2003-819 (qra 2016) rev 2 - environmental protection … · report to report by nypro limited...

Nypro Limited

EPA IPPC Licence number P0567-02

2016 Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA)

on

Hydrocarbon Contaminated Subsoils

MEL Work Item B11

MEL Doc. Ref.: 2003-819 (QRA 2016) REV 2

Date: Friday 14 November 2016

Report by: Report To:

Minerex Environmental Limited Mr. Cecil Black

Hydrogeological, Environmental and Nypro Ltd.,

Geophysical Services Corke Abbey,

Taney Hall, Dundrum, Dublin 14, Ireland Bray,

Dublin 14, Ireland Co. Wicklow.

Tel.: +353-(0)1-2964435

Fax.: +353-(0)1-2964436

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.minerex.ie

Prepared by : Reviewed by:

Sven Klinkenberg B.Sc.

Cecil Shine M.Sc. PGeo, EurGeol

Project Scientist Contaminated Land

Team Leader Contaminated land

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY

Nypro Limited Minerex Environmental Limited

Cork Abbey, Bray, Co Wicklow Doc Ref 2003-819 (QRA 2016) REV 2


on

Page 1 of 33

Contents

1. Executive Summary _________________________________ 3

1.1 BACKGROUND ________________________________________________________ 3

1.2 SCOPE ______________________________________________________________ 3

1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION and CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL ________________________ 3

1.4 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND RESULT ______________________________ 4

1.5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ________________________________ 5

2. Introduction ________________________________________ 7

2.1 PROJECT CONTRACTUAL BASIS & PARTIES INVOLVED _____________________ 7

2.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES _________________________________________________ 7

2.3 SCOPE OF WORKS ____________________________________________________ 8

2.4 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ___________________________________________ 8

3. Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment (GQRA) __________ 16

3.1 POTENTIAL POLLUTANT LINKAGES _____________________________________ 16

3.2 GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ______________________________________ 16

3.3 SOURCE ZONE DATA MANAGEMENT ____________________________________ 17

3.4 RESULTS OF THE GENERIC QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT ____________ 17

4. Detailed quantitative risk assessment (DQRA) __________ 20

4.1 POTENTIAL POLLUTANT LINKAGES _____________________________________ 20

4.2 RISK ESTIMATION MODEL/TOOL DEVELOPMENT FOR DQRA ________________ 20

4.3 DETAILED RISK EVALUATION __________________________________________ 26

5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS __ 29

5.1 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS _________________________________________ 29

5.2 RECOMMENDED WAY FORWARD _______________________________________ 30

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 2 of 33

Appendices Appendix Title Pages Minerex Doc. Ref.

Appendix A MAP: Site location maps 4 x A4 2003-008.cdr

Appendix B Cross-section: Conceptual Site Model locations & EM31 results.

2 x A3 2003-008.cdr

Appendix C Groundwater levels database and graph 5 x A4 2003-011.xls

Appendix D Groundwater chemistry database and graph 15 x A4 2003-010.xls

Appendix E Soil chemistry database 22 x A4 2003-010.xls

Appendix F Remedial Target Methodology Worksheets 25 x A4 2003-797.xls

IMPORTANT: This section should be read before reliance is placed on any of the opinions, advice, interpretations, conclusions or recommendations in the following report.

1. Minerex Environmental Limited (MEL) has prepared this report for the sole use of its client in accordance with the work authorised.

2. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report or any other services provided by MEL.

3. This report may not be relied upon by any other party without the prior and express written permission from MEL.

4. Interpretations contained in this report are derived from available information of the site conditions, the likely environmental responses and the experience of the company.

5. MEL has prepared this report in line with best current practice and with all reasonable skill, care and diligence in consideration of the limits imposed by materials, equipment or methodologies used, and the resources devoted to it as agreed with the client.

6. The interpretative basis of the conclusions contained in this report should be taken into account in any future use of this report. If the scope of the works includes drilling, pitting, sampling, or interpretation of such information, the client’s attention is drawn to the fact that special risks occur whenever hydrogeological and related disciplines are applied to identify subsurface conditions.

7. Even a comprehensive sampling and testing programme (for example drilling, pitting, sampling, or interpretation of such information,), implemented in accordance with a professional Standard of Care, may fail to detect certain conditions.

8. The environmental, geological, geotechnical, geochemical, hydrological and hydrogeological conditions that MEL interprets to exist between sampling points may differ from those that actually exist.

9. Also, the passage of time, natural occurrences, and activities near the site may substantially alter discovered conditions.

10. Changes in the legislation, industry standards and guidance may cause opinion, advice, conclusions and recommendations set out in MEL reports to be inappropriate or incorrect. Once a report has been issued to a Client, MEL will have no obligation to advise the Client of any such changes, or their repercussions.

11. While MEL endeavours to take reasonable effort to assess data in hand at the time of writing and give the best advice possible, MEL will accept no responsibility for how the information within this report is interpreted and used. Where elements of this report are based upon information provided by others, it is assumed that all the relevant information has been supplied to MEL in full and is reliable, accurate and representative.

12. It should be assumed that MEL has not independently verified any information provided by others. MEL, its agents, directors, owners, employees, and contractors will not be held responsible for any loss (reputation, financial, technical or otherwise) occurring from the use of this report, howsoever caused.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 3 of 33

1. Executive Summary

1.1 BACKGROUND

Minerex Environmental Limited (MEL) was contracted by Nypro Limited to carry out, in compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) request as expressed in communication (P0567-02)si11ma dated 14/08/13, a repeat site investigation and risk assessment at their EPA licenced facility in Bray, Co. Wicklow. Nypro have presently initiated the process of relinquishing the licence with the EPA and the work presented here is carried out as part of this process.

Subsequently, MEL was commissioned by Nypro Ireland Ltd in 2016 to carry out further intrusive site investigations (drilling MW6) requested by the EPA, and to include both the results of further investigations and the latest groundwater monitoring results (September 2016) and conclusions in this Quantitative Risk Assessment to give a full and up to date overview of the state of the site with respect to migration and MNA of the contaminants of the site.

The requirement stems from a historical spill of waste oil from a tank located below the main yard of the facility which is deemed to have occurred in or prior to 2002. In 2007/2008 the site investigation and risk assessment showed that the soils surrounding the tank were contaminated with hydrocarbons which led to the implementation, in consultation with the EPA, of a Monitored Natural Attenuation management strategy.

1.2 SCOPE

The scope of the work was to repeat intrusive site investigation and risk assessment carried out by MEL in 2008 and again in 2014, and present the findings in the context of the ongoing MNA management regime. This report also includes results of drilling MW6 to the north of the source area (MW3R) and the latest groundwater sampling results to give a full and up to date overview of the site with respect to risk.

1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION and CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

The site is located in a mixed land use area on the northern outskirts of Bray, County Wicklow. The facility sits on the top of a slope approximately 500m inland from the Irish Sea coast and is surrounded by a mix of residential and commercial developments. The site is bound to the north by a public green area where the Westbrook Stream flows towards the Irish Sea.

The surface of the facility is characterised by extensive impermeable cover (buildings, concrete and tarmacadam) whereas the ground below the facility is characterised by a heterogeneous made ground, shallow natural riverine sediments and a gravel aquifer. A summary of the water bearing horizons below the site is provided in the table below and graphically represented at the end of this summary.

Flow Regime Surface water or

groundwater

Comment

Water flow regime #1 Groundwater (Local) Shallow (upper) gravel horizon (probably perched) in connection with MW4.

Water flow regime #2 Groundwater Deep (lower) gravel horizon in connection with MW3R, MW101 and MW103. The general groundwater flow is towards the east and the

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 4 of 33

(Regional) Irish Sea. Connection with the Irish Sea is confirmed by observed tidal level variations. Likely confined along the path to the Irish Sea.

Water flow regime #3 Groundwater (Local) Shallow clay/sand horizon (probably perched), the general groundwater flow is towards the north and the Westbrook stream. The relationship with the stream is thought to vary seasonally based on MW2, MW1, MW5 & MW6 groundwater level data. Tidal variations were not observed in these wells suggesting poor connectivity with the Irish Sea.

The volume of soil impacted by the spill is located below the main yard in the center of the facility and is overlain by concrete and tarmacadam. Contaminants have been observed historically in the gravel aquifer (Regime #2) and in the shallow clay/sand aquifer (Regime #3) indicating the presence of a pathway for contaminants to impact the groundwater quality and potentially the surface water quality of the Westbrook Stream and Irish Sea (potential receptors of Regime #3 and Regime #2 respectively).

While still elevated, the level of contamination in the soil has substantially decreased since 2008. It is estimated that approximately 75% of the contaminant mass in the soil has been lost as a result of natural attenuation processes (2014). Consequently, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Mineral Oil determinants have returned to background concentrations in Regime #2 and Regime #3, since 2012 and 2013 respectively, indicating that at present impacts could be considered negligible. It is noted however that the volume of soil impacted by the contamination has increase probably as the result of contaminant migration through preferential pathways in the unsaturated ground.

It is considered that at present the presence of impermeable surfaces above the contaminated soil mass are acting as a mitigation factor. However, a potential concern remains in the scenario, albeit unlikely, in which the cover provided by the hard standing surfaces is removed in the future.

1.4 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND RESULT

1.4.1 Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment

A generic quantitative risk assessment was conducted by comparing the most recent soil and groundwater chemistry result with generally accepted reference limits. The assessment confirmed that while the concentration of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Mineral Oil are elevated above the screening level, the concentration of groundwater determinants is below the selected screening level when groundwater immediately below the soil mass is considered. It is also noted that natural sources of hydrocarbons (such as peat layers) in the catchment are present and are likely to have impacted the groundwater quality of Regime #2. The assessment was however progressed to a Detailed

Quantitative Risk Assessment in order to establish the risk posed by the contaminated soil mass in

the scenario where the impermeable cover is removed.

1.4.2 Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment

A detailed quantitative risk assessment was carried out to evaluate potential impacts in a hypothetical future scenario where the impermeable cover provided by the concrete and tarmacadam surfaces is removed. The assessment was carried out in accordance with the Environmental Agency Remedial Targets Methodology using the modelling tools provided with the methodology. The model parameters where selected in order to represent the conditions that are expected to be encountered at the site should the cover be removed.

The modelling exercise has shown that negligible impacts would be observed in the groundwater of Regime #2. However, a minor concern remains when considering groundwater Regime #3 where potential impacts on the groundwater quality immediately below the site and the Westbrook Stream are shown to be possible. It is noted that, in the interest of a conservative approach, mitigation factors

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 5 of 33

such as increased organic content of the soil towards the stream, biological degradation along the pathway and the seasonal variation in flows between the groundwater and the stream, were disregarded in the model.

1.5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Overall the risk at the site is considered to be very low. In particular, the present capping of the soil mass is deemed to have a sufficient mitigating effect to result in the environment being generally protected.

1.5.1 Bi-annual water monitoring should cease

It is recommended that groundwater monitoring should cease. By way of background to this it was recommended as a precaution in the 2014 Risk Assessment report (Ref.: 2003-797) that biannual water sampling and laboratory analysis continues until there are 4 consecutive monitoring events (2 years) showing that groundwater quality has returned to acceptable concentrations. That is, 90% of values for TPH and MO are below the Dutch Target Value (DTV) of 0.05mg/l in locations MW3R (location of source) and MW2 (directly/immediately downgradient of source). MW1 is excluded from such criteria due to the uncertainty related to the results obtained at that location, as discussed in Section 5.2 of this report.

The latest groundwater monitoring report (MEL report 2003-818) states that this criteria has been met. In fact, since November 2013 (7 consecutive monitoring events which is more than 3 years), 100% concentrations of TPH and MO at MW2 and MW3R have been below the referenced limits (DTV 0.05mg/l).

With reference to this report and to the conclusions made in the latest groundwater monitoring report (2003-818) it is clear that the residual contamination on site is at very low levels through natural attenuation and continues to reduce if not undetectable already (below limit of detection) in most instances. The risk of the site developing a reversal of the downward trend in concentration is considered low. Similarly, the risk to receptors is considered low.

1.5.2 No financial provision needs to be provided

It is recommended that no financial provision needs to be in place because the results of this risk assessment indicate that capping of the contaminated soil mass, currently in place by default (tarmacadam and concrete), would be an effective and more sustainable option overall.

1.5.3 Licence surrender to commence now

The Company should now complete the EPA’s licence surrender application form because the activity for which the licence was acquired ceased years ago, and the Irish Sea and the Westbrook Stream are unlikely to be impacted by residual hydrocarbon contaminants from the site. It is understood that the EPA has in the past permitted the surrender of a licence with residual contamination on site. It is noted that the site is zoned Commercial and Industrial not Domestic.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 6 of 33

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 7 of 33

2. Introduction

2.1 PROJECT CONTRACTUAL BASIS & PARTIES INVOLVED

Minerex Environmental Limited (MEL) was commissioned by Nypro Ireland Limited in 2014 to repeat the site investigation (dated April 2008, Minerex Ref 2003-115) to delineate current residual soil hydrocarbon contamination and subsequently update the 2008 Quantitative Risk Assessment (MEL Ref 2003-177). The activities were requested to be conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in communication (P0567-02)si11ma dated 14/08/13 as part of the Licence Surrender process initiated by Nypro for licence P0567-02 (2014: MEL Report 2003-797).

Subsequently, MEL was commissioned by Nypro Ireland Ltd. in 2016 to carry out further intrusive site investigations requested by the EPA (MW6), and to include both the results of further investigations and the latest groundwater monitoring results (September 2016) and conclusions in this Quantitative Risk Assessment to give a full and up to date overview of the state of the site with respect to migration and MNA of the contaminants of the site.

2.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

This document addresses the following:

1. Points b and c below included in communication (P0567-02)si11ma dated 14/08/13 from the EPA:

a) 2007 to date data review and trend analysis.

b) Qualitative Risk Assessment (water, soil and receptors).

c) Complete modelling of risk.

d) Labelling of Monitoring Locations. With the exception of MW5, all other monitoring locations had no labels on them during the site inspection.

The plan to repeat the site investigation was proposed by MEL, and subsequently approved by the EPA, in the document “Proposal to address elements 2 and 3 of the EPA site inspection report dated 4/9/13” (MEL Ref. 2003-788). It should be noted that items a and b have been completed and reported in MEL Report 2003-790 (Bi-annual Groundwater Monitoring Report April 2014). Extracts of these reports are presented here to provide context to the assessment

2. Tasks listed the during a meeting between the EPA, Nypro Ireland Ltd, and MEL on the 26th

September 2016:

a) The EPA referenced the recommendations of the 2014 Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) which recommended carrying out further intrusive investigations. The EPA recommended that the 2014 QRA be updated to include soil sampling results from intrusive investigation and the Round 2 2016 groundwater results. Mr. Shine made the EPA aware of his intention to carryout this work.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 8 of 33

2.3 SCOPE OF WORKS

Table 2.1 below summarises the work items as agreed and which have been completed to date. Items B4, B6, A34 and A37 were reported separately in MEL reports; 2003-798, 2003-797, 2003-810, and 2003-819 respectively.

Table 2.1 Scope of works carried out.

Work item Activities

B4 Site investigation

Carry out sampling in ‘repeat’ boreholes which are in close proximity (<0.5m) from BH3, BH4 and BH5 (drill up to 7m or refusal using Percussion Window Sampler). Additional boreholes to be drilled at a distance out from these locations to determine volume and degree of significant contamination.

B6 Update QRA Update the QRA having regard to the publication “Remedial Targets Methodology – Hydrogeological Risk Assessment for Land Contamination” (EA, 2006)

A34 Drilling of MW6 Drilling of new monitoring location north of source area at MW3R and reporting on soil and groundwater samples obtained during this process.

A37 Groundwater sampling Biannual groundwater monitoring as per licence conditions.

B11 Updating Risk Assessment

Report, Including Items form

EPA Meeting

Update the QRA having regard to the publication “Remedial Targets Methodology – Hydrogeological Risk Assessment for Land Contamination” (EA, 2006), and including items listed at EPA meeting September 2016 i.e. further intrusive investigations (MW6) and the 2nd

biannual groundwater monitoring 2016 event.

This report addresses Work Item B11 and was prepared in consideration of the following national and international guidance listed in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2 Reference guidance.

Document Type Reference

Code of Practice Environmental Risk Assessment for Unregulated Waste Disposal Sites (EPA, 2007)

Guidance Guidance on the management of contaminated land and groundwater at EPA licenced sites (EPA, 2013)

Guidance Remedial Targets Methodology – Hydrogeological Risk Assessment for Land Contamination (EA, 2006)

Report Template Stage 1 Template for Quantitative Risk Assessment Report (EPA, 2013)

2.4 BACKGROUND INFORMATION

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 9 of 33

A graphical representation of the Conceptual Site Model is provided in Appendix B. This is discussed here below.

2.4.1 Site location and operations history

Nypro Ireland Limited is a Medical Device Healthcare Manufacturer. The site occupied by Nypro is located on the northern outskirts of Bray, Co. Wicklow (Appendices A and B). The site is bound by a residential area to the south and west and a public park area, Westbrook Glen, to the north and east. The Westbrook Stream runs through the park and is bound by slopes on either side. The site slopes downhill to a fenced grassed area immediately adjacent to the park. At the bottom of the slope to the east a flat area is being used as a car park for the facility which is now covered with tarmacadam. With the exception of few grassed areas along the roads and slopes the facility surfaces are mostly covered with impermeable materials such as tarmacadam and concrete. A site location map including the location of historical boreholes and active monitoring points on the site can be found in Appendix A.

The Nypro facility has been in operation since 1980. A painting facility was introduced in 2000 but operations ceased at the end of 2005/2006 due to economic reasons. The company is now mainly focused on the healthcare design manufacture and automation assembly of medical devices while retaining some of its more long term packaging customers. There are approximately 330 employees with production operating on a four shift 24 hours day for approximately 360 days per year. In 2004 Nypro was granted an IPPC Licence (P0567-02) for this facility. Nypro is licenced on the following activity:

- The use of coating materials in processes with capacity to use at least 10 tonnes per year of organic solvents, not included in paragraph 12.2.1

The licenced activities have since ceased and Nypro has initiated a Licence Surrender process for the site.

2.4.2 Geological setting

The site contains an industrial facility, which is constructed on ground that has been ‘cut and filled’ with cutting to the east and filling to the west beside the stream. Previous site investigations showed that the site is built on CLAY-rich made ground to a depth of approximately 2m, which is underlain by natural CLAY subsoil, followed by poorly sorted GRAVEL, returning to CLAY and GRAVEL. SAND was noted in MW2 and MW6 to the northeast of the site[1] (Appendices A and B). According to the published subsoil geology mapping, the surrounding area is underlain by made ground or fluvioglacial SANDS and GRAVELS[2]. As shown in the conceptual site model (Appendix B) the structure of the made ground and shallow natural CLAY ground is characterised by a certain level of heterogeneity where the presence of sand and gravel lenses is also noted.

2.4.3 Hydrogeological setting

The data suggest that there are at least three groundwater transmitting horizons on the site. Table 2.3 below summarises the salient characteristics of these groundwater bodies.

Table 2.3 Hydrogeological regimes at the Nypro site.

Flow Regime Surface water or

groundwater

Comment

Water flow regime #1 Groundwater Shallow (upper) gravel horizon (probably perched) in

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 10 of 33

(Local) connection with MW4.

Water flow regime #2 Groundwater (Regional)

Deep (lower) gravel horizon in connection with MW3R, MW101 and MW103. The general groundwater flow is towards the east and the Irish Sea. Connection with the Irish Sea is confirmed by observed tidal level variations. Likely confined along the path to the Irish Sea.

Water flow regime #3 Groundwater (Local)

Shallow clay/sand horizon (probably perched), the general groundwater flow is towards the north and the Westbrook stream. The relationship with the stream is thought to vary seasonally based on MW2, MW1, MW5 & MW6 groundwater level data. Tidal variations were not observed in these wells suggesting poor connectivity with the Irish Sea.

A localised groundwater body, Regime #1, is located west (general upgradient) of the site. Regime #1 shows groundwater levels between 7.0 and 8.0 maOD at the site (monitoring well MW4). Based on the understanding of the geological setting it is likely that Regime #1 is in fact perched.

Monitoring wells MW3R, MW101 and MW103b are installed at depth (>9.0 mbGL) in SAND and GRAVELS. This groundwater body, Regime #2, is thought to be underlying the whole site. The groundwater level of Regime #2 is generally in the order of 1.5-2.0 maOD at the site (Appendix C) (c. 0.8 maOD in September 2016, however exceptionally low groundwater levels were observed across the site during this monitoring event, likely due to dryer than average (30 year mean) months preceding the monitoring event. MEL Report Ref. 2003-818). Information obtained from continuous automatic water level monitoring devices which were placed (09/05/14 to the 15/05/14) in Regime 2 (MW3R, BH101 and BH103B) showed a minor tidal influence of in the order of 100 mm between tide in and tide out times. This granular groundwater transmitting horizon is probably the most important pathway as it is directly below the historic oil spill, which is directly connected to the nearest water body (the Irish Sea approximately 500 m to the east). While MW3R and MW103b are thought to be representative of a phreatic surface, groundwater level information from MW101 drill logs[12], together with the presence of a perched regime (Regime #3 discussed below) east of MW3R and MW103b, would indicate that Regime #2 becomes a confined aquifer east and south of the area under investigation (Appendix B).

Monitoring wells MW1, MW2, MW5 and MW6 are installed in SANDS and CLAYS in the eastern portion of the site. The monitoring wells indicate the presence of a perched groundwater system (Regime #3) which is in connection with the Westbrook Stream a short distance north of the site (between 50m and 20m). The groundwater levels measured in MW1 and MW2 (closest to the stream) generally vary between 2.0 and 4.0 maOD indicating that the relationship with the stream, where the water level is in the order of 3.2 maOD, varies seasonally (Appendix C). Information obtained from continuous automatic water level monitoring devices in MW1 and MW5 showed no evidence of tidal influences on the groundwater levels of Regime #3 indicating poor connectivity, if any, with the underlying Regime #2. It is noted that the perched water of Regime #3 is thought to be limited to the eastern side of the site and has not been observed in boreholes located in the area directly below the spill (MW3R, MW102 and MW103B).

2.4.4 Hydrological setting

The closest surface water is the Westbrook Stream located approximately 50m from the area under investigation. As indicated in MEL Report 2003-790, this is thought to be in connection with groundwater Regime #3 were the relationship alternates seasonally (gaining/loosing stream). This was inferred from the groundwater level recorded in MW1 and MW2 which seasonally fluctuates

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 11 of 33

across the general level of the stream (measured approximately 20m away from MW1). As for Regime #3 the stream is thought to be perched above the main SAND and GRAVEL groundwater body (Regime #2). A graphical representation of the groundwater level monitoring data (2009-2014) at the site is provided in Appendix C.

The Irish Sea coast line is approximately 500m to the east of the site. Groundwater regime #2 has shown to be influenced by tidal variations (Appendix C). Hydraulic continuity is therefore assumed to exist between the gravel aquifer immediately below the site and the Irish Sea.

2.4.5 Contamination history (Source)

A historic release of hydrocarbons is known to have occurred in or preceding 2002. The release occurred from the top of an underground oil interceptor tank located in the yard between the two site buildings. Since the release occurred the tank has been decommissioned and in-filled with concrete. Between 2007 and the time of writing, regular groundwater monitoring (biannually) and a number of site investigation activities have been conducted as part of the proposed Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) management strategy. The following summarises the findings of previous site investigations:

1. The upgradient natural subsoil samples contain low concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons (BH6). Therefore the made ground used historically to construct the site is interpreted as having residual/background hydrocarbon contamination. As reported in MEL report 2003-115, the background diesel range organics (DRO) is taken as 134mg/kg (2008 data).

2. The range of DRO observed in 2007 in BH3, BH4 and BH5 (adjacent to the spill area) ranged from 978mg/kg to 1682mg/kg. At the same time the range of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) was from 1,145mg/kg to 32,790mg/kg whereas mineral oil (MO) was ranging from 782mg/kg to 1,346mg/kg. The highest values were all recorded in BH3 within the top 3.0m of ground. The site investigation exercise was reported in MEL report 2003-052 where MNA was proposed as a possible management strategy.

3. In 2008 (MEL report 2003-115) indicated that soil contamination was not present in BH7 and BH8 where DRO and MO were below the detection limit of 1mg/kg at both locations.

4. In 2010 (MEL report 2003-253) it was posited that natural attenuation could lead to a return to background hydrocarbon concentrations in the soil within five (5) years from the spill. Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) was expected to progress at least until 2012.

5. In February 2011 subsoil sampling was carried during the replacement of MW3 with MW3R, the highest concentrations of EPH / DRO reached 5610mg/kg and MO 3,060mg/kg at a depth of 2.5m to 3.0m. TPH were 5,480mg/kg at the same depth (MEL report 2003-518).

6. In February 2012 a site investigation was conducted in the Westbrook Glen Park along the northern boundary (MEL report 2003-748). Soil samples from two trenches excavated beyond the site fence and directly north of the spill area were collected from the slope and flood plain (Appendix A). The report concluded that with the exception of naturally occurring hydrocarbons, found in peat horizons, no contamination was present at the locations investigated.

7. In November 2012 a Phase 2 site investigation was conducted by Environmental Resources Management (ERM). Spot soil samples were collected from three (3) boreholes at the site. MW101, located away from the spill area, show TPH concentrations of up to 131mg/kg (consistent with background DRO values in BH6). The highest concentration of TPH (12,594mg/kg) was observed in MW102, drilled in close proximity to the identified spill, at a depth of 0.8 mbGL. Up to 7,153mg/kg TPH were observed in MW103B at a depth of 3.0mbGL.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 12 of 33

8. In May 2014 subsoil sampling was carried out with the aim of repeating and extending the site investigation carried out in 2007 (see above). Recorded soil concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were between 2,530mg/kg and 6.25mg/kg whereas mineral oil (MO) soil concentrations where noted to be between 2,620mg/kg and 10.2mg/kg (Appendix A and E).

9. In January 2016 a new monitoring location (MW6) was drilled to the north/north-north-east of the source zone (MW3R)(Appendix X) with the aim of ascertaining if the plume of contaminants had migrated in that direction (i.e. a more direct route toward the Westbrook Stream). Recorded soil concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were between 292 mg/kg and 2.69 mg/kg whereas mineral oil (MO) soil concentrations were between 227 mg/kg and 8 mg/kg. It was concluded that; “there is no evidence from the soil and groundwater in MW6 reported here that the migration extends to MW6 in the direction of the site perimeter embankment and the stream in the valley adjacent to the site” (MEL report 2003-810).

10. In September 2016 the 2nd Biannual (2016) monitoring event was carried out (most recent monitoring event). It was concluded that; “contaminants previously detected in MW2 have been below detection limit since September 2014. Similarly, hydrocarbons and PAHs at MW1 could be related to runoff from the new car park that is in close proximity to this location. Regardless of the source of contaminants in MW1, contaminants in MW1 have been reducting in concentration over the last 6 years, albeit variable downward trends in some instances. The source and main area of concern in the past (MW3/3R) shows evidence that the contamination is no longer present in the deep (lower) gravel groundwater transmitting zone which is directly connected to the Irish Sea verified using continuous water level monitoring devices in 2013. In addition, recent repeat subsoil sampling (Ref.6), risk assessment (Ref.7), and drilling of MW6 (Ref 8) shows that the risk of impact on receptors is low” (MEL report 2003-818).

The contaminated soil around the spill area is considered to be the main source of contamination at the site. Table 2.4 shows a mass balance carried out for TPH to estimate the contaminant mass reduction occurred between 2007 and 2014. The mass balance indicates that the contaminant mass reduction is estimated in the order of 75% over the period considered. However, the latest site investigations (November 2012 and May 2014) are showing that the area impacted has expanded horizontally and extends towards MW2 and MW103 probably as a result of preferential migration through discreet permeable layers (sand lenses) and fissures present in the soil body. As shown in Figure 2.1, the concentration of contaminants in close proximity to the spill area is reducing overtime, albeit not at the rate anticipated during the 2010 MNA study. If the top 3m of soil in this area immediately surrounding the origin of the spill are considered it is possible to estimate the half-life of the contaminant, albeit with some approximation (assuming a single first order model), for the period 2007-2011 and for the period 2011-2014 using:

C/C0 = e-λt

Where C is the concentration of TPH at the time t, C0 is the concentration of TPH at the start of the period considered and λ is the single order rate constant. The half-life so calculated would be 406 days and 920 days for the period 2007-2011 and 2011-2014 respectively. While the longer half-life estimated for the period 2011-2014 could be, to some extent, resulting from changes in the TPH fractions composition (higher C compounds are less amenable to degradation processes and volatilisation for example) the variation is significant enough to suggest that dilution in the soil due to the expansion of the contaminated soil volume has significantly reduced (where available, compositional data for the various TPH fractions is provided in Appendix E). This, together with: (1) the fact that the remaining TPH fractions (EC>21) are characterised by low mobility and (2) the

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 13 of 33

absence of visually observed free product in the samples collected in 2014, would indicate that the potential for further migration is limited and therefore that a significant increase of the contaminated soil volume is deemed unlikely in the future.

Table 2.4 Estimated contaminant mass reduction.

Year Area of

impacted

soils (m2)

Vertical

extent of

impacted

soils (m)

Mass of

impacted soil

(tonne)*

Mean TPH

concentration

(mg/kg)

TPH mass

(kg)

2007# 270 ca. 3 1,460 12,250 17,900

2014##

600 ca.3 3,240 1,270 4,100

* Assuming a specific gravity of 1.8 # Data from MEL reports 2003-052 and 2003-115 ## Data from MEL report 2003-798

Figure 2.1 TPH concentration in soil samples collected from BH3 (2007), BH9/MW3R (2011), and BH13 (2014). These

were all drilled in close proximity to the identified spill area.

The residual hydrocarbon contamination in the soil adjacent to the underground tanks is considered to have historically leached vertically through unsaturated made ground and natural subsoil to the water table. Figure 2.2 below shows the results of the ongoing bi-annual groundwater quality monitoring (MEL report 2003-818). The following summarises the findings of the groundwater monitoring:

1. Water flow regime #1: MW4 is considered to represent the baseline groundwater chemistry of the site. No hydrocarbon contamination has been observed to date.

2. Water flow regime #2: MW3R (previously MW3), deemed to be representative of the groundwater quality in the locally important GRAVEL aquifer, has shown decreasing concentrations of EPH, TPH and PAH and consistently shows values below the detection limit since March 2012. MO has been below detection limit for the same period except for one minor spike in October 2015, however the concentration detected is very low (0.047mg/l) and is not

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 14 of 33

considered significant). MW3R is located directly beneath the contaminated area which would suggest that the contaminants are no longer reaching the water table.

3. Water flow regime #3: As shown in Figure 2.2, sporadic, low concentration hydrocarbons are noted in the groundwater boreholes downgradient of the contaminated area (MW1 and MW2). MEL report 2003-790 suggests that some of the contamination may have reached the shallow water table in several monitoring wells via migration along lateral and vertical pathways in the subsoils and not via groundwater flow alone. However, contaminants have not been detected (have been below detection limit) in MW2 since April 2014, and prior to this concentration trends were downward, albeit variable in some instances. Similarly, hydrocarbons and PAHs at MW1 could be related to runoff from the new car park that is in close proximity to this location. Regardless of the source of contaminants in MW1, contaminants in MW1 have been dropping in concentration over the last 6 years, albeit variable downward trends in some instances. (MEL report 2003-818)

Water quality monitoring of the Westbrook Stream has been carried out by MEL in conjunction with groundwater monitoring events. The results indicate that no impacts from the site were observed on the stream with regards to TPH, EPH, Mineral Oil, PAH or BTEX since 2011 when monitoring of the stream began (MEL report 2003-818).

Parameter EPH (mg/l) TPH (mg/l)

Location MW4 MW103B MW101 MW5 MW3/3R MW6 MW2 MW1 MW4 MW103B MW101 MW5 MW3/3R MW6 MW2 MW1

Date Upgradient → → Downgradient Upgradient → → Downgradient

30-08-07 0.085

05-03-08 0.054

24-03-08 <0.05

10-02-10 <0.02 1.52 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 1.04 <0.01 <0.01

04-06-10 <0.092 7.93 1.13 <0.092 <0.02 7.46 0.105 <0.02

11-03-11 <0.046 0.902 0.438 <0.046 <0.01 0.652 <0.01 <0.01

23-09-11 <0.046 0.291 <0.046 0.129 <0.01 0.126 <0.01 <0.01

23-09-11 0.179 <0.01

12-03-12 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 DRY <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 DRY

18-10-12 <0.046 0.0873 0.0513 0.163 <0.046 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

26-03-13 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 0.414 <0.046 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.253 <0.01

27-11-13 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 0.387 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.217

02-04-14 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 0.315 <0.046 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

24-09-14 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 0.0753 <0.046 <0.046 0.0606 <0.01 <0.010 <0.010 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.034

26-03-15 <0.046 0.057 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 0.533 <0.01 <0.010 <0.010 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.153

30-10-15 <0.046 0.113 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 0.0787 <0.01 <0.010 <0.010 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

22-01-16 <0.046 0.024

22-03-16 <0.046 0.0663 <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 DRY <0.046 <0.046 <0.01 0.012 <0.010 <0.01 <0.01 DRY <0.01 0.013

29-09-16 <0.046 DRY <0.046 <0.046 <0.046 DRY <0.046 0.047 <0.01 DRY <0.010 <0.01 <0.01 DRY <0.01 <0.01

Parameter MO (mg/l) PAH (mg/l)

Location MW4 MW103B MW101 MW5 MW3/3R MW6 MW2 MW1 MW4 MW103B MW101 MW5 MW3/3R MW6 MW2 MW1

Date Upgradient → → Downgradient Upgradient → → Downgradient

30-08-07

05-03-08 <0.00001

24-03-08

10-02-10 <0.020 1.03 <0.020 <0.020 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 0.000113

04-06-10 <0.020 6.56 0.414 <0.020 <0.00001 0.000151 0.000238 0.000166

11-03-11 <0.010 0.556 <0.010 <0.010 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001

23-09-11 <0.010 0.153 <0.010 <0.010

23-09-11 <0.000247 <0.000247 <0.000247 <0.000247

12-03-12 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 DRY <0.000247 <0.000247 <0.000247 DRY

18-10-12 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.000247 <0.000247 <0.000247 <0.000247 <0.000247

26-03-13 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.181 <0.010 <0.000247 <0.000247 <0.000247 <0.00247 <0.000124

27-11-13 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.233 <0.000247 <0.000247 <0.000247 <0.000247 0.0236

02-04-14 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.020 0.250 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344

24-09-14 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.0313 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 0.0099

26-03-15 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.104 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 0.0222

30-10-15 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.258 0.0467 <0.010 <0.010 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 0.00307

22-01-16 <0.010 <0.000344

22-03-16 <0.010 0.106 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 DRY <0.010 <0.010 <0.000344 0.000354 <0.000344 <0.000344 <0.000344 DRY <0.000344 0.000727

29-09-16 <0.010 DRY <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 DRY <0.010 <0.010 <0.00005 DRY <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 DRY <0.00005 0.000345

Legend: Value = Above detection limit Value = No data.

Figure 2.2 Analytical results of groundwater monitoring at the site (values highlighted in yellow indicate exceedance

of relevant guidance limits).

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 15 of 33

MEL report 2003-790 (Bi-annual Groundwater Monitoring - April 2014) suggests, in the interest of caution, that the observed exceedances in MW1 could be linked to the contaminants release by the combined effect of contaminant migration in the unsaturated soil, migration into groundwater in proximity of MW2 and groundwater flow transport towards MW1. However, it has also been hypothesised in previous groundwater monitoring reports (MEL reports 2003-784, 2003-787, 2003-818) that the source of hydrocarbons at this location might be originating from the car park located beside MW1 where contaminants might be entering the groundwater regime through infiltration of rainwater. PAHs were detected in low concentrations in MW3R, MW2, MW1 and MW4 (Upgradient/Baseline) in 2010, however since 2010 PAHs have only ever been detected in MW1. Furthermore, most of the PAH compounds that have been detected in MW1 have never been detected in MW3R or MW2, including; Acenaphthene, Anthracene, Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, etc. In addition, the PAH concentration trend detected in MW1 has been variable, spiking in 2013 and 2015 to concentrations greater (up to 2 orders of magnitude) than that observed in MW3R or MW2 (Ref 2003-814 – 2015 AER)

2.4.6 Potential pollutant linkages: Human Health

The following potential receptors of soil and groundwater impact at the Site were considered:

- employees of the facility;

- below-ground workers;

- residents of nearby residential areas;

There is a potential risk of exposure to on-site and off-site receptors, however this is considered to be low given the extensive presence of hard-standing and grassed areas across the site, which would limit the impacts of soil dust and contaminant vapours. Off-site migration of vapours in the groundwater is also considered to be unlikely to impact off-site receptors due to the general depth of the water table (approximately 8mbGL) (Appendix B) and the general flow direction of groundwater which is to the east. (Appendix A)

Based on the information reviewed there are no abstraction wells intended for human consumption in the area downgradient of the site. Therefore ingestion of contaminated water is also considered unlikely. This qualitative assessment was also confirmed in the ERM generic quantitative assessment[12] where it was concluded that no significant risk to human health would be present.

A minor concern remains for below-ground works where operators might be exposed to contaminants either by dermal contact or inhalation. However there is no long term exposure expected in this scenario and mitigation should be managed under the health and safety provisions of the job.

2.4.7 Potential pollutant linkages: Controlled Waters

The potential pollutant linkages are considered on the basis of the current understanding of environmental conditions encountered at the site and the contamination history of the site. The pathway for groundwater contamination is considered to be leaching of residual hydrocarbon contamination in the soil adjacent to the underground tanks downwards vertically through unsaturated made ground and natural subsoil to the water table (Appendix B). Possible impacts on groundwater and surface water within Regime #2 and Regime #3 are considered and will be discussed further in this report.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:06

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 16 of 33

3. Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment (GQRA)

3.1 POTENTIAL POLLUTANT LINKAGES

3.1.1 Source of contamination and Contaminants of Potential Concern (COPC)

The source of contaminants is considered to be the residual contamination in the soil around the tank where the spill occurred. The possibility of a groundwater plume generated from the spill is also considered. Due to the nature of the spill, Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPH), Mineral Oil (MO) and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) will be considered as the Contaminants of Potential Concern (COPC) in the assessment.

3.1.2 Potential pollutant linkages

The potential pollutant linkages considered in the assessment are summarised in Table 3.1 below.

Table 3.1 Potential pollutant linkages to controlled waters.

Source Pathway Receptor Comment

Residual soil contamination (hydrocarbon)

Migration through soil

Groundwater (regimes #2)

Potentially complete link.


Migration through soil

Groundwater (regime #3)

Potentially complete link.

Regime #2 contaminated groundwater (hydrocarbon)

Plume migration in groundwater flow

Irish Sea Potentially complete link.

Regime #3 contaminated groundwater (hydrocarbon)

Plume migration in groundwater flow

Westbrook Stream Potentially complete link (seasonally).

3.2 GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

Table 3.2 below lists the generic assessment criteria employed in this phase of the assessment. Reference to the source of the limit is also reported.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 17 of 33

Table 3.2 Generic Assessment Criteria.

Parameter Medium Reference

Limit

Reference Source

TPH/MO Soil 500 mg/kg EU Council Decision 2003/33/EC – Limit values for waste acceptable at landfills for inert waste (MO limit).

TPH/MO Soil 5,000 mg/kg Dutch Soil Remediation Circular 2009 – Intervention Value for MO

EPH/TPH/MO Groundwater 0.01 mg/L EPA Interim guideline values for groundwater chemistry (IGV's) – Guidance limit for TPH

EPH/TPH/MO Groundwater 0.05 mg/L Dutch Soil Remediation Circular 2009 – Target Value for MO

EPH/TPH/MO Groundwater 0.6 mg/L Dutch Soil Remediation Circular 2009 – Intervention Value for MO

3.3 SOURCE ZONE DATA MANAGEMENT

The soil chemistry results obtained during the April 2014 site investigation (MEL Report 2003-798), drilling of MW6 (MEL Report 2003-810) and latest groundwater monitoring event of September 2016 (MEL report 2003-818) were directly compared with the relevant GAC. These are reported in Appendix D and Appendix E.

3.4 RESULTS OF THE GENERIC QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT

3.4.1 Soil and subsoil

Results from the 2014 soil investigation indicate five (5) samples showed concentrations of TPH and MO to be elevated above the relevant Inert limit, with BH14-SS2, BH15-SS1 and BH15-SS2 being below the Inert limit (Appendix E). The highest concentrations were recorded in BH12-SS2 (2,620mg/kg) for MO and in BH13-SS5 (2,530mg/kg) for TPH which are both below the Dutch Intervention Value.

Results for soil samples obtained from the drilling of MW6 (January 2016, MEL Report 2003-810) indicate that concentrations for all parameters analysed (TPH, PAH, BTEX, MO, GRO) are below GAC (Generic Assesment Criteria) reference limits, where available.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 18 of 33

3.4.2 Controlled waters

With the exception of MW1, all of the groundwater samples (September 16) showed concentrations of EPH and PAH below the more restrictive IGV limit (Appendix D). The EPH concentration in MW1 was 0.047mg/L which is elevated above IGV limit (0.01mg/L). However it should be noted that the limit of detection for EPH is <0.046mg/L. The laboratory detection limit of <0.046mg/l is above the guideline value of 0.01mg/l; however MEL believes that this discrepancy is not of significance at these locations as the TPH is below the guideline value of <0.01mg/l for TPH which includes EPH. The Total PAH concentration in MW1 was 0.345ug/L, which is elevated above IGV limit (0.10ug/L). However it should be noted that the limit of detection for Total PAH prior to the September 2016 monitoring event was <0.344ug/L. The laboratory detection limit of <0.344ug/l is above the guideline values of 0.075ug/l (Groundwater Regulations) & 0.01ug/l (IGV); however all speciated PAHs are below the individual guidance, therefore this discrepancy is not considered significant. All groundwater samples showed concentrations of MO and TPH below detection limits, and IGV reference limits (Limit of detection for MO and TPH does not exceed the IGV reference limits). (MEL Report 2003-818).

3.4.3 Conclusions

While soil concentrations of TPH and MO are noted to be above the selected Inert limit in the 2014 soil investigation (MEL Report 2003-797), it would appear that impacts on the gravel aquifer beneath the contamination area are no longer present (MW3R, Regime #2) as a result of natural attenuation of contaminants in the soil. Historical data (Appendix E) shows that up to 32,790mg/kg, TPH, and 3,060mg/kg, MO, have been observed in 2007 in close proximity to the origin of the spill (BH3). It is noted that, while the concentration of the contaminants is significantly reducing, the volume of soil impacted by contaminants has increased overtime most likely as a result of preferential migration paths for the contaminant in the unsaturated ground.

The impact of soil contamination on the groundwater quality would presently be mitigated by the extensive cover of tarmacadam and concrete present at the site which is effectively capping the contaminated area and significantly reducing the leaching of contaminants. It is noted that, historical data shows that EPH, TPH and MO concentrations in MW3R, located immediately below the spill area, have been constantly reducing since these peaked in June 2010 when 7.93mg/L, 7.46mg/L and 6.56mg/L were recorded for EPH, TPH and MO respectively. TPH, EPH and PAH have been observed to be below the detection limit in MW3R since March 2012 indicating that impacts on regime #2 are no longer present. MO has been below detection limit for the same period except for one minor spike in October 2015, however the concentration detected is very low (0.047mg/l) and is not considered significant.

In the local shallow aquifer (Regime #3), MW2 at present shows values below the relevant reference limits for TPH, EPH, PAH and MO, in fact all were below the detection limit, indicating that at the time of sampling (September 2016) impacts from the contaminated soil were most likely negligible.

With reference to the historical data, it would appear that migration of contaminants from the soil in to groundwater of Regime #3 has occurred sporadically and impacts appear to be reducing overtime as inferred from sporadic detections in MW2 of TPH and MO (04/06/10 and 26/03/13). Elevated EPH are noted more regularly in MW2. However, while a general correlation between EPH and TPH (or even MO) can be observed historically for groundwater samples in MW3R this cannot be said for MW2 (Figure 3.1).

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 19 of 33

Figure 3.1 Correlation between EPH and TPH in groundwater from MW3R (Regime #3) and MW2 (Regime #2).

Since sporadic detections of EPH, apparently unrelated to TPH (or even MO), are historically observed in MW1, MW2 and MW5, the source of EPH is thought to be associated with the general soil chemistry and organic nature of the shallow ground in the flood plain of the Westbrook Stream (peat horizons were noted immediately north of MW2 during the site investigation carried out in Westbrook Glen Park, MEL report 2003-748). In fact, it is noted that EPH are observed in MW2 only when the local groundwater flow is directed south, from the Westbrook Stream towards the site (Table 3.3 below). This would be supported by the fact that one of only 2 times EPH was recorded, albeit in very low concentrations, in MW5 (18/10/12) the ground water level in MW1 was significantly higher than both MW2 and MW5 (anecdotal information would indicated that the Westbrook Stream was flooding or close to flooding the plain at the time). However, the pattern appears to be less clear when considering EPH in MW1. Occasionally elevated PAH(16) in MW1 would suggests that this might be due to sporadic impacts from the nearby, formerly gravel covered, car park. It is noted that, historically, low levels of PAH(16) and EPH were detected, upgradient of the site, in the Westbrook Stream (18/10/2012 and 29/09/2016) but not downgradient, near MW1.

Recommendations with regards to the results of the generic risk assessment will be presented in Chapter 4 in the context of the present and possible future conditions encountered at the site.

Table 3.3 Groundwater level and EPH concentrations in Regime #3.

Date MW1 water

level

(maOD)

MW2 water

level

(maOD)

MW5 water

level

(maOD)

MW1 EPH

(mg/L)

MW2 EPH

MW2 (mg/L)

MW5 EPH

(mg/L)

02/04/2014 3.64 3.08 3.50 <0.046 0.315 <0.046

27/11/2013 2.69 n/a 2.40 0.387 <0.046 <0.046

26/03/2013 3.94 3.88 3.80 <0.046 0.414 <0.046

18/10/2012 4.04 2.98 2.93 <0.046 0.163 0.087

12/03/2012 1.85 (Dry) 2.61 Not installed n/a <0.046 n/a

23/09/2011 3.03 3.21 Not installed 0.129 <0.046 n/a

11/03/2011 3.43 2.61 Not installed <0.046 0.438 n/a

04/06/2010 3.25 2.20 Not installed <0.092 1.13 n/a

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 20 of 33

4. Detailed quantitative risk assessment (DQRA)

Changes to the site layout, and in particular to the impermeable surfaces overlaying the soil mass impacted by contaminants, are deemed unlikely in the short term. However, in the interest of caution the risk assessment is here extended to assess the risk posed to potential environmental receptors should these surfaces be removed.

4.1 POTENTIAL POLLUTANT LINKAGES

4.1.1 Potential pollutant linkages

The potential pollutant linkages considered in the assessment are summarised in Table 3.1 below. These are consistent with those assessed in the GQRA but, since groundwater regimes #2 and #3 are included in the assessment as pathways to the potential surface water receptors. The source of contaminants is considered to be the residual contamination in the soil around the tank where the spill occurred. In consideration of the age and nature of the spill Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) are considered as the Contaminants of Potential Concern (CoPC) in the assessment.

Table 4.1 Potential pollutant linkages to controlled waters.

Source Pathway Receptor Comment


Migration through soil and groundwater (regime #2)

Irish Sea The scenario assessed assumes that hard stand surfaces are removed from above the soil mass impacted by hydrocarbons.


Migration through soil and groundwater (regime #3)

Westbrook Stream (seasonally)

The scenario assessed assumes that hard stand surfaces are removed from above the soil mass impacted by hydrocarbons.

4.2 RISK ESTIMATION MODEL/TOOL DEVELOPMENT FOR DQRA

The quantitative risk assessment was carried out in accordance with Environment Agency guidance document ‘Remedial Targets Methodology – Hydrogeological Risk Assessment for Land Contamination’[4]. Soil Target Concentrations were derived, for the relevant levels of assessment, using the EA’s Remedial Target Concentrations Worksheet (ver. 3.2). The worksheets for each level of the assessment are presented in Appendix F. It is noted that, since the scenario under investigation is speculative, the model is employed to calculate acceptable soil concentrations, or Target Soil Concentrations (TSCs), rather than to simulate an identified groundwater plume.

4.2.1 Source of contamination and Contaminants of Potential Concern (CoPC)

The general dimensions of the area where residual contamination is assumed to be present are summarised in Table 4.2 (Appendix A). The source of contaminants has been described in detail in the previous sections of this report.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 21 of 33

Table 4.2 Dimensions of the area assumed to be impacted by residual contamination.

Area of impacted

soils (m2)

Width along the main groundwater

flow direction (m)

Width perpendicular to the general

groundwater flow direction (m)

600 20 30

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) was selected as reference parameter for the assessment (CoPC). Since the most abundant TPH component observed in the samples tested during the 2014 site investigation (Figure 4.1) was the EC>16-35 aliphatic component and the EC>21-35 component, the properties of these components of TPH were employed in the model[9]. This is deemed to be a conservative approach in that while higher EC molecules (EC>35) are also present, albeit in lower concentrations, these are generally less mobile within the respective aromatic and aliphatic components.

Figure 4.1 Composition of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons found in the soil in samples taken in 2014 (MEL report

2003-798).

4.2.2 Migration pathways and potential receptors

Contamination is deemed to be leachate driven by meteoric infiltration water from the source area into the groundwater. Further migration is considered to be occurring in the aqueous phase along the groundwater flow direction, reaching the identified receptors. Each groundwater regime will be independently assessed. The distance to the receptor (Irish Sea) in groundwater Regime #2 (regional gravel aquifer) is assumed to be approximately 500m whereas the distance to the Westbrook Stream through the shallow clay/sand aquifer (Regime #3) is estimated to be approximately 50m. Further details regarding the quantitative representation of the pathway characteristics are provided in paragraphs 3.2.4.1 to 3.2.4.3 below.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 22 of 33

4.2.3 Definition of target concentrations (controlled waters)

The main groundwater quality criteria selected for the assessment was the Irish Interim Guideline Values (IGV) limit for TPH of 0.01mg/L[5]. The Dutch Groundwater Target Value (0.05mg/L)[6] and Intervention Value (0.6mg/L) for Mineral Oil (MO) are also included in the assessment and computed Target Soil Concentrations (TSCs) compared with TPH concentrations in the soil. An exceedance of the TSCs is considered to be within one of the following categories in Table 4.3 below. This categorisation is proposed by MEL in the absence of any known formal published categorisation.

Table 4.3 Definition of exceedances.

Classification Comment

Minor exceedance A value which exceeds the reference standard by <1.5 times.

Moderate exceedance A value which exceeds the reference standard by 1.5 to 3 times.

Significant exceedance A value which exceeds the reference standard by >3 times.

4.2.4 Quantitative model development, sensitivity analysis & calibration

Where available, site specific data was employed in the model. Where site specific data was not available, the input parameters for the model were selected conservatively (protective of the environment) from literature values, where a range of parameters was available a sensitivity analysis exercise was carried out prior to selecting a value for the model.

4.2.4.1 Level 1 Assessment

This level of assessment is the most conservative and considers whether the concentrations in the pore water in a contaminated soil are elevated enough to impact on the receptor. In practice this can be achieved by comparing one of the following to a relevant assessment criterion:

i) Measured pore water concentrations

ii) Soil leaching test

iii) Theoretical calculations based on soil/water partitioning equations

The assessment at Level 1 was carried out on the basis of theoretical calculations (iii). The input parameters employed in the calculations are summarised in Table 4.4 (Regime #2 and Regime #3). Details of the source of the parameter value employed are also listed.

Table 4.4 Level 1 input parameters (Regime #2 and Regime #3)

Input Parameters Value Unit Source of parameter value

Water filled soil porosity

2.04E-01 fraction Average Moisture Content of May 2014 samples[7] adjusted for estimated bulk density.

Air filled soil porosity 2.36E-01 fraction Assumed an approximate porosity of 0.44 for a Sandy CLAY[8]. A sensitivity analysis for porosities between 0.30 and 0.50 was also carried out.

Bulk density of soil zone material

1.7E+00 g/cm3 Literature value for Stiff CLAY[8]. A sensitivity analysis for bulk densities between 1.6 and 1.8 was also carried out.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 23 of 33

Henry's Law constant 4.9E+03 6.7E-04

dimensionless

Literature value for the most abundant class of hydrocarbons (soil chemistry): Aliphatic 16-35[9]. Literature value for the most abundant class of hydrocarbons (soil chemistry): Aromatic 21-35[9].

Fraction of organic carbon (in soil)

7.00E-03 fraction Site specific data from upgradient investigation point MW101 at 3mbGL (Total Organic Content, 0.7%). ERM Investigation (2012)[12]. This is assumed to be conservative since up to 2.8% TOC was recorded in 2012.

Organic carbon partition coefficient

6.31E+08 1.26E+05

l/kg Literature value for the most abundant class of hydrocarbons (soil chemistry): Aliphatic 16-35[9] Literature value for the most abundant class of hydrocarbons (soil chemistry): Aromatic 21-35[9]

Soil water partition coefficient

4.42E+06 8.81E+02

l/kg Calculated by the model for non-polar organic chemicals (Aliphatic 16-35). Calculated by the model for non-polar organic chemicals (Aromatic 16-35).


At Level 2 measured or modelled groundwater quality from immediately below the source zone are compared directly with the relevant assessment criteria. Since the scenario being considered is hypothetical (removal of impermeable cover) the values assessed have been modelled in accordance with the Remedial Targets Methodology.

As indicated in Paragraph 3.3, compliance with the computed target concentration is achieved at Level 1 for the aliphatic EC>16-35 component. However, the assessment was progressed to Level 2 for the aromatic EC>21-35 component. The input parameters employed in the calculations are summarised in Table 4.5 (Regime #2) and Table 4.6 (Regime #3). Details of the source of the parameter value employed are also listed.

Table 4.5 Level 2 input parameters (Regime #2).


Infiltration 3.70E-04 m/d EPA recharge maps for made ground[2] indicate a mean recharge of 134 mm/year for the area investigated. A sensitivity analysis was conducted for values up to 200 mm/year as this is indicated by the EPA to be the maximum recharge capacity for the area under investigation.

Length of contaminant source in direction of groundwater flow

2.00E+01 m Based on current understanding of contamination area. Table 4.2 above.

Saturated aquifer thickness

1.30E+01 m Estimated in consideration of the fact that bedrock is approximately 21mbGL[2] and groundwater is approximately 8 mbGL[3].

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 24 of 33


Hydraulic Conductivity of aquifer in which dilution occurs

2.0E+01 m/d From literature values for GRAVEL[13] the hydraulic conductivity was estimated based on a sensitivity analysis for values between 20 m/d and 50 m/d.

Hydraulic gradient of water table

3.7E-03 fraction Groundwater level data between MW103B and MW3R (distance of ca. 23 m) recorded on the 25/04/2014 indicate a local gradient of 0.016 immediately below the contaminated area. However, a more conservative 0.0037 values is used to represent the average gradient between MW103B and the Irish Sea (as measured on the 25/04/2014).

Table 4.6 Level 2 input parameters (Regime #3).


Infiltration 3.70E-04 m/d EPA recharge maps for made ground[2] indicate a mean recharge of 134 mm/year for the area investigated. A sensitivity analysis was conducted for values up to 200 mm/year as this is indicated by the EPA to be the maximum recharge capacity for the area under investigation.

Length of contaminant source in direction of groundwater flow

2.00E+01 m Based on current understanding of contamination area.

Saturated aquifer thickness

4.0E+00 m According to the borehole logs of MW2 at least 4.0 m of saturated aquifer is encountered (MEL Report 2003-115). Therefore 4.0 m was used in the interest of a conservative approach.

Hydraulic Conductivity of aquifer in which dilution occurs

1.0E+00 m/d From literature values for fine SAND[13] the hydraulic conductivity was estimated based on a sensitivity analysis for values between 10 m/d and 0.1 m/d.

Hydraulic gradient of water table

5.0E-03 fraction Measured between MW5 and MW1[3] (25/04/2014 groundwater level data over a distance of ca. 67 m). While the gradient has shown to be seasonally variable, on the date considered the groundwater flow was directed towards the Westbrook Stream (the intended receptor) and therefore the values was used in the model. MW5 and MW1 are generally located side gradient of MW2. However, the value is deemed to acceptably represent the conditions encountered between MW2 and the Westbrook.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 25 of 33


At Level 3 (attenuation in the aquifer), the observed groundwater contamination below the site is compared directly with the target concentration multiplied by an attenuation factor (AF), which is calculated on the basis of the hydrogeological conditions considered.

As indicated in Paragraph 3.3, compliance with the computed target concentration is achieved in Regime #2 and Regime #3 at Level 1 for the aliphatic EC>21-35 component. The assessment was progressed to Level 3 for the aromatic EC>21-35 component. The input parameters employed in the calculations are summarised in Table 4.7 (Regime #2) and Table 4.8 (Regime #3). Details of the source of the parameter value employed are also listed.

Table 4.7 Level 3 input parameters (Regime #2)


Half-life for degradation of contaminant in water

9.9E+99 days Assumed null. While a half-life in water of 60 days can be theoretically calculated for the Aromatic EC>21-35 fraction. There is little information regarding the biodegradative conditions encountered in the aquifer. Therefore these are conservatively assumed to be null.

Bulk density of aquifer materials

1.92E+00 g/cm3 Literature value for GRAVELS[8]

Effective porosity of aquifer

1.9E-01 fraction Literature value for GRAVELS[14]

Distance to compliance point

5.0E+02 m Distance to the Irish Sea.

Partition coefficient 4.42E+06 l/kg Calculated by the model

Longitudinal dispersivity

5.0E+01 m Dispersivities 10%, 1%, 0.1% of pathway length (model defined)

Transverse dispersivity 5.0E+00 m Dispersivities 10%, 1%, 0.1% of pathway length (model defined)

Vertical dispersivity 5.0E-01 m Dispersivities 10%, 1%, 0.1% of pathway length (model defined)

Table 4.8 Level 3 input parameters (Regime #3)


Half-life for degradation of contaminant in water

9.9E+99 days Assumed null. While a half-life in water of 60 days can be theoretically calculated for the Aromatic EC>21-35 fraction[15]. There is little information regarding the biodegradative conditions encountered in the aquifer. Therefore these are conservatively assumed to be null.

Bulk density of aquifer materials

1.80E+00 g/cm3 Literature value for dense SAND[8]

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 26 of 33


Effective porosity of aquifer

2.0E-01 fraction Literature value for SAND[14]

Distance to compliance point

5.0E+01 m Distance to the Westbrook Stream.

Partition coefficient 4.42E+06 l/kg Calculated by the model

Longitudinal dispersivity

5.0E+00 m Dispersivities 10%, 1%, 0.1% of pathway length (model defined)

Transverse dispersivity 5.0E-01 m Dispersivities 10%, 1%, 0.1% of pathway length (model defined)

Vertical dispersivity 5.0E-02 m Dispersivities 10%, 1%, 0.1% of pathway length (model defined)

4.3 DETAILED RISK EVALUATION

4.3.1 Source zone data management and model results

Table 4.9 summarises the computed Target Soil Concentrations (TSCs) for the TPH components considered. The values are developed to represent the potential impacts resulting from the hypothetical removal of impermeable cover layers (such as concrete and tarmacadam) present at the site. Here the TSCs are conservatively compared to the concentration of relevant TPH components recorded at the Site during the April 2014 site investigation. Mean values and maximum values are presented for evaluation.

Table 4.9 Target Soil Concentrations computed for groundwater compliance with Irish Interim Guideline Values (IGV)

Dutch Target Values (NLT) and Dutch Intervention Values (NLI).

Regime Level Component IGV

Target

(mg/kg)

NLT

Target

(mg/kg)

NLI

Target

(mg/kg)

Mean

Conc.

(mg/kg)

Max.

Conc.

(mg/kg)

Regime #2

(Irish Sea)

1 Ali. (EC>16-35) 44,200 2.21E+05 2.65E+06 702 1,405

Aro. (EC>21-35) 8.81 44.1 529 239 490

2 Ali. (EC>16-35) n/a n/a n/a

Aro. (EC>21-35) 204 1,020 n/a 239 490

3 Ali. (EC>16-35) n/a n/a n/a

Aro. (EC>21-35) 15,400 n/a n/a

Regime #3

(Westbrook)

1 Ali. (EC>16-35) 44,200 2.21E+05 2.65E+06 702 1,405

Aro. (EC>21-35) 8.81 44.1 529 239 490

2 Ali. (EC>16-35) n/a n/a n/a

Aro. (EC>21-35) 28.9 145 n/a 239 490

3 Ali. (EC>16-35) n/a n/a n/a

Aro. (EC>21-35) 34.5 172 n/a 239 490

TPH (EC>5-44) 1,270 2,530

* Mean and maximum soil concentration values are referred to the site investigation of April 2014 (MEL report 2003-798)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 27 of 33

- n/a indicates where values were not computed since compliance was achieved at the previous assessment level - GREEN: Max. value is compliant; ORANGE: Mean value is compliant; RED: no value is compliant.

4.3.2 Results of detailed quantitative risk assessment

Overall, the model indicates that compliance with the IGV limit for groundwater quality would be expected in the regional groundwater aquifer (Regime #2) even if the impermeable surfaces of the site were removed.

While groundwater in the gravel aquifer would likely be impacted (Level 2) compliance with the IGV limit would be achieved only a short distance downgradient of the spill area (Figure 4.2). In consideration of:

1. Removal of the cover is an unlikely event in the near future (confirmed by Cecil Black, Nypro Management to EPA several times and is due to the fact that the Bray site has very limited physical expansion opportunities);

2. Compliance with the TSC for Dutch Target Value would be achieved at Level 2 (immediately below the source area) for the highest concentration recorded in soil samples taken in 2014 (aromatic EC>21-35);

3. Size and nature of the receptor (the Irish Sea);

the risk posed by the residual soil contamination to the environment of Regime #2 is deemed to be negligible.

Figure 4.2 Modelled concentration of TPH in groundwater vs distance along the main flow path in Regime #2 (Graph

was obtained for a starting soil concentration of Aromatic EC>21-35 of 490 mg/kg) – Remedial Target Worksheet.

Conversely, in Regime #3, the model indicates that compliance with the IGV limit would not be achieved if the impermeable cover above the contaminated area was to be removed. It is, however, noted that a significant number of conservative assumptions have been included in to the model. Therefore, in consideration of the following:

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 28 of 33

1. Removal of the cover is an unlikely event in the near future (confirmed by Cecil Black, Nypro Management to EPA several times and is due to the fact that the Bray site has very limited physical expansion opportunities);

2. Organic nature of the aquifer between the source and the receptor (the Westbrook Stream);

3. Variable relationship with the receptor;

4. Compliance with the TSC for Dutch Intervention Value would be achieved at Level 1 (in the pore water) for the highest concentration recorded in soil samples taken 2014 (aromatic EC>21-35);

5. Assuming a half-life of 920 days, the average concentration of aromatic TPH (EC>21-35) in the soil (April 2014 data) would reduce to below the TSC calculated for the Dutch Target Value at Level 3 in less than 2 years;

The risk posed by the residual soil contamination to the environment of Regime #3 is deemed to be low.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 29 of 33

5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1.1 Soil contamination

A review of the data has shown that the concentration in the soil of contaminants associated with the historical spill on site has reduced overtime. This confirms that natural attenuation has occurred and is occurring, albeit at a slower rate than predicted by the Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) model developed for the site in 2010.

5.1.2 Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment: Present Scenario

The quantitative risk assessment conducted for impacts on controlled waters shows that, at present, the risk posed by the residual contamination to the locally important GRAVEL aquifer (groundwater regime #2) and the Westbrook Stream (groundwater regime #3) is very low. The remedial targets (MNA remediation approach) are therefore deemed to be generally met. A minor concern exists for regime #3 due to the presence of Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPH), Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) and Mineral Oil (MO) concentrations above the IGV value of 0.01mg/L in the groundwater at MW2 (closest monitoring point to the contaminated area). However, parameters listed above have been below detection limit 2014, and a review of the historical data would indicate that a natural load of hydrocarbons is present in the catchment in the form of organic layers (containing peat) within the flood plain of the Westbrook stream. Additionally, it is at present unclear if the elevated EPH, TPH and MO in MW1 are related to the hydrocarbon spill (vicinity of MW3R) or are associated with run-off from the car park area at the far eastern side of the site. However, the data suggests that the contamination that is being observed in MW1 is different to that observed upgradient, as mentioned in section 2.4 of this document. However, if indeed associated with the spill, it is expected that the groundwater quality at MW1 would return to background values (<0.01 mg/L) within a two (2) years period as observed for MW3R.

5.1.3 Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment: Cover Removal Scenario

At present the impact of contaminants in the soil is mitigated by the presence of an extensive covering of the site with impermeable materials (such as buildings, concrete and tarmacadam) which practically eliminate the infiltration of rainwater. The detailed risk assessment shows that, should the covering surfaces be removed, the impact of residual contamination could result in an exceedance of the IGV limit of 0.01mg/L in Regime #2 at Level 2 of the assessment. However, Regime #2 showed to be protected at Level 3 within approximately 25m for groundwater flowing towards the Irish Sea indicating that a negligible risk is posed by the residual contamination to this regime. Conversely, the results indicate that groundwater within Regime #3 is at risk of not being compliant with the IGV and Dutch Target Value limit at Level 3 indicating the possibility of impacts on the Westbrook Stream. However, it is noteworthy that a variable relationship exists with the stream (influent/affluent) and that natural source of hydrocarbons would be present within the catchment. Also the organic nature of the soils between the site and the stream would be seen as mitigating circumstance in that organic material sorbs / bind hydrocarbons.

5.1.4 Remedial options

Monitored Natural Attenuation was selected as the remedial option for the site. While the contaminant mass reduction has been observed to be less than anticipated at the start of the contamination management process (achievement of remedial targets was expected to occur in 2012), the risk posed

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 30 of 33

to the environment has significantly reduced to a point that it can be considered low. It is noted, that the implementation of alternative remedial options is significantly limited by the nature of the operations being conducted in the yard where contaminated soils are observed. The site is operating on a 24/7 regime and the yard acts as the main loading bay for the products being shipped resulting in almost constant trafficking of the yard. Therefore any excavation or remedial infrastructure installation operations would have potentially serious indirect financial implication for the operation. However, the groundwater quality monitoring results indicate that the residual contamination has a generally negligible impact on the groundwater immediately below the spill area. Additionally, the migration of contaminants in the unsaturated ground would appear to have greatly reduced indicating that further expansion of the impacted soil mass would be unlikely or limited. This suggests that the present capping of the yard with impermeable surfaces, such as tarmacadam and concrete, would, in fact, represent a sufficient mitigation measure: highlighting capping of the contaminated area as a viable remedial strategy. Therefore, no further remedial action is recommended at present especially since there is low (non-negligible) risk should the impermeable covers be removed as part of a redevelopment of the site.

5.1.5 Summary

Expressed simply, the risk assessment work suggests that, the Irish Sea and the Westbrook Stream are unlikely to be impacted by residual hydrocarbon contaminants from the site. However, with the impermeable surface (concrete and tarmacadam) removed the modelling exercise shows that there is a minor risk to the Westbrook Stream. It should be noted that, given the nature of the site operations, the business commitment to the site as expressed each meeting with the EPA in Wexford, and its current layout, the removal of impermeable surfaces is deemed a highly unlikely occurrence in the foreseeable future. Additionally, Nypro has made a committed move away from hydraulic machinery employed at the site and is presently in the process of implementing this strategy. This will further reduce the risks associated with the site by reducing the future risk of spills which could worsen the present conditions.

5.2 RECOMMENDED WAY FORWARD

5.2.1 Bi-annual water monitoring should cease

It is recommended that groundwater monitoring should cease. By way of background to this it was recommended as a precaution in the 2014 Risk Assessment report (Ref.: 2003-797) that biannual water sampling and laboratory analysis continues until there are 4 consecutive monitoring events (2 years) showing that groundwater quality has returned to acceptable concentrations. That is, 90% of values for TPH and MO are below the Dutch Target Value (DTV) of 0.05mg/l in locations MW3R (location of source) and MW2 (directly/immediately downgradient of source). MW1 is excluded from such criteria due to the uncertainty related to the results obtained at that location, as discussed in Section 5.2 of this report.

The latest groundwater monitoring report (MEL report 2003-818) states that this criteria has been met. In fact, since November 2013 (7 consecutive monitoring events which is more than 3 years), 100% concentrations of TPH and MO at MW2 and MW3R have been below the referenced limits (DTV 0.05mg/l).

With reference to this report and to the conclusions made in the latest groundwater monitoring report (2003-818) it is clear that the residual contamination on site is at very low levels through natural attenuation and continues to reduce if not undetectable already (below limit of detection) in most instances. The risk of the site developing a reversal of the downward trend in concentration is considered low. Similarly, the risk to receptors is considered low.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 31 of 33

5.2.2 No financial provision needs to be provided

It is recommended that no financial provision needs to be in place because the results of this risk assessment indicate that capping of the contaminated soil mass, currently in place by default (tarmacadam and concrete), would be an effective and more sustainable option overall.

5.2.3 Licence surrender to commence now

The Company should now complete the EPA’s licence surrender application form because the activity for which the licence was acquired ceased years ago, and the Irish Sea and the Westbrook Stream are unlikely to be impacted by residual hydrocarbon contaminants from the site. It is understood that the EPA has in the past permitted the surrender of a licence with residual contamination on site. It is noted that the site is zoned Commercial and Industrial not Domestic.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




on

Page 32 of 33

a) References

No. Description MEL Ref.

1. Minerex (2007) - Report on site investigation to test for residual soil contamination.

2003-052

2. Geological Survey of Ireland website (www.gsi.ie) [Accessed 2014]

3. Minerex (2014) - Bi-annual Groundwater Monitoring Report for April 2014.

2003-790

4. Environment Agency UK (2006) – Remedial Targets Methodology, Hydrogeological Risk Assessment for Land Contamination.

5. Environmental Protection Agency (2006) - Interim Guideline values (IGV’s) - Towards setting guideline values for the protection of groundwater in Ireland.

6. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment, Department of Soil Protection (2000, 2009) - Dutch soil remediation circular 2009 in conjunction with Dutch guidelines (target and intervention) for soil & groundwater chemistry (2000)

7. Minerex (2014) - Repeat Investigation factual report 2003-798

8. D.M. Nielsen (2006) – Practical Handbook of Environmental Site Characterisation and Groundwater Monitoring, Second Edition.

9. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Criteria Working Group Series (1997) - Selection of Representative TPH Fractions Based on Fate and Transport Considerations

10. Schwartz, F.W. & Zhang, H. (2003) Fundamentals of Groundwater

11. Geological Survey of Ireland (2004) - 1st Draft Shannon Lwr

Central Gravel Group GWB Description November 2004. (www.gsi.ie) [Accessed July 2014]

12. ERM (2012) – DRAFT Phase II Environmental Site Assessment 2003-794

13. Heath, R.C., (1983). Basic ground-water hydrology, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2220

14. Martin N. Sara (2003) Site Assessment and Remediation Handbook, Second Edition

15. Coulon, F et al. (2010), Multimedia fate of petroleum hydrocarbons in the soil : oil matrix of constructed biopiles. Chemosphere, Vol. 81, Issue 11.

16 Report on MW6 drilling, monitoring well installation, and soil & groundwater sampling

2003-810

17 Bi-annual Groundwater Monitoring Report – September 2016 2003-818

18 Annual Environmental Report (IPPC PO 567-02) 2003-814

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




Appendix A

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

Site location

1km

Appendix DConceptual

Cross Section alonggroundwater flow line

Nypro Ltd, Bray, Co. Wicklow

Drawing Ref.: 2003-008.cdrCG 29/05/14

Site locationUnderground Tank

Common Legend

Fill / Unnatural Ground

Granitic Sand

Light Brown Clay

Grey Clay

- NOT TO SCALE

Appendix ASite Plan

Potential Contamination

Groundwater FlowDirection

14 TPH concentration

14* Predicted TPH conc.

Appendix BPlan showing

sniffer survey results

MW1

BH4

GroundwaterMonitoring Point

Borehole Location

All features are +/-2m.

PID <35ppm interpreted as natural

or signature of fill material based

on overall survey.

Appendix CApproximate line of

cross section


Appendix ASite Location Map


Extrapolated fromtopographic contours

Proposedmonitoring points

Groundwaterequipotentials

Concrete/ tarmac surface

Firm to hard brown CLAY

GRAVEL

SAND

Soft grey CLAY

Water strike

Water level (maOD)

Water table

North

Soil sampling borehole

Likely extent of

hydrocarbon

contamination in

Groundwater

Taney Hall,Eglinton Terrace,Dundrum, Dublin 14.Tel: +353 (0)1 2964435Fax: +353 (0)1 2964436E-mail: [email protected] site: www.minerex.ie

GroundwaterFlow Direction

PID readings (ppm)

0.1

Monitoring Well

Borehole Locality

Underground Tanks

Extent of gases from hydrocarbons

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

DecomissionedUnderground

tanksLocation of Historic Spill

BH1

BH4 BH8

BH7

BH6

BH2

BH3

BH5

BH13

BH15

BH14

BH12

MW 4

MW

3R

MW

2M

W1

MW 101

MW

102

MW

103B

MW 5

DecomissionedTanks

50

Scale bar (m)10 15




Drawing Ref.: 2003-008.cdrMV 11/11/14


Common Legend


Granitic Sand

Light Brown Clay

Grey Clay

- NOT TO SCALE

Appendix ASite Plan







MW1

BH4


Borehole Location




on overall survey.


cross section


Appendix ASite Layout showingthe location of siteinvestigation boreholes







GRAVEL

SAND

Soft grey CLAY

Water strike

Water level (maOD)

Water table

North

Site investigation

borehole (2014)


Likely extent of

hydrocarbon

contamination in

Groundwater



PID readings (ppm)

0.1

Monitoring Well

Borehole Locality

Underground Tanks


Appendix BSite Layout showing

Likely Groundwater contoursand contamination

Site investigation

borehole (pre 2014)

Groundwater monitoring

location

Estimated area interested

by soil contamination

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

Site B

oundary

Wooded Slope

Wooded Slope

Old Stre

am (Culve

rted?)

Invert level 2.94Water level 3.04

Westbrook Stream

New Sewer Line January 2012

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0

DRY

DRY

1.19

DRY

1.867.62(not appropriate to useas in an upper (shallow)gravel horizon)

0.86

2.002.32

MW 4

MW 3R

MW 2MW 1

MW 101

MW 102

MW 103B

MW 5

MW 6SW-DS

SW-US

DecomissionedUnderground tanks

Location of Historic Spill

0

Scale bar (m)

25 50




Drawing Ref.: 2003-008.cdrDrawn by: SK 03/11/16


Common Legend


Granitic Sand

Light Brown Clay

Grey Clay

- NOT TO SCALE

Appendix ASite Plan







MW1

BH4


Borehole Location




on overall survey.


cross section


Appendix ASite Map

Including Groundwatercontours and flow direction

GW REGIME







GRAVEL

SAND

Soft grey CLAY

Water strike

Water level (maOD)

Water table

North

Groundwater Monitoring

borehole


Likely Groundwater

Contours

Water level (maOD) (Monitoring

event 29/09/16)

Likely Groundwater

flow direction



PID readings (ppm)

0.1

Monitoring Well

Borehole Locality

Underground Tanks


Surface water Monitoring

location

1.78

Culverted drain

with manholes

Location of water samples

and sykes pump during

pipe laying

WaterSample 1

Dewatering well

Location of dewatering well

for pipe excavation

PID contours (2007)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

Westbrook Stream

Site Boundary

Wooded Slope

Wooded Slope

Old Stre

am (Culve

rted?)

Invert level 2.94Water level 3.24(24/04/14)

New Sewer Line January 2012

3.00 maOD

2.90 maOD

3.10 maOD

3.20 maOD

On the 24/04/2014 the datashows that the Westbrook isloosing water to the ground.However, historical datashows that the relationshipvaries seasonally, withgroundwater levels beingseasonally higher than thestream.

7.88(24/04/14)(not appropriate to useas in an upper (shallow) gravel horizon)

1.5 (24/04/14)

2.91 (24/04/14)2.91 (24/04/14)

3.25 (24/04/14)

1.86 (24/04/14)

1.82 (24/04/14)

MW 4

MW3R

MW 2

MW 1

MW 101

MW 102

MW 103B

MW 5

DecomissionedUnderground

tanksLocation of Historic Spill

50

Scale bar (m)10 15




Drawing Ref.: 2003-008.cdrDrawn by: MV 24/11/14


Common Legend


Granitic Sand

Light Brown Clay

Grey Clay

- NOT TO SCALE

Appendix ASite Plan







MW1

BH4


Borehole Location




on overall survey.


cross section


Appendix AGroundwater contours

and flow directionGW REGIME #3







GRAVEL

SAND

Soft grey CLAY

Water strike

Water level (maOD)

Water table

North

Groundwater Monitoring

borehole


Likely Groundwater

Contours

Water level (maOD) with date

Likely Groundwater

flow direction



PID readings (ppm)

0.1

Monitoring Well

Borehole Locality

Underground Tanks


Surface water Monitoring

location

1.78 (1/1/12)

Culverted drain

with manholes

Location of water samples

and sykes pump during

pipe laying

WaterSample 1

Dewatering well

Location of dewatering well

for pipe excavation

PID contours (2007)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




Appendix B

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

SW-DS

TOC

EOH

1.95mAOD

9.94mbgl

TOC

EOH

-1.03mAOD

10.30mbgl

GL TOC

EOH

1.12mAOD

9.50mbgl

TOC

EOH

-0.84mAOD

11.00mbgl

TOC

EOH

-0.83mAOD

9.40mbgl

GLGL GL

GL

EOH

1.74mAOD

3.00mbgl

TOC

TOC

MW 4(BH11)

MW101 BH 7 BH 3 BH 5

MW3R(BH 10)

MW103B BH 4

MW 2(BH 9)BH 8

MW 1(BH 2) MW 5

EOH3.00mbgl

No installationEOH

3.00mbglNo installation

EOH1.00mbgl

No installation

EOH2.7mbgl

No installation

EOH1.15mAOD4.25mbgl

EOH2.50mbgl

No installation

BH 13

GL

GL

BH 12

EOH4.0mbgl

No installation

EOH5.1mbgl

No installation

BH 14

GLGL

EOH4.5mbgl

No installation

BH 15

EOH6.0mbglNo installation

TOC

MW 6

EOH2.36mAOD

7.7mbgl

Groundwater Flow Regime (GFR) # 2Deep (lower) gravel horizon in connectionwith MW3R, MW101, Mw103 and the Irish Sea

Groundwater Flow Regime (GFR) # 3Shallow clay/sand horizon in connection withWestbrook stream (seasonally), MW2, MW1 & MW5

Groundwater Flow Regime (GFR) # 1Shallow (upper) gravel horizon(probably perched) in connection with MW 4

Regional Groundwater Flow(east to Irish Sea)

Local Groundwater Flowseasonally

north to Westbrook Streamor

south to the site

Confining geology

Piezometric surface

Piezometricsurface

Confining

geology

1.19mAOD

8.10mbREF29/09/16 DRY

22/03/16

0.86mAOD

9.30mbREF

29/11/16

2.00mAOD7.11mbREF29/11/16

2.32mAOD

2.42mbREF

29/11/16

7.62mAOD

4.27mbREF

29/09/16

3.04mAODWater levelin stream29/11/16

2.94mAODInvert levelof stream25/04/14

1.86mAOD

3.54mbREF

29/11/16

DRY

29/11/16

NOTES1. TOC is close to ground level in all location's.

2. All elevations are below mAOD Malin based on DGPS Survey.

3. SW1-S5 is located on the Westbrook Stream directly downstream of the site at the bend in the stream.

4. This colour represents the groundwater chemistry data.

5. This colour represents the soil chemistry data (TPH as mg/kg)

6. This colour represents on site PID readings

7. MW are installed monitoring wells

8. BH series are PWS boreholes for soil sampling and PID readings

9. Cross section is SW-NE

Gravel

Clay

Sand

GL – Ground Level

TOC – Top Of Casing

EOH - End Of Hole

Casing

Screen

Static Water level

Peat

2003 - Nypro:Conceptual Site model / Pathway migration(Bi-annual sampling event - Septmeber 2016)Doc Ref: 2003-008.pptSK (CS) 03/11/16 (Updated to include MW 6)

10. Scale: Vertical axis to scale, horizontal axis not to scale

10

5

0

-5

13

12

11

9

8

7

6

4

3

2

1

-1

-2

-3

-4

15mOD

14

Potential Soil Migration Pathway

Potential Soil Migration Pathway

Potential Groundwater Migration Pathway

UndergroundStorage tank

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

2011-2012

2007-2008 2014

Evolution over time of the contamination plume within the soil(Conceptual Understanding)

2,490

5,480

3,560

1,600

428

3,930

32,790

5,278

131

<38

2,824

1,145

<1

<1

<1

<1

2,250

2,250

1,040

1,700

7

375

6

2,530

SW-DS

TOC

TOC

GL TOC

TOC

TOC

GLGL GL

GL

TOC

MW 4(23/02/2009)

MW 101(27/11/2012)

BH 7(02/04/2008)

BH 3)(23/02/2009

BH 5(30/08/2007)

MW 3R(13/02/2011)

MW 103B(28/11/2012)

BH 4(30/08/2007)

MW 2(19/02/2009)

BH 8(02/04/2004)

MW 1(29/08/2007)

BH 13(12/05/2014)

GL

GL

BH 12(07/05/2014)

BH 14(21/05/2014)

GLGL

BH 15(22/05/2014)

Groundwater Flow Regime (GFR) # 2Deep (lower) gravel horizon in connectionwith MW3R, MW101, Mw103 and the Irish Sea

Groundwater Flow Regime (GFR) # 3Shallow clay/sand horizon in connection withWestbrook stream (seasonally), MW2, MW1 & MW5

Groundwater Flow Regime (GFR) # 1Shallow (upper) gravel horizon(probably perched) in connection with MW 4

Regional Groundwater Flow(east to Irish Sea)

Local Groundwater Flowseasonally

north to Westbrook Streamor

south to the site

Confining geology

Piezometric surface

1.82mAOD

7.47mbgl

25/04/14

1.86mAOD

8.76mbgl

25/04/14

1.50mAOD

8.65mbgl

25/04/14

2.91mAOD

6.2mbgl

25/04/14

2.91mAOD

1.86mbgl

25/04/14

7.88mAOD

4.01mbgl

25/04/14

3.24mAODWater levelin stream25/04/14

2.94mAODInvert levelof stream25/04/14

NOTES1. TOC is close to ground level in all location's.

2. All elevations are below mAOD Malin based on DGPS Survey.

3. SW1-S5 is located on the Westbrook Stream directly downstream of the site at the bend in the stream.

4. This colour represents the groundwater chemistry data.

5. This colour represents the soil chemistry data (TPH as mg/kg)

6. This colour represents on site PID readings

7. MW are installed monitoring wells

8. BH series are PWS boreholes for soil sampling and PID readings

9. Cross section is SW-NE

Gravel

Clay

Sand

GL – Ground Level

TOC – Top Of Casing

EOH - End Of Hole

Casing

Screen

Static Water level

Peat

2003 Nypro:Conceptual Site model / Pathway migration

Doc Ref: 2003-008.pptMV 16/07/14

10. Scale: Vertical axis to scale, horizontal axis not to scale

10

5

0

-5

13

12

11

9

8

7

6

4

3

2

1

-1

-2

-3

-4

15mOD

14

UndergroundStorage tank

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

REPORT TO REPORT BY




Appendix C

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07


Groundwater levels database

Date & time Ref point description

Eastings Northings

MW 1 326310 219619 25-02-09 0:00 Top of new Upvc 50mm OD Standpipe Manual 2.40 4.74 2.34





MW 1 326310 219619 11-11-11 0:00 Top of new Upvc 50mm OD Standpipe Manual No level possible 4.74









































MW 3R 326277 219599 11-03-11 0:00 Top of new Upvc 50mm OD Standpipe Manual 8.71 10.16 1.45


















2003: Groundwater Levels Database

REDUCED

WATER LEVEL

Water Level

mODMalin

REDUCED REF

ELEVATION

Reference point for

water level

monitoring (TOC)

mODMalin

Manual or

Diver

Reading

Water Level

(metres below

reference point)

Monitoring

location ID

Monitoring

location DGPS

Co-ordinates

Minerex Environmental Limited 04-11-16 2003-011 (Database) 1 of 3

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07




Eastings Northings


REDUCED

WATER LEVEL

Water Level

mODMalin

REDUCED REF

ELEVATION

Reference point for

water level

monitoring (TOC)

mODMalin

Manual or

Diver

Reading

Water Level

(metres below

reference point)

Monitoring

location ID

Monitoring

location DGPS

Co-ordinates








































MW 6 326210 219620 29-09-16 0:00 Top of new Upvc 50mm OD Standpipe Manual Dry 9.95



















MW 103B 326208 219616 27-11-12 10:00 Top of new Upvc 50mm OD Standpipe Manual 8.60 10.62 2.02






For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07




Eastings Northings


REDUCED

WATER LEVEL

Water Level

mODMalin

REDUCED REF

ELEVATION

Reference point for

water level

monitoring (TOC)

mODMalin

Manual or

Diver

Reading

Water Level

(metres below

reference point)

Monitoring

location ID

Monitoring

location DGPS

Co-ordinates





MW 103B 326208 219616 29-09-16 0:00 Top of new Upvc 50mm OD Standpipe Manual Dry 10.62


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:07

Nypro Ltd.

Groundwater levels chart

Minerex Environmental Limted 04-11-16 2003-011 (Database) 1 of 1

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00m

AO

D

Date

2003: Nypro Groundwater Levels and Associated Events.

MW4

MW5

MW2

MW1

MW3 andMW3R

MW101

MW103B

Water Level ofWestbrookStream(24/04/14)

Invert level ofWestbrookStream

MW6

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08

Nypro Ltd.

Groundwater levels chart

Minerex Environmental Limted 2003-011 (Database) 21/05/2014

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

mA

OD

Ma

lin

Date

Groundwater levels

MW5

MW3 and MW3R

MW101

MW103B

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08

REPORT TO REPORT BY




Appendix D

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08

Soil and groundwater chemistry data base for Nypro Ltd.

REFERENCE CONCENTRATIONS HYDROCHEMISTRY RESULTS

Groundwater sampling

= No data/Well Dry

Summary of results = Below detection limit= Exceedance of reference concentration

Medium

analysedS.I. No. 9 of 2010 S.I. No. 12 of

2001

S.I. No. 272 of

2009

Parameter

- water

- soil

- gas Units Date sampled

Overall threshold

Values Range

Standards

EPA IGV Limits

MAC - EQS

Inland surface

waters

Target

Levels

(optimum)

Intervention

(action)MW5 MW6

Acenaphthene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Acenaphthene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.0178 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Acenaphthene water ug/l 19-01-12

Acenaphthene water ug/l 12-03-12 Dry 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Acenaphthene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.015

Acenaphthene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.083 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015



Acenaphthene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.075 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Acenaphthene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Acenaphthene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.015

Acenaphthene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 Dry 0.015 0.015

Acenaphthene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.00729 0.005 0.0055 0.005 0.0139 Dry 0.0778 0.209

Acenaphthylene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.0343 0.0278 0.0252 0.0143

Acenaphthylene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011

Acenaphthylene water ug/l 19-01-12

Acenaphthylene water ug/l 12-03-12 Dry 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011

Acenaphthylene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.011

Acenaphthylene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.0597 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011



Acenaphthylene water ug/l 24-09-14 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011



Acenaphthylene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.011

Acenaphthylene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 Dry 0.011 0.011

Acenaphthylene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.00504 0.00596

Anthracene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.0007[d] 5.00 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Anthracene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.0007[d] 5.00 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Anthracene water ug/l 19-01-12 0.0007[d] 5.00

Anthracene water ug/l 12-03-12 0.0007[d] 5.00 Dry 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Anthracene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.0007[d] 5.00 0.015

Anthracene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.0007[d] 5.00 0.075 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015



Anthracene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.0007[d] 5.00 0.075 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Anthracene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.0007[d] 5.00 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Anthracene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.0007[d] 5.00 0.015

Anthracene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.0007[d] 5.00 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 Dry 0.015 0.015

Anthracene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.0007[d] 5.00 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.005 0.005

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 10-02-10 1 0.2 30 7 7 7 7

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 04-06-10 0.75 1 50 0.2 30 7 7 7 7

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 11-03-11 0.75 1 50 0.2 30 7 7 7 7 7 7

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 23-09-11 0.75 1 50 0.2 30 7 7 7 7 7 7

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 19-01-12 0.75 1 50 0.2 30

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 12-03-12 0.75 1 50 0.2 30 Dry 7 7 7 7 7 7

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 10-07-12 0.75 1 50 0.2 30 7

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 18-10-12 0.75 1 50 0.2 30 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 28-11-12 0.75 1 50 0.2 30 1 1 1 1 1







2003-010: Groundwater sample results and associated

reference limits.

Dutch Soil Remediation

Circular 2009 in conjunction

with Dutch guidelines for soil &

groundwater chemistry (2000)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Groundwater)

Regulations, 2010

Water Quality

(Dangerous

Substances)

Regulations,

2001

EPA Interim

guideline

values for

groundwater

chemistry

(IGV's)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Surface

waters)

Regulations,

2009

Surface water sampling

MW1 MW2 Ne

w S

pri

ng

Su

rfa

ce

wa

ter

run

off

dra

ina

ge

fro

m C

ork

e

Ab

be

y a

rea

MW4 Upgradient /

Baseline

monitoring

borehole

Westbrook

Stream -

Upstream

(SW-US)

Westbrook

Stream -

Downstream

(SW-DS)

MW3 /

MW3R

Minerex Environmental Limited 14-11-16 2003-010 (Water & Soil Chemistry Database) Page 1 of 10

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08




= No data/Well Dry


Medium


2001

S.I. No. 272 of

2009

Parameter

- water

- soil


Overall threshold

Values Range

Standards

EPA IGV Limits

MAC - EQS

Inland surface

waters

Target

Levels

(optimum)

Intervention

(action)MW5 MW6


reference limits.





European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Groundwater)

Regulations, 2010

Water Quality

(Dangerous

Substances)

Regulations,

2001

EPA Interim

guideline

values for

groundwater

chemistry

(IGV's)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Surface

waters)

Regulations,

2009


MW1 MW2 Ne

w S

pri

ng

Su

rfa

ce

wa

ter

run

off

dra

ina

ge

fro

m C

ork

e

Ab

be

y a

rea

MW4 Upgradient /

Baseline

monitoring

borehole

Westbrook

Stream -

Upstream

(SW-US)

Westbrook

Stream -

Downstream

(SW-DS)

MW3 /

MW3R

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 22-01-16 0.75 1 50 0.2 30 7

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 22-03-16 0.75 1 50 0.2 30 7 7 7 7 7 Dry 7 7

Benzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 29-09-16 0.75 1 50 0.2 30 7 7 7 7 7 Dry 7 7

Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.0001[d] 0.5 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017

Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.0001[d] 0.5 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017

Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 19-01-12 0.0001[d] 0.5

Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 12-03-12 0.0001[d] 0.5 Dry 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017

Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.0001[d] 0.5 0.017

Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.0001[d] 0.5 0.085 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017



Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.0001[d] 0.5 1.29 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017

Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.0001[d] 0.5 0.215 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017

Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.0001[d] 0.5 0.017

Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.0001[d] 0.5 0.0432 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 Dry 0.017 0.017

Benzo (a) anthracene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.0001[d] 0.5 0.0212 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.0254 0.005

Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009

Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009

Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 19-01-12 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05

Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 12-03-12 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05 Dry 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009

Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05 0.009

Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05 0.045 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009



Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05 2.97 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.0139

Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05 0.404 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.00985

Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05 0.009

Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05 0.0847 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 Dry 0.009 0.009

Benzo (a) pyrene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.075 0.0005[d] 0.05 0.0331 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 Dry 0.0448 0.002

Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023

Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023

Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 19-01-12

Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 12-03-12 Dry 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023

Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.023

Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.115 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023



Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 26-03-15 4.4 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023

Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.624 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023

Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.023

Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.145 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 Dry 0.023 0.023

Benzo (b) fluoranthene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.052 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.0675 0.005

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.0003 0.05 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.0003 0.05 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 19-01-12 0.0003 0.05

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 12-03-12 0.0003 0.05 Dry 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.0003 0.05 0.016

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.0003 0.05 0.08 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016



Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.0003 0.05 3.11 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.0003 0.05 0.338 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.0003 0.05 0.016

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.0003 0.05 0.0865 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 Dry 0.016 0.016

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.0003 0.05 0.0376 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.0555 0.005

Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027

Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08




= No data/Well Dry


Medium


2001

S.I. No. 272 of

2009

Parameter

- water

- soil


Overall threshold

Values Range

Standards

EPA IGV Limits

MAC - EQS

Inland surface

waters

Target

Levels

(optimum)

Intervention

(action)MW5 MW6


reference limits.





European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Groundwater)

Regulations, 2010

Water Quality

(Dangerous

Substances)

Regulations,

2001

EPA Interim

guideline

values for

groundwater

chemistry

(IGV's)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Surface

waters)

Regulations,

2009


MW1 MW2 Ne

w S

pri

ng

Su

rfa

ce

wa

ter

run

off

dra

ina

ge

fro

m C

ork

e

Ab

be

y a

rea

MW4 Upgradient /

Baseline

monitoring

borehole

Westbrook

Stream -

Upstream

(SW-US)

Westbrook

Stream -

Downstream

(SW-DS)

MW3 /

MW3R

Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 19-01-12 0.0004[d] 0.05

Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 12-03-12 0.0004[d] 0.05 Dry 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027

Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.027

Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.135 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027



Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.0004[d] 0.05 1.94 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027

Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.203 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027

Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.027

Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.0645 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 Dry 0.027 0.027

Benzo (k) fluoranthene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.0213 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.0234 0.005

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 10-02-10 10 10 10 10

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 04-06-10 10 10 10 10

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 11-03-11 10 10 10 10 10 10

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 23-09-11 28 28 28 28 28 28

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 19-01-12

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 12-03-12 Dry 28 28 28 28 28 28

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 10-07-12 28

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 18-10-12 28 28 28 28 28 28 28

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 28-11-12 10 10 10 10 10







BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 22-01-16 28

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 22-03-16 28 28 28 28 28 Dry 28 28

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) water ug/l 29-09-16 28 28 28 28 28 Dry 28 28

Chrysene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.003[d] 0.2 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013

Chrysene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.003[d] 0.2 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013

Chrysene water ug/l 19-01-12 0.003[d] 0.2

Chrysene water ug/l 12-03-12 0.003[d] 0.2 Dry 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013

Chrysene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.003[d] 0.2 0.013

Chrysene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.003[d] 0.2 0.065 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013



Chrysene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.003[d] 0.2 1.68 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.0169

Chrysene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.003[d] 0.2 0.222 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.0169

Chrysene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.003[d] 0.2 0.013

Chrysene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.003[d] 0.2 0.0545 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 Dry 0.013 0.013

Chrysene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.003[d] 0.2 0.0262 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.0255 0.005

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 19-01-12

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 12-03-12 Dry 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.016

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.08 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016



Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.773 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.0755 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.016

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.017 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 Dry 0.016 0.016

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.00778 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.00833 0.005

Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 10-02-10 780 730 790 670


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08




= No data/Well Dry


Medium


2001

S.I. No. 272 of

2009

Parameter

- water

- soil


Overall threshold

Values Range

Standards

EPA IGV Limits

MAC - EQS

Inland surface

waters

Target

Levels

(optimum)

Intervention

(action)MW5 MW6


reference limits.





European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Groundwater)

Regulations, 2010

Water Quality

(Dangerous

Substances)

Regulations,

2001

EPA Interim

guideline

values for

groundwater

chemistry

(IGV's)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Surface

waters)

Regulations,

2009


MW1 MW2 Ne

w S

pri

ng

Su

rfa

ce

wa

ter

run

off

dra

ina

ge

fro

m C

ork

e

Ab

be

y a

rea

MW4 Upgradient /

Baseline

monitoring

borehole

Westbrook

Stream -

Upstream

(SW-US)

Westbrook

Stream -

Downstream

(SW-DS)

MW3 /

MW3R

Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 04-06-10 1340 530 770 570

Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 04-06-10 1073

Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 11-03-11 0.63 0.45 0.60 0.76 0.476 0.466

Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 23-09-11 1.37 0.35 0.69 0.88 0.22 0.25

Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 23-09-11 1.18 0.23 0.36 0.56 0.87 0.5 0.41

Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 18-10-12 1157 235 360 557 870 502 413

Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 28-11-12 1132 236 416 668 1094







Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 22-01-16 1080

Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 22-03-16 1400 351 432 681 900 Dry 470 472

Electrical conductivity (EC) water uS/cm 29-09-16 1100 388 358 520 1030 Dry 492 478

EPH (Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (>C10-C40) -

formally DRO (Diesel range organics))

water mg/l 10-02-10 0.01 0.02 0.02 1.52 0.02



water mg/l 04-06-10 0.01 0.092 1.13 7.93 0.092 0.092 0.092



water mg/l 11-03-11 0.01 0.046 0.438 0.902 0.046 0.046 0.046



water mg/l 23-09-11 0.01 0.129 0.046 0.291 0.046 0.046 0.046



water mg/l 23-09-11 0.01 0.01 0.179



water mg/l 19-01-12 0.01



water mg/l 12-03-12 0.01 Dry 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 1.1



water mg/l 10-07-12 0.01 0.046



water mg/l 18-10-12 0.01 0.046 0.163 0.0513 0.046 0.0873 0.0748 0.046



water mg/l 26-03-13 0.01 0.046 0.414 0.046 0.046 0.046



water mg/l 27-11-13 0.01 0.387 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046



water mg/l 02-04-14 0.01 0.046 0.315 0.046 0.046 0.046



water mg/l 24-09-14 0.01 0.0606 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.0753 0.046 0.046



water mg/l 26-03-15 0.01 0.533 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046



water mg/l 30-10-15 0.01 0.0787 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046



water mg/l 22-01-16 0.01 0.046



water mg/l 22-03-16 0.01 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 Dry 0.046 0.046



water mg/l 29-09-16 0.01 0.0466 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 Dry 0.24 0.046

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 10-02-10 10 4 150 5 5 5 5

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 04-06-10 10 4 150 5 5 5 5

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 11-03-11 10 4 150 5 5 5 5 5 5


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08




= No data/Well Dry


Medium


2001

S.I. No. 272 of

2009

Parameter

- water

- soil


Overall threshold

Values Range

Standards

EPA IGV Limits

MAC - EQS

Inland surface

waters

Target

Levels

(optimum)

Intervention

(action)MW5 MW6


reference limits.





European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Groundwater)

Regulations, 2010

Water Quality

(Dangerous

Substances)

Regulations,

2001

EPA Interim

guideline

values for

groundwater

chemistry

(IGV's)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Surface

waters)

Regulations,

2009


MW1 MW2 Ne

w S

pri

ng

Su

rfa

ce

wa

ter

run

off

dra

ina

ge

fro

m C

ork

e

Ab

be

y a

rea

MW4 Upgradient /

Baseline

monitoring

borehole

Westbrook

Stream -

Upstream

(SW-US)

Westbrook

Stream -

Downstream

(SW-DS)

MW3 /

MW3R

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 23-09-11 10 4 150 5 5 5 5 5 5

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 19-01-12 10 4 150

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 12-03-12 10 4 150 Dry 5 5 5 5 5 5

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 10-07-12 10 4 150 5

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 18-10-12 10 4 150 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 28-11-12 10 4 150 2 2 2 2 2







Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 22-01-16 10 4 150 5

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 22-03-16 10 4 150 5 5 5 5 5 Dry 5 5

Ethylbenzene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 29-09-16 10 4 150 5 5 5 5 5 Dry 5 5

Fluoranthene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.003 1 0.0365 0.0442 0.0211 0.0168

Fluoranthene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.003 1 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017

Fluoranthene water ug/l 19-01-12 0.003 1

Fluoranthene water ug/l 12-03-12 0.003 1 Dry 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017

Fluoranthene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.003 1 0.017

Fluoranthene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.003 1 0.085 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017



Fluoranthene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.003 1 1.74 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.0225 0.0396

Fluoranthene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.003 1 0.35 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017

Fluoranthene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.003 1 0.017

Fluoranthene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.003 1 0.0935 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 Dry 0.017 0.017

Fluoranthene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.003 1 0.0426 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.055 0.005

Fluorene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.014 0.0211 0.0163 0.014

Fluorene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Fluorene water ug/l 19-01-12

Fluorene water ug/l 12-03-12 Dry 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Fluorene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.014

Fluorene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.0717 0.14 0.014 0.014 0.014



Fluorene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.07 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Fluorene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Fluorene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.014

Fluorene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 Dry 0.014 0.014

Fluorene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.00683 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.00678 Dry 0.0171 0.0396

GRO (Gasoline Range Organics (>C5-C12) -

formally PRO (Petroleum range organics))

water ug/l 11-03-11 50 50 50 50 50 50



water ug/l 23-09-11 50 50 50 50 50 50



water ug/l 19-01-12



water ug/l 12-03-12 Dry 50 50 50 50 50 50



water ug/l 10-07-12 50



water ug/l 18-10-12 50 50 50 50 50 50 50



water ug/l 26-03-13 50 50 50 50 50



water ug/l 27-11-13 50 50 50 50 50



water ug/l 02-04-14 50 50 50 50 50



water ug/l 24-09-14 50 50 50 50 50 50 50



water ug/l 26-03-15 50 50 50 50 50 50 50



water ug/l 30-10-15 50 50 50 50 50 50 50



water ug/l 22-01-16 50



water ug/l 22-03-16 50 50 50 50 50 Dry 50 50


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08




= No data/Well Dry


Medium


2001

S.I. No. 272 of

2009

Parameter

- water

- soil


Overall threshold

Values Range

Standards

EPA IGV Limits

MAC - EQS

Inland surface

waters

Target

Levels

(optimum)

Intervention

(action)MW5 MW6


reference limits.





European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Groundwater)

Regulations, 2010

Water Quality

(Dangerous

Substances)

Regulations,

2001

EPA Interim

guideline

values for

groundwater

chemistry

(IGV's)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Surface

waters)

Regulations,

2009


MW1 MW2 Ne

w S

pri

ng

Su

rfa

ce

wa

ter

run

off

dra

ina

ge

fro

m C

ork

e

Ab

be

y a

rea

MW4 Upgradient /

Baseline

monitoring

borehole

Westbrook

Stream -

Upstream

(SW-US)

Westbrook

Stream -

Downstream

(SW-DS)

MW3 /

MW3R



water ug/l 29-09-16 50 50 50 50 50 Dry 50 50

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 19-01-12 0.0004[d] 0.05

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 12-03-12 0.0004[d] 0.05 Dry 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.014

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.07 0.14 0.014 0.014 0.014



Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.0004[d] 0.05 2.26 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.214 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.014

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.0391 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 Dry 0.014 0.014

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.0004[d] 0.05 0.0286 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.0429 0.005

m,p-Xylene water ug/l 19-01-12

m,p-Xylene water ug/l 12-03-12 Dry 8 8 8 8 8 8

m,p-Xylene water ug/l 10-07-12 8

m,p-Xylene water ug/l 18-10-12 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

m,p-Xylene water ug/l 28-11-12 3 3 3 3 3







m,p-Xylene water ug/l 22-01-16 8

m,p-Xylene water ug/l 22-03-16 8 8 8 8 8 Dry 8 8

m,p-Xylene water ug/l 29-09-16 8 8 8 8 8 Dry 8 8

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 10-02-10 10 50 600 20 20 1030 20

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 04-06-10 10 50 600 20 414 6560 20

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 11-03-11 10 50 600 10 10 556 10 10 10

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 23-09-11 10 50 600 10 10 153 10 10 10

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 19-01-12 10 50 600

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 12-03-12 10 50 600 Dry 10 10 10 10 10 1250

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 10-07-12 10 50 600 10

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 18-10-12 10 50 600 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 26-03-13 10 50 600 10 181 10 10 10



Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 24-09-14 10 50 600 31.3 10 10 10 10 10 10

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 26-03-15 10 50 600 104 10 10 10 10 10 10

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 30-10-15 10 50 600 10 10 46.7 10 258 10 10

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 22-01-16 10 50 600 10

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 22-03-16 10 50 600 10 10 10 10 10 Dry 10 10

Mineral oil >C10-C40 water ug/l 29-09-16 10 50 600 10 10 10 10 10 Dry 164 10

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) water ug/l 11-03-11 - 9200 3 3 3 3 3 3

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) water ug/l 23-09-11 - 9200 3 3 3 3 3 3

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) water ug/l 12-03-12 - 9200 Dry 3 3 3 3 3 3

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) water ug/l 10-07-12 - 9200 3

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) water ug/l 18-10-12 - 9200 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) water ug/l 26-03-13 - 9200 3 3 3 3 3






For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08




= No data/Well Dry


Medium


2001

S.I. No. 272 of

2009

Parameter

- water

- soil


Overall threshold

Values Range

Standards

EPA IGV Limits

MAC - EQS

Inland surface

waters

Target

Levels

(optimum)

Intervention

(action)MW5 MW6


reference limits.





European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Groundwater)

Regulations, 2010

Water Quality

(Dangerous

Substances)

Regulations,

2001

EPA Interim

guideline

values for

groundwater

chemistry

(IGV's)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Surface

waters)

Regulations,

2009


MW1 MW2 Ne

w S

pri

ng

Su

rfa

ce

wa

ter

run

off

dra

ina

ge

fro

m C

ork

e

Ab

be

y a

rea

MW4 Upgradient /

Baseline

monitoring

borehole

Westbrook

Stream -

Upstream

(SW-US)

Westbrook

Stream -

Downstream

(SW-DS)

MW3 /

MW3R


MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) water ug/l 22-01-16 - 9200 3

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) water ug/l 22-03-16 - 9200 3 3 3 3 3 Dry 3 3

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) water ug/l 29-09-16 - 9200 3 3 3 3 3 Dry 3 3

Naphthalene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.01 70 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.01 70 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 19-01-12 0.01 70

Naphthalene water ug/l 12-03-12 0.01 70 Dry 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.01 70 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.01 70 0.5 1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 27-11-13 0.01 70 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 02-04-14 0.01 70 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.01 70 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.01 70 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.01 70 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.01 70 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Dry 0.1 0.1

Naphthalene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.01 70 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 Dry 0.05 0.05

o-Xylene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 11-03-11 3 3 3 3 3 3

o-Xylene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 23-09-11 3 3 3 3 3 3

o-Xylene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 19-01-12

o-Xylene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 12-03-12 Dry 3 3 3 3 3 3

o-Xylene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 10-07-12 3

o-Xylene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 18-10-12 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

o-Xylene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 28-11-12 2 2 2 2 2







o-Xylene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 22-01-16 3

o-Xylene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 22-03-16 3 3 3 3 3 Dry 3 3

o-Xylene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 29-09-16 3 3 3 3 3 Dry 3 3

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 10-02-10 0.075 0.10 0.113 0.1 0.1 0.1

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 04-06-10 0.075 0.10 0.166 0.238 0.151 0.1

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 11-03-11 0.075 0.10 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.197 0.207

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 23-09-11 0.075 0.10 0.247 0.247 0.247 0.247 0.247 0.247

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 19-01-12 0.075 0.10

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 12-03-12 0.075 0.10 Dry 0.247 0.247 0.247 0.247 0.247 0.247

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 10-07-12 0.075 0.10 0.247

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 18-10-12 0.075 0.10 0.247 0.247 0.247 0.247 0.247 0.548 0.247

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 28-11-12 0.075 0.10 0.195 0.195 0.195 0.195 0.195







PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 22-01-16 0.075 0.10 0.344

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 22-03-16 0.075 0.10 0.727 0.344 0.344 0.344 0.344 Dry 0.344 0.344

PAHs - Total (16) water ug/l 29-09-16 0.075 0.10 0.345 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 Dry 0.534 0.262

pH water pH units 10-02-10 >6.5 - <9.5 7.86 7.36 7.4 7.61

pH water pH units 04-06-10 >6.5 - <9.5 7.7 7.86 7.52 7.6

pH water pH units 11-03-11 >6.5 - <9.5 6.0 to 9.0 7.57 7.90 7.88 7.79 7.43 8.13

pH water pH units 23-09-11 >6.5 - <9.5 6.0 to 9.0 6.82 7.38 6.77 6.81 7.60 7.32

pH water pH units 12-03-12 >6.5 - <9.5 6.0 to 9.0 Dry 6.48 6.57 6.95 8.03 8.2 N/A


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08




= No data/Well Dry


Medium


2001

S.I. No. 272 of

2009

Parameter

- water

- soil


Overall threshold

Values Range

Standards

EPA IGV Limits

MAC - EQS

Inland surface

waters

Target

Levels

(optimum)

Intervention

(action)MW5 MW6


reference limits.





European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Groundwater)

Regulations, 2010

Water Quality

(Dangerous

Substances)

Regulations,

2001

EPA Interim

guideline

values for

groundwater

chemistry

(IGV's)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Surface

waters)

Regulations,

2009


MW1 MW2 Ne

w S

pri

ng

Su

rfa

ce

wa

ter

run

off

dra

ina

ge

fro

m C

ork

e

Ab

be

y a

rea

MW4 Upgradient /

Baseline

monitoring

borehole

Westbrook

Stream -

Upstream

(SW-US)

Westbrook

Stream -

Downstream

(SW-DS)

MW3 /

MW3R

pH water pH units 10-07-12 >6.5 - <9.5 6.0 to 9.0 7.06

pH water pH units 18-10-12 >6.5 - <9.5 6.0 to 9.0 6.91 7.30 7.51 7.60 7.04 6.81 7.51

pH water pH units 28-11-12 >6.5 - <9.5 6.0 to 9.0 6.69 7.71 7.43 7.21 6.98







pH water pH units 22-01-16 >6.5 - <9.5 6.0 to 9.0 6.94

pH water pH units 22-03-16 >6.5 - <9.5 6.0 to 9.0 7.2 8.08 7.78 7.71 7.1 Dry 8.64 8.57

pH water pH units 29-09-16 >6.5 - <9.5 6.0 to 9.0 7.76 7.91 7.68 7.59 7.15 Dry 7.8 7.75

Phenanthrene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.003[d] 5 0.0254 0.0614 0.0331 0.022

Phenanthrene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.003[d] 5 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022

Phenanthrene water ug/l 19-01-12 0.003[d] 5

Phenanthrene water ug/l 12-03-12 0.003[d] 5 Dry 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022

Phenanthrene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.003[d] 5 0.022

Phenanthrene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.003[d] 5 0.11 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022



Phenanthrene water ug/l 26-03-15 0.003[d] 5 0.214 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.0269

Phenanthrene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.003[d] 5 0.0414 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022

Phenanthrene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.003[d] 5 0.022

Phenanthrene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.003[d] 5 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 Dry 0.022 0.022

Phenanthrene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.003[d] 5 0.00835 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.0159 0.005

Pyrene water ug/l 04-06-10 0.0589 0.0749 0.0514 0.0236

Pyrene water ug/l 23-09-11 0.0179 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Pyrene water ug/l 19-01-12

Pyrene water ug/l 12-03-12 Dry 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Pyrene water ug/l 10-07-12 0.015

Pyrene water ug/l 26-03-13 0.075 0.15 0.015 0.015 0.015

Pyrene water ug/l 27-11-13 2.54 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Pyrene water ug/l 02-04-14 0.0267 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017

Pyrene water ug/l 26-03-15 1.71 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.021 0.0359

Pyrene water ug/l 30-10-15 0.365 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.0158

Pyrene water ug/l 22-01-16 0.015

Pyrene water ug/l 22-03-16 0.099 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 Dry 0.015 0.015

Pyrene water ug/l 29-09-16 0.0519 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Dry 0.0697 0.00654

Temperature water ˚C 10-02-10 7.0 10.7 12.1 11.4




Temperature water ˚C 12-03-12 Dry 11.7 13.5

Temperature water ˚C 10-07-12 12.2

Temperature water ˚C 18-10-12 12.2 14.7 13.7 14.5 11.8




Temperature water ˚C 24-09-14 16.3 15.7 13.4 15.3 12.7 13.5 13.7



Temperature water ˚C 22-01-16 13.1

Temperature water ˚C 22-03-16 10.6 14.6 13.8 12.0 10.9 Dry 8.8 9.2

Temperature water ˚C 29-09-16 20.4 17.4 16.4 16.1 16.7 Dry 16.9

Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 10-02-10 10 10 7 1000 4 4 4 4


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08




= No data/Well Dry


Medium


2001

S.I. No. 272 of

2009

Parameter

- water

- soil


Overall threshold

Values Range

Standards

EPA IGV Limits

MAC - EQS

Inland surface

waters

Target

Levels

(optimum)

Intervention

(action)MW5 MW6


reference limits.





European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Groundwater)

Regulations, 2010

Water Quality

(Dangerous

Substances)

Regulations,

2001

EPA Interim

guideline

values for

groundwater

chemistry

(IGV's)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Surface

waters)

Regulations,

2009


MW1 MW2 Ne

w S

pri

ng

Su

rfa

ce

wa

ter

run

off

dra

ina

ge

fro

m C

ork

e

Ab

be

y a

rea

MW4 Upgradient /

Baseline

monitoring

borehole

Westbrook

Stream -

Upstream

(SW-US)

Westbrook

Stream -

Downstream

(SW-DS)

MW3 /

MW3R

Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 11-03-11 10 10 7 1000 4 4 4 4 4 4

Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 23-09-11 10 10 7 1000 4 4 4 4 4 4

Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 19-01-12 10 10 7 1000

Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 12-03-12 10 10 7 1000 Dry 4 4 4 4 4 4

Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 10-07-12 10 10 7 1000 4

Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 18-10-12 10 10 7 1000 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 28-11-12 10 10 7 1000 2 2 2 2 2







Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 22-01-16 10 10 7 1000 4

Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 22-03-16 10 10 7 1000 4 4 4 4 4 Dry 4 4

Toluene (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 29-09-16 10 10 7 1000 4 4 4 4 4 Dry 4 4

TPH (Total petroleum hydrocarbons:

>C6-C40 Aliphatics and Aromatics)

water mg/l 10-02-10 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

TPH (Total petroleum hydrocarbons:


water mg/l 04-06-10 0.01 0.02 0.105 7.46 0.02

TPH CWG (Total petroleum hydrocarbons:


water mg/l 11-03-11 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.652 0.01 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 23-09-11 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.126 0.01 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 19-01-12 0.01



water mg/l 12-03-12 0.01 Dry 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.906



water mg/l 10-07-12 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 18-10-12 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 28-11-12 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 26-03-13 0.01 0.01 0.253 0.01 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 27-11-13 0.01 0.217 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 02-04-14 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 24-09-14 0.01 0.034 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 26-03-15 0.01 0.153 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 30-10-15 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 22-01-16 0.01 0.024



water mg/l 22-03-16 0.01 0.013 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Dry 0.01 0.01



water mg/l 29-09-16 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Dry 0.227 0.01


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08




= No data/Well Dry


Medium


2001

S.I. No. 272 of

2009

Parameter

- water

- soil


Overall threshold

Values Range

Standards

EPA IGV Limits

MAC - EQS

Inland surface

waters

Target

Levels

(optimum)

Intervention

(action)MW5 MW6


reference limits.





European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Groundwater)

Regulations, 2010

Water Quality

(Dangerous

Substances)

Regulations,

2001

EPA Interim

guideline

values for

groundwater

chemistry

(IGV's)

European

Communities

Environmental

Objectives

(Surface

waters)

Regulations,

2009


MW1 MW2 Ne

w S

pri

ng

Su

rfa

ce

wa

ter

run

off

dra

ina

ge

fro

m C

ork

e

Ab

be

y a

rea

MW4 Upgradient /

Baseline

monitoring

borehole

Westbrook

Stream -

Upstream

(SW-US)

Westbrook

Stream -

Downstream

(SW-DS)

MW3 /

MW3R

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 10-02-10 10 10 0.2 70 10 10 10 10

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 04-06-10 10 10 0.2 70 10 10 10 10

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 11-03-11 10 10 0.2 70 10 10 10 10 10 10

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 23-09-11 10 10 0.2 70 11 11 11 11 11 11

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 19-01-12 10 10 0.2 70

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 12-03-12 10 10 0.2 70 Dry 11 11 11 11 11 11

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 10-07-12 10 10 0.2 70 11

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 18-10-12 10 10 0.2 70 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 26-03-13 10 10 0.2 70 11 11 11 11 11






Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 22-01-16 10 10 0.2 70 11

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 22-03-16 10 10 0.2 70 11 11 11 11 11 Dry 11 11

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) water ug/l 29-09-16 10 10 0.2 70 11 11 11 11 11 Dry 11 11


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08

2003: Nypro Bi-annual sampling Report

Minerex Environmental limited 2003-010 (Water & Soil Chemistry Database) 14-11-16

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0

pH

Date

pH (All data)

MW1

MW2

MW3 / MW3R

MW4

(Baseline)

MW5

MW6

MW101

MW103B

SW-US

SW-DS

IGV MAX.

IGV MIN.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08



0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

mg/l

Date

TPH (All data)

MW1

MW2

MW3 / MW3R

MW4

(Baseline)

MW5

MW6

MW101

MW103B

SW-US

SW-DS

EPA IGV Limits

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08



0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

mg/l

Date

EPH (All data)

MW1

MW2

MW3 / MW3R

MW4

(Baseline)

MW5

MW6

MW101

MW103B

SW-US

SW-DS

EPA IGV Limits

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08



0.0

1,000.0

2,000.0

3,000.0

4,000.0

5,000.0

6,000.0

7,000.0

µg/l

Date

MO (All data)

MW1

MW2

MW3 / MW3R

MW4

(Baseline)

MW5

MW6

MW101

MW103B

SW-US

SW-DS

EPA IGV Limits

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08



0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

µg/l

Date

PAH (All data)

MW1

MW2

MW3 / MW3R

MW4

(Baseline)

MW5

MW6

MW101

MW103B

SW-US

SW-DS

EPA IGV Limits

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08

REPORT TO REPORT BY




Appendix E

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08

Soil chemistry data base for Nypro Ltd.

PARAMETER

Composite

upper made

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings

Discrete lower

made ground –

Hydrocarbon

smell and PID

reading of 4.7

Composite

lower made

ground –

Hydrocarbon

smell and PID

reading of 8.6

to 15.3

Composite

lower made

ground – Sweet

smell and no

PID readings

Discrete

sample natural

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings,

base of

unsaturated

zone

Composite

sample natural

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings,

saturated zone,

water levels in

MW3 ranged

from

approxiately 8

0.1-3.0m 2.2-2.6m 0.5-2.0m 1.4-2.3m 2.7-3.0m 0.3-0.9m 1.0-2.0m 2.4-2.7m 0.9-2.5m 0.1 - 1.5m 2.5 - 3.0m 4.7 - 5.0m 5.5 - 7.0m 7.2m 7.9 - 9.3m

- water

- soil


BH1 S1

Upgradient

BH1 S2

Upgradient

BH3 S5

Adjacent to

tanks

BH4 S4

Adjacent to

tanks

BH4 S5

Adjacent to

tanks

BH6 S1

Upgradient

BH6 S3

Upgradient BH7 S1 BH7 S3 BH7 S5 BH8 S3

MW3R -

SS33

MW3R -

SS6

MW3R -

SS34

MW3R -

SS15

MW3R -

SS18

MW3R -

SS35

1, 2, 4 - Trimethylbenzene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <9 78 <9 <9 <9 <9

1, 3, 5 - Trimethylbenzene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <8 40.5 <8 <8 <8 <8

Aliphatic >C5-C6 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

Aliphatic >C6-C8 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 46.8 <10 19.4 <10 <10

Aliphatic >C8-C10 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 116 <10 28 14.7 <10

Aliphatic >C10-C12 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 49.6 14.2 35.5 15.8 <10

Aliphatic >C12-C16 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 5500 10600 6670 4530 3540 8940




Total Aliphatic > C12-C44 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 1770000 4280000 2790000 3120000 123000 336000

Aromatics >EC5-EC7 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

Aromatics >EC7-EC8 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 49.2 <10 <10 <10 <10

Aromatics >EC8-EC10 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 179 <10 22.6 12.4 <10

Aromatics >EC10-EC12 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 32.4 <10 23.7 10.2 <10

Aromatics >EC12-EC16 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 8170 10700 5570 3540 4380 4270





Total Aromatics >EC12-EC44 soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 711000 1200000 764000 811000 370000 91800

Benzene soil ug/Kg 29/08/2007 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Benzene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 587 1110 1630 1690 1060 520

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) soil mg/Kg 12/02/2011 <0.010 0.151 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010

Chloromethane soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 19.4

Dichloromethane soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 <10 <10 10.8 <10 <10

Dimethylheptatriacontane isome soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 None

identified

14213 None

identified

None

identified

None

identified

None

identifiedDimethylspiro-acridane-anthracene isome soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 None

identified

None

identified

8770 None

identified

None

identified

None

identifiedDimethylspiro-acridane-anthracene isome soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <3 16.8 <3 <3 <3 <3

Ethyl methyl benezene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 None

identified

226 None

identified

None

identified

None

identified

None

identifiedEthylbenzene soil ug/Kg 29/08/2007 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Ethylbenzene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <4 13.5 <4 6.07 4.75 <4

m,p-Xylene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <14 41 <14 <14 <14 <14MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) soil mg/Kg 12/02/2011 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5

Naphthalene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <13 <13 <13 162 <13 <13o-Xylene soil ug/Kg 29/08/2007 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1o-Xylene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <3 21.6 <3 <3 <3 <3PAHs - Total (16) soil mg/Kg 29/08/2007 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6p-xylene soil ug/Kg 30/08/2007 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1tert-butyl Methyl Ether soil mg/Kg 29/08/2007 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Tetracosane soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 None

identified

None

identified

13172 None

identified

None

identified

None

identifiedToluene soil ug/Kg 29/08/2007 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Toluene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <2 49.2 3.27 2.15 <2 <2Toluene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 11.4 27.4 8.95 6.1 <5 <5Trimethyl benzene soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 None

identified

230 None

identified

None

identified

None

identified

None

identifiedUnknown raised matrix soil ug/kg 12/02/2011 517,691 1,075,299 1,464,706 100,106 400,323 139,923

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As part of BTEX) soil ug/Kg 12/02/2011 <10 85.2 <10 <10 <10 <10

RESULTS

Subsoil Investigation - February 2011

RESULTS

Subsoil Investigation - August 2007

EXPRESSION OF RESULTS RESULTS

Subsoil Investigation - April 2008

Minerex Environmental Limited 2003-010 (MASTER) Page 1 of 2

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08


PARAMETER

Composite

upper made

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings

Discrete lower

made ground –

Hydrocarbon

smell and PID

reading of 4.7

Composite

lower made

ground –

Hydrocarbon

smell and PID

reading of 8.6

to 15.3

Composite

lower made

ground – Sweet

smell and no

PID readings

Discrete

sample natural

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings,

base of

unsaturated

zone

Composite

sample natural

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings,

saturated zone,

water levels in

MW3 ranged

from

approxiately 8

0.1-3.0m 2.2-2.6m 0.5-2.0m 1.4-2.3m 2.7-3.0m 0.3-0.9m 1.0-2.0m 2.4-2.7m 0.9-2.5m 0.1 - 1.5m 2.5 - 3.0m 4.7 - 5.0m 5.5 - 7.0m 7.2m 7.9 - 9.3m

- water

- soil


BH1 S1

Upgradient

BH1 S2

Upgradient

BH3 S5

Adjacent to

tanks

BH4 S4

Adjacent to

tanks

BH4 S5

Adjacent to

tanks

BH6 S1

Upgradient

BH6 S3

Upgradient BH7 S1 BH7 S3 BH7 S5 BH8 S3

MW3R -

SS33

MW3R -

SS6

MW3R -

SS34

MW3R -

SS15

MW3R -

SS18

MW3R -

SS35

RESULTS

Subsoil Investigation - February 2011

RESULTS

Subsoil Investigation - August 2007

EXPRESSION OF RESULTS RESULTS

Subsoil Investigation - April 2008



soil mg/Kg 29/08/2007 <1 <1 1682 978 1366



soil mg/Kg 03/04/2008 <1 134 <1 <1 <1 <1



soil mg/Kg 12/02/2011 2890 5610

TPH (Total petroleum hydrocarbons) >C6-C40 soil mg/Kg 29/08/2007 34 14 32790 1145 2824

TPH (Total petroleum hydrocarbons) >C6-C40 soil mg/Kg 12/02/2011 2670 3140



soil mg/Kg 12/02/2011 2490 5480 3560 3930 1600 428

Mineral oil >C10-C40 soil mg/Kg 29/08/2007 <1 <1 1346 782 1093Mineral oil >C10-C40 soil mg/Kg 03/04/2008 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Mineral oil >C10-C40 soil mg/Kg 12/02/2011 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 1790 3060GRO (Gasoline Range Organics (>C5-C12) -


soil mg/Kg 12/02/2011 <0.044 0.479 0.048 0.141 0.0644 <0.044


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL

Units Date sampled SS4 SS5 SS6 SS7 ST1 - S1 ST1 - S2 ST1 - S3 ST2 - S1 ST2 - S2 ST3 - S1

ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

1, 2 - Dichlorobenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

1, 2, 4 - Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

1, 4 - Dichlorobenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



1,3 - Dichlorobenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105













1.1.1.2-Tetrachloroethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <10


1.1.1-Trichloroethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <7




1.1.1-Trichloroethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <14 <14







1.1.2.2-Tetrachloroethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <20 <20










1.1-Dichloroethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <8


RESULTS

Soil Investigation - May 2014

RESULTS

Subsoil Investigation (trial pits) - January 2012

EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS



1.1-Dichloroethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <16 <16



1.1-Dichloroethene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <10



1.1-Dichloroethene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <20 <20



1.1-Dichloropropene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <11




1.1-Dichloropropene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <22 <22



1.2.3-Trichlorobenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <6


1.2.3-Trichlorobenzene ug/Kg 07/05/2014

1.2.3-Trichloropropane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <17




1.2.3-Trichloropropane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <34 <34





1.2.4-Trimethylbenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <9




1.2.4-Trimethylbenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <18 <18



1.2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <14




1.2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <28 <28



1.2-Dibromoethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <12




1.2-Dibromoethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <24 <24



1.2-Dichlorobenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <12



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS








1.2-Dichloropropane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <12


1.2-Dichloropropane ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <12 <120


1.2-Dichloropropane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <12 <24 <24





















2 - Methyl naphthalene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

2 - Nitrophenol ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

2, 4 - Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

2, 6 - Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100









2,4-Dichlorophenol ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



2,4-Dichlorophenol ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS


2,4-Dimethylphenol ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



2,4-Dimethylphenol ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



2,4-Dinitrotoluene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



2,4-Dinitrotoluene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100











2-Chloronaphthalene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100

2-Chlorophenol ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100

2-Chlorotoluene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <9




2-Chlorotoluene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <18 <18



2-Methylnaphthalene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



2-Methylnaphthalene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



2-Methylphenol ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



2-Methylphenol ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



2-Nitroaniline ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



2-Nitroaniline ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



2-Nitrophenol ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100

2-Nitrophenol ug/Kg 07/05/2014 >100


2-Nitrophenol ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS








4 - Bromophenylphenylether ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

4 - Chlorophenylphenylether ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

4 - Nitrophenol ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

4-Bromophenylphenylether ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



4-Bromophenylphenylether ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



4-Chloro-3-methylphenol ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



4-Chloro-3-methylphenol ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



4-Chloroaniline ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



4-Chloroaniline ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



4-Chlorophenylphenylether ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



4-Chlorophenylphenylether ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100










4-Isopropyltoluene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <11




4-Isopropyltoluene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <22 <22









For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS











4-Nitrophenol ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100 <100





2-Chlorophenol ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100










2-Chloronaphthalene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Acenaphthene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Acenaphthene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Acenaphthene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Acenaphthylene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Acenaphthylene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Acenaphthylene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Aliphatic >C5-C6 ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <10

Aliphatic >C5-C6 ug/Kg 09/05/2014 10.3

Aliphatic >C5-C6 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <10 <10





Aliphatic >C6-C8 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 10.8 14.2





For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS

Aliphatic >C8-C10 ug/Kg 09/05/2014 144



Aliphatic >C8-C10 ug/Kg 22/05/2014 13.3 <10








Aliphatic >C12-C16 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 2120

Aliphatic >C12-C16 ug/Kg 21/05/2014 1600 <100




Aliphatic >C16-C21 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 13700 34700













Total Aliphatic > C12-C44 ug/Kg 22/05/2014 1740000

Total Aliphatic > C12-C44 ug/Kg 09/05/2014 1570000

Total Aliphatic > C12-C44 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 786000 1860000



Aromatics >EC5-EC7 ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <10


Aromatics >EC5-EC7 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <10 <10




Aromatics >EC7-EC8 ug/Kg 09/05/2014 14.2





Aromatics >EC8-EC10 ug/Kg 09/05/2014 130

Aromatics >EC8-EC10 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 33.6 42.7


Aromatics >EC8-EC10 ug/Kg 22/05/2014 16.7 <10


Aromatics >EC10-EC12 ug/Kg 09/05/2014 58.1

Aromatics >EC10-EC12 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 42 53.6



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:08


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS




Aromatics >EC12-EC16 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 1720

Aromatics >EC12-EC16 ug/Kg 21/05/2014 833 <100




Aromatics >EC16-EC21 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 4930 15700


















Total Aromatics >EC12-EC44 ug/Kg 07/05/2014 507000

Total Aromatics >EC12-EC44 ug/Kg 09/05/2014 678000

Total Aromatics >EC12-EC44 ug/Kg 12/05/2014 254000 667000

Total Aromatics >EC12-EC44 ug/Kg 21/05/2014 585000 <100

Total Aromatics >EC12-EC44 ug/Kg 22/05/2014 62600 <100

Anthracene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Anthracene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Anthracene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100

Anthracene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <100 <100

Anthracene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <100 <100

Azobenzene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Azobenzene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Azobenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100

Azobenzene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <100 <100

Azobenzene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <100 <100

Benzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <10 <10 <10

Benzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <9

Benzene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <9 <10

Benzene ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <10

Benzene ug/Kg 09/05/2014 <10

Benzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <10 <10

Benzene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <10 <10

Benzene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <10 <10


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS

Benzo (a) anthracene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Benzo (a) anthracene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Benzo (a) anthracene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Benzo (a) pyrene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Benzo (a) pyrene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Benzo (a) pyrene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Benzo (b) fluoranthene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Benzo (b) fluoranthene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Benzo (b) fluoranthene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Benzo (g, h, i) perylene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Benzo (g, h, i) perylene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Benzo (k) fluoranthene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Benzo (k) fluoranthene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Benzo (k) fluoranthene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100

Bis(2-chloroethoxyl)methane mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Bis(2-chloroethoxyl)methane mg/Kg 07/05/2014 <100

Bis(2-chloroethoxyl)methane mg/Kg 09/05/2014 <100

Bis(2-chloroethoxyl)methane mg/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <100 <100



bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <100

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate ug/Kg 09/05/2014 631

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate ug/Kg 12/05/2014 191 1230


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <100 <100

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate ug/Kg 22/05/2014 595 <100

Bromobenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <10




Bromobenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <20 <20



Bromochloromethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <14

Bromochloromethane ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <14

Bromochloromethane ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <14 <140

Bromochloromethane ug/Kg 09/05/2014 <14 <280

Bromochloromethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <14 <28 <28



Bromodichloromethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <7




Bromodichloromethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <14 <14



Bromoform ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <10




Bromoform ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <20 <20

Bromoform ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <100 <10

Bromoform ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <100 <10

Bromomethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <13




Bromomethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <26 <26



BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <28

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <24 <24 <24

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <24 <24 <24 <24 <24 <24 <24

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene) ug/Kg 07/05/2014

Butylbenzyl phthalate ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Butylbenzyl phthalate ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Butylbenzylphthalate mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Carbazole mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Carbazole ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Carbazole ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS

Carbazole ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <100 <100

Carbazole ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <100 <100

Carbon disulphide ug/Kg 19/01/2012 28.1

Carbon Disulphide ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <7



Carbon Disulphide ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <14 <14



Carbontetrachloride ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <14




Carbontetrachloride ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <28 <28



Chlorobenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <5




Chlorobenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <10 <10



Chloroethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <14




Chloroethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <28 <28



Chloroform ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <8




Chloroform ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <16 <16



Chloromethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <7




Chloromethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <14 <14



Chrysene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Chrysene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Chrysene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100

Chrysene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <100 <100

Chrysene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <100 <100

cis-1-2-Dichloroethene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <5



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS



cis-1-2-Dichloroethene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <10 <10



cis-1-3-Dichloropropene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <14




cis-1-3-Dichloropropene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <28 <28



Coronene mg/Kg 25/01/2012 <2 <2 <2

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <105




Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Dibenzofuran mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Dibenzofuran ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Dibenzofuran ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Bromochloromethane ug/Kg 07/05/2014

Dibromochloromethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <13




Dibromochloromethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <26 <26



Dibromomethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <9




Dibromomethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <18 <18



Dichlorodifluoromethane ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <4



Dichlorodifluoromethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <8 <8



Dichloromethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <10




Dichloromethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <20 <20


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS



Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 25/01/2012 <0.1

Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 07/05/2014 <100

Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 09/05/2014 <100

Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 25/01/2012 <0.1

Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 07/05/2014 <100

Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 09/05/2014 <100

Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Di-n-butylphthalate mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Ethylbenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <3 <3 <3

Ethylbenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <4


Ethylbenzene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3



Ethylbenzene ug/Kg 09/05/2014 9.03

Ethylbenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <3 <3

Ethylbenzene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <3 <3

Ethylbenzene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 6.66 <3

Fluoranthene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <105




Fluoranthene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Fluorene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Fluorene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100

Fluorene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <100 <100

Fluorene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <100 <100

Hexachlorobenzene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Hexachlorobenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Hexachlorobutadiene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Hexachlorobutadiene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <12





Hexachlorobutadiene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS



Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Hexachloroethane mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Hexachloroethane ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Hexachloroethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Isophorone mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Isophorone ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Isophorone ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100

Isophorone ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <100 <100

Isophorone ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <100 <100

Isopropylbenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <5




Isopropylbenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <10 <10



m,p-Xylene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <6 <6 <6 <14

m,p-Xylene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6

m,p-Xylene ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <6

m,p-Xylene ug/Kg 09/05/2014 15.5

m,p-Xylene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <6 <6

m,p-Xylene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <6 <6

m,p-Xylene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <6 <6

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <5 <5 <5 <11

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <11

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <5

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) ug/Kg 09/05/2014 7.74

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl-ether) ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <5 <5



Naphthalene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <105


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS





Naphthalene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



n-Butylbenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <10




n-Butylbenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <20 <20



n-Dibutyl phthalate ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



n-Dibutyl phthalate ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



n-Dioctyl phthalate ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



n-Dioctyl phthalate ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Nitrobenzene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Nitrobenzene ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <100


Nitrobenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100




N-nitroso-n-dipropylamine mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

n-Nitroso-n-dipropylamine ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <100


n-Nitroso-n-dipropylamine ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100




o-Xylene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <3 <3 <3

o-Xylene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <10

o-Xylene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <10 <3

o-Xylene ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <3

o-Xylene ug/Kg 09/05/2014 9.03

o-Xylene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <3 <3

o-Xylene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <3 <3

o-Xylene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <3 <3

PAHs - Total (16 + Coronene) mg/Kg 25/01/2012 <10 <10 <10

Pentachlorophenol ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Pentachlorophenol ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS



Phenanthrene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <105

Phenanthrene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100



Phenanthrene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100



Phenol ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100

Phenol ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <100

Phenol ug/Kg 09/05/2014 <100

Phenol ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100

Phenol ug/Kg 21/05/2014 1430 <100

Phenol ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <100 <100

Propylbenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <11




Propylbenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <22 <22



Pyrene mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.105

Pyrene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <100

Pyrene ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <1000

Pyrene ug/Kg 09/05/2014 <1000

Pyrene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <100 <100

Pyrene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <100 <100

Pyrene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <100 <100

sec-Butylbenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <10




sec-Butylbenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <20 <20



Styrene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <10

Styrene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <10

Styrene ug/Kg 07/05/2014 <100

Styrene ug/Kg 09/05/2014 <200

Styrene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <20 <20

Styrene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <100 <10

Styrene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 <100 <10

Tert-amyl methyl ether ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <15




Tert-amyl methyl ether ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <30 <30



tert-Butylbenzene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <12




For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS


tert-Butylbenzene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <24 <24



Tetrachloroethene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <5



Tetrachloroethene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <10 <10



Toluene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <2 <2 <2

Toluene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <5


Toluene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2



Toluene ug/Kg 09/05/2014 14.2

Toluene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <2 2.19

Toluene ug/Kg 21/05/2014 <2 <2

Toluene ug/Kg 22/05/2014 3.33 <2

trans-1, 2 - Dichloroethene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <11

trans-1-2-Dichloroethene ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <11



trans-1-2-Dichloroethene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <22 <22



trans-1-3-Dichloropropene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <14




trans-1-3-Dichloropropene ug/Kg 14/05/2014 <200 <200



Trichloroethene ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <9




Trichloroethene ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <18 <18



Trichlorofluoromethane ug/Kg 19/01/2012 <6



Trichlorofluoromethane ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <12 <12



Trichlorofluorormethane ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <6

Vinyl Chloride ug/Kg 25/01/2012 <10



Vinyl Chloride ug/Kg 12/05/2014 <20 <20



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


PARAMETER

Black colour,

Silt Loam, grain

size <0.063

mm, no

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Sandy

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

and Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Stones

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Top Soil,

grain size 0.063

- 0.1 mm,

Stones and

Vegetation

inclusions

Dark Brown

colour, Silt

Loam, grain

size 0.063 - 0.1

mm, Vegetation

and Stones

inclusions

Very Sandy

CLAY

Gravelly, Peaty

CLAY

Slightly Sand

CLAY

Sandy

GRAVEL

Very Sandy,

Slightly Gravelly

CLAY

Very Sandy

CLAY

Sandy, Gravelly

CLAY

Slightly Silty

CLAY

3.0-4.0

mbGL

1.0-1.2

mbGL

2.1-3.25

mbGL

3.25-4.5

mbGL

1.2-2.4

mbGL

4.2-5.8

mbGL

1.2-2.2

mbGL

2.2-4.4

mbGL


ST2 -

S1+S2

ST3 -

S2+S3

2003

BH12 SS2

2003

BH13 SS2

2003

BH13 SS4

2003

BH13 SS5

2003

BH14 SS1

2003

BH14 SS4

2003

BH15 SS1

2003

BH15 SS2

RESULTS


RESULTS


EXPRESSION OF

RESULTS





mg/Kg 19/01/2012 884 123 275



mg/Kg 25/01/2012 222 59.9 80.4 185 205 263 278

TPH (Total petroleum hydrocarbons) >C6-C40 mg/Kg 19/01/2012 993 134 81

TPH (Total petroleum hydrocarbons) >C6-C40 mg/Kg 25/01/2012 267 92 134 337 424 584 546



mg/Kg 19/01/2012 288 47 100



mg/Kg 25/01/2012 144 196 347 867 119 149 171



mg/Kg 25/01/2012 200 226 109 123 160 199 225



mg/Kg 07/05/2014 2250



mg/Kg 09/05/2014 2250



mg/Kg 12/05/2014 1040 2530



mg/Kg 22/05/2014 1700 7.15 375 6.25

Mineral oil >C10-C40 mg/Kg 19/01/2012 41 16.9 112

Mineral oil >C10-C40 mg/Kg 25/01/2012 80.5 20.2 25.8 60.4 89.4 102 112

Mineral oil >C10-C40 mg/Kg 07/05/2014 2620

Mineral oil >C10-C40 mg/Kg 09/05/2014 1830

Mineral oil >C10-C40 mg/Kg 12/05/2014 1210 1790

Mineral oil >C10-C40 mg/Kg 21/05/2014 962 24.8

Mineral oil >C10-C40 mg/Kg 22/05/2014 103 10.2



mg/Kg 19/01/2012 <0.044 <0.044 <0.044



mg/Kg 25/01/2012 <0.044 <0.044 <0.044 <0.044 <0.044 <0.044 <0.044


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


MW3R vs MW6 Soil

Composite

upper made

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings

Discrete lower

made ground –

Hydrocarbon

smell and PID

reading of 4.7

Composite lower

made ground –

Hydrocarbon

smell and PID

reading of 8.6 to

15.3

Composite

lower made

ground – Sweet

smell and no

PID readings

Discrete

sample natural

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings,

base of

unsaturated

zone

Comparison of concentration values against GAC reference limits for Commercial and Public Parks,

and comparison MW3R and MW6 concentration values against each other, with particular emphaisis

on concentration level/magnitude at similar depths, and degree of lowering of concentration with depth.

0.1 - 1.5 2.5 - 3.0 4.7 - 5.0 5.5 - 7.0 7.2 7.9 - 9.3 0.23 - 2.1 2.1 - 3.0 3.0 - 4.8 4.8 - 5.9 5.9 - 6.5 6.5 - 7.7

Parameter Units Date sampled1% SOM (soil

organic matter)

2.5%

SOM 6% SOM 1% SOM

2.5%

SOM 6% SOM

MW3R -

SS33

MW3R -

SS6

MW3R -

SS34

MW3R -

SS15

MW3R -

SS18

MW3R -

SS35 MW6 SS1 MW6 SS2 MW6 SS3 MW6 SS4 MW6 SS5 MW6 SS6

Acenaphthene mg/Kg 16/01/16 84000 (57) 97000

(141)

100000 29000 30000 30000 0.065 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 No Exceedance

Acenaphthylene mg/Kg 16/01/16 83000 (86.1) 97000

(212)

100000 29000 30000 30000 0.118 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 No Exceedance

Aliphatic >C10-C12 mg/Kg 12/02/11 9700 (48) 23000

(118)

47000

(283)

21000

(48)

23000

(118)

24000

(283)

<0.01 0.0492 0.0142 0.0355 0.0158 <0.01 No Exceedance


(118)

47000

(283)

21000

(48)

23000

(118)

24000

(283)

0.0622 0.0398 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally, and lowering with depth.


(59)

90000

(142)

25000

(24)

25000

(59)

26000

(142)

5.5 10.6 6.67 4.53 3.54 8.94 No Exceedance


(59)

90000

(142)

25000

(24)

25000

(59)

26000

(142)

0.502 4.42 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.347 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally, and lowering with depth.

Aliphatic >C16-C21 mg/Kg 12/02/11 38.7 95.7 68 56.4 24.5 11.3 No limit.

Aliphatic >C16-C21 mg/Kg 16/01/16 6.5 9.62 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.583 MW6 concentration lower generally (order of magnitude), and lowering with depth.

Aliphatic >C21-C35 mg/Kg 12/02/11 1310 3280 2180 2420 938 250 No limit.

Aliphatic >C21-C35 mg/Kg 16/01/16 114 149 20.8 6.17 1.65 8.05 MW6 concentration lower generally (order of magnitude), and lowering with depth.

Aliphatic >C35-C44 mg/Kg 12/02/11 1600000 1700000 1800000 450000 480000 490000 417 894 535 640 259 659 No Exceedance

Aliphatic >C35-C44 mg/Kg 16/01/16 1600000 1700000 1800000 450000 480000 490000 32.2 40.1 1.79 <0.1 <0.1 1.13 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally (order of magnitude), and lowering

with depth.


(558)

12000

(1150)

95000

(304)

130000

(558)

180000

(1150)

<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance


(558)

12000

(1150)

95000

(304)

130000

(558)

180000

(1150)

<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance


(322)

40000

(736)

150000

(144)

220000

(322)

320000

(736)

<0.01 0.0468 <0.01 0.0194 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance


(322)

40000

(736)

150000

(144)

220000

(322)

320000

(736)



(190)

11000

(451)

14000

(78)

18000

(190)

21000

(451)

<0.01 0.116 <0.01 0.028 0.0147 <0.01 No Exceedance


(190)

11000

(451)

14000

(78)

18000

(190)

21000

(451)


Anthracene mg/Kg 16/01/16 520000 540000 540000 150000 150000 150000 0.3 <0.016 <0.016 <0.016 <0.016 <0.016 No Exceedance

Aromatics >EC10-EC12 mg/Kg 12/02/11 16000 (364) 28000

(899)

34000

(2150)

9200

(364)

9700

(899)

10000 <0.01 0.0324 <0.01 0.0237 0.0102 <0.01 No Exceedance


(899)

34000

(2150)

9200

(364)

9700

(899)

10000 0.0422 0.0257 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally, and lowering with depth.

Aromatics >EC12-EC16 mg/Kg 12/02/11 36000 (169) 37000 38000 10000 10000 10000 8.17 10.7 5.57 3.54 4.38 4.27 No Exceedance

Aromatics >EC12-EC16 mg/Kg 16/01/16 36000 (169) 37000 38000 10000 10000 10000 1.22 0.907 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally, and lowering with depth.

Aromatics >EC16-EC21 mg/Kg 12/02/11 28000 28000 28000 7600 7700 7800 32.4 36.6 26.1 20.8 1.8 6.68 No Exceedance

Aromatics >EC16-EC21 mg/Kg 16/01/16 28000 28000 28000 7600 7700 7800 9.37 3.22 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally (order of magnitude), and lowering

with depth.

Aromatics >EC21-EC35 mg/Kg 12/02/11 28000 28000 28000 7800 7800 7900 465 822 538 568 247 596 No Exceedance

Aromatics >EC21-EC35 mg/Kg 16/01/16 28000 28000 28000 7800 7800 7900 61.3 53.1 3.1 1.19 1 1.59 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally (order of magnitude), and lowering

with depth.

Aromatics >EC35-EC44 mg/Kg 12/02/11 28000 28000 28000 7800 7800 7900 206 327 194 219 101 213 No Exceednace

Aromatics >EC35-EC44 mg/Kg 16/01/16 28000 28000 28000 7800 7800 7900 32.6 31 1.18 2.2 <0.1 <0.1 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally (order of magnitude), and lowering

with depth.

Aromatics >EC40-EC44 mg/Kg 12/02/11 76.1 11.6 67.6 76.4 36.3 7.21 No limit.

Aromatics >EC40-EC44 mg/Kg 16/01/16 13 12.1 1.25 1.38 <0.1 <0.1 MW6 concentration lower generally, and lowering with depth.


(2260)

86000

(4710)

76000

(1220)

84000

(2260)

92000

(4710)

<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance


(2260)

86000

(4710)

76000

(1220)

84000

(2260)

92000

(4710)

<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance


(1920)

180000

(4360)

87000

(869)

95000

(1920)

100000

(4360)

<0.01 0.0492 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance


(1920)

180000

(4360)

87000

(869)

95000

(1920)

100000

(4360)

<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally, and lowering with depth.


(1500)

17000

(3580)

7200

(613)

8500

(1500)

9300

(3580)

<0.01 0.179 <0.01 0.0226 0.0124 <0.01 No Exceedance


(1500)

17000

(3580)

7200

(613)

8500

(1500)

9300

(3580)


Benzene mg/Kg 12/02/11 27 47 90 90 100 110 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance

Benzene mg/Kg 16/01/16 27 47 90 90 100 110 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance

Benzo (a) anthracene mg/Kg 12/02/11 170 170 180 49 56 62 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 No Exceedance

Benzo (a) anthracene mg/Kg 16/01/16 170 170 180 49 56 62 1.13 0.0733 <0.014 <0.014 <0.014 <0.014 No exceedance. MW6 concentration higher in shallow overburden but lowering to below

LOD rapidly with depth.

Benzo (a) pyrene mg/Kg 12/02/11 35 35 36 11 12 13 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 No Exceedance

Benzo (a) pyrene mg/Kg 16/01/16 35 35 36 11 12 13 1.06 0.05 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 No exceedance. MW6 concentration higher in shallow overburden but lowering to below


Benzo (b) fluoranthene mg/Kg 12/02/11 44 44 45 13 15 16 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 No Exceedance

Benzo (b) fluoranthene mg/Kg 16/01/16 44 44 45 13 15 16 1.21 0.0803 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 No exceedance. MW6 concentration higher in shallow overburden but lowering to below


Benzo (g, h, i) perylene mg/Kg 12/02/11 3900 4000 4000 1400 1500 1600 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 No Exceedance

Benzo (g, h, i) perylene mg/Kg 16/01/16 3900 4000 4000 1400 1500 1600 0.662 0.0416 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 No exceedance. MW6 concentration higher in shallow overburden but lowering to below


Benzo (k) fluoranthene mg/Kg 12/02/11 1200 1200 1200 370 410 440 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 No Exceedance

Benzo (k) fluoranthene mg/Kg 16/01/16 1200 1200 1200 370 410 440 0.63 0.0222 <0.014 <0.014 <0.014 <0.014 No exceedance. MW6 concentration higher in shallow overburden but lowering to below


BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, mg/Kg 12/02/11 <0.010 0.151 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 No limit

BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, mg/Kg 16/01/16 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 MW6 concentration lower generally.

Chrysene mg/Kg 12/02/11 350 350 350 93 110 120 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 No Exceedance

Chrysene mg/Kg 16/01/16 350 350 350 93 110 120 1.09 0.0493 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No exceedance. MW6 concentration higher in shallow overburden but lowering to below


RESULTS - MW6Drilling MW6 Soil - January 2016

Generic Assessment Criteria (GAC) (MEL REF: samp48)

2003-010: Groundwater

sample results and

associated reference limits. Public Parks (POSpark)A public park is an area of open

space provided for recreational use

and usually owned and maintained

by the Local Authority. It is

anticipated that POSpark could be

used for a wide range of activities,

including the following: Family visits

and picnics; Children’s play area;

Sporting activities such as football

on an informal basis (although this

POS is not considered as a

dedicated sports pitch); and Dog

walking.

CommercialThis generic

scenario assumes a typical commercial or

light industrial roperty consisting of a

three-storey building at which employees

spend most time indoors and are involved

in office-based or relatively light physical

work.

RESULTS - MW3RSubsoil Investigation - February 2011

Sample depths (mbGL)

Reasoning for sample discrimination Reasoning for sample discrimination

Composite upper

made ground -

medium brown

clay - dry - no

odour and low PID

readings towards

lower portion only.

Composite

natural ground -

sand -

wet/damp - no

odour but

relatively high /

highest PID

readings

throughout.

Composite

natural ground -

sand -

wet/damp - no

odour and low

PID readings

throughout.

Composite

natural ground -

becoming

sandyer -

becoming

wet/damp - no

odour and low

PID readings

throughout.

Composite

sample natural

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings,

saturated zone,

water levels in

MW3 ranged

from

approxiately 8

to 9 mbgl,

therefore this

sample takes

into account the

Sample ID Sample ID


Composite

upper natural

ground - orange

brown clay, with

transition to

paler grey

brown - damp -

no odour but

relatively high

PID readings in

upper portion.

Composite

lower made

ground -

medium brown

clay - becoming

damp - no

odour and low

PID readings

throughout.


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09


MW3R vs MW6 Soil

Composite

upper made

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings

Discrete lower

made ground –

Hydrocarbon

smell and PID

reading of 4.7

Composite lower

made ground –

Hydrocarbon

smell and PID

reading of 8.6 to

15.3

Composite

lower made

ground – Sweet

smell and no

PID readings

Discrete

sample natural

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings,

base of

unsaturated

zone

Comparison of concentration values against GAC reference limits for Commercial and Public Parks,

and comparison MW3R and MW6 concentration values against each other, with particular emphaisis

on concentration level/magnitude at similar depths, and degree of lowering of concentration with depth.

0.1 - 1.5 2.5 - 3.0 4.7 - 5.0 5.5 - 7.0 7.2 7.9 - 9.3 0.23 - 2.1 2.1 - 3.0 3.0 - 4.8 4.8 - 5.9 5.9 - 6.5 6.5 - 7.7

Parameter Units Date sampled1% SOM (soil

organic matter)

2.5%

SOM 6% SOM 1% SOM

2.5%

SOM 6% SOM

MW3R -

SS33

MW3R -

SS6

MW3R -

SS34

MW3R -

SS15

MW3R -

SS18

MW3R -

SS35 MW6 SS1 MW6 SS2 MW6 SS3 MW6 SS4 MW6 SS5 MW6 SS6

RESULTS - MW6Drilling MW6 Soil - January 2016

Generic Assessment Criteria (GAC) (MEL REF: samp48)

2003-010: Groundwater

sample results and

associated reference limits. Public Parks (POSpark)A public park is an area of open

space provided for recreational use

and usually owned and maintained

by the Local Authority. It is

anticipated that POSpark could be

used for a wide range of activities,

including the following: Family visits

and picnics; Children’s play area;

Sporting activities such as football

on an informal basis (although this

POS is not considered as a

dedicated sports pitch); and Dog

walking.

CommercialThis generic

scenario assumes a typical commercial or

light industrial roperty consisting of a

three-storey building at which employees

spend most time indoors and are involved

in office-based or relatively light physical

work.

RESULTS - MW3RSubsoil Investigation - February 2011


Reasoning for sample discrimination Reasoning for sample discrimination

Composite upper

made ground -

medium brown

clay - dry - no

odour and low PID

readings towards

lower portion only.

Composite

natural ground -

sand -

wet/damp - no

odour but

relatively high /

highest PID

readings

throughout.

Composite

natural ground -

sand -

wet/damp - no

odour and low

PID readings

throughout.

Composite

natural ground -

becoming

sandyer -

becoming

wet/damp - no

odour and low

PID readings

throughout.

Composite

sample natural

ground – no

smell and no

PID readings,

saturated zone,

water levels in

MW3 ranged

from

approxiately 8

to 9 mbgl,

therefore this

sample takes

into account the

Sample ID Sample ID


Composite

upper natural

ground - orange

brown clay, with

transition to

paler grey

brown - damp -

no odour but

relatively high

PID readings in

upper portion.

Composite

lower made

ground -

medium brown

clay - becoming

damp - no

odour and low

PID readings

throughout.

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene mg/Kg 12/02/11 3.5 3.6 3.6 1.1 1.3 1.4 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 No Exceednace

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene mg/Kg 16/01/16 3.5 3.6 3.6 1.1 1.3 1.4 0.195 <0.023 <0.023 <0.023 <0.023 <0.023 No exceedance. MW6 concentration higher in shallow overburden but lowering to below


Ethylbenzene mg/Kg 12/02/11 5700 (518) 13000

(1220)

27000

(2840)

17000

(518)

22000

(1220)

27000

(2840)

<0.003 0.0168 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 No Exceedance

Ethylbenzene mg/Kg 16/01/16 5700 (518) 13000

(1220)

27000

(2840)

17000

(518)

22000

(1220)

27000

(2840)

<0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally.

Fluoranthene mg/Kg 16/01/16 23000 23000 23000 6300 6300 6400 2.4 0.0975 <0.017 <0.017 <0.017 <0.017 No Exceedance

Fluorene mg/Kg 16/01/16 63000 (30.9) 68000 71000 20000 20000 20000 0.157 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No Exceedance

GRO (Gasoline Range mg/Kg 12/02/11 <0.044 0.479 0.048 0.141 0.0644 <0.044 No Exceedance

GRO (Gasoline Range mg/Kg 16/01/16 0.191 0.116 <0.044 <0.044 <0.044 <0.044 No Exceednace. MW6 concentration lower generally, and lowering with depth.

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene mg/Kg 16/01/16 500 510 510 150 170 180 0.529 0.0279 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 No Exceedance

m,p-Xylene mg/Kg 12/02/11 <0.006 0.0636 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 No limit

m,p-Xylene mg/Kg 16/01/16 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 MW6 concentration lower generally.

Mineral oil >C10-C40 mg/Kg 12/02/11 1790 3060 No limit

Mineral oil >C10-C40 mg/Kg 16/01/16 192 227 41.9 33.9 8 6.42 MW6 concentration lower generally (order of magnitude).

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl- mg/Kg 12/02/11 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 No limit.

MTBE (methyl-tert-butyl- mg/Kg 16/01/16 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 All results below limit of detection (LOD).

Naphthalene mg/Kg 12/02/11 190 (76.4) 460 (183) 1100

(432)

1200

(76.4)

1900

(183)

3000 <0.013 <0.013 <0.013 0.162 <0.013 <0.013 No Exceedance

Naphthalene mg/Kg 16/01/16 190 (76.4) 460 (183) 1100

(432)

1200

(76.4)

1900

(183)

3000 0.168 0.0297 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 No exceedance. MW6 concentration higher in shallow overburden but lowering to below


o-Xylene mg/Kg 12/02/11 6600 (478) 15000

(1120)

33000

(2620)

17000

(478)

24000

(1120)

33000

(2620)

<0.003 0.0216 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 No Exceedance

o-Xylene mg/Kg 16/01/16 6600 (478) 15000

(1120)

33000

(2620)

17000

(478)

24000

(1120)

33000

(2620)

<0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 No Exceedance. MW6 concentration lower generally.

PAHs - Total (16 + mg/Kg 16/01/16 12.2 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 No limit.

PAHs - Total (16) mg/Kg 16/01/16 13.4 0.636 <0.118 <0.118 <0.118 <0.118 No limit.

Phenanthrene mg/Kg 16/01/16 22000 22000 23000 6200 6200 6300 1.67 0.0736 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 No Exceedance

Pyrene mg/Kg 16/01/16 54000 54000 54000 15000 15000 15000 1.98 0.0907 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 No Exceedance

Toluene mg/Kg 12/02/11 56000 (869) 110000(1

920)

180000

(4360)

87000

(869)

95000

(1920)

100000

(4360)

<0.002 0.0492 0.00327 0.00215 <0.002 <0.002 No Exceedance

Toluene mg/Kg 16/01/16 56000 (869) 110000(1

920)

180000

(4360)

87000

(869)

95000

(1920)

100000

(4360)

0.00777 <0.002 0.00224 0.00878 0.00456 <0.002 No Exceednace. MW6 concentration lower in shallow overburden but has similar

distirbution with depth.

Total Aliphatic > C12-C44 mg/Kg 12/02/11 1770 4280 2790 3120 123 336 No limit.

Total Aliphatic > C12-C44 mg/Kg 16/01/16 154 204 22.6 6.17 1.65 10.1 MW6 concentration lower generally (order of magnitude), and lowering with depth.

Total Aromatics >EC12- mg/Kg 12/02/11 711 1200 764 811 370 91.8 No limit.

Total Aromatics >EC12- mg/Kg 16/01/16 105 88.3 4.28 3.39 1 1.59 MW6 concentration lower generally (order of magnitude), and lowering with depth.

TPH CWG (Total mg/Kg 12/02/11 2490 5480 3560 3930 1600 428 No limit.

TPH CWG (Total

petroleum hydrocarbons:

mg/Kg 16/01/16 258 292 269 9.59 2.69 11.7 No limit. MW6 concentration lower generally (order of magnitude), and lowering with depth.

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As mg/Kg 12/02/11 <0.01 0.0852 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 No limit.

Xylenes (3 isomers) (As mg/Kg 16/01/16 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 No limit. MW6 concentration lower generally.


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

REPORT TO REPORT BY




Appendix F

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

First released: 2006. Version 3.2: January 2013

Details to be completed for each assessment

Site Name:

Site Address:

Completed by:

Date: 14-Nov-14 Version: 2

Contaminant TPH (Aliphatic EC>16-35)

Target Concentration (CT) 0.01 mg/l Origin of CT:

Data carried forward from an earlier worksheet are identified by a light green background

The spreadsheet also includes a porosity calculation worksheet, a soil impact calculation worksheet and a worksheet that performs some simple hydrogeological

calculations.

Hydrogeological risk assessment for land contamination

Irish Interim Guideline Values

Matteo Viganotti

This worksheet has been produced in combination with the document 'Remedial Targets Methodology: Hydrogeological risk assessment for land contamination (

Environment Agency 2006).

Users of this worksheet should always refer to the User Manual to the Remedial Targets Methodology and to relevant guidance on UK legislation and

policy, in order to understand how this procedure should be applied in an appropriate context.

© Environment Agency, 2006. (Produced by the Environment Agency's Science Group)

The calculation of equations in this worksheet has been independently checked by Entec (UK) Ltd on behalf of the Environment Agency.

All rights reserved. You will not modify, reverse compile or otherwise dis-assemble the worksheet.

It is recommended that a copy of the original worksheet is saved (all data fields in the original copy are blank).

Remedial Targets Worksheet , Release 3.2

This worksheet can be used to determine remedial targets for soils (Worksheets Level 1 Soil, Level 2 and Level 3 Soil) or to determine remedial targets for groundwater (Level 3

Groundwater). For Level 3, parameter values must be entered separately dependent on whether the assessment is for soil or groundwater. For soil, remedial targets are

calculated as either mg/kg (for comparision with soil measurements) or mg/l (for comparison with leaching tests or pore water concentrations).

Site details entered on this page are automatically copied to Level 1, 2 and 3 Worksheets.

Worksheet options are identified by brown background and employ a pull-down menus. Data entry are identified as blue background.

Data origin / justification should be noted in cells coloured yellow and fully documented in subsequent reports.

Liability: The Environment Agency does not promise that the worksheet will provide any particular facilities or functions. You must ensure that the worksheet meets your needs and you remain solely

responsible for the competent use of the worksheet. You are entirely responsible for the consequences of any use of the worksheet and the Agency provides no warranty about the fitness for purpose or

performance of any part of the worksheet. We do not promise that the media will always be free from defects, computer viruses, software locks or other similar code or that the operation of the worksheet will

be uninterrupted or error free. You should carry out all necessary virus checks prior to installing on your computing system.

Nypro (Groundwater Regime #2 and Regime #3)

Abbey Street Bray

IMPORTANT: To enable MS Excel worksheet, click Tools, Add -Ins, Analysis Tool Pak and Analysis Tool Pak-VBA (to calculate error functions).

Environment Agency Publication 20, Remedial Targets worksheet v3.108/12/2014, 15:54

2003-797 (GWRegime2and3 - IGV - ALI)Introduction

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

Level 1 - Soil

0

Contaminant User specified value for partition coefficient 1

Target concentration CT 0.01 mg/l Calculate for non-polar organic chemicals 0

Calculate for ionic organic chemicals (acids)

Input Parameters Variable Value Unit Source of parameter value

Standard entry

Water filled soil porosity θW 2.04E-01 fraction 12% w/w moisture content adjusted for bulk density of 1.7

Air filled soil porosity θa 2.36E-01 fraction Assumed a porosity of approximately 0.44 (minus water content)

Bulk density of soil zone material ρ 1.70E+00 g/cm3

Literature value for Stiff CLAY[8]

Henry's Law constant H 4.90E+03 dimensionless Aliphatic 16-35 TPH CWG[9]

Entry if specify partition coefficient (option)

Soil water partition coefficient Kd 0.00E+00 l/kg

Entry for non-polar organic chemicals (option)

Fraction of organic carbon (in soil) foc 7.00E-03 fraction TOC from ERM report at MW101

Organic carbon partition coefficient Koc 6.31E+08 l/kg Aliphatic 16-35 TPH CWG[9]

Entry for ionic organic chemicals (option)

Sorption coefficient for neutral species Koc,n 0.00E+00 l/kg

Sorption coefficient for ionised species Koc,i 0.00E+00 l/kg

pH value pH 0.00E+00 pH units

Acid dissociation constant pKa 0.00E+00

Fraction of organic carbon (in soil) foc 0.00E+00 fraction

Soil water partition coefficient used in Level Assessment Kd 4.42E+06 l/kg Calculated value

Level 1 Remedial Target Site being assessed: Nypro (Groundwater Regime #2 and Regime #3)

Level 1 Remedial Target 4.42E+04 mg/kg (for comparison with soil analyses) Completed by: Matteo Viganotti

or Date: 14-Nov-14

0.01 mg/l (for comparison with leachate test results) Version: 2


TPH (Aliphatic EC>16-35)

This sheet calculates the Level 1 remedial target for soils(mg/kg) based on a

selected target concentration and theoretical calculation of soil water partitioning.

Three options are included for determining the partition coefficient.

The measured soil concentration as mg/kg should be compared with the Level 1

remedial target to determine the need for further action.

Select the method of calculating the soil water

Partition Co-efficient by using the pull down menu

below

Calculate for non-polar organic chemicals

Remedial targets worksheet v3.1 08/12/2014, 15:55

2003-797 (GWRegime2and3 - IGV - ALI)Level1 Soil

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09



Site Name:

Site Address:

Completed by:
















Nypro (Regime #2 and Regime #3)

Abbey Street Bray



calculations.


Dutch Target Value

Matteo Viganotti










2003-797 (GWRegime2and3 - NLT - ALI)Introduction

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

Level 1 - Soil

0





Standard entry


















Level 1 Remedial Target Site being assessed: Nypro (Regime #2 and Regime #3)


or Date: 14-Nov-14











below



2003-797 (GWRegime2and3 - NLT - ALI)Level1 Soil

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09



Site Name:

Site Address:

Completed by:






calculations.


Dutch Intervention Value

Matteo Viganotti




















Nypro (Regime #2 and Regime #3)

Abbey Street Bray



2003-797 (GWRegime2and3 - NLI - ALI)Introduction

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

Level 1 - Soil

0





Standard entry


















Level 1 Remedial Target Site being assessed: Nypro (Regime #2 and Regime #3)


or Date: 14-Nov-14











below



2003-797 (GWRegime2and3 - NLI - ALI)Level1 Soil

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09



Site Name:

Site Address:

Completed by:


Contaminant TPH (Aromatic EC>21-35)














Nypro (Regime #2)

Abbey Street Bray



calculations.


Irish Interim Guideline Values

Matteo Viganotti










2003-797 (GWRegime2 - IGV - ARO)Introduction

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

Level 1 - Soil

0





Standard entry





Henry's Law constant H 6.70E-04 dimensionless Aromatic 21-35 TPH CWG[9]





Organic carbon partition coefficient Koc 1.26E+05 l/kg Aromatic 21-35 TPH CWG[9]








Level 1 Remedial Target Site being assessed: Nypro (Regime #2)


or Date: 14-Nov-14



TPH (Aromatic EC>21-35)








below



2003-797 (GWRegime2 - IGV - ARO)Level1 Soil

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

Level 2 - Soil

Contaminant from Level 1

Target concentration CT 0.01 mg/l from Level 1


Standard entry

Infiltration Inf 3.70E-04 m/d

Area of contaminant source A 6.00E+02 m2

Not used in calculation

Entry for groundwater flow below site

Length of contaminant source in direction of groundwater flow L 2.00E+01 m 1 Calculate

Saturated aquifer thickness da 1.30E+01 m

Hydraulic Conductivity of aquifer in which dilution occurs K 2.00E+01 m/d

Hydraulic gradient of water table i 3.70E-03 fraction

Width of contaminant source perpendicular to groundwater flow w 3.00E+01 m Not used in calculation

Background concentration of contaminant in groundwater beneath site Cu 0.00E+00 mg/l

Calculate 0 Specify

Enter mixing zone thickness Mz 0.00E+00 m 1 Calculate

Calculated mixing zone thickness Mz 2.22E+00 m

Calculated Parameters

Dilution Factor DF 2.32E+01

Level 2 Remedial Target 2.32E-01 mg/l

or

2.04E+02 mg/kg

Additional optionCalculation of impact on receptor

Site being assessed: Nypro (Regime #2)

Concentration of contaminant in contaminated discharge (entering receptor) Cc 0.00E+00 mg/l Completed by: Matteo Viganotti

Date: 14-Nov-14

Calculated concentration within receptor (dilution only) 0.00E+00 mg/l 0 Version: 2


For comparison with measured pore water concentration. This assumes Level 1 Remedial Target is based on Target Concentration.

For comparison with measured soil concentration. This assumes Level 1

Remedial Target calculated from soil-water

Define mixing zone depth by specifying or calculating depth (using pull down list)

Site data

Upgradient groundwater monitoring data MW4

TPH (Aromatic EC>21-35) This sheet calculates the Level 2 remedial target for soils (mg/kg) or for pore water

(mg/l).

Average Recharge, EPA recharge maps[2]

Literature value for GRAVEL

Measured between MW103B and Irish Sea

The measured soil concentration as mg/kg or pore water concentration should be compared with the Level 2 remedial target

to determine the need for further action. Equations presented in 'Hydrogeological risk assessment for land contamiantion'

(Environment Agency 2006)

Site data

Bedrock is approx 21mbGL GW is approx 8 mbGL

Remedial targets worksheet v3.1 08/12/2014,16:03


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

0 User specified value for partition coefficient

1 Calculate for non-polar organic chemicals

Level 3 - Soil See Note 0 Calculate for ionic organic chemicals (acids)

Input Parameters Variable Value Unit Source Enter method of defining partition co-efficient (using pull down list)


Target Concentration CT 0.01 mg/l from Level 1

Dilution Factor DF 2.32E+01 from Level 2


Select analytical solution (click on brown cell below, then on pull-down menu) Soil water partition coefficient Kd 0.00E+00 l/kg

Equations in HRA publicationEntry for non-polar organic chemicals (option)

Fraction of organic carbon in aquifer foc 1.00E-08 fraction

Select nature of decay rate (click on brown cell below, then on pull-down menu) Organic carbon partition coefficient Koc 6.31E+08 l/kg

Approach for simulating degradation of pollutants: Entry for ionic organic chemicals (option)

Apply degradation rate to pollutants in all phases (e.g. field derived value, laboratory study for aquifer + water mix, radioactive decay) Sorption coefficient for related species Koc,n 0.00E+00 l/kg

Variable Value Unit Source of parameter value Sorption coefficient for ionised species Koc,i 0.00E+00 l/kg

Enter source concentration pH value pH 0.00E+00

Enter soil concentration Co 2530 mg/kg Acid dissociation constant pKa 0.00E+00

Half life for degradation of contaminant in water t1/2 9.90E+99 days No degradation assumed Fraction of organic carbon in aquifer foc 0.00E+00 fraction

Calculated decay rate λ 7.00E-101 days-1

calculated

Width of plume in aquifer at source Sz 3.00E+01 m from Level 2 Soil water partition coefficient Kd 6.31E+00 l/kg

Plume thickness in aquifer at source Sy 2.22E+00 m from Level 2

Bulk density of aquifer materials ρ 1.92E+00 g/cm3

Literature for GRAVELS Dispersivity based on Xu & Eckstein (1995)

Effective porosity of aquifer n 1.90E-01 fraction Literature for GRAVELS Define dispersivity (click brown cell and use pull down list) Dispersivities 10%, 1%, 0.1% of pathway length

Hydraulic gradient "i" 3.87E-03 fraction from Level 2 (adjusted) User defined values for dispersivity

Hydraulic conductivity of saturated aquifer K 2.00E+01 m/d from Level 2

Distance to compliance point x 5.00E+02 m Distance to Irish Sea Enter value Calc value Xu & Eckstein

Distance (lateral) to compliance point perpendicular to flow direction z 0.00E+00 m Longitudinal dispersivity ax 0.00E+00 5.00E+01 9.12E+00 m

Distance (depth) to compliance point perpendicular to flow direction y 0.00E+00 m Transverse dispersivity az 0.00E+00 5.00E+00 9.12E-01 m

Time since pollutant entered groundwater t 1.00E+00 days time variant options only Vertical dispersivity ay 0.00E+00 5.00E-01 9.12E-02 m

Parameters values determined from options Note values of dispersivity must be > 0

Partition coefficient Kd 6.31E+00 l/kg see options

Longitudinal dispersivity ax 50.000 m see options Xu & Eckstein (1995) report ax = 0.83(log10x)2.414

; az = ax/10, ay = ax/100 are assumed

Transverse dispersivity az 5.000 m see options

Vertical dispersivity ay 0.500 m see options

Parameter values should be checked against Level 1 and 2

Note

Calculated Parameters Variable

Groundwater flow velocity v 4.07E-01 m/d

Retardation factor Rf 6.48E+01 fraction Ogata Banks

Decay rate used λ 1.08E-102 d-1

Domenico - Steady state Note if contaminant is not subject to first order degradation, then set half life as 9.9E+99.

Hydraulic gradient used in aquifer flow down-gradient "i" 3.87E-03 fraction 0 Domenico - Time Variant

Rate of contaminant flow due to retardation u 6.29E-03 m/d

Ratio of Compliance Point to Source Concentration CED/C0 1.33E-02 fraction

Attenuation factor (CO/CED) AF 7.54E+01 fraction

Calculated soil leachate concentration Co 2.87E+00 mg/l Site being assessed: Nypro (Regime #2)

Remedial Targets Completed by: Matteo Viganotti

Level 3 Remedial Target 1.75E+01 mg/l For comparison with measured pore water concentration. Date: ########

Domenico - Steady state or This assumes Level 1 Remedial Target is based on Target Concentration. Version: 2

1.54E+04 mg/kg For comparison with measured soil concentration. This

Distance to compliance point 500 m assumes Level 1 Remedial Target calculated from soil-water

partitioning equation.

Ratio of Compliance Point to Source Concentration CED/C0 1.33E-02 fraction Domenico - Steady state

Care should be used when calculating remedial targets using the time variant options as this may result in an overestimate of the remedial target.

The recommended value for time when calculating the remedial target is 9.9E+99

The measured soil concentration as mg/kg or pore water concentration should be compared

with the Level 3 remedial target to determine the need for further action.

Note: 'Relative concentration' is the ratio of calculated concentation at a given

position compared to the source concentration. The calculations assume

plume disperses from the top of the aquifer. An alternative solution assuming

the centre of the plume is located at the mid-depth of the aquifer is presented

in the calculation sheets.

This sheet calculates the Level 3 remedial target for soils(mg/kg) or for pore water (mg/l),

based on the distance to the receptor or compliance located down hydraulic gradient of the

source Three solution methods are included, the preferred option is Ogata Banks.By setting a

long travel time (e.g. 9E99) it will give the steady state solution, which should always be used

when calculating remedial targets.

Domenico - Steady state

Dispersivities 10%, 1%, 0.1% of pathway length

Apply degradation rate to dissolved pollutants only

Soil concentration as mg/kg




This worksheet should be used if pollutant transport and

degradation is best described by a first order reaction. If

degradation is best desribed by an electron limited

degradation such as oxidation by O2, NO3, SO4 etc than an

alternative solution should be used

0.0E+00

1.0E-01

2.0E-01

3.0E-01

4.0E-01

5.0E-01

6.0E-01

7.0E-01

8.0E-01

9.0E-01

1.0E+00

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Rela

tive c

on

cen

trati

on

(n

o u

nti

s)

Distance (m)

Remedial targets worksheet v3.1

08/12/2014,16:05

2003-797 (GWRegime2 - IGV - ARO)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09



Site Name:

Site Address:

Completed by:
















Nypro (Regime #2)

Abbey Street Bray



calculations.


Dutch Target Value

Matteo Viganotti










2003-797 (GWRegime2 - NLT - ARO)Introduction

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

Level 1 - Soil

0





Standard entry




















or Date: 14-Nov-14











below



2003-797 (GWRegime2 - NLT - ARO)Level1 Soil

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

Level 2 - Soil




Standard entry











Calculate 0 Specify





Level 2 Remedial Target 1.16E+00 mg/l

or

1.02E+03 mg/kg




Date: 14-Nov-14







Site data



(mg/l).


Literature value for GRAVEL

Measured between MW103B and Irish Sea




Site data

Bedrock is approx 21mbGL GW is approx 8 mbGL



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09



Site Name:

Site Address:

Completed by:
















Nypro (Regime #2)

Abbey Street Bray



calculations.



Matteo Viganotti










2003-797 (GWRegime2 - NLI - ARO)Introduction

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

Level 1 - Soil

0





Standard entry




















or Date: 14-Nov-14











below



2003-797 (GWRegime2 - NLI - ARO)Level1 Soil

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09



Site Name:

Site Address:

Completed by:






calculations.


Irish Interim Guidline Values

Matteo Viganotti




















Nypro (Regime #3)

Abbey Street Bray



2003-797 (GWRegime3 - IGV - ARO)Introduction

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

Level 1 - Soil

0





Standard entry



















or Date: 14-Nov-14











below




For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09

Level 2 - Soil




Standard entry











Calculate 0 Specify






or

2.89E+01 mg/kg




Date: 14-Nov-14


Literature value for SAND

Measured between MW5 and MW1




Site data

At least 4.5 m according to drill log MW2






Site data



(mg/l).




For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09













Approach for simulating degradation of pollutants: Entry for ionic organic chemicals (option)



Enter source concentration pH value pH 0.00E+00

Enter soil concentration Co 2530 mg/kg Acid dissociation constant pKa 0.00E+00

Half life for degradation of contaminant in water t1/2 9.90E+99 days No degradation assumed Fraction of organic carbon in aquifer foc 0.00E+00 fraction


calculated




Literature for dense SAND Dispersivity based on Xu & Eckstein (1995)

Effective porosity of aquifer n 2.00E-01 fraction Literature for SAND Define dispersivity (click brown cell and use pull down list) Dispersivities 10%, 1%, 0.1% of pathway length


Hydraulic conductivity of saturated aquifer K 1.00E+00 m/d from Level 2

Distance to compliance point x 5.00E+01 m Distance to Westbrook Stream Enter value Calc value Xu & Eckstein


Distance (depth) to compliance point perpendicular to flow direction y 0.00E+00 m Transverse dispersivity az 0.00E+00 5.00E-01 2.98E-01 m









Note












Level 3 Remedial Target 3.91E-02 mg/l For comparison with measured pore water concentration. Date: ########
































0.0E+00

1.0E-01

2.0E-01

3.0E-01

4.0E-01

5.0E-01

6.0E-01

7.0E-01

8.0E-01

9.0E-01

1.0E+00

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Rela

tive c

on

cen

trati

on

(n

o u

nti

s)

Distance (m)


08/12/2014,16:17

2003-797 (GWRegime3 - IGV - ARO)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:09



Site Name:

Site Address:

Completed by:






calculations.


Dutch Target Value

Matteo Viganotti




















Nypro (Regime #3)

Abbey Street Bray



2003-797 (GWRegime3 - NLT - ARO)Introduction

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:10

Level 1 - Soil

0





Standard entry



















or Date: 14-Nov-14











below




For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:10

Level 2 - Soil




Standard entry











Calculate 0 Specify






or

1.45E+02 mg/kg




Date: 14-Nov-14


Literature value for SAND

Measured between MW5 and MW1




Site data

At least 4.5 m according to drill log MW2






Site data



(mg/l).




For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:10













Apply degradation rate to dissolved pollutants onlyApproach for simulating degradation of pollutants: Entry for ionic organic chemicals (option)



Soil leachate concentration as mg/l Enter source concentration pH value pH 0.00E+00

Soil concentration as mg/kg Enter soil concentration Co 2530 mg/kg Acid dissociation constant pKa 0.00E+00

Determine remedial target based on assumed concentrationHalf life for degradation of contaminant in water t1/2 9.90E+99 days No degradation assumed Fraction of organic carbon in aquifer foc 0.00E+00 fraction


calculated




Literature for dense SAND Dispersivity based on Xu & Eckstein (1995)

Effective porosity of aquifer n 2.00E-01 fraction Literature for SAND Define dispersivity (click brown cell and use pull down list) Dispersivities 10%, 1%, 0.1% of pathway length


0 Hydraulic conductivity of saturated aquifer K 1.00E+00 m/d from Level 2

Distance to compliance point x 5.00E+01 m Distance to Westbrook Stream Enter value Calc value Xu & Eckstein


Distance (depth) to compliance point perpendicular to flow direction y 0.00E+00 m Transverse dispersivity az 0.00E+00 5.00E-01 2.98E-01 m









Note












Level 3 Remedial Target 1.95E-01 mg/l For comparison with measured pore water concentration. Date: ########
































0.0E+00

1.0E-01

2.0E-01

3.0E-01

4.0E-01

5.0E-01

6.0E-01

7.0E-01

8.0E-01

9.0E-01

1.0E+00

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Rela

tive c

on

cen

trati

on

(n

o u

nti

s)

Distance (m)


08/12/2014,16:30

2003-797 (GWRegime3 - NLT - ARO)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:10



Site Name:

Site Address:

Completed by:
















Nypro (Regime #3)

Abbey Street Bray



calculations.



Matteo Viganotti










2003-797 (GWRegime3 - NLI - ARO)Introduction

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:10

Level 1 - Soil

0





Standard entry



















or Date: 14-Nov-14











below



2003-797 (GWRegime3 - NLI - ARO)Level1 Soil

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 24-02-2017:02:16:10

2003-819 (qra 2016) rev 2 - environmental protection … · report to report by nypro limited...

Documents