GEOTECHNICAL SITE INVESTIGATION · proposed multi-level (up to 6 level) residential buildings with basement. The report provides information on the subsurface soil profile, site classification,

1

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

LOT 30, SOUTH STREET MARSDEN PARK

GEOTESTA PTY LTD | ABN 91851620815 | 6/31-37 Howleys Road, Notting Hill VIC 3168

Phone: 1300 852216 | Fax: 03 9562 9098 | email: [email protected]

CLIENT : UNIVERSAL PROPERTY GROUP

REPORT No. : NE004-16 - Geotechnical Investigation

DATE : 04 April 2016

Lot 30, South Street, Marsden Park NE004-16

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A geotechnical investigation was conducted by Geotesta for the proposed residential

development at Lot 30 South Street, Marsden Park on 26 February 2016. The aim of the

geotechnical investigation is to provide geotechnical design parameters for the

proposed multi-level (up to 6 level) residential buildings with basement.

The report provides information on the subsurface soil profile, site classification,

suitable foundation systems and founding depths, retaining wall design parameters

and recommendations for earthworks.


3

TABLE OF CONTENT

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 4

2. FIELD INVESTIGATION .................................................................................................................... 5

3. FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................................. 7

3.1 Site Condition .................................................................................................................................. 7

3.2 Site Geology ..................................................................................................................................... 7

3.3 Generalised Soil Profile .................................................................................................................. 7

3.4 Site Classification............................................................................................................................. 8

3.5 Laboratory Test ................................................................................................................................ 9

4. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................... 11

4.1 Pad Footing System ....................................................................................................................... 11

4.1 Bored Pier Footing System ........................................................................................................... 11

5. EARTH WORKS ................................................................................................................................. 13

5.1 Site Stripping & Clearing ............................................................................................................. 13

5.2 Earthworks ..................................................................................................................................... 13

5.3 Drainage of Retention Systems ................................................................................................... 13

5.4 Erosion and sediment control ...................................................................................................... 13

5.5 Open Cut Excavation .................................................................................................................... 14

5.6 Select Fill Material ......................................................................................................................... 14

5.7 Compaction Requirements .......................................................................................................... 14

5.8 Retaining Wall ............................................................................................................................... 15

5.9 Pavement Subgrade Preparation (Driveways and Car parks) ................................................ 15

5.10 Construction Works .................................................................................................................... 15

Appendix A Test Pit and Borehole Logs

Appendix B Laboratory Test Results

Appendix C Core and Test Pit Photos


4

1. INTRODUCTION Geotesta undertook a geotechnical investigation for the proposed multi-level

residential development at Lot 30 South Street, Marsden Park on 26 February 2016.

This geotechnical investigation work was authorised by Universal Property Group.

This report presents the geotechnical investigation results including subgrade

conditions, subsurface soil profile, in-situ testing results, recommendations on the

design of suitable footing systems and founding depths and retaining wall design

parameters.


5

2. FIELD INVESTIGATION

The investigation involved the drilling of 3 boreholes and 12 test pits in the area of the

proposed development. A site sketch showing the approximate borehole locations is

presented in Figure 1. The field investigation was carried out on 26 February 2016.

Figure 1: Site Plan and Borehole Locations

The boreholes were drilled to a maximum depth of 10.0m. Boreholes drilling was

undertaken using a track mounted Comacchio Geo 205 drilling rig. Standard

Penetration Test (SPT) was undertaken in the soil profile in each borehole at every 1.5m

depth interval. Rock coring was undertaken in rock formation.


6

The test pits were excavated to a depth of 2.5m to 3.0m. Test pit excavation was

undertaken using a 5 ton Yanmar Excavator.

The soil profile encountered in the boreholes was logged by a Geotesta Geotechnical

Engineer in accordance with AS 1726-1993. All field observations are presented on the

borehole logs attached in Appendix A. Selected representative samples were sent to the

Geotesta NATA accredited laboratory for testing of appropriate index properties.


7

3. FINDINGS

3.1 Site Condition

The site is a farmland situated to the south of South Street in Marsden Park. The site is

gently sloping towards the north. The property covers an area of approximately 11.5

hectares and is currently an open paddock with scattered trees across the majority of

the site and denser tree cover in the southern section of the site. A farm dam is located

in the northern corner of the property.

3.2 Site Geology

The geological origin of the soil profile was identified from our visual examination of

the soil samples, geotechnical experience, and reference to geological maps of the area.

The geological map of the area indicates that the site is underlain by Wianamatta

Group sandstone and shales (Geology Map of Sydney, 1:100,000 scale) with presence of

residual soil in the upper layers. Bringelly Shale of Wianamatta Group consists of shale,

carbonaceous claystone, claystone, laminated fine to medium grained lithic sandstone

and rare coal or tuff.

Figure 2: Geology Map of the Site

3.3 Soil Profile

The soil profile at the test locations is presented in the borehole logs in Appendix A.

The underlying subsurface soil profile as encountered in boreholes generally consisted


8

of thin layer of silty sand topsoil overlying firm clay that grades to hard clay which

overlies moderately to slightly weathered shale. The test pit excavations revealed no

presence of groundwater to the end of the test pit excavation except in test pit TP7

where perched groundwater was intersected at 2.4m depth.

The subsurface soil profile are detailed in the following table.

Table 1: Subsurface Soil Profile

Borehole

no.

Depth

(m)

Soil/Rock

Type

Consistency/

Relative density/

Strength

Undrained

Shear Strength,

Su (kPa)

TP1-TP12 0.0-0.05 Silty Sand Medium dense -

0.05-1.0 Clay Firm 40

1.0-2.0 Clay Stiff 80

2.0-2.5 Clay Very Stiff 150

BH1 0.0-0.05 Silty Sand Medium dense -

0.05-1.0 Clay Firm 40


2.2-5.5 Clay/XW Shale Very stiff to hard 200-300

5.5-6.0 HW Shale (Class V) Extremely Low 400

6.0-9.0 MW Shale (Class IV) Very Low - Low 800

9.0-10.5 SW Shale (Class III) Low - Medium 1500

BH2 0.0-0.05 Silty Sand Medium dense -

0.05-1.4 Clay Firm 35


3.0-5.0

Clay/XW Shale Very stiff to hard 100-300

5.0-7.9 HW Shale (Class V) Extremely Low 400

7.9-9.0 MW Shale(Class IV) Very Low - Low 800

Groundwater was not encountered in any of the boreholes during our investigation.

3.4 Site Classification

After considering the area geology, the soil profile encountered in the bores and the

climatic zone of the area (zone 2); the site is classified as CLASS H1, with respect to

foundation construction (Australian Standard 2870-2011 Residential Slabs and

Footings).


9

It has been estimated that the Characteristic Surface Movement (ys) of the underlying

natural soil material will be in the range of 40mm to 60mm provided the building site is

protected from “abnormal moisture conditions” and is drained as described in AS 2870.

It must be emphasized that the heave mentioned and recommendations referred to in

this report are based solely on the observed soil profile observed at the time of the

investigation for this report, without taking into account any abnormal moisture

conditions as defined in AS2870 – 2011, Clause 1.3.3 that might be created thereafter.

With abnormal moisture conditions, distresses will occur and may result in “non-

acceptable probabilities of serviceability and safety of the building during its design

life”, as defined in AS2870-2011, Clause 1.3.1.

3.5 Laboratory Test

Representative subgrade samples were sent to a Geotesta NATA accredited laboratory

for testing of appropriate index properties. The laboratory test results are summarized

in Table 2:

Table 2: Summary of Laboratory Test Results

Bore

No.

Depth

(m) Soil Type

Wn

%

LL

%

PI

%

LS

%

BH1 0.5 Clay 19.7 54 36 13

BH2 1.5 Clay 21.2 - - -

BH2 3.0 Clay 19.5 83 59 16

TP4 2.5 Clay 19.8 - - -

TP9 0.7 Clay 19.6 66 45 16

TP11 1.2 Clay 24.4 - - - Note: Wn= Moisture content; LL= Liquid Limit; PI= Plasticity Index; LS= Linear Shrinkage;

Table 3: Summary of Rock Laboratory Test Results

Bore No. Depth (m) Test Type Rock Type Point Load Is50

(MPa)

UCS

(MPa)

BH1 6.0-6.15 Diametral Shale 0.02 0.20

BH2 8.9-9.1 Diametral Shale 0.11 1.00

Table 4 below presents the results of the aggressivity tests on soils concerning concrete

piles.


10

Table 4: Summary of Environmental Laboratory Test Results

Bore No. Depth (m) Soil Type pH SO4

TP03 1.5 CLAY 4.9 530

TP06 2.5 CLAY 4.8 380

TP08 1.0 CLAY 5.0 240

TP10 1.0 CLAY 4.8 240

TP12 1.7 CLAY 4.8 350

BH02 0.5 CLAY 4.9 290

BH03 4.0 SHALE 6.9 260

The test results indicates the soils are non-aggressive for construction of concrete piles.


11

4. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

The proposed multi-level residential buildings associated with the subject development

can be founded on pad footings or bored piers/screw piles.

4.1 Pad Footing System

The proposed multi-level residential buildings can be founded on pad footings

founded into the underlying natural stiff to hard clay/weathered Shale. The footings

can be designed using the following parameters:

Table 5: Allowable bearing capacity

Borehole/Test

Pit nos.

Allowable Bearing

Capacity (kPa)

Founding Material

TP1 to TP12

75kPa Clay, 0.5m-1.0m



BH1

75kPa Clay, 0.5-1.0m


350kPa Clay/EW Rock, 2.2m-5.5m

750kPa Shale, Extremely Low Strength (Class V/IV)

1500kPa Shale, Very Low Strength (Class IV or better)

BH2

75kPa Clay, 0.5-1.5m


350kPa Clay/EW Rock, 3.0m-4.9m

750kPa Shale, Extremely Low Strength (Class V/IV)

1500kPa Shale, Very Low Strength (Class IV or better)

4.1 Bored Pier Footing System

Bored piles can be used to support the proposed multi-level development. We

recommend that the designing engineer refer to AS2870 - 2011 to ensure design

compliance to this document, especially Sections 1.3 “Performance of Footing Systems”

and “Design Considerations”.

The carrying capacity of bored piles can be estimated using the following parameters:


12

Table 6: Pile Design Parameter

Depth

(m)

Soil/Rock Type Undrained Shear

Strength

(kPa)

Design Unit Skin

Friction

(kPa)

Design Unit End

Bearing Capacity

(kPa)

0.0-1.5 Clay (Firm) 50 5 -

1.5-2.0 Clay (Stiff) 75 12 -

2.0-5.5 Clay (Hard) 200 30 400

Varies Shale, EL (Class V) 400 60 700

Varies Shale, VL (Class IV) 800 120 1000

Varies Shale, L-M (Class III) 1500 225 3500

It should be noted that the soil profile may vary across the site. The foundation depths

quoted in this report are measured from the surface during our testing and may vary

accordingly if any filling or excavation works are carried out. It is recommended that a

geotechnical engineer be engaged during footing excavation stage to confirm the

founding depth and founding material.


13

5. EARTH WORKS

5.1 Site Stripping & Clearing

Unless otherwise specified, grass, uncontrolled fill material, clayey silt and other

unsuitable materials shall be removed from the site. All trees and stumps are to be

similarly removed, such areas backfilled and compacted as per Australian Standards

AS3798-2007, Guideline earthworks for commercial and residential developments.

5.2 Earthworks

Where it is necessary to raise the levels of all or part of the subdivision area, such filled

material should be free of organic and/or unsuitable material and shall be placed in

layers not exceeding 250mm in depth. Each layer will be suitably compacted prior to

the laying of the next layer, to a minimum 95% of maximum dry density of standard

compaction. The water content of the fill should be reduced by aeration or increased by

adding water as necessary to achieve this required compaction.

5.3 Drainage of Retention Systems

As seepage infiltration from perched groundwater table is quite likely to be present in

the zones of influence during wet season, it is recommended that a suitable drainage

system be installed and maintained behind all retaining wall structures to ensure the

dissipation of any hydrostatic forces which may result from the accumulation of any

seepage water behind the wall structures. Such seepage water flows should readily be

able to be intercepted by the construction of a suitable sub-surface cut-off drain on the

high side of the subject site.

5.4 Erosion and sediment control

Erosion and Sediment control plan should be implemented before commencing any

earthworks for the proposed development. Below are some general guidelines to be

taken into considerations:

Establish a single entry/exit point when construction work starts

Minimized area to be cleared and provide as much as vegetation as possible

Install sediment fences along the low side of the site before work begins

Ensure the imported fill material/top soil within the sediment controlled plan

Fill in and compact all trenches immediately after services have been laid

Divert water around the work site and stabilized channels


14

A silt trap to be installed around the site perimeter during construction.

Provide temporary earth drain around the proposed site if possible to prevent

water logging within the site Stabilized exposed earth banks/embankment

5.5 Open Cut Excavation

Excavation in the natural stiff to very stiff clay can be undertaken to 1.5m depth

without battering back the sides of the trench. If the open trenches exceed 1.5m in

depth, progressive shielding should be used. Alternatively, the trenches should be

battered back at 2H:1V.

Temporary excavation into the compacted clay fill material can be undertaken in a

similar manner to that used for the natural soil.

The temporary excavation batter in sandy or gravelly soil/fill should be no steeper than

1H:1V.

A suitable dewatering system (spears or sump pump) may be required to pump

groundwater in the event that the groundwater is encountered above the excavation

zone. Although groundwater was not encountered in any boreholes during the

geotechnical investigation, the presence of possible perched groundwater resulted

from infiltration of surface run-off should not be dismissed.

5.6 Select Fill Material

Select fill material should have little volume change with changes in moisture content.

Suitable material types of low reactivity, including sandy clay, silty clay, clayey sand,

silty sand and highly to moderately weathered siltstone and sandstone. The select fill

should be well graded with a maximum particle size of not more than 40mm.

5.7 Compaction Requirements

Compaction of both backfill material and embedment material is required to ensure

that excessive surface settlement does not occur. The required backfill density and

minimum frequency of testing for compaction control as detailed in AS 3798-2007 are

summarized below:

- 1 test per layer per material type per 2500 m2.

- 1 test per 500 m3 distributed evenly throughout full depth and area.

- 3 tests per site.


15

Testing should be undertaken in accordance with AS 1289.5. Tested layers that do not

satisfy the outlined criteria shall be stripped, replaced, recompacted and retested to

achieve the minimum compaction requirement mentioned above.

Testing of compaction density should be undertaken by a suitably qualified

geotechnical testing company. Representative samples of the controlled fill should be

regularly tested.

5.8 Retaining Wall

The lateral earth pressure acting on any proposed retaining wall can be estimated by

using the following soil parameters:

Table 7: Retaining Wall Parameters

Depth

(m)

Soil/Rock Type Unit

Weight

(kN/m3)

Su (kPa) c’ (kPa) Ф’ (deg)

0.0-1.5 Clay (Firm) 18 50 5 23

1.5-2.0 Clay (Stiff) 18 75 10 25

2.0-5.5 Clay (Hard) 19 200 30 25

Varies Shale, EL (Class V) 21 400 50 30

Varies Shale, VL (Class IV) 22 800 100 35

Note: Su= undrained shear strength; c’=effective cohesion; ’=effective angle of friction

5.9 Pavement Subgrade Preparation (Driveways and Car parks)

It is recommended that any uncontrolled fill material or soft spots encountered in the

proposed subgrade be removed to reveal firm ground. The removed section of the

subgrade shall be backfilled with site derived clay material compacted to at least 95%

of maximum dry density of standard compaction (AS 1289.5.1.1) with moisture

condition at the equilibrium moisture content or -1% to +3% of the optimum. Proof

rolling of the subgrade level should then be undertaken to reveal any soft spots prior to

placement of the pavement materials.

5.10 Construction Works

It is recommended that Geotesta be engaged to provide a site inspection during the

early stage of construction to confirm that the ground conditions of the subgrade along

the proposed road construction are consistent with the assumptions or findings in this

report.


16

Should you require any further information regarding this report, please do not

hesitate to contact the undersigned.


17

Information about This Report

The report contains the results of a geotechnical investigation conducted for a specific purpose and

client. The results should not be used by other parties, or for other purposes, as they may contain neither

adequate nor appropriate information. In particular, the investigation does not cover contamination

issues unless specifically required to do so by the client.

Test Hole Logging

The information on the test hole logs (boreholes, test pits, exposures etc.) is based on a visual and tactile

assessment, except at the discrete locations where test information is available (field and/or laboratory

results). The test hole logs include both factual data and inferred information.

Groundwater

Unless otherwise indicated, the water levels presented on the test hole logs are the levels of free water or

seepage in the test hole recorded at the given time of measuring. The actual groundwater level may

differ from this recorded level depending on material permeability (i.e. depending on response time of

the measuring instrument). Further, variations of this level could occur with time due to such effects as

seasonal, environmental and tidal fluctuations or construction activities. Confirmation of groundwater

levels, phreatic surfaces or piezometric pressures can only be made by appropriate instrumentation

techniques and monitoring programmes.

Interpretation of Results

The discussion or recommendations contained within this report normally are based on a site evaluation

from discrete test hole data. Generalized, idealized or inferred subsurface conditions (including any

geotechnical cross-sections) have been assumed or prepared by interpolation and/or extrapolation of

these data. As such these conditions are an interpretation and must be considered as a guide only.

Change in Conditions

Local variations or anomalies in the generalized ground conditions do occur in the natural environment,

particularly between discrete test hole locations. Additionally, certain design or construction procedures

may have been assumed in assessing the soil-structure interaction behaviour of the site. Furthermore,

conditions may change at the site from those encountered at the time of the geotechnical investigation

through construction activities and constantly changing natural forces.

Any change in design, in construction methods, or in ground conditions as noted during construction,

from those assumed or reported should be referred to GEOTESTA for appropriate assessment and

comment.

Geotechnical Verification

Verification of the geotechnical assumptions and/or model is an integral part of the design process -

investigation, construction verification, and performance monitoring. Variability is a feature of the

natural environment and, in many instances, verification of soil or rock quality, or foundation levels, is

required. There may be a requirement to extend foundation depths, to modify a foundation system or to

conduct monitoring as a result of this natural variability. Allowance for verification by geotechnical

personnel accordingly should be recognized and programmed during construction.

Reproduction of Reports

Where it is desired to reproduce the information contained in our geotechnical report, or other technical

information, for the inclusion in contract documents or engineering specification of the subject

development, such reproductions should include at least all of the relevant test hole and test data,

together with the appropriate standard description sheets and remarks made in the written report of a

factual or descriptive nature. Reports are the subject of copyright and shall not be reproduced either

totally or in part without the express permission of Geotesta.


18

APPENDIX A

BORE HOLE AND TEST PIT LOGS

Page: 1 of 1Client: Excavated by Easting:Project: Operator Northing:Job No: Rig Type: Grid Ref:Location: Pit size Collar RL:Date of test: Logged by: Checked by:

DM

No groundwater encountered

M

consistency: moisture: notes: B: Bag sample for Acid SulphateVS very soft very loose D Dry J: Jar Sample for Environmental TestsS soft loose M MoistF firm medium dense W WetST stiff denseVST very stiff very dense water: sampling / testing:H hard water level intact sample from core disturbed samplesoil classification: level risen to B bulk samplesoil is classified in accordance with AS1726 Suv Undrained shear Strength - vane shearunless otherwise noted water inflow SPT standard penetration test

Consi

stency

/ De

nsity

-33.709884Marsden Park 500mm

FIELD TESTS& NOTES

150.827027

Water

Level

s

SD

Samp

ling / R

uns

1.50

2.00

2.50

Moistu

re

AF

Dynam

ic Cone

Blows

per 1

00 mm

DCP e

stimate

dCB

R

4.00

0.00

1.00

0.50

3.00

3.50

2.50

3.50

3.00

4.00

grades very stiff

Test Pit Terminated at 3.0m

Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

od

SMCH

Art-con CivilSteveYanmar

Universal Property GroupLot 30 South St Marsden Park NSWNE004-16

0.00

0.50

1.50

2.00

1.00

26/2/2016

grades grey mottled orange

CLAY, grey mottled orange

Silty SAND, brown, medium grainedCLAY, red brown mottled greymoist, firm

T

Graphi

c Log

Group

Symb

ol

intact tube sample

CL

DF

moist stiffSt

VSt

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

TEST PIT LOG PIT No TP1


DM


M


4.00

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00

T intact tube sample

3.50 3.50

3.003.00

2.50

Test Pit Terminated at 2.5m

grades very stiff VSt

2.50

2.002.00

1.501.50

1.00CL CLAY, grey mottled orange St

moist, stiff1.00

moist, firm0.50 0.50


Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES

0.00 SM Silty SAND, brown, medium grained D 0.00CH CLAY, red brown mottled grey F

Lot 30 South St Marsden Park NSW Steve -33.710513NE004-16 YanmarMarsden Park 500mm26/2/2016 AF SD


Universal Property Group Art-con Civil 150.827007


DM


M


intact tube sample

4.00

3.50

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00

T

3.50

3.003.00

Test Pit Terminated at 2.6m2.502.50

2.00grades very stiff VSt

2.00


moist, stiff1.50

1.001.00



Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES






DM


M


3.50

4.00

T intact tube sampleGEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00

3.50

3.00 3.00

2.50Test Pit Terminated at 2.5m

grades very stiff VSt

2.50

2.002.00

1.501.50


moist, stiff1.00



Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES






DM


M


4.00

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00


3.50 3.50

3.003.00

2.50

Test Pit Terminated at 2.5mgrades with some clay

2.50

2.002.00

1.501.50

1.00SM Silty SAND, grey mottled orange, moist, medium dense MD

with some rock fragments1.00



Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES






DM



4.00

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00


3.50 3.50

3.003.00

2.50

Test Pit Terminated at 2.5m2.50

2.002.00

1.50grades very stiff VSt

1.50

1.001.00


grades grey mottled orange, stiff St

Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES






DM

M

perched groundwater at 2.4m


4.00

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00


3.50 3.50

3.003.00

2.50


2.002.00

1.501.50

1.001.00

CL CLAY, grey mottled orange VStmoist, very stiff


Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES






DM



4.00

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00


3.50 3.50

3.003.00

2.50


2.002.00

1.50

very stiff

1.50

1.001.00grades grey mottled orange, rock fragments in clay matrix VSt


Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES






DM


M


4.00

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00


3.50 3.50

3.003.00

2.50


2.002.00

1.501.50

1.00very stiff

1.00 grades grey mottled orange, rock fragments in clay matrix VSt


Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES






DM


M


4.00

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00


3.50 3.50

3.003.00

2.50


2.002.00

1.501.50

1.001.00

CL CLAY, grey mottled orange, moist, very stiff VStwith some rock fragments


Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES






DM

No groundwaterencountered

M


4.00

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00


3.50 3.50

3.003.00

2.50


2.00CL CLAY, grey mottled orange VSt


1.50

very stiff

1.50

1.001.00grades grey mottled orange, rock fragments in clay matrix VSt


Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES






DM


M


4.00

GEOTESTA PTY LTD

4.00


3.50 3.50

3.003.00

2.50


2.00CL CLAY, grey mottled orange VSt


1.50very stiff

1.50

1.00grades grey mottled orange, rock fragments in clay matrix VSt

1.00


Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

Moistu

reCo

nsiste

ncy /

Densi

tyDy

namic C

oneBlo

ws pe

r 100

mmDC

P estim

ated

CBR

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsFIELD TESTS

& NOTES





Page: ofClient: Drilling Co: Easting:Project: Driller: Northing:Job No: Rig Type: Grid Ref:Location: Inclination: Collar RL:Date Drilled: Bearing: Logged by: Checked by:

consistency: relative density: moisture: notes:VS very soft VL very loose D DryS soft L loose M MoistF firm MD medium dense W WetST stiff D denseVST very stiff VD very dense water: sampling / testing:H hard water level intact sample from core disturbed samplesoil classification: level risen to B bulk samplesoil is classified in accordance with AS1726unless otherwise noted water inflow SPT standard penetration test

BOREHOLE LOG

1 2UNIVERSAL PROPERTY GROUP 150.828194

BORE No BH1

Lot 30 South St Marsden Park NSW -33.711704NE004-16

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le

velsMATERIAL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTS

Type, colour, particle size and shape, structure & NOTES

Moistu

re

Marsden Park26/02/2016 AF SD

Consi

stency

/ De

nsity

0.00 SM Silty SAND, brown, medium grained D D

Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

0.00CH CLAY, red brown mottled grey, moist, firm M F [email protected] 3,4,4 N=8

grades grey mottled orange1.00 1.00

grades stiff St [email protected] 3, 6,10 N=16

2.00 2.00CL CLAY, Extremely Weathered rock, moist, hard M H

grey mottled orange3.00 [email protected] 9, 23, 40 N>60 3.00

changed to coring below 3.5mSolid

Auger

ing



100

100

100

BOREHOLE LOG BORE No BH1

2 2UNIVERSAL PROPERTY GROUP 150.828194Lot 30 South St Marsden Park NSW -33.711704NE004-16Marsden Park26/02/2016 AF SD

Drillin

g Meth

odCo

re rec

overy %

RQD %

Fractu

re Fre

q. (no/

m)Ro

ck We

atherin

g

Rock

Streng

th

Graphi

c Log ROCK SUBSTANCE DISCONTINUITIES FIELD TESTS

Type, colour, texture Type, orientation, roughness, thickness & NOTES3.50

100 0

CLAY, grey mottled red brown, moist, hard, low to medium plasticity 3.50EW

4.50 4.50

100 0grades green grey mottled orange, with some rock fragments

5.50 5.50

HW EL Shale, grey, very low strength, with sub horizontal bedding planes

6.50 6.5080 MW EL-VL grades extremely to very low strength

7.50 7.50

65

8.50 8.50 VL-L very low to low strength

9.50 65 9.50SW L-M low to medium strength

Coring

END OF BOREHOLE AT 10.0M 10.5010.50



Marsden Park

BORE No BH2BOREHOLE LOG1 2

UNIVERSAL PROPERTY GROUP 150.828574Lot 30 South St Marsden Park NSW -33.709901NE004-16

Moistu

re

26/02/2016 AF SD

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le




Consi

stency

/ De

nsity

Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

0.00CH CLAY, red brown mottled grey M F

moist, firm [email protected] 3, 3, 4 N=71.00 1.00

grades grey mottled orange Ststiff

2.00 [email protected] 3, 6, 8 N=14 2.00

grades very stiff

M H

Soil augering terminated at 5.0m, changed to rock coring

4.00CL CLAY, grey mottled red brown


[email protected] 15, 23, 40 N>60

VSt [email protected] 6, 8, 11 N=19

4.00grades hard H

5.00

Solid

augerin

g

3.00 3.00


CLAY, grey mottled red brown, moist, hard, low to medium plasticity

BOREHOLE LOG BORE No BH22 2

UNIVERSAL PROPERTY GROUP 150.828574Lot 30 South St Marsden Park NSW -33.709901NE004-16Marsden Park26/02/2016 AF SD

Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odCo

re rec

overy %

RQD %

Fractu

re Fre

q. (no/

m)Ro

ck We

atherin

gRo

ck Str

ength

Graphi

c Log ROCK SUBSTANCE DISCONTINUITIES FIELD TESTS

Type, colour, texture Type, orientation, roughness, thickness & NOTES5.00

6.00

100 07.00 EL-L Shale, green grey, extremely low to low strength

100 408.00 MW VL

100 70

grades very low strength

Coring

100L grades low strength

709.50

9.00

100 0

Borehole terminated at 9.5m



BOREHOLE LOG

1 1UNIVERSAL PROPERTY GROUP 150.827105Lot 30 South St Marsden Park NSW -33.710354NE004-16

Samp

ling / R

unsWa

ter Le



Moistu

re

Marsden Park26/02/2016 AF SD

Consi

stency

/ De

nsity


Depth

(m)

Drillin

g Meth

odGra

phic L

og

Group

Symb

ol

0.00CH CLAY, red brown mottled grey M F

moist, firmgrades grey mottled orange

1.00 1.00grades stiff St

2.00 2.00CL CLAY, grey mottled orange M VSt

moist, very stiff

3.00

4.00 4.00Shale, dark grey, moderately weathered, ELextremely low strength

5.00

Solid

Auger

ing

Borehole terminated at 5.6m6.00

7.00

3.00

8.00

7.00

5.00

6.00


BORE No BH3

8.00


19

APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

[email protected] 67.92 51.76 0.064 0.02 0.02 0.2 Samples soaked

[email protected] 86.45 51.65 0.294 0.11 0.11 1.1 for 24 hours

Point Load Test ASTM D5741

NE004-16Project Number: Tested By: ZS

4/03/2016Client: Universal Property Group P/L Test Date:

8/03/2016Project Location: Marsden Park, NSW 2765

Project Name: Lot 30 South Street, Marsden Park Checked By: RK

Issue Date:

RemarksBorehole ID Sample ID Test Type

Specimen

Length, L

(mm)

Specimen

Diameter, D

(mm)

Failure

Load, P

(kN)

Uncorrected Point

Load Index, Is

(MPa)

Corrected

Point Load

Index, Is(50)

(MPa)

Estimated

Compressive

Strength

(MPa)

DiametralL0365-7

L0365-8

GEOTESTA Pty Ltd

Unit 6, 31-37 Howleys Road

Notting Hill , Vic 3168

Ph: 1300 852216

Laboratory Geotesta Project Geotechnical Investigation Client Universal Property Group P/L

Report No L0365-M Project No NE004-16 Client ID -

Sample ID As below Location Lot 30 South Street Address Unit 1, 129 Magowar Rd

Borehole ID As below Marsden Park NSW 2765 Girraween, NSW

Test method:

Comments

Test method: AS 1289.2.1.1

Document: Moisture Content V1 Page 1 of 1

Accredited for compliance with

ISO/IEC 17025

Report issued by: Rene Kurniadi

Date issued: 11/03/2016

The results of the tests included in

this document are traceable to

Australian and national standards.

Moisture Content (%)

L0365-6 [email protected] CLAY 24.4


L0365-1 [email protected]

Moisture Content Report

Sampling Method Tested as received



AS1289.2.1.1 - Oven Drying Method

Sample ID Location/Depth Sample Description

CLAY 19.7


GEOTESTA Pty Ltd



Ph: 1300 852216


Report No L0365-G3 Project No NE004-16 Client ID -

Sample ID L0365-5 Location Lot 30 South Street Address Unit 1, 129 Magowar Rd

Borehole ID [email protected] Marsden Park NSW 2765 Girraween, NSW

% %

Particle Size Distribution

% Passing Percentage Passing (By Mass)

## ## ##Comments

1. Test is performed with washed grading (washing method)

Report issued by:


Particle Size Distribution V3

Rene Kurniadi

Page 1 of 1


ISO/IEC 17025





Test Report

Sample Description CLAY, trace of sand/gravel, red brown mottled grey, moist

Sampling Method AS 1289.1.2.1 CL 6.2 - Stockpile

13.2 mm 100

26.5 mm

AS 1289 2.1.1

Method: AS 1289 3.6.1

Sieve Limits

Moisture Content 19.6 Limits Method:

19.0 mm

2.36 mm 94

9.5 mm 100

6.70 mm 100

4.75 mm 99

1.18 mm 92

600 µm 92

425 µm 92

300 µm 91

75 µm 85

150 µm 90 26

.5 m

m

19

.0 m

m

13

.2 m

m

9.5

0 m

m

6.7

0 m

m

4.7

5 m

m

2.3

6 m

m

1.1

8 m

m

60

0 μ

m

42

5 μ

m

30

0 μ

m

15

0 μ

m

75

μm

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

GEOTESTA Pty Ltd



Ph: 1300 852216





% %



## ## ##Comments


150 µm 99

75 µm 99

425 µm 99

300 µm 99

1.18 mm 100

600 µm 99

2.36 mm 100

9.5 mm 100

6.70 mm 100

4.75 mm 100

AS 1289 2.1.1

Method: AS 1289 3.6.1

Sieve Limits


19.0 mm

13.2 mm 100

26.5 mm


Test Report

Sample Description CLAY, mottled grey and orange, moist


Report issued by:



Rene Kurniadi

Page 1 of 1


ISO/IEC 17025




26

.5 m

m

19

.0 m

m

13

.2 m

m

9.5

0 m

m

6.7

0 m

m

4.7

5 m

m

2.3

6 m

m

1.1

8 m

m

60

0 μ

m

42

5 μ

m

30

0 μ

m

15

0 μ

m

75

μm

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

GEOTESTA Pty Ltd



Ph: 1300 852216





% %



## ## ##Comments


150 µm 100

75 µm 99

425 µm 100

300 µm 100

1.18 mm 100

600 µm 100

2.36 mm 100

9.5 mm 100

6.70 mm 100

4.75 mm 100

AS 1289 2.1.1

Method: AS 1289 3.6.1

Sieve Limits


19.0 mm

13.2 mm 100

26.5 mm


Test Report

Sample Description CLAY, mottled grey and orange, moist


Report issued by:



Rene Kurniadi

Page 1 of 1


ISO/IEC 17025




26

.5 m

m

19

.0 m

m

13

.2 m

m

9.5

0 m

m

6.7

0 m

m

4.7

5 m

m

2.3

6 m

m

1.1

8 m

m

60

0 μ

m

42

5 μ

m

30

0 μ

m

15

0 μ

m

75

μm

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

GEOTESTA Pty Ltd

Plasticity Index & Linear Shrinkage Unit 6, 31-37 Howleys Road


Ph: 1300 852216

Geotesta Project Geotechnical Investigation Client Universal Property Group P/L

L0365-A3 Project No NE004-16 Client ID -

L0365-7 Location Lot 30 South Street Address Unit 1, 129 Magowar Rd

[email protected] Marsden Park NSW 2765 Girraween, NSW

Results Notes

% History of sample:

% Method of preparation:

% Linear shrinkage:

% Length of mould:

Comments

Test methods: AS 1289, 2.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.4.1




Oven-dried

Dry-sieved

Curling

21

45

Page 1 of 1

250 mm

Plastic limit

Plasticity index

Linear shrinkage

66


ISO/IEC 17025

Atterberg Limits

Report issued by:


Tests (LL PL PI LS) V4

Rene Kurniadi

16

Sampling Method

Liquid limit

Tested as received

CLAY, red brown mottled grey, moist

Test Report

Sample Description

Laboratory

Report No

Sample ID

Borehole ID

GEOTESTA Pty Ltd



Ph: 1300 852216





Results Notes



% Linear shrinkage:

% Length of mould:

Comments

Test methods: AS 1289, 2.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.4.1

Tested as received

CLAY, mottled grey and orange, moist

Test Report

Sample Description

Laboratory

Report No

Sample ID

Borehole ID

Atterberg Limits

Report issued by:



Rene Kurniadi

16

Sampling Method

Liquid limitPlastic limit

Plasticity index

Linear shrinkage

83


ISO/IEC 17025




Oven-dried

Dry-sieved

No Crack

24

59

Page 1 of 1

200 mm

GEOTESTA Pty Ltd



Ph: 1300 852216





Results Notes



% Linear shrinkage:

% Length of mould:

Comments

Test methods: AS 1289, 2.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.4.1

Tested as received

CLAY, mottled grey and orange, moist

Test Report

Sample Description

Laboratory

Report No

Sample ID

Borehole ID

Atterberg Limits

Report issued by:



Rene Kurniadi

13

Sampling Method

Liquid limitPlastic limit

Plasticity index

Linear shrinkage

54


ISO/IEC 17025




Oven-dried

Dry-sieved

No Crack

18

36

Page 1 of 1

250 mm

0 0.00 True

Environmental

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSISWork Order : Page : 1 of 4ES1605727

:: LaboratoryClient GEOTESTA Environmental Division Sydney

: :ContactContact AMIR FARAZMAND

:: AddressAddress UNIT 6, 31-37 HOWLEYS ROAD

NOTTING HILL 3168

277-289 Woodpark Road Smithfield NSW Australia 2164

:Telephone +61 03 9562 8808 :Telephone +61-2-8784 8555

NATA Accredited Laboratory 825


ISO/IEC 17025.

:Project South St Marsden Park Date Samples Received : 15-Mar-2016 09:40

:Order number ---- Date Analysis Commenced : 16-Mar-2016

:C-O-C number ---- Issue Date : 30-Mar-2016 09:30

Sampler : AMIR FARAZMAND

Site : ----

Quote number : ----

7:No. of samples received

7:No. of samples analysed

This report supersedes any previous report(s) with this reference. Results apply to the sample(s) as submitted.

This Certificate of Analysis contains the following information:

l General Comments

l Analytical Results

Additional information pertinent to this report will be found in the following separate attachments: Quality Control Report, QA/QC Compliance Assessment to assist with

Quality Review and Sample Receipt Notification.

SignatoriesThis document has been electronically signed by the authorized signatories below. Electronic signing is carried out in compliance with procedures specified in 21 CFR Part 11.

Signatories Accreditation CategoryPosition

Ashesh Patel Inorganic Chemist Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW

Celine Conceicao Senior Spectroscopist Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW

Edwandy Fadjar Organic Coordinator Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW

R I G H T S O L U T I O N S | R I G H T P A R T N E R

2 of 4:Page

Work Order :

:Client

ES1605727

South St Marsden Park:Project

GEOTESTA

General Comments

The analytical procedures used by the Environmental Division have been developed from established internationally recognized procedures such as those published by the USEPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In house

developed procedures are employed in the absence of documented standards or by client request.

Where moisture determination has been performed, results are reported on a dry weight basis.

Where a reported less than (<) result is higher than the LOR, this may be due to primary sample extract/digestate dilution and/or insufficient sample for analysis.

Where the LOR of a reported result differs from standard LOR, this may be due to high moisture content, insufficient sample (reduced weight employed) or matrix interference.

When sampling time information is not provided by the client, sampling dates are shown without a time component. In these instances, the time component has been assumed by the laboratory for processing purposes.

CAS Number = CAS registry number from database maintained by Chemical Abstracts Services. The Chemical Abstracts Service is a division of the American Chemical Society.

LOR = Limit of reporting

^ = This result is computed from individual analyte detections at or above the level of reporting

ø = ALS is not NATA accredited for these tests.

Key :

3 of 4:Page

Work Order :

:Client

ES1605727


GEOTESTA

Analytical Results

TP3 1.5MTP6 2.5MTP8 1.0MTP10 1.0MTP12 1.7MClient sample IDSub-Matrix: SOIL

(Matrix: SOIL)

[26-Feb-2016][26-Feb-2016][26-Feb-2016][26-Feb-2016][26-Feb-2016]Client sampling date / time

ES1605727-005ES1605727-004ES1605727-003ES1605727-002ES1605727-001UnitLORCAS NumberCompound

Result Result Result Result Result

EA002 : pH (Soils)

4.8 4.8 5.0 4.8 4.9pH Unit0.1----pH Value

EA055: Moisture Content

14.0 22.9 17.0 17.4 15.3%1----Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C)

ED040S : Soluble Sulfate by ICPAES

350Sulfate as SO4 2- 240 240 380 530mg/kg1014808-79-8

4 of 4:Page

Work Order :

:Client

ES1605727


GEOTESTA

Analytical Results

------------BH2 0.5MBH3 4.0MClient sample IDSub-Matrix: SOIL

(Matrix: SOIL)

------------[26-Feb-2016][26-Feb-2016]Client sampling date / time

------------------------ES1605727-007ES1605727-006UnitLORCAS NumberCompound

Result Result Result Result Result

EA002 : pH (Soils)

6.9 4.9 ---- ---- ----pH Unit0.1----pH Value


8.7 16.2 ---- ---- ----%1----Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C)


260Sulfate as SO4 2- 290 ---- ---- ----mg/kg1014808-79-8

True

Environmental

QA/QC Compliance Assessment to assist with Quality ReviewWork Order : ES1605727 Page : 1 of 5

:: LaboratoryClient Environmental Division SydneyGEOTESTA

:Contact AMIR FARAZMAND Telephone : +61-2-8784 8555

:Project South St Marsden Park Date Samples Received : 15-Mar-2016

Site : ---- Issue Date : 30-Mar-2016

AMIR FARAZMAND:Sampler No. of samples received : 7

:Order number ---- No. of samples analysed : 7

This report is automatically generated by the ALS LIMS through interpretation of the ALS Quality Control Report and several Quality Assurance parameters measured by ALS. This automated

reporting highlights any non-conformances, facilitates faster and more accurate data validation and is designed to assist internal expert and external Auditor review. Many components of this

report contribute to the overall DQO assessment and reporting for guideline compliance.

Brief method summaries and references are also provided to assist in traceability.

Summary of Outliers

Outliers : Quality Control Samples

This report highlights outliers flagged in the Quality Control (QC) Report.

l NO Method Blank value outliers occur.

l NO Duplicate outliers occur.

l NO Laboratory Control outliers occur.

l NO Matrix Spike outliers occur.

l For all regular sample matrices, NO surrogate recovery outliers occur.

Outliers : Analysis Holding Time Compliance

l Analysis Holding Time Outliers exist - please see following pages for full details.

Outliers : Frequency of Quality Control Samples

l Quality Control Sample Frequency Outliers exist - please see following pages for full details.


2 of 5:Page

Work Order :

:Client

ES1605727

GEOTESTA


Outliers : Analysis Holding Time Compliance

Matrix: SOIL

AnalysisExtraction / Preparation

Date analysedDate extractedContainer / Client Sample ID(s) Days

overdue

Days

overdue

Due for extraction Due for analysis

Method

EA002 : pH (Soils)

Snap Lock Bag

----04-Mar-2016TP12 1.7M, TP10 1.0M,

TP8 1.0M, TP6 2.5M,

TP3 1.5M, BH3 4.0M,

BH2 0.5M

----18-Mar-2016 14 ----


Snap Lock Bag

11-Mar-2016----TP6 2.5M 16-Mar-2016---- ---- 5

Snap Lock Bag

11-Mar-2016----TP12 1.7M, TP10 1.0M,

TP8 1.0M, TP3 1.5M,

BH3 4.0M, BH2 0.5M

17-Mar-2016---- ---- 6

Outliers : Frequency of Quality Control Samples

Matrix: SOIL

Quality Control SpecificationQuality Control Sample Type

Method ExpectedQC Regular Actual

Rate (%)Quality Control Sample Type Count

Laboratory Duplicates (DUP)

NEPM 2013 B3 & ALS QC StandardMoisture Content 9.76 10.004 41

Analysis Holding Time Compliance

Holding times for VOC in soils vary according to analytes of interest. Vinyl Chloride and Styrene holding time is 7 days; others 14 days. A recorded breach does not guarantee a breach for all VOC analytes and

should be verified in case the reported breach is a false positive or Vinyl Chloride and Styrene are not key analytes of interest/concern.

Holding time for leachate methods (e.g. TCLP) vary according to the analytes reported. Assessment compares the leach date with the shortest analyte holding time for the equivalent soil method. These are: organics

14 days, mercury 28 days & other metals 180 days. A recorded breach does not guarantee a breach for all non-volatile parameters.

If samples are identified below as having been analysed or extracted outside of recommended holding times, this should be taken into consideration when interpreting results.

This report summarizes extraction / preparation and analysis times and compares each with ALS recommended holding times (referencing USEPA SW 846, APHA, AS and NEPM) based on the sample container

provided. Dates reported represent first date of extraction or analysis and preclude subsequent dilutions and reruns. A listing of breaches (if any) is provided herein.

Matrix: SOIL Evaluation: û = Holding time breach ; ü = Within holding time.

AnalysisExtraction / PreparationSample DateMethod

EvaluationDue for analysisDate analysedEvaluationDue for extractionDate extractedContainer / Client Sample ID(s)

EA002 : pH (Soils)

Snap Lock Bag (EA002)

TP12 1.7M, TP10 1.0M,

TP8 1.0M, TP6 2.5M,

TP3 1.5M, BH3 4.0M,

BH2 0.5M

18-Mar-201604-Mar-2016 18-Mar-201618-Mar-201626-Feb-2016 û ü

3 of 5:Page

Work Order :

:Client

ES1605727

GEOTESTA


Matrix: SOIL Evaluation: û = Holding time breach ; ü = Within holding time.

AnalysisExtraction / PreparationSample DateMethod

EvaluationDue for analysisDate analysedEvaluationDue for extractionDate extractedContainer / Client Sample ID(s)


Snap Lock Bag (EA055-103)

TP6 2.5M 11-Mar-2016---- 16-Mar-2016----26-Feb-2016 ---- ûSnap Lock Bag (EA055-103)

TP12 1.7M, TP10 1.0M,

TP8 1.0M, TP3 1.5M,

BH3 4.0M, BH2 0.5M

11-Mar-2016---- 17-Mar-2016----26-Feb-2016 ---- û


Snap Lock Bag (ED040S)

TP12 1.7M, TP10 1.0M,

TP8 1.0M, TP6 2.5M,

TP3 1.5M, BH3 4.0M,

BH2 0.5M

15-Apr-201625-Mar-2016 18-Mar-201618-Mar-201626-Feb-2016 ü ü

4 of 5:Page

Work Order :

:Client

ES1605727

GEOTESTA


Quality Control Parameter Frequency ComplianceThe following report summarises the frequency of laboratory QC samples analysed within the analytical lot(s) in which the submitted sample(s) was(were) processed. Actual rate should be greater than or equal to

the expected rate. A listing of breaches is provided in the Summary of Outliers.

Matrix: SOIL Evaluation: û = Quality Control frequency not within specification ; ü = Quality Control frequency within specification.

Quality Control SpecificationQuality Control Sample Type

ExpectedQC Regular Actual

Rate (%)Quality Control Sample Type CountEvaluationAnalytical Methods Method

Laboratory Duplicates (DUP)

NEPM 2013 B3 & ALS QC Standard 14.29 10.001 7 üMajor Anions - Soluble ED040S

NEPM 2013 B3 & ALS QC Standard 9.76 10.004 41 ûMoisture Content EA055-103

NEPM 2013 B3 & ALS QC Standard 14.29 10.002 14 üpH (1:5) EA002

Laboratory Control Samples (LCS)


Method Blanks (MB)


5 of 5:Page

Work Order :

:Client

ES1605727

GEOTESTA


Brief Method SummariesThe analytical procedures used by the Environmental Division have been developed from established internationally recognized procedures such as those published by the US EPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In house

developed procedures are employed in the absence of documented standards or by client request. The following report provides brief descriptions of the analytical procedures employed for results reported in the

Certificate of Analysis. Sources from which ALS methods have been developed are provided within the Method Descriptions.

Analytical Methods Method DescriptionsMatrixMethod

In house: Referenced to APHA 4500H+. pH is determined on soil samples after a 1:5 soil/water leach. This

method is compliant with NEPM (2013) Schedule B(3) (Method 103)

pH (1:5) EA002 SOIL

In house: A gravimetric procedure based on weight loss over a 12 hour drying period at 103-105 degrees C.

This method is compliant with NEPM (2013) Schedule B(3) Section 7.1 and Table 1 (14 day holding time).

Moisture Content EA055-103 SOIL

In house: Soluble Anions are determined off a 1:5 soil / water extract by ICPAES.Major Anions - Soluble ED040S SOIL

Preparation Methods Method DescriptionsMatrixMethod

10 g of soil is mixed with 50 mL of distilled water and tumbled end over end for 1 hour. Water soluble salts are

leached from the soil by the continuous suspension. Samples are settled and the water filtered off for analysis.

1:5 solid / water leach for soluble

analytes

EN34 SOIL

In house: Referenced to USEPA 200.2. Hot Block Acid Digestion 1.0g of sample is heated with Nitric and

Hydrochloric acids, then cooled. Peroxide is added and samples heated and cooled again before being filtered

and bulked to volume for analysis. Digest is appropriate for determination of selected metals in sludge,

sediments, and soils. This method is compliant with NEPM (2013) Schedule B(3) (Method 202)

Hot Block Digest for metals in soils

sediments and sludges

EN69 SOIL

In house: Referenced to USEPA SW 846 - 5030A. 5g of solid is shaken with surrogate and 10mL methanol prior

to analysis by Purge and Trap - GC/MS.

Methanolic Extraction of Soils for Purge

and Trap

* ORG16 SOIL

In house: Mechanical agitation (tumbler). 10g of sample, Na2SO4 and surrogate are extracted with 30mL 1:1

DCM/Acetone by end over end tumble. The solvent is decanted, dehydrated and concentrated (by KD) to the

desired volume for analysis.

Tumbler Extraction of Solids ORG17 SOIL

False 3 3.00True

Environmental

QUALITY CONTROL REPORTWork Order : ES1605727 Page : 1 of 3

:: LaboratoryClient Environmental Division SydneyGEOTESTA

:Contact AMIR FARAZMAND :Contact

:Address UNIT 6, 31-37 HOWLEYS ROAD

NOTTING HILL 3168

Address : 277-289 Woodpark Road Smithfield NSW Australia 2164

::Telephone +61 03 9562 8808 +61-2-8784 8555:Telephone

NATA Accredited Laboratory 825


ISO/IEC 17025.

:Project South St Marsden Park Date Samples Received : 15-Mar-2016

:Order number ---- Date Analysis Commenced : 16-Mar-2016

:C-O-C number ---- Issue Date : 30-Mar-2016

Sampler : AMIR FARAZMAND

Site : ----

Quote number : ----

No. of samples received 7:

No. of samples analysed 7:

This report supersedes any previous report(s) with this reference. Results apply to the sample(s) as submitted.

This Quality Control Report contains the following information:

l Laboratory Duplicate (DUP) Report; Relative Percentage Difference (RPD) and Acceptance Limits

l Method Blank (MB) and Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) Report ; Recovery and Acceptance Limits

l Matrix Spike (MS) Report; Recovery and Acceptance Limits

SignatoriesThis document has been electronically signed by the authorized signatories below. Electronic signing is carried out in compliance with procedures specified in 21 CFR Part 11.

Signatories Accreditation CategoryPosition

Ashesh Patel Inorganic Chemist Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW

Celine Conceicao Senior Spectroscopist Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW

Edwandy Fadjar Organic Coordinator Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW


2 of 3:Page

Work Order :

:Client

ES1605727

GEOTESTA


General Comments

The analytical procedures used by the Environmental Division have been developed from established internationally recognized procedures such as those published by the USEPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In house

developed procedures are employed in the absence of documented standards or by client request.

Where moisture determination has been performed, results are reported on a dry weight basis.

Where a reported less than (<) result is higher than the LOR, this may be due to primary sample extract/digestate dilution and/or insufficient sample for analysis. Where the LOR of a reported result differs from standard LOR, this may be due to high moisture content, insufficient sample (reduced weight employed) or matrix interference.

Anonymous = Refers to samples which are not specifically part of this work order but formed part of the QC process lot

CAS Number = CAS registry number from database maintained by Chemical Abstracts Services. The Chemical Abstracts Service is a division of the American Chemical Society.

LOR = Limit of reporting

RPD = Relative Percentage Difference

# = Indicates failed QC

Key :

Laboratory Duplicate (DUP) Report

The quality control term Laboratory Duplicate refers to a randomly selected intralaboratory split. Laboratory duplicates provide information regarding method precision and sample heterogeneity. The permitted ranges

for the Relative Percent Deviation (RPD) of Laboratory Duplicates are specified in ALS Method QWI -EN/38 and are dependent on the magnitude of results in comparison to the level of reporting: Result < 10 times LOR:

No Limit; Result between 10 and 20 times LOR: 0% - 50%; Result > 20 times LOR: 0% - 20%.

Sub-Matrix: SOIL Laboratory Duplicate (DUP) Report

Original Result RPD (%)Laboratory sample ID Client sample ID Method: Compound CAS Number LOR Unit Duplicate Result Recovery Limits (%)

EA002 : pH (Soils) (QC Lot: 399022)

EA002: pH Value ---- 0.1 pH Unit 4.8 4.7 2.12 0% - 20%TP12 1.7M ES1605727-001

EA002: pH Value ---- 0.1 pH Unit 9.6 9.6 0.00 0% - 20%Anonymous ES1605783-001

EA055: Moisture Content (QC Lot: 396057)

EA055-103: Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) ---- 1 % 10.5 9.4 10.4 0% - 50%Anonymous ES1605770-002

EA055-103: Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) ---- 1 % 5.7 6.2 9.45 No LimitAnonymous ES1605770-013

EA055: Moisture Content (QC Lot: 397737)

EA055-103: Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) ---- 1 % 17.5 17.9 2.25 0% - 50%Anonymous ES1605682-003

EA055-103: Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) ---- 1 % 6.3 7.2 13.9 No LimitAnonymous ES1605767-002

ED040S: Soluble Major Anions (QC Lot: 399021)

ED040S: Sulfate as SO4 2- 14808-79-8 10 mg/kg 350 300 14.9 0% - 20%TP12 1.7M ES1605727-001

3 of 3:Page

Work Order :

:Client

ES1605727

GEOTESTA


Method Blank (MB) and Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) Report

The quality control term Method / Laboratory Blank refers to an analyte free matrix to which all reagents are added in the same volumes or proportions as used in standard sample preparation. The purpose of this QC

parameter is to monitor potential laboratory contamination. The quality control term Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) refers to a certified reference material, or a known interference free matrix spiked with target

analytes. The purpose of this QC parameter is to monitor method precision and accuracy independent of sample matrix. Dynamic Recovery Limits are based on statistical evaluation of processed LCS.

Sub-Matrix: SOIL Method Blank (MB)

Report

Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) Report

Spike Spike Recovery (%) Recovery Limits (%)

Result Concentration HighLowLCSMethod: Compound CAS Number LOR Unit

ED040S: Soluble Major Anions (QCLot: 399021)

ED040S: Sulfate as SO4 2- 14808-79-8 10 mg/kg <10 85.7150 mg/kg 12080

Matrix Spike (MS) ReportThe quality control term Matrix Spike (MS) refers to an intralaboratory split sample spiked with a representative set of target analytes. The purpose of this QC parameter is to monitor potential matrix effects on

analyte recoveries. Static Recovery Limits as per laboratory Data Quality Objectives (DQOs). Ideal recovery ranges stated may be waived in the event of sample matrix interference.

l No Matrix Spike (MS) or Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) Results are required to be reported.


20

APPENDIX C

CORE AND TEST PIT PHOTOS


21

Borehole 1 - 3.5m-10.0m

Borehole 2 – 4.9m-9.5m


22

Test pit 1


23

Test pit 2


24

Test pit 3


25

Test pit 4


26

Test pit 5


27

Test pit 6


28

Test pit 7


29

Test pit 8


30

Test pit 9


31

Test pit 10


32

Test pit 11


33

Test pit 12

Documents

GEOTECHNICAL SITE INVESTIGATION · proposed multi-level (up to 6 level) residential buildings with basement. The report provides information on the subsurface soil profile, site classification,