appendix c - emwd · laboratory testing program was designed to evaluate general physical and...

APPENDIX CGeotechnical Investigations and

Geotechnical Basline Reports

[PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK]

GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION

TEMECULA VALLEY REGIONAL WATER

RECLAMATION FACILITY RECYCLED WATER

PIPELINE PROJECT

TEMECULA/MURRIETA AREA, RIVERSIDE

COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

Prepared for

KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS Three Better World Circle, Suite 200

Temecula, California 92590

Project No. 10807.001

December 22, 2014

Updated March 4, 2016

December 22, 2014 Updated March 4, 2016

Project No. 10807.001 Kennedy/Jenks Consultants Three Better World Circle, Suite 200 Temecula, California 92590 Attention: Mr. William C. Yates, Principal Subject: Geotechnical Exploration, Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD),

Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility Recycled Water Pipeline Project, Temecula/Murrieta Area, Riverside County, California

In accordance with your authorization, we performed a geotechnical exploration for the

subject project located in the Cities of Temecula and Murrieta, Riverside County,

California. This report presents our findings and provides our geotechnical

recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed pipeline.

Based on the results of our geotechnical exploration, the subsurface soils conditions

along the proposed pipeline alignment vary depending on location and depth. The

major geologic units are artificial fill associated with existing Murrieta Creek levee and

road subgrade, alluvial deposits, and relatively dense formational materials locally

known as Pauba Sands. Portions of the proposed alignment are located within and

cross several sections of a designated AP Earthquake Fault Zone. Groundwater was

encountered during our exploration at a depth of approximately 15 to 22 feet at Murrieta

creek crossing.

The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any

questions, please do not hesitate to call our office.

Respectfully submitted,

LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC.

Simon I. Saiid GE 2641 (Exp. 09/30/17) Principal Engineer

Robert F. Riha CEG 1921 (Exp. 02/28/18) Senior Principal Geologist

Distribution: (2) Addressee (plus one electronic copy/CD)

Geotechnical Exploration March 4, 2016 Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility Recycled Water Pipeline Project Project No. 10807.001

- i -

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

Section Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1

1.1 SITE/ALIGNMENT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................... 1

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................. 1

1.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF EXPLORATION .......................................................... 1

1.4 FIELD EXPLORATION ....................................................................................... 2

1.5 LABORATORY TESTING .................................................................................... 3

2.0 SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS ....................................................... 4

2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY ...................................................................................... 4

2.2 SITE/ALIGNMENT SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................................................... 4 2.2.1. Artificial Fill................................................................................................ 4 2.2.2. Alluvium Deposits ..................................................................................... 5 2.2.3. Pauba Formation ...................................................................................... 5

2.3 SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER ........................................................................ 6

2.4 GROUNDWATER AND ANALYTICAL TESTING ....................................................... 6

2.5 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY .............................................................................. 8

2.6 SECONDARY SEISMIC HAZARDS ....................................................................... 8 2.6.1. Ground Rupture ........................................................................................ 9 2.6.2. Dynamic Settlement / Liquefaction ............................................................ 9 2.6.3. Lateral Spreading ..................................................................................... 9 2.6.4. Landslides ................................................................................................ 9

3.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................... 10

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................ 11

4.1 GENERAL ..................................................................................................... 11

4.2 EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................................... 11 4.2.1. General ....................................................................................................11 4.2.2. Excavation Characteristics .......................................................................11 4.2.3. Pipe Subgrade .........................................................................................12 4.2.4. Backfill .....................................................................................................12

4.3 BEARING CAPACITY AND EARTH PRESSURES .................................................. 13 4.3.1. Bearing Capacity .....................................................................................13 4.3.2. Earth Pressures .......................................................................................13

4.4 PIPELINE DESIGN ......................................................................................... 13 4.4.1. Soils Parameters .....................................................................................13 4.4.2. External Loads on Flexible Pipe by Soil ...................................................14

4.5 CORROSIVITY EVALUATION ............................................................................ 14

4.6 TEMPORARY CUT SLOPES ............................................................................. 16

4.7 TEMPORARY SHORING .................................................................................. 17

4.8 PRE-EXCAVATION SURVEY AND SETTLEMENT MONITORING .............................. 18

4.9 DEWATERING DURING TRENCHING AND PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION .................... 18


- ii -

4.10 BORE-AND-JACK .......................................................................................... 19

4.11 ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES .......................................................... 19

5.0 LIMITATIONS ....................................................................................................... 21

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 22

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1. EXISTING PAVEMENT THICKNESS ......................................................................... 5

TABLE 2. DEPTHS TO GROUNDWATER ................................................................................ 6

TABLE 3. 2013 CBC SITE CATEGORIZATION AND SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS ............................. 8

TABLE 4. SOIL PARAMETERS FOR PIPE DESIGN ................................................................. 14

TABLE 5. SULFATE CONCENTRATION AND SULFATE EXPOSURE .......................................... 15

TABLE 6. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOIL RESISTIVITY AND SOIL CORROSIVITY ...................... 15

TABLE 7. CORROSION SAMPLE RESULTS .......................................................................... 16

TABLE 8. STATIC LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES ................................................................. 18

LIST OF FIGURES AND PLANS

Figure 1 – Site Location Map

Figure 2 – Regional Geology Map

Figure 3 – Regional Fault Map

Figure 4 – Boring Location Plan

Figure 5 – Site Plan/Cross Section AA

Figure 6 – Schematic Cross Section AA / Murrieta Creek Crossing

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A – Field Exploration / Logs of Exploratory Borings

Appendix B – Results of Laboratory Testing

Appendix C – Analytical/Groundwater Laboratory Testing Results

Appendix D – GBA Important Information about This Geotechnical-Engineering Report


-1-

1.0 I N T R O D U C T I O N

1.1 Site/Alignment Description

The proposed pipeline alignment is generally located within the Right-Of-Ways

(ROW) of existing public roadways as depicted on Figure 1, Site Location Map.

Outside EMWD’s Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility

(TVRWRF), the surrounding areas generally consist of commercial/industrial

buildings and Murrieta Creek. The proposed alignment starts within TVRWRF

and exits the TVRWRF to crosses Avenida Alvarado and turns west at Rio Nedo

Road and north at Fuller Road connecting to Winchester Road. The alignment

continues northwest on Winchester Road to Dendy Parkway, Diaz Road

(Washington Avenue) and crosses Murrieta Creek at Elm Street. The alignment

then parallels Adams Avenue northwest to a tie-in connection point southeast of

Fig Street (see Figures 1 and 4). Site topography is generally flat along the

southern and northern portions of the proposed alignment while sloping to the

east in the central portion of the alignment.

1.2 Project Description

Based on information provided, we understand that EMWD plans to expand the

Tertiary Effluent Pumps Station Capacity at the Temecula Valley Regional Water

Reclamation Facility (TVRWRF) to 34.5 MGD. As such, the proposed Temecula

Valley Recycled Water Pipeline Project is to design and construct approximately

15,500 lineal feet of new pressurized pipeline with inverts expected to be on-the-

order-of 5 to 8 feet below existing grade. However, a 36-inch diameter pipe

(CML&C) is expected to be bored and jacked at Murrieta Creek crossing at a

depth of 10 to 15 feet below Creek bottom. Remainder of this pipeline is

expected to be constructed using conventional cut-and-cover techniques with

approximately 2 to 4 feet of soil cover.

1.3 Purpose and Scope of Exploration

The purpose of our exploration is to (1) evaluate geotechnical engineering

characteristics of the earth materials along the proposed alignment, and (2)

provide geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the

proposed project. As described in our proposal, the scope of our evaluation

included the following tasks:


-2-

Field Exploration: Our field exploration consisted of twenty-one (21) hollow stem auger borings drilled along the proposed alignment to supplement existing data.

Laboratory Tests: Geotechnical laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples collected during our field exploration. This laboratory testing program was designed to evaluate general physical and engineering characteristics of soil along the proposed alignment.

Engineering Analysis: Data obtained from our background review, field exploration, and geotechnical laboratory testing program was evaluated to develop geotechnical conclusions and recommendations for the proposed pipeline design and construction. Analytical testing was also performed on two groundwater samples.

Report Preparation: Results of this evaluation have been summarized in this report, presenting our findings, conclusions and geotechnical recommendations for the proposed sewer pipeline.

This report does not address the potential for encountering hazardous materials

along this alignment. Important information about limitations of geotechnical

reports, in general, is presented in Appendix D.

1.4 Field Exploration

Our field exploration consisted of the excavation of twenty-one (21) hollow stem

auger borings in accessible areas within the right-of-ways of Adams Avenue,

Diaz Road, Dendy Parkway, Winchester Road, Rio Nedo Road, Tierra Alta Way

as well as locations along the alignment within the TVRWRF. Prior to drilling, we

located and marked boring locations for coordination with Underground Service

Alert (USA) and obtained encroachment permits from the Cities of Temecula and

Murrieta. Approximate locations of the borings are depicted on the Boring

Location Plan (Figure 4). The exploratory borings were excavated utilizing a

truck-mounted, CME 75 drill rig using 8-inch hollow-stem flight augers. During

the drilling operation, bulk and relatively undisturbed samples were obtained from

the borings for laboratory testing and evaluation. Sampling of the borings was

conducted by a staff geologist from our office. The collected samples were

transported to our laboratory for testing. Borings were backfilled with native soils

and drilled in existing street shoulders to minimize impact on existing traffic. The

logs of borings are presented in Appendix A.


-3-

1.5 Laboratory Testing

Laboratory tests were performed on representative samples to provide a basis

for development of geotechnical design parameters. Selected samples were

tested to determine the following parameters: insitu moisture and density,

maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, sieve analysis (gradation),

sand equivalent, soluble sulfate content and chloride, pH and resistivity. The

results of our laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B.

In addition, two groundwater samples were collected from temporary water wells

installed in Borings LB-4 and LB-5 (where initial pipeline crossing was planned)

on October 8, 2014. Samples were transported to Enviro-Chem Laboratories,

Inc., a California licensed analytical laboratory with a record of chain of custody.

The results of the laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B.


-4-

2.0 S U M M A R Y O F G E O T E C H N I C A L F I N D I N G S

A summary of our findings from research of pertinent literature, site-specific field

exploration, geotechnical laboratory testing and engineering analysis, is discussed in

this section.

2.1 Regional Geology

As shown on Figure 2, Regional Geology Map, the proposed pipeline alignment

is generally underlain by young alluvial-fan deposits (Qyf) and Pauba Formation

(Qps). Young alluvial channel deposits (Qya) are expected along and crossing

the Murrieta Creek.

2.2 Site/Alignment Subsurface Conditions

Our field exploration indicates that young alluvial-fan deposits and Pauba

Formation along the proposed alignment are generally covered with varying

thicknesses of artificial fill associated with existing improvements/streets.

Detailed descriptions of the earth materials encountered in each excavation are

provided in Appendix A.

2.2.1. Artificial Fill

Artificial fill was encountered in most of our borings as typical embankment fill associated with existing roadways, levee fill in areas adjacent to Murrieta Creek, and basin fills as encountered at TVRWRF. The fill thickness within existing roadways generally extended from few inches (within paved roadways) to as much as 15 feet in the levee area/creek banks. The encountered artificial fill appears to be generated from near or onsite sources (i.e. Pauba Formation or alluvium) and generally consisted of silty and clayey sand to well-graded sand (SM/SW) with varying amounts of gravel. This fill is expected to possess a Sand Equivalent (SE) varying from 9 than 25 and an Expansion Index (EI) of less than 51. Where our borings penetrated existing asphalt, the measured thickness of asphaltic concrete and aggregate base layers are listed in Table 1 below.


-5-

Table 1. Existing Pavement Thickness

Boring # Location

(see Figure 4)

Approx. AC Thickness (Inches)

Approx. Aggregate Base Thickness

(Inches)

LB-1 Adams Avenue 8.0 15.0



LB-10 Dendy Parkway 7.0 8.0

LB-11 Dendy Parkway/Winchester Rd 6.0 12.0

LB-12 Winchester Road 5.5 9.5

LB-13 Rio Nedo Road 5.0 16.0

LB-14 Avenida Alverado/Tierra Alta Wy 4.5 N/A

LB-15 “A” Street TVRWRF 3.5 8.0

BB-4* Winchester Road 4.5 18.0




* Previous Exploration (Leighton, 2010)

2.2.2. Alluvium Deposits (Qyf & Qya)

Where encountered, the alluvium was generally located beneath the artificial fill in roadway areas and extended to the total depth explored of 36.5 feet in the borings adjacent to Murrieta Creek. The encountered alluvium generally consisted of silty sand to well graded sand (SM/SW) and local sandy/silty clay (CL) and clayey/sandy silt (ML) layers adjacent to Murrieta Creek. Trace gravel was locally encountered in the SW/SM sand layers. The alluvium is generally loose/soft to medium-dense/stiff with N-value ranging from 5 to 30 blows per foot. The Sand Equivalent (SE) is expected to range from 10 to 30 and the Expansion Index (EI) is expected to be less than 51. The collapse potential is typically less than one percent. The alluvium was generally found to be very moist in some areas along Murrieta Creek at shallow depths (i.e. LB-8 and LB-9). In addition, based on surface observations, cobbles and small size boulders could be encountered in alluvial deposits as well as existing fill along Murrieta Creek.

2.2.3. Pauba Formation

Pauba Formation was encountered in borings located in the higher elevation within the central portion of the alignment and in localized areas near the TVRWRF. This formation generally consists of coarse-to-fine silty sand (SM) with interbedded poorly-to well-graded sand (SP/SW) with varying amounts of clay. The Pauba Formation is generally medium


-6-

dense to dense with N-value typically greater than 30. The Sand Equivalent (SE) is expected to range from 10 to 40 and an Expansion Index (EI) is typically less than 21. The collapse potential is typically less than 1 percent which is considered very low.

2.3 Surface and Groundwater

No surface water was observed at the time of our field exploration along the

proposed alignment. Rancho California Water District (RCWD) has large water

storage ponds located near the Murrieta Creek (vicinity of LB-5 and LB-6, See

Figure 4). Groundwater was encountered in 5 of our borings adjacent to Murrieta

Creek at varying depths. However, groundwater conditions can fluctuate

seasonally and may also be directly-impacted by other factors not observed at

the time of our field explorations (such as potential seepage from adjacent

ponds). The table below shows the depths to groundwater, where encountered

at the time of exploration.

Table 2. Depths to Groundwater

Boring Depth to Groundwater (ft)

Below Ground Surface

LB-1 14.0

LB-4 24.9

LB-5 15.7

LB-20 22.6

LB-21 21.7

Although free standing water was not encountered in some of our borings, very

moist soils conditions were encountered in several borings along the alignment

and may vary in moisture and location depending on seasonal changes. These

very moist conditions were found to be as shallow as 5 feet (ex. Borings LB-7,

LB-8, LB-9, LB-13, and LB-17).

2.4 Groundwater and Analytical Testing

Groundwater sampling was performed (without purging) by our environmental

scientists on October 8, 2014 and samples were transported to Enviro-Chem

Laboratories, Inc., a California licensed analytical laboratory with a record of

chain of custody. Groundwater samples were collected in pre-cleaned (unused)

Teflon or polyethylene disposable bailers then decanted into laboratory prepared

vials. A brief description of assigned tests, and test results are presented in

Appendix C, Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Testing.


-7-

Two groundwater samples were collected from temporary water wells installed in

Borings LB-4 and LB-5. The water samples were analyzed for constituents

based on the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region

(RWQCB) General Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from

Groundwater Extraction and Similar Discharges to Surface Waters within the San

Diego Region Except for San Diego Bay (WDR), Order No. R9-2008-0002,

NPDES No. CAG919002 and the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) Local

Limits Resubmittal. The following is a summary of test results which exceeded

the RWQCB’s and/or EMWD’s limits:

Total coliform was detected at concentrations of 280,000 MPN/100ml (most

probable number per 100ml of sample) and 350, respectively. The water sample from LB-4 exceeds the WDR’s instantaneous maximum of 1,000 MPN/100ml.

Iron was detected at concentrations of 33.8 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and 45.9 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the WDR’s municipal/potable and non-municipal/non-potable and the Santa Margarita Hydrologic Unit, Murrieta Hydrologic Area instantaneous maximum of 0.3 mg/L and EMWD’s current range of local limit of 10-31 mg/L.

Manganese was detected at concentrations of 0.945 mg/L and 5.70 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the WDR’s municipal/potable and non-municipal/non-potable and the Santa Margarita Hydrologic Unit, Murrieta Hydrologic Area instantaneous maximum of 0.05 mg/L.

Settleable solids were detected at concentrations of 16 mg/L and 210 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the WDR’s average monthly effluent maximum (AMEL) of 0.1 mg/L and the instantaneous maximum of 0.2 mg/L.

Total suspended solids (TSS) were detected at concentrations of 1,780 mg/L and 2,740 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the WDR’s AMEL of 30 mg/L and the instantaneous maximum of 2,740 mg/L.

Total nitrogen was detected at concentrations of 1.63 mg/L and 28.6 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the WDR’s average monthly effluent maximum (AMEL) of 1.0 mg/L. The water sample from LB-5 exceeds the instantaneous maximum of 2.0 mg/L.

Total dissolved solids (TDS) were detected at concentrations of 848 mg/L and 937 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the Santa Margarita Hydrologic Unit, Murrieta Hydrologic Area instantaneous maximum of 750 mg/L.

Other analytes were below the respectable screening levels.


-8-

2.5 Faulting and Seismicity

The subject site, like the rest of Southern California, is located within a

seismically active region as a result of being located near the active margin

between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. The principal source of

seismic activity on this site is movement along the northwest-trending regional

fault systems such as the Lake Elsinore, San Andreas, and San Jacinto. Based

on our review of published geologic map (see Figure 3), portions of the alignment

is located within the Elsinore (Murrieta Creek) Earthquake Fault Zone as created

by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act or County mapped fault zones

(see Figure 3).

For the purpose of structural design, seismic coefficients based on the 2013

California Building Code (CBC) are provided below based on 3 different locations

along the proposed alignment (see Table 3).

Table 3. 2013 CBC Site Categorization and Seismic Coefficients

Parameters

North Portion

(Murrieta Creek Crossing)

Central Portion

(Winchester Road)

South Portion (TVRWRF)

Site Longitude (decimal degrees) -117.18640 -117.18224 -117.16835

Site Latitude (decimal degrees) 33.52821 33.51158 33.50756

Site Class Definition D D D

Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, Ss

1.95 1.88 1.93

Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1s Period, S1

0.79 0.76 0.79

Short Period Site Coefficient at 0.2s Period, Fa

1.0 1.0 1.0

Long Period Site Coefficient at 1s Period, Fv 1.5 1.5 1.5

Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, SMS

1.95 1.88 1.93

Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 1s Period, SM1

1.19 1.15 1.18

Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, SDS

1.30 1.26 1.29

Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1s Period, SD1

0.79 0.76 0.79

2.6 Secondary Seismic Hazards

Secondary seismic hazards such as ground rupture, landsliding, liquefaction, and

lateral spreading are discussed below.


-9-

2.6.1. Ground Rupture

As indicated above, portions of the alignment/pipeline are located within the Elsinore (Murrieta Creek) Earthquake Fault Zone (see Figure 3). More specifically, the pipeline is expected to cross the active Murrieta Creek Fault at potentially 3 locations. Each location may have one or more active fault traces that will be crossed. This geologic hazard exists for similar pipelines in this locality and other areas in Southern California.

2.6.2. Dynamic Settlement / Liquefaction

Liquefaction of saturated cohesionless soils can be caused by strong ground motion resulting from earthquakes. Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated, cohesionless soils lose their strength due to the build-up of excess pore water pressure during cyclic loading such as that induced by earthquakes. As such, saturated sandy alluvial deposits along portions of the alignment (Murrieta Creek) are susceptible to liquefaction hazard.

2.6.3. Lateral Spreading

The phenomenon of liquefaction may also produce lateral spreading of soils adjacent to a body of water or slopes. Lateral spreading is therefore considered as a liquefaction-induced ground failure whereby block(s) of surficial intact natural or artificial fill soils displace laterally downslope or towards a free face along a shear zone that has formed within the liquefied sediment. The displacement of the ground surface associated with this lateral spreading may be on the order of several inches to several feet at the top of the slope and may affect areas well beyond the top-of-slope. As such, the portions of the alignment susceptible to liquefaction hazard as described above are also subject to lateral spreading hazard.

2.6.4. Landslides

Based on our site review and published geologic maps, no landslides were noted along the proposed alignment.


-10-

3.0 S U M M A R Y O F F I N D I N G S A N D C O N C L U S I O N S

Based on our review of published geologic hazard maps and the results of this

geotechnical exploration, there are some geologic/geotechnical concerns that may

affect the constructability cost and long-term performance of the proposed pipeline.

Some of these concerns along with recommended mitigation measures are summarized

below:

Segments of the pipeline may cross or be constructed in potentially unstable terrains in the event of a severe earthquake shaking (underlain by liquefiable soils/lateral spreading). These areas of the alignment are generally located along the Murrieta Creek (i.e. vicinity of Borings LB-1, LB-5 through LB-9, LB-20, and LB-21 - see Figure 4). Mitigation measures to prevent damage to the pipeline in the event of excessive ground displacement resulting from this hazard are considered impractical and/or cost prohibitive and it may be more cost-effective to repair once such damage has occurred, if ever, during the lifetime of the pipeline. However, mitigation measures such as flexible joints and shut-off valves may be installed at these locations to reduce damage and allow for speedy and less costly repair.

As indicated in Section 2.6, the proposed pipeline alignment will cross the Elsinore (Murrieta Creek) Earthquake Fault Zone at potentially 3 locations. This geologic hazard exists for similar pipelines in Southern California and in this locality, which are constructed over known active faults. However, similar to liquefaction hazard, mitigation measures to prevent pipe rupture or damage at these locations are generally considered impractical and/or cost prohibitive due to lack of available data that can predict the magnitude of ground rupture/ displacement at each location. As such, flexible joints and strategically placed shut-off valves are typically installed at these locations to reduce damage and allow for speedy repair.

Depending on actual depth of pipeline at Murrieta Creek crossing, groundwater may be encountered and dewatering will be required. Based on the test results discussed in Section 2.4 and presented in Appendix C, the pumped water will require pre-treatment for surface discharge per RWQCB’s requirements.

Very moist soils (and/or groundwater seepage depending on seasonal variations) were found within shallow depth along some portions of the alignment, especially along Diaz Road (LB-7 through LB-9). These materials may require air drying to near optimum moisture content prior to use as trench backfill.

Conventional cut-and-cover techniques appear feasible for most alignment. Bore-and-jack technique may be required at some street crossings such as Murrieta Creek and conflict with exiting underground utilities.


-11-

4.0 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S

4.1 General

The proposed recycled water system improvements appear feasible from a

geotechnical viewpoint. However, some geotechnical/geologic constraints exist

within portions of the proposed alignment and require special considerations.

Some of these constraints include potential ground rupture at fault crossings and

unstable ground in areas of potentially liquefiable alluvium. As discussed in

Section 3.0 above, mitigation measures to prevent damage to the pipeline in the

event of excessive ground displacement resulting from these hazards are

considered impractical and/or cost prohibitive and it may be more cost-effective

to provide strategic shutoff control valves and repair pipeline after such events, if

occurred. Depending on actual depth of pipeline at Murrieta Creek crossing,

groundwater may be encountered and dewatering will be required.

4.2 Earthwork Considerations

Earthwork associated with the proposed pipelines should be performed in

accordance with applicable EMWD Specifications, “Standard Specifications for

Public Works Construction” (Greenbook, latest edition) and the recommendations

included in the text of this report.

4.2.1. General

Trench excavation should be performed in accordance with the project plans, specifications, and all applicable OSHA requirements. The contractor should be responsible for providing the "competent person" required by OSHA standards. Contractors should be advised that onsite sandy soils could make excavations particularly unsafe and hence necessary safety precautions should be taken at all times.

4.2.2. Excavation Characteristics

Based on the results of our exploratory borings, the onsite fill, alluvium and Pauba formation should generally be excavatable with conventional earthmoving/excavation equipment in good working conditions. Oversized materials (i.e. greater than 6 inches) might be generated in the less weathered Pauba formation. Based on surface observations, gravel, cobbles and small size boulders could be encountered in alluvial deposits as well as existing fill along Murrieta Creek.


-12-

4.2.3. Pipe Subgrade

Prior to pipe installation, the subgrade should be firm, uniform, and free of standing water, loose materials, and gravel/cobble and then properly compacted to provide uniform seating and support to the entire section of the pipe placed on bedding material. Oversize particles larger than 2-inches in largest dimension should be removed from the trench subgrade and replaced with compacted uniform bedding materials. Where groundwater or very moist soils are encountered or the subgrade become disturbed due to localized seepage or surface water, the contractor should excavate the disturbed or saturated soils to a maximum depth of 2 feet and replace with suitable materials to provide a stable trench bottom. Crushed rock (½-inch maximum size) may be used if found necessary to stabilize bottom of trench/pit prior to placing bedding materials. It is not anticipated that placement of filter fabric separation layer will be required due to the granular nature of onsite soils.

4.2.4. Backfill

Prior to backfilling, pipes should be bedded in and covered with a uniform, granular material that has a Sand Equivalent (SE) of 30 or greater, and a gradation meeting requirements of the pipe manufacturer. Approved pipe bedding material may be mechanically compacted or water-densified in-place provided appropriate water evacuation is utilized. Most onsite soils are expected to be too silty to be considered for bedding material. A minimum cover of 12 inches of bedding material should be provided above the top of the pipe. As an alternative, crushed rock per EMWD Standards (SB-157) can be used as pipe bedding and pipe zone backfill. Native soils are generally considered suitable as backfill materials over the pipe bedding zone. These materials should be placed in thin lifts moisture conditioned, as necessary, and mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction per ASTM D 1557 or as required per EMWD standard specifications. Saturated silty/clayey soils will need to be dried back to near optimum moisture content in order to compact and achieve relative compaction. Often, it is more cost-effective to remove and replace these wet materials with dryer (or near optimum moisture) materials. The actual lift thickness should depend on the compaction equipment used. For hand-directed mechanical equipment such as vibratory plates or tampers, the maximum lift thickness should not exceed 4 inches. The contractor should not use jetting to compact trench backfill unless approved by EMWD and the jetting procedures and soils requirements comply with the “GreenBook”.


-13-

4.3 Bearing Capacity and Earth Pressures

4.3.1. Bearing Capacity

A net allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf or a modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pci may be used for design of footings of appurtenant structures founded into a minimum of 2 feet of compacted fill or dense alluvium/Pauba formation. A minimum base width of 18 inches for continuous footings and a minimum bearing area of 3 square feet (1.75 ft by 1.75 ft) for pad foundations should be used. Additionally, an increase of one-third may be applied when considering short-term live loads (e.g. seismic and wind).

4.3.2. Earth Pressures

Lateral loads on thrust blocks and other appurtenant structures may be resisted by passive soil pressure and friction, in combination. An allowable passive pressure based on an equivalent fluid pressure of 300 pounds-per-cubic-foot (pcf), not to exceed 3,500 pounds per square foot (psf) can be used if the pipe is embedded in the dense alluvium/Pauba formation or compacted fill (minimum 2 feet embedment). This equivalent fluid pressure may be doubled for isolated thrust blocks. We have not applied a factor-of-safety to these values. A soil-pipeline surface friction of 0.20 for PVC pipes may be applied. A modulus of soil reaction (E’) of 700 psi can be used to estimate the stiffness of the soil bedding backfill at the sides and below buried flexible pipelines, if applicable, for the purpose of evaluating deflection caused by weight of the backfill over the pipe. An E’ of 1,000 psi can be used where pipeline is underlain by Pauba formation. This value assumes that the proposed pipeline in embedded at least 5 feet below exiting grades and a granular bedding material with an average relative compaction of 90 percent or more (per ASTM D1557) is placed.

4.4 Pipeline Design

4.4.1. Soils Parameters

Structural design of pipes requires proper evaluation of possible loads acting on the pipe, including dead and live or transient loads. Stresses and strains induced on a buried pipe depend on many factors, including the type of pipe, depth and width of trench, bedding and embedment conditions, soil density, angle of internal friction, coefficient of passive earth pressure, and coefficient of friction at the interface between the backfill and in-situ soils. We recommend the following soil parameters for the proposed pipe design:


-14-

Table 4. Soil Parameters for Pipe Design

Soil Parameters Recommended Values

Average Compacted fill moist unit weight, (pcf) 125 to 135

Angle of internal friction of soils (degrees) 31 to 35

Soil cohesion, c (psf) 0

Sliding friction between pipe and native soils 0.20

Coefficient of friction between backfill and native soils 0.45

4.4.2. External Loads on Flexible Pipe by Soil

Structural design of pipes requires proper evaluation of possible loads acting on the pipe, including dead and live or transient loads. Stresses and strains induced on a buried flexible pipe depend on many factors. The magnitude of the load supported depends on the amount of backfill, type of soil, and pipe stiffness. The approximate dead load per unit length can be calculated from the following formula:

DBCW

Where,

W External soil load on pipe: (pounds per foot of pipe)

C Unitless load coefficient (C = 1.5 for 6 feet deep trench, and 2.0 for 10 feet or deeper trench, assuming a trench width of 3 to 6 feet just above the pipe)

γ Total unit weight of soil above pipe (pounds-per-cubic-foot)

B Width of the trench (width just above top of the pipe, in feet)

D Pipe diameter (feet)

In addition to the load from backfill (above equation), loads due to embankments (if applicable) and other loads (live loads) should be considered.

4.5 Corrosivity Evaluation

Sulfate ions in the soil can lower soil resistivity and can be highly aggressive to

portland cement concrete by combining chemically with certain constituents of

the concrete, principally tricalcium aluminate. This reaction is accompanied by

expansion and eventual disruption of the concrete matrix. Potentially high sulfate

content could also cause corrosion of the reinforcing steel in concrete. Table 5

below summarizes current standards for concrete exposed to sulfate-containing

solutions.


-15-

Table 5. Sulfate Concentration and Sulfate Exposure

Sulfate In Water (parts-per-million)

Water-Soluble Sulfate (SO4)

in soil (percentage by weight) Sulfate Exposure

0-150 0.00 - 0.10 Negligible

150-1,500 0.10 - 0.20 Moderate (Seawater)

1,500-10,000 0.20 - 2.00 Severe

>10,000 Over 2.00 Very Severe

The sulfate content was determined in the laboratory for representative onsite

soil sample. The results indicate that the water soluble sulfate range is less than

0.2 percent by weight, which is considered moderate per Table 5 above. Based

upon the test results, Type II cement or an equivalent may be used.

Many factors can affect corrosion potential of soil including soil moisture content,

resistivity, permeability and pH, as well as chloride and sulfate concentration. In

general, soil resistivity, which is a measure of how easily electrical current flows

through soils, is the most influential factor. Based on the findings of studies

presented in ASTM STP 1013 titled “Effects of Soil Characteristics on Corrosion”

(February, 1989), the approximate relationship between soil resistivity and soil

corrosiveness was developed as shown in Table 6 below.

Table 6. Relationship between Soil Resistivity and Soil Corrosivity

Soil Resistivity (ohm-cm)

Classification of Soil Corrosiveness

0 to 900 Very Severely Corrosive

900 to 2,300 Severely Corrosive

2,300 to 5,000 Moderately Corrosive

5,000 to 10,000 Mildly Corrosive

10,000 to >100,000 Very Mildly Corrosive

Acidity is an important factor of soil corrosivity. The lower the pH (the more

acidic the environment), the higher the soil corrosivity will be with respect to

buried metallic structures and utilities. As soil pH increases above 7 (the neutral

value), the soil is increasingly more alkaline and less corrosive to buried steel

structures, due to protective surface films, which form on steel in high pH

environments. The pH of site soils on representative samples vary from 7.0 to

7.6 which is generally considered less active from a corrosion standpoint.

Chloride and sulfate ion concentrations, and pH appear to play secondary roles

in affecting corrosion potential. High chloride levels tend to reduce soil resistivity


-16-

and break down otherwise protective surface deposits, which can result in

corrosion of buried steel or reinforced concrete structures.

Based on minimum resistivity laboratory test results (see Table 7 below), the

onsite soil is considered very severely to mildly corrosive. Ferrous pipe can be

protected by polyethylene bags, tape or coatings, di-electric fittings, concrete

encasement or other means to separate the pipe from wet onsite soils. Further

testing of import and possibly site soil corrosivity could be performed and specific

recommendations for corrosion protection may need to be provided by a qualified

corrosion engineer.

Table 7. Corrosion Sample Results

Boring Sample

Depth (ft) Sulfate

Content (ppm) Chloride

Content (ppm) pH

Minimum Resistivity (ohm-cm)

LB-2 5.0-10.0 106 41 8.21 3890

LB-5 20.0 242 91 7.94 2450

LB-8 5.0-10.0 529 182 8.00 690

LB-11 5.0-10.0 249 30 8.35 7800

LB-14 5.0-10.0 448 107 9.13 988

LB-18 5.0-10.0 442 64 9.10 2200

4.6 Temporary Cut Slopes

The contractor is responsible for all temporary slopes and trenches excavated at

the site and the design of any required temporary shoring. Shoring, bracing and

benching should be performed by the contractor in accordance with the current

edition of the California Construction Safety Orders, see:

http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/sb4a6.html

During construction, exposed earth material conditions should be regularly

evaluated to verify that conditions are as anticipated. The contractor is

responsible for providing the "competent person" required by OSHA standards to

evaluate soil conditions. Close coordination between the competent person and

geotechnical consultant should be maintained to facilitate construction while

providing safe excavations. Existing artificial fill and alluvial soils encountered

are classified as OSHA soil Type C. Therefore, unshored temporary cut slopes

should be no steeper than 1½:1 (horizontal:vertical), for a height no-greater-than

() 20 feet (California Construction Safety Orders, Appendix B to Section 1541.1,

http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/sb4a6.html


-17-

Table B-1). These recommended temporary cut slopes assume a level ground

surface for a distance equal to one-and-a-half (x1.5) the depth of excavation. For

steeper temporary slopes, deeper excavations, and/or where slopes terrain

exists within close proximity to excavation (<1.5xdepth), appropriate shoring

methods or flatter slopes may be required to protect the workers in the

excavation and adjacent improvements. Such methods should be implemented

by the contractor and approved by the geotechnical consultant.

4.7 Temporary Shoring

If the sloped open cut excavation is not feasible based on requirements above

and due to existing structures, excavations for the proposed pipeline should be

supported by a temporary shoring system such as cross-braced hydraulic

shoring, conventional shields, sheet piles, soldier piles and wood lagging. The

choice should be left to the contractor’s judgment since economic considerations

and/or the individual contractor’s construction experience may determine which

method is more economical and/or appropriate. The contractor and shoring

designer should also perform additional geotechnical studies as necessary to

refine the means-and-methods of shoring construction.

The support of all adjacent existing structures during excavation and construction

(including pavements) without distress is the contractor's responsibility. In addition,

it should be the contractor’s responsibility to undertake a pre-construction survey

with benchmarks and photographs of the adjacent properties. Shoring systems

should be designed by a California licensed civil or structural engineer. As

preliminary design guidelines, we present the following geotechnical parameters

for shoring design. The following lateral earth pressures are recommended for

temporary shoring supporting encountered alignment soils with level ground

behind the shoring. Passive pressure also may be used to compute lateral soil

resistance, if necessary, for sheet piles. Earth pressures provided are ultimate

values and a safety factor should be applied as appropriate.


-18-

Table 8. Static Lateral Earth Pressures

Conditions1 Static Equivalent Fluid Weight (pcf)

Active (cantilever) 37

At-Rest (braced) 55

Passive2 300

1. For temporary excavations only, with level backfill, not including surcharges

2. Passive equivalent fluid pressure may be doubled for isolated soldier piles spaced at least 2½ diameters on-center. Passive resistance should not exceed 3,000 pounds-per-square-foot (psf)

Determination of appropriate design conditions (active or at-rest) depends on

shoring flexibility. If a rotation of more than 0.001 radian (0.06 degrees) is

allowed, active pressure conditions apply; otherwise, at-rest condition governs.

Surcharge loads (dead or live) should be added to the indicated lateral earth

pressures and should be applied uniformly, if such loads are within a horizontal

distance that is less-than the exposed shoring height. The corresponding lateral

earth pressure will approximately be 33-percent of the vertical surcharge for

active conditions, and 50-percent for at-rest conditions. Surcharge pressures

from concentrated loads should be evaluated after geometric constraints and

loading conditions are determined on individual basis.

4.8 Pre-excavation Survey and Settlement Monitoring

A very important geotechnical concern is to avoid damaging any existing

improvements adjacent to excavations. It is recommended that the contractor

provide settlement monitoring and contingency plans when excavating near

existing settlement-sensitive structures or underground utilities.

4.9 Dewatering during Trenching and Pipeline Construction

If encountered during excavations, groundwater control, such as dewatering, will

be required to limit instability of the pipeline trench or jack/bore pits and aid in

foundation construction and soil backfill. Dewatering or any other suitable

method for stabilizing excavation bottom may be selected by the contractor

based on actual groundwater conditions encountered and based on the

contractor’s chosen means-and-methods of construction. The selected method

by the contractor should be able to effectively mitigate for bottom heave or

stabilize subgrade soils during construction/backfilling. However, deep

groundwater drawdown should be avoided to reduce the potential for damaging

adjacent structures, if applicable. Dewatering flow/volume will vary significantly


-19-

based on the specific geologic conditions described in our report and actual

depth and geometry of excavated trench or pit. Contractors should be

responsible for estimating dewatering quantities and verify subsurface conditions

prior to construction.

4.10 Bore-and-Jack

It is anticipated that the pipeline will cross underneath the Murrieta Creek by

means of “Bore-and-Jack” operation. This construction method is presumably

feasible from a geotechnical perspective, within encountered alluvial soils.

However, the contractor should review our findings to (1) confirm that the

selected excavation technique is feasible, (2) perform additional studies as

deemed necessary, and (3) evaluate the effect of groundwater / saturated sand

and the soils conditions (potential presence of cobbles and flowing sands).

Passive earth pressure developed at the jacking reaction block may provide

support during pipe jacking operations. The ultimate resistance for design of

jacking reaction block(s) may be assumed to be 300 pcf at level undisturbed

alluvium, which can be doubled for isolated thrust vectors. However, some

deformation will occur, and thrusting could result in heave and damage to

overlying structures in the direction of the thrust vector. This should be carefully

considered by the contractor when choosing jacking and/or receiving pit

locations.

4.11 Additional Geotechnical Services

Recommendations are based on information available at the time our report was

prepared and may change as plans are developed, or if supplemental subsurface

exploration is authorized. Leighton Consulting, Inc. should review site, grading

and foundation plans, when available, and comment further on geotechnical

aspects of the project. Geotechnical observation and testing should be

conducted during excavation and all phases of grading. Geotechnical

conclusions and preliminary recommendations should be reviewed and verified

by us (Leighton Consulting, Inc.) during construction, and revised accordingly if

geotechnical conditions encountered vary from our findings and interpretations.

Geotechnical observation and testing should be provided:

After completion of site clearing,

During overexcavation of unsuitable soil,

During compaction of all fill materials,


-20-

After excavation of all footings and prior to placement of concrete,

During utility trench backfilling and compaction,

During pavement subgrade and base and/or sub-base preparation, and

When any unusual conditions are encountered.


-21-

5.0 L I M I T A T I O N S

This report was necessarily based in part upon data obtained from a limited number of

observances, site visits, soil samples, tests, analyses, histories of occurrences, spaced

subsurface explorations and limited information on historical events and observations.

Such information is necessarily incomplete. The nature of many sites is such that

differing characteristics can be experienced within small distances and under various

climatic conditions. Changes in subsurface conditions can and do occur over time. This

exploration was performed with the understanding that the project as described in

Section 1.2 of this report.

This report was prepared for Kennedy/Jenks Consultants based on Kennedy/Jenks

Consultants’ needs, directions, and requirements at the time of our investigation. This

report is not authorized for use by, and is not to be relied upon by any party except

Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, and its successors and assigns as owner of the property,

with whom Leighton Consulting, Inc. has contracted for the work. Use of or reliance on

this report by any other party is at that party's risk. Unauthorized use of or reliance on

this report constitutes an agreement to defend and indemnify Leighton Consulting, Inc.

from and against any liability which may arise as a result of such use or reliance,

regardless of any fault, negligence, or strict liability of Leighton Consulting, Inc.

The client is referred to Appendix D regarding important information by the

Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) presenting additional information and

limitations regarding geotechnical engineering studies and reports.


- 22 -

R E F E R E N C E S

ASCE, 2010, ASCE Standard 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures by Structural Engineering Institute, ISBN 0-7844-0809-2, Second Printing, Published in 2010.

California Building Code (CBC), 2013, “California Code of Regulations,” Title 24, Part 2, Vol. 2.

California Geologic Survey (CGS), 2006 Geologic Map of California, of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30’ X 60’ Quadrangles, Southern California, Version 1.0.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region, 2008, General Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from Groundwater Extraction and Similar Discharges to Surface Waters within the San Diego Region Except for San Diego Bay (WDR), adopted March 12, 2008.

Hart, E.W., Bryant, W.A., 2007, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Zones Maps, Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey, Special Publication 42, 2007 Interim Revision.

Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2010, Geotechnical Exploration, Rancho California Water District, Winchester Road Recycled Water 8-inch Pipeline Inter-Tie, Temecula, Riverside County, California, Project No. 602823-001, dated March 25, 2010.

National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, (NCEER), 1997, Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Technical Report NCEER-97-0022, dated December 31.

Public Works Standard, Inc., 2012, Greenbook, Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction: BNI Building News, Anaheim, California.

Riverside County, 2004, General Plan Safety Element and Appendix H - Geotechnical Report (Technical Background Document), Adopted October 7, 2003, Geologic Hazards Map of Riverside County, printed May 17.

United States Geological Survey, (USGS), 2016, a Web-Based Program Published by USGS to Calculate Seismic Hazard Curves and Response and Design Parameters based on ASCE 7-10 Seismic Procedures.

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, andthe GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, ©OpenStreetMap contributors

³0 3,000 6,000

Feet

Figure 1

Scale:

Leighton

Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016Thematic Information: Leighton

1 " = 3,000 '

Project: 10807.001 Eng/Geol: SIS/RFR

Map Saved as V:\Drafting\10807\001\Maps\Geotechnical Report\10807.001_F01_SLM_2014-10-06.mxd on 3/7/2016 8:01:28 AM

Author: (asakowicz)

Date: March 2016SITE LOCATION MAP

Eastern Municipal Water District Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Temecula, California

ApproximateProject Alignment

Qps

Qyv

Qps

Trmu

Qya

Qyv

Qpf

Qyv

Qps

Qyf

Qpf

Qya

Qpf

Qps

Qps

Qps

Qyv

QTws

Qpf

Qpf

Qyf

Qps

Qya

Qya

Qps

Qyv

Qps

Qyv

Qps

Qyf

Qpf

Qyv

Qps

Qps

Qps

Qyf

Qyf

Qps

Qps Qyls

QTws

Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

³0 2,000 4,000

Feet

Figure 2

Scale:

Leighton

Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016Geology: USGS, 2006, Geologic map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California, Version 1.0 Open File Report 2006-1217

1 " = 2,000 '


Map Saved as V:\Drafting\10807\001\Maps\Geotechnical Report\10807.001_F02_RGM_2014-10-06.mxd on 3/7/2016 8:09:16 AM

Author: (asakowicz)

Date: March 2016REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP




LegendQTws - Sandstone and conglomerate of Wildomar area

Qpf - Pauba Formation

Qps - Pauba Formation!

!!!

! !

!!

!

!!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!! Qya - Young axial-channel deposits

Qyf - Young alluvial-fan deposits

Qyls - Young landslide deposits

Qyv - Young alluvial-valley deposits

Trmu - Rocks of Menifee Valley, undifferentiated

Tvsr - Santa Rosa basalt of Mann (1955)

ELSINORE FAULT ZONE, TEMECULA SECTION (WILLARD FAULT)

ELSINORE FAULT ZONE, TEMECULA SECTION (MURRIETA CREEK FAULT)

ELSINORE FAULT ZONE, TEMECULA SECTION (WILLARD FAULT)

MURRIETTA HO

T SPRINGS FAULT


³0 3,000 6,000

Feet

Figure 3

Scale:

Leighton

Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016Faults: CGS Bryant, 2010Fault Zones: Riverside County Open Data, 2014

1 " = 3,000 '


Map Saved as V:\Drafting\10807\001\Maps\Geotechnical Report\10807.001_F03_RFM_2014-10-06.mxd on 3/7/2016 8:10:07 AM

Author: (asakowicz)

Date: March 2016REGIONAL FAULT MAP




LegendHistoric (since 1769)

Holocene (last 11,000 years)

Pleistocene (11,000 to 1.6 million years)

Pre-Quaternary (before 1.6 million years)

Fault Zones

FIGURE 4 BORING LOCATION PLANEASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT

TEMECULA VALLEY RECYCLED WATER LINE

Proj: 10807.001

Scale: 1" = 1000'

Eng/Geol: SIS/RFR

Date: 03/2016

Drafted By: JTD Checked By:

N O R T H

LEGEND

LB-21

BB-7

Approximate Location ofGeotechnical Boring (This Exploration)

Approximate Location ofGeotechnical Boring (Leighton, 2010)

LB-1

LB-2

LB-3

LB-4

LB-5

LB-6

LB-7

LB-8

LB-9

LB-10

LB-11

LB-12LB-13

LB-14

LB-15

LB-16

LB-17

LB-18

LB-19

BB-4

BB-5

BB-6

BB-7

Basemap: ArcGIS, 2014

LB-20LB-21

I r

$4,;-A

pp

roxi

ma

te

/ G

,. C

ross

Sec

tion

· $"

Loca

tion

~~~

/~

PL

AN

a

20

40

eo

1"=

40'

Pro

ject

: 10

807.

001

Eng

/Geo

l: S

IS/R

FR

Sca

le: 1

"=50

' D

ate:

Mar

ch 2

016

Th

em

ric In

form

atio

n: L

eigh

iDn

Aut

hor:

JT

D

EX

IST

24

•RW

PE

RR

CW

D

PS

-2

7----'

CR

OS

S S

EC

TIO

N A

A /

/ /

EM

WD

TE

ME

CU

LA

VA

LL

EY

RE

CY

CLE

D

WA

TE

R P

IPE

LIN

E-

MU

RR

IET

A C

RE

EK

CR

OS

SIN

G

Leig

hton

10

50

10

40

10

30

10

10

Mjf

icja

! F

ill

SW

/SM

T.D

.=36

.5'

Mur

rieta

Cre

ek

SW

/SM

Pro

ject

: 10

807.

001

Eng

/Geo

l: S

IS/R

FR

Hor

iz S

cale

: 1 "

=50

' D

ate:

Mar

ch 2

016

Th

em

ric In

form

atio

n: L

eigh

iDn

Aut

hor:

JT

D

Allu

vium

?-

--

--

--

--

--- S

M/M

L

T.D

.=36

.5'

SC

HE

MA

TIC

CR

OS

S S

EC

TIO

N A

A

EM

WD

TE

ME

CU

LA

VA

LL

EY

RE

CY

CLE

D

WA

TE

R P

IPE

LIN

E-

MU

RR

IET

A C

RE

EK

CR

OS

SIN

G

Leig

hton


APPENDIX A

Field Exploration / Logs of Exploratory Borings

Our field exploration consisted of a site reconnaissance and a subsurface exploration

program consisting of hollow-stem auger soil borings. Approximate locations of the

borings are depicted on the Boring Location Plan (Figure 4). Encountered soils were

continuously logged in the field by our representative and described in accordance with

the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D 2488). Logs of these subsurface

explorations, as well as a key to the classification of the soil, are included as part of this

appendix.

Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained at selected intervals within the

borings using a California ring sampler, with 2.42-inch inside diameter brass rings,

driven into the soil with a 140-pound hammer free falling 30-inches in general

accordance with ASTM Test Method D3550. The numbers of blows required for each 6

inches of drive penetration were noted in the field and are recorded on the boring logs.

Unless otherwise indicated, the blows per foot recorded on the boring logs represent the

number of blows required to drive 18 inches in 6 inch increments. In addition disturbed

bag (or bulk) samples were also obtained from soil cuttings. Types of samples obtained

from each location are shown on the boring logs at corresponding depths. Our borings

were backfilled with soil cuttings obtained during the drilling. Representative earth-

material samples obtained from these subsurface explorations were transported to our

Temecula geotechnical laboratory for evaluation and appropriate testing.

The attached subsurface exploration logs and related information depict subsurface

conditions only at the locations indicated and at the particular date designated on the

logs. Subsurface conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at

these locations. The passage of time may result in altered subsurface conditions due to

environmental changes. In addition, any stratification lines on the logs represent the

approximate boundary between soil types and the transition may be gradual.

5710

121522

3614

116

113

114

SM

SC-SM

SW

SC-SM

R-1

R-2

R-3

13

3

15

8"AC/15"AB

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal); SILTY SAND, very dark grayishbrown, moist, fine grained sand

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND, loose, very dark grayish brown, moist,fine grained sand

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND, very dark grayish brown, moist, finegrained sand

Well-graded SAND, medium dense, light gray, moist to wet, fineto medium grained sand

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND, medium dense, very dark grayishbrown, wet, fine to medium grained sand

Drilled to 16.5' Sampled to 16.5' Groundwater at 14'Backfilled with Cuttings

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'

BULK SAMPLECORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE

BCGRST

JTD

Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop

So

il C

lass

.

10-2-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By

Drilling Co.Drilling Co.Project

Project No.

See Figure 4

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling

* * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * *

Co

nte

nt,

%

GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1

Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N

This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at thetime of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locationsand may change with time. The description is a simplification of theactual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may begradual.

TYPE OF TESTS:-200ALCNCOCRCU

% FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL

DSEIHMDPPRV

DIRECT SHEAREXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETERMAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE

SASESGUC

SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

SE, CR253025

101515

61012

111

112

108

SM

SM

SC

R-1B-1

R-2

R-3

2

3

18

6"AC/16"AB

Artificial Fill (Af); SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, dark yellowishbrown, moist, fine to coarse grained sand with fine gravel

SILTY SAND, dense, grayish brown, moist, fine to mediumgrained sand, SE = 24

SILTY SAND, grayish brown, moist, fine to medium grainedsand

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal); SILTY SAND, medium dense, darkgray, moist, fine to medium grained sand

CLAYEY SAND, medium dense, dark grayish brown, moist, veryfine to fine grained sand

Drilled to 16.5' Sampled to 16.5' Groundwater notencountered Backfilled with Cuttings

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-2-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

91924

5710

468

356

128

109

107

102

SM

SM

CL

R-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

9

8

11

23

3"AC/6"AB

Artificial Fill (Af); SILTY SAND, dark grayish brown, moist, fineto medium grained sand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, very dark grayish brown, moist,fine to medium grained sand

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal); SILTY SAND, loose, moist, fine tomedium grained sand

SILTY SAND, loose, dark grayish brown, moist, fine to mediumgrained sand

Lean CLAY, stiff, very dark grayish brown, moist


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-2-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

MD, SA

DS

81620

81317

152330

81322

91520

114

120

112

120

116

SM

ML

SM

SW

R-1B-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

R-5

7

12

11

12

17

Artificial Fill (Af); Levee Fill: SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, lightbrownish gray, dry to moist, fine to coarse grained sand withgravel and cobble to 8"

SILTY SAND, dark grayish brown, moist, fine to medium grainedsand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, very dark grayish brown, moist,fine to medium grained sand, MD = 133.0 @ 8.0%

SILTY SAND, very dark grayish brown, moist, fine to mediumgrained sand

SANDY SILT, very stiff, dark grayish brown, moist, fine tomedium grained sand

Pauba Formation (Qps); SILTY SAND, dense, dark gray,moist, fine grained sand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, dark grayish brown, moist, fine tocoarse grained sand

Well-graded SAND, medium dense, grayish brown, wet, fine tocoarse grained sand

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 2

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-2-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

82131

R-6 Well-graded SAND, dense, dark grayish brown, wet, fine tocoarse grained sand

Drilled to 31.5' Sampled to 31.5' Groundwater at 24.9'Backfilled with Cuttings

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 2 of 2

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-2-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


30

35

40

45

50

55

60

CR

1098

6911

567

567

5911

105

113

106

114

108

SW-SM

SW

SW-SM

SW

SM

CL

SC-SM

ML

R-1B-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

R-5

5

12

22

20

21

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal); Well-graded SAND with SILT, lightgray, dry to moist, fine to coarse grained sand

Well-graded SAND, light brown, dry to moist, fine to coarsegrained sand

Well-graded SAND with SILT, medium dense, dark grayishbrown to grayish brown, dry to moist, fine to coarse grainedsand

Well-graded SAND, dark grayish brown, moist, fine to coarsegrained sand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, dark grayish brown, moist, fine tomedium grained sand

SANDY Lean CLAY, stiff, very dark grayish brown, moist, veryfine to fine grained sand

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND, loose, dark grayish brown, moist, fine tomedium grained sand

SANDY SILT, stiff, dark grayish brown, moist to wet, very fine tofine grained sand

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 2

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-2-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

71119

SMR-6 SILTY SAND, medium dense, dark grayish brown, moist, veryfine to fine grained sand, no recovery with ring, resample withspt


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 2 of 2

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-2-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


30

35

40

45

50

55

60

7911

225

345

118

91

97

SM

SW-SM

SM

CL

R-1B-1

R-2

R-3

4

29

24

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal); SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, lightbrownish gray, dry to moist, fine to coarse grained sand withgravel to 1"

SILTY SAND, grayish brown, moist, fine to medium grainedsand

Well-graded SAND with SILT, medium dense, grayish brown,moist, fine to coarse grained sand

SILTY SAND, dark grayish brown, moist, fine to coarse grainedsand

Lean CLAY with SAND, medium stiff, very dark grayish brown,moist

SANDY CLAY, medium stiff, dark grayish brown, moist, very finegrained sand


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-2-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

CO

7910

789

71521

119

110

122

GW-GM

SM

R-1

R-2

R-3

13

15

11

Artificial Fill (Af); Well-Graded GRAVEL with SILT and SAND,grayish brown, dry to moist, fine to coarse grained sand

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal); SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, darkyellowish brown, moist, fine to coarse grained sand withgravel to 1"

SILTY SAND, medium dense, very dark grayish brown, moist,fine to coarse grained sand

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, very dark grayish brown, moist, fineto coarse grained sand with fine gravel

SILTY SAND, medium stiff, dark grayish brown, moist, finegrained sand, CO = -0.84%



Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-2-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

CR, SE

CO

101313

567

346

120

93

108

SM

SC

SM

ML

CL

R-1B-1

R-2

R-3

13

26

19

Artificial Fill (Af); SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, dark grayishbrown, moist, fine to coarse grained sand, gravel to 1"

CLAYEY SAND, dark brown, moist, fine to medium grainedsand

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, medium dense, dark grayish brown,moist, fine to coarse grained sand with fine gravel, SE = 9

Quaternary Allvium (Qal); SILT with SAND, moist, very darkgrayish brown, very fine to fine grained sand

SILTY CLAY, stiff, dark grayish brown, moist, fine grained sand,CO = -0.6%

Lean CLAY, stiff, dark grayish brown, moist


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

9-18-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

SA

EI

101417

678

456

667

113

118

107

SM

ML

SM

R-1

R-2B-1

R-3

R-4

17

17

19

Artificial Fill (Af); SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, light brownishgray, dry to moist, fine to coarse grained sand with gravel andcobble to 5"

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, grayish brown, moist, fine to coarsegrained sand with fine gravel

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal); SILT with SAND, stiff, dark grayishbrown, moist, very fine to fine grained sand

SILT with SAND, stiff, dark brown, moist, very fine to finegrained sand, EI = 43

SANDY SILT, stiff, very dark brown, moist, fine to mediumgrained sand

SILTY SAND, loose, very dark brown, moist to wet, fine grainedsand, no recovery, resample with spt


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

9-18-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

SE2250

252840

243850

254050

111

111

SM

SM

SW-SM

SW

R-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

7

4

7"AC/8"AB

Artificial Fill (Af);; SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, olive gray,moist, fine to coarse grained sand with gravel and cobble to8", moved hole from large rock

Pauba Formation (Qps); SILTY SAND, gray, moist, fine tocoarse grained sand

SILTY SAND, dense, gray, moist, fine to coarse grained sand,SE = 38

SILTY SAND, dense, dark yellowish brown, moist, fine to coarsegrained sand

Well-graded SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, dense, light brown,moist, fine to coarse grained sand with fine gravel

Well-graded SAND with GRAVEL, dense, light brown, dry tomoist, fine to coarse grained sand with fine gravel


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

9-18-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

CR, SE,SA

152534

254043

3050

104

111

SM

SP-SM

SM

SW-SM

SW

R-1B-1

R-2

R-3

3

11

6"AC/12"AB

Artificial Fill (Af); SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, pale brown,moist, fine to coarse grained sand with gravel to 1"

Pauba Formation (Qps); Poorly graded SAND with SILT, lightbrownish gray, moist, fine grained sand

SILTY SAND, dense, light gray, dry to moist, fine grained sand,SE = 20

SILTY SAND, light olive gray, moist, fine grained sand

Well-graded SAND with SILT, dense, brown to olive gray, moist,fine to coarse grained sand

Well-graded SAND, dense, brown, moist, fine to coarse grainedsand

Drilled to 16' Sampled to 16' Groundwater not encounteredBackfilled with Cuttings

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

9-18-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

253336

203044

2933

50/4"

108

108

SM

SP-SM

SM

SW

SM

R-1B-1

R-2

R-3

3

8

5.5"AC/9.5"AB

Pauba Formation (Qps); SILTY SAND, olive gray, moist, fineto coarse grained sand

Poorly graded SAND with silt, dense, light gray, dry to moist, finegrained sand

SILTY SAND, olive gray, moist, fine to medium grained sand

Well-graded SAND, dense, dark yellowish brown, moist, fine tomedium grained sand

SILTY SAND, dense, olive, moist, fine to medium grained sand


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

9-18-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

102236

183650

223545

222527

114

115

SM

SM

SW-SM

SM

R-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

16

8

5"AC/16"AB

Artificial Fill (Af); SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, dark yellowishbrown, moist, fine to coarse grained sand with gravel to 1"

Pauba Formation (Qps); SILTY SAND, dark yellowish brown,moist, fine to coarse grained sand



Well-graded SAND with SILT, dense, brown, dry to moist, fine tocoarse grained sand

SILTY SAND, dense, dark gray, moist, fine to medium grainedsand


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

9-18-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

CR, SE,SA

152738

151830

81532

127

122

SM

SMR-1B-1

R-2

R-3

10

7

4.5"ACArtificial Fill (Af); SILTY SAND, brown, moist, fine to coarse

grained sand

SILTY SAND, dark brown, moist, very fine to fine grained sand,SE = 9

Pauba Formation (Qps); SILTY SAND, dense, dark yellowishbrown, moist, fine to medium grained sand

SILTY SAND, dark grayish brown, moist, very fine to finegrained sand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, dark yellowish brown, moist, fineto medium grained sand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, dark gray, moist, fine grainedsand


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

9-18-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

121715

81216

112630

292622

121

110

CL

SM

SP-SM

SM

SW-SC

R-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

9

7

3.5"AC/8"AB

Artificial Fill (Af); SANDY Lean CLAY, dark yellowish brown,moist, fine to coarse grained sand

Pauba Formation (Qps); SILTY SAND, medium dense, brown,moist, fine to coarse grained sand

Poorly graded SAND with SILT, medium dense, dark yellowishbrown to dark grayish brown, moist, fine grained sand

SILTY SAND, dark yellowish brown, moist, fine to mediumgrained sand

SILTY SAND, dense, dark yellowish brown to olive brown, moist,fine to medium grained sand

Well-graded SAND with CLAY (or SILTY CLAY), medium dense,reddish brown, moist, fine to coarse grained sand


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-3-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1630

50/5"

7710

678

105

106

114

SM

SC

SW

SC-SM

R-1B-1

R-2

R-3

11

15

14

Artificial Fill (Af); SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, brown, dry tomoist, fine to coarse grained sand with gravel to 1"

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, brown, moist, coarse grained sandto fine gravel

SILTY SAND, dense, dark grayish brown, moist, very fine to finegrained sand

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal); SILTY SAND, very dark grayishbrown, moist, fine to medium grained sand

Well-graded SAND, medium dense, light brownish gray, dry tomoist, fine to coarse grained sand

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND, loose, dark gray, moist, fine to mediumgrained sand


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-3-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

101620

81417

61015

91826

81313

117

114

109

SM

SC-SM

CL

SM

R-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

R-5

10

16

19

Quaternary Allvium (Qal); SILTY SAND with GRACVEL,brown, dry to moist, fine to coarse grained sand with gravel to1"

SILTY SAND, medium dense, dark grayish brown, moist, veryfine to fine grained sand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, dark grayish brown, moist, fine tocoarse grained sand

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND, medium dense, very dark grayishbrown, moist, very fine grained sand

GRAVELLY lean CLAY with SAND, hard, very dark grayishbrown, moist, very fine to fine grained sand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, dark grayish brown, moist, finegrained sand


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-3-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

SE, CR71318

61214

102123

120

116

SM

SC-SM

SC

SM

R-1B-1

R-2

R-3

13

15

Artificial Fill (Af); SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, brown, dry tomoist, fine to coarse grained sand with gravel to 1"

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND, dark brown, moist, fine to mediumgrained sand

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND, medium dense, dark brown, moist, fineto medium grained sand, SE = 10

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND, dark brown, moist, fine to mediumgrained sand

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal); CLAYEY SAND, medium dense,light brown, moist, fine to coarse grained sand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, dark grayish brown, moist to wet,fine grained sand


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-3-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

101521

127

GW

SM

SC-SM

SM

R-1 10

Artificial Fill (Af); Well-graded GRAVEL with SAND, dry, gray,fine to coarse grained sand

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL, dark brown, moist, fine to coarsegrained sand with fine gravel

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND, medium dense, dark brown, moist, fineto coarse grained sand with fine gravel

SILTY SAND, dark brown, moist, fine to medium grained sand

Hole terminated at 8' due to soft refusal on unknown objectGroundwater not encountered Backfilled with Cuttings

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

10-3-14

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

SA

SA

131113

4711

467

101214

61218

91115

192224

118

116

108

116

114

SW

SW-SM

SM

SP-SM

SM

ML

SM/ML

B-1

R-1

R-2B-2

R-3

R-4

R-5

R-6

R-7

10

13

19

17

18

Artificial Fill (Af); Well-graded SAND with GRAVEL, light gray,dry to moist, fine to coarse grained sand with gravel andcobble to 2"

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal); Well-graded SAND with SILT, verydark grayish brown, moist, fine to coarse grained sand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, very dark grayish brown, moist,fine to coarse grained sand

Poorly graded SAND with SILT, dark grayish brown, moist, finegrained sand


SANDY SILT, stiff, dark grayish brown, moist, fine grained sand

SILTY SAND to SANDY SILT, medium dense, dark grayishbrown, moist, fine to medium grained sand, trace clay

SILTY SAND to SANDY SILT, medium dense, dark grayishbrown, wet, fine to medium grained sand

SILTY SAND to SANDY SILT, medium dense, dark grayishbrown, moist to wet, fine to medium grained sand, trace clay

SILTY SAND to SANDY SILT, medium dense, dark grayishbrown, moist to wet, fine to medium grained sand

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 2

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

2-15-16

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.002

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

101626

192328

121 SM/MLR-8

R-9

14 SILTY SAND to SANDY SILT, medium dense, dark grayishbrown, moist to wet, fine to medium grained sand, trace finegravel

SILTY SAND to SANDY SILT, dense, dark grayish brown, moistto wet, fine to medium grained sand, no recovery, resamplewith SPT, trace clay


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 2 of 2

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

2-15-16

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.002

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


30

35

40

45

50

55

60

SA

CR

SA

5810

101111

534

111415

111418

111922

162020

98

101

114

114

122

SW-SM

SM

SM

SW

SP-SM

SW

SW-SM

B-1

R-1

R-2B-2

R-3

R-4

R-5

R-6

R-7

4

4

16

15

11

Artificial Fill (Af); Well-graded SAND with SILT and GRAVEL,light brownish gray, dry to moist, fine to coarse grained sandwith gravel to 3"

Well-graded SAND, light brownish gray, dry to moist, fine tocoarse grained sand

Well-graded SAND, medium dense, light brownish gray, moist,fine to coarse grained sand

Well-graded SAND, light brownish gray, moist, fine to coarsegrained sand

SILTY SAND with gravel, medium dense, light brownish gray,moist, fine to coarse grained sand, with gravel to 1"

Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)

SILTY SAND, loose, dark grayish brown, moist to wet, fine tocoarse grained sand

Well-graded SAND, medium dense, grayish brown, wet, fine tocoarse grained sand

SILTY SAND, medium dense, dark grayish brown, moist to wet,fine to medium grained sand

Well-graded SAND, medium dense, grayish brown, moist to wet,fine to coarse grained sand

Well-graded SAND with SILT, medium dense, dark grayishbrown, moist to wet, fine to coarse grained sand

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 2

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

2-15-16

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.002

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

192627

193150

SWR-8

R-9

Well-graded SAND, dense, grayish brown, wet, fine to coarsegrained sand

Well-graded SAND with GRAVEL, dense, grayish brown, wet,fine to coarse grained sand with fine gravel

Drilled to 36.5' Sampled to 36.5' Groundwater at 22.4' at timeof drilling, at 21.7' on 02/16/16 Backfilled with Cuttings

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 2 of 2

'


BCGRST

JTD


So

il C

lass

.

2-15-16

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


10807.002

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

2-R Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

JTD

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


30

35

40

45

50

55

60

DS8

8

9

SC

SW

SP-SM

ML

R-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

121

125

116

101318

91521

112035

81827

4.5'' Asphalt over 18'' base

PAUBA FORMATIONCLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, medium dense, dark grayish

brown, moist, fine to medium sand,trace gravel

Well-graded SAND, dense, light yellowish brown, moist to wet, fineto coarse sand

SILTY SAND, dense, olive brown, moist, fine sand

SILTY with SAND, very stiff, pale brown, moist, trace fine sand

Drilled to 15'Sampled to 16.5'Groundwater not encounteredBackfilled with soil cuttings and concrete on top (3/15/10 @ 11:28)

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

BSS

Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Auto Hammer - 30" Drop

So

il C

lass

.

3-15-10

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4

RCWD Winchester Road

602823-001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%

GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG BB-4

Logged By

Date Drilled

BSS

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


SE, MD,-200

4

7

18

SM-ML

SP-SM

ML

B-1

R-1

R-2

R-3

110

123

114

132036

102345

1528

50-5''

5.5'' Asphalt over 12'' base

SANDY SILT, medium stiff, dark yellowish brown, moist, very fineto fine sand, trace gravel, trace clay

PAUBA FORMATIONSILTY SAND, dense, olive brown, moist, fine sand

dense, reddish brown, moist, fine to medium sand, some oxidation

very dense, light olive brown, moist to wet, medium to coarse sandSANDY SILT, very stiff, dark gray, moist to wet, fine sand, some

coarse sandDrilled to 15'Sampled to 16.5'Groundwater not encounteredBackfilled with soil cuttings and concrete on top (3/15/10 @ 12:09)

Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

BSS


So

il C

lass

.

3-15-10

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


602823-001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

BSS

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


18

16

12

ML

SM

R-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

114

114

123

82224

91118

111728

73742

6'' Asphalt over 12'' base

CLAYEY SILTY, very stiff, dark gray, moist, low plasticity

very stiff, dark grayish brown, moist, trace fine to medium

PAUBA FORMATIONSILTY SAND, dense, light brown, moist to wet, fine to coarse sand

very dense, olive brown, moist to wet, fine to medium sand, traceoxidation, becomes more silty at the bottom of sample


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

BSS


So

il C

lass

.

3-15-10

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


602823-001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

BSS

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC


SA, EI,CR

14

14

8

ML

SM

R-1B-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

117

118

120

422

81011

2250-4''

2737

50-5''

6'' Asphalt over 7'' base

CLAYEY SILT, soft, dark gray, moist to wet, trace fine sand

stiff, dark grayish brown, moist, fine to medium sand, trace coarsesand

PAUBA FORMATION

SILTY SAND, dense, light brown, moist fine to coarse sand, tracegravel

SILTY SAND, dense, light brown, moist fine to coarse sand, tracegravel


Hole Diameter

Mo

istu

re

Ground Elevation

Dep

th

Blo

ws

Ele

vati

on

Per

6 In

ches

Page 1 of 1

'


BCGRST

BSS


So

il C

lass

.

3-15-10

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Sampled By


Project No.

See Figure 4


602823-001

Drilling Method8"

Sam

ple

No

.

Fee

t

Att

itu

des

SAMPLE TYPES:

Martini Drilling


Co

nte

nt,

%


Logged By

Date Drilled

BSS

Fee

t

S

(U.S

.C.S

.)

Lo

g

Typ

e o

f T

ests

Gra

ph

ic

pcf

Location

Dry

Den

sity

N




DSEIHMDPPRV


SASESGUC



APPENDIX B

Results of Laboratory Testing

3.0

"

1 1

/2"

3/4

"

3/8

"

#

4

#8

#

16

#

30

#50

#

100

#

200

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE O

PEN

ING

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE N

UM

BER

GRAVEL

FIN

ES

FIN

ECLAY

CO

ARSE

CO

ARSE

MED

IUM

10807.0

01

SAN

DSIL

T

F

INE

HYD

RO

METER

KJ/

EM

WD

TVRW

Pip

elin

e G

eo E

xplo

ration

Pro

ject

No.:

LB-4

Sam

ple

No.:

Soil

Type :

PA

RTI

CLE

- S

IZE

DIS

TRIB

UTI

ON

A

STM

D 6

913

Soil

Identifica

tion:

Silt

y S

and (

SM

), b

row

n.

SM

GR

:SA

:FI

: (%

)

Explo

ration N

o.:

Depth

(fe

et)

:5.0

- 1

0.0

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

B-1

Oct

-14

0:

67:

33

0102030405060708090100

0.00

10.

010

0.10

01.

000

10.0

0010

0.00

0

PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

PAR

TIC

LE -

SIZE

(mm

)

"

Sie

ve; L

B-4

, B-1

(10-

2-14

TH

RU

10-

3-14

)

R-1

Feb-1

60

:2

6:

74

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

PA

RT

ICLE

- S

IZE

DIS

TR

IBU

TIO

N

AS

TM

D 6

91

3

Soil

Identifica

tion:

Silt

with S

and (

ML)s

, bro

wn.

(ML)s

GR

:SA

:FI

: (%

)

Explo

ration N

o.:

Depth

(fe

et)

:5.0

SAN

DSIL

T

F

INE

HYD

RO

METER

KJ/

EM

WD

TVRW

Pip

elin

e

Pro

ject

No.:

LB-9

Sam

ple

No.:

Soil

Type :

10807.0

02

3.0

"

1 1

/2"

3/4

"

3/8

"

#

4

#8

#

16

#

30

#50

#

100

#

200

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE O

PEN

ING

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE N

UM

BER

GRAVEL

FIN

ES

FIN

ECLAY

CO

ARSE

CO

ARSE

MED

IUM

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0

01

0.0

10

0.1

00

1.0

00

10.0

00

100

.000


PA

RT

ICL

E -

SIZ

E (

mm

)

"

Sie

ve

; L

B-9

, R

1 (

10

-2-1

4)

3.0

"

1 1

/2"

3/4

"

3/8

"

#

4

#8

#

16

#

30

#50

#

100

#

200

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE O

PEN

ING

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE N

UM

BER

GRAVEL

FIN

ES

FIN

ECLAY

CO

ARSE

CO

ARSE

MED

IUM

10807.0

01

SAN

DSIL

T

F

INE

HYD

RO

METER

KJ/

EM

WD

TVRW

Pip

elin

e G

eo E

xplo

ration

Pro

ject

No.:

LB-1

1Sam

ple

No.:

Soil

Type :

PA

RTI

CLE

- S

IZE

DIS

TRIB

UTI

ON

A

STM

D 6

913

Soil

Identifica

tion:

Silt

y S

and (

SM

), lig

ht

bro

wn.

SM

GR

:SA

:FI

: (%

)

Explo

ration N

o.:

Depth

(fe

et)

:5.0

- 1

0.0

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

B-1

Oct

-14

0:

80:

20

0102030405060708090100

0.00

10.

010

0.10

01.

000

10.0

0010

0.00

0


PAR

TIC

LE -

SIZE

(mm

)

"

Sie

ve; L

B-1

1, B

-1 (9

-18-

14)

3.0

"

1 1

/2"

3/4

"

3/8

"

#

4

#8

#

16

#

30

#50

#

100

#

200

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE O

PEN

ING

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE N

UM

BER

GRAVEL

FIN

ES

FIN

ECLAY

CO

ARSE

CO

ARSE

MED

IUM

10807.0

02

SAN

DSIL

T

F

INE

HYD

RO

METER

KJ/

EM

WD

TVRW

Pip

elin

e

Pro

ject

No.:

LB-2

0Sam

ple

No.:

Soil

Type :

PA

RT

ICLE

- S

IZE

DIS

TR

IBU

TIO

N

AS

TM

D 6

91

3

Soil

Identifica

tion:

Silt

y S

and (

SM

), b

row

n.

SM

GR

:SA

:FI

: (%

)

Explo

ration N

o.:

Depth

(fe

et)

:10.0

- 1

5.0

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

B-2

Feb-1

61

:6

1:

38

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0

01

0.0

10

0.1

00

1.0

00

10.0

00

100

.000


PA

RT

ICL

E -

SIZ

E (

mm

)

"

Sie

ve

; L

B-2

0,

B-2

(2

-15

-16

)

R-4

Feb-1

60

:4

9:

51

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

PA

RT

ICLE

- S

IZE

DIS

TR

IBU

TIO

N

AS

TM

D 6

91

3

Soil

Identifica

tion:

Sandy S

ilt s

(ML),

bro

wn.

s(M

L)

GR

:SA

:FI

: (%

)

Explo

ration N

o.:

Depth

(fe

et)

:20.0

SAN

DSIL

T

F

INE

HYD

RO

METER

KJ/

EM

WD

TVRW

Pip

elin

e

Pro

ject

No.:

LB-2

0Sam

ple

No.:

Soil

Type :

10807.0

02

3.0

"

1 1

/2"

3/4

"

3/8

"

#

4

#8

#

16

#

30

#50

#

100

#

200

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE O

PEN

ING

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE N

UM

BER

GRAVEL

FIN

ES

FIN

ECLAY

CO

ARSE

CO

ARSE

MED

IUM

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0

01

0.0

10

0.1

00

1.0

00

10.0

00

100

.000


PA

RT

ICL

E -

SIZ

E (

mm

)

"

Sie

ve

; L

B-2

0,

R-4

(2

-15

-16

)

3.0

"

1 1

/2"

3/4

"

3/8

"

#

4

#8

#

16

#

30

#50

#

100

#

200

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE O

PEN

ING

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE N

UM

BER

GRAVEL

FIN

ES

FIN

ECLAY

CO

ARSE

CO

ARSE

MED

IUM

10807.0

02

SAN

DSIL

T

F

INE

HYD

RO

METER

KJ/

EM

WD

TVRW

Pip

elin

e

Pro

ject

No.:

LB-2

1Sam

ple

No.:

Soil

Type :

PA

RT

ICLE

- S

IZE

DIS

TR

IBU

TIO

N

AS

TM

D 6

91

3

Soil

Identifica

tion:

Poorly-G

raded S

and (

SP),

bro

wn.S

P

GR

:SA

:FI

: (%

)

Explo

ration N

o.:

Depth

(fe

et)

:0 -

5.0

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

B-1

Feb-1

61

4:

82

:4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0

01

0.0

10

0.1

00

1.0

00

10.0

00

100

.000


PA

RT

ICL

E -

SIZ

E (

mm

)

"

Sie

ve

; L

B-2

1,

B-1

(2

-15

-16

)

R-7

Feb-1

61

8:

72

:1

0

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

PA

RT

ICLE

- S

IZE

DIS

TR

IBU

TIO

N

AS

TM

D 6

91

3

Soil

Identifica

tion:

Well-

Gra

ded S

and w

ith S

ilt (

SW

-SM

), b

row

n.

SW

-SM

GR

:SA

:FI

: (%

)

Explo

ration N

o.:

Depth

(fe

et)

:27.5

SAN

DSIL

T

F

INE

HYD

RO

METER

KJ/

EM

WD

TVRW

Pip

elin

e

Pro

ject

No.:

LB-2

1Sam

ple

No.:

Soil

Type :

10807.0

02

3.0

"

1 1

/2"

3/4

"

3/8

"

#

4

#8

#

16

#

30

#50

#

100

#

200

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE O

PEN

ING

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE N

UM

BER

GRAVEL

FIN

ES

FIN

ECLAY

CO

ARSE

CO

ARSE

MED

IUM

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0

01

0.0

10

0.1

00

1.0

00

10.0

00

100

.000


PA

RT

ICL

E -

SIZ

E (

mm

)

"

Sie

ve

; L

B-2

1,

R-7

(2

-15

-16

)

R-2

Feb-1

62

:7

7:

21

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

PA

RT

ICLE

- S

IZE

DIS

TR

IBU

TIO

N

AS

TM

D 6

91

3

Soil

Identifica

tion:

Silt

y S

and (

SM

), b

row

n.

SM

GR

:SA

:FI

: (%

)

Explo

ration N

o.:

Depth

(fe

et)

:10.0

SAN

DSIL

T

F

INE

HYD

RO

METER

KJ/

EM

WD

TVRW

Pip

elin

e

Pro

ject

No.:

LB-2

Sam

ple

No.:

Soil

Type :

10807.0

02

3.0

"

1 1

/2"

3/4

"

3/8

"

#

4

#8

#

16

#

30

#50

#

100

#

200

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE O

PEN

ING

U.S

. STAN

DARD

SIE

VE N

UM

BER

GRAVEL

FIN

ES

FIN

ECLAY

CO

ARSE

CO

ARSE

MED

IUM

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0

01

0.0

10

0.1

00

1.0

00

10.0

00

100

.000


PA

RT

ICL

E -

SIZ

E (

mm

)

"

Sie

ve

; L

B-2

, R

-2 (

10

-2-1

4)

Soil Type LL,PL,PI

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER3.0" 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #20

GR:SA:FI

GRAVEL SAND FINES COARSE FINE CRSE MEDIUM FINE SILT / CLAY

**

Rev. 08-04

PARTICLE - SIZE CURVEASTM D 422

RCWD WINCHESTER ROAD

s(ML) 60

Project No.:bb

BB-7 3.0

Boring No.: Sample No.:

B-1

Visual Sample Description:

Depth (ft.):

SANDY SILT s(ML), with trace gravel, light brown.

39

602823-001

1 ** **

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0100.1001.00010.000100.000PARTICLE - SIZE (mm)

PER

CEN

T FI

NER

BY

WEI

GH

T

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Liquid Limit (LL)

Plas

ticity

Inde

x (P

I)CL - ML

MH or OH

ML or OL

CL or OL

For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained soils

74

CH or OH

::

"A" Line

: : ::

Sieve; LB-7, B-1

Project Name: Tested By: MRV Date: 10/7/14Project No. : Checked By: JHW Date: 10/9/14Boring No.: Depth (ft.) 7.5Sample No. : Location:Sample Description:

Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.)Wt. of Container No. (gm.)Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.)Weight Soil Retained on #4 SievePercent Passing # 4

in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.

Rev. 03-08

0.543010/8/14

0

880

Expansion Index (EI meas) = ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000

5:30940 0.5430

43.4

1.0

43 Expansion Index ( Report ) = Nearest Whole Number or Zero (0) if Initial Height is > than Final Height

Add Distilled Water to the Specimen

Wt. of Container (gm.)

107.1

0.500010 0.4996

10/8/14 6:301.01.0

14:50 1.010/7/1410/7/14

107.3

Moisture Content (%)

Date

14:40

Void Ratio

Pore Volume (cc) Degree of Saturation (%) [ S meas]

119.1

Time

After TestBefore Test

Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.)5

0.639Dry Density (pcf)Wet Density (pcf)

Specific Gravity (Assumed)

Specimen Height (in.)

Wt. of Mold (gm.)

99.7

4.01

2.70

980.60.0

595.4

980.62.5

1.0430634.6

EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS ASTM D 4829

**

KJ/EMWD TVRW Pipeline Geo Exploration10807.001LB-9R-2/B-1Silt with Trace Gravel (ML), dark brown.

MOLDED SPECIMEN

4.011.0000

5Container No.

Specimen Diameter (in.)

Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold (gm.)200.62.70

355.7200.622.0

0.39084.2

200.6

634.6

130.7

Elapsed Time (min.)

Dial Readings (in.)

93.152.0

Pressure (psi)

0.364Total Porosity

SPECIMEN INUNDATION

75.3

Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.)

11.0

339.3309.6

0.571

39.3

Normal Stress (kip/ft²)

Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²)

Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)

Sample Type: Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.)

Initial Sample Height (in.)

Diameter (in.)

Initial Moisture Content (%)

Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf)

C (psf) (o) Saturation (%)

Peak 723.0 34.9 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.)

Ultimate 273.0 31.8 Final Moisture Content (%)

2.000

Sandy Silt s(ML), dark olive

gray

Boring No.Sample No.Depth (ft)

LB-4R-210

2.342

1.525

66.9

11.57

114.9

0.0500

4.000

3.436

2.745

0.0500

70.7

0.9818

11.57

15.1

1.000

2.415

0.9911

17.1

116.9

1.000

2.415

DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Undrained

1.000

1.270

0.883

0.0500

11.57

111.9

2.415

Soil Identification:

10-14

Project No.: 10807.001

61.7

0.9945

1.000

18.3

KJ/EMWD TVRW Pipeline Geo Exploration

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

She

ar S

tress

(ksf

)

Horizontal Deformation (in.)

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0

She

ar S

tress

(ksf

)

Normal Stress (ksf)

Direct Shear LB-4, R-2 (10-2-14 thru 10-3-14)

Pro

ject

Nam

e:M

RV

Dat

e:

Pro

ject

No.

:M

RV

Dat

e:

Clie

nt:

JHW

Dat

e:

240

228

#DIV

/0!

2350

12:0

012

:10

12:1

212

:32

12.1

2.9

2412

:02

12:1

212

:14

12:3

412

.32.

823

#RE

F!#R

EF!

#RE

F!#R

EF!

T1 =

Sta

rting

Tim

eT3

= S

ettle

men

t Sta

rting

Tim

eS

and

Equ

ival

ent =

R2

/ R1

* 10

0

T2 =

( T1

+ 1

0 m

in) B

egin

Agi

tatio

nT4

= (

T3 +

20

min

) Tak

e C

lay

Rea

ding

(R1)

Rec

ord

SE

as

Nex

t Hig

her I

nteg

er

R2

24

SA

ND

EQ

UIV

AL

EN

T T

EST

A

STM

D 2

419

/ DO

T C

A T

est 2

17

10/1

1/14

T1T2

T3T4

Bor

ing

No.

10/1

1/14

10/1

4/14

Test

ed B

y:

Com

pute

d B

y:

Che

cked

By:

Dep

th (f

t.)A

vera

ge

S

ES

oil D

escr

iptio

nS

ER

1

LB-2

B-1

5.0

- 10.

0S

M

1080

7.00

1

KJ/

EM

WD

TV

RW

Pip

elin

e G

eo E

xplo

ratio

n

Ken

nedy

/Jen

ks C

onsu

ltant

s, In

c.

Sam

ple

No.

San

d E

quiv

alen

t; LB

-2, B

-1 (1

0-2-

14 T

HR

U 1

0-3-

14)

Pro

ject

Nam

e:FL

MD

ate:

Pro

ject

No.

:FL

MD

ate:

Clie

nt:

JHW

Dat

e:

74

90

#DIV

/0!

850

11:5

012

:00

12:0

212

:22

13.6

1.0

811

:52

12:0

212

:04

12:2

413

.41.

29

#RE

F!#R

EF!

#RE

F!#R

EF!

T1 =

Sta

rting

Tim

eT3

= S

ettle

men

t Sta

rting

Tim

eS

and

Equ

ival

ent =

R2

/ R1

* 10

0

T2 =

( T1

+ 1

0 m

in) B

egin

Agi

tatio

nT4

= (

T3 +

20

min

) Tak

e C

lay

Rea

ding

(R1)

Rec

ord

SE

as

Nex

t Hig

her I

nteg

er

R2

9

SA

ND

EQ

UIV

AL

EN

T T

EST

A

STM

D 2

419

/ DO

T C

A T

est 2

17

9/25

/14

T1T2

T3T4

Bor

ing

No.

9/25

/14

10/9

/14

Test

ed B

y:

Com

pute

d B

y:

Che

cked

By:

Dep

th (f

t.)A

vera

ge

S

ES

oil D

escr

iptio

nS

ER

1

LB-8

B-1

5.0

- 10.

0S

C

1080

7.00

1

KJ/

EM

WD

TV

RW

Pip

elin

e G

eo E

xplo

ratio

n

Ken

nedy

/Jen

ks C

onsu

ltant

s, In

c.

Sam

ple

No.

San

d E

quiv

alen

t; LB

-8, B

-1 (9

-18-

14)

Pro

ject

Nam

e:M

RV

Dat

e:

Pro

ject

No.

:M

RV

Dat

e:

Clie

nt:

JHW

Dat

e:

379

367

#DIV

/0!

3750

08:3

008

:40

08:4

209

:02

6.6

2.5

3808

:32

08:4

208

:44

09:0

46.

02.

237

#RE

F!#R

EF!

#RE

F!#R

EF!

T1 =

Sta

rting

Tim

eT3

= S

ettle

men

t Sta

rting

Tim

eS

and

Equ

ival

ent =

R2

/ R1

* 10

0

T2 =

( T1

+ 1

0 m

in) B

egin

Agi

tatio

nT4

= (

T3 +

20

min

) Tak

e C

lay

Rea

ding

(R1)

Rec

ord

SE

as

Nex

t Hig

her I

nteg

er

R2

38

SA

ND

EQ

UIV

AL

EN

T T

EST

A

STM

D 2

419

/ DO

T C

A T

est 2

17

10/7

/14

T1T2

T3T4

Bor

ing

No.

10/7

/14

10/9

/14

Test

ed B

y:

Com

pute

d B

y:

Che

cked

By:

Dep

th (f

t.)A

vera

ge

S

ES

oil D

escr

iptio

nS

ER

1

LB-1

0R

-15.

0S

M

1080

7.00

1

KJ/

EM

WD

TV

RW

Pip

elin

e G

eo E

xplo

ratio

n

Ken

nedy

/Jen

ks C

onsu

ltant

s, In

c.

Sam

ple

No.

San

d E

quiv

alen

t; LB

-10,

R-1

(9-1

8-14

)

Pro

ject

Nam

e:FL

MD

ate:

Pro

ject

No.

:FL

MD

ate:

Clie

nt:

JHW

Dat

e:

193

190

#DIV

/0!

1950

12:5

413

:04

13:0

613

:26

10.9

2.1

2012

:56

13:0

613

:08

13:2

811

.62.

219

#RE

F!#R

EF!

#RE

F!#R

EF!

T1 =

Sta

rting

Tim

eT3

= S

ettle

men

t Sta

rting

Tim

eS

and

Equ

ival

ent =

R2

/ R1

* 10

0

T2 =

( T1

+ 1

0 m

in) B

egin

Agi

tatio

nT4

= (

T3 +

20

min

) Tak

e C

lay

Rea

ding

(R1)

Rec

ord

SE

as

Nex

t Hig

her I

nteg

er

LB-1

1B

-15.

0 - 1

0.0

SM

1080

7.00

1

KJ/

EM

WD

TV

RW

Pip

elin

e G

eo E

xplo

ratio

n

Ken

nedy

/Jen

ks C

onsu

ltant

s, In

c.

Sam

ple

No.

9/25

/14

10/9

/14

Test

ed B

y:

Com

pute

d B

y:

Che

cked

By:

Dep

th (f

t.)A

vera

ge

S

ES

oil D

escr

iptio

nS

ER

1R

2

20

SA

ND

EQ

UIV

AL

EN

T T

EST

A

STM

D 2

419

/ DO

T C

A T

est 2

17

9/25

/14

T1T2

T3T4

Bor

ing

No.

San

d E

quiv

alen

t; LB

-11,

B-1

(9-1

8-14

)

Pro

ject

Nam

e:FL

MD

ate:

Pro

ject

No.

:FL

MD

ate:

Clie

nt:

JHW

Dat

e:

84

75

#DIV

/0!

850

13:0

013

:10

13:1

213

:32

13.1

1.1

913

:02

13:1

213

:14

13:3

413

.41.

08

#RE

F!#R

EF!

#RE

F!#R

EF!

T1 =

Sta

rting

Tim

eT3

= S

ettle

men

t Sta

rting

Tim

eS

and

Equ

ival

ent =

R2

/ R1

* 10

0

T2 =

( T1

+ 1

0 m

in) B

egin

Agi

tatio

nT4

= (

T3 +

20

min

) Tak

e C

lay

Rea

ding

(R1)

Rec

ord

SE

as

Nex

t Hig

her I

nteg

er

LB-1

4B

-15.

0 - 1

0.0

SC

1080

7.00

1

KJ/

EM

WD

TV

RW

Pip

elin

e G

eo E

xplo

ratio

n

Ken

nedy

/Jen

ks C

onsu

ltant

s, In

c.

Sam

ple

No.

9/25

/14

10/9

/14

Test

ed B

y:

Com

pute

d B

y:

Che

cked

By:

Dep

th (f

t.)A

vera

ge

S

ES

oil D

escr

iptio

nS

ER

1R

2

9

SA

ND

EQ

UIV

AL

EN

T T

EST

A

STM

D 2

419

/ DO

T C

A T

est 2

17

9/25

/14

T1T2

T3T4

Bor

ing

No.

San

d E

quiv

alen

t; LB

-14,

B-1

(9-1

8-14

)

Pro

ject

Nam

e:M

RV

Dat

e:

Pro

ject

No.

:M

RV

Dat

e:

Clie

nt:

JHW

Dat

e:

85

99

#DIV

/0!

950

12:0

412

:14

12:1

612

:36

11.7

1.0

912

:06

12:1

612

:18

12:3

812

.11.

210

#RE

F!#R

EF!

#RE

F!#R

EF!

T1 =

Sta

rting

Tim

eT3

= S

ettle

men

t Sta

rting

Tim

eS

and

Equ

ival

ent =

R2

/ R1

* 10

0

T2 =

( T1

+ 1

0 m

in) B

egin

Agi

tatio

nT4

= (

T3 +

20

min

) Tak

e C

lay

Rea

ding

(R1)

Rec

ord

SE

as

Nex

t Hig

her I

nteg

er

LB-1

8B

-15.

0 - 1

0.0

SC

-SM

1080

7.00

1

KJ/

EM

WD

TV

RW

Pip

elin

e G

eo E

xplo

ratio

n

Ken

nedy

/Jen

ks C

onsu

ltant

s, In

c.

Sam

ple

No.

10/1

1/14

10/1

4/14

Test

ed B

y:

Com

pute

d B

y:

Che

cked

By:

Dep

th (f

t.)A

vera

ge

S

ES

oil D

escr

iptio

nS

ER

1R

2

10

SA

ND

EQ

UIV

AL

EN

T T

EST

A

STM

D 2

419

/ DO

T C

A T

est 2

17

10/1

1/14

T1T2

T3T4

Bor

ing

No.

San

d E

quiv

alen

t; LB

-18,

B-1

(10-

2-14

TH

RU

10-

3-14

)

Tested By : FLM Date: 10/7/14

Input By : MRV Date: 10/14/14

Depth (ft.) 5.0 - 10.0

X Moist Mechanical Ram

Dry Manual Ram

Mold Volume (ft³) 0.03320 Ram Weight = 10 lb.; Drop = 18 in.

0 50 100 150

1 2 3 4 5 6

6182 6312 6357 6291

4193 4193 4193 4193 AS REC'D

1989 2119 2164 2098 MOISTURE

1416.6 1582.0 1377.2 1373.4 943.1

1370.0 1505.9 1298.0 1278.6 917.2

420.6 418.5 419.7 420.7 415.0

4.9 7.0 9.0 11.1 5.2

132.1 140.7 143.7 139.3

125.9 131.5 131.8 125.5

133.0 8.0

PROCEDURE USED

X Procedure ASoil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve

Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter

Layers : 5 (Five)

Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five)

May be used if +#4 is 20% or less

Procedure BSoil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve


Layers : 5 (Five)


Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is

20% or less

Procedure CSoil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve


Layers : 5 (Five)

Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six)

Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +¾ in.

is <30%

Particle-Size Distribution:0:67:33GR:SA:FI

Atterberg Limits:

LL,PL,PI

Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)

Weight of Container (g)

Weight of Mold (g)

Net Weight of Soil (g)

Optimum Moisture Content (%) Maximum Dry Density (pcf)

Dry Density (pcf)


TEST NO.

Wet Density (pcf)

Moisture Added (ml)

Silty Sand (SM), brown.

B-1

Preparation Method:


Sample No. :

Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g)

Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)

MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557

Project No.:

Boring No.:

KJ/EMWD TVRW Pipeline Geo ExplorationProject Name:

10807.001

LB-4

110.0

115.0

120.0

125.0

130.0

135.0

140.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)


SP. GR. = 2.65SP. GR. = 2.70SP. GR. = 2.75

XX

Compaction A; LB-4, B-1 (10-2-14 THRU 10-3-14)

Tested By : JRH Date: 3/18/10

Input By : JMB Date: 3-19-10

Depth (ft.) 1.5

X Moist Mechanical Ram

Dry Manual Ram

Mold Volume (ft³) 0.03328 Ram Weight = 10 lb.; Drop = 18 in.

0 50 100 150

1 2 3 4 5 6

6128 6246 6304 6287

4230 4230 4230 4230

1898 2016 2074 2057

431.4 648.2 652.5 594.5

417.5 613.8 610.3 549.2

147.8 147.8 147.8 147.8

5.2 7.4 9.1 11.3

125.7 133.6 137.4 136.3

119.6 124.4 125.9 122.5

126.0 9.0

PROCEDURE USED

X Procedure ASoil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve


Layers : 5 (Five)


May be used if +#4 is 20% or less

Procedure BSoil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve


Layers : 5 (Five)


Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is

20% or less

Procedure CSoil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve


Layers : 5 (Five)

Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six)

Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +¾ in.

is <30%

Particle-Size Distribution:

GR:SA:FIAtterberg Limits:

LL,PL,PI

Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g)

TEST NO.


Sample No. :

Moisture Added (ml)

SILTY SAND (SM), fine to coarse grain with trace gravel, yellowish brown.

B-1

Preparation Method:

MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557

Project No.:

Location:

RCWD WINCHESTER ROADProject Name:

602823-001

BB-5

Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)

Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)


Weight of Mold (g)

Net Weight of Soil (g)

Wet Density (pcf)

Dry Density (pcf)


Optimum Moisture Content (%) Maximum Dry Density (pcf)

110.0

115.0

120.0

125.0

130.0

135.0

140.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0


Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

SP. GR. = 2.65SP. GR. = 2.70SP. GR. = 2.75

XX

Compaction A&B; LB-5, B-1

One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement Potential of Cohesive Soils

(ASTM D 4546) -- Method 'B'

Project Name: Tested By: MRV Date: 10/9/14Project No.: Checked By: JHW Date: 10/14/14Boring No.: LB-7 Sample Type: IN SITUSample No.: R-2 Depth (ft.) 10.0Sample Description:Source and Type of Water Used for Inundation: Arrowhead ( Distilled )** Note: Loading After Wetting (Inundation) not Performed Using this Test Method.

Initial Dry Density (pcf): 107.4 Final Dry Density (pcf): 112.9Initial Moisture (%): 15.7 Final Moisture (%) : 17.7Initial Height (in.): 0.9990 Initial Void ratio: 0.5695Initial Dial Reading (in): 0.0500 Specific Gravity (assumed): 2.70Inside Diameter of Ring (in): 2.416 Initial Degree of Saturation (%): 74.5

1.050 0.9704 0.00 -2.86 -2.86

2.013 0.9601 0.00 -3.89 -3.89

H2O 0.9520 0.00 -4.70 -4.70

-0.84

Rev. 01-10

Percent Swell / Settlement After Inundation =

Corrected Deformation

(%)

Pressure (p) (ksf)

0.5246

0.5084

Final Reading (in) Void Ratio


0.4957

0.0796

0.0899

0.0980

Silty Sand (SM), dark grayish brown.

10807.001

Swell (+) Settlement (-) % of Sample

Thickness

Load Compliance

(%)

Apparent Thickness

(in)

-5.00

-4.00

-3.00

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000

Def

orm

atio

n %

Log Pressure (ksf)

Deformation % - Log Pressure Curve

Inundate With Distilled Water

One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement Potential of Cohesive Soils

(ASTM D 4546) -- Method 'B'

Project Name: Tested By: MRV Date: 10/6/14Project No.: Checked By: JHW Date: 10/9/14Boring No.: LB-8 Sample Type: IN SITUSample No.: R-2 Depth (ft.) 10.0Sample Description:Source and Type of Water Used for Inundation: Arrowhead ( Distilled )** Note: Loading After Wetting (Inundation) not Performed Using this Test Method.

Initial Dry Density (pcf): 99.3 Final Dry Density (pcf): 104.4Initial Moisture (%): 25.5 Final Moisture (%) : 23.8Initial Height (in.): 0.9970 Initial Void ratio: 0.6968Initial Dial Reading (in): 0.0500 Specific Gravity (assumed): 2.70Inside Diameter of Ring (in): 2.416 Initial Degree of Saturation (%): 98.7

1.050 0.9747 0.00 -2.24 -2.24

2.013 0.9600 0.00 -3.71 -3.71

H2O 0.9542 0.00 -4.29 -4.29

-0.60

Rev. 01-10


0.6240

0.0753

0.0900

0.0958

Silty Clay (CL-ML), dark brown.

10807.001

Swell (+) Settlement (-) % of Sample

Thickness

Load Compliance

(%)

Apparent Thickness

(in)

Percent Swell / Settlement After Inundation =

Corrected Deformation

(%)

Pressure (p) (ksf)

0.6589

0.6339

Final Reading (in) Void Ratio

-5.00

-4.00

-3.00

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000

Def

orm

atio

n %

Log Pressure (ksf)

Deformation % - Log Pressure Curve

Inundate With Distilled Water

Project Name: Tested By: JAP Date: 3/18/10Project No. : Checked By: JMB Date: 3/19/10Boring No: Depth (ft.) 3.0Sample No. : Location:Sample Description:

Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.)Wt. of Container No. (gm.)Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.)Weight Soil Retained on #4 SievePercent Passing # 4

in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.

Rev. 03-08

75.2

Add Distilled Water to the Specimen

Elapsed Time (min.)

Dial Readings (in.)

96.848.6Degree of Saturation (%) [ S meas]

3/18/10

Time Pressure (psi)

114.50.4720.321

379.6191.119.2

136.3114.40.5350.348

191.12.70

4643.5

SANDY SILT s(ML), with trace gravel, light brown.

4.011.0425

MOLDED SPECIMEN

4.011.0000Specimen Height (in.)

99.7

Specimen Diameter (in.)

602823-001BB-7B-1

EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS ASTM D 4829

**

643.5

After TestBefore Test

1978.60.0

1978.65.1

603.0191.12.70

4349.5326.049.58.5

124.2

66.4

0

Wt. of Mold (gm.)Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold (gm.)

Moisture Content (%)Wt. of Container (gm.)Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.)Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.)

Specific Gravity (Assumed)

Pore Volume (cc)

Container No.

Date

3/18/10

Void Ratio Dry Density (pcf)Wet Density (pcf)

Total Porosity

12:31 0.500012:41 1.0 10 0.5000

1.0

0.54250.5425

42.5

43 Expansion Index ( Report ) = Nearest Whole Number or Zero (0) if Initial Height is > than Final Height

SPECIMEN INUNDATION


5:456:45

1.01.0

10243/19/103/19/10

Expansion Index (EI meas) = ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000

1084

Normal Stress (kip/ft²)

Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²)

Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)

Sample Type: Drive Deformation Rate (in./min.)

Initial Sample Height (in.)

Diameter (in.)

Initial Moisture Content (%)

Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf)

C (psf) φ (o) Saturation (%)

Peak 470.0 40.3 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.)

Ultimate 427.0 33.7 Final Moisture Content (%)

03-10

Project No.: 602823-001

56.3

0.9956

1.000

17.7

RCWD Winchester RoadDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS

Consolidated Undrained

1.000

1.412

1.342

0.0500

8.39

120.2

2.415

66.5

0.9887

11.8

1.000

2.415

0.9933

14.3

125.8

1.000

2.415

4.000

3.905

3.216

0.0500

2.021

1.386

52.7

8.39

117.9

0.0500

8.39


Olive brown sandy lean clay /

clayey sand s(CL) / (SC)

Boring No.Sample No.Depth (ft)

BB-4R-12.5

2.000

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

Horizontal Deformation (in.)

She

ar S

tress

(ksf

)

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0Normal Stress (ksf)

She

ar S

tress

(ksf

)

Direct Shear; LB-4, R-1 @ 2.5

Project Name: Tested By : G. Berdy Date:

Project No. : Data Input By: J. Ward Date:

Boring No.: Depth (ft.) :

Sample No. :

(%) (ppm) (ppm)

B-1

Container No.

Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt)

Box Constant

SM, dark brown

Adjusted

Moisture

Content

(MC)

Soil

Resistivity

(ohm-cm)

KJ/EMWD TVRW Pipeline Geo Exploration 10/06/14

10/15/14

5-10

10807.001

LB-2

SOIL RESISTIVITY TESTDOT CA TEST 532 / 643

Temp. (°C)pH

Soil pH

3900

4100

202.76

53.35

MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100

3890 27.7 106 41 8.21 22.5

130.003 4100

4

30

40 34.61

DOT CA Test 532 / 643DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422DOT CA Test 532 / 643

1.000

Chloride Content

(ohm-cm)

4500

3900

Resistance

Reading

(ohm)

26.69

5

Min. Resistivity Moisture Content Sulfate Content

Specimen

No.

1

2

Water

Added (ml)

(Wa)

20

Soil Identification:**California Test 643 requires soil specimens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials.

Wt. of Container (g)18.77 4500

2.94

207.15

Moisture Content (%) (MCi)

Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)

Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)

3700

3800

3900

4000

4100

4200

4300

4400

4500

4600

15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0

Soil

Res

istiv

ity (o

hm-c

m)





Sample No. :

40

50 40.21

4

Min. Resistivity Moisture Content

MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100

DOT CA Test 532 / 643

Sulfate Content Chloride Content

(ohm-cm) (%) (ppm) (ppm)

2600

2450

Resistance

Reading

(ohm)

32.42

260024.64


5

Specimen

No.

1

2

3 2550

Adjusted

Moisture

Content

(MC)

Soil

Resistivity

(ohm-cm)

Box Constant

2450 32.7


Temp. (°C)pH

Soil pH

1.000

242 91 7.94

DOT CA Test 532 / 643DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422

22.4

130.00

2450

2550

Container No.

Water

Added (ml)

(Wa)214.73

212.76

57.15


10/17/14

20.0

10807.001

LB-5

R-4



30

Soil Identification:*


Wt. of Container (g)

*California Test 643 requires soil specimens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials.

1.27

SC, dark brown

2400

2450

2500

2550

2600

2650

20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0

Soil

Res

istiv

ity (o

hm-c

m)





Sample No. :

SC-SM, dark brown

Min. Resistivity Moisture Content Sulfate Content Chloride Content



B-1


10/17/14

5-10

10807.001

LB-18

Specimen

No.

1

2

3


68.18

38.69

22.37

130.00

Adjusted

Moisture

Content

(MC)

442 64 9.10 22.52200 30.5


Temp. (°C)pH

Soil pH

6.05

253.00

242.45

MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100

Container No.


Box Constant 1.000



2400

2200

2400



2400

Soil

Resistivity

(ohm-cm)

2400

2200

Resistance

Reading

(ohm)

DOT CA Test 532 / 643DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422DOT CA Test 532 / 643

4

5

Water

Added (ml)

(Wa)

20

30

40

30.53

2100

2150

2200

2250

2300

2350

2400

2450

20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0

Soil

Res

istiv

ity (o

hm-c

m)





Sample No. :



6.69

225.45




5

Min. Resistivity Moisture Content Sulfate Content

Specimen

No.

1

2

Water

Added (ml)

(Wa)

30 800

720

Resistance

Reading

(ohm)

39.51

55.93


710


1.000

Chloride Content

(ohm-cm)

130.003 690

7104

40

50

60

47.72

690 48.1 529 182 8.00 22.2


Temp. (°C)pH

Soil pH

720

690

214.65

53.14

MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100


10/07/14

5-10

10807.001

LB-8

(%) (ppm) (ppm)

B-1

Container No.


Box Constant

SC, dark brown

Adjusted

Moisture

Content

(MC)

Soil

Resistivity

(ohm-cm)

600

650

700

750

800

850

25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0

Soil

Res

istiv

ity (o

hm-c

m)





Sample No. : B-1



30





0.68


10/07/14

5-10

10807.001

LB-11

130.00

8100

7800

Container No.

Water

Added (ml)

(Wa)258.69

257.33

57.46

30 8.35


22.1

Box Constant

7800 39.6


Temp. (°C)pH

Soil pH

1.000

249

5

Specimen

No.

1

2

3 7800

8000

Adjusted

Moisture

Content

(MC)

Soil

Resistivity

(ohm-cm)

(%) (ppm) (ppm)

8600

8100

Resistance

Reading

(ohm)

31.66

860023.91


4

Min. Resistivity Moisture Content

8000

MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100


Sulfate Content Chloride Content

(ohm-cm)

SM, light brown

40

50

60

39.40

47.15

7400

7600

7800

8000

8200

8400

8600

8800

20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0

Soil

Res

istiv

ity (o

hm-c

m)





Sample No. :


4

5

Water

Added (ml)

(Wa)

20

30

40

50


1100

30.88



1000

1100

Soil

Resistivity

(ohm-cm)

1100

1000

Resistance

Reading

(ohm)



47.24

1100

1000

1000

MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100

Container No.


Box Constant 1.000

988 35.0


Temp. (°C)pH

Soil pH

6.34

254.22

242.46

448 107 9.13 22.1

Specimen

No.

1

2

3


56.96

39.06

22.70

130.00

Adjusted

Moisture

Content

(MC)

B-1


10/07/14

5-10

10807.001

LB-14

SC, dark brown

Min. Resistivity Moisture Content Sulfate Content Chloride Content



900

950

1000

1050

1100

1150

20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0

Soil

Res

istiv

ity (o

hm-c

m)


SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST ASTM G-187

Project Name: Tested By : JRH Date: 3/19/10

Project No. : 602823-001 Data Input By JMB Date: 3/19/10

Boring No.: BB-7 Checked By: JMB Date: 3/19/10

Sample No. : B-1 Depth (ft.) : 3.0

Visual Soil Identification:** NOTE: ASTM G-187 REQUIRES SOIL SPECIMENS TO PASS THROUGH NO.8 SIEVE PRIOR TO TESTING. THEREFORE, THIS TEST METHOD MAY NOT BE REPRESENTATIVE FOR COARSER MATERIALS.

Initial Moisture Content (%)Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) 310.0 Initial Soil Weight (gm)(Wt) 1500.0Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) 310.0 Box Constant: 6.76Wt. of Container (gm.) 0.0Moisture Content (%) (MCi) 0.0 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100

Remolded Specimen

Water Added (ml) (Wa) 100 150 200 250 300

Adj. Moisture Content (%) (MC) 6.67 10.00 13.33 16.67 20.00

Resistance Rdg. (ohm) 2000 1000 590 650 710

Soil Resistivity (ohm-cm) 13520 6760 3988 4394 4800

Rev. 11-04


Moisture Adjustments

s(ML)

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0


Soil

Res

istiv

ity (o

hm-c

m)

Minimum Resistivity (ohm-cm)

3988 13.3

Chloride Content (ppm)Moisture Content (%) Sulfate Content ppm/ %

Soil pH

ASTM G-187, D-2216 HACH KIT METHOD AASHTO T-291 ASTM D-4972

24 7.65 <150 <0.0150

Project Name: KJ/EMWD TVRW Pipeline Tested By : G. Berdy Date: 02/17/16

Project No. : 10807.002 Data Input By: J. Ward Date: 02/19/16

Boring No. LB-21

Sample No. R-5

Sample Depth (ft) 22.5

185.49

184.74

74.48

0.68

100.36

71

23

860

8:00/8:40

40

18.4296

18.4276

0.0020

82.30

83

ml of Extract For Titration (B) 30

ml of AgNO3 Soln. Used in Titration (C) 0.5

PPM of Chloride (C -0.2) * 100 * 30 / B 30

PPM of Chloride, Dry Wt. Basis 30

7.49

21.2

Wt. of Crucible (g)

Wt. of Residue (g) (A)

Beaker No.

Crucible No.

Furnace Temperature (°C)

PPM of Sulfate (A) x 41150

PPM of Sulfate, Dry Weight Basis

Dark olive SP

Wt. of Crucible + Residue (g)

Wet Weight of Soil + Container (g)

Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g)


Duration of Combustion (min)

pH TEST, DOT California Test 643

CHLORIDE CONTENT, DOT California Test 422

Time In / Time Out

Weight of Soaked Soil (g)

Temperature °C

pH Value

TESTS for SULFATE CONTENTCHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS

SULFATE CONTENT, DOT California Test 417, Part II






Sample No. : R-5

Container No.


Box Constant

Dark olive SP

Resistance

Reading

(ohm)

31.66

Soil

Resistivity

(ohm-cm)

KJ/EMWD TVRW Pipeline 02/18/16

02/19/16

22.5

10807.002

LB-21

SOIL RESISTIVITY TESTDOT CA TEST 643

Temp. (°C)pH

Soil pH

8300

9400

184.74

74.48

MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100

8300 31.4 83 30 7.49 21.2

4

40

50 130.003 940039.40

8300

5

Min. Resistivity

DOT CA Test 643DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422

(%) (ppm) (ppm)

DOT CA Test 643

1.000

Chloride Content

(ohm-cm)

Moisture Content Sulfate Content

Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)Specimen

No.

1

2

Water

Added (ml)

(Wa)

30

Adjusted

Moisture

Content

(MC) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)

9100



0.68

185.49


8000

8200

8400

8600

8800

9000

9200

9400

9600

20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0

Soil

Res

istiv

ity (o

hm-c

m)



APPENDIX C

Analytical/Groundwater Laboratory Testing Results

Enviro - Chern, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel (909} 590-5905 Fax (909) 590-5907

Date: November 4, 2014

Mr. Simon Saiid Leighton Consulting Inc. 41715 Enterprise Circle North #103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel(951)252-8013 Fax(951)296-0534

Project: 10807.001 I EMWD Recycled Pipeline LAB ID #: 141008-15,-16

Dear Mr. Saiid:

The analytical results for the water samples, received by our laboratory on October 8, 2014, are attached. The water samples were received chilled, intact and accompanying chain of custody record.

Enviro-Chem appreciates the opportunity to provide you and your company this and other services. Please do not hesitate to call us if you have any questions.

Curtis Desilets

Vice /le~~Program

Andy ~rf c

Manager

Laboratory Manager


CUSTOMER:

LABORATORY REPORT Leighton Consulting Inc. 41715 Enterprise Circle North #103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel(951)252-8013 Fax(951)296-0534

PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline

MATRIX:WATER SAMPLING DATE:l0/08/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID

DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/08-10/14 DATE REPORTED:11/04/14

SAMPLE I.D.: LB-5 LAB I.D.: 141008-15

PARAMETER UNIT SAMPLE PQL RESULT

pH pH Units 7.28 TSS Mg/L 2740 1. 00 TDS Mg/L 937 1. 00 Turbidity NTU 2760 0.50 Settleable Solids Ml/L/Hr 210 0.20 Chloride Mg/L 63 . 5 1. 00 Fluoride Mg/L ND 0.10 Chlorine, Residual Mg/L 1.07 0.10 Cyanide, Total Mg/L NO 0.01 Ammonia, as N Mg/L ND 0.10 Nitrate, as N Mg/L 1.07 0.05 Nitrite, as N Mg/L ND 0.01 Sulfate Mg/L 164 1. 00 Sulfide, Total Mg/L NO 0.01 MBAS (Surfactants) Mg/L ND 0.10

COMMENTS PQL = Practical Quanti tat ion Limit DF = Dilution Factor Actual Detection Limit = PQL x DF ND = Non-Detected or below the PQL Mg/L = Milligram per Liter = PPM NTU = Nephrolometric Turbidity Units Ml/L/Hr = Milliliter per Liter per Hour TSS Total Suspended Solids

TDS = Total Dissolved Solids ~;?

DF METHOD

SM4500H+B 1 SM2540C 1 SM2540D

20 SM2130B 1 SM2540F 2 SM4500CL-C 1 SM4500F-B 1 SM4500CL- B 1 SM4500CN- E 1 SM4500NH3-D 2 SM4500N03-E 1 SM4500N03-E

10 SM426C 1 SM4500S-D 1 SM5540C

DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: __ ~~-------------CAL-DRS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555

DATE ANALYZED 10/08/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/08/14 10/08/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/08/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/09/14 10/09/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/09/14

Enviro - Chem, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel (909} 590-5905 Fax (909) 590-5907

CUSTOMER:



MATRIX:WATER SAMPLING DATE:l0/08/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID


SAMPLE I .D . : LB-4 LAB I.D.: 141008-16

----- --- -----·-- --- -- ----- -- . ·· ------ - ------ --- --- ---- ··-· ... ·-- ------PARAMETER UNIT SAMPLE PQL

RESULT pH pH Units 6.84 TSS Mg/L 1780 1. 00 TDS Mg/L 848 1. 00 Turbidity NTU 1800 0.50 Settleable Solids Ml/L/Hr 16 0.20 Chloride Mg/L 43.1 1. 00 Fluoride Mg/L ND 0.10 Chlorine, Residual Mg/L 0.267 0.10 Cyanide, Total Mg/L ND 0.01 Ammonia, as N Mg/L ND 0.10 Nitrate, as N Mg/L 0.357 0.05 Nitrite, as N Mg/L ND 0.01 Sulfate Mg/L 147 1. 00 Sulfide, Total Mg/L ND 0.01 MBAS (Surfactants) Mg/L ND 0.10

COMMENTS PQL "" Practical Quantitation Limit DF "" Dilution Factor Actual Detection Limit = PQL x DF ND = Non-Detected or below the PQL Mg/L "" Milligram per Liter = PPM NTU = Nephrolometric Turbidity Units Ml/L/Hr "" Milliliter per Liter per Hour TSS Total Suspended Solids

DF METHOD

SM4500H+B 1 SM2540C 1 SM2540D

10 SM2130B 1 SM2540F 2 SM4500CL-C 1 SM4SOOF-B 1 SM4SOOCL- B 1 SM4500CN-E 1 SM4500NH3-D 1 SM4500N03-E 1 SM4500N03-E

10 SM426C 1 SM4500S-D 1 SM5540C

TDS "" Total Dissolved Solids

DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ___ ~~~~---------CAL-DHS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555

DATE ANALYZED 10/0B/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/08/14 10/0B/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/0B/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/09/14 10/09/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/09/14


CUSTOMER:

METHOD BLANK REPORT

Leighton Consulting Inc. 41715 Enterprise Circle North #103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel(951)252-8013 Fax(951)296-0534


MATRIX:WATER SAMPLING DATE:10/08/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMQN SAIID


Method Blank For LAB I.D.: 141008-15, -16

PARAMETER UNIT SAMPLE RESULT

TSS Mg/L ND TDS Mg/L ND Turbidity NTU ND Settleable Solids Ml/L/Hr ND Chloride Mg/L ND Fluoride Mg/L ND Chlorine, Residual Mg/L ND Cyanide, Total Mg/L ND Ammonia, as N Mg/L ND Nitrate, as N Mg/L ND Nitrite, as N Mg/L ND Sulfate Mg/L ND Sulfide, Total Mg/L ND MBAS (Surfactants) Mg/L ND

COMMENTS PQL = Practical Quantitation Limit DF = Dilution Factor Actual Detection Limit = PQL x DF ND = Non-Detected or below the PQL Mg/L = Milligram per Liter = PPM

PQL

1.00 1. 00 0.50 0.20 1. 00 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.10 0.05 0.01 1. 00 0.01 0.10

NTU = Nephrolometric Turbidity Units Ml/L/Hr = Milliliter per Liter per Hour TSS Total Suspended Solids TDS = Total Dissolved Solids

DF METHOD

1 SM2540C 1 SM2540D 1 SM2130B 1 SM2540F 1 SM4500CL-C 1 SM4500F-B 1 SM4500CL- B 1 SM4500CN-E 1 SM4500NH3-D 1 SM4500N03-E 1 SM4500N03-E 1 SM426C 1 SM4500S-D 1 SM5540C

" DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ________________ _ CAL-DHS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555

DATE ANALYZED

10/10/14 10/10/14 10/08/14 10/08/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/08/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/09/14 10/09/14 10/10/14 10/10/14 10/09/14

En

viro

-Che

m, I

nc.

1214

E.

Le

xin

gto

n A

ve

nu

e,

Po

mo

na

, C

A 9

1766

T

el

(909

)590

-590

5 F

ax (

909)

590-

5907

M

atri

x:

WA

TE

R/L

IQ

QA

IQC

Rep

ort

Ana

lysi

s U

nits

D

ate

Ana

lyze

d S

ampl

e I.D

. S

.R.

Dup

licat

e %

RP

D

AC

P%

RP

D

Alk

ali o

ily

mg/

L 1

0/9

/20

14

14

1009

-14

188

19

0

1.0

6%

0

-20

R

esid

ual C

hlor

ine

mg/

L 1

0/8

/20

14

1

41

00

8-5

1.

07

1.16

0.

00%

0

-20

D

ensi

ty

g/m

L 0.

00%

0

-20

E

CIS

C

umho

s/cm

9

/25

/20

14

1

40

92

5-2

6

2975

2

98

4

0.3

0%

0

-20

pH

pH

uni

ts

10/8

/20

14

1

41

008

-6

6.84

6.

87

0.44

%

0-20

TO

S

mg

/L

10

/10

/20

14

1

41

00

6-1

3

147

150

2.0

2%

0-2

0

TS

S

mg/

L 10

/10/

201

4 14

10

06

-13

14

7 15

0 0.

00%

0

-20

Tm

:b1d

ity

mg.

IL

10

/8/2

01

4

14

10

08

-6

1800

17

80

0.00

%

0-2

0

I O

IL &

GR

EA

SE

413

.1

mg/

L 0.

00%

0

-20

S

OLI

D

%

0.0

0%

0-2

0

I S

ettle

able

Sol

id

mU

Uhr

1

0/9

/20

14

1

41

00

8-6

16

16

0

.00%

0

-20

R

esis

tivity

oh

ms

0.00

%

0-2

0

anzo

triaz

ole

mg!

L 0

.00

%

0-2

0

%R

PD

= R

elat

ive

Per

cent

Diff

eren

ce

AC

P %

RP

D -

Acc

ep

tab

le R

elat

ive

Pe

rce

nt

Diff

eren

ce

i

Ana

lysi

s U

nit

s D

ate

Ana

lyze

d S

ampl

e I.D

. S

pk C

one

S.R

. A

CP

%R

PD

A

CP

%R

C

MS

MS

%R

C

MS

O

MS

D%

RC

%

RP

D

Aci

dity

m

g/L

0-2

0

80

-12

0

#V

AL

UE

! A

mm

onia

as

N

mg/

L 1

0/1

0/2

01

4

14

10

08

-16

5.

00

0.0

90

0

-20

8

0-1

20

4.

71

92

%

4.9

6

97

%

5.0%

C

P,Io

rtde

mg/

L 1

0/1

0/2

01

4

LCS

1/2

20.0

0.

0 0

-20

8

0-1

20

17

.4

87

%

18.4

9

2%

5.

0%

coo

mg/

L 1

0/1

0/2

01

4

14

10

09

-14

50

0 97

.2

0-2

0

80

-12

0

558

92%

54

8 9

0%

2

.0%

C

RV

I m

g/L

10

/6/2

01

4

14

10

02

-28

0.

4 0.

0 0

-20

8

0-1

20

0.

369

92%

0

.37

3

93

%

1.0%

C

yani

de

~

mg/

L 1

0/1

0/2

01

4

14

10

08

-16

0.

2 0

.00

0

-20

8

0-1

20

0.

182

91%

0

.18

3

92

%

0.5

%

tflu

ori

de

m

g/L

10

/10

/20

14

1

41

00

8-1

6

1.0

0.0

0

0-2

0

80

-12

0

0.89

7 8

9%

0

.93

6

93

%

3.9

%

MB

AS

m

g/L

10

/9/2

01

4

LCS

1/2

0.6

0.0

0

0-20

80

-120

0.

572

95%

0

.55

4

92

%

3.0%

N

itrat

e as

N

mg/

L 1

0/9

/20

14

LC

S1/

2 0.

400

0.0

00

0-

20

80

-12

0

0.35

7 8

9%

0.

352

88

%

1.3

%

Nitr

ite a

s .N

m

g/L

10

/9/2

01

4

LC

S1

/2

0.40

0 0

.00

0

0-20

8

0-1

20

0.

377

94

%

0.3

72

9

3%

1.

3%

EP

A 1

664A

m

g/L

10

/6/2

01

4

LCS

1/2

20.0

0

.00

0-

20

80-1

20

18.1

9

1%

18

.6

93

%

2.5%

O

IL &

GR

EA

SE

413

,2

mg/

L 1

0/3

/20

14

LC

S11

2 20

0

.00

0

-20

8

0-1

20

20

.4

10

2%

2

0.4

1

02

%

0.0%

P

heno

lics

mg/

L 8

/15

/20

14

14

0813

-51

0.5

0.0

0

0-2

0

80

-12

0

0.45

2 9

0%

0

.46

6

93

%

2.8%

S

ulfa

te

mg/

L 1

0/1

0/2

01

4

LCS

1/2

20.0

0

.00

0

-20

8

0-1

20

17

.6

88

%

17

.7

89

%

0.5%

D

isso

lved

Sul

fide

mg/

L 1

0/3

/20

14

14

1001

-1

0.30

0 0

.00

0

0-2

0

80

-12

0

0.26

9 90

%

0.2

64

8

8%

1.

7%

Tota

l Su

lfide

m

g/L

10

/10

/20

14

1

41

00

8-1

6

0.30

0 0.

0 0

-20

8

0-1

20

0.

278

93%

0

.27

3

91

%

1.7%

TR

PH

m

g/L

9/3

0/2

01

4

14

09

30

-34

20

.0

0.0

00

0

-20

8

0-1

20

21

.0

10

5%

2

0.4

1

02

%

3.0%

0

S.R

. =

Sa

mp

le R

esul

ts

%R

C =

Per

cent

Rec

over

y A

CP

%R

C =

Acc

ep

tab

le P

erce

nt R

ecov

ery

Sp

k C

on

e =

Spik

e C

on

cen

tra

tion

C+

Fin

al

Re

vie

we

r: ~

An

aly

st S

ign

atu

re:

\vl/f

I

Enviro - Chern, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel (909) 590-5905 Fax (909) 590-5907

CUSTOMER:

LABORATORY REPORT



MATRIX:WATER SAMPLING DATE:10/08/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID

DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/10/14 DATE REPORTED:ll/04/14


TOTAL METALS ANALYSIS UNIT: mg/L = MILLIGRAM PER LITER = PPM

ELEMENT SAMPLE ANALYZED RESULT PQL Arsenic(As) 0.033 0.01 Boron (B) 0.287 0.10 Cadmium(Cd) ND 0.01 Chromi urn ( Cr) , Total 0.081 0.01 Copper(Cu) 0.152 0.02 Iron (Fe) 45.9 0.10 (X100) Lead(Pb) 0.033 0.01 Manganese (Mn) 5.70 0.01 Mercury (Hg) ND 0.0005 Molybdenum (Mo) ND 0.10 Nickel (Ni) 0.099 0.05 Selenium (Se) ND 0.02 Silver (Ag) NO 0.02 Sodium (Na)* 182 0.10 (X100) Zinc(Zn) 0.172 0.01

*: Sodium = 0.0182 per cent by weight

COMMENTS PQL = Practical Quantitation Limit ND = The concentration is below the PQL or non-detected

Data Reviewed and Approved by:~~~~-----------CAL-DHS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555

EPA METHOD

200 . 7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 245.1 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7

Enviro - Chem, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel {909) 590-5905 Fax (909) 590-5907

CUSTOMER:

LABORATORY REPORT


PROJECT: 10807 . 001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline


DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/10/14 DATE REPORTED:11/Q4/14



------------ ------ -------------- --------- --- ------- -------- -- --ELEMENT SAMPLE EPA ANALYZED RESULT PQL METHOD Arsenic (As) 0.010 0.01 200.7 Boron (B) 0.459 0.10 200.7 Cadmium(Cd) ND 0.01 200.7 Chromi urn ( Cr) , Total 0.061 0.01 200.7 Copper(Cu) 0.062 0.02 200.7 Iron (Fe) 33.8 0.10 (X100) 200.7 Lead(Pb) 0.021 0.01 200.7 Manganese (Mn) 0.945 0.01 200.7 Mercury (Hg) ND 0.0005 245.1 Molybdenum (Mo) lW 0.10 200.7 Nickel (Ni) ND 0.05 200.7 Selenium (Se) ND 0.02 200.7 Silver (Ag) ND 0.02 200.7 Sodium (Na) * 180 0.10 (X100) 200.7 Zinc(Zn) 0.105 0.01 200.7

*: Sodium~ 0.0180 per cent by weight

COMMENTS PQL = Practical Quantitation Limit ND = The concentration is below the PQL or non-detected

Data Reviewed and Approved by: __ ~~~v. ____________ _ CAL-DHS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555


CUSTOMER:

METHOD BLANK REPORT




DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/10/14 DATE REPORTED:11/04/14

Method Blank For LAB I.D.: 141008-15, -16


ELEMENT ANALYZED Arsenic(As) Boron (B) Cadmium(Cd) Chromium(Cr), Total Copper(Cu) Iron (Fe) Lead(Pb) Manganese (Mn) Mercury (Hg) Molybdenum (Mo) Nickel (Ni) Selenium (Se) Silver (Ag) Sodium (Na)* Zinc(Zn)

SAMPLE RESULT

ND

NO NO ND

NO NO

NO NO NO NO ND

ND ND ND

ND

*: Sodium= <0.00001 per cent by weight

COMMENTS PQL = Practical Quantitation Limit

PQL 0.01 0.10 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.10 0.01 0.01 0.0005 0.10 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.01

ND = The concentration is below the PQL or non-detected

Data Reviewed and Approved by: __ ~~---~------------CAL-DHS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555

EPA METHOD

200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 245.1 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7 200.7

Qjf/

QC

.for

Pr£

C :M

etal

S fl.

na{y

sis -

·WA

TE

R M

AT

RIX

Ma

trix

Sp

ike

/ Ma

trix

Sp

ike

Du

plic

ate

/ LC

S :

AN

AL

YS

IS D

AT

E:

10

/10

/20

14

U

nit

: m

g!LC

eJl.m

l

An

aly

sis

Sp

k.S

am

ple

L

CS

L

CS

L

CS

S

am

ple

S

pik

e

MS

%

Re

c

MS

D

%R

ec

%R

PD

BA

TC

H 1

0 C

ON

C.

%R

ec.

S

TA

TU

S

Re

sult

C

on

e.

MS

M

SD

Ch

rom

ium

(Cr)

14

1008

-13

1.00

10

0 P

ASS

0

1.00

0

.944

94

%

0.94

1 94

%

0%

Co

pp

er(

Cu

) 14

1008

-13

1.00

10

0 P

AS

S

0.03

4 1.

00

0.94

3 91

%

0.93

0 90

%

1%

Zin

c(Z

n)

1410

08-1

3 1.

00

99

PA

SS

0.09

5 1.

00

1.04

9

5%

1.

04

95%

0%

AN

AL

YS

IS D

AT

E.:

10

/10

/20

14

An

aly

sis

Sp

k.S

am

ple

L

CS

L

CS

LC

S S

am

ple

S

pik

e

MS

%

Ra

e

MS

D

%R

ec

%R

PD

B

AT

CH

ID

CO

NC

. %

Rec

. S

TA

TU

S

Res

ult

Co

ne

. M

S

MS

D

Me

rcu

ry (

Hg

) 14

1009

-13

0.00

250

96

P

ASS

0

0.00

250

0.00

22

88

%

0.00

22

88

%

0%

MS

/MS

D S

tatu

s:

'

An

aly

sis

%M

S

%M

SD

%

LC

S

%R

PO

C

hrom

ium

(Cr)

PA

SS

PA

SS

PA

SS

P

ASS

(2?

P

AS

S

PA

SS

P

ASS

P

ASS

I

Cop

per(

Cu)

Zin

c(Z

n)

PA

SS

P

ASS

P

ASS

P

ASS

A

NA

LY

ST

: M

ercu

ry (

Hg)

P

ASS

P

ASS

P

ASS

P

AS

S

Acc

ep

ted

Ra

ng

e

75

-12

5

75

-12

5

85

-11

5

0-2

0

FIN

AL

RE

VIE

WE

R:

Q

! I


LABORATORY REPORT CUSTOMER: Leighton Consulting Inc.

41715 Enterprise Circle North #103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel(951)252-8013 Fax(951)296-0534

PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline MATRIX:WATER DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:l0/13/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID DATE REPORTED:11/04/14 SAMPLE I.D.: LB-5 LAB I.D.: 141008-15

ANALYSIS: VOLATILE ORGANICS, EPA METHOD 624, PAGE 1 OF 2 UNIT: uG/L = MICROGRAM PER LITER = PPB

PARAMETER ACETONE ACROLEIN ACRYLONITRILE BENZENE BROMOBENZENE BROMOCHLOROMETHANE BROMODICHLOROMETHANE BROMOFORM BROMOMETHANE 2-BUTANONE (MEK) N-BUTYLBENZENE SEC-BUTYLBENZENE TERT-BUTYLBENZENE CARBON DISULFIDE CARBON TETRACHLORIDE CHLOROBENZENE CHLOROETHANE CHLOROFORM CHLOROMETHANE 2-CHLOROTOLUENE 4-CHLOROTOLUENE DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE

SAMPLE RESULT ND

ND ND ND ND NO ND ND

NO

ND ND NO

NP ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND

1,2-DIBROM0-3-CHLOROPROPANE ND 1 1 2-DIBROMOETHANE ND DIBROMOMETHANE ND 1 2-DICHLOROBENZENE NO 1 3-0ICHLOROBENZENE ND 1,4-DICHLQROBENZENE ND DICHLORODIFLUOROMETHANE ND 1 1 - DICHLOROETHANE ND 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE ND 1 1-DICHLOROETHENE ND CIS-1 2-DICHLOROETHENE ND TRANS-1 2-DICHLOROETHENE ND 1 2-DICHLOROPROPANE ND

PQL Xl 10 10 20

l

1 1 1

1

1

10 1 1

5 1 1

l

1

1 l

l

1 1 l 1

l

l

1 1 1

l

l

l

1 PAGE #2 - ---- TO BE CONTINUE9 ~

DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ---,~~~1'~---------------------------




PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline MATRIX:WATER DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:10/0B/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID

DATE ANALYZED:10/13/14 DATE REPORTED:11/04/14

SAMPLE I.D.: LB-5 LAB I.D.: 141008-15 ANALYSIS: VOLATILE ORGANICS, EPA METHOD 624, PAGE 2 OF 2

UNIT: uG/L = MICROGRAM PER LITER = PPB PARAMETER SAMPLE RESULT 1 3-DICHLOROPROPANE ND 2.2-DICHLOROPROPANE ND 1 1-DICHLOROPROPENE ND CIS-1 3-DICHLOROPROPENE NO TRANS-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE ND ETHYLBENZENE ND 2-HEXANONE NO HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE ND ISOPROPYLBENZENE ND 4-ISOPROPYLTOLUENE NO 4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE (MIBK} ND METHYL tert-BUTYL ETHER (MTBE) ND

' METHYLENE CHLORIDE ND

NAPHTHALENE ND N-PROPYLBENZENE ND

STYRENE NO 1,1,1,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE NO

1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE ND TETRACHLOROETHENE (PCE) NO TOLUENE ND 1,2,3-TRICHLOROBENZENE ND 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE NO 1, 1 I 1-TRI CHLOROE'I'HANE ND 1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE ND TRICHLOROETHENE (TCE) ND TRI CHLOROFLUOROMETHAN 8 Nl:l

1,2,3-TRICHLOROPROPANE ND 1,2,4-TRIMETHXLBENZENE NO 1,3,5-TRIMETHYLBENZENE NO VINYL CHLORIDE ND m,p-XYLENES ND

o-XYLENE NO

COMMENTS PQL = PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMIT NO = NON-DETECTED OR BELOW THE PQLjd_ DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

I

CAL-DHS CERTIFICATE # 1555

PQL Xl 1 1 1

1

1 1

10 1 1

1

10 3 5

1 1

1

1 1 1

1

1 1

1

1

1 1

1

1 1 2

l


LABORATORY REPORT CUSTOMER: Leiqhton Consultinq Inc.


PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline MATRIX:WATER DATE RECEIVED:10/0B/14 SAMPLING DATE:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/13/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID SAMPLE I.D . : LB-4

DATE REPORTED:11/04/14 LAB I.D.: 141008-16


PARAMETER ACETONE ACRO,LEIN ACRYLONITRILE BENZENE BROMOBENZENE BROMOCHLOROMETHANE BROMOOICHLOROMETHANE BROMOFORM BROMOMETHANE 2-BUTANONE (MEK) N-BUTYLBENZENE SEC-BUTYLBENZENE TERT-BUTYLBENZENE CARBON DISULFIDE CARBON TETRACHLORIDE CHLOROBENZENE CHLOROETHANE

SAMPLE RESULT NO

NO ND NO ND

NO NO NO NO ND ND

ND ND ND NO NO

ND CHLOROFORM ND CHLOROMETHANE NO 2-CHLOROTOLUENE NO 4-CHLOROTOLUENE ND DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE NO 1,2-0IBROM0-3-CHLOROPROPANE ND 1 2-0IBROMOETHANE NO OIBROMOMETHANE NO 1 2-0ICHLOROBENZENE NO 1 3 - DICHLOROBENZENE NO 1 4-DICHLOROBENZENE NO DICHLOROOIFLUOROMETHANE ND 1 1-DI CHLOROETHANE ND 1 2 - 0 I CHLOROETHANE NO 1 1-0ICHLOROETHENE NO CIS-1, 2-D_ICHLOROETH.ENE ND TRANS-1,2-DI CHLOROETHENE NO 1 2-0ICHLOROPROPANE NO

PQL Xl 10 10 20

1

1

1 1

l

10 1

1

5 1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1

1 1

1

1

1 1

1 1

1

PAGE #2 -- - -- TO BE CONTINUEJ)fN

DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ____ J.~~~L~~~---------------------------


CUSTOMER:


PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline MATRIX:WATER DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/13/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID DATE REPORTED:11/04/14 SAMPLE I.D.: LB-4 LAB I.D.: 141008-16


PARAMETER SAMPLE RESULT 1 3-DICHLOROPROPANE ND 2 ,2 -DICHLOROPROPANE NO 1 1-0ICHLOROPROPENE NO CIS-1.3-0ICHLOROPROPENE NO TRANS-1. 3 -DICHLOROPROPENE NO ETHYLBENZENE NO 2-HEXANONE NO HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE NO ISOPROPYLBENZENE NO 4-ISOPROPYLTOLUENE ND 4-METHYL-2 - PENTANONE (M~BK) ND METHYL tert-BUTYL ETHER (MTBE) NO METHYLENE CHLORIDE ND NAPHTHALENE N.D N-PROPYLBENZENE NO STYRENE ND 1,1,1,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE ND 1,1.2.2-TETRACHLOROETHANE ND TETRACHLOROETHENE (PCE) NO TOLUENE NO 1,2,3-TRICHLOROBENZENE NO 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE NO 1 1 I-TRICHLOROETHANE NO 1 1 2-TRICHLOROETHANE NO TRICHLOROETHENE (TCE) NO TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE ND 1,2,3-TRICHLOROPROPANE ND 1,2,~-TRIMETHYLBENZENE NO 1,3,5-TRIMETHYLBENZENE NO VINYL CHLORIDE NO m, p-XYLENES ND o-XYLENE NO

COMMENTS PQL = PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMIT ND = NON-DETECTED OR BELOW THE PQL DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ~/~ CAL-DHS CERTIFICATE # 1555 --~;.Y~~~Y __________ _

PQL Xl 1

1 1 l_

1 1

10 1 1 1

10 3 5 1

1

1

1 1

1

1 1 1

1 1 1 1

1

1 1 l

2 1


METHOD BLANK REPORT CUSTOMER: Leighton Consulting Inc.


PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline MATRIX:WATER DATE RECEIVED:l0/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:l0/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/13/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID DATE REPORTED:11/04/14

METHOD BLANK FOR LAB I.D.: 141008-15, -16 ANALYSIS: VOLATILE ORGANICS, EPA METHOD 624, PAGE 1 OF 2

UNIT: uG/L = MICROGRAM PER LITER = PPB PARAMETER ACETONE ACROLEIN ACRYLONITRILE BENZENE BROMOBENZENE BROMOCHLOROMETHANE BROMODICHLOROMETHANE BROMOFORM BRQMOMETHANE 2-BUTANONE (MEK) N-BUTYLBENZENE SEC-BUTYLBENZENE TERT-BUTYLBENZENE <;:ARBON DISULFIDE CARBON TETRACHLORIDE CHLOROBENZENE CHLOROETHANE CHLOROFORM CHLOROMETHANE 2-CHLOROTOLUENE 4-CHLOROTOLUENE

SAMPLE RESULT NO NO NO ND NO NO ND NO NO NO NO NO ND NO NO NO NO NO ND ND

NO DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE NO 1,2-DIBROM0-3-CHLOROPROPANE NO 1 2-DIBROMOETHANE NO DIBROMOMETHANE NO 1 2-DICHLOROBENZENE NO 1 3-DICHLOROBENZENE ND 1 4-0ICHLOROBENZENE NO DICHLORODIFLUOROMETHANE NO 1 1-DICHLOROETHANE NO 1 2-DICHLOROETHANE ND 1 1-DICHLOROETHENE NO CIS-1 2-DICHLOROETHENE NO TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE ND 1 2-DICHLOROPROPANE ND

PQL Xl 10 10 20

1

1

1

1

1

1

10

1

1 1

5

1

1 1

1

1

1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ]

1

1 1

1 1

#2 - --- - TO BE CONTINUED O~PAGE

DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ____ ~,~~~-~~------------------------




PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline MATRIX:WATER DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/13/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID DATE REPORTED:11/04/14

METHOD BLANK FOR LAB I.D.: 141008-15, -16 ANALYSIS: VOLATILE ORGANICS, EPA METHOD 624, PAGE 2 OF 2

UNIT: uG/L = MICROGRAM PER LITER = PPB PARAMETER SAMPLE RESULT 1 3-DICHLOROPROPANE ND 2 2-DICHLOROPROPANE ND 1 1-DICHLOROPROPENE NO CIS-1 3-DICHLOROPROPENE ND TRANS-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE ND ETHYLBENZENE ND 2-HEXANONE NO HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE ND ISOPROPYLBENZENE NO

4-ISOPROPYLTOLUENE ND 4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE (MIBK) ND METHYL tert-BUTYL ETHER (MTBE) ND METHYLENE CHLORIDE ND NAPHTHALENE ND N-PROPYLBENZENE ND STYRENE ND 1,1,1,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE NO 1 1 2 2-TETRACHLOROETHANE NO TETRACHLOROETHENE (PCE) ND TOLUENE ND 1 2 3-TRICHLOROBENZENE NO 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE NO 1 1 I-TRICHLOROETHANE ND 1 1 2-TRICHLOROETHANE ND TRICHLOROETHENE (TCE) ND

TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE ND 1 2 3-TRICHLOROPROPANE NO

1 2 4-TRIMETHYLBENZENE NO 1,3,5-TRIMETHYLBENZENE ND VINYL CHLORIDE ND

m,p-XYLENES ND o-XYLENE ND

COMMENTS PQL = PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMIT ND = NON-DETECTED OR BELOW THE DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: CAL-DHS CERTIFICATE # 1555

PQL Xl 1

1

1

1

1 10

1 1 1

10 3

5 1 1

1

l

1

1 1

1

1 1 1

1

1 1

1

1 2 1

Enviro-Chem, Inc.

1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Po ona ~· Tel (909)590-5905 Fax (909)590-5907

6 ) ( / 8 'flA/QC Report

Date Analyzed: l 0/13-14/2014 Matrix: Water/Liguld

Machine: ~ Unit: ug/L fPPBl

Matrix Spike (MS)/Matrlx Spike Duplicate (MSD)

Spiked Sample Lab I.D.: 141008-76 MS/MSD Analyte S.R. spk cone MS o/oRC MSD o/oRC o/oRPD ACP o/oRC ACP RPD

Benzene 0 25.0 27.1 108% 27.1 108% 0% 75-125 0-20

Chlorobenzene 0 25.0 30.7 123% 30.2 121% 2% 75-125 0-20

1, 1-Dichloroethene 17.4 25.0 48.7 125% 48.4 124% 1% 75-125 0-20 Toluene 0 25.0 30.2 121% 29.9 120% 1% 75-125 0-20 Trichloroethane _(TCE) 113 25.0 134 84% 132 76% 8% 75-125 0-20

Lab Control Spike (LCS): Analyte spk cone LCS o/oRC ACP%RC

Benzene 25.0 21.4 86% 75-125 Chlorobenzene 25.0 29.0 116% 75-125 Chloroform 25.0 22.1 88% 75-125 1, 1-Dichloroethene 25.0 21 .8 87% 75-125 Ethylbenzene 25.0 26.3 105% 75-125 a-Xylene 25.0 27.1 108% 75-125 m,p-Xylene 50.0 55.6 111% 75-125 Toluene 25.0 24.5 98% 75-125 1,1, 1-Trichloroethane 25.0 23.5 94% 75-125 Trichloroethene (TCE) 25.0 28.2 113% 75-125

Surrogate Recovery spk cone ACP o/oRC MB%RC o/oRC o/oRC %RC o/oRC o/oRC %RC Sample I.D.

-M-BLK 141008-15 141008-16

Dibromofluoromethane 25.0 70-130 98% 110% 100% Toluene-dB 25.0 70-130 95% 90% 89% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 25.0 70-130 92% 98% 95%

Surrogate Recovery spk cone ACP o/oRC o/oRC %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC Sample J.D.

Dibromofluoromethane 25.0 70-130 Toluene-dB 25.0 70-130 4-Bromofluorobenzene 25.0 70-130

Surrogate Recovery spk cone ACP%RC o/oRC %RC %RC %RC %RC o/oRC %RC Sample J.D.

Dibromofluoromethane 25.0 70-130 Toluene-dB 25.0 70-130 4-Bromofluorobenzene 25.0 70-130

* = Surrogate fail due to matrix interference; LCS, MS. MSD are in control therefore the analysis is in control. S. R. = Sample Results %RC = Percent Recovery spk cone = Spike Concentration ACP %RC =Accepted Percent Recovery MS = Matrix Spike

fl(4 MSD = Matrix Spike Duplicate

Analyzed/Reviewed By:

Final Reviewer:

Enviro - Chem, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel (909) 590-5905 Fax (909) 590-5907



PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 MATRIX:WATER DATE EXTRACTED:10/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/14/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID DATE REPORTED:l1/04/14 SAMPLE I.D.: LB-5 LAB I.D.: 141008-15

ANALYSIS: SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS, EPA METHOD 625, PAGE 1 OF 2 UNIT: uG/L • MICROGRAM PER LITER . PPB

PARAMETER SAMPLE RESULT PQL Xl Acena1;2hthene ND 10 AcengaQhthylene ND 10 Anthracene ND 10 Benzg(a)anthracene NO 10 Benzo(a)Qyrene ND 10 Benzo(blfluoranthene ND 10 Benzo(g,h, i )Qerylene NO 10 Benzo(k)fluoranthene NO 1 0 Benzoic Acid NO 10 Benzyl AlcohoJ: NO 10 Bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane NO 10 Bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether NO 10 Bis(2-ChloroisoQrOQyl)ether ND 10 Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)Phthalat~ ND 10 4-BromoQhenyl Pl:lenyl Ether ND 10 ButylbenzylQhthalate ND 10 4-Chloro-3-MethylQhenol ND 10 4-Chloroaniline NO J.O 2-ChloronaQh~halene ND 10 2-Chloroj;lhenol NO 10 4 -ChloroQhenyl Phenyl Ether ND 10 Chrysene ND 10 Di-n-butylDhthalate ND lO Di-n-octylQhthalate ND 10 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene ND 10 Dibenzofuran ND 10 1 2-Dichlorobenzene ND 10 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 10 1 4-Dichlorobenzene ND 10 3 3-Dichlorobenzidine ND 10 2,4-DichloroQhenol ND 10 Diethyl Phthalate NO 10 2,4-DimethylQhenol ND 10 Dimethyl Phthalate t!D 10

. - -. TO BE CONTINUED ON PAGE #2

DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: A




PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline DATE RECEIVED:l0/08/14 MATRIX:WATER DATE EXTRACTED:l0/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:l0/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:lQ/14/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID DATE REPORTED:ll/04/14 SAMPLE I.D.: LB-5 LAB I.D.: 141008-15 ANALYSIS: SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS, EPA METHOD 625, PAGE 2 OF 2

UNIT: uG/L = MICROGRAM PER LITER • PARAMETER SAMPLE RESULT 4,6-Di n i tro-2-methyl phenol ND 2,4-Di n i trophenol ND 2 4-Dinit rotoluene ND 2 6-Dinitrotoluene ND Fluoranthene ND Fluorene NO Hexachlorobenzene ND Hexachlorobut adiene NO Hexachlorocyclopentadi ene NO Hexachloroethane NO Indeno(1,2,3-cd}pyr ene ND Isophorone NO 2-Methyl Phenol NO 3-Methyl Pheno l NO 4-Methyl Ph e nol ND 2-Methylnaphthalene ND N-Ni troso-di-n-d i propylamine NO N-Nitrosodimethyl ami ne ND N-Nitrosod i phenyl ami ne ND Naphthalene ND 2-Nitr oanil i ne ND 3-Nitr oaniline ND 4-Nitroaniline NO Ni t rob e nze ne NO 2-Nitrophenol NO 4-Nitrophenol ND Pentachlo rophenol ND Phenanthrene ND Phenol ND Pyrene ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol NO 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ND COMMENTS PQL = PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMIT ND = NON-DETECTED OR BELOW THE PQAL DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ~/' CAL-DHS CERTIFICATE # 1555 --""'-/-· _, ____ _

PPB PQL Xl 1 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 1 0 1 0 10 1 0 1 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Enviro - Chem, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel (909) 590-5905 Fax (909) 590-5907



PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline DATE RECEIVED:l0/08/14 MATRIX:WATER DATE EXTRACTED:l0/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:l0/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:l0/14/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID DATE REPORTED:l1/04/14 SAMPLE I.D.: LB-4 LAB I.D.: 141008-16

ANALYSIS: SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS, EPA METHOD 625, PAGE 1 OF 2 UNIT: uG/L • MICROGRAM PER LITER = PPB

PARAMETER SAMPLE RESULT PQL Xl Acenaphthene NO 10 Acenaphthylene NO 10 Anthracene NO 10 Benzo(a)anthracen.e NO 10 Benzo(a)pyrene NO 10 Benzo(b)fluoranthene ND 10 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene NO 10 Benzo(kl£luoranthene NO 10 Benzoic Acid ND 10 Benzyl Alcohol NO 10 Bis(2-Cbloroethoxylmethane ND 10 Bis(2-Chloroethyllether NO 10 Bis(2-Chloroisopropyllether NO 10 Bis(2-Ethyl hexyl)Phtha l ate NO 10 4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether NO 10 Butylbenzylphthalate ND 10 4-Chloro-3-Methylphenol ND 10 4-Chloroaniline ND 10 2-Chloronaphthalene ND 10 2-Chlorophenol ND 10 4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether ND 10 Chrysene NO 10 Di-n-butylphthalate NO 10 Di-n-octylphthalate NO 10 oibenzo(a,h)anthracene NO 10 Dibenzofuran NO 10 1,2-Dichlorobenzene NO 10 1 3-Dichlorobenzene NO 10 1 4-Dichlorobenzene ND 10 3 , 3-Dichlorobenzidiue ND 10 2,4-Dich1orophenol NO 10 Diethyl Phthalate ND 10 2,4-Dimetbylphenol ND 10 Dimethyl Phthalate ND 10

----- TO BE CON'~L~ED ON PAGE #2

DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: __ ~~~---------------------------

Enviro - Chem, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel (909) 590-5905 Fax (909} 590-5907



PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 MATRIX:WATER DATE EXTRACTED:10/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:10/0B/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/14/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID SAMPLE I.D.: LB-4

DATE REPORTED:11/04/14 LAB I.D.: 141008-16

ANALYSIS: SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS, EPA METHOD 625, UNIT: uG/L a MICROGRAM PER LITER =

PAGE 2 OF PPB

2

PARAMETER 4.6-Dinitro-2-me t hylphenol 2 , 4-Dinitrophenol 2 4-Dinitr otoluen e 2 6-Dinitrot oluene Fluoranthene Fluorene Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Hexachloroethane Indeno( 1 .2.3-cd) p yrene Isophorone 2-Methyl Phenol 3-Methyl Phenol 4-Metbyl Phenol 2-Methylnapbthal ene N-Nitroso-di-n-dipropylamjne N-Nitrosodi methyla mi ne N-Nitrosodiphenyl amine Naphthalene 2-Nitroaniline 3-Nitroaniline 4 -Nitroaniline Nitrobenzene 2-Ni trophenol 4-Nitrophenol Pentachlorophenol Phe nanthrene Phenol

SAMPLE RESULT NO NO ND

NO NO NO NO ND

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND

Pyrene NO 1,2,4-Trichlor obenzene ND 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ND 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ND COMMENTS PQL = PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMIT ND = NON-DETECTED OR BELOW THE PQL ~ DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ~ CAL - DHS CERTIFICATE# 1555 --~~~-~~---------

PQL Xl 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10




PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline DATE RECEIVED:l0/08/14 MATRIX:WATER DATE EXTRACTED:10/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:10/0B/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/14/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID DATE REPORTED:11/04/14

METHOD BLANK FOR LAB I.D.: 141008-15, -16 ANALYSIS: SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS, EPA METHOD 625, PAGE 1 OF 2

UNIT: uG/L = MICROGRAM PER LITER = PPB PARAMETER SAMPLE RESULT PQL Xl Acenaphthene ND LO Acenaphthylene ND LO Anthracene ND 10 Benzo(a)anthracene ND 10 Benzo(a}pyrene NO 10 Benzo(b)fluoranthene NO 10 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene NO 10 Benzo(klfluoranthene NO 10 Benzoic Acid ND 10 Benzyl Alcohol ND 10 Bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane NO 10 Bis(2-Chloroethyllether NO 10 Bis(2-Chloroisopropyl)ether NO 10 Bis (2-Ethyl hexyl)Phthal ate ND 10 4-Bromophenyl J?henvl Ether ND 10 Butylbenzylphthalate NO 10 4-Chloro-3-Methylphenol ND 10 4-Chloroaniline ID 10 2-Chloronaphthalene NO 10 2-Chlorophenol NO 10 4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether ND 10 Chrysene ND 10 Di-n-butylphthalate ND 10 Di-n-octylphthalate 10 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene ND 10 Dibenzofuran ND 10 1 2-Dichlorobenzene ND 10 1 3-Dichlorobenzene ND 10 1 4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 10 3 3-Dichlorobenzidine ND 10 2,4-Dichlorophenol ND 10 Diethyl Phthalate ND 10 2,4-Dimethy lphenol ND 10 Dimethyl Phthalate ND 10

CONTINUWJ

!{P DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ____ ~~~--· ------------------------

TO BE ON PAGE #2




PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline DATE RECEIVED:10/0B/14 MATRIX:WATER DATE EXTRACTED:l0/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:l0/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/14/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID DATE REPORTED:11/04/14

METHOD BLANK FOR LAB I.D.: 141008-15, -16 ANALYSIS: SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS, EPA METHOD 625,

UNIT: uG/L = MICROGRAM PER LITER = PARAMETER SAMPLE RESULT 4,6-Diuitro-2-methylphenol ND 2,4-Dinitrophenol ND 2, 4-Dini trotoluene ND 2,6-Dinitrotoluene ND Fluoranthene ND Fluorene ND Hexachlorobenzene ND Hexachlorobutadiene NO Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND Hexachloroethane ND Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene NO Isophorone NO 2-Methyl Phenol ND 3-Metbyl Phenol NO 4-Methyl Phenol ND 2-Methylnaphthalene NO N-Nitroso-di-n-dipropylamine NO N-Nitrosodimethylamine NO N-Nitrosodiphenylamine ND Naphthalene ND 2-Nitroaniline ND 3-Nitroaniline NO 4-Nitroaniline ND Nitrobenzene ND 2-Nitrophenol ND 4-Nitrophenol ND Pentachlorophenol ND Phenanthrene NO Phenol NO Pvrene ND 1 2 4-Trichlorobenzene ND 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol NO 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ND COMMENTS PQL = PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMIT ND = NON-DETECTED OR BELOW THE PQL a DATA REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: CAL-DHS CERTIFICATE # 1555

PAGE 2 OF PPB

PQL Xl 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 ~0

10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

2

Enviro-Chem, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomon~. ~A 91766 Tel (909)590-5905 Fax (909)590-5907

S:-- 6-..,sJ 8270C_3AIQC Report Matrix: Water Unit: ug/L (PPB)

Date Analyzed: 10/14/2014

Matrix Spike (MS)/Matrlx Spike Duplicate (MSD)

Spiked Sample Lab I. D.: 141008-15 MS/MSD Analyte SR spk cone MS %REC MSD %REC %RPD ACP%REC ACP RPD

Phenol 0.0 40.0 37.0 92% 36.1 90% 2% 50-150 0-20

Pyrene 0.0 40.0 46.2 116% 46.9 117% 2% 50-150 0-20

Laboratory Control Spike LCSl: Analyte spk cone LCS %REC ACP%REC

Phenol 40.0 42.2 106% 75-125

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40.0 46.0 115% 75-125

2 ,4-Dichlorophenol 40.0 42.1 105% 75-125

Hexachlorobutadiene 40.0 41 .9 105% 75-125

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 40.0 42.6 107% 75-125

Fluoranthene 40.0 44.6 112% 75-125

Surrogate Recovery spk cone ACP% %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC

Sample I.D. MB 141008-15 141008-16

2-Fiuorophenol 40 25-121 111% 108% 110%

Phenol-d5 40 24-113 102% 95% 92%

Nitrobenzene-d5 40 23-120 120% 118% 77%

2-Fiuorobiphenyl 40 30-115 100% 115% 115%

2 4,6-Tribromophenol 40 19-122 69% 100% 107%

Terphenyl-d14 40 18-137 134% 128% 128%

Surrogate Recove.ry spk cone ACP% %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC Sample I.D.

2-Fiuorophenol 40 25-121

Phenol-d5 40 24-113 N itrobenzene-d5 40 23-120

2-Fiuorobiphenyl 40 30-115

2,4,6-Tribromophenol 40 19-122 Terphenyl-d14 40 18-137

Surrogate Recovery spk cone ACP% %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC %RC Sample I.D.

2-Fiuorophenol 40 25-121

Phenol-d5 40 24-113

Nitrobenzene-d5 40 23-120

2-Fiuorobiphenyl 40 30-115 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 40 19-122

Terphenyl-d 14 40 18-137

Analyzed and Reviewed By: d~ * = Surrogate fail due to matrix interference Note: LCS, MS, MSD are in control therefore results are in control.

Final Reviewer:

Enviro - Chem, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel (909) 590-5905 Fax (909} 590-5907



PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 MATRIX:WATER SAMPLING DATE:10/0B/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID SAMPLE I.D.: LB-5

DATE EXTRACTED:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/14/14 DATE REPORTED:11/04/14 LAB I.D.: 141008-15

ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES & PCBs, EPA 608 UNIT: uG/L (PPB)

PARAMETER alpha-BHC gamma-BHC be ta-BHC Heptachlor delta-BHC Aldrin Heptachlor Epoxide Endosulfan I 4,4'-DDE Dieldrin Endrin 4 4 I -DDD

Endosulfan II 4 4 I -DDT Endrin Al dehyde Endosulfan Sulfate Methoxychlor alpha-Chlordane gamma-Chlordane Toxaphene PCB-1016 PCB-1221 PCB-1232 PCB-1242 PCB-1248 PCB-1254 PCB··1260 COMMENTS: PQL = PRACTI CAL ND = NON-DETECTED OR BELOW

SAMPLE RESULT ND NO NO NO ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND NO ND NO ND NO ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND NO

QUANTATION LIMIT THE PQL

uG/L ; MICROGRAM PER LITER fi. J Data Reviewed and Approved By: __ ~~~-------------CAL-DHS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555

PQL(Xl) 0.100 0.100 0 . 100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0 . 100 0 . 200 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.200 0.100 0.100 0.200 0.100 0.100 0.100 1.0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0




PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 MATRIX:WATER DATE EXTRACTED:10/08/14 SAMPLING DATE:l0/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/14/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID DATE REPORTED:l1/04/14 SAMPLE I.D.: LB-4 LAB I.D.: 141008-16


PARAMETER aloha-BHC gamma-BHC beta-BHC Heptachlor delta-BHC Aldrin Heptachlor Epoxide Endosulfan I 4 4'-DDE Dieldrin Endrin 4 4 I -DDD Endosulfan II 4 4' -DDT Endrin Aldehyde Endosulfan Sulfate Methoxychlor alpha-Chlordane gamma-Chlordane Toxaphene PCB-1016 PCB-1221 PCB-1232 PCB-1242 PCB-1248 PCB-1254 PCB-1260

SAMPLE RESULT ND ND ND ND ND

ND NO ND ND NO ND

ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND

NO ND ND NO ND

COMMENTS: PQL = PRACTICAL QUANTATION LIMIT ND = NON-DETECTED OR BELOW THE PQL uG/L = MICROGRAM PER LITER ~

Data Reviewed and Approved By:~~~~------------CAL-DHS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555

PQL (Xl) 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.200 0 100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.200 0.100 0.100 0.200 0.100 0.100 0.100 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0




PROJECT: 10807.001 / EMWD Recycled Pipeline DATE RECEIVED:10/08/14 MATRIX:WATER SAMPLING DATE:10/0B/14 REPORT TO:MR. SIMON SAIID

DATE EXTRACTED:10/08/14 DATE ANALYZED:10/14/14 DATE REPORTED:11/04/14

METHOD BLANK FOR LAB I.D.: 141008-15, -16


PARAMETER alpha-BHC gamma-BHC beta-BHC Heptachlor delta-BHC Aldrin Heptachlor Epoxide Endosulfan I 4 4 I -DDE Dieldrin Endrin 4 4 I -DDD Endosulfan II 4 « 4 I -DDT Endrin Aldehyde Endosulfan Sulfate Methoxychlor alpha-Chlordane gamma-Chlordane Toxaphene PCB-1016 PCB-1221 PCB-1232 PCB-1242 PCB-1248 PCB-1254 PCB-1260

SAMPLE RESULT ND ND

ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND

ND

ND

NO ND ND

ND NO ND NO NO ND ND ND NO NO

COMMENTS: PQL = PRACTICAL QUANTATION LIMIT ND = NON-DETECTED OR BELOW THE PQL uG/L = MICROGRAM PER LITER

Data Reviewed and Approved By= ----~~~~-~------------CAL-DHS ELAP CERTIFICATE No.: 1555

PQL (X1)

0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.200 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.200 0.100 0.100 0.200 0.100 0.100 0 . 100 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Enviro-Chem, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel (909)590-5905 Fax (909)590-5907

EPA 608 QAIQC Report -·

Matrix: Water/Ligufd Date Analyzed: 10/14/2014 Unit: ugll

Matrix Sj2lke {MS)/Matrlx Sj2lke 0Uj2Jicate (MSD}

Sj2iked Sam(:!le Lab 1.0.: 141008-15 MS/MSD

Analyte S.R. spk cone MS %REC MSD %REC %RPD ACP %RPD ACP %REC Gamma-BHC 0 0.500 0.549 110% 0.527 105% 4% 0-20% 70-130 Aldrin 0 0.500 0.436 87% 0.407 81% 7% 0-20% 70-130 4,4-DDE 0 0.500 0.597 119% 0.586 117% 2% 0-20% 70-130

Lab Control S!;!ike {LCS} RecoveQ!:

Analyte spk cone LCS %REC ACP %REC Gamma-BHC 0.500 0.536 107% 75-125 Aldrin 0.500 0.573 115% 75-125 4,4-DDE 0.500 0.453 91% 75-125 Dieldrin 0.500 0.580 116% 75-125

Surrogate Recovery ACP% %REC %REC %REC %REC %REC %REC %REC

Sample 1.0. M-BLK 141006-15 141006-16

Tetra-chloro-meta-xylene 50-150 115% 132% 126% Decachlorob[pneyl 50-150 147% 131% 120%

Surrogate Recovery %REC %REC %REC %REC %REC %REC %REC %REC

Sample 1.0. T etra-chloro-meta-xylene Decach lorobipneyl

Surrogate Recovery %REC %REC %REC %REC %REC %REC Sample I.D.

Tetra-chloro-meta-xylene Decachlorobipneyl

S.R. = Sample Result

spk cone = Spike Concentration

%REC = Percent Recovery

ACP %RPD =Acceptable Percent RPD Range

ACP %REC = Acceptable Percent Recovery Range

Analyzed and Reviewed By: \~~ • = Surrogate fail due to matrix interference

~ I Note: LCS, MS, MSD are in control therefore results are In control.

Final Reviewer:

Enviro-Chem, Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue, Pomona, CA 91766 Tel (909)590-5905 Fax (909)590-5907

QA/QC Report

Analysis: EPA 608 (PCB)

Matrix: Water/Liquid ugll !PPBl

Date Analyzed: 10/14/2014

Unit:

Matrix Spike (MS)/Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)

Spiked Sample Lab 1.0.: 141008-15 MS/MSD

Analyte S.R. spk cone MS

PCB (1016+1260) 0 10.0 10.8

LCS STD RECOVERY:

Analyte spk cone LCS % REC

PCB {1016+1260) 10.0 12.4 124%

S.R. =Sample Result spk cone = Spike Concentration %REC = Percent Recovery

%REC MSD

108% 9.2

ACP %REC

75-125

ACP %RPD =Acceptable Percent RPD Range ACP %REC =Acceptable Percent Recovery Range

Analyzed and Reviewed By: ~

Final Reviewer: ---\-P-----

%REC

92% %RPD ACP % RPD ACP %REC

17% 0-20% 70-130

Client: Address:

Associated Laboratories 806 N. Batavia - Orange, CA 92868 Tel (714)771-6900 Fax (714)538-1209 www.associatedlabs.com lnfo@associated/abs. com

Enviro-Chem Inc. 1214 E. Lexington Avenue Pomona, CA 91766

Attn: Curtis Desilets

Comments: TURW Pipeline 10807.001 (141008-15,-16)

04232CA

Lab Request: 347355 Report Date: 11/06/2014 Date Received: 10/08/2014 Client ID: 7420

2,3,7,8-TCDD was analyzed by Ceres Analytical Laboratory, Inc. See attached report.

This laboratory request covers the following listed samples which were analyzed for the parameters indicated on the attached Analytical Result Report. All analyses were conducted using the appropriate methods. Methods accredited by NELAC are indicated on the report. This cover letter is an integral part of the final report.

Sample#

347355-001 347355-002

Client Sample ID

LB-5 (141 008-15) LB-4 (141008-16)

Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to your company. Please feel free to call if there are any questions regarding this report or if we can be of further service.

A~:~c:RIE~~ Nina Prasad President NOTE: Unless notified in writing , all samples will be discarded by appropriate disposal protocol 45 days from date reported.

The reports of the Associated Laboratories are confidential property of our clients and may not be reproduced or used for publication in part or in full without our written permission. This is for the mutual protection of the public, our clients, and ourselves.

27014-01 Lab Request 347355, Page 1 of 12

TESTING & CONSULTING

Chemical

Microbiological

Environmental

Matrix: Water Client: Enviro-Chem Inc. Collector: Client

Sampled: 10/08/2014 1 0:30 Site:

Sample#: J473~5-QQ1 Client Sample#: LB-5 (141008-15) Sample Type:

Analyte Result OF RDL Units Analyzed By Notes Method: EPA 16138 Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD:

2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) See Attached

Method: EPA 351.2 Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD: QC1150185

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 28.6 10 4 mg/L 10/14/14 trinh


1 ,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) NO 0.01 ug/L 11/05/14 kraymond T

1 .2-Dibromoethane (ED8) NO 0.02 ug/L 11/05/14 kraymond T

Method: EPA 821-R-02-012 Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD:

%Survival 90.0 % 10/10/14 quang

Toxicity Units 0.588 TU 10/10/14 quang

Method: EPA 82608 NELAC Prep Method: EPA 50308 QCBatchiD: QC1150187

1 ,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane NO 5 ug/L 10/14/14 bbuilt

1 ,2-Dibromoethane NO 5 ug/L 10/14/14 bbuilt

Surrogate % Recove[)! Limits Notes

1,2-Dich/oroe/hane-d4 (SUR) 101 70-145

4-Bromofluorobenzene (SUR) 107 70-145

Dibromodifluoromethane (SUR) 98 70-145

Toluene-dB (SUR) 104 70-145

Method: SM 4500-0-G Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD:

Dissolved Oxygen 7.34 1 mg/L 10/09/14 mmegaly T2

Method: SM 4500-P-8-5-E Prep Method : 4500-P-8-5 QCBatchiD: QC1150137

Total Phosphorous as P 0.20 0.02 mg/L 10/11/14 dung

Method: SM 5210-B Prep Method: Method/5day QCBatchiD: QC1150287

BOD NO 3 mg/L 10/15/14 cathy 802,T

Method: SM 9221-8 Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD:

Coliform, Total 350 MPN/100ml 10/08/14 jdelacruz

Method: SM 9221-E Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD:

Coliform, Fecal 8 MPN/100ml 10/08/14 jdelacruz

ASSOCIATED LABORATORIES Analytical Results Report


Matrix: Water Client: Enviro-Chem Inc. Collector: Client

Sampled: 10/08/201414:00 Site:

Sample#: ~47~55-0!!2 Client Sample #: L8-4 (141 008-16) Sample Type:

Analyte Result DF RDL Units Analyzed By Notes Method: EPA 16138 Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD:

2,3, 7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) See Attached


Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 1.63 2 0.8 mg/L 10/14/14 trinh


1,2-0ibromo-3-chloropropane (OBCP) ND 0.01 ug/L 11/05/14 kraymond T

1,2-0ibromoethane (EDB) ND 0.02 ug/L 11/05114 kraymond T

Method: EPA 821-R-02-012 Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD:

%Survival 90.0 1 % 10/10/14 quang

Toxicity Units 0.588 TU 10110114 quang

Method: EPA 82608 NELAC Prep Method: EPA 50308 QCBatchiD: QC1150128

1,2-0ibromo-3-chloropropane NO 5 ug/L 10/10/14 bbuill

1,2-Dibromoethane NO 5 ug/L 10/10/14 bbuilt

Surrogate % Recoverx Limits Notes

1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 (SUR) 125 70-145

4-Bromof/uorobenzene (SUR) 96 70-145

Dibromodifluoromethane (SUR) 113 70-145

Toluene-dB (SUR) 101 70-145

Method: SM 4500-0-G Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD:

Dissolved Oxygen 7.14 mg/L 10/09/14 mmegaly T2

Method: SM 4500-P-B-5-E Prep Method: 4500-P-B-5 QCBatchiD: QC1150137

Total Phosphorous as P 0.12 0.02 mg/L 10/11114 dung

Method: SM 5210-8 Prep Method: Method/5day QCBatchiD: QC1150287

BOD 4 3 mg/L 10/15/14 cathy BQ2,T

Method: SM 9221-B Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD:

Coliform, Total 280000 MPN/100ml 10/08/14 jdelacruz

Method: SM 9221-E Prep Method: Method QCBatchiD:

Coliform, Fecal 17 MPN/100ml 10/08/14 jdelacruz

ASSOC/A TED LAB ORA TORIES Analytical Results Report


I QCBatchiD: QC1150128

Matrix: Water

Ana lyle

QC1150128MB1

1,1, 1 ,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1, 1-Trichloroethane

1,1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1 ,2-Trichloroethane

Analyst: bbuilt

Analyzed: 10/10/2014

Method: EPA 8260B

Instrument: VOA-MS (group)

Blank Summary

I Blank I I Result Units I

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ROL

5 5

5

NO

NO

NO

NO ug/L 5

I Notes I

....... - . .. -.-.-- ...... -- - .......... - ..... . .......... - ... . . 1, 1-0ichloroethane

1, 1-0ichloroethene NO

NO

NO

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

5

5

5

5 ! , ~ -~!c~l?r_opr~p~n~ __ • _ _ ~9!~ ....... - .... - -- ...... .. . - ........... . 1 ,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

1 ,2,3-Trichloropropane

1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

NO

NO

NO 1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene NO

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

5

5

5

ug/L 5 ... - ..... ...... -- .... ........... - .... . - . .. - .. . . .. - ....... - .. - .... . . . - - - - .... - ................ .. ..... -1 ,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane NO

1 ,2-Dibromoethane NO

1 ,2-0ichlorobenzene NO 1 ,2-Dichloroethane NO ... -. - ..... . -1 ,2-0ichloropropane ND

1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene NO

1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene NO

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

5

5

5

5

5

5

5 1 ,3-0ichloropropane NO - ...... - - ~ - . - ...... - .. . ~ ..... .. .... .. . - - - - - .. - . - - ~9!~ . - . . - . . . . . . . . . _5- • • • • • • • . • • • - • • • • • • • • . 1 A-Dichlorobenzene NO ug/L 5

2,2-0ichloropropane NO ug/L 5

2-Butanone (MEK) NO ug/L 100

2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether ND ug/L 5 2-clilorotoiuene .• - .• ..•. ........ - .•..• - .. - -No .. .. . ug.tL .• .... ••• •••• - -5 .....••.•.• . •.•.. . ...•.

4-Chlorotoluene NO ug/L 5

4-lsopropyltoluene NO ug/L 5

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) NO ug/L 5 Aceione ... •.• . - •.•. - .•.....•... - - - - - ..•. No - . -.. u

9'tl. . - - . . ........ -1-oo .

Allyl Chloride NO ug/L 5

Benzene

Bromobenzene

NO

NO

ug/L 1

ug/L 5 8ramochio.rcinie.ttiane • · · · · · • • · • • · · • · · · · · · · · · · ·No · .. - ... - ............ - . . -- ....... .._ .... . .... ...... - .... . ..

Bromodichloromethane NO

ug/L

ug/L

5 5

Bromoform ND ug/L 5

~r~r:n?r:n~t~~n_e .•. • . .. _ •• _ •.•..•. ... _____ . _ • ~~ • ___ . ~9!~ _ . __ ..... _ .. ___ 5 _ .• _ • _ ••••• _____ . _ . • • . Carbon Tetrachloride NO ug/L 5 Chlorobenzene NO ug/L 5

Chlorodibromomethane

Chloroethane

Chloroform

Chloromethane

NO

NO . . . . . . . . . . --- ... .. --.-.·No NO

ug/L 5 ug/L 5 ... - . ~ - .......... - ...... - - - ................... - ... ... ... .... . ug/L 5

ug/L 5 cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethene NO ug/L 5

cis-1 ,3-dichloropropene NO ug/L 5 cis-1 ,4-'dicliloro~2~b-uiene - . •• - •. - • - • - - . - . - - - - - . -l'io .. ---ug·ll.: .. - . - . •• • . - .. - .5- . .• •••••.•..•.... •• ••••.. .

Dibromomethane NO ug/L 5

Dichlorodifluoromethane NO ug/L 5

~t~~l~e_n~~n~ •.• _ .••.. . . . .. .• . • _ _ . __ ... . . .. ~~ ..... ~9!~ .... . . . _ ..... __ 5 _ ....•. •..•• ___ .........••. Hexachlorobutadiene NO ug/L 5

lsopropylbenzene NO ug/L 5 --- ·-- -- ------- - ----

ASSOCIATED LABORATORIES Analytical Results Report :-~ .··· i'/ . '-·---~

Lab Request 347355, Page 4 of 12 27014-01

QCBatchiD: QC1150128

Matrix: Water

Analyst: bbuilt


Method: EPA 8260B


I--::--:::-:--:-::-:,-,---------·A_n_a-'ly'--te _______ · _ [ __ ::::~t l __ u_n_its __ _l __ ~---~~=cNote-s - ~ ----------1 QC1150128MB1

m and p-Xylene ND ug/L 5

Methylene chloride ND ug/L 5

Methyl-t-butyl Ether (MTBE) ND ug/L 1

Naphthalene ND ug/L 5 N-'butylben-zerie-. -. -.-. - . • -.- . .••.• ••...... -No .... . ug·n.: .... ••••.. . .... 5 ...•.. •• - ...••... . . - • ....• .

N-propylbenzene ND ug/L 5

a-Xylene ND ug/L 5

Sec-butylbenzene ND ug/L 5 styrene · · · · · · • • • · · · · · · · - · · · · · · · · · • · - · · · ·No · · · · · u

9it.: · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·5- • • • • · • • · · · · · · · · • • · • • • • • · • ·

!-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ND ug/L 10

Tert-butylbenzene ND ug/L 5

Tetrachloroethane ND ug/L 5 Toluene · - - · · · - - · · · · · · · · · · · - · · · · · • · • · · · · ·No · · · · · u

9·,c · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·5- • · • · · • · • · · · · · • · · - • • · · · · · · ·

trans-1 ,2-dichloroethene ND ug/L 5

trans-1 ,3-dichloropropene ND ug/L 5

trans-1 ,4-dichloro-2-butene ND ug/L 5 TrfchJOfaelhen·e· · - - - - - - - · · - · · 6

• • • • • • • • • .. • • • ·NO .. · · · · Ug-/L · · · · · · · · · .... · · · ·s- · · · · · · · · · · .. · · · - · · · · · · · · · · Trichlorofluoromethane

Vinyl Chloride

Xylenes (Total) - - - - . - - ......... - . . - - - - - . . ......... .

ND

ND

ug/L

ug/L

5

5

ND ug/L 5 .. .... .. - ...... .. - .. - . .. .......... - - - .... - - ..... - ~ ... ..

Lab Control Spike/ Lab Control Spike Duplicate Summary

Ana lyle I Spike Amount J LCS LCSD

Spike Result I LCS LCSD Units

l Recoveries 1

I J Limits l LCS LCSD RPD %Rec RPD

QC1150128LCS1

1, 1-Dichloroethene 50 55 ug/L 110 59-172

Benzene 50 54 ug/L 108 62-137

Chlorobenzene 50 59 ug/L 118 60-133

Notes

t:'l~t~~~-~-~~t~l _E~h_e~ (_M_T~~~ __ _____ ... _ . _ . ?~ ____ .. . _ . ~~ .. .... . __ . u_giL_ .•• ~~ .... _ .•.••. ~2_- 1_ 3? . . _ . _ . _ . . . _ .. Toluene 50 52 ug/L 104 59-139

Trichloroethane 50 52 ug/L 104 66-142

Analyte

QC1150128MS1, QC1150128MSD1

1, 1-Dichloroethene

Benzene

Chlorobenzene

Methyl-t-butyl Ether (MTBE)

Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Summary [ Sample I Spike Amount I Spike Result [Amount [ MS MSD MS MSD I Units I Recoveries I I Limits [

MS MSD RPD %Rec RPD [ Notes

ND

ND

NO

NO

Source: 347374-001

50 50 49 50 ug/L 98 100 2.0 59-172 22

50 50 48 51 ug/L 96 102 6.1 62-137 24

50 50 52 52 ug/L 104 104 0.0 60-133 24

50 50 32 37 ug/L 64 74 14.5 62-137 21 Toluene • • · • · · · • · · · · · • • · • · · • ·No · · so · · · ·so· · · · 47 · · · · 4a· · · · · u·giL · · · 94 · · · 96. · · 2.1· · ·59:139 · ·2:, · · · · · · · · · Trichloroethene NO 50 50 47 50 ug/L 94 100 6.2 66-142 21

AS SOCIA TED LA BORA TORIES Analytical Results Report

27014-01 Lab Requesl347355, Page 5 of 12

QCBatchiD: QC1150137 Analyst: dung Method: SM 4500-P-8·5-E

Matrix: Water Analyzed: 10/13/2014 Instrument: CHEM (group)

Blank Summary -

I I I I I l Blank

Analyte Result Units ROL Notes

QC1150137MB1

Total Phosphorous as P NO mg/L 0.02

Total Phosphorous as P04 NO mg/L 0.06


Ana lyle I Spike Amount I

LCS LCSD Spike Result I LCS LCSD Units

I Recoveries I I Limits I LCS LCSD RPO %Rec RPD Notes

QC1150137LCS1

Total Phosphorous as P 0.326 0.33 mg/L 101 80-120

Total Phosphorous as P04 1 1.01 mg/L 101 80-120

Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Summary

[Sam pi~ ~ Spike Amount I Spike Result

I I Recoveries I I Limits 1

1 Analyte Amount MS MSD MS MSD Units MS MSD RPO %Rec RPD Notes

QC1150137MS1, QC1150137MSD1 Source: 347202-001 - -- ··- ~-- - - --Total Phosphorous as P 0.02 0.4 0.4 0.40 0.40 mg/L 100 100 0.0 75-125 20



QCBatchiD: QC1150185 Analyst: tririh Method: EPA 351.2

Matrix: Water Analyzed: 10/14/2014 Instrument: CHEM (group)

Blank Summary --

I I r---- I I I Blank

Analyte Result Units ROL Notes

QC1150185MB1

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen NO mg/L 0.4


Analyte I Spike Amount J LCS LCSO

Spike Result I LCS LCSO Units

I Recoveries I I Limits I LCS LCSD RPO %Rec RPD Notes

QC1150185LCS1

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2.06 2.10 mg/L 102 80-120


Analyte I Sam pi~ I Spike Amount I Amount MS MSO

Spike Result I MS MSO Units

I Recoveries I I Limits 1

1 MS MSO RPO %Rec RPO Notes

QC1150185MS1, QC1150185MSD1 Source: 347336-001

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen NO 10.28 10.28 10.3 10.2 mg/L 100 99 1.0 80-120 20

ASSOCIATED LABORATORIES Analytical Results Report .1~ ,,. " .. .. _ ... , 27014-01 Lab Request 347355, Page 7 of 12

I QCBatchiD: QC1150187

Matrix: Water

Anatyte

QC1150187MB1

1,1, 1 ,2-Tetrachloroethane

1, 1,1-Trichloroethane

1,1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1 ,2-Trichloroethane • • - - • - • - • - ... . .. 0 ••

1,1 ,2-Trichlorotrinuoroethane

1, 1-0ichloroethane

1, 1-0ichloroethene

Analyst: bbuilt


Method: EPA 82608


Blank Summary

) Blank

Result

NO

NO

NO

) Units )

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

I ROL

5

5 5

I Notes

NO •.. ~9!~ .............. _5 ______________ • • ..•. - .. - .. - . . . - . - . NO - ug/L 5

NO

NO

ug/L

ug/L

5

5

I

! , ~ -~~c~l?~o~r_o~:n~ . _ . . . . . . • .. _ . •.•. __ . • • • . . . ~~ . _ . ~9!~ _ . ________ . _ . _5 ...... _ . • ___ . ____ __ _ ... _ .. . 1 ,2 ,3-Trichlorobenzene

1 ,2,3-Trichloropropane

1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

NO

NO

NO

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene NO ug/L i .2-oibi-onio~3-chio.ropropiuie - . - ....•.. - •••• - ••.• No ..... ugiL: .. ----. -. . 1 ,2-0ibromoethane

1 ,2-0ichlorobenzene

1 ,2-0ichloroethane -. 1 ,2-Dichloropropane

1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

NO ug/L

NO ug/L

NO ug/L

NO ug/L

NO ug/L

5 5 5

5 5

5 5

5

5

5

1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene 5 NO ug/L

1 ,3-Dichloropropane NO . __ ~9!~ __ .... _ ... ___ __ s _ . _ . __ . __ . _ . . _ . __ ... _ . _ .. 1 , 4-Dichloroben~e~e- .•••..•... . • - • • . • . . . . NO . . ug/L 5

2,2-Dichloropropane NO ug/L 5

2-Butanone (MEK) NO ug/L 100

2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether NO ug/L 5 2-Chloroioiuerie ..•.•••. - .••. - . - . - • - - - . - .... ND .. - . -ug·n: • - . . . . • . • - . - . -5- - - - - - - •. - . - . - - •••• - - .. , •. -

4-Chlorotoluene NO ug/L 5

4-lsopropyltoluene NO ug/L 5

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) NO - • - - • 0 .. 0 • • • - ... 0 .. 0 .. 0 - .. - .. 0 - .. - •• ~ ... -

. _ _ _ ~9!~ _ . . _ . . . . . . _ _ _ _ _5 _ _ • • • _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ • _ • • • • • • Acetone NO ug/L 100

Allyl Chloride NO

Benzene NO

ug/L

ug/L

5

1

Bromobenzene

8romachioi-cinie.uiane

Bromodichloromethane

.. ... _ .. ~~ . . ... ~9!~ _ ... _ . _ ..... _ . _5 •••••• __ . ___ • _ . _ .. _ .•••.•. NO ug/L 5

NO ug/L 5

Bromoform NO ug/L 5

Bromomethane NO ug/L 5 C8rbcin. TeiraChioride. - · · · · · · - · · .. - · · · · - · · · · · · · ·NO · · · · · ~9-,L · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·5 · · · · · · · · - - · · ·

Chlorobenzene NO ug/L 5

Chlorodibromomethane NO ug/L 5

Chloroethane NO ug/L 5 ChiOrOtOrni .. . .. - - ... - .. . .. .. ...... 0

• 0

r ••• I -NO 0

..... Ug"/L - . - - - - - - - - -5

Chloromethane

cis-1 ,2-0ichloroethene

cis-1 ,3-dichloropropene 0 -.- 0- ............ - ... 0 .......... . . cis-1 ,4-dichloro-2-butene

Oibromomethane

Oichlorodifluoromethane

NO ug/L 5

NO ug/L 5

.. ~~ ..... ~9!~ . ____ _____ _ ... _5_ ••• _ •• .. • ___ . _ . . _ .•.• ••• .• NO

NO

NO

NO

ug/L 5

ug/L 5

ug/L 5

~~~~l~e_n~~n~ •.•• _ . _ _ Hexachlorobutadiene

. . . . ~g!~ . . . . . . . . . . . . - . _5. • • • - • • - - - . . . . . . . - . ug/L 5 · · · · -· · · · · · -· · · · · · ·No

Isopropyl benzene NO ug/L 5 --------- - ---------- - - -· ------- - --·- -



QCBatchiD: QC1150187

Matrix: Water

~1150167MB1 Analyte

m and p-Xylene

Methylene chloride

Methyl-t-butyl Ether (MTBE)

Naphthalene N-b~tylb~n~erie' • • · · • · • · · · · ·

N-propylbenzene

a-Xylene

Analyst: bbuilt


ND

NO

ND

ND .. .. .. ~ ........... ...... . ND

ND

NO

Method: EPA 82609

Instrument: VOA-MS (group}

ug/L

ug/L

ug/L

5 5

... ~9!~ .... . .. .. . ... . _5_ •••••••••• .. • .• •••••• ug/L 5

ug/L

ug/L

5

5

Sec-butylbenzene NO ug/L 5 styrene • • • . - . . - . • • • . • • . • . • • • . • • • • • - . . • . . fllo . . - . . ug-11~ . • • • • - • - • • • . • - .5. • . . - - • • . • . . . . . • • . • • • • • . . . .

!-Butyl alcohol (TBA) NO ug/L 10

Tert-butylbenzene

Tetrachloroethene

Toluene

trans-1 ,2-dichloroethene

trans-1,3-dichloropropene

trans-1,4-dichloro-2-butene

NO ug/L

NO ug/L ........ . . - .. . - ... - - - . ... . - - . - .. .. - ... -NO

NO

ug/L

ug/L

5

5 5

5

ND ug/L 5

NO ug/L 5 ..... . . ... . . .... - ........... .. -. . . ..... - . - - .. .. . . - - .. .. .. - - - .. - - - ............... - - - - - - . - ... - - ... - . -- ... . ...... .. Trichloroethene NO ug/L 5

Trichlorofluoromethane NO ug/L 5

Vinyl Chloride NO ug/L 5

~y_l~n~: ~T?~a~ . __ __ . • _ .......... . ....... _ . - ~o . .. .. ~9!~ ...... _. __ . __ . _s_. _ ....... _ .. _ .... . ....... .


Ana lyle I Spike Amount I Spike Result I LCS LCSD LCS LCSD Units I Recoveries 1 I Limits I

LCS LCSD I RPO %Rec RPD QC1150167LCS1

1, 1-0ichloroethene 50 51 ug/L 102

Benzene 50 49 ug/L 98

Chlorobenzene 50 49 ug/L 98

Methyl-t-butyl Ether (MTBE) 50 53 ug/L 106 Toluene . . ••.• - . - . .• . ... •...•.•• - . 56 . . . ... . . - 46 . - . - . . ... . u'giL ... 92 . ... . . .. .

Trichloroethene 50 47 ug/L 94


59-172

62-137

60-133

62-137

59-139

66-142

Notes

Analyte 1 Sample 1 Spike Amount I Spike Result I I Amount I MS MSO MS MSD Units I Recoveries I I Limits I

MS MSD RPD %Rec RPD I Notes

QC1150187MS1, QC1150187MSD1 Source: 347355-001

1, 1-0ichloroethene

Benzene NO

NO

NO

NO

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

51

52

55

55

50

53

ug/L

ug/L

102 100 2.0 59-172 22

Chlorobenzene

Methyl-t-butyl Ether (MTBE) Toluene .... .. . - - . ... . ... ..• • No' . - . 56 ... . so· .. . 55 .. Trichloroethene NO 50 50 55

104 106

57 ug/L 11 o 114

59 ug/L 110 118 ........ - . . - ... . .. .... .. .. .. . 54 ug/L 110 108

52 ug/L 11 0 1 04

ASSOCI A TED LAB ORA TORIES Analytical Results Report


1.9 62-137 24

3.6 60-133 24

7.0 62-137 21

1.8 59-139 21

5.6 66-142 21

QCBatchiD: QC1150287 Analyst: cathy Method: SM 5210-B

Matrix: Water Analyzed: 10/20/2014 Instrument: CHEM {group)

Blank Summary -- -------

I I I I I I Blank

Ana lyle Result Units RDL Notes QC1150287MB1

BOD ND mg/L 3


Analyte I Spike Amount I LCS LCSD

Spike Result I LCS LCSD Units

I Recoveries I I Limits I LCS LCSD RPD %Rec RPD Notes

QC1150287LCS1

BOD 198 214 mg/L 108 !4.6-115.'

ASSOCI A TED LAB ORA TORIES Analytical Results Report


QCBatchiD: QC1150669 Analyst: kraymond Method: EPA 504.1

Matrix: Water Analyzed: 11/05/2014 Instrument: SVOA-GC (group)

Blank Summary -

I I I I I I Blank

Ana lyle Result Units RDL Notes

QC1150669MB1

1 ,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) ND ug/L 0.01

1 ,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ug/L 0.02


Analyte I Spike Amount I Spike Result I LCS LCSD LCS LCSD Units

I Recoveries 1

I I Limits I LCS LCSD RPD %Rec RPD Notes

QC1150669LCS1, QC1150669LCSD1

1 ,2-0ibromo-3-chloropropane (OBCP) 0.2 0.2 0.248 0.239 ug/L 124 120 4 70-130 25

1 ,2-0ibromoethane (EDB) 0.2 0.2 0.256 0.249 ug/L 128 125 3 70-130 25

ASSOCIATED LABORATORIES Analytical Results Report '~ /l // :-= 27014-01 Lab Request 347355, Page 11 of 12

Qualifiers 8

81

8Q1

8Q2

8Q3

c D

ow J

L

M

NC

p

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

5

T T2

TIC

Definitions OF MDL

NO RDL

Data Qualifiers and Definitions

Analyte was present in an associated method blank. Associated sample data was reported with qualifier. Analyte was present in an sample and associated method blank greater than MDL but less than DRL. Associated sample data was reported with qualifier. No valid test replicates . Result may be greater. Best result was reported with qualifier. Sample toxicity possible. No valid test replicates.

Minimum DO is less than 1.0 mg/L. Result may be greater and reported with qualifier.

Laboratory Contamination.

The sample duplicate RPD was not within control limits, the sample data was reported without further clarification. Sample result is calculated on a dry weigh basis

Reported value is estimated

The laboratory control sample (LCS) or laboratory control sample duplicate (LCSD) was out of control limits. Associated sample data was reported with qualifier. The matrix spike (MS) or matrix spike duplicate (MSD) was not within control limits due to matrix interference. The associated LCS and/or LCSD was within control limits and the sample data was reported without further clarification . The analyte concentration in the sample exceeded the spike level by a factor of four or greater, spike recovery and limits do not apply. Sample was received without proper preservation according to EPA guidelines.

Analyte Calibration Verification exceeds criteria and the result was reported with qualifier.

Analyte calibration was not verified and the result was estimated and reported with qualifier.

Analyte initial calibration was not available or exceeds criteria. The result was estimated and reported with qualifier. Analyte result out of calibration range and was reported with qualifier

The surrogate recovery was out of control limits due to matrix interference. The associated method blank surrogate recovery was within control limits and the sample data was reported without further clarification . Sample was extracted/analyzed past the holding time.

Sample was analyzed ASAP but received and analyzed past the 15 minute holding time.

Tentatively Identified Compounds

Dilution Factor

Method Detection Limit

Analyte was not detected or was less than the detection limit.

Reporting Detection Limit

AS SOCIA TED LA BORA TORIES Analytical Results Report


La

b.

No

. 3

4-3

-3 S

5-1

LA

BO

RA

TO

RY

WO

RK

SH

EE

T

Dat

e R

ecei

ved:

1 o

I 8

/1 4

: D

ate

Rep

orte

d: ~

, o !

14=

1 1

4=

Re

po

rt T

o:

.£nV~t"O -

C~e"MM :

I Y\I

C..

.

:1.0

:1.

Sam

ple

Des

crip

tion

Wc:

:ttel

'" ,p

L

B-

5 (

14

10

0 ~-

15

) -

· _

_ _

Bio

ass

ay

Typ

e

Sla

tic-

!L_

_C

on

linu

ou

s __

Re

ne

wa

.l_

..... v _

_

Scr

eeni

ng_L

_Def

initi

ve. _

__

_

Tes

t O

rgan

ism

: P

imep

hale

s P

rom

elas

S

ourc

e:

Aqu

atic

Bio

Sys

tem

s A

cclim

atiz

atio

n: ~ D

ays

@

20

de

g. C

(F

. B-

2)

Aqu

aria

Vol

ume

: 0.

5 lit

ers

Aqu

aria

Dep

th:

v N

o. F

ish

I C

once

ntra

tion:

_

1_

0_

Tot

al C

hlor

ine

Res

idua

l: Y

ll 1 '.

D S

ampl

e C

ondu

ctiv

ity:

1 t±

& S

um

hosl

cm

Org

anis

m C

hara

cter

istic

s -

len

gth

(m

m):

M

in:

.... m

m

Max

: v

mm

A

vg:

mm

W

eigh

(gm

): M

in:

....

gm

Max

: v

gm

Avg

: gm

D

ilutio

n w

ater

-

Sou

rce

Non

e H

ard

ne

ss-

Initi

al:

~o o

m

all

Fin

al:

4-o

0 m

q/1

Alk

alin

e -I

nit

ial:

~ &

0 m

g/1

Fin

al:

.1 &

o

mg/

1 A

erat

ion:

N

/ A

Con

trol H

ardn

ess

Initi

al:

li-s

m

g/1.

Fin

al:

5 5

mg/

1. C

ontr

ol A

lkal

ine

Initi

al:

? ~

mgl

l F

inal

3

8 m

g/1.

C

ontro

l Con

duct

ivity

.2

,so

um

hos/

cm

Aer

atio

n R

ate:

N

/A

Aer

atio

n D

urat

ion:

T

anks

:

Bio

ass

ay

Dat

e C

on

tro

l D

up

Con

trol

10

0%

Co

nd

itio

ns

Tim

e

1o

ho

Org

an

ism

s 1

01

'\1

10

11

::t,

S

urv

ivin

g

1 o

l1 ~

"ioJ

.:t4-

10

lSS

D

isso

lve

d

c::t

·~n

Oxy

ge

n

11

' 0

0

mg/

1 110!~11

1o

:so

S

tart

pH

24

Hr

48

Hr

Te

mp

7

2 H

r 96

Hr

Re

su

lts -

LC

5o =

%S

urv

iva

l

Tox

ic U

nits

T.U

.

No

. %

10

10

0 1

0

10

0

10

1

Q.L

)_

"10

'JO

O

1o

I

1o

a_

6

.1+

6

. s

".:!-.

1

":l-. ~

~-'-+- -.:

r.o

11

''Li-

oC

~:t

:to

.o"C

~~

~o . .

2.,°C

~-~

1~.0°C

~._1,

l_j"

.q oc

~

mg/

1'

~mg/1

GJ0

°/o

o.s

&8

No.

%

N

o.

10

100

10

1f"

>

"\ () (

'}

10

1

()

10

1"\

1('

)

""'

1 () 1

"1

q 1

()

10

0

q C

....U

-~ro

c-.

c..

":1-

.n

~(')

"==-

S ~-~·

~-.:

:;

':T.l+

~.

":f.

~.n

1Gi.'~ °

C

~

1

-.:r.:

:t :l.

O.o

oC

~.b

~-~

:ln

. .:~.

Qc

,., ~

~-1

:U'J

.fl

"C

"":J-.

s -=

T. ~

1(:

!."t

°C

1-

.c;,.

Obs

erva

tion/

Rem

arks

&

i\ ------~~

------------

%

100

10

0

10

0

qo

<

10

1~.-

:J °

C

~0.0

oc

~n.:l

°C

w.o

oC

1t

1.~

°C

Du _

Q_ 1

00%

N

o.

10

10

_

10

'\{

)

Gj

C,.

C,

~.1

'T.1

-"'

:j-,

Cj

':f..~

~.1

+.G

:. +

.J!

~-s

-:r.

b

%

No.

%

N

o.

100

10_

0 1

C_

O

10

0

<1

0

/

/ v

·1.'1

..~

"C

X

1'.2

.0.0

oc

/o

C

l~ u

c /

:l()

.O °

C

/ 1t

'I-~

°C v

Met

hod

of C

alcu

latio

ns

95%

Con

fiden

ce L

imits

LCso

Met

hod

oc

Qc oc _1

\f/

/A

.

lab

ora

tory

Sup

ervi

sor

%

No.

%

/ /

/

/ v

/ /

oc

oc

oc

oc

oc

Qc

oc

oc

oc

oc

Lab.

No

. :)

4-3

-?>

55

-.l.

Dat

e R

ecei

ved:

1 0

/ S /

1 4:

LA

BO

RA

TO

RY

WO

RK

SH

EE

T

Dat

e R

epor

ted

: 1

o j1

4-

/14

-

Re

po

rt T

o:

.EnV~r-o

-C

-t\ew

v 1

vu

e..

Sa

mp

le D

escr

iptio

n W

Gi\. te

l'"

+-L

J!! -

4-(

1 4=

1 0

0 g

-1

G:. )

Bio

assa

y T

ype

Sta

tic_

L_

Co

nti

nu

ou

s _

_ R

en

ew

ar_

v

__

Scr

eeni

ng_L

_Def

initi

ve _

__

_

Te

st O

rgan

ism

: P

imep

hale

s P

rom

elas

S

ourc

e:

Aqu

atic

Bio

Sys

tem

s A

cclim

atiz

atio

n:

__

a_

Da

ys@

2

0

deg

. C {

F. 8

-2)

Aqu

aria

Vo

lum

e:

0.5

r.ter

s A

quar

ia D

epln

: ./

N

o. F

ish

I C

once

ntr

atio

n:

_1

_0

_ T

otal

Chl

orin

e R

esid

ual:

rol :

D

Sam

ple

Con

duct

ivity

: 1

S G

>o

!Jm

hos/

cm

Org

anis

m C

hara

cter

istic

s -

Leng

th (

mm

):

Min

: .....

mm

M

ax:

v m

m

Avg

: m

m

We

igh

(gm

): M

in:

..,.

gm

Max

: v-

qm

Avg

: gm

D

ilutio

n w

ater

•

Sou

rce

Non

e H

ardn

ess

-In

itia

l:

1> 5

0

mq/

1 F

inal

: 3

G 0

m

q/1

Alk

alfn

e -I

nitia

l: ..2

li-

S

mg/

1 F

inal

: !l.

4-S

m

g{l

Aer

atio

n:

N/ A

C

ontr

ol H

ardn

ess

Initi

al:

1.\. s

m

g/1.

Fin

al:

s s

mg/

1. C

ontr

ol Alk

alin

~ In

itial

: ?.

~

mq/

1 F

inal

3

8 m

q/1.

C

ontr

ol C

ondu

ctiv

ity

~.!l o

)J

mho

s/cm

Aer

atio

n R

ate

: N

/A

Aer

atio

n D

urat

ion:

Bio

ass

ay

Dat

e C

ontr

ol

Co

nd

itio

ns

Tim

e

No

. %

_

10

11

..!1

10

10

0 'lO

J.'

tl

1...0

. 1

00

O

rga

nis

ms

"\O

..l1

!t.

....1

..6

__1_

0_0

Sur

vivi

ng

_1

o_j

1.?.

..'1

()

10

0

_j_~

10

1

00

_

j 0:

...5.

.5.

_6_

. Li-

Dis

solv

ed

~·

.S_Q_

_6. ~

Oxy

ge

n

...1.1.

:...:

1.0.

..3

-.-1

mg/

1 _1

_0,;

4-0

~?.

....:1

.1'..

.00.

...

3-_.

4-

Sta

rt

3..

..0

. 1-

'l.]:_

"C

pH

24 H

r ';

}-2

..

2,(

).{

) o

c 48

Hr

'':).

.:.,

:~.o

.~oc

T

em

p

72 H

r '4

.1

l~o.

o"C

96 H

r 1

-. ~

1~ -~

"C

Re

sult

s -

LC

5o =

lliL

_ m

g/1

~mgfl

cto

%

o.s

88

Tan

ks:

Du~ C

ontr

ol

10

0%

N

o.

%

No.

%

10

10

0 10

10

0 1

0 ~

10

1

0_

!l

....1

..Q

..:l..

.Q..Q

. 1

Q

10

0

1..0

. .,_

o_o_

g

_9

.0

'10

...

1..Q

_Q

01

qo

b.

..Y

:_

0_

3-.

.h

_...

b_

6.~

~,_Q_

~-~

+:t.

{l

..O

_3

:_. 4

-+

R

_

t_Q

_

_1q.

.3-_

°C

"t.4

1~.~ u

c ~.:t.

20

.0 v

c t.

.R ~oc

-=..

~ ::1

.0.2

. "C

,.

_ <1

2

0 :

:1.,. oc

-=

t-.1

~.o

"C

"'=!-.

":1-

~o.o

"C

~-:..3.. ~"C

-=t.R

11

q·C

1"C

Ot!Q

. 100

%

No

. 10

~0

_1

_Q

...9

!1

..6.3

:..

--=t

_._Q

...3.

.cb_

~.o

~"::-

-,..4

..

3__S

~.Cl

"T.3

-~._8_

%

No.

%

10

0 ..

1.0_

0

10

0 ..9

.0

5..

Q

1<'i."

T °C

X

...

l..Q.,Q

_"C

/o

C

:l0

.2.

uc

/

2o

.o "

C

.L

...:1.1~"C v

Met

hod

of C

alcu

latio

ns

95%

Con

fiden

ce L

imits

LCso

Met

hod

"C

"C

"C

No.

L L ~ N

/

/A.

Labo

rato

ry S

uper

viso

r

%

No.

%

/!

/ /

/ v

L L

_ "C

oc

"C

"C

"C

"C

"C

"C

"c

"c 1

Ceres Analytical Laboratorjj Inc. 4919 Windplay Dr., Suite 1 ElDorado Hills, CA 95762

October 20, 2014

Associated Laboratories Mr. Christopher Ota 806 North Batavia Orange, CA 92868

Mr. Ota,

Ceres ID: 10481

Enclosed please find the results for the two aqueous samples received on Octobet• 10,2014. These samples were analyzed for 2,3,7,8·TCDD by EPA method 1613B. Routine turn·around time was provided for this work.

This work was authorized under Associated Laboratories' P.O.# 923512.

The report consists of a Cover Letter, Sample Inventory (Section I), Data Summary (Section II), Sample Tracking (Section VI), and Qualifiers/Abbreviations (Section VII). Raw Data (Section III), Continuing Calibration (Section IV), and Initial Calibration (Section V) are available in a full report (.pdf format) upon request.

The Sample Tracking Section includes all external and internal chain of custodies, labOl'atory bench sheets, and any special instructions received.

If you have any questions regarding this report, please feel free to contact me at (916)932·5011.

Sincerely,

James M. Hedin Director of Operations/CEO jhedin@ceres·lab .com

Ceres Sample ID: 10481-001 10481-002

Section 1: Sample Inventory

Sample IP 347355-001 347355-002

Date Received 10/10/2014 10/10/2014

Collection Date &Time 10/8/2014 10:30 10/8/2014 14:00

Section II: Data Summary

EP

A M

eth

od

16

13

B

Cer

es A

nal

ytic

al L

abor

ator

y

Sam

ple

ID

: M

eth

od

Bla

nk

[;II~Dt

12ilt

il S

am(!

le D

ata

Li!~ato~ D

ata

Nam

e:

Ass

ocia

ted

Labo

rato

ries

M

atr

ix:

Aqu

eous

La

b S

ampl

e ID

: O

-MB

001

Dat

e R

ecei

ved:

N

A

Pro

ject

: 34

7355

S

ampl

e S

ize:

1.

000

L Q

C B

atc

h#

: 12

50

Dat

e E

xtra

cted

: 1

6-0

ct-1

4

ZB-5

MS

Ana

lysi

s D

ate

: 1

7-0

ct-1

4

Ana

lyte

C

on

e. (

pg

jL)

DL

0 E

MPC

b Q

ual

ifie

rs

Lab

eled

Sta

nd

ard

s %

R

LCL-

UC

L c

Qu

alif

iers

2,3,

7,8-

TC

DD

N

D

1.02

IS

13

C-2,

3,7,

8-TC

DD

94

.4

31

-13

7

CR

S 37

I

C 4-

2,3,

7,8-

TC

DD

87

.5

42

-16

4

I

a. S

ampl

e sp

ecifi

c e

stim

ate

d d

ete

ctio

n l

imit

.

b.

Est

imat

ed m

axi

mu

m p

ossi

ble

con

cen

tra

tion

.

c.

Low

er c

on

tro

l lim

it-

up

pe

r co

ntr

ol

limit

.

Ana

lyst

: JM

H

Rev

iew

ed b

y:

BS

-

EP

A M

eth

od

16

13

8

Cer

es A

naly

tica

l La

bo

rato

ry

,sa

mp

le ID

: O

ng

oin

g P

reci

sio

n a

nd

Re

cove

ry

I tl1

tDt D

illi

Sa

me

leD

ata

la

bora

tOQ

! Dat

a

I Nam

e:

Ass

ocia

ted

Labo

rato

ries

M

atr

ix:

Aqu

eous

La

b S

ampl

e ID

: O

-OP

R00

1 D

ate

Rec

eive

d:

NA

I

Pro

ject

: 34

7355

S

ampl

e S

ize:

1

.00

0 L

Q

C B

atc

h#

: 1

25

0

Dat

e E

xtra

cted

: 1

6-0

ct-1

4

ZB-5

MS

Ana

lysi

s D

ate:

1

7-0

ct-1

4

I i' An

aly

te

Con

e. {

ng

/ml)

L

imits

a

Qu

alif

iers

I

Labe

led

Sta

ndar

ds

Con

e.

Lim

its a

Q

ua

lifie

rs

2,3,

7,8-

TC

DD

9.

05

7.3-

14.6

IS

13

C-2

,3,7

,8-T

CD

D

10

6

25-1

41

CR

S 37

CI4-

2,3,

7,8-

TC

DD

10

.3

3.7-

15.8

I

a. M

etho

d ac

cept

ance

cri

teri

a .

Ana

lyst

: JM

H

Rev

iew

ed b

y:

BS

EP

A M

eth

od

16

13

8

Cer

es A

na

lyti

ca

l La

bo

rato

ry

Sa

mp

le 1

0:

3473

55-0

01

Cli

ent D

i!!!!

S

amH

ie D

ata

la

b2!:5

!1!i!

D: Q

ati!

Nam

e:

Ass

ocia

ted

Labo

rato

ries

M

atr

ix:

Aqu

eous

La

b S

ampl

e ID

: 1

04

81

-00

1

Dat

e R

ecei

ved:

1

0-0

ct-1

4

Pro

ject

: 3

47

35

5

Sam

ple

Siz

e:

0.94

8 L

QC

Ba

tch

#:

12

50

D

ate

Ext

ract

ed:

16

-0ct

-14

Dat

e C

olle

cted

: 8

-0ct

-14

ZB

-5 M

S A

naly

sis

Dat

e:

17

-0ct

-14

Tim

e C

olle

cted

: 1

0:3

0

An

alyt

e C

on

e. (

pg

/L)

DL

0 E

MP

Cb

Q

ua

lifi

ers

L

abel

ed S

tan

dar

ds

%R

LC

L-U

CL

c Q

ua

lifi

ers

2,3,

7,8

-TC

DD

NO

1.

25

IS

13C

-2,3

,7,8

-TC

DD

92

.8

31

-13

7

~

37 CI

4-2

,3,7

,8-T

CD

D

91.6

4

2-

164

I I I I

a.

Sam

ple

spec

ific

est

ima

ted

de

tect

ion

lim

it.

b.

Est

imat

ed m

axi

mu

m p

ossi

ble

con

cen

tra

tion

.

c.

Lo

we

r co

ntr

ol

lim

it-

up

pe

r co

ntr

ol

limit

.

Ana

lyst

: JM

H

Rev

iew

ed b

y:

BS

EP

A M

eth

od

16

13

8

Cer

es A

na

lyti

cal L

ab

ora

tory

Sam

ple

ID:

34

73

55

-00

2

{;li

ent D

ata

Sa

me

le D

ata

laborato~ D

ata

Nam

e:

Ass

ocia

ted

La

bo

rato

rie

s M

atr

ix:

Aqu

eous

La

b S

ampl

e ID

: 1

04

81

-00

2

Dat

e R

ecei

ved:

1

0-0

ct-1

4

Pro

ject

: 34

7355

S

ampl

e S

ize

: 0.

934

L Q

C B

atc

h#

: 1

25

0

Dat

e E

xtra

cted

: 1

6-0

ct-1

4

Dat

e C

olle

cted

: 8

-0ct

-14

ZB

-5 M

S A

naly

sis

Dat

e:

17

-0ct

-14

Tim

e C

olle

cted

: 1

4:0

0

Ana

lyte

C

one.

(p

g/L

) D

l0 E

MP

Cb

Qu

alif

iers

la

be

led

Sta

ndar

ds

%R

LC

L-U

CL'

Q

ua

lifie

rs

2,3,

7,8-

TC

DD

N

D

2.86

~

13C

-2,3

,7,8

-TC

DD

10

2 3

1-

137

CR

S 37

CI4-

2,3,

7,8-

TC

DD

10

7 4

2-1

64

a. S

ampl

e sp

ecifi

c e

stim

ate

d d

ete

ctio

n l

imit

.

b.

Est

imat

ed m

axi

mu

m p

ossi

ble

con

cen

tra

tion

.

c. L

ower

co

ntr

ol lim

it-

up

pe

r co

ntr

ol

limit

.

Ana

lyst

: JM

H

Rev

iew

ed b

y:

85

Section VI: Sample Tracking

Cer

es A

naly

tica

l L

abo

rato

ry,

Inc.

49

19

Win

d p

lay

Dr.

Sui

te 1

El D

ora

do

Hill

s, C

A

95

76

2

Tel

: (9

16

}93

2-5

01

1

~·

Co

mp

an

y N

ame:

t'

1:5S

cc..

•a.h

~ L.

.:.b

oro.

:t~>

r•C:

S

Co

nta

ct N

am

e:

Chr

i;,fo

p'tl<

.r

0 \-&

.... A

ddre

ss:

80

(o

IV·

&._t.

._.,.;"

....

S+.

0..-"

""'

CA

Ph:

(l

;'i)

<1t

o -5

72~

Fx

: __

__

__

_ _

Em

ail:

Ma

trix

ab

revi

atio

ns:

A:

Aq

ue

ou

s

E: E

fflu

en

t

S:S

oil

Cha

in o

f Cus

tody

P

leas

e P

rin

t in

Pen

Em

ail:

I VI

DW

: D

rink

ing

Wa

ter

..... ~,m

r:::

rl

SO:

Sol

id

-u:

:l ~

.-f

<:(

c.

. w

'iL

)S

I 2.

.

Pro

ject

lD:

--=::3

~Y....

:7...=

3;..:;

:5-=s;._ _

__

__

_

0 0\

N

QO

<(

0..

u

.J T

(bu

sine

ss d

ays)

Str....d~cr:L

15 d

ays;

Rus

h T

AT

ava

ilab

le

call

M

0 1.."

Q

O

1n

N

V

i Q

O

<:

<(

u 0

..

z w

~ I .....

rl

Q)

U)

...c:

<:(

...

..,

c..

0 :.u

~~~~-~-~?~~]/~.:;;-.~

o 19

98 W

HO

::;

20

05 W

HO

::

Oth

er

Clie

nt u

nder

stan

ds t

ha

t all

term

s de

srib

ed in

the

pro

posa

ls,

qu

ota

tion

s, a

nd

/or

the

gen

eral

term

s an

d co

nd

itio

ns

of C

eres

Ana

lytic

al l

ab

ora

tory

will

be

follo

wed

.

Cer

es A

naly

tical

la

bo

rato

ry re

serv

es t

he

rig

ht t

o t

erm

ina

te it

s se

rvic

e o

r w

ithh

old

de

Me

ry o

f rep

orts

, if

in C

eres

· di

scre

tion

the

te

rms

of t

he

pro

ject

hav

e be

en b

roke

n.

Sample Receipt Check List

Ceres ID:

Client Project ID: J </7-3S.,)

/a# C; 23 s-J7_ Chain of Custody Relinquished by signed?

Custody Seals? Present? Y/N

Intact? YIN

NA:

Unlabeled I Illegible Samples y N

Proper Containers:

Drinking Water, Sodium Thiosulfate present? YIN!@

List COC discrepancies:

List Damaged Samples:

Rev 4 Form AS.O Effective Date: 10/24/13

Ceres Analytical Laboratory

Ce.res ID)O Y81 PB: }2SO Sample#s: /-.J-'2..

Matrix (circle one): Drinking Water ~ Effluent

Solid Soil Sediment Sludge Clay/Clay Slurry

Method [check one): o 1613 2,3,7,8-TCDD ~~

o 1613 2,3,7,8-TCOD/F

Instructions:

Rev4 Form M 4.0

Process Request

Due Date:~ '1

Influent Ash

Other: ___ _

Effective Date: 8/7/14

Sample Volume Calculation

Instructions: 1. Calibrate balance 2. Tare balance 3. Place Full sample bottle with cap on balance. Record weight as Sample+Bottle Wt. 4. Weigh empty bottle and cap. Record as Bottle Wt. 5. Calculate sample Volume (assuming lg = lml) as follows:

Sample Volume= (Sample+ Bottle Wt)- Empty Bottle Wt.

Ceres ID Sample +Bottle Wt. iinPW. 6ott\e Wt. Sample Volume i. " ' l- rr I V//&//'1._

/rff '1 tJ I - ) I .!7 .JL • .J ,~ -..

I ~7 ~~"f..c t:f. .. ,. ., ~ l6/!'J!J 'f ....

tact¥!- r 11t'f;-cJI ~ lflt }7...~ (}I ~ vr L

J ~1. ,.J

4 ll.'J...cJ It cJ. GJ.J 11 L /Js-2./}i .-.J

.

Chemist: __ -:J~C!lo..------- Date:.-LiJ}u)&_

Rev 4 l=nrm M~ .o j:ffpr.tiVP n::.tP.: P./7/14

Me

tho

d:

16 /

3 f!>

SO

P #

: -i

() i ~

l

Cer

es A

naly

tical

lab

ora

tory

S

amol

e P

reo

Ben

ch S

h

ISS

/PA

R

CSS

~

RSS

C

eres

ID

Clie

nt 1

0 V

er.

wt/

vol

~em/

date

/wit

ness

che

m/d

ate/

wit

ness

A

P faa~

FC

chem

/dat

e/w

itne

ss

0-1

25

0-M

BO

Ol

Me

tho

d B

lan

k J~

6 ()(

] L

lk IOI

Jt.Jr~

fo

t ~ i~

/t;),

U1.

n;A-

l;fd};~

}~l /

JfJ-

{jtr/o

-)'1

f'ri

p::i2S

O.~OPR

OO_l·~

.~~:~::.\~~~

_-;c)p

:~·::_.

·· ,,

• 1~

~~/i

Jt/L

,~l

_..

~ .-

~ ... "I

. ~:

1(

I ~

•• i.

10

481-

1250

-001

34

7355

-001

v

d.~

lfJ L

J

I I

1o48

1-n

so-o

o2

; 3ir

i3ss

"~oo2

_v

it,;

rf!;J(

;: ;~I

fjj)

.?J:

?~~,

~-

--~~

~~~;

~; "

.VJ·

f~tL

~". ~

-~

----

t

~· "

--•

"";"

? ,.

:rt:

,,.-;:

:.,. .. ;.

.::-~

\' -P~~·h.t:'~~ ..

~;_;;.

. tl.

1

• -

~ ~

-.

"=~-

--..

-:;:.,

-~'

_,.:.

.J-

·..,•

r4!:~•..::7';':~::\.;::

0:

~·

• :;

..';'

.;_

~-~~·-~.-.:

--

_ ·-

~_.,..

.

tS;:-

::-. .. -

u~·

_.,,.

.-p _

_ ...__

~ "'

$')

:..1

;..;

~· .. ~

':..:

-.."~~~:~>-

..... \--

..·.: .

. ~

... ;-_

....., ·

•-Z~---

·"£·-4

-•;

.·~~

~ 7._,:--~;_

;-~._..-,~~

~!~~~~~~:__,~~·

;.;. -

-r~~--~ .

. -

-'~

~-~~

L&r:

_:-;

. • .

. ~--~

f:';

,l!i

_:;;

~~~·

-.c

-_,

~~~~~~.

-:.~~p:~--

;--:

--

.. •r

. "·

., •. <

:r ~ic:--~~~~·

,-·.•..

._ :.

•;-~

.~--

""

' --

~-

i ""

·t.

"-' -

""'

.. .-~

.'·

_.'_·t-(L

~-•.

~ .. ~·-

_::~.~

-:~:~·

,:,l

~Jrr~~i·

'r·~;:

_;_r-~

-.. ~~'

1:;~_

-·· ._.

... ,

~l

: .. ~

-:-:.

.:~~ ,

.. •

· "'

._...,.

(·,\

.~·"-:

.'-:.::.

...-• .

... '"

"..

..

-T_,...

,._)o._~·,.l"_,..t

~~~~~Ut.

"'--,-,--

.. ~~~~.•

.-._

,;.

,.. L:

: -~

~~~~~--1.-.

,. •-

·"•

f!!j

,.,.

k~~

-~:.

.?s:

-::-

i:,

-"~

~~-~

• ,_

.4

-

"" ...

c;

.,_

,I

~·A.

.'

~ ~

-..

. 1~-

~ ...

.... ~ ~

.• ...

......

""'?'

":'"',

; . ~-lj

• ~...r ~~ .

.... ,.:

--

-r;

I -

--~. !

":::;

. .

,.

.

=--

-'li,

... _

_J -:

~~~ -~

-~

~ :_

. :~~~

-~ ~~""'i

• --~-

' 6~

""l.........

.: .~.:

"-:""!

_:._

.;.~

~!!'

....

-~~Ill ~~ ~ ... -

:j';

--~

, _

_ c

--..

.r ~--~..r--.----=---~-

...... -

---:

1"·

---.

,.,.

_..,._

_ .....

. -

---

"" r-

:-+

._

"'t:

l ..

~~_,.

...

~~

... ..-

--;--

--

----

----

-~~

~ ...

,.. -

e---~

-'

.._ o

• ..

..

r '

' I"'

~ ~

--

...

, J...

_

...

~--.

..:;

~-''1-~.Cr•~

· .-

-1;;

; -=

-t

=

~

• .-

•x··-

.ii-

..~Y

.i\=

.. :.-..

·.

~·

L._

. -·

'-~.

-·

.· •

Co

mm

ents

:@ O

PR

spi

ked

wit

h N

SS

.

soxh

let S

tart

: IS

!] C)

to

/a)'f

so

xhle

t sto

p:

cJ) :

. >s-

lo)o

J 1

· Q,

loh(

/r'f

o i ~

'--10

fJ

)~ P

-~~~~~---------------

Sam

ples

Ret

urne

d by

:. _

___:_lt

_'\.1 ...

.. /J~· =--

----

----

----

----

-

No

te s

ampl

es D

eple

ted:

J f

Z-

For

m M

l.O

revS

Ext

ract

s to

In

stru

me

nt:

J /

~&(}

/0 ;{

z.-/ry

E

xtra

cts

retu

rne

d t

o S

tora

ge L

ocat

ion:

(J

J ~

Cf s;

-I 0

b o k

't

Che

mis

t: ,9a

Pag

e 1

of2

Eff

ectiv

e D

ate:

8/7

/14

Met

hod:

g

lf ~

(;:>

SO

P#

: 6

f, I

S

tan

dar

d

Sta

nd

ard

10

ISS

NS

S

css

RSS

I

Cer

es A

na

lytic

al L

ab

ora

tory

S

ampl

e P

rep

Ben

ch S

heet

V

ol.

Exp

ira

tio

n D

ate

Sol

vent

s/S

olut

ions

/Pac

king

Mat

eria

ls

Nam

e A

mou

nt

Lo

t#

x· Dat

e

lofu..

~/1<:

'i S'd

~ f

J 4 '2

. 2 f }

-2 ~ r J

r t[

t1~ y~ .

__ 'J

Od

EL

l o_o r~

-0 J .

t.( 3

t;;' [

Z.

3 hr

),_ ~

~> ({

~· ~

-r ~-

---;

' P

J 0 0

J J'

f tT

~ /r /r

')

fl ~_

,' c:

qj_

l{ ~

_ p /_

fj_J]

U If

A

Lf) t/

cs-_

/±

c~a\

~f

rj ---

lo 9-

-.;_;jy

jf :1

kl£

4

c : J

19:)

6 ='

fJ 1 Vo

6 f '11

1-'1

) I J

r r

da

~Ov,

Jrs=

3 fo

[6

))'1

1}-

l)..)J

-Js-

Qa

?rr !

Jcrr

:&x

'1 t)

.-; I

L U

J 6

) J 'f

!9-

4 /i

)/,r

-

For

m M

l.O

rev4

C

hem

ist:

(Z I

Pag

e 2

of 2

Eff

ectiv

e D

ate:

7/1

2/1

3

J

B

E

D

X

H

*

I

Cone.

DL

ND

%Rec.

Section VII: Qualifiers/ Abbreviations

Concentration found below the lower quantitation limit but greater than zero.

Analyte present in the associated Method Blank.

Concentration found exceeds the Calibration range of the HRGC/HRMS.

This analyte concentration was calculated from a dilution.

The concentration found is the estimated maximum possible concentration due to chlorinated diphenyl ethers present in the sample.

Recovery limits exceeded. See cover letter.

Results taken from dilution.

Interference. See cover letter.

Concentration Found

Calculated Detection Limit

Non-Detect

Percent Recovery

,.

Section 1

MONTROSE I '• ' I ~ • - • '>1 I I ~ I

.\>S~~clnl•d lAbar.~lnriu f._ .......... -. ...........

SAMPLE ACCEPTANCE CHECKLIST

Client: I;;,t)Y-z:~ · ( he"'- Project: Tui(L.J 'PrPB.c..wP. tofJD?-..oo;{lttt,

Date Received: LO ··"(-t'-( Sampler's Signature Present: Yes ®ill Sample tempe.t:ature: que..-Sample(s) received in cooler: {:!£) No (Skip Section 2) Shipping Information: · Section 2

/'Ice Packs Was the cooler packed with: -- Ice _Bubble Wrap _Styrofoam

t[li?c __ Paper __ None -- Other Cooler TempetntUI:e: (At·tr:ptante n111ge iJ" 0 to 6 Deg. C. or mriva/ 011 it"e;

.l:or MimJbiolo.PJ• mmp/e ~ I 0 DCJ!. Cor anival on itr: ) Section 3 YES NO Was a COC received? ~

Were IDs present? /

Were sampling dates & times present? ,/

Was a signature present? ,/

Were tests clearly indicated? /

Were custodr seals eresent? r-If Yes - were they intact? Were all sameles sealed in elastic bags? / Did all sameles arrive intact? If no, indicate below. / Did all bottle labels agree with COC? (ID, dates and times) _/....:__ Were correct containers used for the tests J:equlred? / Was a sufficient amount of sample sent for tests indicated? / Was there headseace in VOA vials? / Were the containers labeled with cotrect preservatives? ~ Was total residual chlorine measured (Fish Bioassay samples mily)? * *If the answer is no, please inform Fish BioassC!J Dept. immediately. Section 4 Explanations/Comments

Section 5 Was Project Manager notified of discrepancies: YIN N/A Project Manager's response: .. -

Completed By: {0·-15- /~ Date: ________ __..:.f __ _

Associated Laboratories of Montrose Environmental Group ,Inc. !106 N. lhta1·ia Street, Orange, C:A 92868 • T: (714) 771-6900 • F: (714) 771-9933

www.associntcdlnbs.com

N/A

~

/

Page I 1

1'0

En

viro

-Ch

em

Inc

. L

ab

ora

tori

es

Turn

arou

nd T

ime

I I

_J

• 1

0 Sa

me

Day

~

<::

~

MIS

C./P

O#

1214

E.

Lexi

ngto

n A

venu

e,

o 24

Hou

rs

(/)

g ::... ~ ~

<O

P

CA

1

0 48

Hou

rs

ffi a

•i:; ~ 0

-

Q.

-I

omon

a,

9 76

6 r:.

11ou

rs

z B

'5 ~ b

&

u

:

~-

z =>

1--

= a

;z:

sa.

:::,c

:g

.!

Yl§

-><

o --

CA

-DH

S E

LAP

CE

RTI

FIC

ATE

#15

55

. -'-

. 8

~

~

!5

i'!

e fB ~! '"

" ~ 8

12

i-J

1-'

S~ ~

~

LL

w

L.

U I

I SA

J.J1P

LIN

G

g; I ~

~

ff3 •

-S

AM

PLE

10

LAB

10

DATE

TI

ME

~

~

~

g: A

na

lys1

s R

eq

u1r

ed

co

MM

EN

Ts

LB-5

(14

1008

-15)

10

1081

14

10:3

0 W

ate

r 11

V

ario

us

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

w t

h H

ld

" T"

a

c o

mg

1m

e

LB-4

(14

1008

-16)

10

/081

14 1

14:0

0 W

ate

r 11

V

ario

us

X

X

1 X

X

X

X

X

X

l ---

-1

I ·~ lrJ

c"PO

=

I I

1 LaN6

-~--I

I I

--,7uA

J1/A

tlcvv

1 I

I I

I r~~

-1

I ,

I ( 9

ArJ

nAA

b '1

--

'

I I

I I

\ _,

I l

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I II

I I

I I

I I

I I

I

Comp

any N

ame:

Pro

ject C

ontac

t: Sa

mpler

's Sign

ature:

En

viro

-Che

m, I

nc

Cur

tis D

esile

ts

Addre

ss:

1214

E. L

exin

gton

Ave

nue

Tel:

909-

590-

5905

Pr

Tt)

I'{W

rpip

elin

e 10

807.

001

city/S

tate/Z

ip:

, Po

mon

a, C

A 91

766

Faxt

fnilr

oche

min

c@ g

mai

l.com

(1

4100

8-15

, -16

) t

.~ 1

j (./

L

"\

I)_

1.-

o ·'

If-

11

R

elin

quis

hed

by:

i)~

I I J

vrlt

5 l:

¥fl

td(

Rec

eive

d b~

v(>

VI'

L<'

i.AN

D

ate

& T

ime

: L

-:r-

'. i

.t-f

Inst

ruct

ions

for S

ampl

e St

orag

e A

fter A

naly

sis:

Rel

inqu

ishe

d by

: r-

r R

ecei

ved

by:

Dat

e &

Tim

e:

0 D

ispo

se o

f 0

Ret

urn

to C

lien

t}>

(sto

re (3

0 D

ays)

0 O

ther

: R

elin

quis

hed

by:

Rec

eive

d ~

Dat

e &

Tim

e:

D~te;

lo/J

h I

CH

AIN

OF

CU

ST

OD

Y R

EC

OR

D

WH

ITE

WIT

H S

AM

PL

E·

YE

LLO

W T

O C

LIE

NT

P

ag

e

(o

f

) ---

~,~-----

En

viro

-Ch

em

, In

c. L

ab

ora

tori

es

Turn

arou

nd T

ime

I M

i5C

.

0 Sa

meD

ay

1214

E.

Lexi

ngto

n A

venu

e,

0 24

Hou

rs

(/)

Pom

ona

, CA

917

66

0 46

Hou

rs

a:

I w

0

72 H

ours

z

Tel:

(909

) 59

0-59

05

Fax:

(90

9) 5

90-5

907

0 1

Wee

k (S

tand

ard)

~

w

:z

I a:

0

~I

Oth

er:

z :::

J ~

CA

-DH

S E

LAP

CE

RTI

FIC

ATE

#15

55

0 ~

5 c'-

(.)

>

.,I "C

/7~

I X

a:

a:

L

L

w

w

~

0 Cl

... (/)

'

SA

MP

LEID

LA

BID

SA

MPU

NG

~

c)

~

w

An

aly

sis

Re

qu

ire

d

DATE

Tl

ME

w

a:

CO

MM

EN

TS

~

z I-

Cl...

Ln

-s;-

I I U-1 o

o~ -~

-~ l/c

-..$'

-'fl'(

p'

/1):

50

II

X.h

zc

; !ik

/d./

I

~0_,</

\J,

-~

!16 •

..r.r

Y z/~~

IW.t(

k---

zc.

i/t<

.r.l"

f I

I I

I I

I [

I I

I I I

I I

I I I I I

I C

ompa

ny N

ame:

Pr

ojec

t Con

tact

: sam

;;?g~t~p_/

J-e

ui f

r>-.

e.onJvJ-P.~".L

J.c.

51 ;.

,a,.

.,

So

-,d

,

,. lJroieo<_fa~b:

/

Add

ress

: Lf/7/~ ~

,_

,.. -~

(~-ad;

Ah

rAA

#

:/c1

_s_

Te

l:

?5

-!-

ZS

Z--

~o/.3

/O~o7..

oo

1 E

r~w~

-C

ity/S

tate

iZip

: -;-

;: ..-

~ _/

-('A

-9

z s

-7o

Fa

x: '7~/-

Z9

t5-

os-

.:r

s--/V

P$

-J

p.,..,

.L"">

-<

a( .r~c:

J ''~'"'

~ .

Rel

inqu

ishe

d by

d

a#

R

ecei

ved

by:

\A '-

f()

r:it~'L

J;/i

..._'

)-()

Inst

ruct

ions

for

Sam

ple

Stor

age

Afte

r Ana

ltsis

: /

If/

/'

v~

0 D

ispo

se o

f 0

Ret

urn

to C

lient

0

Sto

re (

30 D

ays)

R

elin

quis

hed

by:

Rec

eive

d by

: D

ate

& T

ime:

0 O

ther

: R

elin

quis

hed

by:

Rec

eive

d by

: D

ate

& T

ime:

-

-----

CH

AIN

OF

CU

ST

OD

Y R

EC

OR

D

Dat

e:

/0-,:

Y·/1

' W

HIT

E W

ITH

SA

MP

LE

· Y

ELL

OW

TO

CLI

EN

T

Pag

e _

Lo

t __

L


APPENDIX D

GBA Important Information about This Geotechnical-Engineering Report

Geotechnical-Engineering Report

Geotechnical Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and ProjectsGeotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the needs of a constructor — a construction contractor — or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical- engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one — not even you — should apply this report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated.

Read the Full ReportSerious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical-engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only.

Geotechnical Engineers Base Each Report on a Unique Set of Project-Specific FactorsGeotechnical engineers consider many unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client’s goals, objectives, and risk-management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical-engineering report that was:• not prepared for you;• not prepared for your project;• not prepared for the specific site explored; or• completed before important project changes were made.

Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical-engineering report include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when it’s changed

from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light-industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse;

• the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure;

• the composition of the design team; or• project ownership.

As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes—even minor ones—and request an

assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed.

Subsurface Conditions Can ChangeA geotechnical-engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the geotechnical engineer performed the study. Do not rely on a geotechnical-engineering report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or natural events, such as floods, droughts, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Contact the geotechnical engineer before applying this report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems.

Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional OpinionsSite exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engineers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ — sometimes significantly — from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide geotechnical-construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions.

A Report’s Recommendations Are Not FinalDo not overrely on the confirmation-dependent recommendations included in your report. Confirmation-dependent recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report’s confirmation-dependent recommendations if that engineer does not perform the geotechnical-construction observation required to confirm the recommendations’ applicability.

A Geotechnical-Engineering Report Is Subject to MisinterpretationOther design-team members’ misinterpretation of geotechnical-engineering reports has resulted in costly

Important Information about This

Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes.

While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help.

problems. Confront that risk by having your geo technical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review pertinent elements of the design team’s plans and specifications. Constructors can also misinterpret a geotechnical-engineering report. Confront that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing geotechnical construction observation.

Do Not Redraw the Engineer’s LogsGeotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical-engineering report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize that separating logs from the report can elevate risk.

Give Constructors a Complete Report and GuidanceSome owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make constructors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give constructors the complete geotechnical-engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise constructors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report’s accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure constructors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give constructors the best information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions.

Read Responsibility Provisions CloselySome clients, design professionals, and constructors fail to recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled “limitations,” many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers’ responsibilities begin and end, to help

others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly.

Environmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform an environmental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnical-engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk-management guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else.

Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with MoldDiverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from growing on indoor surfaces. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose of mold prevention, integrated into a comprehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional mold-prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moisture can lead to the development of severe mold infestations, many mold- prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of the geotechnical- engineering study whose findings are conveyed in this report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this project is not a mold prevention consultant; none of the services performed in connection with the geotechnical engineer’s study were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold prevention. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold from growing in or on the structure involved.

Rely, on Your GBC-Member Geotechnical Engineer for Additional AssistanceMembership in the Geotechnical Business Council of the Geoprofessional Business Association exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk-confrontation techniques that can be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer with you GBC-Member geotechnical engineer for more information.

8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017

e-mail: [email protected] www.geoprofessional.org

Copyright 2015 by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, or its contents, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with GBA’s specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document

is permitted only with the express written permission of GBA, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of GBA may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical-engineering report. Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without

being a GBA member could be commiting negligent or intentional (fraudulent) misrepresentation.

[PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK]

GEOTECHNICAL BASELINE REPORT (GBR)

EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT’S

TEMECULA VALLEY REGIONAL WATER

RECLAMATION FACILITY (TVRWRF)

PROPOSED RECYCLED WATER PIPELINE

TEMECULA/MURRIETA AREA

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

Prepared for

KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS Three Better World Circle, Suite 200

Temecula, California 92590-3745

Project No. 10807.002

March 17, 2016 2nd Update – August 2, 2016

March 17, 2016 Updated August 2, 2016

Project No. 10807.002 Kennedy/Jenks Consultants Three Better World Circle, Suite 200 Temecula, California 92590-3745 Attention: Mr. William C. Yates, PE, Principal Subject: Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR)

Eastern Municipal Water District’s (EMWD) Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility (TVRWRF) Proposed Recycled Water Pipeline Temecula/Murrieta Area, Riverside County, California

In accordance with the January 22, 2016 Amendment No. 1 to the Subcontract, Leighton Consulting, Inc. is pleased to present our Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR) for this proposed recycled water pipeline. Primary purpose of this GBR is to establish a contractual statement/baseline of geotechnical/geologic conditions to be encountered during pipeline construction, thereby providing a common basis for bidding. As such, it should be understood that this GBR is meant to reflect a reasonable allocation of risk between EMWD and the Contractor based on available subsurface data to date. We recommend that this GBR be read and reviewed in conjunction with our March 4, 2016 updated Geotechnical Exploration report for this proposed recycled water pipeline. Contractors should perform on their own exploration as they deem necessary to characterize this alignment for their intended means and methods of construction. The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If y ou should have any questions, please do not hesitate to call our Temecula office. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. Simon I. Saiid, GE 2641 Principal Engineer

Robert F. Riha, CEG 1921 Senior Principal Geologist

Distribution: (2) addressee (plus one electronic copy/CD)

Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR) Updated August 2, 2016 EMWD Proposed Recycled Water Pipeline, Temecula, CA Project No. 10807.002

- i -

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Site/Alignment Description ........................................................................... 1

1.2 Project Description ....................................................................................... 1

1.3 Purpose and Scope ..................................................................................... 1

1.4 Hierarchy of Documents .............................................................................. 2

1.5 Materials Sources and Reviewed Reports ................................................... 3

2.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS............................................................................ 4

2.1 Regional Geology ........................................................................................ 4

2.2 Geologic Hazards ........................................................................................ 4

2.3 Subsurface Conditions ................................................................................. 4 2.3.1. Existing Pavement: ................................................................................... 5 2.3.2. Artificial Fill:............................................................................................... 5 2.3.3. Alluvial Deposits: ...................................................................................... 6 2.3.4. Pauba Formation: ..................................................................................... 6 2.3.5. Baselines / Ranges for the Various Soil Units: .......................................... 6

2.4 Surface and Groundwater ............................................................................ 7

2.5 Groundwater Analytical Testing ................................................................... 8

3.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................... 10

3.1 Recommended Supplemental Geotechnical Exploration ........................... 10

3.2 Summary of Findings ................................................................................. 10

3.3 Pre-Excavation Survey and Settlement Monitoring .................................... 11

3.4 Earthwork Considerations .......................................................................... 11 3.4.1. Trench Excavation: ..................................................................................12 3.4.2. Saturated Pipe Subgrade: ........................................................................12 3.4.3. Backfill Materials: .....................................................................................12

3.5 Temporary Excavations ............................................................................. 13

3.6 Dewatering During Trench Excavations ..................................................... 14

3.7 Bore-and-Jack ............................................................................................ 14

3.8 Tunnel Classifications ................................................................................ 15

4.0 LIMITATIONS ....................................................................................................... 16

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 17

L I S T O F T A B L E S

Table 1. Encountered Existing Pavement Thickness ..................................................... 5

Table 2. Baseline Estimates / Ranges (Upper 12 feet In Streets) .................................. 7

Table 3. Depths to Groundwater .................................................................................... 7


- ii -

L I S T O F F I G U R E S

Figure 1 – Site Location Map

Figure 2 – Regional Geology Map

Figure 3 – Boring Location Plan

Figure 4 – Schematic Cross Section AA – Murrieta Creek Crossing

L I S T O F A P P E N D I C E S

Appendix A - Selected Photos of Surface Conditions along Pipeline Crossing

- Google Aerial Map Showing Location of Well 876


-1-

1 . 0 I N T R O D U C T I O N

1.1 Site/Alignment Description

The proposed pipeline alignment is generally located within the right-of-ways

(ROW) of existing public roadways as depicted on Figure 1, Site Location Map.

The alignment starts within Eastern Municipal Water District’s (EMWD’s)

Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility (TVRWRF), and exits the

northerly side of TVRWRF crossing Avenida Alvarado and turns west at Rio

Nedo Road and north at Fuller Road then connecting to Winchester Road. The

alignment continues northwest on Winchester Road to Dendy Parkway, Diaz

Road (Washington Avenue) and crosses Murrieta Creek at Elm Street. The

alignment then parallels Adams Avenue northwest to a tie-in connection point

southeast of Fig Street (see Figures 1 thru 3). Site topography is generally flat

along the southern and northern portions of the proposed alignment while sloping

to the east in the central portion of the alignment.

1.2 Project Description

Based on information provided, we understand that EMWD plans to expand

tertiary effluent pumps capacity at the Temecula Valley Regional Water

Reclamation Facility (TVRWRF) to 34.5 million-gallons-per-day (MGD). As such,

this proposed recycled water pipeline will consist of approximately 16,000 lineal-

feet of new pressurized pipeline with inverts on-the-order-of 8 to 12 feet below

existing grade in streets (excluding creek crossing). The 36-inch-diameter

cement-mortar-lined-and-coated (CML&C) pipeline is to be installed within a 54-

inch-diameter casing bored-and-jacked at the Murrieta Creek crossing, with a

centerline elevation at 1005 feet; which is roughly 25 feet below creek bottom to

avoid scour damage. In addition, we understood during the preparation of this

report that another bore-and-jack excavation is likely at the intersection of Elm

Street and Adam Avenue, with a centerline elevation at approximately 1010 feet.

1.3 Purpose and Scope

Primary purpose of this GBR is to set anticipated geotechnical baseline

conditions to be encountered during pipeline construction, as a common basis for

bidding. This GBR presents an interpretation of geotechnical data collected

during our prior subsurface explorations in 2010 and 2014, including

estimation/distribution of different materials to be encountered and anticipated


-2-

behavior of these materials during pipeline construction. Baseline conditions

described in this report provide a partial basis for the contractor to prepare

construction bids, and serve as the reference for resolution of claims related to

differing site conditions. For work affected by subsurface conditions, bids should

be based on baseline conditions presented in the GBR and the project plans.

For work affected by surface conditions (such as overhead utilities or

environmentally restricted areas), bids should be based on observable surface

conditions, which can be observed during the site visit and described in contract

documents.

Risks associated with conditions consistent with, or less adverse than, these

baseline conditions are allocated to the contractor. Those risks associated with

conditions more adverse than the baseline conditions are accepted by the

Owner. The provision of baseline conditions in the contract is not a warranty that

baseline conditions will be encountered. These baseline conditions are rather

the contractual standard that the Owner and the successful bidder will agree to

use when interpreting differing or unusual site conditions. Owner accepts the

risks for conditions that are less favorable than the stated baseline conditions

and will negotiate with the contractor for additional compensation if these four

conditions exist:

The contractor has demonstrated that they were able to perform the work within the baseline conditions prior to encountering a change in conditions.

The actual conditions encountered are more adverse than baseline conditions.

The contractor can document that the geotechnical conditions are more adverse than those described in this GBR and that exposed conditions materially and significantly increased cost and/or time required to complete the work.

The contractor has made diligent efforts to complete the work described in the contract documents, including any changes to methods, equipment, labor and materials made necessary by the more adverse conditions.

If all of the foregoing conditions are met, then additional compensation will be

negotiated, based on the provisions described in project contract documents.

1.4 Hierarchy of Documents

This GBR was prepared based primarily on our December 22, 2014 (updated

March 4, 2016) Geotechnical Exploration report; which provides details of the


-3-

geotechnical exploration, drilling methods, laboratory testing procedures and test

results, and provides recommendations for design and construction of this

pipeline project. Baseline conditions presented in this GBR shall take

precedence over geotechnical conditions presented in the referenced report.

1.5 Materials Sources and Reviewed Reports

In addition to our previous borings performed along the alignment (Leighton,

2014), borings LB-20 and LB-21 (see Figure 3) were drilled as part of this GBR to

explore subsurface conditions at the Murrieta Creek crossing. Logs of these

borings are presented in Appendix A of the updated Geotechnical Exploration

report (Leighton, 2016). This update report also includes results of geotechnical

laboratory testing and analytical/groundwater laboratory testing performed on

representative samples collected during drilling. In addition, we have performed

a review of published geologic maps and in-house reports performed in this area

or along the pipeline alignment (see References), and our experience with

subsurface conditions encountered in similar geologic settings.


-4-

2 . 0 G E O T E C H N I C A L C O N D I T I O N S

Presented below are “baseline” site geologic/geotechnical conditions based on review

of pertinent literature and the site-specific field exploration (Leighton, 2014/2016).

2.1 Regional Geology

As regionally mapped on Figure 2, “Regional Geology Map,” the proposed

pipeline alignment is generally underlain by young alluvial-fan deposits (Qyf) and

Pauba Formation (Qps). Young alluvial channel deposits (Qya) are expected at

and near the crossing under Murrieta Creek.

2.2 Geologic Hazards

Geologic hazards including liquefaction and earthquake faulting are presented in

the referenced geotechnical report (Leighton, 2016).

2.3 Subsurface Conditions

Baseline geotechnical conditions of encountered earth materials along the

alignment are presented in sections below.


-5-

2.3.1. Existing Pavement: Where our borings penetrated existing asphalt, the measured thickness of asphalt concrete and aggregate base layers are listed in Table 1 below:

Table 1. Encountered Existing Pavement Thickness

Boring Number*

Location (see Figure 4) Approx. AC Thickness (inches)

Approx. Aggregate Base Thickness

(inches)

LB-1 Adams Avenue 8 15



LB-10 Dendy Parkway 7 8

LB-11 Dendy Parkway/Winchester Rd 6 12

LB-12 Winchester Road 5½ 9½

LB-13 Rio Nedo Road 5 16

LB-14 Avenida Alvarado/Tierra Alta Way 4½ N/E

LB-15 “A” Street TVRWRF 3½ 8

BB-4 Winchester Road 4½ 18

BB-5 Winchester Road 5½ 12

BB-6 Winchester Road 6 12

BB-7 Winchester Road 6 7

*see updated Geotechnical Exploration report (Leighton, 2016); “BB” borings drilled in 2010. AC=asphalt concrete, N/E= not encountered

Borings not listed were not drilled through pavements.

2.3.2. Artificial Fill: Artificial fill will be encountered along most of this alignment as typical embankment fill associated with existing roadways, levee fill in areas adjacent to Murrieta Creek and basin fills as encountered at TVRWRF. Fill thickness within existing roadways generally ranged from a few inches (existing pavement section and subgrade) to as much as 15 feet in the levee/basin area. Encountered artificial fill consisted of silty to clayey sand (SM/SC), well-graded sand (SW-SM) with varying amounts of gravel, and sandy to clayey silt (ML). In addition, based on surface observations (see Appendix A), cobbles could be encountered within the fill materials. If existed, size and frequency of these cobbles or boulders cannot be determined based on the drilled borings (advanced with an 8-inch-diameter hollow-stem auger). Engineering characteristics of these soils could be characterized as follows:

Encountered fill was generally loose/soft to dense/very stiff with N-value ranging from 2 to over 50 blows-per-foot.

Moisture content varied from 2 percent to 18 percent.


-6-

Fill is predominantly expected to possess a Sand Equivalent (SE) of less-than (<) 40 and an Expansion Index (EI) of less-than (<) 51.

2.3.3. Alluvial Deposits:

Alluvium was encountered beneath artificial fill in levee and roadway areas and extended to total depths explored of 36½ feet adjacent to Murrieta Creek. Encountered alluvium consisted of silty sand to well-graded sand (SM/SW) with local sandy clay (CL) and clayey silt (ML) layers. In addition, based on surface observations (see Appendix A), cobbles and small size boulders may exist within the alluvium along Murrieta Creek. Our borings were drilled with 8-inch-diameter hollow-stem augers, which would not typically detect cobbles and boulders at depth unless existed at the tip of auger. In such case, the auger will stop from advancing further or experience very difficult drilling condition. The general engineering characteristics of these materials encountered within the upper 10 feet below street grade are as follows:

Encountered shallow alluvium was generally loose/soft to medium-dense/stiff with N-value ranging from 5 to over 30 blows per foot at depth.


Alluvium is predominantly expected to possess a Sand Equivalent (SE) of less-than (<) 40 and an Expansion Index (EI) of less-than (<) 51.

2.3.4. Pauba Formation: Quaternary age Pauba Formation will be encountered in the higher elevation/central portion of the alignment and in localized areas near the TVRWRF (see Figure 2). This formation consists of coarse-to-fine silty sand (SM) with interbedded poorly-to well-graded sand (SP/SW) with varying amounts of silt and clay. The general engineering characteristics within the depth explored are as follows:

Pauba Formation over-consolidated sediments generally were medium dense to dense with N-value typically greater-than (>) 30 blows per foot.


Pauba Formation Sand Equivalent (SE) is expected to range from 15 to 40 with a low Expansion Index (EI) expected to be less-than (<) 21.

2.3.5. Baselines / Ranges for the Various Soil Units: Based on available subsurface exploration data, baseline estimates for soils along this alignment in the upper 12 feet below existing street grade are tabulated below:


-7-

Table 2. Baseline Estimates / Ranges (Upper 12 feet In Streets)

Material Ranges for Entire

Alignment Baseline Estimate

Basis for Estimate

SM/SC/SP/SW 70 to 80% 80% Borings logs

ML/CL 20 to 25% 25% Boring logs

Cobbles/boulders 1 to 5% 5% Visual observations along creek (see Appendix A)

2.4 Surface and Groundwater

Surface water was not observed at the time of the field exploration along the

proposed alignment (Leighton, 2016). Rancho California Water District (RCWD)

has large water storage ponds along the norther portion of the alignment (See

Figure 1). Surface water should be anticipated in Murrieta Creek during local or

regional rains. Groundwater was encountered in several borings adjacent to

Murrieta Creek at varying depths as summarized in table below:

Table 3. Depths to Groundwater

Boring # Approx. Depth to

Groundwater (feet) Approx. Groundwater

Elevation (msl) Date of Readings

LB-1 14.0 1028 Time of Exploration-

10/2/2014

LB-4 20.0 1018 05/16/16

LB-5 15.7 1019 Time of Exploration-

10/2/2014

LB-20 22.6 1019 On day after drilling

2/16/16

LB-21 21.7 1020 On day after drilling

2/16/16

Historic GWT 13.0 1027 Well 876 (see Appendix A)

The California Geological Survey (CGS, 2007) had established “historically high

groundwater levels” for the Murrieta Quadrangle; see Plate 1.2 in link below:

http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/quad/MURRIETA/reports/murr_eval.pdf

Although free standing water was not encountered in some of our borings, very

moist soils conditions were encountered in several borings along the alignment

and may vary in moisture and location depending on seasonal changes. These

conditions were found to be as shallow as 5 feet. For baseline purposes, the

groundwater depth may be assumed at 3 feet below bottom of Murrieta Creek at

proposed crossing location and 13 feet below existing ground surface for the



-8-

remainder of the alignment during a dry season. Figure 4 presents encountered

and historic groundwater conditions at Creek crossing.

2.5 Groundwater Analytical Testing

Two groundwater samples were collected from temporary water wells installed in

Borings LB-4 and LB-5. These water samples were analyzed for constituents

based on the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region

(RWQCB) General Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from

Groundwater Extraction and Similar Discharges to Surface Waters within the San

Diego Region Except for San Diego Bay (WDR), Order No. R9-2008-0002,

NPDES No. CAG919002. The following is a summary of test results which

exceed the RWQCB’s limits:

Coliform: Total coliform was detected at concentrations of 280,000 MPN/100ml (most probable number per 100ml of sample) and 350, respectively. The water sample from LB-4 exceeds the WDR’s instantaneous maximum of 1,000 MPN/100ml.

Iron: Iron was detected at concentrations of 33.8 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and 45.9 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the WDR’s municipal/potable and non-municipal/non-potable and the Santa Margarita Hydrologic Unit, Murrieta Hydrologic Area instantaneous maximum of 0.3 mg/L.

Manganese: Manganese was detected at concentrations of 0.945 mg/L and 5.70 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the WDR’s municipal/potable and non-municipal/non-potable and the Santa Margarita Hydrologic Unit, Murrieta Hydrologic Area instantaneous maximum of 0.05 mg/L.

Nitrogen: Total nitrogen was detected at concentrations of 1.63 mg/L and 28.6 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the WDR’s average monthly effluent maximum (AMEL) of 1.0 mg/L. Water sample from LB-5 exceeds the instantaneous maximum of 2.0 mg/L.

Settleable Solids: Settleable solids were detected at concentrations of 16 mg/L and 210 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the WDR’s average monthly effluent maximum (AMEL) of 0.1 mg/L and the instantaneous maximum of 0.2 mg/L.

TSS: Total suspended solids (TSS) were detected at concentrations of 1,780 mg/L and 2,740 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the WDR’s AMEL of 30 mg/L and the instantaneous maximum of 2,740 mg/L.

TDS: Total dissolved solids (TDS) were detected at concentrations of 848 mg/L and 937 mg/L, respectively. These results exceed the Santa Margarita


-9-

Hydrologic Unit, Murrieta Hydrologic Area instantaneous maximum of 750 mg/L.

As indicated above, the water samples were collected from temporary water

wells installed in Borings LB-4 and LB-5, and not necessarily representative of

conditions at the current proposed creek crossing (LB-20 & LB-21). In addition,

the groundwater quality appears to be generally within acceptable limits for water

disposal at the EMWD’s TVRWRF except for Iron’s concentration which was

slightly over the allowable limits of 10 to 31 mg/L.


-10-

3 . 0 C O N S T R U C T I O N C O N S I D E R A T I O N S

3.1 Recommended Supplemental Geotechnical Exploration

We recommend that the geotechnical baseline conditions presented in this report

be reviewed once pipeline alignment and profile are finalized. In addition,

Borings LB-20 and LB-21 were drilled to depths of 36½ feet below embankment

grade on either side of the proposed Murrieta Creek crossing, which is down to

approximately elevation 1006 feet (MSL) based on provided topographic

information). However, we now understand that the proposed pipeline invert

elevation is likely to be at an elevation of 1005 and bore-and-jack pits may be

deeper or at elevation of 1000± feet. Therefore, due to the previously

unanticipated deep pipeline invert elevation, our borings did not extend below the

anticipated bottom of the now proposed bore-and-jacked casing. Therefore, we

recommend that borings be drilled to at least 5 feet below the bottom of the

proposed bore-and-jack casing invert. To also better assess cobble content, 24-

inch-diameter bucket auger borings should be drilled and these boreholes and

soil samples should be tested during drilling in accordance with the 2015 Edition

of the California Construction Safety Orders for percent oxygen, flammable and

hazardous gases. As indicated in Section 1.2 of this report, another bore-and-

jack excavation is likely to occur at the intersection of Elm Street and Adam

Avenue (vicinity of Boring LB-2) , with a centerline elevation at approximately

1010 feet. As such, we also recommend that borings be drilled to at least 5 feet

below the bottom of the proposed bore-and-jack casing invert.

3.2 Summary of Findings

Soils along the pipeline alignment will be readily excavated by conventional

trench excavating backhoes and excavators in good working order using

conventional cut-and-cover method. Some cemented Pauba Formation beds

may be more difficult to excavate.

As part of the means-and-methods of construction, the contractor is responsible

for all temporary excavations and trenches excavated at this site, and is

responsible for design and installation of temporary shoring and dewatering

Soils along this alignment will predominantly be Type C Cal OSHA classified

soils, as cohesionless and subject to caving. Temporary shallow excavations

(less than 5 feet) with vertical slopes are expected to be generally stable in

Pauba Formation and dense fill. If raveling sand is encountered during


-11-

excavation, then the trench should be properly shored, even for excavations less-

than 5 feet, to protect workers, existing adjacent pavements and utilities.

Excavations of 5 feet or deeper should be shored in any event, in accordance

with Cal-OSHA requirements before personnel are allowed to enter. Laying back

the excavations does not appear to be feasible due to constraints from existing

improvements/streets. Special care should be taken for excavations near

existing improvements to verify that the integrity of existing structures is not

impacted.

Groundwater will be encountered locally during excavation depending on the

pipeline location and invert depth and when construction is carried out (dry or

rainy season). Discharge of groundwater during excavation should comply with

all environmental regulations. It is the responsibility of the contractor to design

and install the dewatering system based on actual groundwater conditions

encountered during construction. Groundwater above pipeline crown should

be expected in Murrieta Creek.

3.3 Pre-Excavation Survey and Settlement Monitoring

Prior to initiating excavation, existing conditions along the alignment should be

photo documented, including existing pavement conditions, and conditions of any

structures within 15 feet of the proposed trench. A thorough Underground

Service Alert (USA) notification (https://www.digalert.org/home.html ) and

meeting should be performed to identify sensitive utilities along this proposed

pipeline alignment. The contractor shall provide settlement monitoring and

contingency plans when excavating near existing settlement-sensitive structures

or underground utilities identified by the District and/or the contractor. The

construction contractor will be required to perform settlement monitoring by a

California licensed Professional Land Surveyor (PLS) during trenching adjacent

to sensitive utilities and structures. Where intersecting existing utilities that are

intolerant to ground movement, extensometers may need to be installed. City

streets will need to be reconstructed as required by the Cities of Temecula and

Murrieta.

3.4 Earthwork Considerations

Earthwork associated with the proposed pipelines should be performed in

accordance with applicable EMWD Specifications, “Standard Specifications for

https://www.digalert.org/home.html


-12-

Public Works Construction” (Greenbook, latest edition) and the project plans and

specifications.

3.4.1. Trench Excavation: Trench excavation should be performed in accordance with the project plans, specifications, and all applicable Cal-OSHA requirements. The contractor should be responsible for providing the "competent person" required by OSHA standards. Contractors should be advised that onsite sandy soils could make excavations particularly unsafe and hence necessary safety precautions should be taken at all times. See Section 3.5 (below) for additional detail. Existing fill and cohesionless soils conform to OSHA soil Type C. Alignment fill, alluvium and Pauba Formation should generally be excavatable with conventional earthmoving/excavation equipment in good working conditions. Oversized materials (i.e. greater than 6 inches) could be generated in the less weathered Pauba formation and alluvial/levee fill materials along the Murrieta Creek. In addition, difficult excavation may be encountered at depths greater than 5 feet in the less weathered Pauba formation and specialized excavation equipment may be required.

3.4.2. Saturated Pipe Subgrade: Prior to pipe installation, the subgrade should be firm, uniform, and free of standing water and properly compacted to provide uniform seating and support to the entire section of the pipe placed on bedding material. Where groundwater or very moist soils are encountered or the subgrade become disturbed due to localized seepage or surface water, the contractor should excavate the disturbed or saturated soils to a maximum depth of 2 feet and replace with suitable materials to provide a stable bottom. Crushed rock (½-inch maximum size) may be used if found necessary to stabilize bottom of trench/pit prior to placing bedding materials.

3.4.3. Backfill Materials: Prior to backfilling, pipes should be bedded in and covered with a uniform, granular material that has a Sand Equivalent (SE) of 30 or greater, and a gradation meeting requirements of the pipe manufacturer. Most onsite soils are expected to be too silty to be considered for bedding material. A minimum cover of 12 inches of bedding material should be provided above the top of the pipe. As an alternative, crushed rock per EMWD Standards (SB-157) can be used as pipe bedding and pipe zone backfill. Native soils are generally considered suitable as backfill materials over the pipe bedding zone. These materials should be placed in thin lifts moisture conditioned, as necessary, and mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction per ASTM D 1557 or as required per EMWD standard specifications. Saturated silty/clayey soils will need to be dried back


-13-

to near optimum moisture content in order to compact and achieve relative compaction. In some areas, it might be cost-effective to remove and replace these wet materials with dryer (or near optimum moisture) materials.

3.5 Temporary Excavations

During construction, exposed earth material conditions should be regularly

evaluated to verify that conditions are as anticipated. The contractor is

responsible for providing the "competent person" required by OSHA standards to

evaluate soil conditions. Close coordination between the competent person and

geotechnical consultant should be maintained to facilitate construction while

providing safe excavations. Existing artificial fill and alluvial soils encountered

are classified as OSHA soil Type C. Therefore, unshored temporary

excavations should be no steeper than 1½:1 (horizontal:vertical), for a height no-

greater-than () 20 feet (California Construction Safety Orders, Appendix B to

Section 1541.1, Table B-1). These recommended temporary excavations

assume a level ground surface for a distance equal to one-and-a-half (x1.5) the

depth of excavation. For steeper temporary slopes, deeper excavations, and/or

where sloping terrain exists within close proximity to excavation (<1.5xdepth),

appropriate shoring methods or flatter slopes may be required to protect the

workers in the excavation and adjacent improvements. Such methods should be

implemented by the contractor and approved by the geotechnical consultant.

If the sloped open cut excavation is not feasible based on requirements above

and due to existing pavements, utilities and/or structures, excavations for the

proposed pipeline should be supported by a temporary shoring system such as

cross-braced hydraulic shoring, conventional shields, sheet piles, and/or soldier

piles and wood lagging. Choice of shoring system should be left to the

contractor’s judgment since scheduling, economic considerations and/or the

individual contractor’s construction experience may determine which method is

more economical and/or appropriate. The contractor and shoring designer

should also perform additional geotechnical studies as necessary to refine the

means-and-methods of shoring construction.

The support of all adjacent existing structures during excavation and construction

(including pavements) without distress is the contractor's responsibility. In

addition, it should be the contractor’s responsibility to undertake a pre-construction

survey with benchmarks and photographs of the adjacent properties. Shoring

systems should be designed by a California licensed civil or structural engineer.


-14-

3.6 Dewatering During Trench Excavations

Where encountered in trench excavations, groundwater control, such as

dewatering, will be required to limit instability of the pipeline and aid in foundation

construction and soil backfill. Dewatering or any other suitable method for

stabilizing excavation bottom may be selected by the contractor based on actual

groundwater conditions encountered and based on the contractor’s chosen

means-and-methods of construction. The selected method by the contractor

should be able to effectively mitigate bottom-heave for stabilize subgrade soils

during pipe installation and backfilling. However, deep groundwater drawdown

should be avoided, to reduce the potential for damaging adjacent structures (not

anticipated at creek crossing).

3.7 Bore-and-Jack

It is probable that the pipeline will cross underneath the Murrieta Creek by means

of “bore-and-jack” operation. This construction method is presumably feasible

from a geotechnical perspective, within encountered alluvial soils. However, the

contractor should (1) review the geotechnical report to confirm that the selected

excavation technique is feasible, and (2) perform additional studies as deemed

necessary to evaluate such technique and the effect of groundwater seepage

and saturated sand. We expect that pump testing will be required and prudent at

the Murrieta Creek crossing to estimate amounts of groundwater flow generated

during construction based on selected pipeline installation method. Dewatering

system design and estimated seepage/discharge flows are not within the scope

of this GBR and are the sole responsibility of the contractor. Dewatering

plans/procedures should be prepared by the contractor’s engineer or specialty

dewatering contractor and reviewed by the District/Engineer. Dewatering

plans/procedures should include pumping or dewatering well locations,

anticipated drawdown and drawdown monitoring, volume of pumping, potential

for settlement, and groundwater discharge. Dewatering rates will vary

significantly based on actual conditions exposed at the site, and size and depth

of excavation. For any surface discharge, disposal of groundwater should be

performed in accordance with California Regional Water Quality Control Board

(RWQCB) requirements, and will likely require a National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System (NPDES) permit, which is expected to be obtained by the

contractor.


-15-

As discussed in Section 2.2 of this report and as shown on Figure 4, Murrieta

Creek Crossing, alluvium at this creek crossing generally consist of silty sand to

well-graded sand (SM/SW) and sandy to clayey silt (ML) layers at depth greater-

than (>)15 feet, as detected in LB-20 (west side of the creek; a hollow-stem

boring). In addition, based on surface observations of creek bed (see Appendix

A), scattered small size cobbles (3 to 6 inches) and small size boulders (12 to 14

inches) could be encountered within this alluvium and/or fill. Based on the field

and laboratory testing results, general engineering characteristics of these

alluvial soils are as follows:

Encountered alluvium was generally loose/soft to medium-dense/stiff with N-value ranging from 5 to over (>) 30 blows per foot.

Cohesionless alluvium is expected to possess “fast raveling” behavior in tunnel excavation in saturated condition and/or below groundwater.

Unless groundwater pressures are maintained below the bottom of the bore-and-jack shafts (if selected as method of excavation), alluvium in and below the bottom of the shafts will heave and potentially lead to instability of the shaft excavation.

3.8 Tunnel Classifications

We understand that pipeline installation crossing underneath the Murrieta Creek

will have a casing diameter of 54-inches and may require deep shaft excavation.

We are unaware of any oil and/or natural gas production in this area and there

are no large deposits of organic soils in this immediate vicinity. However, there

are likely Southern California Gas pressurized pipeline located adjacent to this

alignment. Therefore, this proposed tunnel alignment should be classified as

potentially gassy until and unless the presence of local natural gas pipelines in

this area is ruled out.


-16-

4 . 0 L I M I T A T I O N S

Baseline conditions were developed using judgment to interpolate and/or extrapolate

between exploration locations and laboratory data. This judgment applied in the

interpolations and extrapolations reflects the views of the Owner and design consultant

team in describing baseline conditions. No amount of exploration, testing, and analysis

can precisely predict subsurface characteristics and behavior during construction.

Ground behavior in response to construction often depends on the means-and-methods

of construction selected by the contractor including equipment, operators, techniques,

materials and procedures.

This GBR is only valid for the pipeline alignment depicted on Figure 3, with invert

depths described in Sections 1.1 and 1.2 of this report. Changes in horizontal or

vertical alignment will require reevaluation by Leighton Consulting, Inc.


-17-

R E F E R E N C E S

California Division of Mines and Geology, 1990, Revised Official Map Special Studies Zones, Murrieta Quadrangle: California Division of Mines and Geology, Scale 1:24,000. Effective Date January 1, 1990.

California Geological Survey, 1997, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California: Special Publication 117, 74p., 7 chapters, Appendix A,B,C, and D.

California Geological Survey, 2002, Guidelines for Evaluating the Hazard of Surface Fault Rupture, Note 49, revised May, 2002.

Hart, E. W., and Bryant, W. A., 2007, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning with Index to Earthquake Zones Maps: Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42 Revised 2007.

California Geological Survey, 2007, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Murrieta 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Riverside County, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 115: http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/quad/MURRIETA/reports/murr_eval.pdf

California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region, 2008, General Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from Groundwater Extraction and Similar Discharges to Surface Waters within the San Diego Region Except for San Diego Bay (WDR), adopted March 12, 2008.

Kennedy, 1977, Recency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsinore Fault Zone in Riverside County, California, CDMG Special Report 131.

Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2016, Geotechnical Exploration, Eastern Municipal Water District’s (EMWD) Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility Recycled Water Pipeline Project, Temecula/Murrieta Area, Riverside County, California, California, Project No. 10807.001, dated March 4.

Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2012, Geotechnical Update, Proposed Wild Rivers Water Park, Northwest Corner of Dendy Parkway and Diaz Road, Temecula, California, PN 600769-009, dated May 23.

Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2010, Geotechnical Exploration, Rancho California Water District, Winchester Road Recycled Water 8-inch Pipeline Inter-Tie, Temecula, Riverside County, California, Project No. 602823-001, dated March 25, 2010.



-18-

Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2009, Geotechnical Investigation, EMWD Temecula Valley RWRF 18 MGD Upgrade and Effluent Storage Expansion, South of Avenida Alvarado and West of Diaz Road, City of Temecula, California, PN 602214-001, Revised January 21.

Morton, D.M., 2006, Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006-1217, Version 1.0, map scale 1:100,000.

Public Works Standard, Inc., 2015, Greenbook, Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction: BNI Building News, Anaheim, California.


³0 3,000 6,000

Feet

Figure 1

Scale:

Leighton

Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016Thematic Information: Leighton

1 " = 3,000 '


Map Saved as V:\Drafting\10807\002\10807.002_F01_SLM_2016-05-13.mxd on 5/13/2016 8:54:49 AM

Author: (asakowicz)

Date: May 2016SITE LOCATION MAP




Qps

Qyv

Qps

Trmu

Qya

Qyv

Qpf

Qyv

Qps

Qyf

Qpf

Qya

Qpf

Qps

Qps

Qps

Qyv

QTws

Qpf

Qpf

Qyf

Qps

Qya

Qya

Qps

Qyv

Qps

Qyv

Qps

Qyf

Qpf

Qyv

Qps

Qps

Qps

Qyf

Qyf

Qps

Qps Qyls

QTws

Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

³0 2,000 4,000

Feet

Figure 2

Scale:

Leighton

Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016Geology: USGS, 2006, Geologic map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California, Version 1.0 Open File Report 2006-1217

1 " = 2,000 '


Map Saved as V:\Drafting\11332\001\Maps\10807.002_F02_RGM_2016-05-13.mxd on 5/13/2016 9:18:57 AM

Author: (asakowicz)

Date: May 2016REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP




LegendQTws - Sandstone and conglomerate of Wildomar area

Qpf - Pauba Formation

Qps - Pauba Formation

!!!

!!

!

!!

!

!!!!

!

!

!!

!!!

!

Qya - Young axial-channel deposits

Qyf - Young alluvial-fan deposits

Qyls - Young landslide deposits

Qyv - Young alluvial-valley deposits

Trmu - Rocks of Menifee Valley, undifferentiated

Tvsr - Santa Rosa basalt of Mann (1955)

PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK


-19-

A p p e n d i x A


-20-

F i g u r e 1 - A t P i p e l i n e C r o s s i n g

F i g u r e 2 - A t P i p e l i n e C r o s s i n g


-21-

L o c a t i o n o f W e l l 8 7 6