ANALOG DEVICES INTERNATIONAL - Environmental Protection … · ANALOG DEVICES INTERNATIONAL Prepared for: Analog Devices International Ckrp0003 Analog Round 2 2016 Issue 1 Final AECOM

ANALOG DEVICESINTERNATIONALGroundwater Monitoring October 2016

Project Number: 47092977Report Reference: CKRP0003

15 November 2016

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:26

ANALOG DEVICES INTERNATIONAL

Prepared for: Analog Devices InternationalCkrp0003 Analog Round 2 2016 Issue 1 Final

AECOM2

Quality information

Prepared by Checked by Approved by

Fergus O'ReganSenior EnvironmentalScientist

Kevin FordeAssociate Director

Kevin FordeAssociate Director

Revision History

Revision Revision date Details Authorized Name Position

1 15 November2016

Final Issue Fergus O’Regan Senior Scientist

Distribution List

# Hard Copies PDF Required Association / Company Name

1 Analog Devices International

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:26



AECOM3

Prepared for:Analog Devices InternationalRaheenLimerick

Prepared by:Fergus O'ReganSenior Environmental ScientistT: +353 (21)4365 006M: +353 (87)3295 461E: [email protected]

AECOM Professional Services IrelandDouglas Business CentreCarrigaline RoadCorkIreland

T: +353 21 4536136aecom.com

© 2016 AECOM Ireland Limited. All Rights Reserved.

This document has been prepared by AECOM Ireland Limited (“AECOM”) for sole use of our client(the “Client”) in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees andthe terms of reference agreed between AECOM and the Client. Any information provided by thirdparties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM, unless otherwiseexpressly stated in the document. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior andexpress written agreement of AECOM.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:26



AECOM4

Table of ContentsExecutive summary ........................................................................................................................... 51. Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 7

1.1 Project Contractual Basis and Personnel Involved .......................................................... 71.2 Background Information ................................................................................................. 71.2.1 Site History .................................................................................................................... 71.2.2 Site Description and Setting ........................................................................................... 71.2.3 Hydrology ...................................................................................................................... 81.2.4 Soils and Geology .......................................................................................................... 81.2.5 Hydrogeology ................................................................................................................ 91.2.6 Groundwater Flow.......................................................................................................... 91.2.7 Groundwater Redox Chemistry .................................................................................... 101.2.8 Chemicals of Potential Concern in Groundwater........................................................... 101.2.9 Source-Pathway-Receptor Linkages ............................................................................ 101.2.10Monitoring Network ....................................................................................................... 111.3 Project Objectives ........................................................................................................ 121.3.1 Rationale and Strategy................................................................................................. 121.3.2 Groundwater Sampling and Monitoring ........................................................................ 131.3.3 Laboratory Analyses .................................................................................................... 13

2. RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 142.1 Site Hydrogeology and Groundwater Flow ................................................................... 142.1.1 Water Quality Parameters ............................................................................................ 142.1.2 Groundwater Flow Gradient ......................................................................................... 142.1.3 Observations ............................................................................................................... 152.2 Laboratory Analysis of Groundwater Samples .............................................................. 152.2.1 Assessment Guidelines ................................................................................................ 152.2.2 Groundwater Monitoring Results .................................................................................. 152.2.2.1 Volatile Organic Compounds................................................................................... 152.2.2.2 Semi Volatile Organic Compounds .......................................................................... 162.2.2.3 Major Ion Concentrations and COD Results ............................................................ 162.2.2.4 Dissolved Heavy Metals Results ............................................................................. 162.2.3 Temporal Trends in Chemicals of Potential Concern ..................................................... 162.2.4 Conceptual Site Model ................................................................................................. 172.2.5 Potential Pollutant Linkages ......................................................................................... 17

3. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations ...................................................................... 193.1 Summary and Conclusion ............................................................................................ 193.2 Recommended Way Forward ....................................................................................... 21

FIGURESTABLESAPPENDIX A Laboratory Certificates

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:26



AECOM5

Executive summaryThis report presents results of the second groundwater monitoring round for 2016 conducted at theAnalog Devices International site in Raheen, Co. Limerick by AECOM on 14 October 2016. Themonitoring was completed in accordance with the site’s Integrated Pollution Control (IPC) licencerequirements and is reported in accordance with Stage 1 - Step 2 of the Environmental ProtectionAgency’s (EPA’s) Irish Contaminated Land/Groundwater Framework, issued in 2013.

During Round 2 2016 monitoring, groundwater from the following on-site monitoring wells wassampled:

· GW04A, GW05, GW06, GW07, GW08 and RW01

No floating or sinking non-aqueous phase liquid layers were detected in any of the monitoring wells.

The site is underlain by a highly fractured karstified limestone bedrock aquifer. Groundwater levels inthe aquifer are influenced when the two on-site Production Wells (TW01 and TW02A) are inoperation. Due to the karstified nature of the limestone, there is a wide range of groundwaterelevations in the eastern corner of the site, with the result that groundwater contours in this area arecomplex. Across the remainder of the site, groundwater contours for 14 October 2016 indicate thatgroundwater flow is radial towards Production Well TW01. Further west, groundwater flow is divergentfrom the area of well GW05 towards the south, west and north.

Field measurements of water quality parameters and redox indicators were consistent with previousrounds and indicate that groundwater is low in dissolved oxygen and moderately reducing.

Historically, dissolved concentrations of several chlorinated ethenes have been detected ingroundwater at the site. Total chlorinated ethene concentrations have declined from their peak valuesin 2000 (over 1,500 µg/L) and since 2013 have generally been below 200 µg/L.

Monitoring results for Round 2 October 2016 can be summarised as follows:

· All volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from the standard VOC suite were below laboratorymethod detection limits (MDLs) at monitoring wells GW04A, GW06 and GW08

· Trichloroethene (TCE) was recorded at a concentration of 10 µg/L in groundwater from wellGW05. This represents a decrease from Round 1 (April) 2015, when TCE was detected at aconcentration of 33 µg/L. TCE concentrations have decreased from a recent, minor peak of132 µg/L in January 2016 to 10 µg/L in October 2016, the lowest ever result at this well.

· cis-1,2-Dichloroethene (cDCE) was detected at a concentration of 45 µg/L in groundwater fromwell GW05 in Round 2 2016, representing a decrease in concentration when compared withRound 1 2016 (227 µg/L). cDCE concentrations have decreased from a recent peak of 423 µg/Lin January 2016 to 45 µg/L in October 2016

· Tetrachloroethene (PCE) was the only VOC detected in groundwater from well GW04 (4 µg/L)

· Low concentrations of 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) (12 µg/L), 1,1-dichloroethane (3 µg/L),chloroform (4 µg/L) and PCE (6 µg/L) were detected at monitoring well RW01

· Vinyl chloride (VC) was not detected at any of the six on-site groundwater monitoring wellssampled in October 2016

· SVOCs were below MDLs in groundwater from all six wells sampled in Round 2 2016

· Calcium, magnesium, sodium and total nitrogen were detected above MDLs in groundwater fromall six wells sampled in October 2016 and all at concentrations that did not exceed relevantassessment criteria

· Ammoniacal nitrogen, nitrate, fluoride and COD were detected above laboratory MDLs at one ormore wells in October 2016, however, concentrations did not exceed the relevant assessmentcriteria

· Potassium was detected at a concentration of 6 mg/L in groundwater from well GW07 andmarginally exceeded the EPA Draft Interim Guidelines Value( IGV) of 5 mg/L

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:26



AECOM6

· Sulphate was detected at well GW07 at a concentration of 208 mg/L and exceeded both theGroundwater Threshold Value (GTV) (187.5 mg/L) and IGV (200 mg/L)

· Chloride concentrations at wells GW05, GW06, GW07, GW08 and RW01 exceeded the lowerGTV of 24 mg/L. Chloride concentrations in groundwater from wells GW05, GW06, GW07 andRW01 exceeded the IGV of 30 mg/L but were below the upper GTV (187.5 mg/L) in Round 22016

· Arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, tin and ferrous iron (iron II) were not detected abovelaboratory MDLs in groundwater from any of the six wells monitored in October 2016

· Concentrations of aluminium, chromium, zinc, manganese, ferric iron (iron III) and total iron weredetected above the MDLs in groundwater from at least one monitoring well, but at concentrationsthat did not exceed relevant screening criteria

Based on the Round 2 October 2016 groundwater monitoring results, groundwater sampling shouldcontinue in line with the EPA’s requirements for 2017.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:26



AECOM7

1. Introduction

1.1 Project Contractual Basis and Personnel Involved

AECOM Professional Services Ireland Limited (AECOM) is pleased to present this report detailingresults of recent groundwater monitoring undertaken at Analog Devices International (Analog),Raheen Industrial Estate, Limerick (the site). The work was undertaken in accordance with ProposalNo. OPP-446669, dated 07 December 2015, and authorised by Analog under their purchase ordernumber 45539758, dated 08 December 2015.

The AECOM team for Round 2 October 2016 comprised the following:

· Project Director: Kevin Forde, Associate Director

· Project Manager: Fergus O’Regan, Senior Environmental Scientist

Laboratory analysis of samples was subcontracted to Jones Environmental, U.K., an-AECOMapproved laboratory with UKAS accreditation.

1.2 Background Information

1.2.1 Site History

Analog manufactures mixed-signal and digital signal processing integrated circuits used in electronicequipment. These technologies are used to convert condition and process real-world phenomena,such as light, sound, temperature, motion, and pressure into electrical signals. The coremanufacturing process carried out at the Limerick facility is wafer fabrication.

Analog first established a manufacturing facility in Limerick in 1977 and subsequently expanded,acquiring the adjacent Millipore site in 2000 and Essilor site in 2007. The site was granted anIntegrated Pollution Control (IPC) licence (licence number P0224-01) in 1998 by the EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA). The licence was revised in 2001 (P0224-02).

Chlorinated solvents are not currently used by Analog, although chlorinated solvent use was commonin the semi-conductor industry during the earliest years that Analog operated at the industrial estate.

Trichloroethene (TCE) is routinely detected in groundwater from well GW05. Monthly monitoring ofgroundwater from GW05 has been undertaken on a voluntary basis by Analog since April 2010,following detection of elevated contaminant concentrations in groundwater from GW05 in Round 12010 (relative to 2009 results).

TCE concentrations are following a general declining trend. Between 1999 and 2012, TCEconcentrations were generally between 200 µg/L and 1,500 µg/L. Since September 2012concentrations have been below 200 µg/L, with only one exception (203 µg/L in February 2014).

In 2016, TCE concentrations have decreased from a peak of 132 µg/L in January 2016 to 10 µg/L inOctober 2016.

There is no current source of TCE associated with the site or its operations. The continued source ofTCE detected in groundwater is considered to be residual solvent lost to ground, which is slowlydissolving into groundwater.

1.2.2 Site Description and Setting

The site is situated in the Raheen Business Park; approximately 4.5 km south-west of Limerick Citycentre (see Figure 1). The R526 road, north of the Analog site, provides the main access route to theBusiness Park. The site can also be accessed from the R510 via Roche’s Avenue south-west of thesite.

Raheen Business Park is a modern business park and is occupied by leading national and multi-national organisations.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:26



AECOM8

Analog first established a manufacturing facility in Raheen in 1977 and subsequently expanded,acquiring the adjacent Millipore site in 2000 and Essilor site in 2007. The site comprises amanufacturing facility with associated administration buildings, stores and car parking.

The area is generally low-lying and flat with a very gentle topographic gradient to the north and north-west, toward the estuary of the River Shannon. Ground elevation at the site is approximately 20 mabove Ordnance Datum (aOD).

Land use in the vicinity of the site is predominantly commercial/industrial and residential, assummarised below:

North – Residential properties are present to the north.

South – Commercial/Industrial properties, including BS&S Safety Systems and the FAS TrainingCentre are located to the south.

East – Commercial/Industrial properties, including Provincial Floor Coverings are located to the eastof the site.

West – Commercial properties, including Casey’s Furniture, are to the west of the facility.

1.2.3 Hydrology

The nearest stream to the site is the Derryknockane Stream, which is located 500 m east-south-eastof the site and flows in a south easterly direction, joining the Rootiagh River, approximately 850 msouth-east of the site. The Rootiagh River flows in a westerly direction and joins the Barnakyle River1 km south of the site. The Barnakyle River continues on a westerly course before eventually joiningthe River Maigue, which flows into the River Shannon at Carrigclogher Point, approximately 10 kmwest of the site.

Neither the Rootiagh River nor Barnakyle River are down-gradient of the site.

The nearest surface water body down-gradient of the site is Loughmore Common Turlough(<1 km west of the site). Loughmore Turlough is located adjacent to the main Limerick/Cork road(N20) and north of it. It lies in a shallow basin, elongated in an east-west direction, and reportedlyfloods shallowly (30 – 40 cm) in winter. Loughmore Turlough is reported to be drier in recent timesthan in the past due to drainage (of the surrounding land, rather than of the Turlough itself).

Bunlicky Pond is located approximately 2.5 km to the north-west, and the Shannon Estuary is 500 mbeyond this to the north. Bunlicky Pond is a manmade pond, within the site boundary of Irish Cementand acts as Irish Cement’s inert landfill.

The most significant surface water feature in the wider area is the Shannon Estuary, which flows fromeast to west and is located 3 km north-west of the site.

1.2.4 Soils and Geology

The subsoils mapped across the business park by the Geological Survey of Ireland (GSI) areidentified as ‘made ground’. A zone of Carboniferous limestone till is mapped to the east, west andsouth of the Business Park, with lesser deposits of estuarine silts and clays identified to the north.

GSI data1 indicate that the bedrock aquifer underlying the site consists of undifferentiated Dinantianpure-bedded limestones, with basalts and other volcanic rocks occurring 200 m to the south-east.

The subsoils consist of limestone-derived glacial till. Subsoil thickness varies, with drilling records forthe Analog site indicating that the depth to bedrock ranges from approximately3 m to 11 m below ground level (bgl). Approximately 3 km to the north-west of the site, limestonebedrock outcrops at the surface and there is a limestone quarry (Castlemungret).

1 www.gsi.ie (accessed 02 November 2016)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM9

1.2.5 Hydrogeology

According to GSI online maps, the limestone bedrock aquifer in the region is classified as a LocallyImportant Aquifer, which is Generally Moderately Productive (Lm). Groundwater vulnerability in theRaheen area is assessed as ‘High’ by the GSI.

Groundwater beneath the site is part of the Limerick Urban_SW Groundwater Body (IE_SH_G_146)The most recent data and assessment (2007-2012) indicates that the “Limerick Urban_SW”Groundwater Body beneath the site is achieving Good status2.

According to the GSI website, there is a groundwater well located approximately 200 m north-north-west of the site. The well was reportedly drilled to a depth of 5.5 m bgl; with a ‘poor’ yield of21.8 m3/d.

There are a further four wells within a 2 km radius of the site, one to the east and three to the south-east. The well to the east of the site is located in the townland of Ballysheedy West. The well wasreportedly drilled in 1964 to a depth of 18.9 m bgl with a yield of 16.4 m3/d. One of the three wells tothe south-east of the site is located in the townland of Roxborough and was drilled in 1965 to a depthof 36.6 m bgl. Bedrock was encountered at a depth of 2.4 m bgl; the yield of the well is described as‘poor’ (27.3 m3/d). The other two wells are located in Derrybeg. Both wells are shallow; the first has arecorded depth of 4.9 m, with a ‘poor’ yield of 5.5 m3/d, the second was drilled to 5.2 m bgl and has a‘poor’ yield of 21.8 m3/d.

AECOM understands that there is a groundwater abstraction well on the Stryker Howmedica site <50m from the Analog western site boundary. Publically available data indicates that groundwater is rarelyabstracted by Stryker Howmedica.

It should be noted that there is no permitting system to govern well drilling or any requirement toregister wells in Ireland. Therefore, publically available well records in Ireland are not complete; wellsused for domestic and other purposes are often not recorded by the owners or authorities.

1.2.6 Groundwater Flow

Depth to bedrock across the site ranges from 3 m to 11 m bgl, with overburden consisting of gravellyclay, sandy gravel or boulders. The overburden is dry, with the groundwater table residing in thebedrock aquifer beneath the site. The bedrock aquifer is fractured limestone, but in many of the wellsno flowing fractures zones were encountered during drilling.

Fractured aquifers are also referred to as dual-porosity aquifers, reflecting the difference betweengood hydraulic connections that exist between fractures zones and poor hydraulic connectionsbetween blocks of intact limestone.

Based on field observations during well drilling, groundwater sampling and dip measurements someof the monitoring wells appear to be in aquifer zones with very poor hydraulic connection to the wideraquifer. For example, wells GW05 and GW06 are known to purge dry during sampling and have slowwater level recovery after purging. These wells appear to be in blocks of limestone that are poorlyconnected to the wider aquifer.

Wells GW10 and GW11 would appear to be similarly isolated. These wells are located in the samearea of the site as monitoring well GW09 and the Production Well TW02A. Pumping from TW02Adoes not appear to draw-down the water level in the nearer wells GW10 and GW11 to the sameextent that it is drawn down in more distant well GW09, suggesting wells GW10 and GW11 are poorlyhydraulically connected to TW02A.

At the site, the direction of groundwater flow under natural gradient conditions is to the north andnorth-west. However, groundwater direction flow varies between monitoring rounds. As groundwaterflow occurs preferentially through fracture zones, the actual groundwater flow direction may differ tothat indicated on a groundwater contour map. In a dual porosity aquifer the direction of groundwaterflow is jointly controlled by a structural component (orientation of fracture zones), as well as ahydraulic component (the hydraulic gradient).

2 http://gis.epa.ie/Envision (accessed 02 November 2016)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM10

1.2.7 Groundwater Redox Chemistry

Key redox indicator parameters (nitrate, nitrite, dissolved iron and dissolved manganese) are includedin the biannual monitoring rounds. Results for redox parameters indicate that groundwater conditionsare moderately reducing (borderline anaerobic) beneath the site. This is also indicated by thedetection of cis-1,2-dichloroethene (cDCE - a breakdown product of TCE) at well GW05. However,the groundwater is not sufficiently reducing for the widespread presence of iron in solution or for thegeneration of hydrogen sulphide gas (i.e. not strongly reducing groundwater conditions).

1.2.8 Chemicals of Potential Concern in Groundwater

Groundwater monitoring data are available going back to 1999 for selected wells. The mainchemicals of potential concern detected in groundwater are chlorinated ethenes, specifically TCE andits breakdown daughter products cDCE and vinyl chloride (VC). TCE can be broken-down naturally ingroundwater if conditions are reducing (anaerobic), through a process known as reductivedechlorination.

Chlorinated ethenes are analysed as part of a larger Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) suite. OtherVOCs are occasionally detected in groundwater from other monitoring wells, but generally at lowconcentrations.

The highest VOC concentrations are reported for TCE detected in bedrock aquifer monitoring wellGW05, located in the western corner of the site.

1.2.9 Source-Pathway-Receptor Linkages

A summary of potential Source-Pathway-Receptor (SPR) linkages is outlined in the table below, with adetailed discussion provided in AECOM (then URS) Report: Analog – TCE Support 2008, Reference4931629/CKRP0001, Issue No. 2 Final, date 19 January 2009.

Table 1 Potential SPR Linkages

POTENTIAL SPR LINKAGES

Sources Pathways Receptor

S1 Chlorinated ethenes ingroundwater are related to the on-going dissolution of TCE (andtetrachloroethene) from trappedresidual phase into groundwater.This residual phase is the on-goingsource

Human Health

P1 Ingestion of soil/dust andgroundwater

P2 Dermal contact with soil anddust

P3 Inhalation of indoor and outdoorcontaminant vapours which canarise directly from residual phase inthe unsaturated overburden itselfand indirectly via the dissolvedphase in groundwater

Human Health

On-site workers

Off-site workers

Workers on-siteundertaking subsurfaceworks

Water Supply Well

Well 250 m north- north-west of the site OnsiteProduction Wells TW01and TW02A – used forcooling purposes notpotable supply Well <50 mwest of the site at StrykerHowmedica

Controlled WatersP4 Lateral migration ofcontaminants through the bedrockaquifer

Controlled Waters

Loughmore TurloughBunlicky Pond andShannon Estuary

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM11

1.2.10 Monitoring Network

Analog currently has a network of ten groundwater monitoring wells across the site and twoProduction Wells (TW01 and TW02A) in the centre of the site. Five of the monitoring wells –GW04A3, GW05, GW06, GW07 and GW08 – are required to be monitored biannually, in accordancewith the terms of the site’s IPC licence. In July 2016, AECOM recommended including well RW01 infuture IPC biannual groundwater monitoring events. Well RW01 can be considered a groundwatermonitoring compliance point on the western site boundary4.

Wells are screened at various depths but, given their depths, all are understood to be screened withinthe limestone bedrock. A map illustrating well locations is presented as Figure 2.

Historically, three boreholes were drilled in the early to mid-1990s. An EPA Inspector’s Report from1997, states that groundwater monitoring wells were installed in 1995 as part of an investigationfollowing a spill of hydrogen chloride (hydrochloric acid). No details are available with regard to thegeological sequence drilled, total depth achieved or well installation details. None of these three wellscan currently be located on site and it appears that they were covered over during redevelopment ofthe site around 1999.

GW04, GW05, GW06, GW07 and GW08 were drilled and installed as part of a hydrogeological siteinvestigation to comply with Condition 9.3.2 of the site’s original IPC licence. The investigation wasundertaken in 1999 by Bord na Móna Environmental Limited. The boreholes were installed as50 mm internal diameter groundwater monitoring wells. Four of the five boreholes were drilled intobedrock with total depths ranging from 19 m to 25 m bgl. The original borehole GW07 was completedat 7 m bgl without progressing into bedrock. All boreholes were installed as monitoring wells, withdiscrete screen sections of no more than 4 m in length.

It is understood that well GW07 was re-drilled in 2006, as it was frequently found to be dry duringgroundwater monitoring rounds. No details are available for the re-drilling works. However, given thatthe total depth of the monitoring well is now measured at 25 m bgl, it is most likely that the boreholewas drilled into bedrock. The length of the screen section of the new monitoring well GW07 isunknown.

In advance of redevelopment of the former Essilor building and buildings A2 and A3, well GW04A wasinstalled in 2011, as the original well GW04 was within the footprint of the planned construction worksfor the new R&D building. GW04 was decommissioned in 2012. Replacement well GW04A (drilledwithin 20 m of the original well), encountered similar geological conditions to those reported during thedrilling of well GW04. The borehole was installed as a monitoring well of 50 mm internal diameterHDPE construction, with a 6 m slotted screen section from 24 m to 30 m bgl. During drilling of theborehole at GW04, groundwater inflow was noted at 19 m bgl, but in GW04A the first noticeable inflowwas deeper, at 28.7 m bgl.

In 2000, GW09, GW10 and GW11 were drilled and installed as groundwater monitoring wells by Bordna Móna, as part of due diligence works on the adjacent Millipore site. All three boreholes weredrilled into bedrock, with total depths ranging from 20 m to 26 m bgl. Bedrock was encounteredbetween 2 m and 5 m bgl, with overburden consisting of made ground and gravel. Drilling logs didnot indicate the presence of fractures in the limestone bedrock at these three locations. Long screensections, between 9 m and 15 m in length, were installed in the monitoring wells to maximise thecross-sectional area of groundwater flow into the wells.

The original TW01 and TW02 were drilled and installed in 2004 in the central portion of the Analogsite with the aim of using them as water supply wells to augment the site’s existing supply from thelocal authority. The drilling works and assessment of the wells’ water supply capacities wereundertaken by White Young Green. The boreholes were drilled to total depths of 90 m (TW01) and100 m bgl (TW02) with bedrock encountered at 2 m and 6 m bgl, respectively. No details were notedon the geological log for TW01 with regard to the presence of fractures. However, TW02 encountereda large fracture zone between 25 m and 30 m bgl, with notable inflows of sand and weathered rock.

3 The licence specifies well GW04, which was decommissioned and replaced by well GW04A in 2012, with the approval of theEPA4 AECOM Report – Response to EPA RI005617, 60480977 / CKRP0002, dated 06 July 2016

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM12

Well TW01 was left as an open hole installation, while TW02 was installed with a 125 mm ID screento protect the pump against material coming in from the weathered fracture zone.

A series of pump tests were carried out on both wells and it was found that neither well could sustainparticularly high pumping rates. It was estimated that a combined yield of 90 m3/d could be achievedwhen pumping from both wells. During 2013, combined pumping yields from wells TW01 and TW02have been estimated to be approximately 50 to 60 m3/d, with TW01 producing only 15 m3/d. Thesite’s current water usage is understood to be in the region of 900 m3/d.

Based on the declining groundwater yields from Production Wells TW01 and TW02, it was decided torehabilitate well TW01 and re-drill a replacement Production Well for TW02 in January 2015.

TW01 was rehabilitated successfully over a period of 8 hours5. Pump tests carried out by the drillingcontractor estimate that the safe yield for TW01 is 2.5 m3/hour (60 m3/d). TW02 was abandoned (dueto a blockage resulting from earlier rehabilitation efforts) and backfilled in January 2015. Thereplacement well, TW02A was drilled approximately 2 m east of original TW02. The borehole wasdrilled to 90.9 m bgl, with strong water strikes encountered at approximately 25 m bgl and 90 m bgl.The drilling contractor has estimated that the safe yield of replacement well TW02A is 3.1 m3/hour(~75 m3/d).

In 2007, RW01 and RW02 were drilled to total depths of 30 m and 40 m bgl, respectively, as part of adue diligence assessment of the adjacent Essilor site. Bedrock was encountered between 3.7 m and10.8 m bgl, with the overburden consisting of boulders and gravelly sand. A discreet fracture zonewas noted when drilling RW02 between 12 m and 12.5 m bgl. Both monitoring wells were installedwith long screen sections of 12 m and 20 m in RW01 and RW02, respectively.

1.3 Project Objectives

The main objective of groundwater monitoring is to ensure that Analog comply with the groundwatermonitoring requirements of the site’s IPC licence and as agreed with the EPA.

Secondary objectives of the monitoring are:

· To assess groundwater flow directions and gradients in the bedrock aquifer

· To assess short and long-term concentration trends in key chemicals of potential concern for theselected wells

The second biannual monitoring round for 2016 was conducted on 14 October 2016 and the resultsare presented and discussed in this report.

1.3.1 Rationale and Strategy

Biannual groundwater monitoring is required from the following five on-site groundwater monitoringwells:

· GW04A6

· GW05

· GW06

· GW07

· GW08

Well RW01 was also sampled in October 2016 as recommended by AECOM (see Section 1.2.10).

The remaining monitoring wells on site are not required to be sampled, but groundwater levels aremeasured in them during each biannual sampling visit. These wells are:

· GW09

5 Meehan Drilling, Analog Devices, Limerick, March 20156 Due to planned construction works on-site, original well GW04 was replaced by GW04A in 2011 and in agreement with theEPA

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM13

· GW10

· GW11

· RW02

Following installation of the two Production Wells, it was observed that the original GW07 monitoringwell was frequently dry. In 2006, a new deeper well GW07 was drilled and installed as a monitoringwell.

1.3.2 Groundwater Sampling and Monitoring

Prior to sampling, the depth to groundwater in all accessible monitoring wells on site was measuredusing an electronic interface probe. An interface probe is capable of distinguishing between waterand separate-phase non-aqueous layers, which can be either more or less dense than water.

The depth to groundwater at well RW02 was not measured, as the well was inaccessible due to a carbeing parked over the well on 14 October 2016.

It is known from previous monitoring that well RW02 is blocked at a depth of approximately 8 m bgl.An unsuccessful attempt to unblock the well using hand tools was made during Round 1 2015monitoring. Groundwater depths in vicinity of RW02 are generally greater than 10 m bgl.

Groundwater samples were taken in accordance with AECOM groundwater sampling protocols usingdedicated inertial lift sampling equipment in each of the monitoring wells. In October 2016,groundwater monitoring wells were purged of approximately three times the volume of standing waterin the well (see Table 3) to ensure groundwater samples representative of the aquifer were collected.Groundwater monitoring wells GW05 and GW06 purged dry before three well volumes were removedfrom each well and were sampled upon water level recovery.

During purging, stable measurements of groundwater quality parameters (dissolved oxygen, pH,electrical conductivity, redox potential and temperature) were recorded using a calibrated water qualitymeter and a flow-through cell, to minimise contact between the sample and the atmosphere.

For metals analysis, water samples were filtered (45 µm filters) in the field and collected intolaboratory-supplied containers with appropriate acid preservative.

Sample containers were labelled in the field and the details were entered onto a chain of custodyform. Samples were stored in a chilled cool-box on site and during overnight transit to the laboratory.

1.3.3 Laboratory Analyses

Groundwater samples were sent for analysis to Jones Environmental Laboratories (U.K.), understandard chain of custody procedures. Jones Environmental are an AECOM approved laboratory withUKAS accreditation. All water samples were analysed for a suite of VOCs (including TCE, cDCE andVC), semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), major ions, chemical oxygen demand (COD) anddissolved heavy metals.

A sample inventory is provided in Table 1. Analytical results are presented in Tables 4 – 7, withlaboratory certificates in Appendix A.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM14

2. RESULTS

2.1 Site Hydrogeology and Groundwater Flow

2.1.1 Water Quality Parameters

Table 3 presents field water quality measurements of pH, temperature, electrical conductivity (EC),dissolved oxygen (DO) and oxidation redox potential (ORP) for groundwater from the six monitoringwells sampled in 14 October 2016.

The majority of groundwater pH values were generally slightly above neutral (pH 7), ranging between7.8 (GW08) and 8.1 (GW04A). These readings are consistent with typical pH readings for Irishgroundwater, particularly when originating from a carbonate (limestone) aquifer.

Recorded groundwater temperatures were between 11.8 ºC (GW04A) and 13.7 ºC (GW06). Themeasured groundwater temperatures in October 2016 were slightly higher than the typical range forgroundwater in Ireland (10.0 ºC – 12.0 ºC), but were within previously observed ranges at the site.

EC values ranged between 449 µS/cm (GW08) and 847 µS/cm (RW01). These values are typical forIrish groundwater originating from a carbonate aquifer.

Field ORP readings were compensated, as recommended by the instrument manufacturer, by adding200 mV to the field readings to give redox potential (Eh). Adjusted redox Eh readings rangedbetween 125 mV (RW01) and 248 mV (GW06), indicating slightly anaerobic groundwater conditions inthe aquifer.

DO values were recorded between 1.90 mg/L (RW01) and 6.62 mg/L (GW08). Groundwaterconditions beneath the site can be described as slightly anaerobic (under saturated with respect tooxygen) and are consistent with the redox potential readings noted above. Fully aerated groundwaterat the observed temperatures would be expected to have dissolved oxygen concentrations in theregion of 10 mg/L.

2.1.2 Groundwater Flow Gradient

Depth to groundwater measurements from all accessible wells in Round 2 October 2016 arepresented in Table 3. Depth to groundwater ranged from 7.43 m below casing top (m bct) at wellGW11 to 26.17 m bct at well TW01.

Depth to groundwater readings were converted to equivalent groundwater elevations relative toOrdnance Datum (OD), see Table 3. A groundwater contour map is presented as Figure 3.

The site is underlain by a fractured limestone bedrock aquifer in which water levels have been foundto vary greatly within short distances. In the area of wells GW07, GW09, GW10 and GW11 it provesdifficult to draw groundwater contours due to the range in groundwater elevations. For example, on14 October 2016 the groundwater elevation at well GW10 was 12.21 m OD, while at well GW07,located approximately 20 west of GW10, the groundwater elevation was 4.41 m OD (7.80 mdifference in water level).

Due to the karstified nature of the limestone, there is a wide range of groundwater elevations in theeastern corner of the site, with the result that groundwater contours in this area are complex. Acrossthe remainder of the site, groundwater contours for 14 October 2016 indicate that groundwater flow isradial towards Production Well TW01. Further west, groundwater flow is divergent from the area ofwell GW05 towards the south, west and north.

As mentioned previously, the site is underlain by a highly fractured, anisotropic heterogeneouslimestone bedrock aquifer influenced by on-site extraction wells, in which prediction of direction ofgroundwater flow is complex.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM15

2.1.3 Observations

No floating (light) free-phase non-aqueous layer was detected in any of the wells gauged. The depthto the base of accessible wells was also gauged using an interface probe and no sinking (dense) free-phase non-aqueous layer was detected.

In Table 3, the depth of each well, as dipped on14 October 2016, has been compared to the recordeddepth of the well on installation. Varying degrees of siltation have occurred in most wells. However,for the majority of wells, the thickness of silt accumulating in the base of each well is less than 30% ofthe screen length. Efforts to remove silt from wells with levels of siltation over 30% (GW05 andGW08) were undertaken in 20117. Some additional siltation appears to have occurred in GW05during disruption to the well caused by construction activities in this area. The accumulation of silt inthe base of most wells is not sufficient to inhibit their use as monitoring wells.

The degree of siltation in wells is kept under review and is not deteriorating; the need for rehabilitationwill be re-assessed if the degree of siltation increases over time in a given well.

2.2 Laboratory Analysis of Groundwater Samples

The results of laboratory analysis of groundwater samples are presented in Tables 4 – 7.

2.2.1 Assessment Guidelines

Preliminary assessment of groundwater analytical data was completed by comparing the results witha range of generic groundwater assessment criteria; specifically Groundwater Threshold Values(GTVs), the EPA draft Interim Guideline Values (IGVs) and the Dutch Intervention Values (DIVs).

The GTVs were developed to give effect to measures needed to achieve the objectives of the WaterFramework and Groundwater Directives. The GTVs were most recently amended in July 2016 andare defined in Irish law in Statutory Instrument No. 366 of 2016, European CommunitiesEnvironmental Objectives (Groundwater) (Amended) Regulations, 2016. Exceedance of a thresholdvalue triggers further investigation to confirm whether a ‘Poor’ groundwater chemical status for thegroundwater body as a whole is indicated

The IGVs were developed by the EPA in 2002 using a number of existing water quality guidelines inuse in Ireland, including existing national environmental quality standards, proposed commonindicators for the new groundwater directive, drinking water standards and GSI trigger values.

The DIVs represent concentrations, above which there may be a risk to human receptors, and abovewhich more detailed site-specific risk assessment or remediation may be required in The Netherlands.These guidelines have no legal standing in Ireland and are used as a screening tool for assessmentof potential contaminants only.

2.2.2 Groundwater Monitoring Results

2.2.2.1 Volatile Organic Compounds

VOC results are presented in Table 4.

No VOCs were detected above laboratory MDLs in groundwater from wells GW04A, GW06 andGW08 in Round 2 2016.

TCE was detected at a concentration of 10 µg/L in groundwater from well GW05 in October 2016, thelowest ever result at this well. The GTV for TCE is 7.5 µg/L, the IGV is 10 µg/L and the DIV is 500µg/L.

In October 2016, cDCE was detected at a concentration of 45 µg/L in groundwater from well GW05.The GTV for cDCE is 0.375 µg/L. The IGV for the sum of the dichloroethenes (cDCE plus trans-1,2-Dichloroethene (tDCE)) is 30 µg/L, while the DIV is 20 µg/L.

7 AECOM Report 46402500/CKRP0003, dated 13 January 2012

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM16

Tetrachloroethene (PCE) was the only VOC detected in groundwater from well GW04 in October2016. The reported PCE concentration of 4 µg/L is less than the relevant assessment criteria.

At well RW01, low concentrations of 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) (12 µg/L), 1,1-dichloroethane(3 µg/L), chloroform (4 µg/L) and PCE (6 µg/L) were detected in Round 2 2016. The reportedconcentration of 1,1 DCE was the only VOC result to exceed the assessment criteria at well RW01.The DIV for 1,1 DCE is 10 µg/L and the IGV is 30 µg/L, while there is no GTV defined.

2.2.2.2 Semi Volatile Organic Compounds

SVOC results are presented in Table 5.

No SVOCs were detected above MDLs in groundwater from all six wells sampled in Round 2 2016.

2.2.2.3 Major Ion Concentrations and COD Results

Major ion and COD results are presented in Table 6.

Nitrite was not detected above the MDL (0.02 mg/L) at all six wells sampled in October 2016.

Calcium, magnesium, sodium, sulphate and total nitrogen were detected above MDLs in groundwaterfrom all six wells sampled in October 2016 and all at concentrations that did not exceed relevantassessment criteria.

Ammoniacal nitrogen, nitrate, fluoride and COD were detected above laboratory MDLs at one or morewells in October 2016; however, concentrations did not exceed the relevant assessment criteria.

Potassium was detected at a concentration of 6 mg/L in groundwater from well GW07 and marginallyexceeded the IGV (5 mg/L).

Sulphate was detected at well GW07 at a concentration of 208 mg/L and exceeded both the GTV(187.5 mg/L) and IGV (200 mg/L).

Chloride concentrations at wells GW05, GW06, GW07, GW08 and RW01 exceeded the lower GTV of24 mg/L. Chloride concentrations in groundwater from wells GW05, GW06, GW07 and RW01exceeded the IGV of 30 mg/L but were below the upper GTV (187.5 mg/L) in Round 2 2016.

COD was detected at concentrations of 7 mg/L (GW06), 8 mg/L (RW01) and 14 mg/L (GW07) inOctober 2016. COD was not detected at concentrations above the MDL in groundwater analysedfrom the remaining wells sampled.

2.2.2.4 Dissolved Heavy Metals Results

Dissolved heavy metals results are presented in Table 7.

Arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, tin and ferrous iron (iron II) were not detected abovelaboratory MDLs in groundwater from any of the six wells monitored in October 2016

Concentrations of aluminium, chromium, zinc, manganese, ferric iron (iron III) and total iron weredetected above the MDLs in groundwater from at least one monitoring well, but at concentrations thatdid not exceed relevant screening criteria.

Dissolved heavy metals results indicate that groundwater conditions are not sufficiently reducing forthe widespread presence of dissolved manganese and iron (i.e. not strongly reducing groundwaterconditions). As previously stated, the field observations indicate that groundwater conditions aremoderately reducing.

2.2.3 Temporal Trends in Chemicals of Potential Concern

Chlorinated ethenes have been detected in groundwater from well GW05 since monitoring began in1999. Total chlorinated ethene concentrations have declined from their peak values in 2000(over 1,500 µg/L) and since 2013 have generally been below 200 µg/L, see Figure 4.1.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM17

Since August 2014, all monthly TCE monitoring results at well GW05 have been below 100 µg/L,other than one result in January 2016 of 132 µg/L.

Short-term fluctuations in TCE concentration have occurred generally in the first quarter, for examplethe TCE concentration increased to 707 µg/L in March 2009, to 1,350 µg/L in April 2010 and again to1,120 µg/L in February 2012 at well GW05. This seasonal trend was not apparent between Quarter 12013 and Quarter 1 2016.

Between January 2016 and October 2016, TCE results at well GW05 have generally remained below50 µg/L (see Figure 4.2), however a recent, minor peak TCE concentration of 132 µg/L was noted inJanuary 2016, an increase from 23 µg/L in December 2015. The October 2016 TCE result of 10 mg/Lis the lowest result to date in 2016.

2.2.4 Conceptual Site Model

Low concentrations of TCE and its breakdown products are detected in groundwater from beneath thesite. The detections are primarily from monitoring well GW05, which is a low permeability monitoringwell screened at depth (> 20 m bgl) within fractured limestone bedrock.

Under reducing groundwater conditions, TCE can be converted to cDCE though microbial action,known as reductive dechlorination. It appears that this breakdown process is occurring to a certainextent beneath the Analog site; as groundwater conditions appear to be mildly reducing, and,generally, higher concentrations of cDCE are reported at well GW05 in comparison to TCE. There isalso an absence of other dichloroethene isomers: 1,1-dichloroethene and tDCE, which arepreferentially produced during the manufacture of TCE; indicating that the cDCE has been producedin preference through in-situ reductive dechlorination in the subsurface.

The cDCE detected in groundwater from well GW05 indicates that breakdown of TCE into cDCE isoccurring unaided in-situ.

2.2.5 Potential Pollutant Linkages

A summary of potential Source-Pathway-Receptor (SPR) linkages is outlined in the table below.

Table 2 Potential SPR Linkages

POTENTIAL SPR LINKAGES

Sources Pathways Receptor

S1 Chlorinated ethenes ingroundwater are related tothe on-going dissolution ofTCE (and tetrachloroethene)from trapped residual phaseinto groundwater. Thisresidual phase is the on-going source

Human Health

P1 Ingestion of soil/dust andgroundwater

P2 Dermal contact with soil anddust

P3 Inhalation of indoor and outdoorcontaminant vapours which canarise directly from residual phase inthe unsaturated overburden itselfand indirectly via the dissolvedphase in groundwater

Human Health

On-site workers

Off-site workers

Workers on-site undertakingsubsurface works

Water Supply Well

Well 250 m north- north-west of the site OnsiteProduction Wells TW01and TW02A – used forcooling purposes notpotable supply Well <50 mwest of the site at StrykerHowmedica

Controlled Waters

P4 Lateral migration ofcontaminants through the bedrockaquifer

Controlled Waters

Loughmore TurloughBunlicky Pond andShannon Estuary

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM18

Based on the current site status and monitoring data it is considered that:

· The potential for ingestion of contaminated soil/dust and groundwater is low, as limited soilcontamination was detected and personnel on site do not have contact with groundwater

· Similarly, the potential for dermal contact with contaminated soil/dust and groundwater is low forthe same reasons outlined above

· To date, no VOCs have been detected in groundwater from Production Well TW01. Previously,low concentrations of VOCs have been detected in groundwater from well TW02. TW02 wasdecommissioned and replaced with well TW02A in January 2015. TW02A has not been sampledsince it was installed in January 2015. TW02A was drilled to approximately the same depth asTW02 and is drilled within 2 metres of the original well TW02. It is understood that groundwaterfrom both wells is pumped to a holding tank on site and mixed with water from the mains supply.It is further understood that pumped groundwater forms approximately 10% of the water usedduring production on site therefore, when mixed; there is large potential for dilution.Groundwater is used for production purposes only and is not used for potable supply

· There are limited data for the well located 250 m north-north-west of the site. It is not known ifthis well is currently in use and, if so, for what purpose. Given its proximity to the site, thepotential for dilution is less than for the some of the other identified receptors, although it is stillconsidered to be significant

· A review of publically available data indicates that groundwater is rarely abstracted by StrykerHowmedica and, therefore is not considered a significant receptor

· Loughmore Turlough is understood to be a poor quality turlough, which floods only slightly inwinter. Given its distance from the site, there is considered likely to be significant scope fordilution along the groundwater flow path

· Bunlicky Pond and Shannon Estuary are sufficient distance from the site to allow dilution alongthe groundwater flow path of contaminants that migrate off site

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM19

3. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

3.1 Summary and Conclusion

AECOM undertook the second IPC biannual groundwater-monitoring round for 2016 at the AnalogRaheen facility on 14 October 2016. Six on-site wells were monitored for a range of physio-chemical,organic and inorganic parameters.

From analysis of the groundwater samples collected, the following conclusions can be drawn:

· Groundwater pH values beneath the site were generally above neutral, ranging between 7.8(GW08) and 8.1 (GW04A)

· The groundwater temperature values were all slightly above the normal range for groundwater inIreland (10.0 ºC to 12.0 ºC), up to 13.7 oC at well GW06

· EC values ranged between 449 µS/cm (GW08) and 847 µS/cm (RW01) and are within the typicalrange for Irish groundwater in a carbonate setting

· Field readings ORP, dissolved oxygen and laboratory results for redox indicators indicate thatgroundwater conditions across the site are under-saturated with respect to oxygen and slightlyreducing (borderline anaerobic), although not sufficiently reducing for iron, manganese orhydrogen sulphide to be present widespread in solution in groundwater beneath the site

· VOCs were below MDLs in groundwater from wells GW04A, GW06 and GW08

· The concentration of TCE in groundwater at well GW05 decreased in Round 2 (October) 2016(10 µg/L) compared to Round 1 2016 (33 µg/L) and is the lowest ever result at this well

· The concentration of the TCE breakdown product, cDCE in groundwater at well GW05 alsodecreased in Round 2 2016 compared to Round 1 2016 and is higher than that of the parentcompound TCE

· The cDCE concentration at well GW05 decreased in October 2016 (45 µg/L) compared with April2016 (227 µg/L). The presence of cDCE, rather than other dichloroethene isomers, ingroundwater from well GW05 is indicative of the unaided in-situ breakdown of TCE undernaturally reducing conditions

· PCE was the only VOC detected in groundwater from well GW04 (4 µg/L)

· Low concentrations of 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) (12 µg/L), 1,1-dichloroethane (3 µg/L),chloroform (4 µg/L) and PCE (6 µg/L) were detected at monitoring well RW01

· VC was below the laboratory MDL for all six groundwater samples analysed in October 2016

· There has been an overall decline from the peak chlorinated solvent concentrations at wellGW05 reported in 2000. Since September 2012, only minor fluctuations in TCE concentrationsare reported from round to round. Up to 2012, a general trend of higher TCE concentrations wasapparent in the first quarter of each year, this trend was not apparent between Quarter 1 2013and Quarter 1 2016. A recent, minor peak concentration of TCE (132 µg/L) was noted at wellGW05 in January 2016

· Voluntary monthly monitoring of groundwater from GW05 has been undertaken by Analog sinceApril 2010 and has shown an overall decrease in chlorinated solvent concentrations. Analogplan to continue monthly monitoring of well GW05 in the short term for 2017

· No SVOCs were detected above MDLs in groundwater from the six groundwater monitoring wellssampled in October 2016

· Chloride concentrations at wells GW05, GW06, GW07, GW08 and RW01 exceeded the lowerGTV. All chloride results were below the upper GTV

· Potassium and sulphate exceeded the assessment criteria at well GW07

· Dissolved metals concentrations were low, with the majority of results below the MDLs

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM20

· Concentrations of dissolved aluminium, chromium, zinc, total iron, ferric iron (iron III) andmanganese were detected in groundwater from at least one monitoring well, but atconcentrations that did not exceed relevant screening criteria

· Measured well depths compared to installed depths and the need for rehabilitation works will bekept under review in the next monitoring round, but currently do not indicate that rehabilitationworks need to be repeated

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM21

3.2 Recommended Way Forward

Based on the Round 2 2016 groundwater monitoring results, groundwater sampling at Analog shouldcontinue in line with the EPA’s requirements for 2017.

AECOM have attempted to remove the blockage at well RW02 on a number of occasions but with nosuccess. The blockage, which is at approximately 8 m bgl, hinders the use of the well to monitorgroundwater as depth to groundwater in the area is generally greater than 10 m. Therefore it isrecommended that well if the blockage cannot be removed, then RW02 should be decommissioned.

AECOM recommend sampling pumping well TW02A during the next round of IPC biannualgroundwater monitoring (TW02A was not pumping during Round 2 2016).

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM

FIGURES

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

AS SHOWNJob No.SCALE

FO’R

North

CLIENT

PROJECT LOCATION

DRAWING TITLENOV 2016

A


FO’R KF

60480977FIGURE 1 _SITE LOCATION PLAN

RAHEEN INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,LIMERICK

SITELOCATION

0 km 1 km 2 km 3 km

Approximate Scale

LIMERICK

DOUGLAS BUSINESS CENTRE, CARRIGALINE ROAD,DOUGLAS, CORK

TEL: +353 (0) 21 436 5006 WWW.AECOM.COM


DRAWN

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

TW02ATW02A TW01ATW01A

GW04AGW04A

GW10GW10TW01TW01

GW04AGW04AGW04A

GW05GW05GW05

GW06GW06GW06

GW08GW08GW08

RW01RW01RW01 RW02RW02RW02

GW09GW09GW09

GW11GW11GW11

GW10

TW02ATW02ATW02A

TW01 GW07GW07GW07TW02ATW02ATW02


TEL: +353 (0)21 436 5006 WWW.AECOM.COM

DOUGLAS BUSINESS CENTRE, CARRIGALINE ROAD,DOUGLAS, CORKJob No.

TRACED CHECKEDDRAWN APPROVED

FO’R FO’RDATE

A

NOV 2016

NTSSCALE

KF

60480977

Drawing Title

FIGURE 2 _ SITE LOCATION PLAN

Client


Project

GROUNDWATER MONITORING ROUND 2 OCTOBER 2016

LEGEND

Non-IPC Well Location

IPC Licence Well Location

Essilor Well Location

New Production Well Location

North

Decommissioned Production Well Location

Existing Production Well Location

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27


TEL: +353 (0) 21 436 5006 WWW.AECOM.COMJob No.

TRACED CHECKEDDRAWN APPROVED

FO’R EO’HDATE

A

NOV 2016

NTSSCALE

KF

60480977

Drawing Title

FIGURE 3 _ GROUNDWATER CONTOURMAP - 14 OCTOBER 2016

Client


Project

GROUNDWATER MONITORINGROUND 2 OCTOBER 2016

LEGENDNorth

0.58

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

AECOM Analog GW05 Monthly Monitoring to October 2016

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

2,200

2,400

Mar

-99

Dec

-99

Aug

-00

Apr

-01

Dec

-01

Sep

-02

May

-03

Jan-

04

Sep

-04

May

-05

Feb-

06

Oct

-06

Jun-

07

Feb-

08

Oct

-08

Jul-0

9

Mar

-10

Nov

-10

Jul-1

1

Apr

-12

Dec

-12

Aug

-13

Apr

-14

Dec

-14

Sep

-15

May

-16

Jan-

17

Con

cent

ratio

n(m

g/L)

Figure 4.1GW05 - Chlorinated-Ethene Concentration Trends to October 2016, Analog Devices Int.

TCE

c-1,2-DCE

VC

Vinyl chloride wastentatively identifiedby laboratoryanalysis.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

AECOM Analog GW05 Monthly Monitoring to October 2016

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Jan-

13

May

-13

Sep

-13

Jan-

14

May

-14

Sep

-14

Jan-

15

May

-15

Sep

-15

Jan-

16

May

-16

Sep

-16

Jan-

17

Figure 4.2GW05 - Chlorinated-Ethene Concentration Trends from January 2013 to October 2016, Analog

Devices Int.

TCE

c-1,2-DCE

VC

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM

TABLES

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

Prepared by: DO'LChecked by: FO'R

Table 1 - Sample InventoryAnalog Devices Int. October 2016

Sampling Point GW04A GW05 GW06 GW07 GW08 RW01VOCs X X X X X XSVOCs X X X X X XMajor Ions X X X X X XCOD X X X X X XDissolved HeavyMetals X X X X X X

Notes:VOCs: Volatile Organic CompoundsSVOCs: Semi Volatile Organic Compounds

COD: Chemical Oxygen Demand

Major Ions: Calcium, Magnesium, Potassium, Sodium, Chloride, Sulphate, Ammoniacal Nitrogen,Nitrate, Nitrite, Fluoride and Total Nitrogen

Heavy Metals: Aluminium, Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Tin, Zinc, Iron,Ferrous Iron, Ferric Iron and Manganese

AECOMAnalog Round 2 2016 Tables Final

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27


Table 2 - Well InventoryAnalog Devices Int. October 2016

Monitoring Point BH01 BH02 BH03 GW04 GW04A GW05 GW06 GW07 GW08 GW09 GW10 GW11 RW01 RW02 TW01 TW02 TW02A

Year of Installation Pre1990

Pre1990

Pre1990 1999 2011 1999 1999 1999 1999 2000 2000 2000 2007 2007 2015 2004 2015

Well Elevation (m OD) 20.07 19.39 20.08 19.94 19.03 19.70 19.95 19.81 19.40 19.42 - - -Internal Diameter (mm) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 165 165 125Total Depth Installed (m) 30.4 24.5 18.5 NR 21.5 26.2 20.0 21.0 30.0 40.0 104.0 100 90.9

Length of Screen Section(m) 6.0 3.0 3.0 NR 3.0 9.0 14.0 15.0 12.0 20.0 NR 92 79.7

Top of Screen Section(mbct) 24.4 21.5 15.5 NR 18.5 17.2 6.0 6.0 18.0 20.0 NR 8 11.2

Base of Screen Section(mbct) 30.4 24.5 18.5 NR 21.5 26.2 20.0 21.0 30.0 40.0 NR 100 90.9

Comments/MaintenanceRequired

NewWaterraTM

installed.

Flush watertight cover,goodcondition.

Flush,stopcockcover, ingoodcondition.


Flush,circular 8"cover, ingoodcondition.




Flush watertight cover,goodcondition.

Wellblocked at~8.00 m bct.

ProductionWell.

Decommissioned

ProductionWell.

m OD: Metres above Ordnance Datum - : Not Measuredm bct: Metres below casing top NR: Not Recorded

Notes:

Well de-commissione

d in March2012.

Wells appear to havebeen covered over by

subsequent re-surfacingworks, has not been

located since before May2008.

AECOM Analog Round 2 2016 Tables Final

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27


Table 3 - Water Level Data and Field ObservationsAnalog Devices Int. October 2016

Monitoring Point GW04A GW05 GW06 GW07 GW08 GW09 GW10 GW11 RW01 RW02 TW01 TW02 TW02ATotal Depth Measured(mbct) 29.60 22.80 18.35 23.30 20.60 24.64 20.36 20.98 29.05 - - - -

Total Depth Installed(mbct) 30.4 24.1 18.5 - 21.5 26.2 20.0 21.0 30.0 40.0 103.0 100 90.9

Length of Screen Section(m) 6.0 3.0 3.0 - 3.0 9.0 14.0 15.0 12.0 20.0 - 92 79.9

Thickness of Silt(m) 0.80 1.32 0.15 - 0.90 1.56 - 0.02 - - - - -

% of Screen Blocked bySilt 13% 44% 5% - 30% 17% - - - - - - -

Well Elevation(m AOD) 20.07 19.39 20.08 19.94 19.03 19.70 19.95 19.81 19.40 19.42 19.75 - -

Depth to Groundwater(mbct) 13.270 11.430 13.385 15.535 13.040 15.290 7.740 7.425 16.010 - 26.165 - -

Groundwater Elevation(m AOD) 6.80 7.96 6.70 4.41 5.99 4.41 12.21 12.39 3.39 - -6.42 - -

Well Volume (L) 32 22 10 15 15 - - - - - - - -3 x Well Volume (L) 96 67 29 46 45 - - - - - - - -

Actual Purge Volume (L) 100 60* 20* 48 45 - - - 85 - - - -

pH 8.1 7.9 7.9 7.9 7.8 - - - 8.0 - - - -Temperature (oC) 11.8 12.1 13.7 12.9 12.8 - - - 12.4 - - - -Electrical Conductivity(mS/cm)

720 680 726 838 449 - - - 847 - - - -

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 3.69 2.28 4.56 6.60 6.62 - - - 1.90 - - - -

Redox Potential (mV) 203 150 248 211 210 - - - 125 - - - -

LNAPL/DNAPL Detected No No No No No No No No No - - - -

CommentsClear, NEC,

goodrecovery.

Clear/ slightlycloudy grey,

NEC.

Slightlycloudy brown,

NEC.

Slightlycloudy greywater, NEC.

Cloudybrown, siltywater, NEC.

Not sampled. Not sampled. Not sampled. Cloudy brownwater NEC

Well coveredwith car. Not sampled.

Welldecommissio

ned 2015Not sampled.

m bct: Metres below casing top - : Not Measured ms/cm: Microsiemens per centimetre oC: Degrees Celsiusm OD: Metres above Ordnance Datum mV: Millivolts

* indicates that the well purged dry before three well volumes were removed

Notes:

Redox potential readings compensated by adding 200 mV to field readings as recommended by instrument manufacturerIndicates information not available as well was


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27


Table 4 - Volatile Organic Compound Results (mg/L)Analog Devices Int. October 2016

Dichlorodifluoromethane 2 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether 0.1 10 9200 30 - - - - - -Chloromethane 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Vinyl Chloride 0.1 0.375 5 ---- - - - - - -Bromomethane 1 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Chloroethane 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Trichlorofluoromethane 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) 3 ---- 10 301 - - - - - 12Dichloromethane (DCM) 3 15 1000 10 - - - - - -trans-1-2-Dichloroethene 3 0.375 20* 301 - - - - - -1,1-Dichloroethane 3 ---- 900 ---- - - - - - 3cis-1-2-Dichloroethene 3 0.375 20* 301 - 45 - - - -2,2-Dichloropropane 1 ---- 80** ---- - - - - - -Bromochloromethane 2 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Chloroform 2 75 400 12 - - - - - 41,1,1-Trichloroethane 2 ---- 300 500 - - - - - -1,1-Dichloropropene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Carbon tetrachloride 2 ---- 10 2 - - - - - -1,2-Dichloroethane 2 2.25 400 3 - - - - - -Benzene 0.5 0.75 30 1 - - - - - -Trichloroethene (TCE) 3 7.5 500 70, 102 - 10 - - - -1,2-Dichloropropane 2 ---- 80** ---- - - - - - -Dibromomethane 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Bromodichloromethane 2 75 ---- ---- - - - - - -cis-1-3-Dichloropropene 2 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Toluene 5 525 1000 10 - - - - - -trans-1-3-Dichloropropene 2 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -1,1,2-Trichloroethane 2 ---- 130 ---- - - - - - -Tetrachloroethene (PCE) 3 7.5 40 40, 103 - - - 4 - 61,3-Dichloropropane 2 ---- 80** ---- - - - - - -Dibromochloromethane 2 75 ---- ---- - - - - - -1,2-Dibromoethane 2 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Chlorobenzene 2 ---- 180 1 - - - - - -1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 2 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Ethylbenzene 0.5 ---- 150 10 - - - - - -p/m-Xylene 1 ---- 70***** 104 - - - - - -o-Xylene 0.5 ---- 70***** 104 - - - - - -Styrene 2 ---- 300 ---- - - - - - -Bromoform 2 75 630 ---- - - - - - -Isopropylbenzene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 4 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Bromobenzene 2 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -1,2,3-Trichloropropane 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Propylbenzene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -2-Chlorotoluene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -4-Chlorotoluene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -tert-Butylbenzene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -sec-Butylbenzene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -4-Isopropyltoluene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -1,3-Dichlorobenzene 3 ---- 50*** ---- - - - - - -1,4-Dichlorobenzene 3 ---- 50*** ---- - - - - - -n-Butylbenzene 3 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -1,2-Dichlorobenzene 3 ---- 50*** 10 - - - - - -1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 2 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 3 ---- 10**** 0.45 - - - - - -Hexachlorobutadiene 3 ---- ---- 0.1 - - - - - -Naphthalene 2 ---- 70 1 - - - - - -1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 3 ---- 10**** 0.45 - - - - - -

Notes:MDL: Method Detection Limit GTV: Groundwater threshold value, SI No. 366 of 2016, Schedule 5-: Indicates result below MDL Italics indicates result above GTV----: DIV/IGV/GTV Not Definedns: not sampled

IGV - EPA Draft Interim Guideline ValueIndicates result above DIV Bold Indicates result above IGV*DIV is for both cis and trans 1,2-dichloroethene 1 IGV is for the sum of dichloroethenes**DIV is for the sum of dichloropropanes 2 Two IGVs are given for trichloroethene***DIV is for the sum of all dichlorobenzenes 3 Two IGVs are given for tetrachloroethene****DIV is for the sum of all trichlorobenezenes 4 IGV is for the sum of xylenes*****DIV is for the sum of all xylenes 5 IGV is for the sum of trichlorobenzenes

DIV(mg/L)

IGV(mg/L)

DIV - Dutch Intervention Value

Volatile Organic Compound MDL(mg/L)

GTV(mg/L) GW04A

Groundwater Monitoring Well

GW05 GW06 GW07 RW01GW08


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27


Table 5 - Semi Volatile Organic Compound Results (mg/L)Analog Devices Int. October 2016

Phenols2-Chlorophenol 1 100 200 - - - - - -2-Methylphenol 0.5 --- --- 0.5 1 - - - - - -2-Nitrophenol 0.5 --- --- 0.5 1 - - - - - -2,4-Dichlorophenol 0.5 --- 300 0.5 1 - - - - - -2,4-Dimethylphenol 1 --- --- 0.5 1 - - - - - -2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 0.5 --- 10** 0.5 1 - - - - - -2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 1 --- 10** 200 - - - - - -4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 0.5 --- --- 0.5 1 - - - - - -4-Methylphenol 1 --- --- 0.5 1 - - - - - -4-Nitrophenol 10 --- --- 0.5 1 - - - - - -Pentachlorophenol 1 --- 3 2 - - - - - -Phenol 1 --- 2000 0.5 1 - - - - - -

Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons(PAHs)

2-Chloronaphthalene 1 --- 6 --- - - - - - -2-Methylnaphthalene 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -Naphthalene 1 0.075 A 70 1 - - - - - -Acenaphthylene 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -Acenaphthene 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -Fluorene 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -Phenanthrene 0.5 --- 5 --- - - - - - -Anthracene 0.5 0.075 A 5 10,000 - - - - - -Fluoranthene 0.5 --- 1 1 - - - - - -Pyrene 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -Benzo(a)anthracene 0.5 --- 0.5 --- - - - - - -Chrysene 0.5 --- 0.2 --- - - - - - -Benzo(bk)fluoranthene 1 0.075 A --- 0.5, 0.05**** - - - - - -Benzo(a)pyrene 1 0.0075 0.05 0.01 - - - - - -Indeno(123cd)pyrene 1 0.075 A 0.05 0.05 - - - - - -Dibenzo(ah)anthracene 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -Benzo(ghi)perylene 0.5 0.075 A 0.05 0.05 - - - - - -

PhthalatesBis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 5 6 5*** 8 - - - - - -Butylbenzyl phthalate 1 --- 5*** 5 2 - - - - - -Di-n-butyl phthalate 1.5 --- 5*** 2 - - - - - -Di-n-Octyl phthalate 1 --- 5*** 5 2 - - - - - -Diethyl phthalate 1 --- 5*** 5 2 - - - - - -Dimethyl phthalate 1 --- 5*** 5 2 - - - - - -

Other SVOCs1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1 --- 5* 10 - - - - - -1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1 --- 10 0.4 - - - - - -1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1 --- 5* --- - - - - - -1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -2-Nitroaniline 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -2,4-Dinitrotoluene 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -2,6-Dinitrotoluene 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -3-Nitroaniline 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -4-Bromophenylphenylether 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -4-Chloroaniline 1 --- 30 --- - - - - - -4-Chlorophenylphenylether 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -4-Nitroaniline 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -Azobenzene 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -Carbazole 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -Dibenzofuran 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -Hexachlorobenzene 1 --- --- 0.03 - - - - - -Hexachlorobutadiene 1 --- 10 0.1 - - - - - -Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -Hexachloroethane 1 --- --- --- - - - - - -Isophorone 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine 0.5 --- --- --- - - - - - -Nitrobenzene 1 --- 0.5 10 - - - - - -

Notes:MDL: Method Detection Limit IGV - EPA Draft Interim Guideline Value-: Indicates result below MDL Bold Indicates result above IGV----: DIV/IGV/GTV Not Defined 1 - IGV is for the sum of phenolsns: not sampled 2 - IGV is for the sum of phthalates

DIV - Dutch Intervention ValueIndicates result above DIV GTV: Groundwater threshold value, SI No. 366 of 2016, Schedule 5* DIV is for the sum of dichlorobenzenes Italics indicates result above GTV** DIV is for the sum of all trichlorophenols*** DIV is for the sum of all phthalates

A - PAH compounds specified in GTV

Groundwater Monitoring WellSemi-Volatile OrganicCompounds

GTV(mg/L)

DIV(mg/L)

MDL(mg/L)

IGV(mg/L) GW04A GW05 GW08GW06 GW07 RW01


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27


Table 6 - Major Ion and COD Results (mg/L)Analog Devices Int. October 2016

Calcium 0.20 200 ---- 110 72 96 96 108 106Magnesium 0.10 50 ---- 21 14 17 16 18 15Potassium 0.10 5 ---- 3 3 3 6 1 3Sodium 0.10 150 ---- 14 28 36 64 15 58Chloride 0.30 30 24 - 187.5 23 32 51 66 29 63Sulphate (as SO4) 0.05 200 187.5 134 99 117 208 55 75Ammoniacal Nitrogen(as N) 0.03 0.15 0.065 -

0.175 - 0.03 0.03 0.04 - 0.03

Nitrate (as NO3) 0.20 25 37.5 - - 4 2 4 12Nitrite (as NO2) 0.02 0.1 0.375 - - - - - -Fluoride 0.30 1 ---- - - 0.5 - - -Total Nitrogen 0.50 ---- ---- 1 1 3 2 3 5COD (Settled) 7 ---- ---- - - 7 14 - 8

Notes:MDL: Method Detection Limit----: IGV/GTV Not Defined-: Indicates result below MDLIGV: EPA Draft Interim Guideline ValueBold Indicates result above IGVGTV: Groundwater threshold value, SI No. 366 of 2016, Schedule 5Italics indicates result above GTV

GW05 GW06 GW07 RW01GW08

Groundwater Monitoring WellParameter MDL

(mg/L)IGV

(mg/L)GTV

(mg/L) GW04A


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27


Table 7 - Dissolved Heavy Metals Results (mg/L)Analog Devices Int. October 2016

Aluminium 0.02 ---- 0.2 0.15 - - - - 0.103 -Arsenic 0.0025 0.06 0.01 0.0075 - - - - - -Cadmium 0.0005 0.006 0.005 ---- - - - - - -Chromium 0.0015 0.03 0.03 0.0375 - - 0.0047 0.0016 - -Copper 0.007 0.075 0.03 1.5 - - - - - -Lead 0.005 0.075 0.01 0.0075 - - - - - -Mercury 0.001 0.0003 0.001 0.00075 - - - - - -Tin 0.005 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Zinc 0.003 0.8 0.1 0.00075 - - 0.010 - - -Iron 0.02 ---- 0.2 ---- 0.0270 - 0.138 - - -Ferrous Iron (Iron II) 0.02 ---- ---- ---- - - - - - -Ferric Iron (Iron III) 0.02 ---- ---- ---- 0.03 - 0.14 - - -Manganese 0.00 ---- 0.050 ---- 0.007 0.007 - 0.006 0.006 0.004

Notes:MDL: Method Detection Limit GTV: Groundwater threshold value, SI No. 366 of 2016, Schedule 5----: IGV/GTV Not Defined Italics indicates result above GTV-: Indicates result below MDL

Indicates result above DIVIGV: EPA Draft Interim Guideline ValueBold Indicates result above IGV

DIV: Dutch Intervention Value

DIV(mg/L)

GTV(mg/L)Parameter MDL

(mg/L)IGV

(mg/L) GW04A GW05 GW06 GW07 RW01

Groundwater Monitoring Well

GW08


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM

APPENDIX A Laboratory Certificates

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

Unit 3 Deeside Point

Zone 3

Deeside Industrial Park

Deeside

AECOM

Attention :

Date :

Your reference :

Our reference :

Location :

Date samples received :

Status :

Issue :

Six samples were received for analysis on 18th October, 2016 of which six were scheduled for analysis. Please find attached our Test Report which

should be read with notes at the end of the report and should include all sections if reproduced. Interpretations and opinions are outside the scope of

any accreditation, and all results relate only to samples supplied.

All analysis is carried out on as received samples and reported on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. Results are not surrogate corrected.

Paul Lee-Boden BSc

Project Manager

3rd November, 2016

60490970

Raheen

18th October, 2016

Final report

Compiled By:

Test Report 16/15829 Batch 1

1

Exova Jones Environmental

CH5 2UA

Tel: +44 (0) 1244 833780

Fax: +44 (0) 1244 833781

Fergus O'Regan

Acorn Business Campus

Mahon Industrial Park

Black Rock

Cork

Ireland

Registered Address : Exova (UK) Ltd, Lochend Industrial Estate, Newbridge, Midlothian, EH28 8PL

QF-PM 3.1.1 v16Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced

All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 1 of 10

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

Client Name: Report : Liquid

Reference:

Location:

Contact: Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle

JE Job No.: 16/15829 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03

J E Sample No. 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42

Sample ID GW04A GW05 GW06 GW07 GW08 RW01

Depth

COC No / misc

Containers V H HN HCL P G V H HN HCL P G V H HN HCL P G V H HN HCL P G V H HN HCL P G V H HN HCL P G

Sample Date 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016

Sample Type Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water

Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1

Date of Receipt 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016

Dissolved Aluminium # <20 <20 <20 <20 103 <20 <20 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Arsenic # <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Cadmium # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Calcium # 109.5 72.1 95.7 95.6 107.5 106.3 <0.2 mg/l TM30/PM14

Total Dissolved Chromium # <1.5 <1.5 4.7 1.6 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Copper # <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 ug/l TM30/PM14

Total Dissolved Iron # 27 <20 138 <20 <20 <20 <20 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Lead # <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Magnesium # 21.4 13.5 16.5 16.3 17.6 14.7 <0.1 mg/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Manganese # 7 7 <2 6 6 4 <2 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Mercury # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Potassium # 2.5 3.1 3.0 5.9 1.4 2.6 <0.1 mg/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Sodium # 13.9 27.5 35.6 64.4 15.1 57.7 <0.1 mg/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Tin <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Zinc # <3 <3 10 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM30/PM14

Fluoride <0.3 <0.3 0.5 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 mg/l TM27/PM0

Sulphate # 133.9 99.2 116.8 207.8 54.5 74.9 <0.5 mg/l TM38/PM0

Chloride # 23.1 32.1 51.3 66.0 29.0 62.6 <0.3 mg/l TM38/PM0

Nitrate as NO3 # <0.2 <0.2 4.2 1.5 4.1 12.4 <0.2 mg/l TM38/PM0

Nitrite as NO2 # <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 mg/l TM38/PM0

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N # <0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 mg/l TM38/PM0

COD (Settled) # <7 <7 7 14 <7 8 <7 mg/l TM57/PM0

Dissolved Iron II <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 mg/l TM48/PM0

Dissolved Iron III 0.03 <0.02 0.14 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 mg/l TM30/TM48/PM0

Total Nitrogen 1.4 1.4 2.6 2.0 2.7 4.5 <0.5 mg/l TM38/TM125/PM0

Raheen

Fergus O'Regan

Please see attached notes for all

abbreviations and acronyms

LOD/LOR UnitsMethod

No.


AECOM

60490970



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

Client Name: SVOC Report : Liquid

Reference:

Location:

Contact:

JE Job No.: 16/15829

J E Sample No. 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42


Depth

COC No / misc


Sample Date 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016



Date of Receipt 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016

SVOC MS

Phenols

2-Chlorophenol # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

2-Methylphenol # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

2-Nitrophenol <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

2,4-Dichlorophenol # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

2,4-Dimethylphenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

4-Methylphenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

4-Nitrophenol <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/l TM16/PM30

Pentachlorophenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Phenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

PAHs

2-Chloronaphthalene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

2-Methylnaphthalene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Naphthalene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Acenaphthylene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Acenaphthene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Fluorene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Phenanthrene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Anthracene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Fluoranthene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Pyrene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Benzo(a)anthracene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Chrysene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Benzo(bk)fluoranthene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Benzo(a)pyrene <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Indeno(123cd)pyrene <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Dibenzo(ah)anthracene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Benzo(ghi)perylene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Phthalates

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Butylbenzyl phthalate <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Di-n-butyl phthalate # <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Di-n-Octyl phthalate <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Diethyl phthalate # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Dimethyl phthalate <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Raheen

Fergus O'Regan



LOD/LOR UnitsMethod

No.


AECOM

60490970



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

Client Name: SVOC Report : Liquid

Reference:

Location:

Contact:

JE Job No.: 16/15829

J E Sample No. 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42


Depth

COC No / misc


Sample Date 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016



Date of Receipt 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016

SVOC MS

Other SVOCs

1,2-Dichlorobenzene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30



2-Nitroaniline <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

2,4-Dinitrotoluene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

2,6-Dinitrotoluene <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

3-Nitroaniline <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

4-Bromophenylphenylether # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

4-Chloroaniline <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

4-Chlorophenylphenylether # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

4-Nitroaniline <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Azobenzene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Carbazole # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Dibenzofuran # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Hexachlorobenzene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Hexachlorobutadiene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Hexachloroethane # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Isophorone # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM16/PM30

Nitrobenzene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM16/PM30

Surrogate Recovery 2-Fluorobiphenyl 100 92 94 93 86 119 <0 % TM16/PM30

Surrogate Recovery p-Terphenyl-d14 108 94 99 95 91 125 <0 % TM16/PM30

LOD/LOR UnitsMethod

No.


AECOM

60490970

Raheen

Fergus O'Regan





For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

Client Name: VOC Report : Liquid

Reference:

Location:

Contact:

JE Job No.: 16/15829

J E Sample No. 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42


Depth

COC No / misc


Sample Date 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016 14/10/2016



Date of Receipt 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016 18/10/2016

VOC MS

Dichlorodifluoromethane <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether # <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 ug/l TM15/PM10

Chloromethane # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

Vinyl Chloride # <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 ug/l TM15/PM10

Bromomethane <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM15/PM10

Chloroethane # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

Trichlorofluoromethane # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 12 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

Dichloromethane (DCM) # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

trans-1-2-Dichloroethene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,1-Dichloroethane # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

cis-1-2-Dichloroethene # <3 45 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

2,2-Dichloropropane <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM15/PM10

Bromochloromethane # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Chloroform # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 4 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,1,1-Trichloroethane # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 35 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,1-Dichloropropene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

Carbon tetrachloride # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,2-Dichloroethane # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Benzene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM15/PM10

Trichloroethene (TCE) # <3 10 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,2-Dichloropropane # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Dibromomethane # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

Bromodichloromethane # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

cis-1-3-Dichloropropene <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Toluene # <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ug/l TM15/PM10

trans-1-3-Dichloropropene <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,1,2-Trichloroethane # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Tetrachloroethene (PCE) # <3 <3 <3 4 <3 6 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,3-Dichloropropane # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Dibromochloromethane # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,2-Dibromoethane # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Chlorobenzene # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Ethylbenzene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM15/PM10

p/m-Xylene # <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l TM15/PM10

o-Xylene # <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM15/PM10

Styrene <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Bromoform # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

Isopropylbenzene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/l TM15/PM10

Bromobenzene # <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,2,3-Trichloropropane # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

Propylbenzene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

2-Chlorotoluene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

4-Chlorotoluene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

tert-Butylbenzene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

sec-Butylbenzene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

4-Isopropyltoluene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10



n-Butylbenzene # <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10


1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

Hexachlorobutadiene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

Naphthalene <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l TM15/PM10

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l TM15/PM10

Surrogate Recovery Toluene D8 101 103 104 105 101 101 <0 % TM15/PM10

Surrogate Recovery 4-Bromofluorobenzene 101 101 101 102 100 100 <0 % TM15/PM10

Raheen

Fergus O'Regan



LOD/LOR UnitsMethod

No.


AECOM

60490970



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

Notification of Deviating Samples

J E

Job

No.

Batch Depth J E Sample

No.Analysis Reason

Please note that only samples that are deviating are mentioned in this report. If no samples are listed it is because none were deviating.

Only analyses which are accredited are recorded as deviating if set criteria are not met.

Contact:

Sample ID

Client Name: AECOM

Reference:

Location:

No deviating sample report results for job 16/15829


60490970

Raheen

Fergus O'Regan

QF-PM 3.1.11 v3 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced 6 of 10

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

JE Job No.:

SOILS

DEVIATING SAMPLES

SURROGATES

DILUTIONS

NOTE

It is assumed that you have taken representative samples on site and require analysis on a representative subsample. Stones will generally be

included unless we are requested to remove them.

ISO17025 (UKAS) accreditation applies to surface water and groundwater and one other matrix which is analysis specific, any other liquids are

outside our scope of accreditation.

As surface waters require different sample preparation to groundwaters the laboratory must be informed of the water type when submitting samples.

Where appropriate please make sure that our detection limits are suitable for your needs, if they are not, please notify us immediately.

Surrogate compounds are added during the preparation process to monitor recovery of analytes. However low recovery in soils is often due to peat,

clay or other organic rich matrices. For waters this can be due to oxidants, surfactants, organic rich sediments or remediation fluids. Acceptable

limits for most organic methods are 70 - 130% and for VOCs are 50 - 150%. When surrogate recoveries are outside the performance criteria but

the associated AQC passes this is assumed to be due to matrix effect. Results are not surrogate corrected.

A dilution suffix indicates a dilution has been performed and the reported result takes this into account. No further calculation is required.

If you have not already done so, please send us a purchase order if this is required by your company.

NOTES TO ACCOMPANY ALL SCHEDULES AND REPORTS

Please note we are only MCERTS accredited (UK soils only) for sand, loam and clay and any other matrix is outside our scope of accreditation.

Where Mineral Oil or Fats, Oils and Grease is quoted, this refers to Total Aliphatics C10-C40.

16/15829

WATERS

Data is only reported if the laboratory is confident that the data is a true reflection of the samples analysed. Data is only reported as accredited when

all the requirements of our Quality System have been met. In certain circumstances where all the requirements of the Quality System have not been

met, for instance if the associated AQC has failed, the reason is fully investigated and documented. The sample data is then evaluated alongside

the other quality control checks performed during analysis to determine its suitability. Following this evaluation, provided the sample results have not

been effected, the data is reported but accreditation is removed. It is a UKAS requirement for data not reported as accredited to be considered

indicative only, but this does not mean the data is not valid.

Where possible, and if requested, samples will be re-extracted and a revised report issued with accredited results. Please do not hesitate to contact

the laboratory if further details are required of the circumstances which have led to the removal of accreditation.

Where an MCERTS report has been requested, you will be notified within 48 hours of any samples that have been identified as being outside our

MCERTS scope. As validation has been performed on clay, sand and loam, only samples that are predominantly these matrices, or combinations

of them will be within our MCERTS scope. If samples are not one of a combination of the above matrices they will not be marked as MCERTS

accredited.

Negative Neutralization Potential (NP) values are obtained when the volume of NaOH (0.1N) titrated (pH 8.3) is greater than the volume of HCl (1N)

to reduce the pH of the sample to 2.0 - 2.5. Any negative NP values are corrected to 0.

Where a CEN 10:1 ZERO Headspace VOC test has been carried out, a 10:1 ratio of water to wet (as received) soil has been used.

All samples will be discarded one month after the date of reporting, unless we are instructed to the contrary.

% Asbestos in Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) is determined by reference to HSG 264 The Survey Guide - Appendix 2 : ACMs in buildings

listed in order of ease of fibre release.

All analysis is reported on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. Results are not surrogate corrected. Samples are dried at 35°C ±5°C unless

otherwise stated. Moisture content for CEN Leachate tests are dried at 105°C ±5°C.

Where Mineral Oil or Fats, Oils and Grease is quoted, this refers to Total Aliphatics C10-C40.

Please note we are not a UK Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) Approved Laboratory .

Samples must be received in a condition appropriate to the requested analyses. All samples should be submitted to the laboratory in suitable

containers with sufficient ice packs to sustain an appropriate temperature for the requested analysis. If this is not the case you will be informed and

any test results that may be compromised highlighted on your deviating samples report.



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

JE Job No.:

#

B

DR

M

NA

NAD

ND

NDP

SS

SV

W

+

++

*

AD

CO

LOD/LOR

ME

NFD

BS

LB

N

TB

OC

Samples are dried at 35°C ±5°C

Dilution required.

ABBREVIATIONS and ACRONYMS USED

Outside Calibration Range

No Fibres Detected

Result outside calibration range, results should be considered as indicative only and are not accredited.

Results expressed on as received basis.

Surrogate recovery outside performance criteria. This may be due to a matrix effect.

MCERTS accredited.

ISO17025 (UKAS) accredited - UK.

16/15829

AQC failure, accreditation has been removed from this result, if appropriate, see 'Note' on previous page.

Calibrated against a single substance

Not applicable

No Asbestos Detected.

No Determination Possible

Indicates analyte found in associated method blank.

None Detected (usually refers to VOC and/SVOC TICs).

Analysis subcontracted to a Jones Environmental approved laboratory.

Matrix Effect

Blank Sample

Client Sample

Trip Blank Sample

AQC Sample

Suspected carry over

Limit of Detection (Limit of Reporting) in line with ISO 17025 and MCERTS



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

JE Job No: 16/15829

Test Method No. Description

Prep Method

No. (if

appropriate)

Description

ISO

17025

(UKAS)

MCERTS

(UK soils

only)

Analysis done

on As Received

(AR) or Dried

(AD)

Reported on

dry weight

basis

TM15Modified USEPA 8260. Quantitative Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds

(VOCs) by Headspace GC-MS.PM10

Modified US EPA method 5021. Preparation of solid and liquid samples for GC

headspace analysis.

TM15Modified USEPA 8260. Quantitative Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds

(VOCs) by Headspace GC-MS.PM10

Modified US EPA method 5021. Preparation of solid and liquid samples for GC

headspace analysis. Yes

TM16Modified USEPA 8270. Quantitative determination of Semi-Volatile Organic compounds

(SVOCs) by GC-MS. PM30 Water samples are extracted with solvent using a magnetic stirrer to create a vortex.

TM16Modified USEPA 8270. Quantitative determination of Semi-Volatile Organic compounds

(SVOCs) by GC-MS. PM30 Water samples are extracted with solvent using a magnetic stirrer to create a vortex. Yes

TM27Modified US EPA method 9056.Determination of water soluble anions using Dionex (Ion-

Chromatography).PM0 No preparation is required.

TM30Determination of Trace Metal elements by ICP-OES (Inductively Coupled Plasma -

Optical Emission Spectrometry). Modified US EPA Method 200.7 and 6010BPM14

Analysis of waters and leachates for metals by ICP OES. Samples are filtered for

dissolved metals and acidified if required.

TM30Determination of Trace Metal elements by ICP-OES (Inductively Coupled Plasma -

Optical Emission Spectrometry). Modified US EPA Method 200.7 and 6010BPM14

Analysis of waters and leachates for metals by ICP OES. Samples are filtered for

dissolved metals and acidified if required.Yes

TM30/TM48 Calculation of Fe (III) based on Iron and Fe(II) PM0 No preparation is required.

TM38Soluble Ion analysis using the Thermo Aquakem Photometric Automatic Analyser.

Modified US EPA methods 325.2, 375.4, 365.2, 353.1, 354.1PM0 No preparation is required. Yes

TM38/TM125 Total Nitogen/Organic Nitrogen by calculation PM0 No preparation is required.

Exova Jones Environmental Method Code Appendix


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

JE Job No: 16/15829

Test Method No. Description

Prep Method

No. (if

appropriate)

Description

ISO

17025

(UKAS)

MCERTS

(UK soils

only)

Analysis done

on As Received

(AR) or Dried

(AD)

Reported on

dry weight

basis

TM48Determination of Ferrous Iron by reaction with Sodium Carbonate and Morfamquat

Sulphate which is analysed spectrophotometrically.PM0 No preparation is required.

TM57Modified US EPA Method 410.4. Chemical Oxygen Demand is determined by hot

digestion with Potassium Dichromate and measured spectrophotometerically.PM0 No preparation is required. Yes

Exova Jones Environmental Method Code Appendix


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27



AECOM

AECOM Professional Services Ireland LimitedDouglas Business CentreCarrigaline RoadCorkIreland

T: +353 21 4536136aecom.com

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 15-03-2017:02:23:27

Documents

ANALOG DEVICES INTERNATIONAL - Environmental Protection … · ANALOG DEVICES INTERNATIONAL Prepared for: Analog Devices International Ckrp0003 Analog Round 2 2016 Issue 1 Final AECOM