AITKEN ROWE TESTING LABORATORIES PTY LTD ......2017/02/24 · • Laboratory analysis of representative soil samples for: - TPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (C6 - C9 and C10 - C36),

LIMITED CONTAMINATED SITE INVESTIGATION

PLANNINGMATTERS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

CORNER OF BANNA AVENUE & BONEGILLA STREET,

GRIFFITH NSW

GS11-011

FEBRUARY 2011

AMENDED MARCH 2011

AITKEN ROWE TESTING LABORATORIES PTY LTD

PlanningMatters Development Services Limited Contaminated Site Investigation – Corner Banna Avenue and Bonegilla Street, Griffith

Registration No: GS11-011 February 2011 Amended March 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION 1

2 SCOPE OF WORK 1

3 SITE INFORMATION 2

3.1 SITE IDENTIFICATION 2

3.2 SITE DESCRIPTION 3

3.3 SURROUNDING LAND USE 3 3.4 TOPOGRAPHY & HYDROLOGY 4 3.5 GEOLOGY 4

4 SITE HISTORY 4

5 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION 5

6 FATE OF CONTANIMANTS 5

7 RESULTS 5

8 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 7

9 COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS 7

ADDENDUM 10

APPENDIX A – BOREHOLE LOCATION PLAN 11

APPENDIX B – BOREHOLE LOGS WITH EXPLANATORY

NOTES 13

APPENDIX C – LABORATORY TEST RESULTS AS

RECEIVED FROM ENVIROLAB 18

TABLES AND FIGURES

TABLE 1: SITE IDENTIFICATION SUMMARY 2

TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL CONTAMINANTS 5

TABLE 3: ANALYTICAL RESULTS SUMMARY UPST AREA 6

FIGURE 1: SITE LOCATION 3

FIGURE 2: SITE PLAN SHOWING EXCAVATION ZONE 4

PlanningMatters Development Services Limited Contaminated Site Investigation – Corner Banna Avenue and Bonegilla Street Griffith


1

1 INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

1.1 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the findings of a limited Contaminated Site Investigation (CSI) performed at the United Service Station located on the corner of Banna Avenue and Bonegilla Street, Griffith, NSW (the site). Mr Martin Ruggeri of PlanningMatters Development Services commissioned the report on behalf of the property owner in response to Aitken Rowe Testing Laboratory P/L (ARTL) quotation (ARTL ref: Q10-315) dated 20th December 2010. It is understood that the current owner is assessing future options for the site and it is the purpose of this investigation to aid in the decision process. This amended report has been completed following advice PlanningMatters that the proposed future use of the site will be a retail bottle shop. It should be noted that this limited CSI has been completed without satisfying the NSW EPA sampling design guidelines for such sites.

1.2 OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of this limited CSI are to:

• Briefly document the site history.

• Assess potential sources of contamination.

• Assess the risk of these contaminant sources with respect to

the contamination status of the site.

• Conclude whether or not the site is suitable for continued

use as zoned without further assessment, or provide

recommendations for further assessment (if required) to

enable such conclusions.

2 SCOPE OF WORK

The scope of work undertaken by ARTL to meet the objectives comprised the following:

• Review of historical information including local Council information, anecdotal information and a search for previous investigations performed for the site.

• Review of geology, topography and hydrology of the site.

• Detailed site inspection and investigation including



2

- Power augering at 3 locations to 1.9 – 2.9m - Collection of 9 soil samples for analysis - Undertaking visual inspection for potential onsite

contamination.

• Laboratory analysis of representative soil samples for: - TPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (C6 - C9 and C10

- C36), 9 samples - BTEX – Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and

Xylenes, 9 samples - Lead, 9 samples

• Assessment of data collected during the investigation and analysis of results.

• The completion of a formal report presenting results, contamination assessment of the site and conclusions.

3 SITE INFORMATION 3.1 SITE IDENTIFICATION The site is located on the eastern fringe of the central business of Griffith in the South Western Slopes (as described by NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service) in New South Wales. Table 1 provides a brief summary of the site and Figure 1 displays the site. Table 1: Site Identification Summary

Street Address 90 – 94 Banna Avenue Griffith Title Identifier Lot A DP 420132 Local Government Area Griffith Shire Council



3

3.2 SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is currently listed as Lot A in DP 420132 Banna Avenue,

Griffith, NSW.

The site is currently used as a service station as noted at the time of the investigation. At the time of the investigation the site had been completely developed with building, awning and concrete driveway/parking area.

3.3 SUROUNDING LAND USE

Commercial properties completely surround the site. The site is

bound by Banna Avenue to the north and Bonegilla Street to the east

Banna Avenue

The Site

Figure 1: Site location (in red) shown in relation to Narrandera (© Department of Lands 2010).

Bo

neg

illa

Str

eet



4

and commercial properties immediately west and south. Further to the south lies Yambil Street and further west lies Jondaryan Avenue. 3.4 TOPOGRAPHY AND HYDROLOGY The natural topography of the site comprises slope gradients of less than 1% with a relief of less than 0.5m that form the generally flat floodplain of the Murrumbidgee River catchment. Onsite activities have ensured that surface runoff flows toward stormwater drains and associated network to the north and east. In times of excessive rain it is assumed that water would infiltrate the underlying materials through permeable areas of the site and infiltrate the groundwater system. Depth to groundwater is not known at the site.

3.5 GEOLOGY The general topography of the area is mainly flat. The 1:250,000 scale Geological Series sheet (SI 55-10) for Narrandera indicates that the area is underlain by flood plain deposits of Cainozoic Age, composed of gravel, sand, silt and clay which appeared to be underlain by Jimberro member of Cocoparra Group of Late Devonian Age, comprising sandstone and siltstone. The borehole investigation performed revealed that the site is underlain by a concrete slab to 0.1m overlying fill comprising fine to coarse grained sandy gravel and silty clayey sand which in turn is underlain by natural medium to high plasticity silty clay extending to the borehole refusal depth of 2.2m in BH1, 1.9m in BH2 and 2.9m in BH3. The borehole refusal on site appeared to be encountered on underlying floaters. Groundwater was not encountered in the excavation depth of 2.9m however it should be noted that variations to the water table level could fluctuate with changes to the season, temperature and rainfall. The borehole location plan is attached in Appendix A and borehole logs with explanatory note in Appendix B.

4 SITE HISTORY The site was originally developed and used as a fuel station which it remains as today. Discussions with PlanningMatters Development Services suggested that the owner has been thorough in maintaining stocktake records of fuel purchased versus fuel sold. To date there have been no significant discrepancies. A search of the NSW EPA website registered no current statutory notices issued under the provisions of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997.



5

5 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION Based on the site history and site inspection, the potential

contaminants of concern are displayed in Table 2 below. Table 2: Summary of potential contamination sources/contaminants of concern from the fuel bowser area.

6 FATE OF CONTAMINANTS The fate of contaminants released into the environment is dependent on the properties of the chemicals and subsurface conditions. The available information indicates that the contaminants are likely to be liquid (hydrocarbons, BTEX and Lead).

7 RESULTS All analysis was undertaken by EnviroLab Pty Ltd, a NATA

accredited laboratory in Sydney. Quality assurance techniques were as per Labmark internal procedures. The laboratory test reports as received from EnviroLab Pty Ltd are attached in Appendix C.

Three boreholes (BH1, BH2 and BH3) were excavated immediately adjacent to the UPST’s to depths of 1.9m to 2.9m Below Ground Level (BGL). A total of 9 samples were taken at various depths for analysis. Table 3 summarises the analytical results and compares them to the following guidelines:

� Contaminated Sites – Guidelines for Assessing Service Station Sites, NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) (1994)

Area of Concern Potential Contaminant

Source

Potential Contaminants of Concern

UPST’s and fuel lines/bowsers

Petrol/Diesel Fuels

Petroleum Hydrocarbons

(TPH/BTEX) Lead



6

Sample ID

Sample Depth (m)

Analyte NSW EPA Guideline

(mg/kg) Result (mg/kg)

1A

0.4-0.6 (fill)

Benzene 1 N.D

Toluene 130 N.D

Total Xylene

25 N.D

TPH C6-C9 65 N.D

TPH C10-C36 1000 N.D

Lead 300 8

1B

0.9-1.1 (natural)

Benzene 1 N.D

Toluene 130 N.D

Total Xylene

25 N.D

TPH C6-C9 65 N.D

TPH C10-C36 1000 N.D

Lead 300 12

1C

1.9-2.1 (natural)

Benzene 1 N.D

Toluene 130 N.D

Total Xylene

25 N.D

TPH C6-C9 65 43

TPH C10-C36 1000 1660

Lead 300 14

2A

0.4.-0.6 (fill)

Benzene 1 N.D

Toluene 130 N.D

Total Xylene

25 N.D

TPH C6-C9 65 N.D

TPH C10-C36 1000 N.D

Lead 300 8

2B

1.2-1.4 (natural)

Benzene 1 N.D

Toluene 130 N.D

Total Xylene

25 N.D

TPH C6-C9 65 N.D

TPH C10-C36 1000 N.D

Lead 300 11

Table 3: Analytical results summary UPST area. N.D – Not Detected



7

Sample

ID Sample

Depth (m) Analyte

NSW EPA Guideline (mg/kg)

Result (mg/kg)

2C

2.8-3.0 (natural)

Benzene 1 N.D

Toluene 130 N.D

Total Xylene

25 N.D

TPH C6-C9 65 N.D

TPH C10-C36 1000 N.D

Lead 300 11

3A

0.4-0.6 (natural)

Benzene 1 N.D

Toluene 130 N.D

Total Xylene

25 N.D

TPH C6-C9 65 N.D

TPH C10-C36 1000 N.D

Lead 300 12

3B 1.0-1.2

(natural)

Benzene 1 N.D

Toluene 130 N.D

Total Xylene

25 N.D

TPH C6-C9 65 N.D

TPH C10-C36 1000 N.D

Lead 300 10

3C 2.3-2.5

(natural)

Benzene 1 N.D

Toluene 130 N.D

Total Xylene

25 N.D

TPH C6-C9 65 N.D

TPH C10-C36 1000 N.D

Lead 300 10

8 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

As can be seen from Table 3 above sample 1C was found to have concentration of 1660mg/kg for TPH (C10-C36) which is above the guideline value (1000mg/kg) for sensitive land use. All other analytes for all samples were either not detected or had concentrations below the guideline value for sensitive land use.

9 COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

One sample only was found to be above the threshold concentration for sensitive land use as given by the NSW EPA for TPH (C10-C36).

Table 3 (cont): Analytical results summary UPST area. N.D – Not Detected



8

The level of contamination is, however considered slight. Based on the fact that the property owner has apparently been following a strict stocktake of fuel purchased versus fuel sold it is likely that the cause of contamination is due to overfilling of the UPST as opposed to UPST failure. In addition the risk of human exposure is considered slight to non-existent due to the depth BGL of contamination and the majority of the site is covered (capped) with concrete. There is a risk of the contamination plume migrating off site or into groundwater. Again this risk is considered slight.

The following is recommended for the site to continue operating as a

service station;

1) Ensure fuel delivery operators are following appropriate due diligence process to reduce UPST overfilling.

2) Have suitably qualified personnel to perform integrity testing on the UPST’s and associated pipework to ensure there are no leaks.

3) Perform a detailed CSI that adheres to the minimum sampling

and analysis design guidelines to gain an understanding of the extent of contamination at the site.

4) Ensure the Protection of the Environment Operations (Underground Petroleum Storage Systems) Regulation 2008 is being adhered including the installation of groundwater monitoring wells and development of an Underground Petroleum Storage System management plan.

The following is recommended if the site use is changed from a service station to a retail bottle shop; 1) Have suitably qualified personnel decommission the UPST’s by

removal/disposal and backfilling the excavation with clean fill or by filling the UPST’s with a concrete slurry or similar. WorkCover should be notified of the decommission process.

2) If the UPST’s are excavated then a validation investigation should be completed to ensure any contaminated material has been removed for remediation and/or disposal.

3) If the UPST’s are to be filled with concrete slurry it is highly recommended to have suitably qualified personnel to perform further soil contaminant testing, particularly in the location of BH1. This will provide further understanding of the extent of contamination.

4) Following the decommissioning of the UPST’s the entire site should be capped with a concrete slab of at least 0.15m



9

thickness. Decommissioning UPST’s and capping such sites is considered suitable for remediation.

Nathan McLaren Environmental Consultant Aitken Rowe Testing Laboratories Pty Ltd



10

ADDENDUM

LIMITS OF INVESTIGATION

The recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that the test results are representative of the overall subsurface conditions. However, it should be noted that even under optimum circumstances, actual conditions in some parts of the site may differ from those said to exist, because no environmental consultant, no matter how qualified, and no subsurface exploration program, no matter how comprehensive, can reveal all that is hidden by earth, rock and time. The client should also be aware that our recommendations refer only to our test site locations and the ground level at the time of testing. The recommendations in this report are based on the following:-

a) The information gained from this investigation b) The results received from a NATA accredited environmental laboratory c) Historical information d) Information supplied by the client



11

APPENDIX A BOREHOLE LOCATION PLAN

AITKEN ROWE TESTING LABORATORIES PTY LTD

REGISTRATION NUMBER: GS11-11

PLANNINGMATTERS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – GRIFFITH, NSW

CONTAMINATED SITE INVESTIGATION

UNITED SERVICE STATION, CNR BANNA AVENUE & BONEGILLA ST, GRIFFITH

BOREHOLE LOCATION PLAN

Diesel Cap

Awning/Bowser Area

Building Car Wash

ULP Cap

Diesel Cap

BH3

BH2

BH1

Boundary

Boundary

Exit Entrance

Entrance

Entrance

Banna Avenue

Boneg

illa Road

N



12

APPENDIX B BOREHOLE LOGS WITH EXPLANATORY NOTE

Form R5 revised 14/12/05

Borehole No.: 1

AITKEN ROWE TESTING LABORATORIES PTY LTD Sheet No.: 1 of 1

Ground Level: Existing Date: 2/02/2011

Method: Auger drilling with TC Bit

US

CS

Sym

bol

Description

Dep

th (

m)

Mois

ture

Condit

ion

Consi

sten

cy/

Rel

. D

ensi

ty

Sample

Lab

. T

est

Remarks & Field Records

Type No. L.S %

GW

SC

0.5

CI-CH

1.0

CL-CI

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Logged By: M.S.

Scale: As shown

Dry on Completion

Medium odour

Refusal on cobbles / floaters

MD

MC>PL

Slight odour

NATURAL

110mm

FILL: Appears to be moderately compacted

"Uncontrolled"

@ omc

Slight odour

FILL: Silty Clayey SAND; fine to coarse grained, brown,

St.

St.-VSt.

Silty CLAY; medium to high plasticity, red brown,

trace sand

CONCRETE SLAB

FILL: Sandy GRAVEL; fine to coarse sand, brown,

fine to coarse sand, fines of low plasticity

M

with fine to medium gravel

Silty CLAY; low to medium plasticity, yellow brown,

with fine to coarse sand and fine to medium gravel

D 1C

End of Borehole (BH1) @ 2.2m

D

D

1A

1B

Registration No.: GS11-11

Location: Cnr Banna Avenue Bonegilla Street, Griffith, NSW

Client: Planningmatters Developement Service Pty Ltd - Griffith, NSW


Borehole No.: 2




US

CS

Sym

bol

Description

Dep

th (

m)

Mois

ture

Condit

ion

Consi

sten

cy/

Rel

. D

ensi

ty

Sample

Lab

. T

est


Type No. L.S %

GW

CL-CI

0.5

CI-CH

1.0

CI-CH

1.5

CI

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Logged By: M.S.

Scale: As shown

Dry on Completion


No odour

No odour

MD

MC>PL

NATURAL

@ omc

140mm


"Uncontrolled"

No odourFILL: Sandy Silty CLAY; low to medium plasticity, red St.

St.-VSt.

VSt.

trace sand

CONCRETE SLAB



D-M

brown, fine to medium sand, trace gravel


Silty CLAY; medium to high plasticity, brown, trace

sand and gravel

Silty CLAY; medium plasticity, yellow brown, with

fine to medium sand and gravel


D 2C

D 2A

D 2B





Borehole No.: 3




US

CS

Sym

bol

Description

Dep

th (

m)

Mois

ture

Condit

ion

Consi

sten

cy/

Rel

. D

ensi

ty

Sample

Lab

. T

est


Type No. L.S %

GW

CI

CI-CH 0.5

1.0

CI-CH

1.5

2.0

CI-CH

2.5

CL

3.0

3.5

Logged By: M.S.

Scale: As shown

Dry on Completion

fine to coarse sand, fine gravel


Sandy Gravelly CLAY; low plasticity, yellow brown,

Silty CLAY; medium to high plasticity, yellow brown,

with fine to medium sand and gravel

trace sand

Silty CLAY; medium to high plasticity, yellow brown,

trace sand and gravel

MD

CONCRETE SLAB



D-M

FILL: Silty CLAY; medium plasticity, brown, with sand St.MC>PL


120mm


"Uncontrolled"

NATURAL

Slight odour

No odour


No odourD 3C

D 3A

D 3B






13

APPENDIX C LABORATORY TEST REPORTS AS RECEIVED FROM ENVIROLAB

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSISCERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS 5137751377

Client:Client:

Aitken Rowe Testing Laboratories Pty LtdAitken Rowe Testing Laboratories Pty Ltd

4/2 Riedell St4/2 Riedell St

Wagga WaggaWagga Wagga

NSWNSW 26502650

Attention:Attention: Nathan McLarenNathan McLaren

Sample log in details:Sample log in details:

Your Reference:Your Reference: GS11-11, Contam. Site@United Service StnGS11-11, Contam. Site@United Service Stn

No. of samples:No. of samples: 9 Soils9 Soils

Date samples received / completed instructions receivedDate samples received / completed instructions received 04/02/1104/02/11 // 04/02/1104/02/11

Analysis Details:Analysis Details:

Please refer to the following pages for results, methodology summary and quality control data.Please refer to the following pages for results, methodology summary and quality control data.

Samples were analysed as received from the client. Results relate specifically to the samples as received.Samples were analysed as received from the client. Results relate specifically to the samples as received.

Results are reported on a dry weight basis for solids and on an as received basis for other matrices.Results are reported on a dry weight basis for solids and on an as received basis for other matrices.

Please refer to the last page of this report for any comments relating to the results.Please refer to the last page of this report for any comments relating to the results.

Report Details:Report Details:

Date results requested by: / Issue Date:Date results requested by: / Issue Date: 11/02/1111/02/11 // 11/02/1111/02/11

Date of Preliminary Report:Date of Preliminary Report: Not IssuedNot Issued

NATA accreditation number 2901. This document shall not be reproduced except in full.NATA accreditation number 2901. This document shall not be reproduced except in full.

This document is issued in accordance with NATA's accreditation requirements.This document is issued in accordance with NATA's accreditation requirements.

Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025.Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025. Tests not covered by NATA are denoted with *.Tests not covered by NATA are denoted with *.

Results Approved By:Results Approved By:

Page 1 of 8Page 1 of 8Envirolab Reference:Envirolab Reference: 5137751377

Revision No: RRevision No: R 0000

Client Reference:Client Reference: GS11-11, Contam. Site@United Service StnGS11-11, Contam. Site@United Service Stn

vTRH & BTEX in Soil

Our Reference: UNITS 51377-1 51377-2 51377-3 51377-4 51377-5

Your Reference ------------- GS11-11/1A GS11-11/1B GS11-11/1C GS11-11/2A GS11-11/2B

Depth ------------ 400-600mm 900-1100mm 1900-2100mm 400-600mm 1200-1400mm

Date Sampled

Type of sample

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

Date extracted - 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011

Date analysed - 10/02/2011 10/02/2011 10/02/2011 10/02/2011 10/02/2011

vTRH C6 - C9 mg/kg <25 <25 43 <25 <25

Benzene mg/kg <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Toluene mg/kg <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Ethylbenzene mg/kg <1.0 <1.0 1.7 <1.0 <1.0

m+p-xylene mg/kg <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0

o-Xylene mg/kg <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0

Surrogate aaa-Trifluorotoluene % 77 77 81 76 75

vTRH & BTEX in Soil

Our Reference: UNITS 51377-6 51377-7 51377-8 51377-9

Your Reference ------------- GS11-11/2C GS11-11/3A GS11-11/3B GS11-11/3C

Depth ------------ 1700-1900mm 400-600mm 1000-1200mm 2300-2500mm

Date Sampled

Type of sample

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

Date extracted - 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011

Date analysed - 10/02/2011 10/02/2011 10/02/2011 10/02/2011

vTRH C6 - C9 mg/kg <25 <25 <25 <25

Benzene mg/kg <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Toluene mg/kg <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Ethylbenzene mg/kg <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0

m+p-xylene mg/kg <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0

o-Xylene mg/kg <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0

Surrogate aaa-Trifluorotoluene % 76 79 76 78




sTRH in Soil (C10-C36)




Date Sampled

Type of sample

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

Date extracted - 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011

Date analysed - 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011

TRH C10 - C14 mg/kg <50 <50 660 <50 <50

TRH C15 - C28 mg/kg <100 <100 1,000 <100 <100

TRH C29 - C36 mg/kg <100 <100 <100 <100 <100

Surrogate o-Terphenyl % 88 90 # 91 88

sTRH in Soil (C10-C36)



Depth ------------ 1700-1900mm 400-600mm 1000-1200mm 2300-2500mm

Date Sampled

Type of sample

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

Date extracted - 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011

Date analysed - 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011

TRH C10 - C14 mg/kg <50 <50 <50 <50

TRH C15 - C28 mg/kg <100 <100 <100 <100

TRH C29 - C36 mg/kg <100 <100 <100 <100

Surrogate o-Terphenyl % 87 92 87 90




Acid Extractable metals in soil




Date Sampled

Type of sample

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

Date digested - 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011

Date analysed - 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011

Lead mg/kg 8 12 14 8 11

Acid Extractable metals in soil



Depth ------------ 1700-1900mm 400-600mm 1000-1200mm 2300-2500mm

Date Sampled

Type of sample

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

Date digested - 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011

Date analysed - 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011 09/02/2011

Lead mg/kg 11 12 10 10




Moisture




Date Sampled

Type of sample

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

Date prepared - 9/02/2011 9/02/2011 9/02/2011 9/02/2011 9/02/2011

Date analysed - 10/02/2011 10/02/2011 10/02/2011 10/02/2011 10/02/2011

Moisture % 9.7 18 22 13 21

Moisture



Depth ------------ 1700-1900mm 400-600mm 1000-1200mm 2300-2500mm

Date Sampled

Type of sample

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

2/02/2011

Soil

Date prepared - 9/02/2011 9/02/2011 9/02/2011 9/02/2011

Date analysed - 10/02/2011 10/02/2011 10/02/2011 10/02/2011

Moisture % 21 18 20 17




Method ID Methodology Summary

GC.16 Soil samples are extracted with methanol and spiked into water prior to analysing by purge and trap GC-MS.

Water samples are analysed directly by purge and trap GC-MS.

GC.3 Soil samples are extracted with Dichloromethane/Acetone and waters with Dichloromethane and analysed

by GC-FID.

Metals.20

ICP-AES

Determination of various metals by ICP-AES.

LAB.8 Moisture content determined by heating at 105 deg C for a minimum of 4 hours.




QUALITY CONTROL UNITS PQL METHOD Blank Duplicate Sm# Duplicate results Spike Sm# Spike %

Recovery

vTRH & BTEX in Soil Base ll Duplicate ll %RPD

Date extracted - 09/02/2

011

51377-1 09/02/2011 || 09/02/2011 LCS-3 09/02/2011

Date analysed - 09/02/2

011

51377-1 10/02/2011 || 10/02/2011 LCS-3 09/02/2011

vTRH C6 - C9 mg/kg 25 GC.16 <25 51377-1 <25 || <25 LCS-3 93%

Benzene mg/kg 0.5 GC.16 <0.5 51377-1 <0.5 || <0.5 LCS-3 75%

Toluene mg/kg 0.5 GC.16 <0.5 51377-1 <0.5 || <0.5 LCS-3 78%

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 1 GC.16 <1.0 51377-1 <1.0 || <1.0 LCS-3 103%

m+p-xylene mg/kg 2 GC.16 <2.0 51377-1 <2.0 || <2.0 LCS-3 105%

o-Xylene mg/kg 1 GC.16 <1.0 51377-1 <1.0 || <1.0 LCS-3 106%

Surrogate

aaa-Trifluorotoluene

% GC.16 81 51377-1 77 || 82 || RPD: 6 LCS-3 79%


Recovery

sTRH in Soil (C10-C36) Base ll Duplicate ll %RPD

Date extracted - 09/02/2

011

51377-1 09/02/2011 || 09/02/2011 LCS-5 09/02/2011


011

51377-1 09/02/2011 || 09/02/2011 LCS-5 09/02/2011

TRH C10 - C14 mg/kg 50 GC.3 <50 51377-1 <50 || <50 LCS-5 93%

TRH C15 - C28 mg/kg 100 GC.3 <100 51377-1 <100 || <100 LCS-5 100%

TRH C29 - C36 mg/kg 100 GC.3 <100 51377-1 <100 || <100 LCS-5 78%

Surrogate

o-Terphenyl

% GC.3 91 51377-1 88 || 90 || RPD: 2 LCS-5 94%


Recovery

Acid Extractable metals

in soil

Base ll Duplicate ll %RPD

Date digested - 09/02/2

011

51377-1 09/02/2011 || 09/02/2011 LCS-4 09/02/2011


011

51377-1 09/02/2011 || 09/02/2011 LCS-4 09/02/2011

Lead mg/kg 1 Metals.20

ICP-AES

<1 51377-1 8 || 9 || RPD: 12 LCS-4 105%

QUALITY CONTROL UNITS PQL METHOD Blank

Moisture

Date prepared - 09/02/2

011


011

Moisture % 0.1 LAB.8 <0.10




Report Comments:Report Comments:

Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons in soil:# Percent recovery is not possible to report Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons in soil:# Percent recovery is not possible to report

as the high concentration of analytes in the sample/s have caused interference.as the high concentration of analytes in the sample/s have caused interference.

Asbestos ID was analysed by Approved Identifier: Asbestos ID was analysed by Approved Identifier: Not applicable for this jobNot applicable for this job

Asbestos ID was authorised by Approved Signatory: Asbestos ID was authorised by Approved Signatory: Not applicable for this jobNot applicable for this job

INS: Insufficient sample for this testINS: Insufficient sample for this test PQL: Practical Quantitation LimitPQL: Practical Quantitation Limit NT: Not testedNT: Not tested

NA: Test not requiredNA: Test not required RPD: Relative Percent DifferenceRPD: Relative Percent Difference NA: Test not requiredNA: Test not required

<: Less than<: Less than >: Greater than>: Greater than LCS: Laboratory Control SampleLCS: Laboratory Control Sample

Quality Control DefinitionsQuality Control Definitions

Blank: This is the component of the analytical signal which is not derived from the sample but from reagents,

glassware etc, can be determined by processing solvents and reagents in exactly the same manner as for samples. glassware etc, can be determined by processing solvents and reagents in exactly the same manner as for samples.

Duplicate: This is the complete duplicate analysis of a sample from the process batch. If possible, the sample

selected should be one where the analyte concentration is easily measurable. selected should be one where the analyte concentration is easily measurable.

Matrix Spike: A portion of the sample is spiked with a known concentration of target analyte. The purpose of the matrix

spike is to monitor the performance of the analytical method used and to determine whether matrix interferences exist. spike is to monitor the performance of the analytical method used and to determine whether matrix interferences exist.

LCS (Laboratory Control Sample): This comprises either a standard reference material or a control matrix (such as a blank

sand or water) fortified with analytes representative of the analyte class. It is simply a check sample. sand or water) fortified with analytes representative of the analyte class. It is simply a check sample.

Surrogate Spike: Surrogates are known additions to each sample, blank, matrix spike and LCS in a batch, of compounds

which are similar to the analyte of interest, however are not expected to be found in real samples.which are similar to the analyte of interest, however are not expected to be found in real samples.

Laboratory Acceptance CriteriaLaboratory Acceptance Criteria

Duplicate sample and matrix spike recoveries may not be reported on smaller jobs, however, were analysed at a frequencyDuplicate sample and matrix spike recoveries may not be reported on smaller jobs, however, were analysed at a frequency

to meet or exceed NEPM requirements. All samples are tested in batched of 20. The duplicate sample RPD and matrixto meet or exceed NEPM requirements. All samples are tested in batched of 20. The duplicate sample RPD and matrix

spike recoveries for the batch were within the laboratory acceptance criteria.spike recoveries for the batch were within the laboratory acceptance criteria.

Duplicates: <5xPQL - any RPD is acceptable; >5xPQL - 0-50% RPD is acceptable.Duplicates: <5xPQL - any RPD is acceptable; >5xPQL - 0-50% RPD is acceptable.

Matrix Spikes and LCS: Generally 70-130% for inorganics/metals; 60-140% for organics and 10-140% for SVOC and Matrix Spikes and LCS: Generally 70-130% for inorganics/metals; 60-140% for organics and 10-140% for SVOC and

speciated phenols is acceptable.speciated phenols is acceptable.



Documents

AITKEN ROWE TESTING LABORATORIES PTY LTD ......2017/02/24 · • Laboratory analysis of representative soil samples for: - TPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (C6 - C9 and C10 - C36),