CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT OF FISHING SMACK PUBLIC …

STEINBEX LIMITED

CONTAMINATIONASSESSMENT OFFISHING SMACKPUBLIC HOUSE,

including remediationguidance.

FILE REFERENCE NUMBER: 1109855

October 2005

National Britannia Limited_________________________________________________________________________

Report type Interpretative

Report issue: Draft 2

File number: 1109855

Reference number: R002/RAE

Issuing office: Caerphilly

Originator: ..........................................................

Ron Edwards Chief Chemist October 2005

Checked & approved: ..........................................................

October 2005

This report is not to be used for contractual or engineering purposes unlessthe front cover sheet is signed where indicated by both the originator of thereport and the approver and the report is designated ‘Final’ on the coversheet.


CONTENTS

SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... I

1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................1

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE ..............................................................2

3. CONTAMINATION OF BARFORDS CHEMICALS, ANDCONSEQUENCES FOR FISHING SMACK PUBLIC HOUSE..........2

4. SITE INVESTIGATION BY ENVIRON, APRIL 2002...................4

5. SITE INVESTIGATION BY ADIGE (UK) LTD, SEPTEMBER2005.........................................................................................................................5

6. SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION, MOBILITY ANDPATHWAY...........................................................................................................6

6.1 PETROL AND/OR XYLENE AFFECTING GROUNDWATER BENEATH THE SITE. .......................6Source. ................................................................................................................6Mobility................................................................................................................6Pathways. .............................................................................................................7Receptor. ..............................................................................................................7

7. RISK ASSESSMENT.................................................................................7

TABLE 1: RISK POSED TO VARIOUS TARGETS BY POTENTIAL CONTAMINANTS (PAST &CURRENT)...............................................................................................................7

8. SITE ASSESSMENT .................................................................................7

Conceptual Model...................................................................................................7Remediation. .........................................................................................................8Residual Risk. .......................................................................................................8

9. PROTECTION OF THE FISHING SMACK SITE. ........................8

Premise. ...............................................................................................................8Option 1: Await remediation of the Barfords site before developing the Fishing Smack PublicHouse site. ............................................................................................................9Option 2: Full tanking of basement and replacement and protection of some ground on thesite. .....................................................................................................................9Option 3: Sealing the basement..................................................................................9Option 4: Whole site protection. ..............................................................................10

10. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................10


11. REFERENCES ......................................................................................11

APPENDIX...........................................................................................................1

APPENDIX A: BOREHOLE LOGS AND RESULTS RELATING TO ADIGE INVESTIGATION

OF SEPTEMBER 2005. ..............................................................................................2


i DRAFT 2

Steinbex Limited ID: 1109855Ref No: R002/RAE/Draft 2

October 2005

CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT OFFISHING SMACK PUBLIC HOUSE,including remediation guidance.

SUMMARY

The Fishing Smack Public House is located within the Roding Valley/Abbey Road Riverside

Conservation Area and was built in 1901 in a mock Tudor style. LBBD Council suggests the

building is worthy of protection. The premises includes a low-headroom basement that has,

on occasions, become flooded by ingress of groundwater of either tidal origin or due to heavy

rain. Being within the Conservation Area there is a planning presumption for retention of the

building, other than where the cost of such retention renders any use to be economically non-

viable.

Adjoining the Fishing Smack Public House immediately to the west was Barfords Chemical

Works. The company ceased trading around 2003. Prior to this time it was discovered that

xylene and possibly petroleum hydrocarbons had been lost to the ground and caused ground

contamination that required remediation.

LBBD Environmental Protection Team investigated on at least three occasions and closed

the public house under Emergency Action on one occasion, because of the concentration of

xylene vapour in the basement. The public house closed in 2003.

The Barfords Chemicals site was remediated and a report produced by WSP, but problems

persisted at the Fishing Smack Public House. Further remediation was taken over by

Barfords Chemicals, which closed soon afterwards. The Environment Agency has no record

for the completion of this work.

There is no assurance that under certain circumstances of tide and heavy rain, contaminated

groundwater may affect the building again. Without such assurance being in place, there

remains a Major risk to human health (fire or explosion) at the Fishing Smack Public House

site while a gas-permeable basement or other confined space remains.


ii DRAFT 2

The continued presence of polluted groundwater under any building on site will be

unacceptable to the Environment Agency.

A site investigation was undertaken for Adige (UK) Ltd on behalf of Steinbex in September

2005, involving the construction of three boreholes and monitoring of nine existing monitoring

wells. The investigation found severely contaminated groundwater (at around 2.5 metre

below ground level) in two boreholes and very high PID (hydrocarbon vapour) readings in the

atmosphere of three of the boreholes. The contamination comprised a significant floating

layer of free product (LNAPL - light non-aqueous phase liquid) comprising xylenes and

toluene with other hydrocarbons (other BTEX, petroleum and diesel range mineral oil). No

inorganic contamination was indicated. To give an indication of the voracity of the solvent,

the plastic standpipe in one borehole was described as discoloured and evidently degraded.

Four options are offered for consideration by Steinbex and engineering/architectural

professionals together with LBBDC and the Environment Agency. These range from

retention of the site in its present form until such time as remediation of Barfords (and the

site) is completed to forming a barrier around the site within which new build can take place.

At the “Draft 2” stage of this report, no recommendation is made, the report being for

consideration with the statutory authorities.


1

Steinbex Limited ID: 1109855Ref No: R002/RAE/Draft 2

October 2005

CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT OFFISHING SMACK PUBLIC HOUSE,including remediation guidance.

1. INTRODUCTION

Mr M Khan of Steinbex Limited commissioned National Britannia Limited to assess the

information available on the contaminative status of the Fishing Smack Public House site at

92 Abbey Road, Barking. No site visit is required. A conceptual, qualitative model of hazards

and associated risks will be developed.

Thereafter, to consider the options for retention or otherwise of the present structures on the

site, with due regard to the hazards potentially present on the site and the residual risk to

human health of each of the described options. Because of the findings of the investigation,

this “Draft 2” report offers options for the site for discussion with statutory authorities, and

does not recommend a particular option.

National Britannia is not required to provide detailed engineering design of any option, nor

detailed costs associated with any option or the remediation requirements associated with

any option. The Desktop assessment was carried out by Dr Ron Edwards, Chief Chemist to

National Britannia Limited, an IEMA registered Environmental Auditor of considerable

experience.

The consideration, conclusions and recommendations of this report are based on the

information gained by document searches and that made available by the client. The

interpretation includes consideration of legislation, regulations, Codes of Practice, guidance

notes and current research opinion. Revision of legislation and the potential for litigation or

other action against owners/operators continues to develop, and this report endeavours to

anticipate any environmental problems that may arise within the foreseeable future.

Contaminated Land legislation contained in Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990


2

may have considerable impact on sites that may be contaminated, but there is currently little

associated Case Law. The environmental situation of the site may be subject to varied or

additional interpretation by statutory authorities and others, for which National Britannia

cannot be responsible.

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

The Fishing Smack Public House covers a large part of the site of interest, the remainder

being hardstanding, beer garden and outbuildings. The site is located within the Roding

Valley/Abbey Road Riverside Conservation Area as originally proposed by the Planning and

Development Committee of the Council in 1995. The report to committee describes the

Fishing Smack Public House as having been built in 1901 in a mock Tudor style, and

suggests the building is worthy of protection. The premises includes a low-headroom

basement that has, on occasion, become flooded by ingress of groundwater of tidal origin

and/or due to heavy rain. The building is not a Listed Building. However, being within the

Conservation Area there is a planning presumption for retention of the building, other than

where the cost of such retention renders any use to be economically non-viable.

Adjoining the Fishing Smack Public House immediately to the west was Barfords Chemical

Works. The company ceased trading around 2003. Prior to this time it was discovered that

xylene and possibly petroleum hydrocarbons (petrol) had been lost to the ground and caused

ground contamination that required remediation.

3. CONTAMINATION OF BARFORDS CHEMICALS, ANDCONSEQUENCES FOR FISHING SMACK PUBLIC HOUSE.

Barfords Chemicals was licenced to carry out processes under Integrated Pollution Control

regulations by the Environment Agency, Hatfield. By 1999 it had become apparent that tanks

or pipelines present at the chemical works had leaked xylene and possibly petrol into the

ground. Chemical odours had been detected in the basement of the public house at times

when the basement flooded. Under the supervision of the Environment Agency, Barfords

commissioned a study by WSP in July 1999 to ascertain the extent of the contamination.

The original investigation comprised a soil vapour survey (SVS) that encountered greater

than 2000 ppm (parts per million) of flammable compounds in 19 out of 24 probe holes. The

three probes located along the boundary with the public house all recorded greater than 2000


3

ppm, while two of three probe holes within the public house site found significant levels of

flammable compounds (75 and 37 ppm).

Following these initial investigations, seven boreholes were constructed in September 1999,

BH4 and BH6 being within the public house site. BH4 returned 1200 mg/kg of volatile

organics (quantified as petrol) in the soil and 2900 ug/l petrol in the water. These represent

very significant concentrations.

The company initiated remediation of the chemical works land, comprising hydraulic

containment, removal of oil floating on the water surface (known as LNAPL - Light Non-

Aqueous Phase Liquid) and soil vapour extraction. An interim report of June 2000 by WSP

indicated that the remediation had been successful in greatly reducing the levels of

contamination, and with no measurable LNAPL detectable in the boreholes. A report

describing the results of the remediation is held by the Environment Agency (contact David

Farlie at Environment Agency, Hatfield. The officers involved in 2000 were Ian Moxan and

Nicola Ingrey, neither of which are now available).

Unfortunately, following a period of heavy rain and high tide, groundwater carrying volatile

organic chemicals entered the basement of the Fishing Smack Public House, and

evaporation of these flammable materials generated vapours in the basement that presented

a risk of fire or explosion.

The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (LBBDC), Environmental Protection Team

closed the public house under emergency action because of the risk posed by this potential

explosion hazard. Enquiries of Rob Williams of this team (in September 2005) indicated that

“very high levels of xylene vapour was present in the basement”. Also that there were two or

three such incidents which occurred when heavy rainfall and high tides gave high

groundwater level (which entered the basement) with high levels of solvent. The public

house was closed by Environmental Protection Department “for health and safety” reasons.

Following on from these events Barfords Chemicals commissioned abstraction boreholes

along the boundary with the Fishing Smack Public House to further remediate the situation.

In around 2002, Barfords took direct control of the remediation from WSP. Barfords

Chemical ceased trading soon afterwards, and the Environment Agency have not received

any further information on whether the work was completed or whether it was successful in

reducing levels.


4

The Fishing Smack Public House closed in March 2003 and has been vacant since that time.

No further observations, investigations or assessments have been carried out on the public

house site by the Environmental Protection Team or the Environment Agency. It is not

known if other incidents of flammable vapour build-ups in the basement have occurred, but

there is no reason to conclude that the problem has gone away.

In order to ascertain the state of the site, InnSpired Pubs plc, owners of the Fishing Smack

Public House, commissioned Environ to carry out a site investigation in April 2002.

In order to describe the present state of the ground and groundwater, Steinbex

commissioned a site investigation by Adige (UK) Limited in September 2005.

4. SITE INVESTIGATION BY ENVIRON, APRIL 2002.

Environ carried out an Environmental Investigation on the Fishing Smack Public House in

April 2002 for InnSpired Pubs plc.

Five boreholes were constructed on the site, with three of these prepared for soil vapour and

groundwater collection and analysis. Two boreholes from the previous WSP investigation of

1999 were also used.

Made Ground was encountered in all boreholes to between 1.0 and 1.2 metre below ground

level. This material comprised soft silty clay with brick fragments. No visual contamination

was observed. A soft Alluvial Clay containing gravel was located beneath this Made Ground

to around 6 metre depth.

Groundwater was located at around 2.0 to 2.2 metre below ground level in all boreholes.

Groundwater was considered to be in hydraulic continuity across the site and the River

Roding, and the findings of WSP indicated it rose and fell with the tide.

Soil Vapour Headspace Analysis on the boreholes found significant readings for all

boreholes. Unfortunately the way in which the wells were constructed may have excluded

collection of water from the Made Ground. The readings will have originated from dissolved

solvent in the body of the groundwater and may have excluded any solvent layer that may be

floating on the groundwater. It is clear from the observed groundwater levels that the


5

conditions were not those that had historically led to flammable vapour problems in the

basement.

None of the soil samples that were tested returned any significant results for any common

contaminant, for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon or for Volatile Organic Compounds or BTEX (a

measure that includes xylene). Analysis of groundwaters found exceedances for Total

Petroleum Hydrocarbons in all samples (up to 7200 ug/l against a guideline used of 600 ug/l).

The Environ report describes the geology and hydraulic (groundwater) conditions of the site

in reasonable detail. However, the extent of study, groundwater conditions and timing of the

chemical investigation does little to clarify the hazard from solvent or petrol vapours, only to

indicate that petrol contamination of groundwater on the site persists to some extent.

5. SITE INVESTIGATION BY ADIGE (UK) LTD, SEPTEMBER2005.

A plan of the site showing approximate locations of boreholes, borehole logs and analysis

results are included as Appendix A. Existing monitoring boreholes have been assigned

codes of BHA to BHI, and newly constructed boreholes SE1 to SE3.

Construction of boreholes SE1 to SE3 found between 1.0 m and 1.5 m of Made Ground (of

topsoil, gravel and fragments of brick, glass and ceramics over sandy, silty, clay with gravel

and brick fragments) over between 1 m and 1.5 m of Silty, Gravelly Clay, over Silty, Sandy

Gravel to the base at 2.7 to 3.5 m BGL. Groundwater was found in the Gravel consistently at

3.0 m below ground level. The groundwater in borehole SE3 was visibly contaminated and

possessed a hydrocarbon odour.

Nine existing boreholes were monitored for hydrocarbon vapours with a PID instrument.

Three boreholes, B,C and H generated results of >9999 ppm, while others returned low

readings. The groundwater in these boreholes was sampled and boreholes B and C were

found to contain 10 mm of free product (LNAPL – light non-aqueous phase liquid) while H

contained 50 mm of LNAPL.

Soil samples from borehole SE3 were submitted to Alcontrol Laboratories for a general range

of potential contaminants at depths of 0.3 m and 2.0 m and for BTEX contaminants from 3.5

m depth. The other boreholes were sampled but not submitted for analysis. No significant

contamination was found except for organic compounds at 3.5 m depth, below the water


6

table. Contamination here comprised 498 mg/kg xylenes, 1900 mg/kg toluene, 54 mg/kg

benzene and 73 mg/kg ethylbenzene.

Groundwater samples were submitted for analysis of organic compounds from boreholes C,

F and H. Significant xylene was found in borehole C but not borehole F. Water from

borehole H was subjected to detailed analysis for organic compounds. Total Petroleum

Hydrocarbon content reached 280000 mg/l, with Gasoline Range Organics at 55500 mg/l and

Diesel Range Organics at 269000 mg/l. Xylenes reached 4473 mg/l, 17800 mg/l toluene,

743 mg/l benzene, 669 mg/l ethylbenzene and other compounds.

6. SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION, MOBILITY ANDPATHWAY.

6.1 Petrol and/or xylene affecting groundwater beneath the site.

Source.

As an example of the environmental aspects of potential contaminants, xylene is immiscible

and lighter than water (therefore floats) and has a Low Flash Point (32o C) and an explosive

range of 1.1 to 7.0% in air. It is Stable and Flammable. It is Harmful if swallowed, inhaled or

absorbed through the skin, and has a long-term exposure limit (8-hour) of 50 ppm. It will

disrupt many plastics including natural and other rubbers.

The xylene and toluene will have originated from leakage at Barfords Chemicals at some time

up to 1999, and may persist in soil and on groundwater.

Petrol and diesel, in the quantities present, will have originated from leakage at Barfords

Chemicals or other premises at some time up to 1999 or later, and may persist in soil and on

groundwater.

Mobility.

Xylene, toluene, diesel and petrol are mutually soluble in each other, are highly mobile and

be transmitted floating on, dissolved or occluded in groundwater from contaminated soil and

be moved around by tidal variation in the river, or by occasional floodwater.


7

Pathways.

Movement through permeable ground, especially the Made Ground and gravel beds or

lenses. Floating solvent or petrol may vaporise into confined spaces (such as the basement)

and build vapour concentrations that are flammable or explosive.

Receptor.

Human health could be affected by direct contact with xylene, toluene, benzene, diesel or

petrol on water or in soil.

Human health could be affected by fire or explosion of flammable atmosphere in the

basement or other confined spaces.

7. RISK ASSESSMENT

The environmental risks presented are covered in Table 1.

Table 1: Risk posed to various targets by potential contaminants (past &current).

Activity orincident

Contaminant Perceivedextent ofhazard

Target Pathway PotentialRisk

Direct contactwith soil orwater

Solvents, petroland diesel

Moderate Humanhealth

Ingestion or skincontact withcontaminant

Moderate

Direct contactwith vapour

Solvents andpetrol vapours

Major Humanhealth

Inhalation Major

Fire orexplosion

Xylene or petrolliquid andvapour

Major Humanhealth

Ingress tobasement ofcontaminatedwater

Major

8. SITE ASSESSMENT

Conceptual Model.

History of the site indicates that leakage occurred from tanks or pipelines at Barfords

Chemicals and contaminated soil and groundwater at the Fishing Smack Public House with

xylene and possibly petrol. It is evident that solvent floating on the water surface evaporated


8

in to the confined space of the basement of the public house, generating a potentially

flammable or explosive atmosphere. This may be ignited by a flame or electrical switching.

Soil affected by xylene or petrol on the groundwater has become contaminated. Disturbance

of the soil may bring demolition or construction workers or the public into contact with

affected soil or may inhale fumes.

Remediation.

While a Source of xylene and/or petrol previously existed (up to 2002) it is clear that previous

remediation was ineffective in adequately modulating that Source. Protection of any building

on the site is essential and must be effective. Further remediation of the vicinity of Barfords

is required.

Residual Risk.

Solvents (such as xylenes and toluene), petrol and diesel remain in soil and are available for

migration on groundwater during exceptional tidal or flooding events. The remaining risk to

the public house by build up of flammable vapours in the basement comprises a Major risk.

Removal of areas of previously impermeable hardstanding or floor slabs at Barfords

Chemicals site, could introduce a new migration route, through percolation of rain water and

transport of solvents or petrol to the groundwater.

9. PROTECTION OF THE FISHING SMACK SITE.

Premise.

The following options for safe use of the Fishing Smack Public House site are based on two

considerations:

• The remediation of Barfords Chemicals site has been not been successful in

adequately reducing the hazard on the public house site such that, in certain

circumstances (high tide and heavy rain), the risk of fire or explosion in the

unprotected basement remains a Major risk.

• That the basement is presently open to ingress of groundwater under certain

circumstances.


9

Option 1: Await remediation of the Barfords site before developing the Fishing SmackPublic House site.

The Fishing Smack site could be retained in its current state, with or without retention of the

building, until the adjoining Barfords site is validated as being adequately remediated. As

part of this process, the Fishing Smack Public House site would be included in this

remediation process.

Any building built within the site, with or without a basement would require to be protected

from any unforeseen entry of pollution, by means of a constructed water and vapour ingress

protection system and passive venting from beneath and alongside this.

Option 2: Full tanking of basement and replacement and protection of some ground onthe site.

This option requires an engineering solution whereby the existing basement may be made

impermeable to groundwater and soil atmosphere. This would involve the construction of

basement walls and floor either inside or exterior to the existing walls to a standard that

affords full protection. Any construction would need to use such materials and mode of

construction as to guarantee that ingress of hydrocarbons and vapour will not occur over the

full period required to remediate the adjoining ground. It would be necessary to collect and

treat free phase from the surrounding groundwater on site and it is very unlikely that the

Environment Agency would permit any venting of vapours or soil atmosphere to air.

Option 3: Sealing the basement.

The basement may be filled and sealed. The building would require to be protected from any

build up of potentially flammable vapours within the filled basement by gas proof membrane

and a system of passive or forced ventilation.

It is probable that this solution would leave an undesirable and potentially hazardous situation

in the filled basement and the surrounding ground unless the venting system could be

guaranteed to function adequately in perpetuity. It is highly unlikely that the statutory bodies

would accept a solution that allowed contaminated and potentially hazardous groundwater to

remain beneath the building.


10

Option 4: Whole site protection.

The option would be to provide a boundary barrier to the whole site and build within this. Any

barrier, of suitable engineered quality to prevent ingress of free product and heavily polluted

groundwater and hydrocarbon vapours, would penetrate to a depth that would guarantee that

no free phase, floating on the surface of the groundwater, could enter the site under any

circumstances. It is probably preferable to avoid any differential water pressure on each side

of a barrier, allowing flow of deeper groundwater under or through the lower part of the

barrier.

It would be necessary to decide whether to replace all permeable soil within the site with low

permeability material.

Any building built within the protected area, with or without a basement would require to be

protected from any unforeseen entry of pollution, by means of a constructed vapour

protection system and passive venting from beneath this.

The option to be adopted, or a variation on an option, requires to be fully investigated and

designed by appropriate professionals and fully agreed with Planning officers and the

Environment Agency prior to any development being started. National Britannia Limited

does not warrant or advise that these constitute the only available options, that the

descriptions would fully suit the purpose of protection or that statutory authorities will agree

with the effectiveness of the options. Each option will need to be evaluated by the client, with

suitable professional assistance, in satisfying himself that the measures are effective and

also the cost of the measures.

10. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

a). Sometime prior to 1999 the site of Barfords Chemicals became contaminated with

hydrocarbons, including xylenes and toluene. This material migrated on groundwater on

to the Fishing Smack Public House site.

b). Heavy and hazardous pollution of the groundwater persists beneath the site.

c). Under certain circumstances of high tide and heavy rain, contaminated groundwater has

entered the basement of the public house, generating potentially flammable or explosive

atmosphere in the basement, and may do so in the future.

d). London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Environmental Protection Team investigated

on at least three occasions and closed the public house under Emergency Action on one

occasion, because of the concentration of xylene vapour in the basement.


11

e). Barfords Chemicals closed around 2003 and the public house closed in 2003.

f). The Barfords Chemicals site was remediated and a report produced by WSP, but this

remediation has not been adequately completed or closed out and problems persist at

the Fishing Smack Public House site.

g). There is no assurance that on removal of impermeable hardstanding and floors at the

former Barfords Chemicals site that further contaminant could not reach the groundwater

and migrate to the public house site.

h). With remediation of the adjoining site not having been taken to completion, there remains

a Major risk to human health (fire or explosion) at the Fishing Smack Public House site.

i). Testing of soil from the site indicates that no other significant contamination (other than

hydrocarbons on the groundwater and surrounding soil) exist on the Fishing Smack

Public House site.

j). This “Draft 2” Report offers four options for consideration. The option to be adopted, or a

variation on an option, requires to be fully investigated and designed by appropriate

professionals and fully agreed with Planning officers and the Environment Agency prior to

any development being started.

11. REFERENCES

Environ (2002), Environmental Investigation, The Fishing Smack Public House, Abbey Road,

Barking for InnSpired Pubs plc, Reference 64-C555 of 18-April-2002.

Contacts:

• Rob Williams, London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Council, Environmental

Protection Team.

• Mick Flynn, Environmental Protection Team Leader and David Farlie, Groundwater &

Contaminated Land Team, Environment Agency Hatfield.


1

APPENDIX


2

Appendix A: Borehole Logs and Results Relating to Adige Investigationof September 2005.

Reg. in Cardiff No. 5162214 VAT Reg. No. 732 4887 15

SUB SURFACE SOUTH EAST LTD ' jjGEOTECHNICAL & GEOENVIRONMENTALSITE INVESTIGATION SPECIALISTSAND CONSULTANTSReg. Office3 PEEL STREETPRESTON

PR220STelephone: 01772-561135

Your ref:

Ourref:

consul irlionlirte

AGSs

VICTORIA HOUSEDESBOROUGH STREETHIGH WYCOMBEHP11 2NF

Telephone: O1494 6O1O13Fax: 01494601001e-mail: mltickeesubsurface.co.ukwiww,subsurface.ca.uk

e/>,

fH

»i+ •:

Rotherham Laboratory : Templeborough House, Mill Close, Rotherham. S60 1BZ. (UKAS Lab No. 0995/2300)

Bellshill Laboratory : 2 Mallard Way, Strathclyde Business Park, Bellshill. ML4 3BF. (UKAS Lab No. 0995)

Bradford Laboratory : George Street, Bradford. BD1 5AU. (UKAS Lab No. 0996)

Telephone: 01709 841096 Fax: 01709 841079 E-mail : [email protected]

Certificate of Analysis

Sub Surface Group

Sub Surface North West Limited

3 Peel Street

Preston

PR2 2QS

Sample Received : 10/10/2005

Analysis Completed : 18/10/2005

Site Name : Fishing Smack Public House, 92 Abbey

Road, Barking, London

Your PO No : SE1029

050098908 050098909 050098910Our Ref

Method

Your Ref SE3 @ 3.5mSE3 @ 2.0mSE3 @ 0.3m

Sampled On 26/09/2005 26/09/2005 26/09/2005

81.80 87.00 91.60R1.1 % % % Air Dried Solids

1.19 0.00 42.90R1.1 % % % Stones > 10mm

7.30 8.08 R3.6 pH

< 0.2 2.46 R*6.12.X mg/kg [DSB] mg/kg [DSB] Sulphide

18.6 7.49 R8B mg/kg mg/kg Arsenic

0.639 2.34 R*8B.6 mg/kg mg/kg Boron (water soluble)

0.852 0.071 R8B mg/kg mg/kg Cadmium

29.2 40.3 R8B mg/kg mg/kg Chromium

62.5 16.0 R8B mg/kg mg/kg Copper

0.869 <0.15 R8B mg/kg mg/kg Mercury

38.5 28.8 R8B mg/kg mg/kg Nickel

520 16.5 R8B mg/kg mg/kg Lead

0.588 <0.4 R*8B mg/kg mg/kg Selenium

0.168 0.0404 R8B % % Total Sulphate

592 67.0 R8B mg/kg mg/kg Zinc

0.37 <0.29 R2.5 mg/kg [DSB] mg/kg [DSB] Total cyanide

<1.1 <1 R2.21 mg/kg [DSB] mg/kg [DSB] Phenol (total monohydric)

<1.2 <1.1 R2.5 mg/kg mg/kg Thiocyanate

126 <5 R7.22 mg/kg mg/kg PAH (FID screen)

101000R7.9 ug/kg [DSB] 1,2-Dimethylbenzene

(o-Xylene)

397000R7.9 ug/kg [DSB] 1,3 & 1,4 Dimethylbenzene

(m & p-Xylene)

54200R7.9 ug/kg [DSB] Benzene

73100R7.9 ug/kg [DSB] Ethyl Benzene

1900000R7.9 ug/kg [DSB] Toluene

Approved by: Steve Scott (Operations Manager)

099509962300

SDG Number : SDG05026496

Certificate ID : 140886

Page 1 of 4

Reported : 18/10/2005 16:08

Methods marked * in this report are not in the UKAS Accreditation Schedule for our Laboratory. Methods marked $ are subcontracted, those prefixed R are

performed at the Rotherham Lab & those prefixed S are performed at the Bellshill Lab. Comments, opinions & interpretations expressed herein are outside

the scope of UKAS Accreditation. Details of the methods used and their performance characteristics are available on request. Unless otherwise stated,

sampling was not carried out by ALcontrol Laboratories. < = less than; > = greater than; DSB = dry solids basis.

ALcontrol Laboratories is a trading division of ALcontrol UK Limited. Registered Office : Templeborough House, Mill Close, Rotherham S60 1BZ. Registered in England and Wales No. 4057291

v2.0.2

http://www.alcontrol.co.uk

mailto:[email protected]






Sub Surface Group


3 Peel Street

Preston

PR2 2QS





Your PO No : SE1029

050098911 050098912 050098913Our Ref

Method

Your Ref BHH @ 2.94mBHF @ 2.60mBHC @ 2.58m

Sampled On 26/09/2005 26/09/2005 26/09/2005

269000R7.25 mg/l Diesel range organics (C10

- C26)

55500R*7.9 mg/l Gasoline range organics

(C6 - C10)

11000R7.25 mg/l Lubricating oil range

organics (C26 - C40)

280000R7.25 mg/l Total petroleum

hydrocarbons (C10 - C40)

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane

<5000R7.9 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethane

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethene

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,1-Dichloropropene

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,2,3-Trichloropropane


1240000R7.9 ug/l 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

<5000R7.9 ug/l 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropa

ne

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,2-Dibromoethane

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,2-Dichlorobenzene

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane

70300 19.0 913000R7.9 ug/l ug/l ug/l 1,2-Dimethylbenzene

(o-Xylene)

<2 93.8 3560000R7.9 ug/l ug/l ug/l 1,3 & 1,4 Dimethylbenzene

(m & p-Xylene)


444000R7.9 ug/l 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene





<1000R7.9 ug/l 2-Chlorotoluene

<1000R7.9 ug/l 4-Chlorotoluene

95400R7.9 ug/l 4-Isopropyltoluene


099509962300



Page 2 of 4

Reported : 18/10/2005 16:08






v2.0.2








Sub Surface Group


3 Peel Street

Preston

PR2 2QS





Your PO No : SE1029

050098911 050098912 050098913Our Ref

Method

Your Ref BHH @ 2.94mBHF @ 2.60mBHC @ 2.58m

Sampled On 26/09/2005 26/09/2005 26/09/2005

<1000R7.9 ug/l 1,1-Dimethylethylbenzene

74100R7.9 ug/l 1-Methylethylbenzene

80500R7.9 ug/l 1-Methylpropylbenzene

10.2 <2 743000R7.9 ug/l ug/l ug/l Benzene

<1000R7.9 ug/l Bromobenzene

<5000R7.9 ug/l Bromochloromethane

<1000R7.9 ug/l Bromodichloromethane

<1000R7.9 ug/l Chlorobenzene

<1000R7.9 ug/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethene

<5000R7.9 ug/l cis-1,3-Dichloropropene

<1000R7.9 ug/l Dibromochloromethane

<1000R7.9 ug/l Dibromomethane

<12000R7.9 ug/l Dichloromethane

77400 16.8 669000R7.9 ug/l ug/l ug/l Ethylbenzene

<1000R7.9 ug/l Hexachloro-1,3-Butadiene

104000R7.9 ug/l Naphthalene

60000R7.9 ug/l n-Butylbenzene

105000R7.9 ug/l n-Propylbenzene

38600R7.9 ug/l Styrene

<1000R7.9 ug/l Tetrachloroethene

<1000R7.9 ug/l Tetrachloromethane

(carbon tetrachloride)

295 <2 17800000R7.9 ug/l ug/l ug/l Toluene

<1000R7.9 ug/l trans-1,2-Dichloroethene

<1000R7.9 ug/l trans-1,3-Dichloropropene

<1000R7.9 ug/l Tribromomethane

(bromoform)

<1000R7.9 ug/l Trichloroethene

<1000R7.9 ug/l Trichloromethane

(chloroform)

(1) See reportR*7.15.X GCMS Scan


099509962300



Page 3 of 4

Reported : 18/10/2005 16:08






v2.0.2








Sub Surface Group


3 Peel Street

Preston

PR2 2QS





Your PO No : SE1029

Result Notes

(1) Report for GC/MS Scan

The main compounds tentatively identified by library matching and

quantified ONLY by comparison with an internal standard are listed below.

Reporting criteria :-

The anticipated detection limit for this analysis is approximately 1000mg/l

That means that under the analytical conditions employed,

only compounds at concentrations greater than 1000mg/l are reported.

A tentative identification of a compound is only reported if the

PBM (Probability Based Matching) algorithm produces a match quality of

greater than 75%

Tentatively identified compounds :-

Sample mainly consisted of BTEX and other aromatics and aliphatic hydrocarbon material between C7 and C14.

Quantitation of this material unsuitable by this analysis.

See VOC and TPH results for best quantitation of these compounds


099509962300



Page 4 of 4

Reported : 18/10/2005 16:08






v2.0.2



SUB SURFACESITE INVESTIGATION AND SPECIALIST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS In-Situ Test Results3 Peel Street, Preston, PR2 2QS. Tel. (01772) 561135 Fax (01772) 204907

Job NumberSite: FISHING SMACK PUBLIC HOUSE, 92 ABBEY ROAD, BARKING SE1029

Client: ADIGE (UK) LIMITED Sheet:

Engineer: 1 OF 1

BH Standpipe PID (ppm)

GW Depth (m)

GW sample PID (ppm) GW sample ref.

A 29 2.52 6 088-9

B 20 2.54 >9999 090-1

C 8 2.58 >9999 092-3

D 10 2.35 2 082-3

E 0 2.41 8 064-5

F 28 2.60 9 080-1

G 10 DRY - -

H 168 2.94 >9999 084-5

I 51 2.44 21 086-7

Note:Wells were not pruged to BS10175 standards before retrieving samples

50mm HDPE

110mm HDPE

50mm PVC

50mm HDPE

50mm HDPE

50mm HDPE

50mm HDPE

50mm HDPE

no sheen, water dark grey

50mm free product, water dark grey

slight sheen, water grey

10mm free product, water clear

10mm free product, water clear

no sheen water, orange brown

no sheen water orange brown

slight sheen, water brown

Groundwater Monitoring Results

Date

26/9/05

Description

slight sheen, water clear110mm HDPE

Standpipe type and depth

ini Percussive Borehole

Complete at 3.20111

Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase System (GEODASY) (C) all rights resewed

r

S SUBSURFACE SITE INVESTIGATION, GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS a 3 Peel Street, Preston, PR2 2QS TeI (01772) 561135 F a r (01772) 204907

site'

FISHING SMACK P H , 92 ABBEY ROAD. BARKING

Borehole Number

SEI

s SUBSURFACE Site Borehole Number

SITE INVESTIGATION, GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FISHING SMACK PH. 92 ABBEY ROAD. BARKING 3 Peel Street. Preston. PR2 2 9 s Tel (01772) 561 135 Fax (01772) 204907 1 SE2 1

Casing Diameter

Mini Percussive Borehole

I -

I ! I i

26/09/2005:2.65m

Complete at 3.45m

n completion backfilled with arisings in reverse order I

Figure No. SE1029.SE2

Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase System (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved

s SUBSURFACE Site Borehole

SITE INVESTIGATION, GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS '

FiSHiNG SMACK PH. 92 ABBEY ROAD BARKING a 3 Peel Skeet. Preston, PR2 ZQS Tel. (01772) 561135 Far (01772) 204907 I - Boring Method 1 Casing Diameter

Mini Percussive Borehole

Ground Level (mOD) Client

ADlGE (U.K ) LIMITED

Location

AS PLAN

Dates 1 Engineer

26Qg12005 I

Figure No. SE1029.SE3

Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase System (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved

Depth (m)

4 m

Groundwater Strike

Strike Rise Level

Gravelly CWY

Sandy GRAVEL . .. ..: . . Silty sandy GRAVEL

#. ... . .

s SUBSURFACE SITE INVESTIGATION, GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 3 Peel Street. Preston. PR2 2QS. Tel. (01 772) 561 135 Fax (01 772) 204907

Nominal Section

Site

FISHING SMACK PH. 92 ABBEY ROAD, BARKING

I I I I I I Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase System (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved

Client

ADlGE (U.K.) LIMITED

Date Drawn 1011 012005

Drawn By

Date Checked

Checked By

Sheet 111

Job Number SE1029

Scale 1:20M

Figure No. SE1029.1

SUB SURFACE SITE INVESTiGATION, GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS / 3 Peel Sireel, Preslon, PRZ ZQS Tel. (0l77Z) Sl I35 Far (01772) 204907

Standard Penetration Test Results 1

Job Number : FISHING SMACK PH, 92 ABBEY ROAD, BARKING

SE1029

: ADlGE (U.K.) LIMITED Sheet F

ter: 1 111

CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT OF FISHING SMACK PUBLIC …

Documents

Transcript of CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT OF FISHING SMACK PUBLIC …