SUBSURFACE MANAGEMENT PLAN HELENA EAST PRECINCT … · re: subsurface management plan, helena east...

ENVIPERT00147AA_Management Plans_ 013_JL_V3

Written/Submitted by: Reviewed/Approved by:

Justin Lumsden

Associate Environmental

Scientist

Claire Stewart

Senior Environmental Geologist

SUBSURFACE MANAGEMENT PLAN

HELENA EAST PRECINCT

FORMER MIDLAND RAILWAY

WORKSHOPS

MIDLAND, WA

Prepared for:

Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority Railway Institute Building Corner Helena East and Yelverton Drive MIDLAND WA 6056

Report Date: 16 July 2012 Project Ref: EP2009/140, V3

ENVIPERT00147AA_Management Plans_ 013_JL_V3

16 July 2012

Environmental Resource Management

PO Box 7338

Cloisters Square

PERTH WA 6850

Attention: Jeremy Hogben

Dear Jeremy

RE: SUBSURFACE MANAGEMENT PLAN, HELENA EAST PRECINCT, FORMER MIDLAND

RAILWAY WORKSHOPS

Please find attached the updated Subsurface Management Plan (SMP) for the Helena East Precinct.

The SMP has been prepared by Coffey Environments on behalf of the Metropolitan Redevelopment

Authority (Metropolitan RA) and is submitted to you for your review in your capacity as the appointed

Contaminated Sites Auditor for this site. The SMP provides a framework for the management of

subsurface contamination constraints so that the health and safety of residents and other site users

together with the environment are protected from adverse impacts that could eventuate from

uncontrolled subsurface disturbances.

The SMP has been prepared in order to meet the following regulatory requirements:

To facilitate the clearance of Conditions 13-1 to 13-5 of Ministerial Statement (MS) No. 742, which

pertain to the preparation of the SMP and its subsequent approval by the CEO of the Department of

Environment and Conservation (DEC);

Together with other documentation, including the Helena East Remediation and Validation Report

(Part 1), enable the site to be reclassified under the Contaminated Sites Act 2003.

It is understood that under the Contaminated Sites Act 2003 and the Contaminated Sites

Regulations 2006, a Mandatory Auditor’s Report (MAR) will be necessary to achieve the above

objectives. Hence, the attached SMP together with the Helena East Subsurface Constraints Register

(SCR), provided separately, are submitted with the intention of providing sufficient information on which

a MAR can be prepared. Three additional report copies have been provided for forwarding onto relevant

regulatory bodies, as may be required.

Coffey Environments ENVIPERT00147AA_Management Plans_ 013_JL_V3 16 July 2012

Should you require any clarification during your review of the attached SMP, I trust that you will not

hesitate to contact the undersigned on (08) 9355 7100.

For and on behalf of Coffey Environments Pty Ltd

Justin Lumsden

Associate Environmental Scientist

CC: Ben Rose (Metropolitan RA)

Attached: Subsurface Management Plan (V3), Helena East Precinct

RECORD OF DISTRIBUTION

Coffey Environments

ENVIPERT00147AA_Management Plans_ 013_JL_V3 16 July 2012

No. of copies

Report File Name Report

Status Date Prepared for: Initials

Hard

Copies

CD

Copies

2 1

ENVIPERT00147AA_

Management

Plans_001_JL.docx

Version 1 10 September 2009

Midland

Redevelopment

Authority

JL

1 1

ENVIPERT00147AA_M

anagement

Plans_001_JL.docx

Version 1 10 September 2009 Environmental

Resource Management JL

2

ENVIPERT00147AA_M

anagement

Plans_001_JL.docx

Version 1 10 September 2009 Coffey Environments

Pty Ltd JL

2 2

ENVIPERT00147AA_

Management

Plans_013_JL_V2.docx

Version 2 12 December 2011

Midland

Redevelopment

Authority

JL

4 4

ENVIPERT00147AA_

Management


Version 2 12 December 2011 Environmental


2

ENVIPERT00147AA_

Management


Version 2 12 December 2011 Coffey Environments

Pty Ltd JL

2 2

ENVIPERT00147AA_

Management


Version 3 16 July 2012

Metropolitan

Redevelopment

Authority

JL

4 4

ENVIPERT00147AA_

Management


Version 3 16 July 2012 Environmental


1

ENVIPERT00147AA_

Management


Version 3 16 July 2012 Coffey Environments

Pty Ltd JL

CONTENTS

Coffey Environments


LIST OF ATTACHMENTS I

ABBREVIATIONS II

TECHNICAL DEFINITIONS IV

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Purpose of This Management Plan 1

1.3 Scope of This Management Plan 1

1.4 Applicability of This Management Plan 2

1.5 Environmental Approvals and Regulatory Framework 4

2 SITE IDENTIFICATION AND SETTING 5

2.1 Site Details 5

2.2 Environmental Setting 8

3 SITE REMEDIATION AND CONTAMINATION STATUS 9

3.1 Previous Environmental Investigations 9

3.2 Pre-Remedial Soil and Groundwater Contamination 10

3.3 Remedial Works 11

3.4 Post Remedial Contamination 11

4 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION 13

5 RESPONSIBILITIES 14

6 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 16

7 SUBSURFACE MANAGEMENT CONTROL 18

7.1 Subsurface Management Strategy 18

CONTENTS

Coffey Environments


7.2 Subsurface Access Procedures 18

7.2.1 Notification 19

7.2.2 Plan Preparation 19

7.2.3 Site Induction 19

7.2.4 Access 19

7.2.5 Personal Protective Equipment 20

7.2.6 Clean Fill Excavation and Stockpiling 21

7.2.7 Penetrating Warning Barriers 21

7.2.8 Contaminated Soil Excavation and Stockpiling 21

7.2.9 Excavation Reinstatement 22

7.2.10 Installation or Maintenance of Underground Utilities 22

7.2.11 Horizontal Boring or Other Subsurface Disturbance 23

7.3 Environmental Management Measures 23

7.3.1 Dust and Air Quality Control 23

7.3.2 Groundwater and Surface Water Management 24

7.3.3 Stormwater Management 25

7.3.4 Waste Management 25

7.3.5 Asbestos Waste Management 25

7.3.6 Noise and Vibration Management 26

7.3.7 Traffic Management 26

7.3.8 Community Consultation 26

8 CONTINGENCIES 27

9 PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND REPORTING 30

10 REFERENCES 31

11 STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS 33

CONTENTS

Coffey Environments


Figures in Text

Figure A: Applicability of Subsurface Management Plan

Tables in Text

Table A: Site Identification Information

Table B: Environmental Setting

Table C: Pre-Remediation Soil and Groundwater Contamination

Table D: Potential Exposure Scenarios

Table E: Responsibilities of Parties

Table F: Key Performance Indicators

Table G: Subsurface Management Strategy

Table H: Minimum Recommended Personal Protection Equipment

Table I: Environmental Incident Response Measures

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Coffey Environments


I

Figures

Figure 1: Site Locality Plan

Appendices

Appendix A: DEC Site Summary Form

Appendix B: Certificates of Title

Appendix C: Subdivision Cadastral Plan

Appendix D: Subsurface Works Request Form

Appendix E: Environmental Incident and Hazard Form

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

ABBREVIATIONS

Coffey Environments


II

ACM Asbestos containing material

ANZECC Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council

ATA ATA Environmental

BBG Bowman Bishaw Gorham

CEO Chief Executive Officer

CHC Chlorinated Hydrocarbons

COPC Chemicals of Potential Concern

DEC Department of Environment and Conservation

EMP Environmental Management Plan

ERM Environmental Resources Management Australia

ha hectare

HDPE high density polyethylene

HSP Health and Safety Plans

ISO International Organisation for Standardisation

km kilometre

KPI Key Performance Indicator

LNAPL Light non-aqueous phase liquid

LSA Lower Superficial Aquifer

m metre

mAHD metre(s) Australian Height Datum

MAR Mandatory Auditor Report

mBGL metres below ground level

MRA Midland Redevelopment Authority

ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATIONS

Coffey Environments


III

MS Ministerial Statement

OHS Occupational Health and Safety

PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon

PER Public Environmental Review

PPE Personal Protection Equipment

RVR Remediation and Validation Report

SCR Subsurface Constraints Register

SMP Subsurface Management Plan

SRT Swan River Trust

SSA Shallow Superficial Aquifer

STV Short-Term Trigger Value

SWMS Safe Work Method Statements

TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon

ABBREVIATIONS

Coffey Environments


IV

TECHNICAL DEFINITIONS

Selected technical definitions applicable to this report are listed below and are based on those

definitions contained under the DEC Contaminated Sites Management Series guidelines where further

technical definitions can also be found.

Clean Fill Material that will have no harmful effects on the environment and which consists of

rocks or soil arising from the excavation of undisturbed material.

For material not from a clean excavation, it must be validated to have contaminants

below relevant ecological investigation levels prescribed in DEC (2010) Assessment

Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water.

Contaminated In relation to land or underground water, contaminated means that a substance is

present in, on or under that land or in that underground water, at concentrations that

presents, or has potential to present, a risk of harm to human health or any

environmental value.

Light Non-Aqueous

Phase Liquid (LNAPL)

Non-aqueous substances that have an average density less than water (specific

gravity less than 1) and therefore generally float on water.

Volatile Physical property of a chemical that indicates it potential to transform from an

adsorbed, dissolved or liquid phase into a vapour phase under standard atmospheric

conditions.

Subsurface Management Plan

Helena East Precinct Former Midland Railway Workshops


1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

The Helena East Precinct (‘the site’) represents an approximate 17ha portion of the former Midland

Railway Workshops, located 16km northeast of the city of Perth (Figure 1). Historically contaminated as

a result of past industrial activities, the site was the subject of extensive remedial works that have

largely rendered the site free of contamination. Residual soil contamination that remains on site

represents material that could not practically be removed due to logistical, economic and/or social

(heritage) constraints. Primary examples of such constraints include residual waste fill deposits beneath

and around heritage buildings and extensive waste fill deposits that form the Southern Embankment.

Without controls, residual soil and groundwater contamination that remains on site has the potential to

pose potential environmental and human health risks that, whilst unlikely to be significant in nature,

could affect future site use. Therefore, this Subsurface Management Plan (SMP), together with the

Helena East Subsurface Constraints Register (SCR), have been prepared to enable future site users

requiring subsurface access the ability to identify whether any particular safety or environmental

precautions should be taken.

The nature and extent of subsurface contamination, or ‘constraints’, has been documented in the Coffey

Environments (2012) Helena East Subsurface Constraints Register (SCR). It is envisaged that the SCR

will be progressively updated where the nature and extent of subsurface constraints is found to change.

In this regard, it is paramount that the most current SCR is always referred to.

1.2 Purpose of This Management Plan

The purpose of this SMP is to provide a framework for the management of subsurface contamination

constraints so that the health and safety of residents and other site users together with the environment

are protected from adverse impacts that could eventuate from uncontrolled subsurface disturbances.

Specific SMP objectives include:

Prevent uncontrolled exposure to residual contaminated soil, groundwater or vapour;

Maintain the integrity of warning barriers;

Ensure that if subsurface works have the potential to disturb contamination, the works are

appropriately managed; and

Satisfy regulatory requirements for the preparation and implementation of a SMP (Section 1.5).

1.3 Scope of This Management Plan

This SMP comprises the following information:

A summary of the site, its history, environmental setting, previous investigation works and remedial

works;

Identification of the duties and responsibilities of site users in implementing the SMP;

Establish performance indicators to evaluate the effectiveness of the SMP in meeting its objectives

and as a tool for monitoring areas of potential future SMP applicability;




2

Identify potential hazards associated with intrusive subsurface works in areas or depths that may

intersect contamination so that appropriate safe working procedures and environmental

management protocols can be developed and implemented;

Provide suggested contingency measures in the instance that site users are incidentally exposed to

subsurface contamination; and

Provide example forms that will enable the Site Owner to document that sufficient information has

been provided that will enable site users to take due care prior to accessing the subsurface.

Secondly, example forms are provided to enable the management of any subsurface constraint-

related environmental incidences or hazards to be documented should they arise.

It is not the intention of this management plan to prescribe precise safety procedures for subsurface

access, but rather to identify potential hazards and provide a management framework of issues and

subsequent strategies to be considered. It is the expectation of this management plan, that site users

planning to undertake subsurface activities in areas or depths where contamination exists will

incorporate the key principals of this management plan into their occupation-specific Safe Work Method

Statements (SWMS), Health and Safety Plans (HSP), and Environmental Management Plans (EMP),

that are developed in consultation with a qualified safety professional, as applicable.

1.4 Applicability of This Management Plan

The SMP shall be implemented where one or more of the following scenarios apply:

1. Where (suspected) subsurface contamination has become incidentally exposed.

2. Where the proposed area of subsurface disturbance coincides with a subsurface constraint as

identified by the SCR.

3. Anywhere that the proposed depth of excavation is greater than 1.5m below ground surface levels or

where groundwater may otherwise be intersected.

4. Where there is any other reason to believe the subsurface work area may be impacted by

contaminated soil, groundwater or vapour.

The applicability of the Subsurface Management Plan is diagrammatically presented in Figure A.

NOTE: The implementation of the SMP is required for any subsurface works undertaken in areas

or depths where subsurface constraints are known to exist or are suspected to exist.




3

FIGURE A APPLICABILITY OF SUBSURFACE MANAGEMENT PLAN

Is access to the subsurface required

or is the subsurface already

exposed?

Does the existing or proposed area

of subsurface disturbance coincide

with residual soil contamination?

or

Is there reason to believe the

subsurface may be contaminated by

soil, groundwater or vapour?

or

Will the depth of disturbance extend

to more than 1.5m below ground

surface or is there reason to believe

groundwater may otherwise be

intersected?

IMPLEMENTATION OF SUBSURFACE

MANAGEMENT CONTROL

PROCEDURES (SECTION 7) REQUIRED

PRIOR TO UNDERTAKING WORKS.

Site-specific subsurface

management precautions

arising from contamination

will not be necessary to

complete works.

NO

YES

NO

YES




4

1.5 Environmental Approvals and Regulatory Framework

As a commitment made in the 2006 Helena East Public Environmental Review (PER) (ATA, 2006), the

preparation and submission of this SMP and the SCR for the site represent formal conditions of

ministerial approval for the Helena East remedial works, as contained under Ministerial Statement 742

issued on 6 June 2007.

The following conditions of Ministerial Statement 742 are specifically relevant to the SMP and SCR:

13-1 “Within three months following completion of remediation works and prior to any

subsurface activities, the proponent shall submit a Subsurface Management Plan to the

CEO for approval.

13-2 The proponent shall implement the Subsurface Management Plan required by condition

13-1.

13-3 In the event that services or subsurface activities need to be located or take place,

respectively, below the clean fill cover, prior to the installation of such services or the

conduct of such activities, the proponent shall carry out soil validation tests to

demonstrate that the soil is not contaminated.

13-4 In the event that the soil is contaminated, the proponent shall advise the CEO and shall

complete the works in accordance with the Subsurface Management Plan required by

condition 13-1.

13-5 The proponent shall make the Subsurface Management Plan required by condition 13-1

publicly available in a manner approved by the CEO.”

In addition to ministerial obligations stated, the SMP and SCR are considered relevant information in

assessing the site for reclassification under the Contaminated Sites Act (2003). At the time of report

preparation, the appointed Contaminated Sites Auditor for this site was Mr Jeremy Hogben of

Environmental Resource Management (ERM).




5

2 SITE IDENTIFICATION AND SETTING

2.1 Site Details

Site identification details current at the time of SMP preparation are summarised in Table A. Further

information can be found in the Coffey Environments (2009a) Remediation and Validation Report

(RVR).

A DEC Site Summary Form is included in Appendix A.

TABLE A

SITE IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION

Common Site Name Helena East Precinct, (’The Workshops’), Former Railway Workshops, Midland.

Site Location Yelverton Drive, Midland (Figure 1).

Statutory Identification Lot 499 on Deposited Plan 66298

Volume 2750, Folio 696

Lot 500 on Deposited Plan 66298








Part of Lot 9011 on Deposited Plan 48323






Part of Lot 9502 on Deposited Plan 48323









6

TABLE A




A Land Titles Status Plan and Certificates of Title are provided in Appendix B.

Site Area Helena East: 16.2ha

Southern Embankment: 0.8ha

Total Site Area: 17ha

Registered Proprietor Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority.

Local Government City of Swan.

Current Site Use At the time of reporting the Pattern Shop, Pattern Store and extension were

tenanted by a fine art workshop and studio (‘Midland Atelier’). The remainder of

the site was unoccupied.

Site Features Primarily vacant land bounded by numerous light industrial buildings and

structures up to ~100 years old and 1ha in size.

Site History The Midland Railway Workshops operated between 1904 and 1994. The

workshops were used for the manufacture and maintenance of locomotives and

rolling stock. Significant on-site industrial activities associated with the

workshops included metal-plating, foundry works, fuel storage and distribution

facilities, trade wastewater collection and treatment, and power generation.

Over the course of operation of the Railway Workshops, large volumes of

locomotive cinder and ash are likely to have been offloaded and used as fill to

improve drainage across the broader Railway Workshops Precinct. Other waste

products such as Foundry sand and slag would have also been used as fill, as

evidenced by the composition of fill deposits across the broader Railway

Workshops Precinct.

Proposed Site Subdivision The most current Helena East subdivision plan proposes a mixture of traditional

lots, public open space and internal roads.

The McMullen & Nolan Cadastral Plan (July 2011) is provided in Appendix C.

Proposed End Land Use The Midland Redevelopment Scheme (gazetted 8 February 2005) designates

the preferred uses for the Helena East Precinct as residential, commercial and

community uses (including public open space).

DEC Contaminated Sites

Database Search (August

Lot 499/DP66298 Remediated for Restricted Use




7

TABLE A


2009) Lot 500/DP66298 Remediated for Restricted Use




Lot 9502/DP48323: Contaminated Site - Remediation Required

Lot 9503/DP48323: Contaminated Site - Remediation Required

Lot15299/DP38765: Contaminated Site – Remediation Required

Lot15300/DP38765: Contaminated Site – Remediation Required

Lot 9026/DP66298: Not Classified

Lot 9014/DP48737: Contaminated Site – Remediation Required

Lot 9011/DP48323: Not Classified

Search Results as of December 1 2011




8

2.2 Environmental Setting

The environmental setting of the site is summarised in Table B. Further environmental setting

information can be found in the Coffey Environments (2009a) RVR.

TABLE B

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

Environmental Factor Description

Topography The Helena East Precinct is generally level and consistent with the surrounding land

to the north, west and east at approximately 13-14mAHD. From this site elevation, the

Southern Embankment declines steeply into the Helena River floodplain to a level of

7m-8mAHD, or approximately 6-7m lower than the general site.

Geology The local geology to approximately 25m below ground level (mbgl) is identified as

comprising the alluvial Guildford Formation, generally characterised as clays with

varying silt, sand and gravel content.

Residual waste fill remains on site primarily beneath and adjacent to heritage

structures and also along the Southern Embankment and abutting road reserve. With

the exception of the Southern Embankment where waste fill can exceed 9m in

thickness, waste fill typically ranges from 0.5m to 1.0m thick. Waste fill, grey to black

in colour, comprises a high proportion of cinder, ash and foundry sand, with

occasional inert materials such building rubble and scrap metal.

Imported sand certified as ‘Clean Fill’ extends across much of the remediated site,

replacing waste fill deposits and typically 0.5m to 1.0m thick but up to 3m or more in

areas subjected to deeper remediation.

Hydrogeology Hydrogeological investigations indicate the presence of two upper groundwater

systems and one deeper regional groundwater system. Upper groundwater systems

include a complex, low permeability shallow flow system referred to as the Shallow

Superficial Aquifer (SSA) and the deeper, more continuous groundwater system

referred to as the Lower Superficial Aquifer (LSA). The SSA and LSA occur at

elevations ranging from 1.5-6.5mbgl and 9-10.5mbgl, respectively.

The deeper regional aquifer, the Leederville aquifer, occurs a depth of 48-51mbgl.

Surface Water The nearest surface water body is the Helena River located approximately 70m south

from the Helena East Precinct boundary at its nearest point and an important tributary

to the Swan River. Further afield, an artificial water body known as the Coal Dam is

located approximately 200m northwest of the site boundary, within the previously

remediated Helena West Precinct.




9

3 SITE REMEDIATION AND CONTAMINATION STATUS

3.1 Previous Environmental Investigations

A number of environmental investigations have been undertaken at the site, either specifically for the

Helena East Precinct or as part of investigations of the broader Midland Railway Workshops.

Previous environmental investigation reports include:

Midland Railway Workshops Site, Environmental Audit (BBG, 1994);

Midland Railway Workshops Assessment of Contamination and its Implications (CMPS&F, 1995);

Midland Railway Workshops Site Contaminant Migration Study (BBG, 1995);

Environmental Investigations, Midland Railway Workshops (CMPS&F, 1996);

Detailed Site Investigation, Helena Precinct Waste Fill, Midland Railway Workshops (ENV, 2002);

Hydrogeological Investigation, Helena West, Midland Railway Workshops (ENV, 2003);

Environmental Investigations in Support of Referral, Helena East, Midland Railway Workshops Site

(ENV, 2004);

Public Environmental Review, Helena East Precinct Remediation and Redevelopment (ATA, 2006);

Investigation of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Vapour and Atmosphere in Areas of Known Soil

Contamination at Helena East Precinct, Midland Railway Workshops (Crisalis, 2007);

Dissolved Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Plume Investigation, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland

Railway Workshops (Coffey Environments, 2009b);

Pre-Remediation Health Risk Assessment, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway

Workshops (Coffey Environments, 2010a);

Health Risk Assessment - Block 2 and Block 3, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway

Workshops (Coffey Environments, 2010b);

Post Remediation – Dissolved Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Plume Investigation, Helena East Precinct,

Former Midland Railway Workshops (Coffey Environments 2011a);

Post Remediation Groundwater Contaminant Fate and Transport Assessment, Helena East

Precinct, Former Midland Railway Workshops (Coffey Environments 2011b);

Soil Vapour Investigation Results (March 2011), Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway

Workshops (Coffey Environments 2011c); and

Post-Remediation Health Risk Assessment, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway

Workshops (Coffey Environments, 2011d);

The remediation and validation of the Helena East Precinct has been documented in the following

remediation and validation reports:

Remediation and Validation Report, Part of Helena East Precinct (Part 1), Former Railway

Workshops, Midland (Coffey Environments, 2009a);




10


Workshops, Midland (Coffey Environments 20113); and


Workshops, Midland (Coffey Environments 2011f).

3.2 Pre-Remedial Soil and Groundwater Contamination

The nature and extent of pre-remedial soil and groundwater contamination is summarised in Table C.

Further information on the pre-remedial soil and groundwater contamination status can be found in the

Coffey Environments (2009a) RVR.

TABLE C

PRE-REMEDIATION SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION

Medium Description

Soil Waste Fill Contamination:

Typically, waste fill at the site was found to comprise elevated concentrations of metals

(particularly copper and zinc and to a lesser extent, antimony, chromium, lead and tin), total

petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs) and occasionally, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

(PAHs) and asbestos (both in free-form and bonded form). The volume of waste fill was

found to be most extensive in the southern half of the site where the land originally graded

south into the Helena River floodplain.

Point-source contamination hotspots

Point-source contamination hotspots identified at the site as having impacted underlying

natural soil is summarised as follows:

Multiple inferred fuel and oil hotspots (TPHs and PAHs) across the site, the most

significant of which being within the Southern Embankment;

Solvent hotspots [chlorinated hydrocarbons (CHCs)] in the surrounds of the Hot and

Cold Wells and to a lesser extent south of the Tarpaulin Shop; and

A metal hotspot (hexavalent chromium and total chromium, cadmium, nickel and tin)

west of the Tarpaulin Shop and within the footprint of former metal plating shops.

Groundwater Overall, groundwater investigation works identified the following five broad types of

groundwater impact beneath the site:

1. Widespread marginal elevations of metals (particularly zinc and copper) in the SSA

across much of the site that may be a regional phenomenon.

2. A localised nickel contamination hotspot in the SSA that is likely to be associated with

former on-site metal-plating operations.

3. A localised hydrocarbon plume in the SSA that is likely to be associated with on-site

fuel spillages in the vicinity of the Power House and towards the south of the Tarpaulin




11

TABLE C

PRE-REMEDIATION SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION

Medium Description

Shop. Light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) was identified in groundwater

immediately south of the former Hot and Cold Wells structure.

4. CHC impact in the SSA and the LSA (including vinyl chloride, trichloroethene and

tetrachloroethene). An inferred CHC point-source was identified in the surrounds of the

former Hot and Cold Wells structure. A second CHC source zone and plume was

identified towards the south of the Tarpaulin Shop.

5. A localised hydrocarbon (TPH and PAH) plume in the SSA beneath Block 2 and to a

lesser extent Block 3. LNAPL was identified in groundwater in the central portion of

Block 2.

3.3 Remedial Works

The adopted remedial approach for the site, as proposed in the ATA (2006) PER and ultimately

documented in multiple remediation and validation reports, can be summarised as follows:

1. On-site Treatment and Re-use: Where excavated geotechnically unsuitable waste fill material was

verified as complying with the remediation criteria, on-site geotechnical screening was undertaken to

maximise re-use of this material.

2. Off-site Treatment: where hydrocarbon contaminated material was not suitable for re-use on site,

opportunities to treat this material off site (via bioremediation) were explored. Where material was

treated off site, re-importation was not undertaken due to logistical and geotechnical constraints.

3. Off-site Disposal: All contaminated material that was not suitable for on-site or off-site treatment was

disposed off site at a landfill facility licensed to receive such waste.

4. 'Cap and Contain': Where it was impractical to remove all contaminated material, such as around

heritage buildings or due to other site constraints, contaminated soil was capped with geotextile

visual warning barriers and clean fill cover in accordance with regulatory conditions for this site. Note

in some locations, such as beneath heritage buildings for example, contaminated soil was not

capped with geotextile visual warning barriers due to logistical constraints.

5. Temporary Isolation: Although not originally envisaged in ATA 2006, where it was not practical to

‘cap and contain’ residual contamination at the cessation of the remedial earthworks contract,

cyclone fencing has been temporarily erected to prevent access to contaminated soil present at the

surface. Temporary fencing will be maintained until such a time that civil works, including

underground utility installation, are complete.

3.4 Post Remedial Contamination

The Helena East SCR is designed to be a user-friendly guide of the nature and extent of residual soil

and groundwater contamination for remediated portions of the site. Detailed scientific information

documenting the final site condition has been presented in three remediation and validation reports

(Coffey Environments 2009a, 20113, 2011f) which should be referred to where contamination




12

concentration-specific or sample location-specific information is required, such as may be the case

where residual contaminated soil becomes surplus to site requirements.

In general, residual soil contamination that remains on site at the completion of remedial works

represents material that could not practically be removed due to logistical, economic and/or social

(heritage) constraints. Primary examples of such constraints include residual waste fill deposits beneath

and around heritage buildings and extensive waste fill deposits that form the Southern Embankment.

In addition to residual soil contamination, residual groundwater contamination also remains beneath the

site at the completion of remedial works and is therefore subject to certain ongoing restrictions which

are dealt with in this SMP.




13

4 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION

This section of the SMP identifies potential hazards associated with subsurface contamination in

relation to site users, nearby off-site communities and the environment.

For exposure to occur, a complete pathway must exist between the source of contamination and the

receptor (i.e. the person or ecosystem components potentially affected by the contamination). The

relationship between source, receptor and pathway in the context of residual site contamination and

uncontrolled subsurface disturbance (including groundwater abstraction) related hazards are

summarised in Table D.

TABLE D

POTENTIAL EXPOSURE SCENARIOS

Source Exposure Route Receptor

Contaminated soil Dermal.

Inhalation (particulates or

vapour where contaminants

are volatile).

Ingestion.

Site users undertaking subsurface activities that

disturb contaminated soil.

Off-site communities where generated dust or

vapour extends off site.

Entrainment of sediment into

the stormwater network.

Nearby sensitive environments (i.e. Helena

River).

Contaminated

groundwater

Dermal.

Inhalation (where

contaminants are volatile).

Ingestion.

Site users undertaking subsurface activities that

may or may not intersect contaminated

groundwater.

Site users that abstract contaminated

groundwater via groundwater abstraction bores.

Off-site communities where groundwater plumes

extend off site.

Discharge of groundwater

into the stormwater network.

Nearby sensitive environments (i.e. Helena

River).

It is noted that the building / above-ground vapour intrusion from volatile-contaminated soil and/or

groundwater as an exposure pathway is not considered a hazard in this SMP based on the final site

condition at the completion of remedial works and any localised land use restrictions that apply.

Should there be any reason to believe vapours may exist within a utility trench or other subsurface

enclosed space outside of areas identified in the SCR, then contingency measures prescribed in

Section 8 should be implemented prior to commencing or continuing works. Whilst not necessarily a

hazard, perceived impacts that may result from the disturbance of contaminated soil or groundwater

may also be aesthetic in nature, such as waste fill or hydrocarbon-impacted soil which may be deemed

aesthetically offensive from an visual or olfactory perspective.




14

5 RESPONSIBILITIES

The responsibilities under the SMP of parties involved in subsurface works in contaminated areas or

depths are summarised in Table E. These responsibilities do not replace any other regulatory

responsibilities of the parties in undertaking works at the site and do not include all responsibilities. Until

ownership or responsibility of the site or portions of the site are formally transferred, the Metropolitan

RA will fulfil the role of Site Owner.

TABLE E

RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTIES

Title Responsibilities Comments

Site Owner Ensure that site tenants are aware of the SMP and

associated procedures and the SMP is implemented.

Maintain records and documentation relevant to the SMP.

Ensure tenants are provided with current version of SMP

and are appropriately briefed.

Inform the nearby community of any disruptions that

impact the community and respond to community

complaints.

Ensure SMP performance is monitored against nominated

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and consider

rectification works where required.

The Site Owner will seek

expert advice as

appropriate.

Site Owner’s

Representative

(where

applicable)

Approve consultants and contractors for undertaking

works.

Approve or have approved HSPs, EMPs and SWMSs.

Coordinates the implementation of the SMP on behalf of

the Site Owner.

Appointed by Site Owner.

Tenant Acknowledge and adhere to the requirements of the SMP.

Refrain from any act that could put them or any other

person at risk of exposure to contamination.

Obtain approval from Site Owner for consultants and

contractors undertaking works.

Manage works including consultants and contractors such

that their works are carried out in accordance with SMP

protocols.

Confirm to Site Owner that works are being undertaken in

accordance with procedures set out in SMP.




15

TABLE E

RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTIES

Title Responsibilities Comments

Notify Site Owner of any non-conformance with the SMP

and corrective actions.

Provide to Site Owner and maintain survey plans of

excavations and as-constructed drawings.

Approved

Environmental

Consultant

Undertake environmental monitoring works or provide

advice in accordance with the requirements of the SMP.

Update SMP and SCR as applicable.

Respond to environmental incidents.

Review tasks-specific Approved Contractor EMP where

prepared.

Environmental Consultant

should be suitably

experienced in

contaminated sites.

Commissioned by Site

Owner or Owner’s

Representative or Site

Tenant (with approval from

Site Owner).

Approved/

Licensed

Contractor

(or any party

undertaking the

subsurface

works)

Undertake works in accordance with the requirements of

the SMP.

Prepare applicable HSPs, EMPs and SWMSs.

Suitably experienced

contractor.

Commissioned by Site

Owner or Owner’s

Representative or Site

Tenant (with approval from

Site Owner).




16

6 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

To evaluate the effectiveness of the SMP in meeting its objectives and as a tool for monitoring future

areas of potential SMP applicability, Table F outlines KPIs that shall be integrated into subsurface

constraint management processes at the site. Consistent with roles and responsibilities outlined in

Section 5, it is the responsibility of the Site Owner to ensure SMP performance is monitored against the

nominated KPIs.

TABLE F

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Performance Indicator Verification Responsible Party

1 Tenants are aware of SMP and

associated procedures

Maintain a record of tenant

notifications.

No incidents of uncontrolled

exposure.

Site Owner or Representative.

2 No unregistered subsurface

disturbances

Maintain a subsurface

disturbance register.

No incidents of uncontrolled

exposure.

Site Owner or

Representative.

Tenant.

3 Appropriate health and safety

precautions are taken in

performing works

Task-specific SWMS and Site

Safety Plan (SSP) documents

are prepared and incorporate

SMP control procedures.

Personal Protection Equipment

(PPE) is being worn.

Approved/Licensed Contractor.

4 Area of disturbance is

appropriately reinstated/integrity

of warning barriers is maintained

Recorded inspection of

warning barrier, clean fill cover,

and physical barrier (where

applicable) reinstatement and

compliance with the SMP.

Where the nature and extent of

the warning barrier is altered,

the warning barrier is surveyed

and the SCR is updated

accordingly.


(Expert advice shall be sought

where the SCR requires

updating).

5 Appropriate environmental

management precautions are

taken in performing works

Where warranted, a task-

specific EMP is prepared and

incorporates SMP control





17

TABLE F

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Performance Indicator Verification Responsible Party

procedures.

No environmental incidents

(see below).

6 No unacceptable discharges or

emissions or other

environmental incidents1

Qualitative verified through an

inspection of the works during

and at the completion of works.

In some cases environmental

monitoring may be used to

evaluate the performance of

this KPI, as prescribed in the

SMP.

Record any community

complaints.



where environmental monitoring

is required).

7 All surplus contaminated soil or

dewatered groundwater effluent

appropriately disposed of in

accordance with the SMP

Provision of waste transfer and

disposal dockets or other

verification documentation as

applicable.



where off-site disposal of

contaminated material is

required).

8 SMP remains suitable to the

needs of subsurface disturbance

work and site conditions

Works are implemented in

accordance with the SMP.

SMP is updated as necessary.

Site Owner or Representative.


where the SMP requires

updating).

1: Examples of an unacceptable discharge or emission at this site may include discharge of groundwater effluent or entrainment of

contaminated soil into the stormwater network, visible dust extending beyond site boundaries, uncontrolled off-site disposal of contaminated soil, or an unacceptable discharge or emission determined by other qualitative and/or quantitative means.




18

7 SUBSURFACE MANAGEMENT CONTROL

7.1 Subsurface Management Strategy

This SMP forms part of a broader subsurface management strategy for site contamination with the aim

of the site remedial approach described in Section 3.3 being to eliminate (remove) contamination and

apply engineering controls to any residual contamination (i.e. cap and contain). The subsurface

management control measures detailed herein therefore apply to managing the engineering controls,

implementing administrative controls and as a final precaution, developing a HSP that may require the

use of PPE.

The four types of exposure management controls, listed in preferential order, and site examples of

these controls are outlined in Table G.

TABLE G

SUBSURFACE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

Control Type Site Examples

1 Elimination/substitution and

process modification

General remediation and off-site disposal of contaminated soil.

2 Engineering controls Installation of subdivision services within clean fill.

Installation of warning barriers and clean fill cover over residual

contaminated soil. Installation of fencing to provide physical barriers,

preventing access to areas where residual contamination is present.

Maintenance of other physical barriers (e.g. concrete floors within

heritage buildings) where warning barriers and clean fill do not exist.

3 Administrative controls Certificate of Title memorials that identify the presence of

contamination and site restrictions.

Development of a Subsurface Management Plan and Subsurface

Constraints Register.

4 Identification of residual hazard

and suggested use of PPE

As discussed in the Subsurface Management Plan.

7.2 Subsurface Access Procedures

NOTE: Where subsurface activities are proposed and the implementation of this SMP is required

through an assessment of the works relative to subsurface constraints (Section 1.4), the

subsurface management procedures outlined below shall be implemented. In accordance with

SMP roles and responsibilities (Section 5), the Site Owner is responsible for ensuring the SMP is

implemented.




19

7.2.1 Notification

The permission of the Site Owner must be obtained by the tenant or the subsurface worker, as

applicable, prior to undertaking subsurface activities. The Site Owner will require information on the

proposed activity, location with reference to the Helena East Grid Cell Reference System (see SCR)

and/or survey coordinates, and the anticipated depth of disturbance. An example of a Subsurface

Works Request Form is provided in Appendix D.

7.2.2 Plan Preparation

Prior to any intrusive activities the method of works shall be pre-planned so that risks to workers,

residents, the public and the environment are minimised. Appropriate site preparations will include, at a

minimum, the development of a SWMS and a HSP by the Contractor. Depending on the scale of

subsurface disturbance it may also be appropriate for the Contractor to prepare a task-specific EMP as

assessed in consultation with the Environmental Consultant.

Minimum requirements for the SWMS, SMP and EMP are summarised below.

The SWMS, SMP and EMP shall be in accordance with regulatory and industry institutional

standards including but not limited to those standards contained under the Australian Standard

series and International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO).

The SWMS shall discuss the objectives and order of the works, the equipment and procedures to be

adopted and the potential for exposure.

The HSP shall take into consideration the health risks associated with the hazard and will include as

a minimum the supply of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) for personnel undertaking

the work (including respirators/dust masks). The HSP shall also include dust control measures to

protect site users and the public.

The EMP should include soil, water, waste, noise and dust management, monitoring and emergency

response.

The above documents should be consistent with the minimum requirements proposed in the following

sections of this SMP.

7.2.3 Site Induction

Prior to intrusive works on the site, all personnel involved with site works shall be given a site induction

by a suitably qualified person or as a minimum have read and understood this SMP and the associated

risks at the site.

7.2.4 Access

The work site shall be cordoned-off if there is a risk to the public from entering the site. As a minimum,

unauthorised personnel must be restricted from entering the boundaries of the intrusive work area, and

any temporary stockpiles of contaminated soil where applicable. All barriers are to remain in place until

intrusive works have been completed and all contaminated soil has been reinstated or removed off site

and containment/capping has been completed.

Where possible, the number of personnel working in an impacted area shall be kept to a minimum.




20

7.2.5 Personal Protective Equipment

All personnel within the cordoned-off work site must wear the appropriate PPE as prescribed by their

SWMS and/or HSP. It is envisaged that PPE will be worn in all situations where there is a potential risk

of exposure to contaminated soil or groundwater. Table H summarises the typical PPE recommended

for various scenarios where subsurface contamination may be disturbed.

TABLE H

MINIMUM RECOMMENDED PERSONAL PROTECTION EQUIPMENT

Scenario TYPICAL PPE

1 Disturbance of contaminated soil not containing asbestos or

volatile compounds

or

Disturbance of groundwater not containing volatile

compounds

Protective gloves

Coveralls/long pants and long sleeved

shirt

Safety glasses

A fluorescent traffic vest/and or high

visibility clothing

Steel-toed boots

2 Disturbance of asbestos containing soils As per (1) plus:

Disposable paper coveralls

P2 level disposable dust mask

3 Disturbance of groundwater or soil that contains volatile

compounds1

As per (1) and together with occupational

air quality monitoring:

Half-face or full face respirator fitted with

new filter cartridge appropriate for the

specific chemicals that may be

disturbed.

1: Compounds that are considered volatile or semi-volatile and the known locations of these compounds are identified in the SCR.

Task-specific PPE that may apply to the nature of the subsurface task being performed and beyond

recommended minimum PPE requirements specified in Table G should be considered in the

preparation of a HSP. Furthermore the HSP should detail correct procedures for donning and removing

PPE as well as appropriate PPE disposal.

As noted in Table H, where the subsurface works are likely to disturb residual petroleum and/or

chlorinated hydrocarbon-impacted soil or groundwater, or where there is reason that vapours may be

present in the subsurface, the site-specific HSP developed may recommend that occupational

monitoring be undertaken as an additional level of protection for site workers. Typically, a combination

of real-time qualitative monitoring and delayed quantitative monitoring should be performed. Given the

technical nature of occupational monitoring, it is recommended that occupational health and safety

(OHS) expert experienced in contaminated sites occupational monitoring is engaged to develop the

OHS monitoring program in the instance that such monitoring is deemed appropriate.




21

7.2.6 Clean Fill Excavation and Stockpiling

In certain locations across the site, such as within existing heritage buildings, waste fill is not overlain by

clean fill or warning barriers. Please refer to the SCR to confirm subsurface conditions applicable to the

work area. In case of any doubt, the approved Environmental Consultant should be engaged to

supervise the works and collected confirmatory analytical samples where appropriate.

Clean fill material should be excavated and stockpiled in a designated area. Any clean fill that appears

visually cross-contaminated, such as may be the case near the interface of clean fill and waste fill,

should be segregated and treated as contaminated soil until verification testing demonstrates otherwise.

Clean fill stockpiles should be clearly labelled to identify it as clean fill and covered or wet down to

minimise dust generation.

7.2.7 Penetrating Warning Barriers

The presence and type of warning barrier expected within the area of subsurface works can be found in

the SCR. In some locations, such as beneath heritage buildings where hardstand is present, warning

barriers may not be present at all.

The following measures should be implemented in penetrating warning barriers at the site:

Excavation within a notional distance of 0.3m shall be conducted by hand to minimise the risk of

warning barrier damage and cross-contamination of clean fill.

Warning barriers shall be carefully cut and set aside from the work area for later reinstatement.

Where the warning barrier is highly weathered or otherwise unsuitable for reinstatement, a

replacement warning barrier product of similar composition shall be used to reinstate the excavation.

7.2.8 Contaminated Soil Excavation and Stockpiling

The following minimum requirements apply to the excavation and stockpiling of contaminated soils:

Contaminated soil stockpiles should be temporary in nature only.

Contaminated soil should be stockpiled on hardstand or an impermeable liner, such as high density

polyethylene (HDPE).

Contaminated soil stockpiles should be signed (clearly labelling it as contaminated soil).

Contaminated soil stockpiles be covered and/or wet down to minimise dust generation. Note, over

water spraying of stockpiles may lead to contaminated leachate run-off and therefore water spraying

must be applied in a carefully regulated manner.

Contaminated soil surplus to site requirements shall follow the correct waste disposal procedures, as

detailed in Section 7.3.4.

Where disturbance of contaminated soil identified in the SCR as being volatile in nature, such as

petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated hydrocarbons or contain asbestos, is proposed, the following

additional measures shall apply:

Environmental advice shall be sought from the approved Environmental Consultant with regard to

requirements for public air quality monitoring with consideration to the scope and location of

subsurface works.




22

Contaminated soil stockpiles shall be bunded to protect against any leachate run-off.

Contaminated soil stockpiles shall be placed away from any nearby sensitive land uses and

preferably down-wind of such land uses to the extent practical.

7.2.9 Excavation Reinstatement

Reinstatement of Warning Barriers and Clean Fill Cover

Once works in the impacted soils have been completed, the warning barrier and any clean fill cover

shall be completely restored to original levels and the work area left clean. Contaminated soil may only

be reinstated below the warning barrier where there are no underground utilities present, as described

in Section 7.2.10. Note specific warning barrier repair methodologies may apply depending on the type

of warning barrier and therefore warning barrier product information sheets, contained within the SCR,

should be referred to accordingly. Any changes to the nature and extent of the warning barrier shall be

noted and surveyed and the SCR updated accordingly.

NOTE: At no stage shall soil material from below warning barriers be used as clean fill cover in

reinstating excavations. If contaminated soil is penetrated that is surplus to backfill

requirements or cannot be reinstated for other reasons then the soil must be disposed in the

correct manner prescribed in Section 7.3.4 and certified clean fill should be used to backfill the

hole.

Reinstatement of Physical Barriers

The following measures apply to the reinstatement of physical barriers:

Where contaminated soil exists directly beneath physical barriers, such as concrete floors beneath

heritage buildings, subsurface works shall be considered complete only when the physical barrier is

reinstated.

All equipment that has been in contact with waste fill should be washed down prior to leaving the site

and the sediments disposed of in accordance with waste disposal procedures (Section 7.3.4).

When subsurface works are complete and the area reinstated, the reinstated area shall be checked

and approved by the Site Owner.

7.2.10 Installation or Maintenance of Underground Utilities

Where the purpose of subsurface works is to install an underground utility and the proposed method of

installation is trenching, the utility shall be laid in clean fill to limit any long-term repeated disturbance of

contaminated soil. In addition to excavation procedures listed above, the following earthworks shall be

undertaken to accommodate new underground utilities:

The utility trench shall be boxed out so that at least 0.5m of separation exists between the utility and

any contaminated soil.

All contaminated soil surfaces within the utility trench shall be lined with a warning barrier to

demarcate the presence of contaminated soil.

Prior to backfill, the altered nature and extent of the warning barrier and contaminated soil shall be

surveyed and the SCR updated accordingly.




23

The utility trench shall be backfilled with certified clean fill to the finished level.

It is possible that the excavation of contaminated soil around new utilities may locally remove

contaminated soil in which case the need to install a warning barrier would become obsolete. Where it

is believed that contamination has been locally remediated, the approved Environmental Consultant

must confirm this is the case through an inspection of the excavation and the collection and analysis of

validation samples where this is deemed appropriate.

7.2.11 Horizontal Boring or Other Subsurface Disturbance

Depending on the nature of the work and site constraints, the Approved Contractor may choose to

undertake horizontal boring or other methodologies less intrusive than open excavations. It is possible

that these methodologies will similarly disturb contaminated soil, particularly where contamination is

present at depth, such as the Southern Embankment waste fill deposits but other site examples may

also exist.

Surplus soil generated from horizontal boring should be treated as contaminated until verified as

otherwise by the approved Environmental Consultant through site inspection and stockpile validation

where necessary.

7.3 Temporary Cyclone Fencing

Cyclone fencing has been installed at some locations at the site as a temporary physical barrier to

residual contaminated soil where it was not practical to complete remediation as part of the main

remediation contract. Remediation of these areas will be complete as part of future site civil work

including the installation of underground utilities.

Consistent environmental conditions under Ministerial Statement 742 the following methodology applies

to remediation of residual contaminated soil present at the surface:

1. Residual contaminated soil is capped with geomesh warning barrier such as Enkagrid Max 30,

Secugrid, or similar.

2. A minimum of 0.5m of clean fill cover is to be installed over geomesh (1.0m thickness for

sensitive landuse scenarios such as residential), to the extent practicable with hardstand or

equivalent treatment where this thickness cannot be achieved.

3. The above to be verified through the production of as-constructed diagrams and an inspection

by a qualified environmental consultant.

4. Remove cyclone fencing.

Subsurface access procedures (Section 7.2) and environmental management measures (Section 7.4)

also apply and should be referred to in performing the above works.

7.4 Environmental Management Measures

7.4.1 Dust and Air Quality Control

Dust control should act to minimise dust creation and its movement off site. For the purpose of dust

control the following measures should be implemented:

Wetting down soils where safe to do so.




24

Wetting down and/or coverage of temporary contaminated soil stockpiles.

Dust stabilisation products, such as hydromulch, should be considered where wetting down is

unsafe and stockpile coverage is impractical.

Monitoring meteorological conditions and halting works if adverse weather conditions are predicted.

The placement of wind barriers depending on the scale and duration of subsurface disturbance.

Public air quality monitoring has not been recommended as a minimum requirement to document

adequate dust management during subsurface disturbance works however may be necessary under

certain scenarios. Examples of scenarios where the implementation of a public air monitoring program

should be considered in consultation with the approved Environmental Consultant include, but are not

necessarily limited to, the following:

The scope of subsurface disturbance is deemed significant, requires the preparation of an EMP and

is expected to last several days.

The subsurface works will disturb contaminated material that has the potential to pose health

impacts at relatively low concentrations such as soil impacted by volatile contaminants or asbestos

containing fill.

Where there is community concern relating to the works.

7.4.2 Groundwater and Surface Water Management

NOTE: Groundwater shall not be abstracted unless abstraction is necessary to complete the

subsurface works. So as to minimise the potential for interference of groundwater

contamination plumes and the volume of groundwater effluent requiring management,

groundwater should be removed from excavations using open-sump pumping (or other passive

techniques) only.

Measures that should be implemented where management of groundwater is necessary are

summarised below. Many of the measures are technical in nature and it is expected that the approved

Environmental Consultant will be appointed to oversee groundwater dewatering works.

Should active water table drawdown be necessary to be complete subsurface works, a Dewatering

Management Plan shall be prepared to reflect site-specific risks and be tailored to the nature of the

tasks to be performed.

Groundwater should be treated as contaminated and characterised using existing groundwater

analytical data and/or through the collection and analysis of additional groundwater samples for the

applicable COPCs in consideration to the SCR and previous environmental investigation reports

(Section 3.1) by the approved Environmental Consultant.

Unless groundwater is characterised prior to abstraction and assessed as suitable for on-site re-

infiltration, groundwater effluent should be contained within a vessel, lined bund or similar until

groundwater effluent samples are collected and analysed.

Depending on the nature and magnitude of groundwater contamination and any site constraints the

following groundwater disposal approaches should be considered:




25

Re-infiltration on site where groundwater contaminant concentrations comply with relevant

assessment criteria, such as the ANZECC (2000) Irrigation Short-Term Trigger Values (STVs) and

groundwater effluent discharge can be contained on site, as assessed by the approved

Environmental Consultant.

Disposal to sewer (with approval by relevant authorities including Water Corporation).

Off-site disposal via Liquid Waste Contractors.

NOTE: Unless express authorisation is granted by the DEC and Swan River Trust (SRT), under

no circumstances shall groundwater effluent be discharged into the stormwater network, which

ultimately discharges into the Helena River floodplain.

7.4.3 Stormwater Management

Stormwater on site should be directed away from work areas to minimise the potential for contaminated

soil to become entrained into the stormwater system. Silt filters and traps may need to be considered

around stormwater grates where the work area is within close vicinity.

7.4.4 Waste Management

Excavated contaminated soil that surplus to site requirements or cannot otherwise be reused shall be

disposed off site at facility licensed to receive such waste. Material shall be classified according to the

DEC (2009) Landfill Waste Classification and Definitions by the approved Environmental Consultant

using existing analytical data where this is available or through the collection and analysis of ex-situ

samples for the applicable COPCs in consideration to the SCR and previous environmental

investigation reports (Section 3.1).

7.4.5 Asbestos Waste Management

No asbestos dumps are known to exist on site. Therefore, any asbestos that remains on site is likely to

be in the form of fragmented asbestos containing material (ACM) such as asbestos-cement sheeting, or

as free asbestos fibres. The presence of asbestos in the subsurface at the site is commonly linked to

the presence of waste fill with the significant waste-fill deposits that comprise the Southern

Embankment the primary, but not necessarily the only, site location of asbestos.

In addition to the management measures prescribed for the excavation and stockpile of contaminated

soil (Section 7.2.8) and the waste management measures prescribed above, the following measures

apply to the management of asbestos containing waste:

Where ACM that is distinct from waste fill is encountered, the ACM shall be removed intact,

minimising breakage. Should breakage occur, all fragments are to be collected for disposal.

Unnecessary breaking of ACM shall not be permitted. The ACM shall be placed by hand into plastic

bags that are impermeable to asbestos dust in accordance with the Landfill Waste Classifications

and Definitions (DEC, 2009). The bags will be appropriately signed according to Safety Signs for

the Occupational Environment (Standards Australia, 1994) and placed into leak proof containers.

Whilst unlikely, where fibrous asbestos is encountered that is distinct from waste fill, the removal of

fibrous asbestos must be conducted by a licensed asbestos removalist, under the authority and with

the involvement of Worksafe WA who will determine the appropriate PPE.




26

ACM will be disposed off site to a landfill licensed to accept asbestos wastes in accordance with the

Landfill Waste Classifications and Definitions (DEC, 2009).

It is expected that contingency measures prescribed in Section 8 would apply in the instance that

distinct deposits of ACM of fibrous asbestos is encountered during subsurface works.

7.4.6 Noise and Vibration Management

In order to minimise any disturbance to adjacent land users, the following noise and vibration

management measures should be implemented:

Earthmoving machinery should be operated during daylight hours only.

Earthmoving machinery should be maintained in good working order with effective silencers where

applicable.

In consultation with a Civil Engineer experienced in the protection of heritage buildings, specific

vibration management measures should be considered where mechanical subsurface works are

proposed within close vicinity of heritage buildings.

7.4.7 Traffic Management

Where off-site disposal of contaminated soil requiring multiple trips is envisaged, a Traffic Management

Plan should be prepared to minimise any inconvenience or potential risk to other road users and local

residents. The Traffic Management Plan should amongst other considerations, nominate haulage

routes, any particular traffic management controls and given contaminated soil is being carted,

consideration of street sweeping requirements, wash-down bays and covering of loads.

7.4.8 Community Consultation

Subsurface disturbance of contaminated soil and/or groundwater has the potential disrupt nearby

tenants and therefore the following community consultation measures shall be implemented:

Nearby tenants shall be made aware of the subsurface works and any particular precautions that are

in place.

Works shall be implemented in a manner that minimises disruption to the community.

Adequate information shall be made available by the Site Owner to concerned parties about the

nature of works, the presence of contamination, and measures in place to complete the works

safely.

Community complaints shall be formally documented and responded to in a timely fashion.




27

8 CONTINGENCIES

Whilst with the careful implementation of subsurface control measures outlined in this SMP,

environmental incidents are unlikely to occur, environmental incident response measures have been

defined should any incidents arise. The minimum environmental incident response measures are

summarised in Table I. Additional corrective actions may be necessary depending on the exact nature

of the incident.

An example Environmental Incident and Hazard Form that could be used to document an incident is

provided in Appendix E.

TABLE I

ENVIRONMENTAL INCIDENT RESPONSE MEASURES

Incident Response

Unregistered subsurface disturbance occurs 1. Stop work immediately. Identify location of work relative

to site contamination documented in the SCR.

2. Where the SMP control measures are confirmed as

applicable, ensure such control measures are

implemented prior to proceeding with works.

3. Document the unregistered subsurface disturbance

through the completion of an Environmental Incident

Form and identify and rectify root cause factors.

4. Notify the approved Environmental Consultant.

Identification of unexpected contamination or type

of contamination

1. Stop work immediately. Identify location of work relative

to site contamination documented in the SCR and

confirm the inconsistency.

2. Where subsurface conditions are found to be

inconsistent with the SCR, obtain advice from the

approved Environmental Consultant prior to proceeding

with works.

3. Document the subsurface inconsistency through the

completion of an Environmental Incident Form.

Subsurface contamination becomes incidentally

exposed

1. Identify location of subsurface contamination relative to

site contamination documented in the SCR and confirm

the presence of contamination.

2. Engage a Contractor (if deemed necessary) to repair the

area of subsurface contamination in accordance with the

SMP.




28

TABLE I


Incident Response

3. Document the incidental exposure of subsurface

contamination through the completion of an

Environmental Incident Form and notify the approved

Environmental Consultant.

4. An assessment should be undertaken to identify why

subsurface contamination has become exposed and the

root cause rectified.

Non-conformance with SMP control measures 1. Stop work immediately. Confirm worker is aware of the

SMP and its requirements.

2. Ensure worker completes work in accordance with the

SMP or engage an alternative Contractor to complete

works.

3. In consultation with the approved Environmental

Consultant, identify whether additional work is

necessary as a result of the non-conformance.

4. Document the SMP non-conformance through the

completion of an Environmental Incident Form and notify

the approved Environmental Consultant.

5. An assessment should be undertaken to identify why the

SMP non-conformance occurred, depending on which

identify whether SMP improvement is warranted.

Unacceptable site emission/discharge event1 1. Stop work immediately and contain site discharge or

emission where possible.

2. Where the site emission or discharge represents an

immediate and significant environmental hazard,

immediately notify the relevant emergency departments.

3. Document the unacceptable emission/discharge through

the completion of an Environmental Incident Form and

notify the approved Environmental Consultant.


unacceptable site emission/discharge occurred,

depending on which identify whether SMP improvement

is warranted.




29

TABLE I


Incident Response

The SMP does not appear to address the type of

work proposed (and associated contamination

risks) or other subsurface restrictions that may

arise.

1. Notify the approved Environmental Consultant for advice

prior to completing the works. Task-specific procedures

may need to be developed and ultimately the SMP may

need to be revised.

Community complaint 1. Document the community complaint through the

completion of an Environmental Incident Form and notify

the approved Environmental Consultant.

2. Investigate the community complaint and whether works

are being completed in accordance with the SMP.


community member(s) was distressed, depending on

which, identify whether SMP improvement is warranted.

1: Examples of an unacceptable discharge or emission at this site may include discharge of groundwater effluent or entrainment of

contaminated soil into the stormwater network, visible dust extending beyond site boundaries, uncontrolled off -site disposal of contaminated soil, or an unacceptable discharge or emission determined by other qualitative and/or quantitative means.




30

9 PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND REPORTING

The following minimum performance monitoring and reporting mechanisms should be implemented at

the site indefinitely:

A log book shall be maintained by the Site Owner or the Site Owner’s representative documenting

tenant notifications, registration/induction of workers conducting subsurface works and any

subsurface disturbance works that take place.

All subsurface disturbance works shall be inspected by the tenant and/or Site Owner to ensure site

workers are implemented in accordance with the SMP control measures. In particular, the

excavation shall be inspected prior to backfill to ensure correct reinstatement of warning barriers,

clean fill cover and other physical barriers, as applicable.

The SCR shall be updated to reflect any changes in the nature and extent of contamination in the

subsurface and associated physical barriers.

All waste management documentation which may include for example waste transfer dockets,

landfill receipts and groundwater effluent disposal receipts, shall be reviewed for completeness and

consistency and retained on file.

All environmental sampling and monitoring works, as applicable, shall be formally documented by

the approved Environmental Consultant and are report provided to the Site Owner and other

stakeholders deemed relevant.

Where an environmental incident occurs, an Environmental Incident and Hazard Form shall be

completed and retained. Each incident should be investigated and where the control measures

defined in the SMP are found to be inadequate or no longer appropriate, the SMP shall be revised

by the approved Environmental Consultant.

The suitability and performance of the SMP against the nominated KPIs should be initially reviewed

after a period of no more than five years following implementation by the approved Environmental

Consultant. The SMP may be revised earlier than this date for example where the SMP is found to

not adequately address site conditions.

The SMP shall be made publically available by the Site Owner. As the Site Owner current at the time

of SMP preparation, the Metropolitan RA intends to make the SMP together with the SCR publically

available by posting these documents on its website (http://www.mra.wa.gov.au/).

It is acknowledged that the SMP and SCR were prepared for the broader Helena East Precinct as one

element of site management and reclassification under the Contaminated Sites Act 2003, and that

many of the constraint types and associated processes will not apply to individual lots following

formalisation of site subdivision. In this regard, it may be prudent but not essential for lot-specific ‘fact

sheets’ to be prepared that specifically address the applicability of the SMP and SCR to the lot.

http://www.mra.wa.gov.au/




31

10 REFERENCES

ANZECC (2000) Australian Water Quality Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, Australian

and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, Canberra.

ATA (2006) Helena East Precinct Remediation and Redevelopment: Public Environmental Review,

Report No. 2005/142, ATA Environmental (ATA), Perth.

BBG (1994) Midland Railway Workshops Site, Environmental Audit. Bowman Bishaw Gorham (BBG),

Perth.

BBG (1995) Midland Railway Workshops Site Contaminant Migration Study. Report R14185. Bowman

Bishaw Gorham.

CMPS&F (1995) Midland Railway Workshops. Assessment of Contamination and its Implications.

July, 1995.

CMPS&F (1996) Environmental Investigations: Midland Railway Workshops. December, 1996.

Coffey Environments (2009a) Remediation and Validation Report, Part of Helena East Precinct

(Part 1), Former Railway Workshops, Midland. Coffey Environments, Perth. Prepared for the Midland

Redevelopment Authority. Report No. 2008/172, V1, 30 July 2009.

Coffey Environments (2009b) Dissolved Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Plume Investigation. Coffey

Environments, Perth. Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment Authority. Report No. 2007/273, V3,

30 October 2009.

Coffey Environments (2010a) Pre-Remediation Health Risk Assessment, Helena East Precinct,

Former Midland Railway Workshops. Coffey Environments, Perth. Prepared for the Midland

Redevelopment Authority. Report No. EP2008/140, V3, 3 December 2010.

Coffey Environments (2010b) Health Risk Assessment - Block 2 and Block 3, Helena East Precinct,

Former Midland Railway Workshops, Midland, Western Australia. Coffey Environments, Perth.

Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment Authority. Report No. EP2010/114, V2, 2 November 2010.

Coffey Environments (2011a) Post Remediation – Dissolved Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Plume

Investigation, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway Workshops. Coffey Environments, Perth.

Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment Authority. Report No. EP2011/127, V1, 9 September 2011.

Coffey Environments (2011b) Post Remediation Groundwater Contaminant Fate and Transport

Assessment, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway Workshops, Western Australia. Version 1,

August 2011. Report No: EP2011/122, V1.

Coffey Environments (2011c) Soil Vapour Investigation Results (March 2011), Helena East Precinct,

Former Midland Railway Workshops, Midland, Western Australia. Letter report prepared for:

Environmental Resources Management, 3 June 2011.

Coffey Environments (2011d) Post-Remediation Health Risk Assessment, Helena East Precinct,

Former Midland Railway Workshops. Coffey Environments, Perth. Prepared for the Midland

Redevelopment Authority. Report No. EP2011/117, V2, December 2011.




32

Coffey Environments (2011e) Remediation and Validation Report, Part of Helena East Precinct


Redevelopment Authority. Report No. 2010/065, V2, 2 February 2011.

Coffey Environments (2011f) Remediation and Validation Report, Part of Helena East Precinct


Redevelopment Authority. Report No. 2011/166, V1, 20 October 2011.

Coffey Environments (2012) Subsurface Constraints Register, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland

Railway Workshops (Version 5). Coffey Environments, Perth. Prepared for the Midland Redevelopment

Authority. Report No. EP2009/151, V5 13 July 2012.

Crisalis (2007) Investigation of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Vapour and Atmosphere in Areas

of Known Soil Contamination at Helena East Precinct, Midland Railway Workshops, Crisalis

International (Crisalis), Perth.

DEC (2010) Assessment Levels for Soil, Sediment and Water. Contaminated Sites Management

Series, Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC), Perth.

DEC (2009) Landfill Waste Classification and Definitions 1996 (as amended), Department of

Environment and Conservation (DEC), Perth.

ENV (2002) Detailed Site Investigations/Helena Precinct Waste Fill, Midland Railway Workshops

Volume 1. ENV. Australia (ENV), Perth.

ENV (2003) Hydrogeological Investigation Helena West, Midland Railway Workshops, ENV Australia

(ENV), Perth.

ENV (2004) Environmental Investigations in Support of Referral Helena East, Midland Railway

Workshops Site, ENV Australia (ENV), Perth.

Standards Australia (1994) Safety Signs for the Occupational Environment, AS 1319-1994.




33

11 STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS

(please refer over the page)

Figures Subsurface Management Plan


1414

1414

13131212

11111010

10101111

1212

1313

1414

99

88

77

66

55

9988

77

66

55

55

55

44

33

3344

55

119119

404404

405405

601

602602604

605

606

607607 608608

640640641

642

643

644

645

646

6476488 649649

650650

651651

652652

653653

654654

655655

656656657657

658658659659660660

661661

662662

663663664664 665665

666666

667667

668668

670670

671671

672672

673673

674674

675675

676676

677677

678678

679679

680680

681681

682682

683683

684684

685685

686686

687687

688688

705705

80048004

8007800780118011

80148014

80088008

SECTOR 13SECTOR 13

SECTOR 10ASECTOR 10A

SECTOR 10DSECTOR 10DSECTOR 10BSECTOR 10B

SECTOR 10CSECTOR 10C

SECTOR 10ESECTOR 10E

Boiler ShopBoiler Shop

Black Smith Shop

Black Smith Shop

Tool RoomTool Room

Machine Shop

Machine ShopFitting ShopFitting ShopDiesel Shop

Diesel Shop

TarpaulinTarpaulinShopShop

PowerPowerHouse

House

PatternPatternStoreStore Pattern

PatternShopShop

Element Shop

Element Shop

BLOCK 1BLOCK 1

BLOCK 2BLOCK 2

BLOCK 3BLOCK 3

Main StoreMain Store

RailwayRailwayInstitute

Institute

Gate KeepersGate KeepersOfficeOffice

Time KeepersTime KeepersOfficeOffice

BoilerBoilerHouse/

House/CopperCopperShopShop

AmbulanceAmbulanceBuildingBuilding

AmbulanceAmbulanceGarageGarage

AirAirCompressorsCompressors

Chief Mechanical

Chief MechanicalEngineers Building

Engineers Building

OilOilStoreStore

Weigh Bridge

Weigh Bridge

FoundryFoundry

HELENA WESTHELENA WEST

HELENA EASTHELENA EAST

AREA EAREA E

HELENA STHELENA STEXTENSIONEXTENSION

EXTENT OF SOUTHERNEXTENT OF SOUTHERNEMBANKMENTEMBANKMENT

HELENAHELENAEASTEAST

HELENAHELENAEASTEAST

AREAS A, B, C & DAREAS A, B, C & D

HE

LEN

AH

ELE

NA

STR

EE

TS

TRE

ET

FOUNDRY ROAD

FOUNDRY ROAD

YELVERTONYELVERTON

DRIVEDRIVE

PLA

CE

PLA

CE

CE

NTE

NN

IAL

CE

NTE

NN

IAL

HE

LEN

A

S

TRE

ET

HE

LEN

A

S

TRE

ET

HE

LEN

A S

TRE

ET

HE

LEN

A S

TRE

ET

LOT 669LOT 669

80258025

1520215202

1520215202

707707

709709

708708

703703

704704

698698

699699

700700

701701

702702

696696

695695

694694

693693

692692

691691

690690

80168016

80158015801801

802802

803803

804804

806806

808808

80108010

755755

807807

80098009

737737

738738

739739

740740

66

741741

746746

762762

134134

744744

745745

787787

499499

500500

502502

503503

6696691529915299

80338033

1530015300

926926

927927

928928

929929

930930

931931

900900901901

902902903903

904904905905

906906907907

908908909909

910910911911

912912913913

914914915915

916916917917918918

919919920920 921921

922922923923

924924 925925

932932

933933

HeritageHeritageTreeTree

WorkersWorkersWallWall

1414

10101111

1212

1313

1414

9988

77

66

55

RiverRiver

Fri

02 D

ec 1

1P

RIN

TE

D:

LEGEND

0 25 50 75

metres

SCALE 1 : 2 500 @ A3

100

CoalCoalDamDam

Midland Redevelopment Authority Boundary

Helena East Area Boundary

Cadastral Boundary

Topographic Contour (mAHD)HelenaHelena

SITE LOCALITY PLANFIGURE 1

EN

VI/P

ER

T/0

0147

AA

/Man

agem

ent P

lan/

EP

2009

-140

F01

.dgn

DA

TU

M: M

GA

zn5

0

DR

AW

N: C

R 0

2-12

-11

C

HE

CK

ED

: JL

02-

12-1

1

BASE SOURCE: McMULLEN & NOLAN, Dwg No. 92498-191, Jul 2011.BASE SOURCE: McMULLEN & NOLAN, Dwg No. 92498-191, Jul 2011.AERIAL PHOTO SOURCE: NearMap, flown July 2011.AERIAL PHOTO SOURCE: NearMap, flown July 2011.

SUBSURFACE MANAGEMENT PLAN, HELENA EAST PRECINCTFORMER MIDLAND RAILWAY WORKSHOPS

REGIONAL LOCATION

MIDLANDREDEVELOPMENT

AREA

Appendix A DEC Site Summary Form

Subsurface Management Plan Helena East Precinct

Former Midland Railway Workshops

1

Site Summary Form – Contaminated Site Assessment For completion by the person(s) submitting a report(s) to be assessed by the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) as per the information requirements of the DEC Reporting on Site Assessments (2001) guideline. Completing this form enables DEC to maintain accurate records for the site.

Please note: A completed site summary form must accompany each report submitted to DEC for assessment. Each box must be filled out appropriately. Please do not write “refer to report” in any section.

Copies of all relevant/current Certificates of Title must accompany this form. Site location details:

Site name (e.g. where site may be known by a common/ business name) Helena East Precinct, Former Railway Workshops, Midland

Lot no. NA House no. NA Street Yelverton Drive

Suburb Midland State WA Postcode 6056

Crown Reserve (if applicable) NA

Certificate(s) of Title (or equivalent) Volume/Folio: Lot 499 on Deposited Plan 66298 [Volume 2750, Folio 696] Lot 500 on Deposited Plan 66298 [Volume 2750, Folio 697] Lot 502 on Deposited Plan 66298 [Volume 2750, Folio 698] Lot 503 on Deposited Plan 66298 [Volume 2750, Folio 699] Lot 669 on Deposited Plan 55478 [Volume 2718, Folio 696] Lot 9011 on Deposited Plan 48323 [Volume LR3156, Folio160] Lot 9014 on Deposited Plan 48737 [Volume 2719, Folio 400] Lot 5003 on Deposited Plan 38765 [Volume 2562, Folio 402] Lot 9502 on Deposited Plan 48323 [Volume 2614, Folio 289] Lot 9503 on Deposited Plan 48323 [Volume 2614, Folio 290]

All Certificates of Title stated above have been provided

Where the subject site comprises of multiple certificates of title, please list all certificates:………………………………

Where substances have migrated beyond the cadastral boundaries of the subject site, please provide the addresses, relevant Certificates of Title documentation and owners details for all offsite properties impacted (includes soil and/or groundwater), as an attachment to this form. Is a hard copy of Certificate of Title and associated sketch for all listed sites attached? (Y/N) Y

WAPC reference no. (where applicable) Current Owner/Occupier details:

Site owner (Name and address) Midland Redevelopment Authority Railway Institute Building Cnr Helena Street and Yelverton Drive Midland WA 6056

Site owner company ACN/ABN 63 790 110 828

Site occupier (name and address) NA

Site occupier company ACN/ABN NA Site status (at time of reporting):

NA

2

Proposed land use (e.g. high density residential/child care facility) Residential (standard/high density)

Public Open Space

Commercial

Mixed Use including Community

Identified substances and relevant media (e.g. benzene in soil and groundwater, xylene in soil only)

Soil:

Metals (As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Cr VI, Cu, Mn, Ni, Pb, Sb, Sn, Hg and Zn)

TPHs, PAHs

Asbestos

Groundwater:

Metals (Al, Cd, Cu, Mn, Ni, Zn, Hg and Sb)

Water quality indicators (NO3, hardness, Cl, SO3 and pH)

Volatile Organic Compounds (1,1-DCE, PCE, MEK, Benzene, VC,

1,1-DCE and PCE)

Asbestos (Y/N) Y Health Risk

Assessment (Y/N) Y Community health concerns identified

(Y/N) N Radiological

issues (Y/N)

N

Air quality issues (Y/N)

N Past/present landfill (Y/N)

N Potential human exposure to identified substances > DEC’s Health Investigation Levels or equivalent (Y/N)

Y Other human health issues (Y/N)

Y

Specify other health issues: Potential vapour inhalation risks to future residential occupants based on theoretical future accumulation and volatilisation of Vinyl Chloride in groundwater. Where ‘yes’ is recorded for at least one of the above categories, please submit two copies of the report(s) (relevant documentation) to DEC for referral to the Department of Health (or Radiological Council, in the case of radiological issues) Are site activities licensed under the Environmental Protection Act 1986? (Y/N) Licence No. N

Where laboratory analysis has been undertaken, is the laboratory NATA accredited for all analytes and analytical methodologies used? (Y/N) (If not, why not?)

N/A

Community Consultation: (as per the DEC’s Community Consultation (December 2006) guideline)

Community consultation program commenced/proposed (Y/N) Y

Are consultation program details (e.g. community consultation plan) provided in attached report (Y/N) N

History of Investigation:

Have previous site investigations been undertaken? (Y/N - if yes, please provide details below) Y

Report title, date and author: Midland Railway Workshops Site Environmental Audit (BBG, 1994);

Midland Railway Workshops Assessment of Contamination and its Implications (CMPS&F, 1995);

Midland Railway Workshops Site Contaminant Migration Study (BBG, 1995);

Environmental Investigations, Midland Railway Workshops (CMPS&F, 1996);

Detailed Site Investigation, Helena Precinct Waste Fill, Midland Railway Workshops (ENV, 2002);

Hydrogeological Investigation, Helena West, Midland Railway Workshops (ENV, 2003);

Environmental Investigations in Support of Referral, Helena East, Midland Railway Workshops Site

3

(ENV, 2004);

Investigation of Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Vapour and Atmosphere in Areas of Known Soil

Contamination at Helena East Precinct, Midland Railway Workshops (Crisalis, 2007);

Remediation and Validation Report, Part of Helena East Precinct (Part 1), Former Railway Workshops,

Midland (Coffey Environments, 2009a);

Dissolved Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Plume Investigation, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway


Pre-Remediation Health Risk Assessment, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway Workshops

(Coffey Environments, 2010a);

Health Risk Assessment - Block 2 and Block 3, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway


Post Remediation – Dissolved Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Plume Investigation, Helena East Precinct,

Former Midland Railway Workshops (Coffey Environments 2011b);

Post Remediation Groundwater Contaminant Fate and Transport Assessment, Helena East Precinct,

Former Midland Railway Workshops (Coffey Environments 2011c);

Soil Vapour Investigation Results (March 2011), Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway

Workshops (Coffey Environments 2011d);

Post-Remediation Health Risk Assessment, Helena East Precinct, Former Midland Railway Workshops

(Coffey Environments, 2011e);


Midland (Coffey Environments 2011f); and


Midland (Coffey Environments 2011g).

Declaration:

The information contained in this site summary form is a true representation of the information contained in the attached report(s)/document(s).

Full name (print) Justin Lumsden

Position held Associate Environmental Scientist

Signature Date 5/12/11

Please ensure that a hardcopy of the current Certificate(s) of Title and associated sketch accompanies the site summary form. DEC cannot proceed with the assessment of the report if this information is not provided.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DEC Registrar Only Registrar name: Signature:

CoT verified (Y/N) Owner details verified (Y/N) Complete form (Y/N)

Awaiting Classification (Y/N)

Awaiting Re-Classification (Y/N)

4

Incomplete Form (Y/N)

LWQB Assessment Officer:

Comments/Actions:

Date of data entry:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendix B Certificates of Title



LANDGATE COPY OF ORIGINAL NOT TO SCALE Tue Aug 25 10:09:58 2009 JOB 32815135



LANDGATE COPY OF ORIGINAL NOT TO SCALE Thu Aug 26 10:28:55 2010 JOB 35103317




LANDGATE COPY OF ORIGINAL NOT TO SCALE Fri Jul 30 16:49:13 2010 JOB 34940499

LANDGATE COPY OF ORIGINAL NOT TO SCALE Tue Nov 4 08:23:15 2008 JOB 31236807










TYPE

PURPOSE

PLAN OF

DISTRICT TOWNSITE

LOCALITY

LOCAL AUTHORITY

INDEX SCALE:

LODGEDDATE

FEE PAID

ASSESS No.I.S.C.

SUBJECT TO

DEPOSITED PLAN

FREEHOLD

MIDLAND

ALL DISTANCES ARE IN METRES

1 11

SUBJECT PURPOSE STATUTORY REFERENCE ORIGIN LAND BURDENED BENEFIT TO COMMENTS

INTERESTS AND NOTIFICATIONS

S.S.A.

LEGALCOMPONENT

CERTIFIEDCORRECT

FULL AUDIT

F.S.C. 66298SHEET OF SHEETS

REG26A (4)

YES

FORMER TENURE

ON

FIELD BOOK

IN ORDER FOR DEALINGS

APPROVED

750 at A21 :

DOCKETPLAN

TYPE OF VALIDATION

DATE

DATEINSPECTOR OF PLANS & SURVEYS / AUTHORIZED LAND OFFICER

For INSPECTOR OF PLANS & SURVEYS / AUTHORIZED LAND OFFICER

I

SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATEReg 54

Licensed Surveyor Date

SEE SMARTPLAN

ALL BOUNDARY / CORNER SURVEY MARKSSHOWN ON THIS SHEET ARE INDICATIVE ONLY.

USE ONLY THE SURVEY SHEET/S WHEN DETERMININGTHE TRUE FINAL POSITION AND TYPE OF ALL SURVEY

MARKS PLACED PERTAINING TO THIS PLAN.

SURVEY CARRIED OUT UNDER REG 26ASPECIAL SURVEY AREA GUIDELINES

SEE SHEETS FOR SURVEY INFORMATION

hereby certify that this plan is accurate and is acorrect representation of the - (a) *survey; and/or (b) *calculations from measurements, [*delete if inapplicable]undertaken for the purposes of this plan and that itcomplies with the relevant written law(s) in relationto which it is lodged.

AMENDMENT DATE

AMENDMENTS TABLEVERSION AUTHORISED BY

VERSION

D.P.I. FILE No.

PO Box 3526, Success, W.A. 6964Telephone: (08) 6436 1599Facsimile: (08) 6436 1500

Email: [email protected]

SUBDIVISIONScott J. ANDERSON

SWAN

CITY OF SWAN

LOT 5003 ONDP 38765

C/T 2562/402

MAPS Ref : 92498dp-538fSector 13

DP66298.CSD

N

0 6015


SCALE 1 : 750 @ A2

FILE

DATEHon. MINISTER for PLANNING and INFRASTRUCTURE

APPROVED BY Hon. MINISTER for PLANNING and INFRASTRUCTUREunder Sec. 20(7) of the Midland Redevelopment Act

SU001290977

27.2

36

2

30.8

64

33.1

93

26.8

96

34.6

36

8.19

3

6.51

51.31

55.2

41.49

12.75

29.9

146.727

71.39

12.611

69.4

41.96

23.015

30.5

47

28

90°

84°20'39"

269°49'90°

89°46'57"

90°

90°

89°46'57"

90°

90°13'3"

90°

177°

17'3

3" 90°15'32

"

179°

23'5

8"

92°3'56"

4992271m²

5001449m²

502

5032314m²

R502 SEC 136C OF THE T.L.A. LOT 502 LOT 499

2.6

13.806

95°37'17"

270°

(42.65)

(96.69)

(328.128)

(147.65)

(60.816)

YELVERTON

DRIVE

15300

90°15'32

"

515DP 50077

DP 38765

~ 47684

15202DP 41364

~ 46210

270°

CENT

ENNI

AL P

LACE

SEC 70A OF THE T.L.A.NOTIFICATION THIS PLAN (RAIL NOISE)

SEC 70A OF THE T.L.A.NOTIFICATION THIS PLAN (AIRCRAFT NOISE)

10.1

90° 790°

10.1

12.75

90°

(42.65)

33.1

93

29.9

499502

90°

7

ENLARGEMENT 'A'Not to scale

SEE ENLG. 'A'

R502

RIGHT OF CARRIAGEWAY

YELVERTON DRIVE

THIS PLAN

136°19'59"

43°40'1"9.505

136°19'59"

9026881m²

3

3

92°3'56"

90°15'32" 3

3.002

30.6

69

8 LOT 9026

EASEMENT(Drainage)

SEC 167 OF THE P.& D. ACTREG 33 (a) THIS PLAN LOT 502

EASEMENT(Underground Electrical) SEC 27A. REG 8. T.P & D. ACT. WESTERN POWER

CORPORATIONDP 38765

8

10.91110.9

90°270°

90°13'3"

CITY OF SWAN

33a

33a

ALL LOTSEXCEPT 9026

ALL LOTSEXCEPT 9026

133.844

5095m²

5.3

5.3

5.9 270°

270°

5.990°

90°

33c60.844

89°46

'57"

SEE ENLG. 'B'

89°46

'57"

3

90°

34.6

36

270°

33.01113.806

503502

3

YELVERTON DRIVE

33b133.844(147.65)

ENLARGEMENT 'B'Not to scale

THIS PLAN LOT 50333b EASEMENT(Sewerage)

THIS PLAN LOT 50233c EASEMENT(Electricity Supply)

SEC 167 OF THE P.& D. ACTREG 33 (c)

ELECTRICITY NETWORKSCORPORATION

LOTS 499, 500, 502, 503, 9026, ROAD AND EASEMENTS

33b

WATER CORPORATIONSEC 167 OF THE P.& D. ACTREG 33 (b)

90°13'3"

FINAL

36.2

95

28.2

49

29.0

28

5.195

16.688

77

146.925

4.25

49.326

58.135

42.475

46.3

35.03611.081

73.068

4.25

6.637

41.893

36.785

29°28'51"

156°52'10"

169°

55'3

6"19

3°46

'43"

243°

7' 117°51'44"

90°

90°

70°47'56"

6691323m²

6017046m²

9.295

TYPE

PURPOSE

PLAN OF

DISTRICT

DOLA FILE

TOWNSITE

LOCALITY

LOCAL AUTHORITY

INDEX SCALE:

LODGEDDATE

FEE PAID

ASSESS No.I.S.C.

SUBJECT TO

DEPOSITED PLAN

FREEHOLDALL DISTANCES ARE IN METRES

1 11 1

SU0011

ED/VER AMENDMENT BY DATESIGNATURE

SUBJECT PURPOSE STATUTORY REFERENCE ORIGIN LAND BURDENED BENEFIT TO COMMENTS

INTERESTS AND NOTIFICATIONS

AMENDMENTS TABLE

S.S.A.

LEGALCOMPONENT

CERTIFIEDCORRECT

FULL AUDIT

F.S.C. 55478

EDITION VERSION

SHEET OF SHEETSREG26A (4)

YES

UNLODGED VERSION

FORMER TENURE

ON

FIELD BOOK

IN ORDER FOR DEALINGS

APPROVED

1000 at A21 :

DOCKETPLAN

TYPE OF VALIDATION

DATE

DATEINSPECTOR OF PLANS & SURVEYS / AUTHORIZED LAND OFFICER

For INSPECTOR OF PLANS & SURVEYS / AUTHORIZED LAND OFFICER

I

SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATEReg 54

William S. GUEST

Licensed Surveyor Date

SEE SMARTPLAN

ALL BOUNDARY / CORNER SURVEY MARKSSHOWN ON THIS SHEET ARE INDICATIVE ONLY.

USE ONLY THE SURVEY SHEET/S WHEN DETERMININGTHE TRUE FINAL POSITION AND TYPE OF ALL SURVEY

MARKS PLACED PERTAINING TO THIS PLAN.

SURVEY CARRIED OUT UNDER REG 26ASPECIAL SURVEY AREA GUIDELINES

SEE SHEETS FOR SURVEY INFORMATION

hereby certify that this plan is accurate and is acorrect representation of the - (a) *survey; and/or (b) *calculations from measurements, [*delete if inapplicable]undertaken for the purposes of this plan and that itcomplies with the relevant written law(s) in relationto which it is lodged.PO Box 117, South Perth WA 6951

Telephone: (08) 6436 1599Facsimile: (08) 6436 1500

Email: [email protected]

HEBELANE

AMHERST

ROAD

~4770315577DP 41641 ~46210

15202DP 41364

602DP 50641

~4768415299DP 38765

DP 4136415202

~46210

28.2

49

35.036

11.081

89°24'45"

5.18

1

89°48'43"

33.438

23.4

33

93°18'10"

15299

YELVERTON DRIVEDP 38765

DP 38765

DP 41364

~4621015202

H1

~47684

29.0

28

46.3

89°37'27"

90°

90°58'

45"

6691323m²

180°

0'57

"

94°5'38"

ENLARGEMENT 'E'NOT TO SCALE

H2

SEE ENLG'E'

225°141°21'2"

184°

41'3

"

225°

225°

71°46'40"

H2

YELVERTON DRIVE

SUBDIVISION

H1 MEMORIAL SEC 56(1)HERITAGE of WA Act 1990 HERITAGE COUNCIL of WA

H2 MEMORIAL SEC 56(1)HERITAGE of WA Act 1990

LOT 669

HERITAGE COUNCIL of WA

DOC I242012

DOC I241998

NOTIFICATION SEC 70A OF THE T. L. A. DOC Aircraft Noise

SWAN

CITY OF SWAN

90977

LOT 9018 ONDP 50641

C.T 2631/77

FILE

DATEHon. MINISTER for PLANNING and INFRASTRUCTURE

APPROVED BY Hon. MINISTER for PLANNING and INFRASTRUCTUREunder Sec. 20(7) of the Midland Redevelopment Act

N

0 8020


SCALE 1 : 1000 @ A2

LOT 669

LOTS 601, 669

YELVERTON DRIVE

LOTS 601 AND 669

RESERVE FORRECREATION

LOT 601 RESERVE FOR RECREATION VESTS IN THE CROWN UNDERSEC 152 OF THE P & D ACT THIS PLAN

MAPS Ref : 92498dp-414aDP55478.CSD

FINALWOODBRIDGE/MIDLAND

Appendix C Subdivision Cadastral Plan



PO Box 117South PerthWA 6951Australia

Tel: (08) 9474 1099Fax: (08) 9474 [email protected]

McMullen Nolan andPartners Surveyors Pty LtdABN 90 009 363 311

Description Drawn Date CheckedRev.

Scale 1 : 1000 @ A1

PCGDatum

Drawn

Job No.

Date

Drawing

Revision

0 8020


SCALE 1 : 1000 @ A1 - 1 : 2000 @ A3

NORTH

The contents of this plan are

current and correct as of the

date stated within the revision

panel. All consultants and persons

wishing to utilise this data should

satisfy themselves of this plans

currency by contacting

McMullen Nolan and Partners Surveyors.

Suite 11,2 Hardy StSouth PerthW.A. 6151

18/3/2004

92498

92498-191

FILESmapCOGO:- precal8-10&13Ustation:- 92498pr-191ar

AR

8025

SECTORS 10A, 10B, 10C, 10D, 10E & 13MIDLAND REDEVELOPMENT

Midland Redevelopment Authority

15202

15202

707

709708

703

704

698

699

700

701

702

696

695

694

693

692

691

690

Jennifer Mann

Scott AndersonProj. Mngr.

8016

8015

QualityAssuredCompany

A1

ORIGINAL

ROAD 18 ROAD

18

ROAD

26

ROAD

ROAD 21

ROAD 21

ROAD

21

ROAD 21

ROAD 32

ROAD 19

ROAD 30

HELE

NAST

R EET

ROAD

20

ROAD 28

ROAD

2

ROAD

22(15m)

(23m

)

(30m

)

(16m)

(15m)

(14m

)

(10.5m)

(15m)

(15m)

(14m

)

(15m)

(11m

)(1

6m)

(11m

)(1

3m)

(6.01m)

(15m)

(13m) (13.5m)

(14.

5m)

ROAD

22

(13m

)

27(6.01m)

FOUNDRY ROAD

YELVERTON DRIVE

PLACE

CENT

ENNI

AL

R OAD

3 3(2

8m)

(14m)(11.5m)(13.301m)(9m)(11.1m) (9m) (11.1m)

(13m)ROAD 21

Land Survey Hydrographic Survey 3D Laser Scanning 3D VisualisationMapping Solid Terrain Models Cartographics GIS

All areas and dimensions depictedon this plan are subject to

survey and Landgate registration

A A

B B

AL TDK 30/4/2008 TAVAdd d bt ti f l t 801 & 803 804

LOT 803RESIDES BELOW



ROAD

2

2

HELE

NA ST

REET

HELE

NA ST

REET

HELE

NA ST

REET

-

SECTOR 10A

SECTOR 10B

SECTOR 10C

SECTOR 10D

SECTOR 10E

SECTOR 13

P.O.S.

P.O.S.

801

HELE

NA ST

REET

HELE

NA ST

REET

803

SECTION B - B

SECTION A - A

8010

802

804

RAIL RESERVE

8010

ROAD

2

2

Road To Be

Acquired

Road

Widening

6m W

ide

Acc

ess

Ease

men

t

6m W

ide

Acc

ess

Ease

men

t6m

Wid

e Acc

ess

Ease

men

t

6m W

ide

Acc

ess

Ease

men

t Road

Widening

6m W

ide

Acc

ess

Ease

men

t

6m W

ide

Acc

ess

Ease

men

t Road

Widening

Joins 92498-193 & 92498-195

Power

Ea

semen

t

5m W

ide

Acc

ess

Ease

men

t

Road To Be

Acquired

Road To Be

Acquired

Road To Be

Acquired

6mAccess Easement

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

Join

s 92

498-

189

Padmount

Site

AM JJM 28/5/2008 TDKAmended lot 804 & 808, Added easement to lot 806 and removed easement in lot 787 & 134

INCLUDING HATCHED AREA

AREA BASEMENT BELOW

2794m²

AREA BASEMENT BELOW

2911m²

AREA BASEMENT BELOW

2641m²

Access Easement Access Easement

AN GDC 11/06/2008 TAVAdded lots 805, 8002, access easements and amended lots 807, 808 and 8009

PLANNER'S DESIGN SOURCE for Rev ANPlanner :- PalassisReceived date:- 02/06/2008File name:- Foundry & Pattern shop 010608.pdf

AO

TJM 26/06/2008 TAVAmend lots 6,134,711,741-742,746,755-757,762,8010, lot 804 ' Resides Below' area, remove easement

in lot 806, various buildings, add Right of Carriageway to lot 755, generate summary stats table.

(8m)

Right of Carriageway Easement

DENOTES EASEMENT

DENOTES CADASTRAL BOUNDARY

DENOTES STAGE BOUNDARY

LINE STYLES LEGEND

4.25

7.4

7.3

25

6.7

6.01

42.5

3

37.9

9

27.5

1

24.1

9

11

34.7

3

16.6

172

.24

10.9

7

19.1

6

26.6

5

34.9

5

18.3

2

31.7

4

37.0

3

7.9

3 3

16.2

933

.85

70.3

576

.31

21.7

5

39.9

265

.6

19.2

4

16.0

8

22.2

3

16.8

8

5

21.7

5

15.7

5

5.08

73.5

168

.39

47.9

2

6.36

2525

9.58

19.3

5

28.2

5

36.4

530

.38

21.4

5

21.9

6

14

2

17.0

8

26.9

22.7

622

.27

31.8

6

9.6

50.1

9

3937

.03

25.8

3

34.6

4

34.8

5

10.8

711

29.0

3

2 5. 3

3

72.7

2

4 9.1

4 1.9

2

72.8

4 3.9

7

18.1

11.

04

8.19

14.2

3

30.4

4

35

26.8

24.1

24.7

5

25.3

9

26.6

9

23.4

526.0

4

3.04

26.9

5

2.81

26.9

3

25.2

9

26.4

1

26.7

426.6

7

12.5

6

7.67

23.7

3

17.3

7

18.0

6

24.5

535

.05

35.0

5

8.38

8.5

23.2

4

23.4

4

22.9

9

23.4

11.69

23.2

3

8.21

35

24.9

7

29.7

25.7

25.2

225.4

6

23.8

624.4

3

7.07

8.49

1.41

4.25

8.5

14.2

6.36

1.41

8.5

8.5

7.07

2.82 4.

25

4.25

4.25

4.25

4.25

4.34

4.25

4.25

4.25

4.25

6.6

55.81

91.61

5.9

39.8 42.12

184.18

8.65

4.92

33.8612.81

68

23.82

45.77

39.8

68

9.35

77.9684.4

65.02

53.79

31.59

48

23.49

36.73

46.54

10

58.02

7

45.65 62.44

10.17

46

5.9

68.45

132.440.93

104.88

10 54.9341.76

53.75

87.25

76.24

46.3

185.49

57.6

86.27

42.6513.81

10.4

4.75 48.54 58 45.83

39.57

48.9

13.23

159.12

45.59163.29 25.4

167.63

184.68

57.6173.13 69.4

59.6888

28.32

188.18

188.18

10.83

48.42

48.49

22.56

25.4

35.04 16.01 12.9311.08

33.91

34.16

26.15

3.5 41.96

7.837.81

7.817.81 9.55

7.81

28.81

9 7.77

7.8

22.08

23.91

7.74

29.3121.57

50.53

39.35

7.76

7.787.78

7.787.78

7.77

12

5.56

9.83

7.88.96

5.517.77

7.78

7.8

38.78

7.77

7.77 7.77

23.41

20.44

24.61

14.02

16.93

16.17

7.4

13.31

7.86

7.74

7.74

6.71

3

7.7

30.86

5.52

7.74

7.74

25.58

27.75

29.2

7.1

8.84

6.48

7.768.96

7.74

7.74

7.74

7.74

5.41

6.81

23.58

14.17

59.81 81.6

21.79

47.36

42.45

7.73

7.66

7.72

42.416.55 7.74

15.857.74

7.73

4.25

5.66

6.36

8.5

2.25

8.48

8.5

9.2

4.25

4.25

16.7

4.25

12.01

4.25

4.25

4.25

4.25

4.36

11.1

4.25

61.2438ha

1347600m²

4995777m²500

1037m²5022001m²

5032324m²

6691323m²

7121400m²

7141531m²

716

195m²

191m²

7351815m²

7361584m²

7371368m²

7381460m²

7392421m²

7401292m²

7411490m² 742

2438m²

7441848m²

7451391m²

7461.477

5ha

7511400m²

7521530m²

7531753m²

7541584m² 755

3273m²

756 299m²757655m²

7621.4331ha

7871.0178ha

8012390m²

8021290m²

8032304m² 804

1700m²

8051210m²

8065132m²

8073178m²

8082854m²

80094982m²

80107695m²

15299

432m²430m²

2.1

2.1

2.1

2.5

13.2

2

4.26

1.8

2.6

4.44

1.82

1.82

6.69

4.563.25

1.22

0.64

4.67

4.82

2.6

2.6

3.57

2.6

5.76

4.99

66.6

2.6

67.5

679

.5

710

179m²

713222m²

715

233m²

717

190m²

718

198m²719

196m²720

194m²721

722

187m²

723

180m²724

181m²725

204m²726

225m²

727

201m²

728

206m²

729

208m²

730

209m²731

205m²

732

200m²

733

195m²

734

190m²

743

185m²

748

224m²

749

225m²

750

208m²

15300

164m²

212m²

180m²

Padmount

Site

Padmount

Site

AP CML 19/8/2008 TAVWiden road reserve around public art.

AQ TDK 2/10/2008 TAVAdded road widening on lots 8025 and 8033. Spilt lot 8033 into lots 8033 & 8034

Amend pad mount site in lot 8033 and remove lot 8034 - add service and light pole easements to lots

710, 713, 715-734, 743 and 748-750

AR

SCL 16/10/2008 TAV

21.5

48.9

2

12.3

12.3

26.7328.0

2

21.88 71.7

22.8

102.27100.37

40.9845.4

62.22

5.57

4.25

5.9

15.06

80333139m²

P.O.S.LAND USE / STATISTICS

SECTOR 10 A-E SUMMARY WAPC Ref:-

PARCEL TYPE MAP SYMBOL NUMBER OFPARCELS AREA (ha)

Traditional Lots 58 11.5147

Public Open Space P.O.S. 3 1.5815

Road Widenings ROAD WIDENING 3 0.0556

Roads (inc. truncations) 3.0005

STAGE TOTAL 16.1524

LAND USE / STATISTICSSECTOR 10A WAPC Ref:-





STAGE TOTAL 2.5365

LAND USE / STATISTICSSECTOR 10B WAPC Ref:-





STAGE TOTAL 4.3149

LAND USE / STATISTICSSECTOR 10C WAPC Ref:-



Public Open Space P.O.S. 0 0


STAGE TOTAL 0.7943

LAND USE / STATISTICSSECTOR 10D WAPC Ref:-




Road Widenings ROAD WIDENING 3 0.0556


STAGE TOTAL 5.5837

LAND USE / STATISTICSSECTOR 10E WAPC Ref:-





STAGE TOTAL 2.9230

LAND USE / STATISTICSSECTOR 13 WAPC Ref:-





STAGE TOTAL 1.3334

ENGINEER'S DESIGN SOURCE for Rev AREngineer :-Wood and GrieveReceived date:- 13/10/2008Data purpose:- Padmount Sites and Easements

DENOTES SERVICE EASEMENT

DENOTES LIGHTPOLE EASEMENT

A

B

AA

AB

A A

A

AA A

AB A

AA

AB

A

Appendix D Subsurface Works Request Form



Subsurface Works Request Form Page 1 of 2

SUBSURFACE WORKS REQUEST FORM

Common Site Name: Helena East Precinct

Site Address: Yelverton Drive, Midland

Description: Former Midland Railway Workshops

SITE CONTACTS (to be completed)

Site Owner:

Site Owners Representative:

Tennant(s):

Approved Environmental Consultant:

1. APPLICANT DETAILS

Name of Applicant(s):

Title:

Company

Contact (Office):

Contact (Mobile):

2. LOCATION OF SUBSURFACE DISTURBANCE 2.1 With reference to the Subsurface Constraints Register, where is the approximate proposed location of

subsurface disturbance works?

Grid Cell reference(s):

Common site location name (where known):

Subdivision lots affected:

3. DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE DISTURBANCE 3.1 Type of subsurface disturbance:

Underground utility repair

Installation of additional underground utilities

Site construction (eg footings, etc)

Other:

In completing the following sections, attach additional sheets, plans, etc, if necessary.

3.2 Describe the anticipated scope and duration of the subsurface disturbance:

Subsurface Works Request Form Page 2 of 2

4. FURTHER NOTIFICATION

4.1 Further Notifications (details - Yes/No/Who/Time):

Management:

Tennant(s):


Other:

5. SIGNATURES

Signature of Applicant: Date Responsible Manager: Signature of recipient: Date

Appendix E Environmental Incident and Hazard Form



Environmental Incident & Hazard Report Form Page 1 of 4

SUBSURFACE CONSTRAINTS ENVIRONMENTAL INCIDENT AND HAZARD FORM

Common Site Name: Helena East Precinct

Site Address: Yelverton Drive, Midland

Description: Former Midland Railway Workshops

SITE CONTACTS (to be completed)

Site Owner:

Site Owners Representative:

Tennant(s):


Approved Contractor:

1. Notification of the Incident 1.1 Who is reporting the incident?

Site Owner Contractor

Tennant Other:

Environmental Consultant

1.2 Who received the notification? 1.3 Time of Notification: am/pm on Date: 1.4 Time of incident occurring: am/pm on Date: 1.5 How was the incident notified?

In person

Telephone/Fax

Letter/Memo

1.6 Informant: Name:

Address/Department:

Telephone: 2. Nature of the Incident 2.1 Incident Category (tick more than 1 box if appropriate):

Incident

Hazard or Potential Hazard

Near Miss

Complaint


2.2 Incident Type:

Water Soil

Odour Other :

Noise 2.3 Environmental Risk Ranking:

Low

Medium

High

In completing the following sections, attach additional sheets, records, photographs plans, etc, if necessary.

2.4 Describe the nature of the incident:

2.5 Describe the inferred cause(s) of the incident:

2.6 Duration of the incident (how long did it last):

2.7 Weather Conditions

2.7.1 Rainfall

None Heavy Rain

Light Rain 2.7.2 Wind Speed and Direction

None Strong Wind

Average Direction :


3. Incident Response

3.1 Initial corrective action taken:

3.2 Further Notifications (details - Yes/No/Who/Time):

Management:

Regulatory Agencies:

Emergency Services:

Tennant(s):


Other:

4. Signature

Signed: Date Responsible Manager: Signed by: Title:


7. Post-Incident Assessment (to be filled out by the Environmental Consultant) 7.1 Adequacy of initial corrective action taken:

7.2 Further corrective action taken:

7.2 Recommendations:

7.2.1 Timeframe for implementation of recommendations: 8. Distribution List Date

Management:


Other:

Date post:	11-Aug-2019
Category:	Documents
Upload:	trantuyen
View:	216 times
Download:	0 times

SUBSURFACE MANAGEMENT PLAN HELENA EAST PRECINCT … · re: subsurface management plan, helena east...

Documents