Council archive · source document
Additional Geotech Investigation 22.02.01 From Douglas Partners - 95120.01.R.001 · OPW21/0315
Douglas Partners Pty Ltd
ABN 75 053 980 117
www.douglaspartners.com.au
1/28 Kessling Avenue
Kunda Park QLD 4556
Phone (07) 5351 0400
Braeden Constructions Pty Ltd Project 95120.01
Hoy Road 1 February 2022
LAKE McDONALD QLD 4563 R.001.docx
BWE
Attention: Mick Devlin
Email: [email protected]
Additional Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Residence
33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
1. Introduction
This report presents the results of an additional geotechnical investigation undertaken by Douglas
Partners Pty Ltd (DP) for the proposed residence at 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville.
The investigation was undertaken at the request of Braeden Constructions Pty Ltd in general
accordance with DP’s proposal 95120.01.P.001 via email 30 November 2021 and following
authorisation to proceed received 15 December 2021.
It is understood that the proposed development will consist of a residential dwelling suspended over a
single level basement.
The aim of the investigation was to provide additional comments on the following:
• presence and severity of acid sulfate soils (ASS); and
• management and treatment of ASS (if any).
The investigation comprised the drilling of three additional bores followed by laboratory testing. Details
of the field work and laboratory testing are presented in this report, together, with comments on the
items listed above.
DP previously carried out a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the proposed development. The
results of the previous investigation are presented in the report entitled “Preliminary Geotechnical
Investigation, Proposed Residence, 33 Wyuna Drive Noosaville” DP Report 95120.00.R.001 dated 14
October 2020. Where applicable, the results from the previous investigation have been used to
supplement the results of this investigation.
This report must be read in conjunction with the attached notes entitled “About This Report” along with
any other attached explanatory notes and should be kept in its entirety without separation of individual
pages or sections.
Brisbane • Cairns • Canberra • Central Coast • Coffs Harbour • Darwin • Geelong • Gold Coast • Macarthur • Melbourne
FS 604853 Newcastle • North West Sydney • Perth • Port Macquarie • Sunshine Coast • Sydney • Townsville • Wollongong
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 39 pages
Page 2
Page 2 of 6
2. Field Work Methods
The field work for this investigation was undertaken on 22 December 2021, and comprised the drilling
and sampling of three additional bores (designated as Bores 2 to 4). The approximate bore locations
are indicated on Drawing 1 attached.
The bores were drilled to 6.0 m depth with a 4WD ute mounted Jacro 200 drilling rig using continuous
flight augers fitted with a tungsten carbide (TC) bit. Dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) testing was
carried out to assess the relative density of the subsurface soils. On completion, a PVC standpipe was
installed in Bore 3 with the remaining bores backfilled with spoil which was tamped into the holes.
The field work was undertaken by experienced geotechnical personnel who logged the bores and
collected samples for visual and tactile assessment, and for subsequent laboratory testing. Strata
identification was undertaken through observation of cutting returns and recovered samples.
3. Field Work Results
The subsurface conditions encountered in the bores are described in detail on the attached borehole
logs, together with accompanying notes which define the classification methods and descriptive terms
used. The depths were measured below existing surface levels at the time of investigation.
In summary, the subsurface conditions encountered in the bores typically comprised fill overlying
natural sands. The subsurface conditions encountered are further described below:
• Fill: Silty sand fill was encountered in the bores to between 2.2 m and 2.3 m depth. The relative
density of the silty sand fill initially was typically ‘loose to medium dense’ becoming ‘medium
dense’ and ‘dense’ with depth. In the absence of documentation to confirm the fill was placed in
a controlled manner or to confirm the degree of compaction to an engineering standard was
achieved, the fill is assumed to be ‘uncontrolled’.
• Sands: Underlying the fill, natural sands were encountered in the bores. Initially, the relative
density of the natural sands was typically medium dense and dense, grading very dense
(indurated) below 4.8 m and 5.4 m depth, and continued to the termination of the bores at 6.0 m
depth.
Groundwater seepage was encountered at between 1.65 m and 1.85 m depth at the time of
investigation. It should be noted however, that groundwater depths and ground moisture conditions
are affected by climatic conditions, surface and subsurface drainage conditions, and human influence
and will therefore vary with time. Groundwater levels are expected to be similar to the water level in
the canal at the rear of the site, albeit somewhat a dampened response to tidal variations.
Proposed Residence 95120.01.R.001.docx
33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville February 2022
Page 3
Page 3 of 6
4. Laboratory Testing
Soil samples were recovered from the bores at regular intervals to 4 m depth, and were screened by
measurement of pH after the addition of distilled water (pHf) and peroxide (pHfox). The pHf test
provides a preliminary indication of past oxidation of sulfides resulting in the presence of actual acid
sulfate soils (AASS). The pHfox test provides a preliminary indication of the presence of unoxidised
sulfides and therefore, potential acid sulfate soils (PASS).
Based on the results of the screening tests and visual inspection of the samples, selected samples
were subjected to more rigorous Chromium Suite analytical testing. The results of this testing are
discussed further below with detailed report sheets attached.
Preliminary field screening and chemical laboratory tests for ASS were carried out with reference to
the QASSIT Guidelines (Ahern, C R; Ahern, M R; Powell, B, 1998), the Soil Management Guidelines
(Dear, et al., 2014) and the Laboratory Methods Guidelines (Ahern, McElnea, & Sullivan, 2004).
In addition, a groundwater sample was recovered from the PVC standpipe and also submitted to
laboratory testing. The results of the groundwater testing are attached.
5. Comments
5.1 Criteria for Evaluation of Acid Sulfate Soils
The criteria on which the results (including previous testing) of screening tests (pHf and pHfox) were
assessed as indicative of possible actual acid sulfate soils (AASS) or potential acid sulfate soils
(PASS) were based on the QASSIT Guidelines as follows:
• pHf of less than 4 indicates oxidation of sulfides has probably occurred in the past, indicating the
presence of actual acidity (AASS). None of the samples tested returned a pHf value of less than
4.
• pHf between 4 and 5.5 indicates the soils are acidic. This may be as a result of limited oxidation
of sulfides, but may also be as a consequence of the presence of organic acids.
• pHf of greater than 5.5 indicates the soil has little or no actual acidity; however, this can be
common with PASS materials or marine-influenced samples. The majority of samples tested
returned pHf values of greater than 5.5.
The pHf test method does not detect acidity bound within sulfides; however, the pHfox test gives an
indication of any potential acid release. Results of the pHfox are summarised as follows:
• pHfox of less than 3, plus a pHfox reading at least one pH unit below pHf, plus a strong reaction
with peroxide, strongly indicates the presence of PASS. The only samples which returned a pHfox
values of less than 3 were of the natural sands, and generally with a moderate reaction to
peroxide.
• pHfox between 3 and 4 indicates the possibility of PASS material and a pH fox between 4 and 5
may indicate the presence of small amounts of sulfide or fine carbonates.
Proposed Residence 95120.01.R.001.docx
33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville February 2022
Page 4
Page 4 of 6
To provide confirmation of the above qualitative testing, quantitative analytical testing was carried out
on selected samples, generally with the greatest difference in pHf and pHfox readings and strongest
reaction using the Chromium Suite method.
• The chromium reducible sulfur values (SCR) where greater than 0.01 %S indicates a significant
level of sulfide, and where greater than 0.03 %S then the soil has a potential acidity level
exceeding the QASSIT guideline value. Samples of both the fill and natural sands tested returned
SCR values greater than 0.03 %S indicating levels of potential sulfur.
• Where the total actual acidity (TAA) value exceeds 18 mol/t then the soil has an acidity level
exceeding the QASSIT guideline value. Three of the samples tested returned TAA values greater
than 18 mol/t (or 0.02 %S) indicating the presence of acidity.
Generally, the action criterion from the chromium suite of tests, which triggers a requirement for ASS
disturbance to be managed, derived from the Soil Management Guidelines is as follows:
• Net Acidity (TAA + SCR + SNAS) of greater than or equal to 0.03 %S for disturbances of greater
than 1000 tonnes
Based on the laboratory test results, both the existing sand fill and natural silty sand are considered to
contain PASS, having the potential to generate sulfuric acid when disturbed and exposed to oxygen.
5.2 Management and Treatment of ASS
As the disturbance of the ASS material cannot be avoided, these soils when disturbed will require
treatment to reduce the risk of oxidation and consequent reduction of pH to produce acidic conditions
potentially damaging to the environment and to buried steel and concrete.
‘Ag lime’ should be used as the preferred neutralisation material for the management of ASS as it is
usually the cheapest and most readily available product for soil neutralisation. This material is mildly
alkaline (pH of 8.5 to 9), of low solubility, and does not present any handling problems. The ‘ag lime’
comprises calcium carbonate typically made from limestone that has been finely grounded and sieved
to a fine powder.
Table 1 provides indicative liming rates for neutralisation of the different ASS material likely to be
disturbed.
Table 1: Indicative Liming Rates
Material Lime Application Rate for Treatment (kg/m 3)
Existing Sand Fill 3.0
Natural Sands 4.0
3
Notes: Assumes a bulking up factor of approximately 1.5 tonnes/m
A guard layer of ‘ag lime’ should also be applied over the base of the basement excavation. This
guard layer of lime should be applied at a rate of 2.5 kg/m2.
Proposed Residence 95120.01.R.001.docx
33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville February 2022
Page 5
Page 5 of 6 It is generally preferable if an ‘ag lime’ with a purity of 95% or better is used (ie. NV >95, where NV is the neutralising value, a term used to rate the neutralising power of different forms of materials relative to pure, fine calcium carbonate which is designated NV = 100). The above lime dosing rates should be adjusted by a factor of 100/NV. 6. References Ahern, C R; Ahern, M R; Powell, B. (1998). Guidelines for Sampling and Analysis of Lowland Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) in Queensland 1998. Resource Sciences Centre, Indooroopilly: Department of Natural Resources. Ahern, C. R., McElnea, A. E., & Sullivan, L. A. (2004). Acid Sulfate Soils Laboratory Methods Guidelines. In Queensland Acid Sulfate Soils Manual 2004. Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia: Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy. Dear, S., Ahern, C., O'Brien, L., Dobos, S., McElnea, A., Moore, N., & Watling, K. (2014). Queensland Acid Sulfate Soil Technical Manual: Soil Management Guidelines. Brisbane: Department of Science: Department of Science, Information, Technology, Innovation and the Arts, Queensland Government. 7. Limitations Douglas Partners Pty Ltd (DP) has prepared this report for the proposed residence at 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville in accordance with DP’s proposal 95120.01.P.001 dated 30 November 2021. The work was carried out under DP’s Conditions of Engagement. This report is provided for the exclusive use of Braeden Constructions Pty Ltd for this project only and for the purposes as described in the report. It should not be used by or relied upon for other projects or purposes on the same or other site or by a third party. Any party so relying upon this report beyond its exclusive use and purpose as stated above, and without the express written consent of DP, does so entirely at its own risk and without recourse to DP for any loss or damage. In preparing this report DP has necessarily relied upon information provided by the client and/or their agents. The results provided in the report are indicative of the subsurface conditions on the site only at the specific sampling and/or testing locations, and then only to the depths investigated and at the time the work was carried out. Subsurface conditions can change abruptly due to variable geological processes and also as a result of human influences. Such changes may occur after DP’s field testing has been completed. DP’s advice is based upon the conditions encountered during this investigation. The accuracy of the advice provided by DP in this report may be affected by undetected variations in ground conditions across the site between and beyond the sampling and/or testing locations. The advice may also be limited by budget constraints imposed by others or by site accessibility. The assessment of atypical safety hazards arising from this advice is restricted to the geotechnical components set out in this report and based on known project conditions and stated design advice and assumptions. While some recommendations for safe controls may be provided, detailed ‘safety in Proposed Residence 95120.01.R.001.docx 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville February 2022
Page 6
Page 6 of 6
design’ assessment is outside the current scope of this report and requires additional project data and
assessment.
This report must be read in conjunction with all of the attached and should be kept in its entirety
without separation of individual pages or sections. DP cannot be held responsible for interpretations
or conclusions made by others unless they are supported by an expressed statement, interpretation,
outcome or conclusion stated in this report.
This report, or sections from this report, should not be used as part of a specification for a project,
without review and agreement by DP. This is because this report has been written as advice and
opinion rather than instructions for construction.
Please contact the undersigned at our Sunshine Coast office if you have any questions or require
further clarification on this matter.
Yours faithfully
Douglas Partners Pty Ltd
Brett Egen
Senior Associate
Attachments: About this Report
Test Location Plan
Sampling Methods
Soil Descriptions
Symbols and Abbreviations
Borehole Logs
Laboratory Test Results
Proposed Residence 95120.01.R.001.docx
33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville February 2022
Page 7
Introduction • A localised, perched water table may lead to
These notes have been provided to amplify DP's an erroneous indication of the true water
report in regard to classification methods, field table;
procedures and the comments section. Not all are • Water table levels will vary from time to time
necessarily relevant to all reports. with seasons or recent weather changes.
They may not be the same at the time of
DP's reports are based on information gained from construction as are indicated in the report;
limited subsurface excavations and sampling, and
supplemented by knowledge of local geology and • The use of water or mud as a drilling fluid will
experience. For this reason, they must be mask any groundwater inflow. Water has to
regarded as interpretive rather than factual be blown out of the hole and drilling mud must
documents, limited to some extent by the scope of first be washed out of the hole if water
information on which they rely. measurements are to be made.
More reliable measurements can be made by
Copyright installing standpipes which are read at intervals
This report is the property of Douglas Partners Pty over several days, or perhaps weeks for low
Ltd. The report may only be used for the purpose permeability soils. Piezometers, sealed in a
for which it was commissioned and in accordance particular stratum, may be advisable in low
with the Conditions of Engagement for the permeability soils or where there may be
commission supplied at the time of proposal. interference from a perched water table.
Unauthorised use of this report in any form
whatsoever is prohibited.
Reports
The report has been prepared by qualified
Borehole and Test Pit Logs personnel, is based on the information obtained
The borehole and test pit logs presented in this from field and laboratory testing, and has been
report are an engineering and/or geological undertaken to current engineering standards of
interpretation of the subsurface conditions, and interpretation and analysis. Where the report has
their reliability will depend to some extent on been prepared for a specific design proposal, the
frequency of sampling and the method of drilling or information and interpretation may not be relevant
excavation. Ideally, continuous undisturbed if the design proposal is changed. If this happens,
sampling or core drilling will provide the most DP will be pleased to review the report and the
reliable assessment, but this is not always sufficiency of the investigation work.
practicable or possible to justify on economic
grounds. In any case the boreholes and test pits Every care is taken with the report as it relates to
represent only a very small sample of the total interpretation of subsurface conditions, discussion
subsurface profile. of geotechnical and environmental aspects, and
recommendations or suggestions for design and
Interpretation of the information and its application construction. However, DP cannot always
to design and construction should therefore take anticipate or assume responsibility for:
into account the spacing of boreholes or pits, the • Unexpected variations in ground conditions.
frequency of sampling, and the possibility of other The potential for this will depend partly on
than 'straight line' variations between the test borehole or pit spacing and sampling
locations. frequency;
• Changes in policy or interpretations of policy
by statutory authorities; or
• The actions of contractors responding to
Groundwater
commercial pressures.
Where groundwater levels are measured in
If these occur, DP will be pleased to assist with
boreholes there are several potential problems,
investigations or advice to resolve the matter.
namely:
• In low permeability soils groundwater may
enter the hole very slowly or perhaps not at all
during the time the hole is left open;
July 2010
Page 8
Site Anomalies
In the event that conditions encountered on site
during construction appear to vary from those
which were expected from the information
contained in the report, DP requests that it be
immediately notified. Most problems are much
more readily resolved when conditions are
exposed rather than at some later stage, well after
the event.
Information for Contractual Purposes
Where information obtained from this report is
provided for tendering purposes, it is
recommended that all information, including the
written report and discussion, be made available.
In circumstances where the discussion or
comments section is not relevant to the contractual
situation, it may be appropriate to prepare a
specially edited document. DP would be pleased
to assist in this regard and/or to make additional
report copies available for contract purposes at a
nominal charge.
Site Inspection
The company will always be pleased to provide
engineering inspection services for geotechnical
and environmental aspects of work to which this
report is related. This could range from a site visit
to confirm that conditions exposed are as
expected, to full time engineering presence on
site.
July 2010
Page 9
Site
Location Plan
3
4
N
2
1
LEGEND:-
Bore Location and Number
Previous Bore Location and Number
NOTE:-
1. Test locations are approximate only and are
shown with reference to existing site features.
2. Image obtained from Metromap. Date of
imagery 08-10-2021.
CLIENT: Braeden Constructions Pty Ltd
TITLE: Test Location Plan PROJECT No: 95120.01
Douglas Partners
Geotechnics Environment Groundwater
OFFICE: Sunshine Coast DRAWN BY: JST Proposed Residence DRAWING No: 1
SCALE: As shown DATE: January 2022 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville REVISION: 0
Page 10
Sampling reliability, due to the remoulding, possible mixing
Sampling is carried out during drilling or test pitting or softening of samples by groundwater.
to allow engineering examination (and laboratory
testing where required) of the soil or rock.
Non-core Rotary Drilling
Disturbed samples taken during drilling provide The borehole is advanced using a rotary bit, with
information on colour, type, inclusions and, water or drilling mud being pumped down the drill
depending upon the degree of disturbance, some rods and returned up the annulus, carrying the drill
information on strength and structure. cuttings. Only major changes in stratification can
be determined from the cuttings, together with
Undisturbed samples are taken by pushing a thin- some information from the rate of penetration.
walled sample tube into the soil and withdrawing it Where drilling mud is used this can mask the
to obtain a sample of the soil in a relatively cuttings and reliable identification is only possible
undisturbed state. Such samples yield information from separate sampling such as SPTs.
on structure and strength, and are necessary for
laboratory determination of shear strength and
compressibility. Undisturbed sampling is generally Continuous Core Drilling
effective only in cohesive soils. A continuous core sample can be obtained using a
diamond tipped core barrel, usually with a 50 mm
internal diameter. Provided full core recovery is
Test Pits achieved (which is not always possible in weak
Test pits are usually excavated with a backhoe or rocks and granular soils), this technique provides a
an excavator, allowing close examination of the in- very reliable method of investigation.
situ soil if it is safe to enter into the pit. The depth
of excavation is limited to about 3 m for a backhoe
and up to 6 m for a large excavator. A potential Standard Penetration Tests
disadvantage of this investigation method is the Standard penetration tests (SPT) are used as a
larger area of disturbance to the site. means of estimating the density or strength of soils
and also of obtaining a relatively undisturbed
sample. The test procedure is described in
Large Diameter Augers Australian Standard 1289, Methods of Testing
Boreholes can be drilled using a rotating plate or Soils for Engineering Purposes - Test 6.3.1.
short spiral auger, generally 300 mm or larger in
diameter commonly mounted on a standard piling The test is carried out in a borehole by driving a 50
rig. The cuttings are returned to the surface at mm diameter split sample tube under the impact of
intervals (generally not more than 0.5 m) and are a 63 kg hammer with a free fall of 760 mm. It is
disturbed but usually unchanged in moisture normal for the tube to be driven in three
content. Identification of soil strata is generally successive 150 mm increments and the 'N' value
much more reliable than with continuous spiral is taken as the number of blows for the last 300
flight augers, and is usually supplemented by mm. In dense sands, very hard clays or weak
occasional undisturbed tube samples. rock, the full 450 mm penetration may not be
practicable and the test is discontinued.
Continuous Spiral Flight Augers The test results are reported in the following form.
The borehole is advanced using 90-115 mm • In the case where full penetration is obtained
diameter continuous spiral flight augers which are with successive blow counts for each 150 mm
withdrawn at intervals to allow sampling or in-situ of, say, 4, 6 and 7 as:
testing. This is a relatively economical means of 4,6,7
drilling in clays and sands above the water table. N=13
Samples are returned to the surface, or may be • In the case where the test is discontinued
collected after withdrawal of the auger flights, but before the full penetration depth, say after 15
they are disturbed and may be mixed with soils blows for the first 150 mm and 30 blows for
from the sides of the hole. Information from the the next 40 mm as:
drilling (as distinct from specific sampling by SPTs 15, 30/40 mm
or undisturbed samples) is of relatively low
July 2010
Page 11
The results of the SPT tests can be related
empirically to the engineering properties of the
soils.
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Tests /
Perth Sand Penetrometer Tests
Dynamic penetrometer tests (DCP or PSP) are
carried out by driving a steel rod into the ground
using a standard weight of hammer falling a
specified distance. As the rod penetrates the soil
the number of blows required to penetrate each
successive 150 mm depth are recorded. Normally
there is a depth limitation of 1.2 m, but this may be
extended in certain conditions by the use of
extension rods. Two types of penetrometer are
commonly used.
• Perth sand penetrometer - a 16 mm diameter
flat ended rod is driven using a 9 kg hammer
dropping 600 mm (AS 1289, Test 6.3.3). This
test was developed for testing the density of
sands and is mainly used in granular soils and
filling.
• Cone penetrometer - a 16 mm diameter rod
with a 20 mm diameter cone end is driven
using a 9 kg hammer dropping 510 mm (AS
1289, Test 6.3.2). This test was developed
initially for pavement subgrade investigations,
and correlations of the test results with
California Bearing Ratio have been published
by various road authorities.
July 2010
Page 12
Description and Classification Methods
The methods of description and classification of The proportions of secondary constituents of soils
soils and rocks used in this report are generally are described as follows:
based on Australian Standard AS1726:2017, In fine grained soils (>35% fines)
Geotechnical Site Investigations. In general, the
Term Proportion Example
descriptions include strength or density, colour,
of sand or
structure, soil or rock type and inclusions.
gravel
And Specify Clay (60%) and
Soil Types
Sand (40%)
Soil types are described according to the
predominant particle size, qualified by the grading Adjective >30% Sandy Clay
of other particles present: With 15 – 30% Clay with sand
Trace 0 - 15% Clay with trace
Type Particle size (mm) sand
Boulder >200
Cobble 63 - 200 In coarse grained soils (>65% coarse)
- with clays or silts
Gravel 2.36 - 63
Term Proportion Example
Sand 0.075 - 2.36
of fines
Silt 0.002 - 0.075
And Specify Sand (70%) and
Clay <0.002 Clay (30%)
Adjective >12% Clayey Sand
The sand and gravel sizes can be further
With 5 - 12% Sand with clay
subdivided as follows:
Trace 0 - 5% Sand with trace
Type Particle size (mm) clay
Coarse gravel 19 - 63
In coarse grained soils (>65% coarse)
Medium gravel 6.7 - 19 - with coarser fraction
Fine gravel 2.36 – 6.7 Term Proportion Example
Coarse sand 0.6 - 2.36 of coarser
Medium sand 0.21 - 0.6 fraction
Fine sand 0.075 - 0.21 And Specify Sand (60%) and
Gravel (40%)
Adjective >30% Gravelly Sand
Definitions of grading terms used are: With 15 - 30% Sand with gravel
Well graded - a good representation of all Trace 0 - 15% Sand with trace
particle sizes gravel
Poorly graded - an excess or deficiency of
particular sizes within the specified range The presence of cobbles and boulders shall be
Uniformly graded - an excess of a particular specifically noted by beginning the description with
particle size ‘Mix of Soil and Cobbles/Boulders’ with the word
Gap graded - a deficiency of a particular order indicating the dominant first and the
particle size with the range proportion of cobbles and boulders described
together.
May 2019
Page 13
Cohesive Soils Estuarine soil – deposited in coastal estuaries;
Cohesive soils, such as clays, are classified on the Marine soil – deposited in a marine
basis of undrained shear strength. The strength environment;
may be measured by laboratory testing, or Lacustrine soil – deposited in freshwater
estimated by field tests or engineering lakes;
examination. The strength terms are defined as
follows: Aeolian soil – carried and deposited by wind;
Colluvial soil – soil and rock debris
Undrained transported down slopes by gravity;
Description Abbreviation
shear strength Topsoil – mantle of surface soil, often with
(kPa) high levels of organic material.
Very soft VS <12
Fill – any material which has been moved by
Soft S 12 - 25 man.
Firm F 25 - 50
Stiff St 50 - 100
Very stiff VSt 100 - 200 Moisture Condition – Coarse Grained Soils
Hard H >200 For coarse grained soils the moisture condition
Friable Fr - should be described by appearance and feel using
the following terms:
Dry (D) Non-cohesive and free-running.
Cohesionless Soils Moist (M) Soil feels cool, darkened in
Cohesionless soils, such as clean sands, are colour.
classified on the basis of relative density, generally Soil tends to stick together.
from the results of standard penetration tests Sand forms weak ball but breaks
(SPT), cone penetration tests (CPT) or dynamic
easily.
penetrometers (PSP). The relative density terms
are given below: Wet (W) Soil feels cool, darkened in
colour.
Relative Abbreviation Density Index Soil tends to stick together, free
Density (%) water forms when handling.
Very loose VL <15
Loose L 15-35
Medium dense MD 35-65 Moisture Condition – Fine Grained Soils
Dense D 65-85 For fine grained soils the assessment of moisture
content is relative to their plastic limit or liquid limit,
Very dense VD >85 as follows:
‘Moist, dry of plastic limit’ or ‘w <PL’ (i.e. hard
and friable or powdery).
Soil Origin
‘Moist, near plastic limit’ or ‘w ≈ PL (i.e. soil can
It is often difficult to accurately determine the origin
be moulded at moisture content approximately
of a soil. Soils can generally be classified as:
equal to the plastic limit).
Residual soil - derived from in-situ weathering
‘Moist, wet of plastic limit’ or ‘w >PL’ (i.e. soils
of the underlying rock;
usually weakened and free water forms on the
Extremely weathered material – formed from hands when handling).
in-situ weathering of geological formations.
‘Wet’ or ‘w ≈LL’ (i.e. near the liquid limit).
Has soil strength but retains the structure or
fabric of the parent rock; ‘Wet’ or ‘w >LL’ (i.e. wet of the liquid limit).
Alluvial soil – deposited by streams and rivers;
May 2019
Page 14
Introduction
These notes summarise abbreviations commonly Orientation
used on borehole logs and test pit reports. The inclination of defects is always measured from
the perpendicular to the core axis.
Drilling or Excavation Methods h horizontal
C Core drilling v vertical
R Rotary drilling sh sub-horizontal
SFA Spiral flight augers sv sub-vertical
NMLC Diamond core - 52 mm dia
NQ Diamond core - 47 mm dia
HQ Diamond core - 63 mm dia Coating or Infilling Term
PQ Diamond core - 81 mm dia cln clean
co coating
he healed
Water inf infilled
Water seep stn stained
Water level ti tight
vn veneer
Sampling and Testing
Coating Descriptor
A Auger sample
ca calcite
B Bulk sample
cbs carbonaceous
D Disturbed sample
cly clay
E Environmental sample
fe iron oxide
U50 Undisturbed tube sample (50mm)
mn manganese
W Water sample
slt silty
pp Pocket penetrometer (kPa)
PID Photo ionisation detector
PL Point load strength Is(50) MPa
Shape
S Standard Penetration Test
cu curved
V Shear vane (kPa)
ir irregular
pl planar
st stepped
Description of Defects in Rock un undulating
The abbreviated descriptions of the defects should
be in the following order: Depth, Type, Orientation,
Coating, Shape, Roughness and Other. Drilling
and handling breaks are not usually included on Roughness
the logs. po polished
ro rough
Defect Type sl slickensided
B Bedding plane sm smooth
Cs Clay seam vr very rough
Cv Cleavage
Cz Crushed zone
Ds Decomposed seam
F Fault Other
J Joint fg fragmented
Lam Lamination bnd band
Pt Parting qtz quartz
Sz Sheared Zone
V Vein
May 2017
Page 15
Graphic Symbols for Soil and Rock
General Sedimentary Rocks
Asphalt Boulder conglomerate
Road base Conglomerate
Concrete Conglomeratic sandstone
Filling Sandstone
Soils Siltstone
Topsoil Laminite
Peat Mudstone, claystone, shale
Clay Coal
Silty clay Limestone
Sandy clay Metamorphic Rocks
Gravelly clay Slate, phyllite, schist
Shaly clay Gneiss
Silt Quartzite
Clayey silt
Igneous Rocks
Sandy silt Granite
Sand Dolerite, basalt, andesite
Clayey sand Dacite, epidote
Silty sand Tuff, breccia
Gravel Porphyry
Sandy gravel
Cobbles, boulders
Talus
May 2017
Page 16
BOREHOLE LOG
CLIENT: Rohig (Qld) Pty Ltd SURFACE LEVEL: -- BORE No: 1
PROJECT: Proposed Residence EASTING: PROJECT No: 95120.00
LOCATION: 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville NORTHING: DATE: 24/9/2020
DIP/AZIMUTH: 90°/-- SHEET 1 OF 1
Description Sampling & In Situ Testing
Graphic
Water
Depth Dynamic Penetrometer Test
Log
RL
Sample
of
Depth
(blows per 100mm)
Type
(m) Results &
Strata Comments
5 10 15 20
FILL/Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained, brown,
moist, loose, fill ASS samples taken
0.25 every 0.25 m interval to
- orange-brown streaked grey and brown 0.3 4m depth
D
0.6
0.9
1 FILL/SAND SP: fine to medium grained, orange-brown 1
grey, with silt fines, moist, loose to medium dense, fill
- medium dense to dense
1.6
D
2 2.0 2
2.35
Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained, grey, wet,
medium dense 2.5
D
2.9
3 3
3.3
SAND SP: fine to medium grained, grey, trace of silt
fines, wet, medium dense
3.6
D
4 4.0 4
- dense to very dense
4.9
5 Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained, dark brown, 5
wet, very dense (indurated)
>>
5.3
D
5.8
6 6.0 6
Bore discontinued at 6.0m
Limit of Investigation
RIG: Jacro 200 DRILLER: RB LOGGED: RB CASING: Nil
TYPE OF BORING: Auger
WATER OBSERVATIONS: Groundwater seepage observed at 2.35 m at time of drilling.
REMARKS: Sand Penetrometer AS1289.6.3.3
Cone Penetrometer AS1289.6.3.2
SAMPLING & IN SITU TESTING LEGEND
A Auger sample G Gas sample PID Photo ionisation detector (ppm)
B Bulk sample P Piston sample PL(A) Point load axial test Is(50) (MPa)
BLK Block sample Ux Tube sample (x mm dia.) PL(D) Point load diametral test Is(50) (MPa)
C Core drilling W Water sample pp Pocket penetrometer (kPa)
D Disturbed sample Water seep S Standard penetration test
E Environmental sample Water level V Shear vane (kPa)
Page 17
BOREHOLE LOG
CLIENT: Braeden Constructions Pty Ltd SURFACE LEVEL: -- BORE No: 2
PROJECT: Proposed Residence EASTING: 508005 PROJECT No: 95120.01
LOCATION: 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville NORTHING: 7080553 DATE: 22/12/2021
DIP/AZIMUTH: 90°/-- SHEET 1 OF 1
Description Sampling & In Situ Testing
Graphic
Water
Depth Dynamic Penetrometer Test
Log
RL
Sample
of
Depth
(blows per 100mm)
Type
(m) Results &
Strata Comments
5 10 15 20
FILL/Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained,
grey-brown, with fine gravel, moist, loose, fill ASS samples taken
0.25 every 0.25m interval to
- grey orange-brown, medium dense, no gravel 4m depth
- dense
1 1
- wet
2 2
2.3
Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained, grey, wet,
medium dense
3 3
3.2
SAND SP: fine to medium grained, grey, with silt fines,
wet, medium dense
4 4
- dense
5 5
5.4
Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained, dark
grey-brown, wet, very dense (indurated)
6 6.0 6
Bore discontinued at 6.0m
Limit of Investigation
RIG: Jacro 200 DRILLER: RB LOGGED: RB CASING: NIl
TYPE OF BORING: Auger
WATER OBSERVATIONS: Groundwater seepage observed at 1.8 m depth at time of drilling.
REMARKS: Location coordinates are in MGA94 Zone 56J. Sand Penetrometer AS1289.6.3.3
Cone Penetrometer AS1289.6.3.2
SAMPLING & IN SITU TESTING LEGEND
A Auger sample G Gas sample PID Photo ionisation detector (ppm)
B Bulk sample P Piston sample PL(A) Point load axial test Is(50) (MPa)
BLK Block sample Ux Tube sample (x mm dia.) PL(D) Point load diametral test Is(50) (MPa)
C Core drilling W Water sample pp Pocket penetrometer (kPa)
D Disturbed sample Water seep S Standard penetration test
E Environmental sample Water level V Shear vane (kPa)
Page 18
BOREHOLE LOG
CLIENT: Braeden Constructions Pty Ltd SURFACE LEVEL: -- BORE No: 3
PROJECT: Proposed Residence EASTING: 508016 PROJECT No: 95120.01
LOCATION: 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville NORTHING: 7080568 DATE: 22/12/2021
DIP/AZIMUTH: 90°/-- SHEET 1 OF 1
Description Sampling & In Situ Testing
Graphic
Water
Depth Dynamic Penetrometer Test
Log
RL
Sample
of
Depth
(blows per 100mm)
Type
(m) Results &
Strata Comments
5 10 15 20
FILL/Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained,
grey-brown, with clay fines, with fine gravel, moist, loose ASS samples taken
to medium dense, fill 0.25 every 0.25m interval to
4m depth
- medium dense
1 1
- grey orange-brown, no gravel, wet
18-01-22
2 2
2.2
Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained, grey, wet,
dense
- medium dense
3 3
3.2
SAND SP: fine to medium grained, grey, with silt fines,
wet, medium dense
4 - dense 4
4.8
Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained, dark
5 grey-brown, wet, very dense (indurated) 5
6 6.0 6
Bore discontinued at 6.0m
Limit of Investigation
RIG: Jacro 200 DRILLER: RB LOGGED: RB CASING: NIl
TYPE OF BORING: Auger
WATER OBSERVATIONS: Groundwater seepage observed at 1.65 m depth at time of drilling.
REMARKS: Location coordinates are in MGA94 Zone 56J. PVC standpipe installed to 3m depth. Sand Penetrometer AS1289.6.3.3
Cone Penetrometer AS1289.6.3.2
SAMPLING & IN SITU TESTING LEGEND
A Auger sample G Gas sample PID Photo ionisation detector (ppm)
B Bulk sample P Piston sample PL(A) Point load axial test Is(50) (MPa)
BLK Block sample Ux Tube sample (x mm dia.) PL(D) Point load diametral test Is(50) (MPa)
C Core drilling W Water sample pp Pocket penetrometer (kPa)
D Disturbed sample Water seep S Standard penetration test
E Environmental sample Water level V Shear vane (kPa)
Page 19
BOREHOLE LOG
CLIENT: Braeden Constructions Pty Ltd SURFACE LEVEL: -- BORE No: 4
PROJECT: Proposed Residence EASTING: 508026 PROJECT No: 95120.01
LOCATION: 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville NORTHING: 7080560 DATE: 22/12/2021
DIP/AZIMUTH: 90°/-- SHEET 1 OF 1
Description Sampling & In Situ Testing
Graphic
Water
Depth Dynamic Penetrometer Test
Log
RL
Sample
of
Depth
(blows per 100mm)
Type
(m) Results &
Strata Comments
5 10 15 20
FILL/Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained,
grey-brown, with clay fines, with fine gravel, moist, loose ASS samples taken
to medium dense, fill 0.25 every 0.25m interval to
4m depth
1 1
- medium dense
- grey orange-brown, no gravel
- wet
2 2
2.25
Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained, grey, wet,
dense
2.9
3 SAND SP: fine to medium grained, grey, with silt fines, 3
wet, medium dense
- dense
4 4
- medium dense
4.8
Silty SAND SM: fine to medium grained, dark brown,
5 wet, very dense (indurated) 5
- grey-brown, dense
6 6.0 6
Bore discontinued at 6.0m
Limit of Investigation
RIG: Jacro 200 DRILLER: RB LOGGED: RB CASING: NIl
TYPE OF BORING: Auger
WATER OBSERVATIONS: Groundwater seepage observed at 1.85 m depth at time of drilling.
REMARKS: Location coordinates are in MGA94 Zone 56J. Sand Penetrometer AS1289.6.3.3
Cone Penetrometer AS1289.6.3.2
SAMPLING & IN SITU TESTING LEGEND
A Auger sample G Gas sample PID Photo ionisation detector (ppm)
B Bulk sample P Piston sample PL(A) Point load axial test Is(50) (MPa)
BLK Block sample Ux Tube sample (x mm dia.) PL(D) Point load diametral test Is(50) (MPa)
C Core drilling W Water sample pp Pocket penetrometer (kPa)
D Disturbed sample Water seep S Standard penetration test
E Environmental sample Water level V Shear vane (kPa)
Page 20
Summary of Acid Sulfate Soil Results
Field Screening Test Results Chromium Suite
Reaction
Bore Depth Lithology Net Acidity (%)
pHF pHFOX ΔpH Intensity pHKCl TAA (%) SKCl (%) SCR (%)
(excluding ANC)
(1,2,3,4)*
0.00 FILL/Silty SAND 5.9 3.0 -2.9 0 - - - - -
0.25 FILL/Silty SAND 5.6 3.4 -2.2 0 - - - - -
0.50 FILL/Silty SAND 5.7 3.5 -2.2 0 - - - - -
0.75 FILL/Silty SAND 6.0 3.6 -2.4 0 5.41 0.037 <0.01 <0.01 0.037
1.00 FILL/SAND 6.2 3.9 -2.3 0 - - - - -
1.25 FILL/SAND 6.0 3.8 -2.2 0 - - - - -
1.50 FILL/SAND 6.5 4.6 -1.9 0 - - - - -
1.75 FILL/SAND 6.3 4.3 -2.0 0 5.84 0.034 <0.01 <0.01 0.034
Bore 1
2.00 FILL/SAND 6.6 4.2 -2.4 0 - - - - -
2.25 FILL/SAND 6.3 3.4 -2.9 0 - - - - -
2.50 Silty SAND 5.3 2.7 -2.6 0 - - - - -
2.75 Silty SAND 5.2 2.8 -2.4 2 - - - - -
3.00 Silty SAND 5.4 2.2 -3.2 3 5.08 0.035 <0.01 0.02 0.054
3.25 Silty SAND 5.7 2.7 -3.0 3 - - - - -
3.50 SAND 7.7 2.9 -4.8 3 6.47 0.006 <0.01 0.02 0.022
3.75 SAND 4.8 2.6 -2.2 0 - - - - -
0.00 FILL/Silty SAND 7.7 5.1 -2.6 2 - - - - -
0.25 FILL/Silty SAND 8.9 5.9 -3.0 2 - - - - -
0.50 FILL/Silty SAND 8.9 6.0 -2.9 2 - - - - -
0.75 FILL/Silty SAND 8.9 6.0 -2.9 2 - - - - -
1.00 FILL/Silty SAND 8.8 5.7 -3.1 2 - - - - -
1.25 FILL/Silty SAND 8.8 5.6 -3.2 2 - - - - -
1.50 FILL/Silty SAND 8.3 5.9 -2.4 2 - - - - -
1.75 FILL/Silty SAND 8.2 5.4 -2.8 2 - - - - -
Bore 2
2.00 FILL/Silty SAND 8.6 5.3 -3.3 2 - - - - -
2.25 FILL/Silty SAND 4.7 3.4 -1.3 1 5.7 <0.02 - 0.014 <0.02
2.50 Silty SAND 6.5 3.8 -2.7 2 - - - - -
2.75 Silty SAND 8.7 5.1 -3.6 2 - - - - -
3.00 Silty SAND 7.5 4.5 -3.0 2 - - - - -
3.25 SAND 7.8 3.5 -4.3 2 - - - - -
3.50 SAND 4.5 2.6 -1.9 2 5.9 <0.02 - 0.022 0.02
3.75 SAND 6.1 2.4 -3.7 2 - - - - -
0.00 FILL/Silty SAND 8.3 5.5 -2.8 2 - - - - -
0.25 FILL/Silty SAND 6.0 5.1 -0.9 2 - - - - -
0.50 FILL/Silty SAND 6.9 4.9 -2.0 2 - - - - -
0.75 FILL/Silty SAND 5.4 4.4 -1.0 2 6.3 <0.02 - 0.013 <0.02
1.00 FILL/Silty SAND 8.1 5.5 -2.6 2 - - - - -
1.25 FILL/Silty SAND 8.6 6.0 -2.6 2 - - - - -
1.50 FILL/Silty SAND 8.8 5.7 -3.1 2 - - - - -
1.75 FILL/Silty SAND 7.9 5.1 -2.8 2 - - - - -
Bore 3
2.00 FILL/Silty SAND 6.9 4.5 -2.4 2 - - - - -
2.25 Silty SAND 6.8 4.6 -2.2 2 - - - - -
2.50 Silty SAND 5.5 3.9 -1.6 2 - - - - -
2.75 Silty SAND 7.9 3.5 -4.4 2 - - - - -
3.00 Silty SAND 7.8 2.8 -5.0 2 7.3 <0.02 - 0.035 0.04
3.25 SAND 8.5 4.2 -4.3 2 - - - - -
3.50 SAND 8.4 4.1 -4.3 2 - - - - -
3.75 SAND 8.6 4.1 -4.5 2 - - - - -
0.00 FILL/Silty SAND 8.7 5.7 -3.0 2 - - - - -
0.25 FILL/Silty SAND 7.6 4.9 -2.7 2 - - - - -
0.50 FILL/Silty SAND 8.7 5.9 -2.8 2 - - - - -
0.75 FILL/Silty SAND 7.8 4.7 -3.1 2 - - - - -
1.00 FILL/Silty SAND 6.7 4.1 -2.6 2 9.5 <0.02 - 0.037 0.04
1.25 FILL/Silty SAND 8.4 5.0 -3.4 2 - - - - -
1.50 FILL/Silty SAND 8.3 5.0 -3.3 2 - - - - -
1.75 FILL/Silty SAND 8.1 5.1 -3.0 2 - - - - -
Bore 4
2.00 FILL/Silty SAND 7.6 4.9 -2.7 2 - - - - -
2.25 Silty SAND 5.4 3.7 -1.7 2 - - - - -
2.50 Silty SAND 4.9 2.1 -2.8 2 5.7 <0.02 - 0.02 0.02
2.75 Silty SAND 6.6 3.4 -3.2 2 - - - - -
3.00 SAND 8.1 3.1 -5.0 2 - - - - -
3.25 SAND 8.1 3.7 -4.4 2 - - - - -
3.50 SAND 8.6 3.7 -4.9 2 9 <0.02 - 0.023 0.02
3.75 SAND 8.6 5.4 -3.2 2 - - - - -
[OCR of page images]
of Acid Sulfate Soil Results
Test Results Chromium Suite
Depth Lithology Net Acidity (%)
ApH | Intensity | pHxci TAA (%) Ski (%) Scr (%) (excluding ANC)
1 4)*
0.00 SAND . -2.9 :
0.25 SAND . -2.2 -
0.50 SAND
; SAND z . x
1.00 FILL/SAND . -2.3
1.25 FILL/SAND . -2.2
1.75 FILL/SAND . b Eig)
2.00 FILL/SAND
2.50 SAND . -2.6
2.75 SAND . -2.4
3.25 SAND . -3.0
3.50 SAND
0.00 SAND . -2.6
0.25 SAND . -3.0
SAND . x
0.75 SAND E -2.9
1.00 SAND
SAND ; -
1.50 SAND . -2.4
1.75 SAND 5. -2.8
. SAND x *
2.25 SAND . -1.3
2.50 SAND
3.00 SAND . -3.0
3.25 SAND . -4.3
3.75 SAND . -3.7
0.00 SAND 5. -2.8
0.25 SAND
SAND ; x
0.75 SAND . -1.0
1.00 SAND . -2.6
SAND : x
1.50 SAND 5. -3.1
1.75 SAND
. SAND . x
2.25 SAND ; -2.2
2.50 SAND
3.25 SAND
0.00 SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
Page 21
www.biotrack.com.au
781 Mt Glorious Rd Highvale 4520 Biotrack Certificate of Analysis
Signatory: Ph:+617 3289 7179 ABN 91 056 237 275
Test Code/Name [1] FIELD SCREEN SUITE
Lab Reference (LR) 290920.570 Client Name Douglas Partners Pty Ltd (Sunshine Coast)
SampleID All Samples Client Contact Brett Egen
Project Name 33 Wyuna Drv Noosaville
Report Date 2/10/2020 Job Number 95120
Sample Received Date 28/09/2020 Order Number
Sample Disposal Date 28/11/2020 Chain of Custody
Sample Packaging Plastic Bag Client Email [email protected]
Temperature Ambient Client Address 28 Kessling Avenue Kunda Park Queensland 4556
Analytical Method: Test Methodology for pH_f and pH_fox as per QASSIT 2004 Laboratory Methods. Indications based on pH data only.
RATE: 0=No Reaction 1=Low 2=Moderate 3=High 4=Very High (steam evolved).
TEMP: Surface temperature rise (⁰C) oxidised sample at 5 minutes - cooling may occur for fast reaction.
S# SampleID pH_f pH_Fox Change Rate Indication
1 Bore1 0-250 5.9 3.0 -2.9 0 low TAA & moderate TPA & sulphide possible
2 Bore1 250-500 5.6 3.4 -2.2 0 low TAA & moderate TPA & sulphide possible
3 Bore1 500-750 5.7 3.5 -2.2 0 low TAA & sulphide possible
4 Bore1 750-1000 6.0 3.6 -2.4 0 low TAA & sulphide possible
5 Bore1 1000-1250 6.2 3.9 -2.3 0 low TAA & sulphide possible
6 Bore1 1250-1500 6.0 3.8 -2.2 0 low TAA & sulphide possible
7 Bore1 1500-1750 6.5 4.6 -1.9 0 low TAA & low TPA
8 Bore1 1750-2000 6.3 4.3 -2.0 0 low TAA
9 Bore1 2000-2250 6.6 4.2 -2.4 0 no TAA & sulphide possible
10 Bore1 2250-2500 6.3 3.4 -2.9 0 low TAA & moderate TPA & sulphide possible
11 Bore1 2500-2750 5.3 2.7 -2.6 0 low TAA & moderate TPA & sulphide possible
12 Bore1 2750-3000 5.2 2.8 -2.4 2 low TAA & moderate TPA & sulphide possible
13 Bore1 3000-3250 5.4 2.2 -3.2 3 low TAA & high TPA & high sulphide/low buffer
14 Bore1 3250-3500 5.4 2.7 -2.7 3 low TAA & moderate TPA & sulphide possible
15 Bore1 3500-3750 7.7 2.9 -4.8 3 no TAA & moderate TPA & high sulphide/low buffer
16 Bore1 3750-4000 4.8 2.6 -2.2 0 low TAA & moderate TPA & sulphide possible
Page 2
Page 22
DETERMINATION OF ACID SULFATE SOIL PROPERTIES CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS Bio-Track Analysis By: Bio-Track Pty Ltd aBn 91 056 237 275 781 Mt. Glorious Road Highvale, Brisbane, Australia, 4520 Ph. 07 32897179 LAB REFERENCE LRO61020.716 DATE OF REPORT 08 OCTOBER 2020 4@18:32:29 Page 1 of 1 Report Pages CLIENT NAME Brett Egen c/o Douglas Partners Pty Ltd (Sunshine Coast) 28 Kessling Avenue Kunda Park 4556 PROJECT NAME 33 Wyuna Drv Noosaville YOUR PROJECT/JOB REFERENCE 95120 SAMPLING DATE NUMBER OF SAMPLES 4 Samples supplied by client SAMPLE TYPE:Soil/Solid DATE RECEIVED 6/10/2020 5:11:39 PM PACKAGING Plastic Bag Ground Oven Dry Samples DISPOSED ON 5/12/2020 Sample ID as received. METHODOLOGY: As per (DNR QASSIT May 2004), oven dried (85°C), >1000 um shell removed, fine grind. All reported values gravimetric, dry mass. %sEQ (equivalent sulphur) calculated as moles TAA/624 + %S Cr + %SNAS - sANC_BT (sNAS included irrespective of pH). LIME1 rates calculated to neutralise TPA (or TAA if >TPA)+ aS_RAS -ANC_BT/1.5 LIME2 rates calculated to neutralise TAA + aS_POS or S_Cr + aS_RAS -ANC_BT/ 1.5 NB. Lime rates assume 97% Lime neutralisation but DO NOT include any safety factors. Suggested factor=1.5-2. Rates are kg/ton. Multiply by bulk density to convert to kg/m3. Fineness Factor (FF)=1.5 CBN POS= moles carbonate alkalinity released by oxidation assuming (Ca POS - Ca KCL) + (Mg POS - Mg KCL) is due to carbonate solution. Blanks represent unmeasured values, zeros & <0.x represent measured values. If pH KCl>4.5 then s-RAS (calculated from acid extract) may be zero for undisturbed soil. acid reactive calcium calculated as the difference between 1 M KCl and 4 M HCL soluble Ca. ID. DEPTH pH pH TAA TPA TSA S KCL SP $ POS S$ Cr s-NAS s EQ Ca KCL Ca P Mg KCL Mg P CBN POS LIME1 LIME2 sANC_BT mm KCL Ox m/t m/t m/t % % & % % % mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg m/t kg/t kg/t % Analytical Method Codes 23A 23B 23F 23G 23H = 23Ce 23De 80 23 Ee 22B s20Je s 23Vh 23Wh 238m = 23Tm a23U&X s19A2 Bore1 750-1000 5.41 23 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.037 108 26 1 Bore1 1750-2000 5.84 21 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.034 25 0 1 Bore1 3000-3250 5.08 22 <0.01 0.02 <0.01 0.054 92 0 2 Borel 3500-3750 6.47 4 <0.01 0.02 <0.01 0.022 179 0 1 Signatory ff us8? For and on behalf of Bio-Track Pty Ltd Ca NAS is the Ca NAS mg/kg 20E <10 <10 <10 68
Page 23
0 0.00 True
Environmental
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Work Order : EB2201192 Page : 1 of 14
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD Laboratory : Environmental Division Brisbane
Contact : MR BRETT EGEN Contact : John Pickering
Address : Address : 2 Byth Street Stafford QLD Australia 4053
Telephone : 07 5351 0400 Telephone : +61 7 3552 8634
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville Date Samples Received : 18-Jan-2022 13:24
Order number : 95120.01 Date Analysis Commenced : 19-Jan-2022
C-O-C number : ---- Issue Date : 25-Jan-2022 16:21
Sampler : BRETT EGEN
Site : ----
Quote number : EN/222
No. of samples received : 49
No. of samples analysed : 49
This report supersedes any previous report(s) with this reference. Results apply to the sample(s) as submitted, unless the sampling was conducted by ALS. This document shall
not be reproduced, except in full.
This Certificate of Analysis contains the following information:
l General Comments
l Analytical Results
Additional information pertinent to this report will be found in the following separate attachments: Quality Control Report, QA/QC Compliance Assessment to assist with
Quality Review and Sample Receipt Notification.
Signatories
This document has been electronically signed by the authorized signatories below. Electronic signing is carried out in compliance with procedures specified in 21 CFR Part 11.
Signatories Position Accreditation Category
Kim McCabe Senior Inorganic Chemist Brisbane Inorganics, Stafford, QLD
Satishkumar Trivedi Senior Acid Sulfate Soil Chemist Brisbane Acid Sulphate Soils, Stafford, QLD
RIGHT SOLUTIONS | RIGHT PARTNER
Page 24
Page : 2 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
General Comments
The analytical procedures used by ALS have been developed from established internationally recognised procedures such as those published by the USEPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In house developed procedures
are fully validated and are often at the client request.
Where moisture determination has been performed, results are reported on a dry weight basis.
Where a reported less than (<) result is higher than the LOR, this may be due to primary sample extract/digestate dilution and/or insufficient sample for analysis.
Where the LOR of a reported result differs from standard LOR, this may be due to high moisture content, insufficient sample (reduced weight employed) or matrix interference.
When sampling time information is not provided by the client, sampling dates are shown without a time component. In these instances, the time component has been assumed by the laboratory for processing
purposes.
Where a result is required to meet compliance limits the associated uncertainty must be considered. Refer to the ALS Contact for details.
Key : CAS Number = CAS registry number from database maintained by Chemical Abstracts Services. The Chemical Abstracts Service is a division of the American Chemical Society.
LOR = Limit of reporting
^ = This result is computed from individual analyte detections at or above the level of reporting
ø = ALS is not NATA accredited for these tests.
~ = Indicates an estimated value.
l TDS by method EA-015 may bias high due to the presence of fine particulate matter, which may pass through the prescribed GF/C paper.
l ASS: EA037 (Rapid Field and F(ox) screening): pH F(ox) Reaction Rate: 1 - Slight; 2 - Moderate; 3 - Strong; 4 - Extreme
l EA037 ASS Field Screening: NATA accreditation does not cover performance of this service.
l Sodium Adsorption Ratio (where reported): Where results for Na, Ca or Mg are <LOR, a concentration at half the reported LOR is incorporated into the SAR calculation. This represents a conservative approach
for Na relative to the assumption that <LOR = zero concentration and a conservative approach for Ca & Mg relative to the assumption that <LOR is equivalent to the LOR concentration.
Page 25
Page : 3 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 2 0-0.25 Bore 2 0.25-0.5 Bore 2 0.5-0.75 Bore 2 0.75-1.0 Bore 2 1.0-1.25
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-002 EB2201192-003 EB2201192-004 EB2201192-005 EB2201192-006
Result Result Result Result Result
EA037: Ass Field Screening Analysis
ø pH (F) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 7.7 8.9 8.9 8.9 8.8
ø pH (Fox) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 5.1 5.9 6.0 6.0 5.7
ø Reaction Rate ---- 1 - 2 2 2 2 2
Page 26
Page : 4 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 2 1.25-1.5 Bore 2 1.5-1.75 Bore 2 1.75-2.0 Bore 2 2.0-2.25 Bore 2 2.25-2.5
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-007 EB2201192-008 EB2201192-009 EB2201192-010 EB2201192-011
Result Result Result Result Result
EA037: Ass Field Screening Analysis
ø pH (F) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 8.8 8.3 8.2 8.6 4.7
ø pH (Fox) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 5.6 5.9 5.4 5.3 3.4
ø Reaction Rate ---- 1 - 2 2 2 2 1
Page 27
Page : 5 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 2 2.5-2.75 Bore 2 2.75-3.0 Bore 2 3.0-3.25 Bore 2 3.25-3.5 Bore 2 3.5-3.75
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-012 EB2201192-013 EB2201192-014 EB2201192-015 EB2201192-016
Result Result Result Result Result
EA037: Ass Field Screening Analysis
ø pH (F) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 6.5 8.7 7.5 7.8 4.5
ø pH (Fox) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 3.8 5.1 4.5 3.5 2.6
ø Reaction Rate ---- 1 - 2 2 2 2 2
Page 28
Page : 6 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 2 3.75-4.0 Bore 3 0-0.25 Bore 3 0.25-0.5 Bore 3 0.5-0.75 Bore 3 0.75-1.0
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-017 EB2201192-018 EB2201192-019 EB2201192-020 EB2201192-021
Result Result Result Result Result
EA037: Ass Field Screening Analysis
ø pH (F) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 6.1 8.3 6.0 6.9 5.4
ø pH (Fox) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 2.4 5.5 5.1 4.9 4.4
ø Reaction Rate ---- 1 - 2 2 2 2 2
Page 29
Page : 7 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 3 1.0-1.25 Bore 3 1.25-1.5 Bore 3 1.5-1.75 Bore 3 1.75-2.0 Bore 3 2.0-2.25
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-022 EB2201192-023 EB2201192-024 EB2201192-025 EB2201192-026
Result Result Result Result Result
EA037: Ass Field Screening Analysis
ø pH (F) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 8.1 8.6 8.8 7.9 6.9
ø pH (Fox) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 5.5 6.0 5.7 5.1 4.5
ø Reaction Rate ---- 1 - 2 2 2 2 2
Page 30
Page : 8 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 3 2.25-2.5 Bore 3 2.5-2.75 Bore 3 2.75-3.0 Bore 3 3.0-3.25 Bore 3 3.25-3.5
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-027 EB2201192-028 EB2201192-029 EB2201192-030 EB2201192-031
Result Result Result Result Result
EA037: Ass Field Screening Analysis
ø pH (F) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 6.8 5.5 7.9 7.8 8.5
ø pH (Fox) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 4.6 3.9 3.5 2.8 4.2
ø Reaction Rate ---- 1 - 2 2 2 2 2
Page 31
Page : 9 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 3 3.5-3.75 Bore 3 3.75-4.0 Bore 4 0-0.25 Bore 4 0.25-0.5 Bore 4 0.5-0.75
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-032 EB2201192-033 EB2201192-034 EB2201192-035 EB2201192-036
Result Result Result Result Result
EA037: Ass Field Screening Analysis
ø pH (F) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 8.4 8.6 8.7 7.6 8.7
ø pH (Fox) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 4.1 4.1 5.7 4.9 5.9
ø Reaction Rate ---- 1 - 2 2 2 2 2
Page 32
Page : 10 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 4 0.75-1.0 Bore 4 1.0-1.25 Bore 4 1.25-1.5 Bore 4 1.5-1.75 Bore 4 1.75-2.0
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-037 EB2201192-038 EB2201192-039 EB2201192-040 EB2201192-041
Result Result Result Result Result
EA037: Ass Field Screening Analysis
ø pH (F) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 7.8 6.7 8.4 8.3 8.1
ø pH (Fox) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 4.7 4.1 5.0 5.0 5.1
ø Reaction Rate ---- 1 - 2 2 2 2 2
Page 33
Page : 11 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 4 2.0-2.25 Bore 4 2.25-2.5 Bore 4 2.5-2.75 Bore 4 2.75-3.0 Bore 4 3.0-3.25
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-042 EB2201192-043 EB2201192-044 EB2201192-045 EB2201192-046
Result Result Result Result Result
EA037: Ass Field Screening Analysis
ø pH (F) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 7.6 5.4 4.9 6.6 8.1
ø pH (Fox) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 4.9 3.7 2.1 3.4 3.1
ø Reaction Rate ---- 1 - 2 2 2 2 2
Page 34
Page : 12 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 4 3.25-3.5 Bore 4 3.5-3.75 Bore 4 3.75-4.0 ---- ----
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 ---- ----
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-047 EB2201192-048 EB2201192-049 -------- --------
Result Result Result ---- ----
EA037: Ass Field Screening Analysis
ø pH (F) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 8.1 8.6 8.6 ---- ----
ø pH (Fox) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 3.7 3.7 5.4 ---- ----
ø Reaction Rate ---- 1 - 2 2 2 ---- ----
Page 35
Page : 13 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: WATER Sample ID Bore 3 ---- ---- ---- ----
(Matrix: WATER)
Sampling date / time 18-Jan-2022 00:00 ---- ---- ---- ----
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-001 -------- -------- -------- --------
Result ---- ---- ---- ----
EA005P: pH by PC Titrator
pH Value ---- 0.01 pH Unit 7.76 ---- ---- ---- ----
EA010P: Conductivity by PC Titrator
Electrical Conductivity @ 25°C ---- 1 µS/cm 1200 ---- ---- ---- ----
EA015: Total Dissolved Solids dried at 180 ± 5 °C
Total Dissolved Solids @180°C ---- 10 mg/L 1270 ---- ---- ---- ----
ED037P: Alkalinity by PC Titrator
Hydroxide Alkalinity as CaCO3 DMO-210-001 1 mg/L <1 ---- ---- ---- ----
Carbonate Alkalinity as CaCO3 3812-32-6 1 mg/L <1 ---- ---- ---- ----
Bicarbonate Alkalinity as CaCO3 71-52-3 1 mg/L 89 ---- ---- ---- ----
Total Alkalinity as CaCO3 ---- 1 mg/L 89 ---- ---- ---- ----
ED038: Acidity
Acidity as CaCO3 ---- 1 mg/L 7 ---- ---- ---- ----
ED041G: Sulfate (Turbidimetric) as SO4 2- by DA
Sulfate as SO4 - Turbidimetric 14808-79-8 1 mg/L 355 ---- ---- ---- ----
ED045G: Chloride by Discrete Analyser
Chloride 16887-00-6 1 mg/L 93 ---- ---- ---- ----
ED093F: Dissolved Major Cations
Calcium 7440-70-2 1 mg/L 127 ---- ---- ---- ----
Magnesium 7439-95-4 1 mg/L 19 ---- ---- ---- ----
Sodium 7440-23-5 1 mg/L 106 ---- ---- ---- ----
Potassium 7440-09-7 1 mg/L 7 ---- ---- ---- ----
EG020F: Dissolved Metals by ICP-MS
Aluminium 7429-90-5 0.01 mg/L 0.02 ---- ---- ---- ----
Arsenic 7440-38-2 0.001 mg/L <0.001 ---- ---- ---- ----
Cadmium 7440-43-9 0.0001 mg/L <0.0001 ---- ---- ---- ----
Chromium 7440-47-3 0.001 mg/L <0.001 ---- ---- ---- ----
Cobalt 7440-48-4 0.001 mg/L <0.001 ---- ---- ---- ----
Copper 7440-50-8 0.001 mg/L 0.002 ---- ---- ---- ----
Lead 7439-92-1 0.001 mg/L <0.001 ---- ---- ---- ----
Manganese 7439-96-5 0.001 mg/L 0.025 ---- ---- ---- ----
Nickel 7440-02-0 0.001 mg/L 0.001 ---- ---- ---- ----
Selenium 7782-49-2 0.01 mg/L <0.01 ---- ---- ---- ----
Zinc 7440-66-6 0.005 mg/L 0.008 ---- ---- ---- ----
Iron 7439-89-6 0.05 mg/L <0.05 ---- ---- ---- ----
[OCR of page images]
Page : 13 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville ALS
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: WATER Sample ID Bore 3
(Matrix: WATER)
Sampling date / time 18-Jan-2022 00:00
Compound CAS Number | LOR Unit EB2201192-001
Result
pH Value . PH Unit 7.76
Electrical Conductivity @ 25°C uS/cm 1200
Total Dissolved Solids @180°C mg/L 1270
Hydroxide Alkalinity as CaCO3 DMO-210-001 mg/L <1
Carbonate Alkalinity as CaCO3 3812-32-6 mg/L <1
Bicarbonate Alkalinity as CaCO3 71-52-3 mg/L 89
Total Alkalinity as CaCO3 — mg/L 89
Acidity as CaCO3 mg/L
Sulfate as SO4 - Turbidimetric 14808-79-8 mg/L
Chloride 16887-00-6 mg/L
Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/L
Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/L
Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/L
Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/L
Aluminium 7429-90-5 mg/L 0.02
Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/L <0.001
Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/L <0.0001
Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/L <0.001
Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/L <0.001
Copper 7440-50-8 mg/L 0.002
Lead 7439-92-1 mg/L <0.001
Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/L 0.025
Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/L 0.001
Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/L <0.01
Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/L 0.008
Iron 7439-89-6 mg/L <0.05
Page 36
Page : 14 of 14
Work Order : EB2201192
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: WATER Sample ID Bore 3 ---- ---- ---- ----
(Matrix: WATER)
Sampling date / time 18-Jan-2022 00:00 ---- ---- ---- ----
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2201192-001 -------- -------- -------- --------
Result ---- ---- ---- ----
EG020T: Total Metals by ICP-MS
Aluminium 7429-90-5 0.01 mg/L 128 ---- ---- ---- ----
Iron 7439-89-6 0.05 mg/L 75.1 ---- ---- ---- ----
EK055G: Ammonia as N by Discrete Analyser
Ammonia as N 7664-41-7 0.01 mg/L 0.72 ---- ---- ---- ----
EK059G: Nitrite plus Nitrate as N (NOx) by Discrete Analyser
Nitrite + Nitrate as N ---- 0.01 mg/L 18.3 ---- ---- ---- ----
EK061G: Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen By Discrete Analyser
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N ---- 0.1 mg/L 27.4 ---- ---- ---- ----
EK062G: Total Nitrogen as N (TKN + NOx) by Discrete Analyser
^ Total Nitrogen as N ---- 0.1 mg/L 45.7 ---- ---- ---- ----
EK067G: Total Phosphorus as P by Discrete Analyser
Total Phosphorus as P ---- 0.01 mg/L 3.33 ---- ---- ---- ----
EK071G: Reactive Phosphorus as P by discrete analyser
Reactive Phosphorus as P 14265-44-2 0.01 mg/L <0.01 ---- ---- ---- ----
EN055: Ionic Balance
ø Total Anions ---- 0.01 meq/L 11.8 ---- ---- ---- ----
ø Total Cations ---- 0.01 meq/L 12.7 ---- ---- ---- ----
ø Ionic Balance ---- 0.01 % 3.67 ---- ---- ---- ----
Page 37
0 0.00 True
Environmental
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Work Order : EB2202062 Page : 1 of 4
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD Laboratory : Environmental Division Brisbane
Contact : MR BRETT EGEN Contact : John Pickering
Address : Address : 2 Byth Street Stafford QLD Australia 4053
Telephone : 07 5351 0400 Telephone : +61 7 3552 8634
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville Date Samples Received : 25-Jan-2022 17:10
Order number : 95120.01 Date Analysis Commenced : 31-Jan-2022
C-O-C number : ---- Issue Date : 31-Jan-2022 12:30
Sampler : BRETT EGEN
Site : ----
Quote number : EN/222
No. of samples received : 7
No. of samples analysed :7
This report supersedes any previous report(s) with this reference. Results apply to the sample(s) as submitted, unless the sampling was conducted by ALS. This document shall
not be reproduced, except in full.
This Certificate of Analysis contains the following information:
l General Comments
l Analytical Results
Additional information pertinent to this report will be found in the following separate attachments: Quality Control Report, QA/QC Compliance Assessment to assist with
Quality Review and Sample Receipt Notification.
Signatories
This document has been electronically signed by the authorized signatories below. Electronic signing is carried out in compliance with procedures specified in 21 CFR Part 11.
Signatories Position Accreditation Category
Ben Felgendrejeris Senior Acid Sulfate Soil Chemist Brisbane Acid Sulphate Soils, Stafford, QLD
RIGHT SOLUTIONS | RIGHT PARTNER
Page 38
Page : 2 of 4
Work Order : EB2202062
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
General Comments
The analytical procedures used by ALS have been developed from established internationally recognised procedures such as those published by the USEPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In house developed procedures
are fully validated and are often at the client request.
Where moisture determination has been performed, results are reported on a dry weight basis.
Where a reported less than (<) result is higher than the LOR, this may be due to primary sample extract/digestate dilution and/or insufficient sample for analysis.
Where the LOR of a reported result differs from standard LOR, this may be due to high moisture content, insufficient sample (reduced weight employed) or matrix interference.
When sampling time information is not provided by the client, sampling dates are shown without a time component. In these instances, the time component has been assumed by the laboratory for processing
purposes.
Where a result is required to meet compliance limits the associated uncertainty must be considered. Refer to the ALS Contact for details.
Key : CAS Number = CAS registry number from database maintained by Chemical Abstracts Services. The Chemical Abstracts Service is a division of the American Chemical Society.
LOR = Limit of reporting
^ = This result is computed from individual analyte detections at or above the level of reporting
ø = ALS is not NATA accredited for these tests.
~ = Indicates an estimated value.
l ASS: EA033 (CRS Suite):Retained Acidity not required because pH KCl greater than or equal to 4.5
l ASS: EA033 (CRS Suite): Laboratory determinations of ANC needs to be corroborated by effectiveness of the measured ANC in relation to incubation ANC. Unless corroborated, the results of ANC testing should
be discounted when determining Net Acidity for comparison with action criteria, or for the determination of the acidity hazard and required liming amounts.
l ASS: EA033 (CRS Suite): Liming rate is calculated and reported on a dry weight basis assuming use of fine agricultural lime (CaCO3) and using a safety factor of 1.5 to allow for non-homogeneous mixing and
poor reactivity of lime. For conversion of Liming Rate from 'kg/t dry weight' to 'kg/m3 in-situ soil', multiply 'reported results' x 'wet bulk density of soil in t/m3'.
Page 39
Page : 3 of 4
Work Order : EB2202062
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 2 2.25-2.5m Bore 2 3.5-3.75m Bore 3 0.75-1.0m Bore 3 3.0-3.25m Bore 4 1.0-1.25m
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2202062-001 EB2202062-002 EB2202062-003 EB2202062-004 EB2202062-005
Result Result Result Result Result
EA033-A: Actual Acidity
pH KCl (23A) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 5.7 5.9 6.3 7.3 9.5
Titratable Actual Acidity (23F) ---- 2 mole H+ / t 2 <2 <2 <2 <2
sulfidic - Titratable Actual Acidity (s-23F) ---- 0.02 % pyrite S <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02
EA033-B: Potential Acidity
Chromium Reducible Sulfur (22B) ---- 0.005 %S 0.014 0.022 0.013 0.035 0.037
acidity - Chromium Reducible Sulfur ---- 10 mole H+ / t <10 13 <10 22 23
(a-22B)
EA033-C: Acid Neutralising Capacity
Acid Neutralising Capacity (19A2) ---- 0.01 % CaCO3 ---- ---- ---- 0.51 1.09
acidity - Acid Neutralising Capacity ---- 10 mole H+ / t ---- ---- ---- 101 217
(a-19A2)
sulfidic - Acid Neutralising Capacity ---- 0.01 % pyrite S ---- ---- ---- 0.16 0.35
(s-19A2)
EA033-E: Acid Base Accounting
ANC Fineness Factor ---- 0.5 - 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Net Acidity (sulfur units) ---- 0.02 %S <0.02 0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02
Net Acidity (acidity units) ---- 10 mole H+ / t 11 13 <10 <10 <10
Liming Rate ---- 1 kg CaCO3/t <1 1 <1 <1 <1
Net Acidity excluding ANC (sulfur units) ---- 0.02 %S <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.04 0.04
Net Acidity excluding ANC (acidity units) ---- 10 mole H+ / t 11 13 <10 22 23
Liming Rate excluding ANC ---- 1 kg CaCO3/t <1 1 <1 2 2
Page 40
Page : 4 of 4
Work Order : EB2202062
Client : DOUGLAS PARTNERS PTY LTD
Project : 33 Wyuna Drive, Noosaville
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Sample ID Bore 4 2.4m-2.75m Bore 4 3.5-3.75m ---- ---- ----
(Matrix: SOIL)
Sampling date / time 22-Dec-2021 00:00 22-Dec-2021 00:00 ---- ---- ----
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit EB2202062-006 EB2202062-007 -------- -------- --------
Result Result ---- ---- ----
EA033-A: Actual Acidity
pH KCl (23A) ---- 0.1 pH Unit 5.7 9.0 ---- ---- ----
Titratable Actual Acidity (23F) ---- 2 mole H+ / t 2 <2 ---- ---- ----
sulfidic - Titratable Actual Acidity (s-23F) ---- 0.02 % pyrite S <0.02 <0.02 ---- ---- ----
EA033-B: Potential Acidity
Chromium Reducible Sulfur (22B) ---- 0.005 %S 0.020 0.023 ---- ---- ----
acidity - Chromium Reducible Sulfur ---- 10 mole H+ / t 12 14 ---- ---- ----
(a-22B)
EA033-C: Acid Neutralising Capacity
Acid Neutralising Capacity (19A2) ---- 0.01 % CaCO3 ---- 0.43 ---- ---- ----
acidity - Acid Neutralising Capacity ---- 10 mole H+ / t ---- 87 ---- ---- ----
(a-19A2)
sulfidic - Acid Neutralising Capacity ---- 0.01 % pyrite S ---- 0.14 ---- ---- ----
(s-19A2)
EA033-E: Acid Base Accounting
ANC Fineness Factor ---- 0.5 - 1.5 1.5 ---- ---- ----
Net Acidity (sulfur units) ---- 0.02 %S 0.02 <0.02 ---- ---- ----
Net Acidity (acidity units) ---- 10 mole H+ / t 15 <10 ---- ---- ----
Liming Rate ---- 1 kg CaCO3/t 1 <1 ---- ---- ----
Net Acidity excluding ANC (sulfur units) ---- 0.02 %S 0.02 0.02 ---- ---- ----
Net Acidity excluding ANC (acidity units) ---- 10 mole H+ / t 15 14 ---- ---- ----
Liming Rate excluding ANC ---- 1 kg CaCO3/t 1 1 ---- ---- ----
Used in these records
Additional Geotech Investigation 22.02.01 From Douglas Partners - 95120.01.R.001.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
22.02.01 From Douglas Partners - 95120.01.R.001.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 4.0 MB (large file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.
Original file
Log in to download the original file
The download may take up to a minute.