Lot 30 South Street Geotechnical Report PDF

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
LOT 30, SOUTH STREET MARSDEN PARK
CLIENT : UNIVERSAL PROPERTY GROUP
REPORT No. : NE004-16 - Geotechnical Investigation
DATE : 04 April 2016
GEOTESTA PTY LTD | ABN 91851620815 | 6/31-37 Howleys Road, Notting Hill VIC 3168
Phone: 1300 852216 | Fax: 03 9562 9098 | email: info@geotesta.com.au 1
Lot 30, South Street, Marsden Park NE004-16
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A geotechnical investigation was conducted by Geotesta for the proposed residential

development at Lot 30 South Street, Marsden Park on 26 February 2016. The aim of the
geotechnical investigation is to provide geotechnical design parameters for the
proposed multi-level (up to 6 level) residential buildings with basement.
The report provides information on the subsurface soil profile, site classification,
suitable foundation systems and founding depths, retaining wall design parameters
and recommendations for earthworks.
2
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................4
2. FIELD INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................................................5
3. FINDINGS .............................................................................................................................................7
3.1 Site Condition ..................................................................................................................................7
3.2 Site Geology .....................................................................................................................................7
3.3 Generalised Soil Profile ..................................................................................................................7
3.4 Site Classification.............................................................................................................................8
3.5 Laboratory Test ................................................................................................................................9
4. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................11
4.1 Pad Footing System.......................................................................................................................11
4.1 Bored Pier Footing System ...........................................................................................................11
5. EARTH WORKS .................................................................................................................................13
5.1 Site Stripping & Clearing .............................................................................................................13
5.2 Earthworks .....................................................................................................................................13
5.3 Drainage of Retention Systems ...................................................................................................13
5.4 Erosion and sediment control ......................................................................................................13
5.5 Open Cut Excavation ....................................................................................................................14
5.6 Select Fill Material .........................................................................................................................14
5.7 Compaction Requirements ..........................................................................................................14
5.8 Retaining Wall ...............................................................................................................................15
5.9 Pavement Subgrade Preparation (Driveways and Car parks)................................................15
5.10 Construction Works ....................................................................................................................15
Appendix A Test Pit and Borehole Logs

Appendix B Laboratory Test Results
Appendix C Core and Test Pit Photos
3
1. INTRODUCTION
Geotesta undertook a geotechnical investigation for the proposed multi-level
residential development at Lot 30 South Street, Marsden Park on 26 February 2016.
This geotechnical investigation work was authorised by Universal Property Group.
This report presents the geotechnical investigation results including subgrade

conditions, subsurface soil profile, in-situ testing results, recommendations on the
design of suitable footing systems and founding depths and retaining wall design
parameters.
4
2. FIELD INVESTIGATION
The investigation involved the drilling of 3 boreholes and 12 test pits in the area of the
proposed development. A site sketch showing the approximate borehole locations is
presented in Figure 1. The field investigation was carried out on 26 February 2016.
Figure 1: Site Plan and Borehole Locations
The boreholes were drilled to a maximum depth of 10.0m. Boreholes drilling was
undertaken using a track mounted Comacchio Geo 205 drilling rig. Standard
Penetration Test (SPT) was undertaken in the soil profile in each borehole at every 1.5m
depth interval. Rock coring was undertaken in rock formation.
5
The test pits were excavated to a depth of 2.5m to 3.0m. Test pit excavation was
undertaken using a 5 ton Yanmar Excavator.
The soil profile encountered in the boreholes was logged by a Geotesta Geotechnical
Engineer in accordance with AS 1726-1993. All field observations are presented on the
borehole logs attached in Appendix A. Selected representative samples were sent to the
Geotesta NATA accredited laboratory for testing of appropriate index properties.
6
3. FINDINGS
3.1 Site Condition
The site is a farmland situated to the south of South Street in Marsden Park. The site is
gently sloping towards the north. The property covers an area of approximately 11.5
hectares and is currently an open paddock with scattered trees across the majority of
the site and denser tree cover in the southern section of the site. A farm dam is located
in the northern corner of the property.
3.2 Site Geology
The geological origin of the soil profile was identified from our visual examination of
the soil samples, geotechnical experience, and reference to geological maps of the area.
The geological map of the area indicates that the site is underlain by Wianamatta
Group sandstone and shales (Geology Map of Sydney, 1:100,000 scale) with presence of
residual soil in the upper layers. Bringelly Shale of Wianamatta Group consists of shale,
carbonaceous claystone, claystone, laminated fine to medium grained lithic sandstone
and rare coal or tuff.
Figure 2: Geology Map of the Site
3.3 Soil Profile
The soil profile at the test locations is presented in the borehole logs in Appendix A.
The underlying subsurface soil profile as encountered in boreholes generally consisted
7
of thin layer of silty sand topsoil overlying firm clay that grades to hard clay which
overlies moderately to slightly weathered shale. The test pit excavations revealed no
presence of groundwater to the end of the test pit excavation except in test pit TP7
where perched groundwater was intersected at 2.4m depth.
The subsurface soil profile are detailed in the following table.
Table 1: Subsurface Soil Profile

Borehole Depth Soil/Rock Consistency/ Undrained
no. Relative density/ Shear Strength,
(m) Type
Strength Su (kPa)
TP1-TP12 0.0-0.05 Silty Sand Medium dense -

0.05-1.0 Clay Firm 40
1.0-2.0 Clay Stiff 80
2.0-2.5 Clay Very Stiff 150
BH1 0.0-0.05 Silty Sand Medium dense -
0.05-1.0 Clay Firm 40
2.2-5.5 Clay/XW Shale Very stiff to hard 200-300
5.5-6.0 HW Shale (Class V) Extremely Low 400
6.0-9.0 MW Shale (Class IV) Very Low - Low 800
9.0-10.5 SW Shale (Class III) Low - Medium 1500
BH2 0.0-0.05 Silty Sand Medium dense -
0.05-1.4 Clay Firm 35
3.0-5.0 Clay/XW Shale Very stiff to hard 100-300
5.0-7.9 HW Shale (Class V) Extremely Low 400
7.9-9.0 MW Shale(Class IV) Very Low - Low 800
Groundwater was not encountered in any of the boreholes during our investigation.
3.4 Site Classification
After considering the area geology, the soil profile encountered in the bores and the
climatic zone of the area (zone 2); the site is classified as CLASS H1, with respect to
foundation construction (Australian Standard 2870-2011 Residential Slabs and
Footings).
8
It has been estimated that the Characteristic Surface Movement (ys) of the underlying
natural soil material will be in the range of 40mm to 60mm provided the building site is
protected from “abnormal moisture conditions” and is drained as described in AS 2870.
It must be emphasized that the heave mentioned and recommendations referred to in

this report are based solely on the observed soil profile observed at the time of the
investigation for this report, without taking into account any abnormal moisture
conditions as defined in AS2870 – 2011, Clause 1.3.3 that might be created thereafter.
With abnormal moisture conditions, distresses will occur and may result in “non-
acceptable probabilities of serviceability and safety of the building during its design
life”, as defined in AS2870-2011, Clause 1.3.1.
3.5 Laboratory Test
Representative subgrade samples were sent to a Geotesta NATA accredited laboratory

for testing of appropriate index properties. The laboratory test results are summarized
in Table 2:
Table 2: Summary of Laboratory Test Results

Bore Depth Wn LL PI LS
Soil Type
No. (m) % % % %
BH1 0.5 Clay 19.7 54 36 13
BH2 1.5 Clay 21.2 - - -
BH2 3.0 Clay 19.5 83 59 16
TP4 2.5 Clay 19.8 - - -
TP9 0.7 Clay 19.6 66 45 16
TP11 1.2 Clay 24.4 - - -
Note: Wn= Moisture content; LL= Liquid Limit; PI= Plasticity Index; LS= Linear Shrinkage;
Table 3: Summary of Rock Laboratory Test Results
Point Load Is50 UCS

Bore No. Depth (m) Test Type Rock Type
(MPa) (MPa)
BH1 6.0-6.15 Diametral Shale 0.02 0.20
BH2 8.9-9.1 Diametral Shale 0.11 1.00
Table 4 below presents the results of the aggressivity tests on soils concerning concrete
piles.
9
Table 4: Summary of Environmental Laboratory Test Results
Bore No. Depth (m) Soil Type pH SO4
TP03 1.5 CLAY 4.9 530

TP06 2.5 CLAY 4.8 380
TP08 1.0 CLAY 5.0 240
TP10 1.0 CLAY 4.8 240
TP12 1.7 CLAY 4.8 350
BH02 0.5 CLAY 4.9 290
BH03 4.0 SHALE 6.9 260
The test results indicates the soils are non-aggressive for construction of concrete piles.
10
4. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed multi-level residential buildings associated with the subject development
can be founded on pad footings or bored piers/screw piles.
4.1 Pad Footing System
The proposed multi-level residential buildings can be founded on pad footings

founded into the underlying natural stiff to hard clay/weathered Shale. The footings
can be designed using the following parameters:
Table 5: Allowable bearing capacity
Borehole/Test Allowable Bearing Founding Material
Pit nos. Capacity (kPa)
75kPa Clay, 0.5m-1.0m
TP1 to TP12 150kPa Clay, 1.0m-2.0m
75kPa Clay, 0.5-1.0m
BH1 350kPa Clay/EW Rock, 2.2m-5.5m
750kPa Shale, Extremely Low Strength (Class V/IV)
1500kPa Shale, Very Low Strength (Class IV or better)
75kPa Clay, 0.5-1.5m
BH2 350kPa Clay/EW Rock, 3.0m-4.9m
750kPa Shale, Extremely Low Strength (Class V/IV)
1500kPa Shale, Very Low Strength (Class IV or better)
4.1 Bored Pier Footing System
Bored piles can be used to support the proposed multi-level development. We

recommend that the designing engineer refer to AS2870 - 2011 to ensure design
compliance to this document, especially Sections 1.3 “Performance of Footing Systems”
and “Design Considerations”.
The carrying capacity of bored piles can be estimated using the following parameters:
11
Table 6: Pile Design Parameter

Depth Soil/Rock Type Undrained Shear Design Unit Skin Design Unit End
(m) Strength Friction Bearing Capacity
(kPa) (kPa) (kPa)
0.0-1.5 Clay (Firm) 50 5 -
1.5-2.0 Clay (Stiff) 75 12 -
2.0-5.5 Clay (Hard) 200 30 400
Varies Shale, EL (Class V) 400 60 700
Varies Shale, VL (Class IV) 800 120 1000
Varies Shale, L-M (Class III) 1500 225 3500
It should be noted that the soil profile may vary across the site. The foundation depths
quoted in this report are measured from the surface during our testing and may vary
accordingly if any filling or excavation works are carried out. It is recommended that a
geotechnical engineer be engaged during footing excavation stage to confirm the
founding depth and founding material.
12
5. EARTH WORKS
5.1 Site Stripping & Clearing
Unless otherwise specified, grass, uncontrolled fill material, clayey silt and other
unsuitable materials shall be removed from the site. All trees and stumps are to be
similarly removed, such areas backfilled and compacted as per Australian Standards
AS3798-2007, Guideline earthworks for commercial and residential developments.
5.2 Earthworks
Where it is necessary to raise the levels of all or part of the subdivision area, such filled
material should be free of organic and/or unsuitable material and shall be placed in
layers not exceeding 250mm in depth. Each layer will be suitably compacted prior to
the laying of the next layer, to a minimum 95% of maximum dry density of standard
compaction. The water content of the fill should be reduced by aeration or increased by
adding water as necessary to achieve this required compaction.
5.3 Drainage of Retention Systems
As seepage infiltration from perched groundwater table is quite likely to be present in

the zones of influence during wet season, it is recommended that a suitable drainage
system be installed and maintained behind all retaining wall structures to ensure the
dissipation of any hydrostatic forces which may result from the accumulation of any
seepage water behind the wall structures. Such seepage water flows should readily be
able to be intercepted by the construction of a suitable sub-surface cut-off drain on the
high side of the subject site.
5.4 Erosion and sediment control
Erosion and Sediment control plan should be implemented before commencing any
earthworks for the proposed development. Below are some general guidelines to be
taken into considerations:
 Establish a single entry/exit point when construction work starts

 Minimized area to be cleared and provide as much as vegetation as possible
 Install sediment fences along the low side of the site before work begins
 Ensure the imported fill material/top soil within the sediment controlled plan
 Fill in and compact all trenches immediately after services have been laid
 Divert water around the work site and stabilized channels
13
 A silt trap to be installed around the site perimeter during construction.

 Provide temporary earth drain around the proposed site if possible to prevent
water logging within the site Stabilized exposed earth banks/embankment
5.5 Open Cut Excavation
Excavation in the natural stiff to very stiff clay can be undertaken to 1.5m depth
without battering back the sides of the trench. If the open trenches exceed 1.5m in
depth, progressive shielding should be used. Alternatively, the trenches should be
battered back at 2H:1V.
Temporary excavation into the compacted clay fill material can be undertaken in a
similar manner to that used for the natural soil.
The temporary excavation batter in sandy or gravelly soil/fill should be no steeper than
1H:1V.
A suitable dewatering system (spears or sump pump) may be required to pump

groundwater in the event that the groundwater is encountered above the excavation
zone. Although groundwater was not encountered in any boreholes during the
geotechnical investigation, the presence of possible perched groundwater resulted
from infiltration of surface run-off should not be dismissed.
5.6 Select Fill Material
Select fill material should have little volume change with changes in moisture content.
Suitable material types of low reactivity, including sandy clay, silty clay, clayey sand,
silty sand and highly to moderately weathered siltstone and sandstone. The select fill
should be well graded with a maximum particle size of not more than 40mm.
5.7 Compaction Requirements
Compaction of both backfill material and embedment material is required to ensure

that excessive surface settlement does not occur. The required backfill density and
minimum frequency of testing for compaction control as detailed in AS 3798-2007 are
summarized below:
- 1 test per layer per material type per 2500 m2.

- 1 test per 500 m3 distributed evenly throughout full depth and area.
- 3 tests per site.
14
Testing should be undertaken in accordance with AS 1289.5. Tested layers that do not
satisfy the outlined criteria shall be stripped, replaced, recompacted and retested to
achieve the minimum compaction requirement mentioned above.
Testing of compaction density should be undertaken by a suitably qualified

geotechnical testing company. Representative samples of the controlled fill should be
regularly tested.
5.8 Retaining Wall
The lateral earth pressure acting on any proposed retaining wall can be estimated by
using the following soil parameters:
Table 7: Retaining Wall Parameters
Depth Soil/Rock Type Unit Su (kPa) c’ (kPa) Ф’ (deg)

(m) Weight
(kN/m3)
0.0-1.5 Clay (Firm) 18 50 5 23
1.5-2.0 Clay (Stiff) 18 75 10 25
2.0-5.5 Clay (Hard) 19 200 30 25
Varies Shale, EL (Class V) 21 400 50 30
Varies Shale, VL (Class IV) 22 800 100 35
Note: Su= undrained shear strength; c’=effective cohesion; ’=effective angle of friction
5.9 Pavement Subgrade Preparation (Driveways and Car parks)
It is recommended that any uncontrolled fill material or soft spots encountered in the
proposed subgrade be removed to reveal firm ground. The removed section of the
subgrade shall be backfilled with site derived clay material compacted to at least 95%
of maximum dry density of standard compaction (AS 1289.5.1.1) with moisture
condition at the equilibrium moisture content or -1% to +3% of the optimum. Proof
rolling of the subgrade level should then be undertaken to reveal any soft spots prior to
placement of the pavement materials.
5.10 Construction Works
It is recommended that Geotesta be engaged to provide a site inspection during the

early stage of construction to confirm that the ground conditions of the subgrade along
the proposed road construction are consistent with the assumptions or findings in this
report.
15
Should you require any further information regarding this report, please do not
hesitate to contact the undersigned.
16
Information about This Report

The report contains the results of a geotechnical investigation conducted for a specific purpose and
client. The results should not be used by other parties, or for other purposes, as they may contain neither
adequate nor appropriate information. In particular, the investigation does not cover contamination
issues unless specifically required to do so by the client.
Test Hole Logging
The information on the test hole logs (boreholes, test pits, exposures etc.) is based on a visual and tactile
assessment, except at the discrete locations where test information is available (field and/or laboratory
results). The test hole logs include both factual data and inferred information.
Groundwater
Unless otherwise indicated, the water levels presented on the test hole logs are the levels of free water or
seepage in the test hole recorded at the given time of measuring. The actual groundwater level may
differ from this recorded level depending on material permeability (i.e. depending on response time of
the measuring instrument). Further, variations of this level could occur with time due to such effects as
seasonal, environmental and tidal fluctuations or construction activities. Confirmation of groundwater
levels, phreatic surfaces or piezometric pressures can only be made by appropriate instrumentation
techniques and monitoring programmes.
Interpretation of Results
The discussion or recommendations contained within this report normally are based on a site evaluation
from discrete test hole data. Generalized, idealized or inferred subsurface conditions (including any
geotechnical cross-sections) have been assumed or prepared by interpolation and/or extrapolation of
these data. As such these conditions are an interpretation and must be considered as a guide only.
Change in Conditions
Local variations or anomalies in the generalized ground conditions do occur in the natural environment,
particularly between discrete test hole locations. Additionally, certain design or construction procedures
may have been assumed in assessing the soil-structure interaction behaviour of the site. Furthermore,
conditions may change at the site from those encountered at the time of the geotechnical investigation
through construction activities and constantly changing natural forces.
Any change in design, in construction methods, or in ground conditions as noted during construction,
from those assumed or reported should be referred to GEOTESTA for appropriate assessment and
comment.
Geotechnical Verification
Verification of the geotechnical assumptions and/or model is an integral part of the design process -
investigation, construction verification, and performance monitoring. Variability is a feature of the
natural environment and, in many instances, verification of soil or rock quality, or foundation levels, is
required. There may be a requirement to extend foundation depths, to modify a foundation system or to
conduct monitoring as a result of this natural variability. Allowance for verification by geotechnical
personnel accordingly should be recognized and programmed during construction.
Reproduction of Reports
Where it is desired to reproduce the information contained in our geotechnical report, or other technical
information, for the inclusion in contract documents or engineering specification of the subject
development, such reproductions should include at least all of the relevant test hole and test data,
together with the appropriate standard description sheets and remarks made in the written report of a
factual or descriptive nature. Reports are the subject of copyright and shall not be reproduced either
totally or in part without the express permission of Geotesta.
17
APPENDIX A
BORE HOLE AND TEST PIT LOGS
18
TEST PIT LOG PIT No TP1
Page: 1 of 1
Client: Universal Property Group Excavated by Art-con Civil Easting: 150.827027
Project: Lot 30 South St Marsden Park NSW Operator Steve Northing: -33.709884
Job No: NE004-16 Rig Type: Yanmar Grid Ref:
Location: Marsden Park Pit size 500mm Collar RL:
Date of test: 26/2/2016 Logged by: AF Checked by: SD
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
0.00 SM Silty SAND, brown, medium grained D D 0.00
CH CLAY, red brown mottled grey M F
moist, firm
No groundwater
0.50 encountered 0.50
grades grey mottled orange
1.00 1.00
CL CLAY, grey mottled orange M St
moist stiff
1.50 1.50
2.00 grades very stiff VSt 2.00
2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
Test Pit Terminated at 3.0m
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00
consistency: moisture: notes: B: Bag sample for Acid Sulphate

VS very soft very loose D Dry J: Jar Sample for Environmental Tests
S soft loose M Moist
F firm medium dense W Wet
ST stiff dense
VST very stiff very dense water: sampling / testing:
H hard water level intact sample from core disturbed sample
soil classification: level risen to B bulk sample

soil is classified in accordance with AS1726 Suv Undrained shear Strength - vane shear
T intact tube sample
unless otherwise noted water inflow SPT standard penetration test
GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
No groundwater
1.00 1.00
moist, stiff
1.50 1.50
grades very stiff VSt

2.00 2.00
2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
No groundwater
1.00 1.00

moist, stiff
1.50 1.50
2.00 2.00
2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
No groundwater
1.00 1.00
moist, stiff
1.50 1.50

2.00 2.00
2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
No groundwater
1.00 1.00
SM Silty SAND, grey mottled orange, moist, medium dense M MD
with some rock fragments
1.50 1.50
2.00 2.00
grades with some clay

2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
No groundwater
grades grey mottled orange, stiff St
1.00 1.00

1.50 1.50
2.00 2.00
2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
0.50 0.50
CL CLAY, grey mottled orange M VSt

moist, very stiff
1.00 1.00
1.50 1.50
2.00 2.00
perched groundwater
2.50 at 2.4m 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
No groundwater
grades grey mottled orange, rock fragments in clay matrix VSt

very stiff
1.00 1.00
1.50 1.50
2.00 2.00
2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
No groundwater
1.00 grades grey mottled orange, rock fragments in clay matrix M VSt 1.00
very stiff
1.50 1.50
2.00 2.00
2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
No groundwater
CL CLAY, grey mottled orange, moist, very stiff M VSt

1.00 1.00
1.50 1.50
2.00 2.00
2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
No groundwater

very stiff
1.00 1.00
1.50 1.50
2.00 2.00
2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
Page: 1 of 1
Blows per 100 mm
Sampling / Runs
DCP estimated
Drilling Method
Dynamic Cone
FIELD TESTS
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
& NOTES
Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CBR
moist, firm
No groundwater
1.00 1.00

very stiff
1.50 1.50
2.00 2.00
2.50 2.50
3.00 3.00
3.50 3.50
4.00 4.00

ST stiff dense

GEOTESTA PTY LTD
BOREHOLE LOG BORE No BH1
Page: 1 of 2
Client: UNIVERSAL PROPERTY GROUP Drilling Co: Easting: 150.828194
Project: Lot 30 South St Marsden Park NSW Driller: Northing: -33.711704
Job No: NE004-16 Rig Type: Grid Ref:
Location: Marsden Park Inclination: Collar RL:
Date Drilled: 26/02/2016 Bearing: Logged by: AF Checked by: SD
Sampling / Runs
Drilling Method
Group Symbol
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTS
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log
Type, colour, particle size and shape, structure & NOTES

Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
CH CLAY, red brown mottled grey, moist, firm M F SPT@0.5m 3,4,4 N=8

1.00 1.00
grades stiff St SPT@1.5m 3, 6,10 N=16
2.00 2.00
CL CLAY, Extremely Weathered rock, moist, hard M H

grey mottled orange
Solid Augering
3.00 SPT@3.0m 9, 23, 40 N>60 3.00
changed to coring below 3.5m

consistency: relative density: moisture: notes:
VS very soft VL very loose D Dry
S soft L loose M Moist
F firm MD medium dense W Wet
ST stiff D dense
VST very stiff VD very dense water: sampling / testing:

soil is classified in accordance with AS1726
Page: 2 of 2
Fracture Freq. (no/m)
Rock Weathering
Core recovery %
Drilling Method
Rock Strength
ROCK SUBSTANCE DISCONTINUITIES FIELD TESTS

Graphic Log
Type, colour, texture Type, orientation, roughness, thickness & NOTES

RQD %
3.50 CLAY, grey mottled red brown, moist, hard, low to medium plasticity 3.50
EW
100 0
4.50 4.50
grades green grey mottled orange, with some rock fragments
100 0
5.50 5.50
HW EL
Shale, grey, very low strength, with sub horizontal bedding planes
6.50 6.50
100 80 MW EL-VL grades extremely to very low strength

Coring
7.50 7.50
100 65
8.50 8.50
VL-L very low to low strength
9.50 100 65 9.50

SW L-M low to medium strength
10.50 END OF BOREHOLE AT 10.0M 10.50

Page: 1 of 2
Sampling / Runs
Drilling Method

Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log

Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
moist, firm SPT@0.5m 3, 3, 4 N=7
1.00 1.00
grades grey mottled orange St

stiff
2.00 SPT@1.5m 3, 6, 8 N=14 2.00
Solid augering
3.00 grades very stiff VSt SPT@3.0m 6, 8, 11 N=19 3.00
grades hard H
4.00 4.00
CL CLAY, grey mottled red brown M H
SPT@4.5m 15, 23, 40 N>60
Soil augering terminated at 5.0m, changed to rock coring

5.00
ST stiff D dense

Page: 2 of 2
Fracture Freq. (no/m)
Rock Weathering
Core recovery %
Drilling Method
Rock Strength
ROCK SUBSTANCE DISCONTINUITIES FIELD TESTS

Graphic Log
Depth (m)
Type, colour, texture Type, orientation, roughness, thickness & NOTES

RQD %
5.00 CLAY, grey mottled red brown, moist, hard, low to medium plasticity
100 0
6.00
100 0
7.00 EL-L Shale, green grey, extremely low to low strength

Coring
100 40
8.00 MW VL grades very low strength
100 70
9.00
L grades low strength
100 70
9.50 Borehole terminated at 9.5m
Page: 1 of 1
Sampling / Runs
Drilling Method
Group Symbol
Consistency /
Water Levels
Graphic Log

Depth (m)
Moisture
Density
moist, firm
1.00 1.00
grades stiff St
2.00 2.00
moist, very stiff
Solid Augering
3.00 3.00
4.00 4.00
Shale, dark grey, moderately weathered, EL
extremely low strength
5.00 5.00
Borehole terminated at 5.6m

6.00 6.00
7.00 7.00
8.00 8.00
ST stiff D dense

APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
19
Point Load Test ASTM D5741
Client: Universal Property Group P/L Test Date: 4/03/2016

Project Number: NE004-16 Tested By: ZS
Project Name: Lot 30 South Street, Marsden Park Checked By: RK
Project Location: Marsden Park, NSW 2765 Issue Date: 8/03/2016
Corrected Estimated
Specimen Specimen Failure Uncorrected Point
Point Load Compressive
Borehole ID Sample ID Test Type Length, L Diameter, D Load, P Load Index, Is Remarks
Index, Is(50) Strength
(mm) (mm) (kN) (MPa)
(MPa) (MPa)
BH1@6.0-6.15m L0365-7 67.92 51.76 0.064 0.02 0.02 0.2 Samples soaked
Diametral
BH2@8.93-9.1m L0365-8 86.45 51.65 0.294 0.11 0.11 1.1 for 24 hours
GEOTESTA Pty Ltd
Moisture Content Report Unit 6, 31-37 Howleys Road

Notting Hill , Vic 3168
Ph: 1300 852216
Laboratory Geotesta Project Geotechnical Investigation Client Universal Property Group P/L
Report No L0365-M Project No NE004-16 Client ID -
Sample ID As below Location Lot 30 South Street Address Unit 1, 129 Magowar Rd
Borehole ID As below Marsden Park NSW 2765 Girraween, NSW
Sampling Method Tested as received
Test method: AS1289.2.1.1 - Oven Drying Method
Sample ID Location/Depth Sample Description Moisture Content (%)

L0365-1 BH1@0.5m CLAY 19.7
L0365-2 BH2@1.5m CLAY 21.2
L0365-3 BH2@3.0m CLAY 19.5
L0365-4 TP4@2.5m CLAY 19.8
L0365-5 TP9@0.7m CLAY 19.6
L0365-6 TP11@1.2m CLAY 24.4
Comments
Test method: AS 1289.2.1.1
Accredited for compliance with

ISO/IEC 17025
The results of the tests included in Report issued by: Rene Kurniadi
this document are traceable to
Australian and national standards. Date issued: 11/03/2016
Document: Moisture Content V1 Page 1 of 1

GEOTESTA Pty Ltd
Particle Size Distribution Unit 6, 31-37 Howleys Road
Test Report Notting Hill , Vic 3168
Ph: 1300 852216
Report No L0365-G3 Project No NE004-16 Client ID -
Sample ID L0365-5 Location Lot 30 South Street Address Unit 1, 129 Magowar Rd
Borehole ID TP9@0.7m Marsden Park NSW 2765 Girraween, NSW
Sample Description CLAY, trace of sand/gravel, red brown mottled grey, moist
Sampling Method AS 1289.1.2.1 CL 6.2 - Stockpile
Moisture Content 19.6 % Limits % Method: AS 1289 2.1.1
Particle Size Distribution Method: AS 1289 3.6.1
Sieve % Passing Limits Percentage Passing (By Mass)
26.5 mm 100
19.0 mm 90
13.2 mm 100 80
9.5 mm 100 70
6.70 mm 100 60
4.75 mm 99 50
2.36 mm 94 40
1.18 mm 92 30
600 µm 92
20
425 µm 92
10
300 µm 91
0
150 µm 90
13.2 mm
26.5 mm
9.50 mm
4.75 mm
1.18 mm
2.36 mm
19.0 mm
600 μm
6.70 mm
150 μm
425 μm
300 μm
75 μm
75 µm 85
## ## ##
Comments
1. Test is performed with washed grading (washing method)
Accredited for compliance with Report issued by: Rene Kurniadi

ISO/IEC 17025
Date issued: 11/03/2016
The results of the tests included in
Australian and national standards.
Particle Size Distribution V3 Page 1 of 1
GEOTESTA Pty Ltd
Ph: 1300 852216
Sample Description CLAY, mottled grey and orange, moist

26.5 mm 100
19.0 mm 90
13.2 mm 100 80
9.5 mm 100 70
6.70 mm 100 60
4.75 mm 100 50
2.36 mm 100 40
1.18 mm 100 30
600 µm 99
20
425 µm 99
10
300 µm 99
0
150 µm 99
13.2 mm
26.5 mm
9.50 mm
4.75 mm
1.18 mm
2.36 mm
19.0 mm
600 μm
6.70 mm
150 μm
425 μm
300 μm
75 μm
75 µm 99
## ## ##
Comments

ISO/IEC 17025
GEOTESTA Pty Ltd
Ph: 1300 852216
Borehole ID BH2@1.5m Marsden Park NSW 2765 Girraween, NSW

26.5 mm 100
19.0 mm 90
13.2 mm 100 80
9.5 mm 100 70
6.70 mm 100 60
4.75 mm 100 50
2.36 mm 100 40
1.18 mm 100 30
600 µm 100
20
425 µm 100
10
300 µm 100
0
150 µm 100
13.2 mm
26.5 mm
9.50 mm
4.75 mm
1.18 mm
2.36 mm
19.0 mm
600 μm
6.70 mm
150 μm
425 μm
300 μm
75 μm
75 µm 99
## ## ##
Comments

ISO/IEC 17025
Atterberg Limits GEOTESTA Pty Ltd
Plasticity Index & Linear Shrinkage Unit 6, 31-37 Howleys Road
Ph: 1300 852216
Report No L0365-A3 Project No NE004-16 Client ID -
Sample Description CLAY, red brown mottled grey, moist

Results Notes
Liquid limit 66 % History of sample: Oven-dried
Plastic limit 21 % Method of preparation: Dry-sieved
Plasticity index 45 % Linear shrinkage: Curling
Linear shrinkage 16 % Length of mould: 250 mm
Comments
Test methods: AS 1289, 2.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.4.1

ISO/IEC 17025
Tests (LL PL PI LS) V4 Page 1 of 1
Ph: 1300 852216

Results Notes
Plasticity index 59 % Linear shrinkage: No Crack
Comments
Test methods: AS 1289, 2.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.4.1

ISO/IEC 17025
Ph: 1300 852216

Results Notes
Plasticity index 36 % Linear shrinkage: No Crack
Comments
Test methods: AS 1289, 2.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.4.1

ISO/IEC 17025
0 0.00 True
Environmental
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Work Order : ES1605727 Page : 1 of 4
Client : GEOTESTA Laboratory : Environmental Division Sydney
Contact : AMIR FARAZMAND Contact :
Address : UNIT 6, 31-37 HOWLEYS ROAD Address : 277-289 Woodpark Road Smithfield NSW Australia 2164
NOTTING HILL 3168
Telephone : +61 03 9562 8808 Telephone : +61-2-8784 8555
Project : South St Marsden Park Date Samples Received : 15-Mar-2016 09:40
Order number : ---- Date Analysis Commenced : 16-Mar-2016
C-O-C number : ---- Issue Date : 30-Mar-2016 09:30
Sampler : AMIR FARAZMAND
Site : ----
Quote number : ---- NATA Accredited Laboratory 825
No. of samples received : 7 Accredited for compliance with
ISO/IEC 17025.
No. of samples analysed :7
This report supersedes any previous report(s) with this reference. Results apply to the sample(s) as submitted.
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
Ashesh Patel Inorganic Chemist Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW

Celine Conceicao Senior Spectroscopist Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW
Edwandy Fadjar Organic Coordinator Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW
RIGHT SOLUTIONS | RIGHT PARTNER

Page : 2 of 4
Work Order : ES1605727
Client : GEOTESTA
Project : South St Marsden Park
General Comments
The analytical procedures used by the Environmental Division have been developed from established internationally recognized procedures such as those published by the USEPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In house
developed procedures are employed in the absence of documented standards or by 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.
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.
Page : 3 of 4
Client : GEOTESTA
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Client sample ID TP12 1.7M TP10 1.0M TP8 1.0M TP6 2.5M TP3 1.5M
(Matrix: SOIL)
Client sampling date / time [26-Feb-2016] [26-Feb-2016] [26-Feb-2016] [26-Feb-2016] [26-Feb-2016]
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit ES1605727-001 ES1605727-002 ES1605727-003 ES1605727-004 ES1605727-005
Result Result Result Result Result
EA002 : pH (Soils)
pH Value ---- 0.1 pH Unit 4.8 4.8 5.0 4.8 4.9
EA055: Moisture Content

Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) ---- 1 % 14.0 22.9 17.0 17.4 15.3
ED040S : Soluble Sulfate by ICPAES

Sulfate as SO4 2- 14808-79-8 10 mg/kg 350 240 240 380 530
Page : 4 of 4
Client : GEOTESTA
Analytical Results
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Client sample ID BH3 4.0M BH2 0.5M ---- ---- ----
(Matrix: SOIL)
Client sampling date / time [26-Feb-2016] [26-Feb-2016] ---- ---- ----
Compound CAS Number LOR Unit ES1605727-006 ES1605727-007 -------- -------- --------
Result Result Result Result Result
EA002 : pH (Soils)
pH Value ---- 0.1 pH Unit 6.9 4.9 ---- ---- ----

Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) ---- 1 % 8.7 16.2 ---- ---- ----

Sulfate as SO4 2- 14808-79-8 10 mg/kg 260 290 ---- ---- ----
True
Environmental
QA/QC Compliance Assessment to assist with Quality Review

Contact : AMIR FARAZMAND Telephone : +61-2-8784 8555
Project : South St Marsden Park Date Samples Received : 15-Mar-2016
Site : ---- Issue Date : 30-Mar-2016
Sampler : AMIR FARAZMAND No. of samples received :7
Order number : ---- No. of samples analysed :7
This report is automatically generated by the ALS LIMS through interpretation of the ALS Quality Control Report and several Quality Assurance parameters measured by ALS. This automated
reporting highlights any non-conformances, facilitates faster and more accurate data validation and is designed to assist internal expert and external Auditor review. Many components of this
report contribute to the overall DQO assessment and reporting for guideline compliance.
Brief method summaries and references are also provided to assist in traceability.
Summary of Outliers
Outliers : Quality Control Samples
This report highlights outliers flagged in the Quality Control (QC) Report.
l NO Method Blank value outliers occur.
l NO Duplicate outliers occur.
l NO Laboratory Control outliers occur.
l NO Matrix Spike outliers occur.
l For all regular sample matrices, NO surrogate recovery outliers occur.
Outliers : Analysis Holding Time Compliance

l Analysis Holding Time Outliers exist - please see following pages for full details.
Outliers : Frequency of Quality Control Samples

l Quality Control Sample Frequency Outliers exist - please see following pages for full details.

Page : 2 of 5
Client : GEOTESTA
Outliers : Analysis Holding Time Compliance

Matrix: SOIL
Method Extraction / Preparation Analysis
Container / Client Sample ID(s) Date extracted Due for extraction Days Date analysed Due for analysis Days
overdue overdue
EA002 : pH (Soils)
Snap Lock Bag
TP12 1.7M, TP10 1.0M, 18-Mar-2016 04-Mar-2016 14 ---- ---- ----
TP8 1.0M, TP6 2.5M,
TP3 1.5M, BH3 4.0M,
BH2 0.5M
Snap Lock Bag
TP6 2.5M ---- ---- ---- 16-Mar-2016 11-Mar-2016 5
Snap Lock Bag
TP12 1.7M, TP10 1.0M, ---- ---- ---- 17-Mar-2016 11-Mar-2016 6
TP8 1.0M, TP3 1.5M,
BH3 4.0M, BH2 0.5M
Outliers : Frequency of Quality Control Samples
Matrix: SOIL
Quality Control Sample Type Count Rate (%) Quality Control Specification
Method QC Regular Actual Expected
Laboratory Duplicates (DUP)
Moisture Content 4 41 9.76 10.00 NEPM 2013 B3 & ALS QC Standard
Analysis Holding Time Compliance

If samples are identified below as having been analysed or extracted outside of recommended holding times, this should be taken into consideration when interpreting results.
This report summarizes extraction / preparation and analysis times and compares each with ALS recommended holding times (referencing USEPA SW 846, APHA, AS and NEPM) based on the sample container
provided. Dates reported represent first date of extraction or analysis and preclude subsequent dilutions and reruns. A listing of breaches (if any) is provided herein.
Holding time for leachate methods (e.g. TCLP) vary according to the analytes reported. Assessment compares the leach date with the shortest analyte holding time for the equivalent soil method. These are: organics
14 days, mercury 28 days & other metals 180 days. A recorded breach does not guarantee a breach for all non-volatile parameters.
Holding times for VOC in soils vary according to analytes of interest. Vinyl Chloride and Styrene holding time is 7 days; others 14 days. A recorded breach does not guarantee a breach for all VOC analytes and
should be verified in case the reported breach is a false positive or Vinyl Chloride and Styrene are not key analytes of interest/concern.
Matrix: SOIL Evaluation: û = Holding time breach ; ü = Within holding time.
Method Sample Date Extraction / Preparation Analysis
Container / Client Sample ID(s) Date extracted Due for extraction Evaluation Date analysed Due for analysis Evaluation
EA002 : pH (Soils)
Snap Lock Bag (EA002)
04-Mar-2016 18-Mar-2016
TP12 1.7M, TP10 1.0M, 26-Feb-2016 18-Mar-2016 û 18-Mar-2016 ü
TP8 1.0M, TP6 2.5M,
TP3 1.5M, BH3 4.0M,
BH2 0.5M
Page : 3 of 5
Client : GEOTESTA
Matrix: SOIL Evaluation: û = Holding time breach ; ü = Within holding time.

Method Sample Date Extraction / Preparation Analysis
Container / Client Sample ID(s) Date extracted Due for extraction Evaluation Date analysed Due for analysis Evaluation

Snap Lock Bag (EA055-103)
---- ---- 11-Mar-2016
TP6 2.5M 26-Feb-2016 ---- 16-Mar-2016 û
Snap Lock Bag (EA055-103)
---- ---- 11-Mar-2016
TP12 1.7M, TP10 1.0M, 26-Feb-2016 ---- 17-Mar-2016 û
TP8 1.0M, TP3 1.5M,
BH3 4.0M, BH2 0.5M
Snap Lock Bag (ED040S)
25-Mar-2016 15-Apr-2016
TP12 1.7M, TP10 1.0M, 26-Feb-2016 18-Mar-2016 ü 18-Mar-2016 ü
TP8 1.0M, TP6 2.5M,
TP3 1.5M, BH3 4.0M,
BH2 0.5M
Page : 4 of 5
Client : GEOTESTA
Quality Control Parameter Frequency Compliance

The following report summarises the frequency of laboratory QC samples analysed within the analytical lot(s) in which the submitted sample(s) was(were) processed. Actual rate should be greater than or equal to
the expected rate. A listing of breaches is provided in the Summary of Outliers.
Matrix: SOIL Evaluation: û = Quality Control frequency not within specification ; ü = Quality Control frequency within specification.
Quality Control Sample Type Count Rate (%) Quality Control Specification
Analytical Methods Method QC Regular Actual Expected Evaluation
Laboratory Duplicates (DUP)

Major Anions - Soluble 1 7 NEPM 2013 B3 & ALS QC Standard
ED040S 14.29 10.00 ü
Moisture Content 4 41 NEPM 2013 B3 & ALS QC Standard
EA055-103 9.76 10.00 û
pH (1:5) 2 14 NEPM 2013 B3 & ALS QC Standard
EA002 14.29 10.00 ü
Laboratory Control Samples (LCS)
ED040S 14.29 5.00 ü
Method Blanks (MB)
ED040S 14.29 5.00 ü
Page : 5 of 5
Client : GEOTESTA
Brief Method Summaries

The analytical procedures used by the Environmental Division 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 in the
Certificate of Analysis. Sources from which ALS methods have been developed are provided within the Method Descriptions.
Analytical Methods Method Matrix Method Descriptions
pH (1:5) EA002 SOIL In house: Referenced to APHA 4500H+. pH is determined on soil samples after a 1:5 soil/water leach. This
method is compliant with NEPM (2013) Schedule B(3) (Method 103)
Moisture Content EA055-103 SOIL In house: A gravimetric procedure based on weight loss over a 12 hour drying period at 103-105 degrees C.
This method is compliant with NEPM (2013) Schedule B(3) Section 7.1 and Table 1 (14 day holding time).
Major Anions - Soluble ED040S SOIL In house: Soluble Anions are determined off a 1:5 soil / water extract by ICPAES.
Preparation Methods Method Matrix Method Descriptions
1:5 solid / water leach for soluble EN34 SOIL 10 g of soil is mixed with 50 mL of distilled water and tumbled end over end for 1 hour. Water soluble salts are
analytes leached from the soil by the continuous suspension. Samples are settled and the water filtered off for analysis.
Hot Block Digest for metals in soils EN69 SOIL In house: Referenced to USEPA 200.2. Hot Block Acid Digestion 1.0g of sample is heated with Nitric and
sediments and sludges Hydrochloric acids, then cooled. Peroxide is added and samples heated and cooled again before being filtered
and bulked to volume for analysis. Digest is appropriate for determination of selected metals in sludge,
sediments, and soils. This method is compliant with NEPM (2013) Schedule B(3) (Method 202)
Methanolic Extraction of Soils for Purge * ORG16 SOIL In house: Referenced to USEPA SW 846 - 5030A. 5g of solid is shaken with surrogate and 10mL methanol prior
and Trap to analysis by Purge and Trap - GC/MS.
Tumbler Extraction of Solids ORG17 SOIL In house: Mechanical agitation (tumbler). 10g of sample, Na2SO4 and surrogate are extracted with 30mL 1:1
DCM/Acetone by end over end tumble. The solvent is decanted, dehydrated and concentrated (by KD) to the
desired volume for analysis.
3.00 3
True
False
Environmental
QUALITY CONTROL REPORT

Contact : AMIR FARAZMAND Contact :
Address : UNIT 6, 31-37 HOWLEYS ROAD Address : 277-289 Woodpark Road Smithfield NSW Australia 2164
NOTTING HILL 3168
Telephone : +61 03 9562 8808 Telephone : +61-2-8784 8555
Project : South St Marsden Park Date Samples Received : 15-Mar-2016
Order number : ---- Date Analysis Commenced : 16-Mar-2016
C-O-C number : ---- Issue Date : 30-Mar-2016
Sampler : AMIR FARAZMAND
Site : ----
Quote number : ---- NATA Accredited Laboratory 825
No. of samples received : 7 Accredited for compliance with
ISO/IEC 17025.
No. of samples analysed :7
This report supersedes any previous report(s) with this reference. Results apply to the sample(s) as submitted.
This Quality Control Report contains the following information:
l Laboratory Duplicate (DUP) Report ; Relative Percentage Difference (RPD) and Acceptance Limits
l Method Blank (MB) and Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) Report ; Recovery and Acceptance Limits
l Matrix Spike (MS) Report ; Recovery and Acceptance Limits
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
Ashesh Patel Inorganic Chemist Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW

Celine Conceicao Senior Spectroscopist Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW
Edwandy Fadjar Organic Coordinator Sydney Inorganics, Smithfield, NSW

Page : 2 of 3
Client : GEOTESTA
General Comments
The analytical procedures used by the Environmental Division have been developed from established internationally recognized procedures such as those published by the USEPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In house
developed procedures are employed in the absence of documented standards or by 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 c
Key : Anonymous = Refers to samples which are not specifically part of this work order but formed part of the QC process lot
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
RPD = Relative Percentage Difference
# = Indicates failed QC
Laboratory Duplicate (DUP) Report
The quality control term Laboratory Duplicate refers to a randomly selected intralaboratory split. Laboratory duplicates provide information regarding method precision and sample heterogeneity. The permitted ranges
for the Relative Percent Deviation (RPD) of Laboratory Duplicates are specified in ALS Method QWI -EN/38 and are dependent on the magnitude of results in comparison to the level of reporting: Result < 10 times LOR:
No Limit; Result between 10 and 20 times LOR: 0% - 50%; Result > 20 times LOR: 0% - 20%.
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Laboratory Duplicate (DUP) Report
Laboratory sample ID Client sample ID Method: Compound CAS Number LOR Unit Original Result Duplicate Result RPD (%) Recovery Limits (%)
EA002 : pH (Soils) (QC Lot: 399022)
ES1605727-001 TP12 1.7M EA002: pH Value ---- 0.1 pH Unit 4.8 4.7 2.12 0% - 20%
ES1605783-001 Anonymous EA002: pH Value ---- 0.1 pH Unit 9.6 9.6 0.00 0% - 20%
EA055: Moisture Content (QC Lot: 396057)
ES1605770-002 Anonymous EA055-103: Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) ---- 1 % 10.5 9.4 10.4 0% - 50%
ES1605770-013 Anonymous EA055-103: Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) ---- 1 % 5.7 6.2 9.45 No Limit
EA055: Moisture Content (QC Lot: 397737)
ES1605682-003 Anonymous EA055-103: Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) ---- 1 % 17.5 17.9 2.25 0% - 50%
ES1605767-002 Anonymous EA055-103: Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) ---- 1 % 6.3 7.2 13.9 No Limit
ED040S: Soluble Major Anions (QC Lot: 399021)
ES1605727-001 TP12 1.7M ED040S: Sulfate as SO4 2- 14808-79-8 10 mg/kg 350 300 14.9 0% - 20%
Page : 3 of 3
Client : GEOTESTA
Method Blank (MB) and Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) Report

The quality control term Method / Laboratory Blank refers to an analyte free matrix to which all reagents are added in the same volumes or proportions as used in standard sample preparation. The purpose of this QC
parameter is to monitor potential laboratory contamination. The quality control term Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) refers to a certified reference material, or a known interference free matrix spiked with target
analytes. The purpose of this QC parameter is to monitor method precision and accuracy independent of sample matrix. Dynamic Recovery Limits are based on statistical evaluation of processed LCS.
Sub-Matrix: SOIL Method Blank (MB) Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) Report
Report Spike Spike Recovery (%) Recovery Limits (%)
Method: Compound CAS Number LOR Unit Result Concentration LCS Low High
ED040S: Soluble Major Anions (QCLot: 399021)

ED040S: Sulfate as SO4 2- 14808-79-8 10 mg/kg <10 150 mg/kg 85.7 80 120
Matrix Spike (MS) Report

The quality control term Matrix Spike (MS) refers to an intralaboratory split sample spiked with a representative set of target analytes. The purpose of this QC parameter is to monitor potential matrix effects on
analyte recoveries. Static Recovery Limits as per laboratory Data Quality Objectives (DQOs). Ideal recovery ranges stated may be waived in the event of sample matrix interference.
l No Matrix Spike (MS) or Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) Results are required to be reported.
APPENDIX C
CORE AND TEST PIT PHOTOS
20
Borehole 1 - 3.5m-10.0m
Borehole 2 – 4.9m-9.5m
21
Test pit 1
22
Test pit 2
23
Test pit 3
24
Test pit 4
25
Test pit 5
26
Test pit 6
27
Test pit 7
28
Test pit 8
29
Test pit 9
30
Test pit 10
31
Test pit 11
32
Test pit 12
33

Lot 30 South Street Geotechnical Report PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Lot 30 South Street Geotechnical Report PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

LOT 30, SOUTH STREET MARSDEN PARK

CLIENT : UNIVERSAL PROPERTY GROUP

REPORT No. : NE004-16 - Geotechnical Investigation

DATE : 04 April 2016

A geotechnical investigation was conducted by Geotesta for the proposed residential

Appendix A Test Pit and Borehole Logs

This report presents the geotechnical investigation results including subgrade

Figure 1: Site Plan and Borehole Locations

3.2 Site Geology

Figure 2: Geology Map of the Site

3.3 Soil Profile

The subsurface soil profile are detailed in the following table.

Table 1: Subsurface Soil Profile

TP1-TP12 0.0-0.05 Silty Sand Medium dense -

3.4 Site Classification

It must be emphasized that the heave mentioned and recommendations referred to in

3.5 Laboratory Test

Representative subgrade samples were sent to a Geotesta NATA accredited laboratory

Table 2: Summary of Laboratory Test Results

Table 3: Summary of Rock Laboratory Test Results

Point Load Is50 UCS

Table 4: Summary of Environmental Laboratory Test Results

Bore No. Depth (m) Soil Type pH SO4

TP03 1.5 CLAY 4.9 530

The proposed multi-level residential buildings can be founded on pad footings

4.1 Bored Pier Footing System

Bored piles can be used to support the proposed multi-level development. We

Table 6: Pile Design Parameter

5.3 Drainage of Retention Systems

As seepage infiltration from perched groundwater table is quite likely to be present in

5.4 Erosion and sediment control

 Establish a single entry/exit point when construction work starts

 A silt trap to be installed around the site perimeter during construction.

5.5 Open Cut Excavation

A suitable dewatering system (spears or sump pump) may be required to pump

5.6 Select Fill Material

5.7 Compaction Requirements

Compaction of both backfill material and embedment material is required to ensure

- 1 test per layer per material type per 2500 m2.

Testing of compaction density should be undertaken by a suitably qualified

5.8 Retaining Wall

Depth Soil/Rock Type Unit Su (kPa) c’ (kPa) Ф’ (deg)

5.9 Pavement Subgrade Preparation (Driveways and Car parks)

5.10 Construction Works

It is recommended that Geotesta be engaged to provide a site inspection during the

Information about This Report

Blows per 100 mm

2.00 grades very stiff VSt 2.00

consistency: moisture: notes: B: Bag sample for Acid Sulphate

soil classification: level risen to B bulk sample

Blows per 100 mm

grades very stiff VSt

consistency: moisture: notes: B: Bag sample for Acid Sulphate

soil classification: level risen to B bulk sample

Blows per 100 mm

CL CLAY, grey mottled orange M St

Test Pit Terminated at 2.6m

consistency: moisture: notes: B: Bag sample for Acid Sulphate

soil classification: level risen to B bulk sample

Blows per 100 mm

grades very stiff VSt

consistency: moisture: notes: B: Bag sample for Acid Sulphate