Issuu

Land Quality Management Ltd For

London Borough of Havering

Part 2A Risk Assessment, Arnold's Field, Launders Lane, London Borough of Havering

LQM Report Number: 1582 Issue Number: 2 Status: Final Date: 17/07/2025

This page intentionally left blank

Document Control Sheet Issued by:

Land Quality Management Ltd The Sir Colin Campbell Building University of Nottingham Innovation Park Triumph Road Nottingham NG7 2TU Tel: +44 (0)115 7484080 Email: administrator@lqm.co.uk

Client:

London Borough of Havering Town Hall Main Road Romford RM1 3BB

Report Title:

Part 2A Risk Assessment, Arnold's Field, Launders Lane, London Borough of Havering

LQM Report Number:

1582

Issue Number:

Status:

Final

Date:

17/07/2025

File Location:

G:\Shared drives\P drive\1582 Havering\LQM work

Name Prepared by:

Signature

Paul Nathanail CGeol SiLC SQP

Document Revision Record Issue number

Date

6/29/2025

17/07/2025

Revision Details Amended following LB Havering comments

Limitations This document has been prepared by Land Quality Management Ltd within the terms of the Contract, scope of work, and resources agreed in writing with the Client indicated in this report. Land Quality Management Ltd has no responsibility to the Client and/or others for any matters outside the scope of the agreement. This document is intended for the sole use of the Client. Any third party using this report does so entirely at their own risk. However, this document, and its contents, remains the property of LQM until payment in full of our invoices in connection with the production of this report. LQM makes no warranty or representation whatsoever, express or implied, with respect to the use by a third party of any information contained in this report or its suitability for any purpose. LQM assumes no responsibility for any costs, claims, damages or expenses (including any consequential damages) resulting from use of this report or any information contained within this report by a third party. LQM obtained, reviewed and evaluated information from the Client and other sources as detailed in the report. LQM’s conclusions, opinions and recommendations are based solely on this information. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report represent our professional opinions. These opinions were arrived at in accordance with accepted industry practices at this time and location and as such are not a guarantee that the Site is free from hazardous materials or conditions. Land Quality Management Ltd possess a non-exclusive and non-transferable Ordnance Survey Licence, but do not possess any right to sub-license any of the rights granted by this licence to any party. Under the terms of Land Quality Management Ltd Ordnance Survey Licence, copying of figures containing Ordnance Survey data or using figures for any purpose other than as part of this report is not permitted. ©Land Quality Management Ltd 2025

Bookmarks Where this document is provided in the form of a PDF document, electronic bookmarks have been provided to facilitate document navigation. To use the bookmarks, click on the bookmark icon within your PDF viewing software or refer to the relevant help or software manual.

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

CONTENTS

CONTENTS.............................................................................................................................................3 1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................5 1.1 Terms of Reference .....................................................................................................................5 1.2 The Site ........................................................................................................................................5 1.3 Background .................................................................................................................................5 1.4 Materials for review ....................................................................................................................7 1.5 Aim ...............................................................................................................................................7 1.6 Objectives.....................................................................................................................................7 1.7 Legal Context...............................................................................................................................8 1.7.1 Contaminated land ................................................................................................................8 1.7.2 Deciding whether a possibility of significant harm is significant (human health) ...............8 1.7.3 Category 1: Human Health ...................................................................................................9 1.7.4 Category 4: Human Health ...................................................................................................9 1.7.5 Categories 2 and 3: Human Health .....................................................................................10 1.7.6 Substance ............................................................................................................................11 1.7.7 Mixtures ..............................................................................................................................11 1.7.8 Risk assessment ..................................................................................................................12 1.7.9 Land is not contaminated land unless there is reason to consider otherwise ......................12 1.7.10 Use of Part 2A where no appropriate alternative solution exists ........................................12 2

STATUS OF SMOKE...................................................................................................................14

3 HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT FOR ON SITE SOILS BASED ON GEO ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LIMITED (21 DECEMBER 2023) REPORT (V2.0) ..............15 4 CONTROLLED WATERS ASSESSMENT BASED ON ENVIRONMENT AGENCY SAMPLING OF THE “RODING / INGREBOURNE CATCHMENT RIVER N.C.R.S” ............17 5 EVALUATE AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA (PAHS, PCBS, LEAD, MERCURY, VOCS) ....................................................................................................................................................18 5.1 TRL Limited. March 2025. Final Report entitled "Launders Lane Air Quality Monitoring report May 2023 – September 2024" Prepared for: Havering Borough Council ......18 5.1.1 PAH (BaP) ..........................................................................................................................19 5.1.2 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) .................................................................................19 5.1.3 Heavy metals .......................................................................................................................21 5.1.4 PCB .....................................................................................................................................21 5.2 A-10106 Letter Report for Air Monitoring - Launder's Lane Rv2 (Redacted 30 September 2024) ....................................................................................................................................21 5.3 The Effect of Arnold’s Field Fires on the Respiratory Health of the Surrounding Population ..............................................................................................................................................23 5.3.1 Fire days ..............................................................................................................................23 5.3.2 PM2.5 ..................................................................................................................................24 5.4 Possible Health Impact of Fires at Launders Lane: Havering Cancer Incidence ..............27 6

INJURY FROM LANDFILL FIRE ............................................................................................28

RISK EVALUATION ...................................................................................................................31

REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................33

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

8.1 8.2

ISSUE: 2

Site-Specific Reports ................................................................................................................. 33 Websites ..................................................................................................................................... 33

APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 CV OF PAUL NATHANAIL APPENDIX 2 APPROVED JUDGMENT OF MRS JUSTIC LIEVEN IN CLEAR THE AIR IN HAVERING, R (ON THE APPLICATION OF) V LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING [2025] EWHC 1492 (ADMIN) (17 JUNE 2025) APPENDIX 3 TRL LIMITED. MARCH 2025. FINAL REPORT ENTITLED "LAUNDERS LANE AIR QUALITY MONITORING REPORT MAY 2023 – SEPTEMBER 2024" APPENDIX 4 LB HAVERING . UNDATED. REVIEW OF ASBESTOS MONITORING AT ARNOLDS FIELD, LAUNDERS LANE APPENDIX 5 A-10106 LETTER REPORT FOR AIR MONITORING - LAUNDER'S LANE RV2 REDACTED 30 SEPTEMBER 2024 APPENDIX 6 GEO ENVIRONMENTAL. 21 DECEMBER 2023. REPORT (V2.0) ENTITLED: "GROUND INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR THE LAND AT ARNOLD’S FIELD, LAUNDERS LANE, RAINHAM, RM13 9FL" APPENDIX 7 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY SAMPLING OF THE “RODING / INGREBOURNE CATCHMENT RIVER N.C.R.S, MARCH 2025 APPENDIX 8 LB HAVERING, “THE EFFECT OF ARNOLD’S FIELD FIRES ON THE RESPIRATORY HEALTH OF THE SURROUNDING POPULATION” – FULL TECHNICAL REPORT, NOVEMBER 2024 (FTR) APPENDIX 9 LB HAVERING, “THE EFFECT OF ARNOLD’S FIELD FIRES ON THE RESPIRATORY HEALTH OF THE SURROUNDING POPULATION” – SHORT REPORT, NOVEMBER 2024 APPENDIX 10 LB HAVERING, “THE POSSIBLE HEALTH IMPACT OF FIRES AT LAUNDERS LANE: HAVERING CANCER INCIDENCE”, (UNDATED BUT POSSIBLY 16 AUGUST 2024) APPENDIX 11 WITNESS STATEMENT OF SIMON THELWELL, 10 JANUARY 2025 IN CLEAR THE AIR IN HAVERING, R (ON THE APPLICATION OF) V LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING [2025] APPENDIX 12 LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING CONTAMINATED LAND INSPECTION STRATEGY, REVISION 02 DATED 22 NOVEMBER 2016

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Terms of Reference

(1)

ISSUE: 2

Further to our Proposal and Quotation dated 13 February 2025, the London Borough of Havering

(LBH) commissioned Land Quality Management Ltd. (LQM), through a signed Order Confirmation letter received on 22 February 2025, to undertake work in relation to the aim and objectives below. 1.2

The Site

(2) The site history was summarised by TRL in their report (Background, TRL 2025) as follows: “Waste has been deposited in Arnolds Field on Launders Lane without the appropriate authorisation; since 2000, there have been approximately 2,016 cases of significant volumes of waste being deposited at the site. No information on waste depth is available, however it is known that it can be up to 5 metres deep in places. There are no clear records of the specific type of waste that has been deposited at the site; however, it is known to include household, commercial / industrial (including wood, paper, glass, plastic, mattresses, furniture, cables, and fabric materials) and construction waste deposits. In 2012 a limited site investigation identified elevated levels of lead and benzo[a]pyrene in the soil. Lead is a metal and a persistent contaminant, which can remain in the environment because of historical usage related to old lead-based paint dust and contaminated soil for example. Benzo[a]pyrene is a type of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon that are formed when organic materials (such as coal, oil, tobacco, and wood) are burned. The decomposition of organic waste combined with the presence of combustible types of waste, like plastic and overgrown grass, is thought to have contributed to fires over the last 6 years”. 1.3

Background

(3) LB Havering write "as a result of the illegal infilling of waste above an historic landfill at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane fires have been occurring. A contaminated land phase II investigation was completed at the landfill site and the site was not designated [sic] as contaminated land using established contaminated land methodology. This decision was the subject of a judicial review in part exploring the council’s decision not to consider smoke as a pollutant linkage." The judgment in that judicial review was handed down by Mrs Justice Lieven on 17 June 2025. (4) LQM’s Paul Nathanail carried out a drive past the Arnolds Field site and its vicnity on 2 March 2025. This familiarised him with the terrain and the location of some of the off site air quality monitoring points reported in the documents reviewed below. The site was not accessed.

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

(5)

ISSUE: 2

The information reviewed shows that this is a site: •

that repeatedly requires the London Fire Brigade (LFB) to attend to deal with fires (most recently on 4 July 2025).

•

where the landowner made a submission to the recent judicial review that “there are alternative solutions before designation”.

•

where it is a matter of public record that the LB Havering’s Simon Thelwell’s sworn and attested evidence to the High Court states that: “11. The Interested Party [the landowner] has been in discussions with the Defendant [LB Havering] as local planning authority in relation to possible future plans for the Site, including the provision of pre-application advice. No planning application has yet been received however. None of the discussions to date involve leaving the Site in its current condition and would involve remediation of the site including removal of material.” 12. My conclusions on the current use of the Site are based on fact and knowledge – that is that the site is not open, public access is not possible and there is no informal use of the site by the public. The owner of the site does not use it for any purpose. The 2000 Permission does not give a right for the public to use the land – there is no planning condition or associated legal agreement with the effect to require public access. The description of the 2000 Permission includes the inclusion of “community woodland” and so informal use by the public would not be unlawful in planning terms, however, the 2000 Permission could only be implemented in accordance with that permission, as required by the 2004 Enforcement Notice, which requires the removal of significant volumes of material from the Site. Therefore, any foreseeable future use by the public, or anyone else, would be on a Site which has a markedly different landform and condition to what it is now.”

•

where LB Havering understands that the LFB, when responding to an incident on site, do squeeze through where the new fence meets the old fence rather than wait for the landowner to open the gate allowing vehicular. However, the landowner has recently agreed to put a pedestrian gate there (with an FB lock) so firefighters can get walk-in access. However, LB Havering considers that even under current circumstances (LFB squeezing through) the site remains secure/inaccessible because the fence “looks inaccessible” and no members of the public have any motivation to try to get in.

•

where LB Havering, in justifying its Community Protection Warning (CPW), was satisfied that “Regular fires, particularly in the summer months, are causing an unreasonable burden on the London Fire brigade”.

•

for which LB Havering, as a matter of public record in sworn and attested evidence, has stated that discussions with the landowner do not involve leaving the Site in its current condition and would involve removal of material.

•

where the landowner has not taken voluntary action to stop the fires.

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

1.4 (6)

ISSUE: 2

Materials for review The following documents were provided by LB Havering to review: a. TRL Limited. March 2025. Final Report entitled "Launders Lane Air Quality Monitoring report May 2023 – September 2024" Prepared for: Havering Borough Council [previously supplied as Draft Final dated December 2024] b. LB Havering . Undated. Review of Asbestos Monitoring at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane by Mike Richardson, Senior Public Protection Officer c. Dedacted. A-10106 Letter Report for Air Monitoring - Launder's Lane Rv2 Redacted 30 September 2024. d. Geo Environmental. 21 December 2023. Report (v2.0) entitled: "Ground investigation report for the land at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL" on behalf of London Borough of Havering Council e. Environment Agency sampling of the “RODING / INGREBOURNE CATCHMENT RIVER N.C.R.S, March 2025 f. LB Havering, “The Effect of Arnold’s Field Fires on the Respiratory Health of the Surrounding Population” – Full Technical Report, November 2024 (FTR) g. LB Havering, “The Effect of Arnold’s Field Fires on the Respiratory Health of the Surrounding Population” – Short Report, November 2024 h. LB Havering, “The Possible Health Impact of Fires at Launders Lane: Havering Cancer Incidence”, (undated but possibly 16 August 20241)

1.5 (7)

Aim To advise LB Havering on the status of smoke related issues arising from fires at Arnolds Field,

Launders Lane under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended). 1.6

Objectives

(8) The following objectives need to be completed to achieve the above aim:

•

Establish the status of “smoke” under Part 2A

•

Evaluate air quality monitoring data (PAHs, PCBs, Lead, Mercury, VOCs) in order to risk assess smoke originating from an historic landfill, 2 monitoring station sites and 7 tube sites measuring VOCs.

•

Carry out a generic quantitative risk assessment by comparing available data against appropriate generic assessment criteria

https://issuu.com/haveringcouncil/docs/health_impact_report_-_cancer_incidence

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

•

Assign each pollutant linkage into one of the risk categories under Part 2A introduced by the Statutory Guidance

•

Document the above, in accordance with the Statuory Guidance, in the form of EITHER risk summaries for each significant pollutant linkage OR a statement explaining why the land does not meet the definition of contaminated land under Part 2A [Not covered in this document].

1.7

Legal Context

(9) The legal context is Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (As Amended) (Part 2A). Part 2A is supported by the Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance issued by Defra in 2012 (Statutory Guidance). 1.7.1 (10)

Contaminated land Part 2A states that

“ ‘Contaminated land’ is any land which appears to the local authority in whose area it is situated to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, on or under the land, that— (a) significant harm is being caused or there is a significant possibility of such harm being caused; or [ (b) significant pollution of controlled waters is being caused or there is a significant possibility of such pollution being caused;] (11) The Statutory Guidance Section 1.4 spells out the objectives of government policy as: 1.4 The overarching objectives of the Government’s policy on contaminated land and the Part 2A regime are: (a) To identify and remove unacceptable risks to human health and the environment. (b) To seek to ensure that contaminated land is made suitable for its current use. (c) To ensure that the burdens faced by individuals, companies and society as a whole are proportionate, manageable and compatible with the principles of sustainable development. 1.7.2 (12)

Deciding whether a possibility of significant harm is significant (human health) The Statutory Guidance paragraph 4.16 points out that “The decision on whether the possibility

of significant harm being caused is significant is a regulatory decision to be taken by the relevant local authority.” (13)

Local authorities are advised in paragraph 4.17 that “In deciding whether or not land is

contaminated land on grounds of significant possibility of significant harm to human health, the local authority should use the categorisations described in paragraphs 4.19 – 4.30 below. Categories 1 and 2 would encompass land which is capable of being determined as contaminated land on grounds of significant possibility of significant harm to human health. Categories 3 and 4 would encompass land which is not capable of being determined on such grounds.” (14)

In addition, paragraph 4.18 requires that “the local authority should consider the number of

people who might be exposed to the risk in question and/or the number of people it estimates would be LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

likely to suffer harm. In some cases, the authority may decide that this is not a particularly relevant consideration: it is quite possible that land could be determined as contaminated land on the basis of a significant possibility of significant harm to an individual or a small number of people. However in other cases the authority may consider that the number of people affected is an important consideration, for example if the number of people at risk substantially alters the authority’s view of the likelihood of significant harm or the scale and seriousness of such harm if it did occur”. (15)

Land in categories 1 and 2 meet the definition of contaminated land whereas land in categories

3 and 4 do not meet the definition. 1.7.3

Category 1: Human Health

(16)

The Statutory Guidance advises that 4.19 The local authority should assume that a significant possibility of significant harm exists in any case where it considers there is an unacceptably high probability, supported by robust science-based evidence, that significant harm would occur if no action is taken to stop it. For the purposes of this Guidance, these are referred to as “Category 1: Human Health” cases. Land should be deemed to be a Category 1: Human Health case where: (a) the authority is aware that similar land or situations are known, or are strongly suspected on the basis of robust evidence, to have caused such harm before in the United Kingdom or elsewhere; or (b) the authority is aware that similar degrees of exposure (via any medium) to the contaminant(s) in question are known, or strongly suspected on the basis of robust evidence, to have caused such harm before in the United Kingdom or elsewhere; (c) the authority considers that significant harm may already have been caused by contaminants in, on or under the land, and that there is an unacceptable risk that it might continue or occur again if no action is taken. Among other things, the authority may decide to determine the land on these grounds if it considers that it is likely that significant harm is being caused, but it considers either: (i) that there is insufficient evidence to be sure of meeting the “balance of probability” test for demonstrating that significant harm is being caused; or (ii) that the time needed to demonstrate such a level of probability would cause unreasonable delay, cost, or disruption and stress to affected people particularly in cases involving residential properties.

1.7.4

Category 4: Human Health

(17)

The Statutory Guidance advises that:

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

4.20 The local authority should not assume that land poses a significant possibility of significant harm if it considers that there is no risk or that the level of risk posed is low. For the purposes of this Guidance, such land is referred to as a “Category 4: Human Health” case. The authority may decide that the land is a Category 4: Human Health case as soon as it considers it has evidence to this effect, and this may happen at any stage during risk assessment including the early stages. 4.21 The local authority should consider that the following types of land should be placed into Category 4: Human Health: (a) Land where no relevant contaminant linkage has been established. (b) Land where there are only normal levels of contaminants in soil, as explained in Section 3 of this Guidance. (c) Land that has been excluded from the need for further inspection and assessment because contaminant levels do not exceed relevant generic assessment criteria in accordance with Section 3 of this Guidance, or relevant technical tools or advice that may be developed in accordance with paragraph 3.30 of this Guidance. (d) Land where estimated levels of exposure to contaminants in soil are likely to form only a small proportion of what a receptor might be exposed to anyway through other sources of environmental exposure (e.g. in relation to average estimated national levels of exposure to substances commonly found in the environment, to which receptors are likely to be exposed in the normal course of their lives). 4.22 The local authority may consider that land other than the types described in paragraph 4.21 should be placed into Category 4: Human Health if following a detailed quantitative risk assessment it is satisfied that the level of risk posed is sufficiently low. 4.23 Local authorities may decide that particular land apparently matching the descriptions of paragraph 4.21 (b) or (d) immediately above poses sufficient risk to human health to fall into Categories other than Category 4. However, such cases are likely to be very unusual and the authority should take particular care to explain why the decision has been taken, and to ensure that it is supported by robust evidence. 1.7.5 (18)

Categories 2 and 3: Human Health Categories 2 and 3: Human Health are differentiated as follows: 4.24 For land that cannot be placed into Categories 1 or 4, the local authority should decide whether the land should be placed into either: (a) Category 2: Human Health, in which case the land would be capable of being determined as contaminated land on grounds of significant possibility of significant harm to human health; or (b) Category 3: Human Health, in which case the land would not be capable of being determined on such grounds. 4.25 The local authority should consider this decision in the context of the broad objectives of the regime and of the Government’s policy as set out in Section 1. It should also be mindful of the fact that the decision is a positive legal test, meaning that the starting assumption should be that land does not pose a significant possibility of significant harm unless there is reason to consider otherwise. The authority should then, in accordance with paragraphs 4.26 to 4.29 below, decide which of the following two categories the land falls into: (a) Category 2: Human Health. Land should be placed into Category 2 if the authority concludes, on the basis that there is a strong case for considering that the risks from the land are of sufficient concern, that the land poses a significant possibility of significant harm, with all that this might involve and having regard to Section 1. Category 2 may include land where there is little or no direct evidence that similar land, situations or levels of exposure have caused harm before, but nonetheless the authority considers

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

on the basis of the available evidence, including expert opinion, that there is a strong case for taking action under Part 2A on a precautionary basis. (b) Category 3: Human Health. Land should be placed into Category 3 if the authority concludes that the strong case described in 4.25(a) does not exist, and therefore the legal test for significant possibility of significant harm is not met. Category 3 may include land where the risks are not low, but nonetheless the authority considers that regulatory intervention under Part 2A is not warranted. This recognises that placing land in Category 3 would not stop others, such as the owner or occupier of the land, from taking action to reduce risks outside of the Part 2A regime if they choose. The authority should consider making available the results of its inspection and risk assessment to the owners/occupiers of Category 3 land.” 1.7.6 (19)

Substance Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended) states “‘substance’ means any

natural or artificial substance, whether in solid or liquid form or in the form of a gas or vapour.” (Section 78A (9). (20)

The Statutory Guidance (Defra 2014) points out that “The terms “contaminant”, “pollutant”

and “substance” as used in this Guidance have the same meaning” (Paragraph 6). Paragraph 3.8 explains that “for the purposes of this guidance”

(21)

(a) A “contaminant” is a substance which is in, on or under the land and which has the potential to cause significant harm to a relevant receptor, or to cause significant pollution of controlled waters. (b) A “receptor” is something that could be adversely affected by a contaminant, for example a person, an organism, an ecosystem, property, or controlled waters. The various types of receptors that are relevant under the Part 2A regime are explained in later sections. (c) A “pathway” is a route by which a receptor is or might be affected by a contaminant. In the Statutory Guidance Section 4.1: Significant harm to human health “serious injury” is

expanded in footnote 4 that reads “Physical injury in relation to significant harm would include injury caused by chemical and biochemical properties of substances, such as injury resulting from explosive or asphyxiating properties of gases. It would not extend to injury caused by only physical properties of substances, such as injury caused by falling onto sharp or hard objects made of relevant substances.” 1.7.7 (22)

Mixtures Paragraph 3.10 deals with mixtures and advises that “3.10 In some cases the local authority may encounter land where risks are presented by groups of substances which are likely to behave in the same manner, or a substantially very similar manner, in relation to the risks they may present (e.g. as may be the case with organic substances found in oils). For the purposes of identifying and assessing contaminant linkages and taking regulatory decisions in relation to such linkages, the local authority may treat such groups of contaminants as being in effect a single contaminant and multiple contaminant linkages as being in effect a single contaminant linkage. The authority should only do this if there is a scientifically robust reason for doing so, and it should state clearly why this approach has been taken in relevant documentation (including the risk summary discussed later in this Section) if the land is later determined as contaminated land.”

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

1.7.8

ISSUE: 2

Risk assessment

(23) Risk assessment is underpinned by the contaminant-pathway-receptor framework and for a risk to exist all three elements of the framework must be present. The relationship between the contaminant, pathway and receptor is often called the “pollutant linkage”. The site conceptual model represents the risk assessor’s understanding of the site and potential pollutant linkages present, including the identification of uncertainties, limitations and assumptions associated with the model. The site conceptual model may be subject to review and change should further information be collected. 1.7.9

Land is not contaminated land unless there is reason to consider otherwise

(24) The Statutory Guidance makes it clear in Section 1.3: 1.3 Part 2A provides a means of dealing with unacceptable risks posed by land contamination to human health and the environment, and enforcing authorities should seek to find and deal with such land. Under Part 2A the starting point should be that land is not contaminated land unless there is reason to consider otherwise. Only land where unacceptable risks are clearly identified, after a risk assessment has been undertaken in accordance with this Guidance, should be considered as meeting the Part 2A definition of contaminated land. (25) Local authorities are given considerable leeway on what they could consider to be significant harm beyond what is listed in paragraph 4.5: 4.6 Other health effects may be considered by the local authority to constitute significant harm. For example, a wide range of conditions may or may not constitute significant harm (alone or in combination) including: physical injury; gastrointestinal disturbances; respiratory tract effects; cardio-vascular effects; central nervous system effects; skin ailments; effects on organs such as the liver or kidneys; or a wide range of other health impacts. In deciding whether or not a particular form of harm is significant harm, the local authority should consider the seriousness of the harm in question: including the impact on the health, and quality of life, of any person suffering the harm; and the scale of the harm. The authority should only conclude that harm is significant if it considers that treating the land as contaminated land would be in accordance with the broad objectives of the regime as described in Section 1. 1.7.10

Use of Part 2A where no appropriate alternative solution exists

(26) The Statutory Guidance in sections 1.5 and 1.6 provides overarching advice to local authorities: 1.5 Enforcing authorities should seek to use Part 2A only where no appropriate alternative solution exists. The Part 2A regime is one of several ways in which land contamination can be addressed. For example, land contamination can be addressed when land is developed (or redeveloped) under the planning system, during the building control process, or where action is taken independently by landowners. Other legislative regimes may also provide a means of dealing with land contamination issues, such as building regulations; the regimes for waste, water, and environmental permitting; and the Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) Regulations 2009. 1.6 Under Part 2A , the enforcing authority may need to decide whether and how to act in situations where such decisions are not straightforward, and where there may be unavoidable uncertainty underlying some of the facts of each case. In so doing, the authority should use its judgement to strike a reasonable balance between: (a) dealing with risks raised by contaminants in land and the benefits of remediating land to remove or reduce those risks; and (b) the LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

potential impacts of regulatory intervention including financial costs to whoever will pay for remediation (including the taxpayer where relevant), health and environmental impacts of taking action, property blight, and burdens on affected people. The authority should take a precautionary approach to the risks raised by contamination, whilst avoiding a disproportionate approach given the circumstances of each case. The aim should be to consider the various benefits and costs of taking action, with a view to ensuring that the regime produces net benefits, taking account of local circumstances. (27) LB Havering have made efforts to secure voluntary remediation of the site and Mrs Justice Lieven has said that the landowner asserts “there are alternative solutions before designation [sic].” The term designation is used in the judgment to refer to the decision to identify land as contaminated land. However, there is no evidence of any such voluntary action taking place. Since the context of the judicial review is Part 2A and the above quote, taken from the final paragraph of Mrs Justice Lieven’s judgment in an entirely Part 2A context: 107. It would however not be appropriate for me to determine that the land is contaminated and make any declaration to that effect. That is not a matter for the Court and is a decision for the LA on the up to date material. Therefore the IP’s submissions that there are alternative solutions before designation is not a matter for the Court, but rather the LA. (28) The Statutory Guidance states that: 2.6 The local authority should include in its strategy: … (f) Broadly, how the authority will seek to minimise unnecessary burdens on the taxpayer, businesses and individuals; for example by encouraging voluntary action to deal with land contamination issues as far as it considers reasonable and practicable. (29) In carrying its duties under Part 2A, the LB Havering Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy says (Section 1.2.2 Roles and Responsibilities) that where land is determined as being contaminated land the Council will: “Establish who should bear responsibility for the remediation of land; Establish what remediation is required; Ensure that such remediation takes place, either through agreement with the appropriate person, by serving a remediation notice or, in certain circumstances, through carrying out the work themselves. Undertake urgent remediation action where there is imminent danger of serious harm. Determine who may be liable for remediation and apportion costs Ensure that appropriate remediation takes place, either through voluntary action, or by serving a remediation notice on those responsible and take further action if remediation is not achieved”. (30) In the context of para 5.15 of the Statutory Guidance, to date the landowner has not taken any action to mitigate the fires on site. This should be taken into account when deciding whether to postpone a determination of contaminated land. 5.15 The local authority may postpone determination of contaminated land if the land owner or some other person undertakes to deal with the problem without determination, and the authority is satisfied that the remediation will happen to an appropriate standard and timescale. If the authority chooses to do this, any agreement it enters into should not affect its ability to determine the land in future (e.g. if the person fails to carry out the remediation as agreed). LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

2 (31)

ISSUE: 2

STATUS OF SMOKE This section explores whether smoke is a substance that could form part of a potentially

significant source-pathway-receptor pollutant linkage under Part 2A. (32)

Smoke is a colloidal solution of solid in gas - an aerosol in which the dispersion medium is gas

(air, other gases, vapours) and the dispersed phase is solid particles of non, partly or completely combusted materials. Smoke is not mentioned specifically in either Part 2A or the Statutory Guidance. However, since it is a colloid of solid particles dispersed in a gas medium, it falls within the definition of substance in Part 2A. (33)

In this case, the smoke is the result of the combustion of landfilled waste in the presence of air

rather than by the introduction of subsequent substance(s) (Statutory Guidance Para 7.52 in the section on liability2). As such there is no “later substance” but the chemical reactions resulting from combustion do not stop the original waste being a substance that was then changed into smoke – I will deal with whether the smoke became part of a significant linkage later. (34)

So, the original material deposited in an historic landfill that caught fire and the resulting

smoke fall within the definition of substance in the context of Part 2A. (35)

Below I examine whether exposure to this combusting material or resulting smoke on the

landfill site or away from it can result in a significant possibility of significant harm (SPOSH).

“(a) The substance forming part of the significant contaminant linkage in question is present, or has become a significant contaminant, only as the result of a chemical reaction, biological process, radioactive decay or other change (the “intervening change”) involving: (i) both a substance (the “earlier substance”) which would not have formed part of the significant contaminant linkage if the intervening change had not occurred; and (ii) one or more other substances (the “later substances”). (b) The intervening change would not have occurred in the absence of the later substances; (c) A person (the “first person”) is a member of the liability group because he/she caused or knowingly permitted the presence in, on or under the land of the earlier substance, but he/she did not cause or knowingly permit the presence of any of the later substances. (d) One or more other persons are members of the liability group because they caused or knowingly permitted the later substances to be in, on or under the land. (e) Before the date when the later substances started to be introduced in, on or under the land, the first person: (i) could not reasonably have foreseen that the later substances would be introduced onto the land; (ii) could not reasonably have foreseen that, if they were, the intervening change would be likely to happen; or (iii) took what, at that date, were reasonable precautions to prevent the introduction of the later substances or the occurrence of the intervening change, even though those precautions have, in the event, proved to be inadequate. (f) After that date, the first person did not: (i) cause or knowingly permit any more of the earlier substance to be in, on or under the land in question; (ii) do anything which has contributed to the conditions that brought about the intervening change; or (iii) fail to do something which he could reasonably have been expected to do to prevent the intervening change happening.” LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT FOR ON SITE SOILS BASED ON GEO ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LIMITED (21 DECEMBER 2023) REPORT (V2.0)

(36) Geo Environmental Services Limited (GESL) carried out an intrusive site investigation at the site on behalf of London Borough of Havering Council. GESL say “At the point of reporting, agreement of investigation works on site was obtained from the Landowner on a voluntary basis with a view to mitigating the fires occurring on the site”. (37) The Geo Environmental Services Limited (GESL) report was dated November 2023 and entitled: "Ground investigation report for the land at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL." It “Comprised a review of desk study information, an assessment of the Source Pathway Receptor Linkages (PRA) and development of a site Conceptual Model (CSM) for the current land use. The assessment included a review of third party reports if/where made available) and intrusive investigations including 13No. machine excavated trial pits to depths of between 3.00m and 3.40m bgl (TP101 to TP113); 18No. dynamic sampler boreholes to depths of up to 5.00m bgl (WS101 to WS106, WS106a, WS107, WS107a—c, WS108, WS108a-b, WS109, WS109a-b and WS110) with gas/groundwater installations and return spot gas and groundwater monitoring of standpipes on six occasions. (38) Geochemical laboratory testing was undertaken on encountered soils and waters to support a contamination assessment and preliminary waste assessment for the site.” (39) The GESL report includes a preliminary risk assessment and a quantitative risk assessment but not in terms that are anchored into Part 2A. I note that their Table 3.1 Risk ratings matrix uses language that does not reflect the language of Part 2A or the narrative definitions of Categories 1-4 in the statutory guidance. (40) They also report that the work The London Borough of Havering commissioned GeoEnvironmental to carry out included “Undertaking of the intrusive investigation and subsequent risk assessment based on the intrusive investigation”. (41) Their contaminant analyses (Section 7.2) show large exceedances of generic assessment criteria but GESL do not consider whether that indicates SPOSH. An exceedance of a GAC does not constitute SPOSH – and the statutory guidance makes that clear at paragraph 3.29(b).

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

Table 1 Summary of Screening Criteria Exceedances (From Table 7.4 of GESL 2023) Contaminant

Public Open Space (Park) Criteria (mg/kg)

Samples exceeding criteria

Maximum Value (mg/kg)

Ratio Maximum to Criterion

Exceedance locations on site

Arsenic

170

TP110 3.40m bgl

830

4.9

Southern Area (Lower elevation)

Lead

1300

TP106 2.20m bgl

4400

3.4

Northern Area (Higher elevation)

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

TP103 0.75m bgl WS107c 2.30m bgl

2.2

Northern Area (Higher elevation)

TP103 0.75m bgl WS107c 2.30m bgl

2.1

Benzo(a)pyrene

Dibenzo(ah)anthracene

1.1

Western Area (Lower elevation) 2

1.9

Northern Area (Higher elevation) Western Area (Lower elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation) Western Area (Lower elevation)

(42) The screening values are based on a public open space park land use (CLAIRE 2014; Nathanail et al. 2015). They assume an exposure frequency of 170 days.year-1 for age classes 2-18 and 85 days.year-1 for age class 1 (age 0-1 years). They assume 2 hours.day-1 spent in the park. From this it can be seen that the exposure assumptions are much higher than those likely to apply at Launders Lane. (43) Among their recommended further actions was “Secure the site to prevent unauthorised access”. (44) They conclude that “further consideration is required in relation to the SPR linkages associated with the fires on the site, both during fires and of any impacts following fires” (page 57).

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

CONTROLLED WATERS ASSESSMENT BASED ON ENVIRONMENT AGENCY SAMPLING OF THE “RODING / INGREBOURNE CATCHMENT RIVER N.C.R.S”

(45) The Environment Agency took samples of surface water upstream and downstream of the Site on 7 March 2025 (Table 2). These are presented below and considered under Part 2A in terms of whether or not they indicate a significant possibility of significant pollution of controlled waters. (46) The results show the water chemistry upstream and downstream of the Site are very similar and, if anything, the water quality downstream is slightly better than it is upstream. This evidence does not indicate a significant possibility of significant pollution of controlled waters associated with the Site. Table 2 Results of Environment Agency analyses of surface water upstream and downstream of Old Landfill in Arnolds Field Status Det. Det. Name Code E 0061 pH E 0076 Temperature of Water E 0077 Conductivity at 25 C A 0085 BOD : 5 Day ATU E 0111 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N E 0116 Nitrogen, Total Oxidised as N E 0119 Ammonia un-ionised as N E 0172 Chloride E 0180 Orthophosphate, reactive as P E 0664 Visible oil or grease, significant trace: Present/Not found (1/0) A 3106 GCMS Screen : Semi-Volatile Screen: Semi Quantitative A 6396 Turbidity E 7434 National Grid Reference : Whole : Field report E 7608 Salinity : In Situ E 9901 Oxygen, Dissolved, % Saturation

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

Meth. Code 26 26 26 21 21 21 25 21 21 26

0.068 7.5 0.0011 160 0.034 Not found

Downstream Unit Result 7.79 PHUNITS 8.05 CEL 1354 uS/cm mg/l 0.049 mg/l 7.6 mg/l 0.00048 mg/l 140 mg/l 0.058 mg/l Not found

UNITLESS

21 26

NTU TQ5452382315 TQ539218189 UNITLESS 3 0.71 0.68 ppt 93.5 96.8 %

26 26

Upstream Result 8.04 8.4 1419

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

EVALUATE AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA (PAHS, PCBS, LEAD, MERCURY, VOCS)

5.1

TRL Limited. March 2025. Final Report entitled "Launders Lane Air Quality Monitoring report May 2023 – September 2024" Prepared for: Havering Borough Council

(47) This report’s executive summary reads: “This report summarises the air quality monitoring undertaken by TRL Limited around the Launders Lane site in Havering, covering May 2023 to the end of September 2024. The aim of this project is to understand the potential levels of airborne pollution associated with the uncontrolled burning of materials at Launders Lane, and to get an idea of the ambient levels of airborne pollution without any fires for comparison. The pollutants being monitored have been Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Heavy Metals (Mercury and Lead). Wind speed and direction have also been recorded. The findings of this report demonstrate that, based on annual averages there are no exceedances of UK or World Health Organisation (WHO) thresholds, (where they are available). For the compounds with no thresholds, comparisons have been made with similar historical data sets, again, showing much lower levels. Due to the consistently low measured levels through two summers, it is our recommendation that no further monitoring of these compounds is required.”

(48) TRL report fires that required attendance by the London Fire Brigade (LFB) occurred at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane on 107 days from 2018-2024 (TRL 2025, Table 1). There have been more fires since then, including three very recent incidents that required the LFB to attend on 4, 11 and 12 June 20253. TRL carried out air monitoring at nine locations around Arnolds Field (Figure 1) over the period Jun 2023 to September 2024 (TRL 2025, Table 3). Monitoring at LA2 started in September 2023. TRL concluded: “As of the end of September 2024, most measurements recorded at the TRL Launders Lane air quality monitoring locations are below any available national and WHO annual objectives. For some pollutants, several short term (monthly) readings do exceed objectives, discussed above. To demonstrate an exceedance, these values would have to average above the objective line over a 12-month period. By extending the monitoring period to include two summers and providing a full set of data for more than 12 months, it is seen that no exceedances of objectives have occurred. Some short term raised levels of pollutants do correlate to known fires at the Launders Lane site. The wind direction at the period also indicates that the fires are likely to be the source of the raised levels. As above these short periods do not exceed any national or WHO objectives once averaged out over a 12-month period. From the monitoring carried out and summarised in this report, it is likely that the emissions of some pollutants do increase during fires at the Launders Lane site. However, the increased levels do not exceed any National or WHO objectives, and therefore the risk of adverse health effects is low. Due to the findings outlined above we do not recommend the need for any further monitoring of these pollutants”.

https://www.london-fire.gov.uk/incidents/?initialLoad=False&borough=&type=4605

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

Figure 1 Location map of the 9 chosen monitoring locations around the Launders Lane (LAL) fire site (TRL 2025 Figure 2). LAL1 and LAL2 were primary sites while LA3 – LA10 were secondary sites. 5.1.1

PAH (BaP)

(49) TRL considers that “the levels of B[a]P measured have not been influenced by the presence of a fire” and that “Launders Lane data is consistently lower than the urban site and largely comparable to the countryside site”. They also note that “readings [were taken] from October 2023 through to September 2024” and “the average readings for the period are around 10% of the UK Objective level of 0.25ng/[m]3.” 5.1.2 (50)

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Non-Methane Volatile Organic Compounds (NMVOCs) or more simply VOC were measured

at nine locations on a monthly basis from October 2023 to September 2024, although no measurements were able to be made in November 2023. The monthly measurements were used to calculate annual average concentrations for each VOC and each monitoring station and then compared against the UK annual mean objective (Table 3). Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylenes “act as indicators” for the other VOC. (51) TRL note that for those VOC with an annual mean health-based objective: •

“Benzene levels are below annual mean objective.

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

•

ISSUE: 2

Toluene - There are eight measured monthly values above the annual average objective at LAL1, 2, 6 and 9 across the monitoring period. These do not coincide with any recorded fires attended by LFB. While individually these measurements are above the annual objective figure, once compared on an annual average basis they are well below the objective levels. Ethylbenzene - There are five measured monthly values above annual average objective; LAL9 in July 2023, LAL4 in August 2023, LAL 6 in February 2024 and LAL10 in October 2023 and April 2024. While some of these do coincide with fires attended by LFB, others do not. The annual average figure does not exceed the UK objective. Xylenes - There are three measured monthly values above annual average objective; LAL9 in July 2023 and LAL8 and LAL6 in February 2024. While the July 2023 readings do coincide with a fire attended by LFB, the annual figure does not exceed the UK objective. For all compounds, it is worth noting that there were periods of smouldering/burning at the site when the LFB were not in attendance and would not have been reported. Some of the higher values were measured in the winter when fires are less likely to occur at the site, and so these readings may be associated with other localised burning. All these factors need to be considered when assessing any plausible links between fires at the site and compounds being measured”.

Table 3 VOC annual mean objectives (From TRL 2025) Compound

Annual mean Objective (μg/m3)

Benzene (C6H6)

5 – UK / EU

Toluene (C7H8)

10 - EU

Ethylbenzene (C8H10)

5 - EU

Xylenes (C8H10)

10 - EU

(52)

Occasional monthly exceedances of the annual objectives are reported and some of those

monthly exceedances coincide with fires attended by the LFB. There are no monthly objectives. The monthly average values (reported as ug.m-3) are much lower than workplace exposure limits (reported as mg.m-3) based on 8 hour and 15 minute averaging periods published by the HSE (2021). The WEL are for protecting worker safety so not directly relevant to protecting the general public but nevertheless provide a line of evidence that the monthly average values do not indicate SPOSH. The relevant WEL are: • • • •

Benzene Long-term exposure limit (8-hr TWA reference period) 3.25 mg.m-3 Toluene maximum monthly value of ca 70 ug.m-3 (April 2024); cf Long-term exposure limit (8-hr TWA reference period) 191 mg.m-3 and Short-term exposure limit (15 minute TWA reference period) 384 mg.m-3 Ethylbenzene maximum monthly value of ca 23 ug.m-3 (April 2024); cf Long-term exposure limit (8-hr TWA reference period) 441 mg.m-3and Short-term exposure limit (15 minute TWA reference period) 552 mg.m-3 Xylenes maximum monthly value of ca 92 ug.m-3 (April 2024); cf Long-term exposure limit (8-hr TWA reference period) 220 mg.m-3and Short-term exposure limit (15 minute TWA reference period) 441 mg.m-3.

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

5.1.3 (53)

ISSUE: 2

Heavy metals TRL report that the UK annual mean objective for lead in the air of 0.25μg/m3 (Defra 2022)

was not exceeded at either LA1 or LA2. (54)

The World Health Organization (WHO) established a health-based air quality guideline for

Europe for mercury of 1μg/m3 as an annual average (WHO 2000). There are currently no UK objectives for airborne mercury, however the Environment Agency (2025) published updated Environmental Assessment Levels (EAL) for mercury and its inorganic compounds in 2023 providing an EAL of 0.06μg/m3 averaged over a 24-hour period and of 0.06μg/m3 averaged over a 1-hour period. TRL report that the WHO and the two EAL limits were not exceeded at either LA1 or LA2. 5.1.4

PCB

(55) TRL report that the Environment Agency and others confirm that there is no current routine monitoring of PCBs in the UK. The annual average for the measurements from Launders Lane for October 2023 to September 2024 has been compared to an annual average for other UK sites (2018 data) and provides an indication of potential comparison between the two data sets. Due to the differences in time periods the conclusions should be treated as an indication and weighted as such. •

•

• •

All but one of the LAL1 and LAL2 results are below the 2018 TOMPS report London average. High PCB levels measured at LAL2 (golf course) in July/August 2024 correlate with fires at the Arnolds Field site, but are not seen at LAL1 (Spring Farm Park). The average wind direction is from the West / South-West, which align directly with Arnolds Field. Combined with the lack of measured values at LAL1 point to the potential source of the chemicals being the fires. Looking at the data for individual PCBs, Figure 7 PCB BZ#114 indicates much higher levels at LAL1 and LAL2. Following investigation into the original 2018 data, the lowest limit of detection in 2018 was 0.02pg/m3, as the values measured historically were below this they were documented as 0. The limit of detection has since been reduced providing more accurate readings. The data recorded for the remaining seven PCBs (Figure 6 and Figure 8 to Figure 13) is consistently lower than the comparison sites in the 2018 TOMPS report. Reviewing the fire information in Table 1 and Table 3 together with Figure 5 suggests that Elevated PCB levels in September 2023 and July/August 2024 coincide with recorded fires at Arnolds Field but do not constitute an exceedance of the annual average when calculated.

(56) The TRL report makes no mention of Part 2A and instead considers air quality. 5.2

A-10106 Letter Report for Air Monitoring - Launder's Lane Rv2 (Redacted 30 September 2024)

(57) This document was supplied as a PDF with all details of the organisation and individual who prepared it redacted. In its “Review of Asbestos Monitoring at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane”, LB Havering explains that “This report discusses the findings this study, undertaken on behalf of the Council in August 2024 by a UKAS accredited consultant, which indicated that no asbestos fibres LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

were being released across the boundary of the site. It should be noted that as part of their terms and conditions, the consultant has required that their details be omitted from any publically available report”. (58) The report says that: “Background and Personal air monitoring around the perimeter of the former waste site [was undertaken] to determine the potential spread of asbestos fibres to the surrounding areas during a fire event. Air Monitoring was undertaken within Spring Farm Park on 1st August [2024] and along New Road and Launder's Lane on 29th August. On 1st August the site was smouldering, and the plume was heading to the south-west at time of air monitoring. On 29th August the site was smouldering, and the plume was heading to the south-east at time of air monitoring.” “The results of the air samples collected indicated an airborne fibre concentration below 0.010 f/ml, the lowest level of detection for the method used and below the clearance indicator level. SEM [scanning electron microscopy] certificates noted 'No asbestos fibres were detected during the analysis of any of these samples.'” (59) These results indicate that the levels of airborne asbestos at the boundary of Spring Farm Park and Arnold’s Field at a time when the Arnold‘s Field site was smouldering are sufficiently low not to pose a significant possibility of significant harm. It should be noted that the clearance limit is not a risk-based assessment criterion as described in LCRM. (60) The results from scanning electron microscopy (SEM) examination of the samples along New Road and Launder's Lane on 29th August also did not detect any asbestos fibres. (61) CIRIA’s guidance on asbestos4 comments on the clearance indicator threshold: “Furthermore, the ACOP for CAR 2012 (HSE, 2013) clearly states that the clearance indicator threshold “should be taken only as a transient indication of site cleanliness … and not as an acceptable, permanent environmental level.”” Nevertheless, the analyses indicate that the samples contain no asbestos (SEM results) or no detectable asbestos. (62) As such the available evidence indicates that asbestos does not form part of a significant contaminant linkage.

Nathanail, C P, Jones, A, Ogden, R, Robertson, A. 2014. Asbestos in soil and made ground: a guide to understanding and managing risks. CIRIA C733 RP961 ISBN: 978-0-86017-737-1

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

5.3

ISSUE: 2

The Effect of Arnold’s Field Fires on the Respiratory Health of the Surrounding Population

(63) LB Havering produced two documents in November 2024: a Full Technical Report and a Short Report on “The Effect of Arnold’s Field Fires on the Respiratory Health of the Surrounding Population”. 5.3.1

Fire days

(64) The regular attendance of the London Fire Brigade as recorded on their website5 reduces the escape of substances from the site so reducing the exposure to contaminants by people outside the site. This exposure has been mitigated by the LFB’s repeated actions over several years. (65) The Full Technical Report (FTR) and Short Report define “fire days” as being when the London Fire Brigade attended the Site whilst acknowledging that smouldering could occur on days the LFB did not attend and that fires resulting in LFB attendance could have started days earlier. A total of 99 fire days were recorded from 01 January 2018 until 30 September 2023 (2028 days). Fire days – as defined above - accounted for 4.7% of days in this period but fires or smouldering would have occurred for more days. (66) Fire incidents attended by the London Fire Brigade were the main exposure variable whereas attendances related to respiratory illness at General Practices (GP) and at Accident and Emergency (A&E), GP prescriptions and hospital admissions were the health outcomes of interest. To adjust for potential confounding factors the following variables were included: the daily average levels of NO2, wind speed, humidity, temperature, day of the week and COVID-19 lockdown dates. (67) As such the use of health care services by local residents may be higher outside “fire days” and the two reports may therefore underestimate the risks from fire. However, the reports considered GP attendances during the three- and seven-day periods after “fire days”. In addition to capturing late presentations following adverse effects on fire days themselves and the fact that patients may not be able to secure same-day appointments, this may have allowed the assessment to capture the impact of post-“fire day” smouldering. (68) “No statistically significant increased risk of GP visits found amongst the general population…. on the day of the fire as well as the cumulative three- and seven-day periods following a fire event”. In addition, “No statistically significant impact of “fire days” on prescriptions issued for the treatment of respiratory conditions, A&E attendance or hospital admissions for respiratory illness/symptoms was

https://www.london-fire.gov.uk/incidents/

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

found amongst the local population. This was the case on the day of the fire as well as the cumulative three and seven day periods following a fire event.” (69) However, a “statistically significant association of fires attended by London Fire Brigade at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane with an increased risk of GP attendance by those with existing longterm respiratory conditions (such as asthma or COPD) on the day of a fire” was established. This risk was estimated to be “equivalent to one extra GP appointment every five fire days, compared to days without a fire (or 0.2 extra appointments per day), amongst the local resident population of 23,656 people”. (70) “Overall, out of 1,231 respiratory [long term conditions] LTC GP attendances recorded between January 2018 and September 2023, approximately 20 could be attributed to the impact of reported fire incidents.” (FTR page 5) “We did not find a statistically significant association between fire incidents and GP attendances with general respiratory symptoms, A&E attendances and hospital admissions with respiratory conditions. We also did not find a statistically significant association between daily average PM2.5 levels and any of the outcome variables.” While the reports do not shed light on whether the 20 additional GP attendances are associated with adverse effects that would constitute significant harm, the 3.5% increase in GP prescriptions on fire-days compared to non-fire days was deemed not statistically significant after adjustment for other exposure variables. (71) Overall, these reports indicate public concern, but the evidence indicates no significant harm associated with “fire days” was suffered. 5.3.2

PM2.5

(72) Particulate matter (PM) is everything in the air that is not a gas6. Particulates smaller than 2.5 micrometres in diameter are referred to as PM2.5. The Environment Agency “use both the terms particulate matter (PM) and dust in this document as they are generally interchangeable.”7 (73) The HSE8 notes that “The COSHH definition of a substance hazardous to health includes dust of any kind when present at a concentration in air equal to or greater than 10 mg.m-3 8-hour TWA of inhalable dust or 4 mg.m-3 8-hour TWA of respirable dust. This means that any dust will be subject to COSHH if people are exposed to dust above these levels. Some dusts have been assigned specific WELs and exposure to these must comply with the appropriate limits”. “Inhalable dust approximates to the fraction of airborne material that enters the nose and mouth during breathing and is therefore

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/air-quality-statistics/concentrations-of-particulate-matter-pm10-and-pm25

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/monitoring-ambient-air-particulate-matter

EH40/2005 Workplace exposure limits Containing the list of workplace exposure limits for use with the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 (as amended) London: TSO EH40/2005 (Fourth Edition 2020) https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/eh40.pdf

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

available for deposition in the respiratory tract. Respirable dust approximates to the fraction that penetrates to the gas exchange region of the lung.” The average daily levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) are approximately three orders of magnitude lower than the 8-hour and over two orders of magnitude lower than the 4-hour time weighted average concentrations. Table 4 Average levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) on days with and without fires at Arnold’s Field attended by the London Fire Brigade. [Modified from Table 3 of Full Technical Report (FTR)] (FTR, November 2024) Year

Fire days

Fire days Average PM2.5

Non-fire days Average PM2.5

Days

2018

μg/m3, (SD) 22

μg/m3, (SD) 10.9 (7.4)

365

2019

11.4 (9.5)

11.0 (8.9)

2020

14.8 (6.9)

2021

2022

Fraction fire days

Fraction non-fire days

Average PM2.5

0.003

0.997

μg/m3 10.93041

365

0.038

0.962

11.01534

8.2 (6.7)

366

0.046

0.954

8.506557

13.5(3.9)

8.7 (6.0)

365

0.044

0.956

8.910411

10.1 (5.2)

10.2 (7.8)

365

0.099

0.901

10.19014

2023

4.8 (2.1)

8.4 (6.4)

365

0.041

0.959

8.252055

Total

10.7 (6.7)

9.7 (7.4)

2191

0.045

0.955

9.745185

Figure 2 Annual concentrations of PM2.5 in the UK, 2009 to 2024; Arnold’s Field annual average PM2.5 for 2018-2023 shows as dashed red line (From Defra 20259) (74) The annual average PM2.5 values have been compared against Government limits. Over the period 2018-2024 the annual average PM2.5 levels around Arnold’s Lane have been above the urban background level for 2024 (Figure 2). Defra provides guidance on particulate matter10. The Air Quality Standards Regulations (2010) require that concentrations of PM in the UK must not exceed:

Figure 6 in Defra, 2025 Particulate matter (PM10/PM2.5) - GOV.UK (Updated 26 June 2025)

Accredited official statistics Particulate matter (PM10/PM2.5) Updated 26 June 2025https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/air-quality-statistics/concentrations-of-particulate-matter-pm10-and-pm25 LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

• An annual average of 40 µg/m3 for PM10; • A 24-hour average of 50 µg/m3 more than 35 times in a single year for PM10; • An annual average of 20 µg/m3 for PM2.5. (75) The data in Table 4 do not indicate that these limits are exceeded – whilst the 24-hour average values (the second criterion) are not available, these relate to PM10, not PM2.5. The only relevant standard from the 2010 Regulations specifically for PM2.5 is the annual average. (76) The Environmental Targets (Fine Particulate Matter) (England) Regulations (2023) require that in England by the end of 2040: •

An annual average of 10 µg/m3 for PM2.5 is not exceeded at any monitoring station (the Annual Mean Concentration Target or AMCT). • Population exposure to PM2.5 is at least 35 per cent less than in 2018 (the Population Exposure Reduction Target or PERT). (77) The data in Table 4 indicate that these annual average targets would have been exceeded in 2018, 2019 and 2022 had they been in place. It should also be noted that the WHO target for PM2.5 was updated in 2021 to 5 µg/m3 (from 10 µg/m3)11. The Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants (COMEAP), in its “Advice on health evidence relevant to setting PM2.5 targets – update”12 noted that “available studies have not indicated a threshold of effect below which there is no harm”. The COMEAP notes “that PM2.5 pollution can have harmful effects on people’s health at lower concentrations than had been studied previously [and]… that reducing concentrations to 5 μg/m3 would have public health benefits” leading COMEAP to “strongly support a reduction of PM2.5 concentrations, ideally to (or below) the WHO guideline value of 5 µg/m3”. COMEAP “acknowledged that the Government needs to balance the health benefits of policies and interventions against their costs, and recognised that cost-benefit assessments may play a role in defining targets.” This suggests the target levels are pitched at something approaching a minimal level of risk rather than the much higher level of risk required to pose a SPOSH. Hence the levels reported in Table 2 are not considered to be consistent with a determination of land as contaminated land. (78) Population exposure as assessed for the PERT refers to the average concentration someone in England is exposed to and is based on urban, or in some case suburban background measurements, which are located to be representative of the type of environment most people live and work. (79) The Environmental Improvement Plan 2023 for England set interim targets that by January 2028: • •

An annual average of 12 µg/m3 for PM2.5 is not exceeded at any monitoring station. Population exposure to PM2.5 is at least 22 per cent less than in 2018.

https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/pm25targets/targets-development

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/comeap-statement-response-to-who-air-quality-guidelines-2021

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

(80) By 2022 the average concentration was 11% lower than in 2018. The interim target was not exceeded in any year. (81) Overall, the Havering reports do not indicate that currently in force target levels have been exceeded and do not indicate that annual average PM2.5 levels indicate SPOSH. (82) Hourly PM2.5 data are available from nine current and closed air quality monitoring stations. Two stations are near the southeast corner of the site. Two are to the north of the site. Five are to the northwest of the site within the urban area. This information is being dealt with by LB Havering in their devolved report and is not considered here. 5.4

Possible Health Impact of Fires at Launders Lane: Havering Cancer Incidence

(83) An undated report entitled “The Possible Health Impact of Fires at Launders Lane: Havering Cancer Incidence”, written by LB Havering’s Samantha Westrop, one of several looking at the possible health impacts of recurrent fires at Launders Lane, explored and interpreted cancer incidence data from the National Disease Registration Service NHS England for the ten years 2011 – 2020 to identify any differences between residents living around the Launders Lane site compared with the rest of Havering and England as a whole. (84) The report concluded that •

• •

The incidence of lung cancer, brain cancer, haematological cancer (e.g. leukaemias) and mesothelioma in those residents near to the Launders Lane site were similar to rates in Havering as a whole. The incidence of lung, brain and haematological cancers in Havering were similar to England. Havering as a whole has a higher incidence of mesothelioma than England. No differences in incidence of haematological or brain cancers (the two most common childhood cancers) were seen amongst young people (aged 0-25) resident near to the Launders Lane site compared to Havering as a whole, or England.

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

INJURY FROM LANDFILL FIRE

(85) The Guardian reported an incident that took place on Arnold’s lane landfill13 (Box 1). Box 1 The Rainham volcano: a waste dump is constantly on fire in east London. Why will no one stop it? William Ralston 4 March 2025 Under Arnolds Field, tonnes of illegally dumped waste have been burning for years, spewing pollution over the area. Locals fear for their health – and despair that no one seems willing to help “One afternoon in July 2011, an 11-year-old boy named William Knowlden was out cycling with friends when he came upon Arnolds Field, an expanse of green land in Havering, east London. The site spans about 17 hectares, or 24 football pitches, and around its perimeter runs a wooden fence, with two access points through which vehicles can pass. Arnolds Field rises much higher than the surrounding land. Its surface is lumpy and undulating, like a blanket thrown over a heap of cuddly toys. The land is overgrown. It has been decades since animals grazed there, and few people have set foot on it in recent years. But every so often, it is mistaken for a safe place to explore. As Knowlden descended a hill, he lost control and was thrown over the handlebars. When he came to, he was lying in a small crater and his feet were covered in a powdery residue that resembled ash. He felt a sharp pain in his left foot. When Knowlden’s friends arrived, they removed his shoes and peeled back his socks. One foot was pink and swollen, the skin blistered and shiny; the other was blackened and charred. Patches of skin hung off, revealing layers of fatty tissue. “It looked like it had been eaten by maggots,” Knowlden recalled. “Like pure, pure flesh.” In hospital, doctors informed Knowlden that he’d suffered third-degree burns in his right foot. They were baffled. With thermal burns, there should be an identifiable source of heat, like an open flame, but Knowlden and his friends hadn’t seen anything like that.” https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/mar/04/the-rainham-volcano-arnolds-field-toxic-fires-waste-dump

(86) The London Fire Brigade on 20 September 2024 reported on a Landfill fire near Launders Lane (Box 2). Box 2 “Landfill fire - Launders Lane”, London Fire Brigade https://www.london-fire.gov.uk/incidents/2024/september/landfill-fire-launders-lane-1/

“Four fire engines and around 25 firefighters tackled a fire near Launders Lane in Rainham. Local residents were advised to keep their windows and doors closed due to smoke in the area. Approximately two hectares of wasteland was impacted, with firefighters attacking multiple hotspots. One of the Brigade's 32-metre turntable ladders was used as a water tower to help fight the fire from above. The Brigade's Control Officers were called about the fire at 1930, and firefighters had the incident under control by. (sic) Crews from Wennington, Dagenham, Hornchurch, Barking and Greenwich fire stations are at the scene.”

(87) The Geo Environmental report (Page 42) notes a “High Risk” of direct contact with fires and comments that “Current users may to come into direct contact fires where present on site. There also remain the potential for explosion associated with any fires/ignition sources. In terms of reducing risk, by reducing number of people with access to site the (given the nature of the land being privately owned), and preventing unauthorised access, this could be achieved via securing the site. It is understood that firefighting on site is now undertaken from outside the boundary of the site, in order to reduce the risk to the firefighters.” (88) The Statutory Guidance notes that “4.5 The following health effects should always be considered to constitute significant harm to human health: death; life threatening diseases (e.g. cancers); other

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/mar/04/the-rainham-volcano-arnolds-field-toxic-fires-waste-dump

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

diseases likely to have serious impacts on health; serious injury; birth defects; and impairment of reproductive functions.” (89) In its footnote number 4, the guidance expands on what is a serious injury: “Physical injury in relation to significant harm would include injury caused by chemical and biochemical properties of substances, such as injury resulting from explosive or asphyxiating properties of gases. It would not extend to injury caused by only physical properties of substances, such as injury caused by falling onto sharp or hard objects made of relevant substances.” As such, the third-degree burns William Knowlden suffered would constitute a serious injury and hence significant harm. (90) The Statutory Guidance notes that “4.8 In cases where the local authority considers that: (i) significant harm may be being caused, or is likely to have been caused in the past; and (ii) there is a significant possibility that it may happen again, the authority may choose to consider whether to determine the land on grounds of significant possibility of significant harm (as an alternative to consideration that significant harm is being caused).” This would require land to meet the criteria for Category 1 or Category 2 with respect to human health. “Category 1: Human Health 4.19 The local authority should assume that a significant possibility of significant harm exists in any case where it considers there is an unacceptably high probability, supported by robust science-based evidence, that significant harm would occur if no action is taken to stop it. For the purposes of this Guidance, these are referred to as “Category 1: Human Health” cases. Land should be deemed to be a Category 1: Human Health case where: (a) the authority is aware that similar land or situations are known, or are strongly suspected on the basis of robust evidence, to have caused such harm before in the United Kingdom or elsewhere; or (b) the authority is aware that similar degrees of exposure (via any medium) to the contaminant(s) in question are known, or strongly suspected on the basis of robust evidence, to have caused such harm before in the United Kingdom or elsewhere; (c) the authority considers that significant harm may already have been caused by contaminants in, on or under the land, and that there is an unacceptable risk that it might continue or occur again if no action is taken”. (91) The conditions that caused the third degree burns remain in place in the form of both fires resulting in the call out of the London Fire Brigade and smouldering of subsurface materials. (92) Should members of the public access the land at Arnold’s Field – with or without permission – the significant harm reported in March 2025 to have taken place in 2011 could recur. (93) Since the source of combusting materials remains and the pathway of a trespasser or other person falling into such material is reasonable, the question as to whether or not there is SPOSH depends on the likelihood of members of the public accessing the land, in the light of the current use of the land (paragraphs 3.5-3.6 of the Statutory Guidance). As explained at paragraph 4.11 of the Statutory Guidance, the LB of Havering needs to consider “The estimated likelihood that significant harm might LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

occur to an identified receptor, taking account of the current use of the land in question” and decide, in the language of Category 1(a) whether there is an “unacceptable risk” of the harm reoccuring. LB of Havering will in particular need to consider how if at all accessibility to the land has changed since July 2011. (94) If the judgement is reached that there is such an unacceptable risk, the contaminant linkage of substances under the land at Arnold’s Field combusting (with or without a flame) and causing serious injury to someone on the land constitutes a significant contaminant linkage – in other words the land meets the definition of contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended). (95) If there is not a SPOSH, because there is no or little possibility of public access given the site’s current use, then the land would fall Category 4 (“level of risk posed is sufficiently low”) depending on the level of that likelihood and therefore not within the definition of contaminated land. (96)

Mr Thelwell’s evidence at the Judicial Review demonstrates that LB Havering consider that the

site is sufficiently secure to render it effectively inaccessible to members of the public. LB Havering still considers that even though LFB responders squeeze through a gap in the fence to access the site the site remains inaccessible because the fence “looks inaccessible” and no members of the public have any motivation to try to get in.

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

7 (97)

ISSUE: 2

RISK EVALUATION The Statutory Guidance notes in para 1.6 that 1.6 Under Part 2A , the enforcing authority may need to decide whether and how to act in situations where such decisions are not straightforward, and where there may be unavoidable uncertainty underlying some of the facts of each case. In so doing, the authority should use its judgement to strike a reasonable balance between: (a) dealing with risks raised by contaminants in land and the benefits of remediating land to remove or reduce those risks; and (b) the potential impacts of regulatory intervention including financial costs to whoever will pay for remediation (including the taxpayer where relevant), health and environmental impacts of taking action, property blight, and burdens on affected people. The authority should take a precautionary approach to the risks raised by contamination, whilst avoiding a disproportionate approach given the circumstances of each case. The aim should be to consider the various benefits and costs of taking action, with a view to ensuring that the regime produces net benefits, taking account of local circumstances.

(98)

The decision on whether to determine the site as contaminated land does not appear to be a

straightforward decision. In seeking to strike a reasonable balance between: (a) dealing with the risks raised by contaminants in land and the benefits of remediating land to remove or reduce those risks; and (b) the potential impacts of regulatory intervention, LB Havering needs to reflect on the continued burden on the LFB and the continued impact on the surrounding population that would be worse but for the repeated intervention of the LFB and on the dependence on the continued integrity of measures to prevent public access to the site. In particular, LB Havering should revisit, and consider reaffirming, their assessment reported in the CPW dated 25 April 2024 that “2) Regular fires, particularly in the summer months, are causing an unreasonable burden on the London Fire brigade.” (99) The site has been shown to be affected by contamination and given its current condition these could reach people onsite and offsite. (100) Significant harm in the form of third degree burns has been reported in 2025 as having already

been caused by substances under the land in 2011. LB Havering needs to form a view as to the likelihood of any member of the public gaining access to the site and coming into contact with smouldering substances, considering the site’s current use and state, and any changes in accessibility of the site (such as gates and fencing) since 2011. If it is reasonably likely that public access could take place then there is an unacceptable risk of significant harm being caused by this source-pathwayreceptor linkage and the land should be placed into Category 1 – contaminated land that poses a significant possibility of significant harm , and that there is an unacceptable risk that this might occur again if no action is taken. If LB Havering’s judgement is that it is not reasonably likely that public access could take place then there is not an unacceptable risk and the land should be placed into Category 4, for this linkage, since there is no receptor and the risks would therefore be “low”. (101) As summarised below, the risks posed by other linkages have been evaluated and found not to meet the definition of contaminated land: LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

•

ISSUE: 2

Exposure to contaminant(s) in the form of smoke by nearby residents – the evidence is that although there are increased GP attendances and a not significant increase in prescriptions after “fire days”, the test for SPOSH is not met and the land should fall into Category 3. The monitoring results do not indicate that exposure to contaminant in the form of PM2.5 attributed to the Site and associated with fires is causing significant harm however there is clear evidence of lower levels of adverse effects so the land should fall into Category 3. Exposure to contaminants in the form of PAH, PCB, metals, asbestos and VOC in air does not indicate a significant possibility of significant harm to people off site however some monthly measurements of individual VOC do exceed the annual levels so the land should fall into Category 3. Exposure to soil contaminants assessed against a public open space (park) land use indicates that some generic assessment criteria are exceeded but that those exceedances do not constitute a significant possibility of significant harm given the way the land is being used at this time. The land should fall into Category 3 given the disparity between the current use of the land and its historic and permitted uses. The evidence does not show that there is a significant possibility of significant pollution of controlled waters so the land should be placed into Category 4 with respect to controlled waters.

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

REFERENCES

CLAIRE 2014. Development of Category 4 Screening Levels for Assessment of Land Affected by Contamination Final Project Report (Revision 2) Defra project SP1010 Defra. 2022. Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance (TG22) August 2022 LAQM-TG22-August-22v1.0.pdf HSE. 2020. Workplace exposure limits Containing the list of workplace exposure limits for use with the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 (as amended) London: TSO EH40/2005 (Fourth Edition 2020) https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/eh40.pdf LB Havering. 2016. Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy Revision 02 Nathanail, C P, Jones, A, Ogden, R, Robertson, A. 2014. Asbestos in soil and made ground: a guide to understanding and managing risks. CIRIA C733 RP961 ISBN: 978-0-86017-737-1 Nathanail, C.P.; McCaffrey,C.; Gillett, A.G.; Ogden, R.C. & Nathanail, J.F. 2015. The LQM/CIEH S4ULs for Human Health Risk Assessment, Land Quality Press, Nottingham. ISBN: 978-0-9931084-0-2 WHO. 2000. Air Quality Guidelines for Europe Second Edition. WHO Regional Publications, European Series, No. 91. E71922.pdf

8.1

Site-Specific Reports

TRL Limited. March 2025. Final Report entitled "Launders Lane Air Quality Monitoring report May 2023 – September 2024" Prepared for: Havering Borough Council LB Havering . Undated. Review of Asbestos Monitoring at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane by Mike Richardson, Senior Public Protection Officer Dedacted. A-10106 Letter Report for Air Monitoring - Launder's Lane Rv2 Redacted 30 September 2024. Geo Environmental. 21 December 2023. Report (v2.0) entitled: "Ground investigation report for the land at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL" on behalf of London Borough of Havering Council Environment Agency sampling of the “RODING / INGREBOURNE CATCHMENT RIVER N.C.R.S, March 2025 LB Havering, Community Protection Warning dated 25 April 2024 LB Havering, “The Effect of Arnold’s Field Fires on the Respiratory Health of the Surrounding Population” – Full Technical Report, November 2024 (FTR) LB Havering, “The Effect of Arnold’s Field Fires on the Respiratory Health of the Surrounding Population” – Short Report, November 2024 LB Havering, “The Possible Health Impact of Fires at Launders Lane: Havering Cancer Incidence”, (undated but possibly 16 August 2024) https://issuu.com/haveringcouncil/docs/health_impact_report__cancer_incidence Thelwell, S. 2025. “Witness Statement Of Simon Thelwell” dated 10 January 2025, Supplied as “Witness Statement - Simon Thelwell 10.01.25 (v2).pdf”

8.2

Websites

Accredited official statistics Particulate matter (PM10/PM2.5) Updated 26 June 2025. Defra, 2025. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/air-quality-statistics/concentrations-of-particulatematter-pm10-and-pm25 LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

Guidance:

ISSUE: 2

Monitoring ambient air: particulate matter. Environment https://www.gov.uk/guidance/monitoring-ambient-air-particulate-matter

Agency,

2024.

Development of the Environment Act Targets. Defra, undated. https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/pm25targets/targetsdevelopment COMEAP statement: response to WHO Air quality guidelines 2021. Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants (COMEAP). July 2022. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/comeapstatement-response-to-who-air-quality-guidelines-2021 The Rainham volcano: a waste dump is constantly on fire in east London. Why will no one stop it? William Ralston The Guardian, 4 March 2025. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/mar/04/therainham-volcano-arnolds-field-toxic-fires-waste-dump Landfill

fire Launders Lane, London Fire Brigade. fire.gov.uk/incidents/2024/september/landfill-fire-launders-lane-1/

2024.

https://www.london-

Guidance: Air emissions risk assessment for your environmental permit. 2025. Environment Agency. Last updated 9 May 2025. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/air-emissions-risk-assessment-for-yourenvironmental-permit#environmental-standards-for-air-emissions

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDICES

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 1 CV OF PAUL NATHANAIL

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

DR C PAUL NATHANAIL MA (CANTAB) MSC PHD DIC PGCERTHE CGEOL EUROGEOL SILC SQP

PEN PICTURE Paul Nathanail is a Chartered Geologist and Specialist in Land Condition with specific expertise in soil and made ground contamination evaluation and broader expertise in ground engineering, urban land management and sustainability. He brings a meticulous, thorough and unbiased approach to his work as an expert witness, advisor and researcher that has been much welcomed in the many projects he has been involved in. He was a member of the Defra Expert Panel on Contaminated Land. He has been supporting local authorities fulfill their duties under Part 2A since it came into force in 2000 and has written several risk evaluations for high profile sites. In 2019 he wrote the risk evaluation that resolved matters for a high profile site following a Secretary of State decision that previous Part 2A work was not reasonable. He was the independent Suitably Qualified Person (SQP) for both stages of additional environmental checks carried out around the Grenfell Tower. He is the lead author of CIRIA’s guidance on Asbestos in soil and made ground (2014) and on PFAS in soil and water. He led the development of the LQM CIEH Suitable for Use Levels (S4UL) – the UK’s largest set of soil screening levels. He has provided expert evidence and given verbal evidence in court, adjudications, planning inquiries for a range of issues. He has led projects funded by Innocate UK, UKRI and the European Union. He has consulted for Government bodies in Cyprus, Ireland and Luxembourg as well as the UK, Scotland and Wales.

QUALIFICATIONS University BA (Hons)/ MA Natural Sciences, University of Cambridge, 1985 MSc (Distinction) Engineering Geology, Imperial College, University of London, 1987 PhD, Imperial College, University of London, 1994

Professional Chartered Geologist, 1991 Specialist in Land Condition (SiLC), 2003 European Geologist, 2003 National Quality Mark Scheme Suitably Qualified Person 2019

PRIZES 2019 Society of Chemical Industries Environment Medal 2017 CRC Care Fellow 2009 Geological Society 10th Glossop lecturer and medallist 1987 Imperial College Herbert Lapworth medal

AFFILIATIONS Fellow, Geological Society of London Member, Australasian Land & Groundwater Association Member, EU China Panel on Land and Soils Member, BSI Committee EH4 and ISO Technical Committee 190 Soil Quality Member, British Society of Soil Science

EMPLOYMENT HISTORY 1997 – present 2023 – present C. Paul Nathanail

Managing Director of LQM (full time) Visiting Professor, Environmental Sciences, Nottingham Trent University 1

October 24

2019 - present 2021 – 2024 2020 – 2022 2007- 2018 1998 - 2007 1994-1998 1987-1994 1985-1986

Honorary Research Associate, British Geological Survey Chair, Board of Directors, SiLC Register Ltd Technical Director, Gutteridge, Haskins & Davey Ltd Professor in Engineering Geology, University of Nottingham Senior Lecturer, University of Nottingham Principal Lecturer, CRBE, Nottingham Trent University Geoscientist, Environmental Sciences Division, Wimpey Environmental Assistant Geologist, Cyprus Government Geological Survey Department

SELECTED RECENT PROJECT EXPERIENCE Current and recent topic areas include:  Climate Change: Report for the Environment Agency on the effects of climate change and extreme weather events on the behaviour of environment contaminants and the performance of remediation techniques; development of a green house gas emissions calculator for soil and groundwater remediation; member of ISO committee on climate change and soil.  Asbestos: advising on waste classification of excavated made ground containing asbestos; liaison with HSE about ACOP & Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012; Member ALGA Asbestos Special Interest Group; sampling made ground for asbestos classification; Part 2A assessment for asbestos in road surface materials; sampling, risk assessment and application to discharge planning condition re asbestos in soil.  PFAS: Lead, CIRIA RP145 Good practice guidance for some PFAS in soil and water environment; Development of sampling and sample preparation protocols for PFAS in concrete, soil and groundwater; Advice to Blue Light organisations on PFAS liabilities; Deputy chair, NICOLE Working Group on PFAS; Author – report on Impact of climate change on PFAS fate and transport  Expert witness: Domestic fuel spills; Asbestos in soil (contractual dispute); Remediation tax relief and related matters; common law dispute over foul and surface water drainage; soil aspects of murder case (instructed by defendant’s solicitor); planning appeal and subsequent court case (instructed by Local Authority); appeal against conviction for disposal of waste in manner likely to cause pollution (appointed by defendant’s solicitor)  ‘Intelligent client’ role in major town centre regeneration of former gasworks  Peer review of risk assessment reports for local authorities and insurers  Peer review panels o CL:AIRE Value Engineering panel, Avenue Coking works remediation o BNFL land contamination investigation and assessment o BNFL Contaminated Land COSR  Lead author of LQM/CIEH Suitable For Use Levels (S4UL)  Risk communication – including Ysgol John Bright, Thames View Estate, Higher Openshaw, Grenfell Environmental checks, Stonegate Estate  EU Framework & Horizon 2020: @Cabernet4EU; RESCUE; @INSPIRATION4EU; NanoRem; SPRINT Reduced use of Plant Protection Products  Sustainable remediation: Led drafting of BS ISO 18504:2017  CIRIA author: Applications of biological and non-biological methods of site characterisation and remediation; Control of financial risk from land contamination; Asbestos in Soil and Made Ground; PFAS in soil and water  Modelling spatial distribution of contaminants  Development of decision support systems to guide site investigation design  Environmental applications of GIS and geostatistics

TEACHING AND LEARNING Course Director, MSc Contaminated Land Management, University of Nottingham. MSc Module leader for Site Characterisation, Risk Assessment, Remediation, Urban Regeneration, Environmental Law and Project Management, Environmental C. Paul Nathanail

October 24

Geology; Professional Practice; Geostatistics; Study Tour and Final year BSc module leader for Geological Mapping; Geohazards and resources. Organised and delivered numerous short courses and seminars for regulators, consultants and industry.

SELECTED RECENT PUBLICATIONS Paul has authored and contributed to over 200 technical papers, books, open file reports and consultancy reports. Paul has an h-index of 38 and a i10 index of 82 commensurate with a highly research active professor. His work is recognised for its excellence and impact. Further details on Paul’s publications can be found on Google Scholar at https://tinyurl.com/ya28h8ww

C. Paul Nathanail

October 24

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 2 APPROVED JUDGMENT OF MRS JUSTIC LIEVEN IN CLEAR THE AIR IN HAVERING, R (ON THE APPLICATION OF) V LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING [2025] EWHC 1492 (ADMIN) (17 JUNE 2025)

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

Neutral Citation Number: [2025] EWHC 1492 (Admin) Case No: AC-2024-LON-003340 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE KING'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT PLANNING COURT Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 17/06/2025 Before : MRS JUSTICE LIEVEN --------------------Between : THE KING (on the application of) CLEAR THE AIR IN HAVERING Claimant v THE LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING Defendant and DMC SERVICES (ESSEX) LIMITED Interested Party ----------------------------------------Dr David Wolfe KC and Ms Margherita Cornaglia (instructed by Mishcon de Reya LLP) for the Claimant Mr Meyric Lewis KC and Mr Brendan Brett (instructed by London Borough of Havering) for the Defendant Mr David Hart KC (instructed by Gunnercooke LLP) for the Interested Party Hearing dates: 18 & 19 March 2025 ---------------------

Approved Judgment This judgment was handed down remotely at 10.30am on 17 June 2025 by circulation to the parties or their representatives by e-mail and by release to the National Archives.

............................. MRS JUSTICE LIEVEN

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

Mrs Justice Lieven DBE : 1.

This is an application for judicial review of the decision of the Defendant (“the Decision”), the London Borough of Havering (“the LA”), on 12 July 2024 not to identify land at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane (“the Site”) as contaminated land within the meaning of Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (“EPA”). The Claimant is a group of local residents concerned about clean air in Havering. The Interested Party (“IP”) is the owner of the Site.

The Claimant is represented by Dr David Wolfe KC and Margherita Cornaglia, the LA is represented by Meyric Lewis KC and Brendan Brett, and the IP is represented by David Hart KC.

Background 3.

The Site is 15 ha. It is situated with residential buildings about 400m away. The Site has posed problems for many years and has a very significant planning history.

The Site was previously in lawful use for sand and gravel extraction and then as a landfill site. In 1999 planning permission was granted for development comprising “land raising to improve agricultural quality”. In 2000 further planning permission was granted to change the end use of the then current permission from agriculture to woodland. Condition 1 of that permission required restoration to be carried out in accordance with submitted details, including as to the levels and contouring of the Site.

In 2004 a Stop Notice and two Enforcement Notices were served in respect of the further deposition of waste and materials onto the Site in breach of the 2000 planning permission. An appeal was dismissed. The Enforcement Notices were upheld but have never been complied with. Further unlawful tipping took place between 2011 and 2016, which resulted in the Environment Agency (“EA”) bringing prosecutions.

The IP bought the land in 2017. From at least 2018 there have been fires on the Site to which the Fire Brigade have been called. Those fires produce smoke (according to the Claimant, large plumes of black smoke) which affects homes, a school and a golf course close to the Site. The Fire Brigade were called 134 times in 2022, of which 70 were false alarms, meaning there were 64 fires within a 12 month period. It can be seen from these figures that there is no doubt that the Site is a very significant problem for local residents, the LA and other statutory agencies.

The LA has submitted evidence from Mr Richardson, a senior public protection officer of the LA; Mr Thelwell, the head of strategic development; and Mr Ansell, the director of public health. It appears from that evidence that Mr Richardson was critical in the decision making on what action should be taken in relation to the Site. As I explain below, I allowed a late witness statement from Mr Harding of TRL Ltd (“TRL”) to explain the monitoring that the company had undertaken.

Mr Ansell says that in 2022 he, on behalf of the LA, instigated an expert technical group to bring together relevant authorities and expertise to address the problems posed by the Site. The group included the LA’s public health, public protection, and communications officers, the UK Health Security Agency (“UKHSA”), the EA,

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

Imperial College London, University College London, the Greater London Authority, the London Fire Brigade (“LFB”), and representatives of residents. 9.

The LA and/or the technical group commissioned a number of studies and investigations into the Site and its effects.

10.

The Environmental Research Group at Imperial College London (“ERG”) undertook air quality monitoring relating to the Site. They operate hourly monitoring of nitrogen dioxide and PM2.5 (a particular size of particulate matter) in the air across London in a project called “Breathe London”. The results are available in real time on a website. At the LA’s request, the ERG installed additional monitoring ‘nodes’ in the vicinity of the Site. This data provides updates to the public about the outcomes of that monitoring in order to help residents understand the air quality in the area. The LA provides a “Launders Lane Air Quality Dashboard”, a dedicated website where the public can see the results of Breathe London air monitoring at the locations most pertinent for the Site.

11.

In May 2023 Geo-Environmental Services Limited (“GESL”), a specialist environmental consultant, was commissioned to undertake an on-site contamination assessment for the Site. GESL reported in December 2023 (“the GESL Report”). The GESL Report comprised (i) a desktop review, including an assessment of potential source-pathway-receptor linkages and the development of a “conceptual model” based on the current site use (ii) intrusive investigations on the Site; and (iii) geochemical laboratory testing of recovered soils and waters.

12.

GESL summarised its findings in a presentation given to a public meeting on 24 November 2023, attended by the LA, as follows: i.

There were unsafe levels of arsenic, lead, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, and dibenzo(ah)anthracene in the soil samples recovered from the Site. Where these are at depth, there is low risk; but where these are near or on the surface then risk can be reduced by minimising contact with the soil.

ii.

Gas monitoring showed the presence of methane, carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulphide, carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds (“VOCs”). The personal gas monitors of the GESL operatives were not however triggered whilst they were on the Site. The risk to off-site receptors was low given the low flow of gases, but pockets of methane could potentially exacerbate or sustain fires within the waste on the Site.

iii.

Some evidence of contaminants leaching into water was noted, but this was likely to be in isolated pockets of ‘perched’ rainwater and no evidence of a continuous water body was found within the waste materials. The Common Watercourse adjacent to the Site could not be accessed for testing, but GESL undertook water sampling of installed boreholes on the Site.

iv.

There was evidence of loose asbestos fibres – reassurance air monitoring was recommended to ensure these are not escaping from the Site.

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

The primary way that any risk from contaminants on the Site could be managed would be to prevent access to the Site “thereby breaking the source-pathway-receptor for exposure to the contaminants on site”.

vi.

GESL advised that the risk from smoke from fires on the site “represents a health and safety concern associated with the smoke itself and any potential for particulates to be present/migrating as opposed to a contaminated land issue”.

13.

In October 2022, the LA tendered for specialists to provide enhanced monitoring and assessment to identify whether the particulate matter in the air near the Site contained specific substances of concern emanating from the Site. TRL (a consultancy) were appointed to do the work.

14.

In the initial report in October 2022 TRL said their intention was to start work in May 2023 so that they were in place to monitor over the three hottest months “when fires are more likely and increasing the chances of directly measuring one or more occurrences”, see para 3.4 of the report.

15.

The LA has also obtained disaggregated medical data from North London Integrated Care Board, a local NHS organ, to enable it to study whether residents around the Site were more likely to present with respiratory problems during or immediately after fires. The first tranche of that data was received on 11 December 2023, but the results from the research that was commissioned were not available at the time of the Decision. In addition, the LA requested the National Disease Registration Service to consider the prevalence of particular forms of cancer in local populations.

16.

TRL produced a report in April 2024, which is headed “Launders Lane Interim Air Quality Monitoring report May-December 2023”. The Interim Executive Summary states: “This interim report summarises the air quality monitoring being undertaken by TRL Ltd around the Launders Lane site in Havering, from 18th May 2023 to the end of December 2023. The aim of this project is to understand the potential levels of airborne pollution associated with the uncontrolled burning of materials at Launders Lane, and to get an idea of the ambient levels of airborne pollution without any fires. The pollutants being monitored are Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCS), Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Heavy Metals (Mercury and Lead). Wind speed and direction are also being recorded. Nothing measured to date indicates that any recommended limits (annual mean thresholds), where they are available, are likely to be exceeded or give any cause for concern. It is recommended that on-site monitoring at the Launders Lane site continues through the summer of 2024 to ensure that air pollution associated with any fires attended by the London Fire Brigade is monitored.”

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

17.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

At section 7 TRL set out their interim conclusions: “7 Interim Conclusions This interim report has been prepared to provide an update on the air quality monitoring that has been undertaken by TRL at the Launders Lane site between August 2023 and December 2023. As of the end of December 2023, the majority of measurements recorded at the TRL Launders Lane air quality monitoring locations are below any available national and WHO annual objectives. Where a few of the monthly readings exceed the national annual mean objective, it is likely that once 12 months of data is available, the average of 12 months data will fall below the objective. It’s important to be aware that currently there is not enough data available to enable meaningful comparisons with national annual mean objectives, as that requires 12 months of data. Consequently, the interim conclusions shared here will be reviewed and updated once 12 month’s worth of data is available and comparisons can be made against the annual mean objectives that exist for many of the pollutants being monitored. The main objective of this monitoring task was to gain an understanding of how the fires influence emissions from the Launders Lane site. Unfortunately, the monitoring equipment only came online in August 2023 so missed recording the majority of fires that occurred last year (2023). For this reason, it is recommended that AQ monitoring is continued throughout the summer of 2024. This is likely to provide further opportunities to measure if and how the fires influence the air quality in the area.” [emphasis added]

18.

Unsurprisingly Dr Wolfe placed a great deal of reliance on this paragraph for his submission that the LA had made a premature decision on whether the land was contaminated. Mr Lewis told me on instruction that the interim conclusion was written in error and in fact TRL had carried out monitoring before August 2023. In the light of the fact that TRL’s own report said that of the 15 recorded fires in 2023, 12 had taken place in August, I permitted the LA to put in a late witness statement from TRL explaining the position.

19.

In December 2023 GESL produced a report in which they carefully considered potential pathways and found no contamination pathway on the Site. However, they say at p.44: “It should be noted that the risk from smoke associated with fires on the site represents a health and safety concern associated with the smoke itself and any potential for particulates to be present/migrating as opposed to a contaminated land issue”.

20.

In their report under the heading “Status under Part 2A” at para 8.1 of the report GESL say:

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

“It is considered that the overall risk of the site (when not on fire) in relation to a number of the source pathway receptor (SPR) linkages identified could be reduced be securing the site, thereby removing unauthorised access on the site. However, further consideration is required in relation to the SPR linkages associated with the fires on the site, both during fires and of any impacts following fires. In addition, there are areas where a significant risk of significant harm has not currently been identified but that improvements or limited works on site such as reprofiling and installation of capping across the exposed waste materials, resulting in a reduction of infiltration through the site may also serve to offering a reduction in overall risk.” [emphasis added] 21.

The detail of the monitoring is dealt with below at [84-89].

22.

Between 13 February and 25 April 2024 there are a series of emails between Ms Legate of GESL and Mr Richardson wherein Mr Richardson is seeking advice on the contaminated land issue. On 13 February he asks: “On a related note, I’ve been asked to look at the “significant risk of significant harm” factor for declaring Launders Lane as Contaminated Land under Part 2A, and to request your view on it. Having read the report again, I’m of the opinion that it doesn’t meet the threshold, primarily due to the lack of source-pathway-receptor, unless people are trespassing on the site. Therefore the “significant risk” part of the definition is not met. The question over “significant harm” is still to be addressed, as there are some values higher than the guideline values, and I would be grateful if you could advise if this meets the “significant harm” threshold.”

23.

Ms Legate says in reply “…. When we discussed it initially when we were writing the report I think our view was that the site itself didn’t present significant harm, it was the fires that introduced the higher risk of harm. I’ll come back to you on this one”.

24.

Mr Richardson then asks for Ms Legate’s “official view” on whether the site is or is not contaminated land.

25.

On 25 April Ms Legate replies: “It is the fires that introduce the higher risk of harm to human health in terms of transport of contaminants and air quality and a determination of whether that is significant in terms of risk to human health would need consultation with the air quality experts who have been doing monitoring on and in the vicinity of the site and the further assessment of risk with respect to airborne release of contaminants and asbestos. I am not sure if any airborne monitoring has been done on site with respect to asbestos since our investigation works on site, or what steps/further works have been undertaken since the last public meetings in terms of air quality.

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

The remediation measures presented in the works we have undertaken are driven by the need to reduce/stop the fires on site, as such this is the key risk driver in terms of determining significance from our perspective.” 26.

Later on the same day Mr Richardson responds as follows: “Thanks for the update. Our monitoring to date (which is primarily around the air quality) doesn’t show any particular elevated risk, but then there has not been any fires so far this year so we are currently measuring a baseline. Asbestos monitoring is in the process of being commissioned, and I am hopeful that will be sorted by the end of next month. If I’ve got this fully understood, from the report you provided, the risk of harm is mostly to do with the release of “contaminants” from fires, not the risk of dermal contact (which is significantly minimised if the site is secured from unauthorised access) or from contamination of the watercourse adjacent to the site. I do appreciate that the conceptual model has a high risk from inhalation to the current users if they are on site when a fire is occurring, and also for ground gasses to end users… assuming that the site is redeveloped in some manner. Otherwise, the other risks are very low-moderate, and I am happy that, considering the current use of the land, are not significant. As such, we are minded not to declare the site as Contaminated Land (under Part 2A) as the site is not open land to the public, nor is it easily accessible (unlike a park which is the guidelines you’ve assessed the site under). Therefore, the possibility of people coming into physical contact with the soil is low. Whilst the recommendations within the report indicate that securing the site, capping and venting will further reduce the risk from future fires and prevent unauthorised access, there is currently no evidence to suggest that the fires mobilise the contaminants to neighbouring properties (although this has the caveat that in the current monitoring period there have been no fires of significance since last summer, so the air quality monitoring has not picked up anything untoward). We are, therefore, dealing with the matter under the statutory nuisance/community protection notice regimes, as we are serving an abatement notice on the landowner (for the fires) and a Community Protection Warning to require him to secure the site, and take all reasonable steps to prevent further fires. This will address the recommendations regarding the unauthorised access and also steps to take regarding preventing the fires, though not through the Part 2A regime. Obviously, if further evidence comes to light with regard to the SPOSH and the increase of the risk/possibility of significant harm, we are reserving the right to take action under Part 2A.” [emphasis added]

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

27.

This email is in my view important because it is the clearest evidence of Mr Richardson’s, and therefore the LA’s, reasoning at the time they made the decision under challenge.

28.

The LA made the decision not to designate the Site as contaminated land on 25 April 2024, although the public were not informed until 12 July 2024. I will set out the contents of the decision below. On the same day, the LA issued an Abatement Notice under s.79 EPA, i.e. the statutory nuisance regime.

29.

On 15 May 2024 the IP appealed the Abatement Notice. Ground E of the appeal was that: “It is clear that the site is in a contaminated state”. The IP then refers to s.79(1A) EPA. They then state: “The fires arising on this [sic] are clearly caused by the land being in a contaminated state, so it is not accepted that this is a nuisance under the EPA. This Notice is therefore invalid”.

30.

On 12 July 2024 the LA informed the public via its website that it had decided not to designate the land as contaminated land. The notification on the website, which for these purposes I will treat as the LA’s published reasons, states as follows: “1. The Council has carefully considered the content of the Contaminated Land report, and found that the only possible significant risk of harm from the site is the potential risk of contaminants from fires, which the TRL and other air quality monitoring is assessing (read more on this below). 2. Land is declared as "Contaminated Land" under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, and must present a 'Significant Possibility of Significant Harm (SPOSH)' to human health. This is primarily through skin contact, the uptake in any vegetables or plants grown on the site for consumption, or contamination of the local watercourse. 3. The report makes it clear that there is a high risk from inhalation to anyone who is directly on the site when a fire is occurring, and also for ground gases to affect anyone using the site in future, if it is redeveloped for housing or industrial use. Otherwise, the other risks are very lowmoderate and, considering the current use of the land, are not significant. 4. As such, the Council has decided that the site is not formally designated as Contaminated Land (under Part 2A), as the site is not open to the public, nor is it easily accessible. Therefore, the possibility of people coming into physical contact with the soil and/or gases is low. 5. Whilst the recommendations within the report indicate that securing the site, capping and venting will further reduce the risk from future fires and prevent unauthorised access, there is currently no evidence to suggest that the fires significantly spread contaminants to neighbouring properties. 6. Although it should be noted that whilst the current monitoring has been in place, there has not been a large number of fires since last summer, so the air quality monitoring has not picked up anything outside of the normal levels for the area.

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

7. As such, the Council is dealing with the matter under the statutory nuisance/community protection notice regimes (as listed above). However, if further evidence comes to light with regard to the SPOSH and the increase of the risk/possibility of significant harm, we are reserving the right to take action under Part 2A. 8. A further study is being commissioned to assess the risk of asbestos fibres escaping from the site, which we will openly share all the outcomes of. As our consultants said at the previous public meeting in November it would be highly unlikely for any fibres to be emitted from the site provided any asbestos present is not disturbed. 9. However, as stated at the meeting we want to be sure of this and establish whether the presence of fires has any impact on this.” [I have added the paragraph numbers for the purposes of clarity] 31.

On 20 August 2024 the LA revoked the Abatement Notice and has taken no further legal action in respect of the Site. Therefore the Site is currently not being considered as contaminated land, but also no action is being taken in respect of statutory nuisance. The LA has continued to monitor the Site and further reports are expected. The IP has worked with LFB and GESL to consider practical measures that could be taken on the Site.

32.

In respect of fires on the Site, Mr Ansell says that the monitoring shows an increase in particulate air pollution on many of the days that the LFB reported attending a fire at the Site. He says that the fires cause large but short-lived peaks in particulate air pollution at the individual monitoring sites, depending on the precise location of the fire, the strength and direction of the wind and the speed with which it is extinguished.

33.

The judicial review was commenced on 10 October 2024. Permission was granted by Mrs Justice Lang on 21 November 2024.

The Legal Framework 34.

Part 2A of the EPA governs the designation and management of contaminated land.

35.

S.78A(2) defines contaminated land as: “78A Preliminary … (2) “Contaminated land” is any land which appears to the local authority in whose area it is situated to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, on or under the land, that— (a) significant harm is being caused or there is a significant possibility of such harm being caused; or (b) significant pollution of controlled waters is being caused or there is a significant possibility of such pollution being caused;

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

and, in determining whether any land appears to be such land, a local authority shall, subject to subsection (5) below, act in accordance with guidance issued by the Secretary of State in accordance with section 78YA below with respect to the manner in which that determination is to be made.” … (4) “Harm” means harm to the health of living organisms or other interference with the ecological systems of which they form part and, in the case of man, includes harm to his property. (5) The questions— (a) what harm or pollution of controlled waters is to be regarded as “significant”, (b) whether the possibility of significant harm or of significant pollution of controlled waters being caused is “significant”, shall be determined in accordance with guidance issued for the purpose by the Secretary of State in accordance with section 78YA below.” 36.

By s.78B EPA, local authorities are under a statutory duty to inspect their areas for the purposes of identifying contaminated land, and in carrying out that duty they should act “in accordance” with guidance issued under s.78YA EPA. If the local authority identifies contaminated land, it is required to notify certain persons, identified in s.78B(3) EPA.

37.

Having identified land as contaminated, s.78E requires the local authority to serve a remediation notice, specifying the steps which it considers reasonable to be taken for the remediation of the land, having regard to the cost and severity of the risk posed by the contamination. In doing, the local authority is required to “have regard” to any s.78YA guidance. The person or persons on whom such a notice or notices should be served is determined by the application of s.78F.

38.

Accordingly (as the parties agree) Parliament has decided that the identification of land as contaminated land should be wholly a matter for the Defendant’s judgement, acting in accordance with the EPA and any guidance issued under s.78YA EPA.

39.

S.78YA provides for the Secretary of State to produce Guidance which shall be laid before Parliament in a negative resolution procedure.

40.

S.79 covers statutory nuisances. The following provisions are the most relevant: “79 Statutory nuisances and inspections therefor. (1) Subject to subsections (1A) to (6A) below], the following matters constitute “statutory nuisances” for the purposes of this Part, that is to say— (a)

…

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

(b) smoke emitted from premises so as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance; … (1A) No matter shall constitute a statutory nuisance to the extent that it consists of, or is caused by, any land being in a contaminated state. (1B) Land is in a “contaminated state” for the purposes of subsection (1A) above if, and only if, it is in such a condition, by reason of substances in, on or under the land, that— (a) harm is being caused or there is a possibility of harm being caused; or (b) pollution of controlled waters is being, or is likely to be, caused; and in this subsection “harm”, “pollution of controlled waters” and “substance” have the same meaning as in Part IIA of this Act.” … “80 Summary proceedings for statutory nuisances. … (2A) Where a local authority is satisfied that a statutory nuisance falling within paragraph (g) of section 79(1) above exists, or is likely to occur or recur, in the area of the authority, the authority shall— (a) serve an abatement notice in respect of the nuisance in accordance with subsections (1) and (2) above; or (b) take such other steps as it thinks appropriate for the purpose of persuading the appropriate person to abate the nuisance or prohibit or restrict its occurrence or recurrence.” The Statutory Guidance 41.

The Secretary of State has issued guidance under s.78YA EPA dated April 2012 (“Statutory Guidance”). It can be seen from the provisions set out above that there is a statutory duty to apply this Guidance, and that it has been subject to Parliamentary scrutiny. It therefore is in practice mandatory guidance. The terms of the Guidance are central to the Claimant’s case.

42.

The Guidance explains that: a.

The statutory scheme for contaminated land should only be used “where no appropriate alternative solution exists” to deal with issues raised in a particular case [para 1.5];

Land should only be identified as contaminated land “where unacceptable risks are clearly identified, after a risk assessment has

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

been undertaken in accordance with” the Statutory Guidance [para 1.3];

43.

“The authority should take a precautionary approach to the risks raised by contamination, whilst avoiding a disproportionate approach given the circumstances of each case” [para 1.6];

“The local authority should carry out any intrusive investigation in accordance with appropriate good practice technical procedures for such investigations.” [para 2.12];

“If at any stage the local authority considers, on the basis of information obtained from inspection activities, that there is no longer a reasonable possibility that a significant contaminant linkage exists on the land, the authority should not carry out any further inspection in relation to that linkage.” [para 2.13].

Section 3 deals with “Risk Assessment”. In respect of “current use”: “3.5 “Under Part 2A, risks should be considered only in relation to the current use of the land. For the purposes of this Guidance the “current use means: a)

The use which is being made of the land currently

b) Reasonable likely future uses of the land that would not require a new or amended grant of planning permission. c) Any temporary use to which the land is put, or is likely to be put, from time to time within the bounds of current planning permission. d)

…

3.6 In assessing risks the local authority should disregard any receptors which are not likely to be present given the current use of the land or other land which might be affected.” [paras 3.5(a)(b)(c) and 3.6];…” 44.

On “contaminant linkages” para 3.8 and 3.9 are critical to Ground 3(a): “3.8 Under Part 2A, for a relevant risk to exist there needs to be one or more contaminant pathway-receptor linkages – “contaminant linkage” – by which a relevant receptor might be affected by the contaminants in question. In other words, for a risk to exist there must be contaminants present in, on or under the land in a form and quantity that poses a hazard, and one or more pathways by which they might significantly harm people, the environment, or property; or significantly pollute controlled waters. For the purposes of this Guidance: (a) A “contaminant” is a substance which is in, on or under the land and which has the potential to cause significant harm to a relevant receptor, or to cause significant pollution of controlled waters.

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

(b) A “receptor” is something that could be adversely affected by a contaminant, for example a person, an organism, an ecosystem, property, or controlled waters. The various types of receptors that are relevant under the Part 2A regime are explained in later sections. (c) A “pathway” is a route by which a receptor is or might be affected by a contaminant. 3.9 The term “contaminant linkage” means the relationship between a contaminant, a pathway and a receptor. All three elements of a contaminant linkage must exist in relation to particular land before the land can be considered potentially to be contaminated land under Part2A, including evidence of the actual presence of contaminants. The term “significant contaminant linkage”, as used in this Guidance, means a contaminant linkage which gives rise to a level of risk sufficient to justify a piece of land being determined as contaminated land. The term “significant contaminant” means the contaminant which forms part of a significant contaminant linkage.” 45.

Para 3.12 to para 3.17 deals with “the process of risk assessment”. These passages are critical to the Claimant’s Ground Five: “3.12 The process of risk assessment involves understanding the risks presented by land, and the associated uncertainties. In practice, this understanding is usually developed and communicated in the form of a “conceptual model”. The understanding of the risks is developed through a staged approach to risk assessment, often involving a preliminary risk assessment informed by desk-based study; a site visit and walkover; a generic quantitative risk assessment; and various stages of more detailed quantitative risk assessment. The process should normally continue until it is possible for the local authority to decide: (a) that there is insufficient evidence that the land might be contaminated land to justify further inspection and assessment; and/or (b) whether or not the land is contaminated land. 3.13 For land to proceed to the next stage of risk assessment there should be evidence that an unacceptable risk could reasonably exist. If the authority considers there is little reason to consider that the land might pose an unacceptable risk, inspection activities should stop at that point. In such cases the authority should have regard to paragraphs 5.2 – 5.4 of this Guidance. 3.14 It may become apparent during the course of detailed inspection of land that the assumptions that led to the prioritisation of the land prove to be incorrect, and that the risks posed by the land are lower than expected. In such cases the authority should consider whether (and if so how) to proceed with its inspection, having regard to the need to prioritise inspection activities in accordance with Section 2. There may be good reason to continue until a decision can be taken on whether or not the land is contaminated land. However, as soon as it becomes clear to the authority that the land is unlikely to be contaminated land, it should bring

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

its inspection and risk assessment to an end, and redirect its efforts to the inspection of other land in line with its approach to prioritisation. 3.15 As a general rule, inspections should be conducted as quickly, and with as little disruption, as reasonably possible whilst ensuring that a sufficiently robust assessment is carried out. The local authority should seek to avoid or minimise the impacts of long inspections on affected persons, in particular significant disruption and stress to directly affected members of the public in the case of inspections involving residential land. 3.16 The local authority should seek to ensure that its risk assessment is relevant to the land in question, and that it is based on risks that are reasonably likely to exist. In the course of risk assessment the authority may consider possible exposure scenarios or situations which are very unlikely to occur. However, regulatory decisions should be based on what is reasonably likely, not what is hypothetically possible. 3.17 In undertaking risk assessments, local authorities should ensure that the time and resource put into assessment is sufficient to provide a robust basis for regulatory decisions. In some cases, there may be a need for detailed and lengthy assessments, particularly in complex cases where regulatory decisions are not straightforward. However, in other cases a less detailed and shorter assessment may be appropriate. For example, if it becomes evident early in risk assessment that there is clearly a high or low risk (to the extent that the decision on whether or not land is contaminated land is straightforward) the authority should normally take the decision on the basis of this evidence alone.” [emphasis added] 46.

Section 4 covers the definition of contaminated land. Paras 4.3- 4.6 state: “4.3 The paragraphs below set out categories of harm that should be considered to be significant harm to human health. In all cases the harm should be directly attributable to the effects of contaminants in, on or under the land on the body(ies) of the person(s) concerned. 4.4 Conditions for determining that land is contaminated land on the basis that significant harm is being caused would exist where: (a) the local authority has carried out an appropriate, scientific and technical assessment of all the relevant and available evidence; and (b) on the basis of that assessment, the authority is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that significant harm is being caused (i.e. that it is more likely than not that such harm is being caused) by a significant contaminant(s). 4.5 The following health effect should always be considered to constitute significant harm to human health: death; life threatening diseases (e.g. cancers); other diseases likely to have serious impacts on health; serious injury; birth defects; and impairment of reproductive functions.

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

4.6 Other health effects may be considered by the local authority to constitute significant harm. For example, a wide range of conditions may or may not constitute significant harm (alone or in combination) including: physical injury; gastrointestinal disturbances; respiratory tract effects; cardio-vascular effects; central nervous systems effects; skin ailments; effects on organs such as the liver or kidneys; or a wide range of other health impacts. In deciding whether or not a particular form of harm is significant harm, the local authority should consider the seriousness of the harm in question: including the impact on the health, and quality of life, of any person suffering the harm; and the scale of the harm. The authority should only conclude that harm is significant if it considers that treating the land as contaminated land would be in accordance with the broad objectives of the regime as described in Section 1.” 47.

“[T]he decision [to identify land as contaminated land] is a positive legal test, meaning that the starting assumption should be that land does not pose a significant possibility of significant harm unless there is a reason to consider otherwise” and a “strong case” is required before the statutory scheme is invoked (para 4.25).

48.

It is the “sole responsibility” of the local authority to determine whether any land appears to be contaminated land (para 5.5).

49.

In terms of risk assessment (para 3.32): “there is unlikely to be any single “correct” conclusion on precisely what is the level of risk posed by land, and it is possible that different suitably qualified people could come to different conclusions when presented with the same information. It is for the local authority to use its judgement for form a reasonable view of what it considers the risks to be on the basis of a robust assessment of the available evidence in line with this Guidance.”

Grounds of Challenge 50.

There are five Grounds of Challenge which, to some degree, have varied over the course of the case. The summary below is taken from the Claimant’s Skeleton Argument: Ground One: The Defendant’s approach to the question of whether the "reasonable likely future uses of the land that would not require a new or amended grant of planning permission" would involve the public accessing the Site (per Guidance section 3.5) was unlawful (in condoning breaches of planning control and unlawfully taking into account temporary uses of the land which are not within the bounds of current planning permission). Ground Two: The Defendant unlawfully failed to consider whether there were health effects which may be considered to constitute significant harm under paragraph 4.6 of the Guidance (e.g., respiratory tract effects), and instead limited its assessment to health effects that are always to be considered as causing significant harm (per paragraph 4.5 of the Guidance).

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

Ground Three: The Defendant’s conclusion as to the risk of significant harm to human health: (a) Was based on a misdirection that the off-site pollution impacts of on-site fires were not a potential “contaminant linkage” for the purposes of paragraph 3.8 of the Guidance; and (b) Had no sufficient evidential basis and was anyway not logically based on the evidence before the Defendant (contrary to paragraph 3.4 of the Guidance). Ground Four: The Defendant unlawfully failed to assess risks to nonhuman receptors, contrary to Table 2 of the Guidance. Ground Five: Rather than seeking out the required evidence as mandated by paragraph 3.4 of the Guidance, the Defendant designated the Site as not contaminated and thus unlawfully: (a) Failed to adopt a staged approach to risk assessment (Guidance Section 3.12), and/or (b) Failed to apply a precautionary approach (Guidance Sections 1.6, 4.25(a), 4.46(b)). Ground One 51.

Ground One is that the LA misdirected itself as to the proper meaning of “the current use of the land” in para 3.5 of the Guidance. Dr Wolfe submits that the LA was wrong to take into account “temporary uses of land” which were unlawful, in the sense of being in breach of planning control. He submits that the lawful use of the land was in accordance with the 2000 planning permission for community woodland. He submits that the LA has wrongly treated the current use of the land (presumably as a landfill site) as the relevant use for the purposes of determining whether the land is contaminated land.

52.

He submits that this approach is contrary to the principle set out in Gillick (Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1985] UKHL 7) because it authorises or approves unlawful conduct. He relies upon R (A) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] UKSC 37 at [38] and [41]: “38. In our view, Gillick sets out the test to be applied. It is best encapsulated in the formulation by Lord Scarman at p 182F (reading the word "permits" in the proper way as "sanction" or "positively approve") and by adapting Lord Templeman's words: does the policy in question authorise or approve unlawful conduct by those to whom it is directed? So far as the basis for intervention by a court is concerned, we respectfully consider that Lord Bridge and Lord Templeman were correct in their analysis that it is not a matter of rationality, but rather that the court will intervene when a public authority has, by issuing a policy, positively authorised or approved unlawful conduct by others. In that sort of case, it can be said that the public authority has acted unlawfully by undermining

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

the rule of law in a direct and unjustified way. In this limited but important sense, public authorities have a general duty not to induce violations of the law by others.” … “41. The test set out in Gillick is straightforward to apply. It calls for a comparison of what the relevant law requires and what a policy statement says regarding what a person should do. If the policy directs them to act in a way which contradicts the law it is unlawful. The courts are well placed to make a comparison of normative statements in the law and in the policy, as objectively construed. The test does not depend on a statistical analysis of the extent to which relevant actors might or might not fail to comply with their legal obligations: see also our judgment in BF (Eritrea).” 53.

In my view this argument is plainly and obviously wrong. The LA and the IP have made extensive submissions about the planning history and current situation on the Site, but I do not consider it necessary to go into this level of detail. In my view Dr Wolfe’s submission is contrary to both the plain intent of the EPA and the Guidance, but also common sense.

54.

The purpose of the EPA Part 2A is to deal with contaminated land that impacts, inter alia, on human health. When the Guidance refers to establishing the “current use” it is plainly concerned with the impact of contamination on that use. Whether the use is permanent or temporary may be relevant because it goes to the level of exposure for the human receptor. A future use may be relevant if it is “likely” because there may be a likely future impact.

55.

The EPA is not concerned with whether the use is lawful or not. If a use was unlawful and was likely to imminently cease, whether because the LA were taking action or because of police action, then that would be relevant. But that is because it goes to the likelihood of the use continuing, not because of the lawfulness or otherwise of the use. That issue is irrelevant to the mischief that the EPA Part 2A is dealing with.

56.

The illogicality of Ground One is made clear if the situation was reversed. If there was an unlawful use of the Site which meant people were living there, but there was no reasonable likelihood of that use ceasing promptly, then that unlawful use would in my view be “the current use” for the purposes of the Guidance and assessing whether the land was contaminated. To approach the issue differently would be to rob the EPA and the contaminated land regime of its purpose, namely to protect human health.

57.

The matters being considered in Gillick and Re A were in an entirely different context, and simply have no relevance to the interpretation of paragraph 3.5 of the Guidance here.

58.

I therefore dismiss this Ground.

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

Ground Three 59.

I deal with Ground Three(a) next because it raises a discrete issue of law as to the interpretation of the EPA and the Guidance. All the other Grounds turn on the evidence, and the information that the LA had before them.

60.

Ground Three has two limbs. Ground Three(a) is that the LA misdirected itself on what can amount to a “contaminant linkage” in para 3.8 of the Guidance. This is an issue as to the interpretation of the Guidance. Ground Three(b) is that the LA further misdirected itself on the application of the Guidance to the facts. I will deal with Ground 3(b) separately because it involves a detailed consideration of the evidence before the LA when it made its decision.

61.

Para 3.8 of the Guidance requires a contaminant linkage, with a “contaminant-pathwayreceptor”. It states: “for a risk to exist there must be contaminants present in, on or under the land in a form and quantity that poses a hazard, and one or more pathways by which they might significantly harm people, the environment, or property…”.

62.

In my view there was very considerable confusion both within the LA, and in Mr Lewis’ submissions, in relation to whether impacts on human health from the smoke emanating from the Site could lead to the land being designated as contaminated land.

63.

Mr Richardson in his witness statement at [26] says: “The Environmental Protection Act 1990 is clear that smoke nuisance, caused by combustion, is dealt with through the Statutory Nuisance regime”. At [40] he says: “However it should be reiterated here that an impact on air quality is not a defined means of declaring contaminated land, and no models or authoritative or scientific methods have been approved by DEFRA, the EA, or other authoritative body to determine this (para 3.4) [in is witness statement he referred to para 4.32 but Mr Lewis said that was a mistake] of the Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance).”

64.

It appears from this witness statement that Mr Richardson’s approach was that impacts of smoke emanating from the Site could not give rise to a finding of contaminated land because there was no relevant pathway or linkage that fell within the meaning of the Guidance.

65.

The same approach is taken in the decision, albeit perhaps less clearly. The focus in para 2 is on skin contact, eating vegetables on the Site, or contamination of watercourses. Para 3 refers to inhalation by someone “directly on the Site”. Para 5 says there is no evidence to suggest that the “fires significantly spread contaminants to neighbouring properties”. This directly raises the evidential issue as to what the air quality monitoring showed, but also appears to be focusing on “contaminants” in the sense of asbestos or specific chemical compounds, rather than the impact of the smoke itself through the spread of particulates.

66.

Dr Wolfe submits, and I agree, that the LA certainly at the date of the decision, had drawn a distinction between “contaminants” on the Site and the impact of smoke coming from the Site. The view Mr Richardson took was that if the smoke was causing impacts on human health, then that was a matter for the Statutory Nuisance regime and

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

not for Contaminated Land designation. That is further borne out by the chain of emails set out above. 67.

Dr Wolfe submits, and I agree, that this was a misdirection. The EPA and the Guidance do not, contrary to what Mr Richardson says, make clear that smoke “nuisance” from combustion should only be dealt with as a Statutory Nuisance. S.78A defines contaminated land as where “by reason of substances in, or under the land” … “significant harm is being caused or there is a significant possibility of such harm being caused”. Para 4.3 of the Guidance simply requires that the harm be “directly attributable to the effects of the contaminants”.

68.

Mr Lewis, when pressed, accepted that in principle fires on the Site, which cause harm to human health off the Site, would be capable of giving rise to a finding of contaminated land. He accepted that the “contaminants” on the Site would not need to be causing harm to human health before they went on fire. He submitted, correctly in my view, that there had to be a source-pathway- linkage, so the smoke would itself have to contain contaminants that posed a significant risk to human health.

69.

The most obvious example in my view is that of plastic bottles, which are not in themselves harmful, but if burnt in an unregulated manner could lead to smoke which could cause harm to health. Mr Lewis submitted that the LA’s decision was lawful because it rested on there being no finding that the fires were, or were likely, to be giving rise to smoke which did cause significant harm. The obvious problem with this submission is that the monitoring of the Site by TRL was limited in respect of the Summer 2023 fires. This is the subject of the other Grounds.

70.

Mr Lewis and Mr Hart placed heavy reliance on the fact that the Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment (“CLEA”) Guidance produced by the EA does not include a model for the transportation of contaminants by way of combustion. The CLEA Guidance is an assessment model, produced as non-statutory guidance. Importantly the first page of the document has a disclaimer in the following terms: “The CLEA Guidance can help suitably qualified assessors to estimate the risk that a child or adult may be exposed to a soil concentration on a given site over a long period of exposure that may be a cause for concern to human health. The CLEA Guidance does not cover other types of risk to humans, such as fire, suffocation or explosion, or short-term and acute exposures. Nor does it cover risks to the environment or the pollution of water.” [emphasis added]

71.

It may be that this model, and the reliance that Mr Richardson placed upon it, explains the LA’s misdirection under Ground Three(a). Mr Richardson in his witness statement at [25] says: “For clarity, for the land use model (as defined under CLEA) these pathway [sic] are through the oral route (via direct soil or dust ingestion, or via the consumption of home-grown produce or soil attached to homegrown produce); the dermal route (via direct contact with contaminated soil); or by the inhalation route via dust or vapour, either indoors or

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

outdoors. It does not include a model for the transportation of contaminants by way of combustion.” 72.

CLEA therefore does not purport to deal with smoke borne contamination, even though the LA now accepts that such contamination could lead to a finding that the land was contaminated.

73.

The CLEA model does not change the proper interpretation either of the Guidance or the statutory scheme, nor does it purport to do so. Indeed CLEA makes clear that it is not seeking to deal with risk from fires. It may be that soil exposure is the most common scenario where contaminated land issues arise, but that does not mean that contamination impacted through airborne linkages falls outside the definition.

74.

Mr Hart’s second argument is that Mr Richardson did consider airborne contamination, because he had considered the air quality monitoring carried out by TRL. I deal below with the factual position in respect of the TRL monitoring.

75.

However, in my view there was a misdirection by the LA, and by Mr Richardson in particular, as to whether airborne contamination, where the pathway was combustion (i.e. smoke from the fires) was capable of giving rise to the land being “contaminated land” within the Act and the Guidance. Considering the decision itself, as set out in the press release, and the course of the emails, Mr Richardson appears to have taken the approach that such airborne contamination did not fall within the scope of the Guidance.

76.

Mr Lewis now accepts that smoke can give rise to contaminated land, and in my view he is right to do so. There is nothing in the Guidance which excludes such an approach. Further, it analytically falls within the terms of para 3.8 of the Guidance where what is required is a contaminant, pathway and receptor. The contaminant here is the material on the Site. The pathway is combustion followed by airborne transmission of the particulates. It may be that the material is not harmful to human health in an inert state, but I can see no reason why the chemical reaction of combustion should be excluded as a pathway. It might often be the case that the material if dry and inert is harmless. But if, for example it becomes wet, a chemical reaction occurs and there is contamination of a watercourse. The position might be different if the fires were as a result of an intervening human action, but the evidence here is that these fires are occurring spontaneously in hot weather.

77.

I therefore conclude that the LA misdirected itself on the meaning of para 3.8 of the Guidance. Whether this error was material, or Mr Hart’s second line of resistance on the evidence, depends on the analysis of the evidence set out below.

The Other Grounds 78.

The other Grounds all turn on the degree to which the LA had information compliant with para 3.4 of the Guidance, i.e. that was “authoritative”, “relevant to the assessment of risks” and “appropriate to inform regulatory decisions”, and if they did not do so whether that rendered the decision unlawful.

79.

The outstanding Grounds are as follows:

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

Ground Two is that the LA erred in respect of para 3.6 of the Guidance on human health.

Ground Three(b) is that they did not have sufficient evidence to make the decision that the land was not “contaminated land” and thus the decision was premature.

Ground Four is that they did not properly assess risks to non-human receptors.

Ground Five is that they made a premature decision.

80.

All these Grounds turn on the information that the LA had and whether it was sufficient to meet the requirements of the Guidance, although Grounds Two and Four relate to information about specific risks.

81.

The data fell into three categories. There was the assessment of impacts on the land itself, carried out by GESL who focused on soil contamination; the assessment by TRL which primarily focused on airborne contamination emanating from the Site; and the air quality monitoring done by ERG at Imperial College on nitrogen dioxide and PM2.5 (a particular size of particulate matter).

82.

In the December 2023 GESL report as set out above, they expressly refer to the risk from smoke associated with the fires and say: “However, further consideration is required in relation to the SPR linkages associated with the fires on the site, both during fires and of any impacts following fires.”

83.

It is therefore clear that GESL were not assessing the impact of smoke as a potential pathway to contamination and were of the view that further work was required in respect of this impact.

84.

TRL submitted their interim report in April 2024. They were monitoring for airborne pollutants (as explained above) and the Executive Summary states: “nothing measured to date indicates that any recommended limits (annual mean thresholds) where they are available, are likely to be exceeded or give any cause for concern”. The central issue in respect of TRL, and the heart of Dr Wolfe’s case on the facts, is the level of monitoring that TRL carried out and whether it was reasonable for the LA to make a decision about contaminated land on the basis of that level of monitoring.

85.

The factual position, as established from the TRL report (Table 2) and from Mr Harding’s witness statement is as follows. The offsite monitoring started in May 2023 with one location at Spring Farm Park (LAL1). This location is to the west of the Site, adjacent to housing. A number of secondary sites (Tenax tubes) were installed in June 2023. The second full monitoring site, at Ingrebourne Golf Course (LAL2), was installed on 31 August 2023. Table 1 shows that in 2023 there were 15 fires, with 12 in August and one in September. It follows that the large majority of the fires were not recorded by the LAL2 site.

86.

Mr Harding says in his witness statement that this does not matter for the following reason:

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

“11. The measurements taken at the Spring Farm site (LAL1) (starting in May) and the other 7 secondary locations using Tenex tubes (starting in June) demonstrated that the measured levels of pollution were unlikely to constitute an exceedance of any air quality objectives. These measurements will have captured the effect of fires on the site that occurred during this period (summarised in Table 1 of the Interim Report). 12. It is unlikely that the lack of measurements from LAL2 during this period would have prevented the proper recording of the effect of any fires. This is because the recorded wind speed and direction data in Table 6 for the Spring Farm site (LAL1) also show that the average wind direction for June, July and August would have blown across the Launders Lane site (collecting any pollution) and towards the residential areas (i.e. Spring Farm Park, the neighbouring cemetery and local housing) and therefore also towards LAL1.” 87.

However, unfortunately, this statement fails to engage with the content of the TRL report. At Table 6 the wind speed and direction is set out. In respect of Spring Farm Park, the wind direction in June was indeed from the South East, so blowing across the Site towards the residential areas, but there were no fires in June. In July it was from the south, so not blowing towards the LAL1 monitor. Critically, in August, when most of the fires occurred, the wind direction was from the South/South West (as is the norm in the south of England), so blowing smoke away from the LAL1 monitor. Albeit the wind speed is “calm”. At this point there was no monitor to the east of the Site (i.e. LAL2 had not been installed until 31 August). Therefore, although Mr Harding’s witness statement may be linguistically correct, it fails to acknowledge the problem of no monitor being installed in the direction the smoke was actually blowing.

88.

I am extremely conscious that it is not for a judge of the Administrative Court to judge the facts. But this is a case where a detailed consideration of the report and the witness evidence shows that the true position is not as being presented by the witness.

89.

In my view that lack of monitoring of the impacts of fires at LAL2 during the time when most fires occurred, i.e. for the majority of August 2023 fatally undermined reliance on the TRL data for the conclusion that there was no material impact on the residents from the fires, which could give rise to a finding of contaminated land. At the date the decision was made, i.e. April 2024, the LA did not have the necessary data upon which they could reach a conclusion in line with the Guidance. They did not have data which covered the main period of the fires together with appropriate monitoring at the correct locations.

90.

The Guidance at para 3.4 is very precise about what information is required in order for a proper decision to be made: “3.4 Risk assessments should be based on information which is: (a) scientifically-based; (b) authoritative; (c) relevant to the assessment of risks arising from the presence of contaminants in soil; and (d) appropriate to inform regulatory decisions in accordance with Part 2A and this Guidance.”

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

91.

For this reason, in my view Grounds 3(b) and 5 are made out. The LA appear to have believed that they had sufficient data because they had the TRL monitoring, but they simply do not appear to have appreciated that a critical part of that monitoring only started after the vast majority of the fires in 2023 had already taken place.

92.

For this reason also, Mr Hart’s second ground of defence to Ground 3(a) must fail. The LA did not have the necessary material in respect of the impact from smoke to have properly taken that into account in reaching the Decision.

93.

Ground Two is that the LA failed to consider whether there were health effects which may be considered to constitute significant harm. In other words, it is accepted the LA considered health effects such as cancer which would always cause significant harm, but Dr Wolfe says they failed to consider other health effects which might cause harm, such as respiratory tract effects. He says this is required by para 4.5-4.6 of the Guidance.

94.

Mr Lewis submits that the LA is not under a duty to consider every possible health effect, it must be satisfied that the health effect is sufficiently significant as to potentially justify designation as contaminated land. Therefore para 4.6 does not create a mandatory material consideration but rather identifies matters which the LA may take into account.

95.

Further he submits that the LA has taken into account particular substances of concern through the TRL work.

96.

I agree with Mr Lewis’ interpretation of para 4.5-4.6 of the Guidance. There is a clear distinction in the language of the Guidance between para 4.5 which is mandatory, and para 4.6 which gives the LA a discretion. For the not necessarily significant health effects it must be for the LA to decide whether there is sufficient material for them to be taken into account on a particular case.

97.

Ground Four is that the LA failed to take into account the effect of contaminants on “non-human receptors” and, in particular, impacts on local schools or the devaluation of properties. Dr Wolfe refers to Table 2 of the Guidance which provides that the Defendant “should regard substantial damage or substantial interference as occurring when any part of the building ceases to be capable of being used for the purpose for which it is or was intended”.

98.

However, the Defendant failed to assess whether impacts on properties surrounding the Site (specifically school buildings and businesses) amounted to a substantial interference, as required by Table 2 of the Guidance.

99.

Mr Brett points out that the threshold for the existence of a property impact in Table 2 is that the building or any part of it becomes incapable of being used for the purpose for which it was intended by reason of a contaminant linkage. The contaminated land scheme is not intended to deal with impacts on amenity, which is in substance what Dr Wolfe is complaining about.

100.

In any event there is no evidence as to devaluation of property which could possibly have made it a legal duty for the LA to take this into account.

Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.

AC-2024-LON-003340 Clear the Air v LB of Havering

101.

Further, the LA plainly did have regard to the effect of fires on the use of schools and properties, but there was no evidence to suggest that they were incapable of use.

102.

I agree with Mr Brett on these points. There was insufficient evidence to suggest that the impacts of the fires led to buildings being incapable of use, or that the properties had been devalued. There was no mandatory duty on the LA to consider these matters further in the light of the material before them.

103.

For these reasons I find Grounds Three and Five made out, and reject Grounds One, Two and Four.

104.

The LA and the IP both rely on s.31(2A) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 on the ground that it is highly likely that the decision would be the same if it was re-made. I have had regard to the Court of Appeal decision in R (Bradbury) v Brecon Beacons National Park [2025] EWCA Civ 489 and the need to focus on the impact of the error on the decision-making process.

105.

I do not consider this is an appropriate case to apply s.31(2A). Although there has been further monitoring which Mr Lewis submits does not show any significant risk to human health from fires, I am concerned that the LA appear to have been very confused about the correct legal approach to this site through the decision making process. The error under Ground Three(a) is one of approach, and the misunderstanding about what monitoring had been undertaken in what circumstances does not give the Court confidence in the clarity of the LA’s consideration. This is combined with the position of the IP which in its appeal against the Abatement Notice was that the Site was “contaminated”, but without any clarity as to what that meant and what they were conceding.

106.

In my view it is important that the LA reconsider the decision in the light of the proper legal analysis and all the up to date data that has been collected. It does not appear to me to be at all obvious that the decision would necessarily be the same.

107.

It would however not be appropriate for me to determine that the land is contaminated and make any declaration to that effect. That is not a matter for the Court and is a decision for the LA on the up to date material. Therefore the IP’s submissions that there are alternative solutions before designation is not a matter for the Court, but rather the LA.

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 3 TRL LIMITED. MARCH 2025. FINAL REPORT ENTITLED "LAUNDERS LANE AIR QUALITY MONITORING REPORT MAY 2023 – SEPTEMBER 2024"

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

Launders Lane AQ report

Launders Lane Air Quality Monitoring report May 2023 – September 2024 Prepared for: Havering Borough Council March 2025

Launders Lane AQ report

TRL Project Reference

Launders Lane (ISTAQ001-047)

Client

Havering Borough Council

Title

Launders Lane Air Quality Monitoring Report (March 2025)

Type of document

Final report

Authors

TRL Limited

Lead contact

Charlie Harding (charding@trl.co.uk)

Executive Summary This report summarises the air quality monitoring undertaken by TRL Limited around the Launders Lane site in Havering, covering May 2023 to the end of September 2024. The aim of this project is to understand the potential levels of airborne pollution associated with the uncontrolled burning of materials at Launders Lane, and to get an idea of the ambient levels of airborne pollution without any fires for comparison. The pollutants being monitored have been Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Heavy Metals (Mercury and Lead). Wind speed and direction have also been recorded. The findings of this report demonstrate that, based on annual averages there are no exceedances of UK or World Health Organisation (WHO) thresholds, (where they are available). For the compounds with no thresholds, comparisons have been made with similar historical data sets, again, showing much lower levels. Due to the consistently low measured levels through two summers, it is our recommendation that no further monitoring of these compounds is required.

Acknowledgements This report has been developed by the TRL team with support from Havering Public Health, UKHSA Health Protection team, UKHSA Radiation Chemical and Environmental (RCE) hazards team and a local resident and Representative of Rainham Against Pollution (RAP) and has been reviewed by the Launders Lane Technical sub group ( https://www.havering.gov.uk/info/20073/public_health/895/response_to_fires_at_arnolds_fiel d_launders_lane)

Issue Status

Author(s)

Reviewed By

Approved By

Issue date

Draft

C Harding & A Hewitt TRL Ltd

R Gardner, TRL Ltd

Ebony Kaye TRL LTD

xx-12-2024

Final

C Harding & A Hewitt TRL Ltd

R Gardner, TRL Ltd

Ebony Kaye TRL LTD

06-03-2025

Disclaimer This report has been produced by TRL Limited (TRL) under a contract with Havering Borough CouncilHavering Borough Council. Any views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of Havering Borough CouncilHavering Borough Council.

Launders Lane AQ report

The information contained herein is the property of TRL Limited and does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the customer for whom this report was prepared. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that the matter presented in this report is relevant, accurate and up-to-date, TRL Limited cannot accept any liability for any error or omission, or reliance on part or all of the content in another context.

Contents Monitoring Objectives and Background

Background

Glossary of terms used in this report

iii

Monitoring Details, Locations and Timeline

1.1

Details

1.2

Locations

1.3

Timeline

Monitoring Results - PAHs

2.1

Results

2.2

Discussion

Monitoring Results - PCBs

3.1

Results

3.2

Discussion

Monitoring Results - Metals

4.1

Results

4.2

Discussion

Monitoring Results - VOCs

5.1

Results

5.2

Discussion

Monitoring results - Wind Speed and Direction

6.1

Results

6.2

Discussion

Monitoring conclusions

Appendix A.

Additional supporting documentation.

38 40

Launders Lane AQ report

A.1

PAH Descriptions

A.2

PCBs

A.3

Metals

A.4

VOC

A.5

Wind roses

Appendix B.

Raw Data

B.1

VOC data

B.2

PCBs data

B.3

Metals data

B.4

PAH data

Launders Lane AQ report

Monitoring Objectives and Background TRL has been commissioned by the London Borough of Havering to undertake air quality monitoring in and around the Launders Lane area, Rainham. The aim of this project is to understand the potential levels of airborne pollution associated with the uncontrolled burning of materials at Launders Lane, and to get an idea of the ambient/background levels without any fires. TRL is an independent research organisation, with many years of experience monitoring commercial and large residential fires. The techniques used at this site match those used by the Environment Agency and the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA, formerly Public Health England) in similar scenarios. TRL’s monitoring forms part of a wider package of works to understand the potential impact of the fires, and what is being emitted from the site and contributing to the odour. This TRL report, covers the complete monitoring project from May 2023 through to September 2024. It is one of several being produced to summarise the monitoring and investigations that are being undertaken at the site by organisations including Imperial College London, the London Fire Brigade Service and specialist soil sampling and asbestos consultants.

Background Waste has been deposited in Arnolds Field on Launders Lane without the appropriate authorisation; since 2000, there has been significant volumes of waste deposited at the site. No information on waste depth is available, however it is known that it can be up to 5 metres deep in places. There are no clear records of the specific type of waste that has been deposited at the site; however, it is known to include household, commercial / industrial (including wood, paper, glass, plastic, mattresses, furniture, cables, and fabric materials) and construction waste deposits. In 2012 a limited site investigation identified elevated levels of lead and benzo[a]pyrene in the soil. Lead is a metal and a persistent contaminant, which can remain in the environment because of historical usage1 related to old lead-based paint dust and contaminated soil for example. Benzo[a]pyrene is a type of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon that is formed when organic materials (such as coal, oil, tobacco, and wood) are burned. The decomposition of organic waste combined with the presence of combustible types of waste, like plastic and overgrown grass, is thought to have contributed to fires over the last 6 years. Table 1 shows the number of days on which London Fire Brigade (LFB) responded to fires at the Launders Lane site since 2018. Some of these may include multiple days for the same fire, or one day covering multiple smaller fires. It should be noted that 2022 was the UK’s warmest year on record, with a spell of heatwaves resulting in the UK experiencing its fourth warmest summer on record2, so the risk of fire was greater.

https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/lead

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/news-and-media/media-centre/weather-and-climatenews/2022/2022-provisionally-warmest-year-on-record-for-uk

Launders Lane AQ report

Year

Jan

Feb

Mar

April

May

June

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

2018 2019

2020

2021 2022

1 4

2023 2024

Dec

Total

11 13 4

Table 1: Summary of the number of days with fires occurring at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane that required attendance by the London Fire Brigade (LFB) from 2018-2024

Launders Lane AQ report

Glossary of terms used in this report The definitions provided below are from a variety of sources including the UK Air Defra government website and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Ambient air – The air (or concentration of a pollutant) that occurs at a particular time and place outside of built structures. This is often used interchangeably with “outdoor air”. Annual mean - The annual mean is the average concentration of a pollutant measured over one year. This is normally for a calendar year, but some species are reported for the period April to March, which is known as a pollution year. This period avoids splitting a winter season between two years, which is useful for pollutants that have higher concentrations during the winter months. Deposition - Deposition occurs when compounds of various types of air pollution are deposited on the earth's surface through rain, clouds, snow, fog, or as dry particles. The amount of deposition received in a given area is affected both by the concentration of pollution in the atmosphere and the way in which it is deposited. General factors such as, meteorology and topography influence how much pollution reaches the area from both local and distant sources, as well as how much of that pollution actually impacts the earth's surface via the various wet and dry forms of deposition3 EEA – This is the European Environment Agency (EEA)4. Hydrocarbons - Hydrocarbons are compounds containing various combinations of hydrogen and carbon atoms. They are emitted into the air by natural sources (e.g. trees) and as a result of fossil and vegetative fuel combustion, fuel volatilization, and solvent use. Hydrocarbons are a major contributor to smog. Mercury – Organic mercury compounds, primarily methylmercury, are mainly found in fish. Inorganic mercury refers to compounds that are formed by combining mercury with another element such as oxygen or chlorine. Elemental mercury is liquid at room temperature and is used in barometers and thermometers for example. Each form of mercury has distinct health effects. PAHs - Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) belong to a large group of organic compounds, several of which have been shown to be carcinogenic. The UK Expert Panel on Air Quality Standards (EPAQS) (now merged into the Department of Health's Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants (COMEAP)) recommended a standard for PAHs of 0.25 ng/m3 (annual mean), using Benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P) as a marker compound. PCBs – Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)5 are a group of man-made organic chemicals consisting of carbon, hydrogen and chlorine atoms; they have no known taste or smell, and range in consistency from an oil to a waxy solid. In the USA, PCBs were domestically manufactured from 1929 until manufacturing was banned in 1979. Due to their nonflammability, chemical stability, high boiling point and electrical insulating properties, PCBs were used in hundreds of industrial and commercial applications. TENAX - TENAX tubes are small metal tubes which are clipped to lampposts and absorb pollution passively (without a pump or the need for power)

https://www.fs.usda.gov/air/deposition.htm

https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/institutions-and-bodies/search-all-euinstitutions-and-bodies/european-environment-agency-eea_en 5

https://www.epa.gov/pcbs iii

Launders Lane AQ report

B-TEX – A commonly measured group of pollutants with the use of TENAX tubes, and incorporates, Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene. Heavy Metals - Heavy metals are metallic elements that have a relatively high density and can be toxic or harmful to organisms at low concentrations due to their accumulation in biological systems. Some common heavy metals include lead, mercury, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and nickel. These metals are naturally occurring in the Earth's crust but can become concentrated in the environment through human activities such as industrial processes, mining, and the use of certain products like batteries, paints, and pesticides6. VOCs - Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)7 are compounds that have a high vapour pressure and low water solubility. Many VOCs are human-made chemicals that are used and produced in the manufacture of paints, pharmaceuticals, and refrigerants. VOCs typically are industrial solvents, such as trichloroethylene; fuel oxygenates, such as methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE); or by-products produced by chlorination in water treatment, such as chloroform. VOCs are often components of petroleum fuels, hydraulic fluids, paint thinners, and dry-cleaning agents. VOCs are common ground-water contaminants. WHO – The World Health Organization (WHO) is an organization of 194 Member States. The Member States elect the Director-General, who leads the organization in achieving its global health goals. The WHO coordinates the world’s response to health emergencies, promotes well-being, prevents disease, and expands access to health care8. Units of measurement – SI prefixes such as micro or nano form decimal multiples of SI units such a kilogram9. In relation to this report, a nanogram (ng) equals 10-9 of a gram and a microgram (µg) equals 10-6 of a gram. Decimal number

Name (Symbol)

Factor 100

1 0.1

deci (d)

10-1

0.01

centi (c)

10-2

0.001

milli (m)

10-3

0.000001

micro (µ)

10-6

0.000000001

nano (n)

10-9

Hazard, G. C., & Maurer, B. H. (Eds.). (2006). The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry: Heavy Metals in the Environment (Vol. 2). Springer Science & Business Media. 7

https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/what-are-volatile-organic-compounds-vocs

https://www.who.int/about/who-we-are

https://www.npl.co.uk/si-units iv

Launders Lane AQ report

Objectives The overarching objective of this air quality monitoring study is to ‘understand the potential impact of the fires at Launders Lane on air quality in the local area.’

Monitoring Details, Locations and Timeline

1.1

Details

Air quality monitoring has been undertaken to measure a range of airborne pollutants which are likely to be generated by the burning of waste material and have been detected at commercial fires previously monitored. These include: PAHs – Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (further details in Section 2 Monitoring Results PAHs). PCBs – Polychlorinated Biphenyls (further details in Section 3 Monitoring Results - PCBs). Metals – Lead and Mercury (further details in Section 4 Monitoring Results - Metals). VOCs – Volatile Organic Compounds (further details in Section 5 Monitoring Results - VOCs). The monitoring programme has been designed to collect detailed information on these pollutants while adding a level of source apportionment, which may help identify where they come from, to the findings.

1.2

Locations

Due to variations in wind speed and direction, it can be challenging to monitor a single potential source of pollution. To mitigate these variations this monitoring programme has been designed to collect data from various locations around the site while balancing the need for accuracy, detail, and the suitability of the monitoring location. The instruments providing the more detailed results require mains power, a good line of sight to the potential source of pollution and hard standing. Smaller passive devices are used to surround the area. The two Primary monitoring sites used by TRL are at Spring Farm Park (LAL1) and Ingrebourne Golf Course (LAL2) and allow for the collection of data for airborne heavy metals, PAHs, PCBs as well as wind speed and direction. (It should be noted that LAL2 is not at the exact same location as the commissioned node, although both are on the Golf Club site.) These primary monitoring systems draw sample air in via a size selective sample head and deposit airborne pollution onto a series of specialist filters. These filters are exchanged on a monthly basis for analysis. The results, supplied as a mass in grams, are combined with the volume of air that has passed through the filter to provide a mass per meter cubed value. The result is normally expressed as micro grams (a millionth of a gram) per meter cubed (µg/m3) or nano grams (one thousand-millionth of a gram) per cubic meter (ng/m3). The result represents a monthly average for that location. 1

Figure 1:Image of Spring Farm Park monitoring equipment.

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 1 shows the air quality equipment installation at Spring Farm Park (LAL1). In addition to the two primary sites, 7 secondary sites were selected to provide a geographical ring around the Launders Lane site to measure VOCs. TENAX tubes were deployed at each of these 7 locations plus the 2 primary locations. TENAX tubes are small metal tubes which are clipped to lampposts and absorb pollution passively (without a pump or the need for power); they are collected every 4 weeks and sent for analysis. As with the primary site filters, the results are expressed in a µg/m3 value for the month. For this project, the 10 VOCs identified with the highest µg/m3 readings are being measured and reported each month. An additional TENAX tube (LAL7) is used as a control device and is analysed in the same way but not exposed to the environment. For some of the pollutants being measured there are instruments that can provide real time minute by minute readings, which might have provided further insight. These were considered early in the planning phase but were discounted due to their required infrastructure, disproportionate cost, and potential uncertainties over the quality of the results. In the methodology used, all sample analysis was undertaken by a UKAS accredited laboratory, a level of governance and quality not yet available in real time analysers. When selecting locations for the monitoring, a number of criteria had to be met, including distance to residential areas and local businesses, access to power (for the primary sites), other potential sources of pollution, accessibility, and topography. The map below, Figure 2, shows the monitoring locations.

Map made with QGIS © TRL 2024

Figure 2: Location map of the 9 chosen monitoring locations around the Launders Lane (LAL) fire site

1.3

Timeline

Due to the nature of the project, availability of equipment, and required permissions, not all monitoring could be started at the same time. The timeline in Table 2 below outlines the start 2

Launders Lane AQ report

dates for each location and continued monitoring with each ‘X’ representing a month’s monitoring either completed or in progress. Due to a supply issue the TENAX tube data for November was not collected.

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan 24

Feb

March

Apr

May/June

June/July

July/Aug

Aug/Sept

Secondary sites / TENAX tubes

July

Spring Farm Park (LAL1)

June

Month/ Location

May 23

Table 2: Monitoring schedule and progress to August 2024

n/ X a*

Ingrebourne Golf Course (LAL2)

*No data collected due to supply chain issues

Table 3: Monitoring periods, reporting months and corresponding London Fire Brigade (LFB) attendance days.

Sample period

Month

LFB days of attendance

18th May - 22nd June 2023

June 23

22nd June – 28th July

July 23

28th July – 31st August

August 23

31st August – 5th October

September 23

5th October – 8th November

October 23

8th November – 6th December

November 23

6th December – 5th January 2024

December 23

5th January 2024 – 6th February 2024

January 24

6th February 2024 – 8th March 2024

February 24

8th March 2024 – 3rd April 2024

March 24

Launders Lane AQ report

3rd April 2024 – 1st May 2024

April 24

1st May 2024 – 18th June 2024

May / June 24

18th June 2024 – 23rd July 2024

June / July 24

23rd July 2024 – 22nd August 2024

July / August 24

22nd August 2024 – 3rd October 2024

August / September 24

During the project, 12 out of the 140 TENAX tubes (equivalent to 9%) deployed have gone missing from site; this is common and is likely to be due to theft, high winds or wildlife. The analysis of samples takes 4-6 weeks following the collection from site. This data is then processed in-house and collated.

Launders Lane AQ report

Monitoring Results - PAHs Background

Reasons for monitoring PAHs: Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) are being monitored because current scientific evidence10 suggests that the PAHs in ambient air are associated with increased rates of cancer. It is also indicated that long-term exposure to PAHs can have an adverse effect on lung function, exacerbate asthma, and increase rates of obstructive lung diseases, skin irritation, weakened immune system and cardiovascular diseases. In addition, in children it might impact cognitive or behavioural function. PAHs are a large group/class of organic compounds containing only carbon and hydrogen11 and are classified as persistent organic pollutants formed during the incomplete combustion of organic materials. The most well-known and described mixture of PAHs is Benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P) which has been identified as a human carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and has been determined to be a suitable ‘marker’ for the PAH mixture in ambient air. Consequently, monitoring the levels of B[a]P in the environment serves as an effective way to assess the overall presence of PAHs. Potential sources: PAHs are widespread in the environment and are common byproducts of combustion (burning) processes; they are also a natural constituent of most fossil fuels12. The majority of PAHs in ambient air13 are a result of man-made processes, although they are also produced naturally as a result of forest fires and volcanoes for example. Man-made processes that result in the production of PAHs include: • • •

burning fuels for industrial processes such as coal, wood, petroleum, petroleum products, or oil, (via domestic heating and cooking for example), and vehicle emissions burning refuse, agricultural waste, used tyres, polypropylene, or polystyrene, and tobacco burning

Once PAHs are in the atmosphere, the weight of the molecule dictates their final destination; heavier PAH mixtures tend to become solid while lighter mixtures remain in a gaseous state until removed via precipitation (rainfall). They can be absorbed by plants and accumulate in soil. Human exposure to PAHs may occur from inhalation, dermal (skin) exposure or the ingestion of food or drink contaminated with PAHs.

https://www.who.int/europe/publications/i/item/9789289056533#:~:text=Epidemiological%20studies%2 0have%20shown%20that,or%20behavioural%20function%20in%20children. 11

https://www.snexplores.org/article/explainer-chemistry-organic-carbon

https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/polycyclic-aromatichydrocarbons/where_are_pahs_found.html#:~:text=PAHs%20can%20be%20absorbed%20by%20plan ts%20and%20can%20accumulate%20in%20soil.&text=Cigarette%20smoke%20contains%20many%2 0PAHs,are%20additional%20sources%20of%20PAHs.&text=Benzo(a)pyrene%2C%20a%20potent%2 0carcinogen%2C%20is%20generally,an%20environmental%20indicator%20for%20PAHs 13

Please see glossary of terms for definition. 5

Launders Lane AQ report

Existing limits: In the UK, ambient (outdoor) air quality is regulated by the Air Quality Standards Regulations (AQSR). These Air Quality Standards Regulations set a ‘Target Value’ that relates to PAH as the annual mean concentration of B[a]P which is set at 1 ng/m3. Target values are not legally binding, but the UK Government must take all necessary measures not entailing disproportionate costs to meet them. In addition, the UK National Air Quality objective for PAH14 is an annual mean of 0.25 ng/m3 of B[a]P in ambient air published in the UK Air Quality Strategy. In 1999, the UK Expert Panel on Air Quality Standards issued a report (EPAQS, 1999) recommending an air quality standard for B[a]P in air of 0.25 ng/m3 as an annual average concentration and judged that the attainment of this would make the risk to human health from inhalation of PAH insignificant and was included in the 2007 Air Quality Strategy15 document which was however superseded in England only by the 2023 Air Quality Strategy: framework for local authority delivery16, when the target was removed. The UK PAH Monitoring and Analysis Network provides data that can be compared to the target value and level recommended by the Expert Panel on Air Quality Standards (EPAQS) 0.25 ng/m3 with concentrations measured at a network of sites around the UK17. By the end of 2022 there were 34 ambient air sampling sites in the network, and two deposition samplers. Most of the sampling locations in the network are urban background, but also includes urban industrial, rural background and a single site that is urban traffic. In 202218, the AQSR target value for B[a]P (annual mean concentration of 1 ng/m3) was not exceeded at any of the network sites; however, nine sites exceeded the UK Air Quality Objective for B[a]P (annual mean concentration of 0.25 ng/m3), these were: • • • • • • • • •

Port Talbot Margam (industrial) Scunthorpe Town (industrial) Scunthorpe Low Santon (industrial) Royston (urban background) Swansea Cwm Level Park (urban background) Bristol St Paul’s (urban background) Derry Brandywell (Northern Ireland) Ballymena Ballykeel (Northern Ireland) Kilmakee Leisure Centre (Northern Ireland)

https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/networks/network-info?view=pah

Defra, 2007. The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (Volume 1). URL https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69336/pb12654airquality-strategy-vol1-070712.pdf 16

Defra, 2023. Policy paper. Air quality strategy: Framework for local authority delivery.

URL https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-air-quality-strategy-for-england/air-qualitystrategy-framework-for-local-authority-delivery 17

Figure 2-1: Map of UK PAH monitoring stations in 2022 https://ukair.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat09/2309281159_UK_PAH_Monitoring_and_Analysis_Ne twork_Annual_Report_2022.pdf 18

https://ukair.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat09/2309281159_UK_PAH_Monitoring_and_Analysis_Ne twork_Annual_Report_2022.pdf 6

Launders Lane AQ report

The average data capture of the operational sites in 2022, taking into account any closure or start dates, continued to be very high at 98% which is slightly higher than in 2021.

2.1

Results

The samples collected for PAH levels were analysed against a standard suite of 16 compounds; the full set of results can be found in Appendix A.1 PAH Descriptions. Of these 16 compounds, B[a]P has been examined further as an indicator compound, in line with common practice19. As mentioned in the Background text of this section (Section 2 Monitoring Results - PAHs), monitoring the levels of B[a]P in the environment serves as an effective way to assess the overall presence of PAHs.

2.1.1 Benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P) Benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P), a potent carcinogen, is commonly used as an environmental indicator for PAHs20 and has a national air quality objective associated with it. The reported levels of this compound at both locations are shown below in Figure 3. The national objective for B[a]P is as an annual mean value of 0.25 ng/m3. Compliance with this objective can be demonstrated via the data presented below comparing the National Objective and the LAL annual average figures. The annual average period from September 2023 when all of sites were fully commissioned through to August 2024. The calculated annual averages for B[a]Ps at LAL1 and LAL2 are 0.029ng/m3 and 0.023ng/m3 respectively, which are both below the annual mean target of 0.25 ng/m3

https://ukair.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat09/2309281159_UK_PAH_Monitoring_and_Analysis_Ne twork_Annual_Report_2022.pdf 20

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 3: Measured Benzo(a)pyrene levels at both primary Launders Lane (LAL) sites compared against the national objective limit (0.25ng/m3). B[a]P monitoring at LAL1 commenced in June 2023 and at LAL2 in September 2023

To provide further context to the measured values of B[a]P, data from two DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) operated PAH monitoring sites21 has been included in Figure 4 below. The two locations included are Marylebone Road in central London and Chilbolton Observatory in Stockbridge providing an urban and rural comparison. At the time of writing this report the 2024 comparison data is still at a provisional stage and only extends to June.

Figure 4: Comparison of measured Benzo(a)pyrene values at LAL1 and LAL2 with two other UK monitoring locations. LAL2 monitoring commenced in September 2023

https://ukair.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat09/2309281159_UK_PAH_Monitoring_and_Analysis_Ne twork_Annual_Report_2022.html 8

Launders Lane AQ report

2.2

Discussion

Figure 3 demonstrates compliance with the National annual mean objective through the 12 months of readings from October 2023 through to September 2024. This shows that the average readings for the period are around 10% of the UK Objective level of 0.25ng/3. Even in months when fires were active and increased levels can be seen, no exceedances of the objective were measured. Levels of B[a]P recorded at LAL1 and LAL2 were correlated against fires for the June/July and July/August periods of 2024 (see Table 3 for monitoring periods). This represented the highest total number of fires for the year (number of fires for the exact period monitored were 12 recorded days requiring LFB attendance). The levels measured were similar to the April 2024 period where there were no fires. Since monitoring began, measured levels of B[a]P at both sites have been similar. This implies that the levels of B[a]P measured have not been influenced by the presence of a fire. •

In January 2024 measured levels of B[a]P at LAL1 were higher than the comparison site data and LAL2. This does not coincide with any recorded fires at the Arnolds Field site and is likely to be an unrelated local event.

•

In order to understand how the Launders Lane B[a]P PAH data compares to other UK locations, Figure 4 shows LAL1 and LAL2 results compared to two other UK monitoring locations, Marylebone Road in central London and Chilbolton Observatory in the Oxfordshire countryside, these sites providing an urban and rural comparison. The Launders Lane data is consistently lower than the urban site and largely comparable to the countryside site.

•

The full set of PAH results for 16 compounds are plotted in Appendix A.1 PAH Descriptions for sites LAL1 and LAL2.

Launders Lane AQ report

Monitoring Results - PCBs Background

Reasons for monitoring PCBs: Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) are toxic pollutants which can cause serious health effects in humans22 and are classified as carcinogenic to humans by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)23. They are a group of man-made organic chemicals consisting of carbon, hydrogen and chlorine atoms; they have no known taste or smell, and range in consistency from an oil to a waxy solid. In the UK, the commercial production of PCBs began in 195424; their use was progressively restricted from the early 1970s. By the end of 1972 sales of PCBs for open applications were discontinued and sales of UK manufactured material ceased in 197725. Their use in production has been illegal in the UK since 198726. Potential sources: Due to their non-flammability, chemical stability, high boiling point and electrical insulating properties, in the past PCBs were used in hundreds of industrial and commercial applications including: • • • • • • • • • • • •

Electrical insulation and cooling of transformers, capacitors and other electrical equipment Electrical equipment including voltage regulators, switches, re-closers, bushings, and electromagnets Oil used in motors and hydraulic systems Fluorescent light ballasts Cable insulation Thermal insulation material including fiberglass, felt, foam, and cork. Adhesives and tapes Oil-based paint Caulking Plastics Carbonless copy paper Floor finish

PCBs tend to be found everywhere, with levels typically higher in urban areas compared to rural areas. As highlighted above, PCBs were widely used in industrial applications, including electrical equipment, insulation materials, and hydraulic systems. Consequently, urban areas tend to have higher concentrations of PCBs due to historical industrial activities, such as those described in the bullet points above as well as waste disposal, and urban runoff. The current atmospheric levels of PCBs found in the environment can be accounted for by the accidental release of products or materials containing PCBs, or they can be released

https://chm.pops.int/TheConvention/ThePOPs/The12InitialPOPs/tabid/296/Default.aspx

https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/polychlorinated-biphenyls/adverse_health.html

https://doi.org/10.1016/0269-7491(94)90079-5

https://www.energynetworks.org/assets/images/Resource%20library/Environment%20Briefing%2004 %20-%20Polychlorinated%20Biphenyls%20(PCBs).pdf 26

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5ed921cfd3bf7f46049120f9/RPC-4455_1_DEFRA_Removal_of_equipment_containing_polychlorinated_biphenyls__PCBs__by_2025.pdf 10

Launders Lane AQ report

from environmental reservoirs or stores such as oceans or soil, that are able to sequester (or store) them27. Existing limits: There is no UK National Objective for PCBs.

3.1

Results

A standard set of 12 PCBs have been measured, with each reported PCB BZ# figure relating directly to a specific chemical. Following checks with the Environment Agency, DEFRA, UKHSA and several other independent organisations we have confirmed that there are currently no routine measurements of these pollutants undertaken in the UK. Appropriate historical data has been identified in the form of the 2018 TOMPS report - 2109211254_TOMPS_report_2018.pdf (defra.gov.uk). Eight of the compounds measured in this report, match of those measured at Launders Lane for this project. Table 4 below summarises the eight compounds that can be directly compared between Launders Lane and the 2018 TOMPS report to provide some context for what is being measured locally.

PCB type

Measured at Launders Lane 2023

Historic PCB data TOMPS 2018

PCB BZ#77

PCB BZ#81

PCB BZ#105

PCB BZ#114

PCB BZ#118

PCB BZ#123

PCB BZ#126

PCB BZ#156

PCB BZ#157

PCB BZ#167

PCB BZ#169

PCB BZ#189

Table 4: Historic network PCB data and measured Launders Lane data compound comparison table

https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat09/2109211254_TOMPS_report_2018.pdf 11

Launders Lane AQ report

There is data for the 4 remaining compounds, not reported in the 2018 TOMPS report (#81, 77, 126 and 169) in Appendix A.2 PCBs. To identify periods where there were increased measured levels of PCBs in the air, the total of the eight chemicals have been plotted by month and location; this provides a clear comparison between the sites and highlights any trends or anomalies. This data is illustrated in Appendix A.2 PCBs. Figure 5 represents the combined total of the same eight compounds measured at Launders Lane, compared to the London annual average of the same compounds as measured in 2018 and reported in the TOMPS report. The London data set selected represents geographically the closest set of historical monitoring data and would have been subject to similar background influences. As a direct comparison the annual averages for LAL1 and LAL2 are 0.0011 ng/m3 and 0.0019 ng/m3 respectively, which is below the 2018 London average of 0.0073 ng/m3 (when calculated between October 23 to August 24).

Figure 5: Total of the 8 measured PCBs at the two primary LAL sites by month, with the 2018 London average line included for comparison (monitoring at LAL2 commenced in September 2023). Including annual averages.

Figure 6 to Figure 13 examine the eight individual PCBs and compares them against the most recent TOMPS report data available from 2018. For each of the comparable PCB measurements, the annual average values (October 2023 - September 2024) of the current LAL data sets are presented and compared against annual average data for London as reported in the 2018 TOMPS report.

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 6: PCB BZ#105, 2018 annual averages and Launders Lane Annual average.

Figure 7: PCB BZ#114, 2018 annual averages and Launders Lane Annual average. Note: Following investigation into the original 2018 data, the lowest limit of detection at the time was 0.02pg/m3, as the values measured historically were below this level they were documented as zero. The limit of detection has since been reduced, with advances in technology, providing more accurate readings.

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 8: PCB BZ#118, 2018 annual averages and Launders Lane Annual average.

Figure 9: PCB BZ#123, 2018 annual averages and Launders Lane Annual average.

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 10: PCB BZ#156, 2018 annual averages and Launders Lane Annual average.

Figure 11: PCB BZ#157, 2018 annual averages and Launders Lane Annual average.

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 12: PCB BZ#167, 2018 annual averages and Launders Lane Annual average.

Figure 13: PCB BZ#189, 2018 annual averages and Launders Lane Annual average.

Further comparison and trend plots can be found in Appendix A.2 PCBs.

3.2

Discussion

It has been confirmed by the Environment Agency and others that there is no current routine monitoring of PCBs in the UK. For the reported measurements from Launders Lane an annual average has been calculated for October 2023 to September 2024. This average figure has been compared to an annual average for other UK sites (2018 data) and provides an indication of potential comparison between the two data sets. Due to the differences in time periods the conclusions should be treated as an indication and weighted as such. •

It can be seen from Figure 5 that all but one of the LAL1 and LAL2 results are below the 2018 TOMPS report London average.

•

The high levels measured at LAL2 (golf course) in July/August 2024 do correlate with fires at the Arnolds Field site but are not seen at LAL1 (Spring Farm Park). The average 16

Launders Lane AQ report

wind direction for this period is West / South-West, which aligns with the location of the Arnolds Field site and the LAL 2 monitoring station. The average wind direction combined with the low values measured at LAL1, is coherent with the potential source of the chemicals being the fires. This can be seen in Figure 14 below.

Figure 14 July/August 2024 wind rose over location map, depicting the direction and speed of wind for the monitoring period.

•

Looking at the data for individual PCBs, Figure 7 PCB BZ#114 indicates higher levels at LAL1 and LAL2 when compared to the historical data. Following investigation into the original 2018 data, the lowest limit of detection at the time was 0.02pg/m3, as the values measured historically were below this level they were documented as zero. The limit of detection has since been reduced, with advances in technology providing more accurate readings. If the same (2018) analytical techniques had been used on our current samples they would also have provided a zero reading.

•

The data recorded for the remaining seven PCBs (Figure 6 and Figure 8 to Figure 13) is consistently lower than the comparison sites in the 2018 TOMPS report.

•

Reviewing the fire information in Table 1 and Table 3 together with Figure 5 suggests that the September 2023 and July/August 2024 PCB levels are raised which coincides with recorded fires at Arnolds Field. With these occurrences incorporated into the annual average figure the overall reading remains well below the figures seen in London during 2018.

Launders Lane AQ report

Monitoring Results - Metals Background – Lead (Pb)

Reasons for monitoring Lead: Lead (Pb) can affect almost every organ and system in the body, with children and pregnant women being the most susceptible to the effects of lead. It is naturally occurring in the environment, in air, soil and water, but can also occur as a result of current and historic human activities including the use of fossil fuels and heavy industry. Leaded petrol (banned from sale in January 2000) continues to contribute to ambient air and soil levels of lead, especially in urban environments. Potential sources: Lead can enter the environment from historic use in paint, ceramics, pipes and plumbing materials, solders, petrol, batteries, ammunition and cosmetics. Existing limits available: In the UK28, the annual mean objective for lead in the air is 0.25µg/m3.

Background – Mercury (Hg) Reasons for monitoring Mercury: All forms of Mercury (Hg), which can be organic, inorganic or elemental, can affect the nervous system and kidneys. The health effects from exposure to mercury depend on several factors including the amount and form of mercury, route and length of exposure, and age29. Mercury is a persistent contaminant that does not break down in the environment; it seldom appears as a silver liquid in the environment. In water, it can evaporate into the air. In soil, it can stick to soil and sediments (dirt deposits at the bottom of bodies of water). One type of organic mercury compound called methylmercury can build up in plants and fish. Potential sources: Most people are exposed to organic mercury compounds (typically methylmercury) in food (such as fish, seafood, rice) or to elemental mercury from amalgam used in dental fillings. It is also used in a number of industries and products. It is primarily used in the manufacture of electronics, fluorescent-lighting, and production of chlorinecaustic soda. Other historical uses of mercury (batteries, thermometers and other scientific and medical devices, electronic switches and lighting applications, paints and pigments, fungicides and pesticides) have been eliminated or drastically reduced. Existing limits available: The World Health Organization (WHO) have established a healthbased air quality guideline for Europe for mercury of 1µg/m3 as an annual average30. There are currently no UK objectives for airborne mercury, however the Environment Agency published updated Environmental Assessment Levels (EAL) for mercury and its inorganic compounds31 in 2023 providing an EAL of 0.06µg/m3 averaged over a 24-hour period. The

https://laqm.defra.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/LAQM-TG22-August-22-v1.0.pdf

https://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxFAQs/ToxFAQsDetails.aspx?faqid=113&toxid=24#bookmark05

E71922.pdf (who.int)

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/air-emissions-risk-assessment-for-your-environmentalpermit#environmental-standards-for-air-emissions EAL for mercury in the 2nd phase consultation published in 2023. 18

Launders Lane AQ report

mercury data is recorded as a monthly average in this project, but this EAL may be a useful comparison.

4.1

Results

The results for both lead and mercury have been plotted by month and site.

4.1.1 Lead Figure 15 below shows the measured values of lead at each site, compared against the UK objective. A more detailed plot of lead levels can be found in Appendix A.3 Metals

Figure 15: Measured values of Lead at both LAL primary sites with annual mean objective line. Monitoring at LAL2 commenced in September 2023

4.1.2 Mercury There are currently no UK objectives for airborne mercury, however there is a WHO32 air quality guideline of 1µg/m3 as an annual average established for Europe which is appropriate to compare the Launders Lane data against. The graph below (Figure 16) shows the measured levels at the two Launders Lane sites to allow for comparison and the potential identification of trends.

E71922.pdf (who.int) 19

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 16: Measured values of Mercury at both LAL primary sites. Monitoring at LAL2 commenced in September 2023. (For context, the WHO European guideline annual average for Mercury is 1ug/m3)

4.2

Discussion

With 12 months of recorded data, we can make direct comparisons to the annual mean objectives. •

Lead - Figure 15 compares the LAL data against the annual mean objective and shows that there are no exceedances of the UK annual mean objective of 0.25µg/m3.

•

The February, March and April readings are slightly elevated due to a laboratory analysis variation, in these months the minimum limit of detection increased slightly leading to the higher reported readings.

•

Mercury - Figure 16 shows the LAL data shows no exceedances of the WHO European guideline annual average of 1ug/m3. Figure 16 also shows that the LAL data is lower than the Environmental Assessment Level (EAL) of 0.06µg/m3 for mercury and its inorganic compounds. It is likely that some days provided higher readings than others. The data collected is an accumulative reading for the total period i.e. one month. If at any time in that month a single reading was to exceed the EAL threshold, the monthly value would be in excess 0.06µg/m3 As an indication, the average 24-hour reading can be calculated by dividing the monthly total by the number of days covered by the sample. For example, looking at July 2023 data with a monthly level of approximately 0.002ug/m3 and assuming 30 days in a month, the value, averaged over a 24-hour period would be 0.002 ÷ 30 = 0.0006 ug/m3 which is a 100th of the EAL.

Launders Lane AQ report

Monitoring Results - VOCs Background

Reasons for monitoring these compounds – Non-Methane Volatile Organic Compounds (NMVOCs) are often referred to simply as VOCs and are emitted as gases from certain solids or liquids; they include a variety of chemicals, some of which may have short- and long-term adverse health effects. These33may include eye, nose and throat irritation, headaches, loss of coordination, nausea, damage to liver, kidney, central nervous system, and some have been found to cause cancer in animals and are suspected or known to cause cancer in humans. As with other pollutants, the extent and nature of the health effect will depend on many factors including level of exposure and length of time exposed. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has determined that the specific VOCs benzene and 1,3-butadiene are carcinogenic to humans. Details of the assessment of the carcinogenicity of these VOCs carried out by IARC can be found online.34 Potential sources both process and material - VOCs are emitted by a wide array of products including the following: • • • • • • • • • • • •

paints, paint strippers and other solvents wood preservatives aerosol sprays cleansers and disinfectants moth repellents (historically naphthalene was used in moth repellents, but this is no longer the case as the EEA banned the practice in 2008) and air fresheners stored fuels and automotive products hobby supplies dry-cleaned clothing pesticide building materials and furnishings office equipment such as copiers and printers, correction fluids and carbonless copy paper graphics and craft materials including glues and adhesives, permanent markers and photographic solutions.

Sources of VOCs in the UK have changed considerably since 1990 as illustrated in Appendix A.4.1 NAEI figure showing change in VOC emissions since 199035. Existing limits available - As of 2022, the European Union Ambient Air Quality Directive (2008/50/EC) sets limit values for certain VOCs in outdoor air. The VOCs in Table 5 are among those regulated.

https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/volatile-organic-compounds-impact-indoor-air-quality

https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/networks/network-info?view=hc

https://ukair.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat09/2309281151_UK_Hydrocarbons_Network_Annual_R eport_2022.html#fig-emission_plot 21

Launders Lane AQ report

For Benzene36, there is a UK running annual mean objective of 16.25 µg/m3 and an England and Wales annual average objective of 5 µg/m3. The England and Wales objective is the same as the European objective. Currently, there are no UK mean objectives for toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene. There are also recommended guidelines for VOCs indoors and details of these can be found in Appendix A.4.1 Recommended guidelines for VOCs indoors. Table 5: 2008/50/EC VOC annual mean objectives

5.1

Compound

Annual mean Objective (µg/m3)

Benzene (C6H6)

5 – UK / EU

Toluene (C7H8)

10 - EU

Ethylbenzene (C8H10)

5 - EU

Xylenes (C8H10)

10 - EU

Results

As listed above in Table 5 there are annual mean objectives for 4 of these compounds which act as indicators. A comparison based on the annual average (October 2023 - September 2024) for each of these 4 compounds at the 9 sites has shown that no objectives have been exceeded. There are no results for November 2023 due to technical issues. Due to a storage issue, the measurement tubes were subjected to high temperature prior to deployment. This has the potential to affect detection levels and accuracy of readings. The decision was made not to utilise the tubes. The lead time for replacement prevented timely replacement so the November monitoring of VOCs could not be undertaken. Figure 17 to Figure 20 below provide an indication of the current trends.

Air_Quality_Objectives_Update_20230403.pdf (defra.gov.uk) 22

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 17: Measured levels of Benzene compared to National annual objective

Figure 18: Measured levels of Toluene compared to National annual objective

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 19: Measured levels of Ethylbenzene compared to National annual objective.

Figure 20: Measured levels of Xylenes compared to National annual objective.

From the data shown above, annual averages were derived, and in Table 6 the results are shown for each of the four compounds at each monitoring location along with the objective value.

Launders Lane AQ report

Table 6: Comparison of measured VOC figures compared to Objective annual average values. Compound

UK /EU Objective

Location

ug/m3

LAL1

LAL2

LAL3

LAL4

LAL5

LAL6

LAL8

LAL9

LAL10

Benzene

5.00

0.06

0.13

0.06

0.00

0.08

0.06

0.00

0.15

0.00

Toluene

10.00

1.52

2.69

2.76

1.25

0.13

6.38

0.07

3.20

0.50

Ethylbenzene

5.00

0.00

1.83

0.00

1.16

Xylenes

10.00

0.80

0.77

0.81

0.15

0.13

7.75

1.60

0.00

1.70

For each of the nine locations being monitored for VOCs, the top ten compounds have been analysed and reported. This method allows for the identification of a much wider range of potentially harmful compounds that might not be seen in a smaller quantity or fixed compound analysis. Multiple compounds have been measured at all the locations, many of which do not have UK objectives. During the project, 97 different compounds have been measured. The raw VOC data is available in Appendix B. To provide a visual representation of the overall levels of VOCs and their locations, monthly maps have been produced with a sliding scale which relates to the total value of the measured mass of all compounds at each single location. The aim is to identify any hotspots or patterns in the data that might indicate where pollution from the fire is being blown to, or areas that might provide a background reference. For clarity, N/A on the key represents locations / months where no data is available. This can be due to loss or damage to a TENEX tube.

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 21: Total measured VOC levels by location for July 2023

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 22: Total measured VOC levels by location for August 2023

Figure 23: Total measured VOC levels by location for September 2023

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 24: Total measured VOC levels by location for October 2023

Figure 25: Due to a technical issue, no measurements were taken in November 2023

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 26: Total measured VOC levels by location for December 2023

Figure 27: Total measured VOC levels by location for January 2024

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 28: Total measured VOC levels by location for February 2024

Figure 29: Total measured VOC levels by location for March 2024

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 30: Total measured VOC levels by location for April 2024

Figure 31: Total measured VOC levels by location for May/June 2024

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 32: Total measured VOC levels by location for June/July 2024

Figure 33: Total measured VOC levels by location for July/August 2024

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 34: Total measured VOC levels by location for August/September 2024

Launders Lane AQ report

5.2

Discussion

Compliance with the annual mean objective is demonstrated in Figures 16-19 and Table 6, with no exceedances of the annual mean objectives being measured. These objectives are for the protection of human health, meaning that by not exceeding them the risk of adverse health effects is low. For the VOCs with an annual mean health-based objective: •

Benzene levels are below annual mean objective.

•

Ethylbenzene - There are five measured monthly values above annual average objective; LAL9 in July 2023, LAL4 in August 2023, LAL 6 in February 2024 and LAL10 in October 2023 and April 2024. While some of these do coincide with fires attended by LFB, others do not. The annual average figure does not exceed the UK objective.

•

Xylenes - There are three measured monthly values above annual average objective; LAL9 in July 2023 and LAL8 and LAL6 in February 2024. While the July 2023 readings do coincide with a fire attended by LFB, the annual figure does not exceed the UK objective.

•

For all compounds, it is worth noting that there were periods of smouldering/burning at the site when the LFB were not in attendance and would not have been reported. Some of the higher values were measured in the winter when fires are less likely to occur at the site, and so these readings may be associated with other localised burning. All these factors need to be considered when assessing any plausible links between fires at the site and compounds being measured.

Launders Lane AQ report

Monitoring results - Wind Speed and Direction Background

Reasons for monitoring – To understand a potential source of pollution it is essential to monitor wind direction and speed at the monitoring locations. For this project, wind speed and direction measurements were taken at both primary sites LAL1 and 2, at a height of approximately 2 meters. This height was selected as it will provide a more representative set of values for human exposure. There are two reasons for measuring wind speed and direction: 1) To determine in which direction any pollution from fires is likely to be dispersed and in turn who it may affect, and 2) It allows for analysis of the results with respect to up and downwind, i.e. where the wind is blowing predominantly from one direction, the measurement upwind of the Launders Lane site can be considered as background, while the measurements taken from downwind of the site will be the background levels plus any addition pollution from a fire. This approach does have limitations and can be affected by the placement of the measurement equipment and weather conditions, however through experience, careful planning and interpretation of findings, can provide robust and useful data.

6.1

Results

The two tables below represent the two primary locations, the wind speed and direction data from each site has been processed and interpreted. Further information can be found in Appendix A.5 Wind roses. Two wind directions are provided, the first is the average direction for the month in degrees and is derived from where the wind is blowing from (i.e. a Southerly wind would be blowing from Dartford). The second column provides an easy reference arrow, which when looking at a map can be overlaid to show how the wind would travel from the Launders Lane site. It is also important to consider the period when the wind speed is low, which may lead to pollution from a single point source, such as fire, lingering in the area and not being dispersed.

Launders Lane AQ report

Table 7: Wind speed and direction monitoring results for Spring Farm Park

Average measured wind LAL1 - Spring direction, Farm Park primary based on site. where the wind is blowing from. June - 23

July - 23

Average wind direction across the monitoring site.

134° – South/East 177° – South

Percentage of time where measured wind speed below 1 m/s *

Average wind speed for the period

Wind speed based on the Beaufort scale

17%

1.4 m/s

Light air

1.2 m/s

Light air

15%

0.6 m/s

Calm

39%

1.2 m/s

Light air

36%

1.3 m/s

Light Air

49%

1 m/s

Light Air

19%

2.2 m/s

Light Breeze

35%

1.6 m/s

Light Air

34%

1.6 m/s

Light Air

21%

2 m/s

Light Breeze

196° – August - 23

September - 23

October - 23

South South/ West 178° South 189° South 209°

November – 23

South South/ West 217°

December – 23

South/ West 207°

January – 24

February – 24

March – 24

South South/ West 185° South 180° South

Launders Lane AQ report

205° South South/ West

April – 24

May/June - 24

June/July - 24

July/August - 24

185° South 183° South 187° South

August/September 185° - 24 South

27%

1.7 m/s

Light Air

38%

1.1 m/s

Light Air

47%

0.8 m/s

Light Air

45%

1 m/s

Light Air

47%

1 m/s

Light Air

* Wind speeds below 1m/s can be considered as ‘no wind’, these periods would lead to a significant reduction in the dispersion of air borne pollution.

Table 8: Wind speed and direction monitoring results for the Golf Course

LAL2 - Golf Course primary site.

September - 23

Average measured wind direction, based on where the wind is blowing from.

Average wind direction across the monitoring site.

176° South

Percentage of time where measured wind speed below 1 m/s *

Average wind speed for the period

Wind speed based on the Beaufort scale

20%

2.1 m/s

Light breeze

15%

2.3 m/s

Light Breeze

15%

2.2 m/s

Light breeze

3 m/s

Gentle breeze

3.1 m/s

Gentle Breeze

10%

2.7 m/s

Light Breeze

195° October - 23

South South/ West 208°

November - 23

December - 23

South South/ West 231° South/ West 206°

January - 24

South South/ West 189°

February - 24

South South/ West

Launders Lane AQ report

193° March - 24

South South/ West

3 m/s

Gentle Breeze

3.3 m/s

Gentle Breeze

13%

2.2 m/s

Light Breeze

14%

2.1 m/s

Light Breeze

11%

2.4 m/s

Light Breeze

12%

2.3 m/s

Light Breeze

201° April - 24

South South/ West 184°

May/June - 24

South South/ West 197°

June/July - 24

South South/ West 202°

July/August - 24

South South/ West

August/September 175° - 24 South

* Wind speeds below 1m/s can be considered as ‘no wind’, these periods would lead to a significant reduction in the dispersion of air borne pollution.

6.2

Discussion

The data collected and reported here summarises the average wind speed and direction recorded at sites LAL1 and LAL2, as well as the percentage (%) of time when the wind speed was less than 1m/s when there is "no wind". This percentage is of interest as it gives an indication of periods when pollutants are staying very local to the Launders Lane site due to very low wind speed and not being dispersed across the area. This data set enables further investigation into exceedances, helping to identify patterns or relationships between the wind direction and the source of measured pollutants. As seen in Figure 14 (in the PCB section), wind speed and direction, along with LFB’s logs of fires can provide a clear plausible link between higher measured levels of pollutants and a potential source. As there were no exceedances of annual objectives or guidelines, no further analysis of the wind data has been undertaken.

Monitoring conclusions

This report has been prepared to summarise the air quality monitoring that has been undertaken by TRL at the Launders Lane site between August 2023 and September 2024. The main objective of this monitoring task was to gain an understanding of how the fires influence emissions from the Launders Lane site. The monitoring carried out at site has been robust, with high levels of data capture, correct sample handling and data processing. As of the end of September 2024, most measurements recorded at the TRL Launders Lane air quality monitoring locations are below any available national and WHO annual objectives.

Launders Lane AQ report

For some pollutants, several short term (monthly) readings do exceed objectives, discussed above. To demonstrate an exceedance, these values would have to average above the objective line over a 12-month period. By extending the monitoring period to include two summers and providing a full set of data for more than 12 months, it is seen that no exceedances of objectives have occurred. Some short term raised levels of pollutants do correlate to known fires at the Launders Lane site. The wind direction at the period also indicates that the fires are likely to be the source of the raised levels. As above these short periods do not exceed any national or WHO objectives once averaged out over a 12-month period. From the monitoring carried out and summarised in this report, it is likely that the emissions of some pollutants do increase during fires at the Launders Lane site. However, the increased levels do not exceed any National or WHO objectives, and therefore the risk of adverse health effects is low. Due to the findings outlined above we do not recommend the need for any further monitoring of these pollutants.

Launders Lane AQ report

Appendix A.

Additional supporting documentation.

This appendix provides additional information for: PAH Descriptions; PCBs; Metals; VOC; and Wind Roses. Raw data for the first four of these is provided in Appendix B.

A.1

PAH Descriptions

The full set of PAH results can be seen below. These graphs are used to identify anomalies and patterns in the measurements. The January 2024 reading presents as an outlier and does not align with any reported fires at the Arnolds Field site. Potential explanation could be due to New Year’s Eve fireworks, localised (garden fires), or a wider national event.

Figure 35: Measured PAH levels at LAL1 - Spring Farm Park

Launders Lane AQ report

The Ingrebourne Golf course site (LAL2) came online 3 months later than the Spring Farm Park site (LAL1).

Figure 36: Measured PAH levels at LAL2 – Ingrebourne Golf course, monitoring commenced in September 2023

Launders Lane AQ report

A.2

PCBs

The following two graphs show the measured values of the individual PCBs recorded at each site (one graph per location). Note: the scale on the vertical axis is logarithmic to help with the display of results.

Figure 37: Levels of individual PCBs recorded at LAL1 in 2023 and 2024 (this site came online in June 2023)

Figure 38: Levels of individual PCBs recorded at LAL2 in 2023 and 2024 (this site came online in Sept 2023)

Launders Lane AQ report

The 4 graphs below show the data from the 4 PCB compounds with no direct comparison to the DEFRA TOMPS network (See Section 3.1 Results).

Launders Lane AQ report

A.3

Metals

Levels of Lead recorded at LAL1 & LAL2: It should be noted that displayed levels for February, March and April 2024 are higher than expected due to a change in the minimum detection level at the laboratory.

Figure 39: Levels of Lead (Pb) recorded at LAL1 & LAL2 through the whole monitoring period.

Levels of Mercury recorded at LAL1 & LAL2: As with the lead readings, it should be noted that displayed levels for February, March and April 2024 are higher than expected due to a change in the minimum detection level at the laboratory.

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 40; Levels of Mercury (Hg) recorded at LAL1 and LAL2 through the whole monitoring period.

Launders Lane AQ report

A.4

VOC A.4.1 NAEI figure showing change in VOC emissions since 1990

The Figure below is Figure 1, copied from the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (NAEI) estimated NMVOCs emission from 199037 which illustrates how much sources of VOCs in the UK have changed since 1990.

A.4.2 Recommended guidelines for VOCs indoors Although not relevant to this project, as all monitoring is taking place outdoors at Launders Lane, the link to Indoor Air Quality Guidelines for selected Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in the UK is provided here for information. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5d7a2912ed915d522e4164a5/VO__statement _Final_12092019_CS__1_.pdf

https://ukair.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat09/2309281151_UK_Hydrocarbons_Network_Annual_R eport_2022.html#fig-emission_plot

Launders Lane AQ report

A.5

Wind roses

For each location, the wind speed (meters/second) and direction (degrees) are measured, 15minute averages are logged at site and transmitted remotely. The data is then converted into a wind rose (as below), each covering a given period, in this case one month. The individual segments represent the direction the wind blew from, and the colours denote the speed of the wind. For the first graphic LAL1 month 0, there are three prevalent sections, these align with directions, 1) South, 2) East and 3) North, North-East and demonstrate from which direction the wind was blowing from and is based on the percentage of the total readings taken. The highest wind speeds were from the South, as seen by the darkest outer segment. These wind roses were used to produce the results in Section 6 Monitoring results - Wind Speed and Direction. Due to the way wind roses are created they have been given a month number rather than name. The table below provides a refence.

Sample period

Month

Wind rose month number

18th May - 22nd June 2023

June 23

22nd June – 28th July

July 23

28th July – 31st August

August 23

31st August – 5th October

September 23

5th October – 8th November

October 23

8th November – 6th December

November 23

6th December – 5th January 2024

December 23

5th January 2024 – 6th February 2024

January 24

6th February 2024 – 8th March 2024

February 24

8th March 2024 – 3rd April 2024

March 24

3rd April 2024 – 1st May 2024

April 24

1st May 2024 – 18th June 2024

May / June 24

18th June 2024 – 23rd July 2024

June / July 24

23rd July 2024 – 22nd August 2024

July / August 24 13

22nd August 2024 – 3rd October 2024

August September 24

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 41: Wind roses for LAL1 – Launders Lane Spring Farm Park

Launders Lane AQ report

Figure 42: Wind roses for LAL2 – Launders Lane Ingrebourne Golf Course monitoring at his site only started in September 2023 / Month 3

Launders Lane AQ report

A.5.1 Beaufort wind scale As used in section 6 wind speed and direction, the Beaufort scale38 has been used to express wind conditions. Table 9 provides the correlation between the measured speeds, scale, and descriptions from the Beaufort Scale. Table 9: Beaufort wind scale

Beaufort wind scale

Mean wind speed (m/s)

Limits of wind speed (m/s)

Calm

1-2

Light air

2-3

Light breeze

4-5

Gentle breeze

6-8

Moderate breeze

9-11

Fresh breeze

11-14

Strong breeze

14-17

Near gale

17-21

Gale

21-24

Strong gale

25-28

Storm

29-32

Violent storm

33+

Hurricane

Wind descriptive terms

Beaufort wind force scale - Met Office

Launders Lane AQ report

Appendix B.

Raw Data

This appendix includes all the raw data processed to produce this Final Report. The data contained in this document has been processed in line with TRL procedures and checked internally for quality. For each species and measurement method, the total collected volume of an individual compound has been divided by total volume of sampled air, this provides a mass / volume comparable result i.e. ug/m3

B.1

VOC data

Compound

Location

Month

Year

Result

Phenol

LAL1

July

2023

7.9

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

July

2023

2.4

Benzoic acid

LAL1

July

2023

2.7

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL1

July

2023

2.5

Acetophenone**

LAL1

July

2023

1.8

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL1

July

2023

2.8

Toluene

LAL1

July

2023

0.8

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL1

July

2023

1.4

Nonane

LAL1

July

2023

1.0

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

July

2023

Nonane

LAL2

July

2023

Diethyl Phthalate

LAL2

July

2023

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL2

July

2023

Cyclopentasiloxane, decamethyl-

LAL2

July

2023

Nonanal**

LAL2

July

2023

Silanediol, dimethyl-

LAL2

July

2023

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL2

July

2023

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

July

2023

Toluene

LAL2

July

2023

Benzoic acid

LAL3

July

2023

12.9

Phenol

LAL3

July

2023

9.1

Nonanal**

LAL3

July

2023

5.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

July

2023

2.7

Acetophenone**

LAL3

July

2023

2.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL3

July

2023

4.9

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL3

July

2023

2.6

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL3

July

2023

7.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL3

July

2023

3.2

Phenol

LAL4

July

2023

7.4

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL4

July

2023

5.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL4

July

2023

2.2

Benzoic acid

LAL4

July

2023

2.4

Launders Lane AQ report

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL4

July

2023

2.5

Nonane

LAL4

July

2023

2.1

Acetophenone**

LAL4

July

2023

1.3

Toluene

LAL4

July

2023

1.0

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL4

July

2023

3.0

Benzoic acid

LAL5

July

2023

8.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

July

2023

1.8

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL5

July

2023

2.7

Acetophenone**

LAL5

July

2023

1.8

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL5

July

2023

3.3

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL5

July

2023

3.1

m/p-Xylene

LAL5

July

2023

1.2

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL5

July

2023

3.6

Ethylbenzene

LAL5

July

2023

0.9

Benzoic acid

LAL6

July

2023

20.5

Styrene

LAL6

July

2023

6.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL6

July

2023

6.5

Toluene

LAL6

July

2023

5.4

Nonanal**

LAL6

July

2023

7.2

Phenol

LAL6

July

2023

4.1

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL6

July

2023

5.1

Acetophenone**

LAL6

July

2023

3.4

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL7

July

2023

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL7

July

2023

Benzene

LAL7

July

2023

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL7

July

2023

Benzaldehyde**

LAL7

July

2023

Silanediol, dimethyl-

LAL7

July

2023

Acetic acid

LAL7

July

2023

Dimethyl sulfone

LAL7

July

2023

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL7

July

2023

Benzoic acid

LAL8

July

2023

14.9

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL8

July

2023

39.4

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL8

July

2023

3.7

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL8

July

2023

4.8

Benzene

LAL8

July

2023

1.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL8

July

2023

1.8

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL8

July

2023

5.6

Acetophenone**

LAL8

July

2023

1.6

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL8

July

2023

2.3

m/p-Xylene

LAL9

July

2023

10.5

Ethylbenzene

LAL9

July

2023

10.2

Benzoic acid

LAL9

July

2023

7.8

o-Xylene

LAL9

July

2023

5.3

Nonane

LAL9

July

2023

3.3

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

July

2023

2.5

Launders Lane AQ report

Acetophenone**

LAL9

July

2023

2.6

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL9

July

2023

3.0

Nonanal**

LAL9

July

2023

2.1

Benzoic acid

LAL10

July

2023

14.4

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL10

July

2023

5.3

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL10

July

2023

3.7

Acetophenone**

LAL10

July

2023

2.1

Benzaldehyde**

LAL10

July

2023

1.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL10

July

2023

3.5

Benzoylformic acid

LAL10

July

2023

1.5

Phenylglyoxal

LAL10

July

2023

0.9

Phenol

LAL10

July

2023

0.6

Benzoic acid

LAL1

August

2023

4.6

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL1

August

2023

10.7

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

August

2023

1.5

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL1

August

2023

2.5

Acetophenone**

LAL1

August

2023

1.4

Nonanal**

LAL1

August

2023

1.6

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL1

August

2023

1.6

Acetic acid

LAL1

August

2023

0.5

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL1

August

2023

1.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

August

2023

Acetic acid

LAL2

August

2023

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

August

2023

Benzene

LAL2

August

2023

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL2

August

2023

Silanediol, dimethyl-

LAL2

August

2023

Toluene

LAL2

August

2023

Benzenesulfonamide, N-butyl-

LAL2

August

2023

Benzoic acid

LAL3

August

2023

17.0

Nonanal**

LAL3

August

2023

9.9

Nonanoic acid

LAL3

August

2023

5.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

August

2023

2.4

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL3

August

2023

3.9

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL3

August

2023

4.9

Acetophenone**

LAL3

August

2023

2.4

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL3

August

2023

4.8

Pentacosane

LAL3

August

2023

5.6

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL4

August

2023

42.7

Benzoic acid

LAL4

August

2023

11.0

m/p-Xylene

LAL4

August

2023

7.5

Ethylbenzene

LAL4

August

2023

7.3

Tetracosane

LAL4

August

2023

22.1

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL4

August

2023

7.2

Nonanal**

LAL4

August

2023

4.3

o-Xylene

LAL4

August

2023

3.1

Launders Lane AQ report

Benzaldehyde**

LAL4

August

2023

2.1

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL5

August

2023

75.3

Benzoic acid

LAL5

August

2023

7.3

Tetracosane

LAL5

August

2023

16.0

Nonanal**

LAL5

August

2023

5.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

August

2023

1.8

Acetophenone**

LAL5

August

2023

1.7

m/p-Xylene

LAL5

August

2023

1.4

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL5

August

2023

2.2

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL5

August

2023

2.7

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL6

August

2023

30.2

Benzoic acid

LAL6

August

2023

5.4

Nonanal**

LAL6

August

2023

2.8

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL6

August

2023

7.5

Benzaldehyde**

LAL6

August

2023

1.6

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL6

August

2023

3.1

Acetophenone**

LAL6

August

2023

1.5

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL6

August

2023

1.5

Benzothiazole

LAL6

August

2023

1.3

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL7

August

2023

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL7

August

2023

Benzaldehyde**

LAL7

August

2023

Acetic acid

LAL7

August

2023

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL7

August

2023

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL7

August

2023

Acetophenone**

LAL7

August

2023

Cyclopentasiloxane, decamethyl-

LAL7

August

2023

Benzene

LAL7

August

2023

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL8

August

2023

14.9

Benzoic acid

LAL8

August

2023

3.5

Benzaldehyde**

LAL8

August

2023

1.5

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL8

August

2023

1.8

Nonanal**

LAL8

August

2023

1.8

Acetophenone**

LAL8

August

2023

1.3

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL8

August

2023

1.6

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL8

August

2023

1.8

Toluene

LAL8

August

2023

0.5

Benzoic acid

LAL9

August

2023

6.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

August

2023

1.7

Nonanal**

LAL9

August

2023

2.0

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL9

August

2023

3.4

Acetophenone**

LAL9

August

2023

1.5

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL9

August

2023

2.1

cis-9-Hexadecenoic acid, heptyl ester

LAL9

August

2023

4.1

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL9

August

2023

2.0

Phenol

LAL9

August

2023

0.8

Launders Lane AQ report

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL10

August

2023

29.5

Benzoic acid

LAL10

August

2023

7.5

Nonanal**

LAL10

August

2023

2.3

Benzaldehyde**

LAL10

August

2023

1.7

Acetophenone**

LAL10

August

2023

1.7

4-Cyclopentene-1,3-dione, 2,4-diphenyl-

LAL10

August

2023

3.3

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL10

August

2023

2.9

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL10

August

2023

2.2

Benzene

LAL10

August

2023

0.9

Benzoic acid

LAL1

September

2023

10.5

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL1

September

2023

2.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

September

2023

2.1

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL1

September

2023

3.2

Acetophenone**

LAL1

September

2023

2.0

Butane, 2-methyl-

LAL1

September

2023

0.9

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL1

September

2023

2.6

Toluene

LAL1

September

2023

1.0

Pentane, 2-methyl-

LAL1

September

2023

0.7

Benzoic acid

LAL2

September

2023

9.8

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL2

September

2023

2.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

September

2023

2.2

Acetophenone**

LAL2

September

2023

2.5

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL2

September

2023

3.4

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

September

2023

3.7

Butane, 2-methyl-

LAL2

September

2023

0.9

Toluene

LAL2

September

2023

1.1

Benzoylformic acid

LAL2

September

2023

1.4

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL3

September

2023

31.1

Diethyl Phthalate

LAL3

September

2023

16.8

Benzoic acid

LAL3

September

2023

7.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

September

2023

1.8

Acetophenone**

LAL3

September

2023

1.9

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL3

September

2023

2.7

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL3

September

2023

1.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL3

September

2023

2.2

Toluene

LAL3

September

2023

0.7

Benzoic acid

LAL4

September

2023

20.8

Nonanal**

LAL4

September

2023

14.4

Pentacosane

LAL4

September

2023

14.8

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL4

September

2023

4.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL4

September

2023

2.9

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL4

September

2023

4.6

Acetophenone**

LAL4

September

2023

2.6

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL4

September

2023

4.7

Butane, 2-methyl-

LAL4

September

2023

1.4

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL5

September

2023

91.4

Launders Lane AQ report

Tetracosane

LAL5

September

2023

39.9

Benzoic acid

LAL5

September

2023

5.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

September

2023

1.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL5

September

2023

3.3

Nonanal**

LAL5

September

2023

1.9

Acetophenone**

LAL5

September

2023

1.6

1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid

LAL5

September

2023

2.2

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL5

September

2023

2.1

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL6

September

2023

54.1

Benzoic acid

LAL6

September

2023

9.4

Nonanal**

LAL6

September

2023

3.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL6

September

2023

2.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL6

September

2023

3.0

Acetophenone**

LAL6

September

2023

1.9

Cyclohexane, isothiocyanato-

LAL6

September

2023

1.5

Benzene

LAL6

September

2023

0.6

Toluene

LAL6

September

2023

0.6

Benzene

LAL7

September

2023

Toluene

LAL7

September

2023

Ethylbenzene

LAL7

September

2023

m/p-Xylene

LAL7

September

2023

o-Xylene

LAL7

September

2023

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL7

September

2023

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL7

September

2023

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL7

September

2023

Benzaldehyde**

LAL7

September

2023

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL9

September

2023

24.6

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL9

September

2023

8.2

Benzoic acid

LAL9

September

2023

3.7

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

September

2023

2.0

Nonanal**

LAL9

September

2023

2.5

Acetophenone**

LAL9

September

2023

1.7

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL9

September

2023

1.8

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL9

September

2023

2.8

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL9

September

2023

1.2

Benzene

LAL10

September

2023

1.1

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL10

September

2023

5.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL10

September

2023

1.4

Acetophenone**

LAL10

September

2023

1.4

Nonanal**

LAL10

September

2023

1.2

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL10

September

2023

2.3

m/p-Xylene

LAL10

September

2023

0.8

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL10

September

2023

0.7

Benzene

LAL10

September

2023

0.4

Phenol

LAL10

September

2023

0.4

Nonanal**

LAL1

October

2023

10.6

Launders Lane AQ report

Benzoic acid

LAL1

October

2023

5.4

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL1

October

2023

9.6

Diethyl Phthalate

LAL1

October

2023

3.5

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL1

October

2023

2.5

m/p-Xylene

LAL1

October

2023

1.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

October

2023

1.4

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL1

October

2023

3.7

Acetophenone**

LAL1

October

2023

1.2

Toluene

LAL2

October

2023

21.9

Nonane

LAL2

October

2023

17.6

Pentane, 2-methyl-

LAL2

October

2023

7.4

m/p-Xylene

LAL2

October

2023

8.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

October

2023

7.3

Cyclopentasiloxane, decamethyl-

LAL2

October

2023

24.2

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL2

October

2023

7.5

Butane, 2-methyl-

LAL2

October

2023

4.4

Pentane, 2-chloro-2-methyl-

LAL2

October

2023

7.2

Toluene

LAL3

October

2023

19.8

Nonane

LAL3

October

2023

16.4

m/p-Xylene

LAL3

October

2023

8.2

Pentane, 2-methyl-

LAL3

October

2023

6.1

Cyclopentasiloxane, decamethyl-

LAL3

October

2023

23.3

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL3

October

2023

7.1

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

October

2023

5.8

Butane, 2-methyl-

LAL3

October

2023

3.9

Nonanal**

LAL3

October

2023

6.9

Benzoic acid

LAL4

October

2023

6.2

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL4

October

2023

7.1

Nonanal**

LAL4

October

2023

3.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL4

October

2023

2.2

m/p-Xylene

LAL4

October

2023

1.8

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL4

October

2023

2.4

Acetophenone**

LAL4

October

2023

1.5

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL4

October

2023

3.4

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL4

October

2023

1.3

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL5

October

2023

28.1

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL5

October

2023

2.9

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL5

October

2023

1.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL5

October

2023

3.2

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

October

2023

1.4

Toluene

LAL5

October

2023

1.0

m/p-Xylene

LAL5

October

2023

1.0

Acetophenone**

LAL5

October

2023

1.1

Nonanal**

LAL5

October

2023

1.0

Toluene

LAL6

October

2023

4.5

Benzoic acid

LAL6

October

2023

7.9

Launders Lane AQ report

Nonanal**

LAL6

October

2023

4.2

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL6

October

2023

6.1

Toluene

LAL6

October

2023

2.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL6

October

2023

2.4

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL6

October

2023

2.1

Pentane, 2-methyl-

LAL6

October

2023

1.5

Butane, 2-methyl-

LAL6

October

2023

1.2

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL6

October

2023

2.7

Ethylbenzene

LAL7

October

2023

m/p-Xylene

LAL7

October

2023

o-Xylene

LAL7

October

2023

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL7

October

2023

Benzaldehyde**

LAL7

October

2023

Silanediol, dimethyl-

LAL7

October

2023

Isopropyl myristate

LAL7

October

2023

Benzoic acid

LAL8

October

2023

5.2

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL8

October

2023

4.2

Nonanal**

LAL8

October

2023

2.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL8

October

2023

1.7

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL8

October

2023

1.8

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL8

October

2023

2.0

Acetophenone**

LAL8

October

2023

1.3

Toluene

LAL8

October

2023

0.8

2-Propanone, 1-methoxy-

LAL8

October

2023

0.8

Benzoic acid

LAL9

October

2023

7.5

Nonanal**

LAL9

October

2023

3.2

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL9

October

2023

4.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

October

2023

1.9

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL9

October

2023

2.6

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL9

October

2023

1.7

Acetophenone**

LAL9

October

2023

1.4

Acetic acid

LAL9

October

2023

0.5

Toluene

LAL9

October

2023

0.8

Diethyl Phthalate

LAL10

October

2023

17.7

m/p-Xylene

LAL10

October

2023

7.3

2-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-methyl-

LAL10

October

2023

7.5

Ethylbenzene

LAL10

October

2023

6.2

Toluene

LAL10

October

2023

5.3

o-Xylene

LAL10

October

2023

3.2

Benzoic acid

LAL10

October

2023

3.6

Butane, 2-methyl-

LAL10

October

2023

2.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL10

October

2023

2.8

November

2023

No Data Nonanal**

LAL1

December

2023

6.6

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL1

December

2023

6.8

Benzoic acid

LAL1

December

2023

2.4

Launders Lane AQ report

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

December

2023

1.9

Acetophenone**

LAL1

December

2023

1.8

Benzene

LAL1

December

2023

0.8

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL1

December

2023

1.2

Pentacosane

LAL1

December

2023

3.3

Octane

LAL1

December

2023

1.1

Benzoic acid

LAL2

December

2023

4.7

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

December

2023

1.5

Acetophenone**

LAL2

December

2023

1.7

Nonanal**

LAL2

December

2023

1.1

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

December

2023

1.5

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL2

December

2023

0.9

Benzene

LAL2

December

2023

0.4

Toluene

LAL2

December

2023

0.4

Acetic acid

LAL2

December

2023

0.3

Phenol

LAL3

December

2023

2.8

Toluene

LAL3

December

2023

2.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

December

2023

1.5

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL3

December

2023

3.0

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL3

December

2023

1.6

Nonane

LAL3

December

2023

1.3

Benzene

LAL3

December

2023

0.8

m/p-Xylene

LAL3

December

2023

1.0

Acetophenone**

LAL3

December

2023

1.0

Benzoic acid

LAL5

December

2023

4.2

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL5

December

2023

4.3

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL5

December

2023

6.1

Benzene

LAL5

December

2023

0.9

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

December

2023

1.3

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL5

December

2023

2.2

Acetophenone**

LAL5

December

2023

0.8

Toluene

LAL5

December

2023

0.6

m/p-Xylene

LAL5

December

2023

0.6

Benzoic acid

LAL6

December

2023

10.9

Benzaldehyde**

LAL6

December

2023

2.5

Acetophenone**

LAL6

December

2023

2.1

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL6

December

2023

2.5

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL6

December

2023

1.9

Benzene

LAL6

December

2023

0.8

Phenol

LAL6

December

2023

0.9

Toluene

LAL6

December

2023

0.6

Benzeneacetaldehyde

LAL6

December

2023

0.7

Phenol

LAL9

December

2023

6.3

Nonanal**

LAL9

December

2023

7.8

Toluene

LAL9

December

2023

3.9

Benzoic acid

LAL9

December

2023

4.1

Launders Lane AQ report

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

December

2023

2.3

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL9

December

2023

2.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL9

December

2023

4.2

Nonane

LAL9

December

2023

1.9

Benzene

LAL9

December

2023

1.1

Benzoic acid

LAL10

December

2023

15.7

Nonanal**

LAL10

December

2023

10.1

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL10

December

2023

10.9

Benzaldehyde**

LAL10

December

2023

2.1

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL10

December

2023

2.6

Acetophenone**

LAL10

December

2023

1.7

1-Octene

LAL10

December

2023

1.4

Benzenecarbothioic acid

LAL10

December

2023

1.1

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL10

December

2023

2.4

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL1

January

2024

166.8

Propylene Glycol

LAL1

January

2024

32.5

Ethyl Acetate

LAL1

January

2024

25.9

Pyridine, 3-(1-methyl-2-pyrrolidinyl)-, (S)-

LAL1

January

2024

43.7

Acetone

LAL1

January

2024

12.0

Toluene

LAL1

January

2024

14.0

1-Methoxy-2-propyl acetate

LAL1

January

2024

17.5

Benzoic acid

LAL1

January

2024

15.7

Nonanal**

LAL1

January

2024

15.8

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL2

January

2024

180.9

Ethyl Acetate

LAL2

January

2024

42.2

Acetone

LAL2

January

2024

9.1

1-Methoxy-2-propyl acetate

LAL2

January

2024

19.3

Toluene

LAL2

January

2024

9.7

1-Butanamine, 2-methyl-

LAL2

January

2024

3.6

Cyclohexane

LAL2

January

2024

3.3

Methylene chloride

LAL2

January

2024

2.6

Nicotyrine

LAL2

January

2024

3.5

2-Butanone

LAL2

January

2024

1.5

Phenol

LAL3

January

2024

41.6

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL3

January

2024

22.7

Toluene

LAL3

January

2024

11.2

Nonane

LAL3

January

2024

10.3

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL3

January

2024

9.2

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL3

January

2024

15.6

Benzoic acid

LAL3

January

2024

8.5

Nonanal**

LAL3

January

2024

9.4

Trichloromonofluoromethane

LAL3

January

2024

8.6

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL4

January

2024

91.7

Acetone

LAL4

January

2024

10.4

Toluene

LAL4

January

2024

15.1

Ethyl Acetate

LAL4

January

2024

13.7

Launders Lane AQ report

Cyclohexane

LAL4

January

2024

7.4

1-Methoxy-2-propyl acetate

LAL4

January

2024

7.5

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL4

January

2024

7.9

Methylene chloride

LAL4

January

2024

2.9

Nonanal**

LAL4

January

2024

4.5

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL5

January

2024

85.2

Ethyl Acetate

LAL5

January

2024

24.9

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL5

January

2024

50.3

1-Methoxy-2-propyl acetate

LAL5

January

2024

9.2

Nonanal**

LAL5

January

2024

2.3

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL5

January

2024

3.5

1,3-Dioxolane, 4-methyl-

LAL5

January

2024

1.1

2-Butanone

LAL5

January

2024

0.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

January

2024

1.2

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL8

January

2024

2.6

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL8

January

2024

2.8

Pentacosane

LAL8

January

2024

3.9

Acetic acid

LAL8

January

2024

0.5

Pyrene

LAL8

January

2024

1.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL8

January

2024

0.7

1-Butanol

LAL8

January

2024

0.5

Fluoranthene

LAL8

January

2024

1.3

Furfural

LAL8

January

2024

0.5

.alpha.-Methylstyrene

LAL8

January

2024

0.6

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL9

January

2024

31.0

Acetone

LAL9

January

2024

9.5

Toluene

LAL9

January

2024

12.3

Cyclohexane

LAL9

January

2024

7.4

Nonanal**

LAL9

January

2024

8.9

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL9

January

2024

11.3

Methylene chloride

LAL9

January

2024

2.8

Benzoic acid

LAL9

January

2024

4.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

January

2024

2.8

2,6-Diphenyl-p-benzoquinone

LAL1

February

2024

106.0

Benzoic acid

LAL1

February

2024

8.1

Nonanal**

LAL1

February

2024

6.0

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL1

February

2024

6.5

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL1

February

2024

2.8

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL1

February

2024

3.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

February

2024

1.6

Acetophenone**

LAL1

February

2024

1.2

m/p-Xylene

LAL1

February

2024

0.9

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL1

February

2024

0.8

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL2

February

2024

38.0

Ethyl Acetate

LAL2

February

2024

12.0

1-Methoxy-2-propyl acetate

LAL2

February

2024

7.5

Launders Lane AQ report

1,3-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL2

February

2024

19.0

Methylene chloride

LAL2

February

2024

1.2

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

February

2024

2.9

Acetic acid, methyl ester

LAL2

February

2024

0.7

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

February

2024

0.9

m/p-Xylene

LAL2

February

2024

0.7

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL3

February

2024

78.0

2,6-Diphenyl-p-benzoquinone

LAL3

February

2024

123.0

Ethyl Acetate

LAL3

February

2024

20.0

1-Methoxy-2-propyl acetate

LAL3

February

2024

17.0

Benzoic acid

LAL3

February

2024

10.0

Methylene chloride

LAL3

February

2024

3.1

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL3

February

2024

7.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

February

2024

2.8

Phenol

LAL3

February

2024

2.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL3

February

2024

3.4

2,6-Diphenyl-p-benzoquinone

LAL5

February

2024

187.0

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL5

February

2024

29.0

Ethyl Acetate

LAL5

February

2024

9.7

Benzoic acid

LAL5

February

2024

6.9

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL5

February

2024

20.0

1-Methoxy-2-propyl acetate

LAL5

February

2024

4.8

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL5

February

2024

13.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

February

2024

2.4

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL5

February

2024

2.8

Methylene chloride

LAL5

February

2024

1.2

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL6

February

2024

108.0

Toluene

LAL6

February

2024

69.0

m/p-Xylene

LAL6

February

2024

71.0

2,6-Diphenyl-p-benzoquinone

LAL6

February

2024

167.0

Cyclohexane

LAL6

February

2024

43.0

1-Methoxy-2-propyl acetate

LAL6

February

2024

28.0

Ethylbenzene

LAL6

February

2024

22.0

o-Xylene

LAL6

February

2024

22.0

Ethyl Acetate

LAL6

February

2024

18.0

Benzoic acid

LAL6

February

2024

15.0

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL8

February

2024

127.0

1-Methoxy-2-propyl acetate

LAL8

February

2024

64.0

2,6-Diphenyl-p-benzoquinone

LAL8

February

2024

123.0

Ethyl Acetate

LAL8

February

2024

24.0

Toluene

LAL8

February

2024

15.0

m/p-Xylene

LAL8

February

2024

14.0

Cyclohexane

LAL8

February

2024

11.0

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL8

February

2024

21.0

o-Xylene

LAL8

February

2024

5.2

Methylene chloride

LAL8

February

2024

3.7

Launders Lane AQ report

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL9

February

2024

71.0

2,6-Diphenyl-p-benzoquinone

LAL9

February

2024

119.0

Ethyl Acetate

LAL9

February

2024

17.0

1-Methoxy-2-propyl acetate

LAL9

February

2024

16.0

Didecyl phthalate

LAL9

February

2024

51.0

Methylene chloride

LAL9

February

2024

3.4

Benzoic acid

LAL9

February

2024

4.5

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

February

2024

3.1

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL9

February

2024

10.0

Phenol

LAL9

February

2024

1.9

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL1

March

2024

60.1

Trichloromonofluoromethane

LAL1

March

2024

10.3

Methylene chloride

LAL1

March

2024

6.1

Nonane

LAL1

March

2024

7.1

Toluene

LAL1

March

2024

4.2

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

March

2024

4.6

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL1

March

2024

3.8

Cyclopentasiloxane, decamethyl-

LAL1

March

2024

11.8

m/p-Xylene

LAL1

March

2024

3.4

Benzoic acid

LAL2

March

2024

22.4

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL2

March

2024

15.2

Trichloromonofluoromethane

LAL2

March

2024

18.6

Nonanal**

LAL2

March

2024

12.7

Methylene chloride

LAL2

March

2024

4.9

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

March

2024

12.1

Pentacosane

LAL2

March

2024

17.8

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL2

March

2024

6.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

March

2024

3.7

Heptadecane, 2,6,10,15-tetramethyl-

LAL3

March

2024

53.1

Tetracosane

LAL3

March

2024

39.6

Heneicosane

LAL3

March

2024

22.8

Octadecane

LAL3

March

2024

7.5

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL3

March

2024

4.7

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

March

2024

2.0

Acetophenone**

LAL3

March

2024

1.6

Nonanal**

LAL3

March

2024

1.7

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL3

March

2024

2.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL5

March

2024

7.5

Nonanal**

LAL5

March

2024

2.1

Trichloromonofluoromethane

LAL5

March

2024

1.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

March

2024

1.3

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL5

March

2024

1.5

Acetophenone**

LAL5

March

2024

1.0

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL5

March

2024

2.3

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL5

March

2024

0.6

Cyclopentasiloxane, decamethyl-

LAL5

March

2024

2.5

Launders Lane AQ report

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL6

March

2024

8.1

Diethyl Phthalate

LAL6

March

2024

6.0

Benzoic acid

LAL6

March

2024

2.7

Benzaldehyde**

LAL6

March

2024

2.3

Nonanal**

LAL6

March

2024

2.9

Acetophenone**

LAL6

March

2024

1.8

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL6

March

2024

1.9

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL6

March

2024

1.3

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL6

March

2024

3.0

Nonanal**

LAL9

March

2024

3.1

Phenol

LAL9

March

2024

1.9

Trichloromonofluoromethane

LAL9

March

2024

2.7

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

March

2024

1.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL9

March

2024

3.4

Acetophenone**

LAL9

March

2024

1.7

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL9

March

2024

1.6

Benzene

LAL9

March

2024

0.7

Isopropyl myristate

LAL9

March

2024

1.8

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL10

March

2024

12.7

Trichloromonofluoromethane

LAL10

March

2024

15.4

Benzoic acid

LAL10

March

2024

9.8

Pentacosane

LAL10

March

2024

19.2

Nonanal**

LAL10

March

2024

6.7

Methylene chloride

LAL10

March

2024

3.9

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL10

March

2024

9.5

Benzaldehyde**

LAL10

March

2024

3.7

Phenol

LAL10

March

2024

2.6

Nonanal**

LAL1

April

2024

6.4

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL1

April

2024

8.5

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

April

2024

1.6

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL1

April

2024

1.9

Acetophenone**

LAL1

April

2024

1.3

Acetone

LAL1

April

2024

0.6

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL1

April

2024

3.1

Silanediol, dimethyl-

LAL1

April

2024

0.9

Decanal**

LAL1

April

2024

1.5

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

April

2024

3.0

Acetone

LAL2

April

2024

0.4

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL2

April

2024

0.8

Pentacosane

LAL2

April

2024

2.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

April

2024

0.5

Nonanal**

LAL2

April

2024

0.7

Benzene

LAL2

April

2024

0.4

Acetophenone**

LAL2

April

2024

0.5

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL2

April

2024

1.1

Octane

LAL2

April

2024

0.3

Launders Lane AQ report

Nonanal**

LAL3

April

2024

8.9

Pentacosane

LAL3

April

2024

17.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL3

April

2024

5.2

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

April

2024

2.1

Tetracosane

LAL3

April

2024

6.4

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL3

April

2024

2.2

Acetophenone**

LAL3

April

2024

1.5

Benzoic acid

LAL3

April

2024

1.5

Benzothiazole

LAL3

April

2024

1.6

Tetracosane

LAL4

April

2024

48.8

Heneicosane

LAL4

April

2024

34.1

Benzoic acid

LAL4

April

2024

5.8

Nonanal**

LAL4

April

2024

5.6

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL4

April

2024

8.1

Acetophenone**

LAL4

April

2024

3.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL4

April

2024

2.7

Styrene

LAL4

April

2024

1.6

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL4

April

2024

3.3

Nonanal**

LAL5

April

2024

5.5

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL5

April

2024

1.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

April

2024

1.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL5

April

2024

3.3

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL5

April

2024

1.6

Acetophenone**

LAL5

April

2024

1.3

Benzoic acid

LAL5

April

2024

1.3

Isopropyl myristate

LAL5

April

2024

2.4

Decanal**

LAL5

April

2024

1.4

Nonanal**

LAL6

April

2024

5.1

Acetophenone**

LAL6

April

2024

4.1

Benzaldehyde**

LAL6

April

2024

3.2

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL6

April

2024

4.9

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL6

April

2024

1.1

Phenol

LAL6

April

2024

1.1

Acetone

LAL6

April

2024

0.7

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL6

April

2024

3.2

Benzenecarbothioic acid

LAL6

April

2024

1.1

Nonanal**

LAL8

April

2024

3.8

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL8

April

2024

5.5

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL8

April

2024

1.9

Benzaldehyde**

LAL8

April

2024

1.9

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL8

April

2024

2.0

Acetophenone**

LAL8

April

2024

1.5

Pentacosane

LAL8

April

2024

3.3

Benzoic acid

LAL8

April

2024

1.1

Decanal**

LAL8

April

2024

1.1

2-Propanol, 1-methoxy-

LAL9

April

2024

9.8

Launders Lane AQ report

Nonanal**

LAL9

April

2024

4.7

Methylene chloride

LAL9

April

2024

2.7

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

April

2024

3.4

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL9

April

2024

5.4

Acetophenone**

LAL9

April

2024

2.5

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL9

April

2024

2.7

Toluene

LAL9

April

2024

1.9

Phenol

LAL9

April

2024

1.6

Benzoic acid

LAL10

April

2024

17.8

Ethylbenzene

LAL10

April

2024

7.8

Nonanal**

LAL10

April

2024

9.6

m/p-Xylene

LAL10

April

2024

6.2

Pentacosane

LAL10

April

2024

20.1

Acetone

LAL10

April

2024

2.3

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL10

April

2024

5.6

o-Xylene

LAL10

April

2024

3.1

Benzaldehyde**

LAL10

April

2024

3.0

2,5-Cyclohexadiene-1,4-dione, 2,5-bis(1,1-dimethylpropyl)-

LAL1

May/June

2024

11.0

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL1

May/June

2024

1.5

Cyclohexanone

LAL1

May/June

2024

1.1

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL1

May/June

2024

4.1

Nonanal**

LAL1

May/June

2024

1.4

Cyclohexane, isocyanato-

LAL1

May/June

2024

0.9

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

May/June

2024

0.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL1

May/June

2024

1.4

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL1

May/June

2024

1.9

Benzothiazole

LAL1

May/June

2024

0.6

Isopropyl myristate

LAL2

May/June

2024

5.0

Acetophenone**

LAL2

May/June

2024

1.3

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

May/June

2024

1.1

Nonanal**

LAL2

May/June

2024

1.3

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

May/June

2024

1.5

Acetic acid

LAL2

May/June

2024

0.3

Silanediol, dimethyl-

LAL2

May/June

2024

0.4

Benzene

LAL2

May/June

2024

0.3

Phenol

LAL2

May/June

2024

0.4

Nonanal**

LAL3

May/June

2024

4.1

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL3

May/June

2024

1.5

Acetophenone**

LAL3

May/June

2024

1.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

May/June

2024

2.2

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL3

May/June

2024

1.5

Cyclopentasiloxane, decamethyl-

LAL3

May/June

2024

0.7

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL3

May/June

2024

0.3

m/p-Xylene

LAL3

May/June

2024

0.5

Benzene, 1,2,4-trimethyl-

LAL3

May/June

2024

0.4

2,5-Cyclohexadiene-1,4-dione, 2,5-bis(1,1-dimethylpropyl)-

LAL5

May/June

2024

7.2

Launders Lane AQ report

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL5

May/June

2024

1.4

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

May/June

2024

0.9

Cyclohexanone

LAL5

May/June

2024

0.9

Nonanal**

LAL5

May/June

2024

1.2

Cyclohexane, isocyanato-

LAL5

May/June

2024

1.0

Benzamide, N,N-dimethyl-

LAL5

May/June

2024

1.0

Phenol

LAL5

May/June

2024

0.5

Acetophenone**

LAL5

May/June

2024

0.6

Benzoic acid

LAL6

May/June

2024

19.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL6

May/June

2024

5.3

Acetophenone**

LAL6

May/June

2024

3.2

Benzaldehyde**

LAL6

May/June

2024

2.6

Isopropyl myristate

LAL6

May/June

2024

5.1

Benzoylformic acid

LAL6

May/June

2024

1.7

Nonanal**

LAL6

May/June

2024

1.5

Phenol

LAL6

May/June

2024

0.6

Acetic acid

LAL6

May/June

2024

0.2

Benzoic acid

LAL8

May/June

2024

14.0

Squalene

LAL8

May/June

2024

14.0

Nonanal**

LAL8

May/June

2024

4.4

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL8

May/June

2024

3.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL8

May/June

2024

2.1

Acetophenone**

LAL8

May/June

2024

2.2

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL8

May/June

2024

4.6

Isopropyl myristate

LAL8

May/June

2024

2.9

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL8

May/June

2024

1.8

Nonanal**

LAL9

May/June

2024

3.2

Benzoic acid

LAL9

May/June

2024

1.9

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

May/June

2024

1.5

Isopropyl myristate

LAL9

May/June

2024

3.4

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL9

May/June

2024

2.4

Acetophenone**

LAL9

May/June

2024

1.3

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL9

May/June

2024

1.6

Octane

LAL9

May/June

2024

1.0

Acetic acid

LAL9

May/June

2024

0.4

Isopropyl myristate

LAL10

May/June

2024

4.1

Benzoic acid

LAL10

May/June

2024

1.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL10

May/June

2024

1.3

Acetophenone**

LAL10

May/June

2024

1.5

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL10

May/June

2024

1.3

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL10

May/June

2024

1.5

Nonanal**

LAL10

May/June

2024

0.8

1,3-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL10

May/June

2024

2.0

Phenol

LAL10

May/June

2024

0.4

Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl-

LAL10

May/June

2024

1.2

Benzoic acid

LAL1

June/July

2024

8.0

Launders Lane AQ report

m/p-Xylene

LAL1

June/July

2024

2.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL1

June/July

2024

4.7

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

June/July

2024

2.1

Acetophenone**

LAL1

June/July

2024

1.9

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL1

June/July

2024

2.5

Nonanal**

LAL1

June/July

2024

1.7

o-Xylene

LAL1

June/July

2024

1.2

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL1

June/July

2024

1.3

Benzoic acid

LAL2

June/July

2024

16.0

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL2

June/July

2024

21.0

Acetophenone**

LAL2

June/July

2024

2.8

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL2

June/July

2024

4.1

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

June/July

2024

2.1

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL2

June/July

2024

3.5

Benzoylformic acid

LAL2

June/July

2024

1.6

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

June/July

2024

2.1

Phenylglyoxal

LAL2

June/July

2024

1.0

Benzoic acid

LAL3

June/July

2024

17.0

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL3

June/July

2024

33.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL3

June/July

2024

4.2

Acetophenone**

LAL3

June/July

2024

2.5

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

June/July

2024

2.1

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL3

June/July

2024

3.8

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL3

June/July

2024

4.0

Benzoylformic acid

LAL3

June/July

2024

1.7

Nonanal**

LAL3

June/July

2024

1.4

Benzoic acid

LAL4

June/July

2024

24.0

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL4

June/July

2024

52.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL4

June/July

2024

6.3

Pentacosane

LAL4

June/July

2024

12.0

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL4

June/July

2024

8.5

Benzaldehyde**

LAL4

June/July

2024

3.6

Acetophenone**

LAL4

June/July

2024

3.3

Isopropyl myristate

LAL4

June/July

2024

6.1

Benzoylformic acid

LAL4

June/July

2024

2.1

Benzoic acid

LAL5

June/July

2024

18.0

Docosane

LAL5

June/July

2024

31.0

Pentacosane

LAL5

June/July

2024

34.0

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL5

June/July

2024

38.0

Isopropyl myristate

LAL5

June/July

2024

15.0

Tetracosane

LAL5

June/July

2024

12.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL5

June/July

2024

4.3

Acetophenone**

LAL5

June/July

2024

2.5

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

June/July

2024

2.1

Docosane

LAL6

June/July

2024

89.0

Benzoic acid

LAL6

June/July

2024

21.0

Launders Lane AQ report

Eicosane

LAL6

June/July

2024

41.0

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL6

June/July

2024

26.0

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL6

June/July

2024

27.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL6

June/July

2024

4.8

Acetophenone**

LAL6

June/July

2024

2.8

Benzoic acid

LAL8

June/July

2024

20.0

Docosane

LAL8

June/July

2024

21.0

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL8

June/July

2024

12.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL8

June/July

2024

4.4

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL8

June/July

2024

6.1

Acetophenone**

LAL8

June/July

2024

2.7

Benzoic acid

LAL9

June/July

2024

25.0

Nonanal**

LAL9

June/July

2024

16.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

June/July

2024

12.0

Decane

LAL9

June/July

2024

14.0

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL9

June/July

2024

8.8

Toluene

LAL9

June/July

2024

4.9

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL9

June/July

2024

4.6

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL10

June/July

2024

95.0

Benzoic acid

LAL10

June/July

2024

25.0

Docosane

LAL10

June/July

2024

38.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL10

June/July

2024

12.0

Decane

LAL10

June/July

2024

14.0

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL10

June/July

2024

8.6

Nonanal**

LAL10

June/July

2024

9.1

Pentacosane

LAL10

June/July

2024

20.0

Benzoic acid

LAL2

July/August

2024

26.0

Nonanal**

LAL2

July/August

2024

12.0

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL2

July/August

2024

32.0

Acetophenone**

LAL2

July/August

2024

3.9

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

July/August

2024

3.3

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL2

July/August

2024

4.7

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

July/August

2024

4.0

Pentacosane

LAL2

July/August

2024

6.2

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL2

July/August

2024

2.3

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL1

July/August

2024

105.0

Benzoic acid

LAL1

July/August

2024

31.0

Isopropyl Alcohol

LAL1

July/August

2024

11.0

Ethanol, 2-butoxy-

LAL1

July/August

2024

11.0

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL1

July/August

2024

12.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

July/August

2024

8.7

Benzyl alcohol

LAL1

July/August

2024

8.2

1-Butanol

LAL1

July/August

2024

5.5

Nonanal**

LAL1

July/August

2024

7.6

Benzoic acid

LAL3

July/August

2024

30.0

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL3

July/August

2024

82.0

Launders Lane AQ report

Nonanal**

LAL3

July/August

2024

12.0

Acetophenone**

LAL3

July/August

2024

3.9

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL3

July/August

2024

5.2

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

July/August

2024

3.1

Pentacosane

LAL3

July/August

2024

7.1

Nonanoic acid

LAL3

July/August

2024

3.1

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL3

July/August

2024

4.4

Silanediol, dimethyl-

LAL3

July/August

2024

1.6

Benzoic acid

LAL5

July/August

2024

23.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

July/August

2024

4.2

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL5

July/August

2024

5.9

Acetophenone**

LAL5

July/August

2024

4.0

Pentacosane

LAL5

July/August

2024

8.2

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL5

July/August

2024

4.1

Silanediol, dimethyl-

LAL5

July/August

2024

1.2

Benzoylformic acid

LAL5

July/August

2024

1.7

Acetic acid

LAL5

July/August

2024

0.6

Benzoic acid

LAL6

July/August

2024

23.0

Docosane

LAL6

July/August

2024

18.0

Acetophenone**

LAL6

July/August

2024

4.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL6

July/August

2024

5.4

Eicosane

LAL6

July/August

2024

9.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL6

July/August

2024

3.1

Pentacosane

LAL6

July/August

2024

8.9

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL6

July/August

2024

8.2

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL8

July/August

2024

129.0

Benzoic acid

LAL8

July/August

2024

20.0

Docosane

LAL8

July/August

2024

22.0

Nonanal**

LAL8

July/August

2024

7.9

Benzaldehyde**

LAL8

July/August

2024

2.8

Acetophenone**

LAL8

July/August

2024

2.7

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL8

July/August

2024

3.8

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL9

July/August

2024

63.0

Benzoic acid

LAL9

July/August

2024

13.0

Docosane

LAL9

July/August

2024

16.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

July/August

2024

2.2

Acetophenone**

LAL9

July/August

2024

2.0

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL9

July/August

2024

3.0

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL9

July/August

2024

2.7

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL9

July/August

2024

1.5

1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL10

July/August

2024

31.0

Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL10

July/August

2024

8.0

Isopropyl myristate

LAL10

July/August

2024

2.4

Toluene

LAL10

July/August

2024

0.7

m/p-Xylene

LAL10

July/August

2024

0.6

Pentane, 2-methyl-

LAL10

July/August

2024

0.5

Launders Lane AQ report

Benzoic acid

LAL2

August/September

2024

10.6

Nonanal**

LAL2

August/September

2024

3.7

Acetophenone**

LAL2

August/September

2024

1.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL2

August/September

2024

1.5

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL2

August/September

2024

2.1

Pentacosane

LAL2

August/September

2024

4.1

Nonanoic acid

LAL2

August/September

2024

1.6

Benzene

LAL2

August/September

2024

0.6

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL2

August/September

2024

1.5

1,3-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL3

August/September

2024

38.5

Benzoic acid

LAL3

August/September

2024

9.6

Tetracosane

LAL3

August/September

2024

13.1

Docosane

LAL3

August/September

2024

10.6

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL3

August/September

2024

2.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL3

August/September

2024

1.2

Acetophenone**

LAL3

August/September

2024

1.4

Nonanal**

LAL3

August/September

2024

1.1

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL3

August/September

2024

1.4

Acetic acid, butyl ester

LAL1

August/September

2024

12.9

Benzoic acid

LAL1

August/September

2024

8.0

1,3-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL1

August/September

2024

10.8

Nonanal**

LAL1

August/September

2024

3.7

Benzaldehyde**

LAL1

August/September

2024

2.2

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL1

August/September

2024

1.6

Nonanoic acid

LAL1

August/September

2024

1.6

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL1

August/September

2024

1.7

Acetophenone**

LAL1

August/September

2024

1.1

Benzoic acid

LAL5

August/September

2024

11.3

1,3-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL5

August/September

2024

17.6

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL5

August/September

2024

2.6

Benzaldehyde**

LAL5

August/September

2024

1.5

Acetophenone**

LAL5

August/September

2024

1.4

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL5

August/September

2024

2.3

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL5

August/September

2024

1.6

Benzoylformic acid

LAL5

August/September

2024

0.9

Acetic acid

LAL5

August/September

2024

0.4

Benzoic acid

LAL6

August/September

2024

16.3

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL6

August/September

2024

4.1

Acetophenone**

LAL6

August/September

2024

1.8

Benzaldehyde**

LAL6

August/September

2024

1.6

1,3-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL6

August/September

2024

5.2

1-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-

LAL6

August/September

2024

1.5

Benzoylformic acid

LAL6

August/September

2024

1.1

Acetic acid

LAL6

August/September

2024

0.4

Phenylglyoxal

LAL6

August/September

2024

0.8

5-Hydroxymethylfurfural

LAL8

August/September

2024

17.3

Launders Lane AQ report

Benzoic acid

LAL8

August/September

2024

14.7

1,3-Propanediol, 2-ethyl-2-(hydroxymethyl)-

LAL8

August/September

2024

11.1

1,3-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL8

August/September

2024

16.7

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL8

August/September

2024

2.7

Tetracosane

LAL8

August/September

2024

5.1

Benzaldehyde**

LAL8

August/September

2024

1.5

Acetic acid

LAL8

August/September

2024

0.8

Furfural

LAL8

August/September

2024

1.3

Benzoic acid

LAL9

August/September

2024

15.8

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL9

August/September

2024

3.4

Diethyl Phthalate

LAL9

August/September

2024

3.8

2-Phenacyl-quinoxaline

LAL9

August/September

2024

3.9

Benzaldehyde**

LAL9

August/September

2024

1.5

Acetophenone**

LAL9

August/September

2024

1.4

1,3-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL9

August/September

2024

4.4

Nonanal**

LAL9

August/September

2024

1.2

Benzoic acid

LAL10

August/September

2024

11.5

1,3-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

LAL10

August/September

2024

20.2

Phenylmaleic anhydride

LAL10

August/September

2024

3.0

Benzaldehyde**

LAL10

August/September

2024

1.5

Acetophenone**

LAL10

August/September

2024

1.5

Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-

LAL10

August/September

2024

2.0

Benzoylformic acid

LAL10

August/September

2024

0.9

Acetic acid

LAL10

August/September

2024

0.3

B.2

PCBs data

Site

Reporting Month

Year

Species

ug/m3 result

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#81

0.0000035

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#77

0.0000315

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#123

0.0000047

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#118

0.0000689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#114

0.0000047

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#105

0.0000280

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#126

0.0000035

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#167

0.0000012

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#156

0.0000023

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#157

0.0000012

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#169

0.0000012

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

PCB BZ#189

0.0000012

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#81

0.0000220

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#77

0.0002438

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#123

0.0001378

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#118

0.0022193

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#114

0.0000565

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#105

0.0006447

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#126

0.0000193

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#167

0.0002562

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#156

0.0001102

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#157

0.0000248

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#169

0.0000014

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

PCB BZ#189

0.0000124

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#81

0.0000108

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#77

0.0001097

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#123

0.0000398

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#118

0.0008593

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#114

0.0000205

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#105

0.0002326

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#126

0.0000108

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#167

0.0000241

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#156

0.0000494

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#157

0.0000108

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#169

0.0000072

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

PCB BZ#189

0.0000060

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#81

0.0000030

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#77

0.0000030

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#123

0.0000061

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#118

0.0002371

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#114

0.0000015

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#105

0.0000790

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#126

0.0000015

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#167

0.0000046

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#156

0.0000106

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#157

0.0000015

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#169

0.0000015

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

PCB BZ#189

0.0000015

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#81

0.0000026

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#77

0.0002107

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#123

0.0000845

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#118

0.0007726

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#114

0.0000208

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#105

0.0002458

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#126

0.0000429

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#167

0.0000208

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#156

0.0000377

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#157

0.0000078

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#169

0.0000130

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

PCB BZ#189

0.0000026

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000110

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0001060

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000190

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0004980

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000190

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0001720

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000110

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000240

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000420

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000090

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000020

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000060

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000060

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0000820

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000210

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0005030

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000140

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0001530

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000020

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000150

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000250

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000070

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000020

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000040

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000080

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0001150

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000150

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0004340

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000080

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0001580

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000080

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000170

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000240

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000060

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000020

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000020

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000060

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0001150

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000180

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0004410

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000100

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0001670

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000040

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000040

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000250

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000040

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000010

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000010

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000010

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0001170

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000310

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0007070

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000180

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0002250

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000120

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000010

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000470

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000120

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000010

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000050

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000160

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0001650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000660

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0011740

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000330

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0003700

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000150

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000400

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000610

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000160

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000050

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000150

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000420

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0002540

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0001250

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0016630

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000470

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0005040

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000580

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0001000

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000260

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000020

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000220

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000180

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0001290

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000450

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0008190

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000290

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0002330

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000020

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000330

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000520

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000110

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000040

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000100

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#81

0.0000176

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#77

0.0002392

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#123

0.0000881

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#118

0.0026240

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#114

0.0000579

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#105

0.0008285

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#126

0.0000126

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#167

0.0003626

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#156

0.0001586

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#157

0.0000302

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#169

0.0000025

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

PCB BZ#189

0.0000076

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#81

0.0000089

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#77

0.0000343

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#123

0.0000191

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#118

0.0003379

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#114

0.0000089

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#105

0.0000978

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#126

0.0000064

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#167

0.0000533

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#156

0.0000191

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#157

0.0000038

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#169

0.0000013

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

PCB BZ#189

0.0000025

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#81

0.0000048

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#77

0.0000679

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#123

0.0000194

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#118

0.0003554

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#114

0.0000113

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#105

0.0001228

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#126

0.0000032

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#167

0.0000485

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#156

0.0000162

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#157

0.0000016

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#169

0.0000016

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

PCB BZ#189

0.0000016

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#81

0.0000085

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#77

0.0001991

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#123

0.0001172

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#118

0.0008036

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#114

0.0000169

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#105

0.0002514

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#126

0.0000071

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#167

0.0000254

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#156

0.0000593

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#157

0.0000155

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#169

0.0000010

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

PCB BZ#189

0.0000113

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000091

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0000660

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000116

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0003766

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000181

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0001359

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000104

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000155

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000285

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000065

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000013

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000052

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000014

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0000501

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000097

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0004064

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000097

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0001239

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000014

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0041757

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000223

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000056

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000014

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000028

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000015

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0000742

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000186

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0003417

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000108

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0001221

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000062

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000062

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000247

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000031

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000015

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000015

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000044

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0000826

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000118

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0003748

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000118

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0001608

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000059

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000148

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000177

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000030

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000015

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000015

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000389

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0001122

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000234

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0004611

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000249

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0001636

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000187

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000202

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000452

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000109

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000031

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000047

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000186

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0001272

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000016

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0007244

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000016

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0002544

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000124

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000016

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000543

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000155

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000031

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000047

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0001681

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0006740

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0001028

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0053083

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0001695

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0018760

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0002279

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0003224

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0006086

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0001890

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000264

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0001070

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#81

0.0000302

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#77

0.0001449

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#123

0.0000031

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#118

0.0007936

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#114

0.0000302

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#105

0.0002532

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#126

0.0000378

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#167

0.0000328

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#156

0.0000630

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#157

0.0000202

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#169

0.0000013

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

PCB BZ#189

0.0000151

Year

Species

B.3

Metals data

Site

Reporting Month

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Lead

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Mercury

0.0034396

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Lead

0.0000222

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Mercury

0.0021271

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Lead

0.0011883

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Mercury

0.0028519

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Lead

0.0016860

ug/m3 result 0

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Mercury

0.0057326

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Lead

0.0010392

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Mercury

0.0010392

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Lead

0.0067408

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Mercury

0.0037449

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Lead

0.0026943

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Mercury

0.0013471

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Lead

0.0013917

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Mercury

0.0013917

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Lead

0.0064475

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Mercury

0.0064475

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Lead

0.0074452

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Mercury

0.0074452

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Lead

0.0067533

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Mercury

0.0067533

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Lead

0.0013700

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May / June

2024

Mercury

0.0013700

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Lead

0.0011382

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Mercury

0.0011382

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Lead

0.0011242

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Mercury

0.0011242

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Lead

0.0021572

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Mercury

0.0021572

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Lead

0.0022831

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Mercury

0.0052511

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Lead

Error

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Mercury

Error

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Lead

0.0053840

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Mercury

0.0019229

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Lead

0.0017774

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Mercury

0.0013672

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Lead

0.0013684

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Mercury

0.0013684

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Lead

0.0066209

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Mercury

0.0066209

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Lead

0.0081789

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Mercury

0.0081789

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Lead

0.0072348

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Mercury

0.0072348

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Lead

0.0008791

LAL2 - Golf course

May / June

2024

Mercury

0.0008791

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Lead

0.0011577

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Mercury

0.0011577

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Lead

0.0025891

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Mercury

0.0025891

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Lead

0.0014284

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Mercury

0.0014284

B.4

PAH data

Site

Reporting Month

Year

Species

ug/m3 result

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Naphthalene

0.00564286

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.00564286

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Acenaphthene

0.00564286

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Fluorene

0.00564286

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Phenanthrene

0.00564286

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Anthracene

0.00564286

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Fluoranthene

0.01049571

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Pyrene

0.00981857

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00564286

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Chrysene

0.00767429

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.01128571

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.00564286

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00767429

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.00711000

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00564286

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.01128571

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Naphthalene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Acenaphthene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Fluorene

0.00583689

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Phenanthrene

0.00595363

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Anthracene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Fluoranthene

0.01056823

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Pyrene

0.00936439

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Chrysene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Naphthalene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Acenaphthene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Fluorene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Phenanthrene

0.00817165

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Anthracene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Fluoranthene

0.01634330

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Pyrene

0.01400855

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.02334758

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Chrysene

0.04085826

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.08755341

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.03151923

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.02801709

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.04202564

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00583689

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.06187107

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Naphthalene

0.00688791

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.00688791

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Acenaphthene

0.00688791

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Fluorene

0.00688791

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Phenanthrene

0.01377581

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Anthracene

0.00688791

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Fluoranthene

0.02341888

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Pyrene

0.01928614

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00826549

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Chrysene

0.01928614

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.02755162

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.01239823

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.01239823

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.01239823

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00688791

LAL1 - Springfield farm

September

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.02204130

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Naphthalene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Acenaphthene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Fluorene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Phenanthrene

0.01325764

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Anthracene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Fluoranthene

0.02531005

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Pyrene

0.02410481

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.01325764

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Chrysene

0.03133625

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.07713538

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.03013101

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.02651529

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.05544106

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

October

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.06387774

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Naphthalene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Acenaphthene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Fluorene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Phenanthrene

0.01446288

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Anthracene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Fluoranthene

0.03013101

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Pyrene

0.03133625

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.03374673

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Chrysene

0.06146726

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.12052404

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.05544106

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.05544106

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.08677731

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00602620

LAL1 - Springfield farm

November

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.12052404

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Naphthalene

0.00650339

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.00650339

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Acenaphthene

0.00650339

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Fluorene

0.00650339

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Phenanthrene

0.00910474

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Anthracene

0.00650339

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Fluoranthene

0.01951016

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Pyrene

0.02081084

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.01170610

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Chrysene

0.02341220

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.05462846

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.02211152

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.02341220

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.03121626

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00650339

LAL1 - Springfield farm

December

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.05202711

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Naphthalene

0.00622789

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00622789

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00622789

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Fluorene

0.01121020

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Phenanthrene

0.03487619

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Anthracene

0.00871905

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Fluoranthene

0.06103333

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Pyrene

0.05978775

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.14946938

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Chrysene

0.22420408

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.49823128

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.13701360

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.14946938

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.19929251

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.06726122

LAL1 - Springfield farm

January

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.31139455

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Naphthalene

0.00622960

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00622960

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00622960

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Fluorene

0.00622960

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00996736

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Anthracene

0.00747552

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Fluoranthene

0.02367247

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Pyrene

0.02367247

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.02118063

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Chrysene

0.03613167

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.10839501

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.03239391

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.02491839

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.03613167

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.01245920

LAL1 - Springfield farm

February

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.05232862

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Naphthalene

0.00759100

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00759100

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00759100

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Fluorene

0.00759100

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Phenanthrene

0.02277300

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Anthracene

0.00759100

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Fluoranthene

0.04099100

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Pyrene

0.03643700

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.02429100

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Chrysene

0.03643700

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.08957300

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.03036400

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.03036400

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.03036400

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.03491800

LAL1 - Springfield farm

March

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.00910900

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Naphthalene

0.00700280

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00700280

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00700280

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Fluorene

0.00700280

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00700280

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Anthracene

0.00700280

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Fluoranthene

0.01120448

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Pyrene

0.01120448

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00700280

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Chrysene

0.01120448

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.02941177

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.00980392

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00980392

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.01120448

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00700280

LAL1 - Springfield farm

April

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.01540616

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Naphthalene

0.00412807

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00412807

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00412807

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Fluorene

0.00412807

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00412807

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Anthracene

0.00412807

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Fluoranthene

0.00743053

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Pyrene

0.00660491

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00412807

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Chrysene

0.00577930

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.01403544

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.00495368

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00495368

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.00495368

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00412807

LAL1 - Springfield farm

May /June

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.00743053

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Naphthalene

0.00543650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00543650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00543650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Fluorene

0.00543650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00543650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Anthracene

0.00543650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Fluoranthene

0.00761110

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Pyrene

0.00761110

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00543650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Chrysene

0.00543650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.02283328

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.00652380

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00652380

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.00978569

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00543650

LAL1 - Springfield farm

June / July

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.01304759

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Naphthalene

0.00547166

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00547166

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00547166

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Fluorene

0.00547166

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00547166

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Anthracene

0.00547166

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Fluoranthene

0.01313198

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Pyrene

0.00875465

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00547166

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Chrysene

0.00875465

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.01969797

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.00547166

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00547166

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.01641497

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00547166

LAL1 - Springfield farm

July / August

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.02626395

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Naphthalene

0.00499211

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00499211

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00499211

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Fluorene

0.00499211

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00998423

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Anthracene

0.00499211

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Fluoranthene

0.01897003

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Pyrene

0.01397792

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00499211

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Chrysene

0.01297949

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.03194952

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.00698896

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00998423

LAL1 - Springfield farm

August / September

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.01597476

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Naphthalene

0.00499211

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.02995268

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Acenaphthene

0.01259097

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Fluorene

0.01259097

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Phenanthrene

0.01510916

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Anthracene

0.01259097

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Fluoranthene

0.03021833

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Pyrene

0.02518194

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.01259097

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Chrysene

0.02518194

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.03777291

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.01510916

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.01510916

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.01510916

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.01259097

LAL2 - Golf course

September

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.02770013

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Naphthalene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Acenaphthene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Fluorene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Phenanthrene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Anthracene

0.00635066

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Fluoranthene

0.01016105

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Pyrene

0.01016105

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Chrysene

0.01143118

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.02667276

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.01016105

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00889092

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.02159224

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

October

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.02413250

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Naphthalene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Acenaphthene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Fluorene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Phenanthrene

0.01143118

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Anthracene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Fluoranthene

0.02667276

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Pyrene

0.03048316

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.02667276

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Chrysene

0.05207540

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.09144947

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.03175329

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.04445461

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.04953513

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00635066

LAL2 - Golf course

November

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.06858711

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Naphthalene

0.00706145

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Acenaphthylene

0.00706145

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Acenaphthene

0.00706145

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Fluorene

0.00706145

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Phenanthrene

0.01271061

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Anthracene

0.00706145

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Fluoranthene

0.02542122

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Pyrene

0.02683351

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.01412290

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Chrysene

0.02118435

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.06637762

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.02965808

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.02400893

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.04236869

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00706145

LAL2 - Golf course

December

2023

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.07202678

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Naphthalene

0.00647107

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00647107

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00647107

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Fluorene

0.00776528

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Phenanthrene

0.02717849

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Anthracene

0.00647107

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Fluoranthene

0.05694540

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Pyrene

0.05565118

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.06082804

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Chrysene

0.09059495

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.24590058

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.05823961

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.08282967

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.07894703

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.03235534

LAL2 - Golf course

January

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.11906765

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Naphthalene

0.00695943

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00695943

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00695943

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Fluorene

0.00695943

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00974320

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Anthracene

0.00695943

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Fluoranthene

0.02783771

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Pyrene

0.02922959

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.02366205

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Chrysene

0.03758090

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.11135083

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.04175656

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.02783771

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.04314845

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.01948639

LAL2 - Golf course

February

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.06124295

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Naphthalene

0.00773013

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00773013

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00773013

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Fluorene

0.00773013

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Phenanthrene

0.02164435

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Anthracene

0.00773013

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Fluoranthene

0.04174268

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Pyrene

0.03555858

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.01855230

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Chrysene

0.03710460

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.10203766

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.03092050

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.03246653

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.03710460

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.01236820

LAL2 - Golf course

March

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.04947281

100

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Naphthalene

0.00737746

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00737746

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00737746

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Fluorene

0.00737746

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00737746

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Anthracene

0.00737746

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Fluoranthene

0.01180394

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Pyrene

0.01180394

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00737746

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Chrysene

0.01032845

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.01475492

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.00885295

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00885295

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.00737746

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00737746

LAL2 - Golf course

April

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.00885295

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Naphthalene

0.00778816

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00778816

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00778816

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Fluorene

0.00778816

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00778816

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Anthracene

0.00778816

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Fluoranthene

0.00934579

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Pyrene

0.00934579

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00778816

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Chrysene

0.00778816

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.02336449

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.00934579

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00778816

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.00778816

101

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00778816

LAL2 - Golf course

May /June

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.01246106

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Naphthalene

0.00775579

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00775579

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00775579

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Fluorene

0.00775579

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00775579

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Anthracene

0.00775579

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Fluoranthene

0.00930694

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Pyrene

0.00930694

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00775579

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Chrysene

0.01396041

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.02481852

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.01085810

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00930694

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.00930694

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00775579

LAL2 - Golf course

June / July

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.01396041

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Naphthalene

0.00694802

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00694802

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00694802

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Fluorene

0.00694802

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Phenanthrene

0.00833762

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Anthracene

0.00694802

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Fluoranthene

0.01945444

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Pyrene

0.01667524

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00972722

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Chrysene

0.02223365

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.08476578

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.01528563

102

Launders Lane AQ report

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.00694802

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.05280491

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00694802

LAL2 - Golf course

July / August

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.12367467

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Naphthalene

0.00629858

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Acenaphthylene

0.00629858

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Acenaphthene

0.00629858

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Fluorene

0.00629858

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Phenanthrene

0.01007772

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Anthracene

0.00629858

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Fluoranthene

0.02267488

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Pyrene

0.01637630

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Benzo(a)Anthracene

0.00629858

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Chrysene

0.01889573

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

0.05164834

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

0.00629858

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Benxo(a)Pyrene

0.01889573

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Ideno(123-cd)Pyrene

0.02645403

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Dibenzo(ah)Anthracene

0.00629858

LAL2 - Golf course

August / September

2024

Benxo(ghi)Anthracene

0.04409004

103

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 4 LB HAVERING . UNDATED. REVIEW OF ASBESTOS MONITORING AT ARNOLDS FIELD, LAUNDERS LANE

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

Review of Asbestos Monitoring at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Purpose of the Report: • To provide an overview of the asbestos monitoring carried out by a UKAS accredited consultant in August 2024 around Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham.

Summary of findings: Over 2 monitoring periods on 1 August 2024 and 29 August 2024, the Council commissioned a UKAS accredited consultant to carry out asbestos monitoring on the boundary of Spring Farm Park and New Road/Launders Lane respectfully, whilst fires were occurring on site. On both occasions, no asbestos fibres were discovered. Report Author: Mike Richardson, Senior Public Protection Officer Contact: (email). Environmental.Health@havering.gov.uk.

Executive Summary Geo-Environmental Services Limited (GESL) undertook an intrusive contaminated land study at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham in October 2023. Following the issue of their report in December 2023, it was recommended, as the result of the discovery of small amounts of asbestos containing material (ACM) within the site, that asbestos monitoring was carried out around the site to investigate if asbestos fibres were being released. This report discusses the findings this study, undertaken on behalf of the Council in August 2024 by a UKAS accredited consultant, which indicated that no asbestos fibres were being released across the boundary of the site. It should be noted that as part of their terms and conditions, the consultant has required that their details be omitted from any publically available report.

Introduction Asbestos was once used in many building and manufacturing products, including insulation, roofing, fireproofing materials, brakes for vehicles, artex and other wallboard materials. It's still found in many places, but is banned in new building materials. The health risks around asbestos is due to the release of tiny fibres into the air when it's handled, broken up, drilled, or cut. Inhaling asbestos fibres over prolonged periods of time can cause asbestosis, and is suspected to be responsible for other health issues, particularly lung conditions. Health impacts of asbestos, such as mesothelioma, are most common in those who have been exposed to asbestos at work*, and there is some evidence to suggest that the families of people working in asbestos exposure-prone professions are also at increased risk (as fibres can be transported home on clothing. The London Borough of Havering commissioned a UKAS accredited consultant to undertake sampling around the Arnolds Field site. This was in response to the intrusive contaminated land site investigation commissioned by the Council, and undertaken on the Council’s behalf by GESL. GESL’s report (from December 2023), indicated that small amounts of ACM were on site, either at surface level or below ground level, and to investigate if asbestos fibres were leaving the site. The consultant provide UKAS accredited asbestos sampling, including air monitoring. They carried out monitoring at Spring Farm Park on 1 August 2024 and on the New Road/Launders Lane on 29 August 2024. On both occasions, fires were occurring on the site. *industry such as factories where workers were processing or manufacturing asbestos based products and goods, railway and vehicle production, and the building or construction industry, particularly from the 1950s to the 1990s.

Methods of sampling: Two methods of sampling were agreed as part of the monitoring exercise: PCM – Phase contrast microscopy. This is the standard method used for sampling and counting fibres in the air, and picks up all fibres which may be in the air at the sampling location. However, this would range from the target asbestos fibres to other manmade fibres to vegetation fibres, so cannot be used to solely identify if asbestos fibres are present. 10 static PCM samples were taken on each sampling day, and 2 personal PCM samples for the operatives, and were analysed within days of the samples being taken. SEM – Scanning Electron Microscopy. This enables the fibres captured to be differentiated from the different types of asbestos fibres and other fibres. 5 SEM samples were collected on each occasion, co-locating with some of the static PCM samples, and had a reporting time as they had to be sent to an external laboratory.

Sampling Strategy 1 August 2024. Monitors were set up on the boundary of Spring Farm Park with the land known locally as the “Moretti Land” to the south east of the park. Sampling was attempted on the Moretti Land, however despite being able to gain access, the land was too uneven and overgrown for the consultant’s analysts to safely set up their monitoring equipment along the boundary with Arnolds Field. Therefore it was decided that the next best location that day was to set up the monitoring along the boundary with Spring Park Farm. See Fig 1.1 for the location of the 10 monitoring locations along the boundary. 2 personal monitoring were also carried by the analysts present on site during the duration of the sampling exercise. 1 sample point was the “field blank”, which was not exposed to the air.

During this monitoring, smoke was emanating from the Launders Lane site, but blowing towards New Road, to the South West of Spring Park Farm.

Fig 1.1 Sampling locations 1 August 2024

29 August 2024 Monitoring was carried out, along the New Road and Launders Lane. See Fig 1.2 for the location of the 10 monitoring locations along the boundary. 2 personal monitoring were also carried by the analysts present on site during the monitoring exercise. 1 sample point was the “field blank”, which was not exposed to the air. Smoke was still emanating from the site, blowing towards the South East, where the monitoring locations were situated.

Fig 1.2 Sampling locations 29 August 2024

Results Background There is a control limit of 0.01(0.010) fibres/cm3, which is the recognised controlled limit for asbestos fibre monitoring governed by HSE/WHO. The control limit refers to the concentration of asbestos fibres in any localised atmosphere, measured and averaged over a continuous period of time, in accordance with the 1997 World Health Organisation's recommended method. f/cm3 and f/ml of air are an interchangeable unit of measurement and full results from the monitoring can be found in the reports provided by the consultant.

Summary: 1 August 2024. Less than 0.01 fibres/ml of air (f/ml) were recorded on the static PCM samples. No asbestos fibres were detected in the SEM samples. 29 August 2024 Less than 0.01 f/ml were recorded at the 10 static PCM samples. Whilst up to 6 respiritable fibres were detected within the SEM samples, these were not asbestos fibres but other machine made mineral fibres. Considering the location of the sampling locations, these are more likely to be as a result of road wear and tear and traffic generated.

Conclusion From the monitoring carried out by the Council’s UKAS accredited consultant in August 2024, it would demonstrate that at the time of monitoring, whilst there were fires occurring on the Arnolds Field site, no asbestos fibres were measured. Therefore the risk of respiritable asbestos fibres reaching the neighbouring residential areas and users of the park are minimal, and not of significant concern. Should the site be redeveloped, the appropriate safeguarding measures will be need to be taken to minimise the release of asbestos fibres into the air, particularly to those who may be developing the site. However the risk of the undisturbed ACM leaving the boundary of the site is low providing the appropriate control measures are carried out.

Limitations Guidance for asbestos monitoring does not detail how to monitor asbestos in community settings, but for enclosed spaces, with specific reference to work place monitoring. Therefore in order to provide a cost effective sampling strategy the consultant suggested monitoring across the boundary of the site, to investigate if any ACM would be detected. Due to health and safety restrictions, the analysts are only able to carry out limited to 12 air tests per day. There is a limit of detection of 0.010 f/ml of air sampled for PCM sampling.

Appendix 1: Sanitised consultant report

Appendix 2 Further information regarding asbestos and the health impacts can be found at the following links: NHS information about asbestosis: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/asbestosis/ NHS information about mesothelioma https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/mesothelioma/ Cancer Research – Risks & Causes of Mesothelioma https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/mesothelioma/risks-causes UK Health Security Agency Guidance on Asbestos: Toxicological Overview https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/asbestos-properties-incidentmanagement-and-toxicology/asbestos-toxicological-overview#ref-5 World Health Organisation key facts re Asbestos https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/asbestos Monitoring techniques for asbestos https://www.gov.uk/guidance/monitoring-ambient-air-techniques-andstandards#asbestos

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 5 A-10106 LETTER REPORT FOR AIR MONITORING LAUNDER'S LANE RV2 REDACTED 30 SEPTEMBER 2024.

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 6 GEO ENVIRONMENTAL. 21 DECEMBER 2023. REPORT (V2.0) ENTITLED: "GROUND INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR THE LAND AT ARNOLD’S FIELD, LAUNDERS LANE, RAINHAM, RM13 9FL"

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

GROUND INVESTIGATION REPORT for the land at ARNOLD’S FIELD, LAUNDERS LANE, RAINHAM, RM13 9FL on behalf of LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING COUNCIL

Ground Investigation Report

Report:

GROUND INVESTIGATION REPORT

Site:

ARNOLD’S FIELD, LAND WEST OF LAUNDERS LANE, RAINHAM, ESSEX RM13 9FL

Client:

LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING COUNCIL

Date:

21/12/2023

Reference:

GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Version:

2.0

Prepared by:

Tom Morgan BSc (Hons), FGS Consultant Engineer

& Chris Griffith MESci, FGS Senior Engineer Reviewed by: Fiona Goode BSc (Hons), MSc, FGS, MIEnvSc, RSoBRA Senior Consultant Engineer

& Jason Tilley BEng (Hons), MSc, DIC, FGS Regional Director Authorised by:

Laura Legate CGeol, CSci, BSc (Hons), MSc, FGS Environmental Director

Geo-Environmental Services Limited Unit 7, Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Road, Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex, BN6 9GL +44(0)1273 832972 www.gesl.net

GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

AMENDMENT RECORD Revision ref. 1.0 2.0

Date

Reasons for amendment

17/11/2023 21/12/2023

First Issue Updated with Gas and Groundwater monitoring results following completion of agreed works

GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Author’s initials TM & CG CG

Reviewer’s initials SA & JT FG

Authoriser’s initials LL LL

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................................i 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................1 1.1 General..........................................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Background ...................................................................................................................................................1 1.3 Objectives......................................................................................................................................................1 1.4 Standards and References ............................................................................................................................2 1.5 Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act ...............................................................................................2 1.6 Part 2A Inspection Strategy ..........................................................................................................................3 1.7 Risk Assessment Framework .........................................................................................................................3 1.8 Context for this Assessment .........................................................................................................................4 1.9 Conditions .....................................................................................................................................................5 2.0 DESK STUDY...................................................................................................................................................7 2.1 Site Description .............................................................................................................................................7 2.2 Geology .........................................................................................................................................................8 2.3 Hydrogeology ................................................................................................................................................9 2.4 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................................... 11 2.5 Radon ......................................................................................................................................................... 12 2.6 Environmental Data ................................................................................................................................... 13 2.7 Soil Chemistry ............................................................................................................................................ 13 2.8 Sensitive Land Uses .................................................................................................................................... 13 2.9 Geotechnical Data ...................................................................................................................................... 14 2.10 Landfill and Waste Management Facilities ................................................................................................ 14 2.11 Environment Agency Response (Freedom of Information Request) ......................................................... 17 2.12 Historic Mapping ........................................................................................................................................ 17 2.13 Asbestos ..................................................................................................................................................... 20 2.14 Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) Risk ............................................................................................................. 20 2.15 Previous Ground Investigations ................................................................................................................. 21 2.16 Potential Contamination ............................................................................................................................ 21 2.17 Ground Gas and Vapour Summary ............................................................................................................ 22 3.0 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................................... 24 3.1 Geotechnical Risk Assessment ................................................................................................................... 24 3.1.1 Potential Geotechnical Issues .................................................................................................................... 24 3.2 Preliminary Environmental Conceptual Site Model & Risk Assessment .................................................... 24 3.2.1 Methodology.............................................................................................................................................. 24 3.2.2 Summary of Plausible Sources ................................................................................................................... 25 3.2.3 Summary of Plausible Pathways ................................................................................................................ 27 3.2.4 Summary of Plausible Receptors ............................................................................................................... 28 3.3 Preliminary Risk Assessment Summary ..................................................................................................... 28 4.0 GROUND INVESTIGATION .......................................................................................................................... 29 4.1 Scope of Works .......................................................................................................................................... 29 4.2 Investigation Strategy ................................................................................................................................ 29 5.0 ENCOUNTERED CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................... 31 5.1 Soils ............................................................................................................................................................ 31 5.2 Groundwater .............................................................................................................................................. 33 5.6 Obstructions............................................................................................................................................... 35 5.7 Physical Restrictions................................................................................................................................... 35 6.0 COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALS CONSIDERATIONS........................................................................................... 38 6.1 Potentially Combustible Materials Encountered ....................................................................................... 38 6.2 Asbestos ..................................................................................................................................................... 39

GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

6.3 6.4 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.4.1 7.4.2 8.0 8.1

Surface Fires ............................................................................................................................................... 40 Trommel Fines ........................................................................................................................................... 40 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS......................................................................................................... 41 Ground Gases ............................................................................................................................................. 41 Soil Contamination ..................................................................................................................................... 48 Water/Leachate Contamination ................................................................................................................ 51 Waste Disposal ........................................................................................................................................... 52 Deposited Soils ........................................................................................................................................... 52 Domestic waste .......................................................................................................................................... 53 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 54 Status under Part 2A .................................................................................................................................. 57 FIGURES

FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4 FIGURE 5 FIGURE 6 FIGURE 7 FIGURE 8

Site Location Plan Exploratory Hole Location Plan Tracking Routes and Access Plan Cross Section Location Plan Summary of Encountered Materials Monitoring Well Location Plan Conceptual Site Model (current use) Summary of Landfill Sites in the Vicinity of the Site APPENDICES

APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX F APPENDIX G

GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Desk Study Information (Including UXO Preliminary Assessment and Environment Agency Freedom of Information Request and Google Earth Historical Photographs) Site Photographs Exploratory Hole Logs and Cross Sections Geochemical Laboratory Test Results (soil) Geochemical Laboratory Test Results (water/leachate) Spot Gas and Groundwater Monitoring Results, Additional Monitoring Data Graphs HazWasteOnline Assessment

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Site Details

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Site Address

Land at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ

National Grid Reference

554116, 182008

Site Area

16.94Ha (approx.)

Form of Development

The site is understood to comprise a former landfill site that has subsequently been subject to further deposit of materials over its history. The parcel of land is noted to be undulating in nature with significant level changes, which are finished at surface level with areas of low level and dense vegetation, together with waste materials/Made Ground across the surface of the site. A compound area is located on the eastern boundary off Arnolds Lane, comprising an area of hardstanding with metal portacabin style units. The works comprised a review of desk study information, an assessment of the Source Pathway Receptor Linkages (PRA) and development of a site Conceptual Model (CSM) for the current land use. The assessment included a review of third party reports (if/where made available) and intrusive investigations including 13No. machine excavated trial pits to depths of between 3.00m and 3.40m bgl (TP101 to TP113); 18No. dynamic sampler boreholes to depths of up to 5.00m bgl (WS101 to WS106, WS106a, WS107, WS107a—c, WS108, WS108a-b, WS109, WS109a-b and WS110) with gas/groundwater installations and return spot gas and groundwater monitoring of standpipes on six occasions.

Scope of works

Encountered Conditions

Ground Conditions

Geochemical laboratory testing was undertaken on encountered soils and waters to support a contamination assessment and preliminary waste assessment for the site. It is considered that all of soils encountered across the site comprised Made Ground, with no investigation locations extending into natural soils underlying the site. The Made Ground comprised a mix of materials. The soils encountered generally comprised brown silty/clayey/gravelly sometimes ashy SAND or brown, grey or black gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravels included brick concrete, tarmac, coal, clinker and slate. Other items encountered within exploratory hole positions included tyres, plastic fragments, plastic bags, cement bags, CD players, cassette tapes, timber, slate, ceramic tiles, textiles, hessian, plastic gloves, glass bottles, cabling, ceramic pipe, plastic bottles, paper, metal bars, bike parts, packing tape, polystyrene, fibreglass, metal car parts and timber sleeper, metals drums and canisters, and Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) and/or suspected Asbestos Containing Material (ACM). Some of these encountered soils were noted to have a hydrocarbon/tarry odour (TP105, TP110 and WS107c) others were noted to have an organic odour (TP106, TP107 and TP112). Other soils encountered on site comprised greyish brown ashy gravelly SILT. Gravels are fine to coarse brick with plastic (TP103 and TP104). Domestic waste: often comprising 20% to 85% plastic bags, up to 50% gravelly SAND, gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint, 5% timber, 5% textiles. Other items included: metal pipes, plastic pipes, rope, metals cans, brick, hessian materials, cladding, cables, ceramics, plastic bottles, shoes, foam, car parts, underlay and car registration plates, cassettes, paper labels, metal, tree trunk, carpet, metal wire, plastic tray, netting, plastic bucket (TP101, TP102 and TP113). TP101 was noted to have both hydrocarbon and organic odour.

i GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ Havering Borough Council

Ground Investigation Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ground Conditions Cont.

Groundwater

Excavations

Human Health

Lilac iridescent colouring (thought to be connected with some form of combustion waste) comprising fine to coarse GRAVELS of concrete and clinker (TP107) which was noted to change in colour on exposure to the air, becoming more orangey/brown like rust. Surface tipped materials noted while tracking across the site: 70% plastic (mostly plastic bags), 15% textiles, metal, timber and concrete (TP111) and ACMs. During investigation works groundwater was encountered between 3.00m bgl and 4.10m bgl. On return monitoring visits groundwater has been recorded between 2.40m bgl and 4.70m bgl. During the excavation of the intrusive investigation positions instability was noted within the Made Ground in a number of locations across the site and within varying materials. TP101 at 1.20m and TP102 at 0.80m bgl were noted to be unstable within the domestic waste encountered, TP103 at ~2.30m, TP104 at ~2.10m noted localised spalling. TP105 at 3.20m TP106 at 1.80m, TP108 at ~2.1m and TP110 at 3.4m bgl noted localised instability. After TP111 had reached 3.70m the sides were noted to collapse from 0.80m bgl. TP107, TP109, TP112, TP113 were noted to be stable and excavated to depths of between 3.30m and 3.75m bgl. Instability was only encountered within the window sampler boreholes at WS109B where the position was drilled to 3.2m bgl and collapsed to 2.8m bgl. All excavations on site are likely to be unstable in the short term. Samples from site were tested for a range of contaminants including Metals, TPH, PAH, BTEX, PCBs, VOCs, SVOCs, inorganics and asbestos. Exceedances were identified for metals and PAH when compared to Public Open Space Screening Criteria. The exceedances were identified in TP103 (PAH), TP106 (lead), TP110 (arsenic) and WS107c (PAH). The risk to members of the public from these exceedances would be mitigated if the site was secured to prevent unauthorised access.

Environmental Considerations

Asbestos was identified in 9No samples sent in for analysis. Asbestos cement, loose fibrous debris and loose fibres were among the ACMs identified. It is possible that wind disturbance could entrain any loose fibres at the surface and transport them offsite in the prevalent wind direction. It is recommended that air monitoring be carried out across the site and along the boundaries to monitor for the presence of any asbestos fibres (to assess potential mobility as a result of current conditions on site).

Groundwater/leachate

Ground Gases (Excluding Radon)

Because asbestos containing materials have been identified on site, suitable assessment, planning and control measures to minimise asbestos fibre release must be employed in line with the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 (CAR 2012) when working with asbestos and asbestos containing soils. Water/leachate samples recorded exceedances in relation to Drinking Water Standards (DWS) and EQS Freshwater in arsenic and PAH in TP110 3.50m bgl and Boron, Mercury and Chloride in WS102 3.18m bgl. It is thought that these are likely to be isolated pockets of perched water/leachate rather than a continuous body of groundwater. The nearby surface water Common Watercourse has not been sampled due to overgrown vegetation. The spot monitoring undertaken to date detected methane at concentrations in the range of 0.0% to 33.4%. Carbon dioxide has been detected at concentrations in the range of 0.1% to 30.2% and oxygen in the range 0.1% to 22.0%. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) have been detected at concentrations of between 0.0ppm to 302ppm during the monitoring visits. Atmospheric pressure was recorded in the range

ii GE21483/GIRV2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY of 991mb to 1020mb during the visits undertaken. Borehole flows were measured and recorded steady flows between -0.2 to 1.2 l/hr. Carbon monoxide was detected at concentrations ranging between 0ppm and 12ppm, hydrogen sulphide was recorded at concentrations between 0ppm and 61ppm. It is considered that the elevated concentrations of methane and carbon dioxide identified across the site are being generated by the former historic permitted landfill located on the site. In addition, the lack of oxygen or reduced concentrations of oxygen recorded within the boreholes where elevated methane has been identified identifies a lesser risk of trommel fires in these areas.

Radon

Waste Disposal

The lack of notable flow indicates that the methane and carbon dioxide identified as being generated on the site are migrating by diffusive flow only. Therefore, it is considered, based on the monitoring undertaken to date, that there is a low migration risk of gases off site. The Groundsure report states that the site lies in an area where <1% of homes are above the Action Level as defined by Public Health England and the BGS. In addition, the BGS assessment states that no radon protective measures are required in the construction of new houses or extensions on the site. The Groundsure data utilises the recently updated Radon dataset, effective as of 1st December 2022, and is based on a 50m grid square. Although the analysis indicated that some of the soils on site were classified as nonhazardous, two samples were also found to be hazardous (TP110 3.40m and TP106 2.20m) as part of the analysis undertaken. It should be noted that analysis was only undertaken on a selection of samples recovered from the investigation from the site. It should also be noted that any extraneous materials such as plastic, wood etc present in the soils as observed could impact the waste classification. Where soils are identified to be hazardous pre treatment may render some of the materials non -hazardous. It should be noted that ACMs and trommel fines were identified on site. The presence of these materials will likely impact the waste classification of any parent soils.

Recommended Further Action • Undertake asbestos air monitoring; • Secure the site to prevent unauthorised access; • Consideration of capping of the site; • If abnormal conditions, or conditions differing from those reported are encountered, Geotechnical/GeoEnvironmental advice should be sought to determine a suitable source of action. Suggested Further Action • Undertake continuous gas monitoring for a period of 3-6 weeks across the site; • Undertake a surface emissions survey across accessible areas of the site; • Undertake additional TOC analysis of Made Ground soils across the site; • Install deep boreholes solely within the historic permitted landfill waste material. This Executive Summary is intended to provide a brief summary of the main findings and conclusions of the investigation. For detailed information, the reader is referred to the main report ref. GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23.

iii GE21483/GIRV2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

1.0

INTRODUCTION

1.1

General

Geo-Environmental Services Limited (Geo-Environmental) was instructed by Havering Borough Council (LBH) (the Client) to undertake a Phase I desk study and preliminary risk assessment and subsequent intrusive investigation into the geological and geo-environmental factors pertaining to Land at Arnolds Fields, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL herein referred to as ‘the site’ to provide site specific information in relation to assessment of the site under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The site’s location is presented in Figure 1. 1.2

Background

The site is understood to comprise a former landfill that has subsequently been subject to further unlicensed deposition of materials over its history. The parcel of land is noted to be undulating in nature with significant level changes, which are finished at surface level with areas of low level and dense vegetation, together with waste materials/Made Ground across the surface of the site. A compound area is located on the eastern boundary off Arnolds Lane, comprising an area of hardstanding with metal portacabin style units. The assessment is proposed to understand the environmental factors of the historic landfilling and subsequent deposit of further waste on the site and associated risks. 1.3

Objectives

The site has been subject to formal landfilling and further unauthorised deposits of waste. The site has recently been subject to a number of surface and subsurface fires. As such, works were required by London Borough of Havering Council to assess the risk from the site and in relation to the fires that have occurred on site. The assessment and investigation has been undertaken in line with the Council’s approach to identification, assessment and remediation of contaminated land within the Borough, as required under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The first stage comprised a desk study of geotechnical and geo-environmental factors pertaining to the site, including a review of available historical maps, site walkover and an examination of other available sources of readily available geo-environmental information to allow for the development of a conceptual site model (CSM). A Preliminary Risk Assessment (PRA) was to be undertaken as part of the desk study in accordance with Land Contamination Risk Management (LCRM). The objective of the risk assessment was to evaluate the site and plausible pollutant linkages as set out in, and supported by, statutory guidance with respect to the immediate liabilities under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, and risk posed to Controlled Waters under the Water Resources Act 1991. Following the PRA an intrusive investigation and detailed quantitative risk assessment was subsequently undertaken as part of this report. The objectives of the risk assessment were to evaluate the risks posed in relation to the land use of the site itself, to adjacent land uses and the wider environment, in the context of likely planning requirements, immediate liabilities under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and risks posed to Controlled Waters under the Water Resources Act 1991 from the current status of the site. The data from the geotechnical assessment was to form the basis of an interpretation with respect to potential instability on the site. The works are being undertaken to inform the Client’s assessment of the site and allow for consideration of the stie under their Part 2A duties.

1 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

1.4

Standards and References

Where practicable, the ground investigation and subsequent geotechnical and environmental assessments were undertaken in accordance with the following documents and guidance. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1.5

National Planning Policy Framework – September 2023 Land Contamination Risk Management (LCRM), updated July 2023 Model Procedures for the Management of Contaminated Land, CLR11, DEFRA and Environment Agency 2004 (withdrawn); Environment Agency Guidance on Requirements for Land Contamination Reports, Version 1 dated July 2005; Defra Environmental Protection Act 1990: Part IIA. Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance, April 2012; BS10175:2011+A2:2017 - Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites - Code of Practice, BSI 2017; BS5930: 2015+A1:2020 - Code of Practice for Site Investigations, BSI 2020; EN ISO 14688 Geotechnical Investigation and Testing Part 1-2002 and Part 2-2004; BS1377: 1990 - Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes, BSI1990; NHBC Standards Chapter 4.1 Land Quality - Managing Ground Conditions; NHBC Standards Chapter 4.2 Building Near Trees; NHBC Standards Chapter 4.5 Vibratory ground improvement techniques; CIRIA C665 – Assessing risks posed by hazardous ground gases to buildings (2007); NHBC 10627-R01(04)- Guidance on evaluation of development proposals on sites where methane and carbon dioxide are present (2007); BS8485:2015+A1:2019 Code of practice for the characterisation and remediation from ground gas in affected developments; Estate Road Construction Specification, Rainham City Council 2012, Rev 2017. Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act

Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1990 came into force in England in April 2000. This introduced a regulatory regime for the identification, assessment and remediation of land which falls within the statutory definition ‘contaminated land’. The primary regulators under Part 2A are local authorities. S78(2) of EPA 1990, as amended by the Radioactive Contaminated Land (Modification of Enactments) (England) Regulations 2006, defines contaminated land as follows. Any land/area which appears to the local authority in whose area it is situated to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, or under the land, that: a) Significant harm is being caused or there is significant possibility of such harm being caused, or b) Pollution of controlled waters is being or likely to be caused. And in relation to harm so far as attributable to radioactivity, Any land which appears to the local authority in whose area it is situated to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, or under the land that: a) harm is being caused, or b) there is significant possibility of such harm being caused.

2 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Statutory guidance issued by Defra (April 2012) is an integral part of the regime as it provides guidance and details how specific elements of the regime are to be implemented. This guidance includes the supposition that land is uncontaminated unless or until evidence proves the contrary. In addition, the guidance also states that regulatory decisions should be based on what is reasonably likely and not on what is hypothetically possible. The overarching objectives of the regime are to provide a formal system for the identification, assessment and remediation of land where contamination is causing unacceptable risk of harm to human health or the environment. Contaminant linkages and the associated risk of harm are to be assessed in terms of current use and the circumstance of the land in accordance with the Government’s “suitable for use” approach. A cornerstone of the regime is the ‘polluter pays’ principle, whereby the cost of dealing with any contamination falls upon those (appropriate person(s)) who cause or knowingly permit the contaminating substance(s) to be present. Where such persons cannot be found, and with the exception of contamination solely relating to pollution of controlled waters, the current owner or occupier of the land would normally become responsible. Typically, remediation on a voluntary basis is promoted under the regime. However, where voluntary remediation is not forthcoming, and subject to various conditions, the regulators have a duty to secure appropriate remediation by serving a Remediation Notice on the appropriate person(s). At the point of reporting, agreement of investigation works on site was obtained from the Landowner on a voluntary basis with a view to mitigating the fires occurring on the site. 1.6

Part 2A Inspection Strategy

The Part 2A regime sets duties on local authorities to undertake periodic inspection of their areas for the purpose of identifying potentially contaminated land and determining whether this is a potential special site. The local authority is required to develop a strategic approach which is rational, ordered and efficient and which ensures that land which merits more detailed inspection due to potential contaminant linkages which could exist, is identified efficiently. Detailed inspection may comprise one or more of the following: 1) The collation and assessment of documentary evidence, or information from other sources. 2) A visit to the subject site for the purpose of visual inspection, which may include limited sampling. 3) Intrusive investigation of the land. The Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance states that where intrusive investigation is required, this should be undertaken “in accordance with appropriate good practice technical procedures for such investigations”. 1.7

Risk Assessment Framework

Land that has been polluted or contaminated will not necessarily fall within the above legal definition of contaminated land. The Local Authority is required to make any determination of a site as “contaminated land” in accordance with statutory guidance and following the well-established principles of risk assessment including the concept of a contaminant linkage (also often referred to as a pollutant linkage) where:

3 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

a) A “contaminant” is a substance which is in, on or under the land and which has the potential to cause significant harm to a relevant receptor, or to cause significant pollution of controlled waters. b) A “receptor” is something that could be adversely affected by a contaminant, for example a person, an organism, an ecosystem, property or controlled waters. The various types of receptors that are relevant under the Part 2A regime are set out in the statutory guidance. c) A “pathway” is a route by which a receptor is or might be affected by a contaminant (of a type specified in the regulations). Land cannot be determined as contaminated land unless all three elements of a pollutant linkage are present and the linkages are demonstrated to be significant. In some cases pollutant linkages can change, when new receptors are introduced following the change in land use, for example following development. The term “contaminant linkage” means the relationship between a contaminant, a pathway and a receptor. All three elements of a contaminant linkage must exist in relation to particular land before the land can be considered potentially to be contaminated land under Part 2A. Where the terms significant contaminant and significant contaminant linkage are used within this assessment, they are used in accordance with their definitions within the Statutory Guidance. In order to determine the land as contaminated land, the local authority must be able to demonstrate that one or more contaminant linkage exists in relation to the land and that at least one of the following situations arises: i. ii. iii. iv.

The contaminant linkage(s) result(s) in significant harm being caused to the receptor in the linkage; There is a significant possibility of significant harm being caused to that receptor; The contaminant linkage(s) result(s) in the pollution of controlled waters; or It is likely to result in such pollution.

The statutory guidance provides further detail and the conditions by which “significant harm” and “significant possibility of significant harm” are to be assessed. If at any stage of the assessment process the Local Authority considers on the basis of the information obtained from inspection activities that there is no longer a reasonable possibility that a significant contaminant linkage exists on the land, the authority should not carry out any further inspection in relation to that linkage. In such circumstances, the Local Authority should refer to Sections 5.2-5.4 of the statutory guidance. 1.8

Context for this Assessment

Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part 2A the London Borough of Havering is required to determine whether land within its jurisdiction is contaminated. The London Borough of Havering commissioned Geo-Environmental to carry out a site specific assessment within a scope of work which included: • • •

Review of existing documentary information; Visual inspection of land within the inspection boundary (subject to any current restriction on access given the current land use); Establishing the significance of any pollutant linkages that can be identified through the review of desk based information and visual inspection;

4 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

• • 1.9

Identify data gaps and uncertainties relating to the pollutant linkages identified on the basis of documentary review and visual assessment – the output of this was then utilised to design an appropriate preliminary intrusive investigation for the site. Undertaking of the intrusive investigation and subsequent risk assessment based on the intrusive investigation. Conditions

The desk study data obtained for the site is assumed to be factually correct and up to date at the point of their acquisition. No liability is taken for any omissions or inaccuracies in the data acquired and no attempt has been made to verify the data in this respect. It should also be noted that changes to the desk study data obtained as part of the production of this may occur at source following the production of this report,, Geo-Environmental accepts no liability where any changes in data pertaining to the site occurs and subsequently affects the assessment presented herein. The information collected from the desk study and site walkover has been used to provide an interpretation of the geotechnical and environmental conditions pertaining to the site. The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report are based on the data obtained and the results should be viewed in the context of the range of data sources consulted. Geo-Environmental takes no responsibility for conditions that have either not been revealed in the available records or that occur between or under points of any physical investigation. Whilst every effort has been made to interpret the conditions, such information is only indicative and liability cannot be accepted for its accuracy. In addition, the information obtained in relation to the site and presented herein, may not be exhaustive and further information relevant to the site may be available from other sources which has not been provided or obtained as part of this report. The data collected from the investigations have been used to provide an interpretation of the geotechnical and/or environmental conditions pertaining to the site. The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report are based on the data obtained. Geo-Environmental takes no responsibility for conditions that either have not been revealed in the available records, or that occur between or under points of physical investigation, or that result from updates to desk based data utilised subsequent to that presented herein and at the time of writing which may in turn alter the presented assessment. Whilst every effort has been made to interpret the conditions, such information is only indicative and liability cannot be accepted for its accuracy. It should be noted that in particular the concentrations and levels of mobile liquid and gaseous materials are likely to vary with time. The results obtained may therefore only be representative of the conditions at the time of sampling. The absence of asbestos within soil samples analysed does not guarantee the absence of asbestos within buildings, within or bonded to concrete, as discrete burials, or within the soils mass elsewhere within a site. This report must not be taken as any guarantee that a site is free of hazardous or potentially contaminative materials. Information contained in this report is intended for the use of the Client and Geo-Environmental can take no responsibility for the use of this information by any party for uses other than that described in this report. GeoEnvironmental makes no warranty or representation whatsoever express or implied with respect to the use of this information by any third party. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of Geo-Environmental and Geo-Environmental does not indemnify the Client or any third parties against any dispute or claim arising from any finding or other result of this investigation report or any consequential losses, resulting from unauthorised use of this report. Assessment criteria or other parameters developed for the evaluation of contamination on this site are based on a number of assumptions regarding exposure and toxicology. Exposure to contaminants and levels of adverse effects may therefore vary. Whilst reasonable care and expertise has been employed in the development of such 5 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

criteria, no liability is accepted in this respect. Other criteria or guidance on the development of assessment criteria may be published in the future and no liability is accepted in this respect. The absence of asbestos noted during the site walkover or within any soil samples analysed does not guarantee the absence of asbestos within buildings, within or bonded to concrete, as discrete burials, or within the soil mass elsewhere within a site. This report must not be taken as, or assumed to imply, any guarantee that a site is free of hazardous or potentially contaminative materials. This report remains the property of Geo-Environmental and the Client has no rights to, or reliance upon this document or supporting documents until such time as payment has been received in full for all invoices for works undertaken in connection with this report.

6 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

2.0

DESK STUDY

The findings of the Phase I desk study are presented in the following section. A copy of the information obtained as part of the desk study is presented in Appendix A. Comments made in the following sections regarding possible ground conditions on the site are based purely on the desk study assessment undertaken and associated site walkover. 2.1

Site Description

The site comprises an irregularly shaped parcel of land which extended to c.16.94Ha and was located at NGR 554116, 182008. The site is understood to comprise a former sand and gravel quarry that was subsequently registered as a landfill with the last waste recorded as being accepted in 1965. The site was licensed to accept inert, commercial, industrial, household and solid sludge waste. The details of the type of restoration works on the site post landfilling are unknown but is assumed that the site was restored with a thin cap of non-landfill materials, e.g. soil or stone. No measures to deal with possible ground gases are understood to have been installed as part of any restoration works. More recently unauthorised placement of waste materials has occurred on the site. A review of historical photographs indicates that some level of earthworks, materials movements and potential placing of materials occurred between 1999 and 2019. A Freedom of Information Request by Geo-Environmental to the Environment Agency detailed that between 30,000m3 and 50,000m3 of waste material was deposited on site between 2011 and July 2014. This material consisted of mixed household, commercial and industrial material, suspected from a waste transfer station. It is understood that the site has the tendency to combust periodically, causing smoke and odour issues associated with fires on site. The nature of the ground on the site is uneven, with significant and sometimes sudden variations in elevation across the site. Areas of the site were noted to be significantly raised in relation to the adjacent road (Launders Lane), with the highest elevation being located in the centre portion of the site sloping down to towards the stream boarding the site and adjacent roads. The southern portion of the site was noted be at generally a lower elevation than the central and norther area of the site. Traversing the site with access being created through bunds and around bunds on site and down slopes was noted to be slow and restricted areas where movement and access around site could be safely undertaken (both when undertaking a site walkover and with plant). The site is noted to be quite densely overgrown (weeds, brambles and low levels bushes) and uneven underfoot in areas with significant obstructions, including but not limited to construction rubble, plastic, wood, metal domestic waste (including plastic and black bin bags), appliances (including toasters and the like), fabric and material tentatively identified as Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) and the potential for voids as a results of poor compaction of historical/recent fires on the site, actively smouldering areas or fires, levelling and revegetation of local areas in order to gain access with the dynamic sampling rig was required as vegetation could be dense and some ruts/hillocks on site were steep and or large in nature. The southern portion of the site was noted to be more open and less overgrown with vegetation than the central and northern areas of the site. 7 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

The site is bordered to the northwest and northeast by the Common Watercourse to the southwest by the A1306, to the southeast by Launders Lane with attenuation basins and a golf course beyond, and with a stream running along the western site boundary. The topography of the site is such that the site slopes steeply down towards the stream along the boundaries. The site boundaries were also noted to be very heavily vegetated. A small area of hardstanding was located on the south-eastern boundary of the site directly off Launders Lane, though double metal gates. A metal container was located in the north of the hardstanding. At the point of the site walkover on the 8th August 2023 it was understood that concrete blocks has previously be placed in front of the gates, however these had been moved to allow access. A further smaller tarmacked access was present towards the southern area of the site off Launders Lane, which at the point of the walkover and site investigation works had concrete blocks and fly tipped materials at the entrance with only pedestrian access possible. It is understood that a number of fires have occurred on the site historically and more recently believed at this stage to be associated with the waste mass in the upper layers (historically unauthorised deposited materials) on site. Smouldering trenches were also noted within the central portion of the site during the walkover. It is understood that further fires have also occurred more recently on the southern portion of the site (end of August/beginning of September). Google maps shows historical evidence of areas of burnt ground located in the southern area of the site between the A1306 New Road and Launders Lane. During site investigation works a pile of surface tipped material was smouldering in the southern area of the site. It is understood from Havering Council’s Environmental Health Officer (EHO) that during fire brigade attendance on site the fire crews have refrained from walking or taking equipment directly onto the site due to concerns regarding stability of the site, in particular in relation to areas where fires may have been occurring underground and appear to comprise burning waste materials. It is understood that fires have been dealt with via spraying water onto the site/fire from height along site boundaries. The surrounding land uses were noted to comprise a stream bordering the north and western boundary of the site, Launders Lane to the east, and the A1306 located to the south of the site. The wider area comprised a mix of commercial land uses (comprising mineral extraction and landfilling operations, a golf course to the east of Launders Lane, a cricket ground to the northwest and further agricultural land and a park/area of public open space. The closest residential development was Rainham further to the west and northwest of the site. A selection of the photographs from the site walkover and intrusive works are included as Appendix B. 2.2

Geology

British Geological Survey (BGS) geological mapping indicated the site to be underlain by a succession of natural geology comprising Alluvium, Head Deposits, Taplow Gravel Member and London Clay Formation. In addition, the site is mapped as infilled ground and is understood to have been subject to extraction of natural strata, e.g. sand and gravel, followed by landfilling such that a variable thickness of Made Ground is also anticipated to be present. BS5930:2015 defines Made Ground as anthropogenic ground in which the material has been placed without engineering control and/or manufactured by man in some way, such as through crushing or washing, or arising from an industrial process. Great variations in material type, thickness and degree of compaction invariably occur and there can be deleterious or harmful matter, as well as potentially methanogenic organic material. In addition, on sites which have undergone several phases of historic development it is not uncommon for asbestos to be present at surface and within Made Ground and/or disturbed soils. Alluvium is the most recent river or estuarine deposit and generally comprises silty clays usually with an appreciable organic content. Lenses of sand and gravel are also commonly found, as are pockets of peat. 8 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Head Deposits are drifts produced by solifluction, the downslope movement of debris outwash during the periglacial period, and characteristically comprise poorly sorted clay, sand, gravel and rock of local derivation. The Taplow Gravel Member mainly comprises sand and gravel with localised lenses of silt, clay or peat. The deposits are generally found at an elevation close to or higher than that of the existing rivers. The Taplow Gravel Member forms part of the Maidenhead Formation of the Thames River Terrace Deposits. London Clay Formation in the study area is characterised by stiff grey fissured clay, weathering to brown near surface. Concretions of argillaceous limestone in nodular form (Claystones) occur throughout the formation. Crystals of gypsum (Selenite) are often found within the weathered part of the London Clay, and precautions against sulphate attack to concrete are sometimes required. The lowest part of the formation is a sandy bed with black rounded gravel and occasional layers of sandstone and is known as the Basement Beds. In the north London area the upper part of the London Clay has been disturbed by glacial action and may contain pockets of sand and gravel. 11No. BGS borehole records were identified within the site by the Groundsure dataset, records of which are noted to be from the early 1960s and 1970s. The borehole logs report Topsoil and/or Made Ground across the site with Made Ground was described primarily as bricks and rubble. Sand and gravel were reported to underlie the Topsoil and/or Made Ground between 0.30m-0.90m bgl to 4.50m-5.50m bgl, which was then reported to be underlain by firm to stiff clays of the London Clay Formation between 20.00m and 56.20m bgl. One borehole reported Oldhaven Beds and Woolwich Beds (now referred to as the Lambeth Group) to 75.00m bgl underlain by Thanet Sand to 77.11m bgl where the hole was terminated. 2.3

Hydrogeology

With reference to Groundsure data, the underlying superficial strata were classified as a Secondary ‘A’ aquifer (Taplow Gravel Member) and Secondary Undifferentiated Strata (Alluvium and Head Deposits) and the bedrock strata was classified as Unproductive Strata (London Clay). Secondary ‘A’ aquifers are defined as, permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale, and in some cases forming an important source of base flow to rivers. These are generally aquifers formerly classified as minor aquifers. Secondary Undifferentiated aquifer is the assigned in cases where it has not been possible to attribute either category A or B to a rock type. In most cases, this means that the layer in question has previously been designated as both minor and non-aquifer in different locations due to the variable characteristics of the rock type. Unproductive Strata are rock layers or drift deposits with low permeability that have negligible significance for water supply or river base flow. According to information provided from the Environment Agency the site was indicated to be outside of any Source Protection Zone with regard to the protection of groundwater for potable supply. The environmental dataset did not identify any licenced discharges to controlled water (land/soakaway) within 500m of the site.

9 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Six groundwater abstractions were identified within 500m of the site. Note that one record has been grouped with three different uses, details of which are below: •

•

25m Southwest; Status: Historical; Licence No: TH/037/0055/020; Details: Transfer Between Sources (Post Water Act 2003); Direct Source: Thames Groundwater; Point: Taplow Gravels at East Hall Farm, Wennington; Name: Brett Aggregates Limited; Easting: 553389 Northing: 181284; Annual Volume (m3): Not supplied; Max Daily Volume (m3): Not supplied; Original Application No: Not supplied; Original Start Date: 30/11/2021; Expiry Date: 31/03/2028; Version Start Date: 30/11/2021; Version End Date: Not supplied. 25m Southwest; Status: Active; Licence No: TH/037/0055/020; Details: Transfer Between Sources (Post Water Act 2003); Direct Source: Thames Groundwater; Point: Taplow Gravels at East Hall Farm, Wennington; Name: Brett Aggregates Limited; Easting: 553389 Northing: 181284; Annual Volume (m3): Not supplied; Max Daily Volume (m3): Not supplied; Original Application No: NPS/NA/000978; Original Start Date: 30/11/2021; Expiry Date: 31/03/2028; Version Start Date: 30/11/2021; Version End Date: Not supplied. 114m South; Status: Active; Licence No: TH/037/0055/017; Details: General Use Relating To Secondary Category (Medium Loss), Mineral Washing and Dust Suppression; Direct Source: Thames Groundwater; Point: Wennington Quarry; Name: Ingrebourne Valley Limited; Easting: 553811 Northing: 181530; Annual Volume (m3): 51085; Max Daily Volume (m3): 407; Original Application No: NPS/WR/029645; Original Start Date: 26/07/2019; Expiry Date: 31/03/2028; Version Start Date: 26/07/2019; Version End Date: Not supplied. 114m South; Status: Active; Licence No: TH/037/0055/018; Details: Dewatering; Direct Source: Thames Groundwater; Point: Wennington Quarry; Name: Ingrebourne Valley Limited; Easting: 553811 Northing: 181530; Annual Volume (m3): Not supplied; Max Daily Volume (m3): Not supplied; Original Application No: NPS/WR/030164; Original Start Date: 26/07/2019; Expiry Date: 31/03/2028; Version Start Date: 26/07/2019; Version End Date: Not supplied.

Seven Pollution Incidents (EA/NRW) to groundwater were identified within 500m of the site, details of which are highlighted below: • • • • • •

On site; Incident Date: 20/08/2014; Incident Identification: 1269902; Pollutant: Specific Waste Materials; Pollutant Description: Commercial Waste; Water Impact: Category 3 (Minor); Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant); Air Impact: Category 3 (Minor) On site; Incident Date: 16/05/2013; Incident Identification: 1113336; Pollutant: General Biodegradable Materials and Wastes; Pollutant Description: Other General Biodegradable Material or Waste; Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact); Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant); Air Impact: Category 3 (Minor) On site; Incident Date: 16/05/2013; Incident Identification: 1113336; Pollutant: Inert Materials and Wastes; Pollutant Description: Construction and Demolition Materials and Wastes; Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact); Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant); Air Impact: Category 3 (Minor) On site; Incident Date: 16/05/2013; Incident Identification: 1113336; Pollutant: Specific Waste Materials; Pollutant Description: Household Waste; Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact); Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant); Air Impact: Category 3 (Minor) 63m North; Incident Date: 24/09/2018; Incident Identification: 1653340; Pollutant: Specific Waste Materials; Pollutant Description: Electrical Equipment; Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact); Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant); Air Impact: Category 4 (No Impact) 63m North; Incident Date: 24/09/2018; Incident Identification: 1653340; Pollutant: Inert Materials and Wastes; Pollutant Description: Construction and Demolition Materials and Wastes; Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact); Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant); Air Impact: Category 4 (No Impact)

10 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

•

63m North; Incident Date: 24/09/2018; Incident Identification: 1653340; Pollutant: Specific Waste Materials; Pollutant Description: Contaminated Construction & Demolition Mat & Waste; Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact); Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant); Air Impact: Category 4 (No Impact)

The site was identified as being located within an area with moderate risk of groundwater flooding to occur this is the highest risk within 50m of the site. It is worth noting the majority of the site is negligible risk with the moderate risk areas associated with the stream along the northern and western site boundaries (referred to as the ‘Common Watercourse’, historically identified as the ‘Common Sewer’). 2.4

Hydrology

With reference to the Groundsure dataset, while no surface water features were identified on the subject site itself, the closest surface water feature was located running roughly north-south along the western boundary of the site and comprised an ‘Inland River not influenced by normal tidal action’. Referred to as the Common Watercourse. While the Groundsure data indicated the majority of the site was located in a Flood Zone 1, the boundaries of the site to the northwest and northeast of the subject site were shown to be located within a high risk area for river and coastal flooding (Flood Zone 2 and 3). However, these areas are noted to be located in an area benefiting from the presence of flood defences. Four discharge consents to controlled waters were identified within a radius of 500m of the site boundary: •

•

6m Northwest; Havering Aggregates Limited, Spring Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 8DH; Effluent Type: Trade Discharges - Site Drainage; Permit Number: CANM.1223; Receiving Water: common watercourse aka Southall Sewer; Status: New Consent (WRA 91, S88 & SCHED 10 as amended by env act 1995); Issue date: 08/06/2007; Effective Date: 08/06/2007; Revocation Date: 30/06/2008. 18m Southwest; Rainham Depot, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 8DB; Effluent Type: Miscellaneous; Discharges - Surface Water; Permit Number: CEVR.0140; Receiving Water: Low Level Sewer; Status: Revoked (WRA 91, S88 & SCHED 10 as amended by env act 1995); Issue date: 10/11/1971; Effective Date: 10/11/1971; Revocation Date: 16/01/2009. 29m Southwest; Havering Aggregates Limited, Spring Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 8DH; Effluent Type: Trade Discharges - Process Effluent - not Water Company; Permit Number: CANM.1223; Receiving Water: Common Watercourse aka Southall Sewer; Status: Surrendered Under EPR 2010; Issue date: 01/07/2008; Effective Date: 01/07/2008; Revocation Date: 17/07/2018. 350m Southwest; South Hall Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex; Effluent Type: Trade Discharges - Process Effluent - not Water Company; Permit Number: CANM.0255; Receiving Water: Tributary Southall Sewer; Status: Surrendered Under EPR 2010; Issue date: 16/08/2001; Effective Date: 16/08/2001; Revocation Date: 31/12/2011.

The desk study data identified seven surface water abstraction points within 500m of the site, details of which are below: •

•

On site; Status: Historical; Licence No: 08/37/55/0102; Details: Spray Irrigation – Direct; Direct Source: Thames Surface Water - Non Tidal; Point: Berwick Ponds Farm & South Hall Farm Point 'C'; Name: W O Watt & Partners Ltd; Easting: 554080 Northing: 182110; Annual Volume (m3): 174500; Max Daily Volume (m3): 1528; Original Application No: Not supplied; Original Start Date: 28/11/2003; Expiry Date: 31/03/2016; Version Start Date: 28/11/2003; Version End Date: Not Supplied 2m Northwest; Status: Historical; Licence No: 08/37/55/0102/R01; Details: Spray Irrigation – Direct; Direct Source: Thames Surface Water - Non Tidal; Point: Berwick Ponds Farm & South Hall Farm Point 'C'; Data 11

GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

•

Type: Point; Name: W O Watt & Partners Ltd; Easting: 554069 Northing: 182113; Annual Volume (m3): 174500; Max Daily Volume (m3): 1528; Original Application No: NPS/WR/019126; Original Start Date: 28/11/2003; Expiry Date: 31/03/2028; Version Start Date: 27/02/2017; Version End Date: Not Supplied 35m West; Status: Historical; Licence No: 08/37/55/0065; Details: Spray Irrigation – Direct; Direct Source: Thames Surface Water - Non Tidal; Point: Berwick Ponds Farm, Rainham – Rainham; Common Sewer; Name: W O Watt & Partners Ltd; Easting: 554000 Northing: 182100; Annual Volume (m3): 4546; Max Daily Volume (m3): 4546; Original Application No: Not Supplied; Original Start Date: 01/07/1974; Expiry Date: Not Supplied; Version Start Date: 26/10/1979; Version End Date: Not Supplied 313m Southwest; Status: Historical; Licence No: 08/37/55/0102/R01; Details: Spray Irrigation – Direct; Direct Source: Thames Surface Water - Non Tidal; Point: Berwick Ponds Farm & South Hall Farm Point 'D'; Name: W O Watt & Partners Ltd; Easting: 553784 Northing: 181605; Annual Volume (m3): 174500; Max Daily Volume (m3): 1528; Original Application No: NPS/WR/019126; Original Start Date: 28/11/2003; Expiry Date: 31/03/2028; Version Start Date: 27/02/2017; Version End Date: Not Supplied 319m Southwest; Status: Historical; Licence No: 08/37/55/0102; Details: Spray Irrigation – Direct; Direct Source: Thames Surface Water - Non Tidal; Point: Berwick Ponds Farm & South Hall Farm Point 'D'; Data Type: Point; Name: W O Watt & Partners Ltd; Easting: 553780 Northing: 181600; Annual Volume (m3): 174500; Max Daily Volume (m3): 1528; Original Application No: Not Supplied; Original Start Date: 28/11/2003; Expiry Date: 31/03/2016; Version Start Date: 28/11/2003; Version End Date: Not Supplied 398m Northeast; Status: Historical; Licence No: 08/37/55/0004; Details: Spray Irrigation – Storage; Direct Source: Thames Surface Water - Non Tidal; Point: Berwick Ponds Farm, Rainham – Rainham Common Sewer (2); Data Type: Point; Name: W O Watt & Partners Ltd; Easting: 554900 Northing: 182400; Annual Volume (m3): 45461; Max Daily Volume (m3): 45461; Original Application No: Not Supplied; Original Start Date: 03/11/1966; Expiry Date: Not Supplied; Version Start Date: 29/09/1979; Version End Date: Not Supplied 447m Southwest; Status: Historical; Licence No: 08/37/55/0004; Details: Spray Irrigation – Storage; Direct Source: Thames Surface Water - Non Tidal; Point: Berwick Ponds Farm, Rainham – Rainham Common Sewer (1); Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD; Easting: 553600 Northing: 181600; Annual Volume (m3): 45461; Max Daily Volume (m3): 45461; Original Application No: Not Supplied; Original Start Date: 03/11/1966; Expiry Date: Not Supplied; Version Start Date: 29/09/1979; Version End Date: Not Supplied

Two Pollution Incidents (EA/NRW) to controlled waters were identified within a radius of 500m of the site boundary: • •

50m South; Incident Date: 16/07/2001; Incident Identification: 16636; Pollutant: Pollutant Not Identified; Pollutant Description: Not Identified; Water Impact: Category 3 (Minor); Land Impact: Category 4 (No Impact); Air Impact: Category 4 (No Impact) 52m South; Incident Date: 03/09/2001; Incident Identification: 28584; Pollutant: Other Pollutant; Pollutant Description: Microbiological; Water Impact: Category 3 (Minor); Land Impact: Category 4 (No Impact); Air Impact: Category 4 (No Impact)

It is considered unlikely that the discharge consents or recorded pollution incidents will have ongoing impacts to the site due to the dates of incidents, types of materials discharged, pollutants released and the designated water impact categories. 2.5

Radon

The Groundsure report states that the site lies in an area where <1% of homes are above the Action Level as defined by Public Health England and the BGS. In addition, the BGS assessment states that no radon protective measures are required in the construction of new houses or extensions on the site.

12 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

The Groundsure data utilises the recently updated Radon dataset, effective as of 1st December 2022, and is based on a 50m grid square. 2.6

Environmental Data

Searches of other various environmental databases were made as part of the desk study, including air pollution control sites, Part IIA contaminated land, Integrated Pollution Control (IPC) and Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) sites, registered radioactive substances, COMAH sites, explosives sites, Notification of Installations Handling Hazardous Substances (NIHHS) sites, planning permissions for sites involving hazardous substances and fuel station registers. Additional detail is referenced in Appendix A. The Groundsure dataset did not identify any of the above-mentioned sites within 500m of the site boundary. However, the following industrial land uses/trade directory entries were identified in proximity to the site: • 2.7

Cemetery located ~ 170m north of the site. Soil Chemistry

Data obtained as part of the desk study provides details on the estimated soil chemistry for the natural soils in the vicinity of the site. The estimated soil quality on the subject site is presented Table 2.1. Contaminant Estimated Concentration Arsenic 15 – 25 mg/kg Cadmium 1.8 mg/kg Chromium 60 – 180 mg/kg Lead 100mg/kg Nickel 15 – 45 mg/kg Table 2.1 Estimated soil chemical concentrations of natural soils on site However, it should be noted that this site has been subject to quarrying, landfilling and unathorised deposit of waste over its history and as such it is considered that presence of natural soils across the majority of the site in unlikely. As such, these values are not necessarily representative of the site’s soil chemistry and do not take account of the potential presence or condition of any Made Ground and do not account for a site’s historic or current use. Furthermore, some screening criteria are dependent on pH and soil organic matter content. Therefore, concentrations of specific determinands and the utilised S4UL/C4SL cannot be determined without site specific investigation and analysis. 2.8

Sensitive Land Uses

A search was made of environmentally sensitive areas including local and national nature reserves, areas of outstanding natural beauty (AONBs), Ramsar sites, sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs), conservation areas, special protection areas and biosphere reserves. No environmentally sensitive areas were identified within 500m of the site boundary, with the exception of the site being located within Havering Green Belt. According to the Groundsure data set, the site lies within a surface water Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ), Southall 13 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Sewer and Runningwater Brook NVZ as defined by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Nitrate Vulnerable Zones are designated areas of land draining into waters polluted by nitrates from agriculture. It is also understood that the site is location within Havering’s Air Quality Monitoring Area (AQMA) as of September 2006 with respect to nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter 10 (PM10). 2.9

Geotechnical Data

The site was located within an area considered by the Coal Authority that might not be affected by coal mining activity. National databases for a number of different geological hazards have been compiled by the BGS, and a summary of the highest hazard data pertaining to the site itself is presented in Table 2.2. Hazard Non-coal mining Collapsible ground Compressible ground Ground dissolution Landslide Running sand Shrinking and Swelling clay BGS Recorded Mineral Sites with 500m

• •

• • Table 2.2 Summary of BGS geological hazards 2.10

Designation Negligible Very Low Moderate Negligible Very Low Low Moderate On Site: Launders Lane - Sand and gravel (Taplow Gravel Formation), Ceased 126m north, 162m south, 165m northwest, 249m west, 255m west, 272m east. 380m south, 423m west, 426m southwest and 435m west: Eight ceased sand and gravel pits 255m West: Spring Farm Quarry - Sand & Gravel, Active 380m South: Wennington Quarry - Sand & Gravel, Active

Landfill and Waste Management Facilities

A search of BGS recorded landfill sites, IPC registered waste sites, licensed waste management facilities, Local Authority recorded landfill sites, other registered landfill sites, waste transfer stations and other waste treatment or disposal sites was undertaken as part of the desk study. Such sites may form an artificial source of ground gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, where wastes are buried or disposed of to landfill. Four historic landfill sites, six licensed waste management facilities and two BGS recorded landfill sites were identified within 500m of the site, details of which are provided within Table 2.3 below. Site Details

Specified Waste

Operator: Ingrebourne

L05: Inert LF

Operation Dates Active landfills Active

Reference

Distance from Site

ING014

17m N

14 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Site Details Valley Limited Site Address: New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9GF Operator: Brett Aggregates Limited Site Address: East Hall Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9DS Operator: Havering Aggregates Limited Site Address: South Hall Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EW Operator: Ingrebourne Valley Limited Site Address: Land Adjacent To Wennington Hall Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EE Operator: Brett Aggregates Limited Site Address: East Hall Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9DS Arnold's Field, Launders Lane, Rainham Moor Hall Farm, Launders Lane, Rainham Willow Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, RM13 9ED Rainham Quarry, Warwick Lane, Rainham, Essex Willow Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, RM13 9ED

Specified Waste

Operation Dates

Reference

Distance from Site

L05: Inert LF

Active

BAL174

28m SW

L05: Inert LF

Active

HAV003

42m SW

L05: Inert LF

Active

ING002

137m S

L05: Inert LF

Active

BAL174

489m SW

8HV006

On site

8HV005

On site^

8HV003

16m South

Not Provided

41m Northeast

8HV003

297m Southeast

Historic Landfills Household, First Recorded commercial, inert, 31/12/1965 Last Recorded: industrial and liquid sludge wastes 31/12/1965* First Recorded: Not supplied Inert, Commercial Last Recorded: 31/12/1971 Not supplied

Not supplied

No dates supplied Licence Issue: 25/07/1997 Licence Surrender: 03/03/2015 First Recorded: Not supplied Last Recorded: 31/12/1971 15

GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Site Details Willow Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, RM13 9ED New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9GF

South Hall Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EW

East Hall Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9DS South Hall Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EW

Land Adjacent To Wennington Hall Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EE

Specified Waste

Operation Dates Reference First Recorded: Not supplied Inert, Industrial 8HV003 Last Recorded: 31/12/1971 Licensed Waste Management Facilities Issue Date: 26/07/2010 Modified: ING014 Inert LF 15/02/2021 Surrendered Date: Not supplied Issue Date: 06/02/2002 Landfill taking NonModified: HAV003 Biodegradeable 14/10/2020 Wastes and Inert LF Surrendered Date: Not supplied Issue Date: 08/08/2018 Modified: Inert LF BAL174 06/09/2021 Surrendered Date: Not supplied Issue Date: 06/02/2002 Landfill taking NonEffective Date: Not HAV003 Biodegradable supplied Wastes Surrendered Date: Not supplied Issue Date: 22/04/2021 Effective Date: Not Inert LF ING002 supplied Surrendered Date: Not supplied

Distance from Site 338m South

144m West

201m West

212m Southwest

257m West

430m South

Note: *It is assumed that there is a data error here and the start and end filling dates are not actually the same, historical maps show site was mapped as a sand and gravel pit until 1974. ^ Moor Hall Farm being mapped as onsite, is thought to be a mapping error as it is understood that this was located off site to the east of Launders Lane and has subsequently been developed as Ingrebourne Links Golf Course.

Table 2.3 Summary of landfill and waste management facilities within 500m of the site

Subsequent to the landfill activity on the site as referred to in Table 2.3 above it understood that the site has been subject to unauthorised deposit of waste activates on site. A review of historical photos from Google Earth indicated some level of earthworks, materials movements and potential placing of materials occurred may have occurred between 1999 and 2019 (Copies of relevant photos are presented in Appendix A, with the desk study information). Information raised by a member of the public at a public meeting of residents of Havering Borough Council in Rainham on the 1st September 2023, indicated there was information and a concern with respect to the potential for radioactive waste from the former Olympic development site in London to have been deposited at Arnolds Field as part of the unauthorised deposit of waste. To date no actual evidence of this activity has been made 16 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

available to Geo-Environmental as part of their assessment. However, it was recommended that a radiation monitor be present on site to screen soils as part of any intrusive works on site to further assess this. 2.11

Environment Agency Response (Freedom of Information Request)

A freedom of information request was made to the Environment Agency on the 15th June 2023 in relation to information pertaining to the subject site. A copy of the Environment Agency response is presented in Appendix A. The Environment Agency have advised that due to the timeline for the historical landfilling works on the site the records in relation to the subject site itself are no longer held by the Environment Agency. In addition, it is understood that the Environment Agency have historically commissioned an investigation by Jacobs pertaining the site itself in relation to the subsequent unauthorised deposits of waste on the site. However, due to the time lapse since this report was produced this is also no longer held within the Environment Agency’s records. In summary the Environment Agency freedom of information request in relation to the site response stated ‘Having reviewed our case file, we do not hold any permits, and/or Compliance Assessment Reports. We have no records of any surveys and/or sampling results for the site within the historic casefile. We are aware from our investigation at the site, that between 2011 and July 2014 there was extensive deposits of non-hazardous waste at site, approximately between 30 to 50,000 cubic metres. Waste consisted of mixed household, commercial and industrial material, suspected from a waste transfer station. We took prosecutions against three offenders, who were convicted for the deposits.’ 2.12

Historic Mapping

Historic maps dating back to 1871 were obtained as part of the desk study. A summary of the apparent key features observed on the map extracts both on the site and within the local area is presented within Table 2.4. Date

On-site

Off-site

1862-1866 (1:10,560)

The site comprised two/three fields (assumed to be agricultural).

1866 (1:2,500) 1867 (1:2,500)

No significant changes noted.

Launders Lane ran along the eastern boundary. A common sewer was noted running along the northern and western boundary of the site. The surrounding land was shown to be mostly open fields (agricultural). A farm was shown within 500m north and a barn to the west of the site. Three ponds were shown within 500m east of the site and a further two ponds were noted c.500m and 750m northeast of the site. A pond was shown c.500m north of the site. Wennington was shown c.500m south of the site which comprised a small number of houses and community buildings. A railway was noted c.750m southwest of the site trending NWSE. Two ponds c.500m south of the site were shown with a further pond c.750m southwest of the site. No significant changes noted.

No significant changes noted.

17 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Date 1864-1867 (1:2,500) 1869 (1:10,560) 1895 (1:10,560)

1897 (1:2,500) 1895-1898 (1:10,560) 1907 (1:10,560) 1907 (1:10,560) 1920 (1:2,500) 1921 (1:10,560)

On-site

Off-site

No significant changes noted.

No visible mapping available.

Two areas of marsh were shown along the western side of the site. The fields were no longer divided and the site covered one large field and a small portion of a field immediately to the south. No significant changes noted.

The southernmost pond to the west of the site was no longer shown. A row of houses was mapped c.750m south of the site.

No significant changes noted.

Limited mapping shows no significant changes noted. Limited mapping shows no significant changes noted. Limited mapping shows no significant changes noted. No significant changes noted.

No significant changes noted. No visible mapping available. No significant changes noted. An area of marsh land was shown along the west of the site.

No significant changes noted.

1931 (1:10,560) 1938 (1:10,560)

No significant changes noted.

1939 (1:2,500) 1951 (1:10,560)

No significant changes noted.

1954-1955 (1:10,560)

No significant changes noted.

1961 (1:2,500) 1961-1965 (1:2,500) 1965

No significant changes noted.

A gravel pit was shown c.250m south of the site. A mortuary and cemetery were shown c.750m west of the site. Limited mapping shows no significant changes noted. Residential development (Rainham) was shown c.500m northwest and west of the site. A road (New Road A1306) was shown to run along the southern boundary of the site that joined with Launders Lane just beyond the southeast corner of the site. A “Jews’ Cemetery” was shown approximately c. 180m north of the site. Limited mapping shows additional development of the land c.500m west and southwest of the site. The gravel pit to the south of the site was no longer shown. A recreational ground was c.220m, northwest of the site. An unnamed gravel pit was shown 500m northeast of the site. A development was shown c.750m northeast of the site. A school was shown c.750m southwest of the site. Electricity lines were shown trending roughly east to west just south of the site. No significant changes noted.

No significant changes noted.

18 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Date (1:2,500) 1967 (1:10,560)

1973 (1:2,500) 1974 (1:2,500) 1973-1974 (1:10,000)

On-site

Off-site

The site as shown to comprise a sand and gravel pit was that was noted to extend across the whole site apart from the southernmost tip (SE and SW corners).

The small pit 500m of the northeast of site was no longer mapped. Two large pits were shown c.750m northeast of the site. A works was shown c.500m east of the site. A large sand and gravel pit was noted c.500m southeast of the site. No significant changes noted.

No significant changes noted. Limited mapping showed no significant changes noted. The sand and gravel pit was no longer labelled on the site. No other significant features/changes were noted on the site.

1987-1992 (1:10,000)

No significant changes noted.

1992 (1:2,500) 2001 (1:10,000)

No significant changes noted.

2010 (1:10,000) 2023 (1:10,000)

No significant changes noted.

Limited mapping showed no significant changes noted. The sand and gravel pit c.500m southeast of the site was no longer shown. A large sand and gravel pit 500m extending to c.750m northeast of the site was shown. The pit c.750m northeast of the site was shown to have been extended towards the west. A lake was shown immediately to the east of the site. Some of the pits c.750m northeast of the site were no longer shown. A lake was shown c.750m northeast of the site. One of the electricity lines just south of the site was no longer mapped. No significant changes noted. The pit within 500m to the northeast of the site was no longer mapped. Three lakes were shown c.500m northeast where the pit was previously shown. The watercourse formally labelled as the ‘Common Sewer’ was shown as the ‘Common Watercourse’. One of the ponds mapped c.250m northeast was no longer shown. A second lake/waterbody was shown immediately to the east of the site and c.500m east of the site. A waterbody was mapped c.250m southwest of the site.

No significant changes noted.

Table 2.4 Summary of historic map extracts

From 1862 historic mapping showed the site to have been open fields with hedgerow boundaries. A marsh area was mapped along the west boundary between 1895 to 1921. The 1967 mapping showed a sand and gravel pit extended across almost the entire site; this was shown until the 1973-1974 mapping. It is understood that the site was quarried for the sand and gravel deposits of the Taplow Gravel. This pit (sand and gravel extraction) ceased to be mapped and no further changes were mapped for the site, although landfill records subsequently indicate that the site was infilled with inert and household waste. While not mapped on the historical maps reviewed for the site, the site is understood to have been subject to the further deposition of waste (without formal permitting or regulatory authorisation/approval) following any formal reinstatement works of the original permitted landfill. A review of aerial photographs from Google Earth indicates that earthworks and deposits of further waste materials occurred on site between 1999 and 2019 (copies of

19 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

relevant photos are presented in Appendix A, with the desk study information) with the site comprising appearing to comprise rough grassland from around 2020. The surrounding area remained fairly open for the duration of the mapping. There was development shown c.500m west, north and south of the site. The land to the east of the site was also shown to comprise an area where large sand and gravel pits were noted over the mapping period as well as large water bodies (assumed to be settlement ponds) associated with these areas, some of which were then mapped as subsequently having been infilled. 2.13

Asbestos

During the initial site walkover undertaken on the 8th August 2023 no clear evidence of asbestos containing materials was observed. In line with current best practice, asbestos and ACM should be assumed to be present until proven otherwise, this includes the consideration of the potential for asbestos to be present within the shallow soils on the site as well as beneath areas of hardstanding. It should be noted that the site was noted to be overgrown at the point of the site walkover in August 2023 which may have masked the presence of readily visible asbestos/Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM). A subsequent site walkover of the site was undertaken in September 2023, during which time some site clearance and tracking of an excavator was undertaken to create access routes around the site, did however identify the presence of ACMs at the surface of the site. It should however be noted that the absence of asbestos recorded across parts of the site as part of the site walkover/s is not a guarantee of the absence of asbestos elsewhere on a site. 2.14

Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) Risk

A review of the Zetica UXO Risk Mapping was undertaken, which indicated that the site was located in an area considered to be high risk with respect to UXO. A preliminary desk based risk assessment was undertaken for the site by Zetica. This highlighted that during WWII the site was located in the Urban District (UD) of Hornchurch, which officially recorded 1,091No. High Explosive (HE) bombs with a bombing density of 55.1 bombs per 405 hectares (ha). Readily available records were found to indicate that several HE bombs fell in close proximity to the site. Further liaison was undertaken with Zetica in relation to the historical use of the site as a former sand and gravel quarry which was then subject to infilling and unregulated waste disposal. Zetica confirmed that where works were confined to within the depth and footprint of the post WWII intrusive works (i.e. former quarried area) of the site, the likelihood of encountering UXO on the site was considered to be low. Third party information from liaison with the Council and GEMCO (the Landowner’s Consultants for the site) indicated that the previous site walkovers on site had indicated that there were other potential explosion hazards identified within the unregulated waste at the site including Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG) cylinders. In addition, the presence of ground gases were identified as a potential risk driver in relation to the site. It was concluded that the risk with respect to UXO had been considered, however there remained the potential for further explosion risks at the site relating to items within the waste.

20 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

2.15

Previous Ground Investigations

Geo-Environmental have been made aware of the following 3rd party reports that have been undertaken in relation to the site: • •

Phase 1 Geo-Environmental Assessment for Land at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Essex RM13 9FL, by GEMCO (Green Earth Management Co. Ltd), on behalf of SMC Services (Essex) Limited, reference 1774 R01: Issue 2, dated December 2020. Outline Remediation Strategy for Land at Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Essex RM13 9FL, by GEMCO (Green Earth Management Co. Ltd), on behalf of SMC Services (Essex) Limited, reference 1774 R02: Issue 1, dated October 2022.

Geo-Environmental have also been informed by Havering Borough Council that previous investigation works have been undertaken on the site commissioned by the Environment Agency in relation to the unregulated deposit of waste materials on the site and reported by Jacobs. However, whilst a copy of this report has been requested it is understood that a full copy is no longer held on file by the Environment Agency and to date Geo-Environmental have been unable to obtain a copy. Reference is made in GEMCO’s Phase 1 Assessment Report to a technical note undertaken by Jacobs dated March 2012. The summary provided in the GEMCO report indicates that the materials encountered on site comprised ‘brown sandy gravelly clay or sandy clayey gravel over recently deposited landfill waste, or further made ground of black clayey sandy gravel with ash, peat/decayed vegetation, brick and concrete. The recent landfill comprised domestic and commercial waste including documents, wood, paper, glass, plastic, mattresses, furniture/equipment, cables, netting, fabric and occasional empty medical waste packaging.’ The summary also reports that Jacobs concluded that there was ‘little evidence of decomposition suggesting recent deposition.’ ‘With waste reported to typically noted to be warm/emitting vapour suggesting decomposition was occurring and landfill gasses may be being generated. The full depth of the recent waste material was not proven up to a maximum achieved depth of 4m below ground level.’ A summary of geochemical testing undertaken ‘(where sufficient soil material was available to enable sample collection) identified concentrations of Lead of 1600mg/kg, Benzo(a)pyrene at 2.1mg/kg and Waste Acceptance Criteria Testing which indicated that sulphate concentrations would be above the threshold for inert waste.’ 2.16

Potential Contamination

The site’s previous uses comprised agricultural land, primarily open fields, followed by sand and gravel extraction and more recently as a landfill and area of land subsequently subject to unauthorised deposition of waste. Elevated concentrations of contaminants of concern could potentially be present within Made Ground/waste materials and shallow natural soils underlying the site given the site’s uses. In addition, the presence of surface and/or subterranean fires that have occurred on site are suggestive of organic rich and readily combustible wastes within the landfill mass. The fires noted to have occurred on site are not understood to be limited to a single area of the site, with fires having occurred in the northern and southern area of the site, indicating there is a sporadic element to the fires. The presence of fires occurring on site indicates the potential for organic rich wastes to be present, or the potential for an uncompacted waste with a high plastic content with sufficient oxygen flow throughout and potential for variation of materials laterally and with depth on the site or associated with methane generation within the on-site wastes.

21 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

The presence of contamination is considered likely based on the information reviewed and our understanding of the site history. It would be prudent to assume that along with the presence of commonly occurring brownfield contaminants those associated with household, commercial, inert, industrial and liquid sludge wastes may be present based on the historic landfill records for the site. Potential contaminants could include, heavy metals, organic pollutants such as poly-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), SVOCs and VOCs, inorganic compounds, organic/combustible wastes, plastics and plastics additives, PFAS and PFOA substances (within the buried wastes and from any firefighting foams), asbestos, pesticides, and fertilisers. Further information on the site and landfilling activities was requested via a freedom of information request to the Environment Agency. However, the response stated that due to the age of the site the records were no longer available. Six historic and five active or recent landfill sites are located within 500m of the site, located to the north, south and west of the site (and including the on-site landfill). There is potential for contaminants associated with these off-site landfill sites to migrate, e.g. through more permeable strata and borne in groundwater and/or surface water and impact the subject site. Potential contaminants associated with these landfills include heavy metals, organic pollutants such as poly-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), petroleum hydrocarbons/ oils, inorganic compounds, SVOC and VOCs, PCBs. Ground gas is considered below. It also remains possible that the surrounding land uses may have resulted in the deposition of airborne contaminants on the surface and shallow soils on site including heavy metals, organic pollutants such as polyromantic hydrocarbons (PAH), petroleum hydrocarbons/oils, inorganic compounds. 2.17

Ground Gas and Vapour Summary

The desk study has identified the potential for ground gases and vapours associated with the former on-site landfill site and unauthorised deposited waste materials, together with a risk from organic rich waste that may be present on site and the potential for methane generation within the on-site waste materials. The onsite landfill is recorded as having accepted domestic waste and if/where present this represents a high potential source of methane. Migration of gas and vapours to the site from former landfill sites to the north, south and west of the site is also potentially possible. These landfill sites represent a potential source of ground gas due to the types of wastes that were permitted and deposited. The anticipated natural geology underlying the site comprises a succession of Alluvium, Head Deposits and Taplow Gravel overlying the London Clay Formation. The underlying London Clay bedrock geology is primarily formed of impermeable clay layers and as such is unlikely to represent a plausible migration pathway for ground gases. It is unknown at this stage if the historical pit was formally lined or not. Given the age of the site and underlying geology comprising London Clay it is possible that a formal lining was not installed. However, the superficial deposits may contain permeable layers that could represent a plausible lateral migration pathway. Notwithstanding this, it is anticipated from review of the site’s history, that much of the sand and gravel within the site was extracted and replaced with overburden and landfill wastes. The permeable strata are still likely to remain present around the periphery of the site as some form of gravel pit benching, or battered sides required to maintain a stable site boundary. It is therefore possible that gas generated from off-site and on-site landfills could migrate and mix. Given the known history of the site, it is considered that there is potential for bulk gases such as methane, carbon dioxide and oxygen to be present together with trace gases such as hydrogen sulphide, carbon monoxide, VOCs and the like associated primarily with the historical landfill materials at depth on the site. Subterranean fires and the introduction of water into the landfill body are likely to cause variation in the composition of gases and vapours within the landfill waste mass over time. In addition, flow conditions are also likely to vary.

22 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Ground gas monitoring is recommended to assess the presence, composition and flow conditions of bulk and trace gases within the site. It is recommended that ‘spot’ monitoring is undertaken in order to appropriately assess the risks from ground gases as an initial stage of assessment. Further monitoring in due course to comprise a period of continuous gas monitoring on the site may subsequently be required.

23 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

3.0

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT

Based on the findings of the desk study, the following sections summarise the anticipated geotechnical and environmental factors likely to impact the site. 3.1

Geotechnical Risk Assessment

3.1.1

Potential Geotechnical Issues

The following factors that might impact the geotechnical condition of the site were identified as part of the desk study: • • • • • • • •

The possible presence of Made Ground/Infilled Ground (e.g. varying depth and/or composition) with varying states of compaction which may affect the stability of areas of the site, particularly in areas where fires are known to have occurred. The presence of laterally and vertically variable strata due to the variability in deposited materials on site which may affect the stability of areas of the site, particularly in area where fires are known to have occurred. The suitability of shallow soils as a bearing stratum given potential variation in compaction and waste types across the site. Consideration of the volume change potential of any cohesive soils. The possible presence of aggressive ground conditions (sulphates). The possible presence of shallow leachate and/or groundwater beneath the site and impact this might and foundation excavations and stability on the site, e.g. collapse of excavations or instability during fires. The presence of any vegetation on the site, which may have an effect on stability of soils and variation in volume change of soils if/where shrinkable soils are present. The potential impact from infiltration of rainwater into the ground.

3.2

Preliminary Environmental Conceptual Site Model & Risk Assessment

3.2.1

Methodology

A Preliminary Risk Assessment (PRA) and Conceptual Site Model (CSM) has been prepared in accordance with Land Contamination Risk Management (LCRM) based on information obtained as part of the desk study. Possible risks associated with potential sources of contamination and sensitive receptors identified have been assessed following a source-pathway-receptor (SPR) approach in accordance with current UK protocols. The Conceptual Site Model for the proposed end use (Residential with plant uptake) is presented in Figure 2. A risk may only exist where a plausible SPR linkage is present, and where the quantity or concentration of a contaminant is sufficient so as to cause harm. Under the statutory definition, "Contamination" may only strictly exist where contaminants pose a risk of harm to a receptor. Risk may be defined as a function of the likelihood and severity of any adverse effects arising from contamination. The risk classification has been assessed in accordance with CIRIA C552 (Rudland et al., 2001). A summary of how the risks is derived and their definitions are presented in Tables 3.1 & 3.2 below.

24 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Probability

Consequence Severe

Medium

Mild

Minor

High Likelihood

Very high risk

High risk

Moderate risk

Moderate/low risk

Likely

High risk

Moderate risk

Moderate/low risk

Low risk

Low Likelihood

Moderate risk

Moderate/low risk

Low risk

Very low risk

Unlikely

Moderate/low risk

Low risk

Very low risk

Table 3.1 Risk ratings matrix Risk Rating

Definitions There is a high probability that severe harm could arise to a designated receptor from an identified hazard, OR, there is evidence that severe harm to a designated receptor is currently happening.

Very high risk

This risk, if realised, is likely to result in a substantial liability. Urgent investigation (if not already undertaken) and remediation are likely to be required. Harm is likely to arise to a designated receptor from an identified hazard.

High risk

Realisation of the risk is likely to present a substantial liability.

Urgent investigation (if not already undertaken) is required and remediation works may be necessary in the short term and are likely over the longer term. It is possible that harm could arise to a designated receptor from an identified hazard. Moderate risk However, it is either relatively unlikely that any such harm would be severe, or if any harm were to occur it is more likely that the harm would be relatively mild. It is possible that harm could arise to a designated receptor from an identified hazard. Moderate to low risk However, it is unlikely that any such harm would be severe, or if any harm were to occur it is probable that the harm would be relatively mild. It is possible that harm could arise to a designated receptor from an identified hazard, Low risk but it is likely that this harm, if realised, would at worst normally be mild. There is low possibility that harm could arise to a receptor. In the event of such harm Very low risk being realised it is not likely to be severe. Table 3.2 Risk rating definitions 3.2.2

Summary of Plausible Sources

Possible sources of contamination identified from the desk study are summarised in Table 3.3.

25 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report Source

Description

Soils associated with the former quarrying activities on site

General chemical quality of the soils at depth associated with former quarrying activates and overburden could be impacted by the presence of contamination. However, it is likely that this will only be present at depth on the site.

Shallow soils and Infilled/ waste material (resulting from past activities on site) – including regulated landfilling with Inert and Household waste

General chemical quality of the near surface soils (Made Ground/Infilled Ground (household, commercial, inert, industrial and liquid sludge wastes as permitted on site), could be impacted by the presence of contamination.

Shallow soils/Infilled/ waste material (resulting from Unauthorised deposition of waste)

General chemical quality of the near surface soils (Made Ground/Infilled Ground unauthorised deposits waste materials (or shallow natural) could be impacted by the presence of contamination.

Leachate (Run off/migration through the ground) Asbestos

Ground gases/vapours (waste materials and filled ground)

Naturally occurring aggressive ground conditions

Where contaminants of concern are present these contaminants may be leachable, or leachate may be present (as run from the site or as oil like staining on the water surface) Asbestos free fibres and Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) may be present within any landfilled wastes. Landfill wastes beneath the site surface. The site was historically permitted to accept domestic waste. There is a potential a viable source of ground gas associated with any significant proportions of combustible organic material or putrescible materials if present and due to and the potential for with methane generation within the on-site waste materials, or associate with the presence of fires noted to be occurring within the unauthorised waste deposits on site, or in relation to offsite sources and the potential for ground gas migration onto site

Contaminants Possible elevated concentrations of metals, metalloids, organic pollutants such as Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH, poly-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH),

pesticides, and fertilisers

Possible elevated concentrations of metals, metalloids, organic pollutants such as Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH, poly-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), SVOCs and VOCs, cyanide, ammonia, organic/combustible wastes, plastics and plastics additives asbestos. Possible elevated concentrations of metals, metalloids, organic pollutants such as Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH, poly-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), SVOCs and VOCs, organic/combustible wastes, plastics and plastics additives asbestos. Possible elevated and mobile concentrations of metals, metalloids, organic pollutants such as TPH and PAH compounds. Asbestos (fibres and ACMs)

Methane, carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulphide, carbon monoxide, depleted oxygen, trace gases. Together with the potential for explosions and smoke associated with any fires.

Naturally occurring compounds in the ground which could damage buried concrete.

Possible elevated sulphate concentrations.

It is possible that historic firefighting on site might have included the use of PFAS/PFOA foams. These are persistent organic compounds which accumulate on soils and sediments and also bioaccumulate.*

PFAS/PFOA compounds

Fire fighting

26 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report Source Off site land uses (quarries, landfills, cemetery and agricultural use)

Description Six historic and five active or recent landfill sites have been identified to the north, south and west of the site. As such, there is the potential that these land uses may have resulted in a potential impact to soils and groundwater beneath the site.

Contaminants Possible elevated concentrations of metals, metalloids, possible elevated organic pollutants such as TPH and PAH compounds, sulphate and asbestos, cyanide, ammonia, SVOC and VOCs, PCBs. [gas considered separately]

*A conversation between Geo-Environmental and the fire bridge recently indicated that to date primarily water has been utilised as opposed to foams.

Table 3.3 Possible sources of contamination 3.2.3

Summary of Plausible Pathways

The plausible pathways are summarised in Table 3.4. These pathways are based on the closest possible land use given the current vacant use of the site, which comprise a privately owned site which is not actively open to the public but that is not fully secured/fenced of such that unauthorised access is feasible. ‘Public open space, park’ scenario (albeit without permitted public access due to the site comprising private unsecure land) is considered to be the closest scenario to the current land use. Pathway

Description

Direct Contact

Ingestion of soil particles, inhalation of soil derived dust (including tracked back dust and including asbestos fibres), dermal contact.

Inhalation

Vertical & Migration

Lateral

Shallow Groundwater Chemical Attack Flooding

Inhalation of soil dust (outside). Inhalation of ground gas/vapours (outside). Contaminant movement both vertically through leaching/gravity and horizontally along preferential pathways, e.g. services trenches, more permeable strata or with groundwater, Infiltration to groundwater through the site as a result of precipitation, runoff to surface water. Migration of gases within the landfill body (lateral and vertical migration, migration through ad hoc void spaces and the like) such that the ‘plume’ of gas is detached from the originating source. Shallow groundwater or perched water may be present within the Made Ground or underlying superficial strata which could result in the vertical and lateral migration of contaminants. The superficial deposits are recorded as a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer and Secondary Undifferentiated. Superficial strata are likely to be in hydraulic continuity with surface watercourses. Attack of buried plastics and concrete by aggressive ground conditions. The majority of the site is identified to be located in a Flood Zone 1, with high risk areas for river and coastal flooding in relation to the northern and western site boundaries. The site was also indicated to be located in an area at moderate risk from for the potential for groundwater flooding of property situated below ground level, however no properties are currently located or permitted in relation to the site.

Table 3.4 Possible contamination pathways

27 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

3.2.4

Summary of Plausible Receptors

Potential receptors associated with the site and its current land use are summarised in Table 3.5. Receptor End Users Soft Landscaping

Built Environment

Description Land users of the current site (privately owned vacant site with a metal portacabin within a compound on site). Areas of planting including shrubs, trees, weeds etc. No buildings are currently present on the site. Buried concrete for any structures and plastics for potable water supply pipes if proposed in due course (as part of any remediation works on the site) may be laid in contact with contaminated soils. No services are understood to cross the site.

Adjacent Land Users

Sensitive land uses identified within the immediate vicinity.

Groundwater

Controlled Waters contained within the aquifer(s) beneath the site.

Surface Water

Controlled Waters within lakes, rivers, and ponds, etc., or coastal waters.

Ecological Receptors

Sensitive areas significance.

ecological

Table 3.5 Possible receptors of contamination

Comments The current land use comprises private open land, but which is noted to be unsecure across areas of the site, such that the public access could feasibly occur. Vegetation is present on the subject site and comprises rough low level vegetation.

Aggressive ground conditions and depths of Made Ground may be present beneath the site.

Adjacent land use to the east is primarily a golf course and quarries, landfilling, commercial land uses and open space, with residential and commercial land uses further out from the site. Risk to adjacent land users associated with potential for airborne contaminants and smoke at times when fires are present on site and potential for asbestos fibre release where soils are disturbed/moved around site. The site overlies a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer and Unproductive Strata and is outside of any SPZ. However, this is still considered to represent controlled water located beneath the site which could be subject to contamination from landfill leachate or from fire-fighting runoff. Surface water was identified along the boundary of the site comprising the ‘Common Watercourse’ running along the western and northern site boundary. Due to the sloping nature of the site to the west and north and overgrown nature of the watercourse, a visual assessment of any leachate impacts was not possible due to site access and the overgrown nature of the site.. No ecologically sensitive areas have been identified within 500m of the site. Ecological receptors have not been considered further.

28 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Whilst the above sources and receptors have been identified, Table 3.6 summarises the identified plausible significant pollution linkages and a qualitative assessment of the risks based on the desk study research that are considered to be applicable to this site. A graphical conceptual site model (CSM) of the proposed development end use is presented in Figure 7.

29 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Soils associated with the former quarrying activities on site

Potential Receptors

Possible Pathways

Probability

End Users

Direct contact and inhalation/ ingestion of soil or soil derived dust

Low

Mild

Direct contact and inhalation of Adjacent Land soil derived Users dust/asbestos fibres

Low

Mild

Unlikely

Mild

Consequence

Soft Landscaping/ Vegetation

Root uptake

Water Supply Pipes

Direct contact

Unlikely

Mild

Buildings and Infrastructure

Direct contact

Low

Mild

Risk & Justification Low Current owners/people accessing the site (with or without permission due to unsecure access) are unlikely to come into contact with contaminants associated with the former quarrying activity itself on site and contaminants associated with any overburden as this is expected to be located at depth (if present) with subsequent deposition of waste in a former landfill and subsequent unauthorised deposits overlying these materials. Low Adjacent land uses are unlikely to come into contact with soil present at depth beneath the site, although contaminants could migrate along drain runs and the like where demonstrated to be leachable/mobile. However, contamination is considered unlikely to be present at significant concentrations. In addition, no residential properties are in close proximity to the site and further landfilled areas are present surrounding the current site and located between the site and residential development. Very Low Soft landscaping is present on the site and thus, root uptake is possible. However, the vegetation on the site is noted to be generally low level with any overburden materials associated with the former quarry located at depth beneath the site. As such, it is considered that current root zones on site are unlikely to extend to such depth. If/where this was identified to be occurring the associated risk could be reduced via the installation of a clean cap across the site with uncontaminated soils in the near surface root zone to provide a suitable growing medium, with measure to prevent further penetration of the roots to depth. Very Low The likelihood of any services currently running at such depth beneath the site is considered to be unlikely. Low There are currently no formal buildings present on the site. A compound is located in the central portion of the site off Launders Lane however this is located on an area of concrete with portacabin style units. Given the depth of any associated overburden associated with the former quarry activities themselves beneath the site, any foundations/concrete associated with the compound are not considered likely to be in

30 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors

Groundwater

Possible Pathways

Vertical Migration

Probability

Shallow soils/Infilled waste material (regulated landfilling with Inert and Household waste)

End Users

Risk & Justification contact with these materials.

Low

Vertical & Lateral Surface Water Unlikely Migration

Direct contact and inhalation/ ingestion of soil or soil derived dust

Consequence

Likely

Mild

Low The site is underlain by a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer (Superficial – Taplow Gravel) which is understood to have been quarried beneath the site itself and in relation to adjacent land and Secondary Undifferentiated (Alluvium Deposits) over Unproductive Strata (London Clay). Groundwater or perched water may be present at depth within the superficial deposits or overburden associated with the former quarry. However, contamination is considered unlikely to be present at significant concentrations (leachable concentrations) such that it could present a risk to underlying aquifers. In addition, the site is underlain at depth by the London Clay formation, would likely reduce the potential for vertical migration at such depths as these materials may be present.

Mild

Very Low Any contamination associated with the former quarrying operation itself on site is likely to be present at depth. As such, interaction between these materials and surface water is highly unlikely.

Medium

Moderate Where waste materials have been deposited and insufficient or poor quality capping (non-landfilled materials e.g. soil or stone) has been installed, or where these regulated waste materials have not subsequently been covered with the placement of unregulated wastes on the site, there is the potential for waste materials (including household waste) to be present at surface level and within the shallow soils on the site. Current owners/people accessing the site (with or without permission due to unsecure access) may come into direct contact with soils given the current status of the site, with the potential for these soils and waste mass to be exposed at the surface. The risks could be mitigated in terms of those people accessing the site but securing the site to prevent unauthorised access.

31 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors

Possible Pathways

Shallow soils/Infilled waste material (regulated landfilling with Inert and Direct contact Household waste) Adjacent Land and inhalation of Users soil derived dust

Soft Landscaping/ Vegetation

Water Supply Pipes

Probability

Likely

Consequence

Mild

Risk & Justification Moderate/Low Adjacent land users are unlikely to come into direct contact with soil/waste materials itself, although contaminants could migrate along through the site following infiltration (rainfall) where demonstrated to be leachable/mobile. In addition, if/when waste materials are present at the surface/within shallow soils and fires occur on site soil derived dust could be carried within the smoke. The nature of the site is undulating with a large portion of the site located at a significantly elevated level when compared to the surrounding land so contaminants may be mobilised by wind. However, given the distance to the nearest offsite receptor in terms of human health it is considered unlikely that windblown contaminants would impact off site receptors. Movement of dust (though wind or smoke associated with fires) could be reduced on the site by the installation of a formal capping system on the site to protect the site from wind erosion and to reduce the exposure of waste materials on the site. Moderate Soft landscaping is present on the site and thus, root uptake is possible.

Root uptake

Direct contact

Likely

Unlikely

Medium

If/where this was identified to be occurring the associated risk could be reduced via the installation of a clean cap across the site with uncontaminated soils in the near surface root zone to provide a suitable growing medium, with measures to prevent further penetration of the roots to depth. Low Water supply pipes are likely to come into contact with impacted soils depending upon depth of installation and extent of soil impact. However, the likelihood of any services currently running through the former landfill materials beneath the site is considered to be unlikely.

32 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors

Shallow soils/Infilled Buildings and Infrastructure waste material (regulated landfilling with Inert and Household waste)

Groundwater

Possible Pathways

Probability

Consequence

Direct contact

Low

Medium

Vertical Migration

Low

Medium

Risk & Justification Moderate/Low Foundations and utilities if/where present (such as the concrete compound) may be placed within potentially aggressive soils (e.g. sulphate). There are currently no formal buildings present on the site. A compound is located in the central portion of the site off Launders Lane however, this is located on an area of concrete with portacabin style units. Moderate/Low The site is reported be underlain by a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer (Superficial – Taplow Gravel) however, this is expected to have been removed on the site and in proximity to the site in the most part as a result of former quarrying activities and subsequent infilling with inert and household waste. A Secondary Undifferentiated aquifer (Alluvium Deposits) over Unproductive Strata (London Clay) are also mapped in proximity to the site. Shallow groundwater may be present within the superficial deposits or perched water within any Made Ground/Infilled Ground and overlying the underlying London Clay Formation, which may result in an element of vertical migration. However, the underlying London Clay and the installation of any formal basal construction (if present) from the construction of the landfill may reduce the migration of leachate/water through the site and waste mass into underlying aquifers. Vertical migration through the site could be further mitigated by reducing the infiltration through the site with the installation of a formal cap on site, thereby reducing the potential for leaching of any contaminants.

33 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Shallow soils/Infilled waste material (regulated landfilling with Inert and Household waste)

Shallow soils/waste material (Unregulated Waste Deposition)

Potential Receptors

Possible Pathways

Probability

Surface Water

Vertical & Lateral Migration

Likely

End Users

Direct contact and inhalation/ ingestion of soil or soil derived dust

Consequence

Medium

Risk & Justification Moderate Given the current undeveloped nature of the site, significant overland flow that may affect surface water is considered unlikely, infiltration is likely to percolate through the site itself. However, in periods of heavy rainfall some overland or lateral movement may occur. The nearest surface water feature was identified along the site boundary to the west and north of the site comprising a ditch which was noted to be at a lower elevation than a significant area of the site. Therefore, if a significant source of potentially mobile contamination is identified on site with contaminated soils/waste mass present at shallow depth or on the surface of the site, then there would be an increased risk of contamination. It should also be noted that the site is located in an area where numerous historical landfills are present. As such, the general background quality of any surface water should also be considered in the context of the wider areas and site uses. Reduced infiltration and potential mobilisation of surface water runoff from the site could be mitigated by reducing the infiltration through/across the waste mass materials on the site with the installation of a formal cap on site with surface water drainage, thereby reducing the potential for leaching of any contaminants. Moderate Where waste materials have been illegally deposited without authorisation and are poorly consolidated these are expected to be present to depth some areas and also in comprising shallow and surface materials on the site.

Likely

Medium

Current owners/people accessing the site (with or without permission due to unsecure access) may come into direct contact with soils/waste material given the current status of the site, with these soils and waste mass exposed across the surface of the site. The risks could be mitigated in terms of those people accessing the site by securing the site to prevent unauthorised access to prevent exposure. Risks could also be mitigated via the capping of waste materials/soils on site with a clean cap, such that they are not directly exposed at surface level.

34 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors

Possible Pathways

Shallow soils/waste material Direct contact (Unregulated Waste Adjacent Land and inhalation of Deposition) Users soil derived dust

Probability

Likely

Consequence

Medium

Risk & Justification Moderate Adjacent land users are unlikely to come into direct contact with soil/waste materials itself, although contaminants could migrate along through the site following infiltration (rainfall) where demonstrated to be leachable/mobile. In addition, if/when waste materials are present at the surface/within shallow soils and fires occur on site soil derived dust could be carried within the smoke. The nature of the site is undulating with a large portion of the site located at a significantly elevated level when compared to the surrounding land so contaminants may be mobilised by wind. However, given the distance to the nearest offsite receptor in terms of human health it is considered unlikely that wind blow contaminants would impact off site receptors. Movement of dust (though wind or smoke associated with fires) could be reduced on the site by the installation of a formal capping system on the site to protect the site from wind erosion and to reduce the exposure of waste materials on the site. Moderate Soft landscaping is present on the site and thus, root uptake is possible.

Soft Landscaping/ Vegetation

Root uptake

Likely

Medium

Water Supply Pipes

Direct contact

Unlikely

Medium

If/where this was identified to be occurring the associated risk could be reduced via the installation of a clean cap across the site with uncontaminated soils in the near surface root zone to provide a suitable growing medium, with measure to prevent further penetration of the roots to depth. Low Water supply pipes are likely to come into contact with impacted soils depending upon depth of installation and extent of soil impact. However, the likelihood of any services currently running through the illegally deposited waste materials on the site currently is considered to be unlikely.

35 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors

Shallow soils/waste Buildings and material Infrastructure (Unregulated Waste Deposition)

Groundwater

Possible Pathways

Probability

Direct contact

Low

Consequence

Risk & Justification

Mild

Low Foundations and utilities if/where present (such as the concrete compound) may be placed within potentially aggressive soils (e.g. sulphate). However, it is considered likely that the compound on site was present ahead of the unauthorised deposition of wastes on the site and as such is not considered to be situated over this waste mass material. There are currently no formal buildings present on the site. A compound is located in the central portion of the site off Launders Lane however, this is located on an area of concrete with portacabin style units. Moderate/Low The site is reported be underlain by a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer (Superficial – Taplow Gravel) however, this is expected to have been removed on the site and in proximity to the site in the most part as a result of former quarrying activities and subsequent infilling with inert and household waste. A Secondary Undifferentiated Aquifer (Alluvium Deposits) over Unproductive Strata (London Clay) are also mapped in proximity to the site.

Vertical Migration

Low

Medium

Shallow groundwater may be present within the superficial deposits or perched water within any Made Ground/Infilled Ground and overlying the underlying London Clay Formation, which may result in an element of vertical migration, however a continuous groundwater body is not expected to be present beneath the site. The underlying London Clay and the installation of any formal basal construction (if present) from the construction of the landfill may reduce the migrate of leachate/water through the site and waste mass into underlying aquifers. Vertical migration through the site could be further mitigated by reducing the infiltration through the site with the installation of a formal cap on site, thereby reducing the potential for leaching of any contaminants.

36 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Shallow soils/waste material (Unregulated Waste Deposition)

Contaminants of Concern

Potential Receptors

Possible Pathways

Probability

Surface Water

Vertical & Lateral Migration

Likely

Consequence

Medium

Direct contact and ingestion

Low

Mild

Adjacent Land Direct contact Users and ingestion

Low

Mild

End Users

Leachate (Run off/migration through the ground)

Risk & Justification Moderate Given the current undeveloped nature of the site, significant overland flow that may affect surface water is considered unlikely, infiltration is likely to percolate through the site itself. However, in periods of heavy rainfall some overland or lateral movement may occur. The nearest surface water feature was identified along the site boundary to the west and north of the site comprising a ditch which was noted to be at a lower elevation than a significant area of the site. Therefore, if a significant source of potentially mobile contamination is identified on site with contaminated soils/waste mass present at shallow depth or on the surface of the site, then there would be an increased risk of contamination. It should also be noted that the site is located in an area where numerous historical landfills are present. As such, the general background quality of any surface water should also be considered in the context of the wider areas and site uses. Reduced infiltration and potential mobilisation of surface water runoff from the site could be mitigated by reducing the infiltration through/across the waste mass materials on the site with the installation of a formal cap on site with channel surface water drainage, thereby reducing the potential for leaching of any contaminants. Low No evidence of leachate breakout was noted on the site during the site walkover, although the undulating and overgrown nature of the site may have visually obscured this. It is considered that, given the nature of the site, rainfall and the like would infiltrate directly into the site, and as such any mobilisation and migration of contaminants in this respect is unlikely to be something end users would come into contact with, where the site is left undisturbed. Low Adjacent land users are unlikely to come into direct contact with leachate/water filtering through the site, although contaminants could migrate along drain runs and the like where demonstrated to be leachable/mobile. The closest adjacent land use (human receptor) is noted to be some distance from the site.

37 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors

Possible Pathways

Probability

Soft Landscaping/ Vegetation

Root uptake

Likely

Medium

Water Supply Pipes

Direct contact

Low

Medium

Buildings and Infrastructure

Direct contact

Unlikely

Mild

Groundwater

Vertical Migration

Likely

Medium

Consequence

Risk & Justification Moderate Soft landscaping is present on the site and thus, root uptake is possible. If/where this was identified to be occurring the associated risk could be reduced via the installation of a clean cap across the site with uncontaminated soils in the near surface root zone to provide a suitable growing medium, with measures to prevent further penetration of the roots to depth. Moderate/Low Water supply pipes may come into contact with leachate/water moving through the ground where present depending upon depth of installation and extent of impact. Very Low There are currently no formal buildings present on the site. A compound is located in the central portion of the site off Launders Lane however this is located on an area of concrete with portacabin style units. However, hardstanding would reduce infiltration through this area of the site and as such the potential for leaching of contaminants associated with this area is reduced. Moderate The site is reported be underlain by a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer (Superficial – Taplow Gravel) however, this is expected to have been removed on the site and in proximity to the site in the most part as a result of former quarrying activities and subsequent infilling with inert and household waste. A Secondary Undifferentiated Aquifer (Alluvium Deposits) over Unproductive Strata (London Clay) are also mapped in proximity to the site. Shallow groundwater may be present within the superficial deposits or perched water/leachate within any Made Ground/Infilled Ground and overlying the underlying London Clay formation, which may result in an element of vertical migration. However, a continuous groundwater body is not expected to be present beneath the site. The underlying London Clay and the installation of any formal basal construction (if present) from the construction of the landfill may reduce the migration of leachate/water through the site and waste mass into underlying aquifers. However, the waste types and

38 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors

Surface Water

Possible Pathways

Vertical & Lateral Migration

Probability

Consequence

Risk & Justification volumes are also unknown and pockets of mobile contaminants could be present.

Likely

Medium

Vertical migration through the site could be further mitigated by reducing the infiltration through the site with the installation of a formal cap on site, thereby reducing the potential for leaching of any contaminants. Moderate Given the current undeveloped nature of the site, significant overland flow that may affect surface water is considered unlikely, infiltration is likely to percolate through the site itself. However, in periods of heavy rainfall some overland or lateral movement may occur. The nearest surface water feature was identified along the site boundary to the west and north of the site comprising a ditch which was noted to be at a lower elevation than a significant area of the site. Therefore, if a significant source of potentially mobile contamination is identified on site with contaminated soils/waste mass present on the surface of the site, then there would be an increased risk of contamination. However, it should be noted that that the majority of the waste mass noted at surface level during the site walkover comprised predominately skip/construction type waste, although the waste across the whole site has not been quantified so remains in part unknown. It should also be noted that the site is located in an area where numerous historical landfills are present. As such, the general background quality of any surface water should also be considered in the context of the wider area and site uses. Reduced infiltration and potential mobilisation of surface water runoff from the site could be mitigated by reducing the infiltration through/across the waste mass materials on the site with the installation of a formal cap on site with surface water drainage, thereby reducing the potential for leaching of any contaminants.

39 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors

Possible Pathways

Probability

Consequence

Risk & Justification Moderate Based on desk study information and the unknown nature of the unauthorised tipped waste it I likely that asbestos will be present on site.

End Users

Direct contact and inhalation/ ingestion of soil or soil derived dust/asbestos fibres

Likely

Medium

The risks could be mitigated in terms of reducing people accessing the site by securing the site to prevent unauthorised access. In addition, the installation of a clean cover system on site would break the source, pathway, receptor linkage, by removing the potential for exposure at surface level. Moderate/Low Adjacent land users are unlikely to come into direct contact with ACM/asbestos materials itself although there is the potential that any shallow soil based fibres could be moved though the creation of dust (though wind or smoke associated with fires). It should be noted the vegetation present on site would help to minimise the creation of dust in relation to the site.

Contaminants of Concern Asbestos

Direct contact and inhalation of Adjacent Land soil derived Users dust/ asbestos fibres

In addition, the presence of asbestos within the shallow soils is assumed based on the ACMs identified at surface. End users of the site may come into direct contact with ACMs where present. Any disturbance of the soils on site may also disturb asbestos within the soils/waste mass. It should be noted that the ACMs identified at the surface comprised the likes of asbestos cement board (bonded asbestos) but the presence of free fibres and other types of asbestos cannot be ruled out.

Low

Moderate

In addition, the application of water to the site during rainfall events or during a fire on site would also serve to dampen down and reduce the risk of any mobilise of free fibres that may be present. Any risk would only relate to the presence of free fibres at the surface of the site, those entrained within the soils and waste mass are likely be less mobile. Furthermore, given the distance to the nearest offsite receptor in terms of human health

40 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors

Possible Pathways

Probability

Consequence

Risk & Justification it is considered low likelihood that windblown contaminants would impact off site receptors in general. High Risk The presence of former landfill materials (comprising household waste) and subsequently unauthorised deposits waste (of unknown types) deposits on the site, together with the potential for the presence of mobile and volatile contaminants associated with the waste material is such that there is considered to be a risk of the creation and presence of ground gases beneath the site.

Ground gases and vapours from any Made Ground, filled ground and impacted soils

End Users

Inhalation

Likely

Severe

No buildings are located on the site. The nature of the natural geology underlying the site is expected to be primarily impermeable where London Clay is present and with the sands and gravels having been quarried from the site historically. However, there is the potential for ground gases to migrate through the waste mass material on site and to vent to the atmosphere given the undeveloped nature of the site. Alternatively, where migration of gases is low, pockets of ground gas could build up beneath the site. Where a significant concentration of methane or volatiles builds up in this way this could represent potential explosion or fire source on the site. Given the elevated nature of the site in relation to the surrounding land it is considered unlikely that significant gas migration onto the site would occur from the neighbouring landfill sites.

Buildings and Gas infrastructure/ accumulation neighbouring and potential land explosion of uses/Public flammable gases

Low

Medium

Incorporation of gas collection or venting on the site may be required to reduce the risk of harm or fires on the site. Moderate/Low The closest residential developments are located at a reasonable distance from the site such that risks associated with ground gases from the site are low. However, the presence of gases could present an fire/explosion risk which may results in fires across the site, depending on waste material in areas where ground gases are present.

41 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors End users Adjacent land users

Possible Probability Pathways Direct contact and inhalation / Low ingestion of soil derived dust

Consequence

Risk & Justification

Mild

Very Low No naturally occurring potential sources (given the infilled nature of the site) which could harm human health have been identified.

Direct contact

Low

Mild

Direct contact

Low

Mild

Buildings and Infrastructure

Direct contact

Low

Mild

End Users

Direct contact and inhalation/ soil derived dust/smoke

Likely

Severe

Naturally occurring aggressive ground Water supply conditions pipes

Fires/Explosions/ Fire Fighting

Direct contact Adjacent Land and inhalation of Users soil derived dust

Likely

Medium

Very Low No naturally occurring potential sources (given the infilled nature of the site) which could harm human health have been identified. Very Low No potential natural sources (given the infilled nature of the site) which could affect water supply pipes have been identified. However, the likelihood of any services currently running through the site is considered to be low. Very Low There are currently no formal buildings present on the site. A compound is located in the central portion of the site off Launders Lane however, this is located on an area of concrete with portacabin style units, however this is likely to be located over the historical landfill materials on site and not natural soils. High Risk Current users may to come into direct contact fires where present on site. There also remain the potential for explosion associated with any fires/ignition sources. In terms of reducing risk, by reducing number of people with access to site the (given the nature of the land being privately owned), and preventing unauthorised access, this could be achieved via securing the site. It is understood that firefighting on site is now undertaken from outside the boundary of the site, in order to reduce the risk to the firefighters. Moderate Explosions are known to have occurred on site (thought to be associated with LPG cylinders). This could result in debris and smoke which may affect local road users/residents and may result in airborne particulates, as well as presenting an odour

42 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Contaminants of Concern

Potential Receptors

Possible Pathways

Probability

Groundwater

Vertical Migration

Low

Mild

Surface Water

Vertical & Lateral Migration

Low

Mild

End Users

Direct contact and inhalation/ ingestion of soil or soil derived dust

Unlikely

Mild

Root uptake

Unlikely

Mild

Direct contact

Unlikely

Mild

Direct contact

Unlikely

Mild

Soft Landscaping/ Vegetation

Off site land uses (quarries, landfills, cemetery and Water Supply agricultural use) Pipes Buildings and Infrastructure

Consequence

Risk & Justification nuisance and potential for smoke inhalation. The assessment of particulates and air quality monitoring in the vicinity of the site in relation to the site and neighbouring land uses is outside the scope of works presented herein and is understood to be being undertaken as a separate assessment by others. Low Consideration should also be given to the potential presence of and PFOS/PFAS substances associated with the firefighting undertaken on the site over the history of the fires and the potential for this to migrate vertically within the site. Current liaison with the Council and Fire Brigade indicates that for recent fires water rather than firefighting foams has been utilised. Low Consideration should also be given to the potential presence of and PFOS/PFAS substances associated with the firefighting undertaken on the site over the history of the fires and the potential for this to migrate laterally or as surface water runoff into the surface waters. Current liaison with the Council and Fire Brigade indicates that for recent fires water rather than firefighting foams has been utilised. Very Low Soils and waste materials associated with off-site quarrying and landfilling activities area considered unlikely to have been deposited on the subject site. As such, direct contact with these materials by end users is not expected. In addition, it is considered that there is a low risk of offsite ground gases migrating on to the subject site. Very Low Soils and waste materials associated with off-site quarrying and landfilling activities area considered unlikely to have been deposited on the subject site Very Low Soils and waste materials associated with off-site quarrying and landfilling activities area considered unlikely to have been deposited on the subject site Very Low Soils and waste materials associated with off-site quarrying and landfilling activities area considered unlikely to have been deposited on the subject site

43 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Desk Study Report Potential Source/Media

Potential Receptors

Possible Pathways

Probability

Groundwater

Vertical Migration

Low

Mild

Surface Water

Vertical & Lateral Migration

Low

Medium

Consequence

Table 3.6 Plausible pollutant linkages & qualitative risk assessment

Risk & Justification Low There is the potential that contaminants associated with other landfilling activities the area may have resulted in contamination to groundwater in the vicinity of the site, however given the underlying natural geology at depth this is considered a low likelihood to result in a determinantal impact beneath the subject site. Moderate/Low It should also be noted that the site is located in an area where numerous historical landfills are present. As such, the general background quality of any surface water should also be considered in the context of the wider areas and site uses.

It should be noted that the risk from smoke associated with fires on the site represents a health and safety concern associated with the smoke itself and any potential for particulates to be present/migrating as opposed to a contaminated land issue.

44 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

3.3

Preliminary Risk Assessment Summary

The Preliminary Risk Assessment (PRA) and Conceptual Site Model (CSM) developed from the information gathered as part of the desk study process have identified plausible significant potential pollutant linkages that exist in relation to the current status of the site. The potential pollutant linkages established within this desk study have been considered in the context of the proposed current status of the site, the potential for increased or variation in risk associated with fires on site, and are considered to require investigation and further assessment to support further characterisation, calibration of the CSM and where/if necessary, determine a remedial strategy to reduce, remove or otherwise control any risk within the site to key receptors. It should, however, be noted that the PRA acknowledges that there were numerous uncertainties associated with the existing data. The primary uncertainty being due to the lack of site specific information on the condition of the soils and waste beneath the site. In order to progress the risk assessment and Part IIA assessment of the site, to provide further characterisation of the site, and refinement of the PRA and CSM, it was concluded within the preliminary risk assessment that intrusive investigation and analysis would be required to clarify the presence and magnitude of any contamination and significant risk. As such, the following preliminary geochemical investigation was proposed to be out on the site to include analysis of soil and groundwater (if encountered) samples for the range of potential contaminants identified within the desk study as well as a period of ground gas and groundwater monitoring. It should be noted that the assessment will be undertaken to take account of risk and potential liabilities required to be considered under Part IIA which requires one or more of the following: 1) The collation and assessment of documentary evidence, or information from other sources. 2) A visit to the subject site for the purpose of visual inspection, which may include limited sampling. 3) Intrusive investigation of the land. The works are required to determine if there is the potential for the Part IIA regime to have been triggered in relation to source-pathway-receptor linkages identified on the site such that a significant potential of significant harm (SPOSH) is deemed to have been identified that would potentially require further assessment and determination of required works to mitigate the identified risks. Assessment of risks will be undertaken in relation to key receptors such as human health, controlled waters, built environment, soft landscaping and the like in liaison with the Local Authority and the Environment Agency depending on the risk identified. Any requirement for risk mitigation measures and remediation works on the site cannot be determined until such time as an intrusive investigation and associated testing has been completed. The aim of any remediation works would be to reduce the risk of significant potential of significant harm in relation to the site, based on its current status and land use. Any consideration of the potential for future development works on the site fall outside the scope of works proposed. In addition, it is anticipated that if gross soil contamination is encountered, or pockets of asbestos impacted soils are present, these materials could be classified as Hazardous Waste if off-site removal was required.

28 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

4.0

GROUND INVESTIGATION

4.1

Scope of Works

The following scope of works for the intrusive investigation was agreed with the Client, and reviewed by the Landowner of the site and undertaken in September 2023: • • • • • • • • • • • 4.2

Attendance of a specialist surveyor to survey the investigation positions to capture the co-ordinates and levels of exploratory holes using GPS surveying; Attendance of a Geo-Environmental Engineer to set out and supervise the intrusive investigations, undertake sampling, in-situ testing and logging of recovered soils from exploratory holes; Provision of Photo Ionisation Detector (PID) to assess the soils for VOCs and to support the targeting of the laboratory analysis of samples recovered. Provision of a Tracerco T401 Radiation Contamination Monitor to assess soils recovered from the investigation positions. 13No. machine excavated trial pits to depths of between 3.00m and 4.50m bgl (TP101 to TP113). Initially 15No. trial pits were proposed however, slow tracking and creation of safe access around the site was such that this was limited to 13No. locations being achievable while on site; 18No. dynamic sampler boreholes to depths of up to 5.00m bgl (WS101 to WS106, WS106a, WS107, WS107a—c, WS108, WS108a-b, WS109, WS109a-b and WS110). Several locations refused at shallow depth such that additional positions were drilled in close proximity with a view to trying to achieve proposed depths. Installation of 10No. boreholes (WS101, WS102, WS103, WS104, WS105, WS106a, WS107c, WS108b, WS109b & WS110) with gas and groundwater monitoring standpipes; Return spot gas and groundwater monitoring of standpipes on six occasions. Water/leachate sampling on a single occasion during the first return monitoring visit. Geochemical laboratory testing to support a contamination assessment and preliminary waste assessment for the site; Provision of a Ground Investigation Report. Investigation Strategy

The positioning of exploratory holes was determined on site to provide general coverage of the site in relation to historical landfilling and subsequent unlicensed deposits of waste materials on the site and to target specific areas based on the site walkover. It should be noted that the feasibility and access of investigation positions was subject to the creation of tracking routes round the site where topography and changes in levels were safe to allow. In some central areas of the site steep gradient changes were such that they prevented direct tracking around the site which therefore limited the areas where investigation works could be safely undertaken within the agreed timeframe for the investigation works on site. A plan showing tracking routes created and undertaken around the site is presented in Figure 3. Table 4.1 sets out the investigation strategy adopted. Area of Concern General ground conditions Potential contamination of near surface soils (Top 3-4m bgl) Potential contamination of near surface soils (Top 5m bgl)

Investigation Exploratory holes located across the site, coupled with sampling and laboratory analysis of selected samples. Exploratory holes located to provide coverage of the site, coupled with sampling and laboratory analysis of selected samples. Exploratory holes located to provide coverage of the site primarily around towards site boundaries, coupled with sampling and laboratory analysis of selected samples.

Positions All TP101 - TP113 WS101 to WS106, WS106a, WS107, WS107a—c, WS108,

29 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report Area of Concern

Gas and groundwater/ leachate monitoring

Investigation

Monitoring standpipes installed with boreholes

Table 4.1 Summary of the Investigation Strategy

Positions

WS108a-b, WS109, WS109a-b and WS110

WS101, WS102, WS103, WS104, WS105, WS106a, WS107c, WS108b, WS109b & WS110

Soil and water samples were collected and placed into amber jars and cool boxes on site for transit to the office, where they were stored under chilled conditions (<4oC) prior to final transportation in cool boxes to the laboratory by their in-house courier. Both the geotechnical and contamination testing were undertaken by UKAS accredited laboratories (where appropriate). Contamination testing of soil samples was also undertaken in accordance with accredited MCERTS protocols. Samples were stored in temperature-controlled conditions from sampling until receipt at the laboratory from which time sample preparation and storage was determined by testing requirements and in line with laboratory’s protocols.

30 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

5.0

ENCOUNTERED CONDITIONS

A factual record of the conditions encountered during the physical investigation of the site is presented in the following sections. For further details of the ground conditions, reference should be made to the site photographs presented in Appendix B. The exploratory hole logs and cross sections are presented in Appendix C, the geochemical testing results (soil and water/leachate) in Appendix D and E and the return spot gas and water monitoring results in Appendix F. The HazWasteOnline Assessment is in Appendix G. The physical ground investigation works were undertaken between 18th and 22nd September. Return gas and groundwater monitoring has been undertaken on six occasions (3rd, 13th and 27th October, 6th, 20th November and 4th and 6th December 2023. The final monitoring visit was split into two due to unforeseen issues with the technician’s vehicle). Water/leachate sampling of monitoring installations where sufficient water was recorded within the standpipe was undertaken as part of the 3rd October 2023 sampling visit, with samples submitted to the laboratory for analysis. A further round of water/leachate sampling was undertaken on the 6th November 2023. At the time of writing, further liaison is ongoing with Havering Council to determine if sufficient budget is present to allow analysis of this second round of samples collected. Unless stated otherwise, all depths are reported as metres below ground level (m bgl). 5.1

Soils

The ground conditions encountered within the exploratory holes undertaken all comprised Made Ground. Natural soils were not encountered within any of the investigation positions undertaken. A generalised summary of the encountered soil conditions encountered is presented in Table 5.1. Top (m bgl)

0.00-2.00

Base (m bgl)

4.50+

0.00

0.40

0.00

0.50

0.05

0.10

Description

Locations

MADE GROUND Brown silty/clayey/gravelly sometimes ashy SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete, sometimes tarmac. Cobbles and boulders of concrete and brick. Other items included tyres, plastic fragments, plastic bags, cement bags, CD players, cassette tapes, timber, slate, ceramic tiles, textiles, hessian, plastic gloves, glass bottles, cabling, ceramic pipe, plastic bottles, paper, metal bars, bike parts, packing tape and timber sleeper. Suspected bonded Asbestos Containing Material (ACM).

TP101, TP102, TP103, TP105, TP106, TP107, TP108, TP109, TP111, TP112, TP113, WS101, WS103, WS104, WS106, WS106a, WS107, WS107a, WS017b WS107c, WS108, WS108a, WS108b, WS109, WS109a, WS109b, WS110

Hydrocarbon odour and sheen Charred plastic Organic odour MADE GROUND Greyish brown ashy gravelly SILT. Gravels are fine to coarse brick with plastic. MADE GROUND: Surface tipped materials: 70% plastic (mostly plastic bags), 15% textiles, metal, timber and concrete. TARMAC

TP105 TP108 TP112 TP103, TP104 TP111 WS103, TP110

31 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Top (m bgl)

0.40-1.80

0.80-3.70

Base (m bgl)

5.00+

3.90+

Description

Locations

MADE GROUND Brown, grey or black gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete, flint and occasional chalk. Cobbles and boulders of brick and concrete. Other items included tiles, metal bucket, metal car parts, polystyrene, timber, glass bottles, fibreglass, plastic, ceramic tiles, clinker, tarmac, hessian, coal, slate, suspected Asbestos Containing Material (ACM).

TP104, TP106, TP107, TP110, TP111, TP112, WS101, WS102, WS103, WS104, WS105, WS106, WS106a, WS107c, WS108b, WS109b, WS110

Organic odour Strong hydrocarbon odour Tarry odour MADE GROUND Domestic waste: often comprising 20% to 85% plastic bag, up to 50% gravelly SAND, gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint, 5% timber, 5% textiles. Other items included: metal pipes, plastic pipes, rope, metals cans, brick, hessian materials, cladding, cables, ceramics, plastic bottles, shoes, foam, car parts, underlay, and car registration plates, cassettes, paper labels, metal, tree trunk, carpet, metal wire, plastic tray, netting, plastic bucket.

TP106 & TP107 TP110 WS107c

Hydrocarbon and organic odour Crisps packet best before date 2011 MADE GROUND: Lilac iridescent fine to coarse 1.60 2.00 GRAVELS of concrete and clinker. Table 5.1 Summary of Ground Conditions

TP101, TP102, TP112

TP101 TP112 TP107

For more detailed descriptions at specific locations, reference should be made to the exploratory hole logs presented in Appendix C. No clear distinction can be made between the location of soil waste, domestic waste or skip type waste materials found at higher elevation on site and the materials found at lower elevations in terms of being able to zone the presence and depth of specific waste materials on the site. Although domestic waste was encountered in TP101 and TP102, it was not encountered in WS107, WS108 or WS109 which were of a similar elevation. Domestic waste was also encountered in TP112 which was located at a higher elevation than TP101 and TP102. It is considered that the domestic waste materials encountered on site post-date 2010 based on a crisp packet best before date of 2011 identified on site. The different materials encountered on site did not indicate any clear patterns with regards to deposition laterally or vertically within the investigation positions undertaken on the site. As expected with such sites, the underlying waste was found to be heterogeneous indicating either potentially random locations of deposition at varying times or significantly varying materials during periods of deposition. In terms of the investigation works undertaken on site to date and presented herein it should be noted that only a limited number of positions have been undertaken on large site which is noted to be highly variable in nature.

32 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

As such, this report does not look to interpolate conditions between investigation positions. It should also be noted that conditions can vary over time. 5.2

Groundwater

Groundwater was encountered within the exploratory holes during the intrusive investigation works as summarised within Table 5.2. Exploratory Hole TP105 TP110 WS103

Note:*m AOD unavailable

Groundwater depth (m bgl) [AOD] 3.00 [12.68] 3.60 * 4.10 *

Comments Oily sheen, possibly perched -

Table 5.2 Summary of Groundwater Encountered within Exploratory Holes during the Intrusive Investigation Groundwater monitoring wells were installed within WS101, WS102, WS103, WS104, WS105, WS106a, WS107c, WS108b, WS109b and WS110 to allow for return monitoring to be undertaken. A number of positions had to be terminated and re-drilled in close proximity to the original locations due to obstructions during the site works, in order to achieve the required/proposed depths. Return gas and water monitoring has been undertaken on six occasions on 3rd, 13th, 27th October, 6th and 20th November, and 4th and 6th December 2023. The final monitoring visit was split into two due to unforeseen issues with the technician’s vehicle. All programmed monitoring visits are now complete. Water depths were recorded within the groundwater monitoring standpipes installed during the return groundwater monitoring visits undertaken and are summarised in Table 5.3 below.

33 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Depth to water (m bgl) and water level [m OD] Location 03/10/2023 13/10/2023 27/10/23 06/11/2023 20/11/2023 4/12/2023 [m m bgl m bgl m bgl m bgl m bgl m bgl AOD] [AOD] [AOD] [AOD] [AOD] [AOD] [AOD] WS101* Dry Dry Dry Dry 2.42 3.18 3.16 3.21 2.88 2.97 WS102* * * * * * 3.70 3.66 4.02 3.37 3.14 3.05 WS103* * * * * * * WS104 4.54 4.32 4.27 4.07 3.43 3.37 [15.24] [10.67] [10.92] [10.97] [11.17] [11.09] [11.87] WS105 4.52 4.28 4.07 3.93 4.70 4.50 [12.57] [8.05] [8.29] [8.51] [8.64] [7.87] [8.07] WS106a 4.51 4.40 4.37 3.91 3.67 3.54 [8.87] [4.36] [4.62] [4.50] [4.96] [5.20] [5.33] Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry WS107c 4.98 4.98 4.96 4.96 4.96 [13.14] [8.16] [8.16] [8.18] [8.18] [8.18] Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry WS108b 5.00 4.98 4.97 4.97 4.95 [12.58] [7.58] [7.6] [7.61] [7.61] [7.63] Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry WS109b 3.54 2.89 2.67 2.64 2.62 [14.62] [11.08] [11.73] [11.95] [11.98] [12.00] WS110 3.70 3.33 3.28 3.28 2.79 [14.71] [11.01] [11.38] [11.43] [11.43] [11.92]

Note:*m AOD unavailable Note: - not monitored on that visit

6/12/2023 m bgl [AOD] Dry 3.00 * 3.38 [11.86] Dry 4.96 [8.18] Dry 4.94 [7.64] Dry 2.62 [12.00] 2.63 [12.08]

Table 5.3 Summary of Groundwater Encountered within Monitoring Wells As can be seen from a review of the well levels (at ground level) presented in m AOD, WS107c, WS108b and WS109b, which were noted to be dry over the monitoring period, were noted to be located at a higher levels than other wells where water/leachate was noted to be present. Based on the water levels and that the water was often encountered within the clay based Made Ground it is likely that these represent perched groundwater/leachate pockets on site within or above less permeable strata. WS104, WS105 and WS106a may be representative of water trapped in the unslotted base of the installation, where a sump has effectively created a pathway for trapped porewater/leachate rather than representative of continuous groundwater or perched water at this location beneath the site. During of the monitoring wells was undertaken on 13th October 2023 within wells WS104, WS105 and WS106a with recharge rates monitored and recorded and summarised in Table 5.4 below. Location Start Time Start Depth (m bgl) Finish Time WS104 10:47 4.98 (dry) 13.01 WS105 11.05 5.02 (dry) 13.04 WS106a 11.17 5.01 (dry) 13.08 th Table 5.4 Summary of Groundwater Purging and Recharge rates (13 October 2023)

Finish Depth (m bgl) 4.96 5.01 5.00

34 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

It should be noted that there was heavy precipitation during the purging event therefore the recharge water may be indicative of perched water rather than a continuous groundwater body at shallow depth beneath the site. 5.4

Monitoring

Personal gas monitors which could detect combustible gases and vapours, as well as O2, CO, NO2, SO2 and H2S were used for the duration of the investigative works. These monitors were not triggered by encountered/excavated materials on the site. A radiation contamination monitor was also used during site works. The monitor was swept over the arisings and towards the excavations. The readings recorded were never above measured background levels. The background levels were ascertained from the user manual and double checked at the office ahead of completing site works. 5.5

Surface Water

The nearby Common Watercourse surface water has not been sampled due to access constraints. The watercourse is overgrown and therefore unsafe to access. If access improves over the winter months (vegetation dies back) it may be possible to sample Common Watercourse. In lieu of access to the nearby surface water, water samples were taken from the installed boreholes on site where available to assess potential movement of contaminants. 5.6

Obstructions

Boulder sized concrete and brick fragments were encountered in multiple trial pits across the site. Only TP109, TP111 and TP113 did not encounter boulder sized particles. WS106 encountered an obstruction at 2.2m, WS107, WS107a and WS107b all encountered obstructions between 0.50m and 0.65m, WS108 and WS108a encountered obstructions at 0.5m and WS109 and WS109a encountered obstructions at 0.5m. WS109b encountered an obstruction at 3.2m. Boulder sized pieces of concrete were observed at the surface across the majority of the site. 5.7

Physical Restrictions

Due to the nature of the site, access was difficult and required de-vegetation and access tracks to be constructed. This included tracks and vegetation removal to the rear of the compound for locations TP110 to TP113 and WS103 to WS106. Access to the southern end of the site needed to be made by cutting through a southern bund and construction of a track to the lower southern levels and locations TP110, TP111 and WS103. Access to WS106 also required excavation through a bund. Location TP107 was relocated further north to avoid a bund and significant sharp drop in level. Finally, TP108 was relocated east as the original location was within a steep sided deep trench. Tall dense brambles had to be removed to create access for WS107 and WS108 locations. A summary of encountered materials and constraints is presented in Figure 5. 5.8

Distinguishing Materials

It has been speculated by the Local Authority that the top of the original permitted landfill on site following restoration was potentially similar to the current level of the Launders Lane Road. Unfortunately, it has not been 35 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

possible through the works undertaken to date to obtain any records to verify the original restoration levels of the site following the initial permitted landfilling on the site. From the limited data collected and the lack of datable material it is impossible to ascertain with certainty which material encountered was from the original licensed landfill and which was from the subsequent unauthorised deposits of tipped waste, with the exception of TP112 which encountered a crisp packet which had a best before date of 2011. As part of these works it has not currently been possible to locate and records of the former capping details for the site, so it is unknown whether the original landfill was capped/restored and if so with what materials and to what levels. However, given the date of the landfilling it is expected that a thin restoration capping layer would likely have been applied to the site. However, it is difficult to assess the specific materials which may form the former capping system as no records are available on the final site levels following permitted filling and subsequent restoration. It is possible that the domestic waste encountered in TP101 and TP102 was from the original permitted landfill, despite the original permit not including domestic waste. However, with no dates on items excavated, this cannot be verified. If the original top of the permitted landfill was at the same level as the Launders Lane then material identified in WS102, WS103, TP110 and TP111 were likely part of the original landfill. It was noted during a return spot gas and water/leachate monitoring visit on site that additional waste (materials that could be carried by hand, e.g. a toaster), had been brought onto site near WS103 after the initial site investigation was completed (i.e. between the investigation works and monitoring works being undertaken on the site). It would be prudent to undertake a topographic survey completed across the whole site to understand the current site levels and provide current baseline levels allowing assessment of any changes as a result of any unpermitted fly tipping, stability issues/settlement associated with the variation in waste types and thicknesses across the site or changes in compaction. 5.9

Chemical Analysis

In order to assess the general chemical quality of the Made Ground encountered, samples of soils recovered from the exploratory holes were submitted for analysis for a range of potential contaminants supported by CLR publication CLR8 and Environment Agency R&D66 publication. The testing rationale included sampling and analysis to provide a general coverage of the subject site. Testing was undertaken for a broad range of commonly occurring contaminants including metals, metalloids, inorganic compounds, PCBs, speciated TPH, PAH, asbestos and some organic compounds and included analysis of the differing Made Ground strata encountered. The analysis scheduled is summarized below. TP101 3.0m

Sample

TP102 0.20m TP103 0.75m TP104 3.30m TP105 3.20-3.30

Testing Analysis Metals, TPH, PAH, BTEX, PCB, inorganics, asbestos Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX

Rationale General coverage, soil domestic waste General coverage

within

General coverage, suspected asbestos cement identified. General coverage General coverage, oil sheen noted.

36 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

TP106 2.20m

Sample

TP107 1.8m TP108 4.40m TP109 2.50m TP110 3.40m TP110 3.50m

Testing Analysis Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX, PCB Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX, VOC, SVOC Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX TPH, BTEX, VOC, SVOC

TP111 0.60m

Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX

TP111 3.70m TP113 3.30m

BTEX, TPH Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX, PCB Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX, VOC, SVOC Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX TPH, BTEX, VOC, SVOC, Metals, inorganics, asbestos, TPH, PAH, BTEX, VOC. SVOC, PCB Asbestos, TPH, BTEX Asbestos, TPH, BTEX

WS102 4.70-4.90m WS106a 0.9m WS106a 4.50m WS107c 2.30-2.50m WS108b 2.50m WS109b 1.50m

Rationale General coverage, organic odour noted. General coverage, lilac iridescent coating noted. General coverage, depth range. General coverage General coverage General coverage, oily sheen noted. General coverage, material sits directly below recent surface tipping. General coverage General coverage, soil within domestic waste. General coverage General coverage General coverage General coverage General coverage General coverage

Note: Testing was prioritised within the testing budget allowance to provide a representative assessment, however, not all samples collected were analysed.

Table 5.5 Summary of chemical analysis testing scheduled and rationale

37 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

6.0

COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALS CONSIDERATIONS

Due to the high number of fires reported on the site, Geo-Environmental were asked to assess what buried materials were likely to be igniting or susceptible to fire. The following sections explore the materials encountered on site. Combustible materials have a flashpoint of between 38.7°C and 93.3°C (flammable materials have a flashpoint below 37.8°C). In this report is it assumed that a proportion of the encountered domestic waste have the potential to be combustible, however no testing has been completed to discern their flashpoint in this respect. 6.1

Potentially Combustible Materials Encountered

Household waste, containing materials considered to have the potential to be include potentially combustible material was encountered in TP101, TP102, and TP112. Materials classified as potentially flammable were identified in TP110 though analysis undertaken and an assessment of the materials through HazWasteOnline. The details of the materials are presented below. Location

Top (m bgl) [AOD]

Base (m bgl) [AOD]

TP101

0.80 [15.18]

1.20 [14.78]

TP101

1.20 [14.78]

3.20 [12.78]

TP102

0.80 [14.71]

3.40 [12.11]

TP110

3.40 [-]

3.70 [-]

3.70 [11.54]*

3.90 [11.34]*

TP112

Description soil (up to 50%), plastic (up to 20%), timber (up to 5%), metal pipes, plastic pipes and rope throughout. Soil is gravelly SAND, gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint. (Domestic Waste) * plastic (up to 70%, timber (up to 5%), metals cans, brick, hessian materials, cladding, cables, ceramics, plastic bottles, shoes, foam, car parts underlay and car registration, cassettes, paper labels, metal, tree trunk, carpets, metal wire, vegetable tray and netting. Hydrocarbon and organic odour. (Domestic Waste) plastic bags (up to 70%), timber (up to 5%) and building foam (up to 2%), soil (up to 1%). Shoes, bricks, blue plastic drum, metal, cabling, plastic ducting, tree branch, hanger, plastic bottles, drinks cans, netting, fabric, doormat, broken glass, paper, plumbing pipe, duvet and hessian sacks. (Domestic Waste) Black and grey gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Glass bottles and timber. Strong hydrocarbon odour and below 3.50m groundwater exhibiting a black oil sheen (assumed to be hydrocarbon). In this case it is considered that the oily element to the water former the potentially combustible element. Landfill materials: plastic bags (up to 85%), textiles (up to 5%), timber (up to 5%), plastic bottles, metal, paper, plastic car parts, plastic buckets, suspected Asbestos Containing Materials (cement) and a Quavers multi pack best before 12/03/2011.

NOTE: No level available for TP112, level extrapolated from nearby WS104. No level available for TP110. Note * In TP101 the soils at 1.20-3.20m bgl have the higher potential to be combustible in this location, however the materials noted above at 0.801.20m have elements that could also be combustible if a fire was started in the deeper materials and would burn with pockets of domestic waste and soils across the pit so have been referenced herein for completeness.

Table 6.1: Combustible Materials Encountered

These materials were encountered in deep trial pits. TP102 was relatively close to the “smouldering trench”, identified as part of the 8th August 2023 site walkover and detailed in the site description and understood to be subject to a historical fire on site, which could indicate that similar materials are present at depth in the trench. 38 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Materials in Sample TP110 at 3.40m were classified as having potentially flammable properties (based on the recorded total TPH) in the HazwasteOnline Assessment, which assesses materials for waste classification. Trommel Fines were also identified on the surface in the southern area of the site. Trommel Fines are final materials that come from the mechanical treatment of waste. This material can be made up of some combustible components but are often formed mainly of glass, stone and soils, which would not necessarily be regarded as a combustible material. However, the materials have a very low density and can contain fine particles of timber, plastic etc and due to this a large surface area. They are also difficult to compact and can become quite spongy, thus allowing the flow of oxygen through their matrix. Due to their large surface area, low density and ability for oxygen flow, once ignited, these materials could remain ignited and spread fire throughout the areas where they have been deposited. Although trommel fines were only identified in one specific area (see Figure 5) it is possible that there are more tipped on site, either at the surface or buried. It is also considered that visual identification of these materials was likely to have been hindered by areas of vegetation on site. Their exact composition can vary and, due to their physical properties, can often be costly to dispose of through legitimate routes. It should be noted that although combustible materials were identified at depth an obvious heat source/ignition source was not encountered. The possible presence of LPG canisters as an ignition source was previously raised by the Council, local residents at the public meeting on the 1st September, and within the 3rd party GEMCO Phase 1 assessment report. However, significant evidence of these was not identified as part of the intrusive works undertaken on site, albeit that the total number of investigation positions undertaken only assessment a small proportion of the overall site, in terms of deposited materials. Possible evidence of subsurface fires was observed in TP108 where charred plastic and metal was observed between 1.00m bgl and 1.30m bgl. From these observations alone it is impossible to say with any certainty whether the material was charred on deposition or if there had been a subsurface fire. The charred material was isolated in nature within the trial pit. Photos of the materials encountered within each of the investigation positions are presented in Appendix B. 6.2

Asbestos

Laboratory testing identified loose asbestos fibres were present in deep and shallow soils across the site. Loose fibres in the shallow soils and on the surface of the site may pose a potential health risk to nearby residents. Theoretically loose fibres could migrate from the site in strong winds or entrained in smoke from fires and be transported to surrounding areas. Geo-Environmental are unaware of any studies determining how far asbestos fibres can travel in these situations and therefore unable to advise whether this does pose a practical risk to the nearby residents. Suspected cement bound asbestos was identified on the surface across the site however, cement bound asbestos is notably non-flammable and non-combustible and was often used as a fireproofing material therefore the risk from these discrete fragments is very low.

39 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

It is recommended that asbestos air monitoring is undertaken in areas across the site to further assess the presence of loose fibres were identified to understand if fibres are potentially being transported offsite. Whilst it is recommended that air monitoring is undertaken on/around the site to inform further assessment of the potential for airborne fibres to be released to the air, where asbestos is bound within cement, or mixed within a soil mass, it is considered that there is negligible potential for fibres to be released.

Ideally further monitoring would be undertaken to form a baseline for the site and to consider if/when further fires break out on site to identify any potential fibres within the smoke. 6.3

Surface Fires

Evidence of recent surface fires was observed in the southwest of the site along the boundary with New Road. Charred material was encountered across much of the southern boundary with New Road and a pile of material was still smouldering while the Geo-Environmental Engineers were on site. The pile was not in close vicinity to the working area and was dealt with by Geo-Environmental and GEMCO (the Landowner’s Consultant), with both parties agreeing on site that an appropriate course of action to mitigate the potential risk identified. As such, it was requested that the excavator driver on site dig a fire break trench around these materials. Charred materials included but were not limited to metal (food cans, scrap metal), wood (possibly treated and untreated timber), plastic (bags and solid plastic items), brick, cardboard, paper, rubber (wellington boots), textiles (clothing, carpets) and foam. It should be noted that although charred materials were observed, no evidence of an ignition source were identified in proximity to the material. 6.4

Trommel Fines

Trommel fines were identified in an area in the south of site. Trommel fines are the final materials that come from the mechanical treatment of waste. This material can be made up of some combustible components but are often formed mainly of glass, stone and soils, which would not necessarily be regarded as a combustible material. However, the materials have a very low density and can contain fine particles of timber, plastic etc and due to this a large surface area. They are also difficult to compact and can become quite spongy, thus allowing the flow of oxygen through their matrix. Due to their large surface area, low density and ability for oxygen flow, once ignited, these materials could remain ignited and spread fire throughout the areas where they have been deposited. Although trommel fines were only identified in one specific area it is possible that there are more tipped on site, either at the surface or buried, it is also considered that visual identification of these materials was likely to have been hindered by areas of vegetation on site. Their exact composition can vary and, due to their physical properties, can often be costly to dispose of through legitimate routes.

40 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

7.0

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

A Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment (GQRA) of risks to the adjacent land users utilising the results of the ground investigation was undertaken, the findings of which are presented in the following sections. 7.1

Ground Gases

We have assumed that our monitoring wells have been left untouched between monitoring visits and that gas has accumulated sufficiently between visits. If gas valves were opened between monitoring visits, or wells vented in any other way, the results of the monitoring may not be representative of the gas regime of the site. Gas and groundwater monitoring wells were installed within locations WS101, WS102, WS103, WS104, WS105, WS106a, WS107c, WS108b, WS109b and WS110. Monitoring has been undertaken on six occasions on 3rd, 13th, 27th October, 6th and 20th November, and 4th and 6th December 2023. The final monitoring visit was split into two due to unforeseen issues with the technician’s vehicle. All programmed monitoring visits are now complete. The construction of the monitoring wells is summarised in Table 7.1. It should be noted that all of the monitoring wells installed on site are considered to have response zones located within the Made Ground. Location WS101 WS102

Depth of borehole (m bgl) 2.40 5.00

Response Zone (m bgl) 0.50-2.40 1.00-5.00

WS103

5.00

1.00-5.00

WS104 WS105 WS106a WS107c

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00

1.00-5.00 1.00-5.00 1.00-5.00 1.00-5.00

WS108b

5.00

1.00-5.00

WS109b

3.00

1.00-3.00

WS110

4.00

1.00-4.00

Table 7.1 Summary of monitoring installations and response zones.

Strata Gravelly sandy CLAY (Made Ground) Gravelly CLAY (Made Ground) Gravelly SAND and CLAY (Made Ground) Sandy gravelly CLAY (Made Ground) Sandy gravelly CLAY (Made Ground) Gravelly sandy CLAY (Made Ground) Sandy gravelly CLAY (Made Ground) Gravelly SAND and CLAY (Made Ground) Sandy gravelly CLAY (Made Ground) Gravelly SAND and CLAY (Made Ground)

The spot monitoring undertaken detected methane at concentrations in the range of 0.0% to 33.4%. Carbon dioxide has been detected at concentrations in the range of 0.1% to 30.2% and oxygen in the range 0.1% to 22.0%. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) have been detected at concentrations of between 0.0ppm to 302ppm during the monitoring visits. Atmospheric pressure was recorded in the range of 991mb to 1020mb during the visits undertaken. Borehole flows were measured and recorded a steady flow of -0.2 to 1.2 l/hr. Carbon monoxide was detected at concentrations ranging between 0ppm and 12ppm, hydrogen sulphide was recorded at concentrations between 0.0ppm and 61ppm. The maximum readings recorded during each of the monitoring visits undertaken to date are summarised in the Table 7.2 below.

41 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

CH4%

CO2%

O2%

H2S ppm

CO ppm

VOC

Flow l/hr

Pressure mb

Maximum 03/10/23

WS101 19.3

WS102 30

WS103 0.3

WS104 0.2

WS105 0.1

WS106a 2.0

WS107c 3.6

WS108b 0.2

WS109b 0.0

WS110 0.0

13/10/23 27/10/23

29.7 30.6

32.8 30.1

18.7 19.5

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.3

7.5 5.0

5.8 5.4

0.1 0.1

0.0 0.1

0.5 0.1

06/11/23 20/11/23 04/12/23* 06/12/23* 03/10/23 13/10/23 27/10/23 06/11/23 20/11/23 04/12/23* 06/12/23* 03/10/23 13/10/23 27/10/23 06/11/23 20/11/23 04/12/23* 06/12/23* 03/10/23 13/10/23 27/10/23 06/11/23 20/11/23 04/12/23* 06/12/23* 03/10/23 13/10/23 27/10/23 06/11/23 20/11/23 04/12/23* 06/12/23* 03/10/23 13/10/23 27/10/23 06/11/23 20/11/23 04/12/23* 06/12/23* 03/10/23 13/10/23 27/10/23 06/11/23 20/11/23 04/12/23* 06/12/23* 03/10/23 13/10/23 27/10/23

33.4 32.2 31.8 23.8 30.2 29.4 25.1 21.9 19.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 10 27 24 61 0.0 20.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 13.7 3.4 10.7 10.3 7.3 0.0 0.0 -0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 1019 1002 991

28.0 26.8 27.5 23.1 12.4 21.0 19.7 18.1 16.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.2 0.2 2.0 4.0 16 14 12 13.0 2.0 1.0 2.1 1.0 0.0 0.0 7.1 302 4.8 3.1 10.3 8.7 0.1 0.1 -0.1 0.1 -0.1 0.0 1018 1001 991

13.9 16.2 17.7 1.9 5.0 5.1 1.6 3.0 3.5 17.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 13.2 3.4 0.8 4.4 4.0 3.6 -0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1020 1002 991

0.2

0.1

3.0

0.1

0.0

0.3 0.3 0.1 6.0 6.2 6.7 6.7 8.0 8.1 7.7 14.1 13.3 9.7 3.2 0.8 1.5 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 6.6 4.9 9.3 7.5 6.7 3.6 0.0 -0.1 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 1016 1002 991

0.3 0.2 3.8 3.7 4.4 4.2 5.0 6.0 17.1 17.0 15.3 13.2 10.2 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.1 31.1 0.9 2.4 4.5 3.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1018 1001 991

1.5 4.2 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.5 13.3 0.4 3.7 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 6.0 3.0 7.0 1.0 1.0 60.2 9.1 1.8 1.7 3.4 3.1 -0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.2 1019 1001 991

5.1 2.4 15.6 18 19.1 9.0 15.3 14.8 4.3 1.9 0.4 12.4 3.1 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 12.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 1.0 16.8 44.9 32.1 1.4 12.7 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.0 1019 1001 991

0.4 0.2 11.2 7.4 11.6 12.9 12.3 11.2 7.9 15.2 9.0 7.5 8.9 10.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 27.9 5.6 1.9 7.3 9.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.1 0.0 1018 1000 991

0.1 0.3 4.0 4.1 5.8 5.9 5.1 4.9 16.2 15.4 11.9 15.0 15.0 15.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.9 9.8 17.8 1.7 7.6 3.3 0.0 0.1 0.3 -0.1 0.1 0.0 1019 1001 991

0.0 0.1 1.8 1.9 2.3 2.2 0.8 1.1 9.4 8.3 5.0 3.2 0.9 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 10.2 15.3 8.8 1.5 3.3 4.1 -0.1 0.0 0.0 -0.1 0.0 0.0 1019 1001 991

42 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report Maximum

WS101 WS102 WS103 WS104 WS105 WS106a WS107c WS108b WS109b 999 1000 1001 1001 1000 1001 06/11/23 1000 1000 1001 1007 1007 1008 1002 1008 1008 20/11/23 1009 1009 1008 997 996 997 04/12/23* 996 1018 1019 1019 1019 06/12/23* 1019 1019 Note: % – percentage based on the volume analysed; ppm – parts per million; l/hr – flow reported as litres per hour Note: Gas Guidance requires consideration of lowest levels of oxygen therefore oxygen levels are minimum recorded Note: - Not monitored on that visit. * Last monitoring visit locations spilt over 4th and 6th December 2023.

WS110 1001 1007 1018

Table 7.2 Summary of maximum Gas Readings

It is likely that the elevated gasses are being produced by isolated pockets of specific material, rather than present across the site. The gas monitoring has identified elevated levels of ground gases including methane, carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulphide and VOCs however, no significant flow has been recorded, in addition variation in concentrations was noted between monitoring points on site with the highest levels in the wells located at a lower level (AOD) so potentially associated with the underlying former landfill. The build-up of methane gas could result in a flammable source within pockets where the gas in collecting (although an ignition source is still required (e.g. heat or flame). 7.1.1

Gas Risk Assessment

Ground gas monitoring wells were installed across the site to target onsite landfill materials. Soil samples were also collected from the site from the underlying Made Ground and were submitted for analysis of Total Organic Carbon to aid with the ground gas risk assessment. The intrusive investigation did not encounter conditions that required a revision of the preliminary risk assessment presented within the desk study section of this report. A Tier 1 Ground Gas Risk Assessment (GGRA) incorporating the results of the desk study and ground investigation was undertaken, the findings of which are presented in the following sections. 7.1.2

Ground Gas Sources

The desk study has identified the potential for ground gases and vapours associated with the former on-site landfill site and unauthorised deposited waste materials, together with a risk from organic rich waste that may be present onsite and the potential for methane generation within the on-site waste materials. The onsite landfill is recorded as having accepted domestic waste and if/where present this represents a high potential source of methane. Migration of gas and vapours to the site from former landfill sites to the north, south and west of the site is also potentially possible. These landfill sites represent a potential source of ground gas due to the types of wastes that were permitted and deposited. The anticipated natural geology underlying the site comprises a succession of Alluvium, Head Deposits and Taplow Gravel overlying the London Clay Formation. The underlying London Clay bedrock geology is primarily formed of impermeable clay layers and as such is unlikely to represent a plausible migration pathway for ground gases. It is unknown at this stage if the historical pit was formally lined or not. Given the age of the site and underlying geology comprising London Clay it is possible that a formal lining was not installed. However, the superficial deposits may contain permeable layers that could represent a plausible lateral migration pathway. Notwithstanding this, it is anticipated from review of the site’s history, that much of the sand and gravel within the site was extracted and replaced with overburden and landfill wastes. The permeable strata are still likely to remain present around the periphery of the site as some form of gravel pit benching, or battered sides required to maintain a stable site boundary. It is therefore possible that gas generated from off-site and on-site landfills could migrate and mix. 43 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Given the known history of the site, it is considered that there is potential for bulk gases such as methane, carbon dioxide and oxygen to be present together with trace gases such as hydrogen sulphide, carbon monoxide, VOCs and the like associated primarily with the historical landfill materials at depth on the site. Any occurrence of subterranean fires and the introduction of water into the landfill body are likely to cause variation in the composition of gases and vapours within the landfill waste mass over time. In addition, flow conditions are also likely to vary. 7.1.3

Total Organic Carbon

An assessment of TOC was undertaken on the Made Ground soils recovered from the exploratory hole positions on site in order to provide a further assessment of the background/baseline potential for ground gases to be present on the subject site associated with the underlying encountered landfill material, prior to consideration of potential external sources. TOC gives a conservative estimate of the amount of biodegradable material in waste or soils. It includes both readily available carbon that degrades relatively quickly and non-readily available carbon that will breakdown and degrade very slowly. A selection of soils samples collected from across the subject site were sent for geochemical laboratory analysis for % TOC. The results identified concentrations of TOC across the site between 0.8% and 2.4%, with an average of 1.33%. CL:AIRE RB17 and BS8485:2015 use TOC results to classify a site in terms of anticipated gas risk. For recently placed material a TOC of <1% indicates a classification of Characteristic Situation 1, <1.5% indicates Characteristic Situation 2, and <4% indicates Characteristic Situation 3. The average recorded concentration of TOC on this site is 1.33% therefore the overall results indicate that the site is Characteristic Situation 2 based solely on TOC on the subject site itself. However, it should also be noted that the guidance relates to the placement of fresh waste, and domestic landfill type material was only identified as being present within locations TP101, TP102 and TP112 from the recent investigation works undertaken. However, an assessment of the TOC serves to provide a background assessment for the site for the potential for presence of ground gases ahead of taking account of any potential migration from external sources identified. 7.1.4

Assessment of Gas Monitoring Data

An assessment of the maximum concentrations of recorded hazardous gas recorded and gas flow rates recorded within the return monitoring for the site has been undertaken. Chart 1 below shows the variation in maximum methane concentrations with each monitoring well through the monitoring period undertaken as part of this phase of works.

44 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Maximum Methane Concentrations 1025

1020

1015 1010

1005

1000 995

Pressure (mb)

Methane (% v/v)

990

985

980

975

WS101

WS102

WS103

WS104

WS105

WS107c

WS108b

WS109b

WS110

Pressure

WS106a

Chart 1 Variation in maximum Methane concentrations over the duration of the gas monitoring period It can be seen that methane was recorded within boreholes WS101, WS102, WS103, WS106a and WS107c. Boreholes WS101, WS102 and WS103 have consistently recorded the highest concentrations of methane across the monitoring period. These boreholes are located in the south east and south of the site, and it is thought that these boreholes were located within the historic permitted landfill present on the site. Boreholes WS106a and WS107c were located in the west of the site in areas of the site where it is understood materials including landfill materials may have been relocated/pushed during previous restoration/reprofiling works. Atmospheric pressure does not appear to have influenced the concentrations of methane being recorded. Chart 2 below shows the variation in maximum carbon dioxide concentrations with each monitoring well through the monitoring period undertaken as part of this phase of works.

45 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Maximum Carbon Dioxide Concentrations 35

1025 1020 1015

1010 1005

1000 15

995

Pressure (mb)

Carbon Dioxide (% v/v)

990

985

980

975

WS101

WS102

WS103

WS104

WS105

WS107c

WS108b

WS109b

WS110

Pressure

WS106a

Chart 2 Variation in maximum Carbon Dioxide concentrations over the duration of the gas monitoring period It can be seen that carbon dioxide was recorded in all standpipes over the monitoring period, with boreholes WS101, WS102, WS107c and WS108b consistently recording the highest concentrations. Boreholes WS101 and WS102 were located in the east of the site near to the current site entrance. These boreholes were located either side of an area of hardstanding, therefore, this area of hardstanding is likely to be preventing the venting of gases to atmosphere which may have led to the increased concentration of gas encountered within WS101 and WS102 recorded. Boreholes WS107c and WS108b were located in the west of the side adjacent to a bund followed by a significant drop possibly marking the edge of the former permitted landfill area. Chart 3 below shows the variation in minimum oxygen concentrations with each monitoring well through the monitoring period.

46 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

1025

1020

1015

1010

1005

1000

995

990

985

980

975

WS101

WS102

WS103

WS104

WS105

WS107c

WS108b

WS109b

WS110

Pressure

Pressure (mb)

Oxygen (% v/v)

Minimum Oxygen Concentrations

WS106a

Chart 3 Variation in minimum Oxygen concentrations over the duration of the gas monitoring period It can be seen that boreholes WS101 and WS102 regularly record oxygen concentration of less than 2%. With the exception of the first visit borehole WS103 can also be seen to have recorded oxygen concentrations of less than 2%. Oxygen concentrations are seen to vary in the other boreholes located across the site, however concentrations are generally lower than atmospheric concentrations within the majority of the boreholes. The lack of oxygen or lower concentrations of oxygen recorded within the boreholes across the site indicate a lesser risk of the occurrence of trommel fires in these areas. Concentrations of carbon monoxide and hydrogen sulphide were also recorded within each of the monitoring wells with the highest concentration of carbon monoxide being identified within WS107c at 12ppm, and the highest concentration of hydrogen sulphide being identified within WS101 at 61ppm. In addition, the highest concentration of VOCs were recorded within WS102 at 302ppm, however, this concentration appears to be an anomaly as all other recorded concentrations were between 0.9 and 60.2ppm within all of the monitoring wells. Negligible positive gas flow rates were recorded within boreholes, WS101, WS102, WS104, WS105, WS106a, WS107c, WS108b and WS109b on a number of occasions. The lack of notable flow indicates that the source of the methane and carbon dioxide are migrating by diffusive flow only. Gas primarily migrates via either pressure driven (advective) flow or via diffusive flow. The borehole flow rates recorded across the site during the monitoring period are consistently negligible. As such, gas present beneath the site will diffuse through the soils forming a continuum between the source and ground level, with only minor concentrations of gas reaching ground level, and no perceivable flow. The majority of gas will remain trapped in the soil pores or sorbed to soil particles. The flow rate recorded within WS106a on 4th December 2023 appears to represent a spike or anomaly. Although 47 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

the recorded flow rate is negligible it appears to be higher than any other flow rates recorded. Looking at atmospheric pressure conditions on the date of this monitoring round and the days preceding it, atmospheric pressure appears to be low at the time of the monitoring round and was falling to steady in the days preceding the monitoring round. Therefore, it is considered that atmospheric pressure may have impacted the recorded flow rate, and that it may be representative of a worst-case scenario. Assessment of the construction of the wells and the underlying ground conditions has shown that all of the response zones of the installed wells were solely within the Made Ground materials beneath the site. Description of this Made Ground material was shown to vary across the site. The highest concentrations of methane and carbon dioxide were found within WS101 and WS102, with WS103 identifying high concentrations of methane. These boreholes were located in the south east and south of the site and are thought to be located within the historic permitted landfill material. Elevated concentrations of carbon dioxide were also identified within WS107c and WS108b which were located in the west of the site adjacent to a bunded area thought to possibly represent the edge of the historic permitted landfill. As such, it is considered that the elevated concentrations of methane and carbon dioxide identified across the site are being generated by the former historic landfill located on the site. In addition, the lack of oxygen or reduced concentrations of oxygen recorded within the boreholes where elevated methane has been identified identifies a lesser risk of trommel fires in these areas. The lack of notable flow indicates that the methane and carbon dioxide identified as being generated on the site are migrating by diffusive flow only. Therefore, it is considered, based on the monitoring undertaken to date, that there is a low migration risk of gases off site. 7.2

Soil Contamination

A summary of the ranges of the chemicals recorded by laboratory testing of samples across site and therefore potentially being entrained in any smoke from fires is presented below: Contaminant

Minimum

Maximum 830 2 2.4 110 4700 4400 210 49 <1 100 2000 0

Maximum Sample (mbgl) TP110 3.40m TP104 3.30m TP106 2.20m TP109 2.5m TP106 2.20m TP106 2.20m TP109 2.5m TP106 2.20m TP106 2.20m TP106 2.20m -

Location of the maximum concentration within analysis on site Southern Area (Lower elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation) Southern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation) Southern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation)

Arsenic (mg/kg) Beryllium (mg/kg) Cadmium (mg/kg) Chromium (mg/kg) Copper (mg/kg) Lead (mg/kg) Mercury (mg/kg) Nickel (mg/kg) Selenium (mg/kg) Vanadium (mg/kg) Zinc (mg/kg) Hexavalent Chromium mg/kg) Cyanide (mg/kg) Boron (mg/kg)

12 0.69 0.2 22 37 100 0.3 18 <1 38 91 0 0.1 1.1

4.4 6.3

TP104 3.30m WS102 4.70m

1.0 0.05 5

1.1 94 5

TP106 2.20m TP103 0.75m -

Northern Area (Higher elevation) Entrance compound (Lower elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation)

Phenol (mg/kg) PAH (mg/kg) BTEX (μg/kg)

Northern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation)

48 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

TPH (mg/kg) VOCs (μg/kg) SVOCs (μg/kg)

0.1 <5.0 <0.05

15000 <5.0 3.4

TP110 3.40m TP110 3.50m

Southern Area (Lower elevation)

Entrance compound (Lower elevation) PCBs (mg/kg) <0.001 0.043 TP106 2.20m Northern Area (Higher elevation) Table 7.3 Summary of determinands identified in soil samples analysed from site. It should be noted that none of the maximum concentrations were derived from a sample taken from within the domestic waste, nor were they located directly under the charred tipped material in the southern area of the site. A Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment has been undertaken in order to evaluate any unacceptable risks posed to human health with respect to anyone accessing and walking around the site in its current state. It should be noted that this assessment does not evaluate the risks posed to human health with respect to construction or end users as this will be included in any remediation reports produced if and when an end use for the site has been identified. A quantitative risk assessment has been undertaken by comparing the results of the laboratory chemical testing of shallow soils against Tier 1 screening criteria in the first instance. These criteria comprise the Atkins ATRISK soil screening values (SSVs), the Suitable for Use Levels (S4ULs) published by LQM (Copyright Land Quality Management Limited reproduced with permission; Publication Number S4UL3453. All rights reserved) and the Category 4 Screening Levels (C4SLs) published by DEFRA. Although the C4SLs were released for Part 2A use, the associated policy companion document for the C4SLs indicated that they may also be used for planning. Although the C4SLs represent a marginally higher risk level than the SSACs (low risk rather than minimal risk) it is considered that the risk levels remain very low. Therefore, the final C4SLs are considered to be suitable to assess soils under the planning regime. The exploratory holes were located to provide general coverage of the site. Analysis was undertaken on soil samples collected from these exploratory holes. In the first instance the results of the sample analysis were compared to the Tier 1 screening criteria where available. The results were compared to criteria for Public Open Space (Park) as a conservative approach. Contaminant Arsenic

Public Open Space Samples (Park) Screening exceeding Criteria (mg/kg) criteria 170 TP110 3.40m bgl

Lead

1300

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

Benzo(a)pyrene

Maximum Value (mg/kg)

Exceedance locations on site

830

Southern Area elevation)

(Lower

TP106 2.20m bgl TP103 0.75m bgl WS107c 2.30m bgl

4400

Northern Area elevation) Northern Area elevation) Western Area elevation)

(Higher

TP103 0.75m bgl WS107c 2.30m bgl

Northern Area elevation) Western Area elevation)

(Higher

(Higher (Lower

(Lower

49 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Contaminant Dibenzo(ah)anthracene

Public Open Space Samples (Park) Screening exceeding Criteria (mg/kg) criteria 1.1 TP103 0.75m bgl WS107c 2.30m bgl

Maximum Value (mg/kg) 2.1

Exceedance locations on site Northern Area elevation) Western Area elevation)

(Higher (Lower

Table 7.4 Summary of Screening Criteria Exceedances Exceedances were identified for metals and PAH although it should be noted that TP110 3.40m bgl exceeded the threshold for free product in solution for Aliphatic C12-C16. The risk to members of the public from these exceedances would be mitigated if the site was secured to prevent unauthorised access. Asbestos identification screening was positive in 9No samples submitted for analysis. The results are summarised in the table below. Sample

TP103 0.75m

Asbestos Cement – Chrysotile

Total % asbestos in the sample by hand picking/weight. * -

TP104 0.00m

Asbestos Cement – Chrysotile

TP105 3.20m

Loose Fibres – Chrysotile

TP106 0.00-1.80m

Insulation Lagging – Chrysotile, Amosite Asbestos Cement – Chrysotile Loose Fibres – Amosite

TP106 2.20m TP106 3.00-3.40m

Material Detected

<0.001 <0.001

TP107 1.80m

Insulation Lagging – Chrysotile Asbestos Cement – Chrysotile Loose Fibrous Debris – Chrysotile

0.034

TP111 0.60m

Loose Fibres – Amosite

<0.001

TP113 3.30m

Loose Fibres – Chrysotile

<0.001

Location on site

Northern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Eastern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation) Northern Area (Higher elevation) Central Area (Higher elevation) Southern Area (Lower elevation) Southern Area (Higher elevation)

Note: * quantification was only undertaken on samples where loose asbestos fibres were identified. Quantification was not undertaken on bulk samples where visible ACM was identified.

Table 7.5 Summary of Asbestos Positive IDs

Although the majority of the asbestos positively identified by the laboratory was located in deeper soils, suspected bonded asbestos cement fragments were noted in locations across the whole site. It is possible that wind disturbance could entrain any loose fibres at the surface and transport them offsite. It is recommended that air monitoring be carried out across the site and along the boundaries to monitor for the presence of any asbestos fibres (to assess potential mobility as a result of normal conditions on site/ though airborne release and movement). It is noted that once fibres are in the air, they could travel in the prevalent wind direction. 50 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Water/Leachate Contamination

Three water samples were taken from the site. Two were obtained from installed boreholes (WS102 and WS103) and a third from a trial pit (TP110). Contaminant

Minimum

Maximum

Arsenic (µg/l)

4.14

223

Barium (µg/l)

250

430

Beryllium (µg/l) Cadmium (µg/l)

<0.1 <0.02

<0.1 0.03

Chromium (µg/l)

0.9

1.1

Copper (µg/l)

0.8

3.5

Lead (µg/l)

0.5

7.6

Mercury (µg/l) Nickel (µg/l)

<0.05 2.5

<0.05 10

Selenium (µg/l)

<0.6

2.3

Vanadium (µg/l)

1.4

6.7

Zinc (µg/l)

3.2

Hexavalent Chromium (µg/l) Cyanide (µg/l)

<0.5

<10

430

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as NH3 (µg/l)

11000

47000

Boron (μg/l)

610

4200

Iron (mg/l)

0.14

1.6

PAH (µg/l)

<0.01

3.3

BTEX (μg/l)

<3.0

Maximum Sample TP110 3.50m bgl WS103 3.70m bgl TP110 3.50m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl WS103 3.70m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl TP110 3.50m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl TP110 3.50m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl TP110 3.50m bgl TP110 3.50m bgl -

Location on site Southern Area (Lower elevation) Eastern Area (Lower elevation) Southern Area (Lower elevation) Eastern Area (Lower elevation) Eastern Area (Lower elevation) Eastern Area (Lower elevation) Eastern Area (Lower elevation) Southern Area (Lower elevation) Eastern Area (Lower elevation) Eastern Area (Lower elevation)

Eastern Area (Lower elevation) Southern Area (Lower elevation) Eastern Area (Lower elevation) Eastern Area (Lower elevation) Southern elevation) Southern elevation) -

Area

(Lower

Area

(Lower

51 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

Contaminant

Minimum

Maximum

TPH (µg/l)

<1.0

1700

VOCs (μg/l) SVOCs (μg/l)

<3.0 <0.01

<3.0 3.3

PCBs (µg/l) <0.02 Table 7.6 Summary of Water Results

<0.02

Maximum Sample TP110 3.50m bgl TP110 3.50m bgl -

Location on site Southern elevation) Southern elevation) -

Area

(Lower

Area

(Lower

The water (leachate) results have been screened using groundwater screening criteria and were compared to drinking water standards, EQS Freshwater and AtRisk Commercial Water Screening Values. The exceedances are summarised in the table below. Contaminant Arsenic Boron Mercury Chloride PAH

Drinking Water Standards 10µg/l 1000µg/l 1µg/l 250mg/l 0.1µg/l

EQS Freshwater 50µg/l 2000 µg/l 1 µg/l 250 mg/l -

AtRisk Commercial* -

Note:* No determinands exceeded AtRisk Commercial values for Human Health

Samples exceeding criteria TP110 3.5m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl WS102 3.18m bgl TP110 3.50m bgl

Maximum Value 223 µg/l 4200 µg/l 7.6 µg/l 440 mg/l 1.84 µg/l

Table 7.7 Summary of Water Screening Criteria Exceedances 7.4

Waste Disposal

7.4.1

Deposited Soils

The soil analyses from the main site area were assessed using HazWasteOnline software. Most of the samples assessed were indicated to represent potentially non-hazardous waste with the exception of TP107 at 1.80m and TP110 at 3.40m as detailed below. The HazWasteOnline assessment for the main site area is included within Appendix G. It should be noted that any extraneous materials such as plastic, wood etc. present in the soils as observed will likely impact the waste classification. It may be possible to screen out such materials as part of any remedial treatment process. Details for the two hazardous samples are provided below: • •

TP107 at 1.80m – The following hazardous properties were identified: Carcinogenic (HP7) due to lead concentration, Toxic for reproduction (HP10) due to lead concentration and Ecotoxic (HP14) due to copper concentration, lead concentration and zinc concentration; TP110 at 3.40m bgl – The following hazardous properties were identified: Flammable (HP3) due to TPH concentration, Carcinogenic (HP7) due to TPH concentration, Mutagenic (HP11) due to TPH concentration and Ecotoxic (HP14) TPH concentration and zinc concentration.

It should be noted that asbestos cement fragments were identified within analysis in TP103 at 0.75m, TP106 (between surface level and 1.80m bgl and 3.00m and 3.40m bgl)) and TP104 (at surface level). As such, asbestos cement fragments and suspected asbestos cement fragments were observed across the site at surface and within the waste materials at depth. The presence of visible asbestos cement fragments and lagging identified on site and submitted for analysis (and any other forms of asbestos) identified from analysis in the soil or otherwise 52 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

potentially present across other areas of the site renders the soils a hazardous mixed waste. Some level of treatment such as handpicking of the ACMs would be required with a view to separating the asbestos and soils to reduce the volume of material required to disposed of as hazardous waste. However, this would only be possible for the likes of asbestos cement board, if/where significant volume of lagging for example was encountered it would be very hard to hand pick these materials to reduce the waste classification. However, further testing would be required to classify materials for offsite disposal, and ultimately classification of materials will be subject to an assessment of the test results and soil description by the receiving facility. Hazardous waste has been identified largely in relation to visible fragments of bonded asbestos cement within and on top of the soils. The removal of visible asbestos containing materials by processing or hand picking may serve to remove the hazardous properties from some of the soils (subject to post-processing testing and assessment). All work with asbestos containing materials and asbestos containing soils should be undertaken by a suitably competent contractor who should prepare an asbestos specific risk assessment detailing the control measures to be applied when working with the asbestos containing materials/soils. The contractor should also assess whether the work would be considered licensable and/or notifiable under the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012. It should also be noted that trommel fines (mixed material resulting from waste transfer sites that ensues from sorting waste through large cylinder devices called trommels, which are intended to separate the material by size) were observed on site. No samples sent for analysis contained trommel fines. Should offsite removal be considered for these materials then testing of trommel fines should be undertaken to confirm the exact waste classification disposal/treatment requirements and their presence highlighted to the receiving facility, and ultimately the classification of materials will be subject to an assessment by the receiving facility. The location of the trommel fines identified on site to date is presented in Figure 5. 7.4.2

Domestic waste

The soil analysis from the soils mixed in with the domestic waste materials was sampled and the analytical results were assessed using HazWasteOnline software. The sample was assessed as non-hazardous waste (this presents an indication of the classification of the fine grained soil materials for the purpose of disposal). However, it should be noted that any extraneous materials such as plastic, wood etc present in the soils as observed could impact the waste classification which may then increase the classification. Furthermore, the presence of an Asbestos containing materials (ACMs) or the presence of asbestos fibres within the soils which are quantified above 0.1% would likely render the materials as hazardous waste for the purpose of disposal.

53 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

8.0

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In conclusion, based on the limited data available from a review of the desk study information and from the intrusive investigation works, with the exception of TP113, it has not been possible to formally determine whether materials encountered as part of the intrusive investigation positions are part of the original permitted landfill or unauthorised tipping above. Although some inferences can be made based on areas of the site being significantly topographically higher than others, no details as to the finished levels of the original permitted landfill levels have been identified or reviewed as part of these works. A review of historical photographs for the site (From Google Earth) indicated that earthworks were undertaken on the site at the time of the unauthorised deposition of wastes, which may have moved the permitted landfilled materials from their original placement locations. TP113 can be approximately dated due to the presence of crisp packets with expiry dates still noted to be readable (2011). In addition, areas of waste material were noted at surface level across the majority of the site which are inferred to be unauthorised deposits tipped materials. While multiple potentially combustible materials were encountered both on the surface and in the soils/waste mass, no significant evidence of ignition sources were identified within the soils or waste mass encountered within the exploratory hole positions undertaken. No evidence of LPG canisters was identified as previously considered to present a potential ignition source on the site. They may be present in other areas of the site remote from the investigation positions undertaken. As such, it has not been possible to identify a definite ignition source on the site as part of the works undertaken to date. Charred surface items were observed in the southern portion of the site, including but not limited to metal, plastics and textiles. This area of the site was noted to be subject to several fires the week prior to investigation works commencing on site. In addition, a smouldering trench was identified during the initial site walkover on the site in August 2023 within the central portion of the site, in an area which was noted to have been subject to an historical large fire on site. The trench, that had been dug to attempt to suppress the fire, appeared to contain similar waste type materials to the domestic waste encountered within TP102. Neither the personal gas monitors nor the radiation monitor on site identified elevated levels/levels of concern during the intrusive investigation works undertaken. Return spot gas monitoring of the monitoring standpipes installed within the waste mass on site have identified levels of methane, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulphide and VOCs along with depleted oxygen on site, such that the presence of methane where elevated may be acting to exacerbate and sustain fires on the site within the deposited waste materials. Methane is flammable and explosive between certain limits and the presence of pockets of methane could potentially exacerbate or sustain fires, however an ignition source (e.g. arc/flame/heat would still be required). However, without a source of ignition and with no significant flow, the methane would be likely to remain within the waste mass and concentration reduce towards ground surface. In addition, depleted oxygen concentrations were recorded across the site within the monitoring wells, thereby a reduction in oxygen is considered to reduce the risk of sub terranean fires as oxygen would be needed to enable a fire to burn. It is noted that no significant flow has been detected in terms of ground gases and as such the risk to offsite receptors from ground gas migration is considered to be low. It is suggested that further detailed assessment of gas regime may be beneficial in further assessing the site in order to further to consider the potential for a build-up of gases in pockets across the site and to further assess the presence of ground gases venting from the site. This further assessment is suggested to include continuous gas monitoring, a surface emissions survey and additional TOC analysis of encountered Made Ground materials. Continuous gas monitoring would provide further data in relation to fluctuations in recorded gas concentrations 54 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

and gas flow rates in real time. A surface emissions survey would help to identified areas of the site where gases are venting to atmosphere, aiding to identified areas of the site where pockets of gases are located. Additional TOC analysis of the Made Ground underlying the site would help to provide further assessment of the likely gassing potential of the Made Ground materials located across the site to aid to target areas where gases are most likely to be generated. In addition, it may be prudent to consider the drilling of some deep boreholes in order to locate monitoring wells solely within the former permitted landfill, as this appears to be the main source of gases encountered across the site. It should be noted that the proposed options are with a view to assessing the current status and gassing regime on the site. It should be noted that any works on site such as regrading, capping or subsequent development if proposed would be considered to alter the gassing regime of the site and would need to be considered further in the context of any works proposed. The majority of the soils element encountered are considered to be suitable to be left in-situ beneath the site in terms of risk to human health with regards to public open space (taken as the most conservative end use given the unauthorised access to a private site). While contaminants have been identified including TP110 at 3.40m bgl, TP106 at 2.20m bgl, TP103 at 0.75m bgl and WS107c at 2.30m bgl which had exceedances in arsenic, lead and PAH respectively these were generally noted to be present at depth, such that where the soils remain undisturbed there is not significant risk in terms of risk to human health from the general existing site use. However, the presence of other elevated contamination concentrations associated the waste materials/soils at shallow depth across the site surface cannot be ruled out given the significantly variable nature of the materials and contamination levels identified within the samples analysed. As such, to reduce the risk of unauthorised entry to the site is it recommended that the site is secured. Further consideration would need to be given to the presence of ACMs identified on the surface and in shallow soils beneath the site, together with seemingly sporadic low concentrations of free fibres identified within the soils. Whilst it is recommended that air monitoring is undertaken on/around the site to inform further assessment of the potential for airborne fibres to be released to the air given asbestos was identified both on the surface and in the subsurface soils on site. Were asbestos is bound within cement, or mixed within a soil mass, it is considered that there is negligible potential for fibres to be released. It is considered that the risk to members of the public from the elevated concentrations of specific determinands could primarily be mitigated through securing the site to prevent unauthorised access thereby breaking the source-pathway-receptor for exposure to the contaminants on site. Water/leachate samples found exceedances (when compared to Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for Freshwater) in relation to arsenic and PAH in TP110 at 3.50m bgl and Boron, Mercury and Chloride in WS102 at 3.18m bgl. It is thought that these are likely to be isolated pockets of perched water/leachate which has been impacted by waste localised to the area of the monitoring wells. While a continuous water body has not been identified beneath the site within the Made Ground materials/soils to 5m bgl, the nature of the site is such that infiltration of rainfall will occur on the site, which is likely to result in localised leaching of contaminants and pockets of water/leachate forming which have the potential to migrate. The original scope of works for the site did include the proposed monitoring of the nearby surface water Common Watercourse which boarders the site to the west and north. However, due to the overgrown nature of the site and limited access to date, it has not been possible to safely undertake surface water monitoring. As such, works have focused on assessing the potential for leachable contaminants. During the site works no evident of breakout of leachate was noted in relation to the site, however the overgrown nature of the site could have obscured any such occurrences. The leachability and presence of water within the waste mass/soils on site is considered to be a function of infiltration through the site. As such, in order to reduce the leaching of contaminants and potential migration through the site or to off-site receptors, consideration could be given to providing a capping layer on site formed

55 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

from a less permeable material with surface water channelled over the site to discharge into the adjacent surface water as opposed to being allowed to infiltrate through the site and waste materials. Any detailed proposals for capping of the site to reduce infiltration would also need to consider ground gases in further detail to assess any potential to changes to the gassing regime on site as a result of installing a capping system. Although some of the soils analysed on site were classified as non-hazardous waste (when considered in relation to waste classification for disposal) two samples were found to be hazardous (TP110 3.40m and TP106 2.20m). This classification is based on the chemical properties of the materials. It should be noted that any extraneous materials such as plastic, wood etc present in the soils as observed could impact the waste classifications. The presence of asbestos bonded fragments in soils also impacts the waste classification. It is recommended that the following works be undertaken to further assess or reduce the potential for significant risk of significant harm in relation to the site. •

• •

Asbestos air monitoring on the site to assess the potential of airborne asbestos fibres and any associated risk of migration. Recommended to comprise boundary monitoring as well as within the site. It should be noted that due to the topography on site, boundary monitoring may require access to adjacent land to safely access the site boundaries. Securing of the site to prevent unauthorised access, thereby breaking a number of the source, pathway receptor linkages identified; Consideration of reprofiling and capping of the waste materials on site to further mitigate potential source pathway receptor linkages identified to reduce the risk from the current status on site.

It is also suggested that the following works could be undertaken to aid further assessment of the gassing regime on site and key risk drivers with a longer term view of assessing options for works required toreduce the potential for significant risk of significant harm in relation to the site, in the context of the current land use and any subsequent proposed land use.. •

Further assessment of ground gas regime on the site and potential for methane to comprise a flammable source for fires on site in the form of: o Continuous gas monitoring to monitoring gas concentrations and flow rates in real time. o Surface emissions survey across the site to aid identification of areas of the site where gases are being produced. o Additional TOC analysis of Made Ground soils to help identified areas where the risk of future gas generation is considered higher. o Drilling of deep boreholes to target the historic permitted landfill material.

It is possible that the risks posed by the site could be reduced by leaving the material on site and capping it to break the pathway between source and receptor, prevent any asbestos fibres from leaving site and to starve any combustible material of oxygen to prevent fires. It is likely that any remediation required to make the site suitable for a specific development or change in end use would differ from the works proposed in terms of reducing any risk in relation to the current site status and this would be subject to a further assessment which is beyond the scope of the works presented herein. It should however, be noted that any changes to the site whether that is capping or incorporation of areas of hardstanding will impact on the sites gassing regime and detailed assessment would be required prior to the undertaking of any such works.

56 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Ground Investigation Report

8.1

Status under Part 2A

The site-specific assessment has provided additional information with which to re-assess and further characterise the reasonable possible pollutant linkage groups identified within the Preliminary Risk Assessment (PRA). With regards to human health (regulated by the Local Planning Authority) and controlled waters (regulated by the Environment Agency), contaminant linkages should be considered as ‘significant contaminant linkages’ only where it can be demonstrated that they will result in a ‘significant possibility of significant harm’, often referred to as SPOSH. The strict legal test of SPOSH is where site conditions are such that exposure to the contaminant, and thus the contaminant linkage, would represent an unacceptable intake or other bodily contact assessed on the basis of information on the toxicological properties of that contaminant. The assessment of SPOSH is a regulatory decision and, in relation to human health, should be taken by the Local Authority and/or Environment Agency dependant on receptor. It is considered that the overall risk of the site (when not on fire) in relation to a number of the source pathway receptor (SPR) linkages identified could be reduced by securing the site, thereby removing unauthorised access on the site. However, further consideration is required in relation to the SPR linkages associated with the fires on the site, both during fires and of any impacts following fires. In addition, there are areas where a significant risk of significant harm has not currently been identified but that improvements or limited works on site such as reprofiling and installation of capping across the exposed waste materials, resulting in a reduction of infiltration through the site may also serve to offering a reduction in overall risk.

57 GE21483/GIRv2.0/DEC23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

FIGURES

Project:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Ref No:

GE21483

Revision:

1.0

Unit 7 Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Road

Drawn:

Date:

10/08/2023

Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex BN6 9GL

Figure:

Scale:

On Map

Title

Site Location Plan Geo-Environmental Services Ltd

+44(0)1273 832972 www.gesl.net

N WS109 WS108

WS108b

WS109a

WS110 TP103

WS108a TP101

WS107

WS107b

WS107a

TP102

TP105

TP108 TP107

TP106

TP104

WS107c WS101 WS102

TP113

WS105

TP112

TP109

WS104 TP110

TP111 WS106a

WS106

Project:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Ref No:

GE21483

Revision:

1.0

Unit 7 Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Road

Drawn:

Date:

13/11/2023

Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex BN6 9GL

Figure:

Scale:

On Map

Title

Exploratory Hole Location Plan Geo-Environmental Services Ltd

+44(0)1273 832972 www.gesl.net

WS103

WS109b

Project:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Ref No:

GE21483

Revision:

1.0

Unit 7 Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Road

Drawn:

Date:

27/09/2023

Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex BN6 9GL

Figure:

Scale:

On Map

Title

Tracking Routes and Access Plan Geo-Environmental Services Ltd

+44(0)1273 832972 www.gesl.net

N WS109 WS108

WS108b

Section 4

TP103

WS108a TP101

WS107

WS107b

WS107a

WS109a

WS110

Section 2

Section 3 TP104

TP102

TP105

TP108 TP107

TP106

WS107c WS101 WS102

TP113

TP112 TP109 WS105 WS104 TP111

WS106a

Section 1

TP110

WS106

Project:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Ref No:

GE21483

Revision:

1.0

Unit 7 Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Road

Drawn:

Date:

16/11/2023

Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex BN6 9GL

Figure:

Scale:

On Map

Title

Cross Section Location Plan Geo-Environmental Services Ltd

+44(0)1273 832972 www.gesl.net

WS103

WS109b

Project:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Ref No:

GE21483

Revision:

1.0

Unit 7 Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Road

Drawn:

Date:

18/10/2023

Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex BN6 9GL

Figure:

Scale:

Not To Scale

+44(0)1273 832972 www.gesl.net

Title

Summary of Encountered Materials Geo-Environmental Services Ltd

N WS109 WS108

WS108b

WS109b

WS109a

WS110 TP103

WS108a TP101

WS107

WS107b

WS107a

TP104

TP102

TP105

TP108 TP107

TP106

WS107c

Monitoring Wells

WS101 WS102

TP113 TP112 TP109 WS105 WS104

TP110

TP111 WS106 WS106a

Project:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Ref No:

GE21483

Revision:

1.0

Unit 7 Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Road

Drawn:

Date:

13/11/2023

Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex BN6 9GL

Figure:

Scale:

On Map

Title

Monitoring Well Location Plan Geo-Environmental Services Ltd

+44(0)1273 832972 www.gesl.net

WS103

Possible Pollutant Linkages: 1. Direct contact with contaminated soils 2. Inhaltion/migration of soil dusts, and presence of gases/vapours (inhallation/migration and flammable source) 3. Vertical and lateral migration through permeable strata and within groundwater 4. Shallow groundwater within made ground- vertical and lateral migration 5. Chemical attack of buried plastics and concrete 6. Fire and Firefighting (Explosion/Smoke/direct contact/runoff/infiltration)

Offsite Residenital Properties

Offsite Landfills

Infiltration

Compound

Unauthorised Personnel

Fires/Smoke

Production and Mitgration of Ground Gases

Concrete Slab

2 1

2 Unauthorised deposted waste and moved former landfill materials (Including Asbestos)

Perched Water/leachate

Road

Firefighting Vegetation

Offsite Landfills

Production and Mitgration of Ground Gases

Arnolds Field

Common Watercourse

Key

Adjacent Golf

Portacabin Structure Site Gates

Perched Water/leachate

Former Landfill following Sand and Gravel (Tapow Gravel quarrying) (possible permeable strata)

5 4 Offsite Landfills

Possible Alluvium

Possible Quarry overburden materials subsequently placed at depth on infilling London Clay Formation (impermeable strata)

Project:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council (LBH)

Ref No:

GE21483

Revision:

Unit 7 Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Road

Drawn:

Date:

31/08/2023

Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex BN6 9GL

Figure:

Scale:

Not To Scale

+44(0)1273 832972 www.gesl.net

Title

Conceptual Site Model (Current Use) Geo-Environmental Services Ltd

Perched Water

Project:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Ref No:

GE21483

Revision:

1.0

Unit 7 Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Road

Drawn:

Date:

13/06/2023

Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex BN6 9GL

Figure:

Scale:

Not To Scale

+44(0)1273 832972 www.gesl.net

Title

Summary of Landfill Sites in the Vicinity of the Site Geo-Environmental Services Ltd

APPENDIX A Desk Study Information (Including UXO Preliminary Assessment and Environment Agency Freedom of Information Request and Google Earth Historical Photographs)

From: To: Subject: Date: Attachments:

NET Enquiries Laura Legate HNL317204/AS: FOI Request for Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL 24 July 2023 12:58:05 image001.gif image002.gif image003.gif image004.gif image005.gif image006.jpg image007.png

Hi Laura Thanks for your email. I’m just trying to track down who would be the best person for you to speak with. As soon as I know, I’ll be back in touch. Kind regards

Annette Smith Customers and Engagement Officer Environment Agency, Hertfordshire and North London Alchemy, Bessemer Road, Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire, AL7 1HE Direct dial 0203 0258975 Direct email HNLenquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk My usual working hours are 8.30am to 3pm, Mondays to Wednesdays

From: Laura Legate <Laura.legate@gesl.net> Sent: 19 July 2023 09:34 To: NET Enquiries <HNLenquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk> Cc: Tom Morgan <tom.morgan@gesl.net> Subject: RE: HNL317204/AS: FOI Request for Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL Hi Annette Thank you for your response to Tom in relation to the freedom of information request. We are working on this site on behalf of Havering Council Environmental Health Department (Mike Richardson, senior public protection officer is our point of contact) who are investigating the site to assess the current status of the site with respect to Human Health. Due to instability and fires that has been identified within the waste materials deposited on site. We understand, as is supported by your response, that there were illegal deposits on site and an

investigation from the EA. Would it be possible to provide contact details for the compliance officer or Groundwater Team lead that were involved in the illegal waste activity investigation so that we can discuss this site and understand the risks further ahead of our intrusive investigation works on the site and ensure that the report being produced for Havering Council include all relevant available information. We are happy to pay for further correspondence time if required. Kind Regards Laura

Laura Legate

CGeol, CSci, BSc (Hons), MSc, FGS Environmental Director From: NET Enquiries <HNLenquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2023 3:06 PM To: Tom Morgan <tom.morgan@gesl.net> Subject: HNL317204/AS: FOI Request for Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL

Dear Tom Thank you for your enquiry of 15 June 2023. Having reviewed our case file, we do not hold any permits, and/or Compliance Assessment Reports. We have no records of any surveys and/or sampling results for the site within the historic casefile. We are aware from our investigation at the site, that between 2011 and July 2014 there was extensive deposits of non-hazardous waste at site, approximately between 30 to 50,000 cubic meters. Waste consisted of mixed household, commercial and industrial material, suspected from a waste transfer station. We took prosecutions against three offenders, who were convicted for the deposits. I hope that we have correctly interpreted your request. We respond to requests for recorded information that we hold under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the associated Environmental Information Regulations 2004. This information is provided subject to the Open Government Licence, which you should read. Please get in touch if you have any further queries or contact us within two months if you’d like us to review the information we have sent. Yours sincerely

From: Tom Morgan <tom.morgan@gesl.net> Sent: 15 June 2023 10:10 To: Enquiries, Unit <enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk> Cc: Laura Legate <Laura.legate@gesl.net> Subject: FOI Request for Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL Our Ref: GE21483 Good morning, I would like to submit a FOI request on behalf of our client Havering Borough Council for any information pertaining to a site of the following address: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL Our Ref: GE21483 We are aware the site has been infilled therefore, any landfill data will be particularly prevalent. However, any data on the site is relevant to our work. A site plan is attached if you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to get in contact. Best wishes,

Tom Morgan

Consultant Engineer T: +44 (0) 1273 832972

W: www.gesl.net Head office: Unit 7, Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Rd, Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex, BN6 9GL, UK Hatfield Peverel Office: Office 4 Wheelwrights Yard The Street, Hatfield Peverel, Essex CM3 2EA Bristol Office: Bristol Broad Quay, Broad Quay House, Prince Street, Bristol, BS1 4DJ Birmingham Office: Birmingham Fort Dunlop, Fort Dunlop, Fort Parkway, Birmingham, B24 9FEL

Geo‑Environmental Services Limited has ISO9001, ISO14001 and ISO45001 accreditation. The Company Registration No. is 3214980 and the VAT Registration No. is 679544479.

Information in this message may be confidential and may be legally privileged. If you have received this message by mistake, please notify the sender immediately, delete it and do not copy it to anyone else. We have checked this email and its attachments for viruses. But you should still check any attachment before opening it. We may have to make this message and any reply to it public if asked to under the Freedom of Information Act, Data Protection Act or for litigation. Email messages and attachments sent to or from any Environment Agency address may also be accessed by someone other than the sender or recipient, for business purposes.

From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments:

Nathan Towers Tom Morgan; Uxo Laura Legate; Gavin Roberts; Shaun Armitage RE: Prelim Assessment: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL 30 June 2023 14:13:29 image002.jpg image003.png image004.jpg image005.png image006.png image007.jpg image008.png

Hi Tom Thanks for your email. If your works are confined within the depth and footprint of post-WWII intrusive works, then the likelihood of encountering UXO is considered to be low. If you have any further questions, please don’t hesitate to contact us. Many thanks

Nath Nathan Towers Risk Assessor Zetica Limited T. 01993 886 682 | E. Nathan.Towers@zetica.com | W. www.zeticauxo.com | T. @ZeticaUXO

From: Tom Morgan <tom.morgan@gesl.net> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2023 9:22 AM To: Nathan Towers <Nathan.Towers@zetica.com>; Uxo <Uxo@zetica.com> Cc: Laura Legate <Laura.legate@gesl.net>; Gavin Roberts <gavin.roberts@gesl.net>; Shaun Armitage <Shaun.armitage@gesl.net> Subject: RE: Prelim Assessment: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL Good morning Nath, Thank you for this, we have preformed a desk study of the site and the historic mapping has shown that the site was excavated as a sand and gravel pit between 1967 and 1974 the extents of which cover the entire site on the historic mapping. We are also aware that since it has been used as a mixed landfill site of various waste types. Would this effect the outcome of the prelim recommending the detailed assessment as these groundworks occurred post war.

(1967 historic mapping) Best wishes,

Tom Morgan

Consultant Engineer From: Nathan Towers <Nathan.Towers@zetica.com> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2023 4:01 PM To: Tom Morgan <tom.morgan@gesl.net>; Uxo <Uxo@zetica.com> Cc: Laura Legate <Laura.legate@gesl.net> Subject: RE: Prelim Assessment: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL Hi Tom Please see our PDSA below. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

Pre-Desk Study Assessment Site:

Arnolds Field, Havering, London

Client:

Geo-Environmental

Contact:

Tom Morgan

Date:

29th June 2023

Pre-WWI Military Activity None identified. on or Affecting the Site WWI Military Activity on or Affecting the Site

None identified.

WWI Strategic Targets (within 5km of Site)

The following strategic targets were located in the vicinity of the Site: Transport infrastructure and public utilities. Industries important to the war effort, including munitions and aircraft manufacturing. Royal Flying Corps (RFC) Hornchurch. Military camps and training areas. Anti-Aircraft (AA) defences.

WWI Bombing

None identified on the Site.

Interwar Military Activity on or Affecting the Site

None identified.

WWII Military Activity on or Affecting the Site

None identified.

WWII Strategic Targets (within 5km of Site)

The following strategic targets were located in the vicinity of the Site: Transport infrastructure and public utilities. Industries important to the war effort, including munitions manufacturing, chemical, and engineering works. Royal Air Force (RAF) Hornchurch. Military camps and training areas. AA and anti-invasion defences.

WWII Bombing Decoys (within 5km of Site)

None.

WWII Bombing

During WWII the Site was located in the Urban District (UD) of Hornchurch, which officially recorded 1,091No. High Explosive (HE) bombs with a bombing density of 55.1 bombs per 405 hectares (ha). Readily available records have been found to indicate that several HE bombs fell in close proximity to the Site.

Post-WWII Military Activity on or Affecting the Site

None identified.

Recommendation

It is recommended that a detailed desk study is commissioned to assess, and potentially zone, the Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) hazard level on the Site.

Further information

For information about Zetica’s detailed UXO desk studies and other UXO services, please visit our website: www.zeticauxo.com. Details and downloadable resources covering the most common sources of UXO hazard affecting sites in the UK can be found here. If you have any further queries, please don’t hesitate to get in contact with us at uxo@zetica.com or 01993 886 682.

This summary is based on a cursory review of readily available records. Caution is advised if you plan to action work based on this summary. It should be noted that where a potentially significant source of UXO hazard has been identified on the Site, the requirement for a detailed desk study and risk assessment has been confirmed and no further research will be undertaken at this stage. It is possible that further in-depth research as part of a detailed UXO desk study and risk assessment may identify other potential sources of UXO hazard on the Site.

Many thanks

Nath Nathan Towers Risk Assessor Zetica Limited T. 01993 886 682 | E. Nathan.Towers@zetica.com | W. www.zeticauxo.com | T. @ZeticaUXO

From: Tom Morgan <tom.morgan@gesl.net> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2023 4:21 PM To: Nathan Towers <Nathan.Towers@zetica.com>; Uxo <Uxo@zetica.com> Cc: Laura Legate <Laura.legate@gesl.net> Subject: RE: Prelim Assessment: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL Nath, Thank you very much. Best wishes,

Tom Morgan

Consultant Engineer From: Nathan Towers <Nathan.Towers@zetica.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2023 3:49 PM To: Tom Morgan <tom.morgan@gesl.net>; Uxo <Uxo@zetica.com> Cc: Laura Legate <Laura.legate@gesl.net> Subject: RE: Prelim Assessment: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL Hi Tom I can confirm that the PDSA will be ready for issue by COP tomorrow. Many thanks

Nath Nathan Towers Risk Assessor Zetica Limited T. 01993 886 682 | E. Nathan.Towers@zetica.com | W. www.zeticauxo.com | T. @ZeticaUXO

From: Tom Morgan <tom.morgan@gesl.net> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2023 1:33 PM To: Nathan Towers <Nathan.Towers@zetica.com>; Uxo <Uxo@zetica.com> Cc: Laura Legate <Laura.legate@gesl.net> Subject: RE: Prelim Assessment: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL

Good afternoon Nath, Hope you’re well I was just wondering if we could get an update on the progress of this report? Best wishes,

Tom Morgan

Consultant Engineer From: Nathan Towers <Nathan.Towers@zetica.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 2:24 PM To: Tom Morgan <tom.morgan@gesl.net>; Uxo <Uxo@zetica.com> Cc: Laura Legate <Laura.legate@gesl.net> Subject: RE: Prelim Assessment: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL Hi Tom Not a problem, we’ll get a PDSA completed for you as soon as possible. Many thanks

Nath Nathan Towers Risk Assessor Zetica Limited T. 01993 886 682 | E. Nathan.Towers@zetica.com | W. www.zeticauxo.com | T. @ZeticaUXO

From: Tom Morgan <tom.morgan@gesl.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 1:36 PM To: Uxo <Uxo@zetica.com> Cc: Laura Legate <Laura.legate@gesl.net> Subject: Prelim Assessment: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, Havering, RM13 9FL Good afternoon, Please could I request a prelim assessment for the attached site in Rainham it shows as high on your postcode search. Site address is: Our Job Ref: GE21483 Site Plan: Attached If you require any further information from me, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best wishes,

Tom Morgan

Consultant Engineer T: +44 (0) 1273 832972

W: https://url6.mailanyone.net/scanner?m=1q93Fc-0003BM-5V&d=4%7Cmail%2F90%2F1686659400%2F1q93Fc-0003BM5V%7Cin6l%7C57e1b682%7C20996377%7C7886977%7C648862AC557117E17896B7869A7C05E6&o=l.wwnes.wgte&s=bjAkazrS5od7r_dQXITorgZH_Do Head office: Unit 7, Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Rd, Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex, BN6 9GL, UK Hatfield Peverel Office: Office 4 Wheelwrights Yard The Street, Hatfield Peverel, Essex CM3 2EA Bristol Office: Bristol Broad Quay, Broad Quay House, Prince Street, Bristol, BS1 4DJ Birmingham Office: Birmingham Fort Dunlop, Fort Dunlop, Fort Parkway, Birmingham, B24 9FEL

Geo‑Environmental Services Limited has ISO9001, ISO14001 and ISO45001 accreditation. The Company Registration No. is 3214980 and the VAT Registration No. is 679544479.

This email has been scanned for spam & viruses. If you believe this email should have been stopped by our filters, <a href="https://portal.mailanyone.net/index.html#/outer/reportspam? token=dXNlcj1OYXRoYW4uVG93ZXJzQHpldGljYS5jb207dHM9MTY4ODExMzMwODt1dWlkPTY0OUU5MDk4QUNGRUNFQUJBRUEyNjZFREVFMDM4RUNEO3Rva2VuPWZkMDBm MzZmYTJlZWVjNjg5MDc3MzVmMzRmMjJmNTU3YWI5NzYxYWU7ere to report it.

Launder’s Lane Google Earth Satellite Images

Dated September 1999

Dated December 2002

GE21483/GIR/NOV23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Launder’s Lane Google Earth Satellite Images

Dated December 2003

Dated December 2005

GE21483/GIR/NOV23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Launder’s Lane Google Earth Satellite Images

Dated November 2006

Dated June 2010

GE21483/GIR/NOV23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Launder’s Lane Google Earth Satellite Images

Dated February 2011

Dated July 2013

GE21483/GIR/NOV23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Launder’s Lane Google Earth Satellite Images

Dated July 2014

Dated June 2015

GE21483/GIR/NOV23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Launder’s Lane Google Earth Satellite Images

Dated May 2017

Dated May 2018

GE21483/GIR/NOV23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Launder’s Lane Google Earth Satellite Images

Dated April 2019

Dated June 2019

GE21483/GIR/NOV23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Launder’s Lane Google Earth Satellite Images

Dated April 2020

Dated February 2021

GE21483/GIR/NOV23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Launder’s Lane Google Earth Satellite Images

Dated March 2022

GE21483/GIR/NOV23

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9GJ London Borough of Havering Council

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Order Details

Site Details

Date:

15/06/2023

Location:

554116 182008

Your ref:

GE21483-PO-6505

Area:

16.94 ha

Our Ref:

GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM

Authority: London Borough of Havering ↗

Summary of findings OS MasterMap site plan Contact us with any questions at: info@groundsure.com ↗ 01273 257 755

p. 2 > N/A: >10ha

Aerial image groundsure.com/insightuserguide ↗

p. 9 >

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Summary of findings On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

Historical industrial land uses >

1.2

Historical tanks

15 >

1.3 >

Historical energy features >

1.4

Historical petrol stations

1.5

Historical garages

1.6

Historical military land

Page

Section

Past land use - un-grouped >

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

17 >

2.1 >

Historical industrial land uses >

2.2

Historical tanks

18 >

2.3 >

Historical energy features >

2.4

Historical petrol stations

2.5

Historical garages

Page

Section

Waste and landfill >

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

20 >

3.1 >

Active or recent landfill >

3.2

Historical landfill (BGS records)

3.3

Historical landfill (LA/mapping records)

22 >

3.4 >

Historical landfill (EA/NRW records) >

23 >

3.5 >

Historical waste sites >

24 >

3.6 >

Licensed waste sites >

26 >

3.7 >

Waste exemptions >

Page

Section

Current industrial land use >

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

27 >

4.1 >

Recent industrial land uses >

4.2

Current or recent petrol stations

4.3

Electricity cables

4.4

Gas pipelines

4.5

Sites determined as Contaminated Land

Page

Section

Past land use >

14 >

1.1 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

4.6

Control of Major Accident Hazards (COMAH)

4.7

Regulated explosive sites

4.8

Hazardous substance storage/usage

4.9

Historical licensed industrial activities (IPC)

4.10

Licensed industrial activities (Part A(1))

4.11

Licensed pollutant release (Part A(2)/B)

4.12

Radioactive Substance Authorisations

30 >

4.13 >

Licensed Discharges to controlled waters >

4.14

Pollutant release to surface waters (Red List)

4.15

Pollutant release to public sewer

4.16

List 1 Dangerous Substances

4.17

List 2 Dangerous Substances

32 >

4.18 >

Pollution Incidents (EA/NRW) >

4.19

Pollution inventory substances

4.20

Pollution inventory waste transfers

4.21

Pollution inventory radioactive waste

Page

Section

Hydrogeology >

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

34 >

5.1 >

Superficial aquifer >

Identified (within 500m)

36 >

5.2 >

Bedrock aquifer >

Identified (within 500m)

37 >

5.3 >

Groundwater vulnerability >

Identified (within 50m)

5.4

Groundwater vulnerability- soluble rock risk

None (within 0m)

5.5

Groundwater vulnerability- local information

None (within 0m)

41 >

5.6 >

Groundwater abstractions >

44 >

5.7 >

Surface water abstractions >

5.8

Potable abstractions

5.9

Source Protection Zones

5.10

Source Protection Zones (confined aquifer)

Page

Section

Hydrology >

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

51 >

6.1 >

Water Network (OS MasterMap) >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

55 >

6.2 >

Surface water features >

55 >

6.3 >

WFD Surface water body catchments >

56 >

6.4 >

WFD Surface water bodies >

6.5

WFD Groundwater bodies

Page

Section

River and coastal flooding >

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

57 >

7.1 >

Risk of flooding from rivers and the sea >

58 >

7.2 >

Historical Flood Events >

7.3

Flood Defences

58 >

7.4 >

Areas Benefiting from Flood Defences >

7.5

Flood Storage Areas

60 >

7.6 >

Flood Zone 2 >

Identified (within 50m)

61 >

7.7 >

Flood Zone 3 >

Identified (within 50m)

Page

Section

Surface water flooding >

62 >

8.1 >

Surface water flooding >

Page

Section

Groundwater flooding >

64 >

9.1 >

Groundwater flooding >

Page

Section

Environmental designations >

65 >

10.1 >

High (within 50m)

1 in 30 year, Greater than 1.0m (within 50m)

Moderate (within 50m) On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) >

10.2

Conserved wetland sites (Ramsar sites)

10.3

Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)

10.4

Special Protection Areas (SPA)

10.5

National Nature Reserves (NNR)

67 >

10.6 >

Local Nature Reserves (LNR) >

67 >

10.7 >

Designated Ancient Woodland >

10.8

Biosphere Reserves

10.9

Forest Parks

10.10

Marine Conservation Zones

68 >

10.11 >

Green Belt >

10.12

Proposed Ramsar sites

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

10.13

Possible Special Areas of Conservation (pSAC)

10.14

Potential Special Protection Areas (pSPA)

10.15

Nitrate Sensitive Areas

70 >

10.16 >

Nitrate Vulnerable Zones >

71 >

10.17 >

SSSI Impact Risk Zones >

72 >

10.18 >

SSSI Units >

Page

Section

Visual and cultural designations

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

11.1

World Heritage Sites

11.2

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

11.3

National Parks

11.4

Listed Buildings

11.5

Conservation Areas

11.6

Scheduled Ancient Monuments

11.7

Registered Parks and Gardens

Page

Section

Agricultural designations >

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

83 >

12.1 >

Agricultural Land Classification >

12.2

Open Access Land

12.3

Tree Felling Licences

85 >

12.4 >

Environmental Stewardship Schemes >

12.5

Countryside Stewardship Schemes

Page

Section

Habitat designations >

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

86 >

13.1 >

Priority Habitat Inventory >

13.2

Habitat Networks

87 >

13.3 >

Open Mosaic Habitat >

13.4

Limestone Pavement Orders

Page

Section

Geology 1:10,000 scale >

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

88 >

14.1 >

10k Availability >

89 >

14.2 >

Artificial and made ground (10k) >

91 >

14.3 >

Superficial geology (10k) >

HOME

Non Agricultural (within 250m)

Identified (within 500m)

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

14.4

Landslip (10k)

93 >

14.5 >

Bedrock geology (10k) >

14.6

Bedrock faults and other linear features (10k)

Page

Section

Geology 1:50,000 scale >

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

95 >

15.1 >

50k Availability >

96 >

15.2 >

Artificial and made ground (50k) >

97 >

15.3 >

Artificial ground permeability (50k) >

98 >

15.4 >

Superficial geology (50k) >

99 >

15.5 >

Superficial permeability (50k) >

15.6

Landslip (50k)

100

15.7

Landslip permeability (50k)

101 >

15.8 >

Bedrock geology (50k) >

102 >

15.9 >

Bedrock permeability (50k) >

102

15.10

Bedrock faults and other linear features (50k)

Page

Section

Boreholes >

103 >

16.1 >

BGS Boreholes >

Page

Section

Natural ground subsidence >

107 >

17.1 >

Shrink swell clays >

Moderate (within 50m)

109 >

17.2 >

Running sands >

Low (within 50m)

111 >

17.3 >

Compressible deposits >

Moderate (within 50m)

113 >

17.4 >

Collapsible deposits >

Very low (within 50m)

114 >

17.5 >

Landslides >

Very low (within 50m)

115 >

17.6 >

Ground dissolution of soluble rocks >

Negligible (within 50m)

Page

Section

Mining and ground workings >

117 >

18.1 >

119 >

Identified (within 500m)

Identified (within 50m) 0

None (within 50m) 1

Identified (within 50m) 0

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

BritPits >

18.2 >

Surface ground workings >

120

18.3

Underground workings

120

18.4

Underground mining extents

120 >

18.5 >

Historical Mineral Planning Areas >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

121

18.6

Non-coal mining

122

18.7

JPB mining areas

122

18.8

The Coal Authority non-coal mining

122 >

18.9 >

Researched mining >

122

18.10

123

Mining record office plans

18.11

BGS mine plans

123

18.12

Coal mining

None (within 0m)

123

18.13

Brine areas

None (within 0m)

123

18.14

Gypsum areas

None (within 0m)

123

18.15

Tin mining

None (within 0m)

124

18.16

Clay mining

None (within 0m)

Page

Section

Ground cavities and sinkholes

125

19.1

125

None (within 0m)

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

Natural cavities

19.2

Mining cavities

125

19.3

Reported recent incidents

125

19.4

Historical incidents

126

19.5

National karst database

Page

Section

Radon >

127 >

20.1 >

Radon >

Page

Section

Soil chemistry >

129 >

21.1 >

130 >

Less than 1% (within 0m) On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

BGS Estimated Background Soil Chemistry >

21.2 >

BGS Estimated Urban Soil Chemistry >

132 >

21.3 >

BGS Measured Urban Soil Chemistry >

Page

Section

Railway infrastructure and projects

On site

0-50m

50-250m

250-500m

500-2000m

134

22.1

Underground railways (London)

134

22.2

Underground railways (Non-London)

134

22.3

Railway tunnels

134

22.4

Historical railway and tunnel features

134

22.5

Royal Mail tunnels

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

135

22.6

Historical railways

135

22.7

Railways

135

22.8

Crossrail 1

135

22.9

Crossrail 2

135

22.10

HS2

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Recent aerial photograph N

Capture Date: 17/07/2021 Site Area: 16.94ha

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Recent site history - 2018 aerial photograph N

Capture Date: 01/09/2018 Site Area: 16.94ha

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Recent site history - 2013 aerial photograph N

Capture Date: 20/04/2013 Site Area: 16.94ha

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Recent site history - 2005 aerial photograph N

Capture Date: 29/08/2005 Site Area: 16.94ha

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Recent site history - 1999 aerial photograph N

Capture Date: 04/09/1999 Site Area: 16.94ha

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

1 Past land use Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m) Historical industrial land uses Historical energy features

1.1 Historical industrial land uses Records within 500m

Potentially contaminative land use features digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping at 1:10,000 and 1:10,560 scale, intelligently grouped into contiguous features. To prevent misrepresentation of the size of historical features at any given time, features are only grouped if they have similar geometries within immediately preceding or succeeding map editions. See section 2 for a breakdown of grouping if required. Grouped and the original un-grouped features can be cross-referenced across sections 1 and 2 using the 'Group ID'. Features are displayed on the Past land use map on page 14 > ID

Location

Land use

Dates present

Group ID

On site

Sand and Gravel Pit

1967

2140921

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Land use

Dates present

Group ID

On site

Sewer

1888

2175529

On site

Sewer

1898

2188701

42m NE

Cemetery

1955 - 1992

2273032

57m NE

Refuse Heap

1973 - 1992

2281632

242m NE

Gravel Pit

1955

2139042

407m SW

Gravel Pit

1938

2279078

409m SW

Gravel Pit

1921

2260568

410m SW

Gravel Pit

1938

2192504

415m SW

Gravel Pit

1921

2191063

This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure.

1.2 Historical tanks Records within 500m

Tank features digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping at high-detail 1:1,250 and 1:2,500 scale, intelligently grouped into contiguous features. To prevent misrepresentation of the size of historical features at any given time, features are only grouped if they have similar geometries within immediately preceding or succeeding map editions. See section 2 for a breakdown of grouping if required. Grouped and the original ungrouped features can be cross-referenced across sections 1 and 2 using the 'Group ID'. This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure.

1.3 Historical energy features Records within 500m

Energy features digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping at high-detail 1:1,250 and 1:2,500 scale, intelligently grouped into contiguous features. To prevent misrepresentation of the size of historical features at any given time, features are only grouped if they have similar geometries within immediately preceding or succeeding map editions. See section 2 for a breakdown of grouping if required. Grouped and the original ungrouped features can be cross-referenced across sections 1 and 2 using the 'Group ID'. Features are displayed on the Past land use map on page 14 > ID

Location

Land use

Dates present

Group ID

454m NW

Electricity Substation

1974 - 1992

281190

490m N

Electricity Substation

1961 - 1992

276417

Date: 15 June 2023

HOME

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure.

1.4 Historical petrol stations Records within 500m

Petrol stations digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping at high-detail 1:1,250 and 1:2,500 scale, intelligently grouped into contiguous features. To prevent misrepresentation of the size of historical features at any given time, features are only grouped if they have similar geometries within immediately preceding or succeeding map editions. See section 2 for a breakdown of grouping if required. Grouped and the original ungrouped features can be cross-referenced across sections 1 and 2 using the 'Group ID'. This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure.

1.5 Historical garages Records within 500m

Garages digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping at high-detail 1:1,250 and 1:2,500 scale, intelligently grouped into contiguous features. To prevent misrepresentation of the size of historical features at any given time, features are only grouped if they have similar geometries within immediately preceding or succeeding map editions. See section 2 for a breakdown of grouping if required. Grouped and the original ungrouped features can be cross-referenced across sections 1 and 2 using the 'Group ID'. This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure.

1.6 Historical military land Records within 500m

Areas of military land digitised from multiple sources including the National Archives, local records, MOD records and verified other sources, intelligently grouped into contiguous features. This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure / other sources.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

2 Past land use - un-grouped Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m) Historical industrial land uses Historical energy features

2.1 Historical industrial land uses Records within 500m

Potentially contaminative land use features digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping at 1:10,000 and 10,560 scale. Any records shown are available intelligently grouped in section 1. Grouped and the original ungrouped features can be cross-referenced across sections 1 and 2 using the 'Group ID'. Features are displayed on the Past land use - un-grouped map on page 17 > ID

Location

Land Use

Date

Group ID

On site

Sand and Gravel Pit

1967

2140921

On site

Sewer

1888

2175529

33m SW

Sewer

1898

2188701

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Land Use

Date

Group ID

42m NE

Cemetery

1992

2273032

42m NE

Cemetery

1973

2273032

42m NE

Cemetery

1967

2273032

42m NE

Cemetery

1955

2273032

57m NE

Refuse Heap

1992

2281632

57m NE

Refuse Heap

1973

2281632

242m NE

Gravel Pit

1955

2139042

407m SW

Gravel Pit

1938

2279078

409m SW

Gravel Pit

1921

2260568

410m SW

Gravel Pit

1938

2192504

415m SW

Gravel Pit

1921

2191063

This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure.

2.2 Historical tanks Records within 500m

Tank features digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping at high-detail 1:1,250 and 1:2,500 scale. Any records shown are available intelligently grouped in section 1. Grouped and the original un-grouped features can be cross-referenced across sections 1 and 2 using the 'Group ID'. This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure.

2.3 Historical energy features Records within 500m

Energy features digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping at high-detail 1:1,250 and 1:2,500 scale. Any records shown are available intelligently grouped in section 1. Grouped and the original un-grouped features can be cross-referenced across sections 1 and 2 using the 'Group ID'. Features are displayed on the Past land use - un-grouped map on page 17 > ID

Location

Land Use

Date

Group ID

454m NW

Electricity Substation

1974

281190

454m NW

Electricity Substation

1992

281190

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Land Use

Date

Group ID

490m N

Electricity Substation

1992

276417

493m N

Electricity Substation

1961

276417

This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure.

2.4 Historical petrol stations Records within 500m

Petrol stations digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping at high-detail 1:1,250 and 1:2,500 scale. Any records shown are available intelligently grouped in section 1. Grouped and the original un-grouped features can be cross-referenced across sections 1 and 2 using the 'Group ID'. This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure.

2.5 Historical garages Records within 500m

Garages digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping at high-detail 1:1,250 and 1:2,500 scale. Any records shown are available intelligently grouped in section 1. Grouped and the original un-grouped features can be cross-referenced across sections 1 and 2 using the 'Group ID'. This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey / Groundsure.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

3 Waste and landfill Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m) Active or recent landfill Historical landfill (EA/NRW) Historical waste sites Licensed waste sites Waste exemptions

3.1 Active or recent landfill Records within 500m

Active or recently closed landfill sites under Environment Agency/Natural Resources Wales regulation. Features are displayed on the Waste and landfill map on page 20 > ID

Location

Details

17m N

Operator: Ingrebourne Valley Ltimited Site Address: New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9GF

HOME

WML Number: 101016 EPR Reference: ING014 Landfill type: L05: Inert LF Status: Modified IPPC Reference: EPR Number: EA/EPR/DP3794ER/V002

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Details

28m SW

Operator: Brett Aggregates Limited Site Address: East Hall Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9DS

WML Number: 403322 EPR Reference: BAL174 Landfill type: L05: Inert LF Status: Modified IPPC Reference: EPR Number: EA/EPR/EB3201HA/V003

42m SW

Operator: Havering Aggregates Limited Site Address: South Hall Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EW

WML Number: 80524 EPR Reference: HAV003 Landfill type: L05: Inert LF Status: Modified IPPC Reference: EPR Number: EA/EPR/KP3197NU/V004

137m S

Operator: Ingrebourne Valley Limited Site Address: Land Adjacent To Wennington Hall Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EE

WML Number: 404328 EPR Reference: ING002 Landfill type: L05: Inert LF Status: Issued IPPC Reference: EPR Number: EA/EPR/FB3507SP/A001

489m SW

Operator: Brett Aggregates Limited Site Address: East Hall Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9DS

WML Number: 403322 EPR Reference: BAL174 Landfill type: L05: Inert LF Status: Modified IPPC Reference: EPR Number: EA/EPR/EB3201HA/V003

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

3.2 Historical landfill (BGS records) Records within 500m

Landfill sites identified on a survey carried out on behalf of the DoE in 1973. These sites may have been closed or operational at this time. This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

3.3 Historical landfill (LA/mapping records) Records within 500m

Landfill sites identified from Local Authority records and high detail historical mapping. This data is sourced from the Ordnance Survey/Groundsure and Local Authority records.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

3.4 Historical landfill (EA/NRW records) Records within 500m

Known historical (closed) landfill sites (e.g. sites where there is no PPC permit or waste management licence currently in force). This includes sites that existed before the waste licensing regime and sites that have been licensed in the past but where a licence has been revoked, ceased to exist or surrendered and a certificate of completion has been issued. Features are displayed on the Waste and landfill map on page 20 > ID

Location

Details

On site

Site Address: Arnold's Field, Launders Lane, Rainham Licence Holder Address: -

Waste Licence: Site Reference: 8HV006 Waste Type: Inert, Household Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Reference: Licence Issue: Licence Surrender: -

Operator: Licence Holder: First Recorded 31/12/1965 Last Recorded: 31/12/1965

On site

Site Address: Moor Hall Farm, Launders Lane, Rainham Licence Holder Address: -

Waste Licence: Site Reference: 8HV005 Waste Type: Inert, Commercial Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Reference: Licence Issue: Licence Surrender: -

Operator: Licence Holder: First Recorded Last Recorded: 31/12/1971

16m S

Site Address: Willow Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, RM13 9ED Licence Holder Address: -

Waste Licence: Site Reference: 8HV003 Waste Type: Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Reference: Licence Issue: Licence Surrender: -

Operator: Licence Holder: First Recorded Last Recorded: -

41m NE

Site Address: Rainham Quarry, Warwick Lane, Rainham, Essex Licence Holder Address: Bysingwood Road, Faversham, Kent

Waste Licence: Yes Site Reference: Waste Type: Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Reference: Licence Issue: 25/07/1997 Licence Surrender: 03/03/2015

Operator: Aylett Gravel Ltd Licence Holder: Aylett Gravel Ltd First Recorded Last Recorded: -

297m SE

Site Address: Willow Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, RM13 9ED Licence Holder Address: -

Waste Licence: Site Reference: 8HV003 Waste Type: Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Reference: Licence Issue: Licence Surrender: -

Operator: Licence Holder: First Recorded Last Recorded: 31/12/1971

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Details

338m S

Site Address: Willow Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, RM13 9ED Licence Holder Address: -

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Waste Licence: Site Reference: 8HV003 Waste Type: Inert, Industrial Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Reference: Licence Issue: Licence Surrender: -

Operator: Licence Holder: First Recorded Last Recorded: 31/12/1971

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

3.5 Historical waste sites Records within 500m

Waste site records derived from Local Authority planning records and high detail historical mapping. Features are displayed on the Waste and landfill map on page 20 > ID

Location

Address

Further Details

Date

103m S

Site Address: Launders Lane, Rainham Quarry, RAINHAM, Havering, RM13 9GF

Type of Site: Recycled Aggregates (Conversion) Planning application reference: P1361/02 Description: Scheme comprises change of use of land to enable the production of recycled aggregates and recovert of soils from construction and demolition waste. An application (ref: P1361/02) for Detailed Planning permission was submitted to Havering L.B. on 29th Ju ly 2002. Data source: Historic Planning Application Data Type: Point

314m S

Site Address: The Paddocks, Moor Hall Farm, Aveley, South Ockendon, Essex, RM15 4UU

Type of Site: Land Reclamation Works Planning application reference: P1578.14 Description: Scheme comprises importation of suitable reclamation materials to re-restore uneven land caused by differential settlement from past landfilling and associated works including sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS). Data source: Historic Planning Application Data Type: Point

14/12/201 5

This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey/Groundsure and Local Authority records.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

3.6 Licensed waste sites Records within 500m

Active or recently closed waste sites under Environment Agency/Natural Resources Wales regulation. Features are displayed on the Waste and landfill map on page 20 > ID

Location

Details

144m W

Site Name: Spring Farm Landfill Site Address: New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9GF Correspondence Address: -

Type of Site: Inert LF Size: >= 75000 tonnes Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Licence Number: ING014 EPR reference: EA/EPR/DP3794ER/V002 Operator: Ingrebourne Valley Ltimited Waste Management licence No: 101016 Annual Tonnage: 300000

Issue Date: 26/07/2010 Effective Date: Modified: 15/02/2021 Surrendered Date: Expiry Date: Cancelled Date: Status: Modified

144m W

Site Name: Spring Farm Landfill Site Address: Spring Farm Landfill, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9GF Correspondence Address: -

Type of Site: Inert LF Size: >= 75000 tonnes Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Licence Number: ING014 EPR reference: EA/EPR/DP3794ER/A001 Operator: Ingrebourne Valley Ltd Waste Management licence No: 101016 Annual Tonnage: 300000

Issue Date: 26/07/2010 Effective Date: Modified: Surrendered Date: Expiry Date: Cancelled Date: Status: Issued

201m W

Site Name: South Hall Farm Site Address: South Hall Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EW Correspondence Address: -

Type of Site: Inert LF Size: >= 75000 tonnes Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Licence Number: HAV003 EPR reference: EA/EPR/KP3197NU/V004 Operator: Havering Aggregates Limited Waste Management licence No: 80524 Annual Tonnage: 260000

Issue Date: 06/02/2002 Effective Date: Modified: 14/10/2020 Surrendered Date: Expiry Date: Cancelled Date: Status: Modified

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Details

201m W

Site Name: South Hall Farm Site Address: South Hall Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EW Correspondence Address: -

Type of Site: Landfill taking NonBiodegradeable Wastes Size: >= 75000 tonnes Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Licence Number: HAV003 EPR reference: EA/EPR/KP3197NU/A001 Operator: Havering Aggregates Ltd Waste Management licence No: 80524 Annual Tonnage: 260000

Issue Date: 06/02/2002 Effective Date: Modified: Surrendered Date: Expiry Date: Cancelled Date: Status: Issued

201m W

Site Name: South Hall Farm Site Address: South Hall Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EW Correspondence Address: -

Type of Site: Inert LF Size: 25000 tonnes Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Licence Number: HAV003 EPR reference: EA/EPR/KP3197NU/V003 Operator: Havering Aggregates Limited Waste Management licence No: 80524 Annual Tonnage: 260000

Issue Date: 06/02/2002 Effective Date: Modified: 23/11/2015 Surrendered Date: Expiry Date: Cancelled Date: Status: Closure

212m SW

Site Name: East Hall Farm Inert Landfill Site Address: East Hall Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9DS Correspondence Address: -

Type of Site: Inert LF Size: 25000 tonnes Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Licence Number: BAL174 EPR reference: EA/EPR/EB3201HA/V003 Operator: Brett Aggregates Limited Waste Management licence No: 403322 Annual Tonnage: 0

Issue Date: 08/08/2018 Effective Date: Modified: 06/09/2021 Surrendered Date: Expiry Date: Cancelled Date: Status: Modified

257m W

Site Name: South Hall Farm Site Address: South Hall Farm, New Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EW Correspondence Address: Brett House, Bysingwood Road, Faversham, Kent, ME13 7UD

Type of Site: Landfill taking NonBiodegradeable Wastes Size: >= 75000 tonnes Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Licence Number: HAV003 EPR reference: Operator: Havering Aggregates Limited Waste Management licence No: 80524 Annual Tonnage: 260000

Issue Date: 06/02/2002 Effective Date: Modified: Surrendered Date: Expiry Date: Cancelled Date: Status: Issued

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Details

430m S

Site Name: Wennington Quarry Inert Landfill Site Address: Land Adjacent To Wennington Hall Farm, New Road, Wennington, Rainham, Essex, RM13 9EE Correspondence Address: -

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Type of Site: Inert LF Size: >= 75000 tonnes Environmental Permitting Regulations (Waste) Licence Number: ING002 EPR reference: EA/EPR/FB3507SP/A001 Operator: Ingrebourne Valley Limited Waste Management licence No: 404328 Annual Tonnage: 299999

Issue Date: 22/04/2021 Effective Date: Modified: Surrendered Date: Expiry Date: Cancelled Date: Status: Issued

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

3.7 Waste exemptions Records within 500m

Activities involving the storage, treatment, use or disposal of waste that are exempt from needing a permit. Exemptions have specific limits and conditions that must be adhered to. Features are displayed on the Waste and landfill map on page 20 > ID

Location

Site

Reference

Category

164m S

Pylon

Greater London, RM13

Electrical Features

Infrastructure and Facilities

224m W

Electricity Sub Station

Greater London, RM13

Electrical Features

Infrastructure and Facilities

233m W

Pylon

Greater London, RM13

Electrical Features

Infrastructure and Facilities

This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey.

4.2 Current or recent petrol stations Records within 500m

Open, closed, under development and obsolete petrol stations. This data is sourced from Experian.

4.3 Electricity cables Records within 500m

High voltage underground electricity transmission cables. This data is sourced from National Grid.

4.4 Gas pipelines Records within 500m

High pressure underground gas transmission pipelines. This data is sourced from National Grid.

4.5 Sites determined as Contaminated Land Records within 500m

Contaminated Land Register of sites designated under Part 2a of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. This data is sourced from Local Authority records.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

4.6 Control of Major Accident Hazards (COMAH) Records within 500m

Control of Major Accident Hazards (COMAH) sites. This data includes upper and lower tier sites, and includes a historical archive of COMAH sites and Notification of Installations Handling Hazardous Substances (NIHHS) records. This data is sourced from the Health and Safety Executive.

4.7 Regulated explosive sites Records within 500m

Sites registered and licensed by the Health and Safety Executive under the Manufacture and Storage of Explosives Regulations 2005 (MSER). The last update to this data was in April 2011. This data is sourced from the Health and Safety Executive.

4.8 Hazardous substance storage/usage Records within 500m

Consents granted for a site to hold certain quantities of hazardous substances at or above defined limits in accordance with the Planning (Hazardous Substances) Regulations 2015. This data is sourced from Local Authority records.

4.9 Historical licensed industrial activities (IPC) Records within 500m

Integrated Pollution Control (IPC) records of substance releases to air, land and water. This data represents a historical archive as the IPC regime has been superseded. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

4.10 Licensed industrial activities (Part A(1)) Records within 500m

Records of Part A(1) installations regulated under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016 for the release of substances to the environment. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

4.11 Licensed pollutant release (Part A(2)/B) Records within 500m

Records of Part A(2) and Part B installations regulated under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016 for the release of substances to the environment. This data is sourced from Local Authority records.

4.12 Radioactive Substance Authorisations Records within 500m

Records of the storage, use, accumulation and disposal of radioactive substances regulated under the Radioactive Substances Act 1993. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

4.13 Licensed Discharges to controlled waters Records within 500m

Discharges of treated or untreated effluent to controlled waters under the Water Resources Act 1991. Features are displayed on the Current industrial land use map on page 27 > ID

Location

Address

Details

6m NW

HAVERING AGGREGATES LIMITED, SPRING FARM, NEW ROAD, RAINHAM, ESSEX, RM13 8DH

Effluent Type: TRADE DISCHARGES SITE DRAINAGE Permit Number: CANM.1223 Permit Version: 1 Receiving Water: COM WCOURSE AKA SOUTHALL SEWER

Status: NEW CONSENT (WRA 91, S88 & SCHED 10 AS AMENDED BY ENV ACT 1995) Issue date: 08/06/2007 Effective Date: 08/06/2007 Revocation Date: 30/06/2008

18m SW

RAINHAM DEPOT, NEW ROAD, RAINHAM, ESSEX, RM13 8DB

Effluent Type: MISCELLANEOUS DISCHARGES - SURFACE WATER Permit Number: CEVR.0140 Permit Version: 1 Receiving Water: LOW LEVEL SEWER

Status: REVOKED (WRA 91, S88 & SCHED 10 AS AMENDED BY ENV ACT 1995) Issue date: 10/11/1971 Effective Date: 10/11/1971 Revocation Date: 16/01/2009

29m SW

HAVERING AGGREGATES LIMITED, SPRING FARM, NEW ROAD, RAINHAM, ESSEX, RM13 8DH

Effluent Type: TRADE DISCHARGES PROCESS EFFLUENT - NOT WATER COMPANY Permit Number: CANM.1223 Permit Version: 2 Receiving Water: COM WCOURSE AKA SOUTHALL SEWER

Status: SURRENDERED UNDER EPR 2010 Issue date: 01/07/2008 Effective Date: 01/07/2008 Revocation Date: 17/07/2018

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Address

Details

350m SW

SOUTH HALL FARM, NEW ROAD, RAINHAM, ESSEX, ESSEX

Effluent Type: TRADE DISCHARGES PROCESS EFFLUENT - NOT WATER COMPANY Permit Number: CANM.0255 Permit Version: 1 Receiving Water: TRIBUTARY SOUTHALL SEWER

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Status: SURRENDERED UNDER EPR 2010 Issue date: 16/08/2001 Effective Date: 16/08/2001 Revocation Date: 31/12/2011

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

4.14 Pollutant release to surface waters (Red List) Records within 500m

Discharges of specified substances under the Environmental Protection (Prescribed Processes and Substances) Regulations 1991. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

4.15 Pollutant release to public sewer Records within 500m

Discharges of Special Category Effluents to the public sewer. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

4.16 List 1 Dangerous Substances Records within 500m

Discharges of substances identified on List I of European Directive E 2006/11/EC, and regulated under the Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) Regulations 2015. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

4.17 List 2 Dangerous Substances Records within 500m

Discharges of substances identified on List II of European Directive E 2006/11/EC, and regulated under the Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) Regulations 2015. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

4.18 Pollution Incidents (EA/NRW) Records within 500m

Records of substantiated pollution incidents. Since 2006 this data has only included category 1 (major) and 2 (significant) pollution incidents. Features are displayed on the Current industrial land use map on page 27 > ID

Location

Details

On site

Incident Date: 20/08/2014 Incident Identification: 1269902 Pollutant: Specific Waste Materials Pollutant Description: Commercial Waste

Water Impact: Category 3 (Minor) Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant) Air Impact: Category 3 (Minor)

On site

Incident Date: 16/05/2013 Incident Identification: 1113336 Pollutant: General Biodegradable Materials and Wastes Pollutant Description: Other General Biodegradable Material or Waste

Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact) Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant) Air Impact: Category 3 (Minor)

On site

Incident Date: 16/05/2013 Incident Identification: 1113336 Pollutant: Inert Materials and Wastes Pollutant Description: Construction and Demolition Materials and Wastes

Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact) Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant) Air Impact: Category 3 (Minor)

On site

Incident Date: 16/05/2013 Incident Identification: 1113336 Pollutant: Specific Waste Materials Pollutant Description: Household Waste

Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact) Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant) Air Impact: Category 3 (Minor)

50m S

Incident Date: 16/07/2001 Incident Identification: 16636 Pollutant: Pollutant Not Identified Pollutant Description: Not Identified

Water Impact: Category 3 (Minor) Land Impact: Category 4 (No Impact) Air Impact: Category 4 (No Impact)

52m S

Incident Date: 03/09/2001 Incident Identification: 28584 Pollutant: Other Pollutant Pollutant Description: Microbiological

Water Impact: Category 3 (Minor) Land Impact: Category 4 (No Impact) Air Impact: Category 4 (No Impact)

63m N

Incident Date: 24/09/2018 Incident Identification: 1653340 Pollutant: Specific Waste Materials Pollutant Description: Electrical Equipment

Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact) Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant) Air Impact: Category 4 (No Impact)

63m N

Incident Date: 24/09/2018 Incident Identification: 1653340 Pollutant: Inert Materials and Wastes Pollutant Description: Construction and Demolition Materials and Wastes

Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact) Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant) Air Impact: Category 4 (No Impact)

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Details

63m N

Incident Date: 24/09/2018 Incident Identification: 1653340 Pollutant: Specific Waste Materials Pollutant Description: Contaminated Construction & Demolition Mat & Waste

Water Impact: Category 4 (No Impact) Land Impact: Category 2 (Significant) Air Impact: Category 4 (No Impact)

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

4.19 Pollution inventory substances Records within 500m

The pollution inventory (substances) includes reporting on annual emissions of certain regulated substances to air, controlled waters and land. A reporting threshold for each substance is also included. Where emissions fall below the reporting threshold, no value will be given. The data is given for the most recent complete year available. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency.

4.20 Pollution inventory waste transfers Records within 500m

The pollution inventory (waste transfers) includes reporting on annual transfers and recovery/disposal of controlled wastes from a site. A reporting threshold for each waste type is also included. Where releases fall below the reporting threshold, no value will be given. The data is given for the most recent complete year available. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency.

4.21 Pollution inventory radioactive waste Records within 500m

The pollution inventory (radioactive wastes) includes reporting on annual releases of radioactive substances from a site, including the means of release. Where releases fall below the reporting threshold, no value will be given. The data is given for the most recent complete year available. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

5 Hydrogeology - Superficial aquifer Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Principal Secondary A Secondary B Secondary Undifferentiated Unproductive Unknown

5.1 Superficial aquifer Records within 500m

Aquifer status of groundwater held within superficial geology. Features are displayed on the Hydrogeology map on page 34 > ID

Location

Designation

Description

On site

Secondary A

Permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale, and in some cases forming an important source of base flow to rivers. These are generally aquifers formerly classified as minor aquifers

On site

Secondary Undifferentiated

Assigned where it is not possible to attribute either category A or B to a rock type. In general these layers have previously been designated as both minor and nonaquifer in different locations due to the variable characteristics of the rock type

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Designation

Description

31m NE

Secondary A

336m E

Secondary Undifferentiated

Assigned where it is not possible to attribute either category A or B to a rock type. In general these layers have previously been designated as both minor and non-aquifer in different locations due to the variable characteristics of the rock type

341m SE

Secondary Undifferentiated

356m E

Secondary A

489m E

Secondary Undifferentiated

489m E

Secondary A

492m E

Secondary Undifferentiated

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey, the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Bedrock aquifer Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Principal Secondary A Secondary B Secondary Undifferentiated Unproductive

5.2 Bedrock aquifer Records within 500m

Aquifer status of groundwater held within bedrock geology. Features are displayed on the Bedrock aquifer map on page 36 > ID

Location

Designation

Description

On site

Unproductive

These are rock layers or drift deposits with low permeability that have negligible significance for water supply or river base flow

489m E

Unproductive

These are rock layers or drift deposits with low permeability that have negligible significance for water supply or river base flow

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey, the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Groundwater vulnerability Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m) Superficial vulnerability Principal superficial aquifer, high vulnerability Secondary superficial aquifer, high vulnerability Principal superficial aquifer, medium vulnerability Secondary superficial aquifer, medium vulnerability

Principal superficial aquifer, low vulnerability Secondary superficial aquifer, low vulnerability Bedrock vulnerability Principal bedrock aquifer, high vulnerability Secondary bedrock aquifer, high vulnerability Principal bedrock aquifer, medium vulnerability Secondary bedrock aquifer, medium vulnerability Principal bedrock aquifer, low vulnerability Secondary bedrock aquifer, low vulnerability Other information Unproductive aquifer Soluble rock risk Local information

5.3 Groundwater vulnerability Records within 50m

An assessment of the vulnerability of groundwater to a pollutant discharged at ground level based on the hydrological, geological, hydrogeological and soil properties within a one kilometre square grid. Groundwater vulnerability is described as High, Medium or Low as follows: High - Areas able to easily transmit pollution to groundwater. They are likely to be characterised by high leaching soils and the absence of low permeability superficial deposits. Medium - Intermediate between high and low vulnerability. Low - Areas that provide the greatest protection from pollution. They are likely to be characterised by low leaching soils and/or the presence of superficial deposits characterised by a low permeability. Features are displayed on the Groundwater vulnerability map on page 37 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Summary

Soil / surface

Superficial geology

Bedrock geology

On site

Summary Classification: Secondary superficial aquifer - High Vulnerability Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, Productive Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: High Aquifer type: Secondary Thickness: >10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

On site

Summary Classification: Secondary superficial aquifer - High Vulnerability Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, Productive Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: High Aquifer type: Secondary Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

On site

Summary Classification: Secondary superficial aquifer - High Vulnerability Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, Productive Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: High Aquifer type: Secondary Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

On site

Summary Classification: Secondary superficial aquifer - High Vulnerability Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, Productive Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: High Aquifer type: Secondary Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

On site

Summary Classification: Secondary superficial aquifer - High Vulnerability Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, Productive Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: High Aquifer type: Secondary Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

On site

Summary Classification: Unproductive aquifer (may have productive aquifer beneath) Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, No Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: Aquifer type: Thickness: >10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Summary

Soil / surface

Superficial geology

Bedrock geology

On site

Summary Classification: Unproductive aquifer (may have productive aquifer beneath) Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, No Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: Aquifer type: Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

On site

Summary Classification: Unproductive aquifer (may have productive aquifer beneath) Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, No Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: Aquifer type: Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

On site

Summary Classification: Secondary superficial aquifer - High Vulnerability Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, Productive Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: High Aquifer type: Secondary Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

On site

Summary Classification: Unproductive aquifer (may have productive aquifer beneath) Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, No Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: Aquifer type: Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

13m NE

Summary Classification: Unproductive aquifer (may have productive aquifer beneath) Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, No Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: Aquifer type: Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

16m W

Summary Classification: Secondary superficial aquifer - High Vulnerability Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, Productive Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: High Aquifer type: Secondary Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Summary

Soil / surface

Superficial geology

Bedrock geology

17m S

Summary Classification: Unproductive aquifer (may have productive aquifer beneath) Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, No Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: Aquifer type: Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

23m W

Summary Classification: Secondary superficial aquifer - High Vulnerability Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, Productive Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: High Aquifer type: Secondary Thickness: >10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

31m NE

Summary Classification: Secondary superficial aquifer - High Vulnerability Combined classification: Unproductive Bedrock Aquifer, Productive Superficial Aquifer

Leaching class: High Infiltration value: >70% Dilution value: <300mm/year

Vulnerability: High Aquifer type: Secondary Thickness: 3-10m Patchiness value: >90% Recharge potential: High

Vulnerability: Unproductive Aquifer type: Unproductive Flow mechanism: Mixed

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey, the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

5.4 Groundwater vulnerability- soluble rock risk Records on site

This dataset identifies areas where solution features that enable rapid movement of a pollutant may be present within a 1km grid square. This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey and the Environment Agency.

5.5 Groundwater vulnerability- local information Records on site

This dataset identifies areas where additional local information affecting vulnerability is held by the Environment Agency. Further information can be obtained by contacting the Environment Agency local Area groundwater team through the Environment Agency National Customer Call Centre on 03798 506 506 or by email on enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk ↗. This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey and the Environment Agency.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Abstractions and Source Protection Zones Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m) Source Protection Zone 1 Inner catchment

Source Protection Zone 2 Outer catchment

Source Protection Zone 3 Total catchment

Source Protection Zone 4 Zone of Special Interest

Source Protection Zone 1c Inner catchment - confined aquifer

Source Protection Zone 2c Outer catchment - confined aquifer

Source Protection Zone 3c Total catchment - confined aquifer

Drinking water abstraction licences Drinking water abstraction licences Polygon features

Drinking water abstraction licences Linear features

Groundwater abstraction licence (point) Groundwater abstraction licence (area) Groundwater abstraction licence (linear) Surface Water Abstractions (point) Surface Water Abstractions (area) Surface Water Abstractions (linear)

5.6 Groundwater abstractions Records within 2000m

Licensed groundwater abstractions for sites extracting more than 20 cubic metres of water a day and includes active and historical records. The data may be for a single abstraction point, between two points (line data) or a larger area. Features are displayed on the Abstractions and Source Protection Zones map on page 41 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Details

25m SW

Status: Historical Licence No: TH/037/0055/020 Details: Transfer Between Sources (Post Water Act 2003) Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: TAPLOW GRAVELS AT EAST HALL FARM, WENNINGTON Data Type: Poly4 Name: BRETT AGGREGATES LIMITED Easting: 553389 Northing: 181284

Annual Volume (m3): Max Daily Volume (m3): Original Application No: Original Start Date: 30/11/2021 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 30/11/2021 Version End Date: -

25m SW

Status: Active Licence No: TH/037/0055/020 Details: Transfer Between Sources (Post Water Act 2003) Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: TAPLOW GRAVELS AT EAST HALL FARM, WENNINGTON Data Type: Poly4 Name: BRETT AGGREGATES LIMITED Easting: 553389 Northing: 181284

Annual Volume (m3): Max Daily Volume (m3): Original Application No: NPS/NA/000978 Original Start Date: 30/11/2021 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 30/11/2021 Version End Date: -

114m S

Status: Active Licence No: TH/037/0055/017 Details: General Use Relating To Secondary Category (Medium Loss) Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: WENNINGTON QUARRY Data Type: Poly4 Name: Ingrebourne Valley Limited Easting: 553811 Northing: 181530

Annual Volume (m3): 51085 Max Daily Volume (m3): 407 Original Application No: NPS/WR/029645 Original Start Date: 26/07/2019 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 26/07/2019 Version End Date: -

114m S

Status: Active Licence No: TH/037/0055/017 Details: Mineral Washing Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: WENNINGTON QUARRY Data Type: Poly4 Name: Ingrebourne Valley Limited Easting: 553811 Northing: 181530

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Details

114m S

Status: Active Licence No: TH/037/0055/017 Details: Dust Suppression Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: WENNINGTON QUARRY Data Type: Poly4 Name: Ingrebourne Valley Limited Easting: 553811 Northing: 181530

114m S

Status: Active Licence No: TH/037/0055/018 Details: Dewatering Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: WENNINGTON QUARRY SUMPS Data Type: Poly4 Name: Ingrebourne Valley Limited Easting: 553811 Northing: 181530

Annual Volume (m3): Max Daily Volume (m3): Original Application No: NPS/WR/030164 Original Start Date: 26/07/2019 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 26/07/2019 Version End Date: -

547m NE

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0073 Details: Mineral Washing Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: WARWICK LANE, RAINHAM - GRAVEL PIT Data Type: Point Name: BRETT AGGREGATES LIMITED Easting: 554900 Northing: 182700

Annual Volume (m3): Max Daily Volume (m3): Original Application No: Original Start Date: 31/07/1979 Expiry Date: Issue No: 100 Version Start Date: 23/06/2000 Version End Date: -

597m NE

Status: Active Licence No: 08/37/55/0073 Details: Mineral Washing Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: RAINHAM QUARRY-SILT LAGOON Data Type: Point Name: HAVERING AGGREGATES LIMITED Easting: 554920 Northing: 182750

Annual Volume (m3): 616440 Max Daily Volume (m3): 2291.2 Original Application No: NPS/WR/010700 Original Start Date: 31/07/1979 Expiry Date: Issue No: 102 Version Start Date: 18/05/2012 Version End Date: -

622m NE

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0094 Details: Mineral Washing Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: WARWICK LANE, RAINHAM - BOREHOLE Data Type: Point Name: BRETT AGGREGATES LIMITED Easting: 555000 Northing: 182700

Annual Volume (m3): Max Daily Volume (m3): Original Application No: Original Start Date: 03/09/1999 Expiry Date: 31/12/2004 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 03/09/1999 Version End Date: -

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Details

746m NE

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0105 Details: Mineral Washing Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: RAINHAM QUARRY-BOREHOLE Data Type: Point Name: HAVERING AGGREGATES LIMITED Easting: 555070 Northing: 182810

Annual Volume (m3): 20000 Max Daily Volume (m3): 432 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 14/12/2005 Expiry Date: 31/03/2012 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 14/12/2005 Version End Date: -

817m NE

Status: Historical Licence No: TH/037/0055/005 Details: Mineral Washing Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: RAINHAM QUARRY- BOREHOLE Data Type: Point Name: HAVERING AGGREGATES LIMITED Easting: 555176 Northing: 182790

Annual Volume (m3): 20000 Max Daily Volume (m3): 432 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 20/06/2012 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 20/06/2012 Version End Date: -

821m NE

Status: Active Licence No: TH/037/0055/005 Details: Mineral Washing Direct Source: THAMES GROUNDWATER Point: RAINHAM QUARRY- BOREHOLE Data Type: Point Name: HAVERING AGGREGATES LIMITED Easting: 555176 Northing: 182797

Annual Volume (m3): 20000 Max Daily Volume (m3): 432 Original Application No: NPS/WR/010097 Original Start Date: 20/06/2012 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 20/06/2012 Version End Date: -

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

5.7 Surface water abstractions Records within 2000m

Licensed surface water abstractions for sites extracting more than 20 cubic metres of water a day and includes active and historical records. The data may be for a single abstraction point, a stretch of watercourse or a larger area. Features are displayed on the Abstractions and Source Protection Zones map on page 41 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Details

On site

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0102 Details: Spray Irrigation - Direct Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK PONDS FARM & SOUTH HALL FARM POINT 'C' Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 554080 Northing: 182110

Annual Volume (m3): 174500 Max Daily Volume (m3): 1528 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 28/11/2003 Expiry Date: 31/03/2016 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 28/11/2003 Version End Date: -

2m NW

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0102/R01 Details: Spray Irrigation - Direct Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK PONDS FARM & SOUTH HALL FARM POINT 'C' Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 554069 Northing: 182113

Annual Volume (m3): 174500 Max Daily Volume (m3): 1528 Original Application No: NPS/WR/019126 Original Start Date: 28/11/2003 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 27/02/2017 Version End Date: -

35m W

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0065 Details: Spray Irrigation - Direct Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK PONDS FARM, RAINHAM - RAINHAM COMMON SEWER Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 554000 Northing: 182100

Annual Volume (m3): 4546 Max Daily Volume (m3): 4546 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 01/07/1974 Expiry Date: Issue No: 100 Version Start Date: 26/10/1979 Version End Date: -

313m SW

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0102/R01 Details: Spray Irrigation - Direct Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK PONDS FARM & SOUTH HALL FARM POINT 'D' Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 553784 Northing: 181605

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Details

319m SW

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0102 Details: Spray Irrigation - Direct Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK PONDS FARM & SOUTH HALL FARM POINT 'D' Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 553780 Northing: 181600

Annual Volume (m3): 174500 Max Daily Volume (m3): 1528 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 28/11/2003 Expiry Date: 31/03/2016 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 28/11/2003 Version End Date: -

398m NE

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0004 Details: Spray Irrigation - Storage Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK PONDS FARM, RAINHAM - RAINHAM COMMON SEWER (2) Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 554900 Northing: 182400

Annual Volume (m3): 45461 Max Daily Volume (m3): 45461 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 03/11/1966 Expiry Date: Issue No: 100 Version Start Date: 29/09/1979 Version End Date: -

447m SW

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0004 Details: Spray Irrigation - Storage Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK PONDS FARM, RAINHAM - RAINHAM COMMON SEWER (1) Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 553600 Northing: 181600

Annual Volume (m3): 45461 Max Daily Volume (m3): 45461 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 03/11/1966 Expiry Date: Issue No: 100 Version Start Date: 29/09/1979 Version End Date: -

591m SW

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0102 Details: Spray Irrigation - Direct Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK PONDS FARM & SOUTH HALL FARM POINT 'E' Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 553410 Northing: 181640

Annual Volume (m3): 174500 Max Daily Volume (m3): 1528 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 28/11/2003 Expiry Date: 31/03/2016 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 28/11/2003 Version End Date: -

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Details

605m SW

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0102/R01 Details: Spray Irrigation - Direct Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK PONDS FARM & SOUTH HALL FARM POINT 'E' Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 553401 Northing: 181627

668m SW

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0009 Details: Spray Irrigation - Direct Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: SOUTH HALL FARM, RAINHAM - TRIBUTARY OF THE COMMON SEWER Data Type: Line Name: W J KNIGHT (FARMS) LTD Easting: 553300 Northing: 181600

Annual Volume (m3): Max Daily Volume (m3): Original Application No: Original Start Date: 03/11/1966 Expiry Date: Issue No: 100 Version Start Date: 01/05/1992 Version End Date: -

841m SW

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0009 Details: Spray Irrigation - Direct Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: SOUTH HALL FARM, RAINHAM - POND Data Type: Point Name: W J KNIGHT (FARMS) LTD Easting: 553200 Northing: 181500

Annual Volume (m3): Max Daily Volume (m3): Original Application No: Original Start Date: 03/11/1966 Expiry Date: Issue No: 100 Version Start Date: 01/05/1992 Version End Date: -

1127m N

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0004 Details: Spray Irrigation - Storage Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK PONDS FARM, RAINHAM - BERWICK POND Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 554300 Northing: 183500

Annual Volume (m3): 45461 Max Daily Volume (m3): 45461 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 03/11/1966 Expiry Date: Issue No: 100 Version Start Date: 29/09/1979 Version End Date: -

1180m N

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0096 Details: Spray Irrigation - Storage Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK POND Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 554490 Northing: 183550

Annual Volume (m3): 200000 Max Daily Volume (m3): 1800 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 28/11/2003 Expiry Date: 31/03/2016 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 28/11/2003 Version End Date: -

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Details

1191m N

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0096/R01 Details: Spray Irrigation - Storage Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: BERWICK POND Data Type: Point Name: W O WATT & PARTNERS LTD Easting: 554492 Northing: 183560

Annual Volume (m3): 200000 Max Daily Volume (m3): 1800 Original Application No: NPS/WR/019125 Original Start Date: 01/04/2016 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 1 Version Start Date: 27/02/2017 Version End Date: -

1600m S

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0103/R01 Details: General Use Relating To Secondary Category (Low Loss) Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: WENNINGTON BRANCH SEWER (D) Data Type: Point Name: THE ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS Easting: 553745 Northing: 180120

Annual Volume (m3): 45486 Max Daily Volume (m3): 1565 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 01/04/2016 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 3 Version Start Date: 01/04/2016 Version End Date: -

1600m S

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0103/R01 Details: General Use Relating To Secondary Category (Low Loss) Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: WENNINGTON BRANCH SEWER AT RAINHAM (D) Data Type: Point Name: THE ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS Easting: 553745 Northing: 180120

Annual Volume (m3): 111000 Max Daily Volume (m3): 2766 Original Application No: NPS/WR/028399 Original Start Date: 01/04/2016 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 4 Version Start Date: 27/07/2018 Version End Date: -

1611m S

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0103/R01 Details: General Use Relating To Secondary Category (Low Loss) Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: WENNINGTON BRANCH SEWER Data Type: Point Name: THE ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS Easting: 553740 Northing: 180110

Annual Volume (m3): 45486 Max Daily Volume (m3): 1565 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 01/04/2016 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 2 Version Start Date: 01/04/2016 Version End Date: -

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Details

1844m S

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0103/R01 Details: General Use Relating To Secondary Category (Low Loss) Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: WENNINGTON BRANCH SEWER (C) Data Type: Point Name: THE ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS Easting: 553530 Northing: 179940

Annual Volume (m3): 45486 Max Daily Volume (m3): 1565 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 01/04/2016 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 3 Version Start Date: 01/04/2016 Version End Date: -

1844m S

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0103/R01 Details: General Use Relating To Secondary Category (Low Loss) Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: WENNINGTON BRANCH SEWER AT RAINHAM (C) Data Type: Point Name: THE ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS Easting: 553530 Northing: 179940

1911m S

Status: Historical Licence No: 08/37/55/0103/R01 Details: General Use Relating To Secondary Category (Low Loss) Direct Source: THAMES SURFACE WATER - NON TIDAL Point: WENNINGTON BRANCH SEWER Data Type: Point Name: THE ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS Easting: 553410 Northing: 179920

Annual Volume (m3): 45486 Max Daily Volume (m3): 1565 Original Application No: Original Start Date: 01/04/2016 Expiry Date: 31/03/2028 Issue No: 2 Version Start Date: 01/04/2016 Version End Date: -

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

5.8 Potable abstractions Records within 2000m

Licensed potable water abstractions for sites extracting more than 20 cubic metres of water a day and includes active and historical records. The data may be for a single abstraction point, a stretch of watercourse or a larger area. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

5.9 Source Protection Zones Records within 500m

Source Protection Zones define the sensitivity of an area around a potable abstraction site to contamination. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

5.10 Source Protection Zones (confined aquifer) Records within 500m

Source Protection Zones in the confined aquifer define the sensitivity around a deep groundwater abstraction to contamination. A confined aquifer would normally be protected from contamination by overlying geology and is only considered a sensitive resource if deep excavation/drilling is taking place. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

6 Hydrology Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Water Network (OS MasterMap) Surface water features (wider than 5m) Surface water features (narrower than 5m) WFD River, canal and surface water transfer water bodies WFD Lake water bodies

WFD Transitional and coastal water bodies WFD Surface water body catchments boundaries WFD Groundwater body boundaries

6.1 Water Network (OS MasterMap) Records within 250m

Detailed water network of Great Britain showing the flow and precise central course of every river, stream, lake and canal. Features are displayed on the Hydrology map on page 51 > ID

Location

Type of water feature

Ground level

Permanence

Name

On site

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal action.

On ground surface

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

Common Watercourse

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Type of water feature

2m NE

Permanence

Name

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

2m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

Common Watercourse

15m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

16m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

Common Watercourse

19m S

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

24m S

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

28m SW

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

29m SW

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

Common Watercourse

35m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

35m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

37m SW

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal Underground action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

Common Watercourse

39m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

44m SE

Lake, loch or reservoir.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

HOME

Ground level

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

On ground surface

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Type of water feature

48m SW

Permanence

Name

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

Common Watercourse

49m E

Lake, loch or reservoir.

On ground surface

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

54m SW

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

Common Watercourse

54m SW

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

62m SE

Lake, loch or reservoir.

On ground surface

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

62m SE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

69m SE

Lake, loch or reservoir.

On ground surface

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

70m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

71m SE

Lake, loch or reservoir.

On ground surface

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

80m SE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

87m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

87m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

94m SE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

HOME

Ground level

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Type of water feature

126m S

Permanence

Name

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal Underground action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

132m SE

Lake, loch or reservoir.

On ground surface

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

132m SE

Lake, loch or reservoir.

On ground surface

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

134m SE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal Underground action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

137m SE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

142m SE

Lake, loch or reservoir.

On ground surface

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

149m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

166m S

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

172m S

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

174m SE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

199m SE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

200m SE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

201m SE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal Underground action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

HOME

Ground level

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Type of water feature

210m SE

Ground level

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Permanence

Name

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

212m SE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

213m E

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

215m NE

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

239m E

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

242m SW

Inland river not influenced by normal tidal On ground surface action.

Watercourse contains water year round (in normal circumstances)

This data is sourced from the Ordnance Survey.

6.2 Surface water features Records within 250m

Covering rivers, streams and lakes (some overlap with OS MasterMap Water Network data in previous section) but additionally covers smaller features such as ponds. Rivers and streams narrower than 5m are represented as a single line. Lakes, ponds and rivers or streams wider than 5m are represented as polygons. Features are displayed on the Hydrology map on page 51 > This data is sourced from the Ordnance Survey.

6.3 WFD Surface water body catchments Records on site

The Water Framework Directive is an EU-led framework for the protection of inland surface waters, estuaries, coastal waters and groundwater through river basin-level management planning. In terms of surface water, these basins are broken down into smaller units known as management, operational and water body catchments. Features are displayed on the Hydrology map on page 51 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Type Water body catchment

Water body ID

Operational catchment

Management catchment

On site

River Southall Sewer and Runningwater Brook

GB106037028090

Roding Beam and Ingrebourne

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

6.4 WFD Surface water bodies Records identified

Surface water bodies under the Directive may be rivers, lakes, estuary or coastal. To achieve the purpose of the Directive, environmental objectives have been set and are reported on for each water body. The progress towards delivery of the objectives is then reported on by the relevant competent authorities at the end of each six-year cycle. The river water body directly associated with the catchment listed in the previous section is detailed below, along with any lake, canal, coastal or artificial water body within 250m of the site. Click on the water body ID in the table to visit the EA Catchment Explorer to find out more about each water body listed. Features are displayed on the Hydrology map on page 51 > ID

Location

Type

Name

Water body ID

Overall rating

Chemical rating

Ecological rating

Year

1758m S

River

Southall Sewer and Runningwater Brook

GB106037028090 ↗

Moderate

Fail

Moderate

2019

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

6.5 WFD Groundwater bodies Records on site

Groundwater bodies are also covered by the Directive and the same regime of objectives and reporting detailed in the previous section is in place. Click on the water body ID in the table to visit the EA Catchment Explorer to find out more about each groundwater body listed. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

7 River and coastal flooding Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

River and coastal flooding:

High Medium Low Very Low

Historical Flood Events Areas Used for Flood Storage Areas Benefiting from Flood Defences

Flood Defences © Crown copyright and database rights 2023. Ordnance Survey licence 100035207

7.1 Risk of flooding from rivers and the sea Records within 50m

The chance of flooding from rivers and/or the sea in any given year, based on cells of 50m within the Risk of Flooding from Rivers and Sea (RoFRaS)/Flood Risk Assessment Wales (FRAW) models. Each cell is allocated one of four flood risk categories, taking into account flood defences and their condition. The risk categories for RoFRaS for rivers and the sea and FRAW for rivers are; Very low (less than 1 in 1000 chance in any given year), Low (less than 1 in 100 but greater than or equal to 1 in 1000 chance), Medium (less than 1 in 30 but greater than or equal to 1 in 100 chance) or High (greater than or equal to 1 in 30 chance). The risk categories for FRAW for the sea are; Very low (less than 1 in 1000 chance in any given year), Low (less than 1 in 200 but greater than or equal to 1 in 1000 chance), Medium (less than 1 in 30 but greater than or equal to 1 in 200 chance) or High (greater than or equal to 1 in 30 chance). Features are displayed on the River and coastal flooding map on page 57 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Distance

Flood risk category

On site

High

0 - 50m

High

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

7.2 Historical Flood Events Records within 250m

Records of historic flooding from rivers, the sea, groundwater and surface water. Records began in 1946 when predecessor bodies started collecting detailed information about flooding incidents, although limited details may be included on flooding incidents prior to this date. Takes into account the presence of defences, structures, and other infrastructure where they existed at the time of flooding, and includes flood extents that may have been affected by overtopping, breaches or blockages. Features are displayed on the River and coastal flooding map on page 57 > ID

Location

Event name

Date of flood

Flood source

Flood cause

Type of flood

On site

Ttd_Feo_1953

1953-01-01 1953-12-31

Sea

Operational failure/breach of defence

Tidal

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

7.3 Flood Defences Records within 250m

Records of flood defences owned, managed or inspected by the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales. Flood defences can be structures, buildings or parts of buildings. Typically these are earth banks, stone and concrete walls, or sheet-piling that is used to prevent or control the extent of flooding. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

7.4 Areas Benefiting from Flood Defences Records within 250m

Areas that would benefit from the presence of flood defences in a 1 in 100 (1%) chance of flooding each year from rivers or 1 in 200 (0.5%) chance of flooding each year from the sea. Features are displayed on the River and coastal flooding map on page 57 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

On site

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Area benefiting from flood defences

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

7.5 Flood Storage Areas Records within 250m

Areas that act as a balancing reservoir, storage basin or balancing pond to attenuate an incoming flood peak to a flow level that can be accepted by the downstream channel or to delay the timing of a flood peak so that its volume is discharged over a longer period. This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

River and coastal flooding - Flood Zones Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Flood zone 2 Flood zone 3

7.6 Flood Zone 2 Records within 50m

Areas of land at risk of flooding, when the presence of flood defences are ignored. Covering land between Flood Zone 3 (see next section) and the extent of the flooding from rivers or the sea with a 1 in 1000 (0.1%) chance of flooding each year. Features are displayed on the River and coastal flooding map on page 57 > Location

Type

On site

Zone 2 - (Fluvial /Tidal Models)

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

7.7 Flood Zone 3 Records within 50m

Areas of land at risk of flooding, when the presence of flood defences are ignored. Covering land with a 1 in 100 (1%) or greater chance of flooding each year from rivers or a 1 in 200 (0.5%) or greater chance of flooding each year from the sea. Features are displayed on the River and coastal flooding map on page 57 > Location

Type

On site

Zone 3 - (Fluvial /Tidal Models)

This data is sourced from the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

8 Surface water flooding Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m) 1 in 1000 return period Depth between 0.1m - 0.3m Depth between 0.3m - 1.0m Depth greater than 1.0m 1 in 250 return period Depth between 0.1m - 0.3m Depth between 0.3m - 1.0m Depth greater than 1.0m 1 in 100 return period Depth between 0.1m - 0.3m Depth between 0.3m - 1.0m Depth greater than 1.0m 1 in 30 return period Depth between 0.1m - 0.3m Depth between 0.3m - 1.0m Depth greater than 1.0m © Crown copyright and database rights 2023. Ordnance Survey licence 100035207

8.1 Surface water flooding Highest risk on site

1 in 30 year, Greater than 1.0m

Highest risk within 50m

1 in 30 year, Greater than 1.0m

Ambiental Risk Analytics surface water (pluvial) FloodMap identifies areas likely to flood as a result of extreme rainfall events, i.e. land naturally vulnerable to surface water ponding or flooding. This data set was produced by simulating 1 in 30 year, 1 in 100 year, 1 in 250 year and 1 in 1,000 year rainfall events. Modern urban drainage systems are typically built to cope with rainfall events between 1 in 20 and 1 in 30 years, though some older ones may flood in a 1 in 5 year rainfall event. Features are displayed on the Surface water flooding map on page 62 > The data shown on the map and in the table above shows the highest likelihood of flood events happening at the site. Lower likelihood events may have greater flood depths and hence a greater potential impact on a site.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

The table below shows the maximum flood depths for a range of return periods for the site. Return period

Maximum modelled depth

1 in 1000 year

Greater than 1.0m

1 in 250 year

Greater than 1.0m

1 in 100 year

Greater than 1.0m

1 in 30 year

Greater than 1.0m

This data is sourced from Ambiental Risk Analytics.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

9 Groundwater flooding Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

High Moderate - High Moderate Low Negligible

9.1 Groundwater flooding Highest risk on site

Moderate

Highest risk within 50m

Moderate

Groundwater flooding is caused by unusually high groundwater levels. It occurs when the water table rises above the ground surface or within underground structures such as basements or cellars. Groundwater flooding tends to exhibit a longer duration than surface water flooding, possibly lasting for weeks or months, and as a result it can cause significant damage to property. This risk assessment is based on a 1 in 100 year return period and a 5m Digital Terrain Model (DTM). Features are displayed on the Groundwater flooding map on page 64 > This data is sourced from Ambiental Risk Analytics.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

10 Environmental designations Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m) Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Designated Ancient Woodland Green Belt

10.1 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Records within 2000m

Sites providing statutory protection for the best examples of UK flora, fauna, or geological or physiographical features. Originally notified under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949, SSSIs were renotified under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Improved provisions for the protection and management of SSSIs were introduced by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (in England and Wales) and (in Scotland) by the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 and the Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2010. Features are displayed on the Environmental designations map on page 65 > ID

Location

Name

Data source

1032m N

Ingrebourne Marshes

Natural England

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Name

Data source

1034m N

Ingrebourne Marshes

Natural England

1088m S

Inner Thames Marshes

Natural England

1752m W

Ingrebourne Marshes

Natural England

This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and Scottish Natural Heritage.

10.2 Conserved wetland sites (Ramsar sites) Records within 2000m

Ramsar sites are designated under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, agreed in Ramsar, Iran, in 1971. They cover all aspects of wetland conservation and wise use, recognizing wetlands as ecosystems that are extremely important for biodiversity conservation in general and for the well-being of human communities. These sites cover a broad definition of wetland; marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, and even some marine areas. This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and Scottish Natural Heritage.

10.3 Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) Records within 2000m

Areas which have been identified as best representing the range and variety within the European Union of habitats and (non-bird) species listed on Annexes I and II to the Directive. SACs are designated under the EC Habitats Directive. This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and Scottish Natural Heritage.

10.4 Special Protection Areas (SPA) Records within 2000m

Sites classified by the UK Government under the EC Birds Directive, SPAs are areas of the most important habitat for rare (listed on Annex I to the Directive) and migratory birds within the European Union. This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and Scottish Natural Heritage.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

10.5 National Nature Reserves (NNR) Records within 2000m

Sites containing examples of some of the most important natural and semi-natural terrestrial and coastal ecosystems in Great Britain. They are managed to conserve their habitats, provide special opportunities for scientific study or to provide public recreation compatible with natural heritage interests. This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and Scottish Natural Heritage.

10.6 Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Records within 2000m

Sites managed for nature conservation, and to provide opportunities for research and education, or simply enjoying and having contact with nature. They are declared by local authorities under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 after consultation with the relevant statutory nature conservation agency. Features are displayed on the Environmental designations map on page 65 > ID

Location

Name

Data source

1467m W

Rainham Marshes

Natural England

1467m NW Ingrebourne Valley

Natural England

1533m NW Ingrebourne Valley

Natural England

1677m SW

Natural England

Rainham Marshes

This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and Scottish Natural Heritage.

10.7 Designated Ancient Woodland Records within 2000m

Ancient woodlands are classified as areas which have been wooded continuously since at least 1600 AD. This includes semi-natural woodland and plantations on ancient woodland sites. 'Wooded continuously' does not mean there is or has previously been continuous tree cover across the whole site, and not all trees within the woodland have to be old. Features are displayed on the Environmental designations map on page 65 > ID

Location

Name

Woodland Type

1169m NE

Warwick Wood

Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland

1364m NE

Warwick Wood

Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland

1720m NE

Whitepost Wood

Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Name

Woodland Type

1953m E

Whitehall Wood

Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland

This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and Scottish Natural Heritage.

10.8 Biosphere Reserves Records within 2000m

Biosphere Reserves are internationally recognised by UNESCO as sites of excellence to balance conservation and socioeconomic development between nature and people. They are recognised under the Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme with the aim of promoting sustainable development founded on the work of the local community. This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and Scottish Natural Heritage.

10.9 Forest Parks Records within 2000m

These are areas managed by the Forestry Commission designated on the basis of recreational, conservation or scenic interest. This data is sourced from the Forestry Commission.

10.10 Marine Conservation Zones Records within 2000m

A type of marine nature reserve in UK waters established under the Marine and Coastal Access Act (2009). They are designated with the aim to protect nationally important, rare or threatened habitats and species. This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and Scottish Natural Heritage.

10.11 Green Belt Records within 2000m

Areas designated to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. Features are displayed on the Environmental designations map on page 65 > ID

Location

Name

Local Authority name

On site

London

Havering

775m S

London

Thurrock

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.

10.12 Proposed Ramsar sites Records within 2000m

Ramsar sites are areas listed as a Wetland of International Importance under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (the Ramsar Convention) 1971. The sites here supplied have a status of 'Proposed' having been identified for potential adoption under the framework. This data is sourced from Natural England.

10.13 Possible Special Areas of Conservation (pSAC) Records within 2000m

Special Areas of Conservation are areas which have been identified as best representing the range and variety within the European Union of habitats and (non-bird) species listed on Annexes I and II to the Directive. SACs are designated under the EC Habitats Directive. Those sites supplied here are those with a status of 'Possible' having been identified for potential adoption under the framework. This data is sourced from Natural England and Natural Resources Wales.

10.14 Potential Special Protection Areas (pSPA) Records within 2000m

Special Protection Areas (SPAs) are areas designated (or ‘classified’) under the European Union Wild Birds Directive for the protection of nationally and internationally important populations of wild birds. Those sites supplied here are those with a status of 'Potential' having been identified for potential adoption under the framework. This data is sourced from Natural England.

10.15 Nitrate Sensitive Areas Records within 2000m

Areas where nitrate concentrations in drinking water sources exceeded or was at risk of exceeding the limit of 50 mg/l set by the 1980 EC Drinking Water Directive. Voluntary agricultural measures as a means of reducing the levels of nitrate were introduced by DEFRA as MAFF, with payments being made to farmers who complied. The scheme was started as a pilot in 1990 in ten areas, later implemented within 32 areas. The scheme was closed to further new entrants in 1998, although existing agreements continued for their full term. All Nitrate Sensitive Areas fell within the areas designated as Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZs) in 1996 under the EC Nitrate Directive (91/676/EEC). This data is sourced from Natural England.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

10.16 Nitrate Vulnerable Zones Records within 2000m

Areas at risk from agricultural nitrate pollution designated under the EC Nitrate Directive (91/676/EEC). These are areas of land that drain into waters polluted by nitrates. Farmers operating within these areas have to follow mandatory rules to tackle nitrate loss from agriculture. Location

Name

Type

NVZ ID

Status

On site

Southall Sewer and Runningwater Brook NVZ

Surface Water

802

Existing

On site

Southall Sewer and Runningwater Brook NVZ

Surface Water

802

Existing

654m N

Ingrebourne NVZ

Surface Water

440

Existing

682m N

Ingrebourne NVZ

Surface Water

440

Existing

719m N

Ingrebourne NVZ

Surface Water

440

Existing

1607m SE

Mardyke NVZ

Surface Water

442

Existing

This data is sourced from Natural England and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

SSSI Impact Zones and Units Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m) SSSI Impact Risk Zones SSSI Units Not recorded Favourable Unfavourable - Recovering Unfavourable - No change Unfavourable - Declining Partially destroyed Destroyed

10.17 SSSI Impact Risk Zones Records on site

Developed to allow rapid initial assessment of the potential risks to SSSIs posed by development proposals. They define zones around each SSSI which reflect the particular sensitivities of the features for which it is notified and indicate the types of development proposal which could potentially have adverse impacts. Features are displayed on the SSSI Impact Zones and Units map on page 71 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Type of developments requiring consultation

On site

Infrastructure - Pipelines, pylons and overhead cables. any transport proposal including road, rail and by water (excluding routine maintenance). airports, helipads and other aviation proposals. Minerals, Oil and Gas - Planning applications for quarries, including: new proposals, review of minerals permissions (romp), extensions, variations to conditions etc. oil & gas exploration/extraction. Rural non-residential - Large non residential developments outside existing settlements/urban areas where footprint exceeds 1ha. Rural residential - Any residential development of 100 or more houses outside existing settlements/urban areas. Air pollution - Any industrial/agricultural development that could cause air pollution (incl: industrial processes, livestock & poultry units with floorspace > 500m², slurry lagoons & digestate stores > 200m², manure stores > 250t). Combustion - General combustion processes >20mw energy input. incl: energy from waste incineration, other incineration, landfill gas generation plant, pyrolysis/gasification, anaerobic digestion, sewage treatment works, other incineration/ combustion. Waste - Landfill. incl: inert landfill, non-hazardous landfill, hazardous landfill. Composting - Any composting proposal with more than 75000 tonnes maximum annual operational throughput. incl: open windrow composting, in-vessel composting, anaerobic digestion, other waste management. Discharges - Any discharge of water or liquid waste of more than 5m³/day to ground (ie to seep away) or to surface water, such as a beck or stream. Water supply - Large infrastructure such as warehousing / industry where total net additional gross internal floorspace following development is 1,000m² or more.

This data is sourced from Natural England.

10.18 SSSI Units Records within 2000m

Divisions of SSSIs used to record management and condition details. Units are the smallest areas for which Natural England gives a condition assessment, however, the size of units varies greatly depending on the types of management and the conservation interest. Features are displayed on the SSSI Impact Zones and Units map on page 71 > ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

19 1032m N Ingrebourne Marshes 3 Fen, Marsh And Swamp - Lowland Favourable

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

01/10/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Favourable

01/10/2010

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

01/10/2010

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

26/08/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Unfavourable - Declining

26/08/2010

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

26/08/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

26/08/2010

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Aggregations of non-breeding birds - Teal, Anas crecca

Favourable

24/03/2022

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland damp grasslands

Favourable

20/09/2010

Invert. assemblage W211 open water on disturbed sediments

Partially destroyed

20/09/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Partially destroyed

20/09/2010

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

HOME

20 1034m N Ingrebourne Marshes 4 Fen, Marsh And Swamp - Lowland Unfavourable - Declining

23 1088m S Inner Thames Marshes Wennington North Neutral Grassland - Lowland Partially destroyed

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

24 1122m SW Inner Thames Marshes Pla Silt Lagoons Littoral Sediment Unfavourable - Declining

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Aggregations of non-breeding birds - Teal, Anas crecca

Favourable

24/03/2022

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland damp grasslands

Unfavourable - Declining

27/10/2010

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Aggregations of non-breeding birds - Teal, Anas crecca

Favourable

24/03/2022

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland damp grasslands

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W211 open water on disturbed sediments

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

01/10/2010

Vascular plant assemblage

Favourable

01/10/2010

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

26/08/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Favourable

26/08/2010

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

HOME

25 1156m S Inner Thames Marshes Wennington West - Havering Neutral Grassland - Lowland Favourable

31 1329m NW Ingrebourne Marshes 11 Fen, Marsh And Swamp - Lowland Favourable

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

26/08/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

26/08/2010

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

01/10/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Unfavourable - No change

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

01/10/2010

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

26/08/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Favourable

26/08/2010

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

26/08/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

26/08/2010

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

HOME

32 1331m N Ingrebourne Marshes Abbey Wood Fen, Marsh And Swamp - Lowland Unfavourable - No change

33 1360m NW Ingrebourne Marshes 10 Fen, Marsh And Swamp - Lowland Favourable

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

1420m W Inner Thames Marshes Rainham Rifle Ranges Neutral Grassland - Lowland Unfavourable - Recovering

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Aggregations of non-breeding birds - Teal, Anas crecca

Favourable

24/03/2022

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland damp grasslands

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W211 open water on disturbed sediments

Unfavourable - Recovering

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Unfavourable - Recovering

01/10/2010

Vascular plant assemblage

Unfavourable - Recovering

01/10/2010

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

01/10/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Unfavourable - Declining

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

01/10/2010

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

HOME

36 1435m N Ingrebourne Marshes 1 Neutral Grassland - Lowland Unfavourable - Declining

39 1467m NW Ingrebourne Marshes 8 Fen, Marsh And Swamp - Lowland Favourable

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

01/10/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

01/10/2010

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

01/10/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Unfavourable - Declining

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

01/10/2010

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

01/10/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

01/10/2010

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

HOME

40 1471m NW Ingrebourne Marshes 6 Fen, Marsh And Swamp - Lowland Unfavourable - Declining

41 1524m NW Ingrebourne Marshes 5 Fen, Marsh And Swamp - Lowland Favourable

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

1629m W Inner Thames Marshes Rainham Central Grassland Neutral Grassland - Lowland Destroyed

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland damp grasslands

Destroyed

19/08/2022

Invert. assemblage W211 open water on disturbed sediments

Destroyed

19/08/2022

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Destroyed

19/08/2022

Vascular plant assemblage

Destroyed

19/08/2022

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Aggregations of non-breeding birds - Teal, Anas crecca

Favourable

24/03/2022

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland damp grasslands

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W211 open water on disturbed sediments

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

01/10/2010

Vascular plant assemblage

Favourable

01/10/2010

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

HOME

1656m S Inner Thames Marshes Wennington East - Thurrock Neutral Grassland - Lowland Favourable

1662m W Inner Thames Marshes Rainham Marsh South Of A13 Neutral Grassland - Lowland Unfavourable - Recovering

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland damp grasslands

Unfavourable - Recovering

19/08/2022

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Aggregations of non-breeding birds - Teal, Anas crecca

Favourable

24/03/2022

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland damp grasslands

Favourable

29/06/2010

Invert. assemblage W211 open water on disturbed sediments

Favourable

29/06/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

29/06/2010

Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

01/10/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

01/10/2010

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition: Reportable features:

ID: Location: SSSI name: Unit name: Broad habitat: Condition:

HOME

1673m S Inner Thames Marshes Aveley Marshes (Was Part Of Unit 3) Neutral Grassland - Lowland Favourable

1689m N Ingrebourne Marshes 7 Neutral Grassland - Lowland Favourable

1752m W Ingrebourne Marshes 5 Fen, Marsh And Swamp - Lowland Favourable

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Reportable features: Feature name

Feature condition

Date of assessment

Assemblages of breeding birds - Lowland open waters and their margins

Favourable

01/10/2010

Floodplain fen (lowland)

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W313 moss & tussock fen

Favourable

01/10/2010

Invert. assemblage W314 reed-fen & pools

Favourable

01/10/2010

This data is sourced from Natural England and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

11 Visual and cultural designations 11.1 World Heritage Sites Records within 250m

Sites designated for their globally important cultural or natural interest requiring appropriate management and protection measures. World Heritage Sites are designated to meet the UK's commitments under the World Heritage Convention. This data is sourced from Historic England, Cadw and Historic Environment Scotland.

11.2 Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Records within 250m

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) are conservation areas, chosen because they represent 18% of the finest countryside. Each AONB has been designated for special attention because of the quality of their flora, fauna, historical and cultural associations, and/or scenic views. The National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act of 1949 created AONBs and the Countryside and Rights of Way Act, 2000 added further regulation and protection. There are likely to be restrictions to some developments within these areas. This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and Scottish Natural Heritage.

11.3 National Parks Records within 250m

In England and Wales, the purpose of National Parks is to conserve and enhance landscapes within the countryside whilst promoting public enjoyment of them and having regard for the social and economic wellbeing of those living within them. In Scotland National Parks have the additional purpose of promoting the sustainable use of the natural resources of the area and the sustainable social and economic development of its communities. The National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 established the National Park designation in England and Wales, and The National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 in Scotland. This data is sourced from Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and the Scottish Government.

11.4 Listed Buildings Records within 250m

Buildings listed for their special architectural or historical interest. Building control in the form of 'listed building consent' is required in order to make any changes to that building which might affect its special interest. Listed buildings are graded to indicate their relative importance, however building controls apply to all buildings equally, irrespective of their grade, and apply to the interior and exterior of the building in its entirety, together with any curtilage structures.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from Historic England, Cadw and Historic Environment Scotland.

11.5 Conservation Areas Records within 250m

Local planning authorities are obliged to designate as conservation areas any parts of their own area that are of special architectural or historic interest, the character and appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance. Designation of a conservation area gives broader protection than the listing of individual buildings. All the features within the area, listed or otherwise, are recognised as part of its character. Conservation area designation is the means of recognising the importance of all factors and of ensuring that planning decisions address the quality of the landscape in its broadest sense. This data is sourced from Historic England, Cadw and Historic Environment Scotland.

11.6 Scheduled Ancient Monuments Records within 250m

A scheduled monument is an historic building or site that is included in the Schedule of Monuments kept by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. The regime is set out in the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. The Schedule of Monuments has c.20,000 entries and includes sites such as Roman remains, burial mounds, castles, bridges, earthworks, the remains of deserted villages and industrial sites. Monuments are not graded, but all are, by definition, considered to be of national importance. This data is sourced from Historic England, Cadw and Historic Environment Scotland.

11.7 Registered Parks and Gardens Records within 250m

Parks and gardens assessed to be of particular interest and of special historic interest. The emphasis being on 'designed' landscapes, rather than on planting or botanical importance. Registration is a 'material consideration' in the planning process, meaning that planning authorities must consider the impact of any proposed development on the special character of the landscape. This data is sourced from Historic England, Cadw and Historic Environment Scotland.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

12 Agricultural designations Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m) Grade 1 - excellent quality Grade 2 - very good quality Grade 3 - good to moderate quality Grade 3a - good quality Grade 3b - moderate quality Grade 4 - poor quality Grade 5 - very poor quality Non-agricultural land Urban land Exclusion land Tree felling licences Open Access land

12.1 Agricultural Land Classification Records within 250m

Classification of the quality of agricultural land taking into consideration multiple factors including climate, physical geography and soil properties. It should be noted that the categories for the grading of agricultural land are not consistent across England, Wales and Scotland. Features are displayed on the Agricultural designations map on page 83 > ID

Location

Classification

Description

On site

Grade 3b

Moderate quality agricultural land. Land capable of producing moderate yields of a narrow range of crops, principally cereals and grass or lower yields of a wider range of crops or high yields of grass which can be grazed or harvested over most of the year.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Classification

Description

On site

Grade 1

Excellent quality agricultural land. Land with no or very minor limitations to agricultural use. A very wide range of agricultural and horticultural crops can be grown and commonly includes top fruit, soft fruit, salad crops and winter harvested vegetables. Yields are high and less variable than on land of lower quality.

12m W

Grade 2

Very good quality agricultural land. Land with minor limitations which affect crop yield, cultivations or harvesting. A wide range of agricultural and horticultural crops can usually be grown but on some land in the grade there may be reduced flexibility due to difficulties with the production of the more demanding crops such as winter harvested vegetables and arable root crops. The level of yield is generally high but may be lower or more variable than Grade 1.

51m SW

Grade 3b

85m SW

Grade 1

94m W

Grade 3a

Good quality agricultural land. Land capable of consistently producing moderate to high yields of a narrow range of arable crops, especially cereals, or moderate yields of a wide range of crops including cereals, grass, oilseed rape, potatoes, sugar beet and the less demanding horticultural crops.

165m N

Non Agricultural

197m N

Urban

197m E

Non Agricultural

This data is sourced from Natural England.

12.2 Open Access Land Records within 250m

The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CROW Act) gives a public right of access to land without having to use paths. Access land includes mountains, moors, heaths and downs that are privately owned. It also includes common land registered with the local council and some land around the England Coast Path. Generally permitted activities on access land are walking, running, watching wildlife and climbing. This data is sourced from Natural England and Natural Resources Wales.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

12.3 Tree Felling Licences Records within 250m

Felling Licence Application (FLA) areas approved by Forestry Commission England. Anyone wishing to fell trees must ensure that a licence or permission under a grant scheme has been issued by the Forestry Commission before any felling is carried out or that one of the exceptions apply. This data is sourced from the Forestry Commission.

12.4 Environmental Stewardship Schemes Records within 250m

Environmental Stewardship covers a range of schemes that provide financial incentives to farmers, foresters and land managers to look after and improve the environment. The schemes identified may be historical schemes that have now expired, or may still be active. Location

Reference

Scheme

Start Date

End date

9m NE

AG00396662

Entry Level plus Higher Level Stewardship

01/12/2012

30/11/2022

26m S

AG00396662

Entry Level plus Higher Level Stewardship

01/12/2012

30/11/2022

34m SW

AG00396662

Entry Level plus Higher Level Stewardship

01/12/2012

30/11/2022

130m S

AG00396662

Entry Level plus Higher Level Stewardship

01/12/2012

30/11/2022

This data is sourced from Natural England.

12.5 Countryside Stewardship Schemes Records within 250m

Countryside Stewardship covers a range of schemes that provide financial incentives to farmers, foresters and land managers to look after and improve the environment. Main objectives are to improve the farmed environment for wildlife and to reduce diffuse water pollution. This data is sourced from Natural England.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

13 Habitat designations Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Priority Habitat Inventory Open Mosaic Habitat Limestone Pavement Orders Habitat Networks Primary Habitat Restorable Habitat Associated Habitats Habitat Restoration-Creation Network Enhancement Zone 1 Network Enhancement Zone 2

13.1 Priority Habitat Inventory Records within 250m

Habitats of principal importance as named under Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006) Section 41. Features are displayed on the Habitat designations map on page 86 > ID

Location

Main Habitat

Other habitats

14m S

Deciduous woodland

Main habitat: DWOOD (INV > 50%)

This data is sourced from Natural England.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

13.2 Habitat Networks Records within 250m

Habitat networks for 18 priority habitat networks (based primarily, but not exclusively, on the priority habitat inventory) and areas suitable for the expansion of networks through restoration and habitat creation. This data is sourced from Natural England.

13.3 Open Mosaic Habitat Records within 250m

Sites verified as Open Mosaic Habitat. Mosaic habitats are brownfield sites that are identified under the UK Biodiversity Action Plan as a priority habitat due to the habitat variation within a single site, supporting an array of invertebrates. Features are displayed on the Habitat designations map on page 86 > ID

Location

Site reference

Identificati Primary source on confidence

Secondary source

55m SW

Sand pit by South Hall Farm

Low

UK Perspectives Aerial Photography -

BugLife All Of A Buzz Data

Tertiary source

This data is sourced from Natural England.

13.4 Limestone Pavement Orders Records within 250m

Limestone pavements are outcrops of limestone where the surface has been worn away by natural means over millennia. These rocks have the appearance of paving blocks, hence their name. Not only do they have geological interest, they also provide valuable habitats for wildlife. These habitats are threatened due to their removal for use in gardens and water features. Many limestone pavements have been designated as SSSIs which affords them some protection. In addition, Section 34 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 gave them additional protection via the creation of Limestone Pavement Orders, which made it a criminal offence to remove any part of the outcrop. The associated Limestone Pavement Priority Habitat is part of the UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority habitat in England. This data is sourced from Natural England.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

14 Geology 1:10,000 scale - Availability Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Full coverage Partial coverage No coverage

14.1 10k Availability Records within 500m

An indication on the coverage of 1:10,000 scale geology data for the site, the most detailed dataset provided by the British Geological Survey. Either 'Full', 'Partial' or 'No coverage' for each geological theme. Features are displayed on the Geology 1:10,000 scale - Availability map on page 88 > ID

Location

Artificial

Superficial

Bedrock

Mass movement

Sheet No.

On site

Full

No coverage

TQ58SW

489m E

Full

No coverage

TQ58SE

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Geology 1:10,000 scale - Artificial and made ground Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Reclaimed ground Made ground Worked ground Infilled ground Disturbed ground Landscaped ground

14.2 Artificial and made ground (10k) Records within 500m

Details of made, worked, infilled, disturbed and landscaped ground at 1:10,000 scale. Artificial ground can be associated with potentially contaminated material, unpredictable engineering conditions and instability. Features are displayed on the Geology 1:10,000 scale - Artificial and made ground map on page 89 > ID

Location

LEX Code

Description

Rock description

On site

WMGR-UKNOWN

Infilled Ground

Unknown/unclassified Entry

14m NE

WMGR-UKNOWN

Infilled Ground

Unknown/unclassified Entry

59m NE

WMGR-UKNOWN

Infilled Ground

Unknown/unclassified Entry

327m S

WMGR-UKNOWN

Infilled Ground

Unknown/unclassified Entry

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Geology 1:10,000 scale - Superficial Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Landslip (10k) Superficial geology (10k) Please see table for more details.

14.3 Superficial geology (10k) Records within 500m

Superficial geological deposits at 1:10,000 scale. Also known as 'drift', these are the youngest geological deposits, formed during the Quaternary. They rest on older deposits or rocks referred to as bedrock. Features are displayed on the Geology 1:10,000 scale - Superficial map on page 91 > ID

Location

LEX Code

Description

Rock description

On site

ALV-Z

Alluvium - Silt (unlithified Deposits Coding Scheme)

Silt

On site

ALV-Z

Alluvium - Silt (unlithified Deposits Coding Scheme)

Silt

On site

HEAD-C

Head - Clay (unlithified Deposits Coding Scheme)

Clay

On site

TPGR-XSV

Taplow Gravel Formation - Sand And Gravel

Sand And Gravel

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

LEX Code

Description

Rock description

31m NE

TPGR-XSV

Taplow Gravel Formation - Sand And Gravel

Sand And Gravel

336m E

HEAD-C

Head - Clay (unlithified Deposits Coding Scheme)

Clay

340m SE

HEAD-C

Head - Clay (unlithified Deposits Coding Scheme)

Clay

356m E

TPGR-XSV

Taplow Gravel Formation - Sand And Gravel

Sand And Gravel

489m E

HEAD-C

Head - Clay (unlithified Deposits Coding Scheme)

Clay

489m E

TPGR-XSV

Taplow Gravel Formation - Sand And Gravel

Sand And Gravel

492m E

HEAD-C

Head - Clay (unlithified Deposits Coding Scheme)

Clay

498m NE

ALV-Z

Alluvium - Silt (unlithified Deposits Coding Scheme)

Silt

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

14.4 Landslip (10k) Records within 500m

Mass movement deposits on BGS geological maps at 1:10,000 scale. Primarily superficial deposits that have moved down slope under gravity to form landslips. These affect bedrock, other superficial deposits and artificial ground. This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Geology 1:10,000 scale - Bedrock Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Bedrock faults and other linear features (10k) Bedrock geology (10k) Please see table for more details.

14.5 Bedrock geology (10k) Records within 500m

Bedrock geology at 1:10,000 scale. The main mass of rocks forming the Earth and present everywhere, whether exposed at the surface in outcrops or concealed beneath superficial deposits or water. Features are displayed on the Geology 1:10,000 scale - Bedrock map on page 93 > ID

Location

LEX Code

Description

Rock age

On site

LC-CLAY

London Clay Formation - Clay

Eocene Epoch

489m E

LC-CLAY

London Clay Formation - Clay

Eocene Epoch

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

14.6 Bedrock faults and other linear features (10k) Records within 500m

Linear features at the ground or bedrock surface at 1:10,000 scale of six main types; rock, fault, fold axis, mineral vein, alteration area or landform. Features are either observed or inferred, and relate primarily to bedrock. This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

15 Geology 1:50,000 scale - Availability Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Geological map tile

15.1 50k Availability Records within 500m

An indication on the coverage of 1:50,000 scale geology data for the site. Either 'Full' or 'No coverage' for each geological theme. Features are displayed on the Geology 1:50,000 scale - Availability map on page 95 > ID

Location

Artificial

Superficial

Bedrock

Mass movement

Sheet No.

On site

Full

EW257_romford_v4

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Geology 1:50,000 scale - Artificial and made ground Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Made ground Worked ground Infilled ground Disturbed ground Landscaped ground

15.2 Artificial and made ground (50k) Records within 500m

Details of made, worked, infilled, disturbed and landscaped ground at 1:50,000 scale. Artificial ground can be associated with potentially contaminated material, unpredictable engineering conditions and instability. Features are displayed on the Geology 1:50,000 scale - Artificial and made ground map on page 96 > ID

Location

LEX Code

Description

Rock description

On site

WMGR-ARTDP

INFILLED GROUND

ARTIFICIAL DEPOSIT

14m NE

WMGR-ARTDP

INFILLED GROUND

ARTIFICIAL DEPOSIT

59m NE

WGR-VOID

WORKED GROUND (UNDIVIDED)

VOID

327m S

WMGR-ARTDP

INFILLED GROUND

ARTIFICIAL DEPOSIT

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

15.3 Artificial ground permeability (50k) Records within 50m

A qualitative classification of estimated rates of vertical movement of water from the ground surface through the unsaturated zone of any artificial deposits (the zone between the land surface and the water table). Location

Flow type

Maximum permeability

Minimum permeability

On site

Mixed

Very High

Low

14m NE

Mixed

Very High

Low

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Geology 1:50,000 scale - Superficial Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Landslip (50k) Superficial geology (50k) Please see table for more details.

15.4 Superficial geology (50k) Records within 500m

Superficial geological deposits at 1:50,000 scale. Also known as 'drift', these are the youngest geological deposits, formed during the Quaternary. They rest on older deposits or rocks referred to as bedrock. Features are displayed on the Geology 1:50,000 scale - Superficial map on page 98 > ID

Location

LEX Code

Description

Rock description

On site

TPGR-XSV

TAPLOW GRAVEL MEMBER

SAND AND GRAVEL

On site

ALV-XCZSV

ALLUVIUM

CLAY, SILT, SAND AND GRAVEL

On site

ALV-XCZSV

ALLUVIUM

CLAY, SILT, SAND AND GRAVEL

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

LEX Code

Description

Rock description

On site

HEADXCZSV

HEAD

CLAY, SILT, SAND AND GRAVEL

31m NE

TPGR-XSV

TAPLOW GRAVEL MEMBER

SAND AND GRAVEL

318m SW

ALV-XCZSP

ALLUVIUM

CLAY, SILT, SAND AND PEAT

336m E

HEADXCZSV

HEAD

CLAY, SILT, SAND AND GRAVEL

356m E

TPGR-XSV

TAPLOW GRAVEL MEMBER

SAND AND GRAVEL

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

15.5 Superficial permeability (50k) Records within 50m

A qualitative classification of estimated rates of vertical movement of water from the ground surface through the unsaturated zone of any superficial deposits (the zone between the land surface and the water table). Location

Flow type

Maximum permeability

Minimum permeability

On site

Intergranular

High

Very Low

On site

Intergranular

High

Very Low

On site

Intergranular

Very High

High

On site

Mixed

High

Very Low

31m NE

Intergranular

Very High

High

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

15.6 Landslip (50k) Records within 500m

Mass movement deposits on BGS geological maps at 1:50,000 scale. Primarily superficial deposits that have moved down slope under gravity to form landslips. These affect bedrock, other superficial deposits and artificial ground. This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

15.7 Landslip permeability (50k) Records within 50m

A qualitative classification of estimated rates of vertical movement of water from the ground surface through the unsaturated zone of any landslip deposits (the zone between the land surface and the water table). This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

100

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Geology 1:50,000 scale - Bedrock Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Bedrock faults and other linear features (50k) Bedrock geology (50k) Please see table for more details.

15.8 Bedrock geology (50k) Records within 500m

Bedrock geology at 1:50,000 scale. The main mass of rocks forming the Earth and present everywhere, whether exposed at the surface in outcrops or concealed beneath superficial deposits or water. Features are displayed on the Geology 1:50,000 scale - Bedrock map on page 101 > ID

Location

LEX Code

Description

Rock age

On site

LC-XCZS

LONDON CLAY FORMATION - CLAY, SILT AND SAND

YPRESIAN

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

101

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

15.9 Bedrock permeability (50k) Records within 50m

A qualitative classification of estimated rates of vertical movement of water from the ground surface through the unsaturated zone of bedrock (the zone between the land surface and the water table). Location

Flow type

Maximum permeability

Minimum permeability

On site

Mixed

Moderate

Very Low

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

15.10 Bedrock faults and other linear features (50k) Records within 500m

Linear features at the ground or bedrock surface at 1:50,000 scale of six main types; rock, fault, fold axis, mineral vein, alteration area or landform. Features are either observed or inferred, and relate primarily to bedrock. This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

102

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

16 Boreholes Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Confidential 0 - 10m 10 - 30m 30m+ Unknown

16.1 BGS Boreholes Records within 250m

The Single Onshore Boreholes Index (SOBI); an index of over one million records of boreholes, shafts and wells from all forms of drilling and site investigation work held by the British Geological Survey. Covering onshore and nearshore boreholes dating back to at least 1790 and ranging from one to several thousand metres deep. Features are displayed on the Boreholes map on page 103 > ID

Location

Grid reference

Name

Length

Confidential Web link

On site

554390 182240

ESSEX C.C. ARNOLDS FIELD NO.3

4.57

823765 ↗

On site

554130 181810

ESSEX C.C.ARNOLDS FIELD NO.1 RAINHAM

4.88

823763 ↗

On site

554000 181900

ESSEX C.C. ARNOLDS FIELD NO.4

3.0

823766 ↗

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

103

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Grid reference

Name

Length

Confidential Web link

On site

554240 182000

ESSEX C.C. ARNOLDS FIELD NO.2

6.71

823764 ↗

On site

554210 181680

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH303

20.0

823854 ↗

On site

553990 181850

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK TP.6

1.0

823841 ↗

On site

554110 182070

ESSEX C.C. ARNOLDS FIELD NO.5

3.96

823767 ↗

On site

554170 181710

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH302

30.0

823853 ↗

On site

554150 181750

WENNINGTON WELL

77.11

823902 ↗

On site

554230 181660

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH8

7.5

823843 ↗

On site

554230 181660

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK TP.7

3.0

823842 ↗

14m NE

554430 182190

LAUDERS BARN AVELEY RAINHAM TBH.J

6.0

823759 ↗

20m W

553983 182049

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 22

6.1

824190 ↗

20m N

554207 182361

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 20

6.1

824188 ↗

20m SW

553940 181890

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH300

25.0

823851 ↗

24m NW

554128 182205

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 21

6.1

824189 ↗

27m NE

554349 182399

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 19

3.0

824187 ↗

32m SW

554029 181769

A13 THAMES AV LAUNDERS LN 41

10.0

824016 ↗

32m SW

553924 181861

A13 THAMES AV LAUNDERS LN 39

15.0

824015 ↗

36m NE

554444 182380

JEWS CEMETERY 74/12

4.0

824193 ↗

37m W

553924 181982

JEWS CEMETERY 74/1

5.18

824203 ↗

41m S

554270 181620

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH306

25.0

823857 ↗

42m SW

553906 181900

A13 THAMES AV LAUNDERS LN 38

15.0

824014 ↗

45m S

554170 181640

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH305

25.0

823856 ↗

48m NW

554113 182232

JEWS CEMETERY 74/7

4.0

824197 ↗

48m S

554130 181670

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH304

20.0

823855 ↗

58m NE

554463 182395

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 6

4.0

824174 ↗

64m S

554240 181580

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH309

20.0

823860 ↗

68m SW

553890 181850

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH301

20.0

823852 ↗

69m S

554280 181590

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH307

20.0

823858 ↗

71m N

554215 182425

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 7

4.0

824175 ↗

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

104

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Grid reference

Name

Length

Confidential Web link

75m W

553896 182014

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 23

6.1

824191 ↗

79m S

554340 181659

A13 THAMES AV LAUNDERS LN 44

10.0

824017 ↗

86m NW

554006 182168

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 9

4.0

824177 ↗

87m S

554260 181560

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH308

30.0

823859 ↗

95m N

554092 182319

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 8

3.0

824176 ↗

98m SE

554330 181750

LAUDERS BARN AVELEY RAINHAM TBH.M

6.0

823761 ↗

111m N

554134 182415

JEWS CEMETERY 74/9

4.0

824195 ↗

118m NW

553947 182163

JEWS CEMETERY 74/6

4.0

824198 ↗

118m N

554298 182486

JEWS CEMETERY 74/11

4.0

824194 ↗

118m N

554130 182422

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 17

6.1

824185 ↗

125m E

554450 181990

LAUDERS BARN AVELEY RAINHAM TBH.K

6.0

823760 ↗

130m N

554299 182499

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 18

6.1

824186 ↗

139m N

554110 182430

SPRING FARM RAINHAM

4.0

823961 ↗

148m W

553890 182140

SPRING FARM RAINHAM

4.5

823964 ↗

151m NW

554040 182340

SPRING FARM RAINHAM

3.0

823962 ↗

161m NW

553970 182240

SPRING FARM RAINHAM

4.0

823963 ↗

166m NW

554013 182304

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 16

6.1

824184 ↗

172m W

553864 182145

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 3

6.1

824171 ↗

175m W

553770 181970

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK 5

3.0

823840 ↗

177m NW

554036 182397

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 5

4.0

824173 ↗

177m NW

553947 182240

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 4

4.0

824172 ↗

178m NE

554680 182260

LAUDERS BARN AVELEY RAINHAM TBH.F

3.05

823756 ↗

179m W

553809 182072

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 14

6.1

824182 ↗

188m N

554260 182550

SPRING FARM RAINHAM

3.0

823960 ↗

190m S

554380 181520

LONDON-TILBURY TR.A.13 THURROCK BH9

6.0

823844 ↗

199m NW

553893 182224

SPRING FARM RAINHAM 13

6.1

824181 ↗

206m NE

554550 182520

SPRING FARM RAINHAM

4.0

823959 ↗

213m W

553780 182091

JEWS CEMETERY 74/2

6.1

824202 ↗

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

105

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Grid reference

Name

Length

Confidential Web link

220m NW

553968 182341

JEWS CEMETERY 74/8

5.1

824196 ↗

221m S

554332 181445

A13 THAMES AV LAUNDERS LN 45

12.0

824018 ↗

224m S

554330 181440

A13 LONDON-TILBURY TRUNK RD 45

12.0

823881 ↗

239m E

554640 182100

LAUDERS BARN AVELEY RAINHAM TBH.G

5.49

823757 ↗

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

106

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

17 Natural ground subsidence - Shrink swell clays Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

No data Negligible Very low Low Moderate High

17.1 Shrink swell clays Records within 50m

The potential hazard presented by soils that absorb water when wet (making them swell), and lose water as they dry (making them shrink). This shrink-swell behaviour is controlled by the type and amount of clay in the soil, and by seasonal changes in the soil moisture content (related to rainfall and local drainage). Features are displayed on the Natural ground subsidence - Shrink swell clays map on page 107 > Location

Hazard rating

Details

On site

Negligible

Ground conditions predominantly non-plastic.

On site

Very low

Ground conditions predominantly low plasticity.

On site

Moderate

Ground conditions predominantly high plasticity.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

107

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

108

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Natural ground subsidence - Running sands Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

No data Negligible Very low Low Moderate High

17.2 Running sands Records within 50m

The potential hazard presented by rocks that can contain loosely-packed sandy layers that can become fluidised by water flowing through them. Such sands can 'run', removing support from overlying buildings and causing potential damage. Features are displayed on the Natural ground subsidence - Running sands map on page 109 > Location

Hazard rating

Details

On site

Very low

Running sand conditions are unlikely. No identified constraints on land use due to running conditions unless water table rises rapidly.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

109

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Hazard rating

Details

On site

Low

Running sand conditions may be present. Constraints may apply to land uses involving excavation or the addition or removal of water.

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

110

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Natural ground subsidence - Compressible deposits Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

No data Negligible Very low Low Moderate High

17.3 Compressible deposits Records within 50m

The potential hazard presented by types of ground that may contain layers of very soft materials like clay or peat and may compress if loaded by overlying structures, or if the groundwater level changes, potentially resulting in depression of the ground and disturbance of foundations. Features are displayed on the Natural ground subsidence - Compressible deposits map on page 111 > Location

Hazard rating

Details

On site

Negligible

Compressible strata are not thought to occur.

On site

Moderate

Compressibility and uneven settlement hazards are probably present. Land use should consider specifically the compressibility and variability of the site.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

111

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

112

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Natural ground subsidence - Collapsible deposits Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

No data Negligible Very low Low Moderate High

17.4 Collapsible deposits Records within 50m

The potential hazard presented by natural deposits that could collapse when a load (such as a building) is placed on them or they become saturated with water. Features are displayed on the Natural ground subsidence - Collapsible deposits map on page 113 > Location

Hazard rating

Details

On site

Negligible

Deposits with potential to collapse when loaded and saturated are believed not to be present.

On site

Very low

Deposits with potential to collapse when loaded and saturated are unlikely to be present.

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

113

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Natural ground subsidence - Landslides Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

No data Negligible Very low Low Moderate High

17.5 Landslides Records within 50m

The potential for landsliding (slope instability) to be a hazard assessed using 1:50,000 scale digital maps of superficial and bedrock deposits, combined with information from the BGS National Landslide Database and scientific and engineering reports. Features are displayed on the Natural ground subsidence - Landslides map on page 114 > Location

Hazard rating

Details

On site

Very low

Slope instability problems are not likely to occur but consideration to potential problems of adjacent areas impacting on the site should always be considered.

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

114

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Natural ground subsidence - Ground dissolution of soluble rocks Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

No data Negligible Very low Low Moderate High

17.6 Ground dissolution of soluble rocks Records within 50m

The potential hazard presented by ground dissolution, which occurs when water passing through soluble rocks produces underground cavities and cave systems. These cavities reduce support to the ground above and can cause localised collapse of the overlying rocks and deposits. Features are displayed on the Natural ground subsidence - Ground dissolution of soluble rocks map on page 115 > Location

Hazard rating

Details

On site

Negligible

Soluble rocks are either not thought to be present within the ground, or not prone to dissolution. Dissolution features are unlikely to be present.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

115

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

116

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

18 Mining and ground workings Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

BritPits Surface ground workings Underground workings Underground mining extents Historical mineral planning areas TCA non-coal mining Non Coal Mining Sporadic underground mining of restricted extent possible Localised small scale underground mining possible Small scale mining possible Underground mining known or likely within or in close proximity Underground mining known within or in very close proximity

18.1 BritPits Records within 500m

BritPits (an abbreviation of British Pits) is a database maintained by the British Geological Survey of currently active and closed surface and underground mineral workings. Details of major mineral handling sites, such as wharfs and rail depots are also held in the database. Features are displayed on the Mining and ground workings map on page 117 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

117

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Details

Description

On site

Name: Launder's Lane Address: RAINHAM, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Ceased

Type: A surface mineral working. It may be termed Quarry, Sand Pit, Clay Pit or Opencast Coal Site Status description: Site which, at date of entry, has ceased to extract minerals. May be considered as Closed by operator. May be considered to have Active, Dormant or Expired planning permissions by Mineral Planning Authority

126m N

Name: Spring Farm Quarry Address: RAINHAM, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Ceased

162m S

Name: Willow Farm Gravel Pit Address: RAINHAM, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Ceased

165m NW

Name: Spring Farm Quarry Address: RAINHAM, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Ceased

249m W

Name: South Hall Farm Quarry Address: RAINHAM, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Ceased

255m W

Name: Spring Farm Quarry Address: RAINHAM, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Active

Type: A surface mineral working. It may be termed Quarry, Sand Pit, Clay Pit or Opencast Coal Site Status description: Site which is actively extracting mineral products, or in the case of wharfs and rail depots, is actively handing minerals

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

118

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Details

Description

272m E

Name: Moor Hall Farm Gravel Pit Address: RAINHAM, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Ceased

380m S

Name: Wennington Quarry Address: WENNINGTON, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Active

423m W

Name: South Hall Farm Quarry Address: RAINHAM, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Ceased

426m SW

Name: East Hall Gravel Pit Address: Wennington, RAINHAM, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Ceased

435m W

Name: South Hall Farm Quarry Address: RAINHAM, Essex Commodity: Sand & Gravel Status: Ceased

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

18.2 Surface ground workings Records within 250m

Historical land uses identified from Ordnance Survey mapping that involved ground excavation at the surface. These features may or may not have been subsequently backfilled. Features are displayed on the Mining and ground workings map on page 117 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

119

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Land Use

Year of mapping

Mapping scale

On site

Sand and Gravel Pit

1967

1:10560

42m NE

Cemetery

1955

1:10560

42m NE

Cemetery

1992

1:10000

42m NE

Cemetery

1973

1:10000

42m NE

Cemetery

1967

1:10560

44m SE

Pond

1992

1:10000

57m NE

Refuse Heap

1992

1:10000

57m NE

Refuse Heap

1973

1:10000

242m NE

Gravel Pit

1955

1:10560

This is data is sourced from Ordnance Survey/Groundsure.

18.3 Underground workings Records within 1000m

Historical land uses identified from Ordnance Survey mapping that indicate the presence of underground workings e.g. mine shafts. This is data is sourced from Ordnance Survey/Groundsure.

18.4 Underground mining extents Records within 500m

This data identifies underground mine workings that could present a potential risk, including adits and seam workings. These features have been identified from BGS Geological mapping and mine plans sourced from the BGS and various collections and sources. This data is sourced from Groundsure.

18.5 Historical Mineral Planning Areas Records within 500m

Boundaries of mineral planning permissions for England and Wales. This data was collated between the 1940s (and retrospectively to the 1930s) and the mid 1980s. The data includes permitted, withdrawn and refused permissions. Features are displayed on the Mining and ground workings map on page 117 >

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

120

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Site Name

Mineral

Type

Planning Status

Planning Status Date

On site

Launder's Lane

Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Valid

16/11/62

On site

New Road

Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Refused

Not available

On site

Moor Hill Farm

Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Valid

16/6/76

7m S

Willow Farm

Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Valid

10/9/62

8m S

Moor Hill Farm Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Valid

16/6/76

22m NE

Aylett's Farm

Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Refused

Not available

65m SW

Southall Farm

Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Refused

Not available

124m NE

Aylett's Farm

Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Refused

Not available

301m NE

Aylett's Farm

Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Valid

8/1/63

327m S

Willow Farm

Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Valid

4/12/64

327m E

Aveley Clayfield

Clay

Surface mineral working

Valid

26/6/62

411m SE

Willow Farm

Sand and gravel

Surface mineral working

Valid

31/8/61, 14/3/58

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

18.6 Non-coal mining Records within 1000m

The potential for historical non-coal mining to have affected an area. The assessment is drawn from expert knowledge and literature in addition to the digital geological map of Britain. Mineral commodities may be divided into seven general categories - vein minerals, chalk, oil shale, building stone, bedded ores, evaporites and 'other' commodities (including ball clay, jet, black marble, graphite and chert). This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

121

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

18.7 JPB mining areas Records on site

Areas which could be affected by former coal and other mining. This data includes some mine plans unavailable to the Coal Authority. This data is sourced from Johnson Poole and Bloomer.

18.8 The Coal Authority non-coal mining Records within 500m

This data provides an indication of the potential zone of influence of recorded underground non-coal mining workings. Any and all analysis and interpretation of Coal Authority Data in this report is made by Groundsure, and is in no way supported, endorsed or authorised by the Coal Authority. The use of the data is restricted to the terms and provisions contained in this report. Data reproduced in this report may be the copyright of the Coal Authority and permission should be sought from Groundsure prior to any re-use. This data is sourced from The Coal Authority.

18.9 Researched mining Records within 500m

This data indicates areas of potential mining identified from alternative or archival sources, including; BGS Geological paper maps, Lidar data, aerial photographs (from World War II onwards), archaeological data services, websites, Tithe maps, and various text/plans from collected books and reports. Some of this data is approximate and Groundsure have interpreted the resultant risk area and, where possible, specific areas of risk have been captured. Location

Mineral type

On site

Stone

14m NE

Stone

59m NE

Stone

This data is sourced from Groundsure.

18.10 Mining record office plans Records within 500m

This dataset is representative of Mining Record Office and/or plan extents held by Groundsure and should be considered approximate. Where possible, plans have been located and any specific areas of risk they depict have been captured.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

122

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from Groundsure.

18.11 BGS mine plans Records within 500m

This dataset is representative of BGS mine plans held by Groundsure and should be considered approximate. Where possible, plans have been located and any specific areas of risk they depict have been captured. This data is sourced from Groundsure.

18.12 Coal mining Records on site

Areas which could be affected by past, current or future coal mining. This data is sourced from the Coal Authority.

18.13 Brine areas Records on site

The Cheshire Brine Compensation District indicates areas that may be affected by salt and brine extraction in Cheshire and where compensation would be available where damage from this mining has occurred. Damage from salt and brine mining can still occur outside this district, but no compensation will be available. This data is sourced from the Cheshire Brine Subsidence Compensation Board.

18.14 Gypsum areas Records on site

Generalised areas that may be affected by gypsum extraction. This data is sourced from British Gypsum.

18.15 Tin mining Records on site

Generalised areas that may be affected by historical tin mining. This data is sourced from Groundsure.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

123

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

18.16 Clay mining Records on site

Generalised areas that may be affected by kaolin and ball clay extraction. This data is sourced from the Kaolin and Ball Clay Association (UK).

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

124

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

19 Ground cavities and sinkholes 19.1 Natural cavities Records within 500m

Industry recognised national database of natural cavities. Sinkholes and caves are formed by the dissolution of soluble rock, such as chalk and limestone, gulls and fissures by cambering. Ground instability can result from movement of loose material contained within these cavities, often triggered by water. This data is sourced from Stantec UK Ltd.

19.2 Mining cavities Records within 1000m

Industry recognised national database of mining cavities. Degraded mines may result in hazardous subsidence (crown holes). Climatic conditions and water escape can also trigger subsidence over mine entrances and workings. This data is sourced from Stantec UK Ltd.

19.3 Reported recent incidents Records within 500m

This data identifies sinkhole information gathered from media reports and Groundsure's own records. This data goes back to 2014 and includes relative accuracy ratings for each event and links to the original data sources. The data is updated on a regular basis and should not be considered a comprehensive catalogue of all sinkhole events. The absence of data in this database does not mean a sinkhole definitely has not occurred during this time. This data is sourced from Groundsure.

19.4 Historical incidents Records within 500m

This dataset comprises an extract of 1:10,560, 1:10,000, 1:2,500 and 1:1,250 scale historical Ordnance Survey maps held by Groundsure, dating back to the 1840s. It shows shakeholes, deneholes and other 'holes' as noted on these maps. Dene holes are medieval chalk extraction pits, usually comprising a narrow shaft with a number of chambers at the base of the shaft. Shakeholes are an alternative name for suffusion sinkholes, most commonly found in the limestone landscapes of North Yorkshire but also extensively noted around the Brecon Beacons National Park. Not all 'holes' noted on Ordnance Survey mapping will necessarily be present within this dataset.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

125

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from Groundsure.

19.5 National karst database Records within 500m

This is a comprehensive database of national karst information gathered from a wide range of sources. BGS have collected data on five main types of karst feature: Sinkholes, stream links, caves, springs, and incidences of associated damage to buildings, roads, bridges and other engineered works. Since the database was set up in 2002 data covering most of the evaporite karst areas of the UK have now been added, along with data covering about 60% of the Chalk, and 35% of the Carboniferous Limestone outcrops. Many of the classic upland karst areas have yet to be included. Recorded so far are: Over 800 caves, 1300 stream sinks, 5600 springs, 10,000 sinkholes. The database is not yet complete, and not all records have been verified. The absence of data does not mean that karst features are not present at a site. A reliability rating is included with each record. This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

126

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

20 Radon Site Outline Search buffers in metres (m)

Greater than 30% Between 10% and 30% Between 5% and 10% Between 3% and 5% Between 1% and 3% Less than 1%

20.1 Radon Records on site

The Radon Potential data classifies areas based on their likelihood of a property having a radon level at or above the Action Level in Great Britain. The dataset is intended for use at 1:50,000 scale and was derived from both geological assessments and indoor radon measurements (more than 560,000 records). A minimum 50m buffer should be considered when searching the maps, as the smallest detectable feature at this scale is 50m. The findings of this section should supersede any estimations derived from the Indicative Atlas of Radon in Great Britain (1:100,000 scale). Features are displayed on the Radon map on page 127 > Location

Estimated properties affected

Radon Protection Measures required

On site

Less than 1%

None

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

127

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey and UK Health Security Agency.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

128

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

21 Soil chemistry 21.1 BGS Estimated Background Soil Chemistry Records within 50m

The estimated values provide the likely background concentration of the potentially harmful elements Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead and Nickel in topsoil. The values are estimated primarily from rural topsoil data collected at a sample density of approximately 1 per 2 km2. In areas where rural soil samples are not available, estimation is based on stream sediment data collected from small streams at a sampling density of 1 per 2.5 km2; this is the case for most of Scotland, Wales and southern England. The stream sediment data are converted to soil-equivalent concentrations prior to the estimation. Location

Arsenic

Bioaccessible Arsenic

Lead

Bioaccessible Lead

Cadmium Chromium

Nickel

On site

15 - 25 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

120 - 180 mg/kg

30 - 45 mg/kg

On site

15 - 25 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

120 - 180 mg/kg

30 - 45 mg/kg

On site

15 - 25 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

120 - 180 mg/kg

30 - 45 mg/kg

On site

15 - 25 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

120 - 180 mg/kg

30 - 45 mg/kg

On site

15 - 25 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

120 - 180 mg/kg

30 - 45 mg/kg

On site

15 - 25 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

120 - 180 mg/kg

30 - 45 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 mg/kg

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

129

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Location

Arsenic

Bioaccessible Arsenic

Lead

Bioaccessible Lead

Cadmium Chromium

Nickel

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

On site

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

14m NE

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

16m W

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

16m W

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

17m NE

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

17m S

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

23m W

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

31m NE

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 mg/kg

32m NE

15 mg/kg

No data

100 mg/kg

60 mg/kg

1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

15 - 30 mg/kg

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

21.2 BGS Estimated Urban Soil Chemistry Records within 50m

Estimated topsoil chemistry of Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Nickel, Lead, Tin and Zinc and bioaccessible Arsenic and Lead in 23 urban centres across Great Britain. These estimates are derived from interpolation of the measured urban topsoil data referred to above and provide information across each city

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

130

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

between the measured sample locations (4 per km2). Location

Arsenic (mg/kg)

Bioaccessible Arsenic (mg/kg)

Lead (mg/kg )

Bioaccessible Lead (mg/kg)

Cadmium Chromiu (mg/kg) m (mg/kg)

Copper (mg/kg)

Nickel Tin (mg/kg) (mg/k g)

On site

2.1

0.5

On site

2.5

118

0.5

On site

2.5

0.5

On site

2.6

145

100

0.5

On site

2.6

128

0.5

On site

2.6

129

0.4

On site

2.6

109

0.5

On site

2.6

107

0.4

On site

2.6

104

0.5

On site

2.6

0.5

On site

2.6

0.5

On site

2.8

145

100

0.5

On site

2.8

149

102

0.5

On site

2.8

215

148

0.3

On site

2.8

254

174

0.3

On site

2.8

228

157

0.3

On site

2.8

148

102

0.5

On site

2.8

131

0.5

On site

2.8

228

157

0.3

On site

2.8

264

181

0.3

On site

2.8

232

159

0.3

On site

2.8

185

127

0.4

On site

2.8

113

0.5

On site

2.8

109

0.5

On site

2.8

108

0.5

On site

2.8

108

0.5

100

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

131

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Arsenic (mg/kg)

Bioaccessible Arsenic (mg/kg)

Lead (mg/kg )

Bioaccessible Lead (mg/kg)

Cadmium Chromiu (mg/kg) m (mg/kg)

Copper (mg/kg)

Nickel Tin (mg/kg) (mg/k g)

On site

159

109

0.5

On site

180

124

0.4

On site

3.2

136

0.5

On site

3.2

171

117

0.4

On site

3.2

172

118

0.4

On site

3.5

122

0.6

10m NE

2.1

0.5

13m SE

2.6

132

0.4

17m E

2.5

0.4

25m NE

2.5

101

0.5

26m SW

3.7

107

0.6

103

33m NE

2.3

0.5

34m N

2.5

115

0.5

36m W

2.5

154

106

0.5

39m S

2.6

191

131

0.3

39m SW

3.3

122

0.6

42m NW

2.5

150

103

0.5

43m S

155

106

0.4

44m S

2.6

178

122

0.3

47m SW

3.8

102

0.7

109

49m S

2.6

214

147

0.3

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

21.3 BGS Measured Urban Soil Chemistry Records within 50m

The locations and measured total concentrations (mg/kg) of Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Nickel, Lead, Tin and Zinc in urban topsoil samples from 23 urban centres across Great Britain. These are collected at a sample density of 4 per km2.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

132

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Location

Arsenic (mg/kg)

Cadmium (mg/kg)

Chromium (mg/kg)

Copper (mg/kg)

Nickel (mg/kg)

Lead (mg/kg)

Tin (mg/kg)

Sample Type

On site

16.1

0.3

63.1

61.5

25.9

270.2

15.9

Topsoil

On site

16.7

0.5

102.1

41.9

41.6

109.3

11.5

Topsoil

This data is sourced from the British Geological Survey.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

133

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

22 Railway infrastructure and projects 22.1 Underground railways (London) Records within 250m

Details of all active London Underground lines, including approximate tunnel roof depth and operational hours. This data is sourced from publicly available information by Groundsure.

22.2 Underground railways (Non-London) Records within 250m

Details of the Merseyrail system, the Tyne and Wear Metro and the Glasgow Subway. Not all parts of all systems are located underground. The data contains location information only and does not include a depth assessment. This data is sourced from publicly available information by Groundsure.

22.3 Railway tunnels Records within 250m

Railway tunnels taken from contemporary Ordnance Survey mapping. This data is sourced from the Ordnance Survey.

22.4 Historical railway and tunnel features Records within 250m

Railways and tunnels digitised from historical Ordnance Survey mapping as scales of 1:1,250, 1:2,500, 1:10,000 and 1:10,560. This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey/Groundsure.

22.5 Royal Mail tunnels Records within 250m

The Post Office Railway, otherwise known as the Mail Rail, is an underground railway running through Central London from Paddington Head District Sorting Office to Whitechapel Eastern Head Sorting Office. The line is 10.5km long. The data includes details of the full extent of the tunnels, the depth of the tunnel, and the depth to track level.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

134

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

This data is sourced from Groundsure/the Postal Museum.

22.6 Historical railways Records within 250m

Former railway lines, including dismantled lines, abandoned lines, disused lines, historic railways and razed lines. This data is sourced from OpenStreetMap.

22.7 Railways Records within 250m

Currently existing railway lines, including standard railways, narrow gauge, funicular, trams and light railways. This data is sourced from Ordnance Survey and OpenStreetMap.

22.8 Crossrail 1 Records within 500m

The Crossrail railway project links 41 stations over 100 kilometres from Reading and Heathrow in the west, through underground sections in central London, to Shenfield and Abbey Wood in the east. This data is sourced from publicly available information by Groundsure.

22.9 Crossrail 2 Records within 500m

Crossrail 2 is a proposed railway linking the national rail networks in Surrey and Hertfordshire via an underground tunnel through London. This data is sourced from publicly available information by Groundsure.

22.10 HS2 Records within 500m

HS2 is a proposed high speed rail network running from London to Manchester and Leeds via Birmingham. Main civils construction on Phase 1 (London to Birmingham) of the project began in 2019, and it is currently anticipated that this phase will be fully operational by 2026. Construction on Phase 2a (Birmingham to Crewe) is anticipated to commence in 2021, with the service fully operational by 2027. Construction on Phase 2b (Crewe to Manchester and Birmingham to Leeds) is scheduled to begin in 2023 and be operational by 2033. This data is sourced from HS2 ltd.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

135

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Ref: GS-1VM-K9D-5QE-MKM Your ref: GE21483-PO-6505 Grid ref: 554116 182008

Data providers Groundsure works with respected data providers to bring you the most relevant and accurate information. To find out who they are and their areas of expertise see https://www.groundsure.com/sources-reference ↗.

Terms and conditions Groundsure's Terms and Conditions can be accessed at this link: https://www.groundsure.com/terms-andconditions-april-2023/ ↗.

HOME

Date: 15 June 2023

136

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_1250_1_1 553975, 181759

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1992

Scale:

1:1,250

Printed at:

1:2,000

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_1250_1_2 553975, 182259

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1965

Scale:

1:1,250

Printed at:

1:2,000

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_1250_1_2 553975, 182259

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1974

Scale:

1:1,250

Printed at:

1:2,000

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_1250_1_2 553975, 182259

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1992

Scale:

1:1,250

Printed at:

1:2,000

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

1:1,250 Scale Grid Index

1:2,500 Scale Grid Index

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_Landline_1_1 554075, 181709

Map Name:

LandLine

Map date:

2003

Scale:

1:1,250

Printed at:

1:1,250

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_Landline_1_2 554075, 182009

Map Name:

LandLine

Map date:

2003

Scale:

1:1,250

Printed at:

1:1,250

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_Landline_1_3 554075, 182309

Map Name:

LandLine

Map date:

2003

Scale:

1:1,250

Printed at:

1:1,250

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_Landline_2_1 554375, 181709

Map Name:

LandLine

Map date:

2003

Scale:

1:1,250

Printed at:

1:1,250

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_Landline_2_2 554375, 182009

Map Name:

LandLine

Map date:

2003

Scale:

1:1,250

Printed at:

1:1,250

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_Landline_2_3 554375, 182309

Map Name:

LandLine

Map date:

2003

Scale:

1:1,250

Printed at:

1:1,250

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Landline Scale Grid Index

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_1 553912, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1866-1867

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_1 553912, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1866-1867

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_1 553912, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1867

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_1 553912, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1897

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_1 553912, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1920

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_1 553912, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1939

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_1 553912, 181696

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1961-1966

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_1 553912, 181696

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1965-1966

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_1 553912, 181696

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1992

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1864-1867

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1897

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1920

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1939

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1965

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1961-1966

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1973

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1974

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1992

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1992

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_1_2 553912, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1992

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_1 554537, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1866

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_1 554537, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1867

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_1 554537, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1867

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_1 554537, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1897

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_1 554537, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1920

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_1 554537, 181696

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1939

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_1 554537, 181696

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1961-1965

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_1 554537, 181696

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1992

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1864-1867

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1897

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1920

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1939

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1961

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1965

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1973

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1974

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1992

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1992

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U_LS_2_2 554537, 182321

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1992

Scale:

1:2,500

Printed at:

1:2,500

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1862-1866

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1869

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1895

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1895

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1895

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1895-1898

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1907

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1915

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1921

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1921

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1921

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1931

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1938

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1938

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1938

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1938

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

County Series

Map date:

1951

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

Provisional

Map date:

1954-1955

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

Provisional

Map date:

1967

Scale:

1:10,560

Printed at:

1:10,560

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1973-1974

Scale:

1:10,000

Printed at:

1:10,000

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

1987-1992

Scale:

1:10,000

Printed at:

1:10,000

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

2001

Scale:

1:10,000

Printed at:

1:10,000

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

2010

Scale:

1:10,000

Printed at:

1:10,000

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

Site Details:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Rainham, RM13 9FL

Client Ref: Report Ref: Grid Ref:

GE21483-PO-6505 GS-F6E-KIM-6XC-94U 554225, 182009

Map Name:

National Grid

Map date:

2023

Scale:

1:10,000

Printed at:

1:10,000

N W

Produced by Groundsure Insights T: 08444 159000 E: info@groundsure.com W: www.groundsure.com © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035207

Production date:

15 June 2023

Map legend available at: www.groundsure.com/sites/default/files/groundsure_legend.pdf

APPENDIX B Site Photographs (Selection)

TP101

TP101 Spoil

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP101 Spoil – landfill materials

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP102 Spoil TP102 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP102 Spoil – landfill materials

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP103 Shallow Spoil

TP103 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP103 Spoil

IMG_TP103 Spoil

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP104 Spoil TP104 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP104 Spoil (shallow)

TP104 Spoil (deep) GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP105 TP105 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP105 Spoil

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP106 Spoil TP106 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP106 Spoil – concrete boulder, odorous material

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP106 Spoil

TP107 Spoil TP107 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP107 Spoil

TP107 Iridescent lilac coating

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP107 Spoil

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP108 Spoil TP108 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP108 Spoil TP108 Spoil – burned material GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP109 TP109 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP109 Spoil

TP109 Spoil – evidence of subsurface fires

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP110 Spoil TP110 – water at base GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP110 Spoil

TP110 Spoil – strong hydrocarbon odour

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP111 TP111 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP111 Spoil

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP112 Spoil TP112 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP112 Spoil

TP112 Spoil – landfill materials at base

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP113 Spoil TP113 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

TP113 Spoil

TP113 Spoil – landfill materials at base

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

WS101

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

WS102 WS102 GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

WS103

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

WS104

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

WS105

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

WS106a

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

WS107c

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

WS108b

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

WS109

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

WS110

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

Surface tipped materials near TP111

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

Evidence of surface fires near TP111

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

Smouldering surface materials near TP110

Smouldering surface material near TP110

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

Surface tipped materials near WS107

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

Suspected ACM on track near TP105

Surface materials on track near TP105

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

Suspected ACM on track between TP103 and TP104

Surface materials on track between TP103 and TP104

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

Surface materials on track to TP107

Surface materials on track to TP101/WS109s

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

Surface materials on track to WS107s

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

View of compound from main track

View looking southwest from bund between TP102 and TP105

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

View east from track towards TP103

View looking north/northeast from track to TP104

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

View looking west from track to TP105

View southwest from steep bund on centre of site (north of TP107)

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

Trench in centre of site

20230919_152354

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

View looking west from TP109 (bund followed by drop)

View looking north from north of WS106s

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

View looking west from north of WS106s

GE21483 - Arnold's Field, Launders Lane

Drilling WS102

APPENDIX C Exploratory Hole Logs and Cross Sections

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

18/09/2023 Northing:

554213.9

Weather: Dry

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

182222.2

FINAL Date Printed:

Tracked

Hole Termination:

Sample ID

Test Result

TP101

Status:

Plant Used:

14.16mOD

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides unstable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Brown silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Cobbles and boulders of concrete and brick. Tyres and plastic throughout.

(0.80) 0.50

ES1

0.5

13.36

0.80 (0.40)

12.96

1.20

Landfill materials: 50% soil 20% plastic 5% timber, metal pipes, plastic pipes and rope throughout. Soil is gravelly SAND, gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint.

1.0

Landfill materials: 70% plastic, 5% timber, metals cans, brick, hessian materials, cladding, cables, ceramics, plastic bottles, shoes, foam, car parts underlay and car registration, cassettes, paper labels, metal, tree trunk, carpets, metal wire, vegetable tray and netting. Hydrocarbon and organic odour.

1.5

2.0

(2.00)

2.5

at 2.80m bgl - Canister at 2.90m bgl - Metal drum

3.00

ES2

3.0

10.96

3.20

End of Trial Pit at 3.20m

3.5

Dimensions:

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.20m

Final Width:

2.50m

Final Length:

4.10m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

18/09/2023 Northing:

554199.6

Weather: Rainy

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

182142.3

15.51mOD

Sample ID

0.20

Test Result

TP102

Status:

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Tracked

Hole Termination:

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides unstable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Brown silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Boulders and cobbles of concrete and brick. Cement bag, cassettes tapes and a cd player.

ES1 (0.70)

0.5

14.81

0.70

14.71

0.80

Dark brown gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick. Timber present. Landfill materials: 70% plastic bags, 1% soil, 5% timber and 2% building foam. Shoes, bricks, blue plastic drum, metal, cabling, plastic ducting, tree branch, hangar, plastic bottles, drinks cans, netting, fabric, doormat, broken glass, paper, plumbing pipe, duvet and hessian sacks.

1.0

1.5

2.0

(2.60)

2.5

3.0

12.11

3.40

End of Trial Pit at 3.40m 3.5

Dimensions:

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.40m

Final Width:

1.70m

Final Length:

3.60m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

18/09/2023 Northing:

554332.5

Weather: Dry

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

182264.6

15.98mOD

Sample ID

Test Result

TP103

Status:

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Tracked

Hole Termination:

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Localised spalling

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Greyish brown ashy gravelly SILT. Gravels are fine to coarse brick.

(0.40) 15.58

0.75

0.40

Brown slightly clayey silty fine SAND. Gravels of brick, concrete, suspected Asbestos Containing Material (cement), slate, ceramics tiles and timber. Cobbles and boulders of concrete.

ES1 (1.10)

14.48

2.05

0.5

1.50

1.0

Black very clayey very gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Tiles and textiles.

1.5

2.0

ES2

at 2.30m bgl - Concrete boulder

(2.00)

2.5

3.0

at 3.40m bgl - Greenish tinge to concrete

3.50

ES3

12.48

3.50

Dimensions:

End of Trial Pit at 3.50m

3.5

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.50m

Final Width:

1.70m

Final Length:

4.60m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

18/09/2023 Northing:

554350.2

Weather: Dry

Logged By:

Checked By:

CG Ground Level:

182161.4

15.64mOD

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Tracjed

Hole Termination:

Sample ID

0.00

Test Result

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Localised spalling

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

TP104

Status:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Light grey ashy gravelly SILT. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Plastic bags.

(0.40) 15.24

0.40

Brown gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Cobbles and boulders of brick and concrete. Tiles and a metal bucket.

0.5

1.0

(1.40)

1.5

13.84

1.80

Brown gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse flint.

(0.30) 13.54

2.10

2.0

Greyish brown sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse chalk, flint and brick.

2.5

(1.20)

3.00 - 3.20

3.30

ES1

3.0

12.34

3.30

End of Trial Pit at 3.30m

3.5

Dimensions:

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.30m

Final Width:

1.50m

Final Length:

4.00m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

19/09/2023 Northing:

554267.1

Weather: Dry

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

182138.5

15.68mOD

Sample ID

Test Result

TP105

Status:

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Tracked

Hole Termination:

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides unstable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Brown slightly silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Cobbles of brick and concrete. Boulders of concrete. Plastic fragments, plastic bags, nondegraded timber. Bricks more abundant below 2.5m bgl.

0.5

1.0

1.5

(3.30)

2.0

2.30

ES1 2.5

3.0

3.20

ES2 12.38

3.30

Between 3.20m and 3.30m bgl - Black, hydrocarbon odour, hydrocarbon sheen impacted material.

End of Trial Pit at 3.30m

3.5

Dimensions:

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.30m

Final Width:

1.40m

Final Length:

3.60m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

19/09/2023 Northing:

554263.7

Weather: Drywindy

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

182101.7

15.97mOD

Sample ID

0.00 - 1.80

Test Result

TP106

Status:

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Tracked

Hole Termination:

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides unstable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Light brown slightly silty gravelly fine SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, flint, tarmac and concrete. Cobbles and boulders of brick and concrete. Some plastic debris, bags, metal.

0.5

(1.80) 1.0

1.5

14.17

1.80

Black gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse, flint and brick. Organic odour. At 1.80m bgl. - Concrete boulder 1m x 0.7m.

2.20

2.0

ES1 (1.20) 2.5

12.97

3.00 (0.40)

12.57

Brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete, cobbles and boulders of brick and concrete. Timber and metals car parts.

3.40

3.0

End of Trial Pit at 3.40m 3.5

Dimensions:

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.40m

Final Width:

1.50m

Final Length:

4.70m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

19/09/2023 Northing:

554167.2

Weather: Dry, windy

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

182067.6

19.25mOD

Sample ID

Test Result

TP107

Status:

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Tracked

Hole Termination:

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides stable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Greyish brown ashy silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick flint and concrete.

(0.40) 18.85

0.40

Brown clayey gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Cobbles and boulders of brick and concrete. Suspected Asbestos Containing Materials (cement).

0.5

(0.60)

18.25

1.00

Black gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Decomposed timber and metal. Organic odour.

1.0

(0.60) 1.5

17.65 1.80

ES1

1.60

Lilac iridescent fine to coarse GRAVELS of concrete and clinker.

(0.40) 17.25

2.00

Dark grey silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Plastic glove and hessian sack.

2.0

2.5

(1.75) 3.0

3.5

3.70

ES2

15.50

3.75

Dimensions:

End of Trial Pit at 3.75m

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.75m

Final Width:

1.50m

Final Length:

3.30m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

19/09/2023 Northing:

554227.9

Weather: Dry, windy

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

182105.7

17.89mOD

Sample ID

Test Result

TP108

Status:

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Tracked

Hole Termination:

Sheet 1 of 2 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides unstable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Brown silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Locally black and ashy. Plastic pipe, metal pipe, glass bottles, charred plastic and metal.

0.5

1.0

Between 1.00m and 1.30m bgl - Pocket of charred materials.

(2.50)

1.5

2.0

Black clayey gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Metal and plastic.

15.39

2.50

2.5

(1.10)

3.0

14.69

3.20

Brown clayey gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Cobbles and boulders of brick and concrete. Timber. 3.5

Dimensions:

Photo:

Final Depth:

4.50m

Final Width:

1.70m

Final Length:

3.80m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

19/09/2023 Northing:

554227.9

Weather: Dry, windy

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

182105.7

17.89mOD

Sample ID

Test Result

FINAL Date Printed:

Tracked

Sheet 2 of 2 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides unstable

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

(1.30)

4.40

TP108

Status:

Plant Used:

Hole Termination:

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Brown clayey gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Cobbles and boulders of brick and concrete. Timber.

4.0

ES1 13.39

4.50

End of Trial Pit at 4.50m

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

Dimensions:

Photo:

Final Depth:

4.50m

Final Width:

1.70m

Final Length:

3.80m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins)

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

19/09/2023 Northing:

554084.2

Weather: Windy

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

181886.5

FINAL Date Printed:

Hole Termination:

Sample ID

Test Result

TP109

Status:

Plant Used:

15.71mOD

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides stable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Brown slightly clayey gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Metal, ceramic pipe, plastic and cabling.

0.5

1.0

(2.10)

1.5

1.70

ES1

2.10

ES2

2.0

13.61

2.10

Black gravelly clayey SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Abundant plastic bags, plastic bottles and timber (partially decomposed).

2.5

(1.00)

3.0

12.61

3.10

Brown and black clayey very gravelly SAND. Gravel is fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Metal, plastic and timber, and paper.

(0.50) 3.5

12.11

3.60

Dimensions:

End of Trial Pit at 3.60m

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.60m

Final Width:

0.00m

Final Length:

0.00m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

20/09/2023 Northing:

554230.5

Weather: Windy

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

181680.1

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Hole Termination:

Sample ID

Test Result

TP110

Status:

Tracked

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides unstable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

0.10

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Dark brown very silty GRAVEL. Gravels are coarse tarmac. Dark brown silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete, tarmac and flint. Limited plastic material.

0.5

0.70

(1.15)

ES1

1.0

1.25

Dark grey gravelly sand CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Decomposed timber. Cobbles and boulders of brick and concrete. Polystyrene, plastic and metal. 1.5

2.0

(2.15) 2.5

3.0

3.40

ES2

3.50

EW0

3.40 (0.30)

Black and grey gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Glass bottles and timber. Strong hydrocarbon odour.

3.70

End of Trial Pit at 3.70m

Dimensions:

3.5

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.70m

Final Width:

1.60m

Final Length:

4.00m

Remarks

Termination due to instability.

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

20/09/2023 Northing:

554091.2

Weather: Windy

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

181787.5

9.42mOD

Sample ID

Test Result

TP111

Status:

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Tracked

Hole Termination:

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides unstable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Landfill materials: 70% plastic,15% textiles, metal, timber and concrete.

(0.50)

8.92 0.60

ES1

0.50 (0.30)

8.62

0.80

Brown silty slightly gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse flint. Occasional brick.

0.5

Black and brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse subangular to rounded flint. 1.0

(1.10) 1.5

7.52

1.90

Greyish brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse subangular to rounded flint.

2.0

2.5

(1.80) 3.0

3.5

3.70

ES2

5.72

3.70

Dimensions:

End of Trial Pit at 3.70m

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.70m

Final Width:

1.50m

Final Length:

3.90m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

20/09/2023 Northing:

554205.0

Weather: Windy

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

181907.7

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Hole Termination:

Sample ID

Test Result

TP112

Status:

Tracked

Sheet 1 of 2 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides stable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Brown silty fine gravelly SAND. Gravels of concrete and brick and flint. Cobbles of brick and flint. Rootlets and rebar

(0.40) 0.40

Brown silty fine gravelly SAND. Gravels of concrete and brick and flint. Cobbles of brick and flint. Boulder of brick and concrete. Plastic bags and metal.

0.5

(0.70)

1.0

1.10 1.20

ES1

Brown silty fine gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravels of concrete, brick and flint. Cobbles of brick and flint. Boulder of brick and concrete.

(0.50) 1.5

1.60

Grey silty fine gravelly SAND. Gravels of concrete, brick and flint. Cobbles of brick and concrete. Non decomposed timber, bike pedal and ceramic tiles. Organic odour.

2.0

2.5

(2.10)

3.0

3.5

3.70

Dimensions:

Landfill materials: plastic bags 85%, textiles 5%, plastic bottles, metal, timber 5%, paper, plastic car parts, plastic buckets, suspected Asbestos Containing Materials (cement) and a Quavers multi pack best before 12/03/2011.

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.90m

Final Width:

1.40m

Final Length:

3.70m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

20/09/2023 Northing:

554205.0

Weather: Windy

Logged By:

Checked By:

CG Ground Level:

181907.7

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Tracked

Hole Termination:

Sample ID

3.90

ES2

Test Result

Sheet 2 of 2 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides stable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

TP112

Status:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

3.90

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Landfill materials: plastic bags 85%, textiles 5%, plastic bottles, metal, timber 5%, paper, plastic car parts, plastic buckets, suspected Asbestos Containing Materials (cement) and a Quavers multi pack best before 12/03/2011.

4.0

End of Trial Pit at 3.90m

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

Dimensions:

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.90m

Final Width:

1.40m

Final Length:

3.70m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins)

Backfill

Contract Name:

Client:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Date Started:

GE21483 Easting:

Trial Pit Log

20/09/2023 Northing:

554139.2

Weather: Windy

Logged By:

CG Ground Level:

181948.9

FINAL

Plant Used:

Date Printed:

Hole Termination:

Sample ID

Test Result

TP113

Status:

Tracked

Sheet 1 of 1 Scale:

17/11/2023

1:25

Stability: Sides stable

Samples & In Situ Testing Depths

Checked By:

Strata Details Reduced Level

Depth (m) (Thickness)

Legend

Water

Contract Number:

Trial Pit ID:

London Borough of Havering Council

Strata Description Brown silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Timber.

(1.00)

1.00

0.5

Black ashy silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint. Textiles, timber, timber sleeper, glass, plastic bag, plastic bottles, netting and packing tape.

1.0

Pocket of grey clay

1.5

2.0

(2.30)

2.5

3.0

3.30

ES1

3.30

End of Trial Pit at 3.30m

3.5

Dimensions:

Photo:

Final Depth:

3.30m

Final Width:

1.50m

Final Length:

4.20m

Remarks

Water Strikes (mbgl) Depth Strike

Rose to

Time Elapsed (mins) PhotoofPit

PhotoofSpoil

Backfill

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location:

Rainham

Level:

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

Well

Water Strikes

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Co-ords:

Level (m)

Legend

554259E - 182004N

21/09/2023

WS101 Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Brown very gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete.

0.30 0.50

Concrete COBBLES. Black gravelly sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Cobbles of concrete and brick. Plastic and fibreglass.

2.40

End of Borehole at 2.40m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location:

Rainham

Level:

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

Well

Water Strikes

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Co-ords:

Level (m)

554234E - 181966N

21/09/2023

Legend

WS102 Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Black sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, flint and concrete. Decomposed timber and plastic.

0.50

Greyish brown silty slightly sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Locally brown. Becoming very sandy below 1.2m bgl.

Ashy byproduct

2 2.10

Brown mottled grey soft slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to medium surrounded to subangular flint.

4 4.20

4.70 - 4.90

5.00 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Grey silty gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, chalk and flint. Timber.

Rose To

End of Borehole at 5.00m

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location:

Rainham

Level:

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

Well

Water Strikes

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m) 0.05 0.10

0.60

Co-ords:

Level (m)

554234E - 181684N

21/09/2023

Legend

WS103 Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Brown silty fine SAND. Tarmac. Brown silty slightly clayey gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, flint and concrete. Cobbles of brick and concrete.

Greyish brown silty gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete. Becomes sandy below 0.8m.

1 1.20

Dark grey silty sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Grey sand

2.00

2.30

Brown silty slightly clayey gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, flint and concrete.

Dark grey silty sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint. Locally black. Decomposed timber.

4.00

5.00 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Wet dark grey and black very sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint. Timber.

End of Borehole at 5.00m

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554162E - 181815N

Rainham

Level:

15.24

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

21/09/2023

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS104 Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Grass overlying brown slightly silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint.

0.80

14.44

Brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, tarmac and concrete. Cobbles of concrete. Fine timber fragments. Becoming brown and grey below 0.9m.

Slag/clinker

2 2.10

13.14

Brownish grey silty sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Glass. Ceramic tiles. Timber. Becoming less grey below 4m bgl.

Degraded organic materials

5.00 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

10.24

End of Borehole at 5.00m

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554032E - 181870N

Rainham

Level:

12.57

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

21/09/2023

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS105 Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint. Broken glass, clinker and plastic. Rootlets Cobbles of concrete.

2.80

9.77

Brownish grey sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete, tarmac and flint. 3

5.00 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

7.57

End of Borehole at 5.00m

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location:

Rainham

Level:

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

Well

Water Strikes

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Co-ords:

Level (m)

Legend

553999E - 181932N

21/09/2023

WS106 Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Brown slightly silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Glass and plastic.

0.60

Brown sandy very gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Cobbles of concrete, brick and flint.

1.30

Brownish grey sandy very gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete, slate and flint. Rare cobbles of brick and flint.

Possible sandstone cobble

2.00 2.20

Brown sandy very gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint.

End of Borehole at 2.20m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

553994E - 181929N

Rainham

Level:

8.87

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

21/09/2023

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS106a Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Brown slightly silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Glass and plastic.

0.70 0.90

8.17

Brown sandy very gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Occasional cobbles of brick and concrete. Hessian fibres and timber. 1

1.20

7.67

Brownish grey silty sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete, flint, tarmac and clinker. Occasional cobbles of concrete and brick. Timber.

2 Greyish brown

Brown

4.50

Suspected asbestos fragment

5.00 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

3.87

End of Borehole at 5.00m

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554095E - 182090N

Rainham

Level:

11.83

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

0.10

11.73

0.65

11.18

Legend

WS107 Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By

Stratum Description Brown clayey gravelly sand. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and flint. Brown gravelly sand. Gravels of brick, concrete and flint. Cobbles of concrete and brick.

End of Borehole at 0.65m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Obstruc on at 0.65m

Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554092E - 182088N

Rainham

Level:

11.75

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

22/09/2023

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

0.10

11.65

0.65

11.10

Legend

WS107a Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By

Stratum Description Brown clayey gravelly sand. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and flint. Brown gravelly sand. Gravels of brick, concrete and flint. Cobbles of concrete and brick.

End of Borehole at 0.65m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Obstruc on at 0.65m

Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location:

Rainham

Level:

Client:

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

Well

Water Strikes

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m) 0.10

0.50

Co-ords:

Level (m)

Legend

554101E - 182091N

22/09/2023

WS107b Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Brown clayey gravelly sand. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and flint. Brown gravelly sand. Gravels of brick, concrete and flint. Cobbles of concrete and brick.

End of Borehole at 0.50m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554111E - 182086N

Rainham

Level:

13.14

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

22/09/2023

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS107c Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Brown clayey gravelly sand. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint.

0.30

12.84

1.00

12.14

Brown clayey very gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint. Becoming very clayey with depth. Cobbles of brick and concrete.

Dark grey sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete, flint, coal and clinker. Tarry odour. Decayed timber.

2.30 - 2.50

Black gravelly sandy CLAY.

4.30 - 4.50

5.00 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

8.14

End of Borehole at 5.00m

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554143E - 182140N

Rainham

Level:

12.50

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS108 Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By

Stratum Description Brown very gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint. Plastic.

0.50

12.00

End of Borehole at 0.50m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Obstruc on at 0.5m

Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554142E - 182139N

Rainham

Level:

12.51

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS108a Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By

Stratum Description Brown very gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint.

0.50

12.01

End of Borehole at 0.50m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Obstruc on at 0.5m

Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554139E - 182141N

Rainham

Level:

12.58

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

22/09/2023

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS108b Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Brown very gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick and concrete and flint. Plastic.

1 1.10

11.48

2.10

10.48

Brown clayey gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete, chalk and flint. Glass.

2.50

Brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete, flint and slate. Polystyrene, timber.

Very sandy

5.00 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

7.58

End of Borehole at 5.00m

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554238E - 182279N

Rainham

Level:

14.77

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS109 Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By

Stratum Description Brown very gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint.

0.50

14.27

End of Borehole at 0.50m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Obstruc on at 0.5m

Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554235E - 182275N

Rainham

Level:

14.23

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS109a Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By

Stratum Description Brown very gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint.

0.50

13.73

End of Borehole at 0.50m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Obstruc on at 0.5m

Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554254E - 182275N

Rainham

Level:

14.62

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

22/09/2023

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS109b Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Brown very gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint.

0.70

13.92

Brown very gravelly very sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. 1

1.50

2.30

12.32

2.70

11.92

Brown very gravelly slightly sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint.

Brown very gravelly slightly sandy CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Plastic. 3

3.20

11.42

End of Borehole at 3.20m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Status FINAL

Unit 7, Danworth Farm Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL www.gesl.net Project Name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane

Location: Client: Well

Water Strikes

Borehole No.

Borehole Log Project No. GE21483

Co-ords:

554365E - 182289N

Rainham

Level:

14.71

London Borough of Havering Council

Dates:

22/09/2023

Sample and In Situ Testing Depth (m)

Type

Results

Depth (m)

Level (m)

Legend

WS110 Sheet 1 of 1 Hole Type WLS Scale 1:25 Logged By CG

Stratum Description Brown gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete and flint. Cobbles of brick and concrete.

0.30

14.41

0.90

13.81

1.50

13.21

Brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, flint and chalk.

Brown slightly silty gravelly SAND. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete, flint and chalk.

Greyish brown sandy gravelly CLAY. Gravels are fine to coarse brick, concrete, flint and chalk.

4.00

10.71

End of Borehole at 4.00m

5 Dynamic Sampling Run Details

Water Strike Details (mbgl)

Depth Top Depth Base Diameter Depth Strike

Rose To

Remarks Status FINAL

Title: Section line 1 (WS106A, WS105, TP109, WS104) Vertical Scale: 1:146 Horizontal Scale: 1:1245 Engineer: CG

WS104

TP109

Project Id: GE21483 Project Title: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Location: Rainham Client: London Borough of Havering Council

15 0.80

WS105

14 2.10 2.10

3.10 3.60

WS106a

0.70

1.20

5.00

WS106

Legend Key

5.00 2.80

MADE GROUND 0 TOPSOIL

0.60

-1

-1 1.30

-2

WS106 excluded as unable to survey location in -2

18.64 106.17

10.04 211.57 214.79

15.71

15.24

74.69 26.59 12.57

8.87 11.20 2.92 2.31

Elevation (mAOD)

Chainage (m)

0.00

Offset (m)

8.87

2.00 2.20

Project Id: GE21483 Project Title: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Location: Rainham Client: London Borough of Havering Council

Title: Section line 2 (WS110, TP103, TP105, TP108, TP107) Vertical Scale: 1:77 Horizontal Scale: 1:1777 Engineer: CG

TP107

TP108

0.40

1.00

18 1.60 2.00

TP105

TP103

0.40

WS110

3.75

2.50

15 3.20 1.50

0.30

14 0.90 4.50 1.50

3.50

Legend Key

3.30

MADE GROUND

13.29 232.23

7.37

17.89

19.25

306.79

21.31 181.72 15.68

300.82

12.24 15.98

43.68

3.56

Elevation (mAOD)

Chainage (m)

0.00 4.09

Offset (m)

14.71

4.00

Project Id: GE21483 Project Title: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane Location: Rainham Client: London Borough of Havering Council

Title: Section line 3 (WS107, WS108, TP102, TP105, TP104)

TP104

TP102

TP105

Vertical Scale: 1:131 Horizontal Scale: 1:1692 Engineer: CG

0.40

WS107a WS107

WS107 and WS107A 13

0.30

1.00

0.50 0.50

1.80 2.10

13 3.30

0.10 0.10

WS108, WS108A and WS108B

0.70 0.80

WS108b WS108a WS108

WS107c

3.30

3.40

1.10

0.65 0.65

11 2.10

5.00

8 5.00

WS107b

TOPSOIL 1

0.10

19.04 16.99 17.84

5.71

14.81 187.24

13.40 273.39

12.58 12.51 12.50

15.51

15.68

15.64

22.82 26.72

14.19 19.57

11.75 11.83

13.14

5.05 8.65 20.49 19.00

Elevation (mAOD)

0.00

Offset (m)

Chainage (m)

291.99

WS107B excluded as unable to survey position in

0.50

122.78

MADE GROUND

63.97 65.88 67.19

Legend Key

APPENDIX D Geochemical Laboratory Testing (Soils)

Laura Legate Geo-Environmental Services Ltd Unit 7, Danworth Farm Cuckfield Road Hurstpierpoint West Sussex BN6 9GL

i2 Analytical Ltd. 7 Woodshots Meadow, Croxley Green Business Park, Watford, Herts, WD18 8YS

t: 01273 832972

t: 01923 225404 f: 01923 237404 e: reception@i2analytical.com

e: laura.legate@gesl.net

Analytical Report Number : 23-57983-2 Replaces Analytical Report Number: 23-57983, issue no. 1 Additional analysis undertaken. Asbestos Quantification added as per cleints request Project / Site name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering

Samples received on:

21/09/2023

Your job number:

GE21483

Samples instructed on/ Analysis started on:

21/09/2023

Your order number:

PO6790

Analysis completed by:

09/10/2023

Report Issue Number:

Report issued on:

10/10/2023

Samples Analysed:

4 bulk samples - 20 soil samples

Signed: Anna Goc PL Head of Reporting Team For & on behalf of i2 Analytical Ltd. Standard Geotechnical, Asbestos and Chemical Testing Laboratory located at: ul. Pionierów 39, 41-711 Ruda Śląska, Poland. Accredited tests are defined within the report, opinions and interpretations expressed herein are outside the scope of accreditation. Standard sample disposal times, unless otherwise agreed with the laboratory, are :

soils - 4 weeks from reporting leachates - 2 weeks from reporting waters - 2 weeks from reporting asbestos - 6 months from reporting

Excel copies of reports are only valid when accompanied by this PDF certificate.

Any assessments of compliance with specifications are based on actual analytical results with no contribution from uncertainty of measurement. Application of uncertainty of measurement would provide a range within which the true result lies. An estimate of measurement uncertainty can be provided on request.

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 1 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820305

2820306

2820307

2820309

Sample Reference

TP101

TP102

TP103

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820310

0.75

3.50

18/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Accreditation Status

0.20

18/09/2023

Limit of detection

3.00

18/09/2023

Units

0.50

Date Sampled

Stone Content

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Moisture Content

0.01

NONE

5.8

6.3

5.6

Total mass of sample received

0.001

NONE

1.3

0.7

0.8

Asbestos in Soil Screen / Identification Name

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

Asbestos in Soil

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

Not-detected

Asbestos Quantification (Stage 2)

0.001

ISO 17025

Asbestos Quantification Total

0.001

ISO 17025

Asbestos Analyst ID

N/A

ASE

MWI

N/A

pH - Automated

pH Units

N/A

MCERTS

8.7

7.3

7.9

Total Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Complex Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Free Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Water Soluble Sulphate as SO4 16hr extraction (2:1) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent)

mg/kg

2.5

MCERTS

4800

3500

g/l

0.00125

MCERTS

2.41

1.76

1.73

mg/l

1.25

MCERTS

2410

1760

1730

Sulphide

mg/kg

MCERTS

140

Water Soluble Chloride (2:1)

mg/kg

MCERTS

360

Elemental Sulphur

mg/kg

MCERTS

690

190

< 5.0

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N

mg/kg

0.5

MCERTS

120

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) - Automated

0.1

MCERTS

1.6

1.7

1.5

1.4

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) – Manual

0.1

MCERTS

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.12

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.13

0.27

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.4

0.61

7.3

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.1

0.74

9.4

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

7.1

7.6

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.3

1.7

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

8.7

9.2

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

7.3

7.4

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

4.2

Chrysene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

4.1

3.7

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

5.3

4.7

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

1.7

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

3.5

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.9

1.7

9.7

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.53

0.48

2.1

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

2.1

1.8

9.5

mg/kg

0.8

ISO 17025

52.7

422

General Inorganics

Total Phenols Total Phenols (monohydric) Speciated PAHs

Total PAH Speciated Total EPA-16 PAHs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 2 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820305

2820306

2820307

2820309

Sample Reference

TP101

TP102

TP103

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820310

0.50

3.00

0.20

0.75

3.50

Date Sampled

18/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Antimony (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

ISO 17025

Arsenic (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Beryllium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.06

MCERTS

0.77

0.94

0.87

Boron (water soluble)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

3.4

1.7

Cadmium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

0.9

Chromium (hexavalent)

mg/kg

1.8

MCERTS

< 1.8

Chromium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Copper (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Lead (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

220

180

Manganese (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Mercury (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

0.6

0.5

0.3

Nickel (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Selenium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Vanadium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Zinc (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

240

150

190

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC5 - EC6 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC6 - EC8 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 2.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 8.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

< 8.4

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

NONE

mg/kg

NONE

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC5 - EC7 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC7 - EC8 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

1.3

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

2.8

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

230

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

190

TPH-CWG - Aromatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

9.6

TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

NONE

460

mg/kg

NONE

490

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Heavy Metals / Metalloids

Monoaromatics & Oxygenates

Petroleum Hydrocarbons

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 3 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820305

2820306

2820307

2820309

Sample Reference

TP101

TP102

TP103

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820310

0.50

3.00

0.20

0.75

3.50

Date Sampled

18/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Chloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Chloroethane

µg/kg

NONE

Bromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Vinyl Chloride

µg/kg

NONE

Trichlorofluoromethane

µg/kg

NONE

1,1-dichloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

1,1,2-Trichloro 1,2,2-Trifluoroethane

µg/kg

NONE

Trans 1,2-dichloroethylene

µg/kg

NONE

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

1,1-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

2,2-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Chloroform

µg/kg

NONE

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,1-Dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Cis-1,2-dichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

Carbontetrachloride

µg/kg

NONE

1,2-dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Trichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Dibromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Bromodichloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Cis-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Trans-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,3-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Dibromochloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Tetrachloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

1,2-Dibromoethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Chlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

Styrene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Bromoform

µg/kg

NONE

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

Isopropylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Bromobenzene

µg/kg

NONE

N-Propylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

2-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

4-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Tert-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Sec-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,3-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

P-Isopropyltoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,4-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

VOCs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 4 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820305

2820306

2820307

2820309

Sample Reference

TP101

TP102

TP103

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820310

0.50

3.00

0.20

0.75

3.50

Date Sampled

18/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Units

Limit of detection

Butylbenzene

µg/kg

NONE

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Hexachlorobutadiene

µg/kg

NONE

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

Aniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Phenol

mg/kg

0.2

ISO 17025

2-Chlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

1,3-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

2-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Hexachloroethane

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Nitrobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

4-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Isophorone

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

2-Nitrophenol

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

2,4-Dimethylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

2,4-Dichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

4-Chloroaniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Hexachlorobutadiene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Accreditation Status

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

VOCs TICs VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match

VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match

VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match SVOCs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 5 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820305

2820306

2820307

2820309

Sample Reference

TP101

TP102

TP103

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820310

0.50

3.00

0.20

0.75

3.50

Date Sampled

18/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

2-Methylnaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

2-Chloronaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

Dimethylphthalate

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Dibenzofuran

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Diethyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

4-Nitroaniline

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Azobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

Bromophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

Hexachlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Carbazole

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Dibutyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Anthraquinone

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Butyl benzyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Chrysene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

SVOCs TICs SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 6 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820305

2820306

2820307

2820309

Sample Reference

TP101

TP102

TP103

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820310

0.50

3.00

0.20

0.75

3.50

Date Sampled

18/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status NONE

N/A

NONE

PCB Congener 28

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 52

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.001

PCB Congener 101

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.001

PCB Congener 118

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.001

PCB Congener 138

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.002

PCB Congener 153

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.001

PCB Congener 180

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

mg/kg

0.007

MCERTS

< 0.007

Units

N/A %

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match PCBs by GC-MS

Total PCBs by GC-MS Total PCBs

U/S = Unsuitable Sample I/S = Insufficient Sample ND = Not detected

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 7 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820311

2820313

2820314

2820317

Sample Reference

TP104

TP105

TP106

TP107

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820318

2.20

1.80

19/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Accreditation Status

3.20-3.30

19/09/2023

Limit of detection

2.30

18/09/2023

Units

3.30

Date Sampled

Stone Content

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Moisture Content

0.01

NONE

8.1

Total mass of sample received

0.001

NONE

0.7

1.5

1.3

1.2

1.3

Asbestos in Soil Screen / Identification Name

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

Chrysotile

Amosite

Chrysotile

Asbestos in Soil

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

Not-detected

Detected

Asbestos Quantification (Stage 2)

0.001

ISO 17025

< 0.001

0.034

Asbestos Quantification Total

0.001

ISO 17025

< 0.001

0.034

Asbestos Analyst ID

N/A

MWI

N/A

WEM

SCA

pH - Automated

pH Units

N/A

MCERTS

9.7

7.8

8.8

Total Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

4.4

< 1.0

Complex Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Free Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Water Soluble Sulphate as SO4 16hr extraction (2:1) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent)

mg/kg

2.5

MCERTS

2400

1900

5400

1600

g/l

0.00125

MCERTS

1.22

0.962

2.68

0.804

mg/l

1.25

MCERTS

1220

962

2680

804

Sulphide

mg/kg

MCERTS

Water Soluble Chloride (2:1)

mg/kg

MCERTS

120

130

150

Elemental Sulphur

mg/kg

MCERTS

150

1100

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N

mg/kg

0.5

MCERTS

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) - Automated

0.1

MCERTS

2.4

1.3

2.1

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) – Manual

0.1

MCERTS

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

1.1

< 1.0

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.12

< 0.05

0.07

1.2

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.08

0.13

0.1

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.08

0.18

0.08

0.07

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.09

0.17

0.15

0.08

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.7

2.1

0.6

0.58

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.16

0.53

0.24

0.15

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.5

4.4

2.4

1.4

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.4

4.1

2.1

1.3

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.86

2.5

1.3

0.88

Chrysene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.83

2.3

1.3

0.91

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

1.2

3.5

1.4

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

0.42

1.2

0.69

0.45

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.87

2.7

1.3

0.97

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.51

1.3

0.81

0.55

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.15

0.35

0.23

0.18

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.55

1.5

0.91

0.65

mg/kg

0.8

ISO 17025

9.55

14.3

10.8

General Inorganics

Total Phenols Total Phenols (monohydric) Speciated PAHs

Total PAH Speciated Total EPA-16 PAHs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 8 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820311

2820313

2820314

2820317

Sample Reference

TP104

TP105

TP106

TP107

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820318

3.20-3.30

2.20

1.80

19/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

250

0.1

NONE

Antimony (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

ISO 17025

Arsenic (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Beryllium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.06

MCERTS

0.81

0.69

0.97

Boron (water soluble)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

5.8

3.1

4.4

3.6

Cadmium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

2.4

Chromium (hexavalent)

mg/kg

1.8

MCERTS

< 1.8

Chromium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Copper (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

150

4700

Lead (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

520

160

270

4400

Manganese (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

850

Mercury (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

5.3

0.6

0.8

1.9

Nickel (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Selenium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Vanadium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

100

Zinc (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

390

150

210

2000

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC5 - EC6 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC6 - EC8 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 2.0

5.5

< 2.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 8.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

180

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

< 8.4

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

NONE

220

mg/kg

NONE

280

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC5 - EC7 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC7 - EC8 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 2.0

3.3

< 2.0

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

100

TPH-CWG - Aromatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

< 8.4

TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

NONE

130

mg/kg

NONE

180

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Stone HeavyContent Metals / Metalloids

Accreditation Status

Limit of detection

2.30

18/09/2023

Units

3.30

Date Sampled

Monoaromatics & Oxygenates

Petroleum Hydrocarbons

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 9 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820311

2820313

2820314

2820317

Sample Reference

TP104

TP105

TP106

TP107

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820318

3.30

2.30

3.20-3.30

2.20

1.80

Date Sampled

18/09/2023

19/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Limit of detection

0.1

NONE

Chloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Chloroethane

µg/kg

NONE

Bromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Vinyl Chloride

µg/kg

NONE

Trichlorofluoromethane

µg/kg

NONE

1,1-dichloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

1,1,2-Trichloro 1,2,2-Trifluoroethane

µg/kg

NONE

Trans 1,2-dichloroethylene

µg/kg

NONE

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

1,1-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

2,2-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Chloroform

µg/kg

NONE

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,1-Dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Cis-1,2-dichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

Carbontetrachloride

µg/kg

NONE

1,2-dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Trichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Dibromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Bromodichloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Cis-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Trans-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,3-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Dibromochloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Tetrachloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

1,2-Dibromoethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Chlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

Styrene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Bromoform

µg/kg

NONE

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

Isopropylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Bromobenzene

µg/kg

NONE

N-Propylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

2-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

4-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Tert-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Sec-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,3-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

P-Isopropyltoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,4-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Accreditation Status

Units

Stone VOCs Content

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 10 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820311

2820313

2820314

2820317

Sample Reference

TP104

TP105

TP106

TP107

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820318

3.30

2.30

3.20-3.30

2.20

1.80

Date Sampled

18/09/2023

19/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Units

Limit of detection

Stone Content Butylbenzene

% µg/kg

0.1 5

NONE

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Hexachlorobutadiene

µg/kg

NONE

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

Aniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Phenol

mg/kg

0.2

ISO 17025

2-Chlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

1,3-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

2-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Hexachloroethane

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Nitrobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

4-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Isophorone

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

2-Nitrophenol

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

2,4-Dimethylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

2,4-Dichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

4-Chloroaniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Hexachlorobutadiene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Accreditation Status

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

VOCs TICs VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match

VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match

VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match SVOCs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 11 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820311

2820313

2820314

2820317

Sample Reference

TP104

TP105

TP106

TP107

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820318

3.30

2.30

3.20-3.30

2.20

1.80

Date Sampled

18/09/2023

19/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Stone Content 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

% mg/kg

0.1 0.2

NONE

2-Methylnaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

2-Chloronaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

Dimethylphthalate

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Dibenzofuran

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Diethyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

4-Nitroaniline

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Azobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

Bromophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

Hexachlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Carbazole

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Dibutyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Anthraquinone

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Butyl benzyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Chrysene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

SVOCs TICs SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 12 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820311

2820313

2820314

2820317

Sample Reference

TP104

TP105

TP106

TP107

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820318

3.30

2.30

3.20-3.30

2.20

1.80

Date Sampled

18/09/2023

19/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Stone Content SVOCs TICs Compound Name

0.1 N/A

NONE

SVOC % Match

N/A

NONE

PCB Congener 28

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.043

PCB Congener 52

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.011

PCB Congener 101

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.004

PCB Congener 118

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.003

PCB Congener 138

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.003

PCB Congener 153

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.002

PCB Congener 180

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.002

mg/kg

0.007

MCERTS

0.068

PCBs by GC-MS

Total PCBs by GC-MS Total PCBs

U/S = Unsuitable Sample I/S = Insufficient Sample ND = Not detected

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 13 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820319

2820320

2820321

2820322

Sample Reference

TP107

TP108

TP109

TP110

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820323

2.50

3.40

19/09/2023

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

< 0.1

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Accreditation Status

1.70

19/09/2023

Limit of detection

4.40

19/09/2023

Units

3.70

Date Sampled

Stone Content

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Moisture Content

0.01

NONE

9.3

9.1

7.7

Total mass of sample received

0.001

NONE

1.2

1.3

1.2

1.3

1.2

Asbestos in Soil Screen / Identification Name

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

Asbestos in Soil

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

Not-detected

Asbestos Quantification (Stage 2)

0.001

ISO 17025

Asbestos Quantification Total

0.001

ISO 17025

Asbestos Analyst ID

N/A

SCA

N/A

SCA

pH - Automated

pH Units

N/A

MCERTS

9.3

8.3

8.2

Total Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

U/S**

Complex Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Free Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Water Soluble Sulphate as SO4 16hr extraction (2:1) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent)

mg/kg

2.5

MCERTS

3400

1200

1500

g/l

0.00125

MCERTS

1.7

0.579

0.772

mg/l

1.25

MCERTS

1700

579

772

Sulphide

mg/kg

MCERTS

5.6

Water Soluble Chloride (2:1)

mg/kg

MCERTS

110

260

Elemental Sulphur

mg/kg

MCERTS

110

360

1200

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N

mg/kg

0.5

MCERTS

4.6

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) - Automated

0.1

MCERTS

1.2

0.9

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) – Manual

0.1

MCERTS

9.7

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

U/S**

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.09

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.13

0.07

5.2

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.24

0.12

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.41

0.09

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

4.3

0.85

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.1

0.24

7.1

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

6.9

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

5.8

1.8

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

3.3

1.2

5.3

Chrysene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

3.1

7.5

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

3.8

1.6

5.6

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

1.3

0.57

2.2

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

2.7

1.3

4.8

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.2

0.73

2.3

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.36

0.22

< 0.05

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.4

0.81

2.1

mg/kg

0.8

ISO 17025

36.1

12.7

159

General Inorganics

Total Phenols Total Phenols (monohydric) Speciated PAHs

Total PAH Speciated Total EPA-16 PAHs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 14 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820319

2820320

2820321

2820322

Sample Reference

TP107

TP108

TP109

TP110

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820323

3.70

4.40

1.70

2.50

3.40

Date Sampled

19/09/2023

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Limit of detection 0.1

NONE

mg/kg

ISO 17025

Arsenic (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

830

Beryllium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.06

MCERTS

0.76

0.81

0.84

Boron (water soluble)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

2.5

2.6

Cadmium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

Chromium (hexavalent)

mg/kg

1.8

MCERTS

< 1.8

U/S

Chromium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

110

Copper (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

230

Lead (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

110

120

570

Manganese (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Mercury (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

0.4

210

Nickel (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Selenium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Vanadium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Zinc (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

120

150

1200

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC5 - EC6 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC6 - EC8 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

3.3

< 2.0

1500

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 8.0

8500

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

15000

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

< 8.4

2400

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

NONE

25000

mg/kg

NONE

27000

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC5 - EC7 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC7 - EC8 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 2.0

560

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 10

4300

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

7500

TPH-CWG - Aromatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

1200

TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

NONE

12000

mg/kg

NONE

110

13000

Stone HeavyContent Metals / Metalloids

Accreditation Status

Units %

Antimony (aqua regia extractable)

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Monoaromatics & Oxygenates

Petroleum Hydrocarbons

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 15 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820319

2820320

2820321

2820322

Sample Reference

TP107

TP108

TP109

TP110

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820323

3.70

4.40

1.70

2.50

3.40

Date Sampled

19/09/2023

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Limit of detection

0.1

NONE

Chloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Chloroethane

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

Bromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Vinyl Chloride

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

Trichlorofluoromethane

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1-dichloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1,2-Trichloro 1,2,2-Trifluoroethane

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

Trans 1,2-dichloroethylene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

2,2-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Chloroform

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,1-Dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Cis-1,2-dichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Carbontetrachloride

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,2-dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Trichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Dibromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Bromodichloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Cis-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Trans-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,3-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Dibromochloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Tetrachloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,2-Dibromoethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Chlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Styrene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Bromoform

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Isopropylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Bromobenzene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

N-Propylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

2-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

4-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Tert-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Sec-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,3-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

P-Isopropyltoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,4-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Accreditation Status

Units

Stone VOCs Content

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 16 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820319

2820320

2820321

2820322

Sample Reference

TP107

TP108

TP109

TP110

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820323

3.70

4.40

1.70

2.50

3.40

Date Sampled

19/09/2023

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Units

Limit of detection

Stone Content Butylbenzene

% µg/kg

0.1 5

NONE

< 5.0

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Hexachlorobutadiene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

Aniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Phenol

mg/kg

0.2

ISO 17025

< 0.2

2-Chlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

1,3-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

2-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Hexachloroethane

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

< 0.05

Nitrobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

4-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Isophorone

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

2-Nitrophenol

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

2,4-Dimethylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.09

2,4-Dichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

4-Chloroaniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Hexachlorobutadiene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Accreditation Status

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

VOCs TICs VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match

VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match

VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match SVOCs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 17 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820319

2820320

2820321

2820322

Sample Reference

TP107

TP108

TP109

TP110

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820323

3.70

4.40

1.70

2.50

3.40

Date Sampled

19/09/2023

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Stone Content 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

% mg/kg

0.1 0.2

NONE

< 0.2

2-Methylnaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

0.1

2-Chloronaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

Dimethylphthalate

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.07

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.12

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Dibenzofuran

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Diethyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

4-Nitroaniline

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.09

Azobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

Bromophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

Hexachlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.85

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.24

Carbazole

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Dibutyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Anthraquinone

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.8

Butyl benzyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.2

Chrysene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

1.6

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

0.57

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.3

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.73

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.22

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.81

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

SVOCs TICs SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 18 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820319

2820320

2820321

2820322

Sample Reference

TP107

TP108

TP109

TP110

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820323

3.70

4.40

1.70

2.50

3.40

Date Sampled

19/09/2023

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Stone Content SVOCs TICs Compound Name

0.1 N/A

NONE

SVOC % Match

N/A

NONE

PCB Congener 28

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 52

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 101

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 118

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 138

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 153

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 180

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

mg/kg

0.007

MCERTS

< 0.007

PCBs by GC-MS

Total PCBs by GC-MS Total PCBs

U/S = Unsuitable Sample I/S = Insufficient Sample ND = Not detected

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 19 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820324

2820325

2820326

2820327

Sample Reference

TP110

TP111

TP112

TP113

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820328

1.20

3.30

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

< 0.1

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Accreditation Status

3.70

20/09/2023

Limit of detection

0.60

20/09/2023

Units

3.50

Date Sampled

Stone Content

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Moisture Content

0.01

NONE

Total mass of sample received

0.001

NONE

0.3

0.8

Asbestos in Soil Screen / Identification Name

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

Amosite

Chrysotile

Asbestos in Soil

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

Detected

Asbestos Quantification (Stage 2)

0.001

ISO 17025

< 0.001

Asbestos Quantification Total

0.001

ISO 17025

< 0.001

Asbestos Analyst ID

N/A

SCA

N/A

SCA

pH - Automated

pH Units

N/A

MCERTS

8.1

8.7

Total Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Complex Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

Free Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Water Soluble Sulphate as SO4 16hr extraction (2:1) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent)

mg/kg

2.5

MCERTS

610

2000

g/l

0.00125

MCERTS

0.305

0.992

mg/l

1.25

MCERTS

305

992

Sulphide

mg/kg

MCERTS

4.8

110

Water Soluble Chloride (2:1)

mg/kg

MCERTS

150

350

Elemental Sulphur

mg/kg

MCERTS

7.6

600

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N

mg/kg

0.5

MCERTS

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) - Automated

0.1

MCERTS

0.8

1.8

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) – Manual

0.1

MCERTS

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.06

0.11

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.06

< 0.05

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.05

0.18

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

0.16

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.47

0.6

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.13

0.2

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.1

2.1

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.99

1.8

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.65

0.92

Chrysene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.62

0.93

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

0.77

1.1

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

0.41

0.54

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.76

0.92

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.45

0.56

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.11

0.14

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.49

0.63

mg/kg

0.8

ISO 17025

7.12

10.9

General Inorganics

Total Phenols Total Phenols (monohydric) Speciated PAHs

Total PAH Speciated Total EPA-16 PAHs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 20 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820324

2820325

2820326

2820327

Sample Reference

TP110

TP111

TP112

TP113

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820328

3.50

0.60

3.70

1.20

3.30

Date Sampled

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Limit of detection 0.1

NONE

mg/kg

ISO 17025

Arsenic (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Beryllium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.06

MCERTS

0.71

0.76

Boron (water soluble)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

1.1

2.9

Cadmium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

Chromium (hexavalent)

mg/kg

1.8

MCERTS

< 1.8

Chromium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Copper (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Lead (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

100

300

Manganese (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Mercury (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

0.4

Nickel (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Selenium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Vanadium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Zinc (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

110

190

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC5 - EC6 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC6 - EC8 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

3.1

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 2.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 8.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

180

< 8.0

8.5

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

< 8.4

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

NONE

270

< 10

mg/kg

NONE

< 10

130

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC5 - EC7 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC7 - EC8 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

4.3

< 2.0

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

< 8.4

TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

NONE

110

mg/kg

NONE

Stone HeavyContent Metals / Metalloids

Accreditation Status

Units %

Antimony (aqua regia extractable)

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Monoaromatics & Oxygenates

Petroleum Hydrocarbons

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 21 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820324

2820325

2820326

2820327

Sample Reference

TP110

TP111

TP112

TP113

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820328

3.50

0.60

3.70

1.20

3.30

Date Sampled

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Limit of detection

0.1

NONE

Chloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Chloroethane

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

Bromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Vinyl Chloride

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

Trichlorofluoromethane

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1-dichloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1,2-Trichloro 1,2,2-Trifluoroethane

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

Trans 1,2-dichloroethylene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

2,2-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Chloroform

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,1-Dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0##

Cis-1,2-dichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Carbontetrachloride

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,2-dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Trichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Dibromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Bromodichloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Cis-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Trans-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,3-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Dibromochloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Tetrachloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,2-Dibromoethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Chlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Styrene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Bromoform

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0##

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Isopropylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0##

Bromobenzene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

N-Propylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

2-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

4-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0##

Tert-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Sec-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,3-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

P-Isopropyltoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,4-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Accreditation Status

Units

Stone VOCs Content

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 22 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820324

2820325

2820326

2820327

Sample Reference

TP110

TP111

TP112

TP113

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820328

3.50

0.60

3.70

1.20

3.30

Date Sampled

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Units

Limit of detection

Stone Content Butylbenzene

% µg/kg

0.1 5

NONE

< 5.0

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Hexachlorobutadiene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

Aniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Phenol

mg/kg

0.2

ISO 17025

< 0.2

2-Chlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

1,3-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

2-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Hexachloroethane

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

< 0.05

Nitrobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

4-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Isophorone

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

2-Nitrophenol

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

2,4-Dimethylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

3.1

2,4-Dichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

4-Chloroaniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Hexachlorobutadiene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Accreditation Status

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

VOCs TICs VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match

VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match

VOCs TICs Compound Name VOC % Match SVOCs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 23 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820324

2820325

2820326

2820327

Sample Reference

TP110

TP111

TP112

TP113

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820328

3.50

0.60

3.70

1.20

3.30

Date Sampled

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Stone Content 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

% mg/kg

0.1 0.2

NONE

< 0.2

2-Methylnaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

0.4

2-Chloronaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

Dimethylphthalate

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.11

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.88

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Dibenzofuran

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

0.4

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Diethyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

4-Nitroaniline

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.76

Azobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

Bromophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

Hexachlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

4.1

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.99

Carbazole

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

0.4

Dibutyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

0.2

Anthraquinone

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

0.3

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

6.6

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

5.5

Butyl benzyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

3.3

Chrysene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

3.1

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

3.4

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

1.2

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

2.4

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.1

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.41

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

1.3

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

SVOCs TICs SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 24 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820324

2820325

2820326

2820327

Sample Reference

TP110

TP111

TP112

TP113

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820328

3.50

0.60

3.70

1.20

3.30

Date Sampled

20/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Stone Content SVOCs TICs Compound Name

0.1 N/A

NONE

SVOC % Match

N/A

NONE

PCB Congener 28

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.008

PCB Congener 52

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

0.002

PCB Congener 101

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 118

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 138

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 153

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

PCB Congener 180

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

mg/kg

0.007

MCERTS

0.01

PCBs by GC-MS

Total PCBs by GC-MS Total PCBs

U/S = Unsuitable Sample I/S = Insufficient Sample ND = Not detected

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 25 of 32

Analytical Report Number:

23-57983

Project / Site name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering

Your Order No:

PO6790

Certificate of Analysis - Asbestos Quantification Methods: Qualitative Analysis The samples were analysed qualitatively for asbestos by polarising light and dispersion staining as described by the Health and Safety Executive in HSG 248.

Quantitative Analysis The analysis was carried out using our documented in-house method A006-PL based on HSE Contract Research Report No: 83/1996: Development and Validation of an analytical method to determine the amount of asbestos in soils and loose aggregates (Davies et al, 1996) and HSG 248. Our method includes initial examination of the entire representative sample, then fractionation and detailed analysis of each fraction, with quantification by hand picking and weighing. The limit of detection (reporting limit) of this method is 0.001 %. The method has been validated using samples of at least 100 g, results for samples smaller than this should be interpreted with caution. Both Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses are UKAS accredited. Sample Number

Sample ID

Sample Depth (m)

Sample Weight (g)

Asbestos Containing Material Types Detected (ACM)

PLM Results

Asbestos by hand picking/weighing (%)

Total % Asbestos in Sample

2820314

TP105

3.20-3.30

147

Loose Fibres

Chrysotile

< 0.001

2820317

TP106

2.20

143

Loose Fibres

Amosite

< 0.001

2820318

TP107

1.80

137

Loose Fibrous Debris

Chrysotile

0.034

2820325

TP111

0.60

149

Loose Fibres

Amosite

< 0.001

2820328

TP113

3.30

125

Loose Fibres

Chrysotile

< 0.001

Opinions and interpretations expressed herein are outside the scope of UKAS accreditation.

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 26 of 32

Analytical Report Number: 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6790 Lab Sample Number

2820308

2820312

2820315

Sample Reference

TP103

TP104

TP106

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

2820316

3.00-3.40

19/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

ChrysotileAsbestos Cement

1L- Chrysotile, AmositeInsulation Lagging; 2LChrysotileAsbestos Cement

1L- ChrysotileInsulation Lagging; 2LChrysotileAsbestos Cement

WEM

MWI

WEM

Analytical Parameter (Bulk Analysis)

Accreditation Status

0.00-1.80

18/09/2023

Limit of detection

0.00

18/09/2023

Units

0.75

Date Sampled

Asbestos Identification

Asbestos Analyst ID

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

N/A

U/S = Unsuitable Sample I/S = Insufficient Sample ND = Not detected

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 27 of 32

Analytical Report Number : 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering * These descriptions are only intended to act as a cross check if sample identities are questioned. The major constituent of the sample is intended to act with respect to MCERTS validation. The laboratory is accredited for sand, clay and loam (MCERTS) soil types. Data for unaccredited types of solid should be interpreted with care. Stone content of a sample is calculated as the % weight of the stones not passing a 10 mm sieve. Results are not corrected for stone content.

Lab Sample Number

Sample Reference

Sample Number

Depth (m)

2820305

TP101

None Supplied

0.5

Brown sandy loam with gravel and vegetation.

2820306

TP101

None Supplied

Brown clay and sand with gravel and paper.

2820307

TP102

None Supplied

0.2

Brown clay and sand with gravel and vegetation.

2820309

TP103

None Supplied

0.75

Brown clay and sand with stones and gravel

2820310

TP103

None Supplied

3.5

Brown clay and sand with stones and gravel

2820311

TP104

None Supplied

3.3

Brown clay and sand with gravel.

2820313

TP105

None Supplied

2.3

Brown clay and sand with gravel.

2820314

TP105

None Supplied

3.20-3.30

2820317

TP106

None Supplied

2.2

Brown clay and sand with gravel.

2820318

TP107

None Supplied

1.8

Brown clay and sand with stones and plastic.

2820319

TP107

None Supplied

3.7

Brown clay and sand with gravel.

2820320

TP108

None Supplied

4.4

Brown clay and sand with stones and gravel

2820321

TP109

None Supplied

1.7

Brown clay and sand with gravel.

2820322

TP109

None Supplied

2.5

Brown clay and sand with gravel.

2820323

TP110

None Supplied

3.4

Brown clay and sand with gravel and oil / petroleum.

2820324

TP110

None Supplied

3.5

Brown clay and sand with gravel.

2820325

TP111

None Supplied

0.6

Brown clay and sand with stones and gravel

2820326

TP111

None Supplied

3.7

Brown clay and sand with gravel and vegetation.

2820327

TP112

None Supplied

1.2

Brown clay and sand with gravel.

2820328

TP113

None Supplied

3.3

Brown sandy clay with gravel.

Sample Description *

Brown clay and sand with stones and gravel

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 28 of 32

Analytical Report Number : 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Water matrix abbreviations: Surface Water (SW) Potable Water (PW) Ground Water (GW) Process Waters (PrW) Final Sewage Effluent (FSE) Landfill Leachate (LL)

Analytical Test Name

Analytical Method Description

Analytical Method Reference

Method number

Wet / Dry Analysis

Accreditation Status

Sulphate, water soluble, in soil (16hr extraction)

Determination of water soluble sulphate by ICP-OES. Results reported directly (leachate equivalent) and corrected for extraction ratio (soil equivalent).

In house method.

L038-PL

MCERTS

Metals in soil by ICP-OES

Determination of metals in soil by aqua-regia digestion followed by ICP-OES.

In-house method based on MEWAM 2006 Methods for the Determination of Metals in Soil.

L038-PL

MCERTS

Asbestos identification in soil

Asbestos Identification with the use of polarised light microscopy in conjunction with dispersion staining techniques.

In house method based on HSG 248

A001-PL

ISO 17025

Asbestos identification in Bulks

Asbestos Identification in bulk material with the use of polarised light microscopy in conjunction with dispersion staining techniques.

In house method based on HSG 248

A001-PL

ISO 17025

Boron, water soluble, in soil

Determination of water soluble boron in soil by hot water extract followed by ICP-OES.

In-house method based on Second Site Properties version 3

L038-PL

MCERTS

Complex Cyanide in soil

Determination of complex cyanide by calculation.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL

MCERTS

Chloride, water soluble, in soil

Determination of Chloride colorimetrically by discrete analyser.

In house method.

L082-PL

MCERTS

Elemental sulphur in soil

Determination of elemental sulphur in soil by extraction in In-house method based on Secondsite Property acetonitrile followed by HPLC. Holdings Guidance for Assessing and Managing Potential

L021-PL

MCERTS

Free cyanide in soil

Determination of free cyanide by distillation followed by colorimetry.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL

MCERTS

Moisture Content

Moisture content, determined gravimetrically. (30 oC)

In house method.

L019-UK/PL

NONE

Monohydric phenols in soil

Determination of phenols in soil by extraction with sodium In-house method based on Examination of Water hydroxide followed by distillation followed by colorimetry. and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (skalar)

L080-PL

MCERTS

Speciated EPA-16 PAHs in soil

Determination of PAH compounds in soil by extraction in In-house method based on USEPA 8270 dichloromethane and hexane followed by GC-MS with the use of surrogate and internal standards. Refer to CoA for analyte specific accreditation.

L064-PL

MCERTS

PCB's By GC-MS in soil

Determination of PCB by extraction with acetone and hexane followed by GC-MS.

In-house method based on USEPA 8082

L027-PL

MCERTS

pH in soil (automated)

Determination of pH in soil by addition of water followed by automated electrometric measurement.

In house method.

L099-PL

MCERTS

Sulphide in soil

Determination of sulphide in soil by acidification and heating to liberate hydrogen sulphide, trapped in an alkaline solution then assayed by ion selective electrode.

In-house method

L010-PL

MCERTS

Stones content of soil

Standard preparation for all samples unless otherwise detailed. Gravimetric determination of stone > 10 mm as % dry weight.

In-house method based on British Standard Methods and MCERTS requirements.

L019-UK/PL

NONE

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 29 of 32

Analytical Test Name

Analytical Method Description

Analytical Method Reference

Method number

Wet / Dry Analysis

Accreditation Status

Semi-volatile organic compounds in soil

Determination of semi-volatile organic compounds in soil by extraction in dichloromethane and hexane followed by GC-MS.Refer to CoA for analyte specific accreditation.

In-house method based on USEPA 8270

L064-PL

MCERTS

Tentatively identified compounds (SVOC) in Determination of semi-volatile organic compounds total soil ion count in soil by extraction with dichloromethane and hexane followed by GC-MS followed by a full library scan.

In-house method based on USEPA 8270

L064-PL

NONE

Total cyanide in soil

Determination of total cyanide by distillation followed by colorimetry.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL

MCERTS

Total organic carbon (Automated) in soil

Determination of organic matter in soil by oxidising with potassium dichromate followed by titration with iron (II) sulphate.

In house method.

L009-PL

MCERTS

Volatile organic compounds in soil

Determination of volatile organic compounds in soil by headspace GC-MS.

In-house method based on USEPA8260

L073B-PL

MCERTS

Tentatively identified compounds (VOC) in soil

Determination of volatile organic compounds total ion In-house method based on USEPA8260 count in soil by headspace GC-MS followed by a full library scan.

L073-PL

NONE

BTEX and MTBE in soil (Monoaromatics)

Determination of BTEX in soil by headspace GC-MS. Individual components MCERTS accredited

In-house method based on USEPA8260. Refer to CoA for analyte specific accreditation

L073B-PL

MCERTS

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N in soil

Determination of Ammonium/Ammonia/ Ammoniacal Nitrogen by the discrete analyser (colorimetric) salicylate/nitroprusside method,10:1 water extraction.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton

L082-PL

MCERTS

TPHCWG (Soil)

Determination of hexane extractable hydrocarbons in soil by GC-MS/GC-FID. Refer to CoA for band specific accreditation.

In-house method with silica gel split/clean up.

L088/76-PL

MCERTS

TPH in (Soil)

Determination of TPH bands by HS-GC-MS/GC-FID

In-house method, TPH with carbon banding and silica gel split/cleanup.

L076-PL

NONE

Total organic carbon in soil

Determination of organic matter in soil by oxidising with potassium dichromate followed by titration with iron (II) sulphate.

In house method.

L023-PL

MCERTS

Asbestos Quantification - Gravimetric

Asbestos quantification by gravimetric method - in house method based on references.

HSE Report No: 83/1996, HSG 248, HSG 264 & SCA Blue Book (draft).

A006-PL

ISO 17025

Hexavalent chromium in soil

Determination of hexavalent chromium in soil by extraction in NaOH and addition of 1,5 diphenylcarbazide followed by colorimetry.

In-house method

L080-PL

MCERTS

Sulphate, water soluble, in soil

Determination of water soluble sulphate by ICP-OES. Results reported directly (leachate equivalent) and corrected for extraction ratio (soil equivalent).

In house method.

L038-PL

MCERTS

For method numbers ending in 'UK or A' analysis have been carried out in our laboratory in the United Kingdom (WATFORD). For method numbers ending in 'F' analysis have been carried out in our laboratory in the United Kingdom (East Kilbride). For method numbers ending in 'PL or B' analysis have been carried out in our laboratory in Poland. Soil analytical results are expressed on a dry weight basis. Where analysis is carried out on as-received the results obtained are multiplied by a moisture correction factor that is determined gravimetrically using the moisture content which is carried out at a maximum of 30oC. Unless otherwise indicated, site information, order number, project number, sampling date, time, sample reference and depth are provided by the client. The instructed on date indicates the date on which this information was provided to the laboratory.

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 30 of 32

Analytical Test Name

Analytical Method Description

Analytical Method Reference

Method number

Wet / Dry Analysis

Accreditation Status

Information in Support of Analytical Results List of HWOL Acronyms and Operators Acronym

Descriptions

HS MS FID GC EH CU 1D 2D Total AL AR #1 #2 _

Headspace Analysis Mass spectrometry Flame Ionisation Detector Gas Chromatography Extractable Hydrocarbons (i.e. everything extracted by the solvent(s)) Clean-up - e.g. by Florisil®, silica gel GC - Single coil/column gas chromatography GC-GC - Double coil/column gas chromatography Aliphatics & Aromatics Aliphatics Aromatics EH_2D_Total but with humics mathematically subtracted EH_2D_Total but with fatty acids mathematically subtracted Operator - understore to separate acronyms (exception for +) + Operator to indicate cumulative e.g. EH+HS_Total or EH_CU+HS_Total ## - Quality control parameter has a high recovery (outside of limit); however the associated result is below the reporting limit, other checks applied prior to reporting the data have been accepted. The result should be considered as being deviating and may be compromised. **Analysis could not be completed due to sample matrix.

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 31 of 32

Analytical Report Number : 23-57983 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering

This deviation report indicates the sample and test deviations that apply to the samples submitted for analysis.Please note that the associated result(s) may be unreliable and should be interpreted with care. Key: a - No sampling date b - Incorrect container c - Holding time d - Headspace e - Temperature Sample ID Other ID

Sample Lab Sample Type Number

Sample Deviation

Test Name

Test Ref

Test Deviation

TP110

None Supplied

2820324

BTEX and MTBE in soil (Monoaromatics)

L073B-PL

TP110

None Supplied

2820324

TPHCWG (Soil)

L088/76-PL

TP110

None Supplied

2820324

Tentatively identified compounds (VOC) in soil

L073-PL

TP110

None Supplied

2820324

Volatile organic compounds in soil

L073B-PL

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-09_23-57983-2 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483 Page 32 of 32

Laura Legate Geo-Environmental Services Ltd Unit 7, Danworth Farm Cuckfield Road Hurstpierpoint West Sussex BN6 9GL

i2 Analytical Ltd. 7 Woodshots Meadow, Croxley Green Business Park, Watford, Herts, WD18 8YS

t: 01273 832972

t: 01923 225404 f: 01923 237404 e: reception@i2analytical.com

e: laura.legate@gesl.net

Analytical Report Number : 23-58576

Project / Site name:

Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering

Samples received on:

25/09/2023

Your job number:

GE21483

Samples instructed on/ Analysis started on:

25/09/2023

Your order number:

PO6803

Analysis completed by:

02/10/2023

Report Issue Number:

Report issued on:

02/10/2023

Samples Analysed:

6 soil samples

Signed: Dominika Warjan Reporting Specialist For & on behalf of i2 Analytical Ltd. Standard Geotechnical, Asbestos and Chemical Testing Laboratory located at: ul. Pionierów 39, 41-711 Ruda Śląska, Poland. Accredited tests are defined within the report, opinions and interpretations expressed herein are outside the scope of accreditation. Standard sample disposal times, unless otherwise agreed with the laboratory, are :

soils - 4 weeks from reporting leachates - 2 weeks from reporting waters - 2 weeks from reporting asbestos - 6 months from reporting

Excel copies of reports are only valid when accompanied by this PDF certificate.

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 1 of 16

Analytical Report Number: 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Your Order No: PO6803 Lab Sample Number

2823321

2823322

2823323

2823324

Sample Reference

WS102

WS106A

WS107C

2823325 WS108B

Sample Number

None Supplied

4.50

2.30-2.50

2.50

21/09/2023

22/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Accreditation Status

0.90

21/09/2023 Limit of detection

4.70-4.90

Date Sampled

Units

Depth (m)

Stone Content

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Moisture Content

0.01

NONE

Total mass of sample received

0.001

NONE

1.5

Asbestos in Soil

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

Not-detected

Asbestos Analyst ID

N/A

SPU

PDO

pH - Automated

pH Units

N/A

MCERTS

8.6

8.4

7.8

Total Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Complex Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Free Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

2200

2600

General Inorganics

Water Soluble Sulphate as SO4 16hr extraction (2:1) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent)

mg/kg

2.5

MCERTS

880

g/l

0.00125

MCERTS

0.44

1.09

1.32

mg/l

1.25

MCERTS

440

1090

1320

Sulphide

mg/kg

MCERTS

6.2

Water Soluble Chloride (2:1)

mg/kg

MCERTS

170

Elemental Sulphur

mg/kg

MCERTS

5.3

130

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N

mg/kg

0.5

MCERTS

< 0.5

0.1

MCERTS

0.9

0.8

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.06

0.1

1.3

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

0.12

2.2

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

0.13

3.9

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

0.18

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.09

1.8

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

0.53

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.19

3.6

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.17

3.1

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.09

Chrysene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.1

1.7

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

0.12

2.2

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

< 0.05

0.81

4.7

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.09

1.9

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.07

1.1

6.4

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

0.23

1.6

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.08

1.2

6.6

mg/kg

0.8

ISO 17025

1.06

20.7

202

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) - Automated Total Phenols Total Phenols (monohydric) Speciated PAHs

Total PAH Speciated Total EPA-16 PAHs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 2 of 16

Analytical Report Number: 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Your Order No: PO6803 Lab Sample Number

2823321

2823322

2823323

2823324

Sample Reference

WS102

WS106A

WS107C

2823325 WS108B

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

4.70-4.90

0.90

4.50

2.30-2.50

2.50

Date Sampled

21/09/2023

22/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

mg/kg

MCERTS

Beryllium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.06

MCERTS

1.2

0.79

Boron (water soluble)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

6.3

1.3

1.6

Cadmium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

Chromium (hexavalent)

mg/kg

1.8

MCERTS

< 1.8

Chromium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Copper (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Lead (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

120

190

Mercury (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

0.4

0.8

Nickel (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Selenium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

Vanadium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Zinc (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

170

110

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC5 - EC6 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC6 - EC8 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

2.2

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

7.4

7.2

< 2.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 8.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 8.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

< 8.4

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

NONE

130

120

mg/kg

NONE

110

180

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC5 - EC7 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC7 - EC8 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

1.5

1.4

1.3

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 2.0

4.9

2.3

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 10

180

< 10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 10

130

160

TPH-CWG - Aromatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

< 8.4

TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

NONE

< 10

200

370

mg/kg

NONE

< 10

110

430

Chloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Chloroethane

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

Bromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Vinyl Chloride

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

Trichlorofluoromethane

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

Units

Arsenic (aqua regia extractable)

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Heavy Metals / Metalloids

Monoaromatics & Oxygenates

Petroleum Hydrocarbons

VOCs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 3 of 16

Analytical Report Number: 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Your Order No: PO6803 Lab Sample Number

2823321

2823322

2823323

2823324

Sample Reference

WS102

WS106A

WS107C

2823325 WS108B

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

4.70-4.90

0.90

4.50

2.30-2.50

2.50

Date Sampled

21/09/2023

22/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

1,1-dichloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1,2-Trichloro 1,2,2-Trifluoroethane

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

Trans 1,2-dichloroethylene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

2,2-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Chloroform

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,1-Dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Cis-1,2-dichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Carbontetrachloride

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,2-dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Trichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Dibromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Bromodichloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Cis-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Trans-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,3-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Dibromochloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Tetrachloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,2-Dibromoethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

< 5.0##

Chlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Styrene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Bromoform

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

< 5.0##

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Isopropylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Bromobenzene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

N-Propylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

2-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

4-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Tert-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Sec-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,3-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

P-Isopropyltoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,4-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Butylbenzene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Hexachlorobutadiene

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

< 5.0

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 4 of 16

Analytical Report Number: 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Your Order No: PO6803 Lab Sample Number

2823321

2823322

2823323

2823324

Sample Reference

WS102

WS106A

WS107C

2823325 WS108B

Sample Number

None Supplied

4.70-4.90

0.90

4.50

2.30-2.50

2.50

Date Sampled

21/09/2023

22/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

N/A

NONE

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Depth (m)

VOCs TICs VOCs TICs Compound Name SVOCs Aniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Phenol

mg/kg

0.2

ISO 17025

< 0.2

2-Chlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

1,3-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

2-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Hexachloroethane

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

< 0.05

Nitrobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

4-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Isophorone

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

2-Nitrophenol

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

2,4-Dimethylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.06

0.45

1.3

2,4-Dichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

4-Chloroaniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Hexachlorobutadiene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

2-Methylnaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

0.2

0.4

0.6

2-Chloronaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

Dimethylphthalate

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

< 0.1

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

0.18

2.2

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

0.73

3.9

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Dibenzofuran

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

0.5

4.1

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Diethyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

4-Nitroaniline

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

0.72

Azobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

Bromophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

< 0.2

Hexachlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.09

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

1.2

Carbazole

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

< 0.3

0.4

3.9

Dibutyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

< 0.2

Anthraquinone

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

0.4

< 0.3

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.19

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.17

9.7

Butyl benzyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

< 0.3

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.09

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 5 of 16

Analytical Report Number: 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Your Order No: PO6803 Lab Sample Number

2823321

2823322

2823323

2823324

Sample Reference

WS102

WS106A

WS107C

2823325 WS108B

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

4.70-4.90

0.90

4.50

2.30-2.50

2.50

Date Sampled

21/09/2023

22/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Limit of detection

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.1

4.6

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

0.12

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

< 0.05

2.9

4.7

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.09

6.8

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.07

3.6

6.4

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

< 0.05

0.84

1.6

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

0.08

6.6

N/A

NONE

Pyrene, substituted

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

98 Naphthalene, substituted 97 Phenanthrene, substituted 97

PCB Congener 28

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

PCB Congener 52

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

PCB Congener 101

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

PCB Congener 118

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

PCB Congener 138

mg/kg

0.001

PCB Congener 153

mg/kg

PCB Congener 180

Accreditation Status

Units

Chrysene

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

SVOCs TICs SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

< 0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

< 0.001

mg/kg

0.007

MCERTS

< 0.007

SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

Naphthalene, substituted 98 Phenanthrene, substituted 97

PCBs by GC-MS

Total PCBs by GC-MS Total PCBs

U/S = Unsuitable Sample I/S = Insufficient Sample ND = Not detected

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 6 of 16

Analytical Report Number: 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Your Order No: PO6803 Lab Sample Number

2823326

Sample Reference

WS109B

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

1.50

Date Sampled

22/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Stone Content

0.1

NONE

< 0.1

Moisture Content

0.01

NONE

9.8

Total mass of sample received

0.001

NONE

1.5

Asbestos in Soil

Type

N/A

ISO 17025

Not-detected

Asbestos Analyst ID

N/A

PDO

pH - Automated

pH Units

N/A

MCERTS

Total Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

Complex Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

Free Cyanide

mg/kg

MCERTS

Water Soluble Sulphate as SO4 16hr extraction (2:1) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent) Water Soluble SO4 16hr extraction (2:1 Leachate Equivalent)

mg/kg

2.5

MCERTS

g/l

0.00125

MCERTS

mg/l

1.25

MCERTS

Sulphide

mg/kg

MCERTS

Water Soluble Chloride (2:1)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Elemental Sulphur

mg/kg

MCERTS

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N

mg/kg

0.5

MCERTS

0.1

MCERTS

1.3

mg/kg

MCERTS

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Chrysene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

mg/kg

0.8

ISO 17025

General Inorganics

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) - Automated Total Phenols Total Phenols (monohydric) Speciated PAHs

Total PAH Speciated Total EPA-16 PAHs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 7 of 16

Analytical Report Number: 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Your Order No: PO6803 Lab Sample Number

2823326

Sample Reference

WS109B

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

1.50

Date Sampled

22/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied Limit of detection

0.1

NONE

Arsenic (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Beryllium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.06

MCERTS

Boron (water soluble)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

Cadmium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

Chromium (hexavalent)

mg/kg

1.8

MCERTS

Chromium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Copper (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Lead (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Mercury (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Nickel (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Selenium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Vanadium (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Zinc (aqua regia extractable)

mg/kg

MCERTS

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

< 5.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

< 5.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC5 - EC6 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC6 - EC8 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

1.1

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

4.5

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 8.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

MCERTS

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AL

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AL

mg/kg

NONE

mg/kg

NONE

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC5 - EC7 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC7 - EC8 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC8 - EC10 HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC10 - EC12 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC12 - EC16 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 2.0

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC16 - EC21 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

< 10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC21 - EC35 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

MCERTS

TPH-CWG - Aromatic > EC35 - EC44 EH_CU_1D_AR

mg/kg

8.4

NONE

TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC35) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC44) EH_CU+HS_1D_AR

mg/kg

NONE

mg/kg

NONE

Chloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Chloroethane

µg/kg

NONE

Bromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Vinyl Chloride

µg/kg

NONE

Trichlorofluoromethane

µg/kg

NONE

Accreditation Status

Units

Stone HeavyContent Metals / Metalloids

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Monoaromatics & Oxygenates

Petroleum Hydrocarbons

VOCs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 8 of 16

Analytical Report Number: 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Your Order No: PO6803 Lab Sample Number

2823326

Sample Reference

WS109B

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

1.50

Date Sampled

22/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Stone Content 1,1-dichloroethene

% µg/kg

0.1 5

NONE

1,1,2-Trichloro 1,2,2-Trifluoroethane

µg/kg

NONE

Trans 1,2-dichloroethylene

µg/kg

NONE

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/kg

NONE

1,1-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

2,2-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Chloroform

µg/kg

NONE

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2-dichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,1-Dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Cis-1,2-dichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Benzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

Carbontetrachloride

µg/kg

NONE

1,2-dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Trichloroethene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Dibromomethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Bromodichloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Cis-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Trans-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Toluene

µg/kg

MCERTS

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,3-Dichloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Dibromochloromethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Tetrachloroethene

µg/kg

NONE

1,2-Dibromoethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Chlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Ethylbenzene

µg/kg

MCERTS

p & m-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

Styrene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Bromoform

µg/kg

NONE

o-xylene

µg/kg

MCERTS

Isopropylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Bromobenzene

µg/kg

NONE

N-Propylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

2-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

4-Chlorotoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Tert-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Sec-Butylbenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,3-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

P-Isopropyltoluene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,4-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2-dichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Butylbenzene

µg/kg

NONE

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

µg/kg

ISO 17025

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

Hexachlorobutadiene

µg/kg

NONE

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

µg/kg

ISO 17025

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 9 of 16

Analytical Report Number: 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Your Order No: PO6803 Lab Sample Number

2823326

Sample Reference

WS109B

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

1.50

Date Sampled

22/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

VOCs TICs Compound Name

Accreditation Status

Units

Stone VOCs Content TICs

Limit of detection

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

0.1

NONE

N/A

NONE

SVOCs Aniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Phenol

mg/kg

0.2

ISO 17025

2-Chlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

1,3-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

2-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Hexachloroethane

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Nitrobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

4-Methylphenol

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Isophorone

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

2-Nitrophenol

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

2,4-Dimethylphenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Naphthalene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

2,4-Dichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

4-Chloroaniline

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Hexachlorobutadiene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

2-Methylnaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

2-Chloronaphthalene

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

Dimethylphthalate

mg/kg

0.1

MCERTS

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.1

NONE

Acenaphthylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Acenaphthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Dibenzofuran

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Diethyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

4-Nitroaniline

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Fluorene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Azobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

Bromophenyl phenyl ether

mg/kg

0.2

MCERTS

Hexachlorobenzene

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Phenanthrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Carbazole

mg/kg

0.3

MCERTS

Dibutyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.2

NONE

Anthraquinone

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

Fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Butyl benzyl phthalate

mg/kg

0.3

NONE

Benzo(a)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 10 of 16

Analytical Report Number: 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Your Order No: PO6803 Lab Sample Number

2823326

Sample Reference

WS109B

Sample Number

None Supplied

Depth (m)

1.50

Date Sampled

22/09/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied Limit of detection

% mg/kg

0.1 0.05

NONE MCERTS

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

mg/kg

0.05

ISO 17025

Benzo(a)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

Benzo(ghi)perylene

mg/kg

0.05

MCERTS

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

PCB Congener 28

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

PCB Congener 52

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

PCB Congener 101

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

PCB Congener 118

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

PCB Congener 138

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

PCB Congener 153

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

PCB Congener 180

mg/kg

0.001

MCERTS

mg/kg

0.007

MCERTS

Accreditation Status

Units

Stone Content Chrysene

Analytical Parameter (Soil Analysis)

SVOCs TICs SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match PCBs by GC-MS

Total PCBs by GC-MS Total PCBs

U/S = Unsuitable Sample I/S = Insufficient Sample ND = Not detected

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 11 of 16

Analytical Report Number : 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering * These descriptions are only intended to act as a cross check if sample identities are questioned. The major constituent of the sample is intended to act with respect to MCERTS validation. The laboratory is accredited for sand, clay and loam (MCERTS) soil types. Data for unaccredited types of solid should be interpreted with care. Stone content of a sample is calculated as the % weight of the stones not passing a 10 mm sieve. Results are not corrected for stone content.

Lab Sample Number

Sample Reference

Sample Number

Depth (m)

Sample Description *

2823321

WS102

None Supplied

4.70-4.90

Brown sandy clay with gravel.

2823322

WS106A

None Supplied

0.9

Brown clay and sand with gravel.

2823323

WS106A

None Supplied

4.5

Brown clay and sand with gravel and plastic.

2823324

WS107C

None Supplied

2.30-2.50

2823325

WS108B

None Supplied

2.5

Brown clay and sand with stones and gravel

2823326

WS109B

None Supplied

1.5

Brown clay and sand with gravel and plastic.

Brown clay and sand with gravel.

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 12 of 16

Analytical Report Number : 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering Water matrix abbreviations: Surface Water (SW) Potable Water (PW) Ground Water (GW) Process Waters (PrW) Final Sewage Effluent (FSE) Landfill Leachate (LL)

Analytical Test Name

Analytical Method Description

Analytical Method Reference

Method number

Wet / Dry Analysis

Accreditation Status

Metals in soil by ICP-OES

Determination of metals in soil by aqua-regia digestion followed by ICP-OES.

In-house method based on MEWAM 2006 Methods for the Determination of Metals in Soil.

L038-PL

MCERTS

Sulphate, water soluble, in soil (16hr extraction)

Determination of water soluble sulphate by ICP-OES. Results reported directly (leachate equivalent) and corrected for extraction ratio (soil equivalent).

In house method.

L038-PL

MCERTS

Asbestos identification in soil

Asbestos Identification with the use of polarised light microscopy in conjunction with dispersion staining techniques.

In house method based on HSG 248

A001-PL

ISO 17025

Boron, water soluble, in soil

Determination of water soluble boron in soil by hot water extract followed by ICP-OES.

In-house method based on Second Site Properties version 3

L038-PL

MCERTS

Complex Cyanide in soil

Determination of complex cyanide by calculation.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL

MCERTS

Chloride, water soluble, in soil

Determination of Chloride colorimetrically by discrete analyser.

In house method.

L082-PL

MCERTS

Elemental sulphur in soil

Determination of elemental sulphur in soil by extraction in In-house method based on Secondsite Property acetonitrile followed by HPLC. Holdings Guidance for Assessing and Managing Potential

L021-PL

MCERTS

Free cyanide in soil

Determination of free cyanide by distillation followed by colorimetry.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL

MCERTS

Moisture Content

Moisture content, determined gravimetrically. (30 oC)

In house method.

L019-UK/PL

NONE

Monohydric phenols in soil

L080-PL

MCERTS

Speciated EPA-16 PAHs in soil

L064-PL

MCERTS

PCB's By GC-MS in soil

Determination of PCB by extraction with acetone and hexane followed by GC-MS.

In-house method based on USEPA 8082

L027-PL

MCERTS

pH in soil (automated)

Determination of pH in soil by addition of water followed by automated electrometric measurement.

In house method.

L099-PL

MCERTS

Sulphide in soil

Determination of sulphide in soil by acidification and heating to liberate hydrogen sulphide, trapped in an alkaline solution then assayed by ion selective electrode.

In-house method

L010-PL

MCERTS

Stones content of soil

Standard preparation for all samples unless otherwise detailed. Gravimetric determination of stone > 10 mm as % dry weight.

In-house method based on British Standard Methods and MCERTS requirements.

L019-UK/PL

NONE

Semi-volatile organic compounds in soil

Determination of semi-volatile organic compounds in soil by extraction in dichloromethane and hexane followed by GC-MS.Refer to CoA for analyte specific accreditation.

In-house method based on USEPA 8270

L064-PL

MCERTS

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 13 of 16

Analytical Method Reference

Method number

Wet / Dry Analysis

Accreditation Status

In-house method based on USEPA 8270

L064-PL

NONE

Total cyanide in soil

Determination of total cyanide by distillation followed by colorimetry.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL

MCERTS

Total organic carbon (Automated) in soil

Determination of organic matter in soil by oxidising with potassium dichromate followed by titration with iron (II) sulphate.

In house method.

L009-PL

MCERTS

Volatile organic compounds in soil

Determination of volatile organic compounds in soil by headspace GC-MS.

In-house method based on USEPA8260

L073B-PL

MCERTS

Tentatively identified compounds (VOC) in soil

Determination of volatile organic compounds total ion In-house method based on USEPA8260 count in soil by headspace GC-MS followed by a full library scan.

L073-PL

NONE

BTEX and MTBE in soil (Monoaromatics)

Determination of BTEX in soil by headspace GC-MS. Individual components MCERTS accredited

In-house method based on USEPA8260. Refer to CoA for analyte specific accreditation

L073B-PL

MCERTS

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N in soil

Determination of Ammonium/Ammonia/ Ammoniacal Nitrogen by the discrete analyser (colorimetric) salicylate/nitroprusside method,10:1 water extraction.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton

L082-PL

MCERTS

TPHCWG (Soil)

Determination of hexane extractable hydrocarbons in soil by GC-MS/GC-FID. Refer to CoA for band specific accreditation.

In-house method with silica gel split/clean up.

L088/76-PL

MCERTS

TPH in (Soil)

Determination of TPH bands by HS-GC-MS/GC-FID

In-house method, TPH with carbon banding and silica gel split/cleanup.

L076-PL

NONE

Hexavalent chromium in soil

Determination of hexavalent chromium in soil by extraction in NaOH and addition of 1,5 diphenylcarbazide followed by colorimetry.

In-house method

L080-PL

MCERTS

D.O. for Gravimetric Quant if Screen/ID positive

Dependent option for Gravimetric Quant if Screen/ID positive scheduled.

In house asbestos methods A001 & A006.

A006-PL

NONE

Analytical Test Name

Analytical Method Description

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 14 of 16

Analytical Test Name

Analytical Method Description

Analytical Method Reference

Method number

Wet / Dry Analysis

Accreditation Status

Sulphate, water soluble, in soil

Determination of water soluble sulphate by ICP-OES. Results reported directly (leachate equivalent) and corrected for extraction ratio (soil equivalent).

In house method.

L038-PL

MCERTS

Information in Support of Analytical Results List of HWOL Acronyms and Operators Acronym

Descriptions

HS MS FID GC EH CU 1D 2D Total AL AR #1 #2 _

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 15 of 16

Sample Deviation Report

Analytical Report Number : 23-58576 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering

Sample Lab Sample Type Number

Sample Deviation

Test Name

Test Ref

Test Deviation

WS102

None Supplied

2823321

BTEX and MTBE in soil (Monoaromatics)

L073B-PL

WS102

None Supplied

2823321

TPHCWG (Soil)

L088/76-PL

WS102

None Supplied

2823321

Tentatively identified compounds (VOC) in soil

L073-PL

WS102

None Supplied

2823321

Volatile organic compounds in soil

L073B-PL

WS106A

None Supplied

2823322

BTEX and MTBE in soil (Monoaromatics)

L073B-PL

WS106A

None Supplied

2823322

TPHCWG (Soil)

L088/76-PL

WS107C

None Supplied

2823324

BTEX and MTBE in soil (Monoaromatics)

L073B-PL

WS107C

None Supplied

2823324

TPHCWG (Soil)

L088/76-PL

WS107C

None Supplied

2823324

Tentatively identified compounds (VOC) in soil

L073-PL

WS107C

None Supplied

2823324

Volatile organic compounds in soil

L073B-PL

WS108B

None Supplied

2823325

BTEX and MTBE in soil (Monoaromatics)

L073B-PL

WS108B

None Supplied

2823325

TPHCWG (Soil)

L088/76-PL

WS109B

None Supplied

2823326

BTEX and MTBE in soil (Monoaromatics)

L073B-PL

WS109B

None Supplied

2823326

TPHCWG (Soil)

L088/76-PL

Iss No 2023-10-02_23-58576-1 Arnolds Field Launders Lane Havering GE21483 Page 16 of 16

APPENDIX E Geochemical Laboratory Testing (Water/leachate)

Laura Legate Geo-Environmental Services Ltd Unit 7, Danworth Farm Cuckfield Road Hurstpierpoint West Sussex BN6 9GL

i2 Analytical Ltd. 7 Woodshots Meadow, Croxley Green Business Park, Watford, Herts, WD18 8YS

t: 01273 832972

t: 01923 225404 f: 01923 237404 e: reception@i2analytical.com

e: laura.legate@gesl.net

Analytical Report Number : 23-60861

Project / Site name:

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering

Samples received on:

04/10/2023

Your job number:

GE21483

Samples instructed on/ Analysis started on:

06/10/2023

Your order number:

PO6854

Analysis completed by:

12/10/2023

Report Issue Number:

Report issued on:

12/10/2023

Samples Analysed:

2 water samples

Signed: Joanna Szwagrzak Junior Reporting Specialist For & on behalf of i2 Analytical Ltd. Standard Geotechnical, Asbestos and Chemical Testing Laboratory located at: ul. Pionierów 39, 41-711 Ruda Śląska, Poland. Accredited tests are defined within the report, opinions and interpretations expressed herein are outside the scope of accreditation. Standard sample disposal times, unless otherwise agreed with the laboratory, are :

soils - 4 weeks from reporting leachates - 2 weeks from reporting waters - 2 weeks from reporting asbestos - 6 months from reporting

Excel copies of reports are only valid when accompanied by this PDF certificate.

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-12_23-60861-1 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483.XLSM Page 1 of 10

Analytical Report Number: 23-60861 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6854 Lab Sample Number

2836490

Sample Reference

WS102

2836491 WS103

Sample Number

None Supplied

3.18

3.70

Date Sampled

03/10/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Depth (m)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

pH Units

N/A

ISO 17025

7.5

7.1

Total Cyanide

µg/l

ISO 17025

430

< 10

Complex Cyanide

µg/l

ISO 17025

430

< 10

Free Cyanide

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

Sulphate as SO4

mg/l

0.045

ISO 17025

241

Sulphide

µg/l

NONE

< 5.0

Chloride

mg/l

0.15

ISO 17025

440

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N

µg/l

ISO 17025

9300

39000

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as NH3

µg/l

ISO 17025

11000

47000

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as NH4

µg/l

ISO 17025

12000

50000

Total Organic Carbon (TOC)

mg/l

0.1

ISO 17025

33.8

48.6

Nitrite as N

µg/l

ISO 17025

3.6

4.2

Nitrite as NO2

µg/l

ISO 17025

Alkalinity as CaCO3

mg/l

ISO 17025

970

1500

Bromide

mg/l

0.001

ISO 17025

1.8

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

Naphthalene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

2.22

Acenaphthylene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Acenaphthene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

0.33

Fluorene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Phenanthrene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Anthracene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Fluoranthene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Pyrene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Benzo(a)anthracene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Chrysene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Benzo(a)pyrene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Benzo(ghi)perylene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

µg/l

0.16

ISO 17025

< 0.16

2.55

Analytical Parameter (Water Analysis)

General Inorganics pH (L099)

Total Phenols Total Phenols (monohydric) Speciated PAHs

Total PAH Total EPA-16 PAHs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-12_23-60861-1 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483.XLSM Page 2 of 10

Analytical Report Number: 23-60861 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6854 Lab Sample Number

2836490

Sample Reference

WS102

2836491 WS103

Sample Number

None Supplied

3.18

3.70

Date Sampled

03/10/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Depth (m)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Boron (dissolved)

µg/l

ISO 17025

4200

610

Chromium (hexavalent)

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 5.0

Iron (dissolved)

mg/l

0.004

ISO 17025

0.27

0.14

Arsenic (dissolved)

µg/l

0.15

ISO 17025

4.14

4.55

Barium (dissolved)

µg/l

0.06

ISO 17025

250

430

Beryllium (dissolved)

µg/l

0.1

ISO 17025

< 0.1

Cadmium (dissolved)

µg/l

0.02

ISO 17025

< 0.02

Chromium (dissolved)

µg/l

0.2

ISO 17025

1.1

0.9

Copper (dissolved)

µg/l

0.5

ISO 17025

1.9

3.5

Lead (dissolved)

µg/l

0.2

ISO 17025

7.6

0.5

Mercury (dissolved)

µg/l

0.05

ISO 17025

< 0.05

Nickel (dissolved)

µg/l

0.5

ISO 17025

2.5

Selenium (dissolved)

µg/l

0.6

ISO 17025

1.2

< 0.6

Vanadium (dissolved)

µg/l

0.2

ISO 17025

6.7

1.4

Zinc (dissolved)

µg/l

0.5

ISO 17025

7.3

Benzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Toluene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

p & m-xylene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

o-xylene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >C5 - C6 HS_1D_AL

µg/l

NONE

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >C6 - C8 HS_1D_AL TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >C8 - C10 HS_1D_AL

µg/l

NONE

< 1.0

µg/l

NONE

< 1.0

Aliphatic >C10 - C12 EH_2D_AL_#1_#2

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

Aliphatic >C12 - C16 EH_2D_AL_#1_#2

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

Aliphatic >C16 - C21 EH_2D_AL_#1_#2

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

Aliphatic >C21 - C35 EH_2D_AL_#1_#2 Aliphatic >C10 - C35 EH_2D_AL_#1_#2

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >C5 - C7 HS_1D_AR

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >C7 - C8 HS_1D_AR TPH-CWG - Aromatic >C8 - C10 HS_1D_AR

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 1.0

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 1.0

Aromatic >C10 - C12 EH_2D_AR_#1_#2

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

Aromatic >C12 - C16 EH_2D_AR_#1_#2

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

130

Aromatic >C16 - C21 EH_2D_AR_#1_#2

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

310

Aromatic >C21 - C35 EH_2D_AR_#1_#2 Aromatic >C10 - C35 EH_2D_AR_#1_#2

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

460

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 10

930

Chloromethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Chloroethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Bromomethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Analytical Parameter (Water Analysis)

Heavy Metals / Metalloids

Monoaromatics & Oxygenates

Petroleum Hydrocarbons

VOCs

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-12_23-60861-1 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483.XLSM Page 3 of 10

Analytical Report Number: 23-60861 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6854 Lab Sample Number

2836490

Sample Reference

WS102

2836491 WS103

Sample Number

None Supplied

3.18

3.70

Date Sampled

03/10/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Depth (m)

Analytical Parameter (Water Analysis)

Units

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

Vinyl Chloride

µg/l

NONE

< 3.0

Trichlorofluoromethane

µg/l

NONE

< 3.0

1,1-Dichloroethene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Trans 1,2-dichloroethylene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether)

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,1-Dichloroethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

2,2-Dichloropropane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Chloroform

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,2-Dichloroethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,1-Dichloropropene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Cis-1,2-dichloroethene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Benzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Carbontetrachloride

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,2-Dichloropropane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Trichloroethene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Dibromomethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Bromodichloromethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Cis-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Trans-1,3-dichloropropene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Toluene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,3-Dichloropropane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Dibromochloromethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Tetrachloroethene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,2-Dibromoethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Chlorobenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Ethylbenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

p & m-Xylene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Styrene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Bromoform

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

o-Xylene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Isopropylbenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Bromobenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

n-Propylbenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

2-Chlorotoluene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

4-Chlorotoluene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

tert-Butylbenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

sec-Butylbenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,3-Dichlorobenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

p-Isopropyltoluene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Butylbenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

Hexachlorobutadiene

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-12_23-60861-1 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483.XLSM Page 4 of 10

Analytical Report Number: 23-60861 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6854 Lab Sample Number

2836490

Sample Reference

WS102

2836491 WS103

Sample Number

None Supplied

3.18

3.70

Date Sampled

03/10/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Depth (m)

Limit of detection

Accreditation Status

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

Units

Analytical Parameter (Water Analysis)

µg/l

ISO 17025

< 3.0

N/A

NONE

VOCs TICs VOCs TICs Compound Name SVOCs Aniline

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Phenol

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

2-Chlorophenol

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

1,3-Dichlorobenzene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

2-Methylphenol

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Hexachloroethane

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Nitrobenzene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

4-Methylphenol

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Isophorone

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

2-Nitrophenol

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

2,4-Dimethylphenol

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Naphthalene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

2.2

2,4-Dichlorophenol

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

4-Chloroaniline

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Hexachlorobutadiene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

2-Methylnaphthalene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

2-Chloronaphthalene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Dimethylphthalate

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Acenaphthylene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Acenaphthene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

0.33

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Dibenzofuran

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Diethyl phthalate

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

4-Nitroaniline

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Fluorene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Azobenzene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Bromophenyl phenyl ether

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Hexachlorobenzene

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Phenanthrene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Anthracene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Carbazole

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

1.2

Dibutyl phthalate

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Anthraquinone

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Fluoranthene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Pyrene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-12_23-60861-1 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483.XLSM Page 5 of 10

Analytical Report Number: 23-60861 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Your Order No: PO6854 Lab Sample Number

2836490

Sample Reference

WS102

2836491 WS103

Sample Number

None Supplied

3.18

3.70

Date Sampled

03/10/2023

Time Taken

None Supplied

Depth (m)

Units

Limit of detection

Butyl benzyl phthalate

µg/l

0.05

NONE

< 0.05

Benzo(a)anthracene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Chrysene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Benzo(a)pyrene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

Benzo(ghi)perylene

µg/l

0.01

ISO 17025

< 0.01

3&4-Methylphenol

µg/l

0.1

NONE

< 0.10

N/A

NONE

Octadec-9-enoic acid

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

Z-11-Pentadecenol

6-Methyl-4-indanol

N/A

NONE

N/A

NONE

Culmorin

N/A

NONE

97 3,5-di-tert-Butyl-4hydroxyphenylpropion ic acid 97

N/A

NONE

Phenol, 4,4'-(1methylethylidene)bis-

N/A

NONE

PCB Congener 28

µg/l

0.02

NONE

< 0.02

PCB Congener 52

µg/l

0.02

NONE

< 0.02

PCB Congener 101

µg/l

0.02

NONE

< 0.02

PCB Congener 118

µg/l

0.02

NONE

< 0.02

PCB Congener 138

µg/l

0.02

NONE

< 0.02

PCB Congener 153

µg/l

0.02

NONE

< 0.02

PCB Congener 180

µg/l

0.02

NONE

< 0.02

µg/l

0.14

NONE

< 0.14

Accreditation Status

Analytical Parameter (Water Analysis)

SVOCs TICs SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

SVOCs TICs Compound Name SVOC % Match

99 1Phenanthrenecarboxyli c acid, Benzoic acid, 3,51,2,3,4,4a,9,10,10abis(1,1-dimethylethyl)octahydro-1,4a4-hydroxydimethyl-7-(1methylethyl)-, [1R(1.alpha.,4a.beta.,10a. alpha.)]97 99

PCBs by GC-MS

PCBs by GC-MS Total PCBs

U/S = Unsuitable Sample I/S = Insufficient Sample ND = Not detected

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory. The results included within the report relate only to the sample(s) submitted for testing.

Iss No 2023-10-12_23-60861-1 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483.XLSM Page 6 of 10

Analytical Report Number : 23-60861 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering Water matrix abbreviations: Surface Water (SW) Potable Water (PW) Ground Water (GW) Process Waters (PrW) Final Sewage Effluent (FSE) Landfill Leachate (LL)

Analytical Test Name

Analytical Method Description

Analytical Method Reference

Method number

Wet / Dry Analysis

Accreditation Status

Metals in water by ICP-OES (dissolved)

Determination of metals in water by acidification followed by ICP-OES. Accredited Matrices SW, GW, PW, PrW.(Al, Cu,Fe,Zn).

In-house method based on MEWAM 2006 Methods for the Determination of Metals in Soil.

L039-PL

ISO 17025

Metals in water by ICP-MS (dissolved)

Determination of metals in water by acidification followed by ICP-MS. Accredited Matrices: SW, GW, PW except B=SW,GW, Hg=SW,PW, Al=SW,PW.

In-house method based on USEPA Method 6020 & 200.8 "for the determination of trace elements in water by ICP-MS.

L012-PL

ISO 17025

Boron in water

Determination of boron in water by acidification followed by In-house method based on MEWAM ICP-OES. Accredited matrices: SW PW GW

L039-PL

ISO 17025

Bromide in water by IC

Determination of bromide in waters by ion chromatography. Accredited matrices GW, PW, SW.

In house method based on Standard Methods for the Analysis of Water and Waste Water, method 4500

L008-PL

ISO 17025

Complex cyanide in water

Determination of complex cyanide by calculation. Accredited matrices SW, PW, GW.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL

ISO 17025

Hexavalent chromium in water

Determination of hexavalent chromium in water by acidification, addition of 1,5 diphenylcarbazide followed by colorimetry.

In-house method by continuous flow analyser. Accredited Matrices SW, GW, PW.

L080-PL

ISO 17025

Free cyanide in water

Determination of free cyanide by distillation followed by colorimetry.Accredited matrices SW, GW, PW.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL

ISO 17025

Monohydric phenols in water

Determination of phenols in water by continuous flow analyser. Accredited matrices: SW PW GW

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (skalar)

L080-PL

ISO 17025

Nitrite in water

Determination of nitrite in water by addition of sulphanilamide and NED followed by discrete analyser (colorimetry).Accredited matrices SW, GW, PW.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton

L082-PL

ISO 17025

Speciated EPA-16 PAHs in water

Determination of PAH compounds in water by extraction in In-house method based on USEPA 8270 dichloromethane followed by GC-MS with the use of surrogate and internal standards. Accredited matrices: SW PW GW

L102B-PL

ISO 17025

PCB's By GC-MS in water

Determination of PCB by extraction with acetone and hexane followed by GC-MS.

In-house method based on USEPA 8082

L028-PL

NONE

Sulphide in water

Determination of sulphide in water by ion selective electrode.

In-house method

L029-PL

NONE

Sulphate in water

Determination of sulphate in water after filtration by acidification followed by ICP-OES. Accredited Matrices SW, GW, PW.

In-house method based on MEWAM 2006 Methods for the Determination of Metals in Soil.

L039-PL

ISO 17025

Semi-volatile organic compounds in water

Determination of semi-volatile organic compounds in leachate by extraction in dichloromethane followed by GCMS.

In-house method based on USEPA 8270

L102B-PL

ISO 17025

Tentatively identified compounds (SVOC) in water

Determination of semi-volatile organic compounds total ion In-house method based on USEPA 8270 count in water by extraction with hexane followed by GCMS followed by a full library scan.

L070-PL

NONE

TPHCWG (Waters)

Determination of dichloromethane extractable hydrocarbons in water by GC-MS, speciation by interpretation.

L070-PL

ISO 17025

In-house method

Iss No 2023-10-12_23-60861-1 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483.XLSM Page 7 of 10

Analytical Test Name

Analytical Method Description

Analytical Method Reference

Method number

Wet / Dry Analysis

Accreditation Status

Total cyanide in water

Determination of total cyanide by distillation followed by colorimetry. Accredited matrices: SW PW GW

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL

ISO 17025

Total organic carbon in water

Determination of dissolved organic carbon in water by In-house method based on Examination of Water TOC/DOC NDIR analyser. Accredited matrices: SW PW GW. and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton

L037-PL

ISO 17025

Volatile organic compounds in water

Determination of volatile organic compounds in water by headspace GC-MS. Accredited matrices: SW PW GW

In-house method based on USEPA8260

L073B-PL

ISO 17025

Tentatively identified compounds (VOC) in water

Determination of volatile organic compounds total ion count In-house method based on USEPA8260 in water by headspace GC-MS followed by a full library scan.

L073B-PL

NONE

TPH C10-C35 by GCxGC-FID

Determination of total petroleum hydrocarbons in water by In-house method GC x GC FID with carbon banding aliphatic and aromatic C10-C35. Accredited Matrices SW,GW,PW.

L101B-PL

ISO 17025

BTEX and MTBE in water (Monoaromatics)

Determination of BTEX and MTBE in water by headspace GC-MS. Accredited matrices: SW PW GW

In-house method based on USEPA8260. Refer to CoA for analyte specific accreditation

L073B-PL

ISO 17025

Ammonia as NH3 in water

Determination of Ammonium/Ammonia/ Ammoniacal Nitrogen by the colorimetric salicylate/nitroprusside method. Accredited matrices SW, GW, PW, FSE, LL.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton

L082-PL

ISO 17025

Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N in water

Determination of Ammonium/Ammonia/ Ammoniacal Nitrogen by the discrete analyser (colorimetric) salicylate/nitroprusside method. Accredited matrices SW, GW, PW, FSE, LL.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton

L082-PL

ISO 17025

Ammonium as NH4 in water

Determination of Ammonium/Ammonia/ Ammoniacal Nitrogen by the colorimetric salicylate/nitroprusside method. Accredited matrices SW, GW, PW.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton

L082-PL

ISO 17025

Nitrite as N in water

Determination of nitrite in water by addition of sulphanilamide and NED followed by discrete analyser (colorimetry). Accredited matrices SW, GW, PW.

In-house method based on Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition: Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton

L082-PL

ISO 17025

pH at 20oC in water (automated)

Determination of pH in water by electrometric measurement. Accredited matrices: SW PW GW

In house method.

L099-PL

ISO 17025

Chloride in water

Determination of Chloride (diissolved) colorimetrically by discrete analyser.

In house based on MEWAM Method ISBN 0117516260. Accredited matrices: SW, PW, GW.

L082-PL

ISO 17025

Iss No 2023-10-12_23-60861-1 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483.XLSM Page 8 of 10

Analytical Test Name

Analytical Method Description

Analytical Method Reference

Method number

Wet / Dry Analysis

Accreditation Status

Alkalinity in Water (by discreet analyser)

Determination of Alkalinity by discreet analyser (colorimetry). Accredited matrices: SW, PW, GW.

In house method based on MEWAM & USEPA Method 310.2.

L082-PL

ISO 17025

Information in Support of Analytical Results List of HWOL Acronyms and Operators Acronym HS MS FID GC EH CU 1D 2D Total AL AR #1 #2 _ +

Descriptions Headspace Analysis Mass spectrometry Flame Ionisation Detector Gas Chromatography Extractable Hydrocarbons (i.e. everything extracted by the solvent(s)) Clean-up - e.g. by Florisil®, silica gel GC - Single coil/column gas chromatography GC-GC - Double coil/column gas chromatography Aliphatics & Aromatics Aliphatics Aromatics EH_2D_Total but with humics mathematically subtracted EH_2D_Total but with fatty acids mathematically subtracted Operator - understore to separate acronyms (exception for +) Operator to indicate cumulative e.g. EH+HS_Total or EH_CU+HS_Total

Iss No 2023-10-12_23-60861-1 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483.XLSM Page 9 of 10

Sample Deviation Report

Analytical Report Number : 23-60861 Project / Site name: Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering

Sample Lab Sample Type Number

Sample Deviation

Test Name

Test Ref

Test Deviation

WS103

None Supplied

2836491

BTEX and MTBE in water (Monoaromatics)

L073B-PL

WS103

None Supplied

2836491

Tentatively identified compounds (VOC) in water

L073B-PL

WS103

None Supplied

2836491

Volatile organic compounds in water

L073B-PL

Iss No 2023-10-12_23-60861-1 Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering GE21483.XLSM Page 10 of 10

APPENDIX F Spot Return Gas and GW Monitoring Additional Monitoring Data Graphs

Project: Ref: Client:

Location WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS106a WS106a WS106a

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane GE21483 Havering Borough Council

Date 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023

GSV/Qhgs

Time (sec)

CH4 (%)

CO2 CO O2 (%) (ppm) (%)

H2S (ppm)

Flow (l/hr)

VOC (ppm)

Pressure (mb)

GWL (m bgl)

0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20

2.4 10.2 18.9 19.0 19.1 19.1 19.1 19.3 0.3 26.2 27.7 27.2 27.2 30.0 26.8 25.8 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.1 1.8

2.5 23.3 23.4 23.7 23.8 23.7 23.7 23.8 0.1 22.1 22.8 23.2 23.0 23.1 23.0 22.8 0.1 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.6 0.1 5.7 5.9 6.0 6.0 5.9 5.8 5.8 0.8 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.7 0.5 0.2 0.2

0.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 ‐0.2 ‐0.2 ‐0.2

5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 60.2 60.2 60.2

1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1020 1020 1020 1020 1020 1020 1020 1020 1016 1016 1016 1016 1016 1016 1016 1016 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1019 1019 1019

Dry at 2.35 Dry at 2.35 Dry at 2.35 Dry at 2.35 Dry at 2.35 Dry at 2.35 Dry at 2.35 Dry at 2.35 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.52 4.52 4.52 4.52 4.52 4.52 4.52 4.52 4.51 4.51 4.51

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

16.5 10.2 7.2 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 20.9 5.0 1.3 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 20.9 18.4 17.5 17.4 17.4 17.8 18.2 18.3 21.0 20.1 16.5 14.7 14.1 14.4 14.4 14.4 20.3 20.0 17.5 17.2 17.1 17.1 17.2 17.2 20.7 20.1 15.3

0.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0

CH4

CO2

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.026 0.028 0.027 0.027 0.030 0.027 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.002 ‐0.004

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.022 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.000 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 ‐0.001 0.000 0.000

Page 1 of 11

Characteristic Situation BS8485 & C665 CO2 CH4 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

CS1 Limiting Value Check

NHBC

Flow

CH4

CO2

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit

CO2

CH4 GSV GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

Conc. AMBER 1 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN RED RED RED RED RED RED RED GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1

GSV GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

Conc. GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102

03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023

30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

2.0 2.0 1.8 1.5 0.5 0.0 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.3 2.4 1.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 29.6 29.7 29.7 29.7 29.7 29.7 29.7 0.2 31.6 32.8 31.7

0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 1.4 15.0 15.4 15.5 15.6 15.3 14.2 13.1 0.3 10.8 10.9 11.1 11.2 11.2 11.2 11.2 0.1 3.9 3.9 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.9 0.1 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.3 29.4 30.0 30.2 30.2 30.1 30.1 30.1 0.1 11.7 12.0 12.1

13.0 13.3 14.0 15.0 18.8 20.0 14.3 5.2 4.4 4.3 4.5 5.8 7.2 20.6 17.2 10.4 8.3 8.0 8.0 7.9 7.9 20.8 18.5 16.7 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.3 16.3 21.0 18.1 11.9 9.7 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.9 19.4 7.0 1.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 20.9 11.7 8.6 0.5

1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 9.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 2.0

‐0.2 ‐0.2 ‐0.2 ‐0.2 ‐0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

60.2 60.2 60.2 60.2 60.2 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 302.1 302.1 302.1 302.1

1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1001 1001 1001 1001

4.51 4.51 4.51 4.51 4.51 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 5.00 Dry at 5.00 Dry at 5.00 Dry at 5.00 Dry at 5.00 Dry at 5.00 Dry at 5.00 Dry at 5.00 Dry at 3.54 Dry at 3.54 Dry at 3.54 Dry at 3.54 Dry at 3.54 Dry at 3.54 Dry at 3.54 Dry at 3.54 Dry at 3.70 Dry at 3.70 Dry at 3.70 Dry at 3.70 Dry at 3.70 Dry at 3.70 Dry at 3.70 Dry at 3.70 Dry at 2.32 Dry at 2.32 Dry at 2.32 Dry at 2.32 Dry at 2.32 Dry at 2.32 Dry at 2.32 Dry at 2.32 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16

‐0.004 ‐0.004 ‐0.004 ‐0.003 ‐0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Page 2 of 11

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit

NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 RED RED RED RED RED RED RED GREEN RED RED RED

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 RED RED RED RED RED RED GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b

13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023

60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

31.9 31.9 31.5 31.7 0.0 18.3 18.5 18.5 18.6 18.7 18.7 18.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.6 7.4 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 0.0 6.0 5.8 5.8 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

12.2 12.3 12.4 12.4 0.1 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.1 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 1.1 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 17.5 17.8 17.4 18.0 17.7 17.7 17.7 0.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.4

0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 20.9 6.1 2.6 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 17.5 16.0 14.2 13.5 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 20.2 18.7 17.4 17.1 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 20.6 12.5 2.0 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 20.2 12.1 4.1 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0 21.0 19.8 16.5 15.3 15.2

1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 0.0 4.0 5.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

302.1 302.1 302.1 302.1 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 31.1 31.1 31.1 31.1 31.1 31.1 31.1 31.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 44.9 44.9 44.9 44.9 44.9 44.9 44.9 44.9 27.9 27.9 27.9 27.9 27.9

1001 1001 1001 1001 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000

3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 4.32 4.32 4.32 4.32 4.32 4.32 4.32 4.32 4.28 4.28 4.28 4.28 4.28 4.28 4.28 4.28 4.40 4.40 4.40 4.40 4.40 4.40 4.40 4.40 Dry at 5.01 Dry at 5.01 Dry at 5.01 Dry at 5.01 Dry at 5.01 Dry at 5.01 Dry at 5.01 Dry at 5.01 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 0.001 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Page 3 of 11

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO

CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit

RED RED RED RED GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

WS108b WS108b WS108b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104

13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 13/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023

90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 3.0 27.6 30.6 30.6 30.6 30.6 30.6 30.6 0.5 28.2 28.6 28.7 28.7 28.7 30.1 30.1 0.3 19.4 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

7.4 7.4 7.4 0.2 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 0.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 27.1 28.2 29.4 29.4 29.4 29.4 29.4 0.2 20.4 20.8 20.7 20.9 20.9 21.0 21.0 0.1 5.0 5.0 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.1 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.7 6.7

15.2 15.2 15.2 20.7 19.4 16.2 15.5 15.4 15.4 15.5 15.5 20.2 12.1 8.9 8.3 8.2 8.4 8.4 8.4 2.0 8.1 1.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 20.0 4.0 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 21.4 14.0 7.6 2.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 20.7 18.1 13.7 10.9 9.8 9.7

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 6.0 24.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 2.0 12.0 15.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

27.9 27.9 27.9 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9

1000 1000 1000 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991

Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.89 Dry at 4.89 Dry at 4.89 Dry at 4.89 Dry at 4.89 Dry at 4.89 Dry at 4.89 Dry at 4.89 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry 3.21 3.21 3.21 3.21 3.21 3.21 3.21 3.21 4.02 4.02 4.02 4.02 4.02 4.02 4.02 4.02 4.27 4.27 4.27 4.27 4.27 4.27

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.003 ‐0.028 ‐0.031 ‐0.031 ‐0.031 ‐0.031 ‐0.031 ‐0.031 ‐0.001 ‐0.028 ‐0.029 ‐0.029 ‐0.029 ‐0.029 ‐0.030 ‐0.030 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.002 ‐0.027 ‐0.028 ‐0.029 ‐0.029 ‐0.029 ‐0.029 ‐0.029 0.000 ‐0.020 ‐0.021 ‐0.021 ‐0.021 ‐0.021 ‐0.021 ‐0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013

Page 4 of 11

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO

CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 RED RED RED RED RED RED RED GREEN RED RED RED RED RED RED RED GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

WS104 WS104 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110

27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023 27/10/2023

120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 5.0 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 0.2 4.0 5.3 5.4 5.3 5.2 5.2 5.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

6.7 6.7 0.8 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 18.1 18.8 19.1 19.1 19.0 19.0 19.0 0.9 11.3 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.6 11.6 11.6 0.4 5.7 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.8 0.2 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3

9.7 9.7 20.1 20.1 16.0 15.6 15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3 20.0 10.2 4.1 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 21.2 17.7 4.7 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.5 21.9 13.1 9.8 9.1 9.1 9.0 9.0 9.0 21.0 18.7 13.5 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 21.3 14.5 6.9 5.2 5.0 5.0 5.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

4.9 4.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 32.1 32.1 32.1 32.1 32.1 32.1 32.1 32.1 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8

991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991

4.27 4.27 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.37 4.37 4.37 4.37 4.37 4.37 4.37 4.37 Dry at 4.96 Dry at 4.96 Dry at 4.96 Dry at 4.96 Dry at 4.96 Dry at 4.96 Dry at 4.96 Dry at 4.96 Dry at 4.97 Dry at 4.97 Dry at 4.97 Dry at 4.97 Dry at 4.97 Dry at 4.97 Dry at 4.97 Dry at 4.97 Dry at 2.67 Dry at 2.67 Dry at 2.67 Dry at 2.67 Dry at 2.67 Dry at 2.67 Dry at 2.67 Dry at 2.67 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.000 0.008 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

0.013 0.013 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.036 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Page 5 of 11

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

WS110 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a

27/10/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023

180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

0.1 0.6 32.9 33.1 33.2 33.4 33.4 33.4 33.4 0.0 24.0 25.3 25.8 26.6 28.0 27.4 27.6 0.0 13.7 13.8 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.5 2.9 2.9 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.9

2.3 0.5 24.1 24.7 24.9 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 0.1 16.5 17.5 18.2 18.8 19.5 19.4 19.7 0.1 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 0.2 6.4 6.6 6.7 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 0.1 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

5.0 21.2 4.4 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 21.4 19.0 7.7 2.8 1.8 1.5 1.2 1.0 21.9 14.9 3.0 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 21.0 16.1 6.8 3.8 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 21.0 19.7 15.1 13.7 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 21.6 10.7 2.1 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3

1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

0.0 0.0 52.0 59.0 59.0 61.0 61.0 61.0 61.0 0.0 7.0 10.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

8.8 10.7 10.7 10.7 10.7 10.7 10.7 10.7 10.7 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7

991 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 999 999 999 999 999 999 999 999 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001

3.28 Dry at 2.37 Dry at 2.37 Dry at 2.37 Dry at 2.37 Dry at 2.37 Dry at 2.37 Dry at 2.37 Dry at 2.37 2.88 2.88 2.88 2.88 2.88 2.88 2.88 2.88 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.07 4.07 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.91 3.91 3.91 3.91 3.91 3.91 3.91 3.91

0.000 0.001 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.000 0.024 0.025 0.026 0.027 0.028 0.027 0.028 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

0.000 0.001 0.024 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.000 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.019 0.020 0.019 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Page 6 of 11

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit

NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

GREEN GREEN RED RED RED RED RED RED RED GREEN RED RED RED RED RED RED RED GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1

GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS103

06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 06/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023

0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 31.5 32.0 32.1 32.2 32.2 32.2 32.2 2.7 26.4 26.6 26.8 26.8 26.6 26.6 26.6 0.2

1.0 8.8 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 0.1 12.5 12.7 12.8 12.9 12.9 12.9 12.9 0.9 5.8 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.9 0.9 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 0.2 20.8 21.7 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 1.8 17.5 17.9 18.0 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 0.2

20.9 20.0 13.7 12.5 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4 21.5 13.7 9.8 8.0 7.6 7.5 7.5 7.5 21.1 19.2 16.0 15.2 15.2 15.1 15.0 15.0 21.2 19.0 5.6 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 19.9 9.0 2.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 20.0 9.4 1.9 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 21.3

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 8.0 11.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 0.0

‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 0.0

1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 4.0

1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1001 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1009 1008

Dry at 5.03 Dry at 5.03 Dry at 5.03 Dry at 5.03 Dry at 5.03 Dry at 5.03 Dry at 5.03 Dry at 5.03 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 4.98 Dry at 2.64 Dry at 2.64 Dry at 2.64 Dry at 2.64 Dry at 2.64 Dry at 2.64 Dry at 2.64 Dry at 2.64 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.97 2.97 2.97 2.97 2.97 2.97 2.97 2.97 3.14

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.003 ‐0.026 ‐0.027 ‐0.027 ‐0.027 ‐0.027 ‐0.027 ‐0.027 0.000

‐0.001 ‐0.009 ‐0.009 ‐0.009 ‐0.009 ‐0.009 ‐0.009 ‐0.009 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.001 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.006 ‐0.001 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 ‐0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.002 ‐0.018 ‐0.018 ‐0.018 ‐0.018 ‐0.018 ‐0.018 ‐0.018 0.000

Page 7 of 11

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO

NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN RED RED RED RED RED RED RED AMBER 1 RED RED RED RED RED RED RED GREEN

GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS109b WS109b

20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023

10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

16.0 16.1 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.9 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.1 5.1 5.1 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1

2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.0 0.1 7.7 7.9 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 0.7 4.9 4.9 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.4 14.6 15.0 15.2 15.2 15.3 15.3 15.3 0.3 11.8 12.1 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3 0.1 5.0

17.7 6.5 2.9 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 20.9 16.8 8.6 2.6 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 19.9 18.2 13.0 11.1 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 20.5 13.8 6.7 1.8 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 20.7 14.4 5.7 3.4 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.1 21.2 17.2 13.3 9.2 9.0 8.9 8.9 8.9 21.4 20.3

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 0.1 0.1

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.6 7.6

1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1002 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008

3.14 3.14 3.14 3.14 3.14 3.14 3.14 3.43 3.43 3.43 3.43 3.43 3.43 3.43 3.43 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.012 ‐0.012 ‐0.012 ‐0.012 ‐0.012 ‐0.012 ‐0.012 0.000 0.005

Page 8 of 11

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO

AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 1

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS103 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS105 WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS106a WS101 WS101 WS101

20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 20/11/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 04/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023

20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 17.6 17.6 17.7 17.7 17.7 17.7 17.7 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 2.3 3.6 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 0.0 31.3 31.5

5.0 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.4 7.8 7.9 8.0 8.0 8.1 8.1 8.1 1.1 5.9 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.9 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 18.7 19.1

16.3 15.3 15.1 15.0 15.0 15.0 21.4 6.5 2.6 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 21.1 18.2 2.1 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 21.0 17.6 6.0 2.4 2.0 1.7 1.5 1.5 20.8 17.1 11.1 7.9 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.8 20.1 8.8 3.7 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 22.0 19.1 12.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 16.0

0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.1

7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 7.3 7.3 7.3

1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1008 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 1007 996 996 996 996 996 996 996 996 997 997 997 997 997 997 997 997 996 996 996 996 996 996 996 996 997 997 997 997 997 997 997 997 1019 1019 1019

Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry 2.79 2.79 2.79 2.79 2.79 2.79 2.79 2.79 3.05 3.05 3.05 3.05 3.05 3.05 3.05 3.05 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 3.54 3.54 3.54 3.54 3.54 3.54 3.54 3.54 Dry Dry Dry

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.028 0.043 0.049 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.000 0.031 0.032

0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.004 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.019 0.019

Page 9 of 11

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit

NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN RED RED

AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS101 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS102 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS104 WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS107c WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS108b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS109b WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110

06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023 06/12/2023

30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30 60 90 120 180 0 10 20 30

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

31.8 31.8 31.8 31.8 31.8 2.4 26.9 27.2 27.4 27.5 27.5 27.5 27.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

19.7 19.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 1.4 15.7 16.0 16.1 16.1 16.1 16.1 16.1 0.2 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 1.3 14.4 14.7 14.7 14.8 14.8 14.7 14.7 1.9 10.6 11.1 11.1 11.2 11.2 11.2 11.2 1.5 4.8 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.1

1.9 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 21.3 16.7 3.2 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 21.7 16.7 7.5 3.1 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 21.4 19.6 5.1 4.3 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.7 20.4 18.4 13.8 11.1 10.9 10.8 10.8 10.8 21.0 17.5 16.6 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 21.6 18.6 9.8 5.5

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

17.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 0.0 9.0 11.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1

7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1

1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1018 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1019 1018 1018 1018 1018

Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.38 3.38 3.38 3.38 3.38 3.38 3.38 3.38 Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry Dry 2.63 2.63 2.63 2.63

0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ‐0.001 ‐0.001 ‐0.001 ‐0.001

Page 10 of 11

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit CH4>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit CO2>CS1 limit NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

RED RED RED RED RED AMBER 1 RED RED RED RED RED RED RED GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 AMBER 1 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 AMBER 2 GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

WS110 WS110 WS110 WS110

06/12/2023 60 06/12/2023 90 06/12/2023 120 06/12/2023 180 Max values Min Vaules BH Flow LoD check

Geo-Environmental Services Limited T: 01273 832972 www.gesl.net

0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 33.4 0.0 33.4

1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 30.2 0.0 30.2

4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 22.0 0.1 22.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 0.0 12.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 61.0 0.0 61.0

‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 ‐0.1 1.2 ‐0.2 0.1

4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 302.1 0.0 ‐

1018 1018 1018 1018 1020.0 991.0 ‐

2.63 2.63 2.63 2.63 4.7 2.4 ‐

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.401 0.000 0.033

‐0.001 ‐0.001 ‐0.001 ‐0.001 0.362 0.000 0.030

Page 11 of 11

CS1 CS1 CS1 CS1 CS2 CS1 CS1

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO CH4>CS1 limit

NO NO NO NO NO NO CO2>CS1 limit

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN AMBER 1 GREEN GREEN

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN RED GREEN RED

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN

GREEN GREEN GREEN GREEN RED GREEN RED

GE21483 - Gas Assessment Sheet Visits 1-6

Recorded Gas Flow Rates 1025

1.4

1020

1.2

1015

1010

Pressure (mb)

1005 0.6 1000 0.4 995 0.2 990 0

985

980

-0.2

975

-0.4

Pressure

WS101

WS102

WS103

WS104

WS105

WS106a

WS107c

WS108b

WS109b

WS110

Borehole Flow Rate (l/hr)

0.8

Maximum Hydrogen Sulphide Concentrations 70

1025

1020 60 1015

1010

1005

1000 30

995

990

985 10 980

975

WS101

WS102

WS103

WS104

WS105

WS106a

WS107c

WS108b

WS109b

WS110

Pressure

Pressure (mb)

Hydrogen Sulphide (ppm)

Maximum VOC Concentrations 1025

350

1020 300 1015

1010

1005

200

1000 150

995

990

100

985 50 980

975

WS101

WS102

WS103

WS104

WS105

WS106a

WS107c

WS108b

WS109b

WS110

Pressure

Pressure (mb)

VOC (ppm)

250

APPENDIX G Hazardous Waste Online Assessment

Waste Classification Report HazWasteOnline™ classifies waste as either hazardous or non-hazardous based on its chemical composition, related legislation and the rules and data defined in the current UK or EU technical guidance (Appendix C) (note that HP 9 Infectious is not assessed). It is the responsibility of the classifier named below to: a) understand the origin of the waste b) select the correct List of Waste code(s) c) confirm that the list of determinands, results and sampling plan are fit for purpose d) select and justify the chosen metal species (Appendix B) e) correctly apply moisture correction and other available corrections f) add the meta data for their user-defined substances (Appendix A) g) check that the classification engine is suitable with respect to the national destination of the waste (Appendix C)

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

To aid the reviewer, the laboratory results, assumptions and justifications managed by the classifier are highlighted in pale yellow.

Job name GE21483 Waste Assessment

Description/Comments Based on Analytical Report Numbers: 23-57983-2 & 23-58576

Project

Site

GE21183

Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering

Classified by Name: Shaun Armitage Date: 11 Oct 2023 06:12 GMT Telephone:

Company: Geo-Environmental Services Unit 7, Danworth Farm, Cuckfield Rd Hurstpierpoint BN6 9GL

HazWasteOnline™ provides a two day, hazardous waste classification course that covers the use of the software and both basic and advanced waste classification techniques. Certification has to be renewed every 3 years.

HazWasteOnline™ Certification:

CERTIFIED

Course Hazardous Waste Classification

Date 09 Jun 2022

Next 3 year Refresher due by Jun 2025

Purpose of classification 2 - Material Characterisation

Address of the waste Arnolds Field, Launders Lane, Havering

Post Code N/A

SIC for the process giving rise to the waste

Description of industry/producer giving rise to the waste Possible redevelopment of a former landfill

Description of the specific process, sub-process and/or activity that created the waste Potential waste created be excavations for redevelopment of a former landfill

Description of the waste Sand and clay based Made Ground/deposited soils with frequent anthropogenic material and landfill waste with soil component

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 1 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Job summary # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Sample name TP101--18092023-3.00 TP102--18092023-0.20 TP103--18092023-0.75 TP104--18092023-3.30 TP105--19092023-3.20 TP106--19092023-2.20 TP107--19092023-1.80 TP108--19092023-4.40 TP109--19092023-2.50 TP110--20092023-3.40 TP111--20092023-0.60 TP113--20092023-3.30 WS102--21092023-4.70 WS106A--21092023-0.90 WS107C--22092023-2.30

Depth [m] 3.00 0.20 0.75 3.30 3.20 2.20 1.80 4.40 2.50 3.40 0.60 3.30 4.70 0.90 2.30

Classification Result Non Hazardous Non Hazardous Non Hazardous Non Hazardous Non Hazardous Non Hazardous Hazardous Non Hazardous Non Hazardous Hazardous Non Hazardous Non Hazardous Non Hazardous Non Hazardous Non Hazardous

Hazard properties

HP 7, HP 10, HP 14

HP 3(i), HP 7, HP 11, HP 14

Page 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 33 36 39 42 48 51

Related documents # 1 2 3 4

Name 23-57983_HWOL_Results.hwol 23-58576_HWOL_Results.hwol GE21483.batch GESL Soils Waste Stream Template

Description i2 Analytical .hwol file used to populate the Job i2 Analytical .hwol file used to populate the Job i2 Analytical .batch file used to populate the Job waste stream template used to create this Job

Report Created by: Shaun Armitage

Created date: 11 Oct 2023 06:12 GMT

Appendices Appendix A: Classifier defined and non GB MCL determinands Appendix B: Rationale for selection of metal species Appendix C: Version

Page 2 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 57 61 62

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP101--18092023-3.00

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP101--18092023-3.00 Sample Depth: 3.00 m Moisture content: 14% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

20.439

mg/kg

0.00204 %

0.77

mg/kg 2.775

1.838

mg/kg

0.000184 %

3.4

mg/kg

3.22

9.415

mg/kg

0.000941 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

31.423

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

91.017

mg/kg

0.0091 %

220

mg/kg

189.2

mg/kg

0.0189 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 14% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00314 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

mg/kg 1.353

0.698

mg/kg

0.0000698 %

mg/kg 2.976

56.311

mg/kg

0.00563 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

64.481

mg/kg

0.00645 %

240

mg/kg 4.398

907.732

mg/kg

0.0908 %

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

0.6

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

www.hazwasteonline.com

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 3 of 62

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.0119 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

138

mg/kg

118.68

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

8.7

8.7 pH

mg/kg

1.72

mg/kg

0.000172 %

0.13

mg/kg

0.112

mg/kg

0.0000112 %

1.4

mg/kg

1.204

mg/kg

0.00012 %

1.1

mg/kg

0.946

mg/kg

0.0000946 %

7.1

mg/kg

6.106

mg/kg

0.000611 %

1.3

mg/kg

1.118

mg/kg

0.000112 %

8.7

mg/kg

7.482

mg/kg

0.000748 %

7.3

mg/kg

6.278

mg/kg

0.000628 %

4.2

mg/kg

3.612

mg/kg

0.000361 %

4.1

mg/kg

3.526

mg/kg

0.000353 %

5.3

mg/kg

4.558

mg/kg

0.000456 %

1.7

mg/kg

1.462

mg/kg

0.000146 %

mg/kg

3.44

mg/kg

0.000344 %

1.9

mg/kg

1.634

mg/kg

0.000163 %

0.53

mg/kg

0.456

mg/kg

0.0000456 %

2.1

mg/kg

1.806

mg/kg

0.000181 %

<0.007

mg/kg

<0.007

mg/kg <0.0000007 %

690

mg/kg 3.211

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

polychlorobiphenyls; PCB 602-039-00-4

215-648-1

1336-36-3

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

Page 4 of 62

234-129-0

10545-99-0

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

1905.598

mg/kg

<LOD

0.191 %

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 40

EC Number

CAS Number

monohydric phenols P1186

User entered data

Conv. Factor

mg/kg

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg <0.0001 % Total:

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.345 %

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

User supplied data Determinand values ignored for classification, see column 'Conc. Not Used' for reason Determinand defined or amended by HazWasteOnline (see Appendix A) Speciated Deteminand - Unless the Determinand is Note 1, the Conversion Factor is used to calculate the compound concentration Below limit of detection Only the metal concentration has been used for classification

Supplementary Hazardous Property Information HP 3(i): Flammable "flammable liquid waste: liquid waste having a flash point below 60°C or waste gas oil, diesel and light heating oils having a flash point > 55°C and <= 75°C" Force this Hazardous property to non hazardous because Non-flammable material Hazard Statements hit: Flam. Liq. 3; H226 "Flammable liquid and vapour." Because of determinand: TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group: (conc.: 0.0119%)

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 5 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP102--18092023-0.20

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP102--18092023-0.20 Sample Depth: 0.20 m Moisture content: 6.3% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

19.794

mg/kg

0.00198 %

0.94

mg/kg 2.775

2.444

mg/kg

0.000244 %

1.7

mg/kg

3.22

5.129

mg/kg

0.000513 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

35.606

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

49.583

mg/kg

0.00496 %

180

mg/kg

168.66

mg/kg

0.0169 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 6.3% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00356 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

Page 6 of 62

mg/kg 1.353

0.634

mg/kg

0.0000634 %

mg/kg 2.976

64.141

mg/kg

0.00641 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

75.272

mg/kg

0.00753 %

150

mg/kg 4.398

618.128

mg/kg

0.0618 %

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

0.5

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.0128 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

137

mg/kg

128.369

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

7.3

7.3 pH

0.12

mg/kg

0.112

mg/kg

0.0000112 %

0.13

mg/kg

0.122

mg/kg

0.0000122 %

0.61

mg/kg

0.572

mg/kg

0.0000572 %

0.74

mg/kg

0.693

mg/kg

0.0000693 %

7.6

mg/kg

7.121

mg/kg

0.000712 %

1.7

mg/kg

1.593

mg/kg

0.000159 %

9.2

mg/kg

8.62

mg/kg

0.000862 %

7.4

mg/kg

6.934

mg/kg

0.000693 %

mg/kg

3.748

mg/kg

0.000375 %

3.7

mg/kg

3.467

mg/kg

0.000347 %

4.7

mg/kg

4.404

mg/kg

0.00044 %

1.7

mg/kg

1.593

mg/kg

0.000159 %

3.5

mg/kg

3.28

mg/kg

0.000328 %

1.7

mg/kg

1.593

mg/kg

0.000159 %

0.48

mg/kg

0.45

mg/kg

0.000045 %

1.8

mg/kg

1.687

mg/kg

0.000169 % 0.0572 %

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186

190

mg/kg 3.211

571.711

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 % Total:

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

<LOD

0.18 %

Page 7 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

Page 8 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP103--18092023-0.75

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP103--18092023-0.75 Sample Depth: 0.75 m Moisture content: 5.6% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

16.203

mg/kg

0.00162 %

0.87

mg/kg 2.775

2.279

mg/kg

0.000228 %

1.7

mg/kg

3.22

5.167

mg/kg

0.000517 %

0.9

mg/kg 1.142

0.971

mg/kg

0.0000971 %

mg/kg 1.462

34.493

mg/kg

0.00345 %

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

73.336

mg/kg

0.00733 %

180

mg/kg

169.92

mg/kg

0.017 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 5.6% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

mg/kg 1.353

0.383

mg/kg

0.0000383 %

mg/kg 2.976

61.811

mg/kg

0.00618 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

72.464

mg/kg

0.00725 %

190

mg/kg 4.398

788.812

mg/kg

0.0789 %

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

0.3

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

www.hazwasteonline.com

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 9 of 62

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.0495 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

524

mg/kg

494.656

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

7.9

7.9 pH

mg/kg

0.944

mg/kg

0.0000944 %

0.27

mg/kg

0.255

mg/kg

0.0000255 %

7.3

mg/kg

6.891

mg/kg

0.000689 %

9.4

mg/kg

8.874

mg/kg

0.000887 %

mg/kg

79.296

mg/kg

0.00793 %

mg/kg

20.768

mg/kg

0.00208 %

mg/kg

88.736

mg/kg

0.00887 %

mg/kg

69.856

mg/kg

0.00699 %

mg/kg

25.488

mg/kg

0.00255 %

mg/kg

21.712

mg/kg

0.00217 %

mg/kg

26.432

mg/kg

0.00264 %

mg/kg

7.552

mg/kg

0.000755 %

mg/kg

20.768

mg/kg

0.00208 %

9.7

mg/kg

9.157

mg/kg

0.000916 %

2.1

mg/kg

1.982

mg/kg

0.000198 %

9.5

mg/kg

8.968

mg/kg

0.000897 %

mg/kg 3.211

<16.057

mg/kg <0.00161 %

<LOD

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 %

<LOD

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186

Total:

Page 10 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

0.214 %

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 11 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP104--18092023-3.30

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP104--18092023-3.30 Sample Depth: 3.30 m Moisture content: 16% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

34.381

mg/kg

0.00344 %

mg/kg 2.775

4.663

mg/kg

0.000466 %

5.8

mg/kg

3.22

15.687

mg/kg

0.00157 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

35.603

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

150

mg/kg 1.126

141.862

mg/kg

0.0142 %

520

mg/kg

436.8

mg/kg

0.0437 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 16% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00356 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

Page 12 of 62

mg/kg 1.353

6.026

mg/kg

0.000603 %

mg/kg 2.976

102.503

mg/kg

0.0103 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

76.477

mg/kg

0.00765 %

390

mg/kg 4.398

1440.761

mg/kg

0.144 %

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

5.3

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

mg/kg

0.0042 %

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

4.4

mg/kg 1.884

6.963

mg/kg

0.000696 %

8pH

0.12

mg/kg

0.101

mg/kg

0.0000101 %

0.08

mg/kg

0.0672

mg/kg

0.00000672 %

0.08

mg/kg

0.0672

mg/kg

0.00000672 %

0.09

mg/kg

0.0756

mg/kg

0.00000756 %

0.7

mg/kg

0.588

mg/kg

0.0000588 %

0.16

mg/kg

0.134

mg/kg

0.0000134 %

1.5

mg/kg

1.26

mg/kg

0.000126 %

1.4

mg/kg

1.176

mg/kg

0.000118 %

0.86

mg/kg

0.722

mg/kg

0.0000722 %

0.83

mg/kg

0.697

mg/kg

0.0000697 %

1.2

mg/kg

1.008

mg/kg

0.000101 %

0.42

mg/kg

0.353

mg/kg

0.0000353 %

0.87

mg/kg

0.731

mg/kg

0.0000731 %

0.51

mg/kg

0.428

mg/kg

0.0000428 %

0.15

mg/kg

0.126

mg/kg

0.0000126 %

0.55

mg/kg

0.462

mg/kg

0.0000462 %

mg/kg 3.211

167.246

mg/kg

0.0167 %

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 %

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186

Total:

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

<LOD

0.253 %

Page 13 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

Page 14 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP105--19092023-3.20

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP105--19092023-3.20 Sample Depth: 3.20 m Moisture content: 14% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

14.761

mg/kg

0.00148 %

0.81

mg/kg 2.775

1.933

mg/kg

0.000193 %

3.1

mg/kg

3.22

8.584

mg/kg

0.000858 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

28.91

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

45.508

mg/kg

0.00455 %

160

mg/kg

137.6

mg/kg

0.0138 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 14% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00289 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

mg/kg 1.353

0.698

mg/kg

0.0000698 %

mg/kg 2.976

46.073

mg/kg

0.00461 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

61.41

mg/kg

0.00614 %

150

mg/kg 4.398

567.332

mg/kg

0.0567 %

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

0.6

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

www.hazwasteonline.com

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 15 of 62

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.0396 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

460

mg/kg

395.6

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

9.7

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

0.13

mg/kg

0.112

mg/kg

0.0000112 %

0.18

mg/kg

0.155

mg/kg

0.0000155 %

0.17

mg/kg

0.146

mg/kg

0.0000146 %

2.1

mg/kg

1.806

mg/kg

0.000181 %

0.53

mg/kg

0.456

mg/kg

0.0000456 %

4.4

mg/kg

3.784

mg/kg

0.000378 %

4.1

mg/kg

3.526

mg/kg

0.000353 %

2.5

mg/kg

2.15

mg/kg

0.000215 %

2.3

mg/kg

1.978

mg/kg

0.000198 %

3.5

mg/kg

3.01

mg/kg

0.000301 %

1.2

mg/kg

1.032

mg/kg

0.000103 %

2.7

mg/kg

2.322

mg/kg

0.000232 %

1.3

mg/kg

1.118

mg/kg

0.000112 %

0.35

mg/kg

0.301

mg/kg

0.0000301 %

1.5

mg/kg

1.29

mg/kg

0.000129 %

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

-------

12001-28-4 132207-32-0 12172-73-5 77536-66-4 77536-68-6

9.7 pH <LOD

asbestos 650-013-00-6 38

Page 16 of 62

<10

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

mg/kg

<10

mg/kg <0.001 %

<LOD

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number

EC Number

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.0414 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

77536-67-5 12001-29-5 39 40

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186

150

mg/kg 3.211

414.26

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 % Total:

<LOD

0.177 %

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 17 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP106--19092023-2.20

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP106--19092023-2.20 Sample Depth: 2.20 m Moisture content: 14% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

15.897

mg/kg

0.00159 %

0.69

mg/kg 2.775

1.647

mg/kg

0.000165 %

4.4

mg/kg

3.22

12.184

mg/kg

0.00122 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

30.167

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

80.366

mg/kg

0.00804 %

270

mg/kg

232.2

mg/kg

0.0232 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 14% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00302 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

Page 18 of 62

mg/kg 1.353

0.931

mg/kg

0.0000931 %

mg/kg 2.976

48.632

mg/kg

0.00486 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

58.34

mg/kg

0.00583 %

210

mg/kg 4.398

794.265

mg/kg

0.0794 %

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

0.8

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.0114 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

133

mg/kg

114.38

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

7.8

7.8 pH

0.07

mg/kg

0.0602

mg/kg

0.00000602 %

0.13

mg/kg

0.112

mg/kg

0.0000112 %

0.08

mg/kg

0.0688

mg/kg

0.00000688 %

0.15

mg/kg

0.129

mg/kg

0.0000129 %

0.6

mg/kg

0.516

mg/kg

0.0000516 %

0.24

mg/kg

0.206

mg/kg

0.0000206 %

2.4

mg/kg

2.064

mg/kg

0.000206 %

2.1

mg/kg

1.806

mg/kg

0.000181 %

1.3

mg/kg

1.118

mg/kg

0.000112 %

1.3

mg/kg

1.118

mg/kg

0.000112 %

mg/kg

1.72

mg/kg

0.000172 %

0.69

mg/kg

0.593

mg/kg

0.0000593 %

1.3

mg/kg

1.118

mg/kg

0.000112 %

0.81

mg/kg

0.697

mg/kg

0.0000697 %

0.23

mg/kg

0.198

mg/kg

0.0000198 %

0.91

mg/kg

0.783

mg/kg

0.0000783 %

0.068

mg/kg

0.0585

mg/kg

0.00000585 %

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

polychlorobiphenyls; PCB 602-039-00-4

215-648-1

1336-36-3

-------

12001-28-4 132207-32-0 12172-73-5

asbestos 39

650-013-00-6

www.hazwasteonline.com

<10

mg/kg

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

<10

mg/kg <0.001 %

<LOD

Page 19 of 62

EU CLP index number

EC Number

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

3037.909

mg/kg

0.304 %

0.946

mg/kg

0.0000946 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

77536-66-4 77536-68-6 77536-67-5 12001-29-5 40 41

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols

1100 1.1

P1186

mg/kg 3.211 mg/kg

Total:

0.446 %

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

Page 20 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP107--19092023-1.80

Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 03 * in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP107--19092023-1.80 Sample Depth: 1.80 m Moisture content: 16% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 03 * (Soil and stones containing hazardous substances)

Hazard properties HP 7: Carcinogenic "waste which induces cancer or increases its incidence" Hazard Statements hit: Carc. 1A; H350 "May cause cancer [state route of exposure if it is conclusively proven that no other routes of exposure cause the hazard]." Because of determinand: lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case): (Note 1 conc.: 0.37%) HP 10: Toxic for reproduction "waste which has adverse effects on sexual function and fertility in adult males and females, as well as developmental toxicity in the offspring" Hazard Statements hit: Repr. 1A; H360Df "May damage the unborn child. Suspected of damaging fertility." Because of determinand: lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case): (Note 1 conc.: 0.37%) HP 14: Ecotoxic "waste which presents or may present immediate or delayed risks for one or more sectors of the environment" Hazard Statements hit: Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 "Very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects." Because of determinands: dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide: (compound conc.: 0.445%) lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case): (Note 1 conc.: 0.37%) zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2]: (compound conc.: 0.739%)

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

CAS Number

antimony { antimony trioxide } 051-005-00-X

215-175-0

1309-64-4

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

www.hazwasteonline.com

1303-86-2

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

250

mg/kg 1.197

251.391

mg/kg

0.0251 %

mg/kg

1.32

48.799

mg/kg

0.00488 %

0.97

mg/kg 2.775

2.261

mg/kg

0.000226 %

3.6

mg/kg

9.737

mg/kg

0.000974 %

3.22

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 16% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

Page 21 of 62

EU CLP index number 5

EC Number

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

2.4

mg/kg 1.142

2.303

mg/kg

0.00023 %

mg/kg 1.462

62.613

mg/kg

0.00626 %

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

4700

mg/kg 1.126

4445.007

mg/kg

0.445 %

4400

mg/kg

3696

mg/kg

0.37 %

850

mg/kg 2.749

1962.475

mg/kg

0.196 %

1.9

mg/kg 1.353

2.16

mg/kg

0.000216 %

mg/kg 2.976

122.503

mg/kg

0.0123 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

100

mg/kg 1.785

149.956

mg/kg

0.015 %

2000

mg/kg 4.398

7388.516

mg/kg

0.739 %

136

mg/kg

114.24

mg/kg

0.0114 %

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

8.8

8.8 pH

1.2

mg/kg

1.008

mg/kg

0.000101 %

0.1

mg/kg

0.084

mg/kg

0.0000084 %

0.07

mg/kg

0.0588

mg/kg

0.00000588 %

0.08

mg/kg

0.0672

mg/kg

0.00000672 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 8

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 10 11 12 13

manganese { manganese sulphate } 025-003-00-4

232-089-9

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

231-299-8

238-766-5

vanadium { pentoxide }

239-125-2

15060-62-5

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5

603-181-00-X 18

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

023-001-00-8 15

7785-87-7

ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4 xylene

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

23 24 25 26 27

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene

Page 22 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

EC Number

CAS Number

phenanthrene 201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

-------

12001-28-4 132207-32-0 12172-73-5 77536-66-4 77536-68-6 77536-67-5 12001-29-5

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.58

mg/kg

0.487

mg/kg

0.0000487 %

0.15

mg/kg

0.126

mg/kg

0.0000126 %

1.4

mg/kg

1.176

mg/kg

0.000118 %

1.3

mg/kg

1.092

mg/kg

0.000109 %

0.88

mg/kg

0.739

mg/kg

0.0000739 %

0.91

mg/kg

0.764

mg/kg

0.0000764 %

1.4

mg/kg

1.176

mg/kg

0.000118 %

0.45

mg/kg

0.378

mg/kg

0.0000378 %

0.97

mg/kg

0.815

mg/kg

0.0000815 %

0.55

mg/kg

0.462

mg/kg

0.0000462 %

0.18

mg/kg

0.151

mg/kg

0.0000151 %

0.65

mg/kg

0.546

mg/kg

0.0000546 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

asbestos 650-013-00-6 40

41 42

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols

340

mg/kg

285.6

mg/kg

0.0286 %

mg/kg 3.211

167.246

mg/kg

0.0167 %

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 %

<LOD

P1186 Total:

1.873 %

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

User supplied data Determinand values ignored for classification, see column 'Conc. Not Used' for reason Hazardous result Determinand defined or amended by HazWasteOnline (see Appendix A) Speciated Deteminand - Unless the Determinand is Note 1, the Conversion Factor is used to calculate the compound concentration Below limit of detection Only the metal concentration has been used for classification

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 23 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP108--19092023-4.40

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP108--19092023-4.40 Sample Depth: 4.40 m Moisture content: 9.1% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

15.602

mg/kg

0.00156 %

0.76

mg/kg 2.775

1.917

mg/kg

0.000192 %

2.5

mg/kg

3.22

7.317

mg/kg

0.000732 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

33.214

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

40.937

mg/kg

0.00409 %

110

mg/kg

99.99

mg/kg

0.01 %

0.4

mg/kg 1.353

0.492

mg/kg

0.0000492 %

mg/kg 2.976

54.108

mg/kg

0.00541 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

66.532

mg/kg

0.00665 %

120

mg/kg 4.398

479.726

mg/kg

0.048 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 9.1% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00332 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

Page 24 of 62

<LOD

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.019 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

209

mg/kg

189.981

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

9.3

9.3 pH

0.09

mg/kg

0.0818

mg/kg

0.00000818 %

0.13

mg/kg

0.118

mg/kg

0.0000118 %

0.24

mg/kg

0.218

mg/kg

0.0000218 %

0.41

mg/kg

0.373

mg/kg

0.0000373 %

4.3

mg/kg

3.909

mg/kg

0.000391 %

1.1

mg/kg

1.0

mg/kg

0.0001 %

6.9

mg/kg

6.272

mg/kg

0.000627 %

5.8

mg/kg

5.272

mg/kg

0.000527 %

3.3

mg/kg

0.0003 %

3.1

mg/kg

2.818

mg/kg

0.000282 %

3.8

mg/kg

3.454

mg/kg

0.000345 %

1.3

mg/kg

1.182

mg/kg

0.000118 %

2.7

mg/kg

2.454

mg/kg

0.000245 %

1.2

mg/kg

1.091

mg/kg

0.000109 %

0.36

mg/kg

0.327

mg/kg

0.0000327 %

1.4

mg/kg

1.273

mg/kg

0.000127 % 0.0321 %

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186

110

mg/kg 3.211

321.1

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 % Total:

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

<LOD

0.135 %

Page 25 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

Page 26 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP109--19092023-2.50

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP109--19092023-2.50 Sample Depth: 2.50 m Moisture content: 12% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

17.428

mg/kg

0.00174 %

0.81

mg/kg 2.775

1.978

mg/kg

0.000198 %

2.6

mg/kg

3.22

7.367

mg/kg

0.000737 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

30.868

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

43.594

mg/kg

0.00436 %

120

mg/kg

105.6

mg/kg

0.0106 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 12% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00309 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

mg/kg 1.353

0.476

mg/kg

0.0000476 %

mg/kg 2.976

55.001

mg/kg

0.0055 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

65.98

mg/kg

0.0066 %

150

mg/kg 4.398

580.526

mg/kg

0.0581 %

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

0.4

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

www.hazwasteonline.com

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 27 of 62

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

mg/kg

58.96

mg/kg

0.0059 %

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

8.3

8.3 pH

0.09

mg/kg

0.0792

mg/kg

0.00000792 %

0.07

mg/kg

0.0616

mg/kg

0.00000616 %

0.12

mg/kg

0.106

mg/kg

0.0000106 %

0.09

mg/kg

0.0792

mg/kg

0.00000792 %

0.85

mg/kg

0.748

mg/kg

0.0000748 %

0.24

mg/kg

0.211

mg/kg

0.0000211 %

mg/kg

1.76

mg/kg

0.000176 %

1.8

mg/kg

1.584

mg/kg

0.000158 %

1.2

mg/kg

1.056

mg/kg

0.000106 %

mg/kg

0.88

mg/kg

0.000088 %

1.6

mg/kg

1.408

mg/kg

0.000141 %

0.57

mg/kg

0.502

mg/kg

0.0000502 %

1.3

mg/kg

1.144

mg/kg

0.000114 %

0.73

mg/kg

0.642

mg/kg

0.0000642 %

0.22

mg/kg

0.194

mg/kg

0.0000194 %

0.81

mg/kg

0.713

mg/kg

0.0000713 %

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

203-632-7

108-95-2

phenol 604-001-00-2

1,1-dichloroethane and 1,2-dichloroethane (combined) 39

Page 28 of 62

203-458-1, 200-863-5

107-06-2, 75-34-3

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

CAS Number

tetrachloroethylene 602-028-00-4

204-825-9

127-18-4

carbon tetrachloride; tetrachloromethane 602-008-00-5

200-262-8

56-23-5

trichloroethylene; trichloroethene 602-027-00-9

201-167-4

79-01-6

vinyl chloride; chloroethylene 602-023-00-7

200-831-0

75-01-4

hexachlorobenzene 602-065-00-6

204-273-9

118-74-1

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186 1,1,1-trichloroethane; methyl chloroform 602-013-00-2

200-756-3

71-55-6

1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 602-015-00-3

201-197-8

79-34-5

1,1,2-trichloroethane 602-014-00-8

201-166-9

79-00-5

1,1-dichloroethylene; vinylidene chloride 602-025-00-8

200-864-0

75-35-4

1,1-dichloropropene 602-031-00-0

209-253-3

563-58-6

1,2,3-trichlorobenzene 201-757-1

87-61-6

1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 601-043-00-3

202-436-9

95-63-6

203-444-5

106-93-4

1,2-dibromoethane 602-010-00-6

EC Number

1,2-dichlorobenzene; o-dichlorobenzene 602-034-00-7

202-425-9

95-50-1

1,2-dichloropropane; propylene dichloride 602-020-00-0

201-152-2

78-87-5

1,3-dichlorbenzene 602-067-00-7

208-792-1

541-73-1

1,3-dichloropropane 205-531-3

142-28-9

1,4-dichlorobenzene; p-dichlorobenzene 602-035-00-2

203-400-5

106-46-7

2,2-dichloropropane 209-832-0

594-20-7

bromodichloromethane 200-856-7

75-27-4

bromomethane; methylbromide 602-002-00-2

200-813-2

74-83-9

203-623-8

108-86-1

203-209-7

104-51-8

bromobenzene 602-060-00-9 n-butylbenzene

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

360

mg/kg 3.211

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

1017.346

mg/kg

0.102 %

1,3-dichloropropene; [1] (Z)-1,3-dichloropropene [2] 65

66 67 68

602-030-00-5

208-826-5 [1] 233-195-8 [2]

542-75-6 [1] 10061-01-5 [2]

203-628-5

108-90-7

200-830-5

75-00-3

chlorobenzene 602-033-00-1 chloroethane 602-009-00-0

chloroform; trichloromethane 602-006-00-4

200-663-8

www.hazwasteonline.com

67-66-3

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 29 of 62

EU CLP index number 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83

CAS Number

chloromethane; methyl chloride 602-001-00-7

200-817-4

74-87-3

dibromochloromethane 204-704-0

124-48-1

1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane 602-021-00-6

202-479-3

96-12-8

200-824-2

74-95-3

dibromomethane 602-003-00-8

hexachlorobutadiene 201-765-5

87-68-3

202-796-7

99-87-6

205-227-0

135-98-8

202-851-5

100-42-5

4-isopropyltoluene sec-butylbenzene styrene 601-026-00-0

trans-1,3-dichloropropene 431-460-4

10061-02-6

202-632-4

98-06-6

tert-butylbenzene bromoform; tribromomethane 602-007-00-X

200-854-6

75-25-2

1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 602-087-00-6

204-428-0

120-82-1

1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane 211-135-1

630-20-6

trichlorofluoromethane 200-892-3

75-69-4

mesitylene; 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene 601-025-00-5

EC Number

203-604-4

108-67-8

200-539-3

62-53-3

aniline 612-008-00-7

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

2-chlorophenol; [1] 4-chlorophenol; [2] 3-chlorophenol; [3] chlorophenol [4] 85

86 87 88 89 90

604-008-00-0

202-433-2 [1] 203-402-6 [2] 203-582-6 [3] 246-691-4 [4]

95-57-8 [1] 106-48-9 [2] 108-43-0 [3] 25167-80-0 [4]

bis(2-chloroethyl) ether 603-029-00-2

203-870-1

111-44-4

200-666-4

67-72-1

202-716-0

98-95-3

hexachloroethane nitrobenzene 609-003-00-7

3,5,5-trimethylcyclohex-2-enone; isophorone 606-012-00-8

201-126-0

78-59-1

201-857-5

88-75-5

2-nitrophenol 3,4-xylenol; [1] 2,5-xylenol; [2] 2,4-xylenol; [3] 2,3-xylenol; [4] 2,6-xylenol; [5] xylenol; [6] 2,4(or 2,5)-xylenol [7] 604-006-00-X

92 93

202-439-5 [1] 202-461-5 [2] 203-321-6 [3] 208-395-3 [4] 209-400-1 [5] 215-089-3 [6] 276-245-4 [7]

95-65-8 [1] 95-87-4 [2] 105-67-9 [3] 526-75-0 [4] 576-26-1 [5] 1300-71-6 [6] 71975-58-1 [7]

bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 203-920-2

111-91-1

204-429-6

120-83-2

2,4-dichlorophenol 604-011-00-7

Page 30 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 94

97 98 99 100 101

CAS Number

4-chloroaniline 612-137-00-9

203-401-0

200-431-6 201-795-9 202-467-8

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

0.1

mg/kg

0.088

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

540-59-0 [1] 156-59-2 [2] 156-60-5 [3]

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

98-82-8 [1] 103-65-1 [2]

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

<0.5

mg/kg

<0.5

mg/kg <0.00005 %

<LOD

59-50-7 88-06-2 95-95-4 91-57-6

2-chloronaphthalene 202-079-9

91-58-7

205-011-6

131-11-3

210-106-0

606-20-2

dimethyl phthalate 2,6-dinitrotoluene 609-049-00-8

Classification value

mg/kg <0.00001 %

2-methyl naphthalene 202-078-3

Compound conc.

<0.1

2,4,5-trichlorophenol 604-017-00-X

Conv. Factor

mg/kg

2,4,6-trichlorophenol 604-018-00-5

User entered data

<0.1

106-47-8

chlorocresol; 4-chloro-m-cresol; 4-chloro-3-methylphenol 604-014-00-3

EC Number

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

0.0000088 %

2,4-dinitrotoluene; [1] dinitrotoluene [2] 102

103 104 105

609-007-00-9

204-450-0 [1] 246-836-1 [2]

121-14-2 [1] 25321-14-6 [2]

205-071-3

132-64-9

dibenzofuran 4-chlorophenylphenylether 230-281-7

7005-72-3

201-550-6

84-66-2

diethyl phthalate o-nitroaniline; [1] m-nitroaniline; [2] p-nitroaniline [3]

106

107 108 109 110 111 112

612-012-00-9

201-855-4 [1] 202-729-1 [2] 202-810-1 [3]

88-74-4 [1] 99-09-2 [2] 100-01-6 [3]

203-102-5

103-33-3

azobenzene 611-001-00-6

4-bromophenylphenylether 202-952-4

101-55-3

201-696-0

86-74-8

carbazole dibutyl phthalate; DBP 607-318-00-4

201-557-4

84-74-2

201-549-0

84-65-1

anthraquinone 606-151-00-4

BBP; benzyl butyl phthalate 607-430-00-3

201-622-7

85-68-7

2-chlorotoluene; [1] 3-chlorotoluene; [2] 4-chlorotoluene; [3] chlorotoluene [4] 113

602-040-00-X

202-424-3 [1] 203-580-5 [2] 203-397-0 [3] 246-698-2 [4]

95-49-8 [1] 108-41-8 [2] 106-43-4 [3] 25168-05-2 [4]

1,2-dichloroethylene; [1] cis-dichloroethylene; [2] trans-dichloroethylene [3] 114

602-026-00-3

115

601-024-00-X

208-750-2 [1] 205-859-7 [2] 205-860-2 [3]

cumene; [1] propylbenzene [2] 202-704-5 [1] 203-132-9 [2]

m-cresol; [1] o-cresol; [2] p-cresol; [3] mix-cresol [4] 116

604-004-00-9

203-577-9 [1] 202-423-8 [2] 203-398-6 [3] 215-293-2 [4]

108-39-4 [1] 95-48-7 [2] 106-44-5 [3] 1319-77-3 [4]

Total:

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

0.201 %

Page 31 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

Page 32 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP110--20092023-3.40

Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 03 * in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP110--20092023-3.40 Sample Depth: 3.40 m Moisture content: 29% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 03 * (Soil and stones containing hazardous substances)

Hazard properties HP 3(i): Flammable "flammable liquid waste: liquid waste having a flash point below 60°C or waste gas oil, diesel and light heating oils having a flash point > 55°C and <= 75°C" Force this Hazardous property to hazardous because TPH potentially flammable over 12,500mg/kg Hazard Statements hit: Flam. Liq. 3; H226 "Flammable liquid and vapour." Because of determinand: TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group: (conc.: 2.84%) HP 7: Carcinogenic "waste which induces cancer or increases its incidence" Hazard Statements hit: Carc. 1B; H350 "May cause cancer [state route of exposure if it is conclusively proven that no other routes of exposure cause the hazard]." Because of determinand: TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group: (conc.: 2.84%) HP 11: Mutagenic "waste which may cause a mutation, that is a permanent change in the amount or structure of the genetic material in a cell" Hazard Statements hit: Muta. 1B; H340 "May cause genetic defects [state route of exposure if it is conclusively proven that no other routes of exposure cause the hazard]." Because of determinand: TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group: (conc.: 2.84%) HP 14: Ecotoxic "waste which presents or may present immediate or delayed risks for one or more sectors of the environment" Hazard Statements hit: Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 "Very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects." Because of determinand: zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2]: (compound conc.: 0.375%) Aquatic Chronic 2; H411 "Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects." Because of determinand: TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group: (conc.: 2.84%)

Determinands Moisture content: 29% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 33 of 62

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4 215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) }

215-270-7

Classification value

1.32

778.068

mg/kg

0.0778 %

0.84

mg/kg 2.775

1.655

mg/kg

0.000166 %

mg/kg

3.22

11.431

mg/kg

0.00114 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

110

mg/kg 1.462

114.148

mg/kg

0.0114 %

230

mg/kg 1.126

183.858

mg/kg

0.0184 %

570

mg/kg

404.7

mg/kg

0.0405 %

210

mg/kg 1.353

201.805

mg/kg

0.0202 %

mg/kg 2.976

90.865

mg/kg

0.00909 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

59.572

mg/kg

0.00596 %

1200

mg/kg 4.398

3747.033

mg/kg

0.375 %

40000

mg/kg

28400

mg/kg

2.84 %

mg/kg

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

1308-38-9

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

Compound conc.

830

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-160-9 6

CAS Number

Conv. Factor

User entered data

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 8 9 10

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

231-299-8

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

vanadium { pentoxide }

239-125-2

215-239-8

<LOD

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8

15060-62-5

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium

603-181-00-X 15

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5

023-001-00-8 12

7487-94-7

toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

xylene 18

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex }

1.884

006-007-00-5 20 21 22 23 24

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene

Page 34 of 62

8.2

8.2 pH

mg/kg

23.43

mg/kg

0.00234 %

5.2

mg/kg

3.692

mg/kg

0.000369 %

mg/kg

8.52

mg/kg

0.000852 %

mg/kg

8.52

mg/kg

0.000852 %

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

EC Number

CAS Number

phenanthrene 201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

polychlorobiphenyls; PCB 602-039-00-4

215-648-1

1336-36-3

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

24.85

mg/kg

0.00249 %

7.1

mg/kg

5.041

mg/kg

0.000504 %

mg/kg

9.94

mg/kg

0.000994 %

mg/kg

7.1

mg/kg

0.00071 %

5.3

mg/kg

3.763

mg/kg

0.000376 %

7.5

mg/kg

5.325

mg/kg

0.000533 %

5.6

mg/kg

3.976

mg/kg

0.000398 %

2.2

mg/kg

1.562

mg/kg

0.000156 %

4.8

mg/kg

3.408

mg/kg

0.000341 %

2.3

mg/kg

1.633

mg/kg

0.000163 %

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

2.1

mg/kg

1.491

mg/kg

<0.007

mg/kg

<0.007

mg/kg <0.0000007 %

1200

mg/kg 3.211

2736.045

mg/kg

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.000149 % <LOD

0.274 % <

P1186 Total:

3.684 %

Key

<LOD ND CLP: Note 1

User supplied data Determinand values ignored for classification, see column 'Conc. Not Used' for reason Hazardous result Determinand defined or amended by HazWasteOnline (see Appendix A) Speciated Deteminand - Unless the Determinand is Note 1, the Conversion Factor is used to calculate the compound concentration Below limit of detection Not detected Only the metal concentration has been used for classification

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 35 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP111--20092023-0.60

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP111--20092023-0.60 Sample Depth: 0.60 m Moisture content: 7% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

14.735

mg/kg

0.00147 %

0.71

mg/kg 2.775

1.833

mg/kg

0.000183 %

1.1

mg/kg

3.22

3.294

mg/kg

0.000329 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

31.263

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

39.789

mg/kg

0.00398 %

100

mg/kg

0.0093 %

0.4

mg/kg 1.353

0.503

mg/kg

0.0000503 %

mg/kg 2.976

52.591

mg/kg

0.00526 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

66.409

mg/kg

0.00664 %

110

mg/kg 4.398

449.908

mg/kg

0.045 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 7% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00313 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

Page 36 of 62

<LOD

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

mg/kg

13.95

mg/kg

0.00139 %

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

8.1

8.1 pH

0.06

mg/kg

0.0558

mg/kg

0.00000558 %

0.06

mg/kg

0.0558

mg/kg

0.00000558 %

0.05

mg/kg

0.0465

mg/kg

0.00000465 %

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

0.47

mg/kg

0.437

mg/kg

0.0000437 %

0.13

mg/kg

0.121

mg/kg

0.0000121 %

1.1

mg/kg

1.023

mg/kg

0.000102 %

0.99

mg/kg

0.921

mg/kg

0.0000921 %

0.65

mg/kg

0.605

mg/kg

0.0000605 %

0.62

mg/kg

0.577

mg/kg

0.0000577 %

0.77

mg/kg

0.716

mg/kg

0.0000716 %

0.41

mg/kg

0.381

mg/kg

0.0000381 %

0.76

mg/kg

0.707

mg/kg

0.0000707 %

0.45

mg/kg

0.419

mg/kg

0.0000419 %

0.11

mg/kg

0.102

mg/kg

0.0000102 %

0.49

mg/kg

0.456

mg/kg

0.0000456 %

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

-------

12001-28-4 132207-32-0 12172-73-5 77536-66-4 77536-68-6

<LOD

asbestos 650-013-00-6 38

www.hazwasteonline.com

<10

mg/kg

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

<10

mg/kg <0.001 %

<LOD

Page 37 of 62

EU CLP index number

EC Number

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Classification value

Compound conc.

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

77536-67-5 12001-29-5 39 40

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186

7.6

mg/kg 3.211

22.698

mg/kg

0.00227 %

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 % Total:

<LOD

0.0816 %

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

Page 38 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: TP113--20092023-3.30

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: TP113--20092023-3.30 Sample Depth: 3.30 m Moisture content: 20% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

13.731

mg/kg

0.00137 %

0.76

mg/kg 2.775

1.687

mg/kg

0.000169 %

2.9

mg/kg

3.22

7.47

mg/kg

0.000747 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

26.893

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

80.163

mg/kg

0.00802 %

300

mg/kg

240

mg/kg

0.024 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 20% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00269 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

mg/kg 1.353

0.433

mg/kg

0.0000433 %

mg/kg 2.976

42.858

mg/kg

0.00429 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

57.126

mg/kg

0.00571 %

190

mg/kg 4.398

668.485

mg/kg

0.0668 %

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

0.4

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

www.hazwasteonline.com

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 39 of 62

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.0174 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

217

mg/kg

173.6

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

1.507

mg/kg

0.000151 %

8.7

8.7 pH

0.11

mg/kg

0.088

mg/kg

0.0000088 %

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

0.18

mg/kg

0.144

mg/kg

0.0000144 %

0.16

mg/kg

0.128

mg/kg

0.0000128 %

0.6

mg/kg

0.48

mg/kg

0.000048 %

0.2

mg/kg

0.16

mg/kg

0.000016 %

2.1

mg/kg

1.68

mg/kg

0.000168 %

1.8

mg/kg

1.44

mg/kg

0.000144 %

0.92

mg/kg

0.736

mg/kg

0.0000736 %

0.93

mg/kg

0.744

mg/kg

0.0000744 %

1.1

mg/kg

0.88

mg/kg

0.000088 %

0.54

mg/kg

0.432

mg/kg

0.0000432 %

0.92

mg/kg

0.736

mg/kg

0.0000736 %

0.56

mg/kg

0.448

mg/kg

0.0000448 %

0.14

mg/kg

0.112

mg/kg

0.0000112 %

0.63

mg/kg

0.504

mg/kg

0.0000504 %

0.01

mg/kg

0.008

mg/kg

0.0000008 %

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

polychlorobiphenyls; PCB 602-039-00-4

215-648-1

1336-36-3

-------

12001-28-4 132207-32-0 12172-73-5

<LOD

asbestos 39

650-013-00-6

Page 40 of 62

<10

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

mg/kg

<10

mg/kg <0.001 %

<LOD

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number

EC Number

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

1541.434

0.154 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

77536-66-4 77536-68-6 77536-67-5 12001-29-5 40 41

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186

600

mg/kg 3.211

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 % Total:

<LOD

0.288 %

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 41 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: WS102--21092023-4.70

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: WS102--21092023-4.70 Sample Depth: 4.70 m Moisture content: 25% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

13.863

mg/kg

0.00139 %

1.2

mg/kg 2.775

2.498

mg/kg

0.00025 %

6.3

mg/kg

3.22

15.214

mg/kg

0.00152 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

44.943

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

37.999

mg/kg

0.0038 %

120

mg/kg

0.009 %

<0.3

mg/kg 1.353

<0.406

mg/kg <0.0000406 %

mg/kg 2.976

80.359

mg/kg

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

99.078

mg/kg

0.00991 %

mg/kg 4.398

300.158

mg/kg

0.03 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 25% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00449 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

Page 42 of 62

0.00804 % <LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

<LOD

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

mg/kg

8.25

mg/kg

0.000825 %

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

8.6

8.6 pH

0.06

mg/kg

0.045

mg/kg

0.0000045 %

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

<LOD

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

<LOD

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

<LOD

0.09

mg/kg

0.0675

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

0.19

mg/kg

0.143

mg/kg

0.0000143 %

0.17

mg/kg

0.128

mg/kg

0.0000128 %

0.09

mg/kg

0.0675

mg/kg

0.00000675 %

0.1

mg/kg

0.075

mg/kg

0.0000075 %

0.12

mg/kg

0.09

mg/kg

0.000009 %

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

0.09

mg/kg

0.0675

mg/kg

0.00000675 %

0.07

mg/kg

0.0525

mg/kg

0.00000525 %

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

0.08

mg/kg

0.06

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

203-632-7

108-95-2

phenol 604-001-00-2

0.00000675 % <LOD

<LOD

0.000006 %

1,1-dichloroethane and 1,2-dichloroethane (combined) 39

203-458-1, 200-863-5

www.hazwasteonline.com

107-06-2, 75-34-3

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 43 of 62

EU CLP index number 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

CAS Number

tetrachloroethylene 602-028-00-4

204-825-9

127-18-4

carbon tetrachloride; tetrachloromethane 602-008-00-5

200-262-8

56-23-5

trichloroethylene; trichloroethene 602-027-00-9

201-167-4

79-01-6

vinyl chloride; chloroethylene 602-023-00-7

200-831-0

75-01-4

hexachlorobenzene 602-065-00-6

204-273-9

118-74-1

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186 1,1,1-trichloroethane; methyl chloroform 602-013-00-2

200-756-3

71-55-6

1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 602-015-00-3

201-197-8

79-34-5

1,1,2-trichloroethane 602-014-00-8

201-166-9

79-00-5

1,1-dichloroethylene; vinylidene chloride 602-025-00-8

200-864-0

75-35-4

1,1-dichloropropene 602-031-00-0

209-253-3

563-58-6

1,2,3-trichlorobenzene 201-757-1

87-61-6

1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 601-043-00-3

202-436-9

95-63-6

203-444-5

106-93-4

1,2-dibromoethane 602-010-00-6

EC Number

1,2-dichlorobenzene; o-dichlorobenzene 602-034-00-7

202-425-9

95-50-1

1,2-dichloropropane; propylene dichloride 602-020-00-0

201-152-2

78-87-5

1,3-dichlorbenzene 602-067-00-7

208-792-1

541-73-1

1,3-dichloropropane 205-531-3

142-28-9

1,4-dichlorobenzene; p-dichlorobenzene 602-035-00-2

203-400-5

106-46-7

2,2-dichloropropane 209-832-0

594-20-7

bromodichloromethane 200-856-7

75-27-4

bromomethane; methylbromide 602-002-00-2

200-813-2

74-83-9

203-623-8

108-86-1

203-209-7

104-51-8

bromobenzene 602-060-00-9 n-butylbenzene

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

mg/kg 3.211

50.578

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

0.00506 %

1,3-dichloropropene; [1] (Z)-1,3-dichloropropene [2] 65

66 67 68

602-030-00-5

208-826-5 [1] 233-195-8 [2]

542-75-6 [1] 10061-01-5 [2]

203-628-5

108-90-7

200-830-5

75-00-3

chlorobenzene 602-033-00-1 chloroethane 602-009-00-0

chloroform; trichloromethane 602-006-00-4

Page 44 of 62

200-663-8

67-66-3

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83

CAS Number

chloromethane; methyl chloride 602-001-00-7

200-817-4

74-87-3

dibromochloromethane 204-704-0

124-48-1

1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane 602-021-00-6

202-479-3

96-12-8

200-824-2

74-95-3

dibromomethane 602-003-00-8

hexachlorobutadiene 201-765-5

87-68-3

202-796-7

99-87-6

205-227-0

135-98-8

202-851-5

100-42-5

4-isopropyltoluene sec-butylbenzene styrene 601-026-00-0

trans-1,3-dichloropropene 431-460-4

10061-02-6

202-632-4

98-06-6

tert-butylbenzene bromoform; tribromomethane 602-007-00-X

200-854-6

75-25-2

1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 602-087-00-6

204-428-0

120-82-1

1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane 211-135-1

630-20-6

trichlorofluoromethane 200-892-3

75-69-4

mesitylene; 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene 601-025-00-5

EC Number

203-604-4

108-67-8

200-539-3

62-53-3

aniline 612-008-00-7

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

2-chlorophenol; [1] 4-chlorophenol; [2] 3-chlorophenol; [3] chlorophenol [4] 85

86 87 88 89 90

604-008-00-0

202-433-2 [1] 203-402-6 [2] 203-582-6 [3] 246-691-4 [4]

95-57-8 [1] 106-48-9 [2] 108-43-0 [3] 25167-80-0 [4]

bis(2-chloroethyl) ether 603-029-00-2

203-870-1

111-44-4

200-666-4

67-72-1

202-716-0

98-95-3

hexachloroethane nitrobenzene 609-003-00-7

3,5,5-trimethylcyclohex-2-enone; isophorone 606-012-00-8

201-126-0

78-59-1

201-857-5

88-75-5

2-nitrophenol 3,4-xylenol; [1] 2,5-xylenol; [2] 2,4-xylenol; [3] 2,3-xylenol; [4] 2,6-xylenol; [5] xylenol; [6] 2,4(or 2,5)-xylenol [7] 604-006-00-X

92 93

202-439-5 [1] 202-461-5 [2] 203-321-6 [3] 208-395-3 [4] 209-400-1 [5] 215-089-3 [6] 276-245-4 [7]

95-65-8 [1] 95-87-4 [2] 105-67-9 [3] 526-75-0 [4] 576-26-1 [5] 1300-71-6 [6] 71975-58-1 [7]

bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 203-920-2

111-91-1

204-429-6

120-83-2

2,4-dichlorophenol 604-011-00-7

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 45 of 62

EU CLP index number 94

97 98 99 100 101

CAS Number

4-chloroaniline 612-137-00-9

203-401-0

200-431-6 201-795-9 202-467-8

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

0.2

mg/kg

0.15

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

540-59-0 [1] 156-59-2 [2] 156-60-5 [3]

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

98-82-8 [1] 103-65-1 [2]

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

<0.5

mg/kg

<0.5

mg/kg <0.00005 %

<LOD

59-50-7 88-06-2 95-95-4 91-57-6

2-chloronaphthalene 202-079-9

91-58-7

205-011-6

131-11-3

210-106-0

606-20-2

dimethyl phthalate 2,6-dinitrotoluene 609-049-00-8

Conc. Not Used

mg/kg <0.00001 %

2-methyl naphthalene 202-078-3

Classification value

Compound conc.

<0.1

2,4,5-trichlorophenol 604-017-00-X

Conv. Factor

mg/kg

2,4,6-trichlorophenol 604-018-00-5

User entered data

<0.1

106-47-8

chlorocresol; 4-chloro-m-cresol; 4-chloro-3-methylphenol 604-014-00-3

EC Number

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

0.000015 %

2,4-dinitrotoluene; [1] dinitrotoluene [2] 102

103 104 105

609-007-00-9

204-450-0 [1] 246-836-1 [2]

121-14-2 [1] 25321-14-6 [2]

205-071-3

132-64-9

dibenzofuran 4-chlorophenylphenylether 230-281-7

7005-72-3

201-550-6

84-66-2

diethyl phthalate o-nitroaniline; [1] m-nitroaniline; [2] p-nitroaniline [3]

106

107 108 109 110 111 112

612-012-00-9

201-855-4 [1] 202-729-1 [2] 202-810-1 [3]

88-74-4 [1] 99-09-2 [2] 100-01-6 [3]

203-102-5

103-33-3

azobenzene 611-001-00-6

4-bromophenylphenylether 202-952-4

101-55-3

201-696-0

86-74-8

carbazole dibutyl phthalate; DBP 607-318-00-4

201-557-4

84-74-2

201-549-0

84-65-1

anthraquinone 606-151-00-4

BBP; benzyl butyl phthalate 607-430-00-3

201-622-7

85-68-7

2-chlorotoluene; [1] 3-chlorotoluene; [2] 4-chlorotoluene; [3] chlorotoluene [4] 113

602-040-00-X

202-424-3 [1] 203-580-5 [2] 203-397-0 [3] 246-698-2 [4]

95-49-8 [1] 108-41-8 [2] 106-43-4 [3] 25168-05-2 [4]

1,2-dichloroethylene; [1] cis-dichloroethylene; [2] trans-dichloroethylene [3] 114

602-026-00-3

115

601-024-00-X

208-750-2 [1] 205-859-7 [2] 205-860-2 [3]

cumene; [1] propylbenzene [2] 202-704-5 [1] 203-132-9 [2]

m-cresol; [1] o-cresol; [2] p-cresol; [3] mix-cresol [4] 116

604-004-00-9

203-577-9 [1] 202-423-8 [2] 203-398-6 [3] 215-293-2 [4]

108-39-4 [1] 95-48-7 [2] 106-44-5 [3] 1319-77-3 [4]

Total:

Page 46 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

0.0761 %

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 47 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: WS106A--21092023-0.90

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: WS106A--21092023-0.90 Sample Depth: 0.90 m Moisture content: 15% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

16.834

mg/kg

0.00168 %

mg/kg 2.775

2.359

mg/kg

0.000236 %

1.3

mg/kg

3.22

3.558

mg/kg

0.000356 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

37.27

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

42.108

mg/kg

0.00421 %

120

mg/kg

102

mg/kg

0.0102 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 15% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00373 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

Page 48 of 62

mg/kg 1.353

0.46

mg/kg

0.000046 %

mg/kg 2.976

65.775

mg/kg

0.00658 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

77.388

mg/kg

0.00774 %

170

mg/kg 4.398

635.5

mg/kg

0.0636 %

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

0.4

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.0187 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

220

mg/kg

187

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

8.4

8.4 pH

0.1

mg/kg

0.085

mg/kg

0.0000085 %

0.12

mg/kg

0.102

mg/kg

0.0000102 %

0.13

mg/kg

0.111

mg/kg

0.0000111 %

0.18

mg/kg

0.153

mg/kg

0.0000153 %

1.8

mg/kg

1.53

mg/kg

0.000153 %

0.53

mg/kg

0.451

mg/kg

0.0000451 %

3.6

mg/kg

3.06

mg/kg

0.000306 %

3.1

mg/kg

2.635

mg/kg

0.000263 %

mg/kg

1.7

mg/kg

0.00017 %

1.7

mg/kg

1.445

mg/kg

0.000145 %

2.2

mg/kg

1.87

mg/kg

0.000187 %

0.81

mg/kg

0.689

mg/kg

0.0000689 %

1.9

mg/kg

1.615

mg/kg

0.000162 %

1.1

mg/kg

0.935

mg/kg

0.0000935 %

0.23

mg/kg

0.196

mg/kg

0.0000196 %

1.2

mg/kg

1.02

mg/kg

0.000102 %

5.3

mg/kg 3.211

14.467

mg/kg

0.00145 %

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 %

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186

Total:

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

<LOD

0.121 %

Page 49 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

Page 50 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Classification of sample: WS107C--22092023-2.30

Non Hazardous Waste Classified as 17 05 04 in the List of Waste

Sample details Sample name: WS107C--22092023-2.30 Sample Depth: 2.30 m Moisture content: 12% (wet weight correction)

LoW Code: Chapter: Entry:

17: Construction and Demolition Wastes (including excavated soil from contaminated sites) 17 05 04 (Soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 03)

Hazard properties None identified

Determinands

EU CLP index number 1 2 3 4

EC Number

arsenic { arsenic trioxide } 033-003-00-0

215-481-4

1327-53-3

beryllium { beryllium oxide } 004-003-00-8

215-133-1

1304-56-9

boron { diboron trioxide; boric oxide } 005-008-00-8

215-125-8

1303-86-2

cadmium { cadmium oxide } 048-002-00-0

215-146-2

1306-19-0

chromium in chromium(III) compounds { chromium(III) oxide (worst case) } 215-160-9

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

mg/kg

1.32

17.428

mg/kg

0.00174 %

0.79

mg/kg 2.775

1.929

mg/kg

0.000193 %

1.6

mg/kg

3.22

4.534

mg/kg

0.000453 %

<0.2

mg/kg 1.142

<0.228

mg/kg <0.0000228 %

mg/kg 1.462

28.296

mg/kg

<1.8

mg/kg

2.27

<4.086

mg/kg <0.000409 %

mg/kg 1.126

36.659

mg/kg

0.00367 %

190

mg/kg

167.2

mg/kg

0.0167 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Moisture content: 12% Wet Weight Moisture Correction applied (MC)

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

0.00283 %

1308-38-9

chromium in chromium(VI) compounds { chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex }

<LOD

024-017-00-8 7

copper { dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide } 029-002-00-X

215-270-7

1317-39-1

lead { lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) }

082-001-00-6 9 10 11

mercury { mercury dichloride } 080-010-00-X

7487-94-7

nickel { nickel chromate } 028-035-00-7

238-766-5

14721-18-7

selenium { nickel selenate } 028-031-00-5 vanadium { pentoxide } 023-001-00-8

231-299-8

239-125-2

15060-62-5

mg/kg 1.353

0.953

mg/kg

0.0000953 %

mg/kg 2.976

55.001

mg/kg

0.0055 %

mg/kg 2.554

<2.554

mg/kg <0.000255 %

mg/kg 1.785

59.697

mg/kg

0.00597 %

110

mg/kg 4.398

425.719

mg/kg

0.0426 %

<LOD

divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium 215-239-8

1314-62-1

zinc { zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2] } 030-006-00-9

0.8

231-793-3 [1] 231-793-3 [2]

www.hazwasteonline.com

7446-19-7 [1] 7733-02-0 [2]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 51 of 62

EU CLP index number 14

17 18

CAS Number

TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group TPH tert-butyl methyl ether; MTBE; 2-methoxy-2-methylpropane 603-181-00-X

EC Number

216-653-1

1634-04-4

200-753-7

71-43-2

203-625-9

108-88-3

202-849-4

100-41-4

202-422-2 [1] 203-396-5 [2] 203-576-3 [3] 215-535-7 [4]

95-47-6 [1] 106-42-3 [2] 108-38-3 [3] 1330-20-7 [4]

benzene 601-020-00-8 toluene 601-021-00-3 ethylbenzene 601-023-00-4

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

0.0537 %

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

610

mg/kg

536.8

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

mg/kg 1.884

<1.884

mg/kg <0.000188 %

<LOD

7.8

7.8 pH

1.3

mg/kg

1.144

mg/kg

0.000114 %

2.2

mg/kg

1.936

mg/kg

0.000194 %

3.9

mg/kg

3.432

mg/kg

0.000343 %

mg/kg

6.16

mg/kg

0.000616 %

mg/kg

21.12

mg/kg

0.00211 %

mg/kg

12.32

mg/kg

0.00123 %

mg/kg

33.44

mg/kg

0.00334 %

mg/kg

28.16

mg/kg

0.00282 %

mg/kg

14.08

mg/kg

0.00141 %

mg/kg

13.2

mg/kg

0.00132 %

mg/kg

14.08

mg/kg

0.00141 %

4.7

mg/kg

4.136

mg/kg

0.000414 %

mg/kg

11.44

mg/kg

0.00114 %

6.4

mg/kg

5.632

mg/kg

0.000563 %

1.6

mg/kg

1.408

mg/kg

0.000141 %

6.6

mg/kg

5.808

mg/kg

0.000581 %

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

xylene 19

601-022-00-9

cyanides { salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex } 006-007-00-5

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

pH PH naphthalene 601-052-00-2

202-049-5

91-20-3

205-917-1

208-96-8

201-469-6

83-32-9

201-695-5

86-73-7

201-581-5

85-01-8

204-371-1

120-12-7

205-912-4

206-44-0

204-927-3

129-00-0

acenaphthylene acenaphthene fluorene phenanthrene anthracene fluoranthene pyrene benzo[a]anthracene 601-033-00-9

200-280-6

56-55-3

205-923-4

218-01-9

chrysene 601-048-00-0

benzo[b]fluoranthene 601-034-00-4

205-911-9

205-99-2

benzo[k]fluoranthene 601-036-00-5

205-916-6

207-08-9

benzo[a]pyrene; benzo[def]chrysene 601-032-00-3

200-028-5

50-32-8

indeno[123-cd]pyrene 205-893-2

193-39-5

dibenz[a,h]anthracene 601-041-00-2

200-181-8

53-70-3

benzo[ghi]perylene 205-883-8

191-24-2

203-632-7

108-95-2

phenol 604-001-00-2

1,1-dichloroethane and 1,2-dichloroethane (combined) 39

Page 52 of 62

203-458-1, 200-863-5

107-06-2, 75-34-3

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

CAS Number

tetrachloroethylene 602-028-00-4

204-825-9

127-18-4

carbon tetrachloride; tetrachloromethane 602-008-00-5

200-262-8

56-23-5

trichloroethylene; trichloroethene 602-027-00-9

201-167-4

79-01-6

vinyl chloride; chloroethylene 602-023-00-7

200-831-0

75-01-4

hexachlorobenzene 602-065-00-6

204-273-9

118-74-1

polychlorobiphenyls; PCB 602-039-00-4

215-648-1

1336-36-3

sulfur { sulphur dichloride } 016-013-00-X

234-129-0

10545-99-0

monohydric phenols P1186 1,1,1-trichloroethane; methyl chloroform 602-013-00-2

200-756-3

71-55-6

1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 602-015-00-3

201-197-8

79-34-5

1,1,2-trichloroethane 602-014-00-8

201-166-9

79-00-5

1,1-dichloroethylene; vinylidene chloride 602-025-00-8

200-864-0

75-35-4

1,1-dichloropropene 602-031-00-0

209-253-3

563-58-6

1,2,3-trichlorobenzene 201-757-1

87-61-6

1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 601-043-00-3

EC Number

202-436-9

95-63-6

203-444-5

106-93-4

1,2-dibromoethane 602-010-00-6

1,2-dichlorobenzene; o-dichlorobenzene 602-034-00-7

202-425-9

95-50-1

1,2-dichloropropane; propylene dichloride 602-020-00-0

201-152-2

78-87-5

1,3-dichlorbenzene 602-067-00-7

208-792-1

541-73-1

1,3-dichloropropane 205-531-3

142-28-9

1,4-dichlorobenzene; p-dichlorobenzene 602-035-00-2

203-400-5

106-46-7

2,2-dichloropropane 209-832-0

594-20-7

bromodichloromethane 200-856-7

75-27-4

bromomethane; methylbromide 602-002-00-2

200-813-2

74-83-9

203-623-8

108-86-1

203-209-7

104-51-8

bromobenzene 602-060-00-9 n-butylbenzene

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.007

mg/kg

<0.007

mg/kg <0.0000007 %

<LOD

130

mg/kg 3.211

367.375

mg/kg

mg/kg <0.0001 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

0.0367 %

1,3-dichloropropene; [1] (Z)-1,3-dichloropropene [2] 66

67 68

602-030-00-5

208-826-5 [1] 233-195-8 [2]

542-75-6 [1] 10061-01-5 [2]

203-628-5

108-90-7

200-830-5

75-00-3

chlorobenzene 602-033-00-1 chloroethane 602-009-00-0

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 53 of 62

EU CLP index number 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83

EC Number

chloroform; trichloromethane 602-006-00-4

200-663-8

67-66-3

chloromethane; methyl chloride 602-001-00-7

200-817-4

74-87-3

dibromochloromethane 204-704-0

124-48-1

1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane 602-021-00-6

202-479-3

96-12-8

200-824-2

74-95-3

dibromomethane 602-003-00-8

hexachlorobutadiene 201-765-5

87-68-3

202-796-7

99-87-6

205-227-0

135-98-8

202-851-5

100-42-5

4-isopropyltoluene sec-butylbenzene styrene 601-026-00-0

trans-1,3-dichloropropene 431-460-4

10061-02-6

202-632-4

98-06-6

tert-butylbenzene bromoform; tribromomethane 602-007-00-X

200-854-6

75-25-2

1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 602-087-00-6

204-428-0

120-82-1

1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane 211-135-1

630-20-6

trichlorofluoromethane 200-892-3

CAS Number

203-604-4

108-67-8

200-539-3

62-53-3

aniline 612-008-00-7

Conv. Factor

Compound conc.

Classification value

Conc. Not Used

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.005

mg/kg

<0.005

mg/kg <0.0000005 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.05

mg/kg

<0.05

mg/kg <0.000005 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

75-69-4

mesitylene; 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene 601-025-00-5

User entered data

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

2-chlorophenol; [1] 4-chlorophenol; [2] 3-chlorophenol; [3] chlorophenol [4] 86

87 88 89 90 91

604-008-00-0

202-433-2 [1] 203-402-6 [2] 203-582-6 [3] 246-691-4 [4]

95-57-8 [1] 106-48-9 [2] 108-43-0 [3] 25167-80-0 [4]

bis(2-chloroethyl) ether 603-029-00-2

203-870-1

111-44-4

200-666-4

67-72-1

202-716-0

98-95-3

hexachloroethane nitrobenzene 609-003-00-7

3,5,5-trimethylcyclohex-2-enone; isophorone 606-012-00-8

201-126-0

78-59-1

201-857-5

88-75-5

2-nitrophenol 3,4-xylenol; [1] 2,5-xylenol; [2] 2,4-xylenol; [3] 2,3-xylenol; [4] 2,6-xylenol; [5] xylenol; [6] 2,4(or 2,5)-xylenol [7] 604-006-00-X

202-439-5 [1] 202-461-5 [2] 203-321-6 [3] 208-395-3 [4] 209-400-1 [5] 215-089-3 [6] 276-245-4 [7]

95-65-8 [1] 95-87-4 [2] 105-67-9 [3] 526-75-0 [4] 576-26-1 [5] 1300-71-6 [6] 71975-58-1 [7]

bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane

Page 54 of 62

203-920-2

111-91-1

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

EU CLP index number 94 95

98 99 100 101 102

CAS Number

2,4-dichlorophenol 604-011-00-7

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

0.6

mg/kg

0.528

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.1

mg/kg

<0.1

mg/kg <0.00001 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

4.1

mg/kg

3.608

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

3.9

mg/kg

3.432

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg

<0.2

mg/kg <0.00002 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.3

mg/kg

<0.3

mg/kg <0.00003 %

<LOD

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

540-59-0 [1] 156-59-2 [2] 156-60-5 [3]

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

98-82-8 [1] 103-65-1 [2]

<0.01

mg/kg

<0.01

mg/kg <0.000001 %

<LOD

<0.5

mg/kg

<0.5

mg/kg <0.00005 %

<LOD

106-47-8

59-50-7 88-06-2

2,4,5-trichlorophenol 202-467-8

95-95-4

2-methyl naphthalene 202-078-3

91-57-6

2-chloronaphthalene 202-079-9

91-58-7

205-011-6

131-11-3

210-106-0

606-20-2

dimethyl phthalate 2,6-dinitrotoluene 609-049-00-8

Conc. Not Used

<LOD

2,4,6-trichlorophenol

604-017-00-X

Classification value

mg/kg <0.00003 %

203-401-0

201-795-9

Compound conc.

<0.3

chlorocresol; 4-chloro-m-cresol; 4-chloro-3-methylphenol

604-018-00-5

Conv. Factor

mg/kg

120-83-2

200-431-6

User entered data

<0.3

204-429-6

4-chloroaniline 612-137-00-9

604-014-00-3 97

EC Number

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

0.0000528 %

2,4-dinitrotoluene; [1] dinitrotoluene [2] 103

104 105 106

609-007-00-9

204-450-0 [1] 246-836-1 [2]

121-14-2 [1] 25321-14-6 [2]

205-071-3

132-64-9

dibenzofuran 4-chlorophenylphenylether 230-281-7

7005-72-3

201-550-6

84-66-2

diethyl phthalate

0.000361 %

o-nitroaniline; [1] m-nitroaniline; [2] p-nitroaniline [3] 107

108

612-012-00-9

110 111 112 113

88-74-4 [1] 99-09-2 [2] 100-01-6 [3]

203-102-5

103-33-3

azobenzene 611-001-00-6

109

201-855-4 [1] 202-729-1 [2] 202-810-1 [3]

4-bromophenylphenylether 202-952-4

101-55-3

201-696-0

86-74-8

carbazole dibutyl phthalate; DBP 607-318-00-4

201-557-4

84-74-2

201-549-0

84-65-1

anthraquinone 606-151-00-4

BBP; benzyl butyl phthalate 607-430-00-3

201-622-7

85-68-7

0.000343 %

2-chlorotoluene; [1] 3-chlorotoluene; [2] 4-chlorotoluene; [3] chlorotoluene [4] 114

602-040-00-X

202-424-3 [1] 203-580-5 [2] 203-397-0 [3] 246-698-2 [4]

95-49-8 [1] 108-41-8 [2] 106-43-4 [3] 25168-05-2 [4]

1,2-dichloroethylene; [1] cis-dichloroethylene; [2] trans-dichloroethylene [3] 115

602-026-00-3

116

601-024-00-X

208-750-2 [1] 205-859-7 [2] 205-860-2 [3]

cumene; [1] propylbenzene [2] 202-704-5 [1] 203-132-9 [2]

m-cresol; [1] o-cresol; [2] p-cresol; [3] mix-cresol [4] 117

604-004-00-9

203-577-9 [1] 202-423-8 [2] 203-398-6 [3] 215-293-2 [4]

www.hazwasteonline.com

108-39-4 [1] 95-48-7 [2] 106-44-5 [3] 1319-77-3 [4]

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 55 of 62

EU CLP index number

EC Number

CAS Number

User entered data

Conv. Factor

Classification value

Compound conc.

Total:

MC Applied

Determinand #

CLP Note

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Conc. Not Used

0.19 %

Key

<LOD CLP: Note 1

Page 56 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

Appendix A: Classifier defined and non GB MCL determinands chromium(III) oxide (worst case) (EC Number: 215-160-9, CAS Number: 1308-38-9) Description/Comments: Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database/-/discli/details/33806 Data source date: 17 Jul 2015 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H332 , Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Resp. Sens. 1; H334 , Skin Sens. 1; H317 , Repr. 1B; H360FD , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410

lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case) GB MCL index number: 082-001-00-6 Description/Comments: Worst Case: IARC considers lead compounds Group 2A; Probably carcinogenic to humans; Lead REACH Consortium, following MCL protocols, considers lead compounds from smelting industries, flue dust and similar to be Carcinogenic category 1A Additional Hazard Statement(s): Carc. 1A; H350 Reason for additional Hazards Statement(s): 20 Nov 2021 - Carc. 1A; H350 hazard statement sourced from: IARC Group 2A (Sup 7, 87) 2006; Lead REACH Consortium www.reach-lead.eu/substanceinformation.html (worst case lead compounds). Review date 29/09/2015 divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium pentoxide (EC Number: 215-239-8, CAS Number: 1314-62-1) GB MCL index number: 023-001-00-8 Description/Comments: Hazard statements H301, H330, H350 added by HazWasteOnline due to ATP 18 (Regulation (EU) 2022/692) considers vanadium pentoxide to be Carc. 1B; H350. The GB MCL Agency has reached the same opinion [but is yet to formerly make this change to the MCL List]. Substance has therefore been self-classified. Additional Hazard Statement(s): Carc. 1B; H350 , Acute Tox. 3; H301 , Acute Tox. 2; H330 Reason for additional Hazards Statement(s): 20 Sep 2022 - Carc. 1B; H350 hazard statement sourced from: ATP 18 (Regulation (EU) 2022/692) considers vanadium pentoxide to be Carc. 1B; H350. The GB MCL Agency has reached the same opinion [but is yet to formerly make this change to the MCL List]. Substance has therefore been self-classified. 28 Sep 2022 - Acute Tox. 3; H301 hazard statement sourced from: ATP 18 (Regulation (EU) 2022/692) considers vanadium pentoxide to be "Acute tox 3; H301". The GB MCL Agency has reached the same opinion [but is yet to formerly make this change to the MCL List]. Substance has therefore been self-classified. 28 Sep 2022 - Acute Tox. 2; H330 hazard statement sourced from: ATP 18 (Regulation (EU) 2022/692) considers vanadium pentoxide to be "Acute tox 2; H330". The GB MCL Agency has reached the same opinion [but is yet to formerly make this change to the MCL List]. Substance has therefore been self-classified. TPH (C6 to C40) petroleum group (CAS Number: TPH) Description/Comments: Hazard statements taken from WM3 1st Edition 2015; Risk phrases: WM2 3rd Edition 2013 Data source: WM3 1st Edition 2015 Data source date: 25 May 2015 Hazard Statements: Flam. Liq. 3; H226 , Asp. Tox. 1; H304 , STOT RE 2; H373 , Muta. 1B; H340 , Carc. 1B; H350 , Repr. 2; H361d , Aquatic Chronic 2; H411

ethylbenzene (EC Number: 202-849-4, CAS Number: 100-41-4) GB MCL index number: 601-023-00-4 Description/Comments: Additional Hazard Statement(s): Carc. 2; H351 Reason for additional Hazards Statement(s): 20 Nov 2021 - Carc. 2; H351 hazard statement sourced from: IARC Group 2B (77) 2000 salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex GB MCL index number: 006-007-00-5 Description/Comments: Conversion factor based on a worst case compound: sodium cyanide Additional Hazard Statement(s): EUH032 >= 0.2 % Reason for additional Hazards Statement(s): 20 Nov 2021 - EUH032 >= 0.2 % hazard statement sourced from: WM3, Table C12.2 pH (CAS Number: PH) Description/Comments: Appendix C4 Data source: WM3 1st Edition 2015 Data source date: 25 May 2015 Hazard Statements: None.

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 57 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

acenaphthylene (EC Number: 205-917-1, CAS Number: 208-96-8) Description/Comments: Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 17 Jul 2015 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Acute Tox. 1; H330 , Acute Tox. 1; H310 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 acenaphthene (EC Number: 201-469-6, CAS Number: 83-32-9) Description/Comments: Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 17 Jul 2015 Hazard Statements: Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 , Aquatic Chronic 2; H411

fluorene (EC Number: 201-695-5, CAS Number: 86-73-7) Description/Comments: Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 06 Aug 2015 Hazard Statements: Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 phenanthrene (EC Number: 201-581-5, CAS Number: 85-01-8) Description/Comments: Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 06 Aug 2015 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Carc. 2; H351 , Skin Sens. 1; H317 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315

anthracene (EC Number: 204-371-1, CAS Number: 120-12-7) Description/Comments: Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 17 Jul 2015 Hazard Statements: Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Skin Sens. 1; H317 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 fluoranthene (EC Number: 205-912-4, CAS Number: 206-44-0) Description/Comments: Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 21 Aug 2015 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 pyrene (EC Number: 204-927-3, CAS Number: 129-00-0) Description/Comments: Data from C&L Inventory Database; SDS Sigma Aldrich 2014 Data source: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 21 Aug 2015 Hazard Statements: Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 indeno[123-cd]pyrene (EC Number: 205-893-2, CAS Number: 193-39-5) Description/Comments: Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 06 Aug 2015 Hazard Statements: Carc. 2; H351 benzo[ghi]perylene (EC Number: 205-883-8, CAS Number: 191-24-2) Description/Comments: Data from C&L Inventory Database; SDS Sigma Aldrich 28/02/2015 Data source: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 23 Jul 2015 Hazard Statements: Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 polychlorobiphenyls; PCB (EC Number: 215-648-1, CAS Number: 1336-36-3) GB MCL index number: 602-039-00-4 Description/Comments: Worst Case: IARC considers PCB Group 1; Carcinogenic to humans; POP specific threshold from ATP1 (Regulation 756/2010/EU) to POPs Regulation (Regulation 850/2004/EC). Where applicable, the calculation method laid down in European standards EN 12766-1 and EN 12766-2 shall be applied. Additional Hazard Statement(s): Carc. 1A; H350 Reason for additional Hazards Statement(s): 20 Nov 2021 - Carc. 1A; H350 hazard statement sourced from: IARC Group 1 (23, Sup 7, 100C) 2012

Page 58 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

monohydric phenols (CAS Number: P1186) Description/Comments: Combined hazards statements from harmonised entries in CLP for phenol, cresols and xylenols (604-001-00-2, 604-004-00-9, 604-006-00-X)

Data source: CLP combined data Data source date: 26 Mar 2019 Hazard Statements: Muta. 2; H341 , Acute Tox. 3; H331 , Acute Tox. 3; H311 , Acute Tox. 3; H301 , STOT RE 2; H373 , Skin Corr. 1B; H314 , Skin Corr. 1B; H314 >= 3 % , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 1 £ conc. < 3 % , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 1 £ conc. < 3 % , Aquatic Chronic 2; H411

1,1-dichloroethane and 1,2-dichloroethane (combined) (EC Number: 203-458-1, 200-863-5, CAS Number: 107-06-2, 75-34-3) Description/Comments: Combines the hazard statements and risk phrases for 1,1-dichloroethane and 1,2-dichloroethane Data source: N/a Data source date: 14 Oct 2016 Hazard Statements: Flam. Liq. 2; H225 , Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Carc. 1B; H350 , Aquatic Chronic 3; H412

1,2,3-trichlorobenzene (EC Number: 201-757-1, CAS Number: 87-61-6) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , STOT SE 3; H336 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 3; H410

1,3-dichloropropane (EC Number: 205-531-3, CAS Number: 142-28-9) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H332 , Flam. Liq. 2; H225 , Flam. Liq. 3; H226 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 2,2-dichloropropane (EC Number: 209-832-0, CAS Number: 594-20-7) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H332 , Flam. Liq. 2; H225 , Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Acute Tox. 4; H312 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 bromodichloromethane (EC Number: 200-856-7, CAS Number: 75-27-4) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database; IARC considers substance Group 2B; Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Dam. 1; H318 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Muta. 1B; H340 , Carc. 1B; H350 , Repr. 1A; H360

n-butylbenzene (EC Number: 203-209-7, CAS Number: 104-51-8) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Flam. Liq. 3; H226 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 dibromochloromethane (EC Number: 204-704-0, CAS Number: 124-48-1) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database; IARC considers substance Group 3; Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Acute Tox. 4; H312 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , Acute Tox. 4; H332 , STOT SE 3; H335 , STOT SE 3; H336 , Muta. 2; H341 , Aquatic Chronic 2; H411

hexachlorobutadiene (EC Number: 201-765-5, CAS Number: 87-68-3) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database; IARC considers substance Group 3; Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 3; H301 , Acute Tox. 2; H310 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Skin Sens. 1; H317 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , Acute Tox. 2; H330 , Carc. 2; H351 , Repr. 2; H361 , STOT SE 2; H371 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410

4-isopropyltoluene (EC Number: 202-796-7, CAS Number: 99-87-6) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Flam. Liq. 3; H226 , Asp. Tox. 1; H304 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Aquatic Chronic 2; H411

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 59 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

sec-butylbenzene (EC Number: 205-227-0, CAS Number: 135-98-8) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Flam. Liq. 3; H226 , Asp. Tox. 1; H304 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , Aquatic Chronic 2; H411 trans-1,3-dichloropropene (EC Number: 431-460-4, CAS Number: 10061-02-6) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Flam. Liq. 3; H226 , Acute Tox. 3; H301 , Asp. Tox. 1; H304 , Acute Tox. 3; H311 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Skin Sens. 1; H317 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , Acute Tox. 4; H332 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410

tert-butylbenzene (EC Number: 202-632-4, CAS Number: 98-06-6) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Flam. Liq. 3; H226 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , Acute Tox. 3; H331 , Acute Tox. 4; H332 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Asp. Tox. 1; H304 , Aquatic Chronic 2; H411

1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane (EC Number: 211-135-1, CAS Number: 630-20-6) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database; IARC considers substance Group 2B; Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Acute Tox. 1; H310 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , Acute Tox. 3; H331 , Eye Dam. 1; H318 , Acute Tox. 4; H332 , Carc. 2; H351 , Acute Tox. 4; H312 , Aquatic Chronic 3; H412 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315

trichlorofluoromethane (EC Number: 200-892-3, CAS Number: 75-69-4) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H312 , Ozone 1; H420 hexachloroethane (EC Number: 200-666-4, CAS Number: 67-72-1) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database; IARC considers substance Group 2B; Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Carc. 2; H351 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 , STOT RE 2; H373

2-nitrophenol (EC Number: 201-857-5, CAS Number: 88-75-5) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Acute Tox. 4; H312 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , Acute Tox. 4; H332 , STOT SE 3; H335 , STOT RE 2; H373 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410

bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane (EC Number: 203-920-2, CAS Number: 111-91-1) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 3; H301 , Acute Tox. 4; H312 , Acute Tox. 1; H330 , Acute Tox. 2; H330 , STOT SE 1; H370 , STOT RE 2; H373 2-methyl naphthalene (EC Number: 202-078-3, CAS Number: 91-57-6) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , STOT SE 3; H336 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410

2-chloronaphthalene (EC Number: 202-079-9, CAS Number: 91-58-7) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315

Page 60 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

dimethyl phthalate (EC Number: 205-011-6, CAS Number: 131-11-3) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , Acute Tox. 3; H331 , STOT SE 3; H335 , STOT SE 3; H336 , Repr. 2; H361 , Aquatic Chronic 3; H412

dibenzofuran (EC Number: 205-071-3, CAS Number: 132-64-9) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Acute Tox. 4; H312 , Acute Tox. 4; H332 , Aquatic Chronic 2; H411 4-chlorophenylphenylether (EC Number: 230-281-7, CAS Number: 7005-72-3) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Skin Sens. 1; H317 , Eye Dam. 1; H318 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410

diethyl phthalate (EC Number: 201-550-6, CAS Number: 84-66-2) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Acute Tox. 3; H331 , Acute Tox. 3; H311 , STOT SE 3; H335 , STOT RE 2; H373 , Repr. 2; H361 , Acute Tox. 4; H302 , STOT SE 3; H336 , Skin Sens. 1; H317 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410

4-bromophenylphenylether (EC Number: 202-952-4, CAS Number: 101-55-3) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Skin Sens. 1; H317 , Eye Dam. 1; H318 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410

carbazole (EC Number: 201-696-0, CAS Number: 86-74-8) Description/Comments: VOC; Data from C&L Inventory Database; IARC considers substance Group 2B; Data source: https://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database Data source date: 02 Mar 2017 Hazard Statements: Acute Tox. 4; H302 , Skin Irrit. 2; H315 , Eye Irrit. 2; H319 , STOT SE 3; H335 , Muta. 2; H341 , Carc. 2; H351 , Aquatic Acute 1; H400 , Aquatic Chronic 1; H410 , Acute Tox. 3; H331 , Acute Tox. 3; H311 , Acute Tox. 3; H301

Appendix B: Rationale for selection of metal species arsenic {arsenic trioxide} Reasonable case CLP species based on hazard statements/molecular weight and most common (stable) oxide of arsenic. Industrial sources include: smelting; main precursor to other arsenic compounds beryllium {beryllium oxide} Reasonable case CLP species based on hazard statements/molecular weight. Industrial sources include: most common (non alloy) form, used in ceramics boron {diboron trioxide; boric oxide} Reasonable case CLP species based on hazard statements/ molecular weight, physical form and low solubility. Industrial sources include: fluxing agent for glass/enamels; additive for fibre optics, borosilicate glass cadmium {cadmium oxide} Reasonable case CLP species based on hazard statements/molecular weight, very low solubility in water. Industrial sources include: electroplating baths, electrodes for storage batteries, catalysts, ceramic glazes, phosphors, pigments and nematocides. Worst case compounds in CLP: cadmium sulphate, chloride, fluoride & iodide not expected as either very soluble and/or compound's industrial usage not related to site history chromium in chromium(III) compounds {chromium(III) oxide (worst case)} Reasonable case species based on hazard statements/molecular weight. Industrial sources include: tanning, pigment in paint, inks and glass chromium in chromium(VI) compounds {chromium (VI) compounds, with the exception of barium chromate and of compounds specified elsewhere in this Annex} Worst case species based on hazard statements/molecular weight

www.hazwasteonline.com

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

Page 61 of 62

Report created by Shaun Armitage on 11 Oct 2023

copper {dicopper oxide; copper (I) oxide} Reasonable case CLP species based on hazard statements/molecular weight and insolubility in water. Industrial sources include: oxidised copper metal, brake pads, pigments, antifouling paints, fungicide. Worse case copper sulphate is very soluble and likely to have been leached away if ever present and/or not enough soluble sulphate detected. lead {lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in this Annex (worst case)} There isn’t enough Cr(VI) to make hazardous levels of lead chromate, next worst case species selected mercury {mercury dichloride} Worst case CLP species based on hazard statements/molecular weight nickel {nickel chromate} Worst case CLP species based on hazard statements/molecular weight selenium {nickel selenate} Worst case CLP species based on hazard statements/molecular weight vanadium {divanadium pentaoxide; vanadium pentoxide} Worst case species selected zinc {zinc sulphate (hydrous) (mono-, hexa- and hepta hydrate); [1] zinc sulphate (anhydrous) [2]} There isn’t enough Cr(VI) to make hazardous levels of zinc chromate, next worst case species selected cyanides {salts of hydrogen cyanide with the exception of complex cyanides such as ferrocyanides, ferricyanides and mercuric oxycyanide and those specified elsewhere in this Annex} Harmonised group entry used as most reasonable case as complex cyanides and those specified elsewhere in the annex are not likely to be present in this soil: [Note conversion factor based on a worst case compound: sodium cyanide] sulfur {sulphur dichloride} Worst case species selected antimony {antimony trioxide} Worst case CLP species based on hazard statements/molecular weight and low solubility. Industrial sources include: flame retardants in electrical apparatus, textiles and coatings manganese {manganese sulphate} Worst case CLP species based on hazard statements/molecular weight

Appendix C: Version HazWasteOnline Classification Engine: WM3 1st Edition v1.2.GB - Oct 2021 HazWasteOnline Classification Engine Version: 2023.283.5774.10667 (10 Oct 2023) HazWasteOnline Database: 2023.283.5774.10667 (10 Oct 2023) This classification utilises the following guidance and legislation: WM3 v1.2.GB - Waste Classification - 1st Edition v1.2.GB - Oct 2021 CLP Regulation - Regulation 1272/2008/EC of 16 December 2008 1st ATP - Regulation 790/2009/EC of 10 August 2009 2nd ATP - Regulation 286/2011/EC of 10 March 2011 3rd ATP - Regulation 618/2012/EU of 10 July 2012 4th ATP - Regulation 487/2013/EU of 8 May 2013 Correction to 1st ATP - Regulation 758/2013/EU of 7 August 2013 5th ATP - Regulation 944/2013/EU of 2 October 2013 6th ATP - Regulation 605/2014/EU of 5 June 2014 WFD Annex III replacement - Regulation 1357/2014/EU of 18 December 2014 Revised List of Waste 2014 - Decision 2014/955/EU of 18 December 2014 7th ATP - Regulation 2015/1221/EU of 24 July 2015 8th ATP - Regulation (EU) 2016/918 of 19 May 2016 9th ATP - Regulation (EU) 2016/1179 of 19 July 2016 10th ATP - Regulation (EU) 2017/776 of 4 May 2017 HP14 amendment - Regulation (EU) 2017/997 of 8 June 2017 13th ATP - Regulation (EU) 2018/1480 of 4 October 2018 14th ATP - Regulation (EU) 2020/217 of 4 October 2019 15th ATP - Regulation (EU) 2020/1182 of 19 May 2020 The Chemicals (Health and Safety) and Genetically Modified Organisms (Contained Use)(Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 - UK: 2020 No. 1567 of 16th December 2020 The Waste and Environmental Permitting etc. (Legislative Functions and Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 - UK: 2020 No. 1540 of 16th December 2020 GB MCL List - version 1.1 of 09 June 2021

Page 62 of 62

K4MIQ-YGI4T-175DH

www.hazwasteonline.com

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 7 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY SAMPLING OF THE “RODING / INGREBOURNE CATCHMENT RIVER N.C.R.S, MARCH 2025

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

MIDAS: Sample Details Report Sampling Point Details Point Code:

PRGR9999

RODING / INGREBOURNE CATCHMENT RIVER N.C.R.S

Type:

POLLUTION/INVESTIGATION POINTS - ENVIRONMENT

Area:

THAMES - HERTS AND NORTH LONDON

Sub Area:

L&W HERTS & NORTH LONDON

Country:

England

Political Codes:

Sample Details Status:

Arrived

Source:

Reference:

909102

Taken:

07-Mar-2025 14:09

Material:

2AZZ

RIVER / RUNNING SURFACE WATER

Purpose:

UNPLANNED REACTIVE MONITORING (POLLUTION INCIDENTS)

Mechanism:

SPOT

Sampler:

AC69

BARRY O'SULLIVAN

Received at Lab:

11-Mar-2025 07:26

Last Updated:

STARCROSS LABORATORY (NLS)

Analysis Complete: Sample Held?

12-Mar-2025 01:10:06

Transfer to Archive: No

Reason For Change:

Pre-Sampling Details System Id:

Officer: PRN:

Run Id:

Project Code:

Run Date:

Run No:

90287339

ARG Codes:

Comments Sampler's Comments: INVESTIGATION UPSTREAM FROM OLD LANDFILL IN ARNOLDS FIELD Analyst's Comments: Confirmation Comments: Sample Address:

Ref: 909102

Smpt Code:

Measurements

PRGR9999

Taken:

07-Mar-2025 14:09

Material:

2AZZ

Status Det. Det. Name Meth. ---Result--- Unit Code Code E 0061 pH 26 8.04 PHUNITS E 0076 Temperature of Water 26 8.4 CEL E 0077 Conductivity at 25 C 26 1419 uS/cm A 0085 BOD : 5 Day ATU 21 mg/l E 0111 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N 21 0.068 mg/l E 0116 Nitrogen, Total Oxidised as N 21 7.5 mg/l E 0119 Ammonia un-ionised as N 25 0.0011 mg/l E 0172 Chloride 21 160 mg/l E 0180 Orthophosphate, reactive as P 21 0.034 mg/l E 0664 Visible oil or grease, significant 26 Not found trace: Present/Not found (1/0) A 3106 GCMS Screen : Semi-Volatile 21 UNITLESS Screen: Semi Quantitative A 6396 Turbidity 21 NTU E 7434 National Grid Reference : Whole : 26 1 UNITLESS Field report TQ5452382315 E 7608 Salinity : In Situ 26 0.71 ppt E 9901 Oxygen, Dissolved, % Saturation 26 93.5 %

Acr N N N D D D N D D N

Perm Pol Stats Usr IDV Excl stats U U U U U N U U U U U N U U U U U N N U U U U U N U U U U U N U U U U U N U U U U U N U U U U U N U U U U U N

Y N

N N

U U

N N

MIDAS: Sample Details Report Sampling Point Details Point Code:

PRGR9999

RODING / INGREBOURNE CATCHMENT RIVER N.C.R.S

Type:

POLLUTION/INVESTIGATION POINTS - ENVIRONMENT

Area:

THAMES - HERTS AND NORTH LONDON

Sub Area:

L&W HERTS & NORTH LONDON

Country:

England

Political Codes:

Sample Details Status:

Arrived

Source:

Reference:

909101

Taken:

07-Mar-2025 13:50

Material:

2AZZ

RIVER / RUNNING SURFACE WATER

Purpose:

UNPLANNED REACTIVE MONITORING (POLLUTION INCIDENTS)

Mechanism:

SPOT

Sampler:

AC69

BARRY O'SULLIVAN

Received at Lab:

11-Mar-2025 07:26

Last Updated:

STARCROSS LABORATORY (NLS)

Analysis Complete: Sample Held?

12-Mar-2025 01:10:06

Transfer to Archive: No

Reason For Change:

Pre-Sampling Details System Id:

Officer: PRN:

Run Id:

Project Code:

Run Date:

Run No:

90287337

ARG Codes:

Comments Sampler's Comments: INVESTIGATION DOWNSTREAM FROM OLD LANDFILL IN ARNOLDS FIELD Analyst's Comments: Confirmation Comments: Sample Address:

Ref: 909101

Smpt Code:

Measurements

PRGR9999

Taken:

07-Mar-2025 13:50

Material:

2AZZ

Status Det. Det. Name Meth. ---Result--- Unit Code Code E 0061 pH 26 7.79 PHUNITS E 0076 Temperature of Water 26 8.05 CEL E 0077 Conductivity at 25 C 26 1354 uS/cm A 0085 BOD : 5 Day ATU 21 mg/l E 0111 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N 21 0.049 mg/l E 0116 Nitrogen, Total Oxidised as N 21 7.6 mg/l E 0119 Ammonia un-ionised as N 25 0.00048 mg/l E 0172 Chloride 21 140 mg/l E 0180 Orthophosphate, reactive as P 21 0.058 mg/l E 0664 Visible oil or grease, significant 26 Not found trace: Present/Not found (1/0) A 3106 GCMS Screen : Semi-Volatile 21 UNITLESS Screen: Semi Quantitative A 6396 Turbidity 21 NTU E 7434 National Grid Reference : Whole : 26 1 UNITLESS Field report TQ5392181893 E 7608 Salinity : In Situ 26 0.68 ppt E 9901 Oxygen, Dissolved, % Saturation 26 96.8 %

Acr Perm Pol Stats Usr IDV Excl stats N U U U U U N N U U U U U N N U U U U U N D N D U U U U U N D U U U U U N N U U U U U N D U U U U U N D U U U U U N N U U U U U N Y

Y N

N N

U U

N N

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 8 LB HAVERING, “THE EFFECT OF ARNOLD’S FIELD FIRES ON THE RESPIRATORY HEALTH OF THE SURROUNDING POPULATION” – FULL TECHNICAL REPORT, NOVEMBER 2024 (FTR)

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

The Effect of Arnold’s Field Fires on the Respiratory Health of the Surrounding Population

Full Technical Report

November 2024

Lead Analyst: Dr Anthony Simiyu Wakhisi Email: anthony.wakhisi@havering.gov.uk

Version Control

Version 0.1

0.2

Date

Actions /Edits

01/02/2024 Descriptive Analysis Addressed feedback on descriptive analysis and carried out time series 24/04/2024 regression modelling

By Mark Holder & Anthony Wakhisi Anthony Wakhisi

Revised models using main exposures of interest as the binary fire incidents variable and PM2.5 (continuous).

0.3

For each exposure and each outcome, 16/05/2024 started with basic models (including seasonality) and added variables sequentially.

Anthony Wakhisi

Checked model diagnostics including partial autocorrelation. Performed sensitivity analysis including quasi-Poisson models for over dispersion.

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7 Final Report

Revised analysis to include the LB Havering aggregate data and 14th LSOA 03/07/2024 previously missing data. Included lagged exposure modelling for 7 days period after reported fire / 14/07/2024 intervention by London Fire Brigade Included lagged exposure modelling for 3 days period and calculated means and p 23/08/2024 values for fire days and non fire days health activities Addressed final feedback from Klea and Dimitris including rerunning of some 04/10/2024 regression models with lower degree of freedom splines 01/11/2024

Addressed feedback from LB Havering DPH

Anthony Wakhisi

2|Page

Acknowledgements We wish to express our profound gratitude to the following for their immense contribution in developing the statistical analysis plan, carrying out data analysis, interpretation of results, drafting and editing the final report: Person

Organisation

Role

Imperial College, London

Expert advisor: data analysis, interpretation and reporting

Imperial College, London

Expert advisor: data analysis, interpretation and reporting

Dr Anthony Simiyu Wakhisi, Public Health Principal

London Borough of Havering

Lead analyst and author

Mark Holder, Senior Public Health Analyst

London Borough of Havering

Data analysis & quality assurance

Dr Samantha Westrop, Assistant Director of Public Health

London Borough of Havering

Advisor and co-author

Prof Klea Katsouyanni, Professor of Biostatistics and Epidemiology Dr Dimitris Evangelopoulos, Research Fellow, School of Public Health Faculty of Medicine

3|Page

Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 5 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 7 2 Methods .................................................................................................................. 8 2.1. Datasets and sources ...................................................................................... 8 2.2. Statistical Analysis ........................................................................................... 9 2.3 Time Series Regression Models ..................................................................... 11 2.4 Model Checking and Sensitivity Analysis ........................................................ 12 3 Results: Descriptive Analysis ................................................................................ 13 3.1 LSOAs of interest & resident population ......................................................... 13 3.2 Fire Days......................................................................................................... 13 3.3 PM2.5 ............................................................................................................... 14 3.4 Primary Healthcare ......................................................................................... 14 3.5. A&E Attendances ........................................................................................... 19 3.6 Hospital Admissions ........................................................................................ 20 3.7 Summary Statistics ......................................................................................... 21 3.8 Spearman’s Rank Correlation Matrix .............................................................. 23 4 Results: Time Series Analysis ............................................................................... 25 5 Results: Time Series Regression Models.............................................................. 29 5.1 Fire days ......................................................................................................... 29 5.2 PM2.5 ............................................................................................................... 29 5.3 Lagged Exposure ............................................................................................ 29 5.4 Sensitivity Analysis for Over-dispersion .......................................................... 30 5.5 Partial autocorrelation ..................................................................................... 30 5.6 Data Limitations .............................................................................................. 31 6 Results: Sensitivity Analysis .................................................................................. 34 6.1 Quasi-Poisson model for over-dispersion ....................................................... 34 6.2 Poisson regression models for lagged impact................................................. 35

4|Page

Executive Summary Background

This report details findings from an assessment of the potential impact of fire incidents at the Arnold’s Field site, Launder’s Lane on local residents’ respiratory health. The population at risk was defined as people living in lower super output areas (LSOA) that are fully or partially within two miles radius from Arnold’s Field Landfill. Fourteen Havering LSOAs were included which have an estimated resident population of 23,656 people. In total there were 99 fire days over the assessment period. To assess the fire impact, time series analysis was carried out by the Havering public health team in collaboration with environmental epidemiology experts from Imperial College, London. Time series analysis is a statistical method commonly used in environmental epidemiology particularly with understanding the effect of common exposures to health outcomes across time. In this analysis fire incidents attended by the London Fire Brigade were included as the main exposure variable whereas respiratory illness related attendances at General Practices (GP) and Accident and Emergency (A&E), GP prescriptions and hospital admissions were the health outcomes of interest. To adjust for potential confounding factors the following variables were included; the daily average levels of NO2, wind speed, humidity, temperature, day of the week and COVID-19 lockdown dates.

Key Findings

Amongst residents of the LSOAs of interest a total of 3,537 attendances with respiratory symptoms and 1,458 attendances with major respiratory conditions were recorded at general practices. A total of 108,182 respiratory illness related prescriptions were issued in general practices. A total of 1,530 A&E attendances and 2,482 hospital admissions with respiratory conditions were recorded over the assessment period amongst residents in the LSOAs of interest. As expected, residents in the LSOAs of interest aged 65 years and over had higher primary and secondary healthcare use for respiratory symptoms/conditions as compared to those aged below 65. A statistically significant association was found between fire incidents and GP attendances with respiratory long term conditions (LTCs) mainly Asthma and COPD. The adjusted model results showed a 34% increase in risk and number of GP attendances with long term respiratory conditions (RR 1.34, 95%CI: 1.01, 1.80) on fire days as compared to non-fire days. This is equivalent to approximately 2 extra GP attendances over 10 fire days as compared to non-fire days. Overall, out of 1,231 respiratory LTC GP attendances recorded between January 2018 and September 2023, approximately 20 could be attributed to the impact of reported fire incidents. We did not find a statistically significant association between fire incidents and GP attendances with general respiratory symptoms, A&E attendances and hospital admissions with respiratory conditions. We also did not find a statistically significant association between daily average PM2.5 levels and any of the outcome variables.

5|Page

Conclusion

Our epidemiological time series analysis found a statistically significant association between fires attended by the London Fire Brigade at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane and an increase in number of GP attendances by those with long term respiratory conditions. Associations with other outcome variables were not statistically significant.

Limitations

These results should be interpreted with caution. Despite demonstrating a significant association between fire days and an increase in GP attendances by residents with long term respiratory conditions, we were unable to differentiate between arranged attendances for routine reviews and those booked by patients with acute respiratory illness. However we consider the findings from this analysis plausible as we would not expect routine reviews to significantly differ on fire days as compared to non-fire days or to be influenced by other exposure variables utilised in our models. Dynamics of the fires occurring at the site also need to be considered. In particular, it is possible that smouldering may occur without attendance by the London Fire Brigade and that a fire reported to London Fire Brigade may have started days earlier, before it becomes big enough to be reported to London Fire Brigade. We also acknowledge that same-day GP appointments can be difficult to access. However it is plausible that, especially amongst those with increased sensitivity, respiratory symptoms may have begun prior to the attendance by the Fire Brigade for a specific fire incident. Consultation with clinical colleagues also suggests that in some instances, those with pre-existing respiratory conditions (e.g. COPD) may be prioritised for same-day appointments if presenting with acute respiratory symptoms, although this is not universally the case.

6|Page

1 Introduction

Arnold’s Field is privately owned land off Launders Lane, Rainham in the South of the London Borough of Havering (Figure 1). The site was formerly a sand and gravel quarry, subsequently registered as a landfill licensed to accept inert, commercial, industrial, household and solid sludge waste. The last waste was recorded as being accepted in 1965, however significant volumes of waste were subsequently deposited there without appropriate authorisation. There are no clear records of the specific type of waste that has been deposited at the site; however, it is known to include household, commercial/industrial (including wood, paper, glass, plastic, mattresses, furniture, cables, and fabric materials) and construction waste deposits. No comprehensive information on waste depth is available, however it is known that it can be up to 5 metres deep in places. The landfill site often catches fire, especially during hot weather. Residents complain about the nuisance caused by smoke, dust and odour from the fires and are concerned about potential health impacts. Havering Council has commissioned soil sampling and comprehensive air quality monitoring, and has undertaken an investigation of potential health risks to residents through a contract with Environmental Epidemiology experts from Imperial College London (Professor Klea Katsouyanni 1 and Dr Dimitris Evangelopoulos 2) This report details the findings of the work performed with Environmental Epidemiology experts from Imperial College London; use of health care services, air quality, and meteorological data were used to inform time series models necessary to explore the relationship between days when fires occur at the site and the use of health care services by local residents as a result of respiratory symptoms. Time series analysis is a statistical method required to explore any potential relationship between fire occurrences and use of health care services as there are a number of potential confounding factors 3 that may influence healthcare usage on any given day. These factors may be associated or not with the occurrence of a fire. For example, warmer weather may influence severity of respiratory symptoms experienced by the population, but may also be associated with the occurrence of a fire at the site. A list of variables considered in the analysis, and the associated data sources, can be found in the methods section of this report. The aim of this analysis was to explore whether fires occurring at the Arnold’s Field site are associated with an increase in use of health care services by people residing close to the site.

1 Klea Katsouyanni Profile | Imperial College London

2 Dimitris Evangelopoulos Publications | Imperial College London

3 Confounding factors/variables are those that may compete with the exposure of interest (e.g. fires) in explaining the outcome (e.g. GP attendances) of a study.

7|Page

Figure 1: Map of the London Borough of Havering with lower super output area (LSOA) boundaries. Arnold’s Field landfill is marked by a dark red dot and the 14 LSOAs of interest nearest to the site are highlighted in light red.

2 Methods

2.1. Datasets and Sources

2.1.1 Primary & Secondary Care Data Primary care data (GP attendances) and secondary care data (accident and emergency attendances) were obtained from NHS NEL London ICB team. Hospital admissions data was extracted from the NHS Digital Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) database by the Havering Public Health Intelligence team. Data from NHS NEL ICB were for the period 1st January 2017 to 30th September 2023. These included all patients resident in the 14 Lower Super Output Areas (LSOAs)4 of interest who had attended primary or secondary care services with respiratory illness within the specified period. Also included were records for all patients who were issued respiratory illness related prescriptions in primary care over the same period. Patients were excluded from the datasets if they had an ‘informed dissent’ code in their casenotes. Similar primary and secondary care and prescription data in aggregate format for the whole of Havering was provided for comparative / descriptive analysis. 2.1.2 Fire Days Data Fire incidents data was sourced from the London Fire Brigade. These included fires attended to by the London Fire Brigade occurring on Arnold’s field, off Launders Lane from 01 January 2018 until 30 September 2023.

An LSOA is a geographical area comprised of between 400 and 1,200 households and have a usually resident population between 1,000 and 3,000 persons. Statistical geographies - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

8|Page

2.1.3 Air Pollution Daily average air pollution data (PM2.5 & NO2) were obtained from the Breathe London 5 database specifically from two nodes – Rainham node (closest to landfill during the period of investigation) and Bexley Slade Green node (for comparison). 2.1.4 Meteorological Data Temperature, Wind speed and Humidity data over the same period were sourced from the London City Airport meteorological database 6 and included in statistical modelling as potential confounding factors. 2.1.5 COVID-19 Lockdown Dates COVID-19 lockdown dates were sourced from timeline-lockdown-social (instituteforgovernment.org.uk) and used in models to assess the impact on specified healthcare activity levels over the study period.

2.2. Statistical Analysis

The analysis included data for the period 1 January 2018 to 30 September 2023. Healthcare activity data was available as from 1 January 2017 but the 2017 data was excluded as no fire incident was reported in that year. The resident population of the 14 LSOAs of interest and Havering as a whole was determined using the most recent ONS population estimates (2022). 7 Most of the descriptive data analysis was carried out in MS Excel and time series regression modelling in R Studio. 2.2.1 Variables The following variables were included in the analysis: Exposure Variables • •

Fire Incidents at the Arnold’s Field site (Yes/No) PM2.5 daily average (μg/m3)

Potential Exposure Confounding Variables • • • • •

NO2 daily average (μg/m3) Wind speed daily average (miles per hour- mph) Humidity daily average (%) Temperature daily average (0F) COVID-19 Lockdown Dates (Yes/No)

Healthcare Activity / Outcome Variables •

5 6

Daily number of attendances at general practices with respiratory symptoms8

Breathe London London City Airport (Greater London) weather - Met Office

Population estimates for England and Wales - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

8 Cough, sore throat, wheezing

9|Page

• • • • • •

Daily number of attendances at general practices with a major respiratory condition 9 Daily number of attendances at general practices with long term respiratory conditions (LTC 10 Daily number of attendances at general practices with LTC and recorded respiratory symptoms. Daily number of respiratory prescriptions issued by primary care Daily number of hospital attendances at A&E with respiratory conditions (primary diagnosis) Daily number of hospital inpatient admissions with respiratory conditions (primary diagnosis)

2.2.2 Descriptive analysis Population The population at risk was defined as people living in LSOAs that are partially or fully within two miles radius from Arnold’s field landfill. Numbers and percentages were calculated for persons aged under 65 and 65 years and over for each LSOA. Fire Days & PM2.5 Number of fire days per month and daily average PM2.5 levels including standard deviations on fire days and non-fire days over the study period were calculated and compared. T test 11 was used to measure the statistical significance (p value) of the difference between the average PM2.5 on fire days as compared to non-fire days. Healthcare Activity Annual counts of health activities in primary and secondary care including prescriptions were calculated for both havering as whole and the 14 LSOAs of interest. Average annual rates (2018 – 2023, rate per 1,000 population) were determined using the ONS 2022 mid-year population estimates. 95% confidence intervals were included. Average annual daily counts with standard deviations were also calculated for each variable. T test was used to measure the statistical significance (p value) of the difference between the average healthcare activity levels on fire days as compared to non-fire days. Summary Statistics Summary statistics for all numerical variables were calculated including the total daily counts, minimum, 1st Quartile, Median, Mean, 3rd Quartile, maximum values and missing data for each variable.

9 Asthma, Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Bronchitis, Emphysema, Cystic fibrosis, Lung

cancer, Mesothelioma, Pneumonia, Pulmonary fibrosis, Respiratory infections or any other respiratory condition. 10 Asthma, Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Cystic fibrosis, Lung cancer, Mesothelioma 11https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-readers/publications/statistics-square-one/7-t-tests

10 | P a g e

Correlations Trend charts for exposure and outcome variables were created to visually examine patterns over the period of study. As none of the data were normally distributed, spearman’s rank-order correlation tests12 were carried out for all numerical variables to measure the strength and direction of association. Results were presented in a matrix including correlation coefficients and p values.

2.3 Time Series Regression Models

To investigate whether the short-term variation in healthcare activity associated with respiratory illness among residents in the 14 LSOAs of interest could be explained by the occurrence of fire incidents at the landfill and fluctuations in PM2.5 levels, Poisson Regression Models were utilised. Modelling included adjustment for potential confounding factors namely; temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, weekdays, holidays and COVID-19 Lockdown dates. NO2 was also included for the purpose of sensitivity analysis. Adjusting for seasonality and long term trends The main assessment question was to determine whether short-term variations in the specified health outcome variables could be explained by the exposures of interest i.e. fire incidents and daily PM2.5 Levels. However, because healthcare activity/outcome data was expected to be dominated by seasonal patterns and long term trends, it was necessary to control for these patterns in the regression models in order to effectively separate them out from the short-term associations between exposure and outcome that we were interested in. 13 To control for seasonal patterns and long term trends we fitted a spline function of time for each outcome variable separately. A variety of splines were fitted with varied degrees of freedom i.e. 1, 4, 8 and 12 and we examined the AIC 14 values to determine which was the best fitting spline (the one with the lowest value) for each variable which was then included in all models involving the specific variable. 13 Allowing for delayed exposure The initial model investigated the association between various health activities /outcomes on a given day and the exposure to either fire pollutant on fire days or varied PM2.5 levels while controlling for other potential confounders on the same day. But there was need to explore whether there was any delayed association (lag) with fire incidents in particular. To do this we created 3 and 7 day time-shifted copies of fire days and included them in the model to explore the association between healthcare activity levels and delayed fire effect over the following days respectively after the reported incident and intervention by the London Fire Brigade.13 To check for possible over-dispersion in the fitted Poisson models the same analyses were repeated but based on a quasi-Poisson statistical model and calculated relative 12 Spearman’s Rank Correlation: The Definitive Guide To Understand | Simplilearn

13 Bhaskaran K, Gasparrini A, Hajat S, Smeeth L, Armstrong B (2013). Time series regression studies

in environmental epidemiology, International Journal of Epidemiology; 42(4):1187-1195 14 The Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) is a mathematical method for evaluating how well a model fits the data it was generated from. In statistics, AIC is used to compare different possible models and determine which one is the best fit for the data.

11 | P a g e

risks, mean and variance for the two models were compared. Partial autocorrelation function was used to check if adjustment for seasonality in various models had eliminated or reduced autocorrelation.13 Increase in number of GP Attendances Model For statistically significant associations between exposure and outcome variables, based on the relative risk measures from the adjusted model, the overall extra and daily number of healthcare activities that may be attributed to the specific exposure e.g. fire days were calculated by applying the risk difference (percentage) between exposure and non-exposure days. For example the relative risk for GP attendances with respiratory long term conditions on fire days was 1.34 i.e. 34% higher as compared to non-fire days. 34% was applied to number of attendances on non-fire days to determine the extra attendances that could result from a similar number of fire days and multiplied by 10 to address the issue of resulting less than 1 value (0.2) per day (34% x 1,165 / 2,000 x10 = 2 extra GP attendances per 10 days).

2.4 Model Checking and Sensitivity Analysis

Quasi-Poisson model for over-dispersion To check for possible over-dispersion in the fitted Poisson models the same analyses were repeated but based on a quasi-Poisson statistical model. 15 Relative risks, mean and variance for the two models were compared to identify any significant differences.13 Partial autocorrelation function Partial autocorrelation function 16 was used to check if adjustment for seasonality in various models had eliminated or reduced autocorrelation.13

15 Quasi Poisson Regression – Technical Documentation (zendesk.com)

16 10.2 - Autocorrelation and Time Series Methods | STAT 462 (psu.edu)

12 | P a g e

3 Results: Descriptive Analysis

3.1 LSOAs of interest & resident population

The estimated population of the residents in the fourteen LSOAs of interest was 23,656. 82% (19,404) were persons aged below 65 years (Table 1). Table 1: Resident population estimates 17 by age group of the 14 LSOAs surrounding the site. LSOA Code

LSOA Name

E01002263

Havering 026D

1,310

341

1,651

E01002265

Havering 025A

1,095

281

1,376

E01002342

Havering 030A

1,512

235

1,747

E01002343

Havering 029A

1,276

397

1,673

E01002344

Havering 029B

1,537

330

1,867

E01002345

Havering 030B

1,763

187

1,950

E01002346

Havering 030C

1,355

189

1,544

E01002347

Havering 030D

1,370

270

1,640

E01002348

Havering 029C

1,068

397

1,465

E01002349

Havering 029D

1,147

351

1,498

E01002370

Havering 028C

1,990

276

2,266

E01002371

Havering 028D

1,359

338

1,697

E01002374

Havering 027E

1,387

253

1,640

E01002385

Havering 024A

1,235

407

1,642

19,404 (82%)

4,252 (18%)

23,656

Total

>65 years

65+ years

Total

3.2 Fire Days

Fires attended by the London Fire Brigade occurring on Arnold’s field, off Launders Lane from 01 January 2018 until 30 September 2023 were included as the independent exposure variable in our analysis. Some fires burnt for more than one day, and on some days there was more than one fire burning on the field (i.e. at a different locations on the site). As such a binary variable “fire day” was used, where a fire day was a calendar date with at least one fire occurring on the site in that 24 hour period. A monthly summary of fire days is shown in Table 2. There were a total of 99 fire days over the study period.

17 Population estimates for England and Wales - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

13 | P a g e

Table 2 Summary of the number of days with fires (“fire days”) occurring at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane that required attendance by the London Fire Brigade (LFB) by month from 2018 - 2023. Year

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Total

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

Total

15 7

3.3 PM2.5

The total average PM2.5 levels on fire days attended by the London Fire Brigade was higher as compared to days without a fire. However the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.100) (Table 3). Table 3: Average levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) on days with and without fires at Arnold’s Field attended by the London Fire Brigade.

2018

Average PM2.5, μg/m3, Non-fire days (SD) 10.9 (7.4)

2019

11.4 (9.5)

11.0 (8.9)

2020

14.8 (6.9)

8.2 (6.7)

2021

13.5(3.9)

8.7 (6.0)

2022

10.1 (5.2)

10.2 (7.8)

2023

4.8 (2.1)

8.4 (6.4)

Total

10.7 (6.7)

9.7 (7.4)

Year

Total number of days with fire

Average PM2.5, μg/m3, Fire days (SD)

3.4 Primary Healthcare

3.4.1 Attendance at General Practice with respiratory symptoms A total of 3,537 attendances at general practices with respiratory symptoms were recorded among residents in the LSOAs of interest between January 2018 and September 2023. The number of attendances by age group, by year and overall rates for the entire study period are presented in Table 4. Residents aged 65 and over had a significantly higher attendance rate (33/1,000) as compared to those aged below 65 (24/1,000).

14 | P a g e

Table 4: Number and rate of attendances at general practices with respiratory symptoms among residents of the 14 LSOAs of interest, by age group, between January 2018 and September 2023. Year

Age <65 years

Age 65+ years

Total

2018

501

174

675

2019

616

157

773

2020

350

111

461

2021

396

481

2022

504

149

653

2023

377

117

494

Total

2,744

793

3,537

Population Average Annual Rate, per 1,000 population (95% CI)

20,300

4,197

24,497

23.5 (21.4, 25.7)

32.9 (27.5, 38.7)

25.1 (23.2, 27.2)

Average daily GP attendances on “fire days” compared to non-fire days are shown in Table 5. On average there were less GP attendances (1.3) with respiratory symptoms on days with a fire compared to days without (1.7). However the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.257). Table 5: Average number of attendances at general practices with respiratory symptoms among residents of the LSOAs of interest, on fire days and non-fire days, between January 2018 and September 2023.

2018

Average daily number of GP attendances, Fire days (SD) 3

2019

1.1 (1.2)

2.1 (2.4)

2020

0.6 (0.8)

1.3 (1.8)

2021

1.0 (1.6)

1.3 (1.8)

2022

1.6 (1.8)

1.8 (1.9)

2023

1.5 (1.4)

1.8 (1.8)

Total

1.3 (1.5)

1.7 (2.0)

Year

Total number of days with fire

Average daily number of GP attendances, Non-fire days (SD) 1.8 (1.8)

3.4.2 Major respiratory conditions A total of 1,458 attendances at general practices with major respiratory conditions were recorded among residents of the LSOAs of interest between January 2018 and September 2023. The number of attendances by age group, by year and overall rates for the entire study period are presented in Table 6. Residents aged 65 and over had a significantly higher rate (20/1,000) as compared to those aged below 65 (8.3/1,000).

15 | P a g e

Table 6: Number and rate of attendances at general practices with major respiratory conditions among residents of the 14 LSOAs of interest, by age group, between January 2018 and September 2023. Year

Age <65 years

Age 65+ years

Total

2018

112

174

2019

116

162

2020

111

150

2021

141

202

2022

247

131

378

2023

238

154

392

Total

965

493

1,458

20,300

4,197

24,497

8.3 (7.0, 9.6)

20.4 (16.3, 25.2)

10.4 (9.1, 11.7)

Population Average Annual Rate, per 1,000 population (95% CI)

Average daily GP attendances on “fire days” compared to non-fire days are shown in Table 7. On average there were more GP attendances with major respiratory conditions on days with a fire (0.8) compared to days without (0.7) but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.107). Table 7: Average number of attendances at general practices with major respiratory conditions among residents of the LSOAs of interest, on fire days and non-fire days, between January 2018 and September 2023.

2018

Average daily number of GP attendances, Non-fire days (SD) 0.5 (0.8)

2019

0.2 (0.4)

0.5 (0.8)

2020

0.4 (0.6)

0.4 (0.7)

2021

0.3 (0.4)

0.6 (0.9)

2022

1.0 (1.3)

1.0 (1.6)

2023

1.6 (1.6)

1.4 (1.6)

Total

0.8 (1.1)

0.7 (1.1)

Year

Average daily number of GP attendances, Fire days (SD)

Total number of days with fire

3.4.3 Respiratory Long Term Conditions A total of 1,231 attendances at general practices with respiratory long term conditions (LTCs) were recorded among residents of the LSOAs of interest between January 2018 and September 2023. The number of attendances by age group, by year and overall rates for the entire study period are presented in Table 8. Residents aged 65 and over had a significantly higher rate (17/1,000) as compared to those aged below 65 (7.0/1,000).

16 | P a g e

Table 8: Number and rate of attendances at general practices with respiratory long term conditions among residents of the 14 LSOAs of interest, by age group, between January 2018 and September 2023. Year

Age <65 years

Age 65+ years

Total

2018

108

164

2019

103

142

2020

102

133

2021

116

173

2022

199

105

304

2023

186

129

315

Total

814

417

1,231

20,300

4,197

24,497

7.0 (5.9, 8.2)

17.3 (13.5, 21.7)

8.7 (7.6, 10.0)

Population Average Annual Rate, per 1,000 population (95% CI)

Average daily GP attendances on “fire days” compared to non-fire days are shown in Table 9. On average there were more GP attendances with respiratory LTCs on days with a fire (0.7) compared to days without (0.6) but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.263). Table 9: Average number of attendances at general practices with respiratory long term conditions among residents of the LSOAs of interest, on fire days and non-fire days, between January 2018 and September 2023.

2018

Average daily number of GP attendances, Nonfire days (SD) 0.5 (0.8)

2019

0.2 (0.4)

0.4 (0.7)

2020

0.4 (0.6)

2021

0.3 (0.4)

0.5 (0.8)

2022

0.8 (1.1)

0.8 (1.4)

2023

1.5 (1.6)

1.1 (1.4)

Total

0.7 (1.1)

0.6 (1.0)

Year

Average daily number of GP attendances, Fire days (SD)

Total number of days with fire

3.4.5 Respiratory Prescriptions A total of 108,182 prescriptions in general practices were issued to residents of the LSOAs of interest with respiratory illness between January 2018 and September 2023. The number of prescriptions by age group, by year and overall rates for the entire study period are presented in Table 10. Residents aged 65 and over had a higher annual rate (2,041/1,000) as compared to those aged below 65 (505/1,000).

17 | P a g e

Table 10: Number and rate of prescriptions issued to residents of the 14 LSOAs of interest with respiratory illness, by age group, between January 2018 and September 2023. Year

Age <65 years

Age 65+ years

Total

2018

7,941

7,278

15,219

2019

8,242

7,406

15,648

2020

9,526

7,946

17,472

2021

11,242

9,228

20,470

2022

12,158

9,745

21,903

2023

9,807

7,663

17,470

Total

58,916

49,266

108,182

Population Average Annual Rate, per 1,000 population (95% CI)

20,300

4,197

24,497

505 (495, 515)

2,041 (1,998, 2085)

768 (757, 779)

Average daily prescriptions on “fire days” compared to non-fire days are shown in Table 11. On average there were more prescriptions issued on days with a fire (54) as compared to days without (51). The difference was however not statistically significant (p = 0.425). Table 11: Average number of prescriptions issued to residents of LSOAs of interest with respiratory illness, on fire days and non-fire days, between January 2018 and September 2023.

2018

Average daily number of GP Prescriptions, Fire Days (SD) 57

2019

38.5 (32.4)

42.9 (30.5)

2020

53.1 (27.9)

47.5 (34.3)

2021

47.1 (46.8)

56.5 (37.6)

2022

56.3 (40.2)

60.4 (38.7)

2023

65.2 (37.5)

63.9 (41.9)

Total

53.6 (37.8)

51.4 (36.3)

Year

Total number of days with fire

Average daily number of GP Prescriptions, Non-fire Days (SD) 41.7 (30.0)

18 | P a g e

3.5. A&E Attendances

A total of 1,530 attendances at A&E with respiratory conditions were recorded among residents of the LSOAs of interest between January 2018 and September 2023. The number of attendances by age group, by year and overall rates for the entire study period are presented in Table 12. Residents aged 65 and over had a significantly higher rate (18/1,000) as compared to those aged below 65 (9.4/1,000). Table 12: Number and rate of A&E attendances with respiratory conditions among residents of the 14 LSOAs of interest by age group, between January 2018 and September 2023. Year

Age <65 years

Age 65+ years

Total

2018

130

2019

142

209

2020

147

210

2021

237

318

2022

286

385

2023

190

278

Total

1,092

438

1,530

Population Average Annual Rate, per 1,000 population (95% CI)

20,300

4,197

24,497

9.4 (8.1, 10.8)

18.1 (14.3, 22.7)

10.9 (9.6, 12.2)

Average daily A&E attendances on “fire days” compared to non-fire days are shown in Table 13. On average there were fewer A&E attendances with respiratory conditions on days with a fire (0.7) compared to days without (0.8) but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.105). Table 13: Average number of A&E attendances with respiratory conditions among residents of the LSOAs of interest, on fire days and non-fire days, between January 2018 and September 2023.

2018

Average daily number of A&E attendances, Nonfire days (SD) 0.5 (0.7)

2019

0.2 (0.4)

0.6 (0.9)

2020

0.6 (0.9)

0.6 (0.8)

2021

1.3 (0.9)

0.9 (1.1)

2022

0.8 (0.8)

1.1 (1.1)

2023

0.6 (0.6)

1.0 (1.0)

Total

0.7 (0.8)

0.8 (1.0)

Year

Average daily number of A&E attendances, Fire days (SD)

Total number of days with fire

19 | P a g e

3.6 Hospital Admissions

A total of 2,482 inpatient hospital admissions with respiratory conditions were recorded among residents of the LSOAs of interest between January 2018 and September 2023. The number of admissions by age group, by year and overall rates for the entire study period are presented in Table 14. Residents aged 65 and over had a significantly higher average annual rate (56/1,000) as compared to those aged below 65 (9.8/1,000). Table 14: Number and rate of inpatient hospital admissions with respiratory conditions amongst residents of the 14 LSOAs of interest by age group, between January 2018 and September 2023. Year

Age <65 years

Age 65+ years

Total

2018

243

276

519

2019

248

262

510

2020

142

202

344

2021

146

213

359

2022

192

227

419

2023

168

163

331

Total

1,139

1,343

2,482

Population Average Annual Rate, per 1,000 population (95% CI)

20,300

4,197

24,497

9.8 (8.4, 11.2)

55.7 (48.7, 63.2)

17.6 (16.0, 19.4)

Average daily hospital admissions on “fire days” compared to non-fire days are shown in Table 15. On average there were similar hospital admissions with respiratory conditions on days with a fire (1.2) compared to days without (1.2) (P = 0.296). Table 15: Average number of hospital admissions with respiratory conditions among residents of LSOAs of interest, on fire days and non-fire days, between January 2018 and September 2023. Year

Total number of days with fire

Average daily number of hospital admissions, Fire days (SD)

2018

Average daily number of hospital admissions, Nonfire days (SD) 1.4 (1.3)

2019

1.3 (1.3)

1.4 (1.3)

2020

0.8 (1.1)

0.9 (1.1)

2021

1.4 (1.0)

1.0 (1.0)

2022

1.3 (1.2)

1.1 (1.1)

2023

1.3 (1.2)

1.2 (1.2)

Total

1.2 (1.2)

20 | P a g e

3.7 Summary Statistics

Summary statistics for all outcome and exposure numerical variables were calculated and presented in Table 16 below. These include the total counts, and daily minimum, 1st Quartile, Median, Mean, 3rd Quartile, Maximum values and Missing data. Table 16: Summary statistics for all numerical variables in LSOAs of interest datasets Variable GP Attendances Major Respiratory Conditions: Residents Aged below 65 Years GP Attendances Major Respiratory Conditions: Residents Aged 65 Years & Over GP Attendances Major Respiratory Conditions: Residents of All ages GP Attendances Respiratory LTC: Residents Aged below 65 Years GP Attendances Respiratory LTC: Residents Aged 65 Years & Over GP Attendances Respiratory LTC: Residents of All ages GP Attendances Respiratory Symptoms: Residents Aged below 65 Years GP Attendances Respiratory Symptoms: Residents Aged 65 Years & Over GP Attendances Respiratory Symptoms: Residents of All ages GP Attendances Respiratory LTC & Symptoms: Residents Aged below 65 Years GP Attendances Respiratory LTC & Symptoms: Residents Aged 65 Years & Over GP Attendances Respiratory LTC & Symptoms: Residents of All ages Hospital A&E Attendance: Residents Aged below 65 Years Hospital A&E Attendance: Residents Aged 65 Years & Over

Total

Minimum

1st Quartile

Median

Mean

3rd Quartile

Maximum

Missing Data

965

0.0

0.5

1.0

7.0

0.0

493

0.0

0.2

0.0

4.0

0.0

1,458

0.0

0.7

1.0

9.0

0.0

814

0.0

0.4

1.0

7.0

0.0

417

0.0

0.2

0.0

4.0

0.0

1,231

0.0

0.6

1.0

8.0

0.0

2,744

0.0

1.0

1.3

2.0

11.0

0.0

793

0.0

0.4

1.0

6.0

0.0

3,537

0.0

1.0

1.7

3.0

13.0

0.0

468

0.0

0.2

3.0

4.0

0.0

216

0.0

0.1

3.0

0.0

684

0.0

0.3

1.0

5.0

0.0

1,092

0.0

0.5

1.0

8.0

438

0.0

0.2

0.0

3.0

21 | P a g e

Variable Hospital A&E Attendance: Residents of All ages Hospital Admissions: Residents Aged below 65 Years Hospital Admissions: Residents Aged 65 Years & Over Hospital Admissions: Residents of All ages GP Respiratory Prescriptions: Residents Aged below 65 Years GP Respiratory Prescriptions: Residents Aged 65 Years & Over GP Respiratory Prescriptions: Residents of All ages

Total

Minimum

1st Quartile

Median

Mean

3rd Quartile

Maximum

Missing Data

1,530

0.0

1.0

0.8

1.0

8.0

1,139

0.0

0.5

1.0

5.0

0.0

1,343

0.0

0.6

1.0

5.0

0.0

2,482

0.0

1.0

1.2

2.0

6.0

0.0

58,916

0.0

4.0

31.0

28.1

43.0

131.0

0.0

49,266

0.0

3.0

27.0

23.5

36.0

84.0

0.0

108,182

0.0

7.0

60.0

51.5

78.0

198.0

0.0

NO2 Daily Maximum: Rainham Node

N/A

0.2

10.9

21.8

40.6

49.0

389.1

0.0

NO2 Daily Maximum: Bexley Node

N/A

0.0

3.7

8.2

23.3

22.9

336.1

0.0

NO2 Daily Average: Rainham Node

N/A

0.0

3.6

8.0

12.9

14.6

192.0

8.0

NO2 Daily Average: Bexley Node

N/A

-0.4

1.4

2.5

6.4

5.2

147.9

61.0

PM2.5 Daily Maximum: Rainham Node

N/A

0.0

10.8

15.3

19.6

23.6

472.2

0.0

PM2.5 Daily Maximum: Bexley Node

N/A

0.0

8.4

12.9

17.2

21.7

164.5

0.0

PM2.5 Daily Average: Rainham Node

N/A

-0.9

5.1

7.3

9.7

11.6

57.9

176.0

PM2.5 Daily Average: Bexley Node

N/A

1.5

5.3

7.4

10.1

11.9

62.7

129.0

Temperature (0F): Daily Maximum

N/A

30.2

51.8

60.8

61.2

69.8

102.2

4.0

Temperature (0F ): Daily Average

N/A

26.6

47.3

54.4

55.1

63.2

86.8

3.0

Wind Speed: Daily Maximum

N/A

4.1

9.9

13.0

13.2

15.9

35.0

3.0

Wind Speed: Daily Average

N/A

1.7

5.8

7.4

7.9

9.7

21.3

3.0

Humidity: Daily Average

N/A

14.6

39.6

45.6

52.3

64.8

4.0

22 | P a g e

3.8 Spearman’s Rank Correlation Matrix

Table 17 shows Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients and p values for the association between health outcome variables and specified exposure numerical variables. Statistically significant correlations were observed between NO2 levels and GP attendances with major respiratory conditions (0.05), long term respiratory conditions (LTC) (0.05), respiratory symptoms (0.25), LTC with recorded respiratory symptoms (0.16), hospital admissions with respiratory conditions (0.09) and GP respiratory prescriptions (0.11). A statistically significant inverse correlation was also observed between PM2.5 levels and GP attendances with major respiratory conditions (-0.05), temperature levels and GP attendances with respiratory symptoms (-0.14), LTC with recorded symptoms (-0.09) and A&E attendance (-0.11). A statistically significant inverse correlation was also observed between humidity levels and GP attendances with respiratory symptoms (-0.10), LTC with recorded symptoms (-0.06) and A&E attendances (-0.05). It should be emphasized that these results reflect univariate correlations (not accounting for confounders). Table 17: Spearman’s rank correlation matrix for all numerical exposure and outcome variables

VARIABLES

GP Respiratory Conditions: All ages

GP Respiratory LTC: All ages

GP Respiratory Symptoms: All ages

rho (P value)

GP Respiratory LTC & Symptoms: All ages rho (P value)

Hospital Admissions: All ages

A&E Attendance: All ages

rho (P value)

GP Respiratory Prescriptions : All ages rho (P value)

NO2 Daily Average: Rainham

PM2.5 Daily Average: Rainham

Temperature (0F ): Daily Average

Wind Speed: Daily Average

Humidity: Daily Average

rho (P value)

GP Respiratory Conditions: All ages

1.000

0.940 (<0.001)

0.360 (<0.001)

0.200 (<0.001)

0.110 (<0.001)

0.0687 (0.002)

0.490 (<0.001)

0.050 (0.024)

-0.050 (0.021)

0.000 (0.906)

0.000 (0.982)

0.020 (0.461)

GP Respiratory LTC: All ages

0.940 (<0.001)

1.000

0.330 (<0.001)

0.180 (<0.001)

0.110 (<0.001)

0.0516 (0.020)

0.470 (<0.001)

0.050 (0.040)

-0.020 (0.328)

0.020 (0.368)

-0.020 (0.423)

0.030 (0.165)

GP Respiratory Symptoms: All ages

0.360 (<0.001)

0.330 (<0.001)

1.000

0.540 (<0.001)

0.190 (<0.001)

0.0762 (0.0006)

0.560 (<0.001)

0.250 (<0.001)

0.010 (0.593)

-0.140 (<0.001)

0.000 (0.916)

-0.100 (<0.001)

GP Respiratory LTC & Symptoms: All ages

0.200 (<0.001)

0.180 (<0.001)

0.540 (<0.001)

1.000

0.100 (<0.001)

0.0228 (0.307)

0.240 (<0.001)

0.160 (<0.001)

-0.010 (0.759)

-0.090 (<0.001)

0.010 (0.613)

-0.060 (0.003)

23 | P a g e

VARIABLES

GP Respiratory Conditions: All ages

GP Respiratory LTC: All ages

GP Respiratory Symptoms: All ages

rho (P value)

GP Respiratory LTC & Symptoms: All ages rho (P value)

Hospital Admissions: All ages

A&E Attendance: All ages

rho (P value)

GP Respiratory Prescriptions : All ages rho (P value)

NO2 Daily Average: Rainham

PM2.5 Daily Average: Rainham

Temperature (0F ): Daily Average

Wind Speed: Daily Average

Humidity: Daily Average

rho (P value)

Hospital Admissions: All ages

0.110 (<0.001)

0.190 (<0.001)

0.100 (<0.001)

1.000

0.0874 (0.000)

0.170 (<0.001)

0.090 (<0.001)

0.030 (0.146)

-0.010 (0.704)

0.010 (0.630)

0.030 (0.225)

A&E Attendance: All ages

0.069 (0.002)

0.052 (0.020)

0.076 (<0.001)

0.023 (0.307)

0.0874 (<0.001)

1.000

0.100 (<0.001)

-0.018 (0.413)

-0.016 (0.489)

-0.106 (<0.001)

-0.039 (0.079)

-0.053 (0.017)

GP Respiratory Prescriptions :All ages

0.490 (<0.001)

0.470 (<0.001)

0.560 (<0.001)

0.240 (<0.001)

0.170 (<0.001)

0.100 (<0.001)

1.000

0.110 (<0.001)

-0.030 (0.266)

0.010 (0.601)

-0.040 (0.079)

0.010 (0.586)

NO2 Daily Average: Rainham

0.050 (0.024)

0.050 (0.040)

0.250 (<0.001)

0.160 (<0.001)

0.090 (<0.001)

-0.018 (0.413)

0.110 (<0.001)

1.000

0.230 (<0.001)

-0.240 (<0.001)

-0.190 (<0.001)

-0.150 (<0.001)

PM2.5 Daily Average: Rainham

-0.050 (0.021)

-0.020 (0.328)

0.010 (0.593)

-0.010 (0.759)

0.030 (0.146)

-0.016 (0.489)

-0.030 (0.266)

0.230 (<0.001)

1.000

-0.050 (0.024)

-0.550 (<0.001)

-0.060 (0.013)

Temperature (0F ): Daily Average

0.000 (0.906)

0.020 (0.368)

-0.140 (<0.001)

-0.090 (<0.001)

-0.010 (0.706)

-0.106 (<0.001)

0.010 (0.601)

-0.240 (<0.001)

-0.050 (0.024)

1.000

0.010 (0.684)

0.900 (<0.001)

Wind Speed: Daily Average

0.000 (0.982)

-0.020 (0.423)

0.000 (0.916)

0.010 (0.613)

0.010 (0.630)

-0.039 (0.079)

-0.040 (0.079)

-0.190 (<0.001)

-0.550 (<0.001)

0.010 (0.684)

1.000

-0.020 (0.298)

0.020 (0.461)

0.030 (0.165)

-0.100 (<0.001)

-0.060 (0.003)

0.030 (0.225)

-0.053 (0.017)

0.010 (0.586)

-0.150 (<0.001)

-0.060 (0.013)

0.90 (<0.001)

-0.020 (0.298)

1.000

Humidity: Daily Average

24 | P a g e

4 Results: Time Series Analysis Time series charts below show individual trends for various outcome and exposure variables over the 6 year study period (January 2018 – September 2023).

26 | P a g e

27 | P a g e

28 | P a g e

5 Results: Time Series Regression Models

The main adjusted regression model that was used to determine the significance of associations between primary exposure variables (Fire days or PM2.5) and various outcome variables is labelled with β superscript in all tables. The model includes an adjustment for other exposure variables including; temperature, holidays, wind speed, week days and Covid19 lockdowns.

5.1 Fire days

A Statistically significant association was observed between fire incidents (fire days) and GP attendances with major respiratory conditions. The main adjusted model showed an increase of 32% (RR 1.32, 95%CI: 1.01, 1.73) in GP attendances on fire days as compared to non-fire days. Also observed was a statistically significant association between fire incidents and GP attendances with respiratory long term conditions (LTCs) (Table 18). The adjusted model showed an increase of 34% (RR 1.34, 95%CI: 1.01, 1.80) in GP attendances on fire days as compared to non-fire days. Lagged exposure to general fire pollutants models (3 days) showed a weakened association between fire incidents and GP attendances with respiratory long term conditions (LTCs). The adjusted model showed an increase of 5.4% in GP attendances on fire days as compared to non-fire days but the difference was not statistically significant (Table 18). A statistically significant association was observed between fire incidents and GP respiratory prescriptions in the basic model i.e. before adjustment for covariates. There was a 3.5% increase in prescriptions as compared to non-fire days but after adjustment for other exposure variables the difference was not statistically significant (Table 18).

5.2 PM2.5

We did not observe any statistically significant association between daily average PM2.5 levels and any of the outcome variables in all models.

5.3 Lagged Exposure

Lagged exposure to general fire pollutants models (7 days) showed a weakened association between fire incidents and GP attendances with respiratory long term conditions (LTCs). The adjusted model showed that there was an increase of 14 % in GP attendances on fire days as compared to non-fire days but the difference was not statistically significant (Table 21) Also observed was an association between fire incidents and A&E attendance with respiratory conditions. The adjusted model showed that there was an increase of 11% in A&E attendances on fire days as compared to non-fire days. However, the difference was not statistically significant (Table 21). A statistically significant association was observed between fire incidents and GP respiratory prescriptions in the basic model i.e. before adjustment for covariates. There was a 2.8% increase in prescriptions as compared non-fire days but after adjustment for other exposure variables the difference was not statistically significant (Table 21).

29 | P a g e

5.4 Sensitivity Analysis for Over-dispersion

Quasi-Poisson models were employed to test for data over-dispersion. Results showed that for all indicators except GP prescriptions data were not over-dispersed. These models did not produce any statistically significant results (Table 19)

5.5 Partial autocorrelation

Partial autocorrelation function was used to check if adjustment for seasonality in various models had been eliminated or reduced. Figures 2 and 3 are examples of results from a partial autocorrelation of GP attendances with major respiratory conditions which show a significant reduction in autocorrelation. Figure 2: Partial autocorrelation of GP attendances with major respiratory conditions

Figure 3: Partial autocorrelation of GP attendances with major respiratory conditions after adjustment for seasonality – Model 2 (Basic model + Temperature + Holidays + Wind speed + Weekdays + 12df spline)

30 | P a g e

5.6 Limitations

The accuracy of results from the modelling processes is subject to the quality of data provided to us by various sources i.e. London Fire Brigade (Fire Incidents), Breathe London (Air Quality), London City Meteorological Station (Meteorological data), NHS NEL ICB (GP Attendance, Hospital A&E Attendance) and NHS Digital (Hospital Admissions). Fire days refer to the days when London Fire Brigade attended the site but in real terms the fire may have started days before the intervention and therefore the increased healthcare activity on fire days could have been with the cumulative impact over a number of hours / days leading to the recorded fire day. Furthermore, most recorded fire incidents occurred in clusters either on alternate days or 2 to 6 days in a row. This may have resulted in sustained and heightened exposure and harmful health impact hence contributing to the observed modest increase in health care activities over the fire days. For outcome variables we relied entirely on the NHS data. The major respiratory conditions dataset did not include details on specific presenting symptoms apart from the main diagnosis. It was therefore not possible to differentiate between arranged attendances for routine reviews and those booked by patients with acute respiratory illness. However, we would not expect routine reviews to significantly differ on fire days as compared to non-fire days or to be influenced by other exposure variables utilised in our models. A separate dataset for GP attendance with respiratory symptoms was available for analysis but only 55% of patients with respiratory LTCs were linked to this dataset. Also most of the dates of attendance i.e. diagnosis with major respiratory condition and recorded respiratory symptoms did not match even though the attendances in both cases were during the assessment period (2018-2023). However, we did consult with NHS colleagues and a GP representative who clarified that in most cases where reason for attendance is recorded as a specific condition e.g. COPD, it is reasonable to assume the visit was associated with the condition even where specific symptoms were not recorded.

31 | P a g e

Table 18: Poisson regression models for the impact of local population exposure to general fire pollutants (on fire days) and PM2.5 levels on respiratory healthcare activity, adjusted for seasonality, weekdays, holidays, other meteorological factors and COVID-19 lockdown dates.

Model

Outcome 1: GP Outcome 1: GP Attendances Attendances Resp Resp 1 Symptoms , Fire Symptoms1, Incidents PM2.5 RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI)

Outcome 2: GP Outcome 2: GP Attendances Attendances Major Resp Major Resp 2 Conditions , Fire Conditions2, Incidents PM2.5 RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI)

Outcome 3: GP Attendances Resp LTC3, Fire Incidents RR (95% CI)

Outcome 4: GP Outcome 3: GP Attendances Attendances Resp LTC & Resp LTC3, PM2.5 Symptoms, RR (95% CI) Fire Incidents RR (95% CI)

Outcome 4: GP Attendances Resp LTC & Symptoms, PM2.5 RR (95% CI

Basic model*

0.897 (0.734, 1.096)

0.995 (0.990, 1.000)

1.272 (0.969, 1.669)

0.996 (0.987, 1.005)

1.317 (0.984, 1.762)

1.000 (0.990, 1.010)

0.697 (0.416, 1.170)

0.993 (0.981, 1.005)

Basic model + Temperature** + Holidays*** + Wind speed + Weekdays***

1.003 (0.821, 1.226)

0.996 (0.989, 1.002)

1.323 (1.009, 1.735)

0.999 (0.989, 1.009)

1.345 (1.007, 1.798)

1.003 (0.991, 1.014)

0.786 (0.467, 1.322)

0.993 (0.979, 1.007)

1.001 (0.819, 1.224)

0.996 (0.989, 1.002)

1.321 (1.007, 1.732)

0.999 (0.989, 1.009)

1.343 (1.005, 1.795)

1.003 (0.991, 1.014)

0.786 (0.467, 1.322)

0.993 (0.979, 1.007)

1.000 (0.818, 1.222)

0.996 (0.989, 1.002)

1.325 (1.010, 1.738)

0.999 (0.988, 1.010)

1.348 (1.009, 1.802)

1.002 (0.990, 1.014)

0.785 (0.467, 1.322)

0.991 (0.976, 1.007)

βModel above + Covid19 lockdowns****

Model above + NO2

32 | P a g e

Model

Outcome 6: Resp Outcome 5: GP Outcome 5: GP Hospital Resp Prescriptions, Resp Prescriptions, Admissions, Fire Fire Incidents PM2.5 Incidents RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI)

Outcome 6: Resp Hospital Admissions, PM2.5 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 7: Resp A&E Attendance, Fire Incidents RR (95% CI)

Outcome 7: Resp A&E Attendance, PM2.5 RR (95% CI)

Basic model*

0.951 (0.921, 0.981)

1.000 (0.999, 1.001)

1.017 (0.829, 1.247)

1.004 (0.998, 1.010)

0.947 (0.732, 1.226)

1.005 (0.997, 1.013)

Basic model + Temperature** + Holidays*** + Wind speed + Weekdays***

0.997 (0.966, 1.029)

1.000 (0.999, 1.001)

1.036 (0.845, 1.271)

1.005 (0.998, 1.012)

0.934 (0.721, 1.210)

1.003 (0.993, 1.012)

βModel above + Covid19 lockdowns****

1.000 (0.969, 1.032)

1.000 (0.999, 1.001)

1.034 (0.843, 1.268)

1.005 (0.999, 1.012)

0.935 (0.722, 1.211)

1.003 (0.993, 1.012)

1.001 (0.970, 1.033)

0.999 (0.998, 1.001)

1.031 (0.841, 1.265)

1.006 (0.999, 1.013)

0.667 (0.602, 0.739)

0.997 (0.994, 0.999)

Model above + NO2

1Cough, sore throat, wheezing

2Asthma, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Bronchitis, Emphysema, Cystic fibrosis, Lung cancer,

Mesothelioma, Pneumonia, Pulmonary fibrosis, Respiratory infections or any other respiratory condition. 3Asthma, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Cystic fibrosis, Lung cancer, Mesothelioma *Basic model includes the exposure of interest and a spline function of time. After comparing AIC values, 12 degrees of freedom were used for outcomes 1, 2, 3 and 5 and 8 degrees of freedom for outcomes 4, 6, and 7. **Holidays as a binary variable ***Weekdays as a factor variable (Mon/Tue/Wed/...) ****To check the impact of lockdowns on the effect estimates. β Main Regression Model

33 | P a g e

6 Results: Sensitivity Analysis

6.1 Quasi-Poisson model for over-dispersion Table 19: Quasi-Poisson regression models for the impact of local population exposure to general fire pollutants (on fire days) and PM2.5 levels on respiratory healthcare activity, adjusted for seasonality, weekdays, holidays, other meteorological factors and COVID19 lockdown dates.

Model

Basic model*

Outcome 1: GP Outcome 1: GP Attendances Attendances Resp Resp Symptoms1, Fire Symptoms1, Incidents PM2.5 RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI) 0.897 (0.683, 1.178)

Basic model + Temperature** + Holidays*** + Wind speed + Weekdays***

1.003 (0.810, 1.243)

βModel above + Covid19 lockdowns****

1.000 (0.807, 1.239)

Model above + NO2

1.000 (0.807, 1.239)

0.995 (0.988, 1.002) 0.996 (0.989, 1.002)

0.996 (0.989, 1.002)

0.996 (0.989, 1.003)

Outcome 2: GP Outcome 2: GP Attendances Attendances Major Resp Major Resp Conditions2, Fire Conditions2, Incidents PM2.5 RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI) 1.272 (0.926, 1.747)

1.323 (0.987, 1.775)

1.343 (0.975, 1.852)

1.326 (0.988, 1.777)

0.996 (0.985, 1.007)

0.999 (0.988, 1.010)

0.999 (0.987, 1.011)

Outcome 3: GP Attendances Resp LTC3, Fire Incidents RR (95% CI) 1.317 (0.941, 1.843)

1.345 (0.976, 1.855)

1.343 (0.975, 1.852)

1.348 (0.978, 1.859)

Outcome 4: GP Outcome 3: GP Attendances Attendances Resp LTC & Resp LTC3, PM2.5 Symptoms, RR (95% CI) Fire Incidents RR (95% CI) 1.000 (0.989, 1.011)

1.003 (0.990, 1.015)

1.002 (0.989, 1.016)

Outcome 4: GP Attendances Resp LTC & Symptoms, PM2.5 RR (95% CI

0.697 (0.402, 1.210)

0.769 (0.444, 1.333) 0.786 (0.460, 1.341)

0.786 (0.460, 1.342)

0.993 (0.980, 1.006)

0.993 (0.979, 1.007)

0.993 ( 0.979, 1.006)

0.991 (0.977, 1.006)

34 | P a g e

Model

Basic model*

Basic model + Temperature** + Holidays*** + Wind speed + Weekdays***

Outcome 6: Resp Outcome 5: GP Outcome 5: GP Hospital Resp Prescriptions, Resp Prescriptions, Admissions, Fire Fire Incidents PM2.5 Incidents RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI) 0.951 (0.814, 1.111)

0.997 (0.937, 1.062)

βModel above + Covid19 lockdowns****

1.000 (0.939, 1.064)

Model above + NO2

1.001 (0.941, 1.066)

1.000 (0.995, 1.005)

1.000 (0.998, 1.002)

1.000 (0.998, 1.003)

0.999 (0.997, 1.002)

1.017 (0.820, 1.261)

1.036 (0.840, 1.277)

1.034 (0.839, 1.275)

1.031 (0.836, 1.271)

Outcome 6: Resp Hospital Admissions, PM2.5 RR (95% CI) 1.004 (0.998, 1.010)

1.005 (0.998, 1.012)

1.006 (0.997, 1.013)

Outcome 7: Resp A&E Attendance, Fire Incidents RR (95% CI) 0.947 (0.728, 1.232)

0.934 (0.717, 1.216)

0.935 (0.718, 1.217)

0.667 (0.462, 0.963)

Outcome 7: Resp A&E Attendance, PM2.5 RR (95% CI) 1.005 (0.997, 1.013)

1.003 (0.993, 1.012)

1.003 (0.993, 1.012) 0.997 (0.988, 1.005)

1Cough, sore throat, wheezing

2Asthma, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Bronchitis, Emphysema, Cystic fibrosis, Lung cancer,

35 | P a g e

6.2 Poisson regression models for lagged impact 6.2.1 Three days Lag

Table 20: Poisson regression models for delayed impact on local population with exposure to general fire pollutants (3 days following London Fire Brigade intervention) on respiratory healthcare activity, adjusted for seasonality, weekdays, holidays, other meteorological factors and COVID-19 lockdown dates. Model

Outcome 1: GP Attendances Resp Symptoms1, Fire Days Lag3 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 2: GP Attendances Major Resp Conditions2, Fire Days Lag3 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 3: GP Attendances Resp LTC3, Fire Days Lag3 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 4: GP Attendances Resp LTC & Symptoms, Fire Days Lag3 RR (95% CI)

Basic model*

0.982 (0.832, 1.159)

0.884 ( 0.690, 1.132)

1.020 (0.786, 1.325)

0.970 (0.674, 1.396)

Basic model + Temperature + Holidays** + Wind speed + Weekdays***

0.938 (0.794, 1.108)

0.920 (0.714, 1.184)

1.056 (0.809, 1.379)

0.940 (0.654, 1.353)

βModel above + Covid19 lockdowns****

0.935 (0.792, 1.105)

1.054 (0.807, 1.376)

0.940 (0.654, 1.352)

Model above + NO2

0.931 (0.788, 1.000)

0.921 (0.715, 1.186)

1.059 ( 0.811, 1.384)

0.939 (0.652, 1.351)

36 | P a g e

Model

Outcome 5: GP Resp Prescriptions, Fire Days Lag3 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 6: Resp Hospital Admissions, Fire Days Lag3 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 7: Resp A&E Attendance, Fire Days Lag3 RR (95% CI)

Basic model*

1.035 (1.008, 1.063)

1.059 (0.896, 1.250)

0.992 (0.803, 1.224)

Basic model + Temperature + Holidays** + Wind speed + Weekdays***

1.018 (0.991, 1.045)

1.040 (0.881, 1.228)

0.987 (0.799, 1.218)

βModel above + Covid19 lockdowns****

1.021 (0.993, 1.048)

1.038 (0.879, 1.226)

0.988 (0.800, 1.220)

Model above + NO2

1.024 (0.996, 1.052)

1.032 (0.874, 1.219)

0.979 (0.793, 1.209)

1Cough, sore throat, wheezing

2Asthma, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Bronchitis, Emphysema, Cystic fibrosis, Lung cancer,

37 | P a g e

6.2.2 Seven days Lag

Table 21: Poisson regression models for delayed impact on local population due exposure to general fire pollutants (7 days following London Fire Brigade intervention) on respiratory healthcare activity, adjusted for seasonality, weekdays, holidays, other meteorological factors and COVID-19 lockdown dates. Model

Outcome 1: GP Attendances Resp Symptoms1, Fire Days Lag7 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 2: GP Attendances Major Resp Conditions2, Fire Days Lag7 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 3: GP Attendances Resp LTC3, Fire Days Lag7 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 4: GP Attendances Resp LTC & Symptoms, Fire Days Lag7 RR (95% CI)

Basic model*

1.040 (0.894, 1.210)

1.064 (0.844, 1.341)

1.191 (0.928, 1.528)

0.964 (0.701, 1.326)

Basic model + Temperature + Holidays** + Wind speed + Weekdays***

0.993 (0.852, 1.156)

1.023 (0.809, 1.293)

1.143 (0.888, 1.470)

0.952 (0.690, 1.313)

βModel above + Covid19 lockdowns****

0.990 (0.851, 1.153)

1.020 (0.807, 1.289)

1.140 (0.886, 1.467)

0.952 (0.691, 1.313)

Model above + NO2

0.988 (0.848, 1.151)

1.026 (0.811, 1.296)

1.147 (0.892, 1.476)

0.953 (0.691, 1.314)

38 | P a g e

Model

Outcome 5: GP Resp Prescriptions, Fire Days Lag7 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 6: Resp Hospital Admissions, Fire Days Lag7 RR (95% CI)

Outcome 7: Resp A&E Attendance, Fire Days Lag7 RR (95% CI)

Basic model*

1.028 (1.002, 1.055)

1.075 (0.923, 1.252)

1.113 (0.919, 1.349)

Basic model + Temperature + Holidays** + Wind speed + Weekdays***

0.980 (0.955, 1.005)

1.064 (0.913, 1.240)

1.105 (0.912, 1.340)

βModel above + Covid19 lockdowns****

0.983 (0.958, 1.008)

1.063 (0.912, 1.238)

1.107 (0.913, 1.342)

Model above + NO2

0.985 (0.960, 1.011)

1.058 (0.908, 1.233)

1.102 (0.908, 1.336)

1Cough, sore throat, wheezing

2Asthma, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Bronchitis, Emphysema, Cystic fibrosis, Lung cancer,

39 | P a g e

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 9 LB HAVERING, “THE EFFECT OF ARNOLD’S FIELD FIRES ON THE RESPIRATORY HEALTH OF THE SURROUNDING POPULATION” – SHORT REPORT, NOVEMBER 2024

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

Report Title: The Effect of Arnold’s Field Fires on the Respiratory Health of the Surrounding Population – Short Report Purpose of the Report: • This report is one of several looking at the possible health impacts of recurrent fires at Launders Lane. • This report focuses on exploring and interpreting healthcare data to identify any temporal relationship between occurrence of fires at the site and use of health care services for respiratory symptoms/illness amongst residents living close to the Arnold’s Field site.

Summary of findings:

1. We report a statistically significant association of fires attended by London Fire Brigade at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane with an increased risk of GP attendance by those with existing long-term respiratory conditions (such as asthma or COPD) on the day of a fire. 2. The impact of this increased risk was modest; equivalent to one extra GP appointment every five fire days, compared to days without a fire (or 0.2 extra appointments per day), amongst the local resident population of 23,656 people. 3. There was no statistically significant increased risk of GP visits found amongst the general population. This was the case on the day of the fire as well as the cumulative three and seven day periods following a fire event. 4. No statistically significant impact of “fire days” on prescriptions issued for the treatment of respiratory conditions, A&E attendance or hospital admissions for respiratory illness/symptoms was found amongst the local population. This was the case on the day of the fire as well as the cumulative three and seven day periods following a fire event.

Report Author: Dr Samantha Westrop Contact: Samantha.westrop@havering.gov.uk

Executive Summary

This report explores the potential impact of fire incidents at the Arnold’s Field site, Launder’s Lane on the respiratory health of local residents by analysing their use of healthcare services (primary and secondary care) for the period January 2018 to September 2023. The population at risk was defined as people living in lower super output areas (LSOA) with at least part of the geography within a 2 mile radius from Arnold’s Field. Fourteen Havering LSOAs were included with an estimated resident population of 23,656 people. Fire incidents attended by the London Fire Brigade from January 2018 until September 2023 were included as the exposure variable (n=99 days). Findings of epidemiological time series analysis performed with Environmental Epidemiology experts from Imperial College London are detailed. Use of health care services, air quality, and meteorological data were used to inform statistical models necessary to explore the relationship between days when London Fire Brigade attend to fires at the site and the use of health care services by local residents as a result of respiratory symptoms. We report a statistically significant association of fires attended by London Fire Brigade at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane with an increased risk of GP attendance by those with existing long-term respiratory conditions (such as asthma or COPD) on the day of a fire. The impact of this increased risk was modest; equivalent to one extra GP appointment every five fire days, compared to days without a fire (or 0.2 extra appointments per day), amongst a population of 23,656 people. The significant increased risk of GP visits was not demonstrated amongst the general population. This association was not seen when considering the cumulative three and seven day periods following a fire event. No statistically significant impact of “fire days” on prescriptions issued for the treatment of respiratory conditions, A&E attendance or hospital admissions for respiratory illness/symptoms was found amongst the local population. This was the case on the day of the fire as well as the cumulative three and seven day periods following a fire event. These findings should be interpreted with consideration given to a number of limitations to the data available: residential address was the best possible marker of exposure amongst local residents and does not take into account daily whereabouts or behaviours; fire days were used as the exposure variable and are defined as days when the London Fire Brigade were in attendance, however the site is known to smoulder outside of these attendances; only one air quality monitoring node was installed throughout the entire study period (2018 – 2023); healthcare activity data is not 100% complete and the GP data set for those with long-term respiratory conditions did not include symptoms on the day of presentation to general practice. Additionally, it is potentially difficult for people to access same-day GP appointments, however A&E data was also analysed with a view that should a person in need of urgent care not be able to access general practice, A&E would be an option 24/7. Whilst we have demonstrated a statistically significant increased risk of attending a GP practice amongst those with increased sensitivity to poor air quality on the day of a fire, and recognise that this impact may be substantial to an individual affected, the resulting population level impact of a fire day on health care service use is relatively modest (1 extra GP appointment every 5 fire days for a population of over 23,500).

Introduction

Arnold’s Field is a 16.94 hectare area of privately owned land off Launders Lane, Rainham in the South of the London Borough of Havering (Figure 1). The site was formerly a sand and gravel quarry, subsequently registered as a landfill licensed to accept inert, commercial, industrial, household and solid sludge waste. The last waste was recorded as being accepted in 1965, however significant volumes of waste were subsequently deposited there without appropriate authorisation 1. The site now catches fire, especially during hot weather. Residents complain about the nuisance caused by smoke, dust and odour from the fires and are concerned about potential health impacts. Local Councillors and Local Authority Officers have received concerns from residents relating to poor respiratory health amongst the local community. Havering Council has commissioned soil sampling and comprehensive air quality monitoring, and has undertaken investigations of potential health risks to residents through contract with Environmental Epidemiology experts from Imperial College London and data requests to NEL Integrated Care System (ICS), NHS and National Disease Registration Service, NHS England. This report details the findings of epidemiological time series analysis performed with Environmental Epidemiology experts from Imperial College London. Use of health care services, air quality, and meteorological data were used to inform statistical models necessary to explore the relationship between days when London Fire Brigade attend to fires at the site and the use of health care services by local residents as a result of respiratory symptoms. Epidemiological time series analysis is a statistical modelling methodology applied to explore any potential relationship between daily variations in the occurrence of fires and use of health care services taking into account potential confounding factors 2 that may influence healthcare usage on any given day. For example, warmer weather may influence severity of respiratory symptoms experienced by the population, but may also be associated with the occurrence of a fire at the site. An influence diagram is shown in Figure 2, detailing the variables (measured and unmeasured) that may contribute to a person’s use of health care services for respiratory symptoms. Investigation over longer time periods strengthen such analyses, providing as much data as possible to explore temporal patterns. A list of variables considered in the analysis, and the associated data sources, is fully described in the full technical report published alongside this short report.

Aim

The aim of this analysis was to explore whether fires occurring at the Arnold’s Field site are associated with an increase in use of health care services by people residing close to the site.

Ground investigation report for the land at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham RM13 9FL. Geo-Environmental 2023. https://issuu.com/haveringcouncil/docs/launders_lane_arnold_s_field_-_soil_investigatio?fr=xKAE9_zU1NQ 2 Confounding factors/variables are those that may compete with the exposure of interest (e.g. fires) in explaining the outcome (e.g. GP visits) of a study.

Figure 1 Map of the London Borough of Havering with lower super output area (LSOA) boundaries marked. Arnold’s Field is marked with a red circle. The Havering LSOAs of interest that have at least part of their geography within a 2 mile radius of Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane are highlighted.

Figure 2 Influence diagram of the causal pathway from fire to a person’s use of healthcare services. Variables bordered with a solid line represent variables for which measured data is available. Variables bordered with a dashed line are not measured, but may contribute some variation to statistical models.

Results

Following univariate analysis epidemiological time series statistical modelling was performed to consider the complex interplay of different factors that can influence the outcomes (Figure 2). Such statistical modelling, estimates the level of influence one variable has over another and takes potential confounding variables into account. Time series analysis seeks to account for the influence of other known variables which vary over time in order to identify whether or not the exposure variable of interest (e.g. fires) has an impact on the outcome of interest (e.g. GP visits) irrespective of the contribution from other known variables (e.g. temperature).

Resident population of interest

The population at risk of any potential impact of fires on health care use for respiratory symptoms was defined as people living in lower super output areas 3 (LSOA) that have at least part of the geography within a 2 mile radius from Arnold’s Field. Fourteen LSOAs were included, referred to in this report as “LSOAs of interest” and had an estimated resident population of 23,656 people (Table 1). It should be noted that during the time period explored as part of this study individuals may move residential location, and the physical location of each individual at the exact time of a fire occurring cannot be known. Whilst it is recognised that we are not able to precisely account for the exact location of individuals it is necessary to define the total population living in the area of interest as accurately as possible to provide a denominator population, and hence LSOA of residence represents the best possible definition. Table 1 Resident population of the 14 LSOAs of interest within 4 miles of the Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane site. LSOA Code

LSOA Name

E01002263

Havering 026D

E01002265

Havering 025A

E01002342

Havering 030A

E01002343

Havering 029A

E01002344

Havering 029B

E01002345

Havering 030B

E01002346

Havering 030C

E01002347

Havering 030D

E01002348*

Havering 029C

E01002349

Havering 029D

E01002370

Havering 028C

E01002371

Havering 028D

E01002374

Havering 027E

E01002385

Havering 024A

Total

Age <65 years

1310 1095 1512 1276 1537 1763 1355 1370 1068 1147 1990 1359 1387 1235 19404

Age 65+ years 341

Total 1651

281

1376

235

1747

397

1673

330

1867

187

1950

189

1544

270

1640

397

1465

351

1498

276

2266

338

1697

253

1640

407

1642

4252

23656

Fire incidents

Fires attended by the London Fire Brigade occurring on Arnold’s field, off Launders Lane from 01 January 2018 until 30 September 2023 were included as the An LSOA is a geographical area comprised of between 400 and 1,200 households and have a usually resident population between 1,000 and 3,000 persons. Statistical geographies - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

independent exposure variable in our analysis. Some fires burnt for more than one day, and on some days there was more than one fire burning on the field (i.e. at a different location on the site). As such a binary variable “fire day” was used, where a fire day was a calendar date with at least one fire occurring on the site in that 24 hour period. A monthly summary of fire days is shown in Table 2. Table 2 Summary of the number of days with fires (“fire days”) occurring at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane that required attendance by the London Fire Brigade (LFB) from 2018 - 2023. Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023* Total

Jan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Feb 0 0 0 0 1 0 1

Mar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Apr 0 1 1 0 8 0 10

*until 30 September 2023

May 0 0 0 3 2 0 5

Jun 0 1 0 3 13 0 17

Jul 0 8 0 0 11 2 21

Aug 0 1 8 0 1 12 22

Sep 0 1 7 0 0 1 8

Oct 0 1 1 5 0 0 7

Nov 0 1 0 5 0 0 6

Dec 1 0 0 0 0 0 1

Total 1 14 17 16 36 15 99

PM2.5

Smoke from fires contains large quantities of particulate matter with a diameter of less than 2.5µm (PM2.5) which can penetrate deep into the lungs and have previously been shown to be associated with adverse health outcomes 4. PM2.5 data for the entire study period was only available from the Rainham reference node. Whilst several additional air quality monitoring sites have since been installed around the area the need for data over a longer time period to inform the time series analyses necessitated the use of data from the single node from 2018 – 2023.

Correlation between variables

Correlations between continuous variables (air pollution, meteorological and health outcomes) were investigated using Spearman test. In addition to correlations between a number of outcome variables, potential confounding variables were found to be correlated with one another. For example, average wind speed and daily average NO2 were negatively correlated (rho = -0.190; p<0.001); when wind speed was higher, daily average NO2 was lower.

Use of healthcare services (health outcomes)

Total occurrences of the five health outcomes measures investigated are summarised in Table 3. The seasonality of each of the health outcome measures and the seasonality of fires does not appear to follow the same pattern, as such epidemiological time series analysis was deemed necessary to adjust for this seasonality and interpret the remaining relationship between the exposure (fire days) and each of the health outcome variables. The other variables included in the model are described in Table 4.

4 https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/17-10-2013-outdoor-air-pollution-a-leading-

environmental-cause-of-cancer-deaths

Table 3 Summary of the numbers of each health outcome measure included in the epidemiological time series analysis. Health outcome Visits to general practice made due to respiratory symptoms (all residents) Visits to general practice by those with longterm respiratory conditions recorded Prescriptions issued for treatment of respiratory symptoms Attendances at A&E due to respiratory symptoms Admissions to hospital due to respiratory symptoms

Total number for residents of the LSOAs of interest between January 2018 and September 2023 3,537 1,231 108,182 1,530 2,482

Table 4 Descriptive statistics of explanatory variables included in the multi-variable time series models. Variable (units) Type Mean Median Included in (min-max) (IQR) adjusted time series model (yes/no) Daily average Continuous 55.1 54.4 Yes temperature (ºF) (26.6 – 86.8) (47.3 – 63.2) Daily average humidity Continuous 45.6 45.6 Yes (%) (14.6 – 64.8) (39.6 – 52.3) Daily average wind Continuous 7.9 7.4 Yes speed (mph) (1.7 – 21.3) (5.8 – 9.7) Weekdays Categorical N/A N/A Yes Public holidays

Binary

N/A

Yes

COVID lockdown measures Seasonality

Binary

N/A

No*

Spline N/A N/A function *Variable was explored and not included in the final time series model as it did not add explanatory value.

Yes

Time series models

Models for the effects of the two exposure variables fire day and PM2.5 are shown on the day of the fire incident (Table 5 and Table 6 respectively), the effect of fire day for the cumulative three days following a fire day (Table 7) and the cumulative seven days following a fire day (Table 8). Average daily PM2.5 recorded at the Rainham reference co-location node was not found to be a significant explanatory factor for health care use on the day of a fire in any of the models tested (Table 6), and as such was not investigated for lagged effects (cumulative 3 and 7 days post fire day). Fire days were found to be a significant explanatory factor for attendance at GP on the day of a fire by patients with a long-term respiratory condition recorded, when the time series model accounted for seasonality, temperature, holidays, wind speed, and weekdays (Table 5). On fire days there was an approximate 35% increased risk of those with long term respiratory conditions attending GP on the day of a fire attended by London Fire Brigade compared to days without fire attended by London Fire Brigade. This is the equivalent to each fire day being associated with 0.2 extra GP appointments per day for those with long-term respiratory conditions across the LSOAs of interest. This can be thought of as one extra GP appointment every 5 fire days compared to five days without a fire incident. In 2022, the year with the most fire

days (n=36), this would have totalled just over 7 additional GP appointments that year, amongst a population of 23,656 people. To further contextualise this, there was approximately 650 GP appointments with respiratory symptoms recorded for the total local population throughout the whole of 2022. When this relationship was further explored to see if it remained for the cumulative three and seven day periods following the fire day (giving consideration to the delay in development of respiratory symptoms and the potential difficulties with accessing same-day GP appointments), the exposure variable (fire days) was no longer associated with a difference in relative risk (Table 7 and Table 8; see also the full technical report published alongside this report for comprehensive methodology). When the adjusted model was used to explore the other health outcomes there were no other statistically significant relationships found between exposure variable (either fire day or PM2.5) and health outcome; either on the day of a fire incident, the cumulative three day or seven day periods following the fire day.

Table 5 Poisson regression models for the impact of fire days on respiratory healthcare activity, on the day of the fire incident. Adjusted model incorporates seasonality, temperature, holidays, wind speed, humidity and weekdays. RR = relative risk, CI = confidence intervals 5. GP attendance with respiratory symptoms recorded, Fire Days RR (95% CI) Basic model Adjusted model

0.897 (0.734 – 1.096) 1.003 (0.821 – 1.226)

GP attendances with respiratory long term conditions recorded, Fire Days RR (95% CI) 1.317 (0.984 – 1.762) 1.345 (1.007 – 1.798)

Prescriptions issued for respiratory illness/symptoms, Fire Days RR (95% CI) 0.951 (0.921 – 0.981) 0.997 (0.966 – 1.029)

A&E attendance for respiratory illness/symptoms, Fire Days RR (95% CI) 0.947 (0.732 – 1.226) 0.934 (0.721 – 1.210)

Hospital Admissions for respiratory illness/symptoms, Fire Days RR (95% CI) 1.017 (0.829 – 1.247) 1.036 (0.845 – 1.271)

Table 6 Poisson regression models for the impact of local population exposure to PM2.5 levels on respiratory healthcare activity, on the day of the fire incident. Adjusted model incorporates seasonality, temperature, holidays, wind speed, humidity and weekdays. RR = relative risk, CI = confidence intervals. GP attendance with respiratory symptoms recorded, PM2.5 RR (95% CI) Basic model Adjusted model

0.995 (0.990 – 1.000) 0.996 (0.989 – 1.002)

GP attendances with respiratory long term conditions recorded, PM2.5 RR (95% CI) 1.000 (0.990 – 1.010) 1.003 (0.991 – 1.014)

Prescriptions issued for respiratory illness/symptoms, PM2.5 RR (95% CI) 1.000 (0.999 – 1.001) 1.000 (0.999 – 1.001)

A&E attendance for respiratory illness/symptoms, PM2.5 RR (95% CI) 1.005 (0.997 – 1.013) 1.003 (0.993 – 1.012)

Hospital Admissions for respiratory illness/symptoms, PM2.5 RR (95% CI) 1.004 (0.998 – 1.010) 1.005 (0.998 – 1.012)

5Confidence intervals are used when presenting data to indicate the variation that occurs in any dataset by chance alone. The single number presented as the “rate” of each outcome variable of interest is referred to as a “point

estimate” and sits at the centre of the confidence interval.

Table 7 Poisson regression models for the impact of fire days on respiratory healthcare activity, for the three days following a fire incident (lag=3). Adjusted model incorporates seasonality, temperature, holidays, wind speed, humidity and weekdays. RR = relative risk; CI = confidence intervals. GP attendance with respiratory symptoms recorded, Fire Days, RR (95% CI) Basic model Adjusted model

0.982 (0.832 – 1.159) 0.938 (0.794 – 1.108)

GP attendances with respiratory long term conditions recorded, Fire Days, RR (95% CI) 1.020 (0.786 – 1.325) 1.056 (0.809 – 1.379)

Prescriptions issued for respiratory illness/symptoms, Fire Days, RR (95% CI)

A&E attendance for respiratory illness/symptoms, Fire Days, RR (95% CI)

1.035 (1.008 – 1.063) 1.018 (0.991 – 1.045)

0.992 (0.803 – 1.224) 0.987 (0.799 – 1.218)

Hospital Admissions for respiratory illness/symptoms, Fire Days, RR (95% CI) 1.059 (0.896 – 1.250) 1.040 (0.881 – 1.228)

Table 8 Poisson regression models for the impact of fire days on respiratory healthcare activity, for the seven days following a fire incident (lag=7). Adjusted model incorporates seasonality, temperature, holidays, wind speed, humidity and weekdays. RR = relative risk; CI = confidence intervals. GP attendance with respiratory symptoms recorded, Fire Days, RR (95% CI) Basic model Adjusted model

1.040 (0.894, 1.210) 0.993 (0.852, 1.156)

GP attendances with respiratory long term conditions recorded, Fire Days, RR (95% CI) 1.191 (0.928 – 1.528) 1.143 (0.888 – 1.470)

Prescriptions issued for respiratory illness/symptoms, Fire Days, RR (95% CI)

A&E attendance for respiratory illness/symptoms, Fire Days, RR (95% CI)

1.028 (1.002 – 1.055) 0.980 (0.955 – 1.005)

1.113 (0.919 – 1.349) 1.105 (0.912 – 1.340)

Hospital Admissions for respiratory illness/symptoms, Fire Days, RR (95% CI) 1.075 (0.923 – 1.252) 1.064 (0.913 – 1.240)

Limitations

In this study residential address was the best possible marker of exposure amongst the population living around the site. This has a number of limitations; individuals may move residential location during the time period explored as part of this study, the physical location of each individual at the exact time of a fire occurring cannot be known, exposure is likely to vary for those of working age compared to those who are retired or at school/college owing to the proportion of the day spent away from the home address, it is not possible to account for differences in exposure resulting from individual behaviours of individuals (e.g. staying indoors, shutting windows, vigorous exercise). The data used to inform the exposure variable “fire days” only captures dates and times when the London Fire Brigade were in attendance responding to a fire at the site. The time of the start of the incident is when the London Fire Brigade first arrive at the location, not necessarily exactly when the fire first begins and it is possible that a fire may have been burning for several days before escalating and requiring fire brigade intervention. We were also not able to incorporate fire size into our analysis, as the number of engines in attendance at the time of an incident does not only rely on the size of the fire, but also competing resource requirements for attendance at other sites. It is known that outside of a “fire incident” attended by the London Fire Brigade smouldering often occurs at the site, releasing visible smoke into the environment. In such an occurrence this would not be captured as a “fire day” in our analysis. To capture this circumstance, the PM2.5 variable was explored, however only one air quality node was operational throughout the entire study period investigated (Rainham Reference Co-location), the additional seven being installed at a later date as part of the Launder’s Lane response (one of which is funded by Rainham Against Pollution, the other six by London Borough of Havering). Whether or not a Breathe London air quality monitoring node captures PM2.5 is dependent on wind direction as well as wind speed, and owing to a single node being in one static position, the PM2.5 data collected may not be an accurate representation of the exposure of residents elsewhere in the area. Additionally, average daily PM2.5 is likely to flatten any short term peaks that result from a fire quickly extinguished. For outcome variables we relied entirely on the NHS data. The finding of a significant increase in risk of attendance at GP by those with long-term respiratory conditions should be interpreted with consideration of a number of limitation of general practice data. Firstly, we were unable to differentiate between pre-arranged attendances, for example routine reviews, and those in response to acute respiratory illness (i.e. “emergency” same day appointments) as the dataset did not include details on specific presenting symptoms, only the main diagnosis. However, it is not expected that pre-arranged appointments would differ significantly on fire days compared to non-fire days. We explored the suitability of using a separate dataset of GP attendance with respiratory symptoms recorded but only 55% of patients with long-term respiratory conditions were able to be linked to this dataset. In addition to this incompleteness of data, most of the dates of attendance (i.e. diagnosed long-term respiratory condition and recorded respiratory symptoms) did not match. Consequently, this dataset was not used in the analysis. We did consult with NHS colleagues and a GP representative who clarified that in most cases where reason for attendance is recorded as a specific condition (e.g. COPD), it is reasonable to assume the visit was associated with the condition, even where specific symptoms are not recorded. We acknowledge that same-day GP appointments can be difficult to access, but through consultation with clinical colleagues are aware that for some (e.g. those with pre-existing respiratory conditions experiencing an exacerbation of symptoms), their request may be triaged and prioritised for a same day appointment, although we

cannot state that this approach is universal. However, if major respiratory impacts were being seen, and residents could not access their GP we would expect to see an increase in A&E attendances, where A&E does not have the same limited number of appointments. We did not see this in the analysis. Additionally, it is plausible that those with increased sensitivity, respiratory symptoms may have begun prior to the attendance by the Fire Brigade for a specific fire incident. Furthermore, most recorded fire incidents were observed to have occurred in clusters ranging from 2 to 6 days in a row. This may have resulted in a more sustained impact on air quality, and could have contributed to an increase in primary healthcare activity on subsequent consecutive fire days.

Conclusion

Through the use of epidemiological time-series analysis, we report an association of fires attended by London Fire Brigade at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane with a modest but statistically significant increased risk of GP attendance by those with existing long-term respiratory conditions (such as asthma or COPD) on the day of a fire. This significant increased risk of GP visits was not demonstrated amongst the general population, only those likely to have an increased sensitivity to poor air quality. It was also not seen in the subsequent 3 or 7 day periods following a fire day. Our findings are consistent with national air quality recommendations 6, that short periods of poor air quality can exacerbate existing respiratory problems. Whilst we recognise that the reported statistically significant impact may be substantial to an individual affected, the resulting population level impact of a fire day on health care service use is modest (1 extra GP appointment every 5 fire days). We were unable to find a statistically significant impact of “fire days” on attendance at GP with respiratory symptoms amongst the general population of the LSOAs of interest, prescriptions issued for the treatment of respiratory conditions, A&E attendance or hospital admissions for respiratory illness/symptoms amongst the local population. Air quality, measured by daily average PM2.5 at the Rainham (reference co-location) node, was not shown to be associated with any of the healthcare outcomes investigated in this analysis.

6 https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/air-pollution/daqi

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 10 LB HAVERING, “THE POSSIBLE HEALTH IMPACT OF FIRES AT LAUNDERS LANE: HAVERING CANCER INCIDENCE”, (UNDATED BUT POSSIBLY 16 AUGUST 2024)

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

Launders Lane – Possible Health Impacts of Fires

Report Title: Possible Health Impact of Fires at Launders Lane: Havering Cancer Incidence

Purpose of the Report:  

This report is one of several looking at the possible health impacts of recurrent fires at Launders Lane It explores and interprets cancer incidence data for the ten years 2011 – 2020 to identify any differences between residents living around the Launders Lane site compared with the rest of Havering and England as a whole.

Summary of findings: 1. The incidence of lung cancer, brain cancer, haematological cancer (e.g. leukaemias) and mesothelioma in those resident near to the Launders Lane site were similar to rates in Havering as a whole. 2. The incidence of lung, brain and haematological cancers in Havering were similar to England. Havering as a whole has a higher incidence of mesothelioma than England. 3. No differences in incidence of haematological or brain cancers (the two most common childhood cancers) were seen amongst young people (aged 0-25) resident near to the Launders Lane site compared to Havering as a whole, or England.

Report Author: Samantha Westrop Contact: samantha.westrop@havering.gov.uk

Introduction Arnold’s Field is a 16.94 hectare area of privately owned land off Launders Lane, Rainham in the South of the London Borough of Havering. The site was formerly a sand and gravel quarry, subsequently registered as a landfill licensed to accept inert, commercial, industrial, household and solid sludge waste. The last waste was recorded as being accepted in 1965, however significant volumes of waste were subsequently deposited there without appropriate authorisation1 The site now catches fire, especially during hot weather. Residents complain about the nuisance caused by smoke, dust and odour from the fires and are concerned about potential health impacts. Local Councillors have received concerns from residents relating to diagnoses of cancers amongst the local community. Havering Council has commissioned soil sampling and comprehensive air quality monitoring. As part of the investigation into potential health risks to residents, data on the incidence of a number of cancer types, where an association with air pollution has previously been proposed, was requested from the National Disease Registration Service, NHS England2. Mesothelioma was included in this request as intrusive sampling on the site had identified asbestos, although not in a form or amount that made the land ‘contaminated’ as per the Environmental Protection Act 19903. Nonetheless, it resulted in understandable public unease. In response the Council commissioned further air sampling to ensure that asbestos fibres were not escaping from the site and added mesothelioma to the information request made to NDRS. However, it should be noted that the latency period for mesothelioma (time between exposure to a carcinogen and diagnosis of disease) is on average 20 years4, and as such a link between cases of mesothelioma diagnosed in the period 2010 – 2020, and the fires is biologically implausible. On 18th June 2024, the National Disease Registration Service NHS England performed an extraction and analysis of data at the request of the Public Health team, London Borough of Havering. The data included in this report provides the number of new diagnoses and age standardised rates5 (ASRs) for the following cancers6:  Lung cancers, ICD10 C33-34  Haematological cancers, as defined here7.  Brain cancers, ICD10 C70-72  Mesotheliomas, ICD10 C45 Whilst concerns often arise regarding “all cancers” within a population, it is extremely unlikely that several different cancer types will result from a common environmental exposure. For example, the risk factors and biological mechanism for development of melanoma (skin cancer) differ markedly from cervical cancer. If these two malignancies occurred amongst neighbours within a specific time period, there is unlikely to be a causal factor that would link these two types of cancer. As such, lung cancer, brain and haematological cancers were selected for investigation owing to 1

Ground investigation report for the land at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham RM13 9FL. Geo-Environmental 2023. https://issuu.com/haveringcouncil/docs/launders_lane_arnold_s_field_-_soil_investigatio?fr=xKAE9_zU1NQ 2 https://digital.nhs.uk/ndrs/ 3 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a757dfa40f0b6360e47489d/pb13735cont-land-guidance.pdf 4 Cancer research UK: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancertype/mesothelioma/incidence#heading-Four 5 Age standardisation enables meaningful comparisons to be made between two populations that vary in age structure. More information is provided in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 of the report. 6 International classification of diseases (ICD) revision 10 https://icd.who.int/browse10/2019/en 7 https://www.cancerdata.nhs.uk/getdataout/Haem_Grouping

the possible links between environmental exposure (such as air pollution) and the cancer of interest8. As noted above, mesothelioma was included in the data request owing to local concern. Standard incidence ratios (SIRs) for haematological and brain cancers occurring in younger people (aged 0-24 years) are also investigated. (See Appendix 1 for an explanation of these statistics). Residents living close to Launders Lane were defined as those living within the 14 LSOAs9 in Havering; home to 23,656 residents (Map 1). These LSOAs are referred to in this report as “LSOAs of interest”, and cancer incidence amongst this population is compared to rates in Havering and England as a whole. Incident data was requested for 2011 – 2020, the most up to date data held by NDRS. During this period over 782 thousand cases of the four cancers investigated were recorded nationally. Data were not requested for smaller geographical areas or shorter time periods as the very small number of cases that would result from such criteria were considered too small to identify statistically significant differences between populations. It is common for individuals to move residential location. Given the long latency period of cancer (time between exposure to a carcinogen and diagnosis), living close or further away from Launders Lane at the time of diagnosis gives only an approximate indication of where any exposure may have occurred.

Map 1 Fourteen Havering lower super output areas (LSOA) surrounding the Arnold’s Field site (shaded in orange).

Craver et al. (2024) Cancer Causes Control 35(5):749-760. Air quality and cancer risk in the All of Us Research Program 9 An LSOA is a geographical area comprised of between 400 and 1,200 households and have a usually resident population between 1,000 and 3,000 persons. Statistical geographies - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

Detailed Findings Lung Cancers, ICD10 C33-C34 What is known already? Smoking cigarettes is the single biggest risk factor for developing lung cancer, with 7 in 10 cases of lung cancer attributed to smoking cigarettes10. Passive smoking and use of other tobacco products (such as cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff and chewing tobacco) can also increase the risk of lung cancer and other types of cancer. Whilst most cases of lung cancer are caused by tobacco, people who have never smoked can also develop the condition. Other known causes of lung cancer include: 

Radon gas inhalation – a natural radioactive gas that comes from rocks and soils and can build up inside buildings. This is more common in other areas of the country, not in Havering.



Occupational exposure – chemicals and substances used in several industries have been linked to a higher risk of developing lung cancer. These chemicals include arsenic, arsenic, asbestos, beryllium, cadmium, coal and coke fumes, silica and nickel.



Pollution – frequent exposure to diesel fumes over many years increases the risk of lung cancer

If a person smokes, the best way to prevent lung cancer is to stop smoking. Other lifestyle choices such as a low-fat, high-fibre diet and regular exercise also helps to reduce the risk of developing lung cancer11.

What has this analysis found? Figure 1 and Table 1 show that the rate of lung cancer diagnoses amongst residents in the LSOAs of interest, around the Launders Lane site, was not statistically different12 from the rate of lung cancer diagnoses in Havering and England.

www.nhs.uk/conditions/lung-cancer/causes/ www.nhs.uk/conditions/lung-cancer/prevention/ 12 The 95% confidence intervals, shown by the blue shaded areas, overlap for all three populations measured. See Appendix 1 for more details. 11

Figure 1 Age standardised rates of lung cancer (ICD10 C33-C34), LSOAs of interest, Havering and England, 2011-2020 Table 1 Standardised rates of lung cancer (ICD10 C33-C34), LSOAs of interest, Havering LA and England, 2011-2020 Geography LSOAs of interest

Number of Population-years cancers

Age-sex standardised rate per 100,000 person-years

95% lower confidence interval

95% upper confidence interval

174

230,898

81.8

69.9

95.1

Havering

1,838

2,502,639

80.1

76.4

83.9

England

384,806

549,271,434

78.3

78.0

78.5

Haematological Cancers (as defined here) What is known already? Haematological malignancies, often referred to as “blood cancers” are classified as lymphoid (white blood cells), myeloid (red blood cells) and other haematological malignancies13. Haematological malignancies include lymphomas, myelomas and leukaemias14, as well as a number of other cancers. It is not yet clear what causes each of the different types of haematological cancer; however the distribution is not equal across the population and they are more likely to occur in some population groups than others. For example chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is more likely to occur in older people, men or in those with a family history of the disease15. A recently published study from the USA16 reported an association between blood cancers and higher levels of mean annual PM2.5, with more than a quarter of cases of cancer found in the group exposed to the highest quartile of PM2.5. When differences in sex at birth, ethnicity, age, smoking status, education and BMI were accounted for there was a significant increase in risk of blood cancer with each unit increase of annual mean PM2.5.

What has this analysis found? Figure 2 and Table 2 show that the rate of haematological cancer diagnoses amongst residents in the LSOAs of interest, around the Launders Lane site, was not statistically different17 from the rate of haematological cancer diagnoses in Havering and England. The standardised incidence ratios for those aged 0 – 24 years for haematological cancers were investigated to examine the concerns from residents regarding childhood cancers. Haematological cancers are the most common tumour types (41%) of childhood cancers. No differences in standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) for those aged 0-24 years were found between the 14 LSOAs of interest compared to Havering as a whole (SIR 22.41 [0.57 – 124.80]), or when the 14 LSOAs of interest were compared to England (SIR 18.14 [0.46 – 101.10]) for haematological cancers18.

Get Data Out: Haematological malignancies (cancerdata.nhs.uk) https://bloodcancer.org.uk/understanding-blood-cancer/blood-cancer-types/ 15 www.nhs.uk/conditions/chronic-lymphocytic-leukaemia/causes/ 16 Craver et al. (2024) Cancer Causes Control 35(5):749-760. Air quality and cancer risk in the All of Us Research Program 17 The 95% confidence intervals, shown by the blue shaded areas, overlap for all three populations measured. See Appendix 1 for more details. 18 A standardised incidence ratio (SIR) is often used to determine if the occurrence of cancer in a relatively small population is high or low. If the ratio differs significantly from 100 (confidence intervals do not include 100) it means that there are either more (ratio higher than 100) or less (ratio less than 100) cases than would be expected. 14

Figure 2 Age standardised rates of haematological cancer (ICD10 C81-C96), LSOAs of interest, Havering and England, 2011-2020 Table 2 Standardised rates of haematological cancer (ICD10 C81-C96), LSOAs of interest, Havering LA and England, 2011-2020 Number of Population-years cancers Geography

Age-sex standardised rate per 100,000 personyears

95% lower confidence interval

95% upper confidence interval

LSOAs of interest

124

230,898

60.5

50.0

72.6

Havering

1,492

2,502,639

63.9

60.7

67.3

England

327,361

549,271,434

65.6

65.3

65.8

Brain Cancers, ICD10 C70-C72 What is known already? There are many types of brain tumour that occur in different areas of the brain. Brain tumours can be primary (begin in the brain) or secondary (spread to the brain from elsewhere in the body).19 Currently, Cancer Research UK estimates that only 3% of brain tumours in the UK are preventable; these are tumours linked to previous exposure to medical radiation (1%) and those that are caused by being overweight or obese (2%)20. A recently published study from the USA21 reported an association between brain cancers and higher levels of mean annual PM2.5, with more than a quarter of cases of cancer found in the group exposed to the highest quartile of PM2.5, however when the relationship was explored by unit increase in annual mean PM2.5 with sociodemographic differences taken into account, there was no statistically significant association found.

What has this analysis found? Figure 3 and Table 3 show that the rate of brain cancer diagnoses amongst residents in the LSOAs of interest, around the Launders Lane site, was not statistically different22 from the rate of brain cancer diagnoses in Havering and England. The standardised incidence ratios for those aged 0 – 24 years for brain cancer was investigated to examine the concerns from residents regarding childhood cancers. Brain cancers are the second most common tumour type (20%) for childhood cancers. No differences in standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) for those aged 0-24 years were found between the 14 LSOAs of interest compared to Havering as a whole (62.37 [1.58 – 347.50]), or when the 14 LSOAs of interest were compared to England (52.72 [1.34 – 293.70]) for brain cancers23.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/malignant-brain-tumour/ www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/brain-tumours/risks-causes 21 Craver et al. (2024) Cancer Causes Control 35(5):749-760. Air quality and cancer risk in the All of Us Research Program 22 The 95% confidence intervals, shown by the blue shaded areas, overlap for all three populations measured. See Appendix 1 for more details. 23 A standardised incidence ratio (SIR) is often used to determine if the occurrence of cancer in a relatively small population is high or low. If the ratio differs significantly from 100 (confidence intervals do not include 100) it means that there are either more (ratio higher than 100) or less (ratio less than 100) cases than would be expected. 20

Figure 3 Age standardised rates of brain cancer (ICD10 C70-C72), LSOAs of interest, Havering and England, 2011-2020 Table 3 Standardised rates of brain cancer (ICD10 C70-C72), LSOAs of interest, Havering LA and England, 2011-2020 Number of Population-years cancers Geography

Age-sex standardised rate per 100,000 personyears

95% lower confidence interval

95% upper confidence interval

LSOAs of interest

230,898

7.7

4.4

12.3

Havering

200

2,502,639

8.5

7.3

9.7

England

47,157

549,271,434

9.2

9.1

9.3

Mesothelioma, ICD10 C45 What is known already? More than 2,700 people are diagnosed with mesothelioma each year in the UK24 and it is almost always caused by exposure to asbestos, usually occupational exposure25. This exposure is often as a result of working in an industry such as factories where workers were processing or manufacturing asbestos based products and goods, railway and vehicle production, and the building or construction industry, particularly from the 1950s to the 1990s. National data shows men as more often affected than women owing to the higher proportion of men working in the occupations associated with exposure. This type of cancer typically develops more than 20 years after exposure to asbestos20, and consequently most cases are diagnosed in people aged 75 and over. The peak rate of new mesothelioma diagnoses in 2016-18 was in the 85-89 year age group26. Data of incidence rates over time show a peak of incidence occurring between 2008 and 2013, (20-30 years after the first UK bans on imported asbestos came into effect)27. After 2013 rates of mesothelioma diagnoses have continued to decline, and are predicted to decline further in future28, largely owing to the ban on the use of asbestos-containing materials in houses built from the year 2000 onwards, and the ban on asbestos manufacturing in 1990. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has previously reported that Havering has the 8th highest female mesothelioma death rate in the country, and nearby Barking and Dagenham the highest29. Havering was ranked 21st for the mesothelioma death rate amongst males, whilst nearby Barking and Dagenham was ranked 11th out of 363 nationally30, 31. Given the information above, in particular the timescales of fires occurring at Arnold’s Field and the development of the disease; the link between any cases of mesothelioma in residents living in the LSOAs of interest and the fires seems biologically implausible, however this data was still investigated owing to concern of local residents.

What has this analysis found? Figure 4 and Table 4 show that the rate of mesothelioma diagnoses amongst residents in the LSOAs of interest, around the Launders Lane site, was not statistically different32 from the rate of mesothelioma diagnoses in Havering as a whole. The rates in both Havering and the LSOAs of interest are statistically significantly higher than England33, as is expected based on previous publications by the HSE. If the Arnold’s field site on Launders Lane was a source of asbestos attributable to mesothelioma in the residential population, we would expect to see an increase in incidence rates of mesothelioma in those living in the LSOAs of interest compared to other areas of Havering. Our findings show the rates of mesothelioma in the LSOAs of interest, and the rest of Havering are not statistically different. We therefore believe that the increase rate of mesothelioma in Havering as a whole (compared to England) is likely as a result of a higher proportion of Havering residents working in 24

Cancer research UK: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancertype/mesothelioma/incidence#heading-Four 25 https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/mesothelioma/ 26 Cancer research UK: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancertype/mesothelioma/incidence#heading-Four 27 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/asbestos-properties-incident-management-and-toxicology/asbestosgeneral-information 28 https://www.cancerdata.nhs.uk/incidence_and_mortality 29 Health and Safety Executive (2023). Mesothelioma deaths for Local and Unitary Authority areas in Great Britain 1981- 2021 30 https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/tables/index.htm#lung 31 https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/569065d79b5a48eba246db24f3ffade3 32 The 95% confidence intervals, shown by the blue shaded areas, overlap for LSOAs of interest and Havering as a whole. See Appendix 1 for more details. 33 The 95% confidence intervals, shown by the blue shaded areas, do not overlap between England as a whole and both the LSOAs of interest and Havering. See Appendix 1 for more details.

exposure-prone professions, such as factory work and construction. This pattern is also seen in nearby boroughs; mesothelioma mortality rates are even higher in Barking and Dagenham (males and females) and Newham (females). The timelines for the development of mesothelioma following asbestos exposure do not support a plausible link with the fires at the Arnold’s Field site. This analysis has replicated the findings of previous HSE reports that found Havering as a whole has a higher incidence of mesothelioma – most likely due to a higher rate of employment in occupations that resulted in greater exposure to asbestos. However, as asbestos has been found at the site, there is legitimate concern regarding its potential release. In response, the Council has commissioned additional sampling to look for the presence of air-borne asbestos fibres. This will be shared with residents when complete.

Figure 4 Age standardised rates of mesothelioma cancer (ICD10 C45), LSOAs of interest, Havering and England, 2011-2020 Table 4 Standardised rates of mesothelioma cancer (ICD10 C45), LSOAs of interest, Havering LA and England, 2011-2020

Geography

Number of Population-years cancers

Age-sex standardised rate per 100,000 person-years

95% lower confidence interval

95% upper confidence interval

LSOAs of interest

230,898

10.0

6.0

15.4

Havering

169

2,502,639

7.9

6.7

9.2

England

23,585

549,271,434

5.1

5.2

Conclusion The National Disease Registration Service NHS England reported that the incidence rates (number of newly diagnosed cases of cancer per resident) of three cancer types with plausible links to exposure to air pollution (lung cancers, haematological cancers and brain cancers) did not differ in the LSOAs of interest around the Arnold’s Field site compared to the rest of Havering and England as a whole. Rates of mesothelioma were higher in Havering as a whole compared to England, and it is thought that this Havering-wide increase reflects historic occupational exposure to asbestos. Additional air sampling around the site to investigate the presence of air-borne asbestos fibres, at both times of a fire and when there is no fire, will be carried out. It is extremely difficult and unusual to be able directly attribute cases of cancer to a specific environmental source. Cancers are known to arise through an accumulation of potential carcinogenic exposures over a life time; the impact of each exposure varying from person to person in part due to genetic differences. Throughout life behaviours, places of residence and work often change, and so it is extremely rare to be able to attribute causation to a single point source, even when investigating populations as presented here.

Appendices Appendix 1 Data source, analysis and presentation Data held by the National Disease Registration Service (NDRS) NHS England34 includes all cancer diagnoses made between 2011 and 2020 inclusive. The data in this report spans the full ten years as a long time-frame is most appropriate owing to the relatively long latency period of cancers. The earliest fires occurring on the Launders Lane site have been reported as 201235, and a site survey performed in 2012 found elevated levels of lead and benzo(a)pyrene in the soil36. As such, the entire time frame available from the National Cancer Registry (2011-2020) was investigated. Age standardisation enables meaningful comparisons to be made between two populations that vary in age structure. This is particularly important when comparing rates of cancer as cancer incidence is very strongly associated with age. Without the use of age-standardised rates (ASR) comparing an older population to a younger one may be misleading as there appears to be a higher rate of cancer possibly owing to an external factor (such as air pollution), when in fact it is due to an older population living in the area in question. Figure 1 shows the age distribution of residents in the LSOAs of interest, Havering and England; demonstrating the differences in the agestructure of the three populations. Similar to age-standardisation, sex-standardisation allows comparison to be made between two populations with different proportions of females to males. This is particularly important as life expectancy of females is longer, and so in older populations there is a higher proportion of women than men. It is also important as some cancer types more commonly occur in men compared to women and vice versa. Ethnicity data of individuals diagnosed with cancer is collected by NDRS, however when investigating small-geographies (such as the LSOAs of interest) the number of cancer cases is small, and the population data regarding ethnicity is not available. It was therefore not possible to account for differences in ethnicity as part of this analysis. A standardised incidence ratio (SIR) is often used to determine if the occurrence of cancer in a relatively small population is high or low. It is a way of presenting the difference between the observed number new cases in the population of interest compared to the number of cases that would be expected. SIRs are based on the age- and sex-specific incidence rates in the general population (e.g. England). If the ratio differs significantly from 100 it means that there are either more (ratio higher than 100) or less (ratio less than 100) cases than would be expected. Confidence intervals are used when presenting data to indicate the variation that occurs in any dataset by chance alone. The single number presented as the “standardised rate” of each cancer type is referred to as a “point estimate” and sits at the centre of the confidence interval. When the data set (sample) from which the “estimate” is calculated is larger (e.g. England), the confidence intervals are narrower as the uncertainty around the estimate is less. This is because calculation of an estimate from a larger sample of data gives increased confidence that the estimate represents the true value. Similarly, when a smaller data set is used (e.g. LSOAs of interest) the confidence intervals around the point estimate will be larger. 34

National Disease Registration Service: https://digital.nhs.uk/ndrs www.london-fire.gov.uk/media/7509/72811_response.pdf 36 Ground investigation report for the land at Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane, Rainham RM13 9FL. Geo-Environmental 2023. https://issuu.com/haveringcouncil/docs/launders_lane_arnold_s_field_-_soil_investigatio?fr=xKAE9_zU1NQ 35

The accepted statistical standard is to use “95% confidence intervals” around a point estimate. This can be interpreted that there is 95% certainty that the true value lies within the specified range. Practically, when comparing rates from two populations (e.g. Havering compared to England) if the 95% confidence intervals from each estimate overlap the two rates are not significantly different from one another. An example of this overlap of confidence intervals can be seen in Figure 1. Whilst the blue bar on the graph show that the point estimate is highest for the LSOAs of interest, 95% confidence intervals (a statistical method of describing the statistical variation around an estimate) overlap between LSOAs of interest, Havering and England. This means we have been unable to find (with 95% confidence) a significant difference between the LSOAs of interest and Havering or England as a whole.

Appendix 2 Age profile Figure 5 demonstrates the differences in age profile of the three populations being compared (LSOAs of interest, Havering and England). For example, the LSOAs of interest have a higher proportion of children under 13 years old compared to Havering and England as a whole. These differences in age profile illustrate the need to use age-standardised rates when comparing cancer incidence.

Figure 5 Age distribution of population-years, LSOAs of interest, Havering LA and England, 2011-2020

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 11 WITNESS STATEMENT OF SIMON THELWELL, 10 JANUARY 2025 IN CLEAR THE AIR IN HAVERING, R (ON THE APPLICATION OF) V LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING [2025]

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

Filed on behalf of the Defendant 1st Statement Exhibit ST/1 – ST/2 10 January 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

AC-2024-LON-003340

KINGS BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT BETWEEN: THE KING (on the application of CLEAR THE AIR IN HAVERING (by MS RUTH KETTLE-FRISBY)) Claimant -andTHE LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING Defendant -andDMC SERVICES (ESSEX) LIMITED Interested Party ___________________________________________________________________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF SIMON THELWELL

I, Simon Thelwell, of London Borough of Havering, Town Hall, Main Road, Romford, RM1 3BD will say as follows:Introduction 1.

I am employed by the Defendant as Head of Strategic Development in the Planning and Public Protection Directorate. My responsibilities include the management of majority of the functions of the local planning authority under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (“the Act”) and related legislation. I hold a BSc(Hons) degree in Town and Regional Planning and have over 30 years’ experience working as a planner and managing planning services for local planning authorities.

I have been employed by the Defendant since July 2007. I am familiar with the site known as Arnolds Field, Launders Lane (“the Site”) and the planning history of the Site. I regularly attend the officers group which was formed to discuss issues with regard to the site, in particular providing planning advice in regard to the planning history, current planning status of the site and planning issues for any future proposals. I am duly authorised by the Defendant to make this statement in connection with these judicial review proceedings.

Planning history of the Site

The Site was subject to the extraction of sand and gravel in the 1960s, with the void created by the extraction then filled with waste with the levels restored to their previous (pre-extraction) levels. Typically, such sites were poorly restored with only a thin layer of topsoil and cap such that the land would be of little productive use other than scrub or informal grazing. From looking at the planning history files available, it is my understanding that this site was in this condition from the end of the 1960’s to 2000.

In 1999, planning permission (ref P0954.96) was given for development comprising “land raising to improve agricultural quality” (“the 1999 Permission”). The proposal was to increase the depth of soils on the site through importation of material to support productive agriculture on the land.

In 2000, further planning permission was granted, under section 73 of the Act, to “change end use of current permission (P0954.96) from agriculture to woodland” (“2000 Permission”). Whilst the Defendant cannot locate a copy of the final grant of planning permission as issued, I exhibit as exhibit ST/1 a draft decision notice which to the best of my knowledge and belief reflects the decision notice that was in fact issued, including the conditions attached to that grant.

Condition 1 to the 2000 Permission required the land restoration to be carried out in accordance with details contained in the application, including phasing,

the method of soil spreading, timing for implementation, and the levels and contouring of the restored Site. Those details were varied with the agreement of the Defendant in September 2002. I exhibit as exhibit ST/2 an approved drawing showing the approved levels of the Site under the 2000 Permission. 7.

Condition 4 to the 2000 Permission required the Site to be capped with a layer at least 1.8m deep of topsoil, subsoil and other reclaimed material before any end use can be carried out. Conditions 21 and 22 to the 1999 Permission included action to be taken in the event that the Site was found to be contaminated, and requires details of remediation and/or mitigation measures that are required to be carried out.

The 1999 Permission was implemented through the importation of material onto the Site, commencing in 1999. Following the 2000 Permission, importation of materials continued. However, the nature of the material deposited, the amount of material deposited, and the subsequent contours of the land were well in excess of the approval granted, with the approved contours being exceeded by up to 3.5 meters. As a result of the unauthorised development, a stop notice and two enforcement notices were served [SB/1/8-24]. An appeal against the enforcement notices was dismissed in 2006 [SB/2/25]. The enforcement notices remain in force and have not been complied with. The company that owned the site went into liquidation in 2006 without removing any soils as required by the notices.

Around 2009, a new owner acquired the Site, but they were arrested and subsequently jailed in relation to drug and firearms offences on the Site. During the years after the arrest of the owner (between 2011 and 2016), significant further deposition and burying of waste on the Site took place, resulting in the Environment Agency bringing prosecutions against various individuals.

Current planning position

10. The Interested Party is the current owner of the land after they acquired it in 2017. Since then, there have been no significant occurrences of waste being brought onto the land. The Site remains largely in the same condition as it was in 2016, other than through changes through the fires that have been occurring. The Site is not in any use, and is inaccessible due to being fenced, some very steep slopes close to boundaries and mature vegetation. There is limited evidence of trespass. 11. The Interested Party has been in discussions with the Defendant as local planning authority in relation to possible future plans for the Site, including the provision of pre-application advice. No planning application has yet been received however. None of the discussions to date involve leaving the Site in its current condition and would involve remediation of the site including removal of material. 12. My conclusions on the current use of the Site are based on fact and knowledge – that is that the site is not open, public access is not possible and there is no informal use of the site by the public. The owner of the site does not use it for any purpose. The 2000 Permission does not give a right for the public to use the land – there is no planning condition or associated legal agreement with the effect to require public access. The description of the 2000 Permission includes the inclusion of “community woodland” and so informal use by the public would not be unlawful in planning terms, however, the 2000 Permission could only be implemented in accordance with that permission, as required by the 2004 Enforcement Notice, which requires the removal of significant volumes of material from the Site. Therefore, any foreseeable future use by the public, or anyone else, would be on a Site which has a markedly different landform and condition to what it is now.

Statement of Truth I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. Signed Dated 10th January 2025

___________________________________________________________________________ EXHIBIT ST/1 ___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ EXHIBIT ST/2 ___________________________________________________________________________

LQM REPORT NO.: 1582

ISSUE: 2

APPENDIX 12 LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING CONTAMINATED LAND INSPECTION STRATEGY, REVISION 02 DATED 22 NOVEMBER 2016

LAND QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING

FINAL REPORT 17/07/2025

Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy

Revision 02

Version Control Version 00 01 02

Date 24/03/16 06/04/16 22/11/16

Prepared CZ CZ CZ

Approved JTW JW PK

Description Consultation Draft Consultation Draft Draft

Note This document is approved and authorised for application within the London Borough of Havering. This document contains proprietary information. No part of this document may be reproduced without proper written consent from the Chief Executive of the London Borough of Havering. The Custodian should be notified of all errors, omissions and suggested improvements, whose contact details are: Public Protection, London Borough of Havering, Mercury House, Mercury Gardens, Romford. Essex RM1 3SL Email christina.zervou@havering.gov.uk Tel: 01708 432775

Table of Contents Version Control ...................................................................................................................... i Table of Contents...................................................................................................................ii Forward................................................................................................................................. 1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 2 1.

Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3

1.1

General Policy of the London Borough of Havering ................................................... 3

1.1.1 Corporate Plan .......................................................................................................... 3 1.1.2 Local Development Framework: Core Strategy and Development Control Policies ... 3 1.2

Legal Framework....................................................................................................... 4

1.2.1 Definition of Contaminated Land................................................................................ 5 1.2.2 Roles and Responsibilities......................................................................................... 5 1.2.3 Underlying Principles of the Regime .......................................................................... 8 2.

Characteristics of Havering .......................................................................................... 10

2.1

Geographical Location............................................................................................. 10

2.2

Brief Description and History ................................................................................... 11

2.3

Land Owned by the Council..................................................................................... 12

2.4

Current Land Use Characteristics ............................................................................ 13

2.5

Protected locations .................................................................................................. 13

2.6

Key Property Types ................................................................................................. 13

2.7

Key Water Resource and Protection Issues............................................................. 14

2.8

Geology ................................................................................................................... 14

2.9

Hydrological Characteristics .................................................................................... 15

2.10

Hydrogeology .......................................................................................................... 15

2.11

Areas of naturally metal enriched soils..................................................................... 17

Aims, Objectives and Priorities..................................................................................... 18

3.1

Aims and Objectives ................................................................................................ 18

3.2

Priorities .................................................................................................................. 18

Broader Approach to Dealing with Land Contamination ............................................... 19

4.1

Interaction with other Regimes ................................................................................ 19

4.1.1 Planning and Development...................................................................................... 19 4.1.2 Environmental Permitting......................................................................................... 19 4.1.3 Building Regulations ................................................................................................ 20 4.1.4 Pollution of Controlled Waters ................................................................................. 20 4.1.5 Environmental Damage Regulations........................................................................ 20 4.1.6 Waste Management Licensing................................................................................. 20 4.2

Minimising Unnecessary Burdens............................................................................ 21 ii

Approach to Strategic Inspection ................................................................................. 22

5.1

The Inspection Procedure........................................................................................ 22

5.2

Information Collection .............................................................................................. 22

5.2.1 Information on sources of contamination ................................................................. 22 5.2.2 Information on pathways and receptors ................................................................... 22 5.2.3 Planning records...................................................................................................... 23 5.3

Information Evaluation and Prioritisation of Detailed Inspection............................... 23

5.4

Deviation from the Prioritisation of Detailed Inspection ............................................ 24

Approach to Detailed Inspection .................................................................................. 25

6.1

Activities of Detailed Inspection ............................................................................... 25

6.2

Desk Study and Preliminary Risk Assessment......................................................... 25

6.3

Intrusive Site Investigation ....................................................................................... 25

6.4

Statutory Powers of Entry onto Land ....................................................................... 26

Determination and Remediation of Contaminated land ................................................ 27

7.1

Determination of Contaminated Land ...................................................................... 27

7.1.1 Significant Harm to Human Health........................................................................... 27 7.1.2 Significant possibility of significant harm to human health (SPOSH) ........................ 27 7.1.3 Significant harm and significant possibility of such harm (non-human receptors)..... 28 7.1.4 Significant pollution of controlled waters and significant possibility of such pollution 28 7.2

Remediation ............................................................................................................ 29

7.3

Determining Liability ................................................................................................ 29

Management Procedures............................................................................................. 30

8.1

Introduction.............................................................................................................. 30

8.2

Consulting Legal Services ....................................................................................... 30

8.3

Health and Safety .................................................................................................... 30

8.4

Use of consultants ................................................................................................... 30

8.5

Local Authority Interests in Land.............................................................................. 30

Information Management ............................................................................................. 32

9.1

Introduction.............................................................................................................. 32

9.2

Information and Complaints ..................................................................................... 32

9.3

Public Register ........................................................................................................ 32

9.4

Environmental Enquiries.......................................................................................... 33

9.5

Data Confidentiality.................................................................................................. 33

10. General Liaison, Communication and Review .............................................................. 34 10.1

Internal Liaison ........................................................................................................ 34

10.2

External Liaison ....................................................................................................... 34

10.3

Communication Strategies....................................................................................... 34

iii

10.4

Review and Consultation of the Strategy ................................................................. 35

11. References .................................................................................................................. 36 12. Glossary of Terms........................................................................................................ 37 13. Appendices .................................................................................................................. 41 Appendix 1: Work programme and Timescales for 2017-2021 ............................................ 41 Appendix 2: List of Consultees............................................................................................ 42

Forward Havering has areas of land where there has been significant industrial development. The former industrial and other land uses (such as gravel extraction followed by the unregulated landfilling of waste) have created a legacy of land contamination, which may pose a risk to human health and/or the environment. It is important that these potential risks from land contamination are identified and appropriately addressed. This Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy 2017-2021 sets out Havering Council’s approach for dealing with these risks. The Council first adopted its Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy in 2001. This Strategy was revised and published in September 2004. Since then, considerable progress has been made in the identification, assessment and remediation of potentially contaminated land within the borough (primarily through the planning process). There have also been changes to national legislation and guidance. This revised Strategy has taken these changes into account. Havering Council will continue to work to ensure successful implementation of this Strategy, which will make a contribution towards fulfilling the Council’s vision for a clean Borough, where people are safe and where residents are proud to live.

Executive Summary This updated Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy 2017-2021 sets out Havering Council’s approach to identification, assessment and remediation of contaminated land within the borough, as required by Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. This Strategy replaces Havering Council’s previous Strategy (Revision 01) and incorporates the changes required by the Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance (April 2012). A generic explanation of the primary legal framework, underlying principles and associated Statutory Guidance is provided. A description of relevant aspects of Havering, such as current land use characteristics, protected locations, geology and hydrogeological characteristics is also included. The aims of Havering Council’s Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy are: to ensure compliance with Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended) and; to identify and remove unacceptable risks to human health and the environment associated with contaminated land. To achieve these aims, Havering Council takes a strategic approach. The first stage is to gather information on potentially contaminative land uses (i.e. sources of contamination), receptors, and pathways from a variety of sources. This stage is followed by a riskbased prioritised detailed inspection to, firstly, identify sites where one or more potential contaminant linkages exist and, secondly, to rank these sites in priority from high to low for further inspection. Under this Strategy, the prioritised list of sites for further inspection is programmed for review from within 2017. Once sites have been categorised, in accordance with the methodology set out herein, detailed inspection will be undertaken, primarily through desk-based assessments and where necessary intrusive investigations, to help determine whether (a) significant harm is being caused (b) there is significant possibility of such harm occurring, (c) significant pollution of controlled waters is being caused or (d) there is significant possibility of such pollution being caused. Havering Council aims to undertake desk studies and preliminary risk assessments for the 15 highest risk sites (three per annum) of the prioritised list from 2017 to 2021. Decisions on carrying out intrusive site investigations will be taken on a site specific basis, taking into consideration the potential risk posed to human health by a site, as well as, resources and information available at that time. This Strategy also highlights the importance of a broader approach to dealing with contaminated land using other regulatory actions. Planning is one of the main regimes through which Havering Council deals with land contamination when considering applications for proposed developments. Other regimes include environmental permitting, pollution of controlled waters and waste management licensing. Havering Council has the responsibility for determining whether land within its jurisdiction is contaminated land. Once the land has been determined as contaminated land, in accordance with the procedures of the revised Statutory Guidance, Havering Council will consider how that land should be remediated. Public Protection staff will liaise with relevant sections of Havering Council as well as with external stakeholders where it is required as early as possible throughout the inspection, site investigation and remediation stages.

Introduction

1.1 General Policy of the London Borough of Havering Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part 2A (introduced in 2000) the London Borough of Havering Council (Havering Council) is required to inspect its borough to identify areas of contaminated land. Havering Council is also required to take a strategic approach to carrying out its inspection duty, set out its approach as a written strategy, and keep this under periodic review. Following an amendment to the Statutory Guidance in 2012, local authorities are required to revise the content of their Strategy to take account of the changes. This Strategy replaces Havering Council’s previous strategy (Revision 01) and explains how the Council will implement the Contaminated Land Regime over the period 20172021 as required by Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (hereafter referred to as Part 2A), in accordance with the revised Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance (April 2012). This Strategy sets out Havering Council’s approach to identification, assessment and remediation of contaminated land within the borough. It will form part of a corporate policy framework and has been developed to reflect the goals, aims and objectives of key Council policies and strategies. The main local policies and strategies are described below.

1.1.1 Corporate Plan The Corporate Plan 2015-16 sets out Havering Council's new goals: • • •

Havering will be clean and the Council will care for the environment; People will be safe, in their homes and in the community; The residents will be proud to live in Havering.

Part 2A contributes to providing a cleaner and safer environment for people to live and work in. This Strategy assists in achieving the aforementioned goals.

1.1.2 Local Development Framework: Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Havering’s Local Development Framework (LDF) was adopted in 2008 and is a portfolio of different documents which has been prepared to provide for the future planning of the borough. The Core Strategy establishes Havering Council’s vision for how the borough will look in 2020, and the objectives for delivering this. It comprises twelve key themes: Places to Live, Places to Work, Town Centres, Culture, Community Needs, Transport, Waste, Minerals, Green Belt, Environmental Management, Design and Heritage. Under these key themes the Core Strategy includes two sets of planning policies. The first set (Core Policies) states the Council’s strategy for balancing the need to deliver economic prosperity and new and affordable housing with the protection and enhancement of the borough’s environmental quality. The second set (Development Control Policies) provides more detailed guidance on the criteria against which planning proposals will be determined.

Environmental Management, one of the key themes of the Core Strategy, focuses on how to enhance and protect the environment. It includes the following two Core Policies: • CP 15 – Environmental Management • CP 16 – Biodiversity and Geodiversity The Core Policy (CP15) – Environmental Management seeks to enhance and protect the built and natural environment by taking into account environmental issues such as renewable energy, air quality and pollution, land contamination, the protection of groundwater from contamination, noise, light pollution and climate change adaptation and mitigation. Within this policy context, Contaminated Land is one of the Development Control Policies (DC53), according to which planning permission for development will only be granted where both of the following criteria are met: •

•

Where the development is on or near a site where contamination is known, or expected to exist, a full technical assessment of the site’s physical stability, contamination and/or production of landfill gas must be undertaken. Where the assessment identifies an unacceptable risk to human health, flora or fauna or the water environment, the applicant will be required to agree acceptable long term remediation measures before any planning permission is granted to ensure there is no future harm with regard to the future use of the site. Where feasible, on-site remediation, especially bio-remediation, is encouraged. The development does not lead to future contamination of the land in and around the site.

To reflect the changes introduced by the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and the London Plan and subsequent alterations, the Council is preparing a new Havering Local Plan to replace the Local Development Framework.

1.2 Legal Framework The statutory regime for the identification and remediation of contaminated land came into force on 1 April 2000. The primary legislation is contained in Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, which was inserted by Section 57 of the Environment Act 1995. It is complemented by the Contaminated land (England) Regulations 2006 (as amended) and the Statutory Guidance, which was published by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) in April 2012 and replaced the previous guidance set out in Defra circular 01/2006. The regime sets out a framework for the identification and remediation of ‘contaminated land’, in circumstances where there has not been any identifiable breach of a pollution prevention regime. The overarching objectives of the Part 2A regime are: (a) To identify and remove unacceptable risks to human health and the environment. (b) To seek to ensure that contaminated land is made suitable for its current use. (c) To ensure that the burdens faced by individuals, companies and society as a whole are proportionate, manageable and compatible with the principles of sustainable development.

1.2.1 Definition of Contaminated Land Section 78A(2) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 gives the definition of contaminated land as being: ‘any land which appears to the local authority in whose area it is situated to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, on or under the land that (a) significant harm is being caused; or there is significant possibility of such harm being caused; or (b) significant pollution of controlled waters is being caused or there is a significant possibility of such pollution being caused’. The meaning of ‘harm’ is also defined in Section 78A(4), as ‘harm to the health of living organisms or other interference with the ecological systems of which they form part and, in the case of man, includes harm to his property’/ The definition of contaminated land by virtue of pollution of controlled waters has been amended by section 86 of the Water Act 2003 and is in line with the Water Framework Directive and Directive 2006/118/EC and came into force in April 2012. In line with land, there must be significant pollution of controlled waters or the significant possibility of such pollution being caused.

1.2.2 Roles and Responsibilities Part 2A and the Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance 2012 give the Borough Council a series of duties. In carrying out these responsibilities the Council shall: Prepare, publish and adopt an Inspection Strategy setting out how the Council intends to inspect its area for the purpose of identifying contaminated land. Determine whether particular areas of land are contaminated land in accordance with Statutory Guidance. Decide whether any site, determined as contaminated land, should be designated as ‘special site’, and if so transferring enforcement responsibility to the Environment Agency. Where land is identified and determined as being contaminated land the Council will: • Establish who should bear responsibility for the remediation of land; • Establish what remediation is required; • Ensure that such remediation takes place, either through agreement with the appropriate person, by serving a remediation notice or, in certain circumstances, through carrying out the work themselves. Undertake urgent remediation action where there is imminent danger of serious harm. Determine who may be liable for remediation and apportion costs Ensure that appropriate remediation takes place, either through voluntary action, or by serving a remediation notice on those responsible and take further action if remediation is not achieved. Record certain prescribed information about regulatory actions on a public register and maintain the public register in accordance with the Contaminated Land (England) Regulations 2006.

The Council’s inspection duties are shown in Figure 1. The main duties of the Environment Agency with respect to contaminated land under Part 2A, are: To assist the Council in identifying contaminated land. To provide site-specific advice to the Council on the remediation of contaminated land. To provide advice to local authorities on identifying and dealing with pollution of controlled waters. To act as the enforcing authority and ensure remediation for any land designated as a 'special site’. To maintain a public register of regulatory actions for special sites. To prepare and publish a national report on contaminated land.

Section 78B(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended)

Every local authority shall cause its area to be inspected from time to time for the purpose of identifying contaminated land.

Statutory Guidance 2012

The Statutory Guidance recognises that there are two broad types of “inspection” likely to be carried out by local authorities: (a) strategic inspection and (b) detailed inspection.

Strategic Inspection

Detailed Inspection

1. What is considered strategic inspection in the Guidance: “collecting information to make a broad assessment of land within an authority’s area and then identifying priority land for more detailed consideration”.

2. The Local Authority (LA) should set out its approach to carrying out its inspection duty as a written strategy. 3. The written strategy should include (among others): i) the LA’s approach to strategic inspection ii) the LA’s approach to prioritisation of detailed inspection and remediation activity

1. What is considered detailed inspection in the Guidance: “to obtain information on ground conditions and carrying out the risk assessments which support decisions under the Part 2A regime relevant to that land”.

2. If the LA identifies land where there is a reasonable possibility that a significant contaminant linkage exists, it should inspect the land to obtain information to decide whether it is contaminated land. 3. The understanding of risks is developed through a staged approach to risk assessment (preliminary risk assessment, generic quantitative, detailed etc.). The process should normally continue until it is possible for the LA to decide i) that there is insufficient evidence that the land might be contaminated land to justify further inspection ii) whether or not the land is contaminated land.

Fig. 1 The Council’s inspection duties under Part 2A

1.2.3 Underlying Principles of the Regime Contaminant linkages For any land to be identified as contaminated land at least one contaminant-pathwayreceptor linkage (contaminant linkage), by which a relevant receptor might be affected by the contaminants in question, needs to be established. In other words, for a risk to exist there must be contaminants present in on or under the land in a form and quantity that poses a hazard, and one or more pathways by which they might harm human health, the environment, or property; or significantly pollute controlled waters. The following definitions of ‘contaminant’, ‘receptor’, and ‘pathway’ are included in the Statutory Guidance: (a) A “contaminant” is a substance which is in, on or under the land and which has the potential to cause significant harm to a relevant receptor, or to cause significant pollution of controlled waters. (b) A “receptor” is something that could be adversely affected by a contaminant, for example a person, an organism, an ecosystem, property, or controlled waters. (c) A “pathway” is a route by which a receptor is or might be affected by a contaminant. All three aforementioned elements of a contaminant linkage must exist in relation to particular land before the land can be considered potentially to be contaminated land under Part 2A, including evidence of the actual presence of contaminants. A schematic diagram of a contaminant linkage is shown in Figure 2.

CONTAMINANT

PATHWAY

RECEPTOR

CONTAMINANT LINKAGE

Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of a contaminant linkage The presence of one or more contaminant linkages may constitute a risk, which, according to the Statutory Guidance, means the combination of: (a) the likelihood that harm, or pollution of water, will occur as a result of contaminants in, on or under the land; and (b) the scale and seriousness of such harm or pollution if it did occur. Risk assessment Identification of the contaminant linkage and whether it is significant is ascertained by following a staged process of risk assessment. This is to gain an understanding of the risks presented by the land and any associated uncertainties. The risks are then communicated in what is known as a site conceptual model which can either be presented in writing or diagrammatic format. The staged process commences with a preliminary risk assessment. A desk study and site walkover are carried out, in order to obtain information about previous contaminative uses, general physical and geological conditions and gain a preliminary understanding of potential risks associated with the identification of the contamination likely to be present on the site. Where the preliminary risk assessment suggests that further

understanding of the risks is required, a more detailed site investigation is then carried out. Intrusive site investigation commences with a generic quantitative risk assessment whereby detailed information on the ground conditions is collected to further develop the site conceptual model. This information will allow estimation of the risk that contaminants may pose to receptors, using generic assessment criteria and assumptions and will determine whether a detailed quantitative risk assessment is required. Depending on the findings of the generic quantitative risk assessment it may become necessary to carry out various further stages of more detailed risk assessment to support a decision as to whether or not a site meets the definition of contaminated land under Part 2A. This may include the development of detailed site specific assessment criteria. Determination of contaminated land Following the aforementioned phased risk assessment process, the local authority has the responsibility for determining whether any land appears to be contaminated land. According to the definition of contaminated land, there are four possible grounds for the determination of land as contaminated land: (a) Significant harm is being caused; (b) There is a significant possibility of significant harm being caused; (c) Significant pollution of controlled waters is being caused; (d) There is a significant possibility of significant pollution of controlled waters being caused. If the authority considers that conditions for considering land to be contaminated land do not exist it should not decide that the land is contaminated land. Before making any determination, the local authority needs to identify one or more ‘significant contaminant linkage(s)’, which means a contaminant linkage which gives rise to a level of risk sufficient to justify a piece of land being determined as contaminated land. Remediation of contaminated land Once land has been determined as contaminated land, the enforcing authority must consider how it should be remediated and, where appropriate, it must issue a remediation notice to require such remediation. The enforcing authority for the purposes of remediation may be the local authority which determined the land, or the Environment Agency, which takes on responsibility once land has been determined if the land is deemed to be a “special site”, as defined in section 78A(3) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended).

Characteristics of Havering

2.1 Geographical Location The borough lies on the north eastern edge of London between the M25 and the River Thames. It has a population of 245,974 [2014 mid-year estimates by the Office for National Statistics (ONS)] and a total land area of 11,235 hectares (43 square miles). Approximately half of the borough is Green Belt with major urban areas in Romford, Harold Hill/Harold Wood, Elm Park, Upminster, Hornchurch and Rainham. Figure 3 presents the geographical location of the London Borough of Havering.

Fig. 3 Geographical location of the London Borough of Havering

Fig. 4 The Borough boundary, principal towns, transport routes. 2.2 Brief Description and History The principal areas industrialised within Havering were; • • • •

Rainham, mainly to the south of the London Tilbury Southend (LTS) railway line, but also along the A1306 (formerly A13) Eastern Avenue and along the A12 corridor generally Crow Lane (including site of the former gas works) The brewery site in Romford.

Figure 4 shows the borough boundary, principal towns and transport routes. Rainham is the main area where there has been significant industrial development and where the most contaminative uses were concentrated. The Ferry Lane area was first developed early in the last century along the river frontage. The development continued within the area between Ferry Lane and Rainham Creek and along Coldharbour Lane. The three main chemical industries to be found in the area were Murex, Thames Nitrogen and Albright and Wilson. Since this time most of the chemical industries have declined with sites either being redeveloped for warehousing or left undeveloped obviously leaving sites potentially contaminated. Much of the Ferry Lane area is occupied by low-tech uses such as vehicle breaking, open storage and waste transfer. 11

In the 1930s Ford opened its car plant at Dagenham which expanded into Havering. The car assembly plant has ceased production and major changes are proposed, including the redevelopment of land in Havering. This area is now a focus for regeneration via the Thames Gateway London Partnership including both light industry and residential development. The riverside marshes have been used extensively for waste disposal – mainly waste from central London brought down the Thames by barge, but also Thames dredgings. This started in the 1860s at Coldharbour Point but expanded to include extensive areas on both sides of Rainham Creek and still continues along parts of the river frontage. Tipping of waste is due to last until about 2018, the deposit of dredgings could last much longer. Much of the waste disposal was regulated under the Essex County Council Act 1933 or subsequent waste management legislation however, there is still the possibility of significant contamination being present in these areas. The Romford brewery was established at the end of 18 century, but closed in 1995. The site has now been redeveloped for retail and residential uses. Two railway lines cross the borough established in the mid 1800s: the Great Eastern main line to Norwich and the London Tilbury Southend (LTS) Railway. Industry and sidings were established along these links but are now largely redundant. There has also been industrial development along transport corridors such as the A12 and A1306 (former A13) in particular light industry warehousing and distribution. In recent years there has been a switch to retail outlets, especially along the A12. There were extensive deposits of river terrace sand and gravel mainly in the south of the borough between Rainham and Upminster. Between the 1930s and 1970s significant amount of extraction was undertaken with the resultant holes being infilled with waste materials. Many sites were poorly restored and there was largely no control over the types of wastes deposited or over the way the site was engineered to deal with leachate and landfill gas. The rate of working has declined significantly over recent years and there are now only two operational sites. In other parts of the borough there is a history of clay extraction for brick making. Most of these sites are in the Green Belt where there are less likely to be impacts on residential areas or conflicts with redevelopment proposals. However, there is the possibility of contaminants affecting natural resources, such as watercourses and natural habitats.

2.3 Land Owned by the Council Havering Council has relatively extensive holdings within the borough with responsibilities for the land spread amongst the various services and the following examples are given: • Council offices and depots • Council-owned housing stock and commercial property • Council-owned former landfill sites • Schools and playing fields • Social Services buildings /homes • Sport centres and their playing fields • Public parks and allotments • Highways, service roads and footpaths

• Havering Riverside, • Havering & Hornchurch Country Parks • Cemeteries and a crematorium This Strategy will follow the same procedure for contaminated land inspection for both Council and non-Council owned land. There is the likelihood that Council owned land may have had contaminative uses in the past.

2.4 Current Land Use Characteristics As previously mentioned there are extensive industrial areas within the borough mainly to the south. The borough has some major historic industrial activities, such as; • • • • • • • • •

Aluminium Foundry Process Food Processing Magnet manufacture Rail welding specialists LPG storage terminal Window and door manufacture Natural gas holders Waste transfer and landfilling Furniture manufacture

Medium to smaller industries operating within the borough include; • • • • • • •

Three sewage treatment works Vehicle respraying Freight storage and distribution Metal recycling Steel holding and processing Waste paper processing Concrete batching

2.5 Protected locations There are three Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in the borough. These are Ingrebourne Marshes, Inner Thames Marshes and Hornchurch Cutting. There are also seven Local Nature Reserves: Ingrebourne Valley, The Manor, The Chase, Cranham Brickfields, Cranham Marsh, Bedfords Park and Rainham Marshes. Further to this there are Sites of Metropolitan Importance, Sites of Borough Importance Grades 1 and 2 and Sites of Local Interest within the Borough. Such sites could potentially be harmed by contamination, in particular from surface water contamination.

2.6 Key Property Types Havering has a rich historic environment with 140 Listed Buildings. These are made up of 6 grade I, 15 grade II* and 119 grade II. Further buildings are added to the statutory list from time to time. There are 11 designated conservation areas within Havering. There are three scheduled ancient monuments in the borough. In addition, there are extensive areas of archaeological interest.

2.7 Key Water Resource and Protection Issues Essex and Suffolk Water Company supply Havering’s drinking water, although some drinking water originates from Thames Water Utilities and put into supply at the Chigwell works. They have a number of underground reservoirs/storage facilities for potable water situated on the south side of Lower Bedfords Road and to the south of Broxhill Road in Bedfords Park. There are approximately 25 (2010 data GIS overlay) licensed abstractions within the Havering area, none of which are for public supply. The majority are for spray irrigation and agricultural uses with a small number for sand and gravel washing. There are no known unlicensed abstractions or private water supplies within our area. There is also a well station situated within the borough off Dagenham Road, South Hornchurch. This is known as Dagenham Well and is situated at grid reference E550885, N184257. The well is licensed for the abstraction of potable water and draws from the chalk aquifer. It is a standby source that would be used typically during drought conditions. The well has not been used for public supply since approximately the mid 1980’s. The protection of controlled waters is one of the major issues associated with Havering. There are four distinct watercourses in Havering (please refer to Figure 101): •

The River Beam forms a part of the western boundary of the borough with the London Borough of Redbridge to the West. It has three tributaries; the River Rom (which flows through Romford) and Blacks Brook and further south the River Ravensbourne whose confluence is south of Romford.

•

The Ingrebourne, including its tributaries the Weald Brook and the Paines Brook, drain the centre, east and north of the borough;

•

The River Mardyke drains the eastern area of the borough although for most of its length it flows through Thurrock, outside Havering;

•

The final watercourse is the River Thames into which the above watercourses drain. This forms the southern boundary of the borough.

2.8 Geology The bedrock underlying the majority of The London Borough of Havering is London Clay. The valley heads of the Rivers Rom/Beam and Ingrebourne are characterised by Lowestoft Formation capping tertiary deposits. On the high ground in this area the geology includes Bagshot Formation and Claygate Member beds which cap the London Clay. In the Collier Row, Chase Cross and Harold Wood areas there are outcrops of London Clay with a few patches of Lowestoft Formation still evident on the valley sides of the River Ingrebourne. South of this in the Dagenham, Romford and Rainham area terrace gravels (Taplow Gravel Member) and flood plain gravels are to be found capping the London Clay. In addition to the Taplow Gravel Member, Black Park Gravel Member, Hackney Gravel Member, Lynch Hill Gravel Member and Boyn Hill Gravel Member are also present and all are constituent parts of the Thames Valley Formation. There are also deposits of Alluvium, Head, Glaciofluvial deposits, Glaciolacustrine deposits and Ilford Silt Member. The Beam and Ingrebourne catchments are dominated by clay based soils, which are seasonally waterlogged.

There is considerable heterogeneity with regard to the thickness of the London Clay, and therefore the protection it provides will be location dependent. Especially adjacent to River Thames the thickness of London Clay decreases, being totally absent in some places. Instead, formations such as the Lambeth Group or superficial alluvial deposits are present at the surface.

2.9 Hydrological Characteristics The River Beam rises as the Bourne Brook in the rural area north of Romford (Stapleford Abbots). After a few miles the watercourse becomes the River Rom, flowing southwards through the urban catchment areas of Havering-atte-Bower and Collier Row and being joined by numerous small tributaries. Once in Collier Row the Rom flows through Romford Town centre, largely in a culvert, emerging as the Beam where it meets the River Ravensbourne (Harrow Lodge Park). It then flows in an open channel southward towards the Ford Motor works, following the boundary of Havering with Barking and Dagenham, draining into the Thames within that site. The River Ingrebourne rises as the Weald Brook, which flows south from northwest of Brentwood meandering through clay catchment, becoming the Ingrebourne south of the A12 near Harold Wood. The River flows until it emerges at Hornchurch Country Park and meanders southwards towards the A13. Once south of this major road the River becomes Rainham Creek, which discharges into the Thames via Frog Island sluices. The Ingrebourne and the Beam are both ‘flashy’ rivers, principally because urban run-off accounts for a large proportion of their prospective flows. The lower reaches of both rivers are tidally influenced. The chemical and biological water quality of the rivers in Havering has been historically poor – particularly the Ingrebourne and the Rom/Beam which have poor ecological status under the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The Environment Agency is the lead authority on the WFD and has classified the ecological quality of the designated water bodies in the borough as follows: Water Course

2009 Classification Status

The Raversbourne

Moderate

West branch of the Mardyke

Moderate

River Ingrebourne

Poor

River Mardyke

Poor

River Rom

Poor

Improvement of these standards and protection of river quality from contamination is therefore one of the objectives of this Strategy.

2.10 Hydrogeology The Water Framework Directive (WFD) introduced a comprehensive river basin management planning system to help protect and improve the health of the water environment. Havering falls across the Thames River Basin District. The Thames River 15

Basin Management plan requires the restoration and enhancement of water bodies to prevent deterioration and promote recovery of water bodies. Any proposed activity needs to ensure that it does not: • • •

Cause deterioration of a quality element to a lower status class and/or prevent any ongoing recovery. Result in failure of the prevent or limit objective for groundwater Cause rising trends in chemicals in the water body

The main groundwater bodies in Havering are: • • • • •

Essex gravels (GB40503G000400) thin outcrops present in the east (Current status: poor). South Essex Lower London Tertiaries (GB40602G401000) out cropping in the south adjacent to the Thames (Current status: good). Greenwich Tertiaries and Chalk (GB40602G602500) out cropping in the south west adjacent to Thames (Current status: poor). South Essex Thurrock Chalk (GB40601G401100) located adjacent to the Thames at the Aveley Marshes (Current status: poor). Upper Lea Chalk (GB40601G602900) underlies the borough (Current status: poor).

Further information can be found on the GOV.UK website under River basin management plans: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/river-basin-management-plans-2015 Further information about the WFD and how groundwater protection and betterment is achieved can found in the Environment Agency’s guidance document Groundwater Protection: Principals and Practice (GP3): https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/groundwater-protection-principles-andpractice-gp3 It should be noted that all aquifers are subject to the objectives set out by the WFD. Aquifers are characterized according to their importance as sources of groundwater, for both anthropogenic and ecological purposes, which is a product of their physical properties. These are Principal (regionally the most important), Secondary A and B, Secondary undifferentiated and unproductive strata. The London Borough of Havering contains a number of each of these different types. The Chalk has been classified as ‘Principal’, while the Taplow Gravel Member, which overlies the London Clay in the southern part of the borough, has been classified as a ‘Secondary A Aquifer’. The Black Park Gravel Member, Hackney Gravel Member, Lynch Hill Gravel Member and Boyn Hill Gravel Member, as well as the Lambeth Group and the Thanet Formation are also ‘Secondary A Aquifers’. These aquifers will in places be in hydraulic continuity with the underlying Principal Aquifer in the Chalk. The London Clay has been classified as ‘unproductive strata’. This classification applies where the physical properties of the deposit transmit groundwater at such slow velocities that they are not suitable for groundwater supply purposes. It should be noted that the thickness of the London Clay can vary significantly, and as such may still allow downward movement of water into underlying aquifers such as the Lambeth Group.

2.11 Areas of naturally metal enriched soils British Geological Survey in collaboration with Rothamsted Research and Soil Resources Institute funded by Natural Environmental Research Council have produced a soil geochemical atlas for England and Wales. This atlas will help understand the natural or geogenic concentration of elements in soil and assist in determining whether, and the extent to which, soil may have been contaminated by anthropogenic activities. Havering will consult this atlas in order to understand the background concentration of chemicals in soil.

Aims, Objectives and Priorities

3.1 Aims and Objectives The aims of Havering Council’s Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy are: to ensure compliance with Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended) and; to identify and remove unacceptable risks to human health and the environment (including controlled waters) associated with contaminated land. Havering Council has taken account of the principles of the Statutory Guidance in developing its approach and compliance will be achieved through the following objectives: (a) To continue with the identification of contaminated land in a rational, ordered and efficient manner which reflects any local circumstances; (b) To provide a strategic framework for the identification, inspection and determination of contaminated land; (c) To prioritise areas of land it considers likely to pose the greatest risk to human health or the environment (including controlled waters); (d) To deal with urgent sites as they come to the attention of the authority; (e) To assess development proposals through the planning regime, in order to ensure that the proposed site is suitable for its new use, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework; (f) To encourage voluntary action to deal with land contamination issues as far as it considers reasonable and practicable; (g) To continue with the effective procedures for communication, liaison and information exchange within the council and with third parties; (h) To inform the public of the Council’s intentions in relation to contaminated land;

3.2 Priorities Havering Council’s priorities when dealing with contaminated land will be: a) to protect human health; b) to protect controlled waters; c) to protect designated ecosystems; d) to prevent damage to property; e) to prevent any further contamination of land; h) to maintain consistent approach when inspecting and managing contaminated land.

Broader Approach to Dealing with Land Contamination

4.1 Interaction with other Regimes In the fulfilment of its many functions, Havering Council also deals with contaminated land using other regulatory actions as detailed within sections 4.1.1 to 4.1.6 below. Where a site is already regulated, there will generally be no need to apply Part 2A. Should Part 2A inspections provide evidence that a breach of another pollution prevention regime is occurring, action will normally be taken under this regime.

4.1.1 Planning and Development In its function as the Local Planning Authority, Havering Council is responsible for regulating development and land use under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. In accordance with paragraphs 120 and 121 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012, as well as policy 5.21 of the London Plan (March 2016), local planning authorities have to consider the implications of contamination when developing local plans and when considering applications for proposed developments. The planning regime addresses the risks in relation to future use of land and where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and / or landowner. Within this framework, when considering development proposals, Havering Council seeks to ensure that the proposed site is suitable for its new use taking account of ground conditions. Where necessary, a planning condition will be attached that requires the developer and / or landowner to follow a staged process of risk assessment to demonstrate that contamination has been effectively considered and dealt with in accordance with legislation, current guidance and good practice to demonstrate that the development is suitable for its intended use. Many contaminated sites have already been dealt with through the application of planning controls during redevelopment. Any remediation agreed as a planning condition will be dealt with under planning controls and not under Part 2A.

4.1.2 Environmental Permitting The Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010 (as amended) are designed to minimise the impact form potentially polluting activities. Many industrial installations fall under the environmental permitting regime. This regime is enforced by the Environment Agency for A1 activities and the Council for A2 (LA-IPPC) and part B (LAPPC) activities. Facilities regulated under the Environmental Permitting Regulations where there may be a significant risk to land or groundwater are required to carry out a site condition report to ascertain the baseline conditions of the land before being granted an environmental permit. Should the operator cause contamination of the site by breaching conditions of the permit, the operator is required to remediate the land so that it is returned to its original baseline condition.

4.1.3 Building Regulations The Building Regulations 2010 introduced the requirement for reasonable precautions to be taken to avoid danger to health and safety caused by contaminants on or in the ground covered, or to be covered by the building and any land associated with the building. The building control function has an increasingly important role in securing a safe development with the rising number of developments being constructed using permitted development rights that do not require planning permission. Where contamination potential exists, measures are required to be taken to protect new buildings and their future occupants from any unacceptable risks of contamination, including hazardous ground gases.

4.1.4 Pollution of Controlled Waters The main pieces of legislation which aim to protect water resources are the Water Resources Act 1991, the Water Act 2003, the Water Framework Directive, Directive 2006/118/EC and the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010. Section 161 of the Water Resources Act 1991 gives the Environment Agency powers to take action to prevent or remedy the pollution of controlled waters. However where pollution of controlled waters arises from substances in, on, or under land, there is an overlap between these powers and the Part 2A regime. It has been determined that where contaminated land is polluting or has the potential to pollute controlled waters then remediation will be brought about under Part 2A by the Council, through consultation with the Environment Agency. Where there is historical pollution of groundwater, but where Part 2A does not apply, remediation will be carried out by the Environment Agency under the Water Resources Act. This may occur, for example, where the pollutants are entirely contained within the relevant body of groundwater or where the ‘source’ site cannot be identified.

4.1.5 Environmental Damage Regulations The Environmental Liabilities Directive is implemented in the UK by the Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) Regulations 2009. They are intended to deal with the most serious cases of environmental damage caused by economic activities. The emphasis is on preventing and remedying environmental damage and not enforcement. Environmental damage as defined by the regulations includes contamination of land that results in a significant risk of adverse effects on human health, as well as damage to species and habitats and damage to water. The enforcing authority must establish whether damage is ‘environmental damage’ and identify a responsible operator in order to serve a remediation notice taking account of any measures proposed by the operator.

4.1.6 Waste Management Licensing All waste disposal and processing sites are subject to licensing under Part 2 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended by the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010). Contamination causing significant harm or 20

pollution of controlled waters should be dealt with as a breach of a condition of the licence or permit rather than through Part 2A. Where a waste site has been unlicensed, or where the waste licence has been surrendered under the Control of Pollution Act 1974 regime, potentially these sites could be contaminated land and would be dealt with under the Part 2A regime as contaminated land.

4.2 Minimising Unnecessary Burdens Havering Council is mindful that the Part 2A regime should only be used where no appropriate alternative solution exists and that other legislative regimes may provide a means of dealing with land contamination issues. The Council continues to actively seek remediation of sites via the planning regime when development of a potentially contaminated site is proposed. It is also committed to securing voluntary remediation of sites wherever possible and so undertakes full liaison with site owners during all stages of investigation. Where decisions are not straightforward, Havering Council will take a precautionary approach and judgement shall be used on a case by case basis, taking account of local circumstances, to achieve a reasonable balance between (i) dealing with risks raised by contaminants in land and the benefits of remediating land to remove or reduce those risks; and, (ii) the potential impacts of regulatory intervention including financial costs to whoever will pay for remediation (including the taxpayer where relevant), social impacts, health and environmental impacts of taking action, property blight, and burdens on affected people.

Approach to Strategic Inspection

5.1 The Inspection Procedure In order to identify potentially contaminated land, it is first necessary to identify those land uses, past and present, which have the potential to give rise to contamination. It is also necessary to identify relevant receptors, so that contaminant linkages can be assessed in light of the current use of a particular site. The first stage therefore of strategic inspection is to gather information on potentially contaminative land uses (i.e. sources of contamination), receptors, and pathways from a variety of sources. This stage is followed by a risk based prioritisation to identify firstly sites where one or more potential contaminant linkages exist and secondly to rank these sites in priority from high to low for further inspection.

5.2 Information Collection 5.2.1 Information on sources of contamination In order to identify potentially contaminated land, it is first necessary to identify those land uses, past and present, which have the potential to give rise to contamination. The following data has been collated for this purpose: Dataset Maps (historical & present day)

Historical potentially contaminative uses, historical petrol stations, tanks and energy facilities Historic landfill sites Authorised landfill sites Authorised waste treatment sites Integrated pollution control sites (IPC, IPPC) Pollution incidents Industrial processes

Source Landmark Information Group / Ordnance Survey Landmark Information Group

Environment Agency (27 June 2007) Environment Agency Environment Agency Environment Agency Environment Agency Havering Council

5.2.2 Information on pathways and receptors After having identified all potentially contaminative land uses within the borough, it is also necessary to identify relevant pathways and receptors, so that contaminant linkages can be assessed in light of the current use, as well as of geology and hydrogeology of a particular site. Havering Council has collected the following data: Dataset Geology (solid, drift, artificial, mass movements) Boreholes and wells Groundwater vulnerability Licensed water abstractions

Source British Geological Survey

British Geological Survey Environment Agency Environment Agency 22

Source Protection Zones Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Conservation areas Nature reserves Land use (e.g. residential, schools, recreational land etc.)

Environment Agency Natural England Natural England Natural England Havering Council

5.2.3 Planning records Havering Council holds information submitted as part of the planning process. As described in section 4.1.1, the Council may attach a condition to a planning permission, requiring the developer and / or landowner to follow a staged process of risk assessment to demonstrate that contamination has been effectively considered and dealt with. Within this context, Havering Council has received and assessed desk studies, site investigation reports and remediation reports for a number of sites within the borough. This information contained in planning records forms a valuable resource, along with the information mentioned in sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 above. Many potentially contaminated sites which would normally be subject to further investigation have already been dealt with through the planning regime.

5.3 Information Evaluation and Prioritisation of Detailed Inspection A geographical information system (GIS) has been used by Havering Council to create a spatial database, which enables the interrogation of multiple data sets and GIS overlays, to manage the large amounts of environmental data gathered and compile a database of potentially contaminated sites which are then subject to prioritisation for further detailed inspection. When sufficient information and understanding of the site conceptual model provides confidence that the land is not, or might not, meet the definition of contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, the site can then be removed from the prioritised list. Since the publication of the 2004 Strategy, and following gathering of the above mentioned environmental information on sources of contamination, pathways and receptors, sites have been initially assessed and prioritised in accordance with the Contaminated Land Report (CLR 6) – ‘Prioritisation and categorisation procedure for sites which may be contaminated’, using the ArcGIS software programme and the ConSEPT (Contaminated Site Evaluation and Prioritisation Tool) software tool. This prioritisation has provided a list of approximately 400 potentially contaminated sites ranked in priority from high to low for further inspection. Under this Strategy, the Council will continue its risk based approach to assess potentially contaminated sites and investigate in accordance with the prioritised list of sites for further inspection. The prioritised list is programmed for review from within 2017 and will involve the following areas of work: (1) Review and update GIS overlays if / as appropriate; (2) Rerun ConSEPT with updated GIS overlays and get updated risk scores for all potentially contaminated sites;

(3) Review planning records (including desk studies, site investigation reports and remediation reports), and any other information which may have become available and reassess the risk scores on a site by site basis for all receptors including groundwater.

5.4 Deviation from the Prioritisation of Detailed Inspection During the process of prioritisation, sites which were not given a high priority or were not identified as potentially contaminated may be suspected of causing significant harm as a result of land contamination. Certain events may trigger a change to the priority ranking, such as •

Unforeseen pollution incidents (e.g. accidents, spillages);

•

Changes in circumstances o Changes in land use (this will normally be dealt with through the planning process); o Alterations of pathways (e.g. disturbance of site, change in groundwater levels, alteration of surface waters, introduction of pipelines);

•

New information which changes the potential risk of the site;

•

Complaints from members of the public, local community, businesses;

•

Changes to legislation and revision of guidance;

•

Changes to scientific knowledge (e.g. change of criteria on the hazards and toxicity of a substance may change the level of risk posed by this substance and may therefore lead to reassessment of particular sites).

Approach to Detailed Inspection

6.1 Activities of Detailed Inspection Once sites have been categorised, as described in paragraph 5.3, detailed inspection will be then required to establish the presence or otherwise, of contaminant(s) and linkage(s). The aim of the detailed inspection is to gather site specific information on ground conditions and carry out appropriate risk assessments, to help determine whether there is significant harm or a significant possibility of significant harm occurring, significant pollution of controlled waters or significant possibility of such pollution being caused. The process of detailed inspection will follow the requirements of the Statutory Guidance and may include the following activities: •

A review of all documentation relevant to the site, including a thorough review of the site history and activities on and in the vicinity of the site, past and present (desk study);

•

A site visit and walkover survey for visual inspection to identify the proximity of potential contaminative sources and receptors and possibly limited sampling to determine the likelihood of contamination/pathways being present;

•

A preliminary risk assessment and development of a conceptual site model based on the desk study and walkover survey, to identify potential contaminant linkages being present and determine whether further intrusive site investigation and more detailed risk assessment are needed;

•

An intrusive site investigation, involving the sampling and analysis of soils and / or groundwater and / or gas monitoring, to characterise actual or potential contaminant linkages;

•

A detailed risk assessment to determine the presence or otherwise of one or more significant contaminant linkages.

6.2 Desk Study and Preliminary Risk Assessment The first phase of detailed inspection comprises a predominately desk based exercise. At this stage all information on sources of contamination, pathways and receptors, as well as all planning records and any other available information relevant to the top priority sites (i.e. sites with highest priority on the list) will be reviewed and evaluated. A site walkover will be undertaken as part of this phase to verify the current land use and develop a thorough understanding of the site and adjacent areas. Limited sampling may also be carried out if it is considered necessary. The purpose of this phase is to develop a conceptual site model and identify potential contaminant linkages being present. Havering Council aims to undertake desk studies and preliminary risk assessments for the 15 highest risk sites (three per annum) of the prioritised list from 2017 to 2021.

6.3 Intrusive Site Investigation Any land identified in a preliminary risk assessment as having the potential for one or more significant contaminant linkages to exist will require a detailed investigation, i.e. 25

intrusive site investigation and risk assessment, to determine the nature and extent of any contamination on a site. The sampling and analysis of soil, water and/or ground gases may be required to assess the amount of contamination present. A risk assessment will then be carried out to determine whether any significant contaminant linkage exists. Since the publication of the 2004 Strategy, three sites of high priority, which were former unlicensed landfill sites, have undergone detailed inspection due to the conceptual site model identifying potentially significant contaminant linkages with receptors from soil contamination, landfill gas and leachate. Extensive site investigation works were funded by capital grants from Defra and work was undertaken on the sites between 2007 and 2014. The inspections included both desktop studies and several stages of intrusive site investigation and risk assessments. To date the land at four residential properties has been found to meet the statutory definition of contaminated land within the borough, while the investigation of three properties continues. In December 2013, Defra announced that from 1st April 2017 they will no longer be supporting the cost of investigating and remediating contaminated land under Part 2A through the Contaminated Land Capital Grants (CLCG) Programme. The Council has been awarded a grant for the remediation of the four properties declared as contaminated land. The primary method of intrusive site investigation (and remediation if required) will be through redevelopment under the planning regime. Decisions to carry out intrusive site investigations on other sites will be taken on a site specific basis, taking into consideration the potential risk posed to human health and the environment and the resources available for this work at that time.

6.4 Statutory Powers of Entry onto Land Section 108 of the Environment Act 1995 (as amended) provides the Council with powers to enter, or to authorise in writing, other “suitable persons” to enter premises to carry out an inspection of the land – known as ‘inspection using statutory powers of entry’. Where Havering Council is arranging an intrusive investigation of a site, the Council will serve a notice on the site owner/occupier giving at least 7 days’ notice of the date of the investigation to residential occupiers and to occupiers of land. Consent to enter must be obtained from the landowner/occupier and if refused, access to investigate will be obtained by warrant under Schedule 18 of the Environment Act 1995.

Determination and Remediation of Contaminated land

7.1 Determination of Contaminated Land Havering Council has the responsibility for determining whether land within its jurisdiction is contaminated land. The starting assumption for any site is that land is not contaminated land unless there is a reason to consider otherwise. When following a detailed inspection there is little or no evidence to suggest that a site meets the statutory definition of contaminated land, Havering Council will issue a written statement to the land owners and other interested parties, explaining the rationale behind this decision. When it is likely that the land in question may be determined as contaminated land, Havering Council will first produce a risk summary, explaining the Council’s understanding of the risks and other relevant factors.

7.1.1 Significant Harm to Human Health Following completion of an appropriate scientific and technical assessment of all available and relevant evidence and if Havering Council is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that significant harm is being caused (i.e. that it is more likely than not that such harm is being caused) by a significant contaminant(s) on a site, it can be determined that the site is contaminated land. In cases where Havering Council considers that (i) harm is occurring but it is not significant harm; (ii) significant harm may be being caused or is likely to have been caused in the past; (iii) there is a significant possibility that significant harm may happen in the longer term; Havering Council will consider whether to determine the land on grounds of significant possibility of significant harm, as described in the following section.

7.1.2 Significant possibility of significant harm to human health (SPOSH) In deciding whether or not land is contaminated land on grounds of significant possibility of significant harm (SPOSH) to human health, Havering Council will use the categorisations described below: Category 1: significant possibility of significant harm exists. Land will be deemed to be a Category 1 case where (a) there is evidence of similar land or situations to have caused such harm; (b) similar levels of exposure to the contaminants of concern have resulted in significant harm; (c) there is evidence of significant harm having already occurred. Category 2: land is capable of being determined as contaminated land. Land will be placed into Category 2 where there is a strong case that the risks from the land are of sufficient concern, that the land poses a SPOSH. When little or no direct evidence of similar land exists, land may still be placed into Category 2, where the Council considers that there is a strong case for taking action under Part 2A on a precautionary basis.

Category 3: land is not capable of being determined as contaminated land. Land will be placed in Category 3 where a strong case that the land poses a SPOSH does not exist. Category 3 may also include land where the risks are not low, but nonetheless Havering Council considers that regulatory intervention under Part 2A is not warranted. Category 4: no or low level of risk is identified. Land will be placed into Category 4 where (a) no relevant contaminant linkage has been established; (b) normal levels of contaminants are identified; (c) contaminant levels do not exceed relevant generic assessment criteria; (d) exposure from a contaminant forms a small proportion of overall exposure to that contaminant from other environmental sources.

7.1.3 Significant harm and significant possibility of such harm (non-human receptors) In considering non-human receptors, Havering Council will only regard the following ecological systems and types of properties, as defined in the Statutory Guidance: • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

site of special scientific interest (SSSI); a national nature reserve; a marine nature reserve; a Special Protection Area; a Special Area of Conservation; a “European site” within the meaning of regulation 8 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010; a Ramsar site; any nature reserve established under section 21 of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949; Crops, including timber; Produce grown domestically, or on allotments, for consumption; Livestock; Other owned or domesticated animals; Wild animals which are subject to shooting or fishing rights; Buildings.

Havering Council will follow the Statutory Guidance when considering whether significant harm or a SPOSH to the above receptors is posed by a site.

7.1.4 Significant pollution of controlled waters and significant possibility of such pollution When establishing whether significant pollution of controlled waters is being caused, or whether there is a significant possibility of such pollution being caused, Havering Council will have regard to any technical guidance issued by the Environment Agency. If the Council considers it likely that land might be contaminated land on such grounds, it will consult the Agency and have strong regard to the Agency’s advice prior to any determination made.

7.2 Remediation Once the land has been determined as contaminated land, as described above, and in accordance with the procedures of the Statutory Guidance, Havering Council will consider how that land should be remediated. The broad aim of remediation should be (a) to remove identified significant contaminant linkages, or permanently disrupt them, to reduce risks below an unacceptable level; and/or (b) to take reasonable steps to remedy harm or pollution caused by a significant contaminant linkage. Remediation may involve a range of treatment, assessment and monitoring actions to secure the overall remediation of the land. Havering Council will encourage voluntary remediation and will work with the appropriate person(s) to secure the informal remediation of contaminated land without the need for a formal notice. Where agreement is reached for voluntary remediation, the persons responsible for carrying out the remediation works will be required to prepare a remediation statement. If voluntary remediation is not agreed or undertaken, a remediation notice will be served on the owner/occupier or appropriate persons as required, specifying the necessary remedial action. Havering Council will only require reasonable remediation action in a remediation notice. In deciding what is reasonable, the Council will consider various factors, having particular regard to: (a) the practicability, effectiveness and durability of remediation; (b) the health and environmental impacts of the chosen remedial options; (c) the financial cost which is likely to be involved; and (d) the benefits of remediation with regard to the seriousness of the harm or pollution of controlled waters in question.

7.3 Determining Liability Land may be declared contaminated land upon the identification of one significant contaminant linkage. Full liability therefore cannot be decided until all significant contaminant linkages on the site have been identified. Only then can the procedure relating to the apportionment of liability commence. The apportionment of liability has five distinct stages as follows: • • • • •

Step 1: Identifying potential appropriate persons and liability groups Step 2: Characterising remediation actions Step 3: Attributing responsibility to liability groups Step 4: Excluding members of a liability group Step 5: Apportioning liability between members of a liability group

These procedures are complex and will be undertaken in accordance with the Statutory Guidance.

Management Procedures

8.1 Introduction Public Protection within the Council is responsible for implementing Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and has the lead role in producing, updating and implementing the Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy. These statutory duties will be carried out by the Environmental Protection Officers designated for this work. The Designated Officers will attend training and regular professional meetings to maintain competency and share best practice.

8.2 Consulting Legal Services Legal Services provide advice and guidance for the enforcement side of Havering Council’s varied duties as well as providing legal advice in relation to Council business. They will be consulted in relation to the legal aspects of land contamination and land transactions.

8.3 Health and Safety Prior to carrying out site work, a health and safety risk assessment will be undertaken in accordance with Havering Council’s health and safety policies and procedures. All necessary control measures highlighted in the risk assessment will be implemented prior to the commencement of site works and will be reviewed during the works. Where contractors are engaged by Havering Council to carry out intrusive site investigations, they are required to produce a method statement, which includes details of their health and safety arrangements and procedures in accordance with the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015.

8.4 Use of consultants If detailed / intrusive site investigations or remediation are deemed necessary, the Council may use suitably qualified consultants to carry out these works on their behalf. If consultants are required, they will be procured in accordance with the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules, the award is however normally subject to the Council obtaining the relevant and appropriate funding for the works.

8.5 Local Authority Interests in Land Havering Council owns and has owned a considerable amount of land within the borough, much of which is managed by a number of different departments and directorates. In undertaking the role as contaminated land authority, the Council will develop and implement a prioritisation model for inspections based on an objective risk assessment of all land within the borough irrespective of ownership. If, following the site prioritisation procedure, land under Authority responsibility is potentially contaminated then internal arrangements will be made to establish who, within the Council, bears responsibility. The procedure used will be accountable and transparent to prevent any conflict of interest.

Havering Council has a duty to ensure people occupying or using Council’s owned land are not exposed to harmful concentrations of contaminants. In addition, there is the potential that some of the activities that have taken place on Council owned land may have the potential to give rise to pollution. This may result in Havering Council being liable for the cost of remediation of that land in the event a significant contaminant linkage is present.

Information Management

9.1 Introduction Considerable amounts of information relating to land contamination matters have been gathered throughout the Part 2A process of identification, prioritisation, strategic and detailed site inspection work from a variety of sources. This process is ongoing. Havering Council aims to store information in such a manner that, information can be easily accessible, manageable and consistent.

9.2 Information and Complaints Havering Council receives information and complaints regarding potentially contaminated land and pollution in the borough from members of the public, landowners, other departments of the Council and external agencies from time to time, including anonymously supplied and anecdotal information. Upon receipt of information or a complaint regarding land contamination or water pollution, an officer from Public Protection will acknowledge receipt of this within five working days. All information received will be recorded. The customer will be then contacted by an officer in order to verify the source and details of the information. Customers will be kept updated on actions taken.

9.3 Public Register The Contaminated Land (England) Regulations 2006 requires the Council to maintain a register for Contaminated Land. The Contaminated Land Public Register will serve as a permanent record of all regulatory activity undertaken to ensure the remediation of any site, which has been determined to be contaminated land. The register includes specified details about the condition of the land, and the remediation actions carried out. Specifically, Schedule 3 of the Contaminated Land Regulations 2006 requires information to be kept on the register in respect of: •

Remediation notices;

•

Appeals against remediation notices;

•

Remediation declarations;

•

Remediation statements;

•

Appeals against charging notices;

•

Designation of special sites;

•

Notification of claimed remediation;

•

Convictions for offences under section 78M of the Environmental Protection Act 1990;

•

Guidance issued under section 78V(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990;

•

Other matters prescribed by Regulations;

At the time of publication of this Strategy, the Public Register contains four entries.

9.4 Environmental Enquiries Havering Council receives requests for information relating to the land quality of specific sites. The Council will respond to requests made by the public, solicitors or other interested parties on a site specific basis under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. (EIR), which implement the Directive 2003/4/EC on Public Access to Information. These regulations require Havering Council to make any environmental information they hold available on request, subject to certain exemptions. A charge will be made for such requests and will be required as an advance payment before the information is provided. Apart from responding to land quality specific questions, Havering Council can also provide Land Quality Reports upon request. A Land Quality Report provides environmental information on a chosen property within the borough. This information includes details regarding: • • • • • • • • •

Geology and hydrology Current and historical land uses on the selected property and within a specific radius area of the property Any current or former landfill, filled land, made ground and waste management facilities within 250 metres of the property Any current or former industrial or commercial land uses within 50 metres of the property Petrol stations, historical tanks, energy facilities and pollution incidents within a specific radius area of the property The nature and implications of these land uses Environmentally sensitive data such as pollution control sites and radioactive substances Sites of environmental importance such as conservation areas and listed buildings Copies of historical maps

This information will be assessed by a qualified member of staff and information from the Council’s records and local knowledge will be included. Finally the current status of the property in relation to the Environment Protection Act 1990 Part 2A will be summarised. The current fees can be found on the Fees and Charges page of Havering Council’s website.

9.5 Data Confidentiality All information available to Havering Council will be stored, managed, shared and released in accordance with Council policies relating to the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The Environmental Information Regulations 2004 set out specific provisions with regard to public access to environmental information, refusals to disclose, charging, disclosing and timescales. With regard to requests for information in relation to the prioritised list of sites for future investigation, the Council will respond to questions on whether a site is included in the list as well as the level of priority (high, medium, low) assigned to the site. The exact place of a site on the prioritised list will remain confidential. 33

10. General Liaison, Communication and Review 10.1 Internal Liaison The Environmental Protection Team will liaise throughout the inspection process with relevant sections of Havering Council, in particular Communications, Planning, Building Control and Legal Services. The Leader of the Council, Ward Councillors, the Cabinet Members for Regulatory Services and Community Safety, Environment, Housing, the Group Director of Community and Resources and the Head of Regulatory Services will be informed of site investigation works and the outcome of these works.

10.2 External Liaison Public Protection will be the initial contact point within Havering Council on contaminated land issues and as such will liaise with all of the involved parties where it is required as early as possible throughout the inspection, site investigation and remediation stages. This will be regardless of whether or not there is a formal determination of contaminated land. The Statutory Guidance states that developing an understanding of risks in complex cases may raise issues which are beyond the expertise of one person and may require the involvement of others to conduct a robust risk assessment. The question of whom to consult will depend largely on the circumstances of the land, and expertise and gaps in expertise of the person carrying out the risk assessment. Havering Council will liaise with the necessary Agencies as appropriate depending on the circumstances of the case. Where warranted Havering Council will consider employing the services of external consultants and legal representatives. Havering Council will always consult with the Environment Agency when working through the risk assessment process whether significant pollution of controlled waters is being caused, or there is a significant possibility of such pollution being caused. The Council will also consult Public Health England when trying to establish through the risk assessment process whether significant harm is being caused or there is a significant possibility of such harm being caused. Natural England will be consulted when considering whether land might meet the definition of contaminated land by virtue of an ecological system effect.

10.3 Communication Strategies Prior to site investigation works for the highest priority sites, Public Protection will develop communication strategies with the assistance of the Corporate Communications team as necessary. The Council will proactively communicate the complex matters related to land contamination to those affected by it as early as practicable, in a clear and concise manner. Where it is deemed necessary for a detailed site investigation to be made, the reasons and need for the investigation will be provided to the owners and occupiers of the land and they will be kept informed at all stages of the process and be advised of the outcome of any intrusive investigation, and subsequent decision. In determining whether any land meets the legal definition of contaminated land, Havering Council will not be based only on technical / scientific information, but will also 34

take into consideration financial, social and commercial implications, as well as potentially conflicting view points from different stakeholders.

10.4 Review and Consultation of the Strategy Havering Council has a duty to keep its written Strategy under periodic review to ensure it remains up to date. It is intended that the Strategy will be reviewed every 5 years, to ensure that it is effectively meeting its aims and objectives, it reflects current practices, while being realistic and achievable. If significant changes to the Strategy are considered necessary, such findings will be reported including any recommendations to review the Strategy within that time. The next review of the Strategy is expected to be undertaken in 2021. In developing the Strategy Havering Council has consulted with other regulators, statutory and other organisations and bodies that have an interest in land contamination and in the implementation of the Strategy. Details of contacts and contact addresses of the consultees used are listed in Appendix 2. A number of internal services within the Council were also consulted in the development of this Strategy.

11. References Legislation and Guidance Environmental Protection Act 1990 Environment Act 1995 The Contaminated Land (England) Regulations 2006 The Contaminated Land (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 Environmental Protection Act 1990: Part 2A Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance (April 2012) CLR Published Research Reports 1-15 including CLEA and RCLEA Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (CLR11) published by the Environment Agency; London (2004) Soil Guideline Values (SGVs) published by the Environment Agency Category 4 Screening Levels Documents for Human Health Risk (DEFRA, March 2014) Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment (CLEA) tool (EA, 2009) & Guidance Documents

London Borough of Havering Policies and Strategies Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy (Revision 01,) Corporate Plan 2015-16 Local Development Framework: Core Strategy and Development Control Policies (2008) Sustainable Community Strategy 2008-2013 Communications Strategy 2015-18

12. Glossary of Terms Appropriate Person

Contaminant

Contaminated Land Controlled Waters

Enforcing Authority

Harm

Intrusive Investigation

Owner

Defined in section 78A(9) as ‘any person who is an appropriate person, determined in accordance with Section 78F Part 2A to bear responsibility for anything which is to be done in any particular case’. A substance which is in, on or under the land and which has the potential to cause harm or to cause pollution of controlled waters. Refer to section 1.2.1 in chapter 1 of this Strategy. Defined in section 78A(9) by reference to Part 3 (section 104) of the Water Resources Act 1991 and includes territorial and coastal waters, inland fresh waters and ground waters. Section 78A(9) was amended by section 86 of The Water Act 2003 so that for Part 2A purposes ‘ground waters’ does not include waters contained in underground strata but above the saturation zone. Defined in section 78A(9) as: ‘a) in relation to a special site, the Environment Agency; b) in relation to contaminated land other than a special site, the local authority in whose area the land is situated’ Defined in Section 78A(4) as: ‘harm to the health of living organisms other interference with the ecological systems of which they form part, and, in the case of man, includes harm to his property’. OR with respect to radioactive contamination defined in section 78A(4) (as modified) as: ‘lasting exposure to any person/being resulting from the after effects of a radiological emergency, past practice or past work activity.’ An investigation of land (for example by exploratory excavations), which involves actions going beyond simple visual inspection of the land, limited sampling or assessment of documentary information. Defined in section 78A(9) as: ‘a person (other than the mortgagee not in possession) who, whether in his own right or as trustee for any other person, is entitled to receive the rack rent of the land, or, where the land is not let at a rack rent, 37

Pathway

Pollution of controlled waters

Public Register

Receptor

Remediation

would be so entitled if it were so let.’ One or more routes or means by, or through, which a receptor: (a) is being exposed to, or affected by, a contaminant, or (b) could be so exposed or affected. Defined in section 78A(9) as: ‘The entry into controlled waters of any poisonous, noxious or polluting matter or any solid waste matter’. The public register maintained by the enforcing authority under section 78R of particulars relating to contaminated land. Either: (a) a living organism, a group of living organisms, an ecological system or a piece of property which: (i) is in a category reference in the Statutory Guidance (see appendix E) as a type of receptor, and (ii) is being, or could be, harmed, by a contaminant; or (b) controlled waters which are being, or could be, polluted by a contaminant or (c) a person subjected to lasting exposure resulting from the after-effects of a radiological emergency, past practice or past work activity. Defined in section 78A(7) as: (a) the doing of anything for the purpose of assessing the condition of (i) the contaminated land in question; (ii) any controlled waters affected by that land; or (iii) any land adjoining or adjacent to that land; (b) the doing of any works, the carrying out of any operations or the taking of any steps in relation to any such land or waters for the purpose (i) of preventing or minimising, or remedying or mitigating the effects of any significant harm, or any pollution of controlled waters, by reason of which the contaminated land is such land; or (ii) of restoring the land or waters to their former state; or (c) the making of subsequent inspections from time to time for the purpose of keeping under review the condition of the land or waters.” OR with respect to radioactive 38

Remediation Notice

Remediation Statement

Risk

Significant Harm

Special Site

contamination defined in section 78A(7)(as modified) as: (a) the doing of anything for the purpose of assessing the condition of (i) the contaminated land in question; or (ii) any land adjoining or adjacent to that land; (b) the doing of any works, the carrying out of any operations or the taking of any steps in relation to any such land for the purpose (i) of preventing or minimising, or remedying or mitigating the effects of any harm by reason of which the contaminated land is such land; or (ii) of restoring the land to its former state; or (c) the making of subsequent inspections from time to time for the purpose of keeping under review the condition of the land. Defined in section 78E(1) as a notice specifying what an appropriate person is to do by way of remediation and the periods within which he is required to do each of the things so specified. Defined in section 78H(7). It is a statement prepared and published by the responsible person detailing the remediation actions, which are being, have been, or are expected to be done as well as the periods within which these things are being done. The combination of: (a) the probability, or frequency, of occurrence of a defined hazard (for example, exposure to a property of a substance with the potential to cause harm); and (b) the magnitude (including the seriousness) of the consequences. Defined in section 78A(5). It means any harm which is determined to be significant in accordance with the Statutory Guidance in section 4 and 5. Defined in section 78A(3) as: any contaminated land (a) which has been designated as such a site by virtue of section 78C(7) or 78D(6)...; and (b) whose designation as such has not been terminated by the appropriate Agency under section 39

78Q(4)... The effect of the designation of any contaminated land as a special site is that the Environment Agency, rather than the local authority, becomes the enforcing authority for the land.

13. Appendices Appendix 1: Work programme and Timescales for 2017-2021 Task Whybridge site investigation: Remediation of land declared as contaminated land and further investigation of three properties. Review of existing prioritised list Consider planning applications in relation to land contamination Undertake desk studies and preliminary risk assessments for the 15 highest-risk sites of the prioritised list Carry out detailed intrusive site investigation & risk assessment work Deal with land quality enquiries Deal with unforeseen urgent sites

Timescale Ongoing until end of 2017

Ongoing until end of 2017 Ongoing Ongoing

As determined by the desk studies on the risk basis As they arise As they arise

Appendix 2: List of Consultees External Consultees Environment Agency (NE Thames) Groundwater, Hydrology & Contaminated Land Team Apollo Court 2 Bishop Square Business Park St Albans Road West Hatfield Hertfordshire. AL10 9EX Email: enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk Natural England Area 3A Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 2AL Tel: 0300 060 1963 Email: consultations@naturalengland.org.uk Public Health England Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards Skipton House, 80 London Road London SE1 6LH Email: chemicals.london@phe.gov.uk Food Standards Agency Chemical Safety Division Aviation House, 125 Kingsway London WC2B 6NH. Tel: 0207 2768950, 0207 2768727 Email: cot@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk English Heritage 1 Waterhouse Square 138 - 142 Holborn London EC1N 2ST Tel: 020 7973 3000 Email: customers@english-heritage.org.uk Thames Water Environment and Quality Gainsborough House (RBH2) Manor Farm Road Reading Berkshire RG2 0JN Tel: 0118 959 3720/3302

Greater London Authority Spatial Development Strategy City Hall Queens Walk London SE1 1AH Tel: 02079834000 London Wildlife Trust Dean Bradley House 52 Horseferry Road London SW1P 2AF Tel:020 7261 0447 Email: enquiries@wildlondon.org.uk Essex and Suffolk Water Water Quality Manager Sandon Valley House Canon Barns Road East Hanningfield Chelmsford CM3 8BD East London Waste Authority 1st Floor, Harvey House, St Edward’s Court London Road Romford, RM7 9QD Tel: 0208 724 5803 Email: elwaofficemanager@eastlondonwaste.gov.uk London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Environmental Health Service Roycraft House 15 Linton Road Barking IG11 8HE London Borough of Redbridge Lynton House 255-259 High Road Ilford, Essex IG1 1NN Tel: 020 8554 5000 Email: customer.cc@redbridge.gov.uk London Borough of Brexley Environmental Health Civic Offices 2 Watling Street Bexleyheath Kent DA6 7AT Tel: 020 8303 7777 Email: environmentalhealth@bexley.gov.uk

Brentwood Borough Council Environmental Health Service Town Hall Ingrave Road Brentwood CM15 8AY Tel: 01277 312500 Email: hoehpps@brentwood.gov.uk Thurrock Borough Council Environmental Protection New Road Grays RM17 6SL Tel: 01375 652955 Email: environmental.health@thurrock.gov.uk Epping District Council Environmental Health Service Civic Offices High Street Epping CM16 4BZ Tel: 01992 564608 Email: publichealth@eppingforestdc.gov.uk Essex County Council County Hall Market Road Chelmsford CM1 1QH Tel: 0345 603 7624 Email: contact@essex.gov.uk

Internal Consultees Director of Public Health NHS Havering 12th Floor, Mercury House, Mercury Gardens Romford. RM1 3SL. Chief Executive Department Legal and Democratic Services Town Hall Romford RM1 3BD Economic Development Town Hall Main Road Romford RM1 3BD External Relations Team Town Hall Main Road Romford RM1 3BD Planning Control 5th Floor Mercury House Mercury Gardens Romford RM1 3RX Building Control Service 5th Floor Mercury House Mercury Gardens Romford RM1 3RX Development & Transport Planning Town Hall Main Road Romford RM1 3BD Property Services 86 Market Place, Romford RM1 3HQ