SC Groundwater Assessment PDF
SC Groundwater Assessment PDF
SC Groundwater Assessment PDF
South Australia
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Information Officer
Environment Protection Authority
GPO Box 2607
Adelaide SA 5001
Website: www.epa.sa.gov.au
Email: epainfo@sa.gov.au
ISBN 978-1-921495-55-7
Disclaimer
This publication is a guide only and does not necessarily provide adequate information in relation to every situation.
This publication seeks to explain your possible obligations in a helpful and accessible way. In doing so, however,
some detail may not be captured. It is important, therefore, that you seek appropriate advice regarding your
obligations, including legal advice.
This document may be reproduced in whole or part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the inclusion of an
acknowledgment of the source and to it not being used for commercial purposes or sale. Reproduction for purposes
other than those given above requires the prior written permission of the Environment Protection Authority.
Contents
Abbreviations................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Summary ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 6
1.1 Site contamination ......................................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Purpose.......................................................................................................................................................... 6
1.3 Application of the guideline ............................................................................................................................ 7
1.4 Application of national and international publications .................................................................................... 7
1.5 Currency of this guideline .............................................................................................................................. 7
1.6 National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 ................................ 8
1.7 Protection of the environment during assessment and remediation .............................................................. 8
5 Notification requirements..................................................................................................................................... 22
5.1 Section 83A – Notification of site contamination of underground water....................................................... 22
5.2 Hazardous circumstances............................................................................................................................ 22
Part 4: Remediation.................................................................................................................................................... 33
14 Glossary................................................................................................................................................................. 56
Appendix 3 Section 83A – Notification of site contamination that affects or threatens underground water 65
List of figures
Figure 1 Key considerations for the determination of the existence of site contamination at a site........................ 16
Figure 2 Process to determine environmental values of groundwater at a site ...................................................... 18
Figure 3 Summary of the site contamination tiered risk assessment process ........................................................ 28
Figure 4 Relevant schedules of the ASC NEPM documenting the tiered risk-based approach to assessment ..... 29
List of tables
Table 1 Application of the WQEPP to determine protected environmental values of groundwater .......................... 19
Table 2 Application of a buffer distance for protection of surface waters ................................................................. 19
Table 3 Application of WaterConnect (groundwater data) to determine environmental values of groundwater ....... 20
Table 4 EPA recognised criteria and environmental values of groundwater ............................................................ 21
Table 5 Hazardous circumstances recommended notification, timeframes and emergency contact information .... 22
Table 6 Circumstances when the EPA may require an audit for a site..................................................................... 31
Table 7 Key considerations during site sampling and site activities for collection of reliable data ........................... 31
Table 8 Selection of the remediation options to inform the preparation of the ROA................................................. 39
Table 9 EPA recognised criteria for human health and ecological receptors ........................................................... 63
Table 10 Environmental values of waters and EPA recognised criteria ..................................................................... 64
Abbreviations
ACM asbestos-containing materials
ARMCANZ Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand
ASC NEPM National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (as
amended 2013)
EV environmental value
GR guideline recommendation
1
ITRC Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (US)
LBSC Act Land and Business (Sale and Conveyancing) Act 1994
LBSC Regulations Land and Business (Sale and Conveyancing) Regulations 2010
VI vapour intrusion
2
Summary
The South Australian Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has issued this guideline to describe the legislative and
policy approach to risk-based assessment and remediation of site contamination in South Australia.
This guideline has been prepared for site contamination consultants (consultants), certified practitioners and site
contamination auditors (auditors) undertaking the assessment and remediation of site contamination.
This guideline supports the Objects of the Environment Protection Act 1993 which requires the establishment of
processes for carrying out assessments of known or suspected site contamination and, if appropriate, remediation of
sites.
The purpose of this guideline is to provide information to assist consultants and auditors to adopt a consistent and
compliant interpretation of relevant legislation, policy and guidance. This guideline also provides information to ensure
the assessment and remediation of site contamination is conducted to an appropriate standard in South Australia.
The EPA has prepared information in this guideline to assist consultants and auditors to:
• assess and identify the environmental values of water (groundwater) using a four-step process
• determine when to notify of site contamination that affects or threatens underground water (section 83A of the
Environment Protection Act 1993)
• identify matters that represent hazardous circumstances, with respective timeframes for the management of such
matters
• undertake the assessment of site contamination in general accordance with the National Environment Protection
(Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (as amended in 2013)
• determine when a site contamination audit is required for a site based on the existence of site contamination and
land use at a site, and offsite receptors
• prepare a remediation strategy to address remediation goals, objectives and endpoints for a site
• determine what type of remediation technology or method is appropriate for a site, using a process to assist in the
preparation of a remediation options assessment
• manage and protect the environment when undertaking assessment and remediation
• undertake effective community engagement and risk communication for site contamination matters.
This guideline should be read in conjunction with the following EPA publications:
3
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Part 1
5
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
1 Introduction
1.1 Site contamination
Site contamination can create complex social and economic issues. If not adequately recognised and addressed, site
contamination can pose a significant risk to human health and/or the environment 1. Site contamination can affect one
or more media of the environment including (but not limited to) soil, groundwater and soil vapour. Subsequently via
the vapour intrusion pathway, indoor air may also be affected by site contamination.
Assessment of site contamination at a site may be required as a result of various triggers. The triggers may include a
change in land ownership, the proposed change of the use of a site for a more sensitive use 2, a requirement of a
development approval process, a regulatory requirement of the South Australian Environment Protection Authority
(EPA), or a due diligence assessment. In any instance, the site contamination consultant (consultant) 3 and/or site
contamination auditor (auditor) 4 are likely to be required to make a determination as to the existence of site
contamination.
Robust scientific assessment of site contamination is essential to ensure adequate protection of human health and the
environment. The assessment of site contamination should be undertaken in accordance with the framework provided
in the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (as amended in 2013) (the
ASC NEPM). If site contamination exists, the provisions of Part 10A of the Environment Protection Act 1993 (the EP
Act) apply.
When remediation is required, it is to be undertaken in accordance with this guideline and other relevant national and
international publications 5.
A range of other site contamination publications have been prepared by the EPA for the community and non-site
contamination professionals, which are available on the EPA website.
1.2 Purpose
The guideline has been prepared to reflect developments and learnings related to the regulation of site contamination
in South Australia since 2009 and, in particular, legislative experience and knowledge developed through regulatory
processes since the commencement of Part 10A of the EP Act (July 2009).
• align the framework for the assessment of site contamination with the amended ASC NEPM, and
• provide a framework for the remediation of site contamination in South Australia, by establishing policy that is
risk-based, incorporates the Objects of the EP Act and provides a hierarchy for remediation options.
The purposes of this guideline are to provide consultants and auditors with a risk-based approach to the determination
of site contamination and to clarify the EPA’s expectations of consultants and auditors in the assessment and
remediation of site contamination in South Australia.
In particular, this guideline has been developed to assist consultants and auditors to:
• adopt a consistent and compliant interpretation of relevant legislation, policy and guidance, and
• ensure the assessment and remediation of site contamination is conducted to an appropriate standard.
It also details the responsibilities and roles of all persons involved in the assessment and remediation of site
contamination.
1
Environment is defined in section 3(1) of the EP Act and refer also to the Glossary of this guideline
2
Sensitive use is defined in section 3(1) of the EP Act and refer also to the Glossary of this guideline
3
Site contamination consultant is defined in section 3(1) of the EP Act
4
Site contamination auditor is defined in section 3(1) of the EP Act
5
Refer to section 1.4 of this guideline for the application of national and international publications
6
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
While it is expected that this guideline will provide assistance in understanding the regulation of site contamination in
South Australia, you may need to seek you own advice in relation to your specific circumstances.
The guideline should be read in conjunction with the following EPA publications:
The EP Act and the Environment Protection Regulations 2009 (the Regulations) include a range of different
requirements for consultants, auditors, landowners, occupiers and others. Key legislative provisions and policy
requirements have been highlighted throughout this publication in text boxes where appropriate. Legislative and policy
requirements have been identified with the use of the word ‘must’ or ‘required’. Key aspects and policy have been
highlighted in text boxes as guideline recommendations referenced as ‘GR’.
All South Australian legislation is available on the South Australian legislation website.
Nothing in this document is intended to derogate from or fetter the powers of the EPA and authorised officers under
the EP Act and the regulations made under the EP Act.
There is a range of national and international publications that exist in relation to the assessment and remediation of
site contamination that are not part of the legislative framework applied in South Australia.
Prior to use and application of such publications that are not specifically referred to in this guideline, the EPA
recommends that consultants and auditors understand the legislative background informing the publication. Other
relevant matters to consider include: the limitation of the publication to site-specific circumstances, the sources for the
publication, the age of the publication and whether the publication is widely recognised as authoritative. Draft
publications are generally not considered suitable for the purpose of risk-based decision making for the assessment
and remediation of site contamination.
• Site contamination: implementation of the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination)
Measure 1999 (2016)
• Site contamination: guidelines for the assessment and remediation of groundwater contamination (2009)
• Site contamination: responsibility for assessment and remediation of site contamination (2009)
• Site contamination: how to determine actual or potential harm to water that is not trivial resulting from site
contamination (2008)
• EPA Guidelines: Notification of site contamination that affects of threatens underground water pursuant to section
83A of the Environment Protection Act 1993 (2008)
7
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
This guideline may be replaced, amended or updated periodically by the EPA. All persons should refer to the EPA
website for details of the most recent version of this guideline and other EPA publications related to site
contamination.
The purpose of the ASC NEPM is to establish a nationally consistent approach for the assessment of site
contamination. Its framework promotes sound environmental management practices that should be adopted by the
relevant stakeholders including regulators, site assessors, consultants, auditors, landowners, developers and industry
parties.
The desired outcome of the ASC NEPM is to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment,
where site contamination is found to exist, through the development of an efficient and effective national approach to
the assessment of site contamination.
The ASC NEPM comprises a policy framework supported by two schedules. This guideline and other EPA documents
in the site contamination series are intended to be consistent with the policy framework and guidance provided in the
ASC NEPM.
The EPA expects the assessment of site contamination will be carried out in accordance with the guidance provided
in the ASC NEPM and relevant EPA publications. The ASC NEPM provides some limited guidance on the remediation
of site contamination. It provides details of environmental outcomes 6 for achieving remediation and/or management at
a site.
The ASC NEPM (including any amendments and errata) is available for download from the ComLaw website. The
website for the former Standing Council on Environment and Water (SCEW) provides supporting information about
the ASC NEPM including frequently asked questions, errata and the ASC NEPM Toolbox.
Causing environmental harm 7 (including serious or material environmental harm or environmental nuisance) is an
offence under the EP Act and regulatory action may be taken by the EPA where it occurs. For information relating to
the EPA’s regulation 8 of general environmental duty and the environmental harm provisions of the EP Act, refer to the
EPA publication Compliance and enforcement regulatory options and tools (2009) 9.
6
Principles to be observed in relation to the assessment of site contamination are contained in clause 6 of the ASC
NEPM. Principle 16 provides a hierarchy of options for site clean-up and or management to achieve desired and site-
specific environmental outcomes
7
Refer to section 5 of the EP Act for the definition of environmental harm, and sections 79 and 80 of the EP Act for the
offence provisions for causing serious environmental harm and material environmental harm, respectively
8
Additional information on general environmental duty and environmental harm provisions of the EP Act are provided in
section 3.1 of this guideline
9
The publication referenced should be applied in its state of publication or as updated from time to time
8
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
• prepare draft environment protection policies (EPPs), and conduct reviews of EPPs, regulations and other
measures and practices to ensure that they are adequate and effective to secure the Objects 11 of the EP Act
• contribute to the development of national environment protection measures and ensure their effective application
in South Australia
• conduct investigations for the purpose of assessing compliance 12 with the EP Act.
• provides responses to development applications referred to it through the Development Act 1993
• contributes to Form 1 and 2 statements under the Land and Business (Sale and Conveyancing) Act 1994.
Specifically, Part 10A of the EP Act provides provisions and regulatory instruments in relation to site contamination.
These provisions allow for:
• issuing site contamination assessment orders (SCAOs) 13 and site remediation orders (SROs) 14
• agreement to voluntary site contamination assessment proposals (VSCAPs) 15 and voluntary site remediation
proposals (VSRPs) 16
For further information specific to the EPA’s regulation of site contamination matters, refer to the EPA publication
10
Refer to section 11 of the EP Act for the establishment of the Authority
11
The Objects of the EP Act are defined in section 10 of the EP Act
12
Refer to the EPA publication Compliance and enforcement regulatory options and tools (2009)
13
Refer to section 103H of the EP Act
14
Refer to section 103J of the EP Act
15
Refer to section 103I of the EP Act
16
Refer to section 103K of the EP Act
17
Refer to Division 4 of the EP Act
18
Refer to section 103S of the EP Act
19
Refer to section 103N of the EP Act
9
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
In the course of the EPA’s regulation of site contamination at a site, selection of an appropriate regulatory instrument
is based on:
• the potentially contaminating activities that have taken place at the site or elsewhere
• the potential exposure pathways and risks that exist (based on the chemical substance and potentially affected
media)
When site contamination exists, the EPA will regulate the appropriate person in accordance with the publication Site
contamination: regulatory and orphan site management framework (2017) and guidelines issued by the EPA from
time to time.
This publication describes the legislative instruments available for the regulation of site contamination. It provides
information to appropriate persons to whom the EPA may issue a SCAO or SRO, agree to VSCAP or VSRP and/or
regulate in non-statutory arrangements. In addition, the publication outlines and describes the EPA’s management of
orphan site matters 20. An orphan site includes matters where: it is not practicable to regulate an appropriate person,
the location of the source site cannot be determined, and a potential risk to public health exists.
For further information about auditors and audits, refer to the EPA publication Guidelines for the site contamination
audit system (2015).
GR 1 Site contamination auditor – statements on the suitability of land for sensitive use
Site contamination auditors are the only persons considered by the EPA as appropriate to provide an opinion on
the suitability of land for sensitive use 22 where site contamination exists or is suspected.
An auditor’s role is to independently and objectively examine and review the accuracy and completeness of the
assessment and/or remediation work carried out by others and to complete a site contamination audit report.
For a sensitive use site, only a site contamination auditor can provide an opinion on achieving a remediation
endpoint that is reasonably practicable (where applicable) in accordance with Part 4 of this guideline.
The independence and integrity of the auditor are fundamental aspects of the audit system. The obligations of
auditors with regard to conflict of interest and honesty are detailed in section 103X of the EP Act. Auditors must be
able to demonstrate that the audits they carry out are not subject to a conflict of interest, that they have exercised their
own professional judgment and the opinions they express in the audit documentation have been reached
independently. Severe penalties exist for auditors in relation to conflicts of interest and providing false or misleading
statements 23.
For detailed guidance on the roles and responsibilities of an auditor, refer to the EPA publication Guidelines for the
site contamination audit system (2015).
20
Refer to part 7 of the Regulatory and orphan site management framework (2017)
21
Refer to section 103V of the EP Act
22
Refer to section 3(1) of the EP Act for the definition of sensitive use
23
Refer to sections 103X and 103ZB and divisional penalties and expiation fees of the EP Act
10
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
In accordance with the EPA publications Site contamination policy: certification of practitioners (2018) and
Site contamination: regulatory and orphan site management framework (2017), the EPA is likely to require a
certified site contamination practitioner to undertake assessment and/or remediation of site contamination at a site
The regulatory and orphan site management framework describes the circumstances when the appropriate person
will be required to engage a certified practitioner to undertake assessment or remediation of site contamination. It also
describes the circumstance when reports, prepared and endorsed by certified practitioners, are expected by the EPA.
For a non-sensitive use site, a site contamination consultant can provide an opinion on achieving a remediation
endpoint that is reasonably practicable (where applicable) in accordance with Part 4 of this guideline.
The EPA publication Site contamination consultant (2018) has been prepared for the community to assist in
understanding the level of experience, qualifications and competency of consultants.
2.6 Developers
Developers or persons bringing about a change in the use of land may be liable for site contamination in certain
circumstances. Refer to section 103D of the EP Act for circumstances in which persons may be liable for causing site
contamination. Developers also have responsibilities for assessing the potential for site contamination (ie where a
PCA has been undertaken), prior to the submission of applications for rezoning or development 26. For further
information on the EPA’s regulation of appropriate persons who caused site contamination, refer to Site
contamination: regulatory and orphan site management framework (2017).
24
Section 3(1) of the EP Act provides the definition of an owner
25
Section 3(1) of the EP Act provides the definition of an occupier
26
Refer to section 103D(2) of the EP Act for an appropriate persons who caused site contamination
11
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
information provided is misleading, incomplete or deficient, then the conclusions by the consultant or auditor may be
significantly incorrect or flawed.
Further to this, the EPA relies on the accuracy and completeness of reports to make decisions about risk to the
human health and the environment. If the EPA becomes aware that a person has not or may not have complied with
section 103ZB, the EPA will investigate the matter and will, where appropriate, commence regulatory action (which
may include criminal prosecution).
Three sections of the EP Act (sections 103ZB, 119 and 120A) relate to honesty in reporting provisions. The EPA
expects that consultants and auditors will make their clients aware of this provision before commencing assessment
and/or remediation at a site. Consultants and auditors are advised to accurately record and retain information
provided by relevant persons.
Appendix 1 provides a template to assist those who receive site contamination assessment or remediation reports or
other related information, which is relied upon for decision making or the preparation of other site contamination
reports. It is expected that the use of this form will increase the reliability of the information provided to the relevant
person.
The EPA recommends that consultants and auditors provide the form to relevant person(s) for completion prior to the
commencement of an assessment and/or remediation program. It is recommended that consultants who provide
information to auditors will complete this form in relation to the information they provide to the auditor.
The EPA expects that the Honesty in reporting declaration 27 be completed and included as part of any report that is
provided to the EPA.
27
A copy of the ‘Honesty in reporting declaration’ template is provided in Appendix 1 of this guideline
12
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Part 2
13
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Further, in a contemporary sense environmental harm 29 is caused by the act of polluting. This typically relates to an
incident 30 that takes place at a point in time. It is a criminal offence to cause (serious or material) environmental harm
post commencement of the EP Act (1 May 1995). Additionally, the EP Act establishes a general environmental duty 31,
which creates an obligation on persons to avoid causing pollution, environmental nuisance and environmental harm.
The EPA regulates environmental harm in accordance with the EPA publication Compliance and enforcement
regulatory options and tools (2009).
The EPA acknowledges that there are a number of complexities associated with making a determination of the
existence of site contamination. The EPA policy and interpretation of legislation, described in this guideline, are aimed
at providing clear and consistent information to consultants and auditors for the determination, assessment and
remediation of site contamination. Specifically, the guideline provides the EPA’s interpretation of the definition of site
contamination relevant to the EPA’s regulation of the site contamination provisions of the EP Act.
3.2 Legislation
Site contamination is defined in section 5B of the EP Act as follows:
(1) For the purposes of this Act, site contamination exists at a site if—
(a) chemical substances are present on or below the surface of the site in concentrations above the
background concentrations (if any); and
(b) the chemical substances have, at least in part, come to be present there as a result of an activity at the site
or elsewhere; and
(c) the presence of the chemical substances in those concentrations has resulted in—
(i) actual or potential harm to the health or safety of human beings that is not trivial, taking into account
current or proposed land uses; or
(iii) other actual or potential environmental harm that is not trivial, taking into account current or
proposed land uses.
28
Refer to section 103B of the EP Act
29
Refer to section 5 of the EP Act for the definition of environmental harm
30
Incident relates to a matter where harm to the environment occurs in the course of undertaking an activity, whether
reckless/intentional or accidental
31
Refer to section 25 of the EP Act
14
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
(2) For the purposes of this Act, environmental harm is caused by the presence of chemical substances—
(a) whether the harm is a direct or indirect result of the presence of the chemical substances; and
(b) whether the harm results from the presence of the chemical substances alone or the combined effects of
the presence of the chemical substances and other factors.
(3) For the purposes of this Act, site contamination does not exist at a site if circumstances of a kind prescribed by
regulation apply to the site 32.
An assessment of site contamination at a site, requires assessment of all potentially affected media at that site either
above or below ground, or within existing buildings ie soil, water, soil gas (vapour) and air (environmental media).
When assessment is undertaken within the boundaries of a relevant area of land, this is commonly described as
‘onsite’.
When site contamination has migrated away from the relevant area of land, the site contamination is described as
existing ‘offsite’.
An assessment of site contamination requires the nature of the contamination to be well characterised to enable a
determination of the spatial extent 33 of the contamination. Using the EPA recognised criteria 34 or a non-detection
boundary approach 35 (as may be appropriate in the circumstance) assists in understanding the extent of the
contamination, commencing with intrusive assessment at the likely source zone 36. In doing so, the on and offsite
locations of site contamination may be ascertained, to assist in identifying actual and potential receptors and the
development of a conceptual site model 37.
It is essential, for an adequate assessment of the nature and extent of site contamination, that consultants and
auditors 38 consider the potential for site contamination to migrate offsite. Where offsite contamination is identified as
an issue, the harm (actual or potential), to any media must be adequately assessed and documented. This can be
used to determine the remediation required to address harm onsite and offsite.
32
Section 5(3) of the EP Act enables the Regulations to prescribe that, in certain situations, site contamination will be
taken not to exist at a site. Currently, there is nothing prescribed for this purpose
33
‘Extent of contamination’ refers to the aerial and vertical extent of contamination through the geological and
hydrogeological profile
34
Refer to section 3.5 of this guideline
35
Undertaking assessment to the point of non-detection or background concentrations (or chasing the site contamination)
in any affected media. A robust yet cost-effective approach would involve the application of screening assessment
technologies and/or modelling – a qualitative assessment. The qualitative data informs permanent sampling locations
to adequately quantify the existence of site contamination
36
Key indicators of the source area or ‘source zone’ at a site include, but are not limited to, the following: the location or
area where the PCA was undertaken; the measured highest concentrations of the COI present within the
environmental media; detection of NAPL (measured or dissolved phase); location where loss of containment or spill
occurred; and waste disposal/storage area(s). For further information on the source zone refer to section 6.2 of this
guideline
37
Refer to section 6 of this guideline for information on preparing a conceptual site model
38
The reasons for an audit are further described in section 6 are outlined in Figure 5 of this guideline
15
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
This guideline outlines the EPA’s policy and provides a clear yet scientifically robust approach to assist consultants and
auditors when making determinations of the existence of site contamination at a site. The key considerations when
determining the existence of site contamination are provided in Figure 1.
of chemicals
Figure 1 Key considerations for the determination of the existence of site contamination at a site
A background concentration assessment at a site is to be undertaken in accordance with the EPA Guideline for the
assessment of background concentrations (2018).
Selection of the appropriate recognised criteria for interpretation of analytical data is an essential part of determining
the existence of site contamination. This is a key component of the sampling and analysis quality plan (SAQP), which
should be prepared in accordance with Schedule B2 of the ASC NEPM. The EPA recognised criteria should be
consistently applied for any media that is subject to assessment, in particular groundwater from sensitive to less
sensitive environmental values 39.
The application of the EPA recognised criteria relevant to sampling of soil, soil vapour and indoor air, should be
undertaken in accordance with relevant schedules of the ASC NEPM. The EPA recognised criteria are specified in
Table 9 of Appendix 2 of this guideline.
39
Refer to section 4 of this guideline for further information on determining environmental values of groundwater
16
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
It is acknowledged that during the early stages of a site assessment, environmental values for groundwater may not
be well characterised or understood. A process for determining the environmental values of groundwater is presented
in section 4.3 of this guideline.
The application of the EPA recognised criteria relevant to sampling of waters should be undertaken in accordance
with the applicable publication, as arranged in hierarchical order from the most to least sensitive environmental
values, provided in Table 10 of Appendix 2 of this guideline.
If the concentration of the chemical substance exceeds the EPA recognised criteria 40 this is an indication that site
contamination is likely to be considered to exist.
In addition, published criteria may not exist for all exposure (receptor) settings for each affected media of the
environment. For such circumstances, the EPA considers the standard limit of reporting (LOR) for the particular
chemical substance to be applicable. Alternatively, the application of other published national or international criteria
may be appropriate. It is recommended that the EPA be consulted early on in such a case so as to ensure that the
adopted criteria will be recognised by the EPA.
40
Application of the ‘relevant’ recognised criteria relates to the most appropriate exposure setting for the potentially
affected media specific to the site, using Tables 9 and 10 provided in Appendix 2 of this guideline
17
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
(c) an artificially created body of water or stream that is for public use or enjoyment.
The Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality 2000 (AWQG), prepared by
ANZECC and ARMCANZ provides a nationally consistent approach to the protection of and management of water
quality for Australia and New Zealand. The Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2015 (WQEPP) references
the AWQG as the overarching document relating to the protection and management of water quality in South
Australia.
In this guideline water occurring under the ground has the same meaning as ‘groundwater’.
The EPA has developed the following process in an attempt to simplify making determinations of environmental
values of groundwater at a site. For conservatism, where multiple environmental values of groundwater are identified,
the most sensitive environmental value should be used, as outlined in Step 4 of Figure 2 of this guideline. When
determining environmental values of groundwater at a site, the EPA recommends that consultants and auditors follow
the process detailed in Figure 2. Each step in this process is further described in section 4.3 of this guideline.
If choosing to apply the four-step process developed by the EPA, it is requested that each step of the process be
applied to provide an accumulation of the environmental values of groundwater at a site. Application of Table 4 in step
4 of the process should identify the relevant environmental values of groundwater at a site.When applying the four-
step process, it is recommended that Tables 1 to 4 be included as part of the reporting stage of work to document the
application of the process.
If consultants and auditors choose not to apply the process established by the EPA, the determination of
environmental values of groundwater for a site should be documented in any report.
41
Refer to section 5B(1)(c)(i) of the EP Act
42
TDS can be determined from the electrical conductivity (EC – salinity)
18
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
The WQEPP provides for the identification of protected environmental values of groundwater in TDS ranges, which is
presented in the table to clause 3, schedule 1 of the WQEPP.
The EPA considers an appropriate approach to an adequate assessment of the salinity of groundwater at a site is a
combination of field measurements and laboratory analysis, with results reported in TDS mg/L.
When making a determination of the environmental values of groundwater associated with a site, consultants and
auditors should compare the TDS mg/L in groundwater at a site to the TDS ranges provided in the table to clause 3,
schedule 1 of the WQEPP. It is recommended that Table 1 of this guideline be used as a checklist in the
determination of protected environmental values of groundwater.
Table 2 has been devised so as to offer a practical approach for the consideration of surface water impacts when
making a determination of the environmental values of groundwater.
During the initial assessment of environmental values of groundwater at a site, it may be difficult to determine the
potential for interconnectivity of the local and regional hydrogeology with nearby surface waters. This includes both
fresh and marine waters.
Some chemical substances, such as chlorinated hydrocarbons, are highly mobile when present as a dissolved phase
and can migrate in groundwater over large distances (aerially) and depths (vertically). The EPA recommends that
a 2km radius of the site be set to establish a ‘buffer distance’. This is illustrated in Table 2. The 2km buffer distance is
considered a practical approach to provide a protection for surface waters but to also make adequate determinations
of the environmental value of groundwater for the surface water receptors, as identified in Table 2 of this guideline.
43
It is recommended that Table 2 of this guideline be used as a checklist in the determination of the environmental values
of groundwater when identifying surface water bodies
19
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
WaterConnect (groundwater data ) is an online database of registered groundwater wells (bores) for South Australia
and is maintained by the Department for Environment and Water. It contains information on the age, construction, and
in some cases, water quality data (ie pH, salinity). It is considered a useful tool in understanding how groundwater is
being used by the community (actual use). This provides further information to consultants and auditors that may be
relevant in determining the environmental value of groundwater at a site.
The EPA recommends the use of WaterConnect to determine groundwater environmental values within a 2km
buffer distance of the site.
Using the 2km buffer distance established in Step 2, it is recommended that consultants and auditors identify
registered bore users via WaterConnect database. For further information on applying the data, refer to Table 3 of this
guideline.
Step 4: Actual or potential harm to water that is not trivial – application of EPA recognised criteria
Following the completion of the previous steps in this process, it is possible to identify the environmental values of
groundwater at a site. It is likely that more than one environmental value of groundwater will be identified.
By applying Table 4, consultants and auditors can determine the most sensitive environmental values of groundwater
at a site. The table has been prepared in hierarchical format for both environmental values and recognised criteria. It
is recognised that in some circumstances the most sensitive environmental value and respective criterion may not
44
It is recommended that Table 3 be used as a checklist in the determination of the environmental values of groundwater
when identifying registered users in close proximity to the site
45
The registered users of groundwater identified in Table 3 are arranged in a hierarchical format from most to least
sensitive use
46
The relevant environmental value of groundwater for a registered industrial use bore should be assessed on a case by
case basis. In some circumstances, recreation and aesthetics may be the most relevant environmental value of
groundwater
20
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
provide the highest level of protection for the site 47. In such circumstances, it is considered appropriate, in accordance
with the precautionary principle as described in the Objects 48 of the EP Act, to select the lowest recognised criteria for
a chemical substance.
As such, the use of the most sensitive environmental value and application of the EPA recognised criteria should
assist consultants and auditors in the determination of ‘actual or potential harm to water that is not trivial’.
Furthermore, it should assist in making a determination of the ‘existence of site contamination’ at a site.
WHO (2017)#
WHO (2017) §
Aquatic ecosystems – marine and fresh AWQG – ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000)
Primary industries – agriculture and aquaculture AWQG – ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000)
* Specified hierarchy for the application of criteria for each environmental value of water.
** Application of the most recent NHRMC (2011) criteria should be applied instead of the referenced
NHRMC (2008) criteria in the GMRRW.
#
Application of the WHO (2017) criteria is recognised by the EPA, where no recreational use criteria is
specified for chemical substances in GMRRW – NHRMC (2008).
§
For consistency with the application of the ADWG 2011, when chemical substances do not have a ADWG
value for potable groundwater use, it is recommended that if other international/national criteria is to be
adopted, the ‘order of preference of acceptance’ is undertaken in accordance with the recommendations from
the NHRMC and enHealth. Refer to Section 6.5 of the ADWG 2011.
Note: Documents referenced for the relevant recognised criteria should be applied at the time of publication or
as updated from time to time.
47
An example of this may be for a site where hexavalent chromium [Cr (VI)] has been detected in groundwater and both
drinking water and aquatic ecosystem (marine) environmental values have been identified at the site. The EPA
recognised drinking water criterion is greater than the irrigation criterion. However, Table 4 identifies drinking water as
the most sensitive environmental value. In such circumstances, the selection of the lowest recognised criterion for this
chemical substance (aquatic ecosystems) is considered appropriate. This provides the highest level of protection for the
site, safeguarding of both human health and the environment, and subsequently making a determination of the
existence of site contamination
48
In relation to the Objects of the EP Act, refer to section 10 of the EP Act
49
Table 4 has been developed specific for determining the environmental values of groundwater at a site. In terms of
hierarchy for selection of the appropriate recognised criteria from most to least sensitive, the table should be applied in a
consistent manner as Table 10 in Appendix 2 of this guideline
21
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
5 Notification requirements
5.1 Section 83A – Notification of site contamination of underground water
Groundwater contamination can migrate and expand over large distances, which can pose a significant risk to human
health and/or sensitive environmental receptors. In relation to risk to human health, exposure can occur via
consumption of or irrigation from contaminated groundwater. Volatilisation of volatile chemicals in groundwater can
also pose an inhalation risk in the form of vapour intrusion. Timely notification of groundwater contamination is
essential as it allows the EPA to regulate the site to ensure that human health and the environment are adequately
protected.
Section 83A of the EP Act requires a specific person (owner, occupier, auditor and/or consultant) to notify the EPA
in writing as soon as reasonably practicable after becoming aware of the existence of site contamination at a site or
in the vicinity of a site, that affects or threatens water occurring naturally under the ground or introduced to an
aquifer or other area under the ground.
The EPA considers that a notification may be required when the information previously notified no longer accurately
describes the current known nature and extent of the site contamination. Failure to do so may result in the
commission of an offence and the EPA commencing regulatory action.
If a person, with a duty to notify seeks to rely upon notification by another, then proof of notification should be
obtained from that person. Such proof could include correspondence from the EPA acknowledging receipt of the
notification.
For further information refer to the Appendix 3 of this document, including details on submitting a section 83A
notification pursuant to the EP Act.
Table 5 Hazardous circumstances recommended notification, timeframes and emergency contact information
Soils
Identification of asbestos as free asbestos fines As soon as reasonably Relevant local council
or fibres in an uncontrolled environment, such practicable
EPA via 24/7 pollution and
that there is a significant risk that asbestos fibres
environment incident
may be released to the environment, and people
reporting/complaints: 08 8204
on or offsite may be exposed to the asbestos
2004 or 1800 623 445
50
Notification of a hazardous circumstance is not based on a requirement under the EP Act, rather, it is a recommended
action in order to safeguard human health and the environment
22
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Groundwater
Identification of contaminated groundwater As soon as reasonably EPA via 24/7 pollution and
impacting on surface waters, where concentrations practicable or within 24 environment incident
are likely to pose adverse impacts on the hours of laboratory reporting/complaints: 08 8204
environmental values of the water reporting 2004 or 1800 623 445
NAPL 51 identified in groundwater at any site 52 As soon as reasonably EPA Manager Site Contamination
practicable epasitecontam@sa.gov.au
GPO Box 2607
Adelaide SA 5001
(08) 8204 2004
LNAPL identified in residential/private groundwater As soon as reasonably EPA via 24/7 pollution and
well where potential for uncontrolled explosion practicable environment incident
hazard exists reporting/complaints: 08 8204
2004 or 1800 623 445
Landfill gas explosive limits (or greater) As soon as reasonably Relevant emergency authority:
practicable police, fire or ambulance (000)
Concentrations of soil vapour where chemical As soon as reasonably EPA Manager Site Contamination
substances are likely to be present in above or practicable epasitecontam@sa.gov.au
below ground structures, exceeding relevant GPO Box 2607
human health exposure levels for the land use Adelaide SA 5001
setting (08) 8204 2004
Indoor air
Concentrations of chemical substances measured As soon as reasonably EPA Manager Site Contamination
in indoor air that exceed relevant human health practicable or within 24 epasitecontam@sa.gov.au
exposure levels for the land use setting hours GPO Box 2607
Adelaide SA 5001
(08) 8204 2004
51
Refer to Glossary for the definition of NAPL
52
Represents mandatory notification required pursuant to section 83A of the EP Act
23
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
General
GR 13 Hazardous circumstances
The EPA recommends that if a hazardous circumstance is identified by a consultant that the EPA be notified in
writing in accordance with the relevant timeframes provided in Table 5 of this guideline in order to safeguard human
health and the environment.
24
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Part 3
25
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Assessment of site contamination at a site may be as a result of non-statutory or voluntary mechanisms, or via
statutory requirements, such as an SCAO issued by the EPA. The nature of the trigger will determine the extent and
duration of assessment, and remediation (if necessary). In some instances, this may include the requirement for a site
contamination audit 54 (audit).
Where assessment of site contamination is required or reviewed by the EPA, the EPA requires that assessment to be
undertaken in accordance with the ASC NEPM. The guidance set out in the ASC NEPM provides for a consistent
approach to undertaking robust scientific investigations of site contamination. Schedules A and B2 of the ASC NEPM
outline and provide direction on the tiered-risk approach for the assessment of site contamination.
Further guidance on the regulatory requirements for the assessment and remediation of site contamination is
available in the EPA publication Site contamination: regulatory and orphan site management framework (2017).
The EPA expects the assessment of site contamination to be undertaken in accordance with the ASC NEPM and
EPA guidelines.
Characterisation of primary and secondary sources or the ‘source zone’ is undertaken as part of the assessment
phase of work and is critical for development of any subsequent stage(s) of work that is likely to be required, such as
further site characterisation or remediation. In addition, by determining the subsequent zone of influence associated
with the secondary source, it is possible to adequately characterise the risk(s) associated with the site contamination.
53
Potentially contaminating activities are prescribed in regulation 50 of the Regulations
54
The circumstances when an audit may be required are summarised in Table 6 of this guideline
55
The term ‘primary source’ commonly refers to the location where the potentially contaminating activity or e the activity
causing the site contamination took place, such as a leaking underground storage system
56
Refer to Schedule B2 of the ASC NEPM for information on the use and development of CSMs
26
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
prepared and included in the reporting phases for the stages of assessment and remediation work. A CSM may be
presented in a written format or in visual representation.
The CSM assists in understanding the complexities of site contamination by outlining the essential elements and data
gaps during the assessment phase of work. Additionally, applying multiple lines of evidence 57 (with appropriate
weighting), to assess exposure to site contamination present in different environmental media, will also provide a
robust and scientific understanding of the nature and extent of site contamination associated with a site.
The CSM assists with better characterisation of the various elements of the environment, to determine potential
preferential pathways, the zone of influence (related to the assessment of vapour contamination) and identification of
the various receptors (human health and the environment). For matters that require multiple stages of assessment
work and remediation, the development of a CSM will be an iterative process.
The preparation of a well-characterised CSM, with consideration of known or potential primary and secondary sources
of contamination and potential preferential pathways, will assist to ensure informed decisions are made when
assessing risk and ultimately when remediation may be necessary.
A tier-1 qualitative risk assessment may comprise preliminary site investigations (PSI) and detailed site investigations
(DSI).
The results of a tier-1 qualitative assessment are reviewed against generic screening and investigation levels,
including management levels. An initial screen of the data is undertaken by consultants and auditors to determine
whether further assessment is necessary. In some circumstances, sufficient intrusive information may have been
collected to determine that no further work is necessary. Other complex site contamination matters may require
subsequent stages of assessment to adequately inform risk-based decisions, which is likely to result in tier-2
quantitative risk assessments.
Quantitative risk assessments involve different reporting stages, such as the preparation of a DSI and/or site-specific
risk assessments (SSRA). This can be undertaken at either the tier-2 or the tier-3 stage of the process. This work is
likely to be undertaken in stages, which involves the collection of site-specific data, and is used to prepare the SSRA.
As such the modification of Tier-2 criteria may be necessary, and may form part of the Tier-3 phase of work. Where
an exceedance of this criteria is determined, it is likely to be concluded that there is an unacceptable risk to human
health and/or the environment and remediation may be necessary.
The outcome of the tier-3 risk assessment and preparation of the CSM should inform the preparation of the
remediation options assessment (ROA) when remediation is identified as necessary. The development of the ROA is
to ultimately achieve the remediation goals and objectives, by selecting remediation technologies to effectively
eliminate or prevent actual or potential harm to receptors. For further information in relation to remediation, refer to
Part 4 of this guideline.
The key steps in the tiered-risk assessment process are summarised in Figure 3.
57
Refer to Schedule B2 of the ASC NEPM for information on undertaking assessment of site contamination using a
multiple-lines-of-evidence approach
27
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
• Conduct PSI
• Site history investigations
• Prepare sampling and analysis quality plans (if applicable)
Tier-1
• Preliminary CSM
• Prepare PSI report
• If further assessment required commence DSI
Tier-2
• Update CSM
• Prepare DSI report(s)
• Has sufficient work been undertaken to prepare a ROA (if necessary)?
• Is further risk assessment necessary (SSRA)?
Tier-3
• Update CSM
• Prepare SSRA report(s)
• Has sufficient work been undertaken to preapre a ROA (if necessary)?
Specific application of the tiered-risk based approach for each environmental media and receptors are set out in other
Schedules of the ASC NEPM and summarised in Figure 4.
28
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Schedule B6
Schedule B4 Schedule B5a
Ecological risk Risk-based
Site-specific health
assessment assessment of
risk assessment
groundwater
methodology
contamination
Figure 4 Relevant schedules of the ASC NEPM documenting the tiered risk-based approach to assessment
The purpose of using a tiered assessment process supports risk-based decision making. For most sites, the facts for
each case will be site specific. However, applying a consistent strategy to assess the site will provide clear
determinations and outcomes for the following:
• identification of areas of potential contamination and the potentially affected environmental media (ie soil, water,
soil vapour)
• determination of the nature and extent of site contamination (in any potentially affected environmental media)
29
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
The tiered-risk approach, presented in the ASC NEPM, provides guidance on:
• a process to support the collection of reliable data and selection of appropriate laboratory detection limits
In relation to a proposed sensitive use site 59, the EPA expects that an audit of a site will be undertaken where site
contamination exists or is suspected. An example of where site contamination is suspected to exist is where a
potentially contaminating activity has taken place at the site.
Where the current land use is sensitive, and no potentially contaminating activity or known site contamination issues
have been identified, an audit will generally not be required in relation to a change of land use.
In relation to a non-sensitive use or proposed non-sensitive use site, an audit will generally not be necessary unless
required by the EPA in accordance with the Site contamination: regulatory and orphan site management framework
(2017). However, an audit may be required for such matters based on the complexity of the site, the nature and extent
of the site contamination, and long-term management of any site contamination that remains post-remediation.
Engagement with the EPA is likely to be necessary prior to completion of final reports so as to identify appropriate risk-
based decision making.
The assessment, remediation and auditing of any site where site contamination extending offsite poses a risk to a
sensitive receptor necessitates discussion with the EPA prior to completion of final reports. This is to ensure an
appropriate risk-based approach. Other related key issues should be discussed with the EPA including project
assessment and remediation milestones/timeframes, remediation objectives/goals/endpoints, vulnerable populations,
and community and stakeholder engagement.
Where an audit is necessary, the EPA recommends that the engagement of an auditor be undertaken as early as
possible. Early engagement provides a clear understanding of the objectives and endpoints for assessment and
remediation of a site, for all stakeholders, including the EPA.
Given the complexity of some site contamination matters, in particular where site contamination extends beyond the
site boundary, the EPA expects and may require an auditor to be engaged. Table 6 summarises the circumstances
where the EPA considers it likely that an audit will be required based on the land use at the site subject to
investigations. Table 6 assumes that site contamination exists or is suspected.
58
If the site is subject to audit, the reasons for the audit will correspond to the audit purpose that may inform the
appropriate level of remediation (in relation to land use). Refer to Table 1 of the Guidelines for the site contamination
audit system (2015)
59
Sensitive use is defined in section 3(1) of the EP Act
30
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Table 6 Circumstances when the EPA may require an audit for a site
Site contamination extends offsite Audit2 Extending offsite to non-sensitive use No audit3
1 This would include a site where a change to a sensitive use is proposed. Auditor engagement is likely to be
requested by the planning authority or the EPA. This may be associated with planning and development
processes/approvals/consent.
3 Not necessary unless required by the EPA in accordance with the publications Site contamination: regulatory
and orphan site management framework (2017) (eg complex, widespread contamination matters). Discussion
to take place with the EPA prior to completion of final reports to identify appropriate risk-based decision
making.
GR 15 Auditor engagement
When an audit 60 is required, the EPA publication Site contamination: regulatory and orphan site management
framework (2017)) describes the approach that is likely to be taken by the EPA in regulation of the matter.
Additionally, it is essential that persons using qualitative vs quantitative sampling techniques understand the reliability
of the data for decision making purposes, especially for the preparation of a ROA. Table 7 provides a summary of
some key considerations when undertaking site (field) work or activities relating to the assessment and remediation of
site contamination.
Table 7 Key considerations during site sampling and site activities for collection of reliable data
Soils Photo-ionisation detector (PID) and an appropriate lamp used for the
chemicals of interest (COI) and instrument calibration
Soil sample collection and timing for minimal loss of vapour phase chemical
substances, including appropriate handling – quality assessment and
quality control (QA/QC)
60
Audit requirement will be determined in accordance with Table 6 of this guideline
31
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Vapour, indoor air and modelling Bulk density and geotechnical data collected from an appropriate and
representative depth ie consideration of vapour intrusion in below ground
structures such as basements, where collection of samples from 3m below
ground level is recommended
61
The EPA does not consider it reasonable to sample a groundwater monitoring well with the presence of LNAPL,
detected as a measurable thickness (or sheen), for the purpose of characterising and quantifying the dissolved phase
concentrations (dissolved phase plume) present in the aquifer
62
The publication referenced should be applied as per the date of publication or as updated from time to time
32
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Part 4
Remediation
33
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
An effective remediation strategy should be informed by adequate site contamination characterisation and
assessment using the tiered risk-based approach, a well-developed CSM and multiple-lines-of evidence to support
the proposed approach. A well-informed remediation strategy will prioritise what remediation is required to address
any actual or potential harm to human health, the environment and water. The EPA publication Site contamination:
regulatory and orphan site management framework (2017) explains the general approach of the EPA in regulating
remediation of sites.
The EPA will usually require remediation where a source 64 of contamination is present at a site. Remediation of the
source of site contamination is likely to require treatment, containment and/or removal of chemical substances.
For further information in relation to the remediation considerations during the auditing of site contamination, refer to
the EPA publication Guidelines for the site contamination audit system (2015).
7.2 Legislation
Remediation is defined in the EP Act as:
Treat, contain, remove or manage chemical substances on or below the surface of the site so as to—
(a) eliminate or prevent actual or potential harm to the health or safety of human beings that is not trivial,
taking into account current or proposed land uses; and
(ii) any other actual or potential environmental harm that is not trivial, taking into account current or
proposed land uses.
The EP Act provides the EPA with regulatory tools, such as SROs and emergency SROs, to order appropriate
persons to remediate a site. The EP Act also includes the ability to agree to a VSRP 65.
For further information on the legislative instruments available to the EPA for the regulation of site contamination, refer
to the EPA publication Site contamination: regulatory and orphan site management framework (2017).
63
Refer to section 7.2 of this guideline for the definition of ‘remediate’ as it appears in section 3(1) of the EP Act
64
Refer to section 6.2 of this guideline for further information on characterising sources of contamination
65
Refer to section 2.2 of this guideline for additional information about orders and voluntary proposals
34
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
the environment 66 and water, remediation is to be undertaken to eliminate or prevent the harm as far as reasonably
practicable. Refer to section 8.6 for additional information in relation to remediation and achieving practicability.
Prior to remediating a site, it is essential that site contamination is adequately characterised, including its source,
exposure pathways and identification of receptors. If such matters are not adequately characterised, the remediation
is less likely to be successful and may result in loss of capital, community frustration and possibly (further) legal or
regulatory action.
In most cases, it is not considered appropriate that remediation commence post completion of PSI, except where a
hazardous circumstance 67 is identified.
The importance of the preparation of a well-defined CSM is essential prior to the commencement of any remediation
at a site. It is critical that the consultant and auditor determine the approach to remediation that will be most effective
and appropriate for the site by identifying the appropriate remediation goals, objectives and preparation of the
remediation strategy 68.
The EPA will require remediation at sites where a vapour intrusion risk is suspected of posing an existing or imminent
threat to human health.
• reduce the number of future legacy issues 69 associated with site contamination in South Australia
• improve the quality of harmed environments and to ensure the protection of resources for future generations 70.
It is possible to categorise chemical substances in terms of their behaviour in different environmental media,
specifically focusing on their mobility, volatility and persistence. By categorising the chemical substance, using a site-
specific hierarchical approach, the priority chemical substances that are posing the greatest risk will be addressed via
remediation. This will assist in the selection of the remediation goals and objectives for the preparation of a
remediation options assessment for the site.
GR 16 Remediation of sources
Where a source of site contamination exists at a site, the EPA will likely require the appropriate person to
remediate the source, as described in the EPA publication Site contamination: regulatory and orphan site
management framework (2017) and EPA guidelines.
66
In accordance with the definition in section 3(1) of the EP Act, actual or potential harm to the environment must take into
account the current or proposed land use
67
Refer to section 5.2 of this guideline for hazardous circumstances
68
Refer to section 8 of this guideline for the development of a remediation strategy
69
Refer to the EPA publication Site contamination: regulatory and orphan site management framework (2017) for
information on legacy issues and EPA’s management of orphan site matters
70
Section 10(2) of the EP Act requires the EPA to have regard to, and seek to further, the Objects of the EP Act.
Section 10(1)(a)(i)(A) of the EP Act promotes the principles of ecologically sustainable development and speaks of
management of the environment for future generations
35
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
• treat
• contain
• remove, or
• manage.
Many remediation technologies and methodologies exist that can be selected to undertake remediation and
successfully achieve the remediation endpoints for a site. When considering the legislative options in terms of
hierarchy, the remediation options can be categorised as active or passive.
The EPA considers active remediation measures to include technologies that align with ‘treatment’, ‘containment’ and
‘removal’ of chemical substances at a site. All ‘management’ of chemical substances at a site is considered a passive
type of remediation. Passive options are generally only suitable for sites where risk to the environment and/or water is
low. Management options should not be considered where the risk of harm to human health must be eliminated or
prevented 71.
• goals – selection of overarching remediation goals, to address the identified harm, as reflected in the definition of
‘remediate’ in the EP Act (refer to section 8.2)
• objectives – identification of the site-specific remediation objectives to set the foundation of what remediation will
be necessary to achieve the remediation endpoints (refer to section 8.3)
• remediation options assessment – selection of the appropriate remediation options to address the remediation
goals and objectives, by identifying the specific technologies or methodologies suitable to remediate the chemical
substances at the site (refer to sections 8.4 and 8.5)
• endpoints – identification of the key endpoints to demonstrate that remediation has been successfully completed,
including the circumstances where reasonable practicability can be applied (refer to section 8.6)
• reporting and engagement – identification of stakeholders and the stages of reporting, including the preparation
of risk communication and engagement plans (refer to sections 9 and 12)
• timeframes – identification of the key project milestones and respective timeframes for the stages of remediation,
reporting, and engagement (refer to section 8.7)
The primary goals for any remediation strategy in South Australia, as reflected in the definition of the term “remediate”
in the EP Act, are to:
• eliminate or prevent actual or potential harm to health or safety of human beings that is not trivial, taking into
account the current or proposed land use
• eliminate or prevent, as far as reasonably practicable, actual or potential harm to water that is not trivial
71
If management options are identified as the only applicable remediation option of an ROA and a risk to human health
exists, this must be endorsed by an auditor or agreed to by the EPA via a VSRP
36
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
• eliminate or prevent, as far as reasonably practicable, other actual or potential environmental harm that is not
trivial, taking into account the current or proposed land use.
The EPA will likely require appropriate persons to undertake active remediation, when necessary, to eliminate or
prevent actual or potential harm to health or safety of human beings that is not trivial, taking into account the
current or proposed land use.
Remediation goals should only be determined based on site-specific considerations and an understanding of the
objectives of the remediation strategy. It is acknowledged that it may not always be possible to eliminate actual or
potential harm and, in some circumstances, prevention of harm is likely to be appropriate.
Generally, elimination of harm would be considered to have occurred when the site contamination, that poses the risk,
no longer exists. For example, by physical removal of primary and/or secondary sources 72 or the treatment of the
chemical substances.
Prevention would be considered to have occurred when a treatment or control measure is implemented. For example,
by limiting accessibility at a site with a concrete slab and/or paving to prevent access to residual contaminated soils
that remain at depth 73. These are examples of active remediation options, as opposed to management being a
passive option to remediate a site. An example of a passive option is monitored natural attenuation 74 of chemical
substances in groundwater.
Remediation should only be carried out by suitably experienced and qualified consultants and/or practitioners in
accordance with the ASC NEPM and EPA guidelines. Any remediation report provided to the EPA, is generally
expected to be endorsed by a certified site contamination practitioner.
• benefit of remediation options (scale of impact a remediation approach would have on human health, the
environment or water)
• technical success (physical ability to remove, treat, contain or manage the chemical substances within a
reasonable time frame)
• logistics (site access, project schedules, availability of materials and infrastructure and disposal of wastes)
• financial and capital considerations (cost of remediation including waste treatment or ongoing management)
• social impacts and risk perceptions (stakeholder responsibilities, community engagement needs)
72
Refer to section 7.5 of this guideline for remediation of sources
73
This may be achieved for example by constructing a concrete slab and/or paving to prevent access and the
development of a site management plan to support the use of the site and to establish precautionary measures for
implementation if access to contamination soil was required in the future
74
Refer to section 10.3 of this guideline for further information on the EPA’s policy in relation to monitored natural
attenuation
37
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
• risk the site contamination poses to human health or the environment (including water), including the risks
associated with the likely residual site contamination.
Furthermore, the key principles of ecologically sustainable development 75 should also be considered. The key
principles that relate to protection of the environment include:
• sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future
generations
• investigation criteria: EPA recognised criteria or site-specific criteria derived using the ASC NEPM
• identification of protected environmental values including both surface water and groundwater
• well-developed and informed CSM that identifies the sources (primary and secondary), pathways of exposure and
receptors
• consideration of potential (future) harm (such as future land use, migration of chemical substances)
• EPA regulatory requirements – in accordance with the EPA publication Site contamination: Regulatory and
orphan site management framework (2017).
Table 8 outlines the remediation options, which align with the definition of remediate in the EP Act and has been
prepared to assist consultants, auditors and remediation practitioners to prepare a remediation strategy. It
summarises the circumstances when an audit 78 will be required for the purpose of remediation, and when
considerations of practicability are relevant.
75
Refer to section 10 of the EP Act
76
Refer to the EPA publication Site contamination: regulatory and orphan site management framework (2017) for
achieving remediation end-points and site closure, including the cessation of regulatory involvement
77
Refer to section 7.4 of this guideline for categorisation of chemical substances for remediation purposes
78
Refer to section 6.5 of this guideline for the reasons for an audit
38
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
When used to develop the ROA and select remediation technologies, Table 8 should assist with the preparation of an
effective remediation strategy. In some cases, it may be beneficial to couple remediation techniques, commonly
referred to as ‘remediation trains’ or ‘treatment trains’ 79.
Table 8 Selection of the remediation options to inform the preparation of the ROA
Remediation goals*
Notes:
C = audit requirement will be case by case (refer to Table 6 for reasons for an audit)
D = practicability considerations
* Indicates CSM has been prepared for the site and receptors have been identified.
** If management options are identified as the only applicable remediation technique of an ROA and a risk to
human health exists, this must be endorsed by an auditor and/or agreed to by the EPA via a VSRP
#
Consideration should be given to the selection of combination of remediation options to undertake effective
remediation and achieve remediation endpoints, including active or passive technologies.
Validation 80 of the progress of remediation technologies is recommended. This will inform the efficacy of the
remediation strategy to ensure that it will achieve the remediation goals, and ultimately remediation end-points for site
closure. If remediation is being undertaken in stages, it is recommended that the remediation goals and objective be
revised against Table 8 at each validation stage of reporting. Refer to section 9 of this guideline for the reporting
stages of remediation.
79
Using more than one remediation technique (option) is considered an effective approach to optimising the remediation
strategy. This approach can be referred to as ‘remediation trains’. International guidance on using this approach and
remediation trains is available on the Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC) website. In addition, refer to the
following publication Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC), Technical/Regulatory Guideline, Remediation
Process Optimization: Identifying opportunities for enhanced and more efficient site remediation (2004)
80
Refer to section 9.4 of this guideline for further information on remediation validation reporting
39
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
While the EP Act does not define what is meant by ‘reasonably practicable’ section 25 of the EP Act, which sets out
the general environmental duty, provides a good guide as to what the relevant considerations may be in any given
case.
(1) A person must not undertake an activity that pollutes, or might pollute, the environment unless the person
takes all reasonable and practicable measures to prevent or minimise any resulting environmental harm.
(2) In determining what measures are required to be taken under subsection (1), regard is to be had, amongst
other things, to—
(a) the nature of the pollution or potential pollution and the sensitivity of the receiving environment; and
(b) the financial implications of the various measures that might be taken as those implications relate to
the class of persons undertaking activities of the same or a similar kind; and
(c) the current state of technical knowledge and likelihood of successful application of the various
measures that might be taken.
The EPA recognises that the question of what may constitute the elimination or prevention of relevant harm ‘as far as
reasonably practicable’ will require consideration of technical, logistical, and financial limitations.
Where it is not reasonably practicable to undertake further active remediation at a site, where remediation goals and
end-points have not been achieved and actual or potential harm may still remain, it is likely to be necessary to
consider passive remediation options. For example, revising the remediation options against Table 8 may result in a
change in focus from active to passive remediation options. In the case of chemical substances, this may mean a
change in focus from treatment or removal to containment.
Where it is alleged that active remediation options are no longer reasonably practicable, the EPA will generally require
an auditor to confirm that conclusion and that the passive remediation options proposed are capable of managing the
residual chemical substances that present actual or potential harm at a site. This will be determined and required by
the EPA on a case-by-case basis.
40
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
An SRP may incorporate the remediation action plan (RAP) and environment management plan (EMP). The SRP
should also document the timeframes applicable to the remediation project, including if remediation will be undertaken
as a staged approach and documentation of the key milestones of the remediation strategy.
Where RVR is undertaken in stages, the reporting process may also require a staged reporting approach to support
the respective remediation objectives established for each stage of remediation work. Examples of validation reporting
stages for the remediation project may include:
Appendix 6 provides matters that should be considered by the consultant, remediation practitioner and/or auditor
when undertaking RVR at onsite or offsite locations.
41
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
ongoing issues at a site. The SMP should be prepared with realistic and achievable timeframes and responsibilities
and should not impose a significant burden on existing or future property owners and planning authorities.
Additionally, an SMP may be a requirement or outcome of the audit process and may be included as a condition of an
audit report.
The EPA considers the development of an SMP is likely to be appropriate in the following circumstances (but not
limited to):
• ongoing management of soils affected by chemical substances is required to ensure an acceptable level of risk to
human health and/or the environment in an area where it is not practicable for that soil to be actively remediated
(for example, chemical substances below an impermeable structure)
• chemical substances in soils are being retained under a final cap or fully contained on site within an engineered
containment cell
• active remediation is likely to cause greater adverse environmental impact than would likely to be caused if the
site were left undisturbed
• management measures are necessary to ensure the protection of worker health and safety
• there is residual risk of actual or potential harm that is not trivial in circumstances where all reasonable and
practicable measures have been taken to eliminate or prevent harm.
In these circumstances, a statement on the nature and extent of site contamination must be made clear in the SMP.
An SMP may be required to address each specific affected environmental media 81.
The development of an SMP should ensure the effective management and monitoring of residual site contamination
post active remediation.
The scope of management or monitoring work should be conducted in accordance with the endpoints identified in the
SRP or audit conditions.
• the manner in which chemical substances and/or the site will be managed
• the persons who will be responsible for implementation of the plan, their relevant qualifications and experience
and relevant mechanisms to ensure that the plan will be implemented by those persons
• timeframe over which actions specified in the plan will take place
• contingency plans if the management and monitoring measures are not successful.
81
An example where the preparation of an SMP is beneficial in the remediation strategy, is one which addresses
management of soils at a site (such as onsite containment), including a groundwater monitoring and management plan
to validate the progress of natural attenuation of groundwater contamination at a site
42
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
The length and contents of the SMP will depend on the complexity of the issues for the site. Sufficient detail should be
included in the SMP to be readily understood by stakeholders and implementable.
Where a SMP is prepared to manage site contamination, the EPA is likely to require that the plans are implemented
and that individuals affected by the SMP are aware of the issues 82. This is particularly important when management of
the site contamination, through maintaining barriers 83 or ongoing monitoring, is required for a significant period of time
or in perpetuity.
Appendix 5 of this guideline provides a checklist of information that should be included in an SMP.
82
In some circumstances, the EPA may require that an SMP be implemented and regulated using an environmental
performance agreement pursuant to section 59 of the EP Act, to ensure the safeguarding of human health and the
environment
83
Barriers can include any type of barrier to mitigate risk of exposure or to improve the quality of harmed environments.
Examples of barriers can include paving/concreting to mitigate exposure to contaminated soils, permeable reactive
barriers to improve harmed environment or cut-off walls to reduce and mitigate future harm
43
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Differing policies for remediating sites have been established to support the legislation (where available) of each
State. From a South Australian perspective, the EP Act defines the term ‘remediate’ differently, in particular as far as
considerations of what is reasonably practicable.
When remediating sites, it is essential that the remediation technologies or options selected (as part of the ROA), are
well researched to demonstrate successful application at a site. Pilot trials are beneficial and recommended,
especially in complex geological and hydrogeological environments, built-up areas and when remediation is
necessary as site contamination expands over a widespread area or in existing above ground structures. Applying the
remediation framework established in this guideline, will assist consultants, auditors and practitioners to undertake
effective remediation.
Other national and international guidance and publications on developing remediation strategies, remediation options
and technologies, including useful case studies and remediation projects, is widely available. Prior to use of other
publications and guidance, the EPA recommends that the publications are well researched and applicable to the
affected environmental media at a site.
The EPA acknowledges that numerous technologies exist to remediate all affected environmental media, including
soils, surface water, groundwater, indoor air and ambient air. This guideline provides policy associated with two
approaches/options to remediate groundwater, specifically active remediation of NAPL in groundwater and passive
remediation of dissolved phase plumes in groundwater using monitored natural attenuation.
The extent to which risk may be reduced where NAPL mass is removed is a key consideration of the remediation
objectives, as risks arise through NAPL constituents that partition into groundwater and soil vapour. The EPA
considers that the assessment of risk associated with the presence of NAPL at a site should be based on the
constituent flux at the point of receptor exposure. This is considered appropriate because it determines whether
assimilative or natural attenuation capacity in the aquifer is sufficient to mitigate harm.
When developing the remediation strategy 85 for a site, it is recommended that specific remediation objectives be
established to address any NAPL present at the site. As a minimum, consideration should be given to the following:
• reducing the source of dissolved phase concentrations of chemical substances in the aquifer which are present in
a NAPL or separate phase
• identification of the receptors and early mitigation of the pathways for risk of exposure
• the timeframes to address NAPL in association with the overall remediation strategy.
84
Refer to the National Framework for Remediation and Management of Contaminated Sites in Australia, publications are
available from CRC CARE
85
Refer to section 8.3 of this guideline for remediation objectives
44
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Where active remediation of NAPL does not meet risk-based criteria and the remediation goals and objectives, other
remediation options such as source control or isolation may be required to address further harm. This should be
documented and reported through the stages of remediation, and if necessary, iterations of the ROA to address the
remediation goals and objectives to achieve the remediation endpoint.
Specific information on the selection of light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) remediation options is available in the
CRC CARE publication Technical Report 18: Selecting and assessing strategies for remediating LNAPL in soils and
groundwater (2010).
If MNA is the preferred remediation option 86 for a site where a health risk exists, the EPA is likely to require that the
remediation strategy be endorsed by an auditor and/or agreed to by the EPA via a VSRP 87. MNA (as the only
selected remediation option) is unlikely to achieve the remediation goal of ‘eliminate or prevent actual or potential
harm to the health and safety of human beings that is not trivial, taking into account the current or proposed land use’.
It is recommended that for such matters, the coupling of remediation options be undertaken to achieve the
remediation goals and objectives 88.
Where site contamination poses a health risk and a source exists at a site, the EPA is unlikely to accept MNA as
the only remediation option for the site. For such matters, the EPA is likely to require the remediation strategy be
endorsed by an auditor and/or agreed to by the EPA via a VSRP.
If MNA is identified as a remediation option for a site, the EPA will generally expect the remediation option to be
undertaken in general accordance with the CRC CARE publication Technical Report 15: A technical guide for
demonstrating monitored natural attenuation of petroleum hydrocarbons in groundwater (2010).
Options to optimise the natural attenuation of chemicals in the environment can include coupling remediation options.
This can significantly improve the environmental conditions by reducing chemical load, termed ‘enhanced monitored
natural attenuation’. The concept of enhanced attenuation of chemical substances in groundwater is a useful
approach to achieving ‘plume remediation’ 89, which has been successfully applied in many national and international
cases.
86
Following the outcome of a well-informed and prepared ROA
87
Refer to Table 8 of this guideline for the preparation of a remediation options assessment and the circumstances of
when an audit will be required by the EPA
88
Refer to section 8.5 of this guideline for additional information on coupling remediation options to achieve remediation
goals and objectives
89
Refer to Interstate Technology Regulatory Council publication – Enhanced Attenuation Fact Sheet (2005)
45
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
General environmental duty is detailed in section 25 of the EP Act. Information on general environmental duty,
environmental nuisance and environmental harm is provided in section 3.1 of this guideline.
While non-compliance with the duty is not, in itself, an offence, the EPA may enforce the duty through the issuing of
orders 90 and civil action in the Environment, Resources and Development Court (ERD Court).
Further guidance on key considerations to address one’s general environmental duty when undertaking remediation
at both on and offsite locations is provided in Appendix 6 of this guideline.
In this Act, a reference to the waste management hierarchy is a reference to an order of priority for the management
of waste in which—
3 reuse of waste
4 recycling of waste
are pursued in order with, first, avoidance of the production of waste, and second, to the extent that avoidance is not
reasonably practicable, minimisation of the production of waste, and third, to the extent that minimisation is not
reasonably practicable, reuse of waste, and so on.
The Objects of the EP Act includes ensuring that as far as is reasonably practicable, measures are taken to prevent,
reduce, minimise and, where practicable, eliminate harm to the environment by programs to encourage and assist
industry, public authorities and the community to apply the waste management hierarchy.
A process for identifying environmental values for groundwater at a site is provided in section 3.5 of this guideline.
90
Such orders include environment protection orders (EPOs) and clean up order (CUOs), additional information is
provided in section 2.1 of this guideline
46
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Matters to consider for the protection of fresh and marine surface waterbodies during any remediation activity are
provided in Appendix 6 of this guideline.
The selection of an appropriate mitigation measure for managing surface water runoff should be made with reference
to the waste hierarchy 91. If possible, preference should be given to management measures that prevent pollution of
surface water. Disposal options should only be considered after other measures have been exhausted in accordance
with the waste hierarchy. Care must be taken to ensure that chemical substances are not dispersed into the
environment as a result of any selected mitigation measure.
Examples of mitigation measures to avoid or reduce the generation of runoff of contaminated water to surface
waterbodies include (but are not limited to):
• temporary bunding around stockpiles, or location of stockpiles on waterproof surfaces such as asphalt or
concrete, or under cover where available
• ponds to capture and treat the runoff (for example remove sediment).
11.5 Aesthetics
Aesthetic issues generally relate to the presence of non-hazardous inert foreign material in soil at a site. The
presence of these materials alone at a site would not generally result in site contamination. However, sites that may
have been adequately assessed and/or remediated to address potential human health and environmental issues
arising from site contamination may still contain residual foreign inert materials that require management.
Materials that are likely to result in aesthetic issues include waste materials that may present no health hazard (eg
concrete or brick fragments), have some soil discolouration from a relatively inert chemical waste (eg ferric metals) or
have a residual odour (eg natural sulfur odour).
General considerations and circumstances that would trigger an assessment of aesthetics and the assessment
process for aesthetic issues are described in section 3.6 Schedule B1 of the ASC NEPM and additional information is
provided in Appendix 6 of this guideline.
While inert, caution should be exercised when proposing the retention of large quantities of fill material, such as
demolition rubble, on the site subject to remediation. It may have an impact on the question of whether it is suitable for
a proposed sensitive use, particularly where reasonable use of the land may result in these materials being exposed
and having to be disposed of post remediation completion. If the site is subject to an audit, the matter of aesthetics will
be endorsed by the auditor, where an audit recommendation may be included in the audit report and the preparation
of a SMP may be necessary to manage such aesthetic issues.
11.6 Stockpiles
Soil stockpiles, if not correctly managed, can represent a source of dust, relative to their height, uncompacted nature
and proximity to sensitive receptors.
The EPA expects the following issues to be considered by the consultant, remediation practitioner and/or auditor
when stockpiling soil at a site:
• stockpiles should have a maximum height of about 3 m, or equal to or lower than the average height of
surrounding structures. Stockpile height should reduce as it approaches the site boundary
91
Refer to section 11.2 of this guideline for information on the waste hierarchy
47
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
• stockpile heights should be below fence lines when within about 5m of the boundary
• stockpiles should be covered with an effective dust and/or odour mitigation covering. The contents of the stockpile
will dictate the level of cover ie complete enclosure or the formation of a crust layer
Water can be applied prior to soil excavation or handling activities, and sufficient time should be allowed for water to
infiltrate the soil or stockpile. Consultants, remediation practitioners and auditors should consider the efficacy of using
water jets or sprays to manage airborne dust, especially when handling stockpiles in open areas and in the vicinity of
sensitive receptors. When applying water to manage and reduce dust emissions from stockpiles, all reasonable and
practicable measures should be undertaken to prevent runoff or leaching of potentially impacted water at the site.
In all cases, it is recommended that an appropriate level of community engagement is undertaken at all stages of the
remediation project. Local residents and stakeholders should be advised in advance about the likely duration,
impacts, potential health risks and mitigation measures to be undertaken, followed by updates during the remediation
period. Refer to section 12 of this guideline for additional information on community engagement and risk
communication.
A failure to control dust may constitute an environmental nuisance 92 under the EP Act. As such, it is likely to result in
regulatory action by the EPA.
For further information about key considerations for soil stockpile management during remediation, refer to
Appendix 6 of this guideline and the EPA publication Guideline for stockpile management: Waste and waste derived
products for recycling and reuse (2017).
11.7 Asbestos
Guidance on the assessment of asbestos is provided in Schedule B2 of the ASC NEPM. The guidance is not
applicable to asbestos materials in current buildings or structures including operational pipelines and fences. It also
does not apply to asbestos materials that are wastes, such as planned demolition materials present on the surface of
land awaiting removal. There are particular requirements for removal, transport and disposal of asbestos-containing
materials (ACM) in legislation, including the EP Act and relevant EPA guidelines 93.
The assessment of asbestos should be undertaken by a competent person 94. Asbestos found at a site requires
specialist skills and care in handling, removal and transportation to prevent the likelihood of asbestos fibres becoming
air-borne.
Depending on site-specific circumstances and the proposed remediation approach, conservative management and
risk-based assessment of presumed asbestos contamination may avoid the need for a detailed site investigation (DSI)
where there is a high degree of confidence that the asbestos contamination is confined to bonded ACM in superficial
soil. Where site circumstances are favourable, bonded ACM in sound condition can be used as the primary means of
estimating contamination by subjecting soil samples to on-site sieving and gravimetric procedures. The determination
of asbestos in soil should follow the procedures in section 4 of Schedule B1 and Schedule B2 of the ASC NEPM.
Asbestos-specific communication skills may also be necessary to address potential concerns of workers and the
community. To provide assistance on community engagement and risk communication, if requested, it is
recommended that the EPA be consulted early-on in such cases.
For further information about key considerations for the management of asbestos during assessment and
remediation, refer to Appendix 6 of guideline.
92
Environmental nuisance is defined in section 3(1) of the EP Act
93
Refer to the EPA publication: Wastes containing asbestos: Removal, transport and disposal (2009)
94
Guidance on a competent person in the context of asbestos is provided in Schedule B2 of the ASC NEPM
48
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
95
Refer to prescribed condition of accreditation under regulation 56(2)(c) of the Regulations
49
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Part 5
50
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Community engagement and risk communication in relation to site contamination should be conducted in accordance
with the principles and approach provided in Schedule B8 of the ASC NEPM.
The underlying principles to the approach taken in the ASC NEPM are that:
• an evaluation regarding the probable need for and nature and extent of community engagement should be carried
out at the early stages of assessment
• engagement with the community is considered to be essential for sites with contentious issues.
In order to assist consultants, site owners and appropriate persons responsible for site contamination, the EPA has
published Site contamination: guideline for community engagement (2018). It is recommended that the guideline be
used when undertaking risk management and engagement with the community for all site contamination matters.
The EPA considers that the responsibility for primary community consultation and engagement lies with the person
responsible for the site contamination. When regulating the appropriate person responsible for site contamination, the
EPA may require community engagement and risk communication to be undertaken in accordance with Site
contamination: guideline for community engagement (2018). In some circumstances, the EPA may also engage with
the community and stakeholders to ensure effective risk communication is well managed.
Any engagement with the community should be planned, prepared and implemented in accordance with an appropriate
community engagement plan. Information used for the purposes of community engagement should be presented in a
way that translates scientific information into an understandable language for the relevant audience. The EPA
publication Site contamination: guideline for community engagement (2018) provides templates and practical guidance,
and outlines the EPA’s expectations in this regard.
In addition, a step-by-step approach to community engagement and risk communication is presented in sections 4 and
5 of Schedule B8 of the ASC NEPM.
Where there is an occupier of a site, written consent should be obtained from both the owner and occupier of the land.
Before undertaking a site contamination assessment on third-party land, the owner/occupier should be made aware of
related implications.
The following information is provided as guidance, and the EPA strongly recommends that consultants and auditors
obtain legal advice about the risk to themselves in carrying out the work, before undertaking sampling on private land.
96
For additional information on risk management in relation to site contamination, refer to ITRC publication Decision
making at contaminated sites: Issues and options in human health risk assessment (2015)
51
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
The nature, concentration and extent of chemical substances and site land use will have an effect on how
contamination is managed on third-party land.
The EPA is required to record certain details of site contamination on the EPA Public Register pursuant to section 109
of the EP Act.
The EPA advises that where contamination on third-party sites is identified, the landowners should be informed and an
appropriate risk management strategy be implemented in accordance with this guideline as soon as reasonably
practicable, to ensure the protection of human health and the environment.
Once recorded, this information will be made available on the Public Register Index of the EPA website and to
interested parties upon written enquiry to the Public Register Administrator of the EPA.
The existence of this information in relation to the land will also be identified by the EPA when responding to enquiries
under the Land and Business (Sale and Conveyancing) Act 1994 (LBSC Act) and the subordinate Regulations (LSBC
Regulations) (via the ‘statement of environmental particulars’ contained within the statement under section 7).
This will typically occur at the time of sale of the property. There are also requirements for vendors in relation to
identifying whether environmental assessments of the land have been carried out.
The EPA advises consultants of the need to ensure that any sampling in relation to site contamination on private
property should include a process whereby the landowners are informed by the consultant of the likelihood of the
results having to be provided to the EPA and recorded on the EPA Public Register. It is recommended that discussion
about any subsequent obligations (for both the EPA and the landowner) require relevant information to be passed on
under the Form 1 statement of the Regulations and the LSBC Act.
52
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
• details of serious or material environmental harm caused or threatened in the course of an activity
• details of EPA approved voluntary site contamination assessment and remediation proposals and any reports
associated with the approved proposal
• details of each environmental assessment report 97 carried out by or on behalf of the EPA
• reports prepared on behalf of the former South Australian Health Commission in relation to pollution of land or
contamination of land by chemical substances
• development authorisations
• details of environment protection orders, clean-up orders and clean-up authorisations, site contamination
assessment orders and site remediation orders.
Information that has been placed in the Public Register is available on request from the EPA. Reports can be copied or
inspected.
A listing of selected site contamination information is available through the Site Contamination Index on the EPA Public
Register Directory. Requests for copies of electronic documents listed on the index may be provided at no charge.
There can be no guarantee that the EPA holds any or all information relating to a site. If the EPA holds no information
about a site, this should not be interpreted as meaning that a site is not affected by site contamination or pollution.
Persons with an interest in a site should always carry out their own enquiries and/or assessments to ensure that their
interest in the site is not compromised by site contamination or pollution. Information held in the EPA Public Register
may assist this process.
97
Environmental assessment, in relation to land, means an assessment of the existence or nature or extent of—(a) site
contamination (as defined in the EP Act) of the land; or (b) any other contamination of the land by chemical
substances, and includes such an assessment in relation to water on or below the surface of the land
98
Prior to 1 July 2009, site audit report means a detailed written report that sets out the findings of a site audit. A site
audit, in relation to land, means a review (carried out by a person recognised by the Authority as an environmental
auditor) that examines environmental assessments or remediation of the land for the purposes of determining—(a) the
nature and extent of contamination of the land by chemical substances present or remaining on or below the surface of
the land; and (b) the suitability of the land for a particular use; and (c) remediation that is or remains necessary for a
particular use, but does not include a site contamination audit (as defined in the EP Act) completed on or after 1 July
2009.
53
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
For further information about viewing or obtaining information, contact the EPA by telephone on 08 8204 2004 or 1800
623 445 (freecall for country users) or email epainfo@sa.gov.au.
Sections 7 and 8 of the LBSC Act provide that all mortgages, charges and prescribed encumbrances affecting the land
and particulars of certain prescribed matters be provided by a vendor or their agent to a prospective buyer of land or
small business before settlement. The LBSC Regulations prescribe that a Form 1 must be provided to prospective
buyers that includes those particulars.
The EPA is required by the LBSC Regulations to provide certain information relating to property. In relation to site
contamination, this includes questions set out in Schedule 1 of the LBSC Regulations, incorporating the section:
‘Particulars relating to environment protection’ and certain information relating to mortgages, charges and prescribed
encumbrances affecting the land. This information is included in the ‘Form 1 Statement’ which forms part of the contract
of sale documents for property sales.
Appropriate persons under the LBSC Act can make a direct enquiry to the EPA with payment of a fee for a Section 7
search, which includes the information that the EPA is required to provide to assist with the preparation of the Form 1
statement. The request must be made in writing with the current certificate of title reference of each parcel of land.
Those particulars may include information relating to site contamination, in response to the questions relating to the
prescribed encumbrances or the 'Particulars relating to environment protection' set out in the LSBC Regulations. The
EPA provides that information directly in the form of a ‘Section 7–EPA response’ letter.
Any person can make an enquiry – called a Section 7 direct enquiry – to the EPA upon payment of a fee. The EPA will
then provide a response to these questions, as previously described, where this information is held.
To make a Section 7 enquiry, contact the EPA’s Senior Administration Officer–Section 7 on telephone 08 8204 2179 or
email epainfo@sa.gov.au. For further information, see the relevant EPA publication: Section 7, Land and Business
(Sale and Conveyancing) Act 1994 and the role of the EPA (2018).
Also, records held by the EPA may represent only a portion of information that has been produced for a site, and may
only cover a subset of the environmental issues present at the site. Where this is the case, interested persons should
be aware that further detailed information may exist in a report and that the extract(s) may not fully or accurately
represent this information. Consideration should also be given to any appendices or referenced documents in a report
that may provide further information.
Site contamination reports vary in their scope and detail. This must be taken into account when interpreting the
information contained in reports.
It is recommended that where the information obtained suggests that ongoing responsibilities exist for site
contamination, appropriate advice be sought from an environmental professional (for example, consultant or auditor)
and the EPA.
Reports are based on the condition of the site at the time the report is completed. They do not represent any changes
that may have occurred to the condition of the site or site contamination since the date of report completion. In many
54
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
instances, more than one report will be prepared for a site over time. Interested persons are advised to check the dates
of all available reports to ensure the most recent and most relevant information has been obtained for the site.
All persons who rely on consultant and audit reports are advised to check the currency and details of the documents. If
a person is unsure of the currency, they should contact the EPA for advice. Persons relying on reports are also advised
to ensure that any extracts or pages of a report are read in the context of the complete report.
55
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
14 Glossary
The following definitions are relevant to site contamination. Where a definition is amended in the source document, the
definition in the source document takes precedence over the definition presented below.
Definitions taken from the EP Act or the Regulations are identified by an asterisk (*) 99.
background concentrations* in relation to chemical substances on a site or below its surface, means results
obtained from carrying out assessments of the presence of the substances in the
vicinity of the site in accordance with guidelines from time to time issued by the
Authority. Refer to the EPA publication Guideline: background concentrations
(2018)
chemical substance* any organic or inorganic substance, whether a solid, liquid or gas (or
combination thereof), and includes waste
(the) client the person who commissions a scope of works by a consultant or an audit.
Contamination the condition of land or water where any chemical substance has been added at
above background level and represents, or potentially represents, an adverse
health or environmental impact. This definition of contamination is provided in
the ASC NEPM.
element in relation to the environment any of the principal constituent parts of the
environment (land, air, water, organisms and ecosystems) that may be impacted
by site contamination and includes amenity values (such as aesthetic impacts)
and human-built structures.
hazardous circumstance a state of danger to human beings or the environment, whether imminent or
otherwise, resulting from the location, storage or handling of any substance
having toxic, corrosive, flammable, explosive, infectious or otherwise dangerous
characteristics.
NAPL non-aqueous phase liquid – an organic or inorganic liquid that is not miscible
with water and can exist in groundwater in numerous forms; is commonly
present as a measureable thickness (phase-separated) and is detectable using
an inter-face probe; may be identifiable analytically when solubility has been
reached.
99
Information described in bold text indicates a meaning defined by the EP Act
56
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
(a) has the meaning assigned to the term by section 3 of the EP Act; and
(ii) any other actual or potential environmental harm that is not trivial,
taking into account current or proposed land uses.
residential purposes land currently used or proposed for any form of residential use, including single
lot, medium density and high density, and includes residential portions of mixed
use.
(b) use for a pre-school within the meaning of the Development Regulations
1993. (Note: under the Regulations of the Development Act 1993, the
definition of pre-school includes a nursery, kindergarten or childcare
centre); or
(a) chemical substances are present on or below the surface of the site in
concentrations above the background concentrations (if any); and
(b) the chemical substances have, at least in part, come to be present there
as a result of an activity at the site or elsewhere; and
site contamination assessment a Site Contamination Assessment Order issued under Part 10A of the EP Act
order*
57
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
(b) is for the purpose of determining any one or more of the following matters:
(ii) the suitability of the site for a sensitive use or another use or range
of uses;
(a) sets out the findings of the audit and complies with the guidelines from
time to time issued by the authority; and
(b) includes a summary of the findings of the audit certified, in the prescribed
form, by the site contamination auditor who personally carried out or
directly supervised the audit.
site contamination audit statement* a copy (that must comply with the regulations) of the summary of the findings of
the audit certified, in the prescribed form, by the site contamination auditor who
personally carried out or directly supervised the audit.
site contamination auditor* a person accredited under Division 4 of Part 10A of the EP Act as a site
contamination auditor.
site contamination consultant* a person other than a site contamination auditor who, for fee or reward,
assesses the existence or nature or extent of site contamination.
soil vapour probes* soil vapour probes may be installed in open ground or via holes drilled through
sealed surfaces, such as driveways or parking areas (‘near slab’) or beneath
foundations (sub-slab). Sampling installations may be permanent,
semi-permanent or temporary, depending on access and the need to re-sample.
suspicion of site contamination site contamination is suspected to exist at a site because a potentially
contaminating activity has taken place there. (Note: refer section 103H(1)(b) of
the EP Act)
Tier-1 assessment* a risk-based analysis comparing site data with generic published screening
criteria (Tier 1 criteria) for various environmental values.
Tier-2 assessment* a site-specific assessment in which risks to potentially exposed populations are
assessed using site-specific data on pathways, and the characteristics of the
exposed populations. In Tier 2, site data is compared with generic criteria
modified for site-specific conditions.
Tier-3 assessment* is a further step from a Tier 2 evaluation and examines the specific risk-driving
factors in more detail. This often involves additional data collection and may
incorporate more sophisticated modelling techniques. In Tier 3, site data is
compared with site-specific target levels.
58
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
volatile physical property of a chemical that indicates its potential to transform from an
adsorbed, dissolved or liquid phase into a vapour phase under standard
atmospheric conditions. Highly volatile substances have a low boiling point or
subliming (high vapour) pressure.
water* Includes:
(c) an artificially created body of water or stream that is for public use or
enjoyment.
(e) an area where a declaration has been made by the EPA under section
103S of the EP Act.
well a hole drilled into an aquifer for the purpose of monitoring or extracting
groundwater. This generic term includes groundwater bores, water wells and
tubewells.
59
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Form completed while engaged as a consultant [ ] or auditor [ ] (tick only one box)
Consultant/auditor company:
Postal address:
Telephone: ( ) Facsimile: ( )
Email:
Consultant/auditor reference:
Declaration:
I understand that it is an offence to provide false or misleading information to the Authority (section 120A
of the Environment Protection Act 1993).
I understand that I must clearly qualify any statement of my opinion as to the existence of site
contamination at the site by specifying the land uses that were taken into account in forming that opinion
(section 103ZA of the Environment Protection Act 1993).
Maximum penalties range from $30 000 for individuals to $60 000 for corporations.
Name:
Signature:
60
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
2 Site information
This section is to be completed by the consultant or auditor
Site address:
Date(s) of assessment:
Consultant/auditor reference:
61
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
A person must not make a statement that the person knows to be false or misleading in a material particular
(whether by reason of the inclusion or omission of any particular) in any information furnished to a site
contamination auditor or site contamination consultant that might be relied on by the auditor or consultant in
preparing a report relating to site contamination (whether or not required under this or any other Act).
Maximum penalties range from $30 000 for individuals to $60 000 for corporations.
Declaration:
I hereby declare I have read and that I understand section 103ZB of the Environment Protection Act 1993
printed above.
Name:
Signature:
Name:
Signature:
Name:
Signature:
Name:
Signature:
Name:
Signature:
62
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
ASC NEPM – interim soil vapour health investigation levels (interim HILs)
* The recognised soil investigation levels and screening levels are applicable to samples obtained from the
subsurface, and must be applied in accordance with the ASC NEPM.
** The recognised investigation levels and screening levels are applicable to vapour samples collected from
subsurface, sub-floor and indoor air. Investigation and screening levels are to be applied in accordance with the ASC
NEPM.
#
The recognised groundwater screening levels are applicable to samples obtained from groundwater samples and
must be applied in accordance with the ASC NEPM.
Note: Documents referenced for the relevant recognised criteria should be applied at the time of publication or as
updated from time to time.
100
The Government SA 2014 TCE Action Levels are applicable for the assessment of the vapour inhalation pathway for
sensitive land uses
63
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
WHO (2017)§
WHO (2017)#
* Specified hierarchy for the application of criteria for each environmental value of water.
** Application of the most recent NHRMC (2011) criteria should be applied instead of the referenced NHRMC (2008) criteria in
GMRRW.
#
Application of the WHO (2017) criteria is recognised by the EPA, where no recreational use criteria is specified for chemical
substances in GMRRW – NHRMC (2008).
§
For consistency with the application of the ADWG 2011, when chemical substances do not have a ADWG value for potable
groundwater use, it is recommended that if other international/national criteria is to be adopted, the ‘order of preference of
acceptance’ is undertaken in accordance with the recommendations from the NHRMC and enHealth. Refer to Section 6.5 of
the ADWG 2011.
Note: Documents referenced for the relevant recognised criteria should be applied at the time of publication or as updated from
time to time.
64
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
When reported, the EPA can assist in managing health and ecological risks associated with the site contamination that
affects or threatens groundwater via regulation of the appropriate person and effective engagement with the community
and stakeholders.
Legislation
The requirement for notification of site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater is prescribed by section 83A
of the EP Act as follows.
(b) a site contamination auditor or a site contamination consultant engaged for the purposes of making
determinations or assessments in relation to site contamination on or below the surface of a site.
2 A person to whom this section applies must notify the Authority in writing as soon as reasonably practicable after
becoming aware of the existence of site contamination at the site or in the vicinity of the site (whether arising before or
after the commencement of this section) that affects or threatens water occurring naturally under the ground or
introduced to an aquifer or other area under the ground.
Penalty:
If the offender is a body corporate – $120 000.
If the offender is a natural person – Division 1 fine 101.
(a) describe the location of the site contamination sufficient to identify it; and
(b) include the information known to the person about the nature and extent of the site contamination.
(a) a person is not required to notify the Authority of a matter if the person has reason to believe that the matter has
already come to the notice of the Authority or an officer engaged in the administration or enforcement of this Act;
but
(b) a person is required to notify the Authority of a matter despite the fact that to do so might incriminate the person
or make the person liable to a penalty.
5 Any notification given by a person in compliance with this section is not admissible in evidence against the person in
proceedings for an offence or for the imposition of a penalty (other than proceedings in respect of the making of a
false or misleading statement).
101
Division 1 fine is currently a maximum of $60,000
65
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Examples of such site contamination include (but are not limited to):
• identification of anthropogenic chemical substances in groundwater that have no known natural sources (not trivial)
• identification of chemical substances in soil (or where the depth of the chemical substances cannot be fully
delineated) where there is a potential for the chemical substances to enter groundwater and result in harm to
groundwater 102.
Duty to notify
The following people have a legal responsibility to notify the EPA of site contamination that affects or threatens
groundwater pursuant to section 83A of the EP Act:
• a site contamination auditor or a site contamination consultant engaged for the purposes of making determinations
or assessments in relation to site contamination on or below the surface of a site.
A notification is only required to be submitted by one of the responsible persons for a site.
The duty to notify is prescribed in the EP Act and should be discussed with all responsible persons so that there is no
confusion in reporting obligations. A person cannot contract out of their obligation to comply with the legislation.
• regardless of when the activity that caused the site contamination occurred, and
• even when to do so might incriminate the person or make the person liable to penalty.
A person is not required to notify the EPA if they have reason to believe that the matter has already come to the notice
of the EPA or an officer engaged in the administration or enforcement of the EP Act. For example, where monitoring
data has been submitted to the EPA pursuant to licence (or other statutory) conditions, a separate notification may not
be required if the site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater has been appropriately described.
A list of sites for which the EPA holds a section 83A notification is available on the EPA website. Alternatively, you can
contact the EPA directly to determine if the EPA is aware of a matter.
Timing of notification
A person who has responsibility to notify the EPA must do so as soon as reasonably practicable after becoming aware
of the existence of site contamination at the site or in the vicinity of the site, that affects or threatens groundwater.
The EPA considers that it is up to the notifier to determine what is ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’ based on
individual circumstances.
Examples of situations where a person may become aware of the existence of site contamination that affects or
threatens groundwater include (but are not limited to):
• receipt of laboratory analysis results from site investigations that identify harm to groundwater that is not trivial
(where laboratory and field data have been assessed as reliable)
102
Where insufficient evidence is available to determine that chemical substances in soil will not enter groundwater
(resulting in harm to groundwater), the EPA considers that groundwater to be threatened
66
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
• identification of anthropogenic chemical substances in groundwater that have no known natural sources in
concentrations greater than EPA recognised criteria (where field data has been assessed as reliable)
• identification of a measurable thickness of a non-aqueous phase liquid within an aquifer during field investigations
• receipt of laboratory analysis results that identify chemical substances in soil (where laboratory and field data has
been assessed as reliable) where remediation is required to prevent harm to groundwater occurring
• a review of data or a report (regardless of when it was completed) that identifies site contamination that affects or
threatens groundwater that has not been notified to the EPA.
The EPA recognises that there will be instances where it is considered likely that the identification of elevated naturally
occurring chemical substances represent background concentrations 103. However, site contamination may be
determined to exist due to insufficient information being available to assess background concentrations at the site.
Where this is the case, and further assessment to determine background concentrations 104 is proposed, this should be
clearly identified in the notification. Where site contamination has been determined to exist based solely on chemical
substances likely to represent background concentrations, the EPA may defer processing the notification for up to three
months 105 (from the date of receipt of the notification) or until a background concentration assessment has been
provided (whichever occurs first).
Provision of information
The EP Act states that a notification of site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater must:
• describe the location of the site contamination sufficient to identify it, and
• include the information known to the person about the current nature and extent of the site contamination.
The EPA considers the provision of the following information necessary (where available) to address this requirement:
The location of any information used to determine the existence of site contamination (eg sampling locations) should
be clearly identified in the notification using:
The type, concentration, speciation and phase of chemical substances present should be used to describe the
nature of site contamination.
A notification should include the results of any field measurements or laboratory analyses that were used to
determine the existence of site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater.
The results of assessment at locations where site contamination is not identified may provide important information
about the lateral extent of site contamination, and consideration should be given to include this information with a
notification.
The vertical extent of site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater should be described using:
103
Refer to the EPA Guideline for the assessment of background concentrations (2018)
104
Refer to the EPA Guideline for the assessment of background concentrations (2018)
105
Refer to section 109(4) of the EP Act
67
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Where preliminary information about the nature and extent of site contamination is available at the time of notification
(eg identification of a measurable thickness of non-aqueous phase liquid during field investigations), a preliminary
notification to the EPA in the form of an email or verbal communication is considered acceptable. This should be
followed up with a subsequent, more detailed notification, when further information describing the nature and extent of
site contamination is available, ie after the receipt of results from laboratory analysis.
The EPA expects to be notified when the following circumstances are identified:
• site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater at a new sampling location (whether onsite or offsite)
• new (or previously unidentified) chemical substances at concentrations assessed to represent site contamination
that affects or threatens groundwater (whether at a previous or new sampling location).
When making determinations whether notification to the EPA is required pursuant to section 83A of the EP Act, this is a
requirement of the relevant responsible parties. This may include more than one of the following persons: a consultant,
an auditor, an owner or an occupier of the site. The EPA recommends that the relevant parties discuss the matter and
seek written confirmation that a notification by one of the responsible persons has been submitted to the EPA.
Submitting a notification
Notification of the existence of site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater must be provided to the EPA in
writing using the EPA website or via email. Notifications can also be made by post. The EPA prefers the submission of
electronic notifications for improved efficiency in maintaining the EPA Public Register. Verbal notifications can also be
made to the EPA, however a subsequent written notification must be provided within 48 hours.
To ensure all required information is provided to the EPA to meet the requirements of section 83A of the EP Act, it is
recommended that notifications are submitted using the Section 83A notification form. The form can also be accessed
and submitted directly from the EPA website.
Notifications should be submitted to the EPA using the following contact details:
Email: epasitecontam@sa.gov.au
Tel: (08) 8204 9934
68
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Electronic data
In addition to the written statutory notification, the EPA requests that the following information is provided electronically
at the time of notification (where possible):
Where information is not available, the relevant field should be left blank. The monitoring well data can also be left
blank where the information has not changed from a previous notification submitted electronically in the standard data
format.
Data quality indicators for laboratory and field data relevant to the objectives of the assessment should be assessed
prior to submitting electronic data to the EPA.
The data received will populate the EPA groundwater database, providing a valuable resource to the EPA, consultants
and the public to easily access groundwater data held by the EPA in the future.
To ensure the unique identification of groundwater monitoring wells in the database, the EPA requires that each well is
assigned a unique number using the Well Construction Permit Number issued by the Department for Environment and
Water (DEW). This may be in addition to the monitoring well identification used by the consultant for each site/job.
Where a Well Construction Permit Number is not available, the unique unit number assigned by DEW (available on
WaterConnect) should be used instead.
Where a notification is determined to comply with the requirements of section 83A of the EP Act, the EPA must record
details of the notification in the EPA Public Register in accordance with section 109(3)(i) of the EP Act. This information
will be made available to interested parties upon written enquiry to the EPA Public Register Administrator, and will be
included in the Site Contamination Index on the EPA website. This information will also be identified by the EPA when
responding to enquiries under the LBSC Act.
The EPA will only record details of site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater for parcels of land where
direct evidence (eg intrusive investigation) exists, even though the notifiable site contamination may be inferred to exist
on other parcels of land (eg through groundwater contours or groundwater modelling).
Following review of a received notification, the EPA will determine the person who is responsible for assessment and/or
remediation of the identified site contamination 106. The EPA may provide input into any assessment and/or remediation
strategies which are implemented at a site to ensure compliance with relevant legislation and EPA publications.
106
The EPA regulates site contamination in accordance with the EPA publication Site contamination: regulatory and orphan
site management framework (2017)
69
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Site contamination that affects or threatens underground water notification form pursuant to
section 83A of the Environment Protection Act 1993
Notifier details
Name: Telephone:
Company: Email:
Site details
Owner(s) (please include contact details where known): Occupier(s) (where different to owner):
Has a potentially contaminating activity been undertaken at the site, please describe…………………………………..
Does this notification relate to a change in the location, nature or extent of site contamination that has previously been
notified to the EPA? □ Yes □ No
If yes, please provide the date(s) of previous notification(s):…………………………………
Which group(s) do the chemical substance(s), identified as site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater,
belong to?
70
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
□ Drinking water
□ Recreation and aesthetics
□ Aquatic ecosystems (marine)
□ Aquatic ecosystems (fresh)
□ Primary industries (aquaculture)
□ Primary industries (agriculture)
Where has the site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater been identified?
Has site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater been identified 107 offsite? □ Yes □ No
If yes, please specify offsite certificate(s) of title or address(es):………………………………………………………………
Has an accurate scaled site plan showing sampling locations been included?
□ Yes □ No
This notification provides the following information to determine the existence of site contamination and the support
notification of site contamination that affects or threatens groundwater at the site?
Has the electronic data been assessed as reliable in meeting the objectives of the assessment?
□ Yes □ No
Further assessment details
Have chemical substances been identified that may represent background concentrations?
□ Yes □ No
If yes, will a background concentration 109 assessment be undertaken within the next 3 months?
□ Yes □ No
107
Using direct evidence and not inferred information
108
Not required where electronic information has previously been provided to the EPA and the data has not changed
109
Carried out in accordance with the EPA Guideline for the assessment of background concentrations (2018)
71
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Is any further assessment being undertaken? Is the site subject to a current site contamination audit?
Declaration
It is an offence to provide false or misleading information to the Authority. Maximum penalties range from $30,000 for a
natural person, to $60,000 for a body corporate, pursuant to section 119 of the Environment Protection Act 1993.
I/We declare that the information provided in this form and any accompanying documents is not false or misleading in any
material particular:
Name: Name:
Position: Position:
Signature: Signature:
Date: Date:
72
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Report section and information to be Reference: Preliminary site Detailed site Site-specific
included where relevant guideline, investigation investigation risk
NEPM Schedule (PSI) (DSI) assessment
(SSRA)
Executive summary
Background
Objectives of investigation
Scope of work
Site information
General information
Site history
73
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Report section and information to be Reference: Preliminary site Detailed site Site-specific
included where relevant guideline, investigation investigation risk
NEPM Schedule (PSI) (DSI) assessment
(SSRA)
Drilling logs/well logs (including soil strata, NEPM B2, Desktop review, Summary or
construction details, water level and section 3.5 or intrusive if refer to DSI
quality) required
74
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Report section and information to be Reference: Preliminary site Detailed site Site-specific
included where relevant guideline, investigation investigation risk
NEPM Schedule (PSI) (DSI) assessment
(SSRA)
Site inspection
Background concentrations
Guidelines:
Background
concentration
(2018)
Guidelines:
Background
concentration
(2018)
75
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Report section and information to be Reference: Preliminary site Detailed site Site-specific
included where relevant guideline, NEPM investigation investigation risk
Schedule (PSI) (DSI) assessment
(SSRA)
Investigation levels
Part 2 of this
guideline
Part 3 of this
guideline
Part 3 of this
guideline
Part 3 of this
guideline
Identifying and assessing data gaps for NEPM B2, section Preliminary CSM
CSM refinement 4.4
Part 3 of this
guideline
76
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Report section and information to be Reference: Preliminary site Detailed site Site-specific
included where relevant guideline, NEPM investigation investigation risk
Schedule (PSI) (DSI) assessment
(SSRA)
Part 3 of this
guideline
77
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Report section and information to be Reference: Preliminary site Detailed site Site-specific
included where relevant guideline, NEPM investigation investigation risk
Schedule (PSI) (DSI) assessment
(SSRA)
groundwater
sampling (2007)
Detailed VI assessment
78
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Report section and information to be Reference: Preliminary site Detailed site Site-specific
included where relevant guideline, NEPM investigation investigation risk
Schedule (PSI) (DSI) assessment
(SSRA)
Field QA/QC
Laboratory QA/QC
Data presentation
79
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Report section and information to be Reference: Preliminary site Detailed site Site-specific
included where relevant guideline, NEPM investigation investigation risk
Schedule (PSI) (DSI) assessment
(SSRA)
Validate model
NEPM B2, Summary or
Sensitivity analysis N/A
section 10 refer to DSI
Limitations, assumptions and uncertainties
of model
Exposure assessment
Toxicity assessment
Sensitivity analysis
Reporting
80
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Report section and information to be Reference: Preliminary site Detailed site Site-specific
included where relevant guideline, NEPM investigation investigation risk
Schedule (PSI) (DSI) assessment
(SSRA)
81
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Executive summary
Scope of work
Environmental value (EV)
Site information
Site owner/occupier
Site plan (layout, scale, north arrow,
other site features)
General information
82
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Stakeholder engagement
Reporting
83
Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
84
Guideline for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Air quality Many chemical substances, particularly those associated with ASC NEPM B2, section 15.2.1
petroleum hydrocarbons, gasworks wastes, organic solvents or
National Environment (Ambient Air Quality) Protection Measure (Air
putrescible wastes, may generate offensive odours or noxious vapours.
Quality NEPM)
The release of these to the air can cause varying types and degrees of
EPA Guideline: Air quality impact assessment using design ground
impact, such as explosive conditions, toxic environments, unacceptable
level pollutant concentrations (2006)
health risks (either acute or chronic) and objectionable odours.
Odour and gases (volatile Odours may also cause community concern because the public is likely enHealth Council: Environmental Health Risk Assessment:
emissions) to perceive odours as posing a health risk to the potentially affected Guidelines for assessing human health risks from environmental
community. hazards (2002)
Dust (particulate) Dust may cause concerns about potential health and environmental
emissions impacts if generated at unacceptable levels near sensitive receptors
(eg remediation workers, surrounding community).
Small particles can travel much greater distances than larger particles.
Small particles can cause health problems by entering the lungs, whilst
larger particle sizes are generally caught in the respiratory tract and
might result in sinus congestion, sneezing or coughing.
85
Guideline for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
86
Guideline for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Noise Noise from earthmoving, compaction activities, pumps, blowers, ASC NEPM B2, section 15.2.7
machinery, sirens and vehicles can be a health risk to workers and a
EPA Information Sheet: Environmental Noise (2013)
nuisance for neighbouring properties.
Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007
Failure to adequately address noise issues associated with remediation
activities may also have legislative implications under specific EPA Information Sheet: Construction Noise (2014)
legislation and policies. Handbook for Pollution Avoidance on Building Sites (2004) (2nd edn)
87
Guideline for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Surface water Surface waterbodies receive stormwater, which runs directly into Part 4 of this guideline
waterways, lakes and, ultimately oceans. Runoff from rainfall and
ASC NEPM B2, section 15.2.3
natural site drainage may carry with it leachate or suspended solids
containing chemical substances. Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2015
Management of surface waters during remediation activities is an Code of practice for industrial, retail and commercial stormwater
important part of protecting the health of our waterways and preventing management (in draft at date of publication)
the spread of pollution. The Environment Protection (Water Quality)
Policy 2015 (Water Quality Policy) contains stringent controls for the
management of water quality.
Soil quality (including Taking care to prevent cross contamination of nearby clean soils is Part 4 of this guideline
acid sulfate soils) important so as to avoid the spread of chemical substances, and to
ASC NEPM B2, section 15.2.6
minimise the amount of soil needing to be treated and the resources
required to undertake the project. Similarly, care should be exercised ASC NEPM B2, section 15.2.8
so that polluted surface water does not affect clean soils. EPA brochure: Illegal Dumping: It will cost you (2012)
Groundwater The Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2015 (WQEPP) Parts 2, 3 and 4 of this guideline
imposes stringent obligations to not pollute groundwater and to take all
ASC NEPM B2, section 15.2.2
reasonable and practical measures to prevent or minimise
environmental harm. When undertaking remediation, specific
obligations must be complied with to ensure that water quality is not
degraded.
Flora and fauna Areas of sensitive vegetation and significant trees have substantial ASC NEPM B2, section 15.2.10
environmental value and should be protected, even where site
Development Act 1993, and the relevant development plan for the
contamination may exist.
location
Significant trees are specifically protected from tree-damaging activities
National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972
under the Development Act 1993. Threatened flora and fauna are also
protected under federal environment protection and biodiversity Native Vegetation Act 1991
conservation legislation. Federal legislation: Environment Protection and Biodiversity
Threatened species schedules are found in the National Parks and Conservation Act 1999
Wildlife Act, 1972 and referred to under the Native Vegetation Act, It should be noted that this aspect falls outside the EPA’s
1991. jurisdiction. It is recommended that the relevant authority be
Compliance with all legislation covering sensitive or threatened species contacted if additional information or advice is required.
of flora and fauna is required.
89
Guideline for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Heritage The area designated for remediation may have structures, landscape ASC NEPM B2, section 15.2.9
elements, archaeological deposits or vegetation of heritage significance
Development Act 1993
that could, themselves, contain chemical substances or waste, or are
located above soils or groundwater that may be contaminated. Heritage Places Act 1993
It is also possible that excavation or earthmoving activities may uncover Federal legislation
artefacts of cultural or historical significance. Such artefacts may have It should be noted that this aspect falls outside the EPA’s
substantial heritage value and should be protected. jurisdiction.
90
Guideline for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
Legislation
Copies of the EP Act and Regulations, and all other South Australian legislation are available from the South
Australian legislation website.
The purpose of this measure is to establish a nationally consistent approach to the assessment of site contamination.
South Australia is a participating state in the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment made on 1 May 1992,
and is a participating jurisdiction in relation to the ASC NEPM, which was made on 10 December 1999 and amended
in 2013. The ASC NEPM is required to be implemented by the state through the National Environment Protection
Council (South Australia) Act 1995.
Refer to the National Environment Protection Council (NEPC) website for details.
Other relevant guidelines issued by the EPA include the following waste guidelines:
• Standard for the production and use of waste derived fill (2013)
• Landfill gas and development near landfills – advice for planning authorities and developers (2012)
91
Guideline for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
• Current criteria for the classification of waste–including industrial and commercial waste (listed) and waste soil
(2010).
All publications issued by the EPA are available from the EPA website. Hard copies can be obtained by contacting the
EPA.
The ASC NEPM includes references to documents that provide supporting or further information. Consultants and
auditors are expected to have regard to these references as appropriate.
The CRC CARE (Cooperative Research Centre for Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the Environment)
has published a series of technical reports. Several of these technical reports are referenced in the ASC NEPM. The
technical reports are available through the CRC CARE website.
Other national publications considered relevant are also referenced as appropriate in this and other EPA guidelines.
92
Guideline for the assessment and remediation of site contamination
File format
Information regarding site contamination that is provided to the EPA is required to be placed on the Public Register by
the EPA 110. Notifications and reports require ongoing preservation by the EPA to support access and use over time.
Electronic versions of notifications and reports are requested to be provided to the EPA as PDF files (Portable
Document Format®), which are regarded as suitable for long-term record preservation. The electronic files may be
provided to the EPA on CD or DVD or other acceptable digital format.
All pages within the PDF file should be numbered and the page size set to the ISO 216 A–series Standard, for
example, A4, A3, A0, and so on. In addition, the resolution of the file should not be any lower than 300 dots per inch.
Any attachments, such as photos, figures and maps, should also be included within the PDF, as discussed under:
‘Other issues’ in this Appendix. A notification or report may include colour, and black and white information. This
information should be appropriately reproduced within the electronic copy.
File naming
File name conventions ensure that notifications and reports can be stored and retrieved in an efficient manner. All
notifications recorded and administered by the EPA are assigned a reference number. The reference number is
unique and is provided by the EPA following receipt of a notification. All reports subsequently submitted to the EPA
should be named using the assigned reference number followed by the report completion date in the format
YYYYMMDD, for example: 60000 20140130.
All submitted PDF files should be text searchable. The EPA will request enabled electronic files of notifications or
reports that are not able to be searched or that are copy protected. Appendices provided as PDF files should also
support searchable text and copying of text and images.
PDF files submitted to the EPA should not be locked with any form of password. The EPA will request electronic
copies of reports that are not encrypted or require passwords to access, display, copy, search or print.
Printing options
PDF files should include printing permissions that allow unrestricted printing. The EPA will request enabled electronic
copies of reports where these functions are restricted.
Other issues
Any file attachments, sound files, movie files, plug-in extensions or Javascript actions should be removed or disabled.
Such features are difficult to preserve in the long term and may alter the way a file is displayed in the future. PDF files
should be self-contained. There are several options in the PDF specification that allow components of a PDF
document to be external to the PDF file. Such components are most likely to be lost during long-term preservation, so
externally linked objects or referenced content should be removed or embedded in the PDF file.
110
Refer to section 109 of the EP Act for requirements of the EPA Public Register
93