Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0850-72_Tamarind Avenue Sewer Lift Station_4.4MIGEOTECHNICAL •PROFESSIONALS INC. TRANSMITTAL LETTER DATE: November 13, 1992 TO: City of Fontana 8353 Sierra Ave. Fontana, CA 92335 ATTN: Bob Weddle Nov 4 61992 CITY ENGINEER'S OFFiuL'i GPI PROJECT NO.: 1023.581 SUBJECT: Geotechnical Investigation Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift Station Empire Center, Fontana, California COMMENTS: Enclosed is one copy of the subject report, dated September 19, 1991. pr, . , ( 0 , I 0 t? 9 -,- 1•2t, I P 6,4' 2", \ ,0•1 VI. 9 q ‘f ,/, . ,..J ' k )91t t I C4 VIPte3 / 5;49(Acii,11,-1‘...) SIGNED: James E. Harris, G.E. (AR S (lf,-r, 11 L P.\ if\ CA likA • A • - o 11-• 5736 Corporate Avenue • Cypress, CA 90630 • (714) 220-2211, FAX (714) 220-2122 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION SANTA ANA AVENUE SEWER/LIFT STATION EMPIRE CENTER FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. 3500 Sepulveda Boulevard Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Prepared by: Geotechnical Professionals Inc. 5736 Corporate Avenue Cypress, CA 90630 (714) 220-2211 Project No. 1023.581 September 19, 1991 I The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift -Fontana, CA GPI Proj. 1023.581 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 GENERAL 1 1.2 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS 1 I 1.3 PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION 1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK 2 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3 3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS 3 I 3.2 SUBSURFACE SOILS 3 3.3 GROUNDWATER AND CAVING 3 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND" RECOMMENDATIONS 4 I4.1 GENERAL 4 I 4.2 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 4.2.1 Strong Ground Motion Potential 4.2.2 Potential for Ground Rupture 4.2.3 Potential for Liquefaction I4.2.4 Seismic Ground Subsidence 4.3 EARTHWORK 5 I 4.3.1 Clearing and Grubbing 4.3.2 Excavations 4.3.3 Shoring I 4.3.4 Subgrade Preparation . 4.3.5 Material for Fill 4.3.6 Placement and Compaction Fills 4.3.7 Shrinkage and Subsidence 1 4.3.8 Observation and Testing 4.4 FOUNDATIONS 8 I4.4.1 Foundation Type 4.4.2 Allowable Bearing Capacity I 4.4.3 4.4.4 Minimum Footing Widths/Depths of Embedment Estimated Settlements 4.4.5 Lateral Load Reistance 4.4.6 Footing Excavation Observation I4.5 BUILDING FLOOR SLABS 9 4.6 TYPE OF CEMENT 10 1023-581.01V(9/91) ♦ . ros�r�wa.R ':�ecea'.vnuwrrcWwLo�.namuwwY`.a::..w^.<.`.41C:�:a:9S::l:Y:^,:^.F:/.2"= :ti)^.�"5'::.::Y�S7ti+iG: The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift - Fontana, CA GPI Proj. 1023.581 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) 4.7 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES 4.8 PAVED AREAS 10 10 5.0 LIMITATIONS 12 APPENDICES A Exploratory Borings B Laboratory Tests C Soil Corrosivity Study D Selected Exploratory Borings from Reference 2 1023-581.01 V(9/91) The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift - Fontana, CA GPI Proj. 1023.581 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO. 1 Site Location Map 2 Site Plan APPENDIX A A-1 Key to Log of Borings A-2* and A-3 Log of Borings (*dated 8-29-91) A-2** Log of Borings (**dated 8-7-91) B-1 and B-2 B-3 and B-4 B-2, B-5 thru B-8, B-13, B-15 and B-21 APPENDIX B Grainsize Distribution Direct Shear APPENDIX D Selected Log of Borings from Reference 2 A-1 thru A-6 Selected Log of CPT from Reference 2 TABLE NO. 1 1023-581.01 V(9/91) LIST OF TABLES APPENDIX C Laboratory Tests on Soil Samples The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 GENERAL This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation performed by Geotechnical Professionals Inc. (GPI) for the Slover Avenue/Santa Ana Boulevard/Jurupa Avenue/Empire Center Boulevard (north and south)/Tamarind Avenue portions of the off - site sewer improvements related to the Empire Center development in Fontana, California. Geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the facilities are provided herein. The location of the project site is shown on the Site Location Map, Figure 1. 1.2 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Based on project plans prepared by Hall and Foreman, Inc., dated May 23, 1991 and discussions with them, the proposed sewer line and lift station, covered by this report, will be located adjacent to existing Slover, Santa Ana, Jurupa, and Tamarind Avenues and within proposed north and south Empire Center Boulevards. The sewer line will consist of approximately 14,400± feet of pipeline ranging from 10 to 21 inch diameter pipe. The northern portion of the proposed sewer line (Slover Avenue, Empire Center Boulevard [north], and Sierra Avenue) will be constructed at depths ranging from 10 to 22 feet below existing ground surfaces. The southern portion of the proposed sewer line (Empire Center Boulevard [south], Jurupa Avenue, and Tamarind Avenue) will be constructed at depths ranging from 6 to 26 feet below existing ground surfaces. The proposed alignment is shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. A short portion of the line, between the lift station and Santa Ana Avenue, will consist of a force main. The entire system will drain into the proposed City. of Rialto, Santa Ana sewer line. An investigation report dated September 3, 1991 by GPI was, prepared specifically for the Santa Ana Avenue gravity sewer from Tamarind Avenue to the City of Rialto Treatment Plant. Additional improvements will consist of laterals and manholes for the sewer line system. The piping will consist of vitrified clay pipe (VCP). r • We understand that a Lift Station will be constructed at Tamarind Avenue Station 14+75 west of theproposed edge of pavement. The Lift Station will have plan dimension of 30 feet by 40 feet. The Lift Station will be founded about 30 feet below existing grades. A single -story structure to house support equipment will be constructed above grade. The details of the Lift Station design were not completed at the time this report was prepared. 1.3 PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION The purpose of this investigation is to provide geotechnical design parameters and recommendations related to design and construction of the proposed project. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK Our scope of work for this investigation consisted of review of existing reports, field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis and the preparation of this report. Prior to the field investigation, we reviewed subsurface information from previous investigations in the site area. We also incorporated field and laboratory data from References 1 and 2. Field exploration for this portion of the project consisted of two (2) borings to supplement existing field explorations. The borings were drilled using large diameter bucket -auger equipment and extended to depths ranging 26 to 40 feet below existing grades. A description of field procedures and logs of borings are presented in Appendix A. Boring and Cone -Penetration Tests Logs from previous investigations (References 1 and 2) are included in the Appendices. The logs from Reference 1 were reproduced with the permission of The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. Subsurface conditions from these explorations were utilized as a basis for some of the evaluations and recommendations in this report for the construction of the proposed improvements. Laboratory soil tests were performed on selected representative samples as an aid in soil classification and to evaluate the engineering properties of the soils. The geotechnical laboratory testing program included determinations of moisture content/dry density, grain size distribution, shear strength (direct shear), maximum density (compaction), and chemical (corrosive) characteristics. Laboratory testing procedures and results are summarized in Appendix B. Laboratory testing and corrosion evaluations for this project were performed by M. J. Schiff and Associates under subcontract to GPI. Their report is presented in Appendix C. Engineering evaluations were performed to provide geotechnical design parameters and recommendations related to construction. The results of those evaluations are presented in the remainder of this report. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 2 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS At the time of our site investigation (August 1991), the project area consisted predominantly of undeveloped land covered with grape vines. Some portions of the area are currently covered with paved streets (Sierra, Tamarind and Slover). In general, the existing ground surface at the Empire Center site is relatively flat. The existing site grades range from 1,088± to 1,092± at Slover Avenue to 1,054± to 1,058± at Jurupa. The existing ground surface elevation at the proposed lift station is 1,045±. Detailed ground surface elevations are shown on the project plans. 3.2 SUBSURFACE SOILS Our field investigation disclosed a subsurface profile consisting predominantly of silty sands, sands, gravelly sands and sandy silt lenses and layers. In general, the majority of the soils encountered at the site consisted of slightly moist to moist, medium dense to dense silty sands and firm to stiff sandy silts. A detailed description of the subsurface conditions are presented in Appendices A and D. 3.3. GROUNDWATER AND CAVING Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings drilled for this or the previous geotechnical investigations at the site. Groundwater levels measured in deep wells near the site were at depths on the order of 300 feet. Caving and ravelling was encountered in some of our explorations as summarized in the Logs of Borings. Past experience at the site indicates that the near -surface, dry, sandy soils (0 to 10 feet below existing grades) and the deeper gravelly sands are susceptible to caving/sloughing. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 3 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 GENERAL Our investigation disclosed relatively favorable subsurface conditions for the proposed improvements. The proposed structures can be supported on the existing subsurface soils expected to be exposed at the proposed excavation elevations or on compacted fill as discussed below. The only potential geotechnical constraint that may affect construction of the sewer line drain and lift station is that the near -surface soils are susceptible to caving and are compressible. Recommendations to mitigate these constraint are provided below. 4.2 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 4.2.1 Strong Ground Motion Potential The site is located in a seismically active area and is likely to be subjected to strong ground shaking due to earthquakes on nearby faults. A deterministic evaluation of seismic hazards was performed for a past report. This evaluation indicated that peak ground accelerations on the order of 0.3g to 0.4g are likely to be experienced at the site during the design life of the development. The levels of ground shaking indicated by the deterministic analyses are not unusual for U.B.C. Seismic Zone 4, which includes most of Southern California. 4.2.2 Potential for Ground Rupture There are no known active faults crossing or projecting through the site. Therefore, ground rupture due to faulting is unlikely at this site. 4.2.3 Potential for Liquefaction Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated cohesionless soils undergo a temporary loss of strength during severe ground shaking and acquire a degree of mobility sufficient to permit ground deformation. In extreme cases, the soil particles can become suspended in groundwater, resulting in the soil deposit becoming mobile and fluidlike. Liquefaction is generally considered to occur primarily in loose to medium dense deposits of saturated cohesionless soils. Thus, three conditions are required for liquefaction to occur: (1) a cohesionless soil of loose to medium density; (2) a saturated condition; and (3) rapid, large strain, cyclic loading, normally provided by earthquake motions. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 4 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 Soil liquefaction is not likely to occur at this site primarily because the groundwater level is very deep and the soils at shallow depths have very low moisture (well below saturation). 4.2.4 Seismic Ground Subsidence Strong earthquake shaking may result in some subsidence due to densification of the subsurface materials. Such subsidence, during a significant earthquake, is expected to occur in a relatively uniform manner across the site and not have a major impact on structures. 4.3 EARTHWORK The earthwork anticipated at the project site will consist of clearing, excavations, subgrade preparation, and the placement and compaction of fill. 4.3.1 Clearing and Grubbing Prior to excavation, the areas to be developed should be cleared of all vegetation and debris. All deleterious material generated during the clearing operation should be removed from the site. At the conclusion of the clearing operations, the Geotechnical Engineer should observe and accept the site prior to any grading/excavation. 4.3.2 Excavations Excavations at this site will include removals of disturbed natural soils and moderately compressible surficial soils during grading for the lift station building, footing excavations, and excavation for the well structure at the proposed lift station. Trenching will be performed to construct the balance of the proposed sewer system. Prior to placing fills within the building pad area for the lift station, loose silty sands/sandy silts within the building pad area will need to be densified. This can be accomplished by overexcavation and recompaction. For planning purposes, a depth of removal of 2 feet in general and 4 feet in areas where trees have been removed should be anticipated. The depth of removal limits should extend below existing grades or finished pad grade, whichever is deeper. The removal should extend 5 feet beyond the proposed building lines. It should be noted that the actual depths of removals should be determined in the field, during grading, by the geotechnical engineer. The existing surficial soils at the site are susceptible to caving. Therefore, locally, even shallow excavations where workmen are to enter, will need to be properly shored or sloped back at least 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) or flatter. In areas where excavation will be 1023-581.01 R (9/91) 5 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 performed in the existing streets, we expect that shoring will be used. Since the surficial soils are susceptible to caving, measures should be incorporated to prevent caving from under existing pavement (at edge of trench), which could result in voids of under the pavement. No surcharge loads (including stockpiles) should be permitted within a horizontal distance equal to the height of cut from the toe of the excavation or five feet from the top of the slopes, whichever is greater, unless the cut is properly shored. Excavations that extend below an imaginary plane inclined at 45 degrees below the edge of any adjacent existing site facilities should be properly shored to maintain support of adjacent elements. All excavations and shoring systems should meet the minimum requirements given in the most current State of California Occupational Safety and Health Standards. In general, the excavations should be readily accomplished by conventional soil excavation equipment such as backhoes, loaders, scrapers, or dozers. The trafficability of the surficial soils can be improved by maintaining moist subgrade conditions. 4.3.3 Shoring If shoring is to be used, it should be designed by a licensed civil or structural engineer in accordance with regulatory requirements. The design of the shoring should be based on the recommended geotechnical parameters provided in subsequent sections of this report. The Geotechnical Engineer should review any shoring plans to confirm that the appropriate parameters have been used. 4.3.4 Subgrade Preparation Prior to placing any fills in building areas for the lift station building, the subgrade soils should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM D-1557 and as required by the City of Fontana. In vehicular areas to receive asphalt or concrete pavement, the top 12 inches of the subgrade soils should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum density. 4.3.5 Material for Fill The on -site soils are suitable for use in construction of compacted fills. Imported fill material should be predominately granular, non -expansive and contain no more than 40 percent fines (portion passing No. 200 sieve). The Geotechnical Engineer should be notified at least 72 hours in advance of the location of any soils proposed for import. Each proposed import source should be sampled, tested and accepted for use prior to delivery of the soils to the site. Soils imported prior to acceptance by the Geotechnical Engineer may be rejected if not suitable. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 6 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 Both imported and existing on -site soils, to be used as fill, should be free of debris and any pieces larger than 6 inches in greatest dimension. Excavations in areas of existing trees will generate a significant quantity of roots. The organic material should be removed prior to use of the soils in compacted fill. Any asphalt removed during excavation may be used in the fill provided it is broken down to at least six inches in dimension, not placed within one foot of the pipe and does not constitute more than 25 percent of any portions of the fill. 4.3.6 Placement and Compaction Fills All fill soils placed in the public right-of-way must be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum density as required by the City of Fontana. Fill should be placed in horizontal lifts, moisture conditioned, and mechanically compacted. Jetting flooding of fills is not permitted by the City. The optimum lift thickness will depend on the compaction equipment used and can best be determined in the field. The following uncompacted lift thickness can be used as preliminary guidelines. Plate Compactors Small Vibratory or static rollers (5-ton±) Scrapers and heavy loaders Heavy vibratory (20-ton) 4-6 inches 6-8 inches 8-12 inches 12-18 inches The maximum lift thickness for mechanical compaction should never be greater than 18 inches. The moisture content of the fill materials should be within two percent of optimum to readily achieve the required degree of compaction. The existing soils are dry (well below optimum). Therefore, moistening of these materials during grading will be required. During backfill of excavations, the fill should be properly benched into the construction slopes as it is placed in lifts. Where space constraints (i.e., interference with existing utilities, etc.) do not permit use of equipment for compaction, backfill consisting of one sack sand -cement slurry may be used. 4.3.7 Shrinkage and Subsidence Shrinkage is the loss of soil volume caused by compaction of fills to a higher density than before grading backfill. Subsidence is the settlement of in -place subgrade soils caused by loads generated by large earthmoving equipment. For earthwork volume estimating purposes, an average shrinkage value of 15 to 20 percent and subsidence of 0.1 foot 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 7 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 may be assumed for the existing surficial (upper 10 feet) natural soils. Shrinkage and subsidence of the deeper materials is expected to be nominal, on the order of 5 percent. These values are estimates only. Actual shrinkage and subsidence will depend on the types of earthmoving equipment used and should be determined during grading. 4.3.8 Observation and Testing A representative of GPI should observe all excavations, subgrade preparation and fill placement activities. Sufficient in -place field density tests should be performed during fill placement to evaluate the overall compaction of the soils. Soils that do not meet minimum compaction requirements should be reworked and tested prior to placement of any additional fill. 4.4 FOUNDATIONS 4.4.1 Foundation Type The proposed lift station may be supported on conventional isolated and/or continuous shallow spread footings or a mat foundation founded on the natural soils occurring 30 feet below existing grades. The single -story building may be supported on conventional footings founded in compacted fill. 4.4.2 Allowable Bearing Capacity The proposed lift station will be founded approximately 30 feet below existing grades. An allowable bearing capacity up to 4,000 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used. This value is based on the expected lift station invert elevation. An allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf may be used for shallow foundations supporting the one-story building founded on properly compacted fill. The allowable pressures may be increased one-third for short-term, transient, wind and seismic loading. The maximum edge pressures induced by eccentric loading or overturning moments should not be allowed to exceed these values. 4.4.3 Minimum Footing Widths/Depths of Embedment Allowable Bearing Pressure (psf) 1023-581.01 R(9/91) Minimum Minimum Width Depth 2,000 15 15 3,000 18 18 4,000 24 18 8 sTtNtd"zs�J.A:.H.ewt�'Sse::NrAa9^tv.!u.roaa�sewSa•MI,L `LN(.C.r.1 m�F.Marmon<KN::.:..o-.�.etntexw..vor., The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 4.4.4 Estimated Settlements We do not anticipate any significant settlement for the lift station founded 30 feet below existing grades for the magnitude of allowable bearing pressure provided the subgrade soils are not disturbed during excavation. We anticipate total settlements and differential settlements to be the less than one-half and one-fourth of an inch, respectively, for shallow foundations founded on properly compacted fill. The above estimates are based on the assumption that the recommended earthwork will be performed and that the footings will be sized in accordance with our recommendations. 4.4.5 Lateral Load Resistance Soil resistance to lateral loads will be provided by a combination of frictional resistance between the bottom of footings and underlying soils and by passive soil pressures acting against the embedded sides of the footings. For frictional resistance, a coefficient of friction of 0.40 may be used for design. In addition, an allowable lateral bearing pressure equal to an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot may be used, provided the footings are poured tight against undisturbed natural or compacted fill soils. These values may be used in combination without reduction. - 4.4.6 Footing Excavation Observation Prior to placement of concrete and steel, the Geotechnical Engineer should observe and approve all footing excavations. All excavations should be cleaned of any loose material prior to placement of steel. 4.5 BUILDING FLOOR SLABS Slab -on -grade floors should be supported on granular, non -expansive soils compacted as discussed in the "Compacted Fill" section. A vapor/moisture barrier should be placed under any slabs that are to be covered with moisture -sensitive floor coverings (parquet, vinyl, tile, etc.). The vapor barrier should consist of a polyethylene sheet (visqueen) having a minimum thickness of 6 mils. This material should be covered by a layer of clean sand (not native soil) having a minimum thickness of 2 inches. The function of the sand layer is to protect the vapor barrier during construction and to aid in the uniform curing of the concrete. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 9 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. :. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 4.6 TYPE OF CEMENT Based on the results of laboratory chemical testing for this investigation, the on -site soils exhibit soluble sulphate concentrations less than 50 parts per million. Therefore, ordinary Type 1 or Type 2 cement may be used for the construction of concrete in contact with the subgrade soils. 4.7 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES Active earth pressures can be used for designing walls that can yield at least 1/4 inch laterally under the imposed loads. For level backfill the magnitude of active pressures are equivalent to the pressures imposed by a fluid weighing 30 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). This pressure may also be used for the design of temporary excavation support (cantilevered shoring). At -rest pressures should be used for restrained walls that remain rigid enough to be essentially non -yielding. At -rest pressures are equivalent to the pressures imposed by a fluid weighing 55 pounds per cubic foot. Walls subject to surcharge loads should be designed for an additional uniform lateral pressure equal to one-third and one-half the anticipated surcharge pressure for unrestrained and restrained walls, respectively. The wall backfill should be well -drained to relieve possible hydrostatic pressure or designed to withstand these pressures. Braced shoring should be designed to resist a uniform pressure distribution of 24H (psf). H is defined as the depth of the trench. The above pressure distribution assumes that groundwater will be well below the bottom of the excavation during construction. As • discussed previously, groundwater was not encountered during any of our explorations for this project. 4.8 PAVED AREAS Laboratory testing performed for adjacent projects indicated R-values for the finer grained sandy silts encountered at the lift station site to be on the order of 30 to 40. Preliminary pavement design has been based on an assumed R-Value of 30. The California Division of Highways Design Method was used for design of the recommended preliminary pavement sections. These recommendations are based on the assumption that the pavement subgrades will consist of the existing surface soils. Final pavement design should be based on R-value testing performed near the conclusion of rough grading. The following pavement sections are recommended for planning purposes only. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 10 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. - - September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 • Section Thickness (inches) Traffic Asphaltic Class II Pavement Area Index Concrete Base Course Heavy Truck Driveways 6.0 3 9 Auto and Pickup Driveways 4.0 3 4 The pavement subgrade underlying Class II Base should be properly prepared and compacted in accordance with the recommendations outlined under "Subgrade Preparation". The pavement base course (as well as the top 12 inches of the subgrade soils) should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum density (ASTM D-1557). Aggregate base should conform to the requirements of Section 26 of the California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Class II aggregate base (3/4" maximum) or Section 200-2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book) for untreated base materials. The above recommendations are based on the assumption that the base course will be properly drained. The design of paved areas should incorporate measures to prevent moisture build-up within the base course which can otherwise lead to premature pavement failure. For example, curbing adjacent to landscaped areas should be deep enough to act as a barrier to infiltration of irrigation water into the adjacent base course. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 11 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 5.0 LIMITATIONS The report, exploration logs, and other materials resulting from GPI's efforts were prepared exclusively for use by The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc., the City of Fontana and their consultants in designing the proposed development. The report is not intended to be suitable for reuse on extensions or modifications of the project or for use on any project other than the currently proposed development as it may not contain sufficient or appropriate information for such uses. If this report or portions of this report are provided to contractors or included in specifications, it should be understood that they are provided for information only. Soil deposits may vary in type, strength, and many other important properties between points of exploration due to non -uniformity of the geologic formations or to man-made cut and fill operations. While we cannot evaluate the consistency of the properties of materials in areas not explored, the conclusions drawn in this report are based on the assumption that the data obtained in the field and laboratory are reasonably representa- tive of field conditions and are conducive to interpolation and extrapolation. Furthermore, our recommendations were developed with the assumption that a proper level of field observations and construction review will be provided during grading, excavation, and foundation construction. If field conditions during construction appear to be different than is indicated in this report, we should be notified immediately so that we may assess the impact of such conditions on our recommendations. Our investigation and evaluations were performed using generally accepted engineering approaches and principles available at this time and the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable geotechnical engineers practicing in this area. No other representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended in our report. Respectfully submitted, Geotechnical Prionals Inc. Scott E. Fitinghoff Staff Engineer SEF:JEH:gn 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 12 James E. Harris, G.E. Principal The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift - Fontana, CA GPI Proj. 1023.581 REFERENCES 1. "Geotechnical Investigation, Santa Ana Sewer Line, Fontana, California," dated September 3, 1991 by Geotechnical Professionals Inc., Project No. 1023.591. 2. "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Empire Center, Fontana, CA," dated January 27, 1989 by GEOFON Inc., Project No. 87-357.01. 1023-581.01 V(9/91) 0 2000 4000 fl GEOTECHNICAL la PROFESSIONALS INC. SITE LOCATION MAP SANTA ANA AVE. SEWER / LIFT STATION GPI PROJECT NO.: 1023.581 I SCALE: 1"= 2000' FIGURE 1 SAN BERNARDINO r Kt_t_w/T S. P. R. R. SLOVER 10 11 B-14 IY w • • 5....... _.v 20 • 12 13 AVENUE PB-1 • Still bS"- 14 0 J •28+� I- m 0 z PB-20 • OF 33 19 18 GPI-1 34 17 0 PC-5i0 LIFT STATIO B-i N■ r........ KEINE WrftWti JURUPA 21 AVENUE 22 23 16 15 EXPLANATION PROPOSED SEWER LINE 1-B-1 l APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING BY GPI 0GPI-1 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING BY GPI (REFERENCE 1) PB-1 • APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PREVIOUS BORING (REFERENCE 2) PC-5 • APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PREVIOUS CPT (REFERENCE 2) BASE MAP REPRODUCED FROM INDEX MAP BY HALL AND FORMEN INC. GEOTECHNICAL PROFESSIONALS INC. SITE PLAN SANTA ANA AVE. SEWER / LIFT STATION PROJECT NO.: 1023.581 I - SCALE 1"=800' FIGURE 2 APPENDIX A The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 APPENDIX A EXPLORATORY BORINGS The subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling and sampling two exploratory borings during our investigation. The boring locations are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The borings for the current investigation were advanced to depths ranging from 26 to 40 feet. The borings were drilled using truck -mounted bucket auger equipment. Relatively undisturbed samples were obtained using a brass -ring lined sampler, driven into the soil by a 1,680-pound Kelly bar dropping 12 inches for sampling intervals up to 25 feet. A 840-pound Kelly bar dropping 12 inches was used to drive the brass -ring lined sampler below 25 feet. The number of blows needed to drive the sampler was recorded as the penetration resistance. It should be noted that the number of blows in this case are much lower than the Standard Penetration Resistance because of the greater driving weight. The field explorations for the current investigation were performed under the continuous technical supervision of a GPI field representative who visually inspected the site, maintained detailed logs of the borings, classified the soils encountered, and obtained relatively undisturbed samples for examination and laboratory testing. The soils encountered in the borings were classified in the field and through further examination in the laboratory in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (Figure A-1). Detailed logs of the borings performed for. this investigation are presented in Figures A-2 and A-3 in this appendix. Boring B-1 from Reference 2 (drilled on August 7, 1991) is also included for reference. 1023-581.01X(9/91) A-1 t UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487) PRIMARY DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL SECONDARY DIVISIONS COARSE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN HALF OF MATERIALS IS LARGER THAN # 200 SIEVE SIZE SANDS GRAVELS MORE THAN MORE THAN HALF OF COARSE HALF OFCOARSE FRACTION IS FRACTION IS SMALLER THAN LARGER THAN t! 4 SIEVE # 4 SIEVE CLEAN GRAVELS GW, WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES. (LESS THAN 5% FINES) GP POORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES. GRAVEL WITH GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND -SILT MIXTURE. NON PLASTIC FINES. FINES GC CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND -CLAY MIXTURES. PLASTIC FINES. CLEAN SANDS SW WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS,LITTLE OR NO FINES. (LESS THAN 5% FINES) SP POORLY GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES. SANDS WITH SM SILTY SANDS, SAND -SILT MIXTURES. NON -PLASTIC FINES. FINES SC CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -CLAY MIXTURES. PLASTIC FINES. FINE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN HALF OF MATERIAL IS SMALLER THAN # 200 SIEVE SIZE 2 SILTS AND SILTS AND. CLAYS CLAYS 0 LIQUID LIQUID LIMIT IS LIMIT IS GREATER LESS THAN 50 THAN 50 ML INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY. CL INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS. OL ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY. MH INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOILS, PLASTIC SILTS. CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS. OH ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS. PT PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS. CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA BASED ON FIELD TESTS PENETRATION RESISTANCE (PR) CLAYS AND SILTS • NUMBER OF BLOWS OF 140 POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 SANDS AND GRAVELS CONSISTENCY BLOWS/FOOT• STRENGTH•• INCHES TO DRIVE A 2 INCH O.D. (l 3/8 INCH I.D) BARREL RELATIVE DENSITY BLOWS/FOOT• . _. —> VERY SOFT _ ._ 0 - 2 • 0 - V. SPLIT SAMPLER (ASTM-1586 STANDARD VERY LOOSE 0.4 SOFT 2.4 'b-'% PENETRATION TEST) LOOSE 4 - 10 FIRM 4 • 8 'h - 1 •• UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH IN TONS/SQ. FT. MEDIUM DENSE 10. 30 STIFF 8. 15 1 -2 READ FROM POCKET - DENSE 30.50 VERY STIFF 15.30 2 -4 PENETROMETER VERY DENSE OVER 50 HARD OVER 30 OVER 4 CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA BASED ON LAB TESTS 2 60 6)30) GW AND SW-C = D60 GREATER THAN 4 FOR GW AND 6 FOR SW, CH Cc- u D10 D10 X D60 x BETWEEN 1 AND 3 z°_ 40 CL 4' •�' GP AND SP - CLEAN GRAVEL OR SAND NOT MEETING REQUIREMENT FOR GW GP AND SW u 20 GW AND SM - ATTERBERG LIMIT BELOW "A" LINE OR P.I. LESS THAN 4 GC AND SC ATTERBERG LIMIT ABOVE "A" LINE P.I. GREATER THAN 7 OH & MH - a / FINES FINE MEDIUM COARSEFINE COARSE �-J ML& (SILT OR CLAY) SAND SAND SAND GRAVEL GRAVELJCQBBLESBOULDERS 0 'MIJ' CL SIEVE SIZES 200 40 10 4 3J4" 3' 10" 0 20 40 60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT CLASSIFICATION OF EARTH MATERIALS IS BASED ON FIELD INSPECTION AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED TO IMPLY LABORATORY ANALYSIS UNLESS SO STATED. PROFESSIONALS INC. KEY FOR SOIL EXPLORATION LOGS FIGURE A-1 - = r f MOISTURE (%) DRY DENSITY (PCF) PENETRATION RESISTANCE ;BLOWS/FOOT) SAMPLE TYPE w ro j DEPTH (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS ELEVATION (FEET) This summary applies only at the location of this boring and at the time of drilling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions encountered. NATIVE Sandy Silt (ML) to Silty Sand (SM), brown, dry, firm to medium dense @ 3.5 feet becomes slightly moist - i v-rv- -1040- 3.0 104 4 D Silty Sand (SM), brown, slightly moist, medium dense, B porous -1035- 2.9 103 5 D Sandy Silt (ML), brown, dry to slightly moist, stiff -1030- 3.7 90 6 D B Silty Sand (SM), brown, slightly moist, medium dense to -1025- 2.4 102 5 D dense -1020- 2.5 101 10 D B -1015- 2.6 101 8 D 2.2 116 9 D Silty Sand (SM), brown, slightly moist, medium dense -1010- Terminated at 40 feet. 2.7 96 11 D Caving noted in upper 2 feet of boring SAMPLE C TYPES DATE DRILLED 8-29-91 Rock Core ' ® -1003- PROJECT NO.: 1023.581 FONTANA LIFT STATION S Standard Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: — = D B T Drive Sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered Tube Sample LOG OF BORING NO. B-1 FIGURE A-2 1 MOISTURE (%) DRY DENSITY (PCF) PENETRATION RESISTANCE (BLOWS/FOOT) SAMPLE TYPE rqv c1� Q1 c� DEPTH _, , I , I I I I I (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS z o Hw This summary applies only at the location of this boring and at the time of drilling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions encountered. ›� J" w NATIVE Silty Sand (SM), brownish grey, slightly moist, medium dense @ 3 feet becomes moist -10C,,- -1060- 1.1 115 2 D Gravelly Sand lens -1055- 9.9 112 3 D B _ . Sand (SP), brown, moist, medium dense Sandy Silt (ML) to Silty Sand (SM), brown, moist, stiff to -1050- 4 D medium dense Silty Sand (SM), brown, moist, medium dense, occasional 14.4 109 4 D silt lenses -1045- 2.0 107 4 D j•.. Well -graded sand (SW), brown, slightly moist, dense, gravels to 2-inches diameter -1040- 2.0 15 D ' Terminated at 26 feet. Caving observed in upper 2 feet of boring. Ravelling observed below 5 feet in the boring. SAMPLE7YPES C DATE DRILLED 8-29-91 Rock Core ® Mt ITOFONTANA PROJECT NO.: 1023.581 LIFT STATION S S andard Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: D B T Drive Sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered Tube Sample LOG OF BORING NO. B-2 FIGURE A-3 II ce =.. cHn,. zu w E= F-zO ¢¢tL a. 1- x^ HH DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS Z 0� w �� u) ��, H E pa_ } i-U)N wH3 Z W J Co`m J a. = U I w p� This summary applies onlyat the location of this boring and at the time of drilling. Subsurface conditios may differ at other locations and may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions encountered. J" Lao - NATIVE Silty Sand (SM), brown, slightly moist, medium to dense B r - @3' gravels to 4 inches diameter -1055- 2.9 113 7 D . • . • .. • • Well -Graded Sand with Silt (SW-SM), brownish grey, -` • • • slightly moist, dense, gravels to 4 inches -1050- B • • 3.3 121 9 D 10�.• •.• • . . • -1045- _ Silty Sand (SM), brown, moist, dense 7.1 112 4 D 15-- B _ - -1040- 7.5 111 5 D .-.- -.- ---' 20 - Terminated at 20 feet. Minor ravelling in boring. SAMPLE C TYPES DATE DRILLED 8-7-91 Rock Core q;,.,, :.. ` ®�'' 1,:,.:. z,.. rr: PROJECT NO.: 1023.591 • SANTA ANA AVE. SEWER S Standard Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: D B T Drive Sample 18" Bucket auger Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered Tube Sample LOG OF BORING NO. B-1 FIGURE A-2 APPENDIX B The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTS INTRODUCTION Relatively undisturbed soil samples were carefully packaged in the field and sealed to prevent moisture loss. The samples were then transported to our Cypress office for examination and testing assignments. Laboratory tests were performed on selected representative samples as an aid in classifying the soils and to evaluate the physical properties of the soils affecting foundation design and construction procedures. Detailed descriptions of the laboratory tests are presented below under the appropriate test headings. Test results are presented in the figures that follow. MOISTURE CONTENT AND DRY DENSITY Moisture content and dry density were determined for a number of the ring samples. The samples were first trimmed to obtain volume and wet weight and then were dried in accordance with ASTM 2216-71. After drying, the weight of each sample was measured, and moisture content and dry density were calculated. Moisture content and dry density values are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION A representative sample was dried, weighed, soaked in water until individual soil particles were separated, and then washed on the No. 200 sieve. That portion of the material retained on the No. 200 sieve was oven -dried and then run through a standard set of sieves in accordance with ASTM D422-63. The grain distribution data is shown in Figures B-1 and B-2. DIRECT SHEAR Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed ring samples, in accordance with ASTM D3080-72. After the initial weight and volume measurements were made, each sample was placed in the shear machine, and a normal load comparable to the in -situ overburden stress was applied. The sample was allowed to consolidate and then was sheared to failure. The procedure was repeated on additional test specimens from the same soil layer under increased normal loads. Shear stress and sample deformation were monitored throughout the test. The results of the direct shear tests are presented in Figures B-3 through B-4. 1023-581.01 X(9/91) B-1 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 COMPACTION Compaction tests were performed on selected bulk samples, in accordance with ASTM D1557-70 in order to determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the material tested. The results of the compaction tests are presented below: Maximum Optimum Location Depth (feet) Soil Type Density (pcf) Moisture (%) B-1 8-10 SM 126 11.0 1023-581.01 X(9/91) B-2 U.S. STANDARD SIEVE -INCHES I U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS I 6 3 1.5 3/4 3/8 4 10 20 40 100 200 HYDROMETER 100 90 80 70 I.- 2 CD H w 60 3 } m W 50 H Li. F- w 40 C, C✓ LtI n. 30 20 10 0 • 100 COBBLES 1 I GRAVEL coarse 10 I • • • • I I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS fine coarse SAND medium fine O.i 0 Jl SILT OR CLAY 0.001 Sample Location B-1 10 Classification Silty Sand (SM) MC% 3 LL PL PI Cc Cu Sample Location D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay • B-1 10 4.75 0.18 0.096 0.0 81.4 18.6 PROJECT: FONTANA LIFT STATION PROJECT NO. 1023.581 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION FIGURE8-1 U.S. STANDARD SIEVE -INCHES I U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS I 6 3 1.5 3/4 3/8 4 10 20 40 100 200 HYDROMETER 1 100 90 80 70 I - CD H W 60 3 >- m W 50 z H F- w 40 U lx W 0.. 30 20 10 0 I I 100 COBBLES GRAVEL coarse 1C GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS fine coarse SAND medium fine 01 0 )1 SILT OR CLAY 0.001 Sample Location B-1 15 Classification Sandy Silt (ML) MC% 4 LL PL PI Cc Cu Sample Location D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay B-1 15 4.75 0.0 29.8 70.2 PROJECT: FONTANA LIFT STATION PROJECT NO. 1023.581 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION FIGURE B-2 J r SHEAR STRENGTH, psf 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 ■ 00 10)0 20)0 30J0 4010 50)0 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf PEAK STRENGTH Friction Angle = 33 degrees Cohesion = psf Note: Sample submerged before test Sample Location Classification 60 00 RESIDUAL STRENGTH Friction Angle = 33 degrees Cohesion = 0 psf DD,pcf MC,% • B-1 10.0 Silty Sand (SM) Peak 103 3 m B-1 10.0 Silty Sand (SM) Residual 103 3 PROJECT: FONTANA LIFT STATION PROJECT NO.:1023.581 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS FIGURE B-3 ) • SHEAR STRENGTH, psf 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 00 10)0 2000 30)0 40S0 50)0 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf PEAK STRENGTH Friction Angle = 38 degrees Cohesion = psf Note: Sample Submerged before test Sample Location Classification 60 00 RESIDUAL STRENGTH Friction Angle = 27 degrees Cohesion = 110 psf DD,pcf MC,% • B-1 15.0 Sandy Silt (ML) Peak 90 4 B-1 • 15.0 Sandy Silt (ML) Residual 90 4 PROJECT: FONTANA LIFT STATION PROJECT NO.:1023.581 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS FIGURE B-4 APPENDIX C M. J. SCHIFF & ASSOCIATES Consulting Corrosion Engineers September 17, 1991 GEOTECHNICAL PROFESSIONALS, INC. 5736 Corporate Avenue Cypress, California 90630 Attention: Mr. Scott Fitinghoff Re: Gentlemen: 1291 NORTH INDIAN HILL BOULEVARD CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA 91711-3860 714/626-0967 FAX 714/621-1419 Soil Corrosivity Study Off -Site Santa Ana Sewer Line/Lift Station Fontana, California Your # 1023.58I, MJS&A #91208 Laboratory tests have been completed on the single soil sample you provided from your borings for the subject project at Santa Ana and Tamarind Avenues. We assume that this soil is representative of the most corrosive soil at the site. The purpose of these tests was to determine if the soil may have deleterious effects on underground piping and concrete structures. The electrical resistivity of the sample was measured in its as -received condition and again with distilled water added to create the standardized condition of saturation. Resistivities are at about their lowest value when the soil is saturated. The sample was chemically analyzed for the major anions and cations, and pH was measured. Test, results are shown on Table 1. A useful factor in determining soil corrosivity is electrical resistivity. The electrical re- sistivity of a soil is a measure of its resistance to the flow of electrical current. Corro- sion of buried metal is an electrochemical process in which the amount of metal loss due to corrosion is directly proportional to the flow of electrical current (DC) from the metal into the soil. Corrosion currents, following Ohm's Law, are inversely proportional to soil resistivity. Lower electrical resistivities result from higher moisture and chemical contents and indicate corrosive soil. A correlation between electrical resistivity and corrosivity toward ferrous metals is: Soil Resistivity in ohm -centimeters 0 to 1,000 1,000 to 2,000 2,000 to 10,000 over 10,000 Corrosivity Category severely corrosive corrosive moderately corrosive mildly corrosive The electrical resistivity measured in the laboratory with as -received moisture content was in the mildly corrosive category. When saturated, the sample dropped into the moderately corrosive category. The resistivity dropped considerably with added mois- ture because the sample was dry as -received. Soil pH value was 7.3 which is neutral and not significant in evaluating corrosivity. CORROSION AND CATHODIC PROTECTION ENGINEERING SERVICES SURVEYS • PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS • INTERFERENCE PROBLEMS • SOIL TESTS • SUPERVISION. INSPECTION AND ADJUSTMENT OF INSTALLATIONS GEOTECHNICAL PROFESSIONALS, INC. September 17, 1991 MJS&A #91208 Page 2 The chemical content of the sample was low. Tests were not made for sulfides or negative oxidation-reduction (redox) potentials because they would not exist in this dry aerated sample. This soil is classified as moderately corrosive to ferrous metals. In addition to soil corrosivity, the life of buried materials depends on thickness, strength, loads, construction details, soil moisture, etc. and is, therefore, difficult to predict. Of more practical value are corrosion control methods that will increase the life of materials that would be subject to significant corrosion. The following corrosion control measures are recommended. Abrasive blast underground steel piping and apply a high quality protective coating such as extruded polyethylene, a tape coating system, hot applied coal tar enamel, or fusion bonded epoxy. Apply cathodic protection to steel piping. To prevent dissimilar metal corrosion cells and to facilitate the application of cathodic protection, electrically insulate buried steel piping from dissimilar metals, cement- mostar or concrete coated steel, and above ground steel pipe. Underground steel pipe with rubber gasketed, mechanical, grooved end, or other non- conductive type joints must be bonded for electrical continuity. Electrical continuity is necessary for corrosion monitoring and cathodic protection. Castor ductile iron pipe, valves, and fittings do not require special protective measures such as a plastic wrap. However, to avoid possibly creating corrosion problems, iron should not be placed partially in contact with concrete such as thrust blocks. Use coat- ings mentioned above for steel or polyethylene plastic sheets 8 mils thick to prevent such contact. Electrically insulate underground iron pipe from dissimilar metals and above ground pipe. No special precautions are required for copper, reinforced concrete, asbestos -cement, vitrified clay, or plastic piping placed underground from a corrosion viewpoint. Protect any iron valves and fittings as mentioned above. Where metallic pipelines penetrate concrete structures, use plastic sleeves, rubber seals, or other dielectric material to prevent pipe contact with the concrete and reinforc- ing steel. On any type of pipe, bare steel appurtenances such as bolts, joint harnesses, or flexible couplings should be coated with a coal tar or rubber based mastic or coal tar epoxy after assembly. Standard construction practices and concrete mixes may be used for concrete in con- tact with this soil using type 1 or 2 cement. GEOTECHNICAL PROFESSIONALS, INC. September 17, 1991 MJS&A #91208 Page 3 The scope of this study is limited to a determination of soil corrosivity and its general effects on materials likely to be used for construction. If the architects and/or engi- neers desire more specific information, designs, specifications, or review of design, we will be happy to work with them as a separate phase of this project. Respectfully submitted, M. J. SCHIFF & ASSOCIATES Robert A. Pannell cb Enc: Table 1 L64 MN 1 I MI NE EN I N-- n 0 O 0 ® --- NM TABLE 1 LABORATORY I'LSTS ON SOIL SAMPLES Location Soil Resistivity Chemical Analysis in mg/kg (ppm) of dry soil and ohm -centimeters Calcium Magnesium Sodium Bicarbonate Chloride Sulfate Depth Soil Type As Rec'd Sat'd all Ca Mg Na HCO3 Cl SO4 B1 8-10' silty sand 25,000 3,000 7.3 60 trace 12 122 35 48 Carbonate = 0 Off -Site Santa Ana Sewer Line/Lift Station Fontana, California Your #1023.58I, MJS&A #91208 F16 APPENDIX D GEOFON Project No. 87-357.01 APPENDIX B EXPLORATORY BORING RESULTS The subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling seventeen exploratory borings and excavating eighteen backhoe test pits at the locations shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The borings were advanced to depths up to 36 feet. The test pits were excavated to depths of 5 feet. The borings were drilled using truck -mounted bucket auger drilling equipment. The test pits were excavated using a backhoe. The field explorations were performed under the continuous technical supervision of a GEOFON geotechnical engineer who visually inspected the site, maintained detailed logs of the borings, classified the soils encountered, and obtained relatively undisturbed samples for examination and laboratory testing. Detailed logs of the borings (including those drilled for the previous investigation) ar.e presented in Figures B-2 through •B-21 of this appendix. The logs of test pits are presented in Figure B-22. The soils encountered in the explorations were classified in the field and through further examination in the laboratory in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (Figure B-1). Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained with a 2.42-inch inside diameter ring sampler. The soil sampler was driven with a 1680-pound weight falling 12 inches. Sand cone tests (ASTM D 1556) were performed in test pits. 35701002 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487) COARSE GRALNED SOILS FLNE GRAINED SOILS PRIMARY DIVISIONS CLEAN GRAVELS (LESS THAN 5% FINES) GRAVEL WITH FINES CLEAN SANDS (LESS THAN 5% FINES) SANDS WITH FINES A cn au HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GROUP SYMBOL GW SECONDARY DIVISIONS WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES. GP GM POORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES. SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND -SILT MIXTURE. NON PLASTIC FINES. GC SW CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND -CLAY MIXTURES. PLASTIC FINES. WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS,LITTLE OR NO FINES. SP POORLY GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES. SM SILTY SANDS, SAND -SILT MIXTURES. NON -PLASTIC FINES. SC ML CL OL MH CH CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -CLAY MIXTURES. PLASTIC FINES. INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY. INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS. ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY. INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOILS, PLASTIC SILTS. INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS. OH I ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS. PT PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS. CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA BASED ON FIELD TESTS PENETRATION RESISTANCE (PR) SANDS AND GRAVELS - RELATIVE DENSITY BLOWS/FOOT• . VERY LOOSE 0 . 4 LOOSE MEDIUM DENSE DENSE VERY DENSE 4-10 10-30 30. 50 OVER 50 CONSISTENCY VERY SOFT SOFT FIRM STIFF VERY STIFF HARD CLAYS AND SILTS BLOWS/FOOT• 0-2 2.4 4-8 8.15 15.30 OVER 30 STRENGTHI• • 0.4: 'h • 1 1-2 2-4 OVER 4 • NUMBER OF BLOWS OF 140 POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES TO DRIVE A 2 INCH O.D. ( 1 3/8 INCH I.D.) SPLIT•LIARREL SAMPLER (ASTM-1586STANDARD PENETRATION TEST) •• UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH IN TONS/SQ. FT. READ FROM POCKET PENETROMETER 60 K Z 40 U 2 4 0 CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA BASED ON LAB TESTS OH & MII '20 40 60 80 LIQUID LIMIT GEOFON 1360 GW AND SW-Cu GREATER THAN 4-FOR GW AND 6 FOR SW: C D1U DlU \ DbU BETWEEN I AND 3 GP AND SP - CLEAN GRAVEL OR SAND NOT MEETING REQUIREMENT FOR GW AND SW GW AND SM - ATTERBERG LIMIT BELOW "A" LINE OR P.I. LESS THAN 4 GC AND SC - ATTERBERG LIMIT ABOVE "A" LINE P,L GREATER THAN 7 FINES (SILT OR CLAY)! SAND FINE MEDIUM ICOARSEI PINE COARSC I SAND `SAND GRAVEL GRAVEL j SIEVE SIZES 200 40 10 100 4 3/:4" 3,. 10.. CLASSIFICATION OF EARTH MATERIALS IS BASED ON FIELD INSPECTION AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED TO IMPLY LABORATORY ANALYSIS UNLESS SO STATED. • PROJECT NO.87-357.Ot OVA READING (PPM) a il a`• i DRY DENSITY (PCF) 6 u, § LL ` o Q 2 .. SAMPLE TYPE I p"- DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS W IL V Ill 1092± THIS SUMMARY APPUES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. -. •. SAND -GRAVELLY SAND (SP-SM), light brown, ••.••• predominantly fine sand with some gravels and --1090t occasional cobbles; cobble content increasing below 10 feet; medium dense; slightly moist 0 25 D '• - --1085± 0 10—'0 °. 0 21 D —1080± • •o 'o • • �'. •---- 15 — b • . 0 25 D -.0 • 'o - c : —1075± _ • ;. SANDY SILT (ML) TO SILTY SAND (SM), light brown 20 _ .: to brown, medium dense, moist, occasional 0 26 D _ gravelly and cobbly zones -" - -1070± ' 25— • • 0 45 D •• '• —1065± 30— • 0 28 D _'' —1060± 0 30 D • •' —1055± • r . Last sample interval 40.0'-41.5' 0 36 D 40 : . Boring terminated at 41.5 feet SAMPLE TYPES DATE DRILLED 11-6-87 El Rock Cora PROJECT NO.: 87-357 _ I GEOFON © Standard Spilt Spoon EQUPMFNT USED ,„ C o„, o FONTANA DEVELOPMENT N A T SO Drive Sample 8" Hollow Stem Auger CI O. Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Tuba Sample - Not Encountered LOG OF BORING NO. B-1 11-87 FIGURE B-2 0 MOISTURE (%) DRY DENSITY (PCF) (PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS/FOOT W a. H J a. Fr UI tDEPTH o O v� O (FEET) 1- I __ 1 _ 1__ 1_ I 1 1 1 1 I DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS ELEVATION (FEET) THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUALCONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. : Silty SAND (SM) brown, slightly moist, loose @2' medium dense @4' dense -1045- -1040- -1035- 2.2 3.7 7.8 109 107 92 8 8 8 D Sandy SILT (ML) brown, slightly moist, hard @10.5' grades yellow brown D D Terminate drilling at 16 feet SAMPLE S QDrive B T TYPES DATE DRILLED: 11-30-88 Rock Core Standard Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Tube Sample Not encountered GEcorOFporONated In PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER LOG OF BORING NO. B-4 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-5 LIJ 3 ^ t}- Z o o 0 ¢ ¢¢ a I-- F=-' iij DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS Z F H .'�. 0 E O a } " IX 0 H H 3 Z 0 O W W J a a m J . F ¢ 0 W O THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. D J .. w 1047 ± O ::::•:: Silty SAND (SM) brown, slightly moist, loose @2' medium dense @ 4' light yellow brown, medium dense, trace of 1045• 4.6 102 4 D 5_ gravel Sandy SILT (ML) light grey, moist, very stiff 1040 4.3 105 4 D 10 Silty SAND (SM) brown, slightly moist, medium dense •1035- 4.7 102 4 D 15 Sandy SILT (ML), olive brown, slightly moist, very stiff Terminate drilling at 16 feet SAMPLE C TYPES DATE DRILLED: 11-30-88 Rock Core Standard Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: GEOFON Incorporated NO.:S PROJECT 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER D B T Drive Sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Tube Sample Not encountered LOG OF BORING NO. B-5 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-6 MOISTURE (%) DRY DENSITY CPCF) PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS/FOOT SAMPLE TYPE • o DEPTH (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS o ELEVATION (FEET) THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUALCONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. 2.6 3.5 4.0 108 112 108 4 5 4 :: Silty SAND (SM) , brown, slightly moist, loose a 2' medium dense F • 1050 1045 -1040- D D D Terminate drilling at 15 feet • • SAMPLE TYPES DATE DRILLED: 11-30-88 Core Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: Sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Sample Not encountered GEOFON Inc o r p o r a t e d PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER C Rock S Standard 0 Drive L O G OF BORING NO. B-6 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-7 B Bulk T .Tube W j ~ \ DRY DENSITY (PCF) [PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS/FOOT SAMPLE TYPE DEPTH (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS Z HOi � f' W H " 0 E THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. w tu v W B • Silty SAND (SM) light brown, slightly moist, loose, trace of gravel @2' medium dense 1055 ± • • Silty SAND/ SAND (SM/SP), brown, slightly 1.1 105 3 D moist, medium dense, some gravel -1050- _ @6' minor caving • Silty SAND (SM) , yellow brown, slightly moist, medium dense, trace 3.5 112 8 D 10— ..:::: . *. gravel a 10' dense -1045- 3.7 106 5 D 15—: • : @15' medium dense to dense -1D40- Terminate drilling at 16 feet SAMPLE C S El TYPES DATE DRILLED: 12-2-88 Rock Core Standard Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: Drive Sample 18" BUCKET AUGER E] GEOFON Incorporated PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER B T Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Tube Sample Not encountered LOG OF BORING NO. B-7 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-8 MOISTURE (%) DRY DENSITY (PCF) (PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS/FOOT SAMPLE TYPE HF w W— Os, DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS ELEVATION (FEET) I+ THIS Y APPLIES ONLY ATTH TIME OFMMADRILLING. SUBSURFACETHE CONDITIONS MAYLOCATION OFTHIS DIFFERRING AT OTHERANDAT L CAE TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUALCONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. 0 5 10— 15— - 20-- - 25— . .:. •. : Silty SAND (SM), light brown, slightly moist, loose, with trace of gravel @2' medium dense -1075- 1070- -1065 - -1060- •1055- -1045- 3.2 9.2 10.8 7.9 14.5 97 105 95 108 5 3 6 4 10 15 D •.::•:. Gravelly SAND (SP), brown, slightly moist, medium dense _ Sandy SILT (ML) brown, moist, stiff to very stiff @18' very stiff to hard D r D '• : :.••.: • Silty SAND/ SAND (SM/SP) brown, moist, medium dense D -•-1050- 30—. .. • Sandy SILT (ML) brown, very moist, hard D D _ : E Gravelly SAND (SP) light brown, moist, very dense 35 Terminate drilling at 35 feet SAMPLE -:? C © D B T TYPES DATE DRILLED: 12-1-88 Rock Core Standard split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: Drive Sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Tube Sample Not encountered IncorporatedEOFON PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER LOG OF BORING NO. B-12 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-13 • ��— Q r n H.X, p >: )- N " Z IL o a >- o Z W F- r Z O a i_ Fes- H 3 W W 0 Li!Z W _1 a m al F}- J a a N _ r. 1- F' a.„, o ., DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS 0 ^ 1- r- THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUALCONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. P W u 1085 ± 4.6 4.4 4.7 102 105 102 3 3 3 O - ' : Silty SAND (SM), brown, slightly moist, loose, caving @2' medium dense : @7' some gravel -1080- -1075- •1070- D 10—.'.. 15^ ,. : Silty SAND/ SAND (SM/SP), brown, slightly moist, medium dense D : • Silty SAND (SM) brown, moist, medium dense,trace of fine gravel D Terminate drilling at 16 feet SAMPLE :EJRock'Core TYPES DATE DRILLED: 12-1-88 Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: Sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Sample Not encountered EM GEOFON Incorporated PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER S Standard D Drive Bulk ❑T Tube LOG OF BORING NO. B-14 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-15 W H H 0 E 4.3 3.3 5.2 8.6 103 103 91 94 5 6 5 5 SAMPLE TYPE D D D SAMPLE TYPES 0 Rock Core [Standard Split Spoon Q Drive Sample ® Bulk Sample [T Tube Sample DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUALCONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. Silty SAND (SM), light brown, slightly moist, loose @2' medium dense 5— Sandy SILT (ML), light to yellow brown, slightly moist, very stiff 10- 15 Silty SAND (SM) yellow brown, moist, medium dense • 20-- Sandy SILT (ML), light brown to yellow brown, moist, very stiff -1045- -1040- -1035- -1030- DATE DRILLED: 12-2-88 EQUIPMENT USED: 18" BUCKET AUGER GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered Terminate the drilling at 21 feet 1-89 Incorporated 1025 PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER LOG OF BORING NO. B-20 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-21 GEOFON Project No. 87-357.01 APPENDIX A CONE PENETRATION TEST RESULTS Fourteen Cone Penetration Tests (CPT's) were performed at the site during the present investigation. The locations of the CPT's are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. These soundings were advanced to depths of up to 35 feet below existing site grades. The Cone Penetration Test consists of pushing a cone -tipped probe into the soil deposit while simultaneously recording the cone tip resistance and side friction resistance of the soil to penetration. The Cone Penetration Tests described in this report were conducted in general accordance with ASTM specifications (ASTM D3441-79) using an electric cone penetrometer. The CPT equipment consists of a cone assembly mounted at the end of a series of hollow sounding rods. A set of hydraulic rams is used to push the cone and rods into the soil while a continuous record of cone and friction resistance versus depth is obtained in both analog and digital form at the ground surface. A specially designed all -wheel drive truck is used to transport and house the test equipment and to provide a 20-ton reaction to the thrust of the hydraulic rams. The cone penetrometer assembly (Figure A-1) consists of a conical tip and a cylindrical friction sleeve. The conical tip has a 60 degree apex angle and a projected cross -sectional area of 15 square centimeters. The cylindrical friction sleeve has a surface area of 200 square centimeters. Both the conical tip and the cylindrical friction sleeve have outer diameters of about 4.37 centimeters (about 1-3/4 inches). The interior of the cone penetrometer is instrumented with strain gauges that allow simultaneous measurement of cone tip and friction sleeve resistance during penetration. Continuous electric signals from the strain gauges are transmitted by a cable in the sounding rods to analog and digital data recorders in the CPT truck. 35701002 Appendix A (Cont'd) GEOFON Project No. 87-357.01 Data obtained during a Cone Penetration Test consists of continuous stratigraphic information with close vertical resolution. Stratigraphic interpretation is based on relationships between cone tip resistance and friction resistance. The calculated friction ratio (CPT friction sleeve resistance divided by cone tip resistance) is used as an indicator of soil type. Granular soils typically have low friction ratios and high cone resistance, while cohesive or organic soils have high friction ratios and low cone resistance. These stratigraphic material categories form the basis for all subsequent calculations which utilize the CPT data. Computer plots of the reduced CPT data (including those performed for the previous investigation) are presented in Figures A-2 through A-33 in this appendix. The field testing and computer processing was performed by the Earth Technology Corporation under subcontract to GEOFON. The interpreted soil descriptions were prepared by GEOFON, Inc. 35701002 ELECTRIC CABLE COUPLER INCLINOMETER QUAD RING "0" RING STRAIN GAGE "0" RING QUAD RING 43.7MM► 1.72 INCH r FRICTION SLEEVE CONE GE®FOPJ PROJECT NO. 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER ELECTRONIC FRICTION CONE PENETROMETER 20 TON CAPACITY 1-89 FIGURE A -I 2 rn -o z2 rn rn rn 3 35 90 45 50 FRICTION RESISTANCE TSF tKG/CM2 ) CONE RESISTANCE TSF (KG/CM2 ) Q - _ . . 1 . . . :i". . . J.7U , ,«{u , [SU 900 350 4C s _______ 1 6 FRICTION RATIO (/.1 0 0 9 . 6 EI 0 5 10 15 202 -a 25 z . rn rn rn 30 -� 35 40 45 . -SO 400 8 INTERPRETED SOIL DESCRIPTION SILTY SAND (SM). loose SANDY SILT (ML), stiff Refusal at 5 feet (Gravelly layer) GEDFOf V PROJECT NO.: 87-357 FONTANA DEVELOPMENT LOG OF C-5 11-87 FIGURE A-6 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION SANTA ANA AVENUE SEWER/LIFT STATION . EMPIRE CENTER FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. 3500 Sepulveda Boulevard Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Prepared by: Geotechnical Professionals Inc. 5736 Corporate Avenue Cypress, CA 90630 (714) 220-2211 Project No. 1023.581 September 19, 1991 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift - Fontana, CA GPI Proj. 1023.581 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 • GENERAL 1 1.2 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS 1 1.3 PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION 1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS PAGE 1 2 3 3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS 3 3.2 SUBSURFACE SOILS 3 3.3 GROUNDWATER AND CAVING 3 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 4.1 GENERAL 4.2 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 4.2.1 Strong Ground Motion Potential 4.2.2 Potential for Ground Rupture 4.2.3 Potential for Liquefaction 4.2.4 Seismic Ground Subsidence 4.3 EARTHWORK 4.3.1 Clearing and Grubbing 4.3.2 Excavations 4.3.3 Shoring 4.3.4 Subgrade Preparation 4.3.5 Material for Fill 4.3.6 Placement and Compaction Fills 4.3.7 Shrinkage and Subsidence 4.3.8 Observation and Testing 4 5 4.4 FOUNDATIONS 8 4.4.1 Foundation Type 4.4.2 Allowable Bearing Capacity 4.4.3 Minimum Footing Widths/Depths of Embedment 4.4.4 Estimated Settlements 4.4.5 Lateral Load Reistance 4.4.6 Footing Excavation Observation 4.5 BUILDING FLOOR SLABS 9 4.6 TYPE OF CEMENT 10 1023-581.01V(9/91) The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift - Fontana, CA GPI Proj. 1023.581 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) 4.7 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES 4.8 PAVED AREAS 5.0 LIMITATIONS APPENDICES A Exploratory Borings B Laboratory Tests C Soil Corrosivity Study D Selected Exploratory Borings from Reference 2 1023-581.01 V(9/91) 10 10 12 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift - Fontana, CA GPI Proj. 1023.581 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO. 1 Site Location Map 2 Site Plan APPENDIX A A-1 Key to Log of Borings A-2* and A-3 Log of Borings (*dated 8-29-91) A-2** Log of Borings (**dated 8-7-91) B-1 and B-2 B-3 and B-4 B-2, B-5 thru B-8, B-13, B-15 and B-21 APPENDIX B Grainsize Distribution Direct Shear APPENDIX D Selected Log of Borings from Reference 2 A-1 thru A-6 Selected Log of CPT from Reference 2 TABLE NO. 1 1023-581.01V(9/91) LIST OF TABLES APPENDIX C Laboratory Tests on Soil Samples The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift Station September 19, 1991 GPI Proj. 1023.581 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 GENERAL This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation performed by Geotechnical Professionals Inc. (GPI) for the Slover Avenue/Santa Ana Boulevard/Jurupa Avenue/Empire Center Boulevard (north and south)/Tamarind Avenue portions of the off - site sewer improvements related to the Empire Center development in Fontana, California. Geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the facilities are provided herein. The location of the project site is shown on the Site Location Map, Figure 1. 1.2 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Based on project plans prepared by Hall and Foreman, Inc., dated May 23, 1991 and discussions with them, the proposed sewer line and lift station, covered by this report, will be located adjacent to existing Slover, Santa Ana, Jurupa, and Tamarind Avenues and within proposed north and south Empire Center Boulevards. The sewer line will consist of approximately 14,400± feet of pipeline ranging from 10 to 21 inch diameter pipe. The northern portion of the proposed sewer line (Slover Avenue, Empire Center Boulevard [north], and Sierra Avenue) will be constructed at depths ranging from 10 to 22 feet below existing ground surfaces. The southern portion of the proposed sewer line (Empire Center Boulevard [south], Jurupa Avenue, and Tamarind Avenue) will be constructed at depths ranging from 6 to 26 feet below existing ground surfaces. The proposed alignment is shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. A short portion of the line, between the lift station and Santa Ana Avenue, will consist of a force main. The entire system will drain into the proposed City of Rialto, Santa Ana sewer line. An investigation report dated September 3, 1991 by GPI was prepared specifically for the Santa Ana Avenue gravity sewer from Tamarind Avenue to the City of Rialto Treatment Plant. Additional improvements will consist of laterals and manholes for the sewer line system. The piping will consist of vitrified clay pipe (VCP). We understand that a Lift Station will be constructed at Tamarind Avenue Station 14+75 west of the proposed edge of pavement. The Lift Station will have plan dimension of 30 feet by 40 feet. The Lift Station will be founded about 30 feet below existing grades. A single -story structure to house support equipment will be constructed above grade. The details of the Lift Station design were not completed at the time this report was prepared. 1.3 PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION The purpose of this investigation is to provide geotechnical design parameters and recommendations related to design and construction of the proposed project. 1023-581.01R(9/91) t The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Uft Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK Our scope of work for this investigation consisted of review of existing reports, field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis and the preparation of this report. Prior to the field investigation, we reviewed subsurface information from previous investigations in the site area. We also incorporated field and laboratory data from References 1 and 2. Field exploration for this portion of the project consisted of two (2) borings to supplement existing field explorations. The borings were drilled using large diameter bucket -auger equipment and extended to depths ranging 26 to 40 feet below existing grades. A description of field procedures and logs of borings are presented in Appendix A. Boring and Cone Penetration Tests Logs from previous investigations (References 1 and 2) are included in the Appendices. The logs from Reference 1 were reproduced with the permission of The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. Subsurface conditions from these explorations were utilized as a basis for some of the evaluations and recommendations in this report for the construction of the proposed improvements. Laboratory soil tests were performed on selected representative samples as an aid in soil classification and to evaluate the engineering properties of the soils. The geotechnical laboratory testing program included determinations of moisture content/dry density, grain size distribution, shear strength (direct shear), maximum density (compaction), and chemical (corrosive) characteristics. Laboratory testing procedures and results are summarized in Appendix B. Laboratory testing and corrosion evaluations for this project were performed by M. J. Schiff and Associates under subcontract to GPI. Their report is presented in Appendix C. Engineering evaluations were performed to provide geotechnical design parameters and recommendations related to construction. The results of those evaluations are presented in the remainder of this report. 1023-581.01R(9/91) The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS At the time of our site investigation (August 1991), the project area consisted predominantly of undeveloped land covered with grape vines. Some portions of the area are currently covered with paved streets (Sierra, Tamarind and Slover). In general, the existing ground surface at the Empire Center site is relatively flat. The existing site grades range from 1,088± to 1,092± at Slover Avenue to 1,054± to 1,058± at Jurupa. The existing ground surface elevation at the proposed lift station is 1,045±. Detailed ground surface elevations are shown on the project plans. 3.2 SUBSURFACE SOILS Our field investigation disclosed a subsurface profile consisting predominantly of silty sands, sands, gravelly sands and sandy silt lenses and layers. In general, the majority of the soils encountered at the site consisted of slightly moist to moist, medium dense to dense silty sands and firm to stiff sandy silts. A detailed description of the subsurface conditions are presented in Appendices A and D. 3.3. GROUNDWATER AND CAVING Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings drilled for this or the previous geotechnical investigations at the site. Groundwater levels measured in deep wells near the site were at depths on the order of 300 feet. Caving and ravelling was encountered in some of our explorations as summarized in the Logs of Borings. Past experience at the site indicates that the near -surface, dry, sandy soils (0 to 10 feet below existing grades) and the deeper gravelly sands are susceptible to caving/sloughing. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 GENERAL Our investigation disclosed relatively favorable subsurface conditions for the proposed improvements. The proposed structures can be supported on the existing subsurface soils expected to be exposed at the proposed excavation elevations or on compacted fill as discussed below. The only potential geotechnical constraint that may affect construction of the sewer line drain and lift station is that the near -surface soils are susceptible to caving and are compressible. Recommendations to mitigate these constraint are provided below. 4.2 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 4.2.1 Strong Ground Motion Potential The site is located in a seismically active area and is. likely to be subjected to strong ground shaking due to earthquakes on nearby faults. A deterministic evaluation of seismic hazards was performed for a past report. This evaluation indicated that peak ground accelerations on the order of 0.3g to 0.4g are likely to be experienced at the site during the design life of the development. The levels of ground shaking indicated by the deterministic analyses are not unusual for U.B.C. Seismic Zone 4, which includes most of Southern California. 4.2.2 Potential for Ground Rupture There are no known active faults crossing or projecting through the site. Therefore, ground rupture due to faulting is unlikely at this site. 4.2.3 Potential for Liquefaction Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated cohesionless soils undergo a temporary loss of strength during severe ground shaking and acquire a degree of mobility sufficient to permit ground deformation. In extreme cases, the soil particles can become suspended in groundwater, resulting in the soil deposit becoming mobile and fluidlike. Liquefaction is generally considered to occur primarily in loose to medium dense deposits of saturated cohesionless soils. Thus, three conditions are required for liquefaction to occur: (1) a cohesionless soil of loose to medium density; (2) a saturated condition; and (3) rapid, large strain, cyclic loading, normally provided by earthquake motions. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 4 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 Soil liquefaction is not likely to occur at this site primarily because the groundwater level is very deep and the soils at shallow depths have very low moisture (well below saturation). 4.2.4 Seismic Ground Subsidence Strong earthquake shaking may result in some subsidence due to densification of the subsurface materials. Such subsidence, during a significant earthquake, is expected to occur in a relatively uniform manner across the site and not have a major impact on structures. 4.3 EARTHWORK The earthwork anticipated at the project site will consist of clearing, excavations, subgrade preparation, and the placement and compaction of fill. 4.3.1 Clearing and Grubbing Prior to excavation, the areas to be developed should be cleared of all vegetation and debris. All deleterious material generated during the clearing operation should be removed from the site. At the conclusion of the clearing operations, the Geotechnical Engineer should observe and accept the site prior to any grading/excavation. 4.3.2 Excavations Excavations at this site will include removals of disturbed natural soils and moderately compressible surficial soils during grading for the lift station building, footing excavations, and excavation for the well structure at the proposed lift station. Trenching will be performed to construct the balance of the proposed sewer system. Prior to placing fills within the building pad area for the lift station, loose silty sands/sandy silts within the building pad area will need to be densified. This can be accomplished by overexcavation and recompaction. For planning purposes, a depth of removal of 2 feet in general and 4 feet in areas where trees have been removed should be anticipated. The depth of removal limits should extend below existing grades or finished pad grade, whichever is deeper. The removal should extend 5 feet beyond the proposed building lines. It should be noted that the actual depths of removals should be determined in the field, during grading, by the geotechnical engineer. The existing surficial soils at the site are susceptible to caving. Therefore, locally, even shallow excavations where workmen are to enter, will need to be properly shored or sloped back at least 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) or flatter. In areas where excavation will be 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 5 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 performed in the existing streets, we expect that shoring will be used. Since the surficial soils are susceptible to caving, measures should be incorporated to prevent caving from under existing pavement (at edge of trench), which could result in voids of under the pavement. No surcharge loads (including stockpiles) should be permitted within a horizontal distance equal to the height of cut from the toe of the excavation or five feet from the top of the slopes, whichever is greater, unless the cut is properly shored. Excavations that extend below an imaginary plane inclined at 45 degrees below the edge of any adjacent existing site facilities should be properly shored to maintain support of adjacent elements. All excavations and shoring systems should meet the minimum requirements given in the most current State of California Occupational Safety and Health Standards. In general, the excavations should be readily accomplished by conventional soil excavation equipment such as backhoes, loaders, scrapers, or dozers. The trafficability of the surficial soils can be improved by maintaining moist subgrade conditions. 4.3.3 Shoring If shoring is to be used, it should be designed by a licensed civil or structural engineer in accordance with regulatory requirements. The design of the shoring should be based on the recommended geotechnical parameters provided in subsequent sections of this report. The Geotechnical Engineer should review any shoring plans to confirm that the appropriate parameters have been used. 4.3.4 Subgrade Preparation Prior to placing any fills in building areas for the lift station building, the subgrade soils should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM D-1557 and as required by the City of Fontana. In vehicular areas to receive asphalt or concrete pavement, the top 12 inches of the subgrade soils should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum density. 4.3.5 Material for Fill The on -site soils are suitable for use in construction of compacted fills. Imported fill material should be predominately granular, non -expansive and contain no more than 40 percent fines (portion passing No. 200 sieve). The Geotechnical Engineer should be notified at least 72 hours in advance of the location of any soils proposed for import. Each proposed import source should be sampled, tested and accepted for use prior to delivery of the soils to the site. Soils imported prior to acceptance by the Geotechnical Engineer may be rejected if not suitable. 1023-581.01R(9/91) 6 The Alexander Haagen company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 Both imported and existing on -site soils, to be used as fill, should be free of debris and any pieces larger than 6 inches in greatest dimension. Excavations in areas of existing trees will generate a significant quantity of roots. The organic material should be removed prior to use of the soils in compacted fill. Any asphalt removed during excavation may be used in the fill provided it is broken down to at least six inches in dimension, not placed within one foot of the pipe and does not constitute more than 25 percent of any portions of the fill. 4.3.6 Placement and Compaction Fills All fill soils placed in the public right-of-way must be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum density as required by the City of Fontana. Fill should be placed in horizontal lifts, moisture conditioned, and mechanically compacted. Jetting flooding of fills is not permitted by the City. The optimum lift thickness will depend on the compaction equipment used and can best be determined in the field. The following uncompacted lift thickness can be used as preliminary guidelines. Plate Compactors Small Vibratory or static rollers (5-ton ± ) Scrapers and heavy loaders Heavy vibratory (20-ton) 4-6 inches 6-8 inches 8-12 inches 12-18 inches The maximum lift thickness for mechanical compaction should never be greater than 18 inches. The moisture content of the fill materials should be within two percent of optimum to readily achieve the required degree of compaction. The existing soils are dry (well below optimum). Therefore, moistening of these materials during grading will be required. During backfill of excavations, the fill should be properly benched into the construction slopes as it is placed in lifts. Where space constraints (i.e., interference with existing utilities, etc.) do not permit use of equipment for compaction, backfill consisting of one sack sand -cement slurry may be used. 4.3.7 Shrinkage and Subsidence Shrinkage is the loss of soil volume caused by compaction of fills to a higher density than before grading backfill. Subsidence is the settlement of in -place subgrade soils caused by loads generated by large earthmoving equipment. For earthwork volume estimating purposes, an average shrinkage value of 15 to 20 percent and subsidence of 0.1 foot 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 7 ti The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 may be assumed for the existing surficial (upper 10 feet) natural soils. Shrinkage and subsidence of the deeper materials is expected to be nominal, on the order of 5 percent. These values are estimates only. Actual shrinkage and subsidence will depend on the types of earthmoving equipment used and should be determined during grading. 4.3.8 Observation and Testing A representative of GPI should observe all excavations, subgrade preparation and fill placement activities. Sufficient in -place field density tests should be performed during fill placement to evaluate the overall compaction of the soils. Soils that do not meet minimum compaction requirements should be reworked and tested prior to placement of any additional fill. 4.4 FOUNDATIONS 4.4.1 Foundation Type The proposed lift station may be supported on conventional isolated and/or continuous shallow spread footings or a mat foundation founded on the natural soils occurring 30 feet below existing grades. The single -story building may be supported on conventional footings founded in compacted fill. 4.4.2 Allowable Bearing Capacity The proposed lift station will be founded approximately 30 feet below existing grades. An allowable bearing capacity up to 4,000 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used. This value is based on the expected lift station invert elevation. An allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf may be used for shallow foundations supporting the one-story building founded on properly compacted fill. The allowable pressures may be increased one-third for short-term, transient, wind and seismic loading. The maximum edge pressures induced by eccentric loading or overturning moments should not be allowed to exceed these values. 4.4.3 Minimum Footing Widths/Depths of Embedment Allowable Bearing Pressure (psf) Minimum Minimum Width Depth 2,000 15 15 3,000 18 18 4,000 24 18 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 8 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 4.4.4 Estimated Settlements We do not anticipate any significant settlement for the lift station founded 30 feet below existing grades for the magnitude of allowable bearing pressure provided the subgrade soils are not disturbed during excavation. We anticipate total settlements and differential settlements to be the less than one-half and one-fourth of an inch, respectively, for shallow foundations founded on properly compacted fill. The above estimates are based on the assumption that the recommended earthwork will be performed and that the footings will be sized in accordance with our recommendations. 4.4.5 Lateral Load Resistance Soil resistance to lateral loads will be provided by a combination of frictional resistance between the bottom of footings and underlying soils and by passive soil pressures acting against the embedded sides of the footings. For frictional resistance, a coefficient of friction of 0.40 may be used for design. In addition, an allowable lateral bearing pressure equal to an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot may be used, provided the footings are poured tight against undisturbed natural or compacted fill soils. These values may be used in combination without reduction. 4.4.6 Footing Excavation Observation Prior to placement of concrete and steel, the Geotechnical Engineer should observe and approve all footing excavations. All excavations should be cleaned of any loose material prior to placement of steel. 4.5 BUILDING FLOOR SLABS Slab -on -grade floors should be supported on granular, non -expansive soils compacted as discussed in the "Compacted Fill" section. A vapor/moisture barrier should be placed under any slabs that are to be covered with moisture -sensitive floor coverings (parquet, vinyl, tile, etc.). The vapor barrier should consist of a polyethylene sheet (visqueen) having a minimum thickness of 6 mils. This material should be covered by a layer of clean sand (not native soil) having a minimum thickness of 2 inches. The function of the sand layer is to protect the vapor barrier during construction and to aid in the uniform curing of the concrete. 1023-581.01R(9/91) The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 4.6 TYPE OF CEMENT Based on the results of laboratory chemical testing for this investigation, the on -site soils exhibit soluble sulphate concentrations less than 50 parts per million. Therefore, ordinary Type 1 or Type 2 cement may be used for the construction of concrete in contact with the subgrade soils. 4.7 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES Active earth pressures can be used for designing walls that can yield at least 1/4 inch laterally under the imposed loads. For level backfill the magnitude of active pressures are equivalent to the pressures imposed by a fluid weighing 30 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). This pressure may also be used for the design of temporary excavation support (cantilevered shoring). At -rest pressures should be used for restrained walls that remain rigid enough to be essentially non -yielding. At -rest pressures are equivalent to the pressures imposed by a fluid weighing 55 pounds per cubic foot. Walls subject to surcharge loads should be designed for an additional uniform lateral pressure equal to one-third and one-half the anticipated surcharge pressure for unrestrained and restrained walls, respectively. The wall backfill should be well -drained to relieve possible hydrostatic pressure or designed to withstand these pressures. Braced shoring should be designed to resist a uniform pressure distribution of 24H (psf). H is defined as the depth of the trench. The above pressure distribution assumes that groundwater will be well below the bottom of the excavation during construction. As discussed previously, groundwater was not encountered during any of our explorations for this project. 4.8 PAVED AREAS Laboratory testing performed for adjacent projects indicated R-values for the finer grained sandy silts encountered at the lift station site to be on the order of 30 to 40. Preliminary pavement design has been based on an assumed R-Value of 30. The California Division of Highways Design Method was used for design of the recommended preliminary pavement sections. These recommendations are based on the assumption that the pavement subgrades will consist of the existing surface soils. Final pavement design should be based on R-value testing performed near the conclusion of rough grading. The following pavement sections are recommended for planning purposes only. 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 10 5 t The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 Section Thickness (inches) Traffic Asphaltic Class II Pavement Area Index Concrete Base Course Heavy Truck Driveways 6.0 3 9 Auto and Pickup Driveways 4.0 3 4 The pavement subgrade underlying Class II Base should be properly prepared and compacted in accordance with the recommendations outlined under "Subgrade Preparation". The pavement base course (as well as the top 12 inches of the subgrade soils) should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum density (ASTM D-1557). Aggregate base should conform to the requirements of Section 26 of the California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Class II aggregate base (3/4" maximum) or Section 200-2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book) for untreated base materials. The above recommendations are based on the assumption that the base course will be properly drained. The design of paved areas should incorporate measures to prevent moisture build-up within the base course which can otherwise lead to premature pavement failure. For example, curbing adjacent to landscaped areas should be deep enough to act as a barrier to infiltration of irrigation water into the adjacent base course. 1023-581.01 R (9/91) 11 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September.19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 5.0 LIMITATIONS The report, exploration logs, and other materials resulting from GPI's efforts were prepared exclusively for use by The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc., the City of Fontana arid their consultants in designing the proposed development. The report is not intended to be suitable for reuse on extensions or modifications of the project or for use on any project other than the currently proposed development as it may not contain sufficient or appropriate information for such uses. If this report or portions of this report are provided to contractors or included in specifications, it should be understood that they are provided for information only. Soil deposits may vary in type, strength, and many other important properties between points of exploration due to non -uniformity of the geologic formations or to man-made cut and fill operations. While we cannot evaluate the consistency of the properties of materials in areas not explored, the conclusions drawn in this report are based on the assumption that the data obtained in the field and laboratory are reasonably representa- tive of field conditions and are conducive to interpolation and extrapolation. Furthermore, our recommendations were developed with the assumption that a proper level of field observations and construction review will be provided during grading, excavation, and foundation construction. If field conditions during construction appear to be different than is indicated in this report, we should be notified immediately so that we may assess the impact of such conditions on our recommendations. Our investigation and evaluations were performed using generally accepted engineering approaches and principles available at this time and the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable geotechnical engineers practicing in this area. No other representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended in our report. Respectfully submitted, Geotechnical Professionals Inc. Scott E. Fitinghoff Staff Engineer SEF:JEH:gn 1023-581.01 R(9/91) 12 James E. Harris, G.E. Principal QROF ESS* .944 ��� 4C E. H4RR/� NO. 1100 * EXP. IQ -3/-ga C, ��fq F-FECHN�C" OF CAL1. 1,1 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ana Avenue Sewer/Lift - Fontana, CA GPI Proj. 1023.581 REFERENCES 1. "Geotechnical Investigation, Santa Ana Sewer Line, Fontana, California," dated September 3, 1991 by Geotechnical Professionals Inc., Project No. 1023.591. 2. "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Empire Center, Fontana, CA," dated January 27, 1989 by GEOFON Inc., Project No. 87-357.01. 1023-581.01V(9/91) 0 2000 4000 10601 GEOTECHNICAL 1:2 ® ® PROFESSIONALS INC. SANTA ANA AVE. SEWER / LJFT STATION SITE LOCATION MAP GPI PROJECT NO.: 1023.581 I SCALE: 1"=2000' FIGURE 1 SAN BERNARDINO r r<t_t_whY S. P. R. R. 4. SLOVER AVEN PB-1 • 10 11 14 12 13 LJ z Lu 8 < 24 NO./ +L) ti 1 NT B •2 0 co s 0 z LIJ z Lu J 33 14 19 18 GPI-1 34 PB-20 • 17 LIFT STATIO B-1 • sr 16 0 JURUPA 1 AVENUE 2 2 15 4B-1 lGPI-1 PB-1 • PC-5 • EXPLANATION PROPOSED SEWER LINE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING BY GPI APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING BY GPI (REFERENCE 1) APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PREVIOUS BORING (REFERENCE 2) APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PREVIOUS CPT (REFERENCE 2) BASE MAP REPRODUCED FROM INDEX MAP BY HALL AND FORMEN INC. GEOTECHNICAL PROFESSIONALS INC. SANTA ANA AVE SEWER / UFT STATION PROJECT NO.: 1023.581 I SCALE 1"=800' SITE PLAN FIGURE-2 ti The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 APPENDIX A EXPLORATORY BORINGS The subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling and sampling two exploratory borings during our investigation. The boring locations are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The borings for the current investigation were advanced to depths ranging from 26 to 40 feet. The borings were drilled using truck -mounted bucket auger equipment. Relatively undisturbed samples were obtained using a brass -ring lined sampler, driven into the soil by a 1,680-pound Kelly bar dropping 12 inches for sampling intervals up to 25 feet. A 840-pound Kelly bar dropping 12 inches was used to drive the brass -ring lined sampler below 25 feet. The number of blows needed to drive the sampler was recorded as the penetration resistance. It should be noted that the number of blows in this case are much lower than the Standard Penetration Resistance because of the greater driving weight. The field explorations for the current investigation were performed under the continuous technical supervision of a GPI field representative who visually inspected the site, maintained detailed logs of the borings, classified the soils encountered, and obtained relatively undisturbed samples for examination and laboratory testing. The soils encountered in the borings were classified in the field and through further examination in the laboratory in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (Figure A-1). Detailed logs of the borings performed for this investigation are presented in Figures A-2 and A-3 in this appendix. Boring B-1 from Reference 2 (drilled on August 7, 1991) is also included for reference. , 1023-581.01X(9/91) A-1 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487) PRIMARY DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL SECONDARY DIVISIONS COARSE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN HALF OF MATERIALS IS LARGER THAN ii 200 SIEVE SIZE SANDS GRAVELS MORE THAN MORE THAN HALF OF COARS HALF OF.COARS FRACTION IS FRACTION IS SMALLER THAN LARGER THAN if 4 SIEVE it 4 SIEVE CLEAN GRAVELS GW WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES. (LESS FINE 5% CP POORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES. GRAVEL WITH GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND -SILT MIXTURE. NON PLASTIC FINES. FINES GC CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND -CLAY MIXTURES. PLASTIC FINES. CLAN S(LESS SW WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS,LITTLE OR NO FINES. THAN 5% FINES) SP POORLY GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES. SANDS WITH SM SILTY SANDS, SAND -SILT MIXTURES. NON -PLASTIC FINES. FINES SC CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -CLAY MIXTURES. PLASTIC FINES. FINE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN HALF OF MATERIAL IS SMALLER THAN a 200 SIEVE SIZE = SILTS AND SILTS AND r- CLAYS CLAYS 0 yO LIQUID LIQUID LIMIT IS LIMIT IS n GREATER LESS g' THAN 50 THAN SO ML INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY. CL INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY. GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS. OL ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY. MH INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOILS, PLASTIC SILTS. CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS. OH ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS. PT PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS. CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA BASED ON FIELD TESTS PENETRATION RESISTANCE (PR) CLAYS AND SILTS • NUMBER OF BLOWS OF 140 POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 SANDS AND GRAVELS CONSISTENCY BLOWS/FOOT• STRENGTH•• INCHES TO DRIVE A 2 INCH O.D. (I 3/8 INCH I.D.) SPLIT BARREL RELATIVE DENSITY BLOWS/FOOT• • VERY SOFT 0 • 2 0 - %. SAMPLER (ASTM•1586 STANDARD VERY LOOSE 0 -4 SOFT 2 •4 A. h PENETRATION TEST) LOOSE 4 • 10 FIRM 4 - 8 V, - I •• UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH IN TONS/SQ. FT. MEDIUM DENSE 10. 30 STIFF 8 - 15 I - 2 READ FROM POCKET PENETROMETER DENSE 30.50 VERY STIFF 15 - 30 2 -4 VERY DENSE OVER 50 HARD OVER 30 OVER 4 CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA BASED ON LAB TESTS D60 kSTICITY INDEX N A O O O C ED )2 - 30 CH GW AND SW-C = GREATER THAN 4 FOR GW AND 6 FOR SW, C u D10 c D10XD60 L‘v BETWEEN 1 AND 3 CL s GP AND SP - CLEAN GRAVEL OR SAND NOT MEETING REQUIREMENT FOR GW AND SW 7 GW AND SM - ATTERBERG LIMIT BELOW "A" LINE OR Pi.LESS THAN 4 GC AND SC ATTERBERG LIMIT ABOVE "A" LINE P.I. GREATER THAN 7 - a. / OH & MH FINES FINE MEDIUM COARSE; FINE COARSE '�lML& (SILT OR CLAY) SAND SAND SAND GRAVEL GRAVELCQBBLESBOULDERS 0 "-- -- _ CL SIEVE SIZES 200 40 10 4 3/4" 3" 10" 0 20 40 60 80 100 a LIQUID LIMIT CLASSIFICATION OF EARTH MATERIALS IS BASED ON FIELD INSPECTION AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED TO IMPLY LABORATORY ANALYSIS UNLESS SO STATED. ■ t e KMy GEOTECHNICAL PROFESSIONALS INC. KEY FOR SOIL EXPLORATION LOGS FIGURE A-1 N N N N N W N G.) MOISTURE -1 IN Q) in V CO O (%) i i _. 1--' DRY DENSITY o o N O w a (PCF) PENETRATION co co o cn a) Cn .p RESISTANCE (BLOWS/FOOL 0 0 0 co 0 0 co 0 0 00 0 SAMPLE TYPE w Qw N QN c-' -Qi c� DEPTH I I 1 I i i i 1 I 1 ,_ ,__ 1 I I I , 1 I , 1 1 i l I I 1 I I I i I I (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS 2 H" ¢w This summary applies only at the location of this boring and at the time of drilling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions encountered. p.� J" w 19d,;- NATIVE Sandy Silt (ML) to Silty Sand (SM), brown, dry, firm to medium dense @ 3.5 feet becomes slightly moist -1040- Silty Sand (SM), brown, slightly moist, medium dense, porous -1035- Sandy Silt (ML), brown, dry to slightly moist, stiff -1030- Silty Sand (SM), brown, slightly moist, medium dense to -1025- dense -1020- -1015- -1010- Silty Sand (SM), brown, slightly moist, medium dense Terminated at 40 feet. Caving noted in upper 2 feet of boring -1005- SAMPLE C TYPES DATE DRILLED 8-29-91 Rock Core ®' PROJECT NO.: 1023.581 FONTANA LIFT STATION S Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: — — = _ D B T Standard Drive Sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered Tube Sample LOG OF BORING NO. B-1 FIGURE A-2 re _., WF- Hzo (SAMPLE TYPE( N) DEPTH I I 1 , I I1 ' I I C I I _ I J i l t (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS �� c~n • F'-� E ea! ... >- o IT�� W H3 Z W J Wirm This summary applies only at the location of this boring and at the time of drilling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions encountered. W �?� W NATIVE Silty Sand (SM), brownish grey, slightly moist, medium dense @ 3 feet becomes moist -10CG- -1060- D 1.1 115 2 Gravelly Sand lens -1055- 9.9 112 3 D B . Sand (SP), brown, moist, medium dense Sandy Silt (ML) to Silty Sand (SM), brown, moist, stiff to -1050- 4 D medium dense Silty Sand (SM), brown, moist, medium dense, occasional 14.4 109 4 D silt lenses -1045- 2.0 107 4 D • • . .' Well -graded sand (SW), brown, slightly moist, dense, : gravels to 2-inches diameter B . r -1040- 2.0 15 D . Terminated at 26 feet. Caving observed in upper 2 feet of boring. Ravelling observed below 5 feet in the boring. SAMPLE C TYPES DATE DRILLED 8-29-91 Rock Core ®, PROJECT NO.: 1023.581 FONTANA LIFT STATION Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: — —" S D B T Standard Drive Sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered Tube Sample LOG OF BORING NO. B-2 FIGURE A-3 5 ce N,. °tw.�a �¢LL tu a- I- =F DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS z Hw cc w o oa. .. ce 0 1-No W t•'13 oa ZwJ �a_o7 J a. E N W W ot, This summary applies only at the location of this boring and at the time of drilling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and ma change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented is a simp ification of actual conditions encountered. wv J w 0 r NATIVE Silty Sand (SM), brown, slightly moist, medium to dense B - @3' gravels to 4 inches diameter -1055- 2.9 113 7 D 5 . • • .... Well -Graded Sand with Silt (SW-SM), brownish grey, -` • • • slightly moist, dense, gravels to 4 inches -1050- B J . 3.3 121 9 D • -1045- Silty Sand (SM), brown, moist, dense 7.1 112 4 D 15— B - -1040- 7.5 111 5 D ._.-.-.- -.-.-.-.- . 2 20 Terminated at 20 feet. Minor ravelling in boring. SAMPLE TYPES Rock Core DATE DRILLED 8-7-91 romit CB PROJECT NO.: 1023.591 SANTA ANA AVE. SEWER C S Standard Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: D B T Drive Sample 18" Bucket auger Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered Tube Sample LOG OF BORING NO. B-1 FIGURE A-2 S The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTS INTRODUCTION Relatively undisturbed soil samples were carefully packaged in the field and sealed to prevent moisture loss. The samples were then transported to our Cypress office for examination and testing assignments. Laboratory tests were performed on selected representative samples as an aid in classifying the soils and to evaluate the physical properties of the soils affecting foundation design and construction procedures. Detailed descriptions of the laboratory tests are presented below under the appropriate test headings. Test results are presented in the figures that follow. MOISTURE CONTENT AND DRY DENSITY Moisture content and dry density were determined for a number of the ring samples. The samples were first trimmed to obtain volume and wet weight and then were dried in accordance with ASTM 2216-71. After drying, the weight of each sample was measured, and moisture content and dry density were calculated. Moisture content and dry density values are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION A representative sample was dried, weighed, soaked in water until individual soil particles were separated, and then washed on the No. 200 sieve. That portion of the material retained on the No. 200 sieve was oven -dried and then run through a standard set of sieves in accordance with ASTM D422-63. The grain distribution data is shown in Figures B-1 and B-2. DIRECT SHEAR Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed ring samples, in accordance with ASTM D3080-72. After the initial weight and volume measurements were made, each sample was placed in the shear machine, and a normal load comparable to the in -situ overburden stress was applied. The sample was allowed to consolidate and then was sheared to failure. The procedure was repeated on additional test specimens from the same soil layer under increased normal loads. Shear stress and sample deformation were monitored throughout the test. The results of the direct shear tests are presented in Figures B-3 through B-4. 1023-581.01X(9/91) B-1 The Alexander Haagen Company, Inc. September 19, 1991 Santa Ma Avenue Sewer/Lift Station GPI Proj. 1023.581 COMPACTION Compaction tests were performed on selected bulk samples, in accordance with ASTM D1557-70 in order to determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the material tested. The results of the compaction tests are presented below: Maximum Optimum Location Depth (feet) Soil Type Density (pcf) Moisture (%) B-1 8-10 SM 126 11.0 1023-581.01 x(9/91) B-2 U.S. STANDARD SIEVE -INCHES i U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS i 6 3 1.5 3/4 3/8 4 10 20 40 100 200 HYDROMETER 100 90 80 70 F- s cD H W 60 3 m w 50 Z H U- H W 40 c.) O: w a 30 • • I I I I 20 10 0 100 COBBLES Sample Location B-1 GRAVEL coarse 10 Sample Location B-1 10 D100 4.75 10 fine I I I I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS coarse SAND medium Classification Silty Sand (SM) D60 0.18 D30 0.096 fine D10 0 • • • • • MC% 3 LL %Gravel 0.0 001 SILT OR CLAY PL %Sand 81.4 PI %Silt Cc 18.6 PROJECT: FONTANA LIFT STATION PROJECT NO. 1023.581 0.001 Cu %Clay GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION FIGURE6-1 / U.S. STANDARD SIEVE -INCHES i U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS 6 3 1.5 3/4 3/8 4 10 20 40 100 200 HYDROMETER 100 90 80 70 H I CD H w 60 3 >- m w 50 z H LL F- w 40 U tr W d 30 20 10 0 I I 100 COBBLES • Sample Location B-1 II I GRAVEL coarse 15 1 10 fine I I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS coarse SAND medium Classification Sandy Silt (ML) fine 0 1 MC% 4 LL o OT SILT OR CLAY PL PI Cc 0.001 Cu Sample Location • B-1 15 D100 4.75 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel 0.0 %Sand 29.8 %Silt 70.2 %Clay PROJECT: FONTANA LIFT STATION PROJECT NO. 1023.581 FL" 11=1 I GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION FIGURE6-2 I' 1 SHEAR STRENGTH, psf 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 ■ 00 10)0 2000 3000 4000 50J0 6000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf PEAK STRENGTH Friction Angle = 33 degrees Cohesion = psf Note: Sample submerged before test • Sample Location Classification RESIDUAL STRENGTH Friction Angle= 33 degrees Cohesion = 0 psf DD,pcf MC,% B-1 10.0 B-1 10.0 Silty Sand (SM) Peak Silty Sand (SM) Residual 103 103 3 3 PROJECT: FONTANA LIFT STATION PROJECT NO.:1023.581 N. ir:ft. p I DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS FIGURE B-3 J SHEAR STRENGTH, psf 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 00 1000 2000 3000 4000 50)0 60 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf PEAK STRENGTH Friction Angle = 38 degrees Cohesion= psf Note: Sample Submerged before test • m Sample Location Classification 00 RESIDUAL STRENGTH Friction Angle = 27 degrees Cohesion = 110 psf DD,pcf MC,% B-1 15.0 B-1 15.0 Sandy Silt (ML) Peak Sandy Silt (ML) Residual 90 90 4 4 PROJECT: FONTANA LIFT STATION PROJECT NO.:1023.581 rI DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS FIGURE B-4 M. J. SCHIFF & ASSOCIATES Consulting Corrosion Engineers September 17, 1991 GEOTECHNICAL PROFESSIONALS, INC. 5736 Corporate Avenue Cypress, California 90630 Attention: Mr. Scott Fitinghoff Re: Gentlemen: 1291 NORTH INDIAN HILL BOULEVARD CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA 91711-3860 714/626-0967 FAX 714/621-1419 Soil Corrosivity Study Off -Site Santa Ana Sewer Line/Lift Station Fontana, California Your # 1023.58I, MJS&A #91208 Laboratory tests have been completed on the single soil sample you provided from your borings for the subject project at Santa Ana and Tamarind Avenues. We assume that this soil is representative of the most corrosive soil at the site. The purpose of these tests was to determine if the soil may have deleterious effects on underground piping and concrete structures. The electrical resistivity of the sample was measured in its as -received condition and again with distilled water added to create the standardized condition of saturation. Resistivities are at about their lowest value when the soil is saturated. The sample was chemically analyzed for the major anions and cations, and pH was measured. Test results are shown on Table 1. A useful factor in determining soil corrosivity is electrical resistivity. The electrical re- sistivity of a soil is a measure of its resistance to the flow of electrical current. Corro- sion of buried metal is an electrochemical process in which the amount of metal loss due to corrosion is directly proportional to the flow of electrical current (DC) from the metal into the soil. Corrosion currents, following Ohm's Law, are inversely proportional to soil resistivity. Lower electrical resistivities result from higher moisture and chemical contents and indicate corrosive soil. A correlation between electrical resistivity and corrosivity toward ferrous metals is: Soil Resistivity in ohm -centimeters 0 to 1,000 1,000 to 2,000 2,000 to 10,000 over 10,000 Corrosivity Category severely corrosive corrosive moderately corrosive mildly corrosive The electrical resistivity measured in the laboratory with as -received moisture content was in the mildly corrosive category. When saturated, the sample dropped into the moderately corrosive category. The resistivity dropped considerably with added mois- ture because the sample was dry as -received. Soil pH value was 7.3 which is neutral and not significant in evaluating corrosivity. CORROSION AND CATHODIC PROTECTION ENGINEERING SERVICES SURVEYS • PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS • INTERFERENCE PROBLEMS • SOIL TESTS • SUPERVISION, INSPECTION AND ADJUSTMENT OF INSTALLATIONS GEOTECHNICAL PROFESSIONALS, INC. September 17, 1991 MJS&A #91208 Page 2 The chemical content of the sample was low. Tests were not made for sulfides or negative oxidation-reduction (redox) potentials because they would not exist in this dry aerated sample. This soil is classified as moderately corrosive to ferrous metals. In addition to soil corrosivity, the life of buried materials depends on thickness, strength, loads, construction details, soil moisture, etc. and is, therefore, difficult to predict. Of more practical value are corrosion control methods that will increase the life of materials that would be subject to significant corrosion. The following corrosion control measures are recommended. Abrasive blast underground steel piping and apply a high quality protective coating such as extruded polyethylene, a tape coating system, hot applied coal tar enamel, or fusion bonded epoxy. Apply cathodic protection to steel piping. To prevent dissimilar metal corrosion cells and to facilitate the application of cathodic protection, electrically insulate buried steel piping from dissimilar metals, cement- mostar or concrete coated steel, and above ground steel pipe. Underground steel pipe with rubber gasketed, mechanical, grooved end, or other non- conductive type joints must be bonded for electrical continuity. Electrical continuity is necessary for corrosion monitoring and cathodic protection. Cast or ductile iron pipe, valves, and fittings do not require special protective measures such as a plastic wrap. However, to avoid possibly creating corrosion problems, iron should not be placed partially in contact with concrete such as thrust blocks. Use coat- ings mentioned above for steel or polyethylene plastic sheets 8 mils thick to prevent such contact. Electrically insulate underground iron pipe from dissimilar metals and above ground pipe. No special precautions are required for copper, reinforced concrete, asbestos -cement, vitrified clay, or plastic piping placed underground from a corrosion viewpoint. Protect any iron valves and fittings as mentioned above. Where metallic pipelines penetrate concrete structures, use plastic sleeves, rubber seals, or other dielectric material to prevent pipe contact with the concrete and reinforc- ing steel. On any type of pipe, bare steel appurtenances such as bolts, joint harnesses, or flexible couplings should be coated with a coal tar or rubber based mastic or coal tar epoxy after assembly. Standard construction practices and concrete mixes may be used for concrete in con- tact with this soil using type 1 or 2 cement. GEOTECHNICAL PROFESSIONALS, INC. September 17, 1991 MJS&A #91208 Page 3 The scope of this study is limited to a determination of soil corrosivity and its general effects on materials likely to be used for construction. If the architects and/or engi- neers desire more specific information, designs, specifications, or review of design, we will be happy to work with them as a separate phase of this project. Respectfully submitted, M. J. SCHIFF & ASSOCIATES Robert A. Pannell cb Enc: Table 1 L64 TABLE 1 LABORATORY TESTS ON SOIL SAMPLES Location Soil Resistivity Chemical Analysis in mg/kg (ppm) of dry soil and ohm -centimeters Calcium Magnesium Sodium Bicarbonate Chloride Sulfate Depth Soil Type As Rec'd Sat'd pH Ca Mg Na HCO3 Cl SO4 Bi 8-10' silty sand 25,000 3,000 7.3 60 trace 12 122 35 48 Carbonate = 0 Off -Site Santa Ana Sewer Line/Lift Station Fontana, California Your #1023.58i, MJS&A #91208 F16 GEOFON Project No. 87-357.01 APPENDIX B EXPLORATORY BORING RESULTS The subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling seventeen exploratory borings and excavating eighteen backhoe test pits at the locations shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The borings were advanced to depths up to 36 feet. The test pits were excavated to depths of 5 feet. The borings were drilled using truck -mounted bucket auger drilling equipment. The test pits were excavated using a backhoe. The field explorations were performed under the continuous technical supervision of a GEOFON geotechnical engineer who visually inspected the site, maintained detailed logs of the borings, classified the soils encountered, and obtained relatively undisturbed samples for examination and laboratory testing. Detailed logs of the borings (including those drilled for the previous investigation) are presented in Figures B-2 through B-21 of this appendix. The logs of test pits are presented in Figure B-22. The soils encountered in the explorations were classified in the field and through further examination in the laboratory in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (Figure B-1). Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained with a 2.42-inch inside diameter ring sampler. The soil sampler was driven with a 1680-pound weight falling 12 inches. Sand cone tests (ASTM D 1556) were performed in test pits. 36701002 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487) COARSE GRAINED SOILS FINE GRAINED SOILS PRIMARY DIVISIONS CLEAN GRAVELS (LESS THAN 5% FINES) GROUP SYMBOL GW SECONDARY DIVISIONS WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES. GP POORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES. GRAVEL WITH FINES CLEAN SANDS (LESS THAN 5% FINES) SANDS WITH FINES HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SANDSILT MIXTURE. NON PLASTIC FINES. GC SW SP SM CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND -CLAY MIXTURES. PLASTIC FINES. WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS,LITTLE OR NO FINES. POORLY GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES. SILTY SANDS, SAND -SILT MIXTURES. NON -PLASTIC FINES. SC ML CL OL MH CH CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -CLAY MIXTURES. PLASTIC FINES. INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY. INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS. ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY. INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOILS, PLASTIC SILTS. INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS. OH PT ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS. PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS. CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA BASED ON FIELD TESTS PENETRATION RESISTANCE (PR) SANDS AND GRAVELS RELATIVE DENSITY VERY LOOSE LOOSE MEDIUM DENSE DENSE VERY DENSE BLOWS/FOOT• 0-4 4-10 10-30 30-50 OVER 50 CONSISTENCY VERY SOFT SOFT FIRM STIFF VERY STIFF HARD CLAYS AND SILTS BLOWS/FOOT• 0.2 2-4 4-8 8- IS 15.30 OVER 30 STRENGTH** 0 - y. 1 - I 1.2 2.4 OVER 4 • NUMBER OF BLOWS OF 140 POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES TO DRIVE A 2 INCH U.D. (1 3/8 INCH I.D.) SPLIT BARREL SAMPLER (ASTM-I 586 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST) •• UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH IN TONS/SQ. FT. READ FROM POCKET PENETROMETER 60 w Z 40 U 2 w 0 CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA BASED ON LAB TESTS OH & MI1 •20 40 60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT GEOFON - DI0 L)Iu)6 BETWEEN 1 AND 3 GP AND SP — CLEAN GRAVEL OR SAND NOT MEETING REQUIREMENT FOR GW AND SW GW AND SM — ATTERBERG LIMIT BELOW "A" LINE OR P.I. LESS THAN 4 GC AND SC — ATTERBERG LIMIT ABOVE "A" LINE P.L GREATER THAN 7 i GW AND SW—C D60 GREATER THAN 4 FOR GW AND 6 FOR SW ; F�;' F INES I FINE (SILT FOR CLAY) SAND !MEDIUM �� ND1GR VELPINE jGRAVSEL�OBBLES SIEVE SIZES 200 40 10 4 3/.4" 3" 10" CLASSIFICATION OF EARTH MATERIALS IS BASED ON FIELD INSPECTION AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED TO IMPLY LABORATORY ANALYSIS UNLESS SO STATED. BOULDERS PROJECT NO R7-ng., n) OVA READING (PPM) li 5 2 DRY DENSITY (PCP) 6 w g N UI 9 ,_, SAMPLE TYPE 0 U. DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS W u. 1 j V 1092± RI THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BONG AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPUFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. - ... •• SAND -GRAVELLY SAND (SP-SM), light brown, -' .•..• predominantly fine sand with some gravels and occasional cobbles; cobble content increasing —1090t below 10 feet; medium dense; slightly moist 0 25 D -... ;• - r-1085± 0 10 '0 . —1 0 21 D _••o'.• - • .•• o. —1080± 0 15 -1 0. • • r.• ,:...• ---- 0 25 0 _ D '•0 -• 0 •0 •• r-107 5± _' :. SANDY SILT (ML) TO SILTY SAND (SM), light brown to brown, medium dense, moist, occasional 0 26 D _ gravelly and cobbly zones - —1070± 25— • • 0 45 D _: , - —1065± • o. P • i 30 - .: . ••• 0 28 D - . —1060± 35— • ' 0 30 D _: •. -, : ' —1055± - Last sample interval 40.0'-41.5' 0 36 D 40 : Boring terminated at 41.5 feet DATE SAMPLEtRockck ES Core R DRILLED: 11-6-s7 PROJECT NO.: 87-357 A GEOFON © Standard Split Spoon EOUPMENT USED: INCORPOAA T . 0 FONTANA DEVELOPMEN1 p Drive Sample 8" Hollow Stem Auger 0 Sulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: LOG OF BORING NO. B-1 Sample Not Encountered 11-87 FIGURE B-2 0 Tube j H .., 0H E >- H rn„ Wp D. )- o z W~ FH.¢ 0 I- N (I)THIS to N O Z to J LI Q:m O. SAMPLE TYPE vI� O �, O DEPTH (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS ELEVATION (FEET) 1+ SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUALCONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. :: Silty SAND (SM) brown, slightly moist, loose . @2' medium dense @4' dense • 1045- -1040- -1035- 2.2 3.7 7.8 109 107 92 8 8 8 D Sandy SILT (ML) brown, slightly moist, hard @10.5' grades yellow brown D D Terminate drilling at 16 feet SAMPLE C S D B T TYPES DATE DRILLED: 11-30-88 Rock Core Standard Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: Drive sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Tube Sample Not encountered �� GEOFON Incorporated PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER LOG OF BORING NO. B-4 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-5 W r SAMPLE TYPE 4.6 4.3 4.7 102 105 102 4 4 4 D D D 10 DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. • • • • Silty SAND (SM) brown, slightly moist, loose @2' medium dense @ 4' light yellow brown, medium dense, trace of gravel Sandy SILT (ML) light grey, moist, very stiff 15— Silty SAND (SM) brown, slightly moist, medium dense Sandy SILT (ML), olive brown, slightly moist, very 1 stiff Terminate drilling at 16 feet z 0 HI. W W WW W „ J W 1047 ± -1045- -1040- -1035- SAMPLE TYPES QC Rock Core 0 Standard Split Spoon Ej Drive Sample ® Bulk Sample E1 Tube Sample DATE DRILLED: 11-30-88 EQUIPMENT USED: 18" BUCKET AUGER GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered E� GEOFONt e d PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER LOG OF BORING NO. B-5 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-6 MOISTURE (%). DRY DENSITY (PCP) PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS/FOOT SAMPLE TYPE N o to DEPTH I , (FEET) DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS o ELEVATION (FEET) F+ THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. 2.6 3.5 4.0 108 112 108 4 5 4 : Silty SAND (SM) , brown, slightly moist, loose @2' medium dense -1050- -1045- •1040- D D D Terminate drilling at 15 feet SAMPLERockPCS C Core Split Spoon Sample Sample Sample DATE DRILLED: 11-30-88 EQUIPMENT USED: 18" BUCKET AUGER GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER GEOFON ,V ri GEOFON S Standard I n c o r o r a t e d D Drive LOG OF BORING 1-89 PAGE 1 NO. B-6 OF 1 FIGURE B-7 B Bulk T Tube f, e 1 1 1 i i M .. FI-- H !i 0cj0 H ¢ F. a H \ FZ- F iii DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS0 F W b. v F o a > 0 W N o W W -I aim a ¢ vt 0 TIME OFTHIS MARY DRILLING. SUBSURFACES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF CONDITIONS MAYTHIS DIFFERRATGAND OTHERAT TH LOCAE TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUALCONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. D Li W W 1055± B O • : Silty SAND (SM) light brown, slightly moist, loose, trace of gravel @2' medium dense • •::•:: Silty SAND/ SAND (SM/SP), brown, slightly 1.1 105 3 D 5—: moist, medium dense, some gravel -1050- _ • • @6' minor caving • Silty SAND (SM) , yellow brown, slightly moist, medium dense, trace gravel 3.5 112 8 D 10—:• :.:: @10' dense -1045- _ 3.7 106 5 D 15—. ••••.• : . :• @15' medium dense to dense -1040- • Terminate drilling at 16 feet SAMPLE C S TYPES Rock Standard DATE DRILLED: 12-2-88 Core Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: 18" BUCKET E� I GEOFON n c o r p o r a t e d PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER D B T Drive Sample AUGER Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Tube Sample Not encountered LOG OF BORING NO. B-7 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-8 MOISTURE (%) DRY DENSITY (PCF) PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS/FOOT 'SAMPLE TYPE Zr2 F-w DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS ELEVATION (FEET) µ W w O .. THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUALCONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED., O :: Silty SAND (SM), light brown, slightly moist, loose, with trace of gravel @2' medium dense -1075- 3.2 5 D 5 `' .' 10—:'; ; ' : Gravelly SAND (SP), brown, slightly moist, medium dense 1070- - Sandy SILT (ML) brown, moist, stiff to very stiff 9.2 97 3 D - - -1065- 15— 10.8 105 6 D very to hard - 20— @18' stiff -1060- 7.9 95 4 D • : Silty SAND/ SAND (SM/SP) brown, moist, dense 25—• :.=..: : medium -1055- •. 14.5 108 10 D . • Sandy SILT (ML) brown, very moist, hard -• 30—: • ' • -1050- 15 D Gravelly SAND light (SP) brown, moist, very (fence -1045- 35 Terminate drilling at 35 feet S SAMPLE o S ckTYPCS DATE DRILLED: 12-1-88 Rock Core Standard Split Spoon EQUIPMENT USED: E] GEOFpON I n c o r o r u t e d PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER E B T Drive Sample 18" BUCKET AUGER Bulk Sample GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Tube Sample Not encountered LOG OF BORING NO. B-12 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-13 4.6 4.4 4.7 102 105 102 ZwH3 i- cno W NO aim 3 3 3 D D SAMPLE TYPES :[]'Rock Core `S[] Standard Split Spoon J ]D Drive Sample ®Bulk Sample EiTube Sample 5 10— 15— DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. • • • • • • • • • • Silty SAND (SM), brown, slightly moist, loose, caving @2' medium dense @7' some gravel • • • • • Silty SAND/ SAND (SM/SP), brown, slightly moist, medium dense Silty SAND (SM) brown, moist, medium dense,trace of fine gravel z 0 H W W Uw W„ -J w 1085 ± -1080- -1075- -1070- Terminate drilling at 16 feet DATE DRILLED: 12-1-88 EQUIPMENT USED: 18" BUCKET AUGER GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered GEOFONt e d PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER LOG OF BORING NO. B-14 1-89 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGUREB-15 t a I a I i 1 W D: H v H 0 } Z IL - H 0O. 0 0000 M ♦- ZWO aIXm 4.3 3.3 5.2 8.6 103 103 91 94 SAMPLE TYPES 0 Rock Core S[] Standard Split Spoon []D Drive Sample ® Bulk Sample D Tube Sample DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS W tar THIS APP THE MARY 0 TIME OFMDRILLING`IES SUBSURFACEONLY ATTHE CONDITIONS MAYLOCATION OFTHIS DIFFERRATGOTHERANDAT LOCA- TIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. 0— Silty SAND (SM), light brown, slightly moist, loose @2' medium dense Sandy SILT (ML), light to yellow brown, slightly moist, very stiff 10- 15 Silty SAND (SM) yellow brown, moist, medium dense Sandy SILT (ML), light brown to yellow brown, moist, very stiff 20— Terminate the drilling at 21 feet z 0� H F..F- W QW W„ J• W 1046 ± -1045- -1040- -1035- -1030- 1025 DATE DRILLED: 12-2-88 EQUIPMENT USED: 18" BUCKET AUGER GROUNDWATER LEVEL: Not encountered GEOFONt e d PROJECT NO.: 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER 1-89 LOG OF BORING NO. B-20 PAGE 1 OF 1 FIGURE B-21 t GEOFON Project No. 87-357.01 APPENDIX A CONE PENETRATION TEST RESULTS Fourteen Cone Penetration Tests (CPT's) were performed at the site during the present investigation. The locations of the CPT's are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. These soundings were advanced to depths of up to 35 feet below existing site grades. The Cone Penetration Test consists of pushing a cone -tipped probe into the soil deposit while simultaneously recording the cone tip resistance and side friction resistance of the soil to penetration. The Cone Penetration Tests described in this report were conducted in general accordance with ASTM specifications (ASTM D3441-79) using an electric cone penetrometer. The CPT equipment consists of a cone assembly mounted at the end of a series of hollow sounding rods. A set of hydraulic rams is used to push the cone and rods into the soil while a continuous record of cone and friction resistance versus depth is obtained in both analog and digital form at the ground surface. A specially designed all -wheel drive truck is used to transport and house the test equipment and to provide a 20-ton reaction to the thrust of the hydraulic rams. The cone penetrometer assembly (Figure A-1) consists of a conical tip and a cylindrical friction sleeve. The conical tip has a 60 degree apex angle and a projected cross -sectional area of 15 square centimeters. The cylindrical friction sleeve has a surface area of 200 square centimeters. Both the conical tip and the cylindrical friction sleeve have outer diameters of about 4.37 centimeters (about 1-3/4 inches). The interior of the cone penetrometer is instrumented with strain gauges that allow simultaneous measurement of cone tip and friction sleeve resistance during penetration. Continuous electric signals from the strain gauges are transmitted by a cable in the sounding rods to analog and digital data recorders in the CPT truck. 35701002 Appendix A (Cont'd) GEOFON Project No. 87-357.01 Data obtained during a Cone Penetration Test consists of continuous stratigraphic information with close vertical resolution. Stratigraphic interpretation is based on relationships between cone tip resistance and friction resistance. The calculated friction ratio (CPT friction sleeve resistance divided by cone tip resistance) is used as an indicator of soil type. Granular soils typically have low friction ratios and high cone resistance, while cohesive or organic soils have high friction ratios and low cone resistance. These stratigraphic material categories form the basis for all subsequent calculations which utilize the CPT data. Computer plots of the reduced CPT data (including those performed for the previous investigation) are presented in Figures A-2 through A-33 in this appendix. The field testing and computer processing was performed by the Earth Technology Corporation under subcontract to GEOFON. The interpreted soil descriptions were prepared by GEOFON, Inc. 35701002 ELECTRIC CABLE INCLINOMETER QUAD RING "0" RING STRAIN GAGE 43.7�MM, 1.72 INCH r FRICTION SLEEVE GEOFONI =- -= PROJECT NO. 87-357.01 EMPIRE CENTER ELECTRONIC FRICTION CONE PENETROMETER 20 TON CAPACITY 1-89 FIGURE A -I FRICTION RESISTANCE 1 1 02 rn -0 z2 rn rn rn 30 35 40 45 50 TSF (11G/CH2 CONE RESISTANCE TSF 1KG/CM2 0 5~ U + 14 f 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 4C • • f --.---„, i • • 6 400 FRICTION RATIO (/. 1 E E 0 5 10 15 35 40 45 50 a INTERPRETED SOIL DESCRIPTION SILTY SAND (SM), loose SANDY SILT (ML), stiff Refusal at 5 feet (Gravelly layer) • GEGFC]N ▪ PROJECT NO.: 87-357 FONTANA DEVELOPMENT - LOG OF C-5 11-87 FIGURE A-6