HomeMy WebLinkAbout3890; Encina Basin Phase II Recycled Water; Geotechnical and Environmental Eval; 2003-10-24GEOTECHNICAL AND
LIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
ENCINA BASIN PHASE II RECYCLED
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
STANLEY A. MAHR RESERVOIR
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED FOR:
CGvL Engineers
12396 World Trade Drive, Suite 312
San Diego, California 92128
PREPARED BY:
Ninyo & Moore
Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants
5710 Ruffin Road
San Diego, California 92123
October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
5710 Ruffin Road • San Diego, California 92123 - Phone (858) 576-1000 • Fax (85SJ 576-9600
San Diego • Irvine • Ontario • Los Angeles • Oakland • Las Vegas • Salt Lake City • Phoenix
October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
Mr. Adel Bassyouni
CGvL Engineers
12396 World Trade Drive, Suite 312
San Diego, California 92128
Subject: Geotechnical and Limited Environmental Evaluation
Encina Basin Phase II Recycled Water Distribution System
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir
Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. Bassyouni:
In accordance with your request, we have prepared a geotechnical and limited environmental
evaluation report for the Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir site. Transmitted herewith is our report that
presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding the proposed improvements.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions or comments, please
contact the Project Manager, Mr. Rob Wheeler or the undersigned.
Respectfully submitted,
NINYO & MOORE
Randal L. Irwin, C.E.G
Chief Engineering Geologist
Gregory T. Farrand, C.E.G.
Principal Geologist
RTW/RI/EO/GTF/msf/rim
Distribution: (10) Addressee
Erik Olsen, GE.
Chief Geotechnical Engineer
57!ORuffinRoad - San Diego, California 92 123 • Phone (858] 576-1000 • Fax (858J 576-9600
San Diego • Irvine • Ontario • Los Angeles • Oakland • Las Vegas • Salt Lake City • Phoenix
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. SCOPE OF SERVICES 1
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2
4. SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND 2
5. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 3
6. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3
6.1. Regional Geologic Setting 3
6.2. Site Geology 4
6.2.1. Fill 4
6.2.2. Topsoil 5
6.2.3. Santiago Peak Volcanics 5
6.3. Groundwater 5
6.4. Faulting and Seismicity 5
6.4.1. Strong Ground Motion and Ground Surface Rupture 6
6.4.2. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement 6
6.5. Landsliding 6
7. SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS 7
8. CONCLUSIONS 7
9. GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS 8
9.1. Earthwork 8
9.1.1. Site Preparation 8
9.1.2. Remedial Grading of Existing Fill and Topsoil 8
9.1.3. Cut/Fill Transitions 9
9.1.4. Excavation Characteristics 10
9.1.5. Materials for Fill 10
9.1.6. Compacted Fill 10
9.1.7. Temporary Slope Stability 12
9.1.8. Trench Backfill 13
9.1.9. Drainage 13
9.2. Foundations 13
9.2.1. Shallow Foundations 14
9.2.2. Floor Slabs 14
9.2.3. Shallow Foundation Lateral Resistance 15
9.3. Pavements 15
9.4. Corrosion 17
9.5. Pre-Construction Conference 17
9.6. Construction Observation 18
10489900 IMahr Res rev. do
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
10. OFFSHORE AND LIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 18
10.1. Water Quality Sampling and Water Column Profiling 19
10.1.1. Water Sampling and Laboratory Analysis 19
10.1.2. Water Column Profiling 19
10.2. Environmental Sediment Sampling 20
10.3. Lake Sediment Sampling 21
10.4. Depth Profiling of the Reservoir Bottom 21
11. LIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL AND WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 21
12. LIMITATIONS 22
13. SELECTED REFERENCES 24
Tables
Table 1 - Seismic Design Parameters 7
Table 2 - Recommended Pavement Sections 16
Table 3 -Analytical Results for Water Samples Collected 19
Table 4-Water Column Profile Field Data 20
Table 5 - Analytical Results for the Composite Sediment Sample 20
Figures
Figure 1 - Site Location Map
Figure 2 - Test Pit/Sample Location Plan
Figure 3 - Reservoir Bottom Contour Map
Figure 4 - Fault Location Map
Appendices
Appendix A - Test Pit Logs
Appendix B - Laboratory Testing
Appendix C - Typical Earthwork Guidelines
Attachments
Attachment A - Soil Sample Laboratory Testing Results
Attachment B - Water and Sediment Sample Laboratory Testing Results
104899001 Mahr Res rev.doc
tyinyo
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
1. INTRODUCTION
In accordance with your request, we have performed a geotechnical and limited environmental
evaluation for the proposed modifications at the Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir in Carlsbad, Califor-
nia (see Figure 1). This report presents the results of our field exploration, laboratory testing,
limited environmental analysis, as well as our conclusions and geotechnical recommendations
regarding the proposed improvements at the subject.
2. SCOPE OF SERVICES
Scope of services for this study included the following:
• Review of available background data including as-built plans of the reservoir, geologic and
topographic maps, and stereoscopic aerial photographs.
• Performance of a geologic reconnaissance and mark-out of the proposed test pit locations. In
addition, Underground Service Alert (USA) was notified to mark-out/clear possible under-
ground utilities at the proposed test pit locations.
• Subsurface exploration consisting of excavation of four exploratory test pits. The depths of
the test pits ranged from approximately 0.5 to 4 feet below the ground surface.
• Laboratory testing consisting of in-situ dry density and moisture content, grain size analyses,
Atterberg limits, consolidation, expansion index, corrosivity, and R-value tests.
• Compilation and engineering analysis of the geotechnical data obtained.
• Performance of an off-shore evaluation including: performance of reservoir bottom sound-
ings, collection of three bottom sediment samples, collection to two water samples for water
quality testing, collection of water column samples (5-foot intervals) using specialized sam-
pling equipment, and collection of four bulk samples of shallow lake sediment. Analytical
analyses of the water and bottom sediment samples were performed and geotechnical labo-
ratory testing was performed on the four shallow lake sediment samples.
• Preparation of this geotechnical design report presenting our findings, conclusions, and geo-
technical recommendations regarding the proposed improvements. In addition, the analytical
test results obtained from samples collected during our offshore exploration are presented.
104899001Mahr Res rev.doc
ty/nyo
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
It is our understanding that the proposed project will include the relocation of the inlet/outlet
(I/O) piping to the upstream face of the dam, dredging of sediments from the reservoir bottom,
installation of an aeration/destratification system, construction of a new operations (control)
building on the north side of the dam, and paving of an existing access road leading to the pro-
posed control building and across the top of the dam. Grading for the proposed improvements is
expected to be minor and is likely to entail cuts and fills of less than 5 feet. We anticipate that the
new control building will be a small, slab-on-grade structure of wood-frame, steel-frame, or rein-
forced concrete construction. Building loads are expected to be typical of this type of relatively
light construction.
4. SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The project site is located at Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir, a dam, and reservoir storage system,
situated east of Rancho Santa Fe Road and south of Questhaven Road in Carlsbad, California
(Figure 1). The site improvements include a dam, dam spillway, reservoir, and access road (Fig-
ure 2). Currently the access road consists of a graded dirt road that starts at the gate near the
reservoir spillway and extends west then south across the crest of the dam. The earthfill dam is
approximately 70 feet high, 25 feet wide at the crest, 430 feet wide at the base, and roughly
600 feet in length. The dam access is at an elevation of approximately 600 feet relative to mean
sea level (MSL).
The Mahr Reservoir constitutes an unlined and uncovered reservoir. When full, it has a pool ele-
vation of 594 feet MSL. The water level at the time of our fieldwork was measured by others at
approximately 568 feet MSL. A concrete lined spillway is located on the north portion of the res-
ervoir. The spillway elevation is at approximately 594 feet above MSL. The reservoir site is
situated in a relatively small drainage course with a very limited natural watershed. Accordingly,
reservoir water storage is maintained with imported water pumped into the lake. A submerged
outlet pipe near the mid-portion of the reservoir extends below the base of the dam. The pipe out-
lets into a concrete box located at the downstream base of the dam. The dam is constructed of
104899001 Mahr Res rev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
compacted earth fill with rock riprap placed on the upstream face. A dirt access road extends into
the site from the north and extends across the axis of the dam.
5. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Our subsurface field exploration and geologic reconnaissance was conducted on September 22,
2003, and consisted of the excavation of four test pits. The test pits were excavated with a rubber
tire backhoe with a 24-inch wide bucket, to depths ranging from approximately 0.5 to 4 feet be-
low the existing ground surface (bgs). The purpose of the test pits was to observe and sample the
underlying earth materials. Relatively undisturbed and bulk samples were obtained from the ex-
cavations at selected intervals and transported to our laboratory for testing. The approximate
locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2, and the test pit logs are presented in Appendix A.
Laboratory testing of samples obtained during our subsurface exploration included an evaluation
of in-situ density and moisture content, expansion index, sieve analysis, consolidation, R-value,
and soil corrosivity, including electrical resistivity, pH, chloride content, and sulfate content. The
laboratory tests were performed at our in-house laboratory. The results of the in-situ moisture
content and dry density tests are shown at the corresponding sample depth on the test pit logs in
Appendix A. The results of the other laboratory tests performed are presented in Appendix B.
6. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Our findings regarding regional and local geology, including faulting and seismicity, landslides,
rippability (excavatibility), and groundwater conditions at the subject site are provided in the fol-
lowing sections.
6.1. Regional Geologic Setting
The project area is situated in the southern San Diego County section of the Peninsular
Ranges Geomorphic Province. This geomorphic province encompasses an area that extends
approximately 900 miles from the Transverse Ranges and the Los Angeles Basin south to
104899001Mahr Res rev.doe
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
the southern tip of Baja California (Norris and Webb, 1990). The province varies in width
from approximately 30 to 100 miles. In general, the province consists of rugged mountains
underlain by Jurassic metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks, and Cretaceous igneous
rocks of the southern California batholith. The portion of the province in San Diego County
that includes the project area consists generally of uplifted and dissected Tertiary-age sedi-
mentary rock.
The Peninsular Ranges Province is traversed by a group of sub-parallel faults and fault
zones trending roughly northwest. Several of these faults, which are shown on Figure 3,
Fault Location Map, are considered active faults. The Elsinore, San Jacinto, and San Andreas
faults are active fault systems located northeast of the project area and the Rose Canyon,
Agua Blanca-Coronado Bank, and San Clemente faults are active faults located west of the
project area. The Rose Canyon-Newport Inglewood Fault Zone, mapped approximately 8
miles west of the project site, is the closest known active fault relative to the site. Major tec-
tonic activity associated with these and other faults within this regional tectonic framework
consists primarily of right-lateral, strike-slip movement. Further discussion of faulting relative
to the site is provided in the Faulting and Seismicity section of this report.
6.2. Site Geology
Geologic units encountered during our field reconnaissance and subsurface evaluation in-
cluded fill, topsoil, and materials of the Santiago Peak Volcanics. Generalized descriptions
of the earth units encountered during our field reconnaissance and subsurface exploration
are provided in the subsequent sections. More detailed descriptions are provided on the bor-
ing logs in Appendix A.
6.2.1. Fill
Fill material was encountered in each of our test pits from the existing ground surface to
depths in excess of 4 feet. The fill materials are associated with the access road to the
dam. As encountered, the fill consisted of brown to light yellowish brown, damp, loose
_J&•w~~a10489900 IMalir Res rev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
to medium dense, silty fine to coarse sand, and sandy gravel with gravel and cobbles,
and brown, damp to moist, very stiff, silty fine to coarse sandy clay.
6.2.2. Topsoil
Topsoil was encountered underlying the fill materials in test pit TP-1 to the total depth
explored. As encountered, the topsoil consists of brown, damp to moist, very stiff, fine
to coarse sandy clay.
6.2.3. Santiago Peak Volcanics
Santiago Peak Volcanic rock was encountered below the fill in test pit TP-3 to the total
depth explored. In general, the Santiago Peak Volcanics consisted of light brown to light
reddish brown, damp, intensely weathered to decomposed, metavolcanic rock.
6.3. Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered during our exploratory test pits. Fluctuations in the
groundwater level may occur due to variations in ground surface topography, subsurface
geologic conditions and structure, rainfall, irrigation, and other factors.
6.4. Faulting and Seismicity
The project area is considered to be seismically active. Based on our review of the refer-
enced geologic maps and stereoscopic aerial photographs, as well as on our geologic field
reconnaissance, the subject site is not underlain by known active or potentially active faults
(i.e., faults that exhibit evidence of ground displacement in the last 11,000 years and
2,000,000 years, respectively).
In general, hazards associated with seismic activity include; strong ground motion, ground
surface rupture, liquefaction, and seismically induced settlement. These hazards are dis-
cussed in the following sections.
i04899001 Mahr Res rev doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
6.4.1. Strong Ground Motion and Ground Surface Rupture
Based on a Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the Western United States, issued
by the United States Geological Survey (2002), the project site is located in a zone where
the horizontal peak ground acceleration having a 10 percent probability of being exceeded
in 50 years is 0.26g. The requirements of the governing jurisdictions and applicable build-
ing codes should be considered in the project design. The closest known active fault is the
Rose Canyon-Newport-Inglewood Fault located approximately 8 miles west of the site.
The Rose Canyon-Newport-Inglewood Fault is capable of generating an earthquake of
magnitude of 6.9 (California Division of Mines and Geology, 1998).
Based on our review of the referenced literature and our site reconnaissance, no active
faults are known to cross the project site. Therefore, the potential for ground rupture due
to faulting at the site is considered very low. However, lurching or cracking of the
ground surface as a result of nearby seismic events is possible.
6.4.2. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement
Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earth-
quakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose granular soils and non-plastic silts
that are saturated by a relatively shallow groundwater table are susceptible to liquefaction.
Based on the lack of shallow groundwater and the relatively dense nature of the soils un-
derlying the site, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction and seismically
induced settlement at the subject site is low and is not a design consideration.
6.5. Landsliding
As part of our study, we reviewed background data, including, geologic maps, and stereo-
scopic aerial photographs pertaining to the site. Based on our background review and field
reconnaissance, there are no known landslides mapped underlying the subject site, and
therefore, it is our opinion that landsliding at the site is not a design consideration.
104899QOlMahr Res rev doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
7. SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS
According to the 2001 California Building Code (CBC), (CBSC, 2001), the proposed project site
is in Seismic Zone 4 but not within a Near Source Zone. Table 1 includes the seismic design pa-
rameters for the site as defined in, and for use with, the 2001 edition of the CBC.
Table 1 - Seismic Design Parameters
Parameter
Seismic Zone Factor, Z
Soil Profile Type
Seismic Coefficient Ca
Seismic Coefficient Cv
Near-Source Factor, Na
Near-Source Factor, Nv
Seismic Source Type
Value
0.40
SB
0.40Na
0.40NV
1.0
1.0
B
2001 CBC Reference
Table 16 -I
Table 16 -J
Table 16 -Q
Table 16 -R
Table 16 -S
Table 16 -T
Table 16 -U
8. CONCLUSIONS
Based on our review of the referenced background data, geologic field reconnaissance, subsur-
face evaluation, and laboratory testing, it is our opinion that construction of the proposed project
is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Based on our review of published geologic maps and
our field evaluation, the project site is not underlain by any known active faults or landslides.
Geotechnical considerations include the following:
• Based on the soils encountered in the test pits, the project site is underlain by fill, topsoil,
and intensely weathered Santiago Peak Volcanics. Based on laboratory test results the fill
materials exhibit a potential to settle under load.
• The site is located within Seismic Zone 4.
• The on-site materials should generally be excavatable by heavy-duty earthmoving equipment.
• Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory test pits and is not expected to be a
constraint to construction.
104B99001 Mahr Res rev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
9. GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on our understanding of the project, the following recommendations are provided for the
design and construction of the proposed project.
9.1. Earthwork
In general, earthwork should be performed in accordance with the recommendations pre-
sented in this report. The geotechnical consultant should be contacted for questions
regarding the recommendations or guidelines presented herein. In addition, Typical Earth-
work Guidelines for the project are included as Appendix C. In the event of a conflict in
recommendations, the recommendations presented in the text of this report supersede those
in Appendix C.
9.1.1. Site Preparation
The project site should be cleared and grubbed prior to grading. Clearing and grubbing
should consist of the removal of pavements and other deleterious materials, such as
trash and debris, from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to
the outside of the proposed excavation and fill areas. The debris generated during clear-
ing and grubbing should be removed from areas to be graded and disposed of off site at
a legal dumpsite.
9.1.2. Remedial Grading of Existing Fill and Topsoii
Fill and Topsoii materials encountered in our exploratory test pits are not considered
suitable for structural support in their present condition, unless the building is designed
with deep foundations. Accordingly, we recommend that the material within structural
areas (building footprint and 5 feet horizontally outside of the building footprint, and ex-
tending down at a 1:1 [horizontal:vertical] slope), be removed to a depth of 3 feet or more
below the base of the foundations, and replaced with compacted fill. In areas of pro-
posed non-structural improvements such as concrete flatwork, we recommend remedial
removals extend a depth of 12 inches or more into the existing fill and be replaced with
104899001 Mahi Res rev doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
compacted fill material. The excavated soil may be moisture conditioned, replaced, and
compacted, as recommended below.
Fill soil placed within the upper 3 feet of finished grade in structural areas should con-
sist of clean, granular material with a very low to low expansion index (expansion index
of 50 or less) as evaluated by UBC Standard 18-2 (Expansion Index Test). More expan-
sive soil may be placed in the non-structural areas on the site or at depths of 3 feet or
more. Selective grading may be required to achieve a 3-foot zone of very low to low
expansive soils. Fill should be moisture conditioned to a moisture content near optimum
content and, in structural areas be compacted to 90 or more percent relative compaction,
in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Method
D 1557-02. Expansive soils should be similarly compacted but at a moisture content of
3 percent or more above optimum. Although the optimum lift thickness for fill soils will
be dependent on the type of compaction equipment utilized, fill should generally be
placed in uniform lifts not exceeding approximately 8 inches in loose thickness. Some
oversized material, rocks, or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in dimension, may be an-
ticipated from excavations and should not be used in compacted fills.
9.1.3. Cut/Fill Transitions
Structures should not straddle cut/fill transitions. Our test pits indicated the presence of
weathered rock/native material (i.e., cut) in test pit TP-3, located near the toe of a slope.
If during grading, native materials are found to be less than approximately 5 feet below
the proposed grade, we recommend that the cut portion of the building pad be overex-
cavated, and replaced with compacted fill, unless the building is founded entirely in
bedrock utilizing a deep foundation system. The depth of the overexcavation should be
1/3 of the greatest depth of fill beneath the bottom of the building foundation. The geo-
technical consultant should observe the bottom of the excavated areas at the time of
grading to assess the quality of the exposed material, and to evaluate if additional re-
movals are indicated. The suitable excavated material may then be moisture
conditioned, replaced, and compacted in accordance with the recommendations herein.
r&* f -~~fj—
10489900 IMahr Res rev.doc
ty/nyo
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
As discussed, the building pad area is defined as the building footprint and 5 feet horizon-
tally outside of the building footprint.
9.1.4. Excavation Characteristics
The results of our field exploration program indicate that, as presently proposed, the
project site is underlain by fill materials associated with construction of the dam, top-
soil, and weathered materials of the Santiago Peak Volcanics. The on-site materials
should generally be excavatable to the depth explored by heavy-duty earthmoving
equipment in good working condition.
9.1.5. Materials for Fill
On-site soils with an organic content of less than 3 percent by volume (or 1 percent by
weight) are suitable for use as fill. Fill material should not contain rocks or lumps over
6 inches in largest dimension, and not more than 40 percent larger than 3/4 inch. Utility
trench backfill material should not contain rocks or lumps over 3 inches in largest di-
mension and not more than 40 percent larger than 3/4 inch. Larger chunks, if generated
during excavation, may be broken into acceptably sized pieces or disposed of off site.
Any imported fill material should be a low or very low expansion potential (UBC Ex-
pansion Index of 50 or less [CBSC, 2001]) granular soil. Import material should also
have low corrosion potential (chloride content less than 500 parts per million [ppm],
soluble sulfate content of less than 0.2 percent, and pH of 5.5 or more). Materials for
use as fill should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant's representative prior to
filling or importing.
9.1.6. Compacted Fill
Prior to placement of compacted fill, the contractor should request an evaluation of the
exposed ground surface (clean-out) by the geotechnical consultant. Unless otherwise
recommended, the exposed ground surface should then be scarified to a depth of
approximately 8 inches and watered or dried, as needed, to achieve generally uniform
104899001 Mahi Res rev.doc 10
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
moisture contents at or near the optimum moisture content. The scarified materials
should then be compacted to 90 percent or more relative density in accordance with
ASTM Test Method D 1557-02. The evaluation of compaction by the geotechnical con-
sultant should not be considered to preclude any requirements for observation or
approval by governing agencies. It is the contractor's responsibility to notify the geo-
technical consultant and the appropriate governing agency when project areas are ready
for observation, and to provide reasonable time for that review.
Excavated on-site materials which are in general compliance with the recommendations
presented in Section 9.1.5 may be utilized as compacted fill provided they are generally
free of organic or other deleterious materials and do not contain rock fragments greater
than 6 inches in dimension. Oversize material should be disposed of off site. During
grading, the contractor may encounter soil types other than those analyzed during the
preliminary geotechnical study. The geotechnical consultant should be consulted to
evaluate the suitability of any such soils for use as compacted fill.
Where imported materials are to be used on site, the geotechnical consultant should be
notified 3 working days or more in advance of importation to evaluate, sample and test
the materials from the proposed borrow sites. No imported materials should be deliv-
ered for use on site without prior sampling, testing, and evaluation by the geotechnical
consultant.
Fill materials should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content prior to
placement. The optimum moisture content will vary with material type and other fac-
tors. Moisture conditioning of fill soils should be generally uniform throughout the soil
mass.
Prior to placement of additional compacted fill material following a delay in the grading
operations, the exposed surface of previously compacted fill should be prepared to receive
fill. Preparation may include scarification, moisture conditioning, and recompaction.
r&
T"3~
] 0489900 IMalji Res rev.doc 1 1
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
Compacted fill should be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 8 inches in loose
thickness. Prior to compaction, each lift should be watered or dried as needed to achieve
near optimum moisture condition, mixed, and then compacted by mechanical methods,
using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other appropriate
compacting rollers, to a relative compaction of 90 percent or more as evaluated by
ASTM D 1557-02. Successive lifts should be treated in a like manner until the desired
finished grades are achieved.
9.1.7. Temporary Slope Stability
We recommend that trenches and excavations be designed and constructed in accor-
dance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations. These
regulations provide trench sloping and shoring design parameters for trenches up to
20 feet deep based on a description of the soil types encountered. Trenches over 20 feet
deep should be designed by the Contractor's engineer based on site-specific geotechni-
cal analyses. For planning purposes, we recommend that the following OSHA soil
classification be used:
Fill and Topsoil Type C
Santiago Peak Volcanics Type B
Upon making the excavations, the soil/rock classifications and excavation performance
should be evaluated in the field by the geotechnical consultant in accordance with
OSHA regulations. Recommendations for temporary shoring can be provided, if re-
quested.
In general, temporary slopes above the water table and excavated into the surficial soils
or the Santiago Peak Volcanics should be inclined no steeper than 1.5:1 and 1:1, respec-
tively. Temporary excavations that encounter seepage may need shoring or may be
stabilized by placing sandbags or gravel along the base of the seepage zone. Excava-
tions encountering seepage should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
r&
,y—a-
!04899001Mahr Res rev.doc 19
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
9.1.8. Trench Backfill
Backfill for utility trenches should be compacted to 90 percent or more relative compac-
tion as evaluated by ASTM D 1557-02. Lifts should be of appropriate thickness to allow
compaction to be achieved with the equipment used.
9.1.9. Drainage
Roof, pad, and slope drainage should be directed away from slopes and structures to
suitable discharge areas by non-erodible devices (e.g., gutters, downspouts, concrete
swales, etc.). Positive drainage adjacent to structures should be established and main-
tained. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from the
foundations of the structure at a gradient of 2 percent or steeper for a distance of 5 feet
or more outside the building perimeter, and further maintained by a graded swale lead-
ing to an appropriate outlet, in accordance with the recommendations of the project civil
engineer and/or landscape architect.
Surface drainage on the site should be provided so that water is not permitted to pond. A
gradient of 2 percent or steeper should be maintained over the pad area and drainage
patterns should be established to redirect and remove water from the site to appropriate
outlets.
Care should be taken by the contractor during final grading to preserve any berms,
drainage terraces, interceptor swales or other drainage devices of a permanent nature on
or adjacent to the property. Drainage patterns established at the time of final grading
should be maintained for the life of the project. The property operators should be made
very clearly aware that altering drainage patterns might be detrimental to slope stability
and foundation performance.
9.2. Foundations
The following foundation design parameters are provided based on our preliminary analysis.
The foundation design parameters are not intended to control differential movement of soils.
1 0489900 IMahr Res tev doc 1 -1
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
Minor cracking (considered tolerable) of foundations may occur. The following sections pre-
sent our preliminary foundation recommendations.
9.2.1. Shallow Foundations
As discussed in Section 9.1.3, shallow foundations, either spread or continuous founda-
tions, should be founded entirely in competent bedrock material or entirely in
compacted fill. Shallow foundations founded in properly compacted fill or formational
materials may be designed using an allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per
square foot (psf). This allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third when
considering loads of short duration such as wind or seismic forces. Foundations should
be founded 18 inches or more below lowest adjacent grade. Continuous footings should
have a width of 15 inches or more and isolated footings should be 24 inches or more in
width.
We recommend that foundations be reinforced in accordance with the recommendations
of the project structural engineer. From a geotechnical standpoint, we recommend that
continuous footings be reinforced with four No. 4 reinforcing bars, two placed near the
top of the footing and two near the bottom.
The foundations should be designed for their specific loads and usage. We recommend
that a structural engineer experienced with such structures be consulted.
9.2.2. Floor Slabs
The slabs should be designed for their specific loads and usage, as recommended by a
structural engineer experienced with such structures. To help reduce shrinkage cracking,
we recommend that slabs-on-grade be 5 or more inches in thickness and be reinforced
with No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at the midpoint of the slab and spaced at 18 inches
on-center both ways. The reinforcing bars should be placed on chairs. Floor slabs
should be constructed and reinforced in accordance with the recommendations of the
1 0489900 ] Mahr Res rev doc t A
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24,2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
structural engineer. In addition, if deep foundations are selected, the structural engineer
should design a structural floor slab.
Floor slabs should be underlain by a moisture barrier consisting of a 2-inch layer of
clean sand underlain by a polyethylene moisture barrier, 10-mil or thicker, which is, in
turn, underlain by a 4-inch layer of clean medium to coarse sand or pea gravel. Soils
underlying the slabs should be moisture conditioned and compacted in accordance with
the recommendations contained in this report. Joints should be constructed at intervals
designed by the structural engineer to help reduce random cracking of the slab.
9.2.3. Shallow Foundation Lateral Resistance
For resistance of foundations to lateral loads, we recommend an allowable passive pres-
sure exerted by an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) be used
with a value up to of 3,000 psf. This value assumes that the ground is horizontal for a
distance of 10 feet or more, or three times the height generating the passive pressure,
whichever is greater. We recommend that the upper one-foot of soil not protected by
pavement or a concrete slab be neglected when calculating passive resistance.
For frictional resistance to lateral loads, we recommend a coefficient of friction of 0.35
be used between soil and concrete. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the
sum of the frictional resistance and passive resistance provided the passive resistance
does not exceed one half of the total allowable resistance. The passive resistance values
may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration such as wind or
seismic forces.
9.3. Pavements
Based on the results of our subsurface evaluation, laboratory tests, and our experience with
soils similar to those encountered at and near the site, we have used an R-value of 5 for the
preliminary basis for design of flexible pavements at the project site. Actual pavement rec-
ommendations should be based on R-value tests performed on bulk samples of the soils that
104899001MahrResrev.doc 15
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
are exposed at the finished subgrade elevations across the site at the completion of the mass
grading operations.
We understand that traffic will consist primarily of automobiles, light trucks, and occasional
heavy trucks. For design we have used a Traffic Index (TI) of 5.5 for site pavements. We
recommend that the geotechnical consultant re-evaluate the pavement design, based on the
R-value of the subgrade material exposed at the time of construction. The preliminary rec-
ommended pavement sections are as follows:
Table 2 - Recommended Pavement Sections
Area
Access Road
R-Value
5
Traffic
Index
5.5
Asphalt
Concrete (inches)
3.0
Class 2 Aggregate
Base (inches)
11.5
As indicated, these values assume a traffic index of 5.5 for site pavements. In addition, we
recommend that the upper 12 inches of the subgrade be compacted to a relative compaction
of 95 or more percent relative density as evaluated by ASTM D 1557-02. The above pave-
ment sections should provide an approximate pavement life of 20 years. If traffic loads are
different from those assumed, the pavement design should be re-evaluated.
Although not anticipated, if large refuse trucks and associated dumpsters are present on the
subject site, we suggest that consideration be given to using portland cement concrete pave-
ments in the areas where the dumpsters will be stored and where refuse trucks will stop and
load. Experience indicates that refuse truck traffic can significantly shorten the useful life of
asphalt concrete sections. We recommend that in these areas, 6 inches of 600 psi flexural
strength portland cement concrete reinforced with No. 3 bars, 18 inches on center, be placed
over 6 inches or more of Class II aggregate base compacted to a relative compaction of
95 percent.
104899001Mahr Res rev.doc 16
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
9.4. Corrosion
Laboratory testing was performed on samples of the on-site soils to evaluate pH and electri-
cal resistivity, as well as chloride and sulfate contents. The pH and electrical resistivity tests
were performed in accordance with California Test 643 and the sulfate and chloride tests
were performed in accordance with California Tests 416 and 422, respectively. These labora-
tory test results are presented in Appendix B.
The results of the corrosivity testing indicated an electrical resistivity of the sample tested of
560 ohm-cm. The soil pH of the sample was 7.1. The testing indicated a chloride content of
390 parts per million (ppm). Based on Caltrans criteria and our laboratory test results, the
on-site soils would not be considered representative of a corrosive site, which is defined as
soil with more than 500 ppm chlorides, more than 0.200 percent sulfates, or a pH of 5.5 or
less.
Concrete in contact with soil or water that contains high concentrations of soluble sulfates
can be subject to chemical deterioration. Laboratory testing indicated a sulfate content of the
sample tested of 0.07 percent, which is considered negligible for sulfate attack (CBC, 2001).
We recommend that 3 inches or more of concrete cover be provided over reinforcing steel
for cast-in-place structures in contact with the soil. Although the results of the sulfate tests
were not significantly high, due to the variability in the on-site soils and the potential future
use of reclaimed water at the site, we recommend that Type V cement be used for concrete
structures in contact with soil. In addition, we recommend a water to cement ratio of no
more than 0.45 and a slump of no more than 4 inches.
9.5. Pre-Construction Conference
We recommend that a pre-construction conference be held. Owner representatives, the civil
engineer, geotechnical consultant, and contractor should be in attendance to discuss the
plans and the project.
ty/nyo
104899001 Mahr Res rev.doc 1 ~j
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
9.6. Construction Observation
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on analysis of ob-
served conditions encountered and our exploratory excavations. If conditions are found to
vary from those described in this report, the geotechnical consultant should be notified and
additional recommendations will be provided upon request. The project geotechnical con-
sultant should review the final project drawings and specifications prior to the
commencement of construction. Ninyo & Moore should perform the appropriate observation
and testing services during construction operations.
The recommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that Ninyo &
Moore will provide geotechnical observation and testing services during construction. In the
event that it is decided not to utilize the services of Ninyo & Moore during construction, we
request that the selected consultant provide the client with a letter (with a copy to Ninyo &
Moore) indicating that they fully understand Ninyo & Moore's recommendations, and that
they are in full agreement with the design parameters and recommendations contained in this
report. Construction of proposed improvements should be performed by qualified subcon-
tractors utilizing appropriate techniques and construction materials.
10. OFFSHORE AND LIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
As part of our study, we performed a limited offshore environmental evaluation at the subject
reservoir. An inflatable boat was utilized as a platform to the collect the following data. Survey-
ors set stakes at 40-foot intervals along the southern shoreline and along the dam. These stakes
were used to help locate our position on the lake during the collection of bottom depth soundings
and collection of water and soil samples. Bottom depths, as measured to the nearest foot from the
water surface to the lake bottom, were collected by using an electronic depth finder and manual
soundings. The data was collected and used to generate a general bottom contour map (Figure 3).
Moore
104899001Mahr Res rev.doc 1 g
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
10.1. Water Quality Sampling and Water Column Profiling
As part of our evaluation we collected two water quality samples, and performed a water
column profile analysis. Both tests were performed in the vicinity of the I/O works opening
(Figure 2). The results of the water sampling are presented in the following sections.
10.1.1. Water Sampling and Laboratory Analysis
The water samples were collected by using a submersible sample pump. Water quality
samples were collected from a few feet from the bottom of the reservoir and a few feet
from the water surface. Laboratory analysis included tests for chemical oxygen demand,
total dissolved solids, turbidity, total coliform count, alkalinity, color, and specific con-
stituents (Cl, N, P, CA, Mg, Ma, K, SO4, and TKN). A summary of the analytical test
results is presented on Table 3.
Table 3 -Analytical Results for Water Samples Collected
Parameters
Depth (ft)
Color
Total Dissolved Solids (mgtf)
Turbidity (MTU)
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mgtf)
Total Phosphorous (mg/7)
COD(mgtf)
Alkalinity (mgtf)
Total Nitrogen (mg#)
Calcium (mg#)
Magnesium (mg/0
Chloride (mgtf)
Total Colliform (g)
WS-1
3.0
35
880
7.3
26
6.8
150
530
26
112
42
250
<2
WS-2
25.0
20
940
2.2
13
7.3
15
150
13
86
39.5
250
<2
10.1.2. Water Column Profiling
As discussed, a profile of the water column was performed in the vicinity of the I/O
works opening. Samples were collected using a Horiba™ U22 instrument at 5-foot
depth increments from the water surface to near the bottom. Parameters measured in-
i04S99001Mahr Res rev doc 19
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
eluded dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, and electrical conductivity. The field data
collected with this instrument is presented in Table 4.
Table 4 - Water Column Profile Field Data
Water Depth
25
20
15
10
5
0
Dissolved Oxygen
(mgtf)
0.28
0.76
1.91
2.19
2.36
2.63
Temperature (°C)
14.5
15.2
15.3
15.5
16.2
16.4
PH
6.81
7.10
7.07
7.01
7.05
7.05
Conductivity
(mS/cm)
1.73
1.61
1.60
1.60
1.60
1.60
ORP
(mW)
40
444
466
478
477
464
10,2. Environmental Sediment Sampling
Three sediment samples were collected near the eastern portion of the reservoir. The samples
were combined to create a composite sample for analytical testing. The samples were col-
lected with Ponar type grab sampler, combined, labeled, placed in an ice chest, and
transported to an analytical laboratory for testing. Analytical tests included Title 22 metals,
EPA 8080 (PCBs/Pesticides), EPA 8260B (volatile organics), and EPA 8270C (semivolatile
organics). Laboratory results are presented on Table 5.
Table 5 -Analytical Results for the Composite Sediment Sample
Detected Analyte
Arsenic (mg/kg)
Barium (mg/kg)
Chromium (mg/kg)
Cobalt (mg/kg)
Copper (mg/kg)
Lead (mg/kg)
Molybdenum (mg/kg)
Nickel (mg/kg)
Silver (mg/kg)
Vanadium (mg/kg)
Zinc (mg/kg)
SED-01-1 Result
0.76
48.2
6.13
5.87
66.0
8.16
10.1
5.27
0.73
50.2
68.6
Reporting Limit
(mg/kg)
0.750
0.5
0.25
0.25
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.2
1.0
104899001Mahr Res rev.doc 20
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
10.3. Lake Sediment Sampling
Four sediment samples (Sample No. S-l through S-4), were collected along the northern and
southern shoreline of the reservoir (Figure 2). The samples were visually classified and se-
lected samples were tested for particle gradation (sieve analysis) and Atterberg limits. The
samples ranged from sandy silt to silty fine to coarse sand and gravel. The results of these
and other laboratory tests performed are presented in Appendix B.
10.4. Depth Profiling of the Reservoir Bottom
As discussed, we performed depth profiling of the bottom of the reservoir. An inflatable boat
was used to access the lake, and bottom depth data was collected with an electronic depth
finder and by manual soundings. Surveyor stakes, placed along the dam and along the
southern shoreline, were used to aid locating the depth soundings. The data was recorded to
the nearest foot, and used to create a relative contour map of the reservoir bottom (Figure 3).
Please note that the abundance of aquatic plants near the east end of the reservoir may have
reduced the accuracy of some of the near shore data.
11. LIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL AND WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT
The water quality data collected provide some general information regarding reservoir water
quality characteristics. However, the conclusions that can be drawn from these data are inher-
ently limited due to sampling and analysis uncertainties (e.g. accuracy and precision),
interpretation of water quality objectives, and the fact that the Mahr Reservoir is a dynamic sys-
tem that constantly reacts to changes in the physical, chemical, and biological environment. A
much better understanding of reservoir water quality would be provided by a more rigorous and
extensive sampling and analysis program that addresses among other issues, seasonal variations.
A study regarding water quality or the preparation of a water quality management plan for the
reservoir was beyond the scope of this limited evaluation.
10489900IMahr Res rev.doc 21
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
12. LIMITATIONS
The field evaluation, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analyses presented in this geotechnical
report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care
exercised by geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area. No warranty,
expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions pre-
sented in this report. There is no evaluation detailed enough to reveal every subsurface condition.
Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered
during construction. Uncertainties relative to subsurface conditions can be reduced through addi-
tional subsurface exploration. Additional subsurface evaluation will be performed upon request.
Please also note that our evaluation was limited to assessment of the geotechnical aspects of the
project, and did not include evaluation of structural issues, environmental concerns, or the pres-
ence of hazardous materials.
This document is intended to be used only in its entirety. No portion of the document, by itself, is
designed to completely represent any aspect of the project described herein, Ninyo & Moore
should be contacted if the reader requires additional information or has questions regarding the
content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document.
This report is intended for design purposes only. It does not provide sufficient data to prepare an
accurate bid by contractors. It is suggested that the bidders and their geotechnical consultant per-
form an independent evaluation of the subsurface conditions in the project areas. The
independent evaluations may include, but not be limited to, review of other geotechnical reports
prepared for the adjacent areas, site reconnaissance, and additional exploration and laboratory
testing.
Our conclusions, recommendations, and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site
conditions. If geotechnical conditions different from those described in this report are encoun-
tered, our office should be notified, and additional recommendations, if warranted, will be
provided upon request. It should be understood that the conditions of a site could change with
time as a result of natural processes or the activities of man at the subject site or nearby sites. In
tyinyo
l04899001Mahr Res rev.doc 22
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
addition, changes to the applicable laws, regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur
due to government action or the broadening of knowledge. The findings of this report may, there-
fore, be invalidated over time, in part or in whole, by changes over which Ninyo & Moore has no
control.
This report is intended exclusively for use by the client. Any use or reuse of the findings, conclu-
sions, and/or recommendations of this report by parties other than the client is undertaken at said
parties' sole risk.
NJnuo
104899001MahrResrev.doc 23
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
13. SELECTED REFERENCES
California Building Standards Commission, 2001, California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2,
Volumes 1 and 2.
California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, 1998, Maps of Known
Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada: dated
February.
California Building Standards Commission (CBSC), 2001, California Building Code, Title 24,
Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2003, Corrosion Guidelines, Version 1.0,
dated September.
CGvL, Improvement Plans for Mahr Reservoir, Grading and Access Road Site Plan, Scale
1 "=40% undated.
Jennings, C.W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas: California Division
of Mines and Geology, California Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6, Scale
1:750,000.
Norris, R. M. and Webb, R. W., 1990, Geology of California, Second Edition: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.
Public Works Standards, Inc., 2000, "Greenbook," Standard Specifications for Public Works
Construction.
Tan, S.S., and Kennedy, M.P., 1996, Plate 1, Geologic Map of the Oceanside, San Luis Rey, and
San Marcos 7.5' Quadrangles, San Diego County, California in Geologic Maps of the
Northwestern Part of San Diego County: California Division of Mines and Geology,
Open-File Report 96-02, Scale 1:24,000.
United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, 1989, Engineering Geology
Field Manual.
United States Geological Survey, 2002, National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project, World Wide
Web, http://geohazards.cr.usgs.gov/eq.
Woodward-Clyde, 1981, As-Built Drawings, San Marcos County Water District Reclamation
Project, Carlsbad, California, dated January 20.
Source
USDA
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
Date Flight Numbers
3-31-53 AXN-4M 70 and 71
Scale
1:20,000
10489900IMahr Res rev doc 24
0 1900 3800
Approximate Scale in Feet
REFERENCE: 2002 THOMAS GUIDE FOR SAN DIEGO COUNTY, STREET GUIDE AND DIRECTORY
SITE LOCATION MAP
MAHR RESERVOIR
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
r PROJECT NO.
I 104899001
DATE
10/03 K FIGURE "
1 .
A
WATER ELEVATION -.568.10±
sumer AS OF M-JJ-OJ
A
_ LEGEND
__ ] Approximate location of proposed control building
TP-4 Approximate location of exploratory test pit
- S-4 Approximate soil sample location
0 Approximate location of two water quality samples
• Approximate location of water column analysis
A Approximate location of sediment samples
120
Approximate Scale in Feet
240
f TEST PIT/SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
MAHR RESERVOIR
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
f PROJECT NO.
^ 104899001
DATE A
10/03 J
FIGURE
2
-a-.o
scale
After Morris and Webb, 1990.
t i
FAULT LOCATION MAP
MAHR RESERVOIR
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
f PROJECT NO.
I 104899001
DATE
10/03
\T FIGURE "
J^ 4 .
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
APPENDIX A
TEST PIT LOGS
Field Procedure for the Collection of Disturbed Samples
Disturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following methods.
Bulk Samples
Bulk samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the exploratory excava-
tions. The samples were bagged and transported to the laboratory for testing.
Field Procedure for the Collection of Relatively Undisturbed Samples
Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following method.
The Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler
The sampler, with an external diameter of 3.0 inches, was lined with 1-inch long, thin brass
rings with inside diameters of approximately 2.4 inches. The sample barrel was manually
driven into the ground with the weight of a 20-pound hammer. The samples were removed
from the sample barrel in the brass rings, sealed, and transported to the laboratory for test-
ing.
104899001Mahr Res rev doc
U.S.C.S. METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION
MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES
COARSE-GRAINED SOILS(More than 1/2 of soil>No. 200 sieve size)FINE-GRAINED SOILS(More than 1/2 of soil<No. 200 sieve size)•;*
:::'.'•'i
GRAVELS
(More than 1/2 of coarse •
fraction ' k
> No. 4 sieve size) •
\
SANDS p
fraction
<No. 4 sieve size)
1
SILTS & CLAYS ^
Liquid Limit <50 ^f&®
^
SILTS & CLAYS ^
Liquid Limit >50 <<1
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
»;-;:••::••:*:".-•-
_ •
.-•'
. •
.'! ',. ,*m
m
^1
^^y-ipl^BS^H
2^^Sj3HdB
GW
GP
GM
GC
sw
SP
SM
sc
ML
CL
OL
MH
CH
OH
Pt
Well graded gravels OT gravel-sand mixtures,
little or no fines
Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand
mixtures, little or no fines
Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures
Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures
Well graded sands or gravelly sands, little or
no fines
Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or
Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures
Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures
Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour,
silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with
Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,
gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean
Organic silts and organic silty clays of low
plasticity
Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous
fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts
Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays
Organic clays of medium to high plasticity,
organic silty clays, organic silts
Peat and other highly organic soils
GRAIN SIZE CHART
CLASSIFICATION
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL
Coarse
Fine
SAND
Coarse
Medium
Fine
SILT & CLAY
RANGE OF GRAIN SIZE
U.S. Standard
Sieve Size
Above 12"
12" to 3"
3" to No. 4
3" to 3/4"
3/4" to No. 4
No. 4 to No. 200
No. 4 to No. 10
No. 10 to No. 40
No. 40 to No. 200
Below No. 200
Grain Size in
Millimeters
Above 305
305 to 76.2
76.2 to 4.76
76.2 to 19.1
19.1 to 4.76
4.76 to 0-074
4.76 to 2.00
2,00 to 0.420
0.420 to 0.074
Below 0.074
PLASTICITY CHART
V
Jt
/
CL-k
/
L /
/
CL
/
^ML
/
^
^
iOL
/
/
/
CH
/
/
MH.
X
OH
X
0 10 £0 30 40 50 60 70 BO . 9D «QLIQUID LIMIT (LL), %
U.S.C.S. METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Revised U.S.C.S. Classification Chan
__4fi&^*/plilill'c— -
Explanation of Test P t, Core, Trench and
Hand Auger Log Symbols
PROJECT NO.DATE DEPTH (FEET)0 SAMPLES&
£
1
I0
I
\
<D
3
TJ
CDCO MOISTURE (%)o .
-¥ *
T -4-
xx/xx DRY DENSITY (PCF)zo
CLASS1FICATIU.S.C.S.SM
ML
SM
EXCAVATION LOG
EXPLANATION SHEET
FILL,. ,
Dashed line denotes material change.
Seepage
Shelby tube sample. Distance pushed in inches/length of sample
recovered in inches
ALLUVIUM
Solid line denotes unit change.
Attitude: Strike/Dip
b: Bedding
c: Contact
j: Joint
f: Fracture
F: Fault
cs: Clay Seam
s: Shear
bss; Basal Slide Surface
sf: Shear Fracture
sz: Shear Zone
sbs: Sheared Bedding Surface
The total depth line is a solid line that is drawn at the bottom of the
excavation log.
SCALE: 1 inch = 1 foot
Testpit explanation ,xls
1 ^J^^^Ar4.r
TEST PIT LOG
MAHR RESERVOIR
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO.
104899001
F
DATE
10/03
1 '
^^J
'
i (133d) Hld3Q— tr—
6
z
1 1 SAMPLES '1Q
;
VC
c:
cn
&••
UJo:
wo
DRY DENSITY (PCF)IFICATIONS.C.S.co ^
_i
O
GC
CL
i — > — r i — r \ i — *
DATE EXCAVATED 09/22/03 TEST PIT NO. TP-1
GROUND ELEVATION 598i (MSL) LOGGED BY RTW
METHOD OF EXCAVATION Backhoe with 24" bucket
LOCATION See Test Pit Location Map
DESCRIPTION
FILL;
Brown, damp, loose to medium dense, clayey fine to coarse sandy GRAVEL;
numerous cobble- to boulder-size rock.
TOPSOIL:
Brown, damp to moist, very stiff, fine to coarse sandy CLAY.
Total Depth = 1.5 feet.
Groundwater not encountered.
Backfilled on 9/22/03.
SCALE = 1 in./1 ft.
FIGURE A-2_yy>/^0*yyioorB_
TEST PIT LOG
MAHR RESERVOIR
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO.
104899001
^
DATE
10/03
^| DEPTH (FEET)-2
.
6
~
.*^CD 1 SAMPLES1Q
(DC
CJ•ocCD
CO MOISTURE (%)13.1
19.5 DRY DENSITY (PCF)92.7
105.8 CLASSIFICATION 1U.S.C.S.SM
CL
DATE EXCAVATED 09/22/03 TEST PIT NO. TP-2
GROUND ELEVATION 597'± (MSL) LOGGED BY RTW
METHOD OF EXCAVATION Backhoe with 24" bucket
LOCATION See Test Pit Location Map
DESCRIPTION
FILL:
Light brown, damp, loose to medium dense, silty fine to coarse SAND with
gravel and cobble-size rock.
Brown, damp to moist, very stiff, silty, fine to coarse sandy CLAY; few gravel
and cobble-size rock.
Total Depth = 4.0 feet.
Groundwater not encountered.
Backfilled on 9/22/03.
SCALE = 1 in./1 ft.
TEST PIT LOG
MAHR RESERVOIR
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
xHQ-LLJ
Q
COUJ_lQ_
<
LU
01
DI-00o
U-oQ.
COz
LU
Q
CC
Q
Q
< COy 6*3CO -J
5
O
DATE EXCAVATED 09/22/03 TEST PIT NO.TP-3
GROUND ELEVATION 591'± (MSL) LOGGED BY
METHOD OF EXCAVATION Backhoe with 24" bucket
RTW
LOCATION See Test Pit Location Map
DESCRIPTION
12
SM FILL:
Light brown, damp, medium dense, silty fine to coarse SAND with gravel and
cobble-size rock; little clay.
SANTIAGO PEAK VOLCANICS:
Light brown to light reddish brown, damp, intensely weathered to decomposed
MET A VOLCANIC ROCK.
Total Depth = 4.0 feet.
Groundwater not encountered.
Backfilled on 9/22/03.
SCALE = 1 ln./1 ft.
FIGURE A-41= >= 9
-V= >= 1= *= 1—
TEST PIT LOG
MAHR RESERVOIR
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO. DATE
104899001 10/03
^\^__^S
\
i i || DEPTH (FEET) -,-2
-5
fi
d.1 SAMPLEScg
Q
Q
oO
T3Ca MOISTURE (%)DRY DENSITY (PCF) ^CLASSIFICATION "U.S.C.S.SM
1 1 1 ) 1 } 1
DATE EXCAVATED 09/22/03 TEST PIT NO. TP-4
GROUND ELEVATION 598'± (MSL) LOGGED BY RTW
METHOD OF EXCAVATION Backhoe with 24" bucket
LOCATION See Test Pit Location Map
DESCRIPTION
FILL:
Light yellowish brown, damp, medium dense, silly fine to coarse SAND; little
gravel and scattered cobble-size rock.
1 otal Depth — U.3 teet.
Groundwater not encountered.
Backfilled on 9/22/03.
SCALE = 1 in./1 ft.
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Classification
Soils were visually and texturally classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification
System (USCS) in general accordance with ASTM D 2488-00. Soil classifications are indicated
on the logs of the exploratory excavations in Appendix A.
Tn-Place Moisture and Density Tests
The moisture content and dry density of relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the ex-
ploratory excavations were evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D 2937-00. The test
results are presented on the logs of the exploratory excavations in Appendix A.
Gradation Analysis
Gradation analysis tests were performed on selected representative soil samples in general accor-
dance with ASTM D 422-63. The grain-size distribution curve is shown on Figures B-l through
B-3. The test results were utilized in evaluating the soil classifications in accordance with the
Unified Soil Classification System
Atterberg Limits
Tests were performed on selected representative fine-grained soil samples to evaluate the liquid
limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index in general accordance with ASTM D 4318-00. These test
results were utilized to evaluate the soil classification in accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System. The test results and classifications are shown on Figure B-4.
Consolidation Tests
Consolidation tests were performed on selected relatively undisturbed soil samples in general
accordance with ASTM D 2435-96. The samples were inundated during testing to represent ad-
verse field conditions. The percent of consolidation for each load cycle was recorded as a ratio of
the amount of vertical compression to the original height of the sample. The results of the tests
are summarized on Figures B-5 and B-6.
Expansion Index Tests
The expansion index of selected materials was evaluated in general accordance with U.B.C.
Standard No. 18-2. A specimen was molded under a specified compactive energy at approxi-
mately 50 percent saturation (plus or minus 1 percent). The prepared 1-inch thick by 4-inch
diameter specimen was loaded with a surcharge of 144 pounds per square foot and were inun-
10489900IMahr Res rev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
dated with tap water. Readings of volumetric swell were made for a period of 24 hours. The re-
sults of these tests are presented on Figure B-7.
Soil Corrosivitv Tests
Soil pH, and electrical resistivity tests were performed on a representative sample in general ac-
cordance with California Test (CT) 643. The chloride content of the selected sample was
evaluated in general accordance with CT 422. The sulfate content of the selected sample was
evaluated in general accordance with CT 417. The test results are presented on Figure B-8.
R-Value
The resistance value, or R-value, for basement soils was evaluated in general accordance with
ASTM D 2844-94. A sample was prepared and tested for exudation pressure and R-value. The
graphically evaluated R-value at an exudation pressure of 300 pounds per square inch is re-
ported. The test results are shown on Figure B-9.
104B99001Mahr Res rev doc
GRAVEL
Coarse 1 Fine
SAND
Coarse Medium Fine
FINES
Silt Clay
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS
3" 1-1/2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" 4 8 16 30
T
HYDROMETER
50 100 200
0.01
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
Symbol
•
Hole No.
Sample #1
Depth
(ft)
0.0-0.5
Liquid
Limit
-
Plastic
Limit
-
Plasticity
Index
-
DIO
„
Dao
~
DM
-
cu
--
cc
-
Passing
No. 200
(%)
29
U.S.C.S
GM
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422-98
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
Mahr Reservoir
Carlsbad, California
r PROJECT NO.
^ 104899001
DATE A
10/03 J
\ fFIGU
I B-1
1Q4B99001 GRADATION1 xla
GRAVEL
Coarse Fine
SAND
Coarse Medium Fine
FINES
Silt Clay
3" 1-1/2'
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS
1" 3/4" MT 3/8" 4 3 16 30 50 100 200
HYDROMETER
0.001 0.0001
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
Symbol
•
Hole No.
Sample #3
Depth
(ft)
0.0-0.5
Liquid
Limit
38
Plastic
Limit
28
Plasticity
Index
10
Dto
-
D30
--
Deo
-
cu
~
cc
-
Passing
No. 200
<%>
52
U.S.C.S
ML
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422-98
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
Mahr Reservoir
Carlsbad, California
r PROJECT NO.
\^ 104899001
DATE
10/03 ^)
104899001 ORADATION3.J
GRAVEL
Coarse Fine
SAND
Coarse Medium Fine
FINES
Silt Clay
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS
1-1/2' 1" 3/4" 1/2' 3/8" 4 8 16
HYDROMETER
10 0.0001
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
Symbol
•
Hole No.
TP-4
Depth
(ft)
0.0-0.5
Liquid
Limit
-
Plastic
Limit
-
Plasticity
Index
-
D,0
-
D30
-
Deo
-
cu
-
Cc
-
Passing
No. 200
(%)
14
U.S.C.S
SM
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422-98
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
Mahr Reservoir
Carlsbad, California
r PROJECT NO.
^ 104899001
DATE A
10/03 J
104899O01 eRADATION4®0-0.5.nls
SYMBOL
•
•
LOCATION
Sample #1
Sample #3
DEPTH
(FT)
0.0-0.5
0.0-0.5
LL {%)
31
38
PL {%}
23
28
PI (%}
8
10
U.S.C.S.
CLASSIFICATION
(Minus No. 40
Sieve Fraction]
CL
ML
U.S.C.S.
(Entire Sample)
CL
ML
NP - Indicates non-plastic
70
60
^ 50
XUJ
9 40
3°o
to5
Q.
20
10 Js
/
vL
/
9&S
/
CL
Arm
]/
y
/
ML&OL
/
/
/
CH
/
/r
MH
>
/
/
&OH
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
LIQUID LIMIT (LL), %
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 4318-00
1 C ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST RESULTS 1
Mahr Reservoir
Carlsbad, California
r PROJECT NO.
C 104899001
DATE ^\
10/03 J(FIGURED
B-4 J
104899001 ATTERBERG 1.xb
0
-4.0
-3.0
g -2.0
z
o -1.0CO
1 0.0
X
^ 1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
co 7.0
COUJi 8.0
o
£ 9.0
LJJ
o! 10.0^
3> 11.0LL
OH 12.0
UJ
8 13.0
UJ
| 14.0o
£ 15.0
Q
o 16.0CO
I 17-°
18.0
19.0
20.0
1
— — .. .._.. ---I— -
1
>* •B'^rii-Tfc * -I
*•
__
'***! " '
t
•r-fa-
' ~
,
-~~_
_^^.
» —
—
-v
— J
1 ' "^^ '
..__ |
- \
STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE
1.0
~P] -
...
— i —
Vj-
4^j
- -j —^
— •
---;
Se
Lc
Lo
R(
• —
~
i
—
;at
ac
ac
3b
- -t
. • — u_
~ T- •
— +--_ T
....
^
in
lin
in
DU
N
—
—
-
-
9
9
9
n(
-
—
cp
A
J
i
FOOT
10.0 100.0
- ... :- -. _fr--:_^-.-b
—
• • - -- - -._.... _t
- --- - -
-:-". --:-"V- .---T:~ "-1 +- -•--
~.^_. ...: i
ycle
riorto Inundation
fter Inundation
Cycle
— i —
- '! -
--'I—
*-±
\
-- H |
- -f — J^
__ .( j
-i--I-'
-sii— i 1 —
Borin
Deptt
Soil!
PERFO
- trt
— ^-^ —.L. Ts.
9 No.
i (ft-)
ype
RMED
—-•'--- :
__. _ ._.
-—
TP-2
2.0-3.0
SM+CL
N GENERAL A
. ..
,
CCORD
-—
-—
<\NCE
~-
WIT
—
—
HAS
—
>n
-
—
D 2
1
t.
35-96
f ^ r CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
11an Mahr Resevoir
Carlsbad, California ^
f PROJECT NO. DATE ^
L 104899001 10/03 J
f FIGURED
V B-5 J
10«B9«K)1 CON5OUDATION@2-3 O.ite
0
-4.0
-30
g -2.0
1 o.o
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
fin
5N-PERCENT OF SAMPLE THICKNESS^.OJM-^OCDOa^JCbbbbbbbbc$ 15.0
D
o 16.0CO•z.o 170o l'-u
18.0
19.0
20.0
STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
1 1.0 10.0 100.0
- • - i - - i i ^ |
_._r
=zi~- ;=.
.^^
=.^.
I
- ; i -
.
1
*-
^.jaayy---:-
— -— V
\~~~
—-
— — . .
.
„
—
--.,
j 1
•=^
u. .____.
1
..„.
'1
1 .
...
.
^—=1
__.-,_
(
i
—
— -
»
k
.
h—
,...]..
~~h •
-h
...
-
i ._; 1_.
-
fl
s_^r._
-
-^
i — i
j .
— :=F=
— i —
i —
--
^.
•*^
j—
T
— |JV
=F—
— J—*"
—
(—
__l
I—
_.
t
— I"
Seating C
Loading P
Loading A
Rebound
— -
—
__^s^_ —
— J^-^-J
——
:_---
-.
—
TN^ . —
s
"* •«> — —
s
x.
-
—
• .- _j
—
: : — IZH
1
— _
— • -—
— -
—
— _ —
ycle
r\or to Inundation
fter Inundation
Cycle
^
.. --j- -j- . j__| — -j_
—_._.— — j---
_ ...i — ..__
N:
:
-s-J
,
.
—
I 1
V
J
- —
.
~
— ._.
->--
--
.. _±
—
—
P — -
*j
1
Borin
Deptt
SoiH
PERFO
rr
—
—
_
-
..4..
—
-J
=
-%
gNo.
t (ft.)
"ype
RMED
... 1..._.. .. . i. - .... . . --
- - - • - ! -- ! |
_._.. ... — ....
;; ------- J;; -- i ; - ; - " -; f
.. . . -. ... . , ..;.. : . :. .
— ._ _.._ ,.._ , . !. .,_._.
- . . . . - , . . _ • i --
^- . - - -i - . ... - -
t i......... i .i. ,-..|
— . . .. __.r. ., ._,__
! — - ' -i --
1 ''
X 1 i 1_\. , .._._...; .... . . — i. .. .
u ^ ' ..}".. :,.." .".-. : :.. • "---:--_: -::.-.-
1 i iii
^__l „ : 1 1 — .— 1- --- --i-f
!_ _ s ___ 1 — .... . . .1. :
i i
i .III1 . II
1 ! i ,1 .__ ,. . .*. ._ _ __j.__l_
— _„.;_. ._. ., i ... — ,_j..
- - ^ - -;.- - : - ! -;--:--
, 1 1 — i — | — j — L_
— „„._ \— - .r ... :. ... , — i — u.
— _ 4 .....:.._... -..._-J-.J-
L ^i_-.Tr-.a_TT_-.-lz_TT.n
, ! .
= — . ":v//-L~T'-j--i:l±t
::l"::I:;:r:rz4±
1 .—\ — iiil
1 : ! 1 ! [ 1
TP-2
3.0-4.0
CL
N GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2435-96
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Mahr Resevoir
^ Carlsbad, California ^
f PROJECT NO. DATE A />IGURE^
L 104899001 10/03 J \. B-6 J
104899001 CON5OUDATION@3~4.0.xte
EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE
LOCATION
TP-2
SAMPLE
DEPTH
(FT)
3.0-4.0
INITIAL
MOISTURE
(%)
11.5
COMPACTED
DRY DENSITY
(PCF)
103.2
FINAL
MOISTURE
(%)
26.7
VOLUMETRIC
SWELL
(IN)
0.040
EXPANSION
INDEX
40
EXPANSION
POTENTIAL
Low
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH UBC STANDARD 18-2
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 4829-95
N r EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS^
Mahr Reservoir
Carlsbad, California
r PROJECT NO.
V 104899001
DATE ^
10/03 J
URE]
-7 J
FIGURE
B
1Q48&9001 EXPANTION(NDEX@3-4.0:ils
CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS
SAM RLE LOCATION
TP-2
SAMPLE DEPTH
(FT)
3.0-4.0
pH*
7.1
RESISTIVITY *
(ohm-cm)
560
WATER-SOLUBLE
SULFATE
CONTENT IN SOIL **
{%)
0.07
CHLORIDE
CONTENT ***
(ppm)
390
* PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 643
" PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 417
*** PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 422
CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS
Mahr Reservoir
Carlsbad, California
r PROJECT NO.
L 104899001
DATE A
10/03 J
104899001 CORROSIVlTY1.xls
R-VALUE TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE LOCATION
TP-1
SAMPLE DEPTH
(FT)
0.0-1.5
SOIL TYPE
CL
R-VALUE
5
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2844-94
R-VALUE TEST RESULTS
Mahr Reservoir
Carlsbad, California
r PROJECT NO.
V 104899001
DATE
10/03
"j)
FIGURE
B-9
A
J
104899001 RVALUE, "te
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
APPENDIX C
TYPICAL EARTHWORK GUIDELINES
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. GENERAL 1
2. OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES 2
3. SITE PREPARATION 3
4. REMOVALS AND EXCAVATIONS 4
5. COMPACTED FILL 5
6. OVERSIZED MATERIAL 7
7. SLOPES 8
8. TRENCH BACKFILL 11
9. DRAINAGE 13
10. SITE PROTECTION 14
11. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS 17
Figures
Figure A - Fill Slope Over Natural Ground or Cut
Figure B - Transition and Undercut Lot Details
Figure C - Canyon Subdrain Detail
Figure D - Oversized Rock Placement Detail
Figure E - Slope Drainage Detail
Figure F - Shear Key Detail
Figure G - Drain Detail
104899001 earthworks rev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24,2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
TYPICAL EARTHWORK GUIDELINES
1. GENERAL
These guidelines and the standard details attached hereto are presented as general procedures for
earthwork construction. They are to be utilized in conjunction with the project grading plans.
These guidelines are considered a part of the geotechnical report, but are superseded by
recommendations in the geotechnical report in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the
consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could super-
sede these specifications and/or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. It is the
responsibility of the contractor to read and understand these guidelines as well as the geotechni-
cal report and project grading plans.
1.1. The contractor shall not vary from these guidelines without prior recommendations
by the geotechnical consultant and the approval of the client or the client's author-
ized representative. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant and/or client
shall not be considered to preclude requirements for approval by the jurisdictional
agency prior to the execution of any changes.
1.2. The contractor shall perform the grading operations in accordance with these speci-
fications, and shall be responsible for the quality of the finished product
notwithstanding the fact that grading work will be observed and tested by the geo-
technical consultant.
1.3. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to notify the geotechnical consult-
ant and the jurisdictional agencies, as needed, prior to the start of work at the site
and at any time that grading resumes after interruption. Each step of the grading
operations shall be observed and documented by the geotechnical consultant and,
where necessary, reviewed by the appropriate jurisdictional agency prior to pro-
ceeding with subsequent work.
1.4. If, during the grading operations, geotechnical conditions are encountered which
were not anticipated or described in the geotechnical report, the geotechnical con-
sultant shall be notified immediately and additional recommendations, if
applicable, may be provided.
1.5. An as-graded report shall be prepared by the geotechnical consultant and signed by
a registered engineer and registered engineering geologist. The report documents
104899001 earthworks rev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
the geotechnical consultants' observations, and field and laboratory test results, and
provides conclusions regarding whether or not earthwork construction was per-
formed in accordance with the geotechnical recommendations and the grading
plans. Recommendations for foundation design, pavement design, subgrade treat-
ment, etc., may also be included in the as-graded report.
1.6. For the purpose of evaluating quantities of materials excavated during grading
and/or locating the limits of excavations, a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer
shall be retained.
1.7. Definitions of terms utilized in the remainder of these specifications have been
provided in Section 11.
2. OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES
The parties involved in the projects earthwork activities shall be responsible as outlined in the
following sections.
2.1. The client is ultimately responsible for the aspects of the project. The client or the
client's authorized representative has a responsibility to review the findings and
recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. The client shall authorize the con-
tractor and/or other consultants to perform work and/or provide services. During
grading the client or the client's authorized representative shall remain on site or
remain reasonably accessible to the concerned parties to make the decisions that
may be needed to maintain the flow of the project.
2.2. The contractor is responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory comple-
tion of grading and other associated operations, including, but not limited to,
earthwork in accordance with the project plans, specifications, and jurisdictional
agency requirements. During grading, the contractor or the contractor's authorized
representative shall remain on site. The contractor shall further remain accessible
during non-working hours times, including at night and during days off.
2.3. The geotechnical consultant shall provide observation and testing services and shall
make evaluations to advise the client on geotechnical matters. The geotechnical
consultant shall report findings and recommendations to the client or the client's
authorized representative.
2.4. Prior to proceeding with any grading operations, the geotechnical consultant shall
be notified two working days in advance to schedule the needed observation and
testing services.
104S9900] eaithworksrev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
2.4.1. Prior to any significant expansion or reduction in the grading operation, the
geotechnical consultant shall be provided with two working days notice to
make appropriate adjustments in scheduling of on-site personnel.
2.4.2. Between phases of grading operations, the geotechnical consultant shall be
provided with two working days notice in advance of commencement of ad-
ditional grading operations.
3. SITE PREPARATION
Site preparation shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the
following sections.
3.1. The client, prior to any site preparation or grading, shall arrange and attend a
pre-grading meeting between the grading contractor, the design engineer, the geo-
technical consultant, and representatives of appropriate governing authorities, as
well as any other involved parties. The parties shall be given two working days no-
tice.
3.2. Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the substantial removal of vegetation, brush,
grass, wood, stumps, trees, tree roots greater than 1/2-inch in diameter, and other
deleterious materials from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing shall ex-
tend to the outside of the proposed excavation and fill areas.
3.3. Demolition in the areas to be graded shall include removal of building structures, foun-
dations, reservoirs, utilities (including underground pipelines, septic tanks, leach fields,
seepage pits, cisterns, etc.), and other manmade surface and subsurface improvements,
and the backfilling of mining shafts, tunnels and surface depressions. Demolition of
utilities shall include capping or rerouting of pipelines at the project perimeter, and
abandonment of wells in accordance with the requirements of the governing authorities
and the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant at the time of demolition.
3.4. The debris generated during clearing, grubbing and/or demolition operations shall
be removed from areas to be graded and disposed of off site at a legal dump site.
Clearing, grubbing, and demolition operations shall be performed under the
observation of the geotechnical consultant.
3.5. The ground surface beneath proposed fill areas shall be stripped of loose or unsuit-
able soil. These soils may be used as compacted fill provided they are generally
free of organic or other deleterious materials and evaluated for use by the geotech-
nical consultant. The resulting surface shall be evaluated by the geotechnical
consultant prior to proceeding. The cleared, natural ground surface shall be scari-
104899001 eanhworks rev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
fied to a depth of approximately 8 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted in
accordance with the specifications presented in Section 5. of these guidelines.
3.6. Where fills are to be constructed on hillsides or slopes, topsoil, slope wash, collu-
vium, and other materials deemed unsuitable shall be removed. Where the exposed
slope is steeper than 5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit, or where recommended by
the geotechnical consultant, the slope of the original ground on which the fill is to
be placed shall be benched and a key as shown on Figure A of this document shall
be provided by the contractor in accordance with the specifications presented in
Section 7. of this document. The benches shall extend into the underlying bedrock
or, where bedrock is not present, into suitable compacted fill as evaluated by the
geotechnical consultant.
4. REMOVALS AND EXCAVATIONS
Removals and excavations shall be performed as recommended in the following sections.
4.1. Removals
4.1.1. Materials which are considered unsuitable shall be excavated under the ob-
servation of the geotechnical consultant in accordance with the
recommendations contained herein. Unsuitable materials include, but may not
be limited to, dry, loose, soft, wet, organic, compressible natural soils, frac-
tured, weathered, soft bedrock, and undocumented or otherwise deleterious
fill materials.
4.1.2. Materials deemed by the geotechnical consultant to be unsatisfactory due to
moisture conditions shall be excavated in accordance with the recommenda-
tions of the geotechnical consultant, watered or dried as needed, and mixed to
a generally uniform moisture content in accordance with the specifications
presented in Section 5. of this document.
4.2. Excavations
4.2.1. Temporary excavations no deeper than 5 feet in firm fill or natural materials
may be made with vertical side slopes. To satisfy CAL OSHA requirements,
any excavation deeper than 5 feet shall be shored or laid back at a 1:1 inclina-
tion or flatter, depending on material type, if construction workers are to enter
the excavation.
104899001 eanhworksrev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
5. COMPACTED FILL
Fill shall be constructed as specified below or by other methods recommended by the geotechni-
cal consultant. Unless otherwise specified, fill soils shall be compacted to 90 percent or greater
relative compaction, as evaluated in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557-00.
5.1. Prior to placement of compacted fill, the contractor shall request an evaluation of
the exposed ground surface by the geotechnical consultant. Unless otherwise rec-
ommended, the exposed ground surface shall then be scarified to a depth of
approximately 8 inches and watered or dried, as needed, to achieve a generally uni-
form moisture content at or near the optimum moisture content. The scarified
materials shall then be compacted to 90 percent or greater relative compaction. The
evaluation of compaction by the geotechnical consultant shall not be considered to
preclude any requirements for observation or approval by governing agencies. It is
the contractor's responsibility to notify the geotechnical consultant and the appro-
priate governing agency when project areas are ready for observation, and to
provide reasonable time for that review.
5.2. Excavated on-site materials which are in general compliance with the recommenda-
tions of the geotechnical consultant may be utilized as compacted fill provided they
are generally free of organic or other deleterious materials and do not contain rock
fragments greater than 6 inches in dimension. During grading, the contractor may
encounter soil types other than those analyzed during the preliminary geotechnical
study. The geotechnical consultant shall be consulted to evaluate the suitability of
any such soils for use as compacted fill.
5.3. Where imported materials are to be used on site, the geotechnical consultant shall
be notified three working days in advance of importation in order that it may sam-
ple and test the materials from the proposed borrow sites. No imported materials
shall be delivered for use on site without prior sampling, testing, and evaluation by
the geotechnical consultant.
5.4. Soils imported for on-site use shall preferably have very low to low expansion po-
tential (based on UBC Standard 18-2 test procedures). Lots on which expansive
soils may be exposed at grade shall be undercut 3 feet or more and capped with
very low to low expansion potential fill. Details of the undercutting are provided in
the Transition and Undercut Lot Details, Figure B of these guidelines. In the event
expansive soils are present near the ground surface, special design and construction
considerations shall be utilized in general accordance with the recommendations of
the geotechnical consultant.
5.5. Fill materials shall be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content prior
to placement. The optimum moisture content will vary with material type and other
104B9900I earthworks rev doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
factors. Moisture conditioning of fill soils shall be generally uniform in the soil
mass.
5.6. Prior to placement of additional compacted fill material following a delay in the
grading operations, the exposed surface of previously compacted fill shall be pre-
pared to receive fill. Preparation may include scarification, moisture conditioning,
and recompaction.
5.7. Compacted fill shall be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 8 inches in loose
thickness. Prior to compaction, each lift shall be watered or dried as needed to
achieve near optimum moisture condition, mixed, and then compacted by mechani-
cal methods, using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or
other appropriate compacting rollers, to the specified relative compaction. Succes-
sive lifts shall be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are
achieved.
5.8. Fill shall be tested in the field by the geotechnical consultant for evaluation of gen-
eral compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture
conditions. Field density testing shall conform to ASTM D 1556-00 (Sand Cone
method), D 2937-00 (Drive-Cylinder method), and/or D 2922-96 and D 3017-96
(Nuclear Gauge method). Generally, one test shall be provided for approximately
every 2 vertical feet of fill placed, or for approximately every 1000 cubic yards of
fill placed. In addition, on slope faces one or more tests shall be taken for approxi-
mately every 10,000 square feet of slope face and/or approximately every 10
vertical feet of slope height. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dic-
tate. Fill found to be out of conformance with the grading recommendations shall
be removed, moisture conditioned, and compacted or otherwise handled to accom-
plish general compliance with the grading recommendations.
5.9. The contractor shall assist the geotechnical consultant by excavating suitable test
pits for removal evaluation and/or for testing of compacted fill.
5.10. At the request of the geotechnical consultant, the contractor shall "shut down" or
restrict grading equipment from operating in the area being tested to provide ade-
quate testing time and safety for the field technician.
5.11. The geotechnical consultant shall maintain a map with the approximate locations of
field density tests. Unless the client provides for surveying of the test locations, the
locations shown by the geotechnical consultant will be estimated. The geotechnical
consultant shall not be held responsible for the accuracy of the horizontal or verti-
cal location or elevations.
104899001 earthworksrev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
5.12. Grading operations shall be performed under the observation of the geotechnical
consultant. Testing and evaluation by the geotechnical consultant does not preclude
the need for approval by or other requirements of the jurisdictional agencies.
5.13. Fill materials shall not be placed, spread or compacted during unfavorable weather
conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rains, the filling operation shall not
be resumed until tests indicate that moisture content and density of the fill meet the
project specifications. Regrading of the near-surface soil may be needed to achieve
the specified moisture content and density.
5.14. Upon completion of grading and termination of observation by the geotechnical
consultant, no further filling or excavating, including that planned for footings,
foundations, retaining walls or other features, shall be performed without the in-
volvement of the geotechnical consultant.
5.15. Fill placed in areas not previously viewed and evaluated by the geotechnical con-
sultant may have to be removed and recompacted at the contractor's expense. The
depth and extent of removal of the unobserved and undocumented fill will be de-
cided based upon review of the field conditions by the geotechnical consultant.
5.16. Off-site fill shall be treated in the same manner as recommended in these specifica-
tions for on-site fills. Off-site fill subdrains temporarily terminated (up gradient)
shall be surveyed for future locating and connection.
5.17. Prior to placement of a canyon fill, a subdrain shall be installed in bedrock or com-
pacted fill along the approximate alignment of the canyon bottom if recommended
by the geotechnical consultant. Details of subdrain placement and configuration
have been provided in the Canyon Subdrain Detail, Figure C, of these guidelines.
5.18. Transition (cut/fill) lots shall generally be undercut 3 feet or more below finished
grade to provide a generally uniform thickness of fill soil in the pad area. Where the
depth of fill on a transition lot greatly exceeds 3 feet, overexcavation may be in-
creased at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Details of the undercut for
transition lots are provided in the Transition and Undercut Lot Detail, Figure B, of
these guidelines.
6. OVERSIZED MATERIAL
Oversized material shall be placed in accordance with the following recommendations.
6.1. During the course of grading operations, rocks or similar irreducible materials
greater than 6 inches in dimension (oversized material) may be generated. These
104899001 earttiwoikslev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
materials shall not be placed within the compacted fill unless placed in general ac-
cordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant.
6.2. Where oversized rock (greater than 6 inches in dimension) or similar irreducible
material is generated during grading, it is recommended, where practical, to waste
such material off site, or on site in areas designated as "nonstructural rock disposal
areas." Rock designated for disposal areas shall be placed with sufficient sandy soil
to generally fill voids. The disposal area shall be capped with a 5-foot thickness of
fill which is generally free of oversized material.
6.3. Rocks 6 inches in dimension and smaller may be utilized within the compacted fill,
provided they are placed in such a manner that nesting of rock is not permitted. Fill
shall be placed and compacted over and around the rock. The amount of rock
greater than 3/4-inch in dimension shall generally not exceed 40 percent of the total
dry weight of the fill mass, unless the fill is specially designed and constructed as a
"rock fill."
6.4. Rocks or similar irreducible materials greater than 6 inches but less than 4 feet in
dimension generated during grading may be placed in windrows and capped with
finer materials in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical con-
sultant, the approval of the governing agencies, and the Oversized Rock Placement
Detail, Figure D, of these guidelines. Selected native or imported granular soil
(Sand Equivalent of 30 or higher) shall be placed and flooded over and around the
windrowed rock such that voids are filled. Windrows of oversized materials shall
be staggered so that successive windrows of oversized materials are not in the same
vertical plane. Rocks greater than 4 feet in dimension shall be broken down to 4
feet or smaller before placement, or they shall be disposed of off site.
7. SLOPES
The following sections provide recommendations for cut and fill slopes.
7.1. Cut Slopes
7.1.1. Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and accepted
by the building official, permanent cut slopes shall not be steeper than 2:1
(horizontal:vertical). The recommended height of a cut slope shall be evalu-
ated by the geotechnical consultant. Slopes in excess of 30 feet high shall be
provided with terrace drains (swales) in accordance with the recommenda-
tions presented in the Uniform Building Code, Section 3315 and the details
provided in Figure E of these guidelines.
104899001 eaithworksrev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
7.1.2. The geotechnical consultant shall observe cut slopes during excavation. The
geotechnical consultant shall be notified by the contractor prior to beginning
slope excavations.
7.1.3. If excavations for cut slopes expose loose, cohesionless, significantly frac-
tured, or otherwise unsuitable materials, overexcavation of the unsuitable
material and replacement with a compacted stabilization fill shall be evalu-
ated and may be recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Unless
otherwise specified by the geotechnical consultant, stabilization fill construc-
tion shall be in general accordance with the details provided on Figure F of
these guidelines.
7.1.4. If, during the course of grading, adverse or potentially adverse geotechnical
conditions are encountered in the slope which were not anticipated in the pre-
liminary evaluation report, the geotechnical consultant shall evaluate the
conditions and provide appropriate recommendations.
7.2. Fill Slopes
7.2.1. When placing fill on slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontahvertical), topsoil,
slope wash, colluvium, and other materials deemed unsuitable shall be re-
moved. Near-horizontal keys and near-vertical benches shall be excavated
into sound bedrock or firm fill material, in accordance with the recommenda-
tion of the geotechnical consultant. Keying and benching shall be
accomplished in general accordance with the details provided on Figure A of
these guidelines. Compacted fill shall not be placed in an area subsequent to
keying and benching until the area has been observed by the geotechnical
consultant. Where the natural gradient of a slope is less than 5:1, benching is
generally not recommended. However, fill shall not be placed on compressi-
ble or otherwise unsuitable materials left on the slope face.
7.2.2. Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more sepa-
rate fills, temporary slopes (false slopes) may be created. When placing fill
adjacent to a temporary slope, benching shall be conducted in the manner de-
scribed in Section 7.2.1. A 3-foot or higher near-vertical bench shall be
excavated into the documented fill prior to placement of additional fill.
7.2.3. Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and by the
building official, permanent fill slopes shall not be steeper than 2:1 (horizon-
tal: vertical). The height of a fill slope shall be evaluated by the geotechnical
consultant. Slopes in excess of 30 feet high shall be provided with terrace
drains (swales) and backdrains in accordance with the recommendations pre-
sented in the Uniform Building Code, Section 3315 and the details provided
in Figure E of these guidelines.
104899001 eaithworksrev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
7.2.4. Unless specifically recommended otherwise, compacted fill slopes shall be
overbuilt and cut back to grade, exposing firm compacted fill. The actual
amount of overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired re-
sults are not achieved, the existing slopes shall be overexcavated and
reconstructed in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical
consultant. The degree of overbuilding may be increased until the desired
compacted slope face condition is achieved. Care shall be taken by the con-
tractor to provide mechanical compaction as close to the outer edge of the
overbuilt slope surface as practical.
7.2.5. If access restrictions, property line location, or other constraints limit over-
building and cutting back of the slope face, an alternative method for
compaction of the slope face maybe attempted by conventional construction
procedures including backrolling at intervals of 4 feet or less in vertical slope
height, or as dictated by the capability of the available equipment, whichever
is less. Fill slopes shall be backrolled utilizing a conventional sheeps
foot-type roller. Care shall be taken to maintain the specified moisture condi-
tions and/or reestablish the same, as needed, prior to backrolling..
7.2.6. The placement, moisture conditioning and compaction of fill slope materials
shall be done in accordance with the recommendations presented in Sec-
tion 5. of these guidelines.
7.2.7. The contractor shall be ultimately responsible for placing and compacting the
soil out to the slope face to obtain a relative compaction of 90 percent or
greater as evaluated by ASTM D 1557-00 and a moisture content in accor-
dance with Section 5. The geotechnical consultant shall perform field
moisture and density tests at intervals of one test for approximately every
10,000 square feet of slope face and/or approximately every 10 feet of verti-
cal height of slope.
7.2.8. Backdrains shall be provided in fill slopes in accordance with the details pre-
sented on Figure A of these guidelines, or as recommended by the
geotechnical consultant.
7.2.9. Fill shall be compacted prior to placement of survey stakes. This is particu-
larly important on fill slopes. Slope stakes shall not be placed until the slope
is compacted and tested. If a slope face fill does not meet the recommenda-
tions presented in this specification, it shall be recognized that stakes placed
prior to completion of the recompaction effort will be removed and/or demol-
ished at such time as the compaction procedures resume.
7.3. Top-of-Slope Drainage
10489900] earth\voilisrev.doc 10
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
7.3.1. For pad areas above slopes, positive drainage shall be established away from
the top of slope. This may be accomplished utilizing a berm and pad gradient
of 2 percent or steeper at the top-of-slope areas. Site runoff shall not be per-
mitted to flow over the tops of slopes.
73.2. Gunite-lined brow ditches shall be placed at the top of cut slopes to redirect
surface runoff away from the slope face where drainage devices are not oth-
erwise provided.
7.4. Slope Maintenance
7.4.1. In order to enhance surficial slope stability, slope planting shall be accom-
plished at the completion of grading. Slope plants shall consist of deep-
rooting, variable root depth, drought-tolerant vegetation. Native vegetation is
generally desirable. Plants native to semiarid and arid areas may also be ap-
propriate. Large-leafed ice plant should not be used on slopes. A landscape
architect shall be consulted regarding the actual types of plants and planting
configuration to be used.
7.4.2. Irrigation pipes shall be anchored to slope faces and not placed in trenches
excavated into slope faces. Slope irrigation shall be maintained at a level just
sufficient to support plant growth. Property owners shall be made aware that
over watering of slopes is detrimental to slope stability. Slopes shall be moni-
tored regularly and broken sprinkler heads and/or pipes shall be repaired
immediately.
7.4.3. Periodic observation of landscaped slope areas shall be planned and appropri-
ate measures taken to enhance growth of landscape plants.
7.4.4. Graded swales at the top of slopes and terrace drains shall be installed and the
property owners notified that the drains shall be periodically checked so that
they may be kept clear. Damage to drainage improvements shall be repaired
immediately. To reduce siltation, terrace drains shall be constructed at a gra-
dient of 3 percent or steeper, in accordance with the recommendations of the
project civil engineer.
7.4.5. If slope failures occur, the geotechnical consultant shall be contacted immedi-
ately for field review of site conditions and development of recommendations
for evaluation and repair.
8. TRENCH BACKFILL
The following sections provide recommendations for backfilling of trenches.
104899001 earthworks rev.doc 11
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
8.1. Trench backfill shall consist of granular soils (bedding) extending from the trench
bottom to 1 or more feet above the pipe. On-site or imported fill which has been
evaluated by the geotechnical consultant may be used above the granular backfill.
The cover soils directly in contact with the pipe shall be classified as having a very
low expansion potential, in accordance with UBC Standard 18-2, and shall contain
no rocks or chunks of hard soil larger than 3/4-inch in diameter.
8.2. Trench backfill shall, unless otherwise recommended, be compacted by mechanical
means to 90 percent or greater relative compaction as evaluated in accordance with
ASTM D 1557-00. Backfill soils shall be placed in loose lifts 8-inches thick or
thinner, moisture conditioned, and compacted in accordance with the recommenda-
tions of Section 5. of these guidelines. The backfill shall be tested by the
geotechnical consultant at vertical intervals of approximately 2 feet of backfill
placed and at spacings along the trench of approximately 100 feet in the same lift.
8.3. Jetting of trench backfill materials is generally not a recommended method of den-
sification, unless the on-site soils are sufficiently free-draining and provisions have
been made for adequate dissipation of the water utilized in the jetting process.
8.4. If it is decided that jetting may be utilized, granular material with a sand equivalent
greater than 30 shall be used for backfilling in the areas to be jetted. Jetting shall
generally be considered for trenches 2 feet or narrower in width and 4 feet or shal-
lower in depth. Following jetting operations, trench backfill shall be mechanically
compacted to the specified compaction to finish grade.
8.5. Trench backfill which underlies the zone of influence of foundations shall be me-
chanically compacted to 90 percent or greater relative compaction, as evaluated in
accordance with ASTM D 1557-00. The zone of influence of the foundations is
generally defined as the roughly triangular area within the limits of a 1:1 projection
from the inner and outer edges of the foundation, projected down and out from both
edges.
8.6. Trench backfill within slab areas shall be compacted by mechanical means to a
relative compaction of 90 percent or greater relative compaction, as evaluated in
accordance with ASTM D 1557-00. For minor interior trenches, density testing
may be omitted or spot testing may be performed, as deemed appropriate by the
geotechnical consultant.
8.7. When compacting soil in close proximity to utilities, care shall be taken by the
grading contractor so that mechanical methods used to compact the soils do not
damage the utilities. If the utility contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use
compaction equipment in close proximity to a buried conduit, then the grading con-
tractor may elect to use light mechanical compaction equipment or, with the
approval of the geotechnical consultant, cover the conduit with clean granular ma-
104899001 earthworks rev doc 12
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
terial. These granular materials shall be jetted in place to the top of the conduit in
accordance with the recommendations of Section 8.4 prior to initiating mechanical
compaction procedures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be
appropriate, upon review by the geotechnical consultant and the utility contractor,
at the time of construction.
8.8. Clean granular backfill and/or bedding materials are not recommended for use in
slope areas unless provisions are made for a drainage system to mitigate the poten-
tial for buildup of seepage forces or piping of backfill materials.
8.9. The contractor shall exercise the specified safety precautions, in accordance with
OSHA Trench Safety Regulations, while conducting trenching operations. Such
precautions include shoring or laying back trench excavations at 1:1 or flatter, de-
pending on material type, for trenches in excess of 5 feet in depth. The geotechnical
consultant is not responsible for the safety of trench operations or stability of the
trenches.
9. DRAINAGE
The following sections provide recommendations pertaining to site drainage.
9.1. Canyon subdrain systems recommended by the geotechnical consultant shall be in-
stalled in accordance with the Canyon Subdrain Detail, Figure C, provided in these
guidelines. Canyon subdrains shall be installed to conform to the approximate
alignment and details shown on project plans. The actual subdrain location shall be
evaluated by the geotechnical consultant in the field during grading. Materials
specified in the attached Canyon Subdrain Detail shall not be changed or modified
unless so recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Subdrains shall be sur-
veyed by a licensed land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after
installation. Sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys prior to commence-
ment of filling over the subdrains.
9.2. Typical backdrains for stability, side hill, and shear key fills shall be installed in
accordance with the details provided on Figure A, Figure F, and Figure G of these
guidelines.
9.3. Roof, pad, and slope drainage shall be such that it is away from slopes and struc-
tures to suitable discharge areas by nonerodible devices (e.g., gutters, downspouts,
concrete swales, etc.).
9.4. Positive drainage adjacent to structures shall be established and maintained. Posi-
tive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from the
foundations of the structure at a gradient of 2 percent or steeper for a distance of 5
104899001 eatlhworksrcv.doc 13
Stanley A, Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
feet or more outside the building perimeter, further maintained by a graded swale
leading to an appropriate outlet, in accordance with the recommendations of the
project civil engineer and/or landscape architect.
9.5. Surface drainage on the site shall be provided so that water is not permitted to
pond. A gradient of 2 percent or steeper shall be maintained over the pad area and
drainage patterns shall be established to remove water from the site to an appropri-
ate outlet.
9.6. Care shall be taken by the contractor during finish grading to preserve any berms,
drainage terraces, interceptor swales or other drainage devices of a permanent na-
ture on or adjacent to the property. Drainage patterns established at the time of
finish grading shall be maintained for the life of the project. Property owners shall
be made very clearly aware that altering drainage patterns may be detrimental to
slope stability and foundation performance.
10. SITE PROTECTION
The site shall be protected as outlined in the following sections.
10.1. Protection of the site during the period of grading shall be the responsibility of the
contractor unless other provisions are made in writing and agreed upon among the
concerned parties. Completion of a portion of the project shall not be considered to
preclude that portion or adjacent areas from the need for site protection, until such
time as the project is finished as agreed upon by the geotechnical consultant, the
client, and the regulatory agency.
10.2. The contractor is responsible for the stability of temporary excavations. Recom-
mendations by the geotechnical consultant pertaining to temporary excavations are
made in consideration of stability of the finished project and, therefore, shall not be
considered to preclude the responsibilities of the contractor. Recommendations by
the geotechnical consultant shall also not be considered to preclude more restrictive
requirements by the applicable regulatory agencies.
10.3. Precautions shall be taken during the performance of site clearing, excavation, and
grading to protect the site from flooding, ponding, or inundation by surface runoff.
Temporary provisions shall be made during the rainy season so that surface runoff
is away from and off the working site. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps
shall be provided to remove water as needed during periods of rainfall.
10.4. During periods of rainfall, plastic sheeting shall be used as needed to reduce the po-
tential for unprotected slopes to become saturated. Where needed, the contractor
shall install check dams, desilting basins, riprap, sandbags or other appropriate de-
104899001 eanhworksrev.doc 14
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
vices or methods to reduce erosion and provide the recommended conditions during
inclement weather.
10.5. During periods of rainfall, the geotechnical consultant shall be kept informed by the
contractor of the nature of remedial or precautionary work being performed on site
(e.g., pumping, placement of sandbags or plastic sheeting, other labor, dozing, etc.).
10.6. Following periods of rainfall, the contractor shall contact the geotechnical consult-
ant and arrange a walk-over of the site in order to visually assess rain-related
damage. The geotechnical consultant may also recommend excavation and testing
in order to aid in the evaluation. At the request of the geotechnical consultant, the
contractor shall make excavations in order to aid in evaluation of the extent of
rain-related damage.
10.7. Rain- or irrigation-related damage shall be considered to include, but may not be
limited to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress, and other ad-
verse conditions noted by the geotechnical consultant. Soil adversely affected shall
be classified as "Unsuitable Material" and shall be subject to overexcavation and
replacement with compacted fill or to other remedial grading as recommended by
the geotechnical consultant.
10.8. Relatively level areas where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to depths
greater than 1 foot shall be overexcavated to competent materials as evaluated by
the geotechnical consultant. Where adverse conditions extend to less than 1 foot in
depth, saturated and/or eroded materials may be processed in-place. Overexcavated
or in-place processed materials shall be moisture conditioned and compacted in ac-
cordance with the recommendations provided in Section 5. If the desired results are
not achieved, the affected materials shall be overexcavated, moisture conditioned,
and compacted until the specifications are met.
10.9. Slope areas where saturated soil and/or erosion gullies exist to depths greater than
1 foot shall be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the
applicable specifications. Where adversely affected materials exist to depths of
1 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture condi-
tioning in-place and compaction in accordance with the appropriate specifications
may be attempted. If the desired results are not achieved, the affected materials
shall be overexcavated, moisture conditioned, and compacted until the specifica-
tions are met. As conditions dictate, other slope repair procedures may also be
recommended by the geotechnical consultant.
10.10. During construction, the contractor shall grade the site to provide positive drainage
away from structures and to keep water from ponding adjacent to structures. Water
shall not be allowed to damage adjacent properties. Positive drainage shall be main-
104899001 earthworksrcv.doc 15
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
tained by the contractor until permanent drainage and erosion reducing devices are
installed in accordance with project plans.
104899001 earthwoiksrev.doc 16
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
11. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
ALLUVIUM:
AS-GRADED (AS-BUILT):
BACKCUT:
BACKDRAIN:
BEDROCK:
BENCH:
BORROW (IMPORT):
BUTTRESS FILL:
CIVIL ENGINEER:
CLIENT:
COLLUVIUM:
Unconsolidated detrital deposits deposited by flowing water;
includes sediments deposited in river beds, canyons, flood
plains, lakes, fans at the foot of slopes, and in estuaries.
The site conditions upon completion of grading.
A temporary construction slope at the rear of earth-retaining
structures such as buttresses, shear keys, stabilization fills, or
retaining walls.
Generally a pipe~and-gravel or similar drainage system
placed behind earth-retaining structures such as buttresses,
stabilization fills, and retaining walls.
Relatively undisturbed in-place rock, either at the surface or
beneath surficial deposits of soil.
A relatively level step and near-vertical riser excavated into
sloping ground on which fill is to be placed.
Any fill material hauled to the project site from off-site areas.
A fill mass, the configuration of which is designed by engi-
neering calculations, to retain slopes containing adverse
geologic features. A buttress is generally specified by a key
width and depth and by a backcut angle. A buttress normally
contains a back drainage system.
The Registered Civil Engineer or consulting firm responsible
for preparation of the grading plans and surveying, and
evaluating as-graded topographic conditions.
The developer or a project-responsible authorized represen-
tative. The client has the responsibility of reviewing the
findings and recommendations made by the geotechnical
consultant and authorizing the contractor and/or other con-
sultants to perform work and/or provide services.
Generally loose deposits, usually found on the face or near
the base of slopes and brought there chiefly by gravity
through slow continuous downhill creep (see also Slope
Wash).
104899001 earthworks rev doc 17
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
COMPACTION:
CONTRACTOR:
DEBRIS:
ENGINEERED FILL:
ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST:
EROSION:
EXCAVATION:
EXISTING GRADE:
FILL:
FINISH GRADE:
GEOFABRIC:
The densification of a fill by mechanical means.
A person or company under contract or otherwise retained
by the client to perform demolition, grading, and other site
improvements.
The products of clearing, grubbing, and/or demolition, or
contaminated soil material unsuitable for reuse as compacted
fill, and/or any other material so designated by the geotech-
nical consultant.
A fill which the geotechnical consultant or the consultant's
representative has observed and/or tested during placement,
enabling the consultant to conclude that the fill has been
placed in substantial compliance with the recommendations
of the geotechnical consultant and the governing agency
requirements.
A geologist registered by the state licensing agency who ap-
plies geologic knowledge and principles to the exploration
and evaluation of naturally occurring rock and soil, as re-
lated to the design of civil works.
The wearing away of the ground surface as a result of the
movement of wind, water, and/or ice.
The mechanical removal of earth materials.
The ground surface configuration prior to grading; original
grade.
Any deposit of soil, rock, soil-rock blends, or other similar
materials placed by man.
The as-graded ground surface elevation that conforms to the
grading plan.
An engineering textile utilized in geotechnical applications
such as subgrade stabilization and filtering.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT: The geotechnical engineering and engineering geology con-
sulting firm retained to provide technical services for the
project. For the purpose of these specifications, observations
by the geotechnical consultant include observations by the
geotechnical engineer, engineering geologist and other per-
104B9900I earthworks vev-doc 18
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
sons employed by and responsible to the geotechnical con-
sultant.
104899001 eaithwoiksrev.doc 19
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER:
GRADING:
LANDSLIDE DEPOSITS:
OPTIMUM MOISTURE:
RELATIVE COMPACTION:
ROUGH GRADE:
SHEAR KEY:
SITE:
SLOPE:
SLOPE WASH:
SLOUGH:
SOIL:
A licensed civil engineer and geotechnical engineer, regis-
tered by the state licensing agency, who applies scientific
methods, engineering principles, and professional experience
to the acquisition, interpretation, and use of knowledge of
materials of the earth's crust to the resolution of engineering
problems. Geotechnical engineering encompasses many of
the engineering aspects of soil mechanics, rock mechanics,
geology, geophysics, hydrology, and related sciences.
Any operation consisting of excavation, filling, or combina-
tions thereof and associated operations.
Material, often porous and of low density, produced from
instability of natural or manmade slopes.
The moisture content that is considered optimum to compac-
tion operations.
The degree of compaction (expressed as a percentage) of a
material as compared to the dry density obtained from
ASTM test method D 1557-00.
The ground surface configuration at which time the surface
elevations approximately conform to the approved plan.
Similar to a subsurface buttress; however, it is generally con-
structed by excavating a slot within a natural slope in order
to stabilize the upper portion of the slope without encroach-
ing into the lower portion of the slope.
The particular parcel of land where grading is being per-
formed.
An inclined ground surface, the steepness of which is gener-
ally specified as a ratio of horizontal units to vertical units.
Soil and/or rock material that has been transported down a
slope by gravity assisted by the action of water not confined
to channels (see also Colluvium).
Loose, uncompacted fill material generated during grading
operations.
Naturally occurring deposits of sand, silt, clay, etc., or com-
binations thereof.
104899001 earthworksrev.doc 20
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24,2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
STABILIZATION FILL;
SUBDRAIN:
TAILINGS:
TERRACE:
TOPSOIL:
WINDROW:
A fill mass, the configuration of which is typically related to
slope height and is specified by the standards of practice for
enhancing the stability of locally adverse conditions. A stabi-
lization fill is normally specified by a key width and depth
and by a backcut angle. A stabilization fill may or may not
have a back drainage system specified.
Generally a pipe-and-gravel or similar drainage system
placed beneath a fill along the alignment of buried canyons
or former drainage channels.
Non-engineered fill which accumulates on or adjacent to
equipment haul roads.
A relatively level bench constructed on the face of a graded
slope surface for drainage and maintenance purposes.
The upper zone of soil or bedrock materials, which is usually
dark in color, loose, and contains organic materials.
A row of large rocks buried within engineered fill in accor-
dance with guidelines set forth by the geotechnical consultant.
104S99001 earthwoiksrev.doc 21
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24,2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
FILL SLOPE OVER NATURAL GROUND SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE
OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE
OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
8ACKDRAIN
AND T-CONNECTION
(SEE DRAIN DETAIL,
FIGURE G)
BEDROCK OR
COMPETENT MATERIAL,
AS EVALUATED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE
BENCH INCLINED
SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE
OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE
BEDROCK OR
COMPETENT MATERIAL,
AS EVALUATED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
BACKDRAIN
AND T-CONNECTION
(SEE DRAIN DETAIL,
FIGURE 0)
*MIN1M(JM KEY WIDTH DIMENSION, ACTUAL WIDTH SHOULO BE PROVIDED BY CEOTECHHiCAL CONSULTANT
BASED ON EVALUATION OF STE-SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS.
NOTES; CUT SLOPE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FILL
SLOPE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED ON FIGURE E
NOT TO SCALE
FILL SLOPE OVER NATURAL
GROUND OR CUT FIGURE A
104899001 earthworks rev doe
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24,2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
TRANSITION (CUT-FILL) LOT
QVEREXCAVATt AND RECQMPACT
BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, -/
AS EVALUATED BY THE —^
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT
BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL,
AS EVALUATED BY THE —
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
NOTE: DIMENSIONS PROVIDED IN THE DETAILS ABOVE ARE APPROXIMATE AND MAY BE MODIFIED IN THE FIELD
BY THE GEOTETHN1CAL CONSULTANT AS CONDITIONS DICTATE.
*aithrb.dwg NOT TO SCALE
104899001 earthworksrev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24,2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
COMPETENT MATERIAL
AS EVALUATED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
LOWEST BENCH INCLINED TOWARD DRAIN
DESIGN FINISH GRADE
SUBDRA1N PIPE
OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE
OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE .
CIVIL ENGINEER \
NON-PERFORATED PIPE
20' M1H.
COMPACTED FILL
CUTOFF WALL CONSTRUCTED
OF GROUT, CONCRETE. BENTONJTE,
OR OTHER SUITABLE MATERIAL AS
EVALUATED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
FILTER MATERIAL
eorthft.dwg NOT TO SCALE
FK3UREG
104899001 canhworksrev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
WINDROW SECTION
30 S.E. SOIL (FLOODED)
"V" OR RECTANGULAR TRENCH A MINIMUM
OF 2 FEEt DEEP AND 5 FEET WIDE
EXCAVATED INTO COMPACTED FILL
OR NATURAL GROUND
PAD SECTION
FINISH GRADE
ZONE A MATERIAL
STREET
5' M1N.
ZOKE A: COMPACTED TILL WITH ROCK FRAGMENTS NO GREATER THAN S INCHES IN DIAMETER.
ZONE 8: COMPACTED FILL WITH ROCK FRAGMENTS BETWEEN 6 AND 48 INCHES IN DIAMETER MAY BE PLACED IN STAGGERED
WINDROWS UP TO 100' LONG IN THIS ZONE AND SURROUNDED BY GRANULAR SO!L (30 SAND EQUIVALENT} DENSIFIED BY
FLOODING. ROCK FRAGMENTS LESS THAN 6 INCHES IN DIAMETER MAY BE PLACED IN COMPACTED FILL SOIL.
NOTE: SLOPE DRAINAGE SHOULD 9E PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED ON FIGURE E.
hid S|O,.,d* NOT TO SCALE
OVERSIZED ROCK
PLACEMENT DETAIL FX3URE D
104899001 eaithwotksiev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE
£
MID-SLOPE BACKDRAIN (SEE DRAIN DETAIL,
FIGURE G)
NON-PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE
TERRACE WIDTH*
REINFORCED CONCRETE -
PAVED TERRACE (SWALE)
BENCH INCLINED
SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE
BEDROCK OR COMPETENT
MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
WHEN POSSIBLE, LOWEST BACKDRAIN
SHOULD BE PLACED IN THE BASE OF KEY
(SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G)
MAXIMUM VERTICAL SLOPE HEIGHT. H fFEET)
LESS THAN 30
60
120
GREATER THAN 120
* TERRACE WIDTH AND LOCATION
NO TERRACE REQUIRED
ONE TERRACE AT LEAST 12 FEET W!OE AT
APPROXIMATELY MIDHEIGHT AND 6-FOOT WIDE
TERRACES CENTERED IN REMAINING SLOPES
DESIGNED BY CIVIL ENGINEER WITH
APPROVAL OF GOVERNING AUTHORITIES
NOTES; 1, MID-SLOPE BACKDRAINS SHOULD BE PLACED )H TILL SLOPES IN CONJUNCTION WITH EACH TERRACE.
2. TERRACES SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST A 5-PERCENT GRADIENT. AND RUN OFF SHOULD BE DIRECTED
TO AN APPROPRIATE SURFACE, DRAINAGE COLLECTOR.
3. TERRACES SHOULD BE CLEANED OF DEBRIS AND VEGETATION TO ALLOW UNRESTRICTED FLOW
OF WATER.
4. TERRACES SHOULD BE KEPT IN COOP REPAIR.
5. REFER TO UBC CHAPTER 70 FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.
NOT TO SCALE
RGURE E
104899001 eaithwoiks rev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
PROPOSED GRADED SURFACE
EXISTING GROUND SURFACE
-JESS —7
BEDROCK OR
,- COMPETENT MATERIAL,
f AS EVALUATED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
BENCH INCLINED
SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE
(SEE FIGURE A)
NON-PERFORATED
OUTLET PIPE
NOTES: t. THE DEPTH AND WIDTH OF KEY WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BASED ON ANALYSISOF SITE-SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS.
2. AN ADDITIONAL MID-SLOPE 6ACKDSAIN AND TERRACE DRAIN MAY BE RECOMMENDED FOR SLOPES OVER 30 FEET HIGH.SEE SLOPE DRAINAGE DETAIL, FIGURE E.
3. SLOPE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED OH FIGURE E.
•orthfl.dwg NOT TO SCALE
SHEAR KEY DETAIL
FIGURE F
104899001 earthworksrev.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
ALTERNATIVE A ALTERNATIVE B
FILTER MATERIAL
(9 CUBIC FEET PER LINEAR TOOT)
24" MIN.
(3 CUBIC FEET PER LINEAR FOOT)
* ALTERNATIVE A SUBDRAIN CONFIGURATION
MAY BE USED IN FILLS LESS THAN 25 FEET DEEP
MIN.r
PERFORATED PIPE,
4" MIN. SCHEDULE 40 PVC OR
EQUIVALENT INSTALLED WITH
PERFORATIONS DOWN
T-CONNECTION DETAIL
PERFORATED PIPE SLOPED AT 1K MIN.
TOWARD OUTLET PIPE
NON-PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE UP TO
100' ON CENTER HORIZONTALLY
FILTER MATERIAL
FILTER MATERIAL SHALL 8E CLASS II PERMEABLE
MATERIAL P.ER STATE OF CALIFORNIA STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS OR APPROVED ALTERNATE
GEOFABRIC DRAIN SYSTEM.
CLASS II GRADATIONS
SlEVt SIZE PERCENT PASSING
1"
W3/8
No. 4
No. B
No. 30
No. 50No. ZOO
100
90-10040-100
'25-40
18-335-150-7
0-3
END CAP
PIPE SCHEDULE
PERFORATED AND NON-PERFORATED PIPE SHALL BE
SCHEDULE 40 POLYVINYJ. CHLORIDE (PVC) OR
ACRYLONITRILE BUTAD!E«E STY.RENE (ABS) OR
EQUIVALENT, AND WILL HAVE A MINIMUM CRUSHING
STRENGTH OF 1000 PSt FOR DEPTHS OF FILL UP TO
50 FEET. FOR DEEPER FILLS, PERFORATED ANDNON-PERFORATED PIPE SHOULD BE DESIGNED WITH
ADEQUATE CRUSHING STRENGTH.
THE PIPE DIAMETER WILL GENERALLY M|ET THE FOLLOWING
CRITERIA, BUT MAY BE MODIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT AS CONDITIONS DICTATE.
THE LENGTH OF RUN IS MEASURED FROM THE HIGHEST
ELEVATION.
NOTE:
•artMg.Cwg
AS AN ALTERNATIVE THE FILTER MATERIAL MAYCONSIST OF UP TO f DIAMETER OPEN-GRADED
GRAVEL WRAPPED IN AN APPROVED GEOFABRIC WITH
6-INCH OR MORE OVERLAP.
UNETH QF RUN
0-500'
500-1500'
> 1500'
PIPE DIAMETER
4"
6"
NOT TO SCALE
DRAIN DETAIL
FH3UREQ
104899001 eanhworksrcv.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10,2004)
Project No, 104899001
104899001Mahr Res rcv.doc
Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir October 24, 2003
(Revised March 10, 2004)
Project No. 104899001
ATTACHMENTS
WATER AND SEDIMENT SAMPLE ANALYTICAL LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
104899001Mahr Res rev.doc
^ alscience
Environmental
Jv aboratories, Inc.
October 10, 2003
Rob Wheeler
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Subject: Calscience Work Order Number: 03-10-0153
Client Reference: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Dear Client:
Enclosed is an analytical report for the above-referenced project. The samples
included in this report were received 10/2/03 and analyzed accordance with the
attached chain-of-custody. The water samples were also analyzed for the cations Ca,
Mg, Na, and K at the verbal request of the client.
Unless otherwise noted, all analytical testing was accomplished in accordance with the
guidelines established in our Quality Assurance Program Manual, applicable standard
operating procedures, and other related documentation. The original report of any
subcontracted analysis is provided herein, and follows the standard Calscience data
package. The results in this analytical report are limited to the samples tested and any
reproduction thereof must be made in its entirety.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact the
undersigned.
Sincerely,
Hence Environmental Michael J. prisostomo
Laboratories, Inc. Quality Assurance Manager
Robert Stearns
Project Manager
| LI I I . 7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
b alscience ANALYTICAL REPORT
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore
5710Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Date Received:
Work Order No:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001 Page 1 of 1
Client Sample Number
Lab Sample
Number
Date
Collected Matrix
)153-2
Parameter Result RL
Color 35 5
Solids, Total Dissolved 880 1.0
Turbidity 7.3 0.10
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 26 0.50
Phosphorus, Total 6.8 1.0
Chemical Oxygen Demand 150 5
Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 530 5.0
P_F
1
1
1
1
10
1
1
Quat Units
Color unit
mg/L
NTU
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Date Prepared Date Analyzed
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
10/02/03
10/03/03
10/02/03
10/03/03
10/03/03
10/03/03
10/03/03
Method
EPA 110.2
EPA 160.1
EPA 180.1
EPA 351.3
EPA 365.3
EPA 410.4
SM 2320B
Parameter Result RL
Color 20 5
Solids, Total Dissolved 940 1.0
Turbidity 2.2 0.10
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 13 0.50
Phosphorus, Total 7.3 1.0
Chemical Oxygen Demand 15 5
Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 150 5.0
DF Qua!
1
1
1
1
10 D
1
1
Units Date Prepared Date Analyzed
Color unit
mg/L
NTU
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
10/02/03
10/03/03
10/02/03
10/03/03
10/03/03
10/03/03
10/03/03
Method
EPA 110.2
EPA 160.1
EPA 180.1
EPA 351.3
EPA 365.3
EPA 410.4
SM 2320B
Parameter Result RL
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ND 0.50
Phosphorus, Total ND 0.10
Chemical Oxygen Demand ND 5.0
DF
1
1
1
Qual Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Date Prepared Date Analyzed
N/A
N/A
N/A
10/03/03
10/03/03
10/03/03
Method
EPA 351.3
EPA 365.3
EPA 410.4
RL - Reporting Limit , DF - Dilution Factor , Qual - Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
^alscience
^jivironmental
^ aboratories, Inc. ANALYTICAL REPORT
Ninyo & Moore Date Sampled: 10/01/03
5710 Ruffin Road Date Received: 10/02/03
San Diego, CA 92123-0000 Date Analyzed: 10/02-03/03
Work Order No.: 03-10-0153
Attn: Rob Wheeler Method: EPA 351.3/300.0
RE: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001 Page 1 of 1
All concentrations are reported in mg/L (ppm).
Total Nitrogen Reporting
Sample Number Concentration Limit
WS-1 26 0.50
WS-2 13 0.50
Method Blank ND 0.50
ND denotes not detected at indicated reportable limit.
Each sample was received by CEL chilled, intact, and with chain-of-custody attached.
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
b alscience ANALYTICAL REPORT
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore
5710Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 301OA Total
EPA6010B
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001 Page 1 of 1
Client Sample Number
Lab Sample
Number
Date
Collected Matrix Date Date
Prepared Analyzed QC Batch ID
Parameter
Calcium
Magnesium
Result
112
42.0
RL
1
0.1
DF Qual Units
10 mg/L
1 mg/L
Parameter
Potassium
Sodium
RL DF Qual Units
0.5 1 mg/L
5 10 mg/L
Parameter
Calcium
Magnesium
Result RL DF Qual Units Parameter
86.0 0.1 1 mg/L Potassium
39.5 0.1 1 mg/L Sodium
Result
19.2
200
RL
0.5
5
DF Qual Units
1 mg/L
mg/L10
Parameter
Calcium
Magnesium
Result
ND
ND
RL
0.100
0.100
DF Qual Units
mg/L
mg/L
Parameter
Potassium
Sodium
Result RL DF Qua! Units
ND 0.500 1 mg/L
ND 0.500 1 mg/L
RL - Reporting Limit , DF - Dilution Factor , Qual - Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
^alscience ANALYTICAI REPORT
£fjivironmental
^ aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore Date Received:
5710 Ruffin Road Work Order No:
San Diego, CA 92123-0000 Preparation:
Method:
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Lab Sample Date Date
Client Sample Number Number Collected Matrix Prepared
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
EPA 300.0
Page 1 of 1
Date
Analyzed QC Batch ID
» t
Parameter Result RL DF Qual Units Parameter Result
Chloride 250 50 50 D mg/L Nitrate (as N) ND
Nitrite (as N) ND 0.10 1 mg/L Sulfate 230
RL DF Qual Units
0.10 1 mg/L
50 50 D mg/L
Parameter Result RL DF Qual Units Parameter Result
Chloride
Nitrite (as
250 100 100 D mg/L Nitrate (as N) 0.13
N) ND 0.10 1 mg/L Sulfate 340
RL DF Qual Units
0.10 1 mg/L
100 100 D mg/L
Parameter Result RL DF Qual Units Parameter Result
Chloride ND 1.0 1 mg/L Nitrate (as N) ND
Nitrite (as N) ND 0.10 1 mg/L Sulfate ND
RL DF Qual Units
0.10 1 mg/L
1.0 1 mg/L
RL - Reporting Limit , DF - Dilution Factor , Qual - Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
k alscience ANALYTICAL REPORT
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore
5710 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 3050B / EPA 7471A Total
EPA6010B/EPA7471A
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001 Page 1 of 1
Client Sample Number
Lab Sample
Number
Date Date Date
Collected Matrix Prepared Analyzed QC Batch ID
Comments): Mercury was analyzed on 10/3/03 5:14:10 PM with batch 031003L02
Parameter
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium (Total)
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Result
ND
0.756
48.2
ND
ND
8.13
5.87
66.0
8.16
RL
0.750
0.750
0.5
0.250
0.500
0.25
0.25
0.5
0.50
DF Qua! Units Parameter
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Result
ND
10.1
5.27
ND
0.726
ND
50.2
68.6
EL
0.0835
0.2
0.25
0.750
0.250
0.750
0.2
1.0
P_F
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Qual Units
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
Parameter
Mercury
Result
ND
Qual Units
mg/kg
Parameter
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium (Total)
Cobalt
Copper
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
RL
0.750
0.750
0.500
0.250
0.500
0.250
0.250
0.500
DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Qual Units
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
Parameter
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Lead
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Rk
0.250
0.250
0.750
0.250
0.750
0.250
1.00
0.500
DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Qual Units
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
RL - Reporting Limit , DF - Dilution Factor . Qual - Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
a_ alscience ANALYTICAL REPORT
^ aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore
5710RuffinRoad
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 3545
EPA 8081A/8082
Page 1 of 1
Client Sample Number
Lab Sample
Number
Date
Collected Matrix
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed QC Batch ID
Parameter
Alpha-BHC
Gamma-BHC
Beta-BHC
Heptachlor
Delta-BHC
Afdrin
Heptachlor Epoxide
Endosulfan I
Dietdrin
4,4'-DDE
Endrin
Endrin Aldehyde
4,4'-DDD
Endosulfan II
Surrogates:
Decachlorobiphenyl
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REC (%)
91
RL
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Control
Limits
50-130
DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Qual Units
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
Qual
Parameter
4,4'-DDT
Endosulfan Sulfate
Methoxychlor
Chlordane
Toxaphene
Aroclor-1016
Aroclor-1221
Aroclor-1232
Aroclor-1242
Aroclor-1248
Aroclor-1254
Aroclor-1260
Aroclor-1262
Endrin Ketone
Surrogates:
2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-Xylene
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REC (%)
72
BL
5.0
5.0
5.0
50
100
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
5.0
Control
50-130
DF Qual
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Qual
Units
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
Parameter
Alpha-BHC
Gamma-BHC
Beta-BHC
Heptachlor
Delta-BHC
Atdrin
Heptachlor Epoxide
Endosulfan I
Dieldrin
4,4'-DDE
Endrin
Endrin Aldehyde
4,4'-DDD
Endosulfan II
Surrogates:
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REC (%)
RL
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Control
Limits
DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Qua) Units
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
Qual
Parameter
4,4'-DDT
Endosulfan Sulfate
Methoxychlor
Chlordane
Toxaphene
Aroclor-1016
Aroclor-1221
Aroclor-1232
Aroclor-1242
Aroclor-1248
Aroclor-1254
Aroclor-1260
Aroclor-1262
Endrin Ketone
Surrogates:
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REC (%)
RL
5.0
5.0
5.0
50
100
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
5.0
Control
DF Qual
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Qual
Units
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
Decachlorobiphenyl 97 50-130 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-Xylene 85 50-130
RL - Reporting Limit , DF - Dilution Factor , Qual - Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
b alscience ANALYTICAL REPORT
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore
57 10 Ruff in Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr
Client Sample Number
>$sNSti~ vrT^
Parameter
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Aniline
Phenol
Bis(2-Chloroethyl) Ether
2-Chlorophenol
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
Benzyl Alcohol
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
2-Methylphenol
Bis(2-Chloroisopropyt) Ether
3/4-Methylphenol
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
Hexachloroethane
Nitrobenzene
Isophorone
2-Nitrophenol
2,4-DimethylphenoI
Benzole Acid
Bis(2-Chloroethoxy) Methane
2,4-Dichlorophenol
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Naphthalene
4-Chloroaniline
Hexachloro-1 ,3-Butadiene
4-Chloro-3-Methylphenol
2-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2-Chloronaphthalene
2-Nitroaniline
Dimethyl Phthalate
Acenaphthylene
3-Nitroaniline
Acenaphthene
Surrogates;
2-Fluorophenol
Nitrobenzene-d5
2 ,4, 6-Tri bromophenol
Reservoir
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REG (%}
65
91
47
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
104899001
5L
0.50
0.50
0.50
2.5
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
2.5
0.50
0.50
0.50
2.5
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.40
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.40
0.40
1.5
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.40
0.50
0.40
Control
Limits
31-142
28-139
24-152
Lab Sample
Number
DF Qual Units
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
Qual
Date
Collected Matrix
Parameter
2,4-Dinitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
Dibenzofuran
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
Diethyl Phthalate
4-Chlorophenyl-Phenyl Ether
Fluorene
4-Nitroaniline
Azobenzene
4,6-Dinitro-2-Methylphenol
N-Nitrosodlphenyfamine
2,4 ,6-Trichlorophenol
4-Bromophenyl-Phenyl Ether
Hexachlorobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Di-n-Butyl Phthalate
Fluoranthene
Benzidine
Pyrene
Pyridine
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
Benzo (a) Anthracene
Bis{2-Ethylhexyt) Phthalate
Chrysene
Di-n-Octyl Phthalate
Benzo (k) Fluoranthene
Benzo (b) Fluoranthene
Benzo (a) Pyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-c,d) Pyrene
Dibenz (a,h) Anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) Perylene
Surrogates:
Phenol-d6
2-Fluorobiphenyl
p-Terphenyl-d14
Date
Prepared
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REC (%)
80
80
94
Date
Analyzed
EL
2.5
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.40
0.50
0.50
2.5
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
2.5
0.40
0.40
0.50
0.40
10
0.40
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.40
0.50
0-40
0.50
0.40
0.40
0.35
0.40
0.40
0.40
Cpnfrol
30-136
33-144
23-160
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 3545 -1
EPA 8270C
Page 1 of 2 ""
QC Batch ID
DF Qual Units —
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg <—
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg —
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg _
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg ^
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg "~"
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg — '
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg *™
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg —
1 mg/kg
1 mg/kg
Qual _
RL - Reporting Limit , DF - Dilution Factor , Qual - Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
&. alscience ANALYTICAL REPORT
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Client Sample Number
Lab Sample
Number
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
Date
Collected Matrix
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 3545
EPA 8270C
Page 2 of 2
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed QC Batch ID
Parameter
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Aniline
Phenol
Bis(2-Chloroethyt) Ether
2-Chlorophenol
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
Benzyl Alcohol
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
2-Methylphenol
Bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) Ether
3/4-Methylphenol
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
Hexachloroethane
Nitrobenzene
Isophorone
2-Nitrophenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Benzoic Acid
Bis(2-Chloroethoxy) Methane
2,4-Dichlorophenol
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Naphthalene
4-Chloroaniline
Hexachloro-1 ,3-Butadiene
4-Chtoro-3-Methylphenol
2-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
2,4 ,5-Tri chlorophenol
2-Chloronaphthalene
2-Nitroaniline
Dimethyl Phthalate
Acenaphthylene
3-Nitroaniline
Acenaphthene
Surrogates:
2-Fluorophenol
Nitrobenzene-d5
2,4,6-Tribromophenol
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REG (%)
83
92
76
EL
0.25
0.25
0.25
1.3
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0,25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
1.3
0.25
0.25
0.25
1.3
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.20
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.20
0.20
0.75
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.20
0.25
0.20
Control,
Limits
31-142
28-139
24-152
DF
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Qual Units
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
rng/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
Qual
Parameter
2,4-Dinitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
Dibenzofuran
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
Diethyl Phthalate
4-Chlorophenyl-Phenyl Ether
Fluorene
4-Nitroaniline
Azobenzene
4 ,6-Dinitro-2-Methylpheno!
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
4-Bromophenyl-Phenyl Ether
Hexachlorobenzene
Penta chlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Di-n-Butyl Phthalate
Fluoranthene
Benzidine
Pyrene
Pyridine
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
Benzo (a) Anthracene
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Chrysene
Di-n-Octyl Phthalate
Benzo (k) Fluoranthene
Benzo (b) Fluoranthene
Benzo (a) Pyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-c,d) Pyrene
Dibenz (a, h) Anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) Perylene
Surrogates:
Phenol-d6
2-Fluorobiphenyl
p-Terphenyl-d14
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REG (%)
86
83
92
BL
1.3
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.20
0.25
0.25
1.3
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
1.3
0.20
0.20
0.25
0.20
5.0
0.20
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.20
0.25
0.20
0.25
0.20
0.20
0.18
0.20
0.20
0.20
Control
30-136
33-144
23-160
DF Qual
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Qual
Units
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
RL - Reporting Limit , DF - Dilution Factor , Qual - Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
E_ alscience ANALYTICAL REPORT
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore
5710RuffinRoad
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA5030B ~
EPA 8260B
104899001
Lab Sample
Client Sample Number Number
Date
Collected Matrix
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
Page 1of2 ~
QC Batch ID
^arameter
Acetone
Benzene
Bromobenzene
Bromochloromethane
Bromodichtoromethane
Bromoform
Bromomethane
2-Butanone
n-Butylbenzene
sec-Butylbenzene
tert-Butylbenzene
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Chloromethane
2-Chlorotoluene
4-Chlorotoluene
Dibromochloromethane
1 ,2-Dibromo-3-Chtoropropane
1 ,2-Dibromoethane
Dibromomethane
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
Dichlorodifluoromethane
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethene
c-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
t-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
Surrogates:
Dibromofluoromethane
1 ,4-Bromofluorobenzene
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REG (%)
105
99
SL
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
25
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
25
5.0
5.0
5.0
10
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Control
Limits
79-133
80-110
DF Qual
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Qual
Units
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
Parameter
1 ,3-Dichloropropane
2,2-DichIoropropane
1 ,1 -Dichloropropene
c-1 ,3-Dichloropropene
t-1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
Isopropylbenzene
p-lsopropyttoluene
Methylene Chloride
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
Naphthalene
n-Propylbenzene
Styrene
1 ,1 ,1 ,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1 ,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 ,1 ,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Trich lorofluoromethane
1 ,2,3-Trichloropropane
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
p/m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Methyl-t-Butyt Ether (MTBE)
Surrogates:
Toluene-dS
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REG (%)
97
BL
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
50
5.0
5.0
50
50
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
10
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Control
89-107
iffi
DF Qual Units —
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg —
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg —
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg _
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg __
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg _^
ug/kg """
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg "~
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg •"""
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
•M
Quai
drft
RL - Reporting Limit , DF - Dilution Factor , Qual - Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
^ alscience ANALYTICAL REPORT
i^jivironmental
^ aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Client Sample Number
Lab Sample
Number
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
Date
Collected Matrix
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 5030B
EPA 8260B
Page 2 of 2
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed QC Batch ID
Parameter
Acetone
Benzene
Bromobenzene
Bromochlorome thane
Bromodichloromethane
Bromoform
Bromomethane
2-Butanone
n-Butylbenzene
sec-Butylbenzene
tert-Butylbenzene
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Chloromethane
2-Chlorotoluene
4-Chlorotoluene
Dibromochloromethane
1 ,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
1 ,2-Dibromoe thane
Dibromomethane
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,3-DichIorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
Dichlorodifluoromethane
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethene
c-1,2-Dichloroethene
t-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
1 ,2-Dichioropropane
Surroaates:
Dibromofluoromethane
1 ,4-Bromofluorobenzene
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REG f%)
105
99
BL
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
25
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
25
5.0
5.0
5.0
10
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Control
Limits
79-133
80-110
DF
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Qual Units
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
Qual
Parameter
1 ,3-Dichloropropane
2,2-Dichloropropane
1 ,1 -Dichloropropene
c-1 ,3-Dichloropropene
t-1,3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
Isopropylbenzene
p-lsopropyitoluene
Methylene Chloride
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
Naphthalene
n-Propylbenzene
Styrene
1,1,1 ,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1 ,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1 ,1 ,1-Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Trichlorofluoromethane
1 ,2,3-Trichloropropane
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
p/m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Methyl-t-Butyl Ether (MTBE)
Surroaates:
Toluene-d8
Result
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
REG f%)
96
EL
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
50
5.0
5.0
50
50
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
10
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
50
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Control
89-107
DF Qual
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Qual
Units
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
RL - Reporting Limit , DF - Dilution Factor , Qual - Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
QUALITY ASSURANCE SUMMARY
CALSCIENCE WORK ORDER NO. 03-10-0153
^ a/sc/ence
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
EPA 110.2
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared:
Date
Analyzed:
Duplicate Batch
Number
Parameter
Color
Sample Cone
20
PUP Cone
20
RPD
0
RPDCL
0-25
Qualifiers
'l IJlAlUvkA 7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
a_ a/sc/ence
nvironmental
^ aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
EPA 160.1
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared:
Date
Analyzed:
Duplicate Batch
Number
Parameter
Solids, Total Dissolved
Sample Cone
500
PUP Cone
480
RPD
4
RPDCL
0-25
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
&_ alscience
nvironmental
m aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
5710 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
EPA 180.1
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument Date
Prepared:
Date
Analyzed:
Duplicate Batch
Number
Parameter
Turbidity
Sample Cone
11
PUP Cone
11
RED
2
RPDCL
0-25
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
alscience
mjivironmental
m* aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received;
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
EPA 351.3
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument Date
Prepared:
Date
Analyzed:
Duplicate Batch
Number
Parameter
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Sample Cone
26
RPD
2
RPDCL
0-25
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
Wa/sc/ence
Environmental
^, aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Spike/Spike Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
EPA 365.3
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
MS/MSD Batch
Number
Parameter
Phosphorus, Total
MS %REC MSP %REC
84 83
%REC CL RPD
70-130
RPDCL Qualifiers
0-25
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
a/sc/ence
nvirnnmental Quality Control - Laboratory Control Sample
aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore
5710RuffinRoad
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
EPA 365.3
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument Date Analyzed Lab File ID LCS Batch Number
Parameter
Phosphorus, Total
Cone Added
0.40
Cone Recovered
0.40
%Rec
100
%RecCL
80-120
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
^alscience
Environmental
^ aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
EPA 410.4
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared:
Date
Analyzed:
Duplicate Batch
Number
Parameter
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Sample Cone
360
PUP Cone
360
RPD
1
RPDCL
0-25
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
alscience
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVU/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
SM 2320B
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared:
Date
Analyzed:
Duplicate Batch
Number
Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3)
Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Hydroxide {as CaCO3)
Carbonate (as CaCO3)
Sample Corjc^
150
150
ND
ND
RPD
0
0
NA
NA
RPDCL
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
^ a/sc/'ence
Environmental
^ aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Spike/Spike Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 301OA Total
EPA 601 OB
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instalment
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
MS/MSD Batch
Number
Parameter MS %REC MSD %REC %REC CL RPD RPDCL Qualifiers
Calcium
Magnesium
Potassium
Sodium
4X
4X
114
127
4X
4X
116
136
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
4X
4X
2
3
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
^alscience
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - LCS/LCS Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
5710 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 301OA Total
EPA 601 OB
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
LCS/LCSD Batch
Number
Parameter
Calcium
Magnesium
Potassium
Sodium
LCS %REC
106
105
98
106
LCSD %REC
106
105
98
106
%REC CL
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
RPD
0
0
0
0
RPDCL
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: {714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
a. alscience
nvironmental
m aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Spike/Spike Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
EPA 300.0
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
MS/MSD Batch
Number
Parameter
Chloride
Nitrite (as N)
Nitrate (as N)
Sulfate
MS %REC
109
92
115
112
MSP %REC
105
92
116
110
%REC CL
50-150
50-150
50-150
50-150
RPD
3
0
0
1
RPDCL
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
a/science
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - LCS/LCS Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
5710 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
N/A
EPA 300.0
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
LCS/LCSD Batch
Number
Parameter
Chloride
Nitrite (as N)
Nitrate (as N)
Sulfate
LCS %REC
104
91
96
98
LCSD %REC
104
92
104
100
%REC CL
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
RPD
1
1
8
3
RPDCL
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
alscience
jivironmental
J^ aboratoriesy Inc.
Quality Control - Spike/Spike Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
5710 Ruff in Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir
Quality Control Sample ID
3arameter
Antimony
Arsenic
3arium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium (Total)
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
Date
Matrix Instrument Prepared
Date
Analyzed
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 3050B
EPA 601 OB
MS/MSD Batch
Number
MS %REC MSP %REC %REC CL
64 76
103 102
93 96
102 102
97 97
96 94
100 98
91 160
103 95
94 95
99 92
117 100
103 104
84 89
91 87
57 56
50-115
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
RPD
17
0
2
1
1
1
1
29
8
2
6
15
1
5
2
0
RPDCL
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
Qualifiers
3,4
3
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
a/sc/ence
nvironmental
br aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - LCS/LCS Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
5710Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir
Quality Control Sample ID
Parameter
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium (Total)
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
104899001
Matrix Instrument
LCS %REC
107
114
115
104
108
109
115
105
106
107
112
100
101
106
106
110
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
LCSD %REC %REC CL RPD
91 80-120 16
96
108
95
99
100
105
93
98
97
103
92
97
97
97
103
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
80-120
17
6
9
9
9
9
11
8
9
9
8
5
8
9
6
10/02/0;
03-10-015;
EPA 3050E
EPA6010E
LCS/LCSD Batch
Number
RPDCL
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
^^BP-jBT^%-|g
Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
=— alscience
nvironmental
m aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Spike/Spike Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 7471A Total
EPA 7471A
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
MS/MSD Batch
Number
Parameter
Mercury
MS %REC MSP %REC %REC CL
120 120 76-136
RPD RPDCL Qualifiers
0-16
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
^ alscience
nwronmenfa/ Quality Control - Laboratory Control Sample
m aboratories, Inc.
Ninyo & Moore
5710Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 7471A Total
EPA7471A
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument Date Analyzed Lab File ID LCS Batch Number
Parameter
Mercury
Cona Added
0.835
Cone Recovered
0.913
%Rec
109 82-124
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
^ a/sc/ence
nvironmental
m aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Spike/Spike Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899Q01
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 3545
EPA 8081A/8082
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
MS/MSD Batch
Number
.Parameter
Gamma-BHC
Heptachlor
Endosulfan I
Dieldrin
Endrin
4,4*-DDT
Aroclor-1260
MS %REC
108
100
104
106
104
102
105
MSP %REC
122
114
117
120
120
117
102
%REC CL
50-135
50-135
50-135
50-135
50-135
50-135
50-135
RPD
12
14
12
12
14
13
3
RPDCL
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
alscience
mjivironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - LCS/LCS Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 3545
EPA8081A/8082
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
LCS/LCSD Batch
Number
Parameter
Gamma-BHC
Heptachlor
Endosulfan I
Dieidrin
Endrin
4,4'-DDT
Arodor-1260
LCS %REC
117
114
113
116
111
113
115
LCSD %REC
107
105
108
106
100
107
102
%REC CL
50-135
50-135
50-135
50-135
50-135
50-135
50-135
RPD
9
8
4
9
11
5
12
RPDCL
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
0-25
Qualifiers
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
^alscience
£ nvironmental
j^ aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Spike/Spike Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 3545
EPA 8270C
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Quality Control Sample ID
Parameter
3henol
2-Chlorophenol
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
4-Chloro-3-Methylphenol
Acenaphthene
4-Nitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
Pentachlorophenol
3yrene
Matrix
MS %REC
88
85
80
96
73
93
78
92
87
58
67
Instalment
MSP %REC
85
82
79
93
75
89
79
88
83
55
74
Date
Prepared
%REC CL
48-114
45-111
45-111
44-116
44-122
52-124
49-121
40-130
43-145
19-127
18-168
m
REB
4
4
1
4
3
4
2
4
4
4
10
Date MS/MSD Batch
Analyzed Number
RPDCL Qualifiers
0-18
0-18
0-19
0-18
0-18
0-17
0-20
0-20
0-19
0-48
0-22
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
£_ alscience
nvironmental
m aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - LCS/LCS Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
57lORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir 104899001
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 3545
EPA 8270C
Quality Control Sample ID Matrix Instrument
Date
Prepared
Date
Analyzed
LCS/LCSD Batch
Number
Parameter
Phenol
2-Chlorophenol
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
4-Chloro-3-Methylphenol
Acenaphthene
4-Nitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
Pentachlorophenol
Pyrene
LCS %REC
93
90
91
102
90
99
98
107
99
63
95
LCSD %REC
100
97
98
111
97
106
105
110
105
66
101
%REC CL
58-112
59-107
60-108
52-112
56-116
58-124
55-121
44-134
50-146
24-138
45-129
BED
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
3
6
4
6
RPDCL
0-15
0-17
0-16
0-17
0-16
0-15
0-15
0-19
0-17
0-21
0-15
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
^alscience
Environmental
^ aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - Spike/Spike Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
571 ORuffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir
Quality Control Sample ID
104899001
Matrix
Date Received:
Work Order No:
Preparation:
Method:
Date
Instrument Prepared
Date
Analyzed
10/02/03
03-10-0153
EPA 5030B
EPA 8260B
MS/MSD Batch
Number
3arameter
Jenzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,1-Dichloroethene
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
Methyl-t-Butyl Ether (MTBE)
Tert-Butyl Alcohol (TBA)
Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE)
Ethyl-t-Butyl Ether (ETBE)
Tert-Amyl-Methyl Ether (TAME)
Ethanol
MS %REC
91
96
93
90
89
92
94
94
95
95
94
93
88
96
MSD %REC %REC CL
92
96
94
90
90
92
93
96
95
92
94
93
88
101
77-119
61-139
75-117
69-117
68-140
76-118
49-145
62-134
68-122
59-131
53-137
59-131
70-124
52-130
RPD
1
0
2
0
1
0
2
2
0
3
1
0
0
5
RPDCL
0-17
0-21
0-17
0-21
0-18
0-18
0-21
0-20
0-27
0-32
0-27
0-25
0-18
0-29
Qualifiejg
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 * FAX: (714) 894-7501
*_ alscience
nvironmental
aboratories, Inc.
Quality Control - LCS/LCS Duplicate
Ninyo & Moore
5710 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-0000
Project: CGVL/Mahr Reservoir
Quality Control Sample ID
Date Received:
Work Order No:
104899001
Preparation:
Method:
Date Date
Matrix Instrument Prepared Analyzed
Parameter
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 1 -Dichloroethene
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
Methyl-t-Butyl Ether (MTBE)
Tert-Butyl Alcohol (TBA)
Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE)
Ethyl-t-Butyl Ether (ETBE)
Tert-Amyl-Methyl Ether (TAME)
Ethanoi
LCS %REC
96
98
95
96
92
97
97
97
101
100
98
97
94
106
LCSD %REC
93
98
96
93
92
94
94
98
101
102
99
97
93
114
10/02/OC
03-10-015C
EPA 5030E
EPA 8260E
LCS/LCSD Batch
Number
%REC CL RPD RPDCL Qualifiers
83-119
69-141
86-116
85-115
82-130
81-117
72-120
77-125
75-123
72-120
69-129
71-131
80-122
58-124
3 0-11
0 0-13
1 0-8
3 0-10
1 0-15
3 0-10
3 0-10
1 0-12
0 0-11
2 0-14
0 0-16
0 0-27
2 0-13
8 0-24
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501
i.j/sc/ence GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND QUALIFIERS
Environmental
^ aboratories, Inc.
Work Order Number: 03-10-0153
Qualifier Definition
3 Spike or Spike Duplicate compound was out of control due to matrix
interference. The associated LCS and/or LCSD was in control and,
therefore, the sample data was reported without further clarification.
4 The MS/MSD RPD was out of control due to matrix interference. The
LCS/LCSD RPD was in control and, therefore, the sample data was
reported without further clarification.
D The sample data was reported from a diluted analysis.
ND Not detected at indicated reporting limit.
Q Spike recovery and RPD control limits do not apply resulting from the
sample concentration exceeding the spike concentration by a factor of
four or greater.
7440 Lincoln Way, Garden Grove, CA 92841 -1432 • TEL: (714) 895-5494 • FAX: (714) 894-7501