Attachment 04_R800 and MFA7 Geotechnical Evaluation.pdf

GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION

FOR

CONTAINER SNIPER TOWERS

R800 AND MFA7

MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP PENDLETON

SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

PREPARED FOR

SAALEX SOLUTIONS

1231 CARBIDE DRIVE

CORONA, CALIFORNIA

PREPARED BY

GEOTEK, INC.

1384 POINSETTIA AVENUE

VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92081

PROJECT NO. 3711-SD SEPTEMBER 2, 2021

September 2, 2021 Project No. 3711-SD

Saalex Solutions

1231 Carbide Drive

Corona, California 92881

Attention: Ms. Brandi Parra

Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation

Container Sniper Towers

R800 - 33°26’49.40”N, -117°25’34.30W

MFA7 - 33°26’38.60”N, -117°27’21.40W

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton

San Diego County, California

Dear Ms. Parra, GeoTek, Inc. (GeoTek) is pleased to provide results of a limited geotechnical evaluation for the subject project. This report presents the results of GeoTek’s evaluation and provides preliminary geotechnical recommendations for design, earthwork, and construction. Based upon review, site construction appears feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint, provided that the recommendations included herein are incorporated into the design and construction phases of site improvements.

The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to call GeoTek.

Respectfully submitted, GeoTek, Inc.

Christopher D. Livesey Timothy E. Metcalfe

CEG 2733 CEG 1142

Associate Vice President Principal Geologist

Bruce A. Hick

GE 2284

Geotechnical Engineer

Saalex Solutions Project No. 3711-SD Geotechnical Evaluation September 2, 2021 Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES

2. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION

2.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

3. FIELD STUDY AND LABORATORY TESTING

3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION

3.2 LABORATORY TESTING

4. GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS

4.1 REGIONAL SETTING

4.1.1 EARTH MATERIALS

4.1.1 Cretaceous Trabuco Formation (Ktr)

4.1.2 Cretaceous Santiago Peak Volcanics (Kvsp)

4.2 SURFACE AND GROUND WATER

4.2.1 Surface Water

4.2.2 Groundwater

4.3 EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS

4.3.1 Surface Fault Rupture

4.3.2 Liquefaction/Seismic Settlement

4.3.3 Other Seismic Hazards

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 GENERAL

5.1.1 Site Clearing and Preparation

5.1.2 Removals

5.1.3 Engineered Fill

5.1.4 Excavation Characteristics

5.1.5 Shrinkage and Subsidence

5.1.6 Trench Excavations and Backfill

5.2 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

5.2.1 Mat Foundation

5.2.2 Foundation Set Backs

5.2.3 Seismic Design Parameters

5.2.4 Soil Sulfate Content

5.3 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS

6. INTENT

7. LIMITATIONS

8. SELECTED REFERENCES

ENCLOSURES

Figure 1 – Site Location Map

Figure 2 – Geotechnical Map

Appendix A – Exploratory Logs

Appendix B – Results of Laboratory Testing

Appendix C – General Earthwork Grading Guidelines

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 1

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES

The purpose of this study was to assess the geotechnical conditions of the project sites with regards to geotechnical engineering design and construction recommendations for the proposed improvements. Services provided for this study included the following:

Research and review of readily available geologic data and general information pertinent to the site.

Excavation of two (2) exploratory borings per location (for a total of four (4) borings) and collection of relatively undisturbed and bulk samples for subsequent laboratory testing.

Laboratory testing of soil samples collected during the field exploration.

Review of site seismicity.

Review and analysis of geologic and geotechnical engineering data.

Compilation of this geotechnical report which presents GeoTek’s findings of pertinent site geotechnical conditions and geotechnical recommendations for site development.

2. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION

This report addresses two site locations R800 and MFA7. The subject sites are located within

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton at R800: 33°26’49.40”N, -117°25’34.30W and MFA7:

33°26’38.60”N, -117°27’21.40W, in San Diego County, California This report is limited to the areas of proposed improvements as discussed herein and depicted on the boundaries presented on the Geotechnical Map, Figure 2.

Site R800 is accessible via a dirt trail that can be accessed off Case Springs Road. The proposed structure is to reside at the relatively flat top of a moderate hill, adjacent a linear bedrock outcropping. Although the site is relatively flat, the precise location may result in a location more steep. There are no existing improvements at this site.

Site MFA7 is likewise accessible via a dirt trail which branches off from San Juan Road. The proposed structure would be constructed at the terminus of a ridge in “badland” topography

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 2 with steep slopes flanking the west, south, and east. The site gradient is approximately 8:1

(horizonatl:vertical), the precise location may result in a location more steep. The site no longer contains any improvements, with the exception of a demolished foundation of a previous light structure.

2.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed site improvements for both sites R800 and MFA7 would consist of three stacked shipping containers, each 40 feet long by 8 feet wide by 8.5 feet deep. GeoTek understands that the stacked containers will be supported on a concrete slab foundation.

3. FIELD STUDY AND LABORATORY TESTING

3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION

The field work for this study was conducted on July 7th, 2021 and consisted of a site reconnaissance, excavation of two (2) exploratory hollow stem auger borings at each location

(for a total of four borings), and the collection of bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples for subsequent laboratory testing. Geotechnical borings were advanced with a conventional truck-mounted, CME-75, drill rig. A geologist from GeoTek visually logged the excavations as shown on the Exploration Logs, Appendix A. Approximate locations of test excavations are presented on the Geotechnical Map, Figure 2.

3.2 LABORATORY TESTING

Laboratory tests were performed on soil samples collected during the field exploration. The purpose of the laboratory testing was to evaluate their physical and chemical soil properties for use in engineering design and analysis. Results of the laboratory testing program, along with a brief description and relevant information regarding testing procedures, are included in

Appendix B.

4. GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS

4.1 REGIONAL SETTING

The subject site is located in the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province. The Peninsular Ranges province is one of the largest geomorphic units in western North America. Basically, it extends from the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province to the top of Baja California. This province

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 3 varies in width from about 30 to 100 miles. It is bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the south by the Gulf of California and on the east by the Colorado Desert Province.

The Peninsular Ranges are essentially a series of northwest-southeast oriented fault blocks.

Several major fault zones are found in this province. The Elsinore Fault zone and the Jacinto Fault zone borders the northeasterly margin of the province. The Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon

Fault zone meanders the southwest margin of the province. No faults are shown in the immediate site vicinity on the map reviewed for the area.

4.1.1 EARTH MATERIALS

A brief description of the earth materials encountered during the subsurface exploration is presented in the following sections. Based on published geologic maps, R800 is mapped as

Cretaceous-aged Santiago Peak Volcanics, however based on our site specific evaluation the upper ten feet consists of Cretaceous-aged Trabuco Formation. The MFA7 site is underlain solely by conglomeratic bedrock of the Cretaceous-aged Trabuco formation.

4.1.1 Cretaceous Trabuco Formation (Ktr)

Cretaceous age Trabuco formation was encountered in all four (4) borings and was the only geologic formation found within the scope of exploration at the MFA7 site. The Trabuco

Formation as encountered at the MFA7 site consists of weathered conglomerate, with a grey brown silty sand matrix, with coarse gravel to small boulder-sized clasts derived from nearby granitic and metamorphic sources. The formation was found to be dense to very dense, with many minimally weathered cobble/boulder sized fragments.

In borings B-1 and B-2 (R800 site), sandstone of the Trabuco Formation comprised the upper ten feet of earth materials below the ground surface. As encountered in the borings, the formation consists of a weathered fine to medium sandstone, yellow-brown with orange/red mottling. Within these borings, the sandstone was dense to very dense, poorly graded, and jointed in some areas.

4.1.2 Cretaceous Santiago Peak Volcanics (Kvsp)

The Cretaceous age Santiago Peak Volcanics were encountered at depth in borings B-1 and B-2

R800 site) beginning at approximately 10 feet below the ground surface. The formation as encountered in the borings consisted of metamorphic volcanic rock, pink-brown, dry, and very dense. The formation was notably jointed and fractured, and excavates as a pink-white sandy gravel.

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 4

4.2 SURFACE AND GROUND WATER

4.2.1 Surface Water

Surface water was not observed during the site visit. If encountered, surface water at both sites is likely the result of precipitation or possibly some minor surface run-off from immediately surrounding grades. Provisions for surface drainage should be addressed by the project design civil engineer.

4.2.2 Groundwater

Groundwater or perched water was not encountered in any of the explorations and is not anticipated to be a factor in site development. Localized perched groundwater could be present but is also not anticipated to be a significant factor in site development.

4.3 EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS

4.3.1 Surface Fault Rupture

The geologic structure of the entire southern California area is dominated mainly by northwest-trending faults associated with the San Andreas system. The site is in a seismically active region.

No active or potentially active fault is known to exist at this site nor is the site situated within an

“Alquist-Priolo” Earthquake Fault Zone or a Special Studies Zone (Bryant and Hart, 2007). No faults are identified on the geologic maps reviewed for the immediate proximity of the study area.

4.3.2 Liquefaction/Seismic Settlement

Liquefaction describes a phenomenon in which cyclic stresses, produced by earthquake-induced ground motion, create excess pore pressures in relatively cohesionless soils. These soils may thereby acquire a high degree of mobility, which can lead to lateral movement, sliding, consolidation and settlement of loose sediments, sand boils and other damaging deformations.

This phenomenon occurs only below the water table, but, after liquefaction has developed, the effects can propagate upward into overlying non-saturated soil as excess pore water dissipates.

The factors known to influence liquefaction potential include soil type and grain size, relative density, groundwater level, confining pressures, and both intensity and duration of ground shaking. In general, materials that are susceptible to liquefaction are loose, saturated granular soils having low fines content under low confining pressures.

The liquefaction potential and seismic settlement potential on this site are considered nil due to the dense nature of underlying bedrock and absence of a shallow groundwater table underlying the site.

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 5

4.3.3 Other Seismic Hazards

Evidence of ancient landslides or slope instabilities at this site was not observed during this study or indicated on regional geologic maps. Thus, the potential for landslides is considered negligible.

The potential for secondary seismic hazards such as seiche and tsunami is considered to be remote due to site elevation and distance from an open body of water, as confirmed by the ASCE

Tsunami Hazard Tool.

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 GENERAL

Based on experience with these types of projects and geologic settings, GeoTek has anticipated a mat slab foundation will be preferred by the design, owner, and construction team.

Recommendations for remedial grading are presented in Section 5.1.2.

The proposed improvements appear feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint provided that the project design and construction comply with ordinances of the 2018 International Building Code

(IBC) and recommendations contained in this report. The Grading Guidelines included in

Appendix C outline general procedures and do not anticipate all site-specific situations. In the event of conflict, the recommendations presented in the text of this report should supersede those contained in Appendix C.

5.1.1 Site Clearing and Preparation

Site preparation should commence with removal of vegetation and surface debris, if encountered.

These materials should be properly disposed of off-site.

5.1.2 Removals

Given the dense nature of the shallow native bedrock at both sites and the expected mat slab foundation design, GeoTek anticipates removals to be limited to the upper two feet of loose earth materials, as encountered in the borings.

The mat slab concrete foundations should be placed directly on competent bedrock or properly compacted fill. Competent bedrock is considered to be sedimentary bedrock of the Trabuco

Formation, non-porous, and non-yielding to a soil probe. Any fill placed should be tested to verify relative compaction. The gradient of the removal bottom should not be steeper than a one vertical foot over a distance of 10 horizontal feet (i.e., 1 in 10 overall). It is anticipated that minor fluctuations of the ground surface may result due to grading and foundation excavation, and may

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 6 include surface voids from gravel, cobbles, and boulders that might slough from grading/excavation. Provided such voids are localized and are filled with concrete or compacted fill during construction, they would not be considered adverse when establishing the 1 in 10 gradient of the removal bottom.

The bedrock exposed in the bottom of the excavations should be observed by a representative of the geotechnical engineer to confirm that the exposed material is suitable for foundation support. Any unsuitable bearing material identified by the geotechnical engineer should be removed and replaced as engineered fill or the excavation deepened until suitable bedrock is encountered.

5.1.3 Engineered Fill

On-site materials are generally considered suitable for reuse as engineered fill provided, they are free from vegetation, roots, and other deleterious material. Rock fragments greater than six (6) inches in maximum dimension should not be incorporated into engineered fill without the following consideration. If excavations for foundations and trenches can accommodate large rock during construction, rock larger than 6-inches on longest dimension can be incorporated into fills, however, there should be a suitable amount of sand-size particles in the fill so proper compaction can be verified by ASTM D 6938 Nuclear Densometer test procedures. Placing rock larger than 6 inches may also result in additional concrete due to widening of the trench from dislodged cobbles.

Engineered fill materials should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding eight (8) inches in loose thickness, moisture conditioned to at least two percent above the optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent per ASTM D 1557 test procedures.

5.1.4 Excavation Characteristics

It should be anticipated that dense rock and difficult excavation/drilling would be encountered for excavations into the site bedrock. Specialized excavation techniques and/or equipment may be necessary. “Over-break” of utility trench and footing excavations in the bedrock should be anticipated.

Temporary excavations for grading purposes and installation of underground utilities should be constructed in accordance with OSHA guidelines. Temporary vertical excavations within the on-site materials should be stable at four feet with a 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) cut above.

It is recommended that temporary slopes greater than 4 feet in height not be constructed at inclinations steeper than 1:1 (horizontal:vertical). Flatter inclinations may be needed if low-cohesive sandy soils or groundwater conditions are present. Temporary construction slopes

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 7 should be periodically examined by a competent person, per OSHA requirements, to look of evidence of instability.

5.1.5 Shrinkage and Subsidence

Factors impacting earthwork balancing on the site include bulking, trench spoil from utilities and footing excavations, as well as the accuracy of topography.

Due to the presence of near-surface bedrock, shrinkage and subsidence are not a consideration.

A bulking factor of approximately ten to fifteen percent is considered reasonable for the bedrock.

5.1.6 Trench Excavations and Backfill

Trench excavations should conform to OSHA regulations. The contractor should have a competent person, per OSHA requirements, on site during construction to observe conditions and to make the appropriate recommendations. Utility trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction as determined per ASTM D 1557 test procedures. Where applicable, based on jurisdictional requirements, the top 12 inches of backfill below subgrade for road pavements should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction.

Compaction should be achieved with a mechanical compaction device. Jetting of trench backfill is not recommended. If soils to be used as backfill have dried out, they should be properly moisture-conditioned prior to placement in trenches.

5.2 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

The following design recommendations are prepared based on our review of the proposed project plans and our experience with similar projects. In addition to the foundation designs presented in section 5.2.1, final embedment should maintain a minimum set back from the face of descending slopes of 7 feet to the bottom outside edge of the constructed foundation.

5.2.1 Mat Foundation

A mat foundation system may be used to support the proposed structures. The mat foundation should have a minimum embedment depth of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade and may be designed using an allowable bearing capacity of 5,000 psf, provided the mat is directly underlain by competent material, either bedrock or engineered fill. If the mat foundation excavation exposes fill, testing to verify relative compaction should be performed and additional compactive efforts applied if warranted. The recommended allowable soil bearing pressures may be increased by one-third for temporary seismic or wind loading. Reinforcement within the mat foundation should be determined by the structural engineer.

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 8

For resistance to lateral loads, an allowable coefficient of friction of 0.45 between the base of the foundation elements and underlying bedrock material is recommended. In addition, an allowable passive resistance equal to an equivalent fluid weight of 350 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) for engineered fills acting against the foundations may be used to resist lateral forces. The top foot of passive resistance at foundations should be neglected unless the ground surface is covered by concrete or pavement.

Where the mat foundation is to be designed as a beam on an elastic foundation, a modulus of subgrade reaction (k-value) of 250 pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be considered for design provided the mat foundation is directly underlain by competent material, either bedrock or engineered fill.

It is estimated that the mat foundation may experience a static settlement of ½ inch. The structural engineer should consider this magnitude of static settlement into their design.

5.2.2 Foundation Set Backs

Minimum setbacks for all foundations should comply with the 2018 IBC. Improvements not conforming to these setbacks are subject to the increased likelihood of excessive lateral movements and/or differential settlements. If large enough, these movements can compromise the integrity of improvements. The bottom outside edge of all footings should be set back a minimum of H/2 (where H is the slope height) or seven feet, whichever is less from the face of any descending slope.

5.2.3 Seismic Design Parameters

The R800 site is located at approximately 33.4471 Latitude and -117.4262 Longitude whereas the

MFA7 site is located at approximately 33.4440 Latitude and -117.4559 Longitude. Site spectral accelerations (Ss and S1), for 0.2 and 1.0 second periods for a risk targeted two (2) percent probability of exceedance in 50 years (MCER) were determined using the web interface provided by SEAOC/OSHPD (https://seismicmaps.org) to access the USGS Seismic Design Parameters. A

Site Class “B” is deemed appropriate for this site based on the apparent density of the sedimentary bedrock at the surface and remedial grading recommendations presented herein.

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 9

SITE SEISMIC PARAMETERS

Site Location R800 MFA7

Mapped 0.2 sec Period Spectral Acceleration, Ss 1.011g 1.005g

Mapped 1.0 sec Period Spectral Acceleration, S1 0.372g 0.37g Site Coefficient for Site Class “B,” Fa 0.9 0.9

Site Coefficient for Site Class “B,” Fv 0.8 0.8 Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration for 0.2 Second, SMS

0.91g 0.905g

Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration for 1.0 Second, SM1

0.297g 0.296g

5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 0.2 Second, SDS

0.607g 0.603g

5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 1 second, SD1

0.198g 0.197g

5.2.4 Soil Sulfate Content

The soil soluble sulfate content was determined in the laboratory for an on-site soil sample. The results indicate that the water-soluble sulfate result is less than 0.1 percent by weight, which is considered “negligible” as per Table 4.2.1 of ACI 318. Based on the test results and Table 4.3.1 of ACI 318, no special recommendations for concrete are required for this project due to soil sulfate exposure.

5.3 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS

GeoTek representatives should be present during site grading and foundation construction to check for proper implementation of the geotechnical recommendations. These representatives should perform at least the following duties:

Observe site clearing and grubbing operations for proper removal of all unsuitable materials.

Observe and test bottom of removals prior to fill placement or reinforcement bar for concrete placement.

Evaluate the suitability of on-site and import materials for fill placement and collect soil samples for laboratory testing where necessary.

Observe the fill for uniformity during placement, including utility trench backfill. Also, test the fill for density, relative compaction, and moisture content.

Observe and probe foundation excavations to confirm suitability of bearing materials with respect to density.

If requested, GeoTek will provide a construction observation and compaction report to comply with the requirements of the governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project for the

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 10 site. It is recommended that these agencies be notified prior to commencement of construction so that necessary construction permits can be obtained.

6. INTENT

It is the intent of this report to aid in the design and construction of the proposed development.

Implementation of the advice presented in this report is intended to reduce risk associated with construction projects. The professional opinions and geotechnical advice contained in this report are not intended to imply total performance of the project or guarantee that unusual or variable conditions will not be discovered during or after construction.

The scope of this evaluation is limited to the area explored that is shown on Figure 2. This evaluation does not and should in no way be construed to encompass any areas beyond the specific area of the proposed construction as indicated to us by the client. Further, no evaluation of any existing site improvements is included. The scope is based on GeoTek’s understanding of the project and the client’s needs, GeoTek’s proposal (Proposal No. P-0600120-SD) dated

June 11, 2021 and geotechnical engineering standards normally used on similar projects in this region.

7. LIMITATIONS

GeoTek’s findings are based on site conditions observed and the stated sources. Thus, GeoTek’s comments are professional opinions that are limited to the extent of the available data.

GeoTek has prepared this report in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering and science professions currently practicing under similar conditions in the jurisdiction in which the services are provided, subject to the time limits and physical constraints applicable to this report.

Since GeoTek’s recommendations are based on the site conditions observed and encountered and laboratory testing, our conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions that are limited to the extent of the available data. Observations during construction are important to allow for any change in recommendations found to be warranted. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice and no warranty of any kind is expressed or implied. Standards of care/practice are subject to change with time.

United States Navy Project No. 3711-SD

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page 11

8. SELECTED REFERENCES

ASTM, 2011, “Soil and Rock: American Society for Testing and Materials,” vol. 4.08 for ASTM test methods D-420 to D-5876,; and vol. 4.09 for ASTM test method D-5877 to latest.

Bryant, W.A., and Hart E.W., 2007, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zone Maps, California Geological Survey: Special Publication 42.

California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 2008, “Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California,” Special Publication 117A

GeoTek, Inc., In-house proprietary information.

Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' X 60' Quadrangle, California, Compiled by Michael P.

Kennedy and Siang S. Tan, 2005 Digital Preparation by Kelly R. Bovard1, Rachel M.

Alvarez1and Michael J. Watson1 U.S. Geological Survey, Department of Earth Sciences, University of California, Riverside

SEA/OSHPD web service, “Seismic Design Maps” (https://seismicmaps.org).

Terzaghi, K. and Peck, R.B., 1967, “Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, Second Edition.

Saalax Solutions, Inc.

Container Sniper Towers MFA7, Camp Pendleton, California 1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A Vista, California 92081

Figure 1

Site Location Map

N

Not to Scale Imagery from US Forestry Service, 2021

Approximate Site Location

PN: 3711-SD DATE: September 2021

Saalex Solutions

B-1 B-2

Kvsp

KvspKvsp

Ktr

1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A Vista, California 92081

N

Saalax Solutions, Inc.

Container Sniper Towers R800, Camp Pendleton, California

Figure 2A

Geotechnical Map

PN: 3711-SD DATE: September 2021

0 50 100

Scale: 1" = 50'

Legend B-2

Kvsp

Ktr

Approximate Bore Location

Approximate Limits of Study

Approximate Geologic Contact

Cretaceous Santiago Peak Volcanics (Circled Where Buried)

Cretaceous Trabuco Formation

Imagery from USGS Earth Explorer, 2014

B-3B-4 Ktr

Ktr

Ktr

1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A Vista, California 92081

N

Figure 2B

Geotechnical Map

Imagery from USGS Earth Explorer, 2014

PN: 3711-SD DATE: September 2021

0 50 100

Scale: 1" = 50'

Legend B-2

Ktr

Approximate Bore Location

Approximate Limits of Study

Approximate Geologic Contact

Cretaceous Trabuco Formation (Circled Where Buried)

Saalax Solutions, Inc.

Container Sniper Towers MFA7, Camp Pendleton, California

APPENDIX A

LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS

United States Navy Project No. 3711-SD

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page A2

A - FIELD TESTING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES

Bulk Samples (Large)

These samples are normally large bags of earth materials over 20 pounds in weight collected from the field by means of hand digging or exploratory cuttings.

Bulk Samples (Small)

These are plastic bag samples which are normally airtight and contain less than 5 pounds in weight of earth materials collected from the field by means of hand digging or exploratory cuttings. These samples are primarily used for determining natural moisture content and classification indices.

B - BORING LOG LEGEND

The following abbreviations and symbols often appear in the classification and description of soil and rock on the log of borings:

SOILS

USCS Unified Soil Classification System f-c Fine to coarse f-m Fine to medium

GEOLOGIC

B: Attitudes Bedding: strike/dip

J: Attitudes Joint: strike/dip

C: Contact line

……….. Dashed line denotes USCS material change Solid Line denotes unit / formational change Thick solid line denotes end of the boring

(Additional denotations and symbols are provided on the log of excavation)

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING

BB-1 SM

13 R1

14 R2

50/5

7 S1

50/5 R3

50/3 S2

50/2 S3

---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table

Weathered fine to medium SANDSTONE, yellow brown with orange to red mottling, moist, dense, jointed

Weathered fine to medium SANDSTONE, red yellow moist, dense, poorly graded

Weathered fine to medium SANDSTONE with clay, grayish yellow brown with red mottling, moist, dense

PROJECT NAME: Sniper Towers DRILL METHOD: 8" HSA 3.75" ID OPERATOR:

Cuttings turn very coarse gravel, pulverized metavolcanics

Cuttings turn clayey SAND, olive brown, moist

Billy & Pedro

CLIENT: US Navy DRILLER: Baja Exploration LOGGED BY: MSB

LOCATION: See Boring Locaiton Map ELEVATION: 1550 DATE: 7/7/2021

PROJECT NO.: 3711-SD HAMMER: 140lbs/30in RIG TYPE: CME-75

D ry

D e n s it y

(p c f)

O th e rs

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS

Cretaceous Trabuco Formation (Ktr)

SAMPLES

U S

C S

S y m b o l

BORING NO.: B-1

Laboratory Testing

D e p th ft

S a m p le T y p e

B lo w s i n

S a m p le

N u m b e r

W a te r

C o n te n t

Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE with gravel, light yellow brown, slightly damp to moist, loose

Cretaceous Santiago Peak Volcanics (Kvsp)

Metavolcanics, pinkish brown, dry, very dense, jointed/fractured, minimal retrieval

Meta Volcanics, pinkish brown, dry, very dense, jointed/ fractured, minimal retrieval

Practical Refusal

HOLE TERMINATED AT 18 FEET

Metavolcanics, pinkish brown, dry, very dense, jointed/fractured, minimal retrieval

Practical Refusal at 18 feet

No groundwater encountered

Backfilled with soil cuttings

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test

SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density

L E G E N D Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk

Lab testing:

BB-1 SM

17 R1

50/5

20 R2

50/3

16 S1

50/2 S2

50/2 S2

---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test

SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density

G E N D Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk

HOLE TERMINATED AT 14 FEET

Meta Volcanics, pinkish brown, dry, very dense, jointed/ fractured, practical refusal

Practical Refusal at 14 feet

Weathered fine to coarse SANDSTONE, few clay, white to orange-brown, slightly moist, medium dense to dense, jointed

Weathered SANDSTONE, white to orange-brown, moist, dense

Cretaceous Santiago Peak Volcanics (Kvsp)

Weathered fine to coarse SANDSTONE, white to yellow-brown with orange mottling, slightly moist, dense, jointed

Weathered fine to coarse SANDSTONE, white to yellow-brown with orange mottling, slightly moist, dense, jointed

D ry

D e n s f)

O th e rs

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS

Cretaceous Trabuco Formation (Ktr)

Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE with gravel, yellow brown, moist, loose

SAMPLES

U S

C S

S y m b o l

BORING NO.: B-2

Laboratory Testing

D e p th ft

S a m p le T y p e

B lo w s i n

S a m m b e r

W a te r

C o n te n t

LOCATION: See Boring Locaiton Map ELEVATION: 1550 DATE: 7/7/2021

PROJECT NO.: 3711-SD HAMMER: 140lbs/30in RIG TYPE: CME-75

PROJECT NAME: Sniper Towers DRILL METHOD: 8" HSA 3.75" ID OPERATOR: Billy & Pedro

CLIENT: US Navy DRILLER: Baja Exploration LOGGED BY: MSB

BB-1

SM

30 R1

50/4

50/4 R2

50/6 S1

30 S2

50/1

---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test

SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density

G E N D Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk

Practical Refusal at 11.5 feet

HOLE TERMINATED AT 11.5 FEET

Gravelly medium to coarse SAND with silt, gray brown, damp, dense to very dense, practical refusal

Sandy coarse GRAVEL, conglomerate with silty SAND matrix and fine to coarse gravels to cobbles, gray brown with mixed color gravels, slightly damp, dense to very dense, minimal retrieval

Sandy coarse GRAVEL, conglomerate with silty SAND matrix and fine to coarse gravels to cobbles, gray brown with mixed color cobble fragments, damp, very dense

Silty SANDSTONE with coarse gravel, olive brown, damp, loose

D e n s f)

O th e rs

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS

Cretaceous Trabuco Formation (Ktr)

Sandy coarse GRAVEL, conglomerate with silty sand matrix and fine to coarse gravels to cobbles, gray brown with mixed color gravels, slightly damp, dense to very dense

SAMPLES

U S

C S

S y m b o l

BORING NO.: B-3

Laboratory Testing

D e p th ft

S a m p le T y p e

B lo w s i n

S a m m b e r

W a te r

C o n te n t

LOCATION: See Boring Locaiton Map ELEVATION: 2285 DATE: 7/7/2021

PROJECT NO.: 3711-SD HAMMER: 140lbs/30in RIG TYPE: CME-75

PROJECT NAME: Sniper Towers DRILL METHOD: 8" HSA 3.75" ID OPERATOR: Billy & Pedro

CLIENT: US Navy DRILLER: Baja Exploration LOGGED BY: MSB

BB-1

SM

32 R1

50/4

32 R2

50/5

18 S1

50/4

50/6 S2

50/3 S3

---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table

PROJECT NAME: Sniper Towers DRILL METHOD: 8" HSA 3.75" ID OPERATOR: Billy & Pedro

CLIENT: US Navy DRILLER: Baja Exploration LOGGED BY: MSB

LOCATION: See Boring Locaiton Map ELEVATION: 2285 DATE: 7/7/2021

PROJECT NO.: 3711-SD HAMMER: 140lbs/30in RIG TYPE: CME-75

O th e rs

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS

Cretaceous Trabuco Formation (Ktr)

Silty SANDSTONE with coarse gravel, olive brown, damp, loose, coarse gravels to cobbles in cuttings

SAMPLES

U S

C S

S y m b o l

BORING NO.: B-4

Laboratory Testing

D e p th ft

S a m p le T y p e

B lo w s i n

S a m m b e r

W a te r

C o n te n t

Sandy medium to coarse GRAVEL, conglomerate with silty sand matrix and fine to coarse gravels to cobbles, gray brown with mixed color gravels, damp to moist, dense, water added to ease drilling

Gravelly medium to coarse SAND , fractured conglomerate with silty sand matrix and fine to coarse gravels, gray brown with mixed color gravels, damp, dense to very dense

D e n s f)

Gravelly medium to coarse SAND, gray brown, damp, dense to very dense, minimal retrieval

Gravelly medium to coarse SAND, gray brown, damp, very dense, many granitic coarse fractured gravels, minimal retrieval

Sandy medium to coarse gravel, gray with mixed color gravels, damp, very dense, minimal retrieval

Practical Refusal at 14 feet

HOLE TERMINATED AT 14 FEET

AL = Atterberg Limits EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test

SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density

G E N D Sample type: ---Ring ---SPT ---Large Bulk

APPENDIX B

RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING

Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California Page B2

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING

Identification and Classification Soils were identified visually in general accordance with the procedures of the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (ASTM D2488). The soil identifications and classifications are shown on the exploration logs in Appendix A.

Moisture-Density Relationship Laboratory testing was performed on a soil sample collected during the subsurface exploration. The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined in general accordance with ASTM D 1557 test procedures. The results of the testing are presented in Appendix B.

Shear Strength Shear strength of remolded (compacted) site material was evaluated in general conformance with ASTM Test Method D3080 test procedures. The sample was remolded to approximately 90% of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557 test procedures. Results are presented in Appendix B.

Expansion Index

Expansion Index testing was performed on a representative site soil sample. Testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 4829. The results of the testing are presented in

Appendix B.

Sulfate Content The soluble sulfate content of a representative site soil sample was determined by GeoTek’s subconsultant, Project X, in general accordance with ASTM D 4327 test procedures. The results of the testing are provided in Appendix B.

MOISTURE/DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

Client: Saalex Solutions, Inc. Job No.: 3711-SD

Project: NSWC Sniper Towers Lab No.: 3705

Location: Camp Pendleton, CA

Material Type: F-C Silty Sand Yellow-Brown

Material Supplier: -

Material Source: -

Sample Location: B-1, BB-1

Sampled By: MSB Date Sampled: 7/7/2021

Received By: MSB Date Received: 7/7/2021

Tested By: MSB Date Tested: 7/22/2021

Reviewed By: - Date Reviewed: -

Test Procedure: ASTM D1557 Method: A

Oversized Material (%): 0.0 Correction Required: yes x no

MOISTURE CONTENT (%):12.98701 18.62882 8.187633 26.49074 12.98701 18.62882 8.1876333 26.49074

DRY DENSITY (pcf):112.1902 106.81 111.4578 95.43985

CORRECTED DRY DENSITY (pcf): #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

ZERO AIR VOIDS DRY DENSITY (pcf):

MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP VALUES

Maximum Dry Density, pcf 113.0 @ Optimum Moisture, % 11.0

Corrected Maximum Dry Density, pcf @ Optimum Moisture, %

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Grain Size Distribution: Atterberg Limits:

% Gravel (retained on No. 4) Liquid Limit, %

% Sand (Passing No. 4, Retained on No. 200) Plastic Limit, %

% Silt and Clay (Passing No. 200) Plasticity Index, %

Classification:

Unified Soils Classification:

AASHTO Soils Classification:

5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516171819202122232425262728293031

D R

Y D

E N

S

IT

Y P

C F

MOISTURE CONTENT, %

MOISTURE/DENSITY RELATIONSHIP CURVE

DRY DENSITY (pcf):

CORRECTED DRY DENSITY (pcf):

ZERO AIR VOIDS DRY DENSITY

(pcf)

S.G. 2.7

S.G. 2.8

S.G. 2.6

Poly. (DRY DENSITY (pcf):)

OVERSIZE CORRECTED

ZERO AIR VOIDS

Poly. (S.G. 2.7)

Poly. (S.G. 2.8)

Poly. (S.G. 2.6)

MOISTURE/DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

Client: Saalex Solutions, Inc. Job No.: 3711-SD

Project: NSWC Sniper Towers Lab No.: 3706

Location: Camp Pendleton, CA

Material Type: Brown Silty Sand

Material Supplier: -

Material Source: -

Sample Location: B-3 BB-1

Sampled By: MSB Date Sampled: 7/7/2021

Received By: MRB Date Received: 7/7/2021

Tested By: MRB Date Tested: 7/22/2021

Reviewed By: - Date Reviewed: -

Test Procedure: ASTM D1557 Method: A

Oversized Material (%): 0.0 Correction Required: yes x no

MOISTURE CONTENT (%):5.457198 9.92 12.40472 18.4527 5.457198 9.92 12.404718 18.4527

DRY DENSITY (pcf):117.5202 124.8729 123.0785 110.0819

CORRECTED DRY DENSITY (pcf): #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

ZERO AIR VOIDS DRY DENSITY (pcf):

MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP VALUES

Maximum Dry Density, pcf 125.0 @ Optimum Moisture, % 10.0

Corrected Maximum Dry Density, pcf @ Optimum Moisture, %

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Grain Size Distribution: Atterberg Limits:

% Gravel (retained on No. 4) Liquid Limit, %

% Sand (Passing No. 4, Retained on No. 200) Plastic Limit, %

% Silt and Clay (Passing No. 200) Plasticity Index, %

Classification:

Unified Soils Classification:

AASHTO Soils Classification:

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

D R

Y D

E N

S

IT

Y P

C F

MOISTURE CONTENT, %

MOISTURE/DENSITY RELATIONSHIP CURVE

DRY DENSITY (pcf):

CORRECTED DRY DENSITY (pcf):

ZERO AIR VOIDS DRY DENSITY

(pcf)

S.G. 2.7

S.G. 2.8

Poly. (DRY DENSITY (pcf):)

OVERSIZE CORRECTED

ZERO AIR VOIDS

Poly. (S.G. 2.7)

Poly. (S.G. 2.8)

NSWC Sniper Towers Sample Location:

Date Tested:

Shear Strength: F = 27 O

, C = 140 psf

Notes:

Project Name:

Project Number:

3 - The tests were run at a shear rate of 0.035 in/min.

3711-SD

BB-1 @ B-1

8/11/2021

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

2 - The above reflect direct shear strength at saturated conditions.

1 - The soil specimen used in the shear box was a ring sample remolded to approximately 90% relative compaction from a bulk sample collected during the field investigation.

0.0

500.0

1000.0

1500.0

2000.0

2500.0

3000.0

3500.0

4000.0

0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0

S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S p s f)

NORMAL STRESS (psf)

Shear Strength: F = 27 O

, C = 151 psf

Notes:

1 - The soil specimen used in the shear box was a ring sample remolded to approximately 90% relative compaction from a bulk sample collected during the field investigation.

Project Name:

Project Number:

3 - The tests were run at a shear rate of 0.035 in/min.

PEAK VALUE

3711-SD

BB-1 @ B-1

0.0

500.0

1000.0

1500.0

2000.0

2500.0

3000.0

3500.0

4000.0

0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0

S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S p s

Shear Strength: F = 25 O

, C = 285 psf

Notes:

1 - The soil specimen used in the shear box was a ring sample remolded to approximately 90% relative compaction from a bulk sample collected during the field investigation.

Project Name:

Project Number:

3 - The tests were run at a shear rate of 0.035 in/min.

3711-SD

BB-1 @ B-3

0.0

500.0

1000.0

1500.0

2000.0

2500.0

3000.0

3500.0

4000.0

0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0

S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S p s

Shear Strength: F = 25 O

, C = 296 psf

Notes:

1 - The soil specimen used in the shear box was a ring sample remolded to approximately 90% relative compaction from a bulk sample collected during the field investigation.

Project Name:

Project Number:

3 - The tests were run at a shear rate of 0.035 in/min.

PEAK VALUE

3711-SD

BB-1 @ B-3

0.0

500.0

1000.0

1500.0

2000.0

2500.0

3000.0

3500.0

4000.0

0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0

S H

E A

R S

T R

E S

S p s

Tested/ Checked By:

Sample Source:

Sample Description:

Ring Id: Ring Dia. " : Ring Ht.":

A Weight of compacted sample & ring

B Weight of ring

C Net weight of sample

D

E

Wet Weight of sample & tare

Dry Weight of sample & tare

Tare

F Initial Moisture Content, %

G (E*F)

H (E/167.232)

I (1.-H)

J (62.4*I)

K (G/J)= L % Saturation

EXPANSION INDEX =

EXPANSION INDEX TEST

(ASTM D4829)

Tare

39.7

FINAL MOISTURE

Moisture

Weight of wet sample & tare

Wt. of dry sample & tare

334.2

1"

426.6

103.8

4.9

92.1

SATURATION DETERMINATION

25.5

13.4

51.9

15:35

369.7

DENSITY DETERMINATION

Wet Density, lb / ft3 (C*0.3016)

0.41

0.59

98.8

1325.1

371.4

112.0

Random

15:24 144

16:00

15:34

Initial

1 min/Wet

10 min/Dry

7/23/2021

741.1

4"12

15415:40

Dry Density, lb / ft3 (D/1.F)

Project Number:

Project Name: Sniper Towers

3711-SD

Project Location:

MSB

Camp Pendleton, CA

Loading weight: 5516. grams

B-1, BB-1

7/23/2021

F-C Silty Sand, Yellow Brown

Lab No

7/24/2021 16:00 209

TIME READINGDATE

Final

31.4%

5 min/Wet

READINGS

Tested/ Checked By:

Sample Source:

Sample Description:

Ring Id: Ring Dia. " : Ring Ht.":

A Weight of compacted sample & ring

B Weight of ring

C Net weight of sample

D

E

Wet Weight of sample & tare

Dry Weight of sample & tare

Tare

F Initial Moisture Content, %

G (E*F)

H (E/167.232)

I (1.-H)

J (62.4*I)

K (G/J)= L % Saturation

EXPANSION INDEX =

EXPANSION INDEX TEST

(ASTM D4829)

Tare

4.9

FINAL MOISTURE

Moisture

Weight of wet sample & tare

Wt. of dry sample & tare

1"

192.7

105.4

5.1

96.8

SATURATION DETERMINATION

20.6

9.4

50.9

11:08

369.6

DENSITY DETERMINATION

Wet Density, lb / ft3 (C*0.3016)

0.33

0.67

112.0

1050.2

406.1

122.5

Random

10:57 149

14:40

11:07

Initial

1 min/Wet

10 min/Dry

7/26/2021

775.7

4"12

17211:13

Dry Density, lb / ft3 (D/1.F)

Project Number:

Project Name: Sniper Towers

3711-SD

Project Location:

MSB

Camp Pendleton, CA

Loading weight: 5516. grams

B-4, BB-1

7/26/2021

Gray Silty Sand

Lab No

7/27/2021 7:25 210

TIME READINGDATE

Final

20.3%

5 min/Wet

READINGS

Project X REPORT S210719A Corrosion Engineering Page 1 Corrosion Control – Soil, Water, Metallurgy Testing Lab

29990 Technology Dr, Suite 13, Murrieta, CA 92563 Tel: 213-928-7213 Fax: 951-226-1720 www.projectxcorrosion.com

Results Only Soil Testing for

US Navy Sniper Towers

July 21, 2021

Prepared for:

Chris Livesey GeoTek, Inc.

1384 Poinsettia Ave, Suite A Vista, CA, 92081 clivesey@geotekusa.com

Project X Job#: S210719A Client Job or PO#: 3711-SD

Respectfully Submitted, Eduardo Hernandez, M.Sc., P.E.

Sr. Corrosion Consultant NACE Corrosion Technologist #16592 Professional Engineer California No. M37102 ehernandez@projectxcorrosion.com mailto:ehernandez@projectxcorrosion.com

Project X REPORT S210719A Corrosion Engineering Page 2 Corrosion Control – Soil, Water, Metallurgy Testing Lab

29990 Technology Dr., Suite 13, Murrieta, CA 92563 Tel: 213-928-7213 Fax: 951-226-1720 www.projectxcorrosion.com

Soil Analysis Lab Results

Client: GeoTek, Inc.

Job Name: US Navy Sniper Towers

Client Job Number: 3711-SD Project X Job Number: S210719A

July 21, 2021

Method ASTM D4972

ASTM

G200

ASTM

D4658

ASTM

D4327

ASTM

D6919

ASTM

D6919

ASTM

D6919

ASTM

D6919

ASTM

D6919

ASTM

D6919

ASTM

D4327

ASTM

D4327

Bore# / Description Depth pH Redox Sulfide S2-

Nitrate

NO3

Ammonium

NH4

Lithium Li+

Sodium Na+

Potassium K+

Magnesium Mg2+

Calcium Ca2+

Fluoride F2

Phosphate

PO4

3-

(ft) (mg/kg) (wt%) (mg/kg) (wt%) (Ohm-cm) (Ohm-cm) (mV) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg)

B-2, BB-1 Yellow-Brown Silty Sand 0-5 55.0 0.0055 29.2 0.0029 12,730 2,479 6.5 174 <0.01 5.0 24.5 0.08 48.2 0.6 77.9 178.3 6.3 3.9

B-4, BB-1 Gray-Brown Gravelly Sand 0-5 73.3 0.0073 20.2 0.0020 9,380 2,211 7.3 160 <0.01 0.4 27.3 0.09 50.5 3.0 62.7 181.8 2.7 10.7

ASTM

G187

ASTM

D4327

ASTM

D4327

Resistivity As Rec'd | Minimum

Sulfates

SO4

2-

Chlorides Cl-

Cations and Anions, except Sulfide and Bicarbonate, tested with Ion Chromatography mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (parts per million) of dry soil weight

ND = 0 = Not Detected | NT = Not Tested | Unk = Unknown Chemical Analysis performed on 1:3 Soil-To-Water extract

PPM = mg/kg (soil) = mg/L (Liquid)

KiProj ect X Corrosion Engineering i 'twn*»mi ('iwfr(»l . ><mI, WJirr, «hI Mct»lhmr* 1

Lib Re4]uest Sheet Chiio of Castody

Phone: (213) 928-7213 • Fa* <951)226-1720 • www.projectxcorrosion-com

Ship Samples To: 29990 Technology Dr, Suite 13, Murrieta, CA 92563

Project X Job Number

5Z/0?-/?A &<x>kL.

IMPORTANT: Please complete Project and Sample Identification Data as you would like it to appear In report dlc^uclude lAls form with samples.

z M)

Company Name: GeoTek, Inc. Contact Name: Chris Livesey Phone No: 949-338-9233

Mailing Address: 1384 Poinsettia Ave, Ste A, Vista, CA 92081 Contact Email: Glivesey@geotekusa.com

Accounting Contact: Accounts Payable Invoice Email: ap@geotekusa.com; lwhite@geotekusa.com

Client Project No: 3711-SD Project Name: jjS Navy Splpsr Towefs

P.O.#:

3-5 D«y Standard

3Di)r Guaraatec

S0% imrk-iip

24 Hr

RUSH

tOOH mirfc^p

ANALYSIS REQUESTED (Please circle)

(Business Days) Tom Around Time: ✓ li 1 ̂ si u li tn o

■g. (2 6 .S

OT § b ^ 1Results By: □ Phone □ Fax □ Email o H * X g < P o t ̂

< 1-

OJ.HSVV

z

7. 2 "" s

7 ?

•■r

Date & Received by: Default Method i s

ASTM

Gil li

ASTM D4J27

< O s 1 7 2 li ss < 2 11

MTSA D69I9

SI :? z 7i S< 2 is ii g s 1" ^

S 2

< S

CQ

Soecial InUnicliont: FuH Corrosloa Scrriet ea

Reports

Moisture Content TotalAlkalinity ThlamreResistivity Metall lacigruAnalysis Langeli reIndex Puckorius Index FRXEl latnemeAnalysis Water Hardness

GcoQoad

Rcdox Potential Sulfide Ammonia iNtrate lFouride hPosphate Liihtum Sodium Potassium Magnesium Calcium Bicarbonate FullCorrosion Serie Soi lCorrosivity Evaluation Report Water Corrosivity MiinReport

So liResistivity X a.

Sulfate Chloride

SAMPLE ID • BORE V DESCRIimON DEPTH <R)

DATE

COLLECTED

' < B-2, BB-1 Yellow-Brown Silly Sand 0-5' 7/7/21 X 2 B-4. BB-1 Gray-Brown Gravelly Sand 0-5' 7/7/21 X

K

II

14 1 15 1

APPENDIX C

GENERAL EARTHWORK GRADING GUIDELINES

1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A Vista, California 92083

TYPICAL CANYON

CLEANOUT

STANDARD GRADING

GUIDELINES

ALTERNATES

Original Ground

3’

Loose Surface Materials

PLATE G-1

Finish Grade

3’

Suitable Material

Suitable Material

6” Perforated Pipe in 9 cubic feet per Lineal Foot Clean Gravel Wrapped in Filter Fabric

Construct Benches where slope exceeds 5:1

Bottom of Cleanout to Be At Least 1.5 Times the Width of Compaction Equipment

4 feet typical

Slope to Drain

Original Ground

Loose Surface Materials

Finish Grade

Suitable MaterialConstruct Benches where slope exceeds 5:1

Bottom of Cleanout to Be At Least 1.5 Times the Width of Compaction Equipment

4 feet typical

Slope to Drain

6” Perforated Pipe in 9 cubic feet per Lineal Foot Clean Gravel Wrapped in Filter Fabric

TREATMENT ABOVE

NATURAL SLOPES

STANDARD GRADING

GUIDELINES

TYPICAL FILL SLOPE OVER

NATURAL DESCENDING SLOPE

Topsoil

Bedrock

PLATE G-2

Finish Grade

Fill Slope

Daylight Cut Line per Plan

Project Removal at 1 to 1

Min. 3 Feet Compacted Fill

Colluvium Creep Zone

Minimum 15 Feet Wide or 1.5 Equipment

Widths for Compaction

Toe of Fill Slope per Plan

DAYLIGHT CUT AREA OVER

NATURAL DESCENDING SLOPE

Topsoil

Structural Setback Without Corrective Work

Project Removal at 1 to 1

Colluvium

Creep Zone

Min.

2 Feet

Minimum 15 Feet Wide or 1.5 Equipment

Widths for Compaction

Finish Grade

Bedrock

Min. 3 Feet Compacted Fill

Min.

2 Feet

Compacted Fill

Compacted Fill

1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A Vista, California 92081-8505

Topsoil Colluvium

Creep Zone

COMMON FILL

SLOPE KEYS

STANDARD GRADING

GUIDELINES

TYPICAL FILL SLOPE OVER

CUT SLOPE

Topsoil

Bedrock

PLATE G-3

Finish Grade 2: 1 Fill Slope

4’ Typical

Colluvium Creep Zone

Minimum 15 Feet Wide or 1.5 Equipment

Widths for Compaction

Toe of Fill Slope per Plan

TYPICAL FILL SLOPE

Bedrock or Suitable Dense Material

Minimum compacted fill required to provide lateral support.

Excavate key if width or depth less than indicated in table above

Cut Slope

SLOPE

HEIGHT

MIN. KEY

WIDTH

MIN. KEY

DEPTH

>25

SEE TEXT

1.5

2.5

CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY

WITH SOIL ENGINEER

PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION

Vista, California 92081-8505

NOTES:

1) SOIL FILL OVER WINDROW SHOULE BE 7 FEET OR PER JURISDUICTIONAL STANDARDS AND SUFFICIENT

FOR FUTURE EXCAVATIONS TO AVOID ROCKS

2) MAXIMUM ROCK SIZE IN WINDROWS IS 4 FEET MINIMUM DIAMETER

3) SOIL AROUND WINDROWS TO BE SANDY MATERIAL SUBJECT TO SOIL ENGINEER ACCEPTANCE

4) SPACING AND CLEARANCES MUST BE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW FOR PROPER COMPACTION

5) INDIVDUAL LARGE ROCKS MAY BE BURIED IN PITS.

ROCK BURIAL

DETAILS

STANDARD GRADING

GUIDELINES

PLATE G-4

SEE NOTE 1

15’

MIN.3’ MIN.

3’ MIN.

MINIMUM 15’ CLEAR OR

1.5 EQUIPMENT WIDTHS

FOR COMPACTION

STAGGER ROWS

HORIZONTALLY

NO ROCKS IN

THIS ZONE

CROSS…