ANALYSIS I

LAB 7
SITE E1

Section 1

Victoria Munro
Erica Ma
Marta Swiercz

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 STUDY OBJECTIVES......................................................................................................................................................... 1
3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA ....................................................................................................................... 1
4.0 RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION .......................................................................................................... 3
5.0 METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................................................................ 3
5.1 Soil Sampling Methodology ..................................................................................................................................... 3
5.2 Methods Used For Determining Physical Properties ................................................................................... 4
5.3 Analytical Methods Used For Determining Chemical Parameters .......................................................... 4
5.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control...................................................................................................................... 4
6.0 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................................................................. 5
6.1 Physical Soil Properties ............................................................................................................................................ 5
6.2 Basic Chemistry............................................................................................................................................................ 5
6.3 Analytical Results ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
7.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ............................................................................................................................................. 6
7.1 Comparison to Provincial Standards................................................................................................................... 6
7.2 Any soil standard exceedances? ............................................................................................................................ 6
7.3 Explanation of exceedances .................................................................................................................................... 6
7.4 Limitations ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6
7.5 What compromised the data collection and analysis? ................................................................................. 6
8.0 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................... 7
8.1 Conclusion based on background review and sampling results .............................................................. 7
8.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................... 7
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................................. 8
APPENDIX A HEALTH & SAFETY PLAN ...................................................................................................................... 9
APPENDIX B FIELD/LAB NOTES ................................................................................................................................. 12
APPENDIX C SITE SKETCH ............................................................................................................................................. 13
APPENDIX D LAB PROCEDURES.................................................................................................................................. 14
APPENDIX E LAB NOTES/OBSERVATIONS............................................................................................................. 15
APPENDIX F COPIES OF AIR PHOTOS ....................................................................................................................... 16
APPENDIX G PHOTOGRAPHS OF SAMPLE SITE .................................................................................................... 18
APPENDIX H COPY OF CHAIN OF TITLE .................................................................................................................. 19
APPENDIX I COPY OF CHAIN OF CUSTODY............................................................................................................. 21

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this lab is to practice conducting soil samples, methods of lab analysis, and
interpretation of the analytical results representing the chemical parameters of the site. Our group
was assigned study site E, as such, the site that our soil sample was taken from is located on the
Niagara College-Glendale campus property and is situated adjacent to the lagoons on the
southeast side of the property, as seen in Figure 1. Once the sample has been collected and sent
to the laboratory for analysis, the results will be compared to past data collected at this site as
well as to the provincial standard. After comparing these results, we will be able to determine the
soil quality at this location and be able to provide recommendations for remedial action, if found
to be necessary. The study analysis was completed following the Soil, Groundwater and
Sediment Standards for Use under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act.

2.0 STUDY OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this soil sampling laboratory are as follows,
1. To distinguish past and present land use of the lagoon area on the Niagara College
Glendale campus property,
2. Identify soils found within the Niagara College Glendale campus based on
physical properties and available soil mapping, and
3. Determine if the soils found in the lagoon area within the Niagara College
Glendale campus meet applicable Provincial soil quality standards.

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

The study area is currently being used for a post-secondary institution. The site that we selected
is located adjacent to the lagoons which are situated southeast of the main Niagara College
Glendale Campus buildings as illustrated below in Figure 1. Our exact sampling location was at
43.151579 degrees north, 79.159806 degrees west.
Information of the study sites current and historic land-use, aerial photographs, and sampling
site photographs are found in Appendix C Site Sketch, Appendix F Aerial Photographs, and
Appendix G Photos of Sampling Site.

Study site

Figure 1. Sampling site E1 (Aerial photograph from Niagara Navigator).

4.0 RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The property the study site sits on land that was transferred from the Corporation of the Town of
Niagara on the Lake to Niagara College of Applied Art and Technology in 1999.
Parent Material: Mainly lacustrine heavy clay
Soil Series: HIM 1
Drainage: Imperfect
Slope type: In HIM1 unit where the denominator indicated B=C approximately 50% of
Haldimand soils occur on B slope and 50% occurs on C slope.
Taxonomic classification: Gleyed gray brown luvisol, very fine clayey, alkaline, strongly
calcareous, mild humid to subhumid.

5.0 METHODOLOGY
Names: Marta Swiercz, Victoria Munro, Erica Ma
Sampling Location:
Georeferencing: 43.151579, -79.159806
UTM: Zone 17n
Date of Collection: November 16, 2015
Weather Conditions: Sunny, 12 degrees Celsius
Equipment used: Dutch Auger, kraft paper, nitrile gloves, soil knife, glass beaker, scale
Surrounding land use: Lagoon, Institution (Niagara College), Vineyard, Brewery
Site position on slope: B/2, nearly level, 0.5-2.0
Stoniness: 0, non-stoney, There are very few stones (stones occupy <0.01% of the surface area,
and are more than 30 m apart)
Rockiness: 0, non-rocky, Bedrock exposures do not interfere seriously will tillage (exposures
generally are >75m apart, and cover <2% of the surface)

5.1 Soil Sampling Methodology

Method of sampling:
1. Before going on site, the Dutch auger barrel was cleaned using Alconox solution and
water.
2. At the sampling site, the ground was cleared of any debris and then the sample was
collected.
3. The sample was left in the auger barrel and wrapped in paper towel to secure it on the
walk back to the lab.
4. The sample was released from the barrel and paper towel onto a sheet of Kraft paper on
the lab bench.
5. While wearing Nitrile gloves, the organic layer of the sample was removed, along with
any additional debris.
6. The remainder of the sample was placed into a glass jar, with a tight lid, and proper label.
3

Equipment:

Dutch Auger
Nitrile gloves
Kraft paper
Paper towel

Soil knife
Glasswear, stir stick
pH and conductivity monitors

5.2 Methods Used For Determining Physical Properties

1. Munsell colour: 10 YR 5/2
Using the Munsell colour chart, we compared a variety of colour swatches with the soil that
we sampled. We identified that the sample was nearest to a hue of 10 YR (Yellow-Red), with
a value of 5 and chroma of 2. This comparison indicates that our sample was of a gray-ish
yellow brown colour according to the Munsell colour chart.
2. Texture by Feel: Loamy sand
As a part of our lab analysis, we used the texture by feel method in order to identify the type
of soil we sampled. We used the texture analysis chart and instructions in order to classify
whether our sample was sand, clay or loam. Holding a portion of the soil, we added water
and through analyzing the texture by feel, we immediately discovered that it resulted in
loamy sand as the sample did not form a ribbon as described in the texture analysis chart.

5.3 Analytical Methods Used For Determining Chemical Parameters

The soil sample was sent to Exova Environmental Ontario Laboratories in Ottawa, Ontario
for a chemical analysis.

5.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control

Lab Standard Operating Procedures

Disinfecting lab station with Alconox solution
Wearing nitrile gloves when handling sample
Cleaning Dutch auger, soil knife, glass beaker, glass stir stick with
Alconox solution before and after use
Labelling sample and sampling jar
Zeroing equipment and weighing glassware without and with sample.
Cleaning pH and conductivity probes with distilled water before and after
use to prevent cross-contamination with other samples
Selection of a CALA accredited laboratory for sample analysis
Documentation of Chain of Custody completed by laboratory
Documentation of sampling protocol and procedures
Verification of labelled jars by supervisor (instructor)
Staff Training
WHMIS
Lab Safety Training
Equipment Operation (Dutch Auger)
4

6.0 RESULTS
6.1 Physical Soil Properties
Munsell colour: 10 YR 5/2
Texture by Feel: Loamy sand
Structure Classification
Type/Shape
Class/Size
Grade/Strength
Consistence: Dry, minimal plasticity

Description
Granular
Fine
Weak

6.2 Basic Chemistry

The pH and conductivity were determined in the laboratory using the following method:
10g of the soil sample was weighed and placed into a glass beaker
20 mL of distilled water was put into the beaker and a glass rod was used to break the
soil up
The mixture was left to rest for a few minutes to settle the sample
A pH probe was placed in the settled sample to obtain a pH reading
A conductivity probe was placed in the settled sample to obtain a conductivity
reading
The pH of the soil sample was 5.57
The conductivity of the soil sample was 96.2 S/cm
The remaining soil sample was placed into a labelled jar with preservatives and sent to Exova
Environmental Ontario Laboratories in Ottawa, Ontario for a further chemical analysis.

6.3 Analytical Results

Table 2. Based on Table 9. Generic Site Condition Standards for Use within 30 m of a Water
Body in a Non-Potable Groundwater Condition (Ministry of the Environment, 2011)
Group

Analyte

MRL

Units

Inorganics

Aluminum
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium total
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Silver
Strontium
Vanadium
Zinc
Molybdenum
Thallium

1
1
1
0.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.2
1
1
1
1
1

ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g dry
ug/g dry

Subcontracted

Guidelines

STD -210
STD -2.5
STD -1
STD -67
STD -19
STD -62
STD -45
STD -37
STD -0.5
STD -86
STD -290
STD -2
STD -1

2015
17600
74
<1
<0.5
19
12
16
24400
30
649
21
<0.2
15
31
80
<1
<1

Provincial
Standard
NV *
220
2.5
1.2
70
22
92
NV
120
NV
82
0.5
NV
86
290
2
1

2014

2013

14600
82
<1
<0.5
20
9
27
22100
18
559
21
<0.2
22
31
75
<1
<1

12600
75
<1
<0.5
16
8
15
18400
24
452
22
<0.2
17
27
69
<1
<1

* NV = No Value provided in Generic Site Condition Standards for Use within 30 m of a Water Body in a Potable
Ground Water Condition

The sampling site is not within 250m of a water well; therefore, it is designated as non-potable
groundwater condition.

7.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

7.1 Comparison to Provincial Standards
Using Table 9 from the Soil, Groundwater and Sediment Standards for Use under Part XV.1 of
the Environmental Protection Act the following was found regarding the soil sample:

The elements are within standard limits where available

7.2 Any soil standard exceedances?

No, all elements fell below the soil standards.

7.3 Explanation of exceedances

N/A

7.4 Limitations
The study was limited by the amount of samples collected; for example, only one sample was
collected so it is difficult to find anomalies in the results. Due to limited resources, financial
restraints, and time constraints during the study, only one Dutch auger soil sample was collected
and analyzed by the laboratory. Fortunately, we had access to results from similar studies in the
same site from 2013 and 2014 (See Table 2), which show similar results across the three year
time span.

7.5 What compromised the data collection and analysis?

A potential source of error that may have compromised our data collection was the use of the
Dutch Auger. The use of a Dutch Auger may compromise the data because it is a form of
equipment that is not exceptionally effective. Due to the limitation of collecting one soil sample,
soil depth was limited; therefore, the auger was only used up to the A or lower-A horizon at the
sampling site. In addition, the depth is limited by soil conditions, such as stones and collapsing
sidewalls. When using an auger, soil mixing is common which is not suited to volatiles and can
result in possible cross contamination between sub-layers. Furthermore, the quality of the sample
relied on the augers condition and that it was effectively cleaned prior to use. Another possible
source of error we encountered during the analysis was the use of the texture by feel method
because it is subjective, thus it is not entirely effective.

8.0 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Conclusion based on background review and sampling results
The study site is currently adjacent to two lagoons located on the Niagara College- Glendale
Campus, which was previously used for agriculture (As seen in Appendix F- Figure 3).Although
the many of the analyzed parameters for the soil sample from the site has increased from 2013 to
2014 and again in 2015, the study site does not exceed any sediment standard it was tested for
according to Table 9 of the Soil, Groundwater and Sediment Standards for Use under Part XV.1
of the Environmental Protection.

8.2 Recommendations
Our recommendation is to continue to monitor the site because of the increasing levels of certain
parameters (including, but not exclusive to lead). No remediation action has to be taken on the
site presently, but if the parameter concentrations continue the trend and increase, future
remediation actions may be required.

REFERENCES
Ministry of the Environment. (2011). Soil, Groundwater and Sediment Standards for Use Under
Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. Retrieved from
https://niagara.blackboard.com/bbcswebdav/pid-2174632-dt-content-rid6118879_1/courses/1154_ENVR9102_AA/MOE_SoilStandards_2011.pdf
Ontario Institute of Pedology, 1989. Soils of Saint Catharines. Niagara-on-the-Lake. Regional
Municipality of Niagara, Ontario. Sheet 3, Scale 1:25,000.
Regional Municipality of Niagara, 2015. Niagara-on-the-Lake [map]. Layers used: Niagara
College, 1934, 2000, 2006, 2013 Imagery. Niagara Navigator. Retrieved from
https://maps-beta.niagararegion.ca/Navigator/

APPENDIX A HEALTH & SAFETY PLAN

INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the overall study is to identify past and present land use within the Niagara
College Glendale campus, identify soils based on the physical properties and by use of soil maps,
and to determine if these soils meet the provincial soil quality standards. Our group collected
soil using a Dutch auger in sampling area E, as illustrated in Figure. 1. This study involves a
complete site record and description of the study area, one soil sample collection, soil analysis to
determine physical and chemical characteristics, results and discussion, conclusion, and
recommendations. Following sample collection, we will use methods of analysis to determine the
physical characteristics of the soil, send the soil to the Niagara College labs to determine
chemical characteristics, and evaluate these results to form appropriate conclusions and
recommendations.
We collected samples from around the two lagoons which are located southwest of the Niagaraon-the-lake campus. Specifically, the site is just west of the two campus lagoons, approximately
seven meters into the treeline. We will be exiting the building from the south door exit from the
east wing, walking through the parking lot, and following the path south towards the lagoons,
turned east to walk between the lagoons, towards the study area as illustrated in Figure. 1.
SITE MAP

Parking lot
Path to study site

Study area E
Sample area

Figure 2. Site map and sample

area.

Figure 2. Site map and sample area.

Table 3: Hazard Assessment of Field Work Activities

Field Location:
Niagara College, Niagara-on-the-lake
campus
West of the campus lagoons
Crew:
Marta
Erica Ma
Victoria Munro

Date: November 16, 2015 @ 12:30 2:30 pm

Cell Phone: 289-684-3795

Coordinator/Supervisor: Annie
Michaud
Name and Number: 905-641-2252, ext.
4476

Emergency: 911
Ambulance: 905-688-2191
Niagara College Security: ext. 4444

Niagara College 135 Taylor Road,

Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
906-641-2252
Alternate Contact:
Erica Ma
647 248 - 2285

First Aid Kit packed? Yes

Table 4: Activities, Hazards and Conditions, Controls, PPEs.

Activity

Hazards and
Conditions
Weather:
Precipitation

Controls

Collecting
soil
samples

Weather:
Sun

- Stay hydrated
- Bring/apply sunscreen
- Carry cellphone + charger
- Work with crew
- Check the weather forecast

- Dress appropriately for

weather conditions
appropriate footwear,
extra clothes
- Bring/apply sunscreen

Collecting
Samples

Weather:
Cold
temperatures,
snow

- Carry cellphone + charger

- Work with crew
- Check weather forecast

Walking to
and

Biological
Hazards

- Insect repellent with DEET

- Carry hand sanitizer

- Dress appropriates for

weather conditions
appropriate footwear,
extra clothes, gloves,
coat, warm clothing
- Appropriate
footwear/clothing

Collecting
soil
samples

- Carry cellphone + charger

- Work with crew
- Check the weather forecast

Personal Protective
Equipment
- Dress appropriately for
weather conditions
Rain coat, appropriate
footwear, extra clothes

10

throughout
site
Walking,
collecting
samples,
analyzing
samples
Walking,
collecting
samples

Using
equipment,
collecting
samples

Punctures
and
Abrasions (pokes and
cuts) using
soil knife
Tripping and
Falling

Equipment
Risks
- Soil auger
- Soil knife

- Work with crew

- Carry cellphone + chargers

- Gloves
- First Aid kit

- Be aware of surroundings
- Be cautious, do not rush
- Be aware of sharp objects
and plants
- Work slowly and carefully
using knife
- Be aware of surroundings
- Be cautious around slopes,
unstable ground, etc.
- Carry cellphone + charger
- Work with crew
- Be aware of surroundings
and proximity to workers
- Work with crew
- Be cautious, do not rush
- Do not poke or prod others

- Gloves
- Appropriate shoes
- First Aid kit

- Wear appropriate
footwear
- First Aid kit

- Wear appropriate
footwear and clothing
- First Aid kit

11

APPENDIX B FIELD/LAB NOTES

EXERCISE B: SITE RECORDS
Names:Marta Swiercz, Victoria Munro, Erica Ma
UTM: 43.151579, -79.159806
Date of Collection:November 16, 2015
Weather Conditions:Sunny, 12 degrees Celsius
Equipment used:Dutch Auger, Kraft paper, nitrile gloves, soil knife, glass beaker, scale
Surrounding land use:Lagoon, Institution (Niagara College), Vineyard, Brewery
Sampling location:E behind the lagoons.
Site position on slope:B/2, nearly level, 0.5-2.0
Stoniness:0, non-stoney, There are very few stones (stones occupy <0.01% of the surface area,
and are more than 30 m apart)
Rockiness:0, non-rocky, Bedrock exposures do not interfere seriously will tillage (exposures
generally are >75m apart, and cover <2% of the surface)
EXERCISE C: SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Parent Material: Mainly lacustrine heavy clay
Soil Series: HIM 1
Drainage: Imperfect
Slope type: In HIM1 unit where the denominator indicated B=C approximately 50% of
Haldimand soils occur on B slope and 50% occurs on C slope.
Taxonomic classification: Gleyed gray brown luvisol, very fine clayey, alkaline, strongly
calcareous, mild humid to subhumid.
EXERCISE D: SOIL PROPERTIES
1.
pH: 5.57
Conductivity: 96.2 S/cm
2.
a) Munsell colour: 10 YR 5/2
b) Texture by Feel: loamy sand
c) Structure:
o
type/shape (granular)
o
class/size (fine)
o
grade/strength (weak)
d) Consistence: dry, minimal plasticity

12

APPENDIX C SITE SKETCH

Figure 3. Sketch of site (by Marta Swiercz).

13

APPENDIX D LAB PROCEDURES

14

APPENDIX E LAB NOTES/OBSERVATIONS

15

APPENDIX F COPIES OF AIR PHOTOS

Figure 4. Niagara College Glendale campus, 1934

(Courtesy of Brock University, Niagara Navigator).

Figure 5. Niagara College campus, 2000 (Niagara

Navigator).

16

Figure 6. Niagara College Glendale campus, 2006.

(Courtesy of First Base Solutions Inc., Niagara
Navigator).

Figure 7. Niagara College Glendale campus, 2013

(Niagara Navigator).

17

APPENDIX G PHOTOGRAPHS OF SAMPLE SITE

Figure 8. Photo of sampling site (Photo by

Victoria Munro).

Figure 10. Photo of sampling site looking

towards the lagoons (Photo by Victoria
Munro).

Figure 9. Photo of sampling site looking towards the

lagoons (Photo by Victoria Munro).

Figure 11. Photo of path directly in line from

sampling site (Photo by Victoria Munro).
18

APPENDIX H COPY OF CHAIN OF TITLE

19

20

APPENDIX I COPY OF CHAIN OF CUSTODY

Completed by Professor Annie Michaud.

21