helena river surface water and sediment sampling …€¦ · helena river surface water and...

HELENA RIVER SURFACE WATER AND

SEDIMENT SAMPLING REPORT -

OCTOBER 2012 MONITORING EVENT

Prepared For: Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority

12 Lindsay StreetPerth, WA 6000

Report Number: AP2012-100

Report Version: V1

Report Date: 20 December 2012

Helena River Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Report - October 2012 Monitoring Event

Aurora EnvironmentalMRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_001_nb_v120 December 2012

DISTRIBUTION

No. of

copiesReport File Name

Report

StatusDate Prepared for: Initials

1MRA2012-003_PMON Helena

River_001_nb_V1V1 20 December 2012

Metropolitan

Redevelopment

Authority

NB


River_001_nb_V1V1

20 December 2012 Jeremy Hogben -

Appointed AuditorNB


River_001_nb_V1V1

20 December 2012

Proposal

Implementation

Monitoring Branch -

Office of the

Environmental

Protection Authority

NB


River_001_nb_V1V1

20 December 2012Andrew Miller, DEC -

Contaminated Sites

Branch

NB


River_001_nb_V1V1

20 December 2012Aurora Environmental

NB



TABLE OF CONTENTS

ATTACHMENTS I

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 1

1.2 OBJECTIVES 2

1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 3

1.3.1 Groundwater and Surface Water Interaction 3

2 INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGY 5

2.1 SAMPLING LOCATIONS 5

2.1.1 Surface Water and Sediment 5

2.1.2 Stormwater Outlet 5

2.2 SAMPLING PROCEDURES 6

2.2.1 Surface Water Sampling 6

2.2.2 Sediment Sampling 6

2.2.3 Stormwater Outlet Sampling 6

2.3 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL 7

2.4 LABORATORY PROGRAM – ANALYTICAL SUITE 7

2.5 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 8

2.5.1 Surface Water and Stormwater Outlets 8

2.5.2 Sediment 8

3 INVESTIGATION RESULTS – OCTOBER 2012 9

3.1 SURFACE WATER 9

3.1.1 Metals 9

3.1.2 Organic Compounds 9

3.2 SEDIMENT 9

3.2.1 Metals 9


3.3 STORMWATER OUTLET 10



3.3.1 Metal 11


4 DATA QUALITY EVALUATION 12

4.1 FIELD QUALITY ASSURANCE AND CONTROL 12

4.2 RINSATE BLANK, FIELD BLANK AND TRANSPORT BLANK 13

4.3 LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE 13

4.4 HOLDING TIMES 14

4.5 LABORATORY LIMITS OF REPORTING 15

4.6 DATA QUALITY SUMMARY 16

5 DISCUSSION 17

5.1 HISTORICAL TRENDS IN SURFACE WATER AND SEDIMENT CONTAMINANT

CONCENTRATIONS 17

5.1.1 Surface Water 17

5.1.2 Sediment 19

5.2 STORMWATER OUTLETS 20

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 22

7 BIBLIOGRAPHY 24

TABLES IN TEXT

A. Helena River Sampling Locations

B. Concentrations of TPH in the Helena River Sediment (October 2012)

C. Summary of Laboratory Data Outside of RPD or Spike Criteria

D. Summary of Holding Time Breaches for the October 2012 Sampling Round


Aurora Environmental iMRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_001_nb_V120 December 2012

ATTACHMENTS

LIST OF TABLES

1. Helena River Surface Water Analytical Results, October 2012

2. Summary of Historical Helena River Surface Water Analytical Results

3. Helena River Sediment Analytical Results, October 2012

4. Summary of Historical Helena River Sediment Analytical Results

5. Stormwater Outlet Analytical Results, October 2012

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Regional Location

2. Surface Water, Sediment and Stormwater Outlet Sample Locations

LIST OF APPENDICES

A. Survey Plan of Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Locations

B. October 2012 Field Notes

B. Chain of Custody Documentation and Laboratory Certificates

C. Laboratory Quality Control Reports


Aurora Environmental iiMRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_001_nb_V120 December 2012

µg/kg microgram(s) per kilogram

µg/L microgram(s) per litre

µS Microsiemens

ADWG Australian Drinking Water Guidelines

ANZECC Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council

ARL Analytical Reference Laboratories

ARMCANZ Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand

As Arsenic

ATA ATA Environmental

Aurora Aurora Environmental

BGL Below Ground Level

BOM Bureau of Meteorology

C6-C36 Hydrocarbon chainlength fraction

CaCO3 calcium carbonate

Cd Cadmium

COC Chain of Custody

Cr Chromium

Cu Copper

DEC Department of Environment and Conservation

DNPG Domestic Non-Potable Groundwater

DoH Department of Health

DoW Department of Water

DWG Drinking Water Guidelines

E East


Aurora Environmental iiiMRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_001_nb_V120 December 2012

EC Electrical Conductivity

EIF Environments Incident Form

ETF Engine Test Facility

FWG Fresh Water Guidelines

GCMS gas chromatography mass spectrometry

GPS Global Positioning System

GPT Gross Pollutant Trap

Hg Mercury

HMFWG hardness-modified freshwater guideline

ICPMS Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry

ICPOES Inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry

ISO International Organisation for Standardisation

ISQG Interim Sediment Quality Guidelines

km Kilometre

LOD Limit of Detection

LOR Limit of Reporting

LSA Lower Superficial Aquifer

m Metre

mg/kg milligram(s) per kilogram

mg/L milligram(s) per litre

MRA Midland Redevelopment Authority

MS Ministerial Statement

N North

NATA National Association of Testing Authorities


Aurora Environmental ivMRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_001_nb_V120 December 2012

NHMRC National Health and Medical Research Council

Ni Nickel

NMI National Measurement Institute

NRMMC National Resource Management Ministerial Council

ºC degree(s) Celcius

PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon(s)

Pb Lead

PC Polycarbonate

PER Public Environmental Review

QC Quality Control

RPD Relative Percent Difference

SSA Shallow Superficial Aquifer

TDS Total Dissolved Solids

TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon

TV trigger value

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

Zn Zinc


Aurora Environmental vMRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_001_nb_V120 December 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Aurora Environmental (Aurora) was engaged by the Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority to assess

and report on surface water and sediment quality of the Helena River and stormwater effluent being

discharged from outlets along the southern embankment (the Site). This monitoring event has been

undertaken to satisfy, in part, Conditions 12-4 and 12-5 of Ministerial Statement 742 relating to the

wider Helena East Precinct area. The monitoring event has been completed in accordance with the

Post-Remedial Surface and Groundwater Management Plan produced by Coffey Environments which

outlines the post remedial sampling and analysis requirements for the Helena East Precinct and also

takes into consideration the ‘Helena East Precinct Remediation and Redevelopment, Public

Environmental Review prepared by ATA Environmental.

OBJECTIVES

Objectives for this monitoring event include:

Ensure compliance with Conditions 12-4 and 12-5 of Ministerial Statement 742.

Assess if contaminant concentrations in surface water and sediment are, at a minimum,

consistent with historic concentrations or demonstrating declining trends in contaminants of

potential concern;

Assess if concentrations of contaminants of potential concern from stormwater outlets along

the southern embankment are suitable to be discharged; and

Assess if identified receptors associated with the Helena River are sufficiently protected with

respect to identified contaminants of potential concern.

KEY FINDINGS

The key findings of this monitoring event include:

No concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons or

halogenated aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons were detected in any surface water,

sediment or stormwater outlet sample collected from the Helena River during the October

2012 sampling round.

No concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in any surface water or

stormwater outlet sample collected from the Helena River during the October 2012 sampling

round.

Concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons in the Helena River sediment appear to be

decreasing over time, with the exception of the upstream sampling location which suggests

hydrocarbon impacts are more likely a reflection of the quality of run-off from the greater

Midland area, including roads. A portion of the hydrocarbon concentrations detected within

the sediment of the Helena River may be from a naturally occurring source.


Aurora Environmental viMRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_001_nb_V120 December 2012

All surface water samples reported concentrations of metals less than laboratory detection

limits, with the exception of barium, which reported a consistent concentration in all samples

collected, well below the adopted assessment criteria.

Lead concentrations in surface water have been reported below laboratory detection limits in

the last two sampling rounds, this trend suggests lead concentrations in the surface water of

the Helena River are influenced by source(s) outside of the Workshops site but will continue to

be assessed as part of ongoing monitoring commitments until at least October 2014.

Concentrations of copper and zinc in surface water are most likely influenced by source(s)

outside of the Workshops site, but will continue to be assessed as part of ongoing monitoring

commitments until at least October 2014.

Arsenic, antimony and hexavalent chromium were detected below laboratory detection limits

at all sediment sampling locations. Barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, manganese, nickel,

lead and zinc were detected at concentrations below adopted assessment criteria.

Concentrations of lead reported in the Helena River sediment samples were below adopted

assessment criteria. Trends suggest that concentrations of lead in sediment are influenced by

source(s) outside of the Workshops site, but will continue to be assessed as part of ongoing

monitoring commitments until at least October 2014.

Tin marginally exceeded the low trigger value in sediment at one location in the Helena River.

As there is no baseline data to compare this exceedence to, further sampling rounds are

required to compare this data to and form a better assessment of its impact on the Helena

River aquatic environment. No detectable levels of dissolved tin was present in the Helena

River surface water samples, therefore tin concentrations do not appear to be impacting

surface water quality.

Arsenic, antimony, cadmium, chromium, hexavalent chromium, nickel, lead and tin were

detected below laboratory detection limit at both stormwater sampling locations.

Concentrations of barium, copper, manganese and zinc were detected at concentrations above

laboratory detection limit in one or both of the stormwater outlet sampling points. Zinc and

copper both exceeded the freshwater guideline but not the domestic non potable guideline. As

Helena River surface water and sediment results have not reported elevated concentrations of

zinc or copper, the concentrations reported in the Western Stormwater Outlet have not had

an adverse effect on the Helena River environment and as such the risks to environmental and

human health receptors are low. These concentrations will continue to be monitored and

assessed in further sampling rounds.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Overall, contaminant concentrations in surface water and sediment remain either consistent with

historic concentrations or demonstrate declining trends. Concentrations of contaminants of potential

concern in the stormwater outlets sampled are suitable to be discharged along the southern


Aurora Environmental viiMRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_001_nb_V120 December 2012

embankment, with concentrations of zinc and copper to be re-assessed in the next round of

sampling. No adverse effects are considered to be occurring to identified receptors associated with

the Helena River aquatic environment.

To satisfy Condition 12-7 of Ministerial Statement 742, it is recommended that this report is placed

on the MRA website (http://www.mra.wa.gov.au/publications/publications.phtml) for the life of the

project. Sampling of the Helena River should be undertaken on an annual basis for a further two

years, minimum, to satisfy Condition 12-5 of Ministerial Statement 742.


Aurora Environmental 1MRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_001_nb_V120 December 2012

1 INTRODUCTION

Aurora Environmental (Aurora) was engaged by the Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority (MRA) to

assess and report on surface water and sediment quality of the Helena River and stormwater being

discharged from outlets along the southern embankment (the Site; see Figure 1. This monitoring

event has been undertaken to satisfy, in part, Conditions 12-4 and 12-5 of Ministerial Statement (MS)

742 relating to the wider Helena East Precinct area. The monitoring event has been completed in

accordance with the monitoring plan ‘Post-Remedial Surface and Groundwater Management Plan’

(PGSWMP) produced by Coffey Environments (2012) which outlines the post remedial sampling and

analysis requirements for the Helena East Precinct and also takes into consideration the ‘Helena East

Precinct Remediation and Redevelopment, Public Environmental Review’ (PER) (ATA, 2006).

1.1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Sampling of the Helena River was undertaken by Aurora in order to assess potential environmental

impacts of contaminated soil and groundwater throughout the former Midland Workshops site on

the aquatic environment of the Helena River. The Helena East Precinct represents one of the last

significant portions of the former Midland Railway Workshops to undergo remedial works as part of

the rehabilitation and remediation of the broader workshops site. It is important that the water

quality of the Helena River is monitored following the remedial works to assess the efficacy of the

works undertaken and to protect the health and safety of site users together with the environment

from any potential risks that could eventuate from a potential decline in water quality.

Using information derived from the assessment and remedial works undertaken at the workshops

site Coffey Environments prepared the PGSWMP (Coffey Environments, 2012) which outlines the

objectives and scope for work to be completed as part of the monitoring program. The monitoring

program has been reviewed and endorsed by the Contaminated Sites Auditor, Mr Jeremy Hogben of

Environmental Resources Management (ERM) Australia, as part of the Helena East Precinct, Midland,

Former Railway Workshops, WA, Remediation and Validation Report Part 3, Mandatory Auditors

Report (ERM Australia, 2012) for the Helena East Precinct. The implementation of this PGSWMP

forms an environmental management commitment of the Public Environmental Review (PER) (ATA,

2006) and also Conditions 12-1 to 12-7 of MS 742. Key Ministerial requirements include:

Under Condition 12-1, the PGSWMP is required to be prepared and submitted for regulatory

approval within six months of the completion of remedial works. The PGSWMP should address

both groundwater monitoring and Helena River water quality monitoring;

Under Condition 12-2, groundwater and surface water target concentrations should be

developed that are consistent with baseline water quality data or applicable published

assessment criteria;

Under Condition 12-3, where adopted groundwater and surface water target concentrations

are exceeded, corrective action should be taken;



Under Condition 12-4 the proponent is required to monitor groundwater around the Helena

East Precinct, the Southern Embankment1 and the Meat Industry Association Containment

Cell2 and the water of the Helena River in accordance with sampling locations and a schedule

approved by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the DEC. This condition also requires

monitoring of the Southern Embankment. It is anticipated that this should be addressed in a

separate document (i.e. not included in PGSWMP);

Under Condition 12-5, the surface and groundwater monitoring plan must operate for a

minimum of three years;

Under Condition 12-7, the proponent shall make the monitoring reports required by the

PGSWP publicly available.

Baseline sampling of the Helena River commenced in 2006 as part of the investigations for the

remediation of the Helena East Precinct, as detailed in the Public Environmental Review (PER)

document (ATA, 2006). Biannual sampling (February and October) was conducted in 2006 quarterly

sampling (March, June, September and December) was conducted in 2007, tri-yearly (April, August

and November) in 2008, and annually in June 2010, July 2011 and October 2012. It should be noted

that no sampling was undertaken in 2009 and therefore the October 2012 monitoring event

represents the twelfth sampling round of the Helena River surface water and sediment. Surface

water and sediment sampling points are identified in Figure 2.

During Helena East subdivision works a stormwater management system was installed as per the

Stormwater Discharge Strategy (Egis, 2002). There are two stormwater outlets located in the

Southern Embankment (see Figure 2). The eastern outlet services the eastern portion of the site and

is located approximately 10m southeast of the main service tunnel. The stormwater piping system

has not yet been installed in the eastern site area since Sector 10D/10E subdivision works have not

yet been completed, thus as expected the eastern outlet was not discharging when inspected in

October 2012. The second storm water outlet is located 10m southwest of the main service tunnel

(see Figure 2). In this area several large excavations were required during remedial works to remove

contaminated material, and these were largely filled with clayey material. Although the excavations

were filled and compacted as per engineering specifications to prevent any underground pooling of

stormwater, a passive system was installed to drain away any seepage of water from around former

excavations. Disposal of seepage water (although only minimal seepage, if any, from this pipe is

expected) is via a PVC pipe which traverses through the Southern Embankment and ends beneath

the clean fill cover (see Figure 2). The potential for other off-site sources, such as stormwater from

surrounding roads and industrial activities also exists.

1.2 OBJECTIVES

Objectives for surface water, sediment and stormwater outlet sampling include:

1The Southern Embankment is being assessed as part of the Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report for

Helena East.2

The Meat Industry Association Containment Cell was assessed under a separate cover.



Ensure compliance with the PGSWMP and Conditions 12-4 and 12-5 of MS 742.

Assess if contaminant concentrations in surface water and sediment are, at a minimum,

consistent with historic concentrations or demonstrating declining trends in chemicals of

potential concern (COPCs);

Assess if COPC concentrations from stormwater outlets along the southern embankment are

suitable to be discharged;

Assess if identified receptors associated with the Helena River are sufficiently protected with

respect to identified COPCs.

1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The regional location of the Helena River is presented in Figure 1. The Helena River is located

approximately 75m south of the former Midland Workshops (Figure 2). The river generally flows east

to west, and although the volume increases in the rainy winter months, seasonal flooding no longer

occurs since the Mundaring Weir was installed approximately 22km upstream in 1903. The Helena

River is considered to be ephemeral.

The following information regarding the geological/hydrogeological setting has been summarised

from Crisalis (2006). The geological succession beneath the site comprises approximately 30m of the

Guildford Formation, overlying 5m of the Henley Sandstone (Osborne Formation), which in turn

overlies the Leederville Formation. Groundwater within the Guildford Formation is present within

the shallow superficial aquifer (SSA) and the lower superficial aquifer (LSA). The SSA is hosted within

discontinuous sandy clay and clay layers, which are generally of low hydraulic conductivity, and

extends to approximately 10m below ground surface (mbgs). Groundwater is encountered at depths

of 3 to 5mbgs, and flows in a southwest direction towards the Helena River. The LSA comprises

coarser grained sandy sediments with a higher hydraulic conductivity than the SSA. The LSA is

effectively confined by the SSA system. In contrast to the SSA, groundwater flow direction in the LSA

is west-northwest parallel to the Helena River. Pump tests indicate that there is little connection

between the LSA/Osborne Formation and the Leederville aquifer, this is discussed further is Section

1.3.1. The Pinjar Shale Member of the Leederville Formation acts as an aquiclude between the

LSA/Osborne Formation and the underlying water bearing horizons of the Leederville Formation.

1.3.1 Groundwater and Surface Water Interaction

The riverbed is scoured into clay-rich soils which overlie the LSA on the floodplain. It has been

assumed that the groundwater quality of the LSA does not significantly impact the Helena River as

the LSA predominantly flows parallel to the Helena River. In addition to groundwater flow direction,

there are multiple lines of evidence that indicate that the Helena River is ephemeral and not in

hydraulic connection to the LSA:

• The reliance of rainfall for flow in the Helena River;

• The relative water levels of the Helena River bed and the LSA; and



• Electrical conductivity of the river compared to groundwater.

Based on the lines of evidence provided, and following a review of previous reports on Helena West

hydrogeology (Crisalis, 2006), groundwater from the LSA is not expected to impact the Helena River,

as there is no complete groundwater migration pathway.



2 INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGY

2.1 SAMPLING LOCATIONS

2.1.1 Surface Water and Sediment

As per the PER (ATA, 2006) sampling locations were selected to be representative of conditions up-

gradient, adjacent to, and down-gradient of the Helena East Precinct. Surface water and sediment

sampling was undertaken at five locations along the river bed on 15 October 2012 (see Figure 2). The

locations have previously been surveyed (July 2011) and the survey plan is provided as Appendix A.

The surface water and sediment sampling locations are summarised in Table A.

TABLE A

HELENA RIVER SAMPLING LOCATIONS

SAMPLE LOCATION

IDENTIFICATION*

SURVEYED

COORDINATES

(MGA50)

DESCRIPTION

HR-2 E 406160.7

N 6470206.0South bank, accessed from Stirling Crescent.

HR-1E 405956.6

N6470394.6North bank, accessed from Helena East.

HR-3E405798.1

N6470410.1

North bank, accessed from Helena East, samplinglocation on upstream side of old wooden bridge.

HR-5E 405385.3

N 6470747.9

South bank, accessed through ‘Men of the Trees’Nursery Site (off Amherst Road).

HR-4E 405235.9

N 6470723.3

South bank, accessed through ‘Men of the Trees’Nursery Site, sampling location under Amherst Roadbridge.

*Sample locations listed in order of upstream (east) to downstream (west).

2.1.2 Stormwater Outlet

The sampling locations of the three drainage outlets are shown on Figure 2. Two of the three

locations had sufficient water to collect a sample, they were:

Passive Drain Outlet; and

Western Stormwater Outlet.



It was not expected to obtain a sample from the third drainage outlet location, the Eastern

Stormwater Outlet, as the storm water piping system has not yet been installed.

2.2 SAMPLING PROCEDURES

2.2.1 Surface Water Sampling

All surface water grab samples were labeled, collected and analysed in accordance with the methods

described in AS/NZS 5667.1.1998 and 5667.6.1998 (Standards Australia, 1998a and 1998b).Sample

containers with no preservative were filled directly by inverting the bottle mounted on a 2m length

pole, and plunging it mouth downwards to a depth of approximately 0.3 m below the surface. The

bottle was then tilted so the mouth pointed slightly upwards and directed upstream so as to avoid

sediment entrainment. Sample containers with preservative were filled by decanting from the

unpreserved plastic container attached to the pole. To minimise the possibility of cross

contamination between sample locations, a new collection bottle was used at each sampling

location. Once filled, the sample containers were placed in an esky with ice, held at Aurora’s offices

in a dedicated sample refrigerator and dispatched to the laboratory the following day. Surface water

samples were labeled HR-W, followed by the sample location ID number (e.g. HR-W-1) (see Table A).

Sample details were entered onto a chain of custody (CoC) form that accompanied the samples to

the laboratory. Field notes are presented in Appendix B whilst CoC documentation and laboratory

certificates are presented in Appendix C.

Note: CoC documentation and laboratory certificates include analytical results from groundwater

monitoring wells sampled as part of the same field work program in October 2012 across the wider

Helena East Precinct. Groundwater analytical results are reported under a separate cover.

2.2.2 Sediment Sampling

In consultation with AS5667.12:1999 (Standards Australia, 1999), river sediment samples (labeled

HR-S, followed by the sample location ID number e.g. HR-S-1) were collected using a plastic trowel.

To avoid the potential for cross contamination the plastic trowel was cleaned using a solution of

detergent and tap water, and rinsed with de-ionised water between each sample location. Within

arm’s reach of the water’s edge, the trowel was pushed approximately 5cm into the sediment (this

material is most likely to represent ‘recent’ deposits). The trowel was slowly pulled up and the

sediment deposited directly into pre-labeled jars (a layer of water associated with the sample covers

the sediment in the jar). The sampling was repeated a further two times to fill each jar. Once filled,

the sample containers were placed in an esky with ice and transported to the laboratory the next

day. Sample details were entered onto a CoC form that accompanied the samples to the laboratory.

Field notes for the collection of the Helena River sediment samples are presented in Appendix B

whilst COC) documentation and laboratory certificates are presented in Appendix C.

2.2.3 Stormwater Outlet Sampling

All stormwater outlet samples were labeled, collected, prepared and analysed in accordance with the

methods described in AS/NZS 5667.1.1998 and 5667.6.1998 (Standards Australia, 1998a and 1998b).

Laboratory supplied containers with the appropriate preservative were filled by holding the bottle in



the stream of water coming from the outlet. To minimise the possibility of cross contamination

between sample locations, one set of bottles was used at each sampling location and submitted to

the laboratory. Once filled, the sample containers were placed in an esky with ice and transported to

the laboratory the next day.

Stormwater outlet samples were labeled as per their location on Figure 2 i.e. Western Stormwater

Outlet and Passive Drain Outlet. Sample details were entered onto a CoC form that accompanied the

samples to the laboratory. Field notes for the collection of the stormwater outlet samples are

presented in Appendix B whilst CoC documentation and laboratory certificates for all surface water

samples are presented in Appendix C.

2.3 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL

To decrease the chances of cross contamination, all non-disposable sampling equipment was

decontaminated prior to, and after use. This involved washing with a solution of ‘Decon 90’ and tap

water, followed by a rinse with deionised water. No field blanks or transport blanks were collected;

this is discussed further in Section 4.

Field duplicate samples were collected at a rate of 1:10. Field duplicate samples are used to assess

field and analytical precision measurement which is assessed using the relative percent differences

(RPD) between the primary and duplicate sample results. Generally, it is recommended that the RPD

is less than 30-50% (Standards Australia, 2005). For the purposes of this assessment, replicate data

with concentrations above 10 times the LOR should have a RPD <30% and replicate data with

concentrations below 10 times the LOR should have RPD <50%.

2.4 LABORATORY PROGRAM – ANALYTICAL SUITE

All surface water, sediment and stormwater outlet samples were analysed for the following COPCs:

Metals (arsenic, antimony, barium, cadmium, chromium, hexavalent chromium, copper,

manganese, nickel, tin, lead and zinc);

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH);

Monocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (MAH);

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH); and

Halogenated Aliphatic and Aromatic Hydrocarbons (HAH).

With the exception of MAH and HAH analyses, all analyses were undertaken by Analytical Reference

Laboratories (ARL), which is National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) accredited for all

analyses performed. MAH and HAH analyses was subcontracted by ARL to the National

Measurement Institute (NMI), who are NATA accredited for this analysis.



2.5 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

2.5.1 Surface Water and Stormwater Outlets

The Helena River is considered, based on historic total dissolved solid (TDS) concentrations to be a

freshwater aquatic environment and as such, the following action levels have been adopted in

accordance with the PGSWMP (Coffey Environments, 2012):

Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality (ANZECC &

ARMCANZ, 2000) where toxicants are to be compared against the 95% protection level for

aquatic ecosystems, as presented in the DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and

Water; and

Department of Health (DoH) Contaminated Sites Reporting Guideline for Chemicals in

Groundwater (DoH, 2006) as presented in the DEC (2010).

Historically when metal concentrations exceeded the FWG, the hardness-modified FWG (HMFWG)

value was calculated using Table 3.4.4 of ANZECC and ARMCANZ (2000). The hardness correction

values were not required for the October 2012 analytical results, as all reported concentrations were

below FWG values, however they have been included in the historical results table.

Additionally, the Helena river water results were compared to the Australian Drinking Water

Guidelines (ADWG) (2004), however, the likelihood of water from the Helena River being used for

drinking purposes is improbable. Since the ADWG were historically used, they are still included in the

historical results table for completeness, but have been removed from the current analytical results.

As the stormwater outlets are being used to assess inputs to the Helena River, it is considered

appropriate to assess these analytical results against the same criteria as surface water to ensure

there are no unacceptable concentrations of COPCs being released into the Helena River

Environment.

2.5.2 Sediment

The sediment assessment levels (Interim Sediment Quality Guidelines or ISQGs) adopted by DEC and

presented in Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water (DEC, 2010) are sourced from the

Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (ANZECC & ARMCANZ,

2000). The guidelines contain two concentrations, the ISQG-Low concentration (or trigger value) and

the ISQG-High concentration. The trigger value is a threshold concentration and below this

concentration the frequency of adverse effects is expected to be very low. The ISQG-High

concentration is intended to represent a concentration above which adverse biological effects are

expected to occur more frequently. The initial assessment should be done against the ISQG-Low

concentration (or trigger value) with further investigations/analysis if these levels are exceeded.



3 INVESTIGATION RESULTS – OCTOBER 2012

3.1 SURFACE WATER

A summary of the October 2012 surface water analytical results are presented in Table 1. Historical

surface water analytical results are presented in Table 2. CoC documentation and laboratory

certificates are presented in Appendix C.

3.1.1 Metals

Concentrations of all dissolved metals analysed (arsenic, antimony, cadmium, chromium, hexavalent

chromium, copper, manganese, nickel, tin, lead and zinc) were below the laboratory limit of

reporting (LOR), with the exception of barium. Concentrations of barium in five surface water

samples collected along the Helena River were 40µg/L. This concentration is below the DoH (2006)

DNP guideline value of 7,000µg/L; there is no FWG value for barium. The identical barium

concentrations for surface water samples were confirmed by the laboratory. ARL obtained the same

results off two different instruments (inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry

[ICPOES] and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry [ICPMS]) and from different subsamples

on different days (email from Douglas Todd [ARL] on 17 December 2012).

3.1.2 Organic Compounds

No concentrations of TPH, PAH, MAH or HAH were detected above laboratory LOR in any sample.

3.2 SEDIMENT

A summary of the October 2012 sediment analytical results are presented in Table 3 whilst historical

sediment analytical results are presented in Table 4. CoC documentation and laboratory certificates

are presented in Appendix C.

3.2.1 Metals

Concentrations of barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, manganese, nickel, tin, lead and zinc were

detected at concentrations above laboratory LOR, however, none exceeded the ISQG-Low criteria,

with the exception of tin. One concentration of tin (7mg/kg) detected in sediment sample HR-S-5

(downstream) exceeded the ISQG-Low criterion value of 5mg/kg. This concentration did not exceed

the ISQC-High criterion value of 70mg/kg.

Metal concentrations were generally highest at HR-S-4 (downstream) and generally lowest at both

HR-S-1 (midstream) and HR-S-5 (downstream). HR-S-4 is located in close proximity to Amherst Road.

Concentrations of arsenic, antimony and hexavalent chromium were detected below laboratory LOR

at all sediment sampling locations.




No concentrations of PAH, MAH or HAH were detected above laboratory LOR in any sample. No

concentrations of TPH chain lengths C6-9 and TPH >C36 were detected above laboratory LOR in any

sample. Concentrations of TPH chain lengths C10-14, C15-28 and C29-36 were detected above LOR at every

sediment sample location as presented in Table B.

TABLE B

CONCENTRATIONS OF TPH IN THE HELENA RIVER SEDIMENT (OCTOBER 2012)

SAMPLE LOCATION

IDENTIFICATION *

TPH CONCENTRATIONS (mg/kg)

C6-9 C10-14 C15-28 C29-36 C>36

HR-S-2

(Upstream) <0.2 34 24 8.1 <0.4

HR-S-1 <0.2 2.1 3.2 1.0 <0.4

HR-S-1 <0.2 8.2 6.2 2.3 <0.4

HR-S-1 <0.2 3 7.5 4.5 <0.4

HR-S-4(Downstream)

<0.2 24 16 3.8 <0.4

Notes:

Bold red text indicates the highest value detected across the samples.

Bold text indicates the lowest value detected across the samples.

*Sample locations listed in order of upstream (east) to downstream (west)

As seen in the Table B TPH C10-14 was detected at concentrations ranging from 2.1 to 34mg/kg. TPH

C15-28 was detected at concentrations ranging from 3.2 to 24mg/kg and TPH C29-36 was detected at

concentrations ranging from 1 to 8.1mg/kg. There are no applicable assessment criteria values for

these compounds in sediment. TPH concentrations were highest at the furthermost upstream

sampling location (HR-S-2) and lowest at the next upstream sampling location (HR-S-1), located

downstream from HR-S-2.

3.3 STORMWATER OUTLET

A summary of the October 2012 stormwater outlet analytical results are presented in Table 5. CoC

documentation and laboratory certificates are presented in Appendix C.



3.3.1 Metal

Concentrations of arsenic, antimony, cadmium, chromium, hexavalent chromium, nickel, lead and tin

in stormwater outlet samples were detected below laboratory LOR at both locations (Western

Stormwater Outlet and Passive Drain Outlet) (see Figure 2)

Concentrations of barium, copper, manganese and zinc were detected above laboratory LOR in one

or both of the stormwater outlet sampling points, however, no metal concentrations exceeded

adopted assessment criteria with the exception of zinc and copper. The concentration of zinc (230

µg/L) exceeded the FWG value (8µg/L) and the concentration of copper (2µg/L) marginally exceeded

the FWG value (1.4µg/L) at the Western Stormwater Outlet point.


No concentrations of TPH, PAH, MAH or HAH were detected above laboratory LOR in any stormwater

outlet sample analysed.



4 DATA QUALITY EVALUATION

Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) checks are made to assess data in terms of completeness,

representativeness, comparability, accuracy and precision in order to meet the data quality

objectives. All samples were collected, stored and transported to the laboratory consistent with

Standards Australia (1998a, 1998b and 1999). The sample collection techniques and storage and

transportation conditions have previously been reported in Section 2.

4.1 FIELD QUALITY ASSURANCE AND CONTROL

A total of 7 primary water samples along with one duplicate sample (QC1, duplicate of HR-W-4) were

submitted for analysis. A total of five primary sediment samples along with one duplicate (QC2

duplicate of HR-S-4) were submitted for laboratory analysis. Field duplicates for the surface water

and sediment investigation were collected and analysed at a frequency equal to or greater than one

in ten (10%).

For the purposes of this assessment, replicate data with concentrations above 10 times the LOR

should have a RPD <30% and replicate data with concentrations below 10 times the LOR should have

RPD <50%. All duplicates were found within the acceptable RPD range of 30%-50% (Standards

Australia, 2005) for surface water and stormwater outlet samples. All sediment samples were found

within the acceptable RPD range with the exception of those discussed below.

Of the 11 RPD percentages that were able to be determined from the primary and duplicate

sediment samples (i.e. where concentrations of an analyte were above the LOR in both the primary

and duplicate sample), all were outside the acceptable range. Eight of the elevated RDP percentages

were recorded in association with barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, manganese, nickel, lead and

zinc. Metal concentrations in sediment are notoriously variable due to their distribution in

heterogeneous soils, potential influences of recent rainfall events and water flow variations along the

stream bed. It is likely that this variation combined with the low concentrations reported for copper,

marginally exceeding the laboratory LOR and small differences between primary and duplicate

results, is responsible for the elevated RPD percentage calculated for copper between QC2 and HR-S-

4. RPD exceedences recorded in the remaining seven metals are considered to be as a result of

sample variation due to the heterogeneous nature of the sediments collected. Analytical results from

the primary and duplicate samples used to determine the elevated RPD percentages remained below

the adopted assessment criteria or indicated the presence of impact where assessment criteria was

not available (barium and manganese). On this basis, the apparent lack of accuracy and/or precision

represented by these RPD percentages are not considered to adversely affect the interpretation of

data in this assessment.

Three of the elevated RPD percentages were determined from TPH C10-14, C15-28 and C29-36. There are

no applicable assessment criteria for TPH concentrations in sediment, however all primary and

duplicate samples reported the presence of impact. On this basis, the apparent lack of accuracy

and/or precision represented by these RPD percentages are not considered to adversely affect the

interpretation of data in this assessment.



4.2 RINSATE BLANK, FIELD BLANK AND TRANSPORT BLANK

No equipment rinsate, field or transport blanks were collected on the 15 October 2012 when the

Helena River surface water, sediment and Western Stormwater Outlet were sampled, due to human

error, which resulted in the samples being excluded from submission to the laboratory. A combined

field blank / transport blank sample (QC6) and rinsate blank (QC7) were collected and submitted to

the laboratory for analysis on the 17 October 2012 when the Passive Drain Outlet sample was

collected. QC sample QC6 was analysed for TPH and QC7 was analysed for TPH, PAH and metals.

Neither sample reported concentrations above laboratory LOR indicating that cross-contamination

was unlikely to have occurred on 17 October 2012. This provides some support that potential cross

contamination caused by background levels of COPCs during sampling on the 15 October 2012

was not likely. The Helena River sampling program will continue for a further two years on an

annual basis and this sampling round provides an ongoing assessment of trends in analytes

detected within the surface water, sediment and stormwater outlets. On this basis the lack of

rinsate, field and transport blanks collected on the 15 October 2012 is not considered to

compromise the integrity of the analytical results.

4.3 LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE

Laboratory QA/QC procedures and results are detailed in the certified laboratory quality control

reports contained in Appendix D. Primary soil, sediment and stormwater outlet samples (including

field QC samples) were submitted to ARL. ARL is NATA accredited for the laboratory analysis

performed. HAH and MAH was subcontracted by ARL to NMI who are NATA accredited for this

analysis. PAHs were analysed by both ARL and NMI, both laboratories are NATA accredited for this

analysis.

The analytical methods implemented and reporting by the laboratory were performed in accordance

with the NATA accreditations and consistent with Schedule B(3) of the NEPM (NEPC, 1999). The

laboratories reported an adequate range and frequency of data quality information (including

laboratory duplicates, control samples, surrogate recoveries and spike recoveries) for the purposes

of this assessment. All laboratory QC data were within acceptable limits with the exception of those

summarised in Table C.

TABLE C

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY DATA OUTSIDE RPD OR SPIKE CRITERIA

ANALYTE RESULTS (%) ACCEPTABLE CRITERIA (%)

Laboratory QC report 12-7335 - Laboratory Duplicates (RPDs)1

TPH C10-C14 91 0-25

TPH C15-C28 69 0-25

TPH >C16 – C34 83 0-25



ANALYTE RESULTS (%) ACCEPTABLE CRITERIA (%)

Laboratory QC report 12-7435 – Matrix Spike2

Chromium (dissolved) 135 60-120

Notes:1

Laboratory duplicate RPD percentages calculated from sample 12-7335-6 (QC2 – duplicate of HR-S-4)

2Laboratory matrix spike percentages calculated from sample 12-7404-1 (not a sample from our batch)

The laboratory RPDs, which have exceeded the ARL acceptable criteria of 25% are most likely

attributed to sample heterogeneity, as per the RPDs calculated for primary and duplicate samples.

The sample from which the laboratory duplicates were calculated was collected from Site and used

to calculate the primary / duplicate data reported in Section 4.1.2. This is not considered to adversely

affect the interpretation of data in this assessment as all primary and duplicate samples reported the

presence of TPH impact. One matrix spike recovery was reported outside of acceptable criteria limits

(60-120%). The sample from which the matrix spike was calculated was not a sample collected from

Site. Therefore the reason for the elevated matrix spike cannot be determined. However, elevated

spike recovery results are not a concern as they show possible false positive results, ensuring impacts

are not marginalized.

4.4 HOLDING TIMES

Laboratory analysis was undertaken in accordance with Schedule B(3) of the NEPM (NEPC, 1999) or

Australian Standards (1998b, 1999 and 2005) and using NATA accepted analytical procedures. All

analytes were extracted and analysed within holding times with the exception of those presented in

Table D.

TABLE D

SUMMARY OF HOLDING TIME BREACHES FOR THE OCTOBER 2012 SAMPLING ROUND

ANALYTES MATRIX

LAB

REPORT

NUMBER

SAMPLES

AFFECTED PRESERVATION

DATE

SAMPLED

DATE

EXTRACTED

HOLDING

TIME*

ACTUAL

HOLDING

TIME

Hexavalent

Chromium

Water 12-7335 Stored on ice

and acidified

15/10/12 17/10/12 1 day 2 days

12-7435 17/10/12 19/10/12

PAH Water 12-7435 Stored on ice 17/10/12 25/10/12 7 days 8 days

MAH WaterRn940973

Stored on ice

and acidified

15/10/12 23/10/127 days 8 days

Rn941350 17/10/12 25/10/12

HAH Water Rn940973 Stored on ice 15/10/12 23/10/12 7 days 8 days



ANALYTES MATRIX

LAB

REPORT

NUMBER

SAMPLES

AFFECTED PRESERVATION

DATE

SAMPLED

DATE

EXTRACTED

HOLDING

TIME*

ACTUAL

HOLDING

TIME

Rn941350 and acidified 17/10/12 25/10/12

* As recommended in Australian Standard (1998b)

As indicated in Table D, hexavalent chromium, MAH and HAH were extracted from all surface water

and stormwater outlet samples marginally outside of holding times (one day). PAHs were analysed

outside of holding times for one sample only (Passive Drain Outlet).

The samples were stored in closed eskies during collection and delivery to the laboratory and stored

in Aurora’s office in a dedicated sample refrigerator overnight. The laboratory ensures all samples

requiring refrigeration are stored appropriately upon receipt until analysis is performed. This is done

in accordance with ARL policy and the International Organisation for Standardization (ISO) and

Australian Standard (AS) requirements, which helps to ensure the stability of the analyte. In addition,

all samples analysed for hexavalent chromium, PAH, MAH and HAH reported concentrations less

than laboratory LOR which is consistent with historical results. On this basis it is likely that the one

day holding time exceedence combined with the appropriate storage techniques and consistency

with historical results had a negligible effect on results.

4.5 LABORATORY LIMITS OF REPORTING

Laboratory LORs were considered appropriate for the project, with the exception of the following

PAHs for sediment analysis:

• Acenaphthene – Laboratory LOR = 100 µg/kg, FWG = 16 µg/kg

• Acenaphthalene – Laboratory LOR = 100 µg/kg, FWG = 44 µg/kg

• Fluorene -– Laboratory LOR = 100 µg/kg, FWG = 19 µg/kg

• Anthracene – Laboratory LOR = 100 µg/kg, FWG = 85 µg/kg; and

• Dibenz[a,h]anthracene – Laboratory LOR = 200 µg/kg, FWG = 63 µg/kg.

In situations where the assessment criteria for analytes are higher than the lowest laboratory LOR

achieved by commercial NATA-accredited chemical laboratories, the DEC will accept the use of the

laboratory LOR as assessment criteria provided that the chemical analysis has been undertaken using

the most sensitive NATA-accredited technique available. The samples were analysed at a NATA

accredited laboratory (ARL) to the lowest concentration ARL can detect and as no PAHs have been

detected in any sample in the recent or historical sampling rounds, therefore this is not considered to

affect the integrity of the results.

Mercury was not analysed during the October 2012 sampling round, however it has been analysed

and reported previously, and the results are presented in Table 2. The LOR for mercury (0.1µg/L) has



historically always exceeded the FWG (0.06µg/L) which is the lowest concentration that the

laboratory (ARL) can detect. Mercury has not been detected in any sample historically and therefore

this LOR is not considered to be an issue for the purpose of data interpretation.

4.6 DATA QUALITY SUMMARY

Overall, the data quality information provides confidence that the data is of acceptable quality to

serve as a basis for interpretation for the purposes of this assessment and environmental assessment

of the Site.



5 DISCUSSION

The results of the October 2012 Helena River surface water and sediment monitoring event are

compared to historical results (from February 2006 to July 2011) in order to assess any potential

impacts from the former Midland Workshops Site and remedial works completed to date. As

previously indicated, stormwater outlets have not in the past been sampled and as such, this

sampling event (with the exception of the Eastern Stormwater Outlet, which has not yet been

completed) is considered to represent the initial baseline study.

5.1 HISTORICAL TRENDS IN SURFACE WATER AND SEDIMENT CONTAMINANT

CONCENTRATIONS

5.1.1 Surface Water

Sampling of the Helena River surface water was first conducted by ATA Environmental in February

2006 (historical and recent analytical results are presented in Table 2). The following comments are

considered to be the salient observations:

The current round of monitoring did not record concentrations of TPH or VOCs above LOR,

which is generally consistent with historical monitoring data.

TPH was detected in surface water samples HR-W-2 and HR-W-5 in the April 2008 sampling

event. The detections of TPH in April 2008 was attributed to heavy rainfall received in this area

during this time and the run-off from surrounding urban area.

VOCs (chloroform (4.8µg/L), bromodichloromethane (2.4µg/L) and dibromochloromethane

(1.2µg/L)) were detected in the June 2010 sampling event at sample location HR-W-1.

However, as no guideline values exist for any of these analytes, and the concentrations were

all less than x10 the LOR (<1mg/L) these results are not considered to affect the overall

interpretation of historical results. No VOCs were detected in the October 2012 sampling

round.

The previous sampling round undertaken in July 2011 detected concentrations of naphthalene

in two surface water samples HR-W-DUP, the duplicate sample of HR-W-4 (0.01µg/L) and HR-

W-3 (0.14µg/L). In the same round, concentrations of 2-methylnaphthalene were also

detected in surface water sample HR-W-1 (0.01µg/L) and HR-W-3 (0.01µg/L). These reported

concentrations did not exceed adopted assessment criteria. No other organics were detected

in the surface water samples collected during the July 2011 sampling round, which is unusual

as PAH detections are often associated with TPH compounds. Naphthalene and 2-

methylnaphthalene have not been detected historically and were not detected in the October

2012 analytical results. Therefore the earlier PAH detections are considered to be anomalous

and not an indication of PAH impact within the surface water of the Helena River.



Arsenic, cadmium, chromium, hexavalent chromium and nickel were all recorded at

concentrations below the laboratory LOR for the October 2012 sampling round, which is

generally consistent with historical sampling events.

Barium and manganese have not been analysed for in the surface water of the Helena River

historically. Barium results were consistent across all samples collected from the Helena River

surface water, suggesting background levels in the river. Manganese was identified in the

waste fill along the southern embankment and Helena West area, therefore further

assessment of potential manganese concentrations was warranted in the Helena River. Results

from the October 2012 sampling round reported manganese to be below laboratory LOR in

surface water samples collected.

Concentrations of lead have historically been reported marginally above the laboratory LOR in

all samples with one exceedence of the FWG historically recorded in April 2008 at location HR-

W-5. Lead concentrations reported in the last two monitoring rounds (July 2011 and October

2012) have been below laboratory LOR. This trend suggests lead concentrations in the surface

water of the Helena River are influenced by source(s) outside of the Workshops site but will

continue to be assessed as part of ongoing monitoring commitments until at least October

2014.

Concentrations of copper and zinc were reported below laboratory LOR during the October

2012 sampling round. Copper and zinc concentrations have been historically been elevated in

surface water samples and have been identified as possible contaminants of the Helena River

(Coffey Environments, 2011b). Chart 1 presents the trend of copper concentrations in the

Helena River surface water samples since monitoring commenced in 2006. The graph shows

that copper has historically been present predominately at low concentrations in the Helena

River surface water. The spike in concentrations recorded in April 2008 is attributed to a heavy

rainfall event, causing large volumes of run-off from the surrounding urban area. Two large

storm water outlets fitted with Gross Pollutant Traps located upstream of the Helena River

were reported by Coffey Environments (2011b) to have overflowed with significant erosion

down-gradient to the south. No copper concentration spikes have been reported since April

2008. This trend suggests copper concentrations in the surface water of the Helena River are

influenced by source(s) outside of the Workshops site but will continue to be assessed as part

of ongoing monitoring commitments until at least October 2014.

Chart 2 presents the trend of zinc concentrations in the Helena River surface water samples

since monitoring began in 2006. The zinc concentration spike in April 2008, coinciding with the

spike of copper, is also attributed to the heavy rainfall event during this time, which caused

large volumes of run-off from surrounding urban area. Another spike of zinc was reported in

June 2010. Rainfall during May 2010 was higher than normal, but not as large as the rainfall

recorded in April 2008 (BOM, 2012). This amount of rainfall would likely cause an increased

level of run-off from the urbanised area (industrial and residential) that is located north of the

former Workshops site lies within the stormwater drainage catchment. Given that the



furthermost upstream sample (HR-W-2) reported the highest concentrations, an off-site

source is more likely.

Copper and zinc were not detected above FWG in the DoW 2009 reports summarised in the

Swan River Trust Summary Paper (2009). These samples were collected at least 3km

downstream from the former Midland Workshops Site.

5.1.2 Sediment

Sampling of the Helena River sediment was first conducted by ATA Environmental in February 2006

(historical data and recent analytical results are presented in Table 4). Notable observations include

the following:

No PAHs or VOCs have ever been detected at any sampling location in sediment samples.

Lead concentrations were below the ISQG-Low trigger value for all samples in the October

2012 sampling event. Lead has been reported above the ISQG-Low trigger value at sediment

sampling location HR-S-3 during the four previous sampling events (August 2008, November

2008, June 2010 and July 2011) and at sediment sampling location HR-S-5 for three

consecutive rounds prior to July 2011 (August 2008, November 2008 and June 2010).

Concentrations of lead have been reported above the ISQG-Low trigger value historically in

non-consecutive sampling rounds at sediment sampling location HR-S-4, and exceeded the

trigger value on one occasion in March 2007 at sediment sampling location HR-S-1.

Chart 3 displays trends in lead concentrations detected in the Helena River sediment samples

since monitoring first began in 2006. The graph shows a spike during the August 2008

monitoring round, which could be attributed to the large amount of rainfall received in April

2008, allowing time for the run-off from the surrounding area, to settle and deposit in the

sediment. This trend suggests that concentrations of lead in sediment are influenced by



Zinc concentrations have been reported below the ISQG-Low trigger value of 200mg/kg in all

historical and recent analytical results, with the exception of June 2010, when zinc was

recorded at sediment sampling location HR-S-5 at a concentration of 320mg/kg. This data

suggests that the June 2010 result was anomalous (see Chart 4). It is considered that the

concentrations of zinc that are present below the trigger value in the Helena River sediment

are likely to represent background levels.

The concentration of tin detected at sediment sample location HR-S-5 marginally exceeded the

ISQG-Low trigger value. As tin has not been analysed for historically, there is no baseline data

with which to make a comparison. As only one sample marginally exceeded the ISQG-Low

trigger value and was considerably less than the ISQG-High value, which represents the

concentration above which adverse biological effects are expected to occur more frequently,

this is not considered to be a large risk to environmental or human health receptors.

Subsequent Helena River sampling rounds will provide more information as to the



concentrations of tin within the sediment of the Helena River. No detectable levels of

dissolved tin was present in the Helena River surface water samples, therefore tin

concentrations do not appear to be impacting surface water quality.

Barium and manganese have not been analysed within the sediment of the Helena River

historically. Manganese was included in the analytical suite for sediment due to its presence in

waste fill, located within the southern embankment and Helena West area. Reported results

from the October 2012 sampling round for both barium and manganese will be used as a

baseline for the subsequent Helena River sampling rounds, as no relevant assessment criteria

exist for these analytes.

All other metal concentrations remained below ISQG-low criteria and were similar to the

historical rounds of sediment sampling.

Concentrations of TPH were less than those recorded during the previous sampling event in

July 2011 at all sampling locations with the exception of HR-S-2 (upstream). TPH was first

detected in the Helena River sediment in March 2007 and have been detected in every round

since, apart from June 2007. Chart 5 shows the concentration trend of TPH chain lengths C10-36

in the Helena River sediment from when sampling first commenced in 2006 and suggests that

concentrations of TPH in the Helena River sediment are, overall decreasing with time.

Hydrocarbon contamination was detected and remediated at the Helena East site during the

period that Helena River sediment sampling has been undertaken. Whilst long term migration

of site-source contaminated groundwater cannot be eliminated as a contributing source to the

presence of TPH concentrations within the Helena River, it is considered more likely that the

source of impacted sediment within the Helena River may be a reflection of the quality of in-

flowing stormwater from the greater Midland area and/or the soil quality along the Helena

River floodplain. This is supported by the relatively higher TPH concentrations at the upstream

sampling location (HR-S-2) only. The close proximity of the sampling locations, particularly HR-

S-4, to roads may also be a contributing source of TPH in sediment, resulting from run-off.

Additionally, it is possible that a portion of the hydrocarbons in the sediment may be from a

naturally occurring source e.g. organic matter in the sediment. A silica gel pre-treatment was

undertaken on sediment samples during the June 2010 sampling round, after the samples

were run through the gas chromatography mass spectrometry and the predominant element

of the sediment samples were hydrocarbons with a C15 base (Coffey Environments, 2011a and

2011b). One of the compound groups that are of this structure are sesquiterpenes, which are

found naturally in plants and insects as semiochemicals. Semiochemicals are a chemical

substance or mixture of chemical substances produced by an organism and used for

communication e.g. defensive agents or pheromones.

5.2 STORMWATER OUTLETS

The initial round of data shows that no COPCs from the Passive Drain Outlet are being discharged at

unacceptable concentrations along the southern embankment. Zinc and copper are the only COPC



being discharged above adopted assessment criteria from the Western Stormwater Outlet.

Concentrations of zinc and copper reported during the October 2012 sampling round in surface

water were all below laboratory LOR. Concentrations of zinc and copper reported in the sediment

samples collected in the October 2012 sampling round were all well below the adopted assessment

criteria. Therefore the elevated zinc and copper concentrations reported in the Western Stormwater

Outlet have not had an adverse effect on the Helena River environment. Trends of zinc and copper

will continue to be monitored and assessed in subsequent Helena River sampling rounds. At present,

the river appears to be unaffected and as such the risks to environmental and human health

receptors are low.



6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This monitoring event was undertaken to assess if there have been any adverse environmental

impacts on the aquatic environment of the Helena River which is situated to the south of the Former

Midland Railway Workshops. Based on the monitoring results the following conclusions are made.

No concentrations of PAH, MAH or HAHs were detected in any surface water, sediment or

stormwater outlet sample collected from the Helena River during the October 2012 sampling

round.

No concentrations of TPH were detected in any surface water or stormwater outlet sample

collected from the Helena River during the October 2012 sampling round.

Concentrations of TPH in the Helena River sediments appear to be decreasing over time, with

the exception of the upstream sampling location which suggests hydrocarbon impacts are

more likely a reflection of the quality of run-off from the greater Midland area, including roads

within the vicinity of the sampling location. A portion of the hydrocarbon concentrations

within the sediment of the Helena River may also be from a naturally occurring source.

All surface water samples reported concentrations of metals less than laboratory LOR, with the

exception of barium, which reported a consistent concentration in all samples collected. It is

noted that the concentrations of barium recorded are below the adopted assessment criteria

and as such, this is not considered to represent a risk to the aquatic environment.

Lead concentrations in surface water have been reported below laboratory LOR in the last two

sampling rounds but will continue to be assessed as part of ongoing monitoring commitments

until at least October 2014. In addition, concentrations of copper and zinc in surface water are

most likely influenced by source(s) outside of the Workshops site, but will continue to be

assessed as part of ongoing monitoring commitments until at least October 2014.

Concentrations of arsenic, antimony and hexavalent chromium were reportedly below

laboratory LOR at all sediment sampling locations. Concentrations of barium, cadmium,

chromium, copper, manganese, nickel, lead and zinc were reported below adopted assessment

criteria.

Concentrations of lead reported in the Helena River sediment samples were below adopted

assessment criteria. Trends suggest that concentrations of lead in sediment are influenced by



Concentrations of tin marginally exceeded the ISQG-Low trigger value in sediment at one

location in the Helena River. As there is no baseline data to compare this exceedence to and as

such additional sampling rounds are required to compare this data to and form a better

assessment of its impact on the Helena River aquatic environment. No detectable levels of

dissolved tin was present in the Helena River surface water samples, therefore tin

concentrations do not appear to be impacting surface water quality and as such



concentrations of tin in sediment will be further assessed as part of the next scheduled annual

monitoring event (October 2013).

Concentrations of arsenic, antimony, cadmium, chromium, hexavalent chromium, nickel, lead

and tin were reported below laboratory LOR at both stormwater sampling locations.

Concentrations of barium, copper, manganese and zinc were detected above laboratory LOR in

one or both of the stormwater outlet sampling points. Concentrations of zinc and copper both

exceeded the FWG but not the DNP guideline. As Helena River surface water and sediment

results have not reported elevated concentrations of zinc or copper, the concentrations

reported in the Western Stormwater Outlet do not appear to have had an adverse effect on

the quality of the Helena River and as such the risks to environmental and human health

receptors are considered to be low. Metal concentrations in stormwater outlets will continue

to be monitored and assessed as part of future monitoring events scheduled (October 2014).

Overall, contaminant concentrations in surface water and sediment remain either consistent with

historic concentrations or demonstrate declining trends. COPCs concentrations recorded in

stormwater outlets are suitable to be discharged along the southern embankment, with

concentrations of zinc and copper required to be reviewed in the next scheduled monitoring event.

To satisfy Condition 12-7 of MS 742, it is recommended that this report is placed on the MRA website

(http://www.mra.wa.gov.au/publications/publications.phtml) for the life of the project. Sampling of

the Helena River should be undertaken on an annual basis for a further two years, minimum, to

satisfy Condition 12-5 of MS 742.



7 BIBLIOGRAPHY

ANZECC and ARMCANZ (2000) Australian Water Quality Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water

Quality.

ATA (2006) Helena East Precinct Remediation and Redevelopment: Public Environmental Review.

Report No. 2005/142. ATA Environmental, Perth. Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment

Authority.

Bureau of Meterology (BOM) (2012) Monthly Rainfall - Midland. Accessed online:

http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_nccObsCode=139&p_display_type=dataFil

e&p_startYear=&p_c=&p_stn_num=009025 on 13 December 2012.

Coffey Environments (2009b) Helena West Groundwater Monitoring Program: April 2008.

EP2009/002. Coffey Environments, Perth. Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment Authority.

Coffey Environments (2009c) Areas B, C and D Groundwater Monitoring Program: October/

November 2008. EP2009/022. Coffey Environments, Perth. Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment

Authority.

Coffey Environments (2009d) Clayton Precinct Area E Groundwater Monitoring Program:

November 2008. EP2009/008. Coffey Environments, Perth.

Coffey Environments (2011a) Helena River Water and Sediment Monitoring Program: June 2010

Results. EP2010/179, V1. Coffey Environments, Perth. Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment

Authority.

Coffey Environments (2011b) Post-Remedial Surface and Groundwater Management Plan, Helena

East Precinct, Former Railway Workshops, Midland. EP2011/182, V1. Coffey Environments, Perth.

Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment Authority.

Coffey Environments (2012) Post-Remedial Surface and Groundwater Management Plan, Helena East

Precinct, Former Railway Workshops, Midland. EP2011/182, V2. Coffey Environments, Perth.

Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment Authority.

Crisalis (2006) Review and Recommendation on Groundwater Monitoring at Helena East, Helena

West and within Areas B, C D and Area E, Midland Railway Workshops. Prepared for the Midland

Redevelopment Authority.

DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water, Version 4, Revision 1. Department of

Environment and Conservation (DEC).

DoH (2006) Contaminated Sites Reporting Guideline for Chemicals in Groundwater. Department of

Health Publication.

EGIS (2002) Stormwater Discharge Strategy from the Midland Redevelopment Authority into the

Helena River Floodplain. Egis Consulting, Perth. In: Helena West Environmental Management System,



Report No. 04.011/RP00, Nov 2005. Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment Authority. ENV.

Australia (ENV), Perth.

ERM Australia (2012) Helena East Precinct, Midland, Former Railway Workshops, WA, Remediation

and Validation Report Part 3, Mandatory Auditors Report. Reference: 0064828. Prepared for the

Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority, July 2012.

NHMRC/NRMMC (2004) National Water Quality Management Strategy Australian Drinking Water

Guidelines 2004.

Standards Australia (1998a) Water Quality - Sampling - Guidance on sampling of rivers and streams

AS5667.6:1998. Standards Australia, Homebush.

Standards Australia (1998b) Water Quality - Sampling Part 1: Guidance on the design of sampling

programs, sampling techniques and the preservation and handling of samples AS 5667.1:1998.

Standards Australia, Homebush.

Standards Australia (1999) Water Quality - Sampling - Guidance on sampling of bottom sediments

AS5667.12:1999. Standards Australia, Homebush.

Standards Australia (2005) Guide to the investigation and sampling of sites with potentially

contaminated soil Part 1: Non-volatile and semi-volatile compounds AS 4482.1-2005. Standards

Australia, Homebush.

TABLES

Table 1

Helena River Surface Water Analytical Results, October 2012


Ars

en

ic

An

tim

on

y

Bar

ium

Cad

miu

m

Ch

rom

ium

He

xava

len

tC

hro

miu

m

Co

pp

er

Man

gan

ese

Nic

kel

Lead

Tin

Zin

c

C6

-9

C1

0-1

4

C1

5-2

8

C2

9-3

6

SURFACE WATER ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

Fresh Water Guidelines1

13 NV NV 0.2 NV 1 1.4 1900 11 3.4 NV 8 NV NV NV NV

Domestic non-potable Guidelines2

70 NV 7,000 20 500 500 20,000 5,000 200 100 NV 30,000 NV NV NV NV

Sample ID3

Date ARL ID

HR-W-2 15-Oct-12 12-7335-7 <1 <1 40 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <10 <1 <1 <10 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40

HR-W-1 15-Oct-12 12-7335-8 <1 <1 40 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <10 <1 <1 <10 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40

HR-W-3 15-Oct-12 12-7335-9 <1 <1 40 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <10 <1 <1 <10 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40

HR-W-5 15-Oct-12 12-7335-10 <1 <1 40 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <10 <1 <1 <10 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40

HR-W-4 15-Oct-12 12-7335-11 <1 <1 40 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <10 <1 <1 <10 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40

RPD Calculation

HR-W-4 15-Oct-12 12-7335-11 <1 <1 40 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <10 <1 <1 <10 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40

QC1 15-Oct-12 12-7335-12 <1 <1 40 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <10 <1 <1 <10 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Table must be viewed in colour

Notes: PAH = Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

TPH = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

µg/L = micrograms per litre

ARL ID = Analytical Reference Laboratory (ARL) sample number referenced on laboratory reports

ID = Identification

NV = 'No value' established for contaminant1 Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality (ANZECC & ARMCANZ, 2000) where toxicants are to be

compared against the 95% protection level for aquatic ecosystems, as presented in the DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil,

Sediment and Water2 Department of Health (DoH) Contaminated Sites Reporting Guideline for Chemicals in Groundwater (DoH, 2006) as presented in

the DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water3 In order of upstream (east) to downstream (west)

Values that equal or exceed the guidelines are underlined and either bold or red

No Monocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (MAH) or Halogenated Aliphatic or Aromatic Hydrocarbons (HAH) were detected in any

sample and therefore are not tabulated, see laboratory reports

RPD = Relative Percentage Difference

# = RPD cannot be calculated as both results are below laboratory LOR

RPD (%)

Metals TPH

µg/L µg/L

MRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_002_nb 1

Table 1

Helena River Surface Water Analytical Results, October 2012


SURFACE WATER ASSESSMENT CRITERIA



Sample ID3

Date ARL ID

HR-W-2 15-Oct-12 12-7335-7

HR-W-1 15-Oct-12 12-7335-8

HR-W-3 15-Oct-12 12-7335-9

HR-W-5 15-Oct-12 12-7335-10

HR-W-4 15-Oct-12 12-7335-11

RPD Calculation

HR-W-4 15-Oct-12 12-7335-11

QC1 15-Oct-12 12-7335-12


RPD (%)

Nap

hth

ale

ne

2-m

eth

yln

aph

thal

en

e

Ace

nap

hth

yle

ne

Ace

nap

hth

en

e

Flu

ore

ne

Ph

en

anth

ren

e

An

thra

cen

e

Flu

ora

nth

en

e

Pyr

en

e

Be

nzo

[a]a

nth

race

ne

Ch

ryse

ne

Be

nzo

[b]f

luo

ran

the

ne

Be

nzo

[k]f

luo

ran

the

ne

Be

nzo

[a]p

yre

ne

Ind

en

o[1

,2,3

-c,d

]pyr

en

e

Dib

en

z[a,

h]a

nth

race

ne

Be

nzo

[g,h

,I]p

ery

len

e

16 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV

NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV 0.01 NV NV NV

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #





ID = Identification




the DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water3 In order of upstream (east) to downstream (west)





# = RPD cannot be calculated as both results are below laboratory LOR

PAH

µg/L


Table 2

Summary of Historical Helena River Surface Water Analytical Results


pH

(no

un

its)

Ars

en

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

rom

ium

He

xava

len

tC

hro

miu

m

Co

pp

er

Me

rcu

ry

Nic

kel

Lead

Zin

c

C6

-9

C1

0-1

4

C1

5-2

8

C2

9-3

6

Nap

hth

ale

ne

2-m

eth

yln

aph

thal

en

e

Ace

nap

hth

yle

ne

Ace

nap

hth

en

e

Flu

ore

ne

Ph

en

anth

ren

e

An

thra

cen

e

Flu

ora

nth

en

e

Pyr

en

e

Be

nzo

[a]a

nth

race

ne

Ch

ryse

ne

Be

nzo

[b]f

luo

ran

the

ne

Be

nzo

[k]f

luo

ran

the

ne

Be

nzo

[a]p

yre

ne

Ind

en

o[1

,2,3

-c,d

]pyr

en

e

Dib

en

z[a,

h]a

nth

race

ne

Be

nzo

[g,h

,I]p

ery

len

e

Tota

lPA

H

Ch

loro

form

Bro

mo

dic

hlo

rom

eth

ane

Dib

rom

och

loro

me

than

e

SURFACE WATER ASSESSMENT CRITERIA µg/L

Fresh Water Guidelines1 6.5-8.5 13 0.2 NV 1 1.4 0.06 11 3.4 8 NV NV NV NV 16 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV 3 NV NV NV

'Soft' HMFWG NV NV 0.2 10 NV 1.4 NV 11 3 8 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV

'Moderate' HMFWG NV NV 0.5 25 NV 3 NV 27.5 14 20 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV

Hard' HMFWG NV NV 0.8 37 NV 5.5 NV 42.9 25.8 31.2 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV

'Very Hard' HMFWG NV NV 1 49 NV 7.3 NV 57 40 42 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV

'Extremely Hard' HMFWG NV NV 2 84 NV 12.6 NV 99 90.8 72 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV


NV 70 20 500 500 20,000 10 200 100 30,000 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV 0.01 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV

Drinking Water1

6.5-8.5 7 2 50 50 2000 1 20 10 3000 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV 0.01 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV

Sample ID6 Date ARL ID

17/02/06 4524 - - - 1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 <1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

19/10/06 24060 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 <1 <1 10 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

29/03/07 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

28/06/07 15683 5.9 260 Extremely Hard 1 <0.1 1 - 1 <0.1 3 1 30 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

27/09/07 22770 6.9 71 Moderate 1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 3 <1 32 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

20/12/07 32037 6.9 210 Very Hard 1 <0.1 1 - 1 <0.1 1 1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

8/04/08 10117 4.5 400 Extremely Hard <1 0.2 1 - 22 <0.1 23 1 480 <20 200 440 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

18/08/08 20170 7 96 Moderate 2 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 <1 1 35 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

4/11/08 28474 7.3 91 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 <1 1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

16/06/10 10-3314-4 3.7 370 Extremely Hard <1 0.3 <1 <2 2 <0.1 <1 <1 220 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

20/07/11 11-4861-2 6.7 91 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 1 <1 19 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

15/10/12 12-7335-7 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 - <1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

17/02/06 4523 - - - 1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 <1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

19/10/06 24059 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 <1 1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

29/03/07 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

28/06/07 15682 6.4 100 Moderate 2 <0.1 1 - 5 <0.1 2 3 40 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

27/09/07 22769 6.9 70 Moderate 1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 5 <1 7 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

20/12/07 32036 6.8 180 Very Hard <1 <0.1 1 - <1 <0.1 1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

8/04/08 10116 7.6 210 Very Hard <1 0.3 1 - 20 <0.1 8 2 260 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

18/08/08 20169 6.9 110 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 1 <0.1 <1 1 53 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

4/11/08 28473 7.1 94 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 2 <0.1 <1 1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

16/06/10 10-3314-3 6.5 88 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 5 <0.1 1 1 53 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 4.8 2.4 1.2

20/07/11 11-4861-1 6.7 91 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 1 <1 16 <20 <20 <40 <40 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

15/10/12 12-7335-8 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 - <1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

17/02/06 4525 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

19/10/06 24061 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 <1 <1 10 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

29/03/07 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

28/06/07 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

27/09/07 22771 6.9 68 Moderate 1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 2 <1 8 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

20/12/07 32038 7.1 190 Very Hard <1 <0.1 1 - 1 <0.1 1 1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

8/04/08 10118 7.6 180 Very Hard 1 0.2 <1 - 21 <0.1 8 2 250 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

18/08/08 20171 7.0 100 Moderate 1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 <1 1 64 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

4/11/08 28475 7.2 98 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 1 <0.1 <1 1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

16/06/10 10-3314-5 6.6 67 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 5 <0.1 <1 2 48 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

20/07/11 11-4861-3 6.8 98 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 1 <1 16 <20 <20 <40 <40 0.14 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.32 <1 <1 <1

15/10/12 12-7335-9 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 - <1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

17/02/06 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

19/10/06 24063 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 1 1 10 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

29/03/07 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

28/06/07 15685 6.1 130 Hard 1 <0.1 1 - 3 <0.1 2 2 34 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

27/09/07 22773 7.0 69 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 2 <1 6 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

20/12/07 32040 6.8 200 Very Hard <1 <0.1 1 - 1 <0.1 2 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

8/04/08 10120 7.6 84 Moderate 1 0.1 1 - 36 <0.1 4 4 110 <20 150 340 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

18/08/08 20173 6.9 99 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 <1 <1 41 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

4/11/08 28477 7.1 97 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 <1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

16/06/10 10-3314-7 6.7 50 Soft <1 <0.1 <1 <2 3 <0.1 <1 1 34 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

20/07/11 11-4861-5 6.4 98 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 2 <1 18 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.17 <1 <1 <1

15/10/12 12-7335-10 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 - <1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

17/02/06 4526 - - - <1 <0.1 7 - <1 <0.1 1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

19/10/06 24062 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 <1 <1 10 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

29/03/07 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

28/06/07 15684 6 120 Hard 1 <0.1 1 - 5 <0.1 2 2 40 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

27/09/07 22772 7.0 69 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 - <1 <0.1 2 <1 6 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

20/12/07 32039 7.0 200 Very Hard 1 0.1 1 - 1 <0.1 2 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

8/04/08 10119 7.9 84 Moderate <1 0.1 <1 - 22 <0.1 4 2 49 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

18/08/08 20172 6.9 99 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 <1 1 57 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

4/11/08 28476 7.1 99 Moderate <1 <0.1 1 <2 3 <0.1 <1 1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

16/06/10 10-3314-6 6.4 48 Soft <1 <0.1 <1 <2 5 <0.1 <1 2 37 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.2 <1 <1 <1

20/07/11 11-4861-4 6.4 93 Moderate <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 <0.1 2 <1 19 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.17 <1 <1 <1

15/10/12 12-7335-11 - - - <1 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 - <1 <1 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <1.7 <1 <1 <1

Notes: 1Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality (ANZECC & ARMCANZ, 2000) where toxicants are to be Table must be viewed in colour

PAH = Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons compared against the 95% protection level for aquatic ecosystems, as presented in the DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil,

VOC = Volatile Organic Compounds Sediment and Water

TPH = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 2Department of Health (DoH) Contaminated Sites Reporting Guideline for Chemicals in Groundwater (DoH, 2006) as presented in

HMFWG = Hardness Modified Freshwater Guidelines the DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water

mgCaCO3/L = milligrams calcium carbonate per litre 3Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG) (2004) as presented in the DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water

µg/L = micrograms per litre 4No river water sample was collected in February 2006 as this section of river was dry.

ID = Identification 5No river water samples were collected in March and June 2007 as access to this section was not available.

Table must be viewed in colour 6In order of upstream (east) to downstream (west)

NV = 'No value' established for contaminant7An extensive suite of VOCs have been analysed, however, only those listed have been detected above LOR

Values that equal or exceed the guidelines are underlined and either bold or red Values that equal or exceed the guidelines are underlined and either bold or red


HRW-4

HR-W-54

HR-W-35

HR-W-1

HR-W-2

Har

dn

ess

mg

CaC

O3/L

Potability Suite

0 - 59

60 - 119

240+

NV

200

NV

180-240

120-179

VOC7PAH

µg/L µg/L µg/L

Metals TPH


Table 3

Helena River Sediment Analytical Results, October 2012


Ars

en

ic

An

tim

on

y

Bar

ium

Cad

miu

m

Ch

rom

ium

He

xava

ne

nt

Ch

rom

ium

Co

pp

er

Man

gan

ese

Nic

kel

Lead

Tin

Zin

c

C6

-9

C1

0-1

4

C1

5-2

8

C2

9-3

6

C>

36

SEDIMENT ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

20 2 NV 1.5 80 NV 65 NV 21 50 5 200 NV NV NV NV NV

70 25 NV 10 370 NV 270 NV 52 220 70 410 NV NV NV NV NV

Sample ID2

Date ARL#

HR-S-2 15-Oct-12 12-7335-1 <5 <2 26 <0.1 6 <1 4 28 2 7 <1 12 <0.2 34 24 8.1 <0.4

HR-S-1 15-Oct-12 12-7335-2 <5 <2 18 0.2 12 <1 5 34 2 16 <1 28 <0.2 2.1 3.2 1 <0.4

HR-S-3 15-Oct-12 12-7335-3 <5 <2 37 0.5 7 <1 12 130 4 21 <1 52 <0.2 8.2 6.2 2.3 <0.4

HR-S-5 15-Oct-12 12-7335-4 <5 <2 18 0.2 5 <1 6 37 2 15 7 28 <0.2 3 7.5 4.5 <0.4

HR-S-4 15-Oct-12 12-7335-5 <5 <2 74 0.9 14 <1 24 130 6 46 4 93 <0.2 24 16 3.8 <0.4

RPD Calculation

HR-S-4 15-Oct-12 12-7335-5 <5 <2 74 0.9 14 <1 24 130 6 46 4 93 <0.2 24 16 3.8 <0.4

QC2 15-Oct-12 12-7335-6 <5 <2 22 0.1 8 <1 5 39 3 12 <1 13 <0.2 6.4 6.3 1.9 <0.4

# # 108% 160% 55% # 131% 108% 67% 117% # 151% # 116% 87% 67% #

Table must be viewed in colour Notes:

PAH = Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

TPH = Total Petroleum Hyrdocarbons

mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram

ARL# = Analytical Reference Laboratory (ARL) report number

ID = Identification

NV = No value established for guideline

2 In order of upstream (east) to downstream (west).3 Low molecular weight PAHs are the sum of acenaphthalene, anthracene, fluorene, 2-methylnaphthalene, naphthalene and phenanthrene.4 High molecular weight PAHs are the sum of benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, fluoranthene and pyrene.

Values that equal or exceed the guidelines are bold and underlined or shaded where applicable.

No Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) were detected in any sample.


No Monocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (MAH) or Halogenated Aliphatic or Aromatic Hydrocarbons (HAH) were detected in any sample and therefore are not tabulated, see

laboratory reports

# = no RPD can be determined as one or both of the sample pair is below laboratory LOR

NV = 'No value' established for contaminant

RPD (%)

1 Interim Sediment Quality Guidelines (ISQG) as presented in Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water (DEC, 2010).

Bolded RED QC data exceed acceptable range (concentrations >10 times the LOR acceptable range = 0 - <30%, concentrations <10 times the LOR acceptable range = 0 - <50%).

ISQG-High1

ISQG-Low1

mg/kg mg/kg

Metals TPH


Table 3

Helena River Sediment Analytical Results, October 2012



Sample ID2

Date ARL#

HR-S-2 15-Oct-12 12-7335-1

HR-S-1 15-Oct-12 12-7335-2

HR-S-3 15-Oct-12 12-7335-3

HR-S-5 15-Oct-12 12-7335-4

HR-S-4 15-Oct-12 12-7335-5

RPD Calculation

HR-S-4 15-Oct-12 12-7335-5

QC2 15-Oct-12 12-7335-6


RPD (%)

ISQG-High1

ISQG-Low1

Nap

hth

ale

ne

2-M

eth

yln

aph

thal

en

e

Ace

nap

hth

en

e

Ace

nap

hth

ale

ne

Flu

ore

ne

Ph

en

anth

ren

e

An

thra

cen

e

Flu

ora

nth

en

e

Pyr

en

e

Be

nzo

[a]a

nth

race

ne

Ch

ryse

ne

Be

nzo

(b)f

luo

ran

the

ne

Be

nzo

(k)f

luo

ran

the

ne

Be

nzo

[a]p

yre

ne

Ind

en

o(1

,2,3

-c,d

)pyr

en

e

Be

nzo

(gh

i)p

ery

len

e

Dib

en

z[a,

h]a

nth

race

ne

Low

Mo

l.W

t.P

AH

s3

Hig

hM

ol.

Wt.

PA

Hs4

160 NV 16 44 19 240 85 600 665 261 384 NV NV 430 NV NV 63 552 1700

2100 NV 500 640 540 1500 1100 5100 2600 1600 2800 NV NV 1600 NV NV 260 3160 9600

<100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000

<100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000

<100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000

<100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000

<100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000

<100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000

<100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #


TPH = Total Petroleum Hyrdocarbons

mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram

ARL# = Analytical Reference Laboratory (ARL) report number

ID = Identification

NV = No value established for guideline

2 In order of upstream (east) to downstream (west).3 Low molecular weight PAHs are the sum of acenaphthalene, anthracene, fluorene, 2-methylnaphthalene, naphthalene and phenanthrene.4 High molecular weight PAHs are the sum of benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, fluoranthene and pyrene.

Values that equal or exceed the guidelines are bold and underlined or shaded where applicable.

No Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) were detected in any sample.


No Monocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (MAH) or Halogenated Aliphatic or Aromatic Hydrocarbons (HAH) were detected in any sample and therefore are not tabulated, see

laboratory reports

# = no RPD can be determined as one or both of the sample pair is below laboratory LOR

NV = 'No value' established for contaminant

ANALYTICAL RESULTS


Bolded RED QC data exceed acceptable range (concentrations >10 times the LOR acceptable range = 0 - <30%, concentrations <10 times the LOR acceptable range = 0 - <50%).

PAH

µg/kg


Table 4

Summary of Historical Helena River Sediment Analytical Results


Ars

en

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

rom

ium

He

xava

len

tC

hro

miu

m

Co

pp

er

Me

rcu

ry

Nic

kel

Lead

Zin

c

C6

-9

C1

0-1

4

C1

5-2

8

C2

9-3

6

C>3

6

Nap

hth

ale

ne

Ace

nap

hth

en

e

Ace

nap

hth

ale

ne

Flu

ore

ne

Ph

en

anth

ren

e

An

thra

cen

e

Flu

ora

nth

en

e

Pyr

en

e

Be

nzo

[a]a

nth

race

ne

Ch

ryse

ne

Be

nzo

[a]p

yre

ne

Dib

en

z[a,

h]a

nth

race

ne

Low

Mo

l.W

t.P

AH

s

Hig

hM

ol.

Wt.

PA

Hs

Tota

lPA

H


20 1.5 80 NV 65 0.15 21 50 200 NV NV NV NV NV 160 16 44 19 240 85 600 665 261 384 430 63 552 1700 4000

70 10 370 NV 270 1 52 220 410 NV NV NV NV NV 2100 500 640 540 1500 1100 5100 2600 1600 2800 1600 260 3160 9600 45000

Sample ID2

Date ARL ID

17/02/06 4530 <5 <0.1 6 - 4 0.03 2 8 24 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

19/10/06 24066 <5 <0.1 4 - 4 <0.02 2 11 18 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

29/03/07 7484 <5 <0.1 18 - 16 <0.02 7 32 92 <0.2 1.5 52 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

28/06/07 15676 <5 <0.1 4 - 2 <0.02 1 5 11 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

27/09/07 22778 <5 <0.1 21 - 19 0.73 5 30 190 <0.2 3.1 12 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

20/12/07 32045 <5 <0.1 4 - 1 <0.02 1 5 1 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

8/04/08 10109 <5 <0.1 4 - 1 <0.02 1 5 2 <0.2 <0.2 9.2 4.1 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

18/08/08 20162 <5 <0.1 8 <1 5 <0.02 3 13 33 0.6 24 160 100 29 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

4/11/08 28480 <5 0.8 4 <1 7 <0.2 5 8 29 1.1 12 64 64 11 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

16/06/10 10-33-15-2 <5 0.3 7 <1 8 <0.02 3 18 33 6.1 8.9 51 37 17 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

20/07/11 11-4864-2 <5 <0.1 3 <1 7 <0.02 1 7 19 <0.2 <0.2 5.5 <0.4 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

15/10/12 12-7335-1 <5 <0.1 6 <1 4 - 2 7 12 <0.2 34 24 8.1 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000 <1600

17/02/06 4529 <5 <0.1 11 - 10 0.04 5 23 20 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

19/10/06 24065 <5 <0.1 7 - 8 0.02 3 20 17 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

29/03/07 7483 <5 0.1 30 - 33 0.05 12 74 180 <0.2 0.7 15 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

28/06/07 15675 <5 <0.1 7 - 7 0.03 3 16 21 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

27/09/07 22777 <5 <0.1 10 - 9 0.02 5 24 18 <0.2 8.3 12 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

20/12/07 32044 <5 0.1 5 - 5 <0.02 2 13 86 <0.2 0.6 11 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

8/04/08 10108 <5 <0.1 11 - 10 0.02 4 20 21 <0.2 22 160 86 12 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

18/08/08 20161 <5 0.1 12 <1 16 0.04 4 36 16 0.5 27 140 90 21 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

4/11/08 28479 <5 0.2 9 <1 10 <0.02 3 27 15 2.9 55 260 180 26 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

16/06/10 10-3315-1 <5 0.2 7 <1 8 <0.02 2 20 14 4.8 48 270 110 29 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

20/07/11 11-4864-1 <5 <0.1 5 <1 4 <0.02 2 9 10 <0.2 40 110 33 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

15/10/12 12-7335-2 <5 0.2 12 <1 5 - 2 16 28 <0.2 2.1 3.2 1 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000 <1600

17/02/06 4531 <5 <0.1 24 - 27 0.08 12 63 56 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

19/10/06 24067 <5 <0.1 9 - 14 0.03 4 42 19 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

29/03/07 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

28/06/07 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

27/09/07 22779 <5 <0.1 21 - 22 0.73 5 69 60 <0.2 <0.2 16 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

20/12/07 32046 <5 <0.1 11 - 15 0.04 4 36 43 <0.2 2.1 36 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

8/04/08 10110 <5 <0.1 9 - 11 0.02 3 23 27 <0.2 26 180 94 15 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

18/08/08 20163 <5 <0.1 21 <1 27 0.06 7 96 79 0.6 34 200 130 31 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

4/11/08 28481 <5 0.5 21 <1 26 0.04 8 67 70 2.6 58 350 230 40 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

16/06/10 10-3315-3 <5 0.5 15 <1 23 0.02 6 66 73 3.7 23 130 43 15 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

20/07/11 11-4864-3 <5 <0.1 23 <1 38 <0.02 9 110 96 <0.2 37 180 86 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

Metals TPH PAH

mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg

HR-S-33

ISQG-Low1

ISQG-High1

HR-S-2

HR-S-1


Table 4

Summary of Historical Helena River Sediment Analytical Results


Ars

en

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

rom

ium

He

xava

len

tC

hro

miu

m

Co

pp

er

Me

rcu

ry

Nic

kel

Lead

Zin

c

C6

-9

C1

0-1

4

C1

5-2

8

C2

9-3

6

C>3

6

Nap

hth

ale

ne

Ace

nap

hth

en

e

Ace

nap

hth

ale

ne

Flu

ore

ne

Ph

en

anth

ren

e

An

thra

cen

e

Flu

ora

nth

en

e

Pyr

en

e

Be

nzo

[a]a

nth

race

ne

Ch

ryse

ne

Be

nzo

[a]p

yre

ne

Dib

en

z[a,

h]a

nth

race

ne

Low

Mo

l.W

t.P

AH

s

Hig

hM

ol.

Wt.

PA

Hs

Tota

lPA

H


20 1.5 80 NV 65 0.15 21 50 200 NV NV NV NV NV 160 16 44 19 240 85 600 665 261 384 430 63 552 1700 4000

70 10 370 NV 270 1 52 220 410 NV NV NV NV NV 2100 500 640 540 1500 1100 5100 2600 1600 2800 1600 260 3160 9600 45000

Sample ID2

Date ARL ID

Metals TPH PAH

mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg

ISQG-Low1

ISQG-High1

15/10/12 12-7335-3 <5 0.5 7 <1 12 - 4 21 52 <0.2 8.2 6.2 2.3 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000 <1600

17/02/06 4533 9 <0.1 23 - 23 0.08 10 45 82 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

19/10/06 24069 8 <0.1 9 - 12 0.03 4 31 28 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

29/03/07 7486 <5 <0.1 2 - 2 <0.02 1 5 10 <0.2 0.4 6.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

28/06/07 15678 <5 <0.1 14 - 16 0.05 6 44 43 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

27/09/07 22781 <5 <0.1 20 - 15 0.06 11 28 29 <0.2 6.8 14 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

20/12/07 32048 <5 0.1 6 - 9 0.02 2 27 34 <0.2 2.3 33 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

8/04/08 10112 6 <0.1 4 - 13 0.04 3 27 7 <0.2 14 120 70 15 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

18/08/08 20165 <5 <0.1 29 <1 41 0.06 12 79 150 0.9 25 200 150 37 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

4/11/08 28483 <5 1.1 23 <1 30 0.06 10 58 130 2.7 76 470 330 58 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

16/06/10 10-3315-5 9 1 22 <1 33 0.02 12 72 320 17 99 660 390 94 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

20/07/11 11-4864-5 <5 <0.1 5 <1 10 <0.02 2 16 20 <0.2 13 34 12 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

15/10/12 12-7335-4 <5 0.2 5 <1 6 - 2 15 28 <0.2 3 7.5 4.5 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000 <1600

17/02/06 4532 5 0.1 25 - 31 0.1 12 54 120 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

19/10/06 24068 6 <0.1 10 - 18 0.04 7 42 49 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

29/03/07 7485 <5 <0.1 3 - 3 <0.02 2 6 13 <0.2 0.6 4.7 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

28/06/07 15677 <5 <0.1 13 - 12 0.02 6 26 24 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

27/09/07 22780 <5 <0.1 14 - 12 <0.02 5 42 33 <0.2 3.4 8.2 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

20/12/07 32047 <5 0.1 9 - 13 0.04 3 35 54 <0.2 2.1 28 <0.4 - <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

8/04/08 10111 <5 <0.1 9 - 13 <0.02 4 26 32 <0.2 30 210 120 19 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

18/08/08 20164 <5 <0.1 22 <1 30 0.06 7 99 67 0.8 32 190 120 31 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

4/11/08 28482 <5 0.1 8 <1 11 <0.02 3 26 35 2.7 78 410 220 38 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

16/06/10 10-3315-4 <5 0.6 17 <1 29 <0.02 6 66 60 8.9 130 810 360 62 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

20/07/11 11-4864-4 6 <0.1 13 <1 21 <0.02 7 39 32 <0.2 51 280 87 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <500 <1000 <1500

15/10/12 12-7335-5 <5 0.9 14 <1 24 - 6 46 93 <0.2 24 16 3.8 <0.4 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <200 <200 <600 <1000 <1600


VOC = Volatile Organic Compounds

TPH = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 2 In order of upstream (east) to downstream (west)

µg/kg = micrograms per kilogram 3 No river water samples were collected in March and June 2007 as access to this section was not available.

mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram No VOCs were detected in any sample

NV = 'No value' established for contaminant Values that equal or exceed the guidelines are bold and underlined or shaded where applicable.

ID = Identification


HR-S-5

HR-S-4



Table 5

Stormwater Outlet Analytical Results, October 2012


Ars

en

ic

An

tim

on

y

Bar

ium

Cad

miu

m

Ch

rom

ium

He

xava

len

tC

hro

miu

m

Co

pp

er

Man

gan

ese

Nic

kel

Lead

Tin

Zin

c

C6

-9

C1

0-1

4

C1

5-2

8

C2

9-3

6

WATER ASSESSMENT CRITERIA


13 NV NV 0.2 NV 1 1.4 1900 11 3.4 NV 8 NV NV NV NV


70 NV 7,000 20 500 500 20,000 5,000 200 100 NV 30,000 NV NV NV NV

Sample ID Date ARL ID

Western Stormwater Outlet 15-Oct-12 12-7335-13 <1 <1 40 <0.1 <1 <2 2 <10 <1 <1 <10 230 <20 <20 <40 <40

Passive Drain Outlet 17-Oct-12 12-7435-3 <1 <1 60 <0.1 <1 <2 <1 30 <1 <1 <10 <5 <20 <20 <40 <40





ID = Identification




the DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water




Metals TPH

µg/L µg/L


Table 5

Stormwater Outlet Analytical Results, October 2012


WATER ASSESSMENT CRITERIA



Sample ID Date ARL ID

Western Stormwater Outlet 15-Oct-12 12-7335-13

Passive Drain Outlet 17-Oct-12 12-7435-3

Nap

hth

ale

ne

2-m

eth

yln

aph

thal

en

e

Ace

nap

hth

yle

ne

Ace

nap

hth

en

e

Flu

ore

ne

Ph

en

anth

ren

e

An

thra

cen

e

Flu

ora

nth

en

e

Pyr

en

e

Be

nzo

[a]a

nth

race

ne

Ch

ryse

ne

Be

nzo

[b]f

luo

ran

the

ne

Be

nzo

[k]f

luo

ran

the

ne

Be

nzo

[a]p

yre

ne

Ind

en

o[1

,2,3

-c,d

]pyr

en

e

Dib

en

z[a,

h]a

nth

race

ne

Be

nzo

[g,h

,I]p

ery

len

e

16 NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV

NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV NV 0.01 NV NV NV

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1





ID = Identification




the DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water




PAH

µg/L


FIGURES

MR

A201

2-00

3_PM

ON

Hel

ena

Riv

er_0

01_n

b-f0

1.dg

nP

INP

OIN

T C

AR

TOG

RA

PH

ICS

(08

) 956

2 71

36

Figure 1

Job: MRA2012-003

0 250 500 750 1000m

SCALE 1 : 25 000 at A4 (MGA)

N

Metropolitan Redevelopment AuthorityHELENA RIVER SURFACE WATER AND SEDIMENT SAMPLING REPORTOCTOBER 2012 RESULTS

Drawn: N. Buckingham Date: 17 Dec 2012

SITELOCATION

REGIONAL LOCATION

MRA2012-003_PMON Helena River_001_nb-f02.dgnPINPOINT CARTOGRAPHICS (08) 9562 7136

N

Date: 17 Dec 2012

Figure 2

Job: MRA2012-003

0 50 200m100 150

SCALE 1 : 4 500 at A3 (MGA)

Drawn: N. Buckingham

Metropolitan Redevelopment AuthorityHELENA RIVER SURFACE WATER AND SEDIMENT SAMPLING REPORTOCTOBER 2012 RESULTS

SOURCE: Coffey Environments, Rpt No. EP2011-182, 22 Nov 2011.

SURFACE WATER, SEDIMENT ANDSTORMWATER OUTLET SAMPLE LOCATIONS

APPENDIX A

Survey Plan of Surface Water and Sediment SamplingLocations

HR

5E

405

385

.3N

6470

747

.9

HR

1E

405

956

.6N

6470

394

.6

HR

2E

406

160

.7N

6470

206

.0

HR

3E

405

798

.1N

6470

410

.1

HR

4E

405

235

.9N

6470

723

.3

CENTENNIALPLACE

RO

AD

PLA

TIN

GSHO

PTE

RRACE

MAINGATE

WALLSEND

ROAD

WA

TE

RT

AN

KW

AY

6

11

9

13

4

51

5

73

5

73

773

8

73

9

74

0

74

4

74

5

74

6

75

5

76

2

80

4

80

6

80

7

80

8

50

04

78

7

212

16

17

50

0

50

1

50

2

10

80

4

SW

AN

L

05

01

00

15

0

PL

EA

SE

NO

TE

SA

MP

LE

AR

EA

S H

AV

E B

EE

N L

OC

AT

ED

TO

AN

AC

CU

RA

CY

OF

0.5

m, IN

MG

A5

0

Scale

MG

A5

0D

atu

m

Su

rve

yo

r2

0.0

7.2

01

1S

urv

eye

dB

JR

AIn

itia

l Is

su

eO

VP

20

/07

/11

AL

L D

IST

AN

CE

S A

RE

IN

ME

TR

ES

SC

AL

E

1 :

30

00

@ A

3T

he

bo

un

da

rie

s s

ho

wn

on

th

is p

lan

we

re n

ot

re-e

sta

blish

ed

as p

art

of

this

su

rve

y,

the

refo

re t

his

pla

n

do

es n

ot

gu

ara

nte

e t

he

ir a

ccu

rac

y.

Exi

stin

g e

ase

me

nts

, e

nc

um

bra

nce

s o

r in

tere

sts

are

no

t d

ep

icte

d a

nd

a

title

se

arc

h i

s r

eco

mm

en

de

d t

o o

bta

in t

his

in

form

atio

n.

Re

-esta

blish

me

nt

of

the

ca

da

str

al

bo

un

da

rie

s

is r

eco

mm

en

de

d f

or

an

y p

rop

ose

d w

ork

s o

n o

r n

ea

r e

xis

tin

g b

ou

nd

ari

es.

1:3

00

0

SJA

92

49

8M

P-6

03

A

Sa

mp

le A

rea

Lo

ca

tion

s

MID

LA

ND

RE

DE

VE

LO

PM

EN

T A

UT

HO

RIT

Y

Descri

pti

on

Dra

wn

Date

Ch

ec

ke

dR

ev

.

Le

ve

l 1

2 S

abre

Cre

s.

Ja

nda

ko

t

W.A

. 6

16

4

PO

Bo

x 3

52

6

Succ

ess

WA

69

64

Aus

tra

lia

Te

l: (

08

) 6

43

6 1

59

9

Fa

x:

(08

) 6

43

6 1

50

0

info

@m

ap

su

rve

y.c

om

.au

ww

w.m

ap

surv

ey.c

om

.au

Mc

Mu

llen

No

lan

an

d

Pa

rtn

ers

Surv

eyo

rs P

ty L

td

AB

N 9

0 0

09

36

3 3

11

Qu

ality

Ass

ure

d

Co

mp

any

The c

onte

nts

of

this

pla

n a

re c

urr

ent

an

d c

orr

ect

as o

f th

e d

ate

sta

ted

within

th

ere

vis

ion p

anel. A

ll consultants

and p

ers

on

sw

ishin

g t

o u

tilis

e t

his

data

should

satisfy

them

selv

es o

f th

e p

lans c

urr

ency b

y c

onta

ctin

gM

cM

ulle

n N

ola

n a

nd

Part

ners

Surv

eyo

rs

FIL

ES

Pre

cal:

Su

rvey -

Pla

n N

o:

92

498

IU -

924

98

mp

-60

3a

Job

No.-

Pla

n/R

ev.

A 3 O R I G I N A L

McMULLENNOLAN

www.m

apsurvey.com.au

La

nd

Su

rve

y

Hyd

rog

rap

hic

Su

rve

y 3

D L

ase

r S

ca

nn

ing

3

D V

isu

ali

sa

tio

n

M

ap

pin

g

So

lid

Te

rra

in M

od

els

C

art

og

rap

hic

s

GIS

APPENDIX B

October 2012 Field Notes

APPENDIX C

Chain of Custody Documentation and Laboratory Certificates

LABORATORY REPORT

Job Number: 12-7335

Revision: 00

ADDRESS: Aurora Environmental Date: 2 November 2012

149-151 Kensington St

East Perth WA 6004

ATTENTION: Nicole Buckingham

DATE RECEIVED: 16/10/2012

YOUR REFERENCE: MRA/2012/003

PURCHASE ORDER: N/A

APPROVALS:

REPORT COMMENTS:

Samples are analysed on an as received basis unless otherwise noted.

Metals in soils analysis was conducted on a dry weight basis.

METHOD REFERENCES:

ARL No. 006 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Soil

ARL No. 010 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) in Soil

ARL No. 401 Metals in Soil and Sediment by ICPOES

ARL No. 051 Hexavalent Chromium in Soil

ARL No. 005 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Water

ARL No. 009 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) in Water

ARL No. 040 Arsenic by Hydride Atomic Absorption

ARL No. 402/403 Metals in Water by ICPOES/MS

ARL No. 316 Hexavalent Chromium in Water by Discrete Analyser

Page 1 of 6

LABORATORY REPORT

Aurora Environmental

ARL Job No: 12-7335 Revision: 00 Date: 2 November 2012

PAH in Soil

Sample No: LOR UNITS 12-7335-1 12-7335-2 12-7335-3 12-7335-4 12-7335-5

Sample Description: HR-S-2 HR-S-1 HR-S-3 HR-S-5 HR-S-4

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

2-Methylnaphthalene 0.1 mg/kg <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Benz(a)anthracene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Chrysene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Benzo(ghi)perylene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

2-Fluoro-1,1'-Biphenyl (SS) % 81 [NT] [NT] [NT] [NT]

p-Terphenyl-d14 (SS) % 70 [NT] [NT] [NT] [NT]

PAH in Soil

Sample No: LOR UNITS 12-7335-6

Sample Description: QC2

Naphthalene 0.1 mg/kg <0.1

2-Methylnaphthalene 0.1 mg/kg <0.1

Acenaphthylene 0.1 mg/kg <0.1

Acenaphthene 0.1 mg/kg <0.1

Fluorene 0.1 mg/kg <0.1

Phenanthrene 0.1 mg/kg <0.1

Anthracene 0.1 mg/kg <0.1

Fluoranthene 0.1 mg/kg <0.1

Pyrene 0.1 mg/kg <0.1

Benz(a)anthracene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2

Chrysene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2

Benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2

Benzo(ghi)perylene 0.2 mg/kg <0.2

2-Fluoro-1,1'-Biphenyl (SS) % 65

p-Terphenyl-d14 (SS) % 110

Page 2 of 6

LABORATORY REPORT



TPH in Soil/Sediment



C6-9 0.2 mg/kg <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

C10-14 0.2 mg/kg 34 2.1 8.2 3.0 24

C15-28 0.4 mg/kg 24 3.2 6.2 7.5 16

C29-36 0.4 mg/kg 8.1 1.0 2.3 4.5 3.8

C>36 0.4 mg/kg <0.4 <0.4 <0.4 <0.4 <0.4

TPH in Soil/Sediment



C6-9 0.2 mg/kg <0.2

C10-14 0.2 mg/kg 6.4

C15-28 0.4 mg/kg 6.3

C29-36 0.4 mg/kg 1.9

C>36 0.4 mg/kg <0.4

Metals in Soil and

Sediment



Arsenic 5 mg/kg <5 <5 <5 <5 <5

Cadmium 0.1 mg/kg <0.1 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.9

Chromium 1 mg/kg 6 12 7 5 14

Copper 1 mg/kg 4 5 12 6 24

Nickel 1 mg/kg 2 2 4 2 6

Lead 1 mg/kg 7 16 21 15 46

Zinc 1 mg/kg 12 28 52 28 93

Barium 1 mg/kg 26 18 37 18 74

Chromium (VI) 1 mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

Manganese 1 mg/kg 28 34 130 37 130

Antimony 2 mg/kg <2 <2 <2 <2 <2

Tin 1 mg/kg <1 <1 <1 7 4

Metals in Soil and

Sediment



Arsenic 5 mg/kg <5

Cadmium 0.1 mg/kg 0.1

Chromium 1 mg/kg 8

Copper 1 mg/kg 5

Nickel 1 mg/kg 3

Lead 1 mg/kg 12

Zinc 1 mg/kg 13

Barium 1 mg/kg 22

Chromium (VI) 1 mg/kg <1

Manganese 1 mg/kg 39

Antimony 2 mg/kg <2

Tin 1 mg/kg <1

Page 3 of 6

LABORATORY REPORT



PAH in Water


Sample Description: HR-W-2 HR-W-1 HR-W-3 HR-W-5 HR-W-4

Naphthalene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

2-Methylnaphthalene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Acenaphthylene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Acenaphthene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluorene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Phenanthrene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Anthracene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluoranthene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Pyrene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benz(a)anthracene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Chrysene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)pyrene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(ghi)perylene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

2-Fluoro-1,1'-Biphenyl (SS) % [NT] [NT] [NT] 64 [NT]

p-Terphenyl-d14 (SS) % [NT] [NT] [NT] 84 [NT]

PAH in Water

Sample No: LOR UNITS 12-7335-12 12-7335-13

Sample Description: QC1 Western

Stormwater

Outlet

Naphthalene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

2-Methylnaphthalene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Acenaphthylene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Acenaphthene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Fluorene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Phenanthrene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Anthracene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Fluoranthene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Pyrene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Benz(a)anthracene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Chrysene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)pyrene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(ghi)perylene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1

Page 4 of 6

LABORATORY REPORT



TPH in Water



C6-9 0.02 mg/L <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02

C10-14 0.02 mg/L <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02

C15-28 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04

C29-36 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04

C>36 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04

TPH in Water



Stormwater

Outlet

C6-9 0.02 mg/L <0.02 <0.02

C10-14 0.02 mg/L <0.02 <0.02

C15-28 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04

C29-36 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04

C>36 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04

Metals in Water



Arsenic - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Barium - Dissolved 0.01 mg/L 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04

Cadmium - Dissolved 0.0001 mg/L <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001

Chromium - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Chromium (VI) 0.002 mg/L <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002

Copper - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Manganese - Dissolved 0.01 mg/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Nickel - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Lead - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Antimony - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Tin - Dissolved 0.01 mg/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Zinc - Dissolved 0.005 mg/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005

Metals in Water



Stormwater

Outlet

Arsenic - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001

Barium - Dissolved 0.01 mg/L 0.04 0.04

Cadmium - Dissolved 0.0001 mg/L <0.0001 <0.0001

Chromium - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L 0.001 <0.001

Chromium (VI) 0.002 mg/L <0.002 <0.002

Copper - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 0.002

Manganese - Dissolved 0.01 mg/L <0.01 <0.01

Nickel - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001

Lead - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001

Antimony - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001

Page 5 of 6

LABORATORY REPORT



Metals in Water



Stormwater

Outlet

Tin - Dissolved 0.01 mg/L <0.01 <0.01

Zinc - Dissolved 0.005 mg/L <0.005 0.23

Result Definitions


[NT] Not Tested

[ND] Not Detected at indicated Limit of Reporting

[NR] Analysis Not Requested

(SS) Surrogate Standard Compound

Page 6 of 6

LABORATORY REPORT

Job Number: 12-7435

Revision: 00

ADDRESS: Aurora Environmental Date: 2 November 2012

149-151 Kensington St

East Perth WA 6004

ATTENTION: Nicole Buckingham

DATE RECEIVED: 18/10/2012

YOUR REFERENCE: MRA/2012/003

PURCHASE ORDER:

APPROVALS:

REPORT COMMENTS:

Samples are analysed on an as received basis unless otherwise noted.

METHOD REFERENCES:

ARL No. 005 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Water

ARL No. 009 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) in Water

ARL No. 040 Arsenic by Hydride Atomic Absorption

ARL No. 402/403 Metals in Water by ICPOES/MS

ARL No. 316 Hexavalent Chromium in Water by Discrete Analyser

Page 1 of 4

LABORATORY REPORT



PAH in Water


Sample Description: QC7 Passive Drain

Outlet

ATA-102 ATA-110 ATA-109

Naphthalene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1




Fluorene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1


Anthracene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1


Pyrene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1


Chrysene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1







2-Fluoro-1,1'-Biphenyl (SS) % 93 [NT] [NT] [NT] 72

p-Terphenyl-d14 (SS) % 104 [NT] [NT] [NT] 75

PAH in Water


Sample Description: ATA-100 ATA-106 ATA-108 QC8 QC9

Naphthalene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1




Fluorene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1


Anthracene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1


Pyrene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1


Chrysene 0.1 µg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1







2-Fluoro-1,1'-Biphenyl (SS) % [NT] [NT] [NT] [NT] 69

p-Terphenyl-d14 (SS) % [NT] [NT] [NT] [NT] 65

Page 2 of 4

LABORATORY REPORT



TPH in Water


Sample Description: QC6 QC7 Passive Drain

Outlet

ATA-85-LSA-1 ATA-102

C6-9 0.02 mg/L <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02

C10-14 0.02 mg/L <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02

C15-28 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04

C29-36 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04

C>36 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04

TPH in Water


Sample Description: ATA-110 ATA-109 ATA-100 ATA-106 ATA-108

C6-9 0.02 mg/L <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02

C10-14 0.02 mg/L <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02

C15-28 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04

C29-36 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04

C>36 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04

TPH in Water


Sample Description: QC8 QC9

C6-9 0.02 mg/L <0.02 <0.02

C10-14 0.02 mg/L <0.02 <0.02

C15-28 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04

C29-36 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04

C>36 0.04 mg/L <0.04 <0.04

Metals in Water


Sample Description: QC7 Passive Drain

Outlet

ATA-102 ATA-110 ATA-109

Arsenic - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Barium - Dissolved 0.01 mg/L <0.01 0.06 <0.01 0.02 0.02



Chromium (VI) 0.002 mg/L <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002


Manganese - Dissolved 0.01 mg/L <0.01 0.03 0.01 <0.01 0.06

Nickel - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001





Page 3 of 4

LABORATORY REPORT



Metals in Water


Sample Description: ATA-100 ATA-106 ATA-108 QC8 QC9

Arsenic - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Barium - Dissolved 0.01 mg/L 0.05 0.05 0.09 0.02 0.10



Chromium (VI) 0.002 mg/L <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002


Manganese - Dissolved 0.01 mg/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.06 <0.01

Nickel - Dissolved 0.001 mg/L 0.002 <0.001 0.004 0.001 0.004





Result Definitions


[NT] Not Tested

[ND] Not Detected at indicated Limit of Reporting

[NR] Analysis Not Requested

(SS) Surrogate Standard Compound

Page 4 of 4

Australian Government____________________________________________National Measurement Institute

REPORT OF ANALYSISPage: 1 of 7

Report No. RN940970Client : ANALYTICAL REFERENCE LAB PTY LTD Job No. : ANAL07/121018

46-48 BANKSIA ROAD Quote No. : QT-01898 WELSHPOOL WA 6106 Order No. : 15416

Date Sampled : Date Received : 22-OCT-2012

Attention : KIM ROGERS Sampled By : CLIENTProject Name : Your Client Services Manager : BRIAN WOODWARD Phone : (02) 94490151

Lab Reg No. Sample Ref Sample DescriptionW12/016095 127335-1 SOIL HR-S-2W12/016096 127335-2 SOIL HR-S-1W12/016097 127335-3 SOIL HR-S-3W12/016098 127335-4 SOIL HR-S-5

Lab Reg No. W12/016095 W12/016096 W12/016097 W12/016098Sample Reference 127335-1 127335-2 127335-3 127335-4

Units MethodMonocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Benzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Toluene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Ethylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 m & p-Xylenes mg/kg <2 <2 <2 <2 NGCMS_1120 o-Xylene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Styrene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Isopropylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 n-Propylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 tert-Butylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 sec-Butylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 4-Isopropyltoluene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 n-Butylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Halogenated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Chloromethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Vinyl chloride mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromomethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Chloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trichlorofluoromethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dichloromethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloroethene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 2,2-Dichloropropane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromochloromethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,1-Trichloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120

105 Delhi Road, North Ryde NSW 2113 Tel: +61 2 9449 0111 Fax: +61 2 9449 1653 www.measurement.gov.au_______________________________________________________________________________________

N a t i o n a l M e a s u r e m e n t I n s t i t u t e


Report No. RN940970Lab Reg No. W12/016095 W12/016096 W12/016097 W12/016098Sample Reference 127335-1 127335-2 127335-3 127335-4

Units MethodHalogenated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Carbon tetrachloride mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloropropene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trichloroethene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichloropropane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dibromomethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,2-Trichloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Tetrachloroethene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3-Dichloropropane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dibromoethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Hexachlorobutadiene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Halogenated Aromatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Chlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 2-Chlorotoluene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 4-Chlorotoluene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3-Dichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,4-Dichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3,4-Tetrachlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trihalomethanes NMI 1120 Screen Chloroform mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromodichloromethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dibromochloromethane mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromoform mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons(volatile) NMI 1120 Screen Naphthalene mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Oxygenated Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Acetone mg/kg <5 <5 <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 2-Butanone (MEK) mg/kg <5 <5 <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 2-Hexanone (MBK) mg/kg <5 <5 <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) mg/kg <5 <5 <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) mg/kg <5 <5 <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 Vinylacetate mg/kg <5 <5 <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 Other Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Carbon disulfide mg/kg <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120





Units MethodOther Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Surrogate: DBFM %REC 109 100 112 107 NGCMS_1120 Surrogate: TOL-D8 %REC 94 94 93 93 NGCMS_1120 Surrogate: 4-BFB %REC 102 109 95 100 NGCMS_1120 Dates Date extracted 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 Date analysed 24-OCT-2012 24-OCT-2012 24-OCT-2012 24-OCT-2012

Luke Baker, AnalystOrganics - NSWAccreditation No. 198

31-OCT-2012


Units MethodTrace Elements Total Solids % 38.4 73.2 37.2 68.9 NT2_49

Nasir Shikdar, AnalystInorganics - NSWAccreditation No. 198

31-OCT-2012








Lab Reg No. Sample Ref Sample DescriptionW12/016099 127335-5 SOIL HR-S-4W12/016100 127335-6 SOIL QC 2

Lab Reg No. W12/016099 W12/016100Sample Reference 127335-5 127335-6

Units MethodMonocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Benzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Toluene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Ethylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 m & p-Xylenes mg/kg <2 <2 NGCMS_1120 o-Xylene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Styrene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Isopropylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 n-Propylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 tert-Butylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 sec-Butylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 4-Isopropyltoluene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 n-Butylbenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Halogenated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Chloromethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Vinyl chloride mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromomethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Chloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trichlorofluoromethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dichloromethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloroethene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 2,2-Dichloropropane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromochloromethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,1-Trichloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Carbon tetrachloride mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloropropene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120




Report No. RN940970Lab Reg No. W12/016099 W12/016100Sample Reference 127335-5 127335-6

Units MethodHalogenated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen 1,2-Dichloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trichloroethene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichloropropane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dibromomethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,2-Trichloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Tetrachloroethene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3-Dichloropropane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dibromoethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Hexachlorobutadiene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Halogenated Aromatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Chlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 2-Chlorotoluene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 4-Chlorotoluene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3-Dichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,4-Dichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3,4-Tetrachlorobenzene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trihalomethanes NMI 1120 Screen Chloroform mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromodichloromethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dibromochloromethane mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromoform mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons(volatile) NMI 1120 Screen Naphthalene mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Oxygenated Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Acetone mg/kg <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 2-Butanone (MEK) mg/kg <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 2-Hexanone (MBK) mg/kg <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) mg/kg <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) mg/kg <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 Vinylacetate mg/kg <5 <5 NGCMS_1120 Other Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Carbon disulfide mg/kg <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Surrogate: DBFM %REC 98 101 NGCMS_1120




Report No. RN940970Lab Reg No. W12/016099 W12/016100Sample Reference 127335-5 127335-6

Units MethodOther Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Surrogate: TOL-D8 %REC 93 93 NGCMS_1120 Surrogate: 4-BFB %REC 106 112 NGCMS_1120 Dates Date extracted 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 Date analysed 24-OCT-2012 24-OCT-2012


31-OCT-2012

Lab Reg No. W12/016099 W12/016100Sample Reference 127335-5 127335-6

Units MethodTrace Elements Total Solids % 67.9 65.9 NT2_49

Nasir Shikdar, AnalystInorganics - NSWAccreditation No. 198

31-OCT-2012

All results are expressed on a dry weight basis.

Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025.This report shall not be reproduced except in full.Results relate only to the sample(s) tested.




Report No. RN940970

This Report supersedes reports: RN939734 RN940933



Australian Government____________________________________________National Measurement Institute






Lab Reg No. Sample Ref Sample DescriptionW12/016101 127335-7 WATER HR-W-2W12/016102 127335-8 WATER HR-W-1W12/016103 127335-9 WATER HR-W-3W12/016104 127335-10 WATER HR-W-5


Units MethodMonocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Benzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Toluene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Ethylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 m & p-Xylenes ug/L <2 <2 <2 <2 NGCMS_1120 o-Xylene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Styrene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Isopropylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 n-Propylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 tert-Butylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 sec-Butylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 4-Isopropyltoluene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 n-Butylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Halogenated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Chloromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Vinyl chloride ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromomethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Chloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trichlorofluoromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dichloromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloroethene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 2,2-Dichloropropane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromochloromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120





Units MethodHalogenated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Carbon tetrachloride ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloropropene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trichloroethene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichloropropane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dibromomethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Tetrachloroethene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3-Dichloropropane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dibromoethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Halogenated Aromatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Chlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 2-Chlorotoluene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 4-Chlorotoluene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3,4-Tetrachlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trihalomethanes NMI 1120 Screen Chloroform ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromodichloromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dibromochloromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromoform ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons(volatile) NMI 1120 Screen Naphthalene ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Oxygenated Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Acetone ug/L <10 <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 Vinylacetate ug/L <10 <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 2-Butanone (MEK) ug/L <10 <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) ug/L <10 <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 2-Hexanone (MBK) ug/L <10 <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ug/L <10 <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 Other Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Carbon disulfide ug/L <1 <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120





Units MethodOther Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Surrogate: DBFM %REC 108 121 110 123 NGCMS_1120 Surrogate: TOL-D8 %REC 107 110 107 109 NGCMS_1120 Surrogate: 4-BFB %REC 108 99 109 107 NGCMS_1120 Dates Date extracted 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 Date analysed 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012


31-OCT-2012








Lab Reg No. Sample Ref Sample DescriptionW12/016105 127335-11 WATER HR-W-4W12/016106 127335-12 WATER QC 1W12/016107 127335-13 WATER WESTERN STORM OUTLET

Lab Reg No. W12/016105 W12/016106 W12/016107Sample Reference 127335-11 127335-12 127335-13

Units MethodMonocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Benzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Toluene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Ethylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 m & p-Xylenes ug/L <2 <2 <2 NGCMS_1120 o-Xylene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Styrene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Isopropylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 n-Propylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 tert-Butylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 sec-Butylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 4-Isopropyltoluene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 n-Butylbenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Halogenated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Chloromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Vinyl chloride ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromomethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Chloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trichlorofluoromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dichloromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1-Dichloroethene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 2,2-Dichloropropane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromochloromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Carbon tetrachloride ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120




Report No. RN940973Lab Reg No. W12/016105 W12/016106 W12/016107Sample Reference 127335-11 127335-12 127335-13

Units MethodHalogenated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen 1,1-Dichloropropene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trichloroethene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichloropropane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dibromomethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Tetrachloroethene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3-Dichloropropane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dibromoethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Halogenated Aromatic Hydrocarbons NMI 1120 Screen Chlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 2-Chlorotoluene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 4-Chlorotoluene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 1,2,3,4-Tetrachlorobenzene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Trihalomethanes NMI 1120 Screen Chloroform ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromodichloromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Dibromochloromethane ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Bromoform ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons(volatile) NMI 1120 Screen Naphthalene ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120 Oxygenated Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Acetone ug/L <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 Vinylacetate ug/L <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 2-Butanone (MEK) ug/L <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) ug/L <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 2-Hexanone (MBK) ug/L <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ug/L <10 <10 <10 NGCMS_1120 Other Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Carbon disulfide ug/L <1 <1 <1 NGCMS_1120




Report No. RN940973Lab Reg No. W12/016105 W12/016106 W12/016107Sample Reference 127335-11 127335-12 127335-13

Units MethodOther Compounds NMI 1120 Screen Surrogate: DBFM %REC 111 123 123 NGCMS_1120 Surrogate: TOL-D8 %REC 107 111 105 NGCMS_1120 Surrogate: 4-BFB %REC 107 101 108 NGCMS_1120 Dates Date extracted 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 Date analysed 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012 23-OCT-2012


31-OCT-2012

Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025.This report shall not be reproduced except in full.Results relate only to the sample(s) tested.

This Report supersedes reports: RN940934



APPENDIX D

Laboratory Quality Control Reports

Quality Control ReportJob Number: 12-7335

Date: 6/11/2012

This report must not be reproduced except in full without prior written consent.

This Quality Control Report is issued in accordance with Section 18 of the ARL Quality Management Manual. All QC

parameters are contained within the relevant ARL Method as indicated by the method reference, either on this report

or the Laboratory Report.

Acceptance of Holding Times, Duplicate RPD, Spike, LCS and CRM Recoveries are determined at the time of

analysis by the Signatory indicated on the Laboratory Report.

DEFINITIONS

Duplicate Analysis

A sample, chosen randomly by the analyst at the time of sample preparation, analysed in duplicate.

RPD

Relative Percent Difference is the absolute difference between the sample and a duplicate analysis compared to the

average of the two analytical results. Acceptance Limits can be exceeded by matrix interference or when the result is

less than 5 times the LOR.

Matrix Spike

An additional portion of sample to which known amounts of the target analytes are added before sample preparation.

Acceptance Limits can be exceeded by matrix interference or when the target analytes are present in the sample.

Certified Reference Material (CRM)

A commercially available certified solution/mixture of the target analyte of known concentration.

Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)

An in-house certified solution/mixture of the target analyte of known concentration.

Page 1 of 5


Date: 6/11/2012

PAH in SoilARL006

Holding Time Criteria Date

Extracted 18/10/2012

Analysed 23/10/2012

Duplicate Analysis (12-7333-A-5) RPD (%) Limits (%)

Naphthalene 0 25

2-Methylnaphthalene 0 25

Acenaphthylene 0 25

Acenaphthene 0 25

Fluorene 0 25

Phenanthrene 0 25

Anthracene 0 25

Fluoranthene 0 25

Pyrene 0 25

Benz(a)anthracene 0 25

Chrysene 0 25

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0 25

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0 25

Benzo(a)pyrene 0 25

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0 25

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0 25

Benzo(ghi)perylene 0 25

Duplicate Analysis (12-7335-6) RPD (%) Limits (%)

Naphthalene 0 25

2-Methylnaphthalene 0 25

Acenaphthylene 0 25

Acenaphthene 0 25

Fluorene 0 25

Phenanthrene 0 25

Anthracene 0 25

Fluoranthene 0 25

Pyrene 0 25

Benz(a)anthracene 0 25

Chrysene 0 25

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0 25

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0 25

Benzo(a)pyrene 0 25

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0 25

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0 25

Benzo(ghi)perylene 0 25

Matrix Spike (12-7333-A-5) Recovery (%) Limits (%)

Naphthalene 92 60 - 120

Page 2 of 5


Date: 6/11/2012

Matrix Spike (12-7333-A-5) Recovery (%) Limits (%)

Acenaphthene 93 60 - 120

Phenanthrene 96 60 - 120

Pyrene 98 60 - 120

Chrysene 104 60 - 120

Benzo(a)pyrene 81 60 - 120

Matrix Spike (12-7335-6) Recovery (%) Limits (%)




Pyrene 81 60 - 120

Chrysene 97 60 - 120


TPH in Soil/SedimentARL010



Analysed 22/10/2012


C6-9 0 25

C10-14 91 25

C15-28 69 25

C29-36 83 25

C>36 0 25


C15-28 84 60 - 120

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons - Matrix Spike

A known quantity of commercially available Diesel Fuel is spiked into the sample(s) indicated. Due to the nature of

petroleum hydrocarbons, the matrix spike recovery is reported in the TPH C15-28 Range.

Page 3 of 5


Date: 6/11/2012

Certified Reference Material Recovery (%) Limits (%)

Chromium (VI) 106 80 - 120

Laboratory Control Sample Recovery (%) Limits (%)

Arsenic 98 80 - 120

Cadmium 94 80 - 120

Chromium 119 80 - 120

Copper 89 80 - 120

Nickel 90 80 - 120

Lead 87 80 - 120

Zinc 106 80 - 120

Manganese 95 80 - 120


Antimony 98 80 - 120

Tin 93 80 - 120

Barium 97 80 - 120

PAH in WaterARL005



Analysed 23/10/2012





Pyrene 109 60 - 120

Chrysene 104 60 - 120


TPH in WaterARL009



Analysed 25/10/2012


C15-28 106 60 - 120




Page 4 of 5

Metals in Soil

Extracted 17/10/2012 (CrVI) 23/10/2012(Metals)Analysed 17/10/2012 (CrVI) 25/10/2012(Metals)



Date: 6/11/2012

Metals in Water


Analysed 17/10/2012


Chromium (VI) 0 25


Chromium (VI) 117 60 - 120


Chromium (VI) 106 80 - 120

Arsenic - Dissolved 103 80 - 120

Barium - Dissolved 100 80 - 120

Cadmium - Dissolved 119 80 - 120

Chromium - Dissolved 87 80 - 120

Copper - Dissolved 106 80 - 120

Manganese - Dissolved 102 80 - 120

Nickel - Dissolved 118 80 - 120

Lead - Dissolved 107 80 - 120

Zinc - Dissolved 96 80 - 120

Antimony - Dissolved 97 80 - 120

Tin - Dissolved 90 80 - 120

Page 5 of 5


Date: 2/11/2012

This report must not be reproduced except in full without prior written consent.

This Quality Control Report is issued in accordance with Section 18 of the ARL Quality Management Manual. All QC

parameters are contained within the relevant ARL Method as indicated by the method reference, either on this report

or the Laboratory Report.

Acceptance of Holding Times, Duplicate RPD, Spike, LCS and CRM Recoveries are determined at the time of

analysis by the Signatory indicated on the Laboratory Report.

DEFINITIONS

Duplicate Analysis

A sample, chosen randomly by the analyst at the time of sample preparation, analysed in duplicate.

RPD

Relative Percent Difference is the absolute difference between the sample and a duplicate analysis compared to the

average of the two analytical results. Acceptance Limits can be exceeded by matrix interference or when the result is

less than 5 times the LOR.

Matrix Spike

An additional portion of sample to which known amounts of the target analytes are added before sample preparation.

Acceptance Limits can be exceeded by matrix interference or when the target analytes are present in the sample.

Certified Reference Material (CRM)

A commercially available certified solution/mixture of the target analyte of known concentration.

Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)

An in-house certified solution/mixture of the target analyte of known concentration.

Page 1 of 4


Date: 2/11/2012

PAH in WaterARL005



Analysed 26/10/2012





Pyrene 98 60 - 120

Chrysene 98 60 - 120


TPH in WaterARL009



Analysed 29/10/2012


C15-28 100 60 - 120




Page 2 of 4


Date: 2/11/2012

Metals in Water


Chromium (VI) 106 80 - 120


Arsenic - Dissolved 0 25

Cadmium - Dissolved 0 25

Chromium - Dissolved 0 25

Copper - Dissolved 0 25

Lead - Dissolved 0 25


Arsenic - Dissolved 0 25

Cadmium - Dissolved 0 25

Chromium - Dissolved 0 25

Copper - Dissolved 7 25

Manganese - Dissolved 0 25

Nickel - Dissolved 0 25

Lead - Dissolved 0 25
















Barium - Dissolved 95 80 - 120







Zinc - Dissolved 100 80 - 120

Page 3 of 4

Analysed


19/10/12 (CrVI) 25/10/12 (Metals)


Date: 2/11/2012


Antimony - Dissolved 100 80 - 120

Tin - Dissolved 115 80 - 120

Page 4 of 4

of 2

QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT

Client: ANALYTICAL REFERENCE LAB PTY LTDNMI QA Report No: ANAL07/121018 Sample Matrix: Liquid

Analyte Method LOR Blank Sample DuplicatesSample Duplicate RPD LCS Matrix Spike

ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L % % %Organics Section

Monocyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonsBenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA 112 NAToluene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA 93 NAEthylbenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAm,p-Xylene NGCMS_1120 2 <2 NA NA NA - NAo-Xylene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAStyrene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAIsopropylbenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAn-Propylbenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAtert-Butylbenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAsec-Butylbenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA4-Isopropyltoluene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAn-Butylbenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAHalogenated Aliphatic HydrocarbonsChloromethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAVinyl chloride NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NABromomethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAChloroethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NATrichlorofluoromethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,1-Dichloroethene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA 76 NADichloromethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAtrans-1,2-Dicloroethene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,1-Dichloroethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA2,2-Dichloropropane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAcis-1,2-Dichloroethene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NABromochloromethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,1,1-Trichloroethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NACarbon tetrachloride NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,1-Dichloropropene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2-Dichloroethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NATrichloroethene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA 89 NA1,2-Dichloropropane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NADibromomethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAcis-1,3-Dichloropropene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAtrans-1,3-Dichloropropene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,1,2-Trichloroethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NATetrachloroethene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,3-Dichloropropane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2-Dibromoethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2,3-Trichloropropane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAHexachlorobutadiene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA

Recoveries

Australian GovernmentNational Measurement Institute

105 Delhi Road, North Ryde NSW 2113 Tel: +61 2 9449 0111 www.measurement.gov.au

National Measurement Institute

of 2





Halogenated Aromatic HydrocarbonsChlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA 99 NABromobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA2-Chlorotoluene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA4-Chlorotoluene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,3-Dichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,4-Dichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2-Dichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NATrihalomethanesChloroform NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA 107 NABromodichloromethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NADibromochloromethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NABromoform NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAPAH (volatile)Naphthalene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAOxygenated CompoundsAcetone NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NAVinylacetate NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NA2-Butanone (MEK) NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NA4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NA2-Hexanone (MBK NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NAMethyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NASulfonated CompoundsCarbon disulfide NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NASurrogate: DBFM NGCMS_1120 - - NA NA NA 115 NASurrogate: TOL-D8 NGCMS_1120 - - NA NA NA 103 NASurrogate: 4-BFB NGCMS_1120 - - NA NA NA 100 NA

Results expressed in percentage (%) or ug/L wherever appropriate.Acceptable Spike recovery is 70-130%Maximum acceptable RPDs on spikes and duplicates is 40%. 'NA ' = Not Applicable.RPD= Relative Percentage Difference.

Signed:Danny SleeOrganics Manager, NMI-North Ryde

Date: 31/10/2012

Recoveries



of 2


Client: ANALYTICAL REFERENCE LAB PTY LTDNMI QA Report No: ANAL07/121018 Sample Matrix: Solid


mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg % % %Organics Section


Recoveries




of 2




mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg % % %Organics Section

Halogenated Aromatic HydrocarbonsChlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA 130 NABromobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA2-Chlorotoluene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA4-Chlorotoluene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,3-Dichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,4-Dichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2-Dichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NATrihalomethanes NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAChloroform NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA 126 NABromodichloromethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NADibromochloromethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NABromoform NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAPAH (volatile)Naphthalene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAOxygenated CompoundsAcetone NGCMS_1120 5 <5 NA NA NA - NAVinylacetate NGCMS_1120 5 <5 NA NA NA - NA2-Butanone (MEK) NGCMS_1120 5 <5 NA NA NA - NA4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) NGCMS_1120 5 <5 NA NA NA - NA2-Hexanone (MBK NGCMS_1120 5 <5 NA NA NA - NAMethyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) NGCMS_1120 5 <5 NA NA NA - NASulfonated CompoundsCarbon disulfide NGCMS_1120 5 <5 NA NA NA - NASurrogate: DBFM NGCMS_1120 - - NA NA NA 99 NASurrogate: TOL-D8 NGCMS_1120 - - NA NA NA 102 NASurrogate: 4-BFB NGCMS_1120 - - NA NA NA 105 NA

Results expressed in percentage (%) or mg/kg wherever appropriate.Acceptable Spike recovery is 70-130%Maximum acceptable RPDs on spikes and duplicates is 40%. 'NA ' = Not Applicable.RPD= Relative Percentage Difference.

Signed:Danny SleeOrganics Manager, NMI-Pymble

Date: 31/10/2012

Recoveries



of 2


Client: ANALYTICAL REFERENCE LAB PTY LTDNMI QA Report No: ANAL07/121023 Sample Matrix: Liquid




Recoveries




of 2





Halogenated Aromatic HydrocarbonsChlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA 102 NABromobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA2-Chlorotoluene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA4-Chlorotoluene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,3-Dichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,4-Dichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2-Dichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NA1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NATrihalomethanesChloroform NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA 102 NABromodichloromethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NADibromochloromethane NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NABromoform NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAPAH (volatile)Naphthalene NGCMS_1120 1 <1 NA NA NA - NAOxygenated CompoundsAcetone NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NAVinylacetate NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NA2-Butanone (MEK) NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NA4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NA2-Hexanone (MBK NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NAMethyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NASulfonated CompoundsCarbon disulfide NGCMS_1120 10 <10 NA NA NA - NASurrogate: DBFM NGCMS_1120 - - NA NA NA 100 NASurrogate: TOL-D8 NGCMS_1120 - - NA NA NA 102 NASurrogate: 4-BFB NGCMS_1120 - - NA NA NA 101 NA

Results expressed in percentage (%) or ug/L wherever appropriate.Acceptable Spike recovery is 70-130%Maximum acceptable RPDs on spikes and duplicates is 40%. 'NA ' = Not Applicable.RPD= Relative Percentage Difference.

Signed:Danny SleeOrganics Manager, NMI-North Ryde

Date: 5/11/2012

Recoveries



helena river surface water and sediment sampling …€¦ · helena river surface water and...

Documents