WESTCONNEX M4 WIDENING Pitt Street, Parramatta to Homebush Bay Drive, Homebush Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
(blank page)
Version Reviewed Approved for issue Date
Draft for client review J Duncan B Gilchrist 12 May 2014
Revised draft C Masters B Gilchrist 26 May 2014
Final C Masters B Gilchrist 4 July 2014
Revised Final C Masters B Gilchrist 17 July 2014
Prepared by
SMEC Australia
WestConnex M4 Widening iv Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Contents
1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 1.2 Project description ...... 1 1.3 Study area ...... 7 1.4 Director-General’s Requirements ...... 7 2 Methodology ...... 9 2.1 Overview ...... 9 2.2 Legislation and policy framework ...... 9 2.3 Contaminated land ...... 10 2.4 Hazardous materials ...... 14 2.5 Acid sulfate soils ...... 14 2.6 Sediments ...... 15 2.7 Water ...... 16 2.8 Waste management and handling ...... 17 3 Existing environment ...... 19 3.1 Land use ...... 19 3.2 Climate and meteorology ...... 19 3.3 Geology, soils and sediments ...... 20 3.4 Acid sulfate soils ...... 24 3.5 Contaminated land ...... 24 3.6 Water quality ...... 26 3.7 Groundwater ...... 30 4 Assessment of impacts ...... 33 4.1 Soils and water quality ...... 33 4.2 Acid sulfate soils ...... 37 4.3 Contaminated land and hazardous materials ...... 38 4.4 Groundwater ...... 39 4.5 Waste management and handling ...... 40 5 Environmental management ...... 43 5.1 Overview ...... 43 5.2 Soils and water quality ...... 43 5.3 Acid sulfate soils ...... 45 5.4 Contaminated land and hazardous materials ...... 45 5.5 Groundwater ...... 47 5.6 Waste management and handling ...... 48 6 Conclusion ...... 51 6.1 Soil and water quality ...... 51 6.2 Acid sulfate soils ...... 51 6.3 Contaminated land and hazardous materials ...... 51 6.4 Groundwater ...... 52
WestConnex M4 Widening v Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
6.5 Waste management and handling ...... 52 7 References ...... 53
Annexure 1 Maps of sampling locations
List of figures
1 Regional context 2 Overview of the M4 Widening Project 3 Soil landscapes 4 Acid sulfate soils
WestConnex M4 Widening vi Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Glossary of terms and abbreviations
Term Meaning
ANZECC Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council ARMCANZ Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand ASS Acid sulfate soils ASSMAC Acid Sulphate Soils Management Advisory Committee ASSMP ASS Management Plan bgl Below ground level BH Borehole BTEX Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylenes CBD Central business district CEMP Construction Environmental Management Plan Ch Chainage CLM Act NSW Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 CLMP Contaminated Land Management Plan cm Centimetre CoPC Contaminants of potential concern CSM Conceptual site model; a tool used to characterise the contamination risk profile of an area(s) DECC Former NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change DECCW Former NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water DGRs Director-General’s Requirements (for the EIS) DO Dissolved oxygen DoE Commonwealth Department of the Environment DP Deposited plan DPI NSW Department of Primary Industries EC Electrical conductivity EIS Environmental Impact Statement EP&A Act NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 EPA NSW Environment Protection Authority EPBC Act Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 FC Faecal coliforms ha Hectare ISQG Interim Sediment Quality Guideline ITS Intelligent Transport System km Kilometre LGA Local government area m Metre m3 Cubic metre mAHD Metres above Australian Height Datum
WestConnex M4 Widening vii Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Term Meaning
mg/kg Milligrams per kilogram mS/cm Millisiemens per centimetre; a measure of electrical conductivity mV Millivolts N Nitrogen NSW New South Wales NTU Nephelometric turbidity units, a measurement of water clarity OCP Organo-chlorine pesticides OEH NSW Office of Environment and Heritage OPP Organo-phosphate pesticides P Phosphorus PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons PASS Potential acid sulfate soils POEO Act NSW Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 Proposal footprint Refers to the area of bridge replacement and includes any ancillary locations or drainage structures Riparian Transition zone between land and watercourse Roads and Maritime NSW Roads and Maritime Services RTA Former NSW Roads and Traffic Authority (now Roads and Maritime) RWMP Resource and Waste Management Plan SEDn Identifier denoting sediment sample location SEPP State Environmental Planning Policy SEPP State Environmental Planning Policy Study area Comprises the proposal footprint and any adjoining or adjacent areas where potential indirect impacts may occur SWMP Soil and Water Management Plan TN Total nitrogen TP Total phosphorus TPA Total potential acidity TPH Total petroleum hydrocarbons TRH Total recoverable hydrocarbons TSA Total sulfidic acidity TSS Total suspended solids VENM Virgin Excavated Natural Materials VOC Volatile organic compounds WARR Act NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001 WDA WestConnex Delivery Authority WM Act NSW Water Management Act 2000 WQO Water quality objective µg/g Micrograms per gram µg/kg Micrograms per kilogram µg/L Micrograms per litre
WestConnex M4 Widening viii Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Executive Summary
The assessment presented in this technical paper aims to establish and characterise the significance of potential impacts on soil, sediments, water quality and waste associated with construction and operation of the M4 Widening Project. Contamination investigations and a preliminary hazardous materials audit have also been completed as part of this assessment. This technical paper develops and provides details of measures to mitigate potential impacts in accordance with relevant guidelines. This would ensure the project’s impact on the existing soil, sediment and water regime would be minimised.
Soils and water quality The project sits within the Sydney Harbour and Parramatta River catchment. The project is located on the southern side of the Parramatta River within the A’Becketts Creek, Duck Creek, Duck River, Haslams Creek and Powells Creek subcatchments which all drain to the Parramatta River. The project crosses three soil landscapes, two of which have a high soil erosion hazard. Disturbed terrain also occurs in the project area and can include filled areas. Construction would involve removal of existing vegetation and removal/modification of existing built features (eg paved surfaces) which would expose bare ground. Excavation would involve the stockpiling of spoil prior to reuse or removal from site. These and related construction activities would give rise to potential for erosion of unconsolidated material and entrainment by runoff and subsequent transport off site. This would impact on water quality and aquatic ecosystems in receiving waterways. Existing water quality is degraded as a result of historical and current land use, and construction activities could cause further degradation if not appropriately managed. Construction of bridge piers within and adjacent to the channel of Duck River has potential for mobilisation of sediments and their dispersal via tidal action. However, given the broader distribution of contaminated sediment within the wider Parramatta River estuary, the minimal works to be undertaken within Duck River, and the recommended management measures, it is not anticipated there would be any material impacts associated with sediment disturbance. Management of soils and water quality during construction would be addressed through preparation of a project-specific Soil and Water Management Plan. This would be prepared prior to construction and in accordance with Managing Urban Stormwater–Soils and Construction, Volume 1 Managing Urban Stormwater and Volume 2D Main Road Construction. The Plan would identify best management practices for soil and water management during construction. Best management practice provides design considerations to keep sediment as close as practicable to its source. Management of in-channel sediment associated with bridge construction activities within the Duck River channel would focus on minimising sediment disturbance within the channel and limiting its movement away from the construction site. There would be a risk to receiving water quality during operation, principally in relation to the transport of pollutants in runoff from the motorway pavement. There would also be a risk of accidental spillage of fuels, chemicals or other hazardous materials from leaks or accidents. Impacts on water quality would be mitigated through incorporation of management controls into the motorway drainage design. A number of potential measures have been identified in
WestConnex M4 Widening ix Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
the concept drainage design and detailed design would further consider practicable measures to optimise pollution mitigation.
Acid sulphate soils The potential for acid sulphate soils (ASS) exists along the majority of the project, particularly in proximity to existing drainage channels. The principal risk is associated with disturbance and exposure of ASS to the air from excavation and construction works such as dewatering. If not appropriately managed, this could result in oxidation of ASS (over a period of weeks or months) with subsequent potential for highly acidic runoff that would impact groundwater, soils and waterways as well as built environment elements. An ASS management plan would be prepared in accordance with the Acid Sulfate Soils Manual (Ahern et al 1998) and the Guidelines for the Management of Acid Sulfate Materials: Acid Sulfate Soils, Acid Sulfate Rock and Monosulfidic Black Ooze (RTA 2005). The plan would detail requirements for the management, handling, treatment and disposal of ASS for the construction of the project. No specific management measures are considered necessary with regard to management of ASS during operation.
Contaminated land and hazardous materials There is potential for contaminated land to be disturbed as a result of construction activities associated with excavation and other ground-engaging activities. Construction of the project would also require the temporary occupation of ancillary sites that would be used as construction compounds and/or materials storage sites. Potential environmental impacts associated with the project in relation to contaminated land include:
• Increased waste amounts from improper practices such as poor fill management. • Inappropriate handling/disposal of contaminated or hazardous waste. • Adverse effects on human health (construction personnel, travelling public or nearby communities). • Release of contaminant into underlying soils. • Release of contaminant into groundwater. • Movement of contaminated sediments into waterways. • Adverse effects on flora and fauna. The principal contamination issues with respect to human health and surface water/groundwater are:
• Asbestos fragments as well as fibres in fill soils, with three areas between Church Street and Deniehy Street requiring action prior to the construction phase. • Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) in fill soils. • Hydrocarbons (naphthalene) in groundwater in one borehole (BH101) from an undefined source. • Lead, mercury, PAH and asbestos in sediments present in A’Becketts Creek, Haslams Creek, Duck Creek and Duck River. • Potential ASS soils and sediments.
WestConnex M4 Widening x Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
• Potential for hydrocarbon and landfill gas associated with the closed landfill present to the north of the M4 Motorway. Asbestos has been identified for three areas within the project area and would require appropriate remediation and management to reduce the risk to site users. An Asbestos Management Plan would be developed for the construction of the project, in accordance with the National Environment Protection (Assessment of site contamination) Measure 1999 (April 2013) which identifies criteria for assessment and remediation of non-friable and friable asbestos in soil. There is potential for latent contamination from hydrocarbons, heavy metals, asbestos, PAH contaminants associated with road usage; and hydrocarbons, pesticides, heavy metals and asbestos associated with illegal dumping or fill soils. The potential for hazardous materials has been identified with regard to two commercial properties and four residential properties that would be acquired for the project. Further investigation has been recommended to identify any required management measures.
Groundwater Construction of the project is unlikely to impact on groundwater resources. During construction, groundwater levels would be monitored to identify any impacts that might occur. The potential for operational impacts on groundwater is considered to be low. Spills have been identified as a potential risk and the concept design incorporates appropriate measures to facilitate effective management of this risk.
Waste management and handling Construction activities would generate various waste streams that would require a coordinated management approach. Some 70,000 m3 of excavated spoil material (including ASS and potential ASS) would not be suitable for reuse and would require appropriate disposal offsite. A project-specific Resource and Waste Management Plan would be prepared in accordance with the Roads and Maritime Environmental Protection Specification G36 to facilitate management of construction waste undertaken in a manner consistent with the resource management hierarchy principles of the WARR Act of avoidance, reduction, reuse and recycling. All wastes, including contaminated wastes, would be identified and classified in accordance with the NSW Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Waste Classification Guidelines: Part 1 Classifying Waste (DECCW 2009). Where practicable, construction materials would be sourced so as to avoid/limit creation of excess waste. No specific waste management measures would be required for operation. Management of waste would be addressed through the broader asset management activities undertaken for the M4 Motorway.
WestConnex M4 Widening xi Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
The WestConnex Delivery Authority (WDA) is proposing to widen and upgrade approximately 7.5 kilometres of the M4 Motorway generally between Pitt Street, Parramatta and Homebush Bay Drive, Homebush (the M4 Widening project). The regional context of the project is provided in Figure 1. The WDA was established by the NSW Government to deliver the WestConnex scheme. The WDA is a public subsidiary corporation of the (NSW) Roads and Maritime Services (Roads and Maritime). Its role and functions are set out in Part 4A of the (NSW) Transport Administration (General) Regulation 2013. For the purpose of the M4 Widening project approval process, Roads and Maritime remains the proponent. This technical working paper has been prepared as a specialist component of the environmental impact statement (EIS) to identify and assess the impacts of the project on soil, sediments water and waste and advise mitigation measures to avoid or minimise impacts.
Figure 1 Regional context
1.2 Project description
The M4 Widening project would include the following key features: • Construction of a new two lane viaduct for westbound traffic, on the southern side of the existing viaduct structure between Church Street, Parramatta and Wentworth Street, Granville. • Reconfiguration of the traffic lanes on the existing viaduct structure to four lanes eastbound and two lanes westbound.
WestConnex M4 Widening 1 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
• Construction of a new bridge/viaduct over Duck River at Auburn. • Widening of the existing motorway to the south of the westbound carriageway between Wentworth Street, Granville and Duck River, Auburn. • Widening of the at-surface carriageway of the motorway predominantly within the existing motorway corridor (utilising both the existing median and verge areas), between Junction Street, Auburn and Homebush Bay Drive, Homebush to provide four traffic lanes westbound and four traffic lanes eastbound. • Construction of a new westbound G-loop on-ramp to the M4 Motorway at Homebush Bay Drive, Homebush. • Construction of a new eastbound on-ramp to the M4 Motorway from Hill Road, Lidcombe. • Provision of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) infrastructure for motorway operations. • Provision of road infrastructure and services to support the future implementation of Managed Motorway operations. • Widening and/or lengthening of existing ramps at Church Street, James Ruse Drive, Silverwater Road, Hill Road and Homebush Bay Drive. • Provision of tolling infrastructure such as gantries and control systems. • Provision of new and modified noise barriers. • Provision of new asphalt wearing surface to the existing M4 Motorway. The project is located approximately 13 kilometres to the west of the Sydney central business district (CBD) and generally follows the alignment of the existing M4 Motorway. Figure 2 shows the key features of the project. The project extends from Pitt Street, Parramatta in the west to east of the Homebush Bay Drive interchange at Homebush in the east. The project traverses the suburbs of Merrylands, Parramatta, Holroyd, Granville, Silverwater, Auburn, Lidcombe, Sydney Olympic Park, Homebush and Homebush West. The project spans four local government areas (LGAs) being Holroyd, Parramatta, Auburn and Strathfield. Construction site compounds would provide support to the construction sites. Given the limited opportunities to locate construction compounds within the motorway corridor, compounds would therefore be established at locations as close as possible to the corridor. These would comprise the following:
• Hardstand (the whole area would be covered in hardstand). • Temporary buildings (generally prefabricated) for offices and meeting rooms, a reception and general administration area, and amenity, first aid and toilet facilities. • Parking areas. • Materials laydown and storage areas; these would include purpose-built temporary structures as required. • Perimeter fencing, including visual screening of compounds where necessary.
WestConnex M4 Widening 2 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
The locations of these compounds, together with details of their size, proposed uses and access points are yet to be finalised but potential locations are identified in Table 1-1. Many of these sites are adjacent to or in close proximity to existing drainage channels. These include Church Street (west, east), Main railway west, Duke Street, A’Beckett Street (No. 1, No. 2), James Ruse Drive (west, east), Martha Street (No.1, No. 2), and Duck River (west, east). Appropriate attention would need to be given to environmental controls and site management to avoid or minimise the risk of impact to these (relatively) sensitive receiving environments. Construction of the project would involve a variety of activities with potential to impact on soil and water, and to generate waste materials. These include:
• Clearing of vegetation and grubbing (about 5.6 hectares). • Preparation of site accesses including establishment of environmental controls. • Piling for construction of piers, abutments and retaining walls. • Cutting and backfilling. • Removal of existing pavement and construction of new pavement. • Reconfiguration of the motorway drainage.
WestConnex M4 Widening 3 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study GREAT WESTERN HIGHWAY HARRIS CHURCH ROSEHILL STREET PARRAMATTA PARK ¹ New viaduct New bridge over WENTWORTH Silverwater Road connections Duck River POINT JAMES RUSE DRIVE ! ALFRED STREET EK ABECKET TS CRE
DU CK C ! R DUCK RIVER E HOLROYD E ST K
ROAD WENTWORTH
WOODVILLE PITT STREET
James Ruse Drive connections DUCK RIVER D ! M4 MOTORWAY A SILVERWATER O
D GRANVILLE R A R
O GRANVILLE E Homebush improved access westbound
R ST T
A E JUNCTION
L W L HASLAMS CREEK I ! R NEWINGTON V E D PA V R L O R I A S O M A W T TA ! R O AD R A W S O N MS AUBURN LA C S S K T HA R HILL E E ROAD SYDNEY T New Olympic Park ST HILLIERSconnection ROAD eastbound ! OLYMPIC PARK LAKE BELVERDERE
! LIDCOMBE HOMEBUSHBAY DRIVE Widening within ! motorway corridor
SOUTH GRANVILLE RAWSON ROAD AUBURN SOUTH DRIVE CENTENARY
KEY Overview of the M4 widening project Figure 2 New/upgraded surface road
New ramp 0 0.5 1 Road Km Rail line
Table 1-1 Construction compounds and sites
Approximate Proposed access / Compound Proposed use Area (m2) egress
1 - Church Street Construction 6,800 Access for construction Compound compound plant and materials from Church Street (southbound), egress for trucks onto Junction Street Access and egress from Victoria Street/Duke Street, Prince Street/Harris Street and/or Good Street 2 - A’Beckett Street Construction 15,500 Access and egress from Compound compound A’Beckett Street via Good Street or Alfred Street 3 - Alfred Street Construction 13,700 Access from Alfred Street, Compound compound egress onto Alfred Street or Arthur Street 4 - James Ruse Drive Construction and 10,000 Access and egress from Centre Compound storage facility James Ruse Drive (northbound) 5 - James Ruse Drive Construction and 450 Access and egress from East Access storage facility James Ruse Drive eastbound on-ramp 6a - Martha Street West Construction and 15,600 (west) Access from Wentworth Compound and storage facility 4,500 (centre) Street, egress onto Martha 6b - Martha Street Street Centre Compound 7 - Deniehy Street Construction and 19,800 Access and egress from Compound storage facility Martha Street 8 - Junction Street Construction site 5,200 Access and egress from Compound Junction Street 9 - Adderley Street Construction site 1,600 Access and egress from West Compound Adderley Street West 10 - Adderley Street Construction 11,460 Access and egress from Main Compound compound Adderley Street West 11 - Adderley Street Construction 2,700 Access from Adderley East Compound 1 compound 1,200 Street East, egress onto and 2 Day Street South 12a - Hill Road G-loop Construction 3,570 Access and egress from Hill compound and compound 10,200 Road 12b - Hill Rd North Compound 13 - Homebush Bay Main project site office 21,400 Access and egress from M4 Drive East Motorway westbound off- ramp to Homebush Bay Drive and Flemington Road
WestConnex M4 Widening 5 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
The estimated volumes of waste-derived products generated by construction works are listed in Table 1-2. Table 1-2 Earthworks and pavement removal
Activity Quantity (m3)
Topsoil stripping 5,589
Boxout (excavate to disposal offsite) 36,000
Bulk earthworks (excavate to disposal offsite) 20,600
Unsuitable material (for disposal offsite) 4,330
Removal of existing asphalt pavement 4,500
Greater segregation of waste at the point source and removal of contaminants up front would reduce the proportion of non-recoverable wastes. Large volume markets exist for these waste-derived products when customer requirements of fit-for-purpose are satisfied and the potential risk for environmental harm is low. The Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery in NSW–A Progress Report 2004 (DEC 2004) estimates the quantity of construction and demolitions waste recovered or reprocessed at three million tonnes within the Sydney Metropolitan Area. The project is in close proximity to multiple commercial-scale recyclers of construction and demolition waste streams. These resource recovery facilities are purpose built and currently serve the broader Sydney metropolitan region. This close proximity to high quality recycling facilities and key markets of recycled materials would facilitate significant resource recovery. Demolition of structures would be required with regard to the two commercial properties (2 Junction Street) and the three residential properties being acquired (67 and 71 A’Beckett Street and 49 Onslow Street). Other demolition would be limited to small scale activities such as removal of guard rails, some noise walls, sections of low retaining walls, and redundant drainage infrastructure. The principal environmental management issues with respect to soil and water relate to construction activities in, or in close proximity, to sensitive receiving environments. These include:
• Road widening works, particularly those in proximity to Duck Creek and Haslams Creek. • Bridge/viaduct works, particularly those in proximity to A’Beckett Creek, Duck Creek, Duck River and Haslams Creek. The bridge over Duck Creek would be a nine span steel structure with piled footings. Four piers would be located within or adjacent to the creek channel. A temporary work platform would be built to the south of the bridge alignment. This would be a piled structure with spans of 12–15 metres and about five metres wide. Side platforms would be built to access the pier locations. Where both the temporary and the permanent piles are to be driven, mangroves would need to be cleared.
WestConnex M4 Widening 6 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
1.3 Study area
For the purpose of investigating impacts on soils, water and waste, the project study area includes the proposed upgrade sections of the M4 Motorway corridor as identified in section 1.2, and immediately adjacent lands potentially subject to indirect impacts. The following areas are referred to throughout the report and are defined as:
• Project footprint: this area comprises the limits of the upgrade design, and for the purposes of this proposal includes areas where infrastructure may be installed within the M4 Motorway corridor and associated arterial roads. • Study area: includes the M4 Motorway corridor, associated arterial roads and areas of private property intersected by the project footprint and adjoining areas which may potentially be impacted indirectly.
1.4 Director-General’s Requirements
Table 1-3 lists the Director-General’s Requirements (DGRs) of relevance to this report and where in the report they are addressed.
Table 1-3 DGRs for soils, water and waste
Director-General’s Requirement Where addressed
Construction and operational erosion and sediment and water quality impacts Section 4.1 on Haslams Creek, Duck River, Duck Creek and A’Becketts Creek, including an assessment of:
• potential water quality impacts and mitigation measures to manage water Sections 4.1, 5.2 pollution, with reference to relevant public health and environmental water quality criteria, including those specified in the Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (ANZECC/ARMCANZ 2000), and any applicable regional, local or site-specific guidelines
• proposed storm water management system and management measures Section 5.2 for the containment of pollutants and minimisation of leachate and sediment mobilisation
• management of and disposal strategies for acid sulfate soils, in Section 5.3 accordance with the Acid Sulfate Soils Manual (ASSMAC)
• waste handling Section 5.6
Management of waste, including:
• classification of waste taking into account the Waste Classification Sections 2.1, 5.6 Guidelines (Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water 2009)
• waste handling, stockpiling and transportation Section 5.6
• quantification of bulk earthworks and spoil balance, and reuse or disposal Sections 1.2, of excess spoil 4.5.1, 5.6.1
• preliminary assessment and remediation strategies for contaminated land. Sections 3.5, 4.3, 5.4
WestConnex M4 Widening 7 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
2 Methodology
2.1 Overview
Assessment of impacts on soils and water quality, and development of mitigation and management measures comprised the following activities: • A review of existing project documentation, including the following: - Project geotechnical investigation (Roads and Maritime 2014). - Phase 1 and Phase 2 contaminated land assessments (including consideration of acid sulfate soils). - Concept drainage design. - Constructability review. • A review of available literature not directly related to the project. • Consideration of the impact of construction activities on soils, sediments, and receiving waterways. • Consideration of potential impacts related to operation of the project. The soil and sediment management assessment requires an understanding of several critical factors for both construction and operational phases. For the construction phase of the project, these include local soil characteristics, climatic conditions, construction methods, the extent of land disturbance, and construction staging and duration. The construction phase assessment approach is based on meeting the design criteria and water quality objectives that are outlined in Managing Urban Stormwater–Soils and Construction Volume 1 (Landcom 2004) and Volume 2D (DECC 2008). For the operational phase of the project, critical factors include the proposed road geometry and drainage system, local climatic conditions, and downstream waterways and their proximity to the site. Reference has been made to Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (ANZECC/ARMCANZ 2000). The operational phase assessment approach is also based on meeting the design principles outlined in Procedure for Selecting Treatment Strategies to Control Road Runoff (RTA 2003) and the project’s performance requirements of managing stormwater as close to its source as possible so that the project changes the existing water regime by the smallest amount practicable. Construction activities would generate a number of waste streams. These are likely to include demolition wastes, green waste (vegetative matter), packaging materials, liquid wastes, and excavated material unsuitable for reuse within the project. Consideration of management of waste streams has included reference to the NSW Waste Classification Guidelines (DECCW 2008, 2009) with Part 1 (Classifying Waste) and Part 4 (Acid Sulfate Soils) being most relevant to the project.
2.2 Legislation and policy framework
Relevant legislation, policies and guidelines include the following: • NSW Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act).
WestConnex M4 Widening 9 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
• NSW Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 (CLM Act). • NSW Water Management Act 2000 (WM Act). • NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001 (WARR Act). • NSW Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Act 2008. • NSW Soil Conservation Act 1938. • NSW Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005. • Acid Sulfate Soils Manual. • Acid Sulfate Soils Assessment Guidelines. • Acid Sulfate Soils Planning Guidelines. • Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality 2000. • NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy 2007 (Waste Strategy 2007). • NSW Waste Classification Guidelines, Part 1: Classifying Waste. • NSW Waste Classification Guidelines, Part 4: Acid Sulfate Soils. • Managing Urban Stormwater–Soils and Construction, Volume 1 Managing Urban Stormwater, 4th edition (‘the Blue Book’). • Managing Urban Stormwater–Soils and Construction, Volume 2D Main Road Construction. Relevant Roads and Maritime policies and guidelines include the following: • Water Policy. • Code of Practice for Water Management - Road Development and Management. • Stockpile Site Management Procedures. • Road Design Guideline: Section 8 Erosion and Sediment. • Guideline for Construction Water Quality Monitoring. • Guidelines for the Management of Acid Sulfate Materials: Acid Sulfate Soils, Acid Sulfate Rock and Monosulfidic Black Ooze. • Erosion and Sediment Management Procedure. • Technical Guideline: Temporary Stormwater Drainage for Road Construction. • Environmental Direction: Management of Tannins from Vegetation Mulch. • Procedures for Selecting Treatment Strategies to Control Road Runoff. Relevant Austroads guidelines include the following: • AP-R180 Road Runoff and Drainage: Environmental Impacts and Management Options. • AP-R232 Guidelines for Treatment of Stormwater Runoff from the Road Infrastructure. • Guide to Road Design, Part 5: Drainage Design.
2.3 Contaminated land
Preliminary (Phase 1) and detailed (Phase 2) site assessments were undertaken by GHD (2013, 2014 respectively) to identify potential contamination and acid sulfate soils (ASS) that may be impacted by the project. The framework for the soil and land contamination
WestConnex M4 Widening 10 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
assessment was developed in accordance with guidelines ‘made or approved’, by the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA), under section 105 of the CLM Act. These guidelines include, but are not limited to the following:
• National Environment Protection Council, National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Amendment Measure (No. 1), 2013. • NSW EPA, Contaminated Sites: Guidelines for Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites, 2011. • NSW Department of the Environment and Conservation (DEC), Contaminated Sites: Guidelines for NSW Site Auditor Scheme, 2006. • Stone, Y, Ahern, CR and Blunden, B (1998) Acid Sulfate Soils Manual (and related guidelines). Given the linear nature and extent of the project, the route was divided into the following sections for convenience of analysis:
• Pitt Street to Church Street. • Church Street to Deniehy Street. • Deniehy Street to Junction Street. • Junction Street to Silverwater Road. • Silverwater Road to Homebush Bay Drive.
2.3.1 Phase 1 preliminary site assessment
A Phase 1 preliminary site assessment was undertaken by GHD in October 2013. This included assessing potential contamination issues within the project footprint that may have arisen from past and/or present activities undertaken on and/or adjacent to the project footprint that may represent a risk to human health or the environment. The objectives of the Phase 1 preliminary site assessment were to assess the following along the route:
• Identify potential sources of contamination associated with current and historical land use. • Develop a preliminary conceptual site model (CSM) to evaluate contaminant source – pathway – receptor relationships. • Evaluate the risks of contamination within the context of the proposed upgrade work and identify areas where contamination may pose a potential risk to the proposed work. • Identify areas where further investigation is required to characterise the nature and extent of potential contamination. The scope of the Phase 1 preliminary site assessment is summarised as follows:
• Review of available documentation pertaining to land parcels along the route including: - Review/analysis of current and historical aerial photographs. - Review of regulatory information including section 149 planning certificates, historical title deeds and WorkCover documentation for selected land parcels to be acquired as part of the proposed work.
WestConnex M4 Widening 11 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
- Review of geological and hydrogeological maps and information. - Groundwater borehole database search. - EPA regulatory database searches. - Review of relevant Council information. • Site inspection along the proposed route and at the Westmead Exit. • Development of a preliminary CSM evaluating potential contaminant source–pathway– receptor relationships. Historical title deed searches were limited to land to be acquired or likely to be acquired for the project at the time of the searches. Land acquisitions are limited to the section between Church Street and Deniehy Street. These are listed in Table 2-1 together with the respective legal descriptions of the various parcels of land.
Table 2-1 Property descriptions for acquisition sites
Acquisition site Legal description
2 Junction Street, Granville Lots 1 and 2, DP 1056064 Both lots have been subject to previous consolidations and a detailed summary of these is provided in the Phase 1 report (GHD 2013).
65, 67 and 71 A’Beckett Lot 9, DP 1018522; Lot 60, DP 632569; Lot 50, DP 632565 Street, Granville respectively
49 Onslow Street, Granville Lot 20, DP 632496
Table 2-2 provides a summary of historical land use information for the respective acquisition sites. Full details are provided in the Phase 1 report (GHD 2013).
Table 2-2 Historical land use information for acquisition sites
Acquisition site Historical land uses
2 Junction Street, Granville Lot 1 has been used for a variety of commercial land uses including the motor trade (assuming car sales), as well as RMS (and its predecessors). Lot 2 has been used for a variety of commercial land uses including car sales and mechanics, as well as RMS (and its predecessors).
67 A’Beckett Street, Granville This site has been used for residential purposes since 1911 and is currently privately owned. 71 A’Beckett Street, Granville This site has been used for residential purposes since 1915 and is currently privately owned.
49 Onslow Street, Granville This site has been used for residential purposes since 1908 and is currently privately owned.
WestConnex M4 Widening 12 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Historical aerial photographs from the NSW Land and Property Management Authority, Land and Property Information Division were reviewed for the years: 1930, 1951, 1955, 1961, 1965, 1970, 1978, 1979, 1982, 1986, 1991, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2004 and 2005. The Phase 1 preliminary site assessment recommended a Phase 2 detailed site assessment be undertaken for the project.
2.3.2 Phase 2 detailed site assessment
Soils A total of 84 locations were investigated between 17 February and 4 March 2014. The assessment comprised:
• 31 soil boreholes to a maximum depth of between 1.05 and 5.2 m bgl using a combination of push-tube techniques and solid flight augurs with a geoprobe drill rig. • 14 soil and groundwater boreholes to a maximum depth of between 2.8 and 10 m bgl to allow collection of soils samples and installation of groundwater monitoring wells. • 26 hand augurs drilled to depths ranging between 0.3 m and 2.2 m bgl to collect soil samples. • Excavation of 13 test pits; three to assess spoils to a maximum depth of 2.6 m bgl and 10 to assess stockpiles (to a maximum depth of 1 m bgl). Excavation was undertaken using a 5-tonne track-mounted excavator and samples were collected from the excavator bucket at nominated depths. Soils samples were collected at the ground surface and at nominal depth intervals of 0.5 m, 1 m, and thereafter every metre to the final depths and/or where changes in lithology and potential contamination was observed. All samples were screened in the field using a handheld photo-ionisation detector. This was used to measure volatile organic concentrations in ambient air and is useful as a preliminary check for the possible presence of volatile contaminants such as benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylenes (BTEX) and light fraction total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) species. Soils encountered were described in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System and GHD’s standard logging procedures. Features such as seepage, discolouration, staining, odours and other indications of contamination were noted where applicable. Soil samples were collected in accordance with standard sampling procedures and submitted to testing laboratories accompanied by appropriate chain of custody documentation. Full details are provided in section 5 of the Phase 2 detailed site assessment report (GHD 2014).
Groundwater Groundwater monitoring wells were installed in 14 boreholes; installation details are provided on the borehole logs in Appendix B to the Phase 2 detailed site assessment report (GHD 2014). The depths of the wells were based on the inferred depth of the water table and where signs of groundwater were observed during drilling.
WestConnex M4 Widening 13 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Wells were constructed and developed in accordance with standard practice with regard to their intended monitoring function. Following this, wells were left for about one week to allow groundwater levels to reach equilibrium. Light non-aqueous phase liquid was noted if encountered in the monitoring wells. Purging and sampling of groundwater was undertaken over 5–7 March 2014 following measurement of water levels. During purging, temperature, pH, electrical conductivity (EC), dissolved oxygen (DO), and reduction-oxidation (redox) potential were recorded. Notes of visual and olfactory (smell) observations were also recorded where relevant. Groundwater samples were collected in accordance with standard sampling procedures and submitted to testing laboratories accompanied by appropriate chain of custody documentation.
Sediments and surface water Sediment and surface water samples were collected for A’Becketts Creek, Duck River, Duck Creek and Haslams Creek. Eight sediment samples were collected (grab samples) using a trowel/hand augur or a bottom sampling dredger. Nine surface water samples were collected at the same locations using a disposable bailer or handheld water sampler. Sediment and surface water samples were submitted to testing laboratories accompanied by appropriate chain of custody documentation.
2.4 Hazardous materials
The Phase 1 preliminary site assessment (GHD 2013) included consideration of the potential presence of hazardous materials within the project footprint. This involved:
• Searches of the POEO register to identify sites licenced to handle hazardous materials. • Dangerous goods searches with WorkCover NSW of the Stored Chemical Information Database and microfiche records held by WorkCover NSW. This identified six sites (refer Section 4.3) that potentially contain hazardous materials.
2.5 Acid sulfate soils
ASS are the common name given to sediments and soils containing iron sulfides which, when exposed to oxygen generate sulfuric acid. The majority of acid sulfate sediments were formed by natural processes when certain conditions existed in the Holocene geological period (the last 10,000 years). Formation conditions require the presence of iron-rich sediments, sulfate (usually from seawater), removal of reaction products such as bicarbonate, the presence of sulfate reducing bacteria and a plentiful supply of organic matter (Ahern et al, 1998). The relatively specific conditions under which ASS are formed usually limit their occurrence to low lying parts of coastal floodplains, rivers and creeks. This includes areas with saline or brackish water such as deltas, coastal flats, backswamps and seasonal or permanent freshwater swamps that were formerly brackish. Due to flooding and stormwater erosion, these sulfidic sediments may continue to be re-distributed through the sands and sediments of the estuarine floodplain region. Sulfidic sediment may be found at any depth in suitable coastal sediments, usually beneath the watertable (Ahern et al 1998).
WestConnex M4 Widening 14 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
The assessment guidelines in the Acid Sulfate Soils Manual (Stone et al 1998) specify criteria which, if exceeded, trigger the preparation of a detailed ASS management plan. These criteria are based upon the type of soils, the volume excavated, and the acidity and available sulfur in a soil samples (refer Table 2-3).
Table 2-3 Soil assessment criteria for ASS
Action criteria Action criteria Type of material for 1-1000 t disturbed if >1000 t disturbed Texture Sulfur trail Acid trail Sulfur trail Acid trail range Approx. clay %S mol H+/t %S mol H+/t content oxidisable (oven-dry oxidisable (oven-dry %<0.002 (oven-dry basis) eg (oven-dry basis) eg mm basis) eg TPA or TSA basis) eg TPA or TSA S TOS or SPOS S TOS or SPOS Coarse texture Sands to <5 0.03 18 0.03 18 loamy sands Medium texture >5 to <40 0.06 36 0.03 18 Sandy loams to light clays Fine texture Medium to >40 0.1 62 0.03 18 heavy clays and silty clays
Source: Table 4.3 from Ahern et al (1998). Bold values denote adopted assessment criteria. Initial consideration of ASS comprised a review of ASS Risk Maps from the NSW Natural Resource Atlas database to ascertain the presence of ASS within the project area. This identified the potential for ASS to occur along the majority of the motorway alignment. Assessment of ASS comprised field testing and laboratory analysis. Field investigation involved taking pH measurements, peroxide testing and sample collection. Utilising the results of the field tests, more intensive laboratory testing comprising SPOCAS (suspension peroxide activation combined acidity and sulfate) and Chromium reducible sulphur analysis, was undertaken on selected samples.
2.6 Sediments
As part of the Phase 2 detailed site assessment, sediment samples were collected in A’Becketts Creek, Duck River, Duck Creek and Haslams Creek. Sediment samples were collected in eight accessible locations using a stainless steel hand auger. Sediment samples were collected at the surface and up to 0.4 metres below the estimated level of sediment. For subsurface samples, characteristics of the stratum were noted together with any obvious visual or olfactory evidence of potential sediment contamination. Sediment samples were submitted for analysis at a NATA-certified testing laboratory for heavy metals, total
WestConnex M4 Widening 15 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
recoverable hydrocarbons (TRH), BTEX, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), organo- chlorine pesticides (OCP), ASS and asbestos. Results were considered with reference to the Interim Sediment Quality Guideline (ISQG) detailed Table 3.5.1 in the Australian Water Quality Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Waters (ANZECC 2000).
2.7 Water
The Phase 1 preliminary site assessment recommended groundwater and surface water sampling be undertaken as part of the Phase 2 detailed site assessment to provide baseline conditions as well as assess the need for any management or remedial measures during construction. The assessment methodologies are described as follows.
2.7.1 Surface water
Assessment of likely and potential impacts of the project on water quality has included:
• A review of existing project literature as outlined in section 2.1. • A review of existing conditions using available non-project literature to obtain background information on catchment history and land use to aid in interpreting the existing conditions. • A review of the available existing water quality data. • An assessment of the impact of construction activities on water quality with reference to the ANZECC 2000 water quality guidelines with regard to aquatic ecosystems, visual; amenity, primary/secondary contact recreation, and aquatic foods (cooked). • A review of water quality treatment measures that could be used to mitigate the impact of construction on water quality, following the principles of Managing Urban Stormwater– Soils and Construction Volume 1 (Landcom 2004) and Volume 2D (DECC 2008). • An assessment of the water impacts of the project during operation. • A review of water quality treatment measures that could be used to mitigate the impact of the operation of the project on water quality following the principle of Procedure for Selecting Treatment Strategies to Control Road Runoff’ (RTA 2003), RMS Water Policy (RTA, 1997), and RMS Code of Practice, Water Management (RTA 1999). • Field investigation, sample collection and analysis as follows: - Collection of nine surface water samples from A’Becketts Creek, Duck River, Duck Creek and Haslams Creek. - Analysis at a NATA-certified testing laboratory for dissolved heavy metals, TRH, BTEX, PAH, OCP, organo-phosphate pesticides (OPP), phenols, and volatile organic compounds (VOC). Assessment of potential water quality impacts has also included consideration of the concept drainage. The concept drainage design has been developed in accordance with the Austroads Guide to Road Design (Part 5: Drainage) and Roads and Maritime supplements. The key objectives of the concept drainage design are to: • Identify the existing drainage infrastructure.
WestConnex M4 Widening 16 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
• Preserve existing flow regimes as far as is practical. • Identify where modifications to the existing networks are required and provide a new drainage system to Austroads design standards where such modifications are required. • Provide a new drainage system to Austroads design standards along the proposed ramps. Best practice for design of infrastructure now includes consideration of variability of extreme weather events due to climate change. Based on the current documentation Practical Consideration of Climate Change–Floodplain Risk Management Guideline (Department of Environment and Climate Change 2007) the indicative change in extreme rainfall for the Sydney Metropolitan Catchments is between -7 per cent and +10 per cent by 2070. For this project a 10 per cent increase in rainfall intensity has been adopted for the concept drainage design (SMEC 2014).
2.7.2 Groundwater
As part of the Phase 1 preliminary site assessment (GHD 2013), searches were undertaken of the NSW Groundwater Works website to identify licenced groundwater boreholes in or within close proximity to the project area. Reviews were undertaken of drillers logs to ascertain the character of the underlying material and to identify the nominal depth to the watertable. Hydrogeological maps covering the project area were also reviewed. The subsequent Phase 2 detailed site assessment comprised:
• Drilling of 13 groundwater boreholes. • Groundwater sampling of the 13 installed groundwater monitoring wells installed by GHD and 10 groundwater wells installed as part of the Roads and Maritime geotechnical investigation. • Analysis of selected groundwater samples by a NATA accredited laboratory for a range of contaminants of potential concern (CoPC). The construction methodology and concept design were reviewed to identify potential impacts on groundwater users and aquifers, and whether the project would comprise an ‘aquifer interference activity’ as defined under the WM Act. This in turn was used to inform the need for and development of impact mitigation and management measures, identify the need for an aquifer interference approval respectively.
2.8 Waste management and handling
The POEO Act covers the requirements for waste generators in terms of storage and correct disposal of waste and their responsibility for the correct management of waste, including final disposal. Under the POEO Act and its regulations, guidelines have been established for the classification of waste and these have been considered in the assessment of waste generated by the project and subsequent development of mitigation and management measures. Quantities and types of wastes that would be generated from the project were identified from the project constructability review and were used as the basis for the preliminary classification in accordance with the Waste Classification Guidelines. Resource use for the
WestConnex M4 Widening 17 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
project was assessed by reviewing existing information including the above reports and estimating the resources required for construction and their likely sources.
WestConnex M4 Widening 18 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
3 Existing environment
3.1 Land use
There is a diversity of land use in the study area. The western end is predominantly residential, comprising low density, suburban neighbourhoods, and the Parramatta CBD which contains high density residential and commercial development. The eastern end of the study area is characterised by newer, medium to high density residential suburbs, and major regional and state significant land uses such as the Sydney Olympic Park and Sydney Markets. The central section of the study area is characterised by a mix of low, medium and high density residential areas, large areas of commercial and industrial development, and large scale retail uses. The study area has experienced above average rates of population growth compared to NSW over recent years. This has been driven by redevelopment of former industrial areas and intensification of housing which is expected to continue. The study area contains a number of areas of public open space immediately adjacent to the M4 Motorway. These include Bill Boyd Reserve and Deakin Park at Silverwater, and Kurung Reserve, Holroyd Sports Ground, and Freame Park in the west of the study area.
3.2 Climate and meteorology
The Sydney region is characterised by mild to warm summers and cold winters. Climate data is collected by the Bureau of Meteorology weather station at Sydney Olympic Park, about 400 metres north of the study area. January is the hottest month with a mean maximum temperature of 28.4ºC and July is the coldest month with a mean minimum temperature of 7.8ºC. Mean temperatures exhibit variability and seasonal flux across the year. Mean 9.00 am temperature levels range from 22.3ºC in January to 11.2ºC in July. Mean 3.00 pm temperatures vary from 26.3ºC in January to 16.6ºC in July. Mean relative humidity also displays variability over the year. Mean 9.00 am relative humidity levels range from 56 per cent in October to 72 per cent in February and March. Mean 3.00 pm relative humidity levels vary from 41 per cent in August to 55 per cent in February. February is the wettest month with an average rainfall of 109.8 millimetres over 7.7 days. September is the driest month with an average rainfall of 52.7 millimetres over 5.5 days. Maximum wind speeds during the warmer months have a greater variation between the 9.00 am and 3.00 pm conditions compared to the colder months. Mean 9.00 am wind speeds range from 8.4 kilometres per hour in March to 11.9 kilometres per hour in September and mean 3.00 pm wind speeds range from 12.5 kilometres per hour in June to 19.4 kilometres per hour in December.
WestConnex M4 Widening 19 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
3.3 Geology, soils and sediments
3.3.1 Geology
The geology of the area is derived from the Wianamatta Group and is predominantly underlain by the Ashfield and Bringelly Shale formations, overlying the Hawkesbury Sandstone formation. These formations are described as follows (Department of Mineral Resources and Energy 1991):
• Ashfield Shale (Rwa): Dark-grey to black claystone-siltstone and fine sandstone-siltstone laminate; from the Wianamatta Group of Triassic origin. • Bringelly Shale (Rwb): shale, carbonaceous claystone, claystone, laminate, fine to medium-grained lithic sandstone, rare coal and tuff; from the Wianamatta Group of Triassic origin. These geological units are overlain by Quaternary aged Alluvium (Qha) around the creek lines. This comprises quartz sand, silty sand, silt and clay.
3.3.2 Soil landscapes
Four main soil landscapes have been identified within the project area in accordance with Soil Landscapes of Sydney, (Soil Conservation Service of NSW 1989). These are:
• Birrong (bg) fluvial soil landscape: - Landscape: level to gently undulating alluvial floodplain draining Wianamatta Group shales. Local relief to five metres, slopes less than three per cent. Broad valley flats. Extensively cleared tall open-forest and woodland. - Soils: deep (>250 centimetres) yellow podzolic soils and yellow solodic soils on older alluvial (terraces); deep (>250 centimetres) solodic soils and yellow solonetzic soils on current floodplain. - Limitations: flooding, high soil erosion hazard, saline subsoils, seasonal water logging, very low soil fertility. • Blacktown (bt) residual soil landscape: - Landscape: gently undulating rises on Wianamatta Group shales and Hawkesbury shale. Local relief to 30 metres, slopes are usually less than five per cent. Broad rounded crests and ridges with gently inclined slopes. Cleared woodland and tall open-forest. - Soils: shallow to moderately deep (<100 centimetres) red and brown podzolic soils on crests, upper slopes and well drained area; deep (150-300 centimetres) yellow podzolic soils and soloths on lower slopes and in areas of poor drainage. - Limitations: moderately reactive highly plastic subsoil, low soil fertility, poor soil drainage. • Glenorie (gn) erosional soil landscape: - Landscape: undulating to rolling low hills on Wianamatta Group shales. Local relief 50-80 metres, slopes ranging from five to 20 per cent. Narrow ridges, hill crests and valleys. Extensively cleared tall open-forest.
WestConnex M4 Widening 20 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
- Soils: shallow to moderately deep (<100 centimetres) red podzolic soils on crests; moderately deep (70-150 centimetres) red and brown podzolic soils on upper slopes; deep (>200 centimetres) yellow podzolic soils on lower slopes and humic gleys, yellow podzolic soils and gleyed podzolic soils along drainage lines. - Limitations: high soil erosion hazard, localised impermeable highly plastic subsoil, moderately reactive. • Disturbed terrain (X4), greater than four metres elevation: - Disturbed terrain may include filled areas, which often occur during reclamation of low lying swamps for urban development. Other disturbed terrain includes areas which have been mined or dredged, or have undergone heavy ground disturbance through general urban development or construction of dams or levees. The general distribution of these soil landscapes in the project area is shown in Figure 3.
3.3.3 Sediments
Sydney Harbour, including the Parramatta River, has a highly urbanised and industrialised catchment with a long history of contamination (Birch and Taylor 1999). Duck River, Duck Creek, Haslams Creek and A’Becketts Creek are located within the upper catchment. Sediments in Sydney Harbour are known to be contaminated by a wide range of chemicals including metals (Birch and Taylor 1999, 2000), organochlorine compounds (Birch and Taylor 2000) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (McCready et al 2000). Sediments play a significant role in the storage and transport of contaminants and they are increasingly being used to identify sources of toxicants, determine dispersion pathways and locate contaminant sinks in aquatic systems (Birch et al 2000). Sediment quality investigations undertaken by Birch et al (1995, 1996 and 1995) identified that heavy metal concentrations in sediments of Sydney Harbour are some of the highest in any estuary in Australia with concentration ranges of copper (9.3-1053 micrograms per gram), lead (37.9-3604 micrograms per gram), zinc (108–7622 micrograms per gram) cadmium (below detection limit to 24.3 micrograms per gram), cobalt (2.2–54 micrograms per gram), nickel (5–245 micrograms per gram), iron (0.5-10.6 per cent) and manganese (26.6-578 micrograms per gram) reported. Hatje et al (2001) reported annual mean available particulate trace metal concentrations in Duck River higher than reported background concentrations for Sydney Harbour. The results are summarised in Table 3-1.
McCreedy et al (2000) undertook a program of sediment sampling from 124 locations within Sydney Harbour including Duck Creek and Duck River. Surface sediments were collected using a box corer and the samples were analysed for PAH. The spatial distribution of PAH was found to follow a similar trend to that reported by Irvine and Birch (1998) for heavy metals, with increased concentrations reported towards the bay ends. Petroleum industries located on the bank of Duck River were identified as a point source of PAH in sediments in this area of the harbour.
WestConnex M4 Widening 21 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study ROSEHILL
MAYS HIL L
CHURCHSTREET HARRIS PARK ¹
JAMES RUSE DRIVE
WENTWORTH POINT
M4
HOLROYD
PITT STREET CLY DE
SILVERWATER ROAD
SILVERWATER GRANVILLE
D A NEWINGTON O M4 R
E L L I
V
D
O
O
W
R A W HILL ROAD S P O AR N RA S M T AT R TA E R E O T AD
AUBURN
SYDNEY OLYMPIC PARK
BLAXCELL LIDCOMBE NORTH
HOMEBUSH BAY DRIVE SOUTH GRANVILLE AUBURN SOUTH
Project design Soil landscape Disturbed Terrain Glenorie Soil landscapes Figure 3
Birrong Ettalong Lucas Heights Blacktown 0 0.5 1
Km
Table 3-1 Annual mean available particulate trace metal concentrations
Duck River1 Background2 Parameter 1 Standard Annual mean Mean average Range deviation
Zinc 817.1 mg/kg 364 47 mg/kg 18-123 mg/kg
Lead 200.3 mg/kg 78 33 mg/kg 12-65 mg/kg
Copper 59.1 mg/kg 26.4 10 mg/kg 4-28 mg/kg
Chromium 99.1 mg/kg 43.2 51 mg/kg 17-82 mg/kg
Nickel 10.2 mg/kg 3.2 26 mg/kg 12-39 mg/kg
1 Hatje et al (2001); 2 Irvine and Birch (1998)
Concentrations of total PAH in surface sediments range from <100 micrograms per kilogram to 380,000 micrograms per kilogram McCreedy et al (2000). With the exception of Duck River, the profile of PAH contamination in sediments was primarily dominated by relatively high molecular weight compounds indicating high temperature combustion sources as the primary source of PAH contamination. The profile of PAH contamination at Duck River suggested an unburnt fuel source (ie petrochemical industry). Stormwater runoff from urban catchments is widely recognised as a major source of contamination (Birch and Taylor, 2002). In highly urbanised catchments, road surfaces have been shown to constitute up to 22 per cent of total catchment area and contribute up to 26 per cent of total runoff volumes with commensurate contributions of total ‘heavy metal loads of 19–40 per cent (Davis and Birch 2009) Urban stormwater and drainage systems provide pathways for contaminants to enter receiving waters, including metals bound to soils and consequently sediments of urban waterways frequently exhibit elevated metal concentrations (Birch et al 2011). Strong declining heavy metal trends away from canals discharging into the upper parts of many harbour embayments suggests that stormwater is a major source of contamination (Birch and Taylor 1999). The Phase 2 detailed site assessment included collection of sediment samples from A’Becketts Creek, Duck River, Duck Creek and Haslams Creek (refer Annexure 1 for sampling locations). Of the analytical results with concentrations above the laboratory limit of detection, metals, PAH, dieldrin, and asbestos recorded concentrations above the relevant screening criteria (Table 3.5.1 in the ANZECC 2000 guidelines). These results are summarised as follows (the nomenclature ‘SED’ is used as a sample location identifier).
Church Street to Deniehy Street • Chromium, copper, lead, nickel, mercury and zinc were reported at concentrations exceeding the ISGQ-low trigger values selectively in SED1, SED5, and SED6 and zinc was reported at a concentration exceeding the ISGQ-high values in SED8. • Selected PAH compounds were reported at concentrations exceeding the ISGQ-low trigger values in SED1, SED5 and SED8.
WestConnex M4 Widening 23 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
• No asbestos was reported above the limit of reporting of 0.01 milligrams per kilogram and no respirable fibres were detected, however, chrysotile asbestos was recorded in sample SED8.
Deniehy Street to Junction Street • Arsenic, copper, lead and mercury were reported at concentrations exceeding the ISGQ- low trigger values in SED2 but not SED 3 or SED4 and zinc was reported at a concentration exceeding the ISGQ-high value in SED2. • None of the PAHs in this section were reported above the relevant screening criteria. • No asbestos was reported above the limit of reporting of 0.01 milligrams per kilogram and no respirable fibres were detected, however loose fibre bundles were reported in one sample (SED3).
Silverwater Road to Homebush Bay Drive • Cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel and zinc were reported at concentrations exceeding the ISGQ-low trigger values selectively in SED6 and SED7 and lead and zinc were reported at concentrations exceeding the ISGQ-high values in SED6. • Selected PAH compounds were reported at concentrations exceeding the ISGQ-low trigger values in SED6 and SED7. • No asbestos was reported above the limit of reporting of 0.01 milligrams per kilogram and no respirable fibres were detected, however loose fibre bundles were reported in one sample (SED6).
3.4 Acid sulfate soils
The Phase 1 preliminary site assessment identified the potential for ASS to occur along the entire alignment (GHD 2013). The Phase 2 detailed site assessment indicated that PASS are present within the alluvial clay strata in areas mapped as potential ASS. Areas of ASS are shown in Figure 4.
3.5 Contaminated land
The M4 Widening project covers 9.5 kilometres of existing road network between the Pitt Street overpass at Parramatta and Homebush Bay Drive, Homebush West. The route covers an area of diverse characteristics and is surrounded by a number of potentially contaminating land uses including industrial complexes, landfill sites and railway facilities. There is potential for contaminated land to occur within the vicinity of the project due to old industrial areas and numerous contaminated sites located along the Parramatta River. The locations of these are shown in Annexure 1. The Phase 2 detailed site assessment identified the principal contamination issues as relating to:
• Asbestos fragments and fibres in fill soils between Church Street and Silverwater Road. • PAHs in fill soils between Church Street and Deniehy Street, and between Junction Street and Silverwater Road.
WestConnex M4 Widening 24 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study ROSEHILL
MAYS HIL L
CHURCHSTREET HARRIS PARK ¹
JAMES RUSE DRIVE
WENTWORTH POINT
M4
HOLROYD
PITT STREET CLY DE
SILVERWATER ROAD
SILVERWATER GRANVILLE
D A NEWINGTON O M4 R
E L L I
V
D
O
O
W
R A W HILL ROAD S P O AR N RA S M T AT R TA E R E O T AD
AUBURN
SYDNEY OLYMPIC PARK
BLAXCELL LIDCOMBE NORTH
HOMEBUSH BAY DRIVE SOUTH GRANVILLE AUBURN SOUTH
Project design Acid sulfate risk Acid sulfate soils Figure 4 High probability of occurrence Disturbed Terrain 0 0.5 1 Km No known occurrence
• Hydrocarbons (naphthalene) from an undefined source in groundwater in the section between Church Street and Deniehy Street), with possible soil impacts. • Lead, mercury, PAH and asbestos in sediments present in A’Becketts Creek, Haslam’s Creek, Duck Creek and Duck River. • PASS associated with soils and sediments between Church Street and Junction Street and between Silverwater Road and Homebush Bay Drive. • Potential for hydrocarbon and landfill gas associated with the closed landfill to the north of the M4 Motorway in the section between Junction Street and Silverwater Road.
3.6 Water quality
3.6.1 Environmental values
Current uses and environmental values for the Sydney Harbour and Parramatta River system include maintaining healthy ecosystems, recreation (including swimming, boating, fishing and aesthetics) and commercial activities (such as commercial shipping and tourism).
3.6.2 Water quality objectives
For each catchment in NSW, the state government has endorsed the community's environmental values for water, known as 'Water Quality Objectives' (WQOs). These were adopted following extensive consultation with the community in 1998 (DEC 2006).
The WQOs for the upper estuary relate to protection of:
• Aquatic ecosystems. • Visual amenity. • Primary contact recreation. • Secondary contact recreation. • Aquatic foods (cooked). The water quality guidelines for aquatic ecosystems are presented in Table 3-2.
Table 3-2 Benchmarks for estuarine water quality
Parameter ANZECC 2000 WQ guideline
Total Phosphorus (µg/L) 30
Total Nitrogen (µg/L) 300
Chlorophyll α (µg/L) 4
Turbidity (NTU) 0.5-10
Dissolved Oxygen (% saturation) 80-110
pH 7.0-8.5
Source: Tables 3.3.2, 3.3.3, ANZECC (2000).
WestConnex M4 Widening 26 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
The ANZECC (2000) water quality guidelines state that surface waters used for visual recreational use (no-contact activity) should not be altered in any way that reduces their ability to support aesthetically valuable flora and fauna. In this regard, surface waters should be free from:
• Floating debris, oil, grease and other objectionable matter. • Substances that produce undesirable colour, odour, taste or foaming. • Undesirable aquatic life, such as algal blooms, or dense growths of attached plants or insects. Water used for primary contact activities, such as swimming, bathing and other direct water- contact sports, should be sufficiently free from faecal contamination, pathogenic organisms and other hazards to protect the health and safety of the user. The general guidelines desirable for aquatic scenery are also applicable for water used for primary contact (ANZECC 2000). Water used for secondary contact activities, such as boating and fishing, should also meet the guidelines suggested for aquatic scenery. The water should be free from floating or submerged logs and stumps and excessive growth of algae and other aquatic plants. The quality of the water should be maintained so that there is minimal alteration of the fish habitat (ANZECC 2000). The recommended microbiological characteristics and recommended physical and chemical characteristics are presented in Tables 3-3 and 3-4 respectively.
Table 3-3 Recommended microbiological characteristics
Contact level ANZECC 2000 WQ guideline1
Primary The median bacterial content in samples of fresh or marine waters taken over the bathing season should not exceed: • 150 faecal coliform organisms/100 mL (minimum of five samples taken at regular intervals not exceeding one month, with four out of five samples containing less than 600 organisms/100 mL); • 35 enterococci organisms/100 mL (maximum number in any one sample: 60–100 organisms/100 mL). Pathogenic free-living protozoans should be absent from bodies of fresh water.
Secondary The median bacterial content in fresh and marine waters should not exceed: • 1,000 faecal coliform organisms/100 mL (minimum of five samples taken at regular intervals not exceeding one month, with four out of five samples containing less than 4,000 organisms/100 mL); • 230 enterococci organisms/100 mL (maximum number in any one sample: 450 700 organisms/100 mL). 1 Section 5.2.3.1
WestConnex M4 Widening 27 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Table 3-4 Recommended physical and chemical characteristics
Aspect ANZECC 2000 WQ guideline1
Visual clarity and To protect the aesthetic quality of a waterbody: colour • the natural visual clarity should not be reduced by more than 20 per cent • the natural hue of the water should not be changed by more than 10 points on the Munsell Scale; The natural reflectance of the water should not be changed by more than 50 per cent. To protect the visual clarity of waters used for swimming, the horizontal sighting of a 200 mm diameter black disc (Secchi disc) should exceed 1.6 metres.
pH The pH of the water should be within the range 5.0–9.0, assuming that the buffering capacity of the water is low near the extremes of the pH limits.
Temperature No specific recommendation given variability of individual human response but general range of 15–33 ºC identified.
Toxic chemicals Waters containing chemicals that are either toxic or irritating to the skin or mucous membranes are unsuitable for recreation. In general, toxic substances should not exceed the concentrations provided in Tables 5.2.3 and 5.2.4 (of ANZECC 2000).
Surface films Oil and petrochemicals should not be noticeable as a visible film on the water nor should they be detectable by odour.
1 Section 5.2.3.3
Section 4.4.5 of the ANZECC (2000) water quality guidelines addresses the protection of human consumers of aquatic foods. It notes that the guidelines are intended to be used in conjunction with the Food Standards Code to protect the health of human consumers of aquatic foods from the effects of toxicants, whether the foods be derived from aquaculture, recreational fishing, commercial fishing or indigenous fishing. The food standards developed by the Australia New Zealand Food Authority and published in the Food Standards Code aim to protect consumers from chemically contaminated foods, including aquatic species. Standards for aquatic species are based on the notion of acceptable daily intake or acceptable weekly intake. Guidelines are also provided for biological contaminants.
3.6.3 Existing water quality
A review of existing and historic water quality in the Parramatta River estuary is provided in the Parramatta River Estuary Coastal Zone Management Plan (Cardno 2012). It notes that key water quality parameters of concern for management are:
• DO. • pH. • Turbidity. • Nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus). • Algal concentrations. • Pathogens (faecal coliforms (FC), Enterococci).
WestConnex M4 Widening 28 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
With regard to human recreation, poor water quality has impacted on recreational usage of the estuary for activities such as swimming and fishing. Based on data collected under the Office of Environment and Heritage’s (OEH) Harbourwatch program, water quality in the estuary is often unsuitable for primary contact recreation due to high FC counts. This is believed to result from FC entering the estuary in stormwater runoff from the catchment or sewer overflows, which can result in water quality issues where rates of tidal flushing are low. Overall there are only limited areas of the Parramatta River estuary that are considered suitable for primary and secondary contact recreational activities. Cardno Lawson Treloar (2008) note that dioxins in fish and prawns is a concern and that subsequent to an investigation undertaken by the NSW Food Authority, signage advising limiting consumption of fish and prawns was placed near popular recreational fishing spots around Sydney Harbour, including those in the Parramatta River estuary. Water quality data collected by Sydney Water from the Parramatta River estuary (Cardno 2012) includes monitoring of the following parameters:
• DO. • pH. • Nitrogen (TN and biological available forms: ammonia, nitrates/nitrites). • Phosphorus (TP and biologically available Filterable Reactive Phosphorus). • Chlorophyll α. • FC and Enterococci. Analysis of the monitoring data indicates that average concentrations of these water quality parameters are in excess of the ANZECC (2000) aquatic ecosystem health guidelines for south-east Australian estuaries. The exception is for pH, for which the average values are in the acceptable range. Particular hotspots include Duck River and the Silverwater Bridge area. It is likely that these locations are impacted by sewer overflows due to the high concentrations of nutrients, FC and Enterococci, along with the low DO values. The high levels of nutrients at all sites indicate that nutrients entering the estuary via stormwater is a key issue and there is potential for algal blooms. Water quality was measured as part of the project’s biodiversity assessment (SKM 2014). The results (averaged) for the parameters sampled are presented in Table 3-8. The waterways were generally very turbid and two to four times higher than the upper threshold of ANZECC guidelines for estuarine waters in South East Australia. Although turbidity is not always a useful indicator for estuarine waters, nine days of continuous rainfall totalling 201 millimetres preceded the field survey. The catchment runoff may have contributed to high turbidity values. Dissolved oxygen only complied with the ANZECC guidelines at Haslams Creek and was below the lower threshold value at Duck Creek and Duck River. Temperatures and salinities were higher in Duck River, presumably because it is more tidally influenced and there was greater infiltration of antecedent rainfall than for the concrete lined channels.
WestConnex M4 Widening 29 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Table 3-5 Water quality sampling results, M4 Widening biodiversity assessment
ANZECC WQ Duck Creek Parameter Duck River Haslams Creek Guidelines 2000 (Kay St)
Turbidity (NTU) 0.5–10 37.1 24.1 38.8
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) – 4.9 7.4 9.6
Dissolved Oxygen (%) 80–110 49.2 67.3 87.9
Conductivity (mS/cm) – 7.00 1.42 1.02
Salinity (ppt) – 3.67 0.71 0.50
pH 7.0–8.5 7.50 7.98 7.72
Surface water quality sampling of A’Becketts Creek, Duck Creek, and Haslams Creek was also undertaken as part of the Phase 2 detailed site assessment (GHD 2014). The findings are summarised as follows:
• DO: ranged from 1.24 to 8.27 milligrams per litre indicating aerobic conditions. • EC: ranged from 1,231 microsiemens per centimetre to 26,400 microsiemens per centimetre indicating freshwater and marine water conditions; freshwater is present in A’Becketts Creek and marine water in Duck Creek, Duck River and Haslams Creek. • pH: ranged from 6.77 to 9.10 indicated neutral to moderately alkaline conditions. • Eh: ranged from 9 to 152 millivolts indicating the water has low to relatively high potential for the acceptance of electrons. There was no obvious visual or olfactory evidence of potential contamination observed during the sampling.
3.7 Groundwater
Groundwater is likely to be present in alluvium, shale and sandstone units associated with the study area. The hydrogeology of the project area features shale, siltstone in other sedimentary basins with low potential for groundwater movement and salinity greater than 14,000 milligrams per litre associated with the Wianamatta Group (Department of Water Resources, 1987). Alluvial and other unconsolidated deposits with moderate to high potential for groundwater movement and salinity levels between 0 to 1000 milligrams per litre are associated with Quaternary alluvium deposits. Based on a search of the licensed groundwater boreholes in the vicinity of the alignment, groundwater is not used as a potable water source. Groundwater levels vary across the project area. The Roads and Maritime (2014) geotechnical investigation recorded levels ranging from 0.1 metres AHD to 5.2 metres AHD between 7 March 2014 and 11 March 2014. The Phase 2 detailed site assessment (GHD 2014) recorded levels ranging from 0.95 mAHD to 13.48 mAHD.
WestConnex M4 Widening 30 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Groundwater parameters were observed to be reasonably consistent across the project site, and within each of the strata:
• DO: results range from low to moderate oxygen levels typical of fresh/brackish groundwater. • EC: results suggest that the groundwater is generally brackish to saline, which is expected for groundwater in the Ashfield Shale as this unit was formed in a marine environment. • pH: readings were generally circumneutral which is typical for fresh/brackish groundwater. • Oxidation-reduction potential indicated reducing conditions in many of the monitoring wells while some indicted potential oxidising conditions. During the purging and sampling of the groundwater wells, no obvious visual or olfactory evidence of contamination was recorded, with the exception of BH101 where a slight hydrocarbon odour was noted during the purging and sampling.
WestConnex M4 Widening 31 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
4 Assessment of impacts
4.1 Soils and water quality
4.1.1 Construction
Soil erosion Construction would involve the removal of existing vegetation and removal/modification of existing built features (eg paved surfaces) which would expose bare ground. Excavation would involve the stockpiling of spoil prior to reuse or removal from site. These and related construction activities would give rise to potential for erosion of unconsolidated material and entrainment by runoff and subsequent transported off site. Soils transported into local waterways could have a number of impacts including:
• Reduced hydraulic capacity due to deposition of material within the channel. • Degraded water quality including lower DO levels, increased nutrients (N, P), increased turbidity, and altered pH. • Increased levels of nutrients, metals and other pollutants, transported via sediment and runoff to receiving waterways. • Increased sedimentation smothering aquatic life and affecting aquatic ecosystems. Impacts from eroded material transported off the project site and deposited in terrestrial environments may include smothering of terrestrial vegetation and reduced visual amenity. Once dry, this material could form a source of dust emissions which could also impact on local amenity, particularly where deposition and occurred in proximity to residential areas, sensitive land uses such as schools and child care centres, and public open space. A preliminary erosion and sedimentation assessment has been undertaken for the project in accordance with the Erosion and Sedimentation Risk Assessment Procedure (RTA 2004). This identified the project works to be low risk with reference to the following considerations:
• The size of the project and area of project corridor allows for maintenance and installation of controls. • Slopes are less than five per cent grade and an R factor (rainfall erosivity) of 3500 for this area of Sydney presents as a low erosion hazard. • Soils being exposed are generally within the existing road formation and adjacent to operational drainage networks. • No SEPP 14 wetlands are located within the project boundary. Sediments The potential mobilisation of sediments relates principally to bridge construction works within and adjacent to the Duck River channel. Construction of the bridge would require installation of up to four piers within the channel. Temporary access to the pier locations for construction may require the removal of vegetation including mangroves which presently assist in stabilising the channel bed and banks in turn reducing the potential for erosion/scour and mobilisation of sediments.
WestConnex M4 Widening 33 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Duck River and its tributaries drain a heavily urbanised catchment with historical and current land use having a significant influence on sediment quality. As noted in section 3.3.3, previous investigations have identified trace metal concentrations in Duck River higher than reported background concentrations for the Port Jackson Estuary. Similar findings were made with regard to the limited sediment sampling and analysis undertaken as part of the Phase 2 detailed site assessment (GHD 2014). Duck River is tidal in this location and there are two tidal cycles daily. The tidal movement of water along the channel would have potential to entrain disturbed sediments and transport them both downstream to the Parramatta River estuary on the outward tide and upstream on the inward tide. The bidirectional movement of water in the channel would serve to limit the extent to which sediments were transported. Given the broader distribution of contaminated sediment within the wider Parramatta River estuary, the minimal nature of works in Duck River, and the recommended management measures (refer section 5.2.1), it is not anticipated there would be any material impacts associated with sediment disturbance. Disturbance of sediments would also have potential for localised short term increases in turbidity. Consideration of potential construction impacts on aquatic ecosystems from disturbance of sediments in Duck Creek is provided in the separate biodiversity assessment (SKM 2014).
Water quality Potential impacts on water quality from construction activities would be associated with:
• Removal of mangroves at Duck River associated with pier construction adjacent to and within the channel, and with providing access to the pier locations for construction. • Disturbance/mobilisation of sediment within the Duck River channel associated with pier construction. • Clearing of riparian vegetation. • Exposure and mobilisation of exposed soils during construction such as from cleared areas and stockpiles. • Accidental spills of chemical or hazardous materials. • Inadequate management of runoff, sediment controls from the construction site. • Potential disturbance and exposure of ASS to the air (oxidising conditions) resulting in potential for acidic runoff to reach receiving waterways. Potential impacts could include:
• Degraded water quality including lower DO levels, increased nutrients (N, P), increased turbidity, and altered pH. • Increased sedimentation smothering aquatic life and affecting aquatic ecosystems. • Increased levels of nutrients, metals and other pollutants, transported via sediment and runoff to receiving waterways. • Fuel, chemicals, oils, grease and petroleum hydrocarbon spills from construction machinery directly polluting the river and soils. • Spills of concrete during concrete pours directly or indirectly polluting receiving waterways.
WestConnex M4 Widening 34 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
• Contamination from site compounds, chemical storage areas and washdown locations. • Increased levels of litter from construction activities polluting receiving waterways. • Contamination of receiving waterways as a result of disturbance of contaminated land. • Acid runoff from disturbance of ASS during construction. • Tannin leachate from cleared/mulched vegetation (this impact would likely be minor provided as vegetation clearance would be minimal and any cleared vegetation would be removed from site as soon as practicable after clearing. The project is located on the southern side of the Parramatta River within the A’Becketts Creek, Duck Creek, Duck River, Haslams Creek and Powells Creek subcatchments, which all drain to the Parramatta River. These catchments are highly urbanised with large sections of open channels replaced with concrete-lined channels. Water quality is influenced by runoff from a diverse variety of sources, with the M4 Motorway drainage being only one of these, As noted in section 3.7, existing water quality in the Parramatta River estuary is degraded with average concentrations of water quality management parameters (except for pH) being above the ANZECC (2000) aquatic ecosystem health guidelines for south-east Australian estuaries. Long term impacts on water quality in receiving waters are unlikely to be significant but given the increased motorway catchment area, there could be an incremental impact further reducing water quality. Provided appropriate controls are implemented during construction, short term impacts are expected to be manageable and similarly have no material impact on receiving water quality. The biodiversity assessment undertaken for the project (Appendix I to the EIS) included classification of the receiving waterways (A’Becketts Creek, Duck Creek, Duck River, Haslams Creek) with regard to fish habitat sensitivity and key fish habitat as per the NSW Policy and Guidelines for Fish Habitat Conservation and Management (Department of Primary Industries 2013). The outcomes of this are presented in the following table. Table 4-1 Waterway classifications
Waterway Type Classification A'Becketts Creek Type 3 Minimally sensitive Class 3 – Minimal key fish habitat Duck Creek Type 3 Minimally sensitive Class 1 – Major key fish habitat Duck River Type 2 Moderately sensitive Class 1 – Major key fish habitat Haslams Creek N/A Class 1 – Major key fish habitat
The biodiversity assessment considered potential impacts of construction on aquatic ecosystems and did not identify water quality as a particular concern. Mitigation measures have been identified to manage potential impacts on water quality that could in turn impact on aquatic ecosystems. These relate to design development (and therefore operation) and to construction.
WestConnex M4 Widening 35 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
4.1.2 Operation
Soils Following construction, cleared areas would be paved/landscaped and scour protection installed at drainage outlets. There would be no exposed areas of topsoil and therefore little or no risk of soil erosion and entrainment of unconsolidated material by wind or runoff. The installation of piers in the Duck River channel would reduce the overall channel cross- section resulting in localised increases in flow velocities. This would give rise to potential for scour (increased through removal of mangroves), and entrainment and transportation of sediments. Over the longer term, the channel would adjust to a new equilibrium condition which would involve a wider and/or deeper channel. As noted previously, the tidal nature of water movement would serve to limit the extent to which entrained sediments were transported. Increased turbidity would also be associated with entrainment and transport of sediments. The potential for bank and bed scour can be reduced through provision of appropriate scour protection such as channel armouring (eg rip rap). Consideration of potential operational impacts on aquatic ecosystems from disturbance of sediments in Duck Creek is provided in the separate biodiversity assessment (Appendix I to the EIS).
Water quality Following completion of construction, including rehabilitation of exposed areas where vegetation and/or impervious surfaces had been removed, there would be minimal exposed areas of bare ground that could represent a potential source of unconsolidated material with potential for entrainment. As such, there would be little or no risk of soil erosion and transport of eroded sediments to receiving waterways. Scour at drainage discharge points has potential for erosion and subsequent entrainment of material and transportation to receiving waterways. Provided this is adequately managed through appropriate design considerations such as incorporation of flow velocity reduction measures and scour protection, the likelihood of such impacts would be low. Water quality risks during operation would largely be associated with the runoff of pollutants from the road surface. Typically, pollutants associated with road runoff are:
• Sediments from the paved surface from pavement wear and atmospheric deposition. • Heavy metals such as lead, zinc, copper, cadmium, chromium and nickel attached to particles washed off the motorway pavement. • Oil and grease and other hydrocarbon products. • Rubber particles from wearing off tyres on the road pavement. • Brake pad dust which could potentially include asbestos from older brake pads. • Nutrients such as N and P. These deposits build up on road surfaces and pavement areas during dry weather and can be washed off and transported to waterways during rainfall periods.
WestConnex M4 Widening 36 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Material deposited by motorists, such as non-biodegradable litter and food wastes, could also impact water quality, amenity and aquatic ecosystems if transported into receiving waterways. During operation there would be a risk of accidental spillage of fuel, chemicals or other hazardous liquids as a result of vehicle leakage or road accidents on the motorway. While the likelihood of such potential spills would be low, the impact on the receiving environment could be considerable as spills of this nature would pollute receiving waterways if not adequately managed or mitigated. As previously noted, existing water quality in the Parramatta River estuary is degraded with average concentrations of water quality management parameters being above the ANZECC (2000) aquatic ecosystem health guidelines for south-east Australian estuaries. Polluted runoff would further degrade receiving water quality. As also noted in the preceding section, the biodiversity assessment considered potential impacts of construction on aquatic ecosystems and did not identify water quality as an issue of particular concern. Mitigation measures related to design development have been identified to manage potential operational impacts on water quality that could in turn impact on aquatic ecosystems.
4.2 Acid sulfate soils
4.2.1 Construction
The potential for ASS exists along the majority of the project, particularly in proximity to existing drainage channels. The principal risk is associated with disturbance and exposure of ASS to the air from excavation and construction works such as dewatering. If not appropriately managed, this could result in oxidation of ASS (over a period of weeks or months) with subsequent potential for highly acidic runoff that would impact groundwater, soils and waterways as well as built environment elements. The environmental impacts of acid drainage can include fish kills, fish disease, oyster damage and mortality, adverse effects on aquatic ecosystems, release of heavy metals from contaminated sediments, human and animal health impacts from polluted water, adverse impacts on soil structure and arability and damage to built structures such as bridges (Ahern et al 1998). Within the context of the project, this could impact on water quality and aquatic ecosystems in both the immediate receiving waterways (A’Becketts Creek, Duck Creek, Duck River, Haslams Creek) and the broader Parramatta River estuary.
4.2.2 Operation
The majority of impacts related to ASS would be associated with the risk of disturbance during construction and improper management. Negligible impact from ASS is expected once construction has been completed and the disturbed areas have been stabilised.
WestConnex M4 Widening 37 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
4.3 Contaminated land and hazardous materials
4.3.1 Construction
There is potential for contaminated land to be disturbed as a result of construction activities associated with excavation and other ground-engaging activities. Construction of the project would also require the temporary occupation of ancillary sites that would be used as construction compounds and/or materials storage sites. Potential environmental impacts associated with the project in relation to contaminated land include:
• Increased waste amounts from improper practices such as poor fill management. • Inappropriate handling/disposal of contaminated or hazardous waste. • Adverse effects on human health (construction personnel, travelling public or nearby communities). • Release of contaminant into underlying soils. • Release of contaminant into groundwater. • Movement of contaminated sediments into waterways. • Adverse effects on flora and fauna. The Phase 2 detailed site assessment (GHD 2014) concluded that the primary contamination issues with respect to human health and surface water/groundwater are:
• Asbestos fragments as well as fibres in fill soils, with three areas between Church Street and Deniehy Street requiring action prior to the construction phase. • PAH in fill soils. • Hydrocarbons (naphthalene) in groundwater in borehole BH101 from an undefined source. • Lead, mercury, PAH and asbestos in sediments present in A’Becketts Creek, Haslams Creek, Duck Creek and Duck River. • PASS soils and sediments. • Potential for hydrocarbon and landfill gas associated with the closed landfill present to the north of the M4 Motorway. The Phase 2 detailed site assessment identified three areas within the project area considered to represent a high risk to site users. These relate to the presence of asbestos at:
• The landscaped stockpile on the eastern side of the James Ruse Drive Junction. • In land to the north of the M4 Motorway adjacent to the east and west of Deniehy Street. • In an area of public access beneath the M4 Motorway to the east of Alfred Street. Effective management of risk for these three areas would require appropriate remedial measures as well as the preparation of an Environmental Management Plan to manage the contamination recorded. Other contamination recorded in soil, such as PAH and the potential risks associated with a former landfill, are not considered to present an imminent risk of harm to human health or the environment but would require appropriate management during construction.
WestConnex M4 Widening 38 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
The Phase 2 detailed site assessment concluded there was potential for latent contamination from hydrocarbons, heavy metals, asbestos, PAH contaminants associated with road usage; and hydrocarbons, pesticides, heavy metals and asbestos associated with illegal dumping or fill soils. Two commercial properties (2 Junction Street) and four residential properties (65, 67 and 71 A’Beckett Street and 49 Onslow Street) would be acquired for the project. Based on the age and the structure of buildings on these properties, there is potential for hazardous building materials to be present. Further assessment would be required prior to any demolition works that may be required as part of the construction in order to identify what management measures would be required during demolition to effectively manage risks to human health and environment.
4.3.2 Operation
Incidents such as vehicle accidents on the widened motorway could result in spillage of contaminants or hazardous materials on to the roadway. If not contained and/or cleaned up promptly, there would be potential for these to enter the drainage system and be discharged to receiving waterways. This in turn could impact negatively on water quality and aquatic ecosystems.
4.4 Groundwater
4.4.1 Construction
The main potential impacts on groundwater would relate to:
• Interference to aquifers resulting in a decrease or change in groundwater levels impacting upon groundwater users and groundwater dependent ecosystems. • Pollution of groundwater. The risk of these impacts from construction activities is considered to be low as apart from piling, no construction activities would potentially interfere with any aquifers. No dewatering would be required for piling activities. As noted in section 3.8, groundwater is not used as a potable water source within or in proximity to the project area. Exposure of ASS has potential for acid generation if not managed appropriately. Acidic runoff could impact on a range of environmental aspects including groundwater. Effective management of ASS is well understood and there are established guidelines to manage this risk. The likelihood of this is therefore considered to be low. The risk of pollution of groundwater would be minimised through the implementation of appropriate management measures detailed in section 5.
4.4.2 Operation
There is unlikely to be any material impact on groundwater associated with operation of the project.
The concept drainage design identifies a potential spill basin at the western end of the project (about Ch400) to intercept spills and prevent them from reaching A’Becketts Creek.
WestConnex M4 Widening 39 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
The need for this has still to be confirmed. It is anticipated that there would also be an operational spill management plan in place to facilitate prompt clean up of spill incidents that would serve to minimise impacts including on groundwater.
4.5 Waste management and handling
4.5.1 Construction
Construction activities would create a number of waste streams generating volumes of waste that require a coordinated management process. This section provides a description of each waste stream, and where known the expected quantities of waste materials generated. Section 2.7 lists relevant waste management and handling policy settings applicable to the project. Strategies aimed at reducing waste quantities and enhancing recycling of waste are outlined in section 5.6. Waste generated during construction would primarily be from civil works associated with site preparation, relocation of utilities, and construction of road infrastructure and landscaping. Waste-generating activities would include:
• Vegetation clearance, generating green waste such as logs and mulched material. • Construction of temporary construction compounds, construction roads, ancillary sites and alternative property access would require vegetation clearance, road surface grading, temporary drainage structure installation and the placement of gravel road base where required, generating general asphalt waste, pipe cuts and green waste. • Installation of environmental controls, fencing, silt fences and lockable gates, generating material off-cuts. • Demolition of kerbs, fencing, pavements, concrete noise walls, barriers, signage, lighting, parapets, existing toll plaza and gantries. • Excavation of existing batters, for retaining walls, for drainage, piling for viaduct structure, piers and bridge abutments, • Construction of the ultimate project involving earthworks, placement of pavement layers, drainage, piling and piers to viaduct footings, concrete pour, utilities placement and protection, installation of tolling infrastructure including gantries and control systems, lighting, fencing and road furniture. • Installation of prefabricated bridge deck, prefabricated piers and viaduct units, precast barriers and guard rails, prefabricated culvert units, generating general construction waste. Waste streams generated during construction of the M4 Widening would include the following:
• Surplus spoil (excavated soil, sediment, rock) from bulk earthworks that is unable to be reused within backfilling or restoration. • Contaminated soils that may be exposed during construction, and if exposed, would require offsite disposal (refer to section 4.2).
WestConnex M4 Widening 40 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
• Concrete, pavement, steel and other materials from demolition of kerbs, fencing, pavements, concrete noise walls, barriers, signage, lighting, parapets, existing toll plaza and gantries. • Surplus material from construction and general site reinstatement, such as fencing, sediment, concrete, steel, formwork, and sand bags. • Packaging materials from items delivered to site, such as pallets, crates, cartons, plastics and wrapping materials. • Vegetative waste from clearance and grubbing. • Plant and vehicle maintenance waste, such as oil containers. • General office wastes generated by onsite personnel, such as paper, cardboard, beverage containers and food wastes. • Sewage waste generated through the use of personnel facilities. Earthworks would be required for across the project including for road widening, bridge construction and drainage. Based on estimates drawn from the concept design, it is predicted that about 110,000 cubic metres of imported fill would be required for construction of the project. It is predicted that there would be about 5600 cubic metres of excavation material that could be beneficially reused as fill for the project. Imported fill would either be virgin excavated natural material (VENM) or comply with the conditions attached to a relevant resource recovery exemption. It is estimated that about 51,000 cubic metres of spoil material would be produced through excavation activities that would be unsuitable for reuse on site. This would be transported for beneficial reuse off-site in accordance with a relevant EPA resource recovery exemption or disposed of at a licensed waste facility. Waste from construction of the M4 Widening would be minimised through the implementation of the safeguards and management measures listed in section 5.6. The Phase 2 detailed site assessment included a preliminary waste classification for fill soils. Based on the preliminary waste classification data, fill soils would be classified as general solid waste (no asbestos observed) or hazardous waste with asbestos (at/near BH215). Further waste classification would be required during construction to determine appropriate soil management and disposal. The underlying natural soils have recorded concentrations that would be classified as general solid waste, but if uncontaminated are likely to satisfy the criteria for VENM or excavated natural material. Soils defined as PASS would require disposal in accordance with the NSW Waste Classification Guidelines, Part 4: Acid Sulfate Soils (DECC 2008).
4.5.2 Operation
During operation of the project, small quantities of waste would be generated and would potentially include spills and leakages from vehicles, litter generated by road users and sediment from the water quality control basin. In addition, small quantities of waste would be generated from road maintenance and repair activities. The volume of operational waste would be minor and would be classified and disposed of to an appropriately licensed landfill.
WestConnex M4 Widening 41 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
5 Environmental management
5.1 Overview
Appropriate mitigation and management measures would be implemented during construction and operation to minimise impacts on soil, sediment and water quality, particularly with regard to sensitive receiving environments. The mitigation and management measures that would be implemented during these project phases are described in the following sections. Where appropriate, reference is made to additional investigation to inform development of mitigation and management measures.
5.2 Soils and water quality
5.2.1 Construction
Management of soils and water quality would be addressed through preparation of a project- specific Soil and Water Management Plan (SWMP). This would be prepared prior to construction and in accordance with:
• Managing Urban Stormwater–Soils and Construction, Volume 1 Managing Urban Stormwater, 4th edition (‘the Blue Book’). • Managing Urban Stormwater–Soils and Construction, Volume 2D Main Road Construction. Preparation of the SWMP would include reference to relevant Roads and Maritime policies and guidelines as identified in section 2.2. The SWMP would identify best management practices for soil and water management during construction. Best management practice provides design considerations to keep sediment as close as practicable to its source. Erosion control measures would likely include (but not be limited to):
• Avoiding disturbance where practicable, otherwise minimising the area of disturbance, particularly on and adjacent to river banks. • Designation of ‘no-go’ zones for construction plant and equipment. • Consideration of appropriate erosion and sediment controls during staging of construction activities. • Installation of upstream diversion channels to direct clean runoff from upstream catchments around or through disturbed areas (maintaining separation from runoff containing sediment). • Shaping of disturbed land to minimise slope lengths and gradients and improve drainage. • Installation and appropriate lining of catch drains to carry any sediment laden runoff to appropriate sediment control measures. • Minimising stockpiling of material. Any cleared or excavated materials would be removed off site by truck shortly after excavation and appropriately disposed of or stockpiled off- site. Stockpiles would be located away from drainage lines and creek channels. • Seeding of disturbed areas for temporary soil stabilisation.
WestConnex M4 Widening 43 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
• Employment of appropriate measures to prevent/minimise wind-blown dust from leaving the site. • Establishing designated areas for plant and construction material storage within site compounds and other locations within the project area. • Storage of all chemicals and fuels associated with construction in secure roofed and bunded areas. • Retention of erosion and sediment controls until disturbed areas are stabilised. Management of in-channel sediment associated with bridge construction activities within the Duck River channel would focus on minimising sediment disturbance within the channel and limiting its movement away from the construction site. Management measures may include:
• Minimising the area of mangroves to be cleared. • Installation of temporary coffer dams (sheet piling) around pier construction locations. • Use of a silt curtain, subject to consideration of tidal flow velocities. • Where practicable, programming works likely to disturb aquatic sediments to ‘slack water’ periods. • Water quality monitoring.
5.2.2 Operation
The adopted water quality objective is to minimise potential impacts on downstream receiving waters so that the system changes the existing conditions by the smallest amount practicable. This objective is consistent with the Roads and Maritime Water Policy (RTA 1997) and Code of Practice for Water Management (RTA 1999). The concept drainage design currently provides for water quality treatment through vegetated swales with rock check dams, and spill management basins where space permits. Permanent water quality ponds are not proposed due to space constraints. Identification of potential locations for spill management basins has been undertaken using a risk assessment based on altered traffic conditions and the sensitivity of downstream waterways. There is an existing basin at about Ch7400 and the concept drainage design identifies a potential spill basin at the western end of the project (about Ch400) to intercept spills and prevent them from reaching A’Becketts Creek. Detailed design would further consider practicable measures to optimise pollution mitigation such as bioretention swales with a submerged zone. Post-construction monitoring would be required for a period of two years to ensure successful establishment of landscaping and vegetation cover. Remedial planting may be required in locations where a vegetation cover has not established or has only partially established. It is anticipated these matters would be addressed via a project-specific vegetation and landscape management plan or equivalent.
WestConnex M4 Widening 44 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
5.3 Acid sulfate soils
5.3.1 Construction
An ASS management plan (ASSMP) would be prepared in accordance with the Acid Sulfate Soils Manual (Ahern et al 1998) and the Guidelines for the Management of Acid Sulfate Materials: Acid Sulfate Soils, Acid Sulfate Rock and Monosulfidic Black Ooze (RTA 2005). The plan would detail requirements for the management, handling, treatment and disposal of ASS/PASS during construction of the project. Management strategies for the handling, treatment and disposal of ASS/PASS would include, but not be limited to, the following:
• All relevant construction personnel and contractors would be trained in the requirements of the ASSMP and would be made aware of the location of ASS treatment areas and their personal obligations to report excavated ASS/PASS material to their supervisor. • Preparation of a procedure detailing all relevant matters with regard to treatment of ASS/PASS, including identification of required discharge water quality criteria. • Preparation of a contingency procedure for use when ASS/PASS are unexpectedly encountered during excavation/construction activities. • The time of exposure of ASS/PASS would be minimised to reduce acid production and resulting impacts by: - Programming excavations to ensure that excavations in ASS/PASS areas were left open for the minimum time practicable with the objective of having temporary excavations refilled within 24 hours wherever practicable. - ASS/PASS stockpiles that require more than 24 hours temporary storage would be stabilised with lime to prevent acid generation. • Where excavations have potential to discharge water to the surrounding environment, barriers of limestone would be put in place to neutralise acidic runoff. • ASS/PASS materials would be kept separated from non-ASS/PASS materials at all times. • Monitoring of water quality at ASS/PASS treatment areas and stockpiling locations to ensure required discharge water quality criteria are met. Disposal of any ASS/PASS would be in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements.
5.3.2 Operation
No specific management measures are considered necessary with regard to management of ASS during operation.
5.4 Contaminated land and hazardous materials
5.4.1 Construction
Management of contaminated land and hazardous materials would focus on effective containment and handling of identified matters and areas of concern and ensuring appropriate measures (such as an unexpected finds protocol) are in place to manage any
WestConnex M4 Widening 45 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
contamination and/or hazardous materials that may be subsequently identified or occur (eg accidental spills) during construction. Reference should also be made to the recommended management measures provided in the Phase 2 detailed site assessment incorporation of these as appropriate into the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). To comply with the CLM Act and relevant EPA guidelines in relation to disturbance or treatment of potentially contaminated land, a Contaminated Land Management Plan (CLMP) would be prepared as part of the CEMP for any areas of the construction site and the other areas affected by the contractor's work which are identified as contaminated land or any land contamination caused by the project. The CLMP would detail procedures to:
• Identify potentially contaminated land by monitoring for: - Discolouration or staining of soil. - Bare soil patches both on-site, and off-site adjacent to site boundary. - Visible signs of plant stress. - Presence of drums or other waste material. - Presence of stockpiles or fill material. - Odours. • Investigate potentially contaminated land to determine the concentration and type of contaminants and the extent of contamination (including investigation of the areas of concern noted in section 3.2 where the project interacts with this land). • Protect the environment by implementing control measures to divert surface runoff away from the contaminated land. • Capture and manage any surface runoff contaminated by exposure to the contaminated land. • Assess the requirement to notify relevant authorities, including the EPA. • Manage the remediation and subsequent validation of the contaminated land, including any certification required via a remediation action plan. Excavated material that is not suitable for on-site reuse or recycling, such as contaminated material, would be transported to a site that may legally accept that material for reuse or disposal. Soils leaving the site would be waste classified so that correct resource recovery and or off-site disposal occur. An Asbestos Management Plan would be developed for the construction of the project, in accordance with the National Environment Protection (Assessment of site contamination) Measure 1999 (April 2013) that identifies criteria for assessment and remediation of non- friable and friable asbestos in soil. If previously unidentified asbestos contamination is discovered during construction, work in the affected area would cease immediately, and an investigation undertaken and report prepared to determine the nature, extent and degree of the asbestos contamination. In general, the presence of asbestos does not warrant that a site be notified to the EPA under the CLM Act. The level of reporting must be appropriate for the identified contamination in accordance with Guidelines for Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites (OEH 2011),
WestConnex M4 Widening 46 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
any relevant WorkCover guidelines and include the proposed methodology for the remediation of the asbestos contamination. Remediation activities would not take place until receipt of the investigation report by an appropriate occupational health professional. Where excavated material cannot be classified as virgin excavated natural material, it would need to be classified and disposed of (when it cannot be reused) to an appropriately licensed landfill in accordance with the Waste Classification Guidelines–Part 1: Classifying Waste (DECCW 2009) and Part 2: Immobilisation of Waste (DECC 2008). A classification system would be used to control the excavation, stockpiling and disposal of all potentially contaminated materials. Soils would be classified in-situ prior to excavation or when stockpiled during excavation, depending on available time and room for stockpile areas. Any unexpected finds would follow the same procedures. Prior to commencement of construction, further investigation would be undertaken as follows:
• Assessment of the extent and source of hydrocarbon contamination associated with BH101 (located at the junction of Church Street/Great Western Highway) to inform the requirements of any specific remediation or management measures during construction. • Assessment of the two commercial properties (2 Junction Street) and the three residential properties being acquired (67 and 71 A’Beckett Street and 49 Onslow Street) for the presence of hazardous building materials. This would include an intrusive contamination assessment for 2 Junction Street. • Further investigation of the area of public access beneath the M4 Motorway to the east of Alfred Street to assess the level and extent of asbestos in this area. This would identify the need for any location-specific management measures for incorporation into the CEMP.
5.4.2 Operation
The spill containment measures noted in section 5.2.2 would serve to mitigate contamination associated with operation of the project.
5.5 Groundwater
5.5.1 Construction
Construction of the project is unlikely to impact on groundwater resources. This notwithstanding, groundwater levels would be monitored to identify any impacts on groundwater. Preparation of a project-specific groundwater management plan is not warranted. Instead all groundwater monitoring requirements would be detailed in the SWMP. If construction works are to include dewatering, additional investigations should be undertaken to assess potential impacts on surrounding groundwater users and on the Quaternary aquifer resource, and matters related to treatment and disposal of groundwater. Any potentially adverse impacts identified should be managed, mitigated and monitored appropriately.
WestConnex M4 Widening 47 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
5.5.2 Operation
No specific management measures are considered necessary with regard to operation of the widened motorway.
5.6 Waste management and handling
5.6.1 Construction
Prior to commencement of construction, a project-specific Resource and Waste Management Plan (RWMP) would be prepared in accordance with the Roads and Maritime Environmental Protection Specification G36. The RWMP would facilitate appropriate management of construction waste in a manner that is consistent with the resource management hierarchy principles of the WARR Act of avoidance, reduction, reuse and recycling including:
• Avoidance of unnecessary resource consumption as a priority. • Avoiding generation of excess materials as a priority. • Implement resource recovery including the reuse of materials, reprocessing, recycling, and energy recovery throughout construction. • Consider reuse opportunities for the project within the RWMP. • Undertake disposal only as a last resort. The RWMP would sit under the overarching project CEMP and would address the following matters:
• Quantity and classification of excavated material generated by the project. • Disposal strategies for each type of material. • Details of how waste would be stored and treated on site. • Identification of all non-recyclable waste. • Identification of strategies to ‘avoid’ ‘reduce, reuse and recycle’. • Identification of available recycling facilities on and off site. • Identification of suitable methods and routes to transport waste. • Procedures and disposal arrangements for unsuitable excavated material. Where waste materials are required to be temporarily stockpiled, stockpile locations would be selected in accordance with the following general criteria:
• Be located more than 50 metres from a waterway; • Have ready access to the road network or direct access to the construction corridor. • Be located in areas of low ecological significance and require minimal clearing of native vegetation (not beyond that already required by the project). • Be located on relatively level land. • Be separated from the nearest residences by at least 200 metres (or at least 300 metres for a temporary batching plant).
WestConnex M4 Widening 48 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
• Be above the 20 ARI flood level unless a contingency plan to manage flooding is prepared and implemented. • Not unreasonably affect the land use of adjacent properties. • Operate in a manner that minimises out-of-hours disturbance, including by providing sufficient area for the storage of raw materials to minimise, to the greatest extent practical, the number of deliveries required outside standard construction hours. • Be located in areas of low heritage conservation significance (including identified Aboriginal cultural value) and not impact on heritage sites beyond those already impacted by the project. All wastes, including contaminated wastes, would be identified and classified in accordance with the POEO Act and Waste Classification Guidelines: Part 1 Classifying Waste (DECCW 2009). Where practicable, construction materials would be sourced so as to avoid/limit creation of excess waste. The following general ‘resource recovery exemptions’ would be available for the M4 Widening project to facilitate off site beneficial reuse of project wastes rather than disposal:
• Excavated natural material. • Excavated public road material. • Raw mulch. • Reclaimed asphalt pavement. • Recovered aggregate. Management of specific construction waste streams would include, but not be limited to, the following:
• Excavated material (soil, sediments and rock) that is unsuitable for on-site reuse or recycling would be transported to a site that may legally accept that material for reuse or disposal. • No burning of cleared vegetation or other material would be allowed. Cleared vegetation would be reused on site where practicable, recycled offsite where feasible or otherwise disposed of to an appropriate site. Non-weed species would be mulched for onsite reuse wherever possible, in preference to transportation off-site. Any noxious weeds identified would be disposed of in accordance with the requirements of the DPI for the disposal of noxious weeds. • Putrescible and other waste, such as chemical waste that cannot be recycled, would be regularly collected and disposed of at an appropriate disposal site. • Roadside materials (guide posts, guard rails) would be recycled or reused where possible. • Jointed reinforced concrete and asphalt pavement would be recycled where possible. Any excess concrete is to be sent off-site to a licensed concrete recycling facility. • All excess steel is to be sent off-site to a licensed steel recycled facility. • Special construction waste including batteries, waste oil and containers and other potentially hazardous materials would be separated and sent to recycling facilities where
WestConnex M4 Widening 49 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
possible. Non-recyclable waste would be classified as per the Waste Classification guidelines and disposed to an appropriately licensed facility. • Contaminated wastes would be disposed of to an appropriate waste facility. • Should unanticipated contaminated material be found during excavation activities, a procedure would be developed as part of the CEMP to manage the contaminated material in terms of rehabilitation requirements, waste classification, transport and disposal requirements. Such a procedure would include, as appropriate, the obtaining of appropriate licences and approvals from EPA prior to disposal of a contaminated waste generated by the project, and notification to the operators of the appropriately licensed disposal site. • Secure rubbish bins, with lockable lids would be provided on site, which would be regularly emptied by the supplying contractor. Rubbish loads being transported from the site for disposal would be covered to prevent the spread of waste. • Water captured in construction sediment basins would be reused for dust suppression, watering of landscaped areas and other suitable construction activities where feasible. • General construction waste: where practicable, recyclable material would be separated and sent off-site to licensed recycling facilities. Non-recyclable waste would be classified as General Solid waste and disposed of to an appropriately licensed facility. • General office waste: where practicable, recyclable material would be separated and sent to recycling facilities. Non-recyclable waste would be classified and disposed of to an appropriately licensed facility. • Any waste oil generated from construction plant/vehicle maintenance would be disposed of to an approved disposal site or recycling facility. • Portable, self-contained toilet and washroom facilities would be provided on-site and would be regularly emptied and serviced by the contractor providing them. • Working areas would be maintained, kept free of rubbish and cleaned up at the end of each working day. • At the end of the construction period, unused fuel, oils and chemicals would be removed from the site. • Construction waste material would not be left on site once works have been completed.
5.6.2 Operation
No specific waste management measures would be required for operation. Management of waste would be addressed through the broader asset management activities undertaken for the M4 Motorway.
WestConnex M4 Widening 50 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
6 Conclusion
6.1 Soil and water quality
The project sits within the Sydney Harbour and Parramatta River catchment. The project is located on the southern side of the Parramatta River within the A’Becketts Creek, Duck Creek, Duck River, Haslams Creek and Powells Creek subcatchments which all drain to the Parramatta River. The project crosses three soil landscapes, two of which have a high soil erosion hazard. Disturbed terrain also occurs in the project area and can include filled areas. Construction would involve removal of existing vegetation and removal/modification of existing built features (eg paved surfaces) that would expose bare ground. Excavation would involve the stockpiling of spoil prior to reuse or removal from site. These and related construction activities would give rise to potential for erosion of unconsolidated material and entrainment by runoff and subsequent transport off site. This would impact on water quality and aquatic ecosystems in receiving waterways. Existing water quality is degraded as a result of historical and current land use, and construction activities could cause further degradation if not appropriately managed. Construction of bridge piers within and adjacent to the channel of Duck River has potential to mobilise sediments and dispersal of these via tidal action. However, given the broader distribution of contaminated sediment within the wider Parramatta River estuary, it is not anticipated there would be any material impacts associated with sediment disturbance. There would be a risk to receiving water quality during operation, principally in relation to the transport of pollutants in runoff from the motorway pavement. There would also be a risk of accidental spillage of fuels, chemicals or other hazardous materials from leaks or accidents. Impacts on water quality would be mitigated through incorporation of management controls into the motorway drainage design. A number of potential measures have been identified in the concept drainage design and detailed design would further consider practicable measures to optimise pollution mitigation.
6.2 Acid sulfate soils
The potential for ASS exists along the majority of the project, particularly in proximity to existing drainage channels. The principal risk is associated with disturbance and exposure of ASS to the air from excavation and construction works. This would be effectively managed through preparation and implementation of ASS management plan prepare in accordance with applicable guidelines.
6.3 Contaminated land and hazardous materials
The principal contamination issues with respect to human health and surface water/groundwater are:
• Asbestos fragments as well as fibres in fill soils, with three areas between Church Street and Deniehy Street requiring action prior to the construction phase. • PAH in fill soils.
WestConnex M4 Widening 51 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
• Hydrocarbons (naphthalene) in groundwater in borehole BH101 from an undefined source. • Lead, mercury, PAH and asbestos in sediments present in A’Becketts Creek, Haslams Creek, Duck Creek and Duck River. • PASS soils and sediments. • Potential for hydrocarbon and landfill gas associated with the closed landfill present to the north of the M4 Motorway. Asbestos has been identified for three areas within the project area and would require appropriate remediation and management to reduce the risk to site users. There is potential for latent contamination from hydrocarbons, heavy metals, asbestos, PAH contaminants associated with road usage; and hydrocarbons, pesticides, heavy metals and asbestos associated with illegal dumping or fill soils. The potential for hazardous materials has been identified with regard to two commercial properties and four residential properties that would be acquired for the project. Further investigation has been recommended to identify any required management measures.
6.4 Groundwater
Construction of the project is unlikely to impact on groundwater resources. During construction, groundwater levels would be monitored to identify any impacts that might occur. The potential for operational impacts on groundwater is considered to be low. Spills have been identified as a potential risk and the concept design incorporates appropriate measures to facilitate effective management of this risk.
6.5 Waste management and handling
Construction activities would generate various waste streams that would require a coordinated management approach. Some 70,000 m3 of excavated spoil material (including PASS/ASS) would not be suitable for reuse and would require appropriate disposal offsite. Management of construction waste would be undertaken in a manner consistent with the resource management hierarchy principles of the WARR Act of avoidance, reduction, reuse and recycling.
WestConnex M4 Widening 52 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
7 References
Ahern, CR, Stone, Y, and Blunden, B (1998) Acid Sulfate Soils Assessment Guidelines, ASSMAC, Wollongbar, NSW.
Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council/Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (2000) Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, ANZECC/ARMCANZ, Canberra, ACT.
Birch, GF and Taylor, SE (1999) Sources of heavy metals in sediments of the Port Jackson estuary, Australia. The Science of the Total Environment 227, pp123-138.
Birch, GF, Vanderhayden, M, and Olmos, M (2011) The Nature and Distribution of Metals in Soils of the Sydney Estuary Catchment, Australia. Water Air Soil Pollution 216:581-604
Birch, GF, Taylor, SE and Matthai, C (2001). Small scale spatial temporal variance in the concentration of heavy metals in aquatic sediments: a review and some new concepts. Environmental Pollution, 1-16
Birch, G.F, Harrington, C. Symons, R, K & Hunt, J.W (2007) The source and distribution of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin and polychlorinated dibenzofurans in sediments of Port Jackson, Australia. Marine Pollution Bulletin 54: 295-308.
Cardno Lawson Treloar (2008) Parramatta River Estuary Data Compilation and Review Study, prepared for Parramatta City Council, DECC and Sydney Metropolitan Catchment Management Authority, Sydney NSW.
Cardno (2012) Parramatta River Estuary Coastal Zone Management Plan, prepared for Parramatta River Estuary Management Committee, Sydney NSW.
Department of Environment and Conservation (2004) Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery in NSW–A Progress Report 2004, Sydney NSW.
Department of Environment and Conservation (2006) Using the ANZECC Guidelines and Water Quality Objectives in NSW, Sydney, NSW.
Department of Environment and Climate Change (2007) Practical Consideration of Climate Change–Floodplain Risk Management Guideline, Sydney NSW.
Department of Environment and Climate Change (2008) Managing Urban Stormwater–Soils and Construction, Volume 2D Main Road Construction, Sydney NSW.
Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (1991) 1:100,000 Geological Series Sheet 9130, Sydney. NSW Department of Mineral Resources and Energy, Sydney, NSW.
GHD (2013) Phase I Soil and Land Contamination Assessment, WestConnex–M4 Widening, draft report prepared for WestConnex Delivery Authority, Oct 2013.
GHD (2014) Phase II Contamination and Acid Sulphate Soils Investigation and Assessment, WestConnex–M4 Motorway Widening, draft report prepared for WestConnex Delivery Authority, Apr 2014.
Hatje, V., Birch, G.F,& Hill, D.M (2001) Spatial and Temporal Variability of Particulate Trace
WestConnex M4 Widening 53 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Metals in Port Jackson Estuary, Australia. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 53: 63-77.
Irvine, I and Birch, GF (1998) Distribution of heavy metals in surficial sediments of Port Jackson, Sydney, New South Wales. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences 45, pp297–304.
Landcom (2004) Managing Urban Stormwater–Soils and Construction, Volume 1 Managing Urban Stormwater, 4th edition (‘the Blue Book’), Sydney, NSW.
McCreedy, S, Slee, DJ, Birch, GF and Taylor, SE (2000) The Distribution of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Surficial Sediments of Sydney Harbour, Australia, Marine Pollution Bulletin 40(11), pp999-1006.
Roads and Maritime Services (2014) Geotechnical Investigation Report, WestConnex M4 Widening Pitt Street, Parramatta to Homebush Bay Drive, Homebush, report prepared by Roads and Maritime Services Road Pavement and Geotechnical Engineering (Geotechnical Science Section), 13 March 2014.
Roads and Traffic Authority (2005) Guidelines for the Management of Acid Sulfate Materials: Acid Sulfate Soils, Acid Sulfate Rock and Monosulfidic Black Ooze, Sydney, NSW.
SMEC (2014) M4 Widening Concept Drainage Design, report prepared for WDA, march 2014, Sydney, NSW.
Stone, Y, and Hopkins, G (1998) Acid Sulfate Soils Planning Guidelines, ASSMAC, Wollongbar, NSW.
Stone, Y, Ahern, CR and Blunden, B (1998) Acid Sulfate Soils Manual, ASSMAC, Wollongbar, NSW.
WestConnex M4 Widening 54 Soils, Water & Waste Technical Study
Annexure 1 Maps of sampling locations
ET L STRE ET ROSEHIL D STRE RA MON I
N
A
K
L C
E M T H
R E A U
M E R
S R A C T
T N
D R H S
E E S H S T N E T I T G T R I I T R R S H P E A E O O UNG STR EET E I S L E N
W T T T M
R A S
A T E S R R T E T STREE S T E R R OUNDA B D E E
E E T T N
S
T
R
E
E ET AN STRE T MEEH
I
N
K
E
E R S 1
C M E A C EET A N STR S 1 L R BH101 (Groundwater) CTIO N JUN P O
W S S Naphthalene 18 µg/L A N BH102 T R S R !! A T I R E BH213 T E E BH101 E T MW212 T ! !! BH211 *#SED1 / SW1 ! RWA OTO WA RN M TOR STE N MO WE TER WES *#HA210 S 2 PA *#HA209 RR *#HA208 S AM AT *# TA HA207 SED1 - 0.0-0.2 m (Sediment) R MW206 MW206A OA Chromium (III+VI) 140 mg/kg D *#HA205 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.44 mg/kg Total PAH 4.9 mg/kg MW201 *#HA202 *#HA204 *#HA203 EK RE R C OBER TS T ST ET REET K EC 'B D A A
O
R
T E L E L E I
R V
S L T D T S O E
E O M
R A W I T Groundwater Well Location (GHD, 2014)T EE L S R T T L S I E T H EN W E C B Soil Borehole Location (GHD, 2014)G S R E L U T CR T A E O S N " E Test Pit Location (GHD, 2014) G E R D R O T S A A IL F S T W *# Exceeds NEPM HIL C (Soil) O A Hand Auger Location (GHD, 2014) R L R P E A E R E A E Exceeds NEPME HIL D (Soil) T D L E *# P T E Sediment and Surface Water Location (GHD, 2014) L I Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQG - Low (Sediments) E V R !! WAL D T Geotechnical GroundwaterPO Piezometer (RMS, 2014) Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQG - High (Sediments) O S LE ST U T O RE N N ET ION EE Exceeds NEPM GIL Freshwater (Groundwater) W O !! STR TR Geotechnical Soil Borehole (RMS, 2014) EE S T T L E I Note: Concentrations of metals and some PAH are not AC " L M " Geotechnical Test Pit (RMS, 2014) AL presented for Surface Water and Groundwater Source:W Esri, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, GeoEye, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
LEGEND WestConnex Delivery Authority Job Number 21-23310 Revision A 0 20 40 60 80 100 Lots / Cadastre Areas of Detected Asbestos Contamination WestConnex M4 Widening Phase II Contamination Assessment Date 09 May 2014 Metres Potential Acid Sulphate Soils ! Potential Acid Sulphate Soil Detected (from laboratory analysis)
Map Projection: Transverse Mercator Waterways Sampling Locations and Results Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 56 Railway Section 1 and 2 Figure 1 G:\21\23310\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\21_23310_Z008_WESTCONNEX_InvestigationResults_Fig1.mxd Level 15, 133 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW 2000 T 61 2 9239 7100 F 61 2 9239 7199 E [email protected] W www.ghd.com.au 2010. While GHD has taken care to ensure the accuracy of this product, GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, cannot accept liability of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may be incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason. Data Source: NSW Department of Lands: Cadastre - Jan 2011; Geoscience Australia: 250k Data - Jan 2011, Imagery - ESRI. Created by: tnham T O ALLEN T STREET
T
E
N
H
T
A O
T
M
T
E
T
S E
E T T R EL N EA E NO R R T STRE H ET E
E S
A R
E
S M T I
T
S R
L
R
A M
A
N A T
H T E R E
E
G B OWD E I E E N STRE ET R
R W T
T T RITCH S I S E STR E EET N E
A R E
T D L BH216 - 0.6-0.8 m (Soil)
S L R
A Asbestos fragment detected O R
J D W U ATSON STR EET H
A T 'BEC K R BH218 ETTS A CREE BH214 !! BH105 BH219 K
! BH217 *#SED5 / SW5 BH215
BH216 ! !! ! BH106 !! BH103 !! BH104 *#SW9 T E ! E ! BH107
R
T
S
S I A'BECKE R T T STREET R A SED5 - 0.0-0.1 m (Sediment) H BH215 - 1.0-1.2 m (Soil) Zinc 230 mg/kg ! A ! BH108 'BECKETT Asbestos in soil detected Dieldrin 0.02 mg/kg STREET PR BH220 BH215 - 5.0-5.2 m (Soil) IN SED5 - 0.1-0.3 m (Sediment) CE ! BH221 ST Benzo(a)pyrene TEQ 50 mg/kg RE Zinc 340 mg/kg BH220 - Surface (Soil) ! ET W Total PAH 400 mg/kg Benzo(a)pyrene 0.44 mg/kg Asbestos fragment detected E S T A'BEC E KETT ST Total PAH 4.6 mg/kg R REET N Dieldrin 0.02 mg/kg M BH221 - Surface (Soil) !! O BH109 T V O ICT Asbestos fragment detected R OR W IA A T S E T E R T E E N E E R T A T E L S R T W T T E E E S S R R E T
O R A E D R M T O N S O
H M O T O
G L T R O P L A E I ! R R T ! BH110 R B W B A E M L GRA S A TRE E AT A ET
T R A RO T
A S D
D
T E
E R
F E
L S L R A T T BH111 S E T !! E W E H R AMILT Groundwater Well Location (GHD, 2014) O ON E S T TREET L
S R
S D T
N L S Soil Borehole Location (GHD, 2014) O O P B " M Test Pit Location (GHD, 2014) E
K PA *# Hand Auger Location (GHD, 2014) Exceeds NEPM HIL C (Soil) RR R AM T AIL C AT E W Exceeds NEPM HIL D (Soil) T A OW A *# E R Sediment and Surface P Water Location (GHD, 2014) PE O R AR Exceeds ANZECC 2000R ISQG - Low (Sediments) A A D T D ST EEK E E R UCK CR S E D ! ! Geotechnical GroundwaterU Piezometer (RMS, 2014) Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQGE T- High (Sediments) H N
T I E Exceeds NEPM GIL Freshwater (Groundwater) V !! GeotechnicalM Soil Borehole (RMS, 2014) A S Note: Concentrations of metals and some PAH are not E " " H Geotechnical TestT Pit (RMS, 2014) presented for Surface Water and Groundwater Source: Esri, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, GeoEye, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
LEGEND WestConnex Delivery Authority Job Number 21-23310 Revision A 0 20 40 60 80 100 Lots / Cadastre Areas of Detected Asbestos Contamination WestConnex M4 Widening Phase II Contamination Assessment Date 09 May 2014 Metres Potential Acid Sulphate Soils ! Potential Acid Sulphate Soil Detected (from laboratory analysis)
Map Projection: Transverse Mercator Waterways Sampling Locations and Results Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 56 Railway Section 2 Figure 2 G:\21\23310\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\21_23310_Z009_WESTCONNEX_InvestigationResults_Fig2.mxd Level 15, 133 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW 2000 T 61 2 9239 7100 F 61 2 9239 7199 E [email protected] W www.ghd.com.au 2010. While GHD has taken care to ensure the accuracy of this product, GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, cannot accept liability of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may be incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason. Data Source: NSW Department of Lands: Cadastre - Jan 2011; Geoscience Australia: 250k Data - Jan 2011, Imagery - ESRI. Created by: tnham T
E TP5 - 0.0-0.2m (Soil) ! " TP5 E T R
E Bonded ACM in soil 0.009% T E S
R TP5 - 0.5-1.0 (Soil) Y W T E E S TP9 - 1.5-2.0m (Soil)
S Bonded ACM in soil 0.016% L
T " R N TP3 ! E I ! I R Asbestos fines in soil 0.08411% w/w H N W A'B K M ECK REE S N ET C O TS TP6 - 0.2-0.5m (Soil) " TP9 TO U ! TP10 - 1.5-2.0m (Soil) R Asbestos fines in soil 0.20187% w/w " TP6 W A Bonded ACM in soil 0.001% Y " TP12
TP1 - 1.0-1.5m (Soil) ! Asbestos fines in soil 0.00506% w/w
Bonded ACM in soil 0.018% " TP2 ! ! TP4 - 1.5-2.0m (Soil) ! " TP10 !BH111 ! " TP4 Asbestos fines in soil 0.0086% w/w HAMIL
TON STRE ! " " " TP11 ET " ! TP7 TP8 ! ! TP1 TP11 - 0.5-1.0m (Soil) W K BH112 !! E A Asbestos fines in soil 0.01180% w/w S Y T ST MW222 E R TP11 - 1.5-2.0m (Soil) R EE N " T Source: Esri, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, M Asbestos fines in soil 0.07749% w/w O " AEX, GeoEye, Getmapping, Aerogrid, T" " T " O E IGN, IGP, and the GIS User R E "W Community A " " R " " Y" " T BH112 !! S DUC K C ! *# H REE MW222 SED8 / SW8 T K R ! O TP134A W T Asbestos fragment detected MW222 - 0.15-0.25 m (Soil) N E TP134B Benzo(a)pyrene TEQ 4 mg/kg W Asbestos fragment detected T E Asbestos in soil detected E R SED8 - 0.0-0.1 m (Sediment) TP134C T S
Asbestos in sediment detected Y E !! BH113 Asbestos fragment detected H V Copper 120I mg/kg E TP134D I R T N Lead D 190 mg/kg TP135D E Asbestos fragment detected E E E D R Mercury S 0.3 mg/kg Asbestos in soil detected Asbestos fragment detected T U S Nickel R 37 mg/kg Asbestos in soil detected TP134E E S G Zinc 720 mg/kg E Asbestos fibre bundles detected R T M O E Benzo(a)pyreneA 1.4 mg/kg N E J *#HA223 S 2 G Total PAH 15 mg/kg N E Y S T !! BH114 O E N D E S 3 U R *# ! S C T HA225 T BH224 S K S R
" " E L TP134 C !! E L BH125 BH253 - 0.8-1.0 mR (Soil) !! BH122 T E A Asbestos in soil detectedE D MA N R K E T Asbestos fragment detected HA MW226 !! BH123
K S BH115 ! TR !! EE *# BH124 MW231 - 1.0-1.2 m (Soil) T HA227 !!" SED3 - 0.1-0.2 m (Sediment) " TP135 Asbestos in soil detected
S L BH228 ! Asbestos in sediment detected T E HA229 Asbestos fragment detected E *# T T S ACM R E E Text " T Test PitE Locations (GHD, 2013) E S !! R R BH126 BH228 - 0.7 m (Soil) T T Y S S PA C Asbestos fragment detected Groundwater Well Location (GHD,R 2014) R Y R D R AM R A R A O D E T T B SoilB Borehole Location (GHD, 2014) A RO R A A D H " Test Pit Location (GHD, 2014) BH250 !! BH136
! *# Hand Auger Location (GHD, 2014) Exceeds NEPM HIL C (Soil) BH230 BH116 ! Exceeds NEPM HIL D (Soil) !! BH253 SED4 / *# Sediment and Surface Water Location (GHD, 2014) MW231 *# SW4 Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQG - Low (Sediments) SED2 - 0.0-0.1 m (Sediment) DUC K RIVE
!! Geotechnical Groundwater Piezometer (RMS, 2014) Arsenic 20 mg/kg R Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQG - High (Sediments) ! ! Copper 85 mg/kg SED2 / Exceeds NEPM GIL Freshwater (Groundwater) *# SED3 / !! Geotechnical Soil Borehole (RMS, 2014) Lead 130 mg/kg SW2 ! *# SW3 Note: Concentrations of metals and some PAH are not Mercury 0.3 mg/kg " " Geotechnical Test Pit (RMS, 2014) presented for Surface Water and Groundwater Source: Esri, i-cubed, USDA,Zinc USGS, AEX,440 GeoEye, mg/kg Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community !!
LEGEND WestConnex Delivery Authority Job Number 21-23310 WestConnex M4 Widening Revision A 0 20 40 60 80 100 Lots / Cadastre Areas of Detected Asbestos Contamination Phase II Contamination Assessment Date 13 May 2014 Metres Potential Acid Sulphate Soils ! Potential Acid Sulphate Soil Detected (from laboratory analysis)
Map Projection: Transverse Mercator Waterways Sampling Locations and Results Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 56 Railway Section 2 and 3 Figure 3 G:\21\23310\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\21_23310_Z010_WESTCONNEX_InvestigationResults_Fig3.mxd Level 15, 133 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW 2000 T 61 2 9239 7100 F 61 2 9239 7199 E [email protected] W www.ghd.com.au 2010. While GHD has taken care to ensure the accuracy of this product, GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, cannot accept liability of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may be incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason. Data Source: NSW Department of Lands: Cadastre - Jan 2011; Geoscience Australia: 250k Data - Jan 2011, Imagery - ESRI. Created by: tnham DUCK RIVER TP01 - 0.4-0.5 (Soil), AECOM 2012 Ethylbenzene 2.3-3.6 mg/kg BH117 !! Total Xylene 1.2-2 mg/kg
BH232 TPH C6-C9 12 mg/kg BH232A ! T TPH C10-C40 140 mg/kg
BH233 TP01 )" E ! E TP01 - 0.8m (Soil), AECOM 2012 TP02 )" R T Methane 0%
TP03 )" S ! ! N ! BH118 )")")" O TP02 - 0.2-0.3 (Soil), AECOM 2012 Source: Esri, i-cubed,T USDA, W Ethylbenzene 2.6 mg/kg T C BH234 E E AR N Total Xylene 1.6 mg/kg E N R AR TPH C6-C9 14 mg/kg T VO MW235 S N T S 3 T S E TPH C10-C40 770 mg/kg T TR E E A EE R BH236 TP02 - 0.8m (Soil), AECOM 2012 R T T R S ! Methane 5-10% A R K S 4 O S T S TP03 - 0.5-0.6 (Soil), AECOM 2012 AS T QU U TPH C10-C40 580 mg/kg IT S H TP03 - 0.8m (Soil), AECOM 2012 ST RE Methane 10-19% ET
T E E R MW237 T BH236 - 2.4-2.6 m (Soil) S
N Asbestos fragment detected O B I E T A T C C O E N N E SF U R IE J T LD S S N TR O EE SH T T OR W T S E TR N EET
A DD ER LE ST W R E EE S T TE RN M DE OT AK W O IN E RW S T ST A TR E ER E E N E M T R O T T S O RW T A T A R T R E A BH238 E K R S TP125 BH241 - 0.1-0.2 m (Soil) T S BH239 !"!" BH121 Benzo(a)pyrene TEQ 4 mg/kg N O T L S L E BH240 M
T ! !! BH120 Groundwater Well Location (GHD, 2014) E " " E R BH241 TP126 T S Soil Borehole Location (GHD, 2014) S D BH242 A B B !! BH119 " Test Pit Location (GHD, 2014) O " " R U MW244 - 0.0-0.2 m (Soil) T TP127 D T A S E L *# A Asbestos fragment detected Hand Auger Location (GHD, 2014) E L O I R K H Benzo(a)pyrene TEQ 3 mg/kg R T IN I G K *# D S S Exceeds NEPM HIL C (Soil) Sediment and Surface WaterA Location (GHD,A 2014) TR E R E PA T ET Exceeds NEPM HIL D (Soil) RR S W A !! O M Geotechnical GroundwaterP PiezometerA (RMS, 2014) E A H R L U T IG M G L Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQG - Low (Sediments) TA *# HG A I N R HA243 A O
!! TE H LE E A
Geotechnical ST Soil Borehole (RMS, 2014) Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQG - High (Sediments)V D S ! RE T A ET R " EE Exceeds NEPM GIL Freshwater (Groundwater)R MW244 " Geotechnical Test Pit (RMS, 2014) T A M Note: Concentrations of metals and some PAH are notE *#HA245 A )" Test Pit Location (AECOM, 2012) R presented for Surface Water and Groundwater B Source: Esri, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, GeoEye, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
LEGEND WestConnex Delivery Authority Job Number 21-23310 Revision A 0 20 40 60 80 100 Lots / Cadastre Areas of Detected Asbestos Contamination WestConnex M4 Widening Phase II Contamination Assessment Date 09 May 2014 Metres Potential Acid Sulphate Soils ! Potential Acid Sulphate Soil Detected (from laboratory analysis)
Map Projection: Transverse Mercator Waterways Sampling Locations and Results Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 56 Railway Section 3 and 4 Figure 4 G:\21\23310\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\21_23310_Z011_WESTCONNEX_InvestigationResults_Fig4.mxd Level 15, 133 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW 2000 T 61 2 9239 7100 F 61 2 9239 7199 E [email protected] W www.ghd.com.au 2010. While GHD has taken care to ensure the accuracy of this product, GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, cannot accept liability of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may be incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason. Data Source: NSW Department of Lands: Cadastre - Jan 2011; Geoscience Australia: 250k Data - Jan 2011, Imagery - ESRI. Created by: tnham PE RK D D I R ID NS HA247 - 0.3 m (Soil) RI A A E KS V V U E EN E N Asbestos fragment detected N U L E AV E U V EN O A B U B S *# E E E D HA246 A E N C U O A
O U N T R ! N T S E N E G N F E IE E V IN O *# L V A K A HA247 D R W D T A S E H E D T S N ER R U T N L E L O N O E E L S T I E O P ST R V T RE E M A E H O T T T E H I L *# E T V HA248 P S W T S RO M " " TP137 T AV E EN CHARLTON AVENUE E U R W E T IN S G P A AR R A *#HA249 R I D O E E C R S 4 E R E O P E F U T N A E V E V N A B S 5 U E A E R K S U E E " " N T R TP138 LA A !! BH137 E R N VE V E E N A T A U O H VE E R E N ILE U MW252 " " TP101 E A E N VE NU O E *# J E E HA251 U U E D N N C D A E A E L A O V V A P O R A A R D " IN R D " TP102 T E E E K R E R R U E T LE N I H L T A *#HA254 A A E S J P A A W T L W R T R E A E R V R E E ET E E V E U NU E V IL R A E U IL S T E N S E S *#HA255 B V L " A IL " TP103 S D N A R E O E W R H O S T R E T E W E I E K L L R E I T E H S R T SED6 - 0.0-0.1 m (Sediment) S N C A W B E Asbestos in sediment detected S L S M D T A E A A R Cadmium 4.2 mg/kg N " " TP104 L O S R M Copper 89 mg/kg A S O T H R O Lead 240 mg/kg E R I T W Mercury 0.3 mg/kg L E A IL E H R Nickel 36 mg/kg T T S W Zinc 460 mg/kg S E S A T E Benzo(a)pyrene 1.3 mg/kg D R S L N Total PAH 12 mg/kg M O T T O E R Groundwater WellE Location (GHD, 2014) W R A !! BH129 EEK T MS CR S SED7 - 0.0-0.1 m (Sediment) SLA
*#HA256 HA Soil Borehole Location (GHD, 2014) ! C Lead 140 mg/kg R " E Nickel 32 mg/kg *#SED6 / SW6 Test Pit LocationP (GHD, 2014) Zinc 300 mg/kg ! *#SED7 / SW7 *# Hand Auger Location (GHD, 2014) Exceeds NEPM HIL C (Soil) Exceeds NEPM HIL D (Soil) *# PA Sediment and Surface Water Location (GHD, 2014) RR Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQG - Low (Sediments)AM AT !! Geotechnical Groundwater Piezometer (RMS, 2014) Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQG - High (Sediments)TA R " " TP105 OA !! Geotechnical Soil Borehole (RMS, 2014) Exceeds NEPM GIL Freshwater (Groundwater) D Note: Concentrations of metals and some PAH are not " " Geotechnical Test Pit (RMS, 2014) presented for Surface Water and Groundwater Source: Esri, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, GeoEye, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
LEGEND WestConnex Delivery Authority Job Number 21-23310 Revision A 0 20 40 60 80 100 Lots / Cadastre Areas of Detected Asbestos Contamination WestConnex M4 Widening Phase II Contamination Assessment Date 09 May 2014 Metres Potential Acid Sulphate Soils ! Potential Acid Sulphate Soil Detected (from laboratory analysis)
Map Projection: Transverse Mercator Waterways Sampling Locations and Results Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 56 Railway Section 4 and 5 Figure 5 G:\21\23310\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\21_23310_Z012_WESTCONNEX_InvestigationResults_Fig5.mxd Level 15, 133 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW 2000 T 61 2 9239 7100 F 61 2 9239 7199 E [email protected] W www.ghd.com.au 2010. While GHD has taken care to ensure the accuracy of this product, GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, cannot accept liability of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may be incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason. Data Source: NSW Department of Lands: Cadastre - Jan 2011; Geoscience Australia: 250k Data - Jan 2011, Imagery - ESRI. Created by: tnham " " TP107 UE EN AV " ER " TP128 AS ! FR !BH130 WN DA
D A ! O ! BH131 E R D L W L I I N H D OA F G R L RI A UH C K
A V BH257 E " " N U TP108 E W E S T E R N " " C M TP129 AR O TE TO " " TP109 R R BH258 S W TR A E E !! BH127 T " " TP130 " " " " " " " " TP110 " " " T " E E R T S E BH260 NU VE A A " " TP111 D B UL M O G O NE B A SH
" TP280 " " TP112 " TP281 BH261
E D " TP278 !! BH128 W I N " T TP277 F E L " TP279 E " A R " " TP113 TP276 C T PA S R K R MW259 I A M A H " TP275 A V L T E E T A N D R " TP274 O U A E T D E E " " " TP273 TP114 U E N R E T " V S TP272 T A M E IE E R N R S O R IM F T I L S B A T S A T E T " " R L TP115 S L E O E E P T C E I L R L T S T Groundwater Well Location (GHD, 2014)E E J S E N R O T T Soil Borehole Location (GHD, 2014) E M S W E ES D R T E E " N T RN Test Pit Location (GHD, 2014) E S U M T I N OT S L E OR *# Exceeds NEPM HILO C (Soil) O V W Hand Auger Location (GHD, 2014) P A A I L L Exceeds NEPM HIL D (Soil) L L E *# *# A HA262 " " Sediment and Surface Water Location (GHD, 2014) H TP116 G Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQG - Low (Sediments) C A !! Geotechnical Groundwater Piezometer (RMS, 2014) Exceeds ANZECC 2000 ISQG - High (Sediments) B !! Geotechnical Soil Borehole (RMS, 2014) Exceeds NEPM GIL Freshwater (Groundwater) " " TP117 Note: Concentrations of metals and some PAH are not *# " " HA263 Geotechnical Test Pit (RMS, 2014) presented for Surface Water and Groundwater Source: Esri, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, GeoEye, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
LEGEND WestConnex Delivery Authority Job Number 21-23310 Revision A 0 20 40 60 80 100 Lots / Cadastre Areas of Detected Asbestos Contamination WestConnex M4 Widening Phase II Contamination Assessment Date 09 May 2014 Metres Potential Acid Sulphate Soils ! Potential Acid Sulphate Soil Detected (from laboratory analysis)
Map Projection: Transverse Mercator Waterways Sampling Locations and Results Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 56 Railway Section 5 Figure 6 G:\21\23310\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\21_23310_Z013_WESTCONNEX_InvestigationResults_Fig6.mxd Level 15, 133 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW 2000 T 61 2 9239 7100 F 61 2 9239 7199 E [email protected] W www.ghd.com.au 2010. While GHD has taken care to ensure the accuracy of this product, GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, cannot accept liability of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may be incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason. Data Source: NSW Department of Lands: Cadastre - Jan 2011; Geoscience Australia: 250k Data - Jan 2011, Imagery - ESRI. Created by: tnham E U N E V A E K D C W A IN R U FL A D C H K A A R V E A N S U E
E E IV RIV DR D A A B H B SH US BU EB ME M HO HO
" " TP118
" " TP119 !! BH133 MW266 *# HA264 " " TP120 !! BH134 *#HA265 " " TP121 BH267 S 5 " " TP123 E !! BH135 MW269
TP268 )" " TP3 " TP271 " (! )" TP270 BH3 " TP1 " TP131 " " TP132 (! BH2
)"TP2 TP4 E S L U )"(! BH1 N E V A W W Groundwater Well Location (GHD, 2014) ES E A TE ST E R ER P E N N T M Soil Borehole Location (GHD, 2014) O U O M E T O L N O T E R O E E W R " T R A W V T Test Pit Location (GHD, 2014) D A A S A E I E O *# L R R P Hand Auger Location (GHD, 2014) A L A RK A F N R R L O OA E T D *# Sediment and Surface Water Location (GHD, 2014) U G O W N C I !! Exceeds NEPM HIL CD (Soil) M Geotechnical Groundwater Piezometer (RMS, 2014) A E O L Exceeds NEPM HILR D (Soil) F
!! E Geotechnical Soil Borehole (RMS, 2014) H V D I P Exceeds ANZECCG 2000 ISQG - Low (Sediments) AR A U R R A O " D M " Geotechnical Test Pit (RMS, 2014) Exceeds ANZECCO 2000 ISQG - High (Sediments) A R R TT A D O R R Exceeds NEPM GIL FreshwaterA (Groundwater) O R )" B A Test Pit Location (PB, 2012) L N D O F R E Note: Concentrations of metals and some PAH are not D A T N E (! M Borehole Location (PB, 2012) presented for Surface Water Eand Groundwater B C Source: Esri, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, GeoEye, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
LEGEND WestConnex Delivery Authority Job Number 21-23310 WestConnex M4 Widening Revision A 0 20 40 60 80 100 Lots / Cadastre Areas of Detected Asbestos Contamination Phase II Contamination Assessment Date 09 May 2014 Metres Potential Acid Sulphate Soils ! Potential Acid Sulphate Soil Detected (from laboratory analysis)
Map Projection: Transverse Mercator Waterways Sampling Locations and Results Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 56 Railway Section 5 Figure 7 G:\21\23310\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\21_23310_Z014_WESTCONNEX_InvestigationResults_Fig7.mxd Level 15, 133 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW 2000 T 61 2 9239 7100 F 61 2 9239 7199 E [email protected] W www.ghd.com.au 2010. While GHD has taken care to ensure the accuracy of this product, GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and DATA CUSTODIAN, cannot accept liability of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may be incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason. Data Source: NSW Department of Lands: Cadastre - Jan 2011; Geoscience Australia: 250k Data - Jan 2011, Imagery - ESRI. Created by: tnham