supplementary environmental site assessment · 2018-01-15 · environmental investigation levels...

Supplementary Environmental Site Assessment Ballarat Station Precinct Prepared for: VicTrack Regional Development Victoria Public Transport Victoria

Distribution

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 i

Distribution

Supplementary Environmental Site Assessment, Ballarat Station Precinct 16 October 2015

Copies Recipient Copies Recipient

1 CD 1 PDF

Madelyn Smith Environmental Officer Level 8, 1010 La Trobe Street Docklands VIC 3008

1 PDF Senversa Project File

1 Reliance - This document has been prepared solely for the use of VicTrack, Regional Development Victoria and Public Transport

Victoria. No responsibility or liability is accepted for any damages arising out of the use of this document by any third party.

2 Copyright and Intellectual Property – No portion of this document may be removed, extracted, copied, electronically stored or

disseminated in any form without the prior written permission of Senversa. Intellectual property in relation to the methodology

undertaken during the creation of this document remains the property of Senversa.

3 Principles and Limitations of Investigation - This document is issued subject to the technical principles, limitations and

assumptions provided in Section .

4 Confidentiality – This report was prepared for VicTrack, Regional Development Victoria and Public Transport Victoria and may

contain confidential information. If you receive this report in error, please contact Senversa and we will arrange collection of this

document.

Senversa Pty Ltd ABN: 89 132 231 380 Ground Floor, 51 Clarke Street, Southbank Vic 3006 tel: + 61 3 9606 0070; fax: + 61 3 9606 0074 www.senversa.com.au

Primary Author / Project

Manager

Project

Director & Peer

Reviewer

Eunjee Vella Senior Environmental Engineer

Richard Griffin Senior Associate

Technical

Director

Michael Rehfisch Principal

Executive Summary

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 ii

Executive Summary

Senversa Pty Ltd was engaged by VicTrack with reliance to Regional Development Victoria and Public Transport Victoria to complete a Supplementary Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for an 8.5 hectare parcel of VicTrack owned land at the Ballarat Station Precinct (the site), which has been identified for development.

Between 1998 and 2015, various contaminated land assessment works have been completed at the site, which identified metal, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) and petroleum hydrocarbon impacts within the fill soils and diffuse nitrate and metals concentrations in groundwater. As part of the Precinct Stage 1 due diligence works, VicTrack required a Supplementary ESA to address data-gaps, de-risk the project and gain an understanding of key contaminated land issues that may impact on delivering the proposed development.

The results and findings of the Supplementary ESA works can be summarised as follows:

The site is underlain by heterogeneous fill that is generally less than 1.0 metre (m) thick across the site, but up to 10.5 m deep in the northeast portion of the site. This fill comprises a mixture of gravels, sands, silts and clays; with trace to minor amounts of anthropogenic material including brick, mesh, glass, wood, charcoal, plastic, slag and terracotta tile fragments. Depending on the site area, the natural soils generally consisted of orange brown extremely weathered basaltic silts and clays of the Newer Volcanics Formation and / or extremely weathered orange, red and yellow silts and clays of the Ordovician Castlemaine Group.

Groundwater is present with three shallow formations across the site, including the fill, Newer Volcanics Formation and Ordovician Castlemaine Group. The depths range from 0.1 m below ground level (bgl) in the northeast corner of the site where the site has been cut into the natural soil profile to 8.5 m bgl in the eastern portion of the site where deep filling is present.

Supplementary soil investigation works, combined with historical laboratory data, shows that the fill soils comprise:

Widespread copper, nickel, zinc, benzo(a)pyrene and to a lesser extent arsenic, chromium (III+VI), lead and total recoverable hydrocarbon (TRH) concentrations above the adopted environmental investigation levels for public open space and commercial uses.

Widespread PAH and isolated arsenic and lead concentrations above the human health investigation levels for public open space that was more predominate in the northern portion of the site, particularly along the northwest embankment and areas of deep filling.

Isolated PAH concentrations above the above the human health investigation levels for commercial use in the northern portion of the site.

Comparison of the supplementary and historical data against the IWRG Soil Hazard Categorisation Threshold Limits suggests that the bulk of the fill soils can be categorised as Category C Contaminated Soil with some Category B and A contaminated soil in the northern portion of the site. However, leaching testing to date suggests the metal and PAH contaminants are immobile and the fills soils around the development area could potentially be reclassified (with EPA approval) as “Immobilised Category C Contaminated Soil”.

The groundwater investigation works identified elevated metal (cadmium, copper, lead, nickel and zinc), nitrate and PAHs (benzo(a)pyrene and fluoranthene) concentrations above the adopted groundwater quality objectives. With the exception of nitrate and PAHs, the reported concentrations are likely to be representative of regional and/or naturally occurring background concentrations. The source of nitrate impacts are unknown, but are likely to be associated with leaking sewerage pipework failures in the area or historical locomotive wash-down activities. The slightly elevated PAH concentrations are likely to be associated with fine colloidal matter in the

Executive Summary

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 iii

groundwater samples or possible residual impacts from the former tar tanks. Both the nitrate and PAH impacts are considered to be isolated to the site and are not expected to affect the proposed development, where extractive groundwater beneficial uses are not proposed.

Impact on Proposed Development

The site contains widespread metal and PAH contamination in the fill and some natural soils that are more prevalent in the northern portion of the site, particularly along the northwest embankment and in areas of deep filling. These soils pose a potential risk to human health and the maintenance of ecosystems, but can be readily managed in the context of the proposed commercial and public open space development of the site. More specifically, it is recommended that:

The fill soils are capped with permanent hard standing surfaces in commercial use areas (e.g. building footprints, roadways and car parking) and at least 0.5 m of clean fill cover is placed in proposed public open space areas with soft landscaping. Alternatively for areas where 0.5 m of clean fill cover is not practical, planter boxes could be utilised for proposed decorative trees and plants in smaller soft-landscaping areas. It should be noted that due to geotechnical considerations, the site would already need to be raised by a minimum of 0.1-0.6 m depending on the area (e.g. pavements, car parking areas, heavy load roadways) (Arup, 2015).

A pre and post soil contamination management plan is prepared to manage the health risk to future site users as well as future construction and maintenance workers that will be completing below-ground intrusive works that may come into direct contact with underlying soils.

The generation of excess spoil during construction also has potential significant landfill disposal cost implications. As such, opportunities to minimise soil disposal and retain excess spoil on-site should be considered. These may include (subject to geotechnical conditions and other regulatory and / or VicTrack land owner requirements): Alternative foundation and pavement design solutions to minimise the generation of excess spoils. Reuse of excess spoil in the eastern portion of the site, in accordance with VicTrack’s Soil Reuse

Guidelines. Movement across title boundaries may also require Environment Protection Authority (EPA) approval.

Setback of proposed carpark and hotel building from Lydiard Street North, to prevent excavation of contaminated soil from the existing northwest embankments and allow excess fill from construction works to be from entombment beneath access ramps and walkways to Lydiard Street North.

Maintain proposed site levels close to or slightly above existing site levels to achieve a neutral or cut and fill deficit.

Consolidate proposed service corridors and public open space areas to minimise soil handling. Ensure the proposed public open space areas are 0.5 m above existing site levels, to prevent

excavation of fill soils to accommodate the proposed 0.5 m of clean fill cover.

Recycling of newer ballast can also be considered where it can be demonstrated that the ballast is geotechnical suitable for reuse and can be treated as a construction material and Solid Industrial Waste. However, most of the on-site ballast is old with high fine proportions that would need to be treated as a soil or mechanically screened to separate the fines from the rock aggregate that could potentially be reused and recycled.

Additional Recommendations

The recommendations outlined above and opportunities to minimise soil disposal and retain excess spoil on-site should be considered for proposed master planning of the site. It is also recommended that a waste reclassification application be submitted for the proposed development area to EPA to seek a reclassification of fills soils to ‘Immobilised Category C Contaminated Soils’. At this stage, there is limited elutriation data across the site and the reclassification application would require additional testing to increase the elutriation sampling density at different elutriation pH levels. Whilst a blanket site-wide reclassification application would be advantageous, additional testing could be

Executive Summary

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 iv

limited to areas where larger volumes of soil surplus to needs is likely to require off-site disposal (i.e. proposed hotel area within the northwest embankment areas of the site). If successful, this would allow more freedom surrounding design opportunities, significantly reduce costs of soil removal and prevent the need for double soil handling and alternative engineering designs.

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 v

Contents

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................................. ii

List of Acronyms .................................................................................................................................................................... viii

1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Understanding ................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Project Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Scope of Works Undertaken ........................................................................................................................................ 1

2.0 Background Information .............................................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Site Details .................................................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Environmental Setting .................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.3 Site History ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.3.1 Supplementary Searches ................................................................................................................................................ 5 2.3.2 Site History Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.4 Potential Contaminants of Concern ............................................................................................................................ 7 2.4.1 On-site ............................................................................................................................................................................ 7 2.4.2 Off-site ............................................................................................................................................................................ 7 2.5 Previously Identified Contamination ........................................................................................................................... 8 2.5.1 Soil ................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 2.5.2 Groundwater ................................................................................................................................................................... 8

3.0 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................................. 9 3.1 Relevant Guidelines and Standards ............................................................................................................................ 9 3.2 Fieldwork Methodology ................................................................................................................................................ 9 3.3 Laboratory Analysis ................................................................................................................................................... 12 3.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ..................................................................................................................... 13

4.0 Adopted Investigation Levels .................................................................................................................................... 15 4.1 Soil ............................................................................................................................................................................... 15 4.1.1 Regulatory Framework.................................................................................................................................................. 15 4.1.2 Protected Beneficial Uses of Land ................................................................................................................................ 15 4.1.3 Soil Quality Objectives .................................................................................................................................................. 15 4.2 Groundwater ............................................................................................................................................................... 16 4.2.1 Regulatory Framework.................................................................................................................................................. 16 4.2.2 Relevant Groundwater Segment ................................................................................................................................... 16 4.2.3 Protected Beneficial Uses of Groundwater .................................................................................................................... 16 4.2.4 Groundwater Quality Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 17 4.3 Soil Hazard Categorisation ........................................................................................................................................ 17

5.0 Soil Contamination Assessment ............................................................................................................................... 18 5.1 Ground Profile ............................................................................................................................................................ 18 5.2 Soil Analytical Results ............................................................................................................................................... 18 5.3 Impact on Beneficial of Land ..................................................................................................................................... 19

Contents

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 vi

5.4 Risk to Groundwater (Risk of Leaching) ................................................................................................................... 20 5.5 Preliminary Soil Hazard Categorisation .................................................................................................................... 21

6.0 Groundwater Contamination Assessment ................................................................................................................ 22 6.1 Targeted Groundwater Systems ................................................................................................................................ 22 6.2 Groundwater Flow and Chemistry ............................................................................................................................. 22 6.3 Groundwater Analytical Results ................................................................................................................................ 23 6.4 Impacts to Beneficial Uses of Groundwater ............................................................................................................. 23

7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................................................................ 25 7.1 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................................................. 25 7.2 Impact on Proposed Development ............................................................................................................................ 26 7.3 Additional Recommendations ................................................................................................................................... 26 7.4 Inherent Uncertainties and Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 27 7.5 Project Specific Uncertainties ................................................................................................................................... 28

8.0 References .................................................................................................................................................................. 29

Figures Figure 1: Site Location Plan Figure 2: Site Features and Investigation Location Plan Figure 3: Soil Exceedence Plan (Human Health Commercial Use) Figure 4a: Soil Results from 0.0-0.6 m bgl above Soil Hazard Categorisation Thresholds Figure 4b: Soil Results from 0.6-1.2 m bgl above Soil Hazard Categorisation Thresholds Figure 4c: Soil Results >0.6 m bgl above Soil Hazard Categorisation Thresholds Figure 5: Groundwater Elevation and Exceedence Plan (September 2015)

Tables Table 1: Groundwater Gauging and Survey Data Table 2: Stabilised Field Chemical Parameters Table 3: Summary of Groundwater Results vs. Beneficial Use Objectives Table 4: Soil Analytical Results vs. IWRG621 Threshold Limits Table 5: ASLP Analytical Results vs. IWRG621 Threshold Limits Table 6: Summary of Groundwater Results vs. Beneficial Use Objectives

Appendix A: Proposed Development Masterplan

Appendix B: Summary of Previous Environmental Reports

Appendix C: Supplementary Historical Site Searches

Appendix D: Bore Construction Licence

Appendix E: Lithological Borelogs (Senversa 2015)

Appendix F: Site Photographs

Appendix G: Survey Report (2015)

Appendix H: Groundwater Sampling Field Forms

Appendix I: Calibration Certificates

Appendix J: Analytical Laboratory Reports

Contents

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 vii

Appendix K: Waste Transport Certificates

Appendix L: Quality Assurance / Quality Control

Appendix M: Adopted Soil and Groundwater Quality Objectives

Appendix N: Inferred Fill Thickness and Geological Cross-sections (Arup, 2015)

List of Acronyms

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 viii

List of Acronyms

Acronym Definition

ABC Ambient background concentrations

ACL Added contaminant limits

ACM Asbestos containing material

AHD Australian Height Datum

AS Australian Standard

ASLP Australian Standard Leaching Testing Procedure

AST Above-ground storage tank

bgl Below ground level

BTEX Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, xylenes

COC Chain of custody

DMS Drawing management system

EIL Ecological Investigation Levels

EPA Environment Protection Authority (Victoria)

ESA Environmental Site Assessment

ESL Ecological screening levels

GME Groundwater Monitoring Event

HIL Health investigation levels

HSL Health screening levels

IWRG Industrial Waste Resource Guidelines

m Metre

NATA National Association of Testing Authorities

NEPC National Environment Protection Council

NEPM National Environment Protection Measure

NHMRC National Health and Medical Research Council

NVF Newer Volcanics Formation

OCG Ordovician Castlemaine Group

OCP Organochlorine pesticides

OPP Organophosphate pesticides

PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon

List of Acronyms

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 ix

Acronym Definition

PCB Polychlorinated biphenyls

PID Photo-ionisation detector

PVC Poly vinyl chloride

QA Quality assurance

QC Quality control

SEPP State Environment Protection Policy

SEPP (GoV) State Environment Protection Policy (Groundwaters of Victoria)

SEPP (WoV) State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria)

TDS Total dissolved solids

TEQ Toxic equivalence quotient

TPH Total petroleum hydrocarbon

TRH Total recoverable hydrocarbon

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

VVG Visualising Victoria’s Groundwater

Introduction

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 1

1.0 Introduction

Senversa Pty Ltd was engaged by VicTrack to complete a Supplementary Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for an 8.5 hectare parcel of VicTrack owned land at the Ballarat Station Precinct (the site), which has been identified for development. The general location area of the site is defined within Figure 1.

1.1 Project Understanding

Senversa understands that the Ballarat Station Precinct (previously identified as the Former Freight Yard) is proposed to be revitalised to improve land use and transport outcomes in the precinct. This includes development and use of the precinct for various uses comprising transport, open space, car parking, commercial / retail and possible residential uses, in future stages. The plan comprises of Master Plan Stage 1 Package A and B (expected to be implemented over 2015-2023) located north of the Ballarat Railway Station and Master Plan Stage 2 (expected to be implemented beyond 2024) located to the south of Ballarat Railway Station (refer to potential Stage 1 Master Plan depicted within Appendix A). The investigation area for this assessment comprised land north of Ballarat Railway Station (i.e. Master Plan Stage 1 Package A and B areas). This Stage 1 area comprises a 4-8 storey hotel building integrated with the refurbishment of the Goods Shed (conference centre), a multi-story car park fronting Lydiard Street North, and surrounding public open space and car parking for the station and hotel.

Between 1998 and 2015, various contaminated land assessment works have been completed at the site, which identified metal, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) and petroleum hydrocarbon impacts within the fill soils and diffuse nitrate and metals concentrations in groundwater. As part of the Precinct Stage 1 due diligence works, VicTrack required a Supplementary Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) to address data-gaps, de-risk the project and gain an understanding of key contaminated land issues that may impact on delivering the proposed development.

1.2 Project Objectives

The primary objectives of the Supplementary ESA were to:

Investigate the nature and extent of soil and groundwater contamination at the site, including indication of waste classification;

Provide advice on the contamination risk with respect to the potential future use of the site and to realise the Master Plan Stage 1 works; and

Identify data gaps and provide recommendations for further works (if any).

The Supplementary ESA works were undertaken in conjunction with Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation works that were reported separately by Arup (2015).

1.3 Scope of Works Undertaken

Senversa undertook the following environmental scope of works:

A brief document review of previous environmental assessment reports completed at the site. A brief historical information review of relevant engineering drawings on the Public Transport

Victoria drawing management system (DMS) database, online sources and VicTrack leasing files. Centralisation of relevant historical soil and groundwater laboratory and geographic information

system information into the one database.

A targeted / data-gap soil investigation program, involving the collection of soil samples from 20 environmental and / or geotechnical intrusive locations (SB200 SB214 and MW08-MW11).

Introduction

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 2

Drilling and construction of four additional groundwater monitoring wells (MW08-MW11). A groundwater monitoring event (GME), including water level gauging, purging and collection of

groundwater samples from four new (MW08-MW11) and five existing monitoring wells (EGISMW03, PBMW04, PBMW105, PBMW107, and PBMW108).

Surveying of all new groundwater monitoring wells. Laboratory analysis of select soil and all groundwater samples, by a National Association of

Testing Authorities (NATA) accredited laboratory. Collation and interpretation of the data, including conducting a Quality Assurance / Quality Control

(QA/QC) data validation process. Preparation of this Supplementary ESA report.

It should be noted that the geotechnical scope of works comprised geotechnical logging of five cored boreholes, 46 standard penetration tests at eight intrusive locations and dynamic cone penetration tests at six locations across the site. As mentioned above, this scope of works were undertaken by Arup in conjunction with Senversa’s field program and reported separately (Arup, 2015).

Background Information

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 3

2.0 Background Information

Between 1998 and 2015, numerous assessment works have been completed at the site, as listed below:

CMPS&F, 1998a. V/Line Freight Corporation Environmental Assessment – Preliminary Draft Phase 1 Report, Commissioned by V/Line Freight Corporation.

CMPS&F, 1998b. V/Line Freight Corporation Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment, Lydiard Street, Ballarat, CMPS&F. Commissioned by V/Line Freight Corporation.

Egis, 2001. Progress Report: Groundwater Sampling at Freight Australia’s Country Sites, Egis Consulting Australia Pty Ltd. Commissioned by Freight Australia.

Egis, 2002. Groundwater Sampling at Freight Australia Site, Lydiard Street, Ballarat, Victoria, Egis Consulting Australia Pty Ltd. Commissioned by Freight Australia.

PB, 2003. Environmental Site Assessment – Ballarat Railway Station Precinct, Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd. Commissioned by VicTrack.

GA, 2005a. Revised Contamination Feasibility Assessment – Ballarat Railway Station Site, Ballarat Transit City, Golder Associates Pty Ltd. Commissioned by VicUrban.

GA, 2005b. Ballarat Transit City Development – Preliminary Geotechnical Advice, Golder Associates Pty Ltd. Commissioned by VicUrban.

PB, 2006. Environmental Site Assessment – Ballarat Railway Station Precinct DRAFT, Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd. Commissioned by VicTrack.

ERM, 2007. Final Environmental Report – Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment, Pacific National, Ballarat Rail Yard, Lydiard Street, Ballarat, Victoria, Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd. Commissioned by Pacific National.

Lane Piper, 2009. Synopsis Report on Contamination, corner Lydiard and Nolan Streets, Ballarat, Victoria, Lane Piper Pty Ltd. Commissioned by VicTrack.

SKM, 2011. Geotechnical and Environmental Desktop Investigation, Ballarat Railway Station Precinct, Ballarat Victoria, Final V1, Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. Commissioned by Department of Transport.

Senversa, 2015. Groundwater Monitoring Event (November 2014) – Former Freight Yard, North of Ballarat Railway Station, Senversa Pty Ltd. Commissioned by VicTrack.

The sections below summarises the relevant background details that describe the site and environmental setting. Appendix B summaries the scope or works and key findings from each of the above listed assessment reports.

2.1 Site Details

Item Relevant Site Information

Site Address / Location 140 Lydiard Street North, Ballarat, Victoria.

Site Area Approximately 8.5 hectares.

Lot/Plan Identifiers Lot 1 of Plan TP868581. Lot 2 of Plan TP868581.

Current Volume and Folio Volume 2863 Folio 428.

Municipality City of Ballarat.


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 4


Current Land Use Zoning & Overlays

Public Use Zone – Transport (PUZ4). Heritage Overlay (HO). This property is within, or affected by one or more areas of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Sensitivity (central area of the site).

Current Site Use / Occupier The site is occupied by V/Line rail leases, VicTrack common land and vacant / private leases. The Former Freight Yard, rail tracks and a portion of the Ballarat Train Station commuter car parks are currently leased to V/Line. The Former Freight Yard area is currently being used for commuter car parking and storage of rail infrastructure.

Surrounding Land Use Land uses immediately surrounding the site comprised the following:

North: Nolan Street followed by low to medium density residential with some commercial properties along Lydiard Street North.

South: Ballarat Railway Station, bus station, carriage sheds and former turntable.

East: Rail track and Scott Parade followed by recreational oval and sporting facilities.

West: Lydiard Street North followed by rail track (east to west), low to medium density residential with some commercial properties along Lydiard Street North.

2.2 Environmental Setting


Topography / Drainage The site is relatively flat from historical cut and filling works, with a slight slope down to the southeast. The exception is a steep (in parts) embankment along the northwest boundary areas of the site. The site has an elevation of approximately 429-435 metres Australian Height Datum (m AHD), based on topographical contours published map obtained from Land Channel (www.land.vic.gov.au). Regionally, the land slopes down to the south or southeast towards Yarrowee River, Canadian Creek and Specimen Vale Creek located approximately 600-900 m from the site. The Yarrowee River stone drain culvert is also present beneath the site, along the eastern boundary of the assessment area. Surface water runoff is expected to infiltrate into the ground surface in unpaved areas or be captured in local stormwater drainage lines inferred to discharge into the Yarrowee River stone drain culvert down-gradient of the site.

Regional and Local Geology The ‘Ballarat’ map sheet (1:63,360) from the Geological Survey of Victoria shows that the regional geology comprises of slate, sandstone and mudstone of the Ordovician Castlemaine Group (OCG) overlain by Newer Volcanics basalt Formation (NVF) and discontinuous areas of quartz gravel, sand and conglomerates that may be ferruginised. Alluvial sediments also overlie these sequences in the eastern site areas. SKM (2011) reported the local geology encountered during previous intrusive investigations comprised of varying depths of fill, underlain by weathered basaltic clays and basalt of the NVF, as well as weathered siltstones and clay inferred to represent the OCG. Refer to Section 5 within the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation (Arup, 2015) for further discussion.

Regional Hydrogeology Previous groundwater investigation works indicate that gauged groundwater levels ranged from just below the ground surface to 4.5 m below ground level (bgl) (Senversa, 2015) and appeared to flow southeast towards the Yarrowee River, Canadian Creek and Speciman Vale Creek (located approximately 600-900 m south to southeast). Existing groundwater wells were screened across differing geological sequences, including an unconfined perched fill aquifer, unconfined to semi-confined NVF and / or OCG. Based on regional topography, regional groundwater flow is expected to be south to southeast towards Yarrowee River, Canadian Creek and Specimen Vale Creek. The Yarrowee River stone drain culvert could influence groundwater flow, depending on the invert level of the culvert relative to groundwater depth.


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 5


Nearest Surface Water Bodies The Yarrowee River stone drain culvert is the closest surface water body, which runs north to south along the eastern boundary of the assessment area.

Groundwater Use A review of Visualising Victoria’s Groundwater (VVG’s) registered bore database indicated that there were six potentially registered extractive use bores down or cross-gradient, between the southern site boundary and nearest down-gradient surface water bodies (Yarrowee River, Canadian Creek or Specimen Vale Creek), with listed uses as follows:

Irrigation: WRK043197 (bore depth and screen unknown).

Industrial use: WRK054827 (bore screen 0.3-72 m).

Unspecified groundwater use: WRK986831 (bore depth 30 m), WRK986832 (bore depth 30 m), WRK986833 (bore depth 30 m) and WRK984410 (bore depth 100m).

Further discussion regarding these bores are detailed within Section.

Groundwater Segment A review of VVG’s salinity map indicated that the expected salinity at the site and surrounding area is between 1,000-3,500 mg/L, which would classify the site as Segment B groundwater. However, previous GME’s undertaken at the site have conservatively classified the groundwater as Segment A1 due to the reported salinity ranging between 200-4,200 mg/L across the well network (Senversa, 2015).

2.3 Site History

2.3.1 Supplementary Searches

Previous site history investigation works completed by PB, included the review of historical aerial photography, site interviews, site inspection, title and zoning information, WorkSafe dangerous goods search, local Council and / or library records. To supplement these searches, Senversa obtained and reviewed archived DMS and leasing information as well as historical photographs from http://www.victorianrailways.net online database. The supplementary site history searches did not uncover additional site history information or on-site contamination sources that were not previously identified in earlier reports. Relevant files have been included as Appendix C and pertinent information included the following:

1960 photograph (file 1) of Ballarat Railway Station and rail track leading to the Goods Shed depicts embankment filling still to be undertaken within the northeast area of the site.

Circa 1910 photographs (file 3 & 4) of area between the Goods Shed and Ballarat Railway Station as unsealed and used for horse and cart parking.

1915 and 1927 plans (files 5 & 6) depicts the Ballarat Station Precinct, Ballarat East Station and railway track west of the site, which leads into a wood yard (approximately 100 m west of site). Site features include the station building and platform areas, Goods Shed and associated crane and weighbridge infrastructure, wash-out platform, cattle yard, British Imperial Oil Co, works yard, workshop, tar tanks and sheds and various commercial uses along the western boundary.

1927 sketch (file 6) depicts the former wood yard area west of the site as being developed into Mobil, Shell and BP Australia depots (approximately 100m west of site).

1976 plan (file 7) depicts the cattle yard and British Imperial Oil Co has been replaced with a trucking platform. The wash-out platform, works yard, workshop, tar tanks and sheds have been removed.

2.3.2 Site History Summary

The table below summarises the historical use of the site, based on the findings of the previous historical site assessments and the above supplementary site history review.


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 6

Approximate Period

Historical Use / Activity Source

Late 1858-1862 Ballarat Railway Station, Goods Shed and Freight Yard were constructed and mass earthworks conducted to level the site, which involved cutting into the hillside in the northern part of the site and filling within the southeast portion. The embankment potentially contains mine spoil towards the eastern site area where imported fill was used.

PB, 2003

1862-1900s Former Freight Yard was used for freight handling, storage, shunting and transport of general merchandise, grain, stock, fuels, gold etc. via coal fired steam trains (up until the 1960s) followed by diesel and oil fired trains in the 1950s.

PB, 2003

Early 1900s-1970s Continued use as a Freight Yard. British Imperial Oil Company existed within the central northern site area, likely to have been used as a receiving depot for fuel freight and dispatched by truck. No locomotive refuelling was undertaken at the site, which occurred at the Ballarat East Station site to the southeast. A cattle yard existed within the central northern site area, reported to be for holding cattle prior to train loading. Wagons used for carrying stock were washed down using high pressure water at platforms formerly located over the Yarrowee River stone drain culvert (northeast site boundary). Tar tanks were located along the northwest site boundary and were interpreted to be used for general maintenance and asphalting throughout the railway station precinct. Former workshops and sheds were located within the northwest site area and were likely to have been used for equipment and wagon repair.

PB, 2003 Historical maps

1950s-1960s Steam trains slowly replaced by diesel electric trains. PB, 2003

1970s British Imperial Oil Company, cattle yard, wash-down platforms, tar tanks, workshop and works yard infrastructure demolished / removed. Goods Shed, railway tracks, weighbridge, goods platform and trucking platform remained onsite (1976 historical map). Wash-down of buses, trucks and forklifts occurred north of the Goods Shed until the late 1990s.

PB, 2003 Historical maps

2000s Freight Yard continued to be used for freight handling, storage and shunting activities. The Goods Shed was used for freight handling (noted to be disused from 2009) and the yard used for container storage and handling. Diesel above-ground storage tank (AST) existed immediately west of Goods Shed which was listed as disused in 2009 and a large storage shed / workshop existed on-site. The area between the railway station and Goods Shed was used for commuter car parking purposes.

PB, 2003 ERM, 2007 Lane Piper, 2009

2014-present The site is currently used for commuter and V/Line staff car parking purposes and storage of rail sleepers and track within the Former Freight Yard. The diesel AST had since been removed. Storage of several unbunded 200 litre drums was observed within the western area of the Goods Shed.

Senversa, 2015


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 7

2.4 Potential Contaminants of Concern

2.4.1 On-site

The following table summarises site observations and evidence of past activities that may have led to the release of potential contaminants at the site.

On-Site Activity / Source Potential Contaminants of Concern Assessed?

Uncontrolled filling including potential mine spoil fill and deep filling within east area of site

Various contaminants including metals, Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs), PAHs and to a lesser extent, cyanide, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) -namely benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylene (BTEX), phenolic compounds, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), organochlorine and organophosphate pesticides (OCP, OPP), asbestos containing material (ACM), solid inert waste.

Yes, with some data-gaps within Goods Shed and along rail corridors.

Embankment along Lydiard Street As above Partially

Former Rail land (including workshops, sheds, train operation, weed control, machinery leakage).

Metals (primarily arsenic and lead), TPHs, PAHs and to a lesser extent asbestos, phenolic compounds, OCPs, VOCs, lubricants, coolants, PCBs, sulphate, ammonia and nitrate

Yes, with some data-gaps within Goods Shed and along rail corridors.

Building demolition ACM, heavy metals, building debris. As above

Former British Imperial Oil Co, tar tanks and diesel AST

TPH, BTEX, PAHs Yes, however not down-gradient

Former wash-down areas and cattle yard TPH, BTEX, PAH, metals, and nitrogen compounds Partially

Leaking sewer Nitrogen compounds Yes

2.4.2 Off-site

The following table summarises the potential contamination issues identified off-site that may have affected regional groundwater quality.

On-Site Activity / Source Potential Contaminants of Concern

Uncontrolled filling including potential mine spoil As above

Rail land As above

Building demolition As above

Cross-gradient Former Oil Depots TPH, BTEX

Cross-gradient Former Wood Yard TPH, BTEX, PAH, heavy metals

Leaking sewer Nitrogen compounds


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 8

2.5 Previously Identified Contamination

2.5.1 Soil

Up to four intrusive soil sampling investigations have previously been undertaken across the site (CMPS&F 1998b, PB 2003, PB 2006, ERM 2007). These previous soil investigation work have identified:

Widespread heavy metal (arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, tin, zinc) and PAH impacts in the fill soils

Minor TPH soil impacts in vicinity of the AST, Goods Shed, former works yard (including tar pits) and near rail sidings.

2.5.2 Groundwater

Up to six GMEs have previously been undertaken on select wells across the site, with six existing monitoring wells remaining functional. The most recent GME (Senversa, 2015) reported elevated metal and nitrate concentrations, consistent with previous investigation works. The metal concentrations were considered to be representative of regional and/or naturally occurring background concentrations. The source of nitrate impacts were unknown, but were considered to be associated with leaking sewerage pipework and / or historical wash-down activities at the site.

Hydrocarbon impacts were not detected in the latest GME, however the monitoring wells which previously contained dissolved phase hydrocarbon impacts (outside the southeast end of the Goods Shed) could not be located.

Methodology

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 9

3.0 Methodology

3.1 Relevant Guidelines and Standards

The supplementary field investigations were undertaken in accordance with relevant elements of the following guidelines and standards:

EPA, 1997. State Environment Protection Policy (Groundwaters of Victoria), No. S160, Environment Protection Authority (Victoria), December 1997 (SEPP (GoV)).

EPA, 2000. Groundwater Sampling Guidelines, Publication 669: Environment Protection Authority (Victoria).

EPA, 2003. State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria), No. S107, Environment Protection Authority (Victoria), June 2003 (SEPP (WoV)).

EPA, 2006. Hydrogeological Assessment (Groundwater Quality) Guidelines, Publication 668: Environment Protection Authority (Victoria).

EPA, 2009. Industrial Waste Resource Guidelines (IWRG): Sampling and Analysis of Waters, Wastewaters, Soils and Wastes, Publication IWRG701: Environment Protection Authority (Victoria).

NEPC, 2013. National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Amendment Measure 2013 (No. 1), Canberra: National Environment Protection Council.

Standards Australia, 2005. Guide to the Investigation and Sampling of Sites with Potentially Contaminated Soil, Part 1: Non-Volatile and Semi-Volatile Compounds, Australian Standard: AS4482.1-2005.

Standards Australia, 1999. Guide to the Sampling and Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Soil. Part 2: Volatile Substances, Australian Standard: AS4882.2-1999.

3.2 Fieldwork Methodology

The soil and groundwater investigations (excluding geotechnical scope) were generally completed as per the recommended scope of works from the Revision 1 proposal (Senversa, 2015), including:

A targeted / data-gap soil investigation program, involving the collection of soil samples from 20 environmental and / or geotechnical intrusive locations (SB200-SB214 and MW08-MW11). The objective was to complete a broader coverage in areas which had limited historical assessment and / or in close proximity to potential sources of contamination. More specifically, the rationale for the soil bore locations is provided in the table below.

Drilling and construction of four additional groundwater monitoring wells down-gradient (i.e. in the direction of groundwater flow) of potential areas of concern as described in the table below.

A site-wide GME, including water level gauging, purging and collection of groundwater samples from the four new and five existing monitoring wells. It should be noted that PBMW01 could not be located during the GME and is inferred to have been buried / destroyed beneath a new gravel layer.

Area Rationale Bore IDs

Embankment along Lydiard Street

To provide an understanding of the contamination status of the embankment soils that are likely to require removal for buildings in areas (areas not previously assessed).

SB201, SB202, SB206

Goods Shed Target former AST outside Goods Shed and to provide an understanding of the contamination status of the soils beneath the Goods Shed (area not previously assessed).

SB203, SB212, SB213, SB214

Methodology

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 10

Area Rationale Bore IDs

Abandoned rail corridor To provide an understanding of the contamination status of the soils within the abandoned rail corridor (area not previously assessed).

SB209, SB210

PAH hotspot areas / grid infill / geotechnical infill (including off-site bore on Council land).

Confirm the presence of PAH hotspots identified from previous investigation works, general grid and geotechnical infill locations.

SB200, SB204, SB205, SB207, SB208, SB211

Tar tanks and workshop areas

Target the former tar tanks / workshop area to confirm soil contamination status and assess groundwater quality beneath area.

MW08, MW08_HA

British Imperial Oil Company and cattle yard

Assess the groundwater quality down-gradient of former British Imperial Oil Company Depot and cattle yard and PBMW01.

MW09

Loading platforms outside eastern end of Good Shed

Target former dissolved phase hydrocarbon impacts east of Goods Shed and replacement well for EGISMW02.

MW10

Western boundary (adjacent Yarrowee Creek)

Assess groundwater quality along western boundary of assessment area and potential discharge to Yarrowee stone drain culvert, down-gradient of nitrate impacts PBMW07.

MW11

Figure 2 shows the soil and groundwater investigation locations completed during the Supplementary ESA. The following table describes the methodology employed during the fieldworks program:

Activity Item Description

Soil Sampling and Installation of Monitoring Wells, Development

Date/s 24-27 August 2015

Subcontractors Star Drilling, Urban Drilling

Method The 19 soil bores sampled as part of this investigation were advanced until natural soils were reached or until refusal. Concrete coring or solid augering techniques were used to penetrate areas with concrete and bitumen. Hand clearance to 1.2 m or until natural soils or refusal was met was conducted. Solid auger or push tubes were then used to collect representative samples of the fill and natural soil profile, with a GeoProbe® drilling rig. Where access site restrictions were present (e.g. soil embankment), hand auger techniques were implemented to collect samples of the fill and natural soil profile. Soil samples were collected from within each fill horizon (as required) and the natural soil profile. The bores were reinstated using soil spoil and cement grout or gravel at surface. Four soil bores were converted into dual purpose groundwater monitoring wells using solid auger drilling techniques. The monitoring wells were constructed using 50 millimetre diameter well screens. Sand (8/16 washed) was used at each groundwater monitoring well around the screen. Bentonite and grout was used to seal each groundwater monitoring well from the screened interval to the ground surface. The four groundwater wells were finished with well covers, flush with the surrounding surface. Screen interval details are provided in Table 1. Each newly installed groundwater monitoring well was developed using a foot valve and high-density polyethylene tubing. The wells were purged until three well volumes of groundwater were removed or until the bores was purged dry on two separate occasions. A bore construction licence was obtained by Senversa for the four newly installed wells. The licences obtained for the works are provided within Appendix D.

Methodology

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 11


Soil Classification and Logging

Lithological conditions were logged according to Senversa standard field protocols using a modified version of the Unified Soil Classification System. Soil classification is based on field observations and only intended to provide a general indication of the soil characteristics encountered. The classifications should not be relied upon for geotechnical purposes and have not been confirmed by geotechnical testing or particle size distribution analysis. However, geotechnical information is provided within the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation report (Arup, 2015). The stratigraphy encountered during the drilling is detailed on the logs within Appendix E, summarised in Section 6.1 and select photographs are presented as Appendix F.

VOC Field Measurements

During the soil sampling works, a calibrated photo-ionisation detector (PID) was used to collect semi-quantitative VOC field measurements from targeted soil sample locations. A sub-sample of soil was placed in a snap-lock bag, which was sealed and left for a minimum of 10 minutes (maximum of one hour), prior to measurements being taken. The PID readings were taken from the head space of the bags containing the soil samples. The VOC field measurements are detailed on the lithological logs within Appendix E.

Surveying of Monitoring Well Locations

Date 3 September 2015

Methods A licensed contractor was engaged to survey the location to Map Grid Australia and elevation (m AHD) of the four newly constructed groundwater wells, as well as PBMW105 which was not surveyed previously. The survey results are shown in Appendix Q.

Accuracy A marked point on the poly vinyl chloride (PVC) casing of the monitoring well was level surveyed to the nearest 0.001 m AHD. Lateral (plan) survey tolerance was also to the nearest 0.01 m.

Standing Water Level Measurement

Date Two gauging rounds: 2 and 3 September 2015

Methodology The nine monitoring wells were gauged using a calibrated interface meter. Refer to Table 1 for gauging measurements. Groundwater levels were measured relative to the top of the PVC casing from marks indicating the point surveyed. The interface meter was decontaminated before and after each measurement with a Decon90 and water solution.

Accuracy Recorded to nearest 0.001 m with an accuracy of approximately +/- 0.003 m.

Groundwater Sampling

Dates 2-4 September 2015

Methodology Groundwater samples were collected from nine on-site groundwater monitoring wells using a low-flow sampling method in the first instance, in accordance with EPA Publication 669. The exception was EGISMW03, which was purged dry and sampled via foot valve, due to a blockage at approximately 2.0 m below top of casing and MW10 due to minimal water within the bore and slow recharge observed during well development. Where the water table was below the top of the screen, the pump intake depth was positioned approximately 1.0 m below standing water level. Water table drawdown was monitored during purging and at the completion of sampling, using an interface meter. MW09, PBMW107 exceeded Senversa’s nominated water table drawdown allowance (greater than 50 cm for wells with water above the screen interval), therefore the wells were purged dry and sampled within 24 hours upon sufficient recharge, with a dedicated disposable bailer. Groundwater was collected into laboratory-supplied containers filled with appropriate preservatives for the relevant analytes.

Methodology

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 12


Field Measurements

Field groundwater quality parameters were measured using a water quality meter and a flow-through cell. The parameters included pH, electrical conductivity (EC), dissolved oxygen, oxidation reduction potential (redox) and temperature. Table 2 provides a summary of the stabilised field parameters collected prior to sampling. Sampling of the wells occurred once water level drawdown and water quality parameters had stabilised. Limited water quality measurements were collected for wells that were purged dry. Groundwater sampling field forms are provided in Appendix H.

Field Filtering Groundwater samples that were analysed for dissolved metals were field filtered with 0.45 micron disposable filters. A new filter was used for each groundwater monitoring well location.

Equipment Calibration

Procedure The interface meter and water quality meter was calibrated by the equipment supplier prior to use. Copies of the calibration certificates are provided within Appendix I.

Sample Handling and Preservation

Procedure Samples were collected immediately and placed into laboratory-supplied jars or bottles and stored in a cooler box with ice prior to and during transit to the laboratory. Samples were transported to the laboratory with accompanying chain of custody (COC) documentation and laboratory provided security seals. Details of the sample transportation and handling can be found on the COC and Sample Receipt Notification documentation provided within Appendix J.

Avoidance of Cross Contamination

Procedure Sampling procedures used to prevent cross contamination involved:

The use of new and dedicated disposable bladders, 0.45 micron filters and low-density polyethylene tubing at each monitoring well.

Decontamination of all non-disposable groundwater sampling equipment that came into contact with groundwater between samples (i.e. interface meter, low-flow pump, and water quality meter), using a Decon90 solution followed by a clean water rinse from a separate vessel.

The use of disposable gloves that were replaced between sampling.

Waste Disposal Methodology Soil spoil generated from drilling works and wastewater from development and sampling of the monitoring wells were stored in 205 litre purge drums, which were collected by a licensed waste disposal provider for off-site disposal. Waste Transport Certificates are provided within Appendix K.

3.3 Laboratory Analysis

The analytical schedule completed during the investigation was in general accordance with that proposed, with sampling completed as outlined in the table below. The primary laboratory used for conducting the soil and groundwater analysis was Eurofins │MGT and the secondary laboratory was ALS Environmental Laboratories.

Methodology

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 13

Matrix Analytes

Soil Analysis of primary samples for the following: 2 x IWRG621 Table 2 screens (total recoverable hydrocarbons (TRH)/VOC/Vinyl

Chloride/PAH/Phenols/OCP/ PCB/Cr6+/Metals (As,Cd,Cr,Cu,Ni,Pb,Zn,Hg,Ag,Sn,Mo,Se)/Cyanide/Total Fluoride/pH).

42 x Metals (12) screens (Ag, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Mo, Ni, Pb, Se, Sn, Zn). 37 x PAH. 13 x TRH (C6-C36). 5 x Asbestos identification.

4 x VOC.

3 x Sulphate and pH.

Analysis of secondary QC samples for the following: Two field and two secondary duplicates for metals, TRH, BTEX and PAH.

Soil (Elutriation)

On receipt of the initial soil results, selected soil samples with elevated metal and PAH concentrations were analysed following elutriation using the Australian Standard Leaching Testing Procedure (ASLP). ASLP testing was undertaken using neutral reagent water to: Confirm the likely soil hazard categorisation of the fill soils.

Gain an understanding of the potential for gross metal and PAH contamination in the fill to leach into groundwater from rainwater infiltration.

This included analysis of selected primary samples for the following: 7 x IWRG621 Metals (including arsenic, cadmium, total chromium, copper, lead, mercury, molybedneum,

selenium, silver, tin and zinc).

7 x Arsenic.

4 x Nickel.

9 x Benzo(a)pyrene.

3 x Chromium (VI).

Groundwater Analysis of four primary groundwater samples from new wells: Metals (12).

TRH, PAHs.

Nitrate, ammonia, sulphate.

Analysis of five primary groundwater samples from existing wells: Metals (12), TRH and nitrate.

QC Samples: One field and one secondary duplicate for metals (12), TRH, PAH, nitrate, ammonia and sulphate.

Two rinsate blanks for metals and TRH.

The laboratory certificates of analysis and accompanying chain of custody information are provided in Appendix J.

3.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control

The data QA/QC procedures were adopted by Senversa to provide a consistent approach to evaluation of whether the data quality objectives of the project have been achieved. The process focused on assessment of the useability of the data in terms of accuracy and reliability in forming conclusions on the condition of the elements of the environment being investigated. The approach was generally based on guidance from the following sources:

Standards Australia, 2005. Guide to the Investigation and Sampling of Sites with Potentially Contaminated Soil, Part 1: Non-Volatile and Semi-Volatile Compounds, Australian Standard: AS4482.1-2005.

Methodology

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 14

NEPC, 2013. National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Amendment Measure 2013 (No. 1): Schedule B3 Guideline on Laboratory Analysis of Potentially Contaminated Soils, Canberra: National Environment Protection Council.

USEPA, 2006. Guidance on Systematic Planning Using the Data Quality Objectives Process EPA QA/G-4, Washington D.C: United States Environmental Protection Agency.

USEPA, 2002. Guidance on Environmental Data Verification and Data Validation EPA QA/G-8, Washington D.C: United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Documentation of the data QA/QC assessment is presented within Appendix L. The majority of the results conformed with acceptance criteria and the data was considered to be representative of chemical concentrations in the environmental media sampled and therefore useable for their intended purpose of the contamination status of soil and groundwater at the site.

Adopted Investigation Levels

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 15

4.0 Adopted Investigation Levels

The following section outlines the regulatory framework under which contamination is assessed and managed in Victoria, and specifies relevant objectives and/or investigation levels which have been adopted for initial assessment of whether pollution is present at the site.

4.1 Soil

4.1.1 Regulatory Framework

The State Environment Protection Policy (Prevention and Management of Contamination of Land) 2002 (SEPP (PMCL)) sets out the regulatory framework for the prevention and management of contaminated land within the State of Victoria. The intent of this framework is to maintain and maximise, to the extent practicable, the quality of the land environment in Victoria, in order to protect its existing and potential beneficial uses. The SEPP (PMCL) was declared in June 2002 in accordance with Section 16 of the Environment Protection Act, 1970, and EPA Victoria is responsible for its implementation.

The SEPP (PMCL) identifies a range of land use categories and relevant protected beneficial uses for each of these categories, as well as indicators (chemical or other characteristics) and objectives for these indicators to determine whether the level of an indicator may pose an unacceptable risk to (i.e. precludes) protected beneficial uses. A state of pollution exists where the concentration of a physical, chemical, biological or radiological characteristic (indicator) does not meet the relevant soil quality objective for that indicator and therefore precludes a protected beneficial use for a relevant land use category.

The protected beneficial uses of land at the site, and the soil quality objectives specified in the SEPP (PMCL) for each protected beneficial use of land, are discussed in the following sections.

4.1.2 Protected Beneficial Uses of Land

As discussed in Sections 2.1 the site is currently utilised for commercial purposes including; car parking, commercial leases and V/Line storage. The Master Plan Stage 1 development is proposed to comprise commercial (including car parking) and public open space uses.

In accordance with the SEPP (PMCL) the protected beneficial uses of land used for commercial and recreation / open space are the following:

Maintenance of modified ecosystems. Maintenance of highly modified ecosystems. Human health. Buildings and structures. Aesthetics.

4.1.3 Soil Quality Objectives

Soil quality objectives (also commonly referred to as investigation levels) for the protected beneficial uses of land were adopted in accordance with Table 2 of the SEPP (PMCL), and are detailed in Appendix M of this report.


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 16

4.2 Groundwater

The following section outlines the regulatory framework under which contamination is assessed and managed in Victoria, and specifies relevant objectives and/or investigation levels which have been adopted for initial assessment of whether pollution is present at the site.

4.2.1 Regulatory Framework

The State Environment Protection Policy (Groundwaters of Victoria), 1997 (SEPP (GoV)) sets out the regulatory framework for the protection of groundwater in Victoria. The goal of the policy is:

“to maintain and where necessary improve groundwater quality sufficient to protect existing and potential beneficial uses of groundwaters throughout Victoria”

The SEPP (GoV) defines a range of protected beneficial uses for defined segments of the groundwater environment, based on groundwater salinity – total dissolved solids (TDS). The SEPP (GoV) also specifies indicators (chemical or other characteristics) and objectives to assess whether the level of an indicator may pose an unacceptable risk (i.e. potentially precludes) to protected beneficial uses. Groundwater is considered polluted where one or more of the following situations exist:

The groundwater quality objectives for any protected beneficial use are exceeded. There is otherwise a detriment to a beneficial use (e.g. the presence of odours in water used for

irrigation or recreation use). Non-aqueous phase liquid is present.

Where groundwater has been polluted it must be cleaned up such that the protection of beneficial uses is restored, or if this is not possible, groundwater must be cleaned up to the extent practicable.

4.2.2 Relevant Groundwater Segment

A review of published information, laboratory analysis and field data from the site was undertaken to assess regional groundwater quality. The review identified the following:

The VVG portal indicates the typical salinity to range between 1,000-3,500 mg/L. Previous GME’s undertaken at the site reported salinity ranging between 300-5,500 mg/L. The field estimated TDS results (based on EC) showed that the groundwater concentrations

approximately ranged from 200-4,300 mg/L, which was relatively consistent with previous results. Taking into consideration the above information, groundwater has conservatively been considered to be Segment A1, which is defined in the SEPP (GoV) as groundwater having a TDS in the range 0-500 mg/L.

4.2.3 Protected Beneficial Uses of Groundwater

In accordance with the SEPP (GoV) the protected beneficial uses for Segment A1 groundwater are:

Maintenance of ecosystems. Potable water supply. Potable mineral water supply. Primary contact recreation. Agriculture, parks and gardens. Stock watering. Industrial/commercial uses.

Building and structures.


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 17

4.2.4 Groundwater Quality Objectives

Groundwater quality objectives (also commonly referred to as investigation levels) for the protected beneficial uses of groundwater were adopted in accordance with Table 3 of the SEPP (GoV), and are detailed in Appendix M of this report.

4.3 Soil Hazard Categorisation

The current EPA Victoria guidance document for the categorisation of soil for off-site disposal is the Industrial Waste Resource Guidelines (IWRG) - Soil Hazard Categorisation and Management, June 2009 (Publication IWRG621). Soils that require off-site disposal can be categorised as Fill Material, Category C Contaminated Soil, Category B Contaminated Soil and Category A Contaminated Soil. The following table is a summary of the category and management options for soil, as provided within Publication IWRG621.

Waste Categories

Description Potential Management Options

Off-Site Disposal Requirements

Category A Contaminated soils that display any specific hazard characteristics as listed in Table 1 IWRG621 or any contaminant levels above TC2 or ASLP2 thresholds as listed in Table 2 IWRG621.

On-site remediation

Off-site remediation

Storage pending availability of treatment

No disposal to landfill

EPA transport certificates must be used

Vehicles must hold EPA permit (unless exemption issued)

Category B Contaminated soils with any contaminant level greater than TC1, but below TC2, or greater than ASLP1, but below ASLP2 as listed in Table 2 IWRG621.

On-site remediation


Disposal to Licensed facility

Disposal to licensed facility



Category C Soils with any contaminant level greater than TCO, but below the TC1 and ASLP1 thresholds as listed in Table 2 IWRG621.

On-site remediation


Disposal to Licensed facility

Secondary Beneficial Reuse

EPA Reclassification Application

Disposal to licensed landfill



Fill Material Soils with all contaminant levels below the TCO threshold as listed in Table 2 IWRG621.

No regulatory requirements No regulatory requirements. General obligations under Environment Protection Act, 1970 to prevent adverse impacts.

Notes: TC = total concentrations, ALSP = leachable concentrations (Australian Standard Leaching Procedure).

Soil Contamination Assessment

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 18

5.0 Soil Contamination Assessment

The results of the Supplementary ESA have been used to further assess and characterise the extent of previously identified contamination, as detailed below.

5.1 Ground Profile

The geology observed during the drilling works was generally consistent with the previous soil investigation works undertaken at the site and comprised:

Fill consisting of a mixture of gravels, sands, silts and clays; with trace to minor anthropogenic material including brick, mesh, glass, wood, charcoal, plastic, slag and terracotta tile fragments. The fill was extremely heterogeneous, but was generally more granular at the surface and more cohesive with depth, with less anthropogenic material. It should be noted that no visible asbestos containing material was observed during the field program.

Hydrocarbon odours were not observed during the intrusive works, with the exception of MW08 and MW08_SB (down-gradient of former tar tanks and workshops), where degraded hydrocarbon-like odours were noted within fill and natural soils.

The fill ranged in thickness from 0.2 to 10.5 m bgl and was generally thickest in the northeast portion of the site (infilled embankment areas i.e. areas of deep filling). This is illustrated by the Arup fill thickness contour plan provided in Appendix N.

The natural soils generally consisted of orange brown extremely weathered basaltic silts and clays of the NVF and / or extremely weathered orange, red and yellow silts and clays of the OCG.

The spatial distribution of the two formations varies across the site and generally consists of:

Thick NVF flows across the southern half of the site (in excess of 10 m).

Thin NVF flows across the majority of the northern half of the site (1-4 m thick) underlain by the OCG formation (to depth of investigations).

Thick OCG along portions of the northern site boundary and beneath areas of deep filling within the northeast area of the site.

Lithological logs (new and relevant historical) and photographs of the soil profile at select locations are included in Appendix E and Appendix F, respectively. Fill thickness and cross-section figures completed by Arup (2015) have been included as Appendix N. Further discussion surrounding the subsurface profile is provided within the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation report (Arup, 2015).

5.2 Soil Analytical Results

Soil laboratory results (including relevant historical results) from the field program are summarised against the adopted soil investigation levels in Table 3 and Figure 3 (Ecosystem protection and Human Health Commercial Use). These results show that the fill and some natural soils contain widespread:

Copper, nickel, zinc, benzo(a)pyrene and to a lesser extent arsenic, total chromium, lead and TRH concentrations above the adopted environmental investigation levels for public open space and commercial uses (NEPM 2013 Ecological Investigation Levels (EILs)/ Ecological Screening Levels (ESLs)).

Benzo(a)pyrene toxic equivalence quotient (TEQ) (zero) and isolated arsenic, lead and total PAH concentrations above relevant human health investigation levels for public open space and commercial land use (NEPM 2013 Setting C & D Health Investigation Levels (HILs)/Health Screening Levels (HSL)).


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 19

The metals (excluding nickel) and benzo(a)pyrene concentrations greater than adopted criteria are considered to be associated with historical filling, rather than a point source or sources of contamination. However, the impacts were more dominant in the northern portion of the site, particularly along the northwest embankment and areas of deep filling (refer to Figure 3). The reported nickel concentrations are considered to be associated with the basaltic composition of imported gravels commonly used across the site in access roadways and beneath structures. Elevated TRH concentrations above adopted environmental investigation levels are considered to be representative of site-derived historical areas of concern (i.e. former tar tanks and AST) as well as historical northwest embankment and deep filling areas.

The results compared against the NEPM 2013 soil health screening levels (HSL) for vapour intrusion, were less than the HSL for all land use settings (conservatively assuming sand for material between 0 m to 1 m depth - Refer to Appendix M and Table 1A(3), Schedule B1). This indicates that overall there is a negligible vapour intrusion risk to on or off-site receptors from the identified soil impacts.

Results of the five asbestos identification tests indicate that whilst asbestos fibres are present on-site (detected at SB206), no asbestos was reported at or above the reporting limit of 0.01% weight by weight (w/w). It is also noted that the estimated asbestos concentration was 0.00002% (w/w), which is less than the commercial HSL (0.001% (w/w)).

5.3 Impact on Beneficial of Land

The table below summarises the impact the identified contamination poses to the protected beneficial uses of land, including the proposed commercial use and potential ‘sensitive use’ public open spaces.

Beneficial Use

Beneficial Use Potentially Precluded (Y / N)

Comment

Sensitive Commercial

Maintenance of Ecosystem

Y Y The fill contains elevated metal (including arsenic, chromium (III+VI), copper, lead, nickel and zinc), benzo(a)pyrene and TPH >C10 concentrations that are potentially detrimental to maintenance of slightly to moderately modified ecosystems. These results indicate that some soils at the site may not be suitable for unrestricted use in areas of proposed gardens or soft landscaping. In the context of the proposed public open space and commercial development, the risk to the protected beneficial use could be readily managed with one of the following control measures:

Depending upon the nature of the density of development, eliminating soft-landscaping within the development (i.e. permanent hard standing surface across the entire site).

Providing at least 0.5 m of clean fill cover in proposed soft-landscaping, public open space areas or utilising planter boxes in areas where 0.5 m of clean fill cover is not practical. It should be noted that due to geotechnical constraints, the site would need to be raised by a minimum of 0.1-0.6 m depending on the area (e.g. pavements, car parking areas, heavy load roadways) (Arup, 2015).


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 20

Beneficial Use

Beneficial Use Potentially Precluded (Y / N)

Comment

Sensitive Commercial

Human Health Y Y The fill and some natural soils contain elevated metal (including arsenic, and lead), benzo(a)pyrene TEQ (zero) and total PAHs that pose a potential risk to human health, under a sensitive and commercial land use setting. In the context of the proposed public open space and commercial development, the risk to the protected beneficial could be readily managed with the measures mentioned above (i.e. reducing contact with existing fill soils). However, the heterogeneous fill poses a potential risk to construction workers and future maintenance workers that may penetrate the hardstand and be exposed to the underlying soils, as well as future site users if surface covers (hard standing and clean fill in soft landscaping) are not maintained. These risks would need to be managed by the implementation of a soil contamination management plan with relevant control measures.

Buildings & Structures

N N Limited pH (5.7-8.5 pH units) and sulphate (non-detect) results, when compared to Table 6.4.2(C) ‘Exposure Classification for Concrete Piles – Piles in Soil’ within Australian Standard (AS2159) Piling – Design and Installation (2009), indicate the soils to be non-aggressive in low permeability soils to concrete structures and unlikely to preclude the protected beneficial use of buildings and structures.

Aesthetics Y N The anthropogenic material and isolated hydrocarbon-like odours are not considered to be aesthetically displeasing in the context of the proposed commercial/public open space development where hardstand covers exist and minimal to no access to soils is proposed. However, if access to fill soils is proposed, the anthropogenic material and hydrocarbon-like odours have the potential to be aesthetically displeasing and may warrant management, as part of any redevelopment (e.g. planter boxes and 0.5 m of clean fill).

5.4 Risk to Groundwater (Risk of Leaching)

EPA Publication IWRG621, Solid Industrial Waste Hazard Categorisation, June 2009, provides criteria for contaminant leachability (ASLP) when considering the disposal of impacted material to landfill. ASLP1 criteria from Appendix 3 of Publication IWRG621 (equivalent to Category C criteria), are generally derived from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (1996) Guideline Health Values, multiplied by a dilution/attenuation factor of 100. The application of this factor is based on the USEPA approach developed criteria which was derived using a target concentration in the receiving environment (in this case, NHMRC drinking water guidelines) to account for dilution and attenuation between a landfill and receptor. Whilst not a landfill setting, leachable contaminant concentrations can be compared to ASLP criteria to give an indication of contaminant mobility in the subsurface.

Table 5 provides the results of the limited leachate testing undertaken at the site. A review of the results noted that the reported concentrations were below the IWRG ‘Category C Contaminated Soil’ threshold limits, with the exception of lead at one location (SB209) which marginally exceeded ‘Category C Contaminated Soil’ threshold limits. These results and the absence of elevated concentrations in the natural soils suggest that the identified contamination does not pose an unacceptable risk to groundwater.


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 21

5.5 Preliminary Soil Hazard Categorisation

The results (including relevant historical results) are summarised against the IWRG threshold values in Table 4 and spatially within Figures 4a-4c. The results show that the fills soils and some natural soils contain widespread elevated metal (arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, tin and zinc), benzo(a)pyrene and total PAHs and TRH C10-C36 above the ‘Fill Material’ threshold limits. A review of the results spatially and vertically indicated:

Shallow soils at the site (0.0-0.6 m bgl) are predominately above the ‘Fill Material’ Upper Limits with the deep filling (northeast site area), western embankment and central northern site boundary areas being hotspots for ‘Category B’ and / or ‘Category A’ soils.

Soil samples analysed between 0.6-1.2 m depth were generally categorised as ‘Fill Material’ or ‘Category C’ material with the exception of five locations along the northern boundary in areas of deep filling acting as hotspots for ‘Category B’ and / or ‘Category A’ soils.

Soil samples analysed greater than 1.2 m depth were categorised as ‘Fill Material’ or ‘Category C’ material, with the exception of two locations along the northeast site boundary within areas of deep filling, continuing to be hotspots for ‘Category B’ or ‘Category A’ soils.

Based on reported concentrations collected to date, a site-wide statistical approach would not reduce the soil hazard categorisation to ‘Category C’ material or below, without costly hotspot remediation of several areas across the site. However, as mentioned in Section 5.4, the majority of elutriation testing undertaken on selected samples reported metal and benzo(a)pyrene concentrations below the ‘Fill Material’ Upper Limits. This data suggests that the fill soils within the proposed development footprint could potentially be reclassified as “Immobilised Category C Contaminated Soil”.

Acceptance of this opinion would ultimately be determined by the EPA, however if approved, would significantly reduce costs of soil removal that are likely to be surplus to needs, as part of the proposed development. Additional testing to increase the elutriation sampling density at different pH levels would also be required.

Groundwater Contamination Assessment

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 22

6.0 Groundwater Contamination Assessment

The results of the Supplementary ESA have been used to assess and characterise the extent of groundwater quality at the site, as discussed below.

6.1 Targeted Groundwater Systems

The nine monitoring wells sampled during this GME were screened across three shallow aquifer systems:

Perched fill: MW10.

Perched fill and silty clay: PBMW04 (screened across the fill, weathered NVF and weathered OCG, however, based on moisture observations described during drilling this bore is inferred to be screened across both the perched fill and OCG aquifers).

Weathered basaltic clays of the NVF: EGISMW03, PBMW107, PBMW108 and MW11. Weathered silty clays of the OCG: PBMW105, MW08 and MW09.

Spatially distributed, the NVF appears to be the uppermost regional aquifer system within the southern half of the site (average yield), and the OCG the uppermost regional aquifer system within the northern half of the site (average yield). The perched groundwater in the fill is considered to be a low yielding and discontinuous system that is non-existent over the majority of the site (primarily northeast deep filling areas).

6.2 Groundwater Flow and Chemistry

A summary of the groundwater gauging results from 2015 and 2014 are provided in Table 1. Groundwater chemistry and field measurements recorded prior to sampling at each monitoring well are provided in Table 2. Figure 4 presents the reduced groundwater levels (m AHD) and inferred groundwater flow direction. A review of these results noted that:

Depth to groundwater during gauging ranged from <0.1 m bgl (PBMW105) in the northeast corner of the site where the site has been cut into the natural soil profile to 8.5 m bgl (MW10) in the northeast portion of the site where deep filling is present.

The groundwater flow direction is to the southeast towards Yarrowee River Stone Drain Culvert consistent with historical gauging events.

Groundwater levels have risen by approximately 0.3 m from the previous monitoring event in November 2014 (Senversa, 2015). The rise in water levels is consistent with increased rainwater infiltration occurring during winter.

The monitoring wells were generally determined, based on available screen interval and total bore depth information, to have water levels above the screen, with the exception of MW10 and PBMW107. However, LNAPL is unlikely to be present at the well locations, based on drilling observations and absence of detectable hydrocarbon contaminants in groundwater (refer to Section 6.3).

Groundwater chemistry recorded during purging indicated slightly acidic to neutral pH conditions, relatively fresh groundwater (TDS), redox and dissolved oxygen measurements that were indicative of oxidising and aerobic conditions. There were no distinct groundwater chemistry correlations when compared against the three formations sampled.

Although the wells are screened within various lithologies, the groundwater sampled appears to be interconnected and is considered to be representative of the overall conditions of the shallow aquifer system.


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 23

6.3 Groundwater Analytical Results

The groundwater laboratory results (2014 and 2015) compared against the adopted groundwater quality objectives are provided as Table 6 in the ‘Tables’ section of the report. Figure 5 also illustrates the 2015 exceedences above the adopted groundwater quality objectives.

The 2015 analytical results were relatively consistent with the 2014 results and were predominantly below adopted investigation levels, with the exception of:

Metals (cadmium, copper, lead, nickel and zinc) and PAHs (benzo(a)pyrene and fluoranthene) that exceeded the Maintenance of Ecosystems investigation levels.

Nickel, nitrate and benzo(a)pyrene that exceeded Potable Water Supply and Primary Contact Recreation investigation levels.

Benzo(a)pyrene that exceeded Stock Watering investigation levels.

Hydrocarbon concentrations were not detected at the site, particularly wells located at or near where hydrocarbon impacts (outside the southeast end of the Former Goods Shed or within the commuter car park immediately south of the southeast end of the Former Goods Shed) were historically reported during the CMPS&F 1998b, Egis 2001/2002, PB 2003 and / or PB 2006 GMEs.

With the exception of the nitrate and PAH impacts (MW08 only), the reported concentrations are likely to be representative of regional and/or naturally occurring background concentrations. However, both the nitrate and PAH impacts are considered to be isolated to the site and delineated down-gradient.

The source of nitrate impacts are unknown, however, are likely to be associated with leaking sewerage pipework failures in the area or historical locomotive wash-down activities. The slightly elevated PAH concentrations were reported within the secondary laboratory QC sample, results of which were rerun and reconfirmed. These minor impacts could be associated with the former tar tanks or colloidal matter within the groundwater samples. More specifically, Eurofins (primary laboratory) extracts groundwater from the groundwater sampling bottles once colloidal matter has settled and ALS (secondary laboratory) shakes and extracts groundwater and fine colloidal matter from groundwater sampling bottles. This could be confirmed with a confirmatory sampling round from the wells.

6.4 Impacts to Beneficial Uses of Groundwater

Based on the SEPP (GoV) and results of the groundwater investigation, the impacts on the protected beneficial uses of groundwater, the source of the impact and its relevance to assessment of risk can be summarised as follows:

Protected Beneficial Use

Beneficial Use Potentially Precluded (Y/N)

Relevance of Beneficial Use

Comment/Rationale

Maintenance of Ecosystems – Fresh

Yes Relevant, however only at point of discharge

The beneficial use Maintenance of Ecosystems applies at the point of groundwater discharge to surface water. This is considered to be Yarrowee River, Canadian Creek and Specimen Vale Creek located approximately 600-900 m south to southeast of the site and potentially Yarrowee River Culvert located along the southeast site boundary. Whilst concentrations of cadmium, copper, lead, nickel, zinc and PAHs (benzo(a)pyrene and fluoranthene) exceed relevant screening levels on-site, they are considered unlikely to preclude the maintenance of ecosystems beneficial use at the point of discharge. The metals concentrations are also considered to be representative of natural and/or regional background quality. Elevated PAH concentrations are also considered to be delineated down-gradient and are likely to be isolated to the site, thus are not considered to preclude this beneficial use.


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 24

Protected Beneficial Use

Beneficial Use Potentially Precluded (Y/N)

Relevance of Beneficial Use

Comment/Rationale

Potable Water Supply

Yes Not relevant on-site

Concentrations of nickel, nitrate and benzo(a)pyrene pose a potential risk to this beneficial use. However, due to the lack of registered potable water supply groundwater extraction bores within close proximity to the site as well as the general area being connected to the reticulated mains water supply, it is unlikely that groundwater would be extracted at or in the vicinity of the site and used for drinking purposes. As such, the risk to the adopted beneficial use is considered to be low.

Potable Mineral Water Supply

No Not relevant on-site

The site is not within a known mineral water province, however, upon review of the VVG database two mineral spring bores (IDs 121.1 and 122.1) were identified approximately 5 km southeast (down-gradient) of the site. Both bores (screen depths unknown) have been labelled as fresh spring water bores which can sometimes be bottled as mineral water. As these bores are inferred to be located within a different geological sequence and aquifer this beneficial use is not considered relevant.

Agriculture, Parks and Gardens


No reported exceedences.

Stock Watering Yes Not relevant Slightly elevated benzo(a)pyrene concentrations are delineated by down-gradient on-site monitoring wells and are likely to be confined to the site. Groundwater use for stock watering is not considered relevant at the site given the primarily commercial nature of the proposed development. Furthermore, there are no extractive use groundwater bores registered for stock use located on or in the vicinity of the site, and the region is within an urbanised area.

Industrial Water Use


Groundwater use for industrial purposes is not considered relevant at the site given the primarily commercial nature of the proposed development. One registered industrial use bore (WRK054827) is located down gradient, approximately 150 m southeast of the site. The reported dissolved concentrations are not considered to preclude this beneficial use. The total depth of the industrial bore is also 72 m bgl, which is unlikely to be connected to shallow groundwater beneath the site.

Primary Contact Recreation

Yes Not relevant on-site

No surface water bodies including swimming pools currently exist on-site or are proposed as part of the future development. This beneficial use also requires protection for the recreational users of groundwater in the vicinity of the site, however, the concentrations of nickel, nitrate and benzo(a)pyrene contaminants in groundwater are generally low and are expected to attenuate prior to discharge to nearby surface water receptors. Use of extracted groundwater on or down gradient of the site for swimming or bathing (e.g. for filling of a swimming pool) is possible, however is considered unlikely as the site is located within an urbanised area (i.e. a full reticulated town water supply being readily available). As such, the risk to the adopted beneficial use is considered to be low.

Building & Structures

No Relevant Due to the presence of shallow aquifer systems there is a potential for future building foundations and subsurface structures (e.g. piles or basement) to come into contact with groundwater. However, available sulphate concentrations were non-detect, TDS concentrations were low and pH ranged between 4.9-7.3 pH units. Arup’s Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation report (Arup, 2015) concluded that the shallow groundwater is non-aggressive based on pH, to buildings and structures.

Conclusions and Recommendations

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 25

7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

7.1 Summary of Findings

The results and findings of the Supplementary ESA works can be summarised as follows:

The site is underlain by heterogeneous fill that is generally less than 1.0 m thick across the site, but up to 10.5 m deep in the northeast portion of the site. This fill comprises a mixture of gravels, sands, silts and clays; with trace to minor amounts of anthropogenic material including brick, mesh, glass, wood, charcoal, plastic, slag and terracotta tile fragments. Depending on the site area, the natural soils generally consisted of orange brown extremely weathered basaltic silts and clays of the Newer Volcanics Formation and / or extremely weathered orange, red and yellow silts and clays of the Ordovician Castlemaine Group.

Groundwater is present with three shallow formations across the site, including the fill, Newer Volcanics Formation and Ordovician Castlemaine Group. The depths range from 0.1 m bgl (PBMW105) in the northeast corner of the site where the site has been cut into the natural soil profile to 8.5 m bgl in the eastern portion of the site where deep filling is present.

Supplementary soil investigation works, combined with historical laboratory data, shows that the fill soils comprise:

Widespread copper, nickel, zinc, benzo(a)pyrene and to a lesser extent arsenic, chromium (III+VI), lead and TRH concentrations above the adopted environmental investigation levels for public open space and commercial uses.

Widespread PAH and isolated arsenic and lead concentrations above the human health investigation levels for public open space that was more predominate in the northern portion of the site, particularly along the northwest embankment and areas of deep filling.

Isolated PAH concentrations above the above the human health investigation levels for commercial use in the northern portion of the site.

Comparison of the supplementary and historical data against the IWRG Soil Hazard Categorisation Threshold Limits suggests that the bulk of the fill soils can be categorised as Category C Contaminated Soil with some Category B and A contaminated soil in the northern portion of the site. However, leaching testing to date suggests the metal and PAH contaminants are immobile and the fills soils around the development area could potentially be reclassified (with EPA approval) as “Immobilised Category C Contaminated Soil”.

The groundwater investigation works identified elevated metal (cadmium, copper, lead, nickel and zinc), nitrate and PAHs (benzo(a)pyrene and fluoranthene) concentrations above the adopted groundwater quality objectives. With the exception of nitrate and PAHs, the reported concentrations are likely to be representative of regional and/or naturally occurring background concentrations. The source of nitrate impacts are unknown, but are likely to be associated with leaking sewerage pipework failures in the area or historical locomotive wash-down activities. The slightly elevated PAH concentrations are likely to be associated with fine colloidal matter in the groundwater samples or possible residual impacts from the former tar tanks. Both the nitrate and PAH impacts are considered to be isolated to the site and are not expected to affect the proposed development, where extractive groundwater beneficial uses are not proposed.


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 26

7.2 Impact on Proposed Development

The site contains widespread metal and PAH contamination in the fill and some natural soils that are more prevalent in the northern portion of the site, particularly along the northwest embankment and in areas of deep filling. These soils pose a potential risk to human health and the maintenance of ecosystems, but can be readily managed in the context of the proposed commercial and public open space development of the site. More specifically, it is recommended that:

The fill soils are capped with permanent hard standing surfaces in commercial use areas (e.g. building footprints, roadways and car parking) and at least 0.5 m of clean fill cover is placed in proposed public open space areas with soft landscaping. Alternatively for areas where 0.5 m of clean fill cover is not practical, planter boxes could be utilised for proposed decorative trees and plants in smaller soft-landscaping areas. It should be noted that due to geotechnical considerations, the site would already need to be raised by a minimum of 0.1-0.6 m depending on the area (e.g. pavements, car parking areas, heavy load roadways) (Arup, 2015).

A pre and post soil contamination management plan is prepared to manage the health risk to future site users as well as future construction and maintenance workers that will be completing below-ground intrusive works that may come into direct contact with underlying soils.

The generation of excess spoil during construction also has potential significant landfill disposal cost implications. As such, opportunities to minimise soil disposal and retain excess spoil on-site should be considered. These may include (subject to geotechnical conditions and other regulatory and / or VicTrack land owner requirements): Alternative foundation and pavement design solutions to minimise the generation of excess spoils. Reuse of excess spoil in the eastern portion of the site, in accordance with VicTrack’s Soil Reuse

Guidelines. Movement across title boundaries may also require EPA approval. Setback of proposed carpark and hotel building from Lydiard Street North, to prevent excavation

of contaminated soil from the existing northwest embankments and allow excess fill from construction works to be from entombment beneath access ramps and walkways to Lydiard Street North.

Maintain proposed site levels close to or slightly above existing site levels to achieve a neutral or cut and fill deficit.

Consolidate proposed service corridors and public open space areas to minimise soil handling. Ensure the proposed public open space areas are 0.5 m above existing site levels, to prevent

excavation of fill soils to accommodate the proposed 0.5 m of clean fill cover. Recycling of newer ballast can also be considered where it can be demonstrated that the ballast is geotechnical suitable for reuse and can be treated as a construction material and Solid Industrial Waste. However, most of the on-site ballast is old with high fine proportions that would need to be treated as a soil or mechanically screened to separate the fines from the rock aggregate that could potentially be reused and recycled.

7.3 Additional Recommendations

The recommendations outlined above and opportunities to minimise soil disposal and retain excess spoil on-site should be considered for proposed master planning of the site. It is also recommended that a waste reclassification application be submitted for the proposed development area to EPA to seek a reclassification of fills soils to ‘Immobilised Category C Contaminated Soils’. At this stage, there is limited elutriation data across the site and the reclassification application would require additional testing to increase the elutriation sampling density at different elutriation pH levels. Whilst a blanket site-wide reclassification application would be advantageous, additional testing could be limited to areas where larger volumes of soil surplus to needs is likely to require off-site disposal (i.e. proposed hotel area within the northwest embankment areas of the site). If successful, this would allow more freedom surrounding design opportunities, significantly reduce costs of soil removal and


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 27

prevent the need for double soil handling and alternative engineering designs. Limitations of Investigation

7.4 Inherent Uncertainties and Limitations

The investigation works herein are intended to develop and present sound, scientifically valid data concerning actual site conditions. Senversa does not seek or purport to provide legal or business advice.

The following principles are an integral part of site contamination assessment practices and are intended to be referred to in resolving any ambiguity or exercising such discretion as is accorded the user or site assessor.

Area Field Observations and Analytical Results

Elimination of Uncertainty

Some uncertainty is inherent in all site investigations. Furthermore, any sample, either surface or subsurface, taken for chemical testing may or may not be representative of a larger population or area. Professional judgment and interpretation are inherent in the process, and even when exercised in accordance with objective scientific principles, uncertainty is inevitable. Additional assessment beyond that which was reasonably undertaken may reduce the uncertainty.

Failure to Detect Even when site investigation work is executed competently and in accordance with the appropriate Australian guidance, such as the National Environmental Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Amendment Measure (‘the NEPM’), it must be recognised that certain conditions present especially difficult target analyte detection problems. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, complex geological settings, unusual or generally poorly understood behaviour and fate characteristics of certain substances, complex, discontinuous, random, or heterogeneous distributions of existing target analytes, physical impediments to investigation imposed by the location of services, structures and other man-made objects, and the inherent limitations of assessment technologies.

Limitations of Information

The effectiveness of any site investigation may be compromised by limitations or defects in the information used to define the objectives and scope of the investigation, including inability to obtain information concerning historic site uses or prior site assessment activities despite the efforts of the user and assessor to obtain such information..

Chemical Analysis Error

Chemical testing methods have inherent uncertainties and limitations. Senversa routinely seeks to require the laboratory to report any potential or actual problems experienced, or non-routine events which may have occurred during the testing, so that such problems can be considered in evaluating the data.

Level of Assessment

The investigation herein should not be considered to be an exhaustive assessment of environmental conditions on a property. There is a point at which the effort of information obtained and the time required to obtain it outweigh the benefit of the information gained and, in the context of private transactions and contractual responsibilities, may become a material detriment to the orderly conduct of business. If the presence of target analytes is confirmed on a property, the extent of further assessment is a function of the degree of confidence required and the degree of uncertainty acceptable in relation to the objectives of the assessment.

Comparison with Subsequent Inquiry

The justification and adequacy of the investigation findings in light of the findings of a subsequent inquiry should be evaluated based on the reasonableness of judgments made at the time and under the circumstances in which they were made.

Data Useability

Investigation data generally only represent the site conditions at the time the data were generated. Therefore, the usability of data collected as part of this investigation may have a finite lifetime depending on the application and use being made of the data. In all respects, a future reader of this report should evaluate whether previously generated data are appropriate for any subsequent use beyond the original purpose for which they were collected, or are otherwise subject to lifetime limits imposed by other laws, regulations or regulatory policies.

Nature of Advice The investigation works herein are intended to develop and present sound, scientifically valid data concerning actual site conditions. Senversa does not seek or purport to provide legal or business advice.


m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 28

7.5 Project Specific Uncertainties

Specific uncertainties and limitations noted for this investigation are as follows:

The scope of the investigation was limited to a supplementary assessment of soil and groundwater, to assess risk to the proposed commercial and public open space land use. Further investigation works would be required to satisfy the minimum requirements of a Section 53X Environmental Audit, should it be required in the future.

The assessment is based on a review of the condition of the site at the time of assessment. Senversa’s conclusions presented in this report are therefore based on the information available during the assessment.

The scope of work performed as part of this assessment may not be appropriate to satisfy the needs of any other person. Any other person’s use of, or reliance on, the findings, conclusions, recommendations or any other material presented herein, is at that person’s sole risk.

The Supplementary ESA did not include an assessment of hazardous building materials (e.g. asbestos or synthetic mineral fibres, lead based paints), the storage and handling requirements for dangerous goods or any matters relating to cultural heritage significance.

References

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 29

8.0 References

ANZECC, 1992. Australian Water Quality Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Waters, Canberra: Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council.

ANZECC & ARMCANZ, 2000. Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, National Water Quality Management Strategy Document 4: Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council & Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand.

ANZECC & ARMCANZ, 2000. Australian Guidelines for Water Quality Monitoring and Reporting, National Water Quality Management Strategy Document 7: Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council & Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand.

Arup, 2015. VicTrack, RDV, PTV – Ballarat Station Precinct Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Arup Pty Ltd.

CMPS&F, 1998a. V/Line Freight Corporation Environmental Assessment – Preliminary Draft Phase 1 Report, CMPS&F.

CMPS&F, 1998b. V/Line Freight Corporation Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment, Lydiard Street, Ballarat, CMPS&F.

DSE, 2005. Potentially Contaminated Land General Practice Note, June 2005, State of Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment.

Egis, 2001. Progress Report: Groundwater Sampling at Freight Australia’s Country Sites, Egis Consulting Australia Pty Ltd.

Egis, 2002. Groundwater Sampling at Freight Australia Site, Lydiard Street, Ballarat, Victoria, Egis Consulting Australia Pty Ltd.

EPA, 2000. Groundwater Sampling Guidelines, Publication 669: Environment Protection Authority (Victoria).

EPA, 2002. Clean Up and Management of Polluted Groundwater, Publication 840: Environmental Protection Authority (Victoria).

EPA, 2006. Hydrogeological Assessment (Groundwater Quality) Guidelines, Publication 668: Environment Protection Authority (Victoria).

EPA, 2009. Industrial Waste Resource Guidelines (IWRG): Sampling and Analysis of Waters, Wastewaters, Soils and Wastes, Publication IWRG701: Environment Protection Authority (Victoria).

EPA, 2009. A Guide to Sampling and Analysis of Water, Wastewaters, Soils and Wastes, Publication 441: Environmental Protection Authority (Victoria).

ERM, 2007. Final Environmental Report – Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment, Pacific National, Ballarat Rail Yard, Lydiard Street, Ballarat, Victoria, Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd.

GA, 2005a. Revised Contamination Feasibility Assessment – Ballarat Railway Station Site, Ballarat Transit City, Golder Associates Pty Ltd.

GA, 2005b. Ballarat Transit City Development – Preliminary Geotechnical Advice, Golder Associates Pty Ltd.

GSV, 1974. Ballarat (1:63,380), Geological Survey of Victoria.

Lane Piper, 2009. Synopsis Report on Contamination, corner Lydiard and Nolan Streets, Ballarat, Victoria, Lane Piper Pty Ltd.

References

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2 30

NEPC, 2013. National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Amendment Measure 2013 (No.1) (NEPM). National Environmental Protection Council.

NHMRC & NRMMC, 2011. Australian Drinking Water Guidelines, National Water Quality Management Strategy Document 6: National Health and Medical Research Council & Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council.

NHMRC, 2008. Guidelines for Managing Risks in Recreational Water, Canberra, ACT: National Health and Medical Research Council.

PB, 2003. Draft Environmental Site Assessment – Ballarat Railway Station Precinct, Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd.

PB, 2006. Environmental Site Assessment – Ballarat Railway Station Precinct DRAFT, Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd.

Senversa, 2015. Groundwater Monitoring Event (November 2014) – Former Freight Yard, North of Ballarat Railway Station, Senversa Pty Ltd.

SKM, 2011. Geotechnical and Environmental Desktop Investigation, Ballarat Railway Station Precinct, Ballarat Victoria, Final V1, Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd.

Standards Australia AS4482.1 (2005) Guide to the investigation and sampling of sites with potentially contaminated soil, Part 1: Non-volatile and semi-volatile compounds

Standards Australia, 2009. Piling - Design and Installation, Australian Standard: AS2159-2009.

State of Victoria, 1970. Environment Protection Act 1970, Victoria. Act No 8056/1970 – Version No. 180

State of Victoria, 1997. State Environment Protection Policy (Groundwaters of Victoria). Victoria Government Gazette, No. S 160(17 December 1997), pp. 1-25.

State of Victoria, 2003. Variation to State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria). Victoria Government Gazette, No. S 107(4 June 2003), pp. 1-52.

USEPA, 2000. Guidance on Systematic Planning Using the Data Quality Objectives Process, EPA QA/G-4: United States Environmental Protection Agency.

USEPA, 2002. Guidance on Environmental Data Verification and Data Validation, Washington D.C: United States Environmental Protection Agency.

USEPA, 2013. Regional Screening Levels for Chemical Contaminants at Superfund Sites. [Online] Available at: http://www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/human/rb-concentration_table/index.htm [Accessed April 2015].

University of Ballarat, 2013. Visualising Victoria’s Groundwater, Centre for eCommerce and Communications, Ballarat, accessed 30 September 2015. http://www.vvg.org.au/

WHO, 2008. Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, s.l.: World Health Organisation.

Figures

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2

Figures

Figure 1: Site Location Plan

Figure 2: Site Features and Investigation Location Plan

Figure 3: Soil Exceedence Plan (Human Health Commercial Use)

Figure 4a: Soil Results from 0.0-0.6 m bgl above Soil Hazard Categorisation Thresholds

Figure 4b: Soil Results from 0.6-1.2 m bgl above Soil Hazard Categorisation Thresholds

Figure 4c: Soil Results >0.6 m bgl above Soil Hazard Categorisation Thresholds

Figure 5: Groundwater Elevation and Exceedence Plan (September 2015)

YARR

OW

EER

IVER

NEILL STREETM

AIR

STR

EET

LYDIARD STREET N

DOVETONCRESCENT

UNNAMED

HAVELOCK STREET

MARK

ETST

REET

HA

NC

OC

KS

LAN

E

EBD

EN S

TREE

T

CUTHBERTSLANE

DAVIES STREET

SEYM

OU

R S

TREE

T

SEYM

OU

RCR

ESCE

NT

ARMSTRONG STREET N

SCO

TTPA

RA

DE

COFFEE PALA

CELA

NENOLAN STREET

ARARAT STREET

DOVETON STREET N

LIGAR STREET

Form

erSh

ell D

epot

Form

erB

P D

epot

Form

erM

obil

Dep

ot

Form

erW

oody

ard

Sen

vrS

ae

±

030

6090

120

15

Met

res

1:2,

000

Des

igne

d:

Dra

wn:

Che

cked

:

File

:

E.

Vel

la

S. K

orob

litsa

s

R. G

riffin

M11

268_

02_F

001

site

loca

tion

plan

Dat

e:

Rev

isio

n:

Sc

ale:

7/10

/201

5

0

(A

3)

Lege

nd Wat

erco

urse

Surr

ound

ing

Land

use

Site

Bou

ndar

y

Path: Y:\16_GIS\Jobs\M11268_VICTRACK_BALLARAT_ESA & PRELIM GEOTECH\MXDs\02_SuppESA\M11268_02_F001 site location plan.mxd

Not

es:

Cad

astre

and

road

dat

a so

urce

d fro

m la

nd.v

ic.g

ov.a

u (D

EP

I)A

eria

l im

ager

y so

urce

d fro

m N

earm

ap P

ty L

td

Figu

re N

o:

Title

:

Proj

ect:

Loca

tion:

Clie

nt:

1 Site

Loc

atio

n Pl

an

Supp

lem

enta

ry E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

t

Balla

rat S

tatio

n P

reci

nct

VicT

rack

/ Reg

iona

l Dev

elop

men

t Vic

toria

/ Pub

lic T

rans

port

Vict

oria

Dat

um G

DA

1994

, Pro

ject

ion

MG

A Zo

ne 5

5

Gro

und

Floo

r, 51

Cla

rke

Stre

et,

Sout

hban

k V

IC 3

006

(03)

960

6 00

70

(03)

960

6 00

74w

ww

.sen

vers

a.co

m.a

u

Addr

ess:

Ph

one:

Fax:

W

ebsi

te:

This Drawing is Subject to COPYRIGHT. No portion of this drawing may be removed, extracted, copied, electronically stored or disseminated in any form without the prior written permission of Senversa.

BA

LLA

RAT

NO

RTH

LAK

EW

EN

DO

UR

EE

NE

WIN

GTO

N

BR

OW

NH

ILL

CA

NA

DIA

NM

OU

NT

PLE

AS

AN

TW

AR

RE

NH

EIP

INV

ER

MAY

ALF

RE

DTO

N

SO

LDIE

RS

HIL

LB

LAC

KH

ILL

BA

LLA

RAT

CE

NTR

AL

BA

LLA

RAT

EA

ST

DE

LAC

OM

BE

RE

DA

N

WE

ND

OU

RE

EIN

VE

RM

AYPA

RK

NE

RR

INA

!?!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?!?

!?

!?

!?

!?!?

!?

!?

!?!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?

!?!?

!?

!?

!?

@ A

@ A

@ A

@ A

@ A

@ A

@ A

D

D

D

D

@ A

D

@ A

D

D

D

MW

08

MW

09

MW

10

MW

11

PBM

W10

5

PBM

W10

7

PBM

W10

8

SB20

8

SB20

5

SB20

0_A

SB20

6

SB20

3

SB21

2

SB21

4

SB21

3

SB21

0

SB20

9

SB20

4

SB20

1

SB20

2

SB20

7

PBM

W02

PBM

W10

6

PBM

W03

PBM

W01

BH10

BH11

BH12

BH13

BH14

BH15

BH16

BH17

BH18

BH19

BH20

BH21

BH22

BH24

BH25

BH26

BH12

7

BH12

8

BH12

9

BH13

1BH

132

BH13

3BH

135

BH13

7

BH13

8BH

139

BH14

0BH

141

BH14

2BH

143

BH14

4

BH14

5

BH14

6

BH14

7

BH14

8

BH14

9

BH15

0

BH15

1BH

152BH

153

BH15

4

BH15

5

BH15

6

BH15

8BH16

0

BH16

1

BH16

2

BH16

3

BH16

4

BH1

BH2

BH3

BH4

BH5

BH6

BH7

BH8

BH9

PBM

W04

MW

3

MW

3M

W1

EGIS

MW

03

EGIS

MW

02

SB20

0

SB21

1

Wor

ksho

p

Cat

tleYa

rd

Brit

ish

Impe

rial

Oil

Co.

Was

h-O

utPl

atfo

rms

Wor

ksYa

rd

AST

Tar T

anks

MAR

KET

STRE

ET

DOVETONCRESCENT

LYDIARD STREET N

ARMSTRONG STREET N

NEILL STREET

NOLA

N ST

REET

SCOTT

PAR

ADE

ARARAT S

TREET

HAVELOCK STREET

LIGAR STREET

Form

erG

oods

She

d

Rai

lway

Sta

tion

Bui

ldin

g

YARROWEERIVER

Sen

vrS

ae

±

025

5075

100

12.5

Met

res

1:1,

250

Des

igne

d:

Dra

wn:

Che

cked

:

File

:

E.

Vel

la

S. K

orob

litsa

s

R. G

riffin

M11

268_

02_F

002

site

feat

ures

and

Inv

locs

Dat

e:

Rev

isio

n:

Sc

ale:

10/1

1/20

15

0

(A

3)

Lege

nd@ A

Gro

undw

ater

Mon

itorin

g W

ell L

ocat

ion,

Sen

vers

a 20

15

@ AG

roun

dwat

er M

onito

ring

Wel

l Loc

atio

n, P

B 2

005

@ AG

roun

dwat

er M

onito

ring

Wel

l Loc

atio

n, P

B 2

002

@ AG

roun

dwat

er M

onito

ring

Wel

l Loc

atio

n, E

GIS

199

9D

Gro

undw

ater

Mon

itorin

g W

ell L

ocat

ion,

Los

t/Des

troye

d!?

Soil

Bor

e Lo

catio

n, S

enve

rsa/

AR

UP

2015

!?So

il B

ore

Loca

tion,

PB

200

2

!?So

il B

ore

Loca

tion,

PB

200

5Fo

rmer

AS

TFo

rmer

Site

Fea

ture

sFo

rmer

Tar

Tan

ksSi

te B

ound

ary

Wat

erco

urse

Path: Y:\16_GIS\Jobs\M11268_VICTRACK_BALLARAT_ESA & PRELIM GEOTECH\MXDs\02_SuppESA\M11268_02_F002 site features and Inv locs.mxd

Figu

re N

o:

Title

:

Proj

ect:

Loca

tion:

Clie

nt:

2 Site

Fea

ture

s an

d In

vest

igat

ion

Loca

tion

Supp

lem

enta

ry E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

t

Balla

rat S

tatio

n P

reci

nct

VicT

rack

/ Reg

iona

l Dev

elop

men

t Vic

toria

/ Pub

lic T

rans

port

Vict

oria

Dat

um G

DA

1994

, Pro

ject

ion

MG

A Zo

ne 5

5

Gro

und

Floo

r, 51

Cla

rke

Stre

et,

Sout

hban

k V

IC 3

006

(03)

960

6 00

70

(03)

960

6 00

74w

ww

.sen

vers

a.co

m.a

u

Addr

ess:

Ph

one:

Fax:

W

ebsi

te:


Form

er O

il D

epot

s an

d W

oody

ard

(Mob

il, B

P, S

hell)

160

m w

est f

rom

site

@

Not

es:

Dat

a fro

m 2

002,

200

5 an

d 20

15 in

trusi

ve in

vest

igat

ions

hav

e be

en u

sed

for i

nter

pret

atio

n as

par

t of t

his

asse

ssm

ent

Cad

astre

and

road

dat

a so

urce

d fro

m la

nd.v

ic.g

ov.a

u (D

EP

I)A

eria

l im

ager

y so

urce

d fro

m N

earm

ap P

ty L

td

MW

08

MW

09

MW

10

MW

11

PB

MW

105

PB

MW

107

PB

MW

108

SB

208

SB

205

SB

200

_AS

B2

06

SB

203

SB

212

SB

214

SB

213

SB

210

SB

209

SB

204

SB

201SB

202

SB

207

PB

MW

02

PB

MW

106

PB

MW

03

PB

MW

01

BH

10

BH

11

BH

12

BH

13

BH

14

BH

15

BH

16

BH

17

BH

18

BH

19

BH

20B

H21

BH

22

BH

24

BH

25

BH

26

BH

127

BH

128

BH

129

BH

131

BH

132

BH

133

BH

135

BH

137

BH

138

BH

139

BH

140

BH

141

BH

142

BH

143

BH

144

BH

145

BH

146

BH

147

BH

148

BH

149 BH

150

BH

151

BH

152

BH

153

BH

154B

H15

5B

H15

6

BH

158

BH

160

BH

161

BH

162

BH

163

BH

164

BH

1

BH

2

BH

3

BH

4

BH

5

BH

6

BH

7

BH

8

BH

9

SB

200

LYDIARDSTREETN

ARMSTRONGSTREETN

MA

RK

ETST

REE

T

DOVETONCRESCENT

CUTHBERTSLANE

NEILLSTREET

SCOTTPA

RADE

ARARATSTREET

HAVELOCKSTREET

LIGARSTREET

YARROWEE

RIVER

Fo

rmer

Go

od

s S

hed

Rai

lway

Sta

tio

nB

uild

ing

Sen

vrS

ae

025

5075

100

12.5

Met

res

1:1,

250

Des

igne

d:

Dra

wn:

Che

cked

:

File

:

E

. Vel

la

S. K

orob

litsa

s

R. G

riffin

M11

268_

02_F

003

soil

exce

eden

ce p

lan

Dat

e:

Rev

isio

n:

S

cale

:

9/11

/201

5

1

(A

3)

Leg

end

Sam

ple

Lo

cati

on

Soi

l Bor

e Lo

catio

n (S

enve

rsa,

201

5)

Soi

l Bor

e Lo

catio

n (P

B, 2

005

)

Soi

l Bor

e Lo

catio

n (P

B, 2

002

)

Rep

ort

ed s

oil

bor

es w

ith m

etal

s or

PA

Hs

conc

entr

atio

ns a

bove

HH

Set

ting

‘C’ p

ublic

ope

n sp

ace

HIL

s (r

efe

r to

Ta

ble

3 fo

r fu

rthe

rde

tails

)

Path: Y:\16_GIS\Jobs\M11268_VICTRACK_BALLARAT_ESA & PRELIM GEOTECH\MXDs\02_SuppESA\M11268_02_F003 soil exceedence plan.mxd

Fig

ure

No

:

Titl

e:

P

roje

ct:

Loca

tion:

Clie

nt:

3 So

il E

xcee

den

ce P

lan

(H

um

an H

ealth

C

om

mer

cial

Use

Sup

plem

enta

ry E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

t

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Pre

cinc

t

Vic

Trac

k/ R

egio

nal D

evel

opm

ent V

icto

ria/ P

ublic

Tra

nspo

rt V

icto

riaD

atum

GD

A 1

994,

Pro

ject

ion

MG

A Z

one

55

Gro

und

Flo

or,

51 C

lark

e S

tre

et,

Sou

thba

nk V

IC 3

006

(03

) 96

06

007

0

(03

) 96

06

007

4w

ww

.se

nver

sa.c

om

.au

Add

ress

:

Pho

ne:

Fa

x:

We

bsite

:


B(a

)P T

EQ

(Ze

ro)

124.

7

BH

129

1.0

B(a

)P T

EQ

(Ze

ro)

157.

7

BH

260.

1

B(a

)P T

EQ

(Ze

ro)

57.1

2

BH

130.

5

B(a

)P T

EQ

(Ze

ro)

150.

20.

5B

H10

B(a

)P T

EQ

(Ze

ro)

44.2

6

BH

083.

0

Lead

2100

BH

070.

2

Lead

1900

Lead

2000

SB

208

0.1-

0.3

0.9-

1.0

Che

mna

me

Res

ults

(m

g/kg

)

NE

PC

201

3 -

Hum

an H

ealth

Set

ting

'C' -

Pub

lic o

pen

spac

eN

EP

C 2

013

- M

oE

- C

om

me

rcia

l/ I

nd

ust

ria

l

So

il B

ore

ID

Sam

ple

Dep

th (

mB

GL)

NE

PC

201

3 –

HH

Set

ting

‘D’ –

Co

mm

erci

al /

Ind

ust

rial

Site

Bo

unda

ry

Wat

erco

urse

Not

es:

Dat

a fr

om 2

002,

200

5 an

d 20

15 in

trus

ive

inve

stig

atio

ns h

ave

been

use

d fo

r in

terp

reta

tion

as p

art o

f thi

s as

sess

men

tC

adas

tre

and

road

dat

a so

urce

d fr

om la

nd.v

ic.g

ov.a

u (D

EP

I)A

eria

l im

ager

y so

urce

d fr

om N

earm

ap P

ty L

td

PBM

W02

PBM

W10

6

PBM

W03

PBM

W01

PBM

W10

5

PBM

W10

7

PBM

W10

8

MW

08

MW

09

MW

10

MW

11

BH1

BH2

BH3

BH4

BH5

BH6

BH7

BH8

BH9

BH10

BH11 BH

12

BH13

BH14

BH15

BH16

BH17

BH18

BH19

BH20

BH21

BH22

BH24

BH25

BH26

BH12

7

BH12

8

BH12

9

BH13

1BH

132

BH13

3

BH13

5

BH13

7

BH13

8BH

139

BH14

0

BH14

1

BH14

2BH

143

BH14

4

BH14

5

BH14

6

BH14

7

BH14

8

BH14

9

BH15

0

BH15

1BH

152

BH15

3

BH15

4

BH15

5

BH15

6

BH15

8

BH16

0

BH16

1

BH16

2

BH16

3

BH16

4

SB20

8

SB20

5

SB20

0

SB20

6

SB20

3 SB21

2

SB21

4

SB21

3

SB21

0

SB20

9

SB20

4

SB20

1

SB20

2

SB20

7

SB20

0_A

MW

1

MW

2

MW

3

PBM

W04

EGIS

MW

02

EGIS

MW

03

PBM

W02

PBM

W10

6

PBM

W03

PBM

W01

PBM

W10

5

PBM

W10

7

PBM

W10

8

MW

08

MW

09

MW

10

MW

11

BH1

BH2

BH3

BH4

BH5

BH6

BH7

BH8

BH9

BH10

BH11 BH

12

BH13

BH14

BH15

BH16

BH17

BH18

BH19

BH20

BH21

BH22

BH24

BH25

BH26

BH12

7

BH12

8

BH12

9

BH13

1BH

132

BH13

3

BH13

5

BH13

7

BH13

8BH

139

BH14

0

BH14

1

BH14

2BH

143

BH14

4

BH14

5

BH14

6

BH14

7

BH14

8

BH14

9

BH15

0

BH15

1BH

152

BH15

3

BH15

4

BH15

5

BH15

6

BH15

8

BH16

0

BH16

1

BH16

2

BH16

3

BH16

4

SB20

8

SB20

5

SB20

0

SB20

6

SB20

3 SB21

2

SB21

4

SB21

3

SB21

0

SB20

9

SB20

4

SB20

1

SB20

2

SB20

7

SB20

0_A

!(C

!(C

!(

!(C

!(B

!(F

!(C

!(B

!(C

!(C

!(B

!(C

!(C

!(C

!(C

!(C

!(C

!(B

!(B!(B

!(A

!(C

!(

!(

!(F

!(C!(C

!(F

!(C

!(C

!(F

!(

!(F

!(F

!(F

!(C!(F

!(C

!(C

!(C

!(A

!(

!(

!(

!(C!(B

!(

!(B

!(

!(F!(C

!(C

!(F

!(F!(

!(C

!(B

!(C

!(F

!(C

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(C

!(

!(C

!(F

!(C

!(F

!(

!(

!(

!(F

!(A

!(B

!(C!(F

!(C

!(B

!(C

!(F

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

YARROWEE RIVER

Form

erG

oods

She

d

Rai

lway

Sta

tion

Bui

ldin

g

LYDIARD STREET N

NEILL STREET

NOLA

N ST

REET

SCOTT

PAR

ADE

ARAR

AT S

TREE

T

DOVETO

N CRES

CENT

HAVELOCK STREET

LIGAR STREET

Sen

vrS

ae

±

020

4060

8010

Met

res

1:1,

000

Des

igne

d:

Dra

wn:

Che

cked

:

File

:

E.

Vel

la

S. K

orob

litsa

s

R. G

riffin

M11

268_

02_F

004a

Soi

l Res

ults

0-0

.6m

Dat

e:

Rev

isio

n:

Sc

ale:

9/11

/201

5

1

(A

3)

Lege

ndSa

mpl

e Lo

catio

n: 0

.0 -

0.6

m d

epth

IWR

G 6

21 S

oil H

azar

d C

ater

gory

!(N

o an

alyt

ical

resu

lts w

ithin

0.0

-0.6

mBG

L de

pth

inte

rval

!(AC

ateg

ory

A!(B

Cat

egor

y B

!(CC

ateg

ory

C!(F

Fill

Mat

eria

lSi

te B

ound

ary

Wat

erco

urse

Path: Y:\16_GIS\Jobs\M11268_VICTRACK_BALLARAT_ESA & PRELIM GEOTECH\MXDs\02_SuppESA\M11268_02_F004a Soil Results 0-0.6m.mxd

Figu

re N

o:

Title

:

Proj

ect:

Loca

tion:

Clie

nt:

4a Soil

Res

ults

from

0.0

-0.6

m b

gl a

bove

Soi

l Haz

ard

Cat

egor

isat

ion

Thre

shol

ds

Supp

lem

enta

ry E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

t

Balla

rat S

tatio

n P

reci

nct

VicT

rack

/ Reg

iona

l Dev

elop

men

t Vic

toria

/ Pub

lic T

rans

port

Vict

oria

Dat

um G

DA

1994

, Pro

ject

ion

MG

A Zo

ne 5

4

Gro

und

Floo

r, 51

Cla

rke

Stre

et,

Sout

hban

k V

IC 3

006

(03)

960

6 00

70

(03)

960

6 00

74w

ww

.sen

vers

a.co

m.a

u

Addr

ess:

Ph

one:

Fax:

W

ebsi

te:


Not

es:

Dat

a fro

m 2

002,

200

5 an

d 20

15 in

trusi

ve in

vest

igat

ions

hav

e be

en u

sed

for i

nter

pret

atio

n as

par

t of t

his

asse

ssm

ent

Cad

astre

and

road

dat

a so

urce

d fro

m la

nd.v

ic.g

ov.a

u (D

EP

I)A

eria

l im

ager

y so

urce

d fro

m N

earm

ap P

ty L

td

PBM

W02

PBM

W10

6

PBM

W03

PBM

W01

PBM

W10

5

PBM

W10

7

PBM

W10

8

MW

08

MW

09

MW

10

MW

11

BH1

BH2

BH3

BH4

BH5

BH6

BH7

BH8

BH9

BH10

BH11 BH

12

BH13

BH14

BH15

BH16

BH17

BH18

BH19

BH20

BH21

BH22

BH24

BH25

BH26

BH12

7

BH12

8

BH12

9

BH13

1BH

132

BH13

3

BH13

5

BH13

7

BH13

8BH

139

BH14

0

BH14

1

BH14

2BH

143

BH14

4

BH14

5

BH14

6

BH14

7

BH14

8

BH14

9

BH15

0

BH15

1BH

152

BH15

3

BH15

4

BH15

5

BH15

6

BH15

8

BH16

0

BH16

1

BH16

2

BH16

3

BH16

4

SB20

8

SB20

5

SB20

0

SB20

6

SB20

3 SB21

2

SB21

4

SB21

3

SB21

0

SB20

9

SB20

4

SB20

1

SB20

2

SB20

7

SB20

0_A

MW

1

MW

3

PBM

W04

EGIS

MW

02

EGIS

MW

03

MW

2

!(F

!(C

!(C

! (

!(F

! (

! (

!(C

! (

!(C

!(C

! (

!(C

! (

!(C

!(B

!(C

!(C

! (!(C

!(C

! (

!(C

!(F

!(F

!(A!(F

! (

!(A

!(F

!(F

!(F

! (

! (

! (

!(F! (

!(F

!(F

!(B

!(F

! (

!(C

!(A

! (! (

!(F

! (

!(C

! (! (

! (

!(C

! (!(F

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

!(C

!(F

!(F!(F

!(F

!(C

!(C

!(C

! (

!(C

! (

!(F

! (

!(C

!(F

!(F

!(F

!(F!(F

! (

!(F

!(C

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

YARROWEE RIVER

Form

erG

oods

She

d

Rai

lway

Sta

tion

Bui

ldin

g

LYDIARD STREET N

NEILL STREET

NOLA

N ST

REET

SCOTT

PAR

ADE

ARAR

AT S

TREE

T

DOVETO

N CRES

CENT

HAVELOCK STREET

LIGAR STREET

Sen

vrS

ae

±

020

4060

8010

Met

res

1:1,

000

Des

igne

d:

Dra

wn:

Che

cked

:

File

:

E.

Vel

la

S. K

orob

litsa

s

R. G

riffin

M11

268_

02_F

004b

Soi

l Res

ults

0.6

-1.2

m

Dat

e:

Rev

isio

n:

Sc

ale:

9/11

/201

5

0

(A

3)

Lege

ndSa

mpl

e Lo

catio

n - 0

.6 -

1.2

m d

epth

IWR

G 6

21 S

oil H

azar

d C

ater

gory

! (N

o an

alyt

ical

resu

lts w

ithin

0.6

-1.2

mB

GL

dept

h in

terv

al!(A

Cat

egor

y A

!(BC

ateg

ory

B!(C

Cat

egor

y C

!(FFi

ll M

ater

ial

Site

Bou

ndar

y

Wat

erco

urse

Path: Y:\16_GIS\Jobs\M11268_VICTRACK_BALLARAT_ESA & PRELIM GEOTECH\MXDs\02_SuppESA\M11268_02_F004b Soil Results 0.6-1.2m.mxd

Figu

re N

o:

Title

:

Proj

ect:

Loca

tion:

Clie

nt:

4b Soil

Res

ults

from

0.6

-1.2

mB

GL

abov

e So

il H

azar

d C

ateg

oris

atio

n Th

resh

olds

Su

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Balla

rat S

tatio

n P

reci

nct

VicT

rack

/ Reg

iona

l Dev

elop

men

t Vic

toria

/ Pub

lic T

rans

port

Vict

oria

Dat

um G

DA

1994

, Pro

ject

ion

MG

A Zo

ne 5

5

Gro

und

Floo

r, 51

Cla

rke

Stre

et,

Sout

hban

k V

IC 3

006

(03)

960

6 00

70

(03)

960

6 00

74w

ww

.sen

vers

a.co

m.a

u

Addr

ess:

Ph

one:

Fax:

W

ebsi

te:


Not

es:

Dat

a fro

m 2

002,

200

5 an

d 20

15 in

trusi

ve in

vest

igat

ions

hav

e be

en u

sed

for i

nter

pret

atio

n as

par

t of t

his

asse

ssm

ent

Cad

astre

and

road

dat

a so

urce

d fro

m la

nd.v

ic.g

ov.a

u (D

EP

I)A

eria

l im

ager

y so

urce

d fro

m N

earm

ap P

ty L

td

PBM

W02

PBM

W10

6

PBM

W03

PBM

W01

PBM

W10

5

PBM

W10

7

PBM

W10

8

MW

08

MW

09

MW

10

MW

11

BH1

BH2

BH3

BH4

BH5

BH6

BH7

BH8

BH9

BH10

BH11 BH

12

BH13

BH14

BH15

BH16

BH17

BH18

BH19

BH20

BH21

BH22

BH24

BH25

BH26

BH12

7

BH12

8

BH12

9

BH13

1BH

132

BH13

3

BH13

5

BH13

7

BH13

8BH

139

BH14

0

BH14

1

BH14

2BH

143

BH14

4

BH14

5

BH14

6

BH14

7

BH14

8

BH14

9

BH15

0

BH15

1BH

152

BH15

3

BH15

4

BH15

5

BH15

6

BH15

8

BH16

0

BH16

1

BH16

2

BH16

3

BH16

4

SB20

8

SB20

5

SB20

0

SB20

6

SB20

3 SB21

2

SB21

4

SB21

3

SB21

0

SB20

9

SB20

4

SB20

1

SB20

2

SB20

7

SB20

0_A

MW

1

MW

2

MW

3

PBM

W04

EGIS

MW

02

EGIS

MW

03

!(F

!(

!(C

!(C

!(

!(

!(

!(F

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(C

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(F

!(C

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(F

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(F

!(B

!(

!(F

!(C

!(F

!(F!(F

!(

!(F

!(F

!(!(F

!(C

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(F

!(C

!(

!(C

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(C

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(C

!(A

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

YARROWEE RIVER

Form

erG

oods

She

d

Rai

lway

Sta

tion

Bui

ldin

g

LYDIARD STREET N

NEILL STREET

NOLA

N ST

REET

SCOTT

PAR

ADE

ARAR

AT S

TREE

T

DOVETO

N CRES

CENT

HAVELOCK STREET

LIGAR STREET

Sen

vrS

ae

±

020

4060

8010

Met

res

1:1,

000

Des

igne

d:

Dra

wn:

Che

cked

:

File

:

E.

Vel

la

S. K

orob

litsa

s

R. G

riffin

M11

268_

02_F

004c

Soi

l Res

ults

1.2

m

Dat

e:

Rev

isio

n:

Sc

ale:

9/11

/201

5

1

(A

3)

Lege

ndSa

mpl

e Lo

catio

n - >

1.2

m d

epth

IWR

G 6

21 S

oil H

azar

d C

ater

gory

! (N

o an

alyt

ical

resu

lts w

ithin

>1.

2 m

BG

L de

pth

inte

rval

!(AC

ateg

ory

A!(B

Cat

egor

y B

!(CC

ateg

ory

C!(F

Fill

Mat

eria

lSi

te B

ound

ary

Wat

erco

urse

Path: Y:\16_GIS\Jobs\M11268_VICTRACK_BALLARAT_ESA & PRELIM GEOTECH\MXDs\02_SuppESA\M11268_02_F004c Soil Results 1.2m.mxd

Figu

re N

o:

Title

:

Proj

ect:

Loca

tion:

Clie

nt:

4c Soil

Res

ults

>1.

2 m

BG

L ab

ove

Soil

Haz

ard

Cat

egor

isat

ion

Thre

shol

ds

Supp

lem

enta

ry E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

t

Balla

rat S

tatio

n P

reci

nct

VicT

rack

/ Reg

iona

l Dev

elop

men

t Vic

toria

/ Pub

lic T

rans

port

Vict

oria

Dat

um G

DA

1994

, Pro

ject

ion

MG

A Zo

ne 5

4

Gro

und

Floo

r, 51

Cla

rke

Stre

et,

Sout

hban

k V

IC 3

006

(03)

960

6 00

70

(03)

960

6 00

74w

ww

.sen

vers

a.co

m.a

u

Addr

ess:

Ph

one:

Fax:

W

ebsi

te:


Not

es:

Dat

a fro

m 2

002,

200

5 an

d 20

15 in

trusi

ve in

vest

igat

ions

hav

e be

en u

sed

for i

nter

pret

atio

n as

par

t of t

his

asse

ssm

ent

Cad

astre

and

road

dat

a so

urce

d fro

m la

nd.v

ic.g

ov.a

u (D

EP

I)A

eria

l im

ager

y so

urce

d fro

m N

earm

ap P

ty L

td

EG

IS M

W0

342

7.2

70

PB

MW

04

PB

MW

105

430

.670

PB

MW

107

425

.402

PB

MW

108

427

.806

MW

0843

0.1

87

MW

0942

7.8

20

MW

1042

0.8

05

MW

1142

7.8

50

PB

MW

02

PB

MW

106

EG

ISM

W02

PB

MW

03

PB

MW

01

MW

3

MW

2

MW

1

PB

MW

0442

9.6

62

PB

MW

105

PB

MW

107

PB

MW

108

MW

08

MW

09

MW

10

MW

11

YARROWEE

RIVER

LYDIARDSTREETN

ARMSTRONGSTREETN

MA

RK

ETST

REE

T

DOVETONCRESCENT

CUTHBERTSLANE

NEILLSTREET

NOLA

NST

REET

SCOTTPA

RADE

HAVELOCKSTREET

ARARATSTREET

LIGARSTREET

Fo

rmer

Go

od

s S

hed

Rai

lway

Sta

tio

nB

uild

ing

Sen

vrS

ae

025

5075

100

12.5

Met

res

1:1,

250

Des

igne

d:

Dra

wn:

Che

cked

:

File

:

E

. Vel

la

S. K

orob

litsa

s

R. G

riffin

M11

268_

02_F

005

gw e

leva

tion

and

exce

eden

ce

Dat

e:

Rev

isio

n:

S

cale

:

7/10

/201

5

0

(A

3)

Leg

end Gro

undw

ater

Mon

itorin

g W

ell L

ocat

ion,

EG

IS 1

999

Gro

undw

ater

Mon

itorin

g W

ell L

ocat

ion,

PB

200

2

Gro

undw

ater

Mon

itorin

g W

ell L

ocat

ion,

PB

200

5

Gro

undw

ater

Mon

itorin

g W

ell L

ocat

ion,

Sen

vers

a 20

15

Gro

undw

ater

Mon

itorin

g W

ell L

ocat

ion,

Los

t/Des

troy

edG

roun

dwat

er F

low

Dire

ctio

nW

ater

cour

se

Site

Bou

ndar

y

Path: Y:\16_GIS\Jobs\M11268_VICTRACK_BALLARAT_ESA & PRELIM GEOTECH\MXDs\02_SuppESA\M11268_02_F005 gw elevation and exceedence.mxd

Not

es:

Cad

astr

e an

d ro

ad d

ata

sour

ced

from

land

.vic

.gov

.au

(DE

PI)

Aer

ial i

mag

ery

sour

ced

from

Nea

rmap

Pty

Ltd

Fig

ure

No

:

Titl

e:

P

roje

ct:

Loca

tion:

Clie

nt:

5 Gro

un

dw

ater

Ele

vatio

n a

nd

Exc

eed

ence

Pla

n(A

ug

ust

201

5)S

uppl

emen

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Pre

cinc

t

Vic

Trac

k/ R

egio

nal D

evel

opm

ent V

icto

ria/ P

ublic

Tra

nspo

rt V

icto

riaD

atum

GD

A 1

994,

Pro

ject

ion

MG

A Z

one

54

Gro

und

Flo

or,

51 C

lark

e S

tre

et,

Sou

thba

nk V

IC 3

006

(03

) 96

06

007

0

(03

) 96

06

007

4w

ww

.se

nver

sa.c

om

.au

Add

ress

:

Pho

ne:

Fa

x:

We

bsite

:


Nitr

ate

(as

N)

13C

oppe

r0.

017

Nic

kel

0.01

7Zi

nc

0.06

3B

(a)P

0.6

Flu

oran

then

e1.

8

MW

08

Nitr

ate

(as

N)

29N

icke

l 0.

018

Zinc

0.

012

MW

09

Cop

per

0.01

3N

icke

l 0.

022

Zinc

0.

026

PB

MW

04

Cad

miu

m

0.00

03C

oppe

r0.

03Le

ad

0.00

6N

icke

l 0.

11Zi

nc

0.07

PB

MW

105

Nitr

ate

(as

N)

43P

BM

W10

7

Cop

per

0.01

Zinc

0.

015

PB

MW

108

Che

mna

me

Res

ults

(m

g/L)

*

* B

(a)P

and

Flu

roan

then

e in

μg/

L

Mai

nten

ance

of E

cosy

stem

s -

95%

P

rote

ctio

n F

resh

wat

erP

otab

le W

ater

Sup

ply

Pri

ma

ry C

on

tact

Re

cre

ati

on

We

ll I

D

Ord

ovic

ian

Cas

tlem

aine

Gro

up (

OC

G)

New

er V

olca

nic

For

mat

ion

(NV

F)

Fill

and

OC

G

Fill

Aq

uif

er T

ype

Wel

l ID

Red

uced

Wat

er L

evel

(m

AH

D)

Nic

kel

0.00

2Zi

nc

0.02

5

MW

10

Nic

kel

0.00

9Zi

nc

0.01

2

MW

11

Tables

m1126802_002_rpt_rev2

Tables

Table 1: Groundwater Gauging and Survey Data

Table 2: Stabilised Field Chemical Parameters

Table 3: Summary of Groundwater Results vs. Beneficial Use Objectives

Table 4: Soil Analytical Results vs. IWRG621 Threshold Limits

Table 5: ASLP Analytical Results vs. IWRG621 Threshold Limits

Table 6: Summary of Groundwater Results vs. Beneficial Use Objectives

Tabl

e 1:

Gro

undw

ater

Gau

ging

and

Sur

vey

Dat

a E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

tC

lient

: Vic

Trac

k, R

DV

, PTV

Site

: For

mer

Fre

ight

Yar

d, N

orth

of B

alla

rat R

ailw

ay S

tatio

n, V

icto

riaJo

b N

umbe

r M11

2680

4

Wel

l Cov

er

Type

Inst

alle

d B

ySc

reen

In

terv

alEa

stin

g N

orth

ing

Exis

ting

Surf

ace

Top

of

Cas

ing

Tota

l Wel

l D

epth

Dep

th to

W

ater

Dep

th to

Pr

oduc

t

Red

uced

W

ater

Le

vel

(mB

GL)

(MG

A)(M

GA)

(mAH

D)

(mAH

D)

(mB

TOC

)(m

BTO

C)

(mB

TOC

)(m

AHD

)

MW

08Fl

ush

gatic

- 8m

m b

olts

Senv

ersa

26/0

8/20

15Si

llty

Cla

y (O

rdov

icia

n Si

ltsto

ne)

OC

G1.

0-5.

575

2605

.07

5839

497.

2043

0.78

430.

622/

09/2

015

5.58

60.

433

Yes

N/A

430.

187

Goo

d C

ondi

tion

(new

). 20

cm s

edim

ent a

t wel

l bo

ttom

.C

lear

, no

odou

r or s

heen

.

MW

09Fl

ush

gatic

- 8m

m b

olts

Senv

ersa

24/0

8/20

15C

lay

(Ord

ovic

ian

Silts

tone

)O

CG

2.0-

10.0

7526

60.4

658

3939

5.56

429.

8142

9.70

2/09

/201

59.

942

1.88

0Ye

sN

/A42

7.82

0G

ood

Con

ditio

n (n

ew)

Cle

ar, n

o od

our o

r she

en.

MW

10Fl

ush

gatic

- 8m

m b

olts

Senv

ersa

25/0

8/20

15C

laye

y Fi

llFi

ll2.

0-10

.075

2703

.13

5839

296.

1542

9.44

429.

302/

09/2

015

9.62

08.

495

No

N/A

420.

805

Goo

d C

ondi

tion

(new

)C

lear

, no

odou

r or s

heen

.

MW

11Fl

ush

gatic

- 8m

m b

olts

Senv

ersa

24/0

8/20

11W

eath

ered

Ba

salt

NVF

2.3-

6.0

7526

10.8

758

3937

1.83

430.

0042

9.88

2/09

/201

55.

196

2.03

0Ye

sN

/A42

7.85

Goo

d C

ondi

tion

(new

)C

lear

, no

odou

r or s

heen

.

30/1

0/20

143.

400

Yes

N/A

426.

986

No

odou

r and

no

shee

n du

ring

gaug

ing.

6/11

/201

43.

403

Yes

N/A

426.

983

No

odou

r and

no

shee

n du

ring

gaug

ing.

Slig

htly

si

lted

at w

ell b

otto

m.

2/09

/201

57.

925

3.11

6Ye

sN

/A42

7.27

Goo

d co

nditio

n. D

irt in

gat

ic.

Cle

ar, n

o od

our o

r she

en.

430.

686/

11/2

014

10.9

900.

000

Yes

N/A

430.

681

Goo

d co

nditio

n. S

urve

y m

ark

mad

e. N

eeds

to

be re

surv

eyed

.N

o od

our o

r she

en d

urin

g ga

ugin

g. W

ater

at

surfa

ce le

vel.

430.

672/

09/2

015

11.0

280.

000

Yes

N/A

430.

67Bu

ried

unde

r 5cm

gra

vel.

Wat

er in

gat

ic.

Dep

th to

wat

er a

t sur

face

.30

/10/

2014

4.52

2N

oN

/A42

5.17

0N

o od

our a

nd n

o sh

een

durin

g ga

ugin

g.6/

11/2

014

4.54

2N

oN

/A42

5.15

0N

o od

our a

nd n

o sh

een

durin

g ga

ugin

g.2/

09/2

015

8.63

84.

290

No

N/A

425.

402

Goo

d co

nditio

n.C

lear

, no

odou

r or s

heen

.30

/10/

2014

2.61

5Ye

sN

/A42

7.50

9N

o od

our a

nd n

o sh

een

durin

g ga

ugin

g.6/

11/2

014

2.61

5Ye

sN

/A42

7.50

9N

o od

our a

nd n

o sh

een

durin

g ga

ugin

g.2/

09/2

015

6.82

72.

318

Yes

N/A

427.

806

Goo

d co

nditio

n. W

ater

in g

atic

. C

lear

, no

odou

r or s

heen

.

7/11

/201

48.

770

1.37

1Ye

sN

/A42

8.06

9Po

or c

ondi

tion.

Hea

dwor

ks d

amag

ed w

hen

loca

ting

wel

l with

exc

avat

or.

New

gat

ic

requ

ired.

Res

urve

ying

requ

ired.

Gau

ged

from

new

mar

ked

poin

t but

will

not

be

accu

rate

to fo

rmer

leve

ls a

s PV

C is

cra

cked

. N

o od

our a

nd n

o sh

een

durin

g ga

ugin

g.

Not

gau

ged

- -

-N

/A -

30/1

0/20

140.

622

Yes

N/A

429.

611

No

odou

r and

no

shee

n du

ring

gaug

ing.

6/11

/201

40.

581

Yes

N/A

429.

652

No

odou

r and

no

shee

n du

ring

gaug

ing.

2/09

/201

52.

834

0.57

1Ye

sN

/A42

9.66

2G

ood

cond

ition.

Wat

er in

gat

ic.

Cle

ar, n

o od

our o

r she

en.

* G

PS c

oord

inat

es fr

om 2

002

PB b

orel

og a

nd a

ccur

acy

is to

the

near

est m

etre

.

6.75

0

Scre

ened

Li

thol

ogy

Aver

age.

Blo

ckag

e at

app

roxim

atel

y 2

mTO

C -

can

only

sam

ple

via fo

otva

lve.

Sur

vey

mar

k pr

esen

t.

Goo

d co

nditio

n. R

uste

d ga

tic, n

ot s

ilted

at w

ell

botto

m. S

urve

y m

ark

pres

ent.

Goo

d co

nditio

n. S

urve

y m

ark

pres

ent.

Not

si

lted

at w

ell b

otto

m.

7525

69.7

758

3936

0.19

430.

4843

0.39

NVF

4.3-

7.3

2226

57.4

89*

5838

635.

529*

unkn

own

429.

44

7525

79.2

3

Aver

age

cond

ition.

No

O-r

ing,

rust

ed b

olts

- re

quire

reth

read

ing,

slig

htly

silt

ed a

t wel

l

2.85

0

8.64

2

6.75

0

OC

G7.

0-10

PBM

W04

Flus

h ga

tic -

8mm

bol

tsPa

rson

s Br

inck

erho

ff20

/11/

2002

Fill,

Bas

alt,

Silty

Cla

yFi

ll, &

Lik

ely

OC

G0.

8-2.

8

PBM

W01

PVC

- ga

tic

rem

oved

EGIS

MW

03O

ld-s

tyle

flip

flu

sh li

dEg

is

Con

sulti

ngIn

ferr

ed 1

999

Wea

ther

ed

Basa

lt

Gau

ging

Dat

a

Gau

ging

Com

men

tsD

ate

Gau

ged

Wel

l ID

Dat

e In

stal

led

Wel

l Con

ditio

nW

ater

Ab

ove

Scre

en?

Surv

ey D

ata

Mon

itorin

g W

ell I

nfor

mat

ion

Aqui

fer T

ype

Pars

ons

Brin

cker

hoff

19/1

1/20

02Si

lty C

lay

(Ord

ovic

ian

Silts

tone

)

OC

G5.

0-11

.0

NVF

3.8-

8.8

NVF

3.0-

7.0

PBM

W10

7Fl

ush

gatic

- 8m

m b

olts

Pars

ons

Brin

cker

hoff

28/1

1/20

05Ba

salti

c C

lay

PBM

W10

5Fl

ush

gatic

- 8m

m b

olts

Pars

ons

Brin

cker

hoff

25/1

1/20

05Si

lty C

lay

(Ord

ovic

ian

Silts

tone

)

PBM

W10

8Fl

ush

gatic

- 8m

m b

olts

Pars

ons

Brin

cker

hoff

Nov

embe

r 20

05W

eath

ered

Ba

salt

5839

510.

2243

0.25

430.

23

7525

80.8

358

3937

3.43

430.

1843

0.12

Lost

- su

spec

t bur

ied.

429.

69

7525

53.8

758

3951

6.95

430.

73

7526

74.2

258

3932

5.07

429.

77

Tabl

e 2:

Sta

bilis

ed F

ield

Che

mic

al P

aram

eter

s E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

tC

lient

: Vic

Trac

k, R

DV

, PTV

Site

: For

mer

Fre

ight

Yar

d, N

orth

of B

alla

rat R

ailw

ay S

tatio

n, V

icto

riaJo

b N

umbe

r M11

2680

2

DO

(mg/

L)EC

(μS/

cm)

TDS

(mg/

L)pH

Red

ox (m

V)Te

mp

(°C

)Vo

lum

e Pu

rged

±10%

(1)

±3%

(1)

0.6

conv

ersi

on±0

.05

(1)

±10m

V (1

)±1

0%(L

)

MW

08Si

lty C

lay

(Ord

ovic

ian

Silts

tone

)O

CG

3/09

/201

51.

4368

741

26.

3011

4.6

12.3

28C

lear

, no

odou

r or s

heen

. Min

imal

turb

idity

.Lo

w fl

owG

ood

(4 C

PM)

MW

09Si

lty C

lay

(Ord

ovic

ian

Silts

tone

)O

CG

2/09

/201

56.

6641

825

15.

7714

2.6

14.4

50C

lear

no

odou

r or s

heen

. Min

imal

turb

idity

.Fo

otva

lve

Poor

(1/2

CPM

or l

ess)

MW

10Fi

ll

Perc

hed

Fill

3/

09/2

015

6.28

1013

608

7.31

130.

815

.72

Pale

ora

nge

brow

n, n

o od

our o

r she

en. M

oder

ate

turb

idity

.Fo

otva

lve

Poor

(lim

ited

wat

er in

bo

re)

MW

11W

eath

ered

Ba

salt

NVF

3/09

/201

54.

6131

4.6

189

6.08

135.

614

.112

.7Pa

le o

rang

e br

own,

no

odou

r or s

heen

. Low

tu

rbid

ity.

Low

flow

Goo

d (2

CPM

)

EGIS

MW

03W

eath

ered

Ba

salt

NVF

4/09

/201

56.

0838

423

07.

0921

.215

.99

Brow

n, n

o sh

een,

slig

ht o

rgan

ic o

dour

. Mod

erat

e tu

rbid

ity.

Foot

valv

ePo

or (k

ink

in P

VC -

cann

ot fi

t low

flow

pum

p)

PBM

W04

Fill,

Bas

alt &

Si

lty C

lay

Perc

hed

Fill,

&

likel

y O

CG

3/09

/201

53.

4024

2914

576.

1912

6.5

12.6

9.8

Cle

ar, s

light

org

anic

odo

ur, n

o sh

een.

Min

imal

tu

rbid

ity.

Low

flow

Aver

age

(1 C

PM)

PBM

W10

5Si

lty C

lay

(Ord

ovic

ian

Silts

tone

)O

CG

4/09

/201

51.

7170

9442

564.

9318

8.2

13.9

15.5

Pale

bro

wn,

slig

ht ir

on o

xide

-like

odo

ur, n

o sh

een.

Lo

w tu

rbid

ity.

Low

flow

Aver

age

(1 C

PM)

PBM

W10

7Ba

salti

c C

lay

NVF

3/09

/201

51.

8512

5375

26.

1011

9.4

16.7

24C

lear

to o

rang

e br

own,

no

odou

r or s

heen

. Slig

ht

to m

oder

ate

turb

idity

.Fo

otva

lve

Poor

(1/2

CPM

or l

ess)

PBM

W10

8W

eath

ered

Ba

salt

NVF

4/09

/201

52.

3911

4368

67.

0712

6.7

14.7

34C

lear

no

odou

r or s

heen

. Min

imal

turb

idity

.Lo

w fl

owG

ood

(4 C

PM)

Mon

itorin

g W

ell I

nfor

mat

ion

Sam

plin

g M

etho

dFi

eld

Obs

erva

tions

Wel

l ID

Dat

e Sa

mpl

edSc

reen

ed

Lith

olog

yR

echa

rge

Abi

lity

Wat

er Q

ualit

y St

abili

sed

Para

met

ers

(or m

ost r

epre

sent

ativ

e re

adin

gs if

pur

ged

via

baile

r or f

ootv

alve

)

Aqu

ifer T

ype

Tabl

e 4:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s A

dopt

ed B

enef

icia

l Use

Obj

ectiv

esSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

, B

alla

rat,

Vict

oria

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

802

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- U

rban

Res

iden

tial

/ Pub

lic O

pen

Spac

e

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- C

omm

erci

al/

Indu

stria

l

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'C

' - P

ublic

op

en s

pace

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'D

' -

Com

mer

cial

/ In

dust

rial

160#2

538

099

0

320#2

3

95#2

626

015

018

30#2

621

00

60#2

678

150#2

616

0

1.4#1

620

.92.

082.

93.

292.

63.

6229

.72.

9975

.8

370#2

4

215#1

3

170#1

564

0

215#1

2

215#1

6

170#1

1

170#1

6

1700

#18

3300

#18

75#1

8

135#1

8

165#1

8

95#1

7

Tabl

e 4:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s A

dopt

ed B

enef

icia

l Use

Obj

ectiv

esSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

, B

alla

rat,

Vict

oria

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

802

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- U

rban

Res

iden

tial

/ Pub

lic O

pen

Spac

e

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- C

omm

erci

al/

Indu

stria

l

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'C

' - P

ublic

op

en s

pace

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'D

' -

Com

mer

cial

/ In

dust

rial

160#2

5

320#2

3

95#2

6

1830

#26

60#2

6

150#2

6

1.4#1

6

370#2

4

215#1

3

170#1

5

215#1

2

215#1

6

170#1

1

170#1

6

1700

#18

3300

#18

75#1

8

135#1

8

165#1

8

95#1

7

190

120

900

110

170

250

4.36

37.8

1.58

300

Tabl

e 4:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s A

dopt

ed B

enef

icia

l Use

Obj

ectiv

esSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

, B

alla

rat,

Vict

oria

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

802

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- U

rban

Res

iden

tial

/ Pub

lic O

pen

Spac

e

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- C

omm

erci

al/

Indu

stria

l

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'C

' - P

ublic

op

en s

pace

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'D

' -

Com

mer

cial

/ In

dust

rial

160#2

5

320#2

3

95#2

6

1830

#26

60#2

6

150#2

6

1.4#1

6

370#2

4

215#1

3

170#1

5

215#1

2

215#1

6

170#1

1

170#1

6

1700

#18

3300

#18

75#1

8

135#1

8

165#1

8

95#1

7

180

250

1000

290

180

6983

320

860

490

5.04

4.63

5.75

5.32

104

3.3

93.8

5.4

200

230

Tabl

e 4:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s A

dopt

ed B

enef

icia

l Use

Obj

ectiv

esSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

, B

alla

rat,

Vict

oria

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

802

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- U

rban

Res

iden

tial

/ Pub

lic O

pen

Spac

e

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- C

omm

erci

al/

Indu

stria

l

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'C

' - P

ublic

op

en s

pace

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'D

' -

Com

mer

cial

/ In

dust

rial

160#2

5

320#2

3

95#2

6

1830

#26

60#2

6

150#2

6

1.4#1

6

370#2

4

215#1

3

170#1

5

215#1

2

215#1

6

170#1

1

170#1

6

1700

#18

3300

#18

75#1

8

135#1

8

165#1

8

95#1

7

200

320

370

400

120

100

110

6363

110

140

7361

280

130

480

280

11.5

20 300

Tabl

e 4:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s A

dopt

ed B

enef

icia

l Use

Obj

ectiv

esSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

, B

alla

rat,

Vict

oria

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

802

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- U

rban

Res

iden

tial

/ Pub

lic O

pen

Spac

e

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- C

omm

erci

al/

Indu

stria

l

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'C

' - P

ublic

op

en s

pace

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'D

' -

Com

mer

cial

/ In

dust

rial

160#2

5

320#2

3

95#2

6

1830

#26

60#2

6

150#2

6

1.4#1

6

370#2

4

215#1

3

170#1

5

215#1

2

215#1

6

170#1

1

170#1

6

1700

#18

3300

#18

75#1

8

135#1

8

165#1

8

95#1

7

350

330

8883

120

9166

120

170

250

7423

074

6.87

Tabl

e 4:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s A

dopt

ed B

enef

icia

l Use

Obj

ectiv

esSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

, B

alla

rat,

Vict

oria

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

802

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- U

rban

Res

iden

tial

/ Pub

lic O

pen

Spac

e

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- C

omm

erci

al/

Indu

stria

l

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'C

' - P

ublic

op

en s

pace

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'D

' -

Com

mer

cial

/ In

dust

rial

160#2

5

320#2

3

95#2

6

1830

#26

60#2

6

150#2

6

1.4#1

6

370#2

4

215#1

3

170#1

5

215#1

2

215#1

6

170#1

1

170#1

6

1700

#18

3300

#18

75#1

8

135#1

8

165#1

8

95#1

7

140

100

7079

100

7272

73

160

190

190

160

1611

3.8

6.3

1.7

112.

625

Tabl

e 4:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s A

dopt

ed B

enef

icia

l Use

Obj

ectiv

esSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

, B

alla

rat,

Vict

oria

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

802

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- U

rban

Res

iden

tial

/ Pub

lic O

pen

Spac

e

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- C

omm

erci

al/

Indu

stria

l

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'C

' - P

ublic

op

en s

pace

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'D

' -

Com

mer

cial

/ In

dust

rial

160#2

5

320#2

3

95#2

6

1830

#26

60#2

6

150#2

6

1.4#1

6

370#2

4

215#1

3

170#1

5

215#1

2

215#1

6

170#1

1

170#1

6

1700

#18

3300

#18

75#1

8

135#1

8

165#1

8

95#1

7

290

590

4500

150

120

1900

2000

6167

8261

120

110

1000

200

180

1.8

1.9

Tabl

e 4:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s A

dopt

ed B

enef

icia

l Use

Obj

ectiv

esSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

, B

alla

rat,

Vict

oria

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

802

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- U

rban

Res

iden

tial

/ Pub

lic O

pen

Spac

e

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- C

omm

erci

al/

Indu

stria

l

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'C

' - P

ublic

op

en s

pace

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'D

' -

Com

mer

cial

/ In

dust

rial

160#2

5

320#2

3

95#2

6

1830

#26

60#2

6

150#2

6

1.4#1

6

370#2

4

215#1

3

170#1

5

215#1

2

215#1

6

170#1

1

170#1

6

1700

#18

3300

#18

75#1

8

135#1

8

165#1

8

95#1

7

450

150

100

7811

0

4.1

Tabl

e 4:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s A

dopt

ed B

enef

icia

l Use

Obj

ectiv

esSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

, B

alla

rat,

Vict

oria

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

802

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- U

rban

Res

iden

tial

/ Pub

lic O

pen

Spac

e

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- C

omm

erci

al/

Indu

stria

l

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'C

' - P

ublic

op

en s

pace

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'D

' -

Com

mer

cial

/ In

dust

rial

640#2

4

Tabl

e 4:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s A

dopt

ed B

enef

icia

l Use

Obj

ectiv

esSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

, B

alla

rat,

Vict

oria

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

802

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- U

rban

Res

iden

tial

/ Pub

lic O

pen

Spac

e

NEP

C 2

013

- MoE

- C

omm

erci

al/

Indu

stria

l

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'C

' - P

ublic

op

en s

pace

NEP

C 2

013

- H

uman

Hea

lth

Setti

ng 'D

' -

Com

mer

cial

/ In

dust

rial

Com

men

ts

Tabl

e 3:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s IW

RG

621

Thre

shol

d Li

mits

Supp

lem

enta

ry E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

tB

alla

rat S

tatio

n Pr

ecin

ct ,

Bal

lara

t, Vi

ctor

iaVi

cTra

ck, R

DV,

PTV

M11

2680

2

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

Exce

eds

IWR

G21

Fill

M

ater

ial U

pper

Lim

its

(TC

0)

Exce

eds

IWR

G21

C

ateg

ory

C U

pper

Li

mits

(TC

1)

Exce

eds

IWR

G21

C

ateg

ory

B U

pper

Li

mits

(TC

2)

Tabl

e 3:

Soi

l Ana

lytic

al R

esul

ts v

s IW

RG

621

Thre

shol

d Li

mits

Supp

lem

enta

ry E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

tB

alla

rat S

tatio

n Pr

ecin

ct ,

Bal

lara

t, Vi

ctor

iaVi

cTra

ck, R

DV,

PTV

M11

2680

2

Loca

tion

Sam

pled

Dat

eSa

mpl

e ID

Lab

Rep

ort

Sam

ple

Dep

th (m

)Li

thol

ogy

Gro

upAn

alyt

eU

nits

EQL

Exce

eds

IWR

G21

Fill

M

ater

ial U

pper

Lim

its

(TC

0)

Exce

eds

IWR

G21

C

ateg

ory

C U

pper

Li

mits

(TC

1)

Exce

eds

IWR

G21

C

ateg

ory

B U

pper

Li

mits

(TC

2)

Com

men

ts

Tabl

e 5:

ASL

P An

alyt

ical

Res

ults

vs.

IWR

G62

1 Th

resh

old

Lim

itsSu

pple

men

tary

Env

ironm

enta

l Site

Ass

essm

ent

Bal

lara

t Sta

tion

Prec

inct

VicT

rack

, RD

V, P

TVM

1126

8

Fiel

d ID

MW

08M

W09

MW

10M

W11

SB20

1SB

202

SB20

2SB

203

SB20

4SB

205

SB20

6SB

207

SB20

8SB

208

SB20

9SB

210

SB21

4Lo

catio

n C

ode

MW

08H

A0.

4-0.

5M

W09

0.3-

0.4

MW

101.

0-1.

1M

W11

1.5-

1.7

SB20

10.

0-0.

2SB

202

0.1-

0.2

SB20

20.

9-1.

0SB

203

0.1-

0.2

SB20

40.

1-0.

2SB

205

0.2-

0.3

SB20

60.

2-0.

3SB

207

0.4-

0.5

SB20

80.

1-0.

3SB

208

1.0-

1.1

SB20

91.

0-1.

1SB

210

0.9-

1.0

SB21

40.

3-0.

4Sa

mpl

e D

epth

0.4-

0.5

0.3-

0.4

1-1.

11.

5-1.

70-

0.2

0.1-

0.2

0.9-

10.

1-0.

20.

1-0.

20.

2-0.

30.

2-0.

30.

4-0.

50.

1-0.

31-

1.1

1-1.

10.

9-1

0.3-

0.4

Sam

ple

Dat

e26

/08/

2015

24/0

8/20

1525

/08/

2015

24/0

8/20

1526

/08/

2015

25/0

8/20

1525

/08/

2015

26/0

8/20

1526

/08/

2015

26/0

8/20

1525

/08/

2015

25/0

8/20

1525

/08/

2015

25/0

8/20

1525

/08/

2015

25/0

8/20

1526

/08/

2015

Che

mic

al

Gro

upC

hem

ical

Nam

eU

nits

EQL

Exce

eds

IWR

G62

1 C

ateg

ory

B U

pper

Li

mits

(ASL

P2)

Exce

eds

IWR

G62

1 C

ateg

ory

C U

pper

Li

mits

(ASL

P1)

pH (f

inal

)pH

Uni

ts0.

15

55.

15

55

55

55

55.

15.

35

55

5.1

pH (i

nitia

l)pH

Uni

ts0.

16.

17.

56.

96.

97.

87.

37.

87.

17.

78.

27.

68.

17.

18.

26.

97.

68.

2pH

(lea

chin

g flu

id)

pHU

nits

0.1

55

55

55

55

55

55

55

55

5Ar

seni

cm

g/L

0.01

2.8

0.7

<0.0

1 -

0.14

- 0.

020.

03<0

.01

0.01

0.05

0.04

0.11

0.02

<0.0

10.

01 -

0.1

0.06

Cad

miu

mm

g/L

0.00

50.

80.

2 -

- -

- -

- -

<0.0

05<0

.005

<0.0

05<0

.005

- <0

.005

<0.0

05 -

<0.0

05 -

Chr

omiu

m (I

II+VI

)m

g/L

0.01

- -

- -

- -

- <0

.01

<0.0

1<0

.01

<0.0

1 -

<0.0

1<0

.01

- <0

.01

- C

hrom

ium

VI

mg/

L0.

0520

5<0

.05

- -

<0.0

5 -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- <0

.05

- -

Cop

per

mg/

L0.

0180

020

0 -

- -

- -

- -

<0.0

10.

010.

010.

02 -

4.5

0.06

- <0

.01

- Le

adm

g/L

0.01

41

- -

- -

- -

- <0

.01

0.03

0.06

0.26

- 1.

60.

03 -

0.33

- M

ercu

rym

g/L

0.00

50.

40.

1 -

- -

- -

- -

<0.0

05<0

.005

<0.0

05<0

.005

- <0

.005

<0.0

05 -

<0.0

05 -

Mol

ybde

num

mg/

L0.

0120

5 -

- -

- -

- -

<0.0

1<0

.01

<0.0

1<0

.01

- <0

.01

<0.0

1 -

<0.0

1 -

Nic

kel

mg/

L0.

018

2 -

<0.0

1 -

0.02

- -

0.02

0.02

0.02

<0.0

10.

02 -

0.16

0.02

0.02

0.01

- Se

leni

umm

g/L

0.05

41

- -

- -

- -

- <0

.05

<0.0

5<0

.05

<0.0

5 -

<0.0

5<0

.05

- <0

.05

- Si

lver

mg/

L0.

0540

10 -

- -

- -

- -

<0.0

5<0

.05

<0.0

5<0

.05

- <0

.05

<0.0

5 -

<0.0

5 -

Tin

mg/

L0.

5 -

- -

- -

- -

<0.5

<0.5

<0.5

<0.5

- <0

.5<0

.5 -

<0.5

- Zi

ncm

g/L

0.01

1200

300

- -

- -

- -

- 0.

020.

430.

250.

51 -

4.2

0.51

- 0.

47 -

PAH

sBe

nzo(

a)py

rene

μg/L

14

1<1

- -

- <1

<1 -

- <1

<1<1

<1 -

<1 -

- <1

Met

als

Inor

gani

cs

T5.M

1126

8_AS

LP_2

015

Page

1 o

f 1

Tabl

e 6:

Sum

mar

y of

Gro

undw

ater

Res

ults

vs

Ben

efic

ial U

se O

bjec

tives

Supp

lem

enta

ry E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

tVi

cTra

ck, R

DV,

PTV

M11

268

Loca

tion

MW

09M

W10

MW

11PB

MW

01Sa

mpl

e ID

EGIS

MW

03EG

ISM

W03

EGIS

MW

03M

W08

QC

02Q

C03

MW

09M

W10

MW

11PB

MW

01PB

MW

04PB

MW

04PB

MW

105

PBM

W10

5Sa

mpl

e D

ate

7/11

/201

417

/11/

2014

4/09

/201

53/

09/2

015

3/09

/201

53/

09/2

015

3/09

/201

53/

09/2

015

3/09

/201

58/

11/2

014

7/11

/201

43/

09/2

015

7/11

/201

44/

09/2

015

Lab

Rep

ort N

o.EM

1411

829

EM14

1216

347

1420

4714

2047

1420

EM15

1418

647

1420

4714

2047

1420

EM14

1182

9EM

1411

829

4714

20EM

1411

829

4714

20Sa

mpl

e M

etho

dFo

otva

lve

Foot

valv

eFo

otva

lve

Foot

valv

eFo

otva

lve

Low

Flo

wBa

iler

Baile

rLo

w F

low

Baile

rLo

w F

low

Aqu

ifer T

ype

OC

GPe

rche

d Fi

llN

VFO

CG

Che

mic

al G

roup

Che

mic

al N

ame

Uni

tsEQ

LM

aint

enan

ce o

f Ec

osys

tem

s -

95%

Pr

otec

tion

Fres

hwat

er

Pota

ble

Wat

er

Supp

lyPr

imar

y C

onta

ct

Rec

reat

ion

Agr

icul

ture

Par

ks

and

Gar

dens

LTV

Stoc

k W

ater

ing

Sulfa

te a

s SO

4 - T

urbi

dim

etric

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

- -

- -

- 69

- -

- -

- -

- -

Nitr

ate

(as

N)

mg/

L0.

005

11#1

111

#11

90#5

74

- 3.

813

1412

290.

255.

71.

71.

21.

70.

040.

03N

itrite

(as

N)

mg/

L0.

005

0.9#1

00.

9#10

9#60

<0.0

1 -

- -

- 0.

03 -

- -

<0.0

1<0

.01

- <0

.01

- N

itrog

en (t

otal

oxi

dise

d)m

g/L

0.01

4 -

- -

- 12

- -

- 1.

71.

2 -

0.04

- Su

lpha

te (a

s S)

mg/

L5

83#3

183

#31

330#6

0 -

- -

2323

- 26

1415

- -

- -

- Am

mon

ia (a

s N

)m

g/L

0.01

0.9#5

00.

4#40

0.4#4

0 -

- -

<0.0

1<0

.01

0.3

<0.0

10.

030.

02 -

- -

- -

Tota

l dis

solv

ed s

olid

sm

g/L

560

0#17

600#1

720

00#5

347

3 -

- -

- -

- -

- 10

2087

0 -

6000

- Ar

seni

c (F

ilter

ed)

mg/

L0.

001

0.01

#14

0.01

#14

0.1

#48

0.5#5

6<0

.001

- <0

.001

0.00

10.

001

0.00

1<0

.001

0.00

1<0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

0.00

1C

adm

ium

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

010.

0002

#50

0.00

2#14

0.00

2#14

0.01

#48

0.01

#60

<0.0

001

- <0

.000

2<0

.000

2<0

.000

2<0

.000

1<0

.000

2<0

.000

2<0

.000

2<0

.000

1<0

.000

1<0

.000

20.

0004

0.00

03C

hrom

ium

(III+

VI) (

Filte

red)

mg/

L0.

001

0.05

#90.

05#9

0.1

#48

1#60

<0.0

01 -

<0.0

01<0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

Cop

per (

Filte

red)

mg/

L0.

001

0.00

14#5

01#3

51#3

50.

2#4

80.

4#54

0.00

2 -

0.00

20.

003

0.01

70.

004

0.00

10.

005

0.00

20.

004

0.00

40.

013

0.00

40.

03Le

ad (F

ilter

ed)

mg/

L0.

001

0.00

34#5

00.

01#1

40.

01#1

42

#48

0.1#6

0<0

.001

- <0

.001

<0.0

010.

002

<0.0

01<0

.001

0.00

2<0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

0.00

20.

009

0.00

6M

ercu

ry (F

ilter

ed)

mg/

L0.

0000

50.

0006

#50

0.00

1#14

0.00

1#14

0.00

2#4

80.

002#6

0<0

.000

1 -

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

Mol

ybde

num

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

10.

034#5

10.

05#1

40.

05#1

40.

01#4

80.

15#6

0 -

- <0

.005

<0.0

05<0

.005

<0.0

01<0

.005

<0.0

05<0

.005

- -

<0.0

05 -

<0.0

05N

icke

l (Fi

ltere

d)m

g/L

0.00

10.

011#5

00.

02#1

40.

02#1

40.

2#4

81#6

00.

002

- <0

.001

0.01

50.

016

0.01

70.

018

0.00

20.

009

0.00

60.

017

0.02

20.

090.

11Se

leni

um (F

ilter

ed)

mg/

L0.

001

0.01

1#50

0.01

#14

0.01

#14

0.02

#48

0.02

#60

- -

<0.0

01<0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.01

0.01

0.00

1<0

.001

- -

<0.0

01 -

0.00

2Si

lver

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

10.

0000

5#50

0.1#1

40.

1#14

0.1#1

4 -

- <0

.005

<0.0

05<0

.005

<0.0

01<0

.005

<0.0

05<0

.005

- -

<0.0

05 -

<0.0

05Ti

n (F

ilter

ed)

mg/

L0.

001

0.00

3#51

9.3#5

9.3#5

9.3#5

- -

<0.0

05<0

.005

<0.0

05<0

.001

<0.0

05<0

.005

<0.0

05 -

- <0

.005

- <0

.005

Zinc

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

10.

008#5

03#2

93#2

92

#48

20#6

00.

009

- 0.

010.

063

0.07

90.

073

0.01

20.

025

0.01

20.

051

0.09

30.

026

0.05

0.07

C6-

C9

μg/L

10<2

0 -

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

C10

-C14

μg/L

50 -

<50

<50

<50

<50

<50

<50

<50

<50

<50

<50

<50

<50

<50

C15

-C28

μg/L

100

- <1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00C

29-C

36μg

/L50

- <5

0<1

00<1

00<1

00<5

0<1

00<1

00<1

00<5

0<5

0<1

00<5

0<1

00C

10-C

36μg

/L50

600#4

260

0#42

600#4

260

0#4

260

0#42

- <5

0#62

<100

#62

<100

#62

<100

#62

<50#6

2<1

00#6

2<1

00#6

2<1

00#6

2<5

0#62

<50#6

2<1

00#6

2<5

0#62

<100

#62

C6-

C10

μg/L

10<2

0 -

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

C6-

C10

min

us B

TEX

μg/L

10<2

0 -

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

>C10

-C16

μg/L

50 -

<100

<50

<50

<50

<100

<50

<50

<50

<100

<100

<50

<100

<50

>C10

-C16

min

us n

apht

hale

neμg

/L50

- -

<50

<50

<50

<100

<50

<50

<50

<100

<100

<50

<100

<50

>C16

-C34

μg/L

100

- <1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00>C

34-C

40

μg/L

100

- <1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00>C

10-C

40μg

/L10

060

0#42

600#4

260

0#42

600

#42

600#4

2 -

<100

- -

- <1

00 -

- -

<100

<100

- <1

00 -

Benz

ene

μg/L

195

0#50

1#14

1#14

1#14

<1 -

- -

- <1

- -

- <1

<1 -

<1 -

Ethy

lben

zene

μg/L

180

#51

3#22

3#22

300#1

4<2

- -

- -

<2 -

- -

<2<2

- <2

- To

luen

eμg

/L1

180#5

125

#21

25#2

180

0#14

<2 -

- -

- <2

- -

- <2

<2 -

<2 -

Xyle

ne (m

& p

)μg

/L2

<2 -

- -

- <2

- -

- <2

<2 -

<2 -

Xyle

ne (o

)μg

/L1

350#5

019

0#5<2

- -

- -

<2 -

- -

<2<2

- <2

- To

tal X

ylen

esμg

/L2

20#2

520

#25

600#1

4<2

#62

- -

- -

<2#6

2 -

- -

<2#6

2<2

#62

- <2

#62

- To

tal B

TEX

μg/L

1<1

- -

- -

<1 -

- -

<1<1

- <1

- Ac

enap

hthe

neμg

/L1

400#5

400#5

400#5

- -

- <1

<1<1

<1<1

<1 -

- -

- -

Acen

apht

hyle

neμg

/L1

- -

- <1

<1<1

<1<1

<1 -

- -

- -

Anth

race

neμg

/L1

0.01

#51

1300

#513

00#5

1300

#5 -

- -

<1<1

<1<1

<1<1

- -

- -

- B(

a)P

TEQ

(Zer

o)μg

/L -

- -

- -

0.6

- -

- -

- -

- -

Benz

(a)a

nthr

acen

eμg

/L1

0.02

9#50.

029#5

0.02

9#5 -

- -

<1<1

<1<1

<1<1

- -

- -

- Be

nzo(

a)py

rene

μg/L

0.5

0.1#5

10.

01#1

40.

01#1

40.

01#1

4 -

- -

<1<1

0.6

<1<1

<1 -

- -

- -

Benz

o(g,

h,i)p

eryl

ene

μg/L

1 -

- -

<1<1

<1<1

<1<1

- -

- -

- Be

nzo(

k)flu

oran

then

eμg

/L1

0.29

#50.

29#5

0.29

#5 -

- -

<1<1

<1<1

<1<1

- -

- -

- Be

nzo[

b+j)f

luor

anth

ene

μg/L

1 -

- -

<1<1

<1<1

<1<1

- -

- -

- C

hrys

ene

μg/L

12.

9#52.

9#52.

9#5 -

- -

<1<1

<1<1

<1<1

- -

- -

- D

iben

z(a,

h)an

thra

cene

μg/L

10.

0029

#50.

0029

#50.

0029

#5 -

- -

<1<1

<1<1

<1<1

- -

- -

- Fl

uora

nthe

neμg

/L1

1#51

630#5

630#5

630#5

- -

- <1

<11.

8<1

<1<1

- -

- -

- Fl

uore

neμg

/L1

220#5

220#5

220#5

- -

- <1

<1<1

<1<1

<1 -

- -

- -

Inde

no(1

,2,3

-c,d

)pyr

ene

μg/L

10.

029#5

0.02

9#50.

029#5

- -

- <1

<1<1

<1<1

<1 -

- -

- -

Nap

htha

lene

μg/L

116

#50

0.14

#50.

14#5

0.14

#5<5

- <2

0<1

<1<1

<1<1

<1<5

<5<2

0<5

<20

Phen

anth

rene

μg/L

10.

6#51

- -

- <1

<1<1

<1<1

<1 -

- -

- -

Pyre

neμg

/L1

87#5

87#5

87#5

- -

- <1

<11.

6<1

<1<1

- -

- -

- PA

Hs

(tota

l)μg

/L0.

5 -

- -

<1<1

4<1

<1<1

- -

- -

- 1,

1,1,

2-Te

trach

loro

etha

neμg

/L1

0.5#5

0.5#5

0.5#5

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,1,

1-Tr

ichl

oroe

than

eμg

/L1

270#5

175

00#5

7500

#575

00#5

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,1,

2,2-

Tetra

chlo

roet

hane

μg/L

140

0#51

0.06

6#50.

066#5

0.06

6#5<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 1,

1,2-

Tric

hlor

oeth

ane

μg/L

165

00#5

00.

24#5

0.24

#50.

24#5

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,1-

Dic

hlor

oeth

ane

μg/L

190

#51

2.4#5

2.4#5

2.4#5

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,1-

Dic

hlor

oeth

ene

μg/L

170

0#51

30#1

430

#14

30#1

4<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 1,

2,3-

Tric

hlor

oben

zene

μg/L

110

#50

5.2#5

5.2#5

5.2#5

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,1-

Dic

hlor

opro

pene

μg/L

1<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 1,

2,3-

Tric

hlor

opro

pane

μg/L

10.

0006

5#50.

0006

5#50.

0006

5#5<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 1,

2,4-

Tric

hlor

oben

zene

μg/L

117

0#50

0.99

#50.

99#5

0.99

#5<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 1,

2,4-

Trim

ethy

lben

zene

μg/L

115

#515

#515

#5<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 1,

2-D

ibro

mo-

3-ch

loro

prop

ane

μg/L

11#4

1#41#4

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,2-

Dib

rom

oeth

ane

μg/L

11#1

41#1

41#1

4<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 1,

2-D

ichl

orob

enze

neμg

/L1

160#5

01#2

01#2

015

00#1

4<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 1,

2-D

ichl

oroe

than

eμg

/L1

1900

#51

3#14

3#14

3#14

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,2-

Dic

hlor

opro

pane

μg/L

160

0#51

40#1

40#1

40#1

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,3,

5-Tr

imet

hylb

enze

neμg

/L1

87#5

87#5

87#5

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,3-

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

μg/L

126

0#50

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,3-

Dic

hlor

opro

pane

μg/L

170

0#51

290#5

290#5

290#5

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

1,4-

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

μg/L

160

#50

0.3#2

40.

3#24

40#1

4<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 2,

2-D

ichl

orop

ropa

neμg

/L1

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

2-C

hlor

otol

uene

μg/L

118

0#518

0#518

0#5<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 2-

hexa

none

(MBK

)μg

/L50

34#5

34#5

34#5

<50

- -

- -

- -

- -

<50

<50

- <5

0 -

4-C

hlor

otol

uene

μg/L

119

0#519

0#519

0#5<5

- -

- -

- -

- -

<5<5

- <5

- 4-

Met

hyl-2

-pen

tano

neμg

/L50

1000

#510

00#5

1000

#5<5

0 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

0<5

0 -

<50

- Br

omob

enze

neμg

/L1

54#5

54#5

54#5

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

Brom

ochl

orom

etha

neμg

/L83

#583

#583

#5 -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- Br

omod

ichl

orom

etha

neμg

/L1

60#4

60#4

60#4

<5 -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<5 -

<5 -

PBM

W10

5

OC

G

PBM

W04

Perc

hed

Fill

& O

CG

Met

als

Inor

gani

cs

MW

08EG

ISM

W03

Low

Flo

wN

VFO

CG

VOC

s

PAH

s

BTEX

TRH

- Au

stra

lian

Frac

tions

TRH

- H

SL

Frac

tions

T6.M

1126

8_Be

nUse

rs_2

015_

His

toric

al_W

ATER

Page

1 o

f 4

Tabl

e 6:

Sum

mar

y of

Gro

undw

ater

Res

ults

vs

Ben

efic

ial U

se O

bjec

tives

Supp

lem

enta

ry E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ite A

sses

smen

tVi

cTra

ck, R

DV,

PTV

M11

268

Loca

tion

Sam

ple

IDSa

mpl

e D

ate

Lab

Rep

ort N

o.Sa

mpl

e M

etho

dA

quife

r Typ

e

Che

mic

al G

roup

Che

mic

al N

ame

Uni

tsEQ

LM

aint

enan

ce o

f Ec

osys

tem

s -

95%

Pr

otec

tion

Fres

hwat

er

Pota

ble

Wat

er

Supp

lyPr

imar

y C

onta

ct

Rec

reat

ion

Agr

icul

ture

Par

ks

and

Gar

dens

LTV

Stoc

k W

ater

ing

Sulfa

te a

s SO

4 - T

urbi

dim

etric

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

Nitr

ate

(as

N)

mg/

L0.

005

11#1

111

#11

90#5

7

Nitr

ite (a

s N

)m

g/L

0.00

50.

9#10

0.9#1

09#6

0

Nitr

ogen

(tot

al o

xidi

sed)

mg/

L0.

01Su

lpha

te (a

s S)

mg/

L5

83#3

183

#31

330#6

0

Amm

onia

(as

N)

mg/

L0.

010.

9#50

0.4#4

00.

4#40

Tota

l dis

solv

ed s

olid

sm

g/L

560

0#17

600#1

720

00#5

3

Arse

nic

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

10.

01#1

40.

01#1

40.

1#4

80.

5#56

Cad

miu

m (F

ilter

ed)

mg/

L0.

0001

0.00

02#5

00.

002#1

40.

002#1

40.

01#4

80.

01#6

0

Chr

omiu

m (I

II+VI

) (Fi

ltere

d)m

g/L

0.00

10.

05#9

0.05

#90.

1#4

81#6

0

Cop

per (

Filte

red)

mg/

L0.

001

0.00

14#5

01#3

51#3

50.

2#4

80.

4#54

Lead

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

10.

0034

#50

0.01

#14

0.01

#14

2#4

80.

1#60

Mer

cury

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

005

0.00

06#5

00.

001#1

40.

001#1

40.

002

#48

0.00

2#60

Mol

ybde

num

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

10.

034#5

10.

05#1

40.

05#1

40.

01#4

80.

15#6

0

Nic

kel (

Filte

red)

mg/

L0.

001

0.01

1#50

0.02

#14

0.02

#14

0.2

#48

1#60

Sele

nium

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

10.

011#5

00.

01#1

40.

01#1

40.

02#4

80.

02#6

0

Silv

er (F

ilter

ed)

mg/

L0.

001

0.00

005#5

00.

1#14

0.1#1

40.

1#14

Tin

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

10.

003#5

19.

3#59.

3#59.

3#5

Zinc

(Filt

ered

)m

g/L

0.00

10.

008#5

03#2

93#2

92

#48

20#6

0

C6-

C9

μg/L

10C

10-C

14μg

/L50

C15

-C28

μg/L

100

C29

-C36

μg/L

50C

10-C

36μg

/L50

600#4

260

0#42

600#4

260

0#4

260

0#42

C6-

C10

μg/L

10C

6-C

10 m

inus

BTE

Xμg

/L10

>C10

-C16

μg/L

50>C

10-C

16 m

inus

nap

htha

lene

μg/L

50>C

16-C

34μg

/L10

0>C

34-C

40

μg/L

100

>C10

-C40

μg/L

100

600#4

260

0#42

600#4

260

0#4

260

0#42

Benz

ene

μg/L

195

0#50

1#14

1#14

1#14

Ethy

lben

zene

μg/L

180

#51

3#22

3#22

300#1

4

Tolu

ene

μg/L

118

0#51

25#2

125

#21

800#1

4

Xyle

ne (m

& p

)μg

/L2

Xyle

ne (o

)μg

/L1

350#5

019

0#5

Tota

l Xyl

enes

μg/L

220

#25

20#2

560

0#14

Tota

l BTE

Xμg

/L1

Acen

apht

hene

μg/L

140

0#540

0#540

0#5

Acen

apht

hyle

neμg

/L1

Anth

race

neμg

/L1

0.01

#51

1300

#513

00#5

1300

#5

B(a)

P TE

Q (Z

ero)

μg/L

Benz

(a)a

nthr

acen

eμg

/L1

0.02

9#50.

029#5

0.02

9#5

Benz

o(a)

pyre

neμg

/L0.

50.

1#51

0.01

#14

0.01

#14

0.01

#14

Benz

o(g,

h,i)p

eryl

ene

μg/L

1Be

nzo(

k)flu

oran

then

eμg

/L1

0.29

#50.

29#5

0.29

#5

Benz

o[b+

j)flu

oran

then

eμg

/L1

Chr

ysen

eμg

/L1

2.9#5

2.9#5

2.9#5

Dib

enz(

a,h)

anth

race

neμg

/L1

0.00

29#5

0.00

29#5

0.00

29#5

Fluo

rant

hene

μg/L

11#5

163

0#563

0#563

0#5

Fluo

rene

μg/L

122

0#522

0#522

0#5

Inde

no(1

,2,3

-c,d

)pyr

ene

μg/L

10.

029#5

0.02

9#50.

029#5

Nap

htha

lene

μg/L

116

#50

0.14

#50.

14#5

0.14

#5

Phen

anth

rene

μg/L

10.

6#51

Pyre

neμg

/L1

87#5

87#5

87#5

PAH

s (to

tal)

μg/L

0.5

1,1,

1,2-

Tetra

chlo

roet

hane

μg/L

10.

5#50.

5#50.

5#5

1,1,

1-Tr

ichl

oroe

than

eμg

/L1

270#5

175

00#5

7500

#575

00#5

1,1,

2,2-

Tetra

chlo

roet

hane

μg/L

140

0#51

0.06

6#50.

066#5

0.06

6#5

1,1,

2-Tr

ichl

oroe

than

eμg

/L1

6500

#50

0.24

#50.

24#5

0.24

#5

1,1-

Dic

hlor

oeth

ane

μg/L

190

#51

2.4#5

2.4#5

2.4#5

1,1-

Dic

hlor

oeth

ene

μg/L

170

0#51

30#1

430

#14

30#1

4

1,2,

3-Tr

ichl

orob

enze

neμg

/L1

10#5

05.

2#55.

2#55.

2#5

1,1-

Dic

hlor

opro

pene

μg/L

11,

2,3-

Tric

hlor

opro

pane

μg/L

10.

0006

5#50.

0006

5#50.

0006

5#5

1,2,

4-Tr

ichl

orob

enze

neμg

/L1

170#5

00.

99#5

0.99

#50.

99#5

1,2,

4-Tr

imet

hylb

enze

neμg

/L1

15#5

15#5

15#5

1,2-

Dib

rom

o-3-

chlo

ropr

opan

eμg

/L1

1#41#4

1#4

1,2-

Dib

rom

oeth

ane

μg/L

11#1

41#1

41#1

4

1,2-

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

μg/L

116

0#50

1#20

1#20

1500

#14

1,2-

Dic

hlor

oeth

ane

μg/L

119

00#5

13#1

43#1

43#1

4

1,2-

Dic

hlor

opro

pane

μg/L

160

0#51

40#1

40#1

40#1

1,3,

5-Tr

imet

hylb

enze

neμg

/L1

87#5

87#5

87#5

1,3-

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

μg/L

126

0#50

1,3-

Dic

hlor

opro

pane

μg/L

170

0#51

290#5

290#5

290#5

1,4-

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

μg/L

160

#50

0.3#2

40.

3#24

40#1

4

2,2-

Dic

hlor

opro

pane

μg/L

12-

Chl

orot

olue

neμg

/L1

180#5

180#5

180#5

2-he

xano

ne (M

BK)

μg/L

5034

#534

#534

#5

4-C

hlor

otol

uene

μg/L

119

0#519

0#519

0#5

4-M

ethy

l-2-p

enta

none

μg/L

5010

00#5

1000

#510

00#5

Brom

oben

zene

μg/L

154

#554

#554

#5

Brom

ochl

orom

etha

neμg

/L83

#583

#583

#5

Brom

odic

hlor

omet

hane

μg/L

160

#460

#460

#4

Met

als

Inor

gani

cs

VOC

s

PAH

s

BTEX

TRH

- Au

stra

lian

Frac

tions

TRH

- H

SL

Frac

tions

PBM

W10

7PB

MW

107

PBM

W10

7PB

MW

108

QC

02Q

C03

PBM

W10

8PB

MW

108

6/11

/201

417

/11/

2014

3/09

/201

57/

11/2

014

7/11

/201

47/

11/2

014

17/1

1/20

144/

09/2

015

EM14

1182

9EM

1412

163

4714

20EM

1411

829

EM14

1182

950

68EM

1412

163

4714

20Lo

w-fl

owBa

iler

w F

low

/Foo

tva

Baile

rLo

w F

low

- -

- -

- -

- -

70.3

- 43

4.52

4.51

4 -

4.8

<0.0

1 -

- <0

.01

<0.0

1<0

.005

- -

70.3

- -

4.52

4.51

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- 11

30 -

- 54

647

245

0 -

- 0.

001

- <0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

<0.0

01 -

<0.0

01<0

.000

1 -

<0.0

002

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

- <0

.000

2<0

.001

- <0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

<0.0

01 -

<0.0

010.

01 -

<0.0

010.

001

0.00

30.

001

- 0.

01<0

.001

- <0

.001

<0.0

01<0

.001

<0.0

01 -

0.00

1<0

.000

1 -

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

001

<0.0

0005

- <0

.000

1 -

- <0

.005

- -

- -

<0.0

050.

016

- 0.

006

0.00

50.

005

0.00

5 -

0.00

4 -

- <0

.001

- -

- -

<0.0

01 -

- <0

.005

- -

- -

<0.0

05 -

- <0

.005

- -

- -

<0.0

050.

072

- 0.

004

0.01

70.

025

0.01

3 -

0.01

5 -

<20

<20

- -

<10

<20

<20

<50

- <5

0<5

0<5

0<5

0 -

<50

<100

- <1

00<1

00<1

00<1

00 -

<100

<50

- <1

00<5

0<5

0<1

00 -

<100

<50#6

2 -

<100

#62

<50#6

2<5

0#62

<250

#62

- <1

00#6

2

- <2

0<2

0 -

- <1

0<2

0<2

0 -

<20

<20

- -

<10

<20

<20

<100

- <5

0<1

00<1

00<5

0 -

<50

- -

<50

- -

<50

- <5

0<1

00 -

<100

<100

<100

<100

- <1

00<1

00 -

<100

<100

<100

<100

- <1

00<1

00 -

- <1

00<1

00 -

- -

- <1

- -

- <1

<1 -

- <2

- -

- <1

<2 -

- <2

- -

- <1

<2 -

- <2

- -

- <2

<2 -

- <2

- -

- <1

<2 -

- <2

#62

- -

- <3

#61

<2#6

2 -

- <1

- -

- -

<1 -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

<20

- -

<1<5

<20

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

0 -

- -

- <5

0 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- <5

0 -

- -

- <5

0 -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

- -

- -

- <1

- -

- <5

- -

- <1

<5 -

PBM

W10

7

NVF

PBM

W10

8

Low

Flo

wN

VF

T6.M

1126

8_Be

nUse

rs_2

015_

His

toric

al_W

ATER

Page

2 o

f 4

supplementary environmental site assessment · 2018-01-15 · environmental investigation levels...

Documents