INFORMATION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT REPORTS
August 2007
VICTORIA'S AUDIT SYSTEM AUDIT REPORT CURRENCY An environmental audit system has operated in Audit reports are based on the conditions encountered Victoria since 1989. The Environmenf Profecfion Acf and information reviewed at the time of preparation 1970 (the Act) provides for the appointment by the and do not represent any changes that may have Environment Protection Authority (EPA Victoria) of occurred since the date of completion. As it is not environmental auditors and the conduct of possible for an audit to present all data that could be independent, high quality and rigorous environmental of interest to all readers, consideration should be audits. made to any appendices or referenced documentation An environmental audit is an assessment of the for further information. condition of the environment, or the nature and extent When information regarding the condition of a site of harm (or risk of harm) posed by an industrial changes from that at the time an audit report is process or activity, waste, substance or noise. issued, or where an administrative or computation Environmental audit reports are prepared by EPA- error is identified, environmental audit reports, appointed environmental auditors who are highly certificates and statements may be withdrawn or qualified and skilled individuals. amended by an environmental auditor. Users are Under the Act, the function of an environmental advised to check EPA's website to ensure the currency auditor is to conduct environmental audits and of the audit document. prepare environmental audit reports. Where an environmental audit is conducted to determine the PDF SEARCHABILITY AND PRINTING condition of a site or its suitability for certain uses, an environmental auditor may issue either a certificate or EPA Victoria can only certify the accuracy and statement of environmental audit. correctness of the audit report and appendices as presented in the hardcopy format. EPA is not A certificate indicates that the auditor is of the opinion responsible for any issues that arise due to problems that the site is suitable for any beneficial use defined with PDF files or printing. in the Act, whilst a statement indicates that there is some restriction on the use of the site. Except where PDF normal format is specified, PDF files are scanned and optical character recognised by Any individual or organisation may engage appointed machine only. Accordingly, while the images are environmental auditors, who generally operate within consistent with the scanned original, the searchable the environmental consulting sector, to undertake hidden text may contain uncorrected recognition environmental audits. The EPA administers the errors that can reduce search reliability. Therefore, environmental audit system and ensures its ongoing keyword searches undertaken within the document integrity by assessing auditor applications and may not retrieve all references to the queried text. ensuring audits are independent and conducted with regard to guidelines issued by EPA. This PDF has been created using the Adobe-approved method for generating Print Optimised Output. To assure proper results, proofs must be printed, rather AUDIT FILES STRUCTURE than viewed on the screen. Environmental audit reports are stored digitally by This PDF is compatible with Adobe Acrobat Reader EPA in three parts: the audit report (part A), report Version 4.0 or any later version which is downloadable appendices (part B) and, where applicable, the free from Adobe's Website, www.adobe.com. certificate or statement of environmental audit and an executive summary (part C). A report may be in colour FURTHER I N FORMATION and black-and-white formats. Generally, only black- and-white documents are text searchable. For more information on Victoria's environmental Report executive summaries, findings and audit system, visit EPA's website or contact EPA's recommendations should be read and relied upon only Environmental Audit Unit. in the context of the document as a whole, including Web: www.epa.vic.clov.au/envaudit any appendices and, where applicable, any certificate Email: [email protected] or statement of environmental audit.
1 of 26 0
Department of Defence November 1994
Environmental Audit Report:
North-East Section of Broadmeadows Army Camp
SINCIAIR KNIGHT MER2
2 of 26 SlNClAlR KNIGHT MERZ
222 Kingsway South Melbourne VIC Australia 3205 Telephone: (03) 685 3100 Facsimile: (03) 690 6846
Dr J B Robinson 7 November 1994 Chair man Environment Protection Authority Olderfleet Buildings 477 Collins Street MELBOURNE VIC 3000
Attention: Dr Jeff Bazelmans
Dear Dr Robinson
ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT REPORT AND CERTIFICATE: NORTH EAST SECTION OF BROADMEADOWS ARMY CAMP
On 3 October 1994, I wrote to advise you of my engagement by Mr G Rundell of Hassell Planning Consultants on behalf of the Department of Defence to conduct an environmental audit of land in the north-east section of the Broadmeadows Army Camp.
An environmental assessment program has been completed by Golder Associates Pty Ltd.
The environmental audit of this site has now been completed. I attach the environmental audit report, prepared in accordance with Section 57AA of the Environment Protection-Act 1970.
On the basis of my evaluation of site conditions as described in the audit report, I am of the opinion that the assessment program for the site has demonstrated compliance with appropriate soil criteria. Redevelopment of this site for feasible sensitive uses, including residential, may proceed without significant risk of detriment to human health or the environment.
Sinclair Kni ht Merz Pty. Limited. A.C.N. 001 024 095 PrinCW J K Zight (Chief Executjve). E W Aslaksen. D Barnes. L M Black R E Brayshaw. P A Cassell. A J Condon. J E Curran. B T Dadd, A K Davie. P P hgas. P J A Duffy. T L Fiedler. A J Gale, R A Graham AB Harper M E K Holden I W Housley. D Howarth. P Huckerby. D LA Hunter, G S Eatari. F W Kellermann. J M Kelb’. S C Linforth. 1 R Maitland. D H Mathlin N M Mayo L A Mdseley C J Moss P E Oliver C C Popple R F Pryor M A Read G R Rees, E D Robertson, G E Sharpley, P D Shaw. A B Sinclair ‘AM (Consuihant). R L Smih, 0 F &cy. J Stapieton. R A Stkele. M H thomas AM: I M Thompson. S K Tonkin-Hill. W R Toohey, J C Tranter. P W Vau han J E D Winton R D Winton T C Winton K M Young D 0 Zines #es C P Adam. T J Addison. J J Alban. L Appelgren. R Eiarciay. P A Eaudikh. T J Eoyl;. K W Er&. G E Eullod!~. P C Eurnen. J R Buttenshaw. IJ Carrabm. N L H Case. G Chapple J Chute M Clarke P J Cooper, J H Crossley W L Currey de Vries P V DiM K L Dobrich J L E S D J Campanya R M Dusting, R J Emslie. B J Ftts. T H Fbx. V J Freich. P W Gib& J C Green, P C Griffin. k L Halloran, ‘T S Hanson. P J Heath, G M E R F Hewin: ASJ~~IC A E Jelley. F M Kavana h, C C L Kell. D E Kennedy E T Kettle D J Kilsby D L Kinder J Kirkland G W Layton K R Levey G R Lewis M J Mahon wdrmA W Maltby. L A Mhs. R% Morrison. G F Mullen. C J Needham. jM Nichols.’H D Pain, A’M Prince, I C Purcell. G i Richardso;, K Robinsdn, P Robson: R J Rootsey. M A Simpson. R J Taylor. R G Turland. J M Waugh. W VWight. M Young, K K-C Yuen. R M Zauner 3 of 26 Accordingly, I have issued a Certificate of Environmental Audit for the site, a copy of which is attached with the audit report. The plan attached to the certificate shows the bwndaries of the site subject to the audit and certification.
Should you require any further information, please contact me on 685 3128.
Yours faithfully
R A GRAHAM Environmental Auditor cc. Mr G Rundell, Hassell Planning Consultants Mr P Thornton, Golder Associates
Enclosure
Page 2
4 of 26 J
ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION ACT 1970 SECTION 57AA CERTIFICATE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT SITE AT NORTH EAST SECTION OF BROADMEADOWS ARMY CAMP
I, RICHARD ALAN GRAHAM, of LEVEL 5,222 KINGSWAY, SOUTH MELBOURNE, VICTORIA, 3205, a person appointed by the Environment Protection Authority ("the Authority") under the Environment Protection Act 1970 ("the Act") as an environmental auditor for the purposes of the Act, having:
1. been requested by Mr G Rundell of Hassell Planning Consultants, acting on behalf of the Department of Defence, to issue a certificate of environmental audit in relation to an area of land comprising the north-east section of the Broadmeadows Army Camp, shown shaded on the attached plan;
2. had regard to, amongst other things,
(9 guidelines issued by the Authority for the purposes of section 57AA of the Act;
(ii) guidelines endorsed by the Authority for the assessment and management of contaminated land;
(iii) the beneficial uses that may be made of the land at the site; and
(W relevant State environment protection policieshndustrial waste management policies, namely the State environment protection policy W-29 (Waters of the Yarra River and Tributaries) and the State environment protection policy (The Air Environment);
in making a total assessment of the nature and extent of any harm or detriment caused to, or the risk of any possible harm or detriment which may be caused to, any beneficial use made of the relevant segment at the site by any industrial- process or activity, waste or substance (including any chemical substance); and
3. completed an environmental audit report in accordance with section 57AA(2) of the Act, a copy of which has been sent to the Authority.
HEREBY CERTIFY that I am of the opinion that the condition of that part of the land at the site which is shaded on the attached plan is neither detrimental nor potentially detrimental to any beneficial use of the land at the site. DATE: 7 /ud-?GE-- /9?4
SIGNED: ITOR (CONTAMINATED LAND)
SINCtAIRKNIGHrMERz RAG.mbmSv501200.a04 2/11/94
5 of 26 LEGEND
v74 Site subject to environmental \ audit I1 I I111 ))((I Ill I Ill I I1
6 of 26 :hecked PN.T Department of Defence November 1994
Environmental Audit Report:
North-East Section of Broadmeadows Army Camp
Sinclair Knight Men Pty Ltd A.C.N. 001 024 095 222 Kingsway South Melbourne VIC Australia 3205 Telephone: (03) 685 3100 Facsimile: (03) 690 6846
COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Sinclair Knight Men Pty Ltd. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Sinclair Knight Men Pty Ltd constitutes an infringement of copyright. 7 of 26 1. Audit Details Name of Environmental Auditor: Richard Alan Graham
Date of Appointment as an Environmental Audit (Contaminated Land) under the Environment Protection Act 1970: 19 January 1993
Name of Person making the request for a Certificate of Environmental Audit: Mr G Rundell of Hassell Planning Consultants, on behalf of the Department of Defence
Address of the Audited Site: Land comprising the north- east section of the Broadmeadows Army Camp as shown shaded on Figure 1 - Locallty Plan (Melways ref: Map 7, D6).
Completion date of the Environmental Audit: 31 October 1994
Documentation reviewed during the conduct of this audit: Refer to Appendix A.
5~501200.a02.RAG:mbm:7/11/94 1 8 of 26
-~~ - __ ~__ LEGEND r7A Site subject to environmental audit
3ase map derived from Yeivay flap 7. Edition 18 (large size1
'roje;: No 93612256. I Sczle 1: 16000 I Figure 1 - Audit Site Locality Plan >rCwr. i acre. F.O'C. ! 11/10/93 (from Golder Associates 1994~Figure 1) 9 of 26 I :ntcuec: P.N.T. I 3evisec i 2. Introduction 2.1 Background
The land which is the subject of this environmental audit is an irregular shaped area of land, approximately 30 hectares in area, comprising the north-east part of the Broadmeadows Army Camp. The audit site is bounded by; warehouses, a flammable liquids store and other associated buildings on the developed part of the Army Camp to the south and west; vacant land within the Camp to the north-west; a golf course on the Camp property to the south; a railway line and associated reserved land, and industrial land beyond the railway line, to the east; and developed residential land to the north.
The location of the audit site is shown in Figure 1 - Audit Site Locality Plan.
The land currently forms part of the Broadmeadows Army Camp under the ownership of the Department of Defence. The army is consolidating its operations into the southern part of the Camp complex. As a result, the northern part of the site including the audit site and other areas to the south and west of the audit site (including the warehouses) will become surplus to requirements.
The Department has commissioned a team of consultants lead by Hassell Planning Consultants to develop plans and a program for rezoning, sale and redevelopment of these areas.
As part of this process, Golder Associates has conducted a staged site contaminated assessment for the northern part of the camp, including the audit site (Golder Associates 1994a, 1994b, 1994~).
It was determined that a statutory environmental audit under the Environment Protection Act 1970 would be undertaken as part of the redevelopment planning process.
In accordance with Environment Protection Authority (EPA) guidelines (EPA 1992a) an environmental auditor who is independent of the . assessment consultants was engaged.
Hassell Planning Consultants (on behalf of the Department of Defence) engaged Mr Richard Graham under Section 57AA of the Environment Protection Act 1970 (the Act) to complete an audit of the site. On 3 October 1994, Mr Graham notified the EPA of this engagement.
The EPA has not issued a clean-up notice or exercised any other formal control over the site. The site is not listed on the State Register of
SNCLAlR KNIGHT hERZ 5~501200.aM.RAG:rnbm:7/11/94 2 10 of 26 Confirmed Contaminated Sites.
2.2 Objectives of the Environmental Audit
The statutory environmental audit process for contaminated land is described in Section 57Mof the Act, in EPA guidelines (EPA 1992a, 1992b) and the Minister’s Direction No. 1 (Department of Planning and Housing 1992). The audit process is intended to be applied to land formerly used for industrial or related purposes which is proposed to be redeveloped for a sensitive use such as residential.
The environmental assessment and audit process for the north-east section of the Broadmeadows Army Camp was generally consistent with EPA guidelines, although the land which is subject to the audit is not known to have been used for industrial or similar uses.
The overall objective of the audit process is to facilitate a change in landuse of a contaminated or potentially contaminated site in a controlled manner while protecting human health and environmental quality. The specific objectives of this audit were:
To audit the status of the site in accordance with Section 57AA of the Act.
To prepare an environmental audit report and issue a Certificate (or Statement) of Environmental Audit as appropriate, depending on the contamination status of the land.
To provide assurances to the present site owners (Department of Defence), the planning authority, prospective developers, purchasers, occupants and the nearby community that redevelopment of the site may proceed without endangering human health or environmental quality; and
To provide an independent evaluation of the site conditions and potential risks to health or the environment and of the suitability of the site for proposed future uses.
2.3 Activities of the Environmental Auditor
During the environmental audit, the auditor conducted a number of activities to ensure that these objectives were met, including: inspection of the site on 26 August 1994; o discussions with representatives of Hassell Planning Consultants and Golder Associates (assessment consultants for the site); review of all available relevant documentation including the site assessment reports, government agency policies and guidelines. A full list of documents reviewed is provided in Appendix A - List of
SWRKMGHl MWZ SvSO1200.aM.RAG:mbm:7/11/94 3 11 of 26 Documents Reviewed; critical review of the quality and completeness of the environmental site assessment reports and verification of the assessor’s conclusions; and preparation of this report of the environmental audit in support of a decision to issue a Certificate of Environmental Audit for the site.
SNCLAlR KNlGHl MERZ 5v501200.a02RAG:rnbm:7/11/94 4 12 of 26 3. Site Characteristics \ 3.1 Site Description and History
The site subject to this environmental audit is approximately 30 hectares in area, comprising the north-east section of the Broadmeadows Army Camp (as shown on Figure 1).
The current site owner is the Department of Defence. The history of Army Camp site use is outlined in the reports by Golder Associates (1994a and 1994~).In brief summary, the site history is:
Rural use prior to 1914. Occupation by the Australian Army since 1914, and use for troop training, accommodation, administration, stores/warehousing, horse agistment. The area of the site subject to this audit has not contained structures or been subject to use other than horse grazing. Aerial photographs of the audit site show a grid pattern of firebreaks created by cutting of grass. The Golders' reports suggest some possibility of minor rubbish and waste dumping on the audit site but no firm evldence emerged to support this possibility.
The audit site is generally flat to undulating and contains a flora community reported to be of state significance (Ecology Australia 1993). The Grey Box Grassy Woodland in the north-east part of the Army Camp site is highly modified but examples of this type of vegetation on basalt are now regionally uncommon.
3.2 Potential Contamination Sources
From the available site history information, there appear to be very few potential sources of soil or groundwater contamination on the audit site:
Contamination Source Potential Contaminant
Rubbish or waste dumping Metals, asbestos or various other contaminants. Weed or pest control Organochlorine pesticides. Asbestos used in roofing material on the adjacent warehouse site Asbestos
3.3 Geology and Hydrogeology
The geology and hydrogeology of the area are briefly outlined in the Golder Associates reports (1994a, 1994c).
The Geological Survey of Victoria Sunbury Mapsheet indicates that the site is underlain with Quaternary Age basalt of the Newer Volcanics
Sv501200.a02.RAG:mbm:7/11/94 5 13 of 26 characteristic of the western plains geology.
The soils observed during the site assessments were consistent with this geology, being typically high plasticity, silty clays or clayey silts of basaltic origin (to at least the 0.5 m depths encountered during the assessments).
Bores in the vicinity, in particular on the former City of Broadmeadows landfill site adjacent to the south-east corner of the Army Camp indicate that the regional groundwater table is at 7 to 12 metres below the surface and that the groundwater flow direction is to the south.
Groundwater is moderately saline, non-potable and probably unsuitable for irrigation and stock watering. No groundwater was encountered at the relatively shallow borehole depths (to 0.5 m) of the site assessments.
The site is within the Yarra River catchment. Merlynston Creek, a tributory of Merri Creek, flows along the western boundary of the Army Camp site.
SNCLAlR KMGHl MERZ Sv501200.aM.RAG:mbm:7/11/94 6 14 of 26
~ 4. Review of Site Assessments 4.1 Introduction
Between September 1993 and July 1994 a staged site contamination assessment was conducted by Golder Associates. The program is described in Golder Associates reports (1994a, 1994b and 1994~).A brief summary of the assessments, with comments from the auditor's review is provided below.
4.2 Initial Assessment - September 1993
An initial contamination assessment was conducted in September 1993 (and reported in Golder Associates 1994a), comprising:
0 A broad assessment of the northern area of the Army Camp, of which the audit site is part.
0 Soil sampling on an approximate 125 x 125 metre grid on the audit site. /
0 Soil samples obtained from near-surface (0 - 0.1 m) at 21 locations on the audit site and from 0.4 - 0.5 m depth at four locations on the audit site. Sampling locations are shown on Figure 2 - Soil Sampling Locations.
0 Observations of soil conditions (including visual and odours), logging of bores and screening of all soil samples for volatile hydrocarbons using a photoionisation detector (PID).
0 Laboratory analysis of seven 3-way composite samples made up of the near-surface soil samples (0 - 0.1 m) and two 2-way composites made up of deeper (0.4 - 0.5 m) samples:
- pH, metals (arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, zinc), total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), and total phenolics were tested in all surface and deeper soil composites.
- organochlorine (OC) pesticides were tested in all surface soil composites.
- polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) were tested in two near surface composites and the two deeper soil composites.
- asbestos in two surface individual sampels.
0 Analysis was conducted by WSL Consultants Pty Ltd with quality control check analyses by Analabs.
SWRKMGHlMERZ SvSOl200.aM.RAG:mbm:7/11/94 7 15 of 26 LEGEND
CURRENT SAMPLING LOCATIONS.
0 Id Test location - Report 94612235108
PREVIOUS SAflPLlNG LOCATIONS,
Test Pit location.- Report 93612256 1106.
Test location - sample near surface.- Report 936122561106
Test location -sample near surface and about 0.h J Report 93612256l106
0. I Test location (Sample No.] - sample near surface - Report 94612041105. Li-IIIII-1 cn h1 h1 Auger Hole location (Sample No's1 - samples near suFface and about O.4m Report 94612041105 r/l - W
Fill and Waste - mead and levelled. x 55 IO1 Flammable Store.
Dumped Fill - not sjread.
?ossible buried waste. .*
Area to be Audited.
..
0 9 (11) .. -&.AH2 (7.31 - - I I------GOLF COURSE I I FORMER BROADMEAOOWS COUNCIL LANOF ILL i I I I
Project No.: Scale: 94612235 1 : 5000 Figure 2 Soil Sampling Locations Drawn: Date: - F .ox. 22 10 194 (from Golder Associates 1994c. Fiaure 2) Checked: Revised: -. .- I 16 of 26 4.3 Stage 2 Assessment - July 1994
In July 1994, results of the initial assessment were made available to the environmental auditor for review along with a proposed Work Plan for a more detailed Stage 2 assessment of the audit site (Golder Associates 1994b).
The auditor advised Golder Associates that 'the proposed additional assessment is considered adequate to provide data for completion of the audit'.
The Stage 2 assessment was conducted in accordance with the Work Plan, comprising;
0 Soil sampling on an approximate 85 x 85 metre grid across the site as well as along the north west and east site boundaries.
0 Soil samples were obtained at near-surface (0 - 0.1 m) and 0.4 - 0.5 m depths at 30 locations shown as L1 to L30 on Figure 2 - Soil Sampling Locations.
0 Soil samples were obtained at two depths from a background location near Merlynston Creek to the south-west of the Army Camp (shown as AH32 on Figure 1).
0 Observations, borelogs and PID screening as in the initial assessment.
0 Laboratory analysis by WSL Consultants, with quality control analyses by Analabs, for a range of potential contaminants of concern.
0 The analysis program comprised:
- ten surface and seven depth composite samples (3-way) were analysed for pH, metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, Hg, Zn), TPH and phenolics.
- ten of the composites were also analysed for the metals antimony, beryllium, cobalt, molybdenum, nickel, selenium and tin and PAHs, and twelve composites for OC pesticides.
- five individual samples were analysed for monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene, or BTEX) and chlorinated hydrocarbons.
- ten individual samples were analysed for asbestos.
SWRKMGHl MER2 5vSO1200.aM.RAG:mbm:7/11/94 8
17 of 26 ~~ - the surface and depth background samples were analysed for all indicators (except asbestos).
- elutriation tests for seven metals to assess the potential contaminant mobility through leaching.
- speciation tests for chromium comprising analysis for CrVl (as well as Crlll) on nine samples.
4.4 Summary of Assessment Data
The auditor has reviewed the analytical data from the initial assessment and the Stage 2 assessment. The data are summarised in Table 1 - Summary of Soil Analysis Data.
The data summary shows that the site does not contain significant contamination which exceeds the thresholds of potential concern for health or environmental effects, taken to be the Australian or Dutch B guidelines.
Golder Associates adopted a conservative approach in data assessment. Where composite sample data exceeded the 6 threshold divided by the number of samples in the composite (to allow for possible effects of dilution of a single sample high concentration in compositing), individual samples comprising the composite were analysed.
No data exceeded the B thresholds of potential concern for health effects, for those contaminants for which health guidelines exist.
Only isolated samples exceeded the B'threshold of potential concern for environmental effects for chromium and copper. Nine samples were also analysed for hexavalent chromium (CrVI), the more potentially toxic form of chromium. All results were recorded < 10 mglkg, indicating that Cr is present predominantly as the less toxic Crlll. The chromium results reflect background concentrations in the basalt-derived soils of the area, which typically have chromium concentrations of over 100 mglkg. The chromium concentrations in off-site background samples were 64 and 69 mg/kg, that is above the B threshold and comparable to the highest results recorded in on-site samples.
Only one composite sample result exceeded the B threshold for copper. (68 mgkg compared to 60 mgkg). Analysis results for the individual samples comprising the composite were all less than the B threshold, suggesting that the composite result was not representative.
SNCWRKMGHTMWZ 5v501200.a02RAG:mbm:7/11/94 9
18 of 26 Table 1 - Summary of Soil Analysis Data %of Samples NoSamples Concentration B level Exceed,ng Analysed(1) Range(2) Guidelines(3) Level Met&: Arsenic 29 0.2 - 4.2 20/la, 0% Cadmium 26 8.2- 0.6 3/20 0% Chromium 53 5.4 - 75 50 6% cobalt 20 8.3 - 34 50 0% copper 29 3.8 - 68 co 3% Lead 29 7.6 - 45 m/m 0% M€fCUly 26 all 8.1 1 0% Nickel 22 8.8 - 58 63 0% Zinc 29 10 - 81 ;Do 0% other Met&) 11 each Mms Mrlous 0% PH: a-c9 26 ana0 100 0% C10 - C14 26 alla C15 - C28 26 an60 0% C29-a 25 all 60 1loa, rvux-i @W: lndivklual 5 all 8.5 1 to5 0% Total 5 CdlQ 7 0% PAH: lndivklual 21 all 8.5 1 0% Total 21 dd al 0% cc Pesticides: Dieldrfn 12 all 8.1 0.2 0% other 12 all 8.1 0.5 each 0% Total CC 12 an c1 1 0% phenols 32 8.cQ- 0.05 1 total 0% c?lkMmted 5 a0 85 leach 0% Hyb- Asbestos 10 not detected nla PH 26 5.4 - 7.9 n/a
Note: (1) based on both composite and individual soil sample data frcm both 0 - 0.1 m and 0.4 - 0.5 m depths (2) all results in mgkg dry wegM sdl. except pH (3) ANZECCiNHMRC (1992) or Dutch I3 guidelines used. Numbers are environmental guidelines except Second numbers of a pair and PAH guidelines which are health-based guidelines. 0 level guideline cited for individual PAH is benzo(a)pyrene.
(4) other metal analytes in 'EPA screen' ie. antimony, beryllium. molybdenum. selenium and tin.
SWRKNlGHl MBlz 5~501200.a02.RAG:mbm:7/11/94 10 19 of 26 4.5 Quality AssurancelQuality Control
The auditor's comments on the quality assurancelquality control aspects of the environmental assessment program are provided below:
0 Golder Associates' reports contain an outline of field sampling procedures. On this basis it appears that proper quality control measures were observed during field work (including equipment washing) and sample handling and transportation stages.
The design of the sampling and analysis program was sound and the Stage 2 program incorporated all suggestions made by the auditor.
Field observations and decision making in regard to sampling and analysis, including the use of a photoionisation detector (PID), were appropriate.
The laboratories used in both stages of the assessment (WSL Consultants Pty Ltd as the primary laboratory and Analabs as the secondary (QC) laboratory) are reputable, experienced laboratories with NATA registration for the analyses conducted. Recognised analytical methods (predominantly Victorian EPA or US EPA methods) were used.
0 The assessment report included certified laboratory reports for all analyses performed including quality control testing. The primary laboratory (WSL) conducted adequate in-house duplicate analyses and spike recovery tests on a range of organic and inorganic contaminants.
0 The level of agreement between duplicate analysis data pairs, and the results of spike recovery tests are generally good and give confidence in the reliability of the data generated in the program.
0 The inter-laboratory duplicate analysis program was limited in scope but adequate for the purpose, with the normally accepted 5 - 10% of samples being analysed for selected contaminants (mainly metals) in duplicate by the second laboratory.
Analysis of a washwater sample did not detect contaminants, indicating confidence in the equipment washing protocols.
Off-site background samples were taken for analysis from a location considered reasonably representative of local uncontaminated (and unfilled) conditions.
I O The auditor concludes that proper procedures and methods appear
~ SlNcWRKMGHlMwz 5~5012rn.aM.RAG:mbm:7/11/94 11 20 of 26 to have been generally followed in both stages of the assessment program. The data generated are considered to be sufficiently reliable for the decision-making process undertaken, based on the analytical data.
SURKMGHlMwz 5vSO1200.a02.RAG:mbm:7/11/94 12 21 of 26 5. Health and Environmental Effects This section comments on the hazards and levels of risk potentially arising from the condition of the site subject to this environmental audit. Potential effects on the health of future occupants, users or neighbours of the site as well as effects on the on-site or off-site environment are considered.
5.1 Health Risk Assessment
The site assessment data discussed in Section 4 indicate that soil quality complies with threshold levels of potential concern (B level guidelines) for human health effects for those contaminants for which Australian health guidelines exist (lead, arsenic, cadmium and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) (ANZECWNHMRC 1992). For other contaminants, the detected concentrations are well below levels of potential concern based on acceptable daily intakes (WHO 1987, 1989) or other risk considerations.
It is concluded that soils on the site do not present a risk to the health of future site occupants under any feasible site use.
5.2 Environmental Risk Assessment
Phytotoxic Effects The concentrations of soil contaminants presenting a potential environmental hazard were predominantly below thresholds of concern. Samples in a small number of isolated locations exceeded the B level thresholds of potential environmental concern for chromium and copper. These B levels are in most cases based on potential phytotoxic effects on some sensitive plant species. A site-specific environmental risk assessment has not been conducted and is not justified in this case. It is concluded that the contamination status of the site does not present a significant risk of phytotoxic effects.
Groundwater As noted in Section 3.3 of this report, the groundwater in this location is likely to be at depth greater than would be normally accessed during feasible site uses and the aquifer is unlikely to be suitable for domestic or irrigation use. No water table was intercepted during excavation on site to a depth of about 0.5 metres during the assessment programs.
Elutriation tests were conducted for seven metals on selected soil samples and the results show that the metals are relatively immobile and non-leachable.
The very low contaminant concentrations in site soils and the expected depth of natural soil above the water table further suggest that there is negligible risk of groundwater contamination resulting from present site conditions.
Sv5012OO.aM.RAG:mbrn:7/11/94 13
22 of 26 Su dace Waters This site is immediately east of Merlynston Creek which is a tributary of Merri Creek and in the Yarra River catchment. The beneficial uses, water quality objectives and attainment program to maintain appropriate water quality for surface waters in this catchment are set out in the State Environment Protection Policy for the Waters of the Yarra River and Tributaries (Vic.Govt. 1984).
The low contaminant concentrations in site soils suggest that the site will have negligible potential for contamination of surface waters via runoff or leaching of contaminants into drainage systems.
The site is flat and has a consistent cover of grass and some trees. The site is not prone to water or wind erosion in its present condition. Appropriate measures should be taken during future construction to control sediment in surface run-off.
Air Quality At present, the site has no potential to contribute to air pollution since; no volatile contaminants were detected in site soils: and the site has a healthy grass cover and it has at the surface relatively tightly compacted clayey soils.
The relevant government policy is the State Environment Protection Policy for the Air Environment (Vic.Govt. 1981). This policy does not specifically address short-term, diffuse effects such as construction site dust or contaminant emissions from diffuse non-point sources. However, the present condition of the site presents no risk to compliance with the policy’s air quality objectives or protection of the beneficial uses of the air environment. Some potential for air pollution may arise by dust generation during future construction activity. Appropriate measures to control construction site dust in future should be taken.
Aesthetic Effects The environmental auditor inspected the site during the assessment program. The aesthetic characteristics of soils on site do not present any constraint on future site development and use.
No evidence of visual contamination, waste deposition or odours was found during the assessment program.
23 of 26 6. Conclusions From the evaluation of the site contamination assessment program for the north-east section of the Broadmeadows Army Camp, described in this report, the environmental auditor is of the opinion that:
(a) The site sampling and analysis design and data assessment procedures adopted by the environmental assessment consultants, Golder Associates, were a satisfactory basis for the characterisation of contaminant levels in soils on the site.
(b) Approved sampling and analytical procedures were used by Golder Associates and the analytical laboratories, WSL and Analabs. In particular, the initial assessment and the Stage 2 assessment of site soil conditions together used a sufficient number of samples to characterise soil quality.
(c) The QNQC program undertaken was reasonably comprehensive and satisfactory for the nature of the assessment.
(d) The soil quality data for site soils showed that the concentrations of potential contaminants are generally below threshold levels of concern recommended by the Environment Protection Authority, in . particular ANZECC/NHMRC (1992) B threshold levels for potential health or environmental effects.
(e) The very small number of isolated instances of exceedance of 6 thresholds for potential environmental effects (for chromium and copper) are not considered significant in the context of the total site and the available analytical database. The data is considered to represent background conditions. No evidence of contamination as a result of past activity or use of the site was found.
(f) The condition of the audit site presents no significant risk of adverse health or amenity effects on future users of the site or surrounding areas, or of adverse effects on the air, groundwater or surface water environments.
(9) The site is suitable for redevelopment for a range of potential uses, including sensitive low density residential use. Accordingly, the environmental auditor has issued a Certificate of Environmental Audit for the site in accordance with Section 57AA of the Environment Protection Act 1970. A copy of the Certificate is attached to this report.
Sv501200.a02RAG:mbrn:7/11/94 15
24 of 26 Appendix A - List of Documents Reviewed
0 Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council/National Health and Medical Research Council (1992). Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for the Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sites.
0 Department of Planning and Housing Victoria (1992). Minister’s Direction No. 1: Potentially Contaminated Land. As amended 14 May 1992.
0 Ecology Australia (1993) Flora and Fauna Survey, November 1993.
0 Environment Protection Authority of Victoria (1991). Off-site Disposal of Contaminated Soil. EPA Information Bulletin WM91lOl.
0 Environment Protection Authority of Victoria (1992a). Environmental Audit System: Contaminated Land, Explanatory Notes. EPA Publication No. WM90/04, as revised May 1992.
0 Environment Protection Authority of Victoria (1992b). Guidelines for Environmental Auditors: Contaminated Land/lssue of Certificates of Environmental Audit. EPA Publication No. WM91/14, May 1992.
0 Golder Associates (1994a). Initial Site Contamination Assessment, Army Camp, Broadmeadows, Victoria. Report No. 93612256/106 to Hassell Pty Ltd, June 1994.
0 Golder Associates (1994b). Draft Work Plan: Environmental Audit, North-Eastern Part Army Camp, Broadmeadows, Victoria. Report No. 94612235/02, July 1994.
0 Golder Associates (1994c). Environmental Audit North-Eastern Part of Army Camp, Broadmeadows, Victoria. Report No. 94612235/08 to Department of Defence/Hassell Pty Ltd, October 1994.
0 Victorian Govt. (1981). State Environment Protection Policy (The Air Environment). Victorian Government Gazette, 13 July 1981 (and subsequent amendments).
0 Victorian Govt. (1984). State Environment Protection Policy No. W-29 (Waters of the Yarra River and Tributaries). Victorian Government Gazette, 17 April 1984.
0 World Health Organisation, 1987. Environmental Health Criteria 70. Principles for the safety assessment of food additives and contaminants in food. International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) in cooperation with the Joint FAONHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). Geneva: World Health Organisation.
SURKNiGlil MER2 5~5Q1200.a02RAG:mbm:7/11/94 16 25 of 26 World Health Organisation, 1989. Evaluation of certain food additives and contaminants. Thirty-third report of the Joint FAONHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. World. Health Organisation Technical Report Series 776. Geneva: World Health Organisation.
5~501200.aO2.RAG:rnbm:7/11/94 17
26 of 26