{"text_format":"1","workbook":"xlsx","n_sheets":12,"sheets":["Cover","Notes","Introduction","1) a) Source","1) b) Pathway","1) c) Receptors","2) Site Hazard Rating","3) Likelihood","4) Site Risk and Classification","5) Standard Containment Designs","Sheet1","Risk Scoring"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":19,"macros":1,"external_links":1,"defined_names":122,"comments":3,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900"}

{"sheet":"Cover","index":0,"n_rows":58,"n_cols":6,"rows_kept":58,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"JOB TITLE"]
[]
[null,"JOB NUMBER"]
[]
[null,"MADE BY"]
[]
[null,"CHECKED BY"]
[]
[null,"DATE",null,null,null,"2022-09-06"]
[]
[null,"Description of spreadsheet",null,null,null,"This spreadsheet provides a secondary containment risk assessment for Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) using the Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Association (ADBA) secondary containment risk assessment tool. "]
[]
[null,"Sheet Number prefix",null,null,null,""]
[]
[null,"Member/Location",null,null,null,""]
[]
[null,"Drawing Reference",null,null,null,""]
[]
[null,"Filename",null,null,null,{"$f":"IF(CELL(\"filename\")=\"\",\"\",LEFT(CELL(\"filename\"),FIND(\"]\",CELL(\"filename\"))))","v":{"$error":"#VALUE!"}}]
[]
[]
[null,"CONTENTS OF SPREADSHEET"]
[]
[null,"Sheet",null,"Description"]
[null,"Cover"]
[null,"Notes"]
[null,"Introduction",null,"Introduction to the ADBA Tool"]
[null,"1 a) Source",null,"The inventory of materials is provided in the worksheet 1a) Source "]
[null,"1 b) Pathway",null,"The Pathway information is provided in the worksheet 1) b) Pathway "]
[null,"1 c) Receptors",null,"The Receptor information is provided in the worksheet 1) c) Receptor."]
[null,"2) Site Hazard Rating",null,"The Site Hazard Rating is displayed in the worksheet 2) Site Hazard Rating"]
[null,"3) Likelihood",null,"The likelihood of loss of primary containment and the associated mitigation."]
[null,"4) Site Risk and Classification",null,"The Site Hazard Rating and Classification is in this worksheet"]
[null,"5) Standard Containment Design",null,"The Standard Containment Design is in this worksheet"]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"AUTHORISATION OF LATEST VERSION"]
[]
[null,"Type and method of check",null,null,null,"Review of method, inputs and assumptions"]
[]
[null,"Signatures & dates:",null,null,"Made by ","Chloe Austin-Bangs"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,"Checked "]
[]
[null,null,null,null,"Approved"]
[]
[null,"REVISIONS",null,null,"Current Revision "]
[]
[null,"Rev.","Date","Made by","Checked"," Description"]
[null,"V1","2022-09-06","CAB",null,"Reviewed"]
[null,"V2"]
[null,"V3",null,null,null,"Amendments"]

{"sheet":"Notes","index":1,"n_rows":62,"n_cols":3,"rows_kept":62,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[39,1,39,2],[46,1,46,2],[52,1,52,2],[61,1,61,2],[1,1,1,2],[3,1,5,2],[6,1,6,2],[7,1,9,2],[15,1,15,2],[19,1,19,2]]}
[]
[null,"(1) Purpose of spreadsheet"]
[]
[null,"This spreadsheet outlines the information and data utilised, as well as the assumptions applied to undertake a secondary containment risk assessment for Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) based on the using the Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Association (ADBA) secondary containment risk assessment tool and associated guidance. The ADBA risk assessment is based on CIRIA 736  Containment systems for the prevention of pollution: Secondary, tertiary and other measures for industrial and commercial premises. "]
[]
[]
[null,"(2) Key Assumptions"]
[null,"Any assumptions are outlined in the spreadsheet."]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"(3) Basis of calculations"]
[]
[null,"ADBA Risk Assessment tool."]
[]
[null,"(4) References"]
[null,"All references are outlined in the spreadsheet."]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"(5) Special features"]
[]
[null,null,"Input Cell"]
[null,null,"Key Outputs"]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"(6) Holds or items that require Clarification"]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"(7) Summary"]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"Best Practice Guide"]

{"sheet":"Introduction","index":2,"n_rows":75,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":75,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Although this tool works as a standalone tool, we recommend you read this first:","ADBA CIRIA736 Bund Classification Assessment"]
[]
[null,"There are 5 steps to follow:"]
[]
[null,"1)","Identify the hazard posed to the environment by the inventory of materials held on the site and the location of the site"]
[null,null,"a. Categorise the source"]
[null,null,"b. Identify the pathways"]
[null,null,"c. Identify the receptor"]
[]
[null,"2)","The Site Hazard Rating is derived by this tool from the combination of the hazards assessed above"]
[]
[null,"3)","Calculate the likelihood of a loss of primary containment event occurring"]
[]
[null,"4)","The combination of the Site Hazard Rating and the likelihood of a loss of containment occuring gives the site risk rating and required secondary containment classification"]
[]
[null,"5)","From the class of containment needed, identify suitable designs from the 'Standard Containment Designs' sheet"]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"Additional Guidance"]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"The worksheets in this spreadsheet are protected to prevent inadvertant damage to the tool.  To remove the protection, the password is CIRIA736"]

{"sheet":"1) a) Source","index":3,"n_rows":34,"n_cols":15,"rows_kept":34,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[20,1,20,3],[3,12,3,14],[5,12,6,12]]}
[]
[]
[]
[null,"Material","Material","Total Enclosed Quantity","units","Storage","Flammability","Corrosive","Ecotoxicity (based on LD and quantity)","Environmental hazard rating ","Justification",null,"Risk quantification"]
[null,"Feedstock",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Material","Volume (m3)","Environmental Hazard Rating"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Wet Sludge","0-99","Low"]
[null,"Raw sludge liquors ","Liquid","8","m3","Liquor return pumping station (Fully buried structure, covered, surrounded by grass and gravel surface.)","Not flammable","No","Low","H","Permitted waste types (wet sludge) are non-hazardous, however include substances which exhibit a high source hazard and have an unfavourable influence on the oxygen balance (CIRIA Guidance, Appendix A2).  This would result in an Environmental Hazard rating of High. ",null,null,"100-999","Medium"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Feedstock Overall Rating","H","Any material with a \"High\" rating means the overall rating is High."]
[null,"Process"]
[null,"Raw sludge","Liquid",30,"m3","SAS wet well (Fully buried to depth of 5 m, concrete well, built in 1996. Located inside the sludge thickening building with surrounding drainage grates above a concrete base pipework chamber.)","Not flammable","No","Low","H","Permitted waste types (wet sludge) are non-hazardous, however include substances which exhibit a high source hazard and have an unfavourable influence on the oxygen balance (CIRIA Guidance, Appendix A2).  This would result in an Environmental Hazard rating of High. "]
[null,"Raw sludge","Liquid",190,"m3","Import break tank (Above ground tank constructed of glass fused to steel, built in 1996. Surrounded by gravel.)","Not flammable","No","Low","H","Permitted waste types (wet sludge) are non-hazardous, however include substances which exhibit a high source hazard and have an unfavourable influence on the oxygen balance (CIRIA Guidance, Appendix A2).  This would result in an Environmental Hazard rating of High. "]
[null,"Dewatered / thickened sludge","Liquid",1100,"m3","Mixing and balancing tank (Above ground tank constructed of glass fused to steel, built in 1996. Sits on a concrete base surrounded by a gravel surface.)","Not flammable","No","Low","H","Permitted waste types (wet sludge) are non-hazardous, however include substances which exhibit a high source hazard and have an unfavourable influence on the oxygen balance (CIRIA Guidance, Appendix A2).  This would result in an Environmental Hazard rating of High. "]
[null,"Dewatered / thickened sludge","Liquid",4000,"m3","Primary digesters (x2) (Above ground, steel tanks, built in 1996. Sit on concrete bases surrounded by a gravel surface.)","Not flammable","No","Low","H","Permitted waste types (wet sludge) are non-hazardous, however include substances which exhibit a high source hazard and have an unfavourable influence on the oxygen balance (CIRIA Guidance, Appendix A2).  This would result in an Environmental Hazard rating of High. "]
[null,"Post primary digested sludge","Liquid",7200,"m3","Secondary digesters (x4) (Above ground, glass fused to steel tanks, built in 1996. Surrounded by grass and gravel surface.)","Not flammable","No","Low","H","Permitted waste types (wet sludge) are non-hazardous, however include substances which exhibit a high source hazard and have an unfavourable influence on the oxygen balance (CIRIA Guidance, Appendix A2).  This would result in an Environmental Hazard rating of High. "]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Process Overall Rating","H","Any material with a \"High\" rating means the overall rating is High."]
[null,"Additives and site chemicals"]
[null,"Polyelectrolyte ","Liquid","1 - 10","m3","GBT Poly Storage Tank (fibreglass / plastic tank)","Not flammable","No","Low","L","Low ecotoxicity for the quantities stored."]
[null,"Polyelectrolyte ","Liquid","1 - 10","m3","GBT Poly Mixing Tank (fibreglass / plastic tank)","Not flammable","No","Low","L","Low ecotoxicity for the quantities stored."]
[null,"Antifoam","Liquid","1","m3","Antifoam IBC (fibreglass / plastic)","Not flammable","No","Low","L","Low ecotoxicity for the quantities stored."]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Chemicals Overall Rating","L","Low ecotoxicity for the quantities stored."]
[null,"Fire fighting agents and cooling water spillages"]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Spillages Overall Rating"]
[]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Sources Overall Hazard Rating",{"$f":"IF(OR(J8=\"H\",J15=\"H\",J26=\"H\"),\"H\",IF(OR(,J20=\"M\"=\"M\"),\"M\",\"L\"))","v":"H"}]
[]
[]
["H"]
["M"]
["L"]

{"sheet":"1) b) Pathway","index":4,"n_rows":98,"n_cols":15,"rows_kept":98,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Postcode","PR9 9YL"]
[]
[null,"Pathway - the route from primary containment to receptor",null,null,null,"Environmental hazard rating ","Notes","Source","Description","Link","Image","Source","Description","Source","Source"]
[null,"Site layout and drainage"]
[null,"If any of the site inventory has a runoff time of a few minutes…",null,null,null,null,"N/A  - Run-off time is an estimate of how long it would take to flow to the nearest receptor."]
[null,"If any of the site inventory has a runoff time of a few hours.…",null,null,null,"M","It is assumed the site inventory has a runoff time of a few hours due to the form of sludge and the distance to the receptors. A 2D InfoWorks ICM hydraulic model has been built for Southport STC to represent the failure of specific site assets and the resulting overland flow paths for the spilled flow. The aim of the modelling was to check whether failure of the identified tanks would result in spilled flow reaching the adjacent receptors. The above ground storage assets have been grouped into four areas. A simulation has been carried out for each group of tanks representing the release of 110% of the largest tank within the group. Results from the simulations indicate that the spilled flows from these tanks were predicted to reach receptors. Realistically, the physical property of sludge is slow flowing suspension and relatively immobile. "]
[null,"If any of the site inventory has a runoff time of a few days…",null,null,null,null,"N/A  - Run-off time is an estimate of how long it would take to flow to the nearest receptor."]
[null,"If any of the site inventory has a runoff time of a few weeks…",null,null,null,null,"N/A  - Run-off time is an estimate of how long it would take to flow to the nearest receptor."]
[]
[]
[null,"Topography, geology and hydrology"]
[]
[null,"Made ground (artificial ground)",null,null,null,"M","A medium environmental hazard rating has been selected for geology due to made ground exhibiting variable thickness across the site (Stantec, 2022). Made Ground composition is highly spatially variable and may consist of sandy gravelly clay to gravelly sand deposits, as well as cement and sewage sludge.  Underneath the Made Ground lie superficial deposits of either Saltmarsh Deposits or Tidal Flat Deposits. Superficial deposits are found beneath the entire Site, with the majority of the boreholes recording up to 25 m of sand underlying the Made Ground with occasional thin units of clay. Beneath the sand layer is a thinner layer of clay which ranges between 0.1 to 6.9 m.\n\nSite investigation data indicates that there is a shallow aquifer within the Made Ground / shallowest unit of the superficial deposits which is comprised predominantly of sand / silt which could offer a lateral pathway to the drains to the north and east from for any groundwater present at the Site that is proximal to the drains.","BGS geoviewer","Made ground  (artificial deposit)  on record shown as per image.","http://mapapps2.bgs.ac.uk/geoindex/home.html",null,"Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2","Borehole logs indicate that the Site and its immediate vicinity is extensively covered by Made Ground of variable thickness. Underneath the Site its thickness is typically between around 1 and 3 m; but in one location it was observed to be 6.65 m with timber fragments still recorded at this depth. Made Ground composition is highly spatially variable and may consist of sandy gravelly clay to gravelly sand deposits, as well as cement and sewage sludge. Sewage sludge was noted in BH04A (AEG, 2006) at a depth of 1.7 to 2.9 mbgl within the Made Ground prior to the installation of the storm tanks that are located in close proximity to the borehole.\n\n\nSite investigation data indicates that there is a shallow aquifer within the Made Ground / shallowest unit of the superficial deposits which is comprised predominantly of sand / silt which could offer a lateral pathway to the drains to the north and east from for any groundwater present at the Site that is proximal to the drains.","Allied Exploration & Geotechnics Limited, 2006. Ground Investigation Factual Report Southport UID WwTW for United Utilities, March 2006.\n\n[included as a source to Stantec 2022]","Geotechnics, 2007. Ground Investigation at Southport WwTW CHP Scheme for United Utilities Water plc, June 2007.\n\nNorwest Holst, 2000. Report on a Ground Investigation at Southport WwTW, November 2000.\n\n[included as sources to Stantec 2022]"]
[null,"Superficial deposits - shallow aquifer",null,null,null,"M","The superficial Saltmarsh Deposits and Tidal Flat Deposits are not classified as an aquifer.  However, site investigation data indicates that there is a shallow aquifer within the Made Ground / shallowest unit of the superficial deposits which is comprised predominantly of sand / silt which could offer a lateral pathway to the drains to the north and east from for any groundwater present at the Site that is proximal to the drains. A Medium Environmental Hazard Rating has been selected.","BGS geoviewer","TIDAL FLAT DEPOSITS, 1 - SILT, CLAY AND SAND overly the site as per the image. ","http://mapapps2.bgs.ac.uk/geoindex/home.html",null,"Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2","The superficial Saltmarsh Deposits and Tidal Flat Deposits are not classified as an aquifer.  However, site investigation data indicates that there is a shallow aquifer within the Made Ground / shallowest unit of the superficial deposits which is comprised predominantly of sand / silt which could offer a lateral pathway to the drains to the north and east from for any groundwater present at the Site that is proximal to the drains. "]
[null,"Bedrock - Secondary B Aquifer",null,null,null,"L","The bedrock Mercia Mudstone is designated as a Secondary B aquifer by the Environment Agency. Secondary B aquifers are classified as “predominantly lower permeability layers that may store and yield limited amounts of groundwater due to localised features such as fissures, thin permeable horizons and weathering.” The Mercia Mudstone in the South Cheshire basin has a transmissivity of approximately 23.6 m2/d (BGS, 2000). Given the substantial thickness of Mercia Mudstone, this would translate into a very low hydraulic conductivity.  A Low Environmental Hazard Rating has been selected.\n","BGS geoviewer","Singleton Mudstone Member - Mudstone","http://mapapps2.bgs.ac.uk/geoindex/home.html",null,"Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2","The bedrock Mercia Mudstone is designated as a Secondary B aquifer by the Environment Agency. Secondary B aquifers are classified as “predominantly lower permeability layers that may store and yield limited amounts of groundwater due to localised features such as fissures, thin permeable horizons and weathering.” The Mercia Mudstone in the South Cheshire basin has a transmissivity of approximately 23.6 m2/d (BGS, 2000). Given the substantial thickness of Mercia Mudstone, this would translate into a very low hydraulic conductivity.","BGS, 2000. The physical properties of minor aquifers in England and Wales. Technical Report WD/00/04. British Geological Society.\n\n[included as a source to Stantec 2022]"]
[null,"Drainage",null,null,null,"M","A drain runs along the northern boundary of the WwTW which flows towards the north-east. This drain is only open along the stretch adjacent to the WwTW and is culverted at both ends beneath Marine Drive to the north-east and the housing estate to the south-west. This drain is at an elevation of approximately 3.9 mAOD which is a lower elevation than the Site. However, the closest sludge assets are at a distance of c. 70 m from the drain with WwTW assets at closer distances. To the north of the drain is Crossens Marsh (including the SSSI) which contains numerous drains and surface water bodies and is located at a lower elevation than the Site, however an embankment runs between the drain and the SSSI (this embankment corresponds to the Made Ground that is mapped along the north-western boundary of the Site).\n\nA drain is located on the opposite side (east) of Marine Drive to the Site (eastern drain) at an elevation of approximately 2.5 mAOD and flows in a northerly direction towards the Irish Sea. Approximately 500 m upstream of the Site, this drain is the confluence of Back Drain, The Sluice and Three Pools Waterway which is controlled by a pumping station.\n\nIn the event of a catastrophic failure of an asset, sludge and / or liquor could theoretically inundate, overwhelm, and flow beyond the Site’s surface water drainage system. If this were to occur, then overland flow of sludge and / or liquor via gravity could occur across the ground surface / via local drainage following the local topography. However, owing to the generally flat topography at the Site it is considered unlikely that any overflow flow would reach an off-Site area and it would be through the wider WwTW area to the north and east which would capture any leakage flow before it could reach either drain located c. 70 m from the nearest sludge storage asset on the Site.  Results from the 2D modelling simulations do however indicate that the spilled flows from these tanks were predicted to reach receptors.  Consequently a Medium Environmental Hazard Rating has been selected.","Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2"]
[null,"Mitigation - do these apply?"]
[null,"Some secondary and tertiary containment system is present (see Likelihood assessment)",null,null,null,"L"]
[null,"Minor spills will be contained within the hard surfaced and drained areas and returned to the WwTW for treatment. \n",null,null,null,"L"]
[null,"2D modelling for catastrophic failures of tanks identifies source pathway receptor linkages.\n",null,null,null,"H"]
[null,null,null,null,"Path & Mitigation Overall Rating","H"," - All chemical storage is provided with secondary containment.\n2D model has confirmed pathways to receptors and mitigation modelling has confirmed containment - see Southport secondary containment report 08/09/2022.\n-  Site investigation data indicates that there is a shallow aquifer within the Made Ground / shallowest unit of the superficial deposits which is comprised predominantly of sand / silt which could offer a lateral pathway to the drains to the north and east from for any groundwater present at the Site that is proximal to the drains. "]
[null,"Climatic conditions"]
[null,"Annual rainfall < 1000 mm",null,"886 mm",null,"L"," - The annual rainfall is less than 1,000 mm","Met  Office","UK climate averages","https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-climate-averages/gctcfvseb"]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"Fire Fighting Water"]
[null,"Flammable materials normally present on site in large quantities",null,null,null,"L","It is assumed that most of the assets being modelled contain sludge which has a low combustible nature. "]
[null,"Fire fighting and cooling water contaminated by inventory",null,null,null,"L","Digesters could require fire-fighting water in the eventuality of an explosion on the headspace that communicates with the gas system, but in such a scenario the main pollution is likely to be to air.  Fire water is therefore not  considered to be a pathway risk. "]
[null,"Location"]
[null,"Flooding",null,null,null,"H","The Site is located within a designated flood plain area and is at a high risk of flooding (Flood Zone 3), consequently a high environmental hazard rating has been selected.","EA Flood Map for Planning","The Site is located within a designated flood plain area and is at a high risk of flooding (Flood Zone 3).  The Site is however within an area that benefits from flood defences.","https://flood-map-for-planning.service.gov.uk/",null,"Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2","The Site is located within a designated flood plain area and is at a high risk of flooding (Flood Zone 3)."]
[null,"Site is connected to a Wastewater Treatment Works",null,null,null,"L"," - The WwTW is designed with capacity to treat peaks in flow and loads including from surface water drainage input from the site.  \n - In the event of a catastrophic failure on site it is assumed that the SCADA system would manage the Wastewater treatment process to contain any additional load within the system, where possible, or high level and treatment alarms would alert site operators, who would start the emergency procedures in line with the site accident procedures in the site EMS and shut down/divert processes that risk the  WwTW discharge consent. \n - The potential risk of releases via the WwTW is considered to be low. \n"]
[null,null,null,null,"Site Considerations  Overall Rating","M"]
[]
[]
[null,null,null,null,"Pathway Overall Hazard Rating",{"$f":"IF(OR(F22=\"H\",F34=\"H\"),\"H\",IF(OR(F22=\"M\",F34=\"M\"),\"M\",\"L\"))","v":"H"}]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
["H"]
["M"]
["L"]

{"sheet":"1) c) Receptors","index":5,"n_rows":97,"n_cols":20,"rows_kept":97,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Postcode","PR9 9YL"]
[]
[null,"Receptors","Within","units",null,null,null,null,null,"Environmental hazard rating ","Notes","Source","Description","Link","Image","Source","Description","Source","Description","Source"]
[null,"Watercourses and bodies"]
[]
[null,"Drainage ditches (overland flow)","<100","m",null,null,null,null,null,"M","A drain runs along the northern boundary of the WwTW which flows towards the north-east. This drain is only open along the stretch adjacent to the WwTW and is culverted at both ends beneath Marine Drive to the north-east and the housing estate to the south-west. This drain is at an elevation of approximately 3.9 mAOD which is a lower elevation than the Site. However, the closest sludge assets are at a distance of c. 70 m from the drain with WwTW assets at closer distances. To the north of the drain is Crossens Marsh (including the SSSI) which contains numerous drains and surface water bodies and is located at a lower elevation than the Site, however an embankment runs between the drain and the SSSI (this embankment corresponds to the Made Ground that is mapped along the north-western boundary of the Site).  A drain is located on the opposite side (east) of Marine Drive to the Site (eastern drain) at an elevation of approximately 2.5 mAOD and flows in a northerly direction towards the Irish Sea. Approximately 500 m upstream of the Site, this drain is the confluence of Back Drain, The Sluice and Three Pools Waterway which is controlled by a pumping station.  An unnamed ditch is located along the south-eastern boundary of the site.  Water level is linked to rainfall.  Therefore, a Medium Environmental Hazard Rating has been selected.","Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2",null,null,null,"Google Earth (2022)"]
[null,"Artificial Pond","<50","m",null,null,null,null,null,"L","An artificial pond is located in the east of the WwTW adjacent to the entry road. The pond is lined and is not used for treatment purposes.  A Low Environmental Hazard Rating has been selected.","Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2"]
[null,"Ribble and Alt Estuaries","<50","m",null,null,null,null,null,"M","The area immediately to the north of the WwTW is Ribble and Alt Estuaries which is designated as a Ramsar Site and Special Protection Area and Ribble Estuary which is designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and National Nature Reserve. Ribble Estuary is designated due to passage and supporting of wintering wildfowl in the saltmarsh, mud and sand flats.  Protections relate to the aquatic environment, therefore a Medium Environmental Hazard Rating has been selected.\n\nThe Site is not located within a Nitrate vulnerable zone (NVZ); however, the Black Sluice and Three Pools Waterway (surface water) NVZ lies immediately adjacent to the east along the eastern edge of the WwTW.\n","Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2","The Site is not located within a Nitrate vulnerable zone (NVZ); however, the Black Sluice and Three Pools Waterway (surface water) NVZ lies immediately adjacent to the east along the eastern edge of the WwTW.","Check for Drinking Water Safeguard Zones and NVZs (data.gov.uk)",null,"Magic Map Statutory Designations","Magic Map Application (defra.gov.uk)"]
[null,"Superficial deposits - shallow aquifer","Beneath site",null,null,null,null,null,null,"M","The overlying Saltmarsh Deposits and Tidal Flat Deposits are not classified as an aquifer.  However, site investigation data indicates that there is a shallow aquifer within the Made Ground / shallowest unit of the superficial deposits which is comprised predominantly of sand / silt.  Due to the presence of the shallow aquifer, a Medium Environmental Hazard Rating has been selected.\n","BGS geoviewer","TIDAL FLAT DEPOSITS, 1 - SILT, CLAY AND SAND overly the site as per the image. ","http://mapapps2.bgs.ac.uk/geoindex/home.html",null,"Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2","The overlying Saltmarsh Deposits and Tidal Flat Deposits are not classified as an aquifer.  However, site investigation data indicates that there is a shallow aquifer within the Made Ground / shallowest unit of the superficial deposits which is comprised predominantly of sand / silt.  "]
[null,"Bedrock - Secondary B Aquifer","Beneath site",null,null,null,null,null,null,"L","The bedrock Mercia Mudstone is designated as a Secondary B Aquifer by the Environment Agency. Secondary B aquifers are classified as “predominantly lower permeability layers that may store and yield limited amounts of groundwater due to localised features such as fissures, thin permeable horizons and weathering.”  A Low Environmental Hazard Rating has been selected.","BGS geoviewer","Singleton Mudstone Member - Mudstone","http://mapapps2.bgs.ac.uk/geoindex/home.html",null,"Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2","The bedrock Mercia Mudstone is designated as a Secondary B Aquifer by the Environment Agency. Secondary B aquifers are classified as “predominantly lower permeability layers that may store and yield limited amounts of groundwater due to localised features such as fissures, thin permeable horizons and weathering.”  "]
[null,"Abstraction",700,"m",null,null,null,null,null,"L","The Environment Agency has provided information on 29 licenced abstractions within 3 km of the Site. All the abstractions are being sourced from surface water. Eleven of these are abstraction points and 18 are abstraction reaches. The closest is located 700 m north-east of the Site from Banks Marsh Drain, however the majority are located along Three Pools Waterway, The Sluice and Back Drain to the south-east of the Site (upstream). All the abstractions are used for general agriculture (and the majority are for irrigation).  There are no Source Protection Zones (SPZs) in the vicinity of the Site and the closest is over 5 km away.  as there are no groundwater abstractions within 500m of the site, a Low Environmental Hazard Rating has been selected.","Stantec (2022) Environmental Quantitative Risk Assessment at Southport Wastewater Treatment Works (Stantec, 2022), Report Reference 331001867R2"]
[null,"WwTWs",50,"m",null,null,null,null,null,"L","The WwTWs is a very large operation.  Direct impact on operation is extremely unlikely as sludge would not accumulate to a depth where there was risk of disruption to control cabinets or other assets. "]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Water Overall Rating","M","Justification: Medium Environmental Hazard Ratings assessed for drainage ditches, Ribble and Alt estuaries and shallow aquifer beneath Site."]
[null,"Habitation"]
[null,"Sports Pitches (Southfield Athletic JFC)",25,"m",null,null,null,null,null,"H","Sports pitches located approximately 25m from the nearest identified tanks on Site.","Google Earth (2022)"]
[null,"Residential dwellings",50,"m",null,null,null,null,null,"H","The closest residential properties are located off Treen Close, approximately 50m west of the nearest identified tanks on Site.","Google Earth (2022)"]
[null,"Commerical / industrial",200,"m",null,null,null,null,null,"L","Commercial / industrial premises, the closest of which are located off Crossens Way, approcximately 200m east of the nearest identified tanks on Site.\n\n","Google Earth (2022)"]
[null,"Marine Drive",375,"m",null,null,null,null,null,"L","Marine Drive located approximately 375m from the nearest identified tanks on Site.  ","Google Earth (2022)"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Habitation Overall Rating","H","Justification: Some receptors are Medium Environmental Hazard Rating"]
[null,"Other"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null," "]
[]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Receptors Overall Hazard Rating",{"$f":"IF(OR(J14=\"H\",J21=\"H\"),\"H\",IF(OR(J14=\"M\",J21=\"M\"),\"M\",\"L\"))","v":"H"},null,"  "," "]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
["H"]
["M"]
["L"]

{"sheet":"2) Site Hazard Rating","index":6,"n_rows":106,"n_cols":5,"rows_kept":106,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[12,1,12,3],[3,1,3,4]]}
[]
[]
[]
[null,"Calculated hazard ratings:"]
[null,"Source","Pathway","Receptor","Site Hazard Rating"]
[null,{"$f":"'1) a) Source'!J29","v":"H"},{"$f":"'1) b) Pathway'!F37","v":"H"},{"$f":"'1) c) Receptors'!J26","v":"H"},{"$f":"IF(E106<6,\"Low\",IF(E106<10,\"Medium\",\"High\"))","v":"High"}]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"Possible Combination",null,null,"Site Hazard Rating"]
[null,"L","L","L","Low"]
[null,"M","M","L","Low"]
[null,"H","L","L","Low"]
[null,"M","M","M","Medium"]
[null,"H","M","L","Medium"]
[null,"H","H","L","Medium"]
[null,"H","M","M","High"]
[null,"H","H","M","High"]
[null,"H","H","H","High"]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"Rating lookup table"]
[null,"L",1]
[null,"M",2]
[null,"H",3]
[]
[null,"This assessment score"]
[null,{"$f":"VLOOKUP(B6,B101:C103,2,FALSE)","v":3},{"$f":"VLOOKUP(C6,B101:C103,2,FALSE)","v":3},{"$f":"VLOOKUP(D6,B101:C103,2,FALSE)","v":3},{"$f":"B106*C106*D106","v":27}]

{"sheet":"3) Likelihood","index":7,"n_rows":81,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":81,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[20,6,20,7],[22,1,23,1],[22,3,23,3],[22,4,23,4],[22,5,23,5],[26,1,27,1],[26,3,27,3],[26,4,27,4],[26,5,27,5],[24,1,25,1],[24,3,25,3],[24,4,25,4],[24,5,25,5],[28,5,29,5],[30,1,31,1],[30,3,31,3],[30,4,31,4],[30,5,31,5],[28,1,29,1],[28,3,29,3],[28,4,29,4],[34,1,35,1],[34,3,35,3],[34,4,35,4],[34,5,35,5],[32,1,33,1],[32,3,33,3],[32,4,33,4],[32,5,33,5]]}
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"Rational for the assessment of likelihood "]
[null,"Identification of risks is based on the individual sources of potentially polluting material (sludge tanks, etc.) and on the general site risk identified in the CIRIA guidance"]
[null,"Assessment of the unmitigated risk of emissions from each source is based on the potential for failure of any containment measures provided. "]
[null,"This considers the primary, secondary and tertiary containment associate with each source and the potential breach of these containment measures."]
[null,"The likelihood of failure is quantified, based on the guidelines provided in CIRIA 736 and United Utilities experience of containment failures on their sites. "]
[null,"Basing the quantification of containment failure on United Utilities experience on their own sites therefore accounts for the United Utiltiies design specification, making the assessment relevant to the designs. ",null,"The identification of the likelihood of the loss of containment ad subsequent release of contaminants "]
[null,"The mitigation applied to the risks considers the operational and maintenance procedures, including regular inspecting and testing of containment measures.  "]
[null,"Based on the regular inspecting and testing of containment measures it is considered that the potential for catastrophic failures would be identified prior to failure and either decommissioned and replaced (for example tanks) or repairs (e.g. pipelines)"]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"Risk ","Description of Risk","UNMITIGATED LIKELIHOOD \n","Mitigation applied","MITIGATED LIKELIHOOD",null,"Low","Site Overall Likelihood"]
[null,"SAS wet well 30 m3 total\n\nSpillage of non hazardous sludge: \n - catastrophic failure of tank\n - tank overflow or\n - tank leaks","Containment:\n- Concrete tank construction, tank is self-contained / has lid\n- Fully buried to depth of 5 m","M"," - Tanks are located on an engineered surface drainage system at the Site with ground level grates that capture run-off and any spillages from areas of hard-standing and route them through the system via gravity back to the WwTW to be treated.\n - TCM checks are conducted regularly. \n- Storage tanks are also fitted with high level floats or probes which give an early warning alarm prior to leaks. \n - Southport STC is either manned, or when not, monitored by the Integrated Control Centre (ICC) on a 24/7 basis using SCADA and critical process alarms. A significant spill would be identified quickly, and the spill management procedure initiated, ensuring a rapid clean up.  SCADA controls would also, via a number of surrogate metrics, such as level monitoring, transfer, pump and valve status, provide rapid process control indications of certain loss of containment scenarios. \n - United Utilities has a fleet of sludge tankers across their region which form part of the operational response to sludge spills to be utilised rapidly in the event of a spill at Southport STC.\n - Dependant on the age of the asset non-destructive testing (NDT) is carried out every 10, 5, 2 years and yearly on all tanks and associated ancillary assets. The risk of catastrophic failure will therefore be identified before failure occurs. \n - The EMS contains procedures for visual inspections and actions to be taken in the event of tank failures.\n - In the event of overflow of contaminants it is possible that sludge could flow directly into groundwater. In this event UU will react with an emergency spill response and clean up the area that has been contaminated. \n- All kerbing would be as a minimum to UU standard detail R3 (refer to drawing STND_12_0001). This detail uses BS EN 1340 Type HB2 kerb units and provides c.75mm depth of containment. To provide enhanced containment as necessary larger precast concrete kerb units would be used (Trief GST2A or equivalent) to provide c. 325mm depth of containment). · Containment walls: All walls would be reinforced concrete designed to BS EN 1992 water tightness class 1 and constructed to provide a minimum c.1m depth of containment.\n- All sacrificial area will be reprofiled to include an impermeable membrane which will prevent spilled sludge entering the soil store until the clean up operation can be completed.\n- Speed bumps have been strategically placed to divert and restrict flows to be contained within existing hard standing areas or sacrificial areas of the STC.\n- Existing abandoned tank conversion into secondary containment. The proposed mitigation measure would involve installation of a 1200mm dia manhole sump, with paddle pump integration to ensure rainfall or spill sludge can be returned to the inlet works.\n- All existing hard standing areas being used as secondary / tertiary containment will be routinely checked for cracks and defects to ensure it is compliant with CIRIA736 secondary containment class 2.","L"]
[null,null,"Failure risks and Mitigation Measures:\n- Catastrophic tank failure: Tanks are constructed from reinforced concrete and United Utilities maintain tanks to UU specifications.  Therefore, the risk of catastrophic tank failure is considered to be medium.\n- Tank overflow or leaks: Due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps, the risk of overflow is considered to be low. The high-level overflow also drains into the site drainage system and is then returned to the head of the works. \n- Potential for minor leakage: Pipework associated with the tank is below ground. Emission due to leaks is therefore considered medium.\n-Shortcomings or failure in operational control system: the site is maintained inline with a proactive maintenance schedule and the EMS to ensure ongoing operation of all plant items. Operators are trained in the running of plant items. Likelihood of emissions due to operational failure is considered to be low.\n- Abuse: all site staff and tanker Operators are trained to operate the import tank. No risk of overflow, due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps. Likelihood of emissions due to abuse is considered to be low\n- Impact: Tanks are fully submerged. Likelihood of emissions due to impacts is considered to be low\n- Vandalism, etc.: the STC and WwTW are within a fenced and gated site, with access to the site controlled and CCTV system operational.  Likelihood of emissions due to vandalism is considered to be low\n- Fire, explosion: the pipework is not routed along areas of potential flammable atmosphere.  Likelihood of emissions due to fire or explosion is considered to be low\n- Geological factors: There has been no evidence of wider geotechnical issues during the time the WwTW has been operational on the site.  The tank was designed with geotechnical design input.  Likelihood of emissions due to geological issues is low\n- Ageing: Ageing / deterioration were considered at the point of design. Visual inspections and maintenance regime in place to identify any potential defects caused by ageing.  Likelihood of emissions due to age is considered to be low\n- Lightning strike: tanks are completely submerged and are therefore not at risk of lightning strike.  Likelihood of emissions due to lightning is therefore considered to be low"]
[null,"Import break tank 190 m3 total\n\nSpillage of non hazardous sludge: \n - catastrophic failure of tank\n - tank overflow or\n - tank leaks","Containment:\n- Metal tank construction, tank is self-contained / has lid\n- Above ground tank constructed of glass fused to steel, surrounded by gravel","M"," - Tanks are located on an engineered surface drainage system at the Site with ground level grates that capture run-off and any spillages from areas of hard-standing and route them through the system via gravity back to the WwTW to be treated.\n - TCM checks are conducted regularly. \n- Storage tanks are also fitted with high level floats or probes which give an early warning alarm prior to leaks. \n - Southport STC is either manned, or when not, monitored by the Integrated Control Centre (ICC) on a 24/7 basis using SCADA and critical process alarms. A significant spill would be identified quickly, and the spill management procedure initiated, ensuring a rapid clean up.  SCADA controls would also, via a number of surrogate metrics, such as level monitoring, transfer, pump and valve status, provide rapid process control indications of certain loss of containment scenarios. \n - United Utilities has a fleet of sludge tankers across their region which form part of the operational response to sludge spills to be utilised rapidly in the event of a spill at Southport STC.\n - Dependant on the age of the asset non-destructive testing (NDT) is carried out every 10, 5, 2 years and yearly on all tanks and associated ancillary assets. The risk of catastrophic failure will therefore be identified before failure occurs. \n - The EMS contains procedures for visual inspections and actions to be taken in the event of tank failures.\n - In the event of overflow of contaminants it is possible that sludge could flow directly into groundwater. In this event UU will react with an emergency spill response and clean up the area that has been contaminated. \n- All kerbing would be as a minimum to UU standard detail R3 (refer to drawing STND_12_0001). This detail uses BS EN 1340 Type HB2 kerb units and provides c.75mm depth of containment. To provide enhanced containment as necessary larger precast concrete kerb units would be used (Trief GST2A or equivalent) to provide c. 325mm depth of containment). · Containment walls: All walls would be reinforced concrete designed to BS EN 1992 water tightness class 1 and constructed to provide a minimum c.1m depth of containment.\n- All sacrificial area will be reprofiled to include an impermeable membrane which will prevent spilled sludge entering the soil store until the clean up operation can be completed.\n- Speed bumps have been strategically placed to divert and restrict flows to be contained within existing hard standing areas or sacrificial areas of the STC.\n- Existing abandoned tank conversion into secondary containment. The proposed mitigation measure would involve installation of a 1200mm dia manhole sump, with paddle pump integration to ensure rainfall or spill sludge can be returned to the inlet works.\n- All existing hard standing areas being used as secondary / tertiary containment will be routinely checked for cracks and defects to ensure it is compliant with CIRIA736 secondary containment class 2.","L"]
[null,null,"Failure risks and Mitigation Measures:\n- Catastrophic tank failure: Tanks are constructed from glass fused with steel and United Utilities maintain tanks to UU specifications.  Therefore, the risk of catastrophic tank failure is considered to be medium.\n- Tank overflow or leaks: Due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps, the risk of overflow is considered to be low. The high-level overflow also drains into the site drainage system and is then returned to the head of the works.\n- Potential for minor leakage: Pipework associated with the tank is below ground. Emission due to leaks is therefore considered medium.\n- Shortcomings or failure in operational control system: the site is maintained inline with a proactive maintenance schedule and the EMS to ensure ongoing operation of all plant items. Operators are trained in the running of plant items. Likelihood of emissions due to operational failure is considered to be low.\n- Abuse: all site staff and tanker Operators are trained to operate the import tank. No risk of overflow, due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps. Likelihood of emissions due to abuse is considered to be low\n- Impact: Tanks are above ground. Likelihood of emissions due to impacts is considered to be low\n- Vandalism, etc.: the STC and WwTW are within a fenced and gated site, with access to the site controlled and CCTV system operational.  Likelihood of emissions due to vandalism is considered to be low\n- Fire, explosion: the pipework is not routed along areas of potential flammable atmosphere.  Likelihood of emissions due to fire or explosion is considered to be low\n- Geological factors: There has been no evidence of wider geotechnical issues during the time the WwTW has been operational on the site.  The tank was designed with geotechnical design input.  Likelihood of emissions due to geological issues is low\n- Ageing: Ageing / deterioration were considered at the point of design. Visual inspections and maintenance regime in place to identify any potential defects caused by ageing.  Likelihood of emissions due to age is considered to be low\n- Lightning strike: the tanks are low relative to other structures within the area therefore unlikely to be struck by lightning. Likelihood of emissions due to lightning is low"]
[null,"Mixing and balancing tank 1,100 m3 total\n\nSpillage of non hazardous sludge: \n - catastrophic failure of tank\n - tank overflow or\n - tank leaks","Containment:\n- Metal tank construction, tank is self-contained / has lid\n- Above ground tank constructed of glass fused to steel. Sits on a concrete base surrounded by a gravel surface","M"," - Tanks are located on an engineered surface drainage system at the Site with ground level grates that capture run-off and any spillages from areas of hard-standing and route them through the system via gravity back to the WwTW to be treated.\n - TCM checks are conducted regularly. \n- Storage tanks are also fitted with high level floats or probes which give an early warning alarm prior to leaks. \n - Southport STC is either manned, or when not, monitored by the Integrated Control Centre (ICC) on a 24/7 basis using SCADA and critical process alarms. A significant spill would be identified quickly, and the spill management procedure initiated, ensuring a rapid clean up.  SCADA controls would also, via a number of surrogate metrics, such as level monitoring, transfer, pump and valve status, provide rapid process control indications of certain loss of containment scenarios. \n - United Utilities has a fleet of sludge tankers across their region which form part of the operational response to sludge spills to be utilised rapidly in the event of a spill at Southport STC.\n - Dependant on the age of the asset non-destructive testing (NDT) is carried out every 10, 5, 2 years and yearly on all tanks and associated ancillary assets. The risk of catastrophic failure will therefore be identified before failure occurs. \n - The EMS contains procedures for visual inspections and actions to be taken in the event of tank failures.\n - In the event of overflow of contaminants it is possible that sludge could flow directly into groundwater. In this event UU will react with an emergency spill response and clean up the area that has been contaminated. \n- All kerbing would be as a minimum to UU standard detail R3 (refer to drawing STND_12_0001). This detail uses BS EN 1340 Type HB2 kerb units and provides c.75mm depth of containment. To provide enhanced containment as necessary larger precast concrete kerb units would be used (Trief GST2A or equivalent) to provide c. 325mm depth of containment). · Containment walls: All walls would be reinforced concrete designed to BS EN 1992 water tightness class 1 and constructed to provide a minimum c.1m depth of containment.\n- All sacrificial area will be reprofiled to include an impermeable membrane which will prevent spilled sludge entering the soil store until the clean up operation can be completed.\n- Speed bumps have been strategically placed to divert and restrict flows to be contained within existing hard standing areas or sacrificial areas of the STC.\n- Existing abandoned tank conversion into secondary containment. The proposed mitigation measure would involve installation of a 1200mm dia manhole sump, with paddle pump integration to ensure rainfall or spill sludge can be returned to the inlet works.\n- All existing hard standing areas being used as secondary / tertiary containment will be routinely checked for cracks and defects to ensure it is compliant with CIRIA736 secondary containment class 2.","L"]
[null,null,"Failure risks and Mitigation Measures:\n- Catastrophic tank failure: Tanks are constructed from glass fused with steel and United Utilities maintain tanks to UU specifications.  Therefore, the risk of catastrophic tank failure is considered to be medium.\n- Tank overflow or leaks: Due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps, the risk of overflow is considered to be low. The high-level overflow also drains into the site drainage system and is then returned to the head of the works. \n- Potential for minor leakage: Pipework associated with the tank is below ground. Emission due to leaks is therefore considered medium.\n- Shortcomings or failure in operational control system: the site is maintained inline with a proactive maintenance schedule and the EMS to ensure ongoing operation of all plant items. Operators are trained in the running of plant items. Likelihood of emissions due to operational failure is considered to be low.\n- Abuse: all site staff and tanker Operators are trained to operate the import tank. No risk of overflow, due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps. Likelihood of emissions due to abuse is considered to be low\n- Impact: Tanks are above ground. Likelihood of emissions due to impacts is considered to be low\n- Vandalism, etc.: the STC and WwTW are within a fenced and gated site, with access to the site controlled and CCTV system operational.  Likelihood of emissions due to vandalism is considered to be low\n- Fire, explosion: the pipework is not routed along areas of potential flammable atmosphere.  Likelihood of emissions due to fire or explosion is considered to be low\n- Geological factors: There has been no evidence of wider geotechnical issues during the time the WwTW has been operational on the site.  The tank was designed with geotechnical design input.  Likelihood of emissions due to geological issues is low\n- Ageing: Ageing / deterioration were considered at the point of design. Visual inspections and maintenance regime in place to identify any potential defects caused by ageing.  Likelihood of emissions due to age is considered to be low\n- Lightning strike: the tanks are low relative to other structures within the area therefore unlikely to be struck by lightning.  Likelihood of emissions due to lightning is low"]
[null,"Primary digesters (x2) 4,000 m3 total\n\nSpillage of non hazardous sludge: \n - catastrophic failure of tank\n - tank overflow or\n - tank leaks","Containment:\n- Metal tank construction, tank is self-contained / has lid\n- Above ground, steel tanks. Sit on concrete bases surrounded by a gravel surface","M"," - Tanks are located on an engineered surface drainage system at the Site with ground level grates that capture run-off and any spillages from areas of hard-standing and route them through the system via gravity back to the WwTW to be treated.\n - TCM checks are conducted regularly. \n- Storage tanks are also fitted with high level floats or probes which give an early warning alarm prior to leaks. \n - Southport STC is either manned, or when not, monitored by the Integrated Control Centre (ICC) on a 24/7 basis using SCADA and critical process alarms. A significant spill would be identified quickly, and the spill management procedure initiated, ensuring a rapid clean up.  SCADA controls would also, via a number of surrogate metrics, such as level monitoring, transfer, pump and valve status, provide rapid process control indications of certain loss of containment scenarios. \n - United Utilities has a fleet of sludge tankers across their region which form part of the operational response to sludge spills to be utilised rapidly in the event of a spill at Southport STC.\n - Dependant on the age of the asset non-destructive testing (NDT) is carried out every 10, 5, 2 years and yearly on all tanks and associated ancillary assets. The risk of catastrophic failure will therefore be identified before failure occurs. \n - The EMS contains procedures for visual inspections and actions to be taken in the event of tank failures.\n - In the event of overflow of contaminants it is possible that sludge could flow directly into groundwater. In this event UU will react with an emergency spill response and clean up the area that has been contaminated. \n- All kerbing would be as a minimum to UU standard detail R3 (refer to drawing STND_12_0001). This detail uses BS EN 1340 Type HB2 kerb units and provides c.75mm depth of containment. To provide enhanced containment as necessary larger precast concrete kerb units would be used (Trief GST2A or equivalent) to provide c. 325mm depth of containment). · Containment walls: All walls would be reinforced concrete designed to BS EN 1992 water tightness class 1 and constructed to provide a minimum c.1m depth of containment.\n- All sacrificial area will be reprofiled to include an impermeable membrane which will prevent spilled sludge entering the soil store until the clean up operation can be completed.\n- Speed bumps have been strategically placed to divert and restrict flows to be contained within existing hard standing areas or sacrificial areas of the STC.\n- Existing abandoned tank conversion into secondary containment. The proposed mitigation measure would involve installation of a 1200mm dia manhole sump, with paddle pump integration to ensure rainfall or spill sludge can be returned to the inlet works.\n- All existing hard standing areas being used as secondary / tertiary containment will be routinely checked for cracks and defects to ensure it is compliant with CIRIA736 secondary containment class 2.","L"]
[null,null,"Failure risks and Mitigation Measures:\n- Catastrophic tank failure: Tanks are constructed from steel and United Utilities maintain tanks to UU specifications.  Therefore, the risk of catastrophic tank failure is considered to be medium.\n- Tank overflow or leaks: Due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps, the risk of overflow is considered to be low. The high-level overflow also drains into the site drainage system and is then returned to the head of the works. \n- Potential for minor leakage: Where above ground, pipework is visually inspected on a regular basis for leaks.  Emission due to leaks is therefore considered medium.\n- Shortcomings or failure in operational control system: the site is maintained inline with a proactive maintenance schedule and the EMS to ensure ongoing operation of all plant items. Operators are trained in the running of plant items. Likelihood of emissions due to operational failure is considered to be low.\n- Abuse: all site staff and tanker Operators are trained to operate the import tank. No risk of overflow, due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps. Likelihood of emissions due to abuse is considered to be low\n- Impact: Tanks are above ground. Likelihood of emissions due to impacts is considered to be low\n- Vandalism, etc.: the STC and WwTW are within a fenced and gated site, with access to the site controlled and CCTV system operational.  Likelihood of emissions due to vandalism is considered to be low\n- Fire, explosion: the pipework is not routed along areas of potential flammable atmosphere.  Likelihood of emissions due to fire or explosion is considered to be low\n- Geological factors: There has been no evidence of wider geotechnical issues during the time the WwTW has been operational on the site.  The tank was designed with geotechnical design input.  Likelihood of emissions due to geological issues is low\n- Ageing: Ageing / deterioration were considered at the point of design. Visual inspections and maintenance regime in place to identify any potential defects caused by ageing.  Likelihood of emissions due to age is considered to be low\n- Lightning strike: the tanks are low relative to other structures within the area therefore unlikely to be struck by lightning.  Likelihood of emissions due to lightning is low"]
[null,"Secondary digesters (x4) 7,200 m3 total\n\nSpillage of non hazardous sludge: \n - catastrophic failure of tank\n - tank overflow or\n - tank leaks","Containment:\n- Metal tank construction, tank is self-contained / has lid\n- Above ground, glass fused to steel tanks. Surrounded by grass and gravel surface","M"," - Tanks are located on an engineered surface drainage system at the Site with ground level grates that capture run-off and any spillages from areas of hard-standing and route them through the system via gravity back to the WwTW to be treated.\n - TCM checks are conducted regularly. \n- Storage tanks are also fitted with high level floats or probes which give an early warning alarm prior to leaks. \n - Southport STC is either manned, or when not, monitored by the Integrated Control Centre (ICC) on a 24/7 basis using SCADA and critical process alarms. A significant spill would be identified quickly, and the spill management procedure initiated, ensuring a rapid clean up.  SCADA controls would also, via a number of surrogate metrics, such as level monitoring, transfer, pump and valve status, provide rapid process control indications of certain loss of containment scenarios. \n - United Utilities has a fleet of sludge tankers across their region which form part of the operational response to sludge spills to be utilised rapidly in the event of a spill at Southport STC.\n - Dependant on the age of the asset non-destructive testing (NDT) is carried out every 10, 5, 2 years and yearly on all tanks and associated ancillary assets. The risk of catastrophic failure will therefore be identified before failure occurs. \n - The EMS contains procedures for visual inspections and actions to be taken in the event of tank failures.\n - In the event of overflow of contaminants it is possible that sludge could flow directly into groundwater. In this event UU will react with an emergency spill response and clean up the area that has been contaminated. \n- All kerbing would be as a minimum to UU standard detail R3 (refer to drawing STND_12_0001). This detail uses BS EN 1340 Type HB2 kerb units and provides c.75mm depth of containment. To provide enhanced containment as necessary larger precast concrete kerb units would be used (Trief GST2A or equivalent) to provide c. 325mm depth of containment). · Containment walls: All walls would be reinforced concrete designed to BS EN 1992 water tightness class 1 and constructed to provide a minimum c.1m depth of containment.\n- All sacrificial area will be reprofiled to include an impermeable membrane which will prevent spilled sludge entering the soil store until the clean up operation can be completed.\n- Speed bumps have been strategically placed to divert and restrict flows to be contained within existing hard standing areas or sacrificial areas of the STC.\n- Existing abandoned tank conversion into secondary containment. The proposed mitigation measure would involve installation of a 1200mm dia manhole sump, with paddle pump integration to ensure rainfall or spill sludge can be returned to the inlet works.\n- All existing hard standing areas being used as secondary / tertiary containment will be routinely checked for cracks and defects to ensure it is compliant with CIRIA736 secondary containment class 2.","L"]
[null,null,"Failure risks and Mitigation Measures:\n- Catastrophic tank failure: Tanks are constructed from glass fused with steel and United Utilities maintain tanks to UU specifications. Therefore, the risk of catastrophic tank failure is considered to be medium\n- Tank overflow or leaks: Due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps, the risk of overflow is considered to be low. The high-level overflow also drains into the site drainage system and is then returned to the head of the works. \n- Potential for minor leakage: Pipework associated with the tank is below ground. Emission due to leaks is therefore considered medium.\n- Shortcomings or failure in operational control system: the site is maintained inline with a proactive maintenance schedule and the EMS to ensure ongoing operation of all plant items. Operators are trained in the running of plant items. Likelihood of emissions due to operational failure is considered to be low.\n- Abuse: all site staff and tanker Operators are trained to operate the import tank. No risk of overflow, due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps. Likelihood of emissions due to abuse is considered to be low\n- Impact: Tanks are above ground. Likelihood of emissions due to impacts is considered to be low\n- Vandalism, etc.: the STC and WwTW are within a fenced and gated site, with access to the site controlled and CCTV system operational.  Likelihood of emissions due to vandalism is considered to be low\n- Fire, explosion: the pipework is not routed along areas of potential flammable atmosphere. Likelihood of emissions due to fire or explosion is considered to be low\n- Geological factors: There has been no evidence of wider geotechnical issues during the time the WwTW has been operational on the site. The tank was designed with geotechnical design input.  Likelihood of emissions due to geological issues is low\n- Ageing: Ageing / deterioration were considered at the point of design. Visual inspections and maintenance regime in place to identify any potential defects caused by ageing.  Likelihood of emissions due to age is considered to be low\n- Lightning strike: the tanks are low relative to other structures within the area therefore unlikely to be struck by lightning.  Likelihood of emissions due to lightning is low"]
[null,"Liquor return pumping station 8 m3 total\n\nSpillage of non hazardous sludge: \n - catastrophic failure of tank\n - tank overflow or\n - tank leaks","Containment:\n- Concrete tank construction, tank is self-contained / has lid\n- Fully buried structure, covered, surrounded by grass and gravel surface","M"," - Tanks are located on an engineered surface drainage system at the Site with ground level grates that capture run-off and any spillages from areas of hard-standing and route them through the system via gravity back to the WwTW to be treated.\n - TCM checks are conducted regularly. \n- Storage tanks are also fitted with high level floats or probes which give an early warning alarm prior to leaks. \n - Southport STC is either manned, or when not, monitored by the Integrated Control Centre (ICC) on a 24/7 basis using SCADA and critical process alarms. A significant spill would be identified quickly, and the spill management procedure initiated, ensuring a rapid clean up.  SCADA controls would also, via a number of surrogate metrics, such as level monitoring, transfer, pump and valve status, provide rapid process control indications of certain loss of containment scenarios. \n - United Utilities has a fleet of sludge tankers across their region which form part of the operational response to sludge spills to be utilised rapidly in the event of a spill at Southport STC.\n - Dependant on the age of the asset non-destructive testing (NDT) is carried out every 10, 5, 2 years and yearly on all tanks and associated ancillary assets. The risk of catastrophic failure will therefore be identified before failure occurs. \n - The EMS contains procedures for visual inspections and actions to be taken in the event of tank failures.\n - In the event of overflow of contaminants it is possible that sludge could flow directly into groundwater. In this event UU will react with an emergency spill response and clean up the area that has been contaminated. \n- All kerbing would be as a minimum to UU standard detail R3 (refer to drawing STND_12_0001). This detail uses BS EN 1340 Type HB2 kerb units and provides c.75mm depth of containment. To provide enhanced containment as necessary larger precast concrete kerb units would be used (Trief GST2A or equivalent) to provide c. 325mm depth of containment). · Containment walls: All walls would be reinforced concrete designed to BS EN 1992 water tightness class 1 and constructed to provide a minimum c.1m depth of containment.\n- All sacrificial area will be reprofiled to include an impermeable membrane which will prevent spilled sludge entering the soil store until the clean up operation can be completed.\n- Speed bumps have been strategically placed to divert and restrict flows to be contained within existing hard standing areas or sacrificial areas of the STC.\n- Existing abandoned tank conversion into secondary containment. The proposed mitigation measure would involve installation of a 1200mm dia manhole sump, with paddle pump integration to ensure rainfall or spill sludge can be returned to the inlet works.\n- All existing hard standing areas being used as secondary / tertiary containment will be routinely checked for cracks and defects to ensure it is compliant with CIRIA736 secondary containment class 2.","L"]
[null,null,"Failure risks and Mitigation Measures:\n- Catastrophic tank failure: Tanks are constructed from reinforced concrete and United Utilities maintain tanks to UU specifications.  Therefore, the risk of catastrophic tank failure is considered to be medium.\n- Tank overflow or leaks: Due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps, the risk of overflow is considered to be low. The high-level overflow also drains into the site drainage system and is then returned to the head of the works. \n- Potential for minor leakage: Pipework associated with the tank is below ground. Emission due to leaks is therefore considered medium.\n- Shortcomings or failure in operational control system: the site is maintained inline with a proactive maintenance schedule and the EMS to ensure ongoing operation of all plant items. Operators are trained in the running of plant items. Likelihood of emissions due to operational failure is considered to be low.\n- Abuse: all site staff and tanker Operators are trained to operate the import tank. No risk of overflow, due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps. Likelihood of emissions due to abuse is considered to be low\n- Impact: Tanks are fully submerged. Likelihood of emissions due to impacts is considered to be low\n- Vandalism, etc.: the STC and WwTW are within a fenced and gated site, with access to the site controlled and CCTV system operational.  Likelihood of emissions due to vandalism is considered to be low\n- Fire, explosion: the pipework is not routed along areas of potential flammable atmosphere.  Likelihood of emissions due to fire or explosion is considered to be low\n- Geological factors: There has been no evidence of wider geotechnical issues during the time the WwTW has been operational on the site.  The tank was designed with geotechnical design input.  Likelihood of emissions due to geological issues is low\n- Ageing: Ageing / deterioration were considered at the point of design. Visual inspections and maintenance regime in place to identify any potential defects caused by ageing.  Likelihood of emissions due to age is considered to be low\n- Lightning strike: tanks are completely submerged and are therefore not at risk of lightning strike.  Likelihood of emissions due to lightning is therefore considered to be low"]
[null,"Temporary Dewatering Centrifuge\n\nSpillage of non hazardous sludge: \n - catastrophic failure of tank\n - tank overflow or\n - tank leaks","Containment:\n- Located above ground in a mobile containerised unit on impermeable cover","M"," - Tanks are located on an engineered surface drainage system at the Site with ground level grates that capture run-off and any spillages from areas of hard-standing and route them through the system via gravity back to the WwTW to be treated.\n - TCM checks are conducted regularly. \n- Storage tanks are also fitted with high level floats or probes which give an early warning alarm prior to leaks. \n - Southport STC is either manned, or when not, monitored by the Integrated Control Centre (ICC) on a 24/7 basis using SCADA and critical process alarms. A significant spill would be identified quickly, and the spill management procedure initiated, ensuring a rapid clean up.  SCADA controls would also, via a number of surrogate metrics, such as level monitoring, transfer, pump and valve status, provide rapid process control indications of certain loss of containment scenarios. \n - United Utilities has a fleet of sludge tankers across their region which form part of the operational response to sludge spills to be utilised rapidly in the event of a spill at Southport STC.\n - Dependant on the age of the asset non-destructive testing (NDT) is carried out every 10, 5, 2 years and yearly on all tanks and associated ancillary assets. The risk of catastrophic failure will therefore be identified before failure occurs. \n - The EMS contains procedures for visual inspections and actions to be taken in the event of tank failures.\n - In the event of overflow of contaminants it is possible that sludge could flow directly into groundwater. In this event UU will react with an emergency spill response and clean up the area that has been contaminated. \n- All kerbing would be as a minimum to UU standard detail R3 (refer to drawing STND_12_0001). This detail uses BS EN 1340 Type HB2 kerb units and provides c.75mm depth of containment. To provide enhanced containment as necessary larger precast concrete kerb units would be used (Trief GST2A or equivalent) to provide c. 325mm depth of containment). · Containment walls: All walls would be reinforced concrete designed to BS EN 1992 water tightness class 1 and constructed to provide a minimum c.1m depth of containment.\n- All sacrificial area will be reprofiled to include an impermeable membrane which will prevent spilled sludge entering the soil store until the clean up operation can be completed.\n- Speed bumps have been strategically placed to divert and restrict flows to be contained within existing hard standing areas or sacrificial areas of the STC.\n- Existing abandoned tank conversion into secondary containment. The proposed mitigation measure would involve installation of a 1200mm dia manhole sump, with paddle pump integration to ensure rainfall or spill sludge can be returned to the inlet works.\n- All existing hard standing areas being used as secondary / tertiary containment will be routinely checked for cracks and defects to ensure it is compliant with CIRIA736 secondary containment class 2.","L"]
[null,null,"Failure risks and Mitigation Measures:\n- Catastrophic tank failure: United Utilities maintain tanks to UU specifications.  Therefore, the risk of catastrophic tank failure is considered to be medium.\n- Tank overflow or leaks: Due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps, the risk of overflow is considered to be low. The high-level overflow also drains into the site drainage system and is then returned to the head of the works.\n- Potential for minor leakage: Pipework associated with the tank is below ground. Emission due to leaks is therefore considered medium.\n- Shortcomings or failure in operational control system: the site is maintained inline with a proactive maintenance schedule and the EMS to ensure ongoing operation of all plant items. Operators are trained in the running of plant items. Likelihood of emissions due to operational failure is considered to be low.\n- Abuse: all site staff and tanker Operators are trained to operate the import tank. No risk of overflow, due to level monitors and the interlock on feed pumps. Likelihood of emissions due to abuse is considered to be low\n- Impact: Tanks are above ground. Likelihood of emissions due to impacts is considered to be low\n- Vandalism, etc.: the STC and WwTW are within a fenced and gated site, with access to the site controlled and CCTV system operational.  Likelihood of emissions due to vandalism is considered to be low\n- Fire, explosion: the pipework is not routed along areas of potential flammable atmosphere.  Likelihood of emissions due to fire or explosion is considered to be low\n- Geological factors: There has been no evidence of wider geotechnical issues during the time the WwTW has been operational on the site.  The tank was designed with geotechnical design input.  Likelihood of emissions due to geological issues is low\n- Ageing: Ageing / deterioration were considered at the point of design. Visual inspections and maintenance regime in place to identify any potential defects caused by ageing.  Likelihood of emissions due to age is considered to be low\n- Lightning strike: the tanks are low relative to other structures within the area therefore unlikely to be struck by lightning. Likelihood of emissions due to lightning is low"]
[]
[null,"Risk","Examples of mitigation options","Reduction in likelihood","Detail of measures"]
[null,1,"Operational Failures"]
[null,null,"The team will carry out periodic design reviews and a comprehensive HAZOP involving all the designers (process, civil, drainage, electrical) to ensure primary containment failure risk is very low. In addition operator training will be strengthened with detailed standard operating procedures.",-2,"(Taken from consultant's HAZOP report, for example)"]
[null,null,"Maintenance programme in place",-1]
[null,null,"Audit process in place",-1]
[]
[null,2,"Shortfalls in design"]
[null,null,"Plant control will be assessed at the HAZOP stage",-2]
[null,null,"No outlets below normal liquid level",-1]
[]
[null,3,"Structural failure – materials, components, detailing, corrosion or when exposed to heat and flame"]
[null,null,"Pre-cast concrete tank",-2]
[null,null,"Tank design has no history of failure",-1]
[null,null,"Tank failure risk assessment completed?",-1]
[null,null,"Steel valves",-1]
[null,null,"Structures will be built to British Standards with contractors that work under ISO9000",-1]
[]
[null,4,"Abuse – inappropriate change of use or other misuse"]
[null,null,"Change control procedure in place with sign off from competent personnel in applicable disciplines",-2]
[]
[null,5,"Vehicle impact"]
[null,null,"Armco crash barriers around tank",-2]
[null,null,"Tanks in bund not accessible by vehicles",-2]
[null,null,"Restricted vehicular access to site",-1]
[]
[null,6,"Vandalism, terrorism, force majeure etc"]
[null,null,"lockable valves on outlets (that are locked when not in use by procedure)",-1]
[null,null,"automatic and manual shut off valves",-1]
[null,null,"The site will include fencing where access is open to public",-1]
[null,null,"Passive CCTV system",-1]
[null,null,"Monitored CCTV with motion detection and warning signs",-2]
[]
[null,7,"Fire or explosion"]
[null,null,"DSEAR assessment completed",-2]
[null,null,"Control of ignition sources on site",-1]
[]
[null,8,"Geological factors -subsidence etc"]
[null,null,"Site investigations will be provided to the civil contractor for the design of the foundations",-1]
[]
[null,9,"Ageing or deteriorating assets/sub-components."]
[null,null,"Ageing/deterioration factored into plant design",-1]
[]
[null,10,"Lightning strike"]
[null,null,"Catenary or multiple lightning conductors supplied by specialists",-1]

{"sheet":"4) Site Risk and Classification","index":8,"n_rows":31,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":31,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
[]
[]
[]
[]
["Activity","Site Hazard Rating","Likelihood","Overall Site Risk Rating","Indicated Class of Secondary Containment Required"]
["Site - overall summary score",{"$f":"'2) Site Hazard Rating'!E6","v":"High"},{"$f":"'3) Likelihood'!H22","v":"Low"},{"$f":"IF(D31<3,\"Low\",IF(D31<5,\"Medium\",\"High\"))","v":"Medium"},{"$f":"IF(D6=\"Low\",\"Class 1\",IF(D6=\"Medium\", \"Class 2\",\"Class 3\"))","v":"Class 2"}]
["SAS Wet Well","High","Low","Medium",{"$f":"IF(D7=\"Low\",\"Class 1\",IF(D7=\"Medium\", \"Class 2\",\"Class 3\"))","v":"Class 2"}]
["Import Break Tank","High","Low","Medium","Class 2"]
["Mixing and Balancing Tank","High","Low","Medium","Class 2"]
["Primary Digestors","High","Low","Medium","Class 2",null,null,null,null,null," "]
["Secondary Digestors","High","Low","Medium","Class 2"]
["Liquor Return Pumping Station","High","Low","Medium","Class 2"]
["Temprary Dewatering Centrifuge","High","Low","Medium",{"$f":"IF(D13=\"Low\",\"Class 1\",IF(D13=\"Medium\", \"Class 2\",\"Class 3\"))","v":"Class 2"}]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
["Rating lookup table"]
["Low",1]
["Medium",2]
["High",3]
[]
[{"$f":"VLOOKUP(B6,A27:B29,2,FALSE)","v":3},{"$f":"VLOOKUP(C6,A27:B29,2,FALSE)","v":1},null,{"$f":"A31*B31","v":3}]

{"sheet":"5) Standard Containment Designs","index":9,"n_rows":129,"n_cols":8,"rows_kept":129,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IF('4) Site Risk and Classification'!$E$6=\"Class 1\", \"Your site needs a design based on this diagram\",\"\")","v":""}]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IF('4) Site Risk and Classification'!$E$6=\"Class 3\", \"Your site needs a design based on this diagram\",\"\")","v":""}]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"# ","Material ","When used ","How ","Why "]
[]
[]
[null,"A ","Clay ","If plentiful on site ","1m thick, sheepsfoot roller etc. ","Low cost & effective. "]
[]
[]
[null,"B ","Stabilised soil ","If soil tested and is suitable ","Sample and test to determine amount of lime, cement and depth. ","Low cost & effective when no clay on site. "]
[]
[]
[null,"C ","Bentonite matting ","If A or B not suitable ","Prepare sub, roll out and cover. ","Moderate cost. Quick & easy to lay. Tolerant of damage. "]
[]
[]
[null,"D ","Landfill liner type foil ","If A, B or C not suitable ","Prepare sub, roll out, weld and cover. "]
[]
[]
[null,"E ","Concrete ","Small areas only ","Shutter, place mesh and pour fibre reinforced.","Only if A, B, C or D not suitable. "]

{"sheet":"Sheet1","index":10,"n_rows":46,"n_cols":13,"rows_kept":46,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[]}
[]
[]
[null,null,1,null,2,null,3,null,4,null,5,null,6]
[null,null,"Ag Man",null,"Ag Man & PGC",null,"Ag Man & FW",null,"PGC & FW",null,"FW",null,"Indus & commercial inc green waste"]
[null,"Approx size typical plant +/- 50 %","150 kW",null,"500 kW",null,"1 MW",null,"1 MW",null,"1.5 MW",null,"> 2MW"]
[1,"Source"]
[null,"Farm yard manure","L"]
[null,"Slurry","L"]
[null,"Energy Crops","L"]
[null,"Energy Crop silage","M"]
[null,"Energy crop silage effluent","H"]
[null,"Food waste","-"]
[null,"Green waste","-"]
[]
[null,"Digestate","L",null,"L",null,"M",null,"M",null,"H"]
[null,"Based on vol and aquatic pollutant results"]
[]
[null,"Separated digestate solids","L"]
[null,"Separated digestate liquid","L"]
[]
[null,"Rainwater or surface water runoff contaminated by inventory","L"]
[]
[null,"Fire Fighting Agents harmful in their own right or contaminated by inventory","N/A"]
[]
[null,"Fire fighting and cooling water contaminated by inventory","N/A"]
[]
[2,"Pathway"]
[null,"Site layout and drainage"]
[]
[null,"Topography, geology and hydrology"]
[]
[null,"Climatic conditions"]
[]
[3,"Receptors"]
[null,"Groundwater","See groundwater sheet (similar to amaya's inventory sheet)"]
[]
[null,"Surface water"]
[]
[null,"Local Water Quality"]
[]
[null,"Protected areas"]
[]
[null,"Overall site hazard rating"]
[]
[]
[4,"Liklihood"]

{"sheet":"Risk Scoring","index":11,"n_rows":17,"n_cols":20,"rows_kept":17,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[[1,17,4,17],[7,11,7,14]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Risk Rating"]
[null,"Rating",null,"Likelihood",null,null,"Consequence","incident level",null,null,null,{"$f":"L6*$P$2","v":4},{"$f":"M6*$P$2","v":8},{"$f":"N6*$P$2","v":12},{"$f":"O6*$P$2","v":16},4,"H","Consequence",null,"High"]
[null,"Very low",null,1,"up to 10%",null,1,"Category 4",null,null,null,{"$f":"L6*$P$3","v":3},{"$f":"M6*$P$3","v":6},{"$f":"N6*$P$3","v":9},{"$f":"O6*$P$3","v":12},3,"M",null,null,"Medium High"]
[null,"Low",null,2,"up to 20%",null,2,"Category 3",null,null,null,{"$f":"L6*$P$4","v":2},{"$f":"M6*$P$4","v":4},{"$f":"N6*$P$4","v":6},{"$f":"O6*$P$4","v":8},2,"L",null,null,"Medium Low"]
[null,"Medium",null,3,"up to 50%",null,3,"Category 2",null,null,null,{"$f":"L6*$P$5","v":1},{"$f":"M6*$P$5","v":2},{"$f":"N6*$P$5","v":3},{"$f":"O6*$P$5","v":4},1,"VL",null,null,"Low"]
[null,"High",null,4,"up to 70%",null,4,"Category 1",null,null,null,1,2,3,4]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"VL","L","M","H"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Likelihood"]
[]
[]
[null,"Category 1 – major, serious, persistent and/or extensive impact or effect"]
[null,"on the environment, people and/or property "]
[null,"Category 2 – significant impact or effect on the environment, people"]
[null,"and/or property "]
[null,"Category 3 – minor or minimal impact or effect on the environment, people"]
[null,"and/or property "]
[null,"Category 4 – substantiated incident with no impact."]