GRM/P3937€WB2,€dated€5 -...

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 GRM is a trading name of GRM Development Solutions Ltd

Reporttype:

Environmental andGeotechnical Validation

Site: King Edwards Court,Hyde

Client: Bardsley Constructionc/o Urban Regen

Ref: GRM/P3937/EGV.1

Date: September 2007

GRM

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 GRM is a trading name of GRM Development Solutions Ltd

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 1

2 PHASE III VALIDATION INVESTIGATION............................................................. 3

3 ENVIRONMENTAL VALIDATION........................................................................... 5

4 GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT .......................................................................... 9

5 FURTHER INVESTIGATION................................................................................. 13

6 CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 13

APPENDICES

Site Location Plan Appendix A

PMA Drawing 114.2.03 Rev J ‘Proposed Site Plan’ Appendix B

Urban Regen Drawing 059/001 ‘Earthworks Drawing’ Appendix C

Urban Regen Drawing 059/002 ‘Asbuilt Drawing’ Appendix D

Urban Regen Drawing 059/003 ‘Validation Drawing’ Appendix E

Exploratory Hole Logs Appendix F

Chemical Analysis Results Appendix G

Geotechnical Test Results Appendix H

GRM Contaminant Screening Values Appendix I

Statistical Analysis of Chemical Analysis Results Appendix J

GRM Letter Report Relating to Mottram Old Road Appendix K

Typical Gas Protection Measures Detail Appendix L

Cross Section Showing Capping Detail Appendix M

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PREAMBLE

GRM has been appointed by Urban Regen Ltd (Client) to undertake environmentaland geotechnical validation of the remediation undertaken at the site.

The site is located approximately 1.5km south of Hyde town centre, as shown on theSite Location Plan presented in Appendix A. The National Grid Reference (NGR) forthe approximate centre of the site is SJ 9550 9369.

Urban Regen Ltd has remediated the site for Bardsley Construction Ltd who proposeto develop it with up to three storey housing, four storey apartments and associatedinfrastructure. The outline development proposals provided by the Client arepresented in Appendix B.

The sites formerly comprised a small mixed use industrial park that has beenremediated to allow development. This report should be read in conjunction with thefollowing information, all of which, except the GRM reports, has been provided byBardsley Construction Ltd and Urban Regen Ltd:

• ‘King Edward Court, Hyde – Site Appraisal and Remedial Strategy’, GRM, ReportRef GRM/P3937/F.1, dated April 2007.

• ‘Gas Protection Measures for King Edwards Court, Hyde’, GRM, Letter Report RefGRM/P3937 WB2, dated 5th June 2007.

• ‘Proposed Site Plan’, PMA Drawing 1141.2.03 Rev J (presented in Appendix B).• ‘Earthworks Drawing’, Urban Regen Drawing 059/001 (presented in Appendix C).• ‘Asbuilt Drawing’, Urban Regen Drawing 059/002) (presented in Appendix D).• ‘Validation Drawing’, Urban Regen Drawing 059/003) (presented in Appendix E).• CBR results for test locations 1 to 7.

This Environmental and Geotechnical Validation Report is intended to providesufficient information for the relevant Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council(TMBC) Contaminated Land Department conditions to be discharged and provideinformation that will assist decision making by identifying and recommendingsolutions to ground engineering issues.

GRM standard limitations of reporting are provided on the back cover of this report.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 2

1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL VALIDATION

The Client’s specific requirements were outlined verbally and generally comprised‘investigations to provide environmental and geotechnical validation of the siteremediation works and provide development recommendations in relation tofoundations and infrastructure.’

The principal aims of the Environmental and Geotechnical Validation were as follows:

a) Chemical validation of the imported fill.

b) Geotechnical validation of the engineered fill.

c) Provide preliminary development recommendations.

d) Advise on further works required for the costeffective reduction of risks to thedevelopment and procedures likely to satisfy Regulators.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 3

2 PHASE III VALIDATION INVESTIGATION

2.1 FIELDWORK

The ground investigation (including fieldwork, sampling, monitoring and laboratoryanalyses) has been designed to identify and assess potential ground relatedproblems and to allow cost effective solutions to be advised. The trial pit locationswere scheduled by GRM based on the proposed development layout. All fieldworkand soil descriptions undertaken by GRM were carried out in general accordancewith relevant British Standards.

The locations of the exploratory holes are shown on the Urban Regen ValidationDrawing presented in Appendix E, and the exploratory hole logs are presented inAppendix F. Seven trial pits (VTP1 to VTP7) have been excavated to a maximumdepth of 2.00m below existing ground level (begl). GRM has been informed that thecurrent ground levels are approximately 650mm below proposed finished floor levels(FFLs).

The intrusive ground investigation fieldwork was conducted on the 17th of August2007. At the time of the investigation, access was available to all parts of the site.

Samples taken during the fieldwork but not scheduled for testing will be stored forone month after the issue of this report before disposal. Samples will only be storedfor longer when the client submits a written request for extended sample retention.

2.2 MONITORING INSTALLATIONS

Monitoring installations were not installed as part of the Environmental andGeotechnical Validation as sufficient monitoring was undertaken as part of the initialGRM site appraisal works for recommendations, in respect of the ground gas regimeand gas precautions, to be made.

2.3 PROVEN GROUND CONDITIONS

The ground conditions encountered were as follows:• Made Ground – Granular Capping Layer• Made Ground – General Fill

2.3.1 MADE GROUND – GRANULAR CAPPING LAYER

A granular capping layer comprising brown cobbly, gravelly sand was encountered inall of the exploratory holes to depths of 0.50m to 0.55m begl. This material representsthe site won crushed capping layer placed as part of the remediation.

2.3.2 MADE GROUND – GENERAL FILL

The crushed capping layer was underlain by deposits of imported general fill. Thismaterial was variable across the site and ranged from firm sandy gravelly clay tosandy clayey gravel.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 4

2.4 GROUNDWATER

Groundwater was not observed in any of the validation trail pits. However, theinformation from the GRM Site Appraisal Report suggested a standing water table atgenerally <1.5m (below original ground levels) in the southern section of the site atlevels of approximately 142.2142.6m AOD. This groundwater was assessed to beperched. The groundwater levels in the northern section of the site were noted to varyfrom 145148m AOD and were assessed as unlikely to be connected to the waterencountered in the southern section of the site.

2.5 GROUND GAS

Gas monitoring was undertaken as part of the original GRM appraisal andrecommendations in respect of the gas regime at the site were made in GRM LettterReport GRM/P3937 WB2 ‘Gas Protection Measures for King Edwards Court, Hyde’,dated 5th June 2007 and have been approved by Tameside Metropolitan BoroughCouncil.

2.6 CHEMICAL ANALYSES

In accordance with the agreed remedial strategy, all material imported to site for useas general fill has been subject to chemical analysis for a general suite ofcontaminants, at an approximate rate of one test per 500m³. The crushed granularmaterial used as the capping across the site has been subject to the same suite ofcontamination testing, plus asbestos screening at a rate of one test per 250m³. Thechemical analysis results are presented in Appendix G.

2.7 GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSES

Only limited geotechnical testing has been undertaken as part of Environmental andGeotechnical Validation, as the original GRM Site Appraisal Report containedsufficient data to enable the geotechnical assessment of the site to be completed.However, the results of the water soluble sulphate and pH testing included in thechemical analysis of the general fill and the granular capping layer will be assessedto determine if the concrete classification for the site needs to be changed. The onlyadditional geotechnical testing that has been undertaken is particle size distributiontests on samples of the crushed granular material.

In situ CBR test results have been provided by Urban Regen and are presented inAppendix G; their approximate locations are shown on Urban Regen Drawing059/003 ‘Validation Drawing’ presented in Appendix E. The CBR and particle sizedistribution test results are presented in Appendix H.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 5

3 ENVIRONMENTAL VALIDATION

3.1 GENERAL FILL

As part of the site remediation/reclamation works, site levels have been raised acrossmajority of the site to enable development to proceed. Material has been imported tosite from two separate sources: Mill Fold Depot, Middleton and Mottram Old Road,Stalybridge. Transfer notes/schedules for all the material imported to site areavailable upon request. The general fill material has been capped off with 500mm ofsite won crushed granular material. The environmental validation of each material willbe discussed separately below.

The Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment (‘CLEA’) guidelines have been usedto assess the risks posed to human health. For this assessment the default SoilGuideline Values (SGVs) for residential land with plant uptake have been used, i.e. afemale with a start age class of one and an end age class of six. All pathways havebeen considered including the consumption of homegrown vegetables. This has beencarried out in order to provide a precautionary screening approach to assessing therisk posed to human health.

The list of contaminants covered by CLEA, with a specific SGV, is notcomprehensive. For selected organic and inorganic contaminants, GRM haveadopted the WS Atkins ATRISKsoil thresholds for use as Tier 1 Assessment Criteria(TAC). The ATRISKsoil values have been formulated using a version of the BP RISC4.0 risk assessment model, adapted according to the CLEA methodology.

Where chemical analysis results exceed the TAC, Site Specific Assessment Criteria(SSAC) will be produced using the CLEA UK risk assessment model. Fordeterminands not included in the ATRISKsoil list (e.g. acenaphthylene, phenanthrene)the SNIFFER risk assessment model has been used to formulate a TAC value. TheCLEA SGVs and TAC used in the assessment of the site are presented in AppendixI.

3.1.1 GENERAL FILL – MILL FOLD DEPOT

Approximately 3200m³ of general fill has been imported to site from Mill Fold Depot.The site comprises a former council depot in Middleton, Oldham which containedoffice space, vehicle repair bays and material storage areas (rock salt etc) and hasbeen reclaimed for residential end use. GRM has been informed that the remedialstrategy for the site comprised hotspot removal and reengineering of the madeground deposits below an environmental cap; due to level constraints the site had asurplus of material. It is understood that to keep disposal costs to a minimum all themade ground was kept on site and only natural sand was exported. GRM whereprovided with chemical analysis results for the natural material from Mill Fold Depotprior to importation to determine its suitability for use (presented in Appendix G).

An engineer from GRM collected samples of the natural sand fill imported from MillFold Depot from a large on site stockpile prior to it being placed as general fill.Twelve validation samples (VS112) where collected from random locations aroundthe stockpile; of these, six have been tested for a general suite of contaminants. Thechemical analysis results are presented in Appendix G.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 6

Statistical analysis, in accordance with the principles outlined in the CLR guidance,has been used to assess the chemical analysis results. This statistical analysis isfurther explained in Appendix J along with the analysis spreadsheets.

The US95 for all contaminants tested for, where the distribution is similar, are belowthe CLEA SGV and TAC action levels. Numerous outliers of contamination havebeen identified during the statistical analysis, the majority of which are below therelevant CLEA SGV or GRM TAC and do not pose a risk to future end users.However, an outlier of benzo(a)pyrene has been identified in VS12, which returned aresult of 1.00mg/kg. This result is above the GRM TAC of 0.551mg/kg and could beconsidered to pose a potential risk to end users. However, as the material has onlybeen used as general fill, is covered with 500mm of granular material and willeventually be covered by clean soil capping in the garden areas, the risk isinsignificant.

It is considered that material imported to site from Mill Fold Depot for use as generalfill poses no risk to end users and is suitable for use in a residential development.

3.1.2 GENERAL FILL – MOTTRAM OLD ROAD

Approximately 6900m³ of general fill has been imported to site from Mottram OldRoad, Stalybridge. The site has previously been assessed by GRM; in summary:

• Prior to development for residential end use the site was undeveloped andused for stock grazing.

• The geology comprises thin deposits of superficial clays and sand/gravelover a solid geology of Millstone Grit.

• There are no significant environmental hazards near the site which couldaffect on site soil quality.

• The site is not in a radon affected area.• The site is situated on a minor aquifer.• No industrial land use near to the site has been reported.• The natural strata comprised silty sandy gravelly clay and clayey sand.• The chemical analysis confirmed that the material was suitable for use in a

residential development, although a SSAC was produced due to slightlyelevated levels of benzo(a)pyrene.

A copy of the letter report produced by GRM is presented in Appendix K.

As such a large amount of material was imported to site from Mottram Old Road andonly restricted space was available for storage at King Edward Court, it was notpractical for an engineer from GRM to collect samples for validation testing (as itwould have required an engineer to be on site everyday for seventeen days).Therefore, to comply with the requirement in the agreed remedial strategy of testingone sample per 500m³, the Urban Regen Site Manager collected one sample per dayfrom the first delivery of the day (approximately 400m³ imported per day). Seventeenvalidation samples (VS1329) were collected as described and have been tested for ageneral suite of contaminants. The chemical analysis results are presented inAppendix G.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 7


The US95 for all contaminants tested for, where the distribution is similar, are belowthe CLEA SGV and TAC action levels. Numerous outliers of contamination havebeen identified during the statistical analysis, all of which are below the relevantCLEA SGV or GRM TAC and do not pose a risk to future end users.

It is considered that material imported to site from Mottram Old Road for use asgeneral fill poses no risk to end users and is suitable for use as in a residentialdevelopment.

3.1.3 CRUSHED CAPPING – SITE WON

As part of the site remediation the site has been capped with a 500mm layer of sitewon crushed granular material. It is estimated, based on the capping thickness of500mm and the site area of approximately 2000m² (0.2 hectare), that approximately1000m³ of this material has been used to cap the site.

This material was sampled by an engineer from GRM during the validationinvestigation, and four samples (i.e. one per 250m³) have been tested for a generalsuite of contaminants and an asbestos screen.


The US95 for all contaminants tested for, where the distribution is similar, are belowthe CLEA SGV and TAC action levels. Numerous outliers of contamination havebeen identified during the statistical analysis, all of which are below the relevantCLEA SGV or GRM TAC and do not pose a risk to future end users.

The asbestos screens all returned negative results, therefore the crushed cappinglayer can be considered free of asbestos.

It is considered that site won crushed granular material for use as capping poses norisk to end users and is suitable for use as in a residential development.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 8

3.2 OUTSTANDING ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

3.2.1 EXISTING SITE DRAINAGE

There are existing culvert and drainage runs across the site (their locations areshown on the ‘Asbuilt Drawing’ provided by Urban Regen Ltd presented in AppendixD). It is understood that these are to be diverted by Bardsley Construction during thedevelopment of the site. Once diverted, these should be fully grouted and sealed sothat they do not provide a preferential pathway for off site migration. It is understoodthat Bardsley Construction will be undertaking these works and reporting directly toTMBC.

3.2.2 GAS PROTECTION MEASURES

As detailed in previous reports, the site has been assessed as complying with‘Characteristic Situation 3’ as outlined in table 8.5 of CIRIA C659. Therefore, gasprecautions are considered necessary for this site. A proposed detail is presented inAppendix L along with details of the proposed membrane. These works need to bevalidated to clear the remaining TMBC conditions and it is understood that BardsleyConstruction will be undertaking these works and reporting directly to TMBC.

3.2.3 CAPPING

As detailed in previous reports it has been agreed that the site will be finished with atleast 600mm of clean cover in all soft landscaped areas. As detailed above, a 500mmcrushed granular capping layer has been placed across the whole site. This will besupplemented in the soft landscaped areas by an additional 500mm of clean subsoiland topsoil. A sketch cross section of the proposed capping is shown in Appendix M.All subsoil and topsoil imported for use in the soft landscaped areas will need to bechemically validated to ensure they are suitable for use in a residential developmentand the final depth will need to be checked to ensure that sufficient cover is present.These works will be undertaken by GRM at a later date.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 9

4 GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The proposed development comprises two and three storey houses and apartments.The ground levels in the across the site have been raised by up to 3.00m. The depthsof any underground engineering works (i.e. sewers, pumping stations etc.) areunknown and therefore have not been taken in to account in the followingassessment. It has been assumed that any such works will not compromisefoundation and ground stability.

Should the development proposals or finished levels be altered then thecomments/recommendations below may require revising.

4.2 ENGINEERING GROUND TREATMENT

The site levels have been raised over the majority of the site and the whole site hasbeen capped with 500mm of site won crushed granular material; this should provide astable development platform.

The general fill was engineered as part of the reclamation by using a towed roller, thematerial encountered during the validation investigation appears to have beensuitably compacted and excessive settlements should not be experienced by roads,services or plot areas. It is anticipated, subject to testing, that an allowable bearingpressure of 50kN/m² would be achievable on top of the crushed granular cappinglayer.

Even after capping, the near surface soils may need treatment or reinforcing to allowsafe movement of construction plant and labour (i.e. piling rigs), and an assessmentby the contractor should be undertaken once the type of machinery/plant needed tocomplete the development is known.

4.3 EXCAVATION CONDITIONS

From the validation investigation undertaken, it is likely that excavations up to 2.00mbegl will be stable in the sort term. All excavations on site should be in accordancewith HSE guidelines and stability should be practically maintained at all times.Reference should be made to HSE construction information sheet No. 8 (Revision 1)‘Safety in Excavations’.

Excavation of the materials encountered during the validation investigation should bereadily achieved using conventional hydraulic excavation techniques. A breaker orsimilar plant may be required where hard standing or existing foundations areencountered (see below).

The observed groundwater conditions suggest that for excavations up 2.00m begldewatering should not be required; however, allowance should be made for thelocalised use of sump pumping particularly during periods of inclement weather.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 10

The build program should be tailored to reflect the impact that deep excavationsthrough potentially unstable strata can have on adjacent properties, so that they arenot undermined.

4.4 EXISTING STRUCTURES / SUBSTRUCTURES

Existing substructures were not encountered during the validation investigation and itis understood that the majority of such features have been removed during theremediation of the site. However, the ‘Asbuilt Drawing’ provided by Urban Regen Ltd(presented in Appendix D) indicates that a number of piles and a concrete slab/wallassociated with the former joinery factory have not been removed. It is understoodthat the piles were left in situ as they extended below the water table and thatconcrete slab/wall was not excavated as it extended below the sites main adoptedaccess road and its removal may have comprised the stability of the road. Thesefeatures should be taken in to account during foundation design, i.e. the locations ofthe piles for the new plots should positioned to avoid the existing piles and preboringthrough the concrete slab/wall may be required prior to piling if the remainingconcrete is not removed.

Where practicable, old substructures should be fully removed. However, if this is notpracticable all new foundations should be carried down to fully penetrate them andthey should be broken well away from all new structures.

There are existing culvert and drainage runs across the site (their locations areshown on the ‘Asbuilt Drawing’ provided by Urban Regen Ltd presented in AppendixD). It is understood that these are to be diverted by Bardsley Construction during thedevelopment of the site. Once diverted, the old pipes should be grouted (seeenvironmental validation section).

4.5 BEARING STRATA

Due to large variations in fill thickness, the presence of older fill at depth in thesouthern section of the site and the variation of fill composition, the shallow strata arenot suitable for the proposed structures to found on. Therefore, the bearing strata inthese areas will be the less weathered Rough Rock Formation at depth.

4.6 TREE INFLUENCE ON FOUNDATIONS

No plasticity testing has been performed as part of the geotechnical validation or siteappraisal investigation; however, based on experience of sites with a similar geologyit is considered that the cohesive Glacial Till in the northern section of the site and theimported cohesive fill, are likely to be of moderate volume change potential andcompliance with NHBC Standards Chapter 4.2 is recommended.

Heave precautions will be required where the foundations lie within the heave zone oftrees as defined in NHBC Standards Chapter 4.2.

As the site requires piled foundations (see below) it is considered that the potentialeffect of trees will not have a significant effect on foundation design. However, itshould be noted that in the northern section of the site where Glacial Till is presentthe potential for heave to affect piles and floor slabs needs to be considered.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 11

4.7 TYPE AND DEPTHS OF FOUNDATIONS

Due to the presence of deep made ground, it is considered that piles will be the mostcost effective foundation solution for the proposed development. A specialist pilingcontractor should confirm the suitability of the ground conditions for piling and adviseon the most appropriate/cost effective pile type.

It should be noted that a working platform will be required by the piling contractor; the500mm crushed stone layer should be sufficient in this respect; however, this shouldbe confirmed with the contractor prior to the commencement of piling operations.

4.8 FLOOR SLABS

In situ suspended or precast (beam and block) floor slabs will be required across allof the site, as in excess of 600mm of unsuitable material/fill will remain belowproposed plots.

Old substructures should be removed to a distance of at least 0.5m below any newfloor slabs to prevent the formation of ‘hard spots’.

A voided suspended floor system such as beam and block will be required for allproperties where the foundations lie within the heave zone as defined in NHBCStandards Chapter 4.2.

The site has been assessed as complying with ‘Characteristic Situation 3’ as outlinedin table 8.5 of CIRIA C659. Therefore, gas precautions are considered necessary(see section 3.2.2).

4.9 SLOPE STABILITY AND RETAINING STRUCTURES

The site formerly sloped down relatively steeply to the south. The raising of site levelsin the southern section of the site should, providing adequate drainage has beenincluded, improve overall slope stability as it will act as toe loading.

There are a number of retaining walls on site, particularly on the southern boundary.An experienced structural engineer should inspect and report on these walls.

The present gradients on site are likely to be adjusted by minor earthworks. Futureground profiles may require earth retaining structures, for which further advice maybe required when more information is available.

4.10 SOAKAWAY DRAINAGE

The site is not suitable for soakaway drainage and an alternative drainage systemshould be considered for the disposal of surface water.

4.11 NEW ACCESS ROADS

The seven in situ CBR tests provided by Urban Regen indicate values of 7.849.8%;however, retests at the two locations, where results of 7.8% were calculated, returned

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 12

results of 37% and 49.8%. Therefore, the minimum value of 15% should be used fordesign purposes.

The reengineered fill material is considered suitable for sewer construction; however,as a precautionary measure it would be prudent to ensure that any manhole ringsfounded on the fill are put on a geotextile membrane to spread the applied load.

All proposed services should be kept above the level of the perched water in thebackfilled reservoir (at depth below engineered fill in southern section of the site) asexcavation below this will involve intensive dewatering. Additionally, in this area allmanholes and services should be placed in the engineered fill (not in the underlyingmade ground) and a geotextile should be used in the bedding to spread the appliedloads and protect against differential settlement.

The adopting Local Authority should be consulted at the earliest opportunity todetermine any specific subgrade requirements in respect of adoptable roads.

4.12 BURIED CONCRETE

Following the requirements outlined in BRE Special Digest 1 (2005) ‘Concrete inAggressive Ground’, the Design Sulphate Class for buried concrete at the site (inboth the existing fill/natural ground and the imported fill) should be assumed as DS2and the ACEC Class as AC2. This is based on the sulphate and pH levels in thesoils and groundwater, and assumed mobile groundwater conditions.

The results of the water soluble sulphate and pH testing of the imported fill are shownin Appendix G.

GRM/P3937/EGV.1 13

5 FURTHER INVESTIGATION

No further investigation is considered necessary in respect of the area investigated.However, further information will be required by the Local Authority EHO to clear theremaining conditions, this includes:

• Full details of the works to divert to existing site drainage and culvert (to besupplied by Bardsley Construction).

• Full details of the upgrades to site services and the materials to be used to backfillservice trenches (to be supplied by Bardsley Construction).

• Validation of gas protection measures installation including photographicevidence (to be undertaken by Bardsley Construction)

• Chemical validation of the subsoil and topsoil used to construct near surfacecapping (to be undertaken by GRM).

• Validation of the soil capping thickness (to be undertaken by GRM).

6 CONCLUSIONS

The Environmental and Geotechnical Validation has shown the site has been suitablyreclaimed and reengineered in a manner to enable the proposed development toproceed, assuming compliance with all the recommendations contained within thisreport. Should significantly different ground conditions be encountered during groundworks these should be reported to GRM for reassessment.

Document prepared by

Chris Storey BSc PGDip FGS(Principal Engineer)

Reviewed andApproved by

Simon Cook CEng CGeol MIMMM FGS(Associate Director)

When required inhouse geological, geotechnical, environmental, structural and civil staff helped to produce thisdocument.

APPENDIX

A

PROJECT No: DRAWING No:

DESIGN/DRAWN : DATE:

SCALE@SIZE : ISSUE:

TITLE:

PROJECT:

CLIENT:

DO NOT SCALENOTES:

NTS FINAL

Site Location Plan

CRS 04/2007

Figure 1

GROUND RISK MANAGEMENTBretby Business Park,

BurtononTrent, Staffs, DE15 0YZTel: 01283 551249 Fax: 01283 211968

mail@grmuk.com www.grmuk.com

King Edwards Court, GeeCross, Hyde

Bardsley Construction Ltdc/o Urban Regen Ltd

P3937

© Ground Risk Management Ltd© Crown Copyright. AL 100014100

Approx Site Location

SITE

mailto:[email protected]

APPENDIX

B

S T O C K P O R T R O A D

P.H

.

165

167

153

155

5141

145

1F.F.L. 149.100

3F.F.L. 148.500

6F.F.L. 147.800

7

2

45

8F.F.L. 146.800

910F.F.L. 146.500

1127

26F.F.L. 147.300

2524

23F.F.L. 147.300

22F.F.L. 147.500

2120

19F.F.L. 147.250

1817F.F.L. 147.000 16

1514

13F.F.L. 146.750 12

26 AP

AR

TMEN

TSF.F.L. 146.800 (B

ASEMEN

T)F.F.L. 149.390 (G

RO

UN

D FLO

OR

)

ramp

retaining wall

VVV

21

5 (D)

55

1

44

1

32

32

B

B

A

A

C

C

148.827

147.200

145.225P

RO

POSE

D LE

VELS

1:15 disabled ramp

TUR

NIN

G H

EAD

PLAN

5000

4500

5500

4500

5000

4500

5500

R4500

2020

1919

1818

2122221234

17

1514

13

12

2324

2526

262727

1111 10

109

9

8

7

7

8

6

6

16

All levels and dim

ensions must be checked on site by contractor

prior to comm

encemt of w

orks. Any variations must be reported to

Philip M

illson Architecture.

All inform

ation hereon in is the copyright of Philip Millson

Architecture Lim

ited. Copying in full or in part is forbidden w

ithoutthe w

ritten permission from

Philip Millson Architecture Lim

ited.

REV

.A 17/4/07 H

OU

SE TYPES ALTER

EDR

EV.B

18/4/07 EXISTIN

G & PR

OP

OSED

LEVELS ADD

EDR

EV.C

19/4/07 APA

RTM

EN

T F.F.L. ADJU

STEDR

EV.D

23/4/07 LEVELS & TU

RN

ING

HEAD

REVISED

REV

.E 25/4/07 TU

RN

ING

HEA

D C

OR

REC

TED

& APAR

TMEN

TP

LAN

RE

VISEDR

EV.G

9/5/07 TUR

NIN

G H

EAD

EXTEN

DED

Philip Millson

Architecture Lim

itedH

yde Park House

Cartw

right Street, Hyde

Cheshire, SK

14 4EH.

Tel: 0161 367 2320Fax: 0161 367 7322

email: [email protected]

1141.2.01

J

PR

OPO

SED

RE

SIDE

NTIAL

DEV

ELOP

ME

NT, KIN

G E

DW

ARD

CO

UR

T, GE

E C

RO

SS, H

YDE

PR

OPO

SED

SITE PLAN

M.W

ibberley

12th.April.07

1:250

RE

V.H

11/5/10 EX

NTR

AN

CE

TO S

ITE C

OR

RE

CTE

D 'A

SE

XISTING

'R

EV.I 15/5/07 C

LIENTS AM

END

MEN

TSR

EV.J 24/05/07 MAP

LE HO

USE TYP

E ALTE

RED


APPENDIX

C


P.H

.

153

155

5141

145

6

2

45

911

2725

24

2120

18

1615

14

12

VVV

21

5 (D)

55

1

44

1

32

32

2020

1919

1818

2122221234

17

1514

13

12

2324

2526

262727

1111 10

109

9

8

7

7

8

6

6

16

1

3

V

7

8

10

2623

2219

17

13

KEY

.

Site Boundary

Extents of Earthworks

Imported Fill

Retained concrete

Potential continuationof concrete slab

Underside of Environm

ental Capping 140.500

Approxim

ate OG

L (140.500)

1. Crushed Concrete/1st Generation Stone capping /excavated im

ported fillsare inert and can be reused w

ithin the development.

Existing strata (made

ground) should be deemed to be contam

inated and should only be reusedbelow

the environmental cap.

If unsure please Refer to UR.

2. For Validation of Capping details and construction thickness, please Refer tothe G

.R.M. Com

pletion Report.

3. Typical Cross Section below

:

4. Prior to Foundation and Infrastructure Construction, D

eveloperM

UST refer

to geotechnical recomm

endations in G.R.M

. report.

5. Housebuilder to place 500m

m of inert subsoils/topsoils to external soft

areas. Please Refer to Remediation Com

pletion Report.

6. Keep capping and imported m

aterials seperate from M

ade Ground.

7. During wet w

eather, the natural materials are liable to degradation,

Operations on site m

ust consider this when coordinating w

orks during periodsof w

et weather.

8. If excavating plot foundations/drainage, ensure environmental capping layer

is fully reinstated.

9. Seal stockpiled arisings.

10. The existing live culvert has been left intact and developer should ensurethat it is left undisturbed until a perm

anent/temporary culvert has been

installed. Location of existing culvert manholes and route of culvert pipew

orkare show

n on this drawing.

11. Please Refer to G.R.M

. Completion Report for gas protection m

easures.

12. The Developer

MU

ST ensure that this Draw

ing is read alongside the ProjectRem

ediation and Geotechnical Reporting Prepared by G

.R.M. Consultant

Structural Engineers and G.R.M

. Environmental C

onsultant Engineers.

13. A tem

porary ditch diversion of the culvert from Point A

Point B, has beeninstalled. This ditch diversion should be m

onitored daily to ensure that nodebris/deliterious m

aterial is within the channel w

hich could potentially blockthe pipew

ork down stream

.

14.IF IN

DO

UBT ASK.

500mm

Thick Crushed C

oncrete Environmental C

apEngineered im

ported fill depth

Existing Strata (made ground)

depth varies from 1.0m

4.0m

APPENDIX

D

P.H

.

153

155

5141

6

2

45

911

2725

24

2120

18

1615

14

12

VVV

21

5 (D)

55

1

44

1

32

32

2020

1919

1818

2122221234

17

1514

13

12

2324

2526

262727

1111 10

109

9

8

7

7

8

6

6

16

1

3

V

7

8

10

2623

2219

17

13

NO

TES1. Crushed Concrete/1st G

eneration Stone capping /excavated imported fills

are inert and can be reused within the developm

ent.Existing strata (m

adeground) should be deem

ed to be contaminated and should only be reused

below the environm

ental cap.If unsure please Refer to U

R.


.R.M. Com

pletion Report.


:


eveloperM

UST refer


endations in G.R.M

. report.




pletion Report.



ade Ground.

7. During wet w





et weather.







orkare show

n on this drawing.



easures.

12. The Developer

MU




.R.M. Consultant


. Environmental C


13. A tem






ork down stream

.

14.IF IN

DO

UBT ASK.

500mm

Thick Crushed C


apEngineered im

ported fill depth



4.0mK

EY.

Site Boundary

Extents of Eartworks

Alignm

ent of Existing Culvert

Alignm

ent of Existing Drainage

Stone Drain/W

avin Coil

Retained C

oncrete

Imported Fill


Top of Environmental C

apping 140.500

Concrete Pile Survey

APPENDIX

E


P.H

.

153

155

5141

145

6

2

45

911

2725

24

2120

18

1615

14

12

VVV

21

5 (D)

55

1

44

1

32

32

2020

1919

1818

2122221234

17

1514

13

12

2324

2526

262727

1111 10

109

9

8

7

7

8

6

6

16

1

3

V

7

8

10

2623

2219

17

13

TP3

TP1

TP7

TP2

TP4

TP5

TP6

NO

TES

KEY

.

Site Boundary

Extents of Earthworks

Retained C

oncrete


Underside of Environm

ental Capping 140.500

Trial Pits

CB

R Locations

1. Crushed Concrete/1st Generation Stone capping /excavated im

ported fillsare inert and can be reused w

ithin the development.

Existing strata (made

ground) should be deemed to be contam

inated and should only be reusedbelow

the environmental cap.

If unsure please Refer to UR.


.R.M. Com

pletion Report.


:


eveloperM

UST refer


endations in G.R.M

. report.




pletion Report.



ade Ground.

7. During wet w





et weather.







orkare show

n on this drawing.



easures.

12. The Developer

MU




.R.M. Consultant


. Environmental C


13. A tem






ork down stream

.

14.IF IN

DO

UBT ASK.

500mm

Thick Crushed C


apEngineered im

ported fill depth



4.0m

APPENDIX

F

Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:

GROUNDWATER INSITU TESTING STRATA RECORD

Strike Depth Depth/Type/Ref Hand Vane Strength Depth Level Legend Description(m) (m) (m) (mAOD)

Burton-on-Trent (HQ) Tel: 01283 551249Market Harborough Tel: 01858 414981

GRM Project ref:

Logged by:

Email: [email protected] Web: www.grm-uk.com

STRATA

Date excavated:Date backfilled:

Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details

Strata strengths/densities determined by observation only.

Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):

Groundwater Observations

General Remarks:No groundwater seepage encountered during excavation.

King Edward Road, Hyde

360° Excavator

Bardsley Construction

None.

KT

17/08/200717/08/2007

1.00

2.00

2.00

P39370.000

0.00E0.00N

FINAL

VTP1

-0.50

-1.00

-1.55

-2.00

0.00-0.50/D/001

0.50-1.00/D/002

1.00-1.50/D/003

1.50-2.00/D/004

0.50

1.00

1.55

2.00

Medium dense brown very cobbly gravelly sand withstring and plastic fragments. Cobbles are subangularto subrounded brick and ceramics. Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarse brick.(MADE GROUND)

Firm brown gravelly clay with occasional subangular to subrounded brick cobbles and plastic fragments.(MADEGROUND)

Medium dense brown slightly clayey gravelly sand withoccasional subrounded cobbles of brick.(MADE GROUND)

Firm brown grey mottled orange slightly sandy slightly gravelly clay with abundant rootlets. Sand is fine to medium. Gravel is fine to medium sandstone. Workednatural ground.(FILL)

End of Trial Pit at 2.00 m

1

2

1:25


http://www.grm-uk.com/

Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):


General Remarks:No groundwater encountered during excavation.


360° Excavator


None.

KT

17/08/200717/08/2007

1.00

2.00

2.00

P39370.000

0.00E0.00N

FINAL

VTP2

-0.50

-2.00

0.00-0.50/D/001

0.50-1.00/D/002

1.00-1.50/D/003

1.50-2.00/D/004

0.50

2.00

Medium dense brown very cobble gravelly sand withstring and plastic fragments. Cobbles are subangularto subrounded brick and ceramics. Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarse brick.(MADE GROUND)

Medium dense gravelly cobbly fine to coarse black sand with rootlets and localised pockets of stiff brownclay. Occasional steel string and plastic fragments.Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarsesandstone and brick. Cobbles are well roundedsandstone.(MADE GROUND)


1

2

1:25



Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):




360° Excavator


None.

KT

17/08/200717/08/2007

1.00

2.00

2.00

P39370.000

0.00E0.00N

FINAL

VTP3

-0.50

-1.50

-2.00

0.00-0.50/D/001

0.50-1.00/D/002

1.00-1.50/D/003

1.50-2.00/D/004

0.50

1.50

2.00


Firm brown sandy gravelly cobbly clay. Sand is fine to medium. Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine tocoarse brick and sandstone. Cobbles are subroundedbrick.(MADE GROUND)

Firm brown grey mottled orange CLAY with abundantrootlets and leaves. Worked natural ground.(MADEGROUND)


1

2

1:25



Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):




360° Excavator


None.

KT

17/08/200717/08/2007

1.00

2.00

2.00

P39370.000

0.00E0.00N

FINAL

VTP4

-0.50

-2.00

0.00-0.50/D/001

0.50-1.00/D/002

1.00-1.50/D/003

1.50-2.00/D/004

0.50

2.00


Firm brown very sandy gravelly clay with subroundedcobbles of brick and concrete. Sand is fine to medium. Gravel is subangular to subrounded brick.(MADEGROUND)


1

2

1:25



Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):




360° Excavator


None.

KT

17/08/200717/08/2007

1.00

2.00

2.00

P39370.000

0.00E0.00N

FINAL

VTP5

-0.50

-2.00

0.00-0.50/D/001

0.50-1.00/D/002

1.00-1.50/D/003

1.50-2.00/D/004

0.50

2.00

Medium dense brown very cobble gravelly sand withstring. Cobbles are subangular to subrounded brick.Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarsebrick.(MADE GROUND)

Firm brown very gravelly cobbly slightly sandy claywith occasional string and wood chippings. Sand isfine to medium. Gravel is subangular to subroundedfine to coarse brick, ceramics and roadstone.(MADEGROUND)


1

2

1:25



Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):




360° Excavator


None.

KT

17/08/200717/08/2007

1.00

2.00

2.00

P39370.000

0.00E0.00N

FINAL

VTP6

-0.55

-1.20

-2.00

0.00-0.50/D/001

0.50-1.00/D/002

1.00-1.50/D/003

1.50-2.00/D/004

0.55

1.20

2.00

Medium dense very gravelly very cobbly fine to coarsesand with occasional plastic fragments. Gravel issubangular to subrounded fine to coarse brick andceramic fragments. Cobbles are subangular tosubrounded brick.(MADE GROUND)

Firm brown, mottled black, very sandy very gravellyclay with occasional cobbles and wood chippings. Sandis fine to coarse. Gravel is subangular to subroundedfine to coarse brick. Cobbles are subroundedbrick.(MADE GROUND)

Firm brown mottled orange slightly sandy slightlygravelly clay. Sand is fine. Gravel is subangular tosubrounded fine to coarse brick.(MADE GROUND)


1

2

1:25



Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):




360° Excavator


None.

KT

17/08/200717/08/2007

1.00

2.00

2.00

P39370.000

0.00E0.00N

FINAL

VTP7

-0.50

-0.70

-2.00

0.00-0.50/D/001

0.50-1.50/D/002

1.00-1.50/D/003

1.50-2.00/D/004

0.50

0.70

2.00

Medium dense brown very cobble gravelly sand withstring. Cobbles are subangular to subrounded brick.Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarsebrick.(MADE GROUND)

Firm brown very gravelly cobbly clay. Gravel issubangular to subrounded fine to coarse brick. Cobbles are subangular to subrounded brick.(MADE GROUND)

Firm brown very sandy CLAY.(MADE GROUND)


1

2

1:25



APPENDIX

G

TEST REPORT No 12101

Kelvin House, RTC Business Park, London Road, Derby DE24 8UP Tel: 01332 349977 Fax: 01332 263263 http://www.eiag.co.uk

PAGE 1 OF 7

Issue Date: 06 September 2007

CLIENT DETAILS

Client: GRM DEVELOPMENT SOLUTIONS Ltd Fernie House

149 St Mary’s Road Market Harborough LEICESTERSHIRE LE16 7DT

Originator: M Tomkins

JOB DETAILS

Order Ref: Verbal Our Ref: 12771/1-4/s Job Reference P3937 Site Reference King Edwards Court, Hyde

2702

EIAG Limited Page 2 of 7

TEST REPORT No. 12101 (continued)

TESTING REQUIREMENTS

Date of Requisition 23/08/07

Client Sample Ref EIAG Ref Required Test(s) Standard

UK

AS*

MC

ER

TS*

P3937 12771 / Soil

⎧ Metal content analysis: ⎪ Cd, Se IHM/S0106 Y N ⎪ Cr, Cu, Ni IHM/S0104 Y N

VTP2 @ 0-0.5m 1 ⎪ Zn IHM/S0104 Y Y VTP4 @ 0-0.5m 2 ⎪ As, Pb IHM/S0104 N N VTP5 @ 0-0.5m 3 ⎨ Hg IHM/S0102 N N VTP7 @ 0-0.5m 4 ⎪ FOC analysis IHM N N

⎪ Speciated PAHs content analysis IHM N N ⎪ Phenol Index content analysis IHM N N ⎪ Total cyanide content analysis IHM N N ⎪ Aq sulphate content analysis IHM N N ⎩ pH analysis IHM/S0004 Y N

VTP2 @ 0-0.5m 1 Asbestos Screen IHM N N VTP4 @ 0-0.5m 2 Asbestos Screen IHM N N VTP5 @ 0-0.5m 3 Asbestos Screen IHM N N VTP7 @ 0-0.5m 4 Asbestos Screen IHM N N

IHM – In-house method

* indicates ISO17025 / MCERTS accreditation status

Date of Completion of Testing 05/09/07



SAMPLE DETAILS

Client Ref EIAG Ref Sample Description Sampling

date/time Date received Other comments

P3937 12771 /

VTP2 @ 0-0.5m 1 Brown sandy loam, stones, fibrous root material, cardboard Unknown 23/08/07 - VTP4 @ 0-0.5m 2 Brown silty sand, stones, brick Unknown 23/08/07 - VTP5 @ 0-0.5m 3 Brown sandy loam, stones, brick, woody material Unknown 23/08/07 - VTP7 @ 0-0.5m 4 Brown sandy loam, stones, brick Unknown 23/08/07 -

The sampling was not carried out by EIAG Limited; sampling is not a UKAS accredited activity of EIAG Limited.

PREPARED SAMPLE DETAILS

Client Ref EIAG Ref Results of sieving over 2mm BS Test Sieve P3937 12771 / Amount passing (%) Description of retained material

VTP2 @ 0-0.5m 1 53.86 Stones, brick, cardboard VTP4 @ 0-0.5m 2 53.75 Brick VTP5 @ 0-0.5m 3 49.40 Stones, brick, organics VTP7 @ 0-0.5m 4 61.87 Stones, brick


TEST REPORT No. 12101 (continued) Results: TOTAL CONTAMINANT SUITE ANALYSIS – P3937

VTP2 @ 0-0.5m VTP4 @ 0-0.5m VTP5 @ 0-0.5m VTP7 @ 0-0.5m

Parameter mg/kg (unless stated)

arsenic 4.9 5.3 5.5 7.9 cadmium 0.49 0.24 0.25 0.48 chromium 14.3 13.6 15.0 20.1

copper 12.3 13.8 19.4 349.3 mercury 0.11 0.16 0.15 0.12 nickel 11.5 12.4 12.6 22.0 lead 26.9 45.5 43.3 320.8

selenium <1 <1 <1 <1 zinc 70.3 81.1 73.7 224.9

FOC (%) 1.45 1.53 1.55 1.78

phenols index 0.72 0.52 0.70 <0.5 Total cyanide <1 <1 <1 <1 sulphate (g/l) 1.36 1.38 1.46 1.42

pH 10.70 10.49 10.37 8.53



Results: PAH SPECIATION ANALYSIS – P3937

VT

P2 @

0-0

.5m

VT

P4 @

0-0

.5m

VT

P5 @

0-0

.5m

VT

P7 @

0-0

.5m

Species (mg/kg)

Naphthalene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthylene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluorene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Phenanthrene 0.7 1.1 0.7 1.7 Anthracene <0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4

Fluoranthene 0.6 1.7 1.1 1.1 Pyrene 0.5 1.4 1.0 1.0

Benzo(a)Anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Chrysene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Dibenzo(ah)anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(ghi)perylene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

EPA 16 TOTAL <3.1 <5.6 <4.1 <5.4



Results: ASBESTOS SCREEN ANALYSIS – P3937

Sample Ref Asbestos Presence

VTP2 @ 0-0.5m Negative VTP4 @ 0-0.5m Negative VTP5 @ 0-0.5m Negative VTP7 @ 0-0.5m Negative

C A Stroud Operations Manager 6th September 2007

END OF TEST REPORT

This Test Report is issued in accordance with the laboratory accreditation requirements of the United Kingdom Accreditation Service. This report may not be reproduced other than in full, except with the

prior written approval of EIAG Limited.



REPORT NOTES

In House Methods IHM/S0002: Moisture Content analysis by Oven Drying IHM/S0003: Organic Matter analysis by LOI @ 425oC IHM/S0004: pH in Soil (Instrumental Method) IHM/S0011: Gerhardt Automatic Aqua Regia Digestion of Soils IHM/S0102: Operation of FIMS for Soil Extracts IHM/S0104: Operation of ICP-OES for Soil Extracts IHM/S0106: Operation of ICP-MS for Soil Extracts Soil Analysis Metal results expressed as mg/kg on moisture corrected assisted-dried basis PAH results expressed as mg/kg on as received sample



PAGE 1 OF 8

Issue Date: 10 August 2007

CLIENT DETAILS



Originator: C Storey

JOB DETAILS


2702






UK

AS*

MC

ER

TS*

P3937 12731 / Soil

⎧ Metal content analysis: ⎪ Cd, Se IHM/S0106 Y N

Soil VS1 1 ⎪ As, Cr, Cu, Ni IHM/S0104 Y N Soil VS4 2 ⎪ Zn IHM/S0104 Y Y Soil VS5 3 ⎪ Pb IHM/S0104 N N Soil VS8 4 ⎨ Hg IHM/S0102 N N Soil VS9 5 ⎪ FOC analysis IHM N N Soil VS12 6 ⎪ Speciated PAHs content analysis IHM N N

⎪ Phenol Index content analysis IHM N N ⎪ Total cyanide content analysis IHM N N ⎪ Aq sulphate content analysis IHM N N ⎩ pH analysis IHM/S0004 Y N






SAMPLE DETAILS

Client Ref EIAG Ref Sample Description Sampling date/time Date received Other

comments P3937 12731 /

Soil VS1 1 Brown sand, stones Unknown 24/07/07 - Soil VS4 2 Brown sand, stones Unknown 24/07/07 - Soil VS5 3 Brown sand, stones, clay pieces Unknown 24/07/07 - Soil VS8 4 Brown sand, stones Unknown 24/07/07 - Soil VS9 5 Brown sand, stones Unknown 24/07/07 - Soil VS12 6 Brown clay, stones Unknown 24/07/07 -



Client Ref EIAG Ref Results of sieving over 2mm BS Test Sieve

P3937 12731 / Amount passing (%) Description of retained material

Soil VS1 1 73.55 Stones Soil VS4 2 69.45 Stones Soil VS5 3 45.29 Stones Soil VS8 4 57.47 Stones Soil VS9 5 64.40 Stones Soil VS12 6 82.00 Stones



Soil VS1 Soil VS4 Soil VS5


arsenic 3.3 4.9 4.9 cadmium <0.18 0.22 0.21 chromium 6.3 7.5 8.1

copper 7.1 10.0 9.8 mercury 0.03 0.05 0.04 nickel 5.2 8.1 8.8 lead 14.2 20.6 24.3

selenium <1 <1 <1 zinc 37.6 39.3 39.5

FOC (%) 0.85 3.01 0.96

phenols index <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Total cyanide <1 <1 <1 sulphate (g/l) <0.01 0.08 0.02

pH 8.30 8.53 8.32



Results: TOTAL CONTAMINANT SUITE ANALYSIS – P3937



arsenic 8.1 5.0 4.9 cadmium 0.23 0.22 <0.18 chromium 8.5 8.8 18.1

copper 9.0 10.0 19.5 mercury 0.06 0.05 0.09 nickel 9.2 8.9 20.0 lead 21.3 22.9 33.2

selenium <1 <1 <1 zinc 41.3 44.4 63.4

FOC (%) 1.10 1.01 1.83

phenols index <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Total cyanide <1 <1 <1 sulphate (g/l) <0.01 <0.01 0.11

pH 8.21 8.23 7.89





Species (mg/kg)

Naphthalene 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthylene 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluorene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Phenanthrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)Anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Chrysene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Dibenzo(ah)anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(ghi)perylene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

EPA 16 TOTAL <1.6 <1.6 <1.6





Species mg/kg (unless stated)

Naphthalene <0.1 <0.1 0.3 Acenaphthylene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthene <0.1 <0.1 0.2

Fluorene <0.1 <0.1 0.1 Phenanthrene <0.1 <0.1 0.2 Anthracene <0.1 <0.1 0.1

Fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 1.0 Pyrene <0.1 <0.1 0.8

Benzo(a)Anthracene <0.1 <0.1 0.4 Chrysene <0.1 <0.1 0.4

Benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 0.7 Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 0.3

Benzo(a)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 1.0 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 1.5 Dibenzo(ah)anthracene <0.1 <0.1 0.5

Benzo(ghi)perylene <0.1 <0.1 0.81

EPA 16 TOTAL <1.6 <1.6 <8.4

C Heldreich Quality Manager 10th August 2007

END OF TEST REPORT





REPORT NOTES




PAGE 1 OF 11

Issue Date: 30 August 2007

CLIENT DETAILS



Originator: L Chippington

JOB DETAILS


2702






UK

AS*

MC

ER

TS*

P3937 12763 / Soil

VS13 1 VS14 2 VS15 3 ⎧ Metal content analysis: VS16 4 ⎪ Cd, Se IHM/S0106 Y N VS17 5 ⎪ Cr, Cu, Ni IHM/S0104 Y N VS18 6 ⎪ Zn IHM/S0104 Y Y VS19 7 ⎪ As, Pb IHM/S0104 N N VS20 8 ⎨ Hg IHM/S0102 N N VS21 9 ⎪ FOC analysis IHM N N VS22 10 ⎪ Speciated PAHs content analysis IHM N N VS23 11 ⎪ Phenol Index content analysis IHM N N VS24 12 ⎪ Total cyanide content analysis IHM N N VS25 13 ⎪ Aq sulphate content analysis IHM N N VS26 14 ⎩ pH analysis IHM/S0004 Y N VS27 15 VS28 16 VS29 17






SAMPLE DETAILS

Client Ref EIAG Ref Sample Description Sampling

date/time Date received Other comments

P3937 12763 /

VS13 1 Brown sandy loam, discrete clay pieces, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS14 2 Brown sandy loam, discrete clay pieces, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS15 3 Brown sandy loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS16 4 Brown sandy loam, discrete clay pieces Unknown 17/08/07 - VS17 5 Brown sandy loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS18 6 Brown sandy loam, discrete clay pieces, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS19 7 Brown sandy loam, discrete clay pieces, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS20 8 Brown sandy clay loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS21 9 Brown sandy clay loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS22 10 Brown sandy clay loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS23 11 Brown sandy clay loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS24 12 Brown sandy clay loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS25 13 Brown sandy loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS26 14 Brown sandy clay loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS27 15 Brown sandy loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS28 16 Brown sandy loam, grey/brown clay pieces, stones Unknown 17/08/07 - VS29 17 Brown sandy clay loam, stones Unknown 17/08/07 -


ed Page 4 of 11




P3937 12763 / Amount passing (%) Description of retained material

VS13 1 71.92 Stones VS14 2 79.83 Stones VS15 3 73.62 Stones VS16 4 71.23 Stones VS17 5 66.65 Stones VS18 6 55.82 Stones VS19 7 74.26 Stones VS20 8 66.34 Stones VS21 9 80.50 Stones VS22 10 74.58 Stones VS23 11 65.10 Stones VS24 12 80.11 Stones VS25 13 73.34 Stones VS26 14 82.90 Stones VS27 15 70.56 Stones VS28 16 77.21 Stones VS29 17 69.40 Stones

EIAG Limit



VS13 VS14 VS15 VS16 VS17 VS18


arsenic 3.0 2.8 <1.8 2.2 <1.8 <1.8 cadmium <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 0.22 <0.18 <0.18 chromium 27.8 29.5 37.8 32.1 40.8 37.1

copper 18.4 19.0 22.3 20.3 24.2 23.5 mercury 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.03 nickel 24.7 27.0 33.9 28.5 38.0 37.0 lead 18.4 18.0 18.5 27.7 17.8 18.0

selenium <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 zinc 57.9 57.1 69.7 66.2 75.6 69.2

FOC (%) 1.38 1.26 1.72 1.73 1.13 1.41

phenols index <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Total cyanide <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 sulphate (g/l) <0.01 0.05 0.02 <0.01 0.02 0.02

pH 7.33 7.31 5.66 7.65 5.61 6.23





Species (mg/kg)

Naphthalene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthylene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluorene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Phenanthrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)Anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Chrysene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Dibenzo(ah)anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(ghi)perylene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

EPA 16 TOTAL <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6






arsenic <1.8 2.3 1.9 3.0 1.9 <1.8 cadmium 0.63 0.21 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 chromium 29.5 28.3 30.1 29.6 29.9 29.0

copper 18.9 23.4 21.5 20.9 19.8 20.3 mercury 0.03 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.06 nickel 26.2 26.7 25.6 26.3 28.2 23.9 lead 20.4 30.5 29.1 22.4 19.4 22.6

selenium <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 zinc 60.3 74.0 62.8 61.9 59.2 58.7

FOC (%) 1.22 1.28 1.37 1.39 1.23 1.34

phenols index <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Total cyanide <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 sulphate (g/l) <0.01 0.09 0.01 0.01 0.01 <0.01

pH 7.59 7.52 7.44 7.28 7.52 7.35





Species (mg/kg)

Naphthalene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthylene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluorene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Phenanthrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)Anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Chrysene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Dibenzo(ah)anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(ghi)perylene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

EPA 16 TOTAL <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6




VS25 VS26 VS27 VS28 VS29


arsenic <1.8 <1.8 3.1 3.4 3.2 cadmium 0.23 <0.18 <0.18 <0.18 0.18 chromium 26.7 27.9 28.4 29.7 30.0

copper 20.2 20.1 19.1 16.7 20.5 mercury 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.05 nickel 25.7 26.2 26.8 23.2 25.0 lead 27.7 20.3 16.9 17.9 21.7

selenium <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 zinc 65.8 60.6 58.9 54.5 61.9

FOC (%) 1.34 1.33 1.31 1.43 1.46

phenols index <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Total cyanide <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 sulphate (g/l) 0.10 0.07 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

pH 7.88 7.59 7.59 7.42 7.65




VS25 VS26 VS27 VS28 VS29

Species (mg/kg)

Naphthalene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthylene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Acenaphthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluorene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Phenanthrene 0.8 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 Anthracene 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fluoranthene 0.8 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Pyrene 0.6 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)Anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Chrysene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(a)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Dibenzo(ah)anthracene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Benzo(ghi)perylene <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

EPA 16 TOTAL <3.5 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6

C A Stroud Operations Manager

30th August 2007

END OF TEST REPORT





REPORT NOTES


APPENDIX

H

APPENDIX

I

Arsenic

Cadmium* pH 6 7 8 6 7 81 2 8 1 2 8

Chromium (hexavalent)

Chromium (total)

1 2.5 5 1 2.5 5 1 2.5 5 1 2.5 5 9 21 41 16 41 80 18 43 85 48,0001 2.5 5 1 2.5 5 1 2.5 5 1 2.5 53 7 14 3 8 15 31 73 140 150 350 6801 2.5 5 1 2.5 5 1 2.5 5 1 2.5 578 150 280 21.9 34.4 37.3 80 155 280 21.9 43 78.1

Boron (water soluble)Copper 653 25,000 760,000Zinc** 395 6,089 110,452PAHFree Cyanide 34 34 34 34

Acenaphthene 536 2540 88000Acenaphthylene^ 21.7 3510 88000Anthracene 4300 12700 351000Benzo(a)anthracene 4.79 8.47 290Benzo(a)pyrene ^ 1.1 1.36 29.4Benzo(b)fluoranthene 5.54 8.47 290Benzo(ghi)perylene 62.6 84.7 2900Benzo(k)fluoranthene 55.4 84.7 2900Chrysene 479 847 29000Dibenzo(ah)anthracene ^ 1.03 1.29 29.5Fluoranthene 796 1690 57700Fluorene 454 1690 57700Ideno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 6.04 8.47 290Napthalene 4.4 4.4 98Phenanthrene^ 1470 2010 44400Pyrene 590 1270 43400

NOTES:-Revised January 2008All figures are in mg/kgGRM Tier 1 Assessment Criteria are Atkins Atrisk Values^ Values calculated using CLEA UK* Cd values linked to pH of respective sample** Values for Zinc calculated using the SNIFFER Model*** SGV's linked to Soil Organic Matter (SOM) content of sample. SGV's assume that free phase is not presentSGV's for Phenols (Residential w/out plant uptake & Comm/ind) are x 1000

CLEA SGVs

TIER 1 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

As Per Individual Determinand

CONTAMINANTS

Lead

Mercury

Selenium

Nickel

260 35 8000

15 8 480

450 450 750

200 130 5000

Allotments Comm/Ind

30 1400

Resi w/outplants

20 20 500

Phenols***

Toluene***

Ethylbenzene***

Resi withplants

20

130

35

8

450

No

Tier

1 V

alue

s C

alcu

late

dNo Tier 1 Value

50 75 50

TIER 1 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA (PAHs)

5000

1

CONTAMINANT

ALIPHATIC1%

(0.6)2.5%(1.4)

5%(2.9)

1%(0.6)

2.5%(1.4)

5%(2.9)

1%(0.6)

2.5%(1.4)

5%(2.9)

C6-C8 5.37 11.9 22.7 5.37 11.9 22.7 242 535 1019C8-C10 1.46 3.55 7 1.46 3.56 7.05 66 160 317C10-C12 8.53 20.8 40.1 8.6 21.2 41.7 29900 29600 29800C12-C16 40.7 93.5 162 42.1 101 187 29900 29600 29800C16-35 16100 16100 16200 26100 26700 27300 618000 610000 613000

AROMATIC

C5-7 (benzene) 0.57 1.32 2.57 0.61 1.41 2.75 26.9 62.1 121C7-8 (toluene) 0.62 1.46 2.85 0.69 1.63 3.18 30.4 71.1 139

C8-C10 1.08 2.7 5.34 2.39 5.88 11.6 107 262 512C10-C12 1.92 4.74 9.36 14.2 34.1 63.9 625 1448 2583C12-C16 2.13 5.42 10.6 72.4 152 235 12150 12250 12300C16-C21 116 129 133 289 338 361 9160 9230 9180C21-C35 160 159 158 397 420 402 9380 9300 9250

NOTES:-Revised January 2008.# SOM converted to FOC using a conversion factor of 0.58. Where FOC analysis results are decimalised x100 to convert to %.GRM Tier 1 Assessment Criteria calculated as 'Generic Assessment Criteria' using CLEA UK (SOM content as stated, pH 7).An explanation to the TACs and CLEA UK data source references are provided on pages 6 and 7 of this Appendix.All figures are reported in mg/kg.

% Soil Organic Matter #(equivalent Fraction Organic Carbon - %)

Residential without plantuptake Commercial & industrial

GRM TIER 1 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA - PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON FRACTIONS

LAND USE Residential with plant uptake

2

Parameter Concentration UnitsAcrylamide 0.1 µg/lAluminium 200 µgAl/lAmmonium 0.5 mgNH4/lAntimony 5 µgSb/lArsenic 10 µgAs/lBenzene 1 µg/lBenzo(a)pyrene 0.01 µg/lBoron 1 mgB/lBromate 10 µgBrO3/lCadmium 5 µgCd/lChromium 50 µgCr/lChloride (i) 250 mgCl/lConductivity (i) 2500 µS/cm at 20°CCopper(ii) 2 mgCu/lCyanide 50 µgCN/l1, 2 dichloroethane 3 µg/lEpichlorohydrin 0.1 µg/lFluoride 1.5 mgF/lHydrogen ion 10 pH valueIron 200 µgFe/lLead (ii) 25 µgPb/lManganese 50 µgMn/lMercury 1 µgHg/lMineral Oil (TPH) 10 µg/lNickel (ii) 20 µgNi/lNitrate (iii) 50 mgNO3/lNitrite (iii) 0.5 mgNO2/lPhenol 0.5 µg/lPolycyclic AromaticHydrocarbons (vii) * 0.1 µg/lSelenium 10 µgSe/lSodium 200 mgNa/lSulphate (i) 250 mgSO4/lTetrachloroethene andTrichloroethene (viii) 10 µg/lTetrachloromethane 3 µg/l

Trihalomethanes: Total (ix) 100 µg/lVinyl chloride 0.5 µg/lZinc 5000 µg/l

PesticidesAldrin 0.03 µg/lDieldrin 0.03 µg/lHeptachlor 0.03 µg/lHeptachlor epoxide 0.03 µg/lother pesticides 0.1 µg/lPesticides: Total (vi) 0.5 µg/l

ReferenceUK Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2000* PAHs - sum of specified compounds: - benzo(b)fluoranthene

- benzo(k)fluoranthene - benzo(ghi)perylene - indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

UK Drinking Water Standards (UKDWS)

3

Mercury 1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane Annual average 100 Fenitrothion Annual average 0.01 0-50 >50-100 >100-150 >150-200 >200-250 >250Cadmium 5 1,1,2-Trichloroethane Annual average 400 Flucofuron 95 percentile 1

Hexachlorocyclohexane 0.1 2,4-D (ester) Annual average 1 Iron (dissolved) Annual average 1000Copper(dissolved) Annual average 1 6 10 10 10 28

Carbon tetrachloride 12 2,4-D (non-ester) Annual average 40 Lead (dissolved) Annual averageHardness related (see

table 2b for details)Copper(dissolved) 95th percentile 5 22 40 40 40 112

Total DDT 0.025 2,4-Dichlorophenol Annual average 20 Linuron Annual average 2Nickel(dissolved) Annual average 50 100 150 150 200 200

pp DDT 0.01 2-Chlorophenol Annual average 50 Malathion Annual average 0.01Vanadium(dissolved) Annual average 20 20 20 20 60 60

Pentachlorophenol 2 4-Chloro-3-methyl-phenol Annual average 40 Mecoprop Annual average 20

Dieldrin 0.01 Arsenic (dissolved) Annual average 50 MevinphosMaximum

concentration 0.02Chromium(dissolved) Annual average 5 10 20 20 50 50

Isodrin 0.005 Atrazine & Simazine Annual average 2 Naphthalene Annual average 10 Lead (dissolved) Annual average 4 10 10 20 20 20

Aldrin 0.01 Azinphos-methyl Annual average 0.01 Nickel (dissolved) Annual averageHardness related (see

table 2b for details) Zinc (total) Annual average 8 50 75 75 75 125Endrin 0.005 Bentazone Annual average 500 Omethoate Annual average 0.01 Zinc (total) 95th percentile 30 200 300 300 300 500Total 'Drins 0.03 Benzene Annual average 30 PCSDs 95th percentile 0.05

Hexachlorobenzene 0.03 Biphenyl Annual average 25 Permethrin 95th percentile 0.01Chromium(dissolved) Annual average 150 175 200 200 250 250

Hexachlorobutadiene 0.1 Boron (dissolved) Annual average 2000 pH 95th percentile 06-Sep Lead (dissolved Annual average 20 125 125 250 250 250Chloroform 12 Chloronitrotoluenes Annual average 10 Sulcofuron 95th percentile 25 Zinc (total) Annual average 75 175 250 250 250 500

1,2-dichloroethane 10 Chromium (dissolved) Annual average

Hardness related(see table 2b for

details) Toluene Annual average 50 Zinc (total) 95th percentile 300 700 1000 1000 1000 2000

Trichlorethylene 10 Copper (dissolved) Annual average

Hardness related(see table 2b for

details) Triazaphos Annual average 0.005

Perchlorethylene 10 Cyfluthrin 95th percentile 0.001 TributyltinMaximum

concentration 0.02Trichlorobenzene 0.4 Demeton Annual average 0.5 Trifluralin Annual average 0.1

Dichlorvos Annual average 0.001 TriphenyltinMaximum

concentration 0.02

DichlorvosMaximum

concentration - Vanadium (dissolved) Annual averageHardness related (see

table 2b for details)

Dimethoate Annual average 1 Xylene (m and p, o) Annual average 30

Endosulphan Annual average 0.003 Zinc (total) Annual averageHardness related (see

table 2b for details)

Ammonia (as NH3) 15 500

Table 1: Environmental Quality Standards(EQS) for List 1 Dangerous Substances Table 2a: Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for List 2 Dangerous Substances

Substance EQS TypeAll Freshwater

EQS (ug/l) SubstanceAll Freshwater

EQS (ug/l)

Freshwaters, suitable for Salmonid (game) fish

Freshwaters, suitable for Cyprinid (coarse) fish

Freshwaters, suitable for all fishlife

Table 2b: Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for hardness related List 2 dangerous substances

Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) Groundwater Thresholds for List 1 & 2 Substances

Substance EQS typeEQS (ug/l) for Hardness bands (mg/l CaCO3)

All Freshwater EQS(ug/l)Substance EQS Type

4

Contaminant Material selection ThresholdLevel (mg/kg dried soil)

CorrosionSulphate (SO4) 2000Sulphur (S) 5000Sulphide (S) 250pH <pH5, >pH8Toxic SubstancesAntimony (Sb) 10Arsenic (As) 10*Cadmium (Cd) 3Chromium (hexavalent) (Cr) 25Chromium (total) 600Cyanide (free) (Cn) 25*Cyanide (complexed) (Cn) 250*Lead (Pb) 500Mercury (Hg) 1Selenium (Se) 3Thiocyanate (SCN) 50Organic ContaminantsCoal Tar 50Cyclohexane extractable 50Phenol 5Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons 50Toluene extractable 50TPH DRO (diesel, kerosene) 100Petrol 10Mineral oils 1000

Ref: Water Regulations Advisory Scheme (WRAS) (No. 9-04-03 Issue 1)

Contaminant Thresholds for Subsurface Water Pipes

* It is not recommended that water pipes should be laid in sites where these substances are identified orsuspected

5

Data source references:-

IRIS - Integrated Risk Information System. USEPA.(http://epa.gov/iris).

USEPA (2001) - Fact Sheet: Correcting the Henry's law constant for soil temperature

USEPA (2004) - Users guide for evaluating subsurface vapor intrusion into buildings.

TR - Texas Risk Reduction Program. 30 TAC 350.1-350.5 (2003).

RAIS - Risk Assessment Information System (http://rais.ornl.gov/).

IUPAC-NIST Solubility Database. Schwarz (1977)

RBCA - Risk-Based Corrective Action chemical database

P5-079-TR1 - Environment Agency (2003). Review of Fate and Transport of SelectedContaminants in the Soil Environment. Draft technical report.

GRM TIER 1 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

GRM have derived Tier 1 Assessment Criteria (TAC) to assess the risks posed to humanhealth from petroleum hydrocarbon fractions and selected Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAHs). TACs have been calculated using CLEA UK risk assessment software and principleslaid out in the Contaminated Land Report (CLR) model procedures (R&D publications CLR 7, 9,10, 11 and associated reports). The CLEA UK risk assessment software has been run in-houseby GRM on numerous occasions, with each lowest output value adopted as the TAC.References to physico-chemical and toxicological parameters are provided in the followingtable and are from the data sources detailed below. TACs for additional PAHs are underdevelopment, however in the interim GRM have adopted Atkin's ATRISKSOIL Values whichhave been formulated using a version of the BP RISC 4.0 risk assessment model, adaptedaccording to the CLEA methodology.

Tox 12 - DEFRA & E (2003). Contaminants in Soil: Collation of Toxicogical data and intakevalues for humans. Dioxins, Furans and dioxin-like PCBs

Tox 24 - DEFRA & EA (2004). Contaminants in Soil: Collation of Toxicogical data and intakevalues for humans. Trichloroethene

WHO - World Health Organisation website (http://who.int/en/).

Tox 19 - DEFRA & E (2003). Contaminants in Soil: Collation of Toxicogical data and intakevalues for humans. Xylenes

Tox 20 - DEFRA & EA (2003). Contaminants in Soil: Collation of Toxicogical data and intakevalues for humans. Napthalene

6

http://rais.ornl.gov/).

http://who.int/en/).

Boilingpoint

VapourPressure

Criticaltemp

Enthalpy ofvapourisation

AirDiffusion

coefficient

WaterDiffusion

coefficient

Henry's LawConstant Solubility MW log koc log kow CF root FW CF leaf FW HCV AMDI TDSI ** HCV AMDI TDSI **

Contaminant (K) (Pa at 283K) (K) (cal/mol) (m2/s) (m2/s) (atm-m3/mol) (mg/l) - - - - - ( g/kg bw/day) ( g/day) ( g/kg bw/day) ( g/kg bw/day) ( g/day) ( g/kg bw/day)

ALIPHATIC HYDROCARBONS

C6-C8 369 6380 554 6038 1.00E-05 1E-09 1.22 5.4 100 3.6 4.1 Briggs Briggs 5000 350000 1000 5300 371000 1060P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1

C8-C10 423 6380 635 7457 1.00E-05 1E-09 1.96 0.43 130 4.5 5.2 0.0161 0.0382 100 7000 20 290 20300 58P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1

C10-C12 473 64 710 8482 1.00E-05 1E-09 2.93 0.034 160 5.4 6.3 0.0143 0.00884 100 7000 20 290 20300 58P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1

C12-C16 533 4.9 800 9060 1.00E-05 1E-09 12.7 7.60E-04 200 6.7 7.9 0.0122 0.00105 100 7000 20 290 20300 58P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1

C16-35 593 0.1 890 10696 1.00E-05 1E-09 120 2.50E-06 270 8.8 10.4 0.00814 0.0000377 2000 140000 400 N/A N/A N/A

AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1

C5-7 (benzene) 353 6,400 562 7342 8.80E-06 9.80E-10 0.00 1770 78 2.13 2.13 Briggs Briggs 200 10 200 74 124 72P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 TOX 14 TOX 14

C7-8 (toluene) 383 1780 592 7930 8.70E-06 8.6E-10 5.31E-03 535 92 2.25 2.65 Briggs Briggs 200 10 200 74 124 72P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 TOX 14 TOX 14

C8-C10 423 638 635 7457 1.00E-05 1E-09 1.15E-02 65 120 3.2 3.7 Briggs Briggs 40 2800 8 57 3990 11.4P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1

C10-C12 473 63.8 710 8482 1.00E-05 1E-09 3.42E-03 25 130 3.4 3.9 Briggs Briggs 40 2800 8 57 3990 11.4P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1

C12-C16 533 4.9 800 9060 1.00E-05 1E-09 1.30E-03 5.8 150 3.7 4.3 Briggs Briggs 40 2800 8 57 3990 11.4P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1

C16-C21 593 0.111 890 10615 1.00E-05 1E-09 3.18E-04 0.65 190 4.2 4.9 0.019 0.057 30 2100 6 N/A N/A N/AP5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1

C21-35 613 0.0000446 920 16063 1.00E-05 1E-09 1.64E-05 0.0066 240 5.1 6 0.0167 0.0132 30 2100 6 N/A N/A N/AP5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 USEPA (2001) USEPA (2001) P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1

PAHsBenzo(a)pyrene 768 1.46E-06 969.27 19000 4.30E-06 9E-10 4.54E-07 3.80E-03 768 6.01 6.04 0.00221 0.0125 0.02 (ID) - - 0.00007 (ID) - -

P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 TOX 2 TOX 2

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 797 3.44E-09 990.41 29995 2.00E-06 5.18E-10 1.47E-08 0.0006 278 6.58 6.75 0.00209 0.00486 0.02 (ID) - - 0.00007 (ID) - -P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 TOX 2 TOX 2

Acenaphthylene 543 0.93 - 11600 5.40E-06 6.6E-10 8.29E-05 3.9 152 3.6 4 Briggs Briggs 60 (TDI) 4200 12 - - -P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 # USEPA (2001) RBCA RBCA USPEA (2001) RBCA P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 TR

Phenanthrene 612 0.006 - 13000 1.00E-05 1.00E-05 3.20E-05 5.00E-01 178 4.36 4.57 0.00733 0.0884 30 (TDI) 2100 6 - - -P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 # USEPA (2001) RBCA RBCA USPEA (2001) IUPAC-NIST P5-079/TR1 P5-079/TR1 TR

NOTES:Revised January 2008.* Where stated, inhalation HCV converted from mg/m3 to g/kg/day assuming a 70kg adult breathes 20m3 air per day.** TDSI values as stated when published values available; or TDSI has been assumed as 20% x TDI 1. where MDI > 80% x TDI, or 2. where published MDI values are unavailable.~ No values cited in literature. Enthalpy of vapourisation calculated using formulas contained in USEPA (2001). Critical temperature (K) estimated from BP (K) using using a 1.5 conversion factor.

Travis & Arm regression


Input parameter (units)







ORAL / DERMAL INHALATIONGRM TIER 1 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA - REFERENCE DATA SOURCES


7

APPENDIX

J

GRM Statistical Analysis Methodology

Chemical analysis has been carried out on representative soil samples from within the subject site.

Statistical analysis in line with the current guidance given in R&D publication CLR 7 (Assessment of Risks to Human Health from Land Contamination: An overview ofthe Development of Soil Guideline Values and Related Research) has been carried out. These spreadsheets show the results of this analysis (sheet v1a and sheetv1b).

The mean value test has been carried out to identify the Upper 95 percentile (US95) of the distribution curve calculated from the test results available. This value iscompared with the relevant standards threshold/guidance level, i.e. CLEA SGV or GRM GAC. The lower bound value (lower 95 percentile) for the pH results is usedto calculate the cadmium SGV relevant to the site.

The maximum value test has also been carried out to identify if the contamination results are consistent with the calculated distribution curve or whether the data setcontains an outlier (hotspot).

Where the maximum value test has a similar distribution, i.e. does not contain any outliers, and the calculated US95 is below the relevant action level then the riskposed to the end user is considered to be acceptable.

Where the maximum value test has a similar distribution, i.e. does not contain any outliers, and the calculated US95 is above the relevant action level then thecontaminant poses a risk to the end user which needs to be assessed. Once the risk has been assessed then either remediation or further investigation to betterquantify the risk needs to be carried out.

Sheet V1a is for all of the data available to determine the presence of outliers. Contaminants, which do not have a similar distribution, are highlighted. Alsohighlighted are those contaminants which do have a similar distribution and whose US95 exceeds the relevant action level.

If an outlier of contamination is identified then this area requires either further investigation or special remedial actions. For contaminants with hotspots then theoutlier data is removed and the statistical analysis recalculated. This is done to obtain a representative value for the majority of the site. Sheet v1b shows the resultsof the statistical analysis with the identified outliers (hotspots) removed.

Where significantly different types of made ground are present, i.e. from different sources, the analysis is carried out for each type to better quantify the risks posed.

GRM Statistical Analysis Methodology January 2006

Project No: P3937 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: King Edward Court, Hyde 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details: Crushed Granular Capping LayerRun Number: v1a General Date: 08/10/2008

20.00 8.00 130.00 653.00 8.00 50.00 2.65 35.00 395.00 78.00 5.00

CLEA CLEA CLEA TIER 1 CLEA CLEA CLEA CLEA TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1

Sample

Nu

mber

Sample

Identity

Depth

(m)

Arsen

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

romiu

m

Copper

Mercu

ry

Nickel

Lead

Seleniu

m

Zinc

TotalP

hen

ols

pH

VTP2 0.00.5 4.90 0.49 14.30 12.30 0.11 11.50 26.90 1.00 70.30 1.00 10.70VTP4 0.00.5 5.30 0.24 13.60 13.80 0.16 12.40 45.50 1.00 81.10 1.00 10.49VTP5 0.00.5 5.50 0.25 15.00 19.40 0.15 12.60 43.30 1.00 73.70 1.00 10.37VTP7 0.00.5 7.90 0.48 20.10 349.30 0.12 22.00 320.80 1.00 224.90 1.00 8.53

5.90 0.37 15.75 98.70 0.14 14.63 64.21 1.00 112.50 1.00 10.021.36 0.14 2.96 167.09 0.02 4.94 141.36 0.00 75.07 0.00 1.004.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.002.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.3537.50 0.53 19.23 295.29 0.16 20.44 2.37 1.00 200.82 1.00 8.840.76 0.46 1.19 1.52 0.87 1.15 1.81 0.00 1.99 0.00 1.000.09 0.17 0.08 0.69 0.08 0.13 0.48 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.050.90 0.31 1.30 2.54 0.80 1.34 2.51 0.00 2.35 0.00 1.031.46 0.89 1.46 1.49 1.02 1.49 1.46 0.00 1.49 0.00 0.66

1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42

Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass

Not SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution



SimilarDistribution



SimilarDistribution


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

Notes: The US95 value for pH relates to the lower bound value and is used for the calculation of the cadmium SGVThe Mean Value Test for lead is calculated using the arithmetic mean of the log of the test resultsThe Threshold and US95 values for lead are reported as log values in accordance with CLR guidance

No of samplesValue of t

Maximum Value Test

ymax

TTcrit

Ref for threshold values:

Threshold Values mg/kg:

Mean Value Test

US95

Mean y

Mean

Standard Deviation y

Standard Deviation

Report Sheet v1a General Ground Risk Management

Project No: P3892 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: Woodland Avenue, Burbage 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details: Crushed Granular Capping LayerRun Number: v1a PAH Date:

536.00 116.00 4300.00 4.79 0.54 5.54 62.60 55.40 479.00 0.61 796.00 454.00 6.04 4.40 1853.00 590.00

Atrisk Atrisk Atrisk TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1Samp

le Num

ber

Sample

Identity

Dep

th (m)

Acen

aphth

ene

Acen

aphth

ylene

An

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a)an

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a) pyrene

Ben

zo(b)

fluoran

then

e

Ben

zo(ghi)

perylene

Ben

zo(k)flu

oranth

ene

Ch

rysene

Diben

zo(ah)

anth

racene

Fluoran

then

e

Fluoren

e

Ideno(1

,2,3

cd)pyren

e

Napth

alene

Ph

enan

thren

e

Pyren

e

VTP2 0.00.5 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.60 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.70 0.50

VTP4 0.00.5 <0.1 <0.1 0.20 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.70 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.10 1.40

VTP5 0.00.5 <0.1 <0.1 0.10 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.10 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.70 1.00

VTP7 0.00.5 <0.1 <0.1 0.40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.10 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.70 1.00

0.10 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 1.13 0.10 0.10 0.10 1.05 0.98

0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.37

4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00

2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353

0.10 0.10 0.37 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 1.65 0.10 0.10 0.10 1.61 1.41

1.00 1.00 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.04

0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.19

1.00 1.00 0.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.23 0.15

0.00 0.00 1.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 0.98

1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42

Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

Tcrit

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

Mean y

Standard Deviation yymax

T

Standard Deviation

No of samples

Value of tUS95

08/10/2008Threshold Values mg/kg:


Mean

Report Sheet v1a PAH Ground Risk Management

Project No: P3937 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardensProject Name: King Edward Court, Hyde 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardensLand Use: 1 Other Details: Crushed Granular Capping LayerRun Number: v1b Date: N.B.Suspected Outliers Removed

20.00 8.00 130.00 653.00 8.00 50.00 2.65 35.00 395.00 78.00 5.00


Sample

Nu

mber

Sample

Identity

Depth

(m)

Arsen

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

romiu

m

Copper

Mercu

ry

Nickel

Lead

Selen

ium

Zinc

Total Ph

enols

pH

VTP2 0.00.5 4.90 0.49 14.30 12.30 0.11 11.50 26.90 1.00 70.30 1.00 10.70

VTP4 0.00.5 5.30 0.24 13.60 13.80 0.16 12.40 45.50 1.00 81.10 1.00 10.49

VTP5 0.00.5 5.50 0.25 15.00 19.40 0.15 12.60 43.30 1.00 73.70 1.00 10.37

VTP7 0.00.5 0.48 0.12 1.00 1.00 8.53

5.23 0.37 14.30 15.17 0.14 12.17 37.56 1.00 75.03 1.00 10.02

0.31 0.14 0.70 3.74 0.02 0.59 10.16 0.00 5.52 0.00 1.00

3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00

2.920 2.353 2.920 2.920 2.353 2.920 2.920 2.353 2.920 2.353 2.353

5.75 0.53 15.48 21.48 0.16 13.15 1.79 1.00 84.34 1.00 8.84

0.72 0.46 1.15 1.17 0.87 1.08 1.57 0.00 1.87 0.00 1.00

0.03 0.17 0.02 0.10 0.08 0.02 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.05

0.74 0.31 1.18 1.29 0.80 1.10 1.66 0.00 1.91 0.00 1.03

0.86 0.89 0.99 1.12 1.02 0.73 0.66 0.00 1.09 0.00 0.66

1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution


Tcrit

No of samples

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

T


Ref for treshold values:

ymax

08/10/2008

US95

Mean y

Mean

Standard Deviation

Value of t


Report Sheet v1b General Ground Risk Management

Project No: P3937 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: King Edward Court, Hyde 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details: Crushed Granular Capping LayerRun Number: v1b PAH Date: N.B.Suspected Outliers Removed

536.00 116.00 4300.00 4.79 0.54 5.54 62.60 55.40 479.00 0.61 796.00 454.00 6.04 4.40 1853.00 590.00

TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1 TIER 1Samp

le Num

ber

Sample

Identity

Dep

th (m)

Acen

aphth

ene

Acen

aphth

ylene

An

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a)an

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a) pyrene

Ben

zo(b)

fluoran

then

e

Ben

zo(ghi)

perylene

Ben

zo(k)flu

oranth

ene

Ch

rysene

Diben

zo(ah)

anth

racene

Fluoran

then

e

Fluoren

e

Ideno(1

,2,3

cd)pyren

e

Napth

alene

Ph

enan

thren

e

Pyren

e

VTP2 0.00.5 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.60 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.70 0.50

VTP4 0.00.5 <0.1 <0.1 0.20 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.70 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.10 1.40

VTP5 0.00.5 <0.1 0.10 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.10 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.70 1.00

VTP7 0.00.5 <0.1 <0.1 0.40 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.10 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.70 1.00

0.10 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 1.13 0.10 0.10 0.10 1.05 0.98

0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.37

4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00

2.353 2.920 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353 2.353

0.10 0.10 0.37 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 1.65 0.10 0.10 0.10 1.61 1.41

1.00 1.00 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.04

0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.19

1.00 1.00 0.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.23 0.15

0.00 0.00 1.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 0.98

1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

Tcrit

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

Mean y


T

Standard Deviation

No of samples

Value of tUS95



Mean

Report Sheet v1b PAH Ground Risk Management

Project No: P3937 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: King Edward Court, Hyde 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details: Sand Fill imported from Mill Fold DepotRun Number: v1a General Date: 08/10/2008

20.00 8.00 130.00 653.00 8.00 50.00 2.65 35.00 395.00 78.00 5.00


Sample

Nu

mber

Sample

Identity

Depth

(m)

Arsen

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

romiu

m

Copper

Mercu

ry

Nickel

Lead

Seleniu

m

Zinc

TotalP

hen

ols

pH

VS1 3.30 0.18 6.30 7.10 0.03 5.20 14.20 1.00 37.60 0.50 8.30VS4 4.90 0.22 7.50 10.00 0.05 8.10 20.60 1.00 39.30 0.50 8.53VS5 4.90 0.21 8.10 9.80 0.40 8.80 24.30 1.00 39.50 0.50 8.32VS8 8.10 0.23 8.50 9.00 0.06 9.20 21.30 1.00 41.30 0.50 8.21VS9 5.00 0.22 8.80 10.00 0.05 8.90 2.90 1.00 44.40 0.50 8.23VS12 4.90 0.18 18.10 19.50 0.09 20.00 33.20 1.00 63.40 0.50 7.89

5.18 0.21 9.55 10.90 0.11 10.03 15.63 1.00 44.25 0.50 8.251.57 0.02 4.28 4.36 0.14 5.10 10.19 0.00 9.66 0.00 0.216.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.002.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.0156.48 0.22 13.07 14.48 0.23 14.23 1.50 1.00 52.20 0.50 8.080.70 0.69 0.95 1.01 1.13 0.96 1.19 0.00 1.64 0.30 0.920.12 0.05 0.16 0.15 0.39 0.19 0.38 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.010.91 0.64 1.26 1.29 0.40 1.30 1.52 0.00 1.80 0.30 0.931.69 1.04 1.93 1.88 1.88 1.78 0.87 0.00 1.95 0.00 1.34

1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution





SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution



Maximum Value Test

ymax

TTcrit



Mean Value Test

US95

Mean y

Mean


Standard Deviation


Project No: P3892 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: Woodland Avenue, Burbage 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details: Sand Fill imported from Mill Fold DepotRun Number: v1a PAH Date:

536.00 116.00 4300.00 4.79 0.54 5.54 62.60 55.40 479.00 0.61 796.00 454.00 6.04 4.40 1853.00 590.00


le Num

ber

Sample

Identity

Dep

th (m)

Acen

aphth

ene

Acen

aphth

ylene

An

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a)an

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a) pyrene

Ben

zo(b)

fluoran

then

e

Ben

zo(ghi)

perylene

Ben

zo(k)flu

oranth

ene

Ch

rysene

Diben

zo(ah)

anth

racene

Fluoran

then

e

Fluoren

e

Ideno(1

,2,3

cd)pyren

e

Napth

alene

Ph

enan

thren

e

Pyren

e

VS1 <0.1 0.10 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.10 <0.1 <0.1

VS4 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS5 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS8 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS9 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS12 0.20 <0.1 0.10 0.40 1.00 0.70 0.81 0.30 0.40 0.50 1.00 0.10 1.50 0.30 0.20 0.80

0.12 0.10 0.10 0.15 0.25 0.20 0.22 0.13 0.15 0.17 0.25 0.10 0.33 0.13 0.12 0.22

0.04 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.37 0.24 0.29 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.37 0.00 0.57 0.08 0.04 0.29

6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00

2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015

0.15 0.10 0.10 0.25 0.55 0.40 0.46 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.55 0.10 0.80 0.20 0.15 0.45

0.95 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.83 0.86 0.85 0.92 0.90 0.88 0.83 1.00 0.80 0.92 0.95 0.85

0.12 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.41 0.35 0.37 0.19 0.25 0.29 0.41 0.00 0.48 0.19 0.12 0.37

0.70 1.00 1.00 0.40 0.00 0.15 0.09 0.52 0.40 0.30 0.00 1.00 0.18 0.52 0.70 0.10

2.04 0.00 0.00 2.04 2.04 2.04 2.04 2.04 2.04 2.04 2.04 0.00 2.04 2.04 2.04 2.04

1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73

Pass Pass Pass Pass Fail Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution









SimilarDistribution





Tcrit

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

Mean y


T

Standard Deviation

No of samples

Value of tUS95



Mean


Project No: P3937 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardensProject Name: King Edward Court, Hyde 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardensLand Use: 1 Other Details: Sand Fill imported from Mill Fold DepotRun Number: v1b Date: N.B.Suspected Outliers Removed

20.00 8.00 130.00 653.00 8.00 50.00 2.65 35.00 395.00 78.00 5.00


Sample

Nu

mber

Sample

Identity

Depth

(m)

Arsen

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

romiu

m

Copper

Mercu

ry

Nickel

Lead

Selen

ium

Zinc

Total Ph

enols

pH

VS1 3.30 0.18 6.30 7.10 0.03 5.20 14.20 1.00 37.60 0.50 8.30

VS4 4.90 0.22 7.50 10.00 0.05 8.10 20.60 1.00 39.30 0.50 8.53

VS5 4.90 0.21 8.10 9.80 8.80 24.30 1.00 39.50 0.50 8.32

VS8 8.10 0.23 8.50 9.00 0.06 9.20 21.30 1.00 41.30 0.50 8.21

VS9 5.00 0.22 8.80 10.00 0.05 8.90 2.90 1.00 44.40 0.50 8.23

VS12 4.90 0.18 0.09 33.20 1.00 0.50 7.89

5.18 0.21 7.84 9.18 0.06 8.04 15.63 1.00 40.42 0.50 8.25

1.57 0.02 0.99 1.23 0.02 1.64 10.19 0.00 2.58 0.00 0.21

6.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 6.00 6.00

2.015 2.015 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.015 2.015 2.132 2.015 2.015

6.48 0.22 8.78 10.36 0.08 9.60 1.50 1.00 42.88 0.50 8.08

0.70 0.69 0.89 0.96 1.28 0.90 1.19 0.00 1.61 0.30 0.92

0.12 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.17 0.10 0.38 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.01

0.91 0.64 0.94 1.00 1.05 0.96 1.52 0.00 1.65 0.30 0.93

1.69 1.04 0.92 0.64 1.35 0.65 0.87 0.00 1.52 0.00 1.34

1.73 1.73 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.73 1.73 1.60 1.73 1.73


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution


Tcrit

No of samples

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

T



ymax

08/10/2008

US95

Mean y

Mean

Standard Deviation

Value of t



Project No: P3937 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: King Edward Court, Hyde 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details: Sand Fill imported from Mill Fold DepotRun Number: v1b PAH Date: N.B.Suspected Outliers Removed

536.00 116.00 4300.00 4.79 0.54 5.54 62.60 55.40 479.00 0.61 796.00 454.00 6.04 4.40 1853.00 590.00


le Num

ber

Sample

Identity

Dep

th (m)

Acen

aphth

ene

Acen

aphth

ylene

An

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a)an

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a) pyrene

Ben

zo(b)

fluoran

then

e

Ben

zo(ghi)

perylene

Ben

zo(k)flu

oranth

ene

Ch

rysene

Diben

zo(ah)

anth

racene

Fluoran

then

e

Fluoren

e

Ideno(1

,2,3

cd)pyren

e

Napth

alene

Ph

enan

thren

e

Pyren

e

VS1 <0.1 0.10 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.10 <0.1 <0.1

VS4 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS5 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS8 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS9 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS12 <0.1 0.10 0.10

0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00

2.132 2.015 2.015 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.015 2.132 2.132 2.132 2.132

0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10

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 1.00 1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.60 1.73 1.73 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.73 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

Tcrit

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

Mean y


T

Standard Deviation

No of samples

Value of tUS95



Mean


Project No: P3937 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: King Edward Court, Hyde 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details: Clay fill imported from Mottram Old RoadRun Number: v1a General Date: 08/10/2008

20.00 1.50 130.00 653.00 8.00 50.00 2.65 35.00 395.00 78.00 5.00


Sample

Nu

mber

Sample

Identity

Depth

(m)

Arsen

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

romiu

m

Copper

Mercu

ry

Nickel

Lead

Seleniu

m

Zinc

TotalP

hen

ols

pH

VS13 3.00 0.18 27.80 18.40 0.03 24.70 18.40 1.00 57.90 0.50 7.33VS14 2.80 0.18 29.50 19.00 0.04 27.00 18.00 1.00 57.10 0.50 7.31VS15 1.80 0.18 37.80 22.30 0.02 33.90 18.50 1.00 69.70 0.50 5.66VS16 2.20 0.22 32.10 20.30 0.05 28.50 27.70 1.00 66.20 0.50 7.65VS17 1.80 0.18 40.80 24.20 0.02 38.00 17.80 1.00 75.60 0.50 5.61VS18 1.80 0.18 37.10 23.50 0.03 37.00 18.00 1.00 69.20 0.50 6.23VS19 1.80 0.63 29.50 18.90 0.03 26.20 20.40 1.00 60.30 0.50 7.59VS20 2.30 0.21 28.30 23.40 0.07 26.70 30.50 1.00 74.00 0.50 7.52VS21 1.90 0.18 30.10 21.50 0.05 25.60 29.10 1.00 62.80 0.50 7.44VS22 3.00 0.18 29.60 20.90 0.05 26.30 22.40 1.00 61.90 0.50 7.28VS23 1.90 0.18 29.90 19.80 0.03 28.20 19.40 1.00 59.20 0.50 7.52VS24 1.80 0.18 29.00 20.30 0.06 23.90 22.60 1.00 58.70 0.50 7.35VS25 1.80 0.23 26.70 20.20 0.05 25.70 27.70 1.00 65.80 0.50 7.88VS26 1.80 0.18 27.90 20.10 0.04 26.20 20.30 1.00 60.60 0.50 7.59VS27 3.10 0.18 28.40 19.10 0.02 26.80 16.90 1.00 58.90 0.50 7.59VS28 3.40 0.18 29.70 16.70 0.04 23.20 17.90 1.00 54.50 0.50 7.42VS29 3.20 0.18 30.00 20.50 0.05 25.00 21.70 1.00 61.90 0.50 7.65

2.32 0.21 30.84 20.54 0.04 27.82 21.21 1.00 63.19 0.50 7.210.61 0.11 3.94 1.97 0.01 4.33 4.44 0.00 6.01 0.00 0.6917.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.001.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.7462.58 0.26 32.50 21.37 0.05 29.65 1.36 1.00 65.74 0.50 6.920.35 0.70 1.49 1.31 1.43 1.44 1.33 0.00 1.80 0.30 0.860.11 0.13 0.05 0.04 0.17 0.06 0.08 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.040.53 0.20 1.61 1.38 1.15 1.58 1.48 0.00 1.88 0.30 0.901.64 3.75 2.43 1.76 1.61 2.26 1.88 0.00 1.98 0.00 0.90

2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30


SimilarDistribution



SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution



Maximum Value Test

ymax

TTcrit



Mean Value Test

US95

Mean y

Mean


Standard Deviation


Project No: P3892 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: Woodland Avenue, Burbage 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details: Clay fill imported from Mottram Old RoadRun Number: v1a PAH Date:

536.00 116.00 4300.00 4.79 0.54 5.54 62.60 55.40 479.00 0.61 796.00 454.00 6.04 4.40 1853.00 590.00


le Num

ber

Sample

Identity

Dep

th (m)

Acen

aphth

ene

Acen

aphth

ylene

An

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a)an

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a) pyrene

Ben

zo(b)

fluoran

then

e

Ben

zo(ghi)

perylene

Ben

zo(k)flu

oranth

ene

Ch

rysene

Diben

zo(ah)

anth

racene

Fluoran

then

e

Fluoren

e

Ideno(1

,2,3

cd)pyren

e

Napth

alene

Ph

enan

thren

e

Pyren

e

VS13 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS14 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS15 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS16 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS17 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS18 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS19 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS20 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS21 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS22 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS23 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS24 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS25 <0.1 <0.1 0.10 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.80 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.80 0.60

VS26 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.10 0.10

VS27 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS28 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS29 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.10 <0.1

0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.13

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.12

17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00

1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746

0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.21 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.21 0.18

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.19

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.10 0.22

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.88 3.88

2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution



Tcrit

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

Mean y


T

Standard Deviation

No of samples

Value of tUS95



Mean


Project No: P3937 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardensProject Name: King Edward Court, Hyde 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardensLand Use: 1 Other Details: Clay fill imported from Mottram Old RoadRun Number: v1b Date: N.B.Suspected Outliers Removed

20.00 1.50 130.00 653.00 8.00 50.00 2.65 35.00 395.00 78.00 5.00


Sample

Nu

mber

Sample

Identity

Depth

(m)

Arsen

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

romiu

m

Copper

Mercu

ry

Nickel

Lead

Selen

ium

Zinc

Total Ph

enols

pH

VS13 3.00 0.18 27.80 18.40 0.03 24.70 18.40 1.00 57.90 0.50 7.33

VS14 2.80 0.18 29.50 19.00 0.04 27.00 18.00 1.00 57.10 0.50 7.31

VS15 1.80 22.30 0.02 33.90 18.50 1.00 69.70 0.50 5.66

VS16 2.20 32.10 20.30 0.05 28.50 27.70 1.00 66.20 0.50 7.65

VS17 1.80 0.18 24.20 0.02 38.00 17.80 1.00 75.60 0.50 5.61

VS18 1.80 0.18 23.50 0.03 37.00 18.00 1.00 69.20 0.50 6.23

VS19 1.80 29.50 18.90 0.03 26.20 20.40 1.00 60.30 0.50 7.59

VS20 2.30 28.30 23.40 0.07 26.70 30.50 1.00 74.00 0.50 7.52

VS21 1.90 0.18 30.10 21.50 0.05 25.60 29.10 1.00 62.80 0.50 7.44

VS22 3.00 0.18 29.60 20.90 0.05 26.30 22.40 1.00 61.90 0.50 7.28

VS23 1.90 0.18 29.90 19.80 0.03 28.20 19.40 1.00 59.20 0.50 7.52

VS24 1.80 0.18 29.00 20.30 0.06 23.90 22.60 1.00 58.70 0.50 7.35

VS25 1.80 26.70 20.20 0.05 25.70 27.70 1.00 65.80 0.50 7.88

VS26 1.80 0.18 27.90 20.10 0.04 26.20 20.30 1.00 60.60 0.50 7.59

VS27 3.10 0.18 28.40 19.10 0.02 26.80 16.90 1.00 58.90 0.50 7.59

VS28 3.40 0.18 29.70 16.70 0.04 23.20 17.90 1.00 54.50 0.50 7.42

VS29 3.20 0.18 30.00 20.50 0.05 25.00 21.70 1.00 61.90 0.50 7.65

2.32 0.18 29.18 20.54 0.04 27.82 21.21 1.00 63.19 0.50 7.21

0.61 0.00 1.31 1.97 0.01 4.33 4.44 0.00 6.01 0.00 0.69

17.00 12.00 14.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00

1.746 1.796 1.771 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746

2.58 0.18 29.80 21.37 0.05 29.65 1.36 1.00 65.74 0.50 6.92

0.35 0.74 1.46 1.31 1.43 1.44 1.33 0.00 1.80 0.30 0.86

0.11 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.17 0.06 0.08 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04

0.53 0.74 1.51 1.38 1.15 1.58 1.48 0.00 1.88 0.30 0.90

1.64 0.96 2.15 1.76 1.61 2.26 1.88 0.00 1.98 0.00 0.90

2.30 2.13 2.21 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution


Tcrit

No of samples

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

T



ymax

08/10/2008

US95

Mean y

Mean

Standard Deviation

Value of t



Project No: P3937 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: King Edward Court, Hyde 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details: Clay fill imported from Mottram Old RoadRun Number: v1b PAH Date: N.B.Suspected Outliers Removed

536.00 116.00 4300.00 4.79 0.54 5.54 62.60 55.40 479.00 0.61 796.00 454.00 6.04 4.40 1853.00 590.00


le Num

ber

Sample

Identity

Dep

th (m)

Acen

aphth

ene

Acen

aphth

ylene

An

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a)an

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a) pyrene

Ben

zo(b)

fluoran

then

e

Ben

zo(ghi)

perylene

Ben

zo(k)flu

oranth

ene

Ch

rysene

Diben

zo(ah)

anth

racene

Fluoran

then

e

Fluoren

e

Ideno(1

,2,3

cd)pyren

e

Napth

alene

Ph

enan

thren

e

Pyren

e

VS13 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS14 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS15 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS16 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS17 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS18 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS19 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS20 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS21 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS22 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS23 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS24 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS25 <0.1 <0.1 0.10 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS26 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.10 0.10

VS27 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS28 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

VS29 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.10 <0.1

0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 16.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 16.00 16.00

1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.753 1.746 1.746 1.746 1.753 1.753

0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10

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 1.00 1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.28 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.28 2.28


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

Tcrit

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

Mean y


T

Standard Deviation

No of samples

Value of tUS95



Mean


APPENDIX

K

GRM Bretby Business Park Ashby Road BurtonuponTrent Staffordshire DE15 0YZ

Telephone: (01283) 551249 Fax: (01283) 211968

Date: 26th September 2005 Our Ref: P3708 BC1 Your Ref:

Bardsley ConstructionGlobe SquareDukinfieldCheshireSK16 4RG

Attention of L. Stewart

Dear Lee,

Re: Mottram Old Road, Stalybridge

Further to your recent instructions GRM has undertaken an assessment of the excessnatural superficial deposits at the above site to determine its suitability for reuse on otherresidential development sites. It is understood that as part of the development a balancecut and fill operation is to be undertaken which involve the movement of approximately10,000m³ of material. However, it has been indicated that approximately 1000m³ ofmaterial from foundation/sewer excavations will require cartaway from site.

The assessment has comprised a brief review of the supplied desk study report, a sitevisit by an engineer from GRM to excavate trial pits, collection and chemical analysis ofrepresentative samples and subsequent assessment of the chemical results.

A desk study for the site has been prepared by Trevena Blake and Associates (ReportRef B5575, dated August 2005). In summary the report indicates:

• The site is currently undeveloped and used for stock grazing.• Historically the site has never been developed.• The geology comprises thin deposits of superficial clays and sand/gravel over a solid

geology of Millstone Grit.• There are no significant environmental hazards near the site which could affect onsite

soil quality.• The site is not in a radon affected area.• The site is situated on a minor aquifer.• No industrial land use near to the site has been reported.

In essence the site comprises a ‘greenfield’ site with a minimal risk of soil contaminationbeing present.

GRM have excavated six trial pits across the site to a maximum depth 2.20m begl. Theground conditions were found to comprise natural silty sandy gravely clay and silty clayey

gravely sand overlying weak highly weathered sandstone. Representative samples of thesuperficial sand and clay where collected for chemical analysis.

Six samples have been analysed for a general suite of contaminants. The ContaminatedLand Exposure Assessment (‘CLEA’) guidelines have been used to assess the risksposed to human health. For this assessment the default Soil Guideline Values (SGV’s)for residential land with plant uptake have been used, i.e. a female with a start age classof one and an end age class of six. All pathways have been considered including theconsumption of homegrown vegetables. This has been carried out in order to provide aprecautionary screening approach to assessing the risk posed to human health.

The list of contaminants covered by CLEA, with a specific SGV, is not comprehensive.For selected organic and inorganic contaminants, GRM have calculated GenericAssessment Criteria (GAC) using the CLEA/SNIFFER models and published toxicologicaldata. The GAC have been calculated using the soil conditions that produce the mostconservative threshold value. Site Specific Assessment Criteria (SSAC) will be producedwhere the chemical analysis results exceed the GAC. The CLEA SGV’s and GRM GACused in the assessment of the soils are enclosed for reference.

Statistical analysis in accordance with the principals outlined in the CLR guidance hasbeen used to assess the chemical analysis test results. This statistical analysis is furtherexplained on the analysis spreadsheets (enclosed for reference).

As the samples analysed are relatively similar across the site, the statistical analysis hasbeen carried out on the full data set.

The statistical analysis has identified outliers of the following contaminants:

• An outlier of mercury has been identified in TP4 (0.40m) which returned a result of0.79mg/kg, this is below the CLEA SGV of 8mg/kg and does not pose a risk tohuman health.

• An outlier of lead has been identified in TP6 (0.80m) which returned a result of14.40mg/kg, this is below the CLEA SGV of 450mg/kg and does not pose a risk tohuman health.

• An outlier of benzo(b) has been identified in TP4 (0.40m) which returned a result of0.79mg/kg, this is below the CLEA SGV of 8mg/kg and does not pose a risk tohuman health.

The only contaminant with a US95 value above the relevant CLEA SGV or GRM GAC isbenzo(a)pyrene which returned a US95 value of 1.30mg/kg, this is slightly above theGRM GAC of 0.86mg/kg. Therefore, as the US95 value was greater than the GAC aSSAC has been calculated using the SNIFFER model based on site specific soil data.The SSAC for benzo(a)pyrene in the natural superficial deposits has been calculated as1.45mg/kg, therefore as the US95 value is below this figure it is considered that thelevels present do not pose a risk to human health. The SNIFFER worksheets areenclosed for reference.

Therefore, it is considered that the arisings from the above site which are likely to requirecartaway are suitable for reuse in a residential development. However, it should benoted that due to the use of the SNIFFER worksheets to produce a SSAC forbenzo(a)pyrene the prior approval of the relative Local Authority Environmental HealthOfficer and/or NHBC should be obtained prior to importation to any development.

We trust this is suitable for your current requirements. Should you require any additionalinformation or need clarification of any of the points raised please do not hesitate contactus.

Yours sincerely,for Ground Risk Management Ltd

Chris Storey FGS.Senior Engineer(chriss@grmuk.com)

Enc.P3708 Trial Pit Logs TP16P3708 Chemical Analysis ResultsP3708 Statistical Analysis WorksheetsP3708 BaP SNIFFER Worksheets


Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:



BurtononTrent (HQ) Tel: 01283 551249Market Harborough Tel: 01858 414981

GRM Project ref:

Logged by:

Email: mail@grmuk.com Web: www.grmuk.com

STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):


General Remarks:

Mottram Old Road, Stalybridge

360° Excavator


Stable during excavation.

None used.

KC

25/08/200625/08/2006

2.00

0.80

2.10

None encountered.

P37080.000

0.00E0.00N

TP1

1.60

1.90

2.10

0.90/D/

1.70/D/

1.60

1.90

2.10

Firm red brown silty sandy CLAY with occasional fineto coarse subangular gravel of sandstone.(GlacialTill)

Medium dense red brown silty clayey SAND withoccasional fine to coarse subangular to rounded gravelof sandstone.()

Weak brown/yellow brown highly weathered SANDSTONE.()


1

2

1:25


http://www.grm-uk.com

Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):


General Remarks:


360° Excavator



None used.

KC

25/08/200625/08/2006

2.00

0.80

2.00

None encountered.

P37080.000

0.00E0.00N

TP2

0.90

2.00

0.40/D/

1.40/D/

0.90

2.00

Soft to firm red brown/orange silty sandy CLAY withoccasional fine to coarse subangular to rounded gravelof quartzite.(Glacial Till)

Stiff red brown/grey silty sandy CLAY with occasionalfine to coarse subangular to rounded gravel ofquartzite and sandstone.(Glacial Till)


1

2

1:25



Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):


General Remarks:


360° Excavator



None used.

KC

25/08/200625/08/2006

2.00

0.80

2.00

None encountered.

P37080.000

0.00E0.00N

TP3

0.80

1.80

2.00

0.40/D/

1.00/D/

2.00/D/

0.80

1.80

2.00

Medium dense red brown silty clayey SAND with somefine to coarse subangular to rounded gravel ofquartzite and sandstone.(Glacial Till)

Firm red brown/orange brown/grey silty sandy CLAY withsome fine to coarse subangular gravel ofsandstone.(Glacial Till)

Weak brown highly weathered SANDSTONE.(Millstone GritGroup)


1

2

1:25



Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):


General Remarks:


360° Excavator



None used.

KC

25/08/200625/08/2006

2.00

0.80

2.10

None encountered.

P37080.000

0.00E0.00N

TP4

1.00

1.90

2.10

0.40/D/

1.20/D/

2.00/D/

1.00

1.90

2.10

Medium dense orange brown silty clayey SAND with somefine to coarse subangular to rounded gravel ofquartzite and sandstone.(Glacial Till)

Firm red brown/grey/orange brown silty sandy CLAY withsome fine to coarse subangular to rounded gravel ofsandstone.(Glacial Till)

Weak brown highly weathered SANDSTONE.(Millstone GritGroup)


1

2

1:25



Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):


General Remarks:


360° Excavator



None used.

KC

25/08/200625/08/2006

2.00

0.80

2.20

None encountered.

P37080.000

0.00E0.00N

TP5

0.60

2.20

0.50/D/

1.20/D/

0.60

2.20

Medium dense orange brown very clayey SAND with somefine to coarse subangular to rounded gravel ofquartzite and sandstone.(Glacial Till)

Medium dense orange brown silty SAND with some fine tocoarse subangular to rounded gravel ofquartzite.(Glacial Till)


1

2

1:25



Trial PitNumber

Site

Client

Plant:




GRM Project ref:

Logged by:


STRATA


Ground Level mAOD

Trial Pit Log

Scale:

(kN/m²)

SAMPLES

Depth

(m)

Coordinates:

Shoring:

Stability:

Excavation Details


Dimensions (m)

Final Depth (m):


General Remarks:


360° Excavator



None used.

KC

25/08/200625/08/2006

2.00

0.80

2.20

None encountered.

P37080.000

0.00E0.00N

TP6

1.60

2.20

0.80/D/

2.00/D/

1.60

2.20

Firm to stiff red brown/grey silty CLAY with some fineto coarse subangular to rounded gravel of sandstoneand quartzite.(Glacial Till)

Medium dense silty slightly clayey SAND withoccasional fine to coarse subangular to rounded gravelof quartzite and sandstone.(Glacial Till)


1

2

1:25





PAGE 1 OF 6

Issue Date: 14 September 2006

CLIENT DETAILS

Client: GROUND RISK MANAGEMENT Ltd Bretby Business Park

Ashby Road Burton-upon-Trent STAFFORDSHIRE DE15 0YZ

Originator: K Critchley

JOB DETAILS

Order Ref: Verbal Our Ref: 12230/1-6/s Job Reference P3708 Site Reference Mottram Old Road, Stalybridge

2702






UK

AS*

MC

ER

TS*

P3708 12230 / soil

⎧ Metal content analysis: ⎪ As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Se IHM Y N

TP1 @ 0.9m 1 ⎪ Zn IHM Y Y TP2 @ 1.4m 2 ⎪ Hg, Pb IHM N N TP3 @ 0.4m 3 ⎨ FOC analysis IHM N N TP4 @ 0.4m 4 ⎪ Speciated PAHs content analysis IHM N N TP5 @ 0.5m 5 ⎪ Phenol Index content analysis IHM N N TP6 @ 0.8m 6 ⎪ Total cyanide content analysis IHM N N

⎪ Aq sulphate content analysis IHM N N ⎩ pH analysis IHM Y N

IHM – In-house method, outline details previously supplied to the client





SAMPLE DETAILS

Client Ref EIAG Ref Sample Description Sampling date/time Date received Other commentsP3708 12230 / Soil

TP1 @ 0.9m 1 Brown sand, stones Unknown 30/08/06 - TP2 @ 1.4m 2 Brown sandy clay, stones Unknown 30/08/06 - TP3 @ 0.4m 3 Brown/grey sandy clay, stones Unknown 30/08/06 - TP4 @ 0.4m 4 Brown sand, stones Unknown 30/08/06 - TP5 @ 0.5m 5 Brown sand, clay pieces, stones Unknown 30/08/06 - TP6 @ 0.8m 6 Brown/grey sandy clay, stones Unknown 30/08/06 -




P3708 12230 / Amount passing (%) Description of retained materialSoil

TP1 @ 0.9m 1 84.68 Stones TP2 @ 1.4m 2 78.19 Stones TP3 @ 0.4m 3 65.22 Stones TP4 @ 0.4m 4 77.61 Stones TP5 @ 0.5m 5 69.48 Stones TP6 @ 0.8m 6 71.60 Stones



TP1

@ 0

.9m

TP2

@ 1

.4m

TP3

@ 0

.4m

TP4

@ 0

.4m

TP5

@ 0

.5m

TP6

@ 0

.8m

Parameter (mg/kg) unless stated

arsenic 1.4 3.8 2.6 0.8 2.2 5.1 cadmium 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.06 chromium 13.1 28.3 26.2 44.1 25.6 39.6

copper 8.7 13.8 9.2 5.6 10.6 20.0 mercury <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.79 <0.01 <0.01 nickel 7.4 12.9 14.4 51.8 12.6 28.4 lead 8.4 9.2 7.2 10.3 8.4 14.4

selenium 0.20 0.18 0.03 0.12 0.10 0.08 zinc 24.0 33.1 30.3 19.5 33.7 53.8

FOC (%) 0.38 1.10 0.96 0.55 1.02 1.64

phenols index 0.48 0.42 0.52 0.86 0.20 0.16 Total cyanide <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 sulphate (g/l) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.03

pH 4.63 6.43 6.22 6.04 6.42 5.25

Notes: • analysis performed on air-dried sample, results converted to oven-dried sample

weight; • oven-dried = 16 hours minimum drying to constant weight at @ 105°C.




TP1

@ 0

.9m

TP2

@ 1

.4m

TP3

@ 0

.4m

TP4

@ 0

.4m

TP5

@ 0

.5m

TP6

@ 0

.8m

Species (mg/kg)

acenaphthene <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 acenaphthylene <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

anthracene <0.01 0.84 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.31 benzo(a)anthracene 0.37 3.22 2.60 2.10 0.79 0.84

benzo(a)pyrene 0.21 2.36 <0.01 <0.01 0.35 0.42 benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.01 2.00 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 benzo(ghi)perylene <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.01 <0.01 1.05 0.92 0.38 0.39 chrysene <0.01 5.21 2.88 2.84 1.21 1.07

dibenzo(ah)anthracene <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 fluoranthene 0.30 4.49 6.16 4.89 1.29 2.50

fluorene <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.15 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

naphthalene <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 phenanthrene <0.01 1.09 0.61 0.68 <0.01 0.54

pyrene 0.38 5.17 7.12 5.14 1.52 2.55

EPA 16 TOTAL 1.41 24.38 20.42 16.57 5.54 8.62



Notes: • analysis performed on sample as-received, results converted to oven-dried sample

weight; • oven-dried = 16 hours minimum drying to constant weight at @ 105°C.

C A Archer

Environmental Adviser 14th September 2006

END OF TEST REPORT

This Test Report is issued in accordance with the laboratory accreditation requirements of the United Kingdom Accreditation Service. This report may not be reproduced other than in full,

except with the prior written approval of EIAG Limited.

GRM Statistical Analysis Methodology

Chemical analysis has been carried out on representative soil samples from within the subject site.

Statistical analysis in line with the current guidance given in R&D publication CLR 7 (Assessment of Risks to Human Health from Land Contamination: An overview ofthe Development of Soil Guideline Values and Related Research) has been carried out. These spreadsheets show the results of this analysis (sheet v1a and sheetv1b).

The mean value test has been carried out to identify the Upper 95 percentile (US95) of the distribution curve calculated from the test results available. This value iscompared with the relevant standards threshold/guidance level, i.e. CLEA SGV or GRM GAC. The lower bound value (lower 95 percentile) for the pH results is usedto calculate the cadmium SGV relevant to the site.

The maximum value test has also been carried out to identify if the contamination results are consistent with the calculated distribution curve or whether the data setcontains an outlier (hotspot).

Where the maximum value test has a similar distribution, i.e. does not contain any outliers, and the calculated US95 is below the relevant action level then the riskposed to the end user is considered to be acceptable.

Where the maximum value test has a similar distribution, i.e. does not contain any outliers, and the calculated US95 is above the relevant action level then thecontaminant poses a risk to the end user which needs to be assessed. Once the risk has been assessed then either remediation or further investigation to betterquantify the risk needs to be carried out.

Sheet V1a is for all of the data available to determine the presence of outliers. Contaminants, which do not have a similar distribution, are highlighted. Alsohighlighted are those contaminants which do have a similar distribution and whose US95 exceeds the relevant action level.

If an outlier of contamination is identified then this area requires either further investigation or special remedial actions. For contaminants with hotspots then theoutlier data is removed and the statistical analysis recalculated. This is done to obtain a representative value for the majority of the site. Sheet v1b shows the resultsof the statistical analysis with the identified outliers (hotspots) removed.

Where significantly different types of made ground are present, i.e. from different sources, the analysis is carried out for each type to better quantify the risks posed.

GRM Statistical Analysis Methodology January 2006

Project No: P3708 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: Mottram Old Road, Stalybridge 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details:Run Number: v1a General Date: 08/10/2008

20.00 1.00 130.00 2806.00 8.00 50.00 2.65 35.00 21432.00 78.00 5.00

CLEA CLEA CLEA GAC CLEA CLEA CLEA CLEA GAC GAC GAC

Sample

Nu

mber

Sample

Identity

Depth

(m)

Arsen

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

romiu

m

Copper

Mercu

ry

Nickel

Lead

Seleniu

m

Zinc

TotalP

hen

ols

pH

TP1 0.9 1.40 0.06 13.10 8.70 <0.01 7.40 8.40 0.20 24.00 0.48 4.63TP2 1.4 3.80 0.03 28.30 13.80 <0.01 12.90 9.20 0.18 33.10 0.42 6.43TP3 0.4 2.60 0.03 26.20 9.20 <0.01 14.40 7.20 0.03 30.30 0.52 6.22TP4 0.4 0.80 0.02 44.10 5.60 0.79 51.80 10.30 0.12 19.50 0.86 6.04TP5 0.5 2.20 0.03 25.60 10.60 <0.01 12.60 8.40 0.10 33.70 0.20 6.42TP6 0.8 5.10 0.06 39.60 20.00 <0.01 28.40 14.40 0.08 53.80 0.16 5.25

2.65 0.04 29.48 11.32 0.14 21.25 9.41 0.12 32.40 0.44 5.831.58 0.02 11.06 5.02 0.32 16.54 2.54 0.06 11.84 0.25 0.736.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.002.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.0153.95 0.05 38.58 15.45 0.40 34.86 1.06 0.17 42.14 0.65 5.230.35 1.45 1.44 1.02 1.68 1.23 0.97 1.00 1.49 0.42 0.760.29 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.77 0.30 0.10 0.30 0.15 0.27 0.060.71 1.22 1.64 1.30 0.10 1.71 1.16 0.70 1.73 0.07 0.811.23 1.21 1.10 1.50 2.04 1.60 1.78 1.00 1.62 1.31 0.79

1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution


SimilarDistribution


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution



Maximum Value Test

ymax

TTcrit



Mean Value Test

US95

Mean y

Mean


Standard Deviation


Project No: P3708 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: Mottram Old Road, Stalybridge 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details:Run Number: v1a PAH Date:

440.00 475.00 3450.00 2.90 0.85 5.77 508.00 3.80 220.00 0.49 420.00 490.00 6.23 49.00 420.00 640.00

GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GACSamp

le Num

ber

Sample

Identity

Dep

th (m)

Acen

aphth

ene

Acen

aphth

ylene

An

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a)an

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a) pyrene

Ben

zo(b)

fluoran

then

e

Ben

zo(ghi)

perylene

Ben

zo(k)flu

oranth

ene

Ch

rysene

Diben

zo(ah)

anth

racene

Fluoran

then

e

Fluoren

e

Ideno(1

,2,3

cd)pyren

e

Napth

alene

Ph

enan

thren

e

Pyren

e

TP1 0.9 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.97 0.21 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.30 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.38

TP2 1.4 <0.01 <0.01 0.84 3.22 2.36 2.00 <0.01 <0.01 5.21 <0.01 4.49 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1.09 5.17

TP3 0.4 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 2.60 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1.05 2.88 <0.01 6.16 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.61 7.12

TP4 0.4 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 2.10 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.92 2.84 <0.01 4.89 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.68 5.14

TP5 0.5 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.79 0.35 <0.01 <0.01 0.38 1.21 <0.01 1.29 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1.52

TP6 0.8 <0.01 <0.01 0.31 0.84 0.42 <0.01 <0.01 0.39 1.07 <0.01 2.50 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.54 2.55

0.01 0.01 0.20 1.75 0.56 0.34 0.01 0.46 2.20 0.01 3.27 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.49 3.65

0.00 0.00 0.34 1.04 0.90 0.81 0.00 0.44 1.84 0.00 2.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 2.57

6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00

2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015

0.01 0.01 0.48 2.61 1.30 1.01 0.01 0.82 3.72 0.01 5.14 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.83 5.76

2.00 2.00 1.43 0.18 0.86 1.62 2.00 0.81 0.04 2.00 0.35 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.77 0.41

0.00 0.00 0.89 0.27 0.95 0.94 0.00 0.94 0.99 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.47

2.00 2.00 0.08 0.51 0.37 0.30 2.00 0.02 0.72 2.00 0.79 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.04 0.85

0.00 0.00 1.52 1.23 1.29 2.04 0.00 0.88 0.77 0.00 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.94

1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

Tcrit

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

Mean y


T

Standard Deviation

No of samples

Value of tUS95



Mean


Project No: P3708 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardensProject Name: Mottram Old Road, Stalybridge 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardensLand Use: 1 Other Details:Run Number: v1b Date: N.B.Suspected Outliers Removed

20.00 1.00 130.00 2806.00 8.00 50.00 2.65 35.00 21432.00 78.00 5.00

CLEA CLEA CLEA GAC CLEA CLEA CLEA CLEA GAC GAC GAC

Sample

Nu

mber

Sample

Identity

Depth

(m)

Arsen

ic

Cad

miu

m

Ch

romiu

m

Copper

Mercu

ry

Nickel

Lead

Selen

ium

Zinc

Total Ph

enols

pH

TP1 0.9 1.40 0.06 13.10 8.70 <0.01 7.40 8.40 0.20 24.00 0.48 4.63

TP2 1.4 3.80 0.03 28.30 13.80 <0.01 12.90 9.20 0.18 33.10 0.42 6.43

TP3 0.4 2.60 0.03 26.20 9.20 <0.01 14.40 7.20 0.03 30.30 0.52 6.22

TP4 0.4 0.80 0.02 44.10 5.60 51.80 10.30 0.12 19.50 0.86 6.04

TP5 0.5 2.20 0.03 25.60 10.60 <0.01 12.60 8.40 0.10 33.70 0.20 6.42

TP6 0.8 5.10 0.06 39.60 20.00 <0.01 28.40 0.08 53.80 0.16 5.25

2.65 0.04 29.48 11.32 0.01 21.25 8.64 0.12 32.40 0.44 5.83

1.58 0.02 11.06 5.02 0.00 16.54 1.14 0.06 11.84 0.25 0.73

6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00

2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.132 2.015 2.132 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015

3.95 0.05 38.58 15.45 0.01 34.86 0.99 0.17 42.14 0.65 5.23

0.35 1.45 1.44 1.02 2.00 1.23 0.94 1.00 1.49 0.42 0.76

0.29 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.30 0.06 0.30 0.15 0.27 0.06

0.71 1.22 1.64 1.30 2.00 1.71 1.01 0.70 1.73 0.07 0.81

1.23 1.21 1.10 1.50 0.00 1.60 1.33 1.00 1.62 1.31 0.79

1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.60 1.73 1.60 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution


Tcrit

No of samples

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

T



ymax

08/10/2008

US95

Mean y

Mean

Standard Deviation

Value of t



Project No: P3708 Land Use: 1 = Residential with domestic gardens 3 = AllotmentsProject Name: Mottram Old Road, Stalybridge 2 = Residential w/out domestic gardens 4 = Comm/IndLand Use: 1 Other Details:Run Number: v1b PAH Date: N.B.Suspected Outliers Removed

440.00 475.00 3450.00 2.90 0.85 5.77 508.00 3.80 220.00 0.49 420.00 490.00 6.23 49.00 420.00 640.00

GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GAC GACSamp

le Num

ber

Sample

Identity

Dep

th (m)

Acen

aphth

ene

Acen

aphth

ylene

An

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a)an

thracen

e

Ben

zo(a) pyrene

Ben

zo(b)

fluoran

then

e

Ben

zo(ghi)

perylene

Ben

zo(k)flu

oranth

ene

Ch

rysene

Diben

zo(ah)

anth

racene

Fluoran

then

e

Fluoren

e

Ideno(1

,2,3

cd)pyren

e

Napth

alene

Ph

enan

thren

e

Pyren

e

TP1 0.9 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.97 0.21 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.30 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.38

TP2 1.4 <0.01 <0.01 0.84 3.22 2.36 <0.01 <0.01 5.21 <0.01 4.49 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1.09 5.17

TP3 0.4 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 2.60 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1.05 2.88 <0.01 6.16 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.61 7.12

TP4 0.4 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 2.10 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.92 2.84 <0.01 4.89 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.68 5.14

TP5 0.5 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.79 0.35 <0.01 <0.01 0.38 1.21 <0.01 1.29 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1.52

TP6 0.8 <0.01 <0.01 0.31 0.84 0.42 <0.01 <0.01 0.39 1.07 <0.01 2.50 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.54 2.55

0.01 0.01 0.20 1.75 0.56 0.01 0.01 0.46 2.20 0.01 3.27 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.49 3.65

0.00 0.00 0.34 1.04 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.44 1.84 0.00 2.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 2.57

6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00

2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.132 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015

0.01 0.01 0.48 2.61 1.30 0.01 0.01 0.82 3.72 0.01 5.14 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.83 5.76

2.00 2.00 1.43 0.18 0.86 2.00 2.00 0.81 0.04 2.00 0.35 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.77 0.41

0.00 0.00 0.89 0.27 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.99 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.47

2.00 2.00 0.08 0.51 0.37 2.00 2.00 0.02 0.72 2.00 0.79 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.04 0.85

0.00 0.00 1.52 1.23 1.29 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.77 0.00 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.94

1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.60 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73


SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

SimilarDistribution

Tcrit

Mean Value Test

Maximum Value Test

Mean y


T

Standard Deviation

No of samples

Value of tUS95



Mean


Project Ref: P 3708 Run No: 1

1 This worksheet may be used for organic contaminants

2 on 29/09/2006

and has been checked by on 29/09/2006

3 Benzo(a)pyrene found at

INGESTION PATHWAYS

Toxicology for Ingestion Pathways

4a Is the substance a non threshold substance? (Yor N) y

5a Insert the relevant health criterion for ingestion 2.00E05 mg per kg body weight per dayFor a non threshold substance the relevant health criterion is the Index Dose (ID).For threshold substances the relevant health criterion is the Tolerable DailyIntake (TDI).

Land Use6a The Table below lists the default exposure durations and averaging times, used in the method for standard land uses.

Please insert Y to indicate your choice of land use and acceptance of the default assumptions.

Residential with plant uptake y y

Residential without plant uptake

Allotments

Commercial/industrial

Background Exposure for Ingestion7a Insert Mean Daily Intake (MDI) from nonsoil sources 0.00E+00 mg per day

(If the contaminant is a non threshold substance insert zero )

Is the MDI equal to or greater than 80% of the TDI or is the MDI unkown? (Y or N) y

8a Because the MDI for children is lower than that for adults, the MDI will need to be corrected by a Childhood Factor (CF)which depends on exposure duration. Insert the appropriate factor here:

Childhood Factor(ingestion)

0.485 0.4851

Receptor Body Weight9a Insert the TimeAveraged (female) Body Weight (TABW) depending on the chosen exposure duration

11.15 kg body weight

Reference Intake for Ingestion10a For non threshold substances the Reference Intake (RI) for the ingestion pathway is calculated

using the formula: RIingest=ID 0.00002 mg per kg body weight per day

For threshold substances the Reference Intake (RI) for ingestion pathways is calculatedusing the formula: RIingest=(TDI((MDI/70x46.4)xCF)/TABW)a mg per kg body weight per daya Note The background component is in line with the approach in CLR 9, namely that theMDI is corrected by the relevant adult body weight.For threshold substances where the background exposure (MDI) is greater than or equal to 80%of the TDI, or the MDI is unknown, the Reference Intake (RI) for ingestion pathways is calculated mg per kg body weight per dayusing the formula: RIingest=0.2TDI

INHALATION PATHWAYS

Toxicology for Inhalation Pathways4b Is the substance a non threshold substance. (Yor N) y

5b Insert the relevant health criterion for inhalation 7.00E08 mg per kg body weight per dayFor a non threshold substance the relevant health criterion is the (indicative) Index Dose (ID).For threshold substances the relevant health criterion is the Tolerable DailyIntake (TDI).

Land Use6b The Table below lists the default exposure durations and averaging times, used in the level 1 methodology for standard land uses.

Please insert Y to indicate your choice of land use and acceptance of the default assumptions.

Residential with plant uptake y y

Residential without plant uptake

Allotments 06 2190

06 2190

06 2190

1659 46.4

Land Use Exposure duration (years) Averaging time (days)

Exposure duration (years) TABW06 11.15

Exposure duration (years)06

1659

06 2190

1659 15695

06 2190

06 2190

Exposure duration (years) Averaging time (days)

RICHARD SUTTON

It relates to MOTTRAM OLD ROAD

Land Use

SNIFFER Method Organics

This worksheet has been completed by LEE BROWNSWORD

Commercial/industrial

Background Exposure for inhalation7b Insert Mean Daily Intake (MDI) from nonsoil sources 0.00E+00 mg per day

(If the contaminant is a non threshold substance insert zero )

Is the MDI equal to or greater than 80% of the TDI or is the MDI unknown? (Y or N) Y

8b Because the MDI for children is lower than that for adults, the MDI will need to be corrected by a Childhood Factor (CF)which depends on exposure duration. Insert the appropriate factor here:

Childhood Factor(inhalation)

0.362 0.3621

Receptor Body Weight9b Insert the TimeAveraged (female) Body Weight (TABW) depending on the chosen exposure duration

11.15 kg body weight

Reference Intake for Inhalation10b For non threshold substances the Reference Intake (RI) for the inhalation pathway is

calculated using the formula: RIinhal=ID 0.00000007 mg per kg body weight per day

For threshold substances the Reference Intake (RI) for ingestion pathways is calculatedusing the formula: RIingest=(TDI((MDI/70x46.4)xCF)/TABW)a

a Note The background component is in line with the approach in CLR 9, namely that the mg per kg body weight per dayMDI is corrected by the relevant adult body weight.For threshold substances where the background exposure (MDI) is greater thanor equal to 80% of the TDI the Reference Intake (RI) for inhalation pathways iscalculated using the formula: RIinhal=0.2TDI mg per kg body weight per day

Pathway Check11 The relevant pathways for calculating Site Specific Assessment Criteria depend on the landuse scenarios and the relative tendency of a substance

to exist as vapour molecules as opposed to being dissolved in water, as expressed in Henry's Law constant.

Is the dimensionless Henry's constant H' greater than or equal to 103? (Yor N)If the answer is Y, include vapour inhalation pathways. If it is N, do not. N Inhalation pathway should not be selected if H' < 1E3

Intake via Soil and Dust Ingestion

12 Select a value for SEIding from this table, depending on your choice of land use

SEIding = 9.85E06

13 Is site specific data on the bioaccessibility of the contaminantin soil available? (Y or N) N

If Y insert the representative fraction here (default=1)

The amended SEIding = SEIding * bioaccessibility fraction 9.85319E06 kg soil per kg body weight per day

14 The nominal assessment sub criterion for intake via soil and dust ingestion is calculatedusing the formula: ASCding = RIingest/SEIding

ASCding = 2.00000E05 / 9.85319E06 = 2.029800499 mg per kg soilmg per kg body weight per day kg soil per kg body

weight per day

Intake via Consumption of Homegrown Vegetables15 This pathway only applies to two land uses: residential with plant uptake and allotments. For other land uses go directly to question 25.

Select the basis for the Concentration Factor from 16 or 17 below. Select one option only

16 Are measured site specific Concentration Factors for leafy and rootplant uptake of organics available? (Yor N) N

Measured Concentration Factor for leafy vegetables ug per g (dry or fresh)a weight plant per ug per g dry weight soil

Measured Concentration Factor for root vegetables ug per g (dry or fresh)a weight plant per ug per g dry weight soil

17 Where measured site specific Concentration Factors are not available the following formulae can be used to calculate ConcentrationFactors for leafy and root vegetable uptake of organics using the Briggs and Ryan approach.

To use the formulae for plant uptake of organics the following data are required:a representative value for Kow (octanol/water partition coefficient) 1096478.2 l water per l octanol

a representative value of φ (soil density) 1.6 g dry weight per cm3

a representative value of Koc (organic carbonwater partition coefficient): 1020000 cm3 per g dry weight

a representative value of foc (fraction of organic carbon in soil): 0.0095 kg OC per kg soil

a representative value of θ (soilwater content by volume) 0.15 cm3 per cm3

For leafy vegetables CFleafy = (0.784*100.434*(logKow1.78)^2/2.44*(100.95logKow2.05+0.82)*(φ/(θ+φKocfoc)) 0.000233436CFleafy= 0.000233436

b ug per g fresh weight plant per ug per g dry weight soil

For root vegetables CFroot=(100.77logKow1.52+0.82)*(φ/(θ+φKocfoc))*0.01 0.001395518CFroot= 0.001395518

b ug per g fresh weight plant per ug per g dry weight soil

18 For calculation of the SEIveg the units for CFleafy and CFroot must be ug per g fresh weight plant over ug per g dry weight soil.It may be necessary to use a dry weight conversion factor when using measured CF values.Is a dry weight conversion required? (Y or N) n

Calculation of SEIveg

The Time Averaged Vegetable Consumption Rate for homegrown vegetables is given in the Table below.

b Note If the soil correction factor (than 1 a default value of 1 is used.

Allotments 9.85319E06Commercial/Industrial 5.43222E07

Residential with plant uptake 9.85319E06Residential without plant uptake 9.85319E06

1659 46.4

Land Use SEIding (kg soil/kg body weight/day)

Exposure duration (years) TABW06 11.15

Exposure duration (years)06

1659

1659 15695

Vegetable Type TAVCR (kg FW/day) TAVCR*HF*CF*DW TAVCR*HF*CFBrussel sprouts 5.04750E03 calc not required 7.43926E07Cabbage 4.86885E03 calc not required 7.11229E07Carrot 7.38094E03 calc not required 4.20107E06Leafy salads 3.25677E03 calc not required 1.33070E07Onion 3.69474E03 calc not required 3.00088E06Potato 4.41616E02 calc not required 2.31203E05

19 Select a value for SEIveg from this table for the contaminant of concern, depending on your choice of land use and toxicological endpoint

SEIveg= 2.86E06 kg soil per kg body weight per day

20 The nominal assessment sub criterion for intake via consumption of homegrown vegetables is calculated using the formula: ASCveg = RIingest/SEIveg

ASCveg = 2.00000E05 / 2.86192E06 = 6.98830E+00 mg per kg soilmg per kg body weight per day kg soil per kg body

weight per day

Intake via Ingestion of Soil Attached to Vegetables21 This pathway only applies to two land uses: residential with plant uptake and allotments. For other land uses go directly to paragraph 25.

22 Select a value for SEIindirect from this table, depending on your choice of land use

SEIindirect= 1.1272E06 kg soil per kg body weight per day

23 Is site specific data on the bioaccessibility of the contaminantin soil available? (Y or N) N

Insert the representative fraction here (default=1)

The amended SEIindirect = SEIindirect * bioaccessibility fraction 1.12723E06 kg soil per kg body weight per day

24 The nominal assessment sub criterion for intake via indirect soil ingestionusing the formula: ASCindirect = RIingest/SEIindirect

ASCindirect = 2.00000E05 / 1.12723E06 = 17.74263367 mg per kg soilmg per kg body weight per day kg soil per kg body

weight per day

Intake via Inhalation of Outdoor Air

25 This pathway only applies to substances with H' greater than or equal to 103.To use the formulae for inhalation of outdoor air, the following site parameters are required:

Source AreaSource zone width parallel to wind direction W= 20 metresDepth to subsurface contamination dz= 1.4 metres

Soil MatrixSoil organic matter content SOM= 1 (%) /167 for Foc 5.98802E03 kg OC per kg soilMass fraction of organic carbon in soil foc= 0.0095Air filled porosity θvap= 0.31 unitlessWater filed porosity θwat= 0.15 unitlessTotal porosity θtotal= 0.46 unitlessBulk soil density ρ= 1.6 kg soil per l soil

ContaminantOrganic carbon/water partition coefficient Koc= 1020000 l water per kg OCDimensionless Henry's constant H'= 1.86E05 l water per l airDiffusion coefficient in water Dwat= 9.00E10 m2 per s

Diffusion coefficient in soil air Di= 4.30E06 m2 per s

Air in soil 9.52847E02 unitlessWater in soil 8.47465E03 unitlessAir term 4.09724E07 m2 per sWater term 4.10064E07 m2 per s per (l water per l air)Effective diffusion coefficient Deff= 8.19788E07 m2 per s

Molecular weight MW= 252.32 g per molSaturated vapour pressure SatVP 1.60E07 mmHg

Pathway parametersDilution ratio DR= 20000 unitlessTemperature Temp= 10 oC + 273 = 283 KAmbient air velocity in the mixing zone (default from CLEA is 3 m per s) Vair= 3 m per s

Receptor characteristicsTimeaveraged body height TAH= 1 mHeight of mixing zone h= 1 /2 = 0.5 m

26 Contaminant Volatilisation Factor (CVF)CVF= 1.49863E14 kg soil per l air

27 TimeAveraged Air Intake Outdoors

Landuse

Residential with plant uptake Insert the appropriate TAAIoutv here 7.27E02 m3 air per (kg body weight per day)

Residental without plant uptakeAllotmentsCommercial/Industrial

28 Soil equivalent IntakeCalculate the soil equivalent intake for inhalation of outdoor air 1.09013E12 kg soil per (kg body weight per day)using the formula: SEIoutv = TAAIoutv x CVF x 1000

29 Nominal Assessment Sub CriterionCalculate the nominal assessment subcriteria for intake via outdoor airusing the formula: ASCoutv = RIoutv/SEIoutv

ASCoutv = 7.00000E08 / 1.09013E12 = 64212.33722 mg per kg soilmg per kg body weight per day kg soil per kg body

weight per day

Intake via Inhalation of Indoor Air

30 Indoor inhalation of vapourThis pathway only applies to substances with dimensionless Henry's constant equal to or greater than 103 and to the following landuse scenarios:Residential with plant uptake, Residential without plant uptake, Commercial/industrial

31 Timeaveraged air intake indoors

1.55763E026.45534E03

TAAIoutv m3 air per (kg body weightper day)

7.27421E027.27421E02

Residential with plant uptake 1.12723E06allotments 1.12723E06

Allotments 2.86192E06

Land Use SEIindirect (kg soil per kg body weight per day)

Landuse SEIveg (kg soil per kg body weightper day)

Residential with plant uptake 2.86192E06

Residential with plant uptake 2.78E01 m3 air per (kg body weight per day)

Residential without plant uptakeCommercial/industrial

32 Soil FactorSoil Factor is calculated using the formula SF=Koc x foc/H' SF= 5.21E+08 l air per kg soil

33 Soil vapour partition coefficientThe soil vapour partition coefficient (SVPC) is SVPC= 1.91949E09 kg soil per l air

34 The soil equivalent intakes for inhalation of indoor air is calculatedusing the formula: SEIinv = (TAAIinv x 1000 x SVPC)/DR SEIinv= 2.67172E11 kg soil/(kg body weight per day)

35 The nominal assessment sub criterion for intake via indoor air is calculatedusing the formula: ASCinv = RIinv/SEIinv

ASCinv = 7.00000E08 / 2.67172E11 = 2620.034519 mg per kg soilmg per kg body weight per day kg soil per kg body

weight per day

36 Saturated vapour concentrationSaturated vapour concentration is calculated using the formulaCsat = (SatVP x MW x 109)/(760mmHg x R x Temp) Csat= 2.28739E+00 mm Hg.g per mol

37 Equilibrium contaminant concentration in soil vapourEquilibrium contaminant concentration in soil vapouris calculated using the formula Csv = ASCinv x SVPC Csv= 5.02912E06 mg per l air

38 Saturated vapour concentration compared to the equilibriumcontaminant concentration in soil vapour: Csv / Csat Csv/Csat= 2.19863E06 (mg per l air) per (mm Hg.g per mol)

If the ratio is greated than 1, Level 1 risk assessment is not appropriate. It should be noted for furthersitespecific risk assessment that a Csv/Csat ratio greater than 1 may indicate the presence of a free product.

Integrated site specific assessment criteria (SSAC) for substanceswith dimensionless Henry's constant greater than or equal to 103

soil ingestion pathway 1/ASCding= 1/ = kg soil per mghomegrown vegetable consumption pathway 1/ASCveg= 1/ = kg soil per mgingestion of soil attached to vegetables 1/ASCindirect= 1/ = kg soil per mginhalation of outdoor air 1/ASCoutv= 1/ = kg soil per mginhalation of indoor air 1/ASCinv= 1/ = kg soil per mg

The integrated Site Specific Assessment Criterion (SSAC)

39 For the residential with plant uptake land use the SSACrwp = mg per kg soil

40 For the allotments land use the SSACalt = mg per kg soil

41 For the residential without plant uptake land use the SSACother = mg per kg soil

For the commercial/industrial land use the SSACother= mg per kg soil

42 The Level 1 Site Specific Assessment Criterion for Benzo(a)pyrene in the scenario is mg per kg soil

Integrated site specific assessment criteria for substanceswith dimensionless Henry's constant less than 103

soil ingestion pathway 1/ASCding= 1/ 2.029800499 = 0.492659254 kg soil per mghomegrown vegetable consumption pathway 1/ASCveg= 1/ 6.988304157 = 0.143096233 kg soil per mgingestion of soil attached to vegetables 1/ASCindirect= 1/ 17.74263367 = 0.056361418 kg soil per mg

The integrated Site Specific Assessment Criterion

43 For the residential with plant uptake land use the SSACrwp = 1.444842615 mg per kg soil

For the allotments land use the SSACalt = mg per kg soil

For the residential without plant uptake land use the SSACother = mg per kg soil

For the commercial/industrial land use the SSACother= mg per kg soil

The Level 1 Site Specific Assessment Criterion for Benzo(a)pyrene in the scenario is 1.44484262 mg per kg soil

Risk Evaluation44 Justify your use of the defaults on the worksheet and characterise the risk associated with the site.

Include the following:

Justification provided (Y or N)i. Choice of Relevant Health Criteria value Yii. Site use (current and intended), comment on compatibitility

with land use selected Yiii. Critical Receptor Yiv. Pathways included/omitted (including bioaccessibility if used) Yv. Soil Parameters, e.g. pH Y

All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of SNIFFER.

No promise is made that the spreadsheet will provide any particular facilities or functions. The user must ensure that the worksheet meets their needs and remains solely responsible for the competent use of the spreadsheet. The user is entirely responsible for the consequences of any use of the worksheet and no warrantyis provided about the fitness for purpose or performance of any part of the spreadsheet.

Residential with plant uptake

© SNIFFER 2003

The views expressed in this document are not necessarily those of SNIFFER or the Project Steering Group. Its members, servants or agents accept no liability whatsoever for any loss or damage arising from the interpretation or use of the information, or reliance upon views contained herein.

2.78379E01 Insert the appropriate TAAIinv here2.78379E014.34795E02

Landuse TAAIinv m3 air per (kg body weightper day)

APPENDIX

L

KIT

CH

END

ININ

G

KIT

CH

END

ININ

G

WC

WC

LO

UN

GE

LO

UN

GE

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

http://www.pdffactory.com

APPENDIX

M

PROJECT No: DRAWING No:

DESIGN/DRAWN : DATE:

SCALE@SIZE : ISSUE:

TITLE:

PROJECT:

CLIENT:

DO NOT SCALENOTES:

NTS FINAL

Capping Detail

CRS 09/2007

Figure 1

King Edward Court, Hyde

Bardsley Construction C/OUrban Regen

P3937

© GRM Development Solutions Ltd© Crown Copyright. AL 100014100

GRM Development Solutions Ltd149 St Mary’s Road,

Market Harborough, LE16 7DTTel: 01858 414981 Fax: 01858 414978

mail@grmuk.com www.grmuk.com

Existing Made Ground

(slightly contaminated)

Imported Fill

(chemically validated)

Granular Capping Layer

(chemically validated)

Subsoil and Topsoil in Soft Landscaped Areas

(to be imported and chemically validated at a laterdate)

500mm

500mm

>1000mm


GRM/P3937€WB2,€dated€5 -...

Documents

Transcript of GRM/P3937€WB2,€dated€5 -...