5HFHLYHG ˇ 3 ˇ ˆ - East Staffordshire · 2.1 Scope and Objectives of Report The scope and objectives of this Ground Investigation Report (GIR) is to interpret the information gathered

Ground Investigation Report Branston Locks Development Phase 1 CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001

Revision 0

February 2016

P/2016/00474

Received 24.03.2016

Project Name Branston Locks Development Phase 1

Document Title Ground Investigation Report

Doc. Ref.:COSTCDX8620 /CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001 Rev. 0- i - Issued: February 2016

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Branston Locks Housing Development is being undertaken by Nurton Development (Quintus)

Ltd, west of the A38, Burton upon Trent. Staffordshire County Council are overseeing the

expansion of the highways infrastructure associated with the development and have

commissioned Amey to develop the highways scheme; Phase 1 of the project is to develop new

access routes from Branston Road to the proposed Branston Locks Housing Development

including a new canal bridge across the Trent and Mersey Canal.

This Geotechnical Investigation Report briefly outlines existing information available for the Phase

1 site access area, and presents the findings of the Ground Investigation undertaken along the

proposed route of the Branston Locks Development Access Road. The ground investigation was

conducted in November 2015 and included two combined percussive/rotary boreholes with a

target depth of 20m, and six window sample holes with a target depth of 5m; the works were

evenly split on either side of the Trent and Mersey Canal. Due to difficult ground conditions the

bore hole on the eastern side of the canal was terminated before it reached a satisfactory depth;

however it was decided that sufficient information had been collected during the investigation to

not require further work. All other holes were advanced to depths sufficient to provide information

critical to geotechnical design.

In-situ testing was conducted and samples submitted for geotechnical and chemical laboratory

analysis. A ground water monitoring standpipe was installed in the borehole west of the canal.

Ground conditions were found to be River Terrace deposits composed of dense sands and

gravels to a depth of 4.70m below ground level (bgl), overlying Weathered Mercia Mudstone to a

depth of >16.20m bgl. The weathering grade of the mudstone is Grade IVa (matrix with

occasional claystone pellets) where first encountered, reducing to Grade II (angular blocks of

unweathered marl with virtually no matrix) by the terminal depth. The base of the Mercia

Mudstone was not determined.

Shallow thicknesses of made ground were encountered at three test locations, and was observed

to be reworked River Terrace Deposits. Where holes were advanced in the existing A38 Branston

Roundabout embankments Cohesive Fill was encountered to depths of 4.7m; this material

displays characteristics of reworked Mercia Mudstone. Inspection pits advanced in proximity to

the Trent and Mersey Canal showed Granular Fill material derived from River Terrace Deposits.

Geochemical testing provides no results of significant issue.



Doc. Ref.:COSTCDX8620 /CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001 Rev. 0- ii - Issued: February 2016

Contents

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................ i

2 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 5

2.1 Scope and Objectives of Report .......................................................................... 5

2.2 Description of Project ......................................................................................... 5

2.3 Geotechnical Category of Project ........................................................................ 6

2.4 Other Relevant Information ................................................................................ 6

3 EXISTING INFORMATION .................................................................................. 7

3.1 Topographic Maps (Old and Recent) ................................................................... 7

3.2 Geological Maps and Memoirs ............................................................................. 7

3.3 Aerial Photography ............................................................................................ 8

3.4 Records of Mines and Mineral Deposits ................................................................ 9

3.5 Land Use and Soil Survey Information ................................................................. 9

3.6 Archaeological and Historical Investigations ......................................................... 9

3.7 Existing Ground Investigation Data ..................................................................... 9

3.8 Consultation with Statutory Bodies and Agencies ................................................ 13

3.9 Flood Records ................................................................................................. 13

3.10 Contaminated Land ......................................................................................... 14

3.11 Other Relevant Information .............................................................................. 14

4 FIELD AND LABORATORY STUDIES .................................................................. 15

4.1 Walkover Survey ............................................................................................. 15

4.2 Geomorphological/Geological Mapping .............................................................. 16

4.3 Ground Investigations ...................................................................................... 16

4.4 Drainage Studies ............................................................................................. 18

4.5 Geophysical Surveys ........................................................................................ 18

4.6 Pile Tests ........................................................................................................ 18

4.7 Other Field Work ............................................................................................. 18

4.8 Laboratory Investigation .................................................................................. 18

5 GROUND SUMMARY ......................................................................................... 20

5.1 Geology and Ground Conditions ........................................................................ 20

6 GROUND CONDITIONS AND MATERIALS PROPERTIES .................................... 23

6.1 Granular Fill .................................................................................................... 23

6.2 Cohesive Fill .................................................................................................... 24



Doc. Ref.:COSTCDX8620 /CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001 Rev. 0- iii - Issued: February 2016

6.3 Made Ground .................................................................................................. 28

6.4 River Terrace Deposits ..................................................................................... 30

6.5 Mercia Mudstone ............................................................................................. 33

6.6 Material Properties Summary ............................................................................ 41

7 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT ............................................................................ 43

7.1 Ground Model ................................................................................................. 43

7.2 Site Access Road ............................................................................................. 44

7.3 Branston Locks Canal Bridge ............................................................................ 45

8 COMPARISON OF PROJECT OPTIONS AND RISKS ............................................ 53

9 REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 57

10 GLOSSARY ........................................................................................................ 59

11 FIGURES ........................................................................................................... 61

12 DRAWINGS ....................................................................................................... 62

Appendix A Shepherd Gilmore Environment Limited: Report no. R0017 DH

ME1072 borehole locations & extracts A.1

Appendix B CC Ground Investigation Ltd: Factual Ground Investigation Report B.2



Doc. Ref.:COSTCDX8620 /CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001 Rev. 0- iv - Issued: February 2016

Tables

Table 3-1: Summary of Superficial Geology .......................................................................................... 8

Table 3-2: Summary of Solid Geology .................................................................................................. 8

Table 3-3: BGS Borehole Data [6] ..................................................................................................... 10

Table 3-4: Summary of Geology from SGE 2009 [9] ........................................................................... 11

Table 3-5: Summary of SGE Atterberg Limit Testing [9] ...................................................................... 11

Table 3-6 Summary of SGE One Dimensional Consolidation Test ......................................................... 11

Table 3-7: Summary of SGE PSD Testing [9] ...................................................................................... 12

Table 3-8: Summary of SGE pH, sulphate and sulphur analysis [9] ...................................................... 12

Table 4-1:2015 GI Borehole Summary [16] ........................................................................................ 17

Table 5-1: Borehole Log Summary .................................................................................................... 21

Table 5-2: Generalised Interpreted Ground Conditions ........................................................................ 22

Table 6-1: Granular Fill PSD analysis results ....................................................................................... 23

Table 6-2: Average Atterberg Limit Results – Cohesive Fill .................................................................. 25

Table 6-3: Cohesive Fill PSD analysis results ...................................................................................... 25

Table 6-4: Cohesive Fill Cu, mv value vs Depth ................................................................................... 27

Table 6-5: Average Atterberg Limit Results – Made Ground................................................................. 28

Table 6-6: Made Ground PSD analysis results ..................................................................................... 29

Table 6-7: Average Atterberg Limit Results – River Terrace Deposits ................................................... 30

Table 6-8: River Terrace Deposit PSD analysis results ......................................................................... 31

Table 6-9: Average Atterberg Limit Results – Mercia Mudstone ........................................................... 34

Table 6-10: Mercia Mudstone PSD analysis results .............................................................................. 34

Table 6-11: Corrected SPT values: Mercia Mudstone ........................................................................... 36

Table 6-12: Mercia Mudstone cu values – SPT derived and published data ........................................... 37

Table 6-13: Undrained Unconfined Triaxial testing – Mercia Mudstone Grade IVa ................................ 37

Table 6-14: One-dimensional Consolidation testing – Mercia Mudstone Grade IVa ............................... 38

Table 6-15: Mercia Mudstone Eu, E’ and v values ............................................................................... 39

Table 6-16: Point Load testing – Mercia Mudstone Grade II ............................................................... 40

Table 6-17: ACEC classifications – Mercia Mudstone ........................................................................... 40

Table 6-18: Summary of Material Properties....................................................................................... 41

Table 6-19: Characteristic Geotechnical Parameters ............................................................................ 42

Table 7-1: Settlement Reduction Options For Embankment Construction ............................................. 47

Table 7-2: Embankment Fill Options .................................................................................................. 48

Table 7-3: Options for Branston Locks Canal Bridge............................................................................ 49

Table 8-1: Risk Evaluation Matrix ...................................................................................................... 54

Table 8-2: Geotechnical Risk Register ................................................................................................ 55



Doc. Ref.:COSTCDX8620 /CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001 Rev. 0- 5 - Issued: February 2016

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Scope and Objectives of Report

The scope and objectives of this Ground Investigation Report (GIR) is to interpret the

information gathered during the ground investigation (GI), and to present a geotechnical

evaluation of the information stating the assumptions made in the interpretation of the

test results.

This report has been prepared in accordance with the Design Manual for Roads and

Bridges (DMRB) Volume 4 Section 1 Part 2 HD22/08 [1] specifically Appendix D. As the

project is not currently understood to impact Highways England (HE) assets this report

will not be subjected to the HE certification process; however if planned works are

altered to such an extent that they do affect HE property Key Stage 2 Preliminary

Certification will be sought.

2.2 Description of Project

Branston Locks was identified as a principle Greenfield development site to establish a

new sustainable community on the periphery of Burton upon Trent. The scheme aims to

develop the Branston Locks area with appropriate infrastructure to become self-

sustaining, supporting local growth and contributing to the overall urban development of

Burton upon Trent. The housing development is being undertaken by Nurton

Development (Quintus) Ltd, with Staffordshire County Council (SCC) undertaking

highways infrastructure development.

Amey have been commissioned by SCC to undertake the following aspects of the

scheme, focused on providing information pertinent to Phase 1 of the scheme;

1. To assist in the design, delivery and interpretation of a site investigation

programme for Phase 1 of the works.

2. To assist in the design of the earthworks associated with the construction of the

access road for the Branston Locks development.

3. To assist in the design of the foundations of the new bridge structure associated

with the construction of the access road for the Branston Locks development.



Doc. Ref.:COSTCDX8620 /CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001 Rev. 0- 6 - Issued: February 2016

The GI was commissioned in order to identify the ground conditions and material

properties along the proposed route of the Phase 1 access road. Amey invited four

ground investigation specialists to tender for the work, of which CC Ground

Investigations Ltd (CCG) was awarded the contract.

2.3 Geotechnical Category of Project

On the basis of the available information the scheme is considered to fall within

Geotechnical Category 2 as defined in HD22/08 [1]. As project area comes under the

jurisdiction of SCC rather than Highways England this document will not be submitted for

Geotechnical Certification.

2.4 Other Relevant Information

No other relevant information is known to be applicable to the project at the time of

writing.



Doc. Ref.:COSTCDX8620 /CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001 Rev. 0- 7 - Issued :February 2016

3 EXISTING INFORMATION

Existing information has been comprehensively reviewed in the Branston Locks

Development Phase 1 Preliminary Sources Study Report (PSSR) [2]. The following

information summarizes the findings of the PSSR.

3.1 Topographic Maps (Old and Recent)

The topography of the site has been determined using historic Ordnance Survey (OS)

maps, and Current OS Maps Ref [3].

The Branston Locks Development Site is predominantly flat arable farm land with a

number of isolated domestic and farm buildings scattered across the area. The site is

roughly ‘bottle-shaped’ and is bound on the east by the A38; the north by Shobnall

Road; the west by wooded hills; and the south by Branston Lane. The site is

approximately 1.36 hectares in area. The Trent and Mersey Canal bisects the site on a

southwest-northeast trend, with approximately two-thirds of the site to the west of

the canal and one-third to the east. The Phase 1 Site Access area is located in the

south-eastern corner of the Development Site (Figure 1)

OS Maps indicate the site topography to be generally flat and low lying at an elevation

of approximately 48m above Ordnance Datum (AOD).

Historical OS Maps available in the project Design Access Statement [4] have been

examined to determine historical land use and development. The earliest available

map from 1888 indicates that the site is predominantly defined farming fields, with a

small number residential and farm buildings scattered through the area. The Trent

and Mersey Canal is present on site, and the Branston Road overbridge is in place.

The Settlement of Branston is a short distance to the south-east of the site. The

historic layout and use of the site changes very little as successive OS maps are

viewed; field boundaries show minor changes and new farm buildings are erected,

but essentially the site remains the same. In the immediate vicinity to the site the A38

is constructed in between 1955 and 1991, during which time there is an increase in

the number of residential properties in the Branston Road areas.

3.2 Geological Maps and Memoirs

An examination of the British Geological Survey (BGS) 1:50,000 Sheet 140 [5] and

information provided by the BGS Geoindex [6] have been undertaken.




Artificial ground has not been identified by the BGS in close proximity to the proposed

route of the access road and canal bridge; however the historic construction of the

A38 and the canal are likely to have resulted in engineered fill material being

encountered within the Phase 1 Access site location.

The study area is recorded to be underlain by the superficial deposits described in

Table 3-1, and solid geology described in Table 3-2. Figure 2 provides geological map

extracts.

Table 3-1: Summary of Superficial Geology

Age Strata Description

Pleistocene

(Quaternary)

River Terrace Deposit

(Holme Pierrepont Terrace)

Generally poorly sorted rounded sandy

gravels with syndepositional ice wedge

casts. May contain frequent clay and peat

lenses. Typically 1 to 2m above the flood

plain

Table 3-2: Summary of Solid Geology

Age Strata Description

Triassic Mercia Mudstone Group

Mainly red-brown to dark red mudstone and

silty mudstone with subordinate bands

(skerries) of pale brown to grey sandstone

and grey-green siltstone

The Tutbury Gypsum is inferred to outcrop in proximity to the south-western border

of the Branston Locks Development site.

3.3 Aerial Photography

Recent aerial photography [3] reveals contemporary land use as predominantly arable

agriculture with a residential property (Bridgefield House) located immediately east of

the Trent and Mersey Canal. The Canal is seen to be active, with Narrow boats visible

in the channel and a tow path running parallel on the eastern bank. Overhead utility

cables are present within the fields on the western half of the site.




3.4 Records of Mines and Mineral Deposits

Branston is listed on the Coal Authority Coal Mining and Brine Gazetteer [7] as

potentially requiring a Coal mining and Brine subsidence report. Interrogation of the

BGS website [6], and the Coal Authority Gazetteer, indicates the location of mining

activities is outside the region of concern for the site.

Review of the historical OS maps [3] indicate a large opencast gravel pit to the south

west section of the site, as well as two old Marl Pits to the north west, no records of

mining activity within the site boundary have been ascertained.

The Tutbury Gypsum band is inferred to outcrop in proximity to the south-western

boundary of the site. The Tutbury Gypsum is recognised as an important resource,

and is commercially worked in both open cast and underground mining operations in

the region [8]

3.5 Land Use and Soil Survey Information

A review of historic maps [4] identified that the area that the site is located on has

been predominately agricultural since 1888, with a small number of residential and

farm building being constructed in the area. Between the 1950’s and 1990’s the A38

was constructed to the east of the site.

Soil Survey information is supplied in Section 3.7.

3.6 Archaeological and Historical Investigations

No historical or archaeological investigations have been conducted in the area of

interest.

3.7 Existing Ground Investigation Data

Six boreholes have been identified in BGS [6] records that are located within the

Branston Locks Development Site details of the strata encountered are given in Table

3-3 (depths given in metres below ground level – m bgl). No boreholes are located

within the Phase 1 Access Area (Figure 3).




Table 3-3: BGS Borehole Data [6]

Hole River Terrace

Deposits Mercia Mudstone Ground Water

SK22SW138 0m – 4.2m 4.2m – 6.0m* 3.9m

SK22SW136 0m – 3.5m 3.5m – 6.0m* N/A

SK22SW135 0m – 2.4m 2.4m –5.5m* N/A

SK22SW39 0m – 4.3m 4.2m – 11.6m* N/A†

SK22SW60 0m – 8.0m 8.0m – 8.1m* 1.7m

SK22SW60 0m – 7.0m 7.0m – 7.5m* 1.5m

Notes: * Denotes base of stratum not defined

† No groundwater noted, however geology record is from a well

A Geo-environmental Investigation and Quantitative Risk Assessment commissioned

by Nurton Developments Ltd and executed by Shepherd Gilmour Environment Limited

(SGE) in 2009 [9] across the Branston Locks Development Site. This GI work included

106 window sample hole, and 9 percussive boreholes; however only two of these

holes were within the Phase 1 site (location map and bore hole logs presented in

Appendix A). Information contained within the SGE report is useful in forming a

generalised ground profile for the area of interest, despite no in-situ or laboratory

testing was conducted within the Phase 1 area. The geology encountered is

summarised in Table 3-4.

Peat was encountered in five window sample holes located in the southwest of the

development site; these holes are located approximately 350m west of the Phase 1

area.

Groundwater strikes were observed in the sand and gravel deposits from 2m bgl to

5m bgl, rising to a minimum depth of 0.8m bgl.




Table 3-4: Summary of Geology from SGE 2009 [9]

Stratum General Description Depth m bgl

Topsoil Topsoil 0 to 0.10 – 1.20

Made Ground Brown gravelly clay with gravels

and brick and roof tiles 0 to 0.25 - 1.0

Peat Very soft, spongey, organic rich

peat 0 to 0.8 – 1.20

Clay Firm to stiff brown clay 0.10 – 1.00 to 0.80 – 4.90

Sand and Gravel Fine to course Sand and fine to

course Gravels of mixed lithology 0.30 – 2.90 to 4.50 – 8.10

Mudstone Weak to moderately weak

mudstone 4.80 – 7.60 to >6.10 - > 9.15

Two samples from clay deposits were subjected to Atterberg Limit testing. Results are

displayed in Table 3-5. Results of Atterberg limits test classify the clays as low to

intermediate plasticity.

Table 3-5: Summary of SGE Atterberg Limit Testing [9]

Property Range

Moisture Content 18 - 27%

Liquid Limit 30.8 - 49.6%

Plastic Limit 15.8 - 22.2%

Plasticity Indices 15.0 - 27.4%

A single sample from the clay deposits was tested for coefficient of compressibility,

the results of which are displayed in Table 3-6. This result corresponds to clays of

medium compressibility.

Table 3-6 Summary of SGE One Dimensional Consolidation Test [9]

Exploratory Hole Depth (m bgl) MV (m2/MN)

BH102 2.00-2.45 1.23




Fifteen sand and gravel samples were subjected to particle size distribution (PSD)

analysis, the results of which are summarized in Table 3-7.

Table 3-7: Summary of SGE PSD Testing [9]

Test Parameter Result

Particle Size Distribution

Cobbles 0% – 7%

Gravel 10% – 91%

Sand 9% – 64%

Silt 0%

Selected samples were subject to pH, sulphate and sulphur analysis, a summary of

these is provided in Table 3-8.

Table 3-8: Summary of SGE pH, sulphate and sulphur analysis [9]

Parameter Result

pH Conditions 6.1 – 8.8

Soluble sulphate content <0.10 g/l

Total sulphur content <0.01% to 1.7%

Chemical analysis of soils and groundwater from across the development site was

conducted as part of the Shepherd Gilmore’s site investigation; conclusions made for

the entire development site that may be applicable to the Phase 1 Development are:

Elevated Chromium Levels across the site.

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH) contamination and elevated Copper and

Zinc concentrations at Lawns Farm.

TPH concentrations and elevated Copper sulphate and arsenic concentrations

within groundwater at the site which may represent a potential risk to

controlled water receptors.

Isolated Selenium contamination within shallow soils.

Potential for asbestos associated with the demolition of existing structures




Heterogeneous ground conditions indicating the need for specific site

investigation and risk assessment prior to development.

3.8 Consultation with Statutory Bodies and Agencies

During the design of the GI works the Canal and Rivers Trust (CRT) were consulted;

works were not planned to take place within the CRT’s land, however given the

sampling methodology being used it was important to ensure the GI work did not

result in damage to the canal infrastructure. The CRT reviewed the Risk Assessments

and Method Statements (RAMS), as well as further detailed information relating to

sample locations and methodology. The CRT provided no objections to the planned GI

work as it was to be conducted at a sufficient distance from the canal infrastructure to

not pose a danger to the integrity of the canal.

The Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) [10] was

interrogated to identify any points of concern to be considered. The following issues

were identified:

The Branston Water Park local Nature Reserve is present approximately 200m

to the south of the site.

Woodland on the hillside bordering the west of the site is listed in the

National Inventory of Woodland and Trees, and as a Priority Habitat

(Deciduous woodland).

The land within the A38 Branston Roundabout gyratory is classified on the

Priority Habitat Inventory as Deciduous Woodland.

Five species of birds are specified as being previously recorded within the

area. These include Curlew, Lapwing, Redshank, Tree Sparrow and Yellow

Wagtail.

3.9 Flood Records

Environment Agency (EA) flooding records [11] show the Site Access area to be

situated in an area generally of very low, to low risk from flooding from rivers and

surface water (Figure 4). It should be noted that the area to the west of the canal has

a higher risk of flooding than the area to the east.




A Flood Risk Assessment has been undertaken by SGE in October 2012 [12]. This

report considers the entire Branston Locks Development Site and the area local to the

site. The report concludes that there are relatively low risks of flooding from

numerous sources in the vicinity of the development area and recommends mitigation

measures to reduce flood risk.

3.10 Contaminated Land

No pollution incidents, or previous land uses with potential to contaminate are

recorded within the study area on the EA website [11].

3.11 Other Relevant Information

No other relevant information is known to be applicable to the project at the time of

writing.




4 FIELD AND LABORATORY STUDIES

4.1 Walkover Survey

The primary function of the site walkover was is to confirm potential issues arising

from preliminary sources of information and also to identify any geotechnical

constraints that may not be discernible from desk study information. The site consists

predominantly of open fields adjacent to Branston Road and the Trent and Mersey

Canal. A residential building (Bridgefield House) and grounds are located in the south

east of the site, with Branston road bordering the grounds to the south and the Trent

and Mersey Canal to the west. The development area is relatively flat however

embankments rise to a height of approximately 5m in border the eastern extent along

Branston Road and the A38. A number of observations made during the site walkover

have been summarised below:

Branston Bridge - located outside of the site area however is likely to be

utilised for site access. Branston Bridge connects Branston Road over the

Trent and Mersey Canal and has a weight limitation of 17 tonnes.

Trent and Mersey Canal - observed to be active with Barges passing through

the area. Damage to the concrete on the western edge of the canal, which

suggests a canal survey may be required to assess the risk of any damage

during construction.

Farmed Fields– surface soils within the farmed areas were observed to be

relatively firm however could not be closely inspected due to access

restrictions. The fields were identified as being recently harvested. Track

imprints from machinery on the soil surface were shallow and indicate intense

rainfall may induce soft ground conditions. Access to fields on both sides of

the canal is good, with gated access and flat conditions. An above ground

storage tank was observed 280m north-west of the existing canal bridge;

labelling indicated this held Liquid Fertiliser (Omex Nitroflo 30% N).




Bridgefield House and Grounds was identified as a residential garden and

confirmed as ‘springy underfoot’ owing to turf. A septic tank including surface

assets were identified by the property tenants who reported the septic tank

soakaway as being defective. Additionally the area in front of the building

floods during intense rainfall. An overhead telephone line was observed

coming to Bridgefield House.

Overheard power cables were identified crossing the development site from

southwest to north east. A spur of this line terminates close to the Trent and

Mersey Canal, where it is diverted underground.

4.2 Geomorphological/Geological Mapping

No additional geological or geomorphological mapping has been completed as part of

this geotechnical investigation.

4.3 Ground Investigations

4.3.1 Description of fieldwork

The GI fieldwork was undertaken between 12th and 18th October 2015 by CCG in

general accordance with the Eurocode 7 (EC7) Part 2, Ground Investigation and

testing (1997) [13], BS5930:2015 [14] and BS10175:2001 [15].

The GI scope was specified by Amey to provide geotechnical information required for

the preliminary and detailed design of the Branston Locks Development Site Access

(Phase 1). Specialist GI contractors CCG supplied the following:

A single Commacchio MC300 multi-purpose track mounted rig to advance the

two combined percussive/rotary boreholes up to 20m bgl.

A single Terrier 2002 track mounted rig to advance the six window sample

holes up to 5.00m bgl.

During the GI works adverse ground conditions resulted in hole P1-BH02 failing to

reach target depth; The Amey Engineer on site elected not to continue or re-drill the

hole as sufficient ground information was deemed to have been obtained. Two

additional inspection pits were advanced to identify the make-up of artificial ground

associated with the Trent and Mersey Canal (P1-BH01A) and the A38 embankments

(P1HP-01). Table 4-1 summarizes the locations, extent and installation of the ten

boreholes.




Table 4-1:2015 GI Borehole Summary [16]

Hole Number

Hole Type Total Depth

(m)

National Grid Reference

Easting Northing Elevation Installation

BH01 Combined Percussive/rotary

Borehole

16.20 421714 321402 47.54 Groundwater monitoring

Standpipe

BH01A Inspection Pit 0.75 421719 321397 48.16 No Installation

BH02

Combined

Percussive/rotary Borehole

3.20 421733 32171 47.76 No Installation

WS01 Window Sample Hole 3.00 421614 321430 47.41 No Installation






HP01 Inspection Pit 1.05 421903 321329 48.08 No Installation

Drawing No. COSTCDX8620-GEO-002 illustrates the layout of the GI work.

4.3.2 Copy of Ground Investigation Report

Physical and digital copies of the report generated for the GI work have been supplied

by CCG. This factual report [16] presents the locations of all exploratory holes,

borehole logs, and laboratory results; a copy of the report is presented in Appendix B.

4.3.3 Results of in-situ tests

In-situ Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) utilising split spoon sampler or solid cone

methods were carried out at regular intervals in boreholes in accordance with BS

1377 Part 9 [17] and BS EN ISO 22476-3:2005 [18]. Results are given in the CCG

Factual Report [16] (Appendix B) and displayed in Figure 8 of this report.

BS EN ISO 22476 [18] provides the following equation for adjusting Standard

Penetration Resistance (N) values to account for the energy delivered to the drive

rods (N60 = N value adjusted to a reference energy ratio of 60%):




Where Er is the energy ratio of the specific test equipment.

The CCG factual report (Appendix B) gives the Er value for the test equipment as

60.76%, therefore the adjusted N60 value is only fractionally higher than the

uncorrected ‘N’ value; when decimal rounding is applied N60 = N, therefore

uncorrected N values are used for the derivations in Section 6.

4.4 Drainage Studies

No drainage studies were completed as part of this geotechnical investigation.

4.5 Geophysical Surveys

No geophysical surveys were completed as part of this geotechnical investigation.

4.6 Pile Tests

No pile testing was completed as part of this geotechnical investigation.

4.7 Other Field Work

On 13th November two inspection pits were excavated to determine the location of

the BskyB fibre optic cables installed in the tow path on the eastern canal bank. This

work was conducted by LG Construction and falls outside the scope of work of the

Ground Investigation being reported in the document. A visual inspection was made

of each hole by the Amey Geotechnical Engineer on site during the GI works. The tow

path appears to have been constructed form re-worked river terrace materials. The

cables were identified in a green four-inch duct at 0.51m depth in the north pit

(321383E, 421731N), and 0.575m depth in the south pit (321366E, 421722N). As the

pits did not form part of the GI work, and at the time of inspection no LG

Construction personnel were not present on site; the Engineer did not interfere with

the pits or services, and no samples were taken.

4.8 Laboratory Investigation

4.8.1 Description of tests

The following laboratory testing was undertaken on soil samples recovered from the

site:




Geotechnical laboratory testing:

• Natural moisture content (NMC);

• Liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL) and plasticity index (PI);

• Particle size distribution (PSD) and sedimentation;

• Quick undrained triaxial testing;

One-dimensional consolidation testing; and

Point load strength testing

Chemical & contamination tests:

• BRE SDI suite (Building Research Establishment);

Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) Testing;

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Criteria Working Group (TPH-CWG) testing;

Midi-S suite testing; and

Asbestos Screen.

Copies of laboratory testing results are contained within the CCG Factual Report 2015

[16] and are presented in Appendix B.




5 GROUND SUMMARY

The following geological units were anticipated within the study area following the

review of information sources.

Made Ground

River Terrace Deposits

Weathered Mercia Mudstone

This GIR will utilize the in-situ and laboratory observations and results of the CCG

2015 GI work (Appendix B). Preliminary Geotechnical Design Parameters have been

derived from these ground investigations are outlined in Section 6.

Table 5-1 provides a summary of the general ground conditions present collected

from the borehole data. The determination of Mercia Mudstone Weathering Grades

is outlined in Section 6.5 of this document.

5.1 Geology and Ground Conditions

5.1.1 Geology

All exploratory hole information available to Amey has been reviewed for identifying

the geology across the site. A plan showing the locations of all exploratory holes and

cross-sections across the site are presented in Drawings No. COSTCDX8620-GEO-002

and COSTCDX8620-GEO-003.

The Code of Practice for Site Investigations [14] subdivides anthropogenic soils so as

to differentiate between disturbed natural ground and engineered fill. This report

therefore adopts the following terminology:

“Fill” is placed in a controlled manner.

“Made Ground” is placed without strict engineering control.

Made ground was observed on site, usually as the result of farming. Fill material was

observed in two forms:

1. Granular Fill material associated with the construction of the Trent and Mersey

Canal.

2. Cohesive Fill material associated with the construction of the A38.

Table 5-1 provides a borehole log summary of the encountered Strata.




Note: 1 Indicates base of strata not observed

2 Weathering grades determined in Section 6.5

Table 5-1: Borehole Log Summary

Stratum

(depth m bgl) BH01 BH01A BH02 WS01 WS02 WS03 WS04 WS05 WS06 HP01

Granular Fill - 0.00 to 0.751

- - - - - - - -

Cohesive Fill - - - - - - - - 0.00 to 4.701

0.00 to 1.051

Made Ground 0.00 to

0.30 -

0.00 to 0.85

- - - 0.00 to

0.40 - - -

River Terrace Deposits 0.31 to

4.70 -

0.85 to 3.201

0.00 to 3.001

0.00 to 3.001

0.00 to 3.001

0.40 to 2.001

0.00 to 2.001

- -

Weathered Mercia Mudstone (Grade IVa)2 4.70 to

6.20 - - - - - - - - -

Weathered Mercia Mudstone (Grade III)2 6.20 to 12.05

- - - - - - - - -

Weathered Mercia Mudstone (Grade II)2 12.05 to 16.201

- - - - - - - - -

Ground water 0.90 - - 2.00 2.50 2.20 - 2.35 - -




The generalised ground conditions expected to be found across the site are

displayed in Table 5-2 and are noted as metres Above Ordnance Datum (m AOD).

Note that this generalisation does not identify thicknesses of fill material in proximity

to the A38 or Trent and Mersey Canal as these are anticipated to change with the

varying alignment of these earthworks.

Note: 1 Weathering grade determined in Section 6.5.1

2 Indicates base of strata not observed

Table 5-2: Generalised Interpreted Ground Conditions

Stratum From (mAOD) To (mAOD)

Made Ground 47.7m 47.3m

River Terrace Deposits 47.3m 42.8m

Weathered Mercia Mudstone (Grade IVa)1 42.8m 41.3m

Weathered Mercia Mudstone (Grade III) 1 41.3m 35.5m

Weathered Mercia Mudstone (Grade II) 1 35.5m 31.34m 2

Groundwater 45.39m




6 GROUND CONDITIONS AND MATERIALS PROPERTIES

The strata encountered during the 2015 GI programme, together with depths and

thicknesses are summarised in Section 5. In-situ and laboratory testing results can be

found in the GI Factual Reports attached in Appendices B. A summary of the material

properties for each stratum is provided in Table 6-18. A summary of the derived

geotechnical parameters of each stratum is presented in Table 6-19.

6.1 Granular Fill

6.1.1 Material Description

Granular Fill is observed in hole P1-BH01A only; this was an inspection pit advanced to

0.75m bgl in the ramp to the Branston Road Bridge from the track to the east of the

Trent and Mersey Canal. The Granular Fill is described as brown slightly clayey sandy

gravel, which changes to a slightly sandy clayey gravel at depth. The gravel in both

cases is sub-angular to rounded fine to coarse siliceous material, siltstone, brick concrete

and porcelain.

6.1.2 Material Properties

Classification

One natural moisture content (NMC) tests was conducted on the Granular Fill returning a

NMC value of 13% (Figure 5). One Particle Size Distribution (PSD) tests with pipette

sedimentation was undertaken in the Granular fill, results are provided in Table 6-1 and

Figure 6. The average material is described as a clayey silty sandy gravel.

Bulk Unit Weight

Using guidance given in BS8002:2015 ( [19] Figure 1 p15), and assuming the Granular

Fill to be a medium density gravel / coarse engineered fill above the water table a bulk

density of 17kN/m³ has been assigned to this material.

Table 6-1: Granular Fill PSD analysis results

Hole Depth Clay Silt Sand Gravel Grading

P1-BH01A 0.5m 4 7 22 67 Gap Graded




Shearing Resistance

Due to the Granular Fill being observed only in a single inspection pit no SPT testing was

conducted in the material; therefore no correlations between SPT N values and strength

or stiffness have been possible.

BS8002:2015 allows for the estimation of the critical state effective angle of shearing

resistance (Φ’) based on soil angularity and grading ( [19]Equation 3 and Table 1 p16

and 18); using this equation the Granular Fill is determined to have Φ’=34°.

Chemistry

Classification of the Aggressive Chemical Environment for Concrete (ACEC) has been

undertaken on one sample from Granular Fill material. This has returned a Design

Sulfate class of DS-1, and ACEC class of AC-1.

One sample of Granular Fill was submitted for Midi-s analysis (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Zn, Pb,

Hg, Se, W, S, B, hexavalent chromium, total cyanide, free cyanide, total sulphate,

sulphide, total sulphur, pH, total PAH, phenols, thiocyanate). No results of concern were

received.

Two samples of Granular Fill were submitted for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon – Criteria

Working Group (TPH-CWG) analysis. No results of concern were received.

One sample of Granular Fill was submitted for Asbestos Screening; no asbestos was

detected.

6.2 Cohesive Fill


Cohesive Fill material was observed within P1-WS06 and P1-HP01; both of which were

advanced in the existing A38 embankment. Neither investigation points proved the base

of the stratum, and therefore total thickness of the Cohesive Fill. The material is

described as firm locally friable reddish brown and brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly

to locally gravelly clay. Gravel is angular to sub-rounded fine to coarse siliceous material,

concrete, mudstone, limestone, wood, sandstone and brick. At depth the material is

observed to become soft and the gravel to be made up of angular to sub-rounded fine to

coarse siliceous material and mudstone. The make-up of the Cohesive Fill indicates that

weathered Mercia Mudstone Formation provides a proportion of the source material.





Classification

Testing undertaken within the Cohesive Fill included four NMC tests and three Atterberg

Limits tests. Plasticity classification has been determined as per BS5930 (2015) [14];

results are displayed in Figures 5 and 7 and average values in Table 6-2.

Table 6-2: Average Atterberg Limit Results – Cohesive Fill

Attribute Average Value

Moisture Content 16%

Liquid Limit 37%

Plastic Limit 20%

Plasticity Index 17%

Three samples were submitted for PSD testing with pipette sedimentation; Figure 6 and

Table 6-3 displays results. The average material is described as a clayey silty gravelly

sand.

Table 6-3: Cohesive Fill PSD analysis results

Hole Depth clay Silt Sand Gravel Grading

P1-HP01 0.5m 12 19 36 33 Appears gap graded1

P1-WS06 0.5m 26 33 31 10 Appears well graded1

P1-WS06 4.0 26 38 28 8 Appears gap graded1

Min 12 19 28 8

Max 26 38 36 33

Average 21 30 32 17

Note 1 10% fraction not recorded thus true grading undetermined.




Bulk Unit Weight

Using guidance given in BS8002:2015 [19] and assuming the Cohesive Fill to be have

characteristics of both coarse and fine engineering fill above the water table a bulk


Shearing Resistance

BS8002:2015 allows for the estimation of the critical state effective angle of shearing

resistance (Φ’) based on the soils Plasticity Index ( [19]Equation 7 p19);

( )

Using this equation with the average Plasticity Index the Cohesive Fill is determined to

have Φ’=26.6°.

Undrained Shear Strength

Cohesive Fill was encountered in one window sample hole (P1-WS06) resulting in five

SPT test being conducted within the material. A review of the results described in Figure

8 shows that the uncorrected SPT ’N’ value steadily decreases with depth, with the

exception of the deepest point in the hole returned an uncorrected ‘N’ value of 50 over

30mm, indicating refusal. Removing this result from the cohort gives an average ‘N’

value of 7. The correlation between uncorrected ‘N’ value, Plasticity Index (PI) and

undrained shear strength (cu) outlined by Stroud (1974) [20] has been utilised to

calculate an average cu value:

The PI of the cohesive fill gives an f1 value of 6, therefore an average cu value of

44kN/m2 can be assigned the Cohesive Fill material; alternatively the fill can be given the

cu value associated to its depth, as is indicated in Table 6-4 and Figure 9.




Table 6-4: Cohesive Fill Cu, mv value vs Depth

Depth (m bgl) cu (kPa) mv (MN/m2)

1 72 0.14

2 48 0.21

3 36 0.28

4 18 0.56

Deformability

Stroud & Butler (1975) [21] provide the following equation for determining the

coefficient of volume compressibility (mv):

Plasticity Index is used to determine f2. Using this equation an average mv value of

0.3m2/MN can be assigned the Cohesive Fill material; alternatively the fill can be given

the mv value associated to its depth, as is indicated in Table 6-4 and Figure 10.

Chemistry

Classification of ACEC has been undertaken on one sample from Cohesive Fill material.

This has returned a Design Sulfate class of DS-3, and ACEC class of AC-3.

Two samples of Cohesive Fill were submitted for Midi-s analysis. No results of concern

were received.

Four samples of Cohesive Fill were submitted for TPH-CWG analysis. No results of

concern were received.

Two samples of Cohesive Fill were submitted for Asbestos Screening. No asbestos was

detected.




One sample of Cohesive Fill was submitted for Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) testing.

The results of elute analysis are below that of limit values for inert waste; however the

sulphate value of 1600mg/kg exceeds the 1000 mg/kg upper limit for Inert Waste. This

indicates that excavated Cohesive Fill will be required to be disposed of in a licensed

hazardous waste landfill site; however testing will be required of excavated material to

determine the nature of the waste material.

6.3 Made Ground


Made Ground was seen within three of the exploratory holes (P1-BH01, P1-BH02 and P1-

WS04), up to a maximum depth of 0.85m bgl. Made Ground has been identified both

within arable agriculture fields, and within the grounds of Bridgefield House. The Made

Ground is described brown slightly sandy clayey gravel to slightly sandy gravelly clay. In

all instances the stratum was observed to have occasional rootlets (<2mm) and the

gravels were angular to rounded fine to coarse siliceous material and siltstone with a

varying content of metal fragments, clinker, slag, wood fragments and twine.


Classification

Testing undertaken within the Made Ground included one NMC test and one Atterberg

Limits test. Plasticity classification has been determined as per BS5930 (2015) [14];

results are displayed in Figures 5 and 7; average values are displayed in Table 6-5.

Table 6-5: Average Atterberg Limit Results – Made Ground


Moisture Content 13%

Liquid Limit 41%

Plastic Limit 25%





One sample was submitted for PSD testing with pipette sedimentation; Figure 6 and

Table 6-6 displays results. The average material is described as a clayey silty gravelly

sand.


Bulk Unit Weight

Using guidance given in BS8002:2015 [19], and assuming the Made Ground to be a

medium density gravel / sand above the water table a bulk density of 17kN/m³ has been

assigned to this material.

Shearing Resistance

Due to the Made Ground being observed only in inspection pits no SPT testing was

conducted in the material; therefore no correlations between SPT ‘N’ values and strength

or stiffness have been possible.

BS8002:2015 [19] allows for the estimation of Φ’ based on soil angularity and grading;

the Made ground is determined to have Φ’=34°.

Chemistry

ACEC classification has been undertaken on two samples from Made Ground material.

Both samples returned a Design Sulfate class of DS-2, and ACEC class of AC-2.

One sample of Made Ground was submitted for Midi-s analysis. No results of concern

were received.

Two samples of Made Ground were submitted for TPH-CWG analysis. No results of

concern were received.

One sample of Made Ground was submitted for Asbestos Screening. No asbestos was

detected.

Table 6-6: Made Ground PSD analysis results

Hole Depth clay Silt Sand Gravel Grading

P1-BH02 0.7m 15 23 36 26 Appears gap graded1




6.4 River Terrace Deposits


The River Terrace material was identified within seven of the exploratory holes. Only P1-

BH01 encountered the base of the unit at 4.7m bgl, with a total thickness of 4.4m. The

unit is generally described as being grey to brown slightly clayey sandy gravel; however

areas tend to sandy gravelly clay and clay gravelly sand. The River terrace deposits are

observed to be interbedded, with significant variations of particle size and density

present over very small thicknesses.

The gravels were observed to be sub-rounded to rounded fine to coarse siliceous

material, sandstone and siltstone; Cobbles were rarely observed. In sequences of finer-

grained material occasional observations were made of partially decomposed organic

matter.


Classification

Testing undertaken within the River Terrace deposits included twelve NMC test and two

Atterberg Limits test. Plasticity classification has been determined as per BS5930 (2015)

[14]; results are displayed in Figures 5 and 7; average values in Table 6-7.

Table 6-7: Average Atterberg Limit Results – River Terrace Deposits


Moisture Content 9.4%

Liquid Limit 38%

Plastic Limit 24%





Ten samples was submitted for PSD testing with three of those scheduled for additional

pipette sedimentation; Figure 6 and Table 6-8 displays results. River terrace deposit

material shows a wide variation of particle size distributions; however a general trend is

discernible showing low cohesive content, and significant sand and gravel components.

Material grading alternates between gap graded and uniform graded. The average

material is described as a slightly clayey silty very sandy gravel.

Table 6-8: River Terrace Deposit PSD analysis results

Hole Depth Clay Silt Sand Gravel Grading

P1-BH01 0.5m 9 12 47 32 Gap Graded

P1-BH01 1.5m 3 96 1 Uniformly Graded

P1-BH01 3.7m 24 25 51 Appears Gap Graded1

P1-BH02 1.55m 1 38 61 Gap Graded

P1-BH02 2.75m 2 23 75 Gap Graded

P1-WS01 1.4m 3 16 81 Uniformly Graded

P1-WS02 1.0m 5 26 69 Uniformly Graded

P1-WS03 0.2m 13 19 41 27 Appears Gap Graded1

P1-WS03 1.25m 2 9 85 4 Uniformly Graded

P1-WS04 0.5m 14 33 53 Appears Gap Graded1

Min2 1 16 1

Max2 32 96 81

Average2 12 43 45


2 Min, Max and Average calculated for the sum of Clay and Silt fractions

Bulk Unit Weight

Using guidance given in BS8002:2015 [19], and assuming the River Terrace Deposits to

be dense sands and gravels with a silty component and above the water table a bulk

density of 19kN/m³ has been assigned to this material. Where the material is below the

water table a unit weight of 21kN/m³ has been assigned.





Eighteen SPT tests were conducted within the River Terrace Deposits. A review of the

results described in Figure 8 shows that the uncorrected SPT ’N’ value shows no specific

trend with depth down-hole; the average uncorrected ‘N’ value of the material is 35.

Utilizing the correlation between uncorrected ‘N’ value and undrained shear strength (cu)

outlined by Stroud (1974) [20] an average cu value of 246kN/m2 can be assigned the

River Terrace Deposit material.

Shearing Resistance

BS8002:2015 [19] allows for the estimation of Φ’ based on soil angularity and grading;

using this equation the River Terrace Deposit is determined to have Φ’=32°.

Thomlinson ( [22] Figure 2.13) allows for derivation of Ф’ using SPT results. Using the

average uncorrected ‘N’ value Ф’=37°.

The average Φ’ of 37° derived from the Tomlinson method is recommended for the

material parameter for the River Terrace Material

Stiffness

Bowles (1996) provides equations for the calculation of Undrained Young’s Modulus

(Table 5-6 in [23]) for soils. Using the average material classification described as slightly

clayey silty very sandy gravel the following equation has been used to determine the

Young’s Modulus (Eu):

( )

Therefore the River Terrace Deposits average Eu = 49 MPa.

Thomlinson [22] defines the relationship between undrained and drained Young’s

Modulus (E’) as:

Therefore the River Terrace Deposits average E’ = 29.4 MPa.

Poisson’s Ratio (v) for sands is defined by Thomlinson [22] as 0.1 to 0.3; it is

recommended that a conservative value of v = 0.3 be used for River Terrace Deposits.

Chemistry

Three samples of River Terrace Deposits were submitted for Midi-s analysis. The

following results of note were returned. No results of concern were received.




Five samples of River Terrace Deposits were submitted for TPH-CWG analysis. No results

of concern were received.

One sample of Made Ground was submitted for WAC testing. Analysis results indicate

that excavated River Terrace Deposit can be classified as Inert Waste; however any

excavated material will require further WAC testing prior to disposal.

6.5 Mercia Mudstone


The Mercia Mudstone was identified within P1-BH01 from 4.70m bgl to 16.2m bgl; the

base of the unit was not encountered. The unit was described as reddish brown with

rare blue grey mottling (<10mm) firm slightly sandy clay, developing to a very stiff

slightly sandy gravelly clay with increased depth. The gravels were observed to be sub-

angular fine to coarse extremely weak lithorelics of mudstone. From 12.05m bgl the unit

was described as extremely weak thinly laminated reddish brown mudstone with

occasional veins of light grey gypsum up to 25mm in thickness. Gypsum veins were

observed to predominantly be orientated normal to the mudstone laminations; however

gypsum veins were observed perpendicular to the mudstone laminations linking

horizontal veins 25cm apart.

Weathering grade of the Mercia Mudstone has been determined using weathering

scheme and ranges of index and other properties outlined in CIRIA C570: Engineering in

Mercia Mudstone ( [24] Section 3.2 including Tables 3.2 and 3.3 p28-29). The

weathering profile of the Mercia Mudstone encountered during the 20115 GI is outlined

below:

Grade IVa: 4.7m to 6.2m bgl

Grade III: 6.2m to 12.05m bgl

Grade II: 12.05m to 16.2m bgl





Classification

Testing undertaken within the Mercia Mudstone included six NMC test and four Atterberg

Limits test. Plasticity classification has been determined as per BS5930 (2015) [14];

results are displayed in Figures 5 and 7; average values in Table 6-9.

Table 6-9: Average Atterberg Limit Results – Mercia Mudstone

Attribute

Grade IVa

Average

Value

Grade III

Average

Value

Grade II

Average

Value

All Results

Average

Value

Moisture Content 20% 21% 16% 20%

Liquid Limit 29% 36% 32% 33%

Plastic Limit 19% 23% 19% 21%

Plasticity Index 10% 13% 13% 12%

Four samples were submitted for PSD testing with pipette sedimentation; Figure 6 and

Table 6-10 displays results. The Mercia Mudstone shows varying grain size distribution

which does not appear to be obviously linked with weathering grade, however the

sample cohort size does not allow for accurate interpretation. An average material

composed of all tested weathering grades is described as a slightly gravelly clayey sandy

silt.

Table 6-10: Mercia Mudstone PSD analysis results

Hole Depth Weathering Clay Silt Sand Gravel Grading

P1-BH01 4.7m Grade IVa 35 55 9 1 Appears Gap Graded1

P1-BH01 6.7m Grade III 15 22 27 36 Uniformly Graded

P1-BH01 9.5m Grade III 33 49 15 3 Appears Gap Graded1

P1-BH01 13.5m Grade II 15 22 52 11 Appears Gap Graded1

Min 15 22 9 1

Max 35 55 52 36

Average 25 37 26 13





Bulk Unit Weight

Bulk density values determined for Grade IVa material in consolidation and compression

testing indicate a bulk density of 2.08 Mg/m3, which provides an average bulk unit

weight of 20.4kN/m3.

Using guidance given in BS8002:2015 [19], and assuming the Mercia Mudstone

encountered to be below the water table and a slightly gravelly clayey sandy SILT a bulk


Shearing Resistance

BS8002:2015 [19] allows for the estimation Φ’ based on the soils Plasticity. Given the

average PI the Mercia Mudstone weathering grades Φ’ values are determined as follows:

Grade IVa Φ’=29.5°

Grade III Φ’=28.3°

Grade II Φ’=28.1°

Overall Φ’=28.5°

It is recommended that the average overall effective angle of shearing resistance (Φ’) of

28.5° be used for all weathering grades of Mercia Mudstone


Eight SPT test were conducted within the Mercia Mudstone; one in Grade IVa, four in

Grade III, and three in Grade II material. A review of the results described in Figure 8

shows that the uncorrected SPT ’N’ value increases with depth downhole. It should be

noted that seven of the eight SPT tests were halted at 50 blows as the tests were unable

to penetrate the required 300mm; these tests were all those carried out in Grade III and

II weathering categories. Table 6-11 provides raw (N) and corrected (N300) SPT values.




Table 6-11: Corrected SPT values: Mercia Mudstone

Depth

(m bgl) N

Penetration

(mm) N300

Average

N300

Weathering

Grade

6.7 34 300 34 34 IVa

7.9 50 240 63

65 III

8.7 50 210 71

10.2 50 210 71

11.7 50 270 54

13.2 50 20 750

353 II 14.7 50 100 150

16.2 50 90 158

The very low penetration rates observed in the Grade II weathered material indicate

refusal due to the material becoming increasingly competent; therefore derivation of

material properties from SPT values obtained from the Grade II material are not reported

in this document.

The correlation between uncorrected ‘N’ value, PI and cu outlined by Stroud (1974) [20]

has been utilised to calculate an average cu value. The CIRIA guide to Engineering in

Mercia Mudstone [24] gives the average f1 value for the formation as 5. Measured PI

values of the various grades of weathered Mercia Mudstone fall outside the given range

of f1 values; the conservative f1 value of 5 has been used. cu values derived from SPT

results are plotted in Figure 8 with average values for weathering grades are given in

Table 6-12.

Table 2.4 in the CIRIA guide to Piled foundations in weak rock [25] provides engineering

properties of the Mercia Mudstone weathering grades; cu values are displayed in Table 6-

12.




Table 6-12: Mercia Mudstone cu values – SPT

derived and published data

Grade SPT Derived

cu

CIRIA 181

cu

IVa 170 kPa 850 kPa

III 324 kPa 1090 kPa

II - 1450 kPa

A single undrained unconfined triaxial shear strength test was conducted on Weathering

Grade IVa material obtained from a depth of 5.2 to 5.65m bgl. Table 6-13 displays shear

undrained shear strength versus cell pressure.

Table 6-13: Undrained Unconfined Triaxial testing

– Mercia Mudstone Grade IVa

Cell Pressure

(kPa)

cu

(kPa)

Equivalent Depth

(m bgl)

200 198 9.5

400 269 19.0

600 308 28.5

It is recommended that where derived parameters for cu and E’ are available they be

used in geotechnical design, where they are not figures from CIRIA 181 should be used.

The following values for cu are recommended:

Grade IVa cu= 170 kPa

Grade III cu = 324 kPa

Grade II cu = 1450 kPa




Deformability

Using Stroud & Butler (1975) [21] to determine the coefficient of volume compressibility

from SPT ‘N’ Value and PI the following values for the weathering grades encountered

have been calculated. The PI values of the Mercia Mudstone range from 10% to 13%;

this results in correlations to f2 falling below the lowest part of the trend line provided by

Stroud and Butler. As a result the f2 value adopted for this calculation is the value

recommended in CIRIA C570 [24] of 0.5. Average values are given below and displayed

in Figure 10.

Grade IVa mv= 0.06 m2/MN

Grade III mv = 0.03 m2/MN

An mv value for Grade II weathering has not been provided as the uncorrected SPT ‘N’

values indicate refusal; thus providing unrealistic values.

A single one dimensional consolidation test was conducted on Weathering Grade IVa

material obtained from a depth of 5.2 to 5.65m bgl. Table 6-14 displays coefficient of

volume compressibility versus pressure range.

Table 6-14: One-dimensional Consolidation

testing – Mercia Mudstone Grade IVa

Pressure Range

(kPa)

mv

(m2/MN)

Equivalent Depth

(m bgl)

0 - 100 0.516 0 - 5

100 - 200 0.115 5 - 10

200 - 400 0.071 10 - 20

400 - 800 0.044 20 - 40

800 - 100 0.017 40 - 0

It is recommended that the following values of mv are used in geotechnical design:

Grade IVa mv= 0.06 m2/MN




Grade III mv = 0.03 m2/MN

Grade II mv = 0.03 m2/MN

Stiffness

Table 2.4 in the CIRIA guide to Piled foundations in weak rock [25] provides engineering

properties of the Mercia Mudstone weathering grades; Eu values are displayed in Table

6-15.

Thomlinson [22] defines the relationship between undrained and drain Young’s modulus

(E’) as:

Using the methods described above average Eu and E’ for the varying grades of

weathered Mercia Mudstone have been calculated and are displayed in Table 6-15

Poisson’s Ratio (v) is defined by Thomlinson [22] for various material types, values

recommended for use in geotechnical design are listed in Table 6-15.

Table 6-15: Mercia Mudstone Eu, E’ and v values

Weathering

Grade

CIRIA 181

Eu

Derived

E’

Thomlinson

v

IVa 230 MPa 138 MPa 0.5

III 350 MPa 210 MPa 0.2

II 2830 MPa 1698 MPa 0.2

Point Loading

Point load testing was conducted on three samples of Grade II material; two samples

were of mudstone, one of gypsum. Valid fractures were achieved in each test, and Point

Load Strength Index (Is50) values obtained. The International Society for Rock Mechanics

[26] provides the following equation to determine Uniaxial Compressive Strength (C0)

from Is50




Table 6-16 provides Is50 and C0 values. Due to the low number of tests conducted Is50

values and information derived from these results should be considered to be indicative

rather than definitive.

Table 6-16: Point Load testing – Mercia Mudstone Grade II

Material

Depth

Downhole m

bgl

Is50

MPa

C0

MPa

Weak Mudstone 12.08 – 12.10 0.39 8.6

Gypsum Vein 14.64 – 14.70 0.22 4.8

Weak Mudstone 16.10 – 16.20 0.30 6.6

Chemistry

Classification of the ACEC has been undertaken on two samples from Mercia Mudstone

material; one from weathering Grade III, the other from Grade II. Table 6-17 provides

Design Sulfate and ACEC classes

Table 6-17: ACEC classifications – Mercia Mudstone

Weathering Design

Sulfate Class ACEC Class

Grade III DS-2 AC-2

Grade II DS-3 AC-3




6.6 Material Properties Summary

Table 6-18 summarises material properties for the strata encountered during the GI

works, Table 6-19 lists summary geotechnical parameters for these materials.

Table 6-18: Summary of Material Properties

Atterberg Limits SPT Chemical

NMC LL PL PI N300 pH Water Soluble

Sulphate

(%) (%) (%) (%) (mg/l)

Granular Fill 13 - - - - 9.1 230

Cohesive Fill 16 37 20 17 7 7.8 1600

Made Ground 13 41 25 16 - 8 395

River Terrace Deposit

9 38 24 14 35

- -

Mercia Mudstone

Grade IVa

20 29 19 10 34 - -

Mercia Mudstone

Grade III

21 36 23 13 65 8.4 570

Mercia Mudstone

Grade II

16 32 19 13 353 8.2 1800




Table 6-19: Characteristic Geotechnical Parameters

Strata γb Ф’ cu mv Eu E’ v DS Class

ACEC

Class

(kN/m3) (°) (kN/m2) (MN/m2) MPa MPa

Granular Fill 17 34 - - - - - DS-1 AC-1

Cohesive Fill 19 27 44 0.3 - - - DS-3 AC-3

Made Ground 17 34 - - - - - DS-2 AC-2

River Terrace Deposit 19 37 246 - 49 29 0.3 - -

Mercia Mudstone

Grade IVa Weathering 21 30 170 0.06 230 138 0.5 - -

Mercia Mudstone

Grade III Weathering 21 28 324 0.03 350 210 0.2 DS-2 AC-2

Mercia Mudstone

Grade II Weathering 21 28 1450 0.03 2830 1698 0.2 DS-3 AC-3

Notes for Table 6-18 and 6-19:

1. Information presented in Table 6-18 is factual values taken from the testing results. However, many of the recorded SPT N values have been extrapolated to an equivalent

300mm penetration with a correction for energy efficiency of 60%.

2. Information presented in Table 6-19 is interpreted design parameters for each material group encountered on site. Please refer to the main text in Section 6 for references

and correlations for the interpretations.

3. Abbreviations: γb = bulk unit weight, NMC = natural moisture content, LL= Liquid Limit, PI = plasticity index, SPT N = standard penetration test N60 , cu = undrained

shear strength, Ф’ = peak effective angle of shearing resistance, E’ = effective Young’s Modulus, Eu = undrained Young’s Modulus, v = Poisson’s Ratio, DS Class =

Design Sulphate Class, ACEC Class = Aggressive Chemical Environment for Concrete Class, mv = compressibility,




7 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT

The PSSR document [2] outlined a preliminary engineering assessment based upon the

ground conditions as they were understood given the historic information available and the

planned alignment given in Drawing No. COSTCDX8620-GEO-001. The primary engineering

considerations were:

Settlement of earthworks and structures constructed on susceptible soils – of

specific concern were clays and peat horizons identified in historic GI work.

The type of material used to construct new embankments.

Potential ground improvement techniques to allow shallow foundations for the new

Trent and Mersey Canal road overbridge.

Piling systems for the new Trent and Mersey Canal road overbridge.

Extensive consideration was given to numerous solutions for these issues, the options

considered the most appropriate for the ground conditions and proposed construction as

were understood from the available information were:

Extraction of problematic ground where necessary or pre-loading where

programme allows.

Granular Fill Embankment.

Continuous-Flight Auger (CFA) piling.

The 2015 GI work has greatly increased the understanding of the subsurface conditions at

the Phase 1 development site; as a result the preliminary engineering assessment has been

reviewed below.

7.1 Ground Model

The generalised ground model is presented in Section 5 of this report; this can be

summarised as:

Made Ground 47.7 – 47.3m bgl

River Terrace Deposit 47.3 – 42.8m bgl

Mercia Mudstone (IVa) 42.8 – 41.3m bgl




Mercia Mudstone (III) 41.3 – 35.5m bgl

Mercia Mudstone (II) 35.5m bgl +

Engineered fill is present on site associated with the A38 embankments and the Trent

and Mersey Canal; the type and thickness of material is dependent on the location.

7.2 Site Access Road

The proposed Phase 1 Site Access Road is aligned with the existing A38 Branston

Roundabout exit currently used by Branston road. The new road will bear north-west

from the present alignment and cross the Mersey and Trent Canal approximately 15m

north of the existing overbridge. The new road will be constructed on material added to

the northern side of the existing embankment; as the road alignment diverges from the

current road alignment the new embankment will become independent of the existing

earthworks. The embankment leaves the A38 roundabout and loses elevation to meet

the new Mersey and Trent overbridge which requires a minimum clearance of 2.7m

between the level of the tow path and the underside of the bridge. Once the road has

crossed the canal it grades down to the planned ground level, as do planned spurs

leaving the access road.

7.2.1 Settlement Considerations

Settlement of the underlying materials has the potential to cause delays in construction

and damage the completed works; differential settlement an issue of particular concern

due to the following circumstances:

Transition between loaded material types (i.e. where the embankment passes

from current embankment to River Terrace Deposits)

Transition between loading conditions (changes in embankment thickness)

Transition between the embankments and the new road bridge

Settlement of earthworks will be modelled using the information outlined in Section 6. It

is possible to limit the settlement through appropriate choice and design of foundation

solutions; removal of material prone to settlement/consolidation; pre-loading of the

ground to induce settlement and accelerate consolidation; or through construction

planning.




Table 7-1 summarises the advantages and disadvantages of the options proposed to

reduce differential settlement and consolidation of the embankments.

7.2.2 Material Used for Embankment Fill

The widening of the existing embankments and construction of new embankment

lengths will require the importation of material for the earthworks construction.

Ordinarily either cohesive or granular materials can be used for embankment fill. Both

types of material offer a range of options for exact material type; this will be determined

through design analysis and required slope angles for new embankment, typically

constrained by land take requirements. Placement of both types of material is weather

dependant, as wet conditions will fundamentally change the material properties.

If the settlement or consolidation of the underlying strata is sufficiently problematic the

use of a light-weight fill material such as Pulverised Fuel Ash (PFA) might be considered

to reduce the loading of the soil. PFA is also potentially a cost-effective option if the local

supply of material is abundant, and the planned construction conforms to the criteria set

out in the EA Regulatory Statement 172 [27].

Table 7-2 summarises the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed embankment

fill options.

7.3 Branston Locks Canal Bridge

Branston Locks Canal Bridge will connect the proposed access road on either side of the

Trent and Mersey Canal. The design must conform to design standards set by the Canal

and River Trust and recommendations from the flood risk assessment undertaken by

SGE. These include an aesthetically pleasing appearance, 2.7m clearance from ground

level adjacent to the underside of the bridge and the design must not compromise or

influence inflows from external water sources. The bridge will require significant

foundations to allow it to perform as required. Shallow foundation techniques, such as

pad or raft foundations or a geogrid reinforced earth bridge abutments may be

considered for the development if the bridge loads can be supported by the River

Terrace Deposits. Alternatively, piling systems that may be considered for the

development are:

Sheet piles

Pre-cast driven piles




CFA piles

Cast in situ piles

Table 7-3 summarises the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed foundation

options.




Table 7-1: Settlement Reduction Options For Embankment Construction

Option Recommendation

Dynamic Compaction Not Recommended

For

Can be easily designed and controlled to suit the ground conditions

Many different systems available

Rapid application, provides rapid results where there are granular soils

Against

Settlement will be accelerated, however consolidation will not be addressed, therefore not suitable for all soil types and ground

conditions

Cost of mobilising, running and demobilising equipment

Dynamic solutions will result in noise/vibration issues which will potentially have harmful effects on the existing infrastructure

(services, existing roads, canal)

Effectiveness of treatment is highly dependable on the ground conditions; therefore a risk that the correct depth of treatment

may not be met.

Preloading

and / or

surcharging

Recommended

where

programme

allows

For

Once placed the system will only require monitoring until it is removed

Settlement and consolidation of underlying material will be addressed

The additional use of wick drains will increase the efficiency of the process

Effective option if construction programme allows for the construction of embankments followed by a delay in construction of

the bridge.

Against

Requires the importation and exportation of large quantities of load material

Consolidation to required residual values will take a significant period of time (months)

Use of wick drains will increase the cost of the process

Placement of material will stop any other work being conducted if the preloading is not planned to take place within the

construction programme.




Table 7-2: Embankment Fill Options


Use of cohesive fill Not Recommended

For

Wide range of materials can be considered for use depending on slope requirements

Unit weight of cohesive material is likely to be lower than that of granular; therefore a lower load will be imposed on the

underlying material

Against

Material will be subject to long-term consolidation

Material placement will need to take place in specific weather conditions

Shallower slope angles compared to other options, therefore a larger landtake will be required. Typical slope angles 1 in 3

Use of granular fill Recommended

For

Wide range of materials can be considered for use depending on slope requirements

Free draining

Steeper slope angles than with the use of cohesive fill, therefore steeper slope angles of up to 1 in 2 can be used.

Against


Use of light-weight fill

options (PFA) Not Recommended

For

Light-weight nature will significantly reduce load on underlying strata

Potential cost savings if source of material is local and abundant

Against


Some light-weight fills are classified as waste products, so require permits, specific handling techniques and base layers which

will increase complexity and cost.




Table 7-3: Options for Branston Locks Canal Bridge


Pad Foundation

Recommended if

bridge loads do not

exceed bearing

capacity of River

Terrace Deposits

For

Reinforcement can be added to carry tensile stresses and required loads

Economic

Minimal vibration when compared to piling solutions

Against

Must be supported on fairly stiff ground, which is unlikely to subside

Foundation size can be very large to cope with high point loads

Requires the bearing capacity of the River Terrace Deposits to be greater than the loads imposed by the bridge

Reinforced Earth

Recommended

subject superficial

deposits having

suitable bearing

capacity for the

required loads

For

Reinforcement of embankment material supports the tensile stresses and required loads imposed by the structure

Economic

Rapid implementation

Does not require materials to be driven in to the underlying formations and groundwater

Minimal vibration when compared to piling solutions

Design and construction can be undertaken by specialist contractors

Proprietary systems are supplied with high quality block facings which can be tailored to be sympathetic to the existing

infrastructure

Against

Must be supported on fairly stiff ground, which is unlikely to subside

Foundation size can be very large to cope with high point loads

Requires the bearing capacity of the River Terrace Deposits to be greater than the loads imposed by the bridge






Sheet Piling

Recommended

subject to

successful pile

testing

For

Traditional Construction Methods

Quick and easy to implement

Piles can be driven to formation height

The relatively thin pile cross-section should allow the pile to be driven to depth more easily when compared to other piling

systems

Against

Vibration during installation may exceed limits required for working in the vicinity of the canal

The flat cross-section of the sheet pile will impact on the stiffness of the pile

A facia will be required to cover the sheet piles to aid aesthetics (e.g. concrete panels/block work, brickwork)

Any movement of the pile due to bending will damage the proposed facia

The drivability of the pile will depend on the ground conditions (large cobbles or boulders may deflect or stop piles being driven)

The nature of the River Terrace Deposits may cause significant damage to the piles during installation – damage would be

undetected

Large sheet pile sections may be required leading to the need for a crane on site

Potential delivery issues if long pile lengths are required






Pre-cast driven piles Not Recommended

For

Piles can be manufactured to specification off-site; improved Health Safety Environment and Quality control.

Low materials movement on and around site when compared to other methods

Piles can be driven to current ground level for the bridge superstructure (wingwalls and abutment) to be constructed off the

piles

Against

Vibration during installation may exceed limits required for working in the vicinity of the canal

Smooth shaft surface reduces skin friction, so reliance on end bearing pressure critical

Potential for damage to pile during installation going undetected

Pile tops will need to be broken down to the required height – vibration and HS issues

Driving piles through the River Terrace Deposits may prove difficult to reach target depth

River Terrace Deposits are likely to cause significant damage to the pile






CFA piles Not Recommended

For

Piles are constructed on site to required specifications

Simple, rapid process

Is not a dynamic, impact intensive process

No hole casing required

Irregular shaft surface increases skin friction

Low noise and vibration generation

Against

Potential for hole collapse or voiding depending on ground conditions

Multi-phase process

Implemented at ground level and a traditional abutment and wingwall bridge structure is used.


Integrity of piles dependent on timely concrete supply

Pre-fabricated steel pile cages will be required

River Terrace Deposits are likely to cause significant damage to equipment

River Terrace Deposits are prone to collapse in open-hole situations






Driven Cast in situ

piles Not Recommended

For

Piles are constructed on site to required specifications

Simple, rapid process

Is not a dynamic, impact intensive process

Against

Multi-phase process

Requires temporary casing be withdrawn from hole

Implemented at ground level and a traditional abutment and wingwall bridge structure is used


Integrity of piles dependent on timely concrete supply

Pre-fabricated steel pile cages will be required

River Terrace Deposits have potential to collapse if insufficient restraining force is in place – upon removal of temporary casing

the pile may lose integrity




8 COMPARISON OF PROJECT OPTIONS AND RISKS

The options considered the most appropriate for the ground conditions and proposed

construction are summarised below:

Pre-loading of ground susceptible to settlement where programme allows

Granular Fill Embankment

Reinforced Earth bridge abutments

OR

Sheet Piling (subject to successful pile testing)

A review of the geotechnical and environmental risks associated with the proposed

works has been undertaken. The risks have been evaluated using a risk evaluation

matrix as presented below in Table 8.1. Reference has been made to Part 3 of HD 41/03

‘Maintenance of Highway Geotechnical Assets’ [28] as part of the risk assessment

process.

The risk register is detailed in Table 8.2. The risk register lists the anticipated

geotechnical and environmental hazards associated with the works and the potential

consequences of those hazards. The risk before control of the hazard has been assessed

quantitatively as has the anticipated risk following the proposed response to each

hazard.




Table 8-1: Risk Evaluation Matrix

LIKELIHOOD (L) X SEVERITY (S) = RISK I

% Likelihood

Severity

TIME, COST, SHE, REPUTATION 1 2 3 4 5

Almost Certain 5 Negligible Impact 1 E.g.

Programme,

budget,

commercial

sensitivity,

SHE risks and

reputation

Lik

elih

ood

5 5 10 15 20 25

Probable 4 Client and Contract strained 2 4 4 8 12 16 20

Possible 3 Client dissatisfaction and damage

to Amey relationships 3 3 3 6 9 12 15

Unlikely 2 Threat to future schemes and

Client/business relationships 4 2 2 4 6 8 10

Negligible 1 Threat to contract credibility 5 1 1 2 3 4 5

Risk Ratings

1 to 5 Green Risk is negligible or of otherwise low severity and shall be set aside for further consideration.

5 to 12 Amber Risk is of concern and shall be subject to further analysis and evaluation.

12 to 25 Red Risk is unacceptable and shall be subject to immediate analysis and evaluation.




Table 8-2: Geotechnical Risk Register

Hazard Consequence Risk Before Control Response Risk After Control

(L) (S) I (L) (S) I

Branston Locks Development

Risk of poor ground

conditions under

embankment and

structures

Unacceptable differential and total settlements

due to poor ground conditions 4 4 16

Develop a ground model of settlement analysis

during the detailed design stage. Design

appropriate geotechnical solutions (piles and

settlement mitigation measures).

2 2 4

Encountering

Contaminated

Materials during

construction.

Contamination within shallow soils was

recorded in 2009. Health and Safety

implications to personnel. Delays dependent

on remedial actions.

4 2 8

Pass all suitable ground investigation to the

appointed contractor. Any evidence of

contaminants being encountered to be recorded

and appropriate personnel notified. Suitable PPE

must be worn at all times.

2 1 2

Encountering

unaccounted

contaminants from

historical land use

(Agriculture).

Historical land use indicates extensive farming.

Health and Safety implications to personnel

with regards to contaminants associated with

agriculture.

3 2 6

Any evidence of contaminants being

encountered to be recorded and appropriate

personnel notified. Suitable PPE must be worn at

all times.

2 1 2

Risk of Flooding. The design may increase the flooding risk of

the site. 2 4 8

Account for an increase in flooding risk during

the detailed design stage. Use the existing Flood

Risk Assessment and incorporate design

solutions as recommended.

2 1 2




Table 8-2: Geotechnical Risk Register

Settlement of final

solution.

Low bearing capacity of the soil. Additional

cost and delays to allow re-design. Implication

to health and safety of site personnel and end

users.

3 5 15

Develop a comprehensive ground model. Pass

on all site investigation information to the

designer and appointed contractor. Ensure

appropriate parameters are utilised for the

design based on a comprehensive Ground

Investigation.

2 2 4

Trent and Mersey

Canal

Damage to canal during construction of road

structures. Mass flooding 2 5 10

Follow protocols set by the Canals and Rivers

Trust 1 2 2

Inability of piling

technique to reach

appropriate depth

(boulders in the

River terrace

deposits, skerries in

the Mercia

Mudstone)

Inappropriate geotechnical design leading to

potential failure. 2 5 10

Undertake test piling to confirm the best piling

method for the scheme 1 2 4



Doc. Ref.:COSTCDX8620 /CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001 Rev. 0 Issued: February 2016

9 REFERENCES

[1] Highways Agency, “Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 4 Section 1 Part

2 HD22/08,” Highways Agency, 2008.

[2] Amey, “Branston Locks Development Phase 1: Preliminary Sources Study Report. CON-GE-

BHAM-COSTCDX8620-PSSR,” Amey, Birmingham, 2015.

[3] Microsoft, “Bing Maps,” Microsoft, 27 November 2015. [Online]. Available:

http://www.bing.com/mapspreview?q=map&mkt=en&FORM=HDRSC4. [Accessed 27

November 2015].

[4] Branston Locks Design Access Statement, Birmingham: Node, 2012.

[5] British Geological Survey, 1:50,000 Geological Sheet 140 (Burton Upon Trent) Solid and

Drift Edition.

[6] BGS, “Geoindex,” NERC, [Online]. Available: http://www.bgs.ac.uk/GeoIndex/. [Accessed

02 November 2015].

[7] Coal Authority, “Coal Mining and Brine Gazetteer,” [Online]. Available:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coal-mining-and-brine-subsidence-claim-

search-directory-of-places. [Accessed 09 Novemeber 2015].

[8] BGS, “Gypsum Mineral Planning Fact Sheet.,” Office of the Deputy Prime Minister., 2006.

[9] Shepherd Gilmore, “ Geo-environmental site investigation and generic quantitative risk

assessment, Report no. R0017 DH ME1072.,” Shepherd Gilmour Environment Ltd. , 2009.

[10] DEFRA, “MAGIC,” Natural England, November 2015. [Online]. Available:

http://www.magic.gov.uk/. [Accessed 02 November 2015].

[11] Environment Agency, “What's in your Backyard?,” Environmental Agency, October 2015.

[Online]. Available: http://maps.environment-

agency.gov.uk/wiyby/wiybyController?ep=maptopics&lang=_e. [Accessed 02 Novemeber

2015].

[12] Shepherd Gilmore, “ Flood Risk Assessment; Branston Locks, Burton upon Trent,”

Shepherd Gilmour Environment Ltd. , 2012.

[13] British Standards Institution, “BS-EN1997-2:2007, EN Eurocode 7 Part 2: Ground

Investiation and Testing,” British Standards Institution, 2007.

[14] Bristish Standards Institution, “BS5930:2015. Code of Practice for Site Investigations,”

Bristish Standards Institution, 2015.




[15] British Standards Institution, BS10175:2011,Code of Practice for Investigation of Potentially

Contamniated Sites, British Standards Institution, 2011.

[16] CC Ground Investigations Ltd, “Branston Locks Ground Investigation Report C4877,” CC

Ground Investigations Ltd, Gloucester, 2015.

[17] British Standards Institute, “BS1377-9:1990 Methods ofor Testing For Soils For Civil

Engineering Purposes Part 9. In-Situ Tests,” British Standards Institute, British Standards

Institute, 1990.

[18] British Standards Institute, “BS EN ISO22476-3:2005, Geotechnical Investigaion and

Testing: Standard Penetration Test,” British Standards Institute, 2005.

[19] British Standards Institution, “Code of Practice for Earth Retaining Structures,” British

Standards Institution, 2015.

[20] M. Stroud, “The Standard Penetration Test - its application and interpretation,” in

Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing (ESOPT I), 1974.

[21] M. Stroud and B. F. Butler, “The standard penetration test and the engineering properties

of glacial materials,” in Proceedings of the Syposium on Engineering Properties of Glacial

Materials, Midlands Geotechnical Society, Birmingham, 1975.

[22] M. Tomlinson, “Foundation Design and Construction,” Pearson Education Ltd, 2001.

[23] J. Bowles, Foundation Analysis and Design, McGraw-Hill, 1996.

[24] Construction Industry Research and Information Association, “CIRIA C570: Engineering in

Mercia Mudstone,” Construction Industry Research and Information Association, London,

2001.

[25] CIRIA, “Piled Foundations in weak rock,” DTI, London, 1999.

[26] International Society for Rock Mechanics, “RTH 325-89: Suggested methods for

determining point load strength,” International Society for Rock Mechanics, 1984.

[27] Environment Agency, The Regulation of the Use of Unbound Pulverised Fuel Ash and

Furnace Bottom Ash, Environment Agency, 2014.

[28] The Highways Agency, “HD 41/03 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges: Maintenanve of

Highway Geotechnical Assets,” The Highways Agency, 2003.




10 GLOSSARY

Abbreviation Meaning

AOD Above Ordnance Datum

ACEC Aggressive Chemical Environment for Concrete

bgl Below Ground Level

BS British Standard

BGS British Geological Survey

BRE Building Research Establishment

CCG CC Ground Investigations (Ltd)

CFA Continuous-Flight Auger

CIRIA Construction Industry Research Information Association

CRT Canal and River Trust

cu Undrained Shear Strength

C0 Uniaxial Compressive Strength

DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

EA Environment Agency

EC7 Eurocode 7

Er Energy Ratio

Eu Young’s Modulus

E’ Drained Young’s Modulus

GI Ground Investigation

GIR Ground Investigation Report

HE Highways England

Is50 Point Load Strength Index

kN Kilonewton

l Litre

LL Liquid Limit




Abbreviation Meaning

m Metre

mm Millimetre

MAGIC Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside

mg Milligrams

MN Meganewton

mv Coefficient of Volume Compressibility

N Standard Penetration Resistance

N60 Standard Penetration Resistance adjusted to a reference energy ratio of 60%

N300 Standard Penetration Resistance corrected to 300mm drive

NMC Natural Moisture Content

OS Ordnance Survey

PFA Pulverised Fuel Ash

PI Plasticity Index

PL Plastic Limit

PSD Particle Size Distribution

PSSR Preliminary Sources Study Report

RAMS Risk Assessments and Method Statements

SCC Staffordshire County Council

SGE Shepherd Gilmore Environment Limited

SPT Standard Penetration Test

TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon

TPH-CWG Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon - Criteria Working Group

v Poisson’s Ratio

WAC Waste Acceptance Criteria

Φ’ Critical State Effective Angle of Shearing Resistance




11 FIGURES

Figure Number Title

1 Site Location Maps

2 Superficial and Bedrock Geology

3 BGS Bore Hole Locations

4 Flood Risk Zones

5 Moisture Content, Plastic Limit and Liquid Limit vs. Depth – All Strata

6 Particle Size Distribution – All Strata

7 Atterberg Line Plot – All Strata

8 SPT ‘N’ Value vs. Depth Down-hole – All Strata

9 cu vs. Depth Down-hole – All Strata

10 mv vs. Depth Down-hole – All Strata

Burton Upon Trent Branston Locks Development Phase 1: Site Access

Branston Locks Development Site

Ground Investigation ReportFigure

Reference:Figure 01

Title: Site Location Maps

Report:

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey map with the permission of the controller of H.M.

Stationery Office © Crown copyright reserved. Licence no. 100033905

Project: Brantson Locks Development: Phase 1Report

Reference:CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001

Branston Locks Development Site Boundary

Phase 1 Site

Phase 1 Site

Source : BGS Geoindex

Figure 2

Project: Brantson Locks Development: Phase 1

Report: Ground Investigation Report

Title: Superficial and Bedrock Geology

Report

Reference

CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-

GIR-001

Figure

Reference

N

Branston Locks Development Site

Phase 1 Access Site

Figure 3

Brantson Locks Development: Phase 1

Ground Investigation Report

BGS Borehole locations

CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-

GIR

Figure

Referece:

Source : British Geological Survey [Ref 6]

Report

Reference

Title:

Report:

Project:

N

Phase 1 Access

Flooding Risk from Surface Water Flooding Risk from Rivers & Seas

Chance of flooding/year Chance of flooding/year

greater than 1 in 30

1 in 100 to 1 in 30

1 in 1000 to 1 in 100

greater than 1 in 30

1 in 100 to 1 in 30

Project: Brantson Locks Development: Phase 1Report

Reference:CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001

1 in 1000 to 1 in 100

less than 1 in 1000less than 1 in 1000

Ground Investigation ReportFigure

Reference:Figure 4

Title: Flood Risk Zones

Report:

CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-001 Figure 5

Project:

Report:

Title:

Report

Reference:

Branston Locks Development Phase 1


Moisture Content, Plastic Limit and Liquid Limit vs. Depth - All Strata

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

0 10 20 30 40 50

Dep

th (m

AO

D)

Moisture Content (%)

MC, PL and LL vs. Depth - All Strata

Made Ground MC Made Ground LL Made Ground PL

Granular Fill MC Cohesive Fill MC Cohesive Fill LL

Cohesive Fill PL River Terrace Deposits MC River Terrace Deposits LL

River Terrace Deposits PL Weathered Mercia Mudstone Formation MC Weathered Mercia Mudstone Formation LL

Weathered Mercia Mudstone Formation PL

Report

Reference:

Particle Size Distribution - All Strata

Figure 6CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-001Figure

Reference:

Project:


Title:


0.002

0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2 6 20 60 200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

ge P

assin

g (

%)

Particle Size (mm)

Particle Size Distribution - All Strata

Cohesive Fill Granular Fill

Made Ground River Terrace Deposit

Mercia Mudstone Weathering Grade IVa Mercia Mudstone Weathering Grade III

Mercia Mudstone Weathering Grade II

CLAY SILT SAND GRAVEL

COBBLES fine medium coarse fine medium coarse fine medium coarse

Project:

Report:

Title:

Report

Reference:

Figure

Reference:



Atterberg Line Plot - All Strata

Figure 7CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-001

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Pla

sti

cit

y I

nd

ex(%

)

Liquid Limit (%)

Aline Cohesive Fill (Av) Cohesive Fill Made Ground River Terrace Deposit (Av)

River Terrace Deposit Mercia Mudstone Weathering Grade IVa Mercia Mudstone all Grades (Av) Mercia Mudstone Weathering Grade III Mercia Mudstone Weathering Grade II

CL CI CH

ML MI

CV

MV MH

Figure 8

Project: Branston Locks Development Phase 1


Title: SPT N Value vs. Depth Down-hole - All Strata

Report

Reference:CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-001

Figure

Reference:

NOTES: - SPT derived Mass Shear Strength from Stroud c = f1*N (f1 = 5.5 - 5.8)

- HV Mass Shear Strength values limited to 120 kPa

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Dep

th (

m A

OD

)

SPT N values

SPT N value vs. Depth- All Strata

Cohesive Fill RTD


Mercia Mudstone Weathering Grade II

Mercia Mudston G II 34.4m SPT N = 750

Cohesive Fill 47.84m SPT N = 500

Figure 9



Title: cu vs. Depth Down-hole - All Strata

Report


Figure

Reference:



35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Dep

th (

m A

OD

)

Cu (kPa)

cu value vs. Depth- All Strata

Cohesive Fill

RTD

Mercia Mudstone Weathering Grade IVa

Mercia Mudstone Weathering Grade III

Figure 10



Title: mv vs. Depth Down-hole - All Strata

Report


Figure

Reference:



35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60

Dep

th (

m A

OD

)

Mv values

mv value vs. Depth- All Strata

Cohesive Fill RTD





12 DRAWINGS

Drawing Number Title

COSTCDX8620-GEO-001 Branston Locks Development: Site Location Plan

COSTCDX8620-GEO-002 Branston Locks Development: Exploratory Hole Location Plan

COSTCDX8620-GEO-003 Branston Locks Development: Geological Cross-Section

Revisions

Rev Date Detail

By

Site Location Plan

Branston Lock

Development

Trim

to this line for A1

.

.

010

20

30

40

50

100

A1

\\idhrs001\Consdata\RailD

ata\Projects\ID

H - G

eotechnical Projects\Staffordshire Infrastructure+

\Branston Locks D

evelopm

ent\CAD

\W

IP\1 Live D

rgs\CO

STCD

X8620-G

EO

-001.dw

g

A1

Drawing No. Revision

Scale

Size

A1

Grid Reference

Produced Checked

Prepared

The Built County - Highways

1 Staffordshire Place

C/O Wedgwood Building,

Tipping Street

Stafford, ST16 2DH

Drawing No.Revision

Date

Status

COSTCDX8620-GEO-001

P1

F

21.09.15

1:1000IT NM TB

SK2221

Preliminary

LEGEND

Site Location

Approximate Extents of

Phase One Works

Approximate Extents of

Phase Three Works

Site Location

NOTES

1. Phase Extents are approximate, they should be

used for guidance and site location purposes only.

0.000

10.000

17.854

2

0

.0

0

0

3

0

.

0

0

0

4

0

.

0

0

0

5

0

.

0

0

0

5

0

.

1

2

1

6

0

.

0

0

0

7

0

.

0

0

0

8

0

.

0

0

0

8

9

.

4

7

8

0

.

0

0

0

1

0

.

0

0

0

2

0

.

0

0

0

3

0

.

0

0

0

3

6

.

6

7

1

60.000

4

0

.

0

0

0

5

0

.0

0

0

60.000

7

0.0

00

80.000

0.000

1

0

.0

0

0

13.620

2

0.0

00

3

0

.0

0

0

4

0

.

0

0

0

4

2

.

2

1

6

4

5

.

3

7

3

0

.0

0

0

10.000

20.000

23.066

30.000

40.000

47.631

5

0.0

00

6

0

.

0

0

0

6

7

.

2

9

9

7

0

.

0

0

0

8

0

.

0

0

0

8

6

.

0

1

5

9

0

.

0

0

0

9

1

.

2

2

0

1

0

0

.

0

0

0

1

1

0

.

0

0

0

1

1

7

.

4

0

6

1

2

0

.

0

0

0

1

3

0

.

0

0

0

1

3

1

.

4

0

6

1

3

9

.

0

7

7

0.000

1

0

.0

0

0

2

0

.0

0

0

3

0

.0

0

0

40.000

5

0

.0

0

0

6

0

.0

0

0

7

0

.0

0

0

8

0

.0

0

0

8

0

.6

6

4

3

3

5

.

9

0

5

1

8

6

.

8

9

8

1

5

9

.

6

7

2

9

0

.0

0

0

1

0

0

.0

0

0

1

1

0

.0

0

0

1

2

0

.

0

0

0

1

3

0

.

0

0

0

1

4

0

.

0

0

0

1

5

0

.

0

0

0

1

6

0

.

0

0

0

1

7

0

.

0

0

0

1

8

0

.

0

0

0

1

9

0

.

0

0

0

2

0

0

.

0

0

0

2

1

0

.

0

0

0

2

2

0

.

0

0

0

2

3

0

.

0

0

0

2

4

0

.

0

0

0

2

5

0

.

0

0

0

2

6

0

.

0

0

0

2

7

0

.

0

0

0

2

8

0

.

0

0

0

2

9

0

.

0

0

0

3

0

0

.

0

0

0

3

1

0

.

0

0

0

3

2

0

.

0

0

0

3

3

0

.

0

0

0

3

4

0

.

0

0

0

3

5

0

.

0

0

0

3

6

0

.0

0

0

3

7

0

.0

0

0

3

8

0

.0

0

0

3

9

0

.0

0

0

400.000

400.000

410.000

420.000

4

3

0

.0

0

0

4

4

0

.0

0

0

4

5

0

.

0

0

0

4

5

7

.

9

0

8

4

6

0

.

0

0

0

4

7

0

.

0

0

0

4

8

0

.

0

0

0

4

9

0

.

0

0

0

4

9

6

.

3

0

2

5

0

0

.

0

0

0

510.000

5

2

0

.

0

0

0

5

2

3

.

9

1

8

5

3

0

.

0

0

0

5

4

0

.

0

0

0

5

5

0

.

0

0

0

5

5

0

.

0

5

4

5

6

0

.0

0

0

570.000

5

8

0

.

0

0

0

5

8

2

.

4

3

8

5

9

0

.

0

0

0

6

0

0

.

0

0

0

6

1

0

.

0

0

0

0

.

0

0

0

1

0

.

0

0

0

2

0

.

0

0

0

3

0

.

0

0

0

4

0

.

0

0

0

5

0

.

0

0

0

6

0

.

0

0

0

6

0

.

0

0

0

7

0

.

0

0

0

8

0

.

0

0

0

9

0

.

0

0

0

1

0

0

.

0

0

0

1

1

0

.

0

0

0

1

2

0

.

0

0

0

1

2

1

.

7

6

4

1

3

0

.

0

0

0

1

4

0

.

0

0

0

1

5

0

.

0

0

0

1

6

0

.

0

0

0

1

7

0

.

0

0

0

1

8

0

.

0

0

0

1

9

0

.

0

0

0

2

0

0

.

0

0

0

2

0

1

.

2

0

8

2

1

0

.

0

0

0

2

2

0

.

0

0

0

2

3

0

.

0

0

0

2

4

0

.

0

0

0

2

5

0

.

0

0

0

2

6

0

.

0

0

0

2

7

0

.

0

0

0

2

8

0

.

0

0

0

2

9

0

.

0

0

0

3

0

0

.

0

0

0

3

1

0

.

0

0

0

3

2

0

.

0

0

0

3

3

0

.

0

0

0

3

4

0

.

0

0

0

3

5

0

.

0

0

0

3

6

0

.

0

0

0

3

7

0

.

0

0

0

3

8

0

.

0

0

0

3

9

0

.

0

0

0

4

0

0

.

0

0

0

4

1

0

.

0

0

0

4

2

0

.

0

0

0

4

3

0

.

0

0

0

4

4

0

.

0

0

0

4

5

0

.

0

0

0

Phase One

Phase Three

Revisions

Rev Date Detail

By

P1 27.11.15 For Issue NM

Exploratory Hole

Location Plan

Branston Lock

Development

Trim

to this line for A1

..

010

20

30

40

50

100

A1

\\ID

HRS001\ConsD

ata\RailD

ata\Projects\ID

H - G


\Branston Locks D

evelopm

ent\CAD

\W

IP\1 Live D

rgs\CO

STCD

X8620-G

EO

-002 &

003.dw

g

002


Scale

Size

A1

Grid Reference

Produced Checked

Prepared




Tipping Street

Stafford, ST16 2DH

Drawing No.Revision

Date

Status

COSTCDX8620-GEO-002

P1

COSTCDX8620-GEO-002

P1

27.11.15

1:500IT NM TB

SK2221

SHARED

LEGEND

Combined Cable Percussive

and Rotary Boreholes

Window Sample Holes

Inspection Pits

Section Marker

NOTES

1. Borehole locations are accurate to six significant

figures as shown in the Borehole Location Table

below.

Borehole Location Table

Hole ID

Easting

(x)

Northing

(y)

Ground

Level

(mAOD)

P1-BH01421714

321402 47.54

P1-BH01A 421719 321397 48.16

P1-BH02 421733 321371 47.76

P1-WS01 421614 321430 47.41

P1-WS02 421649 321514 47.77

P1-WS03 421677 321445 47.54

P1-WS04 421787 321350 48.08

P1-WS05 421826 321413 47.87

P1-WS06 421841 321335 52.58

P1-HP01 421903 321329 48.08

N

A

003

A

003

A

0

0

3

A

0

0

3

Revisions

Rev Date Detail

By

P1 06.01.16 For Issue NM

Geological Long Section

Branston Lock

Development

Trim

to this line for A1

..

010

20

30

40

50

100

A1

\\ID

HRS001\ConsD

ata\RailD

ata\Projects\ID

H - G


\Branston Locks D

evelopm

ent\CAD

\W

IP\1 Live D

rgs\CO

STCD

X8620-G

EO

-002 &

003.dw

g

003


Scale

Size

A1

Grid Reference

Produced Checked

Prepared




Tipping Street

Stafford, ST16 2DH

Drawing No.Revision

Date

Status

COSTCDX8620-GEO-003

P1

COSTCDX8620-GEO-003

P1

27.11.15

1:500IT NM TB

SK2221

SHARED

LEGEND

Combined Cable Percussive

and Rotary Boreholes

Window Sample Holes

Inspection Pits

NOTES

1. For details of Weathering grades for Mercia

Mudstone, refer to Section 6.5 of the Ground

Investigation Report:

CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001.

2. Borehole strips are horizontally exaggerated for

better visibility.

LEGEND

Made Ground

Granular Fill

Cohesive Fill

River Terrace Deposits

Weathered Mercia Mudstone

(Grade IV)

Ground Water Encountered



Doc. Ref.:COSTCDX8620 /CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001 Rev. 0- A.1 - Issued: February 2016

Appendix A Shepherd Gilmore Environment

Limited: Report no. R0017 DH

ME1072 borehole locations &

extracts



Doc. Ref.:COSTCDX8620 /CON-GE-BHAM-COSTCDX8620-GIR-001 Rev. 0- B.2 - Issued: February 2016

Appendix B CC Ground Investigation Ltd:

Factual Ground Investigation

Report

FACTUAL REPORT

SITE: Branston Lock Development CLIENT: Staffordshire County Council / Nurton Development

(Quintus) LTD ORDER No: 48000040114/006 DATE: 07 January 2016 REPORT No: C4877

CC Ground Investigations Ltd Report C4877

CONTENTS

REPORT

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. SITE DESCRIPTION AND GEOLOGY 3

2.1 Site Description 3

2.2 Geology 3

3. GROUND INVESTIGATION 4

3.1 Fieldwork 4

3.2 In Situ Testing 6

3.3 Logging 6

3.4 Laboratory Testing 7

4. REFERENCES 9

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Site Plan

Appendix B – Exploratory Hole Data

Appendix C – Laboratory Test Results

Appendix D – SPT Calibration Data


Page 1

1. INTRODUCTION

This investigation was carried out by CC Ground Investigations Ltd (CCGI) on the

instruction and on behalf of Staffordshire County Council / Nurton Development

(Quintus) LTD (The Client) under the technical direction of Amey OWR Limited.

The purpose of the ground investigation was to provide information to assist in the

design of Branston Locks Development Phase 1; a new access route from the A38

roundabout, canal bridge and roads in to the Branston Locks Development.

The scope of the ground investigation was defined in the Engineer’s specification,

reference: Ground Investigation Specification Staffordshire County council‐

Branston Locks Development (CON‐GE‐BHAM‐COSTCDX8620‐GI‐001‐Revision 0).

This report describes the work carried out by CC Ground Investigations Ltd and

presents the findings.

All information, comments and opinions given in this report are based on the

ground conditions encountered during the site work, and on the results of

laboratory and field tests performed during the investigation. There may however

be conditions at or adjacent to the site which have not been taken into account,

such as unpredictable soil strata and water conditions between or below

exploratory holes. A careful watch should be maintained during any future

groundworks and the comments of this report reviewed as necessary.

This report has been prepared for Staffordshire County Council / Nurton

Development (Quintus) LTD and Amey OWR Limited. This report shall not be


Page 2

relied upon or transferred to other parties without the written consent of CC

Ground Investigations Ltd. Should any information contained within this report

be used by any unauthorised third party it is done so at their own risk and shall

not be the responsibility of CC Ground Investigations Ltd.


Page 3

2. SITE DESCRIPTION AND GEOLOGY

2.1 Site Description

The area of investigation comprises a small residential area and local nature

reserve, North of Branston Road with the land currently used for agricultural

purposes, which consists of predominantly open fields at, nearest postcode DE14

3EZ. The site is centred on the approximate National Grid Reference SK 21705

21302.

2.2 Geology

Geological Records (British Geological Survey (BGS), England and Wales sheet 140

Burton upon Trent 1:50,000 scale) indicate the site is underlain by superficial

deposits of Holme Pierrepont Sand and Gravel Member, part of the Trent Valley

Formation. Underlying solid geology comprising mudstones of the Mercia

Mudstone Group is recorded.


Page 4

3. GROUND INVESTIGATION

3.1 Fieldwork

Ten exploratory holes were carried out between 12th and 17th of November 2015.

All exploratory hole locations are shown on the site plan (Appendix A). The

exploratory hole locations were set out by CCGI as directed by the Client on site.

The fieldwork was carried out in general accordance with BS5930, Amendment 2

(2010).

The boreholes, referenced P1‐BH01, P1‐BH01A and P1‐BH02 (Exploratory Hole Data

– Appendix B) were formed using a track mounted Comacchio MC300 multi

purpose rig. Following CAT scanning hand tools were used to excavate an

inspection pit to a maximum depth of 1.20m to check for buried services. Bulk and

environmental soil samples were taken and retained from the inspection pits. The

boreholes were then advanced using percussive sampling techniques to produce

continuous disturbed samples ranging between 112mm and 98mm diameter.

On refusal of percussive sampling the boreholes were continued by rotary core

drilling techniques utilising a water/polymer flush. A double‐tube swivel core barrel

with a semi‐rigid plastic liner was utilised to recover continuous cores of 91mm

diameter.

Undisturbed samples of 100mm nominal diameter were taken in suitable cohesive

material using an open drive sampler U(T)100. The samples were wax sealed on site

to prevent moisture loss.


Page 5

The boreholes, referenced P1‐WS01 to P1‐WS06 (Exploratory Hole Data – Appendix

B) were formed using a track mounted Terrier drilling rig. Following CAT scanning

hand tools were used to excavate an inspection pit to a maximum depth of 1.20m

to check for buried services. Bulk and environmental soil samples were taken and

retained from the inspection pits. The boreholes were then advanced using

percussive sampling techniques to produce continuous disturbed samples ranging

between 83mm and 71mm diameter.

Soil samples were retained in semi‐rigid plastic liners, which were capped on site to

prevent moisture loss.

Boreholes were monitored for groundwater ingress as they were advanced. Upon

encountering water, sampling was temporarily stopped to allow the level to

stabilise. Water levels were also recorded at the start and finish of each shift, on

completion of the borehole and are presented on the relevant log.

On completion, a gas/water monitoring standpipes was installed in P1‐BH01. Each

installation consisted of a 50mm ID HDPE slotted tube set in a filter response zone

of limestone free gravel. The installation was sealed above and below with a

bentonite pellet seal and accessed via a valve assembly. The installation was

protected at the surface by a lockable stopcock cover set in concrete. Installation

details are given on the relevant borehole log.

The inspection pits, referenced P1‐BH01A and P1‐HP01 (Exploratory Hole Data –

Appendix B) were undertaken to provide further information in close proximity to

the existing embankment and canal towpath. Representative bulk disturbed and

environmental soil samples were taken at a range of depths.


Page 6

On completion, all remaining positions were backfilled with bentonite pellets and

arisings with the surface reinstated.

Subsequent to fieldwork, all exploratory hole positions were surveyed and National

Grid co‐ordinates and levels are presented on the relevant log.

On completion of fieldwork all samples were brought to CCGI’s office for storage.

3.2 In Situ Testing

Standard penetration tests (SPT) were carried out in general accordance with BS EN

ISO 22476‐3:2005. A split barrel or a solid cone was used depending upon the

materials encountered and the split barrel samples retained as small disturbed

samples. The SPT N value was taken as the number of blows to penetrate the

300mm test drive following a 150mm seating drive. Where low penetration was

recorded the seating drive was terminated at 25 blows and the test drive

completed after a further 50 blows. SPT results are summarised as uncorrected N

values on the borehole logs and . SPT hammer calibration data is presented in

Appendix D.

3.3 Logging

Soil and rock samples from the exploratory holes were logged by an Engineering

Geologist in general accordance with BS5930, Amendment 2 (2010). Bulk, small

disturbed, core and environmental soil samples were taken retained at a range of

depths. Environmental soil samples were stored on site in temperature controlled

conditions. Soil and rock descriptions are presented in the borehole logs together


Page 7

with details of sampling, in situ testing and relevant comments on drilling

techniques.

Prior to logging photographs of the samples were taken and are presented

following the relevant log.

3.4 Laboratory Testing

The following laboratory tests were carried out by Professional Soils Laboratory

(UKAS No. 4043) in accordance with BS1377:1990, Parts 1 to 8, unless otherwise

stated. The results are presented in Appendix C.

Test Type No. of Tests Remarks

Natural Moisture Content 24 The results are shown on the summary of soil classification tests.

Liquid and Plastic Limits 11 The results are shown on the plasticity chart and summary of soil classification tests.

Particle Size Distribution (wet sieving method)

19 The fine fractions of 12 of these tests were further analysed using the pipette method.

One Dimensional Consolidation 1

Multi‐stage Quick Undrained Triaxial Test

1 Carried out on a full diameter UT100 sample.

Point Load Strength 3 ISRM RTH 325‐89 SR12

BRE SD1 chemical testing suite for soil and water

6 Testing carried out by Chemical Testing Laboratories in accordance with BRE Special Digest 1.


Page 8

A range of chemical tests were carried out on soil and water samples by i2

Analytical (UKAS No. 4041). Testing was carried out in accordance with ISO 17025.

The results are tabulated and presented in Appendix C.

CC GROUND INVESTIGATIONS LIMITED

Mike Atherton BSc (Hons) FGS Rob Clarke. BSc (Hons) MSc (Eng) FGS Senior Engineering Geologist Director


Page 9

4. REFERENCES

British Geological Society, Solid and Drift Sheet 140, Burton Upon Trent, 1:50,000 scale

BRE Special Digest 1:2003: Concrete in aggressive ground. Part 1.

BS 5930+A2:1999 (2010), Code of Practice for Site Investigations

BS 1377: Parts 1 to 9 (1990), Methods of Tests of Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes

BS EN ISO 14688: Part 1: (2002), Identification and description of soil.

BS EN ISO 14688: Part 2: (2004), Principles for a classification of soil.

BS EN ISO 14689: Part 1: (2003), Identification and description.

BS EN ISO 22475: Part 1: (2006), Technical principles for execution.

BS EN ISO 22476: Part 3: (2005), Standard penetration test.

ISRM RTH 325‐89 SR12, Suggested Method for Determining Point Load Strength.


APPENDIX A

Appendix A – Site Plan

Site Layout Plan

Contract No: C4877

Staffordshire County Council

Appendix A

Branston Lock Development

Drawn by: Scale:

MA NTS

Notes:

Reproduced from base plan provided by Engineer


APPENDIX B

Appendix B – Exploratory Hole Data

CC Ground Investigations Ltd

KEY TO EXPLORATORY HOLE LOGS

Logging

The logging of soils and rocks has been carried out in general accordance with BS 5930:1999 (Amendment No.2, 2010).

Sample no/type

C Core run / sample X Dynamic sample D Small disturbed sample B Large disturbed sample U Undisturbed sample UT Thin walled undisturbed sample W Water sample ES Environmental SPT Standard Penetration Test carried out CPT Solid Cone Penetration Test carried out

Water levels

Initial Water Strike Level after monitoring 3.00m Standing Level

Insitu Tests

S 30 Split spoon sampler (SPT) followed by N Value (EN ISO 22476-3:2005) C 30 Solid cone (CPT) followed by N Value (EN ISO 22476-3:2005) *240 Where full test drive not completed, linearly extrapolated N value reported. ** No effective penetration H 30 Hand Vane – direct reading in kPa. Re* denotes refusal (i.e. >140 kPa)

Sample range

Undisturbed sample Core run

Installation Details

Porous Tip Screened Standpipe Bentonite seal

Plain standpipe Granular response zone Concrete

Grout Arisings backfill

C U(T)100

Undisturbed

sample

Rotary core sub-

sample

47.24

47.04

46.69

46.04

45.09

42.84

41.34

0.30

0.50

0.85

1.50

2.45

4.70

6.20

(0.65)

(0.95)

(2.25)

(1.50)

(3.00)

MADE GROUND: Grass over brown slightly sandy clayeyGRAVEL with frequent roots and rootlets (<2mm). Gravelis sub-angular to rounded fine to coarse of siliceousmaterial, siltstone and 1 no. metal fragment (<50mm).Soft brown and orangish brown slightly gravelly sandyCLAY with rare roots and rootlets (<1mm). Gravel issub-rounded to rounded fine to coarse of siliceousmaterial and siltstone.Soft brown and dark grey locally black clayey verygravelly SAND with a slight organic odour. Gravel issub-angular to sub-rounded fine to coarse of siliceousmaterial and siltstone.Light grey and grey slightly clayey gravelly SAND. Gravelis sub-rounded to rounded fine to coarse of siliceousmaterial and siltstone.1.20-1.50m: Locally very gravelly.1.20-1.50m: Medium dense.Light grey and grey slightly clayey slightly gravelly SAND.Gravel is sub-rounded to rounded fine to medium ofsiliceous material.2.20-2.65m: Medium dense to dense.Grey and light grey locally mottled brown and off whitevery clayey very sandy GRAVEL with low cobble content.Gravel is sub-angular to rounded fine to coarse ofsiliceous material, siltstone and sandstone. Cobbles arerounded of siliceous material.3.20-3.64m: Very dense.3.70-3.90m: Brown locally bluish grey clayey sandygravel.4.00-4.20m: Very sandy.4.20-4.65m: Medium dense.

4.50-4.70m: Slightly sandy.

Firm indistinctly thinly laminated brown and reddishbrown slightly sandy silty CLAY with rare light bluish greymottle (<10mm).

5.50-6.20m: Locally friable.

Very stiff indistinctly thinly laminated brown and reddishbrown slightly sandy silty CLAY with rare bluish greymottling (<10mm).6.20-6.80m: Locally gravelly. Gravel is sub-angular fineto coarse of extremely weak mudstone lithorelicts.

Seepage

BESB

ESB

ES

BES

SPT

B

SPT

B

SPT

D

D

D

CPT

B

UT100

D

B

SPT

B

0.10

0.30

0.50

1.00

1.20 - 1.65

1.50 - 2.20

2.20 - 2.65

2.45 - 3.20

3.20 - 3.64

3.50 - 3.70

3.70 - 3.90

4.00 - 4.20

4.20 - 4.65

4.70 - 5.20

5.20 - 5.65

5.65 - 5.75

6.20 - 6.70

6.70 - 7.15

7.00 - 7.90

S 26

S 30

S*52

C 18

S 34

0.90 Nil 0.90 3.203.207.907.90

3.203.205.305.30

0.002.301.902.30

12/11/15 12/11/201513/11/201513/11/201516/11/2015

REMARKS:EQUIPMENT: Hand digging tools. Comacchio MC300 multi purpose track mounted rig.METHOD: Hand dug inspection pit: 0.00-1.20m. Continuous dynamic sampled (128mm and 113mm diam) 1.20-7.90m. Waterflush rotary coring using T6-116 corebarrel 7.90-16.20m.CASING: SW diam to 1.50m, PW diam to 5.30m.GROUNDWATER: Seepage at 0.90m. No rise recorded.INSTALLATION: 50mm ID HDPE slotted pipe with washed gravel response zone: 1.00-16.00m, plain pipe with bentonite pellet seal: 0.20-1.00m, flush 150mm steelcover set in concrete 0.00-0.20m. Gas valve fitted.

(m)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

LegendLevel(mAD)

Depth(m)

ROTARY BOREHOLE LOG

InstallTCRSCRRQD

CoreRun &

SampleDescriptionWater

Levels No/Type Depth (m) Result

Telephone: 01452 739165 , Fax: 01452 739220 , Email: [email protected]

CC GROUND INVESTIGATIONS LTDC

C R

OT

AR

Y L

OG

C48

77.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

AG

S 3

_1.G

DT

7/

1/16

Hole TypeDS+RC

17/11/2015

Date Strike Depth(m)

Casing Depth(m)

Depth AfterObservation (m)

Hole Progress:Date Hole Depth

(m)Casing Depth

(m)Water Depth

(m)

C4877

Groundwater:

End:

12/11/2015Start:

Project Name:

Location:

Client:

Borehole No.

Sheet 1 of 3

Logged ByDP

Project No:

Dates:

Co-ords:

Level:

E 421714 N 321402Branston Lock Development

Burton on Trent

Staffordshire County Council / Nurton Development(Quintus) LTD

P1-BH01

Scale1 : 50.0047.54mAOD

Core Run, Samples & Testing

Seepage

38.34

37.19

35.49

33.14

32.39

31.94

31.34

9.20

10.35

12.05

14.40

15.15

15.60

16.20

28%0%0%

78%0%0%

89%2%0%

100%5%0%

100%0%0%

95%41%0%

98%52%14%

(1.15)

(1.70)

(2.35)

(0.75)

(0.45)

(0.60)

7.90-8.40m: Limited recovery.7.90-8.29m: Very stiff to hard.Very stiff indistinctly thinly laminated brown and reddishbrown slightly sandy silty CLAY with rare bluish greymottling (<10mm). (continued from previous sheet)8.70-9.06m: Hard.

Very stiff thinly laminated reddish brown slightly sandyslightly gravelly silty CLAY with occasional thicklaminations of extremely weak mudstone (<15mm) andrare light bluish grey mottling (<5mm). Gravel is angularto sub-angular fine to coarse lof extremely weakmudstone lithorelicts.

10.20-10.56m: Hard.Very stiff thinly laminated reddish brown slightly sandygravelly CLAY with occasional thick laminations ofextremely weak mudstone (<20mm). Gravel is angular tosub-angular fine to coarse of extremely weak mudstonelithorelicts.10.80m: Very thin bed of weak mudstone (<30mm). Nonintact.10.90-11.00m: Thin bed of weak mudstone withextremely closely to very closely spaced discontinuities.11.20-11.25m: Very thin bed of weak mudstone withextremely closely spaced discontinuities.11.80-12.00m: Occasional veins of light grey horizontalgypsum (<5mm).Extremely weak thinly laminated reddish brownMUDSTONE with rare light bluish grey mottling (<2mm)and locally tending to a stiff clay with occasionalextremely weak sub-angular fine to coarse gravel sizedmudstone lithorelicts. Discontinuities are randomlyorientated extremely closely to very closely spacedundulating rough and smooth.12.05-12.20m: Weak. Very closely space discontinuities.12.25-12.70m: Occasional horizontal light grey gypsumveins (<5mm).13.00m: Horizontal light grey gypsum vein (<40mm).13.05m: Horizontal light grey gypsum vein (<2mm).13.20-13.40m: Weak. Non-intact.13.40-14.00m: Tending to firm gravelly clay. Gravel issub-angular fine to coarse of extremely weak mudstonelithorelicts.13.75-14.00m: Vertical light grey gypsum vein (<2mmthick).14.00-14.40m: Non-intact. Possibly drilling induced.Extremely weak thinly laminated reddish brownMUDSTONE. Discontinuities are horizontal andsub-horizontal very closely to closely spaced undulatingrough and smooth.14.40-14.45m: Vertical discontinuity.14.50-14.52m: Non-intact.14.65-14.70m: Horizontal off-white gypsum vein.14.70-14.85m: Locally bluish grey.14.90-15.15m: Vertical off-white gypsum vein (<20mmthick).15.00-15.15m: Weak with closely spaced discontinuities.Extremely weak thinly laminated reddish brown locallybluish grey and light grey MUDSTONE with occasionalsub-horizontal and sub-vertical gypsum veins (<5mm)and tending to a stiff clay with occasional extremely weaksub-angular fine to coarse gravel sized mudstonelithorelicts. Discontinuities are randomly orientatedextremely closely spaced planar smooth and rough.Weak indistinctly thinly laminated reddish brown locallybluish grey and light grey MUDSTONE with occasional

CSPT

CSPT

B

CCPT

B

CCPT

CB

CCPT

B

C

CC

CPTC

CCPT

7.90 - 8.707.90 - 8.29

8.70 - 10.208.70 - 9.06

9.50 - 10.20

10.20 - 11.7010.20 - 10.56

11.00 - 11.70

11.70 - 13.2011.70 - 12.12

12.03 - 12.1012.20 - 12.90

13.20 - 14.0013.20 - 13.3513.50 - 14.00

14.00 - 14.70

14.65 - 14.7014.70 - 16.2014.70 - 14.8915.08 - 15.20

16.10 - 16.2016.20 - 16.34

S*63

S*71

C*71

C*54

C*750

C*150

C*158

14.0014.0016.20

5.305.305.30

2.702.402.47

16/11/201517/11/201517/11/2015

(m)

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

LegendLevel(mAD)

Depth(m)

ROTARY BOREHOLE LOG

InstallTCRSCRRQD

CoreRun &





C R

OT

AR

Y L

OG

C48

77.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

AG

S 3

_1.G

DT

7/

1/16

Hole TypeDS+RC

17/11/2015


Casing Depth(m)



(m)Casing Depth

(m)Water Depth

(m)

C4877

Groundwater:

End:

12/11/2015Start:

Project Name:

Location:

Client:

Borehole No.

Sheet 2 of 3

Logged ByDP

Project No:

Dates:

Co-ords:

Level:


Burton on Trent


P1-BH01

Scale1 : 50.0047.54mAOD


Seepage

horizontal gypsum veins (<2mm). Discontinuities arehorizontal and sub-horizontal very closely to closelyspaced undulating smooth and rough.15.60-15.65m: Sub-vertical discontinuity.15.85m: Sub-vertical discontinuity (<30mm).15.87m: Horizontal light grey gypsum vein (<5mm).15.87-15.90m: Non-intact.Borehole completed at 16.20m

(m)

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

LegendLevel(mAD)

Depth(m)

ROTARY BOREHOLE LOG

InstallTCRSCRRQD

CoreRun &





C R

OT

AR

Y L

OG

C48

77.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

AG

S 3

_1.G

DT

7/

1/16

Hole TypeDS+RC

17/11/2015


Casing Depth(m)



(m)Casing Depth

(m)Water Depth

(m)

C4877

Groundwater:

End:

12/11/2015Start:

Project Name:

Location:

Client:

Borehole No.

Sheet 3 of 3

Logged ByDP

Project No:

Dates:

Co-ords:

Level:


Burton on Trent


P1-BH01

Scale1 : 50.0047.54mAOD


Seepage

Borehole ID:

Core Photograph

Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:

Box No:

Depth:

1

1.20m – 3.20m

Branson Locks


P1 BH01

Borehole ID:

Core Photograph

Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:

Box No:

Depth:

2

3.20m – 5.20m

Branson Locks

P1 BH01


Borehole ID:

Core Photograph

Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:

Box No:

Depth:

3

5.20m – 8.20m

Branson Locks

P1 BH01


Borehole ID:

Core Photograph

Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:

Box No:

Depth:

4

7.90m – 11.70m

Branson Locks

P1 BH01


Borehole ID:

Core Photograph

Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:

Box No:

Depth:

5

11.70‐14.70m

Branson Locks

P1 BH01


Borehole ID:

Core Photograph

Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:

Box No:

Depth:

6

14.70m – 16.20m

Branson Locks

P1 BH01


48.01

47.71

47.41

0.15

0.45

0.75

(0.15)

(0.30)

(0.30)

Dry

BES

BES

BES

0.20

0.50

0.70

FILL: Grass over soft grey and brown slightly gravelly sandy CLAY with frequentroots and rootlets (<2mm). Gravel is sub-angular to rounded fine to coarse ofconcrete, sandstone and siliceous material.

FILL: Brown slightly clayey sandy GRAVEL. Gravel is sub-angular to rounded fineto coarse of siliceous material, siltstone, brick, concrete and porcelain.

FILL: Brown and dark brown silty very sandy GRAVEL. Gravel is sub-angular torounded fine to coarse of siliceous material, brick and siltstone.

0.70-0.75m: Locally brown and orangish brown. Locally sandy.

Inspection pit completed at 0.75m

(m)

1

2

1

2

LegendLevel(mAD)

Depth(m)

WaterLevels No/Type Depth (m) Result

INSPECTION PIT LOG

Description

CC

IN

S P

IT L

OG

C48

77.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

AG

S 3

_1.G

DT

7/

1/16

Project Name:

Location: Dimensions:

Client:

Sheet 1 of 1

Date12/11/2015

Scale1 : 12.5

Logged ByDP

0.30m

0.30

m

Co-ords:

Level:

E 421719 N 321397

C4877Project No:

REMARKS:

Burton on Trent


EQUIPMENT: Hand digging tools.

METHOD: Hand dug inspection pit: 0.00-0.75m.

GROUNDWATER: Not encountered.

BACKFILL: Upon completion hole backfilled with bentonite pellets 0.00-0.75m and the ground surface reinstated.

REMARKS: Terminated on engineer's instruction.


P1-BH01A

Pit No

Depth0.75m

48.16mAOD


CC GROUND INVESTIGATIONS LTD

Samples & In Situ Testing

47.41

46.91

46.66

45.91

45.56

44.56

0.35

0.85

1.10

1.85

2.20

3.20

(0.50)

(0.75)

(1.00)

MADE GROUND: Grass over soft dark brown slightlysandy gravelly CLAY with occasional roots and rootlets(<2mm) and low cobble content. Gravel is angular torounded fine to coarse of siliceous material, clinker, slagand wood fragments (<30mm). Cobbles are sub-angularof brick.MADE GROUND: Soft friable grey and greyish brownslightly gravelly sandy silty CLAY with rare roots androotlets (<2mm) and low cobble content. Gravel isangular to rounded fine to coarse of glass, brick,siliceous material, slag, slate and porcelain. Cobbles aresub-angular of siliceous material.0.70-0.85m: Locally gravelly.Brown and orangish brown clayey sandy GRAVEL.Gravel is sub-rounded to rounded fine to coarse ofsiliceous material, sandstone and mudstone.Dense brown and orangish brown locally orange slightlyclayey sandy locally very sandy GRAVEL. Gravel issub-rounded to rounded fine to coarse of siliceousmaterial and sandstone.1.55-1.85m: Brown and reddish brown.Brown and light reddish brown slightly clayey gravellySAND. Gravel is sub-angular to rounded fine to coarse ofsiliceous material, siltstone and sandstone.Dense brown slightly clayey very sandy GRAVEL. Gravelis sub-angular to rounded fine to coarse of siliceousmaterial and sandstone.2.20-2.75m: Recovered as slightly sandy gravel.Borehole completed at 3.20m

BESB

ESBB

ESB

SPT

B

B

BCPT

B

0.20

0.50

0.70

0.90

1.101.20 - 1.65

1.55 - 1.85

1.85 - 2.20

2.20 - 2.752.20 - 2.65

2.75 - 3.20

S 38

C 47

3.20 2.20 0.0018/11/2015

REMARKS:EQUIPMENT: Hand digging tools. Comacchio MC300 multi purpose track mounted rig.METHOD: Hand dug inspection pit: 0.00-1.20m. Continuous dynamic sampled (128mm diam) 1.20-2.20m, (113mm diam) 2.20-3.20m.CASING: SW diam to 1.30m, PW diam to 2.20m.GROUNDWATER: None encountered prior to the use of a water flush.BACKFILL: Upon completion hole backfilled with bentonite pellets 0.00-3.20m and the ground surface reinstated.

(m)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

LegendLevel(mAD)

Depth(m)

ROTARY BOREHOLE LOG

InstallTCRSCRRQD

CoreRun &





C R

OT

AR

Y L

OG

C48

77.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

AG

S 3

_1.G

DT

7/

1/16

Hole TypeDS+RC

19/11/2015


Casing Depth(m)



(m)Casing Depth

(m)Water Depth

(m)

C4877

Groundwater:

End:

17/11/2015Start:

Project Name:

Location:

Client:

Borehole No.

Sheet 1 of 1

Logged ByDP

Project No:

Dates:

Co-ords:

Level:


Burton on Trent


P1-BH02

Scale1 : 50.0047.76mAOD


Borehole ID:

Core Photograph

Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:

Box No:

Depth:

1

1.20‐3.20m

Branson Locks

P1 BH02


46.96

46.66

44.41

0.45

0.75

3.00

(0.45)

(0.30)

(2.25)

BB

ES

BES

BES

SPT

D

BSPT

B

0.100.20

0.50

1.00

1.20 - 1.65

1.40 - 1.55

2.00 - 2.502.00 - 2.45

2.50 - 3.00

Grass over soft brown and greyish brown slightly sandy slightlygravelly CLAY with occasional roots and rootlets (<1mm).Gravel is sub-angular to sub-rounded fine to coarse of siliceousmaterial.0.00-0.20m: Locally orangish brown.Light grey and brownish grey locally orangish brown slightlyclayey very sandy GRAVEL. Gravel is sub-angular to roundedfine to coarse of siliceous material, siltstone and sandstone.

Medium dense grey and light greyish brown slightly clayeysandy GRAVEL. Gravel is sub-rounded to rounded fine tocoarse of siliceous material, siltstone and sandstone.

1.40-1.55m: Slightly sandy.

1.80-2.00m: Slightly clayey gravelly sand.

2.50-3.00m: Very sandy.

Borehole completed at 3.00m

S 17

S 27

2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.0016/11/15 16/11/2015

REMARKS:EQUIPMENT: Hand digging tools. Terrier 2002 track mounted rig.METHOD: Hand dug inspection pit: 0.00-1.20m. Continuous disturbed sampling using 101mm diam sample barrel: 1.20-3.00m.CASING: 113mm diam to 3.00m.GROUNDWATER: Standing at 2.00m following SPT 2.00-2.45m. No rise recorded.BACKFILL: Upon completion hole backfilled with arisings 2.30-3.00m and bentonite pellets 0.00-2.30m and the ground surface reinstated.REMARKS: Sand "blowing" inside casing to 2.30m following sample run 2.00-3.00m

(m)

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

LegendLevel(mAD)Sample Depth

(m)WaterLevels No/Type Depth (m)

WINDOW SAMPLE LOG

DescriptionInstallResult



C W

S L

OG

C

4877

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D A

GS

3_1

.GD

T

7/1/

16

Hole TypeWS

16/11/2015


Casing Depth(m)



(m)Casing Depth

(m)Water Depth

(m)

C4877

Groundwater:

End:

16/11/2015Start:

Project Name:

Location:

Client:

Borehole No.

Sheet 1 of 1

Logged ByDP

Project No:

Dates:

Co-ords:

Level:


Burton on Trent


P1-WS01

Scale1 : 31.2547.41mAOD


Hole ID:

Window Sample Photograph

Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:

Depth: 1.20 – 3.00mBranston Lock


P1 WS01

47.07

45.57

45.17

44.77

0.70

2.20

2.60

3.00

(0.70)

(1.50)

(0.40)

(0.40)

BES

BES

BES

BES

BSPT

SPT

B

B

SPT

0.20

0.50

0.70

1.00

1.20 - 2.001.20 - 1.65

2.00 - 2.45

2.20 - 2.60

2.60 - 3.00

3.00 - 3.45

Grass over soft dark brown locally light grey slightly sandygravelly CLAY with rare roots and rootlets (<1mm). Gravel issub-rounded to rounded fine to coarse of siliceous material andsiltstone.

Medium dense brown and orangish brown locally light grey andorange slightly clayey sandy locally very sandy GRAVEL. Gravelis sub-angular to rounded fine to coarse of siliceous material,siltstone and sandstone.1.00-1.20m: Locally clayey.

1.20m: 1 no. rounded cobble of siliceous material.

1.90m: 1 no. rounded cobble of siliceous material.

Medium dense light brown and light greyish brown slightlyclayey gravelly SAND. Gravel is sub-rounded to rounded fine tocoarse of siliceous material and sandstone.

Light brown and light greyish brown locally orange slightly clayeysandy GRAVEL with low cobble content. Gravel is sub-roundedto rounded fine to coarse of siliceous material and siltstone.Cobbles are rounded of siliceous material and sandstone.


S 27

S 47

S 19

2.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.5016/11/15 16/11/2015

REMARKS:EQUIPMENT: Hand digging tools. Terrier 2002 track mounted rig.METHOD: Hand dug inspection pit: 0.00-1.20m. Continuous disturbed sampling using 101mm diam sample barrel: 1.20-3.00m.CASING: 113mm diam to 2.00m.GROUNDWATER: Standing at 2.50m following sample run 2.00-3.00m. No rise recorded.BACKFILL: Upon completion hole backfilled with bentonite pellets 0.00-3.00m and the ground surface reinstated.

(m)

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5



WINDOW SAMPLE LOG




C W

S L

OG

C

4877

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D A

GS

3_1

.GD

T

7/1/

16

Hole TypeWS

16/11/2015


Casing Depth(m)



(m)Casing Depth

(m)Water Depth

(m)

C4877

Groundwater:

End:

16/11/2015Start:

Project Name:

Location:

Client:

Borehole No.

Sheet 1 of 1

Logged ByDP

Project No:

Dates:

Co-ords:

Level:


Burton on Trent


P1-WS02

Scale1 : 31.2547.77mAOD


Hole ID:


Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:


P1 WS02


47.19

46.29

45.94

44.54

0.35

1.25

1.60

3.00

(0.35)

(0.90)

(0.35)

(1.40)

BESB

BES

BES

SPTB

B

SPT

B

B

SPT

0.20

0.35

0.50

1.00

1.20 - 1.651.25 - 1.60

1.60 - 2.00

2.00 - 2.45

2.30 - 2.70

2.70 - 3.00

3.00 - 3.45

Soft dark brown and brown clayey very gravelly SAND with rareroots and rootlets (<1mm). Gravel is sub-angular to rounded fineto coarse of siliceous material and siltstone.

Brown and orangish brown locally light grey and orange slightlyclayey sandy GRAVEL. Gravel is sub-rounded to rounded fine tocoarse of siliceous material, siltstone and sandstone.0.35-0.50m: Locally clayey.

1.00-1.20m: Locally very sandy.

Medium dense light brown locally dark brown slightly clayeySAND with occasional black partially decomposed organicmatter (<2mm).

Light brown locally light grey and reddish brown slightly clayeysandy GRAVEL. Gravel is sub-angular to rounded fine to coarseof siliceous material, sandstone and siltstone.

1.90-2.00m: 1 no. cobble of sub-rounded siliceous material.2.00-2.45m: Medium dense.2.10-2.25m: Locally very sandy.

2.30-3.00m: Occasional black partially decomposed organicmatter (<1mm).

2.70-3.00m: Locally very sandy.

3.00m: 1 no. rounded cobble of siliceous material.Borehole completed at 3.00m

S 25

S 20

S 21

2.20 2.00 2.20 3.00 2.00 2.2016/11/15 16/11/2015

REMARKS:EQUIPMENT: Hand digging tools. Terrier 2002 track mounted rig.METHOD: Hand dug inspection pit: 0.00-1.20m. Continuous disturbed sampling using 101mm diam sample barrel: 1.20-3.00m.CASING: 113mm diam to 2.00m.GROUNDWATER: Standing at 2.20m following SPT 2.00-2.40m. No rise recorded.BACKFILL: Upon completion hole backfilled with bentonite pellets 0.00-3.00m and the ground surface reinstated.

(m)

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5



WINDOW SAMPLE LOG




C W

S L

OG

C

4877

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D A

GS

3_1

.GD

T

7/1/

16

Hole TypeWS

16/11/2015


Casing Depth(m)



(m)Casing Depth

(m)Water Depth

(m)

C4877

Groundwater:

End:

16/11/2015Start:

Project Name:

Location:

Client:

Borehole No.

Sheet 1 of 1

Logged ByDP

Project No:

Dates:

Co-ords:

Level:


Burton on Trent


P1-WS03

Scale1 : 31.2547.54mAOD


Hole ID:


Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:


P1 WS03


47.68

47.38

46.33

46.08

0.40

0.70

1.75

2.00

(0.40)

(0.30)

(1.05)

(0.25)

Dry

BES

BES

BES

SPT

B

B

CPT

0.20

0.50

1.00

1.20 - 1.65

1.35 - 1.65

1.75 - 2.00

2.00 - 2.29

MADE GROUND: Grass over soft brown slightly sandy slightlygravelly CLAY with occasional roots and rootlets (<1mm).Gravel is sub-angular to rounded fine to coarse of siliceousmaterial and wood fragments (<40mm).0.05m: Red twine across pit (<5mm).Orangish brown and brown clayey very sandy GRAVEL with rareroots and rootlets (<1mm). Gravel is sub-rounded to roundedfine to coarse of siliceous material, siltstone and sandstone.Orangish brown and orange slightly clayey sandy locally verysandy GRAVEL. Gravel is sub-rounded to rounded fine tocoarse of siliceous material, mudstone and sandstone.

1.20-1.65m: Dense.

1.35-1.65m: Light grey locally off white and purplish brown.Sandy.

Orangish brown and light brown slightly clayey very sandyGRAVEL. Gravel is sub-rounded to rounded fine to coarse ofsiliceous material and sandstone.Borehole completed at 2.00m

S 43

C*79

2.00 Nil Dry16/11/2015

REMARKS:EQUIPMENT: Hand digging tools. Terrier 2002 track mounted rig.METHOD: Hand dug inspection pit: 0.00-1.20m. Continuous disturbed sampling using 101mm diam sample barrel: 1.20-2.00m.CASING: None used.GROUNDWATER: Not encountered.BACKFILL: Upon completion hole backfilled with bentonite pellets 0.00-2.00m and the ground surface reinstated.REMARKS: Borehole collapsed to 1.20m following sample run 1.20-2.00m.

(m)

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5



WINDOW SAMPLE LOG




C W

S L

OG

C

4877

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D A

GS

3_1

.GD

T

7/1/

16

Hole TypeWS

17/11/2015


Casing Depth(m)



(m)Casing Depth

(m)Water Depth

(m)

C4877

Groundwater:

End:

17/11/2015Start:

Project Name:

Location:

Client:

Borehole No.

Sheet 1 of 1

Logged ByDP

Project No:

Dates:

Co-ords:

Level:


Burton on Trent


P1-WS04

Scale1 : 31.2548.08mAOD


Dry

Hole ID:


Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:


P1 WS04


47.42

47.17

45.87

0.45

0.70

2.00

(0.45)

(0.25)

(1.30)

BES

BES

BES

SPTD

B

SPT

0.20

0.50

1.00

1.20 - 1.651.30 - 1.50

1.50 - 2.00

2.00 - 2.38

Grass over soft brown and dark brown slightly sandy gravellyCLAY with frequent roots and rootlets (<2mm). Gravel issub-angular to rounded fine to coarse of siliceous material andsiltstone.

Brown and orangish brown locally orange and light grey slightlyclayey sandy GRAVEL. Gravel is sub-angular to rounded fine tocoarse of siliceous material, sandstone and siltstone.Orangish brown and orange slightly clayey sandy GRAVEL withlow cobble content. Gravel is sub-angular to rounded fine tocoarse of siliceous material, sandstone and siltstone. Cobblesare sub-rounded of siliceous material.0.90-1.20m: Locally very sandy.

1.20-1.65m: Dense.1.30-1.50m: Locally very sandy.

1.50m: 1 no. granite fragment (<20mm).


S 36

S*61

2.35 2.00 2.35 2.00 Nil 2.3516/11/15 16/11/2015

REMARKS:EQUIPMENT: Hand digging tools. Terrier 2002 track mounted rig.METHOD: Hand dug inspection pit: 0.00-1.20m. Continuous disturbed sampling using 101mm diam sample barrels: 1.20-2.00m.CASING: None used.GROUNDWATER: Standing at 2.35m following SPT 2.00-2.38m. No rise recorded.BACKFILL: Upon completion hole backfilled with bentonite pellets 0.00-2.00m and the ground surface reinstated.

(m)

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5



WINDOW SAMPLE LOG




C W

S L

OG

C

4877

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D A

GS

3_1

.GD

T

7/1/

16

Hole TypeWS

16/11/2015


Casing Depth(m)



(m)Casing Depth

(m)Water Depth

(m)

C4877

Groundwater:

End:

16/11/2015Start:

Project Name:

Location:

Client:

Borehole No.

Sheet 1 of 1

Logged ByDP

Project No:

Dates:

Co-ords:

Level:


Burton on Trent


P1-WS05

Scale1 : 31.2547.87mAOD


Hole ID:


Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:


P1 WS05


52.43

48.68

47.88

0.15

3.90

4.70

(3.75)

(0.80)

Dry

BESB

ES

BES

BES

SPTB

SPT

B

ESSPT

B

BSPT

SPT

0.100.20

0.50

1.00

1.20 - 1.651.30 - 2.00

2.00 - 2.45

2.25 - 3.00

3.003.00 - 3.45

3.40 - 3.90

4.00 - 4.704.00 - 4.45

4.70 - 4.77

FILL: Black and dark brown slightly clayey slightly sandyGRAVEL. Gravel is angular to sub-angular fine to coarse ofclinker.FILL: Firm locally friable reddish brown and brown slightly sandyslightly gravelly, locally gravelly CLAY. Gravel is angular tosub-rounded fine to coarse of siliceous material, concrete,mudstone, limestone, wood, sandstone and brick.

2.30-2.40m: Dark brown.

3.60m: 1 no. black sub-angular slag piece (<40mm).

FILL: Soft reddish brown sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel issub-angular to rounded fine to coarse of siliceous material andmudstone. (POSSIBLE NATURAL).


S 12

S 8

S 6

S 3

S*500

4.70 Nil Dry17/11/2015

REMARKS:EQUIPMENT: Hand digging tools. Terrier 2002 track mounted rig.METHOD: Hand dug inspection pit: 0.00-1.20m. Continuous disturbed sampling using 101mm and 86mm diam sample barrels: 1.20-4.70m.CASING: None used.GROUNDWATER: Not encountered.BACKFILL: Upon completion hole backfilled with bentonite pellets 0.00-4.70m and the ground surface reinstated.REMARKS: Window sample refused at 4.70m.

(m)

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5



WINDOW SAMPLE LOG




C W

S L

OG

C

4877

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D A

GS

3_1

.GD

T

7/1/

16

Hole TypeWS

17/11/2015


Casing Depth(m)



(m)Casing Depth

(m)Water Depth

(m)

C4877

Groundwater:

End:

17/11/2015Start:

Project Name:

Location:

Client:

Borehole No.

Sheet 1 of 1

Logged ByDP

Project No:

Dates:

Co-ords:

Level:


Burton on Trent


P1-WS06

Scale1 : 31.2552.58mAOD


Dry

Hole ID:


Contract ID:

Contract Name:

Hole ID:

C4877

Client:


P1 WS06


47.68

47.03

0.40

1.05

(0.40)

(0.65)

Dry

BES

BES

BES

0.20

0.50

0.90

FILL: Soft brown slightly sandy gravelly CLAY with frequent roots and rootlets(<10mm). Gravel is sub-angular to rounded fine to coarse of siliceous materialand mudstone.

0.30m: 1 no. sub-angular gypsum cobble (<70mm).

FILL: Soft friable light brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly locally gravelly CLAYlocally tending to a very clayey sand with occasional roots and rootlets (<2mm).Gravel is angular to sub-rounded fine to coarse of siliceous material, porcelain,mudstone, gypsum and sandstone.

Inspection pit completed at 1.05m

(m)

1

2

1

2

LegendLevel(mAD)

Depth(m)

WaterLevels No/Type Depth (m) Result

INSPECTION PIT LOG

Description

CC

IN

S P

IT L

OG

C48

77.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

AG

S 3

_1.G

DT

7/

1/16

Project Name:

Location: Dimensions:

Client:

Sheet 1 of 1

Date17/11/2015

Scale1 : 12.5

Logged ByDP

0.30m

0.30

m

Co-ords:

Level:

E 421903 N 321329

C4877Project No:

REMARKS:

Burton on Trent


EQUIPMENT: Hand digging tools.

METHOD: Hand dug inspection pit: 0.00-1.05m.

GROUNDWATER: Not encountered.

BACKFILL: Upon completion hole backfilled with bentonite pellets 0.00-1.05m and the ground surface reinstated.

REMARKS: Terminated on engineer's instruction.


P1-HP01

Pit No

Depth1.05m

48.08mAOD


CC GROUND INVESTIGATIONS LTD


CC Ground Investigation Limited

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST

Telephone: 01452 739165, Fax: 01452 739220, Email: [email protected]

CLIENT Staffordshire County Council SITE Branston Lock Development Borehole

No. Borehole Depth (m)

Bottom Depth (m)

Casing Depth (m)

Water Level (m)

Seating Drive Test Drive Test Type N Blows Pen (mm) Blows Pen (mm)

BH01 1.20 1.65 Nil 0.90 4 6 75 75 6 7 7 6 75 75 75 75 S 26

BH01 2.20 2.65 2.20 GL 2 4 75 75 6 6 8 10 75 75 75 75 S 30

BH01 3.20 3.64 3.20 GL 2 9 75 75 13 15 12 10 75 75 75 65 S *52

BH01 4.20 4.65 4.20 1.87 2 2 75 75 3 4 4 7 75 75 75 75 C 18

BH01 6.70 7.15 5.20 2.71 6 6 75 75 9 9 8 8 75 75 75 75 S 34

BH01 7.90 8.29 5.30 0.78 5 5 75 75 13 13 15 9 75 75 75 15 S *63

BH01 8.70 9.06 5.30 2.40 6 13 75 75 14 20 16 ‐ 75 75 60 ‐ S *71

BH01 10.20 10.56 5.30 2.62 8 12 75 75 14 19 17 ‐ 75 75 60 ‐ C *71

BH01 11.70 12.02 5.30 2.51 8 7 75 75 10 14 11 15 75 75 75 45 C *54

BH01 13.20 13.35 5.30 2.35 7 18 75 55 50 ‐ ‐ ‐ 20 ‐ ‐ ‐ C *750

BH01 14.70 14.89 5.30 2.58 18 7 75 15 30 20 ‐ ‐ 75 25 ‐ ‐ C *150

BH01 16.20 16.34 5.30 2.47 25 ‐ 45 ‐ 36 14 ‐ ‐ 75 20 ‐ ‐ C *158

BH02

BH02

1.20

2.20

1.65

2.65

Nil

1.50

Dry

Dry

3

3

6

7

75

75

75

75

8

10

9

11

10

12

11

14

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

S

C

38

47

WS01 1.20 1.65 Nil Dry 4 4 75 75 5 4 4 4 75 75 75 75 S 17

WS01 2.00 2.45 2.00 Dry 4 6 75 75 8 8 6 5 75 75 75 75 S 27

WS02 1.20 1.65 Nil Dry 2 4 75 75 5 6 8 8 75 75 75 75 S 29

WS02 2.00 2.45 2.00 Dry 5 9 75 75 11 12 12 12 75 75 75 75 S 47

WS02 3.00 3.45 2.00 2.50 2 4 75 75 5 4 5 5 75 75 75 75 S 19

WS03 1.20 1.65 Nil Dry 3 3 75 75 5 5 7 8 75 75 75 75 S 25

WS03 2.00 2.45 2.00 2.20 5 5 75 75 5 5 5 5 75 75 75 75 S 20

WS03 3.00 3.45 2.00 2.20 2 3 75 75 3 5 5 8 75 75 75 75 S 21

WS04 1.20 1.65 Nil Dry 7 7 75 75 9 10 11 13 75 75 75 75 S 43

WS04 2.00 2.29 Nil Dry 20 5 75 20 16 22 12 ‐ 75 75 40 ‐ C *79

WS05 1.20 1.65 Nil Dry 4 6 75 75 8 9 9 10 75 75 75 75 S 46

WS05 2.00 2.38 Nil 2.35 12 13 75 60 13 17 16 4 75 75 75 20 S 61

WS06 1.20 1.65 Nil Dry 3 4 75 75 3 3 3 3 75 75 75 75 S 12 y

WS06 2.00 2.45 Nil Dry 2 1 75 75 2 2 2 2 75 75 75 75 S 8

WS06 3.00 3.45 Nil Dry 0 1 75 75 1 1 2 2 75 75 75 75 S 6

WS06 4.00 4.45 Nil Dry 0 0 75 75 0 0 2 1 75 75 75 75 S 3

WS06 4.70 4.77 Nil Dry 25 ‐ 40 ‐ 50 ‐ ‐ ‐ 30 ‐ ‐ ‐ S *500

Notes: 1. Test carried out in general accordance with BS. 1377: Part 9: 3.3. 2. N values have not been subjected to any correction. 3. Test carried out using split spoon S, solid cone C. 4. Where full test drive not completed, linearly extrapolated N value reported. 5. <1 Denotes hammer self weight penetration (sank under own weight).

6. ** Denotes no effective penetration. CONTRACT CHECKED

C4877 MA


APPENDIX C

Appendix C – Laboratory Test Results

5 – 7 Hexthorpe Road, Hexthorpe, Doncaster DN4 0AR tel: +44 (0)844 815 6641 fax: +44 (0)844 815 6642 e-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]

A copy of the Laboratory Schedule of accredited tests as issued by UKAS is attached to this report. This certificate is issued in accordance with the accreditation requirements of the United Kingdom Accreditation Service. The results reported herein relate only to the material supplied to the laboratory. This certificate shall not be reproduced in full,

without the prior written approval of the laboratory.

Checked and Approved Signatories:

R Gunson A Watkins M Beastall (Director) (Director) (Laboratory Manager)

D Lambe S Royle (Senior Technician) (Senior Technician)

Page 1 of

LABORATORY REPORT

4043

Contract Number: PSL15/5865

Report Date: 17 December 2015

Client’s Reference: C4877

Client Name: CC Ground Investigations Ltd Unit A2 Innsworth Technology Park. Innsworth Lane Gloucester GL3 1DL

For the attention of: Mike Atherton

Contract Title: Branston Lock

Date Received: 03/12/2015 Date Commenced: 03/12/2015 Date Completed: 17/12/2015

Notes: Opinions and Interpretations are outside the UKAS Accreditation * Denotes test not included in laboratory scope of accreditation$ Denotes test carried out by approved contractor

PSL001 Issue 2 Nov 15 Page of .

Hole Sample Sample Top BaseNumber Number Type Depth Depth

m mP1-BH01 B 0.50 Brown very gravelly clayey silty SAND.P1-BH01 B 1.50 2.20 Brown slightly gravelly slightly silty SAND.P1-BH01 D 3.70 3.90 Reddish brown very sandy very clayey GRAVEL.P1-BH01 B 4.70 5.20 Reddish brown slightly gravelly slightly sandy very silty CLAY.P1-BH01 UT 5.20 5.65 Very stiff reddish brown sandy CLAY.P1-BH01 D 5.65 5.75 Reddish brown slightly gravelly sandy CLAY.P1-BH01 SPT 6.70 7.15 Reddish brown very gravelly very sandy very silty CLAY.P1-BH01 B 7.00 7.90 Reddish brown gravelly very sandy very silty CLAY.P1-BH01 B 9.50 10.20 Reddish brown slightly gravelly sandy very silty CLAY.P1-BH01 B 13.50 14.00 Reddish brown gravelly very sandy very silty CLAY.

P1-BH01A B 0.50 Brown very sandy slightly clayey silty GRAVEL.P1-BH02 B 0.70 Brown very gravelly very sandy very silty CLAY.P1-BH02 B 1.55 1.85 Brown very sandy slightly silty GRAVEL.P1-BH02 B 2.75 3.20 Brown very sandy slightly silty GRAVEL.P1-HP01 B 0.50 Brown clayey very silty SAND & GRAVEL.P1-WS01 B 1.00 Brown very sandy GRAVEL.P1-WS01 D 1.40 1.55 Brown sandy slightly silty GRAVEL.P1-WS02 B 1.00 Brown very sandy slightly silty GRAVEL.P1-WS03 B 0.20 Brown very gravelly clayey very silty SAND.

Checked / Approved Date 17/12/15 Contract No:

PSL15/5865

Client Ref:

4043 C4877

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY SOIL DESCRIPTIONS

Description of Sample

Branston Lock


Hole Sample Sample Top Base

Number Number Type Depth Depth m m

P1-WS03 B 1.25 1.60 Brown slightly gravelly slightly clayey silty SAND.P1-WS04 B 0.50 Brown very sandy silty GRAVEL.P1-WS04 B 1.35 1.65 Brown very sandy GRAVEL.P1-WS06 B 0.50 Reddish brown gravelly very sandy very silty CLAY.P1-WS06 B 2.25 3.00 Reddish brown slightly gravelly very sandy CLAY.P1-WS06 B 4.00 4.70 Reddish brown slightly gravelly very sandy very silty CLAY.

Checked / Approved Date 17/12/15 Contract No:

PSL15/5865

Client Ref:

4043 C4877

Branston Lock

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY SOIL DESCRIPTIONS

Description of Sample


(BS1377 : PART 2 : 1990)

Moisture Linear Particle Liquid Plastic Plasticity PassingHole Sample Sample Top Base Content Shrinkage Density Limit Limit Index .425mm Remarks

Number Number Type Depth Depth % % Mg/m3 % % % %m m Clause 3.2 Clause 6.5 Clause 8.2 Clause 4.3/4 Clause 5.3 Clause 5.4

P1-BH01 B 0.50 14 37 24 13 47P1-BH01 B 1.50 2.20 18P1-BH01 D 3.70 3.90 8.0P1-BH01 B 4.70 5.20 22 29 19 10 93P1-BH01 UT 5.20 5.65 19P1-BH01 D 5.65 5.75 20P1-BH01 B 7.00 7.90 21 36 23 13 80P1-BH01 B 9.50 10.20 21 35 23 12 87P1-BH01 B 13.50 14.00 16 32 19 13 49

P1-BH01A B 0.50 13P1-BH02 B 0.70 15 41 25 16 57P1-BH02 B 1.55 1.85 8.2P1-BH02 B 2.75 3.20 6.0P1-HP01 B 0.50 9.8P1-WS01 B 1.00 4.5P1-WS01 D 1.40 1.55 6.1P1-WS02 B 1.00 6.7P1-WS03 B 0.20 19 38 24 14 57P1-WS03 B 1.25 1.60 11 NP

SYMBOLS : NP : Non Plastic * : Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit Wet Sieved.

Date 17/12/15

4043

Checked / Approved

Branston LockPSL15/5865

Intermediate plasticity CI.


Client Ref:


C4877

Contract No:


SUMMARY OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION TESTS

Low plasticity CL.


Low plasticity CL.


(BS5930 :2015)

Date 17/12/15

4043 C4877

Branston Lock

Checked /Approved Contract No:

PSL15/5865

Client Ref:

PLASTICITY CHART FOR CASAGRANDE CLASSIFICATION.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

Pla

stic

ity

Inde

x (P

I%).

Liquid Limit (LL%).

CL CI CH CV CE

ML MI MH MV ME


(BS1377 : PART 2 : 1990)

Moisture Linear Particle Liquid Plastic Plasticity PassingHole Sample Sample Top Base Content Shrinkage Density Limit Limit Index .425mm Remarks

Number Number Type Depth Depth % % Mg/m3 % % % %m m Clause 3.2 Clause 6.5 Clause 8.2 Clause 4.3/4 Clause 5.3 Clause 5.4

P1-WS04 B 0.50 9.7P1-WS04 B 1.35 1.65 2.2P1-WS06 B 0.50 16 40 21 19 77P1-WS06 B 2.25 3.00 19 36 19 17 83P1-WS06 B 4.00 4.70 19 35 19 16 82

SYMBOLS : NP : Non Plastic * : Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit Wet Sieved.

Date 17/12/15

4043

SUMMARY OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION TESTS

Intermediate plasticity CI.Intermediate plasticity CI.


Client Ref:

C4877

Contract No:

PSL15/5865

Checked / Approved

Branston Lock


(BS5930 :2015)

Date 17/12/15

4043 C4877

Branston Lock

Checked /Approved Contract No:

PSL15/5865

Client Ref:

PLASTICITY CHART FOR CASAGRANDE CLASSIFICATION.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

Pla

stic

ity

Inde

x (P

I%).

Liquid Limit (LL%).

CL CI CH CV CE

ML MI MH MV ME

PSL005 Nov 15 Page of

Hole Number: Top Depth (m):

Sample Number: Base Depth(m):

Sample Type:

BS Test Percentage Particle Percentage Soil Total

Sieve Passing Diameter Passing Fraction Percentage

125 100 2 275 100 0.02 18 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 32

37.5 97 0.006 14 Sand 4720 90 2 2 Silt 1210 81 0.002 9 Clay 96.3 77

3.35 712 68

1.18 650.6 590.3 40

0.212 30 Remarks:0.15 25 See summary of soil descriptions.

0.063 21

Date 17/12/15

4043

0.50

Contract No:

P1-BH01

B

PSL15/5865Client Ref:

C4877

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TESTBS1377 : Part 2 : 1990

Wet Sieve & Pipette Analysis, Clause 9.2 & 9.4

Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:

BS Test Percentage 1 1 Soil Total

Sieve Passing 1 1 Fraction Percentage

125 100 1 175 100 1 1 Cobbles 063 100 1 1 Gravel 1

37.5 100 1 1 Sand 9620 100 1 1 Silt/Clay 310 100 1 16.3 100

3.35 992 99

1.18 990.6 960.3 26


0.063 3

Date 17/12/15

4043

1.50

2.20

Contract No:

P1-BH01

B


C4877


Wet Sieve, Clause 9.2

Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 1 175 100 1 1 Cobbles 063 100 1 1 Gravel 51

37.5 100 1 1 Sand 2520 76 1 1 Silt/Clay 2410 62 1 16.3 58

3.35 532 49

1.18 460.6 410.3 30


0.063 24

Date 17/12/15

4043

3.70

3.90

Contract No:

P1-BH01

D


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 66 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 1

37.5 100 0.006 48 Sand 920 100 2 2 Silt 5510 100 0.002 35 Clay 356.3 100

3.35 1002 99

1.18 980.6 960.3 93


0.063 90

Date 17/12/15

4043

4.70

5.20

Contract No:

P1-BH01

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 32 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 36

37.5 100 0.006 25 Sand 2720 94 2 2 Silt 2210 91 0.002 15 Clay 156.3 85

3.35 732 64

1.18 570.6 500.3 45


0.063 37

Date 17/12/15

4043

6.70

7.15

Contract No:

P1-BH01

SPT


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 61 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 3

37.5 100 0.006 45 Sand 1520 100 2 2 Silt 4910 100 0.002 33 Clay 336.3 99

3.35 982 97

1.18 950.6 910.3 86


0.063 82

Date 17/12/15

4043

9.50

10.20

Contract No:

P1-BH01

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 32 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 11

37.5 100 0.006 24 Sand 5220 95 2 2 Silt 2210 95 0.002 15 Clay 156.3 95

3.35 942 89

1.18 770.6 560.3 45


0.063 37

Date 17/12/15

4043

13.50

14.00

Contract No:

P1-BH01

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 9 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 67

37.5 90 0.006 6 Sand 2220 74 2 2 Silt 710 49 0.002 4 Clay 46.3 41

3.35 362 33

1.18 290.6 250.3 19


0.063 11

Date 17/12/15

4043

0.50

Contract No:

P1-BH01A

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 33 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 26

37.5 92 0.006 25 Sand 3620 89 2 2 Silt 2310 82 0.002 15 Clay 156.3 79

3.35 772 74

1.18 710.6 660.3 53


0.063 38

Date 17/12/15

4043

0.70

Contract No:

P1-BH02

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 1 175 100 1 1 Cobbles 063 100 1 1 Gravel 61

37.5 100 1 1 Sand 3820 85 1 1 Silt/Clay 110 55 1 16.3 48

3.35 422 39

1.18 380.6 340.3 15


0.063 1

Date 17/12/15

4043

1.55

1.85

Contract No:

P1-BH02

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 1 175 100 1 1 Cobbles 063 100 1 1 Gravel 75

37.5 88 1 1 Sand 2320 71 1 1 Silt/Clay 210 45 1 16.3 35

3.35 292 25

1.18 230.6 190.3 7


0.063 2

Date 17/12/15

4043

2.75

3.20

Contract No:

P1-BH02

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 26 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 33

37.5 93 0.006 20 Sand 3620 86 2 2 Silt 1910 77 0.002 12 Clay 126.3 73

3.35 692 67

1.18 650.6 590.3 44


0.063 31

Date 17/12/15

4043

0.50

Contract No:

P1-HP01

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 1 175 100 1 1 Cobbles 063 100 1 1 Gravel 81

37.5 100 1 1 Sand 1620 82 1 1 Silt/Clay 310 45 1 16.3 35

3.35 232 19

1.18 160.6 120.3 6


0.063 3

Date 17/12/15

4043

Contract No:

P1-WS01

D


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

1.40

1.550.

002

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 1 175 100 1 1 Cobbles 063 100 1 1 Gravel 69

37.5 100 1 1 Sand 2620 80 1 1 Silt/Clay 510 56 1 16.3 46

3.35 362 31

1.18 270.6 160.3 8


0.063 5

Date 17/12/15

4043


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

1.00

Contract No:

P1-WS02

B

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 28 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 27

37.5 100 0.006 21 Sand 4120 96 2 2 Silt 1910 83 0.002 13 Clay 136.3 79

3.35 752 73

1.18 710.6 660.3 52


0.063 32

Date 17/12/15

4043


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.20

Contract No:

P1-WS03

B

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 7 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 4

37.5 100 0.006 4 Sand 8520 100 2 2 Silt 910 99 0.002 2 Clay 26.3 98

3.35 972 96

1.18 950.6 930.3 81


0.063 11

Date 17/12/15

4043

Contract No:

P1-WS03

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

1.25

1.600.

002

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 1 175 100 1 1 Cobbles 063 100 1 1 Gravel 53

37.5 100 1 1 Sand 3320 84 1 1 Silt/Clay 1410 59 1 16.3 53

3.35 492 47

1.18 450.6 410.3 25


0.063 14

Date 17/12/15

4043

Contract No:

P1-WS04

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.50

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 51 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 10

37.5 100 0.006 39 Sand 3120 96 2 2 Silt 3310 94 0.002 26 Clay 266.3 92

3.35 912 90

1.18 870.6 840.3 74


0.063 59

Date 17/12/15

4043

Contract No:

P1-WS06

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

0.50

0.00

2

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).




Sample Type:



125 100 2 275 100 0.02 53 Cobbles 063 100 2 2 Gravel 8

37.5 100 0.006 40 Sand 2820 99 2 2 Silt 3810 96 0.002 26 Clay 266.3 95

3.35 942 92

1.18 890.6 850.3 80


0.063 64

Date 17/12/15

4043

Contract No:

P1-WS06

B


C4877



Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

4.00

4.700.

002

0.00

6

0.02

0

0.06

3

0.15

0

0.21

2 0.

300

0.60

0

1.18

2.00

3.35

6.3

10.0

20.0

37.5

63

75

125

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Perc

enta

ge P

assi

ng.

Particle Size (mm).

PSL025 Issue 2 Nov 15 Page of

P1-BH01 Top Depth (m):

Base Depth (m) :

Initial Conditions

Moisture Content (%):

Bulk Density (Mg/m3):

Dry Density (Mg/m3):

Voids Ratio:

Degree of saturation:

Height (mm):

Diameter (mm)

Particle Density (Mg/m3):

Assumed

Remarks:

C4877

Checked / Approved

Branston Lock

Date 17/12/15

Client Ref:

Contract No:PSL15/5865

ONE DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION TESTBS 1377: Part 5: 1990: Clause 3

Sample Type:

0

100

200

0.044

4043

400

Sample Number:

0.071

Hole Number:

19 kPa

Cv

5.65

400

200 2.746

13.603100

Top

Method used to

determine CV:

Nominal temperature3.093

2.400

See summary of soils description.

2.65

75.08

UT

5.20

Specimen location

m2/yr

T90

20

800 0.017

97.1 800

20.12 100

within tube:

0.115

0.516

10.615

0.513

during test ' C:

Pressure Range Mv

1.75

2.08

m2/MN

0.370

0.380

0.390

0.400

0.410

0.420

0.430

0.44010 100 1000

Voi

ds R

atio

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

10 100 1000

Cv

- m

2/yr

Pressure -kPa

PSLR030 Issue 2 Nov 15 Page of .


Sample Number: Base Depth (m):

Sample Type

102 158 Test:

Moisture Bulk Dry Cell Corr. Max. Shear Failure Mode Sample taken from top of tube

Specimen Content Density Density Pressure Deviator Strength Strain of Rate of strain = 2 %/min

(%) (Mg/m3) (Mg/m3) (kPa) Stress Cu (%) Failure Latex Membrane used 0.2 mm thick

(kPa) (kPa) Membrane Correction applied (kPa)

θ3 (θ1−θ3)f1/2(θ1−θ3)f 0.36 0.36 0.35

1 19 2.08 1.74 200 395 198 6.8 See summary of soil descriptions

400 539 269 8.7

600 617 308 11.0 Brittle

Date 17/12/15

4043

Diameter (mm):

Client Ref:

5.20

5.65

UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH IN TRIAXIAL COMPRESSIONWITHOUT MEASUREMENT OF PORE PRESSURE

BS1377 : Part7 : 1990: Clause 9

Remarks

Checked / ApprovedPSL15/5865

Contract No:

Branston LockC4877

UT

UU Multistage

P1-BH01

Height (mm):

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Dev

iato

r St

ress

kPa

Axial Strain %

PSL029 Issue 2 Nov 15 Page of

Orientation Area De2 De Is Corr Fac Is50

Par / Perp W D (mm2) (mm) (Mpa) (kN) (MPa) F (MPa)

P1-BH01 12.03-12.10 I N/A 45 21 441 1203.21 34.69 0.410 0.55 0.455 0.848 0.39 Valid P1-BH01 14.64-14.70 I N/A 49 31 961 1934.05 43.98 0.340 0.45 0.235 0.944 0.22 Valid P1-BH01 16.10-16.20 I N/A 64 32 1024 2607.59 51.06 0.590 0.79 0.302 1.010 0.30 Valid

*Note All testing carried out on samples at as received water content Par = parallel, Perp = perpendicular, N/A = Not Applicable

4043

Date

Failure Type Remarks

SUMMARY OF POINT LOAD TEST RESULTS ISRM Suggested Methods : 2007

Branston Lock

Contract No:

PSL15/5865

Client Ref:

17/12/15

Borehole Number Depth (m) Test

Type

Dimensions (mm) Failure Load (P)Sample

Ref

Checked / Approved

C4877

Client

Our Reference

Client Reference

Order No

Contract Title

Description

Date Received

Date Started

Date Completed

Test Procedures

Notes

Approved By

Rob Brown

Certificate of AnalysisCertificate Number 15-53754

23-Dec-15

Professional Soils Laboratory Ltd

5/7 Hexthorpe Road

Hexthorpe

DN4 0AR

15-53754

PSL15/5865

Identified by prefix DETSn (details on request).

Opinions and interpretations are outside the scope of UKAS accreditation. This

certificate is issued in accordance with the accreditation requirements of the United

Kingdom Accreditation Service. The results reported herein relate only to the material

supplied to the laboratory. Observations and interpretations are outside the scope of

ISO 17025. This certificate shall not be reproduced except in full, without the prior

written approval of the laboratory.

Business Manager

(not supplied)

PSL15/5865

One Soil sample.

17-Dec-15

17-Dec-15

23-Dec-15

Derwentside Environmental Testing Services Limited

Unit 2, Park Road Industrial Estate South, Consett, Co Durham, DH8 5PY

Tel: 01207 582333 • email: [email protected] • www.dets.co.uk Page 1 of 3 .

Summary of Chemical AnalysisSoil Samples

Our Ref 15-53754Client Ref PSL15/5865

Contract Title PSL15/5865Lab No 917573

Sample ID P1-BH01Depth 6.20-6.70

Other IDSample Type SOIL

Sampling Date n/s

Sampling Time n/s

Test Method LOD Units

DETSC 2076* 10 mg/l 20

DETSC 2008# 8.4DETSC 2055 1 mg/l 9.9DETSC 2055 1 mg/l < 1.0DETSC 2076# 10 mg/l 570DETSC 2320 0.01 % 0.05DETSC 2321# 0.01 % 0.14Total Sulphate as SO4

Metals

InorganicsMagnesium Aqueous Extract

pHChloride Aqueous ExtractNitrate Aqueous Extract as NO3Sulphate Aqueous Extract as SO4Total Sulphur as S

Page 2 of 3Key: * -not accredited. # -MCERTS (accreditation only implied if report carries the MCERTS logo). n/s -not supplied.

Information in Support of the Analytical ResultsOur Ref 15-53754

Client Ref PSL15/5865Contract PSL15/5865

Containers Received & Deviating Samples

Lab No Sample ID

Date

Sampled Containers Received Holding time exceeded for tests

Inappropriate

container for

tests917573 P1-BH01 6.20-6.70 SOIL PT 500ml Sample date not supplied

Soil Analysis NotesInorganic soil analysis was carried out on a dried sample, crushed to pass a 425µm sieve, in accordance with BS1377.

Organic soil analysis was carried out on an 'as received' sample. Organics results are corrected for moisture and expressed on a dry weight basis.

The Loss on Drying, used to express organics analysis on an air dried basis, is carried out at a temperature of 28°C +/-2°C.

DisposalFrom the issue date of this test certificate, samples will be held for the following times prior to disposal :-

Soils - 1 month, Liquids - 2 weeks, Asbestos (test portion) - 6 months

Key: P-Plastic T-Tub

DETS cannot be held responsible for the integrity of samples received whereby the laboratory did not undertake the sampling. In this instance samples received may

be deviating. Deviating Sample criteria are based on British and International standards and laboratory trials in conjunction with the UKAS note 'Guidance on

Deviating Samples'. All samples received are listed above. However, those samples that have additional comments in relation to hold time and/or inappropriate

containers are deviating due to the reasons stated. This means that the analysis is accredited where applicable, but results may be compromised due to sample

deviations. If no sampled date (soils) or date+time (waters) has been supplied then samples are deviating. However, if you are able to supply a sampled date (and

time for waters) this will prevent samples being reported as deviating where specific hold times are not exceeded and where the container supplied is suitable.

Page 3 of 3

Client

Our Reference

Client Reference

Order No

Contract Title

Description

Date Received

Date Started

Date Completed

Test Procedures

Notes

Approved By

Rob Brown

Identified by prefix DETSn (details on request).

Opinions and interpretations are outside the scope of UKAS accreditation. This

certificate is issued in accordance with the accreditation requirements of the United

Kingdom Accreditation Service. The results reported herein relate only to the material

supplied to the laboratory. Observations and interpretations are outside the scope of

ISO 17025. This certificate shall not be reproduced except in full, without the prior

written approval of the laboratory.

Business Manager

(not supplied)

Branston Lock

5 Soil samples.

10-Dec-15

10-Dec-15

18-Dec-15

Certificate of AnalysisCertificate Number 15-53055

18-Dec-15

Professional Soils Laboratory Ltd

5/7 Hexthorpe Road

Hexthorpe

DN4 0AR

15-53055

PSL15/5865

Derwentside Environmental Testing Services Limited

Unit 2, Park Road Industrial Estate South, Consett, Co Durham, DH8 5PY

Tel: 01207 582333 • email: [email protected] • www.dets.co.uk Page 1 of 3 .

Summary of Chemical AnalysisSoil Samples

Our Ref 15-53055Client Ref PSL15/5865

Contract Title Branston LockLab No 913777 913778 913779 913780 913781

Sample ID P1-BH01 P1-BH01 P1-BH01A P1-BH02 P1-WS06Depth 0.30 12.20-12.90 0.70 0.50 1.00

Other IDSample Type SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL

Sampling Date 03/12/15 03/12/15 03/12/15 03/12/15 03/12/15

Sampling Time n/s n/s n/s n/s n/s

Test Method LOD Units

DETSC 2076* 10 mg/l < 10 70 < 10 < 10 92

DETSC 2008# 7.7 8.2 9.1 8.3 7.8DETSC 2055 1 mg/l 3.1 7.1 6.5 14 4.3DETSC 2055 1 mg/l 1.9 < 1.0 47 34 < 1.0DETSC 2076# 10 mg/l 330 1800 230 460 1600DETSC 2320 0.01 % 0.05 1.8 0.12 0.12 0.22DETSC 2321# 0.01 % 0.16 5.0 0.20 0.26 0.73Total Sulphate as SO4

Metals

InorganicsMagnesium Aqueous Extract

pHChloride Aqueous ExtractNitrate Aqueous Extract as NO3Sulphate Aqueous Extract as SO4Total Sulphur as S

Page 2 of 3Key: * -not accredited. # -MCERTS (accreditation only implied if report carries the MCERTS logo). n/s -not supplied.

Information in Support of the Analytical ResultsOur Ref 15-53055

Client Ref PSL15/5865Contract Branston Lock

Containers Received & Deviating Samples

Lab No Sample ID

Date

Sampled Containers Received

Holding time

exceeded for

tests

Inappropriate

container for

tests913777 P1-BH01 0.30 SOIL 03/12/15 PT 500ml

913778 P1-BH01 12.20-12.90 SOIL 03/12/15 PT 500ml

913779 P1-BH01A 0.70 SOIL 03/12/15 PT 500ml

913780 P1-BH02 0.50 SOIL 03/12/15 PT 500ml

913781 P1-WS06 1.00 SOIL 03/12/15 PT 500ml

Soil Analysis NotesInorganic soil analysis was carried out on a dried sample, crushed to pass a 425µm sieve, in accordance with BS1377.

Organic soil analysis was carried out on an 'as received' sample. Organics results are corrected for moisture and expressed on a dry weight basis.

The Loss on Drying, used to express organics analysis on an air dried basis, is carried out at a temperature of 28°C +/-2°C.

DisposalFrom the issue date of this test certificate, samples will be held for the following times prior to disposal :-

Soils - 1 month, Liquids - 2 weeks, Asbestos (test portion) - 6 months

Key: P-Plastic T-Tub

DETS cannot be held responsible for the integrity of samples received whereby the laboratory did not undertake the sampling. In this instance samples received may

be deviating. Deviating Sample criteria are based on British and International standards and laboratory trials in conjunction with the UKAS note 'Guidance on

Deviating Samples'. All samples received are listed above. However, those samples that have additional comments in relation to hold time and/or inappropriate

containers are deviating due to the reasons stated. This means that the analysis is accredited where applicable, but results may be compromised due to sample

deviations. If no sampled date (soils) or date+time (waters) has been supplied then samples are deviating. However, if you are able to supply a sampled date (and

time for waters) this will prevent samples being reported as deviating where specific hold times are not exceeded and where the container supplied is suitable.

Page 3 of 3

This certificate should not be reproduced, except in full, without the express permission of the laboratory.

The results included within the report are representative of the samples submitted for analysis.

Iss No 15-83305-1

Page 1 of 5

i2 Analytical Telephone: 01923 225404

7 Woodshots Meadow Fax: 01923 237404Croxley Green Business Park email:[email protected]

Watford, WD18 8YS

Report No:

Client:

Location

Sampling Date

Sample ID

Depth (m)

Solid Waste Analysis

TOC (%)** 0.9 3% 5% 6%

Loss on Ignition (%) ** - -- -- 10%

BTEX (µg/kg) ** - 6000 -- --

Sum of PCBs (mg/kg) ** - 1 -- --

Mineral Oil (mg/kg) - 500 -- --

Total PAH (WAC-17) (mg/kg) - 100 -- --

pH (units)** 7.7 -- >6 --

Acid Neutralisation Capacity (mol / kg) 0.71 -- To be evaluated To be evaluated

Arsenic * < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.050 0.5 2 25

Barium * 0.021 0.029 0.28 20 100 300

Cadmium * < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0020 0.04 1 5

Chromium * 0.0025 0.0063 0.058 0.5 10 70

Copper * 0.019 0.0089 0.10 2 50 100

Mercury * < 0.0015 < 0.0015 < 0.010 0.01 0.2 2

Molybdenum * 0.0051 < 0.0030 < 0.020 0.5 10 30

Nickel * 0.0022 0.0031 0.030 0.4 10 40

Lead * 0.010 0.017 0.16 0.5 10 50

Antimony * < 0.0050 < 0.0050 0.024 0.06 0.7 5

Selenium * < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.040 0.1 0.5 7

Zinc * 0.0065 0.0141 0.13 4 50 200

Chloride * 6.9 < 4.0 < 15 800 4000 25000

Fluoride 0.73 0.47 5.1 10 150 500

Sulphate * 15 2.1 37 1000 20000 50000

TDS 60 20 250 4000 60000 100000

Phenol Index (Monhydric Phenols) * < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.50 1 - -

Leach Test Information

Stone Content (%) < 0.1 0

Sample Mass (kg) 2.0

Dry Matter (%) 94

Moisture (%) 5.9

Stage 1

Volume Eluate L2 (litres) 0.34

Filtered Eluate VE1 (litres) 0.23

*= UKAS accredited (liquid eluate analysis only)

** = MCERTS accrediited

mg/kg

using BS EN 12457-3 at L/S 10 l/kg (mg/kg)

Waste Acceptance Criteria Analytical Results

Landfill Waste Acceptance Criteria


Lab Reference (Sample Number)Limits511096

Cumulative 10:1

15-83305

CCGROUND

Stable Non-

reactive

HAZARDOUS

waste in non-

hazardous

Landfill

Limit values for compliance leaching test

Inert Waste

Landfill

Hazardous

Waste Landfill

17/11/2015

P1-BH02

0.90

2:1 8:1

DOC 10 9.3

mg/l mg/l

Eluate Analysis

(BS EN 12457 - 3 preparation utilising end over end leaching

procedure)

800 100094 500

Results are expressed on a dry weight basis, after correction for moisture content where applicable

Stated limits are for guidance only and I2 cannot be held responsible for any discrepencies with current legislation



Iss No 15-83305-1

Page 2 of 5



Watford, WD18 8YS

Report No:

Client:

Location

Sampling Date

Sample ID

Depth (m)


TOC (%)** 0.3 3% 5% 6%


BTEX (µg/kg) ** - 6000 -- --




pH (units)** 6.6 -- >6 --

Acid Neutralisation Capacity (mol / kg) -0.37 -- To be evaluated To be evaluated

Arsenic * < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.050 0.5 2 25

Barium * 0.090 0.055 0.59 20 100 300

Cadmium * < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0020 0.04 1 5

Chromium * < 0.0010 0.0012 0.012 0.5 10 70

Copper * 0.0088 0.0066 0.069 2 50 100

Mercury * < 0.0015 < 0.0015 < 0.010 0.01 0.2 2

Molybdenum * < 0.0030 < 0.0030 < 0.020 0.5 10 30

Nickel * < 0.0010 < 0.0010 < 0.0050 0.4 10 40

Lead * 0.0050 < 0.0050 < 0.020 0.5 10 50

Antimony * < 0.0050 < 0.0050 0.045 0.06 0.7 5

Selenium * < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.040 0.1 0.5 7

Zinc * 0.0028 < 0.0010 < 0.020 4 50 200

Chloride * < 4.0 < 4.0 < 15 800 4000 25000

Fluoride 0.64 0.61 6.1 10 150 500

Sulphate * 620 90 1600 1000 20000 50000

TDS 620 160 2200 4000 60000 100000





Dry Matter (%) 90

Moisture (%) 10

Stage 1





500DOC 18

Cumulative 10:1Limit values for compliance leaching test


mg/l mg/l mg/kg

Eluate Analysis


procedure)

2:1 8:1

1.53.3

Lab Reference (Sample Number) 511097Landfill Waste Acceptance Criteria

Limits

17/11/2015

Inert Waste

Landfill

Stable Non-

reactive

HAZARDOUS

waste in non-

hazardous

Landfill

Hazardous

Waste Landfill

P1-WS06

0.50


Waste Acceptance Criteria Analytical Results15-83305



800 1000

CCGROUND



Iss No 15-83305-1

Page 3 of 5

Analytical Report Number : 15-83305

Project / Site name: Branston Lock Development

Lab Sample

Number

Sample

Reference

Sample

NumberDepth (m) Sample Description *

511096 P1-BH02 None Supplied 0.90 Brown sandy loam with gravel.

511097 P1-WS06 None Supplied 0.50 Brown loam and clay with gravel.

* 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.



Iss No 15-83305-1

Page 4 of 5



Water matrix abbreviations: Surface Water (SW) Potable Water (PW) Ground Water (GW)

Analytical Test Name Analytical Method Description Analytical Method ReferenceMethod

number

Wet / Dry

Analysis

Accreditation

Status

Acid neutralisation capacity of soil Determination of acid neutralisation capacity by

addition of acid or alkali followed by electronic

probe.

In-house method based on Guidance an

Sampling and Testing of Wastes to Meet

Landfill Waste Acceptance

L046-PL W NONE

Chloride in WAC leachate (BS EN

12457-3 Prep)

Determination of Chloride colorimetrically by

discrete analyser.

In house based on MEWAM Method ISBN

0117516260.

L082-PL W ISO 17025

DOC in WAC leachate (BS EN 12457-

3 Prep)

Determination of dissolved organic carbon in

leachate by TOC/DOC NDIR analyser.

In-house method based on Standard

Methods for the Examination of Water and

Waste Water, 21st Ed.

L037-PL W NONE

Fluoride in WAC leachate (BS EN

12457-3 Prep)

Determination of fluoride in leachate by 1:1ratio

with a buffer solution followed by Ion Selective

Electrode.




L033-PL W NONE

Metals in WAC leachate (BS EN 12457-

3 Prep)

Determination of metals in leachate by acidification

followed by ICP-OES.




L039-PL W ISO 17025

Moisture Content Moisture content, determined gravimetrically. In-house method based on BS1377 Part 3,

1990, Chemical and Electrochemical Tests

L019-UK/PL W NONE

pH in soil Determination of pH in soil by addition of water

followed by electrometric measurement.

In-house method based on BS1377 Part 3,


L005-PL W MCERTS

Phenol Index in WAC leachate (BS EN

12457-3 Prep)

Determination of monohydric phenols in leachate

by continuous flow analyser.

In-house method based on Examination of

Water and Wastewater 20th Edition:

Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (skalar)

L080-PL W ISO 17025

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 D NONE

Sulphate in WAC leachate (BS EN

12457-3 Prep)

Determination of sulphate in leachate by

acidification followed by ICP-OES.




L039-PL W ISO 17025

TDS in WAC leachate (BS EN 12457-3

Prep)

Determination of total dissolved solids in leachate

by electrometric measurement.




L004-PL W NONE

Total organic carbon in soil Determination of organic matter in soil by oxidising

with potassium dichromate followed by titration

with iron (II) sulphate.



L023-PL D MCERTS

For method numbers ending in 'UK' analysis have been carried out in our laboratory in the United Kingdom.

For method numbers ending in 'PL' 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.



Iss No 15-83305-1

Page 5 of 5

Dan Page

t: 01452 739 165 t: 01923 225404f: 01452 739 220 f: 01923 237404e: [email protected] e:

Project / Site name: Samples received on: 19/11/2015

Your job number: C4877 Samples instructed on: 26/11/2015

Your order number: Analysis completed by: 04/12/2015

Report Issue Number: 1 Report issued on: 04/12/2015

Samples Analysed:

Signed: Signed:

Reporting Manager Assistant Reporting Manager

For & on behalf of i2 Analytical Ltd. For & on behalf of i2 Analytical Ltd.

Other office located at: ul. Pionierów 39, 41 -711 Ruda Śląska, Poland

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.

15 soil samples


CC Ground Investigation Ltd

Unit A2

Innsworth Tech Park

Innsworth Lane

Gloucester

GL3 1DL

i2 Analytical Ltd.

7 Woodshots Meadow,

Croxley Green

Business Park,

Watford,

Herts,

WD18 8YS


Rexona Rahman

[email protected]

Emma Winter



Iss No 15-83303-1

Page 1 of 10

Analytical Report Number: 15-83303


Lab Sample Number 511070 511071 511072 511073 511074

Sample Reference P1-BH01 P1-BH01 P1-BH01A P1-BH01A P1-BH01A

Sample Number None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied

Depth (m) 0.50 1.00 0.20 0.50 0.70

Date Sampled 12/11/2015 12/11/2015 12/11/2015 12/11/2015 12/11/2015

Time Taken None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied

Analytical Parameter

(Soil Analysis)

Un

its

Lim

it of

de

tectio

n

Accre

dita

tion

Sta

tus

Stone Content % 0.1 NONE < 0.1 < 0.1 - < 0.1 < 0.1

Moisture Content % N/A NONE 15 14 - 13 8.2

Total mass of sample received kg 0.001 NONE 1.6 2.0 - 2.0 2.0

Asbestos in Soil Type N/A ISO 17025 - - Not-detected - -

General Inorganics

pH pH Units N/A MCERTS 6.8 - - - 7.7

Total Cyanide mg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1 - - - < 1

Free Cyanide mg/kg 1 NONE < 1 - - - < 1

Thiocyanate as SCN mg/kg 5 NONE < 5.0 - - - < 5.0Total Sulphate as SO4 mg/kg 50 MCERTS 1900 - - - 1100

Sulphide mg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 - - - 12

Total Sulphur mg/kg 50 NONE 1600 - - - 1200

Total Phenols

Total Phenols (monohydric) mg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 - - - < 1.0

Speciated PAHs

Naphthalene mg/kg 0.05 MCERTS < 0.05 - - - < 0.05

Acenaphthylene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Acenaphthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Fluorene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Phenanthrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Anthracene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Pyrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Benzo(a)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Chrysene mg/kg 0.05 MCERTS < 0.05 - - - < 0.05

Benzo(b)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Benzo(k)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Benzo(a)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.10 - - - < 0.10

Benzo(ghi)perylene mg/kg 0.05 MCERTS < 0.05 - - - < 0.05

Total PAH

Speciated Total EPA-16 PAHs mg/kg 1.6 MCERTS < 1.60 - - - < 1.60

Heavy Metals / Metalloids

Arsenic (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS 5.3 - - - 18

Boron (water soluble) mg/kg 0.2 MCERTS 1.9 - - - 3.5

Cadmium (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 0.2 MCERTS < 0.2 - - - < 0.2

Chromium (hexavalent) mg/kg 4 MCERTS < 4.0 - - - < 4.0

Chromium (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS 11 - - - 10

Copper (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS 7.7 - - - 120

Lead (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS 13 - - - 140

Mercury (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 0.3 MCERTS < 0.3 - - - < 0.3

Nickel (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS 9.5 - - - 46

Selenium (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 - - - < 1.0

Zinc (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS 22 - - - 84



Iss No 15-83303-1

Page 2 of 10



Lab Sample Number 511070 511071 511072 511073 511074

Sample Reference P1-BH01 P1-BH01 P1-BH01A P1-BH01A P1-BH01A

Sample Number None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied

Depth (m) 0.50 1.00 0.20 0.50 0.70

Date Sampled 12/11/2015 12/11/2015 12/11/2015 12/11/2015 12/11/2015

Time Taken None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied


(Soil Analysis)

Un

its

Lim

it of

de

tectio

n

Accre

dita

tion

Sta

tus

Monoaromatics

Benzene µg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0

Toluene µg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0

Ethylbenzene µg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0

p & m-xylene µg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0

o-xylene µg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether) µg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0

Petroleum Hydrocarbons

TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC5 - EC6 mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.1 < 0.1 - < 0.1 < 0.1



TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC10 - EC12 mg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0




TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC35) mg/kg 10 MCERTS < 10 < 10 - < 10 < 10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC5 - EC7 mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS < 0.1 < 0.1 - < 0.1 < 0.1



TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC10 - EC12 mg/kg 1 MCERTS < 1.0 < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC12 - EC16 mg/kg 2 MCERTS < 2.0 < 2.0 - < 2.0 < 2.0

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC16 - EC21 mg/kg 10 MCERTS < 10 < 10 - < 10 < 10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC21 - EC35 mg/kg 10 MCERTS < 10 < 10 - < 10 < 10

TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC35) mg/kg 10 MCERTS < 10 < 10 - < 10 < 10



Iss No 15-83303-1

Page 3 of 10



Lab Sample Number

Sample Reference

Sample Number

Depth (m)

Date Sampled

Time Taken


(Soil Analysis)

Un

its

Lim

it of

de

tectio

n

Accre

dita

tion

Sta

tus

Stone Content % 0.1 NONE

Moisture Content % N/A NONE

Total mass of sample received kg 0.001 NONE

Asbestos in Soil Type N/A ISO 17025

General Inorganics

pH pH Units N/A MCERTS

Total Cyanide mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Free Cyanide mg/kg 1 NONE

Thiocyanate as SCN mg/kg 5 NONE

Total Sulphate as SO4 mg/kg 50 MCERTS

Sulphide mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Total Sulphur mg/kg 50 NONE

Total Phenols

Total Phenols (monohydric) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Speciated PAHs

Naphthalene mg/kg 0.05 MCERTS

Acenaphthylene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Acenaphthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Fluorene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Phenanthrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Anthracene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Pyrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Benzo(a)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Chrysene mg/kg 0.05 MCERTS

Benzo(b)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Benzo(k)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Benzo(a)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Benzo(ghi)perylene mg/kg 0.05 MCERTS

Total PAH

Speciated Total EPA-16 PAHs mg/kg 1.6 MCERTS


Arsenic (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Boron (water soluble) mg/kg 0.2 MCERTS

Cadmium (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 0.2 MCERTS

Chromium (hexavalent) mg/kg 4 MCERTS

Chromium (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Copper (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Lead (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Mercury (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 0.3 MCERTS

Nickel (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Selenium (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Zinc (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

511075 511076 511077 511078 511079

P1-BH02 P1-BH02 P1-WS01 P1-WS02 P1-WS04

None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied None Supplied

0.20 0.50 0.20 0.20 0.50

17/11/2015 17/11/2015 16/11/2015 16/11/2015 17/11/2015


< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1

16 13 17 16 8.5

1.7 1.7 1.5 1.6 1.7

- Not-detected - - -

- 7.2 - 6.6 7.3

- < 1 - 1 < 1

- < 1 - 1 < 1

- < 5.0 - < 5.0 < 5.0- 950 - 870 350

- < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0

- 530 - 700 200

- < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0

- < 0.05 - < 0.05 < 0.05

- < 0.10 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- < 0.10 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- < 0.10 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- 0.69 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- 0.14 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- 2.4 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- 2.1 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- 1.2 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- 1.4 - < 0.05 < 0.05

- 1.2 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- 1.1 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- 1.2 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- 0.47 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- < 0.10 - < 0.10 < 0.10

- 0.51 - < 0.05 < 0.05

- 12.3 - < 1.60 < 1.60

- 13 - 1.1 2.2

- 2.3 - 0.9 < 0.2

- 0.4 - 0.4 < 0.2

- < 4.0 - < 4.0 < 4.0

- 14 - 9.2 11

- 61 - 18 6.5

- 200 - 41 14

- < 0.3 - < 0.3 < 0.3

- 20 - 6.6 7.7

- < 1.0 - < 1.0 < 1.0

- 170 - 44 34



Iss No 15-83303-1

Page 4 of 10



Lab Sample Number

Sample Reference

Sample Number

Depth (m)

Date Sampled

Time Taken


(Soil Analysis)

Un

its

Lim

it of

de

tectio

n

Accre

dita

tion

Sta

tus

Stone Content % 0.1 NONEMonoaromatics

Benzene µg/kg 1 MCERTS

Toluene µg/kg 1 MCERTS

Ethylbenzene µg/kg 1 MCERTS

p & m-xylene µg/kg 1 MCERTS

o-xylene µg/kg 1 MCERTS

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether) µg/kg 1 MCERTS


TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC5 - EC6 mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS



TPH-CWG - Aliphatic >EC10 - EC12 mg/kg 1 MCERTS




TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC35) mg/kg 10 MCERTS

TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC5 - EC7 mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS



TPH-CWG - Aromatic >EC10 - EC12 mg/kg 1 MCERTS




TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC35) mg/kg 10 MCERTS

511075 511076 511077 511078 511079

P1-BH02 P1-BH02 P1-WS01 P1-WS02 P1-WS04


0.20 0.50 0.20 0.20 0.50

17/11/2015 17/11/2015 16/11/2015 16/11/2015 17/11/2015


< 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 < 1.0

< 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0

< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1

< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1

< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1

< 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0

< 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0

< 8.0 < 8.0 < 8.0 < 8.0 < 8.0

27 11 < 8.0 < 8.0 < 8.0

30 11 < 10 < 10 < 10

< 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

< 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0

4.6 2.8 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0

26 19 < 10 < 10 < 10

87 41 < 10 < 10 < 10

120 63 < 10 < 10 < 10



Iss No 15-83303-1

Page 5 of 10



Lab Sample Number

Sample Reference

Sample Number

Depth (m)

Date Sampled

Time Taken


(Soil Analysis)

Un

its

Lim

it of

de

tectio

n

Accre

dita

tion

Sta

tus

Stone Content % 0.1 NONE

Moisture Content % N/A NONE

Total mass of sample received kg 0.001 NONE

Asbestos in Soil Type N/A ISO 17025

General Inorganics

pH pH Units N/A MCERTS

Total Cyanide mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Free Cyanide mg/kg 1 NONE

Thiocyanate as SCN mg/kg 5 NONE

Total Sulphate as SO4 mg/kg 50 MCERTS

Sulphide mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Total Sulphur mg/kg 50 NONE

Total Phenols

Total Phenols (monohydric) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Speciated PAHs

Naphthalene mg/kg 0.05 MCERTS

Acenaphthylene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Acenaphthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Fluorene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Phenanthrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Anthracene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Pyrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Benzo(a)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Chrysene mg/kg 0.05 MCERTS

Benzo(b)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Benzo(k)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Benzo(a)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/kg 0.1 MCERTS

Benzo(ghi)perylene mg/kg 0.05 MCERTS

Total PAH

Speciated Total EPA-16 PAHs mg/kg 1.6 MCERTS


Arsenic (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Boron (water soluble) mg/kg 0.2 MCERTS

Cadmium (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 0.2 MCERTS

Chromium (hexavalent) mg/kg 4 MCERTS

Chromium (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Copper (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Lead (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Mercury (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 0.3 MCERTS

Nickel (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Selenium (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

Zinc (aqua regia extractable) mg/kg 1 MCERTS

511080 511081 511082 511083 511084

P1-WS06 P1-WS06 P1-WS06 P1-HP01 P1-HP01


0.10 0.20 1.00 0.20 0.50

17/11/2015 17/11/2015 17/11/2015 17/11/2015 17/11/2015


< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 -

7.4 11 9.9 12 -

1.2 1.7 1.8 1.6 -

- - Not-detected - Not-detected

- 7.6 7.7 - -

- < 1 < 1 - -

- < 1 < 1 - -

- < 5.0 < 5.0 - -- 10000 5000 - -

- < 1.0 < 1.0 - -

- 3400 1700 - -

- < 1.0 < 1.0 - -

- < 0.05 < 0.05 - -

- < 0.10 < 0.10 - -

- 0.46 < 0.10 - -

- 0.45 < 0.10 - -

- 3.7 < 0.10 - -

- 1.3 < 0.10 - -

- 4.8 0.24 - -

- 3.7 0.26 - -

- 1.7 < 0.10 - -

- 1.4 < 0.05 - -

- 1.5 < 0.10 - -

- 0.87 < 0.10 - -

- 1.2 < 0.10 - -

- 0.56 < 0.10 - -

- < 0.10 < 0.10 - -

- 0.61 < 0.05 - -

- 22.2 < 1.60 - -

- 1.8 7.1 - -

- < 0.2 0.3 - -

- < 0.2 < 0.2 - -

- < 4.0 < 4.0 - -

- 23 22 - -

- 30 16 - -

- 8.8 12 - -

- < 0.3 < 0.3 - -

- 20 22 - -

- < 1.0 < 1.0 - -

- 40 48 - -



Iss No 15-83303-1

Page 6 of 10



Lab Sample Number

Sample Reference

Sample Number

Depth (m)

Date Sampled

Time Taken


(Soil Analysis)

Un

its

Lim

it of

de

tectio

n

Accre

dita

tion

Sta

tus

Stone Content % 0.1 NONEMonoaromatics

Benzene µg/kg 1 MCERTS

Toluene µg/kg 1 MCERTS

Ethylbenzene µg/kg 1 MCERTS

p & m-xylene µg/kg 1 MCERTS

o-xylene µg/kg 1 MCERTS

MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether) µg/kg 1 MCERTS









TPH-CWG - Aliphatic (EC5 - EC35) mg/kg 10 MCERTS








TPH-CWG - Aromatic (EC5 - EC35) mg/kg 10 MCERTS

511080 511081 511082 511083 511084

P1-WS06 P1-WS06 P1-WS06 P1-HP01 P1-HP01


0.10 0.20 1.00 0.20 0.50

17/11/2015 17/11/2015 17/11/2015 17/11/2015 17/11/2015


< 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 -

< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 -

< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 -

< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 -

< 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 -

< 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 -

< 8.0 < 8.0 < 8.0 < 8.0 -

470 43 < 8.0 10 -

480 46 < 10 13 -

< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 -

< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 -

< 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 -

< 1.0 1.2 < 1.0 < 1.0 -

< 2.0 7.4 < 2.0 < 2.0 -

< 10 21 < 10 < 10 -

830 49 < 10 25 -

830 79 < 10 35 -



Iss No 15-83303-1

Page 7 of 10



Lab Sample

Number

Sample

Reference

Sample


511070 P1-BH01 None Supplied 0.50 Brown loam and sand.

511071 P1-BH01 None Supplied 1.00 Brown sand with gravel.

511072 P1-BH01A None Supplied 0.20 -

511073 P1-BH01A None Supplied 0.50 Brown loam and sand with gravel and vegetation.

511074 P1-BH01A None Supplied 0.70 Brown loam and sand with gravel and vegetation.

511075 P1-BH02 None Supplied 0.20 Brown loam and sand with gravel and vegetation.

511076 P1-BH02 None Supplied 0.50 Brown loam and sand with gravel and vegetation.

511077 P1-WS01 None Supplied 0.20 Brown loam and clay with vegetation.

511078 P1-WS02 None Supplied 0.20 Brown loam and sand with gravel and vegetation.

511079 P1-WS04 None Supplied 0.50 Light brown loam and sand with gravel.

511080 P1-WS06 None Supplied 0.10 Brown gravelly loam with vegetation.

511081 P1-WS06 None Supplied 0.20 Light brown loam and clay with gravel.

511082 P1-WS06 None Supplied 1.00 Light brown loam and sand with gravel.

511083 P1-HP01 None Supplied 0.20 Brown loam and sand with gravel and vegetation.

511084 P1-HP01 None Supplied 0.50 -






Iss No 15-83303-1

Page 8 of 10





number

Wet / Dry

Analysis

Accreditation

Status

Asbestos identification in soil Asbestos Identification with the use of polarised

light microscopy in conjunction with disperion

staining techniques.

In house method based on HSG 248 A001-PL D 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 D MCERTS

BTEX and MTBE in soil Determination of BTEX in soil by headspace GC-MS. In-house method based on USEPA8260 L073B-PL W MCERTS

Free cyanide in soil Determination of free cyanide by distillation

followed by colorimetry.



Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL W NONE

Hexavalent chromium in soil Determination of hexavalent chromium in soil by

extraction in water then by acidification, addition of

1,5 diphenylcarbazide followed by colorimetry.

In-house method L080-PL W 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 D MCERTS



L019-UK/PL W NONE

Monohydric phenols in soil Determination of phenols in soil by extraction with

sodium hydroxide followed by distillation followed

by colorimetry.




L080-PL W MCERTS

pH in soil (automated) Determination of pH in soil by addition of water




L099-PL D MCERTS

Speciated EPA-16 PAHs in soil Determination of PAH compounds in soil by

extraction in dichloromethane and hexane followed

by GC-MS with the use of surrogate and internal

standards.

In-house method based on USEPA 8270 L064-PL D MCERTS






L019-UK/PL D NONE

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 D MCERTS

Thiocyanate in soil Determination of thiocyanate in soil by extraction

in caustic soda followed by acidification followed by

addition of ferric nitrate followed by

spectrophotometer.

In-house method L049-PL D NONE

Total cyanide in soil Determination of total cyanide by distillation

followed by colorimetry.



Clesceri, Greenberg & Eaton (Skalar)

L080-PL W MCERTS

Total sulphate (as SO4 in soil) Determination of total sulphate in soil by extraction

with 10% HCl followed by ICP-OES.



L038-PL D MCERTS

Total Sulphur in soil Determination of total sulphur in soil by extraction

with aqua-regia, potassium bromide/bromate



1990, and MEWAM 2006 Methods for the

Determination of Metals in Soil

L038-PL D NONE

TPHCWG (Soil) Determination of hexane extractable hydrocarbons

in soil by GC-MS/GC-FID.

In-house method L076-PL W MCERTS



Iss No 15-83303-1

Page 9 of 10





number

Wet / Dry

Analysis

Accreditation

Status







Iss No 15-83303-1

Page 10 of 10



Watford, WD18 8YS

Report No:

Client:

Location

Sampling Date

Sample ID

Depth (m)


TOC (%)** 0.3 3% 5% 6%


BTEX (µg/kg) ** - 6000 -- --




pH (units)** 6.6 -- >6 --

Acid Neutralisation Capacity (mol / kg) -0.37 -- To be evaluated To be evaluated

Arsenic * < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.050 0.5 2 25

Barium * 0.090 0.055 0.59 20 100 300

Cadmium * < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0020 0.04 1 5

Chromium * < 0.0010 0.0012 0.012 0.5 10 70

Copper * 0.0088 0.0066 0.069 2 50 100

Mercury * < 0.0015 < 0.0015 < 0.010 0.01 0.2 2

Molybdenum * < 0.0030 < 0.0030 < 0.020 0.5 10 30

Nickel * < 0.0010 < 0.0010 < 0.0050 0.4 10 40

Lead * 0.0050 < 0.0050 < 0.020 0.5 10 50

Antimony * < 0.0050 < 0.0050 0.045 0.06 0.7 5

Selenium * < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.040 0.1 0.5 7

Zinc * 0.0028 < 0.0010 < 0.020 4 50 200

Chloride * < 4.0 < 4.0 < 15 800 4000 25000

Fluoride 0.64 0.61 6.1 10 150 500

Sulphate * 620 90 1600 1000 20000 50000

TDS 620 160 2200 4000 60000 100000





Dry Matter (%) 90

Moisture (%) 10

Stage 1





500DOC 18

Cumulative 10:1Limit values for compliance leaching test


mg/l mg/l mg/kg

Eluate Analysis


procedure)

2:1 8:1

1.53.3

Lab Reference (Sample Number) 511097Landfill Waste Acceptance Criteria

Limits

17/11/2015

Inert Waste

Landfill

Stable Non-

reactive

HAZARDOUS

waste in non-

hazardous

Landfill

Hazardous

Waste Landfill

P1-WS06

0.50


Waste Acceptance Criteria Analytical Results15-83305



800 1000

CCGROUND



Iss No 15-83305-1

Page 3 of 5



Lab Sample

Number

Sample

Reference

Sample


511096 P1-BH02 None Supplied 0.90 Brown sandy loam with gravel.

511097 P1-WS06 None Supplied 0.50 Brown loam and clay with gravel.






Iss No 15-83305-1

Page 4 of 5





number

Wet / Dry

Analysis

Accreditation

Status

Acid neutralisation capacity of soil Determination of acid neutralisation capacity by

addition of acid or alkali followed by electronic

probe.

In-house method based on Guidance an

Sampling and Testing of Wastes to Meet

Landfill Waste Acceptance

L046-PL W NONE

Chloride in WAC leachate (BS EN

12457-3 Prep)

Determination of Chloride colorimetrically by

discrete analyser.

In house based on MEWAM Method ISBN

0117516260.

L082-PL W ISO 17025

DOC in WAC leachate (BS EN 12457-

3 Prep)

Determination of dissolved organic carbon in

leachate by TOC/DOC NDIR analyser.




L037-PL W NONE

Fluoride in WAC leachate (BS EN

12457-3 Prep)

Determination of fluoride in leachate by 1:1ratio

with a buffer solution followed by Ion Selective

Electrode.




L033-PL W NONE

Metals in WAC leachate (BS EN 12457-

3 Prep)

Determination of metals in leachate by acidification





L039-PL W ISO 17025



L019-UK/PL W NONE

pH in soil Determination of pH in soil by addition of water




L005-PL W MCERTS

Phenol Index in WAC leachate (BS EN

12457-3 Prep)

Determination of monohydric phenols in leachate

by continuous flow analyser.




L080-PL W ISO 17025






L019-UK/PL D NONE

Sulphate in WAC leachate (BS EN

12457-3 Prep)

Determination of sulphate in leachate by

acidification followed by ICP-OES.




L039-PL W ISO 17025

TDS in WAC leachate (BS EN 12457-3

Prep)

Determination of total dissolved solids in leachate

by electrometric measurement.




L004-PL W NONE

Total organic carbon in soil Determination of organic matter in soil by oxidising

with potassium dichromate followed by titration

with iron (II) sulphate.



L023-PL D MCERTS







Iss No 15-83305-1

Page 5 of 5



Iss No 15-83305-1

Page 1 of 5


APPENDIX D

Appendix D – SPT Calibration Data

Documents

5HFHLYHG ˇ 3 ˇ ˆ - East Staffordshire · 2.1 Scope and Objectives of Report The scope and objectives of this Ground Investigation Report (GIR) is to interpret the information gathered