report unley - stage 3

REPORT

Unley - Stage 3 Environmental Assessment Program

Submitted to:

Environment Protection Authority SA submitted via email:

[email protected]

Submitted by:

Golder Associates Pty Ltd

118 Franklin Street, Adelaide, South Australia 5000, Australia

+61 8 8213 2100

19121313-001-R-Rev0

20 June 2019

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

i

Distribution List Environment Protection Authority


20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

ii

Executive Summary

Golder Associates Pty Ltd was commissioned by the Environment Protection Authority to undertake the Stage

3 environmental assessment of an EPA designated assessment area located within Unley, South Australia

(the Stage 3 assessment area). The objective of the works was to assess vapour intrusion risks to residential

properties in a localised area near the former dry cleaner on the corner of Mary Street and Unley Road.

Eight soil vapour bores were installed to screen depths between 1 and 1.5 m bgl along Mary Street, Austell

Street and Birdwood Avenue in Unley. Soil vapour samples were collected from each bore three days after

installation and concentrations of contaminants of interest were reported as less than the laboratory limit of

reporting in all samples, with the exception of tetrachloroethene (PCE) at locations SV03, SV04 and SV05.

The concentrations of PCE reported did not exceed the Tier 1 screening guidelines (Interim HILs published in

the ASC NEPM).

Based on the measured soil vapour concentrations potential vapour intrusion risks to human health within the

Stage 3 assessment area have not been identified.

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

iii

Table of Contents

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

1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Objective ........................................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Scope of Works ................................................................................................................................. 2

2.0 FIELDWORK METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 2

2.1 Service clearance .............................................................................................................................. 2

2.2 Borehole Drilling ................................................................................................................................ 2

2.3 Field Observations ............................................................................................................................ 2

2.4 Soil Vapour Bore Installation ............................................................................................................. 2

2.5 Soil Vapour Sampling ........................................................................................................................ 3

2.6 Survey ............................................................................................................................................... 3

3.0 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS ............................................................................... 3

3.1 Soil Vapour Assessment Screening Criteria ..................................................................................... 3

3.2 Analytical Results .............................................................................................................................. 3

4.0 DATA QUALITY EVALUATION ................................................................................................................. 4

4.1.1 Soil Vapour .................................................................................................................................... 4

5.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL .................................................................................................................... 5

6.0 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 5

7.0 IMPORTANT INFORMATION ..................................................................................................................... 6

TABLES

Table 1: Soil Vapour Analytical Results ................................................................................................................ 4

Table 2: Results of QC Assessment .................................................................................................................... 5

FIGURES

Figure 1: Assessment Area Location Plan

Figure 2: Soil Vapour Bore Location Plan

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

iv

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A Figures

APPENDIX B Borelogs and Sampling Sheets

APPENDIX C Photographs

APPENDIX D Survey and Calibration Records

APPENDIX E Chemical Table

APPENDIX F QC Table

APPENDIX G Laboratory Certificates and COCs

APPENDIX H Important Information

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The South Australian Environment Protection Authority (EPA) engaged Golder Associates Pty Ltd (Golder) to

undertake the Stage 3 environmental assessment of an EPA designated assessment area located within

Unley, South Australia. The location of the Stage 3 assessment area is shown in Figure 1, Appendix A.

1.1 Background

A number of activities associated with the use of chlorinated hydrocarbon compounds (CHC), including a dry

cleaner on the corner of Mary St and Unley Road, were understood to have been historically undertaken in or

within the vicinity of the Stage 3 assessment area. The EPA has previously undertaken two stages of

assessment work at Unley to assess potential risks associated with CHC present in the subsurface.

Stage 1 of the assessment works was undertaken in 2017 and included a broad-scale passive soil vapour

screen within an area bounded by Mary Street, Charles Lane, Tyne Place and Little Charles Street, as shown

on Figure 1, Appendix A. Some CHCs, including trichloroethene (TCE) and tetrachloroethene (PCE) and also

benzene were detected. Concentrations of these contaminants of potential concern were all reported below or

equal to the adopted Tier 1 screening guidelines. The findings of the Stage 1 assessment are reported in the

Stage 1 environmental assessment report (Tierra, 2017).

Stage 2 of the assessment works was undertaken in 2018 across an expanded assessment area (as

illustrated on Figure 1, Appendix A) and included passive soil vapour sampling in the south-eastern corner of

this expanded area and an investigation of groundwater contamination within the assessment area. PCE was

detected in one of the passive soil vapour samples, however at a concentration below the screening guideline

for residential land use. Groundwater results indicated low concentrations of PCE, TCE and carbon

tetrachloride in the western portion of the expanded assessment area, with concentrations of PCE in

groundwater marginally exceeding screening guidelines for potable water and primary contact recreation in

one of these wells.

In addition to the assessments commissioned by EPA, the EPA were made aware of PCE detected in the

groundwater at concentrations above the adopted screening guideline and TCE concentrations above the

laboratory limit of reporting, at an upgradient site within the south-eastern portion of the Stage 2 assessment

area. SA Health advised that a risk to human health from exposure to low concentrations of CHC in

groundwater does not exist. However, as a precautionary approach, SA Health recommended that

quantitative soil vapour assessment be undertaken in a small area (south-eastern portion of the Stage 2

assessment area) to conclusively determine whether there is any risk to human health.

The Stage 3 Assessment was commissioned by EPA to address the recommendation from SA Health for

quantitative soil vapour assessment in the south eastern portion of the Stage 2 Assessment Area.

1.2 Objective

The objective of the Stage 3 assessment was to assess vapour intrusion risks to residential properties in the

localised area shown on Figure 1 (Appendix A) by undertaking an active soil vapour assessment at eight

locations within public footpaths.

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

2

1.3 Scope of Works

The scope of work was developed with consideration of the National Environmental Protection (Assessment of

Site Contamination) Measure 1999, as amended 2013 (ASC NEPM) and included:

Location and service clearance using ground penetrating radar (GPR) and radio-scanning methods by a

specialist sub-contractor.

Hand auger boring at 8 locations to a depth of 1.5 m below ground level (bgl).

Screening of soil at approximately 0.5 m depths with a photoionisation detector (PID).

Installation of 8 soil vapour bores to screen approximately 1 – 1.5 m depths at each location drilled.

Collection of soil vapour samples from the installed soil vapour bores using passivated Summa canisters.

1 L Summa cannisters were used to sample over a duration of approximately 20 min from each of the

soil vapour bores.

Submission of soil vapour samples for testing for selected CHCs by NATA accredited laboratories.

Assessment of QAQC samples.

2.0 FIELDWORK METHODOLOGY

2.1 Service clearance

Prior to the commencement of drilling each investigation location, a service locator was contracted to

undertake service clearance for underground services using radio-scanning and a ground penetrating radar

(GPR).

2.2 Borehole Drilling

A hand auger was utilised to extend the boreholes to approximately 1.5 m bgl. A hand auger was chosen as

the drilling method for safety precautions, due to the presence of underground services near the borehole

locations. The soil lithology was logged and soil samples were collected and screened at approximately 0.5 m

intervals with a PID to screen for unexpected soil contamination from VOCs. No soil samples were sent to the

lab for analysis as no signs of contamination were noted in the soil. Photographs of the soil encountered at

each location were taken. Borehole logs are provided in Appendix B and Photographs in Appendix C.

2.3 Field Observations

During the fieldwork a PID was used for monitoring for the presence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs).

The PID was calibrated by Air-met prior to the commencement of work. The calibration certificate for the PID

used in the field is included in Appendix D. No elevated PID readings were recorded.

2.4 Soil Vapour Bore Installation

Soil vapour monitoring bores were installed at the eight boreholes drilled, as shown in Figure 2, Appendix A.

The bores were installed to screen approximately 1 – 1.5 m bgl at each location drilled. The soil vapour screen

was comprised of a 15 mm ID stainless steel wire mesh implant with an approximate 150 mm length. This

implant was connected to 15 mm ID Teflon tubing that extended to ground surface. An 8/16 grade washed

sand filter pack was installed surrounding the implants to a depth of 1 m, followed by 250mm of bentonite

chips and finally a bentonite/grout mix to the surface. The soil vapour locations were finished at ground

surface with a flush well head cover.

Detailed bore construction information for each well is provided in Appendix B.

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

3

2.5 Soil Vapour Sampling

Three days after installation the eight newly installed soil vapour bores were sampled. Immediately prior to

sample collection, the soil vapour bore and sample train was purged with a volume equal to three times the

total bore and sampling train volume, to help ensure the sample was, to the extent possible, representative of

the vapour concentration in the soil surrounding the bore. A calibrated air sampling pump set to a flow rate of

100ml/min and rotameter were used to purge the bores. Calibration records for both the pump and rotameter

are included in Appendix D.

Sampling for volatile halogenated compounds (VHCs) was conducted using high volume (1 litre), individual

laboratory supplied and certified Summa® canisters. Certification is provided with the laboratory reports in

Appendix G. The Summa® canisters were equipped with a flow restricting orifice and vacuum gauge to allow

sampling over a 20-minute period (approximately 50 ml/min).

Quantitative helium leak testing was carried out for every sample collected. Ultra-high purity (UHP) helium

(99.999 %v/v) was bled into an inert shroud covering the bore and sampling train. Helium was included as

part of the analysis for each Summa® canister. Calibration records for the helium detector are provided in

Appendix D. The consumable component of the sampling system (Teflon tubing) was replaced for each bore

to prevent cross contamination.

The primary laboratory for the soil vapour analysis was Envirolab Services Pty Ltd (Envirolab) and the

secondary laboratory was SGS. Soil vapour samples were analysed for selected VHCs (including

Tetrachloroethene, Trichloroethene, Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene, Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene, 1,1-Dichloroethene

and vinyl chloride) and Helium.

Laboratory reports from the soil vapour analysis are provided in Appendix G with soil vapour sampling records

included in Appendix B.

2.6 Survey

After the completion of the soil vapour bore installation, the position of each soil vapour bore was surveyed in

GDA 94 by Linkup Construction Surveys. Each soil vapour bore was also clearly labelled inside the gatic. The

survey reports are presented in Appendix D.

3.0 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

3.1 Soil Vapour Assessment Screening Criteria

Soil vapour data has been compared with the following published guidelines to allow a preliminary screen of

the potential for human health risks associated with soil vapour at the site (Tier 1 risk assessment):

ASC NEPM 2013 Interim Soil Vapour Health Investigation Levels for Volatile Organic Chlorinated

Compounds (Interim HILs). Interim HILs are provided for a range of land uses and are presented with

the analytical table in Appendix E.

3.2 Analytical Results

Laboratory analytical results from the soil vapour investigation are provided in Appendix E and laboratory

certificates in Appendix G. Soil vapour results were compared with the screening criteria detailed in Section

3.1. No soil vapour results exceeding the interim HILs were recorded. A summary of the soil vapour analytical

results is provided in Table 1.

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

4

Table 1: Soil Vapour Analytical Results

Chemical Locations Reporting Concentrations Above LOR

Locations Reporting Concentrations Above

Adopted Guideline1

Maximum Concentration (mg/m3)

1,1-Dichloroethene All below LOR N/A <0.002

Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene All below LOR <0.002

Trans-1,2-dichloroethene All below LOR N/A <0.002

Trichloroethene All below LOR - <0.0016

Tetrachloroethene SV03, SV04 and SV05 - 0.04 (SV05)

Vinyl Chloride All below LOR - <0.0008

Notes: N/A – No applicable guideline for chemical of interest.

1ASC NEPM 2013 Interim Soil Vapour Health Investigation Levels for Volatile Organic Chlorinated Compounds

4.0 DATA QUALITY EVALUATION

A data quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) program was implemented as part of this assessment.

The QA/QC program is made up of the following elements:

Implementation of appropriate field work procedures.

Collection and interpretation of field quality control data.

Collection and evaluation of internal laboratory quality control data.

The field work was carried out in accordance with Golder standard technical procedures.

As part of the QA/QC process field quality control samples (primary duplicate and secondary duplicate

samples) were collected and internal quality control samples (spikes, duplicates and method blanks) were

analysed by the laboratories.

The overall assessment of the QC program has been made in terms of completeness. The completeness is

equal to the percentage of valid quality assurance and quality control results. The QC criteria include the

following:

A Relative Percentage Difference (RPD) less than 30% for field duplicates.

Primary laboratory internal duplicates recording RPDs less than 30%.

Primary laboratory control spikes within the acceptable recovery range set by the laboratory.

Primary laboratory internal blanks below laboratory limits of reporting (LORs).

An overall completeness of greater than 95% to be achieved.

4.1.1 Soil Vapour

The following QC samples were collected during the soil vapour investigation:

Duplicates: There was one primary (intra-laboratory) and one secondary (inter-laboratory) duplicate

sample collected in addition to the 8 primary samples collected and submitted for analysis. This results in

a duplicate frequency of greater than 1 in 10 primary samples, which meets ASC NEPM requirements.

The comparison of the duplicate samples and calculation of RPDs is included in Appendix F.

Table 2 lists the results of the QC assessment for the soil vapour sampling.

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

5

Table 2: Results of QC Assessment

Item Objective Summary of Results Compliance, % complete

Chain of Custody Records Completed in full Completed in full Yes, 100%

Recovery and analysis of

field duplicate sample

Collect duplicate samples at

a minimum rate of 10% and

assess that RPDs are within

±30%

The number of duplicate

samples obtained complied

with requirement. No RPD

values were outside ±30%.

Yes, 100%

NATA certification and

approved analytical methods Comply with reference Complied Yes, 100%

Sample preservation and

holding times Comply with reference Complied Yes, 100%

Analysis of laboratory

duplicates

RPDs are within laboratory

DQO of ±50% Complied Yes, 100%

Analysis of Laboratory

Control Samples

Percentage recovery within

the laboratory’s acceptable

limits

Complied. Yes, 100%

Overall Completeness 100%

On the basis of the field and laboratory results conducted for this sampling period, the laboratory has provided

an acceptable QA/QC program and data confirmation. The overall data quality for this investigation is

considered acceptable and sufficiently reliable to achieve the objectives of this assessment.

5.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

A Conceptual Site Model (CSM) was previously developed for the Unley Stage 2 Assessment Area by

Kleinfelder (Kleinfelder 2018) to consider known and potential sources, land uses, the nature and extent of

contamination, contaminant transport mechanisms, receptors and potential exposure pathways. The

additional soil vapour information obtained by the Stage 3 assessment supports the previous finding that only

minor concentrations of chlorinated hydrocarbons are present in soil vapour and that the identified

concentrations do not exceed health-based screening guidelines. The previously presented CSM is

considered to remain valid.

6.0 CONCLUSIONS

Eight soil vapour bores were installed to screen depths between 1 and 1.5 m bgl along Mary Street, Austell

Street and Birdwood Avenue in Unley. Soil vapour samples were collected from each bore three days after

installation and concentrations of contaminants of interest were reported as less than the laboratory limit of

reporting in all samples, with the exception of tetrachloroethene (PCE) at locations SV03, SV04 and SV05.

The concentrations of PCE reported did not exceed the Tier 1 screening guidelines (Interim HILs published in

the ASC NEPM).

Based on the measured soil vapour concentrations potential vapour intrusion risks to human health within the

Stage 3 assessment area have not been identified.

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

6

7.0 IMPORTANT INFORMATION

Your attention is drawn to the document – “Important Information”, which is included in Appendix H of this

report. The statements presented in this document are intended to advise you of what your realistic

expectations of this report should be. The document is not intended to reduce the level of responsibility

accepted by Golder Associates, but rather to ensure that all parties who may rely on this report are aware of

the responsibilities each assumes in so doing.

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

7

Signature Page


James Coley James Corbett

Senior Environmental Consultant Principal Environmental Engineer

JGC/JBC/gp

A.B.N. 64 006 107 857

Golder and the G logo are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation

https://golderassociates.sharepoint.com/sites/107537/project files/6 deliverables/rev 0/19121313-001-r-rev0.docx

APPENDIX A

Figures

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

AU

STELL STREET

MARY STREET

KIN

G W

ILLIAM

RO

AD

UN

LEY RO

AD

PALM

ERSTO

N R

OA

D

MA

RY PLAC

E

QU

EEN STR

EET

BEEC

H AVEN

UE

CHARLES STREET

RO

BER

TS STREET

CHARLES WALK

ARTHUR STREET

HUGHES LANE

UNION STREET

HUGHES STREET

YOUNG STREET

MAUD STREET

CULVERT STREET

WHITTAM STREET

TYNE PLA

CE

DUNKS STREET

MIZPA

H AVEN

UE

CLELA

ND

AVENU

E

MARY LANE

CHARLES LANE

HU

GH

ES PLAC

E

IRW

IN LA

NE

SALISB

UR

Y STREET

PALM

ERSTO

N PLA

CE

MO

RN

ING

TON

RO

AD

ASH

AVENU

E

KILLIC

OAT STR

EET

MCGOWAN AVENUE

OA

K AVEN

UE

RA

MA

GE STR

EET

STAGE 2

STAGE 1

STAGE 3

CLIENTEPA

LEGEND

Assessment Area Stage 1Assessment Area Stage 2Assessment Area Stage 3

NOTE(S)

REFERENCE(S)

1. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH SOURCED FROM NEARMAP. DATE OF CAPTURE 28/03/2019.RESOLUTION 15CM.

1. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY COPYRIGHT NEARMAP PTY LTD.

PROJECTUNLEY - STAGE 3

TITLE

ASSESSMENT AREAS

19121313 001-R 0 1

07-06-2019

GB

-

GS

VJ

PATH

: V:\E

PA\U

nley

\191

2131

3 - U

nley

Sta

ge 3

\Pro

ject

\001

-R\1

9121

313-

001-

R-F

00A

-Rev

0.m

xd C

RE

ATE

D O

N: 2

019-

06-0

7 AT

: 2:3

5:30

PM

IF T

HIS

ME

AS

UR

EM

EN

T D

OE

S N

OT

MAT

CH

WH

AT IS

SH

OW

N, T

HE

SH

EE

T S

IZE

HA

S B

EE

N M

OD

IFIE

D F

RO

M: I

SO

A3

CONSULTANT

PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. FIGURE

DD-MM-YYYY

DESIGNED

PREPARED

REVIEWED

APPROVED

25m

m0

¸KEY MAP

0 220METERS

1:2,750 GDA 1994 MGA ZONE 54

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

!.

!.!.

MA

RY PLAC

E

AU

STELL STREET

UN

LEY RO

AD

LITTLE CH

AR

LES STREET

MARY STREET MARION STREET

BEECH AVENUE

BIRDWOOD AVENUE

MARY LANE

SV01

SV02

SV03

SV04SV05

SV06

SV07 SV08

STAGE 3

CLIENTEPA

LEGEND

!. Approximate Soil Vapour Bore LocationAssessment Area Stage 3

NOTE(S)

REFERENCE(S)

1. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH SOURCED FROM NEARMAP. DATE OF CAPTURE 28/03/2019.RESOLUTION 7.5CM.

1. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY COPYRIGHT NEARMAP PTY LTD.

PROJECTUNLEY - STAGE 3

TITLE

SOIL VAPOUR BORE LOCATION PLAN

19121313 001-R 0 2

07-06-2019

GB

-

GS

VJ

PATH

: V:\E

PA\U

nley

\191

2131

3 - U

nley

Sta

ge 3

\Pro

ject

\001

-R\1

9121

313-

001-

R-F

002-

Rev

0.m

xd C

RE

ATE

D O

N: 2

019-

06-0

7 AT

: 1:5

8:16

PM

IF T

HIS

ME

AS

UR

EM

EN

T D

OE

S N

OT

MAT

CH

WH

AT IS

SH

OW

N, T

HE

SH

EE

T S

IZE

HA

S B

EE

N M

OD

IFIE

D F

RO

M: I

SO

A3

CONSULTANT

PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. FIGURE

DD-MM-YYYY

DESIGNED

PREPARED

REVIEWED

APPROVED

25m

m0

¸KEY MAP

0 60METERS

1:750 GDA 1994 MGA ZONE 54

APPENDIX B

Borelogs and Sampling Sheets

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

Updated in line with Australian Standard Geotechnical Site Investigations (AS1726:2017) GAP Form No.6 RL8 January 2018

EXPLANATION OF NOTES, ABBREVIATIONS & TERMS USED ON BOREHOLE AND TEST PIT REPORTS

DRILLING/EXCAVATION METHOD ADH Hollow auger drilling EX Excavator PQ3 Diamond core - 83 mm ADT Auger drilling with tc-bit HA Hand auger PT Push tube sampling ADV Auger drilling with v-bit HAND Excavated by hand methods RAB Rotary air blast AIRCORE Aircore HMLC Diamond core - 63 mm RC Reverse circulation AT Air track HQ3 Diamond core - 61 mm RT Rock roller BH Backhoe bucket JET Jetting SONIC Sonic drilling CT Cable tool rig MZ Mazier tube sampling SPT Standard penetration testing DTC Diatube coring NDD Non-destructive digging U Undisturbed tube sampling EE Existing excavation NMLC Diamond core - 52 mm WB Washbore drilling EPT Extruded push tube NQ3 Diamond core - 45 mm PENETRATION/EXCAVATION RESISTANCE L Low resistance. Rapid penetration possible with little effort from the equipment used. M Medium resistance. Excavation/possible at an acceptable rate with moderate effort from the equipment used. H High resistance to penetration/excavation. Further penetration is possible at a slow rate and requires significant

effort from the equipment. R Refusal or Practical Refusal. No further progress possible without the risk of damage or unacceptable wear to

the digging implement or machine. These assessments are subjective and are dependent on many factors including the equipment power, weight, condition of excavation or drilling tools, and the experience of the operator. WATER

Water level at date shown Partial water loss Water inflow Complete water loss

GROUNDWATER NOT OBSERVED

The observation of groundwater, whether present or not, was not possible due to drilling water, surface seepage or cave in of the borehole/test pit.

GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED

The borehole/test pit was dry soon after excavation. However, groundwater could be present in less permeable strata. Inflow may have been observed had the borehole/test pit been left open for a longer period.

SAMPLING AND TESTING SPT Standard Penetration Test to AS1289.6.3.1-2004 4,7,11 N=18 4,7,11 = Blows per 150mm. N = Blows per 300mm penetration following 150mm seating 30/80 mm Where practical refusal occurs, the blows and penetration for that interval are reported RW Penetration occurred under the rod weight only HW Penetration occurred under the hammer and rod weight only HB Hammer double bouncing on anvil DS Disturbed sample BDS Bulk disturbed sample G Gas Sample W Water Sample FP Field permeability test over section noted FV Field vane shear test expressed as uncorrected shear strength (sv = peak value, sr = residual value) PID Photoionisation Detector reading in ppm PM Pressuremeter test over section noted PP Pocket penetrometer test expressed as instrument reading in kPa U63 Thin walled tube sample - number indicates nominal sample diameter in millimetres WPT Water pressure test DCP Dynamic cone penetration test CPT Cone penetration test CPTu Cone penetration test with pore pressure (u) measurement RANKING OF VISUALLY OBSERVABLE CONTAMINATION AND ODOUR (for specific soil contamination assessment projects) R = 0 R = 1 R = 2 R = 3

No visible evidence of contamination Slight evidence of visible contamination Visible contamination Significant visible contamination

R = A R = B R = C R = D

No non-natural odours identified Slight non-natural odours identified Moderate non-natural odours identified Strong non-natural odours identified

ROCK CORE RECOVERY TCR = Total Core Recovery

(%) RQD = Rock Quality Designation

(%) SCR = Solid Core Recovery

(%) F = Fracture Frequency

100runcoreofLength

eredcovrecoreofLength 100

runcoreofLengthmm100coreoflengthsAxial

100

runcoreofLengthrecovered core alcyclindric of Length

(m) zoneofLength defectsofNo.

Updated in line with Australian Standard Geotechnical Site Investigations (AS1726:2017) GAP Form No.5 RL9 January 2018

METHOD OF SOIL DESCRIPTION USED ON BOREHOLE AND TEST PIT REPORTS

SYMBOLS

FILL

CLAY (CL, CI or CH)

GRAVEL (GW, GP, GM or GC)

ORGANIC SOILS (OL, OH or Pt)

SAND (SW, SP, SM or SC)

COBBLES or BOULDERS

SILT (ML or MH)

Combinations of these basic symbols may be used to indicate mixed materials such as sandy clay. CLASSIFICATION AND INFERRED STRATIGRAPHY Soil and Rock is classified and described in Reports of Boreholes and Test Pits using the preferred method given in AS1726-2017. The material properties are assessed in the field by visual/tactile methods.

Particle Size Plasticity Properties Soil Group Sub Division Particle Size

BOULDERS > 200 mm COBBLES 63 to 200 mm

GRAVEL Coarse 19 to 63 mm

Medium 6.7 to 19 mm

Fine 2.36 to 6.7 mm

SAND Coarse 0.6 to 2.36 mm

Medium 0.21 to 0.6 mm

Fine 0.075 to 0.21 mm

SILT 0.002 to 0.075 mm

CLAY ˂ 0.002 mm MOISTURE CONDITION Symbol Term Description D Dry Sands and gravels are free flowing. Clays and silts may be brittle or friable and powdery. M Moist Soils are darker than in dry condition and may feel cool. Sands and gravels tend to cohere. W Wet Soils exude free water. Sand and gravels tend to cohere. Moisture condition for fine grained soils is described relative to the plastic limit or liquid limit as specified in AS1726-2017. CONSISTENCY AND DENSITY

Fine Grained Soils Coarse Grained Soils Symbol Term Undrained Shear Strength Symbol Term Density Index (%) SPN “N” *

VS Very Soft 0 to 12 kPa VL Very Loose Less than 15 0 to 4 S Soft 12 to 25 kPa L Loose 15 to 35 4 to 10 F Firm 25 to 50 kPa MD Medium Dense 35 to 65 10 to 30 St Stiff 50 to 100 kPa D Dense 65 to 85 30 to 50

VSt Very Stiff 100 to 200 kPa VD Very Dense Above 85 Above 50 H Hard Above 200 kPa Fr Friable -

In the absence of test results, consistency and density may be assessed from correlations with the observed behaviour of the material. * SPT correlations are not stated in AS1726-2017, and may be subject to corrections for overburden pressure and equipment type. CEMENTATION Weakly Cemented The soil may be easily disaggregated by hand in air or water. Moderately Cemented Effort is required to disaggregate the soil by hand in air or water.

L-M

M-H

FILL: CLAYhigh plasticity, dark brown / grey

CLAYhigh plasticity, pale brown

END OF HAND AUGER @ 1.50 mTARGET DEPTHGROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTEREDSOIL VAPOUR PROBE INSTALLED

CH

CH0.40

43.56

43.16

42.06

HA

0.00 mPID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

GN

E

M(>PL)

M(<PL)

SV

01

Gattic

Bentonite /Grout

Bentonite

Filter pack

SHEET: 1 OF 1

Field Material DescriptionSamplingDrilling

PE

NE

TRA

TIO

NR

ES

ISTA

NC

E

SOIL/ROCK MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TER

RLDEPTH

DE

PTH

(met

res)

ME

THO

D

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST

GAP gINT FN. F01dRL3

CLIENT:PROJECT:LOCATION:JOB NO:

DATE: 20/5/19DATE: 31/5/19

This report of hand augered borehole must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations. It has beenprepared for environmental purposes only, without attempt to consider geotechnical properties or the geotechnical significance of

the materials encountered. As such it should not be relied upon for geotechnical purposes.

EPAEPA Unley Stage 3Unley19121313

COORDS: 281364.5 m E 6129958.4 m N MGA94 54SURFACE RL: 43.56 m DATUM: AHDINCLINATION: -90°HOLE DEPTH: 1.50 m

LOGGED: OHCHECKED: ES

REPORT OF HAND AUGERED BOREHOLE: BH01/SV01

GAP

8_1

6.4

LIB.

GLB

Log

GAP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AGE

191

2131

3 G

INT.

GPJ

<<D

raw

ingF

ile>>

07/

06/2

019

11:3

9 8

.30.

004

Dat

gel T

ools

MO

ISTU

RE

CO

ND

ITIO

NC

ON

SIS

TEN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

PIEZOMETER DETAILS

SV01ID Static Water Level

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

GPilkington

Rectangle

L-M

M-H


CLAYhigh plasticity, pale brown


CH

CH0.60

43.31

42.71

41.81

HA

0.00 mPID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

GN

E

M(>PL)

M - D

SV

02

Gattic

Bentonite /Grout

Bentonite

Filter pack

SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TRA

TIO

NR

ES

ISTA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TER

RLDEPTH

DE

PTH

(met

res)

ME

THO

D

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST



DATE: 20/5/19DATE: 31/5/19







GAP

8_1

6.4

LIB.

GLB

Log

GAP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AGE

191

2131

3 G

INT.

GPJ

<<D

raw

ingF

ile>>

07/

06/2

019

11:3

9 8

.30.

004

Dat

gel T

ools

MO

ISTU

RE

CO

ND

ITIO

NC

ON

SIS

TEN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

PIEZOMETER DETAILS


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

L-M

M-H


CLAYhigh plasticity, red brown


CH

CH0.40

43.11

42.71

41.61

HA

0.00 mPID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

GN

E

M(>PL)

M - DS

V03

Gattic

Bentonite /Grout

Bentonite

Filter pack

SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TRA

TIO

NR

ES

ISTA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TER

RLDEPTH

DE

PTH

(met

res)

ME

THO

D

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST



DATE: 20/5/19DATE: 31/5/19







GAP

8_1

6.4

LIB.

GLB

Log

GAP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AGE

191

2131

3 G

INT.

GPJ

<<D

raw

ingF

ile>>

07/

06/2

019

11:3

9 8

.30.

004

Dat

gel T

ools

MO

ISTU

RE

CO

ND

ITIO

NC

ON

SIS

TEN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

PIEZOMETER DETAILS


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

L-M

M-H

FILL: FOOTPATH PAVING

FILL: SANDfine to coarse grained, orangegrey

Sandy CLAYmedium to high plasticity, grey brown, fine to coarse grained sand

CLAYmedium to high plasticity, pale brown / pale orange


SP

CI-CH

CI-CH

0.06

0.10

0.20

0.40

43.05

42.99

42.95

42.85

42.65

41.55

HA

0.00 m

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

GN

E

M

M(>PL)

M(<PL)

SV

04

Gattic

Bentonite /Grout

Bentonite

Filter pack

SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TRA

TIO

NR

ES

ISTA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TER

RLDEPTH

DE

PTH

(met

res)

ME

THO

D

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST



DATE: 20/5/19DATE: 31/5/19







GAP

8_1

6.4

LIB.

GLB

Log

GAP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AGE

191

2131

3 G

INT.

GPJ

<<D

raw

ingF

ile>>

07/

06/2

019

11:3

9 8

.30.

004

Dat

gel T

ools

MO

ISTU

RE

CO

ND

ITIO

NC

ON

SIS

TEN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

PIEZOMETER DETAILS


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

L-M

M-H


FILL: SANDfine to medium grained, orange brownFILL: Sandy GRAVELfine to coarse grained, sub-rounded to sub-angular, dark brown,fine to coarse grained sand

CLAYhigh plasticity, orange brown


SP

GP

CH

0.06

0.10

0.20

43.27

43.21

43.17

43.07

41.77

HA

0.00 m

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

GN

E

M

M(<PL)

SV

05

Gattic

Bentonite /Grout

Bentonite

Filter pack

SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TRA

TIO

NR

ES

ISTA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TER

RLDEPTH

DE

PTH

(met

res)

ME

THO

D

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST



DATE: 20/5/19DATE: 31/5/19







GAP

8_1

6.4

LIB.

GLB

Log

GAP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AGE

191

2131

3 G

INT.

GPJ

<<D

raw

ingF

ile>>

07/

06/2

019

11:3

9 8

.30.

004

Dat

gel T

ools

MO

ISTU

RE

CO

ND

ITIO

NC

ON

SIS

TEN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

PIEZOMETER DETAILS


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

L-M

M-H

FILL: CLAYhigh plasticity, dark brown, with fine to coarse, sub-angular toangular gravel

CLAYmedium to high plasticity, pale brown / orange brown

END OF HAND AUGER @ 1.40 mREFUSALGROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTEREDSOIL VAPOUR PROBE INSTALLED

CH

CI-CH

0.40

43.62

43.22

42.22

HA

0.00 mPID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

GN

E

W(>LL)

M(>PL)

SV

06

Gattic

Bentonite /Grout

Bentonite

Filter pack

SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TRA

TIO

NR

ES

ISTA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TER

RLDEPTH

DE

PTH

(met

res)

ME

THO

D

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST



DATE: 20/5/19DATE: 31/5/19







GAP

8_1

6.4

LIB.

GLB

Log

GAP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AGE

191

2131

3 G

INT.

GPJ

<<D

raw

ingF

ile>>

07/

06/2

019

11:3

9 8

.30.

004

Dat

gel T

ools

MO

ISTU

RE

CO

ND

ITIO

NC

ON

SIS

TEN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

PIEZOMETER DETAILS


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

L-M

M-H


FILL: SANDfine to medium grained, orange brownFILL: Gravelly CLAYmedium to high plasticity, brown, fine to coarse, sub-rounded tosub-angular gravel

CLAYmedium to high plasticity, orange brown


SPCI-CH

CI-CH

0.09

0.40

43.93

43.83

43.53

42.43

HA

0.00 m

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

GN

E

M

M(<PL)

SV

07

Gattic

Bentonite /Grout

Bentonite

Filter pack

SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TRA

TIO

NR

ES

ISTA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TER

RLDEPTH

DE

PTH

(met

res)

ME

THO

D

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST



DATE: 20/5/19DATE: 31/5/19







GAP

8_1

6.4

LIB.

GLB

Log

GAP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AGE

191

2131

3 G

INT.

GPJ

<<D

raw

ingF

ile>>

07/

06/2

019

11:3

9 8

.30.

004

Dat

gel T

ools

MO

ISTU

RE

CO

ND

ITIO

NC

ON

SIS

TEN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

PIEZOMETER DETAILS


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

L-M

M-H


FILL: SANDfine to medium grained, orange brownFILL: CLAYmedium plasticity, dark brownCLAYmedium to high plasticity, pale brown / orange brown


SPCI

CI-CH

0.09

0.20

44.08

43.98

43.88

42.58

HA

0.00 m

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

PID = 0 ppm

GN

E

M

M(<PL)

SV

08

Gattic

Bentonite /Grout

Bentonite

Filter pack

SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TRA

TIO

NR

ES

ISTA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TER

RLDEPTH

DE

PTH

(met

res)

ME

THO

D

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST



DATE: 20/5/19DATE: 31/5/19







GAP

8_1

6.4

LIB.

GLB

Log

GAP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AGE

191

2131

3 G

INT.

GPJ

<<D

raw

ingF

ile>>

07/

06/2

019

11:3

9 8

.30.

004

Dat

gel T

ools

MO

ISTU

RE

CO

ND

ITIO

NC

ON

SIS

TEN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

PIEZOMETER DETAILS


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

PROJECT INFORMATION

Project Number: Gas Bore ID:

Client: Bore Depth:

Site Location: Date:

Sample Type Sampled By:

GAS BORE DATA

Ambient Temperature Sample train Volume (mL) Clean Sampling Line Yes

Barometric Pressure (kPa) Bore Volume (mL) Leak Check (Helium) Yes

Relative Humidity (%) Purge Volume (mL) Purged Bore Line Yes

Rain Dry Purge time @50mL/min (mins)

Water Logged No

EQUIPMENT RECORD

Calibration Date

Purge Pump 14/06/2018 Flow Controller

Rotameter Canister Number

Helium Dectector 10/10/2018 Date Cleaned

SAMPLING RECORD

Time Helium (ppm) Vacuum (Hg) Time Helium (ppm) Vacuum (Hg)

Start 8:35 600,000 -28

8:40 500,000 -21

8:45 400,000 -14

8:49 300,000 -8

Finish

NOTES

PID = 0.5 ppm

Helium = 5000 ppm

SOIL GAS SAMPLING RECORD FORM

19121313

EPA

Unley

SV01

1.2

23/05/2019

2

Primary ES

9

22

92

Information recorded on site Purging Information (Calculated) Pre Sample Checklist

1899

3530

14/05/2019

ID

SKC AirChek XR5000

Gas Check G3

Defender 510-M

PROJECT INFORMATION


Client: Bore Depth:



GAS BORE DATA





Water Logged No

EQUIPMENT RECORD

Calibration Date




SAMPLING RECORD


Start 9:29 860,000 -29.5

9:34 700,000 -22

9:39 550,000 -14

9:44 450,000 -8

Finish

NOTES

PID = 0.3 ppm

Helium = 5000 ppm


19121313

EPA

Unley

SV02

1.2

23/05/2019

2

Primary ES

9

22

92


2078

3526

24/04/2019

ID

SKC AirChek XR5000

Gas Check G3

Defender 510-M

PROJECT INFORMATION


Client: Bore Depth:



GAS BORE DATA





Water Logged No

EQUIPMENT RECORD

Calibration Date




SAMPLING RECORD


Start 10:10 820,000 -30

10:15 650,00 -23

10:20 5500,00 -15

10:24 470,00 -8

Finish

NOTES

Purging Information (Calculated) Pre Sample Checklist

1752

3641

24/04/2019

ID

SKC AirChek XR5000

Gas Check G3

Defender 510-M

PID = 0.6 ppm

Helium = 9,000 ppm


19121313

EPA

Unley

SV03

1.2

23/05/2019

2

Primary ES

9

22

92

Information recorded on site

PROJECT INFORMATION


Client: Bore Depth:



GAS BORE DATA





Water Logged No

EQUIPMENT RECORD

Calibration Date




SAMPLING RECORD


Start 10:45 900,000 -30

10:50 800,000 -24

10:55 650,000 -16

11:00 550,000 -8

Finish

NOTES

PID = 0.3 ppm

Helium = 3,000 ppm


19121313

EPA

Unley

SV04

1.2

23/05/2019

2

Primary ES

9

22

92


1751

1872

18/04/2019

ID

SKC AirChek XR5000

Gas Check G3

Defender 510-M

PROJECT INFORMATION


Client: Bore Depth:



GAS BORE DATA





Water Logged No

EQUIPMENT RECORD

Calibration Date




SAMPLING RECORD


Start 11:03 900,000 -28

11:08 780,000 -22

11:13 650,000 -15

11:18 550,000 -8

Finish

NOTES


1747

1884

14/05/2019

ID

SKC AirChek XR5000

Gas Check G3

Defender 510-M

Replicate sample of SV04.


19121313

EPA

Unley

SV04-R

1.2

23/05/2019

2

Replicate ES

9

22

92


PROJECT INFORMATION


Client: Bore Depth:



GAS BORE DATA





Water Logged No

EQUIPMENT RECORD

Calibration Date




SAMPLING RECORD


Start 11:49 900,000 -30

11:54 700,000 -23

11:59 530,000 -15

12:03 450,000 -8

Finish

NOTES


1749

3282

14/05/2019

ID

SKC AirChek XR5000

Gas Check G3

Defender 510-M

PID = 0.6 ppm

Helium = 7,000 ppm


19121313

EPA

Unley

SV05

1.2

23/05/2019

2

Primary ES

9

22

92


PROJECT INFORMATION


Client: Bore Depth:



GAS BORE DATA





Water Logged Yes

EQUIPMENT RECORD

Calibration Date




SAMPLING RECORD


Start 14:19 850,000 -30

14:24 650,000 -23.5

14:29 500,000 -14.5

14:34 350,000 -8

Finish

NOTES


1745 or 1779

3536

24/04/2019

ID

SKC AirChek XR5000

Gas Check G3

Defender 510-M

PID = 1.5 ppm

Helium = 2,000 ppm


19121313

EPA

Unley

SV06

1.2

23/05/2019

2

Primary ES

9

22

92


PROJECT INFORMATION


Client: Bore Depth:



GAS BORE DATA





Water Logged No

EQUIPMENT RECORD

Calibration Date




SAMPLING RECORD


Start 14:36 850,000 -29

14:41 750,000 -21

14:46 550,00 -13

14:51 450,000 -8

Finish

NOTES

Replicate sample of SV06.


19121313

EPA

Unley

SV06-R

1.2

23/05/2019

2

Replicate ES

9

22

92


SG1020

SC3699

ID

SKC AirChek XR5000

Gas Check G3

Defender 510-M

PROJECT INFORMATION


Client: Bore Depth:



GAS BORE DATA





Water Logged No

EQUIPMENT RECORD

Calibration Date




SAMPLING RECORD


Start 12:43 950,000 -30

12:48 900,000 -23

12:53 770,000 -15

12:57 700,000 -8

Finish

NOTES


1748

3503

24/04/2019

ID

SKC AirChek XR5000

Gas Check G3

Defender 510-M

PID = 0.8 ppm

Helium = 7,000 ppm


19121313

EPA

Unley

SV07

1.2

23/05/2019

2

Primary ES

9

22

92


PROJECT INFORMATION


Client: Bore Depth:



GAS BORE DATA





Water Logged No

EQUIPMENT RECORD

Calibration Date



Helium Dectector Date Cleaned

SAMPLING RECORD


Start 13:20 850,000 -30

13:25 650,000 -23

13:30 550,000 -15

13:35 500,000 -8

Finish

NOTES


1753

3522

6/05/2019

ID

SKC AirChek XR5000

Gas Check G3

Defender 510-M

PID = 0.5 ppm

Helium = 4,000 ppm


19121313

EPA

Unley

SV08

1.2

23/05/2019

2

Primary ES

9

22

92


APPENDIX C

Photographs

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

Project number: 19121313

Project name: EPA Unley ‐ Stage 3

Photograph 1: Finished SV bore at loca on SV01


Project number:

Project name:

Site Address:



0m 1m

1m 2m

CLIENT EPA PROJECT Unley - Stage 3DRAWN ES DATE 3-Jun-19 TITLE

CHECK JC DATE 3-Jun-19SCALE Not To Scale A4 PROJECT No. PHOTO No. 1

SV01

19121313

0m 1m

1m 2m



SV02

19121313

0m 1m

1m 2m



SV03

19121313

0m 1m

1m 2m



SV04

19121313

APPENDIX D

Survey and Calibration Records

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

To: James Coley Company: Golder associates

Phone: 8213 2100 Fax: 8213 2101

From: Lincoln Jeffery Phone: 0414 840 569 Email: [email protected]

Date: 22/5/2019

SVB coordinates, District – North of Unley Shopping Centre

Well or Bore Easting Northing R.L. Top of PVC No. GDA2020 GDA2020 A.H.D.

SV1 281364.543 6129958.430 43.563

SV2 281327.004 6129967.073 43.309

SV3 281320.891 6130041.370 43.107

SV4 281308.178 6130066.548 43.050

SV5 281345.781 6130061.248 43.271

SV6 281382.824 6130064.416 43.619

SV7 281419.858 6130076.192 43.929

SV8 281438.533 6130077.821 44.084

All Survey information was based from the MGA94 grid system and Australian Height Datum(AHD), triangulated from Permanent Survey Marks in the vicinity of the site.

APPENDIX E

Chemical Table

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

Chemical Data Table Project number: 19121313Project: EPA Unley Stage 3

Other

Vacu

um b

efor

e A

naly

sis

Vacu

um b

efor

e Sh

ipm

ent

Hel

ium

1,1-

Dic

hlor

oeth

ene

cis-

1,2-

Dic

hlor

oeth

ene

tran

s-1,

2-di

chlo

roet

hene

Tric

hlor

oeth

ene

Tetr

achl

oroe

then

e

Viny

l chl

orid

e

Hg" Hg" % by Vol mg/m3 mg/m3 mg/m3 mg/m3 mg/m3 mg/m3EQL 0.01 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.0016 0.0034 0.0008NEPM 2013 Table 1A(2) Comm/Ind D Soil Vap VOCC HILs 0.3 0.08 8 0.1NEPM 2013 Table 1A(2) Rec C Soil Vap VOCC HILs 2 0.4 40 0.5NEPM 2013 Table 1A(2) Res A Soil Vap VOCC HILs 0.08 0.02 2 0.03NEPM 2013 Table 1A(2) Res B Soil Vap VOCC HILs 0.08 0.02 2 0.03

Well ID Sample ID DateLab Report

NumberSample Type

SV01 SV01 23/05/2019 218199 Normal -8 -30 <0.01 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.0016 <0.0034 <0.0008SV02 SV02 23/05/2019 218199 Normal -8 -30 <0.01 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.0016 <0.0034 <0.0008SV03 SV03 23/05/2019 218199 Normal -6 -30 <0.01 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.0016 0.004 <0.0008

SV04 23/05/2019 218199 Normal -5 -29 <0.01 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.0016 0.03 <0.0008SV04-R 23/05/2019 218199 Field_D -9 -30 <0.01 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.0016 0.03 <0.0008

SV05 SV05 23/05/2019 218199 Normal -8 -29 <0.01 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.0016 0.04 <0.0008SV06 23/05/2019 218199 Normal -8 -30 <0.01 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.0016 <0.0034 <0.0008

SV06-R 23/05/2019 M191237 Interlab_D 9.18 - <0.01 <0.0036 <0.0048 <0.0036 <0.0054 <0.0066 <0.0024SV07 SV07 23/05/2019 218199 Normal -7 -29 <0.01 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.0016 <0.0034 <0.0008SV08 SV08 23/05/2019 218199 Normal -8 -30 <0.01 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.0016 <0.0034 <0.0008

Prepared by: JGCChecked by: ES

NA Volatile Organic Compounds

SV04

SV06

1 of 1

APPENDIX F

QC Table

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

Chemical Data Table

Quality Control Replicate Samples

Project number: 19121313Project: EPA Unley Stage 3

SV04 SV04-R SV06 SV06-R SC3699Normal Field_D Normal Interlab_DAir Air Air Air23/05/2019 23/05/2019 23/05/2019 23/05/2019218199 218199 RPD 218199 M191237 RPD

OtherHelium % by Vol 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 <0.01 <0.01 0

Volatile Organic Compounds1,1-Dichloroethene mg/m3 0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0 <0.002 <0.0036 0cis-1,2-Dichloroethene mg/m3 0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0 <0.002 <0.0048 0trans-1,2-dichloroethene mg/m3 0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0 <0.002 <0.0036 0Trichloroethene mg/m3 0.0016 <0.0016 <0.0016 0 <0.0016 <0.0054 0Tetrachloroethene mg/m3 0.0034 0.03 0.03 0 <0.0034 <0.0066 0Vinyl chloride mg/m3 0.0008 <0.0008 <0.0008 0 <0.0008 <0.0024 0

Prepared by: JGCChecked by: ES

Unit EQL

Field IDSample TypeMatrix TypeDateLab Report Number

Page 1 of 1

APPENDIX G

Laboratory Certificates and COCs

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

Envirolab Services Pty Ltd

ABN 37 112 535 645

12 Ashley St Chatswood NSW 2067

ph 02 9910 6200 fax 02 9910 6201

[email protected]

www.envirolab.com.au

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS 218199

118 Franklin St, Adelaide, SA, 5000Address

James ColeyAttention

Golder Associates Pty Ltd (Adelaide)Client

Client Details

24/05/2019Date completed instructions received

24/05/2019Date samples received

9xAirNumber of Samples

19121313, Unley Stage 3Your Reference

Sample Details

Please refer to the last page of this report for any comments relating to the results.

Results are reported on a dry weight basis for solids and on an as received basis for other matrices.

Samples were analysed as received from the client. Results relate specifically to the samples as received.

Please refer to the following pages for results, methodology summary and quality control data.

Analysis Details

Tests not covered by NATA are denoted with *Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025 - Testing.

NATA Accreditation Number 2901. This document shall not be reproduced except in full.

28/05/2019Date of Issue

31/05/2019Date results requested by

Report Details

Nancy Zhang, Laboratory Manager

Authorised By

Chris Guo, Senior Chemist, Air

Results Approved By

Revision No: R00

218199Envirolab Reference: Page | 1 of 11

Client Reference: 19121313, Unley Stage 3

<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01%Helium (He)

24/05/201924/05/201924/05/201924/05/2019-Date analysed

24/05/201924/05/201924/05/201924/05/2019-Date prepared

1884352235033536Air Kit Security No.

AirAirAirAirType of sample

23/05/201923/05/201923/05/201923/05/2019Date Sampled

SV04-RSV08SV07SV06UNITSYour Reference

218199-9218199-8218199-7218199-6Our Reference

Permanent Gas analysis

<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01%Helium (He)

24/05/201924/05/201924/05/201924/05/201924/05/2019-Date analysed

24/05/201924/05/201924/05/201924/05/201924/05/2019-Date prepared


AirAirAirAirAirType of sample

23/05/201923/05/201923/05/201923/05/201923/05/2019Date Sampled

SV05SV04SV03SV02SV01UNITSYour Reference

218199-5218199-4218199-3218199-2218199-1Our Reference

Permanent Gas analysis

Envirolab Reference: 218199

R00Revision No:

Page | 2 of 11


71747781% recSurrogate-Chlorobenzene-D5

75787784% recSurrogate -1,4-Difluorobenzene

73798179% recSurrogate-Bromochloromethane

5.0<0.5<0.5<0.5ppbvTetrachloroethene

<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5ppbvcis-1,2-Dichloroethene

<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5ppbvtrans-1,2-dichloroethene

<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5ppbv1,1-Dichloroethene

<0.3<0.3<0.3<0.3ppbvTrichloroethene

<0.3<0.3<0.3<0.3ppbvVinyl chloride

28/05/201928/05/201928/05/201928/05/2019-Date analysed

27/05/201927/05/201927/05/201927/05/2019-Date prepared

-9-8-7-8Hg"Vacuum before Analysis

-30-30-29-30Hg"Vacuum before Shipment



23/05/201923/05/201923/05/201923/05/2019Date Sampled


218199-9218199-8218199-7218199-6Our Reference

TO15 Chlorinated in Cans ppbv




5.85.00.6<0.5<0.5ppbvTetrachloroethene

<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5ppbvcis-1,2-Dichloroethene

<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5ppbvtrans-1,2-dichloroethene

<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5<0.5ppbv1,1-Dichloroethene

<0.3<0.3<0.3<0.3<0.3ppbvTrichloroethene

<0.3<0.3<0.3<0.3<0.3ppbvVinyl chloride

28/05/201928/05/201928/05/201928/05/201928/05/2019-Date analysed

27/05/201927/05/201927/05/201927/05/201927/05/2019-Date prepared

-8-5-6-8-8Hg"Vacuum before Analysis

-29-29-30-30-30Hg"Vacuum before Shipment



23/05/201923/05/201923/05/201923/05/201923/05/2019Date Sampled


218199-5218199-4218199-3218199-2218199-1Our Reference

TO15 Chlorinated in Cans ppbv


R00Revision No:

Page | 3 of 11





30<3.4<3.4<3.4µg/m3 Tetrachloroethene

<2<2<2<2µg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene

<2<2<2<2µg/m3 trans-1,2-dichloroethene

<2<2<2<2µg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene

<1.6<1.6<1.6<1.6µg/m3 Trichloroethene

<0.8<0.8<0.8<0.8µg/m3 Vinyl chloride

28/05/201928/05/201928/05/201928/05/2019-Date analysed

27/05/201927/05/201927/05/201927/05/2019-Date prepared

-9-8-7-8Hg"Vacuum before Analysis

-30-30-29-30Hg"Vacuum before Shipment



23/05/201923/05/201923/05/201923/05/2019Date Sampled


218199-9218199-8218199-7218199-6Our Reference

TO15 chlorinated in Cans ug/m3




40304<3.4<3.4µg/m3 Tetrachloroethene

<2<2<2<2<2µg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene

<2<2<2<2<2µg/m3 trans-1,2-dichloroethene

<2<2<2<2<2µg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene

<1.6<1.6<1.6<1.6<1.6µg/m3 Trichloroethene

<0.8<0.8<0.8<0.8<0.8µg/m3 Vinyl chloride

28/05/201928/05/201928/05/201928/05/201928/05/2019-Date analysed

27/05/201927/05/201927/05/201927/05/201927/05/2019-Date prepared

-8-5-6-8-8Hg"Vacuum before Analysis

-29-29-30-30-30Hg"Vacuum before Shipment



23/05/201923/05/201923/05/201923/05/201923/05/2019Date Sampled


218199-5218199-4218199-3218199-2218199-1Our Reference

TO15 chlorinated in Cans ug/m3


R00Revision No:

Page | 4 of 11


USEPA TO15 - Analysis of VOC's in air following USEPA TO15 protocolsTO15

Gases determined by GC-FID/TCD using methods ASTM 1945, 1946 and USEPA 3C.AT-003

Methodology SummaryMethod ID


R00Revision No:

Page | 5 of 11


[NT]950<0.01<0.011<0.01AT-0030.01%Helium (He)

[NT]24/05/201924/05/201924/05/2019124/05/2019-Date analysed

[NT]24/05/201924/05/201924/05/2019124/05/2019-Date prepared

[NT]LCS-1RPDDup.Base#BlankMethodPQLUnitsTest Description

Spike Recovery %DuplicateQUALITY CONTROL: Permanent Gas analysis


R00Revision No:

Page | 6 of 11


[NT]8528688198TO15% recSurrogate-Chlorobenzene-D5

[NT]83287891102TO15% recSurrogate -1,4-Difluorobenzene

[NT]89193921107TO15% recSurrogate-Bromochloromethane

[NT][NT]0<0.5<0.51<0.5TO150.5ppbvTetrachloroethene

[NT][NT]0<0.5<0.51<0.5TO150.5ppbvcis-1,2-Dichloroethene

[NT][NT]0<0.5<0.51<0.5TO150.5ppbvtrans-1,2-dichloroethene

[NT][NT]0<0.5<0.51<0.5TO150.5ppbv1,1-Dichloroethene

[NT][NT]0<0.3<0.31<0.3TO150.3ppbvTrichloroethene

[NT][NT]0<0.3<0.31<0.3TO150.3ppbvVinyl chloride

[NT]28/05/201928/05/201928/05/2019128/05/2019-Date analysed

[NT]27/05/201927/05/201927/05/2019127/05/2019-Date prepared

[NT][NT]0-8-81[NT]Hg"Vacuum before Analysis

[NT][NT]0-30-301[NT]Hg"Vacuum before Shipment

[NT]LCS-1RPDDup.Base#BlankMethodPQLUnitsTest Description

Spike Recovery %DuplicateQUALITY CONTROL: TO15 Chlorinated in Cans ppbv


R00Revision No:

Page | 7 of 11


[NT][NT]28688198TO15% recSurrogate-Chlorobenzene-D5

[NT][NT]287891102TO15% recSurrogate -1,4-Difluorobenzene

[NT][NT]193921107TO15% recSurrogate-Bromochloromethane

[NT][NT]0<3.4<3.41<3.4TO153.4µg/m3 Tetrachloroethene

[NT][NT]0<2<21<2.0TO152.0µg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene

[NT][NT]0<2<21<2.0TO152.0µg/m3 trans-1,2-dichloroethene

[NT][NT]0<2<21<2.0TO152.0µg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene

[NT][NT]0<1.6<1.61<1.6TO151.6µg/m3 Trichloroethene

[NT][NT]0<0.8<0.81<0.8TO150.8µg/m3 Vinyl chloride

[NT][NT]28/05/201928/05/2019128/05/2019-Date analysed

[NT][NT]27/05/201927/05/2019127/05/2019-Date prepared

[NT][NT]0-8-81[NT]Hg"Vacuum before Analysis

[NT][NT]0-30-301[NT]Hg"Vacuum before Shipment

[NT][NT]RPDDup.Base#BlankMethodPQLUnitsTest Description

Spike Recovery %DuplicateQUALITY CONTROL: TO15 chlorinated in Cans ug/m3


R00Revision No:

Page | 8 of 11


Not ReportedNR

National Environmental Protection MeasureNEPM

Not specifiedNS

Laboratory Control SampleLCS

Relative Percent DifferenceRPD

Greater than>

Less than<

Practical Quantitation LimitPQL

Insufficient sample for this testINS

Test not requiredNA

Not testedNT

Result Definitions

Australian Drinking Water Guidelines recommend that Thermotolerant Coliform, Faecal Enterococci, & E.Coli levels are less than1cfu/100mL. The recommended maximums are taken from "Australian Drinking Water Guidelines", published by NHMRC & ARMC2011.

Surrogates are known additions to each sample, blank, matrix spike and LCS in a batch, of compounds whichare similar to the analyte of interest, however are not expected to be found in real samples.

Surrogate Spike

This comprises either a standard reference material or a control matrix (such as a blank sand or water) fortifiedwith analytes representative of the analyte class. It is simply a check sample.

LCS (LaboratoryControl Sample)

A portion of the sample is spiked with a known concentration of target analyte. The purpose of the matrix spikeis to monitor the performance of the analytical method used and to determine whether matrix interferencesexist.

Matrix Spike

This is the complete duplicate analysis of a sample from the process batch. If possible, the sample selectedshould be one where the analyte concentration is easily measurable.

Duplicate

This is the component of the analytical signal which is not derived from the sample but from reagents,glassware etc, can be determined by processing solvents and reagents in exactly the same manner as forsamples.

Blank

Quality Control Definitions


R00Revision No:

Page | 9 of 11


Measurement Uncertainty estimates are available for most tests upon request.

Where sampling dates are not provided, Envirolab are not in a position to comment on the validity of the analysis whererecommended technical holding times may have been breached.

When samples are received where certain analytes are outside of recommended technical holding times (THTs), the analysis hasproceeded. Where analytes are on the verge of breaching THTs, every effort will be made to analyse within the THT or as soon aspracticable.

In circumstances where no duplicate and/or sample spike has been reported at 1 in 10 and/or 1 in 20 samples respectively, thesample volume submitted was insufficient in order to satisfy laboratory QA/QC protocols.

Matrix Spikes, LCS and Surrogate recoveries: Generally 70-130% for inorganics/metals; 60-140% for organics (+/-50% surrogates)and 10-140% for labile SVOCs (including labile surrogates), ultra trace organics and speciated phenols is acceptable.

Duplicates: >10xPQL - RPD acceptance criteria will vary depending on the analytes and the analytical techniques but is typically inthe range 20%-50% – see ELN-P05 QA/QC tables for details; <10xPQL - RPD are higher as the results approach PQL and theestimated measurement uncertainty will statistically increase.

For VOCs in water samples, three vials are required for duplicate or spike analysis.

Spikes for Physical and Aggregate Tests are not applicable.

Filters, swabs, wipes, tubes and badges will not have duplicate data as the whole sample is generally extracted during sampleextraction.

Duplicate sample and matrix spike recoveries may not be reported on smaller jobs, however, were analysed at a frequency to meetor exceed NEPM requirements. All samples are tested in batches of 20. The duplicate sample RPD and matrix spike recoveries forthe batch were within the laboratory acceptance criteria.

Laboratory Acceptance Criteria


R00Revision No:

Page | 10 of 11


AIR_TO15_PCETCE: LCS has been run as Ozone Precursor standard; the recovery of LCS cannot be reported due to the fact they are not in the list of analytes requested. However, the non-reported analytes within the LCS had acceptable recoveries.

Report Comments


R00Revision No:

Page | 11 of 11


ABN 37 112 535 645


ph 02 9910 6200 fax 02 9910 6201

[email protected]


SAMPLE RECEIPT ADVICE

James ColeyAttention

Golder Associates Pty Ltd (Adelaide)Client

Client Details

31/05/2019Date Results Expected to be Reported

24/05/2019Date Instructions Received

24/05/2019Date Sample Received

218199Envirolab Reference

19121313, Unley Stage 3Your reference

Sample Login Details

YESSampling Date Provided

Not applicableCooling Method

n/aTemperature on Receipt (°C)

StandardTurnaround Time Requested

9xAirNo. of Samples Provided

YesSamples received in appropriate condition for analysis

Sample Condition

Nil

Comments

Please direct any queries to:

Email: [email protected]: [email protected]

Fax: 02 9910 6201Fax: 02 9910 6201

Phone: 02 9910 6200Phone: 02 9910 6200

Jacinta HurstAileen Hie

Analysis Underway, details on the following page:

Page | 1 of 2


ABN 37 112 535 645


ph 02 9910 6200 fax 02 9910 6201

[email protected]


PPPSV04-R

PPPSV08

PPPSV07

PPPSV06

PPPSV05

PPPSV04

PPPSV03

PPPSV02

PPPSV01

TO

15

ch

lori

na

ted

in

Ca

ns

ug

/m3

TO

15

Ch

lori

na

ted

in

Ca

ns

pp

bv

Pe

rma

ne

nt

Ga

s a

na

lys

is

Sample ID

The ' THIS IS NOT A REPORT OF THE RESULTS.P' indicates the testing you have requested.

Requests for longer term sample storage must be received in writing.

Sample storage - Waters are routinely disposed of approximately 1 month and soils approximately 2 months from receipt.

Additional Info

Page | 2 of 2

Sample Receipt Acknowledgement

To:

Fax:

From: Sample Reception

Pages: ( 1 ) including this page

Co:

Email

24/05/2019

Ref:

SGS has received your samples from the project listed below. If you have any

enquiries please contact us quoting our reference number.

Project/Reference No.:

Our Reference Number:

Date Received:

Estimated date of report:

Additional Information:

Samples received after 4 pm are considered as received on the next working day for turnaround purposes.

Samples with a 24hr or 48hr TAT are considered as received on the next working day if received after 2:30pm.

Surcharges for urgent turnaround requests may apply.

All analytical work is conducted at our Melbourne office.

Sample Storage - All aqueous samples are stored for two weeks after reporting.

- All soils and other samples are stored for one month after reporting.

Please direct any technical or turnaround queries to Adam Atkinson at our Melbourne office.

SGS

Specialist Laboratory Services

Date:

PF-AU-ENV-NHC-QU-018.rpt / Ver 6 / 26.07.2017 / Page 1 of 1

19121313

M191237

24-May-2019

31-May-2019

M191237

James Coley

08 8213 2101

Golder Associates

[email protected]

A.B.N. 44 000 964 278

10 / 585 Blackburn Road

Notng Hill, Vic, 3168

Telephone: (03) 9574 3200

A.B.N. 44 000 964 278

Website: www.sgs.com.au

Email: [email protected]

To the extent not inconsistent with the other provisions of this document and unless specifically agr eed otherwise in writing by SGS, all SGS ser vices ar e rendered in

accordance with the applicable SGS General Conditions of Service accessible at http://www.sgs.com/en/Ter ms -and-Conditions/G eneral -Conditions -of-Services-English.aspx as at the date of this document. Attention is drawn to the limitations of liability and to the clauses of indemnification .

Chartered Chemists

A.B.N. 44 000 964 27810 / 585 Blackburn RoadNo ng Hill, Vic, 3168Telephone: (03) 9574 3200

AdelaideSA 5000A en on: James Coley

SAMPLES:

DATE RECEIVED:

DATE COMMENCED:

METHODS:

RESULTS: Please refer to a ached pages for results.

REPORTED BY:

118 Franklin Street

24‐May‐2019

One sample was received for analysis

24‐May‐2019

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

Majid Abdolali

See A ached Results

Chemist

Note: Results are based on samples as received at SGS laboratories

Golder Associates

3‐Jun‐2019

REPORT NUMBER:

Site/Client Ref:

Order No: 19121313

M191237

19121313

NATA Accredited Laboratory Number: 2562Corporate Site Number: 14420Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025 - Testing.

Page 1 of 4

ANALYTICAL RESULTS

Report N°: M191237

Matrix: Canister

Method: TO‐15.04 Receipt Vacuum / Pressure

Units as Listed ‐ ^^ Vacuum reported as inches of Mercury below standard atmospheric pressure Test Started: 27‐May‐19

Analyte Name

PQL

Client ID

Sampled Date

Leeder ID

10.1

9.18

10.1

9.18Receipt Vacuum (inch Hg) ^^

Receipt Pressure (PSIA)

Duplicate

SV06‐RSC3699

2019018394

SV06‐RSC3699

23‐May‐19

2019018393

Matrix: Canister

Method: TO‐15.02 Vola le Organics (w/v)

Sample units are expressed in µg/m³ Test Started: 27‐May‐19

Analyte Name

PQL

Client ID

Sampled Date

Leeder ID

<3.6

<4.8

<3.6

<6.6

<5.4

<2.4

<3.6

<4.8

<3.6

<6.6

<5.4

<2.4

<1.2

<1.6

<1.2

<2.2

<1.8

<0.8Vinyl Chloride

Trichloroethene

Tetrachloroethene

trans‐1,2‐Dichloroethene

cis‐1,2‐Dichloroethene

1,1‐Dichloroethene

Blank

Method

2019018395

Duplicate

SV06‐RSC3699

2019018394

SV06‐RSC3699

23‐May‐19

2019018393

Matrix: Canister

Method: MA‐1105.AIR.01 General Gases

Sample units are expressed in % by Vol Test Started: 28‐May‐19

Analyte Name

PQL

Client ID

Sampled Date

Leeder ID

nd nd0.01Helium

Duplicate

SV06‐RSC3699

2019018394

SV06‐RSC3699

23‐May‐19

2019018393

Page 2 of 4

QA/QC RESULTS

Report N°: M191237

Matrix: Canister

Method: TO‐15.02 Vola le Organics (w/v)

Quality Control Results are expressed in Percent Recovery of expected result Test Started: 27‐May‐19

Analyte Name

PQL

Client ID

Sampled Date

Leeder ID

109

109

127Vinyl Chloride

Trichloroethene

Tetrachloroethene

Spike

Method

2019018396

Page 3 of 4

Report N°: M191237

Q U ALIFIER S / N O TES F OR R E P OR TE D R ESU LTS PQ L Practic al Quant ita ti on Lim it nd N ot Detect ed – The an a lyt e was no t d et ected above th e rep ort ed PQ L. is Insuffic ient Sample to per form thi s ana lys i s. T Tent at ive ident ific at ion based o n c omput er l ibr a ry search of mass spec tra . NC N ot ca lcul at ed and /or Result s below PQ L NV N o Vacuum , C an ister rece i ved ab ove standard a tmo spher ic p ressure nr N ot Request ed for ana ly sis . R R ejected Resul t – result s for th is ana ly sis fa il ed QC c heck s. SQ S em i‐Quanti ta tiv e r esu lt – quan tit at ion based o n a gener ic respon se fa cto r fo r t his c la ss of ana l yt e. IM Inappropr ia te method of an a lys i s for thi s comp ound U Un able t o p rov ide Qu a lity C ont rol data – high level s of co mpou nds i n sample int er fered wit h ana ly sis o f

QC r esult s . UF Un able t o p rov ide Qu a lity C ont rol data ‐ Sur ro ga t es fai led QC check s du e to samp le matr ix effects L Ana ly te d etect ed a t a leve l above th e lin ear r esp onse o f ca li bra t ion cur ve. E Estimat ed r esu lt. N ATA acc redi ta tio n d oes no t co ver estim at ed r esu lts. C1 These co mpou nds c o‐elut e . ‐‐ Par amet er N ot Determ ined CT E lev a ted c oncen tr at ion . R esult s repo rt ed fr om ca rbon tub e ana ly sis ** S amp le sho ws no n‐petroleu m hydroca rb on pro file

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/General‐Conditions‐of‐Services‐English.aspx .

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 th is 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 fu ll.

Page 4 of 4

APPENDIX ONE. CHAIN OF CUSTODY DOCUMENT

APPENDIX H

Important Information

20 June 2019 19121313-001-R-Rev0

GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD IMPORTANT INFORMATION RELATING TO THIS REPORT

Error! Unknown document property name. Page 1 of 1 GAP Form No. LEG04 RL2

5/2018

The document (“Report”) to which this page is attached and which this page forms a part of, has been issued by Golder Associates Pty Ltd (“Golder”) subject to the important limitations and other qualifications set out below.

This Report constitutes or is part of services (“Services”) provided by Golder to its client (“Client”) under and subject to a contract between Golder and its Client (“Contract”). The contents of this page are not intended to and do not alter Golder’s obligations (including any limits on those obligations) to its Client under the Contract.

This Report is provided for use solely by Golder’s Client and persons acting on the Client’s behalf, such as its professional advisers. Golder is responsible only to its Client for this Report. Golder has no responsibility to any other person who relies or makes decisions based upon this Report or who makes any other use of this Report. Golder accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any person other than its Client as a result of any reliance upon any part of this Report, decisions made based upon this Report or any other use of it.

This Report has been prepared in the context of the circumstances and purposes referred to in, or derived from, the Contract and Golder accepts no responsibility for use of the Report, in whole or in part, in any other context or circumstance or for any other purpose.

The scope of Golder’s Services and the period of time they relate to are determined by the Contract and are subject to restrictions and limitations set out in the Contract. If a service or other work is not expressly referred to in this Report, do not assume that it has been provided or performed. If a matter is not addressed in this Report, do not assume that any determination has been made by Golder in regards to it.

At any location relevant to the Services conditions may exist which were not detected by Golder, in particular due to the specific scope of the investigation Golder has been engaged to undertake. Conditions can only be verified at the exact location of any tests undertaken. Variations in conditions may occur between tested locations and there may be conditions which have not been revealed by the investigation and which have not therefore been taken into account in this Report.

Golder accepts no responsibility for and makes no representation as to the accuracy or completeness of the information provided to it by or on behalf of the Client or sourced from any third party. Golder has assumed that such information is correct unless otherwise stated and no responsibility is accepted by Golder for incomplete or inaccurate data supplied by its Client or any other person for whom Golder is not responsible. Golder has not taken account of matters that may have existed when the Report was prepared but which were only later disclosed to Golder.

Having regard to the matters referred to in the previous paragraphs on this page in particular, carrying out the Services has allowed Golder to form no more than an opinion as to the actual conditions at any relevant location. That opinion is necessarily constrained by the extent of the information collected by Golder or otherwise made available to Golder. Further, the passage of time may affect the accuracy, applicability or usefulness of the opinions, assessments or other information in this Report. This Report is based upon the information and other circumstances that existed and were known to Golder when the Services were performed and this Report was prepared. Golder has not considered the effect of any possible future developments including physical changes to any relevant location or changes to any laws or regulations relevant to such location.

Where permitted by the Contract, Golder may have retained subconsultants affiliated with Golder to provide some or all of the Services. However, it is Golder which remains solely responsible for the Services and there is no legal recourse against any of Golder’s affiliated companies or the employees, officers or directors of any of them.

By date, or revision, the Report supersedes any prior report or other document issued by Golder dealing with any matter that is addressed in the Report.

Any uncertainty as to the extent to which this Report can be used or relied upon in any respect should be referred to Golder for clarification

golder.com

report unley - stage 3

Documents