phase 1 landfill, the leachate mound within Phase 1 reached elevations of approximately
160 m. Final cover was installed on the Phase 1 landfill in 1997 to limit infiltration. The leachate mound is interpreted
as being ‘perched’ above the regional groundwater flow system with strong downward hydraulic gradients, as shown
on Figure 4-2.
Leachate elevations measured in monitoring wells completed in refuse and bedrock in Phase 1 are shown on
Figure 4-5 together with precipitation data collected at Hartland landfill. Shallow monitors 46-2-1 (13.8 m deep) and
48-1-1 (15.4 m deep) are installed near the centre and at the south end of Phase 1, respectively, and leachate
elevations in these monitors have remained fairly constant since February 2000. The leachate elevation data
generally indicates that a downward gradient was present within Phase 1. Leachate elevation data from monitors
47-1-1, 74-1-1 and 75-1-1, screened near the bottom of the refuse at approximately 23, 39 and 33 m respectively,
are also presented on Figure 4-5. The data from these monitoring wells show that deeper in the landfill, leachate
levels respond to seasonal recharge events, and that the lower portions of the Phase 1 landfill are in hydraulic
connection with the regional groundwater flow system in bedrock beneath the landfill.
Since its installation, the groundwater elevation in well 74-1-1 has ranged from approximately 148 to 152 m ASL,
which is interpreted as the elevation of the regional water table beneath the landfill. Since December 2007, water
levels in this well have not exhibited the seasonal variability that was observed in the past. In 2009/10, water levels
appear to have risen to approximately 155 m ASL. Hartland staff indicates that this well is blocked at depth and the
condition of the well appears to be compromised and well 74-1-1 is no longer functional. Because the deep bedrock
groundwater flow system underlying Phase 1 has remained relatively stable for a long time and is well understood,
well 74-1-1 does not need to be replaced at this time. It should be removed from the monitoring program.
The groundwater elevation in well 75-1-1 has ranged from approximately 125 to 127 m ASL since its installation in
2003. Well 75-1-1 is located downgradient of the other wells at the north end of Phase 1 and is connected with the
deep regional water table. The higher perched leachate elevations in shallow monitors VLGW-21-D (142.73 m) and
VLGW-26-D (145.56 m), both located within 50 m of well 75-1-1 and screened in refuse, indicate that strong
downward vertical gradients are present in this area of the landfill.

100
Precipitation (mm)
75 Hartland
50
25
165
Monitoring Wells Screened in Refuse 46-2-1 (11.3 m)
48-1-1 (12.6 m)
VLGW-001-D (19.0 m)
160
VLGW-004-D (17.2 m)
Leachate Elevation (m ASL)
VLGW-011-S (12.0 m)
VLGW-018-D (31.0 m)
155
VLGW-019-D (24.0 m)
VLGW-20-D (28.0 m)
VLGW-21-D (27.0 m)
150
VLGW-26-D (35.0 m)
145
140
160
Monitoring Wells Screened in Bedrock 47-1-1 (22.5 m)
74-1-1 (38.9 m)
75-1-1 (33.1 m)
150 VLGW-002-D (27.0 m)

VLGW-003-D (25.0 m)
VLGW-008-D (28.0 m)
VLGW-015-D (34.0 m)
140
VLGW-016-D (25.9 m)
VLGW-017-D (30.0 m)
130
120
Figure 4-5. Leachate and Groundwater Elevations Within Phase 1

Figure 4-5 presents leachate levels in fourteen gas monitors in the Phase 1 landfill from January 2005 until March
2010. Although it is difficult to accurately measure leachate levels in gas wells, they do provide additional information
on leachate levels in the landfill. Leachate levels in the shallow landfill gas monitors typically show minor variations
in elevation as the refuse has a relatively high porosity and a relatively consistent recharge and discharge. However,
leachate elevations in the deep gas monitors (VLGW-02-D, VLGW-03-D, VLGW-08-D, VLGW-15-D, VLGW-16-D
and VLGW-17-D) continued to fluctuate in response to seasonal variability in groundwater recharge, indicating that
the lower portions of the Phase 1 landfill are in hydraulic connection with the regional groundwater flow system.
Accordingly, groundwater elevations measured in the deep landfill gas wells that exhibit seasonal fluctuations are
included in the interpretation of the regional groundwater flow within the bedrock aquifer shown on Figure 4-1.
Leachate and groundwater elevations collected in 2009/10 at some monitoring locations in Phase 1 (e.g.,
VLGW-11-S, 74-1-1, VLGW-02-D and VLGW-03-D) appear to be anomalous when compared to historical data.
Phase 1 has received final cover and there are no ongoing activities in the area that would cause leachate and
groundwater levels to change relative to historical behavior. It is suspected that improper well labelling has resulted
in water levels being attributed to incorrect wells. Quality assurance measurements should be implemented to
ensure all monitoring wells and gas wells are properly labelled and that staff follow strict water level monitoring
protocols when collecting water level data.
North of Phase 1
A 0.25 m diameter purge well (52-4-0-P7) was installed at the north end of Phase 1 in 1998. Water quality
monitoring data at the downgradient wells indicate that the operation of purge well 52-4-0-P7 has had a mitigative
effect on the northward migration of leachate since it was installed. In order to augment leachate collection at the
north end of Phase 1, an additional 0.25 m diameter purge well (80-1-0-P8) was installed during March 2007. The
influence of pumping the north purge wells (80-1-0-P8 and 52-4-0-P7) on groundwater flow directions is illustrated in
plan on Figure 4-1, with the 115 m, 120 m and 125 m water table contours deflected southward due to drawdown of
the water table surrounding the north purge wells. The effects of pumping are also shown in cross-section on
Figure 4-2 whereby groundwater flow being captured by the pumping well causes the equipotential lines to bend and
gradients to steepen near the well.
Figure 4-6 presents precipitation data together with groundwater elevations at monitoring well locations 40-1-1,
52-1-1, 52-3-0, 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8. Monitor 52-3-0 is the original purge well that operated between 1995 and
1998 and is located within two metres of well 52-4-0-P7. Water levels measured in 52-3-0 reflect water level
oscillations due to changes in the pumping rate from well 52-4-0-P7 and seasonal variations in groundwater
recharge. A second purge well (80-1-0-P8) was installed in March 2007 to augment leachate collection north of
Phase 1 and began pumping during September 2007. Pressure transducers were installed in wells 40-1-1, 52-3-0
(as a proxy for well 52-4-0-P7) and 80-1-0-P8 during 2007 to enable confirmation of the size of the drawdown cone
and provide long-term monitoring of purge well performance at the north end of Phase 1. During 2009, well
52-4-0-P7 was outfitted with a pressure transducer.
Water levels in these wells should continue to be monitored closely to ensure that the north purge wells (80-1-0-P8
and 52-4-0-P7) are functioning properly. Regular maintenance of the purge wells (liner replacement and borehole
cleaning) is necessary to minimize the potential for future leachate impacts at well 40-1-1 and further downgradient.

100
Precipitation (mm)
75 Hartland
50
25
125
40-1-1 (15.2 m)
Purge well off Nov. 17/06
to Jan. 29/07 52-1-1 (30.7 m)
52-3-0 (16.1 m)
52-4-0-P7 (22.5 m)
80-1-0-P8 (20.4 m)
120
115
110
105
Jan-2005 Jan-2006 Jan-2007 Jan-2008 Jan-2009 Jan-2010 Jan-2011

Figure 4-6. Groundwater Elevations Surrounding the North Purge Wells
South of Phase 1
The CRD installed six leachate collection purge wells at the south end of the Phase 1 landfill in August 2000 to
intercept leachate migrating south of the Phase 1 groundwater divide. Pumps were installed in four of these wells
(P1, P2, P3, P4) and they have been in operation since September 2001. Since May 2002, the south purge wells
have been operating on a fairly continuous basis. The remaining two wells, P6 and P7, were not fitted with pumps
due to low well yield at these locations.
Groundwater elevations measured using pressure transducers in each of the four operational south purge wells are
plotted in Figure 4-7. The on/off cycling of the pumps is evident as water levels generally range from approximately
133 to 151 m. These large and rapid changes in water level imply the subsurface material has a low transmissivity,
low bulk porosity and that the cone of depression generated by these wells may be limited in extent. The installation
of pressure transducers in unused purge wells or nearby monitoring wells would provide a means of confirming the
extent of the drawdown cone around the purge wells.
Beginning in January 2007, groundwater elevations in P1 rose well above the historical peaks due to a change in the
hydraulic behaviour of the purge well. This resulted in well yields that were greater than the pumping capacity and
very little drawdown in P1. As a result, a higher capacity submersible pump was installed in P1 during September
2008 to maintain pumping levels at approximately 140 m ASL. Following submersible pump installation in P1,
pumping elevations fluctuated closer to the target pumping groundwater elevation of 140 m ASL in P1, and closer to
135 m ASL in P2, P3 and P4. As a result of pump fouling and excessive maintenance requirements, the submersible
pump was removed from P1 in December 2009 and replaced with the original bladder pump. An additional purge
well (P10) was installed in August 2010 near P1 to permit installation of an additional bladder pump in close
proximity to P1 and augment leachate collection south of the landfill. Ongoing maintenance of all pumps and wells
should be continued to ensure adequate leachate collection.
Seasonal fluctuations in the pumping levels are also apparent on Figure 4-8, with the lowest levels occurring in
summer/fall. It does not appear that the pumping of these wells is responsible for the lowered water levels in deep
wells 18-1-1 and 18-1-2, located 260 m to the northeast, but may locally lower the water table beneath the south end
of Phase 1 during periods of reduced surface infiltration.
Based on groundwater chemistry sampling at location 60, the operation of the south purge wells had a weaker
restorative effect on groundwater quality at the south end of the landfill than in previous years. Elevated
concentrations of leachate indicator parameters were seen in wells 60-1-1, 60-2-1 and 60-3-1 again in 2009/10, as
they were in 2008/09. This is likely the result of higher pumping water levels in P1 during 2007, 2008, part of 2009
and 2010. It is anticipated that the installation and operation of the additional purge well (P10) will improve the
effectiveness of the south purge well system.

100
Precipitation (mm)
75 Hartland
50
25
155
P1
Bladder Pump - 0.44 L/s (7 gpm) Submersible Pump - 1.26 L/s (20 gpm) Bladder Pump - 0.44 L/s (7 gpm)
P2
P3
Purge wells turned off
from Jan. 5 - 27, 2007 P4
150
145
140
135
130
125
Figure 4-7. Groundwater Elevations in the South Purge Wells

100
Precipitation (mm)
Precipitation (Hartland)
75
50
25
135
Lower Lagoon
Upper Lagoon
Phase 2 Basin
130
125
120
115
110
105
135
38-1-1
39-1-1
39-2-1
130
Well 36
Well 37
Phase 2 Basin
125
120
115
110
105
Figure 4-8 - Water Elevations Within the Leachate Conveyance System and Surrounding the Phase 2 Basin
4.4 Groundwater and Leachate Flow – Phase 2
The Phase 2 landfill is located in a large bedrock basin situated immediately west of the north end of the Phase 1
landfill. The bottom of the basin is a groundwater discharge area. Groundwater from the elevated land to the south
and west, as well as from the west side of Phase 1, discharges into the basin and is captured by the Phase 2
hydraulic trap leachate collection system. This captured leachate is discharged through the 350 mm diameter
microtunnel under gravity to the lower leachate lagoon. During August 2004, the West Face Closure was completed,
consisting of a liner/cap on the west face of Phase 2 Cell 1. This liner was intended to function as an internal
drainage face on the east side of Cell 2. In 2008, the toe drain that was constructed at the base of the liner system to
collect internal drainage ceased to function and now only discharges leachate for short periods of time following
intense precipitation. The change in behaviour of the drainage system is presumably the result of pipe settlement
during refuse consolidation. Since April 2005, all water draining from the West Face Closure has been managed as
leachate and discharged into the upper leachate lagoon. All leachate is discharged via the leachate pipeline to the
sanitary sewer.
For proper operation of the hydraulic trap leachate collection system, groundwater levels north of Phase 2 need to
be higher than leachate levels inside the Phase 2 basin. During typical operations, leachate levels within the
Phase 2 basin are maintained 8 to 10 m lower than groundwater elevations outside the basin. The hydraulic trap
design includes a clay liner on the north side of the Phase 2 basin that allows for short-term leachate storage within
Phase 2 during periods of exceptionally wet weather. Pressure transducers installed in monitors 36 and 37 (north of
Phase 2) and within the Phase 2 basin continuously record groundwater and leachate elevations and are used to
confirm that an inward groundwater gradient is maintained, indicating that the hydraulic trap is functioning effectively.
Manual water level measurements are made monthly as a backup system for the pressure transducer
measurements.
Figure 4-8 presents hydrographs for monitoring wells at locations 36, 37, 38 and 39 sited north of Phase 2 and the
upper lagoon and representing regional groundwater levels outside the Phase 2 basin. Water levels plotted on
Figure 4-8 illustrate that groundwater elevations at locations 36 and 37 were higher than leachate levels in the
Phase 2 basin throughout 2009/10, indicating an inward hydraulic gradient was present throughout the year. Similar
to wells at location 36 and 37, water levels at locations 38 and 39 remained above levels in the Phase 2 basin during
2009/10. Figure 4-8 also shows a hydrograph of the leachate levels in the lined upper leachate lagoon and the lower
unlined leachate lagoon based on transducer readings recorded by the SCADA system. The plot shows that
leachate elevations in Phase 2 have been maintained approximately two metres lower following the September 2008
leachate storage test relative to historical levels as a result of changes to operating procedures following the test.
Leachate levels in the Phase 2 Basin are now maintained below the elevation of the unlined lower leachate lagoon.
As discussed in Section 4.2, a divergence in groundwater flow has been inferred north of Phase 2 in the area of the
newly constructed High Level Road. The presence of this groundwater flow divergence has been assumed based on
existing topography and what is known about regional groundwater flow in the area. While the presence of a
divergence in groundwater flow in this area has been accepted for many years, its location has important
implications for maintaining the Phase 2 hydraulic trap as the landfill expands in the future. Until recently, the area
was not easily accessible but with the High Level Road construction, access is now possible.
In order to better understand the direction of groundwater flow north of Phase 2, a total of six new wells were
installed at three separate locations north of the High Level Road. Four new monitoring wells were installed during
2006 in separate boreholes at locations 77 and 78 and an additional two wells were installed during 2007 at location
79 following access improvements. The monitoring of groundwater elevations at these locations will help define
baseline groundwater flow conditions so that the groundwater flow regime can be monitored as landfilling within
Phase 2 continues. This data will be useful for assessing leachate management design requirements in the future.
CRD is currently collecting groundwater elevation data from these wells on a regular basis and plans to install

pressure transducers in select wells to better understand natural temporal and spatial variability in groundwater
elevations over time.
Groundwater elevations collected at locations 77, 78 and 79 during 2009/10, indicate that the inferred groundwater
divergence located north of Phase 2 is slightly less pronounced than originally inferred, although more detailed data
is required to fully assess the potential for northward leachate migration throughout the life of the landfill.
Consideration should be given to the installation of additional groundwater monitors west of location 79 to improve
the understanding of groundwater flow north and west of Phase 2. Detailed groundwater level information will be
important when evaluating the need for additional leachate containment measures north of Phase 2. As more data is
collected, a more detailed interpretation of groundwater flow should be made and the direction of groundwater flow
north of Phase 2 should be better defined. Generally, groundwater elevations indicate that the water table is a
subdued replica of ground surface topography and that there is a downward gradient (groundwater recharge) in the
upland portions of the cross-section (Figure 4-3) and an upward gradient (groundwater discharge) in lowland areas.
In 2002 and 2003, several monitoring wells were installed to investigate potential leachate mounding within the
Phase 2 refuse. Based on 2005/06 data, monitoring wells at locations 67, 68 and 69 were no longer capable of
providing reliable water level data. A total of four replacement monitoring wells were installed in the Phase 2 landfill
in the spring of 2007 at locations 82, 83 and 84. These wells were installed to provide the water level data needed to
assess leachate mounding and drainage within the deeper portions of Phase 2. Groundwater levels have not been
collected from wells at location 84 since February 2009 due to irreparable damage by a compactor or refuse
settlement. Well 84 has subsequently been buried permanently by refuse and is no longer accessible. In October
2010, CRD installed permanent pressure transducers within Phase 2 at location 86 to facilitate continuous
monitoring of leachate levels at multiple elevations within the Phase 2 basin. As Phase 2 filling continues, it will be
important to monitor leachate levels and potential mounding in Phase 2 to verify seismic stability, to confirm
functioning of the Phase 2 underdrain, and to determine if additional leachate containment measures are necessary.
4.5 Summary
Groundwater flow in 2009/10 generally followed previously established patterns. Regional groundwater flows from
Mount Work northeast to the north-south trending valley that underlies the northern portions of the Phase 1 and
Phase 2 landfill. The majority of groundwater flow is northward. Most of the northward groundwater flow in the
bedrock below the landfill is captured by the Phase 2 basin leachate collection system, springs discharging to the
lower lagoon and the Phase 1 north purge well system (wells 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8).
There is a small amount of southeastward groundwater flow from the south end of the Phase 1 landfill toward
Killarney Lake. Southeastward groundwater flow below the landfill is constrained by a clay berm and a bedrock grout
curtain installed at the south end of the landfill and by pumping of the south purge wells (P1, P2, P3 and P4). P10 is
expected to augment leachate collection south of Phase 1 once it is operational. Higher pumping elevations in P1 as
a result of changes in the hydraulic behaviour of the well resulted in reduced leachate capture in December 2009
through 2010. An additional purge well (P10) was installed adjacent to P1 in August 2010, and is anticipated to
augment leachate collection in this area of the landfill once it is operational.
Groundwater monitors east of Phase 1 (locations 76 and 18) confirm flow from east to west toward the landfill,
Groundwater elevations north of the Phase 2 landfill remained within seasonal ranges. Inward hydraulic gradients
toward the Phase 2 basin were maintained throughout 2009/10. The effectiveness of the hydraulic trap needs to be
assessed as Phase 2 refuse extends further north and additional lifts are constructed. Additional leachate

containment measures may need to be implemented at the north end of the Phase 2 landfill to mitigate the potential
for off-site leachate migration during future landfill development. Leachate levels within Phase 2 need to be
monitored on a regular basis.
Pressure transducers installed in wells 40-1-1, 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8 help delineate the size of the drawdown
cone surrounding the purge wells and will provide long-term monitoring of purge well performance at the north end of
Phase 1.
Leachate mounding continues to be present in Phase 1 of the landfill. Strong downward gradients are present within
the refuse. Leachate mounding conditions occur in the Phase 2 landfill as indicated by groundwater elevations at
locations 82 and 83. Both wells at location 84 were damaged and have been replaced with permanently installed
pressure transducers at location 86 in October 2010. This should provide improved monitoring of leachate levels in
Phase 2.
Leachate and groundwater elevations collected in 2009/10 at some monitoring locations in Phase 1 (e.g.,
VLGW-11-S, 74-1-1, VLGW-02-D and VLGW-03-D) appear to be anomalous when compared to historical data.
Phase 1 has received final cover and there are no ongoing activities in the area that would cause leachate and
groundwater levels to change relative to historical behavior. A standard protocol for water level monitoring including
confirmation of well depths and well names should be implemented to ensure consistency in water level
measurement and data recording.

5. Groundwater Quality in Monitoring Wells Near the Landfill
5.1 Data
The analytical results for water samples collected from groundwater monitors in 2009/10 are presented in
Appendix B.1. Groundwater quality samples were collected between April 2009 and March 2010.
The groundwater quality data are compared to the British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines (Criteria)
(Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, 1998a, updated 2001) for drinking water unless otherwise noted. All
data, including the applicable guidelines, are provided in Appendix B. Values that exceed the guidelines are noted.
For ammonia, a key leachate indicator parameter, CRD staff calculated the BC 30-day average criterion for
freshwater aquatic life based on the typical pH and temperature data collected during the monitoring period. These
values are identified on tables in the appendices (1.78 mg/L ammonia at pH 7.5 and 15°C). This provides a
conservative standard as there is potential for groundwater discharge to streams containing aquatic life. There are
no drinking water guidelines for this parameter.
Table 5-1 presents a summary of the wells that exceeded one or more criteria in 2009/10. Monitors where
concentrations of conductivity, ammonia and chloride exceeded criteria are generally categorized as being affected
by leachate. Iron and manganese concentrations above the guidelines are also identified on Table 5-1. Elevated iron
and manganese concentrations may be due to natural geologic conditions and are generally not a reliable indicator
of leachate presence. Iron and manganese are naturally present in the soils and metamorphic rock within the region
and commonly occur at elevated concentrations in the regional groundwater.
Seasonal variability in water quality parameters can mask the overall trend of parameters in groundwater. In order to
better understand long-term trends in water quality, a non-parametric statistical analysis has been employed since
2005. This test, known as the Mann-Kendall test, can be used to evaluate if contaminant concentrations are
significantly increasing or decreasing over time. This method does not rely on normally distributed data and can
incorporate missing data (non-detects) and irregularly spaced measurement periods in the dataset. Non-detect
measurements are assigned the value of the detection limit for the purposes of the statistical analysis. Water quality
data at Hartland landfill often includes concentrations below detection limits and samples are not always collected at
regularly spaced intervals. The hypothesis of both increasing and decreasing trends are tested at the same time.
The Mann-Kendall test can be used for virtually any groundwater parameter and provides a quantitative assessment
of water quality parameters and determines if a statistically significant trend (increasing or decreasing) is present for
a given parameter.

Table 5-1. Hartland Landfill - Groundwater Quality - Exceedences - 2009-2010
B.C. Water Quality Maximum Value 700. 0.35 (2) 0.05 (2) 12.3 (3) 10. 500. (2) 250. (2) 8.5 (2)
Maximum Average 1.78 (3)
Guidelines (1) Minimum Value 6.5
Method Detection Limit 1. 0.001 0.0001 0.005 0.005 0.02 0.5 0.5 0.1
Well electrical ammonia
Station Depth Date Sampled Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Comments
(m) µS/cm mg/L mg/L mgN/L mgN/L mgN/L mg/L mg/L pH
Gw-04-4-1 7.20 2009 Sep 23 526. 0.012 0.046 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 41. 62. 7.5
2009 Nov 25 402. 0.012 0.085 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.88 48. 26. 7.3
2010 Feb 17 285. 0.008 0.07 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 25. 20. 7.8
Gw-07-1-0 36.58 2009 Oct 07 1110. a 0.21 1.95 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 76. 140. 8.1
2010 Feb 18 986. a 0.246 1.84 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 74. 110. 8.
Gw-16-1-2 34.00 2009 Sep 30 373. 0.16 0.125 a 1.54 < 0.005 0.04 26. 4.4 7.8
Gw-17-1-3 17.70 2009 Sep 24 470. 0.353 a 0.221 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 42. 7. 8.2
2010 Feb 23 414. 0.026 0.0125 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.47 45.5 6. 7.3
Gw-19-1-1 37.50 2009 Sep 28 403. 0.116 1.63 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 49. 12. 7.8
2010 Feb 17 409. 0.15 1.2 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 62. 9.8 8.2
Gw-19-1-2 28.00 2009 Sep 28 364. 0.077 0.285 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 6.1 8.
2010 Feb 17 398. 0.78 a 0.788 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 45. 7.6 8.1
Gw-19-2-1 17.00 2009 Sep 28 510. 0.023 0.3 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 83. 10. 7.4
2010 Feb 17 424. 0.085 0.089 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 47. 12. 8.3
Gw-19-2-2 9.00 2009 Sep 28 415. 0.086 0.065 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 57. 11. 8.
2010 Feb 17 429. 0.009 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 54. 13. 8.3
Gw-20-1-2 20.80 2009 Jul 21 370. 0.039 0.065 a 0.56 < 0.005 < 0.02 17. 15. 8.1
2009 Oct 02 436. 0.069 0.112 a 1.23 < 0.005 < 0.02 18. 20. 8.1
2009 Dec 03 347. 0.034 0.057 a 0.549 < 0.005 < 0.02 17. 14. 8.
Purge water very turbid (grey) with fine sands/clay at
2010 Feb 24 332. 0.031 0.046 0.183 < 0.005 < 0.02 16. 12. 8. bottome of bucket. Filtered clear and did not clog.
Gw-21-1-2 8.60 2009 Jul 21 600. 1.58 a 2.445 a 7. b < 0.005 < 0.02 23. 45. 7.6
Water very turbid. Filtered Clear (no clogging - used one
2009 Oct 02 717. a 1.78 a 2.85 a 0.269 < 0.005 < 0.02 22. 71. 7.6 filter)
2009 Dec 03 467. 1.14 a 1.83 a 6.25 b < 0.005 < 0.02 23. 23. 7.3
2010 Feb 24 504. 1.36 a 1.9 a 6.28 b < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 27. 7.2
Gw-21-2-1 4.95 2009 Jul 21 630. 1.5 a 2.66 a 6.7 b < 0.005 0.02 23. 53. 7.5
2009 Oct 02 717. a 1.55 a 2.91 a 8.23 b < 0.005 < 0.02 21. 75. 7.7
2009 Dec 03 455. 0.759 a 1.96 a 6.52 b < 0.005 0.04 23. 23. 7.3
Purge water orange with rusty precipitate. Filtered clear
2010 Feb 24 519. 0.951 a 2.14 a 5.14 b < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 32. 7.3 and did not clog.
Gw-25-1-1 24.50 2009 Oct 07 490. 0.035 0.09 a 0.021 < 0.005 0.07 77. 6. 8.1 Only slightly turbid, but very difficult to filter
2010 Feb 26 474. 0.116 0.091 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 60. 6.5 8.1
Gw-25-1-2 6.50 2009 Oct 07 352. 0.073 0.136 a 0.353 < 0.005 < 0.02 51. 6.1 8.
2010 Feb 26 309. 0.006 0.115 a 0.07 < 0.005 0.19 32. 2.6 7.9
Gw-30-1-2 5.77 2009 Aug 12 831. a 0.006 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.2 23. 160. 7.6
2009 Oct 09 817. a 0.009 0.0006 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.15 26. 130. 8.
2009 Dec 04 291. 0.014 < 0.001 0.007 < 0.005 0.15 15. 31. 7.3
2010 Mar 02 1030. a 0.007 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.44 9.1 220. 6.9
Gw-36-2-1 42.37 2009 Jul 23 110. 0.011 0.004 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 4.3 2.8 9.1 a
2009 Oct 06 105. 0.014 0.003 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 3.7 2.4 9. a
2009 Dec 01 104. 0.009 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 4.2 2.6 9.1 a
2010 Feb 26 116. 0.013 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 8.1 2.5 8.5
Gw-36-3-1 18.00 2009 Jul 23 1400. a 0.014 0.005 0.09 < 0.005 0.84 120. 33. 7.6
2009 Oct 06 1325. a 0.024 0.0113 0.018 0.008 1.46 130. 30.5 7.7
2009 Dec 01 1270. a 0.042 0.119 a 0.217 < 0.005 0.4 140. 27. 7.3
2010 Feb 26 1290. a 0.01 0.007 0.128 0.007 0.84 150. 24. 7.9
Gw-37-2-1 43.50 2009 Jul 23 120. 0.022 < 0.001 < 0.005 0.006 0.02 10. 3.7 9.6 a
2009 Oct 06 114. 0.024 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12. 4.2 9.5 a
2009 Dec 01 376. 0.01 < 0.001 0.024 < 0.005 0.02 11. 4.4 9.7 a
2010 Feb 26 115. 0.02 < 0.001 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 12. 3.8 9.1 a
Gw-37-3-1 14.80 2009 Jul 23 520. 1.56 a 0.468 a 0.73 < 0.005 < 0.02 65. 9.5 7.8
2009 Oct 06 507. 0.035 0.057 a 0.764 0.006 < 0.02 70. 9.5 7.5
2009 Dec 01 559. 1.65 a 0.4325 a 0.817 < 0.005 < 0.02 56.5 8.2 7.6
2010 Feb 26 510. 0.652 a 0.514 a 0.7 0.005 0.04 56. 7.8 8.
Gw-38-1-1 18.29 2009 Jul 23 660. 0.013 0.026 0.84 < 0.005 0.39 53. 11. 8.
2009 Oct 06 655. 1.68 a 0.464 a 0.375 0.005 0.48 48. 11. 7.8
2009 Dec 01 614. 0.05 0.018 0.344 0.01 0.4 48. 10. 7.8
2010 Feb 26 628. 0.029 0.01 0.015 0.006 0.41 50. 11. 8.1
Gw-39-2-1 37.19 2009 Jul 22 330. 0.006 0.0295 0.11 < 0.005 0.04 21. 4.3 8.
2009 Sep 30 335. 0.107 0.067 a 0.719 < 0.005 < 0.02 15. 1.1 8.
2009 Dec 01 376. 0.077 0.194 a 0.439 < 0.005 < 0.02 26. 4.9 7.9
2010 Feb 18 398. 0.035 0.07 a 0.212 < 0.005 0.04 29. 5.1 8.2
Gw-40-1-1 15.24 2009 Jul 23 1100. a 0.025 1.5 a 7.1 b 0.217 7.3 83. 47. 7.8
2009 Sep 30 1020. a 0.013 1.57 a 7.01 b 0.118 2.6 78. 39. 8.
2009 Dec 01 1040. a 0.01 1.365 a 6.965 b 0.287 4.65 85. 46.5 7.8
2010 Feb 19 800. a 0.012 0.837 a 5.39 b 0.258 2.67 62. 31. 7.6
Gw-41-1-1 9.07 2009 Jul 17 730. a 0.051 2.08 a 0.029 < 0.005 0.63 92. 5. 7.6
2009 Oct 09 730. a 0.126 1.75 a 0.024 < 0.005 0.09 200. 5.3 7.9
2009 Dec 04 735. a 0.145 2.03 a 0.498 < 0.005 0.43 220. 4.8 7.6
2010 Mar 02 718. a 0.033 1.68 a 0.013 < 0.005 0.2 190. 4.8 7.9
Gw-42-1-1 8.84 2009 Jul 17 610. 0.749 a 0.166 a 0.076 < 0.005 < 0.02 47. 29. 7.5
2009 Oct 09 666. 0.843 a 0.178 a 0.079 < 0.005 < 0.02 59. 32. 7.7
2009 Dec 04 585. 0.928 a 0.171 a 0.073 < 0.005 < 0.02 41. 29. 7.4
2010 Mar 02 506. 0.662 a 0.1335 a 0.059 < 0.005 < 0.02 35. 19. 7.6
Gw-43-1-1 21.34 2009 Jul 17 790. a 0.011 0.016 0.095 < 0.005 0.06 41. 41. 7.8
2009 Oct 09 783. a 0.046 0.028 0.22 < 0.005 0.03 41. 37. 8.
2009 Dec 08 767. a 0.015 0.012 0.112 < 0.005 0.08 42. 35. 7.7
2010 Feb 25 765. a 0.007 0.011 0.127 < 0.005 0.1 42. 34. 7.9
Gw-50-1-1 16.90 2009 Jul 21 400. 0.016 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 25. 5.6 8.
2009 Oct 02 396. 0.005 0.0027 0.028 < 0.005 0.07 24. 5.8 8.1
2009 Nov 27 461. 0.246 0.171 a 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.02 33. 5.1 8.
2010 Feb 19 388. 0.013 0.002 0.008 < 0.005 0.03 25. 5.9 8.1
Gw-52-1-1 29.72 2009 Jul 15 2600. a 0.776 a 0.442 a 23.3 a < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 290. a 7.7
2009 Oct 05 2600. a 0.8 a 0.47 a 24.1 a < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 270. a 7.6
2009 Dec 02 2460. a 0.798 a 0.482 a 22.4 a < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 270. a 7.4
2010 Feb 25 2450. a 0.796 a 0.426 a 20. a < 0.005 0.12 < 0.5 250. 7.6
Gw-53-1-1 19.96 2009 Jul 22 460. 0.164 0.17 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 35. 5.6 7.8
2009 Sep 30 474. 0.199 0.173 a < 0.005 0.009 < 0.02 36. 5.9 8.2
2009 Nov 27 395. 0.007 < 0.001 0.016 < 0.005 0.05 23. 5.2 8.2
2010 Feb 19 461. 0.171 0.178 a 0.034 < 0.005 < 0.02 35. 6.9 7.9
Gw-55-1-1 13.11 2009 Oct 09 756. a 0.022 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.13 180. 25. 7.9
2010 Mar 02 827. a < 0.005 0.014 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.64 230. 23. 7.9
. 60158830_TBL-5-1_2010-12-21_Groundwater Chemistry - Water Quality Exceedences - UPDATED Dec2010.xls:Exceedences Page 1 of 2

Table 5-1. Hartland Landfill - Groundwater Quality - Exceedences - 2009-2010
Method Detection Limit 1. 0.001 0.0001 0.005 0.005 0.02 0.5 0.5 0.1
Gw-56-1-1 17.38 2009 Oct 09 454. 0.022 0.0125 0.006 0.005 < 0.02 52. 11.5 7.9
2010 Mar 02 481. 0.012 0.015 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.02 67. 10. 8.1
Gw-57-1-1 13.56 2009 Oct 09 460. 0.014 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 16. 29. 8.
2010 Mar 02 458. < 0.005 0.008 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.02 20. 29. 8.1
Gw-58-1-0 19.20 2009 Jul 31 5300. a 0.739 a 6.49 a 51.65 a 0.146 9. 84.5 840. a 7.2 Yellow, amber colour and slightly foamy
2009 Sep 30 5300. a 0.539 a 6.81 a 55.8 a 0.166 6. 79. 770. a 7.8
2009 Dec 08 5290. a 0.502 a 6.9 a 57.5 a 0.143 3.02 73. 800. a 7.3
2010 Feb 19 5210. a 0.572 a 6.38 a 61.2 a 0.148 3.5 75. 800. a 7.5
Gw-60-1-1 22.40 2009 Sep 22 812. a 0.018 0.057 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 72. 48. 7.9
2010 Feb 16 850. a 0.005 0.016 0.046 < 0.005 0.04 69. 64. 7.8
Gw-60-2-1 15.10 2009 Sep 22 745. a 0.1 0.397 a 0.011 < 0.005 < 0.02 80. 71. 7.9
2010 Feb 16 843. a 0.253 0.47 a 0.062 < 0.005 < 0.02 68. 100. 7.9
Gw-60-3-1 6.90 2009 Sep 22 1620. a < 0.005 1.17 a 0.031 < 0.005 1.1 60. 260. a 7.7
2010 Feb 16 831. a < 0.005 0.577 a 0.042 < 0.005 1.49 60. 100. 7.8
Footvalve & tube clogged with clay (light brown like
Gw-62-2-1 18.90 2009 Oct 09 300. 0.013 0.1096 a 0.014 < 0.005 0.08 12. 4.9 8. bentonite). Replaced footvalve &removed 6cm of tubing.
2010 Feb 25 324. 0.016 0.015 0.016 < 0.005 0.04 12. 4.5 7.3
Gw-63-1-1 31.80 2009 Oct 09 315. 0.077 0.109 a < 0.005 0.007 < 0.02 9.4 5.2 8.2
2010 Feb 25 322. 0.1 0.101 a 0.015 < 0.005 < 0.02 8.7 4.5 7.9
Gw-71-1-1 30.48 2009 Jul 31 440. 0.016 0.075 a 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.02 44. 8.1 7.9
2009 Sep 22 416. 0.019 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 28. 9. 8.
2009 Nov 27 453. 0.012 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 55. 8.7 7.9
2010 Feb 16 478. 0.012 0.0245 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.02 65.5 7.8 8.
Gw-71-2-1 20.06 2009 Jul 31 460. 0.064 0.052 a 0.156 < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 11. 7.9
2009 Sep 22 467. 0.035 0.047 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 10. 7.9
2009 Nov 27 461. 0.011 0.015 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 21. 10. 7.8
2010 Feb 16 385. 0.015 0.0125 0.021 < 0.005 0.16 16.9 9.5 7.8
Gw-72-1-1 30.48 2009 Jul 29 660. 0.343 0.194 a 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.02 46. 60. 8.2
2009 Sep 28 664. 0.387 a 0.183 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 43. 61. 8.1
2009 Nov 26 652. 0.387 a 0.197 a 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.02 40. 64. 8.
2010 Feb 16 664. 0.399 a 0.184 a 0.493 0.014 0.06 37. 56. 8.
Gw-72-2-1 20.12 2009 Jul 29 820. a 0.011 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 90. 86. 8.1
2009 Sep 28 825. a 0.01 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 40. 72. 8.1
2009 Nov 26 826. a 0.006 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 70. 93. 7.8
2010 Feb 16 828. a 0.023 < 0.001 0.008 < 0.005 0.03 85. 89. 8.1
Gw-72-3-1 10.36 2009 Jul 29 800. a 0.007 0.08 a 0.014 < 0.005 < 0.02 42. 75. 8.1
2009 Sep 28 781. a 0.015 0.0671 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 85. 87. 7.9
2009 Nov 26 807. a 0.007 0.036 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 52. 81. 7.7
2010 Feb 16 785. a 0.011 0.026 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.02 43. 77. 7.9
Gw-73-1-1 30.66 2009 Jul 28 505. 0.004 0.0105 0.007 < 0.005 0.03 48. 25. 8.
2009 Sep 23 568. 0.007 0.016 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 56. 33. 7.6
2009 Nov 26 513. < 0.005 0.021 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 62. 26. 7.9
2010 Feb 17 548. < 0.005 0.083 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 70. 25. 8.3
Gw-73-2-1 20.12 2009 Jul 28 550. 0.14 0.116 a 0.009 < 0.005 < 0.02 58. 28. 7.9
2009 Sep 23 611. 0.152 0.124 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 31. 59. 7.3
2009 Nov 26 537. 0.155 0.246 a 0.009 < 0.005 < 0.02 39. 44. 7.6
2010 Feb 17 501. 0.156 0.211 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 34. 30. 8.1
Turbid (grey) purge water but no trouble sampling through
Gw-76-1-1 53.95 2009 Jul 16 390. 0.047 0.085 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 83. 3.4 8.1 the filter
2009 Sep 28 432. 0.058 0.162 a 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 100. 3.4 8.
2009 Nov 25 418. 0.02 0.126 a 0.008 < 0.005 0.02 91. 3.7 8.
2010 Feb 18 378. < 0.005 0.049 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 77. 3.3 8.2
Gw-76-2-1 43.28 2009 Jul 16 520. 0.41 a 0.217 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 120. 2.8 8.1
Very turbid, milky colour. Only one filter used. Filtered
2009 Sep 28 778. a 0.057 0.122 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 180. 3.2 8.1 clear
2009 Nov 25 535. 0.179 0.376 a 0.006 < 0.005 < 0.02 130. 3. 8.
Very turbid (dark grey) at end of purge volume. 3L extra
purged to remove turbidity. Filtered clear and filter did not
2010 Feb 18 404. 0.086 0.084 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 78. 2.7 8.2 clog.
Gw-76-3-1 28.96 2009 Jul 16 420. 0.046 0.065 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 51. 2.7 8.1
2009 Sep 28 428. 0.042 0.046 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 52. 2.8 8.1 Slightly turbid. Filtered clear.
2009 Nov 25 414. 0.022 0.043 0.047 < 0.005 < 0.02 53. 2.7 7.9
2010 Feb 18 429. 0.03 0.047 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 36. 2.8 8.2
Gw-77-1-1 37.49 2009 Jul 23 360. 0.033 0.044 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 18. 4.7 8.2
2009 Oct 07 356. 0.221 0.065 a 0.035 < 0.005 < 0.02 18. 4.7 8.1
2009 Dec 08 356. 0.081 0.05 0.206 < 0.005 < 0.02 19. 4.7 8.
2010 Feb 23 359. 0.158 0.066 a 0.083 < 0.005 0.03 20. 4.7 8. Water murky. Sulphur smell with lizard bits.
Gw-77-2-1 19.03 2009 Jul 23 410. 0.071 0.112 a 0.016 < 0.005 < 0.02 29. 5.2 8.1 Turbid purge water but sample passed easily through filter
2009 Oct 07 407. 0.019 0.057 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 31. 5.8 8.
2009 Dec 08 403. 0.011 0.0325 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.02 29. 5.4 8.
2010 Feb 23 400. 0.007 0.049 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 5.3 8.
Gw-79-1-1 38.10 2009 Jul 23 390. 0.03 0.038 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.19 15. 5.2 8.1
2009 Oct 09 386. 0.025 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 16. 5.9 8.1
2009 Dec 08 377. 0.013 0.048 0.009 0.011 0.15 37. 26. 7.8
2010 Feb 25 387. 0.051 0.056 a 0.058 < 0.005 0.21 16. 5.3 7.8
Gw-79-2-1 28.96 2009 Jul 23 400. 0.342 0.171 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.15 18. 5.2 8.
Purge water moderately turbid (dark grey colour). Filtered
2009 Oct 09 397. 0.395 a 0.182 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 20. 5.5 8. easily.
2009 Dec 08 384. 0.219 0.1 a 0.013 0.005 0.09 17. 5.4 7.9
2010 Feb 25 388. 0.39 a 0.122 a 0.016 < 0.005 < 0.02 16. 5.2 7.9
Gw-85-1-1 9.14 2009 Sep 22 1005. a 0.005 1.43 a 3.095 b < 0.005 4.7 66. 170. 7.8 Turbid, muddy brown-yellow colour Filtered clear
2010 Feb 16 468. 0.009 0.726 a 1.44 < 0.005 3.14 37. 40. 7.5
Notes:
na - Not applicable.
a - Above maximum British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
b - Above average British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
c - Below minimum British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
(1) - British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines (Criteria), 1998 Edition, Updated August 24, 2001. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection.
or A Compendium of Working Water Quality Guidelines for British Columbia, 1998 Edition, Updated August 23, 2001. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection.
The guidelines cited are specific to drinking water, unless otherwise noted.
(2) - Aesthetic objective.

(3) - The ammonia guideline is for protection of aquatic life. It is pH and temperature dependant.
The value of 7.5 used for pH is typical of average results observed in recent ground water and surface water samples.
The value of 15 ºC used for temperature is typical of average results observed during summer in streams sampled for surface water quality.
The maximum average value is based on the 30 day average provided in the guidelines. This value is provided for comparison purposes. All reported ammonia data represents discrete samples.
. 60158830_TBL-5-1_2010-12-21_Groundwater Chemistry - Water Quality Exceedences - UPDATED Dec2010.xls:Exceedences Page 2 of 2

For the 2009/10 reporting period, a trend analysis was conducted for all stations regardless of ammonia, conductivity and
chloride concentrations. The analysis of trends is intended to promote early detection of statistically significant trends in
groundwater chemistry in a given well. A statistical trend analysis was conducted using data collected from 34 wells at key
compliance locations in addition to the remaining 51 monitoring wells where water quality is sampled at Hartland.
A statistical analysis utilizing the Mann-Kendall statistic (at the 95% confidence level) was conducted utilizing data
collected between April 2005 and March 2010. A five-year time frame is consistent with the time interval over which
most water quality data is plotted within this report and is expected to provide a good balance between seasonal
variation and long-term trends in water quality in a given monitoring well to point to areas of the landfill where water
quality is degrading and/or improving. The time frame over which trend analysis is conducted should be carefully
evaluated in conjunction with management and operational changes.
All field and lab replicates were removed from the data set prior to the analysis. Conductivity, ammonia and chloride
concentrations were tested for trends using the Mann-Kendall test as they are considered indicators of leachate at
Hartland landfill. Trends in sulphate concentrations were also evaluated because high sulphate concentrations have
been observed in relation to aggregate stockpiles at the Hartland North pad and elsewhere on site.
The results of the statistical trend analysis for all monitoring wells on site is provided in Appendix G and discussed in
the relevant sections of Chapter 5.
5.2 Average Electrical Conductivity
Figure 5-1, presents the average annual electrical conductivity values in plan for samples collected at Hartland
landfill in 2009/10. Figure 5-2 and Figure 5-3 present north-south and east-west cross-sections through the landfill
and north of the landfill that show average annual conductivity values. Average annual conductivity is a good general
indicator of the presence of inorganic parameters and a good indicator of potential leachate contamination when
elevated ammonia and chloride are also present.
On Figure 5-1, the 1,000 µS/cm contour line is interpreted as indicating the presence of leachate in groundwater.
Figure 5-1 shows that groundwater in the vicinity of the Phases 1 and 2 refuse disposal areas has been affected by
leachate. Similar to previous years, the 1,000 µS/cm contour for 2009/10 runs north of the upper and lower leachate
lagoons. The mean conductivity value for well 38-1-1 decreased to 623 S/cm in 2009/10, which is similar to levels prior
to 2007/08 when an anomalously high value of 1,285 µS/cm was observed. The 500 µS/cm conductivity contour was also
retracted from locations 29 and 30 as elevated conductivity and chloride at these locations is inferred to be related to
upgradient road salt contamination. Mean conductivity values at well locations 18 and 76 remain similar to previous
years. The mean conductivity at location 54 also increased slightly to 514 µS/cm and a 500 µS/cm contour was
added surrounding location 54. The 500 µS/cm conductivity contour was extended to surround monitoring location 4
during 2007/08 and conductivity remained slightly elevated in wells 4-3-1 and 4-4-1 during 2009/10. The continued
presence of a 500 µS/cm contour surrounding monitors 41 and 55 and surface water station Sw-N-41-S-1 north of
the Hartland North pad indicates continued degradation of groundwater and surface water quality in this area.
Elevated conductivity values are associated with elevated sulphate and nitrate concentrations which are inferred to
be the result of nearby aggregate stockpiling. Continued conductivity increases in wells 43-1-1, 42-1-1 and at
surface water station Sw-N-42-S-1 indicates a slight downgradient expansion of the conductivity plume associated
with aggregate stockpiling on the Hartland north pad.

5.3 Monitors North of the Phase 1 Landfill
Monitoring site 52 is located in the north toe of the Phase 1 landfill, just south of the lower leachate lagoon at the
centre of the northern leachate plume. This is an area where leachate historically flowed along the bedrock/refuse
interface underlying Phase 1 toward the lower leachate lagoon and is the location of the north purge wells
(52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8). Since monitoring began at this location, groundwater quality has been heavily impacted
by leachate. In 2009/10, groundwater samples from well 52-1-1 (31 m deep) and leachate samples of the combined
discharge from the north purge wells (80-1-0-P8 and 52-4-0-P7) were collected. However, no samples were
collected from wells 52-2-0 (14 m deep) or 52-3-0 (16 m deep). Concentrations of leachate indicator parameters in
monitoring well 52-1-1 in 2009/10 were similar to previously reported values. However, mean annual conductivity
concentrations in the north leachate collection system (well 80-1-0-P8) increased from 2,975 µS/cm in 2007/08 to
3,460 µS/cm in 2009/10. Although these results indicate that groundwater chemistry is generally stable in the area
surrounding the north purge well system, the continuous operation of well 80-1-0-P8 at a slightly higher rate than the
north purge well system historically operated may result in collection of more concentrated leachate from beneath
Phase 1. Lower annual precipitation could also result in less dilution of leachate. Purge well 52-4-0-P7 was installed
within a fracture that likely extends beneath the Phase 1 landfill, and continues to function as a purge well for
pumping leachate to the lower lagoon. An additional purge well (80-1-0-P8) was installed north of Phase 1 in the
spring of 2007 to provide redundancy in the current leachate collection system and additional leachate collection
capacity at the north end of the landfill to expand the area of leachate capture. Well 80-1-0-P8 is a relatively high
yield purge well completed in the same fracture complex as well 52-4-0-P7 and began operating in September 2007.
During the fall of 2008, CRD rehabilitated well 52-4-0-P7 to eliminate any biofilm on the inside of the borehole and
installed a submersible pumping system to replace the previous airlift pumping system. Following rehabilitation, well
52-4-0-P7 was returned to operation in conjunction with purge well 80-1-0-P8 to reinforce leachate collection north of
Phase 1.
Monitor locations 20 and 21 are located directly north of the Phase 1 landfill and the lower leachate lagoon and
between 5 and 15 m from the landfill property boundary. These monitors are located in the most probable path for
any subsurface leachate migration below the unlined lower lagoon. The concentrations of leachate indicator
parameters at locations 20, 21 and 40 are plotted against time in Figure 5-4.
Water quality in the shallow monitors (less than 15 m deep) at location 21 exhibited concentrations similar to
previous years, with elevated conductivity, ammonia and chloride in 2009/10. These wells have exhibited elevated
concentrations of conductivity, ammonia and chloride since their installation in 1988. Water quality has improved
since 1997, following capping of the Phase 1 landfill and installation of the north purge well system. Well 21-1-2 and
21-2-1 continued to exhibit very similar conductivity, ammonia and chloride concentrations in 2009/10.
Chloride concentrations have consistently remained below the chloride criterion for drinking water (250 mg/L) since
1997 and below 125 mg/L since 2002. The maximum chloride concentration in all three wells at location 21 in
2009/10 was 75 mg/L. In 2009/10, iron and manganese concentrations exceeded water quality criteria in the two
shallow wells (21-1-2 and 21-2-1) on all four sampling dates, ammonia exceeded criteria in seven out of eight
samples and conductivity exceeded criteria in two out of eight samples. However, concentrations of all leachate
indicator parameters were well within the range of historical measurements.

2000
21-1-2 (9.6 m)
21-2-1 (5.5 m)
1500
20-1-1 (33 m)
Conductivity (µS/cm)
40-1-1 (15.2 m)
1000
500
100
21-1-2 (9.6 m)
21-2-1 (5.5 m)
10
20-1-1 (33 m)
40-1-1 (15.2 m)
Ammonia (mg/L)
0.1
0.01
Note: Ammonia concentrations on log scale

0.001
200
21-1-2 (9.6 m)
21-2-1 (5.5 m)
160
20-1-1 (33 m)
Chloride (mg/L)
40-1-1 (15.2 m)
120
80
40
Figure 5-4. Groundwater Quality North of Phase 1

Leachate indicator parameters were not elevated in any samples collected from deep monitoring well 21-1-1 (16.0 m
deep), and no exceedences were reported in 2009/10.
There are two deeper wells at location 20, located immediately north of location 21. Concentrations of leachate
indicator parameters were slightly elevated compared to background levels. Other than manganese, which
exceeded water quality criteria in three out of four samples collected from 20-1-2 in 2009/10, no other exceedences
were reported at location 20. Both wells 20-1-1 (33 m deep) and 20-1-2 (21 m deep) have been affected by leachate
in the past. The operation of the north purge well system appears to have reduced the potential for leachate
migration at depth north of the unlined lower leachate lagoon.
A statistical trend analysis of groundwater quality data collected from wells 20-1-1, 20-1-2 and 21-1-1 over the past
five years revealed that there was no statistically significant trend in concentrations of leachate indicator parameters
in 2009/10, indicating that shallow groundwater chemistry has been relatively stable in recent years. However,
statistically significant decreasing trends were observed for ammonia and chloride in well 21-1-2 and conductivity
and chloride in well 21-2-1. Following improvements to the north purge well system in 2007 and 2008, water quality
in deeper wells at location 20 appears to have stabilized, but should continue to be closely monitored. Wells at
location 20 and 21 are located downgradient of well 40-1-1, where anomalously high concentrations of leachate
indicator parameters continue to be present. Groundwater quality at locations 20 and 21 should continue to be
closely monitored for changes. Close monitoring and regular maintenance of the north purge well system should
continue to improve leachate collection at the north end of Phase 1.
Monitor 40-1-1 was installed in 1994 between the lower and upper leachate lagoons at a depth of 15 m.
Groundwater quality at this location began showing effects from leachate in 2002 and continued to be affected in
2009/10. Conductivity, manganese and ammonia continued to be above water quality criteria on all sampling dates
during 2009/10. Nitrate and chloride concentrations continue to be elevated, but did not exceed water quality criteria
during 2009/10. While there have been some improvements in water quality since mid-2002; concentrations of
leachate indicator parameters remain elevated. A statistical analysis revealed that ammonia concentrations have
been decreasing in a statistically significant manner over the past five years, but statistically significant decreasing
trends in conductivity or chloride were not present. Water quality has been investigated at this location in the past
and was the subject of a previous report (AECOM, 2009a). Recent improvements to the north purge well system and
the installation of pressure transducers in nearby monitoring wells are anticipated to reinforce leachate containment
measures in this area as Phase 2 filling continues. Water quality at locations 40, 20 and 21 should continue to be
closely monitored to verify the effectiveness of leachate collection north of the Phase 1 landfill.
Monitoring locations 29 and 30 are located north of Willis Point Road. Conductivity, ammonia and chloride plots for
both locations over the past five years are included on Figure 5-5. Water quality parameters were below guideline
concentrations in all groundwater monitors at location 29 throughout 2009/10. Elevated conductivity and chloride
concentrations since 2007 may be related to road salt application on Willis Point Road. Continued monitoring at this
location will be helpful in determining the source of elevated concentrations of chloride and conductivity.
During 2009/10, all parameters met guideline concentrations in well 30-1-1, while three conductivity exceedences
were noted in monitoring well 30-1-2. Historically, chloride and conductivity concentrations in samples from the
monitoring wells at both locations have been elevated compared to background. During 2009/10, elevated
conductivity and chloride concentrations were associated with very low ammonia concentrations. It is likely that the
use of de-icing salt on Willis Point Road has caused the seasonal variation in chloride and conductivity values. The
District of Saanich has confirmed the use of de-icing salt (sodium chloride) on an as-needed basis on this road for
several years and that no records of application dates are kept. As shown on Figure 5-5, conductivity and chloride
concentrations measured in the shallow monitor at 29-1-2 (5.2 m deep) exhibited seasonal fluctuations, with

1500
29-1-1 (13.8 m)
29-1-2 (5.2 m)
30-1-1 (15.0 m)
1200
30-1-2 (3.5 m)
900
600
300
1
29-1-1 (13.8 m)
29-1-2 (5.2 m)
30-1-1 (15.0 m)
30-1-2 (3.5 m)
0.1
Ammonia (mg/L)
0.01

0.001
400
29-1-1 (13.8 m)
29-1-2 (5.2 m)
30-1-1 (15.0 m)
300
30-1-2 (3.5 m)
Chloride (mg/L)
200
100
Figure 5-5. Groundwater Quality North of Willis Point Rd

maximum concentrations typically occurring in winter months. The shallow monitor at location 30 (30-1-2) has
historically exhibited a very wide range of conductivity and chloride concentrations that fluctuate seasonally. The
2009/10 data for well 30-1-2 indicate that conductivity and chloride concentrations have continued to increase over
previous years and that road salt application on Willis Point Road and potentially dilute leachate continues to impact
water quality at these locations. A statistical analysis of leachate indicator parameters for the past five years
revealed a statistically significant increasing trend in conductivity and chloride concentrations at 30-1-2, and a
decreasing trend in chloride in well 30-1-1. No statistically significant trends were apparent in data collected from
wells at location 29. The generally low concentrations of ammonia in samples originating from wells at locations 29
and 30 suggests landfill leachate is not the primary cause of groundwater quality impacts at these locations north of
Willis Point Road and that road salt may be impacting water quality.
Groundwater monitoring wells 28 and 39 are located between the landfill and Willis Point Road. Groundwater quality
data was not collected at location 28 in 2009/10 due to the need for pump replacement. Wells at location 39 did not
report elevated conductivity, ammonia or chloride and were not impacted by landfill leachate in 2009/10. Elevated
concentrations of manganese exceeded water quality criteria on three out of four sampling dates in 2009/10. A
statistical analysis of conductivity, ammonia and chloride data collected from wells 39-1-1 and 39-2-1 revealed no
statistically significant trend at the 95% confidence level since 2005. The same analysis was conducted for well
28-1-0 in 2008/09 and revealed an increasing trend in chloride concentrations for the period between 2004 and 2009
but with very low concentrations of 5 to 7 mg/L. The increasing trend in chloride concentrations at location 28 may
indicate early stages of dilute leachate impacts at this location. The pump in well 28-1-0 should be repaired as soon
as possible and groundwater quality should continue to be closely monitored at locations north of the upper leachate
lagoon.
There are two monitors at location 31, located 160 m northeast of the lower leachate lagoon and south of Willis Point
Road. They are downgradient of the landfill and have the lowest groundwater elevations measured at this site. All
parameters at location 31 met water quality criteria in 2009/10 and water quality in both monitoring wells is not
affected by landfill leachate. A statistical analysis conducted on data collected from wells 31-1-1 and 31-1-2 between
2004 and 2009 revealed a statistically significant increasing trend in chloride concentrations in wells 31-1-1 and
31-1-2. Similar to chloride concentrations at locations 29 and 30, water quality at location 31 may be mildly affected
by road salt application on nearby Willis Point road. The data combined with the outcome of the statistical analysis
suggest that water quality in this area is stable.
5.4 Monitors West and North of the Phase 2 Landfill and Near the Hartland North Pad
There is one monitoring location (63) on the west side of Phase 2 and three locations (77, 78 and 79) north of
Phase 2 that represent background conditions. In addition, there are six locations (25, 36, 37, 38, 53, 58) north of the
Phase 2 landfill near the upper leachate lagoon, and seven locations (41, 42, 43, 55, 56, 57, 62) near the Hartland
north pad that were monitored for groundwater quality parameters during 2009/10 as shown on Figure 5-1.
5.4.1 Background Wells
Groundwater quality at location 63 typically exhibited conductivity less than 350 µS/cm, ammonia concentrations
below or near detection limits, chloride concentrations below 6 mg/L, sulphate concentrations below 15 mg/L and
low or non-detectable concentrations of other parameters. Manganese concentrations were above guideline
concentrations in the deep well (63-1-1) on all sampling dates in 2009/10, as it has in the past. This well is located
upgradient of Hartland landfill and the samples collected during monitoring are considered representative of
background groundwater chemistry.

Groundwater quality in monitoring wells 77-1-1, 77-2-1 and 78-2-1 exhibited conductivity between 300 and
700 S/cm, low or non-detectable concentrations of ammonia, chloride concentrations that were below 7.5 mg/L and
concentrations of sulphate ranging from 18 to 88 mg/L. Wells at location 77 were above dissolved manganese
criteria in four out of eight samples in 2009/10. This is consistent with water quality monitoring data collected at this
location since the well was installed in 2006. Elevated concentrations of conductivity and sulphate at these locations
could be the result of more mineralized bedrock surrounding the well or the remnants of drill cuttings in the borehole.
Ongoing efforts to develop this well appear to be having a positive effect on the quality of groundwater samples at
this location. Bedrock outcrops immediately south of wells 78 and south of the High Level Road are highly fractured
and mineralized. It is also possible that runoff and infiltration from aggregate stockpiles within the Toutle Valley are
influencing groundwater quality in this area. These two potential causes could have a very similar geochemical
signature, making it difficult to determine which of the two mechanisms is impacting water quality at location 78.
Groundwater quality at location 78 should continue to be monitored.
At location 79, both wells exhibited conductivity values below 500 µS/cm, ammonia concentrations near detection
limits, chloride concentrations generally below 6 mg/L and sulphate concentrations generally below 20 mg/L.
Manganese concentrations were above water quality criteria on five out of 8 sampling dates. Well 79-2-1 was above
criteria for iron on two sampling dates with concentrations up to 0.395 mg/L. Water quality in both wells at this
location may still be influenced by drill cuttings and should be developed further using an inertial foot valve and
surge blocks.
5.4.2 Wells North of Phase 2 Landfill
The closest groundwater monitoring locations to the Phase 2 landfill are 36 and 37. Leachate indicator parameters in
wells at locations 25, 36, 37 and 38 are plotted on Figure 5-6. Monitoring location 36 is located 20 m northeast and
downgradient of the Phase 2 basin. In 2009/10, the water quality in the intermediate monitor 36-2-1 (42.4 m deep)
exhibited conductivity levels of less than 110 µS/cm and a maximum chloride concentration of 2.8 mg/L, which is
consistent with background conditions. A statistically significant increasing trend in chloride concentrations is present
over the last five years of monitoring, but may be related to leachate storage tests conducted in the Phase 2 basin in
2007 and 2008. Monitored pH values remained near or above the 8.5 criterion for most of 2009/10 similar to
previous results, suggesting continued impacts of cement used during monitoring well construction. Concentrations
of all other parameters analyzed for this well were not above criteria. Ammonia concentrations were near detection
limits throughout 2009/10. Groundwater surrounding this well has not been impacted by landfill leachate.
The shallower monitor at location 36 (36-3-1, 18 m deep) has had elevated conductivity, chloride and sulphate
concentrations for a number of years, but ammonia concentrations have been relatively low since installation. In
2009/10, chloride concentrations began to decrease relative to 2008/09, with a maximum concentration of 33 mg/L
in July 2009. Dilute leachate impacts that may be related to the Phase 2 leachate storage test conducted in
September 2008 appear to be slowly dissipating in the immediate vicinity of Phase 2. Continued monitoring will help
understand the potential causes for groundwater improvements in this area. Ammonia concentrations remained
slightly elevated (0.018 to 0.217 mg/L) throughout 2009/10. Conductivity (1,270 to 1,400 µS/cm) concentrations were
similar to values measured in previous years and were above guidelines on all four sampling dates in 2009/10.
Dissolved manganese concentrations were above guidelines on one of four sampling dates in 2009/10, similar to
previous years. The bottom elevation of well 36-3-1 is at 112 m ASL. The bottom of the Phase 2 basin is at 113 m
elevation. The bottom of the clay liner along the north side of the Phase 2 basin is at elevation 114 m. No statistically
significant trends were detected for leachate indicator parameters in well 36-3-1. The water level data indicates that
the hydraulic trap was functioning throughout 2009/10, but the groundwater quality (particularly ammonia and
chloride) at this location should continue to be monitored closely for impacts related to leachate.

3000
25-1-2 (6.5 m)
36-3-1 (18.9 m)
2500
37-3-1 (14.8 m)
38-1-1(19.81 m)
2000
1500
1000
500
100
25-1-2 (6.5 m)
36-3-1 (18.9 m)
10
37-3-1 (14.8 m)
1 38-1-1 (19.81 m)
Ammonia (mg/L)
0.1
0.01
0.001

0.0001
400
25-1-2 (6.5 m)
36-3-1 (18.9 m)
37-3-1 (14.8 m)
300
38-1-1 (19.81 m)
Chloride (mg/L)
200
100
Figure 5-6. Groundwater Quality North of Phase 2

Well 58-1-0, located north of Phase 2 has shown an increase in key leachate indicator parameters above historical
levels beginning in 2001. During 2009/10, concentrations of key leachate indicator parameters remained within the
range of historical concentrations with conductivity values ranging from 5,210 to 5,300 µS/cm, ammonia
concentrations ranging from 51 to 62 mg/L and chloride concentrations ranging from 770 to 840 mg/L. This indicates
that leachate from Phase 1 or Phase 2 Cell 1 continues to impact water quality at location 58. There is only minor
seasonal variation in water quality at this location. It will be important to monitor water quality at this location over
time as it could provide an indication of leachate strength migrating toward the leachate lagoons and the north purge
well system. It is anticipated that the augmentation of the north purge well system undertaken in 2007 and 2008 will
help mitigate leachate migrating northward from this area.
During 2009/10, the water quality at location 37 (25 m north of the Phase 2 basin) was similar to that observed since
2002. Water quality in the deep monitor 37-2-1 (43.5 m deep) continued to have low conductivity (<376 µS/cm), ammonia
(near detection limits) and chloride concentrations (<5 mg/L), which is consistent with background water quality.
Manganese concentrations remained near or below detection limits (0.001 mg/L) in well 37-2-1 again during 2009/10.
These data suggest that water quality in this well is stable and unaffected by leachate. pH was above water quality criteria
at this location on all sampling dates, likely as a result of cement utilized during well installation.
In 2009/10, the shallow well at this location, 37-3-1 (14.8 m deep), reported conductivity values below 560 µS/cm,
ammonia concentrations below 1 mg/L and chloride concentrations below 10 mg/L. Sulphate concentrations
remained below 70 mg/L. All parameter concentrations were within criteria except for iron and manganese, which
was above guidelines in seven out of eight analyses. Elevated concentrations of iron and manganese may be
related to natural geological conditions. Water quality results in well 37-3-1 suggest that the minor leachate impacts
observed in October 2008, may have been related to the temporary hydraulic trap reversal associated with the
Phase 2 leachate storage test, have been reversed.
Location 38 is located roughly 80 m north of the Phase 2 basin just north of the upper leachate lagoon. Groundwater
was sampled four times in 2008/09 at this location in response to anomalously high concentrations of leachate
indicator parameters observed in one sample collected during February 2008. As presented on Figure 5-6,
well 38-1-1 (19.8 m) has historically exhibited conductivity values less than 700 µS/cm, slightly elevated ammonia
concentrations and chloride concentrations less than 15 mg/L. The February 2008 sampling event revealed elevated
concentrations of conductivity (2,580 µS/cm), ammonia (20.6 mg/L), chloride (347 mg/L), dissolved iron (2.61 mg/L)
and dissolved manganese (0.483 mg/L) with concentrations above guidelines for conductivity, ammonia, chloride,
dissolved iron and dissolved manganese concentrations during the February 2008 sampling event. Follow-up
groundwater sampling in 2009/10 indicates that groundwater concentrations of all parameters have returned to
historical levels and the elevated concentrations observed in February 2008 were anomalous. Leachate is not
impacting groundwater at this location. Quarterly groundwater quality monitoring should continue at this location and
analytical results should be closely monitored for any irregularities in water quality.
Wells 25-1-1, 25-1-2 and 53-1-1 are located on an east-west trending ridge 100 m north of the Phase 2 basin near
the property boundary. These wells have had good water quality in the past that was generally not affected by landfill
leachate. In 2009/10, conductivity was generally below 500 µS/cm, ammonia concentrations were below 0.3 mg/L
and chloride concentrations were generally below 7 mg/L. Similar to historical data, dissolved manganese
concentrations exceeded guidelines on three out of four sampling dates in 2009/10. In October 2008 sampling date,
conductivity, ammonia, chloride, iron and sulphate concentrations were elevated above historical values in well
25-1-2, suggesting potential leachate impacts as a result of the Phase 2 leachate storage test conducted during
September 2008. In 2009/10, concentrations of all leachate indicator parameters returned to historical levels in well
25-1-2 following restoration of the hydraulic trap. A statistical analysis of concentrations at location 25 revealed no
statistically significant trends in leachate indicator parameters over the past five years in 25-1-1 or 25-1-2, but an
increasing trend in choride and sulphate concentrations was observed in well 53-1-1. This may be related to

infiltration of surface water in the sedimentation pond. Groundwater discharge from Phase 2 during the leachate
storage test in 2008 is also anticipated to affect groundwater quality in this area in the short term, and groundwater
quality results in these monitoring wells indicate that there is the potential for leachate migration in the event of a
hydraulic trap reversal. This indicates that although groundwater quality appears to be relatively stable at these
locations, it should be monitored very closely for further changes.
At location 27, located northwest of Phase 2 and adjacent to the area of ongoing quarrying and aggregate stockpiling,
conductivity values were generally less than 500 µS/cm, ammonia concentrations were below or near detection limits and
chloride concentrations were below 5 mg/L. Iron and manganese have previously been above guideline concentrations
during winter sampling events, but have not been above guidelines in the past four years. Sulphate concentrations in the
shallow monitor at location 27 (3.5 m) have continued to increase to concentrations above background and reached
97 mg/L during winter sampling, but were typically less than 15 mg/L in the deep bedrock monitor. Concentrations were
typically less than 50 mg/L in previous years. Nearby quarrying, stockpiling of aggregate and road building appear to be
slightly affecting water quality at location 27. Wells at location 27 are not currently affected by landfill leachate, but they
should be sealed and decommissioned prior to refuse deposition in that area.
5.4.3 Hartland North Pad
In 1994, the CRD established a yard waste site at the Hartland North Pad about 400 m northwest of the Phase 2 landfill.
An area about 400 m long and 75 m wide was levelled and filled as shown on Figure 5-1. The pad was constructed of
granular fill (shot rock) and was not paved or lined. Use of this facility for storage and processing of yard waste has since
been phased out and stockpiling of aggregate on the Hartland North Pad began in July 2006. A large volume of aggregate
is currently stored at this location for use as intermediate waste cover and for site improvements.
Background monitoring in the Hartland North Pad commenced in early 1994, when groundwater monitoring wells
were installed at four locations (41, 42, 43 and 44). Groundwater samples were obtained from wells 41, 42, 43 and
44 on three occasions in March 1994 before initiation of the yard waste operation. In the spring of 1996, three
additional wells were drilled at locations 55, 56 and 57 and two additional monitoring wells were installed in the fall of
1998 at location 62 to determine background groundwater quality upgradient of the Hartland North Pad.
Figure 5-7 shows plots of leachate indicator parameters for monitoring locations 41, 42, 43, 55 and 56. In 2009/10, water
quality at location 42 was similar to the past five years, with concentrations of leachate indicator parameters and sulphate
remaining similar over time. Ammonia and chloride concentrations also remained within the range of historical fluctuations
in all wells surrounding the Hartland North pad in 2009/10, with the exception of elevated ammonia concentrations in
monitor 43-1-1 beginning in 2008. Wells 41-1-1, 55-1-1 and potentially, 56-1-1 continued to exhibit increasing conductivity
and sulphate concentrations due to runoff and groundwater recharge from nearby aggregate stockpiles. Conductivity
values approaching 800 S/cm and sulphate concentrations were in excess of 200 mg/L on some sampling dates in wells
41-1-1 and 55-1-1. Conductivity concentrations were above water quality criteria on all sampling dates in 2009/10 at
locations 41, 43 and 55. Similar to previous years, manganese concentrations exceeded guidelines in wells at location 41
and 42, while iron exceeded criteria at location 42 on all sampling dates in 2009/10. Iron and manganese can occur
naturally at elevated concentrations. The criteria for these parameters are based on aesthetic effects such as taste and
laundry staining and are not based on human health considerations. Similar to historical data, the remainder of
parameters were below water quality criteria. A statistical analysis using the Mann-Kendall test for trend revealed
significantly increasing trends in sulphate concentrations over the last five years in wells 41-1-1, 55-1-1- and 56-1-1.
Increasing conductivity concentrations were also reported in well 55-1-1, while decreasing chloride concentrations were
reported in well 42-1-1. No other trends were detected at the 95% confidence level. This indicates that impacts from
historical composting and yard waste handling are slowly decreasing at some locations, while the impacts of aggregate
stockpiling have continued to worsen.

1000
41-1-1 (9.07 m)
800 42-1-1 (8.84 m)

43-1-1 (21.3 m)
600 55-1-1 (13.1 m)
56-1-1 (17.4 m)
400
200
1
41-1-1 (9.07 m)
42-1-1 (8.84 m)
Ammonia (mg/L)
43-1-1 (21.3 m)
0.1
55-1-1 (13.1 m)
56-1-1 (17.4 m)
0.01

0.001
80
41-1-1 (9.07 m)
42-1-1 (8.84 m)
60
Chloride (mg/L)
43-1-1 (21.3 m)
55-1-1 (13.1 m)
40
56-1-1 (17.4 m)
20
250
41-1-1 (9.07 m)
200 42-1-1 (8.84 m)

Sulphate (mg/L)
43-1-1 (21.3 m)
150
55-1-1 (13.1 m)
56-1-1 (17.4 m)
100
50
Figure 5-7. Groundwater Quality North of Hartland North Pad

The 2009/10 monitoring results indicate that historical composting and yard waste handling at the Hartland North
Pad continue to have a small but measurable effect on groundwater quality in the vicinity of the yard waste site.
Aggregate stockpiling has continued to impact groundwater quality downgradient of the aggregate stockpiles at
location 41, 43, 55, and potentially location 56, with concentrations of conductivity and sulphate that were above
guidelines on a continuous basis. Conductivity values continue to decline in areas surrounding the Hartland North
Pad that are not located near aggregate stockpiles and the effects of historical composting and yard waste
operations have declined substantially since yard waste and composting operations ceased. Groundwater quality at
all stations downgradient of aggregate stockpiles should be monitored closely for changes in water quality. All efforts
should be made to reduce the volume of aggregate stored at the Hartland North pad and reduce infiltration wherever
possible through the use of tarps.
5.5 Monitors South of the Phase 1 Landfill
Monitor locations 4, 7, 19, 60, 71, 72, 73 and 85 are all located south of the Phase 1 landfill. The wells at locations 4,
19, 60, 71, 72 and 73 are multi-level nested monitoring wells, while the well at location 7 is a 37 m deep, drilled well
(open borehole) that was used to supply domestic water to the landfill until 1989. The wells at locations 71, 72 and
73 were installed in 2003. Well 85-1-1 was installed in 2009 to replace well 3-2-1, which was decommissioned during
the construction of the new bin facility.
In 1984, a clay berm and grout curtain was installed along the southern perimeter of the landfill to restrict southward
movement of shallow leachate. In addition, a shallow toe drain designed to capture perched leachate seepages
above an elevation of 157 m ASL was installed along the south end of the landfill as part of the Phase 1 closure in
1996/97. In 2001, four purge wells (P1, P2, P3 and P4) went into operation in this area to strengthen leachate
containment and collection south of the landfill. An additional purge well (P10) was recently installed beside P1 to
augment leachate collection south of the landfill.
Figures 5-8 shows plots of leachate indicator parameters in wells located south and downgradient of the landfill, and
Figure 5-9 plots leachate indicator parameters for wells located southeast of the landfill from 2005 to 2010. Wells at
locations 3 (now 85-1-1), 7, 12, and 60 have been affected by leachate to varying degrees for more than a decade.
These wells have historically reported conductivity values above 1,000 S/cm and chloride concentrations greater
than 50 mg/L. The wells most impacted by leachate near the landfill (wells 3-2-1 and 12-1-0) have historically
reported ammonia concentrations greater than 1 mg/L. Well 3-2-1 was replaced by well 85-1-1 in 2009. Well 85-1-1
was impacted by leachate in 2009/10, as well 3-2-1 has been since 1999. Conductivity, ammonia, chloride and
manganese concentrations remained elevated significantly above background levels throughout 2009/10, with
concentrations of conductivity, ammonia and dissolved manganese that were above guidelines on the only sampling
date. It is anticipated that the recent addition of P10 and the continued operation of the south purge well system will
slowly improve water quality south of the landfill over time.

2000
3-2-1 (8.03 m)
7-1-0 (37.3 m)
60-1-1 (23.13 m)
1500
60-2-1 (15.83 m)
60-3-1 (7.63 m)
85-1-1 (9.14 m)
1000 4-2-1 (23.5 m)
4-3-1 (16.8 m)
4-4-1 (8.1 m)
73-1-1 (30.7 m)
500
73-2-1 (20.1 m)
73-3-1 (10.1 m)
100
3-2-1 (8.03 m)
7-1-0 (37.3 m)
10
60-1-1 (23.13 m)
60-2-1 (15.83 m)
1 60-3-1 (7.63 m)
Ammonia (mg/L)
85-1-1 (9.14 m)
4-2-1 (23.5 m)
0.1 4-3-1 (16.8 m)
4-4-1 (8.1 m)
0.01 73-1-1 (30.7 m)

73-2-1 (20.1 m)
73-3-1 (10.1 m)
0.001

0.0001
300
3-2-1 (8.03 m)
7-1-0 (37.3 m)
60-1-1 (23.13 m)
60-2-1 (15.83 m)
200 60-3-1 (7.63 m)
Chloride (mg/L)
85-1-1 (9.14 m)
4-2-1 (23.5 m)
4-3-1 (16.8 m)
4-4-1 (8.1 m)
100 73-1-1 (30.7 m)
73-2-1 (20.1 m)
73-3-1 (10.1 m)
Figure 5-8. Groundwater Quality South of Landfill

2000
71-1-1 (31.1 m)
71-2-1 (20.1 m)
71-3-1 (10.1m)
1500
72-1-1 (30.5 m)
72-2-1 (20.1 m)
72-3-1 (10.4 m)
1000
500
100
71-1-1 (31.1 m)
71-2-1 (20.1 m)
10 71-3-1 (10.1 m)
72-1-1 (30.5 m)
72-2-1 (20.1 m)
Ammonia (mg/L)
1 72-3-1 (10.4 m)
0.1
0.01

0.001
300
71-1-1 (31.1 m)
71-2-1 (20.1 m)
250
71-3-1 (10.1 m)
72-1-1 (30.5 m)
200 72-2-1 (20.1 m)
Chloride (mg/L)
72-3-1 (10.4 m)
150
100
50
Figure 5-9. Groundwater Quality Southeast of Landfill

Three monitoring wells are present at location 60: 60-1-1 (23 m), 60-2-1 (16 m) and 60-3-1 (8 m). During 2009/10,
water quality in wells 60-1-1, 60-2-1 and 60-3-1 showed a slight worsening of groundwater quality, with increased
concentrations of leachate indicator parameters including conductivity, ammonia and chloride as shown on
Figures 5-8 and 5-9. The shallow well at location 60 (60-3-1) exhibited conductivity and chloride concentrations that
were significantly worse than 2008/09. Ammonia was generally reported at concentrations below or just above the
detection limit in all three wells at location 60, although slightly elevated concentrations of ammonia and chloride
were observed in monitors 60-1-1 and 60-2-1 on one sampling date. Elevated concentrations of leachate indicator
parameters at location 60 suggest possible leachate impacts at all three depths at this location. Conductivity was
above water quality guidelines on all sampling dates in all wells at location 60 as did manganese, with one
exception. One chloride concentration above guidelines was also reported in well 60-3-1 in September 2009.
Statistically significant increasing trends were observed in monitors 60-3-1 (conductivity and chloride) and 60-2-1
(chloride), while decreasing trends were present in ammonia and sulphate concentrations in monitor 60-2-1.
Elevated concentrations of some leachate indicator parameters at this location may be related to increased well
recharge resulting in the lack of drawdown and leachate capture in P1 since 2007. The behaviour of P1 was
investigated and drawdown was restored in P1 for most of 2009/10 when a submersible pump was installed in the
well to achieve greater pumping rates. Encrustation problems necessitated frequent shut downs for maintenance, so
the submersible pump was removed in favour of less maintenance intensive bladder pumps. The leachate collection
system was augmented through the addition of another purge well (P10) equipped with a bladder pump adjacent to
P1 in August 2010. Contrary to previous years, water quality was worse at location 60 than at wells 3-2-1 and
85-1-1, suggesting potential leachate migration while P1 was not functioning properly. Declining concentrations of
most leachate indicator parameters at this location in early 2010 is an indication that the submersible pump in P1
and the remainder of the south purge wells (P2, P3, P4) helped constrain leachate flow to the south of Phase 1 in
early 2010. Recent increases in concentrations of some key leachate indicator parameters point to the need for
continued close monitoring of water quality at this location, close review of pumping and water level data in the south
purge wells and active management of the south leachate collection system.
Similar to previous years, elevated levels of conductivity, manganese, sulphate and chloride were detected in both
samples analyzed from well 7-1-0 during 2009/10. Conductivity values (ranging from 986 to 1,110 µS/cm) and
manganese concentrations were above the water quality guidelines during both the October 2009 and February
2010 sampling events. Ammonia concentrations remained below detection limits on all sampling dates. Conductivity
and chloride concentrations in well 7, like those in Well 3 and 60, have shown signs of improvement since 1998, but
in 2009/10, well 7-1-0 exhibited increasing concentrations of conductivity and chloride. Increasing concentrations of
conductivity and chloride south of the landfill are likely related to the impaired performance of P1 between 2006 and
2009. The south purge well system was augmented in August 2010 with the addition of a new well and pump. Water
quality south of the landfill should be followed closely to ensure that leachate containment has been restored in the
area surrounding P1. No statistically significant trends were detected for leachate indicator parameters over the past
five years.
In January 2003, new multilevel monitoring wells were installed at locations 71, 72 and 73 to strengthen the
monitoring network along the southeast property boundary. Wells 72 and 73 were drilled at or near the eastern
landfill property boundary south of Phase 1. Concentrations of leachate indicator parameters from 2005 to 2010 are
shown on Figures 5-8 for wells at location 73 and on Figure 5-9 for wells at locations 71 and 72.
During 2009/10, all samples collected at location 71 met water quality guidelines for all parameters except
manganese in two out of eight samples from well 71-1-1 and 71-2-1. Elevated manganese may be related to natural
geologic variability. Nitrate concentrations were slightly elevated in two of three samples collected from well 71-3-1 in
2009/10, similar to previous years. The shallow well at location 71 (71-3-1) is located downgradient of a wetland
area, which may be the cause of elevated nitrate concentrations. Chloride concentrations in samples from all three

wells at location 71 were approximately 10 mg/L throughout the year. Ammonia concentrations were generally near
or below detection limits during 2009/10 and therefore met water quality guidelines. Statistically significant
decreasing trends in conductivity and sulphate concentrations are present in well 71-1-1 over the past five years.
In 2009/10, the samples collected at location 72 reported conductivity, chloride and sulphate values that were
elevated above background levels. Similar to previous years, conductivity values exceeded the water quality criterion
in all samples collected from 72-2-1 and 72-3-1, with a maximum of 828 µS/cm. Ammonia was reported at very low
concentrations in all three wells at this location and chloride concentrations ranged from 56 to 93 mg/L. One
elevated ammonia concentration (0.493 mg/L) was reported in February 2010 in well 72-1-1, but conductivity and
chloride concentrations remained similar to historic values on that sampling date. As in previous years, dissolved
iron and manganese concentrations exceeded drinking water guidelines in 72-1-1 on the majority of sampling dates
in 2009/10 and manganese concentrations exceeded the drinking water criteria on two out of four sampling dates in
well 72-3-1. Elevated iron and manganese concentrations may be the result of natural geologic conditions. A
statistical analysis using the Mann-Kendall test for trend for data collected between 2005 and 2010 revealed
statistically significant decreasing trends in chloride and sulphate concentrations in well 72-2-1, and increasing
sulphate concentrations in well 72-3-1.
Further south along the eastern property boundary at location 73, conductivity values ranged from 490 to 611 µS/cm,
ammonia concentrations were generally below or slightly above detection limits and chloride concentrations ranged
from 25 to 71 mg/L. Sulphate concentrations ranged from 29 to 70 mg/L at location 73 during 2009/10. Overall,
concentrations of parameters at location 73 were slightly elevated when compared to background levels. As in
previous years, the only parameter that was present at concentrations exceeding water quality guidelines was
manganese in well 73-2-1 on all four sampling dates and in 73-1-1 on one sampling date. When water quality results
at location 73 are compared to those at location 60, a continued slight improvement in water quality with distance
south of Phase 1 can be seen again during 2009/10. A Mann-Kendall statistical trend analysis using data from all
three wells at location 73 revealed a statistically significant declining trend in conductivity data for well 73-1-1 and
ammonia and sulphate for well 73-2-1 at the 95% confidence level. Based on the graphical and statistical analysis of
groundwater chemistry data, it appears that groundwater quality at location 73 is relatively stable.
Location 19 is 130 m due south of location 60 and further downgradient of the Phase 1 landfill. At location 19, water
quality is considerably better than at locations closer to the landfill. The water quality in the deep monitors (38 and
28 m deep) showed slight leachate impacts in 1995 but since 1999 concentrations of most parameters have
declined to concentrations approaching background levels. Concentrations remained relatively stable at location 19
through 2009/10. Manganese concentrations were above water quality guidelines in seven out of eight samples
collected at this location in 2009/10. One iron concentration above guidelines was also reported in well 19-1-2.
Manganese and iron concentrations at this location may be of natural origin.
Location 4 is the most southerly groundwater monitoring location at the landfill. The three monitoring wells at this
location, 4-2-1 (23 m), 4-3-1 (16 m) and 4-4-1 (7 m), reported slightly elevated conductivity and chloride values
compared to background again in 2009/10, with maximum concentrations of 542 µS/cm and 62 mg/L, respectively.
Ammonia concentrations were below detection limits on all sampling dates. Only manganese concentrations
exceeded water quality guidelines in well 4-4-1 on two out of three sampling dates in 2009/10. Manganese can occur
at naturally elevated concentrations. Sulphate concentrations remained above background concentrations in both
the shallow and intermediate depth monitoring wells at this location. As shown on Figure 5-8, conductivity, ammonia
and chloride values have remained similar over the past five years, suggesting stable water quality at this location. A
statistical analysis using the Mann-Kendall test for trend in wells at location 4 over the past five years indicated that a
statistically significant increasing trend was present for chloride concentrations in well 4-2-1; however, chloride
concentrations remain below 20 mg/L. Water quality in wells at location 4 should continue to be closely monitored for
changes in concentrations of leachate indicator parameters.

In summary, water quality data from the south end of the landfill continued to report slightly elevated concentrations
of leachate indicator parameters in 2009/10, as it has since the early 1990’s. While concentrations of leachate
indicator parameters historically appeared to be decreasing, 2009/10 data indicates that the lack of adequate
drawdown and leachate capture in P1 from 2006 to 2009 resulted in the degradation of groundwater quality at
locations 3 and 85, 60 and 7, suggesting the presence of leachate migrating southward from Phase 1. Statistically
significant increasing trends in conductivity and/or chloride were observed at location 60 between 2005 and 2010.
These wells are located south and downgradient of Phase 1 and the south purge wells. The south leachate
collection system has recently been augmented to improve leachate capture south of the landfill. South purge well
performance and groundwater quality south of the landfill should be closely monitored to ensure adequate leachate
capture.
5.6 Monitors East of the Phase 1 Landfill
Monitor locations 9, 16, 17, 18, 50, 54 and 76 are all situated along the east boundary of the Phase 1 landfill north of
Hartland Avenue. The 2009/10 data was similar to previous monitoring data, indicating that landfill leachate was not
present in monitors along the eastern property boundary, north of Hartland Avenue.
Figure 5-10 presents concentrations of leachate indicator parameters in wells at location 17 and 18 from 2005
through 2010. In 2009/10, water quality at monitoring locations 17 and 18 was consistent with historical data and
was not affected by leachate. Samples from all wells at location 17 and 18 had background concentrations of
chloride and met the criteria for analyzed parameters, with the exception of dissolved iron and manganese, which
were above water quality guidelines for two out of 36 analyses at these locations. Manganese guidelines are based
on aesthetic objectives and elevated concentrations are likely due to natural geological conditions. A statistical trend
analysis of concentrations of leachate indicator parameters using the Mann-Kendall test revealed a statistically
significant increasing trend in conductivity (18-2-1) and sulphate (18-2-1 and 18-2-2) data, but concentrations
remained well below water quality guidelines. Elevated concentrations of conductivity and sulphate have been
observed elsewhere at Hartland to be related to the placement of crushed aggregate for road improvements.
Wells at monitoring location 76 were installed in January 2004 and are located approximately 30 m east of
location 18. The 2009/10 data indicates that mean conductivity values for 76-1-1 (55 m), 76-2-1 (43 m) and 76-3-1
(29 m) were 405, 559 and 423 S/cm, respectively. The aesthetic objectives for drinking water quality guidelines
were exceeded in one out of twelve samples for iron and for eight out of twelve sampling dates for manganese in
samples collected from location 76 during 2009/10. One exceedence for conductivity was also reported in
well 76-2-1. Ammonia concentrations generally remain near detection limits and chloride concentrations continue to
be very low and similar to background levels.
CRD staff have identified that there have been difficulties developing these wells due to exceptionally slow recharge
rates with elevated turbidity as a consequence. Samples collected during 2009/10 remained turbid as in previous
years, indicating the need for additional well development. The elevated conductivity, iron, manganese and sulphate
concentrations are all attributed to the poorly developed wells, turbidity of the groundwater samples and natural
conditions. Sampling of these wells has reported gradual improvement of sampling results over previous sampling
events due to ongoing well development efforts. While conductivity, iron, manganese and sulphate remain present at
concentrations above background levels, it is anticipated that further development and sampling of these low yield
wells will further improve upon the quality of samples obtained at location 76.

1000
17-1-1 (53.3 m)
17-1-2 (42.7 m)
17-1-3 (18.9 m)
750
18-1-1 (60.6 m)
18-2-1 (31.25 m)
18-2-2 (18.03 m)
500
250
1
17-1-1 (53.3 m)
17-1-2 (42.7 m)
17-1-3 (18.9 m)
18-1-1 (60.6 m)
0.1
Ammonia (mg/L)
18-2-1 (31.25 m)
18-2-2 (18.03 m)
0.01

0.001
10
17-1-1 (53.3 m)
17-1-2 (42.7 m)
17-1-3 (18.9 m)
8
18-1-1 (60.6 m)
18-2-1 (31.25 m)
Chloride (mg/L)
18-2-2 (18.03 m)
Figure 5-10. Groundwater Quality East of Landfill

5.7 Summary
Water quality at monitoring station 54, located 12 m east of location 17, has not been affected by leachate since its
installation in August 1995 and this trend continued at location 54 through 2009/10. The mean conductivity values for
samples collected from the three wells at this location were 443 µS/cm, 514 µS/cm and 430 µS/cm and well below
1,000 µS/cm, which is interpreted as indicating the presence of leachate in groundwater. The outcome of a statistical
analysis of leachate indicator parameters from wells at location 54 revealed no statistically significant trends at the
95% confidence interval based on data collected between 2005 and 2010. This indicates that groundwater quality is
stable, but should continue to be monitored at this location.
At monitoring locations 16 and 50, located northeast of Phase 1, water quality was indicative of background
conditions and water quality guidelines were met for all parameters that were tested during 2009/10.
The groundwater quality results for 2009/10 were similar to those measured in 2008/09 and leachate-impacted
groundwater is contained within the landfill property. At the north end of the landfill, leachate-affected groundwater
extends just north of the unlined lower leachate lagoon and the lined upper leachate lagoon. The area of elevated
conductivity previously surrounding location 78 no longer exists as a result of focused well development efforts at
this location in 2008. South of the landfill, leachate-affected groundwater extends 80-100 m south of the landfill as in
previous years. Leachate impacts are confined to the landfill footprint on the east side of Phase 1 and are inferred to
extend to the west side of the Phase 2 landfill. Groundwater affected by historical composting and yard waste
processing and current aggregate stockpiling activities at the Hartland North Pad is inferred to extend just beyond
the footprint of the Hartland North pad and extend slightly north of Willis Point Road.
parameters at locations 20 and 21. The operation of the high yield purge well (80-1-0-P8) and rehabilitation of
well 52-4-0-P7 reinforced leachate containment and conveyance measures north of Phase 1. These wells
should continue to be operated in conjunction with one another and water quality should continue to be closely
monitored for leachate impacts at locations 20 and 21.
 Water quality northwest of the lower leachate lagoon (well 40-1-1) remained impacted by leachate during
2009/10. Water quality at this location continued to slowly improve based on a graphical and statistical analysis
of water quality data from 2005-2010, but should continue to be closely monitored. Over time, ongoing
improvements to the north purge well system combined with regular well and pump maintenance is anticipated
to further improve water quality in this area.
 Water quality at locations 29, 30 and potentially 31 continues to be impacted by road salt application on Willis
Point Road. Concentrations of conductivity and chloride show seasonal fluctuations and exhibit highest
concentrations in winter months, while ammonia concentrations remain relatively low.
 Well 36-3-1 continues to exhibit some elevated conductivity, ammonia, nitrate and sulphate concentrations.
Similar to location 36, the shallow well at location 37 (37-3-1) continues to show signs of minor leachate impacts
with elevated conductivity, iron, manganese, ammonia and sulphate concentrations. The slightly impaired water
quality at these locations is likely related to the Phase 2 leachate storage test conducted in September 2008 and
ongoing waste deposition in the area upgradient of locations 36 and 37. Shallow groundwater quality should
continue to be closely monitored at these locations to verify the effectiveness of leachate containment. Cement
used during well construction continues to impact well water quality in wells 36-2-1 and 37-2-1, as it has since
the wells were installed.

 In the shallow well at location 27 (27-1-2), located at the base of the Toutle valley, sulphate continues to be
present at concentrations above historical (background) concentrations throughout the year. This is likely related
to ongoing quarrying, aggregate stockpiling and road building activities in this area. The deep well at this location
 North of Phase 2, water quality at location 78 reported slightly elevated concentrations of conductivity, nitrate,
sulphate and manganese again in 2009/10. Additional well development efforts were focused on this well in
2008 and water quality at this location appears to be improving. The presence of mineralized bedrock near the
well may be the cause of some elevated parameters, but elevated concentrations of conductivity, nitrate and
sulphate could also be related to aggregate stockpiling within the Phase 2 basin or dilute leachate.
 Groundwater quality downslope the Hartland North Pad continues to be affected by historical composting and
aggregate stockpiling activities with elevated concentrations of conductivity, ammonia, nitrate, sulphate and
chloride at locations 41, 42, 43, 55 and 56. Water quality impacts associated with historical composting activities
have continued to slowly improve since 2002, with reductions in both conductivity and chloride concentrations.
However; at locations 41, 43, 55, and potentially 56 indicate elevated concentrations of conductivity, sulphate
and nitrate indicate increasing groundwater impacts associated with the aggregate storage and stockpiling on
the Hartland North pad. Water quality were above guidelines for conductivity on all sampling dates in wells at
locations 41, 43 and 55, for manganese at locations 41 and 42 and iron at location 42. A statistical trend analysis
for data collected between 2005 and 2010 indicated an increasing trend in sulphate concentrations at locations
41, 55 and 56, increasing conductivity at location 55 and decreasing chloride concentrations at location 42. This
indicates slowly declining impacts from historical composting activities and increased impacts from aggregate
stockpiling on the Hartland north pad. Water quality in the vicinity of the Hartland North Pad should continue to
be monitored closely for any impacts associated with the storage of large quantities of aggregate.
 Water quality south of the landfill continued to report elevated concentrations of some leachate indicator
prior. Water quality at locations 3 and 85, 60 and 7 degraded in 2009/10. Following a large infiltration event in
2006/07, the behaviour of the most productive south purge well (P1) changed, resulting in higher water levels
and inadequate drawdown and leachate collection south of the landfill between 2007 and 2009, and migration of
leachate southward from Phase 1 toward wells 60 and 7. In 2009, a higher capacity 1.26 L/s (20 gpm)
submersible pump was installed in P1 to achieve better drawdown. While the submersible pump was effective in
drawing down water levels, it required more maintenance that the lower capacity bladder pumps in the adjacent
purge wells. In 2010, an additional purge well (P10) was added to increase pumping capacity and augment the
south leachate collection system. Over the past five years, there have been statistically significant increasing
trends in leachate indicator parameters in wells 60-3-1 (conductivity and chloride), 60-2-1 (chloride), 4-2-1
(chloride) while groundwater quality has slightly improved in wells 60-2-1 (ammonia and sulphate), 71-1-1
(conductivity and sulphate), 72-2-1 (chloride and sulphate), 73-1-1 (conductivity), 73-2-1 (ammonia and
sulphate) and 4-4-1 (chloride). An increasing trend in sulphate concentrations was also observed in well 72-3-1.
Overall, this suggests slightly greater impacts due to leachate and slowly reducing impacts related to aggregate
placement during construction of the bin facility in 2009. Water quality in this area should continue to be closely
monitored to assess the effectiveness of the expanded south purge well system.

6. Groundwater Quality in Domestic Wells
6.1 Data
This section of the report is based on our interpretation of water quality data collected during July 2009 from
domestic wells around Hartland landfill. The sampling program included:
 single samples collected in July 2009 from eleven selected domestic wells located within a two kilometre radius
of the landfill;
 two replicate samples were collected from domestic wells 25 and 61 in July 2009;
 a repeat sample was collected from domestic well 61 in July 2009; and
 one standard sample (City water) collected in July 2009.
Since the 1980’s, the CRD has performed routine sampling and analysis of domestic wells in the vicinity of the
landfill that are used as the primary source of drinking water. The number of wells included in the program has
gradually been reduced as municipal water became available and residents chose to connect to the municipal
supply system. Most of the domestic wells near Hartland landfill are situated southeast of the landfill as shown on
Figure 6-1. These wells are primarily 0.15 m in diameter, drilled wells that penetrate between 30 and 120 m of
bedrock. Three of the wells are shallow and are dug in the overburden. Well yields are generally low and substantial
drawdowns occur, particularly during the dry summer months.
The samples collected in 2009 were analyzed for general water quality parameters and metals. Tabulated results
are presented in Appendix B.2. Results were compared to the British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines
(Criteria) (Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection 1998a, updated 2001) where available and Canadian Drinking
Water Guidelines (Federal-Provincial Subcommittee on Drinking Water 2008) where they are more stringent. As
illustrated in Appendix B2, only one sample from well 53 exceeded the BC Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality in
2009/10 with elevated iron concentrations.
6.2 Domestic Well Quality
Groundwater quality in the domestic wells in 2009/10 was similar to the results that have been reported since 2000.
Although concentrations of some parameters have exhibited variations since the sampling program began, these
variations are considered to be representative of natural conditions. The groundwater quality in the samples
collected from the domestic wells has not shown a significant or systematic variation over the past several years of
monitoring.
The groundwater northeast of the landfill is sampled in domestic wells 36 and 37. In 2009, groundwater quality was
similar to previous years for well 37. No parameters have been present in concentrations that exceeded water
quality criteria in well 37 since sampling began in 1989. Domestic well 36 has exhibited total lead concentrations
above the guideline of 0.01 mg/L in the past as a result of stagnant water in the well or household plumbing that was
not purged prior to collecting a drinking water sample. Lead concentrations in well 36 remained below water quality
criteria on the July 2009 sampling date.

Groundwater east of the landfill is sampled in domestic wells 24 and 25. Both wells exhibited an increase in
hardness, chloride, total dissolved solids and conductivity, which may be related to the use of water softeners. Water
quality criteria have not been exceeded in domestic wells 24 and 25 since sampling was initiated. One field replicate
was collected from well 25 in July 2009.
In 2009/10, water quality in domestic well 50, located southeast of the landfill, was similar to 2008/09. Copper
showed a significant decrease in concentration in the past year. Total iron concentrations, which exceeded water
quality criteria in 2008/09, were below the guideline of 0.3 mg/L on the July 2009 sampling date. The iron
exceedence in June 2008 is the only exceedence of water quality criteria in domestic well 50 since 1989. This well
exhibited background water quality between 1989 and 1998. Since 1998, concentrations of some parameters have
increased and have fluctuated considerably. The highest recorded conductivity and chloride concentrations occurred
during the exceptionally wet winter of 1998-1999. Since early 1999, the concentrations of all parameters have shown
seasonal effects, with increasing concentrations during winter months and decreasing concentrations in drier
months.
The other domestic wells southeast of the landfill (51, 52 and 53) have exhibited water quality at background
concentrations for many years. There were no water quality exceedences in samples collected from domestic wells
51 or 52 in 2008. In domestic well 53, the total iron concentration was 0.369 mg/L in 2009/10 and exceeded the
guideline of 0.3 mg/L. This well exceeded the iron criteria in 2007/08 and several years previous to that. This well is
a dug well that exhibits very low conductivity and chloride concentrations and is not affected by leachate.
Iron is naturally present in the soils and the metamorphic rocks found in the vicinity of the landfill. Iron concentrations
in groundwater samples collected from domestic wells are interpreted as originating from natural sources. The
guidelines for iron and manganese were set to meet aesthetic considerations (e.g., staining of plumbing fixtures) and
are not health-based objectives.
Domestic well 47 is also located southeast of the landfill. Manganese has exceeded drinking water criteria in the
past at this well. No parameters exceeded water quality criteria in domestic well 47 in 2009/10.
Water quality in domestic well 80 did not exceed drinking water quality guidelines in 2009/10. In domestic well 61,
the total lead concentration was 0.465 mg/L in June 2008, and exceeded the total lead guideline of 0.01 mg/L.
Domestic well 61 was re-sampled in August 2008 and did not exceed water quality guidelines. In 2010, one field
replicate exhibited lead concentrations above drinking water quality guidelines, but upon resampling, lead
concentrations were well below drinking water quality guidelines. The lead exceedences in domestic well 61 are
likely the result of stagnant water in the well or household plumbing that was not purged prior to sampling. Each time
exceedences have been observed, cleaning of the inline particulate filter and resampling results in concentrations
below relevant guidelines. This is a shallow dug well with limited recharge and at the owner’s requiest, CRD reduced
the purge volume prior to sampling. Also, in discussion with the homeowner, CRD determined that the system had
and in-line filter system that was in need of maintenance prior to the first sampling. The filter was serviced prior to
the second sampling. Water quality in these wells is indicative of background concentrations.
Overall, the 2009/10 domestic well water quality results are similar to the historic data. The data indicates that the
domestic wells have not been impacted by leachate from Hartland landfill.
6.3 Summary
As part of the CRD’s groundwater quality monitoring program, eleven domestic wells were sampled in 2009/10. The
water quality monitoring program showed:

 eleven domestic wells were sampled once in July 2009. Well 61 was re-sampled in July 2009;
 one domestic well (53) was above the drinking water criterion for total iron (0.3 mg/L), with a concentration of
 one well (61) was above the drinking water criterion for total lead in one field replicate collected during July
(0.00088 mg/L), indicating that lead concentrations above guidelines may be a result of stagnant water that was
not completely purged from household plumbing or the well prior to sampling and highlighting the need for
regularly scheduled maintenance of the in-line filter system by the homeowner;

7. Surface Water Flow and Quality Near the Landfill
7.1 Data
 Surface water sampling locations are shown on Figure 7-1.
The surface water interpretation was based on water quality data collected at:
 14 locations south and west of the landfill - Sw-S-03, Sw-S-04, Sw-S-10, Sw-S-11, Sw-S-12, Sw-S-20, Sw-S-21,
Sw-S-23, Sw-S-24, Sw-S-25, Sw-S-27, Sw-S-30, Sw-S-31, Sw-S-52; and
 23 locations north and northwest of the landfill - Sw-N-05, Sw-N-06, Sw-N-07, Sw-N-08, Sw-N-09, Sw-N-14,
Sw-N-15, Sw-N-16, Sw-N-17, Sw-N-18, Sw-N-19, Sw-N-41-S-1, Sw-N-41-S-3, Sw-N-41-S-4, Sw-N-41-S-6,
Sw-N-42-S-1, Sw-N-43, Sw-N-45, Sw-N-47, Sw-N-50, Sw-N-51, Sw-N-53, Sw-N-CS-2.
Hartland landfill is located within the Tod Creek watershed on a drainage divide between the Heal Creek drainage
basin to the north and the Killarney Creek basin to the south. Surface water from both the Heal Creek drainage basin
and Killarney Creek basin flow into Tod Creek and ultimately discharge to Tod Inlet. Surface water sampling stations
are shown on Figures 4-1, 5-1 and 7-1. Surface water sampling stations have been established on the landfill
property to monitor compliance at the property boundary and evaluate water quality and identify changes in surface
water quality that could be related to landfill operations. Surface water stations are also located at numerous off-site
locations to routinely monitor water quality.
Laboratory analytical results are presented in Appendix B.3. The results were compared to the British Columbia
Approved Water Quality Guidelines (Criteria) (Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection 1998a, updated 2001) for
freshwater aquatic life. Exceedences of the guidelines are noted in both Table 7-1 and the tables in Appendix B.3.
For ammonia, there is no single value for the protection of freshwater aquatic life. The toxicity of ammonia is related
to the temperature and pH of the water and the BC Criteria provide values for acute and chronic effects. The chronic,
or allowable, 30-day concentration is the most appropriate level to use for the assessment of ongoing operations.
Based on surface water monitoring data collected, CRD staff calculated the allowable 30-day average concentration
of ammonia for the protection of freshwater aquatic life to be 1.78 mg/L, with a maximum allowable concentration of
12.3 mg/L. The appropriate values are shown as the ammonia criterion in Table 7-1 and Appendix B.3.
Surface water quality samples are collected six times per year from property boundary stations and four times per
year from all other stations. When stream courses are dry, the number of samples collected is reduced. In 2009/10,
water quality samples were collected as follows:
 once at Sw-N-41-S7, Sw-N-43, Sw-N-47, Sw-N-53 and Sw-S-21;

 two times at Sw-S-24, Sw-N-CS-S2 and Sw-N-51;
 three times at Sw-S-20, Sw-S-23, Sw-S-27, Sw-S-52, Sw-N-06, Sw-N-19 AND Sw-N-50;
 four times at Sw-S-10, Sw-S-11, Sw-N-07, Sw-N-08, Sw-N-09, Sw-N-14, Sw-N-15, Sw-N-17, Sw-N-41s3,
Sw-N-41s4 and Sw-N-45;
 five times at Sw-S-12, Sw-N-16, Sw-N-18 and Sw-N-42-1; and
 six times at property boundary stations Sw-S-03, Sw-S-04, Sw-N-05 and Sw-N-41-S1.

Table 7-1. Hartland Landfill - Surface Water Quality - Exceedences - 2009-2010
B.C. Water Quality Maximum Value 0.35 (3) 0.35 (3) 0.8 (4) 0.8 (4) 12.3 (5) 200. 0.6 (6) 9. 100. 25.
Maximum Average 0.7 0.7 1.78 40. 0.2 50. (7)
Method Setection Limit 0.1 0.001 0.001 0.0001 0.0001 0.5 0.5 0.005 0.5 1. 0.02 0.005 0.001 0.1 0.5 4.
Well Carbon Ammonia Electrical Ortho Phosphate Solids
Station Depth Date Sampled Total Total Dissolved Total Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved Total Comments
(m) ºC mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mg/L µS/cm mgN/L mgN/L mgP/L pH mg/L mg/L
SW-N-05 N 2009 Jul 02 14.1 0.26 0.002 0.061 0.0013 < 0.5 100. 0.016 5.3 340. 0.56 < 0.005 0.001 8. 53. b 14. Flow very low. Very slightly tubid and slightly brown.
SW-N-05 N 2009 Nov 09 10.4 0.092 --- 0.0034 0.0014 1.5 67. < 0.005 4.2 435. 3.16 < 0.005 0.006 7.7 130. a < 4. Flow moderate. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow-brown.
SW-N-05 N 2009 Dec 11 7.2 0.053 --- 0.0028 0.0015 2.8 75. 0.007 5.5 366. 2.03 0.038 0.001 7.8 90. b < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-05 N 2010 Jan 08 7.8 0.085 0.027 0.0022 0.0011 3.1 62. 0.01 4.6 300. 1.54 < 0.005 0.006 7.6 69. b < 4. Flow moderately high. Clear and slightly yellow.
SW-N-05 N 2010 Feb 10 8.8 0.043 0.015 0.0018 0.001 1.6 79. < 0.005 5.7 347. 1.66 < 0.005 0.021 8.1 74. b < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-05 N 2010 Mar 24 --- 0.053 0.012 0.0056 0.0008 2. 88. 0.012 4.9 355. 1.47 0.006 0.002 7.9 76. b < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-06 N 2009 Jun 29 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- No sample. Watercourse dry.
SW-N-06 N 2009 Nov 13 8.6 0.045 0.015 0.0043 0.0025 6.5 110. < 0.005 21. 449. 2.4 < 0.005 0.068 7.9 69. b < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-06 N 2010 Feb 08 8.2 0.126 0.012 0.019 0.0044 6.8 91. 0.008 12. 337. 0.95 < 0.005 0.007 8. 50. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-06 N 2010 Mar 23 --- 0.009 0.013 0.0069 0.0076 3.7 110. < 0.005 13. 362. 0.97 < 0.005 0.003 8.2 43. 4. Flow very low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-08 N 2009 Jun 29 12.5 3.22 a 1.695 a 0.998 a 1.09 a 18.3 85.5 0.231 31.5 305. 0.13 0.022 0.039 7.7 28.5 9. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow-brown.
SW-N-08 N 2009 Nov 12 7.7 0.406 a 0.247 0.025 0.0289 10.5 56. 0.057 19. 244. 0.38 0.008 0.075 7.8 28. < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and slightly yellow.
SW-N-08 N 2010 Feb 08 --- 0.564 a --- 0.0441 0.0455 5.8 54. 0.043 14. 182. 0.23 0.005 0.02 7.6 13. < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and moderately yellow.
SW-N-08 N 2010 Mar 23 --- 0.744 a 0.438 a 0.069 0.0688 7.2 58. 0.022 12. 191. 0.11 < 0.005 0.012 7.9 14. 5. Flow low. Clear and slightly yellow-brown.
Flow very low. Very turbid and rusty orange colour.
SW-N-09 N 2009 Jun 29 12.3 14.8 a 4.19 a 1.48 a 1.47 a 28.3 92. 0.59 25. 370. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.062 7.6 39. 55. a Filtered clear.
SW-N-09 N 2009 Nov 12 7.7 0.441 a 0.261 0.0309 0.0296 10.1 51.5 0.171 18. 225. 0.29 0.011 0.083 7.7 22.5 < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and slightly yellow-brown.
SW-N-09 N 2010 Feb 08 7.2 0.641 a 0.443 a 0.0484 0.0443 6.7 49. 0.031 14. 171. 0.22 < 0.005 0.025 7.6 9.8 6. Flow moderate. Clear and slightly yellow-brown.
SW-N-09 N 2010 Mar 23 --- 0.677 a 0.445 a 0.0675 0.067 8.4 52. 0.025 13. 182. 0.09 < 0.005 0.015 7.8 12. 5. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-14 N 2009 Jun 29 11.5 0.266 0.008 0.0476 0.0132 4.9 130. < 0.005 18. 360. 0.13 < 0.005 0.008 8.1 24. 8. Flow very low. Very slightly turbid and colourless.
SW-N-14 N 2009 Nov 13 7.8 0.277 0.019 0.0486 0.0019 5.6 97. < 0.005 21. 403. 1.75 < 0.005 0.067 7.9 58. b 13. Flow moderate. Clear and slightly brown.
SW-N-14 N 2010 Feb 08 7.7 0.097 0.022 0.0114 0.0017 4.1 88. 0.007 11. 302. 0.72 < 0.005 0.009 7.9 37. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-14 N 2010 Mar 23 --- 0.125 0.015 0.0172 0.0025 3.2 100. 0.008 11. 318. 0.78 < 0.005 0.004 8.2 28. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-16 N 2009 Nov 09 10.6 0.136 0.085 0.0491 0.0434 19.9 160. 0.006 7.6 547. 7.4 0.024 0.021 8. 66. b < 4. Flow moderately high. Clear and slightly yellow-brown.
SW-N-16 N 2009 Dec 11 3.3 0.253 0.114 0.327 0.286 12.2 160. 0.24 14. 428. 2.54 0.071 0.009 7.9 34. < 4. Flow low. Clear and slightly yellow.
SW-N-16 N 2010 Jan 08 6.4 0.133 0.076 0.0441 0.0424 14.9 130. 0.031 5.2 388. 4.4 0.008 0.016 7.8 37. < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and moderately yellow.
SW-N-16 N 2010 Feb 10 6.4 0.265 0.217 0.275 0.284 10.5 160. 0.055 7.8 398. 1.56 0.013 0.043 8.1 28. < 4. Flow low. Clear and slightly yellow.
SW-N-16 N 2010 Mar 23 --- 0.564 a 0.262 0.172 0.165 12.4 170. < 0.005 6.5 443. 2.48 < 0.005 0.001 8.2 32. 10. Flow low. Moderately turbid and slightly yellow-green.
SW-N-17 N 2009 Jun 29 12.4 0.133 0.089 0.0585 0.0605 1.2 110. < 0.005 19. 370. 0.1 < 0.005 0.003 7.9 43. < 4. Flow very low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-17 N 2009 Nov 13 8.7 0.026 0.018 0.0076 0.0077 1.8 91. < 0.005 21. 441. 1.75 < 0.005 0.059 7.7 72. b < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-17 N 2010 Feb 08 8.2 0.043 0.02 0.011 0.0092 3.7 82. 0.008 11. 330. 1.03 < 0.005 0.005 7.9 57. b < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-17 N 2010 Mar 23 --- 0.057 0.025 0.0196 0.0164 1.5 93. 0.008 12. 341. 0.85 < 0.005 0.004 8.1 33. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-18 N 2009 Jul 02 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- No sample. Watercourse dry.
SW-N-18 N 2009 Nov 09 11.4 0.374 a --- 0.0311 0.023 2. 57. 0.225 4. 357. 2.81 0.016 0.006 7.7 91. b < 4. Flow moderately high. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-18 N 2009 Dec 11 9.2 0.056 --- 0.0018 0.001 1.4 83. 0.007 6.4 377. 2.09 0.035 0.002 8.1 93. b < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-18 N 2010 Jan 08 7.5 0.176 0.01 0.0116 0.0087 1.7 41. 0.386 2.4 207. 1.09 0.006 0.004 7.7 44. < 4. Flow moderate. Slightly turbid and colourless.
SW-N-18 N 2010 Feb 10 9.5 0.039 0.004 0.0015 0.0007 0.9 82. 0.006 4.7 356. 1.73 < 0.005 0.031 8.2 75. b < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-18 N 2010 Mar 24 --- 0.012 --- 0.0004 0.0004 1.9 91. < 0.005 4.4 357. 1.54 0.009 0.001 8.1 72. b < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-19 N 2009 Nov 09 11.1 0.105 0.076 0.041 0.0377 23.2 180. 0.009 6. 586. 8.9 0.077 0.038 8.1 82. b < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and moderately yellow-brown.
SW-N-19 N 2010 Feb 10 7.1 0.05 0.034 0.035 0.016 15.4 190. 0.011 5.1 483. 3.67 0.007 0.069 8.4 35. < 4. Flow low. Clear and very yellow.
SW-N-19 N 2010 Mar 23 --- 0.053 0.03 0.0595 0.0216 < 0.5 200. 0.02 3.8 523. 4.7 0.015 0.001 8.4 51. b 10. Flow low. Moderately turbid and slightly yellow-green.
60158830_TBL-7-1_2010-08-24_ North&South Landfill Surface Water Chemistry Exceedences_SD.xlsm:Excedences Page 1 of 3

Maximum Average 0.7 0.7 1.78 40. 0.2 50. (7)
SW-N-41s1 N 2009 Jul 02 --- 0.014 0.003 0.0035 0.002 2. 120. 0.023 20. 1000. 0.5 < 0.005 0.001 8.1 89. b 7. Flow very low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s1 N 2009 Nov 12 9.7 0.06 --- 0.0318 0.0195 3.1 100. < 0.005 4.7 1070. 7. < 0.005 0.075 7.8 330. a < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s1 N 2009 Dec 11 7.9 0.045 --- 0.0248 0.0147 2.7 87. 0.01 4.8 1040. 6.7 0.039 0.008 7.9 450. a < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s1 N 2010 Jan 08 8.9 0.07 0.012 0.0376 0.0088 2.3 82. 0.005 4.4 805. 3.8 < 0.005 0.009 7.8 300. a < 4. Flow moderately high. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s1 N 2010 Feb 10 8.4 0.06 0.015 0.0301 0.014 2.3 93. 0.006 5.8 994. 3.75 < 0.005 0.027 8.1 220. a < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s1 N 2010 Mar 24 --- 0.049 --- 0.0307 0.0149 3.7 100. < 0.005 3.9 874. 2.63 < 0.005 0.001 8. 300. a < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s3 N 2009 Jul 02 10.1 0.088 0.016 0.0504 0.0191 1.2 110. < 0.005 4.6 470. 5. < 0.005 0.002 8.1 390. a < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s3 N 2009 Nov 12 8.6 0.02 0.01 0.0039 0.003 2.4 110. 0.007 23. 562. 1.22 < 0.005 0.073 8. 120. a < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s3 N 2010 Feb 10 7.4 0.019 0.006 0.0027 0.001 1.5 85. 0.005 8.7 370. 0.59 < 0.005 0.009 8.1 78. b < 4. Flow moderately high. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s3 N 2010 Mar 24 --- 0.048 0.003 0.0081 0.0013 2. 99. < 0.005 11. 369. 0.38 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 66. b 7. Flow moderately low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-41s6 N 2009 Jul 02 20.6 0.03 0.006 0.0167 0.0032 3.7 78.5 0.007 13.5 240. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 14.5 < 4. Flow very low. Very slightly turbid and colourless.
SW-N-42s1 N 2009 Jun 29 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- No sample. Watercourse dry.
SW-N-42s1 N 2009 Nov 12 8.1 0.035 --- 0.0322 0.0178 5.8 150. < 0.005 19. 565. 0.78 0.008 0.076 7.9 96. b < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-42s1 N 2009 Dec 11 2.9 0.021 --- 0.0104 0.0075 4.2 130. 0.026 15.5 459. 0.44 0.041 0.008 8. 86. b < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-42s1 N 2010 Jan 08 6.9 0.047 0.015 0.0327 0.0068 4.2 100. 0.015 11.5 377. 0.62 < 0.005 0.007 7.7 61.5 b < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-42s1 N 2010 Feb 10 6.1 0.053 0.015 0.0518 0.0114 3.6 130. 0.01 11. 428. 0.25 0.006 0.022 8.2 66. b < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-42s1 N 2010 Mar 23 --- 0.032 0.014 0.0355 0.0126 4.2 150. < 0.005 12. 497. 0.23 < 0.005 0.007 8.2 71. b < 4. Flow very low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-43 N 2009 Nov 13 7.1 0.026 0.026 0.0056 0.006 1.5 74.5 < 0.005 12. 445. 3.16 < 0.005 0.059 7.7 101.5 a < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-45 N 2009 Jun 29 12.7 0.065 0.012 0.0221 0.0063 0.7 100. 0.008 10. 360. 0.77 < 0.005 0.002 7.8 54. b 5. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and colourless.
SW-N-45 N 2009 Nov 13 9.4 0.008 0.007 0.0002 0.0003 5.7 120. < 0.005 37. 454. 0.07 < 0.005 0.058 7.9 48. < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and slightly yellow.
SW-N-45 N 2010 Feb 08 8.7 0.045 0.017 0.009 0.0067 2.9 74. 0.01 9.4 339. 1.48 < 0.005 0.006 7.8 47. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-45 N 2010 Mar 23 --- 0.051 0.05 0.0126 0.0111 2.1 87. < 0.005 8.2 349. 1.36 < 0.005 0.004 8.1 44. < 4. Flow very low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-47 N 2009 Nov 09 11.4 0.738 a 0.061 0.0272 0.0032 1.4 24. < 0.005 4.4 148. 1.36 < 0.005 0.018 7.4 29. 21. Flow moderately low. Moderately turbid and slightly grey.
SW-N-50 N 2009 Jul 02 14.4 0.06 0.003 0.0019 0.0016 < 0.5 110. < 0.005 5.1 330. 0.38 < 0.005 0.002 8.2 47. < 4. Flow very low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-50 N 2009 Nov 09 12. 0.315 --- 0.0088 0.0011 2.3 93. < 0.005 5.2 582. 5.8 0.005 0.004 7.9 170. a 5. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-50 N 2010 Mar 24 --- 0.022 --- 0.0009 0.0005 1.5 91. 0.006 4.5 347. 1.46 0.006 0.001 8.1 67. b < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-51 N 2009 Nov 09 10.4 0.113 --- 0.003 0.0019 2. 49. < 0.005 5. 801. 8.1 < 0.005 0.004 7.2 280. a < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-51 N 2010 Feb 10 9.6 0.1 0.004 0.0033 0.0007 1. 83. < 0.005 4.6 355. 1.74 < 0.005 0.026 8.2 49. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-N-53 N 2009 Nov 09 9.4 2.22 a 0.119 0.0608 0.0045 3.3 39. < 0.005 3.8 108. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.004 7.6 8.2 53. a Flow low. Very turbid and moderately yellow.
SW-S-03 S 2009 Jun 30 12.8 0.117 0.039 0.2655 0.264 5.6 190. 0.331 65. 690. 1.48 0.024 0.002 8. 43. 7. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow colour.
SW-S-03 S 2009 Nov 10 12. 0.945 a 0.093 0.0611 0.0389 9.9 64. 0.011 21. 326. 2.11 0.008 0.032 7.7 39. 68. a Flow low. Very turbid and moderately yellow-brown.
SW-S-03 S 2009 Dec 11 9.6 0.089 0.043 0.0099 0.0071 5.3 69. 0.181 15. 248. 1.39 0.037 0.001 7.8 25. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-S-03 S 2010 Jan 08 7.8 0.688 a 0.135 0.0384 0.0231 6.1 65. 0.122 12. 235. 1.93 0.008 0.006 7.5 20. 25. Flow moderate. Very turbid and slightly grey.
SW-S-03 S 2010 Feb 19 9.3 0.068 0.032 0.0134 0.0109 8.5 89. 0.025 14. 289. 1.88 < 0.005 0.006 7.7 28. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-S-03 S 2010 Mar 25 --- 0.067 0.022 0.0317 0.0315 5.4 120. 0.057 18. 369. 1.99 0.005 0.002 7.9 28. < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and colourless.
SW-S-04 S 2009 Jun 30 9.9 0.12 0.003 0.0592 0.0043 3.2 110. < 0.005 40. 450. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.002 8. 46. 10. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and colourless.
Flow moderately high. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow-
SW-S-04 S 2009 Nov 10 10.2 0.154 0.039 0.0466 0.0036 8.3 80. < 0.005 22. 355. 1.19 < 0.005 0.002 8. 41. 11. brown.
SW-S-04 S 2009 Dec 11 5.7 0.206 0.019 0.0566 0.0056 4.5 79. 0.007 20. 295. 0.65 < 0.005 0.002 7.9 31. 9. Flow low. Slightly turbid and slightly brown.
Flow moderately high. Moderately turbid and slightly
SW-S-04 S 2010 Jan 08 6.3 0.403 a 0.067 0.0327 0.0053 3.6 51. 0.016 12. 182. 0.54 < 0.005 0.005 7.7 16. 8. yellow-brown.
SW-S-04 S 2010 Feb 19 6. 0.088 0.017 0.032 0.0028 4.1 87. 0.009 16. 294. 0.86 < 0.005 0.009 7.8 33. 6. Flow moderate. Slightly turbid and colourless.
SW-S-04 S 2010 Mar 25 --- 0.256 0.025 0.0413 0.0035 4.6 88. < 0.005 23. 320. 0.51 < 0.005 0.001 8. 28. 6. Flow moderately low. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow.

Maximum Average 0.7 0.7 1.78 40. 0.2 50. (7)
SW-S-12 S 2009 Jun 30 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- No sample. Watercourse dry.
SW-S-12 S 2009 Nov 10 11.2 2.14 a 0.194 0.194 0.132 11.9 60. 0.139 6.2 239. 1.99 0.013 0.111 7.8 27. 170. a Flow moderately high. Very turbid and moderately brown.
SW-S-12 S 2009 Dec 11 8.1 0.251 0.107 0.0331 0.0306 8.3 56. 0.073 12. 219. 2.92 0.053 0.007 7.7 20. < 4. Flow low. Clear and slightly yellow.
SW-S-12 S 2010 Jan 08 7.6 3.25 a 0.139 0.206 0.111 8.4 71. 1.01 7.9 226. 0.87 0.024 0.009 7.5 19. 180. a Flow moderate. Very turbid and slightly brown.
SW-S-12 S 2010 Feb 19 9.6 0.255 0.152 0.0932 0.0896 12.5 71. 0.06 6.3 263. 3.39 0.014 0.008 7.8 35. < 4. Flow low. Clear and slightly yellow.
SW-S-12 S 2010 Mar 25 --- 0.302 0.118 0.0869 0.0861 14.8 100. 0.037 6. 304. 2.16 0.016 0.002 8.1 28. < 4. Flow low. Clear and slightly yellow.
SW-S-20 S 2009 Nov 12 7.7 0.048 0.047 0.0008 0.0008 11.5 32.5 0.006 7.3 111. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.055 7.6 5.6 < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and moderately yellow-brown.
SW-S-20 S 2010 Feb 19 6.2 0.017 0.003 0.0006 0.0006 4.1 67. 0.011 5.2 159. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.008 7.9 7.4 < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-S-20 S 2010 Mar 25 --- 0.583 a 0.014 0.0114 0.0015 1.3 69. 0.009 4.7 159. < 0.02 0.005 0.002 8. 7.7 14. Flow moderately low. Moderately turbid and colourless.
SW-S-23 S 2009 Nov 10 10.8 0.359 a 0.065 0.15 0.0106 8.7 95. < 0.005 26. 409. 1.5 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 40. 30. a Flow moderate. Moderately turbid and slightly brown.
SW-S-23 S 2010 Feb 19 7.2 0.1 0.021 0.0345 0.0081 5. 94. 0.006 17. 306. 1.04 < 0.005 0.005 8. 28. 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-S-23 S 2010 Mar 25 --- 0.255 0.021 0.0998 0.0057 5.8 98. 0.007 29. 339. 0.67 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 23. 10. Flow low. Slightly turbid and slightly brown.
SW-S-24 S 2009 Nov 10 11. 0.642 a 0.074 0.146 0.015 9.4 77. 0.006 22. 345. 1.5 < 0.005 0.002 7.9 41. 33. a Flow moderately high. Very turbid and moderately brown.
SW-S-24 S 2010 Mar 25 --- 0.261 0.02 0.121 0.0175 6.5 100. 0.007 25. 352. 0.86 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 25. 11. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-S-27 S 2009 Nov 10 9.6 0.432 a 0.046 0.194 0.111 5.2 120. 0.007 51. 506. 0.44 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 35. 7. Flow moderately high. Slightly turbid and slightly grey.
SW-S-27 S 2010 Feb 19 7.2 0.114 0.017 0.0545 0.0106 4.1 110. 0.017 26. 367. 0.21 < 0.005 0.008 8.1 31. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
SW-S-27 S 2010 Mar 25 --- 0.199 0.015 0.0678 0.0035 3.3 120. 0.011 28. 411. 0.21 < 0.005 0.002 8.2 26. 5. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
Notes:
na na - Not applicable.
a Above maximum British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
b Above average British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
c Below minimum British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
(1) British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines (Criteria), 1998 Edition, Updated August 24, 2001. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection an
A Compendium of Working Water Quality Guidelines for British Columbia, 1998 Edition, Updated August 23, 2001. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection.
The guidelines cited are specific to protection of freshwater aquatic life unless otherwise noted.
(2) For streams with unknown fish distribution.

(3) Under review.
(4) The manganese guidelines are hardness dependant. Since the value for hardness is not known, the worst case value ( 25 mg/L ) has been used.
(5) The ammonia guideline is for protection of aquatic life. It is pH and temperature dependant.
(6) The nitrite guidelines are chloride dependant. The chloride concentration was assumed to be the worst case value ( <2 mg/L ).
(7) This value is an alert level, not a maximum average value.

7.2 Surface Water Flow and Quality North of the Landfill
7.2.1 Surface Water Quality North of Phase 1 and Phase 2
Heal Creek flows northeasterly from a sedimentation pond at the north end of the Phase 2 basin to the confluence
with Durrance Creek, as shown in Figures 5-1 and 7-1. Durrance Creek discharges to Tod Creek, which in turn
discharges to Tod Inlet, about 3 km north of the landfill.
Heal Creek is a small creek with a watershed area of 143 hectares. Heal Creek is mainly steep and rocky although
the creek passes through a few small wetlands near the upper end. The creek dries up during the summer months
except in the lower reaches where groundwater discharge maintains flow year-round. Clean runoff is directed from
the Phase 1 final cover and the eastern perimeter of the landfill to a lined sedimentation pond and then into the
wetland located north of the lower leachate lagoon. The wetland, in turn, discharges northward to Heal Creek. Heal
Creek also receives drainage from the area north of Phase 2 (High Level Road ditch), and from a small stream
draining a small wetland below the east end of the Hartland North Pad.
A small wetland is located just north of the lower leachate lagoon. Water flows from this wetland northwards through
a culvert under Willis Point Road and discharges to Heal Creek. Site Sw-N-16 is the compliance point used to
monitor the quality of the surface water leaving the landfill through this route. At 0.564 mg/L the concentration of total
iron exceeded maximum water quality criteria of 0.35 mg/L on March 23, 2010. All other parameters remained below
water quality criteria for maximum concentrations in 2009/10. At Sw-N-16, ammonia, nitrate, conductivity, chloride,
sulphate and dissolved iron concentrations were similar in 2009/10 to previous years. A statistical analysis of
conductivity, ammonia, chloride, sulphate and nitrate concentrations revealed no statistically significant trends
(upward or downward) in data collected at Sw-N-16 from 2005 to present, with the exception of ammonia
concentrations which were found to be decreasing at the 95% confidence level.
The other route for surface water to leave the property to the north is through the main channel of Heal Creek
located just north of Phase 2. Water quality in this area was sampled at compliance point Sw-N-05 and met water
quality criteria for all parameters except dissolved sulphate as was the case in 2008/2009. Sulphate concentrations
ranged from 53 mg/L to 130 mg/L and exceeded the maximum guideline value of 100 mg/L in November 2009
(130 mg/L). Conductivity values reached a maximum value of 435 µS/cm during November 2009. Since 2005, peak
concentrations of conductivity and sulphate increased seasonally during first flush events and was attributed to
aggregate stockpiling. In 2009/2010, concentrations of sulphate and conductivity have decreased in maximum
values as well as average values, although statistically significant trends are not present when the last five years of
data are considered. Average conductivity and sulphate values in 2008/2009 were 430 µS/cm, and 106 mg/L
respectively, compared to 357 µS/cm and 82 mg/L in 2009/2010. This downward trend is evident in concentrations
of ammonia, chloride, and nitrate as well.
CRD is currently considering options to manage runoff from the aggregate stockpile areas during the first flush
events to mitigate the higher conductivity and sulphate concentrations that are typical of these events. During
2006/07, the concentrations of ammonia rose significantly relative to 2005/06 measurements, but have been near or
below detection limits since 2007/08. This suggests that previously elevated concentrations of ammonia were related
to minor leachate infiltration into a damaged portion of the surface water collection system at the northern end of
Phase 2. The damaged portion of the culvert was repaired during the summer of 2007 and ammonia concentrations
have since declined to near historical levels.
A Mann-Kendall statistical trend analysis did not reveal any trend in conductivity, sulphate, chloride, nitrate or
ammonia concentrations over the past five years. The increasing trend in ammonia concentrations reported in
2006/07 may have been related to the break in the surface water conveyance system at the north end of Phase 2

that was repaired during the summer of 2007. Continual decreasing ammonia concentrations near or below
detection limits during 2007/08, 2008/09 and 2009/2010 indicate that the repair to the pipeline diverting clean runoff
past the Phase 2 basin was successful.
North of Phase 2 at Sw-N-45, concentrations of conductivity observed during 2009/10 were similar to those
observed in 2008/09. Concentrations of nitrate and sulphate were observed at values lower than in 2008/09 and
ammonia concentrations declined slightly. Surface water quality met guidelines for all parameters at this off-site
station located downstream of Sw-N-05. The maximum sulphate concentration observed in 2009/10 was 54 mg/L,
compared to 84 mg/L in 2008/09. As with Sw-N-05, maximum and average sulphate concentrations at Sw-N-45
have declined from previous years and may be related to the reduction in aggregate production and stockpiling
within the Toutle Valley west of Phase 2 during 2009/10.
Further downstream on the north side of Willis Point Road at station Sw-N-17, concentrations of conductivity, nitrate,
ammonia and sulphate were slightly lower relative to 2008/09 and were within water quality guidelines. Runoff from
aggregate stockpiles and quarrying areas appeared to be affecting water quality at this location; however, as with
Sw-N-05 and Sw-N-45, maximum and average concentrations of these parameters at Sw-N-17 have decreased over
the past year.
Figure 7-2 presents conductivity, ammonia, chloride and sulphate concentrations in Heal Creek downstream of the
landfill at stations Sw-N-05, Sw-N-06, Sw-N-14, and Sw-N-16 and in Durrance Creek at station Sw-N-07 for the last
five years. The distance of each station from the landfill boundary is shown in brackets in the legend. The plot shows
that water quality continues to meet applicable water quality guidelines at most stations downstream of the landfill on
most dates, although occasional spikes in conductivity, ammonia and chloride have occurred that may be related to
increased runoff during wet weather.
Water quality at Sw-N-06 met water quality guidelines for maximum concentrations on all sampling dates. A
statistical analysis using the Mann-Kendall test did not reveal a statistically significant trend in conductivity, ammonia
or chloride concentrations over the past five years at the 95% confidence level. In 2009/10, water quality at Sw-N-06
on Heal Creek showed elevated conductivity, chloride, nitrate and sulphate concentrations compared with sites
Sw-N-07 and Sw-N-15 (on Durrance Creek). Ammonia concentrations were lower than in previous years and were
at or near detection limits during 2009/10.
Sw-N-14 is located on Heal Creek downstream of Sw-N-06 but upstream of the confluence with Durrance Creek.
Since 1993, water quality at this location has been similar to Sw-N-06. In 2009/10, surface water quality met all
surface water guidelines and conductivity values were comparable to 2008/09. Some parameters (conductivity,
chloride, nitrate and sulphate) measured at Sw-N-14 continue to be slightly elevated relative to background
concentrations at Sw-N-15.
Water quality at Station Sw-N-07, located on Durrance Creek 1.5 km downstream of Sw-N-06 and just upstream of
the confluence with Tod Creek, was similar to concentrations observed at Sw-N-15 in 2009/10.
Stations Sw-N-08 and Sw-N-09 are located on Tod Creek. Sw-N-09 is a background station located immediately
upstream of the confluence of Durrance and Tod Creeks and Sw-N-08 is downstream of the confluence of the two
creeks. Prior to 1990, leachate impacts on water quality were evident at Sw-N-08. However, water quality has
improved since 1990 to the point that results at both these sites are very similar and there have been no detectable
leachate impacts in Tod Creek since 1998. Water quality at these sites was within guidelines, with the exception of
total and dissolved iron and total and dissolved manganese in 2009/10. Total iron concentrations for Sw-N-08 and
Sw-N-09 was above the maximum guideline value of 0.35 m/L for every sampling event with maximum values of

1000
SW-N-16 (30 m)
800 SW-N-05 (40 m)

SW-N-06 (300 m)
600 SW-N-14 (500 m)
SW-N-07 (1150 m)
400
200
NOTE: Colour indicates distance from landfill footprint. Red = 0-200 m; Green = 201-500 m; Blue = > 500 m.
0
10
SW-N-16 (30 m)
SW-N-05 (40 m)
1 SW-N-06 (300 m)
Ammonia (mg/L)
SW-N-14 (500 m)
0.1 SW-N-07 (1150 m)
0.01

0.001
50
SW-N-16 (30 m)
SW-N-05 (40 m)
40
SW-N-06 (300 m)
Chloride (mg/L)
30 SW-N-14 (500 m)
SW-N-07 (1150 m)
20
10
300
SW-N-16 (30 m)
SW-N-05 (40 m)
Sulphate (mg/L)
SW-N-06 (300 m)
200
SW-N-14 (500 m)
SW-N-07 (1150 m)
BCWQ Guideline
100
Figure 7-2. Surface Water Quality North of Phase 1

3.22 mg/L and 14.8 mg/L, respectively. On the June 2009 sampling date, guidelines for dissolved iron and total and
dissolved manganese were above guidelines at both Sw-N-08 and Sw-N-09. The maximum sulphate concentration
was above the guideline of 25 mg/L at Sw-N-09 with a concentration of 55 mg/L in June 2009. Elevated iron and
manganese concentrations at both the background and downgradient sampling locations are probably related to
suspended sediment in this slow moving creek that traverses agricultural lands.
Figure 7-3 presents conductivity, nitrate and sulphate concentrations along the northwest diversion ditch at the
current site of quarrying activity west of Phase 2 at stations Sw-N-51, Sw-N-50 and Sw-N-18 and in Heal Creek at
station Sw-N-05.
Water quality samples have been collected from Station Sw-N-51 and Sw-N-50 since 2004 and from Sw-N-18 since
1997. These stations are located northwest of Phase 2 and adjacent to the area of ongoing quarrying and aggregate
stockpiling. Impacts from the quarrying activities can result from blasting residues and can result in the higher
conductivity values and concentrations of nitrate and sulphate at station Sw-N-51. Sulphate concentrations were
above the maximum water quality guidelines at Sw-N-51 and Sw-N-50 in November 2009. A statistically significant
increasing trend was observed at Sw-S-51 for sulphate for the time period between 2005 and 2010. One total iron
concentration was above the guideline at Sw-N-18 in November 2009, with a concentration of 0.374 mg/L. Elevated
sulphate concentrations were also present at Sw-N-18 on four out of five sampling dates, which is inferred to be the
result of runoff from quarrying areas and aggregate stockpiles.
7.2.2 Surface Water Quality Near the Hartland North Pad
The Hartland North Pad is located northwest of the landfill as shown on Figure 3-1. Beginning in the mid-late 1990’s,
this site was used to compost yard and garden waste received at Hartland. In 2000, all composting activities on the
Hartland north pad ceased and yard waste and organics have not been stockpiled at the Hartland North Pad since
the spring of 2006. The stockpiling of aggregate at the west end of Hartland North Pad began in July 2006 and is
currently the storage site for a large quantity of crushed aggregate that will be used in the future as intermediate
cover and for site improvements.

1500
S W-N-51
S W-N-50
1200
Conductivity (µS/cm))
S W-N-18
S W-N-05
900
600
300
10
S W-N-51
1 S W-N-50
Ammonia (mg/L)
S W-N-18
0.1 S W-N-05
0.01
0.001
0.0001
50
S W-N-51
S W-N-50
40
Chloride (mg/L)
S W-N-18
30 S W-N-05
20
10
500
S W-N-51
S W-N-50
400
Sulphate (mg/L)
S W-N-18
300 S W-N-05
BCWQ Guideline
200
100
Figure 7-3. Surface Water Quality North of Phase 2

The west side of the Hartland North Pad drains northward through an ephemeral channel that originates at the
northwest corner of the Hartland North Pad. The water is carried through a culvert under Willis Point Road and into a
drainage channel that eventually discharges into Durrance Lake approximately 450 m to the north. Flow through the
channel only occurs during wet weather. During dry periods, several wetlands persist along the drainage course but
are not connected by surface flows. In the downstream portions of the creek, flow increases as a result of
groundwater discharge. Further downstream, a second creek of similar size joins the original creek. The “combined”
creek has a well-defined channel in the area where it discharges to Durrance Lake.
Figure 7-4 presents conductivity, chloride, nitrate and sulphate concentrations along the ephemeral channel at the
northwest corner of the Hartland North Pad to the drainage channel discharging into Durrance Lake at stations
SW N-41s1, Sw-N-41s3, Sw-N-42-S1, Sw-N-15 and Sw-N-CSs2. At surface water quality station Sw-N-41s1,
directly north of the pad, all parameters met guideline concentrations during 2009/10 except sulphate, with
concentrations ranging from 89 to 450 mg/L. In 2009/10, sulphate exceeded guideline concentrations of 100 mg/L on
all sampling dates except July 2009. All other parameters met guideline concentrations during 2009/10. A Mann-
Kendall statistical analysis revealed an increasing trend in conductivity and sulphate at the 95% confidence level. No
statistically significant trend in chloride, nitrate or ammonia concentrations is present. Water quality at this location
should continue to be monitored for the effects of runoff from the aggregate stockpiles as conductivity, nitrate and
sulphate concentrations in surface water have increased since stockpiling of aggregate at the Hartland North pad
began in 2006. Mitigative measures including the installation of tarps over aggregate stockpiles to minimize
infiltration and reduction of the volume of aggregate stored on site should also be implemented where possible.
Station Sw-N-41-S3 is located downstream of Sw-N-41-S1 where the drainage from the northwest portion of the
Hartland North pad flows into Durrance Lake. All parameters were within aquatic life criteria throughout 2009/10 with
the exception of sulphate where concentrations in November 2009 exceeded the maximum guideline value of
100 mg/L with a concentration of 120 mg/L, and were slightly elevated from 2008/09 concentrations. Concentrations
of chloride ranged from 4.6 to 23 mg/L in 2009/10, and on average were slightly lower than 2008/09 concentrations.
Conductivity and sulphate concentrations were lower than those observed upstream at Sw-N-41-S1. The
concentrations of conductivity, sulphate and chloride continue to be elevated relative to background conditions
observed at Sw-N-CSs2. A Mann-Kendall statistical analysis revealed no trend in conductivity, ammonia, chloride
and nitrate concentrations between 2005 and 2010. However, an increasing trend in sulphate concentrations is
present at the 95% confidence level at station Sw-N-41-S3. While the impacts on water quality as a result of
historical composting activities appear to be reducing over time, aggregate stockpiling activities on the Hartland
North pad are impacting water quality at Sw-N-41-S3 and water quality should continue to be monitored closely at
this location.
Station Sw-N-41-S6 is a lake sampling location positioned on a point of land extending into Durrance Lake and
SW N-41-S4 is at the outflow of Durrance Lake. Concentrations at the outflow of the lake were similar to those at
Sw N 41-S-6 which is located upgradient of the inlet. All samples in 2009/10 met guidelines for the protection of
aquatic life. There is no indication that water quality in Durrance Lake has been affected by landfill leachate or runoff
from aggregate stockpiles at the Hartland North pad.
Water quality data from Sw-N-42-S1, located northeast of the Hartland North pad along Willis Point Road, indicate
that concentrations of all parameters were within water quality guidelines on all sampling dates in 2009/10; however,
sulphate concentrations were approaching the 100 mg/L guideline level. This site continued to report higher chloride
and conductivity values than other nearby stations. Elevated conductivity and chloride concentrations have been
observed in the past. Decreasing chloride concentrations at Sw-N-42s1 suggest that recently elevated conductivity
values at this station may not be the result of road salt application on Willis Point Road. Similar conductivity and
chloride concentrations have also been observed

1500
SW-N-41s1
SW-N-41s3
1200 SW-N-15
SW-N-CSs2
900
600
300
10
SW-N-41s1
SW-N-41s3
SW-N-15
1
SW-N-CSs2
Ammonia (mg/L)
0.1
0.01
0.001

0.0001
50
SW-N-41s1
SW-N-41s3
40 SW-N-15
SW-N-CSs2
Chloride (mg/L)
30
20
10
500
SW-N-41s1
SW-N-41s3
400
SW-N-15
Sulphate (mg/L)
SW-N-CSs2
300
BCWQ Guideline
200
100
Figure 7-4. Surface Water Quality Downstream of the Hartland North Pad
at Sw-N-43, which is located downstream of Sw-N-42-S1. A Mann-Kendall statistical analysis for Sw-N-42-S-1
revealed no trends in conductivity, nitrate, ammonia and chloride concentrations and a statistically significant
increasing trend in sulphate concentrations over the past five years at this location. This indicates that water quality
at this site is being impacted by runoff from aggregate stockpiles.
7.3 Surface Water Flow and Quality South of the Landfill
An ephemeral stream drains the area to the south of the landfill and flows southward into Killarney Lake, which
subsequently drains into another ephemeral stream flowing to Prospect Lake. Surface water flow south of the landfill
occurs mainly during periods of wet weather and groundwater seepage has been observed in the Killarney Creek
channel during dry periods. Clean surface water runoff from the south slope of Phase 1 runs westward in a ditch to a
culvert that discharges into a small wetland at Sw-S-03 and then into the ephemeral stream that flows south to
Killarney Lake. During the summer/fall of 2008, vegetation management was conducted in the wetland upstream of
Sw-S-04 to improve its overall health.
There are a number of surface water sampling stations located south of the landfill, listed from upstream to
downstream, as follows:
 Sw-S-52 diversion ditch rerouted from north of the landfill, upstream of wheel wash facility
(formerly named Sw-N-52);
 Sw-S-31 diversion ditch near wheel wash facility;
 Sw-S-30 diversion ditch at south end of Phase 1, upstream of Sw-S-20;
 Sw-S-20 diversion ditch at south end of Phase 1;
 Sw-S-12 flow monitoring weir upstream of the new weigh scale area;
 Sw-S-03 culvert emerging from southeast corner of recycling area immediately upstream of
a small natural wetland;
 Sw-S-27 Killarney Creek, north tributary;
 Sw-S-25 Killarney Creek, west tributary, downstream of Sw-S-03;
 Sw-S-24 Killarney Creek, downstream of confluence of north and west tributaries;
 Sw-S-23 diversion ditch at south end of Phase 1 prior to confluence with Killarney Creek;
 Sw-S-21 drainage ditch along road south of diversion ditch at south end of Phase 1;
 Sw-S-04 Killarney Creek, on property boundary, 270 m south of the landfill;
 Sw-S-11 Killarney Creek, inlet to Killarney Lake, 500 m south of landfill; and
 Sw-S-10 Killarney Lake near outlet.
Water quality at stations Sw-S-52 and Sw-S-20 was sampled three times 2009/10 and both stations were consistent
with background concentrations. Concentrations of all leachate indicator parameters (chloride, conductivity and
ammonia) were low as in recent years. However, one sample collected at Sw-S-20 in March 2010 was above water
quality guidelines for total iron with a concentration of 0.583 mg/L. At station Sw-S-52, conductivity ranged from
154 µS/cm to 177 µS/cm, ammonia concentrations ranged from below the detection limit (<0.005 mg/L) to
0.011 mg/L, chloride concentrations were below 9.0 mg/L and sulphate concentrations were below 10 mg/L. At
station Sw-S-20, conductivity ranged from 111 µS/cm to 159 µS/cm, ammonia concentrations ranged from
0.006 mg/L to 0.011 mg/L, and both chloride and sulphate concentrations were below 8.0 mg/L. These results
indicate the southwest diversion ditch is functioning as intended and diverts clean runoff away from the landfill.

Figures 7-5 graphically presents water quality data for stations located south of the landfill, including Sw-S-03,
Sw-S-04, Sw-S-10, Sw-S-11 and Sw-S-12. The distance of each station from the landfill boundary is shown in
brackets in the legend. Water quality at each station is colour coded according to its distance from the landfill
footprint.
The CRD’s recycling area, located adjacent to or slightly downstream of Sw-S-12, went into operation in
January 2001. Water quality monitoring at Sw-S-12 during 2009/10 revealed similar concentrations of conductivity
compared to 2008/09 with a maximum concentration of 304 µS/cm in March 2010. Chloride concentrations
decreased with a maximum concentration of 12 mg/L in December 2009, while ammonia and nitrate concentrations
were similar to 2008/09. These concentrations are elevated compared to background, but remained below
guidelines. Total suspended solids concentrations increased relative to 2008/09, with exceedences in November
2009 (170 mg/L) and January 2010 (180 mg/L). Overall, water quality at location Sw-S-12 appears to be improving
but may still be mildly influenced by landfill operations. Water quality was expected to improve with the closure of the
southwest face of Phase 1 in 2007/08; however, the closure was suspended in the fall of 2007 due to weather and
lack of available materials. Additional work was completed in the winter of 2008 to minimize sediment runoff from the
closure area after sediments were noted in the ditchline in January 2008. Final closure work was completed during
late 2009. Water quality at this location should continue to be monitored closely. The water quality signature at this
location currently resembles that of runoff from aggregate stockpiles which may be related to nearby placement of
aggregate during site improvements completed in 2008/09.
Water quality at Sw-S-03 was affected by contaminated runoff from the south face of the landfill and the former truck
wash area, as well as leachate for many years until the truck wash facility was relocated in the fall of 1997. Sw-S-03
is located in the main channel of Killarney Creek where the culvert discharges into a small wetland area. Total and
dissolved manganese concentrations have improved since 2008/09 and no longer exceed water quality guidelines.
However, total iron concentrations were above maximum water quality guidelines in November 2009 and January
2010. One sample also reported total suspended solids above water quality guidelines during November 2009. It is
anticipated that this is related to erosion of the newly placed cover material prior to establishment of vegetation.
Sulphate concentrations are no longer elevated as they were in 2008/09 following construction works to upgrade the
bin facility. Overall, concentrations of most parameters at Sw-S-03 remained similar to those observed in 2008/09.
An analysis of water quality data revealed no statistically significant trends in conductivity or chloride concentrations
at this location. However, a decreasing trend in ammonia concentrations was detected suggesting reduced leachate
impacts at this location.
Water quality at the property boundary compliance point (Sw-S-04) and concentrations of all parameters except total
iron met water quality guidelines and remained similar to those observed in 2008/09. The water quality guideline of
0.35 mg/L for total iron was exceeded in January 2010 with a concentration of 0.403 mg/L. Conductivity and chloride
concentrations were generally low at Sw-S-04. Nitrate and sulphate concentrations at Sw-S-04 in 2009/10 were
similar to concentrations observed during 2008/09. A Mann-Kendall statistical analysis conducted on the water
quality results at Sw-S-04 dating to 2005 revealed no statistically significant trends in conductivity, ammonia or
chloride concentrations.
The water quality in Killarney Lake at Sw-S-10 was within water quality guidelines and is not affected by landfill
leachate.
Concentrations of all parameters at Sw-S-11 were within guideline concentrations. While most parameter
concentrations at Sw-S-11 were at background levels, conductivity, chloride and sulphate were slightly elevated. The
2009/10 results were similar to those from previous years. Water quality at this location should continue to be
monitored.

1500
SW-S-03 (100 m)
SW-S-04 (300 m)
1200
SW-S-10 (760 m)
SW-S-11 (500 m)
SW-S-12 (50 m)
900
600
300
NOTE: Colour indicates distance from landfill footprint. Red = 0-200 m; Green = 201-500 m; Blue = > 500 m.
0
10
SW-S-03 (100 m)
SW-S-04 (300 m)
1 SW-S-10 (760 m)
SW-S-11 (500 m)
Ammonia (mg/L)
SW-S-12 (50 m)
0.1
0.01
0.001

0.0001
150
SW-S-03 (100 m)
SW-S-04 (300 m)
SW-S-10 (760 m)
120
SW-S-11 (500 m)
SW-S-12 (50 m)
Chloride (mg/L)
90
60
30
Figure 7-5. Surface Water Quality South of Landfill

In 2009/10, overall water quality south of the landfill was similar to 2008/09. Surface water at the south end of the
landfill remained slightly affected by landfill operations in 2009/10 as in previous years, as shown by station
SW-S-12, but water quality showed little or no impact outside the landfill property. Water quality in Sw-S-12 showed
slight improvements in 2009/10 and concentrations of leachate indicator parameters in Killarney Lake remained at or
near background levels. The natural wetland just to the south of Sw-S-03 continued to function as a filter for the
surface runoff from the landfill. Vegetation management conducted in recent years should continue to help improve
downgradient water quality.
7.4 Summary
 Total iron concentrations exceeded guidelines at Sw-N-16 (March 2010), and were above guidelines at
Sw-N-47 (November 2009), Sw-N-53 and Sw-N-18 (November 2009);
 Total suspended solids were above guidelines at Sw-N-53 (November 2009); and
 Surface water quality at boundary compliance stations north of the Hartland North pad generally water quality
criteria on all dates sampled in 2009/10, with the exception of the following:
 Sulphate concentrations exceeded guidelines at Sw-N-41s1 (all six sampling dates), and were above
guidelines at Sw-N-41s3 (one out of four sampling dates) and Sw-N-43 (November 2009).
 Surface water quality at boundary compliance stations south of the landfill generally water quality criteria on all
dates sampled in 2009/10, with the exception of the following:
 Total iron concentrations exceeded guidelines at Sw-S-04 (one out of six sampling dates) and was
above guidelines at Sw-S-03 (two out of six sampling dates); and
 Total suspended solids exceeded guidelines at Sw-S-04 (November 2009 and January 2010) and were
above guidelines at Sw-S-03 (November 2009). This is likely a short term issue related to runoff and
erosion of the final cover material installed on the southeast portion of Phase 1 prior to establishment of
vegetation. Vegetation has since been established by CRD.
and Sw-N-42s1) are present in data collected between 2005 and 2010, suggesting that aggregate stockpiling on
the Hartland North pad has affected water quality at these locations since stockpiling began in 2006. Elevated
sulphate concentrations were present at Sw-N-42s1 throughout 2009/10, where effects of both historical
composting and aggregate stockpiling are evident. CRD is currently investigating options to manage site runoff
to reduce sulphate peaks. Data collected from sampling locations downstream of Sw-N-41-S1 showed an
improvement in water quality with distance from the Hartland North Pad. Water quality in Durrance Lake is not
affected by the Hartland North Pad or the landfill.
 Surface water quality immediately south and southeast of the landfill (Sw-S-03 and Sw-S-04) continued to
improve during 2009/10 and met water quality guidelines. Concentrations were similar to previous years and
minimal effects were seen further downstream to the south of the landfill.
 Water quality in Killarney Lake (Sw-S-10) in 2009/10 met water quality guidelines and showed no discernible

8. Leachate
8.1 Data
Our interpretation of the leachate chemistry data was based on samples collected at the following locations by CRD
staff:
 Hartland Valve Chamber (leachate pipeline flow detection chamber and compliance point);
 Markham Valve Chamber;
 Phase 1 North Purge Well System (combined discharge from 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8);
 Phase 2 landfill leachate clean out; and
 Controlled Waste Ditch.
These locations were sampled and analyzed monthly for conventional parameters, organic compounds and metals
in 2009/2010. In addition, the Hartland Valve Chamber samples were analyzed quarterly for trace organic
compounds including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, phthalate esters, ketones, aromatics, phenols, ethers,
nitrosamines, alkanes, alkenes and other select organic compounds. The west face closure toe drain has also been
sampled in the past, but it was not sampled in 2009/10 due to a lack of discharge on all sampling dates. Discharge
from this toe drain has reduced dramatically over the past two years and now discharges only for short periods
following periods of intense precipitation. The change in drainage patterns from the west face closure toe drain may
be related to settlement of refuse in Phase 2.
8.2 Leachate Generation and Discharge
Leachate collected from the Phase 1 and Phase 2 landfill is discharged to the lower leachate lagoon. To minimize
head build-up in the unlined lower lagoon, leachate is pumped into a second, lined upper lagoon. Leachate storage
volume and residence time within the lagoons varies seasonally. Leachate from the lagoons is discharged from the
site through an 8.6 km long pipeline that discharges to the Saanich sanitary sewer and ultimately to an ocean outfall
at Macaulay Point. Monitoring of inflow to the lagoons is available for the Phase 1 (north) purge well system and the
south leachate pump station.
Discharges from the leachate pipeline are subject to a CRD Waste Discharge Permit (Waste Discharge Permit
Number SC97.001) authorizing the discharge of non-domestic waste to the sanitary sewer in accordance with the
CRD’s Sewer Use Bylaw 2922. The point of compliance is the leachate pipeline flow detection chamber (Hartland
valve chamber), located at the start of the leachate pipeline.
Total monthly leachate flows discharged to sewer are provided in Appendix D.1. Average leachate flow in 2009/10
was 13.62 L/s. This flow was slightly higher than the average 2009/10 flow of 9.36 L/s, but similar to the long-term
(1997 to 2010) average of 12.21 L/s. The highest monthly leachate flow recorded in 2009/10 was 75,489 m3
(28.18 L/s) for January 2010. This is significantly lower than the flows observed during 2006/07, but similar to flows
observed in 2007/08 and 2008/09.
8.3 Leachate Quality
Sampling and testing of leachate quality has been carried out since the early 1970’s. In the past, both the upper and
lower leachate lagoons were sampled separately due to different contributing sources. Between 1992 and 1996,

water from the unfilled Phase 2 basin was pumped to the upper lagoon when necessary. During this period, the
lower lagoon only received leachate from Phase 1.
Since 2000, leachate samples have primarily been collected from the Hartland valve chamber as that location
represents the point of discharge for compliance with the RCSP waste discharge permit. The analytical results of the
routine monthly leachate discharge samples are provided in Appendix B4. Analysis of trace organics in the leachate
discharge was conducted quarterly and is provided in Appendix B5.
As part of the leachate quality characterization program, CRD staff collected additional leachate samples in 2009/10
at the locations identified on Figure 4-1. Samples were collected from the Phase 2 leachate cleanout, the Phase 1
North Purge Well System (wells 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8), the Controlled Waste Ditch and the Markham Valve
Chamber. The Markham Valve Chamber is located approximately 8 km downgradient from Hartland landfill and
upgradient from the point of confluence with the Saanich sanitary sewer line. The analytical results from these
samples are presented, for reference purposes in Appendices B6, B7, B8 and B9, respectively.
8.3.1 Routine Monthly Leachate Analyses and Sewer Use Bylaw Comparison
The Hartland valve chamber is the compliance point for the RSCP permit. During 2009/10, leachate discharges at
the Hartland valve chamber were in compliance with the RSCP waste discharge permit requirements and no
concentrations exceeded permit criteria with the exception of one exceedence of oil and grease concentrations
which marginally exceeded the 15 mg/L guideline with a value of 16 mg/L in October 2009 and one marginal
exceedence for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons with a concentration of 56 μg/L in February 2010. The
concentrations of most leachate constituents measured at the Hartland valve chamber in 2009/10 were within the
range of variability that has been observed in the past. Samples were not collected from the Hartland valve chamber
during September 2009, but a surrogate sample was collected in mid-October. It was this sample that marginally
exceeded the permit criteria for oil and grease. A second sample, collected in late October reported results that met
all permit criteria and reported oil and grease values within the range of historical values.
Figures 8-1 and 8-2 present time series plots for selected parameters in leachate at the compliance point (Hartland
Valve Chamber) over a five year period from April 2005 through March 2010. Concentrations of inorganic
parameters such as conductivity and chloride show the seasonal dilution effect of greater precipitation in the fall and
winter months, resulting in lower concentrations during the wet winter months. Higher concentrations occur during
drier periods in the summer/fall. Concentrations in leachate are well above background concentrations in surface
and groundwater, with conductivity concentrations typically ranging from 2,000 – 7,000 μS/cm, ammonia
concentrations between 100 and 400 mg/L and chloride concentrations between 200 and 600 mg/L.
As shown in Figure 8-2, COD concentrations at the Hartland valve chamber exhibit a pattern similar to that of conductivity
values, although BOD concentrations exhibited more dampened fluctuations relative to COD. BOD concentrations at
Hartland continue to be relatively low (generally below 100 mg/L) for a large landfill. During 2009/10, the maximum BOD
concentration was 106 mg/L in June 2009, which is within the range of historically measured values. BOD concentrations
remained below 50 mg/L on all other sampling dates in 2009/10. Sulphide values recorded at the Hartland valve
chamber during 2009/10 remained below the 1 mg/L permit criteria on all sampling dates. Sulphide has exceeded
the permit limit in previous years and has been the subject of several leachate treatment studies conducted by CRD.
A leachate treatment program has since been implemented and has been effective at maintaining sulphide
concentrations below the RSCP waste discharge permit concentration of 1 mg/L.
According to 2009/10 leachate data from the Phase 2 cleanout, sulphide concentrations within the Phase 2 landfill area
were above 1 mg/L on 9 out of 11 sampling dates, with concentrations ranging from 0.15 mg/L to 9.4 mg/L, similar to

7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
600
500
400
Ammonia (mg/L)
300
200
100
800
600
Chloride (mg/L)
400
200
Figure 8-1. Hartland Valve Chamber Leachate Chemistry (Conductivity, Ammonia, Chloride)
Sulphide (mg/L) 2
300
200
BOD (mg/L)
100
800
600
COD (mg/L)
400
200
Figure 8-2. Hartland Valve Chamber Leachate Chemistry (Sulphide, BOD, COD))
2008/09. As waste deposition continues and the refuse matures, sulphide concentrations may rise over time. BOD and
COD concentrations within Phase 2 were generally higher than the controlled waste ditch and Phase 1, while nitrate
concentrations in the Phase 2 cleanout were generally lower than those measured in Phase 1 and the controlled waste
ditch where leachate is anticipated to be more oxidized. Sulphate concentrations were similar to other areas of the landfill
in Phase 2. This suggests that more anaerobic conditions prevail within the Phase 2 basin, and that sulphide is the most
stable form of sulphur within the Phase 2 landfill.
Data collected from the Phase 1 purge wells (52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8) indicates that as in previous years, total sulphide
concentrations in the Phase 1 leachate are quite low (<0.12 mg/L). The amount of total sulphur in Phase 1 leachate is
somewhat higher than leachate generated in Phase 2, but lower than the controlled waste ditch. While the BOD and COD
values for Phase 1 leachate are generally lower than those collected from other parts of Hartland landfill, the nitrate and
sulphate concentrations are generally higher. This indicates that conditions are more aerobic than elsewhere in the landfill
and that sulphate is the most stable form of sulphur in the Phase 1 landfill. The air-lift pumping system in the north purge
well (52-4-0-P7) was replaced with a submersible pump during 2008, thereby minimizing the potential for leachate
oxidation of sulphide into sulphate as a result of the pumping process. The leachate collection system north of Phase 1
now utilizes submersible pumps in both purge wells (80-1-0-P8 and 52-4-0-P7).
Leachate collected by the controlled waste ditch is relatively strong, but sulphide concentrations were 0.13 mg/L or less
during 2009/10 and slightly lower than concentrations observed in 2008/09. Total sulphur concentrations within the
controlled waste ditch are similar to those found in the Phase 2 basin and Phase 1. BOD and COD concentrations are
slightly lower than those found in Phase 2 and slightly higher than those observed in Phase 1.
Sulphide concentrations in leachate at the Markham valve chamber were similar to those measured at the Hartland
valve chamber during 2009/10. The sulphate and total sulphur concentrations at the Markham valve chamber were
similar to the upstream compliance point (Hartland valve chamber) on the dates sampled. BOD and COD
concentrations are similar at both the Markham valve chamber and the Hartland valve chamber.
8.3.2 Quarterly Trace Organic Analysis at Hartland Valve Chamber
Trace volatile and semi-volatile organic analysis has been carried out quarterly since 1998 on leachate samples collected
from the Hartland valve chamber. Trace organic compound analytical results for combined leachate in 2009/10 are
presented in Appendix B5. The quarterly monitoring includes analysis of 103 trace organic compounds. Of the 103
compounds analyzed, 16 were reported at detectable concentrations on 50% or more of the sampling dates in 2009/10
compared to 22 in 2008/09, 20 in 2007/08 and 14 compounds in 2006/07. Fluctuations in method detection limits over
time partly explain the differences in reportable concentrations over time. The concentrations detected were low compared
to those commonly found in leachate originating at large municipal landfills. No trace organics analyzed exceeded the
discharge permit criteria.
No parameters were present at concentrations above 100 µg/L during the April 2009, July 2009, October 2009 or January
2010 sampling events. During 2009/10, the trace organic compound concentrations in Hartland landfill leachate were
generally similar to those reported in 2008/09, and more similar to historical data. Benzene, toluene, ethylbenze and
xylene compounds decreased slightly and halogenated aromatic compounds remained similar to concentrations observed
in previous years.
Phthalate esters including diethyl phthalate, were generally not detected in leachate during 2009/10. In 2008/09, diethyl
phthalate was detected on all sampling dates, but were not detected in 2009/10. Similarly, no detections of di-n-butyl
phthalate or bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate were detected in 2009/10 like they were in 2008/09. Phthalate ester
concentrations have been detected in Hartland leachate in the past but were generally not detected for the past five years.
This may be related to increased detection limits for this compound in 2009/10. Di-n-butyl phthalate is a plasticiser that is
used in flexible plastic products like garbage bags and is commonly detected in municipal landfill leachate.

During 2009/10, phenol was not reported at detectable concentrations on any of the sampling dates, which may be
the result of 6-fold higher detection limits compared to 2008/09. 2,4-dimethylphenol was detected in two samples
during 2009/10, with concentrations generally at the detection limit of 3 µg/L. Phenol concentrations in Hartland
landfill leachate are lower than or similar to those found at other large landfills. Phenol is commonly used in a
number of manufacturing processes and is present in many consumer products. It also occurs naturally at low
concentrations due to sources in wood and other natural organic matter.
A number of other trace organic compounds were found in the leachate in 2009/10, including the low weight
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons acenaphthene, anthracene, fluorene, naphthalene, phenanthrene and
2-methylnapthalene. Acenaphthene (<4.1 µg/L), naphthalene (<19 µg/L), fluorene (<2.1 µg/L), phenanthrene
(<1.7 µg/L) and 2-methylnapthalene (<3.3 µg/L) concentrations were generally low, although they have continued to
slowly increase relative to previous years. This may be the result of less dilute leachate as a result of lower
precipitation during 2008/09 and 2009/10. Anthracene remained below 1 µg/L and fluorene concentrations remained
below 3 µg/L. High molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon compounds that were detected included
fluoranthene which was present at very low concentrations (below 0.3 µg/L). Non-halogenated aromatic compounds
that were detected included benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, xylenes, m and p-xylenes and o-xylene, with all
concentrations well below 20 µg/L.
The CRD’s Scientific Programs group began conducting high-resolution analyses of leachate in 2004 in addition to
ongoing routine monitoring activities. The high-resolution analytes included polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), nonylphenols, and chlorobenzenes. Data collected between October 2005
and January 2007 was analyzed (Golder, 2008) and revealed that nonylphenols and PBDEs are not present at
levels of environmental concern, even in maximum observed concentrations of 100% leachate. The aquatic risks of
PCBs observed in leachate samples were also found to be negligible. In addition, concentrations of nonylphenols,
DDT and PDBEs 47 and 99 were observed at lower concentrations in leachate than in wastewater, while PBDEs
153 and 154 and low molecular weight PCBs were at higher concentrations in leachate than in wastewater, with
Hartland leachate contributing only 2% of the total wastewater discharge from the Macaulay Point outfall. The
evaluation concluded that despite differences in the chemical profile of leachate and Macaulay Point wastewater,
leachate had no observable impact on the chemical profile at Macaulay Point. Based on these findings, the
additional high resolution analyses were discontinued, although co-ordination between the CRD’s Marine
Environmental Programs and Hartland Environmental Programs is on-going.
8.4 Summary
 Leachate discharges remained in compliance with RSCP permit requirements during 2009/10 with the exception
of one exceedence of oil and grease concentrations which marginally exceeded the 15 mg/L guideline with a
value of 16 mg/L in October 2009 and one marginal exceedence for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons with
a concentration of 56 μg/L in February 2010. The concentrations of most leachate constituents measured at the
Hartland valve chamber in 2009/10 were generally within the range of historical values.
permit criteria.

9. Conclusions
Based on our review of historical data and interpretation of groundwater, surface water and leachate quality data
collected between April 2009 and March 2010, the annual monitoring program provides an effective assessment of
landfill performance and compliance related to groundwater, surface water and leachate flow and quality. The
following conclusions are drawn based on our interpretation of the 2009/10 data:
9.1 Quality Assurance and Quality Control
 RPD’s and RSD’s calculated for groundwater, surface water and leachate analyses in 2009/10 indicate that the
data is acceptably precise for the purposes of this report. Standard operating procedures (SOP) for groundwater,
surface water and leachate quality sampling should be developed to ensure that data integrity is maintained. The
development of an SOP for groundwater level collection should also be considered.
9.2 Groundwater Flow
 Groundwater flow in 2009/10 generally followed previously established patterns. Regional groundwater flows
from Mount Work northeast to the north-south trending valley that underlies the northern portions of the Phase 1
and Phase 2 landfill. The majority of groundwater flow is northward. Most of the northward groundwater flow in
the bedrock below the landfill is captured by the Phase 2 basin leachate collection system, springs discharging
to the lower lagoon and the Phase 1 north purge well system (wells 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8).
 There is a small amount of southeastward groundwater flow from the south end of the Phase 1 landfill toward
Killarney Lake. Southeastward groundwater flow below the landfill is constrained by a clay berm and a bedrock
grout curtain installed at the south end of the landfill and by pumping of the south purge wells (P1, P2, P3 and
P4). Higher groundwater elevations in P1 as a result of changes in the hydraulic behaviour of the well resulted in
reduced leachate capture between 2006 and 2009, and again from December 2009 through 2010. An additional
purge well (P10) has been installed adjacent to P1 and is anticipated to augment leachate collection in this area
of the landfill once it is operational.
 Groundwater monitors east of Phase 1 (locations 76 and 18) confirm flow from east to west toward the landfill,
 Groundwater elevations north of the Phase 2 landfill remained within seasonal ranges. Inward hydraulic
gradients toward the Phase 2 basin were maintained throughout 2009/10. The effectiveness of the hydraulic
trap needs to be assessed as Phase 2 refuse extends further north and additional lifts are constructed.
Additional leachate containment measures may need to be implemented in the future at the north end of the
Phase 2 landfill to mitigate off-site leachate migration. Leachate levels within Phase 2 need to be monitored on a
regular basis.
 Pressure transducers installed in wells 40-1-1, 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8 help delineate the size of the drawdown
cone surrounding the purge wells and will provide long-term monitoring of purge well performance at the north
end of Phase 1.
 Leachate mounding continues to be present in Phase 1 of the landfill. Strong downward gradients are present
within the refuse. Similar leachate mounding conditions occur in the Phase 2 landfill as indicated by groundwater
elevations at locations 82 and 83. Both wells at location 84 were damaged and were replaced with permanently
installed pressure transducers at location 86 in October 2010. Together with information collected from wells at
locations 82 and 83, this should provide adequate monitoring of leachate levels in Phase 2 in its current
configuration.

9.3 Groundwater Quality
The groundwater quality results for 2009/10 were similar to those measured in 2008/09 and landfill leachate-
impacted groundwater is contained within the landfill property. At the north end of the landfill, leachate-affected
groundwater extends just north of the unlined lower leachate lagoon and the lined upper leachate lagoon. South of
the landfill, leachate-affected groundwater extends approximately 200 m south of the landfill. Leachate impacts are
confined to the landfill footprint on the east side of Phase 1 and are inferred to extend to the west side of the Phase
2 landfill. Groundwater affected by historical composting and yard waste processing and current aggregate
stockpiling activities at the Hartland North Pad is inferred to extend just beyond the footprint of the Hartland North
pad and extend slightly north of Willis Point Road. Land use north of Willis Point Road consists of Mt. Work Regional
Park and the Dominion Government Property rifle range.
parameters at locations 20, 21 and 40. The operation of purge well 80-1-0-P8 since 2008 and rehabilitation of
well 52-4-0-P7 in 2008 has reinforced leachate containment and conveyance measures north of Phase 1. These
wells should continue to be operated in conjunction with one another and water quality should continue to be
closely monitored for leachate impacts at locations 20 and 21. Water quality northwest of the lower leachate
lagoon (well 40-1-1) remained impacted by leachate during 2009/10 and should continue to be closely
monitored. Over time, ongoing improvements to the north purge well system combined with regular well and
pump maintenance is anticipated to further improve water quality in this area.
 Well 36-3-1 and 37-3-1 continue to exhibit elevated concentrations of leachate indicator parameters in 2009/10.
The slightly impaired water quality at these locations may be related to the Phase 2 leachate storage test
conducted in September 2008 and ongoing waste deposition in the area upgradient of locations 36 and 37.
Shallow groundwater quality should continue to be closely monitored at these locations to verify the
effectiveness of leachate containment. Cement used during well construction continues to impact well water
quality in wells 36-2-1 and 37-2-1, as it has since these wells were installed.
The historically elevated concentrations are attributed to contamination from the remains of dead amphibians
found in well 38.
 In the shallow well located at the base of the Toutle valley (27-1-2), sulphate continues to be present at
concentrations above historical (background) concentrations throughout the year. This is likely related to
ongoing quarrying, aggregate stockpiling and road building activities in this area. The deep well at this location
 Water quality along Willis Point Road north of the landfill at locations 29, 30 and potentially 31 continues to be
impacted by road salt application on Willis Point Road. Concentrations of conductivity and chloride show
seasonal fluctuations and exhibit highest concentrations in winter months, while ammonia concentrations remain
relatively low.
 Water quality at location 78, located on the bedrock ridge north of Phase 2, continued to report slightly elevated
concentrations of conductivity, nitrate, sulphate and manganese in 2009/10. Additional well development efforts
were focused on this well in 2008 and water quality at this location appears to be slowly improving. The
presence of mineralized bedrock near the well may be the cause of some elevated parameters, but elevated

concentrations of conductivity, nitrate and sulphate could also be related to aggregate stockpiling within the
Phase 2 basin or dilute leachate.
Hartland North Pad
 Groundwater quality downgradient of the Hartland North Pad continues to be affected by historical composting
and aggregate stockpiling activities with elevated concentrations of conductivity, ammonia, nitrate, sulphate and
chloride at locations 41, 42, 43, 55 and 56. Elevated concentrations of conductivity, sulphate and nitrate at
locations 41, 43, 55, and potentially 56 suggest increasing groundwater impacts associated with the aggregate
storage and stockpiling on the Hartland North pad. Water quality exceeded British Columbia Water Quality
Guidelines for: conductivity on all sampling dates in wells at locations 41, for manganese at locations 41 and 42;
and for iron at location 42. Conductivity concentrations were above guidelines on all sampling dates at 43 and
55. A statistical trend analysis for data collected between 2005 and 2010 indicated an increasing trend in
sulphate concentrations at locations 41, 55 and 56, increasing conductivity at location 55 and decreasing
chloride concentrations at location 42. Overall, this indicates slowly declining impacts from historical composting
activities and increased impacts from aggregate stockpiling on the Hartland north pad resulting in increased
sulphate concentrations. Water quality in the vicinity of the Hartland North Pad should continue to be monitored
closely for any impacts associated with the storage of large quantities of aggregate.
 Water quality south of the landfill continued to exhibit elevated concentrations of some leachate indicator
prior.
 Water quality at locations 3 and 85, 60 and 7 degraded in 2009/10. Following a large precipitation event in
2006/07, the behaviour of the most productive south purge well (P1) changed, resulting in increased well
recharge and potentially reduced leachate collection south of the landfill between 2007 and 2009, and possible
migration of leachate southward from Phase 1 toward wells 60 and 7. Pumping capacity in P1 was increased in
2009 through the addition of a higher capacity submersible pump and an additional purge well (P10) was added
in 2010 to increase pumping capacity and augment the south leachate collection system. Over the past five
years, there have been statistically significant increasing trends in leachate indicator parameters in wells 60-3-1
(conductivity and chloride), 60-2-1 (chloride) and 4-2-1 (chloride). Some groundwater quality parameters have
decreased slightly in wells 60-2-1 (ammonia and sulphate), 71-1-1 (conductivity and sulphate), 72-2-1 (chloride
and sulphate), 73-1-1 (conductivity), 73-2-1 (ammonia and sulphate) and 4-4-1 (chloride). An increasing trend in
sulphate concentrations was also observed in well 72-3-1. Overall, this suggests slightly greater impacts due to
leachate migrating south from Phase 1, and slowly declining impacts related to aggregate placement during
construction upgraded to the recycling area and the bin facility between 2006 and 2009 or road salt application
on Hartland Avenue.
East of the Landfill
 Leachate impacts are confined to the landfill footprint on the east side of Phase 1. Measured groundwater
elevations have consistently indicated flow from the bedrock ridge along the east side of the site towards the
landfill at locations 18 and 76.

9.4 Domestic Well Water Quality
As part of the CRD’s groundwater quality monitoring program, eleven domestic wells were sampled in 2009/10. The
water quality monitoring program showed:
 One domestic well (53) was above the drinking water criterion for total iron (0.3 mg/L), with a concentration of
 One well (61) was above the drinking water criterion for total lead in one field replicate collected during July
(0.00088 mg/L), indicating that elevated lead concentrations may be a result of stagnant water that was not
completely purged from household plumbing or the well prior to sampling; and
9.5 Surface Water Quality
 Total iron concentrations exceeded guidelines at Sw-N-16 (March 2010) and Sw-N-18 (November
2009), and were above guidelines at Sw-N-47 (November 2009) and Sw-N-53
 Total suspended solids was above guidelines at Sw-N-53 (November 2009); and
Hartland North Pad
 Surface water quality at boundary compliance stations north of the Hartland North pad generally water quality
criteria on all dates sampled in 2009/10, with the exception of the following:
 Sulphate concentrations exceeded guidelines at Sw-N-41s1 (all six sampling dates) and were above
guidelines at Sw-N-41s3 (one out of four sampling dates) and Sw-N-43 (November 2009).
and Sw-N-42s1) are present in data collected between 2005 and 2010, suggesting that the impacts of aggregate
stockpiling on the Hartland North pad have increased since stockpiling began in 2006. Elevated sulphate
concentrations were present at Sw-N-42s1 throughout 2009/10, where impacts of both historical composting and
aggregate stockpiling are evident. CRD is currently investigating options to manage site runoff to reduce
sulphate peaks. Data collected from sampling locations downstream of Sw-N-41-S1 showed an improvement in
water quality with distance from the Hartland North Pad. Water quality in Durrance Lake is not affected by the
Hartland North Pad or the landfill.

 Surface water quality at boundary compliance stations south of the landfill generally met water quality criteria on
all dates sampled in 2009/10, with the exception of the following:
 Total iron concentrations exceeded guidelines at Sw-S-04 (one out of six sampling dates) and was
above guidelines at Sw-S-03 (two out of six sampling dates) and Sw-N-43 (two out of five sampling
dates); and
 Total suspended solids exceeded guidelines at Sw-S-04 (November 2009 and January 2010) and was
above guidelines at Sw-S-03 (November 2009). This is likely a short term issue related to runoff and
erosion of the final cover material installed on the southeast portion of Phase 1 prior to establishment of
vegetation. Vegetation has since been established by CRD.
 Surface water quality immediately south and southeast of the landfill continued to improve during 2009/10.
Concentrations were similar to previous years and minimal effects were seen further downstream to the south of
the landfill.
 Water quality in Killarney Lake (Sw-S-10) in 2009/10 met water quality guidelines and showed no discernible
9.6 Leachate
The leachate flow and quality data collected in 2009/10 indicates that:
 Leachate discharges remained in compliance with RSCP permit requirements during 2009/10. Two samples
reported values above the permit criterion: oil and grease concentrations marginally exceeded the 15 mg/L
guideline with a value of 16 mg/L in October 2009 and total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons marginally
exceeded the 50 μg/L guideline with a concentration of 56 μg/L in February 2010. This is the first time either of
these constituents have been reported at a value above the permit criteria. A second sample collected later in
October 2009 reported an oil and grease value that was less than the permit criteria and within the historic range
of values for this station.
 The concentrations of most leachate constituents measured at the Hartland valve chamber in 2009/10 were
generally within the range of historical values.
permit criteria.

10. Recommendations
Based on the findings of this report the following recommendations are proposed:
Leachate Collection System
 The north and south purge wells should continue to operate, as these wells help control the movement of
leachate impacted groundwater. The operation of both purge wells (52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8) located at the
north end of the landfill is anticipated to continue to improve leachate containment north of Phase 1. The
following guidelines should be followed:
a) Pumping levels in wells 52-4-0-P7 and 80-1-0-P8 should continue to be maintained at 113.5 m ASL.
Pumping levels in P1, P10 and the remainder of the south purge wells (P2, P3 and P4) should be
maintained at an elevation below 140 m ASL to maximize leachate collection.
b) Leachate purge wells should be operated on a continuous basis except for periods when the leachate
conveyance and storage facilities are at capacity. Regular maintenance and replacement of pumps and
wells as a result of ongoing biofouling and encrustation is very important.
c) Pumping levels and the extent of the drawdown cones surrounding the purge wells should be validated twice
annually to confirm the proper functioning of the wells.
d) Water levels in the south purge wells and water quality south of Phase 1 (location 85, 60 and 7) should be
closely monitored to confirm that the drawdown cone around P1 has been restored following the installation
of an additional purge well (P10) to provide additional pumping capacity.
e) A standard operating procedure should be developed for verification of drawdown and the extent of the
drawdown cone surrounding both the north and south purge well systems during both wet and dry months.
Runoff from Aggregate Stockpiles
 Groundwater and surface water quality downgradient of the northwest sedimentation pond and the Hartland
North Pad should continue to be monitored closely for impacts related to aggregate production and stockpiling.
 A long-term strategy for managing runoff from aggregate stockpiles should be given serious consideration. This
may include minimizing the volume of aggregate stored on the Hartland North pad and installing tarps to
minimize infiltration and recharge below aggregate stockpiles.
Groundwater Flow North of Phase 2
Further investigation is recommended to define the groundwater flow system north of the western unfilled portion of
the Phase 2 landfill during 2011. Defining seasonal water table fluctuations and groundwater flow paths in this area
is important for assessing the potential for northward leachate migration from this area as the landfill footprint and
height of refuse increases to the northwest. Specific recommendations include:
a) Installation of pressure transducers connected to the SCADA system at monitoring well locations 78 and 79
to provide continuous daily records of water level variation north of Phase 2, to better define the
groundwater divergence and to verify leachate containment as landfilling progresses in Phase 2. A pressure
transducer has already been installed in well 79-1-1, but data is currently downloaded to a laptop as no
SCADA infrastructure is available at this location at this time.
b) Two new nested monitoring wells should be installed at locations upgradient and downgradient of location
79 as access permits to better define the groundwater flow pathways north of the landfill. Water levels
should be recorded at least six times annually and samples collected quarterly from each of the wells;

c) Newly installed pressure transducers at location 86 should be connected to the SCADA system to record
leachate levels within Phase 2 at least once per day; and
d) The leachate management design for the area north of Phase 2 should be reviewed and assessed from a
hydrogeological perspective. The existing three-dimensional groundwater model could be used to validate
the hydrogeological conditions surrounding the landfill. The model would enable the evaluation of
groundwater flow and potential contaminant migration pathways under various landfill design scenarios to
support long-term leachate containment planning.
Monitoring Program
Monitoring of groundwater, surface water and leachate quality and flow should continue and include the following:
 Groundwater quality changes observed in well 40-1-1 located between the upper and lower lagoons should
continue to be closely monitored to ensure that the extent of the drawdown cone associated with the purge wells
is sufficient to capture leachate-impacted groundwater near location 40;
 Groundwater quality at locations 36 and 37 should be closely monitored to ensure that the effects of the leachate
storage tests conducted in 2007 and 2008 continue to diminish. Even short term exceedences of the hydraulic
trap can have multi-year implications on nearby groundwater quality.
 Additional well development employing inertial pumps and surge blocks should be conducted at locations 76, 78,
79 and 85 to improve hydraulic connection to the aquifer and reduce suspended sediment in samples. This has
been shown to improve the quality of samples collected at other wells on site.
 The sampling frequency at surface water station Sw-N-45 should be increased from four to six times annually.
 Based on water levels recorded in 2009/10, monitor 74-1-1 appears to be blocked or damaged. Because the
deep bedrock groundwater flow system underlying Phase 1 has remained relatively stable for a long time and is
well understood, well 74-1-1 does not need to be replaced at this time. It should be removed from the monitoring
program.
 For water quality exceedences reported in domestic wells CRD staff should continue to report results to the well
owner.
 The results of the annual monitoring program should continue to be reviewed and interpreted by a qualified
professional experienced in assessing the impacts of landfill leachate at large municipal landfills similar to
Hartland.
 Standard operating procedures (SOP’s) should be reviewed or developed for sampling groundwater, surface
water and leachate to ensure consistency between measurements and sampling events and maintain data
integrity. An SOP for domestic well sampling should also be developed to help reduce the potential for sampling
bias and interferences associated with lead solder, copper pipe and galvanized plumbing.
 Quality assurance laboratory analyses and laboratory precision should be evaluated quarterly, and any
discrepancies should be resolved with the laboratory and sampling personnel within a month of receiving the
laboratory results. The appropriate notation should be added to the data files that explain the reason for the low
precision and the steps taken, if any, to improve the sampling or laboratory procedures.
Construction Management
 Appropriate erosion control measures should be put in place to minimize total suspended solids in runoff from
construction areas for all projects involving excavation or soil relocation.

11. Disclaimer
This report was prepared by AECOM and the information provided in this report is intended for the use of the Capital
Regional District only. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions to be made
based on this report are the responsibility of such third parties. AECOM accepts no responsibility for damages, if any
are suffered by the third party, based on the information contained in this report.
This report is based solely upon data and information provided to AECOM by the Capital Regional District, as well as
upon discussion with CRD staff. We have also drawn upon data, previously complied for Hartland landfill that resides
in our files. Our investigation was intended to determine the potential impacts of landfill leachate on the surrounding
environment, as well as to determine the degree of compliance with legislated guidelines, based on the information
provided to AECOM and our professional judgement.

12. Qualifications of the Authors
Rob Dickin, M.Sc., P.Geo., is a Senior Hydrogeologist and Technical Director with AECOM and has over 31 years
of experience as a consultant. He has completed work at the Hartland Landfill every year since 1987. He has
24 years experience in British Columbia and has worked on numerous waste management projects that involved site
assessments and monitoring. Rob has broad experience in groundwater science, water quality issues associated
with groundwater resource development and has developed both environmental guidelines and policies. Rob is a
member of the British Columbia Contaminated Sites Expert Roster. Rob undertook the senior peer review of this
report.
Ryan Mills, M.Sc., is a Hydrogeologist with over eight years experience interpreting and analyzing hydrogeological
and water chemistry data for waste management, water resources and mining related projects. In the past, Ryan has
authored several groundwater monitoring reports and conducted several site investigations involving drilling and
hydrogeologic testing at Hartland Landfill. He has also undertaken site investigations at numerous other municipal,
industrial and small rural landfills throughout British Columbia. Ryan undertook the bulk of the data review and
interpretation, authorship of this report and supervised junior staff during the preparation of this report.
Stephen Dickin, B.Sc., is a Hydrogeology and Geosciences Assistant with over two years of experience collecting,
analyzing and interpreting hydrogeological and water chemistry data for waste management, mining and
contaminated sites projects. Stephen handled and reviewed the raw data, prepared graphical and CAD figures and
assisted with data interpretation. He has experience supervising and training junior staff as part of field sampling
events for various projects. In the past, Stephen has contributed to groundwater monitoring reports and has
conducted several site investigations involving drilling and groundwater sampling. Since 2008, Stephen has
contributed to the Hartland landfill groundwater monitoring reports. He has also undertaken site investigations at
other municipal and industrial landfills throughout the Lower Mainland and Yukon.
May Quach, M.Env.Sc., is an Aquatic Ecologist with over four years experience in aquatic ecosystem studies for
waste management, hydroelectric and mining related projects. Her work focuses on design, field studies and data
evaluation of water quality, benthic invertebrates, fish and fish habitat and limnological aspects for baseline studies
and impact assessments. May was responsible for analysis and discussion pertaining to surface water quality data
contained within this report.

13. References
AECOM, April 2009a:

Investigation of Water Quality Changes in Well 40-1-1 at Hartland Landfill. Report for CRD. GLL 61-134.
AECOM, November 2009b:

Hartland Landfill Groundwater, Surface Water and Leachate Monitoring Program – Annual Report (April
2008-March 2009). Report for CRD. Project No. 60117147.
BC Environment, 1998a:
British Columbia Water Quality Guidelines (Criteria); 1998 Edition (updated January 17, 2001). prepared by
Water Quality Section Water Management Branch, Environment and Resource Protection Department,
MOELP, August 1998.
BC Environment, 1998b:
A Compendium of Working Water Quality Guidelines for British Columbia 1998 Edition (updated April 2001).
Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks.
Capital Regional District, 2000:

Capital Regional District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 4, 2000”, (Bylaw 2830) Prepared by CRD and Adopted
November 22, 2000.
Federal-Provincial Subcommittee on Drinking Water of the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on

Environmental and Occupational Health, 2008:
Summary of Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality, 2008.
Gartner Lee Limited, October 2008:

2007-March 2008). Report for CRD. GLL 80-417.
Gartner Lee Limited, November 2007:




Gartner Lee Limited, September 2004:

Hartland Landfill – Hydrogeological Review of Groundwater, Surface Water and Leachate Monitoring
Programs. Report for CRD. GLL 23-479.

Gartner Lee Limited, August 2003:

Gartner Lee Limited, June 2003:

Hartland Landfill – 2003 Groundwater Monitor Installations to the Southeast. Report for Capital Regional
District. GLL 23-035.
Gartner Lee Limited, January 2003:

Hartland Landfill Groundwater, Surface Water and Leachate Monitoring Program – Annual Report (January
2001 to March 2002). Report for Capital Regional District. GLL 21-747.

Hartland Landfill Monitoring Program – 2000 Annual Report. Prepared for Capital Regional District. GLL
22-419.
Gartner Lee Limited, August 2000a:

Hartland Landfill Monitoring Program – 1999. Annual Report. Prepared for Capital Regional District. GLL
20-721.
Gartner Lee Limited, March 2000:

Hartland Landfill – Conceptual Design of South Leachate Purge Well System Prepared for Capital Regional
Gartner Lee Limited, March 2000b:

Assessment of Potential Leachate Migration from Hartland Landfill Phase 2 – Winter 1998-1999. Prepared
for Capital Regional District. GLL 99-763.
Gartner Lee Limited, August 1999:

99-733.
Gartner Lee Limited, May 1999:

Hartland Landfill – Installation of Replacement Monitoring Wells (Draft Report) GLL 98-788.
Gartner Lee Limited, July 1998:

98-753.
Gartner Lee Limited, April 1998:

Hartland Landfill – Geophysical Study. Letter report for Capital Regional District.

Deep Fracture Flow Analysis Report, November 1997. Report for Capital Regional District.
Gartner Lee Limited, January 1997a:

Hartland Landfill Purge Well Evaluation. Report for Capital Regional District. GLL 95-798.

Gartner Lee Limited, January 1997b:

Hartland Landfill Yard Waste Composting Area Groundwater Study. Report prepared for Capital Regional

Hartland Landfill Monitoring Program – 1996 Annual Report. Report prepared for Capital Regional District.

Hartland Landfill Monitoring Program – 1996 Annual Report for Capital Regional District. GLL 96-734.


Hartland Landfill Northward Leachate Migration Study. Report for Capital Regional District. GLL 95-717.
Gartner Lee Limited, January 1995:

Heal Basin 1994 Inflow Monitoring Study, Hartland Landfill – GLL 94-706. Report for Capital Regional
District.
Gartner Lee Limited, 1995:

Installation of a Water Supply Well in the North Site Stage 1 Compost Facility. GLL 94-704 Report for the
Capital Regional District.
Gartner Lee Limited, 1994:

Hartland Landfill – Phase II Underdrain Design. GLL 94-702. Report for the Capital Regional District.
Gartner Lee Limited, December 1994:

Groundwater Monitor Installations, Phase I Crest, Hartland Landfill. Report for Capital Regional District. GLL
94-732.

South Toe Drain Design, Phase I, Hartland Landfill. Report for Capital Regional District. GLL 94-707.

Installation of Groundwater Monitors at the North Site Stage 1 Compost Facility and Around the New
Leachate Lagoon. Report Letter for Capital Regional District. GLL 93-759.

Hartland Landfill Monitoring Program - 1993 Annual Report for Capital Regional District. GLL 94-723.

Heal Basin 1993 Inflow Monitoring Study. Report for the Capital Regional District. GLL 92-718.




Hydrogeological Investigation and Leachate Management Concepts – Hartland Landfill – Phase II. GLL 91-
722. Report for the Capital Regional District.
Gartner Lee Limited, March 1992:

Water Quality Impact Assessment – Southeast of the Hartland Landfill. GLL 91-732. Report for the Capital
Regional District.
Gartner Lee Limited, March 1991a:

Hartland Landfill 1990 Hydrogeological Monitoring Report. GLL 90-735. Report for the Capital Regional
District.
Gartner Lee Limited, February 1991b:

Hartland Landfill Leachate Treatability Study. GLL 90-730. Report prepared for the Capital Regional District.

District.
Gartner Lee Limited, December 1988:

District.

Hartland Landfill 1986 - 1987 Hydrogeological Monitoring Report. GLL 87-126. Report for the Capital
Regional District.
Golder Associates Ltd., July 2008:

2007 Assessment of Additional Chemical Analyses for Hartland Landfill. Project 07-1421-0049. Report for
the Capital Regional District.
Golder Associates Ltd., June 2007:

Phase 2 High Level Road Expansion Surface Water Quality Monitoring and Quarry and Aggregate Stockpile
Inspections at the Hartland Landfill. Project 06-1414-019. Report for the Capital Regional District.
Sperling Hansen, July 2003:

2003 Update of Leachate Mounding Assessment at Hartland Landfill. Final Report PPJ03002. Report
prepared for Capital Regional District.
UMA Engineering, May 1997:

Hartland Landfill Yard Waste Composting Site - Water Quality Management. Report prepared for the Capital
Regional District.
UMA Engineering and Gartner Lee Limited, June 1992:

Todd Creek/Prospect Lake Rehabilitation Study. GLL 91-707. Draft final report for the Capital Regional
District.
UMA Engineering. April 1996:

Composting Site - Water Quality Management. An Update Report to the CRD on the Status of Water Quality
Monitoring and Management in the Vicinity of the Yard Waste Composting Site.

Appendix A
Water Level Data
 Monitoring Well Co-ordinates

 Monitoring Well Details
 Water Level Data
 Surface Water Station Co-ordinates
60158830_DRF_RPT_2010 Oct 15 2010_Annual Rpt.Docx

Appendix A-1. Monitoring Well Co-ordinates - 2009 / 2010
Location Elevations Depths Monitor Class

Borehole Depth to
Ground Top of Top of Top of Bottom of Depth to Top Shallow (S),
Northing Easting Depth Bottom of
Station Name Status Surface Casing Piezometer Screen Screen Stickup of Screen Survey Date Intermediate Area of Landfill Comments
(NAD 83) (NAD 83) Below Screen Below
Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation Below Ground (I), Deep (D)
Ground Ground
m m m ASL m ASL m ASL m ASL m ASL m AGL m BGL m BGL m BGL
GW-04-2-1 Active 5375468.5 466169.3 127.14 127.95 127.89 107.49 104.44 0.75 22.70 19.65 22.70 2005 Mar I SP1
GW-04-3-1 Active 5375469.0 466167.8 127.11 128.20 128.16 114.26 111.21 1.05 15.90 12.85 15.90 2005 Mar I SP1
GW-04-4-1 Active 5375466.8 466166.1 127.13 128.08 128.01 122.98 119.93 0.88 7.20 4.15 7.20 2005 Mar S SP1
GW-07-1-0 Active 5375613.3 466177.0 140.60 142.69 142.29 N/A N/A 1.69 36.58 No monitor No monitor 2005 Mar D SP1
GW-09-1-0 Active 5375774.0 466187.0 148.96 150.14 150.14 N/A N/A 1.18 98.37 No monitor No monitor Historic D EP1
GW-12-1-0 Active 5375701.0 466189.0 143.02 143.82 143.82 N/A N/A 0.80 3.40 No monitor No monitor Historic S SP1 Dug well
GW-16-1-1 Active 5376345.6 466130.2 143.48 144.28 144.06 101.98 100.48 0.58 45.35 41.50 43.00 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-16-1-2 Active 5376345.6 466130.1 143.48 144.28 144.00 110.98 109.48 0.52 45.35 32.50 34.00 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-16-2-1 Active 5376347.1 466133.7 143.31 144.09 143.67 119.81 118.81 0.36 25.55 23.50 24.50 2005 Mar I EP1
GW-16-2-2 Active 5376347.0 466133.7 143.31 144.09 143.72 129.81 126.81 0.41 25.55 13.50 16.50 2005 Mar I EP1
GW-17-1-1 Active 5376186.4 466198.0 150.99 152.17 152.08 100.49 98.99 1.09 57.86 50.50 52.00 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-17-1-2 Active 5376186.5 466198.0 150.99 152.17 152.11 110.99 109.49 1.12 57.86 40.00 41.50 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-17-1-3 Active 5376186.5 466198.0 150.99 152.17 152.04 136.49 133.29 1.05 57.86 14.50 17.70 2005 Mar I EP1
GW-18-1-1 Active 5375976.5 466194.8 168.81 169.48 169.00 110.64 109.14 0.19 59.67 58.17 59.67 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-18-1-2 Active 5375976.5 466194.7 168.81 169.48 169.33 122.61 121.11 0.52 59.67 46.20 47.70 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-18-2-1 Active 5375973.0 466193.8 168.92 169.68 169.16 138.42 136.92 0.24 33.35 30.50 32.00 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-18-2-2 Active 5375973.0 466193.7 168.92 169.68 169.12 155.92 152.92 0.20 33.35 13.00 16.00 2005 Mar I EP1
GW-19-1-1 Active 5375503.2 466125.3 132.89 133.86 133.85 96.89 95.39 0.96 41.76 36.00 37.50 2005 Mar D SP1
GW-19-1-2 Active 5375503.2 466125.3 132.89 133.86 133.87 106.39 104.89 0.98 41.76 26.50 28.00 2005 Mar I SP1
GW-19-2-1 Active 5375507.6 466124.1 132.60 133.37 133.26 117.10 115.60 0.66 18.90 15.50 17.00 2005 Mar I SP1
GW-19-2-2 Active 5375507.6 466124.1 132.60 133.37 133.32 126.60 123.60 0.72 18.90 6.00 9.00 2005 Mar S SP1
GW-20-1-1 Active 5376498.3 465971.1 110.46 111.32 111.66 80.46 77.46 1.20 36.60 30.00 33.00 2005 Mar D NP1
GW-20-1-2 Active 5376498.4 465971.0 110.46 111.32 111.67 92.66 89.66 1.21 36.60 17.80 20.80 2005 Mar I NP1
GW-21-1-1 Active 5376483.9 465970.8 110.92 111.79 112.17 98.02 94.92 1.25 16.80 12.90 16.00 2005 Mar I NP1
GW-21-1-2 Active 5376483.9 465970.9 110.92 111.79 112.16 105.42 102.32 1.24 16.80 5.50 8.60 2005 Mar S NP1
GW-21-2-1 Active 5376482.3 465970.0 111.10 111.87 111.80 No log No log 0.70 4.95 No log No log 2005 Mar S NP1
GW-25-1-1 Active 5376491.7 465713.9 129.91 130.89 130.77 106.91 105.41 0.86 25.20 23.00 24.50 2005 Mar I NP2
GW-25-1-2 Active 5376491.7 465714.0 129.91 130.89 130.78 125.61 123.41 0.87 25.20 4.30 6.50 2005 Mar S NP2
GW-27-1-1 Active 5376358.2 465455.8 141.09 141.91 141.57 118.09 116.59 0.48 25.60 23.00 24.50 2005 Mar I BKGND - WP2
GW-27-1-2 Active 5376358.2 465455.7 141.09 141.91 141.56 140.59 137.59 0.47 25.60 0.50 3.50 2005 Mar S BKGND - WP2
GW-28-1-0 Active 5376503.6 465825.1 136.25 137.07 136.52 N/A N/A 0.27 32.80 No monitor No monitor 2005 Mar D NP1
GW-29-1-1 Active 5376563.3 465898.2 113.39 114.41 114.38 100.28 98.87 0.99 15.00 13.11 14.52 2005 Mar S NP1
GW-29-1-2 Active 5376563.3 465898.3 113.39 114.41 114.39 110.39 105.96 1.00 15.00 3.00 7.43 2005 Mar S NP1
GW-30-1-1 Active 5376562.2 465978.4 109.84 110.89 110.79 95.51 94.10 0.95 16.37 14.33 15.74 2005 Mar I NP1
GW-30-1-2 Active 5376562.3 465978.5 109.84 110.89 110.79 108.56 104.07 0.95 16.37 1.28 5.77 2005 Mar S NP1
GW-31-1-1 Active 5376555.2 466080.9 105.28 106.34 106.26 90.92 89.50 0.98 17.40 14.36 15.78 2005 Mar I NP1
GW-31-1-2 Active 5376555.2 466080.9 105.28 106.34 106.26 103.84 99.41 0.98 17.40 1.44 5.87 2005 Mar S NP1
GW-36-1-1 Active 5376398.9 465778.3 130.21 130.21 131.51 117.87 114.87 1.30 15.34 12.34 15.34 2005 Mar I NP2
GW-36-2-1 Active 5376400.6 465776.5 130.00 131.11 131.07 90.68 87.63 1.07 42.40 39.32 42.37 2005 Mar D NP2
GW-36-3-1 Active 5376401.7 465773.6 130.01 131.01 130.96 115.01 112.01 0.95 18.00 15.00 18.00 2005 Mar I NP2
GW-37-1-1 Active 5376432.6 465725.6 129.59 130.12 129.98 117.35 114.35 0.39 15.24 12.24 15.24 2005 Mar I NP2
GW-37-2-1 Active 5376432.5 465727.8 129.92 130.64 130.60 89.47 86.42 0.68 43.60 40.45 43.50 2005 Mar D NP2
GW-37-3-1 Active 5376435.6 465726.8 129.95 130.75 130.63 119.72 115.15 0.68 14.80 10.23 14.80 2005 Mar S NP2
GW-38-1-1 Active 5376464.6 465797.2 131.90 132.46 132.31 N/A N/A 0.41 18.29 No monitor No monitor 2005 Mar I NP2
GW-39-1-1 Active 5376467.2 465876.1 129.54 130.24 130.11 111.10 108.10 0.57 21.44 18.44 21.44 2005 Mar I NP2
GW-39-2-1 Active 5376466.3 465874.7 129.75 130.72 130.58 95.56 92.56 0.83 37.19 34.19 37.19 2005 Mar D NP2
GW-40-1-1 Active 5376432.1 465915.2 122.00 122.78 122.68 109.76 106.76 0.68 17.07 12.24 15.24 2005 Mar I NP1
GW-41-1-1 Active 5376852.1 465190.4 149.48 150.30 150.16 143.41 140.41 0.68 9.07 6.07 9.07 2005 Mar S HNP
GW-43-1-1 Active 5376683.8 465448.7 162.60 163.05 163.10 144.31 141.26 0.50 21.34 18.29 21.34 2007 Apr I HNP
GW-46-2-1 Active 5376075.5 466029.9 169.97 171.25 171.70 161.69 158.69 1.73 11.28 8.28 11.28 2006 Apr S P1
GW-46-3-1 Active 5376085.7 466035.7 169.83 172.46 172.38 137.83 134.78 2.55 35.10 32.00 35.05 2006 Apr D P1 Installed during 2005
GW-46-4-1 Active 5376078.5 466035.9 169.71 172.10 172.03 151.12 148.07 2.32 21.64 18.59 21.64 2006 Apr I P1 Installed during 2005
GW-47-1-1 Active 5375918.3 465992.6 174.85 177.24 177.37 155.09 152.09 2.52 22.55 19.76 22.76 2008 May I P1
GW-48-1-1 Active 5375840.5 466031.3 169.78 171.34 171.63 160.14 157.14 1.85 14.02 9.64 12.64 2006 Apr S P1
GW-50-1-1 Active 5376480.9 466193.4 119.37 120.41 120.43 105.47 102.47 1.06 16.90 13.90 16.90 2005 Mar I EP1
GW-51-1-1 Active 5376475.1 466048.2 110.90 111.68 111.76 106.13 103.13 0.86 7.77 4.77 7.77 2005 Mar S NP1
GW-51-2-1 Active 5376474.1 466045.6 110.90 111.83 111.89 100.49 97.49 0.99 13.41 10.41 13.41 2005 Mar S NP1
GW-51-3-1 Active 5376473.3 466042.7 110.97 111.84 111.89 93.85 90.85 0.92 20.12 17.12 20.12 2005 Mar I NP1
GW-52-1-1 Active 5376406.0 465979.1 119.91 120.94 120.90 93.19 90.19 0.99 29.72 26.72 29.72 Historic I NP1
GW-52-2-0 Active 5376391.0 465959.0 119.99 120.65 120.65 N/A N/A 0.66 15.57 No monitor No monitor Historic I NP1
GW-52-3-0 Active 5376389.9 465948.8 119.78 120.35 120.35 N/A N/A 0.57 15.53 No monitor No monitor Historic I NP1
GW-52-4-0-P7 Active 5376388.0 465947.0 119.80 120.60 120.60 N/A N/A 0.80 22.25 No monitor No monitor Historic I NP1 Purge well
GW-53-1-1 Active 5376506.2 465761.3 130.84 131.81 131.92 114.15 110.88 1.08 19.96 16.69 19.96 2005 Mar I NP2
GW-54-1-1 Active 5376187.7 466226.9 154.63 155.58 155.65 107.91 104.91 1.02 49.72 46.72 49.72 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-54-2-1 Active 5376185.6 466225.5 154.69 155.62 155.66 118.55 115.55 0.97 39.14 36.14 39.14 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-54-3-1 Active 5376183.4 466224.7 154.66 155.50 155.53 138.05 135.05 0.87 19.61 16.61 19.61 2005 Mar I EP1
GW-56-1-1 Active 5376838.5 465287.8 148.67 149.69 149.61 139.92 131.29 0.94 17.38 8.75 17.38 2005 Mar I HNP
GW-58-1-0 Active 5376324.8 465822.9 137.17 138.30 138.23 N/A N/A 1.06 19.20 No monitor No monitor 2009 May I NP2
GW-60-1-1 Active 5375636.9 466137.2 141.63 142.40 142.32 122.23 119.23 0.69 22.40 19.40 22.40 2005 Mar I SP1
GW-60-2-1 Active 5375638.4 466137.4 141.61 142.46 142.40 129.51 126.51 0.79 15.10 12.10 15.10 2005 Mar I SP1
GW-60-3-1 Active 5375640.0 466137.5 141.74 142.60 142.49 137.84 134.84 0.75 6.90 3.90 6.90 2005 Mar S SP1
GW-61-1-1 Active 5375980.6 465523.1 212.00 213.06 212.95 146.40 143.40 0.95 68.60 65.60 68.60 2005 Mar D BKGND - WP2 Survey elevations
GW-62-1-1 Active 5376609.3 465265.5 183.44 184.29 N/A 161.32 159.82 N/A 23.70 22.12 23.62 2008 May I HNP suspect.
Survey elevations
GW-62-2-1 Active 5376610.5 465267.3 183.06 183.96 N/A 168.70 165.70 N/A 18.90 14.36 17.36 2008 May I HNP suspect.
GW-63-1-1 Active 5375812.3 465609.5 197.24 198.18 198.09 168.44 165.44 0.85 31.80 28.80 31.80 2005 Mar I BKGND - WP2
GW-63-2-1 Active 5375809.7 465610.5 197.21 198.11 198.03 186.71 183.71 0.82 13.50 10.50 13.50 2005 Mar S BKGND - WP2
GW-67-1-1 Active 5376256.2 465774.0 155.85 N/A 157.55 133.95 127.85 1.70 28.00 21.90 28.00 2005 Mar I P2
GW-68-2-1 Active 5376353.0 465718.0 141.56 N/A 142.29 123.76 120.76 0.73 20.80 17.80 20.80 Historic I P2
GW-71-1-1 Active 5375643.3 466260.6 144.04 144.93 144.85 116.61 113.56 0.81 31.24 27.43 30.48 2005 Mar D SP1
GW-71-2-1 Active 5375644.1 466259.9 144.04 144.92 144.84 127.04 123.98 0.80 20.10 17.00 20.06 2005 Mar I SP1
GW-71-3-1 Active 5375645.3 466259.1 144.05 144.95 144.90 137.04 134.00 0.85 10.10 7.01 10.05 2005 Mar S SP1
GW-72-1-1 Active 5375670.6 466186.6 143.29 144.13 144.08 115.86 112.81 0.79 30.48 27.43 30.48 2005 Mar D SP1
GW-72-2-1 Active 5375671.7 466186.7 143.32 144.09 144.04 126.56 123.20 0.72 20.12 16.76 20.12 2005 Mar I SP1
GW-72-3-1 Active 5375672.7 466186.8 143.38 144.17 144.12 136.06 133.02 0.74 10.36 7.32 10.36 2005 Mar S SP1
GW-73-1-1 Active 5375532.1 466184.1 134.52 135.47 135.38 106.91 103.86 0.86 30.66 27.61 30.66 2005 Mar D SP1
GW-73-2-1 Active 5375533.2 466184.1 134.50 135.40 135.36 117.40 114.38 0.86 20.12 17.10 20.12 2005 Mar I SP1
GW-73-3-1 Active 5375534.3 466184.1 134.48 135.37 135.31 127.46 124.42 0.83 10.06 7.02 10.06 2005 Mar S SP1
GW-74-1-1 Active 5376013.4 466018.4 170.94 171.56 171.60 138.04 132.04 0.66 38.90 32.90 38.90 2007 Apr D P1
GW-74-2-1 Active 5 376 021.6 466 032.5 170.29 172.25 172.40 153.19 150.19 2.11 20.10 17.10 20.10 2006 Apr I P1 Installed during 2005
GW-75-1-1 Active 5376207.5 466035.3 154.82 155.62 155.97 127.72 121.72 1.15 33.10 27.10 33.10 2007 Apr D P1
GW-76-1-1 Active 5375966.0 466228.4 171.08 171.79 171.69 123.23 117.13 0.61 61.90 47.85 53.95 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-76-2-1 Active 5375967.5 466227.1 171.00 171.77 171.66 133.81 127.72 0.66 43.60 37.19 43.28 2005 Mar D EP1
GW-76-3-1 Active 5375968.8 466226.0 170.99 171.75 171.71 145.08 142.03 0.72 29.00 25.91 28.96 2005 Mar I EP1
GW-77-1-1 Active 5376487.8 465536.8 155.04 155.66 155.63 120.60 117.55 0.59 40.26 34.44 37.49 2006 Apr D NP2 Installed during 2006
GW-77-2-1 Active 5376485.8 465536.2 154.90 155.51 155.45 139.16 135.87 0.55 20.67 15.74 19.03 2006 Apr I NP2 Installed during 2006
GW-78-2-1 Active 5376500.3 465646.7 142.59 143.40 143.36 132.42 129.14 0.77 14.11 10.17 13.45 2006 Apr S NP2 Installed during 2006
GW-79-2-1 Active 5376521.9 465403.1 182.96 183.69 183.59 157.05 154.00 0.64 30.48 25.91 28.96 2007 Apr I NP2 Installed during 2007
GW-80-1-0-P8 Active 5376397.4 465931.0 119.61 120.29 N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.42 No monitor No monitor 2008 May I NP1 Purge well
GW-81-1-0-P9 Active 5376409.0 465910.8 122.17 122.85 N/A N/A N/A N/A 26.82 No monitor No monitor 2008 May I NP1 Installed during 2007
GW-82-1-1 Active 5376257.5 465772.7 154.67 155.89 155.86 135.17 131.50 1.18 23.77 19.50 23.17 2009 May I P2 Installed during 2007
GW-83-1-1 Active 5376353.3 465723.8 140.09 141.40 141.44 124.97 121.92 1.35 18.90 15.12 18.17 2009 May I P2 Installed during 2007
GW-84-1-1 Active 5376225.9 465646.9 158.20 158.86 158.79 120.63 117.58 0.59 27.74 37.57 40.62 2009 Feb I P2 Installed during 2007
GW-84-2-1 Active 5376224.8 465648.5 158.43 159.06 161.36 133.14 130.09 2.93 15.24 25.29 28.34 2009 Feb S P2 Installed during 2007
GW-85-1-1 Active 5375688.3 466068.7 149.09 150.09 150.07 142.99 139.95 0.98 9.14 6.10 9.14 2009 May S SP1 Installed March 2009
VLGW-01-D Active 5375802.0 466040.8 168.25 168.86 168.79 163.25 156.25 0.54 14.00 5.00 12.00 2008 May I P1 Landfill gas well
60158830_App A1-2010-Aug31_Monitoring Well Coordinates_SD.xlsx Page 1 of 2

Appendix A-1. Monitoring Well Co-ordinates - 2009 / 2010
Location Elevations Depths Monitor Class

Borehole Depth to
Ground Top of Top of Top of Bottom of Depth to Top Shallow (S),
Northing Easting Depth Bottom of
Station Name Status Surface Casing Piezometer Screen Screen Stickup of Screen Survey Date Intermediate Area of Landfill Comments
(NAD 83) (NAD 83) Below Screen Below
Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation Below Ground (I), Deep (D)
Ground Ground
m m m ASL m ASL m ASL m ASL m ASL m AGL m BGL m BGL m BGL
VLGW-11-S Active 5375996.8 466122.6 166.06 166.53 166.48 160.42 155.78 0.42 11.28 5.64 10.28 2008 May I P1 Landfill gas well
VLGW-15-D Active 5375842.9 465997.0 170.61 171.13 171.07 156.41 148.21 0.46 23.31 14.20 22.40 2008 May D P1 Landfill gas well
P1 Active 5375732.1 466026.0 157.29 158.38 158.28 147.05 132.29 0.99 25.00 10.24 25.00 2005 Mar I P1 Purge well
GW-01-1-1 Inactive 5375781.9 465852.0 168.56 -42.00 -44.50 168.56 55.54 42.00 44.50
GW-01-1-2 Inactive 5375781.9 465852.0 168.53 -24.40 -24.80 168.53 40.10 24.40 24.80
GW-01-1-3 Inactive 5375781.9 465852.0 168.53 -13.00 -14.75 168.53 29.53 13.00 14.75
GW-01-2-1 Inactive 5375787.9 465859.0 168.25 -4.70 -5.10 168.25 20.50 4.70 5.10
GW-01-3-1 Inactive 5375791.9 465851.0 167.81 -5.11 -5.91 167.81 21.02 5.11 5.91
GW-02-1-1 Inactive 5375813.9 465996.0 166.90 -33.00 -33.50 166.90 48.58 33.00 33.50
GW-02-1-2 Inactive 5375813.9 465996.0 166.90 -23.00 -24.60 166.90 39.29 23.00 24.60
GW-02-1-3 Inactive 5375813.9 465996.0 166.90 -12.20 -13.80 166.90 28.79 12.20 13.80
GW-02-2-1 Inactive 5375812.9 465990.0 167.14 -6.25 -7.50 167.14 22.53 6.25 7.50
GW-03-1-1 Inactive 5375684.9 466042.0 147.41 148.21 148.05 122.91 122.21 0.64 26.03 24.50 25.20
GW-03-1-2 Inactive 5375684.9 466042.0 147.41 148.21 148.05 134.11 133.61 0.64 16.33 13.30 13.80
GW-03-1-3 Inactive 5375684.9 466042.0 147.41 148.21 148.05 143.41 141.61 0.64 7.03 4.00 5.80
GW-03-2-1 Inactive 5375685.5 466037.7 149.20 150.01 149.28 145.15 142.10 0.08 7.10 4.05 7.10 2005 Mar S SP1
GW-04-1-1 Inactive 5375464.0 466171.0 126.67 128.12 128.07 96.47 95.77 1.40 32.00 30.20 30.90
GW-04-1-2 Inactive 5375464.0 466171.0 126.67 128.12 128.07 104.27 103.67 1.40 24.10 22.40 23.00
GW-04-1-3 Inactive 5375464.0 466171.0 126.67 128.12 128.07 116.67 115.07 1.40 11.60 10.00 11.60
GW-04-1-4 Inactive 5375464.0 466171.0 126.67 128.12 128.07 122.97 121.27 1.40 6.10 3.70 5.40
GW-05-1-1 Inactive 5376444.9 465813.9 126.29 127.49 127.49 112.59 110.59 1.20 16.90 13.70 15.70
GW-05-1-2 Inactive 5376444.9 465813.9 126.29 127.49 127.49 118.69 116.69 1.20 10.80 7.60 9.60
GW-05-1-3 Inactive 5376444.9 465813.9 126.29 127.49 127.49 122.89 121.89 1.20 5.60 3.40 4.40
GW-05-2-1 Inactive 5376426.9 465774.9 126.00 126.80 126.80 125.20 124.20 0.80 2.60 0.80 1.80
GW-06-1-1 Inactive 5376148.9 465661.9 127.70 128.41 128.40 107.00 104.90 0.70 23.50 20.70 22.80
GW-06-1-2 Inactive 5376148.9 465661.9 127.70 128.41 128.40 115.20 113.20 0.70 15.20 12.50 14.50
GW-06-1-3 Inactive 5376148.9 465661.9 127.70 128.41 128.40 120.80 118.80 0.70 9.60 6.90 8.90
GW-06-2-1 Inactive 5376151.9 465669.9 127.46 127.76 127.76 125.86 124.86 0.30 2.90 1.60 2.60
GW-08-1-1 Inactive 5375867.9 465738.0 159.26 160.28 160.26 145.86 143.76 1.00 16.50 13.40 15.50
GW-08-1-2 Inactive 5375867.9 465738.0 159.26 160.28 160.26 152.11 150.11 1.00 10.15 7.15 9.15
GW-08-1-3 Inactive 5375867.9 465738.0 159.26 160.28 160.26 156.76 155.76 1.00 4.50 2.50 3.50
GW-10-1-1 Inactive 5376108.9 465701.9 135.11 135.41 135.41 133.61 132.61 0.30 2.80 1.50 2.50
GW-11-1-1 Inactive 5376254.9 465770.9 134.13 135.13 135.13 131.23 130.23 1.00 4.90 2.90 3.90
GW-13-1-1 Inactive 5376166.9 466031.9 150.43 152.73 152.73 121.93 118.93 2.30 33.80 28.50 31.50
GW-13-1-2 Inactive 5376166.9 466031.9 150.43 152.73 152.73 126.83 125.33 2.30 27.40 23.60 25.10
GW-14-1-1 Inactive 5375968.9 465969.9 158.73 160.22 160.22 138.53 135.53 1.49 24.69 20.20 23.20
GW-15-1-1 Inactive 5375754.9 466007.0 159.78 160.82 160.82 145.68 143.38 1.04 17.44 14.10 16.40
GW-22-1-1 Inactive 5376290.1 465751.7 138.54 138.81 139.86 111.22 109.69 1.32 28.09 27.32 28.85
GW-23-1-1 Inactive 5376260.7 465718.7 128.37 129.52 129.50 111.51 110.09 1.13 17.57 16.86 18.28
GW-23-1-2 Inactive 5376260.7 465718.7 128.37 129.52 129.49 124.67 121.80 1.12 5.14 3.70 6.57
GW-24-1-1 Inactive 5376421.9 465753.0 127.77 128.88 128.88 109.91 108.51 1.11 18.56 17.86 19.26
GW-24-1-2 Inactive 5376421.9 465753.0 127.77 128.88 128.87 124.10 121.26 1.10 5.09 3.67 6.51
GW-26-1-1 Inactive 5376319.8 465596.6 128.22 129.16 129.12 109.79 111.20 0.90 17.73 18.43 17.02
GW-26-1-2 Inactive 5376319.8 465596.6 128.22 129.16 129.12 124.36 121.52 0.90 5.28 3.86 6.70
GW-32-1-1 Inactive 5376129.7 465569.9 165.41 166.44 166.34 123.85 122.44 0.93 42.27 41.56 42.97
GW-32-1-2 Inactive 5376129.7 465569.9 165.41 166.44 166.37 157.93 152.04 0.96 10.43 7.48 13.37
GW-33-1-1 Inactive 5376296.5 465627.4 124.55 123.43 124.54 111.11 109.69 -0.01 14.15 13.44 14.86
GW-33-1-2 Inactive 5376296.5 465627.4 124.55 123.43 #VALUE! #VALUE! -124.55 no monitor no monitor
GW-34-1-1 Inactive 5376216.8 465668.4 119.47 104.64 101.64 -119.47 14.83 17.83
GW-34-2-1 Inactive 5376214.9 465668.9 119.67 115.97 112.97 -119.67 3.70 6.70
GW-35-1-1 Inactive 5376207.9 465677.3 120.19 108.29 105.29 -120.19 11.90 14.90
GW-35-1-2 Inactive 5376207.0 465675.9 120.33 117.13 114.13 -120.33 3.20 6.20
GW-45-1-1 Inactive 5376163.1 466106.3 162.37 143.71 140.71 -162.37 18.66 21.66
GW-46-1-1 Inactive 5376078.3 466029.2 170.48 171.65 171.96 140.68 134.68 1.48 29.80 35.80
GW-49-1-0 Inactive 5376759.5 465218.7 160.00 159.81 159.81 N/A N/A -0.19 62.20
GW-59-1-1 Inactive 5376254.5 465636.2 125.62 126.40 126.40 113.72 112.22 0.78 13.40 11.90 13.40
GW-64-1-1 Inactive 5375855.0 465849.0 172.00 172.78 156.20 154.50 0.78 17.50 15.80 17.50
GW-65-1-1 Inactive 5375831.0 465820.0 172.09 172.79 159.79 153.69 0.70 18.40 12.30 18.40
GW-66-1-1 Inactive 5376088.0 465902.0 164.23 165.08 157.03 150.93 0.85 13.30 7.20 13.30
GW-67-2-1 Inactive 5376256.2 465774.0 155.85 157.55 133.95 127.85 1.70 28.00 21.90 28.00 2005 Mar I P2
GW-68-1-1 Inactive 5376353.0 465718.0 141.56 142.74 130.36 124.26 1.18 17.30 11.20 17.30
GW-70-1-1 Inactive 5376019.0 465891.0 167.00 167.59 149.50 143.40 0.59 23.60 17.50 23.60
Notes:
Datum Description
m BGL metres below ground level
m AGL metres above ground level
m ASL metres above mean sea level
Monitor Class
S Shallow well <15 m deep
I Intermediate well between 15 and 30 m deep
D Deep well >30 m deep
Area of Landfill
SP1 South of Phase 1 Landfill
EP1 East of Phase 1 Landfill
NP1 North of Phase 1 Landfill
NP2 North of Phase 2 Landfill
BKGND - WP2 Background Water Quality West of Phase 2
HNP Hartland North Pad
P1 Phase 1
P2 Phase 2
60158830_App A1-2010-Aug31_Monitoring Well Coordinates_SD.xlsx Page 2 of 2

Appendix A-2. Groundwater Stations Details - Monitoring Well Details - 2009 / 2010
Sampled in 2009/ 2010
Pipe
Station Chemistry Water Levels Development Sampling
Status Diameter Comments
Name Boundary Comprehensive Annual 6/yr 10/yr Continuous Method Method
(mm)
(4/yr) (2/yr) (1/yr)
GW-04-2-1 Active 50 Y N N Y N N footvalve footvalve Installed in 1998 October.
GW-04-3-1 Active 50 Y N Y Y N N footvalve footvalve Installed in 1998 October.
GW-04-4-1 Active 50 Y N N Y N N footvalve footvalve Installed in 1998 October.

Pump not working between Nov.1992 and early
GW-07-1-0 Active 220 N Y N Y N N well pump well pump 1994. No samples in 1993. Sampled during 1994.
Pumped not working between Nov.'92 and early '94.
No samples in 1993. Started sampling again in
GW-12-1-0 Active 220 N N N Y N N well pump well pump March 1994. Ground water levels only.
0.05 m sub. pumps were installed in deeper
GW-16-1-1 Active 50 N Y N Y N N sample pump sample pump monitors (16-1-1 and 16-1-2) in 1994.
GW-16-1-2 Active 50 N Y N Y N N sample pump sample pump
GW-16-2-1 Active 50 N Y N Y N N footvalve footvalve

16-2-2 often dry; difficult to develop and sample.
GW-16-2-2 Active 50 N Y N Y N N footvalve footvalve Sometimes use bailer.
GW-17-1-1 Active 50 N Y N Y N N sample pump sample pump monitors (17-1-1 and 17-1-2) in 1994.
GW-17-1-2 Active 50 N Y N Y N N sample pump sample pump

monitors (18-1-1 and 18-1-2) in 1994. Pump
GW-18-1-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N sample pump sample pump replaced in May 2009.
monitors (18-1-1 and 18-1-2) in 1994. Pump
GW-18-1-2 Active 50 Y N Y N Y N sample pump sample pump replaced in May 2009.
GW-18-2-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N footvalve footvalve
GW-18-2-2 Active 50 Y N Y N Y N footvalve footvalve
GW-19-1-1 Active 50 N Y N Y N N footvalve footvalve 19-1-1 sometimes flows artesian.

21-2-1 replaced in 1992 June, original destroyed by
GW-21-2-1 Active 50 N Y Y Y N N footvalve footvalve heavy equipment
GW-25-1-1 Active 50 N Y N N Y N footvalve footvalve
GW-25-1-2 Active 50 N Y N N Y N footvalve footvalve
GW-27-1-1 Active 50 Y N N Y N N not developed footvalve 27-1-1 flowing artesian - not developed
27-1-2 almost dry in summer, bailer used
GW-27-1-2 Active 50 Y N N Y N N footvalve footvalve occasionally.
Open borehole, first sampled in 1997 Apr. Pump
GW-28-1-0 Active 150 N N N N Y N sample pump sample pump Not functioning starting July 2009.
GW-29-1-1 Active 50 Y N N Y N N footvalve footvalve

30-1-2 almost dry in summer, bailer used
GW-30-1-2 Active 50 Y N Y Y N N footvalve footvalve occasionally.

First sampled in late March 1994. Sampling
discontinued after June 1997 due to pressure sensor
GW-36-1-1 Active 50 N N N N N Y NA NA installation. Water levels only.
GW-36-2-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N footvalve footvalve First sampled in March 1997
GW-36-3-1 Active 50 Y N Y N Y N footvalve footvalve Installed in 1998 October.

First sampled in late March 1994. Sampling
discontinued after June 1997 due to pressure sensor
GW-37-1-1 Active 50 N N N N N Y NA NA installation. Water levels only.
GW-37-3-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N footvalve footvalve Installed in 1998 October.
GW-38-1-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N footvalve footvalve First sampled in late March 1994
GW-39-1-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N footvalve footvalve First sampled in late March 1994

First sampled in late March 1994.Transducer
installed in September 2008 and can be removed as
GW-40-1-1 Active 50 N Y N Y Y Y footvalve footvalve required for sampling.
GW-41-1-1 Active 50 Y N Y Y Y N footvalve footvalve First sampled in late March 1994
GW-42-1-1 Active 50 Y N N Y N N footvalve footvalve First sampled in late March 1994
60158830_App A2-2010-Aug24_Groundwater Station Details 2009-2010.xlsx:Status Page 1 of 4

Pipe
(mm)
(4/yr) (2/yr) (1/yr)
GW-43-1-1 Active 50 Y N Y Y N N footvalve footvalve First sampled in late March 1994
GW-44-1-1 Active 50 N N N Y N N footvalve footvalve First sampled in late March 1994.
GW-46-2-1 Active 50 N N N N Y N NA NA Water levels only
GW-46-3-1 Active 50 N N N N Y N NA NA Installed July 2005.
GW-50-1-1 Active 50 Y N Y Y N N footvalve footvalve First sample Aug 1995
GW-51-1-1 Active 50 N Y N Y N N footvalve footvalve First sample Aug 1995
GW-52-1-1 Active 50 Y N Y N Y N footvalve footvalve First sample Aug 1995

Up to 1998 May. Sampled when well pump
operating. From 1998 Jun. Purge well transferred to
GW-52-3-0 Active 150 N N N Y Y Y NA NA 52-4-0. Transducer installed. Water levels only.
GW-52-4-0- Installed 1998 Jun. Sampled when pump operating.

P7 Active 250 N N N N N Y NA NA Purge well in conjunction with 80-1-0-P8.
GW-53-1-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N footvalve footvalve First sample Aug 1995
GW-54-1-1 Active 50 Y N N Y N N footvalve footvalve First sample Aug 1995
GW-54-2-1 Active 50 Y N Y Y N N footvalve footvalve First sample Aug 1995
GW-54-3-1 Active 50 Y N N Y N N footvalve footvalve First sample Aug 1995
GW-55-1-1 Active 50 N Y N Y N N footvalve footvalve First sample June 1996
GW-58-1-0 Active 150 N Y Y N Y N sample pump sample pump First sample June 1997
GW-60-1-1 Active 50 N Y N Y N N footvalve footvalve Installed in 1998 October.
GW-61-1-1 Active 50 N N N Y N N NA NA Installed in 1998 October.
GW-62-2-1 Active 50 N Y Y Y N N footvalve footvalve Installed in 1998 October.
GW-67-1-1 Active 50 N N N N Y N NA NA Only water levels.
GW-68-2-1 Active 50 N N N N Y N NA NA Installed Feb 2003. Only water levels.
GW-71-1-1 Active 50 Y N N Y N N footvalve footvalve Installed 2003 Jan.
GW-71-3-1 Active 50 Y N Y Y N N footvalve footvalve Installed 2003 Jan.
GW-74-1-1 Active 50 N N N N Y N NA NA Installed Feb 2003. Water levels only.

Installed Jan 2004. Dedicator submersible pump
GW-76-1-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N footvalve sample pump system installed January 2010.
GW-76-2-1 Active 50 Y N Y N Y N footvalve footvalve Installed Jan 2004.
GW-76-3-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N footvalve footvalve Installed Jan 2004.
GW-77-1-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N footvalve footvalve Installed Feb 2006.

Pipe
(mm)
(4/yr) (2/yr) (1/yr)

Installed 2007 Apr. RST transducer installed
GW-79-1-1 Active 50 Y N N N N Y footvalve footvalve November 2009.
GW-79-2-1 Active 50 Y N N N Y N footvalve footvalve Installed 2007 Apr.

GW-80-1-0- Installed 2007 Apr. Transducer installed. Purge well
P8 Active NA N N N N N Y sample pump sample pump in conjunction with 52-4-0-P7.
GW-81-1-0- Installed 2007 Apr. Intended to be purge well, but
P9 Active NA NA NA NA NA Y N NA NA recharge rate not adequate.
GW-82-1-1 Active 50 N N N N Y N NA NA Installed 2007 Apr. Water levels only.
GW-83-1-1 Active 50 N N N N Y N NA NA Installed 2007 Apr. Water levels only.
GW-85-1-1 Active 50 N Y Y Y N N footvalve footvalve Installed March 2009. Replaced 03-2-1
P1 Active NA N N N N N Y NA NA South purge well. Pump installed
P2 Active NA N N N N N Y NA NA South purge well.
VLGW001D Active A N N N N Y N NA NA Gas well, water levels only.
VLGW011S Active A N N N N Y N NA NA Gas well, water levels only.
GW-01-1-1 Inactive 20 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Site destroyed.
GW-01-1-2 Inactive 20 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
GW-02-1-1 Inactive 20 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Site destroyed
Deactivated at end of 1998, replaced by new well 60-
GW-03-1-1 Inactive 20 NA NA NA NA NA NA 10 mm footvalve10 mm footvalve 1-1.
Installed in 1998 October. Destroyed and replaced
GW-03-2-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA footvalve footvalve with 85-1-1 in March 2009.
Deactivated during 1998, failed to recharge after
GW-04-1-4 Inactive 40 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA purging.
Site destroyed during construction of Phase II
GW-05-1-1 Inactive 20 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA lagoon
Site destroyed during dike contruction in interim
GW-06-1-1 Inactive 20 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA filling area.

Pipe
(mm)
(4/yr) (2/yr) (1/yr)
Irregular sampling in '93 due to pump control failure.
Sampled during 1994. No longer sampled as of
GW-09-1-0 Inactive 150 N Y N Y N N well pump well pump 2010 due to outdated pump and redundancy.

Site abandoned. Destroyed during expansion of
GW-22-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA interim composting area.
GW-23-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Site destroyed in November 1994
Site destroyed during construction of Phase II
GW-24-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA lagoon
GW-26-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Site destroyed in August 1994
Sub. pump was installed in 1995 in 32-1-1 and was
removed in Feb 1996 from 32-1-1 because of
GW-32-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA blasting nearby, not replaced. Site destroyed in
Sub. pump removed in Feb 1996 from 32-1-1
because of blasting nearby, not replaced. Site
GW-32-1-2 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA destroyed in October 1997
Inactive since August 1992. Excavation has made
GW-33-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA this site inaccessible.
GW-45-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Site destroyed.
GW-46-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Deactivated 1999 June. Blocked above water level.
GW-49-1-0 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Deactived 2005 June.
GW-59-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Destroyed Feb 2005 by Phase 2 construction.
Installed July 2002. Sampled between 2002 Aug and

GW-64-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2003 Apr. Destroyed by interim fill area construction.
Installed July 2002. Sampled between 2002 Aug and

GW-65-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2003 Apr. Destroyed by interim fill area construction.
Installed July 2002. Active between 2002 Aug and
2003 Apr. Never used due to violent foaming.
GW-66-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Destroyed by interim fill area construction.
GW-67-2-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Installed Feb 2003 . Obstructed and inactive
GW-68-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Installed Feb 2003 . Obstructed and inactive

Installed Feb 2003. Destroyed July 2006 during
GW-69-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA construction on active face
Installed Feb 2003. Destroyed July 2006 during
GW-69-2-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA construction on active face
Sampled between 2002 Aug and 2003 Apr.
GW-70-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Destroyed by interim fill area construction.
GW-84-1-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Installed 2007 Apr. Destroyed spring 2009.
GW-84-2-1 Inactive 50 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Installed 2007 Apr. Obstructed fall 2009.
Notes:
Footvalves are 16 mm (5/8") unless otherwise noted.
NA - Not Available or Not Applicable.
A - Diameter reduces from 200 mm at the bottom to 100 mm at ground level.

Appendix A-3. Groundwater Elevations (mASL)
2009 Nov 23 2010 Jan 14

Station 2009 Aug 20 2009 Sep 11 to to 2010 Mar 17
2009 Dec 03 2010 Jan 15
04-2-1 120.79 124.61 115.53 126.20 ---
04-3-1 123.81 124.07 125.21 124.90 ---
04-4-1 124.67 125.32 125.63 125.53 ---
07-1-0 140.53 140.68 141.17 141.14 ---
09-1-0 143.81 149.09 147.33 --- ---
16-1-1 126.65 126.24 135.43 135.03 ---
16-1-2 126.14 125.64 135.56 135.15 ---
16-2-1 127.84 127.95 136.13 135.67 ---
16-2-2 128.08 127.93 136.16 135.70 ---
17-1-1 142.99 142.66 148.67 148.19 ---
17-1-2 142.74 142.49 148.31 147.91 ---
17-1-3 142.69 142.45 148.32 147.85 ---
18-1-1 149.63 149.37 152.86 154.24 153.20
18-1-2 149.52 149.27 152.77 154.13 152.08
18-2-1 157.02 156.81 164.33 163.25 163.15
18-2-2 158.91 158.73 164.40 163.28 163.20
19-1-1 132.66 132.94 133.85 133.85 ---
19-1-2 132.68 132.94 133.87 133.87 ---
19-2-1 132.57 132.83 133.26 133.26 ---
19-2-2 129.23 129.75 133.02 132.97 ---
20-1-1 109.34 109.43 110.54 110.63 ---
20-1-2 109.18 109.24 110.20 110.32 ---
21-1-1 109.81 109.85 111.19 111.09 ---
21-1-2 109.41 109.46 110.71 110.78 ---
21-2-1 109.45 109.49 110.75 110.80 ---
25-1-1 125.26 125.39 127.68 127.67 126.38
25-1-2 126.36 126.45 127.23 127.42 125.89
27-1-1 142.78 142.78 142.78 142.78 142.78
27-1-2 139.07 139.12 140.27 140.42 139.87
28-1-0 120.60 121.09 123.67 123.16 121.52
29-1-1 111.91 112.01 112.37 112.43 ---
29-1-2 112.02 112.10 112.42 112.47 ---
30-1-1 104.79 105.18 106.89 106.95 ---
30-1-2 106.04 106.41 107.91 107.95 ---
31-1-1 103.36 103.48 105.17 105.24 ---
31-1-2 103.36 103.42 105.39 105.43 ---
36-1-1 123.46 122.52 126.55 126.54 124.86
36-2-1 122.50 122.48 125.68 125.24 123.75
36-3-1 121.91 122.02 125.84 125.50 124.06
37-1-1 123.38 123.39 127.43 127.34 124.86
37-2-1 121.50 121.51 125.07 124.79 122.58
37-3-1 123.40 123.50 126.98 126.89 124.34
38-1-1 120.65 120.60 123.68 122.98 121.46
39-1-1 120.51 120.47 124.59 124.11 122.41
39-2-1 120.63 120.60 123.74 123.19 121.55
40-1-1 117.99 118.01 114.18 119.24 118.41
60158830_App A3-2010-Aug25_Groundwater Elevations 2009-2010 - 2010 Jun23.xls:Level Page 1 of 3

2009 Nov 23 2010 Jan 14

2009 Dec 03 2010 Jan 15
41-1-1 147.33 147.42 147.97 147.96 ---
42-1-1 137.11 137.21 137.80 137.86 ---
43-1-1 156.18 156.05 159.00 158.98 157.99
44-1-1 159.30 159.44 161.18 161.17 ---
46-2-1 160.30 160.56 161.06 161.09 160.55
46-3-1 155.01 155.11 154.78 155.89 155.54
46-4-1 144.70 --- 143.96 145.46 146.07
47-1-1 155.30 149.16 155.17 150.02 151.22
47-2-1 146.28 152.25 146.16 152.59 152.63
48-1-1 157.07 157.05 157.29 157.35 156.85
48-2-1 169.56 148.89 144.02 150.07 151.38
50-1-1 112.19 112.24 117.71 118.74 ---
51-1-1 108.71 108.81 110.35 110.53 ---
51-2-1 108.87 108.96 111.00 111.01 ---
51-3-1 108.89 108.99 111.26 111.40 ---
52-1-1 117.52 117.54 118.06 118.11 117.85
52-2-0 117.25 117.22 118.01 118.17 117.67
52-3-0 114.40 114.12 117.67 117.50 115.01
53-1-1 121.12 121.18 123.92 123.56 122.02
54-1-1 147.35 146.99 151.15 150.96 ---
54-2-1 147.11 146.79 150.91 150.80 ---
54-3-1 147.39 147.07 150.99 150.86 ---
55-1-1 140.90 140.86 144.14 144.10 ---
56-1-1 143.19 144.07 145.90 146.08 ---
57-1-1 125.18 124.89 130.14 130.35 ---
58-1-0 128.98 128.89 --- 130.50 130.04
60-1-1 141.12 141.18 141.85 141.81 ---
60-2-1 141.19 141.26 142.05 141.99 ---
60-3-1 140.85 141.17 141.64 141.57 ---
61-1-1 183.15 183.29 187.06 186.55 ---
62-1-1 170.07 169.58 179.29 179.36 ---
62-2-1 170.06 169.58 179.28 179.35 ---
63-1-1 188.95 188.85 193.21 192.90 ---
63-2-1 190.57 190.57 194.44 194.10 ---
71-1-1 140.57 140.54 131.94 142.15 ---
71-2-1 140.66 140.66 132.04 142.24 ---
71-3-1 140.69 140.68 142.16 142.26 ---
72-1-1 140.87 140.99 141.63 141.59 ---
72-2-1 140.93 141.05 141.96 141.93 ---
72-3-1 140.99 141.10 141.97 141.94 ---
73-1-1 132.05 132.31 135.05 134.99 ---
73-2-1 132.05 132.32 135.04 134.97 ---
73-3-1 131.65 132.17 133.18 133.15 ---
74-1-1 155.73 155.75 155.59 155.73 153.69
74-2-1 153.79 153.55 153.24 153.64 153.51
75-1-1 125.45 125.28 125.70 126.77 126.45

2009 Nov 23 2010 Jan 14

2009 Dec 03 2010 Jan 15
76-1-1 155.88 155.58 159.06 159.74 158.38
76-2-1 158.95 158.59 163.50 163.55 161.48
76-3-1 161.00 160.67 166.15 165.78 163.58
77-1-1 152.69 153.27 155.66 155.66 155.27
77-2-1 151.78 152.29 155.32 155.20 154.18
78-1-1 129.92 130.11 134.40 134.35 132.62
78-2-1 130.63 131.13 138.43 138.38 135.70
79-1-1 168.67 168.33 175.25 175.46 172.44
79-2-1 168.66 168.32 175.18 175.37 172.44
81-1-0 119.20 119.25 121.11 120.81 ---
82-1-1 133.32 133.75 133.24 133.35 133.02
83-1-1 126.44 135.14 127.10 127.11 126.66
84-2-1 --- --- (143.82) --- ---
85-1-1 145.51 145.62 147.14 146.02 150.07
LG-01-D 154.92 155.03 155.06 155.12 155.15
LG-02-D 147.16 (147.17) (145.17) 148.90 150.04
LG-03-D --- (147.47) (148.26) (148.47) 151.52
LG-04-D 157.45 157.36 157.41 157.60 157.46
LG-08-D 143.24 142.94 146.65 148.23 146.65
LG-11-S 154.49 154.50 154.50 154.51 154.52
LG-15-D 148.76 148.58 148.80 150.35 151.49
LG-16-D 150.35 150.26 150.55 151.59 152.58
LG-17-D 150.02 149.78 149.60 150.91 152.12
LG-18-D 153.24 153.02 152.48 153.01 153.20
LG-19-D 153.38 153.27 152.96 153.25 153.21
LG-20-D 148.53 148.36 --- 148.46 148.22
LG-21-D 142.76 142.73 142.23 142.62 142.64
LG-26-D 145.61 145.56 146.06 146.42 145.87

Appendix A-4. Surface Water Monitoring Station Details - 2009 / 2010
Location
Northing Easting Conventional Chemistry Additional Parameters

Station Name Status Comments
UTM (NAD83) UTM (NAD83) Routine Boundary Annual Quarry
(3/yr) (3/yr) (1/yr) (stn specfic)
Heal Creek 1/2 way from Northwest Sedimentation Pond to confluence with 42
Sw-N-05 5 376 534.511 465 729.384 A Y Y Y Creek.
Heal Creek 1/3 of the way from the Northeast Diversion Ditch to Durrance
Sw-N-06 5 376 669.740 466 024.406 A Y Creek.
Sw-N-07 5 377 209.377 466 814.510 A Y Durrance Creek just above confluence with Todd Creek.
Intended to replace 07 but water quality differed significantly so station
Sw-N-07A 5 377 096.940 466 527.760 I discontinued.
Sw-N-08 5 377 837.095 467 019.461 A Y Todd Creek just above confluence with Durrance Creek.
Todd Creek below confluence with Durrance Creek. Just below Durrance Road
Sw-N-09 5 377 174.427 466 865.131 A Y bridge.
Heal Creek 2/3 of the way from the Northeast Diversion Ditch to Durrance
Sw-N-14 5 376 795.252 466 228.944 A Y Creek.
Sw-N-15 5 377 109.531 465 982.354 A Y Durrance Creek well above confluence with Heal Creek.
North Wetland at dischage weir into North Wetland Creek, just above
Sw-N-16 5 376 506.808 465 968.695 A Y Y confluence with Heal Creek. .
Heal Creek below confluence with 42 Creek and above confluence with North
Sw-N-17 5 376 566.303 465 903.628 A Y Wetland Creek.
Sw-N-18 5 376 429.846 465 679.709 A Y Y Y Northwest Diversion Ditch at discharge to Northwest Sedimentation Pond.
Northeast Diversion Ditch below Northeast Sedimentation Pond, just above
Sw-N-19 5 376 423.322 466 040.279 A Y Y discharge into North Wetland.
41 Creek at source where pipe dischages from Yardwaste Pad. Near gate on
Sw-N-41s0 5 376 810.000 465 232.000 I access road of Willis Point Road.
Sw-N-41s1 5 376 892.202 465 171.078 A Y Y Y 41 Creek at north side of Willis Point Road, near source.
Sw-N-41s2 5 376 955.866 465 105.992 I 41 Creek at discharge from wetland located part way down creek.
Sw-N-41s3 5 377 102.438 465 021.226 A Y 41 Creek just above discharge to Durrance Lake.
Sw-N-41s4 5 377 189.115 465 130.141 A Y Discharge from Durrance Lake.
Sw-N-41s5 5 377 478.219 464 471.090 I West end of Durrance Lake near where stream enters west end of lake.
Creek / culvert entering Durrance Lake from north side 1/3 of the way from the
Sw-N-41s6 5 377 236.090 464 906.330 A Y west end (Iinlet) to the east end (outlet).
Creek / culvert entering Durrance Lake from north side near west end entrance
Sw-N-41s7 5 377 416.510 464 790.110 I of parking lot.
42 Creek at discharge from 42 Wetland below southeast end of Yardwaste Pad.
Sw-N-42s1 5 376 753.436 465 553.804 A Y Y Y Across Willis Point Road from Well 42.
Sw-N-43 5 376 636.303 465 804.994 A Y 42 Creek just above confluence with Heal Creek.
Sw-N-45 5 376 605.647 465 797.403 A Y Heal Creek just above confluence with 42 Creek.
Sw-N-46 5 376 500.000 465 700.000 I Discharge channel from Northwest Sedimentation Pond.
Sw-N-47 5 376 438.000 465 713.000 A Y Y Runoff from northeast face of Phase 2 into Northwest Sedimentation Pond.
Sw-N-48 5 376 354.000 466 031.000 I Northeast Diversion Ditch at entry into Northeast Sedimentation Pond.
Sw-N-50 5 376 353.361 465 438.872 A Y Y Toutle Valley break out.
Sw-N-51 5 376 323.976 465 444.733 A Y Y NW diversion ditch just above confluence with Toutle Valley break out.
Drainage from High Level Road North Diversion Ditch to Northwest
Sw-N-53 5 376 456.000 465 693.000 A Y Y Sedimentation Pond.
Control station at pond on north side of Willis Point Rd 800 m west of
Sw-N-CSs1 5 377 280.000 464 570.000 I Yardwaste gate. Drains into southeast side of Durrrance Lake.
Control station on south side of Willis Point Rd at ephemeral stream and culvert
Sw-N-CSs2 5 376 933.072 464 896.583 A Y 300 m west of Yardwaste gate.
Sw-S-03 5 375 637.813 466 077.533 A Y Y Kilarney Creek at culvert discharging from underneath Recycle Road.
Sw-S-04 5 375 447.329 466 171.246 A Y Y Kilarney Creek below confluence with Southwest Diversion Ditch.
Sw-S-10 5 375 090.830 466 377.540 A Y Kilarney Lake, near outlet
Sw-S-11 5 375 258.558 466 213.279 A Y Kilarney Creek just above entrance into northwest end of Kilarney Lake.
Sw-S-12 5 375 661.074 465 954.884 A Y Y Kilarney Creek at road bisecting wetland behind bins.
Sw-S-13 5 375 660.000 466 060.000 I Old wash down area septic tank in current yardwaste drop off area.
Sw-S-20 5 375 607.030 465 945.921 A Y Southwest Diversion Ditch at South High Level Road convergence.
Sw-S-21 5 375 419.559 466 150.441 A Y Southwest Diversion Ditch just above confluence with Kilarney Creek.
Sw-S-22 5 375 307.180 466 327.650 I Stream entering northeast end of Kilarney Lake.
Sw-S-23 5 375 469.346 466 151.441 A Y Kilarney Creek just above confluence with Southwest Diversion Ditch.
Kilarney Creek just above confluence with Bike Trail Kiosk Creek and below
Sw-S-24 5 375 553.049 466 179.487 A Y confluence with Southeast Storm Drain.
Sw-S-25 5 375 574.866 466 158.314 A Y Kilarney Creek just above confluence with Southeast Storm Drain.
Sw-S-26 5 375 554.010 466 181.970 I Bike Trail Kiosk Creek just above confluence with Kilarney Creek.
Sw-S-27 5 375 591.468 466 163.597 A Y Southeast Storm Drain just above confluence with Kilarney Creek.
Sw-S-28 5 375 626.640 466 172.100 I 07 Creek just above confluence with Southeast Storm Drain.
Southeast Storm Drain above confluence with 07 Creek, where culvert
Sw-S-29 5 375 645.480 466 159.040 I dischages after crossing under East Hydro Road near well site 60.
Southwest Diversion Ditch just above confluence with High Level Road South
Sw-S-30 5 375 651.511 465 914.193 I Diversion Ditch.
Sw-S-31 5 375 887.490 465 662.951 A Y Base of High Level Road South Diversion Ditch, sampled at the grate.
Sw-S-52 5 376 059.905 465 472.066 A Y Creek from Mt. Work before entering culvert draining to South Diversion Ditch.
60158830_App A4 2010-Aug31_Surface Water Station Details 2009-2010.xlsx

Appendix B
Landfill Chemistry Data
 Quarterly Landfill Groundwater Chemistry –

2009/10
Annual Landfill Groundwater Chemistry –
2009/10
 Domestic Well Chemistry – 2009/10
 Quarterly Surface Water Chemistry – North
and South – 2009/10
Annual Surface Water Chemistry – North
and South – 2009/10
 Monthly Leachate Chemistry–Hartland Valve
Chamber – 2009/10
 Quarterly Leachate Chemistry – Trace
Organics - 2009/10
 Monthly Leachate Chemistry –
Phase 2 Cleanout – 2009/10
 Monthly Leachate Chemistry – North Purge
Well – 2009/10
 Monthly Leachate Chemistry –
Controlled Waste Ditch – 2009/10
 Monthly Leachate Chemistry – Markham
Valve Chamber – 2009/10

Appendix B-1. Quarterly Landfill Groundwater Chemistry - 2009-2010
Method detection limit 1. 0.001 0.0001 0.005 0.005 0.02 0.5 0.5 0.1
Gw-04-2-1 22.70 2009 Jul 28 330. 0.083 0.0015 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 26. 14. 8.2
2009 Sep 28 330. 0.007 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 24. 15. 8.1
2009 Nov 25 326. < 0.005 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 25. 15. 8.
2010 Feb 17 333. 0.016 0.004 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 29. 16. 8.1
Gw-04-3-1 15.90 2009 Jul 28 530. 0.005 0.0006 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 42. 32. 8.
2009 Sep 23 511. 0.007 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 39. 31. 8.
2009 Nov 25 536. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 37.5 34.5 7.9
2010 Feb 17 542. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 41. 42. 8.2
Gw-04-4-1 7.20 2009 Sep 23 526. 0.012 0.046 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 41. 62. 7.5
2009 Nov 25 402. 0.012 0.085 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.88 48. 26. 7.3
2010 Feb 17 285. 0.008 0.07 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 25. 20. 7.8
Gw-07-1-0 36.58 2009 Oct 07 1110. a 0.21 1.95 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 76. 140. 8.1
2010 Feb 18 986. a 0.246 1.84 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 74. 110. 8.
Gw-16-1-1 43.00 2009 Sep 30 345. 0.007 0.002 0.016 0.006 0.09 23. 4.7 7.7
2010 Feb 19 311. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.013 < 0.005 0.23 29.5 3.6 7.7
Gw-16-1-2 34.00 2009 Sep 30 373. 0.16 0.125 a 1.54 < 0.005 0.04 26. 4.4 7.8
2010 Feb 19 341. 0.011 0.002 0.049 < 0.005 0.39 36. 5.4 7.6
Gw-16-2-1 24.50 2009 Sep 30 396. 0.01 0.004 0.184 0.017 0.62 30. 4.4 8.1
2010 Feb 19 329. 0.01 0.011 0.446 0.015 0.24 22. 4.6 7.9
Gw-16-2-2 16.50 2010 Feb 19 223. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.47 30. 2.4 7.3
Gw-17-1-1 52.00 2009 Sep 24 520. 0.149 0.031 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 42. 6.6 7.9
2010 Feb 23 361. 0.021 0.002 0.006 < 0.005 0.22 31. 5.7 7.6
Gw-17-1-2 41.50 2009 Sep 24 437. 0.037 0.026 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 37. 7. 8.2
Very brown purge water at 5L, then light brown/grey. No odour.
Returned to very brown at 50L until dry. Filtered clear and did not
2010 Feb 23 445. 0.071 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 42. 6.2 7.5 clog.
Gw-17-1-3 17.70 2009 Sep 24 470. 0.353 a 0.221 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 42. 7. 8.2
2010 Feb 23 414. 0.026 0.0125 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.47 45.5 6. 7.3
Gw-18-1-1 59.67 2009 Jul 29 400. < 0.005 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 21. 4.2 7.9
2009 Sep 28 407. < 0.005 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 19. 4.4 8.
2009 Nov 27 409. < 0.005 0.011 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 19. 4. 8.
2010 Feb 18 416. < 0.005 0.024 < 0.005 0.014 < 0.02 21. 4.1 8.2
Gw-18-2-1 32.00 2009 Jul 16 280. 0.024 0.004 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 13. 4.7 7.6
2009 Sep 28 386. 0.012 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 18. 4.4 8.
2009 Nov 27 381. 0.012 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 18. 4. 8.
2010 Feb 18 297. 0.027 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 14. 4. 8.1
Gw-18-2-2 16.00 2009 Jul 16 365. < 0.005 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 17. 4.3 7.9
2009 Sep 28 386. 0.009 0.0007 0.049 < 0.005 0.1 21. 4.4 7.8
2009 Nov 27 365. 0.008 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 16. 4. 7.9
2010 Feb 18 364. 0.016 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 18. 4.2 8.1
Gw-19-1-1 37.50 2009 Sep 28 403. 0.116 1.63 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 49. 12. 7.8
2010 Feb 17 409. 0.15 1.2 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 62. 9.8 8.2
Gw-19-1-2 28.00 2009 Sep 28 364. 0.077 0.285 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 6.1 8.
2010 Feb 17 398. 0.78 a 0.788 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 45. 7.6 8.1
Gw-19-2-1 17.00 2009 Sep 28 510. 0.023 0.3 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 83. 10. 7.4
2010 Feb 17 424. 0.085 0.089 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 47. 12. 8.3
Gw-19-2-2 9.00 2009 Sep 28 415. 0.086 0.065 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 57. 11. 8.
2010 Feb 17 429. 0.009 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 54. 13. 8.3
. 60158830_Ap B1a 2010-Sept30 Groundwater Chemistry - Raw Data.xls:Data Page 1 of 7

Gw-20-1-1 33.00 2009 Jul 21 300. 0.028 0.027 0.076 0.006 0.04 15. 12. 8.1
2009 Oct 02 382. 0.009 0.039 0.572 0.025 < 0.02 17. 16. 8.2
2009 Dec 03 211. 0.009 0.009 0.009 < 0.005 0.04 12. 6.6 8.
2010 Feb 24 186. 0.023 0.004 0.009 < 0.005 < 0.02 13. 5. 8.2
Gw-20-1-2 20.80 2009 Jul 21 370. 0.039 0.065 a 0.56 < 0.005 < 0.02 17. 15. 8.1
2009 Oct 02 436. 0.069 0.112 a 1.23 < 0.005 < 0.02 18. 20. 8.1
2009 Dec 03 347. 0.034 0.057 a 0.549 < 0.005 < 0.02 17. 14. 8.
Purge water very turbid (grey) with fine sands/clay at bottome of
2010 Feb 24 332. 0.031 0.046 0.183 < 0.005 < 0.02 16. 12. 8. bucket. Filtered clear and did not clog.
Gw-21-1-1 16.00 2009 Jul 21 170. 0.007 0.006 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.02 11. 3.3 8.1
2009 Oct 02 171. 0.006 0.014 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.02 10. 3.3 8.1
2009 Dec 03 172. < 0.005 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 11. 3. 8.2
2010 Feb 24 173. 0.006 0.007 0.018 < 0.005 < 0.02 11. 2.9 8.
Gw-21-1-2 8.60 2009 Jul 21 600. 1.58 a 2.445 a 7. b < 0.005 < 0.02 23. 45. 7.6
2009 Oct 02 717. a 1.78 a 2.85 a 0.269 < 0.005 < 0.02 22. 71. 7.6 Water very turbid. Filtered Clear (no clogging - used one filter)
2009 Dec 03 467. 1.14 a 1.83 a 6.25 b < 0.005 < 0.02 23. 23. 7.3
2010 Feb 24 504. 1.36 a 1.9 a 6.28 b < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 27. 7.2
Gw-21-2-1 4.95 2009 Jul 21 630. 1.5 a 2.66 a 6.7 b < 0.005 0.02 23. 53. 7.5
2009 Oct 02 717. a 1.55 a 2.91 a 8.23 b < 0.005 < 0.02 21. 75. 7.7
2009 Dec 03 455. 0.759 a 1.96 a 6.52 b < 0.005 0.04 23. 23. 7.3
Purge water orange with rusty precipitate. Filtered clear and did not
2010 Feb 24 519. 0.951 a 2.14 a 5.14 b < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 32. 7.3 clog.
Gw-25-1-1 24.50 2009 Oct 07 490. 0.035 0.09 a 0.021 < 0.005 0.07 77. 6. 8.1 Only slightly turbid, but very difficult to filter
2010 Feb 26 474. 0.116 0.091 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 60. 6.5 8.1
Gw-25-1-2 6.50 2009 Oct 07 352. 0.073 0.136 a 0.353 < 0.005 < 0.02 51. 6.1 8.
2010 Feb 26 309. 0.006 0.115 a 0.07 < 0.005 0.19 32. 2.6 7.9
Gw-27-1-1 24.50 2009 Jul 23 170. < 0.005 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 9.1 3.2 8.2
2009 Oct 07 169. 0.014 0.016 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 9.6 3.4 8.1
2009 Dec 01 169. < 0.005 0.014 0.006 < 0.005 < 0.02 10. 2.8 8.2
2010 Feb 24 170. 0.006 0.013 0.006 < 0.005 < 0.02 10. 3. 8.
Gw-27-1-2 3.50 2009 Jul 28 410. 0.003 0.0003 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 60. 3.8 8. Not sampled on 22July - ran out of purge water
2009 Oct 07 494. 0.009 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 79. 4.4 8.1 Very poor recharge, just enough to collect sample
2009 Dec 01 250. < 0.005 0.004 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.83 97. 2.9 7.6
2010 Feb 24 423. 0.019 0.006 0.013 < 0.005 0.54 73. 3.5 7.4
Gw-29-1-1 14.52 2009 Jul 29 510. 0.075 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 39. 61. 7.8
2009 Oct 09 456. 0.009 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 40. 40. 7.5
2009 Dec 04 467. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.025 < 0.005 0.15 29. 57. 7.4
2010 Mar 02 412. 0.006 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 25. 51. 7.7
Gw-29-1-2 7.43 2009 Jul 29 460. 0.265 0.0315 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 40. 48.5 7.7
2009 Oct 09 426. 0.203 0.022 0.041 < 0.005 0.07 41. 31. 7.3
2009 Dec 04 407. 0.297 0.014 0.012 < 0.005 0.16 28. 50. 7.2
2010 Mar 02 507. 0.048 0.045 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.1 22. 62. 7.6
Gw-30-1-1 15.74 2009 Aug 12 658. 0.01 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 26. 81. 8.
2009 Oct 09 661. 0.009 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 27. 79. 7.9
2009 Dec 04 665. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 32. 84. 7.9
2010 Mar 02 676. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 29. 90. 8.1
Gw-30-1-2 5.77 2009 Aug 12 831. a 0.006 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.2 23. 160. 7.6
2009 Oct 09 817. a 0.009 0.0006 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.15 26. 130. 8.

2009 Dec 04 291. 0.014 < 0.001 0.007 < 0.005 0.15 15. 31. 7.3
2010 Mar 02 1030. a 0.007 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.44 9.1 220. 6.9
Gw-31-1-1 15.78 2009 Jul 29 320. 0.066 0.043 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.02 11. 6.3 8.1
2009 Oct 09 340. 0.033 0.033 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 10. 7.1 7.7
2009 Dec 04 320. < 0.005 0.0115 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 11. 6.9 7.8
2010 Mar 02 275. < 0.005 0.009 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.15 10. 6.3 7.8
Gw-31-1-2 5.87 2009 Jul 29 310. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 11. 6.4 7.9
2009 Oct 09 334. 0.006 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 11. 9.3 7.9
2009 Dec 04 211. 0.018 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.15 9.3 7.2 7.4
2010 Mar 02 268. 0.024 < 0.001 0.006 < 0.005 0.06 9.5 6.6 7.5
Gw-36-2-1 42.37 2009 Jul 23 110. 0.011 0.004 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 4.3 2.8 9.1 a
2009 Oct 06 105. 0.014 0.003 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 3.7 2.4 9. a
2009 Dec 01 104. 0.009 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 4.2 2.6 9.1 a
2010 Feb 26 116. 0.013 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 8.1 2.5 8.5
Gw-36-3-1 18.00 2009 Jul 23 1400. a 0.014 0.005 0.09 < 0.005 0.84 120. 33. 7.6
2009 Oct 06 1325. a 0.024 0.0113 0.018 0.008 1.46 130. 30.5 7.7
2009 Dec 01 1270. a 0.042 0.119 a 0.217 < 0.005 0.4 140. 27. 7.3
2010 Feb 26 1290. a 0.01 0.007 0.128 0.007 0.84 150. 24. 7.9
Gw-37-2-1 43.50 2009 Jul 23 120. 0.022 < 0.001 < 0.005 0.006 0.02 10. 3.7 9.6 a
2009 Oct 06 114. 0.024 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12. 4.2 9.5 a
2009 Dec 01 376. 0.01 < 0.001 0.024 < 0.005 0.02 11. 4.4 9.7 a
2010 Feb 26 115. 0.02 < 0.001 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 12. 3.8 9.1 a
Gw-37-3-1 14.80 2009 Jul 23 520. 1.56 a 0.468 a 0.73 < 0.005 < 0.02 65. 9.5 7.8
2009 Oct 06 507. 0.035 0.057 a 0.764 0.006 < 0.02 70. 9.5 7.5
2009 Dec 01 559. 1.65 a 0.4325 a 0.817 < 0.005 < 0.02 56.5 8.2 7.6
2010 Feb 26 510. 0.652 a 0.514 a 0.7 0.005 0.04 56. 7.8 8.
Gw-38-1-1 18.29 2009 Jul 23 660. 0.013 0.026 0.84 < 0.005 0.39 53. 11. 8.
2009 Oct 06 655. 1.68 a 0.464 a 0.375 0.005 0.48 48. 11. 7.8
2009 Dec 01 614. 0.05 0.018 0.344 0.01 0.4 48. 10. 7.8
2010 Feb 26 628. 0.029 0.01 0.015 0.006 0.41 50. 11. 8.1
Gw-39-1-1 21.44 2009 Jul 22 260. 0.018 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 23. 2.9 8.1
2009 Sep 30 259. 0.007 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 25. 2.8 8.1
2009 Dec 01 250. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 21. 2.7 8.
2010 Feb 18 258. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 24. 2.6 8.2
Gw-39-2-1 37.19 2009 Jul 22 330. 0.006 0.0295 0.11 < 0.005 0.04 21. 4.3 8.
2009 Sep 30 335. 0.107 0.067 a 0.719 < 0.005 < 0.02 15. 1.1 8.
2009 Dec 01 376. 0.077 0.194 a 0.439 < 0.005 < 0.02 26. 4.9 7.9
2010 Feb 18 398. 0.035 0.07 a 0.212 < 0.005 0.04 29. 5.1 8.2
Gw-40-1-1 15.24 2009 Jul 23 1100. a 0.025 1.5 a 7.1 b 0.217 7.3 83. 47. 7.8
2009 Sep 30 1020. a 0.013 1.57 a 7.01 b 0.118 2.6 78. 39. 8.
2009 Dec 01 1040. a 0.01 1.365 a 6.965 b 0.287 4.65 85. 46.5 7.8
2010 Feb 19 800. a 0.012 0.837 a 5.39 b 0.258 2.67 62. 31. 7.6
Gw-41-1-1 9.07 2009 Jul 17 730. a 0.051 2.08 a 0.029 < 0.005 0.63 92. 5. 7.6
2009 Oct 09 730. a 0.126 1.75 a 0.024 < 0.005 0.09 200. 5.3 7.9
2009 Dec 04 735. a 0.145 2.03 a 0.498 < 0.005 0.43 220. 4.8 7.6
2010 Mar 02 718. a 0.033 1.68 a 0.013 < 0.005 0.2 190. 4.8 7.9
Gw-42-1-1 8.84 2009 Jul 17 610. 0.749 a 0.166 a 0.076 < 0.005 < 0.02 47. 29. 7.5

2009 Oct 09 666. 0.843 a 0.178 a 0.079 < 0.005 < 0.02 59. 32. 7.7
2009 Dec 04 585. 0.928 a 0.171 a 0.073 < 0.005 < 0.02 41. 29. 7.4
2010 Mar 02 506. 0.662 a 0.1335 a 0.059 < 0.005 < 0.02 35. 19. 7.6
Gw-43-1-1 21.34 2009 Jul 17 790. a 0.011 0.016 0.095 < 0.005 0.06 41. 41. 7.8
2009 Oct 09 783. a 0.046 0.028 0.22 < 0.005 0.03 41. 37. 8.
2009 Dec 08 767. a 0.015 0.012 0.112 < 0.005 0.08 42. 35. 7.7
2010 Feb 25 765. a 0.007 0.011 0.127 < 0.005 0.1 42. 34. 7.9
Gw-50-1-1 16.90 2009 Jul 21 400. 0.016 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 25. 5.6 8.
2009 Oct 02 396. 0.005 0.0027 0.028 < 0.005 0.07 24. 5.8 8.1
2009 Nov 27 461. 0.246 0.171 a 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.02 33. 5.1 8.
2010 Feb 19 388. 0.013 0.002 0.008 < 0.005 0.03 25. 5.9 8.1
Gw-51-1-1 7.77 2009 Sep 30 351. 0.006 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.26 27.5 11.5 7.8
2010 Feb 24 261. 0.012 0.014 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.41 12. 4.7 7.4
Gw-51-2-1 13.41 2009 Sep 30 404. 0.006 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 29. 18. 8.1
2010 Feb 24 404. 0.007 < 0.001 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.02 28. 19. 8.
Gw-51-3-1 20.12 2009 Sep 30 367. 0.018 0.004 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 14. 30. 8.1
2010 Feb 24 312. 0.015 < 0.001 0.007 0.006 0.03 15. 17. 8.1
Gw-52-1-1 29.72 2009 Jul 15 2600. a 0.776 a 0.442 a 23.3 a < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 290. a 7.7
2009 Oct 05 2600. a 0.8 a 0.47 a 24.1 a < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 270. a 7.6
2009 Dec 02 2460. a 0.798 a 0.482 a 22.4 a < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 270. a 7.4
2010 Feb 25 2450. a 0.796 a 0.426 a 20. a < 0.005 0.12 < 0.5 250. 7.6
Gw-53-1-1 19.96 2009 Jul 22 460. 0.164 0.17 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 35. 5.6 7.8
2009 Sep 30 474. 0.199 0.173 a < 0.005 0.009 < 0.02 36. 5.9 8.2
2009 Nov 27 395. 0.007 < 0.001 0.016 < 0.005 0.05 23. 5.2 8.2
2010 Feb 19 461. 0.171 0.178 a 0.034 < 0.005 < 0.02 35. 6.9 7.9
Gw-54-1-1 49.72 2009 Jul 17 440. 0.007 0.042 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 27. 8.6 7.7
2009 Sep 24 460. 0.01 0.045 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 29. 9.4 7.8
2009 Nov 27 454. 0.007 0.038 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 27. 8.8 7.9
2010 Feb 23 418. 0.01 0.014 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 25. 9.2 7.4
Gw-54-2-1 39.14 2009 Jul 17 510. 0.062 0.035 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 26. 8.5 8.
2009 Sep 24 524. 0.01 0.0258 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 28. 8.7 8.
2009 Nov 27 521. 0.008 0.031 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 28. 8.7 8.1
2010 Feb 23 499. 0.012 0.014 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 27. 8.9 7.9
Gw-54-3-1 19.61 2009 Jul 17 430. 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 32. 7.6 7.8
2009 Sep 24 431. 0.006 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 37. 8.1 8.
2009 Nov 27 429. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 34. 7.5 8.1
2010 Feb 23 430. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 37. 8.6 7.9
Gw-55-1-1 13.11 2009 Oct 09 756. a 0.022 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.13 180. 25. 7.9
2010 Mar 02 827. a < 0.005 0.014 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.64 230. 23. 7.9
Gw-56-1-1 17.38 2009 Oct 09 454. 0.022 0.0125 0.006 0.005 < 0.02 52. 11.5 7.9
2010 Mar 02 481. 0.012 0.015 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.02 67. 10. 8.1
Gw-57-1-1 13.56 2009 Oct 09 460. 0.014 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 16. 29. 8.
2010 Mar 02 458. < 0.005 0.008 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.02 20. 29. 8.1
Gw-58-1-0 19.20 2009 Jul 31 5300. a 0.739 a 6.49 a 51.65 a 0.146 9. 84.5 840. a 7.2 Yellow, amber colour and slightly foamy
2009 Sep 30 5300. a 0.539 a 6.81 a 55.8 a 0.166 6. 79. 770. a 7.8
2009 Dec 08 5290. a 0.502 a 6.9 a 57.5 a 0.143 3.02 73. 800. a 7.3
2010 Feb 19 5210. a 0.572 a 6.38 a 61.2 a 0.148 3.5 75. 800. a 7.5

Gw-60-1-1 22.40 2009 Sep 22 812. a 0.018 0.057 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 72. 48. 7.9
2010 Feb 16 850. a 0.005 0.016 0.046 < 0.005 0.04 69. 64. 7.8
Gw-60-2-1 15.10 2009 Sep 22 745. a 0.1 0.397 a 0.011 < 0.005 < 0.02 80. 71. 7.9
2010 Feb 16 843. a 0.253 0.47 a 0.062 < 0.005 < 0.02 68. 100. 7.9
Gw-60-3-1 6.90 2009 Sep 22 1620. a < 0.005 1.17 a 0.031 < 0.005 1.1 60. 260. a 7.7
2010 Feb 16 831. a < 0.005 0.577 a 0.042 < 0.005 1.49 60. 100. 7.8
Gw-62-1-1 23.70 2009 Oct 09 297. 0.008 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 13. 5.3 8.
2010 Feb 25 295. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.014 < 0.005 0.08 12. 4.1 7.6
Footvalve & tube clogged with clay (light brown like bentonite).
Replaced footvalve &removed 6cm of tubing. Water very slightly
Gw-62-2-1 18.90 2009 Oct 09 300. 0.013 0.1096 a 0.014 < 0.005 0.08 12. 4.9 8. light grey-brown. Sample filtered with no problem.
2010 Feb 25 324. 0.016 0.015 0.016 < 0.005 0.04 12. 4.5 7.3
Gw-63-1-1 31.80 2009 Oct 09 315. 0.077 0.109 a < 0.005 0.007 < 0.02 9.4 5.2 8.2
2010 Feb 25 322. 0.1 0.101 a 0.015 < 0.005 < 0.02 8.7 4.5 7.9
Gw-63-2-1 13.50 2009 Oct 09 343. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 12. 5.6 8.1
2010 Feb 25 330. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.011 < 0.005 < 0.02 13.5 5. 8.2
Gw-71-1-1 30.48 2009 Jul 31 440. 0.016 0.075 a 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.02 44. 8.1 7.9
2009 Sep 22 416. 0.019 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 28. 9. 8.
2009 Nov 27 453. 0.012 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 55. 8.7 7.9
2010 Feb 16 478. 0.012 0.0245 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.02 65.5 7.8 8.
Gw-71-2-1 20.06 2009 Jul 31 460. 0.064 0.052 a 0.156 < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 11. 7.9
2009 Sep 22 467. 0.035 0.047 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 10. 7.9
2009 Nov 27 461. 0.011 0.015 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 21. 10. 7.8
2010 Feb 16 385. 0.015 0.0125 0.021 < 0.005 0.16 16.9 9.5 7.8
Gw-71-3-1 10.05 2009 Jul 31 380. 0.007 < 0.001 0.114 < 0.005 1.41 13. 10. 7.5
2009 Sep 22 413. 0.002 0.0022 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.41 12. 9.3 7.9
2009 Nov 27 378. 0.006 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.85 12. 12. 7.3
Gw-72-1-1 30.48 2009 Jul 29 660. 0.343 0.194 a 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.02 46. 60. 8.2
2009 Sep 28 664. 0.387 a 0.183 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 43. 61. 8.1
2009 Nov 26 652. 0.387 a 0.197 a 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.02 40. 64. 8.
2010 Feb 16 664. 0.399 a 0.184 a 0.493 0.014 0.06 37. 56. 8.
Gw-72-2-1 20.12 2009 Jul 29 820. a 0.011 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 90. 86. 8.1
2009 Sep 28 825. a 0.01 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 40. 72. 8.1
2009 Nov 26 826. a 0.006 0.002 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 70. 93. 7.8
2010 Feb 16 828. a 0.023 < 0.001 0.008 < 0.005 0.03 85. 89. 8.1
Gw-72-3-1 10.36 2009 Jul 29 800. a 0.007 0.08 a 0.014 < 0.005 < 0.02 42. 75. 8.1
2009 Sep 28 781. a 0.015 0.0671 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 85. 87. 7.9
2009 Nov 26 807. a 0.007 0.036 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 52. 81. 7.7
2010 Feb 16 785. a 0.011 0.026 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.02 43. 77. 7.9
Gw-73-1-1 30.66 2009 Jul 28 505. 0.004 0.0105 0.007 < 0.005 0.03 48. 25. 8.
2009 Sep 23 568. 0.007 0.016 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 56. 33. 7.6
2009 Nov 26 513. < 0.005 0.021 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 62. 26. 7.9
2010 Feb 17 548. < 0.005 0.083 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 70. 25. 8.3
Gw-73-2-1 20.12 2009 Jul 28 550. 0.14 0.116 a 0.009 < 0.005 < 0.02 58. 28. 7.9
2009 Sep 23 611. 0.152 0.124 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 31. 59. 7.3
2009 Nov 26 537. 0.155 0.246 a 0.009 < 0.005 < 0.02 39. 44. 7.6
2010 Feb 17 501. 0.156 0.211 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 34. 30. 8.1
Gw-73-3-1 10.06 2009 Jul 28 490. 0.008 0.0009 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 31. 41. 7.9

2009 Sep 23 550. 0.004 0.0007 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 29. 71. 7.8
2009 Nov 26 561. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 36. 62. 7.5
2010 Feb 17 507. 0.01 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 33. 48. 8.1
Gw-76-1-1 53.95 2009 Jul 16 390. 0.047 0.085 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 83. 3.4 8.1 Turbid (grey) purge water but no trouble sampling through the filter
2009 Sep 28 432. 0.058 0.162 a 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 100. 3.4 8.
2009 Nov 25 418. 0.02 0.126 a 0.008 < 0.005 0.02 91. 3.7 8.
2010 Feb 18 378. < 0.005 0.049 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 77. 3.3 8.2
Gw-76-2-1 43.28 2009 Jul 16 520. 0.41 a 0.217 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 120. 2.8 8.1
2009 Sep 28 778. a 0.057 0.122 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 180. 3.2 8.1 Very turbid, milky colour. Only one filter used. Filtered clear
2009 Nov 25 535. 0.179 0.376 a 0.006 < 0.005 < 0.02 130. 3. 8.
Very turbid (dark grey) at end of purge volume. 3L extra purged to
2010 Feb 18 404. 0.086 0.084 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 78. 2.7 8.2 remove turbidity. Filtered clear and filter did not clog.
Gw-76-3-1 28.96 2009 Jul 16 420. 0.046 0.065 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 51. 2.7 8.1
2009 Sep 28 428. 0.042 0.046 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 52. 2.8 8.1 Slightly turbid. Filtered clear.
2009 Nov 25 414. 0.022 0.043 0.047 < 0.005 < 0.02 53. 2.7 7.9
2010 Feb 18 429. 0.03 0.047 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 36. 2.8 8.2
Gw-77-1-1 37.49 2009 Jul 23 360. 0.033 0.044 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 18. 4.7 8.2
2009 Oct 07 356. 0.221 0.065 a 0.035 < 0.005 < 0.02 18. 4.7 8.1
2009 Dec 08 356. 0.081 0.05 0.206 < 0.005 < 0.02 19. 4.7 8.
2010 Feb 23 359. 0.158 0.066 a 0.083 < 0.005 0.03 20. 4.7 8. Water murky. Sulphur smell with lizard bits.
Gw-77-2-1 19.03 2009 Jul 23 410. 0.071 0.112 a 0.016 < 0.005 < 0.02 29. 5.2 8.1 Turbid purge water but sample passed easily through filter
2009 Oct 07 407. 0.019 0.057 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 31. 5.8 8.
2009 Dec 08 403. 0.011 0.0325 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.02 29. 5.4 8.
2010 Feb 23 400. 0.007 0.049 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 24. 5.3 8.
Gw-78-1-1 32.48 2009 Jul 22 580. 0.006 0.027 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 58. 4.5 8.
2009 Oct 07 544. 0.007 0.044 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 55. 4.6 8.1
2009 Dec 08 589. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.027 < 0.005 < 0.02 51. 4.4 7.8
2010 Feb 23 566. 0.009 0.001 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.02 49. 4.8 7.7
Unable to collect sample 22 or 28July. Just enough recharge for
Gw-78-2-1 13.45 2009 Aug 12 574. 0.013 < 0.001 0.016 < 0.005 1.11 68. 4.3 7.9 12Aug, but well went dry during sampling.
Not enough pressure to sample through manifold. Purged into jug
2009 Oct 07 642. 0.04 0.004 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.47 88. 2.7 7.9 and used plunger to sample.
2009 Dec 08 386. 0.031 0.001 0.063 < 0.005 0.94 38. 2.2 7.6
2010 Feb 23 348. 0.035 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.6 49. 2.7 7.5
Gw-79-1-1 38.10 2009 Jul 23 390. 0.03 0.038 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.19 15. 5.2 8.1
2009 Oct 09 386. 0.025 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 16. 5.9 8.1
2009 Dec 08 377. 0.013 0.048 0.009 0.011 0.15 37. 26. 7.8
2010 Feb 25 387. 0.051 0.056 a 0.058 < 0.005 0.21 16. 5.3 7.8
Gw-79-2-1 28.96 2009 Jul 23 400. 0.342 0.171 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.15 18. 5.2 8.
2009 Oct 09 397. 0.395 a 0.182 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 20. 5.5 8. Purge water moderately turbid (dark grey colour). Filtered easily.
2009 Dec 08 384. 0.219 0.1 a 0.013 0.005 0.09 17. 5.4 7.9
2010 Feb 25 388. 0.39 a 0.122 a 0.016 < 0.005 < 0.02 16. 5.2 7.9
Gw-85-1-1 9.14 2009 Sep 22 1005. a 0.005 1.43 a 3.095 b < 0.005 4.7 66. 170. 7.8 Turbid, muddy brown-yellow colour Filtered clear
2010 Feb 16 468. 0.009 0.726 a 1.44 < 0.005 3.14 37. 40. 7.5
Gw-BLANK --- 2009 Jul 15 1. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 1.1 < 0.5 6.6 Freshly deinonised water.
Transported deionised water before filtering through clean
2009 Jul 15 1. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 1.7 < 0.5 6. c apparatus.
2009 Jul 15 1. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 < 0.5 5.8 c Transported deionised water after filtering through clean apparatus.

Transported deionised water before filtering through used and
2009 Jul 15 2. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 < 0.5 6.7 rinsed apparatus.
Transported deionised water after filtering through used and rinsed
2009 Jul 15 4. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.014 < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 0.5 6.6 apparatus.
2009 Oct 05 1. < 0.001 < 0.0001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 1. < 0.5 6.1 c
2009 Oct 05 1. < 0.001 < 0.0001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 1.1 < 0.5 5. c
2009 Oct 05 1. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.037 < 0.005 < 0.02 1. < 0.5 5.9 c
2009 Oct 05 3. 0.002 0.0005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 1.2 < 0.5 6.5
2009 Dec 02 2. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 < 0.5 6.3 c
2009 Dec 02 < 1. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 < 0.5 5.9 c
2009 Dec 02 < 1. < 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 < 0.5 5.9 c
2009 Dec 02 3. < 0.005 0.001 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 < 0.5 6.3 c
2010 Feb 25 3. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.006 < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 < 0.5 7.2
2010 Feb 25 1. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.012 < 0.005 0.04 < 0.5 < 0.5 6.6
2010 Feb 25 3. < 0.005 0.001 0.011 < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 < 0.5 6.6
2010 Feb 25 2. < 0.005 < 0.001 0.006 < 0.005 < 0.02 < 0.5 < 0.5 6.7
na - Not applicable.
a - Above maximum British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
b - Above average British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
c - Below minimum British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
(1) - British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines (Criteria), 1998 Edition, Updated August 24, 2001. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection.
or A Compendium of Working Water Quality Guidelines for British Columbia, 1998 Edition, Updated August 23, 2001. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection.
The guidelines cited are specific to drinking water, unless otherwise noted.
(2) - Aesthetic objective.

(3) - The ammonia guideline is for protection of aquatic life. It is pH and temperature dependant.
The maximum average value is based on the 30 day average provided in the guidelines. This value is provided for comparison purposes. All reported ammonia data represents discrete samples.

Appendix B-1. Annual Landfill Groundwater Chemistry - 2009/2010
Water Quality Criteria (1) Gw-71-3-1 Gw-03-2-1 Gw-03-2-1 Gw-04-3-1 Gw-73-3-1 Gw-54-2-1 Gw-54-2-1 Gw-18-2-2 Gw-76-2-1 Gw-72-3-1 Gw-58-1-0 Gw-50-1-1 Gw-21-2-1 Gw-BLANK Gw-BLANK Gw-BLANK Gw-52-1-1 Gw-BLANK Gw-36-3-1 Gw-36-3-1 Gw-62-2-1 Gw-62-2-1 Gw-43-1-1 Gw-41-1-1 Gw-30-1-2
State Parameter MDL Units Maximum Average Minimum 2009 Sep 22 2009 Sep 22 2009 Sep 22 2009 Sep 23 2009 Sep 23 2009 Sep 24 2009 Sep 24 2009 Sep 28 2009 Sep 28 2009 Sep 28 2009 Sep 30 2009 Oct 02 2009 Oct 02 2009 Oct 05 2009 Oct 05 2009 Oct 05 2009 Oct 05 2009 Oct 05 2009 Oct 06 2009 Oct 06 2009 Oct 09 2009 Oct 09 2009 Oct 09 2009 Oct 09 2009 Oct 09
Value (2) Value Value SS FR1 FR2 SS SS FR1 FR2 SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS FR1 FR2 FR1 FR2 SS SS SS
CONVENTIONALS
Dissolved Alkalinity - Total 0.5 mg/L 190. 140. 150. 180. 150. 250. 250. 180. 140. 250. 1 600. 180. 240. 2.2 < 0.5 960. 2.6 610. 590. 140. 140. 320. 150. 140.
Dissolved Total Organic Carbon 0.5 mg/L 0.7 3.8 3.7 4.6 1.5 1. 1. 0.7 1.5 3.6 94.2 1. 5. < 0.5 < 0.5 41.7 < 0.5 9.3 9.1 < 0.5 < 0.5 8.4 1.7 1.8
Dissolved Hardness -Total ( as CaCO3 0.5 mg/L 500. 196. 238. 240. 246. 234. 306. 303. 210. 219. 349. 1 690. a 188. 231. < 0.5 < 0.5 743. a < 0.5 780. a 727. a 148. 149. 411. 410. 172.
Dissolved Chloride 0.5 mg/L 600. 150. 9.3 170. b 170. b 31. 71. 8.7 8.6 4.4 3.2 87. 770. a 5.8 75. < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 270. b < 0.5 31. 30. 4.9 4.9 37. 5.3 130.
Dissolved Conductivity 1. µS/cm 700. 413. 990. a 1 020. a 511. 550. 524. 524. 386. 778. a 781. a 5 300. a 396. 717. a 1. 1. 1. 2 600. a 3. 1 340. a 1 310. a 300. 300. 783. a 730. a 817. a
Dissolved Nitrogen - Ammonia 0.005 mg/L 1.89 (7) < 0.005 3.2 a 2.99 a < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.049 < 0.005 < 0.005 55.8 a 0.028 8.23 a < 0.005 < 0.005 0.037 24.1 a < 0.005 0.013 0.022 0.013 0.015 0.22 0.024 < 0.005
Dissolved Nitrogen - Nitrate 0.02 mg/L 200. 40. 1.41 4.7 4.7 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 0.1 < 0.02 < 0.02 6. 0.07 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 1.46 1.46 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.09 0.15
Dissolved Nitrogen - Nitrite 0.005 mg/L 0.6 (9) 0.2 (9) < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.166 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005
Dissolved Nitrogen - NO2 + NO3 0.02 mg/L 1.41 4.7 4.7 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 0.1 < 0.02 < 0.02 6.1 0.07 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 1.46 1.47 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.09 0.15
Dissolved pH 0.1 pH 7.9 7.7 7.8 8. 7.8 8. 8. 7.8 8.1 7.9 7.8 8.1 7.7 6.1 5. 5.9 7.6 6.5 7.6 7.8 8.1 7.8 8. 7.9 8.
Dissolved Sulphate 0.5 mg/L 100. 12. 69. 63. 39. 29. 28. 28. 21. 180. a 85. 79. 24. 21. 1. 1.1 1. < 0.5 1.2 130. a 130. a 12. 12. 41. 200. a 26.
Dissolved Total Organic Carbon 0.5 mg/L 0.7 3.8 3.7 4.6 1.5 1. 1. 0.7 1.5 3.6 94.2 1. 5. < 0.5 < 0.5 41.7 < 0.5 9.3 9.1 < 0.5 < 0.5 8.4 1.7 1.8
METALS (3)
Dissolved Aluminum 0.000 2 mg/L 0.1 0.05 0.002 0.005 2 0.004 9 0.003 1 0.002 8 0.015 7 0.011 2 0.007 2 0.039 8 0.004 9 0.014 0.002 3 0.004 3 0.000 4 0.000 3 0.004 0.000 4 0.005 2 0.002 5 0.017 8 0.013 5 0.003 5 0.000 7 0.006 2
Dissolved Antimony 0.000 02 mg/L 0.02 (6)(9) 0.000 08 0.000 15 0.000 14 0.000 16 0.000 07 0.000 03 < 0.000 02 0.000 05 0.000 27 0.000 09 0.001 4 0.000 31 0.000 06 < 0.000 02 < 0.000 02 < 0.000 1 0.000 03 0.000 12 0.000 11 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000 14 0.000 11 0.000 1
Dissolved Arsenic 0.000 02 mg/L 0.005 0.000 06 0.000 29 0.000 35 0.000 21 0.000 19 0.000 17 0.000 16 0.000 11 0.001 1 0.000 4 0.001 2 0.000 37 0.002 16 < 0.000 02 < 0.000 02 0.000 5 < 0.000 02 0.000 34 0.000 34 0.000 17 0.000 17 0.000 25 0.001 18 0.000 25
Dissolved Barium 0.000 02 mg/L 5. (6) 1. (6) 0.012 7 0.020 8 0.020 6 0.059 8 0.045 8 0.013 5 0.013 5 0.014 0.043 8 0.047 3 0.029 8 0.046 3 0.023 2 < 0.000 02 < 0.000 02 0.139 0.000 04 0.148 0.146 0.009 78 0.010 4 0.013 3 0.007 26 0.019 5
Dissolved Beryllium 0.000 01 mg/L 0.005 3 (6)(4) 0.000 01 0.000 01 0.000 02 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 0.000 01 0.000 09 < 0.000 01 0.000 02 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 05 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01
Dissolved Boron 0 05
0.05 mg/L 12
1.2 0 473
0.473 0 699
0.699 0 711
0.711 0 096
0.096 0 144
0.144 < 0.05
0 05 < 0.05
0 05 < 0.05
0 05 < 0.05
0 05 0 945
0.945 4 37
4.37 a < 0.05
0 05 0 818
0.818 < 0.05
0 05 < 0.05
0 05 39
3.9 a < 0.05
0 05 0 194
0.194 0 198
0.198 0 29
0.29 0 321
0.321 0 563
0.563 < 0.05
0 05 0 239
0.239
Dissolved Cadmium 0.000 005 mg/L 0.1 (5) 0.000 084 0.000 12 0.000 164 0.000 029 0.000 056 0.000 049 0.000 026 0.000 054 0.000 03 0.000 135 0.000 21 0.000 016 0.000 028 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 03 0.000 05 0.000 045 0.000 037 0.000 034 0.000 043 0.000 048 0.000 08 0.000 091
Dissolved Calcium 0.05 mg/L 69.7 71.1 71.6 81.9 74.5 91.8 90.6 72.9 61.5 124. 465. 65.4 70.3 < 0.05 < 0.05 210. 0.05 235. 227. 51.2 51.7 145. 141. 57.2
Dissolved Chromium 0.000 1 mg/L < 0.000 1 0.000 2 0.000 2 < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 0.008 4 < 0.000 1 0.000 3 < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 0.001 3 < 0.000 1 0.000 2 0.000 1 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 < 0.000 1 0.000 4 0.000 2
Dissolved Cobalt 0.000 005 mg/L 0.11 0.004 0.001 02 0.003 4 0.003 58 0.000 6 0.000 085 0.000 116 0.000 075 0.000 048 0.000 281 0.001 77 0.062 b 0.000 831 0.003 33 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 0.003 5 0.000 107 0.000 606 0.000 932 0.000 193 0.000 135 0.000 338 0.002 56 0.000 166
Dissolved Copper 0.000 05 mg/L 34.05 (5) 0.002 0.000 52 0.011 2 b 0.011 5 b 0.000 81 0.000 61 0.000 19 0.000 18 0.000 61 0.000 11 0.000 7 0.014 9 b 0.000 2 0.000 99 < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05 < 0.000 3 0.000 47 0.006 08 b 0.005 29 b 0.000 17 0.000 1 0.003 08 b 0.000 81 0.001 36
Dissolved Iron 0.001 mg/L 0.35 0.002 0.005 0.005 0.007 0.004 0.012 0.008 0.009 0.057 0.015 0.539 a 0.005 1.55 a < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.005 0.8 a 0.002 0.017 0.031 0.014 0.012 0.046 0.126 0.009
Dissolved Lead 0.000 005 mg/L 0.33 (7) 0.016 (7) 0.000 015 0.000 026 0.000 024 0.000 016 0.000 008 0.000 02 0.000 02 0.000 023 0.000 074 0.000 023 0.000 39 0.000 008 0.000 036 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 03 0.000 048 < 0.000 005 0.000 014 0.000 024 0.000 017 0.000 036 0.000 011 0.000 012
Dissolved Magnesium 0.05 mg/L 5.23 14.7 15. 10. 11.6 18.7 18.6 6.74 15.8 9.96 129. 6.03 13.6 < 0.05 < 0.05 53.3 < 0.05 47.1 38.8 4.85 4.94 11.8 14.2 7.23
Dissolved Manganese 0.000 05 mg/L 4.3 (5) 2.1 (5) 0.002 2 1.43 1.43 0.000 95 0.000 68 0.026 2 0.025 3 0.000 74 0.122 0.067 1 6.81 a 0.002 72 2.91 b < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05 < 0.001 0.47 0.000 47 0.011 6 0.011 0.095 1 0.124 0.028 1.75 0.000 56
Dissolved Mercury 0.000 01 mg/L 100. 20. 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 0.000 02 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 05 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 05 < 0.000 01 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01
Dissolved Molybdenum 0.000 05 mg/L 2. 1. 0.000 12 0.002 11 0.002 19 0.002 67 0.000 47 0.000 17 0.000 16 < 0.000 05 0.006 23 0.000 63 0.011 5 0.004 72 0.000 79 < 0.000 05 < 0.000 05 0.000 4 < 0.000 05 0.000 11 0.000 17 0.000 44 0.000 52 0.000 82 0.002 08 0.001 78
Dissolved Nickel 0.000 02 mg/L 0.15 (5) 0.000 62 0.003 49 0.003 42 0.000 71 0.001 08 0.000 7 0.000 66 0.000 1 0.001 18 0.003 1 0.088 5 0.000 31 0.003 59 < 0.000 02 < 0.000 02 0.020 1 0.000 12 0.009 06 0.002 45 0.000 34 0.000 38 0.001 25 0.001 32 0.000 88
Dissolved Potassium 0.05 mg/L 0.27 10.8 10.8 0.82 1. 0.95 0.94 0.24 1.03 1.32 40.8 0.66 8.48 < 0.05 < 0.05 12.7 < 0.05 1.42 1.33 0.27 0.28 0.54 2.28 5.42
Dissolved Selenium 0.000 04 mg/L 0.002 0.000 08 0.000 07 0.000 08 0.000 12 0.000 1 < 0.000 04 < 0.000 04 0.000 32 0.000 14 0.000 08 0.000 4 0.000 19 < 0.000 04 < 0.000 04 < 0.000 04 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 04 0.000 18 0.000 16 0.000 08 0.000 08 0.000 08 0.000 06 0.000 08
Dissolved Silver 0.000 005 mg/L 0.003 (5) 0.001 5 (5) < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 03 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 03 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 < 0.000 005 0.000 02 < 0.000 005
Dissolved Sodium 0.05 mg/L 7.75 88.8 89.3 14.4 20.6 5.56 5.54 3.23 81.3 38.2 518. 10.3 42. < 0.05 < 0.05 277. 0.07 21. 17. 4.28 4.33 9.23 7.52 92.1
Dissolved Thallium 0.000 002 mg/L 0.000 006 0.000 023 0.000 02 0.000 008 0.000 017 0.000 01 0.000 01 < 0.000 002 0.000 002 0.000 019 0.000 01 0.000 002 0.000 004 < 0.000 002 < 0.000 002 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 002 0.000 041 0.000 043 0.000 007 0.000 006 0.000 003 0.000 012 0.000 003
Dissolved Tin 0.000 01 mg/L < 0.000 01 0.000 02 0.000 02 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 0.000 01 0.000 72 0.000 02 0.000 04 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 0.000 55 < 0.000 01 0.000 07 0.000 04 0.000 04 0.000 04 0.000 01 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 01
Dissolved Titanium 0.000 5 mg/L 2. < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 0.004 < 0.000 5 0.000 7 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.003 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Dissolved Uranium 0.000 002 mg/L 0.1 0.000 294 0.000 189 0.000 185 0.000 7 0.000 331 0.000 084 0.000 086 0.000 105 0.006 22 0.000 382 0.000 65 0.000 291 0.000 207 < 0.000 002 < 0.000 002 < 0.000 01 < 0.000 002 0.000 448 0.000 44 0.000 34 0.000 357 0.000 193 0.000 56 0.000 118
Dissolved Vanadium 0.000 2 mg/L 0.006 (8) 0.000 4 0.001 1 0.001 1 < 0.000 2 0.000 3 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 0.000 8 0.001 6 0.000 3 0.01 a < 0.000 2 0.000 3 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.001 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 0.000 9 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Dissolved Zinc 0.000 1 mg/L 221. (5) 0.196 (5) 0.001 1 0.001 5 0.001 1 0.001 0.001 0.000 9 0.000 9 0.001 7 0.001 1 0.001 1 0.005 2 0.000 8 0.000 4 0.000 2 0.000 3 < 0.000 5 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 2 0.001 2 0.001 0.000 7 0.016 6
BTEX and AROMATICS - NONHALOGENATED

Total Benzene 0 000 5
0.000 mg/L 0 37
0.37 (6) < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5 < 0.000
0 000 5
Total Ethylbenzene 0.000 5 mg/L 0.2 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total Toluene 0.000 5 mg/L 0.039 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 0.000 8 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.001 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total Xylenes 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total m & p Xylenes 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total o-Xylene 0.000 5 mg/L < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total Styrene 0.000 5 mg/L 0.072 (10) < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether 0.004 mg/L 3.4 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004
AROMATICS - HALOGENATED
Total Chlorobenzene 0.000 5 mg/L 0.001 3 (10) < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.000 5 mg/L 0.000 7 (10) < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0.000 5 mg/L 0.15 (10) < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.000 5 mg/L 0.026 (10) < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 0.001 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
KETONES
Total Dimethyl ketone 0.02 mg/L < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 0.025 0.03 < 0.02 0.023 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02
Total Methyl ethyl ketone 0.01 mg/L < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01
Total Methyl isobutyl ketone 0.01 mg/L < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01
Total Methyl isobutyl ketone 0.01 mg/L < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01
60158830_App B1b 2010-Dec21b_Groundwater Annual Chemistry.xls:Report Page 1 of 2

Appendix B-1. Annual Landfill Groundwater Chemistry - 2009/2010
Water Quality Criteria (1) Gw-71-3-1 Gw-03-2-1 Gw-03-2-1 Gw-04-3-1 Gw-73-3-1 Gw-54-2-1 Gw-54-2-1 Gw-18-2-2 Gw-76-2-1 Gw-72-3-1 Gw-58-1-0 Gw-50-1-1 Gw-21-2-1 Gw-BLANK Gw-BLANK Gw-BLANK Gw-52-1-1 Gw-BLANK Gw-36-3-1 Gw-36-3-1 Gw-62-2-1 Gw-62-2-1 Gw-43-1-1 Gw-41-1-1 Gw-30-1-2
State Parameter MDL Units Maximum Average Minimum 2009 Sep 22 2009 Sep 22 2009 Sep 22 2009 Sep 23 2009 Sep 23 2009 Sep 24 2009 Sep 24 2009 Sep 28 2009 Sep 28 2009 Sep 28 2009 Sep 30 2009 Oct 02 2009 Oct 02 2009 Oct 05 2009 Oct 05 2009 Oct 05 2009 Oct 05 2009 Oct 05 2009 Oct 06 2009 Oct 06 2009 Oct 09 2009 Oct 09 2009 Oct 09 2009 Oct 09 2009 Oct 09
Value (2) Value Value SS FR1 FR2 SS SS FR1 FR2 SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS FR1 FR2 FR1 FR2 SS SS SS
ALKANES - HALOGENATED
Total Bromomethane 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total Dibromoethane 0.000 2 mg/L < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2 < 0.000 2
Total Dibromomethane 0.000 9 mg/L < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9 < 0.000 9
Total Chloromethane 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total Dichloromethane 0.002 mg/L 0.098 1 (10) < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002
Total Trichloromethane 0.001 mg/L 0.001 8 (10) < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.002 a 0.002 a < 0.001 0.002 a < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total Tetrachloromethane 0.003 mg/L ####### (10) < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total Trichlorofluoromethane 0.004 mg/L < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.004
Total Chlorodibromomethane 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total Bromodichloromethane 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total Tribromomethane 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total Chloroethane 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.000 5 mg/L < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.000 5 mg/L 0.1 (10) < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.000 5 mg/L 11.1 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.000 5 mg/L < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.000 5 mg/L < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.000 5 mg/L < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,2-Dichloropropane 0.000 5 mg/L < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
ALKENES - HALOGENATED
Total Chloroethene 0.000 5 mg/L < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total 1,1-Dichloroethene 0.000 5 mg/L < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total Trichloroethene 0.000 5 mg/L 0.021 (10) < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total Tetrachloroethene 0.000 5 mg/L 0.111 (10) < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5 < 0.000 5
Total cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.001 mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Notes:
SS Single sample
FR1, FR2 Field replicates
BLR Blank - Reagent. Freshly deinonised water.
BLT Blank - Trip. Transported deionised water before running through used and rinsed sampling apparatus.
BLF Blank - Field. Transported deionised water after running through used and rinsed sampling apparatus.
(1) British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines (Criteria), 1998 Edition, Updated August, 2006. British Columbia Ministry of Environment and
A Compendium of Working Water Quality Guidelines for British Columbia, Updated August, 2006. British Columbia Ministry of Environment.
(2) Maximum acceptable concentration unless otherwise noted.
(3) Metals guidelines are based on total concentrations, not dissolved, with the exception of aluminium.
(4) Freshwater aquatic life toxicity for ammonia is temperature and pH dependent - calculation uses 2009/2010 average pH of 7.6 and estimated temperature of 8 degrees celcius.
(5) Freshwater aquatic life toxicity for nitrite is chloride dependent - calculation uses 2009/2010 mean chloride >10 mg/L.
(6) Under Ministry review.
(7) Chronic criterion.
(8) Freshwater aquatic life toxicity is hardness dependent - calculation uses 2009/2010 average hardness of 341 mg/L
(9) Ontario water quality objective.
(10) Interim maximum acceptable concentration.
60158830_App B1b 2010-Dec21b_Groundwater Annual Chemistry.xls:Report Page 2 of 2

Appendix B-2. Domestic Well Chemistry - 2009/10
5435 5436 255 5648 5100 176

Criteria Address
Parameters Kiowa Ave Spotts Close Farmington Wallace Wildview Lohr Road
Canadian British Columbia Well Number 24 25 * 36 37 47 50
Guidelines (1) Guidelines (2) Sample Date 9-Jul-09 9-Jul-09 9-Jul-09 9-Jul-09 9-Jul-09 9-Jul-09
aluminum-total n/a 0.2 mg/L 0.0007 0.0018 0.0025 0.0013 0.0173 0.0057
arsenic-total 0.01 0.025 mg/L 0.00005 0.00009 0.00005 0.00199 0.0001 0.00004
antimony-total 0.006 0.006 mg/L < 0.00002 0.00003 0.00004 0.00008 0.00005 < 0.00002
barium-total 1 1 mg/L 0.00062 0.00314 0.00011 0.00798 0.00604 0.00987
boron-total 5 5 mg/L 0.15 0.315 0.837 0.18 < 0.05 0.113
cadmium-total 0.005 0.005 mg/L 0.000048 0.00002 < 0.000005 < 0.000005 < 0.000005 0.000016
calcium-total n/a n/a mg/L 80.5 72.6 10 36 28 19.6
chromium-total 0.05 0.05 mg/L < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001
copper-total 1 1 mg/L 0.00164 0.077 0.00111 0.00463 0.0139 0.0714
iron-total 0.3 0.3 mg/L 0.006 0.002 0.034 0.001 0.009 0.081
lead-total 0.01 0.01 mg/L 0.000059 0.0014 0.000352 0.000575 0.00459 0.00132
magnesium-total n/a 500 mg/L 6.2 9.8 2.72 7.71 4.34 3.44
manganese-total 0.05 0.05 mg/L < 0.00005 0.00029 0.00192 0.0219 0.00742 0.00163
mercury-total 0.001 0.001 mg/L < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001
potassium-total n/a n/a mg/L 0.7 1.7 0.47 1.06 0.4 0.41
selenium-total 0.01 0.01 mg/L 0.00004 0.00005 < 0.00004 < 0.00004 0.00005 < 0.00004
sodium-total 200 200 mg/L 15.7 11.1 38.7 13.9 11.9 10.3
uranium-total 0.02 0.02 mg/L 0.000073 0.000405 0.000019 0.000255 0.000309 0.000018
zinc-total 5 5 mg/L 0.0029 0.0885 0.0117 0.0046 0.0034 0.0217
hardness (as CaCO3) 500 500 mg/L 226 221 36.2 122 87.9 63.1
chloride (dissolved anion) 250 250 mg/L 65 42 9.6 14 14 13
total dissolved solids 500 500 mg/L 400 340 160 190 160 100
conductivity n/a 700 S/cm 530 500 240 310 220 190
(1) Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (Sixth Edition, 1996 - updated 2008).
(2) British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines (2006 edition).
Updated August 2006. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection.
n/a - no Canadian or British Columbia drinking water quality guideline is available for this parameter.
Note: a value preceded by this symbol "<" was not present at a detectable concentration.
* Averaged result from two field replicates.
60158830_App B2 2010-Aug24_Domestic Well Water Chemistry 2009-10.xls:Sheet1 Page 1 of 2

Appendix B-2. Domestic Well Chemistry - 2009/10
200 184 187 237 237 160 City Water

Criteria Address
Parameters Lohr Road Lohr Road Lohr Road Meadowbrook Meadowbrook Lohr Road CRD Hartland Landfill
Canadian British Columbia Well Number 51 52 53 61 * 61 80 99
Guidelines (1) Guidelines (2) Sample Date 9-Jul-09 9-Jul-09 9-Jul-09 9-Jul-09 22-Jul-08 9-Jul-09 9-Jul-09
Re-sampled due to
Units lead exceedence in
one field replicate
on July 9, 2009
aluminum-total n/a 0.2 mg/L 0.0007 0.0012 0.0046 0.005 0.0046 0.0004 0.0129
arsenic-total 0.01 0.025 mg/L 0.00009 0.00008 0.00006 0.00006 0.00003 0.00003 0.00007
antimony-total 0.006 0.006 mg/L 0.00002 < 0.00002 < 0.00002 0.00008 < 0.00002 0.00003 0.00002
barium-total 1 1 mg/L 0.0196 0.0109 0.00231 0.00096 0.00098 0.00864 0.00493
boron-total 5 5 mg/L < 0.05 0.064 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05
cadmium-total 0.005 0.005 mg/L < 0.000005 < 0.000005 0.000008 0.000038 0.000014 < 0.000005 < 0.000000005
calcium-total n/a n/a mg/L 56.8 53.6 20.4 25.3 26.1 46.1 5.01
chromium-total 0.05 0.05 mg/L < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001
copper-total 1 1 mg/L 0.00989 0.00543 0.0218 0.87 0.0751 0.0251 0.0419
iron-total 0.3 0.3 mg/L 0.004 0.004 0.339 0.005 0.004 0.012 0.044
lead-total 0.01 0.01 mg/L 0.000154 0.000096 0.000441 0.0094 0.00088 0.000361 0.000381
magnesium-total n/a 500 mg/L 6.89 7.04 2.8 7.5 7.7 3.57 1.39
manganese-total 0.05 0.05 mg/L 0.00012 0.00011 0.00131 0.00034 0.00023 0.00094 0.00532
mercury-total 0.001 0.001 mg/L < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001
potassium-total n/a n/a mg/L 0.38 0.52 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.31 0.17
selenium-total 0.01 0.01 mg/L 0.00023 0.00012 < 0.00004 0.00007 0.00008 0.00015 < 0.00004
sodium-total 200 200 mg/L 5.99 6.35 4.54 7.01 7.12 4.56 1.7
uranium-total 0.02 0.02 mg/L 0.000709 0.0007 0.000123 0.000012 0.000012 0.000673 0.000006
zinc-total 5 5 mg/L 0.0013 0.0021 0.034 0.39 0.0041 0.0097 0.0236
hardness (as CaCO3) 500 500 mg/L 170 163 62.3 94.1 96.9 130 18.2
chloride (dissolved anion) 250 250 mg/L 19 16 7.2 18 18 8.8 3.6
total dissolved solids 500 500 mg/L 210 180 110 135 150 170 42
conductivity n/a 700 S/cm 360 330 150 225 230 270 48
(1) Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (Sixth Edition, 1996 - updated 2008).
(2) British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines (2006 edition).
Updated August 2006. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection.
n/a - no Canadian or British Columbia drinking water quality guideline is available for this parameter.
Note: a value preceded by this symbol "<" was not present at a detectable concentration.
* Averaged result from two field replicates.
60158830_App B2 2010-Aug24_Domestic Well Water Chemistry 2009-10.xls:Sheet1 Page 2 of 2

Appendix B.3. Quarterly Surface Water Chemistry - South - 2009/2010
Maximum Average 0.7 0.7 1.78 40. 0.2 50. (7)
Method Detection Limit 0.1 0.001 0.001 0.0001 0.0001 0.5 0.5 0.005 0.5 1. 0.02 0.005 0.001 0.1 0.5 4.
Dissolved organic Conductivity - Phosphorus - Ortho Total suspended
Temperature Iron Iron Manganese Manganese Alkalinity Nitrogen - ammonia Chloride Nitrogen - nitrate Nitrogen - nitrite pH Sulphate
Well carbon electrical phosphate solids
SW-S-03 S 2009 Jun 30 12.8 0.117 0.039 0.2655 0.264 5.6 190. 0.331 65. 690. 1.48 0.024 0.002 8. 43. 7. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow colour.
2009 Nov 10 12. 0.945 a 0.093 0.0611 0.0389 9.9 64. 0.011 21. 326. 2.11 0.008 0.032 7.7 39. 68. a Flow low. Very turbid and moderately yellow-brown.
2009 Dec 11 9.6 0.089 0.043 0.0099 0.0071 5.3 69. 0.181 15. 248. 1.39 0.037 0.001 7.8 25. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
2010 Jan 08 7.8 0.688 a 0.135 0.0384 0.0231 6.1 65. 0.122 12. 235. 1.93 0.008 0.006 7.5 20. 25. Flow moderate. Very turbid and slightly grey.
2010 Feb 19 9.3 0.068 0.032 0.0134 0.0109 8.5 89. 0.025 14. 289. 1.88 < 0.005 0.006 7.7 28. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
2010 Mar 25 --- 0.067 0.022 0.0317 0.0315 5.4 120. 0.057 18. 369. 1.99 0.005 0.002 7.9 28. < 4. Flow moderately low. Clear and colourless.
SW-S-04 S 2009 Jun 30 9.9 0.12 0.003 0.0592 0.0043 3.2 110. < 0.005 40. 450. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.002 8. 46. 10. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and colourless.
Flow moderately high. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow-
2009 Nov 10 10.2 0.154 0.039 0.0466 0.0036 8.3 80. < 0.005 22. 355. 1.19 < 0.005 0.002 8. 41. 11. brown.
2009 Dec 11 5.7 0.206 0.019 0.0566 0.0056 4.5 79. 0.007 20. 295. 0.65 < 0.005 0.002 7.9 31. 9. Flow low. Slightly turbid and slightly brown.
Flow moderately high. Moderately turbid and slightly
2010 Jan 08 6.3 0.403 a 0.067 0.0327 0.0053 3.6 51. 0.016 12. 182. 0.54 < 0.005 0.005 7.7 16. 8. yellow-brown.
2010 Feb 19 6. 0.088 0.017 0.032 0.0028 4.1 87. 0.009 16. 294. 0.86 < 0.005 0.009 7.8 33. 6. Flow moderate. Slightly turbid and colourless.
2010 Mar 25 --- 0.256 0.025 0.0413 0.0035 4.6 88. < 0.005 23. 320. 0.51 < 0.005 0.001 8. 28. 6. Flow moderately low. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow.
SW-S-10 S 2009 Jun 30 20.4 0.034 0.011 0.0143 0.0036 4.4 57. < 0.005 26. 250. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.002 7.4 18. < 4. Moderate low. Clear and colourless.
2009 Nov 10 9.5 0.053 0.014 0.0183 0.0126 5.6 61. 0.013 28. 260. 0.13 < 0.005 0.001 7.8 22. < 4. Flow moderately high. Clear and colourless.
2010 Feb 19 6. 0.105 0.068 0.027 0.025 4.1 46. 0.01 14. 174. 0.3 < 0.005 0.006 7.7 15. < 4. Flow moderate. Very turbid and slightly brown.
2010 Mar 25 --- 0.127 0.098 0.0253 0.0252 4.7 51. 0.007 14. 178. 0.23 < 0.005 0.001 7.9 13. < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and slightly yellow.
SW-S-11 S 2009 Jun 30 9.9 0.211 0.011 0.127 0.0125 2.6 86. < 0.005 30. 340. 0.07 < 0.005 0.002 8. 29. < 4. Flow very low. Slightly turbid and colourless.
2009 Nov 10 9.6 0.129 0.044 0.0249 0.013 7.6 78. < 0.005 23. 348. 1.07 < 0.005 0.002 7.9 44. 5. Flow moderately high. Slightly turbid and slightly brown.
2010 Feb 19 6. 0.08 0.02 0.0275 0.0137 3.9 80. 0.012 15. 269. 0.7 < 0.005 0.007 8. 29. < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and colourless.
2010 Mar 25 --- 0.218 0.035 0.0461 0.0172 4.7 85. < 0.005 21. 299. 0.54 0.005 0.001 8.1 25. 6. Flow moderately low. Slightly turbid and slightly yellow.
2009 Nov 10 11.2 2.14 a 0.194 0.194 0.132 11.9 60. 0.139 6.2 239. 1.99 0.013 0.111 7.8 27. 170. a Flow moderately high. Very turbid and moderately brown.
2009 Dec 11 8.1 0.251 0.107 0.0331 0.0306 8.3 56. 0.073 12. 219. 2.92 0.053 0.007 7.7 20. < 4. Flow low. Clear and slightly yellow.
2010 Jan 08 7.6 3.25 a 0.139 0.206 0.111 8.4 71. 1.01 7.9 226. 0.87 0.024 0.009 7.5 19. 180. a Flow moderate. Very turbid and slightly brown.
2010 Feb 19 9.6 0.255 0.152 0.0932 0.0896 12.5 71. 0.06 6.3 263. 3.39 0.014 0.008 7.8 35. < 4. Flow low. Clear and slightly yellow.
2010 Mar 25 --- 0.302 0.118 0.0869 0.0861 14.8 100. 0.037 6. 304. 2.16 0.016 0.002 8.1 28. < 4. Flow low. Clear and slightly yellow.
2009 Nov 12 7.7 0.048 0.047 0.0008 0.0008 11.5 32.5 0.006 7.3 111. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.055 7.6 5.6 < 4. Flow moderate. Clear and moderately yellow-brown.
2010 Feb 19 6.2 0.017 0.003 0.0006 0.0006 4.1 67. 0.011 5.2 159. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.008 7.9 7.4 < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
2010 Mar 25 --- 0.583 a 0.014 0.0114 0.0015 1.3 69. 0.009 4.7 159. < 0.02 0.005 0.002 8. 7.7 14. Flow moderately low. Moderately turbid and colourless.
2009 Nov 10 8.6 0.03 0.024 0.0007 0.0003 8.6 32. < 0.005 7. 113. 0.06 < 0.005 0.001 7.6 12. < 4. Flow moderately high. Clear and slightly yellow.
2010 Feb 19 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- No sample. Watercourse dry.
2010 Mar 25 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- No sample. Watercourse dry.
2009 Nov 10 10.8 0.359 a 0.065 0.15 0.0106 8.7 95. < 0.005 26. 409. 1.5 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 40. 30. a Flow moderate. Moderately turbid and slightly brown.
2010 Feb 19 7.2 0.1 0.021 0.0345 0.0081 5. 94. 0.006 17. 306. 1.04 < 0.005 0.005 8. 28. 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
2010 Mar 25 --- 0.255 0.021 0.0998 0.0057 5.8 98. 0.007 29. 339. 0.67 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 23. 10. Flow low. Slightly turbid and slightly brown.
. 60158830_App B3_2010-Dec21_Surface Water Chemistry - Raw Data b.xls:South Page 1 of 2

Appendix B.3. Quarterly Surface Water Chemistry - South - 2009/2010
Maximum Average 0.7 0.7 1.78 40. 0.2 50. (7)
Method Detection Limit 0.1 0.001 0.001 0.0001 0.0001 0.5 0.5 0.005 0.5 1. 0.02 0.005 0.001 0.1 0.5 4.
Dissolved organic Conductivity - Phosphorus - Ortho Total suspended
Temperature Iron Iron Manganese Manganese Alkalinity Nitrogen - ammonia Chloride Nitrogen - nitrate Nitrogen - nitrite pH Sulphate
Well carbon electrical phosphate solids
2009 Nov 10 11. 0.642 a 0.074 0.146 0.015 9.4 77. 0.006 22. 345. 1.5 < 0.005 0.002 7.9 41. 33. a Flow moderately high. Very turbid and moderately brown.
2010 Mar 25 --- 0.261 0.02 0.121 0.0175 6.5 100. 0.007 25. 352. 0.86 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 25. 11. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
2009 Nov 10 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- No sample. Watercourse dry.
2009 Nov 10 9.6 0.432 a 0.046 0.194 0.111 5.2 120. 0.007 51. 506. 0.44 < 0.005 0.002 8.1 35. 7. Flow moderately high. Slightly turbid and slightly grey.
2010 Feb 19 7.2 0.114 0.017 0.0545 0.0106 4.1 110. 0.017 26. 367. 0.21 < 0.005 0.008 8.1 31. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
2010 Mar 25 --- 0.199 0.015 0.0678 0.0035 3.3 120. 0.011 28. 411. 0.21 < 0.005 0.002 8.2 26. 5. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
2009 Nov 12 8.8 0.041 0.006 0.0021 0.0004 2.3 68. < 0.005 8.6 177. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.075 7.9 9. < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
2010 Feb 19 7.1 0.016 0.002 0.0012 0.0004 1.2 67. 0.011 5. 154. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.001 7.9 7.3 5. Flow low. Slightly turbid and colourless.
2010 Mar 25 --- 0.005 0.004 0.0001 0.0003 1.4 65.5 < 0.005 4.4 159. < 0.02 < 0.005 0.001 8. 5.9 < 4. Flow low. Clear and colourless.
Notes:
na na - Not applicable.
a Above maximum British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
b Above average British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
c Below minimum British Columbia Water Quality Guideline.
(1) British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines (Criteria), 1998 Edition, Updated August 24, 2001. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection an
A Compendium of Working Water Quality Guidelines for British Columbia, 1998 Edition, Updated August 23, 2001. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection.
(2) For streams with unknown fish distribution.

(3) Under review.
(4) The manganese guidelines are hardness dependant. Since the value for hardness is not known, the worst case value ( 25 mg/L ) has been used.
(5) The ammonia guideline is for protection of aquatic life. It is pH and temperature dependant.
(6) The nitrite guidelines are chloride dependant. The chloride concentration was assumed to be the worst case value ( <2 mg/L ).
(7) This value is an alert level, not a maximum average value.
. 60158830_App B3_2010-Dec21_Surface Water Chemistry - Raw Data b.xls:South Page 2 of 2

Appendix B-4. Monthly Leachate Chemistry - Hartland Valve Chamber - 2009/10
Sewer Hartland Valve Hartland Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve
Hartland Valve Chamber Hartland Valve Chamber Hartland Valve Chamber Hartland Valve Chamber
State Parameter Units Use Chamber Valve Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber
Criteria 2009 Apr 27 2009 May 14 2009 May 26 2009 Jun 05 2009 Jul 13 2009 Aug 31 2009 Oct 16 2009 Oct 30 2009 Nov 04 2009 Dec 02 2010 Jan 07 2010 Feb 23 2010 Mar 17
min max FR1 FR2 FR3 Mean SS SS FR1 FR2 Mean SS SS SS SS FR1 FR2 Mean SS SS FR1 FR2 Mean SS
Yellow-brown Re-sampled Amber coloured Brownish tea Sample Medium brown- Light greyish Medium yellow- Medium brown-
Comments Hartland - Leachate: Hartland Valve Chamber Medium Brown Coloured and Clear. colour and for BOD due Dark amber colour and clear. coloured and collected as a yellow colour Medium yellow-brown colour and clear. yellow-brown brown colour Amber coloured and clear. yellow colour
and clear.
clear to lab clear surrogate for and clear colour and clear and clear and clear
CONVENTIONALS
Total Temperature °C 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.3 --- 20.9 20.9 20.9 20.6 20.4 13.2 16.9 15.8 15.8 15.8 13.8 15.4 15.6 15.6 15.6 17.2
Total Oxidation reduction potential mV 124 124 124 124 132 --- 108 108 108 50 31 183 85 163 163 163 50 94 84 84 84 114
Total pH pH 5.5 11 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.8 --- 8.1 8 8.1 7.8 7.9 8.1 8 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.9 7.8 7.8 7.7 7.8 7.7
Total Electrical conductivity µS/cm 4500 4500 4500 4500 4700 --- 5000 5100 5050 6000 5860 6120 4180 4290 4270 4280 3710 3230 5000 5000 5000 4670
Total Total suspended solids mg/L 350 15 16 16 16 11 --- 29 26 28 26 21 19 11 12 12 12 20 6 11 10 11 8
Total Biochemical oxygen demand mg/L 500 22 21 22 22 --- 30 77 106 92 48 18 29 14 24 28 26 33 10 13 < 10 9 23
Total Chemical oxygen demand mg/L 1000 308 305 320 311 329 --- 364 360 362 438 443 416 299 314 265 290 302 234 563 547 555 474
Total Fecal Coliform CFU/100 mL 10 40 110 63 110 --- 780 640 710 950 7400 210 1000 360 390 375 480 340 20 10 15 40
Total Alkalinity - total mg/L CaCO3 1700 1700 1700 1700 1800 --- 1900 2000 1950 490 2300 2600 1600 1700 1700 1700 1500 1200 2000 2000 2000 1800
Total Total organic carbon mg/L 97 99 89 95 91 --- 222 223 223 138 151 158 97 108 108 108 116 77 119 118 119 102
Total Oil and grease - total mg/L 100 2 2 2 2 2 --- 3 3 3 18 3 17 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 3 2
Total Oil and grease - mineral (silica g mg/L 15 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 --- < 2 2 2 < 2 3 16 a 2 3 < 2 2 3 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2
Total Nitrogen - total kjeldahl mg/L N 247 244 229 240 287 --- 291 288 290 357 305 350 234 257 258 258 229 198 321 293 307 293
Total Nitrogen - ammonia mg/L N 221 216 229 222 256 --- 310 291 301 319 284 375 231 238 200 219 221 198 297 293 295 281
Total Nitrogen - nitrite mg/L N 1.01 0.92 0.95 0.96 1.09 --- 0.67 0.379 0.52 0.61 < 0.05 1.55 1.44 1.67 1.63 1.65 0.01 0.097 0.25 0.24 0.25 0.36
Total Nitrogen - nitrate mg/L N 5.8 5.9 6 5.9 9.2 --- 6.2 5.9 6.1 5.8 < 0.2 1.3 8.3 5 5 5 0.06 4.2 3.3 3.2 3.3 7.2
Total Nitrogen - nitrate plus nitrite mg/L N 6.8 6.8 7 6.9 10.3 --- 6.9 6.3 6.6 6.4 < 0.2 2.9 9.8 6.7 6.6 6.7 0.08 4.3 3.6 3.5 3.6 7.6
Total Nitrogen - total mg/L N 254 251 236 247 297 --- 297 294 296 363 305 353 243 264 264 264 229 202 325 297 311 300
Dissolved Chloride mg/L 1500 390 390 380 387 420 --- 410 440 425 480 550 500 240 250 260 255 210 190 400 400 400 320
Dissolved Sulphate mg/L 1500 25 29 28 27 28 --- 24 25 25 9.1 2.9 1.9 78 89 85 87 54 50 26 31 29 34
Total Sulphide - total mg/L 1 0.27 0.18 0.18 0.21 0.063 --- 0.19 0.25 0.22 0.019 0.21 0.09 0.2 0.11 0.09 0.1 < 0.05 0.22 0.23 0.18 0.21 0.08
Dissolved Sulphide - dissolved mg/L 1 0.18 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.051 --- 0.19 0.12 0.16 0.01 0.07 0.06 0.11 0.1 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.16 0.11 0.18 0.15 0.17
Total Cyanide - SAD (total) mg/L 1 0.0118 0.0121 0.0117 0.0119 0.0119 --- 0.0161 0.0159 0.016 0.0209 0.0162 0.01 < 0.0005 0.0149 0.0147 0.0148 0.0148 0.0096 0.0171 0.0167 0.0169 0.0173
Total Cyanide - WAD mg/L 1 0.0046 0.0043 0.0045 0.0045 0.0044 --- 0.0071 0.0067 0.0069 0.0054 0.0084 0.007 0.0039 0.0052 0.0049 0.0051 0.0043 0.0025 0.0067 0.0062 0.0065 0.0079
Total Phenols mg/L 1 0.066 0.072 0.069 0.069 0.018 --- 0.067 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.1 0.036 0.062 0.024 0.025 0.025 0.093 0.079 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.12
Total Hardness - total (as CaCO3) mg/L 471 493 511 492 549 --- 554 541 548 600 627 614 498 453 463 458 436 397 494 511 503 502
ORGANICS
Total Benzene µg/L 100 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 --- 1.3 1.2 1.3 0.8 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.1 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.5
Total Ethylbenzene µg/L 200 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.9 --- 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.8 < 0.5 0.7 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.9 2.9 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.4
Total Toluene µg/L 200 1 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.7 --- 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.5 < 0.5 0.7 1.2 1.8 1.9 1.9 3.8 2.2 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.1
Total Styrene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total Xylenes µg/L 200 6 5 5 5 4 --- 3.3 3.3 3.3 2 < 0.5 2 5 7.4 7.8 7.6 11.2 9 7 6.9 7 6.5
Total m & p Xylenes µg/L 4 3 3 3 2.4 --- 2.2 2.1 2.2 2 < 0.5 1 4 4.6 5 4.8 6.9 5 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.3
Total o-Xylene µg/L 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.7 1.6 --- 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.6 < 0.5 0.5 1.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 4.3 3.4 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.2
Total Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTB µg/L < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 --- < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4
PAH'S
Total Total Polycyclic Aromatics µg/L 50 < 3 < 3 4 2 2.4 --- 0.57 3 1.79 10 1 < 3 7 8.3 15 11.7 5.4 31 56 a 55 a 56 7.7
Total Acenaphthene µg/L 0.9 1.3 2.1 1.4 0.97 --- < 0.01 1.4 0.7 1.5 0.16 1 3.3 3.7 4.7 4.2 3.1 4.1 5.2 5.3 5.3 3.4
Total Acenaphthylene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.12 --- < 0.01 < 0.08 < 0.008 < 0.2 < 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.12 < 0.09 0.09 0.06 < 0.2 < 0.07 < 0.07 < 0.07 0.08
Total Anthracene µg/L < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.11 --- < 0.03 < 0.07 < 0.007 0.1 < 0.07 0.1 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.14 0.2 0.28 0.27 0.28 0.2
Total Fluorene µg/L 0.3 0.5 1 0.6 0.47 --- < 0.03 0.74 0.38 0.8 0.12 0.6 1.5 1.8 2.2 2 1.3 2.1 2.7 2.7 2.7 1.9
Total Naphthalene µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 0.01 --- < 0.01 0.12 0.06 6 0.01 < 3 < 3 0.08 3 1.5 < 0.03 19 40 40 40 0.02
Total Phenanthrene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.01 --- < 0.01 0.14 0.07 0.6 < 0.08 < 0.2 1.1 1.2 1.9 1.6 0.07 1.7 2.5 2.4 2.5 1.3
Total 2-Methylnaphthalene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 0.6 0.3 < 0.01 --- < 0.03 < 0.1 < 0.03 0.8 < 0.02 < 0.2 1 0.93 3.1 2.02 < 0.02 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.7 < 0.04
Total Total LMW-PAH's µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 2.1 --- 0.47 2.8 1.6 10 0.81 < 3 7 8.1 15 11.6 5 31 55 55 55 7.3
Total Benzo(a)anthracene µg/L < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.02 --- < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.1 0.03 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.02 < 0.03 0.02 0.02 < 0.1 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.02
Total Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.02 --- < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02
Total Chrysene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.01 --- < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.2 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.01 < 0.02 0.01 0.02 < 0.2 0.02 0.02 0.02 < 0.01
Total Fluoranthene µg/L 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.17 --- 0.1 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.07 0.2 0.2 0.21 0.24 0.23 0.24 0.3 0.31 0.3 0.3 0.22
Total Benzo(b,j)fluoranthene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.01 --- < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.2 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.2 0.01 < 0.01 0.01 < 0.01
Total Benzo(k)fluoranthene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.01 --- < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.2 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.2 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01
Total Pyrene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.1 --- < 0.08 < 0.07 < 0.008 < 0.2 0.06 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.15 0.15 < 0.2 0.2 0.18 0.2 0.13
Total Benzo(a)pyrene µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.01 --- < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.3 < 0.02 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.3 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01
Total Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.02 --- < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.3 < 0.02 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.3 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02
Total Benzo(g,h,i)perylene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.02 --- < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02
Total Total HMW-PAH's µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 4 1.4 0.29 --- 0.1 0.14 0.1 < 0.3 0.21 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.43 0.5 0.59 0.52 0.56 0.37
METALS
Total Aluminum mg/L 0.089 0.092 0.094 0.092 0.108 --- 0.113 0.105 0.109 0.135 0.128 0.113 0.099 0.097 0.104 0.101 0.102 0.093 0.139 0.146 0.143 0.146
Total Antimony mg/L 0.0011 0.001 0.0011 0.001 0.0012 --- 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0011 0.0011 0.0012 0.0012 0.0012 0.0013 0.0012 0.0012 0.0012 0.0012 0.0011
Total Arsenic mg/L 0.4 0.0051 0.0053 0.0053 0.0052 0.0056 --- 0.0066 0.0064 0.0065 0.0084 0.0083 0.008 0.0055 0.0058 0.0062 0.006 0.0057 0.0044 0.0077 0.0075 0.0076 0.0072
Total Barium mg/L 0.145 0.15 0.156 0.15 0.185 --- 0.186 0.181 0.184 0.208 0.207 0.193 0.148 0.129 0.13 0.130 0.121 0.109 0.173 0.175 0.174 0.166
Total Beryllium mg/L < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 --- < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 0.00006 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Bismuth mg/L < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 --- < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Boron mg/L 3.36 3.49 3.63 3.49 3.96 --- 3.85 3.94 3.90 5.07 4.92 4.9 3.48 3.17 3.2 3.2 3.26 2.69 4.18 4.07 4.13 3.87
Total Cadmium mg/L 0.3 0.00007 0.00008 0.00012 0.00009 0.00006 --- 0.00008 0.00008 0.00008 0.0001 0.00014 0.00015 0.00009 0.00012 0.00008 0.0001 0.00008 0.00004 < 0.00003 0.00005 0.00004 0.00006
Total Calcium mg/L 122 127 131 127 140 --- 141 138 140 149 153 152 131 118 121 120 118 103 122 127 125 125
Total Chromium mg/L 4 0.0262 0.0274 0.0276 0.0271 0.0292 --- 0.0286 0.0286 0.0286 0.0371 0.0395 0.0356 0.0248 0.0266 0.0268 0.0267 0.0264 0.0217 0.0358 0.0354 0.0356 0.0354
Total Chromium III mg/L 0.019 0.019 0.023 0.020 0.022 --- 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.026 0.04 0.036 0.025 0.025 0.023 0.024 0.026 0.022 0.033 0.035 0.034 0.032
Total Chromium VI mg/L 0.008 0.008 0.004 0.007 0.007 --- 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.011 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.001 0.004 0.003 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.003 < 0.001 0.002 0.004
Total Cobalt mg/L 5 0.011 0.0113 0.0115 0.011 0.0126 --- 0.0136 0.0134 0.0135 0.017 0.0209 0.0188 0.0112 0.0113 0.0117 0.0115 0.0102 0.00816 0.013 0.0124 0.013 0.0132
Total Copper mg/L 1 0.0049 0.005 0.0048 0.005 0.005 --- 0.0047 0.0042 0.0045 0.005 0.0276 0.0143 0.0097 0.0098 0.0097 0.0098 0.0134 0.0058 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.0056
Total Iron mg/L 50 2.21 2.03 2.1 2.1 2.24 --- 2.85 2.75 2.8 3.27 4.54 2.64 1.54 1.18 1.21 1.20 1.7 1.1 1.67 1.65 1.66 1.24
Total Lead mg/L 1 0.00075 0.00065 0.00069 0.00070 0.00075 --- 0.00084 0.00077 0.00081 0.00111 0.00102 0.00082 0.00077 0.00076 0.00076 0.00076 0.00142 0.00087 0.00117 0.00119 0.00118 0.00114
Total Lithium mg/L < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 0.003 --- 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003
Total Magnesium mg/L 40.6 43.1 44.7 42.8 48.8 --- 49.2 47.8 48.5 55.5 59.7 57.3 41.4 38.3 39.3 38.8 34.2 34.1 46 47 47 46.3
Total Manganese mg/L 5 1.41 1.47 1.5 1.5 1.61 --- 1.47 1.43 1.45 1.67 1.57 1.62 1.52 1.39 1.43 1.41 1.1 0.99 1.22 1.25 1.24 1.37
Total Mercury mg/L 0.02 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 --- 0.00005 < 0.00005 0.00004 < 0.00005 0.00012 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Molybdenum mg/L 5 0.0016 0.0018 0.0015 0.0016 0.0018 --- 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0019 0.0023 0.0019 0.0013 0.0011 0.0011 0.0011 0.0012 0.001 0.0011 0.001 0.001 0.0018
Total Nickel mg/L 1 0.0421 0.0445 0.0457 0.0441 0.052 --- 0.0532 0.0506 0.0519 0.0705 0.0764 0.0722 0.0442 0.0456 0.0492 0.0474 0.0392 0.0356 0.0535 0.0552 0.0544 0.0535
Total Phosphorus mg/L 1.79 1.88 1.92 1.86 1.93 --- 2.18 2.17 2.18 2.87 2.46 2.7 1.84 1.98 2.05 2.02 1.91 1.69 2.62 2.7 2.7 2.5
Total Potassium mg/L 130 138 140 136 161 --- 160 156 158 194 198 198 126 127 129 128 120 111 162 171 167 164
Total Selenium mg/L 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 0.0006 --- 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 0.0005 0.0004 0.0003 0.0003 0.0004 0.0004 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0006
Total Silicon mg/L 14.8 13.9 14.7 14.5 13.8 --- 14 14.2 14.1 16.1 15.1 16.9 15.9 14.3 14.8 14.6 11.8 12.7 13.3 13.5 13.4 15
Total Silver mg/L 2 0.00004 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 --- < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 0.00004 0.00004 0.00004 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 0.00009 < 0.00003 0.00005 0.00003 0.00004 0.00004
Total Sodium mg/L 291 309 316 305 371 --- 382 371 377 461 517 493 286 282 290 286 249 245 395 408 402 387
Total Strontium mg/L 0.754 0.775 0.798 0.776 0.898 --- 0.932 0.895 0.914 1.06 1.13 1.12 0.793 0.726 0.744 0.735 0.66 0.572 0.813 0.827 0.82 0.812
Total Sulphur mg/L 16 17 19 17 16 --- 20 21 21 13 14 15 40 33 37 35 30 24 15 15 15 < 50
Total Thallium mg/L < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 --- < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001
Total Tin mg/L 0.00629 0.00559 0.00743 0.00644 0.00306 --- 0.00194 0.00194 0.00194 0.00235 0.00272 0.00289 0.00213 0.00227 0.00222 0.00225 0.00339 0.00209 0.00235 0.00228 0.00232 0.00553
Total Titanium mg/L 0.058 0.061 0.058 0.059 0.07 --- 0.053 0.055 0.054 0.057 0.06 0.08 0.061 0.058 0.061 0.060 0.056 0.039 0.04 0.038 0.04 0.075
Total Uranium mg/L 0.00008 0.00009 0.00009 0.00009 0.00011 --- 0.0001 0.00008 0.0001 0.00012 0.0002 0.00017 0.00015 0.00012 0.00013 0.00013 0.00011 0.00009 0.00016 0.0001 0.0001 0.00012
Total Vanadium mg/L 0.029 0.031 0.032 0.031 0.035 --- 0.036 0.035 0.0355 0.045 0.05 0.047 0.031 0.031 0.032 0.032 0.029 0.023 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.032
Total Zinc mg/L 3 0.013 0.0142 0.0147 0.014 0.0156 --- 0.0271 0.0151 0.0211 0.0184 0.015 0.0145 0.015 0.0146 0.0171 0.0159 0.0226 0.0175 0.0185 0.0186 0.0186 0.0208
Total Zirconium mg/L 0.0053 0.0056 0.0058 0.0056 0.0065 --- 0.0066 0.0067 0.0067 0.009 0.0091 0.0099 0.0054 0.0054 0.0056 0.0055 0.0045 0.0038 0.0069 0.0067 0.0068 0.0063
Notes:
a - Exceeded maximum allowable value specified in CRD Sewer Use Bylaw 2467.
b - Exceeded minimum allowable value specified in CRD Sewer Use Bylaw 2467.
--- = Not available.
* Calculations of the average when results were less than detection were made using half of the detection value.
60158830_App B4 to B9_2010-Aug25_Hartland Leachate 2009-2010.xls:App. B.4 Page 1 of3

Appendix B-5. Quarterly Leachate Chemistry - Trace Organics - Hartland Valve Chamber - 2009/10
Sewer Use Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve
Hartland Valve Chamber
State Parameter Units Criteria Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber
min max 2009 Apr 27 2009 Jul 13 2009 Oct 16 2009 Oct 30 2010 Jan 07
FR1 FR2 FR3 SS SS SS SS

Total acenaphthene µg/L 0.9 1.3 2.1 1.5 1 3.3 4.1
Total acenaphthylene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Total anthracene µg/L < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
Total fluorene µg/L 0.3 0.5 1 0.8 0.6 1.5 2.1
Total naphthalene µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 6 < 3 < 3 19
Total phenanthrene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.6 < 0.2 1.1 1.7
Total 2-chloronaphthalene µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total 2-methylnaphthalene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 0.6 0.8 < 0.2 1 3.3
Total Total LMW-PAH's µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 10 < 3 7 31
Total benzo(a)anthracene µg/L < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
Total dibenzo(a,h)anthracene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Total chrysene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Total fluoranthene µg/L 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3
Total benzo(b)fluoranthene + benzo(j)fluoran µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Total benzo(k)fluoranthene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Total pyrene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Total benzo(a)pyrene µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total benzo(g,h,i)perylene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Total Total HMW-PAH's µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 4 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.5
Total total PAHs µg/L < 3 < 3 4 10 < 3 7 31
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Total dimethyl phthalate µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total diethyl phthalate µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total di-n-butyl phthalate µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3
Total di-n-octyl phthalate µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total butylbenzyl phthalate µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3
Total bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate µg/L < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5
KETONES
Total methyl ethyl ketone µg/L < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10
Total dimethyl ketone µg/L < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20
Total methyl isobutyl ketone µg/L < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10
AROMATICS - NON HALOGENATED
Total Benzene µg/L 100 1.4 1.3 1.3 0.8 0.9 1.2 1.1
Total Ethylbenzene µg/L 200 1.3 1.1 1.1 0.8 0.7 1 2.9
Total Toluene µg/L 200 1 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.7 1.2 2.2
Total Xylenes µg/L 200 6 5 5 2 2 5 9
Total m & p Xylenes µg/L 4 3 3 2 1 4 5
Total o-Xylene µg/L 1.7 1.7 1.6 0.6 0.5 1.8 3.4
Total Styrene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) µg/L < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4
Total nitrobenzene µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 0.3
Total 2,4-dinitrotoluene µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.6 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total 2,6-dinitrotoluene µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
AROMATICS - HALOGENATED
Total chlorobenzene µg/L 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1
Total 1,2-dichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 1,3-dichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 1,4-dichlorobenzene µg/L < 2 < 2 < 2 1.8 1.8 2.6 2.2
Total 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
PHENOLS - NON HALOGENATED
Total phenol µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3
Total 2-nitrophenol µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3
Total 4-nitrophenol µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3
Total 2,4-dimethylphenol µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 3 3
Total 2,4-dinitrophenol µg/L < 30 < 30 < 30 < 8 < 7 < 7 < 7
Total 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 4 < 3 < 3 < 3
PHENOLS - HALOGENATED
Total 2-chlorophenol µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 2,4 + 2,5 dichlorophenol µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 2,4,6-trichlorophenol µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total pentachlorophenol µg/L < 6 < 6 < 6 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 4-chloro-3-methylphenol µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
ETHERS - HALOGENATED
Total 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether µg/L < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05
Total 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total bis(2-chloroethyl)ether µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
NITROSAMINES
Total N-nitrosodimethylamine µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total N-nitrosodiphenylamine µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
OTHER ORGANICS
Total acrolein µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 10 < 9 < 20
Total acrylonitrile µg/L < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4
Total benzidine µg/L < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50
Total 3,3-dichlorobenzidine µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 1,2-diphenylhydrazine µg/L < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.09 < 0.05
Total hexachlorobutadiene µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total hexachlorocyclopentadiene µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total alpha-terpineol µg/L < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5
Total isophorone µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.8
ALKANES - HALOGENATED
Total chloromethane µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total dichloromethane µg/L < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2
Total trichloromethane µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total tetrabromomethane µg/L < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50
60158830_App B4 to B9_2010-Aug25_Hartland Leachate 2009-2010.xls:App. B.5 Page 2 of 3

Appendix B-5. Quarterly Leachate Chemistry - Trace Organics - Hartland Valve Chamber - 2009/10
Sewer Use Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve Hartland Valve
Hartland Valve Chamber
State Parameter Units Criteria Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber
min max 2009 Apr 27 2009 Jul 13 2009 Oct 16 2009 Oct 30 2010 Jan 07
FR1 FR2 FR3 SS SS SS SS
Total tetrachloromethane µg/L < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3 < 3
Total chlorodibromomethane µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total bromodichloromethane µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total bromomethane µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total tribromomethane µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total trichlorofluoromethane µg/L < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4
Total chloroethane µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total 1,1-dichloroethane µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 1,2-dichloroethane µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total dibromoethane µg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Total 1,1,1-trichloroethane µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 1,1,2-trichloroethane µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total dibromomethane µg/L < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9
Total hexachloroethane µg/L < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3
Total 1,2-dichloropropane µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
ALKENES - HALOGENATED
Total chloroethene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total 1,1-dichloroethene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total trans-1,2-dichloroethene µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total trichloroethene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total tetrachloroethene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total cis-1,2-dichloroethene µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total cis-1,3-dichloropropene µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Total trans-1,3-dichloropropene µg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Notes:

Appendix B-6. Monthly Leachate Chemistry - Phase 2 Cleanout - 2009/10
Sewer Use Criteria Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout Phase 2 Cleanout
State Parameter Units
2009 Apr 27 2009 May 14 2009 May 26 2009 Jun 04 2009 Jul 13 2009 Aug 31 2009 Oct 16 2009 Nov 04 2009 Dec 02 2010 Jan 07 2010 Feb 23 2010 Mar 17
min max SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
Re-sampled for BOD Sample collected as a Bright orange-yellow Bright amber-yellow
Bright yellow and Bright yelllow coloured Rusty orange colour Bright yellow and Amber coloured and Bright rusty orange Bright rusty-yellow Bright rusty-yellow
COMMENTS: Hartland - Leachate: Phase 2 Cleanout due to lab receiving surrogate for colour and clear; H2S colour and clear. H2S
clear; H2S smell. and clear; H2S smeall. and clear; H2S smell. clear; H2S smell. clear. and clear. H2S smell. and clear. H2S smell. and clear. H2S smell.
error. September 2009. Deep smell. smell.
CONVENTIONALS
Total Temperature °C --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Total Oxidation reduction potential mV --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Total pH pH 5.5 11 7.6 7.8 --- 7.9 7.5 7.6 7.9 7.6 7.8 7.8 7.7 7.6
Total Electrical conductivity µS/cm 6300 6800 --- 9300 6100 11200 13900 5850 6680 4340 6660 5940
Total Total suspended solids mg/L 350 5 4 --- 11 8 < 4 17 5 10 < 4 7 7
Total Biochemical oxygen demand mg/L 500 49 --- 52 350 43 59 67 28 53 46 37 38
Total Chemical oxygen demand mg/L 1000 541 550 --- 906 465 975 1440 a 420 620 386 738 654
Total Fecal Coliform CFU/100 mL < 10 < 1 --- < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 200 70 40 < 10 100
Total Alkalinity - total mg/L CaCO3 2500 580 --- 750 500 < 0.5 6000 2200 2800 1700 2300 2500
Total Total organic carbon mg/L 156 178 --- 481 154 335 443 152 229 59 167 146
Total Oil and grease - total mg/L 100 2 5 --- 10 7 6 14 4 5 6 7 4
Total Oil and grease - mineral (silica gel) mg/L 15 < 2 < 2 --- 2 3 4 13 < 2 2 2 3 < 2
Total Nitrogen - total kjeldahl mg/L N 397 504 --- 679 417 776 1250 411 493 317 464 439
Total Nitrogen - ammonia mg/L N 425 549 --- 710 394 783 1100 411 503 339 452 403
Total Nitrogen - nitrite mg/L N 0.023 < 0.05 --- < 0.02 < 0.05 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.03 0.03 < 0.01 < 0.05 < 0.03
Total Nitrogen - nitrate mg/L N < 0.02 < 0.2 --- 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.4 < 0.2 < 0.03 < 0.04 < 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.1
Total Nitrogen - nitrate plus nitrite mg/L N < 0.02 < 0.2 --- 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.4 < 0.2 < 0.02 < 0.04 < 0.02 < 0.2 < 0.1
Total Nitrogen - total mg/L N 397 504 --- 679 417 776 1250 411 493 317 464 438
Dissolved Chloride mg/L 1500 590 550 --- 760 470 1000 1200 360 510 260 480 410
Dissolved Sulphate mg/L 1500 --- < 5 --- < 5 24 < 0.5 < 0.5 91 13 48 < 5 11
Total Sulphide - total mg/L 1 6.3 a 6.2 a --- 9 a 0.45 5.1 a 4.2 a 4.1 a 6.6 a 9 a 9.4 a 0.15
Dissolved Sulphide - dissolved mg/L 1 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Total Cyanide - SAD (total) mg/L 1 0.0285 0.025 --- 0.047 0.0317 0.0558 < 0.05 0.103 0.029 0.0203 0.0243 0.0295
Total Cyanide - WAD mg/L 1 0.0073 0.0046 --- 0.012 0.0058 0.0219 < 0.05 0.011 0.0079 0.0039 0.0092 0.0118
Total Phenols mg/L 1 0.16 0.022 --- 0.24 0.094 0.36 0.091 0.033 0.15 0.14 0.1 0.1
Total Hardness - total (as CaCO3) mg/L 540 603 --- 588 518 627 574 481 459 392 509 465
ORGANICS
Total Benzene µg/L 100 2.7 2.4 --- 2.2 1.7 1.8 1.4 2.6 1.9 1.5 2.2 2.2
Total Ethylbenzene µg/L 200 3.4 3.9 --- 6.5 1.8 3.4 6.9 6 10.3 5 4.5 4.9
Total Toluene µg/L 200 1.3 1.1 --- 1.5 1 0.9 2.5 2.7 8.6 3.8 1.2 2.1
Total Styrene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total Xylenes µg/L 200 14.1 13.5 --- 12.1 6.4 8.6 12.8 14.2 25 11.2 10.6 10.9
Total m & p Xylenes µg/L 10.8 10.1 --- 8.5 4.6 6.9 9.6 9.4 17.4 7.1 7.2 7.3
Total o-Xylene µg/L 3.3 3.4 --- 3.6 1.8 1.7 3.3 4.8 7.6 4.1 3.4 3.6
Total Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) µg/L < 4 < 4 --- < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4
METALS
Total Aluminum mg/L 0.167 0.188 --- 0.338 0.152 0.397 0.686 0.14 0.199 0.152 0.199 0.22
Total Antimony mg/L 0.0013 0.0017 --- 0.0015 0.001 0.0021 0.0037 0.0012 0.0013 0.0012 0.0018 0.001
Total Arsenic mg/L 0.4 0.0069 0.0089 --- 0.0122 0.0074 0.0192 0.0321 0.0071 0.0089 0.0058 0.0108 0.0079
Total Barium mg/L 0.153 0.177 --- 0.175 0.133 0.212 0.249 0.147 0.122 0.0856 0.123 0.119
Total Beryllium mg/L < 0.00005 < 0.00005 --- < 0.00005 < 0.00005 0.00014 < 0.0002 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Bismuth mg/L < 0.00003 < 0.00003 --- < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.0001 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Boron mg/L 4.88 5.49 --- 7.63 4.53 9.55 14.5 4.15 5.98 3.7 5.21 4.84
Total Cadmium mg/L 0.3 0.00012 0.00003 --- 0.00006 0.00008 0.00009 0.0002 0.00007 0.00003 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Calcium mg/L 137 152 --- 142 130 142 110 121 116 102 125 112
Total Chromium mg/L 4 0.0578 0.0618 --- 0.0903 0.0569 0.117 0.231 0.0448 0.0604 0.0399 0.0612 0.0552
Total Chromium III mg/L 0.055 0.062 --- 0.09 0.055 0.12 0.23 0.041 0.06 0.04 0.061 0.051
Total Chromium VI mg/L 0.002 < 0.001 --- < 0.001 0.002 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.003 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.005
Total Cobalt mg/L 5 0.0151 0.0149 --- 0.0192 0.015 0.0324 0.0574 0.0163 0.014 0.0101 0.0174 0.0143
Total Copper mg/L 1 0.0004 < 0.0003 --- 0.0004 0.0009 0.0022 0.003 0.0013 0.0012 0.0011 0.0008 0.0014
Total Iron mg/L 50 1.2 1.23 --- 1.27 1.32 1.07 1.01 1 0.67 1.5 0.787 0.594
Total Lead mg/L 1 0.0006 0.0005 --- 0.00076 0.00081 0.00126 0.0028 0.00089 0.00113 0.00054 0.00104 0.00079
Total Lithium mg/L < 0.003 < 0.003 --- 0.005 < 0.003 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 0.003 < 0.003
Total Magnesium mg/L 47.9 54.4 --- 57.1 46.9 65.9 72.6 43.5 40.9 33.3 47.6 44.9
Total Manganese mg/L 5 1.89 2.08 --- 1.31 1.97 1.47 0.827 1.57 0.991 1.05 1.3 1.37
Total Mercury mg/L 0.02 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 --- < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.0002 0.00008 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Molybdenum mg/L 5 0.0014 0.0016 --- 0.0016 0.0012 0.0024 0.005 0.0011 0.0014 0.001 0.0014 0.0014
Total Nickel mg/L 1 0.0764 0.0895 --- 0.11 0.0735 0.16 0.253 0.072 0.0772 0.0539 0.0808 0.0732
Total Phosphorus mg/L 3.85 4.26 --- 7.34 3.82 9.32 12.1 3.39 4.87 3.33 4.81 4.21
Total Potassium mg/L 209 249 --- 325 194 410 504 181 221 157 230 212
Total Selenium mg/L 0.0005 0.0011 --- 0.001 0.0017 0.001 0.0015 0.0004 0.0005 0.0007 0.0004 0.0004
Total Silicon mg/L 18 17 --- 15.8 16.9 21.5 17.9 17.7 13.7 13.3 15.8 18.8
Total Silver mg/L 2 < 0.00003 0.00004 --- 0.00005 0.00003 0.00007 0.0001 0.00003 0.00007 < 0.00003 0.00003 0.00005
Total Sodium mg/L 433 527 --- 688 442 905 1230 381 457 347 522 471
Total Strontium mg/L 0.796 0.921 --- 0.986 0.75 1.09 1.13 0.739 0.763 0.576 0.807 0.722
Total Sulphur mg/L 14 11 --- 17 16 15 < 10 40 21 31 10 < 50
Total Thallium mg/L < 0.00001 < 0.00001 --- < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00004 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001
Total Tin mg/L 0.00841 0.00563 --- 0.00864 0.00575 0.00865 0.0333 0.00591 0.00856 0.00471 0.006 0.0086
Total Titanium mg/L 0.08 0.08 --- 0.092 0.081 0.069 0.408 0.078 0.075 0.062 0.079 0.088
Total Uranium mg/L 0.00007 0.00006 --- 0.00007 0.00008 0.00007 0.00016 0.0001 0.00007 0.00005 0.00007 0.00008
Total Vanadium mg/L 0.057 0.068 --- 0.087 0.058 0.113 0.171 0.051 0.065 0.044 0.063 0.053
Total Zinc mg/L 3 0.0142 0.0131 --- 0.0215 0.0127 0.023 0.06 0.0147 0.0307 0.0176 0.0174 0.0141
Total Zirconium mg/L 0.0113 0.0126 --- 0.0202 0.0119 0.0239 0.041 0.0094 0.012 0.0073 0.011 0.0105
Notes:
CRD Sewer Use Bylaw criteria are provided for comparison purposes only. This station is not a discharge location defined by the Waste Discharge Permit.

Appendix B-7. Monthly Leachate Chemistry - North Purge Well - 2009/10
North Purge Well North Purge Well North Purge Well North Purge Well North Purge Well North Purge Well North Purge Well North Purge Well North Purge Well North Purge Well North Purge Well North Purge Well
State Parameter Units Sewer Use Criteria 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8 52-4-0-P7 & 80-1-0-P8
Sample collected as a
Re-sampled for BOD
Paly yellow coloured and Pale yellow coloured and Light yellow colour and Very light yellow colour surrogate for September 2009. Medium-light brownish Pale yellow colour and
Comments: Har - Gw - 80-1-0 (80-A) - Hartland - Purge Well # 8 due to lab receiving Pale yellow and clear. Pale yellow and clear. Pale yellow and clear. Pale yellow and clear.
clear. clear. clear. and clear. Pale yellow and clear. Some yellow colour and clear. clear.
error.
suspended solids.
CONVENTIONALS
Total pH pH 5.5 11 7.6 7.6 --- 7.9 7.4 7.4 7.7 7.3 7.8 7.8 7.6 7.5
Total Total suspended solids mg/L 350 17 7 --- 63 11 42 49 18 25 < 4 17 12
Total Biochemical oxygen demand mg/L 500 14 --- 21 58 < 10 13 23 13 12 < 10 < 10 < 10
Total Chemical oxygen demand mg/L 1000 141 101 --- 228 133 218 223 193 170 57 189 166
Total Fecal Coliform CFU/100 mL 10 50 --- < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 30 80 < 10 < 10
Total Alkalinity - total mg/L CaCO3 1100 940 --- 1600 930 1700 1800 1600 1200 550 1100 980
Total Total organic carbon mg/L 36 37 --- 140 40.3 71 88 70 75 23 37.4 41
Total Oil and grease - mineral (silica gel) mg/L 15 < 2 < 2 --- < 2 3 3 15 < 2 3 < 2 < 2 < 2
Total Nitrogen - ammonia mg/L N 79 72 --- 194 67 157 186 162 120 37.6 86.4 85.4
Total Nitrogen - nitrite mg/L N 0.362 0.214 --- 0.026 0.018 0.013 0.011 0.034 0.03 0.094 0.052 0.065
Total Nitrogen - nitrate mg/L N 17.9 25.1 --- 0.32 16.2 0.12 < 0.02 1.89 0.59 18 15.4 16.5
Total Nitrogen - nitrate plus nitrite mg/L N 18.2 25.3 --- 0.34 16.2 0.13 < 0.02 1.92 0.62 18.1 15.4 16.6
Dissolved Sulphate mg/L 1500 --- 46 --- 2.8 52 6 3.4 25 46 68 37 43
Total Sulphide - total mg/L 1 0.06 0.016 --- 0.12 0.007 0.1 0.07 0.06 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.07
Total Cyanide - SAD (total) mg/L 1 0.0045 0.0044 --- 0.004 0.0043 0.0057 0.0031 0.0038 0.0031 0.0021 0.003 0.0035
Total Cyanide - WAD mg/L 1 0.001 0.0019 --- 0.0019 < 0.0005 0.0023 0.0014 0.002 0.0011 < 0.0005 0.0019 0.0025
Total Phenols mg/L 1 0.028 0.006 --- 0.041 0.021 0.052 0.01 0.014 0.041 0.008 0.02 0.018
ORGANICS
Total Benzene µg/L 100 0.8 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total Ethylbenzene µg/L 200 < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total Toluene µg/L 200 < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total Xylenes µg/L 200 < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total m & p Xylenes µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total o-Xylene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
METALS
Total Barium mg/L 0.24 0.237 --- 0.469 0.25 0.446 0.463 0.366 0.278 0.106 0.237 0.236
Total Beryllium mg/L < 0.00005 < 0.00005 --- < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Bismuth mg/L < 0.00003 < 0.00003 --- < 0.00003 0.00004 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Boron mg/L 2.76 2.57 --- 3.39 2.98 3.53 3.6 3.25 3.26 1.43 2.31 2.18
Total Cadmium mg/L 0.3 0.00013 0.00005 --- < 0.00003 0.00008 < 0.00003 0.00004 < 0.00003 0.0001 0.00005 0.00004 < 0.00003
Total Chromium III mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 --- 0.002 0.003 0.003 < 0.001 0.002 0.007 0.003 0.003 0.002
Total Chromium VI mg/L 0.003 0.002 --- < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.004 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
Total Cobalt mg/L 5 0.00905 0.00881 --- 0.00742 0.0102 0.00858 0.00856 0.00783 0.00824 0.00478 0.008 0.00811
Total Copper mg/L 1 0.0173 0.0174 --- 0.0008 0.0194 0.0019 0.0026 0.0023 0.0218 0.0204 0.0138 0.0136
Total Iron mg/L 50 5.77 3.01 --- 21.8 4.59 17.5 16.5 7.69 7.62 0.603 6.63 6
Total Lead mg/L 1 0.00041 0.00009 --- 0.00006 0.00014 0.00006 0.00006 0.00004 0.00115 0.00017 0.00009 0.00008
Total Lithium mg/L < 0.003 < 0.003 --- 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total Magnesium mg/L 52.9 51.4 --- 64.1 50 66.8 67.1 62.8 50.3 32 50.6 53.8
Total Mercury mg/L 0.02 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 --- < 0.00005 < 0.00005 0.00007 < 0.00005 0.00007 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Nickel mg/L 1 0.0215 0.021 --- 0.0193 0.0231 0.0213 0.0227 0.0218 0.026 0.0132 0.0204 0.0198
Total Potassium mg/L 98.8 98.7 --- 132 90.7 132 135 129 105 54 98.5 100
Total Selenium mg/L 0.0003 0.0002 --- 0.0004 0.0005 0.0004 0.0002 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 < 0.0002 0.0003
Total Silicon mg/L 14.1 12 --- 17.8 11.5 18.6 19.3 17.2 13.8 9.67 11.6 14
Total Silver mg/L 2 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 --- < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 0.00004 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Sodium mg/L 273 266 --- 373 284 406 419 372 278 139 274 278
Total Sulphur mg/L 18 17 --- 8 20 4 7 10 22 27 15 < 50
Total Tin mg/L 0.00388 0.00049 --- 0.00103 0.0006 0.001 0.0011 0.00077 0.00119 0.0004 0.00063 0.00308
Total Titanium mg/L < 0.003 0.005 --- 0.005 < 0.003 0.007 0.005 0.003 0.005 0.004 0.007 0.005
Total Vanadium mg/L 0.004 0.002 --- 0.005 0.002 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.004 < 0.001 0.003 0.002
Total Zinc mg/L 3 0.0067 0.0066 --- 0.0018 0.0067 0.0016 0.0033 0.0026 0.0187 0.0042 0.0064 0.005
Total Zirconium mg/L 0.0006 0.0007 --- 0.0009 0.0006 0.0008 0.0009 0.0008 0.001 < 0.0005 0.0006 < 0.0005
Notes:

Appendix B-8. Monthly Leachate Chemistry - Controlled Waste Ditch - 2009/10
Controlled Waste Controlled Waste Controlled Waste Controlled Waste Controlled Waste Controlled Waste Controlled Waste Controlled Waste Controlled Waste Controlled Waste Controlled Waste
Controlled Waste Ditch
State Parameter Units Sewer Use Criteria Ditch Ditch Ditch Ditch Ditch Ditch Ditch Ditch Ditch Ditch Ditch
Sample collected as a surrogate

Medium amber and Re-sampled for BOD Light tea coloured Medium brown-
Tea coloured and Brownish amber Amber coloured and for September 2009. Medium Medium yellow Medium yellow Med-light brown Light brown-yellow
COMMENTS: Hartland - Leachate: Controlled Waste Ditch some suspended due to lab receiving with some suspended yellow colour and
clear. coloured and clear. slightly turbid. yellow-brown colour and colour and clear. colour and clear. and clear. colour and clear.
solids. error. solids. moderately turbid. clear.
CONVENTIONALS
Total pH pH 5.5 11 8.1 8.1 --- 8.2 8.1 8.3 8.3 8 8.1 8.1 8.1 8
Total Total suspended solids mg/L 350 22 42 --- 110 31 18 130 92 20 8 28 21
Total Biochemical oxygen demand mg/L 500 40 --- 38 196 57 18 32 54 17 17 21 19
Total Chemical oxygen demand mg/L 1000 320 213 --- 368 465 540 469 299 238 178 417 331
Total Fecal Coliform CFU/100 mL < 10 110 --- < 10 20 100 200 220 140 10 < 10 10
Total Alkalinity - total mg/L CaCO3 2200 1700 --- 150 610 < 0.5 2800 2200 1800 1500 2100 1900
Total Total organic carbon mg/L 97 73 --- 263 163 181 192 132 90 66 99 79
Total Oil and grease - mineral (silica gel) mg/L 15 < 2 < 2 --- 2 < 2 3 12 3 3 < 2 < 2 3
Total Nitrogen - ammonia mg/L N 307 235 --- 453 501 562 530 353 268 232 298 260
Total Nitrogen - nitrite mg/L N 0.438 0.52 --- 0.219 0.09 0.15 2.31 0.352 0.03 0.159 0.25 0.339
Total Nitrogen - nitrate mg/L N 0.27 1.4 --- 0.49 < 0.2 < 0.2 6.9 0.15 < 0.04 0.14 0.46 0.44
Total Nitrogen - nitrate plus nitrite mg/L N 0.71 1.9 --- 0.7 < 0.2 0.2 9.2 0.5 0.05 0.3 0.71 0.78
Dissolved Sulphate mg/L 1500 --- 26 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 54 27 32 15 27
Total Sulphide - total mg/L 1 0.09 0.023 --- 0.12 0.013 0.13 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.11 0.09 0.05
Total Cyanide - SAD (total) mg/L 1 0.0086 0.007 --- 0.0118 0.0165 0.0152 0.014 0.0095 0.0062 0.0042 0.0079 0.0087
Total Cyanide - WAD mg/L 1 0.0038 0.0025 --- 0.0053 0.0071 0.009 0.008 0.005 0.0025 0.0018 0.005 0.0048
Total Phenols mg/L 1 0.05 0.016 --- 0.047 0.065 0.09 0.031 0.021 0.052 0.039 < 0.1 0.037
ORGANICS
Total Benzene µg/L 100 0.6 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total Ethylbenzene µg/L 200 < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.7 1.4 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total Toluene µg/L 200 < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.5 1 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total Xylenes µg/L 200 < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 3.7 4 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total m & p Xylenes µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 2.5 2.6 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total o-Xylene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 1.1 1.4 < 0.5 < 0.5
METALS
Total Barium mg/L 0.129 0.108 --- 0.14 0.116 0.116 0.207 0.156 0.115 0.103 0.133 0.133
Total Beryllium mg/L < 0.00005 < 0.00005 --- < 0.00005 < 0.00005 0.00009 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Bismuth mg/L < 0.00003 < 0.00003 --- < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Boron mg/L 3.99 2.74 --- 4.45 5.92 6.31 5.25 3.89 3.25 2.39 3.08 2.87
Total Cadmium mg/L 0.3 0.00015 < 0.00003 --- 0.00003 0.00008 0.00003 0.00012 0.00008 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Chromium III mg/L 0.017 0.01 --- 0.02 0.031 0.033 0.035 0.019 0.015 0.01 0.015 0.013
Total Chromium VI mg/L 0.001 0.002 --- < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.001
Total Cobalt mg/L 5 0.0135 0.00997 --- 0.0175 0.0242 0.0294 0.0268 0.0154 0.0101 0.00781 0.0124 0.0118
Total Copper mg/L 1 0.0016 0.0018 --- 0.0005 0.0005 0.0018 0.0077 0.0017 0.0013 0.0022 0.0006 0.0013
Total Iron mg/L 50 3.04 2.07 --- 4.88 3.47 3.2 3.3 4.69 5.04 3.78 4.86 3.86
Total Lead mg/L 1 0.00086 0.00031 --- 0.00051 0.00059 0.0008 0.00247 0.00074 0.00052 0.00031 0.0003 0.00024
Total Lithium mg/L 0.006 0.005 --- 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.007 0.005 0.004 < 0.003 0.003 0.003
Total Magnesium mg/L 76.5 75.6 --- 80.1 92.2 99.8 79.9 74.4 59.2 63.8 76.6 81.2
Total Mercury mg/L 0.02 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 --- < 0.00005 < 0.00005 0.00006 < 0.00005 0.00011 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Nickel mg/L 1 0.0376 0.0282 --- 0.0433 0.0618 0.0761 0.0798 0.0443 0.03 0.0226 0.034 0.0307
Total Potassium mg/L 159 115 --- 184 241 268 215 157 127 100 148 138
Total Selenium mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 --- 0.0008 0.0022 0.0008 0.0007 0.0005 0.0003 0.0004 0.0004 0.0005
Total Silicon mg/L 15.7 12.7 --- 14.8 15.3 18.1 11.7 15.8 14.2 14.3 13.9 16.9
Total Silver mg/L 2 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 --- < 0.00003 < 0.00003 0.00003 0.00004 < 0.00003 0.00004 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Sodium mg/L 338 271 --- 401 553 603 528 344 262 224 343 ---
Total Sulphur mg/L 12 12 --- 15 10 8 7 26 18 14 7 < 50
Total Tin mg/L 0.00676 0.00261 --- 0.00277 0.004 0.00389 0.0044 0.00319 0.00244 0.00199 0.00197 0.00595
Total Titanium mg/L 0.032 0.026 --- 0.043 0.041 0.041 0.049 0.033 0.029 0.022 0.031 0.026
Total Vanadium mg/L 0.021 0.015 --- 0.024 0.031 0.032 0.032 0.019 0.015 0.012 0.017 0.015
Total Zinc mg/L 3 0.0185 0.014 --- 0.0172 0.0188 0.0233 0.0488 0.0176 0.0165 0.0166 0.0131 0.0123
Total Zirconium mg/L 0.0053 0.0036 --- 0.0064 0.0087 0.0102 0.0122 0.0059 0.0037 0.0026 0.0041 0.0035
Notes:

Appendix B-9. Monthly Leachate Chemistry - Markham Valve Chamber - 2009/10
Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve Markham Valve
State Parameter Units Sewer Use Criteria Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber
2009 Apr 27 2009 May 14 2009 May 26 2009 Jul 13 2009 Aug 31 2009 Oct 16 2009 Oct 30 2009 Nov 04 2009 Dec 02 2010 Jan 07 2010 Feb 23 2010 Feb 23 2010 Mar 17
min max SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
Re-sampled for BOD Sample collected as a Light greyish yellow-
Medium brown-yellow Medium brown-yellow Amber coloured and Brownish tea coloured Medium brown-yellow Medium yellow-brown Medium yellow-brown Grey-amber colour Grey-amber colour Medium brown-yellow
Comments: Hartland - Leachate: Markham Valve Chamber due to lab receiving surrogate for brown colour and
colour and clear. colour and clear. clear. and clear. colour and clear. colour and clear. colour and clear. and clear. and clear. colour and clear.
error. September 2009. Tea clear.
CONVENTIONALS
Total Temperature °C 15.1 14.6 --- 19.6 20 13.4 16.2 15.4 13.5 14.5 17.4 17.4 15.9
Total Oxidation reduction potential mV 124 130 --- 72 163 83 97 130 59 86 76 76 79
Total pH pH 5.5 11 7.8 8 --- 7.8 7.9 8.1 8 7.6 7.9 7.9 7.8 7.8 7.7
Total Electrical conductivity µS/cm 4500 4600 --- 6000 5860 6120 4190 4330 3860 3230 5050 5050 4700
Total Total suspended solids mg/L 350 17 < 4 --- 25 17 19 11 12 6 < 4 7 7 9
Total Biochemical oxygen demand mg/L 500 20 --- 27 41 27 25 < 10 15 31 12 < 10 < 10 23
Total Chemical oxygen demand mg/L 1000 312 333 --- 423 465 435 291 306 302 227 518 518 448
Total Fecal Coliform CFU/100 mL 50 < 10 --- 790 7700 290 1800 350 400 230 20 20 40
Total Alkalinity - total mg/L CaCO3 1700 1800 --- 490 2300 2500 1600 1700 1500 1200 2000 2000 1800
Total Total organic carbon mg/L 87 107 --- 137 162 153 98 103 116 78 119 119 110
Total Oil and grease - total mg/L 100 2 3 --- 5 3 8 4 4 6 2 6 6 2
Total Oil and grease - mineral (silica gel) mg/L 15 < 2 3 --- < 2 2 8 < 2 2 3 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2
Total Nitrogen - total kjeldahl mg/L N 259 272 --- 350 301 374 234 261 236 206 261 261 301
Total Nitrogen - ammonia mg/L N 226 261 --- 307 285 391 234 236 227 198 302 302 280
Total Nitrogen - nitrite mg/L N 1.11 1.25 --- 0.5 < 0.05 1.25 1.37 1.48 0.1 0.159 0.25 0.25 0.46
Total Nitrogen - nitrate mg/L N 5.2 8.3 --- 4.1 < 0.2 1 7.9 4.3 19.1 3.29 1.2 1.2 5.3
Total Nitrogen - nitrate plus nitrite mg/L N 6.3 9.6 --- 4.6 < 0.2 2.3 9.3 5.8 19.2 3.45 1.4 1.4 5.8
Total Nitrogen - total mg/L N 265 282 --- 354 301 376 244 266 256 210 262 262 307
Dissolved Chloride mg/L 1500 380 410 --- 510 550 520 260 240 220 190 370 370 340
Dissolved Sulphate mg/L 1500 22 27 --- 9.2 2.1 0.7 79 78 55 48 28 28 36
Total Sulphide - total mg/L 1 0.17 0.06 --- 0.014 0.25 0.1 0.15 0.11 0.11 0.22 0.15 0.15 0.08
Dissolved Sulphide - dissolved mg/L 1 0.16 0.06 --- 0.009 0.08 0.08 0.14 0.09 0.09 0.14 0.13 0.13 < 0.05
Total Cyanide - SAD (total) mg/L 1 0.0123 0.0126 --- 0.0181 0.0196 0.009 0.0156 0.0201 0.0091 0.008 0.0112 0.0112 0.0131
Total Cyanide - WAD mg/L 1 0.0048 0.0043 --- 0.0046 0.0092 0.009 0.0044 0.0062 0.0035 0.0024 0.0073 0.0073 0.008
Total Phenols mg/L 1 0.062 0.018 --- 0.1 0.08 0.03 0.034 0.008 0.087 0.078 0.1 0.1 0.08
Total Hardness - total (as CaCO3) mg/L 507 557 --- 614 612 592 488 458 512 399 509 509 511
ORGANICS
Total Benzene µg/L 100 1.4 1.2 --- 1.2 0.6 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.7
Total Ethylbenzene µg/L 200 < 0.5 1 --- 1.2 0.6 1.2 1.4 < 0.5 0.9 2.9 2.2 2.2 2.6
Total Toluene µg/L 200 0.6 0.7 --- 0.8 0.6 1.2 1.7 1.8 2.6 2.6 0.9 0.9 1
Total Styrene µg/L < 0.5 < 0.5 --- < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Total Xylenes µg/L 200 3.4 3.6 --- 3.3 1.6 3.6 6.9 7.7 10.8 9.8 6.5 6.5 6.3
Total m & p Xylenes µg/L 1.8 2 --- 2.2 1 2.4 4.3 4.9 6.3 5.6 4.2 4.2 4
Total o-Xylene µg/L 1.6 1.6 --- 1.1 0.6 1.2 2.5 2.8 4.5 4.2 2.2 2.2 2.3
Total Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) µg/L < 4 < 4 --- < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4
METALS
Total Aluminum mg/L 0.093 0.104 --- 0.127 0.121 0.111 0.092 0.095 0.1 0.091 0.141 0.141 0.158
Total Antimony mg/L 0.0011 0.0012 --- 0.0012 0.0012 0.0012 0.0011 0.0012 0.0013 0.0012 0.0013 0.0013 0.0011
Total Arsenic mg/L 0.4 0.0053 0.0056 --- 0.0077 0.0083 0.0087 0.0055 0.0062 0.0059 0.0044 0.0074 0.0074 0.0071
Total Barium mg/L 0.148 0.186 --- 0.212 0.206 0.194 0.149 0.132 0.12 0.112 0.173 0.173 0.17
Total Beryllium mg/L < 0.00005 < 0.00005 --- < 0.00005 0.00007 0.00007 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Bismuth mg/L < 0.00003 < 0.00003 --- < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Boron mg/L 3.6 3.97 --- 5.11 5.26 5.27 3.47 3.28 3.35 2.73 4.08 4.08 3.88
Total Cadmium mg/L 0.3 0.0001 0.00007 --- 0.00011 0.00009 0.0001 0.00009 0.0001 0.00014 0.00004 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 0.00004
Total Calcium mg/L 130 142 --- 156 152 142 128 120 147 103 126 126 127
Total Chromium mg/L 4 0.0297 0.0298 --- 0.0419 0.0376 0.0368 0.0232 0.0263 0.0265 0.0216 0.0366 0.0366 0.0357
Total Chromium III mg/L 0.022 0.027 --- 0.029 0.038 0.034 0.021 0.024 0.027 0.022 0.037 0.037 0.031
Total Chromium VI mg/L 0.007 0.002 --- 0.012 < 0.001 0.003 0.002 0.003 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.005
Total Cobalt mg/L 5 0.0117 0.013 --- 0.0175 0.0205 0.0198 0.0106 0.0116 0.0104 0.00798 0.0131 0.0131 0.0131
Total Copper mg/L 1 0.007 0.0072 --- 0.0077 0.0229 0.0147 0.019 0.0144 0.0157 0.0084 0.005 0.005 0.0083
Total Iron mg/L 50 2.24 2.15 --- 3.21 4.02 2.64 1.38 1.15 1.49 1.04 1.33 1.33 1.12
Total Lead mg/L 1 0.00077 0.00077 --- 0.00092 0.00097 0.00088 0.00117 0.00074 0.00143 0.00095 0.00126 0.00126 0.00119
Total Lithium mg/L < 0.003 0.003 --- 0.003 < 0.003 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.003
Total Magnesium mg/L 44.5 49 --- 54.4 56.3 57.8 40.8 38.3 35.2 34.3 47.2 47.2 47.2
Total Manganese mg/L 5 1.49 1.64 --- 1.63 1.53 1.53 1.47 1.39 1.1 0.993 1.23 1.23 1.37
Total Mercury mg/L 0.02 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 --- < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005 < 0.00005
Total Molybdenum mg/L 5 0.0022 0.0016 --- 0.0015 0.0024 0.0021 0.0035 0.0011 0.0012 0.0011 0.0012 0.0012 0.0016
Total Nickel mg/L 1 0.0438 0.0525 --- 0.0671 0.0727 0.0796 0.0418 0.0466 0.0399 0.0348 0.0568 0.0568 0.054
Total Phosphorus mg/L 1.96 1.92 --- 2.92 2.71 2.25 1.72 1.98 1.83 1.67 2.7 2.7 2.6
Total Potassium mg/L 140 164 --- 202 198 185 124 127 120 112 173 173 171
Total Selenium mg/L 0.0004 0.0006 --- 0.0022 0.0006 0.0005 0.0003 0.0004 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003
Total Silicon mg/L 15.7 13.2 --- 15.5 15.4 13.6 15 14.9 11.1 12.8 13.7 13.7 16
Total Silver mg/L 2 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 --- < 0.00003 0.00003 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003 < 0.00003
Total Sodium mg/L 312 368 --- 486 481 508 276 280 252 249 410 410 396
Total Strontium mg/L 0.775 0.912 --- 1.06 1.09 1.1 0.799 0.737 0.931 0.588 0.832 0.832 0.811
Total Sulphur mg/L 19 15 --- 13 16 9 35 33 28 25 17 17 < 50
Total Thallium mg/L < 0.00001 < 0.00001 --- < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001 < 0.00001
Total Tin mg/L 0.00494 0.00298 --- 0.00252 0.00268 0.00257 0.0024 0.00225 0.00321 0.00224 0.0029 0.0029 0.00483
Total Titanium mg/L 0.067 0.069 --- 0.063 0.056 0.071 0.057 0.056 0.045 0.042 0.046 0.046 0.071
Total Uranium mg/L 0.00008 0.00009 --- 0.00008 0.00022 0.00016 0.00014 0.00012 0.0001 0.0001 0.00009 0.00009 0.00011
Total Vanadium mg/L 0.031 0.037 --- 0.052 0.049 0.054 0.029 0.032 0.031 0.023 0.037 0.037 0.033
Total Zinc mg/L 3 0.0157 0.0164 --- 0.0158 0.0168 0.017 0.021 0.0188 0.0243 0.0201 0.0188 0.0188 0.0266
Total Zirconium mg/L 0.0059 0.0062 --- 0.0094 0.0097 0.0104 0.0053 0.0056 0.0044 0.0038 0.0068 0.0068 0.0067
Notes:

Appendix C
Hartland Climate Data
 Daily Rainfall Data Collected from the

Hartland Weather Station – 1997 to 2010
 Monthly Rainfall Data Collected from the
Hartland Weather Station – 1997 to 2010

Appendix C-1. Daily Rainfall Data Collected from the Hartland Landfill Weather Station - 1997 to Present
Date Daily Rainfall (mm)

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
January 1 2.4 11.6 0 7.6 0 8 5.4 0 11 5 35 0 22.2 22
January 2 0 0 0 0 0 2.6 32.6 0 0 0.8 64.4 11.2 0 1.3
January 3 0 0.2 0 16.8 4.6 2.6 6.8 5.8 0 1.6 7.8 1.6 0.2 0.0
January 4 0 16.2 0 11.2 13 0.2 15 0 0 1.4 9.6 0.4 20.4 40.0
January 5 0 20.8 0 0 30.2 0 0 0 0 23.8 57.4 11 2.8 5.8
January 6 0 20.4 0.4 6.4 0 10.2 0 9.8 3 11.4 2.6 0 21 0.0
January 7 0 1 0 1.8 0 44.4 0 16.4 14.2 6 55.8 0 28.6 0
January 8 0 0 0 7.6 0.2 21.8 0 2.2 12.8 1.8 4.2 8.2 2.2 15.0
January 9 0 0 19.6 19.8 0 0 0 2 0 16.4 10.8 0.6 0.2 2.0
January 10 0 0 21 3 0 0.4 0 1.2 0 42.4 12 36.6 17.2 1.5
January 11 0 0 1 1.2 0 0.4 0 1.6 0.6 14.2 0.6 3.4 0.8 27.8
January 12 0 0 0.2 4.2 0 7.8 7 0 0 17 0 1.8 0 4
January 13 0 17.2 0 0.6 3.2 0 0.4 2.2 0 8.4 0 0 0 2.5
January 14 0 20.4 65.6 6 0 n/a 2.2 2.2 0 0 0 12 0 22
January 15 0 22.8 0.2 10.8 0 0 0 2 3.6 0 0 0 0 21
January 16 0 13.4 10.2 6.4 0 0.8 0 0 8.6 36 5.6 0 0 0
January 17 0 16.4 8.6 2.2 0.4 0.8 0 0 54.4 1.4 0 0 0 1.3
January 18 0 0.2 20.6 0 10.2 1.8 0 5.4 18.4 0 12.4 0.4 0 2
January 19 0 0.4 3.2 0 2.6 8.6 0 2.6 15.4 3.6 5.4 2.8 0 0.0
January 20 0 0 2.8 5.4 0.4 11.6 0.6 0 10 6 0 0 0 0
January 21 0 0.4 1 10 21.4 10.8 9.4 0 0.4 2.2 2 0 0 0.0
January 22 0 1 1.6 0 0 4 27.6 0 42.2 0 18.2 0 0 0
January 23 0 16 0.4 0.4 0 4.4 10 8.6 0.2 0.2 8.8 0 0 0.0
January 24 0 6.2 0 0 1.2 22.8 9.4 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 4
January 25 0 0.4 0.4 0.8 1 20.4 0.6 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 1
January 26 0 6.6 2 0 0 3 24.4 3.6 0 18.6 0 1 0 0.0
January 27 0 4 7.4 0 0 6.2 6.2 4.4 0 3 0 0.2 6 0
January 28 0 1.2 19.2 0 0 0 0 16.8 0.2 11.2 0 0.4 0 0.0
January 29 0 0 88.2 0 5.8 0 7.4 13.4 0 33.2 0 8.2 0 0.5
January 30 0 3.2 2.2 0 5.2 16 2.8 18.6 11.4 10.8 0 4.2 0 6.5
January 31 0 0 5 1 0 3.6 38 0.4 3.8 1 0 2.8 0 0
Total Monthly Rainfall 2.4 200 280.8 123.2 99.4 213.2 205.8 119.8 210.2 277.4 312.8 106.8 121.6 180.5
Maximum Daily Rainfall 2.4 22.8 88.2 19.8 30.2 44.4 38 18.6 54.4 42.4 64.4 36.6 28.6 40
February 1 0 0 28.8 26.4 0 0.8 0.2 6 0 10.2 0 0 1.4 3.0
February 2 0 0 45.4 0.4 9.4 0 0.2 8 0 11 0 0.2 4.6 2
February 3 0 0.4 3.2 0 3.2 0.4 0 1.2 1.6 5.6 1.6 0 0 1.0
February 4 0 0 6.2 0 9.2 0 0 2.2 10.6 32.6 6.6 0.2 0 0.5
February 5 0 0 0.6 0 4 2.6 0 0 0 0 0 12.8 0 1
February 6 0 0 17.6 0.4 0.4 11.8 0 6.4 25.4 0 0 14 4.4 0
February 7 0 0 5.4 0.4 0 8.2 0 0 0 0.2 4 13 0 2.8
February 8 0 1 11.4 5.4 13.4 0.2 0 0 0 0.4 1 1.8 0 0.5
February 9 0 1.6 1.6 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 3.4 0 0
February 10 0 0.8 2.2 0 0 0.6 0 0 0 0 0.4 5.8 12.2 0
February 11 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 1.2 3.4 1.4 3
February 12 0 13.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0.8 0 0 4
February 13 0 11.8 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.8 1 0 0 2.0
February 14 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 14.6 0 0 4
February 15 0 0.6 0 0.6 0.6 0 1.2 3.8 0 0 10.8 3.4 0 1
February 16 0 0 4.8 0.2 10.8 7.8 2.4 2.8 0 0 0.8 0 0 5
February 17 0 0 12.8 0 0.4 0.6 5.4 3 0 0 2.8 0 0 0
February 18 0 0.6 10.6 0 3.4 0 1.6 8 0 0 1.6 0 0 0
February 19 0 3.2 9.6 0 0 4.8 2.4 0 0 0 22.2 0 0 0
February 20 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 10.2 0 0 0 16 2.2 0 0
February 21 0 3.2 3.8 1.4 0 65.8 2.4 0 0 0 1.2 0 0 0
February 22 0 3 24.4 1.4 4.4 38.2 0.8 0 0 0 0.6 0 2.4 0
February 23 0 2.6 10.6 4 0 14.4 0.2 0 0 1.2 0 0 1.6 2.3
February 24 0 0 54.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.4 0 1.8 10
February 25 0 1.8 1.6 0 0 0 0 4.2 0 0 0 0 13.4 1
February 26 0 0 0.2 5.8 0 0 0 3.8 0 12 0 0 0 5
February 27 0 1 21.6 16.8 0 0 0 1.8 0 0.2 0 1.2 0 3.0
February 28 0 13 7.4 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0.6 0
February 29 n/a n/a n/a 13.6 n/a n/a n/a 0.8 n/a n/a n/a 1.6 n/a n/a
Total Monthly Rainfall 0 58.6 286.4 79.6 59.2 160.6 29 53 39.2 79.2 94 63 43.8 50.25
Maximum Daily Rainfall 0 13.8 54.2 26.4 13.4 65.8 10.2 8 25.4 32.6 22.2 14 13.4 9.75
March 1 0 11.8 9.8 0.4 6.6 0 0 0 6.6 0 0 2.8 0 0
March 2 0 1 3.6 2.6 11.2 0 1.2 0 0.2 0 5.4 1.6 0.2 2
March 3 0 2 32 6.2 2.2 0 1.4 2.2 0 0 2.4 4.6 0 0
60158830_Apps C1 and 2 2010-Aug25_Hartland Temp & Precip Data (1997 to present).xls:C-1 Daily Rainfall Page 1 of 7

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
March 4 2.2 0 9 5.8 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.2 0 0
March 5 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 11 0 0 1.2 0 0 0
March 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 0
March 7 0.2 0 0 0 0 0.2 4.8 43.8 0.6 0.4 2.8 2.2 0 1.5
March 8 0 2.6 0 0 5.2 2.8 0.8 0 1.6 15.8 8.8 0 1 0
March 9 8.8 8.2 0 1 2.8 1.2 20.4 0.2 3.4 5.4 1.6 4.4 0 0.25
March 10 0 5.8 0.6 0.2 0 3.4 3 0 0 0.8 12 0 0 2.25
March 11 0 0.4 0 4.6 0 44.8 13.6 0 0 3.8 65.8 0 0 11
March 12 0 1.2 2 0.6 0 18 17.4 0 0 0 3.4 0 0 13.25
March 13 0 2.8 3.6 1.8 3 16.6 17.6 0 0 0 1.2 0 0 1
March 14 0.6 0 7 14.4 0.2 0 6.8 0 0 0.4 3.2 10 0 5.75
March 15 0 0.6 0.4 0 4.6 1.6 0 0 0 0 6.4 24 0 2.5
March 16 0 0 8 3 0.6 15 0 0 4.6 1 6 15 0 1.5
March 17 0 0 0 5.8 0 0 1.2 0 1 0.8 9.8 3.8 2.2 0.25
March 18 1 0 0 4 5.4 8.6 0.8 6.6 0 0 0 2 0 0
March 19 0 0 0.6 5.2 7.2 2.2 3 15.8 11 0 6 4.6 0 0
March 20 0 0 0 1 0.8 13.4 0 0 4 0 1.4 2.2 0 0
March 21 0.2 2.2 4.6 0 0 1.6 8.6 0 0.4 0 0.4 0 0 0.75
March 22 0 7 0 7.6 0 0 27.4 0 0 1.4 4.4 0 0 0
March 23 0 8.8 1 0 0 0 6.2 0.2 0 0 9.6 0.8 0 0
March 24 0.8 3.4 0 0 0 0 1 7.8 0 2.6 8.4 0 0 0
March 25 0 1.4 0 0 8.4 0 0.4 2.4 0 0 0 0.2 0 5.25
March 26 1.6 0.4 15.2 0 5 2.2 6.4 1.6 34.8 1 0 0 0 0.5
March 27 7.6 0 0 0.2 5.6 0.6 3.6 0.2 4 0 0 0.6 0 0
March 28 0 4 0.4 0 7.6 3.6 0.4 0 4.4 0.6 0 4.6 0 2.75
March 29 0.2 0 5.4 0 1.8 0 0 0 3.8 0 0 0 0.2 40
March 30 0 3 6.8 0 0.8 0 0.6 2.2 0 0.4 0.4 0.6 0 0.2
March 31 0.6 6.2 0 0 2 0 2.2 2.8 5.6 0 1.4 15 0 0
Total Monthly Rainfall 24.6 72.8 110 64.4 81 135.8 149.6 97 86 36.6 162.2 99.2 3.6 90.7
Maximum Daily Rainfall 8.8 11.8 32 14.4 11.2 44.8 27.4 43.8 34.8 15.8 65.8 24 2.2 40
April 1 9 0 0 0 1.2 0 0 0 7.6 13.4 0.4 0 18.6
April 2 0 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 0 18.2
April 3 0 0 1.2 0 0 0 0.4 0 2.2 5.6 0 0 0
April 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.6 0 0 0 0 5 0
April 5 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 9.2 0 0.2 0 0
April 6 0 0 0 3.4 2.4 0 1.8 0 1.6 0 0 0.4 0
April 7 0 0 2.2 0 6.4 2 3.8 0 4.6 0 4.6 4.6 0
April 8 0 0.6 0.6 0 0 0 2.6 0 0 3.6 6 1.4 0
April 9 0 0 0.2 0 0 2.4 1.8 0 0 5.6 2 0 n/a
April 10 0 1.6 0 0 4 1 0 0 0.4 4.2 1.2 0 0
April 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
April 12 0 0.8 0.4 0 1.2 0.2 1 0 0.4 0.2 0 0 17.4
April 13 0 0 0 1.6 0.6 11.2 13.6 0 0.6 4.8 1.4 0.2 3.6
April 14 0 0 0 0.8 0 32 0.2 0 0 8.6 0.4 10.8 31.4
April 15 0 0 0 0.4 0 9 0.8 2.2 8 0.4 0 0 n/a
April 16 0.8 0 0 0 0 3.2 0.8 0 5 0 3.4 0 0
April 17 1.2 0 0 0 12.2 0.6 0.6 0 0.2 2.4 0.8 0 4.4
April 18 3.2 0.6 0 0 2.2 0 0.2 0 1.6 0.2 1 6.6 0
April 19 2.8 0 4.4 0 0 0 2.8 0 0 0 0 22.6 0
April 20 21.8 0 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 0
April 21 0 1 0 0 0 0.2 1.4 0 0 1.2 0 8 0
April 22 0 0 4.4 4.4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 1
April 23 4 0 0 1 3.6 0 1 0 0 0 0 1.4 0
April 24 1.6 0.2 0 0 0 0 7.6 0 0.6 0 3.8 0 0
April 25 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0
April 26 0.6 0 1.2 0 0 9.4 0 0 0 0 2.6 0 0
April 27 1 0 0 0.4 0 0.6 1.2 2.2 0 0 11.4 3 0
April 28 4.2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 6.4 0
April 29 1.8 0 0 0.2 1.4 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0
April 30 2 0 0 0.2 4.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Monthly Rainfall 54.8 5.8 18.4 12.4 47.6 71.8 46.2 4.8 43.6 55.6 40.8 70.4 94.6 0
Maximum Daily Rainfall 21.8 1.6 4.4 4.4 12.2 32 13.6 2.2 9.2 13.4 11.4 22.6 31.4 0
May 1 0.8 0 0.4 2.2 3.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May 2 0 0 5.2 0 0 0 0 0.2 2 0 2.8 0.4 4
May 3 0 0 0.2 2 0 0 1.4 1 0 0 2.2 2.8 0
May 4 0.6 0 2 3 2.2 0 11.4 0.6 0.4 0 0.2 0 3.2
May 5 15.8 0 0 2 4 1 4.4 0.6 0 0 0.2 0 8.6

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
May 6 3.6 0 0 1.6 1 0 0 0 0 0.8 1 0 11.8
May 7 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 1 0 3.6 0 0 0
May 8 0 0 3.4 1.6 0 0 0 0.2 0.8 0 0 0 0
May 9 0 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0
May 10 0 0 0.4 11 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.2 3.6
May 11 0 0.2 1.4 0.4 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 0 0.2 2.8
May 12 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4
May 13 0 0 0.4 0 0 1 0 0 0.2 0 0 5.2 10.2
May 14 0 3.6 0.2 0 6 0.2 1.4 0 0.2 0 0 0.2 9
May 15 0 1 0 0 1 0 0.2 0 0.8 0 0 0 0
May 16 0 0 0.2 0 5.2 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0
May 17 0 0 9.4 0 0 6.2 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0
May 18 0 0 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 7.8
May 19 0 0 0 7.2 0 0 2.4 0 1.6 0 1.6 1.8 0
May 20 0 0 0 0 0 1.8 0.6 0 0 0 10.4 0.2 0
May 21 3 0.6 0 4.4 0 0.4 0.4 0 0.4 2.6 0 4.6 n/a
May 22 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 9.4 0.4 17.4 0 0 0
May 23 3.6 0 0 0 0 0 1 1.2 0.4 0 0 0 0
May 24 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0
May 25 0 6.8 0 0 0 2.6 0 1.2 0 3 0 0 0
May 26 0 1.8 0 9.6 0 2.4 0 0.6 0 6.2 0 0.2 1.2
May 27 0.4 22.8 0 7.2 0 0 0.2 9 0 0.4 0 0 0
May 28 4.8 2.4 0 0.8 3.2 2.4 0 3.2 0 0 0 0 n/a
May 29 6 0 0 0 0 1.4 0 7.6 0 0 0 0 0
May 30 5.2 0 0 6.2 1.2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
May 31 14 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0
Total Monthly Rainfall 58.8 40.4 26.8 60 27.4 19.4 25.4 38.4 9.2 34.2 18.4 15.8 62.6 0
Maximum Daily Rainfall 15.8 22.8 9.4 11 6 6.2 11.4 9.4 2 17.4 10.4 5.2 11.8 0
June 1 0.2 0 0.6 0 8.4 0 0 0 0.4 5.4 0 0 0
June 2 0.4 0 0 0 2.8 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0.4 0
June 3 8.2 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 4.4 0
June 4 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 0.4 0
June 5 0 0 4 1.6 0 2.4 0 4.8 0 0 0.8 2.8 0
June 6 0 0 0.4 3.6 0.6 0 0 1 0 0 0.8 5.8 0
June 7 0.6 0 1.6 0.4 0 0 0 0.2 0 6.2 0 0 0
June 8 0 0 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 16.8 0 0 0
June 9 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 5 0 0 9 10.2 0
June 10 0 10.8 0 2.4 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0
June 11 3 0 0 2.6 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
June 12 0.2 0 0 15.8 1.2 0 0 0.4 0 0 0.2 0 0
June 13 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0.6 8.4 0.2 0 0 0 0
June 14 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
June 15 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
June 16 1.2 3.6 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.8 0 0 0
June 17 13.4 0 0 0 0.4 2.6 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 1.4
June 18 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
June 19 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
June 20 0.4 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
June 21 11.8 0 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 5.8 0 1.4
June 22 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 0 0
June 23 2.2 0 6.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
June 24 0 7.8 7.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2 0 2.8
June 25 0.8 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 0.2
June 26 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
June 27 0.6 0 0 0 0.8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4
June 28 0 0 7.4 0 0.2 6.6 0 0 0 0 4 0 0
June 29 27.4 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 4.4 0 0
June 30 0 0 3.6 0.8 0 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Monthly Rainfall 73.8 23.2 37 27.6 28 18 2 20.2 1.6 30.4 34.4 24.2 7.2 0
Maximum Daily Rainfall 27.4 10.8 7.6 15.8 10 6.6 1.4 8.4 0.4 16.8 9 10.2 2.8 0
July 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.2 0 0 0 0 0 0
July 2 0 0 3.2 0.2 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 0 0
July 3 0 20.6 3.2 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 0
July 4 0 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
July 5 2.4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0
July 6 4.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.4 0.4 0 0 0 0
July 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
July 8 23 0 0 0 0 7.4 0 0 0.6 0 0 0 6
July 9 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0
July 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 1.8 0 0 0
July 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.6 0.2 0 0 0 0
July 12 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
July 13 0 0 0 0 n/a 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
July 14 0 1.8 0.6 0 n/a 0 4.2 0 0 0 0 0 0
July 15 0 9.2 0 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
July 16 0 0 0.8 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
July 17 0 0 0.6 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 5.6 0 0
July 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14.45 0 0
July 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
July 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 3.4 0 0
July 21 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.2 0 0
July 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.8 0 0
July 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0
July 24 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
July 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
July 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0
July 27 0 0 0 3.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
July 28 0 0 0 10.2 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
July 29 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.8 0
July 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0
July 31 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0
Total Monthly Rainfall 35 34.4 9.6 16.6 10 7.4 11.8 31 1.2 2 41.65 7 10.6 0
Maximum Daily Rainfall 23 20.6 3.2 10.2 10 7.4 4.2 21 0.6 1.8 14.45 3.8 6 0
August 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 0
August 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
August 3 0 0 0.2 0 13.6 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 0
August 4 0 0 0.2 0 5.4 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 0
August 5 0 0 7.8 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
August 6 5.4 0 0 0 2.4 0 0 25.6 0 0 0 0 0
August 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0
August 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 0
August 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.4 2
August 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 12
August 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 1
August 12 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
August 13 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.2
August 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
August 15 0 0 8.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 0 0
August 16 0 5.4 3.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
August 17 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 2.4 0 0 0 0
August 18 0 0.2 0 3.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
August 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.2 5.8 0
August 20 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 4.8 0
August 21 5.4 0 0 0 2.2 0 0 11.2 0 0 7.6 0.4 0
August 22 0 0 0 0 11.2 0 0 3.4 0 0 0 0 0
August 23 0.2 0 0 0 6.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
August 24 0.2 0 0 0 1.8 0 0 30 0 0 0 15 0
August 25 3.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 31.6 0 0 0 0.6 0
August 26 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 4.6 0
August 27 7.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.6 0 0 0 5.2 0
August 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.4 0 1.2 0
August 29 0 0 3.8 4.8 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0
August 30 0 0 0 1.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
August 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.2 0 0
Total Monthly Rainfall 27 5.6 24.4 9.6 43.2 0.8 0.6 106.2 2.8 3.4 23.2 43.6 22.2 0
Maximum Daily Rainfall 27 5.4 8.2 4.8 13.6 0.8 0.6 31.6 2.4 2.4 12.2 15 12 0
September 1 0 0 0 0 5.2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
September 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
September 3 0 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 5.6 0 1.6
September 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
September 5 0.4 0 2 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4
September 6 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 1.2 0 0 0 0 0 13.8
September 7 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 7.6 0 0 0 0 0 5.4
September 8 0 1.2 0 6 0 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 0

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
September 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.6 0 0 12.2
September 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0
September 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 21.4 0 0 0 0 0
September 12 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0
September 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.4 0 0.6 0 0 0
September 14 6.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0.8 0 0.6 0 0 0
September 15 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 17.2 0 0.2 0 0 0
September 16 9.6 0 0 0 0 0 10 2.2 0 0 5.2 0 5.4
September 17 9.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.8 0 3.2 0 0 0
September 18 5.4 0.2 0 0 0 n/a 8 5.8 0 4.4 2.4 0 0
September 19 0 0 0 0 0 n/a 4.6 7.6 0 1.2 0 0 6.2
September 20 0 0 0 3.2 0 n/a 0 0 0 10 1 0.2 0
September 21 0 0 0 0 5.8 n/a 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0
September 22 0 0 0 0 0 n/a 0 1.4 0 0 0.6 0 0
September 23 0 0 0.4 0 0 n/a 0 4.2 0 0 0 0 0
September 24 0 0 0 0 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 1 11.6 0
September 25 0 2.2 6.2 0 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 0.4 8.4 0
September 26 23 0 0.8 0 14.6 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 1.2 0
September 27 12.4 0 0 0 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
September 28 8.6 0 0 0 0.6 n/a 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0.8
September 29 0 0 0 15.6 0.8 n/a 0 0 0.4 0 1 0 8
September 30 11 0 0 1.4 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 8.8 0 0
Total Monthly Rainfall 89.6 3.6 9.8 26.8 28.6 0 34.6 83.2 0.4 31.8 27.2 21.4 54.8 0
Maximum Daily Rainfall 23 2.2 6.2 15.6 14.6 0 10 21.4 0.4 11.6 8.8 11.6 13.8 0
October 1 3 0 0 0 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.4
October 2 0.4 9.6 0 0 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 10.2 2 0
October 3 12 2.6 0 0 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 1 13.4 0
October 4 15 0.4 0 0 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 1 6.4 0
October 5 1 0 21 0 0 0 0 4.8 0.4 0 0 1.8 0
October 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.6 5.2 0 1.6 9 1.8 0
October 7 8 0 9.2 0 0 0 8.2 3.6 0.4 0 10.4 2.4 0
October 8 13.6 3.4 23.6 1.4 2 0 7.4 19.2 0 5.2 0 0 0
October 9 0.2 1.8 1 5.2 0 0 7.6 3.4 0 0 0.4 0.6 0
October 10 12.2 0 0 3 16.2 0 2.8 0 0.4 0 0 0 0
October 11 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0
October 12 2.2 13.2 3.2 0 7 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0
October 13 2.4 3 7.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n/a 8.2 0.8
October 14 6.6 14.2 0 0 7.4 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 3.2
October 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 10 0 7.6 3.2
October 16 0 0 0 8 0.4 0 100 0 0 1.6 0.2 7 14.2
October 17 0.8 7.6 0 24.8 0 0 104.4 27.2 0 0 1.2 0 48.6
October 18 0 0 0 5.8 1.2 0 0.6 5.2 0 11.8 22.6 0 0
October 19 0 0 0 0.2 3.2 1.6 12.8 10.2 0 8.2 27.4 0 0
October 20 0 0 0 19.2 0 1.2 85.4 3.2 0 0 9.8 1.8 0
October 21 0 0 0 0 14.4 0 13.6 0 0 0 1.6 0 4.4
October 22 0.2 0 0 0 10.4 0 1.6 1.6 0 0 5.6 0 1.4
October 23 0 0 0 0 9.6 0 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 34.8
October 24 0 0 3.2 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0
October 25 0 0 0.4 0 21.4 0 0 7.2 3 0.4 0 0 10
October 26 6.8 0 0 0 9.2 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 7.6
October 27 0 0 1.2 0 1.6 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
October 28 4.2 0 20 4.6 0 0 0 1.6 11 0 0 0 8.4
October 29 21 0 8 0 0 0 0 0.2 3.2 1 0 0 13.4
October 30 47.2 0 44.4 0 6.4 0 0 12.6 12 0 0 0.6 14.4
October 31 7.8 1.8 27.4 1.8 13.6 0 0 0 17.8 0 0 2.4 3
Total Monthly Rainfall 167.4 57.6 170.4 74 124.4 4.6 384.4 105.2 48.2 48 100.4 56 170.8 0
Maximum Daily Rainfall 47.2 14.2 44.4 24.8 21.4 1.8 104.4 27.2 17.8 11.8 27.4 13.4 48.6 0
November 1 0.8 1 0 0 0.6 0 0 15.4 5.6 0 0 0 0
November 2 0 19.4 0 0 0 0 0.6 36.4 12.6 16.6 0 1.4 0.8
November 3 9.4 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 15.6 4 3.4 0
November 4 0 7.4 1.2 9.8 5 0 0 n/a 10.2 21.4 0.2 6.4 0
November 5 0.4 13 0 1.4 0.8 0 0 n/a 21.2 26.2 0 0 19.4
November 6 3.2 0 14 7.8 0 4.2 0 n/a 2.2 88 2.6 66 17
November 7 3.6 0 0 0 0 2.8 0 n/a 0 4.2 2 36.6 18.6
November 8 0 0 2.8 11.8 0 4 0 n/a 2.4 17.6 7.4 2.2 0.8
November 9 0 0 1.4 4 0 7 0 n/a 0.8 1 2 3 6.4
November 10 0 0.2 6.2 0 0 4 0 n/a 3.4 18.2 4.2 2.2 8.2

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
November 11 0 0 18.8 0 0 7.6 0 n/a 27.8 1.2 1.6 12 0.6
November 12 0 22.2 14.6 0 4.8 11.6 0 n/a 0 42.2 22.6 22 0
November 13 0 53.6 7.8 1.4 4.6 5.6 0 n/a 14 18 1.8 0 6.4
November 14 0 22.2 4.4 0 25.8 4 0 n/a 0 0.6 2 0.8 0
November 15 0 33.6 2.6 0 18.4 0 2.2 n/a 0 39.8 14.2 0.2 17
November 16 0 27 10.6 0 6.4 11 22.6 n/a 0.6 0 4.6 0 58.4
November 17 2.4 0 3.8 0 0 0 1.2 n/a 0 12.8 5.4 0 15
November 18 0 0 0 0 0 15.2 68 14.4 0 6.8 1 0 16.4
November 19 1.2 3.6 1 0 15.2 21.8 27.4 0 0 7.8 1.6 0 42.2
November 20 8.4 35.2 9.4 0 6.8 1 0 0 0 14.4 0 3.4 7.2
November 21 0.2 28.8 4 0 7.6 0 0 0 0 35.2 0 7.2 1
November 22 1.4 19.6 3.4 0 7.2 0 0 1.2 0 1.8 0 0 17.6
November 23 0.8 3.8 4.8 6.6 0.8 0 10.6 5.6 0 10.2 0 0 10.2
November 24 3.2 28.2 18.4 0 0 0 5 13.4 0.8 1.4 0 0 2.6
November 25 2.2 43.2 7.2 9 0.6 0 8 2.8 20.4 14.4 0 0 17.2
November 26 0 10.8 0 25.6 2 0 0 1.6 0 32 10.6 0 9.4
November 27 8 0.8 0.4 3.8 6.8 0 0.2 0.8 0 17.8 0 0 0
November 28 16.8 0 0.4 0 33 0 66.8 0 5.2 0.8 10.4 2.2 8.2
November 29 1.8 0.6 0 2 8.8 0 2.6 1.2 12 17.4 0.2 6 7
November 30 9.4 1.2 2.8 4.4 2.4 0 0 5.6 0.2 2 0 0.6 1
Total Monthly Rainfall 73.2 375.4 140.8 87.6 157.6 99.8 215.2 98.4 141.6 485.4 98.4 175.6 308.6 0
Maximum Daily Rainfall 16.8 53.6 18.8 25.6 33 21.8 68 36.4 27.8 88 22.6 66 58.4 0
December 1 0 5.2 9.4 0 8.2 0 0 0 2.6 0 15.2 1.8 0
December 2 0 19.4 16.4 12.4 12.8 0 1.4 0.2 0 0 46.4 0 0
December 3 0 3.6 0 0 0 0 9 0.2 0 0 100.4 0 0
December 4 0 0 0 0 6 3.2 0 16.6 0 3.6 18 0 0
December 5 0 2.4 4.8 0 4.6 0 6.6 1.4 0 0.4 0.2 0 0
December 6 0 0.4 16.2 0 5.2 0 9.8 12.4 0 0 0 4.2 0
December 7 0.4 3 0 0 0 0 10.8 6 0 0.2 0 0.4 0
December 8 1 2.8 1 0 12.4 0 0 16.2 0 0.2 0 0 0
December 9 2.6 2.8 2.6 1.6 0 0 0 22 0 0.6 3.4 9.6 0
December 10 1.8 8.4 3.2 0.8 5.4 4.4 9.2 38.4 0 1.4 0.2 3.8 0
December 11 0 2.8 2.2 0 2.8 6.2 2 0 0 19.2 0.4 0 0
December 12 0 11.4 28.8 0 8.4 20 4.4 0 0.2 17 0 22.2 0
December 13 0 33.2 7.2 0 32.4 0.4 3.4 3 0 29.4 2.2 4.2 0
December 14 1.6 0 22.6 1.2 15 21.4 18.6 14.4 0 31.8 9 1.6 10.4
December 15 2.8 10 63 4.2 3.6 5 0 0.8 0 6.4 16.2 0 25.75
December 16 47.6 7 0 49.2 61.8 5.8 8.4 0.6 0 0 0 0 14.25
December 17 24.6 1 9.8 5.6 29.8 0.2 1.6 3.8 0 0 1.8 5.8 9.5
December 18 2.2 0 3.8 0 1.6 0.2 0 1.8 0 1.8 6.2 3.4 4
December 19 9.8 0 2.4 1.2 6 0.2 0 0 2 10 15.2 0 4.75
December 20 7.8 0 1 3.8 0 0 0.6 0 15.2 6.2 0 0 11
December 21 0.6 6.6 0 1.2 0 0 0.4 0 6.4 15.8 0 27.4 4.75
December 22 0 0 0 4.8 0 0.4 0 0 10.6 1 19.4 13.2 0
December 23 7 0.6 0 3.2 0 0 0 0 11.8 17.2 12.6 0.4 0
December 24 0.2 18.2 0 4.6 0 1.2 4.8 0.8 15.4 23 0.2 21.8 0
December 25 0 17.6 0 7.6 0 14.6 5.2 9.4 12.8 3.4 0 1.8 0
December 26 7.4 21.8 0 2.4 0 12.2 0 4.4 0.4 4.8 0 7.8 0
December 27 4.6 17 0 4.8 0 22.4 3.6 0 6.2 0 4.2 5 0
December 28 10.6 15.4 0 0 2 1 1.8 0 13.8 0 7.6 0.6 0.25
December 29 0.2 46.4 0.2 0 0 0 0 5.6 0.2 0.6 4.2 12.6 0
December 30 0 0 0.2 3 0 4.2 0.2 0.6 5.6 0 1.8 1.6 3.5
December 31 0 0.8 11.6 3.6 6.4 0 4.6 3.2 16.2 0 0 3 16.25
Total Monthly Rainfall 132.8 257.8 206.4 115.2 224.4 123 106.4 161.8 119.4 194 284.8 152.2 104.4 0
Maximum Daily Rainfall 47.6 46.4 63 49.2 61.8 22.4 18.6 38.4 16.2 31.8 100.4 27.4 25.75 0
Appendix C-2. Monthly Rainfall Data Collected from the Hartland Landfill Weather Station between 1997 and 2006
Month Monthly Rainfall (mm)

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Avg
January 2.4 200 280.8 123.2 99.4 213.2 205.8 119.8 210.2 277.4 312.4 106.8 121.6 180.5 175.3
February 0 58.6 286.4 79.6 59.2 160.6 29 53 39.2 79.2 94 63 43.8 50.25 78.3
March 24.6 72.8 110 64.4 81 135.8 149.6 97 86 36.6 162.2 71.4 99.2 90.7 91.5
April 54.8 5.8 18.4 12.4 47.6 71.8 46.2 4.8 43.6 55.6 40.8 70.4 94.6 43.6
May 58.8 40.4 26.8 60 27.4 19.4 25.4 38.4 9.2 34.2 18.4 15.8 62.6 33.6
June 73.8 23.2 37 27.6 28 18 2 20.2 1.6 30.4 34.4 24.2 7.2 25.2
July 35 34.4 9.6 16.6 10 7.4 11.8 31 1.2 2 41.7 7 10.6 16.8
August 27 5.6 24.4 9.6 43.2 0.8 0.6 106.2 2.8 3.4 23.2 43.6 22.2 24.0
September 89.6 3.6 9.8 26.8 28.6 0 34.6 83.2 0.4 31.8 27.2 21.4 54.8 31.7
October 167.4 57.6 170.4 74 124.4 4.6 384.4 105.2 48.2 48 100.4 56 170.8 116.3
November 73.2 375.4 140.8 87.6 157.6 99.8 215.2 98.4 141.6 485 98.4 175.6 308.6 189.0
December 132.8 257.8 206.4 115.2 224.4 123 106.4 161.8 119.4 194 284.8 152.2 104.4 167.9
Total Yearly Rainfall 739.4 1135.2 1320.8 697 930.8 854.4 1211 919 703.4 1277.6 1237.9 807.4 1100.4 321.45
Notes:
No weather data was collected from Nov 4 - 17, 2004.
Weather data collected in 2009 is unreliable due to equipment failure.
60158830_Apps C1 and 2 2010-Aug25_Hartland Temp & Precip Data (1997 to present).xls:C-2 Monthly Rainfall
Appendix D
Leachate Flow Data

Appendix D. Leachate Flow Data
Hartland Leachate System Monthly Flow Data

Days Without Maximum Daily Minimum Daily Average Daily Monthly Total
Flow Flow in M^3 Flow in M^3 Flow in M^3 Flow in M^3
Jan-1997 13 2148 0 2148 40816
Feb-1997 0 2700 732 2226 62334
Mar-1997 0 2759 2412 2696 83557
Apr-1997 0 2655 214 2545 78899
May-1997 4 2654 0 956 29561
Jun-1997 11 1563 0 546 17503
Jul-1997 17 2452 0 525 16090
Aug-1997 15 1608 0 386 11606
Sep-1997 21 2662 0 456 14159
Oct-1997 6 2782 0 1233 36996
Nov-1997 4 2533 0 1437 44565
Dec-1997 2 2408 0 1695 52547
TOTAL 93 2782 0 1404 488633

Jan-1998 0 2603 879 2187 65977
Feb-1998 3 2603 0 1624 43531
Mar-1998 3 2419 0 n/a 35275
Apr-1998 10 1542 0 542 16675
May-1998 13 1890 0 423 12574
Jun-1998 17 1241 0 239 7239
Jul-1998 21 1919 0 240 7645
Aug-1998 31 0 0 0 0
Sep-1998 27 1020 0 58 1821
Oct-1998 19 2379 0 511 14962
Nov-1998 7 2462 0 1538 45248
Dec-1998 0 2619 n/a n/a 76518
TOTAL 151 2619 0 736 327465

Jan-1999 0 n/a n/a n/a 69000
Feb-1999 0 2970 1966 2681 74930
Mar-1999 0 2970 2539 2875 92028
Apr-1999 5 2894 0 1812 57986
May-1999 11 2889 0 660 20656
Jun-1999 18 1215 0 257 7480
Jul-1999 18 2772 0 365 11687
Aug-1999 30 n/a n/a n/a 1000
Sep-1999 4 1193 0 148 4597
Oct-1999 19 1473 0 163 4719
Nov-1999 4 2840 0 1497 43972
Dec-1999 4 3480 n/a 67907
TOTAL 113 3480 0 1162 455962
60158830_App D-2010-Aug24 - Leachate Flow Data.xls Page 1 of 5

Jan-2000 3 2791 0 n/a 55088
Feb-2000 7 2235 0 n/a 29318
Mar-2000 7 2211 0 n/a 37258
Apr-2000 8 1737 0 n/a 21289
May-2000 19 2772 0 501 15547
Jun-2000 19 2685 0 396 11902
Jul-2000 22 1086 0 155 4831
Aug-2000 26 907 0 116 3619
Sep-2000 21 2640 0 354 10623
Oct-2000 n/a n/a n/a n/a 8572
Nov-2000 n/a n/a n/a n/a 11737
Dec-2000 12 2926 0 943 29235
TOTAL 144 2926 0 411 239019

Jan-2001 38089
Feb-2001 30154
Mar-2001 24565
Apr-2001 15 2622 0 646 18746
May-2001 16 1647 0 400 12407
Jun-2001 22 2026 0 295 8862
Jul-2001 22 1521 0 244 7576
Aug-2001 24 2873 0 291 9047
Sep-2001 23 1633 0 157 4723
Oct-2001 15 2631 0 552 17112
Nov-2001 7 2899 0 993 29819
Dec-2001 0 3397 58 2241 69492
TOTAL 144 3397 0 647 270592

Jan-2002 1 2892 0 1946 60342
Feb-2002 1 3395 0 1946 54497
Mar-2002 2 3412 0 2200 68224
Apr-2002 6 2444 0 1022 29651
May-2002 13 2118 0 578 17928
Jun-2002 16 1683 0 381 11435
Jul-2002 20 2330 0 330 10231
Aug-2002 23 1521 0 253 7848
Sep-2002 28 1154 0 72 2160
Oct-2002 26 1356 0 143 4450
Nov-2002 14 2477 0 618 18555
Dec-2002 9 2896 0 987 30615
TOTAL 159 3412 0 873 315936

Jan-2003 5 4880 0 1569 48664
Feb-2003 4 2819 0 1354 37921
Mar-2003 3 2849 0 1533 47546
Apr-2003 6 2185 0 846 24562
May-2003 18 1892 0 514 15962
Jun-2003 15 1397 0 340 10224
Jul-2003 20 1126 0 282 8768
Aug-2003 21 1140 0 214 6658
Sep-2003 23 1147 0 222 6671
Oct-2003 15 3869 0 1621 50260
Nov-2003 4 3681 0 2546 76397
Dec-2003 0 3587 96 2218 68773
TOTAL 134 4880 0 1105 402406

Jan-2004 0 2859 99 1597 49509
Feb-2004 0 2833 2 1536 44551
Mar-2004 2 2792 0 1170 36288
Apr-2004 22 1675 0 319 9272
May-2004 31 0 0 0 0
Jun-2004 13 3565 0 1104 33135
Jul-2004 30 63 0 2 63
Aug-2004 23 3007 0 601 18636
Sep-2004 24 2998 0 454 13640
Oct-2004 14 3668 0 1138 35284
Nov-2004 2 2889 0 1631 48938
Dec-2004 4 3659 0 2191 67947
TOTAL 165 3668 0 979 357263

Jan-2005 7 3671 0 2247 69680
Feb-2005 2 3662 0 2571 72002
Mar-2005 11 2484 0 824 25551
Apr-2005 4 2800 0 1041 30206
May-2005 18 2840 0 691 21437
Jun-2005 16 1800 0 431 12946
Jul-2005 18 1301 0 274 8512
Aug-2005 22 2771 0 417 12927
Sep-2005 19 1301 0 274 8512
Oct-2005 24 3025 0 432 13393
Nov-2005 5 2999 0 1347 40421
Dec-2005 5 2916 0 1180 36601
TOTAL 151 3671 0 977 352188

Jan-2006 0 3415 1123 3075 95329
Feb-2006 2 3435 0 2206 61795
Mar-2006 8 2926 0 846 26247
Apr-2006 14 2141 0 558 16762
May-2006 19 2058 0 464 14402
Jun-2006 21 2175 0 359 10795
Jul-2006 28 1996 0 105 3277
Aug-2006 23 1991 0 327 10148
Sep-2006 22 1770 0 255 7654
Oct-2006 23 2043 0 304 9427
Nov-2006 2 3677 0 2872 86167
Dec-2006 0 3563 3130 3425 106180
TOTAL 162 3677 0 1233 448183

Jan-2007 0 3657 3272 3464 107411
Feb-2007 0 3619 815 2398 67168
Mar-2007 0 3442 38 2130 66034
Apr-2007 6 1929 0 872 26177
May-2007 14 2120 0 572 17740
Jun-2007 18 2127 0 477 14331
Jul-2007 22 2157 0 387 12019
Aug-2007 28 1730 0 92 2859
Sep-2007 29 76 0 2 76
Oct-2007 14 3288 0 945 29316
Nov-2007 11 2306 0 793 23813
Dec-2007 1 3715 0 2549 79041
TOTAL 143 3715 0 1223 445985

Jan-2008 0 2949 260 1644 50970
Feb-2008 2 2927 0 1322 38343
Mar-2008 0 1874 0 901 27953
Apr-2008 7 1849 0 845 25364
May-2008 18 2946 0 537 16670
Jun-2008 25 2695 0 286 8594
Jul-2008 0
Aug-2008 0
Sep-2008 28892
Oct-2008 29892
Nov-2008 17433
Dec-2008 37620
TOTAL 52 2949 0 923 281731

Jan-2009 0 3522 799 2400.13 74404
Feb-2009 2 1551 0 866.54 24263
Mar-2009 0 2388 42 1040.23 32247
Apr-2009 2 2806 0 1045.87 31376
May-2009 5 2274 0 749.55 23236
Jun-2009 7 1818 0 418.39 12970
Jul-2009 5 2844 0 348.39 10800
Aug-2009 2 2866 0 493.26 15291
Sep-2009 9 2838 0 309.67 9290
Oct-2009 3 2838 0 806.00 24986
Nov-2009 0 3348 205 2431.40 72942
Dec-2009 0 3248 1116 2171.29 67310
TOTAL 35 3522 0 1090 399115

Jan-2010 0 3396 1080 2435.13 75489
Feb-2010 0 1794 368 1004.39 28123
Mar-2010 4 1614 0 627.61 19456
Apr-2010 1 2858 0 1281.70 38451
May-2010 0 1990 1 704.19 21830
Jun-2010
Jul-2010
Aug-2010
Sep-2010
Oct-2010
Nov-2010
Dec-2010
TOTAL 5 3396 0 1211 183349

Appendix E
Hartland Landfill Site Plan

July 12, 2007 - Technologist: KE- Map Document: Hartland_Site_Facilities_Phases.mxd
Leachate Pipeline Features Contours (5m interval)
Hartland Landfill Metering or Observation Chamber Depression (5m interval)

Cell Phases
Pump Station
Transition Chamber Lot Lines
Hartland Site Plan Leachate Pipeline Regional Park
Leachate Forcemain
0 25 50 100 150 200

Meters
Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator - Zone 10 North
Orthophoto flown in 2006
North American Datum 1983
13
150
120
13
135 5
70
0
140
75
145 120
12
115
80
155
85
120
110
150
Juan de Fuca Electoral Area 95
Mount Work
10
165 160
115
150
0
District of Saanich
Regional Park
95
90
145 10
16 5
0 80
155 16
16 0
120
90
5 16 11
5
0 0 85
170
17 160
16
5
175 12
5
10
Hartland North
0
190 13
15 5 13
18
Site 5 0 12
5
5
15
95
0
18
105
0 16
0
110
20 16
0 170 5 13
5
17
14
5
0
105
Ro
20
ip e li n e
5
115
ad
a te P
205
150
210
ch
18
0 12 Lea
145
0 110
155
21
5 Hartland
22 Northwest Valve Chamber
160
195
0
190
0
185
Sedimentation Pond (compliance point)

16
21
22
165
(fresh water)
0
5
170
0 115
13 5
0 95
11
15
23 Hig h Le
5
135
19 1
18
5 17 ve
0
l Ro 110
ad 155
130
180
175 115 120
170 West Face Upper Leachate Lower
22
130
20
Leachate 125
5
Leachate Lagoon
5
125
125 Lagoon
22
0 135 120
Aggregate 14
0
nne l 130 135

21
Stockpile otu
160
14
Micr
5
5 140
145 North T 130
200
140 oe Ro ad 130 Pe
23 2
5 40
23
Gas
14
145
r im
0
Sedimentation Pond
5
150
Utilization 15
et
(fresh water) 0
er
Facility
Phase 2
Ea
265
140
160
25
Future
s
14
0
Cell 2
tR
24
145
5
oa
Landfill
150
15
Interim
14
265
(active)
150
d
5
West Face
5
21
Extent
Co
Closure
22 5
5 16
m 155
Closure
0
155
230 po 5
s 15
28 tA
260
0 cc 165
e
160
23
s
160
5
28
160
s
5
Ro
245
ad
28
Phase 1
5
165
170
23
155
Phase 2 (closed 1997)

24
285
Cell 1
0
165
295
(Completed)
170
5
17
27
27
Controlled
0
5
165
Waste
26
25
5
290
17
Area
170
290
0
29
180
170
1
205
17
5
235
Former
29
170
170
225
5
29
Controlled
22
230
0
0
273
175
Waste
165
274
ad
17 5
16
Area
5
275
Ro
18
17
5
170
st
160
245
235
Ea
285
e ter
165 Pe ri m
190
0
5
200
28
15
15
South Leachate
275
16
200
5 Ma Pump Station
in Entrance
24
275
Ac
0
150
270
c e ss Av
R o ad
145
265
195
Bin e nu
290
18
280
Parking
20
e
285
0
270
Drop-off
5
19
20
0
21 0
5
0
26
0
26 19
5
250
230
255 145
255
160
26
Recycling
0
140
Area
21
250
165
5
18
225
5
18
245 270
19
26
155
0
0
250
23
22
0
170
24
5
0
5
14
240
23
135
24
175
5 13
22
Mount Work 5
225
5
130
22 230
Regional Park 15
0
230
0
125
14
0
21
22
5
0
180
23
170
205 215
5
175
210
24 195
0
200
130
2006 Orthophoto
145
21
220
190
120
0
240
not flown
160
135
195
5
11
for this area 5

190
19
180
200
190
150
165
230 235
190
Killarney
19
175
225
5
205
5
195
215
16
155
19
Lake
5
Appendix F
Hartland Landfill Leachate
Pipeline Plan

CRD Environmental Services - Jul 7, 2009 - Technologist: SR - Map Document: Hartland_Leachate_Line.mxd
HARTLAND LANDFILL - LEACHATE PIPELINE PLAN
Hartland Valve
JDF Chamber
EA (compliance point)
W
al
Oldfield Rd
la
ce
D
r
Oldfield Road
Hartland
Landfill
Elk
and
Beaver
Killarney Lake
Lake W
es
t Sa
a
ni
c
L
h
Rd
e
a
c
h
a
t
e
P
Saanich i
d
anich R
p
e
l t Sa
Prospect
i n
Wes
Lake
O ld
Rd e
ban
r
eru
Highlands
Int
Markham
Valve Chamber
Discharge to
Maltby sanitary sewer
Lake
Pike Man
Rd
n Ave
Lake
so n
View Royal
n
lki
Wi C ar e
yR
d
Metres Leachate Pipeline Features Saanich Municipal Sewers Municipal Boundaries Municipal Park
0 100 200 400 600 Metering Chamber 0 - 200 mm Major Roads Regional Park
Projection: UTM ZONE 10N NAD 83 Observation Chamber 201 - 599 mm Contours (10m Interval)
Important This map is for general information purposes only. The Capital Regional District (CRD) makes no representations or warranties Pump Station 600 - 899 mm Major Contour
regarding the accuracy or completeness of this map or the suitability of the map for any purpose. This map is not for navigation. The CRD
will not be liable for any damage, loss or injury resulting from the use of the map or information on the map and the map may be changed Leachate Pipeline > 900 mm Major Contour - Depression Orthophoto flown in 2007
by the CRD at any time.
Appendix G
Results of Statistical Analysis
2009/10

Appendix G1. Results of Groundwater Statistical Analysis 2005-2010
Parameter
Station Conductivity Ammonia Chloride Sulphate

Increasing Decreasing Increasing Decreasing Increasing Decreasing Increasing Decreasing
Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N
Boundary Groundwater Quality Location
Gw‐04‐2‐1 N N N N Y N N N
Gw‐04‐3‐1 N N N N N N N N
Gw‐18‐2‐1 Y N N N N N Y N
Gw‐18‐2‐2 N N N N N N Y N
Gw‐21‐1‐2 N N N Y N Y N N
Gw‐21‐2‐1 N Y N N N Y N N
Gw‐30‐1‐1 N N N N N Y N N
Gw‐30‐1‐2 Y N N N Y N N N
Gw‐40‐1‐1 N N N Y N N N N
Gw‐53‐1‐1 N N N N Y N Y N
Gw‐72‐2‐1 N N N N N Y N Y
Gw‐73‐1‐1 N Y N N N N N N
Gw‐73‐2‐1 N N N Y N N N Y
Routine Groundwater Quality Location
Gw‐09‐1‐0 N N Y N N N N N
Gw‐19‐1‐2 Y N N N N N N N
Gw‐55‐1‐1 Y N N N N N Y N
Gw‐57‐1‐1 N N N Y N N N Y
Gw‐60‐2‐1 N N N Y Y N N Y
Gw‐60‐3‐1 Y N N N Y N N N
Gw‐71‐1‐1 N Y N N N N N Y
60158830_App_G1_Groundwater Statistical Output Summary_Sept_28_2010.xls:App. G - Stat. Summary 2008-09 Page 1 of 1

Appendix G2. Results of Surface Water Statistical Analysis 2005-2010
Parameter
Station Conductivity Ammonia Chloride Sulphate Nitrate

Increasing Decreasing Increasing Decreasing Increasing Decreasing Increasing Decreasing Increasing Decreasing
Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N
Boundary Surface Water Quality Location
SW-S-03 N N N Y N N N N N N
SW-S-04 N N N N N N N N N Y
SW-N-05 N N N N N N N N N Y
SW-S-12 N N N N N N N N N N
SW-N-16 N N N Y N N N N N N
SW-N-18 N N N N N N N N N N
SW-N-41s1 Y N N N N N Y N N N
SW-N-42s1 N N N N N N Y N N N
Routine Surface Water Quality Location
SW‐N‐CSs2 Y N N N N N N N Y N
SW-N-08 N N N N Y N N N N Y
SW-N-09 N N N N Y N N N N Y
SW-N-15 N N N N N N Y N N N
SW-S-20 Y N N N Y N Y N N N
SW-S-25 N N N Y N N N N N N
SW-N-41s3 N N N N N N Y N N N
SW-N-41s4 N N N N N N N N N N
SW-N-41s6 N N N Y N N Y N N N
SW-N-52 N N N N Y N N N N N
60158830_App_G2_Surface Water Statistical Output Summary_Sept_3_2010_SD.xls:App. G - Stat. Summary 2008-09 Page 1 of 1

1.43.3.1 2009 Hartland Landfill Groundwater Surface Water and Leachate Monitoring Program Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1.43.3.1 2009 Hartland Landfill Groundwater Surface Water and Leachate Monitoring Program Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Environment

Capital Regional District

Hartland Landfill Groundwater, Surface

Statement of Qualifications and Limitations

 as agreed in writing by Consultant and Client

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx

December 21, 2010

Capital Regional District

Attention: Ms. Mary Anne Fillipone, M.Sc., P.Geo.

Project No: 60158830

Dear Ms. Fillipone,

Yours very truly,

Robert C. Dickin, M.Sc., P.Geo.

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt B.Docx

# of Hard Copies PDF Required Association / Company Name

Report Prepared By:

Stephen Dickin, B.Sc.

May Quach, M.Sc.

Report Reviewed By:

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt B.Docx

Quality Assurance and Quality Control

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx i

North of the Landfill

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx ii

Hartland North Pad

South of the Landfill

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx iii

East of the Landfill

Domestic Well Water Quality

Surface Water Quality

The surface water quality data collected in 2009/10 revealed that:

North of the Landfill

Hartland North Pad

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx iv

South of the Landfill

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx v

Leachate Collection System

Runoff from Aggregate Stockpiles

Groundwater Flow North of Phase 2

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx vi

Quality Assurance and Quality Control

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx vii

Statement of Qualifications and Limitations

1. Introduction .....................................................................................................................................1

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx

Figure 5-10. Groundwater Quality East of Landfill........................................................................................................ 54

B. Landfill Chemistry Data

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx

C. Hartland Climate Data

D. Leachate Flow Data

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx 1

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx 3

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx 4

3.1 Field Techniques

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx 5

3.2 Sample Analysis and Quality Assurance

3.2.1 Relative Percent Difference – Groundwater and Surface Water

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx 6

60158830_FN_RPT_2010 Dec 21 2010_Annual Rpt Sb.Docx 7

µS/cm mg/L mg/L mgN/L mgN/L mgN/L mg/L mg/L pH

Gw-04-3-1 RPD 2009 Nov 25 0.7% na na na na 0.0% 8.0% 2.9% 1.3%

Gw-16-1-1 RPD 2010 Feb 19 0.0% na na na na 4.4% 3.4% 36.6% a 1.3%