AEA has performed over 500 audit jobs around the country, and has had significant experience with virtually all types of contaminants in all types of industries.

AEA has a rich history of small to large scale work, and is able to cater to projects of any size. Examples of some of the projects we have performed can be found below.

services

 

Client – Large Chemical and Energy Company
Location – WA
Year(s) – Ongoing
Project Value – $200k

Project Summary – Site history includes 65 years of industrial land-use where various chemicals were produced and disposed of onsite. DER requiredan I-MAR following considerable remediation works. A MAR was prepared in 2016 following completion of the final remediation and validation, to enable the commercial development.

Outcome & Highlights – The MAR included an assessment and classification of commercial/residential properties downgradient of the site. The site has been classified as Remediatedfor Restricted Use (RRU). Downgradient properties were classified as RRU based on long-term monitoring of impacted groundwater.

Client – Public Private Partnership Consortium
Location – SA
Year(s) – Approx. 18 months
Project Value – Estimated $1.5m

Project Summary – This former Adelaide rail yard is being redeveloped as a hospital and medical facility. It is thethird most expensive building in the world and largest audit undertaken in SA. Various environmental investigations, remediation and excavations have been carried out.

Outcome & Highlights – We were committed at inception of the audit to ensure the staged audit did not delay the opening of the hospital. Due to residual impacted materials, an Operational Environmental Management Plan was necessary to ensure the risks to human health and the environment remain within acceptable levels.

Client – Construction Company
Location – SA
Year(s) – 2010 to 2012
Project Value – $70k

Project Summary – 35,000 m3of material was imported to the site as WDF. Due to elevated metals the soil was destined for landfill unless an audit was conducted to approve its disposal in a nearby quarry.

Outcome & Highlights – Potential acid sulphate soils (PASS) material was identified and subsequently removed from the site with the remaining material validated. AEA reviewed and endorsed the use of the material, undertook site inspections of both the source and receiving sites and completed the Site Contamination Audit Report which determined no site contamination was present and the site was suitable for its intended use.

Client – Large Mining Organisation
Location – WA
Year(s) – 2012 to 2016
Project Value – $95k

Project Summary – A voluntaryaudit followed the identification of several potential areas of environmental concernat a site proposed for temporary accommodation and commercial use for a nearby iron ore mine. Historical use includes firefighting training for the adjacent airport showing the presence of PFOS, heavy metals and asbestos.

Outcome & Highlights – Due to a lack of regulatory criteria for commercial land use, we provided expert advice and approval on site specific assessment criteria. An audit report has been submitted to DER to enable the development to progress.

Client – Large Developer
Location – VIC
Year(s) – 2013 to present
Project Value – $210k+

Project Summary – Multiple lots to be redeveloped under a Public‐Private Partnership with the State of Victoria for hospital use. The 3 stage audit included:Main Hospital site, Child Care Centre and Hotel site, and Multi‐level car park.

Outcome & Highlights – Three audit reports with Statements of Environmental Audit having been completed. A number of underground storage tanks were removed and validated. A significant cork tree needed to be protected during site investigations, remediation and re-development.

Client – Private Developer
Location – VIC
Year(s) – 2015 to present
Project Value – $50k+

Project Summary – Redevelopment of a former service station and mechanical workshop. AEA considered historical and associated data gaps as well as work plans and completion of additional investigations of soil and groundwater contamination. Petroleum hydrocarbons have been identified.

Outcome & Highlights – Human Health Risk Assessment confirmed no requirement for a vapour management system to be installed below the basement level of the building. CUTEP submission for EPA determination has been lodged.

Client – Local Council
Location – VIC
Year(s) – 2014 to 2015
Project Value – $95k+

Project Summary – Construction of the cell was verified in accordance with the approved detailed design,including sub-grade, compacted clay liner, high density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane, cushion geotextile, leachate collection pipes and sump, leachate drainage aggregate and separation geotextile.

Outcome & Highlights – Timely completion of the Audit Report post completion of cell construction to expedite commencement of waste deposition in new cell. Completion of a Risk Assessment to confirm there were no significant increases in risk to the relevant beneficial uses associated with the Auditor approved variations in design.

Client – Manufacturer
Location – SA
Year(s) – 2012 to present
Project Value – $830k

Project Summary – Site contamination audit of the current operations as part of its closure and divestment strategy. Groundwater contamination extends offsite under residential users. The issue is complicated further by several similar regional sources making the responsibility and delineation of the plume(s) challenging. To date, no health risks have been identified from potential inhalation to residential users.

Outcome & Highlights – AEA has been a major contributor to the Voluntary Site Contamination Assessment Proposal (VSCAP), that the client has recently entered into with EPA.

Client – Residential and Commercial Land Developers
Location – WA
Year(s) – 2011 to 2015
Project Value – $60k+

Project Summary – A contaminated sites audit was completed of this former market garden to verify that the site was suitable for residential redevelopment. The site comprised 21 parcels of land, each with individual ownership. Soil at the site was contaminated with heavy metals and asbestoswas also present.

Outcome & Highlights – A Remediation Action Plan (RAP) was developed. Excavation and off-site disposal of contaminated soilto a licenced landfill facility. Site development earthworks occurred concurrently with remediation and validation so that project timelines were able to be met.

Client – Developer
Location – WA
Year(s) – 2014 to 2016
Project Value – $200k+

Project Summary – Statutory audit of a former limestone quarry and inert landfill as a required WAPC condition for residential redevelopment. Soil was imported to stabilise the area triggering a need for further soil and landfill gas investigations including a human health and environmental risk assessment. Results showed that asbestos was present, though no soil impact existedin the capping materials. Gas protection measures were required for the proposed buildings.

Outcome & Highlights – The auditor reviewed and endorsed an Environmental Site Management Plan detailing suitable gas protection measures for installation prior to the construction of residential buildings.

Client – Manufacturer
Location – NSW
Year(s) – 2015 to 2016
Project Value – $200k+

Project Summary – AEA completed a statutory audit to determine land use suitability and satisfy a condition of sale. The site is zoned for industrial use, however an environmental conservation zone is present alongside the property boundary. Various contamination was found due largely to historical placement of fill. Two retention dams were present on site and remediation of the dam sediments was undertaken under a Development Consent, which was required due to proximity to the conservation zone. Council prohibited soil remediation within the conservation zone itself. Asbestos-contaminated soils were excavated from the remainder of the site and placed in the remediated dams, then capped and revegetated.

Outcome & Highlights – This management method allowed re-use of the site for industrial purposes whilst minimising the volume of soil which was required to be disposed off-site, resulting in significant cost savings for our client.

Back to Top