information regarding environmental audit reports

INFORMATION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT REPORTS August 2007

VICTORIA’S AUDIT SYSTEM An environmental audit system has operated in Victoria since 1989. The Environment Protection Act 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 to 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, to 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 to 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 it is not possible for an audit to present all data that could be of interest to 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 to 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 INFORMATION For more information on Victoria’s environmental audit system, visit EPA’s website or contact EPA’s Environmental Audit Unit.

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

Email: [email protected]

http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/envaudit/environmental_audits.asp

http://www.adobe.com/

http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/envaudit

mailto:[email protected]?subject=Electronic Audit Report Enquiry - PDF Info Sheet

41017\PN820_Sth Yarra.doc

28 May 2002

Caulfield Krivanek & Sugar

424 Burke Road

CAMBERWELL VIC 3124

Attention: Mr Trevor Rees

Dear Sir

RE: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

19 – 23 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA

We have pleasure in submitting herein our report detailing the results of the

geotechnical investigation conducted at the above site.

Should you require clarification of any aspect of the report, please contact the

undersigned.

Yours faithfully

BFP CONSULTANTS PTY LTD

GK SEARLE

19 – 23 Wilson Street,South Yarra

Geotechnical Investigation &Environmental Assessment

for

Caulfield Krivanek & Sugar

Prepared by

PJ NoonanGK Searle

BFP Consultants Pty Ltd515 Bridge RoadRICHMOND VIC 3121

DATE: May 2002 Tel: +613 9429 7555JOB NO. 41017 Fax:+613 9429 7117

Email: [email protected]


TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION.......................................................................................1

2.1 SITE IDENTIFICATION................................................................................................12.2 SITE HISTORY..........................................................................................................22.3 GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY ..............................................................................2

3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................................3

3.1 SITE CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................33.1.1 Surface Conditions ......................................................................3

3.2 SOIL INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................33.2.1 Methodology................................................................................33.2.2 Subsurface Conditions.................................................................5

3.3 GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT..................................................................................53.4 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL .................................................................6

4.0 ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................7

5.0 SOIL CONTAMINATION TESTS.......................................................................................9

6.0 RESULTS.........................................................................................................................10

6.1 ANALYTICAL RESULTS ............................................................................................106.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL ...............................................................11

7.0 SOIL ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................12

7.1 SOIL CONTAMINATION GUIDELINES .........................................................................127.2 PRESENT SOIL CONTAMINATION STATUS ................................................................13

8.0 GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................14

8.1 GROUNDWATER GUIDELINES ..................................................................................148.1.1 Determination of Groundwater Contamination ........................... 148.1.2 Determination of Groundwater Quality Criteria........................... 148.1.3 Beneficial Use............................................................................ 15

9.0 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................16

10.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................18

APPENDIX A TITLE CERTIFICATES

APPENDIX B SITE HISTORY INFORMATION

APPENDIX C GROUNDWATER DATABASE

APPENDIX D BOREHOLE LOGS

APPENDIX E CHAIN OF CUSTODY

APPENDIX F LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

1


1.0 INTRODUCTION

At the request of Caulfied Krivanek & Sugar, a geotechnical investigation and

environmental assessment has been conducted on the site of a proposed multistorey

building development located at 19 – 23 Wilson Street, South Yarra.

The investigation has been conducted for the purpose of assessing typical subsurface

conditions at the site, and consequently providing comments and recommendations on

foundation and retaining wall design parameters and excavation characteristics of the

subsurface materials. The current contamination status of the site was also assessed

with a view to obtaining a Certificate/Statement of Environmental Audit issued by an

EPA accredited Environmental Auditor.

2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION

2.1 Site Identification

The site is located at 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra. The sites are described as Vol

6154 Fol 692 (No. 19) and LP 45519 (derived from Vol 8376 Fol 407 and Vol 8420 Fol

196 which in turn are derived from Vol 1277 Fol 345) in the Parish of Prahran and has a

total area of approximately 800m2. A copy of the Title Certificates are included in

Appendix A.

Surrounding land uses include the following:

• The site is bounded to the south by Wilson Street with the properties comprising a

combination of residential and light commercial/office buildings

• The site is bounded to the north by Garden Lane with properties comprising light

commercial/office buildings.

• The site is bounded to the east by residential properties.

• The site is bounded to the west of the site by a light commercial/office building;

further east is a 3-storey carpark structure.

Figure 1 presents a reproduction of Map 2L from the MeIway Street Directory, showing

the location of the site at grid reference K8. Figure 2 presents the site plan.

2


2.2 Site History

An environmental site history survey provides information regarding potential

contaminants likely to be found onsite and if required, possible locations to be targeted

for sampling. The survey takes into consideration previous potentially contaminating

land uses onsite and in areas adjacent to the site.

Based on information provided by the Royal Historical Society of Victoria, and a review

of historical aerial photographs, the following historical account of the site is provided.

The site was first listed in the Sands and McDougall Directories in 1864 at which time it

was mainly residential and remained this way until 1974. A food and clothing shop

occupied the site from 1974 until its recent demolition. The appended title certificates

confirm this site usage.

Aerial Photography taken between 1945 and 1987 are consistent with the above

records with the site typically occupied by a residential building. Surrounding land use

during this period has remained a mixture of light commercial and residential which is

consistent with present day land uses.

No evidence of potential contamination was detected as a result of past site or

surrounding land usage.

The Royal Historical Society of Victoria report and the Aerial photographs are presented

in Appendix B.

2.3 Geology and Hydrogeology

The Melbourne Geological Survey of Victoria 1974 Melbourne Map (1:63, 360 No. 7822

Zone 55) indicates that the site is underlain by Tertiary aged deposits typically identified

as the Brighton Group sediments with this being generally confirmed by the field data.

The closest natural watercourse to the site is the Yarra River, located approximately

1050 metres to the north of the site.

3


Based on the Water Bureau, Natural Resources and Environment (NRE) Victorian

Groundwater Database, there are 11 regional groundwater bores within a one kilometre

radius of the site, indicating groundwater is expected to be at an approximate depth of

between 4.0 and 7.0 metres. Bore number 86269 located approximately 900 metres

from the site is not considered representative of the subject site groundwater conditions

due to a different litholigy encountered at this location (i.e Basalt vs Brighton Group).

The closest groundwater bore, approximately 500 metres to the southwest of the site,

has a standing water level of 4.0 metres (142827), and is listed as being used for

groundwater investigation purposes only. All the groundwater bores within the 1.0km

radius with the same lithology as the subject site are groundwater investigation bores

only.

The groundwater database is presented in Appendix C.

3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

3.1 Site Conditions

3.1.1 Surface Conditions

The site is relatively flat and is currently unoccupied. The construction of a 5 -6 storey

apartment building with one basement level under is proposed involving excavation of

up to 3.0 metres below existing surface levels.

3.2 Soil Investigation

3.2.1 Methodology

Standards Australia (1997) AS4482.1 Guide to the sampling of potentially contaminated

soil, Part 1: Non-volatile and semi-volitile compounds was used as the basis for

minimum sampling points during the investigation.

The field investigation sampling was conducted over the period 20 – 21 May 2002 and

involved the drilling of 6 boreholes to termination depths ranging from 1.3 metres to 5.5

metres using a trailer mounted drill rig.

Target sampling was not conducted during the investigation as no evidence of

contamination was noted during the site inspection or the site history information.

4


Insitu Dynamic Cone Penetrometer tests and Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were

performed in the subsurface materials encountered in the investigation whilst samples

of the subsurface materials were collected at regular intervals during borehole

advancement for contamination assessment purposes. Soil samples were collected in

250 ml glass sample containers and sealed with a teflon lined screw cap lid with zero

headspace. The samples were stored in a cool, dark environment comprising placing

samples into a sealed esky immediately after collection, prior to being forwarded to the

analytical laboratory .

The results of the field tests are shown on the borehole logs.

The logs of the boreholes and an inferred geological cross section of the site are

included in Appendix D and the approximate borehole and sampling locations are

shown on the enclosed Figures 2 & 3.

To minimise the risk of cross contamination during the environmental sampling

program, samples were obtained using split spoon sampling techniques. In conjunction

with the method outlines above, the split spoon sampler was cleaned and washed

utilising the following procedures prior to each sample being collected:

• Wash and clean in water to remove adhered soil and other matter.

• Wash and clean in a phosphate-free detergent/water mix.

• Rinse in potable water.

• Final rinse in distilled water.

The field work was performed by a Geotechnical Engineer who logged the subsurface

materials encountered, supervised sampling and testing, ensured adherence to

cleaning procedures and maintained chain-of-custody documentation for all samples.

5


3.2.2 Subsurface Conditions

The investigation revealed that the soil profile is relatively uniform over the site, and

typically consists of:

FILL: SILTY SANDY GRAVEL; fine to coarse sands and gravels, moist, dense and

extending to depths ranging from 0.2 to 0.3 metres

Overlying

FILL: SILTY SAND, fine to medium sand, dark grey, some fine to medium gravels, dry

dense and extending to depths ranging from 0.3 to 0.4 metres

Overlying

SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium, dry, medium dense to dense, grey, with some fine

to medium gravel and extending depths ranging from 0.50 metres to 0.7 metres.

Overlying

SILTY CLAY/GRAVELLY SILTY CLAY (CH); high plasticity, some fine to coarse

ironstone gravels, orange, brown and grey, moist, very stiff and extending to depths

ranging from 2.3 to 4.5 metres.

Overlying

CLAYEY/SILTY SANDS (SC/SM), fine to medium sands, grey, orange and brown,

moist, medium dense to dense and extending to the borehole termination depths.

Groundwater or seepage inflows were not encountered during the investigation.

Some minor variations to the above typical subsurface profile were encountered during

the investigation and reference should be make to the appended borehole logs for a full

description of subsurface conditions at each borehole location.

3.3 Groundwater Assessment

The groundwater table was not intercepted in this investigation, however anecdotal

evidence suggests that a Shallow Aquifer system is present within these Brighton Group

materials at depths ranging from 4.0 – 10.0 metres.

6


3.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control

A summary of the Quality Control/Quality Assurance program undertaken by BFP is

presented below:

• Performance of equipment decontamination during soil sampling, in accordance with

Section 7.5 of AS4482.1.

• Laboratory assessment performed by appropriately qualified environmental

scientists,

• Collection of quality control split, duplicate and rinsate blank samples.

BFP Consultants employed the services of the following NATA certified laboratories for

the analyses program:

• WSL Consultants as the primary laboratory for all chemical analyses.

• MGT Environmental as the secondary laboratory for external analyses.

Quality control samples provide information identifies potential errors caused by cross

contamination, inconsistencies in sampling methods or laboratory analytical techniques

used. The quality control program performed during this assessment involved the

collection and analyses of the following samples:

• Internal Laboratory Quality Control – As part of the NATA Certification,

laboratories must perform internal duplicate analysis of samples and compare them

to applicable guidelines. Sample spikes are also conducted to assess the extent of

the matrix bias (recovery interface) and sample to sample precision. In addition,

internal laboratory blank samples are run to assess the potential for laboratory

equipment errors.

• Blind Replicate Samples – replicate samples submitted to the primary laboratory

for analysis as two individual samples without notification to the laboratory that they

have been replicated. Two blind replicates were analysed as part of this

assessment.

7


• Split Samples – a sample submitted to the primary laboratory was split by the

primary laboratory and forwarded to the secondary laboratory for analysis. The

same parameters were analysed and where possible using the same or similar

analytical techniques. One split sample was analysed as part of this assessment.

• Rinsate (Equipment) Blank Samples – These samples provide information

ensuring there is no cross contamination from sampling equipment. After sampling,

equipment is decontaminated. Following decontamination, de-ionised water is

poured over the equipment and collected in a jar. The water is analysed for

parameters of concern. Rinsate blank samples were collected from the split spoon

sampler. One rinsate blank sample was collected and analysed as part of this

assessment.

A quantitative measure of the accuracy of the duplicate laboratory results was made

using the calculated relative percentage difference (RPD) values. The RPD values

were calculated using the following equation:

RPD (%) =2/)(

)(1

1

CCCC

o

o

+−

X 100

Where Co = concentration obtained from the primary sample;

C1 = concentration obtained from the blind replicate or split sample

The assessment was performed by appropriately qualified environmental scientists.

Appropriate chain of custody procedures were implemented during all sample analytical

requests. The completed chain of custody forms are presented in Appendix E.

4.0 ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS

It is understood that the proposed building is to consist of 3 storey apartment structure

with a basement founded at a depth of approximately 3.5 metres below existing surface

levels and will occupy the entire site. The structure is to be supported on pad and strip

footings founded at or above this level.

8


Based on the results of the field investigation, pad footings and strip footings should

therefore be founded on either of the following medium:

GRAVELLY SILTY CLAY, high plasticity, moist, very stiff, grey, brown and orange. Pad

and strip footings founded in this manner may be proportioned for allowable bearing

pressures of 275kPa and 250kPa respectively.

Or Alternatively,

SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium, moist , medium dense to dense, grey, brown and

orange and encountered at depths ranging from 2.3 to 4.5 metres. Pad and strip

footings founded in this manner may be proportioned for an allowable bearing pressure

of 400 kPa.

For the above recommendations on founding medium and allowable bearing pressures

settlements are expected to be less than 20mm.

Insofar as a Site Classification in accordance with AS2870 is applicable foundations

founding in the SILTY CLAY materials should be designed in accordance with a CLASS

M classification whilst foundations founded in the SILTY SAND materials may be

designed in accordance with a CLASS A classification.

In regard to the proposed basement construction, excavation walls should remain stable

for the medium term if the upper SILTY SAND and FILL materials are battered at an

angle of 45° (1:1) and the SILTY/GRAVELLY CLAYS are battered at an angle of 70°.

Due to the perceived unstable nature of the overlying FILL and SILTY SAND materials

in vertical cut, extensive excavation support will be required for vertical excavations in

these materials.

The proposed excavation would result in vertical and lateral movements in the founding

soils of any adjacent buildings and consequently settlement of these structures. These

movements can be minimized by the use of temporary or permanent retention

structures. To minimize movements, both the basement walls and associated tiebacks

should be designed for “at-rest” (KO) earth pressure conditions. In the SILTY CLAY

profile applicable at this site, it is recommended that a uniform pressure distribution of

6HkPa, where H equals the height of the wall, should be used to design wall units and

anchors. The provision of drainage behind the wall will be required. For cantilever walls

9


not incorporated in the structure, use of an active earth pressure distribution based on a

KA value of 0.3 should be satisfactory.

Retaining wall construction sequencing should involve the vertical excavation of the

medium term batters and panel construction in a “hit and miss” arrangement in drives

not exceeding 1.2 metres as a result of adjacent buildings foundations.

Excavation to the proposed basement depth of 3.5 metres should be readily achievable

using conventional earthmoving equipment and groundwater inflows are not expected

within this depth.

5.0 SOIL CONTAMINATION TESTS

All soil samples were returned to the BFP laboratory whereupon 12 individual samples

from various depths, 2 blind replicate samples, 1 split sample and 1 rinsate blank were

assembled for subsequent contamination assessment.

The laboratory analysis was programmed to test the individual and rinsate blank

samples for a broad range of soil contaminants and properties as contained in the EPA

Screen test, including but not limited to:

• pH

• Total Cyanide and Sulphates

• Various Heavy Metals

• BTEX Compounds (MAH)

• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)

• Organochlorine Pesticides and Phenols

• Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)

• Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH)

• Volatile Halogenated Organics

• Chlorinated Hydrocarbons

10


The schedule of soil analysis is as follows:

Sample Identification Sample Description Laboratory Analysis

BH1 @ 0.1 – 0.2m FILL: Silty Sandy Gravel EPA Screen

BH1 @ 0.5 – 0.6m Silty Sand EPA Screen, Asbestos

BH1 @ 2.5 – 2.95m Gravelly Clay EPA Screen

BH2 @ 1.0 – 1.45m Silty Clay EPA Screen

BH2 @ 4.5 – 4.95m Silty Sand EPA Screen, Sulphate, Chloride

BH3 @ 0.0 – 0.2m FILL: Silty Sandy Gravel EPA, Sulphate, Chloride, Asbestos

BH3 @ 2.5 – 2.95m Gravelly Silty Clay EPA Screen

BH4 @ 1.0 – 1.3m Silty Clay EPA Screen, Sulphate, Chloride

BH4 @ 2.6 – 2.75m Silty Sand EPA Screen

BH5 @ 0.0 – 0.2m FILL: Silty Sandy Gravel EPA Screen, Asbestos

BH6 @ 1.0 – 1.45m Silty Clay EPA Screen

BH6 @ 4.5 – 4.95m Clayey Sand EPA Screen

BD1 @ 2.5 – 2.95m Blind Replicate of BH1 As, Cr, Co, Ni, Pb, Zn, Cu and Hg

BD4 @ 2.6 – 2.75m Blind Replicate of BH4 As, Cr, Co, Ni, Pb, Zn, Cu and Hg

BD3 @ 2.5 – 2.95 Split Sample of BH3 As, Cr, Co, Ni, Pb, Zn, Cu and Hg

BH5 – Rinsate Blank Water EPA Screen

The tests were performed under NATA accreditation and the results are presented in

Appendix F.

6.0 RESULTS

6.1 Analytical Results

Full details of the analytical results of all soil samples collected by BFP Consultants,

including sample location/depth, contaminant concentrations and chromatograms for

the TPH analyses can be found in Appendix F.

A summary of the analytical results of selected soil samples containing elevated levels

of contaminants including sample location/depth, contaminant concentrations,

comparison with the appropriate environmental guideline and detection limits is

presented as Table 1.

Project: 19-23 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA Job No: 41017

geotechnical engineers Location: SOUTH YARRA, MELBOURNE Date: 03/6/02

515 Bridge Road, Richmond 3121 Client: CAULFIELD KRIVANEK & SUGAR

Phone (03) 9429 7555 Facsimile (03) 9429 7117

Email: [email protected] Web: www,bfp.com.au

Contaminant (mg/kg dry weight) As Co Cr Cu Hg Ni Zn Benzo(a)pyrene Total PAH's

NEPM (Aust) - EIL Level 20 - - 100 1 60 200 - -

ANZECC "B" Level for soil 20 - 50 60 1 60 200 1 20

Dutch "B" Level for soil 30 50 250 100 2 100 500 1 20

Dutch "C" Level for soil 50 300 800 500 10 500 3000 10 200

NEPM (Aust) HIL "A" Level 100 100 - 1000 15 600 7000 1 20

NEPM (Aust) HIL "D" Level 400 400 - 4000 60 2400 28000 4 80

Detection Limit 5 5 5 5 0.05 5 5 0.1 1

BH1 @ 0.1 - 0.2m 6 22 38 27 0.07 60 87 0.9 9

BH1 @ 0.5 - 0.6m <5 <5 12 <5 0.18 6 22 0.2 2

BH1 @ 2.5 - 2.95m <5 <5 13 <5 <0.05 <5 <5 <0.1 <1

BH2 @ 1.0 - 1.45m 32 21 99 9 <0.05 41 17 <0.1 <1

BH2 @ 4.5 - 4.95m <5 <5 56 <5 <0.05 6 <5 <0.1 <1

BH3 @ 0.0 - 0.2m 7 16 33 31 <0.05 56 81 3.2 27

BH3 @ 2.5 - 2.95m 140 36 120 13 0.06 31 29 <0.1 <1

BH4 @ 1.0 - 1.3m 130 21 84 <5 <0.05 28 6 <0.1 <1

BH4 @ 2.6 - 2.75m 50 38 140 20 0.32 30 11 <0.1 <1

BH5 @ 0.0 - 0.2m <5 16 21 25 <0.05 61 56 2.1 15

BH6 @ 1.0 - 1.45m 15 20 110 14 <0.05 40 16 <0.1 <1

BH6 @ 4.5 - 4.95m 12 5 120 <5 <0.05 10 19 <0.1 <1

Legend 11000 Value greater than NEPC Health Investigation Level "A"

560 Value greater than DUTCH Criteria "B" indicative value for further investigation

190 Value greater than ANZECC Criteria "B" indicative value for further investigation

TABLE 1 - SUMMARY of CONTAMINATION LEVELSBFP

11


6.2 Quality Assurance/Quality Control

The results of the blind replicate sample analysis indicated relative percentage

differences (RPD’s) of between 0% and 160%. The results of the split sample analysis

indicated RPD’s of between 0% to 122%.

The high RPD’s indicate a trend that lower reported concentrations of heavy metals are

generated by MGT in comparison to WSL. An explanation as to possible causes of the

consistent discrepancy may be as follows:

• It is understood that laboratory analytical procedures in Australia vary with several

types/standards of analytical techniques currently permitted. This differs noticeably

from the USA in which stringent techniques employed. In this instance the methods

employed by WSL and MGT differ in regard to the digestion method used for

retrieval of heavy metal concentrations. WSL use a microwave method which

digests the sample at 190° at 6 atmospheres pressure whilst MGT digests the

sample at 95° at atmospheric pressure (1 atmosphere)

• All samples replicated or split were of a non homogeneous nature.

As the laboratory techniques employed by both WSL and MGT are currently legitimate

forms of sample analysis, the results reported by both laboratories have been

considered.

The results of the rinsate blank sample analysis indicated levels of all contaminants to

be near or below the level of detection for the analytical method.

An assessment of the quality assurance report generated by WSL confirms that RPD’s

for laboratory duplicate samples were in the range of <1.0% to 16.9%. Percentage

recoveries for spiked samples ranged from 57.7% to 131%.

All method blank samples indicated levels below the detection limit for the analytical

method.

Based on the overall results, the low levels of contaminants and interpretation of the

quality assurance analysis, it is our opinion that an acceptable degree of confidence in

the analytical laboratory reported results has been achieved.

12


7.0 SOIL ASSESSMENT

7.1 Soil Contamination Guidelines

For the purposes of the Assessment, the following environmental standards have been

utilised in assessing soil contaminant concentrations detected at the site.

ECOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION LEVELS

Primary reference has been made to Schedule B of the National Environment Protection

(Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (NEPM). Table 5-A of the

document which lists the Ecological Investigation Levels (EIL’s) for Interim Urban

settings has been adopted to assess the presence of soil contamination at the site.

The purpose of the NEPM is to establish a nationally consistent approach to the

assessment of site contamination whilst providing adequate protection of human health

and the environment.

ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION LEVELS

The joint Australian and New Zealand Environment and conservation Council/National

Health and Medical Research Council 1992 publication Australian and New

Zealand Guidelines for the Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sites

has been used as a supplementary guide for determining whether soil contamination is

present on site. The guidelines lists “Investigation Levels”, commonly referred to as

ANZECC B Levels, for the majority of potential soil contaminants. Where the

concentrations of soil contaminants are below the ANZECC B Levels, a site can

generally be regarded as suitable for any beneficial land use.

Where no other relevant Australian Standards are available, reference has been made

to “The Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and the Environment

1994 publication Environmental Quality Objectives in the Netherlands – A Review

of Quality Objectives and Their Policy Framework in the Netherlands”. The

environmental investigation value is calculated as the ‘average’ of the Target and

Intervention Values. These values are commonly referred to as “Dutch B Values”.

13


NEPM HEALTH INVESTIGATION LEVELS

Based on the previous land use of the site (residential/light commercial), in order to

assess the potential health risk presented by the chemical contaminants, primary

reference has been made to the “A” human exposure settings contained within the

NEPM. Considering the proposed site usage of a 3 storey residential apartment building

with minimal opportunities for soil access, the concentrations of potential contaminants

have also been referenced to the NEPM ‘D’ human exposure settings to assess the

potential land use for the site.

7.2 Present Soil Contamination Status

The test results indicate levels below the detection levels or the adopted criteria levels in

most of the samples with the following exceptions :

• Arsenic concentrations of 140 mg/kg in BH3 @ 2.5 – 2.95m and 130 mg/kg in BH4

@ 1.0 – 1.3m exceeded the EIL, ANZECC B, DUTCH C and NEPM A Levels of

20mg/kg, 20mg/kg, 50mg/kg and 100mg/kg respectively.

• Arsenic concentrations of 32 mg/kg in BH2 @ 1.0 – 1.45m and 50 mg/kg in BH4 @

2.6 – 2.77m exceeded the EIL, ANZECC B and DUTCH B Levels of 20mg/kg,

20mg/kg and 30mg/kg respectively.

• The levels of Benzo(a)pyrene of 3.2mg/kg in BH3 @ 0.0 – 0.2m and 2.1mg/kg in

BH5 @ 0.0 – 0.2m exceeded the Dutch B and NEPM A level of 1mg/kg

• The level of Total PAH of 27mg/kg in BH3 @ 0.0 – 0.2m exceeded the Dutch B and

NEPM A level of 20mg/kg

• Chromium concentrations of 99mg/kg in BH2 @ 1.0 – 1.45m, 56mg/kg in BH2 @ 4.5

– 4.95m, 120 mg/kg in BH3 @ 2.5 – 2.95, 84mg/kg in BH4 @ 1.0 – 1.3m, 140mg/kg

in BH4 @ 2.6 – 2.75m, 110mg/kg in BH6 @ 1.0 – 1.45m and 120mg/kg in BH6 @

4.5 – 4.95m exceeded the ANZECC B Level of 50mg/kg

• Nickel concentration of 61mg/kg in BH5 @ 0.0 – 0.2m marginally exceeded the

ANZECC B level of 60mg/kg

14


In regard to OH&S, based on the relatively low levels of contaminants detected and the

non/semi volatile nature of these identified contaminants, the main route of potential

exposure for personnel is via skin absorption through direct contact with contaminated

soils and ingestion via skin/hand to mouth contact

Provided good personal hygiene and housekeeping measures are followed on the site it

is our opinion that the contaminants in the soil represent a low exposure risk to

prersonnel during the proposed site works.

8.0 GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

8.1 Groundwater Guidelines

8.1.1 Determination of Groundwater Contamination

For the purpose of this Assessment, primary reference has been made to Schedule B of

the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure

(NEPM) 1999. Table 5-B of the document which lists the Groundwater Investigation

Levels (GIL) for Aquatic Ecosystems – Fresh Waters has been adopted to assess the

presence or otherwise of groundwater contamination below the site.

The NEPM also lists supplementary criteria for drinking water – health/aesthetics and

agricultural criteria for irrigation and livestock.

Where no criteria has been proposed by the NEPM, the Dutch Value (as outlined in

Section 6.1) or the most stringent criteria has been applied.

8.1.2 Determination of Groundwater Quality Criteria

The Victorian Government (1997) State Environmental Protection Policy Groundwaters

of Victoria (Groundwater SEPP) has been used for the determination of the beneficial

use applied to the groundwater from site. The policy nominates the ANZECC (1992)

Australian Water Quality Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Waters for determining

beneficial uses of groundwater. The criteria listed in Section 2 Table 2.1 “Summary

guidelines for protection of aquatic ecosystems” has been applied in the NEPM

15


document and has been adopted in determining risks associated with the proposed

beneficial use.

The Groundwater SEPP requires certain beneficial uses of groundwater to be protected.

These beneficial uses are based on the classification of groundwater into segments with

the segments being determined by groundwater quality based on total dissolved solids

(TDS). The specific groundwater quality indicators and objectives to be achieved for

each beneficial use are outlined in the Groundwater SEPP.

The Groundwater SEPP divides groundwater in Victoria into five segments, based on

TDS. The segments are defined in Table 2.

Table 2

Groundwater Segments

Segment A1 A2 B C D

TDS Range (ppm) 0 – 500 501 – 1,000 1,001 – 3,500 3,501 – 13,000 >13,000

As groundwater sampling was not conducted during this investigation, the most

sensitive groundwater segment has been adopted for the protection of beneficial uses,

that being Segment A1.

8.1.3 Beneficial Use

Therefore, in accordance with the Groundwater SEPP, beneficial uses which require

protection are potable water, potable mineral water, irrigation, stock watering, industry,

ecosystem protection and buildings/structures.

Potable Water

As there is a reliable, high quality reticulated water supply system in the South Yarra

area, “potable water supply” is not considered to be a beneficial use of this local Shallow

Aquifer System

16


Potable Mineral Water Supply

The site and its commercial /residential locality is not in a recognized mineral water

production area and therefore the Groundwater SEPP objective for potable mineral

water supply is not applicable

Irrigation

The Shallow Aquifer System is considered suitable for use as irrigation for parks and

gardens. However, due to the low yield of the local Shallow Aquifer System it is unlikely

that a sustainable volume could be extracted. Therefore the Groundwater SEPP for

irrigation is not applicable

Stock Watering

As the site and surrounds are typically commercial/residential, stock watering as a

beneficial use is not considered applicable.

Industry

Industrial water would typically require a high volume of water which is not available

from this Shallow Aquifer System and therefore this beneficial use is not applicable.

Buildings/Structures

The Groundwater SEPP requires that introduced contaminants in the groundwater do

not result in corrosion to structures or building materials. As groundwater at this site was

not encountered within the investigation depth of 6.0 metres and with the proposed

basement founding above this level at 3.0 metres, this beneficial use is not applicable.

9.0 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS

The analytical test results conducted on samples collected from 19 – 23 Wilson Street

revealed elevated levels of PAH’s in the some of the near surface Fill materials (0.0m–

0.2m). The test results also revealed elevated levels of Arsenic and Chromium in the

naturally occurring soils at depths ranging from 1.0 – 3.0 metres. Additional testing

indicated that hexavalent Chromium is not present in the Total Chromium levels

17


presented earlier which indicates the natural elevation of Chromium within the natural

soils

However in all the above cases of elevated levels of contaminants the recorded levels

are below the NEPM “D” level which is applicable for the proposed site usage of a

residential apartment block with minimal opportunities for soil access.

In addition, based on the proposed site development works which is to involve the

excavation of a 3.0 metre deep basement, these materials with elevated levels of

contaminants are to be removed from the site prior to apartment building construction.

Similarly, the lack of significant contamination in the naturally occurring soils indicates

that contamination is unlikely to have adversely impacted on the Local Shallow Aquifer

below the site and its subsequent beneficial uses. As the site is to be redeveloped into

medium-high density residential apartments, it is likely that the entire site will be covered

by buildings or paved areas following removal of the upper 3.0 metres of the soil profile.

As such the potential for the site to induce contamination migration through to the

groundwater is considered extremely low.

Based on the above information on proposed site development works and the laboratory

test results, the site may be redeveloped into a more sensitive land use i.e. residential,

with the issuance of a Certificate/Statement of Environmental Audit provided by a

Victorian EPA approved environmental auditor as a result of this environmental

investigation.

_________________

Reviewed by:

GK Searle

18


10.0 REFERENCES

1. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council/National

Health and Medical Research Council (1992). Australian and New Zealand

Guidelines for the Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sites.

2. National Environment Protection Council (1999). National Environment

Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure.

3. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council. Australian

Water Quality Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Waters, November 1992.

4. Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and the Environment (1994).

Environmental Quality Objectives in the Netherlands – A Review of Quality

Objectives and Their Policy Framework in the Netherlands.

5. Standards Australia (1997) AAS4482.1. Guide to the sampling and investigation

of potentially contaminated soil, Part 1: Non-volatile and semi-volatile

compounds.

6. Standards Australia (1999) AS4482.1. Guide to the sampling and investigation

of potentially contaminated soil, Part 2: Volatile substances.

7. The Victorian Government (1997). State Environmental Protection Policy

Groundwater of Victoria (Groundwater SEPP).

BFP CONSULTANTS PTY LTDJOBNO

CLIENT

SCALEFIG. 1

CAULFIED, KRIVANEK & SUGAR

41017 1:6000

19-23 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA

Reference:MELWAYGreaterMelbourne,Map2L,GridK8.

BFP CONSULTANTS PTY LTDJOB NO

CLIENT

SCALE

FIG. 2

CAULFIED, KRIVANEK & SUGAR

41017 1:250

19-23 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA

BH1

BH2

BH3

BH4

BH5

BH6

GARDEN LANE

WILSON STREET

EXISTINGBUILDING

EXISTINGHOUSE

APPENDIX A

TITLE CERTIFICATES

. - . 'r.;u. -rc,_;*...n:,a.-." . - + : . . . _ ._ . .

/ '

h l . ?..FO'.. , T r d / ~ ~ c r . -.i,!~~:;i~.~!:i~,;l. 5'5 . .

.% . -.- ; ~ -*;,. , ,. . - . . .

. ~ \ ., .'<'

is now the propr ie tor

Registered 14th February 1975

nos the p r o p r i e t o r Rqglstered 23rd March 1976

now the pmprietor

Prqprtetor is now t h e p r o ? r i e T o r

Registered 30th May 1980

. . , .:T,.$F:. ;!..~-..r .:g; ... ,..:.. ,.,- ." ,: , , . .

, . . : ;&j.:::,;:',:. -:. : -:..._ . . I

JOINT P R O P R f E T O R S

€ L I E MANSOUR 6 F E R I A L H A N S O U R OF 3 H I L L E R ST.

P R A H R A I

R E G I S T E R E D 16 /9 /92

S124039V

CAVEAT

C A V E A T O R : VILLAGE R O A O S H O W ;AM F A C T O R ' l

PTY CTD

C A P A C I T Y : P U R C H A S E R f F E E S I M P L E

L O D G E D B Y : H E R B E R T GEER & RUHDLE

NOTICE TO: LEVEL 211355 B O U R K E S T . - >

M E L B O U R N E 3 0 0 0 ~2 ,pig. '"

NO: U787565Q

DATE: 2 3 / 5 / 9 7

CAVEAT W I T H D R A W N 1 7 FEB 1998 u > t q l q / j ~

FLAN OF SUBDIVISION

OF PART OF CROWN ALLOTMENT 35

PARISH PRAH RAN COUNTY OF B O U R K E

VDL. 7277 WL. 3;s

SCALE O F FEET

LP045519, Page 1 of 1, Printed 12:27 18/07/2002, Search Enquiry 339205. Customer 209500

I 09-rcr~n7 oqn0 .I -C A ~ ~ i ~ t o r l I 7-37 I ~ln717007 customer LR401

. : , P T Y LTD . " I -

I Y . l ' . i i : I T Y : I- t t 3 l> l t 'L t C A P A C I T Y : P U R C H A S E R / F E E SIMPLE

I.. .% ' 8 .

, J + ? : : i3F U L A I K D O C L J M E N T : S E E C A V E A T . ' L O ~ G E D : B Y : H E R B E R T GEER & R U N D L E

I . O I ! ; E D i i Y : E G G L E S r O N CLI.F!ON-JONES, PI !:!I . , ; , , . I i . ~

! ; N O T I C E T O : LEVEL 2 1 / 3 8 5 B O U R K E ' S T .

, ,Lk"""n . , . - .,".,"

. N O : U 7 8 7 8 6 5 Q N!): 5480468T

O A T € : 1 1 / 5 / 9 3 . . : : D A T E : 2 3 / 5 / 9 7 ':ki:gw -,;

I . . _ . . . . . . . . . . .

I ;.% ;, .'j. ; :;< !. J Ti i;j & i: y; Tt ... .'- i i . /--- ---. : ( - 1 1 . : . I

2 WELLINGTON PD. 1 WST MELBOURNE 3002

i :

I '. . .i MORTGAGE. $.

ORIGINAL @.@a\ a .L?.CIJ r ) p . r .15 C E TAKEN FROM THE OFFICE - : , .:$:<. . .,:?.: ,, ,I \. :%. $

&&e+&& OF TITLES i l ; I . , i w . , u v ~ /

REGISTER B b 3 r .

voc. \ , 1 FOL

- VICTORIA

ACT " UNDER THE ,,TRANSFER Of L A N D

Cj.eaners a r e now the j o i n t pl:t>i~rie::o!:5 9 . ; , r . ~ e:,tace i n iee :; ! i t l t . j . :. . . ; e c t

to the enculnbrances notifiecl ilerc!ancier i i l i.2, 'i'liPb'T. piecc of !.,inc! - - - - -

c ? c l i n e n t ; . , i 31x3 coloured red and i8J.u~ o n i::~i! 111ap i n the marg 1.n be in<] i . o t 2-

on Pl.arl of Subdivision No.43>13? P a r i s h of PL-;:riran - - - - - - - - - - - -

DATEG the 2nd ciay of iaay 1952

:.:. to t l ~ l : Land coj.o,.lrec! 121 ue-

'!'I:: EII$EIJJ,N'r:, (if ar?:') - . - -- -- c2:: ist ing O.'er t h e S3::il'. \,..! - - .**irtue of S e c t i o n - br 3:: !;he - ,i%-sn,;fcr ., .. 0: : {,and I.ct - - - --

Derived from V o l . l Z i ' 7 Fo r . 3 4 5

1 Rd301196 Paae 3 of 4 Printed 12:27 18/07/2002. Customer LR401

'j s i d H c :

p This I S the Shr-ct morked , + n f c r r r d t o in the C e r t i f i c a t e of T i t l e cnterud in t h e Rrgirtcr Book V o l gli . F o l . " :

H 2 * 0

. . . . . . . . I : n 7. :: (-J

. . . . . . . . . . . . ...... -~ -. .....-.... - - -. - .: c q

.G a- I m

) i ) j? ; $L - .? F C A V E A T . - . -- - - . - . . s n d

: . .- I . a. i t i4KH S O U R 3 " U M

: T ! I V l . A T O K : M A R K H A R O L D I H O M S O N ! fi

u ,: M I L c F K S T . P R A H R A N 3!3: C 0

! \ A T E i!F C L A I M D O C U M E N T : 2 0 / 1 1 / 8 9

I I ; l n r . i v B Y : ~ 0 2 3 s M A R K H A R O L D T H O M S O N O F 11 i I D o c A V E N U E R D . C A M B E R W E L L 3 1 2 4 !. v s M

j N O T I T I T O : A S A B O V E tc r-l

! . 1 : Y O : F ' 2 6 4 1 6 W I.

: g 1 P.

0 3 . I i A l E : 1 5 / 3 / 9 0 1 : f ~ i ~ ~ i i & ' . ~ ! < j : ) \ . M 0 n V1

! . . " :,b' i 1 ; . ., L.AYSE cm L . \ I.]c 4'7 .'. \-...~ . .. -1.. ...............

.;-[.!.-"p. A T & & ly 17 . 3 ~ i c c , - L . , .. 1 - ",L I -.,7; +__I..

1 2 1 O C T iwi! 4 i /.---.-- I I

$4~; - '7. MORTGAGE 2 : [.:;; ;:.::2 i - ... . - ..... -. . - .. \. . (.-b --.- bb[ .. i ',

NOT lON6lL fliJ5Tk!!X14 B L

i , . ,: . -"

I J o I t i T P R O P R I E T O R S l Y 11060151 3!/05/95 r yr

CI!E M A N S O U R & F E R l A L M A N S O U R OF rt

I (D t I .

..-.. X

. i 7 M T L L E R S T . P R A H R A N yr

5 K L G I Z T E R E D 1 6 / 9 / 9 2 3

P I

5 ! ? 4 Q 4 @ V

I I I. I . 1.

- - - - - - - - -

.>I

MORTGAGE : .. ,. ..

N A T I e N A i I U S T R A L ~ I . ; B R ~ ~ L;~ITED .' . ,q3 - .. 1 : . .

T709330E 01/06/95 j j -., . . yr : i P.. 7

I ) . . . P. !; 10 ..... [ I

'-. .<,, ., !: . ',?" . i' I - - - - - - - - - ... , ! '=l

\'. *-.- I 0 i ' CAVEAT . ' P . . i I -

C A V E A T " ' ' . P.

. . -- . . -- - - - a

,I >,/ !~ a : " !, li . C p , V t A . r O H : V I L L A G E R O A D S H O W ;AM F A C T O R Y .I : .,I.. : FI:R l A L I.lAPISOIIR r

j P , ? i 'A [ : i ' Y : F E E S i M!)L[ P T Y L T B <

iD

1131 1 -:i C C A I H I )OC[J I . lENT: S E E C A V E A T ' C A P A C I T Y : P U R C H A S E R ~ F E E s I M P L E . . ti

? ~ D C C U B Y : E G G L E S T U N C L I F T O N - J O N E S b C O ID

L O D G E D B Y : HERBERT 'GEER R U N D L E '

..,iOTI C L P O : ~ T H ' F L O O R 8 3 - 8 9 W I L L ~ A M S.1. ? .

Ii M E L B O U R N E 3 0 0 0 ! ! N O T ~ C E T O : L E V E L 2 1 / 3 8 5 U O U R K E S T . ,

*----.- . ? I

! i M E L B O U R N E 3 0 0 0 [ . -: *.,. ',2:;+\ '.

20 : S J 8 0 4 6 8 T :I /,: :':-;;., . ii { , . ? I .

:)/I: t.: ! ! / 5 / 9 3 4 .. 'I

N O : U 7 8 1 8 6 5 Q x.. - :>;:;; ;;+? .., . ' a ,

. . . "- . -

r . , . : \ . j i; :i k~ ci; ;l? -/:,/,a .. a,.,% . . I . . . . . : b - .: /' tj .i'.. .:

I . . . 8 . . . . .. L..- . :.'* 154 tj i+ .... -_ __ -

D A T E : 2 3 / 5 / 9 7 . .

I . .- i t ; .,. r. .h T T:?, !;L (1 ,;:. . .:./---- .-. l t t : ! , i ' r ! b J e . . . :: I., :; ,: , : . a ' .

i

1 7 F E D 1398 G ' ) L . , . . > 5 1 1

I. - . - -. --.. . .

i I

MORTGAGE i i

12771345, Page 2 of 6, Printed 12:28 18/07/2002, Search Enquiry 339226. Customer 209500

. .

t -

i i 8 .

11: 1 ': , :!; . . . I I_.:

; J ' . ~ . .

;; + 1 : .. ? , . . . .: . , . . i. C .' I . , '

I 17771345 Paae 3 nf 6. Printed 12.28 lR/O7/21)02 S e a ~ r h hnl lirv 71977Fi CI ~ s l n r n ~ r 7naann

INTENTIONALLY BtAPCK

--R' !, - -> - - AE! T O PABT No. d 7 ? ~ l & + /

CANCELLED

APPENDIX B

SITE HISTORY INFORMATION

ROYAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF VICTORIA INC. 239 A'Beckett Street. Melbourne 3000

FAX TO:

FAX FROM:

Peter Noonan - BFP Consultants Fax Number: 9429 71 17

Michael King - RHSV

DATE: Monday 1 3 ' ~ May 2002

SUBJECT: Site History for 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

PAGES: One (including this page)

Dear Mr Noonan,

Wilson Street is listed from 1864, it was mainly residential housing with a few shops in this era. 19-23 Wilson Street has been residential through the years till 1974 when there was food and clothing shop. There doesn't seem to be any hazardous materials in this area.

I will forward our invoice and hard copy of this report in the mail.

Yours sincerely

u 4 Michael King Administrative Officer

Tel: (03) 9326 9288 Fax: (03) 9326 9477 Email: [email protected] ABN 36 520 675 471 Reg. No: A2529 Find out more about us on our website: www.historyvictoria.com.au

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH - 1979 1

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH - 1963 -- _JT

APPENDIX C

GROUNDWATER DATABASE

The Water Bureau . Department of Natural Resources and Environment Victorian Groundwater Database For enquiries' regarding this report contact Sinclair Knight Merz on ph:(03) 9248 3100

BORE LOCATION REPORT 5/20/2 11:30:32 Page 1

BORE OLD RIG NO. / BORE W G AMG EAST NORTH DATE TOTAL RLNS BORE USES DRILL LOGS AQUIF AQUIF TSS ID BORE LIC NO. AUTH SHEET ZONB COMPLETED DEPTH TYPE METHOD G D FROM TO mg/L

NO. lm) (m) (m)

- PARISH 3416 - P W W

N w NKN NKN NKN NKN NKN NKN NKN NKN NKN

PARISH 3431 - PYWHEITJORRK 89269 10009 12320 LAND 782221 55 323400 5810260 01/12/1979 36.50 GW DM ST DHH N Y 20.0 33.0 2032.0

'**'* END OF REPORT '**'*

The Water Bureau . Department of Natural Resources and Environment Victorian Groundwater Database For enquiries regarding this report contact Sinclair might Merz an ph:I031 9248 3100

BORE COMPOSITE REPORT 5/20/2002 11:32:28 Page 1

BORE DITR Date Aqif Aquif Lith SWL Pump Time Draw- Latest Chemical Analysis 1d NO Completed from To (m) Rate (h:ml down Date MTK TSS CL FE fH EC Hard

(mi lml ll/secl (ml Sampled Total -~ ~

-

- Parish: 3416 - PFSdRILN

GRAV

Pariah: 3431 - PYWHEITJORRK

89269 10009 01/12/1979 20.0 33.0 BASA 17.0 4.1 AIR

*'*** END OF REPORT **** '

The Water Bureau . Department of Natural Resources and Environment Victorian Groundwater Database For enquiries regarding this report contact Sinclair Knight Merz on ph:1031 9248 3100

AQUIFER REWRT 20/5 /2 11 :31 :20 Page 1

BORE OLD WATER FROM TO LITHO CASING DIA TYP APER SWL PUMP PUMP PUMP DRAW REC EC TEST TEST

ID BORE SCREEN lml lm) LOGY DEPTH lmml lmml lm) DEPTH RATE TIME DOWN TIME TYPE DATE

NO. lml lml ll/secl (H:Ml lm) 1H:M)

- PARISH 3416 - PRAHFAN

114212 **.** SCREEN 3 . 0 6 .0 GRAV 54 PSL WATER 4 . 5 GRAV 3 . 0 50 P12

116167 .".' SCREEN 1 0 . 8 1 6 . 7 50 PSL WaTB.I 1 2 6 1 0 . 8 50 P l 0 . .. . - -. . - - . -

142776 "*** SCREEN 4 . 5 7 . 5 SAND 142777 ***** SCREEN 4 . 5 7 . 5 SANE 142778 *'*** SCREEN 4 . 5 7 . 5 SAND 142822 *'+** SCREEN 4 . 5 7 . 5 SAND

WATER 5 . 5 7 . 5 ~ - ~-

142824 ***** SCREEN 4 . 5 7 . 5 SANE WATER 5 .0 7 . 5

142825 ***** SCREEN 4 . 5 7 . 5 SAND WATER 5 .0 7.5

142826 ***** SCREEN 4 . 5 7 . 5 SAND WATER 5 . 0 7 . 5

142827 ****' SCREEN 4 . 0 7 .0 SAND WATER 4 . 0 7 .0

PARISH 3 4 3 1 - PXWHEITJORRK

89269 10009 WATER 2 0 . 0 33 .0 BASA SCREEN 3 0 . 0 36 .0 BASA

-~ ~

50 PSL 50 FSL 50 PSL 50 PSC

4 . 5 5 0 P 1 0 50 PSC

4 . 5 5 0 P 1 0 50 PSC

4 . 5 S O P 1 0 50 PSC

4 . 5 50 P18 50 PSC

4 . 0 50 PI8

3 0 . 0 1 2 5 PVC 1 7 . 0 36 .5 4 . 0 9 PSL 4 1 7 . 0 4 . 0 9

BAL 2510111999 25 /01 /1999

BAL 25/01 /1999 25 /01 /1999

BAL 21/05 /1999 21/05/1999

AIR 01/12/1979 AIR 01/12/1979

***'* END OF REPORT *'***

APPENDIX D

BOREHOLE LOGS.

geotechnical engineers 515 Bridge Road, Richmond 3121

Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 942971 17

ENGINEERING BOREHOLE LOG

Borehole no. 1

Sheet no. 1 of 2

Job no. 41017

Material Description

SPT=5/616

Layer of dense gravel Difficult to Auger

geotechnical engineers 515 Bridge Road. Richmond 3121

Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117


Borehole no. 1

Sheet no. 2 of 2

Job no. 41017


Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 942971 17


Borehole no. 2 Sheet no. 1 of 2

Job no. 41017


SPT = 4 15 19

associated fine to medium sand

hard layers of ironstone fine to coarse ironstone gravel with separated with CH clay associated fine to medium sand, orange and dark brown

SPT=28117/25 Duplicate Sample

geotechnical engineers

515 Bridge Road, Richmond 3121

Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117


Borehole no. 2

Sheet no. 2 of 2

Job no. 41017

Structure, additional Material Description observations

SPT=7111114


Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 942971 17


Borehole no. 3

Sheet no. 1 of 2

Job no. 41017


angular crushed Basalt gravel, fine to sand, low plasticity fines, grey,

Augering difficult - hard layers of ironstone separated with CH clay

SPT=12/10/17 Duplicate Sample

medium plasticity fines, orange and pale grey

........................................................ SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand. orange and pale grey, some low to medium


515 Bridge Road. Richmond 3121

Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117


Borehole no. 3

Sheet no. 2 of 2

Job no. 41017


SPT=6112116

A, /44*& A BFP


515 Bridge Road, Richmond 3121

Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 942971 17


Borehole no. 4

Sheet no. 1 of2

Job no. 41017

Material Description observations

SPT = 16 140 for 300mm

Augering difficult - hard layers of ironstone separated with CH clay

(1.40m drilled in 75 minutes)

SPT = 42 for 150mm Duplicate Sample


Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 942971 17


Borehole no. 4

Sheet no. 2 of 2

Job no. 41017


geGechnical engineers 515 Bridge Road, Richmond 3121

Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117


dorehole no. 5

Sheet no. 1 o f 2

Jobno. 41017

Client : CAULFIELD KRIVANEK AND SUGAR PTY LTD Date : 21/05/2002

Project : ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Logged By : CJC 1 CDL

Location : 19 - 23 WILSON STREET. SOUTH YARRA

Drill model : PIONEER 100 Slope 90 deg RL Surface : Not measured -

Notes g 5

deg

A X 0 %

6 w 2; .s .% s;

D

D MD

VSt

Hole diameter : 120mm

Samples Tests

D

N*

Datum :

Structure, additional obse~atiOnS

FILL No Odour NoOdour NoOdour

No Odour

SPT = 50 for 100rnm No Odour

Bearing

a 0 - .o

a


FILL: SILTY SANDY GRAVEL; fine to coarse angular crushed Basalt gravel, fine to coarse

Depth (m)

-

2

D

z a

-

- c 0 .- e n

9 z .- 5 M

D D

M

sand, low plasticity fines, grey, broken brick, thin asphalt layer - FILL: SILTY SAND; fine to medium 0.50 sand, dark grey, some fine to - medium gravel - SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium - sand, light grey, some fine to medium gravel I

SILTY CLAY (CH); high plasticity, grey and orange, some fine to coarse sand and qtz gravels Layers of Ironstone from 1.0 metre / BH 5 - Auger Refusal @ 1.30 metres

.

- 1 .OO

- -

- 1.50

- - -

- 2.00

- - - -

2.50

- - - -

3.00

- - - -

3.50

- - -

- 4.00


Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 942971 17


dorehole no. 6

Sheet no. 1 of 2

Job no. ' 41017



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117


Borehole no. 6 Sheet no. 2 of 2

Job no. 41017

APPENDIX E

CHAIN OF CUSTODY

, , ,. ; , ::$;,

I , ,..,,,, ~ . . .

CHAIN OF CUSTODY DOCUMENTATION , :. a)$;. . ..

BFP : , .,: "',,' . t" ,. 1 ' ,!"ZF! ,. ,?".,,? ,

4 1 0 I=?-. , , / . geolechnicai engineers

Job No. 515- R&. Rlshimrj3121

Ph (03) 042) 7555 Frr (a31 84237117 , . 19 - 23 W,CSOAI S m q Y M ~ s , , . , .

Projed: Shed NO. I OF I

ka lv ica l Labaatory WSf- 1, :

. . , , . . .. i,,.,.. i3n3 I

. , * , , , . , . . .., .

Couriw : , $". &,,. 5 '

LaboratoG Andysla : Il

I I I I . . , Rdinquiahed by: (print& signature) , Date Tlmo Reclcyd by: (print 8 signature) Date Tlme . ,,;I,,, .

'.I,,;

.. Sample Mdrlx Water (W) Studgo (SL) * Sample Preservatlm - Ice (I) Ch preserved (U) Sol (S) Ccvnpolne (C) HNO, I H a (H)

Job No. 5 1 5 B W R d , R-3121

4 1017

Ph /@JI WB 7555 FU (m) ~ 2 9 7 1 1 ,

,q - 23 LJ~LSCK) SWEET h Y A P U ~ Shed NO. I oF I

L a ~ ~ i c a i Labmatory M L 7-

I I I Rdhquiahed b y : @,inl& signature) Drde

.' S a m p l e Mrdrix Water w) Sudge (SL) Sol (S) Cornpodto (C)

Tlme

* Sample Preservation - Ice (I) Lh preserved (U) HN0,I H a (H)

Recleved by: (print& signature) Dde Time

APPENDIX F

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

'V WSLConsultants'" Enviroscience

TN:1819

Q U A L I T Y MlNAGEMENl S Y S T E M

Your Ref: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

3 June 2002

BFP Geotechnical Engineers 51 5 Bridge Rd. RICHMOND VIC 3121

Date Received: 22/05/2002

Attention: Mr. Geoff Searle

Certificate of Analvsis WSL Report ~"rnber: 458109

I ile sample(s) referred to in this report were analysed by the following methods:

Analyte(s) Method Asbestos' M02

Chloride WSL 075 Cyanide APHA 4120 Fluoride APHA 4500F,C, WSL 077

Metals WSL-032 OCs WSL8000

PAHs WSL8000 PCBs WSL8000

Sulphate WSL 076 Total Phenolics APHA 4120

TPH WSL030 Volatiles WSL3810A. WSL3810B

Results pertain to samples as received

Details of thisreport were faxed on: 3/06/2002 . . .

Yours faithfully

WSL Consultants Pty Ltd

&%Bray Manager Of Chemistry

WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 712 676

2-8 Harvey Streer, Richmond, Vicroria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: wrl&rl.com.au Web: www.wsl.com.au

'Analysed by : Kilpatrick &Associates NATA No. 5169. Report No. V3607

This Laboralory i s accredited by the National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(s) reported

herein have been performed in accordance with itsterms of accreditation. This document shall not bc reproduced

except in full.

Accreditation No's 1201 & 1205

A NATA Accredited Laboratory Page 1 of An Approved Quarantine Premises An Approved EPA Auditor

( WSLConsultantsm urr C O . , ~ : ~ ~ S r, M. , Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 712 676 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +6l 3 9429 4666 Farimile: +GI 3 9429 2294 Email: wsl&sl.com.au Web: mvw.wsl.corn.au

>ale : 3Jun-2002 YSL Report No: 458109 NSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Gcotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Strect, South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Samplc As Cd Ca Cr Cu Hg

458109 22-May-2002 BHI 0.1-O.2M 6 4 . 2 22 38 27 0.07

4581 10 22.May-2002 BH1 0.5-0.6M <5 c0.2 c5 12 <5 0.18

4 blank space indicates no test performed Results expressed as mgikg dry weight Page 2 of. 21

WSLConsultantsTM WSL c ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ pty. ~ ~ d . Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +6l 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ws1.com.a~

)ate : 3-Jun-2002 YSL Report No: 458109 NSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotcchnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Sample ASBESTOS

4 blank spacc indicates no lest performed

No asbestos detected.

No asbestos detected.

No asbcstos deteded.

7 WSLConsultantsm WSL c o m ~ ~ t s m Lrd. , , Enriroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 19 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: 161 3 9429 2294 Email: wsl&sl.com.au Web: www.ws1.com.a~

Q U A L I T Y MANAGEMEtil S Y S T E M

)ate: 3-Jun-2002 YSL Report No: 458109 VSLlobNumbcr: 18192 Client: BFP Gcotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Sample TPH TPH TPH TPH BENZENE TOLUENE ETHYL XYLENES STYRENE CUMENE C6-CY C10-C14 CIS-C28 C29-C36 BENZENE

1 2 4-TRI- METHYL BENZENE

~11.5

c0.5

<0.5

4 . 5

~ 0 . 5

4 5

< 0 5

c0.5

cu.5

<0.5

s0.5

c0.5

TOTAL FLUORIDE CYANIDE SULPHATE CIIL.OKIOE PHENOLS

A blank space indicnes no led perfotmed Rcwla axpressed as mgikg dry weight

A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 OW 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street; Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +GI 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: www.wsl.com.au

Dale: 3-Jun.2002 WSL Report No: 458109 WSL JohNurnher: 18192 Client BFP Gcotcehnical Engineers Job Rrference: 411117 - 19-23 Wilson Slrcet, South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Sample NAP ACY ACE FLU PHE ANT FLA PYR BAA CHR 8 8 1

458118 22-Map2002 BH5 0.0-0.2M

4581111 22-May-2002 BHG 1.0-1.45M

4581211 22-May-ZOO2 BHG 4.5-4.95M

IKF BAP DBA BGP IPY TOTAL PAH

A blank spclce ilidicdles no test performed Resulu txpressed as rngikg dry weigh1

17 Enviroscience

Date : 3.Jun-2002 WSL Report No: 458109 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers

LAB NUM Rcceivcd Sample

A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: t61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: wwwwrl.com.au

4 blank space indicates no test performed

Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

HCB . a-BHC LINDANE HEPTACHLOR

Results expressed as mglkg dry weight

Q U A L I T Y MANAGEMEM S Y S T E M

HEPTACHLOR- EPOXIDE

<0.05

<005

4 0 5

coo5

a 0 5

co.05

<0.05

c0.05

4 0 s

<0.05

4 0 5

~0 .05

DDE

<005

co.05

<005

c0.05

<005

co.05

<0.05

~0 .05

~ 0 . 0 5

c0.05

<005

<0.05

DIELDRIN

<on5

<o.os

<I105

<0.05

<no5

<005

c0.05

<005

<005

<005

c0.05

<0.05

WSLConsultants" w s ~ Consultants ~ t y . ~ t d . Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Srreet, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Tcleohone: t61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294

Q U A L I T Y W G E M E N l S Y S 1 E M

Email: [email protected] Web: www.wsl.corn.au

Date : 3-Juo,2002 WSL Reporl No: 458109 WSL JobNulnber: 18192 Client: BFP ~eatechnicel Engineers Jab Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

DDD DDT ENDRlN METHOXYCHLOR CHLORDANE b-ENDO- SULPHAN

ENDOSULPHAN SULPHATE

ENDRlN ALDEHYDE

LAB NUM Received Sample a-ENDO- SULPHAN

c0.05

c0.05

<0.05

<0.05

<0.05

c0.05

~ 0 . 0 5

4 0 5

<0.05

c0.05

<0.05

4 0 5

458109 22-May2002 BHI 0.1-O.2M

458110 22-May-2002 BH10.5-0.6M

A blank space indicates no test performrd Results exprcsscd as mglkg dry weight I'agc 7 of.. ?I

-1 WSLConsultantsm WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvry Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: t61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: www.wsl.com.au

Q U A L I T Y MANAGEMEHI S Y S T E M

Date : 3-Jun.2002 WSL Reporl No: 458109 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Gcotcchnical Engineers Jab Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Sample AROCLOR AROCLOR AROCLOR 1016 1221 1232

AROCLOR 1242

AROCLOR 1248

AROCLOR 1254

c0.1

<O.I

c0.1

<0.1

c0.1

co.1

<0.1

<0.1

co.1

co.1

CO.1

c0.1

AROCLOR TOTAL 1260 PCBs

<O.l <l

c0.1

<O.l

<0.1

<O.l

< o 1

<O.I

co.1

<O.l

<0.1

<O.I

c0.1

458109 22-May-2002 BHI 0.1-0.2M

Results expressed as rngikg dry weight A blank spacu indicates no test performed

Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294

Email: [email protected] Web: w.ws l . com.au

WSL Report No: 458109 WSL JobNulnber: 18192 Client: BFT Gcotechnical Engi~ieers JobReference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yaira

LAB NUM Received Sample As Cd Ca Cr Cu Hg Ma Ni Pb Se Sn Zn

458123 22-May-2002 RINS BH5

A blank spavv indicates no tcst performed Results expressed as rngIL.

'1 WSLConsultarits" W ~ L Consultants ~ t y . ~ t d . A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvy Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: 161 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Wcb: w.wsl .com.au

. - . ~ ~~ .- YSL Report No: 458109 YSL JobNurnher: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers J o b Reference: 411117 - 19-23 Wilson Street. South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Sample TPH TPH TPH TPH BENZENE TOLUENE ETHYL XYLENES STYRENE CUMENE 124-TRI- TOTAL FLUORlUC ( Y A N I I I I C1,-CY CIO-C14 CIS-C28 C29-C36 BENZENE METHYL PHENOLS

BENZENE

Ablank spree indicates no test pcfformcd

- Q U A l l T V MANAGEMWT S Y S T E M

WSLC0nsultantsm WSL Consultants PW ~ t d . Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Tele~hone: 161 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +G1 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: wmu.wsl.com.au

,,to#,

5 43 Q U A L I T Y MANAGEMENT S Y S T E M

Date : 3.Jun-2002 WSL Report No: 458109 WSLJobNombrr: 1111Y2 Cliel: BFP Gcofechnical Enginrcn Job Reference: 411117 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Sarnpir NAP ACY ACE FLU PHE ANT FLA PYR BAA CHR BBF BKF BAP DBA BGP II'Y TOSAI

PA11

458123 22-Mny-2002 RlNS BHS

A blank space indicdlcs no test pcrformcd

WSLConsultantsTM WSL Consultants PV. ~ t d

li Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 712 676

2-8 Harvey Srreer, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: t61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +6l 3 9429 2294

Email: [email protected] Web: www.wsl.com.au

Jate : 3-Jun-2002 WSL Report NO: 458109 $JSL JobNumher: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Rece~ved Sample I-ICB a-BHC LINDANE HEPTACHLOR ALDRIN b-BHC d-BHC HEPTACHLOR- uOE Dl1 LDItIN EPOXIDE

22-May-2002 RlNS BH5

A blank space indicates no test performed Results expressed as mg/L

q u l L l r y WGWEW S Y S T E M

7 WSLCon~ultant~~ w s ~ G ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ P PV. L~*. , , Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: tG1 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ws1.com.a~

Pate : 3Jun3002 WSL Report No: 458109 NSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 -19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Samplc

22-May-2002 RINS BHS

A blank space indicates no tea performed

DDD ' DDT ENDRIN METHOXYCHLOR CHLORDANE a-ENDO- b-ENDO- ENDOSULPHAN ENDRlN SULPHAN SULPHAN SULPHATE ALDEHYDE

Results expressed as mg/L

Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 171 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: 161 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +GI 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected]&.au Web: www.wsl.com.au

Q U A L I T Y WANAGEMM S Y S T E M

Date : 3-Jun-2002 W S L Report No: 458109 WSL JobNumbrr: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Jab Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Streel, South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Sample

A blank spacc indicates no test performed

AROCLOR AROCLOR AROCLOR 1016 1221 1232

AROCLOR AROCLOR AROCLOR AROCLOR TOTAL 1242 1248 1254 1260 PCBs

Results expressed as mg/L I I4 o i . 21

WSLConsultantsTM WSL ~onsultants PY ~ t d . Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 712 676 A.B.N. 49 004 712 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +GI 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +GI 3 9429 2294

- Q U A l l l l MANAGEMEM S Y S T E M

Email: [email protected] Web: m.wsl .carn .au

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Date : 3-Jun.2002 WSL Report No: 458109 WSL JabNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geatechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LA8 NUM Reference Sample As Cd Co Cr Cu HE Mo Ni

458527 22-May-2002 BLANK .<5 4 . 2 <5 <5 <5 c o o s <5 <5

458558 (Duplicate of 458109) 458109 22-May-2002 BH1O.l-O.2M % RI'D

458560 (Duplicate of 458119) 4581 19 22-May2002 BH6 1.0-1.45M % RJ'D

458559 (Spike of458109) Expected

% Recovery 458109 22-May-2002 BH10.1-0.2M

458561 (Spikeof 458119) Expecled

'70 Recovery 4581 19 22-May2002 BH6 1.0-145M

A blank space indicates no test performed Results expressed as mgikg dry weight

WSLConsultantsTM WSL Consultants ~ t y . ~ t d . Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

47 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ws1.com.a~

Dale : 3.Jun.2002

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT WSL Report No: 458109 WSL JobNamhcr: 18192 Client: BFP Grotcchnical E~~ginesrs l a b Reference: 41017 - 18-23 Wilson Slrcel. South Yarra

LAB NUM Reference Sample TPH TPH TPH TPH BENZENE TOLUENE ETHYL XYLENES STYRENE CUMENE C6-CL) CII1-C14 CIS-C28 C29-C36 BENZENE

458527 22.May-2002 BLANK

458526 (Dupli~atr of4.58lU9) 4581119 22-May.2092 BH1O.l-O.ZM % RPD

458528 (Drtplicate of458114) 458114 22-May.2002 BH3 0.0-0.2M % RPD

45873 1 (lJt<plic~Lr of 458117) 4581 17 22-May.2002 BH4 2.6-2.75M 90 RPD

459548 (11nrplicdtc of 4.58116) 458116 22-May2092 BH4 1.0-1.30M 90 RPD

458559 (Spike oJ45xl09) Expeeled

%Recovery 4581011 22.May-2002 BHI O.l-O.2M

458719 (Spike r~f4S8S27) Expected 90 Reeovcry

458527 22-May2002 QC SPIKE

458732 (Spik~ of 458.727) Expected

90 Recovery 458527 22-May-20112 STANDARD RECOVERY

1 2 4-TRI- TOTAL FLUORIDE CYANIDE SULI'HA'TE ('111 01311)?. METHYL PHENOLS BENZENE

A blank space indicates no tesl performed Results expressed as mgikg dry weight

WSLConsultantsTM WSL consultans ~ t y . ~ t d . A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 001 752 676

4 7 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: t61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +GI 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: www.wsl.com.au

Date : 3.Jun.2002 . QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT

WSL Repurl No: 458109 WSL JabNurnber: 18192 Client: BFP Oeotcchnical Engineers Jub Reference; 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarru

Q U A L I T Y MANAGEMEW S Y S T E M

LAB NUM Reference Sample TPH TPH T P H TPH BENZENE TOLUENE ETHYL XYLENES STYRENE CUMENE 124-TRI- TOTAL FLUORIDE CYANIDE SULI'IIAIE C'Ill.Ollll)li C6-CY C1II-C14 CIS-C28 CZY.C36 BENZENE METHYL PHENOLS

BENZENE

459547 (.Spike ~~/'4SXllOj Expected

99 Recovery 4581111 22-MaySIHl2 BHlO.5-O.6M

4 blank space iiidicales no lest performed Results expressed as mgikg dry weigh1

W S L C o n ~ ~ l t a n t ~ ~ ~ WSL Consultants pry. ~ t d . A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 671

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: t61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: t61 3 9429 2294 Email: wsl&sl.com.au Web: www.ws1.com.a~

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Date : 3..lun2002 WSL Reporl No: 458109 WSL JobNurnbei: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers . Job Reference: 411117 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB N U M Reference Sarnole NAP ACY ACE FLU PHE ANT FLA PYR BAA CHR BBF

458527 22-May.2002 BLANK

459414 (Ilc~plioolr of 458116) 4581 16 22-May2002 BH4 1.0.1.30M % RPD

458719 Cipikr 0[4.i8.527) Experled

% Recovery 458527 22-May-2W2 QC SPIKE

Q U A L I T Y MANAGEMEW S Y S T E M

BKF

</I. 1

CO. l

< 0 1 I1

1.4 1.3 1118 < 0 1

1.4 1.3 109 11.2

BAP

<I1 I

Cll.1 <0.1

0

1.3 1.3 I l l0

s0.1

1.3 1.3 Ill11 0.2

DBA

~11.1

~ 1 l . I <I]. I

11

1.2 1.3

92.3 cn.1

1.2 1.3

92.3 <ll.l

BGP

</J.l

<11.1 <O.I

I1

1.2

1.3 92.3 <ll. i

1.3 1.3 100 0 I

IPY

(iJ.1

</J I <I1 I

I1

1.5 1.3 115

<I11

I S 1.3 117 11. I

A blank space indicales no test perlormed Rcsults expressed as mgikg dry wtight Vage 16 or.. 21

WSLConsu~tantsTM WSL Consultants PW ~ t d . Envirosdence A.C.N. 004 752 676 ~ B . N . 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone:. 161 3 '9429 4666 Facsimile: t61 3 9429 2294

Q U A L I T Y MANAGEMENI S Y S T E M

Email: wsl&sl.cam.au Web: www.ws1.com.a~

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Date : 3-Jun-2002 WSL Report No: 458109 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Clienl: BFP Oeotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Streel, South Yarra

HEPTACHLOR- EPOXIDE

DDE LAB NUM Reference Sample HCB a-BHC LINDANE HEPTACHLOR ALDRlN b-BHC d-BHC

458527 22-May2002 BLANK

459414 (Duplicate of 458116) 458116 22-May-2002 BH4 1.0-1.30M % RPD

458719 (Spike of 458527) Expected

% Recovery 458527 22-May2002 QC SPIKE


% Recovely 458110 22-May-2002 BH10.5-0.6M

A blank space indicates no test performed Results expressed as mglkg dry weight

1 WSLConsultantsm urr C O N Y ~ M ~ ( ~ d .

Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Srreet,'Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: 161 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: www,wsl.com.au


QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Date : 3.Jun.2002 WSL Report No: 458109 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Jab Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Reference Sample DDD DDT ENDRIN METHOXYCHLOR CHLORDANE a-ENDO- SULPHAN

b-ENDO- SULPHAN

ENDOSULPHAN

SULPHATE

45827 22-May2002 BLANK

459414 (Duplicare of458116) 4581 16 22-May-2002 BH4 1.0-1.30M % RPD

458719 (Spike of 458527) Expectcd

% Recovery 458527 22-May-2002 QC SPIKE

459413 (Spike of 458110) Expected 9% Recovery

4581 10 22-May-2002 BH1 0.5-0.6M

Results expressed as mglkg dry weight I':,gc 20 uf.. 21 A blank apace indicates no lest performed

Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676 2-8 Harvey Strcct, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: wsl&sl.com.au Web: www.wsl.com.au


QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Date : 3-.lun-2002 WSL Report No: 458109 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Job Refercnce: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Reference Sample

458527 22-May-2002 BLANK

459414 (Duplicate of 458116) 4581 16 22-May-2WZ BH4 1.0-1.3OM '

% RPD

4587 19 (Spike of 458527) Expected

% Recovery 458527 22-May-2002 QC SPlKE

459413 ( S p ~ e of 458110) Expected

% Recovery 458110 22-May2002 BH10.5-0.6M

A blank space indicates no rest performed

AROCLOR AROCLOR AROCLOR AROCLOR AROCLOR 1016 1221 1232 1242 1248

Results expressed as mgkg dry weight

AROCLOR AROCLOR TOTAL 1254 1260 PCBs

WSL CONSULTRNTS - TP LIIL uuka LUY L "LA,,

sample ii; 16 page 1 a l 1 ile N m : 450109 d m a : C : \ T C ~ \ P I D A \ T P K \ R ~ C H I V E D \ ~ ~ ~ A O ~ ~ A . ~ W

Data : 1 8 / 0 7 / 2 0 0 2 1 4 : 2 6 ~ i m o of I n j e c t i o n : 2 4 / 0 5 / 2 0 0 2 00:47

1od ~ n d ~ i " e : 19.62 m i n LOW Point : 26B.22 mV

~ i g l i poin t : 2 7 1 . 0 0 mV rc Time : 0 . 0 0 min .r: Factor: 0 . 0 plot offset; 2 6 8 mV p l o t Scs.1~: 3 . 8 mV

Response [mV] N N N -I

N N N N U .-. 4 N U 4 .> m V

? g l . l . I l ~ l 1 1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ 1 1 1 ~ 1 -

-P - V 1 ON

N-OCTAN -

CAR-9 -

3

CAR 28 .-

A CAR 30 -

WSL CONSULTQNTS - TP LLLL U ~ L L ~ LU y A u r r l

,od :r Tine : 0.00 min end ~ i m o : 14.62 nln

B F ~ C C O T : 0.0 plot Offset; 52 mV

sample R ; 17 Page 1 of 1

Date : 18101/2002 14:21 ~ i m e of 1n3a~ti~n: 24/05/2002 01:19 LOW Point : 52 .i? rrV "igh point ; 5 6 3 2 mV

p l o t S w . 1 ~ : 3 . 9 mV

--0.87

-1.84

N-OCTAN --

CAR-9 -

WSL CONSULTRNTS - TP LIIL " I L L U C V X L -..

had r t Time : 0.00 min end Time : 19.62 min l e ~ a ~ t o i : 0.0 plot Offset: 352 mV

oate : 18/07/2002 14:56 rime of Injection: 24/05/2002 02:21 Low Point . 3 5 2 . 4 8 niV ~ i g h poinf ; 355.71 mV

Plot Scale: 3 . 2 mV

CAR 30 -

.e N-c : asall2 ime : c:\Tc~\FIDA\TPH\ARCHIVED\&B~AO~OA.~W a d r Time : 0 . 0 0 rnin ~ n d Time : : 9 . 5 2 min r Factor: 0.0 plot offset: d39 NV

Sample #: 20 Page 1 of 1 Dare : 18/07/2002 1 4 ~ 2 8 ~ i m e of Injection: 24/05/2002 02:52 LUW point : 439.11 mV "inh poinr : 442.10 mV - -

plot scale: 3.0 nlv

Response [mV] h a a i i- a +.

P P P D P a I. n L.l - P

W i r a P - $. - * h e - . p p o o m '4 " ", -. .. . ,

V 1 0 N 0 . 7 5

N-OCTAN

CAR12

WSL CONSULTRNTS - TP LIIL u l t L a LUY L -ILL

ole Name : 458113 :Name : C : \ K ~ \ F I D A \ T P H \ A R C H ~ ~ ~ D \ ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ ~ A . R A W :hod !rr Time : 0.00 inin ~ n d ~ime : 19.62 m i n

L w S ~ c t o r : 0.0 Plot Offset: 20 mV

Sample # : 21 Page 1 of 1 Date : 13/01/2002 14:23 ~ine of Injecticn; 24/05/2002 0 1 ~ 2 2 LOW Poinr : 19.71 mV nigh point : 2 0 . 9 1 m\' Plot Scale; 9.2 mV

CAR 28 - CAR 30 -

WSL CONSULTRNTS - TP cnroma~ogr-a111

>le N m e ; 45:3116 me : c : \ ~ ~ \ F I D B \ T P H \ A R C R I V ~ D \ ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ~ hod rt T ~ ' C : 0 . 3 0 m i n End Time : 1 9 . 6 2 ndn e factor: 3.0 plot o f f ~ e t : 578 mV

Smplo W : 27 page 1 of 1

Dace : 18/07/2002 14:40 ~ i m e of ~njcccian: 24/05/2002 06:10 LOW point : 977.95 mV High Poinc : 889.01 mV

Ploc Scale. 11.1 mV

Response [mVj a, w a,

ra LY IP a, 0) m m m m m 0) w m -4 U 01 U1 m

U ?' U UJ P

i I-- P

CAR-6 ,.>- 2 . 1 1

- 2 . 4 8 N-OCTAN

CAR-0 -

CAR-14

- 4 CAR 30 -

ple Nmo : 453115 e N m : C:~TC~\FIDA\TPK\ARCHIVED\P~~A~~~R-RAW :hod ~ r t Time : 0.30 min ~ n d Time : 19.60 nlin

l e F o c t o r : 0.0 Ploc Ottset: 370 nN

S q l e 4 : 22 page 1 of 1 ~ a f e : 18/07/2002 14 :29 ~ i m e of Injection: 24/05/2002 03:53 LOW Poinr : 370.23 mV ~ i ~ h point : 374.19 m'd

P l o t Scale; 4.0 mv

sample 1: 2 3 Pagc 1 of 1 jle N m : 458116 : ~ + m : C : \ ~ ~ \ F I D A \ T P B \ M C H I V E D \ ~ ~ Z A O ~ ~ A ~ R A ~ ~~t~ : 15,/07/2002 l 4 : 2 9 hod

~ i m e of Injection: 24/05/2002 04:24 LOW Paint. : 317.68 mV "igh point : 334.25 mV

r r Time : 0,OC sin ~ n d ~ i m e : 19.62 nLin Ir Factor: 0.0 Plot OLfsel: 318 mV plot Scale: 16.6 iriV

Response / m V ]

C L . i* 'LA L. '5. L.

N

0.83

1.85 +.> 2 . 3 4

N-OCTAN - :-3:A4

:hod ~ r t Time : 0 . 0 0 mie ma ~1.e ; 19.62 r ~ i n

. ~ c ~ a c c o r : 0 . 0 plot Offset: 9 6 1 mV

S ~ l e # : 2 4 Pass 1 of 1

Date : 1 8 / 0 1 / 2 0 0 2 14:46 Time of Injection: 24/05/2002 04:39 LOW Point : 966.10 mV ~ i g h point : 1018.14 mV

plot Scale: 52.0 mV

Response [mv]

CAR 28 -.

CAR 30 -

WSL CONSULTRNTS - TP LILL uua ~ u y L a r u

Smple 1: 29 page 1 oL 1 ,le Name : 450118 ?!>ma : C:\TC~\FIDE\TPH\ARCHIVED\~~~V~~~A.~W Date ; 18/07/2002 14:41

had Time of injection: 26/05/2002 01:10 h d ~ i m o : 19.62 min LOW point ; 966.50 mV High Point : 978.62 mV

r t Time : 0.00 min l o ?actor: 0.0 Plot OEfeet: 966 mV p lo t Scale: 11.9 mV

Response [mV] ~3 LO 10 w ~3

(d iD '3 w LD m U 4 -1 4 0 Ln -4 U 4 4 .I m ol -

C9 UY c 3 N

- -1.61 - -??---. -2 .12

2.54 N-OCTAN - ."

.3.22 CAR-9 - I

WSL CONSULTRNTS - IF \-ILL "ill* l r V Y C U-..

~ l e ~Ik7ie : 458113 raame : C : \ I ' C ~ \ F I D B \ T P ~ ' \ R R C H I ~ D \ ~ ~ ~ V O ~ ~ $ . ~ W :hod i r t Timn I 0 0 0 m l n md Time ; 1 9 . 6 2 ".in le ioccor: 0.0 ?lor Offset 9 7 i mV

camn1e i t: 2 : page 1 o f 1 -~

Date : 15/07/2002 i 4 : 5 5 ~ i m e 3f Injectioo: 2 4 / 0 5 / 2 0 0 2 O3:jS Law Poin t : 970.74 mv ~ i g h P o i n ~ : 984.73 mV

?lot Sca le : 1 4 . 0 2?i

-,.---.l .61 A

2.01

2 . 5 0 N-OCTAN -

CAR 2 8

CAR 30

WSL CONSULTANTS - TP LIIL uuia L V Y I WILL

lr Name : 458120 Nmc ; C;~,K~\FIDB\TPH\RRCHIVED\~~~V~~~R.RRW 10d - t ~i~~ : 0.00 mln ED^ ~ i = : 13 .62 min

e F a C t O K : 0.0 p l o t offset: 910 mV

sample li; 23 page 1 of l mte ; 18/01/2002 15:00 ~ i r n ~ of Injection: 24/05/2002 V4;09 LOW Point : 910.02 mV nigh Point : 993.91 mV

plot Scale: 23 -9 mV

- .... CAR 28 - ."

Environmental Consulting Pty. Ltd.

3 Kingston Town Close. Oakleigh. Victoria. 3166. Australia Postal Address: P O . Box 276. OaklelQh. Victoria. 3166. Australla

~elephone: + 61 3 9564 7055 Fax + 61 3 9564 7190

Emaii: [email protected]

6 June 2002

BFP Geotechnical Engineers 515 Bridge Road Richmond Victoria 3121

: C . CC~.JIJ-%. Dear 'Chris

MGT ANALYTICAL REPORT NO 154783

Please find attached the analysis results for the 19-23 W I L S O N S T S T H YARRA samples received 22/05/02

Yours faithfully

Michael Wrig

Environmental Consulting Pty. Ltd. 3 Kingston Town Class, Oaklelgh, Victoria 3166, Australia

Postal Address: PO. Box 276, Oakleigh, Victoria. 3166, Australia Telsphona: + 61 3 9564 7055

Fax+61 3 95647190 Email: [email protected]

CLIENT

MGT ANALYSIS REPORT 154783

:- BFP Geotechnical Engineers 515 Bridge Road Richmond Victoria 3121

SITE : 19-23 WILSON ST STH YARRA

DATE RECEIVBD : - 22/05/02

DATE EXTRACTED OR PREPARED :- 22/05/02 - 23/05/02 DATE REPORTED : - 06/06/02

QA/QC DETAILS :- The QA/QC for these samples is detailed in this report no : 154783

A total of 1 duplicate, 1 matrix spike % recovery and 1 method blank analyses

. . or sets of analyses were carried out on this batch of samples.

All QA/QC results for duplicates, matrix spike % recovery, method blank

and known QC standards were within the set acceptable criteria.

FINAL REPORT : - The results in this report supersede any previously corresponded results.

Michael wright Laboratory Manager Page 1 of

Environmental Consulting Pty. Ltd. 3 Kingston Town Close, Oakieigh. Victoria 3166, Australia

Postal Address: P.O. Box 276, Oakleigh, Victoria, 3166, Australia BFP Geotechnical Engineers Telephone: + 61 3 9564 7055 515 Bridue Road Fax+613 95647190 ~ichmond- Email: mgtOrngtsnv.com.au Victoria 3121 Site : 19-23 WILSON ST STH YARRA

HEAVY METALS USEPA 6010B (ICP), 7470/1 (CVAA) I I Sample I B D ~ 2.5-2.95 I B D ~ 2.5-2.95 Dlspike % Recov (Meth.Bl.(mg/l) 1 Lab. NO. 1 ~ ~ 2 4 8 3 1 ~ ~ 2 4 8 3 ~ 1 ~ ~ 2 4 8 3 ~ 1

Mercury <0.1 CO. 1 103% <o. 001 Nickel I 12 I 11 I 94% I <O. 05 I

Arsenic

Chromium

Cobalt

CoDDer

I I I I , Zinc 8 6 8 6 98% <O. 05

I I I I 1 I

I I I I I I

Extraction with H202, HN03 & HC1. Results in ppm (soils mg/kg dry, waters mg/l).

6 2

65

8.6

20

Date received 22/05/02 Date Reported 06/06/02

NATA Acsr.ditM Laboratory Nunbw: 1261 nb!.omtanir.mraa.d~th. ~ . ~ ~ n . ~ ~ ~ w u i o n o l l i f in~~uthmii . . A"rtn,i.. rhe,ostsr8y?,.d h.n*h.".bs.np.*m.a,"urord.nsrwnh~' , . , . , .......,...,,......*.- A,,,"" *","".i",,,,,

6 4

6 7

8.6

20

Report No. 154783 Page 2 of 2

90%

97%

89%

102%

<O. 02

<O. 05

<O. 05

<O. 05

Environmental Consulting Pty. Ltd. 3 mng.tn T- am, om~d&.wdda. 3166.ksbmllm

Porn1 A&-: PO. b x 276. oa~sla. wdd.. 3166. ksbmll. Tdephlru: (03) S564 7055

Fu: (03) S564 7190

CRITERIA USED T O ASSESS OUALlTY CONTROL RESL'LTS VALIDITY ASD RELIABILITY O F TEST RESULTS

Ihc continuing validity m d reliability ofrau1LF is accomplishad by monitoring a number of factan:

1. Analysis of duolicates. Du~licatcs mn at a minimum of 5% 2. Recovery of known additions. Spikes tun at a minimum of 5% with each batch of samples. 3. Analysis of reagent blanks run with each'batch of samples.

Duplicates are analyscd as &matter of couns and the data analysed by means of a range chat type system. The range for each duplicate pair is determined and 'normalised' by dividing by .. . the avcrazc ofthc du'olicatc results. - Once enough data has been gathered contr?l data for each method can be developed. Ihe mcu, rangc(R) is determined sv:

R = ( T R , ) .- n

Where n =number of observations and R, = nomaliscd rangc

and the variance (aquare of the standard deviation) is determined iu:

s: = ( ZR:. ti^')

n - I

The control criteria thus become:

' Average range , ' R Warning L h i t R + 25, Control Limit R +3sr

The namaliscd range far each duplicate pair is calculated and compared withthe above criteria. (?his can be achieve sither graphically or by visual comparison ofthc data). Since the limits are based on 95% and 90% sonfidc~cc levels rcroectivclv. thc follokine . . actions aremken, based on there slatistical parameten.

Control Limit

If anc measurcmcnt cxoscds the C.L. repeat the analysis. If the repeat is within the C.L. coitinuc analysc~. I f i t excccdsthc C.L. discontinue analyses and correct the problem.

Warnine Limit

Iftwo out ofthrcc successive points exceed the W.L. analyss another sample. Ifthe nent point is less than the W.L. continue analyses, ifthe n c n ~ o i n t exceeds the W.L. dincanlinue anslysss and correctthe problem.

'** Particular care needs to be Wen with somr sail sampler with regard to sample hamogsricity, especially with regard to 'organics' analyses. Statistical analysis may indicalu apmblcrn exists when in factthe problem is really only rampls homogeneity.

2. Recovery ofknownsdditions.

Thc recovery of known additions is used to verify the absence of matrix etyects and absencc of interfcrcnocs. Recovery from standards is used to vsnfy method pcrformance. Recovery data is compared against acccpwce criteria published in Standards Methods for Examination of Water and Waste water, or appropriate U S . EPA Methods.

Ifrecoverics fall outliidc acccptancc criteri+ analyscs should be discontinued and the problem rcctif~cd.

3. Analysis ofReaeent Blanks

Rcagcnt b l a k s an used to monitorpurity ofreagenm and the overall procedural blank. Reagent blanks an mn as amattcr ofcoune with each batch for analysis. Unusual or out 01' the 'norm' results for blank are investigated and corrective astian taken before analysis of any batch is completed.

M. Wright I'

Laboratory Manager

WSLConsultants '" nviroscience

12 July 2002

BFP Geotechnical Engineers

51 5 Bridge Rd. RICHMOND VIC 3121



Date Sampled: 8/07/2002

~anager-of Chemistry

q U A L 1 T Y YUUCDlMT S Y S T E M


Certificate of Analvsis WSL Report Number: 471 002

The sarnple(s) referred to in this report were analysed by the followbng methods: Analyte(s) Method

CHCS w s L 8 i z o ~ OPs WSL8140

pH WSL 062 Volatiles WSL3810A

Results pertain tosamples as received Details of this report were faxed on: 15/07/2002

Yours faithfully WSL Consultants Pty LW

WSL Consultants Pcy. Ltd. A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 712 676

2-8 H w e y Sucer, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: wsl&sl.com.au Web: www.wrl.com.au

This Laboratory is accredited by the National As~ociation of Testing Authorities, Australia. The test(%) reported herein have been performed in accordance with itr terms of accreditation. This document shall not be reproduced except in full.

Acuedifation No's 1201 & 1205

A NATA Accredited Laboraro~y An Approved Quarantine Premises An Approved EPA Auditor

page ' Of &

,,'",

*, :€3 Q U A L I T Y MANAGEMEW $-M

WSLConsultant~~ WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. A.C.N. 004 752 676 A,B,N. 49 004 752 676

.' 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia

Telephone: t 6 1 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +6l 3 9429 2294

Email: wal&sl.com.au Web: wwwwsl.com.au

Date : 12.JuI-2002 WSL Report No: 471002 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers lob Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Sample PH MEVINPHOS DlAZlNON MALATHION FENTHION CHLOR ETHION DICHLORVOS STIROFOS ICONNEL PARATHION (pH Units) PYRIPHOS

10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE I

10-lul-2002 SAMPLE 2

A blank space indicates no test performed Results expressed as mukg dry weight where applicable.

1 WSLConsultantsm AL cOnS~tm. ~ t * . , , Envimdence , ,

A.C.N. 004 752 676 AB.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +GI 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 EmBil: [email protected] Web: wwwsl.corn.au

Dale : 12-Jul-2002 WSL Report No: 471002 WSL JabNurnber: 18192 Client: BFP Ocatechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Slreet, South Yarra


10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 1



A blank space indicates no test performed

I 1-Dl Dl TRI 12-Dl BROMO CHLORO 1 12-TRI CHLORO 12-Dl I l l -TRI ,CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO DlCHLORO BENZENE CHLORO DIBROMO CHLORO CHLORO

ETHANE METHANE METHANE ETHANE METHANE ETHANE METHANE PROPANE ETHANE


WSLConsultantsm WSL ~onsu l t an t s ky. ~ t d .


2-8 HarvqvSrreet, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: t 6 1 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: t 6 1 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: wwwwsl.com.au

Date : 12-JuI-2002 WSL Report No: 471002 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB SUM Received Sample

471002 10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 1

471003 10-Jul-2W2 SAMPLE 2

471004 10-Iul-2002 SAMPLE 3


:a Z,

q U A l l T Y MANAGEMENT S-YST'M

1 2-DI 13-Dl 14-Dl 1122-TETRA 1 l-Dl 12-DICHLORO 12-DICHLORO TETRA TRI CARBON CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO ETHENE ETHENE CHLORO CHLORO TPTIIA BENZENE BENZENE BENZENE ETHANE ETHENE (CIS ) (TRANS) ETHENE ETHENE CHLOItIIIE

Rcsults expressed as rnglkg dry weight

WSLConsultantsTM WSL Consultants ~ t y . ~ t d . Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 176

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: .+61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: www.wsl.com.au

- P U A l l T Y MANAGEMEM

' S T t M

)ate : 12-Jut-2002 @SL Report No: 471002 NSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers, Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Rcceived Sample 1 1 12-TETRA 1 1-DICHLORO 1 2 3 TRI- I 2-DIBROMO 12-DIBROMO 13-DICHLORO I 3-DLCHLORO 1 3 DlCLOllO CHLORO PROPENE CHLORO 3-CHLORO ETHANE PROPANE PROPENE PRDI'ENE ETHANE PROPANE PROPANE (CIS) (TRANS)

471002 10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 1

471003 10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 2

471004 10-Jut-ZOO2 SAMPLE 3

Results expressed as mglkg dry weight A blank space indicates no test performed

WSL~Onsultants~. WSL c ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ' P ~ ~ ~ d . Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Srrcet, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia . ' Teleohone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294

Email: [email protected] Web: www.wsl.com.au

late : 12duI-2002 NSL Report No: 471002 . . NSL JabNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Gcotechnical ~nginee!s : JobRefercnce: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Received Sample 2 2-DICHLORO 2-CHLORO 4-CHLORO BROMO BROMO BROMOFORM DIBROMO PROPANE TOLUENE TOLUENE CHLORO BENZENE METHANE

METHANE




Results expressed as mgikg dry weight A blank space indicates no test performed Page 6 or.. 15


2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: 161 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: wsl&sl.corn.au Web: w . w s l . c o m . a u

)ate : 12-Jul-2002 YSL Report No: 471002 VSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra


10-lul-2002 SAMPLE 1

471003 10-lul-2002 SAMPLE 2

471004 10-lul-2002 SAMPLE 3

4 blank space indicates no test performed

BENZAL BENZOTRI 2 CHLORO HEXA- HEXACHLORO HEXA- PENTA- CFILORIDE CHLORIDE NAPTHALENE CHLORO CYCLO CHLORO CHLORO

BUTADIENE PENTADIENE ETHANE BENZENE

Results expressed as mgikg dry weight I'agc 7 oi.. I5

WSLConsultant~~~ WSL c ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ pty. ~ ~ d . Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 252 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 H a y Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Ausrralia ' Teleohone: r613 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294

Email: [email protected] Web: www.wsl.corn.au

Date : 12.Jul-2002 WSL Report No: 471002 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFT Geotechnical Engineers' Job Reference: 41017 - 19.23 Wilson Street, South Yarra


471002 10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 1

471003 10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 2

471004 10-lul-2002 SAMPLE 3

A blank space indicates na test performed

1 2 3-TRI 1 2 4-TRI 1 3 5-TR1 1 2 3 4-TETRA 1 2 3 5-TETRA 1 2 4 5-TETRA CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO

BENZENE BENZENE BENZENE BENZENE BENZENE BENZENE

c0.5 <0.5 <0.5 g0.5 c0.5 <0.5

r0.5 c0.5 <0.5 <0.5 c0.5 <0.5

c0.5 c0.5 <0.5 c0.5 <0.5 <0.5


WSLConsultantsrm w s ~ con,ulfants PV ~ ~ d . Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: wwwwsl.com.au

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT

QUALITY MMAGEMENl s r UM

)ace : 12-Jul-2002 NSL Report No: 471002 NSL JabNumber: 18192 Client: BFP ~eo techn ica i~ng ineers lob Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Reference Sample pH MEVINPHOS DlAZlNON MALATHION FENTHION CHLOR ETHlON DICHLORVOS STIROFOS RONNEI. PAII,ZI'lIION (pH Units) PYRIPHOS

471389 10-Jul-2002 BLANK


% Reco,,ery 471003 10-Jul-2W2 SAMPLE 2

A blank space indicates no test performed Results expressed as m a g dry weight where applicable.

WSLConsultantsm ' WSL consu~~tts ~ ~ r y . ~ t d .

Enviroscience . A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 751 676

, 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: +61 3.9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 ~ r n i l : [email protected] Web: www.wsl.com.au

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT )ate : 12.Ju13002 YSL Report No: '471002 . .

YSL JabNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Georechnical Engineers lob Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Reference Sample l l-DI Dl TRI 12-01 BROMO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO DICHLORO BENZENE ETHANE METHANE METHANE ETHANE METHANE

1 12-TRI CHLORO ETHANE

CHLORO DlBROMO METHANE

12-Dl CHLORO PROPANE

I 11-'I'Rl CI-ILORO ETHANE

10-Jul-2002 BLANK

471549 (Duplicore of 471002) 471002 10-Jul-2M)Z SAMPLE l % RPD


% Recovery 471389 1O:IuI-2002 QC SPIKE

\blank space indicates no test pe~formed Results expressed as m a g dry weight

( WSLConsultantsm WSL comim, r, it*.

Enviroscience ' . A.C.N. 004'752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676 '' . 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia

Telephone: t61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +GI 3 9429 2294 Email: wsl&sl.com.au Web: www.wrl.com.au

*, 43 Q U A L I T Y

MANAGEMENI s C-M

. . QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Date : 12-Jul-2002. WSL Report No: 471002 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Strcet, South Yarra

LAB NUM Refcrcnce Sample 1 2-01 1 3-Dl 1 4-DI 1122-TETRA I l-Dl I 2-DICHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO ETHENE BENZENE BENZENE BENZENE ETHANE ETHENE (CIS)

12-DICHLORO ETHENE (TRANS )

TETRA TRI CHLORO CHLORO ETHENE ETHENE

CARBON TE'I'RA

CHL0RII)r:

471389 10-Jul-2002 BLANK

471549 (Duplicate of 471002) 471002 10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 1 % RFD


% Recovery 471389 I~-Jul-2002 QC SPIKE

A blank space indicates no test performed Results expressed as mglkg dry weight

WSLConsultantsl~ WSL consultaits pry. ~ t d . AC.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 712 676

; 2-8 Harvey Stleer, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia '

~ e l e ~ h o n e : +GI 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +6l 3 9429 2294 Email: w s l ~ s l . c o m . a u Web: www.wsl.com.au

-- Q U A L I T Y MNAGEmNI s L-M

. QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT late : 12-Jul-2002 WSL Report No: 471002 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical ~ i i i n e e r s Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Reference Sample . . 1 1 12-TETRA I I-DICHLORO 1 2 3 TRI- 1 2-DIBROMO 12-DIBROMO 1 CHLORO PROPENE CHLORO 3-CHLORO ETHANE ETHANE PROPANE PROPANE

3-DICHLORO PROPANE

13-DICHLORO PROPENE

(CIS)

1 3 DICLOI<O PROPEKI.: (TRANS)

471389 10-Jul-2002 BLANK

471549 (Duplicate of 471002) 471002 10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 1 90 RPD

471548 (Spike of 471389) Expeetcd

90 Recovery 471389 IOJul-2002 QC SPIKE

~esul ts expressed as mgmg dry weight A blank space indicates no test pcrforrned

, WSLConsul tants~~. WSL Condulonts ~ t d .

Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676 2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia ~e1eoho"e: +6l 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +GI 3 9429 2294

Q U A L I T Y MMGEMEh'l : '.>&M

Email: [email protected] Web: www.ws1.com.a~

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT )ate : 12-Jul-2002 YSL Report No: 471002 YSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Reference Samplc 2 2-DICHLORO 2-CHLORO 4-CHLORO BROMO PROPANE TOLUENE TOLUENE CHLORO

METHANE

BROMO BENZENE

BROMOFORM DIBROMO METHANE

471389 10-lul-2002 BLANK

471549 (Duplicate of471002) 471002 10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 1 % RPD

471548 (Spike of471389) Expected 90 Recovery

471389 10-Jul-2002 QC SPIKE

A blank space indicates no test performed Rcsults expressed as m@g dry weight

WSLConsultantsM WSL Consultants rty. L I ~ .

Enviroscience A:C.N. 004 752 676 A.B.N. 49 004 752 676 2-8 Harvey Srrcet, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Teleohone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294

Email: wrl&sl.com.au Web: w . w s 1 . c a m . a ~

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Date : 12-Jul-2002 WSL Report No: 471002 WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Reference Sample

471389 10-Jul-2002 BLANK

471388 (Spike of471003) Expected

90 Recovery 471003 10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 2

4 blank spilcc indicates no lest performed

BENZAL BENZOTRI 2 CHLORO HEXA- HEXACHLORO CHLORIDE CHLORIDE NAF'THALENE CHLORO CYCLO

BUTADIENE PENTADIENE

Results expressed as mgikg dry weight

HEXA- CHLORO ETHANE

PENTA- CHLORO BENZENE

;pfJ . *, q U A L I T v MANAGLMW "-$2

( WSLConsultantsm WSL corn,,, 4 1.. Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 712 676 A.B.N. 49 004 712 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia Telephone: t 6 1 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: www.wsl.com.au

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT late : 12-Jul-2002 NSL Report No: 471002 NSL JobNumber: 18192 Clienl: BFP Geotechnical Engineers Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Strecl, South Yarra

LAB NUM Reference Sample 1 2 3-TRI CHLORO BENZENE

1 2 4-TRI 1 3 5-TRI CHLORO CHLORO BENZENE BENZENE

1 2 3 4-TETRA CHLORO BENZENE

1 2 3 5-TETRA 1 2 4 5-TETRA CHLORO CHLORO BENZENE BENZENE

471389 10-Jul-2002 BLANK


7% Recovery 471003 10-Jul-2002 SAMPLE 2

A blank space indicates no tcst performed Results expressed as mgikg dry weight

Q U A L I T Y MANAGEMENT S Y S T E M ,*<.-. *r.c,,r,,,m~


23 July 2002

BFP Geotechnical Engineers 515 Bridge Rd. RICHMOND VIC 3121




Certificate of Analysis WSL Report Number: 458109A

The sample(s) referred to in thls report were analysed by the foilow~ng methods

Analyte(s) Method Cr6+ APHA 3500-CRB

Hydrocarbon ProfileAA WSL 8279 pH WSL 062

"" Nata registration does not cover the performance of this test

Results pertain to samples as received

Details of this report were e-rnailed on: 22/07/2002

Yours faithfully WSL Consultants Pty L td

V i c t o r Wi l lms

Director Of Chemistry

WSL Consultants Pty. Lrd. A.C.N 004 752 676 A.B.N 49 004 752 676 2-8 Harvey Strecr Richmond. \'icroria 3121, Ausrralh l'clcphone: +61 3 9429 4666 Pacsimilc: +61 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web l'agc: www.wsl.com.au

This laboratory is accredited by the National Association of Testinq Authorities. Australia - The tests reported herein have been performed in accordance with its terms of accreditation.

Page 1 of 3 A NAI'A Accredited 1.aboratory i\n Approved Quarmnrinc I'rcrniscs A n Approved I51'A Auditor & Analyst

WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. ACN 004 752 676 WSL 2-8 Hamey Suet Richmond, Victo, 3121 ,Aus tda

Enviroscience Telcphone: t 6 1 . 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: t 6 1 3 9429 2294 Ernail: [email protected] Wcb Page: www.wsl.com.au

Date : 23-Jul-2002 WSL Report No: 458109A WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers

LAB NUM Received Sample No.

BH1 0.1-O.2M

BHI 0.5-0.6M

BH1 2.5-2.95M

BH2 1.0-1.45M

BH2 4.5-4.95M

BH3 0.0-O.2M

BH3 2.5-2.95M

BH4 1.0-L.30M

BH4 2.6-2.75M

BH5 0.0-0.2M

BH6 1.0-1.45M

BH6 4.5-4.95M

BDI 2.5-2.95M

BD4 2.6-2.75M


Job Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarta

pH HEXAVALENT (pH Units) CHROMIUM

8.8 <I

8.5 <I

8.5 <I

7.5 <I

8.0 <I

9.0 <I

8.1 <I

7.5 <I

8.2 <I

9.0 <I

7.0 <I

' 8.2 <1

8.5 <I

8 . 5 <I

Results expressed as mglkg dry weight where applicable . agc 2 of.

WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. ACN 004 752 676

Enviroscience Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: + 6 1 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web Page: ~uw.wsl.com.au

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Date : 23-Jul-2002 WSL Report No: 458109A WSL JobNumber: 18192 Client: BFP Geotechnical Engineers lob Reference: 41017 - 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

LAB NUM Reference Sample No.

474004 16-Jul-2002 BLANK

472706 (Duplicate of 458112) 4581 12 16-Jul-2002 BH2 1.0-1.45M % RPD

472707 (Duplicate of 458118) 4581 18 16-lul-2002 BH5 OO-O.2M % RPD

473407 (Duplicate of 458115) 4581 15 16-Jul-2002 BH3 2.5-2.95M % RPD

473408 . (Spike of 458116) Expected

%Recovery 4581 16 16-Jul-2002 BH4 1.0-1.30M


pH HEXAVALENT (pH Units) CHROMIUM

Results expressed as mgikg dry weight where applicable Page 3 o f . 3

BFP CONSULTANTS

BFP CONSULTANTS PTY LTD - , ACN 073682270

GEOTECHWICAb MINING GEOL~~~UL C W S U L T M S Un*l& X Z l H m h ~ R o r d NOTllNG HILLVK: 3766 Tel+6159%27111 Fax+61 385627189

FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION

TO : <ad\* - h . % d - FAXNO : [email protected] \ l a

COMPANY : cYS FROM ,'P& a-. ROUTINE:

DATE

OUR REF :

COPIES :

Number of pages Including header.

If there are any problems with UIis bansmission please advise us as soon as possible

Message:

MUBOURN@, PERTH, UVNCESTON. ULVERSTW4E Peter G Fuller. Donald R Millar. Geoflny K Se*, Phillp M Dight

18/11 ' 03 TUE 09:56 ITX/RX NO 54831 a001

18/11 2003.09:03 FAX +613 95627199 ..a .:

..a % \.:

- . .. - -. .

BFP CONSULTANTS

. , . . . 19 September 2002 . . . . ,

. : , . . BFP Geotechnical Engineers . , . : j ...

' '

51 5 Bridge Rd. . . . . . . . , . . , . . . ., ,., .

.!.. , . . .. .. . . .. . . RICHMOND VIC 3121

. , . . .




Attention: Mr. Peter Noonan

Certificate of Analvsis WSL Report Number: 486208

.L .. . . . - . . The sarnple(s) referred to in this report were enalysed by the following methods: "..". . . ,,,......., ,,,. : : .,,,,, . .. . ... ...,.......... ..., l . . . , , .. , ,. , < . . . . . . . . .. . .. ..... . ." .. . . : ....' . . .:. . : . : ... :.. ., ..: . .. ~n&,fl~*$;~~@~,~,::.;,;;:;;.;~:;~.:;;:;;7; '!,+j..;!;:,::..:$;<;; , ;:::i:., &i&*e(sp:,; 'M&tiQd:!; ;!la ,' ; ;?;,;!;;;;;.;'. :. .: .. . . ... .. . , . . . m , ..... ....,..,,,,,,. . , . . . . . . , , . . . . ,...,..... ~ . . . . . . . ......., . , ..., .. .,,.,. , . . . , . . . :. .:.. I . . . .

Acrylates WSL381OB Alkalinity APHA 2320 6 Cations WSL023A. WSL 023A CHCs WSLB120B

chloride APHA 4 5 0 L i - G ~ ~ GCMS SemiVols Scan ̂' WSL 8287

Metals WSL632 OPs WSL8140

PCBs WSLBOW PhosphoNs WSL 029A

Sulphate APHA 4500S04E Total Dissolved Solids APHA 2540 C

Volatiles WSW81OB.W9L3810A

Cr6+ APHA 3500-CRB GCMS Vols Scan ̂ ^ WSL 8286

ocs WSLllODO PAHS wsL8000

Phenols WSL804DD Phlhalates WSL033

Sulphur WSL 023A TPH WSLO30

Cenificate of analysis page 1 to 27. Pan: 2 - GCMS Semivols scan 18 pages. GCMS Vols scan 14 pages.

Results pertain to samples as received Derails of this report were faxed on: 1081 9/09/2002

Yours faithfully WSL Consultants Pty LW

Nick Bray / Manager Of Chemistry

WSL Gdcanu Py- Lrd. hW. OW 752 676 ABS. 49 m4 752 676

2-8 Harvey S u e q Richmond Vicia3121, A d

This Lnbowory ir .ccledirsd by the Na~ianal &-don of Test iv~ Mrhoriticl. AorVnli.. The rcr[r) nponsd htnin have heen prfamwlin mccadvlc~ wirh is namr of accrcdiulion. This d~cum~nt shall nor k r c p r o d d cza;pr in full.

. . .. -i48*&~&% performance of rhk rest

A NATA Amedircd Lboraroty An ~ ~ ~ r o v c d Q u v a n ~ c Prcmisa

WSLConsultants"' w s c P d. Enviroscience' ICC.N. OM 7% 676 A.B.N. 49 W751674

2-8 Harvey Slrnet, Richmond, Kcroria 3121, Aurtnlia Tckphone; 16 1 3 9429 4666 Facsirn ilr: +6 1 3 9429 2294 EmJI: w~l&rl.corn.au Web: w~w~w6l.rom.w

19.Sep-20112 Reporl No: 4863(18 IobNumhe~: 19192 Client: BIT Ocotechmcal E d n t u r Job Rskrencc: 41017 - 19.21 Wilmn Sweet, South Y u p

B NUM Rccci\,cd Salnplo Al 4 As B Ba Be M Co Cr Cr6t b W

P q c 2 of.. 27 @ 0 . 0 U .

A.C.N. 094 751 676 AU.NnaN.49 uW 7x676 2-8 Harvey Srrccr, Richmond, finotin 3121, A u t d i a Tclcphune: t61 3 9429 4G66 Rcsimilr: 361 3 9427 2294 Mi: w r l ~ . m m r u Web: www.d.com.au

: 19-Sep-2W2 B p r l Nw 4867,08 JobNumber: 18192 Clicne BPP Gcolcfhdcal Eyimcrs Job Refusn~c: 41011 19-23 Wilson Smcl, SouIh Yana

B NUM Rmivcd Sampl~ Mn Mo Ni Pb S Sb Sb So Sn /

Page 3 of.. 27 @ 0 0

W WSLConsu!tanrs" wSL Conrulrmn PL d. Enviroscience A.C.N. DM 712 676 AU.N, 49 OM 711 676

2-8 H a y Srrrn, Richmond, Viccoria 3 121, Aumalia Ttlephonc: t61 3 9429 4666 Fauimilt: +61 3 9429 2294

b p o i ~ o ; 486208 JobNumbl;r: 18192 ClicB: B W acolwhnical Engineers Job Rofrxna: 41017 - 19-23 Wilr~nSlrcet.Soulh Y-

. NUM Received Sample POTASSIUM SODIUM CALCNM hlAGNESNM CARBONATE HYDROXIDE 81- ALKALINITY CHUlRlDB SULPHATE

ar Cam3 r CaC03 CARBONATE ar CaCm a CaC03

Rcsulu expressed as m#L where nppliabic Page 4 of., 27

0 0

?'

18/11 2003 09:04 FAX +813 95827199

. BFP CONSULTAhTS

.-

C a 18/11 ' 03 TUE 09: 58 ITX/RX NO 54831 @lo08

18/11 9003 09:04 FAX +el3 95627199

. BFP CONSULTANTS

ISLC~nsultants"" WSL consulmu PL .d. ' iL+:roscience AcN. 004 751 676 A.0.N. 49 OM 751 676 2-8 Harvey S t r m Richmond, Wcrwia 3 12 1 , A u d a

h a i l : wsl&sl.mm.au Wcb: ~ . w r l . c o r n . a u

: lD.&p.ZOlU BtporlNm: 41WM IobNumber: 18192 Clirnt: BFQ (karchicnl Elyiwn lob W n n c r : 41011.19.23 Wilrrm SMn, Saulk Yam

b 0 NUM kcaiicd Srlnph NAP ACV ACE FLU PHR ANT FLA PYR BAA CSIR BBF BKP W DQA B(iP WY TOTAL.

~ a l P M k r q * r r o n ( l alhsrnurr o f l ~ r h l m d ~ ~ . ~ ~ ' k ~ ~ a i r d ~ , m W -nk spac4 indiollu no tad prmnd

WS~Consultantsrm WSL Consultants P(' .d. Znviroscience AC.N. OM 7 9 676 nn.N. 49 OD4 711 676

28 Hmcy Strrrt. Richmond, %toria 3 121, A d i a Tclepkone: :GI 3 9429 4666 Eaclimik! +GI 3 9429 2294

: 19-sepmm Reporl No: dScXX4 JobNumber: 18192 Client BPP Olatechaicsl ~nginocn lob Referem: 41017 - 19.23 Wihon Stns1,South Vans

NUM Rcccived Sample

01 e 0

zank space indivaits no test putormad Pegc 6 of.. 27 0 0 w -. 0 N 0

18/11 2003 09:05 FAX +El3 95627lSS BFP CONSULTANTS

- t . : a g i j g 5 0 s $ 9 8 ", $ $ E W

5 5 3 3 s q v e s R

. ~ t ~ o i ~ a : 486008 JobNumber: 18192 Uiwt: BFP Oeotucbnical Engiw.cn Job Rsfennoc: 41017 - 19-23 W k r Smol, South Ya,m

3 NIIM Rcceiued Sample MBVINPHOS DlAZlKON MALATHION IWiTHION CllLDR m O N DICHWRVOS STIROFOS RONNBL PARAWlON PYRIPHOS

~ 8 / 1 1 2003 09:06 FAX +a13 95627199

- BFP CONSULTANTS

- 9 -z % t: Pi

3 E

s a Pi .A

0 %! o N .g s 2 ii?

3 = g .. .- n o - &.I+ s x g

.. !2

9 8 z a

A.C.N. DM 751 676 rl.B.N.49 OM 75l676

2-8 H u v y St~tcr, Rjchmond. Vicrnria 31 2 1. Ausrnlia Thphonc: tbl 3 9429 4666 Facsimile: 4 1 3 %29 2294 Erndl: ml&8l.cum.au Web: w.ml.com.au

19&p-ZOm REparl Ne 486208 IobNumboi: MI92 Cljlnl: BFP Omtachnicnl mgincm Job Rtftirencc: 41017 - 19-23 W i h o Street. So& Y m

I3 NUM Rcccived Sample

86210 3-Scp-2W1 RINSATE

AROCLOR AROCUIR AROCLOR '1016 1221 1 232

AROCLOR AR0CU)R AROCLOR AROCLOR IWIXL 1242 1248 1254 1ZM) PCLb

co.001 ~0.001 d.WI <O.W1 <OD1

4.001 a.ao1 CO.OOL Q.OOI Q.OI

4.001 dLa)l Ul,a.aol Q.W1 mffl

18/11 2003 09:06 FAX +el3 95627190 BFP CONSULTANTS

W 8 .

WSLConsultantsm WSL coo sultan^ .d. Enviroscience M.N. O D ~ 751 676 11.0.~. 49 004 751 676

ZB H w e y Straet, Richmond, Vic~oria 3 121, Australia Tckrrhonr: +GI 3 9429 4666 Faaimile: +61 3 9429 2294

: 19-Sep-ZOaZ h p o r l No: 486308 JobNumhs: 18i91 alenl: B m Gmluhnical Engineem Job Rtkreoce: 42017. 19-23 WlhnSlrcsl, Soulh Y y

B NUM Rcccivcd Ssmple I l-Dl Dl TR1 l &Dl BROMO CHWRO 112-1R1 %OR0 12-01 111-TRI CHKIRO CHLORD CMaRO CHLORO DICHLORO BENZENE CHLORO DIBROMO CHLORO CHLORO ETHAN5 METHANE M m A N B ETHANE MBMANB ETHANE MLTWWE PROPANB ETHANE

18/11 2003 09:06 FAX c613 956271D9 BFP CONSULTANTS

r WSLConsultantsm W S L G ~ S U ~ ~ ~ P(' :d. Envimsciencc A.C.N. ODI 752 616 LB.N 49 aot 7% 676

2-8 Hsrvey S r m , Richmond, Vctoh 3121, Austnlj, Telephone: t61 3 3429 46GG F~windc; 161 3 9429 2294 Emd: w r l ~ l . c o m . r u Web: www.w~l.corn.au

: 19-Sep-2IIM .Report No: MQOB JobNvmbzc 18192 Cticnl: BFP Gwtechaicd Engineem lob Rsfercnce: 41011 - 19.23 Wilson S l ~ ~ c l , Soulh Yarn

1 I I 2.TETRA 1 1-DICHLORO I2 3 TRI. I MLBROMO I 2-DIBRO.MO 13-DICHLORO I 3-DICHLORO 1 3 D I W R O - CHU)RO PROPENB CHLORO 3-CHUJRO ETHANE PROPANB PROPENE PROPGNB FJnANI! PMPANE PROPANE (cq (TRANS)

Rye 16 of.. 27 0

5

WSLConsultantsn' WSL conr~tvln P( cd. Enviroscience A.C.N. 004 757. 676 ABN. 49 OM 751 676

2-8 Harvey Street, Richmond, Mctaria 3121, A u d n Telephone: t61 3 9429 4666 Fruimilc: r61 3 1427 2294 Email: walhl.com.au Web! wm~wrl.corn.au

: 19.Sep.2OW .Repor1 ME: 4116208 . JobNsmbcr: 18192 Clieml: BFP Gcotechnlcpl Eyinsen Job R s l c r ~ c o : 41017 - 19-23 Wilsan Shccl, South Yam

U3 NUM Rceeivsd Sornplc 2 2-DICHLORO 2.CHUIRO 4CHMRO BROMO BROMO BROMOFURM DIBROhlO PROPANE TOLUENE TOLUEM CHLORO BENZENE METHANE

METHANE

WSLConsultantsm wsr CRMUI~,,,~ PC' ;d. Envirosdence A.C.N. DM 79% 676 A.B.N. 49 OM 751 fin

2-8 Harvey Strcrt, Richmond, Victaria 3121, Australia Telephone: *GI 3 9429 4666 Eacsirnilc: 4 1 3 9429 2294 ~ m h : [email protected] Web: wwn.nal.com.zu

19SEp2002 Rmpod No: JobNwrJIu: 18192 Clicnl: BFP Geolrehnid Engineer8 lob Rcfmnc% 41017 - L9.27 Wilson Streel, Souh Yurn

1 NUM Receiwd Slmptc BBNWL BENZOTRI Z CHLORO HBXA HBXACHMRO HBXA- PENTA- CHLORID@ CHLORIDE NAPTHALENE WRO CYCLO CHLORO CHLDRO

BUTADIENE PBNTADIENE RWANB BENZENE

n s 3 P I l l

P a p 18 nf.. 27 a 0 . -

A.C.N. 004 752 676 A0.N. 49 0 0 4 751 0 4 2-8 H a ~ e y Streel, Richmond, Kctatiu 3121. A u d i a Trlephone: *61 3 9429 4666 Facsimile 461 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] \&b: nmv.wri.urm.au

I 19-8ep-100a Report No: 486208 IobNumbrr: 18392 ClicnU BFP OcMsbnical h ~ n w r r Job Rcfcnna: 4Nll7- 19.73 W h S f ~ c l , Srmtk Y m

- -I

S Z 0

01 C OI z~nk s p m indicnlos M tcsl performed

1 2 %TUI 1 2 4-TRI 135.TRI 1234-TETRA 123S.TETM 1245-TElXA CHLORO CHLORO CHLORO CHWRO CHWRO CHLORO BGNZENB BENZBNG BENZENE B B N Z W BENZBNB BWZBNB

WSLConsultanrsW wsr CON~~MO et(..d. Enviroscience ACN. OM 751 676 A.E.N. 49 OM 751 676

t 8 Harvc). Stmr, Richmond, Victoria 3 121, Ausmli. Tckuhonc: t 6 l 3 9429 4666 Pa(~imilc. t61 3 $429 2294 Enrail: [email protected] Wsb: m,wl ,mm.ru

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT : 19-Sep-1002 Repar( No. 486208 JobFlumbcr: 18192 Clicnc BFP Gwtechnical Bngimom lob Refernos: 41017 - 19-23 WikonSleei, South Yam

: NUM Rofercnca Sample . POTASSIUM SODIUM CALCIUM MAGNESIUM CARDONATI3 HMROXLDB BI- ALKALINITY CHLORIDE SULPHAT% mCoC03 MCBCW WBONATB MCICM

as acal

Ruvlls cxprewd as m@L when appliablc Pa* 20 of.. 27 & 0 M I- \ 0 N 0

18/1,1 ,2003 OS:O8 FAX +613 95627199 BFP CONSULTANTS

W WSLConsultantsN WSL ~ a m ~ t r n t s P( d. Enviroscience A.C.N. OM 7Y 676 ALN. 49 PO1 752 676

2.8 Harvey Srrcct, Richmond, Ncmria J 121, Ausmliz Telephone: r6 l 3 9429 4666 Fauimitc: +GI 3 9429 2294 Emuil: n . h l . m m u u W war.lrs.com.au

LII-S~plorn QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT

tepon NO: w a n rbNumbm: 16142 CUml: BFP OcvtaEbnical @"&ten J* Rlkmxe 4lOl7.19-2) W i Wa, Soulh Y m

PHBNOL ' I 1 I DIMETHYL 1-MWRO J~HUIP.0- lCDl 1 4 6.71U QWTA W O L S PHENOL PHENM. 3 . W L ' CHlORO C l U l R O CHU)RO

234frllTRA 2-Kfl'RO 4.NlTRO CHLORO PHENOL PHeNOL PHWOL

18/l,1,2003 09:08 FAX +813 95827199

l i - BFP CONSULTANTS

9 ;i e = s P $ !

8 P :E j; Y a B &

18/11 '03 TUE 09:58 [TX/RX NO 54831 m021

WSLConsultantsM WSL c o ~ t p a v F( ,d. Envimscience A.C.N. 001 7% 676 A.B.N. 49 OM 752 676

2-8 Harvey S~recr, Richmond, Victolia 3121, Aiutdia Tclcpbonc 861 3 9429 4iii6 Feuimilc 4 1 3 9429 2294 Email: [email protected] Web: www.wrl.cum.iu

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT : 19Sep2002 .Report No: 486208 . IobKumbw: 18192 Client: BIT G~eotechnical Bnginscn Job Rcf~rcmm: 41017 - 19.23 WihnSU~at,Soulh Yana

\B NUM Reference Snnrple

$87617 3-Snp-2MZ BLANK

HCB a-BHC UNDAM HePTACRWR ALDRIN b.BHC d-BHC HEITACHLOR- DDE DlaLDRlN EPaXlDE

Paw 24 of.. 27 @ 0 N 01 \ 0 N 0

WSLConsultantsN WSL comulmu 4- (d Enviroscicnw ACN. OM 752 676 A.R.N. 49 004 n1 676

28 Huvey Strw, Richmond, Victo~iu 3121, A u s d i a Telephone: +61 3 9429 4666 M m i l s : +613 9429 2294 Emril: [email protected] Web: mnv.wd.mm.ru

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT : : 19-ssp-aooa ; Repor( No! 486208 . JobNumbcr: 1.3192 Client: B W Gcotcchnicol Bngincvs Job Rdclcnct: 41017 - 19.23 WimSlr~tl, Soulh Yarra

48 NUM Reference Sample

487617 3-&p-2002 BLANK

4876 l B (Spike of 487617) Ixpected Recovery 487617 3.Srp20DZ QC SPlKE

*. zank apace indicale. M teal perhnoed w

DDD DDT ENDRlN ~ O X Y C f U O R Cl iWRDANE a.EN!X- b . E w GNDOSULPHAN ENDRIN SULPHAN SULPHAN SULPHATE ALDEHYDE

$ 1 .-

= a 18/11 '03 TUE 09:56 [TX/RX NO 548fl m028

geotechnical engineers Monitoring Bore No

515 Bridge Road, Richmond 3121 Sheet no.

Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :

Project : Logged By :

Location :

Drill model : Slope 90 deg RL Surface :

Hole diameter : Bearing - deg Datum :

SILTY SAND (SM); fine to coarse sand, low W MD Concrete D -plasticity fines, orange-brown, pale grey, Plugdark red. M DIronstone concretion (0.5-1.0m) Sand

1.00MD

Strong Hydrocarbon Odour

2.00

Odour BentoniteBecoming fine to medium sand, pale grey, Screenedbrown, orange. 3.00 (2.5-5.0m)


4.00 Strong Hydrocarbon Odour

5.00BH 4 - Terminated @ 5.0m below basement level.

6.00

7.00

8.00

4

1 of 1

41017

14/4/03

Sup

port

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Notes Samples

Tests

CAULFIELD KRIVANEK AND SUGAR PTY LTD

Met

hod

Material DescriptionDepth

(m)Structure, additional

observations

Gra

phic

log

Wat

er

Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex

ENGINEERINGBOREHOLE LOG

ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT CJC

Basement floor

-

19 WILSON ST. SOUTH YARRA

GEMCO

100mm

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, low M MD Concrete D -plasticity fines, grey, Plug

Sand1.00

Becoming orange, brown, red, some low to medium plasticity fines.

CLAYEY SAND (SC); fine to medium sand, M MDlow to medium plasticity fines, orange, 2.00brown, grey, red.

Strong odour BentoniteScreened

3.00 (2.5-5.0m)Strong Hydrocarbon Odour

Red/brown.

Some grey 4.00

Fine sand


6.00

7.00

8.00

100mm

5

1 of 1

41017

Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex

Structure, additional observations

-

17/4/03

JN

Basement floor

Met

hod

Sup

port


(m)

Gra

phic

log

Notes Samples

TestsWat

er

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on



ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT


GEMCO

BFP BFP BFP

geotechnical engineers Monitoring Bore no.


Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



FILL: GRAVELLY SAND; fine to coarse M MD Concrete Plug D -angular gravel, fine to medium sand,grey

0.50Sand

1.00SILTY CLAY (CH); high plasticity, brown and M VStorange, some grey, some fine to mediumsand

1.50

2.00

Layer of fine to coarse rounded quartz 2.50gravel M VSt

BentoniteSANDY CLAY (CH); high plasticity fines,fine to medium sand, some coarse sand,orange-brown and grey, variable sand 3.00content with depth

No Odour DPID = 0 ppm

3.50

Sand

4.00

41017

16/9/02

PJN

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

-

Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex


Depth (m)


Not measured


ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Gra

phic

log

Wat

er

19 - 23 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA

EDSON

BOREHOLE LOGENGINEERING

3

120mm

1 of 3

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



SILTY SAND (SM) / CLAYEY SAND (SC); M MD D -fine to medium sand, layers of medium tohigh plasticity fines, red-brown, orange,some grey, some coarse sand

4.50 Some HydrocarbonOdourPID = 6 ppm D

5.00Screened Section5.0 to 9.5 metres

5.50

6.00 Slight HydrocarbonOdourPID = 10 ppm D

6.50

M MD

7.00SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, red-brown, orange, some grey, some lowto medium plasticity fines, some coarsesand

7.50 Strong HydrocarbonOdourPID = 120 ppm D

8.00

3

2 of 3

41017


(m)

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

EDSON Not measured



PJNENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

16/9/02

ENGINEERING

Gra

phic

log

120mm

BOREHOLE LOG


Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Wat

er

-

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, M MD D -red-brown, orange, some low to mediumplasticity fines Sand

8.50

9.00

Strong HydrocarbonOdourPID = 60 ppm D

9.50MB 3 - Terminated @ 9.50 metres

10.00

10.50

11.00

11.50

12.00

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

Not measured

-120mm

EDSON


16/9/02


(m)

Gra

phic

log




Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

3

3 of 3

41017

Structure, additional observationsW

ater

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



FILL: SILTY SANDY GRAVEL; fine to coarse M MD Concrete Plug D -angular gravel, fine to medium sand,grey


1.00 Sand

1.50

2.00

Layer of fine to coarse rounded quartzgravel

2.50SANDY CLAY (CH); high plasticity fines, M VStfine to medium sand, some coarse sand, Bentoniteorange-brown and grey, variable sand content with depth

3.00


3.50 Sand

4.00

2

120mm

1 of 3


EDSON


Not measured



Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Gra

phic

log

Wat

er

Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex


Depth (m)


-

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

41017

16/9/02

PJN

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :






5.50


6.50

SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, M MDred-brown, orange, some grey, some lowto medium plasticity fines, some coarse 7.00sand


8.00

-


Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Wat

er

Gra

phic

log

120mm


EDSON Not measured





(m)

2 of 3

41017

2

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

16/9/02

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :




8.50

9.00



10.00

10.50

11.00

11.50

12.00

Wat

er Structure, additional observations

2

3 of 3

41017


(m)

Gra

phic

log




Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

120mm

EDSON


16/9/02

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

Not measured

-

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



FILL: SILTY SANDY GRAVEL; fine to coarse D MD Concrete/ Bentonite Plug D -angular gravel, fine to medium sand, D MD Bentonitegrey MFILL: SILTY SAND; fine to medium M MDsand, dark grey, some fine to 0.50 Sandcoarse gravelSILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, dark grey becoming pale grey from M VSt0.5 metres, some fine to mediumgravel 1.00SILTY CLAY (CH); high plasticity, brown andorange, some grey, some fine to mediumsand

1.50 DLayer of fine to coarse rounded quartzgravel MSANDY CLAY (CH); high plasticity fines, M VStfine to medium sand, some coarse sand,orange-brown, variable sand content with 2.00depth

2.50

No Odour3.00 D

PID = 80 ppm

becoming pale grey, increasing sandcontent

3.50

Becoming orange-brown

4.00 No Odour D


Met

hod



observations

Gra

phic

log

Wat

er

Con

sist

ency

den

sity

, in

dex

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

PIONEER 100

120mm




Notes Samples

Tests Sup

port

CJC

Not measured

-

1

1 of 3

41017

28/8/02

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



SANDY CLAY (CH); high plasticity fines, M MD PID = 0 ppm D -fine to medium sand, some coarse sand,orange-brown, variable sand content with Sanddepth

4.50

SILTY SAND (SM) / CLAYEY SAND (SC); M MDfine to medium sand, layers of medium tohigh plasticity fines, red-brown, orange, Strong Hydrocarbonsome grey, some coarse sand 5.00 Odour

PID = 45 ppm D

5.50SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, M MDred-brown, orange, some grey, some lowto medium plasticity fines, some coarse Slight Hydrocarbonsand Odour

6.00 PID = 186 ppm D

6.50

Slight Hydrocarbon7.00 Odour

Orenge-brown, pale brown, some low PID = 200 ppm Dplasticity fines

7.50Bentonite Plug

Strong Hydrocarbon8.00 Odour D

Met

hod


(m)

Gra

phic

log

Wat

er

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Con

sist

ency

den

sity

, in

dex




PIONEER 100 Not measured

-

Notes Samples

Tests Sup

port

41017

28/8/02

CJC

1

2 of 3

D



120mm

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, M MD PID = 170 ppm D -red-brown, orange, some low to mediumplasticity fines Sand

Screened Section8.50 8.0 to 9.5 metres

9.00



10.00

10.50

11.00

11.50

12.00


Met

hod

Sup

port

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

BOREHOLE LOG


Con

sist

ency

den

sity

, in

dex


(m)

Gra

phic

log


PIONEER 100

120mm

Wat

er

-

Notes Samples

Tests

CAULFIELD KRIVANEK AND SUGAR PTY LTD 28/8/02

CJC

Not measured

1

3 of 3

41017

D

ENGINEERINGBFP

CLIENT

FIG.Geotechnical, Mining&GeologicalConsultants

JOB# SCALE

FILE DATE

NTS

BFP

CAULFIED,KRIVANEK & SUGAR

41017

19-23WILSONSTREET,SOUTHYARRA

GARDEN LANE

WILSON STREET

EXISTINGBUILDING

EXISTINGHOUSE

1:250

41017SampleLocations.cdr 08-07-20024

MB2

MB3

MB1

MB5

MB4



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



FILL: SILTY SANDY GRAVEL; fine to coarse D MD Concrete/ Bentonite Plug D -angular gravel, fine to medium sand, D MD Bentonitegrey MFILL: SILTY SAND; fine to medium M MDsand, dark grey, some fine to 0.50 Sandcoarse gravelSILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, dark grey becoming pale grey from M VSt0.5 metres, some fine to mediumgravel 1.00SILTY CLAY (CH); high plasticity, brown andorange, some grey, some fine to mediumsand

1.50 DLayer of fine to coarse rounded quartzgravel MSANDY CLAY (CH); high plasticity fines, M VStfine to medium sand, some coarse sand,orange-brown, variable sand content with 2.00depth

2.50

No Odour3.00 D

PID = 80 ppm

becoming pale grey, increasing sandcontent

3.50

Becoming orange-brown

4.00 No Odour D


Met

hod



observations

Gra

phic

log

Wat

er

Con

sist

ency

den

sity

, in

dex

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

PIONEER 100

120mm




Notes Samples

Tests Sup

port

CJC

Not measured

-

1

1 of 3

41017

28/8/02

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



SANDY CLAY (CH); high plasticity fines, M MD PID = 0 ppm D -fine to medium sand, some coarse sand,orange-brown, variable sand content with Sanddepth

4.50

SILTY SAND (SM) / CLAYEY SAND (SC); M MDfine to medium sand, layers of medium tohigh plasticity fines, red-brown, orange, Strong Hydrocarbonsome grey, some coarse sand 5.00 Odour

PID = 45 ppm D

5.50SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, M MDred-brown, orange, some grey, some lowto medium plasticity fines, some coarse Slight Hydrocarbonsand Odour

6.00 PID = 186 ppm D

6.50

Slight Hydrocarbon7.00 Odour

Orenge-brown, pale brown, some low PID = 200 ppm Dplasticity fines

7.50Bentonite Plug

Strong Hydrocarbon8.00 Odour D

Met

hod


(m)

Gra

phic

log

Wat

er

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Con

sist

ency

den

sity

, in

dex




PIONEER 100 Not measured

-

Notes Samples

Tests Sup

port

41017

28/8/02

CJC

1

2 of 3

D



120mm

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, M MD PID = 170 ppm D -red-brown, orange, some low to mediumplasticity fines Sand

Screened Section8.50 8.0 to 9.5 metres

9.00



10.00

10.50

11.00

11.50

12.00


Met

hod

Sup

port

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

BOREHOLE LOG


Con

sist

ency

den

sity

, in

dex


(m)

Gra

phic

log


PIONEER 100

120mm

Wat

er

-

Notes Samples

Tests

CAULFIELD KRIVANEK AND SUGAR PTY LTD 28/8/02

CJC

Not measured

1

3 of 3

41017

D

ENGINEERINGBFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



FILL: SILTY SANDY GRAVEL; fine to coarse M MD Concrete Plug D -angular gravel, fine to medium sand,grey


1.00 Sand

1.50

2.00

Layer of fine to coarse rounded quartzgravel

2.50SANDY CLAY (CH); high plasticity fines, M VStfine to medium sand, some coarse sand, Bentoniteorange-brown and grey, variable sand content with depth

3.00


3.50 Sand

4.00

2

120mm

1 of 3


EDSON


Not measured



Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Gra

phic

log

Wat

er

Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex


Depth (m)


-

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

41017

16/9/02

PJN

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :






5.50


6.50

SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, M MDred-brown, orange, some grey, some lowto medium plasticity fines, some coarse 7.00sand


8.00

-


Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Wat

er

Gra

phic

log

120mm


EDSON Not measured





(m)

2 of 3

41017

2

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

16/9/02

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :




8.50

9.00



10.00

10.50

11.00

11.50

12.00

Wat

er Structure, additional observations

2

3 of 3

41017


(m)

Gra

phic

log




Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

120mm

EDSON


16/9/02

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

Not measured

-

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



FILL: GRAVELLY SAND; fine to coarse M MD Concrete Plug D -angular gravel, fine to medium sand,grey

0.50Sand


1.50

2.00

Layer of fine to coarse rounded quartz 2.50gravel M VSt

BentoniteSANDY CLAY (CH); high plasticity fines,fine to medium sand, some coarse sand,orange-brown and grey, variable sand 3.00content with depth


3.50

Sand

4.00

41017

16/9/02

PJN

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

-

Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex


Depth (m)


Not measured



Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Gra

phic

log

Wat

er


EDSON


3

120mm

1 of 3

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :






5.50

6.00 Slight HydrocarbonOdourPID = 10 ppm D

6.50

M MD

7.00SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, red-brown, orange, some grey, some lowto medium plasticity fines, some coarsesand


8.00

3

2 of 3

41017


(m)

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

EDSON Not measured




16/9/02

ENGINEERING

Gra

phic

log

120mm

BOREHOLE LOG


Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Wat

er

-

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :




8.50

9.00



10.00

10.50

11.00

11.50

12.00

Notes Samples

Tests Met

hod

Sup

port

Not measured

-120mm

EDSON


16/9/02


(m)

Gra

phic

log




Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

3

3 of 3

41017

Structure, additional observationsW

ater

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



SILTY SAND (SM); fine to coarse sand, low W MD Concrete D -plasticity fines, orange-brown, pale grey, Plugdark red. M DIronstone concretion (0.5-1.0m) Sand

1.00MD


2.00

Odour BentoniteBecoming fine to medium sand, pale grey, Screenedbrown, orange. 3.00 (2.5-5.0m)


4.00 Strong Hydrocarbon Odour


6.00

7.00

8.00

4

1 of 1

41017

14/4/03

Sup

port

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on

Notes Samples

Tests


Met

hod



observations

Gra

phic

log

Wat

er

Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex


ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT CJC

Basement floor

-


GEMCO

100mm

BFP



Ph (03) 9429 7555 Fax (03) 94297117 Job no.

Client : Date :


Location :



SILTY SAND (SM); fine to medium sand, low M MD Concrete D -plasticity fines, grey, Plug

Sand1.00

Becoming orange, brown, red, some low to medium plasticity fines.

CLAYEY SAND (SC); fine to medium sand, M MDlow to medium plasticity fines, orange, 2.00brown, grey, red.

Strong odour BentoniteScreened

3.00 (2.5-5.0m)Strong Hydrocarbon Odour

Red/brown.

Some grey 4.00

Fine sand


6.00

7.00

8.00

100mm

5

1 of 1

41017

Con

sist

ency

de

nsity

, ind

ex


-

17/4/03

JN

Basement floor

Met

hod

Sup

port


(m)

Gra

phic

log

Notes Samples

TestsWat

er

Moi

stur

e co

nditi

on



ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT


GEMCO

BFP BFP BFP

. . . ..

( 0 9 ' 0 3 . TGE 1 2 : 3 9 FIX 6 1 3 9 8 8 9 1320 C ' FLD , ITRI\'&SZiG.+R

G/05 " 0 2 THU 18:28: F.U 61392782850 LJRS ? f t E L B O m

Fax Transmitt4 .-\

To: Perer Noonan @FP) Fax; 9429 71 17

( cc: Gavin h4cDondd (Caulfield Krivmck and Sugar PL) Fax: 9889 1720

I From: Warren Pump

Date: 29 August 2002 Page 1 of: 2

la1 w urgent u rwase neply 'Our 0 For Falbw-up infotmatlon

' If you do not tbC9irr6 all pagas cr transmisian I$ Illegfhle. @ease mLcA be crigin~brlo tWend. Stlouid ths fetslvilu be sent tri the wrong fax number, WCJUICI receiver plea98 deBtroy this cnpy W I ~ Wly URS irnrnadiateiy. Thank you,

, Subject: Audit of 19-23 Wilson Street, South Y a m URs Project No: 5 1224401 -561

Message: Perer, Thank you for the dAlling log fowardtd t our office this morning. As noted in our phone conversation t~ r l i e r this morning, given the identified conurnination noted during rhe drilling iavestigafion, we will rcclulte analysis of soil samples and a larger suit of andysis of graundwatcr as ulelI as addirianal wells at rk site. To assist you in this task, the follswing requirements have bwn identified as a minimum far now:

Testing and Analysis af Groundwater : Given the identihca~ion of csn~ominatiotn in *C soil rznd fwher assessment of groundwater, a more thorough ~haracterisation is required in order to ensure full thk conraminacion observed is adequrely chmcterised. Groundwater c~llex ted fmm this we11 will need to be ~ s r c d for the parameters as listed below. 4 Field paramet9rs (pH, redax potential, dissolved oxygn, condaedvizy):

Major anions and cal.ions:

MetaXs ( As, Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Pb, Me In, Sn, Zn, Hg, Sb, St) [LOR'S of 0,30lmgL, 0.001 ~$1 for Hg, Sb): (if Cr 3 found, test far Cr 6 d$o)

TDS:

Total phosphae;

Total Sulphur (as 5043;

T o 4 perroleurn hydrocarbons - TFH (LOR'S of 10 u&); and

Q Vol3tiles Organic Chemicals (LOR'S of 0.01 u& lower if possible) (MAHs including bur nor limited to BTEX, salatill: chlorinattd bydrocarbns (as lisred in previaus canespondence), Trihdornethanes, Oxigenated compounds including acetane, vinyl aceute, MEK, MBK. MBK, methanol, bcnryl alcohol erc

Senu VoIrti!as Orgsnic Chtmicds (LOR'S of 0.01 u@ Icwerif possible) (PAH's, phcnols, phthdate esters, nitrosamincs, nirroaromtics, ketones, hidoetheis, chlorinated hydrwarbcns, a-iali=s and knzidienes )

Total cyanide (LOR'S of O,OOtrn@):

URS U W l a Pry Lrrj [ABN 46 000 691 690) UR5 k y e , 658 Churtk S l ~ l Rhmontl, vaarla 3121 Aum& - - - . . - -. . .

Fax Transmittal

To; Peta Soonan (BFP) 29 Augusr 2Oil2 Page 2

Orgmochlorine wd organophosphate pesricidcs (LOR'S d0.001 US); and

PCBs. Pltasc f o v u d a comple:c tisting aF aniilytcs to be included (by each laboratory} prior to any re~ting being performed.

Gs noted in today's phone conversaxion smdard QAQC ramplcs (including a split sample slid &sate - blank) arc required in accordance wi& the EPA guidelines for goundwvter samplkg- Please note the rinsxre blank should be colected using de-itsnisd water and should be passed &tough dl pieces af equipment used far sampling (tubing, pumps etc) after sampling and deconramination has been camplcred.

As noted in prior correspondence, it is requested that dl Itaborarorj chrarnatagms k provided in additiun La rht: standard reporting requkmtnrs.

Testiog of Soil Samples Collected: Based on che observed contamination, the samples collected at 3m, 4,911s. S .8n~ and 9.311 should be tested a minimum. These samples should be scree~red for the following analy ees:

a pH; Meed5 ( As, Cd, Cr, CP, Cu, Pb, MO. Ni, SR, 231, Hg, Sb, St)

e Toul pz~roleum hydrocarbons - TPH (LOR'S of I0 ug4.1; and

BTEX, volatile chlorinared h ychoch~ns, and

PAH's, AS with the waters, please ensurz these msrs ate perfomcd using the appropriste LOR'S r t la t iv t to rhe NEPM and pmvide chrornatogmms.

Additional Wells: AS h o t 4 in our discussi~n earlier today, the detection of this contamhation a1 rh2 site will r k q ~ i f f rhe .insrattation of B number of additional borcs in a d e i to determine the flow direction and extant of titc

conminarjon idenrificd, We feel ir: would be best to discuss this maitcx further 14th ya~y$elves in cons~lwtion with c l t t cticnt. At this gtage we believe rha~ i t would be best if a meerirmg could he urauged a;ld we will advise you of the likely date and rime following discussion of the rnxrer with the client.

Other Comer&: Plcasc ensure rhnr all ~ I z v m t comments in relarian la adour are recorded on ckc drilling logs. Wc will also need to discuss the reporting requuernwts in relation ro these soil and gr~undwater samples. Ir may be easiest if we discuss this when we meer. probably same tirne 2lrrl-j next w~c;k. Please cor~racr rh t undersigned cn 9279 2885 should you have any further que$rians ~ g w d i n g rhis mattes. ~- -.

Warren Pump Senior principal EPA-accredited Environmcnral Auditor [Conraminared Sand)

Fax Transmittal

Company. Caulfield Krivanek md Sugw PiL

Facsimile* 9889 1420

Frorn- Warren Pump

CC'

Page 1 a? 2

URGENT

Special ,, ,structions: onfidentisl Urgent t] Please Reply a Far Ybcr Inform:dtion For Foliciiv-~tp

if you do not ~ c s i v e ail pages or bansmBslon b Ilkgib)c, p i s w contad the orlglna!~l ' tO wend, Should th;: f f lC i i f lk b$ see to the W D ~ Q fax ,numbr, wculrf remkel p!oaecdestroy this mpy and notib URS t~rtI~tIktsly. Thank you. -- - - - . - -- -

Subject Sraturoq Envit-unmcntal Audit of Land URS Project ;to: 51 224-001 -561

19-23 Wibon Street, South Ynr-

Message:

DomeniciCbvin.,

AS: requesicd, I providz this sate to advise on px-rogmss with the c n ~ o m ~ e n M alLl.ld:ing of the above site

1 understand &a?. you may also ~ G s k io a1py this fax to the building s w c y ~ r .

The audit is being conducted in n ~ c o r ~ c e with scc-cisn 43 of the Emironmsnr Profecrr'o,w Acr 1 Y 70. I wzs requested by Caulfield Ejiivmek & Sugar, kcki.tec;ts, on khai T o f ib client. Mr Jozy f ilarinos, to commence the audit tin the 18' Mar& 2002. The Eavimnrnent Protcction Authority was notilied ofthe audit by lettw an TIE i gL' Match 20152.

Upon completion c~f the audit, it is my intention to issue an Audit Report and a Ccrtidica~:! o r S tatevrent uf En-qironmcntal Audit including condiricrns re1 ntin g to drvdcprnenr mci ongoing uccupation of the l a d . The find conditions will be delem~inrd fullowing completion of the current soil md g~ur~dwat t r investigations by environmental ~onsultmts, BFP'-

1 stisfied that investigarions o f the enuirumental c~ndition of the lmii a e .orogssi;ing in accordace with EP.4 requirements for mdi~icg of land, As you are aware, we also met iniomally with EPA lasr week to advisa of progress of work a d to brief hem nn interim findings of the invesrigations.

URS Auhlia Prf Lrr: (AEN 46 005 531 630) URS H o w , 6% CllUrdl mtt -. .

Fax Transmittal

To: Domenit C~i$mtl/GaYin h1cl)anald Caul field Krivaek md Sugar P L 23 Srprcmkr 2002 Prigs 2

As you me also a m , I recently called fir additional investigations of the site to &her asess issues rclatcd to the envir~nmental, quality of gcrtuldwam t h a ~ lies beneath the sie. BFP drillcd boreholes 10 srlmple thc goundw-atcr on the 28" August 2002 and 16" Septcmter 2002,

At this 3m.ge, I: am awaiting resulki o f Iaboratorq' te* of thc groundwater samples before ascssiug the need or otherwise fur fuxt9er testing and sampling on TJI~ s i k . Ncverthelesr, based on results of drilling and on-site testing furnished to me by BFF, it. i~ clear &at &e site i s not likely to be a source of enviran,at=nd pollutirm, Although inrerim results show that contamhattd gmund.;c- ate^ has migrated below &e site, rhc sotme(s) of lhat contamination appear to lie elscwhcrc,

Bascd on the lindings of this invedgatcq- work, I see no r w o n to delay or postpnc building constxuclion work on the site. This psition w s also supported by thz =A uficers during our meeting last week.

4 1 am s t i s f i d 9h3~ the ent;lranmentaI audit wn proceed in pardcl, with the building w r k s It would be my expemtion that tha Statement of Environmental Audit and audit report would be completed witkin thc next 6-8 weeks.

Please contacL the ufidersigned orr 9279 288g shoilltl you have my fiuther qucsiians regarding lhis matter n

Warren ~ u m p V $enior Priacipal

+'03 TUE 12: JF FAX 131 3 9,9,99 1720 c ' FLD . KRI'i'&SI;GriR

i * r. l

! : $ E ~ . i d [ [ ,::I: U?S k!EiB(]URI4: 61 3 9 ? 7 3 ? ! 2 ~

Fax Transittal +,

To: Doineilic Cksani.e/Gavin McDonald

Company: Csulfield Krivanek and Sil,oar Pfi, w

Facsimiie: 988.9 1720

From: Wmen h m p

cc' Peter Noona11 (BFP) 9429 7 i 17

Date: 23 Scprcmbc~ 2002

Psge 1 of:

-.. -- -.As

Qpeeia[ .:ions' a Csnfidenlial a Urgent D Please R~p1y !d For Your Infcrrnatan Fur Foilow-up __ -_ . - . . -- .

If you dn nsr (mehe ell p q t u Qr tKmsmissicn 1: ikgibls, p14aBc contaa dla originator to re-send. Should ?he fdirclk be s e ~ t ta ;he worig f,ax number, rmuld rewiuer please daslray ~ h k copy and notify tlRS imm&iateiy. Tmnk you.

--..-

Subject: Nun-aqueous Phase LCyrrid at 19-23 Wilson Street, lJRS Project No: 51 224-00;-561 Soudx Yarrii

Message:

Funhcr !o our previous advicc in sclalion LC,) the strtrurory ntrdh on rhe ubovc re femnd sire, we were i~lfOr~t~ed yes~erd3.y by thc site ixqsassur [ B E ) rhat non-,ulueoitri p h a e fiquid (it . Iayr of pttilol or similar ky&ocaqban "ilaating un the wil t t~~ t~h lc . ~illerwise knowl] as fn's prorluct) has bccli cncaunlcrtd ix? one of dlc: wells drilled at thc sirc (MB02).

We havc rhis morning il~specccd the site rr~~d gauged thc well concerned. i l yd roc~k~on product was recodeti in ibis wcIl wirh m apprnximlltc rhickrless aT i . -3111 'L*his rcprcscn [A 9

significant qunr~ljiy uf free producr..

This i'iading is of conccrn and will have signiRcan1 implicatiocs in tmrtlr or he. shtutory audit, works ltqujrcd IQ cornplcte the sramrvry audil und the tirnillg and ncure ol' m y cleall- LIP works propostd far he site..

Your men tiun is drawn to Clause 1 R of the Sratc Environment Protection Policy (frrounrlwaters of Vicioria) 1997, which r tams: *Wtern non-aqueoro. phrise liquid is prcsen: in art aqr~(fkr. ir rntdsf _he rmoved u n l m 01s Aufho~~iQ lie. the EPA) ic. .sc~ti.@p:d rhnr there is no unucccp~able risk posed to gpt~ bcneji~'bE rest ithe nolz-aqueou phsa liquiri, '

As such additional works will be required by the site assessor in order to further dt1i:ie;;lte thc extent of the problcnl and the irnplicarionr in relatiion to the proposcd development.

URS A l s r r d ~ Pry Ltd (ABN 4 cjM 63'1 6%) URS H ~ s e , 655 C n u ~ h %feet Richmond, viaofa 3121 A U a d a Po Box 28.5, FiFihrnmd Vm~ria 3121 TW 67 3 8278 2888

C ' FLD , HRIT-&SUGAR AS 61 3 9889 1 7 2 0

Fax Transmittal

To: Ihmei; CrismtclIjavin YIcDonilld C;iulfielc! Krivaxk and S u g ~ r P L 23 Scpicn~bar 2002 Past 2

discussions will1 rhe EPA, in s.elatian ro the groundwater nrld the n o n - ~ ~ ~ U C O U S pha.sc liquid. uld agrccrricnL on apprc7priaIc acrions wjlI dso be rcquircd before the stabroly audir may be complcrcd,.

d t is i m p o ~ ~ a n ~ that we advise you tila[ ~sponsibllity for zhc clem-up af the free product wi1: need tu bc discussed in detail. with the EPA. It would bi: our. preference that ~ddi~iorls? rests (as specified below) be colnple~ed before mcc~ilg wih he EYA

Givcn rbz rlanlrc of rhe contamha.tion delected, it soil gas survey acr.oss blrs site %.ill be required. Soil gax shc~uld bE: mcasurr=d at nu less thau four tsgcled locations ac~oss -d~c site at one 7newc: inrcrval3 rrtm the sodacc down ~ r ) at l e ~ ~ t 2 incrrcs below the proposed bascrneni ]eve! v/ith at Icas: one !rlrgeted 10c&rion exlendi.ng to r l ~ c dcptb of the hizhext PH3 rccarding ti, dale. S211ples sllould be m;llyse~I for BTEX by T hernzal Dcso~p~ion/O;ls Ct~ramatography/l%ass Specrrunlcemy. Thc Auditor prefers thaz rllc method to be zlscd Is T!~cm~al Descrptiot'l Mcthnd tiS'F.pA T0'17 "Det~rmitmrion u]' Yr~lrrtide Orgmic Cr~nzpisunds in Avhienr Air rl_ring Acrt'vu $tt~iplitig otz~o .Torhent T~&Ps " . '1-hc dctcctiorl %mi& fi1r this t ~ c k l l i C l ~ ~ should be 5 ng or beuer an the tube. Any ~rtlposed approiich shduld 2 1 1 ~ i l inciuclc QNQC pro~ocols . T o further dtliaedta groundwater flow dirccti.m and thc cxtcnl a i lhe free product ar rhc site, w t would require Lha~ the deepest roil gas survey be carried out in the centre of the sirc and ~rmvel-ted to a groundwater monitoring weI1. W e would also rcquite a h

addiliunal well in thr: x o u h west conlcr. All wells are TO be scrccned o v e r the .full Icngtll of rh e well ro a[ Ics r 1 n7 &have the cxpccLed R tilnriing watcr Icvd

WE rccor;\nrarid h a t at t h i s stagc ~t lc site assessor put together a proposal arid work p1:m to covein rllc soil gas slirvey works and r~~orrirnelld that they consult 1.eede.r Co~~sulring f t . ~

funher advice or) ,soil p i~s sampling and analysis requircmcnis. We request that dic 2bvnrk plan bc submitled {or reviewprior ra a~ny w?rks being c;miect tlu~,.

Ir it; nc:,~ed that crhcr filrchcr works u d S ~ T C / surroilnding jand usc scvicrv may be required f ~ l l o w i n g confmnation of the grc,ut~dl;vszcer flow dirdlinn as indita~cd By ihc cullccrzd rc clue by the ~ i t e assessor

We rtqucs? that you piease info1.m your client (Mr 3 . Pilarinos) ihese dr=ve:opnicnrs l 3 LL. sewn as p s s i b ! ~ . It) additivn we will nccd confimaricln of thc l o c ~ ~ ~ i o n of any proposcd works ar the site rclativz La IIIP we11 10caTio11li. as the wells should bc preservrd until all rnartcrs wirh rhc EPA have ken resolved. Please contacr the undtrsi p s d on 9279 28 88 should you havc any ft~flhcr questions ~ ~ l i ~ d i n g hls rnarrcr.

. . .. .. ------+I

F-\Z 6 1 3 9889 1 7 2 0 C ' FLD , HR I VkSUG-AR 4 ij i.: $3 "7,

~ " 3 3 ' 9 ~ ; I , ~ , E ~ E ~ V ? ? ~ E 6 : 3 3 ? i 3 ? 8 5 $ m S _ Y _ - N c , E l ? < .v ., .t /'; . +, ,:,;;,' --' --" *. .

GARDEN LANE ----I-----

r

I EXIST NB HOUSE

I

-- *

0.3 TPE 2 2 3 5 FAX 6 1 3 9 y 5 9 1720 C ' FLD, KRIV$<SUGAR

" 0 2 TlSU 1J:ll F.sX 81392792830 LRS HELBOtRYE

L ~ F . Z =

Fax Transmittal

To: Gavin McDonald Cautficld Krivanck and Sugar PA. 22 August 2002 Page 2

pH; 4 BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethy!ben~ne idlld ~yZeht).(LOR's of 1 -0 ug.L): r Told petroleum hydrxarbons (LOR'S of 10 ufi); and

Volatile chiohased hydr.sca&ons (LOR'S ofQ-'L u@).

h y ddli ing company engaged by the She .45se620r TO corismcr or decornmirsian a grcindwarer sampling or monlro&ng well musr hold s license i n aecprdance with sectior, 67 of rhe Wa?erhcr 1989.

The Sics Assessor is reminded h a t EPA has published =idclines for poundwaler sampling ("Gmundwa~~r Sampling Guideline$" WA Publication 669, ApriI 2000). These should be used by ~9t Site Assessor as 3 benchmark i n assessirlg groudwa~er sampling. 4 range of guidance i s pravibd however one of the most notiteable items is thar the guidelines conclude that bailers nor. a recommended device for sarrpling of volatises. As such, a low flow sampling devices shotdd bc utilised for the purpose of this assessrnenr

Xt is requested tkar all laborarory chremstograma bc praGded in additiarl [o the stanckird reporiiing requirerrtcn~s. BFP should also provided a detaiied list of voi~i le chlorinaied hydroeiirborr a.nalyrl"s ta the goufidwa~er sampling so ar rct enmtt rhnr. su%cient coverage i s achieved. Soils mm.mtertd dating rhe drilling should be scrwned with a P D an$ all abservztions approprinely \ogg&, Soil m p l c s should bc collected from the well locatisn ar the rime of drilling at I m intervals from a non-hal depth of 3m onwads ho~vever ~hdlower ~arnplls should also bc collected shocld uncharactcrisric or u n u s v ~ l ground canditions be encountered. The samples callected shsuld be appropriartd preserved ilnd forwarded to (he resting laboratory. It is requested that a draft hare lag be fofivsrded to the A~tdi~or within 23 hocrrs $0 tbm any testing of soils can be dwidcd following review of h e ground conditions emcaullrered,

Please conK3cr rkt undersigned on 9279 2688 should you have any W.~ha qucrtiorls repudirig bhis matter,

Wmen Pump Senior Principal EPA-accrcdired Envirorin>ental Auditor (Combrninaled Land)

Fax Transmittal

To: Gavin McDonald

Date: 22 April 2003

Page t & 5

.- -- Special

in: ' ztiona: a ConSdential Urgent Please Reply a ~Isr~our infanation a For Falldw-cp - -.-----

ff yao do not lemk a[l pages or tmm~)Stibn k Itlegibb, ~ h e coi.Mthe briginator b r e m d . Should t k fac$I~ik Oe sent 13 the wrong fax number, would mSYBfplsase d W m y th16 c ~ y and nadly LtW I m ~ ~ i y . h n k you.

- . - _

Svbject' Eavhoa~ental Audit, 19-33 Whon Street* U ~ ~ P r o j e c t N o 51&24-001-561 Prshm -Auditor Comment8 on Remaining hvegdgation Work

I Tasks lnvalved to Complete the Envimnrnental Audit

AS rquestpd, and confirming di-sion with BFP and yourself on-site recently, we s-iw below our understandkg the next steps in the audit of the Wilson Smet site:

1- BFP to drill two additiond groundwater wellells (SW c o r n and in ceofre of site) and assess guundwtcr Bow dixwtioq

2. Using band-excavated homholes. BFP to -duct soil gas s w e y d possible hydrocarbon vapours in ihe top 2m of rhe soil prome;

3. BFP to prepare a s m site chtzractcrisstion for auditor review, suitable for later submission to EPA;

4. BFP to prep= a Work Plan fur Health and Ecdogicsl Risk A s ~ ~ m ~ t z i q for ~ u & t o r review and acceptance. Adlong other things, the risk msessment dhw selecdon of site-specific desn-up mg,se. Auditor and BFF 0 rhen inkmually brief EPA anpgrcss of the site assessment and audit aad seek EPA guidance;

3 TCE 1 2 ; 1 2 F.41 81 3 9880 1721I i: ' FLn , KRI IrkSI.TGGAR , . L'KS M E t B 9 U R N E 6 1 3 S 2 7 9 2 8 5 C / i c 6 4 G 2 ; 3 . :'

Fax Transmittal To: Gavm McDonald C&ld Krivmek 2k Sugar 22 April 2003 Page 2

5. BFP to c m y out ground'u~fer risk assessment hi accordance with Auditor a d EPA requirements, including computer modelling of the potential flow of conknim~ed groundw~ers off-site. Risk iwesrnent would need to encompass aU ptemtkl hmm and ecologicd receprors for c m h a 1 : d goundwm and for soil vapoms. This risk assessment mge may identify the need for additional samplin$ or labomtory analyses ~f soil and/or groundwater samples:

6- Subject to fdings of risk a s ~ e s s ~ c n t , BFP to a Remeddon A&n Plrrn (RAP) 9

and c,anccptual design for a poud+aterremediafinn system, for review and acceptance by the Auditor.

7 . Upon agreement of the RAP, BFP to manage the detaileddesign, inskdlati~n, opemtion and validation ofthe removal of hydroiatbon fillids floating on the water table, plus my other grnmdwltr remediation that my be found necessaty;

8, BFP to prepare Environmmd Site A$sesm~tnr. Rqart in accordance EPA 8;~dixhg requirzments, inwrpdrwhg dl necessary soil and pundvietn invesrigatiarr results, For detailed review by the Auditor;

9 FoUsvYing complctiofi of ~omdwater clean-up, BET tu prepare a poundwter clem up report (a report on " C l m Up to thE: E*ent Fmcticabk, ie a "CUTEP Rq0fi9'), for review by the Auditor;

10. Auditor to PC& EPA natutory determination of the CWTEP repar& and then ac% in accordance with EPA decision to ccomplek the audit.

1 1 .. Auditor prepares aa Audit R q r t and then issues a ~tataent or Certificae of Environmental Audit.

l%e s t q s involved in k s a processes are marwrised b flow charts fonn overitsf.

2. Schedule for Campletfan

We c m o t give you an accurate timetable for completion ofthese steps as most depe~d on the heresources available wirbin BFP and your client's comment t o ktcp the sire dean-up and audit pmccss happening,

The EPA auditing system allows an auditor to completi: the audit and issue a S&re:men'~ or Ccnifi~aie of Enviroamental Audit only following compldan of the gmmd~atm clean-up. As you know, f ~ ~ p : Auditor is an in-n&nt reviewer, rather than a project rnmea, md cann~t ~ICCT, manege or desiga the clean-up works. Fmm ow e x p i w e , h w w q the above steps would take between 6-9 months to complete, but thgt is s s i ~ c e n ~ uncerf&ty about the duration of the removal f b r n beneath the site of the flo&g hydrwabom and contaminated groundwater. Subject to the t g e of remcdiati~n mrn favoured by BFP, the total volume of fluids to be removed md the rate at which the pumping: system can remove fluids, the clean-up of the site may take more than 12 mombs.

BF'F' and myrelllnoy be able TO better estimate t iming and toe of the work follo~p compl&on of the next round of 'barehole drilling.

/ TcE 1 2 : 4 2 FAX 61 3 9889 ~ ~ ~ [ ] C ' FLD , KRII'&SLTGAR @,1135

, k : : , ; 8 : 5 5 U J $ h \ F \ B O U R N E 6 1 3 3 ? 7 9 2 8 5 0 Fuo t 4 ~ I ' / $ 3

3 4 5-- I 1 I

URS Fax Transmittal i t

To: Gavln McDonald Caulfield Krivanek & Sugar 22 April 2003 Page 3

3. Estimated Costs

COTE for this work ar:: very difficult t:, estimate, as we do not ye1 h a w h e scale of the problem. Typical costs would be ers fbU0m:

1. Proposed site drilling by BFP (baed on quoted amovnt): S. y

2. Work Plan for Risk Assessmca% and costs of cordwring risk assessment ar~d groundwater flow modelling: $

3 Preparation of ~emediation A d ~ l l Plan s4 . 4, h p l e m s n t ~ a n and validatioh of G r o m d ~ e t RAP $

s . CUEP R ~ T ~ for ~ u d i ~ ~ r ad EEPA % ' 6. Find Site kssessmem R e p a $ : 7. EFA and A ~ d i ~ o r mccdags md corresp~ndence $

8. ;Audirosfeff S

This gives tad budget of say $ , t o %

P i w e feet fiee ta call me if you have my queries.

warren Pump tl Senior Principal Enviranmtntal Auditor ( C o n t m t o d Land)

RE GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION ACVlCE FOR 19-25 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA

Approved for PRIORIT/ NORMAL Internal use

DATE 1 August 2003 TO Mr Jerry Pilarinos, Wey Hotels Pty Ltd CC Mr Gavln Macdonald, CautfIsId Krivanek 81 Sugar Ply Ltd (fax: (0: ) 9888 17w

FAX (03)%09 7215

The Monnatbn mt&d this f ~ c s b n l ls lnlended OR& khe we of W namedmc@en~~~rdispn%i&gedd mnsden&l ff you hsve WIL& thk b M 4 ki e m , @me mljfy US.

- 4 1 .... l__l--- _,.-., .."",,,----.--.-.---,,~-- (.ll.lll.U-.---.--.-"-.-".-

Hold

Dear Jerry,

FROM Michael Seignior FAX (03) 8699 2122

PHONE (03) 8699 21 99 REF W1a

PAGES 19

Please refer to the following letter report and proposed follow on scope of work for the above site.

Yours sincerely, HLA=Envirosclences Pty Limited

Michael Seignior Prindpal Environmental %en tist '

HlffEnvirosdsncas Pty Llrnibd ABN 36 060 204 702 48 Ctareadon Skeet Melbourne VIC 3205 Australia Td.* 61 3 8699 2199 Fa*. MI 5 8899 2122 Emall, hlamdb~elb.hla~vira.cwn.au urmu.hbenviro.com.8~1

sustalnahle solutEons for environmental, OHS and natural resource managernanf

01/08 '03 FRT 1 R - 3 5 I T Y / Q T htn o q n o l m n ~ i

,3 FRI 16:32 FAII: 61 3 93285544 HLA-Envirosciences

t

1 August 2003 M400330j

Mr Jerry Pilarinos

Exley Hotels Pty Ltd PO Box 388 Malvern VlC 3144

RE: GROUNDWATER CQNTAMlNAllON ADVICE FOR 19-23 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA

Dear Jerry,

INTRODUCTION HLA-Envirosciences Pty Ltd (HLA) Was engaged by Exley Hotels Pty Ltd (Exley Hotels) to undertake a preliminary investigation regarding the presence of grdundwater contamination at their property located at 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra, Victoria (the site).

Our understanding of the current environmental status of the site is as follows:

The site (of approximate dimensions 26 m x 27 m) is currently subject to a statutory environmental audit, with Mr Warren Pump of URS Australia Pty Ltd (URS) being the appointed environmental auditor (the auditor).

@ BFP Consultant. Pty Ltd (BFP) was engaged by the site architects Caulfield Kfivanek & Sugar Pty Ltd (CKBS) to undertake georechnical and environmental assessments of the site. . a* Contaminated groundwater has been discovered beneath the site. Contarninatin appears to cornprise of motor spirit (pe'trol). Light non-aqueous phase llquid (LNAPL) has been observed to be present in three of the five groundwater monitoring bores installed on the site; Construction is currently underway at the site, which has involved the excavation and removal of soil across the entlre site to accommodate a basement car park, to a depth of approximately 2.5 m;

@ There is no obvious on-site source (past or present) of this groundwater contamination. It is therefore considered at this stage that the contamination is more llkely to derive horn

d off-site from soum(s) unknown; Soil gas measurements of volatile petrol-related chemicals (Le. BTW) have ken undemken by a subcontractor engaged by BFP (Air Water Noise Pty Ltd) and have returned results that are of concern to the auditor;

@ The auditor is concerned with the presence df groundwater contamination and is requiring additional works to be conducted, including further groundwater assessment, vapour intrusion modelling and the preparation of a groundwater remedial action plan;

HLA€nviwscimccs k y Limited ABN 54 OGO 2C4702 rendn~i C l ~ r n ' l . 5 r b i i l l l Mclbournc VIT ??05 Irl th l 3 ii1;'J1) 11'17 FJX +GI 3 8654) .!171

L r n - ,,iG -,,,- Ll. ...... ̂ ....... ... n i /nn ' n 2 FRT ia:a!i TTX/RX Nn Q F Q R I lihnn?

i p FRI 16:33 FAX 61 3 93285544 HLA-Envirosciences

Page 2 of 6

1 August 2W3

/ i BFP has recognised that they require assistance with the management of groundwater i contamination issues at the site in order to satisfy the requirements of the auditor, and 'i has nominated HLA to provide this asgistance.

SCOPE OF WORK The scope of work undertaken as part of this investigation was in accordance with that defined as 'Stage 1' in our proposal dated 23 June 2003. Specifically, this comprised the following:

Initial communications and meetings with BFP, including a preliminary review of @ environmenta Me osrsssrnent data compiled by BFP to date as well as relevant W n communications from'the auditor; & Acquisition of all relevant groundwater-related data from BFP, detailed review of these

1

data and identification of data gaps in the context of facilitating the completion of a statutory environmental audit;

@ v Plotting of groundwater elevations, corrected 101 the presence of floating free product in order to enable an interpretation of the direction of groundwater flow.

@ One meeting with the auditor to clarify his position in relation 10 the groundwater contamination status of the site, and to obtain an understanding of additional groundwater-related work that wilt be required to complete the audit. @ The provision of this letter report that summaries H M s understanding of the current auditor requirements, ouilines the specific work bsks required by HLA to fulfil these requirements (i.e. Stage 2) and the estimated time and cost to complete these tasks.

FINDINGS -

Review of BFP Data

Information obtained from BFP and subsequently reviewed by HLA included the following:

- A B FP report titled 'Geotechnical Investigation a Environmental A~se5.S ment", prepared for CKBS, May 2002 (Jab No. 41017);

r A hand-drawn sketch showing site groundwater bore locations, reduced water levels and reduced levels of floating product (where present). Thissketch is provided as Attachment A; Bore logs of each of the five groundwater monitoring bores installed (i-e. MBO1 to NIBUS); - A letter from Theiss Sewices Pty Ltd that provides a summary of the groundwater sampling methodology employed;

4 A report produced by AWN Pty Ltd titled "19 Wllson Street, South Yarra Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme", May 2003: Certificates of Analysis issued by WSL Consultants for fhe analysis of groundwater samples; Various gas chromatograms produced by WSL Consultants via analysis of groundwater samples.

Review of these data revealed the following:

According to the Royal Historical Society of Victoria Inc, report provided as Appendix B of the BFP May 2002 report, the site has been used for residential purposes from the 180U1s

33 FAX 61 3 83285544 Hh-~nvirosclences

Page 3 01 6

1 PllguQa03

to 1974 when a food and dothing shop was established. Based on the available information, it is not clear as to what speeRc purposes the site was used for from 1974 onwards, however BFP report that the site was used as a food and clothing shop from 1974 until its recent demolition. As shown on the sketch provided as Attachment A, LNAPL was observed to be present in bores MB02, MBO4 and ME05 (i-e. within the east and central portion of the site), whilst no LNAPL was observed to be present in bores MBOI and MB03 (in the eastern portion of the site). The thickness of LNAPL (where present) ranged from 1.06 m (MB05) to 1.25 rn (M 602). On the basis of the bore logs pmvided, all groundwater monitoring bores appear to be screened above the water table (which is required to enable the detection of LNAPL), with the exception of MBO1, which appears to be screened below the water table, Thus, the possibility of LNAPL being present at MBO1 cannot be ruled out at this stage. Samples of groundwater from bores ME01 and MB03 were collected by Theiss and submitted to WSL Consultants for chemical analysis. According to the WSL Certificates of Analysis. the groundwater samples were collected on 2 September 2002 and submitted to WSL for analysis on 3 September 2002, Results obtained from these analyses were included the following:

D Elevated concentrations of TPH (C6-C14), BTEX and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene were found to be present in both samples. These results are consistent with the presence of a dissolved phase groundwater plume of petrol (motor spirit).

o Acetone (2.2 mgll) and M1BK (0.07 rngll) were found to be present in sample MB01. These compounds are typically used as paint thinners;

o Trans-113-dichioropropene was detected in both MBOI (0.94 rnglL) and MB03 (0.90 mglL). This compound is typically used as a soil fumigant;

o Concentrations of TDS ranged from 1,800 to 1,900 rng/L. Reduced water levels (corrected for the presence of LNAPL) have been tabulated and are provided as Attachment 0. The reduced water level measured for MBO1 is highly anomalous and has been ignored (BFP advise that the bore was damaged during soil excavation works). As no measurement nf LNAPL density is currently available, two sets of corrected reduced water levels are provided, based on assumed LNAPL densities of 0.73 g/ml and 0.83 glrnl. On the basis of the assumption that LNAPL density is 0.83 mg/L, groundwater flow direction is interpreted to be in north-easterly direction, which is consistent with local topography. From this it may then be inferred that an off-site source of the LNAPL may potentially exist to the west or south-west of the site, On the basis of the soil gas survey undertaken by AWN (2003), BTEX was found to be present in the soil gas.

Meeting with Auditor A meeting was held between the appointed environmental auditor Mr Warren Pump of URS end Mr Mlchael Seignior of HLA at the URS offices in Richmond on 17 July 2003, A summary of the primary discussion points is as follows:

It was agreed that a key guiding principle within the Environment Protection Act (the Act), / PA are empowered to administer and must ablde by, is the principle of

eetings held between the auditor and the EPA approximately 12 rnonths previously, the EPA indicated that in the absence of knowledge of the identity of the person OF parsons responsible for the groundw~ter pollution at the site, they would hold

1 16:34 FAX 61 3 93285544 m-Envirosclences

Page 4 of 8

1 August ZO03

&responsible the person that currently owns or occupies h a site. This is technically possible under the Act, but it was agreed that it is not in the spirit of the Act. Given the above, it was agreed that it Could be in the best interests of Exley Hotels to at least definitively establish that the site is not the source of the groundwater pollution, and

P that there are much more likely sources in the site vicinity. Ideally, the actual pollution source should be identified and thls information passed on to the €PA. Gfven that vapouffi emanating from the contamhated groundwater have the potential to enter averlying air space (in this case an underground car park) and to be subsequently inhaled by the occupants. an assassment needs to be made regarding the risks posed to the building occupants. The assessmenl should also evaluate whether the pmposed measures to mitigate these risk (e-g. relatively high air exchange rates within the underground car park) are satisfactory.

ONGOING WORK On the basis of the above findings and discussions, the following ongoing work is recommended:

Undertake a more rigorous historical review of the site and surrounding properties in order to establish:

o The existence of definitive evidence as to whether or not 19-23 Wilson Street is the probable source of the groundwater pollution;

o The most likely source or sources of the groundwater pollution. This review will involve:

o A thorough review of historical council records, archlves and databases, a.s well as liaison with iocal persons-knowledgeable with the site area as required (should they be identsed);

o %review of the Sands and McDougall Directory, histoilcal maps etc. kept at the State Library;

' o A detailed review of historical aerial photographs maintained by DNRE;

-c+ o A walk-over survey of h e local area, delineating the location of known potenbal

J groundwater contamination sources (particularly evidence of the presence of f ' underground storage tanks).

Undertake a more definltlve characterisation of kgiona~ocal groundwater elevations (lo enable an interpretation of regionelflocal groundwater flow direction), as well as definitively establishing the nature of LNAPL present. This will be achieved via the following:

D Perform another round of standlng water level and LNAPL elevation measurements from existing operational site groundwater bores. Obtain a sample of the LNAPL and confirm its nature, approximate age and density:

JO Review of existing audit reports that exist in the area (abtained via a Freedom of Information (Fol) request to the EPA); Review of DNRE Groundwater Database as well as other groundwater information sources.

Undertake vapour intrusion modelling to chancterise potential human exposures and resulting health rlsks associated with vapoun emanating from the LNAPL and dissolved phase groundwater contamination into the overlying building, and the subsequent management option5 required to minimise these risks; Summarise the findings of the above tasks within a report and provide to the auditor for review;

1 16:34 FAX 61 3 nJ2Ubas4 nu-cnvlr~sclences

rn Assuming that the findings of this report demonstrates that the site is unlikely to be the source of the groundwater pollution, hold a meeting with the EPA (in the presence of the auditor) to clarify ongoing obligations (if any) with respect to groundwater pollution; Produce a follow-up letter repart summarising the outcomes of the meetings with EPA and the auditor.

COST ESTIMATE Our estimated price to complete the scope of work described in Sectian 4 of this report is as follows:

Professional Fees: Expenses:

Tctai:

Any variations to the proposed scope of work will be charged on a fees dnd expenses basis- However, such variations will not proceed unless written authorisation from Exley Hotels has been obtained. A schedule of professional rates and expenses is provided as Attachment C.

The price(s) quoted is exclusive of Goods and Services Tax (GST). GST of XI?& will be added to invoices to fully recover GST.

We are able to commence the ongoing work described immediately upon obtaining w e n authorisation from Exley Hotels to proceed. We anticipate that the woFk will be completed within 4 to 5 weeks of commencement,

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

We propose to undertake this work according to our Standard Terms of Engagement, which are provided as Attachment D, Should you accept the proposal to undertake ongoing work, please sign and return the Proposal Acceptance Record, provided as Attachment E.

--.

I 1 6 ~ 3 5 FAX 81 3 93285544 HLA-En~lrosciences

We trust that this report is satisfactory, Should you have any contact the undersigned an (03) 8699 2135.

' Yours sincerely, HLA-Envirosciences Pty Llrnited

IWIchael Seignior Principal Environmental Scientist

cc: GaYin Macdonald, Caulfleld Kriuanek & Sugar Pty Ltd

queries. please don't

Page 6 of I

1 August 2003

hesitate to

This document was prepared for the sole use of Edey Hotels Pty ltd and the mgulatory agencies that are dlrectly involved in this pmject, the only lntsnded beneliciades of our wrk. No other paw should rely on the infurrnatlon tomined herein

without the prior written consant of HLA-Envirasdences Pty tirnited and Edey Hotels Pty ltd.

- Survey Levels and NAPL I

Groundwater Gauging Results

19-23 Wlison Street, South Yarra

N A P L DENSfTY = 0.73

Measurement Depth NAPC Water Thickness in Specific Well Gravitv

m(ref) rnBTOC rnBTOC rnl3TQC

MB03 02-Sap-02 -2.635 7.00 -6.515 -6.51 5

MB04 02-Sep-02 -2.55 5,OQ -6.220 -7.41 8 -1 .I90 0.730 -6.549 ----- MB05 02-Sep-02 -2.47 5.00 -6.199 -7,254 -1.055 0.730 -6.484

interpreted gfoundwaer flow dlrecCon

Nolea: rnBTOC - mslres below lop ol casing ' RL - remue level NAPL - non-aqusous phase liquid AHD - Auclrallan Heighl Dalurn HLA-Envlrasclenaes Pty Limited Page I of I

Caulfield Krivanek & Sugar Po Lid h,

Architecrs . Planner$, inferinr Designers 424 Burke Road, Cnnthentul~, Vicinria 3124 Telepircrne: (03) 9989 97.22 Far: (03) 9889 I720 Ernall: c k . ~ ~ e l b a u t n a s i n r w u y . n e ~ ~ 1 ~ s

FA CSIfiIILE TMIV'SMISSlQfV

1'0: Warren Pump Fmm; Gavin Macdonald

Company: URS Australia Ply Ltd Date: 25109102

Fax No: 9279 2850 No of Pages; 2

Re: 21-23 Wlison Street South Yarra CC:

Job No: 99203 Ref: URS-04

-- MESSAGE; ENVIRONMENTAL AUDLT

Warren,

As d i s c u s s ~ d at :he meeting with EPA, we attach a response to the basement ventiiation system designed fcr the project. If we nesd a basement axfraction system do you believe 'rtsis is suifabie or v ~ i l l we require the system to be upgraded (to what level of extraction) ?

Shoule you havo any queries please contact the writer.

Regards

Gavin Macdonald

7 . /30 :09 .1:13 TI.E 1?:-11 131 3 9 8 8 9 l S ? r : ~ C ' FLD , IiRIT'&SPI:;.IR ,x 1'; 1 5

:UUP . 2 1, <./cf',~L. 2

I ENGINEERS CA s ~ i m

Our Ref 109591M

Caulfield Khvanek & Sugar Pty Ltd 424 Bourke Road CAMBERWELL V1C 3124,

Attention: Gavin McDonald

RE: WILSON STREET - SOUTH YARRA , -- Baslsrneht Car Park Verrtilatiatl

- . 1 -_-_ Dear Gavin,

The basement car park is fulfy ventilated by a mechanicat exhaust system &at is designed tdin amordam wilh AS1 668.2 - 1991.

, The exhaust system extrack a total of 3,870 Us fmm three rldes ofthe c a r park at high level an6 tf 8 Iwv level. This exhaust a t e is equal b 16 air changer per hour, or in other mrds a change nver d

air every six minutes. / LL,,/'

The exhaust fan mn op ia te a! high s p ~ d ar~d low spesd. The ctmm3on of tfie fan is mntin~~alis on Iw speed exoept fer when it gm tu high speed under any of the foligwing cosldltionc. -

(i) When rnovmnt within be car perk as detecled ham tks motion detectors,

( 0 During peak periods as datermined by h e time clock settings urhici.; wclillc! typicalty be 8 to 9am ad 5 to 6pm.

( i i ) Under fire mode. '

Director SCIjErdE GROUP CONSJWLTING EYGINERS

REPORT NO: B163

REPORT DATE OF ISSUE: 29/05/2003

-LV

BFP CONSULT~NTS PTY LTD ,. --.,< 5

RICHMOND,' VICTORIA AIR@ WATER. NOISE

A.W.N. CONSULTANTS Melbourne Sydney

Telephone: (031 9758 7299 (02) 9584 1900 Fax: 103) 9752 2694 (02) 9584 1068

BFP CONSULTANTS PTY LTD

RICHMOND, VICTORIA

A*WeN PTY. LTD. A.C.N. 083 198 OOI A.B.N. 74 083 198 001

CONSULTING ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS/~CIENTISTS - POLLUTION MONITORING AND CONTROL

NATA Amedited Laboratory No. 19 10 NATA endorsed test report. This doarmat shall not be reproduced, except in full.

A*W*N (AIR WATER NOISE) CONSULTANTS (ABN 74 083 198 001) (NATA Laboratory Accreditation No. 1910) 3 & 411 8 Thomas Street Femtree Gully Vic 3 156 Telephone: (03) 9758-7299 Facsimile: (03) 9752-2694 Email: a~~~n.%';lwn.com.au

O AmW*N (AIR WATER NOISE) CONSULTANTS

Tl~is document is, and sl~all remain, t l~e property of A.W.N. (Air Water Noise) Consultants. The document lnay only be used for the purposes for which it was commissioned, and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.

A.W.N. (Air Water Noise) Consultants, 3 & 411 8 Thomas Street, Femtree Gully, 3 156

Contact: Mr. P. Noonan Contact: Miss Jacinda Houston

-----

Ref: JWSLH BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd, Richmond, Victoria: Report No: B163 19 Wilson Streef South Yarra Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

- -,

2.0 TEST METHODS ................................................................................................................. 2.1

2.1 Benzene. Toluene. Ethyl Benzene and Xylene Isomers .......................................... 2.1

3.0 MEASUREMENT UNCERTALNTY ESTIMATES ....................................................................... 3.1

3.1 Benzene. Toluene. Ethyl Benzene and XyIene Isomers .......................................... 3.1

TABLES

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Table 8

Table 9

....................................................... Soil Gas BTEX Concentrations: Bore Hole No 1 4.2

Soil Gas BTEX Concentrations: Bore Hole No . 1 ...................................................... 4.3



. .................................................. Soil Gas BTEX Concentrations: Bore Hoie No 3 4 . 6


...................................................... Soil Gas BTEX Concentrations: Bore Hole No . 4 4.8

Soil Gas BTEX Concentrations: Bore Hole No . 4 ..................................................... .4.9

................................................................................................... Summary of Results 5.1

Ret JWSLW BFP Consultants Pty . Ltd. Richmond, Victoria: ReportNo: B163 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

A.W.N. (Air Water Noise) Consultants was commissioned by BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd. to conduct soil gas monitoring at 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra on 1 7 ~ May, 2003.

The monitoring programme was as follows:

Nortll-east comer of basement

North-east comer of basement

North-west corner of basement

North-west comer of basement

South-west corner of basement

South-west corner of basement

( South-east comer of basement

South-east comer of basement 1

Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylene isomers





Benzene, toluene, ethyl bellze~te and xyIene isomers


Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xyIene isomers

Ref MSLH BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd, Richmond, Victoria: 1.1 Report No: B163 19 Wilson Street, South Y a m Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2b03 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

2.0 TEST METHODS

2.1 BENZENE, TOLUENE, ETHYL BENZENE AND XYLENE ISOMERS

Activated carbon tubes were used for the sampling of volatile organic compounds from the bore holes.

Sample volume was determined by placing a critical orifice in the sample train. The critical orifice flowrate was determined using a transfer standard (calibrated flowmeter).

Analysis involved desorption from the activated carbon with carbon disulphide, and injection into a gas chromatograph equipped with a mass spectrometer (GCMS).

The mass spectra generated were used to identify and quantify the compounds through comparison with known injected standards.

The test method used was in accordance with A.W.N. Consultants Method No. A13, "Adsorbent Tube Sampling: Volatile Organic Compounds in Source Emissions".

Ref JH/SLH BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd., Richmond, Victoria: 2.1 ReportNo: B163 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

3.1 BENZENE, TOLUENE, ETHYL BENZENE AND XYLENE ISOMERS

The uncertainty of measurement for the test method is reported as 11% to 17% for the analytes determined.

-

Ref JH/SLH BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd., Richmond, Victoria: 3.1 ReportNo: B163 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

The results of the monitoring programme conducted on 7U1 May, 2003 are presented as follows:


Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylem isomers


Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xyfene isomers





Ref WSLH BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd., Richmond, Victoria: 4. 1. Report No: B163 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

I

A * W @ N (AIR WATER NOISE) CONSULTANTS C O N S U L T I N G ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS/SCIENT ISTS - M O N I T O R I N G AND C O N T R O L

3 & 4/ 1 8 Tt~omos Street, Ferntree Gully, Vjclorio, 3 156 Aus~rolio 8/ i 6-1 6A Hearne Street, Mor~dole, N.S.W. 2223 Australia Postal Address: P.O. Box 155, Fernlree Gully 3 156 Posiol Address: P.O. Box 1 10, Riverwood 2 2 10 Telephone: (6 1 3) 9758 7299 Telephone: (6 1 21 9 5 8 4 1900 Facsimile: (61 31 9752 2694 Facsimile: (61 2) 9 5 8 4 1068 Emoil:awn&wn.com au Enwi l :~&a~.com.au

TABLE 1 SOIL GAS BTEX CONCENTRATIONS

ADDRESS: 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra, 3 141

DATE: May 07,2003

LOCATION: Bore Hole No. 1 (North-east corner of basement)

SMLE DEPTH: 200 mm

Benzene* *: Sample Number Sample Period (hours)

Concentration (mg/Nm3)

Toluene** : Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


Ethyl benzene* *: Sample Number Sample Period @ours)


Total xyIene isomers**: Sample Number Sample Period @ours)


NOTE: N o d volume Nm3 = gas volume in cubic metres at O°C and 101.3 @a. ** Sample analyses conducted by WSL Consultants Pty. L,td NATA Accredrtation No. 1201 (Report No. 563614).

Ref JWSLH Reuort No: El63

BFP Consultants Pry. Ltd, Richmond, Victoria: 4.2 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra

~ e b r t Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

A W N P f i . LTO A C N 083 198001. A B N 74 083 198 001

- II -

A a W 9 N (AIR WATER NOISE) CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS/SCENTlSTS - MONITORING AND CONTROL

3 & 4/1 8 Thornos Street, Ferntree Gully, Victoria, 3 156 Australia 8/ 16-1 6A Heorne Street, Morldae, N.S.W. 2223 Aus~ralia Postal Address. P.O. Box 155. Ferntree Gully 3 156 Postal Addiess: P.O. Box l 10, Riverwood 22 10 Telephone: (6 1 3) 9758 7299 Telephone: [b 1 2) 9584 1900 Facsim~le: 161 3 ) 9752 2694 Focsirnile: 16 1 2) 9584 1068 Emil: awnQam.cm.au Emii: ~ & a ~ . c o m . a u

TABLE 2 SOIL GAS BTEX CONCENTRAT~ONS

ADDRESS: 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra, 3 141

DATE: May 07,2003

LocAmON: Bore Hole No. 1 (North-east corner of basement)

Benzene* * : Sample Number Sample Period (hours)

Concentration (m&/Nm3)

Toluene**: .

Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


Ethyl benzene** : Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


Totd xylene isomers**: Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


m: Normal volume Nm3 = gas volume in cubic metres at O°C and 101.3 Pa . ** Sample analyses conducted by WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. NATA Accreditation No. 1201 (Report No. 563614).

Ref JWSLH BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd, Richmond, 4.3 ReportNo: B163 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

A W N PTY LTD A C N 083 1 9 8 0 0 1 , A B N 74 083 138031

I

A W @ N (AIR WATER NOISE) CONSUlTANTS C O N S U L T I N G E N V I R O N M E N T A L ENGINEERS/SCIENT ISTS - M O N I T O R I N G A N D C O N T R O L ==#==== 3 & 4/ 18 Thomas Street, Fern~ree Gully, Vicloria, 3 156 Avstrolia 8/16-16A Hesme Street, Mortdale, N.S.W. 2223 Australia Posiol Address: P.O. Box 155, Fernlree Gully 3 156 Postal Address. P.O. Box 1 10, Riverwood 22 10 Telephone. (61 31 9758 7299 Telephone: (61 21 9584 1900 Facsimile. (61 3) 9752 2694 Facsimile: 161 2) 9584 1068 Em3il:[email protected] Email:awn&avm.com.au


ADDRESS: 19 Wilson Street, SouthYarra, 3141

DATE: May 07,2003

LOCATION: Bore Hole No. 2 (North-west corner of basement)



Toluene**: Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


Ethyl benzene * * : Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


Total xylene isomers**: Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


NOTE: Normal volume Nm3 = gas volume in cubic metres at 0°C and 101.3 Wa. ** Sample analyses conducted by WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. NATA Accreditation No. 1201 (Report No. 563614).

ReE JH/SLH BIT Consultants Pty. Ltd, Rtchmon4 Victoria: 4.4 Report No: B 163 19 Wilson Streef South Yarra ~ekrt Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

AWN PIY. lTD. A.C.N.083 198OCII.A.B.N. 74 083 198001

- A @ W I\] (AIR WATER NOISE) CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS/SCIENTSTS - M O N I T O R I N G AND C O N T R O t

3 & 4/ 18 Thomas Street, Ferntree Gully, Victor~o, 3 156 Aus~rolio 8 / l b - l 6 A Hearne Skeet, Mortdale, N.S.W. 2223 Australia Postal Address: P.O. Box 155, Ferntree Gully 3 156 Posiol Address: P.O. Box 1 10, Riverwood 22 10 Telephone. (6 1 3) 9758 7299 Telephone: 161 2) 9584 1900 Facsimile: (61 3) 9752 2694 Facsimile: [61 2) 9 5 8 4 1068 Email:[email protected] Email:[email protected]

TABLE 4 SOIL GAS BTEX CONCENT~RA~ONS

ADDRESS: 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra, 3 14 1

DATE: May 07,2003

LOCATION: Bore Hole No. 2 (North-west corner of basement)



Toluene* *: Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


Ethyl benzene*': Sample Number Sample Period (hours)

Concentration fmg/Nm3)



NOTE: Normal volume Nm3 = gas volume in cubic metres a1 0°C and 101.3 kPa. - ** Sample analyses conducted by WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. NATA Accreditation No. 1201 (Report No. 563614).

Ref JH/SLH BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd., Richmond, wctoria: 4.5 Report No: B 163 19 Wilson StreeC South Yarra Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

A.W N PTY. ITD. A.C.N.083 19803l. A.B.N. 74 083 198001

- A a W [\I (Al R WATER NOISE) CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENVtRONMENTAL ENGINEERS/SCIENTISTS - M O N I T O R I N G A N D CONTROL

3 & 4/ 18 Thomos Street. Ferntree Gully, Victoria, 3 156 Australia 8 / 16-1 6A Heorne Streel, Mortdale, N.S.W. 2223 Australia Postal Address: P.O. Box 155, Ferntree Gully 3 156 Pos~al Address: P.O. Box 1 10, Riverwood 22 10 Telephone: (61 31 9758 7299 Telephone: (61 2) 9584 1900 Facsimile: (6 1 3) 9752 2694 Facsimile: (6 1 21 9584 i 068 Emoil: [email protected] Ema~l: am&m.com.au


ADDRESS: 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra, 3 14 1

DATE: May 07,2003

LOCATION: Bore Hole No. 3 (South-west corner of basement)





Ethyl benzene** : Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


Total xylene isomers*': Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


NOTE: Normal volume Nm3 = gas volume in cubic metres at O°C and 101.3 kPa. - ** Sample analyses conducted by WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd. NATA Accreditation No. 1201 (Reprt No. 563614).

Ref JWSLH BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd, Richmond, Victoria: 4.6 Report No: B 163 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra ~ e p o r i Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

A.W.N. PTY. LTD AC.N. 083 198 @ G I , A 6.N 74 083 198 001

- - A 0 W N (AIR WATER NOISE) CONSULTANTS C O N S U L T I N G E N V I R O N M E N T A L ENGINEERS/SCIENTISTS - M O N I T O R I N G A N D C O N T R O L

3 8 4/1 8 Thomos Street, Ferntree Gully, Victoria, 3 156 Australia 8 /16 ] 6A Heorne Sireel, Mortdole, N.S.W. 2223 Austrolio Poslol Address: P.O. Box 155, Ferntree Gully 3 156 Postal Address: P.O. Box 1 10, Riverwood 22 10 Telephone: 161 3) 9758 7299 Telephone: (61 2) 9584 1900 Facsimile: 161 3 ) 9752 2694 Facsimile: (6 1 2) 9584 1068 Emil: wn&vm.com.ou Email:[email protected]


ADDRESS: 19 Wilson Street, SouthYat~a, 3141

DATE: May 07,2003

LOCATION: Bore Hole No. 3 (South-west corner of basement)





Ethyl benzene**: Sample Number Sample Period @ours)




m: Normal volume Nm3 = gas volume in cubic metres at O°C and 10 1.3 kPa. ** Sample analyses conducted by WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd NATA Accredtation No. 1201 meport No. 563614).

Ref: EUSLH BFP Consultants PLy. Ltd, Richmond, Victoria: 4.7 Report No: B163 19 Wilson Street, South Yana Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

A W N FTY 1TD A C N 083 198001,ABN 74 053 198ClOl

- A@ W I\] (AIR WATER NOISE) CONSULTANTS C O N S U l T I N G ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS/SCIENTISTS - M O N I T O R I N G AND CONTROL

.:, , ., .

3 & 4/ 18 Thomas Street, Ferntree Gully, Victoria, 3'1 56 Australia 8/ 16-1 bA Hearne Street, Mortdole, N.S.W. 2223 Australia Posla Address: P . 0 Box 155, Ferntree Gully 3 i 56 Postal Address: P.O. Box 1 10, Riverwood 22 10 Telephone. (61 31 9758 7299 Telephone: (6 1 21 9584 1900 Facsimile: (61 3) 9752 2694 Facsimile: (6 1 21 9584 1068 Emoil: avn%wm.com.au Email:[email protected]


ADDRESS: 19 Wilson Street, ! South Yarra, 3 14 1

DATE: May 07,2003

LOCATION: Bore Hole No. 4 (South-east corner of basement)

SAMPLE DEPTH: 300 rnm


Concentration (rng/Nm3)

Toluene* * : Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


Ethyl benzener*: Sample Number Sample Period (hours)

Concentration fmg/Nm3)



NOTE: Normal volume Nm3 = gas volume in cubic metres at O°C and 101.3 kPa. - ** Sample analyses conducted by WSL Consultants Pty. Ltd NATA Accredrtation No. 1201 (Report No. 563614).

Ref JWSLH BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd, Richmond, Victoria: ReportNo: 3163 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

A W.N. W. !TD. AC.N. 083 198 001, A B N 74 083 198 Clot

- A W * 1\1 (AIR WATER NOISE) CONSULTANTS C O N S U L T I N G E N V I R O N M E N T A L ENGINEERS/SCIENT ISTS - M O N I T O R I N G AND CONTROL

3 & 4/ 1 8 Thomas Streel, Ferntree Gully, Victoria, 3 156 Auslroio 8/ 1 6-1 6A Heorne Sireel, Moridale, N.S.W. 2223 Aus~ratio Poslal Address. P.O. Box 155, Fernlree Gully 3 156 Postol Address: P.O. Box 1 10, Riverwood 22 10 Telephone: (6 1 3) 9758 7299 Telephone: (6 1 21 9584 1 900 Facsimile: (6 1 3) 9752 2694 Facsimile: (6 1 2) 9584 1068 Email:[email protected] Emil:a\~l&m.com.au

TABLE 8 SOIL GAS BTEX CONCENTRA~ONS

ADDRESS: 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra, 3141

DATE: May 07,2003

LOCATION: Bore Hole No. 4 (South-east corner of basement)



Toluene**: Sample Number Sample Period (hours)


Ethyl benzene**: Sample Number Sample Period (hours)




NOTE: N o m l volume Nm3 = gas volume in cubic mews at O°C and 101.3 kPa. ** Sample analyses wnductedby WSL Consultants P!y. Ltd NATA Accreditation No. 1201 (Report No. 563614).

Ref: jWSLH BFP Consultants Fly. Ltd., Richmond, Victoria: Report No: B163 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

A W N mY 1TD ACN 083 19300l.ABN 74 083 198001

A summary of results from the soil gas contaminant monitoring conducted on 7* May, 2003 is presented in Table 9.

Ref JH/SLH BFP Consultants Pty. Ltd, Richmond, Victoria: 5.1 Report No: B163 19 Wilson Street, South Yarra Report Date of Issue: 29/05/2003 Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme

1. boa^ ROLE No. I Dliusn (mm)

CON<IKSTRATION (mg/Nm3)

B E N ~ N K I TOLUENE 1 ETML BENZENE

vasilel

Text Box

For more documents relating to Appendix F, please refer to Attachments of this PDF

.12. MAR. 2004 -f&43 EPA VICTORIA 613 96952578 , 3 ! + 3

,d'

12 March 2004

Mr Phil Sinclair Coffey Geosciences Pty Ltd PO Box 40 KEW VIC 3101

In~cinal use

1 ..

Dear Mr Slnclair

CLEAN-UP OF GROUNDWATER TO THE EXTENT PRACTICABLE - 19-23 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA

Thank you for your correspondence dated 23 December 2003 and subsequent additional information requesting advice on how to proceed in the completion of the audlt for the above named site, I n addltion, EPA has undertaken a significant amount of work to enable a decision on this matter to be reached. This was dye to a lack of detail in the information, and the quality of the information provided by you. This introduced significant delays to completing the process. We will detail and discuss this matter further with you at a later date.

EPA has come to the opiniorl that the light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) identified at the site Is unlikely to originate from it.

Generally, where LNAPL is present and it is practicable to remove, LNAPL must be removed. However, EPA accepts that, in this case, removal of the LNAPL is impracticable whilst the source and extent of that LNAPL remain unknown.

Pursuant to Clause 19 of the State environment protection policy (Groundwaters of Victoria) the Authority has:

1. Determined that groundwater pollution a t the site has been cleaned-up to the extent practicable; and

2. Identified that the site is within a Groundwater Quqlity Restricted Use . - Zone.

I n finalisipg the environmental audit for this site, you should ensure that the following are included in the Statement of Environmental Audit:

12. MAR. 2004 €PA VICTORIA 613 96952578 13:v3 .

a note that the Authority has ideptified the site as within a Groundwater Quality Restricted Use Zone, and that the Authority has determined that groundwater has been cleaned-up to the extent practicable;

a further note that, pursuant to Clause 19 of the SEPP (Groundwaters of Victoria) the Authority will require a periodic reassessmept of the practicability of clean up:

a condltlon that requires access to bore(s) be maintained for futu-re clean up a t the site and that an agreement be entered into with the Responsible Authority to ensure that appropriate measures are established at the site to allow future access to clean up;

a condltlon advlslng that; groundwater not be abstracted from the site for uses other than clean-up or monitoring; and

conditions, that you see necessary, related to the ongoing management of groundwater and the LNAPL at the site. Any condition should include the requirement to re-establish defective bore(s) at the site. The Statement should include sufficient detail to be clear as to the requirements you are specifying. Alternatively, the Statement may refer to a detailed groundwater management plan.

It is preferable that the groundwater management plan be completed and included wlth the environmental audit report. We would encourage you to discuss statement conditions with EPA prior to completion of the audit. - If you have any questions, please contact me on 9695 2554.

Yours sincerely

PAUL MORITZ C

MANAGER - LAND AND GROUNDWATER

1

Phil Sinclair

From: [email protected]: Wednesday, 3 March 2004 8:35To: Phil SinclairSubject: 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra

Phil,

As discussed on the 26th and again yesterday there is material missing from your submissions on this matter. Could you please send me a copy of the BFP report(s) related to investigations at the site asap so that I can respond.

ThanksMichael

Michael RehfischProject Manager - GroundwaterLand & GroundwaterEPA Victoria40 City RoadSouthbank VIC 3006Ph: 9695 2516 Fax: 9695 2578www.epa.vic.gov.auDX210082

********************************************************************************PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTINGTHIS EMAIL********************************************************************************This email, including any attachments, is intended only for use by theaddressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or personal information and may also be the subject of legal and/or parliamentary privilege. Any personal information contained in this email is not to be used or disclosed for any purpose other than the purpose for which you have received it.

If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited by State and Commonwealth Acts Of Parliament including the Victorian Information Privacy Act 2000. If you have received this communication in error please contact the sender immediately and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of viruses by MimeSweeper.

***************************************************************************HAVE YOU UPDATED YOUR VIRUS SOFTWARE TODAY?***************************************************************************

1

Phil Sinclair

From: [email protected]: Wednesday, 3 March 2004 17:01To: Phil SinclairSubject: vapour risk assessment - Wilson Street, South Yarra

Phil,

Can you please just clarify a couple of points on the HRA.

1. Please confirm that the modelled indoor air concentrations in thebasement compare with the measured concentrations in soil gas beneath the slab. That is, the HRA has derived soil gas concentrations resulting from the LNAPL. Do these numbers compared with the measured soil gas concentrations collected at the site?2. The indoor air screening level concentration for children is greaterthan that for an adult. Can you please check that this is correct (7.0 ug/m3 adult versus 14 ug/m3 child).3. Is the floor crack percentage conservative enough, and would youexpect additional cracking in future?4. Can you confirm that the reduced air exchange rate used in the model is an unforced or "natural" air exchange rate or an air exchange rate for residential building design.

I will discuss with you tomorrow morning.

RegardsMichael



If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited by State and Commonwealth Acts Of Parliament including the Victorian Information Privacy Act 2000.

2

If you have received this communication in error please contact the sender immediately and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.



1

Phil Sinclair

From: [email protected]: Thursday, 4 March 2004 17:02To: Phil SinclairSubject: Wilson Street

Phil,

Thank you for your fax of yesterday and this morning. Please be aware that I have only just received the faxes as they were sent to the wrong number. In future could you please send information to fax number 9695 2578, the business fax number for this unit.

Thanks for providing further information on the HRA. We are currently assessing all available information and will respond to your requests when this assessment has been finalised.

Michael Rehfisch






1

Phil Sinclair

From: [email protected]: Friday, 5 March 2004 17:32To: [email protected]: Wilson St CUTEP outcome.

Phil

We today finalised deliberation on your CUTEP submission for 19-23 Wilson St S Yarra, and determined that CUTEP has been achieved. We will forward the formal notification letter after it has been completed early next week (I am in Bendigo for most of Tuesday).

This has not been a simple matter to deal with. The most significant delays in completing this process have come about because EPA has needed to undertake a significant amount of work, itself, to enable a decision on this matter to be reached. This was due to a lack of detail in, and thequality of, the information provided. We will detail and discuss thismatter further with you at a later date.

Paul

PAUL MORITZMANAGER LAND & GROUNDWATEREPA VictoriaFirst Floor HWT Tower40 City RoadSouthbank Vic 3006Tel: (03) 9695 2554 (Direct) Fax: (03) 9695 2578





2

1

Phil Sinclair

From: [email protected]: Tuesday, 6 January 2004 15:08To: Phil SinclairSubject: 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra submission

Follow Up Flag: Follow upDue By: Wednesday, 7 January 2004 8:00Flag Status: Completed

Phil,

We have begun looking at your submission and I have a couple of queries asfollows:

What are the LNAPL constituents and the proportion of each (table 7-2 was not included in the submission)? What is the vapour risk posed to residential indoor airspace above the basement (cancer and non-cancer health risks)? Please consider the risk posed by the vapour conservatively assuming that there is no forced air ventilation of the basement carpark. I note your comment that the carpark would not be sealed - Do you know if the carpark is passively vented also? What information do you have on the fate and transport of contaminants to conclude that the risk to maintenance of ecosystems is low (including consideration of the dissolved phase component of the plume)?

ThanksMichael



If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use or dissemination of this

2

communication is strictly prohibited by State and Commonwealth Acts Of Parliament including the Victorian Information Privacy Act 2000. If you have received this communication in error please contact the sender immediately and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.



1

Phil Sinclair

From: [email protected]: Wednesday, 7 January 2004 11:18To: Phil SinclairSubject: 19-23 Wilson Street South Yarra

Phil,

Apologies for the second email on this matter. I have a couple of otherqueries:

As you are aware EPA was approached by the former Auditor of the site highlighting concerns that whoever picked up this audit may not have all relevant information available to them in completing the audit. Whilst EPA is not in possession of a report prepared by HLA-Enviroscience on the site history, EPA has been advised that the further works by HLA did not rule out the site as a source site. It has been suggested to EPA that the site was also used for panel beating or mechanical repair type operations. For your own confidence in the completeness of the site history, and subsequent conclusion that the site is not the source, I suggest you seek out any information that would confirm or refute this suggestion. Further to the matter of the site history, I note your comments that both the former auditor and HLA recommended the collection of additional history of the area, based on amongst other reasons, the proximity to Dye Works Park. Do you have a view on whether this recommendation for collection of additional site history was warranted? If you believe it was, have you taken any steps to pursue it? I note also that neither you nor the former auditor observed the excavation and validation operations of the basement carpark excavation. What confidence (including supporting information) do you have using your multiple lines of evidence approach, that no contamination was observed during the excavation works? Please provide documented evidence of the validation sampling procedures and your opinion on the suitability of this work (including adequacy of sampling strategy including sample density, sampling interval, the sample collection, preservation, holding times, and analytical technique). On another point in your introduction you seek clarification on how to complete the audit consistent with s.13 of the guidelines. In this case, and subject to any determination by the Authority, 13.7 of the guidelines should be used to complete the audit (that is the auditor determines CUTEP and provides information in the SoEA).

This information will assist EPA in assessing your submission in accordance with s14.5 of the auditor guidelines, and will also assist you in forming an opinion on the condition of the site and its suitability for use.

Michael RehfischProject Manager - GroundwaterLand & GroundwaterEPA Victoria40 City RoadSouthbank VIC 3006Ph: 9695 2516 Fax: 9695 2578www.epa.vic.gov.au

2

DX210082





1

Phil Sinclair

From: Phil Sinclair [[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, 9 March 2004 14:52To: '[email protected]'Cc: '[email protected]'; [email protected]: E16246/1-A: RE: Wilson St CUTEP outcome.

E16246/1-AS: RE: Wilson St CUTEP outcome.

Paul

Thank you for your correspondence of Friday, 5 March 2004, in relation to the audit of the above site. I will proceed to complete the audit report, and await the formal correspondence on this matter.

Please be advised, that at no stage was any of the correspondence to EPA intended to be a CUTEP submission. The items supplied were forwarded in order to comply with EPA Auditor Guidelines in relation to the presence of free product at an audit site, and subsequently in response to EPA queries raised with me.

In order to improve the conduct of audits such as this in future, it would be appreciated if we could arrange a debriefing session at some time towards the end of March; say in the week commending Monday, 29 March.

Please contact the undersigned if you have any queries concerning this correspondence.

RegardsPHIL SINCLAIRPRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTCoffey Geosciences Pty LtdACN 056 335 516ABN 57 056 335 516Contact details - Melbourne Office16 Church Street, HAWTHORN VIC 3122PO Box 40, KEW VIC 3101Telephone +61 3 9853 3396Mobile 0403 24 24 75Facsimile +61 3 9853 0189Email [email protected] Site http://www.coffey.com.au/)NB The content of this message and any attachments may be privileged, in confidence or sensitive. Any unauthorised use is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and disregard and delete the email. Email may be corrupted or interfered with. Coffey cannot guarantee that the message you receive is the same as that we sent. At Coffey's discretion we may send a paper copy for confirmation. In the event of any discrepancy between paper and electronic versions the paper version is to take precedence.

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 5 March 2004 17:32To: [email protected]: Wilson St CUTEP outcome.

Phil

We today finalised deliberation on your CUTEP submission for 19-23 Wilson St S Yarra, and determined that CUTEP has been achieved. We will forward the formal notification letter after it has been

2

completed early next week (I am in Bendigo for most of Tuesday).

This has not been a simple matter to deal with. The most significant delays in completing this process have come about because EPA has needed to undertake a significant amount of work, itself, to enable a decision on this matter to be reached. This was due to a lack of detail in, and thequality of, the information provided. We will detail and discuss thismatter further with you at a later date.

Paul

PAUL MORITZMANAGER LAND & GROUNDWATEREPA VictoriaFirst Floor HWT Tower40 City RoadSouthbank Vic 3006Tel: (03) 9695 2554 (Direct) Fax: (03) 9695 2578





Electronic Copy

EXLEY HOTELS PTY LTD

Assessment of Vapour Risk Associated with Hydrocarbon

Contamination of Groundwater - 19-23 Wilson Street, SOUTH YARRA

E16246/1-SA

30 January 2004

This is an electronic version of a Coffey report.

A signed paper copy of this report will be issued to the client.

In the event of any discrepancy between the paper and electronic versions of this report, the signed paper version is

to take precedence.

E16246/1-SA RJB 30 January 2004

Electronic Copy This is an electronic version of a Coffey report.

A signed paper copy of this report will be issued to the client. In the event of any discrepancy between the paper and

electronic versions of this report, the signed paper version is to take precedence.

Exley Hotels Pty Ltd c/o Caulfield Krivanek & Sugar Pty Ltd 424 Burke Road CAMBERWELL VIC 3124 Attention: Mr Gavin McDonald cc Mr Jerry Pilarinos Dear Sir, RE: ASSESSMENT OF VAPOUR RISK ASSOCIATED WITH HYDROCARBON

CONTAMINATION OF GROUNDWATER - 19-23 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA This report presents the results of an assessment of health risk associated with the hydrocarbon vapour migration from groundwater to the basement of an apartment block at 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra. The assessment indicates low risk to human health associated with the presence of hydrocarbon contamination if no mitigation measures are undertaken.

The assessment of risk of exposure to residents via air in the building foyer relies heavily on the stairwell door being shut when not in use. Propping open the stairwell door or removal of the door may result in unacceptable risks to residents in the foyer.

For and on behalf of

COFFEY GEOSCIENCES PTY LTD

per ROSS BEST

SENIOR PRINCIPAL

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004

C:\Documents And Settings\Sinclaip\Coffey03\Exley\E162461SA.Doc

i Electronic Copy

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT 1

2.1 Groundwater Contamination and Sub-surface Conditions 1

2.2 Toxicity Assessment 2

2.3 Exposure Assessment 2

2.4 Exposure Parameters 2

2.5 Modelling of Benzene Emission to Indoor Air 4

2.6 Site Risk Characterisation 7

2.7 Site-Specific Target Level for Groundwater 7

3. REFERENCES 11

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


1 Electronic Copy

1. INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of an appraisal of health risk associated with migration of hydrocarbon vapour from groundwater through the soil profile into apartment building at 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra. This work was commissioned by Exley Hotels Pty Ltd to meet the requirements of a statutory environmental audit of the site.

The risk assessment was based upon information provided in relation to the design of the apartment building together with groundwater and soil vapour contamination information presented in BFP (November 2003), and as provided by BFP to the environmental auditor for preparation of the audit report (e.g. A.W.N (May 2003)). The assessment considers risks associated with the following pathway:

• Partitioning of phase-separated hydrocarbons at the surface of the groundwater table; • Migration upward through the soil profile by diffusion; • Migration through assumed defects in the floor slab of the building basement carpark; • Entry to the foyer air space via a connecting doorway; and • Indoor inhalation of hydrocarbon vapour originating from groundwater contamination.

The assessment makes use of site investigation data, design information and published guidelines in relation to health risks associated with exposure to benzene.

This assessment is limited to consideration of indoor inhalation risks associated with benzene contamination beneath the apartment building and does not address other contamination or risk matters.

2. HEALTH RISK APPRAISAL

2.1 Groundwater Contamination and Sub-surface Conditions

Previous investigations at the site (BFP May 2002) and subsequent data obtained at the site by BFP and its specialist sub-consultants HLA Environmental and A.W.N Pty Ltd and provided to the environmental auditor have revealed:

• The presence of groundwater at a depth of approximately 6.5m below the original ground surface at the site and approximately 4m below the surface of the basement carpark concrete slab of the apartment building;

• Measured groundwater concentrations of benzene of about 13mg/L at the site. • Free phase hydrocarbon contamination has been observed at the groundwater surface.

The groundwater contamination is interpreted as having resulted from leakage from an unknown offsite source, assumed to be located close to the site; most likely to the west or south west; but sources to the north or north-east (based on a neighbourhood walk through) cannot be excluded.

The sub-surface profile at the site consists of:

• Concrete slab (750mm thick), overlying; • Low density polyethylene liner approximately 0.2mm thick, overlying; • Crushed rock (300mm thick) provided as a sub-surface vapour drainage layer, overlying; • Crushed rock and sandy clayey fill (400mm thick), overlying;

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


2 Electronic Copy

• Clayey sandy fill (1.1m thick),overlying; • Sand and clayey sand of the Brighton Group to a depth of at least 4m. 2.2 Toxicity Assessment

Of the contaminants identified during site investigations carried out by Coffey, benzene was assessed to have the potential to provide the greatest health risk because:

• Benzene was identified in groundwater samples at concentrations in excess of water quality guidelines; and

• Benzene is a known human carcinogen with epidemiological studies of workers exposed to high benzene levels clearly demonstrating excess incidence of leukemia.

• There are no other identified groundwater contaminants that are confirmed carcinogens. However, there is some possibility that 2,4 dimethyphenol, which has been identified in groundwater, is a topical co-carcinogen, but its role as a primary cancer producing agent is uncertain (Toxline – HSDB database entry for 2,4 dimethyphenol).

2.3 Exposure Assessment

The 3 storey building includes approximately 20 residential apartments. There is no residential part of the site with a direct airway connection to the basement carpark. There is a stairway entry from the foyer of the apartment block leading down into the basement carpark. This stairway has a basement level solid door that limits air flow between the foyer area and the basement carpark. There is a shutter / roller door which has, as a minimum, a 2 square metre area of slotted roller to allow air entry to feed the basement forced air ventilation at the top of the vehicle entry ramp leading to Garden Lane. Residents and maintenance staff are not expected to spend significant periods of time within the basement carpark. The carpark is for residents use only. It is not a public carpark and would not be staffed permanently by a carpark attendant. Given the above considerations, exposure to benzene originating from groundwater contamination may occur through:

• Partitioning of benzene from the LNAPL / dissolved phase in groundwater into the vapour within the soil pore space;

• Diffusion of benzene from groundwater surface upward through the soil profile driven by the concentration gradient; and

• Diffusion from soil upward through defects in the floor slab of the basement carpark into the basement carpark airspace.

• Diffusion from basement carpark airspace upward through the stairwell doorway into the foyer airspace.

• Diffusion from the foyer airspace laterally and upwards into the residential unit airspaces.

2.4 Exposure Parameters

In this assessment, potential risks to residents and maintenance workers were estimated assuming a reasonable maximum exposure (RME) for the individual air inhalation pathway. ASTM (1995) defines RME as the highest exposure that is reasonably expected to occur at the site. Residents and maintenance workers are considered to have the greatest potential for exposure as they could either reside for long periods of time in the residential apartments located at the site, or potentially conduct work in the basement for substantial periods of time. For this assessment, exposure of residents and maintenance workers was calculated for

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


3 Electronic Copy

exposures occurring in the basement carpark and foyer.

Exposure of residents is expected to be substantially higher than for maintenance workers, as the exposure duration for residents is expected to be significantly greater than for maintenance workers. Nevertheless an assessment of the risk based screening level for indoor air quality was separately assessed for residents and maintenance workers to check acceptance criteria protective of each receptor group.

For maintenance workers the following exposure factors were adopted:

• Exposure frequency – 20 days per year;

• Exposure duration – 30 years (reasonable maximum for working life at the apartment building); and

• Daily exposure – 8 hours/day (typical working hours).

For residents, the following exposure factors were adopted:

• Exposure frequency – 365 days per year (7 days per week and 52 weeks per year);

• Exposure duration – 70 years; and

• Daily exposure – 2 hours/day in basement and 24hours/day in foyer.

Additional exposure parameters required in the risk assessment include body weight and respiratory rate for a typical adult. In Australia, advice on these exposure parameters is contained with the Proceedings of the Third National Workshop on Health Risk Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sites (SAHC, 1996). This document recommends a body weight of 70kg be used for risk assessments involving adult receptors. For inhalation rate, enHealth (2002) indicates a ventilation rate of 23m3/day for an adult male for 8 hours of resting and 16 hours of light/non-occupational activity. This is considered a realistically conservative value to be adopted for this risk assessment.

Tables 1 and 2 summarise the exposure parameters adopted for this risk assessment.

TABLE 1: EXPOSURE PARAMETERS FOR MAINTENANCE WORKERS & RESIDENTS – BASEMENT CARPARK

Parameter Maintenance Worker Values

Adult Residents

Values (Child)

Reference Source

Potential Lifetime Duration (years)

70 70 (70) SAHC (1996)

Body weight (kg) 70 70 (15) Assumed average weight for adults - SAHC (1996)

Exposure Duration (years) 30 70 (15) Assumed duration of occupation (maintenance workers) or residents

Exposure frequency (days/year)

20 365 (365) Assumed reasonable value; SAHC (1996)

Daily Inhalation Rate (m3/d)

7.7 2.4 (1.2) enHealth (2002) (0.5 adult rate for child) – 8 hours exposure per day for maintenance worker and 2 hours exposure per day for resident

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


4 Electronic Copy

TABLE 2 – EXPOSURE PARAMETERS FOR MAINTENANCE WORKERS AND RESIDENTS – FOYER

Parameter Maintenance Worker Values

Adult Residents

Values (Child)

Reference Source

Potential Lifetime Duration (years)

70 70 (70) SAHC (1996)

Body weight (kg) 70 70 (15) Assumed average weight for adults - SAHC (1996)

Exposure Duration (years) 30 70 (15) Assumed duration of occupation (maintenance workers) or residents

Exposure frequency (days/year)

20 365 (365) Assumed reasonable value; SAHC (1996)

Daily Inhalation Rate (m3/d) 7.7 23 (13) enHealth (2002) (0.5 adult rate for child) – 8 hours exposure per day for maintenance worker and 24 hours exposure per day for resident

2.5 Modelling of Benzene Emission to Indoor Air

Modelling of potential health risks requires modelling of the movement of contaminants in the gaseous form from the (LNAPL) contaminated capillary fringe / dissolved phase plume through the overlying clean soil, cracks in the building slab and into the indoor air. Mixing within the indoor air space is an important element of the assessment. This requires assessment of the rate of exchange of the indoor air. Modelling of the movement of volatile compounds through the soil is a complex task which has received recent attention of Australian scientists and regulators (Markey et al, 1996; Anderssen et al, 1998). Further complexity is introduced when modelling the accumulation of volatile compounds in an enclosed space subject to indoor-outdoor air exchange. For this assessment, advice has been obtained from the building designers in relation to the rate of air exchange which will be provided from the building air conditioning system. Mr Gavin McDonald of Caulfield, Krivanek and Sugar Pty Ltd (Architect for Exley Hotels Pty Ltd) advised that the area located above the basement carpark would be subject to a minimum of 10 air exchanges per hour during operation of the facility. It is understood that this rate of exchange was designed to address the potential for vapours entering the basement from groundwater via soil vapour through the basement slab. This is considered a high rate of air exchange, and advice from EPA was that an unforced air exchange rate should be used to assess the reasonable maximum exposure to building users. Recognising this possibility, a reduced air exchange rate of 12 air exchanges per day was assumed, consistent with values adopted in ASTM (1995) for residential buildings.

Parameters relating to benzene migration within the soil were based upon published data and site information. These parameters are summarised in Table 3.

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


5 Electronic Copy

TABLE 3 – ADOPTED MODEL PARAMETERS (BENZENE)

Symbol Parameter Value Reference Source

Dair Diffusion coefficient in air (cm3/s) 0.093 ASTM

Dwat Diffusion coefficient in water (cm3/s) 0.000011 ASTM

S Solubility (mg/L) 1750 ASTM SFi

Inhalation cancer slope factor, (mg/kg-day)-1

0.0273 Based upon IRIS 4/7/03 (70kg body weight and 20m3/d inhalation rate)

H Henry’s law constant (L H2O / L air) 0.22 ASTM

The ceiling height of the basement carpark is 2.0m. Ceiling heights in the foyer are 2.65m and in typical apartments (ground floor used as typical) is 2.70m. The floor area of the building is 20m by 25m.

ASTM (1995) also recognise the complexities associated with modelling these phenomena and, within the risk based corrective action (RBCA) framework, propose a staged approach to the use of mathematical models, namely;

• Employing relatively simplistic models (often algebraic or semi-analytical expressions), based on uniform properties and regular geometry. The purpose of these models is to provide a rapid indication of the magnitude of the problem and of the need for more complex analysis.

• Employing numerical models which allow for the analysis of more complex heterogeneous systems.

ASTM (1995) provides mathematical equations for the first of the levels described above. The equations ‘Groundwater -> enclosed space (indoor) vapour inhalation’ described in Tables X2.2, X2.3 and X2.5 of the ASTM Standard E1739-95 (ASTM, 1995) were applied for this study.

Calculation of the indoor air concentration of gaseous contaminants derived from LNAPL was undertaken using the following equations, which were adapted from ASTM (1995):

Soil Gas Concentration Resulting from the LNAPL:

Csg = (VP x MW x MF)/(R x T)

where: Csg = soil gas concentration (mg/m3)

VP = vapour pressure of the compound at STP (atm);

MW = molecular weight of the compound (mg/mol);

MF = mole fraction of the compound;

R = universal gas constant (0.000082 atm-m3/mol-K);

T = temperature (K)

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


6 Electronic Copy

Flux into Building Basement through Foundation Cracks: Fx = (Deff

crack x Csg x η )/(Lcrack)

where: Fx = Flux of gaseous compound into building basement (mg/hr-m2);

Deffcrack = diffusion coefficient through foundation cracks (cm2/sec)

n = fraction of foundation cracks (cm3/cm3);

Lcrack = basement slab thickness (m).

Deffcrack = (Dair x θ3.33

acrack/θ2T) + [Dwat x θ3.33

wcrack/(H x θ2T)]

Indoor Air Concentration in Basement Carpark:

Cindoor-basement = Fx /(Lb x ER)

where: Cindoor-basement = Indoor air concentration (mg/ m3);

Lb = Enclosed space volume/infiltration area ratio;

ER = Air exchange rate (hr-1).

Using the equations presented above and data presented in Tables 3 and 4, the indoor air concentration of benzene in the basement carpark was calculated to be 2.9µg/m3.

Benzene concentration in air in the foyer was calculated to assess potential risks to residents. To simplify the risk assessment, residential exposure was calculated based on the modelled benzene concentrations in the foyer (i.e. assumes residents live in the foyer). This removed the need to perform additional calculations to assess the migration of foyer air into residential apartments. As the foyer is connected directly to the basement carpark by stairwell, but none of the residential apartments are, is assessed that the foyer would receive a significantly greater flux of benzene from the basement than the residential apartments. Therefore, the assessment of risk in the foyer is considered particularly conservative.

The following migration pathways for benzene in air from the basement to the carpark to the foyer were recognised:

• Diffusion from the basement upward through defects in the floor slab of the foyer into the foyer airspace; and

• Diffusion from basement carpark airspace upward through the stairwell doorway into the foyer airspace.

Of these two migration pathways, migration through the stairwell doorway will produce a significantly greater flux of contamination into the foyer than diffusion through the foyer slab. The door of the stairwell is reasonably well sealed and it is considered that diffusion from the basement would be greatest at those times when the stairwell doorway is opened during movement of residents between the foyer and basement carpark. For this assessment we have assumed that the stairwell door is opened 10 times per apartment per day (i.e. 200 openings per day) and that during each opening, 4m3 of air is transferred from the basement carpark directly to the foyer without dilution in the stairwell. The concentration of benzene in foyer air was calculated using the following equation:

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


7 Electronic Copy

Indoor Air Concentration in Foyer:

Cindoor-foyer = Cindoor-basement x Vex x Nex /(Vf x ER)

where: Cindoor-basement = Indoor air concentration in basement (mg/ m3);

Vex = Volume of air exchanged from stairwell (m3);

Nex = Number of air exchanges from stairwell per hour (hr-1).

Vf = Volume of foyer (m3).

ER = Air exchange rate (hr-1).

Using the equation presented above and data presented in Tables 3 and 4, the indoor air concentration of benzene in the foyer was calculated to be 0.15µg/m3.

2.6 Site Risk Characterisation

In order to estimate the incremental lifetime risk of cancer associated with potential inhalation exposure to benzene originating from contaminated groundwater at the site the results of the estimated exposure and the toxicological assessment need to be combined. A formal policy regarding the level of acceptable incremental risk of a person developing cancer following exposure to environmental contamination has not been formulated in Australia. In this regards, the following is noted from international sources:

• ASTM (1995) indicates that a risk in the range 1 in 1,000,000 to 1 in 10,000 should be employed in risk base corrective action analysis, with a risk of 1 in 100,000 being frequently used as a threshold of concern;

• The WHO (1993) Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality are based on a risk of 1 in 100,000;

• The NHMRC/ARMCANZ (1994) Australian Drinking Water Guidelines nominate a negligible level of risk of 1 in 1,000,000.

Given the above information, for the purpose of this study a target excess individual lifetime cancer risk of 1 in 100,000 was adopted.

The lifetime cancer risk associated with inhalation of benzene of a nominated concentration was based upon the unit risk factor of 7.8x10-6 (µg/m3)-1. This represents the risk for an individual to develop cancer due to lifetime exposure to a concentration of 1 µg/m3 of benzene in air. The adopted cancer unit risk factor was taken from the US EPA Integrated Risk Information System database on 4 July 2003. WHO indicate a range from 4.4 to 7.5x10-6 (µg/m3)-1 for inhalation unit risk factor for benzene. Note that the adopted US EPA value is a little more conservative than the WHO values.

2.7 Site-Specific Target Level for Air Quality

The procedures described in ASTM (1995) were employed to assess the ambient air concentration which would result in a lifetime cancer risk of 1 in 100,000 based on the assumptions and site parameters described in this report. The equations used to derive this site specific target level are presented below:

Indoor air screening level: RBSLair = (TR x BW x ATc x 240 x 103)/(SFi x IRair x EF x ED)

Parameters for the calculations are presented in Table 4.

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


8 Electronic Copy

TABLE 4 – ADOPTED PARAMETERS – RISK BASED SCREENING LEVEL (RBSL) ASSESSMENT Symbol Parameter Value Basement

(Foyer) Source

Dair Diffusion coefficient in air, cm2/s 0.093 ASTM

Dwat Diffusion coefficient in water, cm2/s 0.000011 ASTM

ER Enclosed-space air exchange rate, 1/s 0.00014 ASTM (12 changes/day)

H Henry's law constant, cm3/cm3 0.22 ASTM

LB Average ceiling height, cm 200 (265) Site Data

Lcrack Slab thickness, cm 75 Site Data

LGW Depth to groundwater, cm 325 Site Data

η Area fraction of cracks in slab, cm3/cm3 0.0001 Assessed Site Value. Based on a crack in the foundation 2mm width and 25m length

θacrack Vol. Air content in slab cracks, cm3/cm3 0.26 Assessed Site Value

θas Vol. Air content in vadose zone, cm3/cm3 0.26 Assessed Site Value

θT Total soil porosity, cm3/cm3 0.38 Assessed Site Value

θwcrack Vol. Water content in slab cracks, cm3/cm3 0.12 Assessed Site Value

θws Vol. Water content vadose zone, cm3/cm3 0.12 Assessed Site Value

ATc Average Life Time Carcinogens, years 70 Section 2.4

BW Body weight, kg 70 Section 2.4 (child = 15)

ED Exposure duration, years 70 (30) Section 2.4

EF

Exposure frequency, days/year - Resident (Maintenance worker)

365 (20)

7d/wk x 52wk/yr (20days/yr)

IRair-indoor

Daily indoor inhalation rate at site – Resident – 24hr / 2hr (Maintenance worker - 8hr), m3/day

23 / 2.4 (7.7)

En Health (child x0.5)

SFi

Inhalation cancer slope factor, (mg/kg-day)-1

0.0273

Based upon IRIS 4/7/03 (70kg body weight and 20m3/d inhalation rate)

TR Target excess individual lifetime cancer risk 1.00E-05 Section 2.6

Note to Table: Bracketed vales are those adopted for the foyer exposure scenario.

Using the equations set out Table 3 and the parameters set out in Table 4, site specific risk based screening levels for benzene in indoor air in the basement carpark and foyer were calculated. The RBSLs are presented in Table 5.

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


9 Electronic Copy

TABLE 5 - RESULTS OF RISK ASSESSMENT (BENZENE IN GROUNDWATER)

Parameter Adult Resident

Child Resident

Maintenance Worker

Comment

RBSLair-basement Indoor air screening level in basement

7.0 µg/m3 14 µg/m3 93 µg/m3 Indoor air concentration not measured (indoor air concentration calculated based on presence of groundwater LNAPL)

RBSLair-foyer Indoor air screening level in foyer

0.73 µg/m3 1.3 µg/m3 93 µg/m3 Indoor air concentration not measured (indoor air concentration calculated based on presence of groundwater LNAPL).

The values listed in Table 5 represent screening levels, which if exceeded would require a more detailed assessment of risk. It is important to note, that the RBSL values for maintenance workers assume that the maintenance work would not involve removal of the basement slab, or work in maintenance pits or other enclosed spaces in within the basement. The exposure during this type of work would be expected to be significantly higher than for standard maintenance activities (i.e. sweeping surfaces, painting etc). Should maintenance involve these activities, the risk assessment would need to be reviewed. The results of the assessment are sensitive to the assumption of the percentage of the floor slab occupied by cracks. The assumption of 0.01% area of cracks is considered reasonable. This value was calculated on the assumption that a crack 2mm in width running the length of the basement (25m) was present.

The screening level protective of residents is substantially lower than that for maintenance workers, principally due to the lower exposure frequency and duration of maintenance workers (20 exposures per year and 30 years duration assumed) compared with residents (365 exposures per year and 70 years duration assumed). This indicates that the risks to residents are greater than those to maintenance workers in relation to inhalation risks from benzene.

The modelled indoor air concentration in the basement carpark resulting from diffusion of soil gas derived from a constant source of LNAPL on the groundwater resulted in an indoor air concentration for benzene of 2.9µg/m3, which is below the site specific risk based screening levels (resident and maintenance worker) for indoor air, presented in Table 5.

The modelled indoor air concentration in the foyer resulting from diffusion of air up the stairwell from the basement carpark resulted in an indoor air concentration for benzene of 0.15µg/m3, which is below the site specific risk based screening levels (resident and maintenance worker) for indoor air, presented in Table 5.

Based on this assessment, it is considered reasonable for the apartment building to be occupied without specific remedial measures to address the existing hydrocarbon contamination of ground water. Given the concerns raised by the auditor previously appointed for the site, an upgraded ventilation unit was installed, capable of 10 air changes per hour under continuous normal operation. Taking into account these measures and that the risk assessment indicated that modelled air concentrations are well below site-specific screening levels, it is concluded that risks to maintenance workers (and residents) of 19-23 Wilson Street, South Yarra, associated with hydrocarbon contamination are low and within generally acceptable levels.

The above assessment is based on conditions measured at the time of earlier (i.e. September 2002) environmental investigations conducted by others and on advice provided to Coffey in relation to facility design. Should changes to these conditions take place, it is recommended that the results of the risk

E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


10 Electronic Copy

assessment be reviewed. Furthermore, the assessment of risk in the foyer relies heavily on the stairwell door being shut when not in use. Propping open the stairwell door or removal of the door may result in unacceptable risks to residents in the foyer. Accordingly, it is considered appropriate for a failsafe mechanism to be installed to prevent this occurring.



E16246/1-SA 30 January 2004


11 Electronic Copy

3. REFERENCES

• American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 1995. Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action Applied at Petroleum Release Sites, E1739-95.

• ANZECC/NHMRC (1992) Australia and New Zealand Guidelines for the Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sites.

• Anderssen, B. and Markey, B. (1998) Exposure to volatiles from below-ground surfaces, Proceedings of the Fourth National Workshop on the Health Risk Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sites, Contaminated Sites Monograph Series No. 7, 1998.

• A.W.N Pty Ltd (May 2003) “19 Wilson Street, South Yarra Soil Gas Contaminant Monitoring Programme” (Report No. B163 dated 29 May);

• BFP (November 2003). “Untitled” Copy of Certificates of Analysis for groundwater samples (WSL Consultants Report No 486208 dated 19 September 2002) (facsimile to Coffey Geosciences Pty Ltd). Groundwater Monitoring bore logs prepared by BFP. Plan of Monitoring Bore locations provided by BFP.

• EnHealth (2002). Department of Health and Ageing and enHealth Council (2002) “Environmental Health Risk Assessment, Guidelines for Assessing Human Health Risks from Environmental Hazards”

• Markey, B, and Anderssen, B., (1996) Volatilisation from soil and exposure assessment, Proceedings of the Third National Workshop on the Health Risk Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sites, Contaminated Sites Monograph Series No. 5, 1996.

• South Australian Health Commission, 1991, 1993, 1996. National workshops on the health risk assessment and management of contaminated sites.

• World Health Organisation (1996) Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, Second Edition, Volume 2: Health Criteria and Other Supporting Information. WHO, Geneva, 1996 pp 461-467. (http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/GDWQ/Chemicals)

E16246/1-AK: Groundwater gauging information; 19-23 Wilson St Paul, Michael, It is understood that EPA does not consider that the information provided to date allows it to be satisfied that the audit site is not the source site. As auditor, I have twice expressed the view in writing to EPA that I do not believe that the site is the source site of the free phase hydrocarbon present on the site. The auditor previously appointed to audit the site; Mr Warren Pump of URS Australia Pty Ltd has also expressed his opinion in writing on 23 September 2002 that “it is clear that the site is not likely to be the source of environmental pollution”. (URS_23_09_02B.pdf) HLA-Environmental’s Mr Michael Seignior has also expressed the opinion in writing (HLA_01_08_03.pdf) that “There is no obvious on-site source (past or present) of this groundwater contamination. It is therefore considered at this stage that the contamination is more likely to derive from off-site from source(s) unknown”. Please find following; additional information on the above audit site as requested in the teleconference held this morning between EPA (Paul Moritz, Michael Rehfisch – EPA, Phil Sinclair – Coffey). Attachment 1. Original BFP figure showing bore locations as of 8 July 2002 (Figure 4_41017_08_07_02.pdf). Attachment 2. URS gauged groundwater and free product for three wells (MB1, MB2 and MB3) on 23 September 2002 (URS_23_09_02A.pdf). Free product was only observed for MB2, located in the north-west corner of the audit site. Groundwater flow contours based on the three bores were presented in a fax to the architect acting for Exley Hotels Pty Ltd (Caulfield, Krivanek & Sugar Pty Ltd). Interpreted groundwater flow direction is suggested as being ENE. Attachment 3. HLA-Envirosciences gauged the wells and free product and presented this in a report to Exley Hotels on 1 August 2003 (HLA_01_08_03.pdf). NOTE THAT THE NOMENCLATURE FOR THE BORES IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH ATTACHMENT 1; the labels MB4 and MB5 have been interchanged on the HLA figure. Free product was observed for:

• the bore labelled MB2 located in the north-west corner of the audit site; • the bore labelled MB4, located in the central southern portion of the audit site (BFP’s bore

MB5); and • the bore labelled MB5, located in the south-west corner of the audit site (BFP’s bore MB4).

Interpreted groundwater flow direction is suggested as being NNE. NOTE ALSO that the bore labelling error has been carried through to the Figure contained in Coffey’s reporting to date. Coffey tested the bores using an interface probe in January 2004 with the aim of confirming (or otherwise) the presence of free product at the site. The testing confirmed the presence of free product of approximately 1m thickness at the bore labelled MB4 in Coffey reporting (BFP’s bore MB5). Measurement of free product thickness was not undertaken at bore MB2 due to bore cap damage and access difficulty. Depth to groundwater at bore MB1 was approximately 0.70m below the cap; but the bore integrity was not sound (consistent with HLA’s findings). No free product was indicated as being present at this location. No free product was indicated as being present at bore MB5 (BFP’s bore MB4), which is inconsistent with HLA’s findings.

Depth to groundwater at MB5 (BFP’s bore MB4) was consistent with HLA measurements (although excavation of the basement had occurred in the intervening time period and surveyed reference levels for the bores were not available). MB3 was not located. EPA is asked to consider the additional information as a matter of urgency and to advise the auditor in writing of the reasons why it considers or suspects that the site is the source of the free product at the site. I will seek to confirm the timing of this advice tomorrow; Friday 27 February 2004. The written advice is requested to enable my client’s legal advisor to address the legal circumstances in which my client finds himself. Regards PHIL SINCLAIR PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST Coffey Geosciences Pty Ltd ACN 056 335 516 ABN 57 056 335 516 Contact details - Melbourne Office 16 Church Street, HAWTHORN VIC 3122 PO Box 40, KEW VIC 3101 Telephone +61 3 9853 3396 Mobile 0403 24 24 75 Facsimile +61 3 9853 0189 Email [email protected] Web Site http://www.coffey.com.au/) NB The content of this message and any attachments may be privileged, in confidence or sensitive. Any unauthorised use is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and disregard and delete the email. Email may be corrupted or interfered with. Coffey cannot guarantee that the message you receive is the same as that we sent. At Coffey's discretion we may send a paper copy for confirmation. In the event of any discrepancy between paper and electronic versions the paper version is to take precedence.

F:\ENVIRO\E16246.1\E162461AP.Doc

Note. If you do not receive all pages, please telephone COFFEY on the above number as soon as possible. Important: The contents of this facsimile (including attachments) may be privileged and confidential. Any unauthorised use of the contents is expressly prohibited. If you have received the document in error, please advise us by telephone (reverse charges) immediately and then shred the document. Thank you.

Michael, Paul,

My client has requested that EPA urgently informed me in writing, through the address / contact numbers contained on this facsimile, of the reasons why EPA will not permit the audit of the above site to be completed. My client urgently requires a response in writing for the reasons stated in our letter of 2 March 2004 (ref E16246/1-AN).

I am aware that EPA has requested further information about the audit site which was provided today. However, such a request should not prevent EPA from providing the reason or reasons why the audit cannot be completed that are the compelling concern of Exley Hotels Pty Ltd (Exley Hotels). Exley Hotels has advised me that it is suffering increasing losses as time passes and does not have an explanation that it can provide to other interested parties in the development.




PHIL SINCLAIR

Victorian EPA Appointed Environmental Auditor – Category - Contaminated Land.

To Environment Protection Authority From Phil Sinclair

Attention MICHAEL REHFISCH / DR PAUL MORITZ Date 3 March 2004

Facsimile number 9695 2579 Our Reference E16246/1-AP PLS

cc Exley Hotels Pty Ltd c/o Jerry Pilarinos 9504 8216

Number of pages including this page 1

Subject: COMPLETION OF ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT: 19-23 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA

F:\ENVIRO\E16246.1\E162461AQ.Doc

Note. If you do not receive all pages, please telephone COFFEY on the above number as soon as possible. Important: The contents of this facsimile (including attachments) may be privileged and confidential. Any unauthorised use of the contents is expressly prohibited. If you have received the document in error, please advise us by telephone (reverse charges) immediately and then shred the document. Thank you.

Michael, Paul,

With reference to our correspondence in relation to completion of the environmental audit report (E16246/1-AN dated 2 March 2004 and E16246/1-AP dated 3 March 2004), I have been requested by our client to contact EPA to once more seek URGENTLY and FINALLY, EPA’s written advice as to which reasonable grounds prevent the statutory environmental audit of the above site from being completed.

Our client considers that he is in quite an invidious position, having received my advice that the audit of the site is complete, except for EPA’s outstanding requirements; which remain unknown and uncertain.

Under these circumstances, it is considered only fair and reasonable that I should be able to advise our client immediately of any reasonable grounds that prevent the environmental audit report for the site from being completed and issued. My client has strongly requested that I complete and issue the environmental audit report, should I not be advised of the reason or reasons by Close of Business on 4 March 2004.

I therefore urgently require EPA’s written advice on the outstanding reason or reasons to justify my current position of not issuing the environmental audit report at this time and my current inability to meet our clients timing requirements.




PHIL SINCLAIR

Victorian EPA Appointed Environmental Auditor – Category - Contaminated Land.

To Environment Protection Authority From Phil Sinclair

Attention MICHAEL REHFISCH / DR PAUL MORITZ Date 4 March 2004

Facsimile number 9695 2579 Our Reference E16246/1-AQ PLS

cc Exley Hotels Pty Ltd c/o Jerry Pilarinos 9504 8216

Number of pages including this page 1

Subject: COMPLETION OF ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT REPORT: 19-23 WILSON STREET, SOUTH YARRA

1

Phil Sinclair

From: Phil Sinclair [[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, 4 March 2004 14:07To: '[email protected]'; 'Paul Moritz'Cc: 'Ross Best'; 'Damien Davidson'Subject: E162461/-AR: RE: vapour risk assessment - Wilson Street, South Yarra

Importance: High

E162461/-AR: RE: vapour risk assessment - Wilson Street, South Yarra

Michael, Paul,

Please find below, the responses to EPA's further queries. These are edited from the response provided to me by a member of my support team who was involved in the conduct of the Vapour Health Risk Appraisal.

Question 1. Please confirm that the modelled indoor air concentrations in the basement compare with the measured concentrations in soil gas beneath the slab. That is, the HRA has derived soil gas concentrations resulting from the LNAPL. Do these numbers compared with the measured soil gas concentrations collected at the site?

Response: The modelled indoor air concentrations in the basement were modelled based on calculated soil gas concentrations. The soil gas concentration beneath the slab was calculated based on the presence of LNAPL. The conservative assumption was made that the LNAPL plume did not degrade/decay with time and the plume was continuous beneath the site. The field soil gas measurements were undertaken prior to the basement slab being placed and therefore would be much lower than if a slab was present, as there would be significantly lower flux to the atmosphere through the concrete slab. The modelled soil gas concentration was significantly greater than the measured concentrations. _____________________________________

Question 2. The indoor air screening level concentration for children is greater than that for an adult. Can you please check that this is correct (7.0ug/m3 adult versus 14 ug/m3 child).

Response: The screening levels are correct. The screening levels vary based on the differences between an adult and child in exposure duration, body weight and inhalation rate. For our assessment the following parameters were adopted:Body weight (kg): 70 - Adult. 15 - Child;Exposure Duration (yrs): 70 - Adult. 15 - Child;Inhalation rate (m3/day): 23 - Adult. 11.5 - ChildExposure time per day (hrs): 2.5 - Adult and Child.

It is the exposure duration that accounts for the adult screening level being higher than that for a child. _____________________________________

Question 3. Is the floor crack percentage conservative enough, and would you expect additional cracking in future?

Response: The floor crack percentage is considered conservative. The percentage adopted was based on a crack 2mm width and 25m long in the basement slab. Cracking of the slab is expected in the future. _____________________________________

Question 4. Can you confirm that the reduced air exchange rate used in the model is an unforced or "natural" air exchange rate or an air exchange rate for residential building design.

Response: The air exchange rate adopted was an unforced exchange rate. This was adopted to assess the reasonable maximum exposure to building users. An air exchange rate of 12 air exchanges per day was assumed and is consistent with values adopted in ASTM (1995) for residential buildings.

RegardsPHIL SINCLAIRPRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTCoffey Geosciences Pty LtdACN 056 335 516ABN 57 056 335 516

2

Contact details - Melbourne Office16 Church Street, HAWTHORN VIC 3122PO Box 40, KEW VIC 3101Telephone +61 3 9853 3396Mobile 0403 24 24 75Facsimile +61 3 9853 0189Email [email protected] Site http://www.coffey.com.au/)NB The content of this message and any attachments may be privileged, in confidence or sensitive. Any unauthorised use is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and disregard and delete the email. Email may be corrupted or interfered with. Coffey cannot guarantee that the message you receive is the same as that we sent. At Coffey's discretion we may send a paper copy for confirmation. In the event of any discrepancy between paper and electronic versions the paper version is to take precedence.

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, 3 March 2004 17:01To: Phil SinclairSubject: vapour risk assessment - Wilson Street, South Yarra

Phil,

Can you please just clarify a couple of points on the HRA.

1. Please confirm that the modelled indoor air concentrations in thebasement compare with the measured concentrations in soil gas beneath the slab. That is, the HRA has derived soil gas concentrations resulting from the LNAPL. Do these numbers compared with the measured soil gas concentrations collected at the site?2. The indoor air screening level concentration for children is greaterthan that for an adult. Can you please check that this is correct (7.0 ug/m3 adult versus 14 ug/m3 child).3. Is the floor crack percentage conservative enough, and would youexpect additional cracking in future?4. Can you confirm that the reduced air exchange rate used in the model is an unforced or "natural" air exchange rate or an air exchange rate for residential building design.

I will discuss with you tomorrow morning.

RegardsMichael


3



