North Lowther Energy Initiative: Appendix 7.4 Soil and Water Sampling … · 2019. 9. 18. · additional soil sampling round undertaken from the 5 th to 7 December 2016. Soil leachate

North Lowther Energy Initiative:

Appendix 7.4

Soil and Water Sampling Results

Prepared by

Mouchel

Morrison House

Lanark Court

Ellismuir Way

Tannochside Business Park

Uddingston

Glasgow

G71 5PW

T 01698 802850

W www.mouchel.com

North Lowther Energy Initiative


© Mouchel 2017 ii

Document Control Sheet

Project Title North Lowther Energy Initiative

Report Title Soil and Water Sampling Results

Revision G

Status Final

Control Date 09/05/2017

Record of Issue

Issue Status Author Date Check Date Authorised Date

A Draft M. Cross 24/10/2016 T. Eckhardt 24/10/2016 S. Bone 24/10/2016

B Draft M. Cross 04/11/2016 T. Eckhardt 04/11/2016 S. Bone 04/11/2016

C Draft (incorporating December 2016 data)

M. Cross 09/01/2017 T. Eckhardt 10/01/2017 S. Bone 11/01/2017

D Draft M. Cross 02/02/2017 T. Eckhardt 02/02/2017 S. Bone 03/02/2017

E Draft

(A3 Format)


F Draft

(Updated A3 Formatting)


G Final M. Brennan 09/05/2017 S. Bone 09/05/2017 S. Bone 09/05/2017

Distribution

Organisation Contact Copies

LUC Kate Wigley 1

2020 Renewables Ian Simms 1

This report is presented to Land Use Consultants Limited in respect of North Lowther Energy Initiative Mining Desk

Study and may not be used or relied on by any other person or by the client in relation to any other matters not

covered specifically by the scope of this Report.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the report, Mouchel Limited is obliged to exercise reasonable

skill, care and diligence in the performance of the services required by Land Use Consultants Limited and Mouchel

Limited shall not be liable except to the extent that it has failed to exercise reasonable skill, care and diligence,

and this report shall be read and construed accordingly.

This report has been prepared by Mouchel Limited. No individual is personally liable in connection with the

preparation of this report. By receiving this report and acting on it, the client or any other person accepts that no

individual is personally liable whether in contract, tort, for breach of statutory duty or otherwise.

New information, changed practices or new legislation may necessitate revised interpretation of the report after

the date of its submission.



© Mouchel 2017 iii

Contents

Document Control Sheet ...................................................................................................................................... ii

Contents ................................................................................................................................................................ iii

Tables .................................................................................................................................................................... iii

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ..................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Fieldwork Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 1

2 Summary and Interpretation of Test Results ............................................................................................. 2

3 Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 3

3.1 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................................... 3

3.2 Recommendations........................................................................................................................................... 3

4 References ..................................................................................................................................................... 3

Appendix 1: Development Area Sampling Locations ....................................................................................... 1

Appendix 2: EXOVA (UK) Ltd Results of Laboratory Analysis ........................................................................ 2

Appendix 3: Results of analysis of Soil Leachate and Surface Water Samples ............................................ 3

Appendix 4: Results of analysis of Soil Samples .............................................................................................. 5

Tables

Table 1. Sampling Locations within Development Area ......................................................................................... 2



© Mouchel 2017 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

North Lowther Energy Initiative (NLEI) is a joint venture between 2020 Renewables Limited and Buccleuch Estates

Limited and is proposing to develop a wind farm on land owned by Buccleuch Estate. The turbines would be up to

150m high to blade tip and will have a generation capacity of approximately 150MW.

The scale of the development means that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is required and a Scoping

Report was issued at the end of January 2016 to the Scottish Ministers. Response from consultees identified the

following key areas of concern:

“SEPA has concerns that large scale deep construction work may release further metal loadings into the catchment

unless proper comprehensive pre-development studies are undertaken to understand the geology at the turbine

locations/construction areas and whether disturbance of soils, peat and/or bedrock may exacerbate an existing

problem”.

The legacy of mining in the development area has resulted in elevated concentrations of heavy metals, in particular

lead, zinc and cadmium being released into the environment and adversely impacting local ground and stream

water quality. Consequently, there is concern that excavation, construction and drainage associated with the

proposed development of wind turbines and the associated infrastructure such as substations, access tracks and

borrow pits could exacerbate the pollution situation.

A detailed Mining Desk Study (Appendix 7.3) was undertaken by Mouchel in summer 2016 identifying areas with

historic mining activities. The results of the desk study informed the wind farm design as wind turbine locations

and proposed infrastructure aim to avoid areas with a higher risk of potential heavy metal mobilisation, e.g. mine

waste tips. The desk study concluded that proposed site developments were clearly away from areas with likely

mining impacts, with the exception of access corridor C which was considered at the time (towards the eastern

boundary of the scoping area). The study recommended a detailed site walkover for this area, collection of soil

samples and a visit at the Wanlockhead Mining Museum. This site walkover was undertaken in September 2016

together with a visit of the Mining Museum. No additional information became available through the visit of the

museum and no specific mining features were observed in the area of concern (i.e. the proposed access corridor

C). A first set of baseline soil and surface water samples were taken during the September 2016 site visit, followed

by a wider round of baseline soil sampling in December 2016.

This water and soil sampling report is intended to present a summary of the results for the initial monitoring visit

(September 2016) and subsequent sampling undertaken in December 2016. This report provides an analysis of

the data collected and makes recommendations relating to the proposed development.

1.2 Fieldwork Summary

A review of historic mine plans and maps (Appendix 7.3) identified an area situated predominantly within the

Wanlock Water Valley and its flanks where the majority of the mine workings exist/existed.

Targeted soil and water sampling was undertaken by trained Mouchel staff on 29th September 2016 and an

additional soil sampling round undertaken from the 5th to 7th December 2016. Soil leachate analysis was

undertaken on soil samples to identify the leachability of contaminants of concern from these soils.

Appendix 1 identifies the soil and surface water sampling locations within the NLEI development area for both field

trips. Details of the locations and the samples are also provided in Table 1. outlines the rationale behind each

sampling location and the analysis were defined by the following criteria:

Areas where proposed turbine and access tracks are close to the areas identified as possibly having been

impacted or had the potential to be impacted by historic mining or naturally high metal background concentrations

(Mouchel, 2016);

Identify surface water locations downstream from areas that are identified as having the potential to be affected

by development activities;

Determine the leachability of metals to assess how readily metals are leached out of the material; and

Provide a baseline of metal concentrations in the development area, completed in the second round of sampling

in December 2016.

Additional sampling undertaken in December 2016 was designed to provide wider site coverage and to determine

soil metal concentrations for comparison with the results of the first sampling round. Sampling locations in the

December round targeted areas with proposed infrastructure across the site. In order to obtain representative

samples and to further characterise the sources of heavy metals and the potential of mobilisation of metals during

the development process, samples from soil below the overlying peat layer and the peat itself were taken. Heavy

metals in the peat/soil could potentially originate from windblown dust or represent natural background conditions.

All laboratory analysis was undertaken by Exova (UK) Ltd in Glasgow and Appendix 2 provides laboratory

certificates with the test results.

Appendix 3 presents a summary of chemical analysis for all water and soil leachate tests completed for both rounds

of sampling. The laboratory test results are compared to the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)

Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for annual allowances (AA) for freshwater (SEPA, 2015).

Limited soil and sediment quality guidelines specially tailored for metal mine environments are available. A report

by the Coal Authority (2014) compares a number of different soil guideline values to provide some context to the

metal concentrations reported by Exova Ltd for the NLEI development site. These guidelines include:

The Interdepartmental Committee on the Redevelopment of Contaminated Land (ICRCL) Guidance Note

70/90: Notes on the restoration and aftercare of metalliferous mining sites for pasture and grazing (ICRCL,

1990);

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) Soil Quality Guidelines for Environmental Health

(CCME, 1999);

Dutch Soil Remediation Circular (2009); and

The Environment Agency (EA) Soil Guideline Values (2009).

In addition, the mean chemistry of soils in the Southern Uplands as reported by Towers et al (2006) are also

reported by the Coal Authority (2014). The chemistry values provide some local context to the chemistry of the soil

samples in the area of Wanlockhead. Given the high background concentrations (i.e. from natural background and

from mining history) the appropriate source of guideline values will need to be negotiated with SEPA and will be

dependent on the relevant site activities (e.g. waste handling). However, the initial sampling and screening of soil

samples is a good indicator of background levels and helps to guide further discussions.

Appendix 4 presents a summary of chemical analysis for soil samples in comparison to the above soil guideline

values.



© Mouchel 2017 2

Table 1. Sampling Locations within Development Area

Sample

ID Easting Northing

Sample

Date

Sample

Depth (m) Sample Description Sample Location

SS01 286286 612438 29/09/2016 0.25 Peat

Turbine array 10 -14

access track

SS02 286190 612213 29/09/2016 0.25 Peat

SS03 286190 611988 29/09/2016 0.30 Peat

SS04 284331 614130 29/09/2016 0.30 Peat

SS05 284116 614130 29/09/2016 0.25 Peat

SS06 283916 613855 29/09/2016 0.25 Peat

SS07 284266 613855 29/09/2016 0.25 Peat

SS08 285566 616044 07/12/2016 0.80 Fibrous wet peat, decomposed

below Turbine array 32 –

35 access track SS09 284987 616761 07/12/2016 0.25

Fibrous organic brown soil at surface, below stony brown sandy soil with grey silty/clay

SS10 282947 616421 05/12/2016 0.35

Peaty organic, fibrous at surface. Below is grey clay/silt (sampled)

Turbine 30 access

track

SS11 283792 615916 05/12/2016 0.30

Organic soil at surface. Below is brown, stony (gravels & pebbles) clayey silt (sampled)

Turbine array 22 –

24 access track

SS12 282211 615824 05/12/2016 0.50

Peaty organic soil at surface. Below is stony clayey silty soil with orange grey/brown mottling (sampled)


29 access track

SS13 283029 614896 05/12/2016 0.60 Wet peat well decomposed Turbine array 15 –

16 access track

SS14 283958 614537 07/12/2016 0.60

Fibrous wet peat at surface. Dense brown silty clay below (sampled)

Turbine 21 access

track

SS15b 280679 614952 06/12/2016 0.40 Brown silty loam with gravels and some cobbles

Turbine array 1 – 9

access track

SS16 281425 613692 06/12/2016 0.50

Peat at surface. Below is thin layer of grey clay, stony silty clay with orange mottling sampled

SS17 282340 612341 06/12/2016 0.50

Well decomposed peat at

surface. Below is sandy silty

clay with some cobbles

SS18 284422 612102 06/12/2016 0.60

Peaty at surface with dark

humic layer below. Sample

taken from stony clay silt layer

with orange mottling.

SS19 282720 613861 06/12/2016 0.40 Organic brown forest soil Turbine array 15 –

20 access track

SS20 283465 612243 06/12/2016 0.50 Peaty/organic soil, stony Turbine array 1 – 9

access track

SS21 283339 613805 06/12/2016 0.40

Organic brown soil at surface, sample taken below at interface with peaty soil and grey stony clay


20 access track

SS22 284169 615128 07/12/2016 0.50 Organic brown soil. Brown sandy soil below sampled

WQ01 285121 614843 29/09/2016 N/A N/A Wanlock Water

Sample

ID Easting Northing

Sample

Date

Sample

Depth (m) Sample Description Sample Location

WQ02 285055 614765 29/09/2016 N/A N/A Glengaber Burn

WQ03 283308 614372 29/09/2016 N/A N/A Glensalloch Burn

WQ04 282748 613158 29/09/2016 N/A N/A Cog burn

WQ05 285436 610156 29/09/2016 N/A N/A Glenclach Burn

WQ06 281813 608727 29/09/2016 N/A N/A Glendyne Burn

Table notes: access corridors are proposed access routes for wind turbine development.

SS denotes soil samples and WQ surface water sampling locations. Sample descriptions are those given by Mouchel staff

during sampling rounds.

SS15 could not be sampled as noted by Field Staff. SS15b is alternate sample location in close proximity to original proposed

sampling location of SS15

Sample descriptions/depth for water samples N/A, watercourse is identified in sample location column.

2 Summary and Interpretation of Test Results

Determinant concentrations in exceedance of SEPA EQS for annual allowances (AA) are highlighted in Appendix

3 for soil leachate and surface water sampling data for both sampling rounds.

Appendix 4 summarises exceedances in metal concentrations for soils, defined by the various soil guidelines

provided by the Coal Authority (2014) for comparison. A summary of the results are provided below:

Depth to sample for soil leachate and soils testing was within and below (where land permitted) the near

surface layer (<0.50m). Sampling horizons ranged from 0.25m to 0.80m and comprised predominantly peat

and loam material;

Almost all soil leachate samples from the first round of sampling (September 2016) exceed screening levels

in cadmium, lead and zinc, and sample SS03 exceeded the screening level in chromium;

Copper is above SEPA EQS threshold criteria for all soil leachate samples (SS01 – SS22) collected for both

rounds of sampling;

From second round of samples (December 2016), SS09, SS10, SS13 and SS16 exceeded screening levels

in lead and zinc;

Chromium is above SEPA EQS threshold criteria for soil leachate sample at SS18. The sample was taken in

the approximate location of historic mine extent and concern;

15 out of 22 and 13 out of 20 soil samples show exceedances in chromium (total) and nickel, respectively,

when compared to the mean chemistry of soils in the Southern Uplands as reported by Towers et al (2006);

Exceedances in copper at locations SS09, SS12, SS16, SS17, SS20 and SS22, and for zinc at location SS16,

for soil samples were measured when compared to the mean chemistry of soils in the Southern Uplands

(Towers et al, 2006).;

Locations SS01 and SS02 show exceedances in lead for soil samples were measured when compared to the

CMME Soil Guidelines (1999). The sample locations are in the approximate location of historic mine extent

and concern;

No other exceedances in metal concentrations for arsenic, cadmium, mercury and selenium were measured

for sample locations SS01 to SS22, when compared to the mean chemistry of soils in the Southern Uplands

(Towers et al, 2006);

Exceedances in chromium are found in all surface water quality samples;

Sample locations WQ01 (Wanlock Water) is above SEPA EQS threshold criteria for cadmium, chromium,

copper, lead and zinc; and

Sample locations WQ04 and WQ05 are above SEPA EQS threshold criteria for copper.

The elevated measured surface water concentrations are not unexpected but measured widespread elevated soil

leachate and soil heavy metal concentrations are unexpected, in particular exceedances of chromium in the soil.



© Mouchel 2017 3

The soil samples are described predominantly as peat and loam which suggests that heavy metal pollution is likely

to originate from underlying bedrock material (i.e. natural background).

Soil leachate analysis indicates that dewatering peat material (and subsequent oxidation), and the underlying loam

material have the potential to mobilise heavy metal pollution. 14 out of 22 soil leachate samples (all of variable

material) exceed SEPA EQS threshold values for both zinc and copper (Appendix 3). Zinc is generally the most

mobile heavy metal in the water environment. It should be noted that the screening values are very low and slight,

relatively consistent exceedances such as for chromium suggest a more natural background-related issue. It

should also be noted that soil leachate analysis provides theoretical results, i.e. it describes the potential of these

contaminants to be mobilised but it does not necessarily mean that under site conditions mobilisation of these

metals actually occurs at the provided concentration and for a long period of time.

Overall the set of baseline test results does not indicate a particular area of contamination in proposed

development areas on site or a specific strata which could be defined as distinct potential source of pollution. The

potential additional mobilisation of heavy metals from natural background, in particular when dealing with peat,

during earthworks and when managing run off and drainage needs to be considered in the development process

and design. Potential mitigation may involve placing extracted peat material below water table to avoid oxidation

or to have smaller artificial peat bogs to optimise metal absorption from surface run-off. A more detailed baseline

description will be required to quantify the current metal loading that gets released from the site, i.e. under natural

conditions and how this affects the metal loadings of the receiving water courses. Based on the current

development proposal (i.e. avoiding high risk areas) and implementing good practice makes it unlikely that

significant additional metal loading gets released from the site.

3 Conclusions and Recommendations

3.1 Conclusions

A first set of soil and water baseline data has been assessed including soil samples from an area that was identified

as Moderate risk in Mouchel’s Mining Desk Study. The proposed development avoids areas of historic mining

activities and site visits and site sampling undertaken so far do not indicate any historic mining activities or

presence of mine waste tips in proximity of proposed wind turbine locations or access tracks. However, nearby

historic mining activities have created a continuous impact on surface water quality and the obtained baseline data

suggest that also the natural ground contains elevated heavy metal concentrations which provides a potential

source of heavy metals to the water environment.

From the obtained baseline data, there is no specific pattern in terms of individual metal exceedances (comparing

exceedances of soil, soil leachate and surface water data) or spatial distribution of the exceedances.

By avoiding areas with historic mining impacts and by implementing good practice for material handling on site

and drainage design, the avoidance of significant additional mobilisation of heavy metals from natural material is

considered manageable.

3.2 Recommendations

The obtained baseline data suggest that generic screening levels for soil and soil leachate tests are likely to be

unsuitable to measure impacts on the water environment as a result of the proposed development. A detailed

baseline study is therefore recommended to allow derivation of site specific screening values for future comparison.

Such a detailed site study should be undertaken post-planning consent, in combination with geotechnical ground

investigations, and should comprise a comprehensive site sampling campaign, including soil sampling based on

a sampling grid (e.g. 1000m x 1000m, approx. 50-60 additional soil samples). This will provide a range of soil and

soil leachate concentrations for each heavy metal defining the natural background concentrations across the NLEI

development area. Future earthworks could then use the established concentrations allowing material within the

given background range to be re-used on site (e.g. cut and fill).

As part of the detailed baseline study additional water sampling (including the sampling of small water features) is

recommended, e.g. to define how acidic waters discharging from peat covered areas are. Acidic water from the

peat could increase leaching of heavy metals from the soils and it cannot be excluded that even under current,

natural conditions metal mobilisation from the natural ground is causing exceedances of the very low

Environmental Quality Standards in the receiving water courses. A detailed site baseline study could estimate the

metal load that gets released from the site under natural conditions for future comparison.

The baseline sampling will be based on natural soils, i.e. excluding samples from mining waste tips as no

earthworks are proposed to be undertaken in areas with known mining history or areas with known mine waste

deposits.

Evaluations of potential mitigation requirements including water monitoring requirements related to potential

additional metal mobilisation as a result of the proposed earthworks or site drainage features would be based on

the detailed baseline description and design details (e.g. cut and fill) and those proposed within the ES will be

refined based on the final designs and the results of detailed sampling undertaken during post-consent site

investigation.

The exact scope and methodology of the proposed detailed baseline study and further assessments have to be

discussed and agreed with SEPA.

4 References

CCME, 1999. Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Environmental and Human Health.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Envrionment, 1999

Coal Authority, 2014. The impacts of mining on the Wanlock Water, Wanlockhead, Dumfries and Galloway:

Scoping Study. The Coal Authority 2014

Dutch Soil Remediation Circular, 2009.

(http://www.esdat.com.au/Environmental%20Standards/Dutch/ENGELSE%20versie%20circulaire%20Bodemsan

ering%202009.pdf)

Environment Agency, 2009. Soil Guideline Values (http://www.environment-

agency.gov.uk/research/planning/64015.aspx)

Interdepartmental Committee on the Redevelopment of Contaminated Land, 1990. Guidance Note 70/90: Notes

on the Restoration and Aftercare of Metalliferous Mining Sites for Pasture and Grazing. First Edition. Released

February 1990

Mouchel, 2016. North Lowther Energy Initiative Mining Desk Study, Land Use Consultants Limited. DRAFT

Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA), 2015. Supporting Guidance (WAT-SG-53) Environmental

Quality Standards and Standards for Discharges to Surface Waters. Version v6. Released December 2015

Towers, W., Grieve, IC., Hudson, G., Campbell, CD., Lilly, A., Davidson, DA., Bacon, JR, Langan, SJ and

Hopkins, DW. 2006. Report on the current state and threats to Scotland’s soil resource. Environmental Research

Report 2006/1



© Mouchel 2017

Appendix 1: Development Area Sampling Locations

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A !A !A

!A !A

!A

!A!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A!A

!A

!A!A

!A

SS01

SS02

SS03

SS04SS05

SS06SS07

WQ01

WQ02

WQ03

WQ04

WQ05

WQ06

SS08

SS09

SS10

SS11SS12

SS13

SS14

SS15b

SS16

SS17

SS18

SS19

SS20

SS21

SS22

1

2

3

4

5

6 7

8

9

10

11

1213

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

Drawing No.

Drawing Title

Project

Client

Scale @ A3 :

© Mouchel

Ü

LAND USE CONSULTANTS LIMITED

NORTH LOWTHER ENERGY INITIATIVE

APPENDIX 1

Path: W:\NLEI - Wind Farm Mining Desk Study\GIS\LLEI\FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION PLAN_20170106.mxd

Ver

A

Amendments

OriginBy CheckedBy

CheckedDate

ApprovedBy

-

Approved by

and date

Checked by

and dateOriginated by

and date

MC

09/01/2017

SB

09/01/2017

TE

09/01/2017A

Purpose : Information

1. Reproduced from OS maps by permission of Ordnance Survey® on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. ©Crown copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number:100037180

2. Reproduced from BGS online materials © NERC 2016, under Open Government License.

1:40,000

KEYSite Boundary

!A Proposed Turbine Locations

Watercourse

Upgraded Track Draft

New Track Draft

Sample Locations

Soil Samples (September 2016)

Water Quality Samples (September2016)

Additional Soil Sample Locations(December 2016)

TARGETED SOIL AND WATERSAMPLING LOCATIONS, CONTAMINATED

LAND SITE SURVEY

Contains OS data © Crown Copyrightand database right 2016

WA

NLO

CK

WATER

CR

AW

ICK

WATER

MENNOCK WATER



© Mouchel 2017

Appendix 2: EXOVA (UK) Ltd Results of Laboratory Analysis

Exova (UK) Ltd T: +44 (0)141 941 2022

70 Montrose Avenue F: +44 (0)141 952 7099

Hillington Park E: [email protected]

Glasgow W: www.exova.com

G52 4LA

Test Certificate

Client:

Site:

Date Tested:

Date Reported: 13 October, 2016 Certificate No: 16/4790/RG/SL/C1

Date Received: 3 October, 2016 File No: 16/4790/RG/SL

Sample Type: Solid Client Ref: 4500146490

Lab sample ref: C250617 C250618 C250619 C250620 C250621

Client sample ref: SS1 0.25m SS2 0.25m SS3 0.3m SS4 0.3m SS5 0.25m

Date sampled: 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16

Sample matrix (see notes): S S S S S

Determinand Method Units ISO

17025

MC

ER

TS

LO

DDeviation Assessment

Deviation(s) C. Review N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Metals (Leachate)

Arsenic leachable AN47e µg/l Y N 0.25 2.68 5.33 1.82 32.19 36.55

Cadmium leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 4.12 5.41 0.19 0.11 0.14

Chromium leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 4.34 2.27 4.96 4.61 1.86

Copper leachable AN47b µg/l Y N 0.1 15.28 16.25 30.49 59.88 81.18

Lead leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 39.96 41.47 15.79 15.97 30.01

Mercury leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05

Nickel leachable AN47b µg/l Y N 0.1 1.23 1.29 3.13 2.09 2.50

Selenium leachable AN47c µg/l Y N 1 1.69 1.19 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00

Zinc leachable AN47g µg/l Y N 0.5 22.2 18.4 74.2 76.4 111.8

Metals (soil)

Arsenic AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 12 3 <2 <2 <2

Cadmium AN8a mg/kg Y Y 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Chromium (total) AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 24 6 51 13 <2

Copper AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 6 3 7 <2 <2

Lead AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 74 100 20 5 33

Mercury AN8a mg/kg Y Y 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Nickel AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 8 2 18 8 <2

Selenium AN8a mg/kg Y Y 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Zinc AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 19 6 19 5 7

Sample Prep(C)

EMR EMR % N N/A 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

% Stones Stones % w/w N N/A 0.1 16.3 8.1 10.1 <0.1 <0.1

Moisture Content @ <30°C AN1 % w/w Y N/A 0.1 44.6 62.1 50.0 86.4 82.0

Sample Description MCERTS ver4. N N/A 2a 2a 2 2 2

Misc

Chromium (VI) AN7 mg/kg Y N 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Chromium (VI) leachable HACH 4b mg/l N N 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Iron AN8e mg/kg N N 10 16919 2919 13595 1163 393

Iron leachable AN47g µg/l Y N 0.5 1314.8 1107.7 952.7 647.6 608.4

Mouchel

Station House, 1st Floor, Mercury Court, Tithebarn Street, Liverpool, L2 2QP

NLEI - Soil samples - Ref 1073683

3 October, 2016

Page 1 of 3

Exova (UK) Ltd T: +44 (0)141 941 2022




G52 4LA

Test Certificate

Client:

Site:

Date Tested:

Date Reported: 13 October, 2016 Certificate No: 16/4790/RG/SL/C1

Date Received: 3 October, 2016 File No: 16/4790/RG/SL

Sample Type: Solid Client Ref: 4500146490

Lab sample ref: C250622 C250623

Client sample ref: SS6 0.25m SS7 0.25m

Date sampled: 29/09/16 29/09/16

Sample matrix (see notes): S S


17025

MC

ER

TS

LO


Deviation(s) C. Review N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Metals (Leachate)

Arsenic leachable AN47e µg/l Y N 0.25 41.59 7.30

Cadmium leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 0.35 0.06

Chromium leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 1.44 1.19

Copper leachable AN47b µg/l Y N 0.1 70.30 26.97

Lead leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 46.87 6.26

Mercury leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 <0.05 <0.05

Nickel leachable AN47b µg/l Y N 0.1 2.72 1.25

Selenium leachable AN47c µg/l Y N 1 1.04 1.42

Zinc leachable AN47g µg/l Y N 0.5 110.8 25.5

Metals (soil)

Arsenic AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 <2 <2

Cadmium AN8a mg/kg Y Y 1 <1 <1

Chromium (total) AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 <2 <2

Copper AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 <2 <2

Lead AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 18 4

Mercury AN8a mg/kg Y Y 1 <1 <1

Nickel AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 <2 <2

Selenium AN8a mg/kg Y Y 1 <1 <1

Zinc AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 11 <2

Sample Prep(C)

EMR EMR % N N/A 0.1 <0.1 <0.1

% Stones Stones % w/w N N/A 0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Moisture Content @ <30°C AN1 % w/w Y N/A 0.1 83.7 66.1

Sample Description MCERTS ver4. N N/A 2 2

Misc

Chromium (VI) AN7 mg/kg Y N 1 <1 <1

Chromium (VI) leachable HACH 4b mg/l N N 0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Iron AN8e mg/kg N N 10 540 393

Iron leachable AN47g µg/l Y N 0.5 601.2 540.4

Mouchel


NLEI - Soil samples - Ref 1073683

3 October, 2016

Page 2 of 3

Notes

1. All analyses performed on the sample dried at <30ºC, except analyses suffixed with ‘M’.

2. Analyses suffixed ‘M’ were performed on the sample as received and corrected for ‘% moisture at <30ºC’ where applicable.

3. All results are expressed as dry weight.

4. Sample Matrix key: S. - Soil OS. - Other Solid MCERTS accreditation applicable to Sample Matrix 'S' only.

5. Natural stones (pebbles, gravels etc.) which do not pass a 4mm sieve are excluded from dried analyses (for chemical testing only).

6. Tests marked * indicate subcontracted analyses.

7. The laboratory has tested the material/items supplied by the client as sampled in accordance with the client’s own requirements.

8. ^Sample Description key: 1. - Sand, 2. Loam, 3. Clay, 4. Sand/loam mix, 5. Sand/clay mix, 6. Clay/loam mix, 7. Other.

suffixed with: A - Stones, B - Construction rubble, C - Visible Hydrocarbons, D - Vegetation, E - Glass/metal, F - Strong odour, G - Other.

9. Leachate preparation is not included in our UKAS accreditation.

10. Dates of testing for all parameters are available upon request.

11. EMR denotes Extraneous material.

12. Sampling location details and sample information were supplied with the sample.

13. Bulk Analysis carried out in accordance with DIHM ASB/01 which is based on Health & Safety Executive procedure

Appendix 2: Asbestos in Bulk Materials: Sampling and identification by polarised light microscopy(PLM) set out in HSG248.

14. Asbestos material identification is based on visual examination only. Comments are not covered by UKAS accreditation.

15. NAD denotes - 'No Asbestos Detected'.

16. Any additional letter or number suffix included after the method reference is for internal use only.

17. Please note that results relate only to the items tested and that this test report should not be reproduced except with full permission of the laboratory.

Signed for, and on behalf of Exova (UK) Ltd.

Prepared by: Approved by:

F Barr J McEleny

Administrator Operations Manager

Registered Office: Exova (UK) Ltd. Lochend lndustrial Estate, Newbridge, Midlothian, EH28 8PL United Kingdom. Reg No. SC 70429

Page 3 of 3

Exova (UK) Ltd T: +44 (0)141 941 2022




G52 4LA

Test Certificate

Client:

Site:

Date Tested:

Date Reported: 19 December, 2016 Certificate No: 16/6107/G/SL/C1

Date Received: 9 December, 2016 File No: 16/6107/G/SL

Sample Type: Solid Client Ref: No order supplied


Client sample ref: SS12 SS10 SS13 SS11 SS15

Date sampled: 05/12/16 05/12/16 05/12/16 05/12/16 06/12/16



17025

MC

ER

TS

LO



Metals (Leachate)


Cadmium leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05


Copper leachable AN47b µg/l Y N 0.1 13.1 19.2 106 17.5 3.45

Lead leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 0.21 1.63 251 0.35 0.29



Selenium leachable AN47c µg/l Y N 1 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 1.88


Metals (soil)

Arsenic AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 3 <2 <2 2 2


Chromium (total) AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 33 12 3 19 30

Copper AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 15 5 5 6 11

Lead AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 9 8 4 12 18


Nickel AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 25 5 4 9 21


Zinc AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 44 9 4 16 54

Sample Prep(C)

EMR EMR % N N/A 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

% Stones Stones % w/w N N/A 0.1 8.4 4.8 <0.1 18.9 65.6


Sample Description MCERTS ver4. N N/A 6A 2A 6 6A 2A

Misc



Iron AN8e mg/kg N N 10 26689 4715 2584 17955 29129

Iron leachable AN47g µg/l Y N 0.5 239 225 266 581 84.9

Mouchel Consulting

Lanark Court, Ellismuir Way, Tannochside Park, Uddingston, Glasgow, G71 5PW

NLEI - Soil samples received 8/12/16

09/12/16

Page 1 of 4

Exova (UK) Ltd T: +44 (0)141 941 2022




G52 4LA

Test Certificate

Client:

Site:

Date Tested:






Date sampled: 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16



17025

MC

ER

TS

LO



Metals (Leachate)


Cadmium leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.07


Copper leachable AN47b µg/l Y N 0.1 11.5 4.40 6.42 19 12.6

Lead leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 4.78 0.14 0.21 0.61 0.56



Selenium leachable AN47c µg/l Y N 1 <1.00 <1.00 1.43 <1.00 <1.00


Metals (soil)

Arsenic AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 <2 7 2 2 <2


Chromium (total) AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 40 24 35 37 25

Copper AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 21 23 22 10 11

Lead AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 4 16 7 5 9


Nickel AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 38 17 29 19 14


Zinc AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 73 47 44 23 26

Sample Prep(C)

EMR EMR % N N/A 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

% Stones Stones % w/w N N/A 0.1 26.2 7.5 40.9 33.9 12.2


Sample Description MCERTS ver4. N N/A 4A 6A 2A 4A 2A

Misc



Iron AN8e mg/kg N N 10 34012 32654 42284 27391 33032

Iron leachable AN47g µg/l Y N 0.5 162 50.6 216 522 436

Mouchel Consulting



09/12/16

Page 2 of 4

Exova (UK) Ltd T: +44 (0)141 941 2022




G52 4LA

Test Certificate

Client:

Site:

Date Tested:






Date sampled: 07/12/16 07/12/16 06/12/16 07/12/16 07/12/16



17025

MC

ER

TS

LO



Metals (Leachate)

Arsenic leachable AN47e µg/l Y N 0.25 <0.25 0.93 0.50 1.69 0.80

Cadmium leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05


Copper leachable AN47b µg/l Y N 0.1 2.95 17 12.6 10.9 13.6

Lead leachable AN47a µg/l Y N 0.05 <0.05 0.42 0.29 0.88 28.4



Selenium leachable AN47c µg/l Y N 1 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00


Metals (soil)

Arsenic AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 3 <2 <2 <2 <2


Chromium (total) AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 32 20 <2 3 30

Copper AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 23 6 <2 11 14

Lead AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 5 4 <2 <2 9


Nickel AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 31 4 <2 6 17


Zinc AN8b mg/kg Y Y 2 61 7 <2 2 38

Sample Prep(C)

EMR EMR % N N/A 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

% Stones Stones % w/w N N/A 0.1 17.2 <0.1 29.9 <0.1 26.2


Sample Description MCERTS ver4. N N/A 4A 6 4A 2D 2A

Misc



Iron AN8e mg/kg N N 10 33373 3442 383 3508 32966

Iron leachable AN47g µg/l Y N 0.5 19.6 150 123 25.8 343

Mouchel Consulting



09/12/16

Page 3 of 4

Notes

1. All analyses performed on the sample dried at <30ºC, except analyses suffixed with ‘M’.

2. Analyses suffixed ‘M’ were performed on the sample as received and corrected for ‘% moisture at <30ºC’ where applicable.

3. All results are expressed as dry weight.

4. Sample Matrix key: S. - Soil OS. - Other Solid MCERTS accreditation applicable to Sample Matrix 'S' only.

5. Natural stones (pebbles, gravels etc.) which do not pass a 4mm sieve are excluded from dried analyses (for chemical testing only).



8. ^Sample Description key: 1. - Sand, 2. Loam, 3. Clay, 4. Sand/loam mix, 5. Sand/clay mix, 6. Clay/loam mix, 7. Other.

suffixed with: A - Stones, B - Construction rubble, C - Visible Hydrocarbons, D - Vegetation, E - Glass/metal, F - Strong odour, G - Other.

9. Leachate preparation is not included in our UKAS accreditation.


11. EMR denotes Extraneous material.

12. Sampling location details and sample information were supplied with the sample.

13. Bulk Analysis carried out in accordance with DIHM ASB/01 which is based on Health & Safety Executive procedure

Appendix 2: Asbestos in Bulk Materials: Sampling and identification by polarised light microscopy(PLM) set out in HSG248.

14. Asbestos material identification is based on visual examination only. Comments are not covered by UKAS accreditation.

15. NAD denotes - 'No Asbestos Detected'.

16. Any additional letter or number suffix included after the method reference is for internal use only.

17. Please note that results relate only to the items tested and that this test report should not be reproduced except with full permission of the laboratory.

18. Deviating samples : Deviating samples can be defined as those which are not (correctly) cared for. As a result, deviating samples may jeopardise the validity

of the reported test result. Where a deviation has been found in relation to the sample(s) submitted for testing, the test result may be compromised. Reasons

for deviating samples are denoted by means of a number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5A, 5B, 6 or 7 under the analyte 'Deviation(s)' and highlighted in red. Explanation of this number

coding as follows: 1. Sample not submitted in an appropriate container(organic testing), 2. Sample not submitted in an appropriate container(inorganic testing),

3. Sample not submitted in an appropriate container(all testing), 4. Sample lacks the date and time of sampling, 5A – Sample stability time exceeded prior to

commencement of testing/receipt of sample, 5B – Sample stability time exceeded during testing, 6. Inappropriate storage/transit conditions, and

7. Other (please contact the laboratory for further information).

19. LOD denotes Limit of Detection (also our reporting limit)



F Barr J McEleny



Page 4 of 4

Exova (UK) Ltd T: +44 (0)141 941 2022




G52 4LA

Test Certificate

Client:

Site:

Date Tested:

Date Reported: 10 October, 2016 Certificate No: 16/4789/RG/W/C1

Date Received: 3 October, 2016 File No: 16/4789/RG/W

Sample Type: Liquid Client Ref: 4500146490


Client sample ref: WQ06 WQ05 WQ04 WQ03 WQ02

Date sampled: 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16

Sample matrix (see notes): OW OW OW OW OW


17025

LO

D

Deviation Assessment

Deviation(s) C. Review N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Metals (Waters)

Arsenic (w) AN47e µg/l N 0.25 0.86 0.42 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25

Cadmium (w) AN47a µg/l N 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05

Chromium (w) AN47a µg/l N 0.05 6.90 8.08 6.72 7.23 7.92

Copper (w) AN47b µg/l N 0.1 0.69 1.21 1.23 0.82 0.82

Lead (w) AN47a µg/l N 0.05 0.05 0.42 0.17 0.47 0.58

Mercury (w) AN47a µg/l N 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05

Nickel (w) AN47b µg/l N 0.1 0.19 1.54 0.83 0.83 0.67

Selenium (w) AN47c µg/l N 1 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00

Zinc (w) AN47g µg/l N 0.5 0.6 1.5 1.8 2.5 1.7

Chromium (VI) w HACH 4a mg/l N 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

Iron (w) AN47g µg/l N 0.5 7.9 503.1 87.0 223.1 100.7

Mouchel


NLEI - Water samples - Ref 1073683

06/10/16

Page 1 of 2

Exova (UK) Ltd T: +44 (0)141 941 2022




G52 4LA

Test Certificate

Client:

Site:

Date Tested:

Date Reported: 10 October, 2016 Certificate No: 16/4789/RG/W/C1

Date Received: 3 October, 2016 File No: 16/4789/RG/W

Sample Type: Liquid Client Ref: 4500146490

Lab sample ref: C250616

Client sample ref: WQ01

Date sampled: 29/09/16

Sample matrix (see notes): OW


17025

LO

D

Deviation Assessment

Deviation(s) C. Review N/A N/A N/A N/A

Metals (Waters)

Arsenic (w) AN47e µg/l N 0.25 0.36

Cadmium (w) AN47a µg/l N 0.05 3.34

Chromium (w) AN47a µg/l N 0.05 7.87

Copper (w) AN47b µg/l N 0.1 3.02

Lead (w) AN47a µg/l N 0.05 38.89

Mercury (w) AN47a µg/l N 0.05 <0.05

Nickel (w) AN47b µg/l N 0.1 1.16

Selenium (w) AN47c µg/l N 1 <1.00

Zinc (w) AN47g µg/l N 0.5 351.0

Chromium (VI) w HACH 4a mg/l N 0.01 0.01

Iron (w) AN47g µg/l N 0.5 28.0

Notes



3. Results reported for metals are ‘dissolved’ unless otherwise stated.


5. Sample description key: EW - Effluent Water; GW - Ground Water; LL - Landfill Leachate; OW - Other Water;

PL - Prepared Leachate; PrW - Process Water; PW - Potable Water; SW - Surface Water; WW - Waste Water.



F Barr J McEleny



Mouchel


NLEI - Water samples - Ref 1073683

06/10/16

Page 2 of 2



© Mouchel 2017

Appendix 3: Results of analysis of Soil Leachate and Surface Water Samples

Table notes: red highlighted cells identify sample locations where concentration exceeds SEPA EQS for Water Framework Directive. Where no value present for SEPA EQS threshold then this has not be defined in current guidelines.

Results of analysis for soil leachate samples against SEPA EQS (2015)

Lab Sample Ref: C250617 C250618 C250619 C250620 C250621 C250622 C250623 C257896 C257897 C257884 C257886 C257883 C257885 C257894 C257887

Mouchel Sample Ref: SS01

0.25m

SS02

0.25m

SS03

0.30m

SS04

0.30m

SS05

0.25m

SS06

0.25m

SS07

0.25m

SS08

0.80m

SS09

0.25m

SS10

0.35m

SS11

0.30m

SS12

0.50m

SS13

0.60m

SS14

0.60m

SS15b

0.40m

Date Sampled: 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 07/12/16 07/12/16 05/12/16 05/12/16 05/12/16 05/12/16 07/12/16 06/12/16

Determinant Units Lab Limit of

Detection

SEPA EQS

for WFD

(AA)

Arsenic µg/L 0.250 50.000 2.680 5.330 1.820 32.190 36.550 41.590 7.300 1.690 0.800 1.140 0.600 0.340 2.510 0.930 0.360

Cadmium µg/L 0.050 0.080 4.120 5.410 0.190 0.110 0.140 0.350 0.060 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050

Chromium µg/L 0.050 4.700 4.340 2.270 4.960 4.610 1.860 1.440 1.190 0.430 2.600 1.340 1.880 2.540 0.530 1.320 0.820

Copper µg/L 0.100 1.000 15.280 16.250 30.490 59.880 81.180 70.300 26.970 10.900 13.600 19.200 17.500 13.100 106.000 17.000 3.450

Lead µg/L 0.050 1.200 39.960 41.470 15.790 15.970 30.010 46.870 6.260 0.880 28.400 1.630 0.350 0.210 251.000 0.420 0.290

Mercury µg/L 0.050 0.070 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050

Nickel µg/L 0.100 4.000 1.230 1.290 3.130 2.090 2.500 2.720 1.250 0.440 1.000 0.860 1.030 0.780 1.330 0.990 0.810

Selenium µg/L 1.000 1.690 1.190 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.040 1.420 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.880

Zinc µg/L 0.500 11.900 22.200 18.400 74.200 76.400 111.800 110.800 25.500 11.200 21.300 18.100 8.800 6.400 88.900 12.400 3.200

Note: Secondary table (below) is a continuation of above tabulated results of analysis for soil leachate samples completed December 2016.

Lab Sample Ref: C257888 C257889 C257891 C257892 C257890 C257895 C257893

Mouchel Sample Ref: SS16

0.50m

SS17

0.50m

SS18

0.60m

SS19

0.40m

SS20

0.50m

SS21

0.40m

SS22

0.50m

Date Sampled: 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 07/12/16


Detection

SEPA EQS

for WFD

(AA)

Arsenic µg/L 0.250 50.000 0.280 0.280 1.170 0.600 0.430 0.500 0.250

Cadmium µg/L 0.050 0.080 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.070 0.050 0.050 0.050

Chromium µg/L 0.050 4.700 3.220 0.760 5.880 2.030 1.260 1.870 0.570

Copper µg/L 0.100 1.000 11.500 4.400 19.000 12.600 6.420 12.600 2.950

Lead µg/L 0.050 1.200 4.780 0.140 0.610 0.560 0.210 0.290 0.050

Mercury µg/L 0.050 0.070 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050

Nickel µg/L 0.100 4.000 0.990 0.360 1.070 0.980 0.580 0.640 0.330

Selenium µg/L 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.430 1.000 1.000

Zinc µg/L 0.500 11.900 13.700 2.100 16.400 12.100 4.200 7.800 3.300



© Mouchel 2017

Results of analysis for surface water samples against SEPA EQS (2015)

Lab Sample Ref: C250616 C250615 C250614 C250613 C250612 C250611

Mouchel Sample Ref: WQ01 WQ02 WQ03 WQ04 WQ05 WQ06

Date Sampled: 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16


Detection

SEPA EQS

for WFD

(AA)

Arsenic µg/L 0.250 50.000 0.360

0.250 0.250 0.250 0.420 0.860

Cadmium µg/L 0.050 0.080 3.340 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050

Chromium µg/L 0.050 4.700 7.870 7.920 7.230 6.720 8.080 6.900

Copper µg/L 0.100 1.000 3.020 0.820 0.820 1.230 1.210 0.690

Lead µg/L 0.050 1.200 38.890 0.580 0.470 0.170 0.420 0.050

Mercury µg/L 0.050 0.070 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050

Nickel µg/L 0.100 4.000 1.160 0.670 0.830 0.830 1.540 0.190

Selenium µg/L 1.000 - 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Zinc µg/L 0.500 11.900 351.000 1.700 2.500 1.800 1.500 0.600

Chromium

(VI)

µg/L 0.010 3.400 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010

Iron µg/L 0.500 1000.00 28.000 100.700 223.100 87.000 503.100 7.900

Table notes: red highlighted cells identify sample locations where concentrations exceed SEPA EQS for Water Framework Directive. Where no value present for SEPA EQS threshold then this has not be defined in current guidelines. Water quality samples taken during Round 1 September 2016 sampling program only



© Mouchel 2017

Appendix 4: Results of analysis of Soil Samples

Results of analysis of soil samples against published soil guideline values for select elements

Lab Sample Ref: C250617 C250618 C250619 C250620 C250621 C250622 C250623 C257896 C257897 C257884 C257886 C257883 C257885

Mouchel Sample Ref:

SS01

0.25m

SS02

0.25m

SS03

0.3m

SS04

0.3m

SS05

0.25m

SS06

0.25m

SS07

0.25m

SS08

0.80m

SS09

0.25m

SS10

0.35m

SS11

0.30m

SS12

0.50m

SS13

0.60m

Date Sampled: 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 29/09/16 07/12/16 07/12/16 05/12/16 05/12/16 05/12/16 05/12/16

Determinant Units

Lim

it o

f D

ete

cti

on

ICR

CL

Me

tallif

ero

us

Min

e S

ites (

1990)

Du

tch

So

il

Rem

ed

iati

on

Cir

cu

lar

(2009)

EA

So

il G

uid

eli

ne

s

(2009)

CC

ME

So

il

Gu

ideli

ne

s (

1999)

To

wers

et

al

(2006)

Arsenic mg/kg 2.000 50.000 60.000 32.000 17.000 - 12.000 3.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 3.000 2.000

Cadmium mg/kg 1.000 3.000 13.000 10.000 3.800 1.280 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Chromium

(total) mg/kg 2.000 - - - 64.000 8.600 24.000 6.000 51.000 13.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 3.000 30.000 12.000 19.000 33.000 3.000

Copper mg/kg 2.000 250.000 190.000 - 63.000 12.000 6.000 3.000 7.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 11.000 14.000 5.000 6.000 15.000 5.000

Lead mg/kg 2.000 300.000 530.000 - 70.000 139.000 74.000 100.000 20.000 5.000 33.000 18.000 4.000 2.000 9.000 8.000 12.000 9.000 4.000

Mercury mg/kg 1.000 - 36.000 170.000 12.000 - 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Nickel mg/kg 2.000 - 100.000 130.000 50.000 6.500 8.000 2.000 18.000 8.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 6.000 17.000 5.000 9.000 25.000 4.000

Selenium mg/kg 1.000 - - - - - 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Zinc mg/kg 2.000 1000.000 720.000 - 200.000 67.000 19.000 6.000 19.000 5.000 7.000 11.000 2.000 2.000 38.000 9.000 16.000 44.000 4.000

Table notes: coloured cells identify sample locations where concentrations exceed soil guideline values listed. Cell colour corresponds to soil guideline. Where no value present for comparison this has not been defined in soil guideline.

Soil samples SS08 to SS13 taken during Round 2 December 2016 of sampling program



© Mouchel 2017

Continued results of analysis of soil samples against published soil guideline values for select elements

Lab Sample Ref: C257894 C257887 C257888 C257889 C257891 C257892 C257890 C257895 C257893

Mouchel Sample Ref: SS14 0.60m

SS15b

0.40m

SS16

0.50m

SS17

0.50m

SS18

0.60m

SS19

0.40m

SS20

0.50m

SS21

0.40m

SS22

0.50m

Date Sampled: 07/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 06/12/16 07/12/16

Determinant Units

Lim

it o

f D

ete

cti

on

ICR

CL

Me

tallif

ero

us

Min

e S

ites (

1990)

Du

tch

So

il

Rem

ed

iati

on

Cir

cu

lar

(2009)

EA

So

il G

uid

eli

ne

s

(2009)

CC

ME

So

il

Gu

ideli

ne

s (

1999)

To

wers

et

al

(2006)

Arsenic mg/kg 2.000 50.000 60.000 32.000 17.000 - 2.000 2.000 2.000 7.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 3.000

Cadmium mg/kg 1.000 3.000 13.000 10.000 3.800 1.280 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Chromium

(total) mg/kg 2.000 - - - 64.000 8.600 20.000 30.000 40.000 24.000 37.000 25.000 35.000 2.000 32.000

Copper mg/kg 2.000 250.000 190.000 - 63.000 12.000 6.000 11.000 21.000 23.000 10.000 11.000 22.000 2.000 23.000

Lead mg/kg 2.000 300.000 530.000 - 70.000 139.000 4.000 18.000 4.000 16.000 5.000 9.000 7.000 2.000 5.000

Mercury mg/kg 1.000 - 36.000 170.000 12.000 - 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Nickel mg/kg 2.000 - 100.000 130.000 50.000 6.500 4.000 21.000 38.000 17.000 19.000 14.000 29.000 2.000 31.000

Selenium mg/kg 1.000 - - - - - 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Zinc mg/kg 2.000 1000.000 720.000 - 200.000 67.000 7.000 54.000 73.000 47.000 23.000 26.000 44.000 2.000 61.000

Table notes: coloured cells identify sample locations where concentrations exceed soil guideline values listed. Cell colour corresponds to soil guideline. Where no value present for comparison this has not been defined in soil guideline.

Soil samples SS08 to SS13 taken during Round 2 December 2016 of sampling program

Documents

North Lowther Energy Initiative: Appendix 7.4 Soil and Water Sampling … · 2019. 9. 18. · additional soil sampling round undertaken from the 5 th to 7 December 2016. Soil leachate