Case studies of asbestos contaminated land
Prepared by the Rawtec team in collaboration with Reincarnate and Prensa Pty Ltd for the Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency. The original is on the Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency website.
Summary published
Seven remediation projects, from a $110,000 bushfire clean-up to a $31.5 million containment project on a remote peninsula. The report finds the decision usually rests on a business case, and the business case usually rests on the value of the land afterwards.
At Campbell Section 5 in Canberra, remediation cost about $15 million. The site then sold for $64 million. Contamination came in at six times the original estimate and the project still finished 25 weeks early and only about 5% over budget.
At Sleaford Mere, a post-bushfire clean-up cost about $110,000 on land valued at about $200,000.
Campbell Section 5 remediation, on a $64 m site
Contaminated soil removed at Campbell Section 5
Cost reduction at Lyneham from risk-based planning
Lost time injuries at Cox Peninsula, over ~100,000 hours
What the seven projects establish
Sampling and risk-based planning
At Campbell Section 5 contamination was found at six times the original estimate — 40,000 cubic metres, or 52,700 tonnes, hauled 22 kilometres. The project still beat a 95-week program in 70 weeks, because flexibility had been designed into the methodology.
Lyneham Sports Precinct was originally budgeted at $6.5 million and remediated for $3.5 million — a 45% reduction on 13,200 tonnes — by working from a risk-based Remedial Action Plan and stripping only the affected 250 millimetre upper layer.
Cox Peninsula: containment, safety and local employment
Cox Peninsula contained 28,000 cubic metres in an engineered cell roughly 100 metres square and up to eight metres deep, rather than trucking it out. Total project cost $31.5 million.
Cox Peninsula recorded zero lost time injuries across approximately 100,000 work hours. The report’s conclusion: the up-front planning time is “offset through reduced injury and lost work time and in some instances a faster overall removal time”.
Cox Peninsula awarded 16 subcontractor packages to Indigenous businesses and about 30% of contracted hours went to an Indigenous workforce. The APY Lands program spent $3.6 million over three years cleaning about 387,000 square metres across four of ten contaminated sites.
Community concern, and a small, fast project
“The presence of asbestos at any site can raise concerns for the community, many of whom do not have the technical knowledge to understand the difference between real and perceived risks.” Culturally appropriate messaging is named as decisive in the two remote projects.
Launceston Airport removed the top 100 millimetres from about 300 square metres of amosite-contaminated ground for approximately $100,000 in a two-week intensive period, at an operating airport.
The five recommendations, as written
“In all cases, a clear business case, which considers both qualitative and quantitative costs and benefits should be established to support decision making.”
“Effective planning and communication is essential in ensuring community concerns are managed and thus reduces the chance of project delays arising from community complaints.”
“Retaining flexibility in the project methodology and developing strong partnerships with regulators can buffer a project from unplanned delays.”
Engineered containment cells “can support the business case for site remediation through reduced transport and disposal costs”.
It costs planning time and returns it in reduced injury, reduced lost time and sometimes a faster overall removal.
Information came largely from public and confidential sources, “most provided as secondary information and via stakeholder interviews”. The report itself flags the limits of quantification: at the larger remote landfill sites “accurately quantifying the total amount of the different ACM forms identified was difficult”, because material was mixed with general building waste or partly buried. In the Clayton case study, drilling through slabs returned no asbestos in the tested areas despite known contamination on the site.
The other two ASEA reports
Same client, same team.
The full report covers all seven projects, the site assessment and sampling approach, conceptual site models and the remediation methods used.
Working on an asbestos legacy problem?
These three reports document how asbestos removal, remediation and pipe renewal have been managed in Australia. If you are weighing up a removal program, a remediation business case or an asset renewal strategy, we would like to hear from you.