PN204159 Interpretative Report

OS License Number : 100020449

CEDEWAIN SPECIALISTALN SCHOOL

Interpretative Report

for

Powys County Council - SchoolServices

Engineer : Heart of Wales PropertyServices Limited

Project Number PN204159

January 2021

Ground

Investigation

www.geotechnics.co.uk

IssuingOffice

North West OfficeThe Geotechnical CentreUnit 1, Borders Industrial ParkRiver Lane, SaltneyChesterCH4 8RJTel: 01244 [email protected]

Head Office

The Geotechnical Centre

203 Torrington Avenue

Tile Hill

Coventry

CV4 9UT

Tel: 02476 694664

[email protected]

South West Office


Unit 5, Orchard Court

Heron Road, Sowton

Exeter

EX2 7NR

Tel: 01392 463110

[email protected]

North East Office


Unit 1, Bypass Park Estate

Sherburn-in-Elmet

Leeds

LS25 6EP

Tel: 01977 525030

[email protected]

Geotechnics Limited, Registered in England No. 1757790 at 203 Torrington Avenue, Tile Hill, Coventry CV4 9UT

Ground Investigationfor

Interpretative Report

CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALNSCHOOL

forPowys County Council - School Services

Engineer : Project No:

Heart of Wales Property Services Limited PN204159

January 2021

LIST OF CONTENTS

Page No

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

2.0 OBJECT AND SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION 1

3.0 PRESENTATION 1

4.0 THE SITE

4.1 Location 1

4.2 Description 2

5.0 PROCEDURE

5.1 Commissioning 2

5.2 General 2

5.3 Light Weight Deflectometer (LWD) Tests 2

5.4 Trial Pits 2

5.5 Soakaway Tests 3

5.6 Cable Percussion Boreholes 3

5.7 Dynamic Sample Boreholes 3

5.8 Photo-ionisation Detector (PID) Tests 3

5.9 Instrumentation and Monitoring 3

6.0 LABORATORY TESTING

6.1 Geotechnical 4

6.2 BRE SD1 Test Suites 5

6.3 Chemical/Contamination 5

7.0 DESK STUDY

7.1 General 6

7.2 Geology 6

7.3 Site History 6

7.4 Hydrology 6

7.5 Hydrogeology 6

7.6 Environmental Issues 6

8.0 INTERPRETATION

8.1 Ground Conditions and Soil Parameters 7

8.2 Groundwater 10

CO

NT

EN

TS

9.0 EVALUATION

9.1 Proposals 10

9.2 Foundation Design Principles 11

9.3 Earthworks 11

9.4 Foundations Solutions 12

9.5 Ground Floor Slabs 13

9.6 Excavation 13

9.7 Chemical Attack on Buried Concrete 14

9.8 Pavement Design 14

9.9 Soakaway Design 15

10.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

10.1 Legal Framework 15

10.2 Proposed Site Use 15

10.3 Conceptual Model 16

10.4 Visual and Olfactory Evidence of Contamination 16

10.5 Soil Testing 16

10.6 Soil Contamination Results and Screening 17

10.7 Leachate Contamination Results and Screening 18

10.8 Aggressive Ground 18

10.9 Gas Results Summary 18

10.10 Groundwater Contamination Results and Screening 20

10.11 Risk Assessment 20

10.12 Conclusions and Recommendations 21

CO

NT

EN

TS

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1 Site Location Plan

APPENDIX 2 Lightweight Deflectometer (LWD) Test Records

APPENDIX 3 Trial Pit Records

APPENDIX 4 Trial Pit Photographs

APPENDIX 5 Soakaway Test Results

APPENDIX 6 Cable Percussion Borehole Records,

SPT Results Summary Sheets and

SPT Hammer Energy Test Report

APPENDIX 7 Dynamic Sample Borehole Records,



APPENDIX 8 Monitoring Results

APPENDIX 9 Laboratory Test Results - Geotechnical

APPENDIX 10 Laboratory Test Results - Chemical/Contamination (Soil)

APPENDIX 11 Laboratory Test Results - Chemical/Contamination (Groundwater)

APPENDIX 12 Laboratory Test Results - Gas Sampling

APPENDIX 13 SPT N-Value and Undrained Shear Strength versus Depth and Elevation Plots

APPENDIX 14 Generic Assessment Criteria (GAC)

APPENDIX 15 Proposed Site Layout Plan

APPENDIX 16 Exploratory Hole Location Plan

APPENDIX 17 Investigation Techniques and General Notes

APPENDIX 18 Environmental Notes - Context and Methodology for Assessment

AP

PE

ND

ICE

S

Form REP004 Cedewain Specialist ALN School

Rev 4.1 Factual and Interpretative Report, Project No PN204159, January 2021.

Page 1 of 21

1.0 INTRODUCTION

In October 2019, a Phase 1 Geo-environmental Desk

Study was undertaken by Geotechnics Limited

relating to proposed developments of the existing

Maesyrhandir CP School and Ysgol Cedewain off

Plantation Lane in Newtown, Powys, LD1 6AW. The

findings of the Phase 1 Geo-environmental Desk

Study are presented in a report issued on

18th October 2019 under Geotechnics Limited’s

Project No. PN183917.

Following on from the Phase 1 Geo-environmental

Desk Study, a Phase 2 Geo-environmental Intrusive

Ground Investigation was carried out on the

Cedewain School (Ysgol Cedewain) site.

The Phase 1 Geo-environmental Desk Study and

subsequent Phase 2 Geo-environmental Intrusive

Ground Investigation were carried out to the

instructions of the Engineer, Heart of Wales Property

Services Limited, on behalf of the Client, Powys

County Council - School Services. This report

describes the work undertaken and presents the data

obtained during the Phase 2 Geo-environmental

Intrusive Ground Investigation.

2.0 OBJECT AND SCOPE OF

THE INVESTIGATION

The object of the investigation was to ascertain the

nature and extent of the potential sources of

contamination identified in the Phase 1 Geo-

environmental Desk Study. A further object of the

investigation was to obtain additional information on

the ground and groundwater conditions relating to

the design of the proposed works within the

limitations posed by trial hole numbers, locations,

depths, methods adopted and the scope of approved

in situ and laboratory testing.

The investigation comprised trial pits, cable

percussion boreholes, dynamic sample boreholes, in

situ and laboratory testing and reporting. A

geotechnical and geo-environmental interpretation

and evaluation of the data obtained was also

commissioned.

3.0 PRESENTATION

A description of the site and a summary of the

procedures followed during the investigation process

are presented in Sections 4 to 6. The factual data so

obtained are presented in Appendices 2 to 15 of this

report.

A Phase 1 Geo-environmental Desk Study to seek

information which may already exist about the site, its

history, geology and ground conditions has previously

been carried out by Geotechnics Limited and the

findings are summarised in Section 7 of this report. It

is recommended that the Phase 1 Geo-environmental

Desk Study Report is read in conjunction with this

Phase 2 Geo-environmental Intrusive Ground

Investigation Report in order to obtain a full

understanding of all of the information obtained

relating to the site.

An interpretation of the data obtained is presented in

Section 8 and a geotechnical evaluation of its

significance in relation to proposals available at the

time of preparation of this report in Section 9. An

environmental assessment is presented in Section 10.

Attention is drawn to the General Notes and

Investigation Procedures presented in Appendix 17.

to aid an understanding of the procedures followed

and the context in which the report should be read.

Supplementary Environmental Notes are presented in

Appendix 18.

4.0 THE SITE

4.1 Location

The site comprises the existing Cedewain School,

located off Plantation Lane, within the district of

Maesyrhandir in Newtown, Powys. The approximate

Ordnance Survey National Grid Reference for the

Ground Investigation Interpretative Report

for

CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST Project No: PN204159

ALN SCHOOL January 2021



Page 2 of 21

centre of the site is SO 099 903 and an extract from

the relevant 1:50,000 Scale O.S. Map (Sheet No. 136)

is included as Appendix 1.

4.2 Description

The site is irregular in shape, with maximum

dimensions of approximately 280m from east to west,

and 160m from north to south.

The eastern half of the site comprises the Cedewain

School, which consists of a brick-built single storey

main school building with UPVC entrance porch. The

ground levels around parts of the building are higher,

resulting in some cut-slopes (roughly 1m high) around

the edges of the structure. A tarmac-surfaced access

road leads to a car park in front of the main building.

The remainder of the site is mainly occupied by a

series of single storey texture-coated and some

timber lap clad pre-fab classrooms with timber access

ramps and staircases. Some of the pre-fab classrooms

face onto tarmac playing areas and others are

connected by tarmac footpaths. To the south of the

school buildings lies a large open grass field, gently

sloping to the northwest. The school is bounded by

fencing on all sides.

The western half of the site comprises a publicly

accessible playing field immediately adjoining the

school grounds.

The site is surrounded to the north and east by

residential estates, and by industrial and commercial

properties to the south and west.

5.0 PROCEDURE

5.1 Commissioning

The work was awarded following submission of a

proposal for ground investigation of the site in

accordance with the Client’s requirements and the

recommendations of the Phase 1 Geo-environmental

Desk Study.

5.2 General

The procedures followed in this site investigation are

based on BS 5930:2015 – Code of Practice for Site

Investigations and BS 10175:2011+A2:2017 -

Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites. The soils

and rocks encountered have been described in

accordance with BS5930:2015 and BS EN ISO 14688-

1:2018 and BS EN ISO 14689:2018.

The Exploratory Hole locations were selected by

Geotechnics Limited and their positions are shown on

the Exploratory Hole Location Plan in Appendix 16.

The co-ordinates and levels shown on the

Exploratory Hole Records were measured using a

Leica Smart Rover GPS survey device. The depths

quoted on the exploratory hole records are in metres

below ground level.

At each exploratory hole location with the exception

of the trial pits an inspection pit was excavated using

hand tools to a depth of 1.20m below ground level to

check for the presence of underground services. Prior

to and on completion of the excavation, the location

was scanned using a cable avoidance tool (CAT).

5.3 Light Weight Deflectometer

(LWD) Tests

Eight (8 No.) in situ lightweight deflectometer (LWD)

tests were carried out at the locations marked on the

Exploratory Hole Location Plan (see Appendix 16)

and numbered LWD1 to LWD8. The tests were each

carried out at a depth of 0.50m below ground level.

The testing was carried out on 30th October 2020.

The tests were carried out using a Prima 100

lightweight deflectometer in accordance with Interim

Advice Note 73/06 Revision 1 (2009). From these

tests a measurement of the Surface Modulus was

obtained from which an estimate of the California

Bearing Ratio was derived.

The LWD results are presented in Appendix 2.

5.4 Trial Pits

Two (2 No.) Trial Pits were excavated to depths of

3.00m (TP1) and 3.50m (TP2) below ground level

using a 6 tonne tracked excavator on 28th and

29th October 2020. This work was supervised on site

by a geotechnical / geo-environmental engineer.

The profiles of strata or other features were

recorded as excavation proceeded and

measurements taken from ground level.

Representative samples were taken, where

appropriate, for laboratory examination and analysis

and in addition, environmental soil samples (ES) were

recovered at the depths indicated on the Trial Pit

Records. Samples were taken directly from excavated

materials deposited at the surface. Groundwater

observations and trench stability notes are included

on the Trial Pit Records, presented in Appendix 3.

Photographs of the pits are presented in Appendix 4.



Page 3 of 21

5.5 Soakaway Tests

Three (3 No.) soakaway tests were carried out in

Trial Pits TP1 and TP2 at depths of between 0.26m

and 3.50m below ground level in accordance with the

method given in BRE Digest 365 “Soakaway Design”,

2016. The Digest requires the test to be repeated

three times at each location, however, due to the

slow soakage of the water from the test pits it was

only possible to carry out two tests in Trial Pit TP1

and a single test in Trial Pit TP2. Due to the location

of the Trial Pits within publicly accessible land, it was

not possible to continue the tests overnight. The

results of the tests are presented in Appendix 5.

5.6 Cable Percussion Boreholes

Five (5 No.) 150mm diameter boreholes (numbered

BH1 to BH5) were sunk by Cable Percussion Tool

techniques to depths ranging between 5.50m and

8.00m below ground level. The work was carried out

between 26th and 29th October 2020.

Representative disturbed (D and B) and driven open-

tube thin-walled (UT) samples of the soils

encountered were obtained at regular intervals.

Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were undertaken

at the depths indicated on the borehole records in

accordance with BS EN ISO 22476-3:2005+A1:2011

to obtain a measure of the engineering properties of

the proved strata. In addition, environmental soil

samples (ES) were recovered at the depths indicated

on the Cable Percussion Borehole Records,

presented in Appendix 6, together with the SPT

Results Summary sheets and the SPT Hammer Energy

Test Report.

No groundwater was encountered during the drilling

operations. It should be noted that the addition of

water to the borehole as part of the drilling process

may have masked the presence of groundwater in the

borehole. Where water was added it has been noted

on the Borehole Records.

On completion, standpipes were installed in each of

the boreholes (see Section 5.9).

5.7 Dynamic Sample Boreholes

Fifteen (15 No.) Dynamic Sample Boreholes

(numbered WS1 to WS15) were undertaken at the

site to depths ranging between 2.43m and 5.45m

below ground level. The work was carried out

between 26th and 30th October 2020.

The Dynamic Samples were taken using the super-

heavy Dynamic Probe apparatus which drives lined

steel tubes into the ground in 1m lengths. Samples

were retrieved in the plastic liners. The retrieved

liners were split and the recovered soils described

before being sub-sampled into ES, D and B samples as

shown on the Dynamic Sample Borehole Records,

presented in Appendix 7, together with the SPT

Results Summary sheets and the SPT Hammer Energy

Test Report. The holes were not cased and progress

depended on the nature of the strata penetrated.

Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were undertaken

at the depths indicated on the borehole records in

accordance with BS EN ISO 22476-3:2005+A1:2011

to obtain a measure of the engineering properties of

the proved strata.

Groundwater observations are included on the

Dynamic Sample Borehole Records where

appropriate and any rise in water level was recorded

over twenty minutes whilst drilling operations were

suspended.

On completion, standpipes were installed in Dynamic

Sample Boreholes WS6, WS7, WS9 and WS12 (see

Section 5.9). The remaining boreholes were backfilled

with bentonite pellets and reinstated with arisings.

5.8 Photo-ionisation Detector

(PID) Tests

Headspace testing of the Environmental Soil samples

taken from the exploratory holes was carried out

using a suitably calibrated ION Tiger hand-held

Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) detector (PID)

Monitor fitted with a 10.6eV UV lamp. The results of

the PID tests are presented on the exploratory hole

records with the concentrations of VOCs recorded

in parts per million.

5.9 Instrumentation and

Monitoring

Long-term monitoring of the gas and groundwater

levels was made possible by the installation of

standpipes as follows:

Exploratory

Hole

Standpipe

Slotted Pipe & Filter Zone

(m)

BH1 2.60 to 5.45

BH2 1.00 to 2.70

BH3 1.00 to 6.00

BH4 1.00 to 7.90

BH5 2.00 to 6.60



Page 4 of 21

Exploratory

Hole

Standpipe

Slotted Pipe & Filter Zone

(m)

WS6 1.00 to 5.00

WS7 0.30 to 0.80

WS9 0.70 to 1.70

WS12 0.30 to 0.80

Monitoring of the gas and groundwater levels at the

site commenced on 5th November 2020 with further

visits on 18th November and 3rd December 2020.

On each of the monitoring visits a record of the

groundwater level in the standpipes was obtained.

On 3rd December 2020, where water was recorded,

samples were obtained (where possible) following

purging of water in the standpipes. The following

parameters were recorded using a multi-parameter

flow cell during low-flow purging which continued

until such time as the parameters reached a steady

level.

Temperature (°C)

Electrical Conductivity (mS/cm)

pH

Redox Potential (mV)

Dissolved Oxygen Concentration (%)

In addition to the groundwater levels, the following

parameters were measured and recorded in each

standpipe using a Geotechnical Instruments Limited

GA5000 Gas Analyser:

Concentrations (% Vol) of CH4, O2, CO2,

along with (ppm) H2S, CO

Flow Rate

Barometric Pressure

The results of the monitoring are presented in

Appendix 8.

6.0 LABORATORY TESTING

6.1 Geotechnical

The laboratory testing schedule was formulated by

Geotechnics Limited. Unless otherwise stated, the

tests were carried out in Geotechnics Limited's UKAS

accredited Laboratory (Testing No. 1365) and were

undertaken in accordance with the appropriate

Standards as indicated below and on the Laboratory

Test Certificate in Appendix 9. Any descriptions,

opinions and interpretations are outside the scope of

UKAS accreditation.

The tests undertaken can be summarised as follows:

BS EN ISO 17892-1:2014

22 No. Water Content Determination

BS EN ISO 17892-2:2014

1 No. Bulk Density Determination

BS EN ISO 17892-4:2016

5 No. Particle Size Distribution

Determination – Sieving

Method

5 No. Particle Size Distribution

Determination – Pipette

Method

BS EN ISO 17892-5:2017

4 No. Incremental Loading

Oedometer Test

BS EN ISO 17892-8:2018

2 No. Unconsolidated Undrained

Triaxial Test

BS EN ISO 17892-12:2018

12 No. Determination of Liquid and

Plastic Limits

BS 1377:1990

Test No. Test Description

Part 4

3.3 2 No. Dry Density/Moisture Content

relationship determination.

Compaction Test - British

Standard (2.5 kg Hammer)

7.2 2 No. California Bearing Ratio (CBR)

Measurement

- recompacted

Part 7

3 1 No. Shear Strength by Laboratory

Vane



Page 5 of 21

The following testing was carried out at the

laboratories of Professional Soils Laboratory Limited

(UKAS Accredited Laboratory, Number 4043).

BS 1377 :1990

Test No. Test Description

Part 6

6 1 No. Permeability in a Triaxial Cell.

6.2 BRE SD1 Test Suites

The following testing was carried out at the

laboratories of Derwentside Environmental Testing

Services Limited (UKAS Accredited Laboratory,

Number 2139).

BRE Special Digest 1 Suite

10 No. Suites comprising:

pH

Soluble Sulphate

Acid Soluble Sulphate

Total Sulphur

The results of these BRE SD1 tests are presented in

Appendix 10.

6.3 Chemical/Contamination

Selected samples of soil, leachate, groundwater and

gas were tested at the laboratories of Derwentside

Environmental Testing Services Limited (UKAS

Accredited Laboratory, Number 2139) for a number

of determinands in order to check on potential site

contamination. The determinands were selected by

Geotechnics Limited and are detailed below and on

the results sheets together with the test method,

accreditation and detection limit. The results of the

soil and leachate testing are presented in

Appendix 10, whilst the groundwater testing results

are presented in Appendix 11 and the gas results are

presented in Appendix 12.

Soil and Leachate

Soil samples were tested for the following

determinands:

Arsenic

Boron (Water Soluble)

Cadmium

Chromium

Chromium (Hexavalent)

Copper

Lead

Mercury

Nickel

Selenium

Zinc

Cyanide

pH

Sulphate (Water Soluble)

MTBE

Organic Matter

Phenols (Monohydric)

Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (Speciated)

Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Speciated)

Asbestos Screen

Groundwater

Groundwater samples taken from the standpipes

were tested for the following determinands:

Arsenic

Boron

Cadmium

Total Chromium

Chromium (Hexavalent)

Copper

Lead

Mercury

Nickel

Zinc

Cyanide

pH

Sulphate (Water Soluble)

MTBE

Phenols

Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (Speciated)

Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Speciated)

The results are presented in Appendix 11.

Gases

The gas samples taken from the standpipes were

tested for the following determinands:

Carbon Dioxide

Carbon Monoxide

Hydrogen

Methane

Nitrogen

Oxygen

Ethane

Propane

Butane

Pentane

Hexane

Heptane

Ethene

Hydrogen Sulphide

The results are tabulated in Appendix 12.



Page 6 of 21

7.0 DESK STUDY

7.1 General

A Phase 1 Geo-environmental Desk Study has

previously been undertaken by Geotechnics Limited

and its findings were presented in a report issued on

18th October 2019 under Geotechnics Limited’s

Project No. PN183917. An Envirocheck Report was

obtained as part of the desk study.

A summary of the findings is given in the following

sub-sections. Maps and memoirs published by the

British Geological Survey (BGS) have also been

consulted in relation to the site geology.

7.2 Geology

Reference has been made to the 1:50,000 scale British

Geological Survey Solid and Drift Maps (Sheet 165 -

Montgomery), dated 1994, and to the

BGS Geology of Britain Viewer,

http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html.

These show that the site is underlain by the following

sequence:

Superficial Deposits

Drift cover on the site is noted as being Alluvial Fan

Deposits, of Quaternary age. The alluvial deposits are

associated with the River Severn which lies

approximately 550m northwest of the site at its

closest point. Immediately to the east of the site,

Devensian Till is shown to be present, whilst

unclassified Sediment is shown to the northeast of the

site.

Made Ground is not recorded on or adjacent to the

site on the geological records consulted, however

Made Ground is expected in some areas of the site

associated with the construction of the existing

school.

Solid Geology

The underlying bedrock shown beneath the majority

of the site comprises the Nantglyn Flags Formation,

of Silurian age. No description is recorded for these

rocks.

The southwest portion of the site, within the playing

field, is shown to be underlain by rocks of the Dingle

Mudstone Member, part of the Bailey Hill Formation,

of Silurian age. The rocks are described as mudstone,

homogeneous, medium-grey with common thin (<5cm)

fine-grained sandstone layers. Commonly parallel

laminated.

Immediately adjacent to the south-eastern border of

the site, a northeast-southwest trending fault is

shown. The fault is shown to have an axial plane trace

of an anticline.

7.3 Site History

The earliest map is the 1884-85 1:10,000 map which

shows the site as a plantation (largely undeveloped

fields). Most of the site area has been developed since

that time principally with the construction of former

farm buildings, two schools with playgrounds, access

roads and playing fields.

Subsequent changes, both on site and in the

surrounding area, are detailed in the desk study

report.

7.4 Hydrology

The nearest surface water feature is a drainage ditch

located approximately 101m southwest of the site.

There are no licenced surface water abstractions

within 500m of the site.

7.5 Hydrogeology

The BGS GeoIndex website,

http://mapapps2.bgs.ac.uk/geoindex/home.html,

shows that the superficial deposits beneath the site

are classified as a Secondary (undifferentiated)

Aquifer. The underlying bedrock is classified as a

Secondary B Aquifer.

The Envirocheck groundwater vulnerability map

indicates that the aquifer underlying the site is Variably

Permeable.

The site is not located within a designated

Groundwater Source Protection Zone.

7.6 Environmental Issues

Pertinent environmental features identified by the

Envirocheck report are listed below:

There is a single BGS Recorded Mineral Site

recorded approximately 182m northeast of

the site, referred to as Park House. The site

is recorded as an opencast site for extraction

of common clay and shale.

There is a single discharge consent for Lilac

Cottage, Nantoer, approximately 428m west

of the site. The consent concerns the

discharge of sewage effluent, and was issued



Page 7 of 21

in 1976. The current status of the consent is

not supplied.

There is a single discharge consent for

Castell-Y-Dail, Newtown, approximately

485m southwest of the site, operated by

Powys County Council. The consent

concerns the discharge of sewage effluent,

and was issued in 1978. The current status

of the consent is not supplied.

There are three (3 No.) recorded Integrated

and Local Authority Pollution Prevention

Controls. These are located approximately

230m southwest of the site and relate to

Laura Ashley Limited.

There is a single Historic Landfill site,

recorded roughly 13m to the northeast of

the site. The site was operated by Newtown

Rural District Council and received Inert,

Industrial, Commercial, Household and Special

Waste. The site was first recorded in 1941

and the last input was recorded in 1975.

There is a single Local Authority Recorded

Landfill Site recorded approximately 44m

northeast of the site on Plantation Lane.

There is a single record of Potentially Infilled

Land (Non-Water), recorded 22m northeast

of the site, referred to as Unknown Filled

Ground (Pit, quarry etc).

There is a single Potentially Infilled Land

(Water) entry recorded on the site.

There are five (5 No.) Potentially Infilled

Land (Water) entries recorded within 250m

of the site.

8.0 INTERPRETATION

8.1 Ground Conditions and Soil

Parameters

On the basis of the expected geology discussed in

Section 7 and the findings of the exploratory holes it

has been possible to classify the various strata proved

in the investigation into the following divisions:

Topsoil

Made Ground

Alluvial Fan Deposits

Glacial Till

Bedrock

The ground profile exposed in the exploratory holes

represents the conditions at discrete locations. The

degree to which they represent conditions between

or beyond the exploratory holes is a matter for

conjecture and these can only be interpolated and

hence, the uncertainties arising from this should be

recognised.

Profiles of SPT N-value and undrained shear strength

derived from undrained triaxial strength test results

and from SPT results against depth and elevation are

presented in Appendix 13.

8.1.1 Topsoil

In all of the exploratory holes except WS7, WS8 and

WS12, a surface layer of Topsoil was encountered,

ranging in thickness between 0.15m and 1.00m. The

Topsoil predominantly comprised soft brown to dark

brown slightly sandy to sandy slightly gravelly clay with

rootlets. In WS9, the consistency of the Topsoil was

soft to firm, and friable.

In BH5, the Topsoil comprised brown slightly gravelly

slightly silty fine to medium sand.

In TP1, the Topsoil was described as brown sandy

clayey subangular fine to coarse gravel with some rootlets.

In TP2, the Topsoil comprised soft to firm sandy silt

with rootlets.

8.1.2 Made Ground

At Dynamic Sample locations WS7, WS8 and WS12,

Made Ground was present at ground level, with a

thickness of 0.10m. The Made Ground comprised

black tarmacadam. In WS7 and WS12, the

tarmacadam was underlain by a sub-base layer of

brown and grey, locally greenish grey, slightly sandy to

sandy slightly silty angular to subangular fine to coarse

gravel of limestone and dolerite. A low cobble content

was noted between 0.40m and 0.60m depth in WS7.

In WS8, the tarmacadam was underlain by orangish

brown gravelly slightly silty fine to coarse sand with a

medium cobble content, extending from a depth of

0.10m to 0.60m below ground level.

At exploratory holes WS9 to WS11, Made Ground

was present below the surficial Topsoil and

tarmacadam. In WS9 and WS11, the Made Ground

comprised light brown to dark brown slightly sandy to

sandy gravelly clay with a medium cobble content. In

WS9, the Made Ground was firm to stiff, and friable,

whilst the soil was soft to firm in WS11. The gravel

and cobbles comprised mudstone, siltstone,

sandstone, limestone, coal, concrete, tarmacadam and

brick fragments.



Page 8 of 21

In WS10, the Made Ground comprised a layer of black

tarmacadam beneath the Topsoil at a depth of 0.20-

0.40m below ground level.

8.1.3 Alluvial Fan Deposits

In Borehole BH4, the Topsoil is underlain by Alluvial

Fan Deposits comprising loose brown slightly gravelly

silty fine sand. The Alluvial Fan Deposits extend from

a depth of 1.00m to 1.65m below ground level.

A single water content test was undertaken in the

Alluvial Fan Deposits, with a result of 16.5%.

A single SPT was carried out within the Alluvial Fan

Deposits, in BH4 from a depth of 1.20m below ground

level. The recorded N-value of the test was 9,

indicating a loose relative density.

8.1.4 Glacial Till

The Made Ground and Topsoil were underlain in all

exploratory holes, except BH4, by Glacial Till. The

Glacial Till was encountered at depths ranging

between 0.15m and 1.80m below ground level, with a

thickness of up to 6.90m. In BH4, the Glacial Till was

encountered beneath the Alluvial Fan Deposits.

The Glacial Till encountered was highly variable in

composition, predominantly comprising clay strata,

with some gravel strata noted at greater depths in

TP1, WS6, WS7, WS8, and WS10-WS14.

The clay strata generally comprised light brown, brown,

yellowish brown and greyish brown, locally mottled grey

and orange, slightly sandy to sandy slightly gravelly to

gravelly, locally very gravelly, clay. The strata locally graded

to non-plastic clayey silt. A low cobble content of

siltstone and sandstone was locally noted.

The consistency of the clay strata ranged from soft to

very stiff between the exploratory holes, and was

locally friable.

The gravel strata were encountered at depths ranging

between 1.40m and 3.60m below ground level. The

strata comprised light to dark brown, grey and greyish

brown sandy to very sandy slightly silty or clayey angular

to subrounded fine to coarse gravel of mudstone, siltstone,

sandstone, quartzite and limestone. A low cobble

content was noted locally.

Water content tests carried out on the Glacial Till

produced values of between 5.4% and 32.2%, where

it typically comprises clay. However, where the

Glacial Till consists of gravel the recorded water

contents were 14.1% and 15.2%.

Twelve (12 No.) Plasticity Index tests have been

undertaken on disturbed samples within the Glacial

Till. Using the Plasticity Index test results, the

Consistency Index (Ic) has been calculated (see the

following table).

Borehole Depth

(m bgl)

ω

(%)

IP

(%)

IC

BH1 1.65 25.19 15 0.99

BH2 1.20-1.65 21.13 11 0.81

BH3 1.60 20.12 13 1.14

BH3 3.00-3.45 7 14 1.64

BH4 3.00-3.45 7.36 13 1.74

BH5 1.20-1.65 28.17 17 0.87

BH5 2.50 16.2 NP -

TP1 1.00-1.40 10.3 25 1.51

TP2 0.80-1.20 32.16 22 0.72

WS5 4.00-4.45 7.76 NP -

WS6 3.80-4.00 8.07 10 1.89

WS7 2.00-2.80 14.1 NP -

The results indicate that, of the plastic soil samples,

five (5 No.) samples are classed as clay of intermediate

plasticity, whilst the remainder are of low plasticity.

The Consistency Index (IC) values generally suggest

stiff to very stiff consistency, although the Consistency

Index from TP2 at 0.80m depth suggests a firm

consistency.

A single laboratory shear vane test was carried out

with the Glacial Till, reporting an undrained shear

strength of 38 kN/m2, indicating low strength.

Two (2 No.) unconsolidated undrained triaxial

strength tests were carried out on undisturbed

samples recovered from within the Glacial Till and the

results are tabulated below:

Bore-

hole

Depth

(m bgl)

ω

(%)

Bulk

Density

(ρ)

(Mg/m3)

Undrained

Shear

Strength

(cu)

(kN/m2)

BH2 2.00-

2.45

12.23 1.99 89

BH4 2.00-

2.45

20.27 2.23 87

A total of four (4 No.) consolidation tests have been

undertaken on undisturbed samples recovered within

the Glacial Till and the results are tabulated below:



Page 9 of 21

Bore-

hole

Depth

(m bgl)

mv (m2/MN)

BH1 2.00-2.45

40-80

kN/m2

80-160

kN/m2

160-320

kN/m2

0.24 0.17 0.10

BH3 2.00-2.45

40-80

kN/m2

80-160

kN/m2

160-320

kN/m2

0.20 0.14 0.09

BH4 2.00-2.45

40-80

kN/m2

80-160

kN/m2

160-320

kN/m2

0.16 0.10 0.06

BH5 2.00-2.45

40-80

kN/m2

80-160

kN/m2

160-320

kN/m2

0.14 0.10 0.06

Two (2 No.) Compaction Tests were carried out on

the cohesive Glacial Till and the results are shown

below.

Borehole

(depth - m)

Maximum

Dry

Density

(Mg/m3)

Optimum

Moisture

Content

(%)

Natural

Moisture

Content

(%)

WS4

2.00-2.80

1.95 10.5 13.2

WS5

1.30-1.80

1.74 16.0 25.7

Two CBR tests were also carried out within the

cohesive Glacial Till and the results are shown below.

Borehole Depth

(m bgl)

CBR at

Natural

Moisture

Content (ω)

(%)

Dry

Density

(Mg/m3)

TP2 2.90-3.50 1.7 (14.4) 1.91

WS5 4.00-5.00 28 (7.9) 2.06

A single Triaxial Permeability Test carried out within

the Glacial Till produced a vertical permeability (Kv)

of 9.8 x 10-11ms-1, with a dry density of 1.47Mg/m3

Five (5 No.) Particle Size Distribution Tests were

carried out on samples of granular Glacial Till as part

of the investigation. The following distributions were

noted:

Gravel 23 – 71 %

Sand 12 – 25 %

Silt 10 – 51 %

Clay 2 – 14 %

A total of sixty-six (66 No.) SPTs were carried out

within the Glacial Till clay strata, of which fifty-six (56

No.) achieved full penetration.

The following empirical relationship:

cu = N x 5, as appropriate for PI = 25%

(after Stroud, 1975)

can be used to tentatively correlate values of

undrained shear strength (cu) with SPT N-values:

Borehole Depth

(m

bgl)

SPT N-

value

cu

(kN/m2)

Undrained

Shear Strength

classification

BH1 1.20 8 40 Low to Medium

BH1 3.00 40 200 Very High

BH1 4.00 44 220

BH2 1.20 8 40 Low to Medium


BH3 1.20 7 35 Low

BH3 3.00 40 200

Very High BH4 3.00 37 185

BH4 5.00 44 220

BH5 1.20 9 45 Medium


BH5 5.00 44 220

WS1 1.20 18 90

High WS1 2.00 28 140

WS1 3.00 27 135

WS2 1.20 14 45 Medium

WS2 2.00 20 40 Low to Medium

WS2 3.00 22 60 Medium

WS2 4.00 16 135 High

WS2 5.00 15 80

WS3 1.20 10 70 Medium

WS3 2.00 39 80

High WS3 3.00 42 145

WS4 1.20 13 125

WS4 2.00 17 130

WS4 3.00 27 65 Medium

WS4 4.00 33 115 High

WS4 5.00 38 170 Very High

WS5 1.20 10 70 Medium

WS5 2.00 18 100

High WS5 3.00 38 110

WS5 4.00 42 80

WS5 5.00 26 75 Medium to High

WS6 4.00 14 50 Medium


WS7 1.20 10 210

WS8 1.20 13 65 Medium

WS8 2.00 14 85 High

WS9 1.20 26 135


WS10 2.00 8 190

WS11 1.20 12 50 Medium

WS11 2.00 27 90 High

WS12 1.20 16 190 Very High

WS12 2.00 14 210

WS12 3.00 16 130 High

WS13 1.20 29 45 Medium

WS13 2.00 25 85 High

WS13 3.00 26 140

WS14 1.20 13 70 Medium

WS14 2.00 23 75 Medium to High

WS15 1.20 34 50 Medium

A total of fourteen (14 No.) SPTs were carried out

within the Glacial Till gravel strata. The results are

tabulated below, including estimated friction angles

(φ’), estimated using the relationship proposed by

Peck et al. (1967):



Page 10 of 21

Borehole Depth

(m bgl)

SPT

N φ’ Density

WS6 1.20 9 30 Loose

WS6 2.00 17 33 Medium Dense

WS7 2.00 18 33


WS7 4.00 50

/295mm - Very Dense

WS8 3.00 40 39 Dense

WS8 4.00 50

/280mm - Very Dense


WS10 4.00 35 37

Dense WS10 5.00 33 37

WS11 3.00 33 37

WS11 4.00 50

/270mm - Very Dense


WS12 4.80 50

/290mm -

Very Dense

WS13 4.00 50

/275mm -

WS14 3.00 34 37 Dense

WS14 4.00 50

/270mm 41 Very Dense

The SPT result plots presented in Appendix 13 show

a great deal of scatter in the data. There is a notable

trend of increasing SPT N-value with depth within the

Glacial Till, although the range of N-values remains up

to 30 at each test depth.

8.1.5 Bedrock

At the base of the Cable Percussion Boreholes,

bedrock was encountered. The bedrock was

encountered at depths ranging between 5.50m and

7.90m below ground level and was penetrated a

maximum of 0.20m, in BH2.

In BH1, BH2 and BH5, the bedrock comprised

brownish grey, brown and grey siltstone, whilst the

bedrock was described as greyish brown mudstone.

In BH3, no samples of the bedrock were obtained due

to the rapid refusal depth of the SPT. It is assumed

that the SPT refusal indicates the presence of bedrock

as opposed to a cobble or boulder obstruction.

A total of four (4 No.) SPTs were carried out within

the bedrock, all encountering refusal with no

penetration achieved.

8.2 Groundwater

During the fieldwork, groundwater was encountered

in exploratory holes WS2, WS3, WS7-WS10 and

WS12.

No groundwater inflows were encountered in any of

the remaining exploratory holes.

Groundwater seepages were noted at depths of

5.00m below ground level (116.24m OD) in WS2 and

1.00m below ground level (120.82m OD) in WS3.

Groundwater strikes were noted at depths of

between 2.00m and 3.60m below ground level, at

elevations ranging between 119.91m OD and

123.54m OD. During each of the groundwater

strikes, no rise was recorded.

During the post-fieldwork monitoring visits,

groundwater was noted in two standpipes. The

groundwater levels recorded are presented below:

Standpipe Groundwater

level range

(m bgl)

Groundwater

level range

(m OD)

BH1 DRY DRY

BH2 DRY DRY

BH3 DRY DRY

BH4 6.00 – 6.35 114.80 - 115.15

BH5 DRY DRY

WS6 DRY DRY

WS7 DRY DRY

WS9 1.40 – 1.55 123.99 - 124.14

WS12 DRY DRY

During the monitoring carried out following

fieldwork, groundwater was only noted in BH4 and

WS9. The groundwater level was noted between

1.40m and 6.35m below ground level, at elevations

between 114.80m OD and 124.14m OD.

The BH4 standpipe was installed at the lowest

elevation of all the installations, at an elevation of

113.15m OD. As such, it is possible that the

groundwater levels noted within the BH4 standpipe

represent the local groundwater table.

It is considered likely that the shallower groundwater

levels in WS9 are representative of perched water

tables within the Glacial Till.

9.0 EVALUATION

9.1 Proposals

At the time of the investigation the site comprised the

existing buildings of the Cedewain School, as well as

areas of tarmacadam hardstanding/ playgrounds and

grassed playing fields. To the west of the school lie

publicly accessible playing fields.



Page 11 of 21

It is proposed to demolish the existing Cedewain

School buildings and to construct a larger main school

building to the northwest of the current location. A

large playing field will be constructed in the place of

the old school building with an adjoining Multi-Use

Games Area (MUGA). A large car park will also be

constructed within the northwest portion of the site.

Running around the eastern, southern and western

edges of the site a large linear woodland area is

proposed, with a trim trail, play areas and forest

school facilities. Three (3 No.) interconnected SuDS

retention ponds are proposed in the southern and

southwestern extents of the site. A landform bund is

presented on the proposed layout plan, running

parallel to the SuDS network. Several garden and

horticultural areas are proposed in the eastern

portion of the site.

The proposed levels presented on the site layout plan

range from 120.50m OD in the area of the car park

in the northwest of the site to 123.00m at the MUGA

in the east of the site. The proposed ground floor

level (GFL) for the new school building is

121.50m OD.

As such, some minor earthworks will be required to

reduce the level in some areas of the site and remove

local variations in topography. The most significant

‘cut’ area will be in the vicinity of the proposed playing

field to the southeast of the new school building,

where the proposed finished levels are up to 2m

lower than the present elevation. Except for local

areas, in which the proposed levels are up to 0.50m

higher than present, there are no significant ‘fill’ works

indicated. As such, it is assumed that the excavated

‘cut’ soil may be used to construct the landform bund.

The proposed site layout, including preliminary

proposed formation levels, is presented in

Appendix 15.

At the time of writing this report, structural loadings

were not known. It is understood that no retaining

structures are proposed as part of the development,

although it is assumed that some slopes with be

constructed as part of the re-profiling works.

9.2 Foundation Design Principles

In formulating proposals for foundation and floor slab

design, the two primary controlling factors are soil

strength and foundation settlement. In general it is

the latter which is the primary determinand of what

is perceived to be satisfactory performance. For clay

soils, allowable bearing capacity is based on undrained

shear strength, although a Factor of Safety of 3 is

commonly adopted in order to ensure that the

loading is on the sensibly linear component of the

stress/strain curve for the soil.

With time, the clays will strengthen under the higher

loadings as any excess pore water pressures dissipate.

Hence, the worst case is at the time of initial loading

and, for gradually applied or static loading, bearing

capacity should progressively increase. For eccentric

loading, where peak load is at an extremity of the

foundation, this can be higher than the allowable load,

provided that the mean equivalent stress is within the

allowable value.

For granular or essentially free draining soils the

frictional characteristics and density will dominate

bearing capacity and this is generally much higher than

for clay soils. For normal spread foundations

conventional design is typically based on the stress

which would give rise to 25mm settlement. Actual

settlements will depend upon the type, period, load

intensity and width of the loaded area and the

thickness and compressibility of the soils below.

A further issue for foundations is the degree of

variability in the foundation soils. The adoption of a

lower bearing pressure than strength criteria would

indicate implicitly results in a larger foundation which

is likely to behave more in line with average

conditions and hence, for a given load, to result in less

differential settlement.

9.3 Earthworks

It is understood that some areas to the east and

southeast to the site will be ‘cut’ in order to reduce

the level to that which is proposed. The proposed

levels of the eastern portion of the site, in which the

Horticultural School and orchard are proposed, are

not known at this time.

The most significant earthworks proposed are in the

vicinity of the new playing field, at which location the

proposed levels are up to 2m lower than present. As

this area comprises the existing school buildings, the

building foundations will be included in the ‘cut’ soil

removed.

Stripping of soil from a site has the potential to result

in some heave in the underlying clay resulting from

the removal of significant volumes of overburden.

However, although up to 2m thickness of soil is

proposed to be removed on the site, only minor level

variations are proposed in areas of building

construction. As such, it is likely that any notable



Page 12 of 21

heave will only occur in the proposed playing field

areas, and will probably go unnoticed during

construction.

It is expected that the stripped Topsoil and natural

soils will be used to construct the landform bund

proposed in the southwestern region of the site.

During the stripping operation, it will be necessary to

segregate the discrete soil types. This will allow

subsequent assessment of the soils either for removal

from site or re-use as fill material for the landform

bund.

As the stripped soil will contain Made Ground in the

form of the foundations of the demolished buildings,

it will be necessary to screen the soil to allow for its

re-use on the site, and for the subsequent disposal of

the Made Ground material. It is expected that

remaining soil will be removed from site for either

disposal or re-use, if deemed suitable.

Prior to commencement of the construction works,

further specifications may be provided with regard to

the requirements of the soil for use in the landform

bund. Following receipt of this information. It may be

necessary to further assess the soil for this purpose.

As indicated by the proposed finished levels for the

site, it will be necessary to construct some slopes to

facilitate the changes in level. At the time of the

production of this report, no information is known

which regard to the slopes proposed. However, it

must be considered that all slopes should not be over-

steepened, and must comprise adequate drainage to

ensure their stability. Additionally, it will be necessary

to consider vegetation cover to provide surface

protection for the slopes.

9.4 Foundation Solutions

9.4.1 Strip/Pad Foundations

Within the footprint of the new school building, the

proposed levels are up to 0.87m lower than present.

As such, some local stripping of the soil will take place

to reduce the ground level.

Following stripping of the topsoil across the footprint

of the proposed building, Glacial Till is likely to be

exposed across most of the site. During the ground

investigation, Alluvial Fan Deposits comprising sand

were noted immediately beneath the topsoil in BH4

to a depth of 1.65m below ground level, below which

depth the Glacial Till was present.

It is important to note that the footprint of the new

school building does not contain any buildings at

present. As such, the new building foundations will be

unaffected by the demolition of the existing buildings

and Made Ground is not expected to be encountered.

Based on the findings of the investigation, it is evident

that the Glacial Till should provide a suitable bearing

stratum for structural foundations. As such,

traditional strip/pad foundations could be used to

support the proposed buildings in areas where the

Glacial Till is exposed. Foundations would need to be

installed at a minimum depth of 1.00m below ground

level.

It should be noted that localised softened areas of the

Glacial Till may be present across the site.

Additionally, as noted at location BH4, loose Alluvial

Fan Deposits may be present overlying the Glacial Till

in some areas. At those locations, it would be

necessary to excavate through these deposits to

expose the Glacial Till. It will be necessary to ensure

that the Glacial Till exposed at the base of the

foundation excavations is of firm or stiffer

consistency. As such, it is recommended that careful

inspection of foundation trenches is carried out by a

Geotechnical Engineer or other suitably qualified

person prior to concreting, to ensure that natural

undisturbed clay of adequate strength and consistency

is present at the base. If adequate clay strata are

exposed at the base of the foundation trenches, the

width of the foundations should be designed so as to

impose a bearing pressure of no greater than

180kN/m2.

Foundation settlement will be partly dependent on

the applied loadings. Whilst details of foundation

loadings are not available at this stage, taking an

assumed worst case scenario of 180kN/m2 acting on

strip/pad foundations ranging between 1.00m and

2.00m in width, and adopting a worst-case value for

the Coefficient of Volume Compressibility (mv) of

0.24m2/MN, it is estimated that long-term

consolidation settlement of foundations constructed

as above would be less than 25mm.

9.4.2 Concrete Trench Fill Foundations

As mentioned, the Glacial Till should provide a

suitable bearing stratum for structural foundations.

Once proposed building loadings are known, it may

be the case that a greater allowable bearing pressure

is required. If this is the case, foundation trenches

must be excavated deeper until Glacial Till of higher

strength is encountered. Once suitable bearing soil is

found, concrete trench fill methods may be adopted.



Page 13 of 21

It should be noted that, if deeper foundations are used

for the buildings, it may be possible to increase the

maximum allowable bearing pressure as a function of

the increase in the ‘depth/breadth ratio’ of the

foundations without any increase in the shear

strength of the soil with depth.

9.4.3 Piled Foundations

It is not envisaged that piled foundations will be

required for the proposed building construction.

However, once known, if the proposed loadings

prove to be significant, it may be necessary to

investigate a piled foundation solution.

9.4.4 Building near Trees

At present, several trees are located across the site

amongst the existing school buildings, as well as

around the edge of the publicly-accessible playing

fields.

The proposed site layout plan includes a significant

number of trees, shown within all areas of the site,

particularly within the linear woodland area running

round the eastern, southern and western edges of the

site.

Tree root systems in clay soils can cause shrinkage

and swelling movements due to moisture extraction

by the trees. NHBC Standards Chapter 4.2, ‘Building

near Trees’ (2017) gives guidance on foundation

depths and precautions against heave where

foundations are to be constructed within influencing

distance of trees. It should be noted that special

precautions may be required relating to heave where

trees have been or are to be removed.

The Modified Plasticity Index I’p is calculated as

follows:

I’p = Ip x % less than 425µm

100

Atterberg limit (plasticity index) tests have been

carried out on samples of the Glacial Till and can be

used to determine the volume change potential in

accordance with NHBC Chapter 4.2. The Modified

Plasticity Index results ranged between 3.50 and

19.58, indicating a ‘Low’ Volume Change Potential for

each of the samples tested.

9.5 Ground Floor Slabs

Over the footprint of the proposed building it is

anticipated that the soils at the level of the proposed

ground floor slabs will comprise natural undisturbed

Glacial Till and also loose Alluvial Fan Deposits. Given

variations in the settlement characteristics of the

Glacial Till and the Alluvial Fan Deposits, there is a

risk that some differential movement could occur

across ground floor slabs. However, if the risk of such

movements can be accepted by the Client (i.e.,

“super-flat” classification [zero settlement] floor slab

is not required) then a normal ground bearing floor

slab construction could be adopted.

It is recommended that the formation surface is

proof-rolled (heavy roller) with any soft spots being

removed and replaced with clean crushed stone or

other suitable well-graded granular material.

If the risk of potential differential settlement of the

floor slab cannot be accepted then it is recommended

that a fully suspended ground floor slab construction

is adopted with all loads carried by the main

foundations.

In accordance with NHBC Chapter 4.2, ‘Building near

Trees’, special precautions may also be required

relating to heave on ground floor slabs, where trees

have been, or are to be removed. As previously

stated in Section 9.4 above, the Glacial Till can

generally be taken as lying within the “low” volume

change potential classification of NHBC Chapter 4.2.

For low volume change potential soils the NHBC

recommend the following minimum void dimensions

below ground beams or ground floor slabs

constructed within the zone of influence of trees.

Type

Under Ground Beam

and Suspended In

situ Concrete

Ground Floor

Under

Precast

Concrete

Ground

Floor

Minimum Void 50mm 200mm

Should cast in situ suspended floor slabs be adopted

then a void former will be required in order to create

the minimum required void dimension beneath the

slabs to protect against potential heave of the

underlying clay soils.

9.6 Excavation

Excavations on the site should be achievable using

conventional earth moving plant.

Excavation sides can stand vertically in cohesive soils

but instability of these sides can be sudden and

unpredictable. Entry into any such excavations by



Page 14 of 21

personnel carries a significant risk of injury or death

and hence processes to avoid the necessity to do this

should be devised wherever possible.

Support to the sides of excavations should be in

accordance with the recommendations of CIRIA

Report 97, 1983. Support will be required for

excavations in excess of 1.20m depth within granular

materials or soft cohesive deposits. The particular

requirements will need to be evaluated under the

CDM Regulations.

Based on the findings of the intrusive investigation,

groundwater inflows would not be expected in the

excavations. Some seepages may occur in excavations

during construction work if granular layers are

encountered, although it is anticipated that these

seepages would shortly cease and therefore not affect

excavation.

All plant or machinery must maintain an appropriate

stand off from the crest of open excavations.

All formations should be protected from mechanical

disturbance and assumed to be frost-susceptible.

9.7 Chemical Attack on Buried

Concrete

The results of the chemical testing can be summarised

as follows:

Topsoil

pH 5.5 to 5.7

Water Soluble Sulphate <0.01 to 0.017 g/l

Total Sulphate 0.04 to 0.05 %

Total Sulphur 0.02 to 0.03 %

Total Potential Sulphate 0.06 to 0.09 %

Made Ground

pH 7.1 to 9.1

Water Soluble Sulphate < 0.01 to 0.022 g/l

Alluvial Fan Deposits

pH 5.6

Water Soluble Sulphate 0.01 g/l

Total Sulphate 0.05 %

Total Sulphur 0.02 %

Total Potential Sulphate 0.06 %

Glacial Till

pH 5.5 to 8.3

Water Soluble Sulphate < 0.01 to 0.096 g/l

Total Sulphate < 0.01 to 0.16 %

Total Sulphur 0.01 to 0.03 %

Total Potential Sulphate 0.03 to 0.09 %

Based on the procedures outlined in BRE Special

Digest 1: 2005 and the test results, the Design

Sulphate Class for the site is DS-1.

Assuming mobile groundwater conditions concrete

should be designed for an Aggressive Chemical

Environment for Concrete (ACEC) Class of AC-2z.

9.8 Pavement Design

It is understood that the proposed development will

include a level surfaced car park immediately to the

northwest of the proposed new school building. The

proposed car park will comprise 48 No. car parking

spaces, 3 No. disabled car parking spaces, 15 No.

minibus parking spaces, 4 No. electric vehicle charging

locations and a ‘drop-off’ layby. The surfaced area is

shown to lead around to the northeastern side of the

proposed building, where an area comprising delivery

bays and a loading zone is proposed. The proposed

finished level of the car park is shown to be 120m OD.

As such, the finished car park level will be up to 1.27m

lower than the current ground elevation.

An existing access road is also presented on the

proposed site layout leading from Plantation Lane

behind the Maesyrhandir School to the location of the

proposed new MUGA. However, it is not believed

that the existing access road will be redeveloped and

that only minor works will be carried out on it.

The conditions prevailing at the time of construction

will affect the CBR of the subgrade soil and its

strength. Research has shown the importance of the

equilibrium moisture content of the subgrade. The

relationship between soil suction and the moisture

content shows that a soil that becomes wet during

construction will retain water and will therefore be

weaker under the pavement in the equilibrium

condition than a foundation that has remained dry,

particularly for soils of low to medium plasticity.

Equilibrium CBR values for various materials for poor

and good construction conditions are given in a

report by the TRRL (Report 1132) and in Interim

Advice Note 73/06 "Design Guidance for Road

Pavement Foundations (Draft HD25)" produced by

the Highways Agency. The Plasticity Indices (PI)

obtained from the materials likely to be exposed at

formation level were between 10% and 15%. For

reference, the following equilibrium CBR values are

indicated for thin and thick construction in the Interim

Advice Note. It must be noted that the values below

are for a high water table scenario, assuming that the

foundations will be wetted during their life.



Page 15 of 21

PI Equilibrium CBR (%)

Thin Thick

10 3 6

20 4 5

Eight (8 No.) in situ lightweight dynamic (LWD) plate

tests were carried out at 0.50m below ground level

across the area of the proposed new car park. The

CBR values estimated from the LWD testing ranged

between 0.6 % and 4.1 %.

The LWD tests were carried out at a depth of 0.50m

below ground level in order to provide data at an

assumed formation level. As no proposed pavement

design information was available at the time of

production of this report, it may become necessary

to adopt a different pavement formation level than the

assumed depth of 0.50m, for which the CBR values

obtained may be less representative.

The lowest CBR value of 0.6% was estimated at test

location LWD5, near the centre of the proposed car

park. The highest CBR value of 4.1% was estimated at

test location LWD6, in the northwest corner of the

proposed car park. On this basis, as the formation

levels are not currently known, a design CBR of 0.6%

would seem conservative to adopt for this site for an

assumed formation level of 0.50m below ground level,

at an elevation of 120 mOD.

It will be necessary to excavate and remove the

Topsoil across the area of the proposed car park

prior to construction of the road base. As the

elevation of the area of the proposed car park ranges

between approximately 120.5 and 120.9 mOD, the

formation level for the car park will be lower than

0.50m below the existing ground level. As such, it will

be necessary to carry out further testing following

reduction of the ground level across the area to

provide indicative CBR results.

Proof rolling should be carried out on the formation

surface to identify locally weak areas.

Tests have shown many of the soils present on the

site to have Plasticity Indices below 20%. As a result,

and in accordance with Road Note 29, all formations

should be assumed to be frost susceptible.

9.9 Soakaway Design

Four (4 No.) in situ soakaway tests carried out in

accordance with the method given in BRE Digest 365

“Soakaway Design”, 2016 yielded the following results:

Trial

Pit

Test

No.

Test Depth

(m bgl)

Infiltration Rate

(f)

(ms-1)

TP1 1 0.35 – 3.00 2.76 x 10-5

TP1 2 0.30 – 3.00 Unable to calculate –

pit collapsed to 2.30m

depth TP2 1 0.26 – 3.50 Unable to calculate –

insufficient change in

water level

Only one of the tests conducted managed to drain to

a sufficient level to derive the infiltration rate of the

soil. The subsequent test in TP1 was stopped

prematurely because the excavation collapsed.

The Glacial Till beneath the site shows significant

variability in terms of its use for the construction of

soakaways. As identified in TP2, some areas of Glacial

Till exhibit infiltration rates that are insufficient for the

design of a soakaways. However, some areas of the

Glacial Till comprise granular components that may

be suitable for the construction for a soakaway.

On the basis of the soakaway testing carried out on

the site, in accordance with BRE Digest 365

“Soakaway Design”, 2016, it would be necessary to

excavate further soakaway test pits at the exact

locations of proposed soakaway construction. As

such, the local variability in the soil can be assessed

for soakaway construction and potentially moved if

necessary to locate a more suitable location.

10.0 ENVIRONMENTAL

ASSESSMENT

10.1 Legal Framework

This report follows the principles and methodology

outlined in Land Contamination: Risk Management

(LCRM) and BS10175:2011+A2:2017 which are

currently determined as UK best practice. The

primary issues of concern are Risks to Human Health,

for which the regulator is generally the Local

Authority and Risks to Controlled Waters for which

the appropriate consultee is the Environment Agency

[Natural Resources Wales]. Reference should also be

made to the Environmental Notes in Appendix 18 to

place the discussion in context.

10.2 Proposed Site Use

Current proposals for the site indicate that a new

school development with accompanying playground,

multi-use games area, playing fields, car parking and



Page 16 of 21

access highways are proposed on site. Hence, for the

purposes of this report, the contamination risk

assessment in respect of human health is considered

in the context of a proposed site use of ´Public Open

Space´ associated with residential development. This

is a very conservative approach, and this land use

assumes that the site will contain grass areas that will

be predominantly used by children for playing and

outdoor activities (such as football) and be close

enough to indoor spaces (including classrooms) for

tracking back of soil to occur, thus indoor exposure

pathways apply.

10.3 Conceptual Model

The Conceptual Site Model (CSM) is a representation

of the current understanding of the site and the

surrounding environment. This includes an

understanding of the geology, groundwater, surface

water bodies and potential contamination processes

acting on substances present and migration pathways.

It also takes into account all identified potential

pollutant linkages using a source-pathway-receptor

approach, based on the proposed use of the site.

Where any element of the source-pathway-receptor

linkage is absent, there is considered to be no or

negligible risk.

The following potential site-specific Source-Pathway-

Receptor Linkages were identified in the Desk Study

(Geotechnics Limited’s Project No. PN183917 -

October 2019). These formed the basis of the site-

specific Conceptual Site Model and the ground

investigation undertaken and analytical testing in line

with current guidance:

Sources

Made Ground (on site)

Plantation Road Landfill Site (off-site)

Infilled Ground, Landfill and Backfilled Quarry

potentially encroaching onto site boundary

(off-site)

Pathways

Inhalation

Dermal contact

Ingestion

Groundwater migration / leaching

Migration through ground / buried services

Ground gas and vapour migration and ingress

Receptors

Current site users (groundsmen)

Future site users (pupils, staff including

teachers and groundsmen and visitors)

Construction and future maintenance workers

Buildings and structures

Buried services

Groundwater

The potential presence of a linkage should not be

taken to indicate its actual presence or significance

which can only be confirmed through site

investigation and analysis. This preliminary model is of

necessity generalised and local variations may exist

which have not been taken into account by the model.

10.4 Visual and Olfactory Evidence of

Contamination

A description of the soils encountered, and ground

conditions observed during the ground investigation

are provided in Section 8 of this report. Exploratory

Hole Logs are presented in Appendices 3, 6 and 7.

No visual or olfactory evidence of contamination was

encountered in soils on site with the exception of

natural coal. Coal was encountered within both the

Made Ground and the natural strata on site at

predominantly shallow depths. Evidence of coal was

noted as follows:

Between 0.3m and 1.3m bgl in WS3



Between ground level and 0.3m bgl in WS13

No evidence of hydrocarbon odours or staining was

observed, and no evidence of potential Asbestos-

Containing Materials (ACMs) was recorded.

No visual or olfactory evidence of contamination was

encountered during the programme of groundwater

and ground gas monitoring on site with no

hydrocarbon or sulphur-rich odours recorded and no

evidence of sheen on the groundwater observed.

10.5 Soil Testing

The analytical results obtained during this

investigation are presented in Appendix 10.

A total of twenty-one (21 No.) soil samples from

across the site were collected and dispatched for

chemical testing.

The samples taken targeted the Topsoil, Made

Ground and underlying natural superficial deposits

and were intended to provide a range of general

coverage and targeted samples. Four of the boreholes

on site (WS8, WS9, WS10 and WS12) were targeted



Page 17 of 21

to investigate the location of the former farm

buildings, which were identified as part of the Desk

Study carried out on site.

This included seven samples taken from the Made

Ground (two samples from WS7 and one sample each

from WS8, WS9, WS10, WS11 and WS12). The

remainder of the samples were taken from the

Topsoil and natural strata. Soil samples were

subjected to a suite of chemical testing including some

or all of the following:

Heavy metals (CLEA Metals)

Total Cyanide

Hexavalent Chromium

Speciated PAHs (USEPA16)

Speciated TPH (CWG)

BTEX

Monohydric Phenols

Asbestos

pH

Soil Organic Matter (SOM)

In addition, some further chemical aggressivity testing

(pH and sulphate) was undertaken on selected soil

samples; this is reported in Section 9.7.

Soil testing was scheduled by Geotechnics Limited

and testing was undertaken at a UKAS and MCerts

accredited laboratory.

10.6 Soil Contamination Results and

Screening

A risk-based approach is used for the assessment of

contamination. This requires identification of a

contaminant source, a receptor, and a realistic

pathway via which the contaminant may reach the

receptor. The Risk Assessment is a two-stage

process.

The first stage is to perform a Generic Quantitative

Risk Assessment (GQRA). The soil test results have

been compared against the relevant Generic

Assessment Criteria (GAC). In the absence of a

complete regulatory set of screening values, derived

using the CLEA Framework, GAC screening values

have been utilised and are based on the following:

Category 4 Screening Levels (C4SLs) published

by DEFRA

The 2014 Land Quality Management (LQM) /

Chartered Institute of Environmental Health

(CIEH) Suitable for Use Levels for Human

Health Risk Assessment (S4ULs)

Guidance values produced by the

Environmental Industries Commission (EIC),

the Association of Geotechnical and

Geoenvironmental Specialists (AGS), and

Contaminated Land: Application in Real

Environments (CL:AIRE) in December 2009

The second stage of the Risk Assessment process is

Risk Evaluation, which comprises an authoritative

review of the findings with other pertinent

information in cases where the GAC are exceeded,

to consider if exceedance may be acceptable in the

context of the site.

This is a Tier 2 assessment, using GAC soil screening

values, and involves generic human health risk

assessment for a public open spaces (residential) CLEA

land-use scenario. The proposed development will

include sports pitches and soft landscaping areas as

well as new school facilities. This is considered to be

the most suitable land use scenario for the site given

the nature of the proposed development.

The chemical (contamination analysis) testing results

have been screened against GAC screening values

(provided in Appendix 14) to carry out an assessment

of potential risks associated with contamination at the

site. In the case where all the samples tested for a

given substance were below the GAC, no further

consideration is necessary for that substance.

GAC based on a Soil Organic Matter Content (SOM)

of 1% have been used, this is a based on an average

SOM of 1.98% for the site soils, obtained from the

laboratory results. The SOM recorded ranged

between 0.5% and 5.4 %. No evidence of organic

materials including Peat, plant matter or rootlets

were recorded within the site soils.

No evidence of any landfill or quarry backfill materials

were encountered in any of the boreholes on site,

providing confidence that the off-site quarry does not

extend across the site boundary.

All PID readings recorded during the ground

investigation were below 50ppm, which is typically

considered the threshold with respect to further

investigation. This was supported by the laboratory

evidence outlined below which confirmed the absence

of volatile compounds such as BTEX.

The findings of the assessment for each group of

contaminants is discussed below in turn for the

twenty-one samples collected at the site.



Page 18 of 21

pH

The pH at the site ranged between 5.5 and 9.1, with

the average pH across the site recorded as 6.75

indicating slightly acidic soils.

Asbestos

Twenty-one soil samples were tested for the

presence of Asbestos. None of the samples were

confirmed to contain Asbestos-Containing Materials

(ACMs).

Heavy Metals

Concentrations of all heavy metals on site were

recorded to be below the relevant GAC. The

concentrations of Hexavalent Chromium were below

the detection limit of the analysing equipment of

1mg/kg in all samples.

BTEX

The recorded BTEX concentrations recorded were

all below the detection limit of the analysing

equipment of 0.01 mg/kg in all samples.

PAHs

The concentrations of speciated PAHs were below

detection limits in all but one of the twenty-one

samples tested at the site. The sample taken from

WS7 at 0.1m bgl was noted to contain speciated PAH

concentrations above detection limits. However, all

concentrations were recorded to be below the

relevant GACs.

TPH

The two samples taken from WS7 at 0.1m and 0.5m

bgl recorded concentrations of several speciated TPH

fractions above detection limits. All concentrations

were recorded to be below the relevant GACs.

The four samples taken from WS8 at 0.4m bgl, from

WS9 at 0.5m bgl, WS10 at 0.2m bgl, WS11 at 0.5m

bgl and WS12 at 0.1m bgl also recorded several

speciated TPH fractions above detection limits. All

concentrations were recorded to be below the

relevant GACs.

Phenols

The concentrations of Monohydric Phenols recorded

on site were below the detection limit of 0.3 mg/kg in

all of the samples.

10.7 Leachate Contamination

Results and Screening

The risks to surface water and groundwater from

contaminants on site have been assessed against the

Environment Agency (2006) Remedial Targets

Methodology (RTM). Pollutants from contaminated

land sites are considered as passive inputs under the

European Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC),

and as such are regulated under the Agency’s ‘limit’

pollution objective. Acceptable Water Quality

Targets (WQT) are defined for protection of human

health (based on UK Drinking Water Standards) and

for the protection of aquatic ecosystems

(Environmental Quality Standards).

The results of the two leachate samples collected at

the site from TP2 at 0.4m bgl and WS3 at 0.5m bgl

have been compared against the relevant UK DWS

and EQS as detailed above.

The sample taken from TP2 at 0.4m bgl recorded a

pH of 7 and contained concentrations of all

determinands, with the exception of PAHs below the

relevant UK DWS and EQS. The sample recorded a

concentration of speciated PAHs of 8.1 ug/l, above

the UK DWS of 0.1ug/l. The UK DWS is considered

to be very conservative as the water within the

borehole is not to be used as a potable water supply.

On this basis, there is no significant risk posed to the

site, however, any PAH contamination recorded in

the soils on site does appear to be leachable.

The sample taken from WS3 at 0.5m bgl recorded a

pH of 6 and contained concentrations of all

determinands below the relevant UK DWS and EQS.

10.8 Aggressive Ground

Natural soils were tested for aggressivity towards

building materials such as in-ground concrete. The

results are reported in Section 9.7 but summarised

below for completeness in the context of risks to

receptors.

Based on the procedures outlined in BRE Special

Digest 1: 2005 and the test results, the Design

Sulphate Class for the site is DS-1. Assuming mobile

groundwater conditions concrete should be designed

for an Aggressive Chemical Environment for

Concrete (ACEC) Class of AC-2z.

Based on the soil data obtained, no specific measures

are required related to below-ground services. All

below-ground structures should be designed in

accordance with current guidance.

10.9 Gas Results Summary

The gas monitoring results obtained during this

investigation are presented in Appendix 8. Three



Page 19 of 21

rounds of precautionary monitoring were carried out

on 5th and 18th November and on 3rd December 2020.

As outlined in the Desk Study Report for the site,

irrespective of the results of the ground gas risk

assessment undertaken as part of the ground

investigation, suitable radon protective measures

must be incorporated into the final design due to the

nature of the ground conditions and potential radon

risk at the site. As such, no radon monitoring was

carried out by Geotechnics Limited.

The Contaminated Land Officer (CLO) at Powys

County Council provided advice following a review of

the Desk Study Report suggesting Characteristic

Situation 2 gas protection measures be installed at the

site. Thereby removing the need to undertake gas

monitoring (as Environmental Health undertake an

assessment of the adjacent landfill). Defaulting to

Characteristic Situation 2 was considered a more

economically advantageous alternative than

undertaking a detailed site-specific ground gas risk

assessment for the proposed development scheme.

This is because, regardless of hazardous ground gases

such as Methane and Carbon Dioxide, radon

protective measures were determined as being

necessary in the proposed development. It was

anticipated that suitable protective measures could be

designed and installed which could protect the

development from both radon and other gases such

as Carbon Dioxide and Methane in accordance with

Characteristic 2 Situation. On this basis and following

advice from the CLO as detailed in this section of this

report, it was not considered essential to carry out

ground gas monitoring. As a precautionary measure

and to confirm the ground gas risk at the site did not

exceed Characteristic Situation 2, a limited

programme of monitoring was carried out by

Geotechnics Limited. It is acknowledged that this

programme of monitoring does not constitute a full

ground gas risk assessment in line with current good

practice guidance.

The precautionary ground gas monitoring programme

was carried out under variable conditions, including

very low and very high atmospheric pressures (971mb

to 1025mb).

The key findings of the monitoring programme are

summarised below:

Maximum Carbon Dioxide concentration of

3.4% v/v recorded on site.

Maximum Methane concentration of 0.2% v/v

recorded on site.

Minimum Oxygen concentration of 6.4%

recorded in WS7 on one occasion. Remaining

Oxygen concentrations ranged between 17.4%

and 20.8%.

Zero flow rates of 0 l/hr recorded.

Maximum Photo-Ionisation Detector (PID)

readings of 21.2ppm recorded in WS12.

No concentrations of either Carbon Monoxide

(CO) or Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) were

recording as part of the monitoring

programme.

The results have been assessed in accordance with

CIRIA’s C665 Assessing Risks posed by Hazardous

Ground Gases to Buildings (2007) to confirm that the

recorded concentrations do not exceed the

requirements of Characteristic Situation 2. Details on

the approach are detailed in that document. In

summary, the Gas Screening Value (GSV) is defined as

the product of gas concentration multiplied by flow

rate.

The GSV is then considered with other parameters to

define a Characteristic Situation (CS), which identifies

the need for and scope of any necessary gas

protection measures:

Maximum Methane and Carbon Dioxide

concentrations of 0.2% and 3.4%, respectively.

Maximum flow rate of 0 l/hr.

Methane GSV of 0.002.

Carbon Dioxide GSV of 0.034.

Using the modified Wilson and Card Classification the

data obtained indicates that the site, based on the

available data, is considered to be a Characteristic

Situation 1 site which indicates very low risk with

respect to Carbon Dioxide and Methane.

Additional lines of evidence were sought to provide

further evidence to confirm the validity of the results

on site by means of gas sampling using Tedlar bags.

Two (2 No.) samples of ground gas were taken from

two installations during the final round of monitoring

on 3rd December 2020. Samples were taken from BH5

and WS7. The samples were dispatched to a specialist

environmental forensics laboratory. The samples

recorded concentrations of Carbon Dioxide of 1.55%

and 2.11% respectively. Methane, Carbon Monoxide,

Hydrogen Sulphide and all other trace gases were

reported to be below the respective detection limits.

Oxygen concentrations of 18.8% in BH5 and 8.1% in

WS7 were recorded. The results were found to be in

accordance with the field monitoring results carried

out in both of the boreholes.



Page 20 of 21

On this basis, as recommended by the CLO, radon

and Characteristic Situation 2 gas protection

measures at the site will provide a sufficient level of

protection for the proposed development.

10.10 Groundwater Contamination

Results and Screening

Groundwater strikes were recorded within the

Superficial Deposits within six of the boreholes on

site during the ground investigation (WS2, WS8,

WS9, WS10 and WS12). Groundwater strikes varied

between 1.8m and 3.6m bgl and no rises in

groundwater levels were reportedly immediately

following the drilling of the boreholes. No evidence of

odours were reported within the groundwater. In

WS3, groundwater seepage was recorded around 1m

bgl.

One groundwater sample was taken during the third

round of monitoring from WS9 for confirmatory

purposes. The sample had a pH of 7.8 which was

within the EQS pH range of 6 to 9.

The sample recorded very low level speciated PAH

concentrations below the UK DWS of 0.1ug/l. No

exceedances of either the UK DWS or EQS were

recorded within the sample, with the levels of many

contaminants noted to be below detection limits.

The analytical results obtained from sampling during

this investigation are presented in Appendix 11.

10.11 Risk Assessment

The data from the soil sampling, information from the

exploratory hole logs and the engineer’s on-site

observations have been used to undertake an

assessment of risk associated with contamination to

refine the preliminary CSM in Section 10.3.

The site is to be developed as a new school with

accompanying outdoor facilities and parking. The

most suitable end use scenario - public open spaces

(residential) has been assumed for the site.

A Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment (GQRA) has

been undertaken utilising methods detailed in CIRIA

Guidance document C552 entitled Contaminated Land

Risk Assessment. A Guide to Good Practice published in

2001. The findings are as follows:

Limited Made Ground is present across the site and

no evidence of contamination (with the exception of

what appeared to be natural coal) was recorded in the

soils encountered on site. No odours or evidence of

contamination were seen in groundwater and no

vapours were recorded on site. No concentrations of

any contaminants in excess of the GAC were

recorded on site and no asbestos was recorded

within the laboratory testing results.

No evidence has been found to suggest off-site

contamination has affected the site soils. The risk

posed to human health by outdoor exposure

(ingestion and dermal contact) is therefore

considered to be Very Low.

Risk posed to buildings and structures (in-ground

concrete) may be at Low risk from pH and sulphate

in the site soils. By utilising Design Sulphate Class DS-

1 and Aggressive Chemical Environment for Concrete

(ACEC) Class of AC-2z in accordance with BRE

Special Digest 1: 2005 the risk posed to buildings and

structures can be readily mitigated to Very Low.

Selection of appropriate water supply pipes in

accordance with UK WIR Guidance for Selection of

Water Supply Pipes to be used in Brownfield Sites. Ref.

10/WM/03/21. 2010 (subject to agreement with

Welsh Water) would readily reduce risks to water

supply pipework to Very Low.

Shallow groundwater below the site is perched and

discontinuous in pockets within permeable layers

within the Made Ground and Superficial Deposits on

site. It is unlikely to be utilised in as a potable supply

and no groundwater abstractions from this stratum

are known to exist nearby. The Superficial Deposits

below the site are classified as an Undifferentiated

Aquifer and the underlying bedrock is a Secondary B

Aquifer. As such the shallow groundwater below the

site is considered to be a low sensitivity receptor.

No evidence of contamination likely to affect shallow

and deep groundwater has been identified in soils on-

site. The area of hard ground cover and artificial

drainage will increase as part of the proposed

development, reducing infiltration and therefore

leaching potential in some areas. Despite this, surface

water may be disposed of via soakaways in some areas

of the site. The risk posed by leachable soil

contaminants to shallow and deep groundwater via

leaching is considered to be Low.

Negligible evidence for hazardous ground gases

including Methane and Carbon Dioxide have been

encountered during precautionary monitoring. The

previously identified off-site ground gas sources,

including the off-site infilled quarry and landfill site are

therefore no longer considered to be part of the

pollutant linkage. The CS1 classification means no

significant risk exists to human health (future site

users) from those gases via inhalation / asphyxiation



Page 21 of 21

and buildings and structures (ingress / explosion).

Entry into below ground and confined spaces on site

should not be carried out due to possible oxygen

depletion (recorded in one location on site on one

occasion). A watching brief for vapours should be

maintained. As recommended by the CLO at Desk

Study stage, Characteristic Situation 2 gas protection

measures at the site will provide a sufficient level of

protection for the proposed development as detailed

in Section 10.12.

As outlined within the Desk Study Report, the risk

from radon gas to the proposed development is

Moderate and remedial action in the form of radon

protection measures will be required as detailed in

Section 10.12.

Risk to construction workers is not considered within

this assessment although it is envisaged that such risks

would be readily manageable by the earthworks or

other contractor undertaking their own risk

assessment and adopting suitable PPE if required.

10.12 Conclusions and

Recommendations

Conclusions

A programme of ground investigation was undertaken

to investigate the nature and extent of potential

contamination within the vicinity of the proposed

development works at the site.

No evidence of Asbestos was encountered in any of

the samples collected and tested across the site and

no evidence of contaminant concentrations in excess

of the relevant Public Open Spaces GAC were

recorded on site.

Some leachable PAHs were detected within the

samples analysed, though the concentrations

recorded are not considered to pose a significant risk

to the site. No notable PAH concentrations in excess

of either the EQS or UK DWS were recorded in

groundwater.

Low concentrations of Methane and Carbon Dioxide

have been reported as part of the monitoring

undertaken at the site. As recommended by the CLO

at Desk Study stage, Characteristic Situation 2 gas

protection measures and radon protection will

provide sufficient protection for the proposed

development against ground gas.

Recommendations

No remedial action is required at the site with respect

to soils and groundwater.

Specialist advice for the design of ground gas and

radon protection measures suitable for Characteristic

Situation 2 within all new buildings on site will be

required as part of the proposed development.

Site work should be designed, and risk assessed with

cognisance to guidance in HSG66 Protection of workers

and the general public during the development of

contaminated land published by HSE (1991).

On a general note, it is advised that the findings of this

report and the recommendations within are discussed

with the Local Planning Authority prior to proceeding.

Signed for and on behalf of Geotechnics Limited.

Prepared by:

Aaron Field

BSc. (Hons) MSc. FGS

Senior Engineer

Megan Parker Seal

BSc. FGS

Environmental Consultant

Reviewed by:

Colin Dodd

BSc (Hons), MSc, CEng, MICE

Principal Engineer

1

APPENDIX 1

Site Location Plan

SITE LOCATION PLAN

Ground InvestigationforCEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOLforPowys County Council - School Services

© Crown Copyright Reserved, OS License Number: 100020449

2

APPENDIX 2

Lightweight Deflectometer (LWD) Test Records

Client

Test Information

Material Type

Test Level (m OD)

Test Depth (m bgl) Temperature (C)

Test Results

1 2 3

21.0 21.6 21.6

86.2 87.7 87.2

1080.1 1069.2 1062.1

Surface Modulus: 21.4 MN/m2

Estimated CBR from Surface Modulus: 1.4 %

Description of soil at test level:

Project

Drop Number

E-Modulus

(MN/m2)

Maximum Pressure

(kN/m2)

Maximum Deflection

(mm)

Form INS014 Rev 1

CLAY

120.27

0.50

300

Overcast, raining

Plate Diameter (mm)

Weather Conditions

CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL Test Location LWD1

Project No PN204159

Test No 1

INSITU TESTING - Lightweight Dynamic Plate Test (LWD)

Lightweight Dynamic Plate Test carried out in accordance with Interim Advice Note 73/06 Revision 1 (2009)

Heart of Wales Property Services Limited Date 30/10/2020

13

Average

21.4

87.0

1070.5

Test carried out with Prima 100 Lightweight Deflectometer (LWD).

Poission's Ratio value of 0.35 used in calculation.

Remarks

Brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly CLAY.

-2000

200400600800

10001200

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Defle

ctio

n (m

m)

Time (ms)

Average Deflection

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pres

sure

(kN

/m2 )

Time (ms)

Average Pressure

Client

Test Information

Material Type

Test Level (m OD)


Test Results

1 2 3

15.8 15.8 15.5

86.5 87.1 87.2

1439.1 1454.0 1477.5






13

Average

15.7

86.9

1456.9



Remarks


Form INS014 Rev 1

CLAY

119.94

0.50

300

Overcast, raining

Plate Diameter (mm)

Weather Conditions


Project No PN204159

Test No 1

INSITU TESTING - Lightweight Dynamic Plate Test (LWD)Project

Drop Number

E-Modulus

(MN/m2)

Maximum Pressure

(kN/m2)

Maximum Deflection

(mm)

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

20000 10 20 30 40 50 60

Defle

ctio

n (m

m)

Time (ms)

Average Deflection

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pres

sure

(kN

/m2 )

Time (ms)

Average Pressure

Client

Test Information

Material Type

Test Level (m OD)


Test Results

1 2 3

18.9 19.0 19.1

88.2 88.8 89.9

1231.2 1228.1 1240.2




Project

Drop Number

E-Modulus

(MN/m2)

Maximum Pressure

(kN/m2)

Maximum Deflection

(mm)

Form INS014 Rev 1

CLAY

120.33

0.50

300

Overcast, raining

Plate Diameter (mm)

Weather Conditions


Project No PN204159

Test No 1




13

Average

19.0

89.0

1233.2



Remarks


-2000

200400600800

100012001400

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Defle

ctio

n (m

m)

Time (ms)

Average Deflection

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pres

sure

(kN

/m2 )

Time (ms)

Average Pressure

Client

Test Information

Material Type

Test Level (m OD)


Test Results

1 2 3

13.7 13.6 13.3

84.7 85.3 85.1

1625.0 1649.0 1685.9






13

Average

13.5

85.0

1653.3



Remarks


Form INS014 Rev 1

CLAY

120.06

0.50

300

Overcast, raining

Plate Diameter (mm)

Weather Conditions


Project No PN204159

Test No 1


Drop Number

E-Modulus

(MN/m2)

Maximum Pressure

(kN/m2)

Maximum Deflection

(mm)

-500

0

500

1000

1500

20000 10 20 30 40 50 60

Defle

ctio

n (m

m)

Time (ms)

Average Deflection

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pres

sure

(kN

/m2 )

Time (ms)

Average Pressure

Client

Test Information

Material Type

Test Level (m OD)


Test Results

1 2 3

12.9 13.1 13.3

86.3 86.5 86.6

1761.5 1737.4 1712.2




Project

Drop Number

E-Modulus

(MN/m2)

Maximum Pressure

(kN/m2)

Maximum Deflection

(mm)

Form INS014 Rev 1

CLAY

120.43

0.50

300

Overcast, raining

Plate Diameter (mm)

Weather Conditions


Project No PN204159

Test No 1




13

Average

13.1

86.5

1737.0



Remarks


-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

20000 10 20 30 40 50 60

Defle

ctio

n (m

m)

Time (ms)

Average Deflection

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pres

sure

(kN

/m2 )

Time (ms)

Average Pressure

Client

Test Information

Material Type

Test Level (m OD)


Test Results

1 2 3

44.8 43.5 43.1

87.7 86.7 87.3

515.7 525.0 533.5






13

Average

43.8

87.2

524.7



Remarks


Form INS014 Rev 1

CLAY

119.52

0.50

300

Overcast, raining

Plate Diameter (mm)

Weather Conditions


Project No PN204159

Test No 1


Drop Number

E-Modulus

(MN/m2)

Maximum Pressure

(kN/m2)

Maximum Deflection

(mm)

0

100

200

300

400

500

6000 10 20 30 40 50 60

Defle

ctio

n (m

m)

Time (ms)

Average Deflection

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pres

sure

(kN

/m2 )

Time (ms)

Average Pressure

Client

Test Information

Material Type

Test Level (m OD)


Test Results

1 2 3

13.3 14.6 15.1

88.2 88.5 90.5

1746.3 1598.2 1575.2




Project

Drop Number

E-Modulus

(MN/m2)

Maximum Pressure

(kN/m2)

Maximum Deflection

(mm)

Form INS014 Rev 1

CLAY

120.34

0.50

300

Overcast, raining

Plate Diameter (mm)

Weather Conditions


Project No PN204159

Test No 1




13

Average

14.3

89.0

1639.9



Remarks


-1500-1000

-5000

500100015002000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Defle

ctio

n (m

m)

Time (ms)

Average Deflection

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pres

sure

(kN

/m2 )

Time (ms)

Average Pressure

Client

Test Information

Material Type

Test Level (m OD)


Test Results

1 2 3

16.9 17.0 17.1

84.9 85.8 85.9

1325.6 1325.7 1321.3






13

Average

17.0

85.5

1324.2



Remarks


Form INS014 Rev 1

CLAY

121.27

0.50

300

Overcast, raining

Plate Diameter (mm)

Weather Conditions


Project No PN204159

Test No 1


Drop Number

E-Modulus

(MN/m2)

Maximum Pressure

(kN/m2)

Maximum Deflection

(mm)

-500

0

500

1000

15000 10 20 30 40 50 60

Defle

ctio

n (m

m)

Time (ms)

Average Deflection

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pres

sure

(kN

/m2 )

Time (ms)

Average Pressure

3

APPENDIX 3

Trial Pit Records

Form REP002 Rev 4

DATA SHEET - Symbols and Abbreviations used on Records Sample Types B Bulk disturbed sample

BLK Block sample

C Core sample

D Small disturbed sample (tub/jar)

E Environmental test sample

ES Environmental soil sample

EW Environmental water sample

G Gas sample

L Liner sample

LB Large bulk disturbed sample

P Piston sample (PF - failed P sample)

TW Thin walled push in sample

U Open Tube - 102mm diameter with blows to take sample. (UF - failed U sample)

UT Thin wall open drive tube sampler - 102mm diameter with blows to take sample. (UTF - failed UT sample)

V Vial sample

W Water sample

# Sample Not Recovered

Insitu Testing / Properties CBRP CBR using TRL probe

CHP Constant Head Permeability Test

COND Electrical conductivity

TC Thermal Conductivity

TR Thermal Resistivity

HV Strength from Hand Vane

ICBR CBR Test

IDEN Density Test

IRES Resistivity Test

MEX CBR using Mexecone Probe Test

PKR Packer Permeability Test

PLT Plate Load Test

PP Strength from Pocket Penetrometer

Temp Temperature

VHP Variable Head Permeability Test

VN Strength from Insitu Vane

w% Water content

(All other strengths from undrained triaxial testing)

S Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

C SPT with cone

N SPT Result

-/- Blows/penetration (mm) after seating drive

-*/- Total blows/penetration (mm)

( ) Extrapolated value

Groundwater Water Strike Depth Water Rose To

Instrumentation Seal Filter Seal

Strata Legend

Made Ground Granular

Made Ground Cohesive

Topsoil

Cobbles and Boulders

Gravel

Sand

Silt

Clay

Peat Note: Composite soil types shown by combined symbols Chalk Limestone Sandstone Coal

Strata, Continued Mudstone Siltstone Metamorphic Rock

Fine Grained Medium Grained Coarse Grained Igneous Rock

Fine Grained Medium Grained Coarse Grained

Backfill Materials Arisings Bentonite Seal Concrete Fine Gravel Filter General Fill Gravel Filter Grout Sand Filter Tarmacadam

Rotary Core

RQD Rock Quality Designation (% of intact core >100mm) FRACTURE INDEX Fractures/metre FRACTURE Maximum SPACING (m) Minimum NI Non-intact core NR No core recovery AZCL Assumed zone of core

loss (where core recovery is unknown it is assumed to be at the base of the run)

TRIAL PIT RECORDProject

Client

Engineer Trial PitProject No

Samples and Tests Strata

Depth Type Results

Scale

Description Depth LegendStratumNo

Excavation Groundwater

DateDepthObserved

Details

RemarksSymbols andabbreviations areexplained on theaccompanyingkey sheet.

All dimensionsare in metres.

Length (C)Width (B)Plant

Shoring

Stability

Depthof Pit

Date Backfilled

CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL HEART OF WALES PROPERTY SERVICES LTD. PN204159

309848.7 POWYS COUNTY COUNCIL 290325.2 121.52

G.L. 121.52 0.10- 0.50 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Brown sandy clayey subangular 0.10- 0.50 D fine to coarse gravel of siltstone and sandstone. 0.10- 0.50 ES Some rootlets. 0.10- 0.50 PID=<0.1 0.50 121.02 0.60- 0.90 B Firm brown slightly gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravel is 0.60- 0.90 D subangular fine to coarse of siltstone and sandstone. 0.60- 0.90 ES 0.90 120.62 0.60- 0.90 PID=<0.1 Brown very gravelly CLAY, locally grading to clayey 1.00- 1.40 B gravel. Gravel is angular to subrounded fine to 1.00- 1.40 D mc=10% coarse of mudstone, siltstone and sandstone. Low 1.00- 1.40 ES subangular cobble content of siltstone and sandstone. 1.00- 1.40 PID=<0.1 1.50 120.02 1.60- 1.90 B Firm brown and yellowish brown gravelly CLAY. Gravel 1.60- 1.90 D is angular to subrounded fine to coarse of siltstone

and sandstone. 1.90 119.62 1.90- 2.20 B 1.90- 2.20 D Stiff bluish brown and greyish brown mottled orange 2.20- 2.50 B slightly sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is 2.20 119.32 2.20- 2.50 D subangular fine to medium of siltstone and sandstone. 2.20- 2.50 ES 2.20- 2.50 PID=<0.1 Greyish brown very sandy slightly silty angular to 2.60 118.92 2.70- 3.00 B subrounded fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone, 2.70- 3.00 D siltstone and sandstone.

3.00 118.52 Grey sandy slightly silty angular to subrounded fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone, siltstone, and sandstone. Low subrounded cobble content.

End of Excavation

6 tonne tracked excavator. 0.60 28/10/2020 3.20 None. None encountered.

28/10/2020 Pit sides spalling below 2.60m depth.

ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. Soakaway Tests carried out at 0.30m and 0.46m depth.

Trial Pit TP1

National Grid ENCoordinates

1:50 Ground Level m OD

Levelm OD

Logged by LP

Logged in accordance with BS5930:2015 + A2:2020

Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021

TRIAL PIT RECORDProject

Client

Engineer Trial PitProject No

Samples and Tests Strata

Depth Type Results

Scale

Description Depth LegendStratumNo

Excavation Groundwater

DateDepthObserved

Details

RemarksSymbols andabbreviations areexplained on theaccompanyingkey sheet.


Length (C)Width (B)Plant

Shoring

Stability

Depthof Pit

Date Backfilled



G.L. 124.92 Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft to firm sandy silt with 0.15 124.77

0.20- 0.40 B rootlets. 0.20- 0.40 D 0.40 124.52 0.20- 0.40 ES Firm brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravel is subangular 0.20- 0.40 PID=<0.1 to subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone 0.40- 0.70 B and sandstone. 0.40- 0.70 D 0.40- 0.70 ES Firm brown slightly gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravel is 0.40- 0.70 PID=<0.1 subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of siltstone 0.80- 1.20 B and sandstone. 0.80- 1.20 D mc=32% 0.80- 1.20 ES 0.80- 1.20 PID=<0.1

2.00- 2.50 B 2.00 122.92 2.00- 2.50 D Firm to stiff brown slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is

subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of siltstone and sandstone.

2.80 122.12 2.90- 3.50 B Stiff brown mottled orangish grey gravelly CLAY with 2.90- 3.50 D a medium cobble content of siltstone and sandstone.

3.50 121.42 End of Excavation

6 tonne tracked excavator. 0.60 29/10/2020 3.80 None. None encountered.

29/10/2020 Stable during excavation.

ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. Soakaway Test carried out at 0.26m depth.

Trial Pit TP2



Levelm OD

Logged by LP


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021

4

APPENDIX 4

Trial Pit Photographs

TP1 (1)

PHOTOGRAPHS

Project Number : PN204159

Project : CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL

TP1 (2)

PHOTOGRAPHS



TP1 (3)

PHOTOGRAPHS



TP1 (4)

PHOTOGRAPHS



TP2 (1)

PHOTOGRAPHS



TP2 (2)

PHOTOGRAPHS



TP2 (3)

PHOTOGRAPHS



5

APPENDIX 5

Soakaway Test Results

TP1

1

PN204159

28/10/2020

GL

0.00 0.35 2.65 100.00 WL

0.50 0.53 2.47 93.21

1.00 0.56 2.44 92.08 Total Effective

1.50 0.60 2.40 90.57 depth depth

2.00 0.65 2.35 88.68

2.50 0.70 2.30 86.79

3.00 0.70 2.30 86.79

4.00 0.75 2.25 84.91

5.00 0.81 2.19 82.64 = 3.200 m

6.00 0.89 2.11 79.62 = 0.600 m

7.00 0.90 2.10 79.25 = 3.000 m

8.00 0.91 2.09 78.87 = 2.650 m

9.00 0.95 2.05 77.36

10.00 0.98 2.02 76.23

11.00 0.99 2.01 75.85

12.00 1.02 1.98 74.72

13.00 1.06 1.94 73.21

14.00 1.07 1.93 72.83

15.00 1.09 1.91 72.08

16.00 1.12 1.88 70.94

17.00 1.13 1.87 70.57

18.00 1.15 1.85 69.81 1.988 12.00

19.00 1.17 1.83 69.06 0.663 140.00

20.00 1.19 1.81 68.30 = m3

21.00 1.20 1.80 67.92 = m2

22.00 1.20 1.80 67.92 = min

23.00 1.24 1.76 66.42 = m/sec

Sheet 1

Form INS009 Rev 6

1.013

Head

(m)

Depth from GL

(m)

ELAPSED

TIME

(mins)

Trial PitCEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOLProject

Test No

DateClient Heart of Wales Property Services Limited

25%

Vp75-25

Soil Infiltration, f

ap50

2.544

tp75-25

2.338

2.76E-05

11.990

Time

(mins)

0.350m

HEAD

(m)

=

% of effective depth

HEAD

(%)

Initial depth from

GL

Trial pit width

Trial pit depth

INSITU TESTING - Soakaway Test

Effective depth (Head of Water)

Remarks Depth of pit after test - 2.33m.

Pit assumed to have collapsed at end of test in Soil Infiltration calculations.

TRIAL PIT SOAKAWAY

Y

128.000

DEPTH of

water below

ground level

(m)

Project No

Trial pit length

75%

TP1

1

PN204159

28/10/2020

Form INS009 Rev 6


Test No



Project No

GL

24.00 1.25 1.750 66.0 WL

25.00 1.26 1.740 65.7

26.00 1.29 1.710 64.5 Total Effective

27.00 1.30 1.700 64.2 depth depth

28.00 1.30 1.700 64.2

29.00 1.32 1.680 63.4

30.00 1.33 1.670 63.0

35.00 1.41 1.590 60.0

40.00 1.48 1.520 57.4 = 3.200 m

45.00 1.53 1.470 55.5 = 0.600 m

50.00 1.60 1.400 52.8 = 3.000 m

55.00 1.67 1.330 50.2 = 2.650 m

60.00 1.73 1.270 47.9

70.00 1.84 1.160 43.8

80.00 1.94 1.060 40.0

90.00 2.07 0.930 35.1

100.00 2.11 0.890 33.6

110.00 2.17 0.830 31.3

120.00 2.23 0.770 29.1

130.00 2.28 0.720 27.2

140.00 2.33 0.670 25.3

1.988 12.00

0.663 140.00

= m3

= m2

= min

= m/sec

Sheet 2



tp75-25 0.000

Soil Infiltration, f 2.76E-05

ap50 11.990

75% 1.013

ELAPSED

TIME

(mins)

DEPTH of

water below

ground level

(m)

HEAD

(m)

HEAD

(%)

Initial depth from

GL

% of effective depthHead

(m)

Depth from GL

(m)

25% 2.338

Vp75-25 2.544

Trial pit length

Trial pit width

Trial pit depth

Time

(mins)


= 0.350m Y

TRIAL PIT SOAKAWAY

TP1

1

PN204159

28/10/2020

Form INS009 Rev 6


Test No



Project No

tp75 = 12.00

tp25 = 140.00

Sheet 3



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 160.0

% o

f E

ffecti

ve D

ep

th

Elapsed Time (mins)

TP1

2

PN204159

28/10/2020

GL

0.00 0.30 2.70 100.00 WL

0.50 0.35 2.65 98.15

1.00 0.40 2.60 96.30 Total Effective

1.50 0.42 2.58 95.56 depth depth

2.00 0.46 2.54 94.07

2.50 0.49 2.51 92.96

3.00 0.53 2.47 91.48

3.50 0.55 2.45 90.74

4.00 0.58 2.42 89.63 = 3.200 m

5.00 0.62 2.38 88.15 = 0.600 m

6.00 0.69 2.31 85.56 = 3.000 m

7.00 0.70 2.30 85.19 = 2.700 m

8.00 0.74 2.26 83.70

9.00 0.78 2.22 82.22

10.00 0.80 2.20 81.48

11.00 0.82 2.18 80.74

12.00 0.84 2.16 80.00

13.00 0.87 2.13 78.89

14.00 0.93 2.07 76.67

15.00 0.96 2.04 75.56

16.00 0.98 2.02 74.81

17.00 0.99 2.01 74.44 2.025 0.00

18.00 1.00 2.00 74.07 0.675 0.00

19.00 1.01 1.99 73.70 = m3

20.00 1.02 1.98 73.33 = m2

21.00 1.03 1.97 72.96 = min

22.00 1.04 1.96 72.59 = m/sec

Sheet 1



Remarks Test stopped after 140 minutes due to pit collapsing to 2.30m depth - water level

recorded at 1.80m depth after collapse.

Unable to calculate Soil Infiltration rate due to early test termination.

TRIAL PIT SOAKAWAY

Y

0.000

DEPTH of

water below

ground level

(m)

Project No

Trial pit length

75%

Time

(mins)

0.300m

HEAD

(m)

=


HEAD

(%)

Initial depth from

GL

Trial pit width

Trial pit depth

25%

Vp75-25


ap50

2.592

tp75-25

2.325

#DIV/0!

12.180


Test No


Form INS009 Rev 6

0.975

Head

(m)

Depth from GL

(m)

ELAPSED

TIME

(mins)

TP1

2

PN204159

28/10/2020


Project No


Test No


Form INS009 Rev 6

GL

23.00 1.05 1.950 72.2 WL

24.00 1.06 1.940 71.9

25.00 1.07 1.930 71.5 Total Effective

30.00 1.13 1.870 69.3 depth depth

40.00 1.23 1.770 65.6

50.00 1.32 1.680 62.2

60.00 1.40 1.600 59.3

70.00 1.48 1.520 56.3

80.00 1.55 1.450 53.7 = 3.200 m

90.00 1.66 1.340 49.6 = 0.600 m

100.00 1.71 1.290 47.8 = 3.000 m

110.00 1.73 1.270 47.0 = 2.700 m

120.00 1.94 1.060 39.3

130.00 2.04 0.960 35.6

140.00 2.11 0.890 33.0

2.025 0.00

0.675 0.00

= m3

= m2

= min

= m/sec

Sheet 2

= 0.300m Y

TRIAL PIT SOAKAWAY

Trial pit length

Trial pit width

Trial pit depth

Time

(mins)


75% 0.975

ELAPSED

TIME

(mins)

DEPTH of

water below

ground level

(m)

HEAD

(m)

HEAD

(%)

Initial depth from

GL


(m)

Depth from GL

(m)

25% 2.325

Vp75-25 2.592

tp75-25 0.000

Soil Infiltration, f #DIV/0!

ap50 12.180

Remarks

TP1

2

PN204159

28/10/2020


Project No


Test No


Form INS009 Rev 6

tp75 =

tp25 =

Sheet 3

Remarks

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 160.0

% o

f E

ffecti

ve D

ep

th

Elapsed Time (mins)

TP2

1

PN204159

29/10/2020

GL

0.00 0.26 3.24 100.00 WL

0.50 0.30 3.20 98.77

1.00 0.30 3.20 98.77 Total Effective

1.50 0.30 3.20 98.77 depth depth

2.00 0.30 3.20 98.77

2.50 0.31 3.19 98.46

3.00 0.31 3.19 98.46

3.50 0.31 3.19 98.46

4.00 0.31 3.19 98.46 = 3.800 m

5.00 0.31 3.19 98.46 = 0.600 m

6.00 0.32 3.18 98.15 = 3.500 m

7.00 0.32 3.18 98.15 = 3.240 m

8.00 0.32 3.18 98.15

9.00 0.33 3.17 97.84

10.00 0.33 3.17 97.84

11.00 0.33 3.17 97.84

12.00 0.33 3.17 97.84

13.00 0.34 3.16 97.53

14.00 0.35 3.15 97.22

15.00 0.35 3.15 97.22

16.00 0.35 3.15 97.22

17.00 0.36 3.14 96.91 2.430 0.00

18.00 0.36 3.14 96.91 0.810 0.00

19.00 0.37 3.13 96.60 = m3

20.00 0.37 3.13 96.60 = m2

21.00 0.38 3.12 96.30 = min

22.00 0.38 3.12 96.30 = m/sec

Sheet 1



Remarks Unable to calculate Soil Infiltration due to insufficient change in water level.

TRIAL PIT SOAKAWAY

Y

0.000

DEPTH of

water below

ground level

(m)

Project No

Trial pit length

75%

Time

(mins)

0.260m

HEAD

(m)

=


HEAD

(%)

Initial depth from

GL

Trial pit width

Trial pit depth

25%

Vp75-25


ap50

3.694

tp75-25

2.690

#DIV/0!

16.536


Test No


Form INS009 Rev 6

1.070

Head

(m)

Depth from GL

(m)

ELAPSED

TIME

(mins)

TP2

1

PN204159

29/10/2020


Project No


Test No


Form INS009 Rev 6

GL

23.00 0.38 3.120 96.3 WL

24.00 0.39 3.110 96.0

25.00 0.39 3.110 96.0 Total Effective

26.00 0.40 3.100 95.7 depth depth

27.00 0.40 3.100 95.7

28.00 0.40 3.100 95.7

29.00 0.40 3.100 95.7

30.00 0.41 3.090 95.4

35.00 0.41 3.090 95.4 = 3.800 m

40.00 0.43 3.070 94.8 = 0.600 m

50.00 0.45 3.050 94.1 = 3.500 m

60.00 0.49 3.010 92.9 = 3.240 m

70.00 0.50 3.000 92.6

80.00 0.53 2.970 91.7

100.00 0.57 2.930 90.4

120.00 0.62 2.880 88.9

140.00 0.67 2.830 87.3

160.00 0.69 2.810 86.7

180.00 0.70 2.800 86.4

200.00 0.72 2.780 85.8

220.00 0.76 2.740 84.6

230.00 0.77 2.730 84.3 2.430 0.00

340.00 0.79 2.710 83.6 0.810 0.00

= m3

= m2

= min

= m/sec

Sheet 2

= 0.260m Y

TRIAL PIT SOAKAWAY

Trial pit length

Trial pit width

Trial pit depth

Time

(mins)


75% 1.070

ELAPSED

TIME

(mins)

DEPTH of

water below

ground level

(m)

HEAD

(m)

HEAD

(%)

Initial depth from

GL


(m)

Depth from GL

(m)

25% 2.690

Vp75-25 3.694

tp75-25 0.000

Soil Infiltration, f #DIV/0!

ap50 16.536


TP2

1

PN204159

29/10/2020


Project No


Test No


Form INS009 Rev 6

tp75 =

tp25 =

Sheet 3


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 350.0

% o

f E

ffecti

ve D

ep

th

Elapsed Time (mins)

6

APPENDIX 6

Cable Percussion Borehole Records,



Form REP002 Rev 4


BLK Block sample

C Core sample





G Gas sample

L Liner sample






V Vial sample

W Water sample








ICBR CBR Test

IDEN Density Test




PLT Plate Load Test


Temp Temperature



w% Water content



C SPT with cone

N SPT Result






Strata Legend



Topsoil


Gravel

Sand

Silt

Clay






Rotary Core



BOREHOLE RECORDProject

Client

Engineer BoreholeProject No

Sampling Properties Strata

DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale

Description Depth Legend

Boring Groundwater

Depth Dia Technique Crew of Hole Cased Water Date Struck Cased Rose to Sealed Groundwater

Remarks

Symbols andabbreviations areexplained on theaccompanyingkey sheet.


Time Mins

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength

ProgressDepth Depth Depth to Depth Depth Depth Remarks oninHole



G.L. 121.58 0.00- 1.20 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Brown slightly sandy slightly 0.20 ES gravelly clay with rootlets. Gravel is angular to 0.20 PID=<0.1 subrounded fine to coarse of siltstone and 0.50 ES sandstone. 0.50 121.08 0.50 PID=<0.1

Soft to firm brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to

1.00 ES coarse of siltstone and sandstone. 1.00 PID=<0.1 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S8

1.60 ES 1.60 119.98 1.60 PID=<0.1 Firm to stiff brown slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel 1.65 D 25 is subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of 2.00- 2.45 UT30 2.00 20 mudstone, siltstone and sandstone.

(DRY)

2.70 D 2.70 118.88 Stiff to very stiff brown slightly mottled grey

3.00- 3.45 D 3.00 S40 slightly gravelly to gravelly CLAY. Gravel is (DRY) angular to subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone,

siltstone and sandstone.

4.00- 4.45 D 4.00 S44 4.00 117.58 (DRY) Stiff to very stiff greyish brown gravelly CLAY

with a low cobble content of siltstone. Gravel is angular fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone and sandstone.

5.00- 5.00 D 5.00 S50/0 (DRY)

5.50- 5.50 5.00 C50/0 5.50 116.08 (DRY) Brownish grey SILTSTONE, recovered as gravel. 5.60 115.98

End of Borehole

1.20 0.40 Inspection Pit DMW G.L. 29/10/20 08:00 None 5.50 0.15 Cable Percussion DMW 5.50 5.00 DRY 29/10/20 18:00 encountered.

Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. A 50mm standpipe was installed to 5.45m with a geowrapped slotted section from 2.60m to 5.45m with flush lockable protective cover. Backfill details from base of hole: bentonite seal up to 5.45m, gravel filter up to 2.60m, bentonite seal up to 0.30m, concrete up to ground level.

Cable Percussion BH1



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by LP


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time Mins

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 122.37 0.00- 1.20 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Brown slightly gravelly clay 0.20 ES with rootlets. Gravel is subangular fine to coarse 0.20 PID=<0.1 of siltstone. 0.50 ES 0.50 121.87 0.50 PID=<0.1 Soft to firm brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly

CLAY. Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of siltstone and sandstone.

1.00 ES 1.00 PID=<0.1 1.20- 1.65 D 1.20 21 S8

(DRY)

1.60 120.77 1.65 ES Firm brown mottled grey slightly sandy slightly 1.65 PID=<0.1 gravelly CLAY. Gravel is angular to subangular fine 2.00- 2.45 UT30 89 12 to coarse of mudstone, siltstone and sandstone.

At 2.00m, high strength.

2.45- 2.50 D

3.00- 3.45 D 3.00 S37 3.00 119.37 (DRY) Stiff to very stiff brown slightly sandy slightly

gravelly CLAY. Gravel is angular to subangular fine to medium of siltstone and sandstone.

3.50 118.87 Stiff to very stiff brown occasionally greyish brown gravelly CLAY with a low subangular cobble content of siltstone. Gravel is angular to

4.00- 4.45 UTF subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone 50 and sandstone.

5.00- 5.30 D 5.00 S50/ (DRY) 150

6.00- 6.38 # 6.00 S50/ (DRY) 225

6.40 115.97 6.45- 6.45 6.00 C50/0 Grey SILTSTONE, recovered as gravel.

(DRY) 6.60 115.77 End of Borehole

1.20 0.40 Inspection Pit DMW G.L. DRY 28/10/20 08:00 None 6.60 0.15 Cable Percussion DMW 5.30 4.50 DRY 28/10/20 18:00 encountered.

5.30 29/10/20 08:00 6.60 6.60 DRY 29/10/20 18:00

Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. A 50mm standpipe was installed to 2.70m with a geowrapped slotted section from 1.00m to 2.70m with flush lockable protective cover. Backfill details from base of hole: bentonite seal up to 2.70m, gravel filter up to 1.00m, bentonite seal up to 0.30m, concrete up to ground level.




Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by LP


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time Mins

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 121.80 0.00- 1.20 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Brown slightly sandy clay with 0.20 ES rootlets. 0.20 PID=<0.1 0.50 ES 0.50 121.30 0.50 PID=<0.1 Firm brown slightly gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravel is

subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of siltstone and sandstone.

1.00 ES 1.00 PID=<0.1 1.20- 1.65 D 1.20 S7 1.20 120.60

(DRY) Firm brown mottled orange slightly sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is subangular to subrounded

1.60 D 20 fine to medium of siltstone and sandstone. 1.60 120.20 1.60 ES 1.60 PID=<0.1 Firm to stiff greyish brown mottled orange slightly 2.00- 2.45 UT50 20 sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is angular to

subrounded fine to coarse of siltstone and sandstone. Below 2.40m, stiff.

2.45- 2.50 D

2.70 119.10 Firm to stiff brown slightly sandy gravelly CLAY

3.00- 3.45 D 3.00 7.0 S40 with a low subrounded cobble content. Gravel is (DRY) angular to rounded fine to coarse of mudstone,


3.45- 4.00 B

4.00- 4.45 UT50

5.00- 5.00 # 5.00 S50/0 (DRY)

5.45 D

6.00- 6.00 # 6.00 S50/0 At 6.00m, refusal encountered - probable bedrock. 6.00 115.80 (DRY)

End of Borehole

1.20 0.40 Inspection Pit DMW G.L. DRY 27/10/20 08:00 None 6.00 0.15 Cable Percussion DMW 2.00 1.50 DRY 27/10/20 18:00 encountered.

2.00 1.50 28/10/20 08:00 6.00 6.00 DRY 28/10/20 18:00

Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. Cable Percussion Borehole terminated at 6.00m depth due to refusal - probable bedrock. A 50mm standpipe was installed to 6.00m with a slotted section from 1.00m to 6.00m with flush lockable protective cover. Backfill details from base of hole: gravel filter up to 1.00m, bentonite seal up to 0.30m, concrete up to ground level.




Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by LP


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time Mins

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 121.15 0.00- 1.20 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft brown slightly sandy 0.20 ES slightly gravelly clay with rootlets. Gravel is 0.20 PID=<0.1 angular to subangular fine to coarse of mudstone, 0.50 ES siltstone and sandstone. 0.50 PID=<0.1

1.00 ES 1.00 120.15 1.00 PID=<0.1 Loose brown slightly gravelly silty fine SAND. 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) 17 S9 Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse of

mudstone, siltstone and sandstone.

1.65 119.50 1.65 ES Firm to stiff yellowish brown slightly gravelly 1.65 PID=<0.1 CLAY. Gravel is angular to subrounded fine to 1.80 119.35 1.80 B coarse of mudstone, siltstone and sandstone. 1.80 D 2.00- 2.45 UT50 2.00 87 20 Stiff to very stiff friable greyish brown mottled

(DRY) orange slightly sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravel is 2.45 D angular to subangular fine to coarse of mudstone

and siltstone.

3.00- 3.45 D 3.00 7.4 S37 (DRY)

3.45- 4.00 B

4.00- 4.45 UT50 4.00 At 4.00m, high strength. (DRY)

4.45 D 4.45 116.70 Stiff greyish brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly to gravelly CLAY. Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse of mudstone and

5.00- 5.45 # 5.00 S44 siltstone. 5.00 116.15 (DRY)

Stiff to very stiff greyish brown very gravelly CLAY with a low cobble content. Gravel is angular

5.45- 6.00 B to subangular fine to coarse of mudstone and siltstone.

6.00- 6.45 B 6.00- 6.45 UTF 6.00

50 (DRY)

7.00- 7.00 D 7.00 S50/0 (DRY)

7.90 113.25 7.90- 7.90 D 7.90 S50/0 Greyish brown MUDSTONE, recovered as clayey gravel. 8.00 113.15

(DRY) End of Borehole


7.90 6.00 6.50 27/10/20 08:00 8.00 6.00 DRY 27/10/20 18:00

Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. Water was added to assist boring at 7.90m depth. A 50mm standpipe was installed to 7.90m with a geowrapped slotted section from 1.00m to 7.90m with flush lockable protective cover. Backfill details from base of hole: gravel filter up to 1.00m, bentonite seal up to 0.30m, concrete up to ground level.




Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by LP


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time Mins

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 122.05 0.00- 1.20 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Brown slightly gravelly silty 0.20 ES fine to medium sand with rootlets. Gravel is 0.20 PID=<0.1 subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of 0.50 ES siltstone and sandstone. 0.50 121.55 0.50 PID=<0.1

Firm brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is subangular fine to medium of siltstone

1.00 ES and sandstone. 1.00 PID=<0.1 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) 28 S9

1.60 D 1.65 120.40 1.65 ES Firm greyish brown slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel 1.65 PID=<0.1 is subangular fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone 2.00- 2.45 UT45 2.00 15 and sandstone. 2.00 120.05

(DRY) HV=38 Firm to stiff brown mottled orange and grey slightly sandy CLAY.

2.50 D 16 At 2.00m, low strength. Below 2.50m, locally grading to slightly sandy clayey silt.

3.00- 3.45 D 3.00 S37 (DRY)

3.45- 4.00 B 3.45 118.60 Stiff to very stiff dark brown and grey gravelly CLAY with a low subrounded cobble content. Gravel is angular to rounded fine to coarse of mudstone,

4.00- 4.45 B siltstone and sandstone. 4.00- 4.45 UTF 4.00

50 (DRY)

5.00- 5.45 # 5.00 S44 (DRY)

6.00- 6.38 D 6.00 S50/ (DRY) 225

6.60- 6.75 D 6.60 S50/0 6.60 115.45 (DRY) Brown SILTSTONE, recovered as gravel. 6.75 115.30

End of Borehole


Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. A 50mm standpipe was installed to 6.60m with a geowrapped slotted section from 2.00m to 6.60m with flush lockable protective cover. Backfill details from base of hole: gravel filter up to 2.00m, bentonite seal up to 0.30m, concrete up to ground level.




Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by LP


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021

Fieldwork Results - SPT Results Summary

Project Project No PN204159CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL

Client Heart Of Wales Property Services Ltd.

Hole Depth TypeSPT 'N'

Value

Seating Drive Test Drive

0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

BH1 1.20 S 2 2 2 2 2 2-122.38 8 *

BH1 3.00 S 5 5 10 10 10 10-120.58 40 *

BH1 4.00 S 7 7 11 11 11 11-119.58 44 *

BH1 5.00 S 25/0 50/0-118.58 50/0 >

BH1 5.50 C 25/0 50/0-118.08 50/0 >

Printed: 02/11/2020 Page 1

-/-

-*/-

Blows/penetration (mm) after seating

Total blows/penetration (mm)

S - Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

C - SPT with cone

Penetration under own weight (mm)SWP L - Split Spoon with liner used

Remarks

Energy Ratio, Er (%)

Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Danny Corner

AR2418

64.00

10/07/2020





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

BH2 1.20 S 2 3 2 2 2 2-123.17 8 *

BH2 3.00 S 5 5 7 10 10 10-121.37 37 *

BH2 5.00 S 12 23 25 25-119.37 50/150 >

BH2 6.00 S 15 10 20 20 10-118.37 50/225 >

BH2 6.45 C 25/0 50/0-117.92 50/0 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Danny Corner

AR2418

64.00

10/07/2020





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

BH3 1.20 S 2 2 2 1 2 2-122.60 7 *

BH3 3.00 S 5 10 10 10 10 10-120.80 40 *

BH3 5.00 S 25/0 50/0-118.80 50/0 >

BH3 6.00 S 25/0 50/0-117.80 50/0 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Danny Corner

AR2418

64.00

10/07/2020





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

BH4 1.20 S 2 2 3 2 2 2-121.95 9 *

BH4 3.00 S 8 9 9 9 9 10-120.15 37 *

BH4 5.00 S 9 9 11 11 11 11-118.15 44 *

BH4 7.00 S 25/0 50/0-116.15 50/0 >

BH4 7.90 S 25/0 50/0-115.25 50/0 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Danny Corner

AR2418

64.00

10/07/2020





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

BH5 1.20 S 2 3 3 2 2 2-122.85 9 *

BH5 3.00 S 8 9 9 10 9 9-121.05 37 *

BH5 5.00 S 9 9 10 11 11 12-119.05 44 *

BH5 6.00 S 20 5 20 20 10-118.05 50/225 >

BH5 6.60 S 5 20 50/0-117.45 50/0 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Danny Corner

AR2418

64.00

10/07/2020

7

APPENDIX 7

Dynamic Sample Borehole Records,



Form REP002 Rev 4


BLK Block sample

C Core sample





G Gas sample

L Liner sample






V Vial sample

W Water sample








ICBR CBR Test

IDEN Density Test




PLT Plate Load Test


Temp Temperature



w% Water content



C SPT with cone

N SPT Result






Strata Legend



Topsoil


Gravel

Sand

Silt

Clay






Rotary Core




Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater

Depth Technique Crew of Hole Cased Water Date Struck Cased Rose to Sealed Groundwater

Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength

ProgressDepth Depth Depth to Depth Depth Depth Remarks onin



G.L. 120.28 0.00- 0.30 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft to firm dark brown 0.00- 0.30 D slightly sandy clay with some rootlets. 0.20 ES 0.30 119.98 0.30- 1.20 B Firm light brown mottled grey slightly sandy 0.30- 1.20 D gravelly CLAY. Gravel is subangular to subrounded 0.50 ES fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone and

sandstone. 1.00 ES

Below 1.20m, stiff, friable. Low subangular to 1.20- 1.60 B subrounded cobble content of mudstone and 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S18 sandstone.

1.60- 2.00 D

2.00- 2.80 B 2.00 118.28 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S28 Stiff dark brown slightly sandy gravelly CLAY. 2.00 ES Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse of


2.80- 3.00 D 3.00- 3.45 D (DRY) S27

3.45 116.83 End of Borehole

1.20 0.40 Inspection Pit PMS G.L. 26/10/20 08:00 None 3.45 0.10 Dynamic Sampler PMS 3.45 DRY 26/10/20 18:00 encountered.

Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. Backfill details from base of hole: bentonite seal up to 0.50m, arisings up to ground level.

Dynamic Sampler WS1



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 121.24 0.00- 0.30 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft to firm dark brown 0.00- 0.30 D slightly sandy clay with some rootlets. 0.20 ES 0.30 120.94 0.30- 1.20 B Soft light brown slightly sandy gravelly CLAY. 0.30- 1.20 D Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarse 0.50 ES of siltstone and sandstone.

1.00 ES Below 1.20m, firm.

1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S14 1.20- 1.45 D 1.45- 1.85 B 1.45 119.79

Stiff light brown mottled grey slightly sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravel is subangular to subrounded

1.85- 2.00 D fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone and 2.00- 2.35 B sandstone. 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S20 Below 2.00m, slightly sandy. 2.00- 2.35 D 2.00 ES 2.35 118.89 2.35- 2.85 B Stiff dark brown very gravelly CLAY with a low

subangular cobble content of sandstone. Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse of mudstone,

2.85- 3.00 D siltstone and sandstone. 3.00- 3.80 B 3.00- 3.45 D (DRY) S22

3.80- 4.00 D 4.00- 4.80 B 4.00- 4.45 D (DRY) S16

4.80- 5.00 D 5.00- 5.45 D (WET) S15


1.20 0.40 Inspection Pit PMS G.L. 26/10/20 08:00 2.80 Damp. 5.45 0.10 Dynamic Sampler PMS 5.45 WET 26/10/20 18:00 5.00 Seepage - no

rise.


Dynamic Sampler WS2



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 121.82 0.00- 0.30 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft to firm dark brown 0.00- 0.30 D slightly sandy clay with some rootlets. 0.20 ES 0.30 121.52 0.50 ES Soft to firm light brown slightly sandy gravelly

CLAY. Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone, sandstone and rare coal.

1.00 ES

1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S10 1.30- 1.80 B 1.30 120.52

Firm to stiff orangish brown mottled bluish grey slightly gravelly sandy CLAY with some pockets (up to 100mm) of silt. Gravel is subangular to

1.80- 1.90 D subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone 1.90 119.92 1.90- 2.00 D and sandstone. 2.00- 2.80 B 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S39 Stiff to very stiff dark brown slightly sandy 2.00 ES gravelly CLAY. Gravel is angular to subangular fine

to coarse of mudstone, siltstone and sandstone. Below 2.00m, very gravelly. Between 2.50m and 2.70m, band of angular to

2.80- 3.00 D subrounded fine to coarse gravel of mudstone, 3.00- 3.45 # (DRY) S42 siltstone and sandstone. 3.00- 3.80 B

3.80- 4.00 D 4.00- 4.43 D (DRY) S50/

275


1.20 0.40 Inspection Pit PMS G.L. 26/10/20 08:00 1.00 Seepage - no 4.43 0.10 Dynamic Sampler PMS 4.43 DRY 26/10/20 18:00 rise.

Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. Dynamic Sample Borehole terminated at 4.43m depth due to refusal. Backfill details from base of hole: bentonite seal up to 0.50m, arisings up to ground level.

Dynamic Sampler WS3



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 123.54 0.00- 0.30 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft dark brown sandy clay with 0.00- 0.30 D some rootlets. 0.20 ES 0.30 123.24 0.20 PID=<0.1 Firm to stiff dark brown slightly sandy slightly 0.30- 1.20 B gravelly CLAY with some rootlets. Gravel is 0.30- 1.20 D subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of 0.50 ES mudstone, siltstone, sandstone and quartzite. 0.50 PID=<0.1 1.00 ES 1.00 PID=<0.1 1.20 122.34 1.20- 1.80 B Firm light brown slightly gravelly sandy CLAY. 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S13 Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarse

of mudstone and sandstone.

1.80- 1.90 D 1.90 121.64 1.90- 2.00 D Stiff light brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly 2.00- 2.80 B 14 silty CLAY. Gravel is angular to subangular fine to 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S17 coarse of mudstone, siltstone, sandstone and 2.00 ES limestone. 2.00 PID=<0.1 Below 2.00m, friable, light brown mottled orange.

2.80- 3.00 D 3.00- 3.80 B Below 3.00m, very gravelly. 3.00- 3.45 D (DRY) S27

3.80- 4.00 D 4.00- 4.80 B Below 4.00m, very stiff. 4.00- 4.45 D (DRY) S33

4.80- 5.00 D 5.00- 5.45 D (DRY) S38




Dynamic Sampler WS4



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 124.51 0.00- 0.30 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft dark brown sandy clay with 0.00- 0.30 D some rootlets. 0.20 ES 0.30 124.21 0.20 PID=<0.1 Soft dark brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly 0.30- 1.20 B CLAY with rare rootlets. Gravel is subangular to 0.30- 1.20 D subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone, 0.50 ES sandstone and quartzite. 0.50 PID=<0.1 1.00 ES 1.00 PID=<0.1 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S10 1.30 123.21 1.30- 1.80 B 29 Firm to stiff light brown slightly sandy gravelly

CLAY. Gravel is subangular fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone and sandstone.

1.80- 2.00 D 2.00- 2.20 B 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S18 2.00 ES 2.20 122.31 2.00 PID=<0.1 Stiff light brown slightly sandy gravelly CLAY with 2.20- 2.80 B a low subangular cobble content of sandstone and

limestone. Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone, sandstone and

2.80- 3.00 D limestone. 3.00- 4.00 B Between 3.00m and 4.45m, very stiff. 3.00- 3.45 D (DRY) S38 Below 3.10m, friable, very gravelly.

4.00- 5.00 B 5.4 Below 4.00m, locally grading to slightly sandy 4.00- 4.45 D (DRY) 7.8 S42 gravelly clayey silt.

5.00- 5.45 D (DRY) S26




Dynamic Sampler WS5



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 123.44 0.00- 0.30 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft dark brown slightly sandy 0.00- 0.30 D clay with many rootlets. 0.20 ES 0.30 123.14 0.20 PID=<0.1 Firm to stiff dark brown slightly sandy gravelly 0.30- 1.20 B CLAY with rare rootlets. Gravel is subangular to 0.30- 1.20 D subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone 0.50 ES and sandstone. 0.50 PID=<0.1 1.00 ES 1.00 PID=<0.1 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S9 1.40 122.04 1.20- 1.40 D Medium dense light brown sandy clayey subangular to 1.40- 1.80 B subrounded fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone and

sandstone. 1.80- 2.00 D Below 1.80m, rare pockets (up to 50mm) of silt. 2.00- 2.80 B 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S17

2.80- 3.00 D 3.00- 3.45 D (DRY) S28

3.20- 3.80 B 3.20 120.24 Firm to stiff friable dark brown slightly sandy very gravelly CLAY with a low cobble content. Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone, sandstone and limestone.

3.80- 4.00 D 8.1 4.00- 4.80 B 4.00- 4.45 D (DRY) S14

4.80- 5.00 D 5.00- 5.45 D (DRY) S15



Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. A 50mm standpipe was installed to 5.00m with a geowrapped slotted section from 1.00m to 5.00m with flush lockable protective cover. Backfill details from base of hole: arisings up to 5.00m, gravel filter up to 1.00m, bentonite seal up to 0.30m, concrete up to ground level.

Dynamic Sampler WS6



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 124.09 0.00- 0.10 B MADE GROUND: Black tarmacadam. 0.10 123.99 0.10- 0.40 B 0.10 D MADE GROUND: Brown sandy slightly silty angular to 0.40 123.69 0.10 ES subangular fine to coarse gravel of limestone. 0.10 PID=0.6 0.60 123.49 0.30 D MADE GROUND: Greenish grey slightly sandy slightly 0.30 ES silty angular to subangular fine to coarse gravel 0.30 PID=0.7 of limestone and dolerite. Low cobble content. 0.40- 0.60 B 0.40- 0.60 D Firm to stiff slightly gravelly sandy CLAY with 0.50 ES some pockets (up to 65mm) of silt. Gravel is 0.50 PID=<0.1 subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of 0.60- 1.20 B mudstone, siltstone and sandstone. 0.60- 1.20 D 1.20- 1.80 B 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S10 2.00 122.09 1.50 ES Medium dense dark brown sandy clayey subangular to 1.50 PID=<0.1 subrounded fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone, 1.80- 2.00 D siltstone, sandstone and limestone. Low cobble 2.00- 2.80 B 14 content. 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S18

2.80- 3.00 D 2.80 121.29 3.00- 4.00 B Medium dense brown sandy clayey angular to 3.00- 3.45 D (WET) S15 subangular fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone,

siltstone, sandstone and limestone.

4.00- 4.45 D (3.00) S50/ Below 4.00m, very dense. 295


1.20 0.40 Inspection Pit PMS G.L. 27/10/20 08:00 3.00 No rise. 4.45 0.10 Dynamic Sampler PMS 4.45 WET 27/10/20 18:00

Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. Dynamic Sample Borehole terminated at 4.45m depth due to refusal. A 50mm standpipe was installed to 0.80m with a geowrapped slotted section from 0.30m to 0.80m with flush lockable protective cover. Backfill details from base of hole: bentonite seal up to 0.80m, gravel filter up to 0.30m, bentonite seal up to 0.10m, concrete up to ground level.

Dynamic Sampler WS7



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 124.31 0.00- 0.10 B MADE GROUND: Black tarmacadam. 0.10 124.21 0.00- 0.10 D 0.10- 0.60 B MADE GROUND: Orangish brown gravelly slightly silty 0.10- 0.60 D fine to coarse sand with a medium cobble content. 0.10 ES Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse of 0.60 123.71 0.10 PID=0.9 mudstone, sandstone, limestone, tarmacadam, 0.40 ES concrete and brick fragments. 0.40 PID=0.9 0.60- 1.20 B Soft to firm light brown slightly gravelly sandy 0.60- 1.20 D CLAY. Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to 1.00 ES medium of mudstone, siltstone and sandstone. 1.00 PID=0.5 Below 1.00m, sand is fine to coarse. 1.20- 1.80 B Below 1.30m, gravelly. 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S13 Between 1.50m and 1.70m, very gravelly. 1.80- 2.00 D 2.00- 2.60 B 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S14

2.60- 3.00 D 2.60 121.71 Dense light brown sandy clayey angular to subangular fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone,

3.00- 3.80 B siltstone, sandstone and limestone. 3.00- 3.45 D (DRY) S40 Below 3.20m, low cobble content.

3.80- 4.00 D 15 4.00- 4.43 D (DRY) S50/ Below 4.00m, very dense.

280




Dynamic Sampler WS8



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 125.54 0.00- 0.25 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft to firm friable dark brown 0.00- 0.25 D slightly gravelly sandy clay with some rootlets. 0.25 125.29 0.20 ES Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse of 0.20 PID=<0.1 mudstone, siltstone, sandstone, tarmacadam and 0.25- 1.20 B brick fragments. 0.25- 1.20 D 0.50 ES MADE GROUND: Firm to stiff friable dark brown sandy 0.50 PID=<0.1 gravelly clay with a medium cobble content. Gravel 1.00 ES is angular to subangular fine to coarse of 1.00 PID=<0.1 mudstone, siltstone, sandstone, limestone, 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S26 tarmacadam, concrete and brick fragments. 1.20- 1.80 D

1.80- 2.00 D 1.80 123.74 2.00- 2.44 D (WET) S50/ Stiff friable light brown sandy gravelly CLAY with

285 a low cobble content. Gravel is subangular to 2.00 ES subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone 2.00 PID=<0.1 and sandstone.



Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. Dynamic Sample Borehole terminated at 2.44m depth due to refusal. A 50mm standpipe was installed to 1.70m with a geowrapped slotted section from 0.70m to 1.70m with flush lockable protective cover. Backfill details from base of hole: gravel filter up to 0.70m, bentonite seal up to 0.20m, concrete up to ground level.

Dynamic Sampler WS9



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 125.74 0.00- 0.20 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft dark brown slightly 0.00- 0.20 D gravelly sandy clay with some rootlets. Gravel is 0.20 125.54 0.20- 0.40 B subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of 0.40 125.34 0.20- 0.40 D mudstone, sandstone and tarmacadam. 0.20 ES 0.20 PID=0.1 MADE GROUND: Black tarmacadam. 0.40- 1.20 B 0.40- 1.20 D Soft to firm light brown mottled orange slightly 0.40 ES gravelly sandy CLAY with a low cobble content. 0.40 PID=<0.1 Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to medium 1.00 ES of mudstone, siltstone and sandstone. 1.00 PID=<0.1 Below 1.20m, firm to stiff, slightly sandy, 1.20- 1.80 B gravelly. 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S9 1.80- 2.00 D 2.00- 2.80 B 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S8

2.80- 3.00 D 3.00- 3.80 B 3.00 122.74 3.00- 3.45 D (WET) S15 Medium dense brown very sandy clayey angular to

subangular fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone, siltstone and sandstone. Low cobble content. Below 3.40m, some pockets (up to 100mm) of sandy gravelly clay.

3.80- 4.00 D 4.00- 5.00 B Below 4.00m, dense. 4.00- 4.45 D (WET) S35

5.00- 5.45 D (WET) S33




Dynamic Sampler WS10



Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 125.83 0.00- 0.20 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft dark brown sandy gravelly 0.00- 0.20 D clay with some rootlets. Gravel is angular to 0.20 125.63 0.20- 0.50 B subangular fine to coarse of mudstone, sandstone 0.20- 0.50 D and tarmacadam. 0.50 125.33 0.20 ES 0.20 PID=0.1 MADE GROUND: Soft to firm light brown slightly 0.50- 1.20 B sandy gravelly clay with a medium subangular cobble 0.50- 1.20 D content of tarmacadam. Gravel is angular to 0.50 ES subangular fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone, 0.50 PID=0.4 sandstone, coal and tarmacadam. 1.00 ES 1.00 PID=<0.1 Firm to stiff orangish brown sandy gravelly CLAY 1.20- 1.80 B with a low cobble content. Gravel is subangular to 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S12 subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone, 1.80- 2.00 D sandstone and quartzite. 2.00- 3.00 B Below 1.20m, some bands (up to 150mm) of subangular 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S27 to subrounded fine to coarse gravel of mudstone,

siltstone, sandstone and quartzite. 2.30 123.53

Dense dark brown sandy clayey angular to subangular fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone, siltstone, sandstone and quartzite. Low cobble content.

3.00- 3.45 D (DRY) S33 Between 3.00m and 4.00m, no recovery - possibly pushing cobble.

4.00- 4.42 D (DRY) S50/ 270







Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 123.51 0.00- 0.10 B MADE GROUND: Black tarmacadam. 0.10 123.41 0.00- 0.10 D 0.10- 0.50 B MADE GROUND: Grey sandy slightly silty angular to 0.10- 0.50 D subangular fine to coarse gravel of limestone. 0.50 123.01 0.10 ES 0.10 PID=0.7 Soft to firm light brown slightly gravelly sandy 0.50- 1.20 B CLAY with some rootlets. Gravel is subangular to 0.50- 1.20 D subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, sandstone 0.50 ES and coal. 0.50 PID=0.4 Below 1.00m, firm to stiff. Rootlets absent. 1.00 ES 1.00 PID=0.1 1.20- 1.80 B 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S16 1.80- 2.00 D 2.00- 2.80 B 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S14

Between 2.80m and 3.00m, very gravelly. 2.80- 3.00 D 3.00- 3.60 B 3.00- 3.45 D (DRY) S16

Below 3.40m, slightly sandy, very gravelly.

3.60- 4.00 D 3.60 119.91 Medium dense brown very sandy very clayey angular to subangular fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone,

4.00- 4.80 B siltstone, sandstone and limestone. Low cobble 4.00- 4.45 D (WET) S23 content.

At 4.80m, sample barrel refused. 4.80- 5.24 D (WET) S50/

290



Inspection pit hand excavated to 1.20m depth and no services were found. ES sample = 1 x 60ml glass vial and 2 x 258ml amber glass jars. Dynamic Sample Borehole terminated at 5.24m depth due to refusal. A 50mm standpipe was installed to 0.80m with a geowrapped slotted section from 0.30m to 0.80m with flush lockable protective cover. Backfill details from base of hole: bentonite seal up to 0.80m, gravel filter up to 0.30m, bentonite seal up to 0.10m, concrete up to ground level.




Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 122.47 0.00- 0.30 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft dark brown slightly 0.00- 0.30 D gravelly sandy clay with many rootlets. Gravel is 0.20 ES subangular to subrounded fine to coarse of 0.30 122.17 0.20 PID=<0.1 mudstone, sandstone and coal. 0.30- 1.20 B 0.30- 1.20 D Firm to stiff orangish brown slightly gravelly 0.50 ES sandy CLAY with a low cobble content. Gravel is 0.50 PID=<0.1 subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone 1.00 ES and sandstone. 1.00 PID=<0.1 Below 1.20m, gravelly. 1.20- 1.80 B 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S29

1.80- 2.00 D 2.00- 2.80 B 2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S25

Below 2.50m, friable, slightly sandy, very gravelly.

2.80- 3.00 D 3.00- 3.80 B 3.00- 3.45 D (DRY) S26

3.20 119.27 Medium dense dark brown sandy clayey angular to subangular fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone, siltstone, sandstone and limestone. Low cobble content.

3.80- 4.00 D 4.00- 4.43 D (DRY) S50/

275







Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 122.60 0.00- 0.30 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Dark brown sandy gravelly clay 0.00- 0.30 D with some rootlets. Gravel is subangular to 0.20 ES subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone, 0.30 122.30 0.20 PID=<0.1 sandstone and brick fragments. 0.30- 1.20 B 0.30- 1.20 D Soft to firm light brown sandy gravelly CLAY with a 0.50 ES low cobble content. Gravel is subangular to 0.50 PID=<0.1 subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, siltstone 1.00 ES and sandstone. 1.00 PID=<0.1 1.20- 1.30 B 1.30 121.30 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S13 Firm to stiff orangish brown slightly sandy 1.30- 1.50 D gravelly CLAY. Gravel is subrounded to rounded fine 1.50- 2.00 B to coarse of mudstone, siltstone and sandstone.

2.00- 2.45 D (DRY) S23

2.80 119.80 3.00- 3.80 B Dense dark brown sandy clayey angular to subangular 3.00- 3.45 D (DRY) S34 fine to coarse GRAVEL of mudstone, siltstone,

sandstone and limestone.

3.80- 4.00 D 4.00- 4.42 D (DRY) S50/ Below 4.00m, very dense.

270







Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021


Client



DepthSampleType kPa

w%

Scale


Boring Groundwater


Remarks



Time MinsDiaHole

DepthCased &

(to Water)Strength




G.L. 124.91 0.00- 0.20 B Grass over TOPSOIL: Soft brown slightly gravelly 0.00- 0.20 D sandy clay with some rootlets. Gravel is subangular 0.20 124.71 0.20- 1.20 B to subrounded fine to coarse of mudstone, 0.20- 1.20 D siltstone, sandstone and brick fragments. 0.20 ES 0.20 PID=<0.1 Soft to firm orangish brown sandy gravelly CLAY. 0.50 ES Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse of 0.50 PID=<0.1 mudstone, siltstone, sandstone and quartzite. 1.00 ES Below 1.00m, stiff. 1.00 PID=<0.1 Below 1.20m, very stiff, friable, orangish brown 1.20- 1.80 B mottled bluish grey. 1.20- 1.65 D (DRY) S34

1.80- 2.00 D 2.00- 2.43 D (DRY) S50/

280







Levelm OD

SPT N

Logged by JN


Figure 1 of 1 11/01/2021





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS1 1.20 S 3 3 3 4 5 6-121.08 18 *

WS1 2.00 S 6 7 7 7 7 7-120.28 28 *

WS1 3.00 S 4 5 6 7 7 7-119.28 27 *


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS2 1.20 S 1 2 3 3 4 4-122.04 14 *

WS2 2.00 S 2 3 4 5 5 6-121.24 20 *

WS2 3.00 S 3 4 5 6 5 6-120.24 22 *

WS2 4.00 S 3 4 4 4 4 4-119.24 16 *

WS2 5.00 S 2 3 3 4 4 4-118.24 15 *


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS3 1.20 S 1 2 2 2 3 3-122.62 10 *

WS3 2.00 S 5 6 8 10 10 11-121.82 39 *

WS3 3.00 S 7 10 10 10 11 11-120.82 42 *

WS3 4.00 S 8 11 15 14 14 7/50-119.82 50/275 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS4 1.20 S 1 2 3 3 3 4-124.34 13 *

WS4 2.00 S 2 3 3 4 5 5-123.54 17 *

WS4 3.00 S 6 7 7 8 6 6-122.54 27 *

WS4 4.00 S 8 10 10 9 7 7-121.54 33 *

WS4 5.00 S 10 11 10 8 10 10-120.54 38 *


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS5 1.20 S 1 1 2 2 3 3-125.31 10 *

WS5 2.00 S 3 4 5 3 4 6-124.51 18 *

WS5 3.00 S 7 8 9 10 9 10-123.51 38 *

WS5 4.00 S 7 9 11 11 10 10-122.51 42 *

WS5 5.00 S 4 5 6 6 7 7-121.51 26 *


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS6 1.20 S 2 2 2 2 2 3-124.24 9 *

WS6 2.00 S 2 3 4 4 4 5-123.44 17 *

WS6 3.00 S 3 4 5 7 7 9-122.44 28 *

WS6 4.00 S 3 3 3 4 4 3-121.44 14 *

WS6 5.00 S 3 3 4 3 4 4-120.44 15 *


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS7 1.20 S 1 1 2 2 3 3-124.89 10 *

WS7 2.00 S 3 3 4 4 5 5-124.09 18 *

WS7 3.00 S 3 4 4 5 3 3-123.09 15 *

WS7 4.00 S 7 10 12 13 13 12/70-122.09 50/295 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS8 1.20 S 2 2 3 3 3 4-125.11 13 *

WS8 2.00 S 2 3 3 4 3 4-124.31 14 *

WS8 3.00 S 10 12 11 10 8 11-123.31 40 *

WS8 4.00 S 9 11 13 14 14 9/55-122.31 50/280 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS9 1.20 S 4 6 6 7 6 7-126.34 26 *

WS9 2.00 S 7 9 13 14 13 10/60-125.54 50/285 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS10 1.20 S 1 1 2 2 2 3-126.54 9 *

WS10 2.00 S 1 2 2 2 2 2-125.74 8 *

WS10 3.00 S 3 4 5 4 3 3-124.74 15 *

WS10 4.00 S 5 6 7 9 10 9-123.74 35 *

WS10 5.00 S 6 7 10 9 7 7-122.74 33 *


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS11 1.20 S 1 2 3 3 3 3-126.63 12 *

WS11 2.00 S 2 3 4 6 8 9-125.83 27 *

WS11 3.00 S 6 7 7 8 9 9-124.83 33 *

WS11 4.00 S 10 12 13 12 15 10/45-123.83 50/270 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS12 1.20 S 3 4 4 4 4 4-124.31 16 *

WS12 2.00 S 2 3 4 3 4 3-123.51 14 *

WS12 3.00 S 3 3 4 3 4 5-122.51 16 *

WS12 4.00 S 3 4 6 7 5 5-121.51 23 *

WS12 4.80 S 9 11 12 13 14 11/65-120.71 50/290 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS13 1.20 S 2 3 4 7 9 9-123.27 29 *

WS13 2.00 S 3 4 5 6 7 7-122.47 25 *

WS13 3.00 S 4 5 5 7 7 7-121.47 26 *

WS13 4.00 S 6 9 11 14 15 10/50-120.47 50/275 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS14 1.20 S 1 1 2 3 4 4-123.40 13 *

WS14 2.00 S 3 4 5 5 7 6-122.60 23 *

WS14 3.00 S 6 8 9 9 8 8-121.60 34 *

WS14 4.00 S 7 10 11 13 15 11/45-120.60 50/270 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019





Value


0-75 75-150 0-75 75-150 150-225 225-300(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

SWP

(mm)m bgl

Level

m OD

'N'

10 20 30 40 50

Uncorrected SPT

WS15 1.20 S 6 7 7 9 9 9-125.71 34 *

WS15 2.00 S 9 11 13 13 14 10/55-124.91 50/280 >


-/-

-*/-




C - SPT with cone


Remarks


Driller

Hammer No.

Calibration Date

Shaun Nabitt

DART478

74.00

29/10/2019

8

APPENDIX 8

Monitoring Results

FIELDWORK - Water Level MonitoringProject

Client

Project No

Borehole

Instrument (dia. mm)

Depth to Base (m)

Filter Zone

Level

(m)

Depth

(m)Date

CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOLPN204159

Sheet No

Time LevelDepth

(m)Level

Depth

(m)Level

Depth

(m)Level

Depth

(m)Level

Depth

(m)Level

BH1 BH2 BH3 BH4 BH5 WS6

S (50mm)

5.45

2.60-5.45

121.58 m OD

S (50mm)

2.70

1.00-2.70

122.37 m OD

S (50mm)

6.00

1.00-6.00

121.80 m OD

S (50mm)

7.90

1.00-8.00

121.15 m OD

S (50mm)

6.60

2.00-6.75

122.05 m OD

S (50mm)

5.00

1.00-5.00

123.44 m OD

Powys County Council 1

5 Nov 2020 DRY DRY DRY 6.00 115.15 DRY DRY

18 Nov 2020 DRY DRY DRY 6.35 114.80 DRY DRY

3 Dec 2020 DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY

Remarks



FIELDWORK - Water Level MonitoringProject

Client

Project No

Borehole

Instrument (dia. mm)

Depth to Base (m)

Filter Zone

Level

(m)

Depth

(m)Date

CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOLPN204159

Sheet No

Time LevelDepth

(m)Level

Depth

(m)Level

Depth

(m)Level

Depth

(m)Level

Depth

(m)Level

WS7 WS9 WS12

S (50mm)

0.80

0.30-0.80

124.09 m OD

S (50mm)

1.70

0.70-1.70

125.54 m OD

S (50mm)

0.80

0.30-0.80

123.51 m OD

Powys County Council 2

5 Nov 2020 DRY 1.40 124.14 DRY

18 Nov 2020 DRY 1.55 123.99

3 Dec 2020 DRY 1.43 124.11 DRY

Remarks



FIELDWORK - Insitu Gas Monitoring - Instrument RecordProject Project No

BoreholeClient Sheet No.

Installation Details

Installation Type DiameterDepth to Base Cover TypeFilter Zone Ground LevelDate Installed

Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

Water Temp.

(deg)

ElectricalConductivi

ty (uS/cm)

pH

(pH Units)

Redox

(mV)

Dissolved Oxygen

(%)

Water Sample Taken (Yes/No)

Methane (Peak) CH4

(% VOL)

Remarks

CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL PN204159

Powys County Council 1 (1 of 3)

BH1

Standpipe 50mm

5.45m Flush lockable protective cover

2.60 - 5.45m 121.58 m OD

30 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1

18-Nov-2020 0.1

3-Dec-2020 0.1





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

Methane (Steady) CH4

(% VOL)

Carbon Dioxide (Peak) (% VOL)

Carbon Dioxide (Steady) (% VOL)

Oxygen (Peak)

(% VOL)

Oxygen (Steady)

(% VOL)

Hydrogen Sulphide H2S

(ppm)

Carbon Monoxide

CO (ppm)

Remarks



BH1

Standpipe 50mm


2.60 - 5.45m 121.58 m OD

30 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1 1.0 1.0 20.4 19.4 0 0

18-Nov-2020 0.1 1.8 1.8 20.6 18.7 0 0

3-Dec-2020 0.1 2.7 2.7 20.6 17.4 0 0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

BarometricPressure

(mbar)

Flow Rate (Peak)

(l/hr)

Flow Rate (Steady)

(l/hr)

PID Peak

(ppm)

PID Average

(ppm)

Odour

(-)

Colour

(-)

Remarks



BH1

Standpipe 50mm


2.60 - 5.45m 121.58 m OD

30 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 1025 0.0 0.0 4.3 3.6

18-Nov-2020 994 0.0 0.0

3-Dec-2020 971 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.4





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

Water Temp.

(deg)


ty (uS/cm)

pH

(pH Units)

Redox

(mV)

Dissolved Oxygen

(%)


Methane (Peak) CH4

(% VOL)

Remarks



BH2

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 2.70m 122.37 m OD

30 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 Unable to record

gas concentrations

- gas bung had

fallen out of

standpipe.

18-Nov-2020 0.1

3-Dec-2020 0.1





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1


(% VOL)



Oxygen (Peak)

(% VOL)

Oxygen (Steady)

(% VOL)


(ppm)

Carbon Monoxide

CO (ppm)

Remarks



BH2

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 2.70m 122.37 m OD

30 October 2020

5-Nov-2020

18-Nov-2020 0.1 2.9 2.9 20.8 16.8 0 0

3-Dec-2020 0.0 3.4 3.4 20.5 16.2 0 0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

BarometricPressure

(mbar)

Flow Rate (Peak)

(l/hr)

Flow Rate (Steady)

(l/hr)

PID Peak

(ppm)

PID Average

(ppm)

Odour

(-)

Colour

(-)

Remarks



BH2

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 2.70m 122.37 m OD

30 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 1025

18-Nov-2020 994 0.0 0.0

3-Dec-2020 971 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.4





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

Water Temp.

(deg)


ty (uS/cm)

pH

(pH Units)

Redox

(mV)

Dissolved Oxygen

(%)


Methane (Peak) CH4

(% VOL)

Remarks



BH3

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 6.00m 121.80 m OD

28 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1

18-Nov-2020 0.1

3-Dec-2020 0.1





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1


(% VOL)



Oxygen (Peak)

(% VOL)

Oxygen (Steady)

(% VOL)


(ppm)

Carbon Monoxide

CO (ppm)

Remarks



BH3

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 6.00m 121.80 m OD

28 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1 0.8 0.8 20.3 19.8 0 0

18-Nov-2020 0.1 2.4 2.4 20.5 18.2 0 0

3-Dec-2020 0.0 3.2 3.2 20.9 17.6 0 0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

BarometricPressure

(mbar)

Flow Rate (Peak)

(l/hr)

Flow Rate (Steady)

(l/hr)

PID Peak

(ppm)

PID Average

(ppm)

Odour

(-)

Colour

(-)

Remarks



BH3

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 6.00m 121.80 m OD

28 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 1025 0.0 0.0 3.1 3.1

18-Nov-2020 994 0.0 0.0

3-Dec-2020 971 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.6





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

Water Temp.

(deg)


ty (uS/cm)

pH

(pH Units)

Redox

(mV)

Dissolved Oxygen

(%)


Methane (Peak) CH4

(% VOL)

Remarks



BH4

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 8.00m 121.15 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1

18-Nov-2020 0.1

3-Dec-2020 0.1





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1


(% VOL)



Oxygen (Peak)

(% VOL)

Oxygen (Steady)

(% VOL)


(ppm)

Carbon Monoxide

CO (ppm)

Remarks



BH4

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 8.00m 121.15 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1 1.0 1.0 20.4 19.7 0 0

18-Nov-2020 0.1 2.1 2.1 20.7 18.7

3-Dec-2020 0.0 2.7 2.7 20.7 18.7 0 0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

BarometricPressure

(mbar)

Flow Rate (Peak)

(l/hr)

Flow Rate (Steady)

(l/hr)

PID Peak

(ppm)

PID Average

(ppm)

Odour

(-)

Colour

(-)

Remarks



BH4

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 8.00m 121.15 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 1025 0.0 0.0 5.2 3.2

18-Nov-2020 994 0.0 0.0

3-Dec-2020 971 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.9





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

Water Temp.

(deg)


ty (uS/cm)

pH

(pH Units)

Redox

(mV)

Dissolved Oxygen

(%)


Methane (Peak) CH4

(% VOL)

Remarks



BH5

Standpipe 50mm


2.00 - 6.75m 122.05 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1

18-Nov-2020 0.1

3-Dec-2020 0.0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1


(% VOL)



Oxygen (Peak)

(% VOL)

Oxygen (Steady)

(% VOL)


(ppm)

Carbon Monoxide

CO (ppm)

Remarks



BH5

Standpipe 50mm


2.00 - 6.75m 122.05 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1 0.6 0.6 20.3 20.0 0 0

18-Nov-2020 0.1 1.9 1.9 20.7 18.5 0 0

3-Dec-2020 0.0 2.3 2.3 20.7 18.3 0 0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

BarometricPressure

(mbar)

Flow Rate (Peak)

(l/hr)

Flow Rate (Steady)

(l/hr)

PID Peak

(ppm)

PID Average

(ppm)

Odour

(-)

Colour

(-)

Remarks



BH5

Standpipe 50mm


2.00 - 6.75m 122.05 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 1025 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.3

18-Nov-2020 994 0.0 0.0

3-Dec-2020 971 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.3





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

Water Temp.

(deg)


ty (uS/cm)

pH

(pH Units)

Redox

(mV)

Dissolved Oxygen

(%)


Methane (Peak) CH4

(% VOL)

Remarks



WS6

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 5.00m 123.44 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1

18-Nov-2020 0.1

3-Dec-2020 0.0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1


(% VOL)



Oxygen (Peak)

(% VOL)

Oxygen (Steady)

(% VOL)


(ppm)

Carbon Monoxide

CO (ppm)

Remarks



WS6

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 5.00m 123.44 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1 0.7 0.7 20.2 19.9 0 0

18-Nov-2020 0.1 1.3 1.3 20.4 19.3 0 0

3-Dec-2020 0.0 2.8 2.8 19.9 18.2 0 0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

BarometricPressure

(mbar)

Flow Rate (Peak)

(l/hr)

Flow Rate (Steady)

(l/hr)

PID Peak

(ppm)

PID Average

(ppm)

Odour

(-)

Colour

(-)

Remarks



WS6

Standpipe 50mm


1.00 - 5.00m 123.44 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 1025 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.4

18-Nov-2020 994 0.0 0.0

3-Dec-2020 973 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.9





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

Water Temp.

(deg)


ty (uS/cm)

pH

(pH Units)

Redox

(mV)

Dissolved Oxygen

(%)


Methane (Peak) CH4

(% VOL)

Remarks



WS7

Standpipe 50mm


0.30 - 0.80m 124.09 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1

18-Nov-2020 0.2

3-Dec-2020 0.0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1


(% VOL)



Oxygen (Peak)

(% VOL)

Oxygen (Steady)

(% VOL)


(ppm)

Carbon Monoxide

CO (ppm)

Remarks



WS7

Standpipe 50mm


0.30 - 0.80m 124.09 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1 0.3 0.3 20.2 20.2 0 0

18-Nov-2020 0.2 0.1 0.1 20.3 20.2 0 0

3-Dec-2020 0.0 3.0 2.9 20.2 6.4 0 0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

BarometricPressure

(mbar)

Flow Rate (Peak)

(l/hr)

Flow Rate (Steady)

(l/hr)

PID Peak

(ppm)

PID Average

(ppm)

Odour

(-)

Colour

(-)

Remarks



WS7

Standpipe 50mm


0.30 - 0.80m 124.09 m OD

27 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 1025 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.3

18-Nov-2020 994 0.0 0.0

3-Dec-2020 973 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

Water Temp.

(deg)


ty (uS/cm)

pH

(pH Units)

Redox

(mV)

Dissolved Oxygen

(%)


Methane (Peak) CH4

(% VOL)

Remarks



WS9

Standpipe 50mm


0.70 - 1.70m 125.54 m OD

29 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.2

18-Nov-2020 0.1

3-Dec-2020 8.9 121.1 8.34 176.8 85.8 Yes 0.1





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1


(% VOL)



Oxygen (Peak)

(% VOL)

Oxygen (Steady)

(% VOL)


(ppm)

Carbon Monoxide

CO (ppm)

Remarks



WS9

Standpipe 50mm


0.70 - 1.70m 125.54 m OD

29 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1 0.3 0.3 20.3 20.2 0 0

18-Nov-2020 0.1 0.1 0.1 20.8 20.8 0 0

3-Dec-2020 0.0 0.4 0.4 20.3 20.2 0 0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

BarometricPressure

(mbar)

Flow Rate (Peak)

(l/hr)

Flow Rate (Steady)

(l/hr)

PID Peak

(ppm)

PID Average

(ppm)

Odour

(-)

Colour

(-)

Remarks



WS9

Standpipe 50mm


0.70 - 1.70m 125.54 m OD

29 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 1025 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.2

18-Nov-2020 994 0.0 0.0

3-Dec-2020 972 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.0 None Clear





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

Water Temp.

(deg)


ty (uS/cm)

pH

(pH Units)

Redox

(mV)

Dissolved Oxygen

(%)


Methane (Peak) CH4

(% VOL)

Remarks



WS12

Standpipe 50mm


0.30 - 0.80m 123.51 m OD

28 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1

18-Nov-2020 0.1

3-Dec-2020 0.1





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1


(% VOL)



Oxygen (Peak)

(% VOL)

Oxygen (Steady)

(% VOL)


(ppm)

Carbon Monoxide

CO (ppm)

Remarks



WS12

Standpipe 50mm


0.30 - 0.80m 123.51 m OD

28 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 0.1 1.4 1.4 21.2 21.2 0 0

18-Nov-2020 0.1 0.6 0.6 20.5 20.2 0 0

3-Dec-2020 0.0 2.1 2.1 20.2 18.3 0 0





Date Time

Remarks

Form 003/1

BarometricPressure

(mbar)

Flow Rate (Peak)

(l/hr)

Flow Rate (Steady)

(l/hr)

PID Peak

(ppm)

PID Average

(ppm)

Odour

(-)

Colour

(-)

Remarks



WS12

Standpipe 50mm


0.30 - 0.80m 123.51 m OD

28 October 2020

5-Nov-2020 1024 0.0 0.0 21.2 21.2

18-Nov-2020 994 0.0 0.0

3-Dec-2020 973 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.1

9

APPENDIX 9

Laboratory Test Results - Geotechnical

DATA SHEET - Laboratory Test Symbols

Classification and Strength

Symbol C - Clay M - Silt

(0 - containing organic matter)

Plasticity L - Low

I - Intermediate

H - High

V - Very High

E - Extremely High

Ip Plasticity Index

% % retained on 425 µm sieve, shown under Ip value

wL Liquid Limit

wP Plastic Limit

NP Non-Plastic

NAT Sample tested in natural state

w Water Content

p Particle Density

Test Quick undrained triaxial tests SS Single stage - 102mm diameter.

S3 Single stage - set of 3

38mm diameter.

MS Multistage - 102mm diameter.

D Drained Test

HV Hand Vane

PP Pocket Penetrometer (kg/cm²)

NST Not suitable for test

b Bulk Density

3 Triaxial Cell Pressure

1 - 3 Deviator Stress

## Excessive Strain

cu Undrained Cohesion

c Cohesion Intercept

Angle of Shearing Resistance

Linear Linear Shrinkage Shrink

Stab add- Stabiliser which is added

Consolidation

mv Coefficient of Volume Compressibility

cv50 Coefficient of Consolidation - Log t

cv90 Coefficient of Consolidation - t

Rock

UF Unacceptable Failure

Chemical Analysis

Acid Soluble Total sulphate in specimen, expressed as SO3 %, value in brackets expressed as SO4 %

Water Soluble Soluble sulphate in 2:1 water : soil extract, expressed as SO3 g/l, value in brackets expressed as SO4 g/l

In Water Sulphate content of groundwater, expressed as SO3 g/l, value in brackets expressed as SO4 g/l

pH pH value

Organic content Organic content expressed as a percentage of dry weight

Chloride Chloride Ion content expressed as a percentage of dry weight

MCV, Compaction, CBR

MCV Moisture Condition Value at natural water content

MCC Moisture Condition Calibration

CCV Chalk Crushing Value

Compaction

Type 2.5 = 2.5 kg Rammer 4.5 = 4.5 kg Rammer V = Vibrating Hammer

b Bulk Density

d Dry Density

CBR California Bearing Ratio

Type 2.5 = Test on Specimen Recompacted using 2.5 kg Rammer 4.5 = As above but using 4.5 kg Rammer V = As above but using Vibrating Hammer M = Test on open drive mould specimen cut in field S = Soaked Specimen

Top CBR at top of mould

Bottom CBR at bottom of mould

ND None Detected

* In the Sample Description denotes a laboratory

only description

d

Testing Start Date

Testing Complete

Comments

Project No

Project Name

StandardTest

QuantityUKAS

BS EN ISO 17892-1:2014 22 Yes

BS EN ISO 17892-12:2018

Cl. 5.3 & 5.511 Yes

BS EN ISO 17892-12:2018

Cl. 5.3.14 & 5.61 Yes

BS EN ISO 17892-2:2014

Cl. 5.11 Yes

BS 1377-7:1990

Cl. 3.01 No

BS EN ISO 17892-8:2018 2 Yes

BS 1377-4:1990

Cl. 3.32 Yes

BS 1377-4:1990

Cl. 7.22 Yes

BS EN ISO 17892-5:2017 4 Yes

BS EN ISO 17892-4:2016

Cl. 5.25 Yes

BS EN ISO 17892-4:2016

Cl. 5.45 Yes

Test Results checked and approved for issue.

Signed for and on behalf of Geotechnics Limited

Stephane Schiano (Laboratory Testing Manager)

Note: Any descriptions, opinions or interpretations are outside the scope of UKAS accreditation.

The results within this report relate only to the samples tested and received from the client.

203 Torrington Avenue, Tile Hill,

Coventry, CV4 9UT

Test Description

Water Content

Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit (4 Points Method)

Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit (1 Point Method)

Bulk Density by Linear Measurement

Particle Size Distribution by Sieving Method

Particle Size Distribution by Pipette Method

Shear Strength by Laboratory Vane

Shear Strength by Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial Test - Single Stage

2.5 kg Rammer Dry Density/Moisture Content Relationship (Compaction)

California Bearing Ratio (CBR)

Incremental Loading Oedometer

Laboratory Test Certificate

Samples / Material Source

Form REP008 Rev 3

Client Ref. No.

14/12/2020

N/AUnit 1B, Borders Industrial Estate

River Lane, Saltney

Chester CH4 8RJ

Issued To Date of issue

1

Samples Recv'd 18/11/20 & 25/11/20

Summary of Tests

Geotechnics Ltd


PN204159

CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL

Issue No.

Sampled by Geotechnics Limited

Sample State As received18/11/2020

14/12/2020

LABORATORY RESULTS - Classification and Strength

Project Project No:

Sample

Hole Depth Type Description

Depth)

Sample

PN204159CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL

Ref

m

(Specimen

Classification Strength

Symbol lp Test �b � �� cw w w

L p 3 31

Mg/m kN/m3 2

kN/m2

kN/m2

(>425)

c

kN/m2

upd

( )

%

�d

( )(

%%%

Avg

BH1 D N821751.65

(1.65)

Firm to stiff brown slightly gravelly

CLAY.

CI 15

(7%)

40 25 25.2

BH1 UT N821762.00-

2.45

(2.00)


CLAY.

(See Test Remarks Sheet for further

information)

20.3 SS NST NST

BH2 D N821781.20-

1.65

(1.20)

Firm brown slightly sandy slightly

gravelly CLAY.

CL 11

(37%)

30 19 21.1

BH2 UT N821792.00-

2.45

(2.25)

Firm high strength brown mottled grey

slightly sandy slightly gravelly CLAY.

12.2

<27.5>

SS 1.99 40 178 89 89

BH3 D N821801.60

(1.60)

Stiff greyish brown mottled orange


CI 13

(20%)

35 22 20.1

BH3 UT N821812.00-

2.45

(2.00)




information)

19.9 SS NST NST

BH3 D N821823.00-

3.45

(3.00)

Stiff brown slightly sandy gravelly

CLAY.

CL 14

(67%)

30 16 7.0

BH4 D N821831.20-

1.65

(1.20)

Brown slightly gravelly silty fine SAND. 16.5

BH4 UT N823422.00-

2.45

(2.00)

Stiff to very stiff high strength friable

greyish brown mottled orange slightly

sandy gravelly CLAY.

20.3

<20.8>

SS 2.23 40 174 87 87

BH4 D N821843.00-

3.45

(3.00)

Very stiff friable greyish brown mottled

orange slightly sandy gravelly CLAY.

CL 13

(65%)

30 17 7.4

BH5 D N821861.20-

1.65

(1.20)


gravelly CLAY.

CI 17

(13%)

43 26 28.2

BH5 UT N821872.00-

2.45

(2.00)

Firm to stiff low strength brown mottled

orange and grey slightly sandy CLAY.


information)

15.5 SS

HV

2.25 NST

Top= 38

BH5 D N821882.50

(2.50)

Brown mottled orange and grey slightly

sandy clayey SILT. (8%)

26 NP 16.2

TP1 D N821891.00-

1.40

(1.00)

Brown clayey fine to coarse GRAVEL. CI 25

(86%)

48 23 10.3

Remarks NST - Not suitable for TestFor Standards followed see Laboratory Test Certficate

w% - ^ = Rock water content test; x = Aggregate moisture content test

QUT Water Contents: <Failure Zone>, [After test]

LABORATORY RESULTS - Classification and Strength

Project Project No:

Sample


Depth)

Sample


Ref

m

(Specimen

Classification Strength

Symbol lp Test �b � �� cw w w

L p 3 31

Mg/m kN/m3 2

kN/m2

kN/m2

(>425)

c

kN/m2

upd

( )

%

�d

( )(

%%%

Avg

TP2 D N821910.80-

1.20

(0.80)

Firm brown slightly gravelly sandy

CLAY.

CI 22

(11%)

48 26 32.2

WS4 B N821922.00-

2.80

(2.00)

Stiff light brown slightly sandy slightly

gravelly silty CLAY.

13.9

WS5 B N821931.30-

1.80

(1.30)

Firm to stiff light brown slightly sandy

gravelly CLAY.

28.8

WS5 B N821944.00-

5.00

(4.00)

Stiff light brown slightly sandy gravelly

clayey SILT.

5.4

WS5 D N821954.00-

4.45

(4.00)


clayey SILT. (63%)

29 NP 7.8

WS6 D N821973.80-

4.00

(3.80)

Light brown sandy clayey fine to coarse

GRAVEL.

CL 10

(63%)

27 17 8.1

WS7 B N821982.00-

2.80

(2.00)

Dark brown sandy clayey fine to coarse

GRAVEL.


information)

(83%)

39 NP 14.1

WS8 D N822003.80-

4.00

(3.80)


GRAVEL.

15.2

Remarks NST - Not suitable for TestFor Standards followed see Laboratory Test Certficate

w% - ^ = Rock water content test; x = Aggregate moisture content test

QUT Water Contents: <Failure Zone>, [After test]

LABORATORY RESULTS -

Project:

Project No: PN204159


PLOT OF PLASTICITY INDEX AGAINST LIQUID LIMIT

Classification Chart

for all items tested

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

Liq u id Limit %

Interm ediate

CL

CI

CH

CE

CV

M L M I

M H

M V

M E

H igh V ery H ig h E xtrem ely H ighLo w

Remarks 16/12/2020

Soil Type Plasticity Characterisics

C Clay

M Silt

L Low

I Intermediate

H High

V Very High

E Extremely High

Table of Soil Types and Plasticity Characteristics from BS 5930 : 1999

LABORATORY RESULTS - Atterberg Limit

Project Project No:

Sample


Depth)

Sample


Ref

m

(Specimen

Results

Sym-

bol

lp w wL p>425

sieve

%%%

Test Type Water

%

(Factor)

Point Data

m�

Cone

Pene.

BH1 D N821751.65

(1.65)


CLAY.

Fall Cone 4pt with

increasing water content,

cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

CI 7%15 40 25

BH2 D N821781.20-

1.65

(1.20)


gravelly CLAY.

Fall Cone 4pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

CL 37%11 30 19

BH3 D N821801.60

(1.60)



Fall Cone 4pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

CI 20%13 35 22

BH3 D N821823.00-

3.45

(3.00)

Stiff brown slightly sandy gravelly

CLAY.

Fall Cone 4pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

CL 67%14 30 16

BH4 D N821843.00-

3.45

(3.00)

Very stiff friable greyish brown mottled

orange slightly sandy gravelly CLAY.

Fall Cone 4pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

CL 65%13 30 17

BH5 D N821861.20-

1.65

(1.20)


gravelly CLAY.

Fall Cone 4pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

CI 13%17 43 26

BH5 D N821882.50

(2.50)

Brown mottled orange and grey slightly

sandy clayey SILT.

Fall Cone 4pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

8% 26 NP

TP1 D N821891.00-

1.40

(1.00)

Brown clayey fine to coarse GRAVEL. Fall Cone 4pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

CI 86%25 48 23

TP2 D N821910.80-

1.20

(0.80)

Firm brown slightly gravelly sandy

CLAY.

Fall Cone 4pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

CI 11%22 48 26

Remarks

LABORATORY RESULTS - Atterberg Limit

Project Project No:

Sample


Depth)

Sample


Ref

m

(Specimen

Results

Sym-

bol

lp w wL p>425

sieve

%%%

Test Type Water

%

(Factor)

Point Data

m�

Cone

Pene.

WS5 D N821954.00-

4.45

(4.00)


clayey SILT.

Fall Cone 4pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

63% 29 NP

WS6 D N821973.80-

4.00

(3.80)


GRAVEL.

Fall Cone 4pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

CL 63%10 27 17

WS7 B N821982.00-

2.80

(2.00)

Dark brown sandy clayey fine to coarse

GRAVEL.


information)

Test Remark: 1-point cone1-point cone

Fall Cone 1pt with


cone type: 80g/30,

washed over 425um

sieve

20.7

20.4

35.80

35.68

(1.094)

83% 39 NP

Remarks

LABORATORY RESULTS - Particle Size Distribution

Project:


CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL Hole

Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

WS4

2.00-2.80m

B

N82192

Sample Description

Stiff light brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly silty CLAY.

mm

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000Particle Size (mm)

CLAY

Fine Medium Coarse

SILT

Classificatio

n

Fine Medium Coarse

SAND

Fine Medium Coarse

Gravel

Cobbles Boulders

% of each

14

12

23

0

0

Size % Finer Size

Sieving Method

Fine Particle Analysis

Method

Pre-treated

with

% loss on

Pre-treatment

Particle

Density

Wet sieve

Hydrogen

Peroxide

0.69

2.65

(Assumed)

100

100

100

100

100

94

89

85

83

77

75

65

47

25

14

Pipette

Uniformity Coefficient

Not Available

SAND

GRAVEL

COBBLES

BOULDERS

Classification

51

CLAY

SILT

100

100

72

70

68

125

mm100

mm75

mm63

mm50

mm37.5

mm20

mm14

mm10

mm6.3

mm5

mm2

mm1.18

m600 �

m300 �

m150 �

m63 �

m20 �

m6 �

m2 �

% Finer

Remarks 17/12/2020Sieve:-Test performed in accordance with BS EN ISO 17892-4:2016

Pipette:-Test performed in accordance with BS EN ISO 17892-4:2016


Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

WS7

2.00-2.80m

B

N82198

Sample Description

Dark brown sandy clayey fine to coarse GRAVEL.

mm

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000Particle Size (mm)

CLAY

Fine Medium Coarse

SILT

Classificatio

n

Fine Medium Coarse

SAND

Fine Medium Coarse

Gravel

Cobbles Boulders

% of each

2

17

71

0

0

Size % Finer Size

Sieving Method


Method

Pre-treated

with

% loss on

Pre-treatment

Particle

Density

Wet sieve

Hydrogen

Peroxide

0.00

2.65

(Assumed)

100

100

100

100

79

70

59

47

42

29

23

12

6

3

2

Pipette


249.44

SAND

GRAVEL

COBBLES

BOULDERS

Classification

10

CLAY

SILT

100

100

18

16

14

125

mm100

mm75

mm63

mm50

mm37.5

mm20

mm14

mm10

mm6.3

mm5

mm2

mm1.18

m600 �

m300 �

m150 �

m63 �

m20 �

m6 �

m2 �

% Finer




Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

WS8

3.00-3.80m

B

N82199

Sample Description

Light brown sandy clayey fine to coarse GRAVEL.

mm

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000Particle Size (mm)

CLAY

Fine Medium Coarse

SILT

Classificatio

n

Fine Medium Coarse

SAND

Fine Medium Coarse

Gravel

Cobbles Boulders

% of each

4

20

65

0

0

Size % Finer Size

Sieving Method


Method

Pre-treated

with

% loss on

Pre-treatment

Particle

Density

Wet sieve

Hydrogen

Peroxide

0.62

2.65

(Assumed)

100

100

100

100

91

74

64

54

48

35

29

15

12

7

4

Pipette


628.41

SAND

GRAVEL

COBBLES

BOULDERS

Classification

11

CLAY

SILT

100

98

23

20

17

125

mm100

mm75

mm63

mm50

mm37.5

mm20

mm14

mm10

mm6.3

mm5

mm2

mm1.18

m600 �

m300 �

m150 �

m63 �

m20 �

m6 �

m2 �

% Finer




Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

WS10

4.00-5.00m

B

N82339

Sample Description

Brown very sandy clayey fine to coarse GRAVEL.

mm

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000Particle Size (mm)

CLAY

Fine Medium Coarse

SILT

Classificatio

n

Fine Medium Coarse

SAND

Fine Medium Coarse

Gravel

Cobbles Boulders

% of each

4

21

65

0

0

Size % Finer Size

Sieving Method


Method

Pre-treated

with

% loss on

Pre-treatment

Particle

Density

Wet sieve

Hydrogen

Peroxide

0.36

2.65

(Assumed)

100

100

100

100

85

79

67

54

50

35

29

14

11

7

4

Pipette


527.79

SAND

GRAVEL

COBBLES

BOULDERS

Classification

10

CLAY

SILT

100

96

23

19

16

125

mm100

mm75

mm63

mm50

mm37.5

mm20

mm14

mm10

mm6.3

mm5

mm2

mm1.18

m600 �

m300 �

m150 �

m63 �

m20 �

m6 �

m2 �

% Finer




Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

WS12

4.00-4.80m

B

N82340

Sample Description

Brown very sandy very clayey fine to coarse GRAVEL.

mm

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000Particle Size (mm)

CLAY

Fine Medium Coarse

SILT

Classificatio

n

Fine Medium Coarse

SAND

Fine Medium Coarse

Gravel

Cobbles Boulders

% of each

6

25

49

0

0

Size % Finer Size

Sieving Method


Method

Pre-treated

with

% loss on

Pre-treatment

Particle

Density

Wet sieve

Hydrogen

Peroxide

0.94

2.65

(Assumed)

100

100

100

100

100

92

85

73

68

51

43

26

19

11

6

Pipette


697.88

SAND

GRAVEL

COBBLES

BOULDERS

Classification

20

CLAY

SILT

100

100

36

30

26

125

mm100

mm75

mm63

mm50

mm37.5

mm20

mm14

mm10

mm6.3

mm5

mm2

mm1.18

m600 �

m300 �

m150 �

m63 �

m20 �

m6 �

m2 �

% Finer



LABORATORY RESULTS - Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial Test

Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

BH2

2.00-2.45m

UT

N82179

Sample Description

Firm high strength brown mottled grey slightly sandy slightly gravelly CLAY.

The following samples were combined to perform this test:

(Mg/m )

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

1 4 0

1 6 0

1 8 0

2 0 0

0 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8

S tra in %

41.2

50.2

57.3

72.8

81.2

88.4

63.3

112.0

95.1

121.6

125.9

130.2

117.1

137.6

141.2

145.0

156.2

148.1

161.9

163.5

165.4

159.1

169.1

133.8

167.5

0.3

0.5

0.8

1.5

2.0

2.5

1.0

4.5

3.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

5.0

7.0

7.5

8.0

9.0

9.5

8.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

10.5

13.0

13.5

12.5

Strain

%

Corrected

Deviator

Stress kN/m

173.5

174.8

176.9

177.9

175.8

15.1

15.6

16.6

17.1

16.1

22

Strain

%

Corrected

Deviator

Stress kN/m

BS EN ISO 17892-8:2018

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Sample Condition

Orientation of sample

Initial Diameter

Undisturbed

Vertical

Initial Length

100.43

199.28

Initial Water Content 12.2

(mm)

(mm)

(%)

Initial Bulk Density 1.99(Mg/m )

3Initial Dry Density 1.77

3

Cell Pressure 40(kPa)

Membrane100 / 0.0000(mm/kPa)

Corrected Deviator Stress 178(kPa)

Undrained Shear Strength 89(kPa)

Strain at Failure 17.1(%)

Mode of Failure Intermediate

Rate of Strain (%/min) 1.5

Thickness/Correction

101.3

170.8

3.5

14.1

106.7 4.0

172.1 14.6

150.7

153.6 10.0

Failure Zone Water Content 27.5(%)

Water Content (after test) (%)

Particle Density 2.65 Assumed(Mg/m )3

'Specimen Height' at start199.12

of Shearing Stage(mm)

Test Type Single Stage

18/12/2020Remarks

Sheet 1 of 2


Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

BH2

2.00-2.45m

UT

N82179

18/12/2020Remarks

Sheet 2 of 2


Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

BH4

2.00-2.45m

UT

N82342

Sample Description

Stiff to very stiff high strength friable greyish brown mottled orange slightly sandy gravelly CLAY.

The following samples were combined to perform this test:

(Mg/m )

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

1 4 0

1 6 0

1 8 0

2 0 0

0 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8 2 0 2 2 2 4

S tra in %

23.6

29.3

35.4

55.0

68.3

81.1

43.0

115.9

93.4

126.1

131.4

135.5

121.8

147.8

151.4

151.8

161.9

155.0

163.8

166.2

167.8

163.2

170.0

141.6

168.7

0.2

0.5

0.7

1.4

1.9

2.4

1.0

4.3

2.9

5.2

5.7

6.2

4.8

6.7

7.2

7.6

8.6

9.1

8.1

10.5

11.0

11.5

10.0

12.4

12.9

11.9

Strain

%

Corrected

Deviator

Stress kN/m

172.5

172.9

173.6

173.8

173.2

173.3

173.2

173.0

173.0

173.1

172.1

14.3

14.8

15.7

16.2

16.7

15.3

17.7

18.1

18.6

17.2

19.1

22

Strain

%

Corrected

Deviator

Stress kN/m

BS EN ISO 17892-8:2018

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Sample Condition

Orientation of sample

Initial Diameter

Undisturbed

Vertical

Initial Length

103.40

209.56

Initial Water Content 20.3

(mm)

(mm)

(%)

Initial Bulk Density 2.23(Mg/m )

3Initial Dry Density 1.85

3

Cell Pressure 40(kPa)

Membrane100 / 0.0000(mm/kPa)

Corrected Deviator Stress 174(kPa)

Undrained Shear Strength 87(kPa)

Strain at Failure 16.2(%)

Mode of Failure Plastic

Rate of Strain (%/min) 1.9

Thickness/Correction

102.9

171.6

3.3

13.4

109.4 3.8

172.2 13.8

158.2

160.0 9.5

172.1 19.6

171.7 20.0

Failure Zone Water Content 20.8(%)

Water Content (after test) (%)

Particle Density 2.65 Assumed(Mg/m )3

'Specimen Height' at start209.56

of Shearing Stage(mm)

Test Type Single Stage

18/12/2020Remarks

Sheet 1 of 2


Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

BH4

2.00-2.45m

UT

N82342

18/12/2020Remarks

Sheet 2 of 2

LABORATORY RESULTS - MCV, Compaction, CBR

Project Project No:

Sample


Depth)

Sample


Ref

m

(Specimen

Compaction CBR

MCV Type�b

BottomType w

w

%

CBR

%

Top

w

%

CBR

%Mg/m3

w

MCV

dd� �

Mg/m3

(Opt) (Max)

% % Mg/m3

TP2 B N823382.90-

3.50

(2.90-

3.50)

Stiff brown mottled orangish grey

gravelly CLAY.

2.19 1.91 2.5kg 2.2 14.4 1.8 15.4

WS4 B N821922.00-

2.80

(2.00-

2.80)

Stiff light brown slightly sandy

slightly gravelly silty CLAY.

2.5kg (10.5)

6.7

8.7

13.2*

17.4

21.5

2.65a

1.93

2.07

*2.15

2.05

1.96

(1.95)

1.81

1.91

*1.90

1.75

1.61

WS5 B N821931.30-

1.80

(1.30-

1.80)

Firm to stiff light brown slightly

sandy gravelly CLAY.

2.5kg (16.0)

11.2

13.5

16.3

20.6

21.8

25.7*

2.65a

1.78

1.94

2.01

2.03

1.95

*1.90

(1.74)

1.60

1.71

1.73

1.68

1.60

*1.51

WS5 B N821944.00-

5.00

(4.00-

5.00)

Stiff light brown slightly sandy

gravelly clayey SILT.

2.25 2.06 2.5kg 28 7.9 33 11.2

Remarks Particle Density - a=assumed, m=measured

NST = Not suitable for Test

# = stabilised, see relevant test plot for details

For Standards followed see Laboratory Test Certficate

w% - * = at natural moisture content; x = aggregate moisture content


Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

WS4

B

N82192

Compaction

2.00-2.80m

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

1.60

1.70

1.80

1.90

2.00

2.10

2.20

2.30

2.40

2.50

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Moisture Content (%)

2.5kg Rammer at natural moisture content

2.5kg Rammer�

�

�

Optimum Moisture Content

Remarks


Maximum Dry Density

Particles retained on

Particle Density

10.5

1.95

0

0

2.65 (Assumed)

Preparation

2.5kg Rammer

Mg/m3

%

%

17/12/2020

BS1377 Part 4 1990 : Clause 3.3 and 3.4

Stiff light brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly

silty CLAY.DescriptionMg/m3

Single Sample

37.5mm

20mm sieve


Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

WS5

B

N82193

Compaction

1.30-1.80m

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

1.60

1.70

1.80

1.90

2.00

2.10

2.20

2.30

2.40

2.50

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Moisture Content (%)

2.5kg Rammer at natural moisture content

2.5kg Rammer�

�

�


Remarks


Maximum Dry Density

Particles retained on

Particle Density

16.0

1.74

0

0

2.65 (Assumed)

Preparation

2.5kg Rammer

Mg/m3

%

%

17/12/2020

BS1377 Part 4 1990 : Clause 3.3 and 3.4

Firm to stiff light brown slightly sandy gravelly

CLAY.DescriptionMg/m3

Single Sample

37.5mm

20mm sieve

LABORATORY RESULTS - CBR Force Penetration

Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

TP2

2.90-3.50m

B

N82338

Sample Description

Stiff brown mottled orangish grey gravelly CLAY.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Pene trat ion of Plu nge r (mm )

Top load

Bottom Load

PenetrationTop

(N)

0.25mm

0.50mm

0.75mm

1.00mm

1.25mm

1.50mm

1.75mm

2.00mm

2.25mm

2.50mm

2.75mm

3.00mm

3.25mm

13

3.75mm

3.50mm

Bottom

(N)

16

24 22

37 27

56 38

67 42

79 53

46 33

114 78

132 90

151 103

98 64

190 126

210 141

231 154

174 111

4.00mm

4.25mm

4.50mm

4.75mm

5.25mm

5.50mm

5.75mm

6.00mm

6.25mm

6.50mm

6.75mm

7.00mm

7.25mm

270

5.00mm

7.50mm

183

288 197

310 213

360 250

382 271

408 289

335 229

450 335

476 354

494 364

430 308

542 404

556 422

251 173

526 381

PenetrationTop

(N)

Bottom

(N)Test Type

Surcharge

Bulk Density

Dry Density

(Mg/m )

(Mg/m )3

3

Hand Calculation

CBR BottomTop

Value

w%

2.2

14.4

1.8

15.4

2.5kg

13.60

21.3

Yes

kg

%

Method BS1377 Part 4 1990 : Clause 7.0

2.19

1.91

Remarks 17/12/2020

LABORATORY RESULTS - CBR Force Penetration

Project:



Sample Depth

Sample Type

Sample Ref

WS5

4.00-5.00m

B

N82194

Sample Description

Stiff light brown slightly sandy gravelly clayey SILT.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Pe netrat ion of Plun ger (mm )

Top load

Bottom Load

PenetrationTop

(N)

0.25mm

0.50mm

0.75mm

1.00mm

1.25mm

1.50mm

1.75mm

2.00mm

2.25mm

2.50mm

2.75mm

3.00mm

3.25mm

525

3.75mm

3.50mm

Bottom

(N)

563

833 943

1124 1364

1729 2559

2063 2944

2395 3211

1423 2011

3002 3941

3321 4333

3583 4515

2705 3598

4134 5001

4352 5224

4625 5350

3840 4770

4.00mm

4.25mm

4.50mm

4.75mm

5.25mm

5.50mm

5.75mm

6.00mm

6.25mm

6.50mm

6.75mm

7.00mm

7.25mm

4993

5.00mm

7.50mm

5704

5177 5893

5365 6066

5741 6318

5934 6503

6106 7263

5549 6223

6442 7903

6601 8132

6785 8320

6273 7621

7076 8632

7231 8717

4807 5554

6910 8440

PenetrationTop

(N)

Bottom

(N)Test Type

Surcharge

Bulk Density

Dry Density

(Mg/m )

(Mg/m )3

3

Hand Calculation

CBR BottomTop

Value

w%

28

7.9

33

11.2

2.5kg

13.60

7.4

No

kg

%

Method BS1377 Part 4 1990 : Clause 7.0

2.25

2.06

Remarks 17/12/2020

5 – 7 Hexthorpe Road, Hexthorpe, Doncaster DN4 0AR tel: +44 (0)844 815 6641 fax: +44 (0)844 815 6642 e-mail: [email protected] [email protected]

A copy of the Laboratory Schedule of accredited tests as issued by UKAS is attached to this report. This certificate is issued in accordance with the accreditation requirements of the United Kingdom Accreditation Service. The results

reported herein relate only to the material supplied to the laboratory. This certificate shall not be reproduced other than in full, without the prior written approval of the laboratory.

Checked and Approved Signatories: S Royle A Watkins R Berriman (Laboratory Manager) (Director) (Quality Manager)

H Daniels S Eyre L Knight (Senior Technician) (Senior Technician) (Senior Technician) Page 1 of

LABORATORY REPORT

4043

Contract Number: PSL20/6426

Report Date: 26 November 2020 Client’s Reference: PN204159 Client Name: Geotechnics Limited

203 Torrington Avenue Tile Hill Coventry CV4 9UT

For the attention of: Stephane Schiano Contract Title: Cedewain Specialist Aln School

Date Received: 13/11/2020 Date Commenced: 13/11/2020 Date Completed: 26/11/2020 Notes: Opinions and Interpretations are outside the UKAS Accreditation

* Denotes test not included in laboratory scope of accreditation $ Denotes test carried out by approved contractor

Hole Number: 0.80

Sample Number: Base Depth (m) : 1.20

Sample Type: Lift Number:

Date Grid Reference:

Contract No.PSL20/6426Client RefPN204159

1.93Mg/m3

Mg/m3

%

-(assumed/measured)

1

Direction Of FlowSaturation Time

Consolidation TimePermeability Time

Date FinishedTop Drain UsedBase Drain Used

Method of Saturation

1.4731

0.8082.65

assumed

4

Y

Test Setup19/11/202025/11/2020

Y

By back pressureVertically Downwards

1

Days

DaysDays

PERMEABILITY IN A TRIAXIAL CELLBS 1377 : Part 6 : 1990: Clause 6

4043

101.41

8008.67

Top Depth (m) :

mm2Area

Initial Specimen Conditions

1564

HeightDiameter 100.98

g

mmmm

-Mg/m3

gcm3Volume

Dry MassMass

Bulk DensityDry Density

Moisture ContentVoids Ratio

Specific Gravity

TP2

B

Date Started

Description of SpecimenBrown slightly gravelly slightly sandy CLAY.

Final Specimen Conditions28

1.881.47

%Mg/m3

Mg/m3

Moisture ContentBulk DensityDry Density

RemarksRemoulded with 2.5kg rammer

Cedewain Specialist ALN School

812.16

1191


-

Lift Number

TP2

100

PERMEABILITY IN A TRIAXIAL CELL

m

Saturation

Grid Reference

10200

4043

Specimen DetailsHole NumberSample Depth

Sample No,

BS 1377 : Part 6 : 1990 Clause 6

Cell Pressure Incr.

Differential PressureBack Pressure Incr.

Final Cell PressureFinal B Value

kPakPakPakPa

Cell PressureBack Pressure

Final PWP PWP dissipation

300100

kPakPakPa

400300

%


kPaConsolidation

Effective Pressure

0.96

0.80

5050

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Volu

me

Cha

nge

(cm

3 )

Square-root Time (min)

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0 50 100 150 200 250

B Va

lue

Cell Pressure - kPa


BS 1377 : Part 6 : 1990 Clause 6PERMEABILITY IN A TRIAXIAL CELL

Back Pressure Diff.

400

Hole NumberSpecimen Details

Mean Rate of FlowAverage Temperature

Vertical Permeability Kv

Sample DepthSample No.

10020

0.001020

m/s

Cell Pressure

Permeability Stage

0.80

Lift Number

Permeability Stage

9.8E-11

Grid Reference

Mean Effective Stress

m


kPakPa

ml/min'C

kPa

TP2

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Volu

me

Cha

nge

(cm

3)

Time Minutes

VC in VC Out Best fit line Linear (Best fit line)

LABORATORY RESULTS - Test Remarks

Project Project No:

Sample

Hole Depth Type

Depth)

Sample


Ref

m

(SpecimenLaboratory Remark

BH1 UT N821762.00-

2.45

(2.00-

2.45)

Quick Undrained Triaxial Test - NST= Due to insufficient sample in tube for test.

HSV not suitable as sample collasped when vane pushed in.

BH3 UT N821812.00-

2.45

(2.00-

2.45)

Quick Undrained Triaxial Test - NST= Sample frctured in tube therefore insufficient sample to perform test.

HSV not suitable as sample collasped when vane pushed in.

BH5 UT N821872.00-

2.45

(2.00-

2.45)

Quick Undrained Triaxial Test - NST= Insufficient cohesive sample in tube to perform test.

Vane Test - Could only take one vane reading as sample crumbled.

WS7 B N821982.00-

2.80

(2.00-

2.80)

Atterberg Limit Test - 1-point cone1-point cone

Remarks

10APPENDIX 10

Laboratory Test Results - Chemical/Contamination (Soil)

Certificate Number 10-Nov-20Client

Our Reference

Client Reference

Order No

Contract Title

Description

Date Received

Date Started

Date Completed

Test Procedures

Notes

Approved By

Adam Fenwick

Opinions and interpretations are outside the laboratory's scope of ISO 17025accreditation. This certificate is issued in accordance with the accreditationrequirements of the United Kingdom Accreditation Service. The results reported hereinrelate only to the material supplied to the laboratory. This certificate shall not bereproduced except in full, without the prior written approval of the laboratory.

Contracts Manager


11 Soil samples.

30-Oct-20

30-Oct-20

10-Nov-20

Identified by prefix DETSn (details on request).

Certificate of Analysis

20-22003

Geotechnics LTDThe Geotechnical CentreUnit 1B Borders Ind. ParkRiver LaneSaltneyChesterCH4 8RJ

20-22003

PN204159

ON27312

Derwentside Environmental Testing Services LimitedUnit 2, Park Road Industrial Estate South, Consett, Co Durham, DH8 5PY

Tel: 01207 582333 • email: [email protected] • www.dets.co.uk Page 1 of 7 .

Summary of Chemical Analysis

Soil SamplesOur Ref 20-22003

Client Ref PN204159Contract Title CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL

Lab No 1753650 1753651 1753652 1753653 1753654 1753655 1753656

Sample ID BH4 BH5 BH5 WS1 WS2 WS3 WS4

Depth 0.50 0.20 1.65 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.50Other ID 1 4

Sample Type ES ES ES ES ES ES ESSampling Date 26/10/2020 27/10/2020 27/10/2020 26/10/2020 26/10/2020 26/10/2020 27/10/2020Sampling Time n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s

Test Method LOD Units

DETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kg 6.3 8.8 8.7 6.3 6.6 7.3 7.5DETSC 2311# 0.2 mg/kg 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2DETSC 2301# 0.1 mg/kg 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1DETSC 2301# 0.15 mg/kg 22 30 29 23 23 26 25DETSC 2204* 1 mg/kg < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0DETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kg 20 30 32 23 25 30 25DETSC 2301# 0.3 mg/kg 19 48 49 16 19 18 18DETSC 2325# 0.05 mg/kg < 0.05 0.08 0.07 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05DETSC 2301# 1 mg/kg 26 30 28 30 31 35 34DETSC 2301# 0.5 mg/kg < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5DETSC 2301# 1 mg/kg 100 110 110 89 85 93 97

DETSC 2008# pH 5.5 5.7 5.5 6.1 6.0 6.2 6.1DETSC 2130# 0.1 mg/kg 0.9 0.7 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3DETSC 2002# 0.1 % 1.2 3.5 4.4 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.9DETSC 2076# 10 mg/l 17 12 28 11 12 < 10 < 10DETSC 2320 0.01 % 0.03DETSC 2321# 0.01 % 0.04

DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kg < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5DETSC 3072# 1.2 mg/kg < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2DETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kg < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5DETSC 3072# 3.4 mg/kg < 3.4 < 3.4 < 3.4 < 3.4 < 3.4 < 3.4 < 3.4DETSC 3072* 3.4 mg/kg < 3.4 < 3.4 < 3.4 < 3.4 < 3.4 < 3.4 < 3.4DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3072# 0.9 mg/kg < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9DETSC 3072# 0.5 mg/kg < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5DETSC 3072# 0.6 mg/kg < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6DETSC 3072# 1.4 mg/kg < 1.4 < 1.4 < 1.4 < 1.4 < 1.4 < 1.4 < 1.4DETSC 3072* 1.4 mg/kg < 1.4 < 1.4 < 1.4 < 1.4 < 1.4 < 1.4 < 1.4DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01

Metals

Inorganics

Petroleum Hydrocarbons

Benzene

Aromatic C12-C16Aromatic C16-C21Aromatic C21-C35Aromatic C35-C44Aromatic C10-C44Ali/Aro C10-C44

Aliphatic C35-C44Aliphatic C10-C44Aromatic C5-C7Aromatic C7-C8Aromatic C8-C10Aromatic C10-C12

Aliphatic C6-C8Aliphatic C8-C10Aliphatic C10-C12Aliphatic C12-C16Aliphatic C16-C21Aliphatic C21-C35

Cyanide, TotalOrganic matterSulphate Aqueous Extract as SO4Sulphur as S, TotalSulphate as SO4, Total

Aliphatic C5-C6

LeadMercuryNickelSeleniumZinc

pH

ArsenicBoron, Water SolubleCadmiumChromiumChromium, HexavalentCopper

Page 2 of 7Key: * -not accredited. # -MCERTS (accreditation only applies if report carries the MCERTS logo). n/s -not supplied.




Lab No 1753650 1753651 1753652 1753653 1753654 1753655 1753656

Sample ID BH4 BH5 BH5 WS1 WS2 WS3 WS4

Depth 0.50 0.20 1.65 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.50Other ID 1 4

Sample Type ES ES ES ES ES ES ESSampling Date 26/10/2020 27/10/2020 27/10/2020 26/10/2020 26/10/2020 26/10/2020 27/10/2020Sampling Time n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s


DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01

DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 3301 1.6 mg/kg < 1.6 < 1.6 < 1.6 < 1.6 < 1.6 < 1.6 < 1.6

DETSC 2130# 0.3 mg/kg < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyreneDibenzo(a,h)anthraceneBenzo(g,h,i)perylenePAH Total

Phenol - Monohydric

PAHs

Phenols

PyreneBenzo(a)anthraceneChryseneBenzo(b)fluorantheneBenzo(k)fluorantheneBenzo(a)pyrene

AcenaphthyleneAcenaphtheneFluorenePhenanthreneAnthraceneFluoranthene

EthylbenzeneTolueneXyleneMTBE

Naphthalene





Lab No

Sample ID

Depth

Other ID

Sample Type

Sampling Date

Sampling Time


DETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kgDETSC 2311# 0.2 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 0.15 mg/kgDETSC 2204* 1 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 0.3 mg/kgDETSC 2325# 0.05 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 1 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 0.5 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 1 mg/kg

DETSC 2008# pHDETSC 2130# 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 2002# 0.1 %DETSC 2076# 10 mg/lDETSC 2320 0.01 %DETSC 2321# 0.01 %

DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 1.2 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 3.4 mg/kgDETSC 3072* 3.4 mg/kgDETSC 3072* 10 mg/kgDETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 0.9 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 0.5 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 0.6 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 1.4 mg/kgDETSC 3072* 1.4 mg/kgDETSC 3072* 10 mg/kgDETSC 3072* 10 mg/kgDETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg

Metals

Inorganics


Benzene





Aliphatic C5-C6


pH


1753657 1753658 1753659 1753660WS5 WS6 WS7 WS7

0.20 1.00 0.10 0.50

ES ES ES ES27/10/2020 27/10/2020 27/10/2020 27/10/2020

n/s n/s n/s n/s

10 7.4 2.6 0.70.6 0.2 0.2 < 0.20.3 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.131 25 23 25

< 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.036 26 24 3549 19 7.5 2.8

0.08 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.0536 33 18 18

< 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5140 99 83 65

5.7 6.9 8.1 8.50.6 0.3 0.2 0.13.5 1.1 5.4 1.416 < 10 20 < 10

< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01

< 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5< 1.2 < 1.2 19 < 1.2< 1.5 < 1.5 220 19< 3.4 < 3.4 2800 340< 3.4 < 3.4 620 88< 10 < 10 3600 430

< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01

< 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9< 0.5 < 0.5 22 2.3< 0.6 < 0.6 350 30< 1.4 < 1.4 3300 540< 1.4 < 1.4 950 190< 10 < 10 4500 730< 10 < 10 8100 1200

< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01





Lab No

Sample ID

Depth

Other ID

Sample Type

Sampling Date

Sampling Time


DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321 0.01 mg/kg

DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 1.6 mg/kg

DETSC 2130# 0.3 mg/kg


Phenol - Monohydric

PAHs

Phenols



EthylbenzeneTolueneXyleneMTBE

Naphthalene

1753657 1753658 1753659 1753660WS5 WS6 WS7 WS7

0.20 1.00 0.10 0.50

ES ES ES ES27/10/2020 27/10/2020 27/10/2020 27/10/2020

n/s n/s n/s n/s

< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01

< 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 1.0

0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 1.0

0.2 < 0.1 3.0 < 1.00.1 < 0.1 7.5 < 1.0

< 0.1 < 0.1 3.6 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 5.0 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 9.7 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 4.6 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 1.6 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 1.0< 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 1.0< 1.6 < 1.6 35 < 16.0

< 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3


Summary of Asbestos Analysis



Lab No Sample ID Material Type Result Comment* Analyst1753650 BH4 0.50 SOIL NAD none Keith Wilson

1753651 BH5 1 0.20 SOIL NAD none Keith Wilson

1753652 BH5 4 1.65 SOIL NAD none Keith Wilson

1753653 WS1 0.50 SOIL NAD none Keith Wilson








Crocidolite = Blue Asbestos, Amosite = Brown Asbestos, Chrysotile = White Asbestos. Anthophyllite, Actinolite and Tremolite are other forms of Asbestos. Samples are analysed by DETSC 1101 using polarised light microscopy in accordance with HSG248 and documented in-house methods. NAD = No Asbestos Detected. Where a sample is NAD, the result is based on analysis of at least 2 sub-samples and should be taken to mean 'no asbestos detected in sample'. Key: * -not included in laboratory scope of accreditation.

Page 6 of 7

Information in Support of the Analytical ResultsOur Ref 20-22003

Client Ref PN204159Contract CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL

Containers Received & Deviating Samples

Lab No Sample ID

Date

Sampled Containers Received

Holding time

exceeded for

tests

Inappropriate

container for

tests1753650 BH4 0.50 SOIL 26/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1753651 BH5 0.20 SOIL 27/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1753652 BH5 1.65 SOIL 27/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1753653 WS1 0.50 SOIL 26/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1753654 WS2 1.00 SOIL 26/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1753655 WS3 1.00 SOIL 26/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1753656 WS4 0.50 SOIL 27/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1753657 WS5 0.20 SOIL 27/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1753658 WS6 1.00 SOIL 27/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1753659 WS7 0.10 SOIL 27/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1753660 WS7 0.50 SOIL 27/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml

Soil Analysis NotesInorganic soil analysis was carried out on a dried sample, crushed to pass a 425µm sieve, in accordance with BS1377.

Organic soil analysis was carried out on an 'as received' sample. Organics results are corrected for moisture and expressed on a dry weight basis.The Loss on Drying, used to express organics analysis on an air dried basis, is carried out at a temperature of 28°C +/-2°C.

DisposalFrom the issue date of this test certificate, samples will be held for the following times prior to disposal :-Soils - 1 month, Liquids - 2 weeks, Asbestos (test portion) - 6 months

End of Report

Key: G-Glass J-Jar DETS cannot be held responsible for the integrity of samples received whereby the laboratory did not undertake the sampling. In this instance samples received may be deviating. Deviating Sample criteria are based on British and International standards and laboratory trials in conjunction with the UKAS note 'Guidance on Deviating Samples'. All samples received are listed above. However, those samples that have additional comments in relation to hold time, inappropriate containers etc are deviating due to the reasons stated. This means that the analysis is accredited where applicable, but results may be compromised due to sample deviations. If no sampled date (soils) or date+time (waters) has been supplied then samples are deviating. However, if you are able to supply a sampled date (and time for waters) this will prevent samples being reported as deviating where specific hold times are not exceeded and where the container supplied is suitable.

Page 7 of 7


Our Reference

Client Reference

Order No

Contract Title

Description

Date Received

Date Started

Date Completed

Test Procedures

Notes

Approved By

Adam Fenwick


Contracts Manager


8 Soil samples, 1 Leachate sample.

03-Nov-20

03-Nov-20

16-Nov-20



20-22186Geotechnics LTDThe Geotechnical CentreUnit 1B Borders Ind. ParkRiver LaneSaltneyChesterCH4 8RJ20-22186

PN204159

ON27312



Summary of Chemical AnalysisSoil Samples

Our Ref 20-22186Client Ref PN204159

Contract Title CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOLLab No 1754882 1754883 1754884 1754885 1754886 1754887

Sample ID WS8 WS9 WS10 WS11 WS12 WS13

Depth 0.40 0.50 0.20 0.50 0.10 1.00Other ID

Sample Type SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOILSampling Date 28/10/2020 29/10/2020 29/10/2020 29/10/2020 28/10/2020 28/10/2020Sampling Time n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s


DETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kg 11 6.9 8.1 5.2 0.8 8.6DETSC 2311# 0.2 mg/kg < 0.2 < 0.2 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2DETSC 2301# 0.1 mg/kg 0.5 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 2301# 0.15 mg/kg 16 25 25 20 32 21DETSC 2204* 1 mg/kg < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0DETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kg 61 31 34 22 37 23DETSC 2301# 0.3 mg/kg 30 16 27 12 1.9 14DETSC 2325# 0.05 mg/kg 0.06 < 0.05 0.06 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.07DETSC 2301# 1 mg/kg 17 28 29 24 29 23DETSC 2301# 0.5 mg/kg < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5DETSC 2301# 1 mg/kg 110 76 97 82 50 140

DETSC 2008# pH 8.1 7.1 9.1 6.9 7.8 7.0DETSC 2130# 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 0.1 1.1 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1DETSC 2002# 0.1 % 1.2 1.2 2.3 3.6 1.5 0.5DETSC 2076# 10 mg/l 22 19 13 96 < 10 < 10DETSC 2320 0.01 %DETSC 2321# 0.01 %

DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kg 2.3 < 1.5 7.4 4.0 1.8 < 1.5DETSC 3072# 1.2 mg/kg 3.0 < 1.2 12 6.9 4.3 < 1.2DETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kg 4.7 < 1.5 18 14 17 < 1.5DETSC 3072# 3.4 mg/kg 28 < 3.4 100 280 1000 < 3.4DETSC 3072* 3.4 mg/kg 19 < 3.4 75 140 570 < 3.4DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg 54 < 10 170 380 1600 < 10DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 0.07DETSC 3072# 0.9 mg/kg < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9DETSC 3072# 0.5 mg/kg 1.1 < 0.5 0.7 0.5 1.2 < 0.5DETSC 3072# 0.6 mg/kg 1.4 < 0.6 < 0.6 1.5 18 < 0.6DETSC 3072# 1.4 mg/kg 90 < 1.4 110 490 2100 < 1.4DETSC 3072* 1.4 mg/kg 34 < 1.4 41 190 770 < 1.4DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg 120 < 10 130 580 2800 < 10DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg 180 < 10 200 960 4400 < 10DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01

Metals

Inorganics


BenzeneEthylbenzeneToluene





Aliphatic C5-C6


pH






Sample ID WS8 WS9 WS10 WS11 WS12 WS13

Depth 0.40 0.50 0.20 0.50 0.10 1.00Other ID

Sample Type SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOILSampling Date 28/10/2020 29/10/2020 29/10/2020 29/10/2020 28/10/2020 28/10/2020Sampling Time n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s


DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01DETSC 3321 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01

DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 1.0 < 0.1DETSC 3301 1.6 mg/kg < 1.6 < 1.6 < 1.6 < 1.6 < 16.0 < 1.6

DETSC 2130# 0.3 mg/kg < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3


Phenol - Monohydric

PAHs

Phenols



XyleneMTBE

Naphthalene




Contract Title CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOLLab No

Sample IDDepth

Other IDSample Type

Sampling DateSampling Time


DETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kgDETSC 2311# 0.2 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 0.15 mg/kgDETSC 2204* 1 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 0.3 mg/kgDETSC 2325# 0.05 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 1 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 0.5 mg/kgDETSC 2301# 1 mg/kg

DETSC 2008# pHDETSC 2130# 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 2002# 0.1 %DETSC 2076# 10 mg/lDETSC 2320 0.01 %DETSC 2321# 0.01 %

DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 1.2 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 3.4 mg/kgDETSC 3072* 3.4 mg/kgDETSC 3072* 10 mg/kgDETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 0.9 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 0.5 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 0.6 mg/kgDETSC 3072# 1.4 mg/kgDETSC 3072* 1.4 mg/kgDETSC 3072* 10 mg/kgDETSC 3072* 10 mg/kgDETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg

Metals

Inorganics


BenzeneEthylbenzeneToluene





Aliphatic C5-C6


pH


1754888 1754889WS14 BH3

0.50 0.50

SOIL SOIL28/10/2020 27/10/2020

n/s n/s

8.0 8.6< 0.2 0.4< 0.1 0.2

25 24< 1.0 < 1.0

32 2918 43

< 0.05 0.1137 27

< 0.5 < 0.5100 100

6.5 6.40.1 0.31.0 2.9

< 10 < 100.01 0.02

< 0.01 0.16

< 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01

< 1.5 < 1.5< 1.2 < 1.2< 1.5 < 1.5< 3.4 < 3.4< 3.4 < 3.4< 10 < 10

< 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01

< 0.9 < 0.9< 0.5 < 0.5< 0.6 < 0.6< 1.4 < 1.4< 1.4 < 1.4< 10 < 10< 10 < 10

< 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01




Contract Title CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOLLab No

Sample IDDepth

Other IDSample Type

Sampling DateSampling Time


DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kgDETSC 3321 0.01 mg/kg

DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kgDETSC 3301 1.6 mg/kg

DETSC 2130# 0.3 mg/kg


Phenol - Monohydric

PAHs

Phenols



XyleneMTBE

Naphthalene

1754888 1754889WS14 BH3

0.50 0.50

SOIL SOIL28/10/2020 27/10/2020

n/s n/s

< 0.01 < 0.01< 0.01 < 0.01

< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 0.1 < 0.1< 1.6 < 1.6

< 0.3 < 0.3


Summary of Chemical AnalysisLeachate Samples


Contract Title CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOLLab No 1754890

Sample ID TP2

Depth 0.40Other ID

Sample Type LEACHATESampling Date 29/10/2020Sampling Time n/s


DETSC 1009* Y

DETSC 2306 0.16 ug/l 0.55DETSC 2306* 12 ug/l < 12DETSC 2306 0.03 ug/l 0.26DETSC 2306 0.25 ug/l < 0.25DETSC 2203 7 ug/l < 7.0DETSC 2306 0.4 ug/l 0.8DETSC 2306 0.09 ug/l < 0.09DETSC 2306 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 2306 0.5 ug/l < 0.5DETSC 2306 1.3 ug/l 10

DETSC 2008 pH 7.0DETSC 2130 40 ug/l < 40DETSC 2055 0.1 mg/l 2.7

DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l 62DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l 12DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l 12DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 1 ug/l < 1.0

Preparation

Metals

Inorganics


XyleneMTBE

Aromatic C35-C44Aromatic C10-C44Ali/Aro C10-C44BenzeneTolueneEthylbenzene

Aromatic C7-C8Aromatic C8-C10Aromatic C10-C12Aromatic C12-C16Aromatic C16-C21Aromatic C21-C35

Aliphatic C10-C44Aliphatic C12-C16Aliphatic C16-C21Aliphatic C21-C35Aliphatic C35-C44Aromatic C5-C7

Cyanide, TotalSulphate as SO4

Aliphatic C5-C6Aliphatic C6-C8Aliphatic C8-C10Aliphatic C10-C12

Copper, DissolvedLead, DissolvedMercury, DissolvedNickel, DissolvedZinc, Dissolved

pH

Leachate 2:1 250g Non-WAC

Arsenic, DissolvedBoron, DissolvedCadmium, DissolvedChromium, DissolvedChromium, Hexavalent

Page 6 of 9Key: * -not accredited. n/s -not supplied.

Summary of Chemical AnalysisLeachate Samples


Contract Title CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOLLab No 1754890

Sample ID TP2

Depth 0.40Other ID



DETSC 3304 0.05 ug/l < 0.05DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.02DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.12DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.14DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.97DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.96DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 1.5DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 1.1DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.58DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.55DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.65DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.30DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.52DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.35DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.06DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l 0.30DETSC 3304 0.2 ug/l 8.1

DETSC 2130 100 ug/l < 100

PAH Total

Phenol - Monohydric

PAHs

Phenols

Benzo(b)fluorantheneBenzo(k)fluorantheneBenzo(a)pyreneIndeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyreneDibenzo(a,h)anthraceneBenzo(g,h,i)perylene

PhenanthreneAnthraceneFluoranthenePyreneBenzo(a)anthraceneChrysene

NaphthaleneAcenaphthyleneAcenaphtheneFluorene


Summary of Asbestos AnalysisSoil Samples


Contract Title CEDEWAIN SPECIALIST ALN SCHOOL

Lab No Sample ID Material Type Result Comment* Analyst1754882 WS8 0.40 SOIL NAD none D Wilkinson

1754883 WS9 0.50 SOIL NAD none D Wilkinson






1754889 BH3 0.50 SOIL NAD none D Wilkinson


Page 8 of 9




Lab No Sample ID

Date


Holding time

exceeded for

tests

Inappropriate

container for

tests1754882 WS8 0.40 SOIL 28/10/20 GJ 500ml, GJ 60ml1754883 WS9 0.50 SOIL 29/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1754884 WS10 0.20 SOIL 29/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1754885 WS11 0.50 SOIL 29/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1754886 WS12 0.10 SOIL 28/10/20 GJ 500ml, GJ 60ml1754887 WS13 1.00 SOIL 28/10/20 GJ 500ml x2, GJ 60ml1754888 WS14 0.50 SOIL 28/10/20 GJ 500ml x2, GJ 60ml1754889 BH3 0.50 SOIL 27/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1754890 TP2 0.40 LEACHATE 29/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml

Soil Analysis NotesInorganic soil analysis was carried out on a dried sample, crushed to pass a 425µm sieve, in accordance with BS1377.Organic soil analysis was carried out on an 'as received' sample. Organics results are corrected for moisture and expressed on a dry weight basis.The Loss on Drying, used to express organics analysis on an air dried basis, is carried out at a temperature of 28°C +/-2°C.


End of Report


Page 9 of 9


Our Reference

Client Reference

Order No

Contract Title

Description

Date Received

Date Started

Date Completed

Test Procedures

Notes

Approved By

Adam Fenwick


Contracts Manager


One Soil sample.

03-Nov-20

03-Nov-20

09-Nov-20



20-22187Geotechnics LTDThe Geotechnical CentreUnit 1B Borders Ind. ParkRiver LaneSaltneyChesterCH4 8RJ

20-22187

PN204159

ON27312






Lab No 1754891

Sample ID BH1

Depth 1.00Other ID

Sample Type SOILSampling Date 29/10/2020Sampling Time n/s


DETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kg 13DETSC 2311# 0.2 mg/kg 0.2DETSC 2301# 0.1 mg/kg 0.2DETSC 2301# 0.15 mg/kg 15DETSC 2204* 1 mg/kg < 1.0DETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kg 29DETSC 2301# 0.3 mg/kg 18DETSC 2325# 0.05 mg/kg 0.10DETSC 2301# 1 mg/kg 13DETSC 2301# 0.5 mg/kg < 0.5DETSC 2301# 1 mg/kg 52

DETSC 2008# pH 6.0DETSC 2130# 0.1 mg/kg 0.4DETSC 2002# 0.1 % 2.4DETSC 2076# 10 mg/l < 10DETSC 2320 0.01 % 0.03DETSC 2321# 0.01 % 0.08

Metals

Inorganics



pH






Lab No 1754891

Sample ID BH1

Depth 1.00Other ID



DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kg < 1.5DETSC 3072# 1.2 mg/kg < 1.2DETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kg < 1.5DETSC 3072# 3.4 mg/kg < 3.4DETSC 3072* 3.4 mg/kg < 3.4DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg < 10DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3072# 0.9 mg/kg < 0.9DETSC 3072# 0.5 mg/kg < 0.5DETSC 3072# 0.6 mg/kg < 0.6DETSC 3072# 1.4 mg/kg < 1.4DETSC 3072* 1.4 mg/kg < 1.4DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg < 10DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg < 10DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01


BenzeneEthylbenzeneTolueneXyleneMTBE




Aliphatic C5-C6





Lab No 1754891

Sample ID BH1

Depth 1.00Other ID



DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 1.6 mg/kg < 1.6

DETSC 2130# 0.3 mg/kg < 0.3


Phenol - Monohydric

PAHs

Phenols



Naphthalene





Lab No Sample ID Material Type Result Comment* Analyst1754891 BH1 1.00 SOIL NAD none Michael Kay


Page 5 of 6




Lab No Sample ID

Date


Holding time

exceeded for

tests

Inappropriate

container for

tests1754891 BH1 1.00 SOIL 29/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml



End of Report


Page 6 of 6


Our Reference

Client Reference

Order No

Contract Title

Description

Date Received

Date Started

Date Completed

Test Procedures

Notes

Approved By

Adam Fenwick


Contracts Manager


6 Soil samples.

03-Nov-20

03-Nov-20

10-Nov-20




20-22188

PN204159

ON27312






Sample ID BH1 BH3 BH4 BH4 BH5 WS10Depth 1.60 1.60 0.20 1.00 1.00 0.40

Other IDSample Type SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL

Sampling Date 29/10/2020 27/10/2020 26/10/2020 26/10/2020 27/10/2020 29/10/2020Sampling Time n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s


DETSC 2008# pH 6.2 6.3 5.6 5.6 6.1 8.3DETSC 2076# 10 mg/l < 10 < 10 < 10 10 < 10 15DETSC 2320 0.01 % 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02DETSC 2321# 0.01 % 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03

pHSulphate Aqueous Extract as SO4Sulphur as S, TotalSulphate as SO4, Total

Inorganics

Page 2 of 3Key: # -MCERTS (accreditation only applies if report carries the MCERTS logo). n/s -not supplied.




Lab No Sample ID

Date

Sampled Containers Received Holding time exceeded for tests

Inappropriate

container for

tests1754892 BH1 1.60 SOIL 29/10/20 GJ 250ml, GJ 60ml1754893 BH3 1.60 SOIL 27/10/20 GJ 250ml, GJ 60ml1754894 BH4 0.20 SOIL 26/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml Total Sulphur ICP (7 days), pH + Conductivity (7 days)

1754895 BH4 1.00 SOIL 26/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml Total Sulphur ICP (7 days), pH + Conductivity (7 days)

1754896 BH5 1.00 SOIL 27/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml1754897 WS10 0.40 SOIL 29/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml



End of Report


Page 3 of 3


Our Reference

Client Reference

Order No

Contract Title

Description

Date Received

Date Started

Date Completed

Test Procedures

Notes

Approved By

Adam Fenwick


Contracts Manager


1 Soil sample, 1 Leachate sample.

04-Nov-20

04-Nov-20

11-Nov-20




20-22288

PN204159

ON27312






Lab No 1755616

Sample ID WS14

Depth 1.00Other ID



DETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kg 9.8DETSC 2311# 0.2 mg/kg 0.2DETSC 2301# 0.1 mg/kg 0.2DETSC 2301# 0.15 mg/kg 29DETSC 2204* 1 mg/kg < 1.0DETSC 2301# 0.2 mg/kg 33DETSC 2301# 0.3 mg/kg 22DETSC 2325# 0.05 mg/kg < 0.05DETSC 2301# 1 mg/kg 39DETSC 2301# 0.5 mg/kg < 0.5DETSC 2301# 1 mg/kg 97

DETSC 2008# pH 6.6DETSC 2130# 0.1 mg/kg 0.2DETSC 2002# 0.1 % 0.9DETSC 2076# 10 mg/l 16

Metals

Inorganics

Cyanide, TotalOrganic matterSulphate Aqueous Extract as SO4


pH






Lab No 1755616

Sample ID WS14

Depth 1.00Other ID



DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kg < 1.5DETSC 3072# 1.2 mg/kg < 1.2DETSC 3072# 1.5 mg/kg < 1.5DETSC 3072# 3.4 mg/kg < 3.4DETSC 3072* 3.4 mg/kg < 3.4DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg < 10DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321* 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3072# 0.9 mg/kg < 0.9DETSC 3072# 0.5 mg/kg < 0.5DETSC 3072# 0.6 mg/kg < 0.6DETSC 3072# 1.4 mg/kg < 1.4DETSC 3072* 1.4 mg/kg < 1.4DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg < 10DETSC 3072* 10 mg/kg < 10DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321# 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01DETSC 3321 0.01 mg/kg < 0.01


TolueneXyleneMTBE

Aromatic C21-C35Aromatic C35-C44Aromatic C10-C44Ali/Aro C10-C44BenzeneEthylbenzene



Aliphatic C5-C6Aliphatic C6-C8Aliphatic C8-C10





Lab No 1755616

Sample ID WS14

Depth 1.00Other ID



DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 0.1 mg/kg < 0.1DETSC 3301 1.6 mg/kg < 1.6

DETSC 2130# 0.3 mg/kg < 0.3

Benzo(g,h,i)perylenePAH Total

Phenol - Monohydric

PAHs

Phenols

ChryseneBenzo(b)fluorantheneBenzo(k)fluorantheneBenzo(a)pyreneIndeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyreneDibenzo(a,h)anthracene

FluorenePhenanthreneAnthraceneFluoranthenePyreneBenzo(a)anthracene

NaphthaleneAcenaphthyleneAcenaphthene



Leachate SamplesOur Ref 20-22288


Lab No 1755617

Sample ID WS3

Depth 0.50Other ID



DETSC 1009* Y

DETSC 2306 0.16 ug/l 0.45DETSC 2306* 12 ug/l < 12DETSC 2306 0.03 ug/l < 0.03DETSC 2306 0.25 ug/l 0.27DETSC 2203 7 ug/l < 7.0DETSC 2306 0.4 ug/l 4.0DETSC 2306 0.09 ug/l 0.74DETSC 2306 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 2306 0.5 ug/l 1.3DETSC 2306 1.3 ug/l 6.2

DETSC 2008 pH 6.0DETSC 2130 40 ug/l < 40DETSC 2055 0.1 mg/l 2.5

Preparation

Metals

Inorganics

Cyanide, TotalSulphate as SO4

Copper, DissolvedLead, DissolvedMercury, DissolvedNickel, DissolvedZinc, Dissolved

pH

Leachate 2:1 250g Non-WAC

Arsenic, DissolvedBoron, DissolvedCadmium, DissolvedChromium, DissolvedChromium, Hexavalent





Lab No 1755617

Sample ID WS3

Depth 0.50Other ID



DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3322 0.1 ug/l < 0.1DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3072* 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 1 ug/l < 1.0DETSC 3322 1 ug/l < 1.0


XyleneMTBE

Aromatic C35-C44Aromatic C10-C44Ali/Aro C10-C44BenzeneTolueneEthylbenzene


Aliphatic C10-C44Aliphatic C12-C16Aliphatic C16-C21Aliphatic C21-C35Aliphatic C35-C44Aromatic C5-C7

Aliphatic C5-C6Aliphatic C6-C8Aliphatic C8-C10Aliphatic C10-C12





Lab No 1755617

Sample ID WS3

Depth 0.50Other ID



DETSC 3304 0.05 ug/l 0.08DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.01 ug/l < 0.01DETSC 3304 0.2 ug/l < 0.20

DETSC 2130 100 ug/l < 100

PAH Total

Phenol - Monohydric

PAHs

Phenols

Benzo(b)fluorantheneBenzo(k)fluorantheneBenzo(a)pyreneIndeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyreneDibenzo(a,h)anthraceneBenzo(g,h,i)perylene

PhenanthreneAnthraceneFluoranthenePyreneBenzo(a)anthraceneChrysene

NaphthaleneAcenaphthyleneAcenaphtheneFluorene





Lab No Sample ID Material Type Result Comment* Analyst1755616 WS14 1.00 SOIL NAD none Keith Wilson


Page 8 of 9




Lab No Sample ID

Date


Holding time

exceeded for

tests

Inappropriate

container for

tests1755616 WS14 1.00 SOIL 28/10/20 GJ 500ml x2, GJ 60ml1755617 WS3 0.50 LEACHATE 26/10/20 GJ 250ml x2, GJ 60ml



End of Report


Page 9 of 9

11

APPENDIX 11

Laboratory Test Results - Chemical/Contamination(Groundwater)

Element Materials Technology P: +44 (0) 1244 833780

Unit 3 Deeside Point F: +44 (0) 1244 833781

Zone 3

Deeside Industrial Park W: www.element.com

Deeside

CH5 2UA

Geotechnics

Attention :

Date :

Your reference :

Our reference :

Location :

Date samples received :

Status :

Issue :

Senior Project Manager

1

One sample were received for analysis on 3rd December, 2020 of which one were scheduled for analysis. Please find attached our Test Report which should be read with notes at the end of the report and should include all sections if reproduced. Interpretations and opinions are outside the scope of any accreditation, and all results relate only to samples supplied. All analysis is carried out on as received samples and reported on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. Results are not surrogate corrected.

Authorised By:

Paul Boden BSc

Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced

Unit 1B Borders Industrial Park River Lane Chester Cheshire CH4 8RJ

Aaron Field

10th December, 2020

PN204159

Test Report 20/17049 Batch 1


3rd December, 2020

Final report

Element Materials Technology Environmental UK LimitedRegistered in England and WalesRegistered Office: 10 Lower Grosvenor Place, London, SW1W 0ENCompany Registration No: 11371415 1 of 8

Client Name: Report : LiquidReference:Location:Contact: Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 20/17049 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03

EMT Sample No. 1-3

Sample ID WS9

Depth

COC No / misc

Containers V P G

Sample Date 03/12/2020

Sample Type Ground Water

Batch Number 1

Date of Receipt 03/12/2020

Dissolved Arsenic # 3.3 <2.5 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Boron 13 <12 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Cadmium # <0.5 <0.5 ug/l TM30/PM14

Total Dissolved Chromium # 14.6 <1.5 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Copper # <7 <7 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Lead # <5 <5 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Mercury # <1 <1 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Nickel # <2 <2 ug/l TM30/PM14

Dissolved Zinc # <3 <3 ug/l TM30/PM14

PAH MS

Naphthalene # <0.1 <0.1 ug/l TM4/PM30

Acenaphthylene # <0.013 <0.013 ug/l TM4/PM30

Acenaphthene # <0.013 <0.013 ug/l TM4/PM30

Fluorene # <0.014 <0.014 ug/l TM4/PM30

Phenanthrene # 0.044 <0.011 ug/l TM4/PM30

Anthracene # <0.013 <0.013 ug/l TM4/PM30

Fluoranthene # 0.027 <0.012 ug/l TM4/PM30

Pyrene # 0.034 <0.013 ug/l TM4/PM30

Benzo(a)anthracene # <0.015 <0.015 ug/l TM4/PM30

Chrysene # 0.016 <0.011 ug/l TM4/PM30

Benzo(bk)fluoranthene # <0.018 <0.018 ug/l TM4/PM30

Benzo(a)pyrene # <0.016 <0.016 ug/l TM4/PM30

Indeno(123cd)pyrene # <0.011 <0.011 ug/l TM4/PM30

Dibenzo(ah)anthracene # <0.01 <0.01 ug/l TM4/PM30

Benzo(ghi)perylene # <0.011 <0.011 ug/l TM4/PM30

PAH 16 Total # <0.195 <0.195 ug/l TM4/PM30

Benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.01 <0.01 ug/l TM4/PM30

Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.01 <0.01 ug/l TM4/PM30

PAH Surrogate % Recovery 71 <0 % TM4/PM30

MTBE # <5 <5 ug/l TM36/PM12

Benzene # <5 <5 ug/l TM36/PM12

Toluene # <5 <5 ug/l TM36/PM12

Ethylbenzene # <5 <5 ug/l TM36/PM12

m/p-Xylene # <5 <5 ug/l TM36/PM12

o-Xylene # <5 <5 ug/l TM36/PM12

Cedewain Specialist ALN SchoolAaron Field

Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms

LOD/LOR Units MethodNo.

Element Materials TechnologyGeotechnicsPN204159

QF-PM 3.1.2 v11Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced

All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 2 of 8

Client Name: Report : LiquidReference:Location:Contact: Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 20/17049 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03

EMT Sample No. 1-3

Sample ID WS9

Depth

COC No / misc

Containers V P G

Sample Date 03/12/2020

Sample Type Ground Water

Batch Number 1

Date of Receipt 03/12/2020

TPH CWG

Aliphatics

>C5-C6 # <10 <10 ug/l TM36/PM12

>C6-C8 # <10 <10 ug/l TM36/PM12

>C8-C10 # <10 <10 ug/l TM36/PM12

>C10-C12 # <5 <5 ug/l TM5/PM16/PM30

>C12-C16 # <10 <10 ug/l TM5/PM16/PM30

>C16-C21 # 180 <10 ug/l TM5/PM16/PM30

>C21-C35 # 120 <10 ug/l TM5/PM16/PM30

>C35-C44 <10 <10 ug/l TM5/PM16/PM30

Total aliphatics C5-44 300 <10 ug/l TM5/TM36/PM12/PM16/PM30

Aromatics

>C5-EC7 # <10 <10 ug/l TM36/PM12

>EC7-EC8 # <10 <10 ug/l TM36/PM12

>EC8-EC10 # <10 <10 ug/l TM36/PM12

>EC10-EC12 # <5 <5 ug/l TM5/PM16/PM30

>EC12-EC16 # <10 <10 ug/l TM5/PM16/PM30

>EC16-EC21 # <10 <10 ug/l TM5/PM16/PM30

>EC21-EC35 # <10 <10 ug/l TM5/PM16/PM30

>EC35-EC44 <10 <10 ug/l TM5/PM16/PM30

Total aromatics C5-44 <10 <10 ug/l TM5/TM36/PM12/PM16/PM30

Total aliphatics and aromatics(C5-44) 300 <10 ug/l TM5/TM36/PM12/PM16/PM30

Phenol # <0.01 <0.01 mg/l TM26/PM0

Sulphate as SO4 # 2.9 <0.5 mg/l TM38/PM0

Total Cyanide # <0.01 <0.01 mg/l TM89/PM0

Hexavalent Chromium <0.006 <0.006 mg/l TM38/PM0

pH # 7.80 <0.01 pH units TM73/PM0


Element Materials TechnologyGeotechnicsPN204159Cedewain Specialist ALN SchoolAaron Field




Notification of Deviating Samples

EMTJob No.

Batch DepthEMT

Sample No.

Analysis Reason

Please note that only samples that are deviating are mentioned in this report. If no samples are listed it is because none were deviating.Only analyses which are accredited are recorded as deviating if set criteria are not met.

Element Materials Technology

PN204159Cedewain Specialist ALN SchoolAaron FieldContact:

Sample ID

Client Name: GeotechnicsReference:Location:

No deviating sample report results for job 20/17049

QF-PM 3.1.11 v3 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced 4 of 8

EMT Job No.:

SOILS

DEVIATING SAMPLES

SURROGATES

DILUTIONS

BLANKS

NOTE

NOTES TO ACCOMPANY ALL SCHEDULES AND REPORTS20/17049

Please note we are only MCERTS accredited (UK soils only) for sand, loam and clay and any other matrix is outside our scope of accreditation.

Where an MCERTS report has been requested, you will be notified within 48 hours of any samples that have been identified as being outside ourMCERTS scope. As validation has been performed on clay, sand and loam, only samples that are predominantly these matrices, or combinationsof them will be within our MCERTS scope. If samples are not one of a combination of the above matrices they will not be marked as MCERTSaccredited.It is assumed that you have taken representative samples on site and require analysis on a representative subsample. Stones will generally beincluded unless we are requested to remove them.

All samples will be discarded one month after the date of reporting, unless we are instructed to the contrary.

If you have not already done so, please send us a purchase order if this is required by your company.

Where appropriate please make sure that our detection limits are suitable for your needs, if they are not, please notify us immediately.

All analysis is reported on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. Limits of detection for analyses carried out on as received samples are notmoisture content corrected. Results are not surrogate corrected. Samples are dried at 35°C ±5°C unless otherwise stated. Moisture content forCEN Leachate tests are dried at 105°C ±5°C.

Where Mineral Oil or Fats, Oils and Grease is quoted, this refers to Total Aliphatics C10-C40.

Where a CEN 10:1 ZERO Headspace VOC test has been carried out, a 10:1 ratio of water to wet (as received) soil has been used.

% Asbestos in Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) is determined by reference to HSG 264 The Survey Guide - Appendix 2 : ACMs in buildings listed in order of ease of fibre release.

Sufficient amount of sample must be received to carry out the testing specified. Where an insufficient amount of sample has been received the testing may not meet the requirements of our accredited methods, as such accreditation may be removed.

Negative Neutralization Potential (NP) values are obtained when the volume of NaOH (0.1N) titrated (pH 8.3) is greater than the volume of HCl (1N) to reduce the pH of the sample to 2.0 - 2.5. Any negative NP values are corrected to 0.

The calculation of Pyrite content assumes that all oxidisable sulphides present in the sample are pyrite. This may not be the case. The calculation may be an overesitimate when other sulphides such as Barite (Barium Sulphate) are present.

WATERS

Please note we are not a UK Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) Approved Laboratory .ISO17025 accreditation applies to surface water and groundwater and usually one other matrix which is analysis specific, any other liquids areoutside our scope of accreditation.As surface waters require different sample preparation to groundwaters the laboratory must be informed of the water type when submitting samples.


All samples should be submitted to the laboratory in suitable containers with sufficient ice packs to sustain an appropriate temperature for therequested analysis. The temperature of sample receipt is recorded on the confirmation schedules in order that the client can make an informeddecision as to whether testing should still be undertaken.

Surrogate compounds are added during the preparation process to monitor recovery of analytes. However low recovery in soils is often due to peat,clay or other organic rich matrices. For waters this can be due to oxidants, surfactants, organic rich sediments or remediation fluids. Acceptablelimits for most organic methods are 70 - 130% and for VOCs are 50 - 150%. When surrogate recoveries are outside the performance criteria butthe associated AQC passes this is assumed to be due to matrix effect. Results are not surrogate corrected.

A dilution suffix indicates a dilution has been performed and the reported result takes this into account. No further calculation is required.

Where analytes have been found in the blank, the sample will be treated in accordance with our laboratory procedure for dealing with contaminatedblanks.

Data is only reported if the laboratory is confident that the data is a true reflection of the samples analysed. Data is only reported as accredited whenall the requirements of our Quality System have been met. In certain circumstances where all the requirements of the Quality System have not beenmet, for instance if the associated AQC has failed, the reason is fully investigated and documented. The sample data is then evaluated alongsidethe other quality control checks performed during analysis to determine its suitability. Following this evaluation, provided the sample results have not been effected, the data is reported but accreditation is removed. It is a UKAS requirement for data not reported as accredited to be consideredindicative only, but this does not mean the data is not valid. Where possible, and if requested, samples will be re-extracted and a revised report issued with accredited results. Please do not hesitate to contactthe laboratory if further details are required of the circumstances which have led to the removal of accreditation.



EMT Job No.:

Measurement Uncertainty

#

SA

B

DR

M

NA

NAD

ND

NDP

SS

SV

W

+

>>

*

AD

CO

LOD/LOR

ME

NFD

BS

LB

N

TB

OC

20/17049

REPORTS FROM THE SOUTH AFRICA LABORATORY

Any method number not prefixed with SA has been undertaken in our UK laboratory unless reported as subcontracted.

Measurement uncertainty defines the range of values that could reasonably be attributed to the measured quantity. This range of values has not been included within the reported results. Uncertainty expressed as a percentage can be provided upon request.

ABBREVIATIONS and ACRONYMS USED

ISO17025 (UKAS Ref No. 4225) accredited - UK.

ISO17025 (SANAS Ref No.T0729) accredited - South Africa

Indicates analyte found in associated method blank.

Dilution required.

MCERTS accredited.

Not applicable

No Asbestos Detected.

None Detected (usually refers to VOC and/SVOC TICs).

No Determination Possible

Calibrated against a single substance

Surrogate recovery outside performance criteria. This may be due to a matrix effect.

Results expressed on as received basis.

AQC failure, accreditation has been removed from this result, if appropriate, see 'Note' on previous page.

Results above calibration range, the result should be considered the minimum value. The actual result could be significantly higher, this result is not accredited.

Analysis subcontracted to an Element Materials Technology approved laboratory.

Samples are dried at 35°C ±5°C

Suspected carry over

Limit of Detection (Limit of Reporting) in line with ISO 17025 and MCERTS

Outside Calibration Range

Matrix Effect

No Fibres Detected

AQC Sample

Blank Sample

Client Sample

Trip Blank Sample



EMT Job No: 20/17049

Test Method No. DescriptionPrep Method

No. (if appropriate)

Description

ISO17025

(UKAS/SANAS)

MCERTS (UK soils

only)

Analysis done on As Received (AR) or Dried

(AD)

Reported on dry weight

basis

TM4 Modified USEPA 8270D v5:2014 method for the solvent extraction and determination of PAHs by GC-MS. PM30 Water samples are extracted with solvent using a magnetic stirrer to create a vortex.

TM4 Modified USEPA 8270D v5:2014 method for the solvent extraction and determination of PAHs by GC-MS. PM30 Water samples are extracted with solvent using a magnetic stirrer to create a vortex. Yes

TM5Modified 8015B v2:1996 method for the determination of solvent Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPH) within the range C8-C40 by GCFID. For waters the solvent extracts dissolved phase plus a sheen if present.

PM16/PM30 Fractionation into aliphatic and aromatic fractions using a Rapid Trace SPE/Water samples are extracted with solvent using a magnetic stirrer to create a vortex.

TM5Modified 8015B v2:1996 method for the determination of solvent Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPH) within the range C8-C40 by GCFID. For waters the solvent extracts dissolved phase plus a sheen if present.

PM16/PM30 Fractionation into aliphatic and aromatic fractions using a Rapid Trace SPE/Water samples are extracted with solvent using a magnetic stirrer to create a vortex. Yes

TM5/TM36 please refer to TM5 and TM36 for method details PM12/PM16/PM30 please refer to PM16/PM30 and PM12 for method details

TM26 Determination of phenols by Reversed Phased High Performance Liquid Chromatography and Electro-Chemical Detection. PM0 No preparation is required. Yes

TM30

Determination of Trace Metals by ICP-OES (Inductively Coupled Plasma – Optical Emission Spectrometry): WATERS by Modified USEPA Method 200.7, Rev. 4.4, 1994; Modified EPA Method 6010B, Rev.2, Dec 1996; Modified BS EN ISO 11885:2009: SOILS by Modified USEP

PM14 Preparation of waters and leachates for metals by ICP OES/ICP MS. Samples are filtered for Dissolved metals, and remain unfiltered for Total metals then acidified

TM30

Determination of Trace Metals by ICP-OES (Inductively Coupled Plasma – Optical Emission Spectrometry): WATERS by Modified USEPA Method 200.7, Rev. 4.4, 1994; Modified EPA Method 6010B, Rev.2, Dec 1996; Modified BS EN ISO 11885:2009: SOILS by Modified USEP

PM14 Preparation of waters and leachates for metals by ICP OES/ICP MS. Samples are filtered for Dissolved metals, and remain unfiltered for Total metals then acidified Yes

TM36

Modified US EPA method 8015B v2:1996. Determination of Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) in the carbon chain range of C4-12 by headspace GC-FID. MTBE by GCFID co-elutes with 3-methylpentane if present and therefore can give a false positive. Positive MTBE results will be re-run using GC-MS to double check, when requested.

PM12 Modified US EPA method 5021A v2:2014. Preparation of solid and liquid samples for GC headspace analysis. Yes

TM38

Soluble Ion analysis using Discrete Analyser. Modified US EPA methods: Chloride 325.2 (1978), Sulphate 375.4 (Rev.2 1993), o-Phosphate 365.2 (Rev.2 1993), TON 353.1 (Rev.2 1993), Nitrite 354.1 (1971), Hex Cr 7196A (1992), NH4+ 350.1 (Rev.2 1993 (comparabl

PM0 No preparation is required.

Element Materials Technology Method Code Appendix





Description

ISO17025

(UKAS/SANAS)

MCERTS (UK soils

only)


(AD)


basis

TM38

Soluble Ion analysis using Discrete Analyser. Modified US EPA methods: Chloride 325.2 (1978), Sulphate 375.4 (Rev.2 1993), o-Phosphate 365.2 (Rev.2 1993), TON 353.1 (Rev.2 1993), Nitrite 354.1 (1971), Hex Cr 7196A (1992), NH4+ 350.1 (Rev.2 1993 (comparabl

PM0 No preparation is required. Yes

TM73 Modified US EPA methods 150.1 (1982) and 9045D Rev. 4 - 2004) and BS1377-3:1990. Determination of pH by Metrohm automated probe analyser. PM0 No preparation is required. Yes

TM89Modified USEPA method OIA-1667 (1999). Determination of cyanide by Flow Injection Analyser. Where WAD cyanides are required a Ligand displacement step is carried out before analysis.

PM0 No preparation is required. Yes



12

APPENDIX 12

Laboratory Test Results - Gas Sampling

Element Materials Technology P: +44 (0) 1244 833780

Unit 3 Deeside Point F: +44 (0) 1244 833781

Zone 3

Deeside Industrial Park W: www.element.com

Deeside

CH5 2UA

Geotechnics

Attention :

Date :

Your reference :

Our reference :

Location :

Date samples received :

Status :

Issue :

Senior Project Manager

1

Two samples were received for analysis on 3rd December, 2020 of which two were scheduled for analysis. Please find attached our Test Report which should be read with notes at the end of the report and should include all sections if reproduced. Interpretations and opinions are outside the scope of any accreditation, and all results relate only to samples supplied. All analysis is carried out on as received samples and reported on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. Results are not surrogate corrected.

Authorised By:

Paul Boden BSc

Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced

Unit 1B Borders Industrial Park River Lane Chester Cheshire CH4 8RJ

Aaron Field

10th December, 2020

PN204159

Test Report 20/17049 Batch 2


3rd December, 2020

Final report

Element Materials Technology Environmental UK LimitedRegistered in England and WalesRegistered Office: 10 Lower Grosvenor Place, London, SW1W 0ENCompany Registration No: 11371415 1 of 6

Client Name: Report : GasReference:Location:Contact:EMT Job No: 20/17049

EMT Sample No. 4 5

Sample ID BHS WS7

Depth

COC No / misc

Containers TB TB

Sample Date 03/12/2020 03/12/2020

Sample Type Gas Gas

Batch Number 2 2

Date of Receipt 03/12/2020 03/12/2020

Carbon Dioxide 1.55 2.11 <0.05 % TM69/PM0

Carbon Monoxide <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 % TM69/PM0

Hydrogen <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 % TM69/PM0

Methane <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 % TM69/PM0

Methane <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM69/PM0

Nitrogen 79.7 89.7 <0.5 % TM69/PM0

Oxygen 18.8 8.1 <0.5 % TM69/PM0

Methane <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Ethane <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Propane <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Butane <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Pentane <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Hexane <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Heptane <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Ethene <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Total of 8 named gases <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Number of other gases 0 0 None TM45/PM0

Total of other gases <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Grand Total C1-C7 Gases <5 <5 <5 ppmV TM45/PM0

Hydrogen Sulphide <1 <1 <1 ppm TM119/PM0

Cedewain Specialist ALN SchoolAaron Field



Element Materials TechnologyGeotechnicsPN204159



Notification of Deviating Samples

EMTJob No.

Batch DepthEMT

Sample No.

Analysis Reason

Please note that only samples that are deviating are mentioned in this report. If no samples are listed it is because none were deviating.Only analyses which are accredited are recorded as deviating if set criteria are not met.

Element Materials Technology

PN204159Cedewain Specialist ALN SchoolAaron FieldContact:

Sample ID

Client Name: GeotechnicsReference:Location:

No deviating sample report results for job 20/17049


EMT Job No.:

SOILS

DEVIATING SAMPLES

SURROGATES

DILUTIONS

BLANKS

NOTE

NOTES TO ACCOMPANY ALL SCHEDULES AND REPORTS20/17049

Please note we are only MCERTS accredited (UK soils only) for sand, loam and clay and any other matrix is outside our scope of accreditation.

Where an MCERTS report has been requested, you will be notified within 48 hours of any samples that have been identified as being outside ourMCERTS scope. As validation has been performed on clay, sand and loam, only samples that are predominantly these matrices, or combinationsof them will be within our MCERTS scope. If samples are not one of a combination of the above matrices they will not be marked as MCERTSaccredited.It is assumed that you have taken representative samples on site and require analysis on a representative subsample. Stones will generally beincluded unless we are requested to remove them.

All samples will be discarded one month after the date of reporting, unless we are instructed to the contrary.

If you have not already done so, please send us a purchase order if this is required by your company.

Where appropriate please make sure that our detection limits are suitable for your needs, if they are not, please notify us immediately.

All analysis is reported on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. Limits of detection for analyses carried out on as received samples are notmoisture content corrected. Results are not surrogate corrected. Samples are dried at 35°C ±5°C unless otherwise stated. Moisture content forCEN Leachate tests are dried at 105°C ±5°C.


Where a CEN 10:1 ZERO Headspace VOC test has been carried out, a 10:1 ratio of water to wet (as received) soil has been used.

% Asbestos in Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) is determined by reference to HSG 264 The Survey Guide - Appendix 2 : ACMs in buildings listed in order of ease of fibre release.

Sufficient amount of sample must be received to carry out the testing specified. Where an insufficient amount of sample has been received the testing may not meet the requirements of our accredited methods, as such accreditation may be removed.

Negative Neutralization Potential (NP) values are obtained when the volume of NaOH (0.1N) titrated (pH 8.3) is greater than the volume of HCl (1N) to reduce the pH of the sample to 2.0 - 2.5. Any negative NP values are corrected to 0.

The calculation of Pyrite content assumes that all oxidisable sulphides present in the sample are pyrite. This may not be the case. The calculation may be an overesitimate when other sulphides such as Barite (Barium Sulphate) are present.

WATERS

Please note we are not a UK Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) Approved Laboratory .ISO17025 accreditation applies to surface water and groundwater and usually one other matrix which is analysis specific, any other liquids areoutside our scope of accreditation.As surface waters require different sample preparation to groundwaters the laboratory must be informed of the water type when submitting samples.


All samples should be submitted to the laboratory in suitable containers with sufficient ice packs to sustain an appropriate temperature for therequested analysis. The temperature of sample receipt is recorded on the confirmation schedules in order that the client can make an informeddecision as to whether testing should still be undertaken.

Surrogate compounds are added during the preparation process to monitor recovery of analytes. However low recovery in soils is often due to peat,clay or other organic rich matrices. For waters this can be due to oxidants, surfactants, organic rich sediments or remediation fluids. Acceptablelimits for most organic methods are 70 - 130% and for VOCs are 50 - 150%. When surrogate recoveries are outside the performance criteria butthe associated AQC passes this is assumed to be due to matrix effect. Results are not surrogate corrected.

A dilution suffix indicates a dilution has been performed and the reported result takes this into account. No further calculation is required.

Where analytes have been found in the blank, the sample will be treated in accordance with our laboratory procedure for dealing with contaminatedblanks.

Data is only reported if the laboratory is confident that the data is a true reflection of the samples analysed. Data is only reported as accredited whenall the requirements of our Quality System have been met. In certain circumstances where all the requirements of the Quality System have not beenmet, for instance if the associated AQC has failed, the reason is fully investigated and documented. The sample data is then evaluated alongsidethe other quality control checks performed during analysis to determine its suitability. Following this evaluation, provided the sample results have not been effected, the data is reported but accreditation is removed. It is a UKAS requirement for data not reported as accredited to be consideredindicative only, but this does not mean the data is not valid. Where possible, and if requested, samples will be re-extracted and a revised report issued with accredited results. Please do not hesitate to contactthe laboratory if further details are required of the circumstances which have led to the removal of accreditation.



EMT Job No.:

Measurement Uncertainty

#

SA

B

DR

M

NA

NAD

ND

NDP

SS

SV

W

+

>>

*

AD

CO

LOD/LOR

ME

NFD

BS

LB

N

TB

OC

20/17049

REPORTS FROM THE SOUTH AFRICA LABORATORY

Any method number not prefixed with SA has been undertaken in our UK laboratory unless reported as subcontracted.

Measurement uncertainty defines the range of values that could reasonably be attributed to the measured quantity. This range of values has not been included within the reported results. Uncertainty expressed as a percentage can be provided upon request.

ABBREVIATIONS and ACRONYMS USED

ISO17025 (UKAS Ref No. 4225) accredited - UK.

ISO17025 (SANAS Ref No.T0729) accredited - South Africa

Indicates analyte found in associated method blank.

Dilution required.

MCERTS accredited.

Not applicable

No Asbestos Detected.

None Detected (usually refers to VOC and/SVOC TICs).

No Determination Possible

Calibrated against a single substance

Surrogate recovery outside performance criteria. This may be due to a matrix effect.

Results expressed on as received basis.

AQC failure, accreditation has been removed from this result, if appropriate, see 'Note' on previous page.

Results above calibration range, the result should be considered the minimum value. The actual result could be significantly higher, this result is not accredited.

Analysis subcontracted to an Element Materials Technology approved laboratory.

Samples are dried at 35°C ±5°C

Suspected carry over

Limit of Detection (Limit of Reporting) in line with ISO 17025 and MCERTS

Outside Calibration Range

Matrix Effect

No Fibres Detected

AQC Sample

Blank Sample

Client Sample

Trip Blank Sample






Description

ISO17025

(UKAS/SANAS)

MCERTS (UK soils

only)


(AD)


basis

TM45 Methane - Heptane by Gas Chromatography with Flame Ionisation Detector (GC-FID) PM0 No preparation is required.

TM69 Analysis of gas samples by direct injection onto a Gas Chromatography (GC) column and analysed using a Flame Ionisation Detector (FID) or a Thermocouple Detector (TD) PM0 No preparation is required.

TM119 Determination of hydrogen sulphide using Gerhardt Steam distillation followed by Impact Pro Multi Gas Detector. PM0 No preparation is required.



13

APPENDIX 13

SPT N-Value and Undrained Shear Strength versus Depthand Elevation Plots

Glacial Till

Job No PN204159

Date 16/12/2020

Figure 1


Plot of SPT - Depth Profile

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Dep

th (

m b

gl)

SPT 'N' Value

Glacial Till

Job No PN204159

Date 16/12/2020

Figure 2


Plot of SPT - Depth Profile

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Ele

vati

on

(m

OD

)SPT 'N' Value

Glacial Till

Job No PN204159

Date 16/12/2020

Figure 3


Plot of Shear Strength - Depth Profile

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

0 50 100 150 200 250

De

pth

(m

bg

l)Shear Strength (kPa)

Glacial Till

Job No PN204159

Date 16/12/2020

Figure 4


Plot of Shear Strength - Depth Profile

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

1260 50 100 150 200 250

Ele

va

tio

n (

m O

D)

Shear Strength (kPa)

14

APPENDIX 14

Generic Assessment Criteria (GAC)

The tables below set out the Generic Assessment Criteria (GAC) for the Public Open Spaces (residential) land use scenario. All contaminants are expressed in mg/kg.

Generic Assessment Criteria (GAC) for Public Open Spaces (residential)

Based on a 1% Soil Organic Matter Content (most conservative approach)

Based on SGVs, C4SL and S4UL values

Heavy Metals

Arsenic 79

Beryllium 2.2

Boron 21,000

Cadmium 120

Chromium 1,500

Chromium VI 7.7

Copper 12,000

Lead 630

Mercury (elemental) 16

Mercury (inorganic) 120

Nickel 230

Selenium 1,100

Vanadium 2,000

Zinc 81,000

BTEX

Benzene 72

Toluene 56,000

Ethyl Benzene 24,000

m/p Xylenes 41,000

o Xylenes 41,000

Xylenes 41,000

Speciated PAHs

Naphthalene 4,900

Acenaphthylene 15,000

Acenaphthene 15,000

Fluorene 9,900

Phenanthrene 3,100

Anthracene 74,000

Fluoranthene 3,100

Pyrene 7,400

Benzo[a]anthracene 29

Chrysene 57

Benzo[b]fluoranthene 7.1

Benzo[k]fluoranthene 190

Benzo[a]pyrene 5.7

Indeno[123-cd]pyrene 82

Dibenzo[ah]anthracene 0.57

Benzo[ghi]perylene 640

Asbestos

Asbestos Non-detected

Speciated TPH Fractions

Aliphatic C5 - C6 570,000







Aromatic C5 - C7 56,000

Aromatic C7 - 8 56,000


Aromatic C10 - 12 5,000




15

APPENDIX 15

Proposed Site Layout Plan

Legend

197.000

Retro bracken concrete block paving byTobermore (or similar approved)

LegendSite Boundary

Compacted GravelRed Super CEDEC by CEDStone (or similar approved)Gabion wall filled with recycled material,faced with locally sourced natural stone

Proposed allotment garden,timber railway sleeper raised beds

Proposed ornamental grassesand perennial planting

Proposed native hedge planting

Proposed lawn

Proposed native tree

Hardworks

Softworks

MUGA surface material - porous macadam

Proposed bench

Furniture

Proposed litter bin

Existing tree to be retained

Existing tree to be removed

Primary building entrance

Proposed 1.8m fence

Proposed pedestrian gate

Proposed 1.1m railing

Fencing

Proposed woodland tree planting,planted as whips and standards

Proposed Level

Existing Level

+196.000

Footprint of demolished building

Proposed sliding gatefor vehicle access

Tegula heather concrete block paving byTobermore (or similar approved)

Proposed cycle stand12no. (22 spaces)

Extent of building canopy

Learning Garden 1Outdoor classroom, sensory surfaces,play features, seating elements

Learning Garden 2Early Years outdoor classroom, sensorysurfaces, play features, seating elements

Play AreaRubber crumb play surfacing, playmounds & inclusive play equipment

Accessible woodland path,compacted gravel surface

Proposed timber post and rail fence toextent of woodland / forest school area.

Lawn bankGradient 1:3 or shallower

Existing surface finishes madegood, existing levels retained

Proposed rain garden planting

Proposed externaldining table and chairs

Public right of way footpath

Inclusive Playequiptment

10no. Trim trail stations alongwoodland footpath. Exercizeequiptment to be confirmed

4no. Electric vehicle charging points

DK

DK

DK

DK

DK

DK

DK

DK

DK

DK

DK

DKDK

DK

DK

DK

DK

DK

DK

Equipment Bay

5 m²

Eqip. B

ay

5 m²

Lift 2

4 m²

Oxygen

St.

5 m²

Staff Ch/W

C

10 m²

Store7 m

²

Senso

ry/Soft

Play Roo

m

34 m²

WC's22 m

²

Store15 m

²

Touch Trust/

Sensory

Room

31 m²

Staff C

hang

e

11 m²

Circ.

13 m²

Acc. W

C

4 m²

Stair 2

39 m²

Cloaks

2 m²

Hygien

e Rm.

15 m²

Calming

Rm.

9 m²

Cloaks

2 m²

GT Store

4 m²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m²

Cloaks

2 m²

Service

s

4 m²

Mobility E

quipment Store

10 m²

GT Store

4 m²

Staff Work

Room/Offic

e

16 m²

Store4 m

²

Hygiene/W

C

15 m²

EY Corrido

r

98 m²

Store4 m

²

Laun

dry Roo

m

7 m²

Cleane

rs Stor

e

6 m²

Store4 m

²

Store4 m

²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m²

Hygien

e Rm.

15 m²

Senso

ry Gard

en

392 m²

Circulatio

n

46 m²

Circ.

135 m²

Circ.

35 m²

Circ.

9 m²

Pool C

hang

e F

30 m²

Pool C

hang

e M

30 m²

WC's27 m

²

External S

tore

15 m²

Store5 m

²

Sick Bay

7 m²

Demo/Store Room

20 m²

Dining

100 m² Acc.

Chang

e

12 m²

Kitchen Store

11 m²

Servery

10 m²

Small Dining

46 m²

Community Cafe Kitch

en

21 m²

Receptio

n/ Admin O

ffice

25 m²

Staff C

h. F

10 m²

Mob. Eq. S

tore

10 m²

Lift 1

4 m²

Pool S

tore

10 m²

Pupil C

hang

e Fem

ale

27 m²

Plant Room

95 m²

Staff C

h F

9 m²

Staff Ch M

9 m²

Pupil C

hang

e Male

26 m²

Parents Room/H

ealth O

ffice

21 m²

Interview R

oom

9 m²

Pool P

lant

18 m²

Server

10 m²

Lobb

y

44 m²

Med Store

4 m²

Acc. W

C

5 m²

Stores

33 m²

Rebound Room

36 m²

Hydrotherapy P

ool

110 m²

Circ.

42 m²

??

Acc. W

C

5 m²

Tech S

tore

7 m²

Kitchen

43 m²

Physio

Sto.

6 m²

Physio

35 m²

Nurses

Base

20 m²

MI room

19 m²

Specialist

Corridor

57 m²

Calming ro

om

10 m²

Hygiene/W

C

15 m²

Scienc

e and

Techn

ology

Classro

om

73 m²

GT Store

4 m²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m²

Hygien

e Rm.

15 m²

GT Store

4 m²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m²

Mobility E

quipment

11 m²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m²

Stair-1 Lobby

49 m²

Stair 1

39 m²

Lobb

y 2

27 m²

Recep

tion C

lassb

ase

76 m²

Early Y

ears

76 m²

Hall

182 m²

F

Servery

UP

121.0

120.5

121.5

122.0

120.0

119.5

119.0

119.0

119.0

119.5

120.0

120.5

120.0

122.0

121.5

121.0

125.0

124.5

124.0

123.5

123.0

122.5

123.0

124.0

124.5

125.0

126.0

126.5

125.0

125.5

124.5

127.0

126.0

126.5

126.5

124.0

124.5

125.0

125.5

126.0

127.0

125.0

125.0

124.5

123.5

123.0122

.0

121.5

121.0

121.0

120.5

121.0

120.0

120.0

119.0

119.5

119.5

120.0

119.0

119.0119.0

119.5

122.0

121.0

121.5

121.0

121.0

121.0

121.5

122.0

121.0

121.0

121.0

121.0

120.5

120.0

119.5

Proposed School Building

Proposed playing field55m x 37m

Proposed MUGA36m x 21m

SUDsRetentionPond

Forest SchoolFacility - LearningGarden

Forest SchoolFacility - Play Area /Trim Trail

Forest SchoolFacility -Quiet / ReflectionSpace

WoodlandPlanting

WoodlandPlanting

WoodlandPlanting

LearningGarden

Early YearsLearningGarden

LearningGarden

Inclusive Play Area

SensoryCourtyard

SUDsRetentionPond

SUDsRetentionPond

48no. Car Parking Spaces

4no. Mini Bus CarParking Spaces


3no. DisabledParking Spaces

Delivery Bays / Loading Zone

ExternalDining Area

Terraced seating & Viewing Areas


AllotmentGarden

Vehiclemaintenancearea

12no. Cycle Stands(22 spaces)

3m width dedicated cycleand footpath

+123.000

+123.000

+123.000

+123.000

+121.500

+120.500

+120.500

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

+120.000

+121.500

+120.500

+121.000

+121.500

+122.000

+122.500

+123.000

+123.500

+122.500

+125.000+124.000

1:21 ramp

+122.500

+122.500

+122.500

+122.500

+122.500

+122.000

+121.500

Gated access toMaesyrhandir School

1:21 ramp

1:21 ramp

Footbridge

Footbridge

Footbridge

AccessibleWoodlandFootpath



InclusivePlay Area

AccessibleOrchardFootpath

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

Play mound

Play mound

ExistingPolytunnelRetained

Forest SchoolFacility - SUDs

Learning Garden

SUDsRetentionPond

LandformBund

WoodlandPlanting

WoodlandPlanting

TerracedAmpthitheatre

Forest SchoolStage

21no. CarParking Spaces

Horticultural SchoolAllotment Garden

Footbridge




Drop Off

ExisitngTurning CircleRetained

ExistingPergodaRetained

Fruit TreeOrchard

LandformBund

LandformBund

LandformBund

Reed BedSUDs Learning

Garden

Trim TrailStation 1

Trim TrailStation 2

Trim TrailStation 3

Trim TrailStation 4

Trim TrailStation 5

Trim TrailStation 6

Trim TrailStation 7

Trim TrailStation 8

Trim TrailStation 9

Trim TrailStation 10

2no. DisabledCar Parking Spaces

Potting ShedHorticultural

Learning SchoolFacility

Ornamentalgardens

Maesyrhandir School

Plantation Lane

Falcon Court

Pine Court

4no. Electric vehiclecharging points

Client

Project

Title

DateAprvdAuthorRevRevision POI

newcastle:studio 011, hoults yard, walker road,

newcastle, ne6 2hl. t: +44 (0)191 281 3775london:

Unit 8 De Beauvoir Block, 92-96 De BeauvoirRoad, London n1 4en +44 (0)203 479 2649

glasgow:177 W George St, Glasgow Metropolitan Area

G2 2LB. t: +44 (0)191 281 3775

w: www.oobe.co.uk e: [email protected]

Revision

Scale

Date

Dwg. No.

Powys County CouncilCedewain Specialist ALN School

Site Plan

CED-OOB-ZZ-00-DR-L-0001 1:500 @A1

P08 September 2019

Workstage 2

This drawing is not to be scaled. All dimensions to be checked on site.Discrepancies, ambiguities and / or omissions between this drawing and information givenelsewhere must be reported immediately to head office for clarification before proceeding.

Issued for information P01 EGA MGO 05/09/19S2

Stage 2 - Draft P02 EGA MGO 18/10/19S3

Stage 2 - Draft WIP P03 EGA MGO 25/10/19S3

Stage 2 P04 EGA JGR 30/10/19S4

Issued for information - additional redline P05 EGA JGR 29/05/20S2

Stage 2 - additional redline P06 EGA JGR 03/06/20S2



metres

0 5 10 15 20 25

Potting Shed Horticultural Learning Facility:Timber shed structure approximately 5m x 5m,with roof. Design to be developed at later stagesand agreed with architect and structural engineer.

Forest School Stage:Timber stage structure approximately 5m x 3m,raised ~1m off ground level, with roof/canopy.Design to be developed at later stages andagreed with architect and structural engineer.

16

APPENDIX 16

Exploratory Hole Location Plan

Proposed School Building

Proposed playing field55m x 37m

Proposed MUGA36m x 21m

SUDsRetentionPond

Forest SchoolFacility - LearningGarden

Forest SchoolFacility - Play Area /Trim Trail

Forest SchoolFacility -Quiet / ReflectionSpace

WoodlandPlanting

WoodlandPlanting

WoodlandPlanting

LearningGarden

Early YearsLearningGarden

LearningGarden

Inclusive Play Area

SensoryCourtyard

SUDsRetentionPond

SUDsRetentionPond

48no. Car Parking Spaces



3no. DisabledParking Spaces

Delivery Bays / Loading Zone

ExternalDining Area

Terraced seating & Viewing Areas


AllotmentGarden

Vehiclemaintenancearea

12no. Cycle Stands(22 spaces)

3m width dedicated cycleand footpath

+123.000

+123.000

+123.000

+123.000

+121.500

+120.500

+120.500

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

+120.000

+121.500

+120.500

+121.000

+121.500

+122.000

+122.500

+123.000

+123.500

+122.500

+125.000+124.000

1:21 ramp

+122.500

+122.500

+122.500

+122.500

+122.500

+122.000

+121.500

Gated access toMaesyrhandir School

1:21 ramp

1:21 ramp

Footbridge

Footbridge

Footbridge




InclusivePlay Area

AccessibleOrchardFootpath

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

+121.500

Play mound

Play mound

ExistingPolytunnelRetained

Forest SchoolFacility - SUDs

Learning Garden

SUDsRetentionPond

LandformBund

WoodlandPlanting

WoodlandPlanting

TerracedAmpthitheatre

Forest SchoolStage


Horticultural SchoolAllotment Garden

Footbridge




Drop Off

ExisitngTurning CircleRetained

ExistingPergodaRetained

Fruit TreeOrchard

LandformBund

LandformBund

LandformBund

Reed BedSUDs Learning

Garden

Trim TrailStation 1

Trim TrailStation 2

Trim TrailStation 3

Trim TrailStation 4

Trim TrailStation 5

Trim TrailStation 6

Trim TrailStation 7

Trim TrailStation 8

Trim TrailStation 9

Trim TrailStation 10

2no. DisabledCar Parking Spaces

Potting ShedHorticultural

Learning SchoolFacility

Ornamentalgardens

Maesyrhandir School

Plantation Lane

Falcon Court

Pine Court

4no. Electric vehiclecharging points

Equipm

ent B

ay

5 m²

Eqip. Bay

5 m²

Lift 24 m

²

Oxygen St.

5 m²

Staff C

h/WC

10 m²

Store

7 m²

Senso

ry/Soft

Play Roo

m

34 m²

WC's22

m²

Store15

m²

Touch

Trust/S

enso

ry Roo

m

31 m²

Staff Change

11 m²

Circ.

13 m²

Acc. W

C

4 m²

Stair 2

39 m²

Cloaks

2 m²

Hygien

e Rm.

15 m²

Calming Rm.

9 m²

Cloaks2 m

²

GT Store

4 m²

General Teach

ing Classroom

65 m

²

Cloaks

2 m²

Service

s

4 m²

Mobility

Equipm

ent S

tore

10 m

²

GT Store

4 m²

Staff Work

Room/Offic

e

16 m

²

Store4 m

²

Hygiene/W

C

15 m²

EY Corrido

r

98 m²

Store4 m

²

Laun

dry Roo

m

7 m²

Cleane

rs Stor

e

6 m²

Store4 m

²

Store4 m

²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m

²

Hygiene Rm.

15 m²

Sensory

Garden

392 m

²

Circulatio

n

46 m²

Circ.

135 m

²

Circ.

35 m

²

Circ.

9 m²

Pool C

hang

e F

30 m²

Pool C

hang

e M

30 m

²

WC's27 m

²

Externa

l Stor

e

15 m²

Store5 m

²

Sick Bay

7 m²

Demo/S

tore R

oom

20 m²

Dining

100 m

² Acc. Cha

nge

12 m

²

Kitchen

Store

11 m²

Servery

10 m

²

F

Small Dining

46 m

²

Commun

ity Cafe

Kitchen

21 m²

Recep

tion/

Admin

Office

25 m²

Servery

Staff Ch. F

10 m²

Mob. Eq. S

tore

10 m²

Lift 1

4 m²

Pool S

tore

10 m

²

Pupil Change Female

27 m²

Plant Room

95 m²

Staff C

h F

9 m²

Staff Ch M

9 m²

Pupil C

hang

e Male

26 m²

Parents

Room/Hea

lth O

ffice

21 m²

Interview Room

9 m²

Pool Plant

18 m²

Server

10 m²

Lobby44 m

²

Med Store

4 m²

Acc. W

C

5 m²

Stores

33 m

²

Rebou

nd Roo

m

36 m

²

Hydrot

herap

y Poo

l

110 m

²

Circ.

42 m²

? ?

Acc. W

C

5 m²

Tech Store

7 m²

Kitchen

43 m²

Physio

Sto.

6 m²

Physio

35 m²

Nurses

Base

20 m

²

MI room

19 m²

Specia

list Corr

idor

57 m²

Calming

room

10 m²

Hygiene/W

C

15 m²

Scienc

e and

Techn

ology

Classro

om

73 m

²

GT Store

4 m²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m²

Hygien

e Rm.

15 m

²

GT Store

4 m²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m²

Mobility

Equipm

ent

11 m

²

Genera

l Tea

ching

Classro

om

65 m²

Stair-1

Lobb

y

49 m

²

Stair 1

39 m

²

Lobb

y 2

27 m²

Recep

tion C

lassb

ase

76 m²

Early Y

ears

76 m²

Hall18

2 m²

UP

BH1

BH2

BH3

BH4

BH5

LWD1LWD2

LWD3LWD4

LWD5

LWD6

LWD7

LWD8

TP1

TP2

WS1

WS10

WS11

WS12

WS13

WS14 WS15

WS2

WS3

WS4WS5

WS6WS7

WS8 WS9

Key

Cable Percussion Borehole

Dynamic Sample Borehole

Light Weight Deflectometer Test

Trial Pit

Client:

Heart of Wales Property Services

Project:


Drawing Title:

Proposed Hole Location Plan

Date:

November 2020Scale: 1:500@A1

Project No:

PN204159File Name:

Geo-PN204159-001(1)

Phone: 01244 671117

Fax: 01224 671122

E:mail [email protected]

www.geotechnics.co.uk

The Geotechnical Centre,

Unit 1, Borders Industrial Park,

River Lane, Saltney,

Chester

CH4 8RJ

Meters

0 10 20

\\Helios\Data\Projects\Chester\2020\PN204159\Drawings\Geo-PN204159-001.dwg

17

APPENDIX 17

Investigation Techniques and General Notes

INVESTIGATION TECHNIQUES

Form REP006 Rev 2

INTRODUCTION

The following brief review of Ground Investigation techniques, generally used as part of most Site Investigations in the UK, summarises their methodology, advantages and limitations. Detailed descriptions of the techniques are available and can be provided on request. This review should be read in conjunction with the accompanying General Notes.

TRIAL PITS

The trial pit is amongst the simplest yet most effective means of identifying shallow ground conditions on a site. Its advantages include simplicity, speed, potential accuracy and cost-effectiveness. The trial pit is most commonly formed using a back-acting excavator which can typically determine ground conditions to some 4 metres below ground level. Hand excavation is often used to locate, expose and detail existing foundations, features or services. In general, it is difficult to extend pits significantly below the water table in predominantly granular soils, where flows can cause instability. Unless otherwise stated, the trial pits will not have been provided with temporary side support during their construction. Under such circumstances, entrance into the pit is not permitted and hence observations will have been made from the ground surface and samples taken from the excavator bucket. Where access for personnel is required to allow close observation of the exposed strata, the taking of samples and the carrying out of in situ tests, the sides of the trial pits (Observation Pits in BS 5930:2015) will be made safe using temporary supports or the sides battered back to a stable angle. Some limited access to such Trial Pits (Observation Pits) at depths less than 1m may be allowed in stable conditions or where the sides are benched or battered back to a safe angle. Trends in strata type, level and thickness can be determined, shear surfaces identified and the behaviour of plant, excavation sides and excavated materials can be related to the construction process. They are particularly valuable in land slip investigations. Some types of in situ test can be undertaken in such pits and large disturbed or block samples obtained.

CABLE PERCUSSION BORING

The light Cable Percussion technique of soft ground boring, typically at a diameter of 150mm, is a well-established simple and flexible method of boring vertical holes and generally allows data to be obtained in respect of strata conditions other than rock. A tubular cutter (for cohesive soils) or shell with a flap valve (for granular soils) is repeatedly lifted and dropped using a winch and rope operating from an “A” frame. Soil which enters these tools is regularly removed and either sampled for subsequent examination or test, or laid to one side for later removal off site and licensed disposal or, if permitted by the Client, use as backfill. Steel casing will have been used to prevent collapse of the borehole sides where necessary. A degree of disturbance of soil and mixing of layers is inevitable and the presence of very thin layers of different soils within a particular stratum may not be identified. Changes in strata type can only be detected on recognition of a change in soil samples at the surface, after the interface has been passed. For the foregoing reasons, depth measurements should not be considered to be more accurate than 0.10 metre. The technique can determine ground conditions to depths in excess of 30 metres under suitable circumstances and usually causes less surface disturbance than trial pitting. In cohesive soils cylindrical samples are retrieved by driving or pushing in 100mm nominal diameter tubes. In soft soils, piston sampling or vane testing may be undertaken. In granular soils and often in cohesive materials, in situ Standard Penetration Tests (SPT’s) are performed. The SPT records the number of standard blows required to drive a 50mm diameter open or cone ended probe for 300mm after an initial 150mm penetration. A modified method of recording is used in denser strata. Small disturbed samples are obtained throughout.

ROTARY DRILLING

Rotary Drilling to produce cores by rotating an annular diamond-impregnated tube or barrel into the ground is the technique most appropriate to the forming of site investigation boreholes through rock or other hard strata. It has the advantage of being able to be used vertically or at an angle. Core diameters of less than 100mm are most common for site investigation purposes. Core is normally retrieved in plastic lining tubes. A flushing fluid such as air, water or foam is used to cool the bit and carry cuttings to the surface. Depths in excess of 60 metres can be achieved under suitable circumstances using rotary techniques, with minimal surface disturbance. Examination of cores allows detailed rock description and generally enables angled discontinuity surfaces to be observed. However, vertical holes do not necessarily reveal the presence of vertical or near-vertical fissures or joint discontinuities. The core type and/or techniques used will depend on the ground conditions. Where open hole rotary drilling is employed, descriptions of strata result from examination at the surface of small particles ejected from the borehole in the flushing medium. In consequence, no indication of fissuring, bedding, consistency or degree of weathering can be obtained.

DYNAMIC SAMPLING

This technique involves the driving of an open-ended tube into the ground and retrieval of the soil which enters the tube. It was previously called window or windowless sampling. The term “window sample” arose from the original device which had a “window” or slot cut into the side of the tube through which samples were taken. This was superseded by the use of a thin-walled plastic liner to retrieve the soil sample from within a sampler (windowless sampling) which has a solid wall. Line diameters range from 36 to 86mm. Such samples can be used for qualitative logging, selection of samples for classification and chemical analysis and for obtaining a rudimentary assessment of strength. Driving devices can be hand-held or machine mounted and the drive tubes are typically in 1m lengths. Depending on the type of rig used, the hole formed can be cased to prevent collapse of the borehole sides. Where the type of rig does not allow the insertion of casing, the success of this technique can be limited when soils and groundwater conditions are such that the sides of the hole collapse on withdrawal of the sampler. Obstructions within the ground, the density of the material or its strength can also limit the depth and rate of penetration of this light-weight investigation technique. Nevertheless, it is a valuable tool where access is constrained such as within buildings or on embankments. Depths of up to 10m can be achieved in suitable circumstances depending on the rig type but depths of 5m to 6m are more common.

EXPLORATORY HOLE RECORDS

The data obtained by these techniques are generally presented on Trial Pit, Borehole, Drillhole or Dynamic Sample Records. The descriptions of strata result from information gathered from a number of sources which may include published geological data, preliminary field observations and descriptions, in situ test results, laboratory test results and specimen descriptions. A key to the symbols and abbreviations used accompanies the records. The descriptions on the exploratory hole records accommodate but may not necessarily be identical to those on any preliminary records or the laboratory summaries. The records show ground conditions at the exploratory hole locations. The degree to which they can be used to represent conditions between or beyond such holes, however, is a matter for geological interpretation rather than factual reporting and the associated uncertainties must be recognised.

DYNAMIC PROBING

This technique typically measures the number of blows of a standard weight falling over a standard height to advance a cone-ended rod over sequential standard distances (typically 100mm). Some devices measure the penetration of the probe per standard blow. It is essentially a profiling tool and is best used in conjunction with other investigation techniques where site-specific correlation can be used to delineate the distribution of soft or loose soils or the upper horizon of a dense or strong layer such as rock. Both machine-driven and hand-driven equipment is available, the selection depending upon access restrictions and the depth of penetration required. It is particularly useful where access for larger equipment is not available, disturbance is to be minimised or where there are cost constraints. No samples are recovered and some techniques leave a sacrificial cone head in the ground. As with other lightweight techniques, progress is limited in strong or dense soils. The results are presented both numerically and graphically. Depths of up to 10m are commonly achieved in suitable circumstances. The hand-driven DCP probing device has been calibrated by the Highways Agency to provide a profile of CBR values over a range of depths.

INSTRUMENTATION

The most common form of instrument used in site investigation is either the standpipe or else the standpipe piezometer which can be installed in investigation holes. They are used to facilitate monitoring of groundwater levels and water sampling over a period of time following site work. Normally a standpipe would be formed using rigid plastic tubing which has been perforated or slotted over much of its length whilst a standpipe piezometer would have a filter tip which would be placed at a selected level and the hole sealed above and sometimes below to isolate the zone of interest. Groundwater levels are determined using an electronic “dip meter” to measure the depth to the water surface from ground level. Piezometers can also be used to measure permeability. They are simple and inexpensive instruments for long term monitoring but response times can limit their use in tidal areas and access to the ground surface at each instrument is necessary. Remote reading requires more sophisticated hydraulic, electronic or pneumatic equipment. Settlement can be monitored using surface or buried target plates whilst lateral movement over a range of depths is monitored using slip indicator or inclinometer equipment.

GENERAL NOTES

Form REP006 Rev 2

1. The report is prepared for the exclusive use of the Client named in

the document and copyright subsists with Geotechnics Limited. Prior

written permission must be obtained to reproduce all or part of the

report. It is prepared on the understanding that its contents are only

disclosed to parties directly involved in the current investigation,

preparation and development of the site.

2. Further copies may be obtained with the Client's written permission,

from Geotechnics Limited with whom the master copy of the

document will be retained.

3. The report and/or opinion is prepared for the specific purpose stated

in the document and in relation to the nature and extent of proposals

made available to Geotechnics Limited at that time. Re-consideration

will be necessary should those details change. The recommendations

should not be used for other schemes on or adjacent to the site

without further reference to Geotechnics Limited.

4. The assessment of the significance of the factual data, where called

for, is provided to assist the Client and their Engineer and/or Advisers

in the preparation of their designs.

5. The report is based on the ground conditions encountered in the

exploratory holes together with the results of field and laboratory

testing in the context of the proposed development. The data from

any commissioned desk study and site reconnaissance are also drawn

upon. There may be special conditions appertaining to the site,

however, which are not revealed by the investigation and which may

not be taken into account in the report.

6. Methods of construction and/or design other than those proposed by

the designers or referred to in the report may require consideration

during the evolution of the proposals and further assessment of the

geotechnical and any geoenvironmental data would be required to

provide discussion and evaluations appropriate to these methods.

7. The accuracy of results reported depends upon the technique of

measurement, investigation and test used and these values should

not be regarded necessarily as characteristics of the strata as a whole

(see accompanying notes on Investigation Techniques). Where such

measurements are critical, the technique of investigation will need to

be reviewed and supplementary investigation undertaken in

accordance with the advice of the Company where necessary.

8. The samples selected for laboratory test are prepared and tested in

accordance with the relevant Clauses and Parts of BS EN ISO 17892

and BS 1377 Parts 1 to 8, where appropriate, in Geotechnics

Limited’s UKAS accredited Laboratory, where possible. A list of tests

is given.

9. Tests requiring the use of another laboratory having UKAS

accreditation where possible are identified.

10. Any unavoidable variations from specified procedures are identified in

the report.

11. Specimens are cut vertically, where this is relevant and can be

identified, unless otherwise stated

12. All the data required by the test procedures are recorded on individual

test sheets but the results in the report are presented in summary

form to aid understanding and assimilation for design purposes.

Where all details are required, these can be made available.

13. Whilst the report may express an opinion on possible configurations

of strata between or beyond exploratory holes, or on the possible

presence of features based on either visual, verbal, written,

cartographical, photographic or published evidence, this is for

guidance only and no liability can be accepted for its accuracy.

14. The Code of Practice for Ground Investigations – BS 5930:2015

calls for man-made soils to be described as Anthropogenic Ground

with soils placed in an un-controlled manner classified as Made

Ground and soils placed in a controlled manner as Fill. In view of

the difficulty in always accurately determining the origin of man-

made soils in exploratory holes, Geotechnics Limited classify such

materials as Made Ground. Where soils can be clearly identified

as being placed in a controlled manner then further classification

of the soils as Fill has been added to the Exploratory Hole Records.

15. Classification of man-made soils is based on the inspection of

retrieved samples or exposed excavations. Where it is obvious

that foreign matter such as paper, plastic or metal is present,

classification is clear. Frequently, however, for man-made soils that

arise from the adjacent ground or from the backfilling of

excavations, their visual characteristics can closely resemble those

of undisturbed ground. Other evidence such as site history,

exploratory hole location or other tests may need to be drawn upon

to provide clarification. For these reasons, classification of soils on

the exploratory hole records as either Made Ground or naturally

occurring strata, the boundary between them and any

interpretation that this gives rise to should be regarded as

provisional and subject to re-evaluation in the light of further data.

16. The classification of materials as Topsoil is generally based on

visual description and should not be interpreted to mean that the

material so described complies with the criteria for Topsoil used in

BS 3882:2015. Specific testing would be necessary where such a

definition is a requirement.

17. Ground conditions should be monitored during the construction of

the works and the report should be re-evaluated in the light of

these data by the supervising geotechnical engineers.

18. Any comments on groundwater conditions are based on

observations made at the time of the investigation, unless

specifically stated otherwise. It should be noted, however, that the

observations are subject to the method and speed of boring, drilling

or excavation and that groundwater levels will vary due to seasonal

or other effects.

19. Any bearing capacities for conventional spread foundations which

are given in the report and interpreted from the investigation are

for bases at a minimum depth of 1m below finished ground level

in naturally occurring strata and at broadly similar levels

throughout individual structures, unless otherwise stated. Typically

they are based on serviceability criteria taking account of an

assessment of the shear strength and/or density data obtained by

the investigation. The foundations should be designed in

accordance with the good practice embodied in BS 8004:2015 -

Foundations, supplemented for housing by NHBC Standards.

Foundation design is an iterative process and bearing pressures

may need adjustment or other measures may need to be taken in

the context of final layouts and levels prior to finalisation of

proposals.

20. Unless specifically stated, the investigation does not take account

of the possible effects of mineral extraction or of gases from fill or

natural sources within, below or outside the site.

21. The costs or economic viability of the proposals referred to in the

report, or of the solutions put forward to any problems

encountered, will depend on very many factors in addition to

geotechnical or geoenvironmental considerations and hence their

evaluation is outside the scope of the report.

18

APPENDIX 18

Environmental Notes - Context and Methodology forAssessment

SITE CONTAMINATION – Context and Methodology for Assessment –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Geotechnics Limited Notes on Assessment of Contaminated Land


203 Torrington Avenue,

Tile Hill, Coventry. CV4 9AP Page 1 of 4

1.0 INTRODUCTION

These notes provide a context and methodology

against which contamination at the site has been

assessed. The Desk Study (if commissioned as part of

this project) and the assessment discussed in the text

of this report has been undertaken in accordance with

current best practice as identified in BS10175:2011

Investigation of Contaminated Sites Code of Practice

and the Defra/Environment Agency Contaminated Land

Report 11 (CLR11) Model Procedures for the

Management of Land Contamination. It also conforms

to the general requirements set down in Environment

Agency Guidance on Requirements for Land

Contamination Reports.

Contaminated Land reporting, investigation and

assessment is currently undertaken using a phased

approach and may be preliminary (i.e. Desk Study),

main or supplementary. The principal aim is to reduce

any remaining uncertainty within the Conceptual Site

Model (CSM) to an acceptable level. Investigation is

considered an iterative process under current guidance

and should proceed to the next phase if significant risk

or uncertainty remains. Please note that Geotechnics

Limited Reports do not address risk associated with

potential contamination by botanical agents such as

Japanese Knotweed.

To determine potential risk and uncertainty, reference

is made to the currently accepted UK methodology as

defined by the source-pathway-receptor model of land

contamination and as further detailed in Section 4

below. Please note that reports do not address

potential contamination by botanical agents such as

Japanese Knotweed.

2.0 LEGAL FRAMEWORK

Land contamination is an increasingly important

material consideration within the overall planning

regime. The Planning Authority is required to consider

the potential implications of contamination both when

it is developing structure or local plans and when it is

considering individual applications for planning

permission. Where contamination is suspected or

known to exist at a site, a Planning Authority may

require investigations to be undertaken, for example,

before granting planning permission. Alternatively it

may include conditions on the permission itself

requiring appropriate investigation and, if necessary,

remediation. Part IIA of the Environmental Protection

Act 1990 has created a regime within which the

identification and remediation of contaminated land can

be undertaken regarding current land use and legacy

contamination. This is then further refined through the

use of guidance on specific aspects of the process

produced by various authorising bodies.

Section 78A(2) of the Act defines contaminated land

for the purposes of Part IIA as:

“any land which appears to the local authority in

whose area it is situated to be in such a condition,

by reason of substance in, on or under the land

that:

a) significant harm is being caused or there is a

significant possibility of such harm being caused;

or:

b) significant pollution of controlled waters is

being, or is likely to be caused.”

Part IIA is intended to complement the Planning Regime

and both of these are intended to embody a “suitable

for use approach”. In the context of Part IIA, action is

necessary only where there are unacceptable risks to

health or the environment, taking in to account the

current use of the land and its environmental setting.

Environmental reports should provide an assessment of

the contamination conditions considered likely to be

found at the site in the context of the legal framework

discussed above. Hence, this assessment is based solely

on our current knowledge and understanding of the

site as determined by the information made available to

us by the Client or acquired on their behalf as well as

our understanding of the proposed development, legal

and other guidance available at the time of writing.

3.0 SITE USE AND ASSESSMENT

The primary issues of concern are usually the risks to

human health, for which the regulator acting as

Statutory Consultee under the Planning Regime is

generally the Local Authority, and risks to Controlled

Waters, for which the appropriate consultee is the

Environment Agency.

For the purposes of assessment, the contamination risk

assessment in respect of human health is considered in

the context of the proposed site use over three broad

categories as follows:-

a) Allotments

This categorisation assumes that no residents are

present on the site so occupation is not continuous.

However, the site is used for the growing of food

for consumption either on or off site and therefore

includes an exposure contribution from eating

home-grown vegetables. It also assumes that users

will come into direct dermal contact with soil

materials.






b) Industrial/Commercial

This categorisation assumes that no residents are

present and the site is normally used for

commercial and/or industrial purposes. Persons

using the site may potentially have short term

exposure only to open spaces on site.

c) Residential with or without plant uptake

This categorisation assumes that residents may have

access to open space close to the home with or

without an exposure from home-grown vegetables.

Where the proposed site use is not specifically noted

as one of the above model categories, reference may

be made to alternative exposure models such as S4UL

Open Space Residential and Open Space Parkland

which may be more appropriate for areas such as

playing fields, but have not yet been formally endorsed

by the regulators. Otherwise it may be possible to

default to a combination of two of the available models

to allow the appropriate level of caution to be applied.

The model selected for the assessment at this site and

any deviation from the standard models is discussed in

the report text.

4.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

The Conceptual Site Model (CSM) is a representation

of the current understanding of the site and the

surrounding environment. This incorporates an

understanding of the geology, groundwater, surface

water bodies and potential contamination processes

acting on substances present and migration pathways. It

also takes into account all identified potential pollutant

linkages using a source-pathway-receptor approach,

based on the proposed use of the site. Where any

element of the source-pathway-receptor linkage is

absent, there is considered to be no or negligible risk.

The following describes the methodology adopted for

current UK assessments, which are based on the

known topographic, geological and groundwater

conditions in combination with current, historical and

expected land use. Depending on the nature of the site,

this information may be presented in the report

graphically as cross-sections, maps, diagrams, flow

charts and/or in tabular and written form as

appropriate to the linkages identified.

4.1 Sources

These are based on the known history of the site and

surrounding area obtained from available documentary

and other sources as noted in the report. The exact

processes undertaken and materials stored or used on,

or around, a site are not usually known in detail and in

such cases general conclusions and assumptions can be

made based on the information available in Guiding

Principles for Contaminated Land (GPLC) and other

relevant Department of Environment (DOE) or similar

industry profiles. The identification of a potential

source should not be taken to indicate its actual

presence. This can only be determined through an

intrusive investigation and associated environmental

monitoring and analysis.

4.2 Pathways

A pathway can be defined as: “A possible route or

means by which a receptor could be, or is, exposed to

or affected by a contaminant”. Pathways for

contamination associated with human health and

Controlled Waters are considered separately since

they generally follow different pathways.

Human Health

The Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment (CLEA

UK) Model designed for human health assessments

includes ingestion, dermal contact and inhalation

pathways. All of these pathways must be considered

when undertaking risk assessments.

Pathway Description Assumptions

Ingestion Outdoor Soil Contamination in

top 0.1m of soil,

100%

Bioaccessibility

Indoor Soil

Consumption of

home grown

Vegetables

Contamination in

top 0.5m of soil.

Consumption of

soil attached to

home grown

vegetables

Dermal

Contact

Outdoor Soil Contamination in

top 0.5m of soil,

pathway not

considered for

metals.

Indoor Soil

Inhalation Outdoor fugitive

dust

Contamination in

the top 0.1m of soil

Indoor fugitive

dust

Outdoor soil

vapour

Contamination in

top 1.0m of soil and

constant source

assumed. Indoor soil vapour

Where the proposals for the site include complete

cover with buildings and hard surfacing, ingestion and

outdoor dermal contact pathways are not considered

likely to be present except during construction. If soft

landscaping is present, these potential pathways must

be considered regardless of the model used.






Controlled Waters

Controlled Waters are generally defined as any lake,

pond, river or other watercourse and groundwater.

This therefore includes water contained within the

saturated (phreatic) zone of the ground. Soil pore

waters and waters contained within the unsaturated

(vadose) zone are therefore outside the definition of

controlled waters and as such are not considered as

receptors, though they may still be pathways. Possible

pathways for contamination to reach controlled waters

include surface runoff, infiltration, and the migration of

mobile contaminants, including leaching through the

unsaturated zone. Variations in groundwater levels can

cause leaching of contaminants from above the current

water table.

Pathway Description

Surface Water Surface Runoff and overland flow

Infiltration

Via leaking sewers, pipes and

tanks

Migration through unsaturated

zone

Groundwater Fluctuating groundwater levels

Leaching by groundwater

Via leaking sewers, pipes and

tanks

Migration through unsaturated

zone

Capillary rise

4.3 Receptors

A receptor is normally defined as some thing that could

be adversely affected or harmed by being exposed to a

contaminant. The receptors to be generally considered

in this sense usually fall into one of the following

categories:

• Humans: End site users; children, employees,

adults, guests and construction workers.

• Controlled Waters: Surface Water and

Groundwater

• Ecological receptors (wildlife)

• Building Fabric and Services

Note that in some cases pathways can also be

receptors and vice versa depending on the site ground

model and the sensitivity of the receptors. Where

specific receptors are not considered relevant, this shall

be noted in the report.

4.4 Site Specific Contamination Linkages

Those potential Source-Pathway-Receptor linkages

identified as relevant and possible on the basis of their

presumed physicochemical characteristics form the

basis of the CSM risk assessment.

5.0 RISK ASSESSMENT

Using the identified linkages a preliminary conceptual

model is produced for the site. Assessment is then

undertaken to determine the level of risk that the

identified potential linkages may pose to the identified

receptors. Where risk is considered to be potentially

significant, or the remaining unknowns may be

potentially significant, additional investigation and/or

mitigation may be appropriate.

5.1 Soil Risk Assessment

At the time of writing, official Soil Guideline Values

(SGVs) have only been published for certain specific

inorganic and organic determinands. These values are

provided mainly from the updated CLEA UK (V1.06)

model as screening values and are generally considered

conservative. Hence, where the SGVs are not

exceeded, the risk to humans from long term exposure

is considered low to negligible. For substances for

which there are no official published SGVs or for which

updated published values are not yet available,

comparison is made to the previously published

guidance to give an indication of relative contaminant

levels.

In addition, reference may be made to Suitable for Use

Levels (S4ULs) for Human Health Risk Assessment

(Chartered Institute of Environmental Health – LQM

2015 including amendments) Soil Generic Assessment

Criteria (GACs) for Human Health Risk Assessment

(CL:AIRE 2010) and Category 4 Screening Levels

(C4SL) for use in planning (CL:AIRE 2014). These are

collections of screening values derived using the

current CLEA UK model but not necessarily formally

adopted or endorsed by DEFRA or the EA. SGVs,

S4ULs, C4SLs and GAC's all make assumptions about

the methods by which contamination can reach

receptors and assumptions about the amounts each

pathway can transmit in order to derive generic values

for basic screening purposes.

As part of the CLEA assessment process, statistical

analysis of the results employs the concepts of the

Mean Value Test and the Maximum Value Test. The

Mean Value Test applies a factor to the results to

account for inherent uncertainty and mainly uses the

number of trial holes and/or samples to determine this

factor. The Mean Value Test gives a 95% confidence

limit (known as a US95) that contaminant

concentrations are likely to fall below this value at any

particular point across the site. However, the Mean

Value Test assumes a “normal distribution”. Where the

result of the Mean Value Test is heavily biased as the

result of a single high contaminant concentration value

(i.e. where the data set does not appear to be

“normal”), the Maximum Value Test is used.






The Maximum Value Test statistically determines

whether the highest concentration recorded is likely to

be a statistical outlier or not, given the characteristics

of the data set. If proven to a suitable degree of

confidence, the outlier value should be removed from

the data used in the original Mean Value Test and the

US95 should be recalculated. The results of both

statistical methods are highly dependent on the size of

the data set and are assumed to be representative.

Analysis of the US95 results and average data values for

each contaminant (as recommended in "Guidance on

comparing soil contamination data with a critical

concentration" CL:AIRE/CIEH 2008) is undertaken

which for this site is discussed in the report text. This

guidance states that both the average for the data set

and the calculated US95 value need to lie above the

chosen guidance value before they can potentially be

considered as significant. In this case the critical value is

the appropriate SGV for the substance being analysed.

The SGV indicates the level for a given exposure

scenario, at or below which there is unlikely to be any

significant possibility of significant harm. Therefore,

where both the average and the US95 exceed the

critical value, there remains an as yet un-quantified

possibility of harm.

5.2 Water Risk Assessment

Assessment is generally undertaken firstly against UK

Drinking Water Standards to give an idea of relative

contamination levels. On this basis, risk is assessed not

only in human health terms based on direct exposure

and ingestion pathways, but also on water quality

criteria, such as taint, which may have no direct health-

based impact. If the levels are exceeded significantly,

the Environmental Quality Standards appropriate to the

region, situation and/or regulator concerned may be

used. Note, these latter standards are variable and

subject to change in light of their need to parallel

European Red List substance lists as transposed into

UK law. The European Water Framework Directive

now requires waters to be considered holistically, i.e.

any contamination of groundwater, perched or

otherwise, must be considered and assessed.

5.3 Gas Risk Assessment

The ground gas risk is assessed using CIRIA C665

(Assessing risks posed by hazardous ground gases to

buildings: CIRIA, 2008) which uses Gas Screening

Values (GSV's) to determine the risk from ground gas

to a development and the appropriate measures that

should be incorporated into the building design. The

GSV for the site is based on the maximum gas

concentration recorded in percent combined with the

worst-case flow rate in litres per hour during visits to

site to monitor the gas and groundwater levels installed

in exploratory holes. Where any figure is less than the

detection level of the instrument for that parameter,

the value used in the calculation is required to default

to the detection level.

5.4 UXO Risk Assessment

Determination of actual risk from Unexploded

Ordnance (UXO’s) should only be undertaken by

specialist contractors. However, the publication

"Unexploded Ordnance (UXO), A guide for the

construction industry" (CIRIA C681, 2009) notes that a

preliminary potential risk assessment can and should be

undertaken during the pre-works stage. Where such an

assessment for the site has been undertaken, the

criteria noted in CIRIA C681 Chapter 5 (Tables 5.1-

5.3) have been used. Where specific factors used in

determining the risk remain unknown or are uncertain,

the assumption is made that an increased level of risk is

present.

6.0 UNCERTAINTIES

Where information that could reasonably be expected

to have been found, determined or deduced and has

not been, this will be noted in the report text in

accordance with the principles of BS10175 (2011). In

addition, a relative measure of the level of uncertainty

in the conclusions and/or data will be noted if

appropriate or the data values are greater than would

normally be anticipated or assumed. For example, it is

accepted that sampling, analytical and statistical error

during soil sampling will always be potentially present in

any investigation, but this will not be further detailed

except where specifically relevant, tested (i.e. through

sample duplicates), requested or required by the

standard.

7.0 CONCLUSIONS

The environmental risk assessment conclusions will be

based on our current professional understanding of the

site location, site history, CSM, proposed site use and

the legal and guidance information provided and/or

available to us at the time of writing the report. Such

information may therefore change over time and as

such, reports may require periodic updating and may

not be suitable for use, other than for the specific

purpose for which it was initially produced. The report

should also be considered in the context of the

included General Notes and Investigation Techniques.

It should also be noted that the report and its

conclusions may be subject to different interpretation

by appropriate regulators and expresses our

professional interpretation of the relevant guidance and

documentation in relation to our current understanding

of the site. Neither it (nor any accompanying

documentation) should be taken as being in any way a

definitive statement of a legal position unless otherwise

explicitly stated as being such.

PN204159 Interpretative Report

Documents

Transcript of PN204159 Interpretative Report