risk assessment and method statement

Practical, sustainable solutions to complex environmental problems

E: [email protected]

www.tgen.co.uk

Risk Assessment and Method Statement

for

Bulk Excavation Monitoring, Management and Validation

at

Earls Court Redevelopment (Heavy Lifting Crane)

SW5 9TA

(ref. TJ3005CR1v1.2)

Terragen Environmental Consultants Limited Registered Office: 10a St John Street, Newport Pagnell, Bucks MK16 8HJ

Registered in England & Wales (Registered No. 05711942)

The Ridings, 4 Village Close, Sherington, Bucks, MK16 9PZ E: [email protected]

W: www.tgen.co.uk

DOCUMENT CONTROL DETAILS

Report Title: Risk Assessment and Method Statement

for Bulk Excavation Monitoring, Management and Validation

Site Address:

Earls Court Redevelopment (Heavy Lifting Crane)

London SW5 9TA

Report Reference: TJ3005CR1 Issue: Version 1.2 Date: July 2016

Client: Keltbray Limited

Contact: Jim O’Sullivan

Author:

Terragen Environmental Consultants Limited The Ridings

4 Village Close Sherington

Buckinghamshire MK16 9PZ

Contact: Paul Brewer (Project Manager)

Prepared by: Paul Brewer

BSc (Hons), MSc, MI Soil Sci Senior Environmental Consultant

Date: 08/07/2016

Reviewed by: Dr. Barry Powell

BSc (Hons), PhD, MCIWM Principal Consultant

Date: 08/07/2016

Terragen Environmental Consultants Limited (TGEN) has prepared this report in accordance with the instructions of Keltbray Limited (the contractor) under the terms of our appointment to compile a risk assessment and method statement (RAMS) for the monitoring, management and validation of the bulk excavation. This method statement is for the sole and specific use of the contractor and TGEN shall not be responsible for any purpose other than that for which it was prepared and provided. Should the contractor require to pass copies of the report to other parties for information, the whole of the report should be so copied but no professional liability or warranty shall be extended to other parties by TGEN in this connection without the explicit written agreement thereto by TGEN.

Our Ref.: TJ3005CR1v1.2 Client: Keltbray Limited Site: Earls Court Redevelopment (Heavy Crane Base), London, SW5 9TA

Page 2 of 17 © Terragen Environmental Consultants Limited 2016

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 4

2.0 OUR ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................................ 6

3.0 METHOD STATEMENT ................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 Personnel, Briefings and Routine Inspections ........................................................................................................ 7

3.2 Hardstanding and Structures ....................................................................................................................................... 7

3.3 General Arisings and Management ............................................................................................................................. 7

3.4 Segregation of Contaminated Arisings ...................................................................................................................... 8 3.4.1 Asbestos Containing Materials ........................................................................................................................................................ 9 3.4.2 Chemical Contamination ................................................................................................................................................................. 11

3.5 Discovery Strategy ........................................................................................................................................................ 11 3.5.1 Fuel Tanks .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 3.5.2 Deleterious Materials ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12 3.5.3 Hydrocarbon Impacted Soil ............................................................................................................................................................ 12

3.6 Validation Procedure .................................................................................................................................................... 13

3.7 Formation Level Inspection ........................................................................................................................................ 13

3.8 Reuse of Site Won Materials ....................................................................................................................................... 13

3.9 Duty of Care .................................................................................................................................................................... 13

4.0 OPERATING PROCEDURE........................................................................................................... 14

4.1 Hazards and Risks ......................................................................................................................................................... 14

4.2 Site Personnel ................................................................................................................................................................ 14

4.3 Competency and Training ........................................................................................................................................... 14

4.4 Welfare and First Aid .................................................................................................................................................... 14

4.5 Safety of Site Personnel ............................................................................................................................................... 15

4.6 Equipment and Materials ............................................................................................................................................. 15

4.7 Environmental Protection Arrangements ................................................................................................................ 15

4.8 Methodology and Controls .......................................................................................................................................... 16 Figures

Figure 1 Exploratory Hole Location Plan

Appendices

Appendix A Exploratory Hole Logs. Appendix B Waste Carriers and Receiving Facilities. Appendix C References and Bibliography.



LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ACM Asbestos Containing Material PAH Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon(s) Al Aluminium PAL Powell Associates Limited AONB Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl(s) AoPC Area(s) of Potential Concern PCoC Potential Contaminants of Concern AST Above Ground Storage Tank PE Polyethylene BaA Benzo(a)anthracene PFS Petrol Filling Station BaP Benzo(a)pyrene PID Photo Ionisation Detector BbF Benzo(b)fluoranthene POS Parks and Open Spaces BGS British Geological Survey PPE Personal Protective Equipment BH Borehole PRA Preliminary Risk Assessment BTEX Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene & Xylene PVC Polyvinyl Chloride CAT Cable Avoidance Tool QTSE QTS Environmental Limited CD&E Construction, Demolition & Excavation RBMP River Basin Management Plan Chy Chrysene RMS Risk Management Strategy CLEA Contaminated Lane Exposure Assessment RWFD Revised Waste Framework Directive CSM Conceptual Site Model RWL Resting Water Level CWG California Working Group S South C4SL Category 4 Screening Levels S4UL Suitable 4 Use Levels DEFRA Dept. for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs SAC Special Area of Conservation DahA Dibenzo(ah)anthracene SGV Soil Guideline Value DQRA Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment SNRHW Stable Non-Reactive Hazardous Waste E East SPA Special Protection Area EA Environment Agency SPL Significant Pollutant Linkage EU European Union (Council/Commission etc.) SPR Source-Pathway-Receptor FRA Flood Risk Assessment SPZ Source Protection Zone GAC Generic Assessment Criteria SSAC Site Specific Assessment Criteria GQA General Quality Assessment SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest GQRA Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment SVOC Semi Volatile Organic Compound(s) Ha Hectare(s) TGEN Terragen Environmental Consultants Limited IcdP Indeno(123-cd)pyrene TOC Total Organic Carbon LLTC Low Level of Toxicological Concern TP Trial Pit LNR Local Nature Reserve TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon(s) LoW List of Wastes UCL95 95% Upper Confidence Limit m Metre(s) UK United Kingdom mAOD Metres Above Ordnance Datum UKAS UK Accreditation Service mbgl Metres Below Ground Level UKEA UK Environment Agencies MTBE Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether UN United Nations MCERTS EA Monitoring Certification Scheme USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency N North UST Underground Storage Tank NGR National Grid Reference VOC Volatile Organic Compound(s) NNR National Nature Reserve W West NP National Park WAC Waste Assessment Criteria NVZ Nitrate Vulnerable Zone WFD Water Framework Directive WS Window Sampler



1.0 INTRODUCTION

Planning permission for the redevelopment of Earls Court was granted in November 2013 by the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (LBHF ref. 2011/02001/OUT) and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC ref. PP/11/01937). The outline permissions include a set of conditions from both LBHF and RBKC in relation to land contamination (LBHF numbers 50 to 56 and RBKC numbers 46 to 51, and 92). Demolition of the Earls Court Exhibition Centres EC1 and EC2 has commenced.

The next phase of demolition will include the removal of the basement floor slab and below ground obstructions. A heavy lifting crane is to be installed on site for the removal of portal beams spanning the four tunnels of the District Line running beneath the area of the former EC1. The construction of the base for the heavy lifting crane and platform for erecting the crane and processing the portal beams will involve excavation to a minimum formation level of 104mLUL* (i.e. 4mAOD), followed by construction of the crane base. In areas where the existing basement slab or existing ground level is lower, the slab will be removed and the backfilling will commence from the lower level. The pivot point of the heavy lifting crane is generally located over the former swimming pool, and offset back from tunnels two and three of the District Line. The works will include the break out of the existing basement slab of EC1 and reducing existing concrete building foundations to formation level. Approximately 30,000m3 of bulk excavation is proposed, which equates to an average dig of approximately 3mbgl. Excavated soil arisings will be disposed or recycled offsite. Approximately 35,000m3 to 40,000m3 of 6F2 material will then be placed to form the crane base. The material will be sourced from the demolition activities onsite, which the contractor has been processing under the Waste & Resource Action Programme (WRAP) quality protocols.

Local excavations will be carried out in the vicinity of the portal beams around the four District Line tunnels to enable the beams to be removed by the crane. The beams will be moved to a processing area adjacent to the heavy lifting crane prior to removal from the site. Surface water runoff will be controlled throughout the operation of the crane. The majority of rain water which falls on the site will be collected and discharged to the public sewer.

A ground investigation across this part of the site has been carried out by Geotechnical Observations Limited in two phases. The data from the investigations is presented in the factual ground investigation reports, which should be read in full in conjunction with this RAMS:

Ground Investigation Report at Earls Court Exhibition Centre Version E dated 11th May 2016 by Geotechnical Observations Limited.

Ground Investigation Report at Earls Court Exhibition Centre – Supplementary Contamination GI dated 13th May 2016 by Geotechnical Observations Limited.

Based upon the findings of the ground investigations undertaken, Ove Arup & Partners Limited has compiled an interim risk assessment and remediation method statement (RMS):

Earls Court Redevelopment Heavy Lifting Crane Interim Contamination Risk Assessment and Remediation Method Statement dated 26 May 2016.

The interim RMS should be read in full in conjunction with this RAMS, but can be briefly summarised as follows:

No evidence of gross contamination has been identified by the ground investigation and no significant risks to human health or controlled water receptors have been identified that require specific advance remediation.

Risk management procedures are required during the works. Localised and relatively minor contamination has been identified in the soil that is to be excavated as part of the heavy lifting crane works. In particular, heavy metals including lead (Pb) were detected in the made ground in BH404 and TPH in the made ground in BH7.

Low concentrations of asbestos were also detected in a number of samples. Precautions will be adopted during the upcoming works in relation to the potential for ground contamination and the specific potential for asbestos that has been identified. Particular enhanced precautions will be employed in the localised areas where higher concentrations of contamination have been identified.

* London Underground Limited Levels given in metres above a tunnel datum of 100m below ordnance datum (i.e. mAOD plus 100).



The RMS outlines a number of mitigation measures to be implemented during the works, which can be summarised as follows:

The works will be undertaken in a fashion to prevent the creation of dusts and hence prevent any fibre inhalation on site and dust emissions from the works. All made ground should be kept damp when being handled or when exposed at the surface.

Sufficient hygiene units and PPE should be provided for the works. The requirements described in the Control of Asbestos Regulations (CAR) (2012) and CIRIA:C733 Asbestos in

soil and made ground: a guide to understanding and managing risks (2014) should be adhered to where they apply. An occupational risk assessment should be undertaken by a competent assessor (asbestos specialist) in accordance with CAR (2012) and the associated code of practice to determine the likely exposure resulting from the works and the level of protection and management required by CAR (2012), this will also identify if the works with asbestos will be licensed, notifiable non-licensed work or non-licensed work and what notifications and health surveillance is required.

Air monitoring may be undertaken during the works to confirm the absence of respirable fibres above the CAR (2012) action levels. If works are to be undertaken close to residential properties, then a lower detection limit for air monitoring may be warranted as described in CIRIA:C733.

The requirements set out in the Health and Safety Executive workplace exposure limits should be adopted, together with COSHH and CDM regulations.

Appropriate contamination watching briefs should be maintained during the works (e.g. for contamination and asbestos where practicable) and a discovery strategy for unexpected ground conditions implemented.

Robust material and waste management procedures should be implemented, ensuring that all necessary licences/ permits and waste documentation are compliant with the relevant regulations and guidance.

A watching brief should be maintained throughout the works. The watching brief should be documented and compiled in the verification report. It should be defined on site, communicated to staff involved in the ground works (toolbox talks etc.) and reported on. The watching brief should incorporate inspections of the subgrade in areas of tanks, and any below ground pipework, following break out of the basement floor slab. In addition, an inspection of the formation level should be made to inform future assessment for the development. If previously unidentified areas of potential contamination (such as hydrocarbon impacted soils or additional ACM) are encountered the soil should either be sampled in-situ in the ground (and left undisturbed while the samples are tested and the results interpreted) or be excavated and stockpiled separately in an appropriate manner (i.e. bunded and covered stockpile).

Measures should be taken to restrict dust and surface water runoff. On receipt of the results, soils should be disposed offsite to a suitable permitted landfill or recycling/treatment

centre. There is not envisaged to be any opportunity to reuse soils within the proposed development. Sampling should be undertaken by suitably qualified and experienced personnel aware of the remediation

design objectives. The laboratory chemical analysis should be undertaken in accordance with MCERTS/UKAS validated methods, where available. The ground conditions and any remaining sources of contamination will be identified, and will be considered in an updated RMS for the future development.

Where excavations are to be undertaken in the vicinity of BH404 and BH7, where specific higher concentrations of contaminants have been observed, some enhanced mitigation measures should be implemented an enhanced watching brief should be undertaken and documents during excavation in these areas. This should comprise frequent inspection of excavated material and formation levels by a suitably competent person, in order to further develop an understanding of the extent and source of the contamination. Excavated material which meets the description of the contaminated soils should be carefully segregated, and tested at a suitable frequency for hazardous waste classification purposes. Stockpiles of excavated potentially contaminated soils in this area should be appropriately segregated, bunded and sheeted, to avoid cross-contamination, and reduce infiltration or the production of dust. Considering the high concentration of asbestos at BH404, the classification of the works due to asbestos (i.e. whether they are notifiable non-licensed or licensed works) should be considered in advance by a suitably competent person.

The contractor is also to undertake their works in accordance with the RMS and provide records to demonstrate compliance with each of the objectives and the information set out in the verification plan, as detailed below:

A watching brief for contamination, to be advised by a contamination specialist appointed by the contractor, and to include provision for enhanced mitigation in areas of identified localised contamination.

An asbestos management plan based on the potential for asbestos in soils, to be undertaken by an asbestos specialist appointed by the contractor.



Documented evidence of the watching brief for contamination and asbestos, including a survey and photographic record under the slab in areas of the former fuel tanks, below ground pipework, areas of identified localised contamination (BH404 and BH7) and any areas where previously unidentified contamination is detected.

A discovery strategy for dealing with any previously unidentified ground contamination. Waste duty of care documentation, including classification testing of soils. Chemical certification of soil and aggregate material for reuse, or imported for use on site. Consignment records for imported soil and aggregate materials.

2.0 OUR ASSESSMENT

We have reviewed the site investigation reports and interim RMS comprising forty-six samples from twenty-two locations to depths of up to 8.6mbgl representing circa 30000m3 of excavation arisings from a surface area of 9585m2 to an average depth of 3.1mbgl for the construction of the heavy lifting crane base. The exploratory hole location plan presented in Figure 1 also shows the outline of the heavy lifting crane base and Appendix A contains a copy of the exploratory hole logs of concern. The enabling works for the crane base will be achieved by a combination of cut and fill across the current basement. The table below summarises the elevations of the exploratory holes, the depth of cut or fill, the likely composition of material from these locations and the likely stratum that will be encountered at formation level.

Ref Elevation (mLUL) Depth of Cut (-) or Fill (+) Composition of Material Stratum at Formation Level

BH1 106.0 -2.0m 1.5m Concrete and 0.5m RTD RTD

BH2 107.0 -3.0m 3.0m MG MG

BH3 107.9 -3.9m 3.9m MG MG

BH4 103.5 +0.5m n/a Fill

BH5 103.5 +0.5m n/a Fill

BH6 108.0 -4.0m 4.0m MG MG

BH7 108.0 -4.0m 4.0m MG MG

BH8 103.5 +0.5m n/a Fill

BH9 103.5 +0.5m n/a Fill

BH401 102.0 +2.0m n/a Fill

BH402 108.1 -4.1 3.0m MG and 1.1m RTD RTD

BH403 106.4 -2.4m 2.4m MG MG

BH404 105.5 -1.5m 1.5m MG MG

TP401 107.1 -3.1 1m MG and >1.5m RTD Probably RTD

TP402 107.1 -3.1 >2.5m MG Probably MG

TP403 107.1 -3.1 >2.5m MG Probably MG

TP404 107.2 -3.2 2.1m MG and 1.1m RTD RTD



TP407 103.4 +0.6 n/a Fill

TP408a 108.0 -3.0 >2.5m MG Possible MG

TP409 108.1 -3.1 >2.5m MG Possible MG

TP410 103.5 +0.5 n/a Fill

BH4, BH5, BH8, BH9, TP407 and TP410 (bold italics) were all excavated in the lower basement area and are below the formation level of 104mLUL Locations shaded grey are outside of the boundary of the proposed heavy lifting crane base, although some of the materials may be encountered in conjunction with localised excavations associated with the portal beams. Locations shaded green are inside the crane base and above formation level.

Made ground (MG) was encountered across the whole of the site with an average thickness of circa 2.9m. It is generally described as being concrete hardstanding over a largely sandy, gravelly material containing some to much ash, clinker, coal and coke etc. It is estimated that circa 19860m3 (66%) of the excavation will be granular MG and circa 6500m3 (22%) will be uncontaminated (inert) broken out concrete etc. and circa 3640m3 (12%) will be natural (inert) sand and gravel (RTD).



3.0 METHOD STATEMENT

The following section details the methods to be implemented by the contractor during the bulk excavation including monitoring, management and validation. This will include general management of the bulk excavation for the removal (segregation) and/or treatment (e.g. screening) of contaminated soils from uncontaminated soils for disposal offsite as waste. In accordance with the RMS this will include:

The segregation, disposal and validation of materials arising from locations where elevated concentrations of contaminants (e.g. ACM, elevated TPH/PAH etc.) have been previously encountered.

The identification, segregation, disposal and validation of unexpected contamination including areas where soils of an unusual colour, odour etc. are encountered or containing deleterious materials in accordance with the discovery strategy (Section 3.5).

In addition, materials will also be segregated depending on the particular physical and chemical requirements of the chosen receiving facility(s).

3.1 Personnel, Briefings and Routine Inspections

The works by the contractor described in this RAMS will be implemented by a project manager, site manager, machine operators and banksmen supported by a geo-environmental engineer and an asbestos specialist (where necessary).

The contractor will provide a written statement confirming that all operatives have been informed of the nature of contamination at the site and the requirements of the RMS including the discovery strategy and the procedure to follow should unexpected contamination be encountered. (see Section 3.5). This should take the form of a tool box talk from the site manager and the contractor will provide documentation confirming that all operatives have attended such a briefing.

A routine watching brief will be maintained during the groundwork phase of the development by a geo-environmental engineer. As a minimum, this will consist of weekly visits to the site to inspect the ongoing works. Where required, the frequency of visits will be increased to include attendance during the excavation of hotspots, areas of unexpected contamination etc. During the works routine reassurance samples will also be collected from the general waste arisings. During the works the geo-environmental engineer will produce monthly reports documenting the weekly inspections, which will include the results of the routine reassurance sampling. Separate inspection reports will be produced detailing the removal of hotspots of known and unexpected contamination.

The contractor will also produce monthly waste summary reports, which will include a log of all materials disposed offsite as waste.

3.2 Hardstanding and Structures

The surface hardstanding and any buried structures/obstructions encountered in the ground will be removed and segregated for disposal to an appropriately permitted recycling facility or for reuse on site as backfill following treatment. Any concrete hardstanding observed to be stained or with an odour (e.g. hydrocarbon impacted) will be stockpiled separately for assessment by a geo-environmental engineer.

3.3 General Arisings and Management

In accordance with the latest waste management regulations and statutory guidance, the correct description of a significant proportion of the MG and any RTD and London Clay (LC) based on physical appearance and past activity at the site is soil & stones not containing dangerous substances (LoW Code 170504). The MG material is largely granular and would be suitable for treatment (e.g. screening etc.) dependent upon the programme and weather conditions etc.

The aim of the bulk excavation monitoring and management will be to minimise the volume of contaminated arisings disposed offsite as waste. Where practicable, this will include a range of measures such as screening out of oversized materials (e.g. use of a riddler bucket to remove concrete etc.), careful excavation based on the visual appearance of the contaminated waste materials etc. (e.g. using physical and chemical data from previous site investigations etc.).



Routine samples will be taken at a rate of circa one per 1000m3 (i.e. thirty samples), which will be submitted to a UKAS/MCERTS accredited laboratory for testing in accordance with our standard soil contamination suite (TGENS1) which includes the following parameters:

Total Antimony Total Lead Total Phenols (monohydric) Total Arsenic Total Mercury Total Sulphate Total Barium Total Molybdenum Water Soluble Sulphate Total Beryllium Total Nickel Sulphide Water Soluble Boron Total Selenium pH Value Total Cadmium Total Vanadium Total Organic Carbon Total Chromium Total Zinc PAH (by GCFID – EA 18 compounds) Hexavalent Chromium Total Cyanide TPH (by GCFID – 8 band) Total Copper Free Cyanide

The TGENS1 suite above covers a wide range of potential contaminants associated with a wide range of current and historic activities and as such, should be sufficient to accommodate most contaminants of concern likely to be associated with the site. However, should any specific contaminants be suspected as a result of observations made during the works then it may be necessary to supplement the standard suite with additional tests (e.g. asbestos, BTEX, MTBE, herbicides, pesticides, VOC, semi-VOC, PCB etc.). A proportion of the samples will also be submitted for WAC testing to confirm the disposal designation.

A summary of waste carriers and waste receiving facilities is presented in Appendix B. This will be subject to a degree of change dependent on the nature and classification of materials encountered during the works. The carrier, classification and destination will be included in the monthly waste summary report produced by the contractor.

3.4 Segregation of Contaminated Arisings

Based on our assessment of the physical and chemical data presented in the site investigation reports, the only materials that would not be classified as uncontaminated soil and stones, thus requiring segregation are detailed in the table below:

Ref Sample Depth Material

Type Presence

(mbgl) Description Waste

Classification (mbgl) (mLUL)

BH3 1.0-2.5 106.9-105.4 MG3 0.2-3.0 White asbestos fibres (<0.001%) & Sb Non-hazardous

(low level asbestos)

BH7 2.3 105.7 MG3 2.0-3.0 Elevated PAH & TPH SNRHW

BH402 0.1 108.0 MG3 0.0-0.1 White asbestos (0.037%) – all types Non-hazardous

(low level asbestos)

BH404 0.3-1.3 105.2-104.2 MG2 0.1-2.2 White asbestos lagging (0.002%) & Pb etc SNRHW

BH404 2.2-2.3 103.3-103.2 MG4 2.2-2.3 White asbestos (0.176%) – all types SNRHW Entries shaded grey are outside of the heavy lifting crane base. Entries in bold italics are below formation level. Entries shaded green are inside

the heavy lifting crane base and above formation level. Other annotations are as follows: MG1 Hardstanding (tarmac/concrete assumed uncontaminated and recycled/stockpiled). MG2 Uncontaminated made ground (no physical evidence of contamination). MG3 Slightly contaminated made ground (slight content of potential contaminants such as ash & clinker etc.). MG4 Significantly contaminated made ground (significant evidence/quantities of contamination such as ash, clinker etc.). RTD River Terrace Deposits (natural sand & gravel horizon). LC London Clay (natural clay horizon) underlying the KPG. SNRHW Stable non-reactive hazardous waste.

As highlighted in the table above, both BH402 and BH404 are located outside the footprint of the excavations for the heavy lifting crane base, although we have assumed for the purposes of this RAMS that materials represented by these samples may be encountered during localised excavations for the portal beams.



In conjunction with the geo-environmental engineer and/or asbestos specialist:

The locations of the contaminated materials will be located on the site plan, surveyed and marked out onsite such that all operatives are aware of the location(s) to prevent inclusion with the bulk arisings.

The contaminated material(s) will be carefully excavated out and placed into a stockpile for further assessment pending disposal offsite as waste to an appropriate facility.

The contaminated material(s) encountered at each of these locations and any other locations where unexpected contaminated materials are encountered will be excavated out until no visual or olfactory evidence of contamination remains. This will be supplemented with VOC monitoring with a PID where appropriate.

Once excavated out, the contaminated material(s) from the locations will be transported via dumper and placed into individual quarantined stockpiles, which will have an impermeable base and will be bunded as required in order to prevent the escape of contaminated leachate and sheeted and/or dampened down to prevent dust release as required by the weather conditions at the time of stockpiling.

The results from the site investigations and/or any supplementary sampling exercise (e.g. WAC sampling of stockpiles) will be submitted to appropriate waste management facilities to confirm the correct disposal classification prior to the commencement of the disposal operation.

After the contaminated material has been removed the validation procedure will be implemented (see Section 3.6).

3.4.1 Asbestos Containing Materials

Asbestos is a naturally occurring silicate mineral and exists typically one of the following chemical types:

Chrysotile (white). Amosite (brown). Crocidolite (blue).

It can occur either in a bonded or fibrous form. The fibres are very fine, less than 3 microns in diameter, and respirable into the lungs, where they can lodge indefinitely and penetrate tissue. All forms of asbestos are a harmonised entry in EC regulation 1272/2008 (as amended):

HP7 Carcinogenic Class 1A (H350) at ≥0.1% and HP5 Harmful Class RE1 (H372**) at ≥1%

If the waste contains fibres that are free and dispersed then the waste will be hazardous if it as a whole contains 0.1% or more asbestos. Where the waste contains identifiable fragments of ACM (i.e. any particle of a size that can be identified as potentially being asbestos by a competent person if examined by the naked eye), then these fragments must be assessed separately. This would also apply to any dispersed fibres produced by deliberately breaking up such identifiable fragments. The waste is hazardous if the concentration of asbestos in the fragment(s) of ACM is 0.1% or more. The waste is regarded as a mixed waste and classified accordingly. The following codes should be assigned to the asbestos waste as appropriate:

17 06 05* Construction material containing asbestos. 17 06 01* Insulation material containing asbestos.

17 06 05* would normally be used in preference to 17 06 01* for the asbestos in asbestos contaminated soil and stones.

** route of exposure cannot be excluded.



The three locations where asbestos was observed and/or detected in samples submitted for laboratory testing are summarised in the table below:

Ref Sample Depth Presence

(mbgl) Description

Waste Classification

LoW Code (mbgl) (mLUL)

BH3 1.0-2.5 106.9-105.4

0.2-3.0 White asbestos fibres (<0.001%) & Sb Non-hazardous

(low level asbestos) 17 05 04

BH402 0.1 108.0 0.0-0.1 White asbestos (0.037%) – all types Non-hazardous

(low level asbestos) 17 05 04

BH404 0.3-1.3 105.2-104.2

0.1-2.2 White asbestos lagging (0.002%) & Pb etc. SNRHW 17 06 05*

BH404 2.2-2.3 103.3-103.2

2.2-2.3 White asbestos (0.176%) – all types SNRHW 17 06 05*

In BH404 possible ACM fragments were noted in the MG at 2.3mbgl, although this location is both outside the crane base and below 104mLUL. At the remaining locations, asbestos was not visible to the naked eye and only detected in the laboratory under a microscope. Should localised excavations be undertaken in material represented by BH3, BH402 and BH404, arisings will be segregated from the general waste and subsequently validated in accordance with the procedure detailed in Section 3.6.

During the period involving the excavation of MG from areas of known ACM contamination, the site manager and banksmen will be supported by an asbestos specialist from the contractor who will be available onsite to inspect and identify any potential ACM within the arisings. The contractor will implement the following procedure:

An accredited analyst will be available onsite when working in the three known hotspot locations who will be capable of identifying any suspected ACM and whether it is notifiable to the HSE or can be removed as an unlicensed material.

A regime of background air and personnel asbestos monitoring will be in place adjacent to work areas. Provided this exercise indicates there is no airborne asbestos fibres being generated by the works, the visit/test frequency will be reviewed.

The excavation will be carried out by operatives who have undertaken approved asbestos awareness training. Asbestos containing soils will be placed in a dedicated temporary stockpile or directly into covered lorries

pending offsite disposal to an appropriately permitted facility. Any area where asbestos has been identified (excavation or stockpiles) will be damped down while the asbestos

is being removed in order to prevent the release of asbestos fibres. A power washer (or similar) will be used to create a mist over the excavated ground to supress airborne particles. In dry conditions, all areas will be damped down as a matter of course.

If any asbestos fragments are found either on the surface of the site or in localised pockets during the excavation then asbestos trained operatives will be employed to inspect the material. All visible fragments, where feasible and safe to do so, will be handpicked, double bagged and placed into a dedicated lockable skip pending offsite disposal to a suitably permitted facility. Operatives will wear face fitted masks, disposable overalls, overshoes and gloves whilst hand picking asbestos fragments.

The contractor will have a specialist asbestos team available to mobilise onsite within short notice to respond to any discovery of suspected ACM in the excavation works.

A decontamination unit will be available onsite during excavation works where it is thought likely that inadvertent asbestos fibre exposure to operatives may occur.

Should gross ACM and/or gross ACM impacted soils be found then it will be necessary for the contractor to prepare and implement a method statement for the works to be undertaken in accordance with the CAR (2012) and Asbestos in soil and made ground: a guide to understanding and managing risks (CIRIA 2014).

The contractor will undertake these works in accordance with current good practice ensuring that suitable health and safety measures are implemented and that risks to workers, neighbours and the surrounding environment are minimised.



3.4.2 Chemical Contamination

Ref Sample Depth Presence

(mbgl) Description

Waste Classification

LoW Code (mbgl) (mLUL)

BH7 2.3 105.7 0.2-3.0 Elevated PAH & TPH Hazardous 17 05 03*

The MG represented by the sample taken from BH7 @ 2.3mbgl containing variable amounts of concrete, brick, ceramic and clinker would be properly classified as hazardous waste. During the works, the MG represented by this sample will be segregated from the general waste arisings and submitted for laboratory analysis to include WAC testing in order to properly classify the material for disposal offsite as waste. The remedial excavation will subsequently be validated in accordance with the procedure detailed in Section 3.6.

3.5 Discovery Strategy

The investigation to date have provided a reasonably robust assessment of potential contamination across the site. There is however a risk of further contamination being present in small discrete areas (hotspots) that have not been previously identified and there can be no certainty that all such areas have been or will be located and/or sampled. As such, a discovery strategy will be implemented.

There are two aspects to the strategy, one relating to encountering contaminants previously identified at other locations on the site and the second relating to the identification of contaminants not previously encountered (e.g. those of an unusual appearance and/or odour).

Should suspected contaminated materials be encountered during excavation, either by visual or olfactory methods, the contractor shall implement the following procedures:

Works shall be halted and the site manager shall be contacted to inspect the area of concern. Photographs of the area shall be taken and detailed plans and method statements for dealing with the issue

shall be drafted and forwarded to the local authority for approval. Time and resources may need to be allocated to complete these further works/assessment with laboratory

testing/analysis to be undertaken as necessary. The contractor may need to adjust the programme to enable works in other areas of the site to be progressed.

Verification samples shall be obtained from the base and sides of any excavations to demonstrate that the material has been effectively remediated.

A written summary of the discovery strategy will be included within the TGEN monthly reports and the contractor monthly reports.

3.5.1 Fuel Tanks

Should any fuel or oil tanks be encountered in the ground, then they will be decommissioned in accordance with relevant EA guidelines (e.g. PPG27). The possibility of encountering as yet undiscovered tanks cannot be fully discounted.

Where above ground storage tanks (AST), underground storage tanks (UST) or interceptors are found to contain liquids, then these shall be emptied and cleaned/degassed by an appropriately licensed contractor. All certification for this process should be retained. The London Fire Brigade (Petroleum Group) should also be informed of this activity and in the case of petroleum filled tanks may wish to be in attendance to verify the process. Allowance should be made for over excavation to remove any hydrocarbon contaminated soils from around the base and sides of any AST, UST or interceptors.

Any areas where tanks (AST or UST), fuel feed infrastructure or interceptors etc. are encountered will be treated as unexpected hotspots of contamination and will be subject to the monitoring and validation procedure described in Section 3.6 and will be backfilled with suitable imported material or site won arisings validated in accordance with the procedures described in Section 3.8.



It is proposed that the following procedures will be adopted to deal with UST and to excavate any hydrocarbon impacted soils:

1 Task specific risk assessments and method statements should be in place, and risks and required mitigation measures communicated to all relevant personnel prior to the works commencing. Appropriate PPE and, if required, RPE should be provided and utilised.

2 Once the location of the identified UST at the site is confirmed (and if any additional UST are identified during the site clearance, surface strip or redevelopment works), these tanks will be made safe and removed from the site in accordance with the recommendations in Chapter 5 of the Defra Groundwater Protection Code ‘Petrol stations and other fuel dispensing facilities involving underground storage tanks’. All UST, AST, fuel feed infrastructure and interceptors are to be removed for offsite disposal. All tank removal works will be undertaken under specialist supervision.

3 When UST are identified (and have not been previously decommissioned) these will be assessed, opened to vent any gases contained within and any contents removed by vacuum tanker prior to removing the tanks and associated pipework for offsite disposal.

4 During the removal of the UST and the excavation of the soils, a qualified geo-environmental engineer should maintain a watching brief and undertake a visual inspection of the ground material.

5 Hydrocarbon contaminated material will be loaded directly into wagons or temporarily stockpiled pending offsite disposal, on suitable impermeable plastic sheeting and covered with plastic sheeting to prevent runoff or leaching of contamination and to minimise the potential for dust generation.

6 On the assumption that any significant hydrocarbon contamination is likely to be in localised hotspots, it is considered that the site has a low potential to generate an odour that is likely to cause a nuisance issue at or beyond the site boundary. However, should a potential significant odour issue be identified, the groundwork in that area will be suspended until a suitable odour suppression or mitigation system is in place.

7 Validation samples will be collected from the sides and the bases of the UST excavations and any other hydrocarbon impacted areas, including hotspots, to confirm that removal of the impacted soils has been successful. Samples would be analysed for speciated TPH, speciated PAH and VOC.

8 A detailed written and photographic record of the works will be made to provide an audit trail of the works and for inclusion in a verification report. This will include a record of the location and dimensions of hotspot excavations, volumes of materials removed and reused onsite and/or disposed offsite, details of all validation testing and copies of waste transfer documentation for materials disposed offsite.

Where AST are encountered, following removal of the tank and any related fuel feed infrastructure, the ground will be inspected by the geo-environmental engineer (e.g. visual inspection backed by photographs and in-situ PID measurements) and where necessary backed by laboratory testing. Should contamination be encountered, then this will be treated as an unexpected hotspot and dealt with in accordance with the discovery strategy and validation strategy.

3.5.2 Deleterious Materials

Any significant quantities of deleterious materials (e.g. metal, timber, textiles, plastics etc.) encountered at the site surface or in the made ground or generated as a result of routine site works will be segregated and placed into a separate skip(s) for disposal offsite as general waste.

3.5.3 Hydrocarbon Impacted Soil

If encountered, soils contaminated with hydrocarbons will be excavated out for ex-situ treatment (e.g. soil vapour extraction, bioremediation, screening etc.) or treatment/disposal offsite as waste depending on the volumes of contaminated material encountered and on the time constraints of the development.



3.6 Validation Procedure

Upon completion of any remedial excavations of known or unexpected hotspots and/or the segregation of unsuitable materials, a validation exercise will be undertaken by the geo-environmental engineer, comprising in-situ monitoring (VOC using PID) and/or soil testing around the base and sides. As a minimum, one sample will be recovered from each of the sides and from the base of the remedial excavations. Should the first round of validation sampling return results that fail the respective targets then additional material will be removed and the validation process repeated until the targets are achieved. Upon confirmation that the remedial targets have been achieved the remedial excavation will be backfilled with uncontaminated materials.

If impacted soils are encountered at the site boundary, the soils will be assessed by the geo-environmental engineer (i.e. visual and olfactory inspection supplemented with appropriate monitoring and sampling). Where necessary, appropriate measures will be designed by the geo-environmental engineer based on the nature and/or the extent of the contaminant(s). Where appropriate, a geo-environmental engineer will consult with the local authority to determine and agree the necessary scope of works.

The results of all validation monitoring and testing, including a photographic record will be maintained and presented in a verification/closure report.

3.7 Formation Level Inspection

After the excavation has been completed and prior to the installation of any pile mat, the geo-environmental engineer will inspect the material at formation level across the site. During the formation inspection particular attention will be given to the areas where contamination was encountered.

This inspection(s) will include a report on visual observations and olfactory evidence of any contamination including a photographic record of the nature of the material encountered at formation level. Where necessary the visual inspection will be supplemented with additional trial pits and soil sampling (i.e. where there is MG or visual or olfactory evidence of contamination at the formation surface etc.).

3.8 Reuse of Site Won Materials

Any site won materials (e.g. aggregates, granular MG, clay etc.) retained for reuse will be tested in accordance with our general contamination suite and/or a relevant industry standard. Laboratory certificates of analysis will be provided for all site won materials that are reused onsite (e.g. aggregates, specified fill etc.).

3.9 Duty of Care

Duty of care paperwork now needs to include the following:

The relevant SIC Code (2007) for the bulk excavation is 43.12 (site preparation). A declaration that you have fulfilled your duty to apply the waste hierarchy as required by Regulation 12 of the

Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011.

Uncontaminated natural soil may be deemed as non-waste and reused onsite and/or offsite by following the latest CL:AIRE Definition of Waste Code of Practice (CoP) if declared by a Qualified Person (qp).



4.0 OPERATING PROCEDURE

This operating procedure identifies the main hazards and provides a summary risk assessment for those hazards stating the control measures required to manage the identified risks anticipated to be encountered during the excavation of hotspots of ground contamination and the associated programme of bulk excavation monitoring and validation.

This operating procedure also details good practices to be adopted by TGEN when performing bulk excavation monitoring and validation, and ground investigations including hand and machine dug trial pits, hand augering and stockpile sampling. We have also provided an outline of practices that would be adopted for borehole excavation (window sampling, cable percussive drilling, rotary coring etc.) to obtain soil and/or groundwater samples should these be required, although this is not considered likely based upon the anticipated scope of works.

Good practices to be adopted will comply with the following ground investigation industry guidance and codes of practice:

Guidelines for Good Practice in Site Investigations (AGS 2006). Quickstart Guide to Contaminated Land Investigation (AGS 2011). Guide to Environmental Sampling (AGS 2010). Guidance for Safe Intrusive Activities on Contaminated or Potentially Contaminated Land (BDA 2008). Health and Safety Manual for Land Drilling: A Code of Safe Drilling Practice (BDA 2002). Code of Practice for Site Investigations (BS 5930:1999+A2:BSI 2010). Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites. Code of Practice: BS10175 (BSI 2011). Technical Aspects of Site Investigation. Volumes I and II (EA 2000). Avoiding Danger from Underground Services: HSG 47 (HSE 2005).

4.1 Hazards and Risks

The following hazards have been identified and risk assessed:

Services/Utilities (e.g. electric, gas, fuel, water, sewers, communications etc.). Excavations. Contact with substances hazardous to health. Damage to assets (e.g. parked vehicles), site personnel and the public from flying debris. Unexploded ordnance (UXO). Working on water. Working near water. No material procured for use in the works is likely to require COSHH safety data sheets. The possibility of the ground being contaminated must be considered. Substances potentially present within the

soils onsite include (but are not limited to) heavy metals, hydrocarbon compounds (including petrol, diesel and oil range organics and polyaromatic hydrocarbons), volatile organic compounds (VOC), asbestos and soil borne bacteria/disease (e.g. Weils disease). Appropriate PPE and approved methods of work will be adhered to whilst undertaking groundwork to avoid exposure to any compounds likely to cause hazard to health.

4.2 Site Personnel

Geo-environmental engineer(s). Plant driver(s). Banksman(s).

4.3 Competency and Training

All personnel will be competently trained in accordance with recognised industry good practice guidelines and procedures (e.g. AGS, BDA, BSI etc.) to carry out the operations they are undertaking. Training for the specified tasks will be identified as part of the precautionary measures identified in the risk assessments.

4.4 Welfare and First Aid

Welfare facilities for this work will be located at the worksites compound (if provided) otherwise they will be agreed with the contractor prior to commencing works at the site. First aid kit and eyewash is provided



within all TGEN vehicles. Mobile telephones will be at hand at all times, unless switched off because of potential risks in certain scenarios (e.g. entry into confined spaces that may/do contain volatile vapours).

4.5 Safety of Site Personnel

All project personnel will be required to wear the following PPE, where appropriate:

High visibility vests. Safety boots (with steel toecaps and insoles). Safety helmets. Ear defenders (where signs / notices are displayed). Eye protection. Face masks for dust and organic vapours (where necessary). Gloves. Lifejacket (where working on or near water, minimum BS EN 396, 150N). First aid kit.

Good personal hygiene should be observed by all staff during the period of work. Washing water and a first aid kit will be available in close proximity to the site operatives. If asbestos is identified within the soil, then the procedure set out in Section 3.4.1 will be followed. Any other works not outlined, which may be undertaken, will be referred to the TGEN H&S representative.

4.6 Equipment and Materials

Equipment and materials available for use dependent upon the nature of the sampling required is as follows:

JCB or 360° excavator with suitable bucket/breaker. Cable Avoidance Tool (CAT). Shovel, soil auger, trowel, man-hole keys and chisel. Sample containers (amber bottles, plastic bottles and EPA vials). Cool boxes and cool packs. Signage, screens, temporary fencing and protective sheeting. Rope and tape measure. Torch. Mobile phone and digital camera. Screw drivers, spanners, hammer, bolt croppers & allen keys. Temporary fencing and/or signage to designate working area, and protection of nearby assets, infrastructure, site

personnel and/or members of the public by signage, screening and/or sheeting etc.

4.7 Environmental Protection Arrangements

It is anticipated that under most circumstances there will be negligible levels of noise, dust, debris, smoke or soil vapour release generated by our activities. However, if concrete/hardstanding breakage is required noise and flying debris (e.g. concrete chippings) risks may be present. Dust generation from site investigation works is unlikely to be of significance even in hot and dry conditions, unless working indoors or in other confined places.

There is a potential for debris to be released, which could pose a risk of damage to site personnel and/or members of the public working/passing by close to the drilling/breaking out operations, nearby assets and/or infrastructure if not adequately protected by use of warning signs, screens and/or protective sheets etc. Standard environmental procedures will be employed with no special precautions envisaged for this work operation.

If soil is encountered during the course of site investigation fieldwork, that is suspected to have ACM present, the procedure in Section 3.4.1 will be followed.



4.8 Methodology and Controls

Prior to excavation, it has to be assured that it is not likely to reveal the existence of any buried services. This is done through the provision of a permit to dig and/or checking existing utility contract drawings, a visual inspection of the working area and by the use of a CAT, which will detect most types of services in the location, including those not marked on the services drawings. Care will be taken when excavating the services as not all are picked up with the CAT. The excavation will therefore be rechecked visually on a frequent basis or by using hand held equipment (i.e. manual digging) to 1.2mbgl, following HSG47.

The position of the excavation will depend upon the nature of the immediate ground. Prior to the investigation, a geo-environmental engineer will conduct a walkover survey to establish areas that require further study. The geo-environmental engineer will designate ultimate excavation locations based on visual and olfactory evidence.

The sampling strategy will be balanced between providing quality and representative information without entailing excessive cost. The investigation will be carried out in accordance with BSI (2011). Samples will be taken in appropriate containers, labelled and stored in suitable conditions ready for delivery to the selected UKAS/MCERTS accredited laboratory. Cross contamination of samples will be avoided by ensuring the hand trowel/auger/shovel is cleaned between each sampling event.

Excavations in hardstanding (e.g. concrete etc.) surfaces may require the use of a pneumatic breaker or a corer. The pneumatic breaker or the corer will only be used to breakout the area to the depth of the hard construction. Thereon, the excavation will be carried out using the necessary equipment. During excavation, a sample will be taken from the surface layers using a hand trowel. Excavation will then continue until the appropriate depth is achieved.

The nature, depth, horizons encountered and any groundwater will be documented during the excavation. Logging of the excavations will be carried out from the surface unless the sides of the excavation are battered/benched back in order to stabilise the slope angle.

Upon completion of the excavation, the trial pit will be secured with visual barriers and the excavation covered up with plywood board if not to be immediately backfilled. If the trial pit is to be left open overnight, flashing lamps will be secured on the barriers. Potentially unstable excavations will not be left open for any length of time. These will be backfilled immediately after logging and sampling.

All excavations will be backfilled as soon as possible. The backfilling of materials will be undertaken in the approximate sequence in which they were removed. Excavations will be made good to an agreed specification, which may entail the use of concrete/tarmac surface plugs.

If the centre of a stockpile is not accessible by hand auger then excavation by machine may be required.

Representative samples will be taken of the stockpile using hand trowels, shovels and augers. If required, subsamples will be combined to form representative samples of the stockpile (e.g. ten individual subsamples of a stockpile can be combined into one by appropriate use of sampling/mixing techniques, such as quartering and riffling etc.). Taking representative samples of the material will depend on the heterogeneity of the stockpile. More samples may be required if the stockpile is heterogeneous.

Samples will be taken in appropriate containers, labelled and stored in suitable conditions ready for delivery to the selected UKAS/MCERTS accredited laboratory. Cross contamination of samples will be avoided by ensuring the hand trowel/auger/shovel is cleaned between sampling.


©Copyright Terragen Environmental Consultants 2016

EVENT HAZARDS CONTROL MEASURES & INSTRUCTIONS TO OPERATIVES RESULTANT

RISK

Contact with buried statutory underground services.

Electrocution. Flooding. Explosion. Exposure. Injury or fatality to public, staff or

contractors.

CAT surveys to be undertaken by certified persons of all areas prior to excavation, to locate buried services.

Operatives to be issued with permit to dig with statutory undertaker plans attached, prior to commencing excavation.

Tool box talks to be given to operatives prior to commencing work. Care to be exercised when entering and exiting trial holes.

Low

Low

Low Low

Excavation

Being hit by plant or excavator bucket.

Personnel to keep agreed distance from turning circle of excavator and to keep eye/verbal contact with the operator (or by use of a dedicated banksman).

Low

Excavations. Persons permitted into shallow (circa <1.0m) excavations under supervision and only with the necessary PPE, and following completion of a confined space & stability risk assessment. Deeper excavations should not be entered.

Low

Arisings to be stockpiled away from excavations to avoid imposing additional load. Excavations to be battered back or benched as dictated by site conditions.

Low

Rigid barriers to be erected around each trial pit, or preferably, backfilled immediately. Low

Contaminated land.

Ingestion contact with hazardous substances.

Areas for excavation identified as being potentially contaminated, (on-going site assessment to be made during excavation).

Gloves and eye protection to be worn at all times.

Dust masks and ear protection to be worn when required.

Low

Low Low

Reduced stability of buildings and structures.

Trial pits to be located away from structures to avoid undermining or requirement for support.

Low

Flying debris from breaking out hardstanding.

Warning signs, fencing, screening and use of protective sheets to protect nearby assets, infrastructure, site personnel and members of the public (and/or by use of a dedicated banksman).

Low

UXO. Tool box talk by specialists to be attended prior to commencing works. Vigilance during inspection of excavations and arisings.

Low


© Terragen Environmental Consultants Limited 2016

Figure 1 Exploratory Hole Location Plan.

&<

&<

&<

&<&<

&<&<

&<

&<

&<&<

&<

&<

&<

&<&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

EDED

ED

"S

"S"S

"S

!?!?

!?!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?!?

"S

"S

"S

"S

"S

"S

"S

"S"S

"S

"S

BH9

BH8

BH7

BH6

BH5

BH4 BH3

BH2 BH1

TP410

TP409

TP408

TP407

TP406

TP405

TP404TP403

TP402

TP401

BH404 BH403

BH402

BH401

TP408A

TP508

TP506TP505

TP504

TT02

WSTP06WSTP05

WS21WS20

WS19

WS18

WS17

WS16

WS03

WS02

WS01

BH11

BH05

BH03

BH02

WS17A

WS07A

WS02A

BH11B

BH11A

525200 52540017

8200

Job No125066-11Drawing No IssueFigure 5 D1

Drawing StatusDraft

Job Title

Client

13 Fitzroy StreetLondon W1T 4BQTel +44 20 7636 1531 Fax +44 20 7580 3924www.arup.com

0 25 5012.5

Metres

LegendThe Site

Exploratory Hole Locations!?GeO Advanced 2015 boreholes!?GeO 2016 boreholes"SGeO 2016 trial pits"SGeO Phase 2 Trial pits (June 2016)EDConcpet 2014 Trial pits&< Concept 2014 Gas standpipe&< Concept 2014 Dual standpipe&< Concept 2014 Windowless sampleContamination Point Sources

Asbestos DetailsElec Sub StationGasTankHeavy Lifting Crane base areaDeep basement (backfill)Former swimming pool

Potential Contamination SourcesFormer canalFormer pondFormer water chuteRail lines

!°

© Arup

EC Properties LP

Earls Court Redevelopment

A3

MXD Location

12/05

/2016

17:26

:18

Scale at A31:1,000

Issue Date By Chkd Appd

D1 2016-05-11 AJ JW CB

Figure 5Reduced level dig for crane base construction

Lillie BridgeDepot



Appendix A Exploratory Hole Logs.

Depth (m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

Samples and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

0.300.30

0.50 - 2.000.50 - 2.00

3.00

3.50 - 4.00

4.70 - 5.00

5.00

5.50 - 6.00

6.50 - 7.00

7.50 - 8.00

7.86

8.50 - 9.008.70

9.00 - 9.45

9.45 - 9.509.50 - 9.95

Ref

B1ES1B2

ES2

ES3

B3

B4

ES4

B5

B6

B7

EW1

B8ES5

U9

D10D11

Results/Blows/Recovery (%)

N=20 (5,14/8,5,4,3)(C)

N=6 (4,5/3,1,1,1)(C)

N=49 (10,12/11,11,12,15)

(C)

N=40 (5,16/11,10,9,10)(C)

N=30 (3,7/11,10,4,5)(C)

Blows 120 (100)

N=22 (2,3/4,5,5,8)(S)

Strata Depth (m)

0.000.150.50

3.00

3.50

4.10

4.45

7.50

8.308.50

Stratum Description

Reinforced concrete.MGLoose grey brown slightly clayey silty very sandy fine to coarse, sub angular to sub rounded GRAVEL of concrete, mortar, ash, flint and brick. Sand is sub angular fine to coarse.MGVery loose grey brown silty sandy fine to coarse, sub angular to sub rounded GRAVEL of flint, concrete, mortar, ash and occasional brick fragments. Sand is sub angular fine to coarse. MG

Very loose grey brown silty sandy frequently cobbly sub angular sub rounded, fine to coarse GRAVEL of flint and concrete with occasional brick fragments. Sand is sub angular fine to coarse. Cobbles are sub angular to sub rounded, fine to medium of flint. MGLoose grey brown silty, very sandy sub angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse GRAVEL of concrete, mortar, ash and flint with rare brick fragments. Sand is sub angular fine to coarse.MGConcrete pad.MGDense yellowish brown very sandy angular to sub rounded fine to coarse GRAVEL of flint. Sand is angular to sub rounded fine to coarse. Sand is decreasing with depth. RTD

Dense yellow brown sub rounded fine to coarse SAND and GRAVEL of flint. Gravel is angular to sub rounded. RTD

Dense very gravelly fine to coarse SAND. Gravel is angular to sub rounded fine to coarse of flint. Occasional clay lenses (10cm x 5cm x 5cm). RTDFirm fissured dark grey brown mottled black organic slightly silty micaceous CLAY with rare gypsum. Fissures are closely spaced randomly orientated undulating and planar

Continued on next sheet

Legend Water Strike

Instrument

Geotechnical Observations LtdThe Peter Vaughan Building9 Avro Way, Brooklands,Weybridge, SurreyKT13 0YF

Borehole LogBorehole No.

BH3Sheet 1 of 5

Co-ordinates: 525248.91E 178193.45NProject Name:Location:

Earls Court GI - Super CraneEarls Court Exhibition Centre, London

Compiled by:Checked by:

ELAMR

FINAL Hole Type:Level (m):

CP107.9

Client: Keltbray Drilling Contractor: TFGI Scale: 1:50Project No. 15-054 Dates: 21/12/2015 - 11/01/2016 Logged by: ZB

Remarks: Drilling took place from "ground level" down 3.60m through the basement into a 0.90m trial pit prepared by Keltbray.Initial ground is extremely soft. First attempt at CPT immediately descending to depth and first sample from 0.5 to 2.0m, nottypical 0.5m range. Made ground in trial pit subsides during drilling creating a 0.08m gap between concrete and soil.Borehole was dry.Installation of standpipe into the river terrace gravels as directed by Arup. Top of standpipe is 0.10m above ground level. Sand backfill was added from 5.00mbgl to 8.50mbgl.

Casing DiameterDepth (m) Dia (mm)

4.05 2504.50 2009.00 150

Depth (m)

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

13.0

13.5

14.0

14.5

15.0

15.5

16.0

16.5

17.0

17.5

18.0

18.5

19.0

19.5


10.50 -10.95

10.95 -11.00

11.00 -11.45

12.00 -12.45

12.45 -12.50

12.50 -12.95

13.50 -13.95

13.95 -14.00

14.00 -14.45

15.00 -15.45

15.45 -15.50

15.50 -15.95

16.50 -16.95

16.95 -17.00

17.00 -17.45

18.00 -18.45

18.45 -18.50

18.50 -18.95

19.50 -19.95

19.95 -20.00

Ref

U12

D13D14

U15

D16D17

U18

D19D20

U21

D22D23

U24

D25D26

U27

D28D29

U30

D31D32


Blows 112 (100)

N=21 (2,3/3,5,6,7)(S)

Blows 90 (100)

N=23 (2,4/5,5,6,7)(S)

Blows 94 (100)

N=25 (2,4/5,6,6,8)(S)

Blows 83 (100)

N=27 (3,4/4,6,8,9)(S)

Blows 81 (100)

N=26 (2,4/5,6,7,8)(S)

Blows 84 (100)

N=35 (4,5/6,8,9,12)(S)

Blows 82 (100)

N=26 (4,5/5,6,7,8)(S)

Strata Depth (m)

10.95

12.00

13.50

17.00

18.45

Stratum Description

smooth. Occasional weak claystone inclusions (up to 3cm x 2cm x 1cm). LC

Stiff to very stiff fissured greyish brown mottled black organic SILT and CLAY with rare gypsum. Clay is micaceous. Fissures are closely spaced, randomly orientated undulating and planar smooth. Occasional weak claystone inclusions (up to 3cm x 2cm x 1cm). LCStiff to very stiff fissured greyish brown mottled black organic SILT and CLAY with rare gypsum. Clay is micaceous. Fissures are closely spaced, randomly orientated undulating and planar smooth. Occasional white shell fragments (up to 5mm x 1mm).LCStiff to very stiff fissured greyish brown mottled black organic SILT and CLAY with rare gypsum. Clay is micaceous. Fissures are closely spaced, randomly orientated undulating and planar smooth. Occasional silt laminations <10mm thickness.

LC

Stiff to very stiff fissured greyish brown mottled black organic SILT and CLAY with rare gypsum. Clay is micaceous. Fissures are closely spaced, randomly orientated undulating and planar smooth. Frequent silt infilled burrows (up to 2mm). Frequent bivalve shells (up to 10mm x 5mm). Rare claystone lenses (up to 5mm x 3mm x 2mm).LCStiff to very stiff fissured dark greyish brown mottled black organic SILT and CLAY with rare fine sand and rare gypsum. Clay is micaceous. Fissures are extremely closely spaced randomly orientated undulating and planar smooth. Frequent silt infilled burrows (up to 2mm). Frequent bivalve shells (up to 10mm x 5mm).


Legend Water Strike

Instrument



BH3Sheet 2 of 5




ELAMR


CP107.9




4.05 2504.50 2009.00 150

Depth (m)

20.5

21.0

21.5

22.0

22.5

23.0

23.5

24.0

24.5

25.0

25.5

26.0

26.5

27.0

27.5

28.0

28.5

29.0

29.5


20.00 -20.45

21.00 -21.45

21.45 -21.50

21.50 -21.95

22.50 -22.95

22.95 -23.00

23.00 -23.45

24.00 -24.45

24.45 -24.50

24.50 -24.95

25.50 -25.95

25.95 -26.00

26.00 -26.45

27.00 -27.45

27.45 -27.50

27.50 -27.95

28.50 -28.95

28.95 -29.00

29.00 -29.45

30.00 -30.45

Ref

U33

D34D35

U36

D37D38

U39

D40D41

U42

D43D44

U45

D46D47

U48

D49D50

U51


Blows 85 (100)

N=28 (2,4/6,5,8,9)(S)

Blows 76 (100)

N=32 (4,5/6,7,9,10)(S)

Blows 100 (100)

N=29 (4,5/6,7,8,8)(S)

Blows 150 (90)

N=40 (4,5/8,10,11,11)(S)

Blows 84 (100)

N=33 (4,6/6,6,10,11)(S)

Blows 94 (100)

N=38 (4,5/7,8,10,13)(S)

Blows 130 (100)

Strata Depth (m)

24.45

Stratum Description

Rare claystone lenses (up to 5mm x 3mm x 2mm).LC

Very stiff fissured brown silty CLAY with rare gypsum. Fissures are extremely closely spaced randomly orientated undulating and planar smooth. LC


Legend Water Strike

Instrument



BH3Sheet 3 of 5




ELAMR


CP107.9




4.05 2504.50 2009.00 150

Depth (m)

30.5

31.0

31.5

32.0

32.5

33.0

33.5

34.0

34.5

35.0

35.5

36.0

36.5

37.0

37.5

38.0

38.5

39.0

39.5


30.45 -30.50

30.50 -30.95

31.50 -31.95

31.95 -32.00

32.00 -32.45

33.00 -33.45

33.45 -33.50

33.50 -33.95

34.50 -34.95

34.95 -35.00

35.00 -35.45

36.00 -36.45

36.45 -36.50

36.50 -36.95

37.50 -37.95

37.95 -38.00

38.00 -38.45

39.00 -39.45

39.45 -39.50

39.50 -39.95

Ref

D52D53

U54

D55D56

U57

D58D59

U60

D61D62

U63

D64D65

U66

D67D68

U69

D70D71


N=38 (4,5/7,8,9,14)(S)

Blows 153 (100)

N=37 (4,7/7,8,10,12)(S)

Blows 120 (100)

N=37 (4,7/7,9,10,11)(S)

Blows 99 (100)

N=33 (4,7/7,8,8,10)(S)

Blows 115 (100)

N=41 (4,7/8,10,11,12)(S)

Blows 120 (80)

N=41 (4,7/7,10,10,14)(S)

Blows 120 (90)

Strata Depth (m)

39.45

Stratum Description

Very stiff fissured brown silty CLAY with rare pyrite and rare gypsum. Fissures are extremely closely spaced randomly orientated


Legend Water Strike

Instrument



BH3Sheet 4 of 5




ELAMR


CP107.9




4.05 2504.50 2009.00 150

Depth (m)

40.5

41.0

41.5

42.0

42.5

43.0

43.5

44.0

44.5

45.0

45.5

46.0

46.5

47.0

47.5

48.0

48.5

49.0

49.5

Samples and In Situ Testing Depth (m) Ref Results/Blows/Recovery (%)

Strata Depth (m) Stratum Description

undulating and planar smooth. LC

BH complete at 39.950m

Legend Water Strike

Instrument



BH3Sheet 5 of 5




ELAMR


CP107.9




4.05 2504.50 2009.00 150

Depth (m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5


0.30

0.80 - 1.001.00

1.00 - 1.50

1.50 - 1.95

1.802.00 - 2.45

2.30

3.00 - 3.45

3.30

4.004.00 - 4.454.00 - 4.50

5.00 - 5.455.00 - 5.50

6.00 - 6.456.00 - 6.50

6.30

7.00 - 7.50

7.50 - 8.00

7.808.00 - 8.458.00 - 8.50

8.50 - 9.00

9.00 - 9.45

9.50 - 10.00

10.00 -10.45

Ref

ES1

B1B2

ES2

B3

ES3B4

ES4

B5

ES5

B7D6

ES6

B9D8

B11D10ES7

B12

B13

ES8B15D14

B16

D17

B18

D19


N=27 (6,10/8,6,5,8)(S)

N=18 (5,5/4,4,5,5)(S)

N=24 (5,4/4,4,2,14)(C)

N=16 (2,5/5,5,3,3)(S)

N=5 (0,0/1,1,1,2)(S)

N=12 (1,3/3,3,3,3)(S)

N=50 (4,12/50 for 150mm)

(C)

N=36 (1,0/4,6,13,13)(C)

N=16 (1,3/3,3,5,5)(S)

N=17 (1,2/3,3,5,6)(S)

N=26 (2,4/5,8,6,7)(S)

Strata Depth (m)

0.000.15

0.801.00

1.50

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

7.50

8.00

9.00

Stratum Description

Reinforced CONCRETE. Reinforced with 5mm rebar.MGMedium dense, orangish brown, very gravelly fine to coarse SAND. Gravel is sub angular to rounded, fine to coarse of flint, brick fragments, clinker, ceramic and concrete fragments. MGMedium dense grey brown slightly clayey, silty very sandy sub angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse GRAVEL of flint, concrete, ceramic, brick and clinker. Sand is sub angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse. MGMedium grey brown silty very sandy sub angular to rounded, fine to coarse GRAVEL of flint. Sand is sub angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse.MGLoose grey brown clayey silty very sandy sub angular to sub rounded GRAVEL of flint with rare concrete. Sand is sub angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse. MGMedium loose grey brown sandy angular to sub rounded, fine to cobble GRAVEL of flint, concrete and brick. Sand is sub angular, fine to coarse. MGLoose grey brown slightly clayey silty very sandy angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse GRAVEL of flint, brick, concrete, coal and coke. Sand is angular to sub angular fine to coarse. MGVery loose dark grey gravelly silty fine to coarse SAND. Gravel is angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse of flint brick and clinker. MGLoose dark grey clayey silty gravelly SAND. Gravel is angular to sub rounded of flint and rare fine brick fragments. MGVery dense yellow brown sandy angular to sub rounded fine to coarse GRAVEL of flint. Sand is sub angular medium coarse. RTDDense yellow brown gravelly sub angular, fine to medium SAND. Gravel is angular to sub rounded fine to coarse of flint. RTDFirm yellow brown sandy gravelly SILT. Sand is fine. Gravel is fine to medium.RTD


Legend Water Strike

Instrument



BH7Sheet 1 of 2




ELAMR


CP108.0


Remarks: Drilling took place from "ground level" through to the basement into a 0.80m trial pit prepared by Keltbray.Borehole was dry.Installation of standpipe into the river terrace gravels as directed by Arup. Top of standpipe is 0.01m below ground level. Sand backfill was added from 5.56mbgl to 8.00mbgl.


3.50 2008.00 150

Depth (m)

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

13.0

13.5

14.0

14.5

15.0

15.5

16.0

16.5

17.0

17.5

18.0

18.5

19.0

19.5

Samples and In Situ Testing Depth (m) Ref Results/Blows/Recovery (%)


Firm fissured grey brown silty CLAY. Fissures are closely spaced undulating randomly orientated and planar smooth. LCFirm fissured grey brown SILT CLAY. Fissures are closely spaced undulating randomly orientated and planar smooth. LC


Legend Water Strike

Instrument



BH7Sheet 2 of 2




ELAMR


CP108.0


Remarks: Drilling took place from "ground level" through to the basement into a 0.80m trial pit prepared by Keltbray.Borehole was dry.Installation of standpipe into the river terrace gravels as directed by Arup. Top of standpipe is 0.01m below ground level. Sand backfill was added from 5.56mbgl to 8.00mbgl.


3.50 2008.00 150

Depth (m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5


0.090.30 - 0.60

1.40

2.30

4.30

6.30

8.30 - 8.60

RefES2ES1

ES3

ES4

ES5

ES6

ES7

Peak PID Result (ppm)

2.409.40

0.40

7.40

2.00

5.00

21.40

Strata Depth (m)

0.000.030.090.110.45

1.20

1.60

2.10

3.00

5.30

9.30

9.80

Stratum Description

Concrete.MGBrick and ash fill comprising coke and coal fragments.MGNorth and East faces: black very Sandy/Gravelly ash comprising of coke and coal.South and West faces: reinforced concrete.MGReinforced concrete.

MGBrown gravelly fine to coarse SAND. Gravel is angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse of concrete, brick, clinker, coke and coal.MGBrown sandy slightly clayey fine angular GRAVEL of flint and concrete. Sand is fine to coarse.MGConcrete slab.MGBrown sandy angular to sub angular, fine to medium GRAVELS of flint and concrete (concrete from breaking through slab). Sand is fine to medium.2.80mbgl - occasional fine to medium angular to sub angular GRAVELS of ceramic (possible main drainage).MGBrown very gravelly fine to medium SAND. Gravel is sub angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse of flint with occasional gravels of ceramic.RTDBrown very gravelly fine to medium SAND. Gravel is sub angular to sub rounded fine to coarse of flint.RTD

Orangish brown slightly sandy gravelly weathered CLAY. Sand is fine to coarse. Gravel is fine to medium, angular to sub rounded flint.


Legend Water Strike

Instrument



BH402Sheet 1 of 2


Earls Court - Supplementary ContaminationEarls Court Exhibition Centre


ELAMR

PRELIM Hole Type:Level (mLUL):

CP108.12


Remarks: Drilling took place from "ground level" through a cored hole 3m down to the basement into a pit prepared by Keltbray.Significant water added from 5.30mbgl to 9.80mbgl during drilling. No water strike recorded.Installation completed as instructed by Arup. Top of standpipe is 6.5cm above ground level. Pea gravel backfill added from 5.30mbgl to 9.8mbgl. Bentonite seal added above and below response zone. Standpipe rose during installation. Desired base of standpipe = 9.80mbgl, actual depth = 9.62mbgl.Ceramic found down to 5.30mbgl but believed to have been drawn down during drilling. All ceramic expected to be originally located directly below the concrete slab encountered at 1.60mbgl to 2.1mbgl as part of a broken drainage pipe.


2.15 2009.70 150

Depth (m)

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

13.0

13.5

14.0

14.5

15.0

15.5

16.0

16.5

17.0

17.5

18.0

18.5

19.0

19.5

Samples and In Situ Testing Depth (m) Ref Peak PID Result (ppm)


RTDFirm brownish grey laminated silty CLAY.LC


Legend Water Strike

Instrument



BH402Sheet 2 of 2




ELAMR


CP108.12


Remarks: Drilling took place from "ground level" through a cored hole 3m down to the basement into a pit prepared by Keltbray.Significant water added from 5.30mbgl to 9.80mbgl during drilling. No water strike recorded.Installation completed as instructed by Arup. Top of standpipe is 6.5cm above ground level. Pea gravel backfill added from 5.30mbgl to 9.8mbgl. Bentonite seal added above and below response zone. Standpipe rose during installation. Desired base of standpipe = 9.80mbgl, actual depth = 9.62mbgl.Ceramic found down to 5.30mbgl but believed to have been drawn down during drilling. All ceramic expected to be originally located directly below the concrete slab encountered at 1.60mbgl to 2.1mbgl as part of a broken drainage pipe.


2.15 2009.70 150

Depth (m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5


0.300.30 - 1.30

2.20 - 2.30

2.50

4.50

6.30 - 6.50

Ref

ES1ES2

ES3

ES4

ES5

ES6

Peak PID Result (ppm)

0.50

26.20

12.903.00

0.50

0.70

Strata Depth (m)

0.000.08

1.30

2.302.50

6.70

7.00

Stratum Description

Concrete.MGBrown slightly gravelly slightly clayey SAND comprising of organic material. Gravel is sub angular to sub rounded, fine to medium of concrete, brick, sandstone and flint with occasional cobbles of concrete (up to 10 x 9 x 6cm).MGDark brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Sand is fine to coarse. Gravel is angular to sub rounded, fine to medium of brick, concrete, sandstone, flint, glass and metal. Possible ACM fragments and copper wire at 2.30mbgl.MGOrangish brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Sand is fine to coarse. Gravel is angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse of brick, clinker and flint.MGBrown sandy angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse GRAVEL of flint. RTD

Brown sandy angular to sub rounded, fine to coarse GRAVEL of flint with occasional brown lenses of clay.RTDDark grey brown silty CLAY.LC


Legend Water Strike

Instrument



BH404Sheet 1 of 1




ELAMR


CP105.52


Remarks: Drilling took place from "ground level" through a cored hole 4.00m down to the basement into a pit prepared by Keltbray.Significant water added from 2.50mbgl to 7.00mbgl during drilling. No water strike recorded.Standpipe installed as directed by Arup. Top of standpipe is 3cm above ground level. Pea gravel backfill added from 3.00mbgl to 7.00mbgl. Bentonite seal added above and below response zone.First withdrawal of soil was at 1.30mbgl as the soil compressed down from beneath the concrete at ground level.


7.10 150



Appendix B Waste Carriers and Receiving Facilities

Monthly Environmental Report

Earls Court

Page 1

Soil & Stone Removal Carriers & Facilities

Table of Waste Carriers & Treatment

Waste carriers used and their licenses, as well as the receiving waste treatment and landfill facilities.

Waste Carrier Waste Carrier's License Date of Expiry of registration Checked with

Environment Agency Records

Keltbray Haulage CB/DU84378 17.02.2019 07.06.2016

PML CB/JM3451JK 16.02.2017 07.06.2016

S. Walsh & Son CBDU93666 01.04.2019 07.06.2016

PJC Sweepers CBDU76417 02.12.2018 07.06.2016

D.M.Haulage CB/RE5504FB 27.06.2017 07.06.2016

Hornbees CB/FE5705RG 27.09.2017 07.06.2016

Paramount CB/CE5009MW 08.08.2016 07.06.2016

G F Gordon CB/XM3887VT 23.04.2018 07.06.2016


Earls Court

Page 2

Kent Materials Services CB/DU74829 26.03.2018 07.06.2016

Morari Services CB/HM3783TU 27.07.2017 07.06.2016

CWB Transport CB/DE5702VL 25.08.2017 07.06.2016

DJ Tippers Ltd CB/GE5088PX 04.08.2016 07.06.2016

H&H Haulage CBDU66496 27.10.2018 07.06.2016

Normand Road Haulage CBDU76609 17.02.2019 07.06.2016

PB Donoghue CB/WM3546FM 21.09.2017 07.06.2016

Supple Transport CB/BE5003YV 16.11.2017 07.06.2016

BL Penwarden CBDU82262 17.02.2019 07.06.2016

PJ Leonard CB/EM3781BM 10.01.2017 07.06.2016


Earls Court

Page 3

Waste Facility Waste Facilities’ Permit Checked with Environmental

Agency Records

Ingrebourne Valley Ltd Rainham, Essex

DP3794ER/A001 07.06.2016

Keltbray AWS Silvertown EPR/FP3092LH 07.06.2016

Brett Aggregates Hithermoor KP3230ES

07.06.2016

Brett Aggregates, Home Farm JP3332SY 07.06.2016

FCC – WRG Waste Services Limited BM4635IH 07.06.2016



Appendix C References and Bibliography.

Site Investigation, Environmental Risk Assessment and Waste Classification


REFERENCES & BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alloway (1995). Heavy Metals in Soils (2nd Ed.). Alloway (2004). Contamination of Soils in Domestic Gardens & Allotments (Land Contamination & Reclamation, 12(3), 2004). BRE (1994). Performance of Building Materials in Contaminated Land (BRE Report 255). BRE (2001). Protective Measures for Housing on Gas Contaminated Land (BRE Digest 414). BRE (2004). Cover Systems for Land Regeneration. BRE (2005). Concrete in Aggressive Ground (BRE Special Digest 1 3rd Ed.). BRE (2007a). Soakaway Design (BRE Digest 365). BRE (2007b). Radon: Protective Measures for New Dwellings. (BRE Report 211). BSI (2007). CoP for the Characterisation and Remediation from Ground Gas in Affected Developments (BS 8485:2007). BSI (2010). CoP for Site Investigations (BS 5930:1999+A2:2010) (as amended). BSI (2011). Specification for Composted Materials (PAS 100:2011 3rd Ed.). BSI (2013a). Guidance on Investigations for Ground Gas. Permanent Gases and VOC (BS 8576:2013). BSI (2013b). CoP for Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites (BS 10175:2011+A1:2013). BSI (2015). Specification for Topsoil (BS 3882:2015). CIEH (2009). Generic Assessment Criteria for Human Health Risk Assessment (Land Quality Press 2nd Ed.). CIRIA (2001). Contaminated Land Risk Assessment: A Guide to Good Practice (Report C552). CIRIA (2007). Assessing Risks Posed by Hazardous Ground Gases to Buildings (Report C659 & Report C665). CIRIA (2009). The VOCs Handbook (Report C682). CIRIA (2014). Asbestos in Soil and Made Ground: A Guide to Understanding and Managing Risks (C733). CL:AIRE (2008). Guidance on Comparing Soil Contamination Data with a Critical Concentration. CL:AIRE (2009). Generic Assessment Criteria for Human Health Risk Assessment. CL:AIRE (2010). A Framework for Assessing the Sustainability of Soil and Groundwater Remediation. CL:AIRE (2014). Development of C4SL for Assessment of Land Affected by Contamination (SP1010 Rev. 2). DCLG (2010). The Building Regulations (SI 2010:2214) (as amended). DCLG (2011). The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (SI 2011 1824). DCLG (2012). National Planning Policy Framework. DCLG (2014). National Planning Policy for Waste. DCE (2010). Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water (V4 Rev. 1). DEFRA (2005). The Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations (SI 2005 894) (as amended). DEFRA (2009a). River Basin Districts Surface Water and Groundwater Classification (WFD) (England and Wales) Direction. DEFRA (2009b). A Code of Good Agricultural Practice for Farmers, Growers and Land Managers. DEFRA (2009c). The Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) Regulation (SI 2009 153). DEFRA (2010a). The Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations (SI 2010 675) (as amended). DEFRA (2010b). River Basin Districts Typology, Standards & Groundwater TV (WFD) (England and Wales) Directions. DEFRA (2011). The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations (SI 2011 988) (as amended). DEFRA (2012a). Part 2A Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance. DEFRA (2012b). The Contaminated Land (England) (Amendment) Regulations (SI 2012 263). DEFRA (2012c). Normal Background Concentrations of Contaminants in English Soils (R&D Project SP1008). DEFRA (2015). The Hazardous Waste (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations (SI 2015 1360). DETR (1998a). The Surface Waters (Dangerous Substances) (Classification) Regulations (SI 1998 389). DETR (1998b). The Groundwater Regulations (SI 1998 2746). DETR (2000). The Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations (SI 2000 3184) (as amended). Dickinson et al. (2000). Planting Trees on Contaminated Soils (Land Contamination & Reclamation, 8 (2), 2000). DoE (1987). Derivation of Trigger Values for Hydrocarbons in Contaminated Soil. DoE (1991). Landfill Gas. (WMP27 2nd Ed.). DoE (1992). Effects of Organic Chemicals in Contaminated Land on Buried Services (WRc 2982). DoE (1994a). Guidance on Preliminary Site Inspection of Contaminated Land (CLR2). DoE (1994b). The Surface Waters (River Ecosystem) (Classification) Regulations (SI 1994 1057). DoE (1995a). Industry Profiles. DoE (1995b). Landfill Design, Construction and Operational Practice (WMP26B). DoE (1996). The Surface Waters (Abstraction for Drinking Water) (Classification) Regulations (SI 1996 3001). DoE (1997). The Surface Waters (Fishlife) (Classification) Regulations (SI 1997 1331) (as amended). DoH (2010). The Animal Feed (England) Regulations (SI 2010 2503). DWP (2012). The Control of Asbestos Regulations (SI 2012 632). EFSA (2008). Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain on a Request from the European Commission on Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons in Food (EFSA Journal 724, 1-114). Eikmann & Kloke (1991). Taken from Land Contamination and Reclamation 6 (4) 1998. EA (2000a). Risks of Contaminated Land to Buildings, Building Materials and Services (P331). EA (2000b). Technical Aspects of Site Investigation: Volume 1 & Volume 2 (P5-065/TR). EA (2001a). Assessment & Management of Risks to Buildings, Material & Services from Contaminated Land (P5-035/TR/01). EA (2001b). Secondary Model Procedures for the Development of Soil Sampling Strategies for Contamination (P5-066/TR). EA (2002). Priority Contaminants for the Assessment of Land (CLR8). EA (2003). Review of Fate & Transport of Selected Contaminants in the Environment (P5-079-TR1). EA (2004). Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (CLR11). EA (2005). The UK Approach for Evaluating Human Health Risks from Petroleum HCs in Soil (P5-080/TR3). EA (2006a). Methodology for the Derivation of Remedial Targets for Soil & Groundwater to Protect Water (P20 V 3.1).

Site Investigation, Environmental Risk Assessment and Waste Classification


EA (2006b). Building a Better Environment – A Guide for Developers. EA (2007a). Information About Your Groundwater Quality Analysis Results (V1). EA (2007b). UK Soil and Herbage Pollutant Survey (V1). EA (2008a). Site Condition Report – Guidance and Templates (H5 V2.0). EA (2008b). Compilation of Data for Priority Organic Pollutants (SC050021/SR7). EA (2008c). An Ecological Risk Assessment Framework for Contaminants in Soil (SC070009). EA (2009a). Human Health Toxicological Assessment of Contaminants in Soil (SC050021/SR2). EA (2009b). Updated Technical Background to the CLEA Model (SC050021/SR3). EA (2009c). CLEA Software (Version 1.05) and Handbook (SC050021/SR4). EA (2009d). A Review of Body Weight and Height Data Used in the CLEA Model (SC050021/TR1). EA (2009e). Using Soil Guidance Values (SC050021/SGV Introduction). EA (2009f). Standards and Measures for the Deposit of Inert Waste on Land. EA (2010a). Guiding Principles for Land Contamination (GPLC1). EA (2010b). FAQs, Technical Information, Detailed Advice and References (GPLC2). EA (2010c). Reporting Checklists (GPLC3). EA (2010d). Guidance on Monitoring Landfill Gas Surface Emissions (LFTGN07 V2). EA (2013a). Waste Sampling and Testing for Disposal to Landfill (EBPR1 11507B Final). EA (2013b). Getting the Basics Right: How to Comply With Your Environmental Permit (V6.0). EA (2015). CLEA Software (Version 1.071). EU (1967). The Dangerous Substances Directive (67/548/EEC). EU (1999). The Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC) (as amended). EU (2000a). The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) (as amended). EU (2000b). The List of Waste Decision (2000/532/EC) (as amended). EU (2002). Undesirable Substances in Animal Feed Directive (2002/32/EC) (as amended). EU (2003). Waste Acceptance Criteria and Procedures Decision (2003/33/EC). EU (2006a). The Groundwater Directive (2006/118/EC) (as amended). EU (2006b). Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (1907/2006/EC) (as amended). EU (2008a). The Environmental Quality Standards Directive (2008/105/EC) (as amended). EU (2008b). The Revised Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) (as amended). EU (2008c). Classification, Labelling & Packaging of Substances & Mixtures Regulation (1272/2008/EC) (as amended). EU (2013). The Priority Substances Directive (2013/39/EU) (as amended). EU (2014a). The List of Waste Amendment Decision (2014/955/EU). EU (2014b). RWFD Annex III Replacement Regulation (1357/2014/EU). Highways England (1998). Specification for Highway Works (as amended). HSE (1991). Protection of Workers & the General Public During the Development of Contaminated Land. HSE (2007). Occupational Exposure Limits (EH40/2005) (as amended). HSE (2009). The Chemicals (Hazard Information and Packaging for Supply) Regulations (SI 2009 716). HSE (2010). Asbestos: The Survey Guide (HSG 264). ICRCL (1990). Notes on the Restoration and Aftercare of Metalliferous Mining Sites for Pasture and Grazing (70/90). MADEP (2002). Characterising Risks Posed by Petroleum Contaminated Sites. MAFF (1998). The Soil Code. Nathanail et al. (2015). The LQM/CIEH S4UL for Human Health Risk Assessment. NAVFAC (2003). Guidance for Environmental Background Analysis, Volume II. (NFESC User’s Guide UG-2054-ENV). NEPC (1999). Guidelines on Investigation Levels for Soil and Groundwater (Schedule B1). NHBC (2007). Guidance on Evaluation of Development Proposals on Sites where Methane and Carbon Dioxide are Present. NHBC (2008). Guidance for the Safe Development of Housing on Land Affected by Contamination (R&D 66 Volume 1). NHBC (2011). NHBC Standards. NHBC (2012). Verification of Ground Gas Protection Measures (Technical Extra Issue 07). NIPHE (2001). Technical Evaluation of the IV for Soil, Sediment and Groundwater (RIVM Report 711701 023). ODPM (2004). PPS23: Planning and Pollution Control Annex 2: Development on Land Affected by Contamination. SEGH (1993). Lead in Soil: Recommended Guidelines. SNIFFER (2003). Method for Deriving Site Specific Human Health Assessment Criteria for Contaminants in Soil. Thomas et al. (2012). Coal Tar Forensics. UKEA (2015). Waste Classification: Guidance on the Classification and Assessment of Waste (WM3 1st Ed.). UKWIR (2010). Guidance for the Selection of Water Supply Pipes to be Used in Brownfield Sites (Report 10/WM/03/21). USEPA (2015). Contaminated Site Clean Up Information. Water UK (2014). Contaminated Land Assessment Guidance. Wilson et al. (2009). The Ground Gas Handbook. WHO (2011). Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality (4th Ed.). Yunker et al. (2002). PAHs in the Fraser River Basin: A Critical Appraisal of PAH Ratios as Indictors of PAH Source and Composition (Organic Geo-Chemistry 33, 2002, 489-515). TGEN (2015). Forensic Methods of Determining Source of PAH Compounds in Contaminated Land (unpublished). TGEN (2015). How to Select or Determine EQS and Controlled Water Guidance Values (unpublished). TGEN (2015). Inorganic Contaminant Database unpublished). TGEN (2015). Properties and Fate of Inorganic Contaminants in Soils and Waters (unpublished). TGEN (2015). Relationship Between Total and Leachable Contaminants in Brownfield Land (unpublished). TGEN (2015). WAC Assessment Tool (unpublished). TGEN (2015). Waste Classification Tool (unpublished).

risk assessment and method statement

Documents