report on geotechnical investigation

Report on Geotechnical Investigation Junee Correctional Centre

14 September 2016 Cardno i

Report on Geotechnical Investigation

Junee Correctional Centre A11651-004

Prepared for Department of Justice, NSW 14 September 2016


14 September 2016 Cardno ii

Contact Information Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd

Trading as Cardno South Coast

ABN 95 001 145 035 Level 1, 47 Burelli Street PO Box 1285 Wollongong NSW 2500 Telephone: 02 4228 4133 Facsimile: 02 4228 6811 International: +61 2 4228 4133 [email protected] www.cardno.com.au

Author(s): Elliot Ashby Senior Engineering Geologist

Approved By: Chris Meikle Manager - Geotechnical

Document Information Prepared for Department of Justice,

NSW Project Name Junee Correctional Centre File Reference Report 001 (A11651-

004).docx Job Reference A11651-004 Date 14 September 2016 Version Number 0 Effective Date 14/09/2016 Date Approved: 14/09/2016

Document History Version Effective

Date Description of Revision Prepared by: Reviewed by:

0 14/09/16 First Issue Elliot Ashby Zac Othman

© Cardno. Copyright in the whole and every part of this document belongs to Cardno and may not be used, sold, transferred, copied or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner or form or in or on any media to any person other than by agreement with Cardno.

This document is produced by Cardno solely for the benefit and use by the client in accordance with the terms of the engagement. Cardno does not and shall not assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any third party arising out of any use or reliance by any third party on the content of this document.


14 September 2016 Cardno iii

Table of Contents 1 Introduction 1

1.1 Overview 1 1.2 Objectives 1 1.3 Scope of Work 1

2 Site Identification 2 2.1 Location and Identification 2 2.2 Overall Development Site and Surrounding Area Description 2

3 Site Investigation 3 3.1 Investigation Methodology 3

3.1.1 Field Work 3 3.1.2 Laboratory Testing 3

3.2 Investigation Findings 4 3.2.1 Regional Geology 4 3.2.2 Subsurface Conditions 4 3.2.3 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing 4 3.2.4 Soil Salinity, Aggressivity and Sodicity Testing 6 3.2.5 Soil Contamination Testing 6

4 Comment and Recommendations 7 4.1 Geotechnical Model 7 4.2 Existing Fill and Contamination 7 4.3 Earthworks Guidelines 8

4.3.1 Proposed Earthworks 8 4.3.2 Site Preparation 8 4.3.3 Drainage and Erosion Control 8 4.3.4 Excavatability 9 4.3.5 Excavation Stability 9 4.3.6 Filling 10

4.4 Retaining Walls 11 4.4.1 Design and Construction Recommendations 11 4.4.2 Design Parameters 11

4.5 Salinity and Sodicity 11 4.6 Structure Footings 12

4.6.1 Site Classification 12 4.6.2 Foundation Conditions and Footing Recommendations 12 4.6.3 Soil Aggressivity 12

4.7 Pavements 12 4.7.1 Design Parameters 12 4.7.2 Preliminary Pavement Compositions 13 4.7.3 Materials and Compaction Specification 13 4.7.4 Subsoil Drainage 13 4.7.5 Subgrade Preparation 14 4.7.6 Construction Inspections 14

5 Limitations 15

References 16


14 September 2016 Cardno iv

Appendices Appendix A Test Location Plan Appendix B Logs & Explanation Notes Appendix C Geotechnical Lab Results Appendix D Environmental Lab Results

Tables Table 2-1 Site Identification 2 Table 3-1 Material property test results 5 Table 3-2 Shrink/swell testing results 5 Table 3-3 Laboratory CBR test results 5 Table 3-4 Soil aggressively testing 6 Table 3-5 Sodicity and Salinity testing 6 Table 4-1 Retaining wall parameters 11 Table 4-2 Preliminary pavement compositions 13 Table 4-3 Pavement material specification and compaction requirements 13


14 September 2016 Cardno 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Overview

This report presents the results of geotechnical investigation undertaken by Cardno for the proposed expansion of the Junee Correctional Centre located on Park Lane in Junee, NSW.

The proposed development site is in the order of 10 ha and consists of two sections, situated to the south and east of the existing facility. The proposal includes the addition of 496 beds for medium and maximum-security accommodation and associated facilities and an additional 150 minimum-security accommodation beds and facilities.

The project is currently in the Concept Design phase and the assessment was conducted to provide preliminary geotechnical data and comment on the potential contamination and options for treatment or disposal of filling located on site.

This report work was commissioned by Phillips Smith Conwell Architects on behalf of Department of Justice, NSW: Prison Bed Capacity Unit.

1.2 Objectives

The scope of works for the assessment was required primarily to inform the Concept Design, and to provide the following data and recommendations:

> Comment on the potential contamination and treatment for existing filling.

> General guidelines for site preparation and comment on the earthworks procedures and potential construction issues.

> Salinity and soil aggressivity assessment.

> Geotechnical parameters for structures.

> Preliminary site classification in accordance with AS2870 – 2011 based on existing conditions.

> Comment on founding conditions and footing design recommendations.

> Preliminary pavement design thicknesses for access roads.

1.3 Scope of Work

The scope of work broadly comprised the following:

> Desktop study comprising a review of available geological and geotechnical data.

> Inspection and site walkover to map salient features.

> Excavation of test pits across the site for geotechnical assessment of the subsurface profile

> Laboratory testing for to assess the geotechnical and chemical properties of the soils and rock encountered at the site.



2 Site Identification

2.1 Location and Identification

The site is located across Lot 1 DP703393 and Lot 2 DP703393 with a detailed site identification presented in Table 2 -1 below.

Table 2-1 Site Identification

Item

Site Address 197 Park Lane, Junee NSW

Legal Description Lots 1 and 2 DP703393

Approximate Area 81.82 ha (total site area)

Legal Site Owner NSW Government

Municipality Junee Shire Council

Site Zoning Primary Industry

2.2 Overall Development Site and Surrounding Area Description

The site located approximately 2.5 km from the township of Junee and is bounded by farmland in all directions with the nearest residential related structures some 500 m away.

The site itself is generally characterised by open grassed pasture or cropping land. The proposed maximum and medium security expansion is extensively located on Lot 1 DP703393 with the minimum-security expansion located on Lot 2 DP703393 based on the preliminary designs.

The site contained several structures at the time of site inspection, including sheds and other assorted domestic and farming associated features or objects such as: irrigation systems, tanks, fuel and chemical storage facilities and farming equipment.

The site topography falls to the west at approximately 2°, with the highest elevations in the east of Lot 2. A shallow grassed drainage berm is located towards the west of Lot 2 surface runoff control measure to divert any overland flow from higher elevations away from the corrections centre and associated infrastructure. Aside from the minor surficial overland drainage measures, no significant stormwater drainage infrastructure was observed.

At the time of the site inspection, vegetation at the site was characterised by grassed pasture or the plantation of crops. Mature and semi mature trees were sporadically located across the site or used as “wind breaks” between paddocks.



3 Site Investigation

3.1 Investigation Methodology

3.1.1 Field Work

A site walkover was conducted by Cardno’s Senior Geotechnical Engineer and Senior Engineering Geologist on the 9 August 2016 to map salient site and geotechnical features.

Intrusive fieldwork was conducted on 10 August 2016 following the initial site inspection, and comprised the following.

> Excavation of 11 test pits using a 5.5 tonne excavator fitted with a 450 mm toothed bucket. The test pits were distributed across Lot 1 in the south (TP01-TP07) and Lot 2 in the EAST (TP08-TP011) to provide coverage of the site with consideration to the future development requirements and the observed site features. The test pits were advanced to the target depth of 2.5 m, with approximately half of test pits terminated prior to the target depth due to bucket refusal or ‘virtual’ refusal in cases where progress was slow and nearing refusal.

> Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) testing conducted adjacent to the majority of test pit locations to provide an assessment of the in situ soil strength conditions.

> Hand penetrometer (pocket penetrometer) readings over the soil profiles in the test pits to supplement DCP testing and engineering/tactile assessment of the soil strength.

> Engineering assessment and logging of the subsurface profiles by a senior engineering geologist from Cardno.

> Sampling of material considered representative of subsurface profile encountered across the site for the purpose of laboratory assessment.

> Environmental surface samples were taken from selected locations based on site observations and were placed into laboratory supplied 250 g soil sampling jars with individual identifications, and preserved in chilled insulated containers during the fieldwork. The samples were refrigerated following the fieldwork and transported to the laboratory in an insulated container containing ice within allowable sample holding times.

> Backfilling of the test pits with excavation spoil materials, with nominal compaction using the excavator bucket.

The locations of geotechnical test pits are shown on Drawing 1 attached in Appendix A. The test pits were located by a hand held GPS device and as such, the locations shown on the drawings shall be considered as approximate only. Engineering logs for geotechnical test pits are contained in Appendix B together with explanatory notes.

3.1.2 Laboratory Testing

Laboratory testing for the purpose of geotechnical assessment was conducted at a Cardno NATA accredited construction materials testing laboratory and comprised the following.

> Four shrink/swell tests to measure soil volume change over an extreme soil moisture content range. The tests were conducted on remoulded disturbed samples.

> Four Atterberg Limits for material classification.

> Four Particle Size Distribution (PSD) for material classification.

> Four Emerson crumb tests to classify soil dispersion.

> Four 4-day soaked California Bearing Ratio (CBR) for subgrade strength assessment.

Geotechnical laboratory test report sheets are included in Appendix C.



The following analysis was conducted at SGS Pty Ltd, who hold current NATA accreditation for the chemical testing conducted.

> Four Soil Aggressivity suites including: - pH - Electrical Conductivity (EC) and Resistivity - Chloride and Sulfate (soluble)

> Four Salinity tests (calculated from EC), Exchangeable Cations and Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC).

> Five of the following suites: - Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons - Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes (BTEX) - Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) - Organochlorine (OC) & organophosphate (OP) Pesticides - Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) - 8 metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Pb, Ni, Zn) - Asbestos in soil

Laboratory Certificates of Analysis are included in Appendix D.

3.2 Investigation Findings

3.2.1 Regional Geology

A review of the Wagga Wagga 1:250,000 Geological Sheet [1] suggests that the site is typically on quaternary colluvium underlain by regional granite.

3.2.2 Subsurface Conditions

The soil and rock strata encountered in the test pits across the site comprised a relatively consistent natural clay soil profile overlying weathered rock generally summarised as follows.

> TOPSOIL: comprising Silty CLAY, of low plasticity ranging in depth to 0.1-0.2 m below ground surface (bgs) but on average 150 mm in thickness.

> COLLUVIUM or ALLUVIUM: low plasticity Silty CLAY, Sandy CLAY or Silty Sandy CLAY with minor component of gravel, generally firm in consistency with a moisture content wet of the plastic limit at the time of fieldwork.

> RESIDUAL: low plasticity Sandy CLAY or Silty Sandy CLAY, generally stiff to very stiff and wet of the plastic limit.

> WEATHERED ROCK: generally extremely weathered and extremely low strength GRANITE, completely weathered with little to no rock structure (i.e. with soil like properties) encountered at depths of 1.0-1.9 m bgs in all test pits.

No groundwater or seepage were encountered in test pits at the time of fieldwork; however, pits were backfilled on completion, which prevented further assessment of the groundwater conditions. No test pits were excavated in areas surrounding the existing structures at the site; however, surface samples were collected. Minor filling appears to be evident in these areas based on limited sampling conducted in conjunction with observations of the site surface disturbances.

3.2.3 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

The results of laboratory testing are summarised in the tables below. Table 3-1 presents material property and soil classification testing, Table 3-2 presents results of the shrink/swell tests and the results of standard compaction and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) testing are summarised in Table 3-3.



Table 3-1 Material property test results

Test pit

Depth (m) Soil description Percent Passing 2.36 mm

Percent Passing 75 µm

LL (%)

PL (%)

PI (%)

LS (%)

Emerson Class

TP01 0.2-0.4 Silty CLAY, with Sand

99 75 29 11 18 10.0 8

TP02 0.9-1.0 Sandy CLAY with Gravel

97 65 - - - - -

TP06 1.2-1.3 Sandy CLAY with Silt, trace Gravel

92 68 26 13 13 6.5 7

TP07 1.4-1.6 GRANITE – Extremely Weathered

- - - - - - 7

TP08 1.0-1.1 Sandy Silty CLAY with Gravel

98 52 28 13 15 8.0 7

TP11 0.3-0.5 Silty CLAY, with Sand

- - 28 10 18 6.0 -

Notes to table: LL: Liquid Limit PL: Plastic Limit PI: Plasticity Index LS: Linear Shrinkage

Table 3-2 Shrink/swell testing results

Test pit

Depth (m) Sample Type

Soil description Esw

(%) Esh

(%) Iss

(%)

TP01 0.2-0.4 R Silty CLAY, with Sand 2.0 0.0 1.1

TP06 1.2-1.3 R Sandy CLAY with Silt, trace Gravel

3.5 0.0 1.9

TP07 1.4-1.6 R GRANITE – Extremely Weathered

1.4 0.0 0.8

TP08 1.0-1.1 R Sandy Silty CLAY with Gravel

2.8 0.0 1.6

Notes to table: Esw: Swelling strain Esh: Shrinkage strain Iss: Shrink/Swell index R: testing undertaken on remoulded disturbed sample

Table 3-3 Laboratory CBR test results

Test pit Depth (m) Soil description W (%)

SOMC (%)

SMDD (m)

Swell (%)

CBR (%)

TP01 0.2-0.4 Silty CLAY, with Sand 17.2 14.0 1.83 0.5 4.0

TP06 1.2-1.3 Sandy CLAY with Silt, trace Gravel

17.3 15.0 1.84 1.0 4.0

TP07 1.4-1.6 GRANITE – Extremely Weathered

12.2 13.0 1.90 0.0 8

TP08 1.0-1.1 Sandy Silty CLAY with Gravel

18.8 18.0 1.76 0.0 3.5

Notes to table: W: Field moisture content SOMC: Standard Optimum Moisture Content SMDD: Standard Maximum Dry Density



CBR testing was undertaken on remoulded specimens compacted to a target 100% standard maximum dry density and soaked with a surcharge for four days. Subgrade strength is moisture and density dependent and where the existing subgrade is compacted to less than 100% standard compaction and moistures above SOMC exist, the in situ CBR values may be less than the above tested values.

For details of the laboratory testing conducted, reference can be made to the laboratory report sheets contained within Appendix C.

3.2.4 Soil Salinity, Aggressivity and Sodicity Testing

Results of soil aggressivity tests on selected samples are summarised in Table 3-4, with results of salinity and sodicity testing in Table 3-5.

Table 3-4 Soil aggressively testing

Test pit

Depth (m)

Soil description pH EC (dS/m)

Sulfate (mg/kg)

Chloride (mg/kg)

Resistivity (ohm.cm)

TP01 0.7 Sandy Clay, trace Gravel

6.8 0.034 6.6 0.58 30000

TP02 0.3 Silty Clay, trace Gravel 6.8 0.044 5.7 1.1 23000

TP07 1.7 GRANITE – Extremely Weathered

7.5 0.064 6.6 5.9 16000


7.7 0.190 13 7.7 5400

Table 3-5 Sodicity and Salinity testing

Test pit

Depth (m)

Soil description Salinity (1)

(mg/kg) CEC

(meq/100g) ECe (2) ESP

(%)

TP01 0.7 Sandy Clay, trace Gravel 58 7.7 0.289 3.9

TP02 0.3 Silty Clay, trace Gravel 110 8.8 0.374 1.0


66 6.3 0.544 5.5


220 14 1.615 2.8

Notes to Table: (1) From Conductivity (2) Multiplication Factor of 8.5 [2].

3.2.5 Soil Contamination Testing

Reference should be made to the environmental laboratory test reports included in Appendix D for details of the contamination testing conducted.



4 Comment and Recommendations

4.1 Geotechnical Model

A generalised geotechnical model was developed for the site to inform the recommendations and design, and is broadly summarised as follows.

Unit 1 Surficial Soils

1A - TOPSOIL: organic and root affected material encountered up to 200 mm in thickness.

1B - FILL: minor filling observed primarily around existing structures and associated with construction of access roads and carparks.

Unit 2 CLAY

2A - Colluvium & Alluvium: soft to firm clay soils, generally wet of the plastic limit and shallow (extending to less than 1 m bgs).

2B - Residual: stiff to very stiff sandy clay soils weathered from granite.

Unit 3 Weathered Rock

3A - Extremely Weathered Granite: completely weathered such that the rock structure is not evident and the strata essentially behaves as a soil.

3B - Distinctly Weathered Granit: extremely weathered and very low to low strength granite.

4.2 Existing Fill and Contamination

Limited soil contamination testing was conducted to provide preliminary comment on treatment of soil surplus to the development i.e. waste. This assessment does not include a Phase 1 Contamination Assessment and the testing conducted is intended to inform the contamination assessment.

The results of the investigation are summarised as follows.

> The southern portion of the site is heavily disturbed although the majority of the site contains only minor anthropogenic disturbances related to primarily roads, carparks and farming.

> The fill and disturbed soils across the site appear to be primarily site won; however, there is some component of import most likely related to access track or pad construction.

> Some potentially contaminating activities are evident at the site.

> Laboratory testing indicates generally low levels of most organic and inorganic analytes; however, one sample (SS4) returned an elevated level of arsenic.

> Some minor staining (paint) was observed adjacent the structures in the southwestern portion of the site, and some hydrocarbon staining is evident adjacent the fuel storage tank.

> No asbestos fragments were identified on site with no detections in samples submitted for laboratory analysis.

Further assessment is required to adequately characterise the potential for contamination arising from the previous and current site use i.e. a Phase 1 Contamination Assessment.

In areas outside of the identified disturbed portions of the site, the excavated natural soils excluding the topsoil, would be suitable for reuse as engineered fill on site. Such soils could be classified as either General Solid Waste (non-putrescible) in accordance with the NSW EPA Waste Classification Guidelines [3], Excavated Natural Material (VENM) or Excavated Natural Material (ENM) [4]; however specific confirmation testing/assessment is required prior to removing soil from the site.



4.3 Earthworks Guidelines

4.3.1 Proposed Earthworks

The proposed earthworks are expected to include some cut, particularly in the eastern areas where the minimum-security expansion is proposed. The existing road levels may provide some constraint to proposed earthworks levels.

Based on the results of the investigation, excavations are likely to encounter thin layers of topsoil, colluvium, and residual clays overlying weathered rock. Clay profiles are generally shallow, with the exception of areas at lower elevations in the southwest portion of the site, and rock was generally encountered at depths averaging 1.5 m.

4.3.2 Site Preparation

Prior to bulk earthworks, the site should be cleared of any foreign matter or unsuitable material, which includes but is not limited to the following

> Vegetation or organic matter.

> Topsoil or soil significantly affected by roots or root fibres.

> Any scattered waste or dumped materials.

> Uncontrolled filling which would be subject to further assessment.

Deleterious materials that cannot be reused on site shall be disposed of at a licenced waste facility and classified in accordance with the NSW EPA Waste Classification Guidelines [3]. The majority of inert materials could be pre-classified; however, special consideration may be needed for any putrescibles, farm equipment, fuel, oil, grease, or chemical storage devices. Stripped topsoils shall be stockpiled for re-use where suitable; or reassessed if affected by spills or other contamination.

Topsoils were generally encountered in the order of 100-200 mm in thickness. The root affected zone was generally limited to this depth; with some organics extending deeper; however, careful site preparation measures would maximise the re-use potential for soils underlying the topsoil materials. Following site preparation including stripping and stockpiling of the topsoil materials, appropriate erosion control and adequate drainage shall be maintained as per Council guidelines and below in Section 4.3.3.

As part of the site preparation, compaction or removal and replacing of the low strength colluvial/alluvial soils (Unit 2A) should be conducted. The need for and extent of this should be based on site inspection following stripping and although the unit generally up to 1 m in depth, the lower strength or soft layers were limited to the upper zone of the unit and are sporadic across the site. This is required in areas of proposed foundations, filling or pavements as described in the Sections below.

4.3.3 Drainage and Erosion Control

Prior to earthworks, appropriate site surface drainage and other measures should be implemented to prevent ponding and scouring during the construction, and to minimise the risk of trafficability issues on site clays during and after inclement weather. These measures shall include temporary drains, surface grading along with erosion and sediment control, and should be appropriately reinstated following the construction.

The soils are not considered highly dispersive based on the limited testing conduced; however, in general, regimented compaction and moisture control during fill placement is good practice and would aid in reducing the risk of erosion. A suitable thickness of topsoil (preferably >100 mm) shall also be provided to promote vegetation growth for longer-term erosion control.



4.3.4 Excavatability

The excavatability of the weathered rock encountered across the site was assessed by test pitting using a 5.5 tonne excavator fitted with a 450 mm toothed bucket. The results of the assessment are generally summarised as follows.

> Rock was encountered in all 11 of the test pits at depths ranging from 1.0-1.9 m bgs.

> Practical bucket refusal was encountered on weathered rock in five of the test pits at depths in the range of 1.4 - 2.3 m.

> The rock encountered comprised extremely low to very low strength granite; however, refusal is inferred to be on low strength granite.

> The rock encountered ranged from extremely to distinctly weathered. The majority of the granite was found to be one consistent rock mass and as such, the rock mass strength or excavatability was generally consistent across the entire site.

At the test pit locations, and across a majority of the site, excavations could be readily undertaken to the depths shown on the test pit logs using conventional earthmoving equipment such as large (20-30 tonne) excavators and D9 size dozers. Considering the rock was typically consistent in depth and strength across the majority of the site, machine refusal is likely to be encountered at similar depths across the entire site. Given the size of the excavator used (5.5 tonne) there is potential that larger machines may be able to excavate to deeper depths prior to refusal. Although the granite bedrock was found to be consistent across the test pits there may be pockets of deep or shallower rock that were not identified due to the spatial constraints of the test pits.

Where the excavation is relatively confined, such as in the excavation of services trenches, excavator bucket refusal would be expected at similar levels to those at which machine refusal was encountered during excavation of the test pits, depending on the size of equipment used. It is expected that for deeper excavation, hydraulic rock hammer excavation and the use of large capacity (30 tonne) excavators with a single ripper attachment may be required if slightly weathered of fresh granite is encountered.

No standing groundwater was encountered during investigation and dewatering is not expected to be required however, seepage may be encountered particularly at the soil and rock interface. Although not expected to be required, deeper excavations in the southwestern portion of the site may encounter groundwater, and where proposed, further assessment would be recommended. It should also be noted that groundwater levels are likely to fluctuate with variations in climatic and site conditions.

4.3.5 Excavation Stability

Excavations or trenches in the stiff or better clay or residual soil and weathered rock profile would be expected to stand close to vertical in the short-term. Unsupported short-term excavations or trenches may undergo some local slumping during excavations in the colluvium, or if seepage is encountered.

Where personnel are to enter excavations, options for short-term excavations include benching or battering back of the excavations to 1 Vertical to 1 Horizontal (1H:1V) within the stiff or better residual soil and extremely weathered rock profile, or the support of excavations. Short-term excavations within the more competent rock may be battered at steeper than 1V:1H may not require support; however, this would be subject to specific geotechnical assessment.

It is recommended that long-term excavations shall be either battered at 1V:2H or flatter (preferably 1V:3H) and protected against erosion or be supported by engineered and suitably constructed retaining walls. Long-term excavations may be battered steeper than 1V:2H in rock materials, subject to specific geotechnical assessment.



4.3.6 Filling

4.3.6.1 Placement Methodology

Fill shall be placed and compacted in accordance with AS 3798-2007 Guidelines on Earthworks for

Commercial and Residential Development [5] with consideration to the following recommendations.

It is expected that construction of fill platforms during the bulk earthworks, which would be suitable to support structural loads associated with development, would include the following. Within any road alignments, subgrade formation preparation shall be in accordance with Section 4.7.5.

> Removal of any existing fill, topsoil, slopewash or deleterious soils from areas where fill is to be placed. In general, unsuitable material as described in Section 4.3.6.3 shall be removed.

> Benching of the exposed subgrade or batter slope in the area where fill is to be placed if slopes are steeper than 1V:8H (approximately 7°).

> Proof rolling of the exposed subgrade to detect any weak or deforming areas of subgrade that should be excavated and replaced with compacted fill.

> Placement of fill in uniform horizontal layers with compaction of each layer to a minimum dry density ratio of 98% Standard Compaction (AS 1289 Clause 5.1.1) at moisture contents of in the order of ±2% but generally as close to SOMC as practical. Over compaction should be avoided. Fill materials shall comprise of suitable materials as detailed below in Section 4.3.6.2.

All fill shall be battered at a slope of 1V:2H or flatter (preferably 1V:3H) and temporary erosion control shall be provided as described in Section 4.3.3. To prevent erosion in the long term, provision of protection by vegetation along with adequate drainage is also required. Batter slopes of 1V:3H are recommended for long-term maintenance would reduce the risk of erosion. Where a suitable batter slope is not possible, the fill shall be supported by an engineer designed and suitably constructed retaining walls.

4.3.6.2 Fill Materials

Fill materials are expected to comprise site won soil and rock, and shall not include any unsuitable material as described in Section 4.3.6.3. The site materials may require treatment depending on the proposed use, and would be expected to require some degree of moisture re-conditioning, subject to weather conditions prior to and during construction. Fill materials are generally expected to comprise the following.

> Site won residual or colluvial clay soils: Generally, soils excavated on site with the exception of topsoil are considered suitable for re-use as engineering fill.

> Site won ripped rock: Generally, all site won ripped rock would be suitable, and would be the preferable material for re-use as engineering fill following moisture conditioning.

> Imported materials: Classified as Virgin Excavated Natural Material (VENM) in accordance with the NSW Waste Classification Guidelines Part 1 - Classification of Waste [3], or Excavated Natural Material (ENM) as per the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005 The Excavated Natural Material Exemption 2012 [4].

4.3.6.3 Unsuitable Material

Materials excavated on site with the exception of topsoils and soils with the following properties are generally considered suitable for re-use as engineering fill.

> The presence of vegetation including tree stumps, roots, root fibres or other organic matter.

> Silts or soils with a predominant portion (>50%) of silt.

> Existing filling subject to further assessment as required.

> Ripped rock comprising oversize material i.e. particle sizes of greater than 100 mm or 2/3 of the compacted layer thickness.

Soils with high moisture contents may be considered unsuitable at the time of construction. The requirement for moisture conditioning will depend on the weather conditions prior to and during construction.



4.3.6.4 Trench Backfill

Trench backfill including bed and haunch zones, and side and overlay zones shall meet the requirements of the Council conditions. Care is required to ensure that compaction is achieved over the entire fill area, particularly adjacent any vertical excavated faces. This may require ‘keying in’ or benching to allow compaction equipment to achieve full compaction to the edge. Alternately, the use of hand compaction equipment would be required.

4.4 Retaining Walls

4.4.1 Design and Construction Recommendations

All structural retaining walls or retaining walls in excess of 0.6 m in height shall be engineer designed and take into account the following.

> Surcharge loading from slopes and structures above the wall.

> Loading from any proposed compaction of fill behind the wall.

> Adequate surface and subsurface drainage shall be provided behind all retaining walls, including a free draining granular backfill to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressures behind the wall.

> Utilising materials that are not susceptible to deterioration.

> Foundations shall be in stiff clay, controlled fill or weathered rock below any unsuitable material such as uncontrolled fill, topsoil, slopewash or other deleterious soils.

4.4.2 Design Parameters

The following preliminary soil parameters are suggested for analysis of earth pressures from retained engineered fill, clay soils and weathered rock. The design parameters could be amended following finalising of earthworks extent and proposed fill material.

Table 4-1 Retaining wall parameters

Parameter Controlled Fill Residual Clay Rock

Description Mix of site won clay and rock (98% compaction under Level 1 Control)

Unit 2B and Stiff (cu>50kPa) or better

Weathered granit

Angle of Internal Friction (ɸ’) 26° 26° 30°

Cohesion (c’) 0 kPa 2 kPa 10 kPa

Bulk Unit Weight 18 kN/m3 19 kN/m3 22 kN/m3

Foundation Bearing Capacity (min 0.3 m embedment)

150 kPa 100 kPa 700 kPa

4.5 Salinity and Sodicity

The were no indicators of salinity or sodic soils identified during the site inspection and the results of the chemical testing confirms that the soils are non-saline in accordance with the Salinity Class Assessment Criteria [2].

Sodicity is the measure of exchangeable sodium in the soil and relates to the likely dispersion on wetting and potential reactivity. Sodic soils display surface crusting and low infiltration, are very hard dense subsoils, susceptible to severe gully erosion and tunnel erosion, and restrict root growth. Sodic soils are classified as soils with an ESP of 6-14% and based on the results of the testing conducted; the soils encountered at the site are non-sodic.

The results of the laboratory testing and site inspection indicate that salinity and sodicity do not present a constraint to the development.



4.6 Structure Footings

4.6.1 Site Classification

The laboratory shrink/swell testing conducted indicates that the tested clay soils are slightly to moderately reactive. Based on the soil profiles encountered in the test pits, and in accordance with AS 2870-2011 [6], classifications are in the range of Class S (Slightly Reactive) ranging to Class M (Moderately Reactive). The range of classifications is based on the assumption that all footings are founded in the natural clay/rock profile or controlled fill.

It is expected that Class M ranging to Class H1 (Highly Reactive) could be expected following the proposed earthworks if site won soils are utilised as filling. Notwithstanding this, final classifications would depend on extent of cut and fill and the reactivity of the material utilised as fill. Class P sites would occur where uncontrolled fill exists on lots and where the earthworks are not conducted in accordance with AS 3798-2007 i.e. where the filling is not defined as controlled fill.

The site classification range is preliminary in nature and following earthworks, classification should be conducted to ascertain final site classification prior to any foundations or footings being constructed.

4.6.2 Foundation Conditions and Footing Recommendations

The proposed structures are likely to be founded on shallow footings, with relatively lightweight structures and loading expected. All footings shall be founded below any topsoil, deleterious soils or uncontrolled fill, on strata of similar stiffness to minimise the risk of differential movements.

The colluvial/alluvial soils (Unit 2A) encountered across the site are of low strength and should not be relied on for foundation support. The foundation shall comprise of stiff or better clays (i.e. cu>50kPa). Depending on the extent of bulk earthworks, this unit may not present a significant constraint in that the soft layers will be either removed/compacted prior to filling, or removed in cut. Alternatively, footings need to be extended to depths below this low strength stratum.

If footings are founded below low strength layers (Unit 2A) in stiff residual soils or in engineered fill placed and compacted in accordance with the guidelines in this report, footing design shall be conducted on allowable bearing capacity of 100 kPa. Where founded uniformly on the extremely weathered granite, a bearing capacity of at least 500 kPa could be adopted depending on the depth and strength. The bearing capacities provided are based on the assumption of lightly loaded structures with footings that are embedded 300 mm, founded in minimum stiff or medium dense natural soil or engineered fill, and provided that confirmation of the bearing capacity is conducted during construction.

4.6.3 Soil Aggressivity

The soils encountered at the site predominately comprised clays and weathered rock with no groundwater observed. Low permeability clay soils above the groundwater level have a soil exposure classification of B in accordance to AS 2159-2009 [7].

Based on the results of the aggressivity laboratory testing, a Non-Aggressive classification could be adopted for durability design of subsurface steel and concrete elements in soil.

4.7 Pavements

4.7.1 Design Parameters

The material tested returned CBR values of 3.5% and 4% for clay soils and 8% for the weathered rock, with in situ CBR correlations indicating less than 3%. Provided that site preparation is conducted in accordance with the guidelines in the report, and any fill is placed and compacted to 100% standard maximum dry density at SOMC, a recommended design CBR of 3.5% is adopted for the design.

Two design traffic scenarios are considered, one for a lightly trafficked pavement areas with nominal design traffic of 5×103 Equivalent Standard Axles (ESA) and one for limited heavy vehicle and bus access roads of 2.5×105 Equivalent Standard Axles (ESA) assuming the following:



> 50 year design period

> Standard heavy vehicle axle loadings i.e. no overloaded vehicles

> Average of 2 heavy vehicles per day (4 heavy vehicle movements, entry and exit)

Where traffic data varies from the information provided in this report, review of pavement design may be required.

4.7.2 Preliminary Pavement Compositions

The following Table 4-2 provides preliminary pavement thicknesses for the assumed road traffic loading. Pavement designs are determined in accordance with Austroads AGPT02-12 Guide to Pavement Technology Part 2: Pavement Structural Design [8].

Table 4-2 Preliminary pavement compositions

Road Category Light Vehicle Only Access Roads

Wearing Surface 14/7mm ‘double/double’ seal over prime

30 mm AC10(1) over primer seal

Basecourse 100 mm 150 mm

Subbase (2) 180 mm 250 mm

Total thickness 280 mm 430 mm

Subgrade replacement (3) (3)

Notes to table: (1) Dense Graded Asphalt (DGA) with C320 binder (2) Extended beyond the rear face of the kerb profile or shoulder. (3) Subgrade replacement is required in areas of low strength clay soils and additional subgrade replacement may be required for constructability depending on climatic conditions prior to and during construction.

4.7.3 Materials and Compaction Specification

Pavement materials and compaction requirements for new pavement construction shall conform to the construction specifications and the following requirements.

Table 4-3 Pavement material specification and compaction requirements

Pavement Course Material Specification Compaction Requirements

Wearing Course Sprayed Seal or Asphaltic Concrete

As per the Supplier Design and Construction Specification

Basecourse High quality crushed rock

Complying with the project specifications. DGB with a CBR ≥ 80%, Plasticity Index ≤8

Min 98% Modified (AS1289 5.2.1) or Min 102% Standard (AS1289 5.1.1)

Subbase Crushed rock

Complying with the project specifications. DGS with a CBR ≥ 30%, Plasticity Index ≤12

Min 95% Modified (AS1289 5.2.1) or Min 100% Standard (AS1289 5.1.1)

Subgrade or subgrade replacement

CBR > 3.5% Min 100% Standard (AS1289 5.1.1)

4.7.4 Subsoil Drainage

Subsoil drainage is required at subgrade level along both sides of constructed pavements where the road is in cut, or on the high side of the road where boxed construction is utilised or the road is constructed on grade.

The subgrade shall be constructed with sufficient cross fall (a minimum of 3%) to assist with any moisture entering the pavement not becoming trapped. The drains shall be located below or behind the kerb to intercept any moisture ingress from outside and within the road alignment.



Subsoil drainage is particularly important in roads that are heavily trafficked or areas where landscaped areas are located adjacent the pavement as moisture ingress from watering will consistently wet the pavement materials potentially leading to premature deformation and pavement failure.

4.7.5 Subgrade Preparation

Subgrades shall be prepared with consideration to the following general recommendations:

> Ripping of rock where encountered at subgrade level is required to a minimum depth of 300 mm below subgrade formation level. Compaction of the ripped rock shall be to minimum subgrade compaction requirements.

> Elimination of abrupt changes between subgrade conditions, such as transition from rock to soil subgrade, by methods such as selective grading or mixing of material to provide a transition between material types, and moisture/density control of subgrade compaction.

> Proof rolling of the exposed subgrade with a heavy (minimum 12 tonne static) roller with any soft or weak areas detected to be excavated and replaced with a suitable compacted fill or subgrade replacement. To prevent zones of variable permeability, which may trap moisture and lead to subgrade deformation, material of similar consistency to the subgrade shall be utilised where localised replacement is required.

> Compaction of the subgrade filling or select shall be to a minimum dry density ratio of 100% Standard Compaction (AS 1289 Clause 5.1.1) in layers of not greater than 200 mm and generally between SOMC and 3% dry i.e. -3% of SOMC to SOMC.

> Protection of the subgrade to prevent any excessive wetting or drying.

> Formation of the pavement in accordance with the pavement design and specifications.

It is recommended that trafficking of the subgrade be minimised or avoided (where possible) during construction to prevent the permanent deformation of the subgrade. The boxed road alignment shall not be used as a haul road during construction, with footpath areas outside the road alignment offering alternate areas for construction traffic.

4.7.6 Construction Inspections

The subgrade will require inspection by an experienced geotechnical consultant after boxing out or filling to design subgrade level. The purpose of inspections is to confirm design parameters, assess the suitability of the subgrade to support the pavement and delineate areas, which may require subgrade replacement, and areas requiring remedial treatment prior to rehabilitation.



5 Limitations

Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd have performed investigation and consulting services for this project in general accordance with current professional and industry standards. The extent of testing was limited to discrete test locations and variations in ground conditions can occur between test locations that cannot be inferred or predicted.

A geotechnical consultant or qualified engineer shall provide inspections during construction to confirm assumed conditions in this assessment. If subsurface conditions encountered during construction differ from those given in this report, further advice shall be sought without delay.

Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd, or any other reputable consultant, cannot provide unqualified warranties nor does it assume any liability for the site conditions not observed or accessible during the investigations. Site conditions may also change subsequent to the investigations and assessment due to ongoing use.

This report and associated documentation was undertaken for the specific purpose described in the report and shall not be relied on for other purposes.



References

[1] Adamson C.L. and Loudon A.G., Wagga Wagga 1:250 000 Geological Sheet SI/55-15, 1st edition, Sydney: Geological Survey of New South Wales, 1966.

[2] Department of Land and Water Conservation, Site investigations for Urban Salinity, Department of Land and Water Conservation NSW, 2002.

[3] NSW EPA Waste Classification Guidelines, “Part 1 - Classification of Waste,” NSW Environment Protection Authority, November 2014.

[4] Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005 - General Exemption Under Part 6, Clause 51 and 51A, “The excavated natural material exemption 2012,” Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW, October 2012.

[5] Australian Standard AS3798-2007, “Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and Residential Structures,” Standards Australia, 2007.

[6] Australian Standard AS2870-2011, “Residential Slabs and Footings,” Standards Australia, 2011. [7] Australian Standard AS2159-2009, “Piling - Design & Installation,” Standards Australia, 2009. [8] Austroads AGPT02-12, “Guide to Pavement Technology Part 2: Pavement Structural Design,” Austroads

Ltd, 2012. [9] National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999, “Schedule B1

Guidelines on Investigation Levels For Soil and Groundwater,” National Environment Protection Council, 16 May 2013.



Junee Correctional Centre

APPENDIX

A TEST LOCATION PLAN

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

EDED

ED

ED

ED

ED

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

TP11

TP10

TP09

TP08TP07

TP06

TP05

TP04

TP03

TP02

TP01

SS

SS5

SS4

SS3

SS2

SS1

300 m

320 m

© Land and Property Information 2015r Map Produced by Cardno NSW/ACT Pty Ltd (WOL)

Date: 2016-09-13 | Project: A11651_004Coordinate System: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 55

Map: A11651-004-GS-001_GeotechPlan1.mxd 01

0 25 50 75 100Metres

LegendApproximate GeotechnicalInvestigation Area

ED Test Pit

&< Environmental Sample

10m Contours (LPI)

Watercourses (LPI)

Cadastre (LPI, 2011)

GeotechnicalInvestigation Test

LocationsJUNEE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

Scale at A31:2,500




APPENDIX

B LOGS & EXPLANATION NOTES

M

MC > PL

MC > PL

XW

S - F

St - VSt

EL

0.20m

0.70m

B

0.40m

ES

0.10m

0.60m

1.70m

2.50m

HP In-situ = 50 kPa

Slow Progress

Topsoil: silty CLAY, brown with organics

Silty CLAY, low plasticity, red, with sand

Sandy CLAY, low plasticity, orange-brown, trace fine anglular gravel

Grading to weathered rock

Completely weathered GRANITE, orange, black, quartz & biotite, orthoclase,plagioclase (feldspars)

Testpit TP01 terminated at 2.50 m

CL

CL

2

2

2

1

4

7

7

10

16

28

EQUIPMENT TYPE : 5.5t ExcavatorLOGGED BY : EA

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSoil Type, plasticity or particle characteristic, colour

Rock Type, grain size, colourSecondary and minor components

SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS

STRUCTURE& Other Observations

MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH

TESTPIT LOGTESTPIT LOG

DATE EXCAVATED : 10/8/16EASTING : 550618

METHOD : 450mm Toothed Bucket

LOCATION : See Drawing for locationCHECKED BY : ZO

NORTHING : 6142110

File: A11651-004 TP01 Page 1 OF 1

CLIENT : Department of Justice, NSW: Prison Bed Capacity UnitPROJECT : Junee Correctional Centre ExpansionLOCATION : Junee, NSW SHEET : 1 OF 1

PROJECT REF : A11651-004

HOLE NO : TP01

CARDNO (NSW/ACT) PTY LTDSee Explanatory Notes fordetails of abbreviations& basis of descriptions.

ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR

- Residual soil- Extremely weathered- Distinctly weathered- Slightly weathered- Fresh rock

- Extremely low- Very low- Low- Medium- High- Very high- Extremely high

ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH

- Very Soft- Soft- Firm- Stiff- Very Stiff- Hard

- Undisturbed Sample- Disturbed Sample- Environmental sample- Bulk Disturbed Sample- Standard Penetration Test- Hand/Pocket Penetrometer

UDESBSPTHP

SAMPLES & FIELD TESTS RELATIVE DENSITY

- Very Loose- Loose- Medium Dense- Dense- Very Dense

VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL

MOISTURE & GROUNDWATER

- Dry- Moist- Wet- Optimum MC- Plastic Limit- Water seepage/inflow- Water level

GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

MC > PL

MC > PL

XW

St

H

EL

0.35m

0.90m

ES

B

1.00m

0.10m

0.80m

1.60m

2.50m

HP In-situ = 100 kPa



Silty CLAY, low plasticity, red, with sand, trace gravel

Sandy CLAY, low plasticity, brown, pale orange, with fine to medium subrounded gravel




CL

CL

2

4

3

7

21

23

30




SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS


MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH





NORTHING : 6141976

File: A11651-004 TP02 Page 1 OF 1



HOLE NO : TP02


ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR



ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH



UDESBSPTHP



VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL



GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

M

MC > PL

MC > PL

XW

F - St

St - VSt

EL

0.15m

0.70m

1.50m

2.50m

HP In-situ = 100 - 160 kPa


Slow Progress


Silty CLAY, low plasticity, red, with sand, trace organics

Sandy Silty CLAY, low plasticity, brown, fine to coarse sub rounded sand




CL

CL

3

2

2

3

5

5

18

22

28




SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS


MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH





NORTHING : 6142043

File: A11651-004 TP03 Page 1 OF 1



HOLE NO : TP03


ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR



ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH



UDESBSPTHP



VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL



GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

M

MC > PL

MC > PL

XW

F

VSt

EL

1.90mB

2.10m

0.20m

0.80m

1.60m

2.50m


Slow Progress


Silty CLAY, low plasticity, red, with sand, trace sand

Sandy Silty CLAY, low plasticity, brown, fine to coarse grained sand




CL

CL

2

2

1

2

5

10

11

18

27




SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS


MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH





NORTHING : 6141928

File: A11651-004 TP04 Page 1 OF 1



HOLE NO : TP04


ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR



ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH



UDESBSPTHP



VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL



GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

M

MC > PL

MC > PL

XW

St

VSt

EL

0.20m

0.70m

1.30m

1.60m



Slow Progress



Sandy Silty CLAY, low plasticity, brown, fine to coarse grained sand




Virtual refusal

CL

CL

6

5

3

7

16

16

VR




SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS


MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH





NORTHING : 6141883

File: A11651-004 TP05 Page 1 OF 1



HOLE NO : TP05


ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR



ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH



UDESBSPTHP



VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL



GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

M

MC > PL

MC > PL

XW

F

St - VSt

EL

1.20mB

1.30m

0.20m

0.70m

1.90m

2.50m

Wet sandy layer on one face of testpit (excavated adjacent trench withPVC)



Slow Progress



Sandy CLAY, low plasticity, brown, with silt, trace gravel




CL

CL

3

3

2

3

7

5

7

8

13

16




SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS


MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH





NORTHING : 6141983

File: A11651-004 TP06 Page 1 OF 1



HOLE NO : TP06


ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR



ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH



UDESBSPTHP



VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL



GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

M

MC > PL

MC > PL

XW

F

St

EL

1.40m

1.70m

B

1.60m

ES

0.20m

0.70m

1.20m

1.80m



Slow Progress



Sandy CLAY, low plasticity, brown, with gravel




Virtual refusal

CL

CL

3

2

3

3

6

9

11

16

>30




SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS


MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH





NORTHING : 6141974

File: A11651-004 TP07 Page 1 OF 1



HOLE NO : TP07


ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR



ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH



UDESBSPTHP



VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL



GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

M

MC > PL

XW

F

VSt

EL

1.00mB

1.10m

0.15m

1.50m

2.50m


Easily Excavated


Topsoil: silty sandy CLAY, brown with organics

Sandy Silty CLAY, low plasticity, red, with angular to sub rounded quartzgravel




CL

2

2

3

3

9

12

12

14

18

28




SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS


MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH





NORTHING : 6141993

File: A11651-004 TP08 Page 1 OF 1



HOLE NO : TP08


ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR



ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH



UDESBSPTHP



VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL



GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

M

MC > PL

MC > PL

MC > PL

XW

F

F

St

EL

0.15m

0.35m

0.60m

1.10m

1.60m




Slow Progress


Sandy CLAY, low plasticity, red, trace silt

Sandy Silty CLAY, low plasticity, brown

Silty CLAY, low plasticity, red-brown, trace sand



Virtual refusal

CL

CL

CL

3

4

2

4

2

3

4

14




SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS


MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH





NORTHING : 6142047

File: A11651-004 TP09 Page 1 OF 1



HOLE NO : TP09


ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR



ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH



UDESBSPTHP



VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL



GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

M

MC > PL

MC > PL

XW

HW

F - St

VSt

EL

VL

0.20m

0.90m

1.40m

2.20m

2.30m



Slow Progress


Silty CLAY, red, trace sand

Sandy CLAY, orange-brown, trace fine anglular gravel


Distinctly weathered GRANITE


Virtual refusal

CL

CL

4

2

2

3

4

11

12

15

15

18

29




SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS


MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH





NORTHING : 6142076

File: A11651-004 TP10 Page 1 OF 1



HOLE NO : TP10


ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR



ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH



UDESBSPTHP



VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL



GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

M

MC > PL

M to D

XW

VSt

H

EL

0.30m

1.10m

B

ES

1.50m

0.10m

0.50m

1.00m

1.50m


HP In-situ > 600 kPa

Slow Progress



Sandy CLAY, low plasticity, orange-brown, trace fine anglular gravel




Virtual refusal

CL

CL

23

17

21




SA

MP

LES

&FI

ELD

TE

STS


MO

ISTU

RE

/

WE

ATH

ER

ING

CO

NS

ISTE

NC

Y /

RE

L D

EN

SIT

Y /

RO

CK

STR

EN

GTH





NORTHING : 6142255

File: A11651-004 TP11 Page 1 OF 1



HOLE NO : TP11


ROCK WEATHERING

RSXWDWSWFR



ROCK STRENGTH

ELVLLMHVHEH

CONSISTENCY

VSSFStVStH



UDESBSPTHP



VLLMDDVD

DMWOMCPL



GE

OTE

CH

.GLB

Log

CA

RD

NO

_TE

STH

OLE

_LO

G J

UN

EE

CO

RR

EC

TIO

NS

CE

NTR

E.G

PJ

13/

09/2

016

14:5

0 8

.30.

004

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NS

YMB

OL

GR

OU

ND

WA

TER

LEV

ELS

DE

PTH

(m)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

DC

P(B

LOW

CO

UN

T)

100

200

300

400

HAN

DPE

NET

RO

-M

ETER

(kPa

)

>>

Explanatory Notes The methods of description and classification of soils and rocks used in this report are based on Australian Standard AS1726-1993 Geotechnical Site Investigations. Material descriptions are deduced from field observation or engineering examination, and may be appended or confirmed by in situ or laboratory testing. The information is dependent on the scope of investigation, the extent of sampling and testing, and the inherent variability of the conditions encountered.

Subsurface investigation may be conducted by one or a combination of the following methods.

Method

Test Pitting: excavation/trench BH Backhoe bucket EX Excavator bucket X Existing excavation Natural Exposure: existing natural rock or soil exposure Manual drilling: hand operated tools HA Hand Auger Continuous sample drilling PT Push tube Hammer drilling AH Air hammer AT Air track Spiral flight auger drilling AS Large diameter short spiral auger AD/V Continuous spiral flight auger: V-Bit AD/T Continuous spiral flight auger: TC-Bit Hollow flight auger drilling HFA Continuous hollow flight auger Rotary non-core drilling WS Washbore (mud drilling) RR Rock roller Rotary core drilling HQ 63mm diamond-tipped core barrel NMLC 52mm diamond-tipped core barrel NQ 47mm diamond-tipped core barrel Concrete coring DT Diatube

Sampling is conducted to facilitate further assessment of selected materials encountered.

Sampling method

Disturbed sampling B Bulk disturbed sample D Disturbed sample ES Environmental soil sample Undisturbed sampling SPT Standard Penetration Test sample U Thin wall tube ‘undisturbed’ sample Water samples EW Environmental water sample

Field testing may be conducted as a means of assessment of the in situ conditions of materials.

Field testing

SPT Standard Penetration Test (blows/150mm) HP/PP Hand/Pocket Penetrometer Dynamic Penetrometers (generally blows/150mm) DCP Dynamic Cone Penetrometer PSP Perth Sand Penetrometer MC Moisture Content VS Vane Shear PBT Plate Bearing Test PID Photo Ionization Detector

If encountered, refusal (R) or virtual refusal (VR) of SPT or dynamic penetrometers may be noted.

The quality of the rock can be assessed be the degree of fracturing and the following.

Rock quality description

TCR Total Core Recovery (%)

(length of core recovered divided by the length of core run)

RQD Rock Quality Designation (%)

(sum of axial lengths of core greater than 100mm long divided by the length of core run)

Notes on groundwater conditions encountered may include.

Groundwater

Not Encountered Excavation is dry in the short term Not Observed Water level observation not possible Seepage Water seeping into hole Inflow Water flowing/flooding into hole

Perched groundwater may result in a misleading indication of the depth to the true water table. Groundwater levels are also likely to fluctuate with variations in climatic and site conditions.

Notes on the stability of excavations may include.

Excavation conditions

Stable No obvious/gross short term instability noted Spalling Material falling into excavation (minor/major) Unstable Collapse of the majority, or one or more face

of the excavation

Explanatory Notes: General Soil Description The methods of description and classification of soils used in this report are based on Australian Standard AS1726-1993 Geotechnical Site Investigations. In practice, a material is described as a soil if it can be remoulded by hand in its field condition or in water. The dominant component is shown in upper case, with secondary components in lower case. In general descriptions cover: soil type, plasticity or particle size/shape, colour, strength or density, moisture and inclusions.

In general, soil types are classified according to the dominant particle on the basis of the following particle sizes.

Soil Classification Particle Size

CLAY < 0.002mm SILT 0.002mm 0.075mm SAND fine 0.075mm to 0.2mm medium 0.2mm to 0.6mm coarse 0.6mm to 2.36mm GRAVEL fine 2.36mm to 6mm medium 6mm to 20mm coarse 20mm to 63mm COBBLES 63mm to 200mm BOULDERS > 200mm

Soil types are qualified by the presence of minor components on the basis of field examination or the particle size distribution.

Description Percentage of minor component

Trace < 5% in coarse grained soils < 15% in fine grained soils With 5% to 12% in coarse grained soils 15% to 30% in fine grained soils

The strength of cohesive soils is classified by engineering assessment or field/laboratory testing as follows.

Strength Symbol Undrained shear strength

Very Soft VS < 12kPa Soft S 12kPa to 25kPa Firm F 25kPa to 50kPa Stiff St 50kPa to 100kPa Very Stiff VSt 100kPa to 200kPa Hard H > 200kPa

Cohesionless soils are classified on the basis of relative density as follows.

Relative Density Symbol Density Index

Very Loose VL < 15% Loose L 15% to 35% Medium Dense MD 35% to 65% Dense D 65% to 85% Very Dense VD > 85%

The moisture condition of soil is described by appearance and feel and may be described in relation to the Plastic Limit (PL) or Optimum Moisture Content (OMC).

Moisture condition and description

Dry Cohesive soils: hard, friable, dry of plastic limit. Granular soils: cohesionless and free-running

Moist Cool feel and darkened colour: Cohesive soils can be moulded. Granular soils tend to cohere

Wet Cool feel and darkened colour: Cohesive soils usually weakened and free water forms when handling. Granular soils tend to cohere

The plasticity of cohesive soils is defined as follows.

Plasticity Liquid Limit

Low plasticity ≤ 35% Medium plasticity > 35% ≤ 50% High plasticity > 50%

The structure of the soil may be described as follows.

Zoning Description

Layer Continuous across exposure or sample Lens Discontinuous layer (lenticular shape) Pocket Irregular inclusion of different material

The structure of soil layers may include: defects such as softened zones, fissures, cracks, joints and root-holes; and coarse grained soils may be described as strongly or weakly cemented.

The soil origin may also be noted if possible to deduce.

Soil origin and description

Fill Man-made deposits or disturbed material Topsoil Material affected by roots and root fibres Colluvial Transported down slopes by gravity Aeolian Transported and deposited by wind Alluvial Deposited by rivers Lacustrine Deposited by lakes Marine Deposits in beaches, bays and estuaries Residual Developed on weathered rock

The origin of the soil generally cannot be deduced on the appearance of the material only and may be determined based on further geological evidence or other field observation.

Explanatory Notes: General Rock Description The methods of description and classification of rocks used in this report are based on Australian Standard AS1726-1993 Geotechnical Site Investigations. In practice, if a material cannot be remoulded by hand in its field condition or in water, it is described as a rock. In general, descriptions cover: rock type, grain size, structure, colour, degree of weathering, strength, minor components or inclusions, and where applicable, the defect types, shape, roughness and coating/infill.

Sedimentary rock types are generally described according to the predominant grain size as follows.

Rock Type Description

CONGLOMERATE Rounded gravel sized fragments (>2mm) cemented in a finer matrix

SANDSTONE Sand size particles defined by the following grain sizes: fine 0.06mm to 0.2mm medium 0.2mm to 0.6mm coarse 0.6mm to 2mm

SILTSTONE Predominately silt sized particles SHALE Fine particles (silt or clay) and

fissile CLAYSTONE Predominately clay sized particles

The classification of rock weathering is described based on definitions in AS1726 and summarised as follows.

Term and symbol Definition

Residual Soil

RS Soil developed on rock with the mass structure and substance of the parent rock no longer evident

Extremely weathered

XW Weathered to such an extent that the rock has ‘soil-like’ properties

Distinctly weathered

DW The strength is usually changed and may be highly discoloured. Porosity may be increased by leaching, or decreased due to deposition in pores

Slightly weathered

SW Slightly discoloured; little or no change of strength from fresh rock

Fresh Rock FR The rock shows no sign of decomposition or staining

The rock material strength can be defined based on the point load index as follows.

Term and symbol Point Load Index Is50

Extremely low EL < 0.03MPa Very Low VL 0.03MPa to 0.1MPa Low L 0.1MPa to 0.3MPa Medium M 0.3MPa to 1MPa High H 1MPa to 3MPa Very High VH 3MPa to 10MPa Extremely High EH > 10MPa

It is important to note that the rock material strength as above is distinct from the rock mass strength which can be significantly weaker due to the effect of defects.

A preliminary assessment of rock strength may be made using the field guide detailed in AS1726, and this is conducted in the absence of point load testing.

The defect spacing and bedding thickness, measured normal to defects of the same set or bedding, is described as follows.

Definition Defect Spacing

Thinly laminated < 6mm Laminated 6mm to 20mm Very thinly bedded 20mm to 60mm Thinly bedded 60mm to 0.2m Medium bedded 0.2m to 0.6m Thickly bedded 0.6m to 2m Very thickly bedded > 2m

Terms for describing rock and defects are as follows.

Terms

Joint JT Sheared zone SZ Bed Parting BP Sheared surface SS Contact CO Seam SM Dyke DK Crushed Seam CS Decomposed Zone DZ Infilled Seam IS Fracture FC Foliation FL Fracture Zone FZ Vein VN

The shape and roughness of defects in the rock mass are described using the following terms.

Planarity Roughness

Planar PR Very Rough VR Curved CU Rough RF Undulating U Smooth S Irregular IR Polished POL Stepped ST Slickensides SL

The coating or infill associated with defects in the rock mass are described as follows.

Definition Description

Clean No visible coating or infilling Stain No visible coating or infilling; surfaces

discoloured by mineral staining Veneer Visible coating or infilling of soil or mineral

substance (<1mm). If discontinuous over the plane; patchy veneer

Coating Visible coating or infilling of soil or mineral substance (>1mm)

Graphic Symbols IndexClays

CLAY

Silty CLAY

Sandy CLAY

Gravelly CLAY

Silts

SILT

Clayey SILT

Sandy SILT

Gravelly SILT

Sands

SAND

Clayey SAND

Silty SAND

Gravelly SAND

Gravels

GRAVEL

Clayey GRAVEL

Silty GRAVEL

Sandy GRAVEL

Sedimentary Rock

CONGLOMERATE

BRECCIA

SANDSTONE

SILTSTONE

SHALE

MUDSTONE,

CLAYSTONE COAL

LIMESTONE

Metamorphic Rock

SLATE, PHYLLITE, SHIST

GNEISS

QUARTZITE, MARBLE

Igneous Rock

GRANITE

RHYOLITE

BASALT, DOLERITE

IGNIMBRITE

TUFF, VOLCANIC

BRECCIA

Other Soils

TOPSOIL

ORGANIC SOILS

COBBLES, BOULDERS

Fill Strata

FILL

ASPHALT

CONCRETE

ROADBASE

BALLAST

Piezometer Symbols

Screen Section

Casing: sand backfill

Casing: gravel backfill

Casing: spoil backfill

Bentonite Seal

Cement Seal

Spoil Backfill

Cement Backfill




APPENDIX

C GEOTECHNICAL LAB RESULTS

of 17/09/2016Report Date / Page:Area Description:

Client Reference/s:Component:

22960/T/828Internal Test Request:Junee Correctional CentreLocation:

Lot Number:Prison Bed Capacity UnitProject:

22960/P/81Project Number:,Client Address:

22960/R/1515-1Report Number:Department of Justice, NSWClient:

EMERSON CLASS NUMBER REPORT

Albion Park NSW 2527

Unit 1, 28 Shaban Street

[email protected]:Address:

02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:

Illawarra LaboratoryLaboratory:Cardno Construction Sciences

AS1289.3.8.1Test Procedures:

7

GRANITE - extreamly weatherd

1.4 - 1.6

TP07

20

Potable

AS1289.1.2.1 Cl 6.5.4

-

Existing

10/08/2016

-

-

22960/S/3349

7

sandy silty clay with gravel

1.0 - 1.1

TP08

20

Potable

AS1289.1.2.1 Cl 6.5.4

-

Existing

10/08/2016

-

-

22960/S/3350

7

sandy CLAY with silt

1.2 - 1.3

TP06

20

Potable

AS1289.1.2.1 Cl 6.5.4

-

Existing

10/08/2016

-

-

22960/S/3348

8

silty clay

0.2 - 0.4

TP01

20

Potable

AS1289.1.2.1 Cl 6.5.4

-

Existing

10/08/2016

-

-

22960/S/3345

Emerson Class Number

Soil Description

Depth

Test Pit

Water Temperature (C°)

Water Type

Sampling Method

Material Type

Material Source

Date / Time Sampled

Lot Number

ID / Client ID

Sample Number

22960Corporate Site Number:

1986Accreditation Number:

The results of the tests, calibrations and/or measurements included in thisdocument are traceable to Australian/national standards.

Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025

W34Rep Rev 1Form ID:

Jack McKillopApproved Signatory:

Remarks







ATTERBERG LIMITS REPORT




02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:


silty clayMaterial Description

-Material TypeDry SievedAtterberg Preparation

ExistingMaterial SourceOven DriedAtt. Drying Method

31/08/2016Date Tested

Elliot AshbySampled By

0.2 - 0.4(m)Depth10/08/2016Date Sampled

TP01Test PitAS1289.1.2.1 Cl 6.5.4Sampling Method

Sample Location22960/S/3345Sample Number

AS1289.3.1.2, AS 1289.3.3.1, AS1289.3.2.1, AS1289.3.4.1, AS1289.2.1.1Test Procedures:

N/ALinear Shrinkage Defects:

10.0Linear Shrinkage (%)

18Plasticity Index (%)

11Plastic Limit (%)

29Liquid Limit (%)

Specification MaximumTest ResultSpecification MinimumAtterberg Limit

Atterberg Limits Results





W11bRep Rev 1Form ID:

Craig SalmonApproved Signatory:

Remarks











02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:


sandy CLAY with siltMaterial Description









-Linear Shrinkage Defects:



13Plastic Limit (%)

26Liquid Limit (%)









Remarks











02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:


sandy silty clay with gravelMaterial Description









-Linear Shrinkage Defects:



13Plastic Limit (%)

28Liquid Limit (%)









Remarks











02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:


-Material Description









CrackingLinear Shrinkage Defects:



10Plastic Limit (%)

28Liquid Limit (%)









Remarks







CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO REPORT




02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:


silty clayMaterial Description

StandardCompactive Effort-Client Reference

-Material Limit End-Material Type

-Material Limit StartExistingMaterial Source






AS1289.6.1.1, AS1289.5.1.1, AS1289.2.1.1Test Procedures

4.0CBR Value @ 5.0mm (%):

4.5Minimum CBR Specification (%):0.5CBR Swell (%):

14.9Moisture (remainder) After Soak (%)15.8Moisture (top 30mm) After Soak (%)1.83Dry Density After Soak (t/m³):4.5CBR Surcharge (kg)

Soaked / 4 DaysTest Condition / Soaking Period:100.0Placement Moisture Ratio (%):13.8Placement Moisture Content (%):

101.0Placement Dry Density Ratio (%):1.84Placement Dry Density (t/m³):100Target Moisture Ratio (%):100Target Density Ratio (%):

ExcludedOversize Included / Excluded0.0Sample Percent Oversize (%)

17.2Field Moisture Content (%):14.0Optimum Moisture Content (%):1.83Maximum Dry Density (t/m³):





W7Rep Rev 1Form ID:


Remarks











02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:


sandy CLAY with siltMaterial Description











4.5Minimum CBR Specification (%):1.0CBR Swell (%):

16.4Moisture (remainder) After Soak (%)21.0Moisture (top 30mm) After Soak (%)1.81Dry Density After Soak (t/m³):

-CBR Surcharge (kg)Soaked / 4 DaysTest Condition / Soaking Period:

100.0Placement Moisture Ratio (%):15.0Placement Moisture Content (%):99.5Placement Dry Density Ratio (%):1.83Placement Dry Density (t/m³):100Target Moisture Ratio (%):100Target Density Ratio (%):







W7Rep Rev 1Form ID:


Remarks











02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:


GRANITE - extreamly weatherdMaterial Description










8CBR Value @ 5.0mm (%):

-Minimum CBR Specification (%):0.0CBR Swell (%):

14.0Moisture (remainder) After Soak (%)14.8Moisture (top 30mm) After Soak (%)1.91Dry Density After Soak (t/m³):4.5CBR Surcharge (kg)









W7Rep Rev 1Form ID:


Remarks











02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:


sandy silty clay with gravelMaterial Description











4.5Minimum CBR Specification (%):-CBR Swell (%):

18.3Moisture (remainder) After Soak (%)18.5Moisture (top 30mm) After Soak (%)

-Dry Density After Soak (t/m³):4.5CBR Surcharge (kg)









W7Rep Rev 1Form ID:


Remarks







PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION REPORT




02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:


-Material TypeExistingMaterial Source







750.075800.150840.300870.425900.600971.18992.36

10019.0

SpecificationMaximum

PercentPassing (%)

SpecificationMinimumAS Sieve (mm)





W9Rep Rev 2Form ID:


Remarks











02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:









650.075710.150760.300800.425820.600911.18972.36

1004.7510019.0


PercentPassing (%)






W9Rep Rev 2Form ID:


Remarks











02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:









680.075710.150740.300760.425780.600841.18922.36954.75966.7999.5

10019.0


PercentPassing (%)






W9Rep Rev 2Form ID:


Remarks











02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:









520.075580.150660.300710.425770.600911.18982.36

1004.751006.710019.0


PercentPassing (%)






W9Rep Rev 2Form ID:


Remarks







SHRINK SWELL INDEX




02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:


-Material Type29/08/2016Date Tested

ExistingMaterial SourceElliot AshbySampled By

10/08/2016Date Sampled

AS1289.1.2.1 Cl 6.5.4Sampling Method

0.2 - 0.4(m)Depth22960/S/3345Sample Number

TP01Test PitAS1289.7.1.1, AS1289.2.1.1Test Procedures:

20.2Swell Post-Soak Moisture Content (%)13.4Shrinkage Moisture Content (%):

16.3Swell Pre-Soak Moisture Content (%)5.00Estimated Inert Inclusions (%):

MinorCracking / Crumbling:silty claySoil Description:

0.0Swell Strain (%)

2.0Shrinkage Strain (%)1.1Shrink / Swell Index







Remarks







SHRINK SWELL INDEX




02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:










MinorCracking / Crumbling:sandy CLAY with siltSoil Description:

0.0Swell Strain (%)








Remarks







SHRINK SWELL INDEX




02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:










MinorCracking / Crumbling:GRANITE - extreamly weatherdSoil Description:

0.0Swell Strain (%)








Remarks







SHRINK SWELL INDEX




02 4577 9055Fax:02 4577 4605Phone:74 128 806 735ABN:










MinorCracking / Crumbling:sandy silty clay with gravelSoil Description:

0.0Swell Strain (%)








Remarks




APPENDIX

D ENVIRONMENTAL LAB RESULTS

Date Reported

Contact

SGS Alexandria Environmental

Unit 16, 33 Maddox St

Alexandria NSW 2015

Huong Crawford

+61 2 8594 0400

+61 2 8594 0499

[email protected]

10

SGS Reference

Email

Facsimile

Telephone

Address

Manager

Laboratory

A11651-004

A11651

[email protected]

61 2 4228 6811

61 2 4940 5542

Level 1, 47 Burelli Street

Wollongong

NSW 2500

CARDNO (NSW) PTY LTD

Zac Othman

Samples

Order Number

Project

Email

Facsimile

Telephone

Address

Client

CLIENT DETAILS LABORATORY DETAILS

20/8/2016

ANALYTICAL REPORT

SE155905 R0

Date Received 12/8/2016

COMMENTS

No respirable fibres detected in all samples using trace analysis technique.

A portion of the sample supplied has been sub-sampled for asbestos according to SGS In-house procedures.

We therefore cannot guarantee that the sub-sample is representative of the entire sample supplied.

SGS Environment, Heath and Safety recommends supplying approximately 50-100g of sample in a separate container.

Asbestos analysed by Approved Identifier Ravee Sivasubramaniam .

Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025. NATA accredited laboratory 2562(4354).

Bennet Lo

Senior Organic Chemist/Metals Chemist

Dong Liang

Metals/Inorganics Team Leader

Huong Crawford

Production Manager

Kamrul Ahsan

Senior Chemist

Ly Kim Ha

Organic Section Head

Ravee Sivasubramaniam

Hygiene Team Leader

SIGNATORIES

Member of the SGS Group

www.sgs.com.aut +61 2 8594 0400

f +61 2 8594 0499

Australia

Australia

Alexandria NSW 2015

Alexandria NSW 2015

Unit 16 33 Maddox St

PO Box 6432 Bourke Rd BC

Environment, Health and SafetySGS Australia Pty Ltd

ABN 44 000 964 278

Page 1 of 2120/08/2016

SE155905 R0ANALYTICAL RESULTS

VOC’s in Soil [AN433] Tested: 15/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5

SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL

- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

Benzene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Toluene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

m/p-xylene mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

o-xylene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Naphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Total Xylenes* mg/kg 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3

Total BTEX mg/kg 0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 2 of 2120/08/2016


Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil [AN433] Tested: 15/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

Benzene (F0) mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

TRH C6-C9 mg/kg 20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20

TRH C6-C10 mg/kg 25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25

TRH C6-C10 minus BTEX (F1) mg/kg 25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 3 of 2120/08/2016


TRH (Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons) in Soil [AN403] Tested: 15/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

TRH C10-C14 mg/kg 20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20

TRH C15-C28 mg/kg 45 <45 <45 <45 <45 <45

TRH C29-C36 mg/kg 45 <45 <45 <45 <45 <45

TRH C37-C40 mg/kg 100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100

TRH >C10-C16 (F2) mg/kg 25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25

TRH >C10-C16 (F2) - Naphthalene mg/kg 25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25

TRH >C16-C34 (F3) mg/kg 90 <90 <90 <90 <90 <90

TRH >C34-C40 (F4) mg/kg 120 <120 <120 <120 <120 <120

TRH C10-C36 Total mg/kg 110 <110 <110 <110 <110 <110

TRH C10-C40 Total mg/kg 210 <210 <210 <210 <210 <210

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 4 of 2120/08/2016


PAH (Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons) in Soil [AN420] Tested: 15/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

Naphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

2-methylnaphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

1-methylnaphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Acenaphthylene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Acenaphthene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluorene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Phenanthrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Anthracene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Pyrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Chrysene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(b&j)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(k)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Dibenzo(ah)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(ghi)perylene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Carcinogenic PAHs, BaP TEQ <LOR=0 TEQ 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Carcinogenic PAHs, BaP TEQ <LOR=LOR TEQ (mg/kg) 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3

Carcinogenic PAHs, BaP TEQ <LOR=LOR/2 TEQ (mg/kg) 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Total PAH (18) mg/kg 0.8 <0.8 <0.8 <0.8 <0.8 <0.8

Total PAH (NEPM/WHO 16) mg/kg 0.8 <0.8 <0.8 <0.8 <0.8 <0.8

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 5 of 2120/08/2016


Speciated Phenols in Soil [AN420] Tested: 15/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

Phenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

2-methyl phenol (o-cresol) mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

3/4-methyl phenol (m/p-cresol) mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Total Cresol mg/kg 1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5

2-chlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

2,4-dimethylphenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

2,6-dichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

2,4-dichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

2,4,6-trichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

2-nitrophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

4-nitrophenol mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

2,4,5-trichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

2,3,4,6/2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Pentachlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

2,4-dinitrophenol mg/kg 2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2

4-chloro-3-methylphenol mg/kg 2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 6 of 2120/08/2016


OC Pesticides in Soil [AN400/AN420] Tested: 15/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

Hexachlorobenzene (HCB) mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Alpha BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Lindane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Heptachlor mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Aldrin mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Beta BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Delta BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Heptachlor epoxide mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

o,p'-DDE mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Alpha Endosulfan mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Gamma Chlordane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Alpha Chlordane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

trans-Nonachlor mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

p,p'-DDE mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Dieldrin mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Endrin mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

o,p'-DDD mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

o,p'-DDT mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Beta Endosulfan mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

p,p'-DDD mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

p,p'-DDT mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Endosulfan sulphate mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Endrin Aldehyde mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Methoxychlor mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Endrin Ketone mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Isodrin mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Mirex mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 7 of 2120/08/2016


OP Pesticides in Soil [AN400/AN420] Tested: 15/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

Dichlorvos mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Dimethoate mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Diazinon (Dimpylate) mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Fenitrothion mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Malathion mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Chlorpyrifos (Chlorpyrifos Ethyl) mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Parathion-ethyl (Parathion) mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Bromophos Ethyl mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Methidathion mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Ethion mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 8 of 2120/08/2016


PCBs in Soil [AN400/AN420] Tested: 15/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

Arochlor 1016 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Arochlor 1221 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Arochlor 1232 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Arochlor 1242 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Arochlor 1248 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Arochlor 1254 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Arochlor 1260 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Arochlor 1262 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Arochlor 1268 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Total PCBs (Arochlors) mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 9 of 2120/08/2016


pH in soil (1:2) [AN101] Tested: 18/8/2016

TP01-0.7 TP02-0.3 TP07-1.7 TP11-1.1

SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL

- - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.001 SE155905.002 SE155905.003 SE155905.004

pH (1:2) pH Units - 6.8 6.8 7.5 7.7

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 10 of 2120/08/2016


Conductivity (1:2) in soil [AN106] Tested: 18/8/2016

TP01-0.7 TP02-0.3 TP07-1.7 TP11-1.1

SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL

- - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.001 SE155905.002 SE155905.003 SE155905.004

Conductivity (1:2) @25 C* µS/cm 1 34 44 64 190

Resistivity (1:2)* ohm cm - 30000 23000 16000 5400

Resistivity (1:2)* ohm m 1 300 230 160 54

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 11 of 2120/08/2016


Soluble Anions in Soil from 1:2 DI Extract by Ion Chromatography [AN245] Tested: 18/8/2016

TP01-0.7 TP02-0.3 TP07-1.7 TP11-1.1

SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL

- - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.001 SE155905.002 SE155905.003 SE155905.004

Chloride mg/kg 0.25 0.58 1.1 5.9 7.7

Sulphate mg/kg 0.5 6.6 5.7 6.6 13

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 12 of 2120/08/2016


Conductivity and TDS by Calculation - Soil [AN106] Tested: 18/8/2016

TP01-0.7 TP02-0.3 TP07-1.7 TP11-1.1

SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL

- - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.001 SE155905.002 SE155905.003 SE155905.004

Conductivity of Extract (1:5 dry sample basis) µS/cm 1 18 34 20 68

Salinity (by calculation)* mg/kg 10 58 110 66 220

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 13 of 2120/08/2016


Exchangeable Cations and Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC/ESP/SAR) [AN122] Tested: 17/8/2016

TP01-0.7 TP02-0.3 TP07-1.7 TP11-1.1

SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL

- - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.001 SE155905.002 SE155905.003 SE155905.004

Exchangeable Sodium, Na mg/kg 2 69 21 80 93

Exchangeable Sodium, Na meq/100g 0.01 0.30 0.09 0.35 0.40

Exchangeable Sodium Percentage* % 0.1 3.9 1.0 5.5 2.8

Exchangeable Potassium, K mg/kg 2 200 350 120 500

Exchangeable Potassium, K meq/100g 0.01 0.51 0.90 0.31 1.3

Exchangeable Potassium Percentage* % 0.1 6.6 10.3 4.9 8.9

Exchangeable Calcium, Ca mg/kg 2 780 1200 620 1700

Exchangeable Calcium, Ca meq/100g 0.01 3.9 6.2 3.1 8.3

Exchangeable Calcium Percentage* % 0.1 50.1 70.9 48.6 57.3

Exchangeable Magnesium, Mg mg/kg 2 370 190 320 540

Exchangeable Magnesium, Mg meq/100g 0.02 3.1 1.6 2.6 4.5

Exchangeable Magnesium Percentage* % 0.1 39.4 17.8 41.0 30.9

Cation Exchange Capacity meq/100g 0.02 7.7 8.8 6.3 14

Sodicity from Sol. and Exch. Sodium* mg/kg 2 69 21 80 93

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 14 of 2120/08/2016


Total Recoverable Metals in Soil/Waste Solids/Materials by ICPOES [AN040/AN320] Tested: 17/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

Arsenic, As mg/kg 3 <3 5 6 270 <3

Cadmium, Cd mg/kg 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.5 <0.3

Chromium, Cr mg/kg 0.3 19 18 20 17 21

Copper, Cu mg/kg 0.5 6.9 9.7 15 27 9.2

Lead, Pb mg/kg 1 8 10 12 8 8

Nickel, Ni mg/kg 0.5 5.6 6.3 12 19 6.9

Zinc, Zn mg/kg 0.5 14 49 29 74 14

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 15 of 2120/08/2016


Mercury in Soil [AN312] Tested: 17/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

Mercury mg/kg 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 16 of 2120/08/2016


Fibre Identification in soil [AN602] Tested: 18/8/2016

SS1 SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.005 SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

Asbestos Detected No unit - No No No No No

Estimated Fibres* %w/w 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 17 of 2120/08/2016


Moisture Content [AN002] Tested: 16/8/2016

TP01-0.7 TP02-0.3 TP07-1.7 TP11-1.1 SS1


- - - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.001 SE155905.002 SE155905.003 SE155905.004 SE155905.005

% Moisture %w/w 0.5 17 15 8.7 12 16

UOMPARAMETER LOR

SS2 SS3 SS4 SS5

SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL

- - - -

10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016 10/8/2016

SE155905.006 SE155905.007 SE155905.008 SE155905.009

% Moisture %w/w 0.5 16 7.0 9.8 9.6

UOMPARAMETER LOR

Page 18 of 2120/08/2016

SE155905 R0METHOD SUMMARY

METHOD METHODOLOGY SUMMARY

The test is carried out by drying (at either 40°C or 105°C) a known mass of sample in a weighed evaporating

basin. After fully dry the sample is re-weighed. Samples such as sludge and sediment having high percentages of

moisture will take some time in a drying oven for complete removal of water.

AN002

A portion of sample is digested with nitric acid to decompose organic matter and hydrochloric acid to complete the

digestion of metals. The digest is then analysed by ICP OES with metals results reported on the dried sample

basis. Based on USEPA method 200.8 and 6010C.

AN040/AN320

A portion of sample is digested with Nitric acid to decompose organic matter and Hydrochloric acid to complete the

digestion of metals and then filtered for analysis by ASS or ICP as per USEPA Method 200.8.

AN040

pH in Soil Sludge Sediment and Water: pH is measured electrometrically using a combination electrode and is

calibrated against 3 buffers purchased commercially. For soils, an extract with water is made at a ratio of 1:2 and

the pH determined and reported on the extract after 1 hour extraction (pH 1:2) or after 1 hour extraction and

overnight aging (pH (1:2) aged). Reference APHA 4500-H+.

AN101

Conductivity and TDS by Calculation: Conductivity is measured by meter with temperature compensation and is

calibrated against a standard solution of potassium chloride. Conductivity is generally reported as µmhos /cm or

µS/cm @ 25°C. For soils, an extract with water is made at a ratio of 1:5 and the EC determined and reported on

the extract, or calculated back to the as-received sample. Salinity can be estimated from conductivity using a

conversion factor, which for natural waters, is in the range 0.55 to 0.75. Reference APHA 2510 B.

AN106

Resistivity of the extract is reported on the extract basis and is the reciprocal of conductivity. Salinity and TDS can

be calculated from the extract conductivity and is reported back to the soil basis.

AN106

Exchangeable Cations, CEC and ESP: Soil sample is extracted in 1M Ammonium Acetate at pH=7 (or 1M

Ammonium Chloride at pH=7) with cations (Na, K, Ca & Mg) then determined by ICP OES/ICP MS and reported as

Exchangeable Cations. For saline soils, these results can be corrected for water soluble cations and reported as

Exchangeable cations in meq/100g or soil can be pre-treated (aqueous ethanol/aqueous glycerol) prior to

extraction. Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC) is the sum of the exchangeable cations in meq/100g.

AN122

The Exchangeable Sodium Percentage (ESP) is calculated as the exchangeable sodium divided by the CEC (all in

meq/100g) times 100.

ESP can be used to categorise the sodicity of the soil as below :

ESP < 6% non-sodic

ESP 6-15% sodic

ESP >15% strongly sodic

Method is refernced to Rayment and Higginson, 1992, sections 15D3 and 15N1.-

AN122

Anions by Ion Chromatography: A water sample or extract is injected into an eluent stream that passes through the

ion chromatographic system where the anions of interest ie Br, Cl, NO2, NO3 and SO4 are separated on their

relative affinities for the active sites on the column packing material. Changes to the conductivity and the

UV-visible absorbance of the eluent enable identification and quantitation of the anions based on their retention

time and peak height or area. APHA 4110 B

AN245

Mercury by Cold Vapour AAS in Soils: After digestion with nitric acid, hydrogen peroxide and hydrochloric acid ,

mercury ions are reduced by stannous chloride reagent in acidic solution to elemental mercury. This mercury

vapour is purged by nitrogen into a cold cell in an atomic absorption spectrometer or mercury analyser .

Quantification is made by comparing absorbances to those of the calibration standards. Reference APHA

3112/3500

AN312

OC and OP Pesticides by GC-ECD: The determination of organochlorine (OC) and organophosphorus (OP)

pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in soils, sludges and groundwater. (Based on USEPA methods

3510, 3550, 8140 and 8080.)

AN400

Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons: Determination of Hydrocarbons by gas chromatography after a solvent

extraction. Detection is by flame ionisation detector (FID) that produces an electronic signal in proportion to the

combustible matter passing through it. Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons (TRH) are routinely reported as four

alkane groupings based on the carbon chain length of the compounds: C6-C9, C10-C14, C15-C28 and C29-C36

and in recognition of the NEPM 1999 (2013), >C10-C16 (F2), >C16-C34 (F3) and >C34-C40 (F4). F2 is reported

directly and also corrected by subtracting Naphthalene ( from VOC method AN433) where available.

AN403

Additionally, the volatile C6-C9 fraction may be determined by a purge and trap technique and GC /MS because of

the potential for volatiles loss. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) follows the same method of analysis after

silica gel cleanup of the solvent extract. Aliphatic/Aromatic Speciation follows the same method of analysis after

fractionation of the solvent extract over silica with differential polarity of the eluent solvents .

AN403

The GC/FID method is not well suited to the analysis of refined high boiling point materials (ie lubricating oils or

greases) but is particularly suited for measuring diesel, kerosene and petrol if care to control volatility is taken. This

method will detect naturally occurring hydrocarbons, lipids, animal fats, phenols and PAHs if they are present at

sufficient levels, dependent on the use of specific cleanup /fractionation techniques. Reference USEPA 3510B,

8015B.

AN403

Page 19 of 2120/08/2016

SE155905 R0METHOD SUMMARY

(SVOCs) including OC, OP, PCB, Herbicides, PAH, Phthalates and Speciated Phenols (etc) in soils, sediments

and waters are determined by GCMS/ECD technique following appropriate solvent extraction process (Based on

USEPA 3500C and 8270D).

AN420

SVOC Compounds: Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs) including OC, OP, PCB, Herbicides, PAH,

Phthalates and Speciated Phenols in soils, sediments and waters are determined by GCMS /ECD technique

following appropriate solvent extraction process (Based on USEPA 3500C and 8270D).

AN420

VOCs and C6-C9 Hydrocarbons by GC-MS P&T: VOC`s are volatile organic compounds. The sample is presented

to a gas chromatograph via a purge and trap (P&T) concentrator and autosampler and is detected with a Mass

Spectrometer (MSD). Solid samples are initially extracted with methanol whilst liquid samples are processed

directly. References: USEPA 5030B, 8020A, 8260.

AN433

Qualitative identification of chrysotile, amosite and crocidolite in bulk samples by polarised light microscopy (PLM)

in conjunction with dispersion staining (DS). AS4964 provides the basis for this document. Unequivocal

identification of the asbestos minerals present is made by obtaining sufficient diagnostic `clues`, which provide a

reasonable degree of certainty, dispersion staining is a mandatory `clue` for positive identification. If sufficient

`clues` are absent, then positive identification of asbestos is not possible. This procedure requires removal of

suspect fibres/bundles from the sample which cannot be returned.

AN602

Fibres/material that cannot be unequivocably identified as one of the three asbestos forms, will be reported as

unknown mineral fibres (umf).

AN602

AS4964.2004 Method for the Qualitative Identification of Asbestos in Bulk Samples, Section 8.4, Trace Analysis

Criteria, Note 4 states:"Depending upon sample condition and fibre type, the detection limit of this technique has

been found to lie generally in the range of 1 in 1,000 to 1 in 10,000 parts by weight, equivalent to 1 to 0.1 g/kg."

AN602

The sample can be reported “no asbestos found at the reporting limit of 0.1 g/kg” (<0.01%w/w) where AN602

section 4.5 of this method has been followed, and if-

(a) no trace asbestos fibres have been detected (i.e. no ‘respirable’ fibres):

(b) the estimated weight of non-respirable asbestos fibre bundles and/or the estimated weight of asbestos in

asbestos-containing materials are found to be less than 0.1g/kg: and

(c) these non-respirable asbestos fibre bundles and/or the asbestos containing materials are only visible under

stereo-microscope viewing conditions.

AN602

Page 20 of 2120/08/2016

SE155905 R0FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTES

*

**

NATA accreditation does not cover

the performance of this service.

Indicative data, theoretical holding

time exceeded.

-

NVL

IS

LNR

Not analysed.

Not validated.

Insufficient sample for analysis.

Sample listed, but not received.

Samples analysed as received.

Solid samples expressed on a dry weight basis.

Where "Total" analyte groups are reported (for example, Total PAHs, Total OC Pesticides) the total will be calculated as the sum of the individual

analytes, with those analytes that are reported as <LOR being assumed to be zero. The summed (Total) limit of reporting is calculated by summing

the individual analyte LORs and dividing by two. For example, where 16 individual analytes are being summed and each has an LOR of 0.1 mg/kg,

the "Totals" LOR will be 1.6 / 2 (0.8 mg/kg). Where only 2 analytes are being summed, the " Total" LOR will be the sum of those two LORs.

Some totals may not appear to add up because the total is rounded after adding up the raw values.

If reported, measurement uncertainty follow the ± sign after the analytical result and is expressed as the expanded uncertainty calculated using a

coverage factor of 2, providing a level of confidence of approximately 95%, unless stated otherwise in the comments section of this report.

Results reported for samples tested under test methods with codes starting with ARS -SOP, radionuclide or gross radioactivity concentrations are

expressed in becquerel (Bq) per unit of mass or volume or per wipe as stated on the report. Becquerel is the SI unit for activity and equals one

nuclear transformation per second.

Note that in terms of units of radioactivity:

a. 1 Bq is equivalent to 27 pCi

b. 37 MBq is equivalent to 1 mCi

For results reported for samples tested under test methods with codes starting with ARS -SOP, less than (<) values indicate the detection limit for

each radionuclide or parameter for the measurement system used. The respective detection limits have been calculated in accordance with ISO

11929.

The QC criteria are subject to internal review according to the SGS QAQC plan and may be provided on request or alternatively can be found here :

http://www.sgs.com.au/~/media/Local/Australia/Documents/Technical%20Documents/MP-AU-ENV-QU-022%20QA%20QC%20Plan.pdf

This document is issued, on the Client 's behalf, by the Company under its General Conditions of Service available on request and accessible at

http://www.sgs.com/en/terms-and-conditions. The Client's attention is drawn to the limitation of liability, indemnification and jurisdiction issues

defined therein.

Any other holder of this document is advised that information contained hereon reflects the Company 's findings at the time of its intervention only

and within the limits of Client's instructions, if any. The Company's sole responsibility is to its Client and this document does not exonerate parties to

a transaction from exercising all their rights and obligations under the transaction documents.

This report must not be reproduced, except in full.

UOM

LOR

↑↓

Unit of Measure.

Limit of Reporting.

Raised/lowered Limit of

Reporting.

Page 21 of 2120/08/2016

Date Reported

Contact



Alexandria NSW 2015

Huong Crawford

+61 2 8594 0400

+61 2 8594 0499

[email protected]

5

SGS Reference

Email

Facsimile

Telephone

Address

Manager

Laboratory

A11651-004

A11651

[email protected]

61 2 4228 6811

61 2 4940 5542


Wollongong

NSW 2500


Zac Othman

Samples

Order Number

Project

Email

Facsimile

Telephone

Address

Client


COMMENTS

20 Aug 2016

ANALYTICAL REPORT

SE155905 R0

Date Received 12 Aug 2016

No respirable fibres detected in all samples using trace analysis technique.

A portion of the sample supplied has been sub-sampled for asbestos according to SGS In-house procedures.

We therefore cannot guarantee that the sub-sample is representative of the entire sample supplied.

SGS Environment, Heath and Safety recommends supplying approximately 50-100g of sample in a separate container.

Asbestos analysed by Approved Identifier Ravee Sivasubramaniam .

Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025. NATA accredited laboratory 2562(4354).

SIGNATORIES

Bennet Lo

Senior Organic Chemist/Metals Chemist

Dong Liang

Metals/Inorganics Team Leader

Huong Crawford

Production Manager

Kamrul Ahsan

Senior Chemist

Ly Kim Ha

Organic Section Head

Ravee Sivasubramaniam

Hygiene Team Leader


www.sgs.com.aut +61 2 8594 0400

f +61 2 8594 0499

Australia

Australia

Alexandria NSW 2015

Alexandria NSW 2015




ABN 44 000 964 278

Page 1 of 320/08/2016

SE155905 R0ANALYTICAL REPORT

RESULTS

Method AN602Fibre Identification in soil

Fibre IdentificationClient

Reference

Laboratory

ReferenceMatrix Date Sampled

Sample

Description

SS1 No Asbestos Found

Organic Fibres Detected

<0.0110 Aug 201624g SoilSoilSE155905.005



<0.0110 Aug 201650g Soil, Plant

Matter

SoilSE155905.006



<0.0110 Aug 201637g Clay, Soil,

Rocks

SoilSE155905.007



<0.0110 Aug 201642g Clay, Soil,

Rocks

SoilSE155905.008

SS5 No Asbestos Found <0.0110 Aug 201629g SoilSoilSE155905.009

Page 2 of 320/08/2016

SE155905 R0

METHOD METHODOLOGY SUMMARY

METHOD SUMMARY

Qualitative identification of chrysotile, amosite and crocidolite in bulk samples by polarised light microscopy (PLM)

in conjunction with dispersion staining (DS). AS4964 provides the basis for this document. Unequivocal

identification of the asbestos minerals present is made by obtaining sufficient diagnostic `clues`, which provide a

reasonable degree of certainty, dispersion staining is a mandatory `clue` for positive identification. If sufficient

`clues` are absent, then positive identification of asbestos is not possible. This procedure requires removal of

suspect fibres/bundles from the sample which cannot be returned.

AN602

Fibres/material that cannot be unequivocably identified as one of the three asbestos forms, will be reported as

unknown mineral fibres (umf).

AN602

AS4964.2004 Method for the Qualitative Identification of Asbestos in Bulk Samples , Section 8.4, Trace Analysis

Criteria, Note 4 states:"Depending upon sample condition and fibre type, the detection limit of this technique has

been found to lie generally in the range of 1 in 1,000 to 1 in 10,000 parts by weight, equivalent to 1 to 0.1 g/kg."

AN602

The sample can be reported “no asbestos found at the reporting limit of 0.1 g/kg” (<0.01%w/w) where AN602

section 4.5 of this method has been followed, and if-

(a) no trace asbestos fibres have been detected (i.e. no ‘respirable’ fibres):

(b) the estimated weight of non-respirable asbestos fibre bundles and/or the estimated weight of asbestos in

asbestos-containing materials are found to be less than 0.1g/kg: and

(c) these non-respirable asbestos fibre bundles and/or the asbestos containing materials are only visible under

stereo-microscope viewing conditions.

AN602

FOOTNOTES

Amosite - Brown Asbestos

Chrysotile - White Asbestos

Crocidolite - Blue Asbestos

Amphiboles - Amosite and/or Crocidolite

(In reference to soil samples only) This report does not comply with the analytical reporting recommendations in the Western Australian Department

of Health Guidelines for the Assessment and Remediation and Management of Asbestos Contaminated sites in Western Australia - May 2009.

Sampled by the client.

Where reported: 'Asbestos Detected': Asbestos detected by polarised light microscopy, including dispersion staining.

Where reported: 'No Asbestos Found': No Asbestos Found by polarised light microscopy, including dispersion staining.

Where reported: 'UMF Detected': Mineral fibres of unknown type detected by polarised light microscopy, including dispersion staining. Confirmation

by another independent analytical technique may be necessary.

Even after disintegration it can be very difficult, or impossible, to detect the presence of asbestos in some asbestos -containing bulk materials using

polarised light microscopy. This is due to the low grade or small length or diameter of asbestos fibres present in the material, or to the fact that very

fine fibres have been distributed intimately throughout the materials.

The QC criteria are subject to internal review according to the SGS QAQC plan and may be provided on request or alternatively can be found here :

http://www.sgs.com.au/~/media/Local/Australia/Documents/Technical%20Documents/MP-AU-ENV-QU-022%20QA%20QC%20Plan.pdf

This document is issued, on the Client 's behalf, by the Company under its General Conditions of Service available on request and accessible at

http://www.sgs.com/en/terms-and-conditions. The Client's attention is drawn to the limitation of liability, indemnification and jurisdiction issues

defined therein.

Any other holder of this document is advised that information contained hereon reflects the Company 's findings at the time of its intervention only

and within the limits of Client's instructions, if any. The Company's sole responsibility is to its Client and this document does not exonerate parties to

a transaction from exercising all their rights and obligations under the transaction documents.

This test report shall not be reproduced, except in full.

NA - Not Analysed

LNR - Listed, Not Required

* - NATA accreditation does not cover the performance of this service .

** - Indicative data, theoretical holding time exceeded.

Page 3 of 320/08/2016

SE155905 R0

Date Reported

Contact



Alexandria NSW 2015

Huong Crawford

+61 2 8594 0400

+61 2 8594 0499

[email protected]

10

SGS Reference

Email

Facsimile

Telephone

Address

Manager

Laboratory

A11651-004

A11651

[email protected]

61 2 4228 6811

61 2 4940 5542


Wollongong

NSW 2500


Zac Othman

Samples

Order Number

Project

Email

Facsimile

Telephone

Address

Client


22 Aug 2016

STATEMENT OF QA/QC

PERFORMANCE

SE155905 R0

COMMENTS

12 Aug 2016Date Received

All the laboratory data for each environmental matrix was compared to SGS' stated Data Quality Objectives (DQO). Comments

arising from the comparison were made and are reported below.

The data relating to sampling was taken from the Chain of Custody document and was supplied by the Client.

This QA/QC Statement must be read in conjunction with the referenced Analytical Report.

The Statement and the Analytical Report must not be reproduced except in full.

All Data Quality Objectives were met with the exception of the following:

Matrix Spike Mercury in Soil 1 item

Sample counts by matrix 9 Soil Type of documentation received COCDate documentation received 12/8/2016 Samples received in good order YesSamples received without headspace Yes Sample temperature upon receipt 18.4°CSample container provider SGS Turnaround time requested StandardSamples received in correct containers Yes Sufficient sample for analysis YesSample cooling method None Samples clearly labelled YesComplete documentation received Yes

SAMPLE SUMMARY


www.sgs.com.aut +61 2 8594 0400

f +61 2 8594 0499

Australia

Australia

Alexandria NSW 2015

Alexandria NSW 2015




ABN 44 000 964 278

Page 1 of 1822/8/2016

SE155905 R0

SGS holding time criteria are drawn from current regulations and are highly dependent on sample container preservation as specified in the SGS “Field Sampling Guide for

Containers and Holding Time” (ref: GU-(AU)-ENV.001). Soil samples guidelines are derived from NEPM "Schedule B(3) Guideline on Laboratory Analysis of Potentially

Contaminated Soils". Water sample guidelines are derived from "AS/NZS 5667.1 : 1998 Water Quality - sampling part 1" and APHA "Standard Methods for the Examination

of Water and Wastewater" 21st edition 2005.

Extraction and analysis holding time due dates listed are calculated from the date sampled, although holding times may be extended after laboratory extraction for some

analytes. The due dates are the suggested dates that samples may be held before extraction or analysis and still be considered valid.

Extraction and analysis dates are shown in Green when within suggested criteria or Red with an appended dagger symbol (†) when outside suggested criteria. If the sampled

date is not supplied then compliance with criteria cannot be determined. If the received date is after one or both due dates then holding time will fail by default.

HOLDING TIME SUMMARY

Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN106Conductivity (1:2) in soil

Sample No.Sample Name QC Ref Sampled Received Extraction Due Extracted Analysis Due Analysed

TP01-0.7 SE155905.001 LB107944 10 Aug 2016 12 Aug 2016 17 Aug 2016 17 Aug 2016 17 Aug 2016 17 Aug 2016




Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN106Conductivity and TDS by Calculation - Soil






Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN122Exchangeable Cations and Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC/ESP/SAR)


TP01-0.7 SE155905.001 LB107837 10 Aug 2016 12 Aug 2016 07 Sep 2016 17 Aug 2016 07 Sep 2016 19 Aug 2016




Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN602Fibre Identification in soil


SS1 SE155905.005 LB107935 10 Aug 2016 12 Aug 2016 10 Aug 2017 18 Aug 2016 10 Aug 2017 19 Aug 2016





Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN312Mercury in Soil


SS1 SE155905.005 LB107811 10 Aug 2016 12 Aug 2016 07 Sep 2016 17 Aug 2016 07 Sep 2016 19 Aug 2016





Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN002Moisture Content











Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420OC Pesticides in Soil


SS1 SE155905.005 LB107668 10 Aug 2016 12 Aug 2016 24 Aug 2016 15 Aug 2016 24 Sep 2016 19 Aug 2016





Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420OP Pesticides in Soil







22/8/2016 Page 2 of 18

SE155905 R0










Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN420PAH (Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons) in Soil







Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420PCBs in Soil







Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN101pH in soil (1:2)






Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN245Soluble Anions in Soil from 1:2 DI Extract by Ion Chromatography


TP01-0.7 SE155905.001 LB107914 10 Aug 2016 12 Aug 2016 17 Aug 2016 17 Aug 2016 14 Sep 2016 17 Aug 2016




Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN420Speciated Phenols in Soil







Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN040/AN320Total Recoverable Metals in Soil/Waste Solids/Materials by ICPOES


SS1 SE155905.005 LB107886 10 Aug 2016 12 Aug 2016 06 Feb 2017 17 Aug 2016 06 Feb 2017 19 Aug 2016





Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN403TRH (Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons) in Soil







Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN433VOC’s in Soil







Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN433Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil




22/8/2016 Page 3 of 18

SE155905 R0










Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN433Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil (continued)





22/8/2016 Page 4 of 18

SE155905 R0

Surrogate results are evaluated against upper and lower limit criteria established in the SGS QA /QC plan (Ref: MP-(AU)-[ENV]QU-022). At least two of three routine level soil

sample surrogate spike recoveries for BTEX/VOC are to be within 70-130% where control charts have not been developed and within the established control limits for charted

surrogates. Matrix effects may void this as an acceptance criterion. Water sample surrogate spike recoveries are to be within 40-130%. The presence of emulsions,

surfactants and particulates may void this as an acceptance criterion.

Result is shown in Green when within suggested criteria or Red with an appended reason identifer when outside suggested criteria. Refer to the footnotes section at the end

of this report for failure reasons.

SURROGATES

Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420OC Pesticides in Soil

UnitsSample Name Sample NumberParameter Criteria Recovery %

Tetrachloro-m-xylene (TCMX) (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 91

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 89

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 91

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 87

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 89

Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420OP Pesticides in Soil


2-fluorobiphenyl (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 84

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 82

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 82

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 82

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 80

d14-p-terphenyl (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 94

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 96

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 96

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 98

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 92

Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN420PAH (Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons) in Soil


2-fluorobiphenyl (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 70 - 130% 84

SS2 SE155905.006 % 70 - 130% 82

SS3 SE155905.007 % 70 - 130% 82

SS4 SE155905.008 % 70 - 130% 82

SS5 SE155905.009 % 70 - 130% 80

d14-p-terphenyl (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 70 - 130% 94

SS2 SE155905.006 % 70 - 130% 96

SS3 SE155905.007 % 70 - 130% 96

SS4 SE155905.008 % 70 - 130% 98

SS5 SE155905.009 % 70 - 130% 92

d5-nitrobenzene (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 70 - 130% 82

SS2 SE155905.006 % 70 - 130% 82

SS3 SE155905.007 % 70 - 130% 82

SS4 SE155905.008 % 70 - 130% 82

SS5 SE155905.009 % 70 - 130% 80

Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420PCBs in Soil


Tetrachloro-m-xylene (TCMX) (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 91

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 89

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 91

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 87

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 89

Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN420Speciated Phenols in Soil


2,4,6-Tribromophenol (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 70 - 130% 87

SS2 SE155905.006 % 70 - 130% 90

SS3 SE155905.007 % 70 - 130% 89

SS4 SE155905.008 % 70 - 130% 88

SS5 SE155905.009 % 70 - 130% 78

d5-phenol (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 50 - 130% 89

SS2 SE155905.006 % 50 - 130% 92

SS3 SE155905.007 % 50 - 130% 88

SS4 SE155905.008 % 50 - 130% 84

SS5 SE155905.009 % 50 - 130% 76

Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN433VOC’s in Soil


Bromofluorobenzene (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 89

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 84

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 83

22/8/2016 Page 5 of 18

SE155905 R0

Surrogate results are evaluated against upper and lower limit criteria established in the SGS QA /QC plan (Ref: MP-(AU)-[ENV]QU-022). At least two of three routine level soil

sample surrogate spike recoveries for BTEX/VOC are to be within 70-130% where control charts have not been developed and within the established control limits for charted

surrogates. Matrix effects may void this as an acceptance criterion. Water sample surrogate spike recoveries are to be within 40-130%. The presence of emulsions,

surfactants and particulates may void this as an acceptance criterion.

Result is shown in Green when within suggested criteria or Red with an appended reason identifer when outside suggested criteria. Refer to the footnotes section at the end

of this report for failure reasons.

SURROGATES

Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN433VOC’s in Soil (continued)



SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 88

d4-1,2-dichloroethane (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 82

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 75

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 76

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 79

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 80

d8-toluene (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 84

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 75

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 80

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 86

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 83

Dibromofluoromethane (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 75

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 71

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 74

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 74

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 74

Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN433Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil



SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 84

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 83

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 83

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 88

d4-1,2-dichloroethane (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 82

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 75

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 76

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 79

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 80

d8-toluene (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 84

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 75

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 80

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 86

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 83

Dibromofluoromethane (Surrogate) SS1 SE155905.005 % 60 - 130% 75

SS2 SE155905.006 % 60 - 130% 71

SS3 SE155905.007 % 60 - 130% 74

SS4 SE155905.008 % 60 - 130% 74

SS5 SE155905.009 % 60 - 130% 74

22/8/2016 Page 6 of 18

SE155905 R0

Blank results are evaluated against the limit of reporting (LOR), for the chosen method and its associated instrumentation, typically 2.5 times the statistically determined

method detection limit (MDL).

Result is shown in Green when within suggested criteria or Red with an appended dagger symbol (†) when outside suggested criteria.

METHOD BLANKS

Conductivity (1:2) in soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN106

Sample Number Parameter Units LOR Result

LB107944.001 Conductivity (1:2) @25 C* µS/cm 1 <1

Conductivity and TDS by Calculation - Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN106

Sample Number Parameter Units LOR

Exchangeable Cations and Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC/ESP/SAR) Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN122

Sample Number Parameter Units LOR

Mercury in Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN312


LB107811.001 Mercury mg/kg 0.05 <0.05

LB107812.001 Mercury mg/kg 0.05 <0.05

OC Pesticides in Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420


LB107668.001 Hexachlorobenzene (HCB) mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Alpha BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Lindane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Heptachlor mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Aldrin mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Beta BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Delta BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Heptachlor epoxide mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Alpha Endosulfan mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Gamma Chlordane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Alpha Chlordane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

p,p'-DDE mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Dieldrin mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Endrin mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Beta Endosulfan mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

p,p'-DDD mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

p,p'-DDT mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Endosulfan sulphate mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Endrin Aldehyde mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Methoxychlor mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Endrin Ketone mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Isodrin mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Mirex mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Surrogates Tetrachloro-m-xylene (TCMX) (Surrogate) % - 91

OP Pesticides in Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420


LB107668.001 Dichlorvos mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

Dimethoate mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

Diazinon (Dimpylate) mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

Fenitrothion mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Malathion mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Chlorpyrifos (Chlorpyrifos Ethyl) mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Parathion-ethyl (Parathion) mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Bromophos Ethyl mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Methidathion mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

Ethion mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Surrogates 2-fluorobiphenyl (Surrogate) % - 84

22/8/2016 Page 7 of 18

SE155905 R0




METHOD BLANKS

OP Pesticides in Soil (continued) Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420


LB107668.001 Surrogates d14-p-terphenyl (Surrogate) % - 98

PAH (Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons) in Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN420


LB107668.001 Naphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

2-methylnaphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

1-methylnaphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Acenaphthylene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Acenaphthene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Fluorene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Phenanthrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Anthracene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Pyrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Chrysene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Dibenzo(ah)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Benzo(ghi)perylene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Total PAH (18) mg/kg 0.8 <0.8

Surrogates d5-nitrobenzene (Surrogate) % - 82

2-fluorobiphenyl (Surrogate) % - 84

d14-p-terphenyl (Surrogate) % - 98

PCBs in Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420


LB107668.001 Arochlor 1016 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

Arochlor 1221 mg/kg 0.2 <0.2








Total PCBs (Arochlors) mg/kg 1 <1

Surrogates Tetrachloro-m-xylene (TCMX) (Surrogate) % - 91

Soluble Anions in Soil from 1:2 DI Extract by Ion Chromatography Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN245


LB107914.001 Chloride mg/kg 0.25 <0.25

Sulphate mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

Speciated Phenols in Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN420


LB107668.001 Phenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

2-methyl phenol (o-cresol) mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

3/4-methyl phenol (m/p-cresol) mg/kg 1 <1

2-chlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

2,4-dimethylphenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

2,6-dichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

2,4-dichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

2,4,6-trichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

2-nitrophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

4-nitrophenol mg/kg 1 <1

2,4,5-trichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

2,3,4,6/2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol mg/kg 1 <1

Pentachlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

2,4-dinitrophenol mg/kg 2 <2

4-chloro-3-methylphenol mg/kg 2 <2

Surrogates 2,4,6-Tribromophenol (Surrogate) % - 103

22/8/2016 Page 8 of 18

SE155905 R0




METHOD BLANKS

Speciated Phenols in Soil (continued) Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN420


LB107668.001 Surrogates d5-phenol (Surrogate) % - 107

Total Recoverable Metals in Soil/Waste Solids/Materials by ICPOES Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN040/AN320


LB107886.001 Arsenic, As mg/kg 3 <3

Cadmium, Cd mg/kg 0.3 <0.3

Chromium, Cr mg/kg 0.3 <0.3

Copper, Cu mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

Lead, Pb mg/kg 1 <1

Nickel, Ni mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

Zinc, Zn mg/kg 0.5 <0.5

TRH (Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons) in Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN403


LB107668.001 TRH C10-C14 mg/kg 20 <20

TRH C15-C28 mg/kg 45 <45

TRH C29-C36 mg/kg 45 <45

TRH C37-C40 mg/kg 100 <100

TRH C10-C36 Total mg/kg 110 <110

VOC’s in Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN433


LB107646.001 Monocyclic Aromatic

Hydrocarbons

Benzene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Toluene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

m/p-xylene mg/kg 0.2 <0.2

o-xylene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Polycyclic VOCs Naphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1

Surrogates Dibromofluoromethane (Surrogate) % - 81

d4-1,2-dichloroethane (Surrogate) % - 80

d8-toluene (Surrogate) % - 88

Bromofluorobenzene (Surrogate) % - 87

Totals Total BTEX mg/kg 0.6 <0.6

Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN433


LB107646.001 TRH C6-C9 mg/kg 20 <20

Surrogates Dibromofluoromethane (Surrogate) % - 80

d4-1,2-dichloroethane (Surrogate) % - 80

d8-toluene (Surrogate) % - 88

22/8/2016 Page 9 of 18

SE155905 R0

Duplicates are calculated as Relative Percentage Difference (RPD) using the formula: RPD = | OriginalResult - ReplicateResult | x 100 / Mean

The RPD is evaluated against the Maximum Allowable Difference (MAD) criteria and can be graphically represented by a curve calculated from the Statistical Detection Limit

(SDL) and Limiting Repeatability (LR) using the formula: MAD = 100 x SDL / Mean + LR

Where the Maximum Allowable Difference evaluates to a number larger than 200 it is displayed as 200.

RPD is shown in Green when within suggested criteria or Red with an appended reason identifer when outside suggested criteria. Refer to the footnotes section at the end of

this report for failure reasons.

DUPLICATES


UnitsParameterOriginal LORDuplicate Original Duplicate Criteria % RPD %

SE155905.004 LB107944.008 Conductivity (1:2) @25 C* µS/cm 1 190 200 31 6

Resistivity (1:2)* ohm cm - 5400 5100 15 6

Resistivity (1:2)* ohm m 1 54 51 17 6



SE156020.001 LB107943.013 Conductivity of Extract (1:5 dry sample basis) µS/cm 1 18000 18081.0338983051 30 1



SE155900.002 LB107811.014 Mercury mg/kg 0.05 -0.0040745839-0.0022918917 200 0

SE155905.007 LB107811.024 Mercury mg/kg 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 200 0



Moisture Content Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN002


SE155884.002 LB107713.011 % Moisture %w/w 0.5 17 18 36 3

SE155884.012 LB107713.022 % Moisture %w/w 0.5 15 15 37 1

SE155905.001 LB107713.033 % Moisture %w/w 0.5 17 17 36 3

SE155907.001 LB107713.043 % Moisture %w/w 0.5 5.3 5.8 48 8



SE155908.005 LB107668.014 Hexachlorobenzene (HCB) mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Alpha BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Lindane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Heptachlor mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Aldrin mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Beta BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Delta BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Heptachlor epoxide mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

o,p'-DDE mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Alpha Endosulfan mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 200 0

Gamma Chlordane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Alpha Chlordane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

trans-Nonachlor mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

p,p'-DDE mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Dieldrin mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 200 0

Endrin mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 200 0

o,p'-DDD mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

o,p'-DDT mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Beta Endosulfan mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 200 0

p,p'-DDD mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

p,p'-DDT mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Endosulfan sulphate mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Endrin Aldehyde mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Methoxychlor mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Endrin Ketone mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Isodrin mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Mirex mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Surrogates Tetrachloro-m-xylene (TCMX) (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.12 0.12 30 1



SE155909.004 LB107668.027 Naphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 0.07 163 0

2-methylnaphthalene mg/kg 0.1 0.3 0.32 62 6

1-methylnaphthalene mg/kg 0.1 0.3 0.34 61 13

Acenaphthylene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 0.01 200 0

Acenaphthene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 0.04 200 0

22/8/2016 Page 10 of 18

SE155905 R0







DUPLICATES

PAH (Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons) in Soil (continued) Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN420


SE155909.004 LB107668.027 Fluorene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 0.06 184 0

Phenanthrene mg/kg 0.1 0.6 0.64 46 8

Anthracene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 0.06 184 0

Fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 0.4 0.47 52 9

Pyrene mg/kg 0.1 0.3 0.33 60 0

Benzo(a)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 0.2 0.19 81 5

Chrysene mg/kg 0.1 0.2 0.17 91 6

Benzo(b&j)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 0.1 0.13 107 0

Benzo(k)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 0.04 200 0

Benzo(a)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 0.1 135 0

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 0.03 200 0

Dibenzo(ah)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 0.01 200 0

Benzo(ghi)perylene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 0.05 184 0

Carcinogenic PAHs, BaP TEQ <LOR=0 TEQ (mg/kg) 0.2 <0.2 0.1207 200 0

Carcinogenic PAHs, BaP TEQ <LOR=LOR TEQ (mg/kg) 0.3 <0.3 0.2517 129 0

Carcinogenic PAHs, BaP TEQ <LOR=LOR/2 TEQ (mg/kg) 0.2 <0.2 0.1862 134 0

Total PAH (18) mg/kg 0.8 2.3 2.56 63 10

Surrogates d5-nitrobenzene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.4 0.38 30 12

2-fluorobiphenyl (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.4 0.35 30 13

d14-p-terphenyl (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.5 0.44 30 11

pH in soil (1:2) Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN101


SE155905.004 LB107944.008 pH (1:2) pH Units - 7.7 7.7 31 0



SE155905.004 LB107914.007 Chloride mg/kg 0.25 7.7 7.5 33 3

Sulphate mg/kg 0.5 13 14 45 5



SE155909.006 LB107668.025 Phenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 200 0

2-methyl phenol (o-cresol) mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 200 0

3/4-methyl phenol (m/p-cresol) mg/kg 1 <1 <1 200 0

Total Cresol mg/kg 1.5 <1.5 <1.5 200 0

2-chlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 200 0

2,4-dimethylphenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 200 0

2,6-dichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 200 0

2,4-dichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 200 0

2,4,6-trichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 200 0

2-nitrophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 200 0

4-nitrophenol mg/kg 1 <1 <1 200 0

2,4,5-trichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 200 0

2,3,4,6/2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol mg/kg 1 <1 <1 200 0

Pentachlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 200 0

2,4-dinitrophenol mg/kg 2 <2 <2 200 0

4-chloro-3-methylphenol mg/kg 2 <2 <2 200 0

Surrogates 2,4,6-Tribromophenol (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.4 4.7 30 7

d5-phenol (Surrogate) mg/kg - 1.9 2.0 30 4



SE155905.005 LB107886.014 Arsenic, As mg/kg 3 <3 <3 78 14

Cadmium, Cd mg/kg 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 149 0

Chromium, Cr mg/kg 0.3 19 20 33 7

Copper, Cu mg/kg 0.5 6.9 7.0 37 0

Lead, Pb mg/kg 1 8 8 43 0

Nickel, Ni mg/kg 0.5 5.6 5.4 39 2

22/8/2016 Page 11 of 18

SE155905 R0







DUPLICATES

Total Recoverable Metals in Soil/Waste Solids/Materials by ICPOES (continued) Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN040/AN320


SE155905.005 LB107886.014 Zinc, Zn mg/kg 0.5 14 13 45 2



SE155909.004 LB107668.026 TRH C10-C14 mg/kg 20 <20 0 200 0

TRH C15-C28 mg/kg 45 170 217 53 24

TRH C29-C36 mg/kg 45 110 120 69 10

TRH C37-C40 mg/kg 100 <100 0 200 0

TRH C10-C36 Total mg/kg 110 280 337 66 19

TRH C10-C40 Total mg/kg 210 280 337 98 19

TRH F Bands TRH >C10-C16 (F2) mg/kg 25 <25 32 123 25

TRH >C10-C16 (F2) - Naphthalene mg/kg 25 <25 32 123 25

TRH >C16-C34 (F3) mg/kg 90 250 309 62 20

TRH >C34-C40 (F4) mg/kg 120 <120 0 200 0



SE155900.006 LB107646.014 Monocyclic

Aromatic

Benzene mg/kg 0.1 0.01 0.01 200 0

Toluene mg/kg 0.1 0.03 0.03 200 0

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 0.1 0.01 0.01 200 0

m/p-xylene mg/kg 0.2 0.02 0.03 200 0

o-xylene mg/kg 0.1 0.01 0.01 200 0

Polycyclic

VOCs

Naphthalene mg/kg 0.1 0 0 200 0

Surrogates Dibromofluoromethane (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.22 4.25 50 1

d4-1,2-dichloroethane (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.63 4.58 50 1

d8-toluene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.76 4.85 50 2

Bromofluorobenzene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 3.79 3.9 50 3

Totals Total Xylenes* mg/kg 0.3 0.03 0.04 200 0

Total BTEX mg/kg 0.6 0.08 0.09 200 0

SE155910.001 LB107646.023 Monocyclic

Aromatic

Benzene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Toluene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

m/p-xylene mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 200 0

o-xylene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0

Polycyclic

VOCs

Naphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 200 0





Totals Total Xylenes* mg/kg 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 200 0

Total BTEX mg/kg 0.6 <0.6 <0.6 200 0



SE155900.006 LB107646.014 TRH C6-C10 mg/kg 25 0.13 0.14 200 0

TRH C6-C9 mg/kg 20 0 0 200 0





VPH F Bands Benzene (F0) mg/kg 0.1 0.01 0.01 200 0

TRH C6-C10 minus BTEX (F1) mg/kg 25 0.05 0.05 200 0

SE155910.001 LB107646.023 TRH C6-C10 mg/kg 25 0.03 0.1 200 0

TRH C6-C9 mg/kg 20 0 0 200 0





VPH F Bands Benzene (F0) mg/kg 0.1 0.01 0.02 200 0

TRH C6-C10 minus BTEX (F1) mg/kg 25 -0.05 -0.0099999999 200 0

22/8/2016 Page 12 of 18

SE155905 R0

Laboratory Control Standard (LCS) results are evaluated against an expected result, typically the concentration of analyte spiked into the control during the sample

preparation stage, producing a percentage recovery. The criteria applied to the percentage recovery is established in the SGS QA /QC plan (Ref: MP-(AU)-[ENV]QU-022). For

more information refer to the footnotes in the concluding page of this report.

Recovery is shown in Green when within suggested criteria or Red with an appended dagger symbol (†) when outside suggested criteria.

LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLES


LORUnitsParameterSample Number Result Expected Criteria % Recovery %

LB107944.002 Conductivity (1:2) @25 C* µS/cm 1 310 303 85 - 115 101



LB107943.002 Conductivity of Extract (1:5 dry sample basis) µS/cm 1 NA 303 85 - 115 101

Exchangeable Cations and Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC/ESP/SAR) Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN122


LB107837.002 Exchangeable Sodium, Na mg/kg 2 NA 390 80 - 120 83

Exchangeable Potassium, K mg/kg 2 NA 343 80 - 120 83

Exchangeable Calcium, Ca mg/kg 2 NA 2570 80 - 120 85

Exchangeable Magnesium, Mg mg/kg 2 NA 635 80 - 120 87



LB107811.002 Mercury mg/kg 0.05 0.20 0.2 70 - 130 99

LB107812.002 Mercury mg/kg 0.05 0.19 0.2 70 - 130 95



LB107668.002 Heptachlor mg/kg 0.1 0.2 0.2 60 - 140 84

Aldrin mg/kg 0.1 0.2 0.2 60 - 140 82

Delta BHC mg/kg 0.1 0.2 0.2 60 - 140 75

Dieldrin mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 0.2 60 - 140 75

Endrin mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 0.2 60 - 140 87

p,p'-DDT mg/kg 0.1 0.2 0.2 60 - 140 77

Surrogates Tetrachloro-m-xylene (TCMX) (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.13 0.15 40 - 130 87



LB107668.002 Dichlorvos mg/kg 0.5 1.8 2 60 - 140 89

Diazinon (Dimpylate) mg/kg 0.5 1.7 2 60 - 140 87

Chlorpyrifos (Chlorpyrifos Ethyl) mg/kg 0.2 1.7 2 60 - 140 84

Ethion mg/kg 0.2 1.6 2 60 - 140 79

Surrogates 2-fluorobiphenyl (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.4 0.5 40 - 130 82

d14-p-terphenyl (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.5 0.5 40 - 130 90



LB107668.002 Naphthalene mg/kg 0.1 3.7 4 60 - 140 93

Acenaphthylene mg/kg 0.1 3.8 4 60 - 140 94

Acenaphthene mg/kg 0.1 3.9 4 60 - 140 98

Phenanthrene mg/kg 0.1 3.7 4 60 - 140 93

Anthracene mg/kg 0.1 3.8 4 60 - 140 95

Fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 3.6 4 60 - 140 91

Pyrene mg/kg 0.1 3.7 4 60 - 140 91

Benzo(a)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 4.0 4 60 - 140 100

Surrogates d5-nitrobenzene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.4 0.5 40 - 130 80

2-fluorobiphenyl (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.4 0.5 40 - 130 82

d14-p-terphenyl (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.5 0.5 40 - 130 90

PCBs in Soil Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN400/AN420


LB107668.002 Arochlor 1260 mg/kg 0.2 0.4 0.4 60 - 140 101

pH in soil (1:2) Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN101

LORUnitsParameterSample Number

22/8/2016 Page 13 of 18

SE155905 R0

Laboratory Control Standard (LCS) results are evaluated against an expected result, typically the concentration of analyte spiked into the control during the sample

preparation stage, producing a percentage recovery. The criteria applied to the percentage recovery is established in the SGS QA /QC plan (Ref: MP-(AU)-[ENV]QU-022). For

more information refer to the footnotes in the concluding page of this report.

Recovery is shown in Green when within suggested criteria or Red with an appended dagger symbol (†) when outside suggested criteria.

LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLES

pH in soil (1:2) (continued) Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN101


LB107944.003 pH (1:2) pH Units - 7.4 7.415 98 - 102 99



LB107914.002 Chloride mg/kg 0.25 37 40 70 - 130 92

Sulphate mg/kg 0.5 39 40 70 - 130 96



LB107668.002 Phenol mg/kg 0.5 1.0 1 70 - 130 101

2,4-dichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 1.2 1 70 - 130 118

2,4,6-trichlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 0.9 1 70 - 130 93

Pentachlorophenol mg/kg 0.5 1.3 1 70 - 130 128

Surrogates 2,4,6-Tribromophenol (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.9 5 40 - 130 98

d5-phenol (Surrogate) mg/kg - 2.0 2 40 - 130 101



LB107886.002 Arsenic, As mg/kg 3 52 50 80 - 120 103

Cadmium, Cd mg/kg 0.3 52 50 80 - 120 105

Chromium, Cr mg/kg 0.3 50 50 80 - 120 101

Copper, Cu mg/kg 0.5 50 50 80 - 120 100

Lead, Pb mg/kg 1 52 50 80 - 120 104

Nickel, Ni mg/kg 0.5 51 50 80 - 120 102

Zinc, Zn mg/kg 0.5 51 50 80 - 120 102



LB107668.002 TRH C10-C14 mg/kg 20 40 40 60 - 140 100

TRH C15-C28 mg/kg 45 <45 40 60 - 140 95

TRH C29-C36 mg/kg 45 <45 40 60 - 140 78

TRH F Bands TRH >C10-C16 (F2) mg/kg 25 40 40 60 - 140 100

TRH >C16-C34 (F3) mg/kg 90 <90 40 60 - 140 83

TRH >C34-C40 (F4) mg/kg 120 <120 20 60 - 140 80



LB107646.002 Monocyclic

Aromatic

Benzene mg/kg 0.1 1.8 2.9 60 - 140 62

Toluene mg/kg 0.1 2.2 2.9 60 - 140 76

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 0.1 2.1 2.9 60 - 140 73

m/p-xylene mg/kg 0.2 4.0 5.8 60 - 140 69

o-xylene mg/kg 0.1 2.0 2.9 60 - 140 68

Surrogates Dibromofluoromethane (Surrogate) mg/kg - 3.9 5 60 - 140 78

d4-1,2-dichloroethane (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.1 5 60 - 140 81

d8-toluene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.4 5 60 - 140 88

Bromofluorobenzene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.7 5 60 - 140 94



LB107646.002 TRH C6-C10 mg/kg 25 <25 24.65 60 - 140 86

TRH C6-C9 mg/kg 20 <20 23.2 60 - 140 75

Surrogates Dibromofluoromethane (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.1 5 60 - 140 81

d4-1,2-dichloroethane (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.3 5 60 - 140 85

d8-toluene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 5.0 5 60 - 140 101

Bromofluorobenzene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.5 5 60 - 140 89

VPH F Bands TRH C6-C10 minus BTEX (F1) mg/kg 25 <25 7.25 60 - 140 124

22/8/2016 Page 14 of 18

SE155905 R0

Matrix Spike (MS) results are evaluated as the percentage recovery of an expected result, typically the concentration of analyte spiked into a field sub -sample during the

sample preparation stage. The original sample 's result is subtracted from the sub-sample result before determining the percentage recovery. The criteria applied to the

percentage recovery is established in the SGS QA/QC plan (ref: MP-(AU)-[ENV]QU-022). For more information refer to the footnotes in the concluding page of this report.

Recovery is shown in Green when within suggested criteria or Red with an appended reason identifer when outside suggested criteria. Refer to the footnotes section at the

end of this report for failure reasons.

MATRIX SPIKES


QC Sample Parameter Units LORSample Number Result Original Spike Recovery%

SE155863.037 LB107811.004 Mercury mg/kg 0.05 0.31 0.17 0.2 69 ④

SE155905.008 LB107812.004 Mercury mg/kg 0.05 0.17 <0.05 0.2 88



SE155908.001 LB107668.028 Hexachlorobenzene (HCB) mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Alpha BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Lindane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Heptachlor mg/kg 0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.2 75

Aldrin mg/kg 0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.2 76

Beta BHC mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Delta BHC mg/kg 0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.2 75

Heptachlor epoxide mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

o,p'-DDE mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Alpha Endosulfan mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - -

Gamma Chlordane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Alpha Chlordane mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

trans-Nonachlor mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

p,p'-DDE mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Dieldrin mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 75

Endrin mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 76

o,p'-DDD mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

o,p'-DDT mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Beta Endosulfan mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - -

p,p'-DDD mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

p,p'-DDT mg/kg 0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.2 75

Endosulfan sulphate mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Endrin Aldehyde mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Methoxychlor mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Endrin Ketone mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Isodrin mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Mirex mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Surrogates Tetrachloro-m-xylene (TCMX) (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.11 0.13 - 75



SE155905.005 LB107668.026 Dichlorvos mg/kg 0.5 1.7 <0.5 2 87

Dimethoate mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 - -

Diazinon (Dimpylate) mg/kg 0.5 1.8 <0.5 2 88

Fenitrothion mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - -

Malathion mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - -

Chlorpyrifos (Chlorpyrifos Ethyl) mg/kg 0.2 1.7 <0.2 2 85

Parathion-ethyl (Parathion) mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - -

Bromophos Ethyl mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - -

Methidathion mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 - -

Ethion mg/kg 0.2 1.6 <0.2 2 81

Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - -

Surrogates 2-fluorobiphenyl (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.4 0.4 - 82

d14-p-terphenyl (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.5 0.5 - 92



SE155905.005 LB107668.026 Naphthalene mg/kg 0.1 3.7 <0.1 4 91

2-methylnaphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

1-methylnaphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Acenaphthylene mg/kg 0.1 3.6 <0.1 4 91

Acenaphthene mg/kg 0.1 3.8 <0.1 4 95

Fluorene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Phenanthrene mg/kg 0.1 3.6 <0.1 4 91

Anthracene mg/kg 0.1 3.8 <0.1 4 94

Fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 3.6 <0.1 4 91

22/8/2016 Page 15 of 18

SE155905 R0

Matrix Spike (MS) results are evaluated as the percentage recovery of an expected result, typically the concentration of analyte spiked into a field sub -sample during the

sample preparation stage. The original sample 's result is subtracted from the sub-sample result before determining the percentage recovery. The criteria applied to the

percentage recovery is established in the SGS QA/QC plan (ref: MP-(AU)-[ENV]QU-022). For more information refer to the footnotes in the concluding page of this report.

Recovery is shown in Green when within suggested criteria or Red with an appended reason identifer when outside suggested criteria. Refer to the footnotes section at the

end of this report for failure reasons.

MATRIX SPIKES

PAH (Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons) in Soil (continued) Method: ME-(AU)-[ENV]AN420


SE155905.005 LB107668.026 Pyrene mg/kg 0.1 3.6 <0.1 4 89

Benzo(a)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Chrysene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Benzo(b&j)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Benzo(k)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Benzo(a)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 3.9 <0.1 4 97

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Dibenzo(ah)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Benzo(ghi)perylene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Carcinogenic PAHs, BaP TEQ <LOR=0 TEQ 0.2 3.9 <0.2 - -

Carcinogenic PAHs, BaP TEQ <LOR=LOR TEQ (mg/kg) 0.3 4.0 <0.3 - -

Carcinogenic PAHs, BaP TEQ <LOR=LOR/2 TEQ (mg/kg) 0.2 3.9 <0.2 - -

Total PAH (18) mg/kg 0.8 29 <0.8 - -

Surrogates d5-nitrobenzene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.4 0.4 - 80

2-fluorobiphenyl (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.4 0.4 - 82

d14-p-terphenyl (Surrogate) mg/kg - 0.5 0.5 - 92



SE155905.005 LB107668.027 TRH C10-C14 mg/kg 20 42 <20 40 105

TRH C15-C28 mg/kg 45 45 <45 40 113

TRH C29-C36 mg/kg 45 <45 <45 40 78

TRH C37-C40 mg/kg 100 <100 <100 - -

TRH C10-C36 Total mg/kg 110 120 <110 - -

TRH C10-C40 Total mg/kg 210 <210 <210 - -

TRH F Bands TRH >C10-C16 (F2) mg/kg 25 43 <25 40 108

TRH >C10-C16 (F2) - Naphthalene mg/kg 25 43 <25 - -

TRH >C16-C34 (F3) mg/kg 90 <90 <90 40 105

TRH >C34-C40 (F4) mg/kg 120 <120 <120 - -



SE155883.001 LB107646.024 Monocyclic

Aromatic

Benzene mg/kg 0.1 1.9 <0.1 2.9 64

Toluene mg/kg 0.1 2.3 <0.1 2.9 79

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 0.1 2.2 <0.1 2.9 77

m/p-xylene mg/kg 0.2 4.2 <0.2 5.8 72

o-xylene mg/kg 0.1 2.2 <0.1 2.9 76

Polycyclic

VOCs

Naphthalene mg/kg 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - -

Surrogates Dibromofluoromethane (Surrogate) mg/kg - 3.8 4.2 - 76

d4-1,2-dichloroethane (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.4 4.3 - 87

d8-toluene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.0 4.1 - 81

Bromofluorobenzene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 3.7 3.7 - 74

Totals Total Xylenes* mg/kg 0.3 6.4 <0.3 - -

Total BTEX mg/kg 0.6 13 <0.6 - -



SE155883.001 LB107646.024 TRH C6-C10 mg/kg 25 <25 <25 24.65 82

TRH C6-C9 mg/kg 20 <20 <20 23.2 82

Surrogates Dibromofluoromethane (Surrogate) mg/kg - 3.8 3.8 - 76

d4-1,2-dichloroethane (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.4 4.0 - 87

d8-toluene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 4.0 4.4 - 81

Bromofluorobenzene (Surrogate) mg/kg - 3.7 3.6 - 74

VPH F

Bands

Benzene (F0) mg/kg 0.1 1.9 <0.1 - -

TRH C6-C10 minus BTEX (F1) mg/kg 25 <25 <25 7.25 104

22/8/2016 Page 16 of 18

SE155905 R0

Matrix spike duplicates are calculated as Relative Percent Difference (RPD) using the formula: RPD = | OriginalResult - ReplicateResult | x 100 / Mean

The original result is the analyte concentration of the matrix spike. The Duplicate result is the analyte concentration of the matrix spike duplicate.

The RPD is evaluated against the Maximum Allowable Difference (MAD) criteria and can be graphically represented by a curve calculated from the Statistical Detection Limit (SDL) and Limiting Repeatability (LR) using the formula: MAD = 100 x SDL / Mean + LR


RPD is shown in Green when within suggested criteria or Red with an appended reason identifer when outside suggested criteria. Refer to the footnotes section at the end of this report for failure reasons.

MATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATES

No matrix spike duplicates were required for this job.

22/8/2016 Page 17 of 18

SE155905 R0FOOTNOTES

Samples analysed as received.

Solid samples expressed on a dry weight basis.

QC criteria are subject to internal review according to the SGS QA/QC plan and may be provided on request or alternatively can be found here :

http://www.sgs.com.au/~/media/Local/Australia/Documents/Technical Documents/MP-AU-ENV-QU-022 QA QC Plan.pdf

① At least 2 of 3 surrogates are within acceptance criteria.

② RPD failed acceptance criteria due to sample heterogeneity.

③ Results less than 5 times LOR preclude acceptance criteria for RPD.

④ Recovery failed acceptance criteria due to matrix interference.

⑤ Recovery failed acceptance criteria due to the presence of significant concentration of analyte (i.e. the

concentration of analyte exceeds the spike level).

⑥ LOR was raised due to sample matrix interference.

⑦ LOR was raised due to dilution of significantly high concentration of analyte in sample.

⑧ Reanalysis of sample in duplicate confirmed sample heterogeneity and inconsistency of results.

⑨ Recovery failed acceptance criteria due to sample heterogeneity.

⑩ LOR was raised due to high conductivity of the sample (required dilution).

† Refer to Analytical Report comments for further information.

*

-

IS

LNR

LOR

QFH

QFL

NATA accreditation does not cover tthe performance of this service .

Sample not analysed for this analyte.

Insufficient sample for analysis.

Sample listed, but not received.

Limit of reporting.

QC result is above the upper tolerance.

QC result is below the lower tolerance.

This document is issued, on the Client 's behalf, by the Company under its General Conditions of Service, available on request and accessible at

http://www.sgs.com/en/terms-and-conditions. The Client's attention is drawn to the limitation of liability, indemnification and jurisdiction issues defined

therein.

Any other holder of this document is advised that information contained herein reflects the Company 's findings at the time of its intervention only and

within the limits of Client's instructions, if any. The Company's sole responsibility is to its Client and this document does not exonerate parties to a

transaction from exercising all their rights and obligations under the transaction documents.

This test report shall not be reproduced, except in full.

22/8/2016 Page 18 of 18

Offer of Professional Services West Dapto Stage 2 Coal Wash Emplacement Assessment

Prepared for Stockland Page 11

About Cardno Cardno is an ASX-listed professional infrastructure and environmental services company, with expertise in the development and improvement of physical and social infrastructure for communities around the world. Cardno’s team includes leading professionals who plan, design, manage and deliver sustainable projects and community programs. Cardno is an international company listed on the Australian Securities Exchange [ASX:CDD].

Contact Cardno (NSW/ACT) Pty Ltd

Level 1, 47 Burelli Street Wollongong NSW 2500

Phone 02 4231 9600 Fax 02 4228 6811

[email protected] www.cardno.com