Risk Based Management approaches for megasites

1
Risk Based Management approaches for megasites

• Nicole workshop Lille October 2003

• Huub Rijnaarts 1) , Natalie Hoogeveen 1) , Jeroen
  ter Meer 1) ,
• Jurand Bien 2) , and Steve Wallace 3)
• TNO The Netherlands
• Research Centre on Soil, Groundwater and Sediment
  Management Wageningen University/TNO
• NICOLE/

2
Budgets, Time Frame, Policy and Innovation The
Dutch experience
Budget NL 0,5 B/yr
innovation
costs
Conventional clean up
Risk Based Management
Single sites
Mega sites
in-situ
MNA

Time Required to implement
2000
2015
WFD
2030
National
2100
2200
To a reasonable timeframe
3
Megasite characteristics

• Large (km2 scale) contaminated area or impacted
  area (current or potential)
• Multiple site owners, stakeholders, end-users
• Multiple contamination sources, migration,
  pathways and receptors in a complex
  geohydrological system
• Financial resources largely insufficient for
  complete cleanup within regulatory timeframes
• Management of risks do need an integrated system
  approach

 
4
Megasites in Europe, some examples
5
Megasites and the WFD/GWD

• WFD/GWD require River Basin Management Plans to
  be installed
• Aim is to achieve good quality status for all
  groundwater and surface water systems in Europe
  in 2015
• Risk management zones (for groups of) point
  sources (GWD)
• site specific management plans
• site specific risk and emission control measures
• site specific risk management zone(s)
• integrated into river basin management plans
• The Integrated Management System (IMS)
• as developed by the EU project WELCOME and
  experience at model megasites can offer good
  support in implementing the WFD/GWD requirements
  at EU megasites

6
Basic conceptual model
Risk Management Zone
Megasite
Sources
Potential receptors
Groundwater flow (pathway)
7
Characteristics for megasites

• Status of identification as megasite
• Is the site identified as a megasite, needing an
  integrated risk based management approach, (e.g.
  due to the so called multi-site effect)?
• Conceptual basis
• What is the quality of the knowledge level
  underlying risk based megasite management
  scenarios and megasite plans

8
Conceptual model
Receptor Land use function
recreational
industrial
agricultural
residential
Receptor GW well
Receptor humans
6
5
2
8
Receptor Surface water, sediment
3
Receptor Subsurface, soil
Contamination sources
1
4
C
aquifer
Receptor Groundwater
7
9
Characteristics for megasites (2)

• Risk profile
• W. Surface water and groundwater bodies are the
  major receptors national and EU (WFD, GWD)
  legislation for protecting water systems need to
  be taken into account
• L. Land-use (humans and ecosystems) are the major
  risk drivers national and future EU soil and
  contaminated land legislation need to be taken
  into account
• Management status
• Stakeholders participating, financial resources
  available, a responsible management institution
  established

10
EU project Welcome Water, Environment, Landscape
Management at Contaminated Megasites(EESD/RTD,
no. EVK1-2001-00132)
 Development of Integrated Management Systems
for Prevention and Reduction of Pollution of
Water bodiesat contaminated Industrial
Megasites www.EUwelcome.nl/
11
Welcome megasites

• Industrial harbor areas at a river delta
  Rotterdam and Antwerp
• Organochemical Industrial Complex along Middle
  area of a river Bitterfeld/Wolfen
• Metal mining region at spring area of river
  system Tarnowskie Góry, Poland

12
Ports of Rotterdam Antwerp

13
Conceptual model for regional risk assessment and
management plan
harbour
polders
(0th plane of compliance)
E3
(4th plane of compliance)
1st plane of compliance
source
E1
E2
3rd plane of compliance
2nd plane of compliance
wvp
14
Build the conceptual model

• Sources of pollutants are based on the activities
  in the Port

15
Build the conceptual model

• Receptor is the surface water

16
Integrated Management Systemcase study
Bitterfeld megasite
17
(No Transcript)
18
HIRET Land-use spatial/temporal risk model
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
The future Megasite Management Plans as part of
River Basin Management Plans

• Megasite management plans at the WELCOME sites at
  the end of 2004
• WELCOME IMS guideline examples from model sites
  available mid to end 2004
• From end 2004 the IMS guideline can be used as a
  tool to implement the requirements of the WFD/GWD
• For megasites with a strong focus on Land-use
  dominated risks, the IMS-guideline can be easily
  extended, i.e. on the basis of the HIRET tool
  developed by TNO/WU
• EU policies are also growing towards an
  integrated approach for regulation of soil,
  water, and sediment quality in Europe
• This is supported by FP6 Integrated Projects

23
AQUATERRA EU FP6 Integrated Project, under
contract negotiation with EU commission

• Title
• Integrating modelling of the river-sediment-soil-g
  roundwater systems advanced tools for the
  management of catchment areas and river basins in
  the context of Global Change
• Characteristics
• Budget 20 Million
• Running from 2004, for five years
• 10 leading EU research groups, 44 partners, incl.
  SMEs and Stakeholders
• Five river basin cases with selected research
  areas
• Brévile (1 catchment)
• Ebro (4 research areas)
• Meuse (2 research areas, floodplain river
  transect)
• Elbe (5 research areas)
• Danube (floodplain transect)