Council archive · source document
Pacific Geotech report Nov 2023 v3 · OPW23/0189
ACID SULFATE SOIL REPORT: Proposed Residence
30 Mossman Court
Noosa Heads
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd
November 2023
PG-10899
VERSION 3
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 29 pages
Page 2
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
Author: Robert Maxwell
28th November, 2023
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd
Email: [email protected]
ATTENTION: DAVID DODD
Dear Sir,
ACID SULFATE SOIL INVESTIGATION – PROPOSED RESIDENCE
30 MOSSMAN COURT, NOOSA HEADS
Enclosed is a copy of our report for the above project dated November 2023. An
electronic copy of the report has been issued.
It should be noted that access to the site was restricted by the existing on-site
residence and testing was therefore restricted to one location only. Additional
borehole drilling and testing will be required when access becomes available.
Should you have any queries regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact
Robert Maxwell or Peter Elkington at this office.
Yours faithfully,
R. MAXWELL (RPEQ 16596)
For and on behalf of
PACIFIC GEOTECH PTY LTD
[email protected]
www.pacgeo.com.au
Page 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1
2.0 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 2
3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. 2
4.0 GEOLOGICAL MODEL .......................................................................................... 4
5.0 GROUNDWATER .................................................................................................... 4
6.0 LABORATORY TESTING ......................................................................................... 5
7.0 LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................... 7
Appendices
Appendix A
Notes relating to this report
Appendix B
Borehole Record Sheets
Appendix C
Laboratory Test Certificates
Appendix D
Site Plan
Appendix E
Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan
Page 4
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 1
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report contains the results of the acid sulfate soil investigation by Pacific Geotech
and contains advice and recommendations relating to:
Acid sulfate soil conditions
Development of an Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan
Proposed Development
It is understood that the proposed development is to consist of the construction of a
two-storey residence above a single level basement at the above site. Earthworks are
envisaged to consist of cuts of up to 3m for the basement. The total volume of material
to be disturbed is in the order 900m3.
The proposed development is indicated below.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
PROPOSED SECTION
Page 5
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 2
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
2.0 METHODOLOGY
The investigation comprised the drilling and sampling of one (1) boreholes to a depth
of 9.0m, using a Compac 018 drilling rig fitted with 100mm solid flight augers, and one
(1) hand auger across the proposed building area. Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
(DCP) testing was conducted adjacent to the boreholes.
The deeper borehole was sampled for Acid Sulfate purposes, in addition to
geotechnical sampling.
Additional borehole drilling and testing will be required when access to the remainder
of the site becomes available.
The boreholes were located by an experienced geotechnical engineer with
reference to the site features and locations were recorded. At the completion of the
drilling, the holes were checked for groundwater intrusion and then backfilled.
The soil classification descriptions and field tests were carried out in general
accordance with Australian Standards.
AS 1726 Geotechnical Site Investigations
QASSIT Queensland Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation
Team Dept. of Natural Resources, 'Guidelines
for Sampling and Analysis of Lowland Acid
Sulfate Soils (ASS) in Queensland, 1998' (Oct.
1998, Revision 4.0).
NOOSA COUNCIL 'SC6.9.3 Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) Investigation
and management plan
QUEENSLAND State Planning Policy Guideline, December
GOVERNMENT 2013, Acid Sulfate Soils
Borehole records, Dynamic Cone Penetrometer test results and a site plan showing
the test locations are appended to the report.
3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
The site of the proposed development is located at 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads.
The site was bordered by Mossman Court to the south, existing residences to the east
and west, and a canal to the north.
At the time of the investigation, the site was occupied by an existing two storey
residence and detach single garage. The site was relatively level and drainage was
considered poor to fair.
Refer following aerial and site photographs for typical site conditions.
Page 6
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 3
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
AERIAL IMAGE
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Page 7
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 4
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
4.0 GEOLOGICAL MODEL
The subsurface profile encountered in borehole BH01 generally consisted of a surficial
concrete layer associated with the driveway, overlying very loose to loose sand fill to
a depth of 2.3m, overlying natural sands that were generally medium dense to dense,
becoming indurated at a depth of 6.6m, and continued to the termination of
borehole BH01 of 9.0m.
In HA02, loose silty sand fill was encountered to a depth of 0.6m, overlying loose sand
fill to the termination depth of 1.0m.
Table 1. presents a summary of the encountered subsurface profile. Detailed borehole
record sheets are appended to this report.
TABLE 1 SUBSURFACE PROFILE SUMMARY
NATURAL
SAND
BH No. FILL BH TD
Dense to Very Dense
Medium Dense to Dense
(Indurated)
BH01 0.0-2.3 2.3-6.6 6.6-TD 9.0
BH02 0.0-TD NE NE 1.0
Notes:
1. All depths in metres below ground level at time of investigation.
2. NE - Not Encountered; TD - Termination Depth.
5.0 GROUNDWATER
Groundwater was noted in borehole BH01 at a depth of 2.8m at the time of drilling.
Water levels can be expected to similar to the tidal levels of the neighbouring canal
and may vary with seasonal and climatic conditions.
Page 8
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 5
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
Typically the groundwater levels in the area are encountered at levels of
approximately RL 0.5m to RL 1.0m. Fluctuations of +/- 0.5m are typically noted in the
area.
Increases in the groundwater levels often occur following significant rainfall events
(floods) with the groundwater levels to as much as RL 1.5m to RL 2.0m being noted in
the area.
6.0 LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory testing was undertaken in general accordance with the
recommendations outlined in the QASSIT 'Acid Sulfate Soils Laboratory Methods
Guidelines 2004' and was undertaken by Pacific Geotech. The results of the testing
program are appended to this report.
The testing program comprised of initial screening tests on recovered samples,
followed by quantitative testing using the Chromium Reducible Sulfur (CRS) suite.
Screening Tests
Screening tests were undertaken on soil samples collected from borehole BH01. Two
small sub-samples of each soil sample were prepared; one sub-sample from each
sample was mixed with approximately 20mL of distilled water, and the other sub-
sample mixed with approximately 20mL of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), buffered to a
pH of 5.4 with sodium hydroxide.
Slurry pHs were measured with a calibrated pH meter. The pH of the distilled water/soil
slurry (pHF) was measured approximately one hour after mixing, whilst the pH of the
hydrogen peroxide/soil slurry (pHFOX) was measured approximately one to two hours
after mixing.
The pH screening tests can be used for the preliminary identification of a potential or
actual ASS using a combination of three trigger factors as follows:
a) The strength of the reaction with peroxide is a useful indicator but cannot be
used alone. Organic matter and other soil constituents such as manganese
oxides can also cause a reaction.
b) A pHFOX value at least one unit below pHF may indicate a potential ASS. The
great the difference between the two measurements, the more indicative the
value is of a potential ASS. The lower the final pHFOX value the better the
indication of a positive result.
c) If the pHFOX is less than 3, and the other two conditions apply, then it strongly
indicates a potential ASS. The more the pHFOX drops below 3, the more positive
the presence of sulfides.
In broad summary, several of the ‘natural’ soil samples tested did show a strong
indication of ASS presence at depths greater than 3m below ground level. The results
Page 9
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 6
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
of the screening tests were used to assist in the selection of samples for more detailed,
quantitative laboratory testing.
Chromium Suite Analysis
Chromium suite analysis was undertaken to quantify existing soil acidity and potential
future acid generation from possible ASS. Soil samples were refrigerated until
transported to Pacific Geotech’s laboratory, under standard chain of custody
protocol. A summary of results is given in Table 2.
TABLE 2 CHROMIUM SUITE TESTING SUMMARY
Nett Acidity Liming Rate
BH No. Depth (m)
(mol H+/t) (kg CaCO3/t)
BH 01 1.0 <5 <1
BH 01 2.0 11 <1
BH 01 3.0 23 2
BH 01 4.0 35 3
Summary
On the basis of the testing undertaken, some samples provided nett acidity values
above the QASSIT defined action criteria at depths greater than 3m below ground
level. Therefore, soils disturbed on-site should be treated in accordance with the
attached Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan.
The results of the laboratory testing are appended to this report.
Page 10
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 7 November 2023 Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3 DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads 7.0 LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for the Proposed Residence at 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads. The report is provided for the exclusive use of DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd, for this project only and for the purposes outlined in the report. It should not be used by, or relied upon, for other projects on the same or different sites or by a third party. In preparing this report, we have relied upon information provided by the client or their agents. The results are indicative of the subsurface conditions on site only at the specific testing locations. Subsurface conditions can change between test locations and the design and construction should take the spacing of the testing and testing methods adopted and the potential for variation between the test locations. This is not to reduce the level of responsibility accepted by Pacific Geotech, but rather to ensure that the parties who may rely on the information contained in this report are aware of the responsibilities they assume in doing so. R. MAXWELL (RPEQ 16596) For and on behalf of PACIFIC GEOTECH PTY LTD
Page 11
Project No. PG-10899
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
APPENDICES
Page 12
Project No. PG-10899
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
APPENDIX A
NOTES RELATING TO THIS REPORT
Page 13
Notes Relating to this Report
Reports other particles present (e.g. sandy clay) as set
out below:
The report has been prepared by qualified
personnel, is based on the information Soil
Particle Size
obtained from field and laboratory testing, and Classification
has been undertaken to current engineering Clay less than 0.002mm
standards of interpretation and analysis. Silty 0.002 to 0.06mm
Sand 0.06 to 2mm
Gravel 2 to 60mm
Every care has been taken with the report as it
relates to interpretation of subsurface
Non-cohesive soils are classified on the basis of
conditions, discussion of geotechnical
relative density which can be correlated from
conditions and contains recommendations or
the results of Standard Penetration Test (SPT) as
suggestions for design and construction.
below:
However, unexpected variations in ground
conditions will occur. The potential for this will
SPT ‘N’ Value
depend partly on testing, spacing and Relative Density
(blows/300mm)
sampling frequency. Very Loose less than 4
Loose 4 – 10
If variations are identified, Pacific Geotech Medium Dense 10 – 30
would be pleased to assist with additional Dense 30 – 50
investigations or advice to resolve the matter. Very Dense greater than 50
Copyright Cohesive soils are classified on the basis of
strength (consistency) and can be quantified
This report is the property of Pacific Geotech by the Pocket Penetrometer test, Vane Shear
Pty Ltd. The report may only be used for the test, laboratory testing or engineering
purpose for which it was commissioned and in examination. The strength terms are defined as
accordance with the Terms of Engagement of follows:
proposal. Unauthorised use of this report is
prohibited. Unconfined Compressive
Classification
Strength kPa
Borehole and Test Pit Logs Very Soft less than 25
Soft 25 - 50
The borehole and test pit logs presented in this Firm 50 – 100
report are an engineering and/or geological Stiff 100 – 200
interpretation of the subsurface conditions, and Very Stiff 200 - 400
Hard greater than 400
their reliability will depend to some extent on
Friable strength not attainable – soil
frequency of sampling and the method of crumbles
drilling or excavation.
Rock types are classified by their geological
Interpretation of the information and its
names, together with descriptive terms
application to design and construction should
regarding weathering, strength, defects, etc.
therefore take into account the spacing of
boreholes or pits, the frequency of sampling, Planarity
and the possibility of other than ‘straight line’ CU Curved
variations between the test locations. DIS Discontinuous
IR Irregular
Description and Classification Methods PR Planar
ST Stepped
The description and classification of soils and UN Undulose
rocks used in this report are based on AS 1726.
Soil types are described according to the
predominating particle size and behaviour as
set out in the attached Unified Soil
Classification Table qualified by the percent of
October 2017 pg. 1
Page 14
Roughness Investigation Methods
POL Polished
RJ Rough Test Pits: These are typically undertaken with a
S Smooth backhoe or a tracked excavator, allowing
SL Slickened examination of the insitu soils. Limitations of test
VR Very Rough
pits are the problems associated with collapse
of the pits, disturbance and difficulty of
Defects Type reinstatement and the consequent effects on
BP Bedding Parting close-by structures. Care must be taken if
CL Cleavage construction is to be carried out near test pit
CO Contact locations to either properly recompact the
CS Crushed Seam backfill during construction or to design and
CZ Crushed Zone
construct the structure so as not to be
DB Drilling Break
adversely affected by poorly compacted
DK Dyke
DL Drill Lift backfill at the test pit location.
DZ Decomposed Zone
FC Fracture Hand Auger Drilling: A borehole of typical
FL Foliation diameter of between 50mm to 75mm advance
FZ Fracture Zone manually operated equipment. Premature
HB Handling Break refusal of the hand augers can occur on a
IS Infilled Seam variety of materials such as fill, gravel, hard
JT Joint clays and collapse of the borehole (typically in
H Schistosity non-cohesive soil).
SI Sill
SM Seam Continuous Spiral flight Augers: The borehole is
SS Shear Seam advanced using 65mm to 100mm diameter
SZ Shear Zone
continuous spiral flight augers, which are
VN Vein
withdrawn at intervals to allow sampling and
VO Void
insitu testing. Augers of up to 300mm in
Sampling diameter are used to recover larger volumes of
sample. Samples are returned to the surface
Sampling is undertaken during the fieldwork to by the flights or may be collected after
allow examination of the soil or rock and to withdrawal of the auger flights. Samples can
allow laboratory testing to be undertaken. be disturbed and layers may become mixed.
Augering below the groundwater table can be
Disturbed samples taken during drilling provide less reliable than augering above the water
information on plasticity, grain size, colour, table.
moisture content and minor constituents. Bulk
samples are similar but of greater volume A Tungsten Carbide (TC) bit for auger drilling
required for some test procedures such as CBR into rock can be used to indicate rock strength
testing. and continuity by variation in drilling resistance
and from examination of recovered rock
Undisturbed samples are taken by pushing a fragments but provides only an indication of
thin-walled sample tube, usually 50mm the likely rock strength. Where rock strengths
diameter (known as a U50), into the soil and may have a significant impact on construction
collecting a sample of the soil contained in a feasibility or costs, then further investigation by
relatively undisturbed state. Such samples yield means of cored boreholes may be warranted.
information on structure and strength, and are
necessary for laboratory determination of shear Wash Boring: The borehole is advanced by a
strength and compressibility. Undisturbed bit attached to the end of a hollow rod string,
sampling is generally effective only in cohesive with water being pumped down the drill rods
soils. and returned up the annulus of the borehole,
carrying the drill cuttings. Changes in
Details of the type and method of sampling stratification can be determined from the
used are given on the attached logs. return, together with information from “feel”
and rate of penetration.
Page 15
The borehole can be stabilised through the use using a Cone Penetrometer in general
of drilling mud as a circulating fluid. The term accordance with AS 1289 6.5.1, 1999.
‘mud’ encompasses a range of products
ranging from bentonite to polymers such as In the tests, a 36mm diameter rod with a
Revert or Biogel. conical tip is pushed continuously into the soil,
the reaction being provided by a hydraulic
Continuous Core Drilling: A continuous core ram system. Measurements are made of the
sample is obtained using a diamond tipped end bearing resistance on the cone and the
core barrel. This technique provides a reliable fractional resistance on a separate 135mm
(but relatively expensive) method of long sleeve, immediately behind the cone.
investigation. In rocks, an NMLC triple tube Pore Pressure is recovered through a pore ring
core barrel is used, which gives a core of about located either within, or more usually
50mm diameter. The length of core recovered immediately behind the cone/tip.
is compared to the length drilled and any
length not recovered is shown as CORE LOSS. As penetration occurs (at a rate of
approximately 20mm per second) and data is
Standard Penetration Tests: Standard recorded every 20mm of penetration, the
Penetration Tests (SPT) are used mainly in non- results are presented graphically.
cohesive soils, but can also be used in cohesive
soils as a means of indicating density or The information provided on the plot
strength and also of obtaining a disturbed comprises:
sample. The test procedure is described in
Cone resistance – expressed in mPa
Australian Standard 1289, “Methods of Testing
Sleeve friction – expressed in kPa
Soils for Engineering Purposed”, Test 6.3.1.
Friction ratio – the ratio of sleeve
The test is carried out in a borehole by driving a friction to cone resistance expressed as
50mm diameter split sample tube with a a percentage.
tapered shoe, under the impact of a 63kg Pore pressure in kPa
hammer, with a free fall of 760mm. The sample Tilt of probe (in degrees).
is driven in three successive 150mm increments
and the ‘N’ value is taken as the number of
The ratios of the sleeve resistance to cone
blows for the last 300mm. In dense soils, hard
resistance will vary with the type of soil
clays or weak rock, the full 450mm penetration
encountered, with higher relative friction in
may not be practicable and the test is
clays than in sands. Friction ratios of 1% to 2%
discontinued.
are commonly encountered in sands and rising
The test results are reported in the following to 2% to as high as 8%, and higher in organic
form: soils. Soil descriptions based on cone
resistance and friction ratios are only inferred
In the case where full penetration is and must not be considered as exact.
obtained with successive blow counts
for each 150mm of , say, 4, 6 and 7 Stratification can be inferred from the cone
blows, as and friction traces and from experience and
N = 13 information from nearby boreholes, etc. Where
4, 6, 7 shown, this information is presented for general
In a case where the test is discontinued guidance, but must be regarded as
short of full penetration, say after 15 interpretive.
blows for the first 150mm and 30 blows
Dynamic Cone Penetrometers:
for the next 40mm, as
N > 30
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests are
15, 30/40mm
carried out by driving a 16mm diameter rod
into the ground with a 9kg sliding hammer
Cone Penetrometer Testing (CPT): Cone
dropping 510mm and counting the blows for
Penetrometer Testing with or without pore
successive 100mm increments of penetration.
pressure measurement (CPTu) is carried out
Page 16
Logs for fill, it may be difficult to reliably determine
the extent of the fill.
The borehole or test pit logs are an
interpretation of the subsurface conditions, and Laboratory Testing
their reliability will depend to some extent on
the frequency of sampling and the method of Laboratory testing is carried out in general
drilling or excavation. accordance with Australian Standard 1289
‘Methods of Testing Soil for Engineering
Interpretation of the information shown on the Purposes’.
logs, and its application to design and
construction, should therefore take into Site Anomalies
account the spacing of the boreholes or test
In the event that conditions encountered on
pits, the method of drilling or excavation, the
site during construction appear to vary from
frequency of sampling and testing and the
those which were expected from the
possibility of other than “straight line” variations
information contained in the report, the
between the boreholes or test pits. Subsurface
company requests that it immediately be
conditions between boreholes or test pits may
notified. Most problems are much more readily
vary significantly from conditions encountered
resolved when conditions are exposed than at
at the borehole or test pit locations.
some later stage.
Groundwater
Review of Design
Where groundwater levels are measured in
Where major civil or structural developments
boreholes, there are several potential
are proposed or where only a limited
problems:
investigation has been completed or where the
Although groundwater may be geotechnical conditions/constraints are quite
present, in low permeability soils it may complex, it is prudent to have a design review.
enter the hole slowly or perhaps not at
Site Inspection
all during the time it is left open.
A localised perched water table may
Pacific Geotech would be pleased to provide
lead to an erroneous indication of the
engineering inspection services for
true water table.
geotechnical aspects of work to which this
Water table levels will vary from time to
report is related:
time with seasons or recent weather
changes and may not be the same at Requirements could range from:
the time of construction.
The use of water or mud as a drilling i. a site visit to confirm that conditions
fluid will mask any groundwater inflow. exposed are no worse than those
Water has to be flushed from the hole interpreted, to
and drilling mud must be washed out ii. a visit to assist the contractor or other
of the hole or ‘reverted’ chemically if site personnel in identifying various
water observations are to be made. soil/rock types such as appropriate
More reliable measurements can be made by footing or pier founding depths, or
installing standpipes from which ongoing iii. full time engineering present on site.
monitoring can be undertaken.
Fill
The present of fill materials can often be
determined only by the inclusion of foreign
objects (e.g. bricks, steel ,etc.) or by distinctly
unusual colour, texture or fabric. Identification
of the extent of fill materials will also depend on
investigation methods and frequency. Where
natural soils similar to those at the site are used
Page 17
Project No. PG-10899
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
APPENDIX B
BOREHOLE RECORD SHEETS
Page 18
Borehole No.
BH01
Page 1 of 2
Project No.: PG-10899
Client: DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd Commenced: 06/10/2023
Project Name: Proposed Residence Logged By: RR
Hole Location: 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads Checked By:
Hole Position:
Drill Model and Mounting: Compac 018 RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: Datum: AHD Operator: RR
Drilling Information Soil Description DCP
Classification
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description
Recovery
Tests Fraction, Colour, Structure, Bedding,
Symbol
Method
Casing
Remarks Plasticity, Sensitivity, Additional
Water
RL Depth
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
Concrete (CCT)
0.15
SP FILL SAND (SP) Very loose to loose, fine to medium grained, pale
yellow brown, moist.
ASS 0.50-1.00 m
1
ASS 1.00-1.50 m
D 1.10-1.50 m
ASS 1.50-2.00 m
ER PACGEO 1.01.2 LIB.GLB Log PACGEO BOREHOLE PG-10899.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 17/10/2023 10:45 10.03.00.09 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: pacgeo 1.01.2 2022-05-25 Prj: Precise 1.01 2016-11-23
2
ASS 2.00-2.50 m
2.30
SP NATURAL SAND (SP) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, pale
yellow brown, moist.
AD/T
ASS 2.50-3.00 m
D 2.60-3.00 m
2.80
SP SAND (SP) Medium dense to dense, fine to medium grained, pale grey,
wet.
3
ASS 3.00-3.50 m
ASS 3.50-4.00 m
4
4.10
D 4.10-4.50 m SP SAND (SP) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, pale grey, wet.
Method Water Samples and Tests Remarks
AS - Auger Level (Date) U - Undisturbed Sample
RR - Rock Roller D - Disturbed Sample 1. Groundwater encountered at 2.80m.
WB- Washbore Inflow SPT - Standard Penetration Test 2. DCP refusal at 3.07m.
B - Bulk Sample 3. Standpipe installed to 3.15m.
Classification Symbols and
Support Soil Descriptions
C - Casing
Based on Unified Soil
Classification System
Page 19
Borehole No.
BH01
Page 2 of 2
Project No.: PG-10899
Client: DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd Commenced: 06/10/2023
Project Name: Proposed Residence Logged By: RR
Hole Location: 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads Checked By:
Hole Position:
Drill Model and Mounting: Compac 018 RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: Datum: AHD Operator: RR
Drilling Information Soil Description DCP
Classification
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description
Recovery
Tests Fraction, Colour, Structure, Bedding,
Symbol
Method
Casing
Remarks Plasticity, Sensitivity, Additional
Water
RL Depth
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
SP SAND (SP) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, pale grey, wet.
(continued)
6
6.60
ER PACGEO 1.01.2 LIB.GLB Log PACGEO BOREHOLE PG-10899.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 17/10/2023 10:45 10.03.00.09 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: pacgeo 1.01.2 2022-05-25 Prj: Precise 1.01 2016-11-23
SM Silty SAND (SM) Dense to very dense, fine to medium grained, dark
brown, wet (indurated sand).
AD/T
7
8
D 8.60-9.00 m
9.00
9
Hole Terminated at 9.00 m
Method Water Samples and Tests Remarks
AS - Auger Level (Date) U - Undisturbed Sample
RR - Rock Roller D - Disturbed Sample 1. Groundwater encountered at 2.80m.
WB- Washbore Inflow SPT - Standard Penetration Test 2. DCP refusal at 3.07m.
B - Bulk Sample 3. Standpipe installed to 3.15m.
Classification Symbols and
Support Soil Descriptions
C - Casing
Based on Unified Soil
Classification System
Page 20
Borehole No.
HA02
Page 1 of 1
Project No.: PG-10899
Client: DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd Commenced: 06/10/2023
Project Name: Proposed Residence Logged By: RR
Hole Location: 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads Checked By:
Hole Position:
Drill Model and Mounting: Hand Auger RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: Datum: AHD Operator: RR
Drilling Information Soil Description DCP
Classification
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description
Recovery
Tests Fraction, Colour, Structure, Bedding,
Symbol
Method
Casing
Remarks Plasticity, Sensitivity, Additional
Water
RL Depth
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
SM FILL Silty SAND (SM) Loose, fine to medium grained, dark brown, with
fine sized gravel, dry.
HA
0.60
SP FILL SAND (SP) Loose, fine to medium grained, pale yellow brown,
moist to dry.
1.00
1
Hole Terminated at 1.00 m
ER PACGEO 1.01.2 LIB.GLB Log PACGEO BOREHOLE PG-10899.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 17/10/2023 10:45 10.03.00.09 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: pacgeo 1.01.2 2022-05-25 Prj: Precise 1.01 2016-11-23
2
3
4
Method Water Samples and Tests Remarks
AS - Auger Level (Date) U - Undisturbed Sample
RR - Rock Roller D - Disturbed Sample 1. Groundwater not encountered.
WB- Washbore Inflow SPT - Standard Penetration Test 2. DCP refusal at 2.38m.
B - Bulk Sample
Classification Symbols and
Support Soil Descriptions
C - Casing
Based on Unified Soil
Classification System
Page 21
Project No. PG-10899
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY TEST CERTIFICATES
Page 22
pH Screen Report
CLIENT: DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd PROJECT NUMBER: PG-10899
ADDRESS: 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads REPORT NUMBER: 23-536 Rev. No.0
REPORT DATE: 10.10.23
PROJECT NAME: Proposed Residence
TEST METHOD: ENV04
SAMPLE LOCATION
SAMPLING METHOD: Disturbed
SAMPLED BY: Pacific Geotech
DATE SAMPLED: 6.10.23
DATE RECEIVED: 9.10.23
DATE TESTED: 9.10.23
Sample
Lab Ref. No. Depth (m) pH pHFOX pHFOX Reaction Rating
Description
E23-536-1 BH01 0.5 6.4 5.1 X
E23-536-2 BH01 1.0 6.3 5.2 X
E23-536-3 BH01 1.5 6.6 5.1 X
E23-536-4 BH01 2.0 6.5 5.1 X
E23-536-5 BH01 2.5 6.5 5.1 X
E23-536-6 BH01 3.0 5.7 3.1 XX
E23-536-7 BH01 3.5 5.2 3.0 XXXX
E23-536-8 BH01 4.0 4.8 3.0 XXXX
pH Screen Reaction Rating Table
Reaction Scale Reaction
X Slight Reaction
XX Moderate Reaction
XXX High Reaction
XXXX Vigorous Reaction, gas evolved, heat generated
Pacific Geotech accepts no responsibilty for the collection and transport of samples submitted by external parties.
Measurement uncertainty data is available upon request. LOR denotes Limit of Reporting
All samples are analysed on an as received basis and the results in rhis report pertain only to the sample submitted.
This report supercedes any previous report(s) issued with this reference number. This document shall not be reproduced except in full.
Accredited for Compliance with ISO/IEC 17025 - Testing Approved Signatory
Pacific Geotech Pty Ltd - Accreditation No. 21130
Daryl Surkitt
Gold Coast Laboratory - Site No. 25487 Environmental Laboratory Manager
Form ER003.1.
Page 1 of 1
Page 23
Acid Sulfate Soil Report
CLIENT: DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd PROJECT NUMBER: PG-10899
ADDRESS: 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads REPORT NUMBER: 23-537 Rev. No.0
PROJECT NAME: Proposed Residence REPORT DATE: 13.10.23
SAMPLE LOCATION
SAMPLING METHOD: Disturbed
SAMPLED BY: Pacific Geotech
DATE SAMPLED: 6.10.23
DATE RECEIVED: 9.10.23
DATE TESTED: 9.10.23
PREPERATION/ANALYSIS METHOD: ENV01/ENV02
Lab Ref Number E23-537-1 E23-537-2 E23-537-3 E23-537-4
Sample Description Unit LOR BH01 BH01 BH01 BH01
Depth (m) 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
pHKCL pH Unit 0.1 6.4 6.6 5.3 5.1
Chromium Reducible Sulfur %w/w S 0.005 <0.005 0.017 0.037 0.056
Chromium Reducible Sulfur mol H+/t 3 <3 11 23 35
TAA pH to 6.5 mol H+/t 2 <2 <2 <2 <2
s-TAA pH to 6.5 %w/w S 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
KCl Ext S %w/w S 0.005 0.006 0.005 0.006 0.006
HCl Ext S %w/w S 0.005 0.012 0.010 0.015 0.012
Retained Acidity (SNAS) %w/w S 0.005 N/R N/R N/R N/R
Retained Acidity (SNAS) mol H+/t 3 N/R N/R N/R N/R
ANC %CaCO3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
ANC mol H+/t 5 12 13 13 11
Net Acidity mol H+/t 5 <5 11 23 35
Net Acidity %w/w S 0.005 <0.005 0.018 0.037 0.056
Net Acidity - ANC mol H+/t 1 <1 <1 10 24
Liming Rate kg CaCO3/t 1 <1 1 2 3
Liming Rate - ANC kg CaCO3/t 1 <1 <1 1 2
Liming rate only includes ANC when its effectiveness has been corroborated by simulative oxidation procedures such as incubation. Unless corroborated, the results for ANC analyses should not be used when determining Net Acidity for
for comparison with action criteria. The Liming Rate-ANC calculation is only inluded when the amount of acid neutralising present in the soil is capable of buffering the soil at pH 6.5 or above. A liming safety factror of 1.5 has been applied.
Results apply to samples that have been dried at 85±5oC. LOR denotes Limit of Reporting. N/R denotes Not Required. The results in this report pertain only to the samples as received. This document shall not be reproduced except in full.
Method uncertainty data is available at www.pacgeo,com,au/safety-and -quality-assurance. This report supercedes anty previous report(s) isssued with this reference number.
Pacific Geotech accepts no responsibilty for the collection and transport of samples submitted by external parties.
Accredited for Compliance with ISO/IEC 17025 - Testing Approved Signatory
Pacific Geotech Pty Ltd - Accreditation No. 21130
Daryl Surkitt
Gold Coast Laboratory - Site No. 25487 Environmental Laboratory Manager
Form ER004.1
Page 1 of 1
Page 24
Project No. PG-10899
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
APPENDIX D
SITE PLAN
Page 25
HA02
BH01
Drawn
Project: Proposed Residence
RM
Drawing No.
Date
Location: 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads A4
Oct 23
PG-10899-01
Checked
Client: DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd
Page 26
Project No. PG-10899
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASR VER 3
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Investigation - Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
APPENDIX E
ACID SULFATE SOIL MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 27
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 1
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASSMP VER 2
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan – Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
ACID SULFATE SOIL MANAGEMENT PLAN (ASSMP)
PROPOSED RESIDENCE
30 MOSSMAN COURT, NOOSA HEADS
Objective The objective of the ASSMP is to control any acid generation from
insitu ASS materials and to restrict to an acceptable level any
potential on-site and off-site environmental impacts. A further
objective is to manage earthworks activities and provide measures
to maintain water quality within the site and in adjacent areas.
Proposed It is understood that the proposed development is to comprise the
Development construction of a two storey residence with a basement.
Earthworks are envisaged to consist of cuts of up to 3m for the
basement. A total volume of material to be disturbed is
approximately 900m3. Additional investigation and testing will be
required to confirm the results and recommendations of this
management plan.
Subsurface Mapping
Conditions The site is located in an area that is mapped on the Noosa Council
Acid Sulfate Soils Mapping as Disturbed Land likely to contain ASS.
ASS Investigation
Drilling and sampling encountered a reasonably consistent profile
of sand that:
• did not indicate any obvious ASS presence from a visual and
tactile perspective in the fill or the natural profile.
• indicated that the upper level sands were not acid sulfate soils
and the lower level sands below 3.0m indicated a low level of
acid sulfate soil present.
• had the highest liming rate required to neutralise the acidity of
4kg/m3 (based on laboratory testing of selected samples) for
the lower level sands.
• The proposed excavations for the basement (up to 3.0m
depth)are not expected to disturb the acid sulfate soils but may
just indicate the acid sulfate strata.
Management To mitigate and manage potential adverse environmental impacts
Strategy during site construction operations, the following will be
undertaken:
• an ASS consultant should review the site earthworks schedule
and plan of operations;
• adoption of appropriate erosion control measures to limit
sediment loss due to run-off from site works area;
• where excavation below the water table, or if disturbance of
any silty sands is necessary, a materials handling and
management strategy and procedures for lime treatment of
any disturbed material will be required;
• monitoring and treatment (if necessary) of waters in detention
basins to a level suitable for discharge into external waterways;
and
• site supervision by approved persons and regular reporting to
the Project Engineer/Manager throughout the construction
phase.
Page 28
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 2
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASSMP VER 2
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan – Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
Tasks/Actions Investigations of ASS to date have targeted soils to a maximum
depth of 4.0m below the existing ground level. Zones of materials
with nett acidity above the action criteria have been identified
over the site at depths greater than 3m below ground level. The
materials to a depth of approximately 3.0m have been shown by
testing to not contain acid sulfate. If material below 3m is disturbed
they will require lime treatment to neutralize acidity.
In order to assess potential impacts and treatment requirements for
ASS, the Earthworks Contractor shall prepare an earthworks
schedule for the proposed construction activities prior to
commencement of the construction and earthworks activities.
ASS Treatment:
The spoil to be removed from site will either be treated onsite prior
to removal, or:
• treated on-site in accordance with the procedures given below;
or
− A temporary stockpile and treatment area will be
established where all excavated material may be
conditioned (dried) and lime treated, for subsequent use for
site landscaping or general fill requirements.
− Bunding will be constructed around the perimeter of the
designated ASS treatment pad to intersect and contain run-
off from the pad during the soil treatment operations.
− A suitably sized drain or temporary retention basin will be
constructed to collect drainage water from the treatment
pad in the vent of heavy rainfall during the construction
period. This will be constructed in a manner to protect
water quality in adjacent waterways.
− Alternatively, the basement excavation can be used as a
treatment platform with drainage water or run-off collected
in the retention basin will be tested to determine the quality
of the water. If the water quality falls outside the
performance indicators (described below), the water will
be treated prior to discharge from the site.
− The excavated spoil will be spread out in a designated
treatment area in layers up to 0.25m loose thickness. Aglime
with a neutralising value of 100% will be applied evenly over
the surface and thoroughly blended into the spoil at a
uniform minimum rate of 4kg (CaC0 3 )/m3.
− When incorporation of the lime is complete, Chromium Suite
validation testing of the treated spoil will be carried out to
establish that sufficient lime has been added (and uniformly
mixed) to neutralise the acid generation potential of the
spoil. The validation test will be deemed to have passed if
the net acidity is 18 mol H+/t. A higher result will require the
application of additional lime, until a satisfactory validation
result has been achieved.
− Once lime treatment is complete, the treated spoil will be
removed from site or may then be stockpiled for later use
for landscaping or for general site fill requirements.
− Selection of the most appropriate test methods and
determination of liming requirements for neutralisation will
be the responsibility of the ASS Consultant.
• Treated at an off-site facility in accordance with the approved
ASSMP for the facility.
Page 29
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 3
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASSMP VER 2
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan – Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
Performance ASS
Indicators Chromium Suite testing carried out for validation of applied liming
rates will be deemed to be acceptable if the net acidity recorded
is 18 mol H+/t.
Water
Laboratory testing of retained water will be carried out for pH,
electrical conductivity (ED), iron (Fe), aluminium (Al), dissolved
oxygen and turbidity. Levels of these parameters considered
acceptable are as follows:
pH 6.5 to 8.5 pH units
EC <1,500 S/cm
Fe <1,000 ug/L
Al <5.0 ug/L if pH <= 6.5 pH units
<100.0 ug/L if pH > 6.5 pH units
Turbidity <20NTU
Dissolved Oxygen >80% saturated
Testing for the Fe and Al will only be necessary if the pH of the water
falls below pH 6.0.
Frequency/Timing ASS
The sampling and testing of any lime treated material will be
subject to QA testing, which will be repeated until satisfactory
results are obtained. Chromium Suite validation testing will be
carried out at a rate of 1 test/250m3 of treated spoil.
Water
The following monitoring frequency is recommended during
dewatering operations (if required):
• daily measurements of pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity and
suspended solids; and
• weekly measurements of the full list of Performance Indicators
nominated above (if dewatering has been required).
If the results of monitoring prove consistent, the frequency of
monitoring may be reduced, subject to the approval of the ASS
Consultant.
Corrective Action ASS
If lime treatment of ASS is unsuccessful, whereby performance
targets are not being met as indicated by the QA and water quality
testing procedures:
• The earthworks schedule will be reassessed and action taken to
determine the problems causing the breach of standards.
• If the problems are related to ineffective implementation of the
ASSMP, then the plan will be audited to ensure improved
implementation. Monitoring and testing will be increased to
ensure compliance with the established standards.
• Any significant changes to the ASSMP will be subject to
discussions with and the approval of, the relevant regulatory
authorities.
Water
Compliance failures regarding specified performance criteria shall
be recorded including the date, time, nature of failure and actions
taken to rectify the situation. Monitoring results should be reviewed
Page 30
Project No. PG-10899 Page | 4
November 2023
Ref: PG-10899, 2023-10-16, ASSMP VER 2
DD Sunnyside CD Sunnyside Pty Ltd – Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan – Proposed Residence, 30 Mossman Court, Noosa Heads
in relation to site management practices on a regular basis and
improvement strategies should be developed as required.
Responsibility The satisfactory implementation of the ASSMP will be the
responsibility of the Earthworks Contractor. The ASS Consultant will
ensure that:
• the contractor is made aware of site specific conditions and
implications for the management of ASS within the site; and
• correct methods for the collection of samples and testing are
employed and the reporting of results to the relevant site
authorities.
The Earthworks Contractor’s responsibilities will include:
• awareness of site conditions and requirements for the
implementation of the ASSMP;
• modifying earthworks/construction procedures to comply with
the ASSMP and erosion control plan;
• propose any corrective action measures to be approved by
the ASS Consultant; and
• implementing approved correction actions.
Reporting The ASS Consultant shall report to the Project Manager on a regular
basis on the performance of the site management plan.
The Contractor’s Representative shall report to the Project
Manager and to the ASS Consultant on:
• the effectiveness of the operating strategies;
• problems in implementing the ASSMP management strategies;
• compliance with testing requirements run-off control and
materials handling; and
• effectiveness of any corrective action adopted.
Used in these records
Pacific Geotech report Nov 2023 v3.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
Acid Sulfate Soil Report report.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 2.0 MB (small file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.