Appendix 10.3 Ground Investigation Report

7/26/2019 Appendix 10.3 Ground Investigation Report

1/252

APPENDIX 10.3

Ground Investigation Report, WSP

April 2012


2/252

QUALITY MANAGEMENT

WSP Env i ronment & EnergyThree White Rose Office ParkMillshaw Park laneLeedsLS11 0DLTel: +44 (0) 113 395 6200Fax: +44 (0) 113 395 6201www.wspgroup.com

Reg.No.1152332 England

Issue/revision Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2

Remarks Draft for Comment

Date April 2012

Prepared by R. Thomps on

Signature

Checked by M. Neden

Signature

Authoris ed by A. Hallas

Signature

Project number 28305

File reference 28305_GIR_V1


3/252

CONTENTS

1 Introduction 2

2 The Site & Existing Information 4

3 Field & Laboratory Studies 6

4 Ground Summary 9

5 Ground Conditions & Material Properties 10

6 Groundwater and Ground Gas 17

8 Preliminary Ground Gas Risk Assessment 21

9 Conclusions and Recommendations 22

10 References 23

FIGURES

FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION PLAN

FIGURE 2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT & EXPLORATORY HOLE LOCATION PLAN

FIGURE 3 GEOLOGICAL MAP

FIGURES 4A & 4B GEOLOGICAL CROSS SECTIONS

FIGURE 5 MOISTURE CONTENT & PLASTIC LIMIT VERSUS DEPTH (COHESIVE ALLUVIUM)

FIGURE 6 CONSISTENCY INDEX VERSUS DEPTH (COHESIVE ALLUVIUM)

FIGURE 7 UNDRAINED COHESION VERSUS DEPTH (COHESIVE ALLUVIUM)

FIGURE 8 DRAINED YOUNGS MODULUS VERSUS DEPTH (ALLUVIUM)

FIGURE 9 SPT N160VERUS DEPTH (GRANULAR ALLUVIUM)

FIGURE 10 UND RAINED COHESION VERSUS DEPTH (GRADE III/IVA MERCIA MUDSTONE)

FIGURE 11 DRAINED YOUNGS MODULUS VERSUS DEPTH (GRADE III/IVA MERCIA MUDSTONE)

FIGURES 12 A-C TCR, SCR & RQD VERSUS DEPTH (MERCIA MUDSTONE)

FIGURE 13 UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH VERSUS DEPTH (GRADE II MERCIA MUDSTONE)

FIGURE 14 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO VERSUS DEPTH

APPENDICES

APPEND IX A EXPLORATOR Y HOLE RECORDS

APPENDIX B DCP TEST RESULTS, SOAKAWAY TEST RESULTS AND GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORYTESTING

APPEND IX C CALIBRATION CERTIFICATE FOR SP T HAMMER

APPEND IX D CHEMICAL LABORATORY TESTING


4/252

APPENDIX E MONITORING RESULTS

APPENDIX F WSP RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACH

APPEND IX G LIMITATIONS


5/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012

Ground Investigation Report

Project Dove

1

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT

This report is addressed to and may be re lied upon by the following parties:-

Nestl

Nestl UK Ltd.

Tutbury

Staffs

DE13 9LY

This assessment has been prepared for the sole use and reliance of the above named parties. This report shall not

be relied upon or transferred to any other parties without the express written authorisation of WSP Environment &

Energy. No responsibility will be accepted where this report is used, either in its entirety or in part, by any other

party.


6/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

2

1 Introduction

1.1 AUTHORISATION

WSP Environment & Energy (WSPE&E) has been instructed by Nestl, to undertake targeted ground investigation

works to assist with the design of a proposed expansion o f their facility at Hatton, Derbyshire (Figure 1).

1.2 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS

Nestl propose to construct a new 29,730m Freeze Dried Coffee manufacturing facility adjacent to their existing

coffee manufacturing facility.

The buildings vary from single storey to approximately 35m in height with several cooling stacks within the

development.

The fac ility will include:

Engineering/technical workshop;

Reception with coffee bean delivery station;

Utilities block (air compressors and cooling towers);

Boiler building;

Extraction buildings;

Drying building; and

Filling and packing building.

The facility will comprise a mixture of steel and concrete framed buildings. The main process buildings will have

concre te frames wh ile the ancillary and single storey buildings will be steel framed.

The proposed development is presented as Figure 2.

1.3 OBJECTIVES & SCOPE OF WORKS

The main objectives of the works are to develop a conceptual ground model for the site and to identify any potential

constraints with respect to geo technical design, contamination and ground gas.

The scope of works comprised:

review of third party informa tion provided by the client;

targeted intrusive ground investigation;

laboratory geotechnical/rock testing and chemical analysis of soil & groundwater;

ground gas /groundwater monitoring;

ground gas risk assessmen t;

contamination risk assessment considering human health and the wider environment;

derivation of characteristic geotechnical design parameters; and,

provision of geotechnical recommendations for the construction of foundations, floor slabs, external worksand drainage.


7/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

3

This report presents a factual description of the fieldworks and laboratory testing results, develops a conceptual

ground model, qualitative contamination/ground gas risk assessmen t, and der ives characteristic geo technical design

parameters. This report fulfils the requirements of a Ground Investigation Report (GIR) as detailed in BS EN 1997-

2:2007[1]

.

Specific geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the scheme, together with a Risk Register,

will be provided in a Geotechnical Design Report (GDR).

1.4 PREVIOUS REPORTS

A Ground Investigation and Piling Limited (GIP) report [2]

has been provided by the Client for consideration and its

findings are summarised in Section 2.3. A desk study report is currently under preparation, a summary of which will

be incorporated into the final version of this report.

1.5 LIMITATIONS

The general limitations to the nature of the investigation are outlined in Appendix G.

Data obtained by GIP [2]has been used in the development of the conceptual ground model and the derivation ofdesign parameters. In this respect, the data has been taken in good faith as being a true reflection of site conditions

however, WSPE & E cannot accept liability for any errors, or omissions in the da ta provided.


8/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

4

2 The Site & Existing Information

2.1 SITE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION

The site is situated immediately to the east of the existing Nestl facility, which is located o ff Station Road and Marston

Lane, Hatton and approximately 1km no rtheast of Tutbury town centre, Derbyshire. A site location plan is presentedas Figure 1. An aerial photograph of the site is shown below.

The site comprises approximately 10 ha of relatively flat lying (around 52-53m above Ordnance Datum (AOD))

agricultural land, which is divided into two irregular shaped fields by fences and a discont inuous hedgerow . The site is

bisected by two un-surfaced tracks. The track which bisects the site roughly south west to north east is a continuation

of Marston Lane, which runs through the existing facility to its junction with Station Road to the west.

The site is bounded to the no rth by agricultural land, a small sewage works and Hoon Hay Manor and Farm . To the

south lies a railway line, with agricultural land and the River Dove beyond and to the east lies further agricultural land.

To the west lies the exis ting Nestl facility. There is a level crossing over the railway line on the south west corner of

the site and an underpass on the south east corner.

Aerial Phot ogr aph of Sit e an d Immediate Surr ou ndi ng Ar ea


9/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

5

2.2 GEOLOGY

The published British Geological Survey map[3]

indicates that the site is underlain by alluvial drift deposits overlying

Mercia Mudstone bedrock.

An extract of the relevant geological map is presented a s Figure 3.

2.3 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION

The GIP investigation [2]

was undertaken in December 2011 and comprised the formation of eight cable percussive

boreholes (BH1 to BH8) to a maximum depth of 13.15m below ground level (bgl). Boreholes GIP BH1 to GIP BH6

were formed either within, or close to the proposed development site and their locations are shown on Figure 2.

Boreholes GIP BH7 and GIP BH8 were formed to the west of the main facilty and therefore lie outwith the proposed

development area.

The ground conditions encountered in GIP BH1 to GIP BH6 generally correspond to those interpreted from geological

mapping and are summarised in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1 - Summary o f GIP Investi gation

Strata with General DescriptionsDepth to base

(m bgl)Thickness (m) Notes

Topsoil 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.6 -

Cohesive Alluvium firm through to very stiff sandy gravelly clay 1.45 2.45 1.15 2.25Not encountered in

BH2 and BH3

Granular Alluvium medium dense sand and gravel 4.0 5.3 2.0 4.9 -

Weathered Mercia Mudstone Stiff through to hard friable clay over

mudstoneNot proven 3.45 8.15 proven -

The recorded groundwa ter strikes during the investigation were between 2.2m and 2.8m bgl. It is understood that groundwater/ground gas

monitoring has been carried out by GIP. However, this data has not been provided.


10/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

6

3 Field & Laboratory Studies

3.1 GROUND INVESTIGATION

3.1.1 Description of Fieldworks

Ground investigation works were undertaken by WSPE&E between 27 February and 5 March 2012 in accordance withBS EN: 1997-2:2007

[1]and the relevant sections of BS5930 (A2):1999

[4].

An exploratory hole location plan is presented as F igure 2. Exploratory hole records are presented in Appendix A.

Table 3.1 below summarises the fieldworks undertaken.

Table 3.1 Sum mary of Fieldw orks

Method/ Test NumberMax. Depth

(m bgl)*Installation

Cable Percussion5 (WSP BH01 to WSP

BH05)13.00

Combined groundwater and gasmonitoring standpipes to 5m or 6m bgl

in all boreholes

Rotary coring follow on3 (WSP BH01, WSP

BH02 & WSP BH05)23.75 See above

Machine excavated trial pits 12 (TP1 to TP12) 2.4 N/A

Dynamic Cone Penetrom eter 12 (DCP1 to DCP12) 0.95 1.26 N/A

Soakaway Tests 3 (SA1 to SA3) 2.2 N/A

*metres below ground level

The trial pitting was observed by archaeologists and ground levels and Ordnance Survey coordinates provided by

them are shown on the boreho le and trial pit records (no elevations provided for trial pits).

3.1.2 In Situ Testing

Field Vane Tests

Hand Shear Vane (HSV) tests were undertaken, where possible, in the boreholes and trial pits. The results of HSV

testing is presented on the exploratory hole records (Appendix A) and on a plot of undrained shear strength versus

depth for the Cohesive Alluvium, which is presented as Figure 7.

Standard Penetration Tests

Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were performed in situwithin the boreholes and the results are presented on the

explora tory hole records (Append ix A). A calibration certificate for the SPT hammer is presented in Appendix C.

A plot of SPT N160 (corrected for hammer efficiency & effective stress[5]

) value versus depth for the Granular

Alluvium is presented a s Figure 9.


11/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

7

DCP Tests

Twelve Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests were undertaken next to their corresponding Trial Pit at existing

ground level at the locations shown on Figure 2.

California Bearing Ratio (CBR) values were derived from the DCP data using the following relationship presented by

the Highways Agency[6]

;

Log10(CBR) = 2.48 - 1.057 (Log10(mm/blow).

Plots of cumu lative blow count versus depth are presented in Appendix B and CBR values are summarised on Figure

14.

Soakaway Tests

Three soakaway tests (SA1 to SA3) were undertaken at the positions shown on Figure 2. The purpose of the tests

was to assess the infiltration characteristics of the ground to a ssist in the design of a series of attenuation ponds and

swales, which will form part of the surface water drainage system. The locations of the tests were provided by WSP

Buildings.

The tests were undertaken within machine excavated trial pits which were extended through the Cohesive Alluvium toexpose the Granular Alluvium below. Each pit was carefully measured then rapidly filled w ith water and the depth of

water achieved recorded as the effective wa ter depth. The time for the water level to fall to 25% of the effective water

depth was then recorded.

Infiltration values (f) were calculated in general accordance with guidance provided in BRE 365[7]

, although the

effective area was reduced to take into account the presence of clay, of likely very low permeability, within the walls of

the pits.

It is also noted that all three trial pits recorded groundwater towards their base (1.65 2.00m bgl) and in this respect

the tests are likely recording permeability rather than infiltration rate, although in practice the values are generally

broadly similar.

Test results are presented in Appendix B and are discussed in Section 5.3.

3.2 LABORATORY TESTING

3.2.1 Description of Tests

Geotechnical & Rock Testing

A programme of laboratory testing of soils and rock was undertaken on selected samples recovered during the

investigation described in Section 3.1.1 The testing was undertaken where applicable in accordance with the

requirements of BS1377:1990[8]

, BS EN 1997-2:2007, BRE Special Digest 1[9]

, or ISRM[10]

and comprised the

following;

Natural moisture content;

Atterberg Limits;

Particle size distribution;

pH & Sulphate Content;

BRE Extended suite;

Organic matter;

Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial;

One dimensional consolidation;


12/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

8

Point load Index; and,

Unconfined compressive strength.

Chemical

Seven soil samples were subjected to analysis for combinations of the following:

pH; Water soluble sulphate;

Total sulphate;

Metals arsenic, cadmium , chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium and zinc;

16 speciated po lycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH);

Speciated total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH); and,

Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene isomers (BTEX).

A groundwater sample from each monitoring well (WSP BH01 WSP BH05) was analysed for pH, metals (arsenic,cadmium, chromium, copper , lead, mercury, nickel, selenium and zinc), TPH and BTEX.

3.2.2 Test Results

The results of the geotechnical and chemical laboratory testing are presented in Appendices B and D respectively.

3.2.3 GIP chemical analysis

The GIP report[2]

presents the results of analysis of an additional seven soil samples from within the study area.

These samples were analysed for some, or all of the following determinands:

pH;

Metals arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, vanad ium and zinc;

16 specia ted polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); and

Total phenols.

GIP also undertook analysis of three groundwater samples from within the study area. These samples were analysed

for pH and sulphate.


13/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

9

4 Ground Summary

Geological Mapping[3 ]

and the previous GIP investigation[2]

ind icate that the subject site is underlain by cohesive and

granular Alluvium, which overlie weathered Mercia Mudstone bedrock.

The current ground investigation has confirmed this general sequence and, on the basis of the information obtained,the following ground summary has been derived for the site.

Table 4.1 Proposed Grou nd Summ ary

Stratum Typical Description Depth to Base

(m bgl)

Thickness (m) Notes

Topsoil Sandy gravelly clay or clayey

gravelly sand

0.1 0.6 0.1 0.6 -

Alluvium Upper

Cohesive

Firm through to very stiff orange

greyish brown sandy gravelly clay

0.7 2.45 0.45 2.25 Not encountered in GIP

boreholes BH2 and BH3

Lower

Cohesive

Very soft through to soft grey brown

sandy gravelly slightly organic c lay

1.8 2.8 0.65 1.1 Encountered in WSP borehole

BH3 and trial pits TP6 and

TP10 only

Granular Medium dense through to dense

multi-coloured very sandy gravel

4.0 5.7 2.0 4.9 Base of stratum not proven in

trial pits

Mercia

Mudstone

Group

Grade III/IVa

Mudstone*]

Firm through to hard redd ish brown

friable clay grading into extremely

weak through to moderately strong

mudstone and siltstone

8.0 13.5 3.0 9.12 Base proven in WSP

boreholes BH1, BH2 and BH5

only

Grade II

Mudstone*

Extremely weak through to

moderately strong muds tone and

siltstone

- - Base not proven in any

exploratory holes

* CIRIA C570[11]

Groundwater has been observed to stand at approximately 1.5m below current ground level within either the Cohesive

or Granular Alluvium.

Two indicative cross sections through the site are presented as Figures 4A & 4B. Section lines are shown on Figure

2.


14/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

10

5 Ground Conditions & Material Properties

The following section discusses the ground conditions and materials properties determined from the previous and

current ground investigations and the soil, rock and basic chemical testing laboratory testing described in Section 3.

The results of the detailed chemical analysis of soils and groundwater are d iscussed in Section 7.

Where necessary, determination of characteristic parameters has been based on a cautious estimate of results

derived from laboratory, published correlations and field tests, complemented with engineering judgement and

consideration o f the relevant limit state.

Where material parameters are assumed, derived by calculation, or taken from published sources, further details are

provided as to their derivation.

5.1 TOPSOIL

Topsoil was encountered in all exploratory holes during the previous and current ground investigations. The thickness

of the stratum ranged between 0.1m and 0.6m, typically 0.3m and was generally described as a firm sandy gravelly

clay or clayey gravelly sand.

Laboratory testing results for the Topsoil are presented in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1 Summary o f In Situ & Laborato ry Testing Resu lts Topsoi l

Parameter Observed Range Average Number of tests

Water soluble sulphate (g/l)


15/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

11

Parameter Observed Range Average No. of tests

Plasticity Index (%) 10 - 47 31.5 15

Moist Bulk Unit Weight (kN/m3) 17.8 19.1 18.5 6

Undrained cohesion - Hand Shear Vane (kN/m2) 40 - 167 78.7 32

Undrained cohesion - Laboratory Triaxial (kN/m

2

) 43 - 93 67.3 6

Coefficient of volume c ompress ibility (mv,m2/MN -

v+100kN/m2)

0.04 0.10 0.07 4

Water soluble sulphate (mg/l)*


16/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

12

Nfcu 1 kN/m2

where f1is a factor related to the plasticity index.

An f1value of 4.5 was adopted based on a characteristic plasticity index of 30%.

Based on Figure 7, the following undrained shear strength profile is proposed for design:

Upper Cohesive Alluvium - cu= 80kN/m2reducing to 40kN/m

2at 1.25mbgl

Lower Cohesive Alluvium - cu= 40kN/m2.

Compressibility and Stiffness

Four oedometer tests were under taken on und isturbed samples of the Upper Cohesive Alluvium. For each sample

tested, a cycle of loading, unloading and reloading was performed. Values of mvwere then derived from the reload-

unload sequence over a stress range equivalent to in situ effective stress plus 100kN/m2. Values of mvwere found to

range from 0.04 to 0.10m2/MN. A single test undertaken by GIP, which did incorporate a reload unload sequence ,

gave an mv of 0.18m2/MN.

Pre-consolidation pressures for the Upper Cohesive Alluvium were found to be in the range 105kN/m2to 180kN/m

2.

Over consolidation Ratios (OCR) were determined using the Casagrande method; a characteristic OCR of 5 was

calculated. The high OCR values are considered to a reflection of desiccation within the Upper Cohesive Alluvium due

to water table fluctuations, evaporation and plant transpiration.

Values of drained Youngs Modulus (E) were determined using E= (1/mv) [13]

and correlations between Eu, cuand

OCR based on a Plasticity Index of 30%. An Eu/cuof 400 was indica ted (see below), which gives E=240 cu.

Chart showing variation of th e correlation Eu/c uwith plasticity index and OCR[13]

Based on past experience, a slightly lower correlation of E=180cuwas adopted for the softer Lower Cohesive

Alluvium.

Values of Ederived from the above methods are presented on F igure 8 and based on this, the following stiffness

profile is proposed for design;

E=12MN/m2to 1.25m & 7.0MN/m

2thereafter.


17/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

13

5.3 GRANULAR ALLUVIUM

Granular Alluvium was encountered directly below the Upper/Lower Cohesive Alluvium in all exploratory holes, with

the except ion of GIP BH2 and GIP BH3, where the Cohesive Alluvium was absent. The granular Alluvium comprised

med ium dense and dense, well graded , silty, sandy to very sandy gravel. The gravel componen t was noted to be well

rounded and of various lithology. The Granular Alluvium was found to range in thickness from 2m to 4.9m, with the

lower thickness corresponding with the occurrence of the Lower Cohesive Alluvium.

In situ and laboratory testing results for the Granular Alluvium are presen ted in Table 5.4.

Table 5.4 Sum mary of In Situ & Laborator y Testing Result s Granular Allu vium

Parameter Observed Range Average No. of tests

SPT N60 6 70 26 42

SPT N160 6.8 61.7 27.7 42

% Gravel 59-81 75 5

% Sand 16-37 22 5

% Silt/Clay 1-6 3 5

Uniformity coefficient (D10/D60) 20-66 33 5

Infiltration (f) Perm eability, k (m/s) 1.7x10-5 3.4x10

-5 2.1x10

-5 9

Shear Strength

Figure 9 shows a plot of SPT N160 (corrected for hammer efficiency and effective stress) for the Granular Alluvium.

Based on a representative SPT N160 of 22, an effective angle of internal friction of 34 degrees is suggested for the

granular soils[14]

.

Compressibility and Stiffness

Values of Youngs Modulus for the granular soils have been determined using the following method:

E = 2.0*N60 [5].

Values o f Ederived from the above method are presented on Figure 8 and based on this, a stiffness of 38MN/m2 is

proposed for design.

Infiltration/Permeability

As discussed in Section 3.1 infiltration rates (f) were calculated using a slightly modified version of the procedureoutlined in BRE 365

[7]. Test results are presen ted in Append ix B and summarised in Table 5.4. Based on the values

obtained, an infiltration rate/permeability of 1x10-5m/s is proposed for design.

5.4 MERCIA MUDSTONE

Mercia Mudstone was encountered below the Granular Alluvium in all of the WSP and GIP boreholes.

The rock head level in the recent boreholes (The GIP boreholes were not levelled in) ranged from 47.01m AOD (WSP

BH04) to 48.23m AOD (WSP BH05), with no apparen t regional dip.

The Mercia Mudstone showed a typical weathering profile, with a decrease in weathering effects with depth. The state

of weathering was described in accordance with CIRIA C570[11]

as detailed below;


18/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

14

Table 5.5 Simp lified Mercia Mud sto ne Weathering Grades

Weathering Grade Descript ion Notes

Fully Weathered IVb Matrix only Can be confused with solifluction or

drift deposits, but contains no

pebbles. Plastic slightly silty clay.

May be fissured

Partially weathered IVa

III

II

Matrix with occasional claystone pellets less

than 30 mm dia, but more usually coarse sand

size

Matrix with frequent lithorelicts up to 25mm.

As weathering progresses, lithorelicts become

less angular

Angular blocks of unweathered marl with

virtually no matrix.

Little or no trace of original (Grade

I) structure through clay may be

fissured. Lower permeability than

underlying layers

Water content of matrix greater

than that of lithoreclicts

Spheroidal weathering, Matrix

starting to encroach along joints:

first indications of chemical

weathering

Unweathered I Mudstone (often jointed and fissured). Water content varies due to

depositional variations.

The whole of the sequence was considered to comprise partially weathered materials and on the basis of physical

description was divided into the following zones;

An upper zone, between 7.2m (WSP BH05) and 9 .12m (WSP BH02) thick, assessed as consisting of GradeIII and Grade IVa materials. The GIP boreholes term inated on mudstone, and if it is presumed that this is the

base of the Grade III/IVa zone, its thickness may be more variable, ranging from 3m (GIP BH5) to 8m (GIP

BH4).

A lower zone, of unproven thickness, assessed as comprising predominantly Grade II materials withoccasional bands of more weathered (Grade III) materials.

Both zones are discussed in more detail below.

Grade III/IVa Mercia Mudstone

The Grade III/IVa Mercia Mudstone was predominantly described as firm to very stiff reddish-brown, silty, gravelly

calcareous clay.

In situ and laboratory testing results for the Grade III/IVa Mercia Mudstone are presen ted in Table 5.6.


19/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

15

Table 5.6 Summ ary of In Situ & Labor atory Testing Results Grade III/IVa Mercia Muds tone

Parameter Observed Range Average

Typical range for

Grade IVa

materials from

CIRIA C570[11]

Typical range

for Grade III

materials from

CIRIA C570[11]

No. of

tests

SPT N60 18 267 (extrapo lated) 93


20/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

16

Plots of Total Core recovery (TCR), Solid Core Recovery (SCR), Rock Quality Designation (RQD) and Fracture Index

(FI) are presented as Figures 12A to 12C, which include the lower cored sections of the Grade III/IVa materials as well

as the Grade II. TCR can be seen to show a general increase with depth for the Grade II mudstone. Values of SCR

are relatively consistent with an average of around 75%.

RQD values show a wide scatter, but a general increase with depth is suggested.

In situ and laboratory testing results for the Grade II Mercia Mudstone are presented in Table 5.7.

Table 5.7 Summary of In Situ & L aboratory Testing Resul ts Grade II Mercia Mudsto ne

Parameter Observed Range Average Typical rang e

for Grade II

materials from

CIRIA C570[11]

No. of tests

Moisture Content (%) 23 25 23.2 22-24.5 6

Moist Bulk Unit Weight (kN/m3) 22.4 - 23.7 23.1 22-24.5 9

Point Load Index, Is50 0.06 2.93 0.73 37

Unconfined Compressive Strength (MN/m2) 6.6 48.9 17.7 9

Unconfined Compressive Strength

Figure 13 presents a plot of UCS versus depth for the Grade II Mercia Mudstone. To further evaluate UCS and to

determine values for sections of core not suitable for direct UCS testing, a series of point load tests were undertaken.

Conversion of the point load index Is50 results to an equivalent UCS is achieved through application of a correction

factor (K). This is derived by correlating with direct UCS tests at equivalent depths and a Kvalue of 16 was adopted

for this site.

Based on Figure 13, the following UCS profile is proposed for design:

UCS= 4.0MN/m 2at 12m increasing linear ly to 7.0MN/m2at 24m bgl.

Stiffness

Values of drained Youngs Modulus (E) for the Grade II Mercia Mudstone have been determined using the

relationship proposed by Rowe & Armitage[15]

where;

E= 215 (UCS)0.5

Based on the design UCS discussed above, this would suggest an E value of 430 MN/m2

at 12m bgl increasing

linearly to 560MN/m2 at 24m bgl.


21/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

17

6 Groundwater and Ground Gas

6.1 GROUNDWATER STRIKES

Groundwater strikes observed during the previous and current ground investigations are summarised in Table 6.1 and

noted on the logs included in Appendix A.Table 6.1 Summary of Groundwater Strikes Encountered During Fieldworks

Exploratory Hole No.

Depth of

ground

water strike

(m bgl)

Groundwater

level after 20

minutes

(m bgl)

Stratum

TP1 1.45 -Granular alluvium

TP2 1.8- Granular alluvium


TP4 1.3- Upper cohesive alluvium







TP11 1.5 - Granular alluvium


WSP BH01

2.9 2.4 Granular alluvium


10.0 6.5 Weathered mudstone

WSP BH02





WSP BH03

2.8 1.7 Lower cohesive alluvium


WSP BH04



WSP BH05



5.8 4.7 Wea thered mudstone

8.7 7.7 Wea thered mudstone


22/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

18

Exploratory Hole No.

Depth of

ground

water strike

(m bgl)

Groundwater

level after 20

minutes

(m bgl)

Stratum

GIP BH1 2.8 2.8 Granular alluvium

GIP BH2 2.45 2.45 Granular alluvium

GIP BH3 3.0 3.0Granular alluvium




6.2 GROUNDWATER MONITROING & SAMPLING

All five boreholes undertaken as part of the current investigation were installed with combined groundwater and

ground gas monitor ing standpipes. As discussed previously, the monitoring data from the previous GIP investigationwas no t available a t the time of writing.

To date, three of a total of six programmed monitoring visits have been undertaken. Three of the previous GIP

installations were located and a lso monitored (GIP BH1, GIP BH3 &, GIP BH4). Groundwa ter samples were recovered

for chemical analysis on the first visit.

Monitored groundwater levels to date are provided in Appendix E and summarised in Table 6.2.

Table 6.2 Summary of Gro undw ater Levels

Exploratory Hole

Water level during m onitorin g

m bgl (mAoD) Stratum

Min Max.

WSP BH01 1.42 (51.49) 1.55 (51.36) Upper Cohesive Alluvium



WSP BH04 1.40 (51.30) 1.48 (51.22) Granular Alluvium

WSP BH05 1.59 (51.23) 1.67 (51.15) Granular Alluvium

GIP BH1 1.59 1.70 Upper Cohesive Alluvium

GIP BH3 1.48 1.54 Granular Alluvium

GIP BH4 1.17 1.24 Upper Cohesive Alluvium

Monitored levels to date suggest that shallow groundwa ter flow is to the south east, albeit with a very shallow hydraulic

gradient of approximately 0.004. The River Dove lies approximately 150m to the south of the site

6.3 GROUNDWATER CHEMISTRY

Sulphate contents and pH values for the groundwater samples are summarised in Table 6.3.


23/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

19

Table 6.3 Groun dwater pH & Sul phate Results

Determinant Observed Range Average No. of tests

pH 6.24 7.61 7.12 5

Sulphate (g/l) 0.20 1.52 0.90 5

6.4 GROUND GAS MONITORING

To date, three ground gas monitoring visits have been completed out of a scheduled six. The results are presented in

Appendix E and are summarised in Table 6.4.

Table 6.4 Sum mary of Gro und Gas Mon itor ing Data (3 visi ts)

Exploratory

Hole

Steady Gas Concentration (%v/v)

Steady Flow Rate (l/hr)

Methane Carbon Dioxide Oxygen

Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max

WSP BH01 0.0 0.2 0.4 2.0 7.8 18.5 0.0 0.6

WSP BH02 0.0 1.2 0.1 0.4 19.8 20.6 0.0 0.4

WSP BH03 0.0 0.0 3.0 4.7 12.5 15.4 0.0 0.3

WSP BH04 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.5 17.6 18.5 0.0 0.2

WSP BH05 0.0 0.1 2.3 3.9 11.9 16.2 -1.0 0.2

GIP BH1 0.0 0.5 2.8 5.0 17.9 18.5 0.0 0.9

GIP BH2 0.0 0.0 1.0 4.2 17.5 19.7 0.0 0.6

GIP BH3 0.0 0.4 0.1 2.3 18.9 19.9 0.0 0.4

Barometric pressures during the monitoring period ranged from 1025mB to 1027mB.


24/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

20

7 Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment

7.1 GENERAL

Legislation and guidance on the assessment of contaminated sites acknowledges the need for a tiered risk based

approach. This report represents a Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment (GQRA) being a comparison of sitecontaminant levels against generic standards and compliance criteria including an assessment of risk using the

source-pathway-target model.

Further details of the WSPE risk assessment approach are provided in Appendix F.

7.2 HUMAN HEALTH ASSESSMENT

Based on the continued use of the site as a food manufacturing plant and continued use of parts of the study area as

a public bridleway, as a conservative assessment the chemical data has been compared against the more stringent of

the Public Parks or Commercial GACs for 1% soil organic matter (SO M) content.

None of the samples contained contaminant concentra tions that exceed the relevant SGV or GAC. Therefore, basedon the proposed end use, the soil contaminant concentrations observed are not likely to represent a risk to human

health.

7.3 CONTROLLED WATERS ASSESSMENT

Aside from a minor concentration of toluene in BH02 which could be attributable to laboratory error, no TPH or BTEX

was detected in any of the groundwater samples analysed. The single toluene concentration detected is below the the

GAC. Dissolved nickel was de tected at concentra tions above the GAC in BH02 (41.3 g/l) and BH03 (184 g/l). The

GAC is derived from the River Basin District Typology, Standards and Groundwater Threshold Values (Water

Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Directions 2010 (GTV).

The GTV refers to specific River Basin Management Plans. The appropriate document in this case is the River Basin

Managem ent Plan, Humber River Basin District 6 Annex B, Environment Agency,December 2009. No specific

dissolved or total nickel concentration is available for the River Dove Mercia Mudstone. The maximum threshold value

for groundwater risk assessment in the UK from the GTV is 116g/L which BH03 exceeds.

No sources of nickel have been identified during the site investigation and we consider that this concentration is likely

to be associated with the crushing and subsequent dissolution of gravel during the drilling process or a discharge from

an offsite source. We note tha t the GTV relates to surface water quality and tha t groundwater typically has elevated

metal concentrations relative to their surface water receptors. We consider that dilution and oxidation of nickel when it

enters the River Dove is likely to sufficiently reduce dissolved nickel concentrations to below the GTV.


25/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

21

8 Preliminary Ground Gas Risk Assessment

8.1 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

No significant potential sources of ground gas have been identified within the site or within a 250m radius of the site.

To date, three monitoring visits have been undertaken, from a recommended four visits and a preliminary assessmentof ground gas risk is presented below. This should be updated once additional monitoring has been completed.

The WSPE approach to ground gas risk assessmen t is detailed within Appendix E.

8.2 MONITORING RESULTS

8.2.1 Monitoring Results

Barometric pressures during the gas monitoring period ranged from 1025 mBars to 1027 mBars. The maximum

methane concentra tion to date is 1.2%v/v recorded within WSPBH02. All other methane readings are below 0.5%v/v.

A maximum carbon dioxide concentration of 5.0%v/v was recorded in GIPBH1. Gas flows were low, with a maximum

reading o f 0.9l/hr in GIPBH1.

All wells were combined groundwater/ gas monitoring wells and as such all of the wells have been partially flooding

during the gas mon itoring. None of the wells have been shown to be completely flooded . The presence of water in

gas mon itoring wells can influence gas flow rates and concentration through dissolution in the water column . However

as no sources have been identified at the s ite we do no t consider that this poses a significant risk.

8.3 PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT

Based on the available da ta, the GSVs calculated for the subject site are as follows:

Methane (0.012 x 0.9) GSV = 0.0108l/hr

Carbon diox ide (0.05 x 0 .9) GSV = 0.045l/hr

As the GSVs are suitably low we assess the CIRIA characteristic classification as 1 , very low risk. Ground gas

protection measures are not anticipated, although it should be noted that this preliminary assessment should be

confirmed once the results of additional monitoring visits are known.


26/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

22

9 Conclusions and Recommendations

9.1 GROUND CONDITIONS

The current ground investigation has generally confirmed the findings from the previous GIP investigation[2]

. Ground

conditions have been found to generally comprise topsoil underlain by a variable thickness of Cohesive Alluviumoverlying Granular Alluvium and Mercia Mudstone bedrock.

The Cohesive Alluvium has been divided into an upper and lower layer. The Upper Cohesive Alluvium, which was

generally encountered across the site, comprises a desiccated, medium shear strength clay with an average thickness

of 1.1m across the proposed development. The Lower Cohes ive Alluvium was only encountered in three exploratory

holes and comprises up to 1.1m of very low to low shear strength clay. The Lower Cohesive Alluvium is considered to

have no obvious distribution on the site.

The granular Alluvium comprises medium dense very sandy gravel.

The Mercia Mudstone was considered to be partially weathered over the full depth achieved during the investigation.

The mudstone comprised an upper zone of Grade III/IVa material between 7m and 8m thick and consisting of firm

becoming very stiff clay. This was underlain by an extremely weak to weak mudstone, which was assessed as GradeII.

Groundwater levels during monitoring have generally been between 1.1m and 1.7m below current ground level, either

the Cohesive or Granular Alluvium.

Geotechnical design parameters have been provided within this report.

Specific recommendations regarding the construction of structural foundations, floor slabs and external works will be

made w ithin the Geotechnical Design Report.

9.2 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

Chemical analysis has no t identified any significant risks to human health and no specific remediation measures areconsidered necessary. Vigilance shou ld be maintained during the ground works and any visual or olfactory evidence

of contamina tion should be reported and subject to additional analysis and risk assessment. However, based on site

history and current usage the risk of encountering significant contamination is considered to be low.

A preliminary ground gas risk assessment has shown the site to fall within Characteristic Situation 1 requiring no

specific gas protection measures. This will need to be reassessed once the results of additional ground gas

monitoring are available.


27/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

23

10 References

1. BS EN 1997-2:2007 Eurocode 7 - Geotechnical Design. Ground Investigation and Testing. UK.

2. Ground Investigation and Piling Limited (January 2012), SiteInvestigation on Land Adjacent to Nestle,

Marston Lane, Tutbury, Staffordshire, Reference AJM/19716.

3. British Geologica l Survey (1982), Burton Upon Trent - Sheet 140 (Solid and Drift Edition), 1:50,000 scale.

4. BSI (2010) BS5930:1999+A2 Code of Practice for Site Investigation, UK.

5. CIRIA (1995), Repor t No. 143, The Standard Penetration Test (SPT): Methods and Use UK

6. Highway Agency (2009), Interim Advice Note 73/06 , Design Guidance for Road Pavement Foundations(Draft HD25), UK

7. BRE (2007) Digest 365, Soakaway Design, UK

8. BSI (1990) BS1377:1990 - Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes, UK

9. BRE (2005) Special Digest 1, Concrete in Aggressive GroundUK

10. ISRM. International Society of Rock Mechanics, Commission on Testing Methods, Suggested Method forDetermining Point Load Strength, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min.Sci. and Geom ech. Abstr. 22, 1985, pp.51-60 .

11. CIRIA (2001), Report No. 570, Engineering in Mercia Mudstone UK

12. BS EN ISO 14688-2:2004. Geotechnical Investigation and Testing. Identification and Classification of Soil.

Part 2: Principles for a Classification. UK.

13. CIRIA (1983), Special Publication 27, Settlement of Structures on Clay Soils, UK.

14. Tomlinson M.J. (2001), Founda tion Design & Construction, 7thed., UK

15. CIRIA (2004), Report No. 181, Piled Foundations in Weak Rock UK

16. CIRIA (2007) Report No. 665, Assessing Risks Posed by Hazardous Ground Gases to Buildings UK


28/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

24

FIGURES


29/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

25

FIGURE 1

SITE LOCATION PLAN


30/252

Scale : NTS

Ref : 28305

Title : Figure 1 Site Location Plan

Site : Project Dove

ENVIRONMENT & ENERGY

Site

28305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

N


31/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

26

FIGURE 2

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT & EXPLORATORY HOLELOCATION PLAN


32/252

WSPG

roupplc

c

SectionLineA-A'

SectionLineB-B'


33/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

27

FIGURE 3

GEOLOGICAL MAP


34/252

Scale : 1:10,000

Ref : 28305

Title : Figure 3 Geological Map

Site : Project Dove

ENVIRONMENT & ENERGY

Site

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

Legend


35/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

28

FIGURES 4A & 4B

GEOLOGICAL CROSS SECTIONS


36/252

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44

46

48

50

52

54

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260

BH02BH05

TP02TP10

This is a generalised section based on ground conditions encountered in exploratory holes. Actual ground conditions including depths and the properties of strata may vary.

SUBSURFACE SECTION North South Sectio

ReducedLevel

TOPSOIL Silty sandy gravellyCLAY

S AND and GRAV EL S il ty gravel ly CLAY

No recovery MUDSTONE

SILTSTONE Gypsum, Rocksalt

SANDSTONESilty sandy organicCLAY

A3LITHOLOGYSITEMAP

28305

NESTLEHATTON.GPJ

AGS_3.1_ALL.GDT

24/4/12

Client: Nestl

Project: Project Dove

Number: 283053

O

OG

S

8305

S

O

G

J

GS_3

_

G

/

/

WSP Environmental Ltd150-182 The QuaysSalford. M50 3SPTelephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401

BH02

BH05

TP02

TP10


37/252

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44

46

48

50

52

54

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

BH01BH02 BH03

BH04TP01 TP05

This is a generalised section based on ground conditions encountered in exploratory holes. Actual ground conditions including depths and the properties of strata may vary.

SUBSURFACE SECTION East West Section

ReducedLevel

TOPSOIL Silty sandy gravellyCLAY

S AND and GRAV EL S il ty gravel ly CLAY

No recovery

MUDSTONE

Interbeddedmudstone andsiltstone

SILTSTONE

Gravelly CLAY

A3LITHOLOGYSITEMAP

28305

NESTLEHATTON.GPJ

AGS_3.1_ALL.GDT

24/4/12

Client: Nestl

Project: Project Dove

Number: 283053

O

OG

S

8305

S

O

G

J

GS_3

_

G

/

/

WSP Environmental Ltd150-182 The QuaysSalford. M50 3SPTelephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401

BH01

BH02 BH03

BH04

TP01

TP05


38/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

29

FIGURE 5

MOISTURE CONTENT & PLASTIC LIMIT VERSUS DEPTH(COHESIVE ALLUVIUM)


39/252

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Depth(mbg

l)

Moisture Content & Plastic Limit (%)

Figure 5 - Moisture Content and Plastic Limit versus

Depth (Cohesive Alluvium)

Upper Alluvium - MC

Upper Alluvium - PL

Lower Alluvium - MC

Lower Alluvium - PL

Mudstone

Mudstone - PL


40/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

30

FIGURE 6

CONSISTENCY INDEX VERSUS DEPTH(COHESIVE ALLUVIUM)


41/252

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00

Depth(mbg

l)

Consistency Index

Figure 6 - Consistency Index versus Depth

(Cohesive Alluvium)

Upper

Lower


42/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

31

FIGURE 7

UNDRAINED COHESION VERSUS DEPTH

(COHESIVE ALLUVIUM)


43/252

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Depth(mbg

l)

Undrained Cohesion (kN/m2)

Figure 7 - Undrained Cohesion versus Depth

(Cohesive Alluvium)

SPT "N" - UPPER

TRIAXIAL - UPPER

HSV - UPPER

HSV - LOWER

SPT "N" - LOWER

Proposed Design Line


44/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

32

FIGURE 8

DRAINED YOUNGS MODULUS VERSUS DEPTH

(ALLUVIUM)


45/252

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

Dept

h(mb

gl)

Drained Young's Modulus, E' (MPa)

Figure 8 - Drained Young's Modulus versus Depth

(Alluvium)

Granular Alluvium (SPT N) Upper Cohesive Alluvium (E'=240cu)

Upper Cohesive Alluvium (Consol.) Lower Cohesive Alluvium (E'=180cu)

GIP (Consol.)

Proposed Design Lines

Values over 60MPa not shown for

clarity


46/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

33

FIGURE 9

SPT N160 VERUS DEPTH

(GRANULAR ALLUVIUM)


47/252

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Depthmbg

l

SPT N160

Figure 9 - SPT N160 Value versus Depth

(Granular Alluvium)

GIP SI (2012)

WSP SI (2012)



48/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

34

FIGURE 10

UNDRAINED COHESION VERSUS DEPTH

(GRADE III/IVA MERCIA MUDSTONE)


49/252

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Depth(mb

gl)

Undrained Cohesion (kN/m2)

Figure 10 - Undrained Cohesion versus Depth

Grade III/IVa Mercia Mudstone

SPT 'N'

Triaxial

Values over 800 kPa not

shown for clarity



50/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

35

FIGURE 11

DRAINED YOUNGS MODULUS VERSUS DEPTH

(GRADE III/IVA MERCIA MUDSTONE)


51/252

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

0 50 100 150 200 250

Figure 11 - Drained Young's Modulus versus Depth

(Grade III/IVa Mercia Mudstone)

SPT N*0.9



52/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

36

FIGURES 12 A-C

TCR, SCR & RQD VERSUS DEPTH

(MERCIA MUDSTONE)


53/252

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 20 40 60 80 100

z/mb

gl

Figure 12A -Total Core Recovery versusDepth (Mercia Mudstone)

Grade II

Grade III/IVa

TCR (%)


54/252

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 20 40 60 80 100

z/mb

gl

Figure 12B - Solid Core Recovery versusDepth (Mercia Mudstone)

Grade II

Grade III/IVa

SCR (%)


55/252

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 20 40 60 80 100

z/mb

gl

Figure 12C - Rock Quality Designation versusDepth (Mercia Mudstone)

Grade II

GradeIII/IVa

RQD (%)


56/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

37

FIGURE 13

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

VERSUS DEPTH (GRADE II MERCIA MUDSTONE)


57/252

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Depth(mbg

l)

UCS (MPa)

Figure 13 - Unconfined Compressive Strength

versus Depth (Grade II Mercia Mudstone)

Pointload

UCS



58/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

38

FIGURE 14

CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO VERSUS DEPTH


59/252

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0

Depth(mm

bgl)

CBR (%)

Figure 14 - California Bearing Ratio versus Depth

TP1

TP2

TP3

TP4

TP5

TP6

TP7

TP8

TP9

TP10

TP11

TP12


60/252

00028305_GIR_V1

April 2012


Project Dove

39

APPENDIX A

EXPLORATORY HOLE RECORDS


61/252

Grass over firm brown very sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is fineangular of various litholgies with common roots. (TOPSOIL)

Firm greyish brown mottled orange brown sandy slightly gravelly CLAY.Gravel is fine angular of carbonaceous material. (ALLUVIUM)

Medium dense to dense medium and coarse SAND and well rounded fineto coarse GRAVEL of various lthologies. (ALLUVIUM)

4.00 m bgl becomin dense

(0.40)

(1.40)

(3.80)

48

66

2.90

3.30

0.40

1.80

52.51

51.11

20

20

2.40

1.00

0.00-0.40 B0.00-0.40 D0.10-0.40 ES

0.40-1.20 B0.40-1.20 D0.40-0.60 ES

1.20-1.65 U100 13 blows

2.00 SPT 2,3,59,10,10N=34(S)

2.00-2.45 B2.00-2.45 D

3.00 SPT 1,2,55,5,7

N=22(S)3.00-3.45 B3.00-3.45 D

4.00 SPT 2,7,910,9,16N=44(S)

4.00-4.45 B4.00-4.45 D

ALV

ALV

ALV

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)

SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA

Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.

Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Time Strike

Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water

Boring Progress Water Strikes

Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No

The Victoria, 150-182 The QuaysManchester, M50 3SP

Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401

WSP Environment & Energy

27-02-1229-02-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150 & Rotary

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client

Logged ByContractor / Driller

GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

1 of 2Project Dove

52.913E 421963.006N 329774.061

Ground Level (m)

BH01

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill

Inspection pit dug to 1.2m bgl. Borehole terminated at 22.0m bgl. Drill with light cablepercussion to 10.0m bgl. Rock core with rotary rig to 22.0m bgl. No significantcontamination observed. Groundwater encountered at 2.9m bgl and 3.3m bgl. Boreholeinstalled upon completion. Response zone between 1.0 to 6.0m bgl.

Scale 1:31.25 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual andmanual identification.

08WSPBHLOG

28305-NESTLEHATTON.GPJWSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT

24/4/12


62/252

9 10 5.6 10

Medium dense to dense medium and coarse SAND and well rounded fineto coarse GRAVEL of various lthologies. (ALLUVIUM) (continued)

Firm fissured reddish brown occasionally greyish green slightly gravelly togravelly calcareous CLAY. Gravel is angular fine to medium of extremelyweak Mudstone. Weathering zone III/IVa. (MERCIA MUDSTONE)

8.00 m bgl becoming very stiff red brown silty clay. Weathering zone IVa

Borehole continued as a Cored Drillhole

(4.40)

10.00

5.60

10.00

47.31

42.91

20 6.50128

5.00 SPT 3,5,1010,11,13N=44(S)

5.00-5.45 B5.00-5.45 D

6.00-6.45 B6.00-6.45 D

7.00-7.45 U100 50 blows

9.00 SPT 12,13,2740,33

N=100/0.225(S)

9.00-9.45 B9.00-9.45 D

9.60 SPT 10,15,1743,40

N=100/0.18(S)

ALV

MMG

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


27-02-1229-02-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150 & Rotary

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

2 of 2Project Dove

52.913E 421963.006N 329774.061

Ground Level (m)

BH01

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill

Inspection pit dug to 1.2m bgl. Borehole terminated at 22.0m bgl. Drill with light cablepercussion to 10.0m bgl. Rock core with rotary rig to 22.0m bgl. No significantcontamination observed. Groundwater encountered at 2.9m bgl and 3.3m bgl. Boreholeinstalled upon completion. Response zone between 1.0 to 6.0m bgl.


08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


63/252

Grass over firm brown very sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is fineangular of various litholgies with common roots.(TOPSOIL)

Firm greyish brown mottled orange brown sandy slightly gravelly CLAY.Gravel is fine angular of carbonaceous material with common roots.(ALLUVIUM)

Medium dense medium and coarse SAND and well rounded fine to coarseGRAVEL of various lthologies. (ALLUVIUM)

2.00 - 2.50 m bgl becoming clayey

Stiff reddish brown occasionally greyish green silty slightly gravellybecoming gravelly calcareous CLAY. Gravel is angular fine to medium ofextremely weak Mudstone with occassional gypsum lenses. Weatheringzone IVa becoming III. MERCIA MUDSTONE)

(0.30)

(1.70)

(2.30)

46

66

92

66

2.70

0.30

2.00

4.30

52.17

50.47

48.17

20 1.70

0.00-0.30 B0.00-0.30 D

0.30-1.20 B0.30-1.20 D

1.20-1.65 U100

2.00 SPT 3,5,66,6,4

N=22(S)2.00-2.45 B2.00-2.45 D

3.00 SPT 3,4,54,4,5

N=18(S)3.00-3.45 B3.00-3.45 D

4.00 SPT 3,5,65,6,7

N=24(S)4.00-4.45 B4.00-4.45 D

ALV

ALV

ALV

MMG

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


29-02-1205-03-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150 & Rotary

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

1 of 3Project Dove

52.465E 422033.365N 329732.149

Ground Level (m)

BH02

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill

Inspection pit dug to 1.2m bgl. Borehole terminated at 23.75m bgl. Drill with light cablepercussion to 13.0m bgl. Rock core with rotary rig to 23.75m bgl. No significantcontamination observed. Groundwater encountered at 1.4m bgl. Borehole installed uponcompletion. Response zone between 1.0 to 6.0m bgl.


08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


64/252

Stiff reddish brown occasionally greyish green silty slightly gravellybecoming gravelly calcareous CLAY. Gravel is angular fine to medium ofextremely weak Mudstone with occassional gypsum lenses. Weatheringzone IVa becoming III. MERCIA MUDSTONE) (continued)

6.00 m bgl becoming very stiff. Weathering zone IVa

(8.70)

5.20

6.50

8.50

20

20

20

2.10

4.00

6.60

5.00-5.45 U100 50 blows

6.00 SPT 5,13,1620,25,30N=91(S)

6.50-6.95 B6.50-6.95 D

8.00 SPT 8,10,1618,20,25N=79(S)

8.00-8.45 B8.00-8.45 D

9.50 SPT 5,7,89,9,13

N=39(S)9.50-9.95 B9.50-9.95 D

MMG

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


29-02-1205-03-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150 & Rotary

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

2 of 3Project Dove

52.465E 422033.365N 329732.149

Ground Level (m)

BH02

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill



08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


65/252

12 13 60

Stiff reddish brown occasionally greyish green silty slightly gravellybecoming gravelly calcareous CLAY. Gravel is angular fine to medium ofextremely weak Mudstone with occassional gypsum lenses. Weatheringzone IVa becoming III. MERCIA MUDSTONE) (continued)

12.00 m bgl becoming hard with frequent mudstone gravel. WeatheringZone III.


13.0039.47

11.00 SPT 3,5,77,11,11N=36(S)

11.00-11.45 B11.00-11.45 D

12.00-12.45 B12.00-12.45 D

MMG

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


29-02-1205-03-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150 & Rotary

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

3 of 3Project Dove

52.465E 422033.365N 329732.149

Ground Level (m)

BH02

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill



08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


66/252

Grass over firm brown sandy slightly gravelly CLAY with common rootlets.Gravel is fine angular of various litholgies. (TOPSOIL)

Firm orange brown mottled grey brown sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravelis fine and medium rounded to subangular of various lithologies.(ALLUVIUM)

Firm dark grey sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is fine and mediumsubrounded to angular of various lithologies. (ALLUVIUM)


(1.50)

(1.10)

(1.90)

76

66

76

66

2.80

0.20

1.70

2.80

4.70

52.40

50.90

49.80

47.90

20 1.70

0.00-0.20 B0.00-0.20 D

0.20-1.20 B0.20-1.20 D

1.20-1.65 U100

2.00 SPT 2,3,33,3,4

N=13(S)2.00-2.45 B2.00-2.45 D

3.00 SPT 3,3,34,4,5

N=16(S)3.00-3.45 B3.00-3.45 D

4.00 SPT 3,4,55,4,4

N=18(S)4.00-4.45 B4.00-4.45 D

ALV

ALV

ALV

ALV

MMG

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


02-03-1202-03-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

1 of 2Project Dove

52.597E 422086.163N 329733.103

Ground Level (m)

BH03

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill

Inspection pit dug to 1.2m bgl. Borehole refused at 9.92m bgl. No significantcontamination observed. Groundwater encountered at 2.8m bgl. Borehole installed uponcompletion. Response zone between 1.0 to 5.0m bgl.


08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


67/252

Firm becoming stiff fissured reddish brown occasionally greyish greenslightly gravelly to gravelly calcareous CLAY. Gravel is angular fine andmedium of extremely weak mudstone. Weathering zone III/IVa. (MERCIAMUDSTONE) (continued)

8.00 m bgl becoming very stiff

Borehole complete at 9.92m bgl

(5.22)

8.40

9.9242.68

20 5.90

5.00 SPT 3,3,45,6,7

N=22(S)5.00-5.45 B5.00-5.45 D

6.50-6.95 U100 50 blows

8.00 SPT 8,10,1575,10

N=100/0.15(S)

8.00-8.45 B8.00-8.45 D

9.00-9.45 B9.00-9.45 D

9.50 SPT 10,15,2525,30,20N=100/0.285(S)

MMG

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


02-03-1202-03-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

2 of 2Project Dove

52.597E 422086.163N 329733.103

Ground Level (m)

BH03

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill

Inspection pit dug to 1.2m bgl. Borehole refused at 9.92m bgl. No significantcontamination observed. Groundwater encountered at 2.8m bgl. Borehole installed uponcompletion. Response zone between 1.0 to 5.0m bgl.


08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


68/252

Grass over firm brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly CLAY with commonrootlets. Gravel is fine angular of various litholgies. (TOPSOIL)

Firm orange brown mottled grey brown sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravelis fine and medium rounded to subangular of various lithologies.(ALLUVIUM)


4.00 m bgl becoming dense

(0.30)

(0.80)

(4.60)

82

70

3.00

4.10

0.30

1.10

52.41

51.61

20

20

2.00

2.80

0.00-0.30 B0.00-0.30 D

0.30-1.10 B0.30-1.10 D

1.20 SPT 3,3,34,4,4

N=15(S)1.20-1.65 B1.20-1.65 D

2.00 SPT 2,3,24,5,5

N=16(S)2.00-2.45 B2.00-2.45 D

3.00 SPT 3,4,510,8,6

N=29(S)3.00-3.45 B3.00-3.45 D

4.00 SPT 3,5,910,10,18N=47(S)

4.00-4.45 B4.00-4.45 D

ALV

ALV

ALV

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


05-03-1205-03-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

1 of 3Project Dove

52.705E 422122.684N 329775.691

Ground Level (m)

BH04

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill

Inspection pit dug to 1.2m bgl. Borehole refused at 9.92m bgl. No significantcontamination observed. Groundwater encountered at xxm bgl. Borehole installed uponcompletion. Response zone between 1.0 to 6.0m bgl.


08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


69/252

Medium dense medium and coarse SAND and well rounded fine to coarseGRAVEL of various lthologies. (ALLUVIUM) (continued)5.00 m bgl becoming very dense

Firm becoming stiff fissured reddish brown occasionally greyish greenslightly gravelly to gravelly calcareous CLAY. Gravel is angular fine andmedium of extremely weak mudstone. Weathering zone IVa. (MERCIAMUDSTONE)


(4.23)

5.70

9.93

47.01

42.78

5.00 SPT 2,5,811,22,25N=66(S)

5.00-5.45 B5.00-5.45 D

6.00-6.95 U

8.00 SPT 5,8,1316,26,45N=100/0.245(S)

8.00-8.45 B8.00-8.45 D

9.50 SPT 10,15,1926,35,30N=110/0.245(S)

9.50-9.95 B9.50-9.95 D

ALV

MMG

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


05-03-1205-03-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

2 of 3Project Dove

52.705E 422122.684N 329775.691

Ground Level (m)

BH04

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill



08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


70/252

Borehole complete at 9.93m bgl

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


05-03-1205-03-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

3 of 3Project Dove

52.705E 422122.684N 329775.691

Ground Level (m)

BH04

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill



08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


71/252

Grass over firm brown very sandy slightly gravelly CLAY with commonrootlets. Gravel is fine angular of various litholgies. (TOPSOIL)

Firm orange brown sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is fine angular ofcarbonaceous material. (ALLUVIUM)


Firm becoming stiff fissured reddish brown occasionally greyish greenslightly gravelly slightly calcareous CLAY. Gravel is angular fine to mediumof extremely weak mudstone. Weathering zone IVa. (MERCIAMUDSTONE)

(0.40)

(1.10)

(3.10)

2.00

2.90

0.40

1.50

4.60

52.43

51.33

48.23

20

20

1.80

1.40

0.00-0.20 B0.00-0.20 D

0.20-1.00 B0.20-1.00 D

1.00-1.20 B1.00-1.20 D

1.20-1.65 U100 35 blows

1.50-2.00 B1.50-2.00 D

2.00 SPT 3,4,56,5,5

N=21(S)2.00-2.45 B2.00-2.45 D

3.00 SPT 3,3,55,7,7

N=24(S)3.00-3.45 B3.00-3.45 D

4.00 SPT 4,5,56,6,7

N=24(S)4.00-4.45 B4.00-4.45 D

ALV

ALV

ALV

MMG

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


28-02-1201-03-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150 & Rotary

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

1 of 2Project Dove

52.826E 421988.490N 329616.513

Ground Level (m)

BH05

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill

Inspection pit dug to 1.2m bgl. Borehole terminated at 18.3m bgl. Drill with light cablepercussion to 9.5m bgl. Rock core with rotary r ig to 18.3m bgl. No significantcontamination observed. Groundwater encountered at 2.0m bgl. Borehole installed uponcompletion. Response zone between 1.0 to 6.0m bgl.


08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


72/252

Firm becoming stiff fissured reddish brown occasionally greyish greenslightly gravelly slightly calcareous CLAY. Gravel is angular fine to mediumof extremely weak mudstone. Weathering zone IVa. (MERCIAMUDSTONE) (continued)



(4.90)

5.80

8.70

9.5043.33

20

20

4.70

7.70

5.00 SPT 3,4,55,7,7

N=24(S)5.00-5.45 B5.00-5.45 D

6.00-6.45 U100 50 blows

7.50 SPT 8,10,1218,35,35N=100(S)

7.50-7.95 B7.50-7.95 D

8.50 SPT 10,14,2525,36,14N=100/0.255(S)

8.50-8.95 B8.50-8.95 D

MMG

StandingDate

mm

Minutes Casing

HSV

(kN/m2)

From To

Water Added

Hours Tool From To

Chiselling

Water DptDepthTime

Elev.

(m)


Depth

Description

BOREHOLE LOG

Dia.


Depth Type PID

(ppmV)

Test

Result P.Pen

(kN/m2)

(Thick

-ness)Water


Legend

Date

Sheet

DateJob No


Telephone: 0161 886 2400Fax: 0161 886 2401


28-02-1201-03-12

Project

Method/Plant Used

Dando 150 & Rotary

28305

Co-Ordinates ()

Client


GSS J. Watson

Hole No.

Nestl

2 of 2Project Dove

52.826E 421988.490N 329616.513

Ground Level (m)

BH05

General Remarks

Geology

Install /Backfill

Inspection pit dug to 1.2m bgl. Borehole terminated at 18.3m bgl. Drill with light cablepercussion to 9.5m bgl. Rock core with rotary r ig to 18.3m bgl. No significantcontamination observed. Groundwater encountered at 2.0m bgl. Borehole installed uponcompletion. Response zone between 1.0 to 6.0m bgl.


08WSPBHLOG


24/4/12


73/252

10.00 22.00 100

10.0010.14

10.4210.5010.54

13.50

13.99

14.57

15.00

72

97

100

61

72

97

100

44

24

87

100

30

42.9142.77

42.4942.4142.37

39.41

38.92

38.34

37.91

10.00 128Water polymer

(0.28)

(2.96)

(0.49)

(0.58)

(0.43)

128

No Recovery

Stiff locally firm fissured reddish brown occasionallygreyish green silty gravelly slightly calcareousCLAY. Gravel is angular fine to medium of extremelyweak Mudstone. Weathering zone III. (MERCIAMUDSTONE)

Extremely weak thickly laminated light greyishSILTSTONE with reddish brown clay partings up to5mm thick. Weathering zone II (MERCIAMUSTONE)

No Recovery

Stiff locally soft reddish brown occassionally greygreen silty gravelly CLAY. Gravel is fine to mediumangular of extremely weak mudstone withoccassional gypsum laminae. Weathering zone IVato III. (MERCIA MUDSTONE)

Extremely weak thickly laminated to thinly beddedreddish brown slightly calcareous MUDSTONElocally gravelly Clay. Laminae and bedding areirregularly spaced of gypsum (1-10mm).Weathering zone II to III. (MERCIA MUDSTONE)

No recovery. Red brown clayey flush indicating Clayhorizon. Probable weathering zone III/IVa.

Extremely weak thinly bedded red brown and greygreen unconsolidated silty slightly calcareousMUDSTONE with common irregular gypsumlaminae (2-5mm). Weathering zone II. (MERCIAMUDSTONE)

13.64 - 13.71 Non Intact.Recovered as subangulargravel of extremely weakMudstone13.82 - 13.91 Non Intact.Recovered as subangulargravel of extremely weak

Mudstone

10.00

10.50

12.00

13.50

15.00

MMG

MMG

MMG

MMG

MMG

Boring Progress

mm

Date Water Strike From To Type Return Depth Casing Casing Dia

(Thick

-ness)

LegendSCRRQDElev.

(m)TCR

Rock Test

Result (MPa)

ROTARY DRILLHOLE LOG

Core Dia. (mm)

Rotary Flush

(SPT 'N')

Fractu

Appendix 10.3 Ground Investigation Report

Documents

Transcript of Appendix 10.3 Ground Investigation Report