20517 App N.pdf [As Published] · 132007.1259

Page 2

| a a a
, = a =

ACID SULFATE SOILS ASSESSMENT
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
215-219 DAVID LOW WAY

PEREGIAN BEACH

Prepared for
Scanlon Properties Pty Ltd

Project No. 07160
18 June 2007

GEOTECHNICAL AND GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT S

Butler Partners Pty Ltd Ph: 61 7 3852 3800
ABN 14 816 574 268 Fx: 61 7 3852 3808
79 Doggett Street P.O Box 2267
Newstead

Fortitude Valley BC

Queensland 4006 Queensland 4006

Page 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No
SECTION 1 = INTRODUCTION.......sssssssssssssssssssssssssessssssssssssssesssssssssssssssuusesececsssssssssssioisessesessssssssnsenseeeey 4
14 Project

 

 

1.2 Proposed Scope of Work .
1.3 IC OTTITAISS ICT eeeeeereseseateeectettettemeeseerrrttretreete ieee terete rer eeneetieestese rarer eterstrerts 1
SECTION 2 - THE SITE

  
 

2.1 Site Description

 

 

 

 

 

 
  

 

    

2.2 Geology.........
2.3 ASS Mapping
SECTION (3: ~FIELDWORK ....0-sccocinssccssscgeoceencsconsetecsensavensonursosnvevsuanssonsaeecsusesseeucsesoeetssmeeeuostitanrersneeeennerenavees 4
3A Drilling and Sampling Methods
3.2 Bore Locations and Supervision...
SECTION 4 - INVESTIGATION RESULTS ..ssecsssecserscessvasesveeceetsssnesnscsenavernrrotseonertennviestonnsacursraseernsatssnveasened 5
41 Results a0.
42 Subsurface Conditions . mG)
4.3 Groundwater 0)
44 Laboratory Testing 20
4.4.1 Screening Tests.... 5
4.4.2 Chromium Suite Analysis. 8)
SECTION 5 - COMMENTS ®
5.1 Assessment Criteria for Acid Sulfate Soils 9
5.2 Acid Sulfate Soils 0... eee a)
0

5,3 Neutralisation of Disturbed ASS

TABLES:

Table 1: Observed Groundwater Depths/Reduced Levels During Drilling

Table 2: Summary of Screening Test Results.

Table 3: Summary of Laboratory Results .. : .
Table 4: Action Criteria Based on ASS analysis ‘er Three Broad Tenure Categaries,

 

ATTACHMENTS:

Drawing No. 4 Locality Plan & Test Locations

Appendix A Bore Reports with Explanatory Notes
Appendix B Laboratory Report Sheets

Appendix C Draft Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan

 

Residential Development
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No. 07160 18 June 2007

Page 4

 

SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION

1.1. Project

It is understood that it is proposed to develop the site by the construction of a residential development partly
suspended over a single level basement carpark at approximately RL 4.0m to RL 6.1m, involving approximately
2m maximum depth of bulk excavation. The location of the site and a potential layout for the development are
shown approximately on Drawing No. 1 attached.

1.2 Proposed Scope of Work

It was anticipated that the site ground conditions might comprise fill material, sands and silts overlying estuarine
clays. Based on the scope of the proposed development, the anticipated ground conditions and the
requirements of Sections 6 to 8 of the State Planning Policy 2/02 Guidelines - Planning & Managing
Development Involving ASS, it was proposed to investigate the site at the same time as (but separate from) an
Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) by:

e collecting samples at 0.25m intervals from six bores to a depth of 2.5m, or prior refusal;

e conducting acid sulfate soil (ASS) screening tests on all samples recovered from the bores;
e undertaking Chromium Suite laboratory testing on selected soil samples; and

e — preparation (if required) of an Acid Sulfate Soils Management Plan (ASSMP).

1.3 Commission

Based on the proposed nature of the development, the anticipated subsurface conditions and the scope of work,
a fee to undertake the assessment was presented in a proposal of 23 March 2007. Butler Partners was
subsequently commissioned by Scanlon Properties Pty Ltd to undertake the assessment as proposed.

 

Residential Development Page 1 of 10
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No. 07160 18 June 2007

Page 5

 

SECTION 2 - THE SITE

2.1 Site Description

At the time of investigation the site was developed as a caravan park. A one and two storey ‘Manager's
Residence/Office’ and a single storey ‘Amenities Block’ were located on the eastern side of the site, with the
remainder of the site comprising caravan parking areas surrounded by grassed areas with medium to tall trees
and a gravel and partly paved ‘ring-road’ around the site. Ground surface levels reduce non-uniformly across
the site from east to west from a high at David Low Way of approximately RL10m to a low along the western
boundary of approximately RL2.5m. Three general views of the site at the time of the investigation are given in
Photographs 1 to 3.

 

o md nee eS a E
Photograph 2: General view of the site looking north from the south-western corner

 

Residential Development Page 2 of 10
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No. 07160 18 June 2007

Page 6

 

2.2 Geology

Reference to Queensland Department of Mines and Energy's 1:100,000 Gympie Special sheet indicates that the
site is mapped in an area of Quaternary Parabolic Dunes comprising quartz sand and Estuarine Deposits
comprising sandy mud, muddy sand and minor gravel.

2.3 ASS Mapping

Reference to the Department of Natural Resources and Mines’ (DNR&M) Acid Sulfate Soils Redcliffe to Teewah
Map 2 indicates that the site is located approximately on the boundary of areas mapped as “land >5m with low or
negligible probability of ASS occurrence” and “land with limited field assessment, but where there is a
reasonable probability of ASS occurrence”.

 

Residential Development Page 3 of 10
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No. 07160 18 June 2007

Page 7

 

SECTION 3 - FIELDWORK

3.1 Drilling and Sampling Methods

Fieldwork was undertaken on 14 May 2007 and comprised the drilling and sampling of six bores using a trailer-
mounted Hydrapower Trekker drilling rig operating solid flight augers. Strata identification and sampling was
from drill cuttings brought to the surface on the auger flights.

All soil samples collected from the bores were placed in plastic bags that were sealed after removing as much air
as possible and stored on ice prior to analysis.

3.2 Bore Locations and Supervision

Bore locations were determined in the field by direct measurement from existing site features and are indicated
approximately on the attached Drawing No. 1. The ground surface levels at the bore locations have been
interpolated from contours given on PMM's Combined Detail Survey Plan (Drawing No. 7328-03, dated 18 April
2007).

An experienced senior geotechnician set out the test locations, logged the stratigraphy encountered in the bores
and directed the in-situ sampling and testing program.

 

Residential Development Page 4 of 10
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No. 07160 18 June 2007

Page 8

 

SECTION 4 - INVESTIGATION RESULTS

41 Results

The subsurface conditions encountered in the bores are given on Bore Report Sheets included in Appendix A,
using classification and descriptive terms defined in the accompanying notes. Laboratory test report sheets are
included in Appendix B.

4.2 Subsurface Conditions

For a description of the stratigraphy encountered in the bores, the Bore Report sheets should be consulted.
However, in broad summary, the subsurface conditions encountered in the bores generally comprised a surface
layer of either fill material (in Bores 1 to 4) that varied up to a maximum depth of 0.8m, or silty sand (in Bores 5
and 6) to a maximum depth of 0.4m. In Bores 1 and 2 only, the fill was underlain by natural, dark grey-brown
silty clays that were underlain in turn by silty sands that were indurated below 2m depth. In Bores 3 to 6, the
surface fill or silty sand layer was underlain by sands.

43 Groundwater

Free groundwater was encountered during the drilling of four of the six bores at the depths/RLs given in Table 1.
It should be noted that groundwater levels can vary seasonally and with prevailing weather conditions.

Table 1: Observed Groundwater Depths/Reduced Levels During Drilling

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ae | Groundwater Observations —
Depth Reduced Level

1 0.8 RL 2.3m
2 0.8 RL 2.3m
3 1.5 RL 6.0m

4 Not encountered =
5 | 16 RL 5.9m
~ 6 | Notencountered

44 Laboratory Testing

4.4.1 Screening Tests

Screening tests were undertaken on all soil samples collected from all bores. The screening tests comprised
two small sub-samples of soil; one mixed with approximately 20 mL of distilled water, and the other mixed with
approximately 20 mL of hydrogen peroxide, buffered to a pH of 5.0 with sodium hydroxide.

Slurry pH was measured with a calibrated pH meter. The pH of the distilled water/soil slurry (pH) was
measured approximately one hour after mixing, whilst the pH of the hydrogen peroxide/soil slurry (pHrox) was
measured approximately one to two hours after mixing.

 

Residential Development Page 5 of 10
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No. 07160 18 June 2007

Page 9

 

The pH screening tests can be used for preliminary identification of 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 pHrox value at least one unit below pH may indicate a potential acid sulfate soil (PASS). The greater
the difference between the two measurements, the more indicative the value is of a PASS. The lower

the final pHrox value the better the indication of a positive result.

(c) If the pHrox <3, and the other two conditions apply, then it strongly indicates a PASS. The more the
pHrox drops below 3, the more positive the presence of sulphides.

The results of the screening tests undertaken on samples recovered from the bores are given in Table 2,
together with an indication of which (if any) trigger factors were noted.

Table 2: Summary of Screening Test Results

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sample i Screening Test Indicators
Material . 7
Bore | Depth Type Reaction | pHr | pHrox | Strong reaction pHe-pHroot | pHrox<3
(m) with peroxide

0.0-0.25 Fill Medium | 4.7) 2.0 v v
0.25-0.5 Fill Medium | 48) 29 v ne
0.5-0.75 Fill Strong 46) 14 v v v
0.75-1.0 Fill and Silty Clay Strong 55 | 12 ¥ v v

1 1.0-1.25 | Silty Clay and Silty Sand Strong 5.4 47 v v v
1.25-1.5 Silty Sand Weak 66} 23 v v
4.5-1.75 Silty Sand VeryWeak | 5.2} 1.9 v v
1.75-2.0 Silty Sand Very Weak | 5.0 28 v v
2.0-2.25 Silty Sand VeryWeak | 4.9} 28 v v
0.0-0.25 Fill Very Strong | 6.5 | 2.7 v v v
0.25-0.5 Fill Very Strong | 5.3 | 2.1 v v v
0.5-0.75 Fill Very Strong | 5.1 15 v v v
0.75-1.0 Fill and Silty Clay Strong 63 | 1.7 v v v

2 1.0-1.25 | Silty Clay and Silty Sand Strong 66] 1.3 v v v
1.25-1.5 Silty Sand Medium | 54] 19 v v
1.5-1.75 Silty Sand Medium | 5.7 | 2.4 v v
1.75-2.0 Silty Sand Medium 5.4 18 v v
2.0-2.25 Silty Sand Medium | 5.1 1.8 v v

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 Ahern C.R., Ahern M.R., Powell B. Guidelines for Sampling and Analysis of Lowland Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) in

 

Queensland 1988

Residential Development Page 6 of 10
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach

Project No. 07160 18 June 2007

Page 10

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sample 2 Screening Test Indicators
Material -
Bore | Depth Type Reaction | pHr | pHrox | Strong reaction pHe-pHroot | pHrox<3
(m) with peroxide

0.0-0.25 Fill and Sand Weak 52| 3.0 ¥
0.25-0.5 Sand Very Weak | 4.5 | 3.1 v
0.5-0.75 Sand Very Weak | 5.0 3.8 v
0.75-1.0 Sand Very Weak | 4.9 | 5.3

3 4.0-1.25 Sand Very Weak | 5.0 | 5.2
1.25-1.5 Sand Very Weak | 4.8 | 3.6 v
4.5-1.75 Sand “Very Weak | 5.3 | 5.1
1.75-2.0 Sand Very Weak | 5.6 5.8
2.0-2.25 Sand Very Weak | 5.9 5.8
2.25-2.5 Sand Very Weak | 6.1 5.9
0.0-0.25 Fill and Sand Weak 62) 48 wv
0.25-0.5 Sand Very Weak | 54} 4.1 v
0.5-0.75 Sand Very Weak | 5.3 | 5.5
0.75-1.0 Sand Very Weak | 4.9 | 5.2

4 4.0-1.25 Sand Very Weak | 5.7 5.6
1.25-1.5 Sand Very Weak | 5.9 | 5.1
4.5-1.75 Sand Very Weak | 5.5 5.5
1.75-2.0 Sand Very Weak | 5.9 | 5.5
2.0-2.25 Sand Very Weak | 6.0 | 5.5
2.25-2.5 Sand Very Weak | 5.9 5.6
0.0-0.25 Silty Sand Weak a ae) v v
0.25-0.5 Silty Sand and Sand Weak 5.7 | 24 v v
0.5-0.75 Sand Weak 6.1] 41 v
0.75-1.0 Sand Weak 58 | 43 v

5 1.0-1.25 Sand Very Weak | 5.0} 4.9
4.25-1.5 Sand Very Weak | 4.9 5.0
4.5-1.75 Sand Very Weak | 5.2 57
1.75-2.0 Sand Very Weak | 5.8 | 5.6
2.0-2.25 Sand Very Weak | 5.7 | 56
2.25-2.5 Sand Very Weak | 59 |} 5.6
0.0-0.25 Silty Sand Weak 6.2] 39 v
0.25-0.5 Silty Sand and Sand Very Weak | 6.3 5.0 v
0.5-0.75 Sand Very Weak | 5.9 |} 5.4
0.75-1.0 Sand Very Weak | 6.2 | 5.7

6 1.0-1.25 Sand Very Weak | 5.9 |} 4.4 wv
4.25-1.5 Sand Very Weak | 6.1 5.8
4.5-1.75 Sand Very Weak | 5.6 5.8
1.75-2.0 Sand Very Weak | 5.8 5.7
2.0-2.25 Sand Very Weak | 54} 5.1
2.25-2.5 Sand Very Weak | 5.9 oT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The results of the screening tests indicate reactions ranging from very weak to very strong after the addition of
hydrogen peroxide; pHrox values 1 pH unit below the pHr value measured in nearly all the samples analysed;
and a significant number of samples analysed yielded pHrox values below 3 pH units.

 

Residential Development
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach

Project No. 07160

Page 7 of 10

18 June 2007

Page 11

 

In summary, the results of the screening tests are considered to give a reasonably strong indication of possible
ASS presence in Bores 1 and 2. However, it is considered that there was generally no strong indication of ASS
presence (with some exceptions in the upper 1.5m depth) in Bores 3 to 6. As a result of the mixed screening
test results, it was considered that Chromium Suite laboratory analysis should be conducted on selected

samples.

4.4.2

Chromium Suite Analysis

Based on the results of the screening test results, samples were selected for Chromium Suite analysis and were
kept on ice until transported to Australian Laboratory Services Pty Ltd (ALS) under standard chain of custody
protocol. A summary of the test results is given in Table 3.

Table 3: Summary of Laboratory Results

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Titratable chromluny Net Liming
Bore|; beet Material price | cece) eductble |e atiaity | Rater
(m) Acidlty Sulfur - (Scr) %S (kglt)
% S %S
0.25-0.5 Fill 56 | <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 2
1 | 1.04.25 |Silty Clay and Silty Sand] 5.4 | <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 -
2.25-2.5 Silty Sand 54 | <0.02 <0.02 “ <0.02 :
0.75-1.0 | FillandSilyClay | 54 | 0.02 0.02 0.04 2
2 | 154.75 Silty Sand 57 | <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 :
2.25-2.5 Silty Sand 56 | <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 5
3 | 05075 Sand 64 | <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 :
4 | 125-45 Sand 65 | <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 é
5 | 20-225 Sand 63 | <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 2
6 | 175-20 Sand 65 | <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results in Bold exceed the QASSIT Action Criteria for disturbance of >1000 tonnes of soil (Section 5.1)

* Based on the use of good quality fine ag-lime with a neutralising value of 100 % and incorporating a factor of safety of 1.5 to allow for
inconsistencies in mixing during application

 

Residential Development

215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach

Project No. 07160

Page 8 of 10

18 June 2007

Page 12

 

SECTION 5 - COMMENTS

5.1 Assessment Criteria for Acid Sulfate Soils

ASS in Queensland are assessed in accordance with the Queensland Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation Team
(QASSIT) Guidelines for Sampling and Analysis of Lowland Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) in Queensland 1998
(QASSIT Guidelines) and the State Planning Policy 2/02 Guideline Planning and Managing Development
Involving Acid Sulfate Soils. The State Planning Policy 2/02 Guideline provides Action Criteria for assessing the
results of laboratory testing quantifying the acid producing effects based on the sum of existing plus potential
acidity. These action criteria are presented in Table 4.

Table 4: Action Criteria Based on ASS Analysis for Three Broad Texture Categories

 

 

 

Action Criteria Action Criteria
Type of Material (1.- 1000 tonnes disturbed) (> 1000 tonnes disturbed)
Existing + Potential Acidity Existing + Potential Acidity

 

Equivalent Equivalent Acidity Equivalent Equivalent Acidity
Sulfur (%S) (mol H*/tonne) Sulfur (%S) (mol H*/tonne)
{oven-dry basis) | (oven-dry basis) | (oven-dry basis) | (oven-dry basis) _

Texture Range Approx. Clay
McDonald et al. (1990) Content (%)

Coarse Texture

 

 

 

Sands to loamy sands oe 9.03 18 0.03 18
Medium Texture
Sandy loams to light clays 5-40 0.06 36 0.03 18 ;
Fine Texture

 

 

 

 

 

_Medium to heavy clays, sity clays | __ 7° 2 oe i a

 

As the amount of natural soil to be disturbed during the proposed works is anticipated to exceed 1,000 tonnes of
soil, the ‘greater than 1000 tonne’ Action Criteria of 0.03 %S from Table 4 has been used as the basis for
assessment of site soils.

5.2 Acid Sulfate Soils

Samples tested from within the fill material and natural sands/silty sands reported net acidity levels less than
0.03% and these materials are therefore not considered to be ASS.

Samples tested from within the natural silty clays indicated levels of actual acidity below laboratory reporting
limits, with one exception. The silty clays are therefore considered to include an apparently limited amount of
ASS, potentially at isolated locations. Whilst the amount of ASS in the silty clay soils appears to be relatively
low, under State Planning Policy 2/02 they will nevertheless require management and treatment to neutralise
any net acidity, if they are to be disturbed. As such, an Acid Sulphate Soil Management Plan (ASSMP) is
required and a draft ASSMP is presented in Appendix C for consideration.

 

Residential Development Page 9 of 10
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No. 07160 18 June 2007

Page 13

 

5.3 Neutralisation of Disturbed ASS

The calculated liming rate for the natural silty clay soils based on the results of the Chromium Suite results is
given in Table 3 (and on the laboratory report sheets included in Appendix B) and is 2 kg of ag-lime/tonne of dry
natural silty clay soils, based on a factor of safety of 1.5 and the use of good quality fine ag-lime with a
neutralising value of 100 %.

It is suggested that consideration be given to the adoption of a neutralising value of 80 % in calculation of the
required liming rate to allow for potential inconsistencies in the quality of the ag-lime. The calculated liming rate
using a neutralising value of 80 % for the ag-lime would be approximately 3 kg dry natural silty clay soils.

 

BUTLER PARTNERS PTY LTD
Reviewed by
BRUCE BUTLER MIKE NEIGHBOUR
Principal Principal
Residential Development Page 10 of 10

215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No. 07160 18 June 2007

Page 14

 

Vv AY

} :ON ONIMVYC

 

09120 ‘ON LOAPONd

 

 

 

 

:G3AOUddY

di ‘AA NMVed

200@ SN ‘aLvd

(ev) 0001: ‘AIVOS
=

wor oe 02 OF 0

 

 

 

HLYON
2
S tm
2 128
a % ™m
sz
S 25

2 S
= | er
So 50
4 =< mm
m z =<
4 & oo
a
S 2 O
2 g UO
oq 2c =
S mi
& =

 

goge Zoe J 19 alywisoey
008e ZS8€ J 19 uOYdaja,
BIIENSNY 9OOy PuE|sUaEND
peaisman ‘jeans ye660q Ey

EEE ET!
a =)

 

 

GL Ald
SAILWIdOd NOINVOS
“1N3I70

 

       

Hom, Buyuipray.
3904/2009

sda

 

Auepunog ayig¢

alog >

QN3931

 

“S\N. (uonIp3 38}¢) €1)18u 62 de} ISe09 eulysung :eoualgey GEN
PIT Ald ssaud Jesuanlun yySutdog ‘uojssuvag ym peonpouday

 

 

 

>
3
&, j
gees; \“R
8 9 \"\
3s qj \
= 5
§ 3/
é
898MeIN
Let
? ~
es 4
32 j 5s & No,
ai EN 43
g 5,
3
\ 2
\S
spoquadog
Se
bury bay
Lr
B Wi a

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 15

SALON ANOLVNV1dX4 HLIM SLYOday 3NOE
V XIGNAddV

i™ o™

Page 16

 

BORE REPORT

Client: Scanlan Properties Pty Ltd

Project: Residential Development

Location: 215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No: 07160

BORE 1

Page No: 1 of 1
Date: 8 June 2007

 

Ground Surface Level: RL 3.1m*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

iS
2 | 8 2
=e Description > e a 2
—£ = 8 2 2 £
= E Ss 2 So xe
a a | s A E 3
a a a a n e
3.1
0
FILL 0
- grey-brown and yellow-brown, silty sand, traces of sandy clay, trace of sub- a D
+. angular gravel
| 0.25
4 D
4 05
1 D
] 0.75
SILTY CLAY (OH) D
- dark grey-brown, with organics
14 1.0
2.04 D
SILTY SAND (SM) 1.25
- dark grey-brown
z| D
4.5
1 D
| 1.75
D
Qt b erate See ro
- indurated sand a0
D
| 2.25
4 D
25
| End of Bore at 2.5 m
35
D Disturbed Sample E Environmental Sample c NMLC Coring
B- Bulk Sample S$ Standard Penetrometer Test (SPT) Is(50) Point Load Test Result (MPa)
U_—_Undisturbed Tube (50mm diameter) HB SPT Hammer Bouncing (d)  Diametral Point Load Strength Test
pp Pocket Penetrometer Test (kPa) (.) No Sample Recovery (a) Axial Point Load Strength Test

 

 

Rig: Hydrapower Trekker
Drilling Method: Auger
Groundwater: Free groundwater encountered at 0.8m depth

Remarks: * Approximate ground surface level interpolated from PMM Group's Drawing No. 7328-03, dated 18 April 2007

 

 

 

Page 17

 

BORE REPORT

Client: Scanlan Properties Pty Ltd

Project: Residential Development

Location: 215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No: 07160

BORE 2

Page No: 1 of 4
Date: 8 June 2007

 

Ground Surface Level: RL 3.1m*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S
cs 2 | 3 2
Ez Description 4, 5 5 2 3
s E 3S 2 2 =
s z|2| é 5 3
a ao | no no -
3.4
0 0.0
FILL
- grey-brown and yellow-brown, silty sand, traces of sandy clay, trace of sub- “| D
4 angular gravel
| 0.25
4 D
4 0.5
| D
] 0.75
SILTY CLAY (OH) D
- dark grey-black, with organics
15 1.0
2.05 D
SILTY SAND (SM) 1.25
- dark grey-brown
sd D
15
| D
| 1.75
D
eee i
- indurated sand 20
1.05 D
| 2.25
4 D
25
| End of Bore at 2.5 m
34
D Disturbed Sample E Environmental Sample c NMLC Coring
B_ Bulk Sample S$ Standard Penetrometer Test (SPT) |s(50) Point Load Test Result (MPa)
U_—_Undisturbed Tube (50mm diameter) HB SPT Hammer Bouncing (d)  Diametral Point Load Strength Test
(

pp Pocket Penetrometer Test (kPa) ) No Sample Recovery

(a)

Axial Point Load Strength Test

 

Rig: Hydrapower Trekker
Drilling Method: Auger
Groundwater: Free groundwater encountered at 0.8m depth

Remarks: * Approximate ground surface level interpolated from PMM Group's Drawing No. 7328-03, dated 18 April 2007

 

 

 

Page 18

 

BORE REPORT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Client: Scanlan Properties Pty Ltd BORE 3
Project: Residential Development Page No: 1 of 1
Location: 215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach Date: 8 June 2007
Project No: 07160 Ground Surface Level: RL 7.5m*
=z
g & 2
Ee Description > ec a 3
= ee 3 2 2 3
s E 3° 2 2. eo
a 7 = € £ BD
a — = Oo o oa
a xr a no no =
1S
0 0.0
FILL
- grey-brown, sandy fine sub-angular gravel 7 D
SAND (SP) 0.25
- light grey-brown, fine grained a
7.04 05
| D
| 0.75
D
14 1.0
D
] 1.25
4 D
}------------------ -~~-----------------------------------------4 6.044 15
- medium to coarse grained
| D
| 1:78
D
24 2.0
D
| 2.25
4 D
5.0 25
4 End of Bore at 2.5 m
344
D Disturbed Sample E Environmental Sample C —_-NMLC Coring
B Bulk Sample S Standard Penetrometer Test (SPT) 1s(50) Point Load Test Result (MPa)
U_—_Undisturbed Tube (50mm diameter) HB SPT Hammer Bouncing (d) Diametral Point Load Strength Test
pp Pocket Penetrometer Test (kPa) (.) No Sample Recovery (a) Axial Point Load Strength Test

 

 

Rig: Hydrapower Trekker

Drilling Method: Auger

Groundwater: Free groundwater encountered at 1.5m depth

Remarks: * Approximate ground surface level interpolated from PMM Group's Drawing No. 7328-03, dated 18 April 2007

 

 

Page 19

 

BORE REPORT

Client: Scanlan Properties Pty Ltd

Project: Residential Development

Location: 215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No: 07160

 

BORE 4

Page No: 1 of 1

Date: 8 June 2007

Ground Surface Level: RL 6.0m*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ez
2 = 2
E Description > - 4 3
£ = EY 2 2 2
=| = Ss 2 2 =
a a = 5 5 3
a a a on on e
0 oe 0.0
FILL
- grey-brown and orange, sandy fine to medium sub-angular gravel D
SAND (SP) 0.25
- light grey-brown, fine grained p
0.5
| D
| 0.75
D
14 5.04 1.0
D
| 1.28
4 D
1.5
| D
4.75
D
244 4.04 2.0
D
] 2.25
4 D
25
J End of Bore at 2.5 m I
35 3.04
D Disturbed Sample E Environmental Sample c NMLC Coring
B_ Bulk Sample $S Standard Penetrometer Test (SPT) Is(50) Point Load Test Result (MPa)
U_—_Undisturbed Tube (50mm diameter) HB SPT Hammer Bouncing (d) Diametral Point Load Strength Test
(

pp Pocket Penetrometer Test (kPa) ) No Sample Recovery

(a) Axial Point Load Strength Test

 

Rig: Hydrapower Trekker
Drilling Method: Auger
Groundwater: No free groundwater encountered during auger drilling

Remarks: * Approximate ground surface level interpolated from PMM Group's Drawing No. 7328-03, dated 18 April 2007

 

 

 

Page 20

 

BORE REPORT

Client: Scanlan Properties Pty Ltd

Project: Residential Development

Location: 215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No: 07160

BORE 5

Page No: 1 of 1
Date: 8 June 2007

 

Ground Surface Level: RL 7.5m*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=
2 | € 2
= Description 5 ce a ze
= = 6 2 2 2
£ € S 2 2 fe
s 3 | 5 § 8
a a = on n re
0 75 0.0
SILTY SAND (SM)
- dark grey-brown, fine grained D
] 0.25
D
SAND (SP)
- light grey-brown, fine grained 705 05
| D
| 0.75
D
14 1.0
D
| 4.25
4 D
6.0 1.5
D
| 1.76
D
254 2.0
D
| 225
4 D
5.0 25)
4 End of Bore at 2.5m
34
D Disturbed Sample E Environmental Sample C —_-NMLC Coring
B- Bulk Sample S Standard Penetrometer Test (SPT) ls(50) Point Load Test Result (MPa)
U_—_Undisturbed Tube (50mm diameter) SPT Hammer Bouncing (d) Diametral Point Load Strength Test
pp Pocket Penetrometer Test (kPa) () No Sample Recovery (a) Axial Point Load Strength Test

 

Rig: Hydrapower Trekker
Drilling Method: Auger

Groundwater: Free groundwater encountered at 1.6m depth
Remarks: * Approximate ground surface level interpolated from PMM Group's Drawing No. 7328-03, dated 18 April 2007

 

 

 

Page 21

 

BORE REPORT

Client: Scanlan Properties Pty Ltd

Project: Residential Development

Location: 215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach
Project No: 07160

BORE 6

Page No: 1 of 4
Date: 8 June 2007

 

Ground Surface Level: RL 9.0m*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E
a) 2 g
=e Description 3 ec a 2
= = 6 2 2 2
= = s 2 2 fe
S + |. 5 Ee 3
a a a no on e
0. My 0.0
SILTY SAND (SM)
- dark grey-brown, fine grained D
] 0.25
SAND (SP) b
| _ =light grey-brown, fine grained
0.5
| D
| 0.75
D
14 8.04 1.0
D
| 1.28
4 D
41.5
| D
| 41.75
D
254 7.04 2.0
D
1 2.25
4 D
2.5
J End of Bore at 2.5m 4
35 6.05
D Disturbed Sample E Environmental Sample Cc NMLC Coring
B Bulk Sample S$ Standard Penetrometer Test (SPT) Is(50) Point Load Test Result (MPa)
U_—_Undisturbed Tube (50mm diameter) HB SPT Hammer Bouncing (d)  Diametral Point Load Strength Test
pp Pocket Penetrometer Test (kPa) (.) No Sample Recovery (a) Axial Point Load Strength Test

 

 

Rig: Hydrapower Trekker
Drilling Method: Auger

Groundwater: No free groundwater encountered during auger drilling
Remarks: * Approximate ground surface level interpolated from PMM Group's Drawing No. 7328-03, dated 18 April 2007

 

 

 

Page 22

 

Notes on Description and Classification of Soil

The methods of description and classification of soils used in this report are generally based on Australian Standard AS1726-1993 “Geotechnical Site
Investigations”.

Soil description is based on an assessment of disturbed samples, as recovered from bores and excavations, or from undisturbed materials as seen in
excavations and exposures or in undisturbed samples. Descriptions given on report sheets are an interpretation of the conditions encountered at the time
of investigation.

In the case of cone or piezocone penetrometer tests, actual soil samples are not recovered and soil description is inferred based on published correlations,
past experience and comparison with bore and/or test pit data (if available).

Soil classification is based on the particle size distribution of the soil and the plasticity of the portion of the material finer than 0.425mm. The description of
particle size distribution and plasticity is based on the results of visual field estimation, laboratory testing or both. When assessed in the field, the
properties of the soil are estimated; precise description will always require laboratory testing to define soil properties.
Where soil can be clearly identified as FILL this will be noted as the main soil type followed by a description of the composition of the fill (eg. FILL — yellow-
brown, fine to coarse grained gravelly clay fill with concrete rubble). If the soil is assessed as possibly being fill this will be noted as an additional
observation.
Soils are generally described using the following sequence of terms. In certain instances, not all of the terms will be included in the soil description.

MAIN SOIL TYPE (CLASSIFICATION GROUP SYMBOL)

- strength/density, colour, structure/grain size, secondary and minor components, additional observations

Information on the definition of descriptive and classification terms follows.

SOIL TYPE and CLASSIFICATION GROUP SYMBOLS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Major Divisions Particle Size Classification Typical Names
Group Symbol
BOULDERS > 200mm
COBBLES 63 - 200mm
GRAVELS Coarse: 20 - 63 mm GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little
COARSE (more than half of coarse} Medium: 6 - 20 mm lor no fines.
GRAINED SOILS fraction is larger than] Fine: 2.36-6mm GP Poorly graded gravels and gravel-sand mixtures,
(more than half of material is}238 ™m) little or no fines, uniform gravels.
larger than 0.075 mm) GM Silly gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures.
GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures.
SANDS Coarse: 0.6 - 2.36 mm SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no
(more than half of coarse} Medium: 0.2 - 0.6 mm fines.
fraction is smaller than] Fine: 0.075-0.2 mm SP Poorly graded sands and gravelly sands; little or
2.36mm) no fines, uniform sands.
SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures.
SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures.
SILTS & CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, silty/clayey
(liquid limit <50 %) fine sands or clayey silts with low plasticity.
FINE CLand Cl Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,
GRAINED SOILS gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays.
(more than half of material is OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low|
smaller than 0.075 mm) plasticity.
SILTS & CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine
(liquid limit >50 %) sandy or silty soils.
CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity.
OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity,
organic silts.
HIGHLY ORGANIC Pt Peat and other highly organic soils.
SOILS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notes on Description and Classification of Soil
Revision 2, November 2001 Page 1 of 2

Page 23

Notes on Description and Classification of Soil

DESCRIPTIVE TERMS FOR MATERIAL PROPORTIONS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coarse Grained Soils Fine Grained Soils
% Fines Modifier % Coarse Modifier
<5 Omit, or use ‘trace’ <15 Omit, or use trace.
5-12 — |Describe as ‘with clay/silt’ as applicable. 15-30 |Describe as ‘with sand/gravel’ as applicable.
>12 Prefix soil as ‘silty/clayey’ as applicable > 30 Prefix soil as ‘sandy/gravelly’ as applicable.
STRENGTH TERMS ~ COHESIVE SOILS
Strength Undrained Shear Field Guide to Strength
Term Strength
Very soft <12 kPa Exudes between the fingers when squeezed in hand.
Soft 12-25 kPa Can be moulded by light finger pressure.
Firm 25 - 50 kPa Can be moulded by strong finger pressure.
Stiff 50-100 kPa Cannot be moulded by fingers, can be indented by thumb.
Very stiff 100 - 200 kPa Can be indented by thumb nail.
Hard > 200 kPa Can be indented with difficulty by thumb nail.
DENSITY TERMS ~ NON COHESIVE SOILS
Density Density SPT “N” CPT Cone
Term Index Resistance
Very loose <15% 0-5 0-2MPa
Loose 15-35 % 5-10 2-5 MPa
Medium dense 35 - 65 % 10-30 5-15 MPa
Dense 65-85% 30-50 15-25 MPa
Very dense > 85% > 50 > 25 MPa
COLOUR

 

The colour of a soil will generally be described in a ‘moist’ condition using simple colour terms (eg. black, grey, red, brown etc.) modified as necessary by

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“pale”, “dark”, “light” or “mottled”. Borderline colours will be described as a combination of colours (eg. grey-brown).

EXAMPLE

eg: CLAYEY SAND (SC) - medium dense, grey-brown, fine to medium grained with silt.

Indicates a medium dense, grey-brown, fine to medium grained clayey sand with silt.

 

Notes on Description and Classification of Soil
Revision 2, November 2001

 

 

Page 24

S13HS LYOdaY AYOLVYORVT
€@ XIGNAddV

Page 25

ALS Environmental CSAS)
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

 

Client : BUTLER PARTNERS PTY LTD Laboratory : Environmental Division Brisbane Page / 10f5
Contact : MR BRUCE BUTLER Contact : Tim Kilmister Wer Orden * EB0706355
Address : P O BOX 2267 FORTITUDE VALLEY BC QLD Address ! 32 Shand Street Stafford QLD Australia 4053
AUSTRALIA 4006
E-mail : [email protected] E-mail : [email protected]
Telephone ! 38523800 Telephone ! 61-7-3243 7222
Facsimile : 38523808 Facsimile ! 61-7-3243 7259
Project : 07160 Quote number : BN/217/06 Date received : 8 Jun 2007
Order number / BW83 Date issued : 15 Jun 2007
C-O-C number : - Not provided - No. of samples - Received : 10
Site : - Not provided - Analysed 10

 

ALSE - Excellence in Analytical Testing

 

 

RATA Accredited Laboratory This document has been electronically signed by those names that appear on this report and are the authorised signatories. Electronic
oo signing has been carried out in compliance with procedures specified in 21 CFR Part 11.
This document is issued in Signatory Position - Department
NA T A eel Lea-Ellen Catt Laboratory Technician - Acid Sulphate Inorganics - NATA 825 (818 - Brisbane)
Ww accreditation requirements. Soils
WORLD REGOGHIEED Accredited for compliance with

ACCREINTATION ISO/IEC 17025.

Page 26

Page Number 5 20f5

 

Client : BUTLER PARTNERS PTY LTD ALS
Work Order : EB0706355 ALS Enuwironmental
Comments

This report for the ALSE reference EB0706355 supersedes any previous reports with this reference. Results apply to the samples as submitted. All pages of this report have been checked and
approved for release.

This report contains the following information:

e Analytical Results for Samples Submitted
@ Surrogate Recovery Data

The analytical procedures used by ALS Environmental have been developed from established internationally-recognized procedures such as those published by the US EPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In
house developed procedures are employed in the absence of documented standards or by client request. The following report provides brief descriptions of the analytical procedures employed for
results reported herein. Reference methods from which ALSE methods are based are provided in parenthesis.

When moisture determination has been performed, results are reported on a dry weight basis. When a reported ‘less than’ result is higher than the LOR, this may be due to primary sample
extracts/digestion dilution and/or insuffient sample amount for analysis. Surrogate Recovery Limits are static and based on USEPA SW846 or ALS-QWI/EN38 (in the absence of specified USEPA
limits). Where LOR of reported result differ from standard LOR, this may be due to high moisture, reduced sample amount or matrix interference. When date(s) and/or time(s) are shown bracketed,
these have been assumed by the laboratory for process purposes. Abbreviations: CAS number = Chemical Abstract Services number, LOR = Limit of Reporting. * Indicates failed Surrogate
Recoveries.

Specific comments for Work Order EB0706355

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. Conversion to liming rate in kg/m3 = kg/t x wet bulk density in t/m3.
Retained Acidity not required because pH KCI greater than or equal to 4.5

Page 27

Aueduwog peuiry sieyioig joqdwed ¥

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

b> z b> b> > yeooro by 1 ayey Buwy
OL Lx ce OLl> Ol> y/+H OW OL _
zo'0> ¥0'0 z0'0> zo"0> z0'0> S% 200
sh sb sb sb sh s‘0 Jojoe4 sseusul} ONY
Buyunosoy aseg ploy -3-ec0V4
7 (azz-e)
OL> ZL Ol> Ol OL> 1/+Ha]OW OL AnyINg aiqonpey WniWosYD - AypIoe |
z0'0> z0'0 z0'0> z0'0> z0'0> S% 200 (azz) snying aiqionpey wniw0sYyo,
Aupioy jenuaiod :g-ee0Va
- — - (62-8)
z0'0> z0'0> ___20°0> zo'0> z0'0> sawkd% ZOO Aypioy jenoy eiqeyesiiy - o1pyins
_ v Lb ze 6 9 Y/+H ejow 7% (4€2) Auploy jenoy aiqeyety
Lg vs vs vs 9S wun Hd 40 (vez) Om Hd
Aupioy lenyoy :y-ec0va
s00-sse90.083 vo0-sse902084 £00-Ss¢902084 200-SS€90L083 -o0-sse902084 ue woy, eS. saeuy.
QI ajdwes Aioyesoge7,
00:1 00:r1 00:r1 00:r1 00:r1
200z unr 8 zZ00z unr 8 2002 unr 8 2o0z unr 8 2002 unr 8 Pew, / 12q aes 5
110s 10s 110s 110s 10s uoyduosag / adh xujeW ajdweg
SL'L-S"| @# 3NOS O'L-SZ'0 7# ANOS G'2-S7'% L# ANOS SZ'L-0"L L# ANOS $'0-SZ'0 L1# 3NOS : | ajdwieg yuayD syinsey jeopfjeuy
PRISONS ST SSe90204 - 4JOPIC. HOM
G11 Ald SYANLYVd YATLNE - quad

S17

gsoe: 4aquinn e6eq

Page 28

 

1 seyjaug aqdweo y

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

bo 6 Pp > \> yeooeo By} ayey Buu

o> oL> Ol> OL> | OL> V/+H a]ow OL (stun Ayipoe) Apioy JN

z0'0> zo'0> Z0'0> Z0'0> Z0'0> S% 200 (sun anyins) Aupioy 18N

sb sb sb sh sb sO Joyjoe4 Sseueul4 ONY

Buyunosoy aseg ploy 3-E£0Va

- (Lv6-s)
Lo"0> _ Lo"0> a = sawkd% 10°0 __ Aysedeo Bulsiesjnan ploy - o1pyins _

(Lw61-e)

OL> i OL> — _— }/+H9e]0W OL _ Aedeo Bursieqnan ploy - Aypioe

10'0> — Loo> = — £0080 % 10°0 (L¥6L) Ayoedeo Bulsieqnen ploy

Ayoeded Bursijesynan ploy :0-e0Va

- (azz-e)

O1> O1> OL> 01> O1> 1/+He]OW OL AnyINS eiqionpey WnIWOEIYD - AypIoe

z0'0> z0'0> z0'0> Z0°0> z0'0> $% 200 (a2z) snying aiqionpey Wn!W0sYyD,

____ Auproy renueiod :a-ecova

- _ — (ez-s)

zo'0> zo'0> z0"0> z0'0> : 00> s awd % 200 Aypioy lemoy aigeyesiy - oIpyins

ze a 2 a 9 V/+HeoW Z (3€z) Auploy remoy eiqeyenu

s9 9 s9 v9 9S wun Hd 10 (vez) IOM Hd

Aypioy lenjoy :y-ec0Va

010-sse90z084 600-SS¢902084 800-Sse902084 200-SS€902084 900-Ss¢902084 san won, PUNE, maetiy,

1 QI ajdwes Auoyesoqe7,
00:r1 00°r1 00°r1 00:r1 00:r1
Zo0z unr 8 Zo0z unr g 200z unr g 2002 unr 8 200z unr 8 FOWL / aq e|dwes
: uond! dA di
Ios Tos ___Tlos ___los ___llos uonduosag / adAl xijeW) ejdwes synsay jeonAjeuy
0'2-S2"| 9# JOS Sz'z-0'2 S# JOS G'L-S2"L b# ANOS SZ'0-S'0 €# SOS G'2-S2'2 7# ANOS : g| afdwies yuar|D

RUSRUOINUS ST ssego.0ga - JEPIO YOM
GL1 Ald SMANLYWd YSTLNG ¢ wad

S17

GJOV: 4aquiny e6eq

Page 29

Aueduiog paywry sieyjoig yaqdueg y

Z0'e YNVOO : UoIsien yodex

“yoda, siy} uo juaseaid sayeBouns ON @

 

sy] [04JU0D azeBo1ins
UBUD ST sse90z0ga : APIO HON
S1v G11 Ald SYANLUVd HATLNG : que

S40'G 3 dequiny ebed

Page 30

NV1d LNSWA9VNVW TI0S aLV47Ns aiov Lavud
J XIGNAddV

Page 31

 

Residential Development

215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach

Draft Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan (ASSMP)

 

Element

Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan

 

Objective/Target

The objective of the ASSMP is to control net acidity levels within soils disturbed during
site development works, and to restrict to an acceptable level any potential on-site and
off-site environmental impacts during site redevelopment.

 

ASS Management
Strategy

To mitigate and manage potential environmental impacts associated with ASS during the
redevelopment works: This will be achieved by having a materials handling and
management strategy in place, as well as procedures for either on-site lime treatment of
soils or, the appropriate off-site treatment of soils (if a suitably sized and appropriately
located space is not available for on-site treatment).

 

Tasks/Actions

 

 

An ASS investigation has been carried out to assess the soils within the redevelopment
site, to a maximum depth of 2.5m below the existing surface level. Fill materials, sands
and silty sands have been shown to contain negligible levels of net acidity and do not
require treatment for ASS. However, the natural dark grey-brown, silty clays encountered
in Bores 1 and 2 have been shown (in Bore 2) to contain levels of net acidity that exceed
the State Planning Policy 2/02 Action, Criteria of 0.03 %S. The natural silty clays will
therefore require treatment as follows:

If on-site treatment is undertaken then lime treatment of the soils will be undertaken

as described below.

e Where on-site treatment is not possible the silty clays will be excavated, then
transported in a sealed truck to an appropriately designed off-site treatment area for
neutralisation.

ASS Treatment On-Site

e Any silty clays exposed in the base of the basement excavation will require an
application of ag-lime at a rate of 5 kg/square metre.

e Where excavated silty clay soils are to be treated on-site, a suitably sized dedicated
treatment area will be created. Soils to be treated shall be placed on the treatment
area in layers not thicker than 0.3m.

e Bunding will be constructed around the perimeter of the designated treatment area
to intercept and contain run-off from the area during the soil treatment operations.

e The base of the treatment area is to be lime treated prior to placement of each layer
of excavated material. Re-treatment with ag-lime is required prior to placement of
each new layer of excavated material to be treated, and at the conclusion of all
treatment. The base of the treatment pad shall have a minimum ag-lime application
of 5 kg/square metre.

e Ag-lime will be applied evenly over the surface of the treatment area and thoroughly
blended into the ASS at a rate of 3 kg of ag-lime/tonne of dry silty clay soil. This
liming rate is based on a factor of safety of 1.5 and the use of good quality fine ag-
lime with a neutralising value of not less than 80 %.

e When incorporation of the lime is complete, chromium suite validation testing of the
treated spoil will be carried out to establish that sufficient ag-lime has been added to
neutralise the acid generation potential of the spoil. Where validation testing fails to
meet performance indicators, application of additional ag-lime will be required until a
satisfactory net acidity validation result has been achieved.

e Once ag-lime treatment is complete, the treated spoil may then be stockpiled for
later use or off-site disposal (as appropriate).

e Should the proposed depth of disturbance extend below 2.5m in depth from surface
level, then additional ASS testing will be required.

e Lime-treated, stockpiled soil shall have sediment fences and/or hay bales placed
downslope to intercept any eroded material. Earthen bunds shall be constructed
downslope of stockpile areas to divert run-off/drainage to a collection sump. The
water quality of the sump is to be monitored against the water quality objective

 

 

 

Residential Development

Appendix C

215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach Page 1 of 3

Project No. 07160

18 June 2007

Page 32

 

Residential Development

215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach

Draft Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan (ASSMP)

 

Element

Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan

 

Tasks/Actions (cont'd)

criteria for a tidal estuary.
ASS Treatment Off-Site

Where soils are required to be treated off-site, treatment of the soils will be undertaken
either:

e in accordance with the provisions of this ASSMP for on-site treatment, modified as
necessary for use at an accessible alternative off-site treatment area; or

e in accordance with the ASSMP for the designated off-site treatment area.

 

Performance Indicators

Retained Water

Laboratory testing of the water encountered during basement excavation will be carried
out for pH, dissolved oxygen and, turbidity. These parameters will be assessed against
the equivalent water quality objective criteria for a tidal estuary as follows:

pH 6.5-8.5
Disturbed Oxygen 80-100% saturation
Turbidity 20NTU

Treated Soil
Chromium suite testing carried out for validation, of applied liming rates will be deemed to
be acceptable if the net acidity level recorded is <0,02%S.

 

Frequency/Timing

Retained Water

Water quality within basement excavations will be monitored regularly during soil
removal and particularly following substantial rainfall events.

Treated ASS
The sampling and testing of any lime treated soils will be subject to validation testing ata
rate of one test per 400m* of treated soil, which will be repeated until satisfactory results
are obtained.

 

Contingency Plan

If lime treatment of soils is unsuccessful whereby performance targets are not being met

as indicated by the validation testing and water quality testing procedures then:

e the soil removal schedule will be reassessed and action taken to determine the
problems causing the unsuccessful performance;

e if the problems are related to ineffective implementation of the ASSMP, then the
plan will be audited by a person nominated by the project manager to ensure
improved implementation (monitoring and testing will be increased to ensure
compliance with the established standards); and

e any significant changes to the ASSMP will be subject to discussions with the
relevant regulatory authorities.

 

Responsibility

Responsibility (cont'd)

 

 

The satisfactory implementation of the ASSMP by the contractor will be the
responsibility of the project manager, who will ensure:

e the contractor is made aware of site specific conditions and implications for the
management of sediments within the site;

e the contractor complies with the elements of the ASSMP and erosion control
measures proposed;

e correct methods for the collection of samples and testing are employed and that the
results are reported to the relevant site authorities; and

e corrective action measures proposed by the contractor are approved.
The contractor's responsibilities will include:

e awareness of site conditions and requirements for the implementation of the
ASSMP;

 

 

 

Residential Development Appendix C
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach Page 2 of 3
Project No. 07160 18 June 2007

Page 33

 

Residential Development

215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach

Draft Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan (ASSMP)

 

 

 

 

 

Element Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan
e — supervision of the mixing and soil amelioration process;
e modification of earthworks/construction procedures to comply with the ASSMP;
e presentation of proposed corrective action measures (if required) which will then be
approved by the project manager; and
e implementation of approved corrective actions.
Reporting The contractor shall report to the project manager representative on:

e the effectiveness of the operating strategies;
e problems in implementing the ASSMP management strategies;
e compliance with testing requirements, run-off control.and materials handling; and

 

e effectiveness of any corrective action adopted.

 

 

Residential Development Appendix C
215-219 David Low Way, Peregian Beach Page 3 of 3
Project No. 07160 18 June 2007