Environmental Audit Report

INFORMATION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT REPORTS August 2007

VICTORIA'S AUDIT SYSTEM An environmental audit system has operated in Victoria since 1989. The Environmenf Profecfion Acf 1970 (the Act) provides for the appointment by the Environment Protection Authority (EPA Victoria) of environmental auditors and the conduct of independent, high quality and rigorous environmental audits.

An environmental audit is an assessment of the condition of the environment, or the nature and extent of harm (or risk of harm) posed by an industrial process or activity, waste, substance or noise. Environmental audit reports are prepared by EPA- appointed environmental auditors who are highly qualified and skilled individuals.

Under the Act, the function of an environmental auditor is t o conduct environmental audits and prepare environmental audit reports. Where an environmental audit is conducted to determine the condition of a site or its suitability for certain uses, an environmental auditor may issue either a certificate or statement of environmental audit.

A certificate indicates that the auditor is of the opinion that the site is suitable for any beneficial use defined in the Act, whilst a statement indicates that there is some restriction on the use of the site.

Any individual or organisation may engage appointed environmental auditors, who generally operate within the environmental consulting sector, t o undertake environmental audits. The EPA administers the environmental audit system and ensures its ongoing integrity by assessing auditor applications and ensuring audits are independent and conducted with regard t o guidelines issued by EPA.

AUDIT FILES STRUCTURE Environmental audit reports are stored digitally by EPA in three parts: the audit report (part A), report appendices (part B) and, where applicable, the certificate or statement of environmental audit and an executive summary (part C). A report may be in colour and black-and-white formats. Generally, only black- and-white documents are text searchable.

Report executive summaries, findings and recommendations should be read and relied upon only in the context of the document as a whole, including any appendices and, where applicable, any certificate or statement of environmental audit.

AUDIT REPORT CURRENCY Audit reports are based on the conditions encountered and information reviewed at the time of preparation and do not represent any changes that may have occurred since the date of completion. As i t is not possible for an audit t o present all data that could be of interest t o all readers, consideration should be made to any appendices or referenced documentation for further information.

When information regarding the condition of a site changes from that at the time an audit report is issued, or where an administrative or computation error is identified, environmental audit reports, certificates and statements may be withdrawn or amended by an environmental auditor. Users are advised t o check EPA's website to ensure the currency of the audit document.

PDF SEARCHABILITY AND PRINTING EPA Victoria can only certify the accuracy and correctness of the audit report and appendices as presented in the hardcopy format. EPA is not responsible for any issues that arise due to problems with PDF files or printing.

Except where PDF normal format is specified, PDF files are scanned and optical character recognised by machine only. Accordingly, while the images are consistent with the scanned original, the searchable hidden text may contain uncorrected recognition errors that can reduce search reliability. Therefore, keyword searches undertaken within the document may not retrieve all references to the queried text.

This PDF has been created using the Adobe-approved method for generating Print Optimised Output. To assure proper results, proofs must be printed, rather than viewed on the screen.

This PDF is compatible with Adobe Acrobat Reader Version 4.0 or any later version which is downloadable free from Adobe's Website, www.adobe.com.

FURTHER I N FORMATION For more information on Victoria's environmental audit system, visit EPA's website or contact EPA's Environmental Audit Unit.

Web: www.epa.vic.clov.au/envaudit

Email: [email protected]

1 of 229

http://www.adobe.com

Appendix C - Preliminary Site Assessment Report

~ ~~ ~

ME01 147:ROJRAGFH.DOC

2 of 229

Golder Associates Pty Md A.C.N. 006 io7 857 MELBOURNE OFFICE

25 Burwood Road Hawthorn, Vic 3122 Australia Telephone (03) 819 4044 Fax (03) 818 7990

REPORT ON

PRELIMINARY CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT

MASSEY FERGUSON SITE SUNSHINE, VICTORIA

Submitted to: O’Connor Wargon Chapman

75-79 Chetwynd Street North Melbourne, Victoria 3051

DISTRIBUTION:

4 copies - O’Connor Wargon Chapman 2 copies - Golder Associates Pty. Ltd.

October 199 1 9 16 12280

OFFICES IN ADELAIDE. BRISBANE. CAIRNS, GOLD COAST, MAROOCHYDORE. MELBOURNE, PERTH. SYDNEY, WOLLONGONG --..-....--... - . . . . ̂ . -... - - -.,..... ,..... ̂. _ . . .- . ... - ..,- --.. .....--_.,... ^ _ ^ . . .....--- 3 of 229

October 1, 1991 -1- 91612280

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Golder Associates Pty. Ltd. has carried out a contamination assessment of the Massey

Ferguson Plant Site in Sunshine, Victoria.

The site is bounded by Devonshire Road, Hampshire Road, Ballarat Road and Anderson

Road. It has a total area of approximately 24 hectares and is made up of Lots 1? 2, 11 and

12.

At the time of the assessment Lot 1 which occupies an area of about six hectares at the north

end of the site was cleared of buildings although the concrete floor of a building remained

adjacent to Ballarat Road. Buildings until recently covered the majority of the remainder of

the site. At the time of the assessment they were being demolished to floor level.

The site has been occupied by agricultural machinery manufacturers since 1889 including the

H.V. McKay Harvester Company from 1904 to 1955 and subsequently Massey Ferguson

until about 1986.

Uses of parts of the site include foundries, metal and wood manufacturing and processing

areas, agricultural machinery and equipment assembly areas, paint dips and paint shops,

warehouses and both open and undercover storage areas.

There are underground tanks, underground pipes including oil pipes and a number of

electrical substations on the site.

A creek originally crossed the site from west to east. It was undergrounded during the

1950’s or 1960’s except for an open, dammed section on the east side of the site which has

become a sediment trap.

Lot 1 was investigated most intensely during the assessment. Twenty five test pits were

excavated over this area based on a modified 50 m x 50 m grid. Lots 2, 11 and 12 were

covered by a much coarser grid of fifteen test pits in order to provide an initial scan of

contaminants in this area.

Golder Associates 4 of 229

October 1, 1991 -ii- 9 16 12280

Field sampling was undertaken using appropriate decontamination procedures and the test pits

were logged to provide information on subsurface conditions. Contamination was visually

assessed and all samples screened for volatile organic compounds using a photoionisation

detector.

The site was found to be underlain by a sequence which consisted of

(i) fill - 0.2 to 2.0 m deep, often including foundry waste and/or metal

(ii) soil - dominantly stiff to hard silty clay

(iii) rock - basalt was encountered in seven of the test pits where is occurred to

within 0.5 m of the surface.

Perched groundwater seepage was observed on three test pits. The permanent groundwater

table is judged to occur at greater depth in the basalt rock.

Samples were submitted for analyses to WSL Consultants and for chemical analyses. All

analyses were undertaken under appropriate NATA registration. Check testing was carried

out at a second laboratory.

The chemical analyses of samples included analyses for a range of metals, pH, cyanide,

phenolics, total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH),

organochlorine pesticides, halogenated volatile organics, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB's)

and volatile aromatic hydrocarbons (BTEX). The analytical results are summarised in Tables

3 and 4. In the absence of Australian criteria, the analytical results were compared to "Dutch

Guidelines" to assess the severity of contamination which in summary are

Dutch Level B - an indicative value for further investigation.

Dutch Level C - an indicative value for cleaning up.

Sites in which contaminants in samples exceeded Dutch B and C level are shown on Figures

5 and 6.


9 1612280 ... October 1, 1991 -111-

The contamination assessment carried out has resulted in the identification of two main types

of contamination at the site. These are metal contamination and petroleum hydrocarbons

contamination. There are also localised elevated concentrations of polycyclic aromatic

hydrocarbons and phenolics.

As indicated by Figure 5 metal contamination above Dutch Level B occurs in samples from

widespread locations over the site. Metal contamination above Dutch Level C also occurs

at a number of locations. As indicated by Figure 6 total petroleum hydrocarbon

contamination at above Dutch Level €3 occurs only in samples from the southern end of Lot

1. However, it occurs at a range of locations over the remainder of the site and exceeds

Dutch level C at two locations.

Contamination was principally confined to the fil l . There was also localised contamination

of the underlying natural soil, generally where there was also significant contamination of the

fill. The sediment trapped in the creek near Hampshire Road is also significantly

contaminated with concentrations of chromium, lead, zinc and total petroleum hydrocarbons

exceeding Dutch Level C.

Elutriation testing carried out indicated the potential for migration of metal contaminants into

the groundwater or offsite is low.

Based on the information available we consider Lot 1 could not be used of residential

purposes without clean up of this area. However, we consider that it would be suitable for

industrial or commercial purposes provided an appropriate contaminant management strategy

is incorporated in redevelopment plans to minimise the potential risks to the environment and

to people using the site.

The investigations carried out over Lots 2, 11 and 12 are judged insufficient to make

definitive statements about appropriate future uses for this area except that in its present form

the land cannot be used of residential purposes. We judge that the land is likely to be

suitable for commercial or industrial uses. However, further assessment is required and some

clean up is considered likely to be necessary.


October 1, 1991 -iv- 9 16 12280

We recommend the sediment in the creek is removed and that either the remainder of the

creek is undergrounded or that the potential for sediment to enter and accumulate on the

creek bottom is minimised.


October 1. 1991 -V- 9 16 12280

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2.0 BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 .1 Backhoe Pit Excavation and Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.2 Screening for Volatile Hydrocarbons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.3 FieldRanking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

4.0 CHEMICAL ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

5.0 RESULTS OF FIELD INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.1 Geology of the Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.2 Surface Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.3 Subsurface Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

5.3.1 Fill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.3.2 Soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.3.3 Rock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.3.4 Field Evidence of Subsurface Contamination . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.3.5 Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

6.0 CHEMICAL ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.1 SoilSamples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.2 Elutriation Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.3 Quality Assurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

7.0 DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

8.0 LIMITATIONS OF THIS REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19


October 1, 1991 -vi- 91612280

TABLE 1 TABLE 2 TABLE 3

TABLE 4

TABLE 5

FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4 FIGURE 5 FIGURE 6

APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX F

Field Contamination Ranking Analytical Methods Chemical Analysis Summary - metals, pH, cyanide, phenolics,

Chemical Analysis Summary - pesticides, halogenated volatiles,

Chemical Analysis Summary - Elutriation Testing

TPH, PAH

PCB’s, BTEX

Site Plan Factory Layout Test Pit Locations Fill Depth and Type Elevated Metal Concentrations Elevated Organic Concentrations

Factory Layout 1955 Health and Safety Plan Reports of Test Pits Laboratory Reports - Soil Samples Laboratory Reports - Elutriation Testing Laboratory Reports - Quality Assurance Testing


October 1, 1991 -1- 9 16 12280

1 .o INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of a soil contamination assessment conducted at the former

Massey Ferguson plant site in Sunshine, Victoria. The assessment was performed by Golder

Associates Pty. Ltd. at the request of O’Connor Wargon Chapman Pty. Ltd. Approval to

proceed with the assessment was given in a letter from O’Connor Wargon Chapman dated

August 5, 1991 following submission of our proposal dated May 29, 1991.

The site has partial frontages to Devonshire Road, Hampshire Road, Ballarat Road and

Anderson Road, Sunshine as shown on Figure 1. It comprises Lots 1, 2, 11 and 12 and has

an overall area of about 24 hectares.

The aim of the contamination assessment was

To provide an initial assessment of subsurface contamination for Lot 1.

To provide an initial scan for subsurface contamination over Lots 2, 11 and 12 to a

lesser level of assessment than Lot 1.

The general approach was as follows

Collect and review background data about the site with the aim of utilising the

historical research carried out by others and additional data to identify areas of

possible subsurface Contamination.

Excavate a series of test pits on the site to provide subsurface information and to

provide samples for laboratory chemical analyses.

Carry out a range of chemical testing on selected samples to evaluate the extent and

types of contamination at the site and also to evaluate the potential for migration of

contaminants from the site.

Prepare a report presenting the results of field activities and laboratory analysis

performed during the contamination assessment of the site and providing an assessment of the implication of the results.

Golder Associates

~~ ~~~ ~ ~

10 of 229

October 1, 1991 -2- 9 16 12280

2.0 BACKGROUND

Lot 1, the "Northern Paddock" has an area of about 6 hectares. At the time of the

assessment it was predominantly vacant land which was in part grassed and in part concrete

covered. Soil and rubble from demolition activities on the southern part of the site covered

part of the Lot.

Lots 2, 11 and 12 cover an area of about 18 hectares and until recently were mainly occupied

by factory buildings. At the time of the assessment buildings on the eastern side of this area

had been largely demolished and demolition activities were underway on the remainder of this

area. The majority of these three lots were asphalt and concrete paved or floored. The

concrete and asphalt was generally still in place.

A creek crossed the site from Anderson Road to Hampshire Road near Hertford Road. The

downstream end of the drain near the Hampshire Road was open, the remainder had been

piped and undergrounded.

Extensive information is available about the site because of its historical significance. In

particular, the Massey Ferguson Site Study, Stage 2 Report, January 1987, researched and

compiled by Melbournes Living Museum of The West Incorporated was used as a source of

background information about the site. The summary to the report indicates the overall uses

of the site were as follows:

The original subdivision of the area occurred in 1850. In 1889 the Braybrook (Agricultural)

Implement Company was established on the site. In 1904 this company was bought out by

the H.V. McKay Harvester Company from Ballarat which manufactured the "Sunshine

Harvester". The operations of Sunshine Harvester Works expanded to occupy the current

site and parts of the surrounding area. In 1955 the "Works" were purchased by Massey

Ferguson who ultimately scaled down production at the site in the 1970's and 1980's

culminating in closure of the site in 1986 and progressive demolition since this date.

Use was also made of a series of aerial photographs from the years 1946, 1956, 1964 which

provided information on the recent history of the site.


October 1, 1991 -3- 9 1612280

Of particular assistance was Mr. Donald McKay who worked at the site from 1931 to 1971.

Mr. McKay was interviewed in August 1991 and was able to provide understanding of the

layout and range of work undertaken at the site that was extremely useful in planning and

assessing the results of the contamination assessment.

Figure 2 shows final uses for various areas as identified by O'Connor Wargon Chapman.

Shown in brackets on the plan are various earlier or more detailed uses of the area identified

by Mr. McKay.

Figure A1 and Table A1 in Appendix A provide a locality plan for the factory in 1955 and

a list of building and departments from about 1940 to 1960. The figure and table are taken

from the 1987 Site Study, Stage 2 report referred to earlier. The quality of reproductions

of both the figure and table is poor. However, they illustrate the range of activities

undertaken at the works.

It is beyond the scope of this report to provide a detailed history of the site. The key features

of relevance to the contamination assessment are the range of past uses of a particular area

and a general understanding of the activities at the site. In summary it was found that:

virtually every component required in the manufacture of the agricultural machinery

produced were manufactured on the site by a range of wood and metal working

processes.

the railway lines on the west side of the site were used to transport in raw materials

and transport out finished machinery products.

large stockpiles of raw materials and finished products were maintained on the site.

Lot 1, the "Northern Paddock" was occupied primarily by a large storage shed

adjoining Ballarat Road and open and covered storage areas for raw materials,

particularly timber. Major structures on Lot 1 in the mid 1950's are shown on

Figure 2. This figures also shows the railway lines for bringing in raw materials.


October 1, 1991 -4- 91612280

according to Mr. McKay, the area adjacent to the creek in Lot 1 was - in part used for air raid shelters during World War 2

filled with a variety of materials

used as a waste metal storage area

- -

the creek was progressively diverted into a concrete pipe drain. Air photographs

indicate this occurred during the late 1950's or early 1960's. The original creek

course in Lot 1 is shown on Figure 2. It does not appear to coincide with the

easement for the drain that replaced it. This easement is shown on Figure 1.

the creek remained open in Lot 2 adjacent to Hampshire Road and was dammed with

a concrete wall which trapped silt and debris.

according to Mr. McKay raw materials were delivered to the general location where

the "New Foundry" was built in 1967 and tlowed through the earlier foundry and

various manufacturing shops in Lots 12 and 2 along the Hampshire Road side of the

site. Finished components were then transported progressively across the site to the

assembly and painting areas which were mainly located in Lot 11 on the west side

of the site.

uses of some areas changed with time for example there are references to three

foundrys and Mr. McKay indicated there were two powerhouses

according to Mr. McKay there was a network of underground pipes servicing the site

which carried compressed air, water and fuel oil

fuel tanks were located at various points around the site. One area where a number

were located was at the northern end of the West Warehouse

there were several SEC substations, paint dip pits, and large in ground acid tank.

3.0 FELD INVESTIGATION


October 1, 1991 -5- 9 16 12280

3.1 Backhoe Pit Excavation and SamDling

The field investigation for the contamination assessment took place between August 19 and

23, 1991. Test pits were excavated with a backhoe supplied by Kingston Plant Hire Pty. Ltd.

at forty locations on the site. Where required an excavator with a rock breaker was used to

break the concrete around the perimeter of the test pit. The concrete was then removed by

the backhoe.

In Lot 1, twenty five test pit locations were initially based on a 50 x 50 m grid. Following

the background data search the basic grid pattern was modified to

provide sampling locations both through and adjacent to the concrete covered areas

which were in general the floors of former buildings.

provide locations representative of the areas of the site that were used as open storage

areas.

to provide several sampling locations in the filled creek channel.

The resulting modified test pit locations are shown on Figure 3.

In Lots 2, 11 and 12 where only an initial scan was to be undertaken the approach used was

to

locate nine sampling locations approximately on a broad grid basis to provide

information from a number of random locations. Test Pits 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 35,

37, 38 and 39 were located in this way.

locate six test pits in areas indicated by the background data search to have potential

for contamination to have occurred but that were not already covered by the grid

sampling locations. These test pits were located as follows


October 1, 1991 -6- 9 16 12280

Test Pits 26 and 32 - located in former foundry areas identified by Mr.

McKay.

Test Pit 33 located in the Blacksmith Shop area identified by

Mr. McKay.

Test Pit 34 - located in the Centreway Crane area and an area of

paint dips identified by Mr. McKay. A second test

pit was excavated at this location (Test Pit 34A)

after buried pipes were found in the first test pit

Test Pit 36 - located in an area with numerous underground fuel

tanks.

Test Pit 40 - located near a large paint dip.

The test pit locations are shown on Figure 3. Soil samples were collected from the test pits

at a range of depths. A sample of sediment was also collected from the creek upstream of

the bridge near Hampshire Road. This sampling location is also shown on Figure 3 .

Rigorous decontamination procedures were observed during the field investigation. The

backhoe was steam cleaned on arrival on site and the backhoe bucket was steam cleaned

between each test pit. Soil samples taken from the backhoe bucket were sampled from the

centre of the excavated soil in the bucket in order to minimise the risk of cross contamination

of samples from a particular test pit.

All small sampling equipment was cleaned prior to obtaining each sample. The cleaning

procedure involved

. ..

rinsing with tap water to remove soil and other material

washing with phosphate free laboratory detergent

rinsing with clean tap water

final rinsing with distilled water.


October 1, 1991 -7- 9 16 12280

Disposable latex gloves were worn at all times during sampling and were changed between

taking each sample.

Samples of the final washing water from cleaning of the backhoe bucket were collected and

submitted to the laboratory for analyses to check that cross contamination of samples from

different locations was not occurring via sampling process.

A geotechnical engineer from Golder Associates was in attendance during all field work and

logged the test pits, ensured that all cleaning procedures were adhered to, collected the

samples into laboratory prepared containers, stored them in cool conditions on site and

delivered them daily to Golder Associates office where they were stored in a refrigerator

prior to delivery to the laboratory for chemical analyses.

A site specific health and safety plan was prepared for the field investigation at the site. A

copy of this plan is included in Appendix B.

Details of subsurface conditions observed during test pit excavation are included on the

Reports of Test Pits presented in Appendix C. Also included in Appendix C are explanations

of the Notes and Abbreviations Used on Logs and the Method of Soil Classification.

3.2 ScreeninP for Volatile Hvdrocarbons

A photoionisation detector was used to screen all samples collected for the presence of

volatile hydrocarbons. The photoionisation detector was calibrated for benzene and

isobutylene was used to check calibration prior to use of the detector. The results of this

screening are presented on the Reports of Test Pits.

3.3 Fieid Ranking

The soil of samples collected during the investigation were ranked in the field on the basis

of visual and odorous evidence of contamination using a scale from 0 to 3. A description of

the criteria describing each Rank is presented as Table 1 of this report.


October 1, 1991 -8- 9 16 12280

Results of field rankings are included on the Report of Test Pits. Although this system is

arbitrary and subjective, it can be useful in assisting selection of samples for analysis and in

interpretation of laboratory results.

4.0 CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

All chemical analyses were carried out by or under the direction of WSL Consultants Pty.

Ltd. with quality control testing of duplicate samples conducted by Envirogard laboratories.

All analyses were carried out under NATA registration. The analyses undertaken, the

analytical methods and the reporting limits (method detection limits) used by WSL are listed

in Table 2.

A total of ninety nine samples were submitted to WSL for chemical analyses. The range of

analyses performed on the samples were as follows.

Constituent

Total Metals - nickel, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, zinc

PH Total Cyanide

Phenolics

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH)

Organochlorine Pesticides

Halogenated Volatile Organics

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)

Volatile Aromatic Hydrocarbons (BTEX)

Number of Analvses

Lot 1 Lots 2. 11, - 12

60 37

60 37

45 36

15 14

27 20

40 26

7 5

17 18

3 4.

10 13

The majority of samples analysed were from near surface or a depth of about 0.75 m. A

number of samples were also analysed from a depth of about 1.5 m. Samples from other

depths were analysed at some locations to ensure analysis were undertaken that were

representative of the range of materials encountered.


October 1, 1991 -9- 9 16 12280

Following receipt and evaluation of preliminary data, seven of the samples were selected for

elutriation testing to establish the potential mobility of metal contaminants in the soil and to

be able to assess their potential leach into the groundwater. The testing involves acid

extraction of toxic materials from a soil sample and thus represents conditions more severe

than those likely to be encountered on site.

The laboratory reports of the results of the chemical analyses performed on the soil samples

are presented in Appendix D. The reports of the elutriation testing are presented in Appendix

E and the reports of Quality Assurance analysis are presented in Appendix F.

5.0 RESULTS OF FIELD INVESTIGATION

5.1 Geologv of the Area

The Geological Survey of Victoria 1:63,360 scale Melbourne mapsheet shows the general

area of the site to be underlain by Quaternary Age Newer Volcanics basalt. The materials

found during the investigation are considered to be consistent with map sheet indications.

5.2 Surface Conditions

As previously discussed buildings on the site were being demolished at the time of the

investigation. Demolition was generally progressing down to floor level at the time and the

concrete and asphalt floor and roadways remained largely in place.

The areas covered by concrete and asphalt were not specifically identified as part of the field

investigation. The depth of any concrete or asphalt encountered at each test location was

noted on the Test Pit log. The major area not covered by concrete or asphalt was the

southern two thirds of Lot 1 and the adjacent area in Lot 11.

A number of pits and paint dips are identified on Figure 2. These were copied from site

plans prepared by O’Connor Wargon Chapman. Some had been backfilled prior to the field

investigation.


October 1 , 1991 -10- 9 16 12280

5.3 Subsurface Conditions

5.3.1

All forty test pits excavated at the site encountered fill. The fill ranged from 0.2 m thick in

Test Pit 5 at the north end of the site to 2.0 m deep in Test Pit 36. The bases of the fill was not reached in Test Pit 40 which met refusal on concrete at 1.85 m and may have been

excavated in a backfilled concrete lined pit.

The depth of fill found is summarised on Figure 4. The depth of fill was greatest in the

southern part of the Lot 1. This is considered to be at least in part related to the filling of the

creek which crossed this area.

The limited number of test pits covering the remainder of the site make it difficult to interpret

any overall trend. The deep fill found in Test Pit 36 was in an area containing a number of

underground tanks. Other fill greater than 1 m deep was found in Test Pits 29 and 32 located

in the old Foundry area and Test Pit 40 previously described.

Excluding the concrete and asphalt flooring and paving of the fill was composed of three

main types of materials

soil, sometimes containing building rubble

foundry waste which was dominantly slag and other similar material which in places

were up to boulder size

metal of all types including metal sheets, barrels, wire, pipe and molten metal waste.

Where foundry waste or metal were identified in the test pits is indicated on Figure 3 and

described in more detail in the Reports of Test Pits.

5.3.2 soil

The natural soil underlying the fill was dominantly high plasticity, stiff to hard, grey and

brown silty clay. There was some carbonate material identified in a number of test pits.

Basalt gravel to boulders were also identified in several test pits.


October 1, 1991 -1 1- 9 1612280

5.3.3 &&

Basalt was encountered in seven of the forty test pits excavated. In Lot 1, Test Pits 1, 1 1 ,

14 and 17 met refusal on the top of the weathered basalt at depths of 1.2 to 1.4 m. In Lots

2, 1 1 and 12, Test it 31 met refusal on basalt at 1.3 m and Test Pits 27 and 39 met refusal

on basalt at 0.5 m and 0.8 m respectively. Test Pit 34A encountered slightly weathered

basalt at 0.5 m and was continued to refusal at 0.95 m.

5.3.4 Field Evidence of Subsurface Contamination

Photoionisation detector (PID) readings above background levels were recorded at Test Pits

33, 38 and 40. The locations and readings are shown on Figure 4.

In Test Pit 33, PID readings of up to 39 ppm were recorded in samples of both fill and

natural soil. In Test Pit 38 a reading of 60 ppm was obtained in a localised area of natural

soil. In Test Pit 40 a yellow nodule in the fill gave a PID reading of 140 ppm. All other

5..

B

i? readings were zero.

Field ranking of the samples taken indicated seven samples with visible or obvious

contamination these were from

b

Lot 1 Test Pit 18 and 25 - metal sheetdmolten metal waste

Lots2, 1 1 & 12 Test Pit 33 - a pipe was intersected in the test pit and there was an

odour in both the fill and natural soil as well as elevated PID

readings.

Test Pit 40 - the test pit may have been excavated in a backfilled pit.

Some yellow nodules were observed at a depth of 1.5 m which

produced a PID reading of 140 ppm.

Golder Associates

~~

20 of 229

October 1, 1991 -12- 9 16 12280

5.3.5 Groundwater

Groundwater seepage was encountered in Test Pits 15 and 17 at 0.6 m in Test Pit 24 at 1.45

m. No other boreholes encountered groundwater. These observations are judged to reflect

local perched groundwater. We would expect the groundwater table to be at a greater depth

based on our knowledge of the general area.

6.0 CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

6.1 Soil SamDles

A summary of chemical analysis results is presented in Tables 4 and 5.

The analytical results have been compared with guideline criteria presented in the document

"Draft Australian Guidelines for the Assessment and Management of Contaminated sites",

published jointly by the Australian and New Zealand Environment Council (ANZEC) and the

National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) in June 1990. This document

recommends the use of guideline levels for contaminants published by The Netherlands

Ministry of Environment ("Dutch Levels"), as follows:

DUTCH Level B - an indicative value for further investigation. Contamination

concentrations below this level are generally acceptable for

most land uses, including residential use.

DUTCH Level C - an indicative value for cleaning up. At contaminant

concentrations over this level management of the

contamination or clean-up may be necessary.

.s

Australian guidelines for soil contamination are still in the process of development.

However, we understand that the format of future Australian guidelines will be similar to the

Dutch guidelines, ie. three comparative levels, A, B and C, will be presented. It should be

noted that an Australian Level B has been published for lead, and this value is used in place

of the Dutch Level B in this report.


October 1, 1991 -13- 9 1612280

* P

t

The guideline levels are as shown in Tables 3 and 4. Also shown, are the constituents

analysed in the soil samples that exceed Dutch Level B or Dutch Level C for each sample

tested.

Elevated concentrations of total metals are identified by location on Figure 5. Twenty of the

sixty samples analysed from the test pits in Lot 1 exceeded Dutch Level B for one or more

metals and four samples exceeded Dutch Level C. The metals found in elevated

concentrations most frequently were nickel, copper and zinc with chromium, lead, cadmium

and arsenic also occurring in elevated concentrations in some samples. Samples with total

metal concentrations which exceeded Dutch Level C were as follows.

Test Pit Depth Contaminant Concentration Dutch Level C

0 m d k q m d k g

11 0.25 - 0.3 copper 1000 500

18 0.05 - 0.08 zinc 3200 3000

23 1.45 - 1.50 cadmium 29 20

25 0.90 - 1.00 nickel 9 10 500

chromium 1800 800

copper 2300 500

Heavy metal contamination found in Lot 1 was confined to samples of fill except for a sample

of natural soil from Test Pit 18 which exceeded Dutch Level B for zinc. The samples of fill

above the natural soil in this test pit also had an elevated concentration of zinc.

Eleven of the thirty six samples analysed from the test pits in Lots 2, 11 and 12 exceeded

Dutch Level B one or more total metals and three samples exceeded Dutch Level C. The

metals found in elevated concentrations most frequently were nickel, coper, lead and zinc

with chromium and arsenic also occurring in elevated concentrations in some samples.

Samples with total metal concentrations exceeding Dutch Level C were as follows.


October 1, 1991 -14- 9 16 12280

Test Pit Depth Contaminant Concentration Dutch Level C

m mdkg mglkg

38 0.15 - 0.2 lead 1100 600

40 0.20 - 0.25 lead 1000 600

0.9 - 1.00 lead 2300 600

Heavy metal contamination above Dutch Level B in the samples analysed from test pits in

Lots 2, 11 and 12 was confined to the fill.

The sample of soil from the open part of the creek upstream of the bridge had elevated

concentrations of a number of heavy metals. These were chromium, copper, lead, zinc and

cadmium. Samples with metal concentrations that exceeded Dutch Level C were as follows.

Location

Creek bed

The majority

Contaminant Concentration Dutch Level C

m d k g (mglkg

Chromium 980 800

Lead 980 600

Zinc 7500 3000

f samples were neutral to alkaline with a pH range of 6.1 to 9.7. Tot 1

cyanide was not found at concentrations above the method detection limit in any of the

samples analysed.

Elevated concentrations of organic compounds are identified by location on Figure 6.

Concentrations of phenolic compounds found in samples analysed were generally low

although they were detected in a number of samples. The only sample from the test pits to

exceed Dutch Level B was a sample from Test Pit 33 with a total phenol concentration of 6.4

mgkg. No sample exceeded Dutch Level C. The concentration of phenolic compounds in

the creek sediment also exceeded Dutch Level B.


October 1, 1991 -1s- 9 16 12280

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) concentrations were below Dutch Level B in all

samples analysed from Lot 1 . Over the remainder of the site, two samples from Test Pit 33

and one sample from Test Pit 38 exceeded Dutch Level B and one sample from Test Pit 38

with a PAH concentration of 267 mg/kg exceeded Dutch Level C. Samples of natural soil

from Test Pits 33 and 38 had PAH concentrations that exceeded Dutch Level By the

remaining samples were from fi l l .

There are no Dutch Guidelines for total petroleum hydrocarbons. However, Dutch Levels for

mineral oils are generally used as a guide. Total petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations

exceeded Dutch Level B for mineral oil in two sampla from Test Pits 23 and 25 in Lot 1.

The maximum total petroleum hydrocarbon concentration in this area was 3800 mg/kg in a

sample from the fill in Test Pit 23. Total petroleum hydrocarbon concentration exceeded

Dutch Level B in two samples from Test Pits 36 and 40 in Lots 2, 1 1 and 12. They

exceeded Dutch Level C in a further four samples from Test Pits 33, 38 and 40 with

concentrations of up to 33000 mg/kg. The creek sediment sample also exceeded Dutch Level

C with a total petroleum hydrocarbon concentration of 3 1000 mg/kg in the original analysis

and 13000 mg/kg in the duplicate that underwent check testing. The distribution of test pits

where Dutch Level B or C were exceeded is shown on Figure 6.

The majority of elevated concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons were in samples of

fill. However in Test Pits 33 and 38 where elevated concentrations occurred in the fill, there

were also elevated concentrations in the underlying soil.

No organochlorine pesticides, halogenated volatile organics, PCB’s or voIatiIe aromatic

hydrocarbons were detected at above the respective method detection limits for these

contaminants. The method detection limits were all in turn below Dutch Level B.

6.2 Elutriation Testing

The results of the elutriation testing are summarised in Table 6. The testing carried out was

limited in terms of the number of samples. However, testing was generally carried out on

the more highly metal contaminated samples which would have the greatest potential to leach

metals.


October 1, 1991 -16- 9 16 12280

Limits for evaluating the test results are initially based upon NHMRC drinking water

guidelines multiplied by 100. All results were below these limits. The results are also below

the limits for the elutriable fraction acceptable by the EPA in soil that can disposed of as low

level contaminated soil. The results of the testing indicate that the metal contaminants in the

fill and soil on the site have low leachability and low potential for groundwater

contamination.

6.3 Oualitv Assurance

The results of the quality assurance testing are presented in Appendix F. The results of

check analyses by Envirogard are also presented with the WSL results in Tables 3 and 4.

The contaminant concentrations in samples of wash water from cleaning of sampling

equipment are in general below the method detection limit. Exceptions are zinc which was

present at up to 0.05 mg/L and copper at up to 0.75 mg/L.

The copper concentration found is considered to be higher than normally expected.

However, it is not considered that zinc or copper at these concentrations would lead to

significant cross contamination of samples.

Discussions with Mr. B. Lyons of WSL indicate that he considered the results of the check

analyses are consistent with the original analyses results. He commented that different

analytical equipment was used for the metals analysis and has led to differences in detection

levels between the two laboratories and some variation in results. There is variation in the

very high concentrations total petroleum hydrocarbons in the creek sediment samples. Mr.

Lyons considered that this was due to variability within the sample submitted.

7.0 DTSCUSSTON

The initial contamination assessment carried out has resulted in the identification of two main

types of contamination at the site. These are

(i) Metal contamination

(ii) Petroleum hydrocarbons contamination.


October 1, 1991 -17- 9 1612280

There are also localised elevated concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and

phenols.

In the absence of Australian criteria, Dutch criteria have been used to assess the level of

contamination. As indicated by Figure 5 metal contamination above Dutch Level B occurs

in samples from widespread locations over the site. Metal contamination above Dutch Level

C is not as widespread but occurs at a number of locations. As indicated by Figure 6 total

petroleum hydrocarbon contamination occurs only in samples from the southern end of Lot

1. However it occurs at a range of locations in Lots 2, 11 and 12.

Fill was found at all test pit locations and contamination was principally confined to the fill.

There was also localised contamination of the underlying natural soil, particularly where there

was organic contamination of the fill. Metal contamination of the underlying soil was

confined to one sample and elutriation testing carried out indicated the potential for migration

of metal contaminants into the groundwater or offsite is low.

The sediment trapped in the creek near Hampshire Road is significantly contaminated with

chromium, lead and zinc and total petroleum hydrocarbons.

The spacing of test locations is significantly closer in Lot 1 than in Lots 2, 11 and 12. In

turn this provides a greater level of confidence in assessing the implications of contamination

on future uses of this part of the site.

We understand that Lot 1 is currently zoned for commercial purposes. We consider that it

would be suitable for this use or industrial use provided redevelopment incorporates a

contaminant management strategy. If residential use of Lot 1 were considered this would

require the issuing of a Certificate of Environmental Audit. The levels of contamination

found are such that this would require some form of clean-up.

The aim of the a contaminant management strategy is two fold

(i) to protect the environment

(ii) The environment can be protected by minimising the risk of contaminants moving offsite.

This can primarily occur via surface water or the groundwater.

to protect people using the site.


October 1, 1991 ,18- 91612280

The creek sediment on the site has been shown to be contaminated. We recommend that the

sediment in the creek be removed and that either the remainder of the creek is placed

underground in pipe or that the potential for sediment to enter the creek and accumulate on

the creek bottom is minirnised. Levels of zinc and petroleum hydrocarbons in the sample

analysed are such that if representative of the sediment as a whole, the sediment would have

to be disposed of as prescribed waste in a secure landfill licensed to accept such waste.

The permanent groundwater table is judged to be at a depth of 10 to 15 m in the basalt

underlying the site. We consider the potential for groundwater contamination is low because

of

(i)

(ii)

the low leachability of the metal contaminants found at the site

the attenuation of contaminants by the clay overlying the basalt and clay infilling in

the defects in the basalt

However, in order to demonstrate that the contaminants found are not affecting the

environment we consider that it would be advantageous to confirm that the groundwater

underlying the site is not contaminated, particularly due to the petroleum hydrocarbons found.

This would require the installation of groundwater monitoring boreholes.

Protection of the environment can also be enhanced by providing a low permeability capping

layer that reduces the amount of water percolating through the contaminated material. This

can be achieved by using materials such as concrete, asphalt, brick paving or clay capping

to cover areas not already covered by buildings. These materials also act as a separation

layer between the contaminants present and people using the site. The use of such a

separation layer is considered to be an effective way of minimising the impact of

contamination on these people.

The contaminant management strategy should be developed when the final proposed uses of

the site are known. Specific design measures can then be implemented as part of this

strategy.


c October 1, 1991 -19- 9 16 12280

The investigations carried out over Lots 2, 11 and 12 which comprise the remainder of the

site are judged insufficient to make definitive statements about appropriate future uses for this

area except that in its present form the land cannot be used of residential purposes. We judge

that the land is likely to be suitable for commercial or industrial uses. However, further

assessment is required and some clean up is likely to be necessary. For example, there are

underground tanks on the site and buried pipes with evidence of contamination around them.

Removal of these tanks and pipes and any obviously contaminated material is judged to be

necessary as part of the redevelopment the site.

8.0 LIMITATIONS OF THIS REPORT

Soil and rock formations are variable. The test pit logs indicate the approximate subsurface

conditions only at the specific test locations. Boundaries between zones on the logs are often

not distinct, but rather are transitional and have been interpreted. The precision with which

subsurface conditions are indicated depends largely on the frequency and method of sampling,

and the uniformity of subsurface conditions. The spacing of test sites also usually reflect

budget and schedule constraints. Groundwater conditions described in this report refer only

to those observed at the place and under the circumstances noted in the report. These

conditions may vary seasonally or as a consequence of construction activities on the site or

adjacent sites.


October 1, 1991 -20- 9 1612280

Where conditions encountered at the site differ significantly from those anticipated in this

report, either due to natural variability of subsurface conditions or construction activities, it

is a condition of this report that Golder Associates Pty. Ltd. be notified of the changes and

provided with an opportunity to review the recommendations of this report.

GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD.,

per:

P.N. Thornton

Senior Engineering Geologist

R.J. Parker

Principal

PNT/RJP/dl/280WP02 .rpt


October 1, 1991 9 1612280

TABLE 1

FIELD CONTAMINATION RANKING

Descriotion

No odour or visual evidence of contamination

Slight visual evidence of contamination and/or slight odour

Visual evidence of contamination and/or odour

Obvious contamination


October 1, 1991 91612280

TABLE 2

ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS

~ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _

ANALYTICAL METHOD CONSTITUENT LEVEL

D E T E C T I O N LEVEL

PH Victorian EPA Method 139-5 Electrode determinetion.

0.1 units

Total Cyanide USEPA 9010 0.02 mgkg Distillation of acidified sample followed by air purge and trap with sodium hydroxide solution and determination bv colourimetric methods.

Total Metals cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, zinc, nickel by atomic absorption spectroscopy.

Victorian EPA Method 139- 1 3 Digestion in sulphuriclnitric acid with determination

cadmium 0.1, chromium 1 .O, copper 0.2. lead 1.0, zinc 0.2, nickel 1 .O mglkg

mercury Victorian EPA Method 139-1 6 Digestion in sulphuriclnitric acid followed by permanganate/ persulphate oxidation with determination by flameless atomic absorption spectroscopy.

0.02 mgkg

Victorian EPA Method 7061 Digestion in nitric acid and hydrogen peroxide with determination by atomic absorption spectroscopy.

0.02 m g k g arsenic

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)

20 mgkg APHA 5520ClUSEPA 3550 Extraction with trichlorotrifluoroethane with determination by infrared spectroscopy.

Phenolics USEPA Method 8040-3550 Sonication extraction followed by gas chromatography and determination by flame ionisation detection.

0.02 mgkg

0.1 m g k g

0.01 mgkg

Poly-cyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHI

USEPA Method 8270 Sonication extraction followed by gas chromatography with determination by mass spectrometry.

Volatile Aromatic Hydrocarbons (BTEX)

USEPA Method 8020-5030 Extraction in methanol followed by purge and trap then gas chromatography and determination by photoionisation detection.

USEPA Method 8010-5030 Extraction in methanol followed by purge and trap then gas chromatography with determination by halogen specific detection.

0.1 m g k g

0.01 mgkg

Halogenated Volatile Organics

Organochlorine Pesticides USEPA 8080 Sonication extraction followed by gas chromatography and determination by electron capture detection.


October 1, 1991 9 16 12280

Polychlorinated Biphenyls USEPA 8080 0.1 mgkg (PC6) Sonication extraction followed by gas chromatography

and determination by electron capture detection.

USEPA EPTOX, APHA 3 1 1 16/31 1 4 8 cadmium 0.05

absorption spectroscopy. 0.05 mgIL. copper 0.05 mg/L. l e a d 0 . 0 5 mg/L, z i n c 0 . 0 1 mg/L. nickel 0 .1 mglL

Elutriated Metals Extraction at pH = 5 followed by analysis using atomic *-


APPENDIX A

FACTORY LAYOUT 1955


pul ld lng .

1 m i 4 n l l n n D o p t . , L o a L h a r Dapt. , AoombLy Ploor , Orchanl, Tramport

I D 3horroan, Photogrnphlo R o c a I C Ambulnrm. e o a a ID Pay O f f i C e 8 . '. 2 A a a a n b b P l o o r Carpenters, Omhard. PA , s t o r e o v a r 0 r a L o h ~

R a p o h , Rol ler Ueorlngo, Canvas R m , Bwtory Duge., O b l e ' D l n h g Roan.

. .

Prlntlng. ilood U l l l .

~ o r c . ' ' ' ' .. - --.-. -.. . ..- . c - .-..a.

34 of 229

- ? -

E*

4 # a I 3 3 J I! I 1

: :0.

56

59 60 61 6 2 63

' ;07

2' 6 7 68 69 70 71 72 73 74

' 75 76 77 78 79 80 01 $

ig

02 8

8 89 - 9 9l

2 97 98 99

91 92 93 94

97 98

9t 9

Departaent. , . . . . . .

,. . , -

35 of 229

APPENDIX C

REPORTS OF TEST PITS


- 3

' 4

I - /" * c ... ... ... ... . . ... :.:.:. : :.:. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... :.:.:. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I I

c

- 1 1 $; i! I I

8

a

l-

5 4 0

a

-

INFERRED STRATIGRAPHY

FILL - Concrete slab

SILTY CLAY (CH). stiff, grey.

------------------------------ hard. pale brown. trace carbonate material.

END OF TEST PIT AT *.5m GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED

I SAMPLING

AND TESTING OTHER

DS RANK0 PID : Oppm

DS RANK 0 PID : Oppm


Report d test pit must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations 37 of 229

I Repcni of test pil must be read in conjunction with accompanying not- and abbeviatiom 38 of 229

I Report d teuf pit must be read in conjunction with eoxmpanying notea and awreviations I 39 of 229

I + 7 2 ... ... ... ? 5 ... . .... ... .:-. ... . . ... ... . ... . . ... ... ... . ..... . . ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . . ... ... ... ... ... I I

! : c : C

I : I I

? ; >

-

INFERRED STRATIGRAPHY a

d 2

FILL - Sandy Sill (ML). topsoil. dark grey. -__________________________ foundry waste, orangebrown. some sand, some glass like material.

Silty Sand (SM). dark grey, some metal and wood.

--__________________--------_-

--__________________---------- Silty Clay (CH). stiff, orange-brown, some black, some gravel and foundry waste.

SAMPLING AND TESTING

DS RANK1 PID:Oppm Head space sample

OS RANK 0 PID : Oppm


OTHER

40 of 229

I . . >

.;c

... * c ... ... ... ...... ... .. . . .. ... ... ... ... ... ... . . ... ... ... .:... ... .>:.: .\... ... ... ... ... . . ... ... .: . ..... ... ... ... I I

i

2 - C

c 1 : C

I I

i U a

i

-


FILL - Foundry waste. very dense , in a silly sand matrix. some boulderr.

END OF TEST PIT AT 1.5m GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED

I

u IN

I I

0 9 0 I a 4 a 0 I

1.50

--.

1 SAMPLING

AND TESTING OTHER


DS RANK 0 PID : Oppm Head space sample


Re- d test oit must be read in coniunction with accomwina notee and abbreviation~ 41 of 229

I

2 5 :.:... . ...

+ ...

... ... ... ... ... ...... .::. >>:. :.:... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...:. ... ... ... . . ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... lii I

c E ' t I 1 I I

3 Y

B >


boulders.

SlLlY CLAY (CH). very df. grey. trace root fibres.

____________________---_----_- orangebrown and brown. some pin holes.

END OF TEST PIT AT 1.4m GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED REFUSAL ON WEATHERED ROCK


DS RANK1 PID:Oppm

DS RANK 0 PID : Oppm Head space sample


OTHER

42 of 229


FILL - Silly send (SM). moderately dense, dark grey, some foundry waste. concrete and boulders. Sandy Clay (CL). orange-brown, some gravel and metal.

----------_--_-----------_----

SILTY C U Y (CH). stiff, grey.

END OF TEST PIT AT 1.6m SEEPAGE ENCOUNTERED AT 0.6m

0.M

0.a


OTHER

I

OS RANK1 PI0:Oppm


DS RANK0 PID : Oppm

.

43 of 229

I Repoc( of test pit must be r a d in conjunction with aaxMlpanying notes and abbreviatiom, 44 of 229


FILL - Silty sand (SM). moderately dense. dark browngrey. haca foundry waste.

oran e-brown. =me foundry waste, bricks and metddebris.

SlLM CLAY (CH). sliff. bluegrey.

.............................. pak brown. trace grey and orangebrown. some basalt boulders.

END OF TEST PIT AT 1.55m GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED


OTHER

I DS RANK 1 PID : Oppm

DS RANKO PID : Oppm

DS RANKO PID : Oppm

fbpoitd test pit must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations 45 of 229

APPENDIX D

LABORATORY REPORTS - SOIL SAMPLES


NSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 1-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE UCHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

1

MI3HOD SAMPLE DESCRIPTION TPI TPI "2 TP2 TP3 TP3 TP3 TP6

SECTION SAMPLE LOCATION Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 3 Sa 1

SAMPLE DEPTH (m) 0.05- 0.75- 0.08- 0.75- 0.25- 0.75- 1.4- 0.05- 0.08 0.80 0.10 0.80 0.35 0.80 1.5 0.08

U B NO. 9653 9654 9656 9657 9639 9660 9661 9662

EL: 429 4666 ?AX: 429 2294

TP6

Sa 2

0.75- 0.80

9663

DATE SAMPLED : 19 - 20.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 21.8.91 DATE ANALYSED: 21.8.91

VIC EPA 139-13

VIC EPA 139-13

VIC EPA 139-13

VIC EPA 139-13

VIC EPA 139-13

VIC EPA 139-13

VIC EPA 139-16

US EPA 7061

RESULTS OF ANALYSES - pH, TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS, PHENOLS, CYANIDE & HEAVY MmALS

Nickel 120 34 46 33 22 29 24 120 35

Chromium 28 66 97 66 63 57 62 28 67

Copper 31 12 120 10 13 9.7 7.3 28 9.7

Lead 4.8 9.8 9.5 9.2 10 9.9 11 3.1 9.7

Zinc 67 23 96 28 26 27 23 56 22

Cadmium eo.1 co.1 <0.1 <0.1 <o. 1 co.1 <0.1 co.1 <0.1

Mercury <O.O2 c0.02 <O.O2 <O.O2 <0.02 <0.02 c0.02 q0.02 c0.02

Arsenic 0.20 0.48 4.6 0.17 0.20 0.40 0.19 0.34 0.46 A

(SOIL)

~~

10' 'fENTS: All results expressed in mg/kg except pH.

Results pertain to samples as received.

'RIN YS PAL CREMIST I

9372

4 September 1991/ec (10559)

47 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCUTES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 4666 DATE SAMPLED : 19 - 20.8.91 FAX: 429 2294 DATE RECEIVED: 21.8.91

DATE ANALYSED: 21.8.91

RESULTS OF ANALYSES - pH, TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS. PHENOLS, CYANIDE & HEAVY METALS

(SOIL)

METHOD SAMPLE DESCRIPTION TP7 T P 7 T P 8 T P S TPll T P l l T P l l TP12 TPl2

SECTION SAMPLE LOCATION Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 3 Sa 1 Sa 2

SAMPLE DEPTH (m) 0.16- 0.75- 0.15- 0.75- 0.05- 0.75- 1.25- 0.05- 0.75- 0.20 0.80 0.20 0.80 0.10 0.80 1.30 0.08 0.80

U B NO. 9665 9666 9668 9669 9671 9672 9673 9674 9675

VIC EPA 139-5 pH (pH units) 9.6 8.5 6.3 8.4 8.7 8.3 9.1 7.6 8.1

A--*-4 5520C Tohl Petroleum -- -- L, ,PA 3350 Hydrocarbons

US EPA 80.10-3550 Phenolics as Phenol -- -- c0.02 -- c0.02 -- US EPA 9010 Cyanide 4 -- <5 <5 <5 <5 C5 C5

-- -- -- c20 -- 110 --

-- -- -- --

VIC EPA 139-13 Nickel 110 36 130 35 99 12 46 72 38

VIC EPA 139-13 Chromium 28 70 25 61 30 76 60 32 66 ..

COD-'IENTS: All results expressed in mg/kg except pH.


35 13 7.0 62 11

14 9.3 9.5 94 9.5

110 26 140 28 16

4 . 1 co.1 <0.1 co.1 co.1

<0.02 c0.02 c0.02 <0.02 <0.02

0.53 0.76 0.31 8.2 1.1

PRINCIPAL c&vfIsr

24 September 1991/ec (10559)

48 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280



RESULTS OF ANALYSES - pH, TOCAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS, PHENOLS, CYANIDE & HEAVY METALS

(SOIL)

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

SAMPLE LOCATION

SAMPLE DEPTH (m)

METHOD

SECTION

TP13 TP13 TP14 TP14 TP15 TP15 TP16 TP16 TP17

Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa I Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1

0.08- 0.80- 0.10- 0.70- 0.15- 0.75- 0.05- 0.75- 0.05- 0.15 0.85 0.15 0.80 0.20 0.80 0.08 0.80 0.08

US EPA 9010

VIC EPA 139-13

VIC EPA 139-13

I LAB NO. i 9677 i 9678 i 9680 i 9681 i 9683 i 96M i 9686 i 9687 i 9689 11

Cyanide <5 d d -- <5 -- 0' <J <5

Nickel 82 31 9.3 24 48 29 51 45 89

Chromium 65 73 88 62 61 58 62 59 42 I

VIC EPA 139-5 pH (pH units) 7.6 8.2 7.2 7.6 7.6 7.8 8.2 8.6

Total Petroleum I Hydrocarbons A""4 5520C L. ,PA 3350

m F l 8 0 1 0 - 3 5 5 0 c P h e n o l i r s P h e n o l I <0.02 I <0.02 I -- I -- I <0.02 I -- I <0.02 I -- I -- II

10' "TENTS: All results expressed in mg/kg except pH.

Results pertain to samples as received. 9372

I.J. LYONS 'RINCIPAL C H I M E T

4 September 1991/ec (10559)

49 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS P T Y LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280



RESULTS OF ANALYSES - pH, TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS, PHENOLS, CYANIDE & HEAVY METALS

(SOIL)

METHOD SAiMPLE DESCRIPTION "17 TP18 TP18 "19 TP19 TP20 TPM TP20

SECTION SAMPLE LOCATION Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 3

SAMPLE DEPTH (m) 0.75- 0.05- 0.75- 0.05- 0.75- 0.08- 0.80- 1.4- 0.80 0.08 0.80 0.08 0.80 0.15 0.85 1.50

U B NO. 9690 9692 9693 9695 9696 9698 9699 9700

TP21

Sa 1

0.2- 0.25

9701

VIC EPA 139-5

AP"4 55MC L. ,PA 3350

US EPA 8040-3550 ~~ ~~ -~

US EPA 9010 Cy an id e <5 <5

VIC EPA 139-13 Nickel 27 m VIC EPA 139-13 Chromium 46 120

~~ ~ ~~ ~

pH (pH units) 8.5 9.9 7.9 7.3 7.7 8.1 7.1 9.0 9.7

Total Petroleum -- Hydrocarbons

Phenolics as F'henol -- -- -- -- -- <0.02 -- -- <0.02

30 -- -- -- 10 -- 240 --

VIC EPA 139-13

VIC EPA 139-13

VIC EPA 139-16

US EPA 7061


Zinc 18 3200

Cadmium ~ 0 . 1 1.3

Mercury <0.02 <0.02

Arsenic 1.2 2.6

B.J. LYONS ! PRINCIPAL CH~MIST

24 September 1991/ec (10559)

~~

lo00

<o. 1

<0.02

0.69

12 59 11 36 20 8.3 52

9.6 25 10 23 20 11 49

500 20 140 84 27 UO

<0.1 <0.1 eo.1 <0.1 1.0 <o. 1

0.05 <0.02 C0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02

1.1 1.4 4.9 1.0 0.35 6.2

50 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES F T Y LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

E L : 429 4666 DATE SAiMPLED : 21 - 22.8.91 FAS: 129 2294 DATE RECEIVED: 23.8.91

DATE ANALYSED 23.8.91


(SOIL)

VIC EPA 139-13

VIC EPA 139-16

US EPA 7061

Cadmium <0.1 c0.1 s0.1 so. 1 <o. 1 (0.1 4.1 <0.1 CO.1

Mercury <O.Ot 4 - 0 2 4.02 d.02 4.02 <0.02 0.05 <0.02 0.02

Arsenic 1.2 0.47 0.42 0.24 0.26 26 9.1 35 8.9

:O'-'QENTS: All results expressed in mg/kg except pH.

ResuIts pertain to samples :IS received.

I.1 September 1991/ec (10559)

51 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS rw I;H) CLIENT: GOI.I)EH ASSOCI/' YS I Y Y 1111) DAI'E SAMPI.EI): 21-7' *' 91 2-8 HARVEY SI'REET RE: SUNSHINE DATE KECEIVEI): 23.8. RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280 DATE ANALYSED: 23.8.91

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

I P 10

TP 2s

'1'P 28

TP 31

CREEK 1iK:I)

TEL: 429 4666 FAX: 429 2294

SAMPLE SAMPLE I A B NO LINDANE AIJDRIN DI EI,DHIN 1)DE KNI)KIN 1)DI) IDCATION DEPTH (m)

Sa 1 0.05-0.10 9794 <o.o I eo.01 <o.o I <o.o I 4 . 0 I <o.o I Sa 1 0.05-0.10 9803 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <o.o I <o.o I <o.o I Sa 1 0.15-0.20 9812 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <o.o I <0.01 co.0 I

Sa 1 0.12-0.16 9822 (0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <o.o I <o.o I t0.01

-- -- 91135 <o.o I <o.o I <o.o I <O.OI <0.0 I <o.o I

I'HINCII'AI. CHEMIS'C 24 Septemller 1991lec (10559)

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS - ORGANOCHIDRINE PESTICIDES

RESULTS ESPKESSEI) As nig/kg DRY WEIG1iT

TEST METHOD US EPA 8080

(SOIL)

COMMENTS: Results pertain to samples as received. 9372

52 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 4666 DATE SAIMPLED: 19-20.8.91 FAX: 429 2294 DATE RECEIVED: 2 1.8.91

DATE AVALYSED: 21.8.91

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS - HALOGENATED VOLATILE ORGANICS

METHODS - US EPA 8010 & 5030

(SOIL)

SAiMPLE DESCRIPTION

SAMPLE LOCATION Sa 1 I T P l T P 2 T P 3 T P 6 T P 8

Sa 1 Sa 1 Sa 1 Sa I Sa 1

SAMPLE DEPTH (rn)

U B NO.

1.1 Dichloroethane

. ,iylene Chloride

Chloroform

______~ ~ -

0.08-0.15 0.05-0.08 0.08-0.10 0.25-0.35 0.05-0.08 0.15-0.20

9653 9656 9659 9662 9668 9677

<o. 1 <o. 1 <0.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <0.1

<o. I <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. I <o. 1 <o. 1

<o. 1 <o. 1 eo. 1 (0.1 <o. 1 <o. 1

COMMENTS: All results expressed as mg/kg


1.2 Dichlorobenzene

1.2 Dichlorobenzene

., Dichlorobenzene -

B.J 'LYONS , 'I/ ?&CIPAL CHEMIST

<o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 co. 1 co. 1 CO.1

< O . l <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1

<o. 1 <o. 1 <0.1 <o. 1 <0.1 <o. 1

9372

!-I September 1991/ec (10559)

53 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

1.2 Dichlorobenzene It-. Dichlorobenzene

TEL: 129 4666 FAX: 429 2294

<o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1

eo. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. I <o. 1 <o. 1

DATE SAiMPLED: 2 1-22.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 23.8.91 DATE MALYSED: 23.8.9 1


METHODS - US EPA 8010 & 5030

(SOIL)

COMMENTS: All results expressed as mgkg


B.J..LYONS PRINCIPAL CHEMIST

24 %ptemkr 1 9 9 1 1 ~ (10559) \I

. .

54 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER USOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY flREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND M C 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 4666 FAX: 129 2294

DATE SAMPLED: 19-20.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 21.8.91 DATE ANALYSED: 21.8.91

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS - POLYCYCLIC AROIMATIC HYDROCARBONS

(SOIL)

I

TP1 T P 2 T P 3 T P 3 TP6 T P 7 11 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

Sa 1 Sa 1 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 1 11 SAMPLE LOCATION

55 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91 612280

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

SAMPLE LOCATION

SAMPLE DEPTH (m)

U B NO.

TEL: 129 4666 FAX: 429 2294

T P 8 TP 11 TP 11 TP 12 TP 13 TP 13 TP 11

Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1

0.75-0.80 0.054.10 0.75-0.80 0.05-0.08 O.O&a.15 0.804.85 0.10-0.15

9669 9671 9672 96 74 9677 9678 9680


~~~~ ~ ~ ~~

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS - POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS

Acenaphthy lene

. raphthene

Fluorene

Phenanthrene

Anthncene

-

(SOIL)

<o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 eo. 1 <o. 1 <0.1

eo. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 4.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 eo. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 4.1 (0.1 eo. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 0.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 eo. 1 4.1

<o. 1 eo. 1 0.2 0.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. I I

~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Pyrene (0.1 0.2

Benzo(a)anthracene <o. 1 0.3

~~

4.1 <0.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 eo. 1 0.1 <0.1 <o. 1 (0.1

~~ ~~ ~~~

Chrysene 4.1 (0.1

Benzofluoranthene <o. 1 0.2

Fluoranthene I <0.1 I 0.2 I <0.1 I 4 . 1 I <0.1 I CO.1 I <0.1

4.1 4.1 <o. 1 4.1 4.1

4.1 4.1 <o. 1 (0.1 <o. 1

24 September 199Uec (10559)

56 of 229

i WSL CONSULTANTS m y LTD CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 3666 FAX: 429 2294

DATE SAMPLED: 19-m.8.91 DATE RECEIVED 2 1.8.91 DATE ANALYSED: 21.8.91


(SOIL)

COMMENTS: Results pertain to samples as received.

All results expressed in mg/kg 9372

2-4 September 1991/ec (10559)

57 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY S R E E T RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION T P 3 T P 5 T P 5 T P 9

SAMPLE LOCATION Sa 1 Sa 1 Sa 2 Sa 1

SAMPLE DEPTH (m) 0.25-0.30 0.05-0.15 0.75-0.85 0.16-0.20

LAB NO. 9785 9788 9789 9791

TEL: 429 4666 FAY: 429 2294

T P 9 TP 10 TP 10

Sa 2 Sa 1 Sa 2

0.75-0.85 0 . 0 5 4 1 0 0.5-0.6

9792 9793 9795

DATE SAMPLED: 2 1-22.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 23.8.91 DATE ANALYSED: 23.8.91

~ ~ ~

Naphthalene <o. 1 <o. I <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 < O . l <o. 1

Acenaphthy lene <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 eo. 1 <0.1 eo. 1

. iaphthene <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <0.1 (0.1 4 . 1

Fluorene <o. 1 eo. 1 co. 1 <0.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1

-


Anthracene

Fluoran thene

Pyrene

Benzo(a)anthracene

(SOIL)

~

<o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <O. I <o. 1 <o. 1 eo. 1

<o. 1 <0.1 ’ <0.1 co. 1 <0.1 e0.1 0.3

go. 1 <o. I co.1 <o. 1 <0.1 <0.1 0.3

CO. 1 (0.1 co. 1 co. 1 <o. 1 co. 1 0.1


All results expressed in mg/kg 937;

: ‘I - I ..- _ _ _ ;-.

... . . . . . . . ‘ . .C

Analyses conducted by ICs, NATA Registration No. 3108 US EPA 8270 (GC/MS) . . . . . . .., . . . -.. ... >!:.iwsl Asscc

, .... .-:.:!. i:.: :‘..z::c) r2:

L..L.?:-..-

m.l.7 :z?,,

.... . . . . . . . . . . . . ,yf -....- hsrc:z *:.a’. 2

- I.. . . . . . . . . . ;t’ ..:.:.: :1.5

of :e:i:’:z’:..:!. . .:.- . . . . . . .,:: ,:.; eXC?;)C ir. ?.::I.

B.J. LYONS

24 September 199Uec (10559)

58 of 229

~ WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VrC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 4666 FAY: 429 2291

DATE SAMPLED: 21 -22.8.9 1 DATE RECEIVED: 23.8.91 DATE ANALYSED: 23.8.91


(SOIL)


All results expressed in mgkg

Analyses conducted by ICs, NATA Registration No. 3108 US EPA 8270 (GC/MS)

B.J[LYONS I/ P ~ C I P A L 'CHEMIST

9372

U September 1991/ec (10559)

59 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS I T Y LTD CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION TP 1 T P 7 TP 14 TP 20

SAMPLE LOCATION Sa 2 Sa 2 Sa 2 Sa 1

SAMPLE DEPTH (m) 0.75-0.80 0.75-0.80 0.70-0.80 0.08-0.15

W B NO. 9654 9666 9681 9698

r

TEL: 429 3666 FAY: 429 2294

I

TP 21 TPU

Sa 1 Sa 2

0.2-0.25 0.75-0.80

9701 9708

DATE SAMPLED: 19-20.8.91 DATE RECEIVED 21.8.91 DATE ANALYSED: 21.8.91

Benzene <0.02

Toluene <0.02

RESULTS OF ANALYSES - HEADSPACE BENZENE, TOLUENE, ETHYL BENZENE AND kYLENE

~~ - ~~

<0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 s0.02

<0.02 4 . 0 2 C0.02 <0.02 <0.02

(SOIL)

I Benzene 4 . 0 2 <0.02 <0.02 4 . 0 2

Xylene <0.02 4.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 I <0.02 I


All results expressed as mg/kg

Method US EPA 8020 - 5030

B.J. LYONS / PRIN IPALcbMIsT $: 24 September 1991/ec (10559)

60 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY !STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND M C 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 4666 FAX 429 2294


RESULTS OF ANALYSES - HEADSPACE BENZENE, TOLUENE, ETHYL BENZENE AND .XYLENE

(SOIL)


All results expressed as mgkg

Method US EPA 8020 - 5030 I

I

PRINCIPAL &EMST

2-4 September 1991/ec (10559)

61 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS YI'Y LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCV ' S PTY LTD DATE SAMPLED: 19-2" 91 2-8 HARVEY SI'REET RE: SUNSHINE DATE RECEIVED: 2 I .8. KICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280 DATE ANALYSED: 21.8.91

SAMPLE SAMPLE SAMPLE LAU NO AHOCHI.OR # 1016 1221 1232 I242 12-48 1254 1260 DESCRIPTION LOCATION DEFTH (m)

T P 3 Sa I 0.25-0.35 9659 4. I <o. I <o. I <o. I <o. I <o. I to. I

TP 13 Sa 1 0.08-0.15 9677 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. I <o. I (0. I 4 . 1

, TP 23 , Sa 1 , 0.15-0.20 , 9707 rn <O.l rn co.1 rn eo.1 , <0.1 , (0.1 . <0.1 , <0.1

"EL 429 4666 FAX: 429 22pi

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS - PCB

IWSUIII'S EXPRESSED AS niglkg I)HY WKIGII'I'


(SOIL)

24 September 19911ec (10559)

COMMENTS: Results pertain to samples as recelved. m

62 of 229

APPENDIX E

LABORATORY REPORTS - ELUTRIATION TESTING

Golder Associates

63 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS P T Y LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCMTES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 4666 FAX: 429 2294

DATE SXMPLED: 20.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 2 1.8.9 1 DATE ANALYSED: 24.8.91

RESULTS OF ANALYSES - ELUTRUTED HEAVY METALS

(SOIL)

TP 25 I 1 TP23 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION TP 10

0.05-0.1

0516

9794

<o. 1

-- -- -- -- --

<0.001

~

SAMPLE DEPTH (m) 0.9-1.0 1.45-1.5 SECTION

3111B

05 10 0511 NEW LAB NO.

9805 9709 OLD LAB NO.

Nickel

Chromium

0.2

CO.05

<0.05 -- Copper

Lead

3.9 3.7 Zinc

Cadmium

<0.001 0.002 Arsenic


A1 results expressed as mg/L

US EPA Toxicity Test, Federal Register Part 111.

9372

PRINCIP@HEMIST

1 October 1991/ec (10559)

64 of 229

APPENDIX F

LABORATORY REPORTS - QUALITY ASSURANCE TESTING


WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY ST'REET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

E L : 429 1666 FAX: 429 2294

DATE SAMPLED : 19 - 20.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 21.8.91 DATE ANALYSED 21.8.91

RESULTS OF ANALYSES - pH. TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS, PHENOLS, CYANIDE & HEAVY METALS

(WATER)

IOMMENTS: All results expressed in mW1,.


Insufficient Sample

I

1.J LYONS WNCIPAL PEMIST 4 September 1991/ec (10559)

66 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS F"Y LTD CLIENT GOLDER ASSOCIATES R Y LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 4666 FAY: 429 2294

DATE SAMPLED : 21 - 22.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 23.8.91 DATE ANALYSED: 23.8.91


(WATER)

COMMENTS: All results expressed Ln mg/L.

Results pertain to samples as received

Insuficient Sample

B.J.,,LYONS 2 PRJNCIPAL HEMIST

24 September 19911ec (10559)

67 of 229

NSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES P T Y LTD 1-8 HARVEY Sl'REET RE: SUNSHINE UCHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

4500-H,B

55MC

553OC

EL: 429 4666 PAY: 429 2294

pH (pH units) 6.9

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons *

Phenolics as Phenol 1

DATE SAMPLED : 23.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 26.8.91 DATE ANALYSED 26.8.91

3111B

3111B

3111B

3112B

3114B

RESULTS OF ANALYSES - pH, TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS. PHENOLS, CYANIDE & HEAVY MFTALS

Lead <0.05

Zinc c0.01

Cadmium <o.o 1

Mercury <O.oOl

Arsenic <0.001

(WATER)

SAIMPLE DESCRIPTION

SAMPLE LOCATION

LAB NO.

1 Chromium II

IOMMENTS: All results expressed in mfl.


Insufficient Sample

5;j. ,J-, LYONS $6- -

RsycIpAL3-sT I September 1991/ec (10559)

. . - . . . . . -.-El

'. "'1 I . . 1.i _.. .. . ,. ... . . -I.-. -. . . ..... . .

9372

68 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS F'TY LTD CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES I T Y LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 4666 DATE SAMPLED: 19-20.8.91 FAX: 429 2294 DATE RECEIVED: 21.8.91



SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

LAB NO.

Naphthalene

Acenaphthylene

Acenaphthene

(WATER)

FIELD BLANK

9710

co.01

co.01

<0.01

Fluorene

Phenanthrene

Anthracene

Fluoran thene

Pyrene

Benzo(a)anthracene

Chrysene

Benzofluoranthene

Benzo(a)pyrene

Indene( 123-cd) py mne

Dibenzo(ah)anthracene

Benzo(ghi)perylene

co.01

co.01

co.01

co.01

4 . 0 1

co.01

<0.01

4 . 0 1

4 . 0 1

<o.o 1

4 . 0 1

4 . 0 1

C MENTS: Results pertain to samples as received.

All results expressed in mg/L

Analyses conducted by ICs, NATA Registration No. 3108 US EPA 8270 (GUMS)

9372

B.J. LYDNS ' PRIN&AL CHEMIST

24 September 1991/ec (10559) \i

69 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND M C 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 4666 FAX: 429 2294

DATE SAMPLED: 21-22.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 23.8.91 DATE ANALYSED 23.8.91


(WATER)

-:--'9 ... ;.:;: ;:q 9372

MENTS: Results pertain to samples as received.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . All results expressed in mg/L . .

........ . . . . '..: :::? S3: imal r\.iscc!itf::n

..... . . . . . i :.c :Ls:~:: r:?.,:.->

Analyses conducted by ICs, NATA Registration No. 3108 US EPA 8270 (GUMS) ThlS Lz!v>:.:!:::*: i: :...

of - p.,:-,,:.- . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . ....... . . . _ - . _ . a . ....._ . . . . . .

9 !? I ~ , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .__.....- ... , l . _ : i _ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.::::.jr ::: I C I I .

5J.FYONS it! PRINCIPAL FEMIST

U September 1991/ec (10559)

70 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD

RICHMOND VIC 3121 2-8 HARVEY STREET

TEL: 429 4666 FAX: 429 2294

CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES VTY LTD RE: SUNSHINE JOB NO: 91612280



METHODS - USE EPA 8010 & 5030

(WATER)

SAMPLE DESCRIITION FIELD BLANK

SAMPLE LOCATION

LAB NO. - ~

1.1 Dichloroethane

Methylene Chloride

Chloroform

1.2 Dichloropropane

1.2 Dichloroethane

2 Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether

Bromodichloromethane

Chlorobenzene

1,IJ Trichloroethane

Chlorodibromomethane

Bromoform

1.2 Dichlorobenzene

1.2 Dichlorobenzene

1.4 Dichlorobenzene

COMMENTS: AI1 results expressed as mg/L


I-II (0.0 1

eo.01

(0.01

(0.01

(0.01 3 (0.01

<0.01

(0.0 I

tl September 199Uec (10559)

71 of 229

WSI, C o N s u u x r v r s pry i:m CIJENT: COI.I)EH ASSOCIP *s pry IXI) DATE SAMPLED: 21-2' " 91 2-8 HARVEY STKEhT RE: SUNSHINE DATE RECEIVED: 23.8.. RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91 612280 D A l E ANALYSEI): 23.8.9 1

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

FIELD B U N K

TEL: 429 4666 FAX: 429 2294

SAMPLE IAI) NO LINDANE AIJKIN 1)1 EI.I)RIN 1)I)E ENIIRIN 1)DI) DIYI LOCAI'ION

Sa 3 9834 <0.01 (0.01 <0.01 <o.o I <o.o I qo.0 I <o.o I

B.J. u u LYON PRINCIPAL CHEMIST 24 September 1991/ec (10559)

RESUIII'S OF ANA1,YSIS - ORGANOCH1,OKINE PESHC1I)I~S


(WATER)

COMMENTS: Results pertaln to samples as received.

72 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES F T Y LTD 2-8 HARVEY STREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 1666 FAX: 129 2291

DATE SAMPLED : 19 - 22.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 21 - 23.8.91 DATE ANALYSED: 21 - 23.8.91


(SOIL)

CHECK TESTING

MHA 552oc Total Petroleum

COMMENTS: All results expressed in rng/kg except pH.


Analysis conducted by Envirogard. Laboratory Report No. 00092 NATA Registration No. 1892

9372 . . . *. . . .

. . .

. . . .(? ..-.::n.:l .\.;.cr..:: . . . . . . . . . . -. . * .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :::’* ...

PRINCIP BS” Lye% HEMIST

24 September 1991/ec (10559)

73 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY SlREET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

TEL: 429 4666 DATE SAMPLED: 19-20.8.91 .......... DATE RECEIVED: 21-23.8.91 DATE ANALYSED: 2 1-23.8.91


METHODS - US EPA 8010 8~ 5030

(SOIL)

CHECK TESTING

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

SAMPLE LOCATION

SAMPLE DEPTH (m)

LAB NO.

I Total Halogenated Volatile Organics (ww

TP1 TP23 CREEK BED

Sa 1 Sa 1 -- 0.05-0.08 0.15-0.20 -- 9653 9707 9835

<o. 1 <o. 1 4.1

Analysis conducted by Envlrogard Laboratory Report No. 00092 NATA Registration No. 1892

PRINCIPAL CHDJhST

24 September 199Yec (10559)

93 72

. . ~. . . - ...... . . . .

. . . . _ _ _..‘> -‘..:*“-I i-:- ...... .._.... . .

, .,, **:. :. . , .:.. _..- . - - . I - , ,

. . . . . . . . . .,.i::., 1.s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ::..:.: ... _ . ,

74 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: COLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 2-8 HARVEY =MET RE: SUNSHINE RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280

SAMPLE DEPTH (m)

W B NO.

TJCL: 429 3666 FA.: 429 2293

0.05-0.08 0.15-0.20 0.05-0.10 0.1-0.2 0.2-0.25 -- 9653 9707 9794 9807 9825 9835

DATE SAMPLED: 19-20.8.91 DATE RECEIVED: 2 1-23.8.9 1 DATE ANALYSED: 21-23.8.91

Acenaphthylene

Acenaphthene


4.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 eo.1 so. 1 <o. 1

<0.1 4.1 <o. 1 eo. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1

(SOIL)

Fluorene

Phenanthrene

Anthracene

CHECK TESTING

<o. 1 <O. l c0.1 <O.l 4.1 <O.l

<o. 1 eo. 1 4.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 0.9

<0.1 eo.1 <O. 1 (0.1 co. 1 <o. 1

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION JTpI l T P D l T P l 0 I T P ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ 3 2

SAMPLE LOCATION I s a 1 l ~ a 1 I Sa 1 I Sa 1 I Sa 1 I -- II

Naphthalene I CO.1 1 4 . 1 I <O.l I co.1 I <O.l I 0.5 II


All results expressed in mg/kg

Analyses conducted by Envimgard. Laboratory Report No. 00092 NATA Registration No. 1892

US EPA 8270 (GC/MS)

93 72 -r ., -..-..: _ - ... . ; . ..

PRlkcIPAL C p S T

24 September 1991/ec (10559)

75 of 229

WSL CONSULTANTS PTY LTD CLIENT: GOLDEK ASSOCL-' 'S PTY LTD DATE SAMPLEI): 19-2J' 91 2-8 HARVEY Sl'REET RE: SUNSHINE DATE RECEIVED: 21-i .91 RICHMOND VIC 3121 JOB NO: 91612280 DATE ANALYSED: 21-23.8.91

"EL: 429 4666 FAX: 429 22%

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS - ORGANOCIiLOKINE PE5TICII)ES

RESULTS EXFRESSEI) AS tridkg DRY WEICII'I'

TEST MhTHOD US EPA 8080

(SOIL)

CHECK TESTING

COMMENTS: Resylts pertain to samples as received.

. Analysis conducted by Envirogard. ' Laboratory Report No. 00092

NATA Registration No. 1892

<o.o I

<o.o I

<o.o I

I qo.01

n.l.%.YONf FKINCIPA CHEMIST U September 1991/ec (10559)

9312

76 of 229

Appendix D - Stage 2 Site Assessment Report

SlNCWR KNlGHT MER2 ME01 147:RO3RAGFH.DOC

77 of 229

Golder Associates Pty Ltd A c 1.1 006 107 857 MELBOURNE OFFICE

25 Burwood Road. Hawthorn, Vc 31 22 Aust!alia (PO Box 6079. Hawthorn West, VIC 31 22 Australia) Telephone (03) 981 9 4044 Fax (03) 981 8 7990

der &tes

REPORT ON

STAGE 2 CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT

LOT 10, FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE BALLARAT ROAD, SUNSHINE, VICTORIA

REVISION 1

Submitted to: Atkinson Project Management (Aust) Pty Ltd

49 Agnes Street EASTMELBOURNE VIC 3002

DISTRIBUTION

5 copies - Atkinson Project Management (Aust) Pty Ltd 2 copies - Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd 2 copies - Golder Associates Pty Ltd

October 14, 1997 966 1368012 18

OFFICES IN ADELAIDE. BRISBANE. CAIRNS. GOLD COASI. iA~ROOCH~DORE. MELSOU2I!E. ?E2TH. SYDIIEY. ~!OLLOt~IGOi~IG. JAK.r?RIA , c c q \ r , , - c " pT\. . T ? , . , C r . . I ,-. .,,. n. 5'' .... .. - - - .. . . . - . - -. - . - . .. . . - - ._ . . . -

78 of 229

October 14. 1997 -1- 9661368012 18

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1 . INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 1

2 . SCOPE OF WORK ................................................................................. 1

3 . BACKGROUND .................................................................................... 2 3.1 General ......................................................................................... 2 3.2 Site History .................................................................................... 2

3.2.1 Massey Fergusson Site - General ................................................... 3 3.2.2 Site History of Lot 10 ................................................................ 4

3.3 Results of Previous Assessments ........................................................... 4

4 . STAGE 2 FIELD INVESTIGATION ............................................................ 6 1 4.1 Selection of Selection of Sample Locations .............................................. 6

4.2 Soil Sampling ................................................................................. 7

5 . SITE CONDITIONS ............................................................................... 8 5.1 Site Geology ................................................................................... 8 5.2 Surface Conditions ........................................................................... 8 5 .3 Subsurface Conditions ....................................................................... 8 5.4 Groundwater .................................................................................. 9

6 . LABORATORY ANALYSIS ..................................................................... 9

7 . INITIAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ......................................................... 10

8 . COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS WITH ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION CRITERIA ..................................................................... 11

8.1 Fill ............................................................................................ 11 8.2 Natural Soil .................................................................................. 12 8.3 Results of Elutriation Testing ............................................................. 13

9 . COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS WITH HEALTH INVESTIGATION LEVELS ............................................................................................... 13

10 . AUDITOR’S SITE SPECIFIC CRITERIA .................................................. 14

11 . OFF SITE DISPOSAL OF SOIL ............................................................. 15

12 . QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMME .................................................. 16 12.1 Check Testing ............................................................................. 16 12.2 Results of Duplicates Submitted to WSL .............................................. 17 12.3 Results of External Quality Assurance Check Testing .............................. 17 12.4 Results of WSL’s Internal Quality Control Testing .................................. 18

13 . DISCUSSION .................................................................................... 19 13.1 Remedial Works and Contaminant Management ..................................... 19 13.2 Health and Environmental Impact ...................................................... 20

13.2.1 Health Considerations ............................................................. 20 13.2.2 Environmental Impact ............................................................. 20

14 . CONCLUSION .................................................................................. 21

15 . LIMITATIONS OF THIS REPORT .......................................................... 23

16 . REFERENCES ................................................................................... 24

Golder Associates

79 of 229

October 14, 1997 .ii- 966 1368012 18

Table 1 Table 2 Table 3

Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 1 1

4

Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4

Plate 1

Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C

Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F

TABLES

Analytical Programme Summary of Analytical Results - Inorganics Summary of Analytical Results - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Monocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Summary of Analytical Results - Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Summary of Analytical Results - Organochlorine Pesticides Summary of Analytical Results -Chlorinated Hydrocarbons Summary of Analytical Results - Volatile Halogenated Organics Summary of Analytical Results - Polychlorinated Biphenyls Summary of Analytical Results - Preliminary Assessment Results of Quality Assurance Check Testing - Duplicates Analysed by WSL Results of Quality Assurance Check Testing - Duplicates Analysed by AEL

FIGURES

Plan of Subdivision Former Factory Layout Sample Locations and Depth of Fill Exceedances of ANZECC/NHMRC Level B Criteria

PLATES

Historical Aerial Photographs

APPENDICES

Work Plan Survey Plan of Sample Locations Report of Test Pits Notes and Abbreviations Method of Soil Classification Analytical Results - WSL Consultants Pty Ltd Analytical Results - AEL Pty Ltd Important Information About Your Environmental Site Assessment

Colder Associates 80 of 229

October 14, 1997 -1- 966 1368012 18

1. INTRODUCTION

Golder Associates has completed a Stage 2 contamination assessment of Lot 10 at the

former Massey Fergusson site located on Ballarat in Sunshine (Figure 1). The Stage 2

assessment has been conducted for Atkinson Project Management (Aust) Pty Ltd (Atkinson)

on behalf of the Department of Justice. It is proposed that the site is developed for use as a

Police and Courts Complex and Atkinson are project managing the redevelopment of site to

that end.

A preliminary contamination assessment was undertaken of the land including Lot 10 by

Golder Associates in 1991 (Reference 1). A review of the preliminary assessment work was

completed in March 1997 by Golder Associates (Reference 2) so that the Department of

Justice could make an informed decision as to the appropriate measures to deal with soil

contamination on Lot 10.

Subsequently, a statutory Environmental Audit is being conducted of the site and the EPA

appointed Environmental Audit (Contaminated Land) that has been engaged to undertake

the Audit is Mr Rick Graham (the Auditor) of Sinclair Knight Men. The works completed

as part of this phase of assessment were undertaken following consultation with the Auditor.

Lot 10 is covers approximately 1.97 ha and is currently vacant.

2. SCOPE OF WORK

A proposal to conduct the Stage 2 Contamination Assessment was provided to Atkinson in a

letter dated March 18, 1997 (Reference P971554). The Stage 2 Contamination Assessment

involved the following scope of work:

Development of a formal work plan and quality assurance programme for the Stage 2

Contamination Assessment developed in light of Auditor comment.

Implementation of the work plan including field investigation and chemical analysis.

Field investigation works involved selection of a further twenty sample locations at the

site. Inclusive of the sample locations selected on Lot 10 that were investigated as part of

the previous investigation work, the resultant number of locations is thirty.

Recovery of soil samples from the twenty locations.

Golder Associates

81 of 229

October 14, 1997 -2- 966 1368012 18

Analysis of samples for known site contaminants and broadly screen selected samples

for a range of potential contaminants.

Comparison of chemical analysis results of the samples for this Stage 2 assessment and

the preliminary assessment with published Australian and International guidelines and

assessment of the implications of the results.

Preparation of reporting outlining the findings of the two stages of contamination

assessment, particularly with respect to completing the Audit of the site.

Liaison with the Auditor during the assessment process.

3. BACKGROUND

3.1 General

Lot 10 formed the north east portion of the former Massey Fergusson property. Two

previous contamination assessments have been undertaken by Golder Associates that

include information that is relevant to Lot 10. The results are presented in reports dated

October 199 1 and May 1992 (References 1 and 3).

The October 1991 report presents the results of the preliminary investigation over the entire

Massey Fergusson site covering 24 ha and included Lot 10.

Other reports address specific areas of the overall Massey Fergusson site to the south and

provides a general background to the nature of the contamination (Reference 3) but does not

provide additional specific data for Lot 10.

For completeness, the results of the previous assessment (Reference 1) are included and

discussed in this report.

3.2 Site History

The site history for Lot 10 has been developed based on the site history developed for the

entire Massey Fergusson property as part of earlier assessments and in particular is based

extensively on the Massey Fergusson Site Study. Stage 2 Report (Reference 4).


October 14, 1997 -3- 966136801218

3.2.1 Massey Fergusson Site - General

The Massey Fergusson property has been occupied by agncultural machinery manufacturers

from 1889 including the HV McKay Harvester Company from 1904 to 1955 and

subsequently Massey Fergusson until 1986.

The original subdivision of the area occurred in 1850. In 1889 the Braybrook (Agncultural)

Implement Company was established on the property. In 1904 this company was brought

out by the HV McKay Harvester Company from Ballarat which manufactured the “Sunshine

Harvester”. The operations of the Sunshine Harvester Works expanded to occupy the current

property and parts of the surrounding area. In 1955 the “Works” were purchased by Massey

Fergusson who ultimately scaled down production at the property in the 1970s and 1980s,

which culminated in closure of the property in 1986. Most of the buildings were

subsequently demolished in 1991.

A plan showing the finals uses for various areas as identified O’Connor Wargon Chapman,

who were responsible for the decommissioning works at the property. Also shown are

various more specific uses of the area identified by Mr D McKay, a former employee of the

factory who was interviewed as part of the site history research.

Uses of parts of the property included foundries, metal and wood manufacturing and

processing areas, agncultural and equipment assembly areas, paint dips, paint shops,


The northern area of the property encompassing Lot 10 was known as the “Northern

Paddock” and covered area of approximately 6 ha. The remainder of the Massey Fergusson

property covers an approximate 18 ha area and until the early 1990s was mainly occupied

by factory buildings. At the time of preparation of this report, all the former buildings on the

Massey Fergusson property had been demolished except the Bulk Store in the southern part

of the property and construction works associated with redevelopment of parts of the

property had commenced.

A creek originally traversed the property from Anderson Road to Hampshire Road near

Hertford Road. This was subsequently diverted to an underground drain which crossed

beneath the property. More recently, creek flows upstream of the site have been diverted

into a drain along Anderson Road.


October 14, 1997 -4- 9661 368012 18

3.2.2 Site History of Lot 10

The overall Massey Fergusson property has been used for the manufacture of agricultural

equipment since 1889. A review of aerial photographs from 1946, 1956, 1964 and 1981

indicates that the area of Lot 10 changed very little during that period (Plate 1).

The buildings and features in Lot 10 generally remained as shown in Figure 2. These

included a large storage building covering much of the northern portion of Lot 10, two

railway lines entering Lot 10 from the west and general open and covered storage areas

covering the remainder of the lot. The railway lines were used to transport in the raw

~ materials and transport the finished machinery products from the site. Review of the aerial photographs indicates such stockpiles along the railway in Lot 10.

The open areas appeared to be unpaved throughout this time. It is understood that the store

and storage areas were used for the storage of raw materials for the plant including timber

and metal.

The storage building was demolished and some of the railway lines were removed in the

1980s before the remainder of the Massey Fergusson site building; which were demolished

in the early 1990s. Since then the site has remained vacant.

3.3 Results of Previous Assessments

The preliminary assessment of Lot 10 carried out by Golder Associates in 1991 (Reference

1) indicated that variable fil l containing factory wastes overlies natural soil. The only

exceedances of ANZECCNMRC Level B criteria were for the metals arsenic, chromium,

copper, nickel and zinc in the fill and chromium and zinc in the natural soil. Five

exceedances of the Proposed Dutch Intervention Values were found for samples of fi l l for

copper and zinc and one exceedence for a sample of natural soil due to an elevated zinc

concentration.

A review of the preliminary assessment work was undertaken by Golder Associates in 1997

(Reference 2). The review was undertaken to allow the Department of Justice to make an

informed decision as to the appropriate measures to deal with soil contamination on Lot 10,

given the proposed use of the site as a Police and Courts Complex.


October 14, 1997 -5- 966136801218

The review found based on the results of the 1991 assessment, Lot 10 was considered

suitable for general commercial or industrial uses and more specifically for a police station

and courts complex providing a contaminant management plan is put in place. In general, it

was considered that this would require that a minimum thickness of 300 mm of soil should

be placed over the existing materials in areas that were not to be covered by buildings or

pavements. This was to provide a separation layer between site users and potentially

contaminated materials.

Although no underground tanks were believed to be present, it is possible that such tanks or

similar sub-surface features or localised undiscovered areas of contamination could exist on

the site. In the event that these were found during development works, the review indicated

that they should be removed and validation sampling and analysis of remaining soil should

be undertaken to demonstrate that contaminant levels are suitably low. An on-going

contaminant management plan would have to be implemented. This would address issues

such as maintenance of the separation layer.

Given the history of the Massey Ferguson property, it was recommended that in order to

demonstrate with a high level of confidence that Lot 10 is suitable for use as a police station

and courts complex, a Statement of Environmental Audit should be obtained. Further, it

was considered that this should be done as part of the re-development process and that the

approach would involve:

Completing a Stage 2 contamination assessment of Lot 10 prior to any re-development.

The scope of the Stage 2 assessment would be determined in conjunction with the

Auditor.

0 Carrying out any localised clean-up considered necessary by the Auditor prior to or at the

start of re-development.

Development and implementation of a plan to manage any further localised

contamination found during the earth-works for the redevelopment.

Issue of a Statement of Environmental Audit.

Implementation of any conditions applied to the Statement such as the provision of a

layer of clean soil in areas not covered by buildings and pavements.

Colder Associates

85 of 229

October 14, 1997 -6- 966136801218

This approach was adopted and has led to the completion of the Stage 2 Contamination

Assessment and the preparation of this report.

4. STAGE 2 FIELD INVESTIGATION

A work plan and quality assurance programme for the Stage 2 assessment were developed

incorporating Auditor comment. The aim of the field investigation was to

provide additional information regarding the suitability of on site soil and fill for use on the

site for a police and courts complex; and

1

provide the Auditor with additional information to facilitate the completion of an

Environmental Audit of the site.

The works undertaken as part of the field investigation are detailed in the work plan

included in Appendix A. Details regarding the field investigation are summarised below.

4.1 Selection of Selection of Sample Locations

The Stage 2 assessment works involve the selection of a further 20 sample locations at Lot

10. Soil samples had been recovered from ten locations across Lot 10 as part of previous

investigation works undertaken by Golder Associates (Reference 1). The total number of

soil sample locations is now thirty which adequately meets the requirements recommended

for a 1.97 ha site outlined in the Draft Australian Standard for the Sampling of Soils Par[ 1:

Guide to the Sampling and Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Soil (Reference 5) .

Samples locations (inclusive of the preliminary assessment) are on an approximate 30 m

gnd and additional sample locations have been place in areas of potential concern.

Of the twenty sample locations selected for the Stage 2 assessment, four were located in the

vicinity of a former store, five in the vicinity of the rail lines, three within known timber

storage areas and eight across the general site to broadly screen for contamination. Details

relating to sample locations for the Preliminary and Stage 2 assessments are outlined below.


October 14, 1997 -7- 966 1 3 68012 1 8

Area of Potential Preliminary Assessment Stage 2 Assessment Concern

Store TP 4, TP 5 , TP 9 G97TP I , G97TP2, G97TP3, G97TP9

G97TP IO, G97TP 1 I , G97TP14, G97TP15,

G97TP 19 Timber Store Areas TP 14, TP 20 G97TP13, G97TP16,

G97TP 17 Site General TP IO, TP 13, TP IS, G97TP4, G97TPS,

G97TP6, G97TP7, G97TP8, G97TP12, G97TP 18, G97TP20

Rail Lines

TP 18, TP 19

The sample locations for the Stage 2 assessment were located by survey. A copy of the

I survey plan is included in Appendix B.

4.2 Soil Sampling

The Stage 2 field investigation involved soil sampling from twenty test pits and was

undertaken on July 16 and 17, 1997. A total of 90 samples were recovered from the test pits.

Descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered at each test pit and depths at which

samples were recovered are presented in Appendix C, Report of Test Pits. A summary of the

Notes and Abbreviations Used and the Method of Soil Classification are also included in

Appendix C.

Throughout the sampling, a Microtip photoionisation detector (PID) was used to identify the

possible presence of volatile organic compounds in the soil. The PID was fitted with a 10.6

eV lamp and was calibrated to iso-butylene. Its response to iso-butylene was checked before

the instrument was used.

Sampling was undertaken using Golder Associates Standard Sampling Protocols which are

included as part of Work Plan (Appendix A). In summary, sampling equipment was cleaned

prior to recovering each sample to minimise the potential of cross contamination between

samples. The following procedure was used:

0 a rinse to remove adhered soil;

washing in phosphate fiee detergent;

a final rinse in tap water; and

0

0

0 a rinse in distilled water.


October 14, 1997 -8- 9661 3680121 8

The soil samples were placed in clean pre-washed jars or head space vials and stored under

cooled conditions while in the field and in transit. A chain of custody record was kept for all

soil samples from the time of sample collection until delivery to the laboratory.

5. SITE CONDITIONS

5.1 Site Geology

The Geological Survey of Victoria 1:63,360 scale Melbourne Mapsheet indicates that the

site is underlain by early Quaternary Aged Newer Volcanics basalt. The natural soil and

, rock encountered at the site are consistent with those indications.

5.2 Surface Conditions

At the time of the assessment the site was vacant land and the surface was largely grass

covered. Some disturbance was noted due to the Brimbank City Council’s road construction

activities, particularly around the southern and western boundaries. The fall across the site is

approximately 1.5 m in a north to south direction.

The site is bounded to the north by Ballarat Road; east of the site land is currently used for

commercial purposes. Land to the south land is being developed for use as a shopping and

cinema complex, while land to the west over Harvester Road is being developed for Vic

Roads.

5.3 Subsurface Conditions

Fill was encountered at all 30 locations investigated as part of the Preliminary and Stage 2

assessments. In summary, the depth of fil l in the test pits excavated was found to range from

0.1 m to 1.9 m. The shallowest fi l l was generally found on the northern portion of the Lot

10, while areas of deeper fill were found near the southern and eastern boundaries of the

site. The depth of fi l l at each sample locations is shown on Figure 3.

The layer of f i l l was variable in nature and was found to be primarily silty, gravelly or

clayey and in places to include bitumen, crushed rock, slag, ash, coke, wood including

railway sleepers, scrap metal, brick, ballast and plastic. The fill encountered on Lot 10 is

considered to be consistent in nature with the f i l l encountered on other portions of the

Massey Fergusson site.


October 14, 1997 -9- 966136801218

The natural soil encountered was generally a greyhrown silty clay which is consistent with

the expected natural soil that overlies the basalt of the area. Basalt rock was encountered in

four out of the thirty test pits excavated.

A photoionisation detector (PID) survey was undertaken involving recording of field PID

readings of soil samples. PID readings were generally less than 1 ppm. However, the near

surface samples of fill recovered from G97TP9 and G97TP20 had PID readings of 64.2 ppm

and 9.8 ppm respectively. Vial samples were recovered for volatile organic analysis.

Selected samples with low PID readings were also analysed for volatile organic compounds

, to confirm that these compounds were not present at significant concentrations in the soil.

5.4 Groundwater

Groundwater or perched groundwater was not encountered in any of the thirty test pits

excavated as part of the Preliminary or Stage 2 assessment.

A review of regional groundwater conditions was undertaken as part of previous

investigation work at the former Massey Fergusson site (Reference 6). This review found

A line of boreholes drilled about 500 m west of the site which indicates that the

groundwater table is 10 to 15 m below ground surface

A line of boreholes which are understood to be monitored by Southern Rural Water

about 1 km north of the site, indicate groundwater levels 10 to 16.5 m below ground

surface.

The regional information is considered to confirm that the regional groundwater table at the

site would be at a depth in excess of 10 m.

6. LABORATORY ANALYSIS

WSL Consultants Pty Ltd (WSL) was engaged as the primary analytical laboratory for the

project. Australian Environmental Laboratories Pty Ltd (AEL) was engaged as the secondary

laboratory for quality assurance purposes. Both WSL and AEL are NATA registered for the

analyses undertaken. Laboratory reporting sheets showing the analytical methods used and

NATA certification for the analyses undertaken by WSL are presented in Appendix D and by

AEL in Appendix E. WSL also conducted an internal quality assurance testing program.

Golder Associates

89 of 229

October 14, 1997 -10- 966 1368012 18

Laboratory reporting sheets for the internal quality control testing are presented in Appendix

D.

Samples were generally analysed for total petroleum hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic

hydrocarbons and the metals arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury and zinc.

Selected samples were also analysed for the EPA Screen.

Field duplicates of samples were submitted to the primary and secondary laboratory for quality

assurance check testing. Of the fifty three samples analysed, five duplicates were submitted to

each of the laboratories. Duplicates were analysed for total petroleum hydrocarbons,

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and the metals arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead,

mercury and zinc.

The complete analytical programme is further outlined in Table 1.

7. INITIAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

The results of chemical analyses of soil samples collected during this investigation were

initially compared with published Australian criteria in order to assess the severity of

contamination of soil at the site. The general criteria used in this report are presented in the

Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for the Assessment and Management of Contaminated

Sites, January 1992 (ANZECC/NHMRC Guidelines) (Reference 7). Specifically, the criteria

are ANZECCMHMRC Level B guidelines which are environmental investigation levels, and

exceedances are considered to indicate the need for further investigation and assessment of the

contamination.

The ANZECCMHMRC guidelines indicate that where no A N Z E C C M C Level B criteria

exists, the Dutch Level B (Reference 8) should be used as a threshold value for environmental

concerns. Dutch Proposed Intervention Values have also been used in this report as a fkrther

point of comparison (Reference 9).

Contaminant concentrations below ANZECCMHMRC Level B (or Dutch Level B) are

generally considered as suitable for any beneficial use. Contaminant concentrations above

these levels require further site specific assessment of their health and environmental impact,

with the nature of the proposed land use being an important factor in determining acceptable

contaminant concentrations. As a general guide, contaminant concentration levels above the


October 14, 1997 -1 1- 966 1368012 18

ANZECC/NHMRC Level B (or Dutch Level B), but below the Dutch Proposed Intervention

Value are generally considered acceptable for land intended for commercial or industrial uses.

Depending on site specific factors, higher contaminant concentrations may also be tolerable.

The criteria used for this assessment are summarised in Tables 2 to 8.

8. COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS WITH ENVIRONMENTAL

INVESTIGATION CRITERIA

The analytical result reporting sheets for the Stage 2 assessment are presented Appendix D.

, The analytical results of the Stage 2 analysis are summarised in Tables 2 to 8 and the results of the preliminary assessment are summarised in Table 9. For both the preliminary and

Stage 2 assessment the results for which there were exceedances of the ANZECC/NHMRC

Level B criteria are shown on Figure 4.

8.1 Fill

The pH of the fill was found to range from 7.4 to 9.0 to indicating alkaline conditions.

Comparison of the chemical analysis results indicate that samples with concentrations of the

;metals arsenic, copper, chromium, lead, zinc, manganese or nickel that exceeded the

ANZECCNHMRC Level B criteria in fill occurred across the site (Figure 4).

Concentrations of the metals antimony, barium, beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, mercury,

molybdenum, selenium and tin were all below the ANZECC/NHMRC Level criteria in the

samples analysed.

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were generally not detected at concentrations above the

laboratory method detection limit in the samples analysed. However, the concentration of

the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon benzo(a)pyrene in two samples marginally exceeded

the ANZECCNHMRC Level B criterion of 1 mgkg. These were from test locations

G97TP15 and G97TP18, the locations of which is shown on Figure 4. There were no

exceedances of the ANZECC/NHMRC Level criterion of 20 mgkg for total polycyclic

aromatic hydrocarbons.

Concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons were generally below the laboratory method

detection limit. However, the heavier end fractions were detected in samples at

concentrations above the laboratory method detection limit but below the


October 14, 1997 -12- 966 13680/2 18

ANZECCAWMRC Level B criteria in some fill samples recovered from test pits including

TP 9, TP 10, TP 15, TP 18, TP 20, G97TP17, G97TP18, G97TP19 and G97TP20. The

concentration in a duplicate recovered from G97TP 17 had a concentration that exceeded the

ANZECC/NHMRC Level B criteria.

The concentration of sulphate, cyanide, total phenolics, pentachlorophenol, cyanide,

monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, volatile halogenated organics, polychlorinated

biphenyls, organochlorine pesticides and chlorinated hydrocarbons were all below the

laboratory method detection limit and therefore below relevant ANZECCMHMRC Level B

criteria in the samples analysed. In addition, although elevated PID readings were found for

, samples G97TP9/1 and G97TP20/1 (64.2 ppm and 9.8 ppm, respectively) the chemical analyses results do not indicate the presence of volatile organic compounds in the soil at

these locations.

The concentrations of metals in some samples also exceeded Proposed Dutch Intervention

Values, these are also shown on Figure 4 and are summarised below.

Sample Location Sample Depth Contaminant(s) Concentration

Preliminary Assessment TP IO 0.05-0.1 m Copper 300 mgkg TP 15 0.15-0.2 m Copper 2 I O mgkg TP 18 0.05-0.08 m Copper, zinc 2900 mgkg, 3000 mgkg

of Concern

0.35-0.4 m Zinc 1000 mgkg 0.75-0.8 m Zinc 1000 mgkg

Stage 2 Assessment G97TP9 0.0-0.1 m Copper 500 mgkg G97TP10 0.4-0.5 m Copper 1300 rngkg G97TP 13 0.3-0.4 m Copper, zinc 4200 mgkg, 940 mgkg G97TP18 1.0-1.1 m Chromium, 2000 mgkg, 440 mgkg

G97TP14 0.0-0.1 m Copper 260 mgkg 0.3-0.4 m Copper 470 mgkg

G97TP 17 0.4-0.5 m Lead 4500 mgkg G97TP 16 0.4-0.5 m Copper, zinc 290 mgkg, 780 mgkg G97TP I5 0.0-0.1 rn Copper 520 mgkg

copper

8.2 Natural Soil

The pH of the natural soil ranged from 7.1 to 9.0 indicating an alkaline condition.

Concentrations of the metals were generally below the ANZECCAWMRC Level B criteria.

Concentrations of chromium exceeded the ANZECC/NHMRC Level B criterion of 50

mgkg and ranged up to 80 mgkg at six locations. There were no exceedances of the

Proposed Dutch Intervention Values for chromium in the natural soil. The concentration of


October 14, 1997 -13- 9661 3680121 8

zinc at TP 18 at a depth of 0.75 m was 1000 mgkg which exceeded the Proposed. Dutch

Intervention Value of 720 mgkg.

Concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in

samples of the natural soil analysed were not detected at concentrations above the laboratory

method detection limit and were therefore below relevant ANZECC/NHMRC Level B

criteria.

8.3 Results of Elutriation Testing

Upon receipt of the preliminary analytical results, samples that were considered to have

significantly elevated concentrations of a particular metal or metals (typically where there

were exceedances of the Dutch Proposed Intervention criteria) underwent elutriation testing

for those metals.

The results of the elutriation testing are summarised below. Sample Sample Contaminant(s) of Total Concentration Elutriable Fraction Location Depth G97TP9 0.0-0.1 rn G97TP10 0.4-0.5 rn G97TP13 0.3-0.4 rn G97TP 14 0.0-0.1 rn

0.3-0.4 rn G97TP 15 0.0-0.1 rn G97TP 16 0.4-0.5 rn G97TP17 0.0-0.1 rn

G97TP18 1 .O-l . I rn Chromium, copper 2000 rngkg, 440 rngkg 0.08 rnglL, 0. I7 mg/L 0.4-0.5 rn Lead 4500mgkg 420 mglL

Concern Copper Copper Copper, zinc Copper Copper Copper Copper, zinc Lead

500 rngkg 1300 rngkg 4200 rngkg, 940 mgkg 2GO mgkg 470 rngkg 520 mgkg 290 rngkg, 780 rngkg 34 r n g k g

0.1 I rnglL 2.4 mglL 7.9 rng/L, 2.7 rnglL 0. I6 mglL 0.05 mg/L 0.20 rng/L 0.02 rng/L, 1.2 rnglL 48 rnglL

These leachabilities are generally low. However, the elutriable lead fiactions in the samples

from G97TP17 exceed the maximums allowed by the EPA for Low Level Contaminated

Soil (Reference 11).

9. COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS WITH HEALTH

INVESTIGATION LEVELS

The concentration of contaminants has also been compared to the Health Based Soil

Investigation Levels outlined in the National Environmental Health Forum Monographs

Soils Series No. 1 (Reference 10) where there were exceedances of ANZECCAWMRC

Level B criteria. The future use of the site as a police and courts complex would essentially

be for a commercial type use involving covering much of the site with buildings and for

open space type use. However, there will also be some open space. Therefore, the Health

Based Soil Investigation Levels for a commercial and for open space type use for arsenic,


October 14, 1997 -14- 966 1368012 18

copper, chromium, lead, manganese, nickel, zinc and the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon

benzo(a)pyrene are outlined below

Contaminant Health Based Investigation Health Based Investigation

(mg/kg) Recreational Open Space Level for Commercial Use Level for Parks and

(mglkg) Arsenic 500 200 Copper 5000 2000

Chromiurn(l1l) 60% 24% Chrornium(V1) 500 200

Lead I500 GOO Manganese 7500 3000

Nickel 3000 GOO Zinc 35000 14000

Note: Based on experience in the area Chromium (VI) is likely to be present only as a very small percentage of total chromium. The remainder will be Chromium (111).

Benzo(a)pyrene 5 2

Review of the chemical analysis results indicate that there is only one exceedence of the

NEHF Health Based Investigation Levels for commercial use for lead. This is for a sample

recovered from a depth of 0.4 m from G97TP17. Concentrations in primary and duplicate

samples ranged from 3500 mgkg to 14000 mgkg.

The exceedences of NEHF Health Based Investigation Levels for open space are as follows:

Contaminant Sample Location Sample Depth (m) Concentration Copper G97TP13 0.3-0.4 4200

Lead G97TP17 0.4-0.5 4500 Manganese G97TP8 0.0-0. I 3100

10. AUDITOR’S SITE SPECIFIC CRITERIA

The Auditor has also developed site specific criteria relating to acceptable contaminant

levels that can remain on the site. Exceedances of the Auditor’s site specific criteria indicate

the need for either further investigation or clean up. The site specific criteria developed by

the Auditor are outlined below.

Contaminant Auditor’s Site Specific Criteria (mglkg)

Arsenic 200 Copper zoo0 Lead 600 Zinc I4000 Other metals Total petroleum hydrocarbons

observed from health perspective

C , G IO0 Total Clo-C,, (0.0- I .O m of finished surface) Total Clo-C,, (below I .O m of finished surface)

Polvcvclic aromatic hydrocarbons (total) IO0

IO00 5000


October 14, 1997 -15- 966 1368012 18

Comparison of the chemical analysis results for the preliminary and Stage 2 assessments

indicates samples which contained contaminant concentrations that exceeded the Auditor’s

site specific criteria were:

A sample recovered from a depth of 0.3 m from G97TP13 which had a copper

concentration of 4,200 mg/kg; and

A primary sample recovered from a depth of 0.4 m from G97TP17 which had a lead

concentration of 3500 mg/kg. Lead concentrations of 4500 mgkg and 14000 mgkg

were found in duplicates of the sample sent to the primary and secondary laboratory

respectively. The average total CIo-C36 concentration in the primary and duplicate

samples was 1100 mgkg which also exceeds the Auditor’s criteria. ,

11. OFF SITE DISPOSAL OF SOIL

If during site development soil is to be disposed off site, it must be undertaken with regard

to off-site disposal criteria set out in EPA Bulletin 448, Classification of Wastes (Reference

11). Soil and fil l can be categorised into four types:

Fill Material (clean fill) which comprises soil, gravel and rock - Concentrations of potential

contaminants must not exceed those listed as the maximum concentrations allowed as

outlined in Table 3 of in EPA Bulletin 448, Classification of Wastes (Reference 11).

Solid Inert Material which comprises demolition material, concrete, bricks, timber, plastic,

bitumen and shredded tyres.

Low Level Contaminated Soil - Contaminant concentrations and elutriable fractions must

not exceed those listed as the maximum concentrations set out in Table 3 of in EPA Bulletin

448. Classification of Wastes (Reference 11).

Prescribed Waste as listed in the Prescribed Waste Regulations and Table 4 of in EPA

Bulletin 448, Classification of Wastes (Reference 11).

There are generally no environmental restrictions on the handling of Fill Material. Soil

meeting Fill Material criteria generally does not require disposal to a licensed landfill. EPA

requirements state that the disposal of Fill Material must not give rise to any off site impact.


October 14, 1997 -16- 966 1 368012 1 8

In view of the known industrial history of the site, it would be considered prudent to dispose

of Fill Material sourced from the site to landfill.

Soil meeting Low Level Contaminated Soil Criteria must be disposed of to an appropriately

licensed landfill. Victorian EPA approval to dispose of Low Level Contaminated Soil is also

required. Victorian EPA approval is likely to require onerous testing requirements.

Soil that does not meet the Low Level Contaminated Soil Criteria nominally requires

disposal as Prescribed Waste. This is generally to an appropriately licensed landfill.

Transport and disposal of the soil must be carried out in vehicles utilising Waste Transport

Certificates and licensed to carry Prescribed Waste. If the landfill license criteria for

Prescribed Waste are exceeded, treatment such as fixation will be required before the

material will be accepted.

12. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMME

The quality assurance programme submission of duplicates to both WSL and AEL for check

testing and a review of the internal quality control results by WSL.

12.1 Check Testing

The results of the check testing have been assessed in terms of Relative Percent Difference

(RPD) calculated as

A - B %RPD = 1-1 ~ 2 0 0 A + B

Where,

A is the concentration of an analyte in a sample as determined by the primary

laboratory; and

B is the concentration of the same analyte in the duplicate of the sample.

RPD values can range from 0 to 200, with a value of 0 representing perfect agreement behveen

laboratories, whilst a value approaching 200 represents a complete divergence of results. For

the purposes of this assessment Golder Associates consider that an RPD which are 6 0 %

represent good correlation between laboratory results.


October 14, 1997 -17- 966136801218

Where the laboratories have used different detection limits and the results are indicated to be

consistent or if both the laboratories have determined the concentration of the analyte as being

below the laboratory detection limit, then a nominal RPD value of < 50% has been assigned.

However, if the results obtained do not indicate that the results are consistent, for example, one

results is say 4 0 and the other result is 15, then the RPD for the analyte has been calculated

using half the he detection limit.

The results of the quality assurance testing for duplicates submitted to WSL for analysis are

presented in Appendix D and calculated RPDs are summarised in Tables 10 and are

discussed in Section 12.2. The calculated RPDs for samples analysed by the primary

laboratory (WSL) and duplicates analysed by the second laboratory (AEL) are included in

Tables 11 and are discussed in section 12.3. Results of internal quality assurance undertaken

by WSL is discussed in Section 12.4.

12.2 Results of Duplicates Submitted to WSL

Two W D s of greater than 50% were found out of the 135 quality assurance check analyses

carried out on field duplicates analysed by WSL. These were for lead in duplicate samples of

fill from Test Locations G97TP10 and G97TP12. The differences are between field duplicates

which may not be entirely homogeneous and are not considered to affect the result of the

assessment. Overall, the results are therefore indicated to exhibit a high degree of

reproducability .

12.3 Results of External Quality Assurance Check Testing

RPDs of greater than 50% were found for 14 out of the 135 quality assurance check analyses

canied out on field duplicates analysed by AEL. Nine of these were found for some duplicate

analysis of the metals arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, mercury, lead and zinc, two were

for the petroleum hydrocarbon fractions C29-C36, total cIo-c36 in one duplicate and three for

the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons phenanthrene, fluoranthene and pyrene in one duplicate.

Although there is some variation in the results obtained by the two laboratories as indicated by

exceedances of the 50% criterion, overall the results obtained generally do indicate a level of

consistency. Discrepancies have generally occurred when one laboratory reports a low

concentrations of a particular contaminant and the other laboratory reports the concentration as

less than the laboratory method detection limit or also in a low concentration. In particular, in

the twelve duplicates, where the result obtained by the primary laboratory was less than the


October 14, 1997 -18- 966136801218

ANZECCMHMRC Level B criterion, the result obtained by the second laboratory was also

less than the ANZECCMHMRC Level B criterion in all but one case.

The exception was a TPH analysis of a fill sample from a depth of 0.4m to 0.5m at test

location G97TP17. The results of analyses on duplicate samples in the Clo to c36 range were

used as follow:

Primary Sample

WSL Field Duplicate

AEL Field Duplicate

860 mglkg

950 mgkg

1480 mglkg

f

All three analysed identified TPH in the CIS to CZ8 and CZ9 to c 3 6 ranges. The discrepancies

are considered most likely due to variability between the field duplicates. Assessment of

results have been based on the concentration of TF’H exceeding ANZECCNHRMC Level B

(or in the case Dutch Level B) criteria and also the Auditors site specific criteria.

The remaining duplicate with an RPD of >50 was for lead in the same sample of fill from test

location G97TP17. This is the same sample as the one with a TPH with an RPD of >50. The

results of analyses were as follows:

Primary Sample

WSL Field Duplicate

AEL Field Duplicate

3500 mgkg

4500 mgkg

14000 mgkg

The variation is considered to be most likely due to sample inhomogeneity.

exceeded the Auditors site specific criteria.

outcome of the assessment.

All results

Therefore the variation does not affect the

12.4 Results of WSL’s Internal Quality Control Testing

The results of the internal quality control testing undertaken by WSL are included in Appendix

D to this report. The internal quality control testing comprised of analysis of spikes and duplicates. A total of 44 spike analysis and 66 duplicate analysis were undertaken. Spikes and duplicates were analysed for approximately 10% of all samples analysed. Spike and duplicate results have been expressed as percentage of the expected result. The results of the spike analysis ranged from 84% to 11 1%. Results for duplicates ranged from 90% to 119 YO. The internal quality control results are within the range 75% to 125% which is considered to indicate satisfactory reproducability of laboratory results for quality control purposes.


October 14, 1997 -19- 966 1368012 1 8 ~ ~

13. DISCUSSION

13.1 Remedial Works and Contaminant Management

Discussion with the Auditor has indicated that in the two known areas where contaminant

concentrations exceed his site specific criteria there will have to be localised remedial

works. These two areas centre around G97TP13 and G97TP17. It is considered that as the

contaminants of concern are restricted to the layer of fill and that the full layer of fi l l should

be remediated. As the exceedances of the Auditor’s site specific are highly localised, it is

considered that the following approach to remedial works would be appropriate:

Excavate the layer of fill within a 5 m radius centred around G97TP13. Excavation will

be to a nominal depth of 0.6 m to remove the elevated concentrations of copper; and

Excavate the layer of fill within a 5 m radius centred around G97TP17. Excavation will

be to a nominal depth of 0.7 m to remove the elevated concentrations of lead and

petroleum hydrocarbon.

The material excavated from both these areas will have to be disposed off site as Prescribed

Waste. In the case of material excavated from G97TP17, this may require fixation because

of the leachability of the lead. An alternative is to treat the material on site in a manner that

will satisfy the Auditor. This could involve mixing the material with sufficient cement to

reduce its leachability to meet Low Level Contaminated Soil Criteria. The fixed waste

could then be placed under a building. However, this is subject to approval of the Auditor.

Following the excavation of the two areas, the Auditor is likely to require validation

sampling and analysis to confirm that residual contaminant concentrations at the boundary

of the excavations are below the site specific criteria and that no further excavation works

are required.

If the excavations are to be backfilled suitable fil l sourced from the site can be used.

Following redevelopment, in areas where potentially contaminated fil l may be present in

areas not covered by roadway, pavement or buildings, a layer of clean soil will need to be

placed. These areas are typically areas where landscaping is to occur. The Auditor has

indicated that it will be acceptable to cover these areas with a 0.3 m layer of clean soil. The

clean soil used should meet contaminant concentrations specified for Fill Material outlined

in EPA Iffortnation Bttlletin, Classification of Wastes, Publication 448 (Reference 1 1).

Golder Associates

99 of 229

October 14, 1997 -20- 966 1368012 1 8

13.2 Health and Environmental Impact

The health and environmental impacts have been assessed based on the results of the two

stages of investigation and proposed remedial works.

13.2.1 Health Considerations

Works are to be undertaken to remediate the two areas where known concentrations of

contaminants exceed the Site Specific criteria developed by the Auditor. This will involve

the excavation and off site disposal of the contaminated soil and fill or treatment in a

manner acceptable to the Auditor. As a result there will be no known exceedances of the

NEHF Health Investigation Levels for commercial use in the existing fill or underlying

natural soil at Lot 10 unless the soil has been treated to the requirement of the Auditor.

Although ‘hot spots’ may be present, these will be addressed by the addition of a separation

layer. This will separate the users of the site from potentially elevated contaminant

concentrations and may be in the form of building, pavement or a layer of clean soil. In

addition, an ongoing contaminant management plan will be developed and implemented to

address any works such as maintenance works which may breach the separation layer. This

approach will also address the one exceedence of NEHF Health Based Investigation Levels

for open space that will not be addressed by remediation.

In view of these measure which are to be implemented as part of site development, it is

considered that the residual contamination at the site will not affect the health of site users.

13.2.2 Environmental Impact

The results of the assessments indicate generally low contaminant concentrations present in

the natural soil. This indicates minimal evidence of leaching of potential contaminants into

the natural soil from the overlying layer of fill. The results of the elutriation testing are

generally low and indicate low potential for to leaching from the layer of fi l l to occur. The

result of elutriation testing undertaken on two samples of fi l l recovered from G97TP17

indicate the lead in the fill is mobile and could potentially leach into the underlying natural

soil. However, a review of the total concentration of lead in the underlying sample of

natural soil demonstrates that this has not occurred.


October 14, 1997 -21- 966136801218

In addition, measures are to be implemented which will reduce the environmental impact of

the identified contaminant concentrations include:

undertaking remediation of two hot spots

covering most of the site with buildings or pavements

covering remaining areas with a minimum 0.3 m layer of clean soil that meets EPA Fill

Material criteria.

As result, all areas where site fill remains will be covered. Therefore there is considered to

be little opportunity for dust generated from particularly the site fill to impact on the

~ environment.

Also, in view of the depth of groundwater and the generally low leachability of the

contaminants, there is considered to be little opportunity for contamination associated with

the layer of fill at the site to impact on the groundwater following remedial works. However,

the measures outlined will also reduce infiltration of rain and surface water thereby further

reducing the potential for contaminants leached from the fill at the site to contaminate

groundwater.

The layer of clean soil imported into areas where landscaping is to occur will also provide

protection for plants that have their root zone founded in this material.

Therefore, in view of the measures to be implemented with respect to environmental issues,

it is therefore considered that the residual contamination at site will have minimal impact on

the environment.

14. CONCLUSION

Overall, it is considered that the results of the Preliminary and Stage 2 contamination

assessments indicate the need for the localised remedial works. In particular, these works

would involve:

Excavation and remediation of two areas of Prescribed Waste; and

Importation of a minimum 0.3 m layer of soil that meets EPA Fill Material Criteria to

cover areas not already covered by buildings or pavements.


96613680l218 October 14, 1997 -22-

It is considered that following these works the site will be suitable for its proposed use as a

police and courts complex providing a contaminant management plan for the site is in place.

The contaminant management plan will address issues that may arise during site

development and during maintenance activities that could breach the separation layer above

the potentially contaminated fill.

It is recommended that this report is submitted to the Auditor for his review and

confirmation that this approach is acceptable. The likely outcome of the Audit is expected to

be a Statement of Environmental Audit with conditions. The conditions are likely to address

issues regarding

Materials suitable for a separation layer and thickness of the separation layer.

Procedures for dealing with potentially significant contamination encountered during

construction in areas, not identified in part of this assessment. For example, this could

include the finding of an underground tank, an area of odorous contaminated soil or other

unexpected highly contaminated area.

0 Procedures for informing workers exposed to contaminated soil at the site of

precautionary measures required to protect their health.

0 Keeping of records relating to the management of contaminated material encountered

during contraction.

The specific conditions included in the Auditor’s Statement will form the basis for further

requirements related to soil contamination at the site.


October 14, 1997 -23- 966136801218

15. LIMITATIONS OF THIS REPORT

Attached as Appendix F is a document entitled "Important Lnformation About Your

Environmental Site Assessment" which should be read in conjunction with this report.

GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD

per:

' U a Parker

Senior Environmental Scientist

Peter N Thornton

Associate PNT/JP/668wp2 18.doc


October 14, 1997 -24- 966136801218

16. REFERENCES

Reference 1

Reference 2

Reference 3

Reference 4

Reference 5

Reference 6

Reference 7

Reference 8

Reference 9

Golder Associates Pty Ltd. Report on Preliminary Contamination Assessment,

Massey Ferguson Site, Sunshine, Victoria. October 1991. Ref 91612280.

Golder Associates Pty Ltd. Report on Soil Contamination Review, Lot 10,

Massey Fergusson Site, Sunshine. March 1997. Ref 96613680107

Golder Associates Pty. Ltd. Report on Contamination Assessment, Lots 2, I I and 12, Massey Ferguson Site, Sunshine, Victoria. May 1992. Ref

9161241 5/15

Melbourne's Living Museum of the West Inc. Massey Fergussorz Site Study,

Stage 2 Report. January 1987.

Standards Australia. Draft Australian Standard for the Sampling of Soils

Part I : Guide to the Sampling and Investigation of Potentially

Contaminated Soil. August 1996

Golder Associates Pty Ltd. Report on Contamination Assessment, Devonshire

Road Ofice Site, Sunshine City Centre, Sunshine, Victoria. December 1993.

Ref. 9361241 1/10.

Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, National Health and Medical Research Council. Australian and New Zealand

Guidelines for the Assessnzent and Management of Contaminated Sites.

January 1992

Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council,

National Health and Medical Research Council. Drafi Australian Guidelines

for the Assessment and Management of Contaminated Site. June 1990

Swartjes, Frank A, and van den Berg, Reinier. Remediation of Contaminated

Soil and Groundwater: Proposals for Criteria and Priority Setting. Workhop

on Contaminated Soils. Stockholm, October 26-28, 1993


October 14, 1997 -25- 966 1368012 18 ~~

Reference 10 National Environmental Health Forum. Health Based Soil Investigation

Levels. National Environmental Health Forum Monographs. Soil Series No.

1, 1996.

Reference 1 1 Victorian Environment Protection Authority. EPA Information

Classification of Waste, Publication 448. May 1995.

Bulletin,


Test Sample Sample Sample Sample Location Number Date Type Depth

i97TP1 G97TP111 16/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m

i97TP2

i97TP3

i97TP4

i97TP5

;97TP6

G97TP1/2

G97TP 113 G97TP1/4*

G97TP1/5** G97TP1/6 G97TP211

G 9 7TP 212 G97TP2/3 G97TP3/1 G97TP3/2 G97TP313 G97TP3/4 G97TP4/ 1

G97TP4/2 G97TP4/3 G97TP414

G97TP415 G97TP511 G97TP5/2

G97TP5/3 G97TP611 G97TP6/2

G97TP6/3*

G97TP6/4**

16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97

16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 6/07/97 6/07/97 6/07/97 6/07/97 6/07/97

6/07/97 6/07/97 6/07/97

6/07/97

Fill Natural Natural Natural Natural

Fill Natural Natural

Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill

Natural Fill Fill Fill

Fill Natural

0.1-0.2 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.1-0.2 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.0-0.05 m 0.05-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.8-0.9 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.7-0.8 m 1.0-1.1 m 1.3-1.4 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.9-1.0 m

0.0-0.1 m

0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m

0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m G97TP615 16/07/97

Duplicate submitted to WSL for specified analysis; **Duplicate

Analysis

Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and total phenolics Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum-hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and total phenolics

Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and total phenolics Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons


Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons






bmitted to AEL for specified analysis

TABLE 1 ANALYTICAL PROGRAMME ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO, FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

I

106 of 229


397TP7 G97TP711 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 rn G97TP7/2 G97TP7/3 G97TP7/4

G97TP7/5 397TP8 G97TP8/1

G97TP8/2

G97TP8/3 G97TP814

397TP9 G97TP911

G97TP9/2 G97TP9/3

G97TP10/2* G97TP 10/3** G97TP 1014 G97TP 1015 G97TP 1016

397TP11 G97TP11/1 G97TP11/2 G97TP 1 113 G97TP1114 G97TP1115

397TP10 G97TP1011

17/07/97 17/07/97

17/07/97

17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97

17/07/97 17/07/97 16/07/97

16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97

Fill Fill

Natural

Natural Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill Fill Fill Fill

Natural

Fill Fill Fill Fill

Natural

0.2-0.3 rn 0.4-0.5 rn 0.8-0.9 m

1.1-1.2 rn 0.0-0.1 rn 0.3-0.4 rn 0.5-0.6 m 0.9-1 .O rn 0.0-0.1 rn

0.4-0.5 rn 0.9- 1 .O rn 0.0-0.1 m 0.0-0.1 rn 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 rn 04-0.5 m 0.7-0.8 rn 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 rn 0.5-0.6 rn 0.9- 1 .O m 1.9-2.0 rn

' Duplicate submitted to WSL for specified analysis; **Duplicate !

Analysis



EPA Screen Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons


Metals I, total petroleum hydrocarbons, polycylic aromatic hydrocarbons, total phenolics and monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

Metals I, total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

EPA Screen Metals I, total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I, total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons


Metals I , total petroleurn hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons xnitted to AEL for specified analysis

TABLE 1 ANALYTICAL PROGRAMME ATKWSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT 10, FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

680x101.xIs 2l10197 Checked 107 of 229


397TP12 G97TP1211 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m

G97TP 1212 G97TP 12/3*

G97TP 12/4* * G97TP 1215 G97TP 1216

397TP13 G97TP1311 G97TP 1312 G97TP 1313 G97TP 1314

397TP14 G97TP14/1

G97TP 1412 G97TP14/3

397TP 15 G97TP 1511 G97TP 1512 G97TP 1513 G97TP 1 514 G97TP 15/5 G97TP 1516

397TP16 G97TP 1611 G97TP 1612 G97TP 1613 G97TP 1 6/4

17/07/97 17/07/97

17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97

17/07/97 17/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 6/07/97 7/07/97 7/07/97 7/07/97

Fill

Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill Fill

Natural Fill

Fill Natural



0.2-0.3 m

0.2-0.3 m 0.2-0.3 m

0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.0-0.1 m

0.3-0.4 m 0.7-0.8 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 rn 0.5-0.6 m 0.8-0.9 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.4-0.5 m

' Duplicate submitted to WSI 7/07/97 Natural 0.9-1 .O rn for specified analysis; **Duplicate I

Analysis

Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and total phenolics Metals I, total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

EPA Screen


Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons, polycylic aromatic hydrocarbons, total phenolics and monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons




Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons EPA Screen


)mined to AEL for specified analysis

TABLE 1 ANALYTICAL PROGRAMME ATKMSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO, FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

108 of 229


;97TP 12 G97TP 1211 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m G97TP 1212

G97TP12/3* G97TP12/4** G97TP 1215 G97TP 1216

i97TP 13 G97TP 1311 G97TP 1312 G97TP 1313 G97TP13/4

i97TP14 G97TP14/1

G97TP 1412 G97TP 1413

i97TP 15 G97TP 1511 G97TP 1512 G97TP 1513 G97TP 1 514 G97TP 1515 G97TP 1516

i97TP16 G97TP1611 G97TP 1612 G97TP 1613 G97TP16/4 ~

Duplicate submitted to WSL for specified analysis; **Duplicate

17/07/97

17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97

17/07/97 17/07/97

17/07/97 17/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97

Fill

Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill Fill

Natural Fill

Fill Natural



Natural

0.2-0.3 m

0.2-0.3 m 0.2-0.3 m

0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.0-0.1 m

0.3-0.4 m 0.7-0.8 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.8-0.9 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.9-1.0 m

Analysis

~~~ ~



-

EPA Screen


Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons, polycylic aromatic hydrocarbons, total phenolics and monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons




Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons EPA Screen


imitted to AEL for specified analysis


680x101.xls 2110197

109 of 229


i97TP 17 G97TP 171 1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m G97TP 1 712 G97TP17/3* G97TP 17/4**

G97TP 1715 j97TP 18 G97TP 181 1

G97TP18/2 G97TP 1 813 G97TP 1814

i97TP19 G97TP1911 G97TP 1912 G97TP 1913

G97TP 1914 G97TP 1915 G97TP 1916

397TP20 G97TP20/1 G97TP20/2 G97TP2013 G97TP2014 G97TP20/5

17/07/97 17/07/97

17/07/97

17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17107197 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97

Fill Fill Fill



Natural Natural Natural


0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m

0.4-0.5 m 1.0-1.1 m

0.0-0.1 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 1.4-1.5 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 1.8-1.9 m 1.8-1.9 m 1.8-1.9 m 0.1-0.2 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.2-1.3 m

G97TP2016 17/07/97 Natural 1.8- 1.9 m Duplicate submitted to WSL for specified analysis; **Duplicate s

Note 1 Metals - arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, zinc, mercury.

Analysis

EPA Screen Metals I, total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I , total petroleum-hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons


Metals ', total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

Metals I, total petroleum hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and total phenolics Metals I, total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Metals I, total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

EPA Screen Metals I , total petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons


bmitted to AEL for specified analysis


680x101 .XIS 21 10191

110 of 229

Location N A ~ , Mth G9TIPI G9TIPIII 16/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m

GPTIPlR G97IPIl3 G9TIP1/4* G97TPIIS" G9TIP1/6

G97TP2 G9TIP2/1 G9TIPUZ G9TIP2/3

G97TP3 G9TIP3Il G9lTP3R G9TIP313 G97TP314

G97TP4 G9TIP4/1 G9TIP4l2 G97TP413 G97TP414 G9TIP4/5

G97TPS G97TPSII G97TPSl2 G9lTP513

G97TP6 G9TIP6/1 G97TP60 G9TIP6/3* G97TP6/4** G9lTP6/5

G9lTP7 G9Tl'P7/1 G97TP712 G9TIP7/3 G97TP7/4 G9TIP7/5

Ci9TIP8 G9TIP8ll G97TP8R

16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/91 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/91 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 I7/07/91 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97

Fill Natural Natural Natural

Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill

Natural Fill Fill Fill Fill


Natural Natural

Fill Fill

0.1-0.2 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.1-0.2 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.0-0.05 m 0.05-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.8-0.9 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.7-0.8 m 1.0-1.1 m 1.3-1.4 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.9-1 .O m 0.0-0.1 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.8-0.9 m 1.1-1.2 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 rn

G9TIP8l) 17/07/97 Natural 0.5-0.6 m G9TIP814 17/07/97 Natural 0.9-1.0 rn

S9TIp9 G9TIP9/1 16/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 rn G97TP9R 16/07/97 Natural O.44.5rn

- Sulphate

<IO

2000 -

4ntimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper Mercury Lead Nickel Manganese Molybdenum Selenium Tin Zinc

<0.2 C0.2 C0.2

< I

0.3

C0.2 <0.2

C0.2

<0.2

<0.2 C0.2

0.5 <0.2 C0.2 2.8

<0.2 <0.2

< I

0.2

C0.2 C0.2

140 <5 19 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

C0.2 <0.2

9 27 30 43

31

30 9.8

18

36

42 22

33 17 28 16 IO 13 19

19

27 28

43 49 27

ez 25

28

8.2

21

58 9.9

bL 9.2 I 1 ZL 6.3 6.8 16

34

48 16

14 4Q Lzp 9.3

. . . . . . . i i i i$@

I I

<0.05

<0.05

CO.05

co.05 <0.05

<0.05 co.05 <o.os CO.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.07

<0.05

0.05 <0.05

<O.OS 0.06

CO.05

<O.OS CO.05

33 CO.05 12 CO.05 I3 <0.05 16 <0.05

L@ <O.OS

14 '. 0.08

. . . . . . . . .... . . . .

<5 12 12 17

ua I 5 <5

I 2

13

71 9.9

76 I2

9.7 I70 6. I 5.7 9

I50

I20 13

37 200

I I

9.3 I I

48 7.5 9.3 19

m 14 45

9.2

36

75 <5

I70 29 7. I m

17 20 25

I30

47 5.4

24 luzp <5 <5 < 5 67 m

I 2

30 9.9

20 20 400 3 50 50 60 500 50 200 I 300 60 55 625 12 380 240 190 10 530 210 LOO 720

All rcrulu arc umrred u mdka desa otherwise scaified F iawa in told iraliu that have bcm &lined c x d Ihc modified ANZECUNHMRC Level B critcrii Fiauta in bold iu l iu Ihl have bcm chdcd crcced the modified Dutch Prows4 Intcrvcnlion Value

DuDlicue iuhnincd u) WSL lor nrocificd YUlvsL. **DuDliute cubmined to AEL lor rmificd nnrlvsis

TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS INORGANICS ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGWENT (AUSTI PTY LTD FUR'IHER CONTAMlNATlON ASSESSMENT LOT IO. FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

111 of 229

Locotion Number Dale Type Depth G97TPIO G97TPIOII 16/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m

Sulphate

<IO

<IO

<IO

<IO

2000

G97TPlOl2* 16/07/97 G97TP10/3** 16/07/97 G97TP1014 16/07/97 G97TP10/5 16/07/97 G97TP1016 16/07/97

G97TPI I G97TPI 111 16/07/97 G97TPI In 16/07/97 G97TPI 113 16/07/91 G97TPI 114 16/07/97 G97TPI 115 16/07/97

G97TPI2 G97TPIUI 17/07/97 G97TPl2R 17/07/97 G97TPIZ3. 17/07/97 G97TP12/4*' 17/07/97 G97TP1215 17/07/97 G97TPlZ6 17/07/97

G97TP13 G97TP1311 l7/07/97 G97TP13l2 17/07/97 G97TP13/3 17/07/97 G97TP13/4 17/07/97

G97TP14 G97TP14/1 17/07/97 G97TP14R 17/07/97 G97TP1413 17/07/97

G97TPIS G97TPISll 16/07/97 G97TP1512 16/07/97 G97Tl'15/3 16/07/97 G97TP1514 16/07/97 G9TI'PI5/5 16/07/97 G97TPISI6 16/07/97

G97TP16 G97TPIUI 17/07/91 G97TP1612 17/07/97 G97TPIW3 17/07/91 G97TP16/4 17/07/97

397TP17 G97TP17Il 17/07/97 G97TPI 712 I7/07/97 G97TP17/3* 17/07/91 G97TPI 714" 17/07/97

Cyanidc

<5

<s

<s

<5

50 50

Fill Fill Fill Fill


Natuml Fill Fill Fill Fill

Nntural Nntural

Fill Fill Fill

Natural Fill Fill

Natural Fill Fill Fill Fill Fill


Nstural Fill Fill Fill Fill

0.0-0.1 m 0.O.O.I rn 0.3-0.4 m 04-03 m 0.7-0.8 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.9-1.0 m I .9-2.0 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.7-0.8 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.8-0.9 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.9-1.0 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m

G97TP1715 17/07/97 Nurural 1.0-1.1 m

Dutch Proposed Intervenflon Values ANZECClNHMRC or Dutch Level B Crlterla

lok i

~~ ~~

Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Boron Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper Mercury Lead Nickel Manganese Molybdenum Selenium Tin Zinc

<5 7.1 80 <S 7 < 0 2 32 <5 <5 <5 140 13 46 <0.05 96 39 .7TJ 9 9 18 8. I <5 2Q

26

< 5 <S 9 8.6 9

L1 <S I3 I3

IS

6.9

0.3 I 0.3 <0.2 <0.2 0.6

<0.2

I8 <s <5 <0.2

0.5 C0.2 0.4 <0.2

0.6

<0.2

<0.2

0.7 1 . 1

65 <s 8.2 <0.2 1.3 0.9 S

33 40 45 25 27 39

33

I3 48 18 16 17

25

23 25 u 26

32

41

31

19 52

24 41 38 46

48 <oos 52 COOS

42 007 /OW 006 9 4 COO5

,W? 0 13

5 5 . 0 0 9

<5 <o.os @ 0.06 26 0.1 I 20 0.05 24 0.07

27 30 CO.05

11p 0.06

96 <005

73 009 z9e 006

17 52 <O.OS 11p 0.12 UQ 0.09 160 <O.OS

200 83 37 47 I I 87

95

<5 74 78 40 54

8

I60 12

I IO IO0

I30

I20

I 3

IO 100

8 8 <5 3 50 1 300 60 500 50 ZOO 50 60 20 400

55 625 I2 380 240 190 IO 530 210 200 720

03 25 13 0 14 16 20

I50 I30 74

4zQ 13 I70

LLP

6. I 22Q 99 93 76

5.8

aea 780

,I1 results arc cxprcrrcd as m a n unless ochmvix specified Finwcr in bold iulio thu havc been underlined c a c a d chc modified ANZECUNHMRC Lcvcl B crilcria Finwa in bold iLalicr thu haw brm stu&d cxcced the modified Dutch Proposed lntmmlion Vduc ' Duolicvc rubmilld IO WSL Tor s a c i f i d d n k : **DuDlicuc submittcd to AEL Tor soecificd andvrir

TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS INORGANICS ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PTS LTKI FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO. FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE 112 of 229

Test Sample Sample Sample Sample Location Number Date Type DWlh G97TP18 G97TP18Il 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m

G97TPI 8R G97TP1813 G97TP1814

G97TP19 G97TP19/1 G97TP190 G97TP19/3 G 9 r n 1914 G9lTP19IS G97"19/6

G97TP20 G97TPZOll G97TP200 G9lTP20/3 G97TP20l4 09TIp20IS

I1/07/91 17/07/97 17/07/97 I1/07/91 I1/01/91 I1/07/97 17/01/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 I7/01/91 I7/01/97 I7/07/97 I1/07/91

Fill Fill




0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 1.4-1.5 m 0.0-0.1 ni

0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 1.8-1.9 m 1.8-1.9 m 1.8-1.9 m 0.1-0.2 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.2-1.3 m

G97Ti2016 17/07/91 Natural 1.8-1.9 ni

ANZECCITVHMRC or Dutch Level B Criteria Dutch Proposed lnlerventlon Vnlucs

IOtCS

Sulphate

<IO

2000 - -

:yanidc

<5

- so so -

Antimony Anenic Barium Beryllium Boron Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper Mercury Lead Nickel Manganese Molybdenum Selenium Tin Zinc

5.8 0.5 31 0.12 210 un 19

<S 14 17

m? I70 41 I so

<5 0.2 15 7.1 <0.05 13 6.8 <S <s <5 2ep 7.1 200 <5 7.5 0 .6

14 c0.2 BL U 0.06 27 I IO 16 CO.05 140 45 lfQQ 4 6 C5

5.9 0.8 27 L2.Q 0.48 48 2I.Q

20 20 400 3 50 50 60 I 300 60 so0 so 200 SS 625 I2 380 240 190 IO 530 210 200 720

All rads we caprased Y mRkR wllpl olhmise specified Finurcs in told italics l a h v e brm undnlined exceed l e modified ANZECUNHMRC Lcvel8 criteria FiRwa in told italics IJUI have km shaded exceed l e modified Duch Prormed In~crvcndon Value

Duoliclle submitted 10 WSL for specified mdvris: "DuDliulc submilled Io AEL Tor rlrcified analvrir

TABLE 2 S W M A R Y OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS INORGANICS ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUSn PTV LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO. FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

680alOl.rh UlOrm

113 of 229

Test Sample Sample Sample Sample Location Number Date T i e Depth G97TP1 G97TP111 16/07/97

G97TP1/2 G97TP1/3 G97TP1/4* G97TP 1/5** G97TP 116

G97TP2 G97TP2/1 G97TP2/2 G97TP2/3

G97TP3 G97TP3/1 G97TP312 G97TP3/3 G97TP314

G97TP4 G97TP411 G97TP412 G97TP4/3 G97TP414 G97TP4/5

G97TP5 G97TP5/1 G97TPY2

16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 6/07/97 6/07/97 6/07/97 6/07/97 6/07/97 6/07/97

16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97

Fill Fill


Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill

0.0-0.1 m 0.1-0.2 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.1-0.2 m 0.5-0.6 m

0.0-0.05 m 0.05-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.8-0.9 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.7-0.8 m 1.0-1.1 m 1.3-1.4 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m

G97TP513 16/07/97 Natural 0.9- 1 .O m ANZECC/NHMRC or Dutch Level B Criteria

Dutch Proposed Intervention Values otes

Xylene Total

Benzene Toluene Benzene c6-c9 ClO-CI.4 cIS-c28 C2Tc36

clO-c36

<20 <20 <50 G O

<20 <20 <50 <50 <20 <20 <50 <50 <20 <20 6 0 6 0 100 1000

5000 1 3 5 5 1 130 50 25

All resulls are expressed as mgkg unless otherwise specified Figures in bold iulics that have been underlined exceed the ANZECCMHMRC Level B criteria; Figures in bold italics that have been shaded exceed the Dutch Proposed lnlervention Value

Duplicate submitted to WSL for specified analysis; **Duplicate submitted to AEL for specified analysis

TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS & MONOCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT 10, FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

680x101.xls 21 10197 Checked &/ 114 of 229

Test Sample Sample Sample Sample Location Number Date Twe DeDth G97TP6 G97TP6/1

G97TP6/2 G97TP6/3* G97TP6/4* * G97TP615

G97TP7 G97TP711 G97TP7/2 G 9 7TP 713 G97TP7/4 G97TP7/5

G97TP8 G97TP811 G97TP8/2 G97TP813 G97TP814

G97TP9 G97TP9/1 G97TP912 G97TP9/3

G97TP 10/2* G97TP10/3** G97TP 1014 G97TP 1015

G97TP10 G97TP1011

16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97

Fill Fill Fill Fill


Natural Natural

Fill Fill

Natural Natural



0.0-0.1 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.8-0.9 m 1.1-1.2 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.9- 1 .O m 0.0-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.9-1 .O m 0.0-0.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.4-0.5 m

G97TP10/6 16/07/97 Natural 0.7-0.8 m ANZECC/NHMRC or Dutch Level B Criteria

Dutch Proposed Intervention Values 'otes

All results are expressed os mVka unless otherwise specified

<20 <20 <20 <20

<20

<20 <20

<20 <20 <20

<20 <20

c20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20

<20 <20 <20 <20

<20

<20 <20

<20 <20 <20

<20 <20

<20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20

<5 0 <so

<5 0 <so <so

100 1000

Benzene Toluene Xylene Benzene

<os < O S C0.S <0.5

~

1 3 5 5 1 130 so 2s

Figures in bold iblics that h a l e been underlined exceed the ANZECC/NHMRC Level B criteria; Figures in bold italics that have been shaded exceed the Dutch Proposed Intervention Value * Duplicate submitted to WSL for specified analysis; **Duplicate submitted to AEL for specified analysis

TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS & MONOCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS

~ ~~~

ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO. FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

680x101 .XIS

115 of 229

Test Sample Sample Sample Sample Location Number Date Type Depth G97TP11 G97TP1111 16/07/97

G97TP 1 112 G97TP 1 1 /3 G97TP 1 114 G97TP1115

G97TP12 G97TP12/1 G97TP 1212 G97TP 1 213 * G97TP12/4** G97TP 1215 G97TP 1216

G97TP 1 3 G97TP 1311 G97TP 1312 G97TP 1313 G97TP 13/4

G97TP14 G97TP1411 G97TP 1412 G97TP 14/3

G97TP15 G97TP15/1 G97TP 1512 G97TP 1513 G97TP 1 514 G97TP 1515

16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97

Fill Fill Fill Fill


Natural Natural

Fill Fill Fill

Natural Fill Fill

Natural Fill Fill Fill Fill Fill

0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.9-1 .O m 1.9-2.0 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.7-0.8 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m

G97TP15/6 16/07/97 Natural 0.8-0.9 m ANZECC/NHMRC or Dutch Level B Criteria

Dutch Proposed Intervention Values lotes

<20

<20

<20 <20 <20 <20 <20

<20

<20 <20 <20 <20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20 <20 <20 <20 <20

<20

<20 <20 <20 <20

<20

<20

<20 <20 ~. 6 0 4 0 1 nn 1000

5000

Benzene Toluene Ethyl Xylene Benzene

1 3 5 5 1 130 50 25

All results are exoressed as mdka unless otherwise soecified I I

Figures in bold i k c s that have been underlined exceed the ANZECCMHMRC Level B criteria; Figures in bold italics that have been shaded exceed the Dutch Proposed Intervention Value Duplicate submitted to WSL for specified analysis; **Duplicate submitted to AEL for specified analysis

TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS & MONOCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO, FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

680x101.xls 2110197 Checked pdf 116 of 229

Test Sample Sample Sample Sample Location Number Date Type Depth G97TP16 G97TP1611 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m

G97TP 1612 G97TP 1613 G97TP 1614

G97TP 17 G97TP 1711 G97TP 1712 G97TP 1 713 * G97TP17/4** G97TP 1715

G97TP 1 8 G97TP 1 8/ 1 G97TP 1 812 G97TP 1813 G97TP 1814

G97TP19 G97TP1911 G97TP 1912 G97TP 1913 G97TP19/4 G97TP 1915 G97TP 1916

G97TP20 G97TP20/1 G97TP20/2 G97TP2013 G97TP2014 G97TP2015

17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 7/07/97 7/07/97 7/07/97 7/07/97 7/07/97 7/07/97

Fill Fill






0.3-0.4 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.9-1.0 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 1.4-1.5 m 0.0-0.1 rn 0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 1.8-1.9 m 1.8-1.9 m 1.8-1.9 m 0.1-0.2 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.2-1.3 m

G97TP20/6 17/07/97 Natural 1.8- 1.9 m ANZECC/NHMRC or Dutch Level B Criteria

Dutch Proposed Intervention Values lotes

<20 <20 <20

<20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20

<20

<20 <20 <20

<20 <20 <20

<20

<20 4 0 <50 <20 <20

<20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20

<20

<20 <20 <20

<20 <20 <20

<20

<50 4 0

<50 520 5 60 850 230 6 0

6 0

<5 0 - 3 0 94

140 130 <50

370

- 3 0 <50

55 0 340 390 630 210 <50

- 4 0

<50 <50 <50

130 73

<50

320

860 ''

950 L4Ba 440

94

270 203

690

100 1000

Benzene Toluene Xylene Benzene

1 3 5 5

All results are expressed as m a r ! unless otherwise specified Figures in bold italics that have been underlined exceed the A N Z E C C M H M R C Level I3 criteria; Figures in bold italics that have been shaded exceed the Dutch Proposed Intervention Value

Duplicate submitted to W S L for specif ied analysis; **Duplicate submitted to A E L for specified analvsis

TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS & MONOCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS

680x101 .XIS

ATKINSON PROJECT M A N A G E M E N T ( A U S T ) PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO, FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

J

117 of 229

Test Sample Sample Sample Sample Location Number Dac Type Depth

G9lTPI G97TPlll 16/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 ni 16/07/91 I6/07/97 I6/07/97 I6/07/97 I6/07/97 16/07/91 16/07/97 16/07/97 I6/07/97 I6/07/97 I6/01/97 I6/07/91 16/07/91 I6/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/01/97 I6/07/97 16/01/91 I 6/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 17/07/97 I7/07/91 I7/07/91 17/07/97 17/01/97 I7/07/97 I7/07/97 17/01/97 I7/07/97 16/01/97 16/07/97

Fill Natural Natural Natural Natural


Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Fill



Natural Natural

Fill Fill

Natural Natural

Fill Natural

0.1-0.2 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.1-0.2 m 0.5-0.6 m

0.0-0.05 m 0.05-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.8-0.9 m 0.0-0. I m 0.5-0.6 m 0.7-0.8 m 1.0-1.1 m 1.3-1.4 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.9-1 .O m 0.0-0.1 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.8-0.9 m 1.1-1.2 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.9-1 .O m 0.0-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m

G97”9/3 16/07/97 Natural 0.9-1.0 m ANZECC/NHMRC or Dutch Level B Crllerla

Dutch Proposed lnlerventton Values MO

<os

<0.5 <os <os

<os

<os

<0.5 <0.5

<0.5

<os <os

<os <os <os <os <0.5 <os <o. I

<os

<os <os

<os <os <os

<os <os

<OS

<os <0.5 <0.5

<os

<os

<0.5 <os

<0.5

<os <os

<os <os <os <os <os <os <o. 1

CO.5

<os <0.5

<0.5 <os <os

CO.5 <os

<os

<os < O S <os

<OS

<0.5

CO.5 <os

<0.5

<os <os

<os <os <os <os <os <0.5 <o. I

<os

<o.s GO.5

<os < O S < O S

<os <os

Naph Acenaph Acenaph Fluorene Phenan Anthracene Fluoran Pyrene Benzo(a) Chrysene Benzo@) Benzoe) Benzo(a) ldeno Dibcnzo(ah) Benzo(ghi) Total thalene thalene thene threne thene anthracene fluoranlhene fluordnthene pyrene (123-cd) anthracene perylcne PAHs

p w n e <o.s <o.s <0.5 <0.5 <os <5

10 IO IO IO I 20 40

All rcrulu arc c x p w d P( mw%n d e v olhmuc r p c i f i e d FIRUIO in bold ilnlio thu hnvc brm underlined cxcccd lhc mdf ied ANZECUNHMRC Level B cnima FIR-= in bold iraliu thy havc brm sludcd c x c d UIC m d f i d Dutch Propored lntervcnuon Valuc

Dvol~cnv subm~ned io WSL ra rocc~ficd d v r u * * D ~ D I I C ~ I C submitied to AU lor raclf icd d v m r

TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PIY LTD FURTHER CONTAMlNATlON ASSESSMENT LOT IO. FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

118 of 229

'I

Test Snmple Sample Sample Sample Location Number Date Type Depth

G97TPIO G97TP1011 16/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m G97TPl0/2' G97TP10/3** G97TPlOl4 G97TP10/5 G97TP IO16

G97TPI I G97TPI 111 G97TPI 112 G97TPl 113 G97TPI 114 G97TPl1/5

G97TP12 G97TPI2ll G97TPIZ2 G97TPI 213. G97TPI 214.. G97TP1215 G97TP1216

G97TP13 G97TPl3ll G97TP1312 G97TPI313 G 9 m I 314

G97TP14 G97TP14Il G97TP1412 G97TP1413

G97TPIS G97TPISlI G97TPI 512 G97TPI SI3 G97TPIS14 G97TPl S / S G97TPI 516

G97TP16 G97TP1611 G97TPI612 G97TP1613 G97TP1614

G97TP17 G97TP17/1 G97TPI 712 G97TPI 713' G97TP17/4*'

16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 16/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/91 17/07/97 17/07/97 17/07/97

Fill Fill Fill Fill



Natural Natural

Fill Fill Fill

Natural Fill Fill

N a m l Fill Fill Fill Fill Fill



0.0-0.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 04-0.5 m 0.7-0.8 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.9- I .O m 1.9-2.0 m 0.0-0. I ni 0.2-0.3 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.5-0.6 m 1.0-1.1 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.7-0.8 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.2-0.3 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 m 0.5-0.6 ni 0.8-0.9 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.3-0.4 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.9-1.0 m 0.0-0.1 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m 0.4-0.5 m

G97TP1715 17/07/97 Natural 1.0-1.1 m ANZECCP4HhlRC or Dutch Level B Crlterla

Dukh Proposed Intervention Vduec lola

Naph Accnaph Acenaph Fluorene Phenan Anthracene Fluotan Pyrene BenzNa) Chrysrne Benzo(b) Benzo(k) BenzNa) Ideno DibenzNah) BenzNghi) Total halcne thalenc them h e n e thene anthracene fluoranthene fluoranthene pyrene (l23cd) anthracene perylene PAHs

pyrene <o 5 <os <0.5 <0.5 C0.S co.5 <0.5 <0.5 <os <os <os <o.s <os

<os <os <os <os <os <os

<os

<0.5 <os <0.5 <os <o. I

C0.5

<os <os <os <os

<os

<0.5

C0.5 <os <os <0.5

<os <os <os <os

<os <os <os <os <os <0.5

<os

<os <os <os <os <o. I

CO.5

co.5 <0.5 <0.5 <os

<os

CO.5

<os <os <os co.5

CO.5 <os io .5 0.8

<0.5 <os <os <os <os <0.5

<os

<os <os <os C O S <o. I

< O S

<0.5 <os <o.s <os

<0.5

CO.5

<os <os <os < O S

<os <os <os <os

<os <os <os <os <os <0.5

<o.s

<os <os <os <0.5 <o. I

<os

CO.5 c0.s < o s <0.5

<os

<os

<os <0.5 <os <0.5

<0.5 <os <os 0.7

<os <os <os <os <0.5 <os

<os

c0.s <0.5 < O S <os <o. I

<o.s

<os <os <os <os

C0.S

<o.s

<os < O S <os <os

<0.5 <os <0.5 0.7

<os <os <0.5 c0.s < O S <os

<o.s

CO.5 <os CO.5 <0.5 <o I

<os

<0.5 <os <o.s <os

<os

C0.S

<os C0.S <os <os

<os <0.5 <os <os

<o.s <os <os <0.5 <0.5 <os

<os

<os <os <OS <0.5 <o. I

<0.5

<0.5 <os <o 5 <os

<os

<os

C0.5 <os <o.s <0.5

<os c0.s <os <os

<os <os <os <os <os <os

C0.S

<os <os CO.5

<os <o. I

<os

e0.5 <os < o s <os

<os

<os

<os <os <os CO.5

<os <os <os <os

<os <os <0.5 <os <0.5 <0.5

<o.s

CO.5 C0.S <o.s <os <o. I

<os

<0.5 <os CO.5 <os

<os

<os

<os <o.s < O S CO.5

<os <os <os <os

<o.s CO.5

CO.5 <o.s < O S c0.s

<os

C0.S <o.s ~ 0 . 5 <os <o. I

< O S

<0.5 <OS <o.s <os

<0.5

<os

<0.5 CO.5 CO.5

<o. 5

C0.5 <os <os <os

~ 0 . 5 <0.5 ~ 0 . 5 CO.5 <0.5 <O 5 <0.5 <O.S <0.5 <os <0.5 <os <o.s CO.5 <os 5 10 IO 10 10 1 20

All rcsulu uc uprased as rna/Ln unlcu olhmrlsc rwilicd Fipwa in bold iulio lhpl hwc trcn undnlined cxcccd lhc modified ANZECUNHMRC Lcvcl B mmia FiRwa in bold iuliu lhpl ha\e brm shaded exceed the rnodilicd Dutch Roaacd lnlmmuon Value

DuDlicuc ruknincd 10 WSL lor smilied nnalvrb. **Du~Iiu!c submitted 10 AEL lor socclficd MJVSIS

TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AlJSn PTY L l D FUKTHER CONTAhllNATlON ASSESSMENT LOT I O . FORMER MASSEY FFRGUSSON SITE

119 of 229

Test Samqle Sample Sample Sample Location Number Date Type Depth

G97TP18 G97TP18/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m G97TP18/2 17/07/97 Fill 0.5-0.6 m G97TP1813 17/07/97 Fill 1.0-1. I ni G97TP18/4 17/07/97 Natural 1.4-1.5 m

G97TP19 G97TP19/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m G9TIP19/2 17/07\97 Fill 0.5-0.6 rn G97TP1913 17/07/97 Fill 1.0-1.1 m G9TIP19/4 17/07/97 Natural 1.8-1.9 ni G97TP1915 17/07/97 Natural 1.8-1.9 rn G97TP19/6 17/07/97 Natural 1.8-1.9 m

G97TPZO G97TP20/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.1-0.2 m G97TPZ00 17/07/97 Fill 0.5-0.6 m G9TIP20/3 17/07/97 Fill 0.5-0.6 rn G97TPZ0/4 17/07/97 Fill 0.5-0.6 m G9TTP2OI5 17/07/97 Fill 1.2-1.3 m G97TP20/6 17/07/97 Natural 1.8-1.9 m

ANZECCINHMRC or Dutch Level B Crlterio Dulch Proposed Intervention Values

lo la All radU arc cxmesscd as ma/Ln unless o h m i c raciiicd

Naph Acenaph Accnaph Fluorene Phenan Anthracene Fluoran Pyrene BenzNa) Chrysene Bcnzo(b) Benzo(k) Benzda) ldeno DibcnzNah) Benzo(ghi) Total thalene thalene thene threne thene anthracene fluoranthene fluoranlhene pyrcne (123-cd) anthracene perylene PAHs

<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 eo.5 co.5 <0.5 0.6 0.7 cos cos co.5 cos co.5 <os <5 co.5 <o.s

co.5 <0.5 <0.5 co.5 0.8 co.5 I 0.3 e0.5 0.8 1 . 1 0.8 L2 cos cos 0.5 8.5

co.5 <0.5 co.5 eo.5 <0.5 co.5 <0.5 co.5 co.5 <os cos <os co.5 <0.5 <os <0.5 e5 <0.5 <0.5 co.5 co.5 <0.5 co.5 <0.5 <0.5 co.5 <os cos co.5 <0.5 co.5 cos cos e5

p w n e

co.5 co.5 <0.5 <0.5 co.5 co.5 co.5 co.5 .<os co.5 - <os cos co.5 co.5 <os cos <5

co.5 <0.5 <o.s co.5 co.5 CO.5 co.5 <0.5 co.5 cos cos co.5 co.5 co.5 CO.5 <os e5 SO.5 e0.5 cO.5 cO.5 cO.5 cO.5 cO.5 cO.5 cO.5 <os c0.s <os <o.s CO.5 c o s co.5 <5 co.5 co.5 CO.5 co.5 co.5 <o.s co.5 <0.5 <0.5 <os cos co.5 co.5 CO.5 <os <os e5

co.5 e0.5 <o.s <os <0.5 < 5 <o.s <o.s co.5 co.5 co.5 co.5 CO.5 <0.5 co.5 <0.5 co.5

5 IO IO 10 10 I 20 an

Fiuurcr in bald i u l i u hat b v t bccn undnlinrd cawed Ihc m d f i c d ANZECUNHMRC Lac1 B criima Finuta in bold iuliu hat h \ c bcrn r W c d c a c d h c modificd Dutch R o w c d Inimmtson Vduc

DuDliCllC rubmilled to WSL Tu rmcificd mdvra. "Dwliutc rubmittcd to AEL for soccificd a d v r i r

TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS

ATKINSON PROJECT LtANAGEMENT ( A U S l l PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO. FORMER MASSEY FERCUSSON SITE

120 of 229

Test Sample Sample Sample Sample Total Pentachloro HCB Lindane Heptachlor Heptachlor0 Aldrin Dieldrin Endrin DDD DDE DDT Total Location Number Date Type Depth Phenolics phenol epoxide Organochlor

pesticides < 1 < I < I < I < 1

G97TP8 G97TP8/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m <O. 1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <O.I <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <O.l G97TP10 G97TPIO/I 16/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 rn <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 eo.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 G97TP13 G97TP13/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1, <0.1 <0.1 < O . l <0.1 <O.l G97TP 16 G97TP I6/l 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m cO.1 <0.1 <O.l <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 G97TP I7 G97TP 1711 17/07\97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 < 0 . 1 . <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

All resulIs are expressed as rnglkg unless otherwise specified Figures in bold italics that have been underlined exceed h e modified ANZECClNHMRC Level B criteria Figures in bold iwlics that have been shaded exceed h e modified Dutch Proposed lnlervention Value

TABLE 5 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES & PHENOLICS ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO. FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

680x101 .XIS 3111v(17

121 of 229

Tea Sample sample Sample Sample Benzal Benu, Benzyl 2 1.2 1.3 1.4 Hexachloro Hexachloro Hexachloro Hexachloro Hexachloro Tetrachloro 1.2.4 Pentachloro Location Number Dau Type Deplh chloride trichloride chloride Chloronapt Dichloro Dichloro Dichloro benzene butadiene cyclo hexane cyclo ethane benzene Trichloro benzene

halene benzene benzene benzene pentadiene benzene

G97TP8 G97TP8/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m < O . l < O . l <0.1 cO.1 <0.1 < O . l <O. l < O . l <O. l < O . l <0.1 <o. I <0.1 <0.1 < O . l G97TPIO G97TPIOII 16/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m < O . l <O.l < O . l <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <o. 1 < O . l <0.1 <0.1 < O . l co.1 < O . l G97TP13 G97TPI3II 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.lm <0.1 <O. l < O . l <0.1 <0.1 CO.1 <0.1 < O . l <o. I <0.1 <o. I < O . l <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 G97TP16 G97TP16/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.O-O.I m < O . l CO.1 < O . l < O . l < O . l CO.1 <o.l <0.1 < O . l <0.1 , < O . l <o. I < O . l < O . l <O.l G97TP17 G97TP17/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.lm < O . l CO.1 < O . l < O . l < O . l <0.1 <O. l <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 < O . l <o. I <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 G97TP20 G97TPZOll 17/07/97 Fill 0.1-0.2m < O . l < O . l <O.l < O . l < O . l <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 . <0.1 <o. 1 <0.1 <o. I <0.1 < O . l <O.l

ANZECC/NHMRC or Dutch Level B Criteria Dutch Proposed Intervention Values

TABLE 6 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS CHLORINATED HYDROCARBONS ATKINSON PROJECT LIANACELIENT (AUSn PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSh! ENT LOT IO. FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

122 of 229

Test Sample Sample Sample Sample 1,l Methylene Chloro 1,2 1.2 Bromo Chloro 1.1,2- Chloro 1.2 1.3 1.4 Location Number Date Type Depth Dichloro chloride form Dichloro Dichloro dichloro benzene Trichloro dibromo Dichloro Dichloro Dichloro

ethane ~ r o ~ a n e ethane methane ethane methane benzene benzene benzene G97TP8 G97TP8II 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

G97TPIO G97TPlOll 16/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 C0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

G97TP13 G97TPI311 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

G97TP16 G97TP16/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Cd.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

G97TP 17 G97TP 171 I 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 rn <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 $0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 G97TP20 G97TP20ll 17/07/97 Fill 0.1-0.2m <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 X0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

ANZECCIMWRC or Dutch Level B Criteria > Dutch Proposed Intervention Values 3.5

ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO. FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

123 of 229

Test Sample Sample . Sample Sample Location Number Date Type Depth

G97TP8 G97TP8/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m G97TP10 G97TP10/1 16/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m G97TP 13 G97TP 13/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m G97TP 16 G97TP 1 6/ 1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m G97TP 17 G97TP 17/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.0-0.1 m G97TP20 G97TP20/1 17/07/97 Fill 0.1-0.2 m

Dutch Proposed Intervention Values ANZECC/NHMRC or Dutch Level B Criteria

All results are expressed as mg/kg unless otherwise specified Figures in bold italics that have been underlined exceed the modified ANZECCINHMRC Level B criteria Figures in bold italics that have been shaded exceed Ihe modified Dutch Proposed Intervention Value

Arochlor Arochlor Arochlor Arochlor Arochlor Arochlor Arochlor 1016 1221 1232 1242 1248 1254 1260 Total PCI <0.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 < 1 <O. 1 <0.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 co.1 <0.1 <0.1 < 1 <O. I <o. 1 <0.1 <o. 1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 < 1 < 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <o. 1 <0.1 ' <0.1 <o. 1 < 1 <O. 1 <o. 1 <0.1 50.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <O.I' <0.1 <0.1 < 1

1 1

TABLE 8

680x101.xls 21 10197

SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS ATKINSON PROJECT MANAGEMENT (AUST) PTY LTD FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO, FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

124 of 229

Sample Sample Sample Sample Depth Tes~ Location Type Number Date

Northern Paddock Fill 4 21/08/91 0.25-0.3 Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northem Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock Northern Paddock

pH 8.7

Fill Nat. Soil

Fill Nat. Soil

Fill Fill Fill

Nat. Soil Fill

Nat. Soil Fill

Nat. Soil Fill Fill

Nat. Soil Fill

Nat. Soil Fill Fill

Nat. Soil

5 5 9 9 IO 10 13 13 14 14 15 15 I8 I8 I8 19 19 20 20 20

2 1/08/9 1 2 1/08/9 I 2 1/08/9 1 2 I/08/9 1 2 110819 I 2 1 108i9 1 20/08/91 20/08/91 20/08/9 I 20/08/9 I I9/08/9 I I9/08/9 I 19/08/9 I I9/08/9 1 I9/08/9 1 I9/08/9 1 I9/08/9 I 20/08/9 I 20/08/9 I 20/08/9 1

0.05-0.15 0.75-0.85 0.16-0.2 0.75-0.85 0.05-0.1 0.5-0.6 0.08-0.15 0.8-0.85 0.1-0.15 0.7-0.8 0.15-0.2 0.75-0.8 0.05-0.08 0.35-0.4 0.75-0.8 0.05-0.08 0.75-0.8 0.08-0. I5 0.6-0.65 0.8-0.85

9.2 8.6 9.5 9

817.8' 8.1 7.6 8.2 7.2 7.6 7.6 7.8 9.9 7.4 7.9 7.3 7.7 8. I 8.2 7. I

Northern Paddock Nat. Soil 20 20108/91 1.4-1.5 1 9 ANZECCPJHMRC or Dutch Level B Criteria 1 6-9

I Dutch Prooosed Intervention Values I Noes I. All rcsulu arc cxprcsscd as m@g dry weight unlcss olhcnvisc spccificd 2. Figures in bold iulics that havc bcen underlined cxcccd Ihc ANZECCMHMRC Lcvcl D criteria 3. Figurer io bold italics that havc bcca shaded cxcccd thc Dutch Lcvcl C Critcria 4. Criteria lor mincrnl oil (C,o IO C,6), Critcria lor lucl (C, IO C,) arc 100/800 5. Samplc sclcctcd lor chcck testing (817.8: Initial RcsulVChcck Tcst)

~ ~~

Cyanide Phenols Total Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Lead Mercury Nickel Zinc Total PAH (total) (total) Cl&,

1.2 <o. 1 38 17 12 C0.02 48 60 ~ <o. 1 0.47 0.42 0.24 0.26

2.655 9.1 10

0.66 2.9 0.56 0.7 0.82 2.6 8.9

0.69 1.1 I .4 4.9 6.6

1

<o. 1 <o. 1 <o. I <o. 1

<0.1/<1 <o. 1 <o. I <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. 1 <o. I <o. I

I .3 <o. 1 <o. I

I <o. I <o. I <o. I <o. I

27 18 27 8.6

300fl80 41 Lea 14 14 10

21 0 12

290 m

12 59 I I 36 42 20

C l . 0 11

C1.0 IO

44/59 52 14

9.6 <1.0 9.6 75 9.6 39 85 9.6 25 10 23 14 20

<0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02

<0.02/<5 0.05

<0.02 <0.02 C0.02 C0.02 <0.02 C0.02 <0.02 0.02

<0.02 0.05

<0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02

E. 40 ua 34

2o0/190 '' 58

8.2 ,34 9.3 24 48 29 2QQ 33 z5 20 25 43 22 17

56 34 59 28

190/180 120 62 30 I 1 22 I80 21

3200 1000 1000 SM 20 I40 49 84

G O <o. 1 <20 <o. I 50 <o. I

<20 <o. 1 <0.02<2 270 0. I k O . I

1.5 <0.02 <20 <o. 1 <0.02 <20 <o. I

<o. I

C0.02 270 <o. I

240 0.2 <o. I

0.7

<0.02 40 0. I <o. 1 <o. 1

0.35 <0.1 60 8.3 I 1 <0.02 26 27 <5 20 3 50 60 300 1 60 200 50 1 1000' 20

55 12 380 190 530 I O 210 720 500 10 50001 200

TABLE 9 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT - 1991 ATKINSON PROJECT hlANAGEMENT (AUST) PTY LTO FURTHER CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT IO, FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE

125 of 229

C97lTl2n WSL M'Urrhrc'ntagr

DIRcrrotr G97TPI7R WSL G9TTP17/3 WSL

Rtlulvr Prrcrmtagr DIRtrmte

<20 <50 -30 <20 <so e o e50 <50 <so c20 c50 -30 <20 CJO cso

c50 -30 <so <20 C50 <SO <20 c50 <so <JO z50 <so R O <so <so c20 cso <so -30 c50 cso

C20 SI0 110 8ML

<XI 7 I 4 10

~ 2 0 560 390 9SO

8.6 <02 16 20 001 40 93 . . . . . . . . s <SO I2 26 7s .:.'.:b':.'.:.' . , . . . . . . 6 . . .

CS 1.3 41 120 0.12 3500 190 0 9 38 120 OW 4500 100

cJo 36 29 2s s

~ V . ) - . W C U * Y l l r . O . I ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ , , ~ ~ , ~ ~ . ~

TABLE 10 RESULTS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE CHECK TESTING

126 of 229

RESULTS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE CHECK TESTING DUPLICATES ANALVSED BY AEL AlKWOON AlOltZl W A O W I l A U ~ P l Y LTD NITIIU. CONTAMINATION APL%WmT l D T IO. F O W MISIEY M O U M N SITE

127 of 229

' r o l e c t No 96613680 AS SHOWN

check e '[A PLAN OF SUBDIVISION 20 I1 191 Date

F.0'C. Drown

Revi sed LOT 10. MASSEY FERGUSON SITE, SUNSHINE

Fie U

1 128 of 229

LOT 8 BOUNDARY

HAMPSHIRE ROAD

)(ISIORIU acu - uo U T E S TO E WAIl21) I N A muCnAuA1- awnlo*.

[FINAL ASSEHBLYI

WEST WAREHOUSE (PLOUGH SHOP1

! A A I l HAY SIDING

L- - -

_ _ _ _ _ - --- - T - UNDERGROUND TANKS

T1 T2 T3 Removed, 9100L. 1 4 Petrol. removed. 4500L.

LEGEND TS Diesel. removed. 4500L. T6

FOUNDRY T I Oiesei. 9000L. 13500L removed. T8

Gear oil, M O L capacity, not removed. Cannot be located-may not exist. ANDERSON ROAD

3 No. 200L tanks. transmission oil and engine oil. removed.

T w o small par t ly oil filled, open tanks removed.

Final use as designated by O'Connor. Wargon Chapman. lor. No. PO277-0)

ffouo8n Earlier use as indicated by D.McKay.

MASSEY FERGUSON FACTORY Scale:

Date:

96613680 1 : 2500 iapproxl.

F.O'C.

Project NO.:

Drawn: 20 /1191 FORMER LAYOUT I L

LOT 8, MASSEY FERGUSON SITE, SUNSHINE Checked: Re vis e d:

I - - - .- I -. _ _ -

129 of 229

9 10 11

%+ NOTES L E V E L S ARE IN METRES TO A.H.O. 8 ARE SHOWN THUS +' D A T U M BEING M.M.B. B.M. No. 1820 LOCATED IN B A L L A R A T ROAD NEAR WESTMORLANO ROAD. RL. L O - 3 2 A.H.O.

ENGINEERING PEGS PLACED SHOWN THUS.

CO-ORDINATE O A T U N I S THAT U S E 0 IN L ITTLE 8 BROSNAN P L A N OF SURVEY REF 2 5 0 2 VERSION 1 9 - 3 - 9 7

SIGNIFICANT TREES ONLY H A V E BEEN SHOWN.

SET-OUT INFORMATION H A S BEEN OBTAINED FROM GOLOER ASSOCIATES TEST LOCATIONS P L A N D A T E 0 21/1/97.

O A T € OF SURVEY 15-7 -1997

0.2m = DEPTH OF FILL BELOW GROUND SURFACE IN m

12

0 Q 0 cr

4 5 6

0.

? m -t

- a. c c 0. U

P

7 8

\ R

2 1

3 a

3 .

0 Q 0 cr

130 of 229

6 7 8 9 10

N O T E S 0

L E V E L S ARE IF1 METRES TO A H 0 d ARE SHOWN THUS +' D A T U M BEING M M B B M N o 1820 LOCATED IN B A L L A R A T R O A D NEAR W E S i M O R L A N D ROAD RL 60.32 A H D

ENGINEERING PEGS PLACED SHOWN THUS

CO-ORDINATE D A T U M I S T H A T U S E D I N L ITTLE 8 BROSNAN P L A N OF SURVEY REF 2502 VERSION 19-3-97

c l l6

SIGNIFICANT TREES ONLY H A V E BEEN SHOWN

SET-OUT INFORMATION HAS BEEN OBTAINED FROM GOLDER ASSOCIATES TEST LOCATIONS P L A N D A T E D 21/1/97

D A T E OF SURVEY 15-7-1997

0 . h = D E P T H OF FILL BELOW GROUND SURFACE IN rn

11 12

0 < 0 Q

2 3 . 4 1

I-

5

0.

p' m -*

N

m

I f € a? C O

!? a ' E 0.T 0

r- a

s.r 0 0

0 0

*+a

0 '0 I N a

0.0. U;.

:E

c 'E a

S Q

"0

uo

131 of 229

- ---_. - -.

DATE : 27 I1 I46

DATE : 11 / 3 I64

- - - L o t 10 Site Boundary.

DATE: 1956

P l a t e 96613680 ' ro jec t No

HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS I I -1 1 LOT 10, MASSEY FERGUSON SITE, SUNSHINE I Zhecked. 1 gev lsed 132 of 229

APPENDIX A

Work Plan


October. 1997 -1- 966136801202

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1 . INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1

2 . BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 2 2.1 General Site History .................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Site History for Lot 10 ................................................................................................ 3 2.3 Previous Assessment Works ....................................................................................... 4

3 . SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................................... 5

4 . PROPOSED FIELD SAMPLING PROGRAMME .......................................................... 6

5 . ASSESSMENT CRITERIA .............................................................................................. 7

6 . PROPOSED ANALYTICAL PROGRAM ....................................................................... 8

7 . QUALITY ASSURANCE ................................................................................................ 9

8 . REPORTING .................................................................................................................. 10

9 . REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 12

FIGURES

Figure 1 Locality Pian Figure 2 Pian of Subdivision Figure 3 Former Factory Layout Figure 4 Site Plan

APPENDICES

Appendix A Technical Procedure No . 1 Soil Sampling


October, 1997 -1- 966136801202

1. INTRODUCTION

The City of Brimbank has subdivided and is proposing to sell the area at the northern end of

the former Massey Ferguson site in Ballarat Road, Sunshine (Figure 1). The area has been

subdivided into two lots (Lot 7 and Lot 10) with associated roadway easements (Figure 2). It

is understood that the Department of Justice are proposing to develop a police station and

court complex on Lot 10 which is the eastern of the two lots.

Golder Associates Pty Ltd has been commissioned by Atkinson Project Management on

behalf of the Department of Justice to undertake a Stage 2 contamination assessment of the

Lot 10 (the site) which is understood to comprise an area of 1.97 hectares. This stage of

works is being undertaken as part of the process leading to a Statement of Environmental

Audit for Lot 10. The Environmental Audit that will be undertaken is a statutory process and

will completed in accordance Section 57AA of the Environment Protection Act, 1970. It is

understood the Environmental Auditor that has been engaged to complete the Audit is Mr

Rick Graham of Sinclair Knight Merz.

The site is currently vacant. Land to the south and west is currently being developed for

commercial purposes.

The purpose of this Stage 2 contamination assessment is to provide the Auditor with

additional information regarding the contamination status of the site. This will allow

0 recommendations to be made as to the extent of clean up works, if required;

0 the development of a contaminant management plan to manage contamination that may

remain on site or be encountered during future site development works; and

0 the completion of the Environmental Audit of the site (subject to any further

requirements of the Auditor).

This work plan briefly sets out background information about the Massey Fergusson site

and the previous assessment work. It also outlines the proposed works to be completed for

this Stage 2 assessment.


October, 1997 -2- 966 13680l202

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 General Site History

The site history for Lot 10 is discussed as part earlier assessment reports (References 1, 2, 3 &

4). The history is based extensively on the "Massey Ferguson Site Study, Stage 2 Report",

January 1987 researched and compiled by Melbourne's Living Museum of the West

Incorporated.

The Massey Ferguson property has been occupied by agricultural machinery manufacturers

since 1889 including the H V McKay Harvester Company from 1904 to 1955 and

subsequently Massey Ferguson until 1986.

The original subdivision of the area occurred in 1850. In 1889 the Braybrook (Agricultural)

Implement Company was established on the property. In 1904 this company was bought out

by the H.V. McKay Harvester Company from Ballarat which manufactured the "Sunshine

Harvester". The operations of Sunshine Harvester Works expanded to occupy the current

property and parts of the surrounding area. In 1955 the "Works" were purchased by Massey

Ferguson who ultimately scaled down production at the property in the 1970s and 1980s

culminating in closure of the property in 1986 and subsequent demolition of most of the

buildings on the property in 1991.

Figure 3 shows final uses for various areas as identified by OlConnor Wargon Chapman, who

were responsible for demolition work at the property. Shown in brackets on the plan are

various earlier or more specific uses of the area identified by Mr. D. McKay a former

employee of the factory who was interviewed as part of the site history research.

Uses of parts of the property included foundries, metal and wood manufacturing and

processing areas, agncultural and equipment assembly area, paint dips, paint shops,


The north east area of the property encompassing Lot 10 was known as the "Northern

Paddock'' with an area of about 6 hectares. The remainder of the property covers an area of

about 18 hectares and until the early 1990s was mainly occupied by factory buildings. At the

time of this assessment all of the buildings on the entire Massey Ferguson property had been

demolished except the Bulk Store in the southern part of the property.


October, 1997 -3 - 966 136801202

A creek originally crossed the property from Anderson Road to Hampshire Road near Hertford

Road. This was subsequently diverted to an underground drain which crossed beneath the

property. More recently, creek flows upstream of the site have been diverted into a drain along

Anderson Road.

2.2 Site History for Lot 10

The overall Massey Ferguson property has been used for the manufacture of agncultural

equipment since 1889. A review of aerial photographs from 1946, 1956, 1964 and 1981

indicates that the area of Lot 10 changed very little in this period.

The buildings and features in Lot 10 generally remained as shown on Figure 3. The

improvements included a large storage building covering much of the northern part of Lot 10,

two railway lines entering the Lot 10 area from the west and general open and covered storage

areas covering the remainder of the area. The open areas appeared to be unpaved throughout

this time. It is understood that the store and storage areas were used for the storage of raw

materials for the plant including timber and metal.

Virtually every component required in the manufacture of the agricultural machinery produced

was manufactured on the site by a range of wood and metal working processes. The railway

lines on the site were used to transport in the raw materials and transport out finished

machinery products. Large stockpiles of raw materials and finished products were maintained

on the site. The aerial photographs indicate such stockpiles along the railway in Lot 10.

The storage building was demolished and some of the railway lines were removed in the

1980s before the remainder of the Massey Fergusson site building; which were demolished

in the early 1990s. Since then the site has remained vacant.


October, 1997 -4- 966 136801202

2.3 Previous Assessment Works

Previous investigation work undertaken in 199 1 included Lot 10. Specifically, Lot 10

comprises the north east portion of Lot 1 of the subdivision at the time of the 1991

investigation. Test pits that were excavated as part of the investigation works undertaken for

the assessment located on the now Lot 10 are shown on Figure 4. A total of 10 test pits were

excavated on an approximate 50 m gnd; test pits were numbered 4, 5, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 18,

19 and 20.

The findings of the assessment are outlined in the Golder Associates report Preliminary

Contamination Assessment, Massey Fergusson Site, Sunshine, Victoria, October 1991

(Reference 1). A review of the previous investigation works undertaken on Lot 10 with

regard to the proposed development was completed by Golder Associates in March 1997

(Reference 5). In summary, the review outlined that the initial assessment of Lot 10 camed

out in 1991 indicated that variable fill containing factory wastes overlies natural soil. The

only exceedances of ANZECCNHMRC Level B criteria were for the metals arsenic,

chromium, copper, nickel and zinc in the fill and chromium and zinc in the natural soil.

Only one exceedance of Dutch Level C Criteria was found. This occurred in a sample of fill

where the zinc concentration was elevated.

Further the review found that based on the results of the 1991 assessment, Lot 10 is

considered suitable for general commercial or industrial uses and more specifically for a

police station and courts complex providing a contaminant management plan is put in place.

In general, this would require that a minimum thickness of 300 mm of soil should be placed

over the existing materials in areas that are not covered by buildings or pavements to

provide a separation layer between site users and potentially contaminated materials. Also,

although no underground tanks are believed to be present, it is possible that such tanks or

similar sub-surface features or localised undiscovered areas of contamination could exist on

the site. In the event that these are found during development works on the site, they should

be removed and validation sampling and analysis of remaining soil should be undertaken to

demonstrate that contaminant levels are suitably low. Also, an on-going contaminant

management plan should be implemented. This would address issues such as maintenance

of the separation layer.

Any soil imported onto the site as a separation layer should meet the requirements for “Fill

Material” as outlined in the EPA Bulletin 448 Classijication of Wastes (Reference 6).


October, 1997 -5- 966136801202

The review further outlined that any soil removed from Lot 10 must be disposed in

accordance with the requirements of EPA Bulletin 448 Classification of Wastes (Reference

6 ) *

It was outlined that provided the site is not to be re-zoned to a sensitive land use such as

residential use, or the council has no such requirements, there is no statutory requirement

that Lot 10 undergo an Environmental Audit. However, a statutory Environmental Audit

can be undertaken to demonstrate and give added surety that a site is suitable for its

intended purpose. This has been or is being done on most, if not all of the remainder of the


Given the history of the Massey Ferguson site, a Statement of Environmental Audit should

be obtained in order to demonstrate with a high level of confidence that Lot 10 is suitable

for use as a police station and courts complex. This should be done as part of the re-

development process. The recommended approach initially involved completing a Stage 2

contamination assessment of Lot 10 prior to any re-development. The scope of the Stage 2

assessment is subject to confirmation with the Auditor.

3. SCOPE OF WORK

The scope of work developed for this Stage 2 contamination assessment is based on a 30 m

sampling grid. This sampling grid is consistent with the general gnd over main part of the


The broad scope of work for the Stage 2 Assessment for Lot would involve the following:

Development of a formal work plan and a quality assurance program for the

assessment incorporating for comment by the Auditor.

Implementation of the work plan including field investigation and chemical

analysis.

Preparation of an assessment report.

Liaison with the Auditor at all stages.


October, 1997 -6- 966136801202 ~

It should be noted that investigation of groundwater has not been considered in the scope of

work based on the previous observation by Golder Associates and Sinclair Knight Men that

the contamination on the site is unlikely to impact significantly on the groundwater.

4. PROPOSED FIELD SAMPLING PROGRAMME

Assessment works will generally be undertaken in accordance with procedures outlined in

the Draft Australian Standard for the Sampling of Potentially Contaminated Soil (Reference

7). Sampling will be undertaken in accordance with Golder Associates sampling protocols

relating to soil sampling. A copy of the Golder Associates technical procedure relating to

soil sampling is included as Appendix A.

It is intended that the proposed sampling programme will supplement the data already

collected. The field investigation will involve excavating test pits using a backhoe to

achieve an approximate 30 m grid across the site, with additional samples placed in areas of

potential concern. Samples will therefore be recovered from a further 20 locations in areas

not previously sampled to produce an approximate 30 m sampling gnd (Figure 4). Samples

will generally be recovered from two depths at each location (nominally 0.0 and 0.5 m

depths). It is anticipated that these samples will generally be samples of fill. At five

locations, a third sample will be recovered, nominally from a depth of 1.0 m in the natural

soil. It is anticipated that at least 45 samples will be recovered for analysis.

All soil samples will be given a unique sample number which will include the test location

and a number commencing at 1 through to n, where n is the number of samples retrieved

from the test location. The test pits will be numbered G97TP1 through to G97TP20. For

example, if three samples are recovered G97TP1 the samples would be labelled G97TP1/1,

G97TP1/2 and G97TP1/3. Soil samples will also be labelled with sample depths, the job

number (96613680), and the sample date.

All soil samples will be screened for the presence of volatile organic hydrocarbons using a

photoioisation detector. Where PID readings are detected at concentrations above 15 ppm

then vial samples will be collected for volatile hydrocarbon analysis.

Following the completion of the sampling programme the test pit locations will be surveyed

in order to allow them to be relocated should this be necessary.


October, 1997 -7- 966 13680/202

5. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

The assessment criteria that will be used for the project will be developed by the Auditor.

However, the results of chemical analyses of soil samples collected during this investigation

will initially be compared with published Australian criteria in order to assess the severity of

contamination of soil at the site.

The general criteria that will be used are presented in the Australian and New Zealand

Guidelines for the Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sites, January 1992

(ANZECC/NHMRC Guidelines) (Reference 8). Specifically, the criteria are

ANZECC/NHMRC Level B guidelines which are environmental investigation levels, and

exceedances are considered to indicate the need for further investigation and assessment of the

contamination.

The ANZECC/NHMRC guidelines indicate that where no ANZECC/NHMRC Level B criteria

exists, the Dutch Level B (Reference 9) should be used as a threshold value for environmental

concerns. Dutch Proposed Intervention Values have also been used in this report as a further

point of comparison (Reference 10).

Contaminant concentrations below ANZECC/NHMRC Level B (or Dutch Level B) are

generally considered as suitable for any beneficial use. Contaminant concentrations above

these levels require further site specific assessment of their health and environmental impact,

with the nature of the proposed land use being an important factor in determining acceptable

contaminant concentrations. As a general guide, contaminant concentration levels above the

ANZECC/NHMRC Level B (or Dutch Level B), but below the Dutch Proposed Intervention

Value are generally considered acceptable for land intended for commercial or industrial uses.

Depending on site specific factors, higher contaminant concentrations may also be tolerable. '


October, 1997 -8- 966 I36801202

6. PROPOSED ANALYTICAL PROGRAM

WSL Consultants Pty Ltd (WSL) will be engaged as the primary analytical laboratory for the

project. AEL Pty Ltd (AEL) will be engaged as the secondary laboratory to undertake check

testing. Both WSL and AEL are NATA registered for the analyses proposed.

The range of analyses, analyhcal methods and expected reporting limits for soil and

groundwater samples are outlined below. The reporting limits for soils may vary depending on

the soil matrix.

Analytical methods used by the laboratories have all been NATA endorsed. The following

methods are used by WSL for analysis.

Analyte Method Reporting Limit PH

Heavy metals ' Mercury

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Total petroleum hydrocarbons

Total phenolics Pentachlorophenol Monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Chlorinated hydrocarbons

Volatile halogenated organics

Polychlorinated biphenyls

Cyanide Sulphate

Organochlorine pesticides

Victorian EPA Publication 139 Method 5 Victorian EPA Publication 139 Method 13 Victorian EPA Publication 139 Method 16 WSL 8100 based on USEPA Method 8100 WSL 030

APHA 5530C & WSL 8040 based on USEPA Method 8040 WSL 3810 based on USEPA Method 3810 WSL 8 120 based on USEPA Method 8120 WSL 3810 based on USEPA Method 3810 WSL 8080 based on USEPA Method 8080 APHA 4500D (CN) Victorian EPA Publication 139 Method 5 & APHA 4500E (SO,) WSL 8080 based on USEPA Method

0.1 unit

5.0 mgkg, except Cd 0.2 mgkg 0.05 mgkg

0.5 mgkg

C,-C,: 20 mgkg C,, -C14: 20 mgkg C15-C28: 50 mgkg C2,-C,,: 50 mg/kg 0.1 mgkg

0.5 mgkg

0.1 mgkg

0.5 mgkg

Individual: 0.1 mgkg Total: 1 mgkg 5 mgkg 10mgkg

Individual: 0.1 mgkg 8080 Total: 1 mgkg

r\ntimony, arsenic. beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, tin, zinc Zadmium, chromium, copper, lead, zinc ' Sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium


October, 1997 -9- 96613680/202

Soil samples will be analysed individually. The analytical programme for the soil samples will

be finalised upon the completion of sampling when targeting of analyses can be undertaken

based on field observations. However, as a guide it is anticipated that the 35 samples that each

sample will be analysed for

0 the metals arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, mercury and zinc

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and

total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs).

.. .

Five samples will be analysed for the full EPA screen which in addition to the analysis

outlined above would also include analysis for

0 the metals antimony, beryllium, cobalt, molybdenum, selenium and tin

total phenolics

0 chlorinated hydrocarbons

organochlorine pesticides

0 monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (MAHs) and

0 polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

Additionally six samples will be analysed for pentachlorophenol.

Selected samples will have elutriation testing for metals undertaken. However, samples will

be selected based on the maximum concentrations (total) and will occur once the

preliminary analytical results have been reviewed.

7. QUALITY ASSURANCE

Approximately 10% of the samples retrieved will be split in the field and relabelled with

dummy sample numbers for use for quality assurance purposes as required. Approximately

45 samples are expected to be collected as part of the sampling programme. Therefore

approximately 5 samples are expected be retrieved for quality assurance purposes. The

dummy sample number will be consecutive. For example if a field duplicate is to be made

of the third sample collected from G97TP1 (G97TP113) then the sample number assigned to

the duplicate will be G97TP1/4.

The quality assurance programme will include the analysis of the field duplicates and is

outlined below.


October, 1997 -10- 966 136801202

~ _ _ _ _ _ _

Description Number of Duplicates Analysis Field Duplicates submitted to 2 Metals' (2 analyses) Primary Laboratory PAHs (2 analyses)

TPHs (2 analyses) Field Duplicates submitted to 2 Metals' (2 analyses) Second Laboratory PAHs (2 analyses)

TPHs (2 analyses) Notes Metals' = arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury nickel and zinc PAHs = Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons TPHs = Total petroleum hydrocarbons

All the quality assurance data will be reviewed and where there are discrepancies in results

extracts will re-analysed by the other laboratory.

All internal quality control laboratory data supplied by WSL will also be reviewed to ensure

that there are not discrepancies in their results.

8. REPORTING

Preparation of the report will involve:

Tabulation of data from the previous investigation undertaken at the site;

0 Tabulation of data analysed for the field investigation undertaken as part of this Stage 2

contamination assessment;

Review of data from past and current investigation;

Comparison of chemical analyses results with Australian and international guidelines;

0 Preparation of report which includes an assessment of the implications of soil

contamination found with regard to the Environmental Audit.

GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD.

per:

Julia Parker

Senior Environmental Scientist PNT/J P/680wp202 .doc

Golder Associates

Peter N Thornton

Associate

144 of 229

October, 1997 -1 1- 966 136801202


October, 1997 -12- 966136801202

9. REFERENCES

Reference 1

Reference 2

Reference 3

Reference 4

Reference 5

Reference 6

Reference 7

Reference 8

Golder Associates Pty Ltd. Report on Preliminary Contamination Assessment,

Massey Ferguson Site, Sunshine, Victoria (Ref. No. 9 16 12280), October

1991.

Golder Associates Pty Ltd. Report on Contamination Assessment, Lots 2, I 1

and 12, Massey Ferguson Site, Sunshine, Victoria (Ref. 91612415/15). May

1992.

Golder Associates Pty Ltd. Report on Contamination Assessment, Devonshire

Road Office Site, Sunshine City Centre, Sunsliine, Victoria (Ref.

9361241 1/10). December 1993.

Golder Associates Pty Ltd. Report on Contamination Assessment, Sunshine

Marketplace Development, Sunshine, Victoria (Ref.. 9561 3505114). April

1995.

Golder Associates Pty Ltd. Report on Soil Contamination Review, Lot IO,

Massey Fergusson Site, Sunskine (Ref. 96613680107). March 1997.

Environment Protection Authority, Victoria. Classification of Wastes, EPA

Information Bulletin Publication 448. May 1995.

Standards Australia. Draft Australian Standard for the Sampling of Soils

Part I : Guide to the Sampling and Investigation of Potentially

Contaminated Soil. August 1996

Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for the Assessment and Managernent

of Contaminated Sites. Australian and New Zealand Environment and

Conservation Council, National Health and Medical Research Council,

January 1992

Golder Associates

~ ~~ ~~~

146 of 229

October, 1997 -13- 96613680/202

Reference 9 Draft Australian Guidelines for the Assessment and Management of

Contaminated Site. Australian and New Zealand Environment and

Conservation Council, National Health and Medical Research Council, June

1990

Reference 10 Swartjes, Frank A, and van den Berg, Reinier. Remediation of Contaminated

Soil and Groundwater: Proposals for Criteria and Priority Setting. Workshop

on Contaminated Soils, Stockholm, October 26-28, 1993


WORK PLAN

STAGE 2 CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT LOT 10

FORMER MASSEY FERGUSSON SITE BALLARAT ROAD, SUNSHINE

Submitted to: Aitkinson Project Management (Aust) Pty Ltd

49 Agnes Street EAST MELBOURNE VICTORIA 3002

DISTRIBUTION

2 copies - Aitkinson Project Management (Aust) Pty Ltd 1 copy - Golder Associates Pty. Ltd.

October 1997 966 13680/202

148 of 229

APPENDIX A

Technical Procedure No. 1 Soil Sampling


October, 1997 -Al- 966 13680/30 1

TECHNICAL PROCEDURE No. 1 SOIL SAMPLING

1.0 PURPOSE OF TECHNICAL PROCEDURE

To enable recovery of a representative sample(s) of site soil from a known location(s) and depth(s) in a manner which is consistent and which minimises any risk of the sample not being representative.

2.0 APPLICABILITY OF TECHNICAL PROCEDURE

This technical procedure applies to sampling of soil for the purpose of chemical analysis by means of hand tools or assisted by mechanical excavators or drilling rigs. It applies to field engineers, geologists or technicians undertaking soil sampling activities.

3.0 DEFINITIONS

Soil Sampling Programme - The term soil sampling programme refers to the document which provides information on the site from which soil is to be sampled, the number of samples and sampling locations, and the intended chemical analysis of samples. This may be the Field Brief, Specific Work Instruction or Site Specific Work Plan, and should be issued in conjunction with a General Health and Safety Plan or Site Specific Health and Safety Plan. The instructions set out in the soil sampling programme should be adhered to. Any deviations from the soil sampling programme will require the approval of the Golder Associates project manager.

3.0 REFERENCES

None cited.

4.0 DISCUSSION OF TECHNICAL PROCEDURE

This procedure should be used by all field staff engaged in sampling soil for chemical analysis.

5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES

Overall responsibility for implementation of this technical procedure rests with the Golder Associates project manager. Direct responsibility for the implementation of this technical procedure rests with the Golder Associates field engineer, geologist or technician.

6.0 FIELD EQUIPMENT LIST

The following is a list of the minimum field equipment that will generally be required for sampling soil:

latex (or equivalent material) gloves phosphate fiee detergent (laboratory grade) distilled or deionised water and spray flasks esky and ice supply laboratory pre-cleaned glass sample jars (screw of twist top) AND/OR glass headspace vials (crimp on caps) with crimper hand sampling tools (sampling scoop, spatula, spade/shovel) crowbar wash buckets (3) and scourers or brushes marking pen (solvent based suitable for w-riting indelibly on glass)


October, 1997 -A2- 96613680/301

field logging sheets or notebook chain of custody form measuring tapes (5 metre and 30 metre or equivalent lengths) site plan and other necessary information as provided in the soil sampling programme

Where indicated by the soil sampling programme, additional equipment will be provided. This equipment may include the following:

site health and safety equipment (eg. respirators; latex gloves; flammable gas detectors; draeger-type pump and colorimetric tubes) field monitoring equipment (eg. organic vapour detectors/analysers)

7.0 GENERAL SITE PROCEDURES

7.1 Equipment Cleaning and Handling

All equipment should be placed on a clean plastic groundsheet or within a vehicle (eg. van) and not on bare ground. All sampling tools should be cleaned on site prior to recovering any soil samples and subsequently between recovering each soil sample and prior to leaving the site using the cleaning procedure set out below. Latex gloves are to be worn whilst cleaning equipment and when handling cleaned equipment. Cleaned equipment is to be rested on a groundsheet or on plastic sheeting within a vehicle and not on bare ground. All used gloves and other wastes generated by sampling are to be collected and removed from the site for appropriate disposal.

EQUIPMENT CLEANING PROCEDURE Initial wash in tap water to remove adhered dirt Second wash in tap water and detergent solution (phosphate free, laboratory grade detergent such as Decon 90) Rinse in tap water Final rinse with distilled or deionised water

7.2 Location of Sampling Points

The instructions for location of sampling points provided in the soil sampling programme should be adhered to. The required sampling points should be located to an accuracy within 3 metres radius of the locations specified in the soil sampling programme. The locations of all sampling points should be measured by means of graduated tape from permanent features marked on the site plan and recorded. Where physical barriers, underground or overhead hazards or similar circumstances prevent soil sampling, the sampling point may be moved but kept as close as practicable to the origmally proposed location.


October, 1997 -A3- 966 13680/301

8.0 GENERAL SAMPLE HANDLING PROCEDURES

A clean pair of latex gloves should be worn whilst recovering each soil sample. The area from which the soil sample is to be removed (or the sample itself upon removal) should first be screened using a photoionisation detector. The results of the screening should be recorded on the field log. A cleaned piece of equipment should be used to recover each soil sample. Soil samples may be handled with gloved hands (clean gloves) to assist with placing samples into jars etc. Recovered soil samples should be placed immediately into glass jars and sealed with screw or twist top lids OR recovered soil samples should be placed in glass headspace vials and the seal crimped on. Each sample jar should be labelled using a solvent based marking pen on the side of the jar and on the lid of the jar OR on the side of the headspace vial and on the lid of the headspace vial as follows:

Golder Associates Job Number Sample Location Number (eg. borehole or test pit identification number) Sample Identification Number Sample Recovery Depth Date

Due to the general small size of headspace vials, which precludes large amounts of information being written on them, the minimum information to be provided on the lid and the side of a headspace vial is as follows:

Job Number Sampling Location Number Sample Identification Number

The visual contamination of the sample should be assessed and recorded in the field log book. A written record of the recovery of each sample should be kept and will contain the information outlined above regarding the location, depth, and identification numbers of soil samples. As specified by the soil sampling programme documentation, a field soil log should be kept of each borehole, augerhole or test pit. Sample recovery information should be noted on the field soil log including the PID screening results and the contamination ranking. Where a field soil log is not required for a specific job, the minimum record of field soil conditions should be a description and soil classification for each recovered sample which is to be kept in the field note book and a copy place on the job file. The sample recovery details should also be recorded on the chain of custody form. The minimum information to be recorded on this form is as follows:

Date Sample Location Number Sample Identification Number Sample Recovery Depth Chemical Analysis Request (may be completed in the field or in the office)

Recovered soil samples should be placed on ice in an esky and stored in this manner until delivery to the analytical laboratory or return to Golder Associates office where they will be stored under rehgeration until delivery to the analytical laboratory. Sample holding time in the Golder Associates office is not to exceed 48 hours.


October, 1997 - A 4 966 13680/30 1

9.0 SAMPLING SOIL FROM EXCAVATED TEST PITS

The procedures set out below apply to soil sampling from test pits which have been excavated using a backhoe.

TO RECOVER THE SOIL SAMPLE FROM WITHIN THE TEST PIT PROCEED AS FOLLOWS:

- put on a clean pair of latex gloves use a spatula or the side of a shovel to scrape surface material from the side of - the test pit, scraping vertically from top to bottom of the desired sampling interval to expose undisturbed soil use a sampling scoop to recover a discrete soil sample at the required depth from the side of the test pit which has been scraped

if additional soil samples are required from different depths, use a new or cleaned sampling scoop to recover each additional sample from the scraped side of the test pit

recovered from the side of the test pit. Unless otherwise specified in the soil sampling programme, the reference point for depth measurements should be the ground surface If it is deemed that the test pit should not be entered then the soil samples should be recovered from the backhoe or excavator bucket

- place the recovered soil sample in a glass jar and seal the jar with a lid

- use a measuring tape to establish the sampling depths for each discrete sample

TO RECOVER THE SOIL SAMPLE FROM THE BACKHOE BUCKET, PROCEED AS FOLLOWS :

put on a clean pair of latex gloves direct the equipment operator to scrape material from the base of the test pit at the required depth into the backhoe bucket use a sampling scoop to recover material from the backhoe bucket. A number of small soil portions should be recovered from various locations within the mass of material in the backhoe bucket and transferred to a glass jar. Sample portions should be recovered from the centre of the soil mass and not from the bucket walls

operator should knock out as much of the material in the backhoe or excavator bucket as possible prior to obtaining the next sample of material use a new or cleaned sampling scoop to recover each new soil sample from the backhoe bucket use a measuring tape lowered into the test pit to establish the depths from which material was sampled into the backhoe or excavator bucket

- if additional samples are required from different depths, the equipment

FOR EACH RECOVERED SAMPLE: Label the sample jar as previously specified Place the sample jar on ice in the esky Record the sample recovery details on the field soil log or in the field notebook as previously specified Fill in the Chain of Custody form as previously specified Record the soil conditions on the field soil log or in the field notebook On completion of the test pit, backfill the pit with excavated material and compact material by wheel rolling with the backhoe. Mound excess earth over the test pit.


APPENDIX B

Survey Plan of Sample Locations

Golder Associates

154 of 229

LEVELS ARE IN METRiS 10 AH.0 . 6 ARE SHOWN THUS +’- OPTUfl BEING fl.M.8 B.M. No 1820 LOCATED IN

I

BALLARAT RL. L 0 . 3 2 A.H.O. ROAD NEAR WESlMna, .AND ROAD. P L A N OF SURVEY fNGINEE41NG DEGS PLACET. 1. ’

CO-ORCihc:E O A l U M lr ‘HAT USED IN LITTLE 6 BROSNAN

’N l H U S 0l6 PROPOSED POLICE & COURTS .DEVELOPMENT

B A L L A R A T ROAD PLAN OF St iPVEY RE1 2 5 0 2 VERSION 19-3-97. ;?!e 6 7 37

SIGNIFICAN’ r: . f S O N L ~ H A V f B E t N SHOWN. L i t r n r t d Surveyor SUNSHINE P t l r r Francis Sulllvan

S I T - J U T l t i F i ~ i . r , 4 ~ 1 0 N HA; BE! OBTAINED F70M GOLICR A,S>.’ClA!ES T E S T LCC4 TlONS LITTLE & BROSNAN:: REF !io. 2 6 0 0 - 1

A.cx 001 .,. 111 SCALE _L;cr

P L L Y OATEC 21/1/97. MELWAY REF. 26 H10 I I I I h LAND DEVELOPMENT SURVEYORS. CONSULTANTS PLANNERS D A T E 10-7-97 VERSION 17-7-97

SURVEYOR G.F. :.f!4WN G.F. L C.B. 5”” b 5 10 15 20 189 JOHNSTON STREET. FITZROY. 3065. ISSUED

DATE OF S:II;VI*. 15-7-195 . 0 \ f A O O A ~ A \ Y L O P . I OYG

L ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ IN fl~-~f~ TELEPHONE: lO319417.7311 F A X : 10319417-1813 ,,OOOtGP( -

I

B A L L A R A T T.8.M NAIL IN BACK KERB

R O A D T.8.M SPIKE IN ASPHALT PATI.

2 3 1 . 6 3

v.

0 N

i $b’

a’ 597TP1

ti.5G86.07

TP5

N 5067.60

597TP9

! N 50L9.87 1 m

‘ L o t 8 o n PS 341388R

N.5017.09

.,+* 597TP6 -

N 5008.07 0’ 1-1

p 0’ G97TP8

G97TP13

E 1909,LL v** 1 ti L961.90 1

0’

+ 5 9 7 1 P l L

pi L9L7.00

f T P 2 0 ./I I I v‘ E 1966.L?

?’ !NL.31-591 TP18

TP19

G97TPZO

N O T E S .*+

155 of 229

APPENDIX C

Report of Test Pits Notes and Abbreviations

Method of Soil Classification



FILL - CH Silty CLAY, high plasticity, dark brown, trace medium gravel throughout. moist, firm ----_____----___---___________ yellow brown, trace fine sand, moist firm

CH Silty CLAY. high plasticity. brown. trace root I fibre throughout moist. very stiff to hard

END OF TEST PIT @ l.1m GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED


Sa G97TP111 PID = Oppm

Sa G9AP1/2 PID = Pppm

Sa G97TP113 PID=O m Sa G97&/4 PID = Oppm Sa G97TP115 PID = Oppm

Sa G9AP1/6 PID = Oppm

OTHER

NB: Top O.lm is fill from road works B.0.K areas

G9TTP114 b5 are field duplicates of G9AP113

Report of test pit must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations 157 of 229


FILL - SC Clayey SAND, fine to medium grained, dark brown. trace to with medium to coarse gravel. throughout, trace cobble, root fibre, moist [medium dense

CH Silty CLAY. high plasticity, dark brown, trace root fibre throughout moist very stiff

r

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . trace carbonate

END OF TEST PIT @ 0.8m GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED

7 wzz. 0.00

u 0.10

z4.5 0.80

.--


;a G9TTW1 'ID = Oppm

;a G97TP2/2 'ID = Oppm

;a G97TW3 'ID = Oppm

&mrt of test nit must be read in coniunction with accompanvina notes and abbreviations

i/ OTHER

158 of 229

= 3 $ - ... *t

2 8 ...... ...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I I

O

B 5 I I

U

? 2

.-


FILL SM Silly SAND, fine to medium rained black with bitumen throughout, trace root fitre, rnididium dense SC Clayey Sandy GRAVEL. medium to coarse grained, rounded, trace cobble. fine to medium sand, orange brown, moist. dense

r----- ._---________----________

_____________-________________ CH Silly CLAY, high plasticity. pale greylbrown. trace root fibre, moist. stiff to very sbff


3.U.z 0.00

u 0.40

xw 1 .00

---


Sa G9TTP3I1 ?ID = Oppm

Sa G9iTP3l2 PID = O.9ppm

Sa G9TTP3I3 PID = Oppm

Sa G9AP314 PID = Oppm

OTHER

Repon of test pit must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations 159 of 229


FILL - CH Silty CLAY. high plasticity, orangelbrown. trace carbonate throughout with coarse basaltic gravel, moist. firm

___--________________________ Crushed rock fine to coarse grained, dry. very de

lnteriayed Fill, brown, predominantly slag (some solid zones), with ash, slag gravel, trace slag cobble, SM Silty SAND, dry. very dense

CH Silty CLAY. high plasticity. dark brown, moist. son to firm

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . orangebrown. moist very stiff

END OF TEST P i l @ 1.5m GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED

-

.-


;a G97TP411 'ID = 0.5ppm

Sa G97TP4/2 PID = Oppm

Sa G97TP413 PID = O.6ppm

Sa GBTTP414 PID = Oppm

Sa G97TP415 PID = OSppm

'd OTHER

W.6m inferred BOK f i l l from neighbouring roadworks

Inferred site Fill G97TP413. not material imported for road construction

Report of test pit must be read in coniunclion with accompanying notes and abbreviations 160 of 229


FILL - SM Silty SAND, fine to medium, pale brown. with gravel, fine to coarse gravel, trace slag, trace root fibre throughout. moist. loose

________--_---_--------------- black, trace ash throughout. trace slag, wood, fine gravel, dry, loose to medium dense

CH Silty CLAY, high plasticity. orangebrown. trace root fibre, moist stiff to very sbff


z I SAMPLING I OTHER


Sa G9TTP513 PID = 0.3ppm

Report of test pit mud be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations 161 of 229


FILL - SM Silly SAND, fine to medium, pale brown, with fine to coarse gravel, sla , trace ash, root fibres throughout moist,%ose

_______--_______--__---------- black trace to with ash throughout trace slag, root fibre, gravel, dry, loose to medium dense

FILL - SM Silly SAND, fine to medium, pale brown, with fine to coarse gravel, sla , trace ash, root fibres throughout moist,%ose

_______--_______--__---------- black trace to with ash throughout trace slag, root fibre, gravel, dry, loose to medium dense

END OF TEST PIT @ l . l m GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED


;a G9TTP611 'ID = Oppm

Sa G9TTP6/2 PID = O m Sa G97f9613 PID = Oppm Sa G97TP614 PID = Oppm


~ e r n e of test oit must be read in coniunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations

OTHER

G9TTP613 & 4 are field dupicates of G97TP6E

162 of 229


FILL - GM Silly GYVEL grey, medium to awse gravel, basaltic, wth medium sand throughout moist, medium dense

Interlayered Fill, brown. predominantly slag, with zones of ash throughout trace cobbles of slag, SM Silty SAND, dry. dense

____------_---_---------------

CH Silty CLAY, high plasticitj. brown, moist, firm



OTHER

ia GQTTP711 'ID = lppm

h G9TTP712 'ID = O.5ppm

Sa G9TTP713 'ID = 2.9ppm

Sa G9TTP714 PID = lppm

Sa GQTTP715 PID = 1.1ppm


*.-

. -.

--


lnteriayered FILL brown. GP Sandy GRAVEL fine gravel, fine to coarse grained sand. with slag. coarse to cobble, ash throughout. trace clay. coke, metal, dry, dense

CH,SiI CLAY, high plasticity, orangebrown. moist. 5 m to strff


A Z J § 0.40

w 1.10

---


a G9TTP0ll ID = Oppm

ia G97TP8/2 'ID = Oppm

;a G9TTP013 'ID = l.0ppm

?a G97TP014 'ID = 4.2ppm

OTHER 0

Report of test pit must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes end abbreviations 164 of 229

= ... 5

.l ... ... 2 2 ... ... ... ... ... ... .::. ...:. ...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . . ... ... I I

i : C :<

I . !; I I

W 0 I Y 0 2


FILL - Solid layer of slag, (trace metal within), molten, metallic/heavy. dry, very dense

CH Silly CLAY, high plasticity, grey, moist. firm to stiff



- OTHER

Sa G9TTP9/1 PID = 64.2ppm

Sa G97TP9/2 PID = Opprn

Sa G9TTP9/3 PID = Opprn

Report of test pit must be read in coniunction with accomDanvina notes and abbreviations 165 of 229

. INFERRED STRATIGRAPHY 0

E "PI 2

GM Silty GRAVEL, fine to c m , dark brownblack. with gravelly slag (fine to coarse, trace cobbles), trace to with ash throughout trace ballast. trace broken brick, root fibre, wood (including railway sleepers), moist. dense

_____--______-______---------- Predominantly ash layer, grey, with slag, trace broken brick root fibre, moist. medium dense

CH Silty CLAY, high plasticity. pale brown, moist. firm

____________________---------- orange brown, trace carbonate throughout. moist. Stiff



Sa G97TP10/1 PID = 0 m Sa ~ 9 8 1 1 on PID = O m Sa G97#10/3 PID = Oppm

Sa G97TPlOI4 PID = Oppm

Sa G97TP1015 PID = lppm

Sa G97TP10/6 PID = 0.3ppm

Rewrt of test pit must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations

OTHER

NOTE: Testpit location moved 4.3m North of

rail line GP97TPlM & 3 are field duplicates of GP97TplO/l

surveyed location on to

Pit - B/W rail tracks. tracks still in place

166 of 229

= ... % # ... $e ... Q ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I I

, C

5 ! t I 2 I I

W 0 f Y

2 m

- I -

INFERRED STRATIGRAPHY l!f% FILL - SM Silty SAND, fine to medium, dark brown, ballast medium to coarse gravel, c wood. slag, coke. ash, root fibre throughout. moist. medium dense

with wood (railway sleepers), trace to with ash, trace coke, trace slag, c o r n gravel, moist. medium dense

_____--____-_----__-__________

CH Silty CLAY, high plasticity, orange/brown. with zones of slag, ash. coke. coarse sand, moist. firm

CH Silty CLAY, high plasticity, brown, moist, stiff

END OF TEST PIT (@ 2.0117

2.00


Sa GSTTP1111 PID = Oppm

Sa G9TTP11R PID = Oppm

Sa G9TTP1113 PI0 = 21.5ppm


Sa G9TTPl PID = 1 . 5 ~

I5 n

Report of test pit must be read in coniunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations

OTHER

tOTE: Testpit location moved 1.9m North of surveyed ocation to rail line

hilway sleepers @ 0.2. ).4m

167 of 229

. . .

. -

. ._

= ... % T ...

2 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..... ..:.:. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

.::::: ... ...... ... I I

CY

8 4 I I

U

2 J n


FILL - GC Clayey GRAVEL medium to coarse, brown, trace slag throughout, trace coke, moist medium dense

SP S A N D . r r l y graded, brown, with grave!. slag, trace to wi dense

_____________----------------- ash, trace coke, fine sand. medium

CH Silty,CLAY, high lasticity. orangebrown. moist, s~ to very stit

END OF TEST PIT @ 1.2m GROUNWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED



Sa G97TP12/2 PID = Oppm Sa G97TPlU3 PID = O m Sa G9#12/4 PID = Oppm


Sa G9TTP12/6 PID = Oppm

Report of test pit must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations

OTHER

Top 0.0 - 0.1 inferred mixed fill from road batter

G97TP12/3 & 4 are field duplicates of G97TP12/2

168 of 229


FILL - GC Sandy Clay to coarse sand, ellowxrown. trace cobble. trace root fibre Jroughout. trace slag, dry.

SP SAND, poorly graded, dark brown black with medium to corne gravel throughout. fine to medium, trace slag gravel throughtout. trace coke, ash, moist. medium dense

GRAVEL coarse. medium

r n E L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

.............................. Interlayered fill, brown, predominantly SM Silly S with ,ash. trace coke, trace broken brick, dry. medium dense

CH Silly CIAY, high plasticity, dark brown, with basalt floater throughout moist, stiff

BACKHOE REFUSAL @ 0.6m - INFERRED BASALT FLOATER GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED


OTHER

I

Sa G9TTP1311 PID = Oppm

Sa G9TTP13/2 PID = 0.lppm




I

0

- 1

- 2

INFERRED STRATIGRAPHY I

FILL - SM Silty SAND, fine, dark brown, with fine to medium gravel, tram root fibre, moist, medium dense

GC Clayey Sandy GRAVEL medium. medium sand, dark brown, with zones of slag, gravel with wooden sleepers, trace coke. ash, metal, moist dense

CH Silty CLAY, high plasticity, dark grey, trace carbonate throughout. with basalt floaters @ 0.5m. moist, very stiff

BACKHOE REFUSAL @ 0.9m ON BASALT FLOATER GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED

= ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ..,... ..,.,. ...... ..:.. $$ ... ... $$ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... :.:.:. ... :.: .:.:.:

I I

... ... ... ..../ ...... ...

9 ?

i ?,

? SAMPLING AND TESTING

Sa G9AP14t1 PID = Opppm

Sa G9AP14/2 PID = Oppm

Sa G9AP14l3 PID = Oppm

Rewrt of test pit mud be read in coniunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations

OTHER

Testpit location moved 2.5m North of surveyed location to inferred centre of railway tracks

170 of 229


FILL - SM Silty SAND, fine, dark brown. with fine to medium gravel, trace root fibre, moist, medium dense

lnteriayed fill - GM Silty Sandy GRAVEL, medium to coarse, fine to medium sand, orangebrown with zones of slag and ash throughout. trace brick coke, metal, wood (railway sleeper), dry. very dense

--____-----___----____________

-------------------_---------- ash with slag gravel, black, SM Silly SAND, trace coke, dry, medium dense to dense

CH Silty CLAY, high plasticity, pale brownlorange. moist, very stiff



la G9TTP1511 'ID = Oppm

;a G97TP15/2 'ID = Oppm

G9AP1513 'ID = Op m ;a ~9&'i5/4 +ID = Oppm Sa G9TTP15/5 PID = Oppm


Rewrt of test nit must be read in coniunction with accomoanvino notes and abbreviations

OTHER

restpi location moved !.6m North of surveyed ocation to inferred :entre of railway line

>9TTP15/4 & 5 are field iuplicates of GP9TTP1513

171 of 229

- p [ 2 3 ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .:... :.y. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I I

C

E I I

u ? P


FILL - GM Silty GRAVEL fine to COQISB. brown, with CH Silty CLAY, trace slag throughout. moist loose ________------------------ SP SAND, poori graded, fine to medium, black with slag througKout. trace ash. coke. slag, cobble, brick, wood. metal. moist. medium dense

_____________---_---------____ Predominantly slag layer, brown. with zones of ash, very dense

CH Silty CLAY, high plasticity, dark grey, trace root fibre throughout. moist. stiff to very stiff



Sa G9TTP16/1 PID = lppm

Sa G97TP16l2 PID = Oppm



OTHER

%port of test pit must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations 172 of 229


I

FILL - SC Clay SAND, fine to medium, dark brown. trace silt throuzout. trace root fibre, slag, coke. msdium to coarse gravel. moist medium

------------_____________ SM Silty SAND, fine to medium, dark brown. with zones of CH Silty CLAY throughout, trace to with concrete cobble. wood. ash. slag, trace coke, dry, medium dense to dense

CH Silty CLAY. high plastici , dark brownlgrey. trace root fibre throughout, %m to stiff




Sa G9?TP17/2 PID = 0.3ppm Sa G9TTP1713 PID = Oppm Sa G9TlP1714 PID = Oppm


Report of test pit must be read in coniunction with accornwnvina notes and abbreviations

OTHER

Note: old footing on South side of pit

some wall collapse 0.30.6m

G97TP1713 & 4 are field duplicates of GP97TP17/2

173 of 229

END OF TEST P l l @ 1.5m GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED





Sa G9TTP10I4 PID = O.2ppm

OTHER

Testpit located 3m east of tree

hmrt of test nit must be read in coniunction with acoommvina notes and abbreviations 174 of 229

=

* ... B > ... ... ... ... ...... ...._. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ... ... ... .:.:.: ... ... ..... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..:.. .-:.. ... ... ... ... I I

C

$ ! I I

W

P d Y 0

- .-

INFERRED STRATIGRAPHY 0

a a: a


h G97TP1911 'ID = Oppm

Sa G97TP19/2 PID = 1.3ppm

Sa G97TP1913 PID = 1.5ppm

Sa G97TP1914 PID = 4.lppm Sa G97TP1915 PID = 3.5ppm Sa G97TP1916 PID = 5.8ppm

OTHER

k t p i t location moved im North of surveyed ocation to inferred :entre of railway line

G97TP1915 L 6 are field duplicates of GP97TP1914



FILL - CH Silty CLAY. high plasticity. brown. with medium to coarse gravel. trace slag. metal. moist soft

SM Silty SAND, black. medium, with zones of slag and ash, trace root fibre throughout trace coke. moist medium dense

Predominantly Slag Gravel, brown, with SM Si SAND, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravx cobble. trace to with ash, trace metal throu hout trace to with ash, trace root fibre, wood. cofe. broken brick. dry. dense to very dense

with metal throughout, (rustylorange appearance), dry

CH Silty CLAY, high plasticity, dark brodgrey. trace carbonate throughout moist, stift

REFUSAL ON TEST PIT @ 1.9m ON INFERRED BASALT FLOATER GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED I


Sa G9?TP20/1 PID = 9.8ppm

Sa G97TP20/2 PID = 0 m Sa G9?%0/3 PID = Oppm Sa G9?TP20/4 PID = Oppm

Sa G9?TP20/5 P = Oppm

Sa G9?TP20/6 PID = Oppm

Report of test pit must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations

OTHER

Inferred back of kerb fill from previous roadworks

G9AF20/3 & 4 are field duplicates of GWAP20/2

trace nt residue in s a m p r

176 of 229

NOTES AND ABBREVIATIONS

FIELD SAMPLING AND TESTING

Recovery Lost DS U63

SPT

NMLC

FV PP FP PM

NQ i

Depth interval of recovered soil sample or rock core Depth interval of lost soil sample or rock core (default location at base of run) Disturbed sample Thin walled tube sample - number indicates nominal sample diameter in millimetres - R indicates refusal to penetration - PH indicates advance by hydraulic pressure from drill rig Standard penetration test to AS 1289 6.3.1 - 1993 N = penetration resistance (blows for 300 mm penetration following 150 mm seating drive). Result reported according to penetration (P) achieved:

N, and blows for each 150 mm of penetration blows for seating drive, plus subsequent blows and penetration total blows and penetration

- HW ( full penetration under hammer and rod weight) - HB (hammer bouncing)

- P=450m111 - 150CP<450 - P < 150 mm

Other abbreviations used - RW (fil l penetration under rod weight only)

52 mm dia. rock core obtained in triple tube core barrel 47 mm dia. rock core obtained in wireline biple tube core barrel Field vane shear test (result expressed as shear strength s,) Pocket penetrometer test (result expressed as instrument reading in Ha) Field permeability test over section noted Pressuremeter test over section noted.

(k = hydraulic conductivity) (E = Young's Modulus) (s, = inferred undrained shear strength)

GROUNDWATER

GWL

GROUNDWATER NOT OBSERVED: the observation of groundwater, whether present or not, was not possible

Observed groundwater level at date shown

due to drilling water, surface seepage, rain, etc, or caving of hole or test pit

GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED: hole or test pit dry after drilling or excavation, but groundwater could still be present in less permeable soil or where hole or test pit was back-filled soon after completion.

LABORATORY TESTING

Strength Tests Index Properties

T triaxial shear test (a, = cell confining pressure) P Bulk density D direct shear test (CT" = surcharge pressure) P d Dry density U unconfined compression test Wf Field moisture content LV laboratory vane test wL Liquid Limit

wp Plastic Limit Test Resu Its 4 Plasticity Index

LS Linear Shrinkage c', 41' S" undrained shear strength (I. uniaxial compressive strength E Young's Modulus V Poisson's ratio

effective stress strength parameters

177 of 229

-

METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION

DESCRIPTION PARTICLE SIZE

CODDLES 200-60mm

~ ~. Symbol

EQUIVALENT AS SIEVE SIZE

0.d ' 0

4% GW '.a. 0'

0 0 0

GM

GC

.. SM - .

ML

CL

OL

MH

CH

OH

Description Definition of Soil Components

Well graded gravels or sand-gravel mixtures, less than 12% fines.

Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, less than 12% fines.

Silty gravel, gravel-sand-silt mixtures.

Clayey gravel, gravel-sand-clay mixtures.

Well graded sands or gravelly sands, less than 12% fines.

Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, less than 12% fines.

Silty sand, sand-silt mixtures.

Clayey sand, sand-clay mixtures.

Inorganic silts, rock flour, sandy or clayey silts of low plasticity.

Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays.

Organic silts and organic silty clays of low to medium plasticity.

Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatom- aceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts.

Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays

Organic clays of high plasticity, organic silty clay, organic silt.

Peat and other highly organic soils. G M P t

0: W E FILL Fill material. 0 L

63-19mm 19-6.7mm

line 6.79.36mm

SAND coarse 236-0.6mm 0.6-0.212mm

tine 0.212-0.075mm

0.06-0.002mm 1 I <0.075mm

<0.002mm

AS17261993 App. A. AS 12893.6.1-1995 1 Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils

RELATIVE DENSITY

VERY LOOSE LOOSE

MEDRJh4 DENSE DENSE

VERY DENSE

SPT" VALUE blowd3OOmm

0 IO 4 4 lo 10 10 lo 30 30 IO SO above 50

Consistency of Cohesive Soils

VERY SOFT SOFT FIRM STIFF

VERY STIFF HARD

010 I2 12 lo 25 25 lo 50 50 lo 100 100 IO 200 above 200

Note: i) Fines defined as material which passes a 0.075mm sieve.

ii) For logging purposes the pocket penetrometer reading is taken as twice the undrained shear strength.

iii) SPT is Standard Penetration Test (AS 12896.3.7 - 1993)

PLASTICITY CHART

0 10 20 30 4 0 50 60 70 80 90 1W Llquld Llmll wL (x)

Form R-020 Rcvhcd Scp %

178 of 229

APPENDED

Analytical Results - WSL Consultants pty Ltd


BL:SC:126%

2 September 1997

Golder Associates Pty Ltd P.O. Box 6079 HAWTHORNWEST VIC 3122

Attention: Mr. P. Thornton

Enviroscience

RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONISUNSHINE

Job No: 9661 368011 12

Certificate of Analvsis

WSL Report No. 34044 - Chemical Analyses

Date Sampled - Received by WSL Consultants on 18/07/97

Instructions were received on 20/08/97 Analyses were commenced on 20/08/97

Soil samples were tested in accordance with the analytical methods described in "Chemical Analysis of Polluted Soils" VIC EPA, Publication 139, Nov. 1981 and WSL in-house methods, with the results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

Water samples were tested in accordance with the analytical methods described in "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Waste Water", APHA 19th Edn. 1995 and WSL in-house methods, with the results expressed asmglLitre unless stated otherwise.

All Quality Control Data is expressed as percentages of the expected values.


8.J LYONS PRINCIPAL CHEMIST

WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. A.C.N. 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

This Laboratory is registered by the National Association of Testing Authorities. Australia. The test(s) reponed herein have been performed in accordance with its terms of registration. This document shall not be reproduced except in full.

A NATA Accredited I&%$ Of

An Approved Quarantine Premises

An Approved EPA Audiror & Analyst 180 of 229

WSLConsultants Enviroscience ACN 004 752 676

78576 78577 78578 78579- 78580

78582-- 78583 78584 78585 ~- - ----- . -. ~ . . - . .

785E' ..'I ---

785-73-' . .

' 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: +613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

I

. . . . . . . . . . . I

G97TP971 G97TP1015 G97TP1313 G97TP1411 G97TP1412

78581--G97TP15/1 G97TP1613' G97TP1712 --r G97TPl713 G97TPl813

QC Data

-..---_ .. -- ---. -- - _ 1 ~

-

! ,... __ ..... . . . . . . . . . . .

.......... I

I ' I '

* ----- ~ -- I -_.. . . .

. .... --.-.-.-. ............ j ...

. .r . - .

" ---_ ' . . -----.-I .................... -- - - . - - . I :I.. . -I 78578-G97TP13/3

G97TPl813

Spike (%) %-~~TP'l 3 - ~ ~ - . - - -.

-..~--_ ' . C'' -- ........ -..-..I.-.:: , . .

i __- I

CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LID

JOB NO: 96613680/112 RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONISUNSHINE

1. __

SAMPLE DETAILS I P- LAB NO 1 I DESCRIPTION 1 LOCATION 1 DEPTH

I

I--- .----- 1---1 I- I

METALS - ELUTRIATION OF SOIL (TCLP)

i SOIL I . ._ METHODS i WATER

Page 2 of 2 Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Water results expressed as rnglL unless stated otherwise. Elutriation Method US EPA 131 1

181 of 229

BL:SC: 12634

5 August 1997

Golder Associates Ply Ltd P.O. Box6079 HAWTHORNWEST VIC 3122


Enviroscience

0 8 AUF 1997

u

Order No: GA-MELB-2053

RE: ATKINSONIMASSEY FERGUSSONISUNSHINE

Job No: 96613680

Certificate of Analysis


Date Sampled 16-17/07/97 Received by WSL Consultants on 17/07/97



Water samples were tested in accordance with the analytical methods described in "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water &.Waste Water", APHA 19th Edn. 1995 and WSL in-house methods, with the results expressed asmglLitre unless stated otherwise.



PRINCIPAL CHEMIST

WsL Consultants Pty. Ltd. A.CN. 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 , Australia Telephone: (03) 9429 4666 Facsimile: (03) 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

This Laboratory is registered by the National Association of Testing Authorities. Australia. The test(s) reported herein have been performed in accordance with its terms of registration. This document shall not be reproduced except in full .

Page 1 of 20 A NATA Accredited Laboratory


An Approved EPA Auditor & Analyst 182 of 229

W S LConsultants Enviroscience ACN 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121 Telephone: +613 9423 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2294

SAMPLE DETAILS Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Mercury Lead

LAB NO DESCRIPTION LOCATION DEPTH (m)

74552 G97TPIQ G97TP1 0.1-0.2 <5 <0.2 9.0 33 <0.05 <5 74553 G97TP1/3 G97TP1 0.4-0.5 <5 <0.2 27 12 <0.05 12

CLIENT: RE:

JOB NO:

REPORT NO 33472 Received: 17/07/97

Zinc Phenols

48 <o. 1 7.5

GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD

183 of 229

ww V l U v l l D U L Lull t.3

Enviroscience ACN 004 7 5 2 G7G

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 121 Telephone: t613 3429 4666 Facsimile: 4 1 3 7429 2294 Email: [email protected]

'REPORT NO Received:

Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Mercury Lead Zinc

33472 17/07/97

Phenols

CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONlSUNSHlNE

SAMPLE DETAILS . . . . .....a. .. I_ %.%. . . . . . . . . . . . LAB NO

74574 -- ,G97TP9/1 74575 . .G97TP912 . - c...-. I G97TP9 . "0.410.5

. . . . ._:_ _.__ =1458-o. 74379 ,G97TP10/5 G97TP10 : 0.4-0.5

.G97TP10/6 iG97TP10 ,0.7-0.8

DESCRIPTION ! LOCATION DEPTH (m) I -.______._ I G97TP9 0-0.1 ,_ -- .. .- .... . . I-_ ._. .

. . . . . . 7457-8 74577 ~Gg~T-pi-o./-4-. ,G97TP10/2 ._- ~ G97TP10 - 0-0.1 . . ......... ..i G97TP10 .. 03-04 .

1- . -

74582 :G97TPS iM' . _.._I . . . . L- .

jGg-jfijT2 . . . . . . ._ __ 74584 ;G97TP12/1 ~ 0-0.1

. I -. . . I

74581 1G97TPl.i/l iG97TPll '0-0.1 rG97TPI 1 ~ 0.5-0.6 7458-3. iG97T-p-l .-__ - - . -1 _ .__

. . . . . . iG97TP1 I : 1.9-2.0 ... -_ -

JOB NO: 96613680

METALS & PHENOLS - SOIL

WSLO23 WSLO23 . .

This Laboratory is registered by the National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) reported herein have been performed in accordance with its t-nnr of registration. This document rhdl not be rqw&ucd except in full.

WSLO23 I 139-16 I WSLO23 I WSLO23 i 55306 WSL . . . . . 023 i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 1 . . - - -.-. I I I I I

1 ~ 0 . 0 5 30 1 ~ 0 . 1 ...... .......

... . . ..... _ _ _ ..... . . . . . . . . .. . .

200 37 ... . -. 18

... ...

...

. . . . . .... .... ... - 95 . .. . . . . ....

...... .. ..

. . . ...... ...

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

. . . ....

. .

. . ... ..... ..... ........ i 3

. . . . . . . . . . . .

... ....... . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

; ...... . . , . . . . ..... ......

__ 19 j 7.3

.

0.7 i 27- ~ , 1 .I 52 j 290 !

n

Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise b Page 3 of 20

184 of 229


2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: +613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD

JOB NO: 96613680 RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONlSUNSHlNE

METALS & PHENOLS - SOIL

SAMPLE DETAILS I Arsenic

I I I I

METHODS SOIL I WSLO23 1

Cadmium Chromium Copper

1.3 41 120 0.9 38 120 0.3 25 13 0.5 31 70 8.1 2000 440 0.4 39 140 c0.2 18 12 c0.2 20 15 0.2 15 7.1 c0.2 81 92 0.8 27 120

__ -

This Laboratory is registered by the National Association of Teiting Authorities, Australia. The teSt(6) repodcd hcreis have been p e r f o d in accordance with its tcmc of rcgistration. This document shall nm k reprodwed exccpr i n fu l l .

0.12 3500 190 0.09 4500 200 0.14 16 8.8 0.12 210 370 0.34 140 680 ~0 .05 34 170 ~0 .05 15 41 0.16 24 150 ~0 .05 13 6.8 0.06 27 110 0.48 48 71 0

I I

139-1 6 WSL 023 WSL 023

Phenols

CO. 1

CO. 1

Page 4 of 20

Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. 185 of 229

WSLConsultants CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD

Enviroscience

RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONSUNSHINE 2-8 Harvey Street, JOB NO: 96613680 f h i s Laboratoq i s registered by the National Association

Richmond, Victoria 3 121 of Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) rcportcd herein have baem performed in accordance with its tennc of registration. This document shall no( k reproddutcd Telephone: t 613 9429 4666 except i n full . Facsimile: t 613 9429 2294

Email: [email protected]

ACN 004 752 67G

QUALITY CONTROL DATA - METALS & PHENOLS - SOIL

5530C WSLO23 I METHODS -- SOIL ___ -- WSL 023 WSL023 1 WSLO23 1 WSLO23 1 139-16 1 WSLO23 1 WATER

Page 5 of 20 Soil results expressed as mgkg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

186 of 229


2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 31 21 Telephone: +6 1 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS - SOIL

CLIENT: RE:

JOB NO:

GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONlSUNSHlNE 9661 3680 This Laboratory i s registered by the National Association

of Testing Authoritiea, Australia. The ~est(s) mpor!ed herein have been performed in sccordnnce with its terns of registration. This documcat shall no( k repmdncod c i c c p ~ in f u l l .

Page 6 of 20 L Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. 187 of 229

w 3 LLOnSUltantS Enviroscience ACN 004 752 676

REPORT NO Received:

SAMPLE DETAILS C6-C9 >C9-C14 >C14-C28 >C28-C36

LAB NO DESCRIPTION LOCATION DEPTH (m)

?4573 G97TP813 G97TP8 0.5-0.6 <20 <20 6 0 <50 4 0 74574 G97TP9/1 G97TP9 0-0.1 <20 <20 <50

74575 G97TP9Q G97TP9 0.4-0.5 <20 <20 <50 <50 74576 G97TPlOll G97TP10 0-0.1 <20 <20 6 0 4 0 74577 G97TP1012 G97TP10 0-0.1 <20 <20 e50 6 0 r4578 G97TP1014 G97TP10 0.3-0.4 <20 <20 <50 6 0 '4579 G97TP10/5 G97TP10 0.4-0.5 <20 <20 <50 <50 '4580 G97TPI 0/6 G97TP10 0.7-0.8 <20 <20 <50 <50 '4581 G97TP1111 G97TP11 0-0.1 <20 <20 6 0 e50 '4582 G97TP11/3 G97TP11 0.5-0.6 <20 <20 <50 e50

G97TPll 1.9-2.0 <20 <20 <50 <50 G97TPl2 0-0.1 e20 <20 4 0 e50 E F ' '4585 - -_ G97TP12l2 G97TP12 0.2-0.3 .._- <20 <20 <50 <50

'4587 G97TP1313 G97TP 1 3 0.3-0.4 <20 <20 6 0 <50 ,4588 G ~ P I 314 G97TP13 0.5-0.6 <20 <20 <50 6 0 '4589 G97TP1411 G97TP14 0-0.1 <20 <20 <50 <50 Id

'4591m P i 511 G97TPl5 0-0.1 <20 <20 4 0 4 0 '4592 -mi 513 G97TP15 0.5-0.6 d20 <20 4 0 <50

~~~~ ~

'4586 G97TP1311 G97TP13 0-0.1 <20 <20 4 0 <50 _- -_ -.

-

,590 G97TP14.Q G9/ I 144 0.3-0.4 e20 <20 <50 <50

' 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: + 6 1 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: t 6 1 3 9429 2294

33472 17/07/97

CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONISUNSHINE

I

METHODS

JOB NO: 96613680 This Laboratory i s registered by the National hsaodatlw of Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(6) reported herein have been performad in IICCO~MCC with i ts terms of registration. T h i s document shall not bc reprodud except in full.

WSL 030 WSL 030 SOIL WSL 030 WSL 030 WATER

Page 7 of 20 Soil results expressed as mgkg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

188 of 229

WSLConsultants Envi roscience ACN 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Srreet, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: +GI 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +GI 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS - SOIL

LAB NO

74593 74594 74595 74596 74597 74598 74599 74600 74601 74602 74603 74604 74605 74060 74607 74608- 74609



SAMPLE DETAILS C6-C9 >C9-C14 >C14-C28 >C28-C36

DESCRIPTION LOCATION DEPTH (m)

G97TP1516 G97TP15 0.8-0.9 <20 <20 4 0 4 0 G97TP1611 G97TP16 0-0.1 <20 <20 4 0 6 0 G97TP16Q G97TPl6 0.3-0.4 <20 <20 4 0 (50 G97TP1613 G97TP16 0.4-0.5 <20 <20 4 0 e50 G97TPI 711 G97TPl7 0-0.1 e20 <20 4 0 4 0 G97TP17/2 G97TP17 0.4-0.5 <20 <20 520 340 G97TP17/3 G97TP17 0.4-0.5 <20 <20 560 390 G97TP1715 G97TP17 0.4-0.5 I:osFfG <20 <20 4 0 6 0 G97TP18/1 G97TP18 0-0.1 <20 <20 4 0 4 0 G97TP1 813 G97TP18 1.0-1.1 <20 <20 230 210 G97TPI 911 G97TP1 9 0-0. I <20 <20 4 0 <50

<20 <50 4 0 G97TP19/2 G97TP19 0.5-0.6 G97TP19 1.0-1.1 <20 <20 94 <50 G97TP19 ..... ..... _ G97TP1913

1.8-1.9 <20 <20 4 0 6 0 G97TP1916 --- G97TP20/1 G97TP20 0.1-0.2 <20 <20 140 130 o.5-o.6"-.- --.- -

<20 <20 130 73 G97TP20 G97TP20/2 G97TP2015 G97TP20 I .2-1.3 <20 <20 370 320

- -.-

-- .____. ___ - - _-.______ <20

___ ---. ........ ~ ..... . -I

... .__. ....... ......... __- .--

T h i s Lsbomtory i s rcgiatercd by the National Associatlac of Tealing Authorities, Austnlia. The test(s) t-cpc.ncd herein have beca performed in accordance with i t s IC:IM

of regisiretion. This document shall not be reproditccd except in full.

ME TH ODs

F Received:

SOIL WSL 030 WSL 030 WSL 030 WSL 030 WATER

17107197 3

Page 8 of 20 Soil results expressed as rnglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

189 of 229


Received: I 17/07/97

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond. Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: + G I 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: t613 9429 2294 Ernail: [email protected]

LAB NO

r4555 74566 '4577 74594 '4599


JOB NO: 96613680 RE: ATKl NSO NlMASS EY FE RG USSONlS U NS H I N E

SAMPLE DETAILS C 6 - C 9 > C 9 - C 1 4 > C 1 4 - C 2 8 > C 2 8 - C 3 6

DESCRIPTION LOCATION DEPTH

Duplicate (YO) 100 (Total) Duplicate (%) 100 (Total) Duplicate (%) 100 (Total) Duplicate (%) 100 (Total) '

Duplicate (YO) 94 (Total)

Thio Laboratoq i s registered by the National Acsociuttas o f felt ing Authoritier, Australia. The test(s) repond herein have b a a perfwmod in accordwce with i t s t e r m of registnition. T'hir documcmt rhall no( k reproduced except in fu l l .

I I I I I I I I I I

'4564 Spike (%) '4579 Spike (%) '4595 Spike(%) '4604 i Spike (%)

110 (Total) 101 (Total) 106 (Total) 103 (Total)

I 1 WATER I I I I

METHODS

Page 9 of 20 Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

SOIL I WSLO30 I WSLO30 I WSLO30 I WSLO30 I I

190 of 229


2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121 Telephone: +613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS - SOIL



Thin Laboratory is registered by the National A ciatiam or Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) reponed hrreia have been performad in accordance with its term hf rgistration. This document :hall no( be r e p d o c 4 v*r:u.bt in fu l l .

IREPORTNO I 33472

t Received: I 17/07/97 Benzo(a) Indeno- Dibemo Benzo(0hi) Total PAH pyrene ( 1 2 3 4 ) - (ah) perylene

ovrene anthra-

Benzo(a) Chrysene Benzo(b) Benzo(k) anthra- fluoranthene fluuen-

SAMPLE DETAILS Naph- lhalene

LAB 1- - anthene

I ” I w n e / I I I I No (DESCRIPTION1 LOCATION I I 74552 IG97TPlR IG97TP1 10,14,2 I c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5 c0.5 c0.5

e0.5 c0.5 c0.5 e0.5

e0.5 e0.5 cO.5 c0.5 74555 G97TP114

e0.5

~ 0 . 5

~ 0 . 5 e0.5

e0.5 e0.5

<OS e0.5

e0.5 < O S < O S

< O S c0.5 < O S

c0.5 < O S < O S

c0.5 c0.5

c0.5

74562 IG97TP4/4 IG97TP5 11.0-1.1 I e0.5

74563 G97TPYl

74564 G97TP5R

-- --

e5

4

<5

4

e5

c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5

c0.5 c0.5 e0.5

s0.5 e0.5 c0.5

c0.5 e0.5 e0.5

e0.5 e0.5 4 . 5

~ 0 . 5

<OS

~ 0 . 5

c0.5

c0.5

c0.5 e0.5 c0.5 c0.5 e0.5

c0.5 c0.5 e0.5 e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 - ~ 0 . 5 e0.5 <OS 4 5 e0.5

e0.5 40.5 c0.5 c0.5 e0.5

< O S C O S e0.5 I ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5

c0.5 c0.5 C O S -1 < O S c0.5

e0.5 <OS ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 ~ 0 . 5

- --

c0.5

c0.5 <OS

c0.5 c0.5

e0.5 < O S

?:

G97TP71J Ti P7 e0.5

14570 G97TP714 G97TP7 0.8-0.9 e0.5

:4571 G97TPB11 G97TP8

r4572 G97TP8R G97TP8 10.3-0.4 ~ 0 . 5 1 1 5

_- __-. --

~ 0 . 5 -- ---.-

e0.5 I c0.5 e0.5 <OS e0.5 ~ 0 . 5

~ 0 . 5 e0.5 e0.5 < O S 4

-3 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5 I I I

I METHODS I

Soil results expressed a s mgkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Water results expressed as mglL unless stated otherwise. 191 of 229


POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS - SOIL

SAMPLE DETAILS New- Amnaph- Acenaph- Fluorene Phenan- Anlhra- Fluor- Pyrene Benzo(a) Chrysene Benzo(b) Benzo(k) Benzo(a) Indeno- Oibenzo Benzo(ghi) lhalena lhylene lhene lhrana utne anlhene anlhra- fluoranlhene fluaen- pyrene (123-d)- (ah) perylene

LAB -ne lhene pyrene anlhre- cane No DESCRIPTION LOCATION DEPTH

(m)

c0.5 e0.5 c0.5 4573 G97TPBA G97TP8 0.5-0.6 ~ 0 . 5 < O S ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 4 5 ~ 0 . 5 C O S c0.5 c0.5 <OS c0.5 <OS < O S

4574 G97TP9/1 G97TP9 0-0.14 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 C O S e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 90.5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 c0.5 e0.5 ~ 0 . 5

e0.5 e0.5 < O S 4575 G97TP9R G97TP9 0.40.5 < O S < O S c0.5 g0.5 < O S c0.5 c0.5 C O S c0.5 c0.5 C O S ~ 0 . 5 < O S

c0.5 4 . 5 < O S 4576 G97TP1011 G97TP10 0-0.1 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 < O S < O S ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 e0.5 c0.5 e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5

e0.5 e0.5 c0.5 4577 G 9 7 T P l M G97TPlO 04.1 4 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 < O S ~ 0 . 5 C O S 0.6 e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 c0.5 < O S

e0.5 4 . 5 < O S 4578 G97TP1014 G97TP10 0.30.4 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 C O S e0.5 e0.5 c0.5 c0.5 C O S c0.5 < O S <OS

c0.5 c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 4579 G97TP1015 G97TP10 0.4-0).5 4 . 5 c0.5 < O S c0.5 4 5 e0.5 c0.5 c0.5 e0.5 c0.5 C O S C O S c0.5

e0.5 c0.5 < O S ~ 0 . 5 < O S ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 + O S c0.5 c0.5 c0.5 . e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 C O S c0.5 e0.5

e0.5 4 . 5 <OS 4 . 5 < O S <OS ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 c0.5 4 . 5 e0.5 C O S c0.5 c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5

e0.5 < O S + O S < O S e0.5 c0.5 c0.5 COS c0.5 e0.5 e0.5 e0.5 c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 4 5 < O S

e0.5 < O S < O S C O S c0.5 c0.5 c0.5 e0.5 e0.5 C O S c0.5 < O S c0.5 c0.5 e0.5 < O S

~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 < O S ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 < O S ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 c0.5 C O S < O S

C O S e0.5 <OS c0.5 < O S c0.5 < O S 4 5 c0.5 < O S < O S e0.5 c0.5 < O S e0.5 C O S

~ 0 . 5 < O S ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 c0.5 < O S e0.5 e0.5 c0.5 < O S 4 5 e0.5 c0.5 ~ 0 . 5

.-

- _ - - -

-_____ - __ _-_ _.

_ _

RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONlSUNSHlNE Phi8 Laboratory i s registered by the National Association cf Testing Authorities, Australik The tcst(8) npnd herein have been performad in accordltnce with i t s t:ms of rezistration. T h i s document shall no( k rrprudncsd excep t in fu l l .

JOB NO: 96613680

REPORT NO 33472

Received: 17107197 Total PAH

<5

c5

4

c5

e5

c5

-3

c5

e5

e5

c5

C 5

c5

C 5

55z- - -

1589

1590

1591

1592

-- - -

-- 6

<5

G97TP14/1 G97TP14 0-0.1 ~ 0 . 5 < O S ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 < O S ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 c0.5 4 . 5 4 . 5 c0.5 4

e5 G97TP14R G97TP14 0.3-0.4 e0.5 < O S ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 c0.5 e0.5 C O S c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 <OS ~ 0 . 5 c0.5

11 G97TPlYl G97TPl5 0-0.1 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5 0.9 c0.5 2.1 2.7 1.7 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.9

<5 G 9 7 T P l S G97TP15 0.50.6 <OS < O S ~ 0 . 5 e0.5 c0.5 e0.5 c0.5 c0.5 e0.5 c0.5 < O S e0.5 ~ 0 . 5

e0.5 e0.5 cO.5

e0.5 c0.5 e0.5

G97TP1313 G97TP13 0.50.4 < O S e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 0.7 0.7 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 < O S <OS C O S ~ _ -

4588G97TP134 G97TP13 0.50.6 < O S < O S ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 4 5 e0.5 c0.5 c0.5 C O S c0.5 c0.5 c0.5 e0.5

e0.5 C O S <OS

0.8 C O S 0.9

c0.5 e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 ~~~

Soil results expressed as mgkg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

192 of 229

LAB No

'4593 - '4594

,4595'

SAMPLE DETAILS Naph- lhalane


G97TP156 G97TP15 0.84.9 < O S .--

G97TP1611 G97TP16 0-0.1 e0.5

G97TPlM G97TPl6 0.34.4 C0.5 --

Acenaph- thylene

Awnaph- Fluorene Phenan- thene threne

~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5

71 c0.5

< O S < O S

~ 0 . 5 4 5

< O S 0.5

C O S ~ 0 . 5

Anthra- cene

Fluor- Pyrene Benzo(a) Chrysene Banzo(b) Benzo(k) enthene anthra- fluoranthene fluaan-

< O S

~ 0 . 5

~ 0 . 5

< O S e0.5 <0.5 e0.5 < O S ~ 0 . 5

0.6 0.6 < O S ~ 0 . 5 < O S ~ 0 . 5

~ 0 . 5 <OS < O S 40.5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5

<OS

e0.5

~ 0 . 5

<5 < O S <0.5 <0.5

<5 < O S c0.5 40.5

c0.5 ~ 0 . 5 < O S ' <5



T h i s Laboratory is registered by the National Associatb of Testing Authorities, AU8trdik The test(s) rc;kl:.ted k n i n have been p e r f o m in scowdance with its t::i:is

d registrrtion. This document skill no( k reproCacCC; except in full.

' 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: + G I 3 3429 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2234 Email: [email protected]

POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS - SOIL

I 17 I I I I

< O S < O S C O S s0.5 < O S e0.5 ~ 0 . 5

~ 0 . 5 C O S <OS ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 < O S

<0.5 ~ 0 . 5 < O S C O S ~ 0 . 5 <0.5 <0.5

~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 < O S <0.5 e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5

<0.5 C O S ~ 0 . 5 , C O S < O S < O S < O S

q0.5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5 < O S 0.6 0.7

~ 0 . 5 1 .o 1.3 < O S 0.8 1.1 0.8

. ____ - --

I_---_____-I_ ~

-- -

'4597 IG97TP17/1 IG97TP17 I W . 1 I eO.5

'0.5, ~ 0 . 5 < O S <0.5 c5

1.2 ~ 0 . 5 c0.5 0.5 8.5

<OS <OS < O S cO.5 c5 ~ 0 . 5

4604 G97TP19R G97TP19 0.5-0.6 e0.5

4605- G97TP19rJ G97TP19 1.0-1.1 4 5

4606 G97TP1916 G97TP19 1.8-1.9 < O S

-- _.-- ----- -.--

4607 . -_ -I- G97TP2W1 G97TP20 -- 0.1-0.2 <OS

-. q0.5

e0.5 .......... --

._ _-

WSL 8100 I I

METHODS

Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Water results expressed as mglL unless stated otherwise. 193 of 229


2-8 Harvey Srreer, Richmond, Victoria 3121 Telephone: +613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +GI 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

. . . >o c " , ,


JOB NO: 96613680 RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONBUNSHINE

SAMPLE DETAILS Naph- Amneph- Awnaph. lhalene thylene lhene

LAB No DESCRIPTION( LOCATION I DEPTH

QUALITY CONTROL DATA - POLYCYCLIC AROMATICHYDROCARBONS - SOIL

4555 Duplicate (%)

4577 Duplicale (%)

4599 -I Duplicate (%) -

4579 Ispike(%) I I I I I 4595 Spike (%)

4604 Spike(%) -;

1 I I I I I METHODS I

Fluorene Phenen- Anthra- 'T

-I-+- = Fluor- I Fyrene Benzo(a) Chrysene Benzo(b) Benzo(k)

anthem I enlhra- I Ifluoranthenel fluwan-

WSL 8100

This Laboratory ir registered by the National Assochtim c?f Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) rcportcd k r e i e have beer performed in accordance with i t s ttrms of registration. T h i s document shall not be fcprodud e x x p t i n full.

~~

I I I

Soil results expressed as mgkg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

194 of 229

REPORT NO Received:

Sulphate Phenols Total Cyanide Penta- chloro-

Soluble)' phenol

PH (pH Units) (Water

33472 17/07/97

. . . . . . . . 139-5 WSL 076 5530C

I

' WSL8040 ~ ! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c . . . . . . . I

I

4500-CN E

I

WSLConsultants Enviroscience ACN 004 752 G7G

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 31 2 1 Telephone: +613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]


I SAMPLE DETAILS . . . . . . . . . . . , i

I .

LAB NO I j DESCRIPTION LOCATION i DEPTH(M I ! I 0,l .. __ - . . . . . .

eo.1 j <0.1 j eo.1 ; <0.1 ' en 1 .!-

... __ ....... - ._

... - .. . ~ .

........ ---- - ..... _- G97TP8/1 G97TP8 i 0-0.1 i e0.1

. . . I . .. ... 1 - , eo.1 ........ - .... ._ -. , . - . . . --- .....

! <O. l : eo.1 I eo.1 i eo.1

.,- ... - ._ ...... ...

.I. .... !. .. ....

:-. -'.. -.

8 .o e5

<5 e5 e5 e5

. . . . 4 - . ...... - ......

.

. . . . . . . . - . . . .

-

e10 . . . . . . -_._. -. . I

... 1 ....... .I .

'G97TPlO ! 0-O.'l G97TPl..3 . - . - . ; 0-0.1 'G97TPl O/l '

G97TP1 Si1 .G97TP16- 0-0.1

.G97TP20/1

. . . . . - - - . . ,G97TP13/1 . . . .

. . . -. - . G97TP1711 1G97TP17 I 0-0.1 . . - .... - .

: G97TP20 0.1-0.2 . . . . . . . . . . . i

. . 1 < i o 9.0 , .. 7,4 ._ . _i. - - c-l-o-

'7.8 . ' i.-

.. . . . . . 8.2 . j

.... ._ ...

. . . . I .... 4 0 7.9 . j . .

.... -

. . . .

. . .

... .. - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . - . I - -. . . - . _.

. . . . . . . . i i- --- -. - - _. - -. .

. i I

. . . _- I . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I .:--:/:.: ~

.- I . .- 1 -.--.--....-; jQC Data

)Duplicate (YO) /Duplicate (YO) ,D- I uplicate (YO) . f

;Spike (YO)

. . . . . . . . .

.... -- . . . . . . . . . . ...

................ : ' ' 1 ' - .' '

!

- .. I . . . . I

i i

1

. . . . . . . .. I...... : I . . . . . _ I _ I I

- - "

. . . . . . \. . - ........ ._ . . . . .,.

loo , ! ..... ... A,.- . ., .~ .... _..! ..... t .. - . . . . . . . .... _ j .

I 100 i -I 100 ~

- -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

I I . . . . . . ..... . .

! 1- i 1 . .

- _i._. I - .:. ._

! , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . ! ,

99 I

1 . . .

. . .

I

I .

1- -

I I

- : j

. . . . . .

. , . . : . . . . . . . 2-. -.

METHODS SOIL ' WATER f

b Page 14 of 20

Soil results expressed as mgkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. 'Nata registration does not cover the performance of this test. 195 of 229


JOB NO: 96613680 RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONEUNSHINE

METALS - SOIL

Tbir Laboratory i s registered by the National AssocfRtioa of Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) repc ?ed berein have been performed i n accordance with i t s t:.?8

of registration. T h i s document shall not be reprodurd except in full.


2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: + G I 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: + G I 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

Page 15 of 20 /I v Soil results expressed as mgRg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

196 of 229



2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: +613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

MONOCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS - SOIL

RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONlSUNSHlNE t h i o Laboratory is registered by the National Ascociarim of Tearing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) rep:::! !ob herein have been perf& in accordance with its ! : ' ; i l l

of regirtrotion. This docnment shall not be r c p d u i ~ d except in full.

JOB NO: 96613680

REPORT NO Received:

SAMPLE DETAILS Benzene Toluene Ethyl Xylenes t Benzene

I LAB No 1 DESCRIPTION LOCATION DEPTH (M)

G97TP17 0-0.1 ~0.5 <0.5 <0.5 G97TP19 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5 <0.5 G97TP20 0.1-0.2 <0.5 ~ 0 . 5 ~ 0 . 5

74597 G97TP1711 74606 G97TP1916 74607 G97TP20/1

~

- METHODS SOIL WSL 38108 WSL 38108 WSL 38108 WSL 38108 -_ - _. _. __ - WATER

7 17/07/97

1 I

Paae 16 of 20 k / , ~I

Soil results expressed as mgkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Water results expressed as mg/L unless stated otherwise.

' I

197 of 229

WSLConsultants Envi roscience ACN 004 752 676



'Ihi8 bboratory il registered by the National Associarim of Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) r c p c r t d herein hsvc baea ptrformsd in IccOrd~ce with its I$.::=

of registration. T h i s document shall no( be rcproduc-d cxccpr in f u l l .

' 2-8 Harvey Srreet, Richmond, Vicroria 3 12 1 Telephone: +6 1 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

VOLATILE HALOGENATED ORGANICS - SOIL 33472 REPORT NO


I SAMPLE DETAILS 1 .3 Dichloro- benzene

1.4 Dichlom- benzene

Dichlom- ethane I LAB

No DESCRIPTION LOCATION DEPTH (m)

4571 G97TPBll G97TP8 0 4 1

4576 G97TPlW1 G97TP10 0 4 . 1

4586 G97TP131 G97TP13 0 0 . 1

4594 G97TP16/1 G9TTP16 00.1

-

ethane

c0.5

c0.5

C O S

~ 0 . 5

< O S c0.5 c0.5

<OS COS c0.5

c0.5 c0.5

c0.5 20.5 < O S <OS

4597 (G97TP17/1 IG97TP17 100.1 c0.5 c0.5

4 . 5 I I ~ 0 . 5

c0.5 c0.5 c0.5 c0.5 . c0.5

I c0.5 -

I --- --e ._ ---I*

I I I

I METHODS I

WSL 18108 I

T Page 17 of 20 lei Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Water results expressed as mglL unless stated otherwise.

198 of 229



This Laboratory ir rcgirtmd by the National Assselat ia of Tertiag Authorities, Australia. The tut(r) rcportad herein have b e e m pcifotnud in UMCC with i ts krnia of rzgistratioa. Thir document rhdl no( k @acid except in fu l l .

SAMPLE DETAILS 1016 1221 1232 1242 1248 1254

LAB NO

74571 G97TP811 G97TP8 0-0.1 eo. 1 CO. 1 eo. 1 eo. 1 <o. 1 eo.1 74576 G97TP1011 G97TP10 0-0.1 eo. 1 <o. 1 CO. 1 eo. 1 eo. 1 eo. 1 74786 G97TP1311 G97TPl3 0-0.1 eo. 1 (0.1 <o. 1 eo. 1 40.1 (0.1 74594 G97TP1611 G97TP16 0-0.1 eo. 1 eo. 1 CO. 1 eo.1 eo. 1 co.1 74597 G97TP1711 G97TP17 0-0.1 <o. 1 <o. 1 eo. 1 eo. 1 eo. 1 eo.1 74607 G97TP2011 G97TP20 0.1-0.2 CO. I CO. 1 eo.1 eo. 1 CO. 1 <o. 1


’ 2-8 Harvey Srreer, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: + G I 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: + G I 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

1260 Total PCBS

eo. 1 e1 eo.1 < I <o. 1 <1 eo. 1 e1 eo. 1 e1 co.1 <1

PCBS (AROCHLOR NO.) - SOIL IREPORTNO I 33472 I

I I Received: I 17/07/97

! I I I I I I t I METHODS SOIL I WSL8080 I WSL8080 I WSL8080 I WSL8080 I WSL8080 I WSL8080 1 WSL8080 I WSL8080 I

Page 18 of 20 47 Soil results expressed as mgkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. V

199 of 229

C L I E N T : GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONlSUNSHlNE

REPORT NO

Received: SAMPLE DETAILS HCB Lindane Heplachlor Aldrin Heptachlor ODE Dieldrin Endrin ODD DOT Total

Peslicides LAB epoxide

No DESCRIPTION LOCATION DEPTH (ml

4571 G97TPWl G97TP8 W . 1 co.1 co.1 <O.l co.1 eo.1 eo.1 dO.1 co.1 co.1 eo.1 < I

4576 G97TP1011 G97TP10 00.1 eo.1 40.1 <O,l CO.1 go.1 e0.1 4 1 co.1 co.1 40.1 e1

4 5 8 6 G97TPlYl G97TP13 00.1 eo.1 eo.1 co.1 co.1 eo.1 eo.1 eo.1 e0.1 eo.1 co.1 c1 - 4594 G97TPlWl G97TP16 04.1 co.1 co.1 eo.1 co.1 eo.1 eo.1 co.1 co.1 co.1 eo.1 e1

4597 G97TP17/1 G97TP17 00.1 eo.1 co.1 SO.1 co.1 eo.1 eo.1 co.1 co.1 co.1 co.1 e1

4607 G97TP2011 G97TP20 0.1-0.2 eO.1 cO.1 ~ 0 . 1 cO.1 cO.1 cO.1 cO.1 ~ 0 . 1 eO.1 cO.1 e1

-

-- .- ___-_

QC Dala

- - 4571 Duplicale (%) 100 .- _-

1607 Spike(%) 97 - .-

- -.

-- --- ~~~~~

. - -- - --

METHODS WSL 8080

JOB NO: 96613680

33472

17/07/97

ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES - SOIL

Soil results expressed as mgikg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

T h i n Laboretor). i s registered by the National Associnth of Testing Authorities. Aurt~mlia. The tesl(a) report4 hcreia have been performbd in accordance with i ts tend cf registration. T h i s dOCIImCRt :hall noc bc rrprcmiucJd ercept in full.

200 of 229

hviroscience .CN 004 752 G7G



. T h i s Loboratory i s registend by the National ALsodatlea of Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) reported herein have beer pcrtonoad in W X O ~ ~ M C C with i ts ie;.m of registration. T b i s documemt shall not bc r c p r v d o d except in fell.

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 121 Telephone: +GI 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +GI 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

CHLORINATED HYDROCARBONS - SOIL IREPORTNO I 33472 I

I t Received:l 17/07/97 SAMPLE DETAILS Benzal

Chloride

co.1

1.4 Dichloro- benzene

Hexe- Hexe- Hexe- chloro- chloro- chloro-

benzene butadiene cyclo- hexane pente-

diene

co.1 7 co.1 co.1

co.1 co.1 co.1

co.1 co.1 co.1

co.1

4 1

co.1

4586 lG97TPlYl IG97TPl3 (00.1 I cO.1

4594 G97TPlEJl co.1 c0.1 co.1

co.1 co.1 co.1 co.1

co.1 co.1 I co.1 I co.1 I co.1

ac Date

loo (IOlOl)

--I--'---,$= --

- ---____- I I I I -I t--t--l-

L WSL 8120 I METHODS I

Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. 201 of 229

-

. . . ........ ........ ,./. ..L.-_._...>

BL: Id :12267

12 September 1997

Golder Associates Pty Ltd P.O. Box 6079 HAWHORN WEST VIC 3122 Attention: Mr. P. Thornton

Enviroscience

DOCUMrENi No.

RE: SUNSHINE

Job No: 9661 3680/113

Certificate of Analysis


Date Sampled 14/08/97 Received by WSL Consultants on 14/08/97


, Soil samples were tested in accordance with the analytical methods described in "Chemical Analysis of Polluted Soils" VIC EPA, Publication 139, Nov. 1981 and WSL in-house methods, with bk

the results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

Water samples were tested in accordance with the analytical methods described in "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water &Waste Water", APHA 19th Edn. 1995 and WSL in-house methods, with the results expressed asmglLitre unless stated otherwise.



6.J LYONS PRINCIPAL CHEMIST


2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 31 21, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: wslconOozemail.com.au

This Laboratory is registered by the National Association of Testing Authorities. Australia. The test(s) reported herein have been performed in accordance with its terms of registration. This document shall not be reproduced except in full.

Page 1 of 4

A NATA Accredited Laboratory


An Approved EPA Auditor & Analyst 202 of 229

' 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: +613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +613 3429 2294 Eniail: [email protected]

SAMPLE DETAILS

I I

'9994 iG97TP6/3 '9995-.'-iGgnp12/3

!

-. - -! ........... I. ... .............

I -_ I ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.. . . . _ . . I

I I .. - . . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . . . I..-

-- . . . . . -. ..... .. . . . . . I ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . ....

I i ..- - .- . - -- - ,

. , I . . . ! I .! - - .. _ - . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . !

.... ! . . i . . . .- . . . . - . . . - . -. - . . . ._ ..._ . - __ ... - I -- . . . - ........ _.__ i.. . . . . J

I ! I . . . i ' I

I

I I I !

!

I

, .

! ! . * . ! I

, 4 - . . . . . .

METHODS SOIL - . ...... i WATER


JOB NO: 966136801113 RE: SUNSHINE

METALS - SOIL

......... ...... . . . . . . . ._ ... - __ . .

. . 1 . . . - - .. I _. . . . . .

. . . . , ....

. . . . . - _ _ .. i . . . . . . . . . . T -- '

. - - i ....... .- . .!. . . . . . . .

. . . - . -J- . . . . . I

I i

1 I -

i

.....

. . .

.. - ..

. . - . . .

Chromium

13 16

.. ...

....... .......

..........

..... .. ._ - . - ....... _ _ ......... . . - . . - . .__ .

.............

....... ._ .....

............ ...

................

i I

! j '

i .......

I

WSLO23 ~ WSLO23 1 WSL 023

Copper

6.8 20

- . - .

.......... .

..

. - . . . . . __ - .. _. .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . -. _ _ .- ..

...... -

... - .......

.... - - ......

WSL 023

___. - c0.05 0.05

,_ f -

.....

..... -- ......

.I___- - 1

.... ._ .... -.t .... _ _ ... ... - .. .. __ r.-- _. ......

. .... ._ ... - .

. ..... ........ -. . . .

I . . . I .

.. . I . .

REPORT NO 34245

Zinc

- .. ..........

-- - .. _.

_ _ ___ __ . . . . . __

1 . . . . . . _ _ _ . . . . . . . i

I . . . . . .

j . .

I WSLO23 I WSL 023

Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. L Page 2 of 4

I

203 of 229

-

LAB NO

79994

79995

- .-

.

- -

- ..... .

-.

w swbLunsuiran1:S Enviroscience ACN 004 752 676

’ 2-8 Harvey Srreer, Richmond, Vicroria 3 12 1 Telephone: t 6 1 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: t 6 1 3 9429 2294


JOB NO: 9661368011 13 RE: SUNSHINE

Email: [email protected] POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS - SOIL

(REPORTNO I 34245 I

-. . ... . . , ._ - .

METHODS I WSL 8100

Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless slated otherwise.

204 of 229

\IlraLConsultants Envi roscience ACN 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Ilichniond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: +613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS & PHENOLS -SOIL

SAMPLE DETAILS C 6 - C 9 >C9-C14 >C14-C28 >C28-C36 Phenols ---... -- _I_-

LAB NO DESCRiPTiON 1 LOCATION DEPTH (rn) !

79994 G97TP6l3 0.5-0.6 <20 <20 ~ 5 0 6 0 0.2 79995 G97TP1213 0.2-0.3 <20 <20 4 0 e50 0.2

~ ~~

- .- QC Data Duplicate (%)

- --__ --__ _ _ _ _ . _ - -

79994 I___. -- Total (100) __--.------ . .-.... ... ---- - ~ .- .__-----I. --_ .. - . . . . -.-- --- - -- -. -

- .. - - ... ~

._ _-- ----.-.._ - . . _ . _ . ____ . - _ _ __.._ - ____ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .

I -- - --

I ! -~ ,__-_. -- ._-_-.-- --. I _.----.. - - . ___. ._ - ... ___ __

- - 5530C . . . .......... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . WSL 030 . . . WSL 030 - SOIL WSL 030 WSL 030 METHODS 1 . WATER I


JOB NO: 96613680/113 RE: SUNSHINE

l

t

pmpir- Received: 14/08/97

I ; Page 4 of 4 Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. W

205 of 229

APPENDIX E

Analytical Results - AEL Pty Ltd

Golder Associates

206 of 229

ws Lconsdmts

BL:SC: 12634

5 August 1997

Golder Associates Pty Ltd P.O. Box 6079 HAWTHORNWEST VIC 3122


Enviroscience

RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONlSUNSHlNE

Job No: 96613680

Certificate of Analysis - Check Testing


Date Sampled 16-17/07/97 Received by WSL Consultants on 17/07/97


Soil samples were tested in accordance with the analytical methods described in “Chemical Analysis of Polluted Soils”WC EPA, Publication 139, Nov. 1981 and WSL in-house methods, with the results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise.

Water samples were tested in accordance with the analytical methods described in “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Waste Watet’, APHA 19th Edn. 1995 and WSL in-house methods, with the results expressed as mglLitre unless stated otherwise.


Results pertain to samples as received. Analysis conducted by A.E.L. Report No. 19650

!.

Your s/ait h f u 114

W S L o b r LTD

B.J LYONS PRINCIPAL CHEMIST

WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. A.CN. 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1, Australia Telephone: (03) 9429 4666 Facsimile: (03) 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

This Laboratory is registered by the National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia. The tesi(s) reported herein have been performed in accordance with its terms of registration. This document shall not be reproduced except in full.

Page 1 O f 4 A NATA Accredited Laboratory

An Approved Quarancine Premises

An Approved EPA Audiror & Analyst 207 of 229

W SLConsultants Enviroscience ACN 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Srreer, Richmond, Victoria 3 121 Telephone: + G I 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: 4 1 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

SAMPLE DETAILS Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Mercury Lead

LAB NO DESCRIPTION LOCATION DEPTH (M)

G97TP115 G97TP1 0.4-0 5 <5 e1 43 16 ~0.05 17 G97TP1013 G97TP10 0-0.1 9 1 40 52 e0 05 a3 G97TP1714 G97TP17 0.4-0.5 13 5 46 160 ~0.05 14000


JOB NO: 96613680 RE: ATKINSONIMASSEY FERGUSSONISUNSHINE

REPORT NO 33473 Received: 17/07/97

Zinc

19 130 240

CHECK TESTING - METALS -SOIL

_. -- ---

.-.--

~ - - - -

- _- -

This Lab

- _ _ - --.I . _ - .- ---_I-

---I__-.- ----I_ - -

--

METHODS SOIL MEM-O10,005 MEM-O10,005 MEM-010,005 MEM-010,005 MEM-O10,005 MEM-010,005 MEM-010,005 WATER

ty is rcgirtercd by the National As$ocltitlm of Tcating Authorities, Australia. The test(s) report :d tsrcia hnve been performcd in accordance with its tc:ir.s (jf rqistration. This document shall not be r c p f o d a ~ d C A C C ~ ~ iii full.

~ a g e 2 o f 4 U Soil results expressed as mgkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Analysis conducted by A.E.L. Report No. 19650

208 of 229

WSLConsu Enviroscience ACN 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street,

G97TPIi5 G97TP10/3 G97TP1714

tants CLIENT: GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: t613 9429 4666 Facsimile: t613 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

CHECK TESTING - TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS - SOIL

G97TP1 0.4-0.5 <20 G97TP10 0-0.1 <20 G97TP17 0.4-0.5 <20

SAMPLE DETAILS C6-C9.

<20 <20 <20

LAB NO 1 DESCRIPTION I LOCATION 1 DEPTH(M) 1 4 0 4 0 <50 <50 850 630

METHODS

I I I !

SOIL ME0 - 020 -_----I_._. ~

WATER M E 0 - 020

l?tis Laboratoty is registered by the National Associ i t iW of Testing Authorities, A u s t r a h The test(s) rcportcd k c i a have b o performed in .ceordmnce with its km.c of registration. This document rhrli no( be r e p t d w a s d

ME0 - 020 ME0 - 020

cxczpr in full.

REPORTNO I 33473 Received: I 17/07/97

1 I I I I I

Page 3 of 4 Soil results expressed as mglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Analysis conducted by A.E.L. Report No. 19650

209 of 229

L

WSLConsultants Enviroscience ACN 004 752 G7G

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 121 Telephone: + G I 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: 4 1 3 3423 2234 Email: [email protected]

POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS -SOIL


JOB NO: 96613680 RE: ATKlNSONlMASSEY FERGUSSONEUNSHINE

This Laboratoq is rcgislcrcd by the National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) rcportd horeis have been performed in accordance with its : X T I S

c f registr8:ion. This document ahall no( be reprduwd cxccpt iti f u l l .

IREPORTNO I 33473

Benzo(a) Chrysene Benzo(b) I Benzo(r) I Benzo(e) I lndano- anthre- I lfluoranlhene fluoran pyrene (1234) .

SAMPLE DETAILS lhalene

~ 0 . 5

Acenaph- lhylene lhene

anthra-

- e0.5 e0.5 ~ 0 . 5

e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5 e0.5 ~ 0 . 5 e0.5 e 0 5 e 0 5 e 0 5

< 0 5 e o 5 0.8 c0 5 0 7 0 7 /_/Pl7/4 1 7 1 7 1;4-0,5 <0.5

-

~ 0 . 5

i -l---i---l-l-

--

METHODS -

MEO-029/030 I I

1 Page 4 of 4 b Soil results expressed as mgikg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Analysis conducted by A.E.L. Report No. 19650

210 of 229

BL: Id :12267

12 September 1997

Golder Associates Pty Ltd P.O. Box 6079 HAWTHORN WEST VIC 3122 Attention: Mr. P. Thornton

Order No: 2053

RE: SUNSHINE

Job No: 966136801113

Certificate of Analysis - Check Testing


Date Sampled 14/08/97 Received by WSL Consultants on 14/08/97



Water samples were tested in accordance with the analytical methods described in "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Waste Water", APHA 19th Edn. 1995 and WSL in-house methods, with the results expressed as mglLitre unless stated otherwise.


Results pertain to samples as received. Analysis conducted by A.E.L. Report No. 201 02

B.J LYONS PRINCIPAL CHEMIST


2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 I , Australia

Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: wslconOozemail.com.au

This Laboratory is registered by the National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) reported herein have been performed i n accordance with its terms of registration. This document shall not be reproduced except in full .

Page 1 of 4

A NATA Accredited Laboratory

An Approved Quarantine Premises An Approved EPA Auditor & Analyst

211 of 229

VI): s LConsultants Enviroscience ACN 004 752 676

SAMPLE DETAILS Arsenic. Cadmium. Chromium. Copper. Mercury.

0.5-0.6 <5 <I .o 19 16 0.07 9 <I .o 17 24 0.07

r--- k_l_7(--.”- -.--- LAB NO i

20102-1 :G97TP6/4

DESCRIPTION 1 LOCATION DEPTH (m)

201 02-2 iG97TP1214 0.2-0.3 I I I I I I I

.. .. --- ..... ----- _-._____- - I 1 I - - ~ - .____ ~-

__.-I_- _____- . . - - - -_ _- - - . _ _ _ --

_____ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . .. - -.--. ___ - ._ ._ - .- _ _ - .- .----=I . ------i:

1 - -.

- . -----._ . ~----I

I

!

’ 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: +613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]

REPORT NO 34246

Received: 14/08/97

Lead. Zinc.

9 25 54 76

-


JOB NO: 9661 368011 13 RE: SUNSHINE

__ ..... _ __ __ -- -- 1 - - - j - - - -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . __ ._ ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . -_-.--.-I_ -

CHECK TESTING - METALS - SOIL

__ - . . . ... . - .---

. ... . . . . . . . -_

i

Soil results expressed as mg/kg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Analysis conducted by A.E.L. Report No. 20102.

. . - I 1 .-

i .. ..... - _- -- -- __-_

- --F::-. - :.-___?_-

I

Ll Page 2 of 4

MEM-005 MEM-010 .- MEM-004 ’ MEM-010 MEM-010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . j SOIL ; WATER

... METHODS MEM-010 MEM-010 _ __ . . . . . . . . . . . . ...

212 of 229

LAB NO

- 20102

20102 _ _ _

.-

__ -

_.

-.

WW W U U V I l J U l L U . r 1 1 3

Enviroscience ACN 004 712 676

' 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 31 2 1 Telephone: + 6 1 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: t61 3 9429 2294

P


JOB NO: 9661 3680/113 RE: SUNSHINE

Eniail: [email protected] CHECK TESTING - POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS - SOIL IREPORTNO I 34246

Soil results expressed as mgkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Analysis conducted by A.E.L. Report No. 20102.

/4 Page 3 o f 4

213 of 229


' 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3 12 1 Telephone: +613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +613 9429 2294 Ernni I: wslcon@ozemai I. corn .a u

CHECK TESTING - TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 8 PHENOLS - SOIL


JOB NO: 9661 3680/113 RE: SUNSHINE

REPORTNO I 34246


SAMPLE DETAILS

LAB No 1 DESCRIPTION I

10102-1 iG97TP6/4 101 02-2 .G97TP12/4

. . . . . . I . i - . I 1

__-_. _. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LOCATION 1 DEPTH (rn)

I

I ---- ."

. . . . . . _ . . . . . . .

.. -. - . . . . . . . . . .

I I I , c20 c20 e50 c50 ~0.05 I

I I I I I 1

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . .

-

... i . . -- . 1.. .............. t . I . . I I __ - ...... - . . ._ .... .-. . . . . . . . . . ._ }. .. _ _

I

I

. . . . -. ...... . . . . . . . . . . ,. . . . .

I I I I I I

MEI-065 MEO-020 MEO-020 MEO-020 MEO-020 .......... r ' _ I.-. . - .. I. . . . . . 4 I .

I

IDS 1 SOIL . ...... j WATER

Page 4 of 4 bL

I

v Soil results expressed as rnglkg dry weight unless stated otherwise. Analysis conducted by A.E.L. Report No. 20102.

214 of 229

APPENDIX F

Important Information About Your Environmental Site Assessment


These notes have been prepared by Golder Associates Pty. Ltd. using guidelines prepared by ASFE; The Association of Engineering Finns Practicing in the Geosciences, of which Golder Associates is a member. They are offered to help you in the interpretation of your Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) reports.

REASONS FOR CONDUCTING AN E S A

=A'S are typically, though not exclusively, carried out in the following circumstances:

0 As pre-acquisition assessments, on behalf of either purchaser or vendor, when a property is to be sold; as predevelopment asSeJsments, when a property or area of land is to be redeveloped or have its use changed, for example, from a factory to a residential subdivision; as pre-development assessments of greenfield sites, to establish 'baseline' conditions and assess environmental, geological and hydrol&cal constraints to the development of. for example, a landfill; and as audits of the environmental effects of an ongoing operation.

0

0

0

Each of these circumstances requires a specific approach to the assessment of soil and groundwater contamination. in all cases, however, the objective is to identify and if possible quantify the risks which ~ n r e ~ ~ g n i s e d contamination poses to the proposed activity. Such risks may be both financial, for :xample. clean-up costs or limitations on site use, and hysical. for example, health risks to site users or the Jublic.

IBE LIMlTATIONS OF AN ESA

Uthough the information provided by an €SA can -educe exposure to such nsks . no €SA. however iiligently c a m 4 out. can eliminate them. Even a igorous professional assessment may fail to detect all notamination on a site. Contaminants may be p-t n artas that were not surveyed or sampled. or may nigratc to arcas which showed no signs of nontarnioation when sampled.

AN ESA REPORT Is BASED ON A UNIQUE SET OF PROJECT SPECIFIC FACTORS

Your environmental report should not be used:

0 When the aature of the proposed development is changed, for example, if a residential development is proposed insttad of a commercial one; when the size or configuration of the proposed development is altered: when the location or orientation of the proposed structure is modified; when there is a change of ownership; or for the application to an adjacent site.

0

d

0

0

To help avoid costly problems, refer to your consultant to determine how any factors which have changed subsequent to the date of the report may affect its recommendations.

ESA "FINDINGS" ARE PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATES

Site assessment identifies actual subsurface conditions only at hose points where samples are taken, when they are taken. Data derived through sampling and subsequent laboratory testing are interpreted by geologists, engineers or scientists who then render an opinion about overall subsurface conditions, the nature and extent of contamination. its likely impact on the proposed development and appropriate remediation me.asum. Actual conditions may differ from those inferred to exist, because no professional, no mattcr how qualified. and no subsurface exploration program. DO matter how comprehensive, can reveal what is hidden by earth, rock and time. The actual interface bemeen materials may be far more gradual or abrupt than a report indicates. Actual conditions in spas not sampled may differ from predictions. Nothing can be done to preveot the unanticipated, but steps can be &en to help minimix its impact. For this reason. wries should retain the services of their consultaots hrough he development stage, to identify variations. xmduct additional e t s which m y be needed, and to -ecommeod solutions to problems encountered on site.

216 of 229

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE

Subsurface conditions are changed by natural processes and the activity of man. Because an ESA =port is based on conditions which existed at the time of subsurface exploration, decisions should not be based on an ESA report whose adequacy may have been affected by time. Speak with the consultant to l a m if additional tests are advisable.

I

ESA SERVICES ARE PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES AND PERSONS

Every study and ESA report is prepared in response to a specific Brief to meet the specific needs of specific individuals. A report prepared for a consulting civil engineer may not be adequate for a construction contractor. or even some other consulting civil engineer. A report should not be used by other persons for any purpose, or by the client for a different purpose. No individual other than the client should apply a report even apparently for its intended purpose without first conferring with the consultant. No person should apply a rkport for any purpose other than that originally contemplated without first conferring with the consultant.

AN ESA REPORT IS SUBJECT TO MISINTERPRETATION

Costly problems can occur when design professionals develop their plans based on misinterpretations of an ESA. To help avoid these problems, the environmental consultant should be retained to work with appropriate design professionals to explain relevant Findings and to review the adequacy of their plans and specifications relative to contamination issues.

LOGS SHOULD NOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE ENGINEERING REPORT

Final borehole or test pit logs are developed by environmental scientists. engineers or geologists based upon their interpretation of field logs (assembled by site personnel) and laboratory evaluation of field samples.

Only final logs are customarily included in our reports. These logs should not under any circumstances be redrawn for inclusion in site remediation or other design drawings, because drafters may commit errors or omissions in the transfer process. Although photographic reproduction eliminates this problem, it does nothing to minimise the possibility of contractors. misinterpreting the logs during bid preparation. when this occurs, delays, disputes and unanticipated costs are the all-too-frequent result.

To reduce the likelihood of boring log misinterpretation, the complete report must be available to persons or organisations involved in the project, such as contractors, for their use. Those who do not provide such access may proceed under the mistaken impression that simply disclaiming responsibility for the accuracy of subsurface information always insulates them from attendant liability. Providing all the available information to persons and organisations such as contractors helps prevent costly construction problems and the adversarial attitudes which may aggravate them to disproportionate scale.

READ RESPONSIBILITY CLAUSES CLOSELY

Because an ESA is based extensively on judgement and opinion, it is necessarily less exact than other disciplines. This situation has resulted in wholly unwarranted claims being lodged against consultants. To help prevent this problem, model clauses have been developed for use in written transmittals. These are not exculpatory clauses designed to foist liabilities onto some other party. Rather. they are definitive clauses which identify where your consultant’s responsibilities begin and end. Their use helps all parties involved recognise their individual responsibilities and take appropriate action. Some of these definitive clauses are likely to appear in your ESA report, and you are encouraged to read them closely. Your consultant will be pleased to give full and frank answes to your questions.

217 of 229

MASSEY FERGUSON,SUNSHINE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS SUMMARY

IAULC J

Sheet 1 o f 2

TEST PIT DEPTH NICKEL CHROMIUM COPPER LEAD ZINC NO. m m ! m m& mg/lrg w k g m!&

'NORTHERN PADDOCK' TP 1

TP2

TP 3

TP 4 T P S

TP 6

TP7

TP 8

TP 9

TP 10

TP 11

TP 12

TP 13

TP 14

TP 15

TP 16

TP 17

TP I8

TP 19

TP 20

TP 21

TP 22

TP 23

TP 24

TPZS

ARSENIC PH CYANIDE PHENOLICS TPH PAH'r MERCURY CADMIUM m s b m s k m5n;5 he43 mg/lrg W l k g mg/lrg

4 . 1

0. Ilco. 1

0.3

. .. - . . . - . . . . . .. - 46 60 7 9.5 16 4 .1 4 . 0 2 0.34 9.1 -5

. .. ' . ' . ..: 32 w .9:02 82

. . 1 .z- I .30 0.05;0.08~ 0.754.80 38/38 66/70 I l l l Z 9.5134 Q).11<1 4.02/-5 0.531-5 a. 118.2

0.05-0.08 0..7s-0.s0

'0:75-0.80 . ? . O S ~ . O S

0.05-0.08 25 0.75-0.80 10 0.08-0.15 23 0.60-0.65 14 0.80-0.85 20 - 1.40-1.50 26 8.3 11 27 4 . 1 4 . 0 2 0.35 9 c!i 0.206.25' 9' .' 2%. 0.80-0.90 8 31 - 1.40-1.50 38 68 8.8 7.5 22 4. I 4 . 0 2 0.54 9.2 4 . 1

. .

0.05-0. 0.90-1. 1.45-1.

DUTCH LEVEL B DUTCH LEVU. C

I00 250 100 150. 500 500 800 500 600 Moo

AUST LEVU. 8 3CCmgkg

''..SAMPLED FROM FILL 9801880 INITIAL RESULTICHECK TEST

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5 20

2 30 10 50

50 500

1 1000. 20 10 5000. 200

* MINERAL OIL

218 of 229

, - - - Sheet 2 of 2


zmc CADMIUM MERCURY ARSENIC PH CYANIDE TPH PAH's PHENOLICS TEST PIT DEPTH NICKEL CHROMiUM COPPER LEAD NO. m mg@ m g k m e k mg@ Wncg m s k ? m e a m g k m& - m5Q m s a

FACTORY A R M TF' 26

TP 27

TP 28

TP 29

TP 30

TP 31

TP 32

TP 33

'a' . . . .

.. . 3 5 . 8 . >B . 266.7.. >c. :

8 O o o x 45.2 >B . . 13MW) x " .

- - . . . 2:4. . . . . . . . . . . . - . - . :

1.35-1.45 27 64 9.4 7.7 24 4 . 1 4 . 0 2 1.2 9.2 4 62 ;

. 270. . . . . ..".Xi.. , , : .........

,441;:. TP 34A 0.204.25

o.-.9s a. 1 4 . 0 2 0.6 8.3 a 0.70-0.75 . . . . 11 35 83' 13 - - - ... -. - - - ._ .. ~~

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 4 . 1 0.03 0.75 7.5 4

TP 35 0.2o;o.z. 22 61 12 24

TP 36 0.10-0. IS 35 4 0.4 0.75-0.85 30 a 4 . 0 2 340 - 1.80-1.90 0.5 1300 >B 1 - 7 l h ' ) nl 40 - -

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... " e.-" TP 37

TP 38

TP 39

TP 40

CREEK BED

DUTCH LEVEL B DUTCH LEVEL C

~ l o o 150. 500 5 2 30 - 50 1 1000' 20 - 500 10 5000. m 100 m .

500 800 500 600 3ooo 20 10 50 AUST LEVEL B 3OOmg/kg MINERAL OIL

...................... ......... j . . . . . . . . . . I. .. .( :I: jj.,'j 2:::: j: : ~ : : ~ : ~ ~ . : ~ ~ c SAMPLED FROM F n L . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... 9-&...... . . INITIAL RESULTICHECK TEST

I ....... . .a ..

219 of 229

Sheet IML!LL 1 Y o f 2


PCB's ** 0 . c PESTICIDES ** HALOGENATED VOLATILE DEPTH BENZENE TOLUENE ETHYLBENZENE XYLENE TEST P l l NO. m m g k g mg/lrg mghg

TP1

T P 2

TP 3

TP4 TP 5

TP 6

TP 7

TP 8

T P 9

TP 10

TP 11

TP 12

TP 13

TP 14

TP 15

TP 16

TP 17

TP 18

TP 19

TP 20

TP 21

TP22

TP 23

TP 24

TP25

'NORTHERN PADD

V. I J Y . 0 - I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0.05-0.10 0.50-0.60 0.05-0.10 0.25-0.30 0.75-0.80

. . . . . . . . . . . a.~:,;.":"' <0:1"', :.I . . . . . . . . . . . ........... . . . . - -

. . . . . . . 4 . 1

... -.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . - a. 1 -

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. . - . .

. . . . . . . . . . . -

. . . . . . . - _ ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._-

. . . . . . . . . . ..... a l l : . . . . . . -

. . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . _.. ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . -

. . . . . -.. . . . . . . .

. . - . . . -

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.N-1.w

0.05-0.10 0.90-1.00 I .45- I .M


0.5 5

3 30

5 50

5 50

0.5 1 5 10

** IDIVIDUAL RESULTS ALL BELOW DETECIION LEVEL QUOTED

!

1 10

i 220 of 229

- - Sheet 2 o f 2


TEST PIT NO.

FACTORY TP 26

TP 27

TP 28

TP 29

TP 30

TP 31

TP 32

TP 33

I 0 . C PESTICIDES * a HALOGENATED VOLATILE PCB'r ** TOLUENE FTHYLBENZENE XYLENE

ORGANICS ** m& m& DEPTH BENZENE m m g m m d k m g k m g m

A

TP M A

a. I ;:. . ". ; ' . , . TP 35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TP 37

TP 38

TP 39

TP40

CREEK BED


0.5 5

3 30

5 50

5 50

0.5 I 5 10

** IDIVDUAL RESULTS ALL BELOW DFTEmION LEVEL QUOTED

1 10

I

221 of 229

October 1, 1991

~~

9 16 12280

Test Pit

10

18

23

25

29

36

Creek Sediment

TABLE 5

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS SUMMARY - ELUTRIATION TESTING

Samule DeDth 0

0.05 - 0.10

0.05 - 0.08

1.45 - 1.50

0.9 - 1.0

0.8 - 0.9

1.8 - 1.9

Contaminant

Nickel Arsenic

Nickel Zinc

Zinc Arsenic

Nickel Chromium Copper Zinc Arsenic

Lead Zinc Arsenic

Lead Zinc Arsenic

Chromium Copper Lead Zinc Cadmium Arsenic

Concentration in Soil m d k g

200 26

200 3200

1800 2.8

910 1800 2300 1200 33

420 390 31

240 930 18

980 260 980 7500 19 19

Concentration in Elutriate mg/L

<0.1 <0.001

<0.1 4.8

3.7 < 0.002

< 0.2 < 0.05 < 0.05 3.9 < 0.001

< 0.05 1.8 < 0.001

< 0.05 0.91 < 0.001

< 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 14 < 0.05 0.004


I 2 110 191

DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DATE SCALE AS SHOWN I F. O'C. P.N.T.

SITE PLAN MASSEY FERGUSON, SUNSHINE

PROJECT No. 91612280

FIGURE 1

BALLARAT ROAD

LOT 1

LOT 11

f

L

LOT I 2

L HERTFORD

ROAD

SCALE (approx.)

m 30 0 30 60 90 120 150 m - @ Golder Associates

223 of 229

MASSEY FERGUSON FACTORY LAYOUT I I

FIGURE 2

Q

0 a a

I- U a J A a

m U

SCALE DRAWN BY CHECKED By DATE 2 110 I91

1 . I lTlfl8ER I STORES)

I I r i


LEGEND

FOUNORY Final use as designated by O'COfInOr. WargOn Chapman, (Or. No. PO277-Dl

1 ; 2500 (approxl

iFoUNORYI Earlier use as indicated by O.McKay.

F. O'C. P.N.T. 224 of 229

TEST PIT LOCATIONS

c .

FIGURE 3

n a a 0

DATE 2 110 191 SCALE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY P.N.T.

F. O'C.

l-

a a a


2 2 a a

5

4

3

2

1

8 10 m 15 m 20 ll

8 9 m 14 8 19

m 8 .

HAMPSHIRE ROAD

26 8

27

25 m

24

36

28 m 29 I X

32 8

33

i a m 23 ' 13 W

37 38 . 22

17 12

6 8

11 8 16 8

31 m I

ANDERSON

LEGEND

36 8 T e s t Pit

X Creek Sample

30

39

W CY T O m a z o o m > W 0

ROAD

225 of 229

FILL DEPTH AND TYPE FIGURE 4

CHECKED BY DATE k110191 P.N.T.

DRAWN BY F. O'C.

SCALE PROJECT No. 91612280

I I

HAMPSHIRE ROAD

3; L" 21 a

25 A 8

30 8

a E O m a o a z o > W 0

3 2 A @

33 A PI0 ZI-38ppm 0 a

2~ A n G . 9 . 23 A

@ 18 . @ @ 37 6 8

3 . 8 .

I-

CY J J

a a a m

12 17 B 8 2 . 7 .

2' A !

ROAD ANDERSON

L E G E N D

FILL DEPTH FILL TYPE

soil, rubble. inert was te . Includes:

@ ;eyriky W a s t e

W 0-0.5m

PI0 Photoionisation Oetector readings D background.

@ Goider Associates

226 of 229

ELEVATED METAL CONCENTRATIONS

D 6 0 CLL

I- 6 e 6

6 m

FIGURE S

ROAD HAMPSHIRE

26 B

DATE CHECKED BY L/10/91

32 .


Cu (O.Z/tYOJ @ Pb 10. Z/ZtOJ

In n a t u r a l soil. Zn Zinc SCALE DRAWN BY F. O’C. 1 : 2500 *

Cu !0.5/190J In 10.9/1200J

25 @ ;;-- ir (0.9/:300/ Cu I0.9/230OJ

P.N.T.

3L . 33 . /

22 ~ Cu I0.75/270J ?5 IO. 75/230J

11 . 12 . ,Vi (O.t6/1tOJ

Pb /O.l/tlOOJ 39

I . / . A b 3 E!? S ON

L E G E N D

> Dutch Level 8

R0P.D

As Arsenic Cd Cadmium Cr Chromium

/0.25/1000/ Oep thlml /Concentration mg I k g

227 of 229

I I

F.0'C. CHECKED BY SCALE DRAWN 8Y * In natural soil. 1 : 2500

I ELEVATED ORGANICS 'CONCENTRATIONS I FIGURE 6

PROJECT No. DATE C 110 /91 91612280

I I

ROAD HAMPSHIRE

I 26 8

Phenols f-/i?6J CREEK SAIYPLE @29 ,

TPH I-/3WOOI

32 W

27 8 2 8 8 31 8 I 30 8

36 @ TPH 118/1300/

13 m i a 8 I I 3 7 0

2 2 8 17 8 12 a

6 8

11 m 16 8 8

\

ANDERSON ROAD

L E G E N D

i . .

. ..

228 of 229

MASSEY FERGUSON FACTORY LAYOUT 1955 FIGURE AI

g-@

I I

I 9 c r o R r ' P L A N / $ ;5 F Golder Associates

229 of 229

Environmental Audit Report

Documents