Asbestos in soil survey and reporting app
Asbestos in soil turns up on demolition sites, in imported fill and on former industrial land, and it is assessed differently from chemical contamination: fragments are collected from the surface or from test pits, weighed, and expressed as a concentration of bonded or friable asbestos in the soil. The report needs every test pit, its sieved soil mass and fragment weights recorded consistently, because the concentration is only as good as those two numbers.
Built for consultants running teams of roughly 3–50 inspectors.
Sample ACM in soil report
An illustrative excerpt. The site, readings and findings are fictional; the layout is yours to set.
ACM in soil report
Table 2 — Test pit gravimetric results (field)
- Site
- Former dairy, 140 Paddock Road (fictional)
- Sampling
- 10 L soil volume per sample, sieved at 7 mm
- Date
- 28 May 2026
| Test pit | Fill description | Fragments recovered | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| TP01 | Clayey fill with brick, 0–0.6 m | 3 fragments, 18 g | Status: Lab confirm |
| TP02 | Topsoil over natural clay | None observed | Status: None |
| TP04 | Ash and demolition rubble, 0–1.2 m | 11 fragments, 64 g | Status: Lab confirm |
| Surface walk 3 | Fragment field near former shed pad | 22 fragments collected | Status: Lab confirm |
Fields captured on site
Your firm builds the form in-app, so these are a starting point rather than a fixed schema. Every field is captured on the device, with or without signal, and lands in the ACM in soil report where your template puts it.
Per test pit
- Location and map point
- Depth and fill profile
- Soil volume and mass sieved
- Fragment count and mass
- Friable material observed
Surface inspection
- Transect or grid cell
- Fragments collected
- Photo
Samples
- Sample ID
- Laboratory identification result
Standards the report works to
- NEPM 1999 (amended 2013)National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure
- Schedule B1 includes the health screening levels for asbestos in soil.
- WA Department of HealthGuidelines for the Assessment, Remediation and Management of Asbestos-Contaminated Sites in Western Australia
- The gravimetric approach the NEPM screening levels are based on.
- AS 4964-2004Method for the qualitative identification of asbestos in bulk samples
- Laboratory confirmation of the fragments recovered.
Load the standards you hold into your reference library and the drafted prose is written against them rather than against a general model.
How the ACM in soil report gets built
Capture it once, offline
Your firm builds the asbestos in soil survey form in-app — 25 field types, nesting repeatable groups, compound AND/OR visibility rules, reusable modules and calculated fields. Field capture works with no signal: jobs, forms, photos, notes and audio all queue in an idempotent outbox that only clears once the server confirms receipt.
Link it to your sample locations
Enter sample locations once, as a register. Every one of your samples, bores and monitoring rounds then points at a stored row rather than a name somebody typed — and the links survive a disconnected device.
Render your own template
The ACM in soil report renders into the Word template you already use — your letterhead, your section order, your clause library — with conditionals, loops over repeats, composable sub-templates and photo grids.
Reviewed before it leaves
You write the review framework: a checklist of what a ACM in soil report must contain, plus the prose standards you would mark a junior against. Link it to a report template and it runs every time that template renders. Each finding comes back graded info, minor or major, quoting the sentence at fault, and a person accepts or dismisses every one.
Because the structured submission behind the report is held too, the review is a comparison rather than a proofread: The report says every bore was sampled to three metres; the form has BH07 refused at 1.2 m.
Checks a environmental framework usually carries
- Every exceedance in the results tables is discussed in the assessment text
- The guideline values cited match the land use actually being assessed
- No sample or bore ID appears in the prose that is absent from the data
- Data gaps, refusals and deviations from the sampling plan are stated as limitations
Questions
- Can the form calculate a concentration from the weights?
- A calculated field can divide fragment mass by soil mass for each pit, so the field estimate is in the record before laboratory confirmation arrives.
- How are surface pickups recorded alongside test pits?
- Surface inspection and test pits are separate repeatable groups on the same job, each with photos, so the report can present them as two tables.
- Can delineation pits be linked to the pit they are chasing?
- Yes, through a reference field: each step-out pit points at the original location it delineates.
What this is not
Worth knowing before you book a demo, so neither of us wastes the half hour.
- Not field-service dispatch. No timesheets, no parts, no inventory. Scheduling exists to get an inspector to a site.
- No signature capture. If your deliverable has to carry a signed sign-off on the artefact itself, this is not the tool yet.
- Field capture is what works offline — jobs, forms, photos, notes and audio. Reports, chat, scheduling and the inbox need a connection.
- No client portal. Reports go out as a file or a password-protected link.
Other environmental work we cover
- Landfill gas monitoringGas monitoring report
- Litter auditsLitter count report
- Noise monitoring surveysAcoustic report
- Odour surveysOdour assessment report
- Pest animal control programsControl program report
- Phase 1 site assessmentsESA report
- Phase 2 contamination samplingSampling analysis report
- Rehabilitation monitoringRehab progress report
Other disciplines
Rebuild your ACM in soil report in SurveyThanks
Bring the Word template you already send clients. If you are coming off another field-forms tool, a filled report can be uploaded, read field by field, and re-rendered into your template.