Excavated Material and Waste Management Strategy Overview...

Excavated Material and Waste Management Strategy Overview of Strategy

Mott MacDonald 18 February 2005

Excavated Material and Waste Management Strategy

Overview of Strategy

Volume 1 of 3

February 2005

This document has been prepared for the titled project or named part thereof and shouldnot be relied upon or used for any other project without an independent check being carried out as to its suitability and prior written authority of Mott MacDonald being obtained. Mott MacDonald accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequences of this document being used for a purpose other than the purposes for which it was commissioned. Any person using or relying on the document for such other purpose agrees, and will by such use or reliance be taken to confirm his agreement to indemnify Mott MacDonald for all loss or damage resulting thereof. Mott MacDonald accepts no responsibility or liability for this document to any party other than the person by whom it was commissioned.

i Excavated Material and Waste Management Strategy Overview of Strategy


List of Contents Page

Sections and Appendices

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Summary Scheme Description 1

1.3 Route Definitions 1

1.4 Technical Report Format 2

1.5 Excavated Materials and Waste Management Strategy 3

2 CATEGORIES OF SURPLUS MATERIAL 4

2.1 Material Types 4

2.2 Demolition Material (estimated volume 0.3 million m3) 4

2.3 Excavated Material (estimated volume 6.0 million m3) 4 2.3.1 Clean Excavated Material 4

(i) Subsurface works: 5 (ii) Surface works: 5

2.3.2 Contaminated excavated material (estimated volume 0.5 million m3) 5

2.4 Construction Material (estimated volume 1.2 million m3) 6 2.4.1 Sprayed Concrete Lining Material 6 2.4.2 Other construction wastes: 6

3 THE WASTE HIERARCHY AND STRATEGY 7

3.1 Waste Hierarchy 7

3.2 Beneficial Re-use Options 7 3.2.1 Recycling of demolition wastes 7 3.2.2 Excavated Material 8 3.2.3 Contaminated Material 8

(i) Containment 9 (ii) Remediation 9 (iii) Direct Disposal to Landfill 10 (iv) Actions to Achieve Solutions 10

3.2.4 Construction Wastes 11 3.2.5 Sprayed Concrete Lining Residues 11

4 LOADING AND TRANSPORTATION OF SURPLUS MATERIAL 12

4.1 Modes of Transportation 12

4.2 Rail 12 4.2.1 Train Loading Sites 12

(i) Paddington New Yard Sidings (Royal Oak Sidings) 13 (ii) Mile End (Devonshire Street) Sidings 13 (iii) Bow Midland Yard East Sidings 13

4.2.2 Notional Train Plan 13

4.3 Water 13 4.3.1 Barge Loading Sites 13

(i) Isle of Dogs barge loading facility: 14 (ii) Limmo Peninsula barge loading facility: 14 (iii) Manor Wharf barge loading facility: 15

4.4 Road 15

5 LANDFILL SITE SELECTION 16

6 SURPLUS MATERIALS SUMMARY ANALYSIS 18

1 Excavated Material and Waste Management Strategy Overview of Strategy


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Crossrail is a major new cross-London rail link project that has been developed to serve London and the south-east of England. Crossrail will support and maintain the status of London as a world city by providing a world class transport system. The project includes the construction of a twin-bore tunnel on an east-west alignment under central London and the upgrading of existing National Rail lines to the east and west of central London. The Crossrail route is shown in Figure 1 below. Figure 1: Crossrail route map:

1.2 Summary Scheme Description The project will enable the introduction of a range of new and improved rail journeys into and through London. It includes the construction of seven central area stations, providing interchange with London Underground, National Rail and London bus services, and the upgrading or renewal of existing stations outside central London. Crossrail will provide fast, efficient and convenient rail access to the West End and the City by linking existing routes from Shenfield and Abbey Wood in the east with Maidenhead and Heathrow in the west. Crossrail will be a significant addition to the transport infrastructure of London and the south-east of England. It will deliver improved services for rail users through the relief of crowding, faster journeys and the provision of a range of new direct journey opportunities. The project will also have wider social and economic benefits for London and the south-east of England.

1.3 Route Definitions Crossrail's route has four distinct sections: a central section within central London and, outside central London, western, north-eastern and south-eastern sections.

Transportfor London



In the west, Crossrail will use the Great Western Main Line (GWML) between Maidenhead and Westbourne Park. The existing 25 kV overhead electrification between Paddington and Airport Junction will be extended to Maidenhead and bridge alterations will be undertaken as necessary. The main infrastructure changes are the construction of a flyover structure (the Stockley flyover) to allow Crossrail trains to access the existing tunnelled spur to Heathrow and the provision of a rail underpass (a dive-under) west of Acton Yard. A new line, within the existing railway corridor, will be provided between Langley and West Drayton. Enhancements will also be made to stations, with the most significant works being at Ealing Broadway, Southall, Hayes and Harlington, West Drayton, Slough and Maidenhead. New stabling sidings are also proposed at Old Oak Common, West Drayton and west of Maidenhead station. The central route section will consist largely of a twin-bore tunnel beneath central London with portals at Royal Oak in the west, Pudding Mill Lane in the north-east and Victoria Dock Road in the south-east. The central route section extends from a point around 200 m west of the A40 Westway to a point around 500 m to the east of the portal at Pudding Mill Lane in the north-east and a point just to the east of Poplar Dock and the A1206 Prestons Road in the Isle of Dogs in the southeast. New stations and associated structures, such as ventilation shafts, will be provided along this part of the route. On the north-east route section, Crossrail will use the existing Great Eastern Main Line (GEML) between Pudding Mill Lane and Shenfield. The main infrastructure changes are a new train maintenance depot west of Romford station and the reinstatement of a track between Goodmayes and Chadwell Heath. Enhancements will also be made to stations, with the most significant works being proposed at Ilford and Romford. This route has existing 25kV overhead electrification. New stabling facilities will be provided at Gidea Park. The south-east route section runs between a point to the east of the Isle of Dogs station and the eastern terminus at Abbey Wood, where Crossrail will serve a reconstructed station. Crossrail will operate in a twin-bore tunnel to Victoria Dock portal where it will serve a reconstructed station at Custom House. The route will then follow the existing alignment currently used by the North London Line (NKL) through the Connaught Tunnel to Silvertown. At North Woolwich, a new twin-bore tunnel to Plumstead, referred to as the Thames Tunnel, will pass beneath the River Thames. Two new tracks will be provided between Plumstead and a point east of Abbey Wood station to accommodate Crossrail services on the NKL corridor. This route will be provided with 25kV overhead electrification on the Crossrail lines.

1.4 Technical Report Format This technical report provides the specialist information on the excavated materials and waste management strategy for the Crossrail EIA. It has been prepared jointly by Mott MacDonald and Adams Hendry. The responsibilities of the consultants and the report structure are set out as follows:

Volume 1 Excavated Material and Waste Management Strategy Mott MacDonald Volume 2 Best Practicable Environmental Option Adams Hendry Volume 3 Appraisal of Landfill Sites Adams Hendry

This is Volume 1 that sets out the strategy and contains details of the technical aspects of the generation of material, loading, transport and treatment or disposal of the materials and the processes taken during the selection of disposal sites (landfill sites). Volume 2 covers the Best Practicable Environmental Option as applied to the strategy. Volume 3 provides details of the landfill sites and respective planning policies.



1.5 Excavated Materials and Waste Management Strategy During the period of the construction of the Crossrail project, surplus material will be generated in the categories and estimated volumes shown below:

Surplus Material Type Estimated Volume (million m3)

Demolition material 0.3 ‘Clean’ excavated material 6.0 Contaminated excavated material 0.5 Construction material including sprayed concrete lining residues 1.2 Total 8.0

The estimated volumes have been calculated by multiplying the in situ volume of material by a conversion factor to estimate the volume of material in bulk to be transported to the disposal sites.

Material Type Conversion Factor (million m3 in situ to million m3 bulked)

Demolition material 1.5 ‘Clean’ excavated material:

Subsurface section 1.8 Surface sections 1.5

Contaminated excavated material 1.8 Construction material including sprayed concrete lining residues 1.8

A breakdown of the allocation of the clean excavated material and sprayed concrete lining material to disposal sites by mode of transport is provided in Section 6. An excavated materials and waste management strategy has been drawn up to identify the surplus material types and the means of transport and final treatment or disposal. The strategy covers the disposal of surplus material at landfill disposal sites, although Crossrail will apply the principles of the waste management hierarchy to achieve beneficial re-use of materials where feasible. It has been assumed that demolition material will be handled, transported and recycled by an independent contractor and thus will not be transported to the disposal sites identified by this study. It has also been assumed that contaminated surplus material will be remediated in situ, or remediated at off-site treatment facilities and thus will also not be transported to the disposal sites identified in this study.



2 CATEGORIES OF SURPLUS MATERIAL

2.1 Material Types

Surplus material can be defined as material arising from the construction of Crossrail for which reuse cannot be found within the confines of the project and is required to be transferred for beneficial use on another project or to a disposal site.

For the purposes of this study surplus materials have been categorised as follows:

• Demolition material: • Materials arising from building clearance

• Excavated material: • ‘Clean’ excavated materials • Contaminated excavated materials

• Construction material: • Sprayed concrete lining materials • Over ordered/supplied construction materials • Packaging e.g. polythene wrap, pellets • Canteen/mess room waste

The types and overall volumes of surplus materials generated by construction of Crossrail are discussed in the following subsections.

2.2 Demolition Material (estimated volume 0.3 million m3)

There will be a requirement to demolish some buildings and structures at various points along the proposed Crossrail route to enable construction activities to proceed. At some station or shaft construction sites a considerable amount of demolition will be carried out, notably at Farringdon, Tottenham Court Road, Bond Street and Pudding Mill Lane portal worksites. The types of demolition material that will be generated by the construction of Crossrail are anticipated to include:

• Asbestos • Brick • Glass • Made Ground/Asphalt • Plasterboard

• Ceramics • Concrete • Metal • Plastics • Polystyrene

A large proportion of the demolition waste will be inert: brick, glass, ceramics or concrete. However the presence of significant quantities of metal, plastics, polystyrene, plasterboard, electric cable and other materials will render the mixed waste as general non-putrescible rather than inert. Asbestos will be removed from buildings before demolition and disposed of at suitably licensed disposal sites.

2.3 Excavated Material (estimated volume 6.0 million m3)

2.3.1 Clean Excavated Material

The excavated material that will be generated by the construction of Crossrail is anticipated to include:



• Made Ground • Terrace Gravels • London Clay • Lambeth Group

• Thanet Sands • Chalk • Dredged materials • Material dug out of former landfill sites

Excavated material will arise from subsurface works and surface works detailed following.

(i) Subsurface works:

The subsurface works will take place within London between Royal Oak portal, Pudding Mill Lane portal and Victoria Dock portal and between North Woolwich portal and Plumstead portal. Excavated material will arise from the construction of:

• Box stations • Tunnelled stations • Intermediate shafts

• Portals (cuttings) • Bored running tunnels • Dredgings (Isle of Dogs)

The majority of materials generated by the construction of Crossrail are estimated to arise from the construction of the subsurface structures.

(ii) Surface works:

Surface works will take place within the western section of the route, between Maidenhead station and Royal Oak portal, and within the eastern sections, between Pudding Mill Lane portal and Shenfield station in the north east and between Plumstead portal and Abbey Wood station in the south eastern section. The surface works will involve bridge works, station upgrades, trackwork, overhead line electrification works and systems works.

The largest volume of excavated material that will arise from construction of the western section of the route will arise from the construction of Acton dive-under. The largest construction works in the eastern section of the route will be at the Romford train stabling and maintenance depot. It is anticipated that the material from these works will be remediated as necessary and will remain in situ with a cap provided over the site. Therefore, at this stage no volumes of surplus material from Romford depot have been included in the disposal aspects of the waste management strategy. However, should further studies of the works at Romford demonstrate that the removal of surplus material is preferable, this could be carried out by rail transport.

There will be some minor earth works where station upgrades and track works will take place. It is envisaged that where possible these small volumes of material will be reused locally.

2.3.2 Contaminated excavated material (estimated volume 0.5 million m3)

A proportion of the material excavated during construction works will have been contaminated by previous activities or events along the line of the route. These materials will require particular attention in handling, from a health and safety perspective, and disposal from a regulatory perspective.

The studies leading up to the submission of the Environmental Statement have been based on examination of historical records to establish where previous activities are likely to have generated potentially contaminative materials. The types of activities have then been considered to determine the likely contaminants that may have polluted the ground and the classification of those contaminants as hazardous or non-hazardous using the Consolidated European Waste Catalogue 2002.



Throughout the remainder of this report contaminated excavated material is discussed under its own headings because these materials will have to be handled, treated and,if necessary, transported and disposed of independently from ‘clean’ excavated material.

2.4 Construction Material (estimated volume 1.2 million m3)

2.4.1 Sprayed Concrete Lining Material

During subsurface construction works sprayed concrete lining (SCL) will be used for free form in situ temporary and/or permanent lining of some of the stations constructed as boxes, some tunnel sections at stations, some shafts, crossovers at shaft sites and turnout caverns. It is also expected that small amounts of SCL will be utilised at the portals.

The technique of SCL involves the excavation of small sections of tunnels and other structures in stages. At each stage the excavated face is sealed with a thin layer of sprayed concrete for temporary support and then the circumference is sprayed with a thicker primary and/or permanent secondary lining. The temporary face support layer is then excavated to progress the tunnel construction and the process is repeated.

Waste produced during the process will be generated by face sealing and subsequent excavation, sprayed concrete rebound (consisting mostly of aggregate) and other activities including cleaning of equipment and line and pump losses.

Rebound and other waste SCL is assumed to be a fixed percentage of the sprayed concrete used in construction. Estimates for this value range between 10% and 50% and for the purposes for this study 30%.

The SCL waste will be mixed with some excavated material at construction sites where it is used. The SCL will comprise mainly concrete containing certain additives and possibly steel fibres added for structural stability and polypropylene fibres added for fire resistance.

The SCL waste is considered to be non-hazardous waste, rather than inert and is, therefore, identified as a separate category to the clean excavated material.

2.4.2 Other construction wastes:

By nature of their activities construction sites will produce their own waste streams, for example:

• Surplus construction materials resulting from over ordering • Damaged materials • Packaging • Canteen and mess room wastes • Hazardous waste, such as oils for plant maintenance

A well run construction site will minimise these wastes and their effect, for example, by ensuring the correct amount of construction materials are ordered and by minimising and/or recycling packaging where possible. Contractors will be required to adhere to appropriate industry standards in this respect so that construction wastes will not have a major impact on the overall disposal requirements of the project. It will be the responsibility of the contractors to remove these wastes and for this reason they have not been considered in this study.



3 THE WASTE HIERARCHY AND STRATEGY

3.1 Waste Hierarchy

A strategy has been developed for surplus materials management that follows the national hierarchy for sustainable waste management. This section of the report should be read in conjunction with volume 2 – Best Practical Environmental Option (BPEO). The diagram below illustrates the hierarchy in order of preference from the most desirable option at the top, to the least desirable option at the bottom:

MINIMISEGeneration of material

REUSE AND/ORRECYCLE

Materials within theCrossrail Project

REUSE AND/ORRECYCLE

Materials for beneficial useon other projects

DISPOSEOf material at licensed sites

3.2 Beneficial Re-use Options

3.2.1 Recycling of demolition wastes

The immediate re-use of demolition wastes at the sites where they are generated is not a viable option but the screening and sorting of the wastes for recycling and re-use elsewhere is in line with the national waste hierarchy adopted by the Crossrail project. This will be a requirement for all works contracts where it is proved to be environmentally advantageous.

There are several government sponsored and industry-led research organisations, including the Building Research Establishment and the Construction Industry Research and Information Association, which carry out research into, and issue guidance on, the best environmental practice in the processing and re-use of demolition materials. There are also many materials exchange bureaux and recycled products guides that enable holders of recycled products to contact others in demand of good quality processed materials. Crossrail will require its works contractors to follow best



environmental practice by implementing such measures as are appropriate to achieve the re-use and/or recycling of demolition wastes.

Greater London is well served with sites licensed, or exempt from licensing, to accept, process and recycle demolition materials and Crossrail will require the works contractors to make provision for the use of these outlets during the demolition period. It is likely that the majority of the materials will be delivered to these sites in relatively short road journeys.

3.2.2 Excavated Material

The most environmentally sustainable approach to handling excavated material will be to recover it for re-use – preferably within the construction of Crossrail itself. However, advantages and disadvantages, for example environmental effects of on-site storage and treatment and fitness for purpose of recovered materials compared to new materials, will be assessed where practicable in order to prove the beneficial uses of any surplus materials.

The next preferable option in the waste hierarchy will be the application of the excavated materials for beneficial use in other projects that require the types of materials generated. A considerable proportion of the excavated material will be ‘clean’ London Clay that is in demand for the engineering of ground works and landscape projects. The environmental benefit to be obtained would be further enhanced if suitable projects were available within the Greater London area, in order to minimise transportation time, distance and the associated negative environmental impacts such as traffic congestion and air pollution. At the time of writing, no such projects have been positively identified, although the proposed East London Thames Gateway project and the London Olympics bid could provide opportunities. Groundwater levels in London are rising and the Environment Agency recently announced that it is examining the need for further measures to supplement the Thames Barrier. This could create opportunities for the use of the surplus materials in flood defence schemes.

The best opportunities for identifying major opportunities for beneficial re-use of excavated materials will arise through dialogue between Crossrail and the nominated undertaker, the Environment Agency, the planning authorities and the development agencies in London and the south-east of England and it is proposed to continue the dialogue that has already been opened with these bodies.

A proportion of the excavated materials will arise in a condition that may make them unsuitable for beneficial re-use without some form of physical separation, for example soils mixed with aggregates. The introduction of equipment for the screening and sorting of excavated materials at the Crossrail construction sites would require land-take, for equipment and storage of pre and post processed materials. In addition, noise and dust effects at the construction sites would be increased and the adverse effects are likely to offset the advantages gained from the reduction in transport movements. There are several licensed commercial waste recovery companies operational in London and the South-East to which these types of wastes can be taken for screening, sorting, size grading and treatment and subsequent re-use. There are, similarly, sites that are registered as exempt from licensing because they need the materials for site development or restoration. It will be a requirement on the works contractors to include the use of these facilities where practicable.

3.2.3 Contaminated Material It will be necessary to make provision in the construction programme for intrusive investigations to be carried out at certain sites. This will involve the creation of boreholes or trial pits to enable samples of materials to be removed for laboratory examination. The results of the laboratory examination will determine more precisely the nature and extent of the contamination and its classification under the Consolidated European Waste Catalogue. On other sites it will be necessary to carry out an assessment of the risks that the contaminants may be mobilised or otherwise released by other activities on the site. The risk assessment may lead to the conclusion that the contaminated



materials should be left in situ as found, or possibly with the addition of some form of containment. The nominated undertaker or contractor will carry out site assessments, investigations and/or risk assessments on the potentially contaminated sites identified (see the Contaminated Land Technical Report for details). In the event that areas of ground contamination are to be disturbed by the construction activities, it may be the case that these materials will remain within the construction site, as part of the design, or it may be the case that they are surplus and require removal from the construction site. If the materials are to remain within the construction site, then it is likely that either containment or remediation will be required to prevent the release of contaminants and subsequent pollution of the environment or harm to human health. If the materials are to be taken away from the construction site for disposal, the options may involve remediation before or after removal, or direct disposal in the contaminative state. The following table summarises the possible scenarios:

Materials remain on site undisturbed

Materials disturbed then replaced on site

Materials removed from site

Risk assessment will determine the appropriate course of action Containment Containment Remediation on site prior to

removal for beneficial re-use elsewhere

Remediation and re-use on site Remediation at an off-site treatment works prior to beneficial re-use elsewhere

Direct disposal to a suitably licensed landfill site

(i) Containment The containment of contaminated materials is carried out when pollutants have been identified that could migrate into groundwater resources or be released to atmosphere and cause pollution of the environment or harm to human health. The risk assessment will determine the form of containment, examples of which may be engineered clay or bentonite cells or the placement of a concrete overlay.

(ii) Remediation Remediation is carried out when pollutants have been identified that will respond to some form of treatment to remove them from the material or render them safe. There are many forms of remediation and the nature of the pollutants and the risk assessment will determine the approach, which may range from ventilation in windrows, soil washing, chemical treatment or biological treatment through the introduction of micro-organisms. The extent to which remediation techniques can be carried out within the construction sites will be determined by the nature of the contamination, the available space and the amount of time available within the construction programme. There are commercial treatment facilities at off-site locations which may have to be used. Remediation and beneficial re-use of contaminated materials is in line with the principles of best practicable environmental option (BPEO) and discussions with the Environment Agency have established that the Agency is in favour of this approach rather than direct disposal to landfill. There are potential constraints on the use of remediation techniques associated with space and time in a project where continuous removal of excavated materials is vital to the progress of tunnelling activities. Crossrail will, therefore, explore and promote the application of remediation to contaminated excavated materials, both on-site and off-site, in preference to direct disposal wherever the actual best practicable environmental option can be achieved.



(iii) Direct Disposal to Landfill The direct disposal of contaminated materials to appropriately licensed landfill sites is, in accordance with the waste hierarchy, the least preferable option. It has been common industry practice in the UK for many years to place contaminated soils in landfill sites, very often in conjunction with inert or non-hazardous putrescible materials. This form of co-disposal has been banned in the UK under the Landfill Regulations 2002. These regulations required the operators of all landfill sites to register their sites to take materials in one of three categories: inert, non-hazardous and hazardous. The co-disposal of hazardous wastes with other wastes is no longer permitted and wastes can only be accepted at a particular landfill if they meet the relevant waste acceptance criteria for that class of landfill. The full waste acceptance criteria are scheduled to apply from July 2005 and so will be applicable to the Crossrail project. For hazardous waste landfills there will be a Hazardous Waste List and if the materials for disposal are on the list, they will need to be assessed against leaching limit values and other criteria prior to acceptance. At the same time that changes to the regulation of landfills are being introduced, the UK government has announced proposals to replace the Special Waste Regulations 1996 with new Hazardous Waste Regulations. The new regulations will replace the current definition of ‘special waste’ with the European law term ‘hazardous waste’. Consultation on the proposed new regulations came to a close late in 2004 and further announcements on the final details of the legislation are awaited. The effect of the ban on co-disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes and the requirement to classify landfill sites, coupled with the uncertainty surrounding waste acceptance criteria and the definition of hazardous wastes, has been a drastic reduction in the number of commercial landfill sites in the UK permitted to accept hazardous wastes. In answer to a parliamentary question in September 2004, the Secretary of State for the Environment submitted tables showing that applications had been submitted for eighteen commercial hazardous waste landfills of which only six had been granted, nine were to be determined and three had been refused. An initial assessment indicates that none of the sites that had received permits would provide suitable outlets for contaminated materials from the Crossrail project. Discussions have been held with landfill site operators during the assessment of available disposal outlets for all excavated materials from the Crossrail project and, although none of the operators is currently able to offer landfill disposal space for contaminated materials generated by the project, several are considering making applications to establish stable non-reactive hazardous waste disposal cells within existing non-hazardous waste sites and to establish treatment facilities for hazardous wastes at such sites. The decision of the landfill operators on whether to proceed with these proposals is likely to be influenced by developments in clarification of the waste acceptance criteria and the proposed hazardous waste regulations. The decision of the landfill operators will also be driven by the commercial viability of their proposals and this will include a guaranteed supply of waste for treatment or disposal. The landfill operators have indicated that the Crossrail project could be a potential provider of such material but the commercial viability will depend on the volumes of materials and the nature of the contamination, neither of which will be precisely determined before the project is approved.

(iv) Actions to Achieve Solutions The effect of recently introduced and currently proposed regulatory changes has drastically reduced the available landfill disposal outlets for contaminated material that may fall into the classification of hazardous waste. The commercial response to this situation is only now developing and Crossrail will:

a) investigate and maximise the opportunities for on-site remediation and re-use of contaminated materials

b) investigate and maximise the opportunities for off-site remediation and beneficial re-use elsewhere of contaminated materials



c) engage in continuous dialogue with the operators of treatment facilities and landfill sites to secure suitable outlets for contaminated materials.

It is considered that, despite the current position of uncertainty which arises from circumstances outside the control of Crossrail, the actions identified above will provide acceptable solutions which will not be a barrier to the progress of the project or cause pollution of the environment or harm to human health.

3.2.4 Construction Wastes

The minimisation of waste from the construction activities associated with Crossrail will be a stringent requirement in the works contracts. There are many guidance documents and tools to assist with best practice in the management of construction site waste. These aim to aid the identification and auditing of waste sources, types, quantity, cause and cost in order to assist the implementation of waste minimisation plans.

The successful application of waste minimisation techniques and on-site segregation of surplus materials and packaging for recycling should reduce the residual waste from construction sites to a level that will be comfortably absorbed into the existing materials recovery and transfer infrastructure in London without major impact on the waste management strategy.

3.2.5 Sprayed Concrete Lining Residues

SCL contaminated excavated material will comprise mainly concrete containing certain additives and possibly polypropylene or steel fibres, the presence of which will place the waste in the category of non-hazardous, rather than inert. It has been identified as a separate category to the clean excavated material to show that this small constituent of the overall volume of surplus material will need to be consigned to sites that can accept non-hazardous waste. Such sites, with adequate capacity, are identified in Section 5 of this report.



4 LOADING AND TRANSPORTATION OF SURPLUS MATERIAL

4.1 Modes of Transportation

It has been estimated that about 15% of surplus material will be removed by barge, 30% by rail and the remaining 55% by road transportation. These allocations are influenced by the positions and availability of loading and off-loading sites, the need or otherwise for infrastructure changes at those sites, the geographical location of landfill sites and the availability of waterways and train paths to connect the loading and off-loading sites. Where a short road journey to a loading point is required, e.g. to Manor Wharf barge loading facility, the allocation of material has been made to the principal mode of transport. Opportunities to increase the utilisation of barges are potentially available and Crossrail will continue to investigate these opportunities. The respective allocations to barge, rail and road may, therefore, vary and the studies undertaken in the report reflect a potential use of barge transportation in the region of 30%.

4.2 Rail

4.2.1 Train Loading Sites

Rail transport is fast and large amounts of excavated material can be carried at one time, providing adequate loading and unloading facilities and suitable pathways exist, making it an efficient form of transport. The use of rail limits the number of road vehicles required and hence limits the environmental disadvantages of carriage by road. It is currently intended that all excavated materials arising from bored running tunnel construction and a proportion from some subsurface stations and shafts will be removed by rail, subject to the availability of railway pathways.

Excavated material arising from the project is likely to be loaded onto trains from three railheads: Paddington Goods Yard sidings (Royal Oak sidings), Mile End (Devonshire Road) sidings and Bow Midland Yard East sidings. The generation sites that will contribute excavated materials to be removed from these railheads are given in the table below.

Railhead: Sites contributing excavated materials to railhead:

Paddington New Yard sidings

(Royal Oak sidings)

Royal Oak portal (Cut and Cover)

Royal Oak tunnelling site

Paddington station

Mile End (Devonshire Street) sidings

Pedley Street tunnelling

Bow Midland Yard East sidings Pudding Mill Lane Portal

Pudding Mill Lane tunnel site

Although rail has been identified as the transport mode for excavated material leaving the above sites there are a number of issues that should be considered.



There are limitations on the number of disposal sites with facilities to accept material directly from rail. These disposal sites are detailed in Section 5 of this report.

The capacity of the rail network to take additional rolling stock and the availability of the train pathway is the subject of ongoing studies. Scheduling must be balanced between the operating hours of the disposal sites and, time when there is spare capacity on the network and the generation of material. Rolling stock to take the excavated material may need to be procured if sufficient capacity does not exist at present. Forward planning with regard to the procurement and manufacture of freight trains will be necessary to ensure that the rolling stock is in place for the start of the project.

(i) Paddington New Yard Sidings (Royal Oak Sidings)

There is an existing facility used for rail freight of commercial materials at this site. The sidings will need minor modifications for the initial phase of the Crossrail construction works to enable material to be removed by rail. The amount of material to be removed will increase as the project progresses and at this point the commercial freight handling infrastructure will be removed and the sidings will be re-configured to enable the handling of higher volumes of surplus material from the project.

(ii) Mile End (Devonshire Street) Sidings

There is an existing facility at this location which has been out of use for approximately ten years. The connections with the Great Eastern Line will be renewed and the layout of the sidings modified to accept the sixteen-wagon trains that are assumed in the preliminary notional train plan.

(iii) Bow Midland Yard East Sidings

This site currently has a facility which is suitable for the removal of surplus material by rail, with no significant track alterations required.

4.2.2 Notional Train Plan

A notional train plan based on the feasibility of rail-borne disposal at the three rail-served landfill sites identified in this report has been prepared. It has been established that a practicable train plan can be achieved without likely impact on other rail services. During the course of development of the project, other construction projects that can be rail-served may emerge and the plan may be altered accordingly. In any event, the plan will be influenced by the interplay between the volumes of material generated at each of the train loading sites and the available train off-loading sites and will inevitably evolve during development of the project.

4.3 Water

4.3.1 Barge Loading Sites

Utilising the River Thames has the potential to provide an alternative environmentally attractive mode of transport for the removal of excavated and demolition materials, thus alleviating the additional pressures on London's road network.

There are a number of environmental advantages that can be realised through the utilisation of barges to transport material generated by construction of Crossrail. With a large capacity for bulk transport (i.e. 1,000 tonnes per barge) the number of movements required to transport material away



for disposal is markedly less than the number of lorry movements. Utilising the River Thames has the advantage of providing temporary storage as barges can be loaded and moored overnight.

There are a limited number of suitable disposal sites with access by barge and the disposal site would need to be located near the chosen waterway transport route. This may have programme and financial implications for the project.

Currently there are three feasible areas for the loading of material onto barge:

Barge loading facility: Sites contributing excavated materials to barge removal area:

Isle of Dogs Isle of Dogs station

Isle of Dogs tunnel site

Limmo Peninsula Limmo Peninsula Shaft

Limmo Peninsula tunnel site

Manor Wharf

Thames tunnel

Plumstead Portal

Warren Lane shaft

Arsenal Way shaft

(i) Isle of Dogs barge loading facility:

The Isle of Dogs worksite is situated at Canary Wharf in London’s Docklands. The worksite will be the point of removal of excavated material associated with the construction of the box situated under the North Dock and material resulting from the tunnel drive.

From the Isle of Dogs it is feasible to use 1,000 tonne barges for transportation of material to disposal sites via the River Thames. Material will be moved to the barge loading facility via conveyor along Bellmouth Passage.

With a loading time of five hours and the requirement to use the movement of the tides on the outward and return journeys it is assumed that only one trip could be made daily by each barge. Although multiple barges could be loaded at one time it is anticipated that tugs would work with a large number of barges in order to maximise the use of tide movements. Further studies will need to be undertaken in relation to establishing the most appropriate number of barges transported per tide and the number of tugs used.

(ii) Limmo Peninsula barge loading facility:

The Limmo Peninsula worksite will be located to the south of Canning Town Station adjacent to Bow Creek. This site will be used for the removal of material associated with the tunnel drives from Limmo Peninsula.

This study has indicated that it would be feasible to use 1,000 tonne barges for transportation of material to disposal sites along the River Thames via Bow Creek. Crossrail is undertaking further studies into mooring barges adjacent to the worksite, the requirement for any bank stabilisation works



and the potential for moving barges loaded at Limmo Peninsula with tugs already moving material from the Isle of Dogs.

(iii) Manor Wharf barge loading facility:

The Plumstead portal will be situated on the south side of the River Thames to the east of the existing Plumstead station. Material arising from construction of Plumstead portal and the Thames Crossing (which will be driven from Plumstead portal to North Woolwich portal) will be transported from the Plumstead worksite by road to a barge loading facility at Manor Wharf on the site of the former Belvedere Power station.

This study has shown that it is feasible for materials to be transported along the River Thames in 1,000 tonne barges to disposal sites from the Manor Wharf barge loading facility. It is envisaged that 4 to 6 barges will be able to be moored at any one time. This facility exists but will require improvement works to bring it back into use for the project.

4.4 Road

The transportation of material by road will generally rank lower when assessed against environmental criteria than rail or barge but can be efficient and cost-effective when the road network adjacent to the loading and off-loading sites is suitable to support the movement of heavy goods vehicles on major routes. Crossrail will maximise the opportunities to use rail and barge wherever such opportunities arise but there are work sites where the removal of material by road is the only viable option. This will be the case for surplus material arising from the majority of the Crossrail subsurface stations and ventilation shafts. In addition, it is possible that, even where there is access to other forms of transport at generation and disposal sites, road transport may be required for part of the surplus material disposal pathway.

Most disposal sites identified for the Crossrail project are accessible by road and if an emergency situation arose where the rail and/or barge network failed, for example, through workers striking or foggy weather, where feasible, road transportation could be used as an alternative to road and/or barge transportation until rail/barge facilities could be utilised again.

An ‘in principle’ road traffic assessment of the suitability of the primary sites to be accessed by road has been carried out and included in Volume 3 of this report. Reference should also be made to the Traffic Report forming Volume 8 of the Environmental Statement.



5 LANDFILL SITE SELECTION

A systematic approach has been used to identify suitable landfill disposal sites for disposal of surplus materials that cannot be absorbed by minimisation, beneficial re-use and recycling techniques.

The Environment Agency list of licensed or permitted landfill sites was reviewed and companies operating sites in the Thames, Anglian, Southern, Midland and South West Regions were contacted and asked for information on sites that will be open for part, or all of the construction phase of the project.

Using questionnaires the following information was obtained from the operators of the disposal sites identified:

• Remaining operational life • Waste types accepted • Total capacity • Maximum inputs over periods of time • Potential capacity available to Crossrail • Number of vehicle movements available to Crossrail per day • Operational hours • Whether access is available by road, rail or barge • Whether there is scope for a rail head • Disposal cost at 2002 rates

A screening process was applied to the information obtained from the site operators. Discussions were then held with the operators of sites that the screening process indicated would be suitable for the project. These discussions helped to verify or amend some of the information gathered about the sites and, in some cases, to identify other sites that had not been previously identified as suitable for the project. The discussions also established that the majority of the surplus clean excavated material will be used for beneficial restoration purposes at the disposal sites rather than take up void capacity.

Concurrently with the discussions with the site operators, assessments were carried out to identify any planning constraints that might not have emerged from the screening process. The planning assessments are set out in Volume 3 of this report.

These processes have sifted out ten landfill sites with planning permission and appropriate waste management licences covering the excavation period of the project and with sufficient capacity to take the excavated materials at the required rate to meet the programme. The following table lists the ten selected landfill sites and the key facts from the sifting process.



Summary of Selected Landfill Disposal Sites

Site Operator Current operational life end date

Total capacity for Crossrail

(million m3)

Potential mode of transfer from Crossrail worksites

Calvert

(Buckinghamshire). Shanks Waste Services 2012 2.4 Rail

Stewartby

(Bedfordshire) Shanks Waste Services 2020 1.6 Rail

Pitsea

(Essex) Cleanaway Ltd 2012

2.25 +

1.5 clay requirement

for restoration

Rail

Road

Water

Rainham

(Greater London (East))

Cleanaway Ltd 2012 0.75 Water

Westmill at Ware

(Hertforshire) Biffa Waste Services 2017

1.05 +

0.27 clay requirement for engineering

Road

Patteson Court, Redhill

(Surrey) Biffa Waste Services 2016

2.0 +

1.0 clay requirement for engineering

Road

Shakespeare Farm

(Kent) Biffa Waste Services 2009 0.22 Road

Colnbrook

(Slough) Biffa Waste Services 2015* 1.0 Road

Wapseys Wood

(Buckinghamshire) Onyx UK 2012

0.5

required for site restoration

Road

Springfield Farm

(Buckinghamshire) Onyx UK 2024

0.25

required for site engineering

Road

* The current predicted operational life of the site has been obtained from discussions with the site operator and takes account of proposals to apply for extension of the existing permissions to meet site restoration requirements.



6 SURPLUS MATERIALS SUMMARY ANALYSIS

Tables are set out below for each of the disposal sites showing the volumes of clean excavated material and SCL material allocated to them, the generation sites for that material and the mode of transport.

Discussions with the operators of the landfill sites identified in the tables has established that the majority of the surplus clean excavated material will be used for beneficial restoration purposes at the disposal sites rather than take up void capacity.

Disposal Site: Calvert: Generation site:

Transportation mode:

Volume of ‘clean’ excavated and SCL material (bulked) for disposal:

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Restoration/ disposal volume available at landfill:

0 800,000 800,000 800,000 0 0

Royal Oak portal Rail (To Colnbrook by road)

115,047 28,762 0 0 0

Royal Oak tunnel drive

Rail 0 66,022 264,089 176,059 0 0

Paddington station Rail 0 101,159 113,804 151,739 (To Pitsea by rail)

0

TOTAL VOLUME: 0 282,228 406,655 327,798 0 0 Disposal Site: Stewartby: Generation site:




400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 0 0

Pedley Street tunnel drive (In 2010, 65% to Stewartby by rail, 35% to Pitsea)

Rail 0 0 (To Pitsea by rail)

136,011 0 0

Pudding Mill Lane portal

Rail 3,346 8,366 11,712 11,712 0 0

Pudding Mill Lane tunnel drive (In 2010, 80% by rail to Pitsea, 20% by rail to Stewartby)

Rail 0 0 77,638 77,638 0 0

TOTAL VOLUME: 3,346 8,366 89,350 225,361 0 0



Disposal Site: Pitsea: Generation site:




250,000 1,000,000 1,050,000 1,000,000 250,000 200,000

Paddington station

Rail (To Calvert by rail)

(To Calvert by rail)



113,804 0

Pedley Street tunnel drive (In 2010, 65% to Stewartby by rail, 35% to Pitsea)

Rail 0 0 230,171 73,236 0 0

Pudding Mill Lane tunnel drive (In 2010, 80% by rail to Pitsea, 20% by rail to Stewartby)

Rail 0 0 (To Stewartby by rail)

310,553 0 0

VOLUME (Rail) 0 0 230,171 383,789 113,804 0 Isle of Dogs tunnel drive

Barge 0 0 124,847 145,655 0 0

Limmo tunnel drive

Barge 0 45,065 180,261 105,152 0 0

Limmo shaft Barge 19,171 30,656 0 0 0 0 Isle of Dogs station

Barge 174,816 419,560 419,560 314,670 0 0

VOLUME (Barge) 193,987 495,281 724,668 565,477 0 0 Whitechapel station

Road (To Patteson Court by road)

241,162 (To Patteson Court by road)

(To Patteson Court by road)

0 0

Hanbury Street shaft

Road 3,747 49,582 0 0 0 0

Pedley Street temporary tunnel and shaft

Road 14,285 35,713 0 0 0 0

Stepney Green shaft and junction

Road 12,326 49,679 49,390 0 0 0

Victoria Dock portal

Road 19,480 58,440 0 0 0 0

North Woolwich portal

Road 5,066 60,796 30,398 0 0 0

VOLUME (Road) 54,904 495,372 79788 0 0 0 TOTAL VOLUME:

248,891 990,653 1,034,627 949,266 113,804 0

Disposal Site: Rainham: Generation site:




50,000 250,000 250,000 200,000 0 0

Plumstead tunnel drive

Barge 0 0 242,585 66,160 0 0

Warren Lane shaft

Barge 0 14,067 5,115 5,115 0 0

Arsenal Way shaft

Barge 6,354 11,438 0 8,896 0 0

Plumstead portal Barge 23,437 93,749 0 93,749 11,719 0 TOTAL VOLUME:

29,791 119,254 247,700 173,920 11719 0



Disposal Site: Springfield Farm: Generation site:




50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 0

Hyde Park shaft Road 7,076 25,207 21,269 3,538 0 0 Park Lane shaft Road 2,996 23,342 6,185 0 0 0 TOTAL VOLUME:

10,072 48,549 27,454 3,538 0 0

Disposal Site: Wapseys Wood: Generation site:




100,000 150,000 150,000 100,000 0 0

Bond Street station

Road 23,606 138,724 146,932 38,523 0 0

TOTAL VOLUME:

23,606 138,724 146,932 38,523 0 0

Disposal Site: Colnbrook: Generation site:




140,000 220,000 220,000 140,000 140,000 140,000

Acton dive-under Road 10,968 18,803 18,803 7,834 0 0 Royal Oak portal Road 47,936 (To Calvert

by rail)


0 0 0

Tottenham Court Road station

Road 0 156,244 197,827 52,013 53,049 4,296

TOTAL VOLUME:

58,904 175,047 216,630 59,847 53,049 4,296



Disposal Site: Westmill at Ware: Generation site:




264,000 264,000 264,000 264,000 264,000 0

Fisher Street shaft

Road 2,598 16,924 633 1,899 1,991 0

Farringdon station

Road 0 88,833 178,883 81,514 0 0

Eleanor Street shaft

Road 7,082 15,581 0 0 0 0

Mile End Park shaft

Road 5,856 21,987 0 0 0 0

Hertsmere Road shaft

Road 0 4,341 0 1,736 0 0

Blackwall Way shaft

Road 0 4,152 0 2,906 0 0

TOTAL VOLUME:

15,536 151,818 179,516 88,055 1,991 0

Disposal Site: Patteson Court: Generation site:




600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 0

Liverpool Street station

Road 25,969 201,113 98,801 15,754 0 0

Whitechapel station

Road 54,218 (To Pitsea by road)

52,215 357 0 0

TOTAL VOLUME:

80,187 201,113 151,016 16,111 0 0



Disposal Site: Shakespeare Farm: Generation site:




110,000 110,000 0 0 0 0

Lowell Street shaft

Road 8,815 44,076 0 0 0 0

TOTAL VOLUME:

8,815 44,076 0 0 0 0

The following table summarises the total volumes of clean excavated material and SCL material allocated to the disposal sites. The volumes of demolition material and contaminated material, which will not be transported to the disposal sites, have been added to show the total surplus material generated.

Total volumes of material (bulked):

Total volume to be transported to the primary landfill sites: 7,206,134Volume of demolition material (bulking factor: 1.5): 284,100Volume of contaminated material (bulking factor: 1.8): 506,597TOTAL MATERIALS VOLUME: 7,996,831

Excavated Material and Waste Management Strategy Overview...

Documents

Transcript of Excavated Material and Waste Management Strategy Overview...