W912PL-09-B-0005_Attachments.pdf

ATTACHMENT 1

LAKE O NEILL HISTORICAL SEDIMENT & WATER ANALYSES

2004 SEDIMENT & WATER ANALYSES

2003 ENVIROMATRIX METALS & WATER ANALYSES

2003 SOLAR BEE WATER & SLUDGE ANALYSES

1988 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION & CHEMICAL ANALYSES

Lake O'Neill Dredging and Recharge Pond Rehabilitation W912PL-09-B-005

Attachment 1 Page 1 August 18, 2009

2004 SEDIMENT & WATER ANALYSES

2004 SEDIMENT SAMPLING

A series of core samples were extracted from the bottom surface of Lake O'Neill on March 11 and 12, 2004, to characterize the sediment in the lake. Figure 1-1 shows the locations for all of the recent sediment analysis that has been completed at Lake O'Neill.

Sediment cores were collected from the bottom of the Lake using a hand operated piston corer mounted from a boat. At each of eight locations, the boat was anchored in three places to minimize drifting. The depth of water was measured and the location in latitude and longitude was recorded using a GPS unit. A rod of the appropriate length to account for the depth of water was attached to a four-inch diameter aluminum agricultural pipe with polycarbon insert sleeve and hardened polycarbon tip. The rod was lowered to the lakebed surface and pushed by hand as far as possible. A sliding piston hammer was pounded over the pipe from the side of the boat to further penetrate the sediments. There is a sliding cap inside the sleeve to prevent the slurry and sludge sediments from mixing into the water column. When the desired depth is reached, or compacted materials are encountered, the core is removed and the sediments remain in the polycarbon sleeve by suction and friction.

2004 SEDIMENT SAMPLING RESULTS

A sieve analysis was conducted on each of the eight sediment samples to determine grain size distribution and physical characteristics of the lake bottom material. The results showed a larger fraction of coarse sediments near inlets to the Lake and a larger fraction of fine sediments predominating in the center of the Lake. Two samples containing mostly fine sediments were tested for settling rates using a hydrometer. A metals analysis was completed for a sample collected from Core #1 to verify earlier sampling results showing selenium concentrations slightly above the maximum contaminant level (selenium was reported at 9.91 mg/L with an STLC of 1mg/L). The March 2004 metals analysis did not detect any selenium concentration above the method's detection limit of 0.1 mg/L.

Attachment 1 Page 2 August 18, 2009

FIGURE 1-1

TABLE 1-1

LAKE O’NEILL CORING, MARCH 2004

Lake O'Neill Coring March 2004 Core #1 Core #2 Core #3 Core #4 Core #5 Core #6 Core #7 Core #8 Water

Sample Date 3/12/04 3/11/04 3/12/04 3/11/04 3/11/04 3/12/04 3/11/04 3/11/04 3/12/04 Time 0945 1130 1100 1010 1635 0830 1530 1255 & 1355 0830

Notes near SMR div 2 attempts 2 attempts near

Solar Bee near

S3 (6/03) 3 attempts 2' above lake bottom

Latitude 33 19.688 33 19.584 33 19.785 33 19.669 33 19.691 33 19.688 33 19.932 33 20.065 & 20.080 33 19.742

Longitude 117 19.511 117 19.476 117 19.323 117 19.401 117 19.362 117 19.246 117 19.309 117 19.347 & 19.353 117 19.350

Water Level 10.4' 14' 14.1' 15' 14' 8.5' 10.3' 5' & 4.3' 14' Thickness of Bottom Slurry 0" 12" 16" 9" 5" 0" 2" 0" Thickness of Bottom Sludge 4" 2'-3" 4'-6" 3'-6" 2'-9" 0'-3" 1'-0" ~1'-0"

Core Length 4'-6" 4'-4" 7'-8" 5'-10" 7'-2" 5'-1" 6'-3" 1'-10" & 2'-1"

Sediment Sample ID sed1 sed2 sed3 sed4 sed5 sed6 sed7 sed8 Sediment Sample time

(COC) 0945 1115 1100 1000 1630 0830 1530 1330 0830

Sieve Analysis yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes Hydrometer Analysis no no yes no no no yes no Metals Analysis hold / yes hold / no hold / no hold / no hold / no hold / no hold / no hold / no fish toxicity

Attachment 1 Page 4 August 18, 2009

Visual observations of the cores showed coarse sands in the delta areas of the north (Core #8) where Fallbrook Creek enters the Lake, and to the east (Core #6) between the peninsula and the main boat ramp area. There is wetland vegetation near both of these areas that would act as a buffer during storm events, allowing coarse grain sediments to settle out, and finer sediments to be transported further into the center of the Lake. Fine and coarse sands are present near the north side of the dam, where the inlet from the Santa Margarita River diversion enters the Lake.

Dark organic fine material predominated in other areas of the Lake. The sieve analysis determined the proportions of fine and coarse material present in the sediments.

2004 Sieve Analysis

Sieve analysis identifies the grain sizes present in a soil sample as well as the grain size distribution. The size of a soil particle has an effect on the engineering behavior of the soil as well as the type of beneficial reuse for the material once it is removed. Grain sizes with an equivalent particle diameter between 0.074 mm and 5 mm are classified according to the U.S.

Standard sieve number, which is related to a specific grain size as determined by the standard sieve test. Soils finer than 0.074 mm are usually dimensioned in millimeters or micrometers (Holtz and Kovacs, 1981) using the hydrometer test.

The sieve analysis results from Cores #1 to #8 (Table 1-2) show the varying percentages of gravel, sand, silt, and clay at the eight locations sampled. The percentage of fine material, composed of silt and clay, range from 28% to 98% of the sample.

TABLE 1-2

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS, MARCH 2004

(PERCENT)

SAMPLE

GRAVEL

(>2 mm)

SAND

(0.0625 - 2 mm)

SILT

(0.0039 – 0.0625mm)

CLAY

(< 0.0039 mm)

Core #1 1.2 55.0 34.5 9.3 Core #2 0.1 32.0 41.7 26.2 Core #3 0.0 1.3 41.2 57.5 Core #4 0.0 1.5 39.4 59.2 Core #5 0.0 2.8 42.4 54.8 Core #6 3.8 67.8 18.8 9.6 Core #7 0.1 2.9 57.3 39.7 Core #8 7.1 60.6 18.9 13.4

Attachment 1 Page 5 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 6 August 18, 2009

GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS

Contract Number/Name: Lake O'Neill Contact person: Brian Riley Date of analysis: 17Mar04 Date of report: 24Mar04 Analysis method: Sieve/pipette (Plumb, 1981) Sample Identification: SED 1 Total sample weight: 27.703 grams

-------- Size ------ Weight Cumulative Microns Phi grams Percent Percent

2000.000 -1.0 0.333 1.202 1.202

1414.214 -0.5 0.061 0.220 1.422

1000.000 0.0 0.057 0.206 1.628

707.107 0.5 0.090 0.325 1.953

500.000 1.0 0.153 0.552 2.505

353.553 1.5 0.587 2.119 4.624

250.000 2.0 0.695 2.509 7.133

176.777 2.5 2.056 7.421 14.554

125.000 3.0 4.186 15.110 29.664

88.388 3.5 4.230 15.269 44.933

62.500 4.0 3.128 11.291 56.224

31.250 5.0 3.648 13.169 69.393

15.625 6.0 3.436 12.403 81.796

7.812 7.0 1.866 6.737 88.533

3.906 8.0 0.594 2.144 90.677

1.953 9.0 0.424 1.531 92.208 < 1.953 > 9.0 2.159 7.792 100.000

% < 4 phi = 43.776 % > 1 phi = 1.953 % gravel = 1.202 % sand = 55.022 % silt = 34.453 % clay = 9.323

Sample Statistics

Median Mean Dispersion Skewness phi microns phi microns

3.724 75.66 4.438 46.15 1.890 0.377

5th percentile = 1.575 16th percentile = 2.548 50th percentile = 3.724 84th percentile = 6.327 95th percentile = .

*** 95th percentile not reached ***

MEC Analytical Systems, Inc.

2433 Impala Dr.

Carlsbad, CA 92008

Attachment 1 Page 7 August 18, 2009

Contact person: Brian Riley Date of analysis: 17Mar04 Date of report: 24Mar04 Analysis method: Sieve/pipette (Plumb, 1981) Sample Identification: SED 2 Total sample weight: 21.348 grams

-------- Size ------ Weight Cumulative Microns Phi grams Percent Percent

2000.000 -1.0 0.018 0.084 0.084

1414.214 -0.5 0.012 0.056 0.141

1000.000 0.0 0.033 0.155 0.295

707.107 0.5 0.029 0.136 0.431

500.000 1.0 0.027 0.126 0.557

353.553 1.5 0.051 0.239 0.796

250.000 2.0 0.172 0.806 1.602

176.777 2.5 0.480 2.248 3.851

125.000 3.0 1.236 5.790 9.640

88.388 3.5 1.993 9.336 18.976

62.500 4.0 2.794 13.088 32.064

31.250 5.0 3.351 15.698 47.762

15.625 6.0 2.588 12.121 59.883

7.812 7.0 1.697 7.948 67.832

3.906 8.0 1.273 5.961 73.793

1.953 9.0 1.103 5.166 78.959 < 1.953 > 9.0 4.492 21.041 100.000

% < 4 phi = 67.936 % > 1 phi = 0.431 % gravel = 0.084 % sand = 31.980 % silt = 41.729 % clay = 26.207

Sample Statistics

Median Mean Dispersion Skewness phi microns phi microns

5.185 27.50 6.502 11.03 3.162 0.417

5th percentile = 2.599 16th percentile = 3.341 50th percentile = 5.185 84th percentile = 9.664 95th percentile = .

*** 84th percentile extrapolated *** *** 95th percentile not reached ***

MEC Analytical Systems, Inc.

2433 Impala Dr.

Carlsbad, CA 92008

Attachment 1 Page 8 August 18, 2009

Contact person: Brian Riley Date of analysis: 17Mar04 Date of report: 24Mar04 Analysis method: Sieve/pipette (Plumb, 1981) Sample Identification: SED 3 (A) Total sample weight: 16.286 grams

-------- Size ------ Weight Cumulative Microns Phi grams Percent Percent

2000.000 -1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000

1414.214 -0.5 0.008 0.049 0.049

1000.000 0.0 0.006 0.037 0.086

707.107 0.5 0.013 0.080 0.166

500.000 1.0 0.011 0.068 0.233

353.553 1.5 0.028 0.172 0.405

250.000 2.0 0.011 0.068 0.473

176.777 2.5 0.022 0.135 0.608

125.000 3.0 0.025 0.154 0.761

88.388 3.5 0.036 0.221 0.982

62.500 4.0 0.054 0.332 1.314

31.250 5.0 0.127 0.781 2.095

15.625 6.0 1.909 11.721 13.816

7.812 7.0 2.291 14.065 27.881

3.906 8.0 2.376 14.586 42.467

1.953 9.0 1.994 12.242 54.709 < 1.953 > 9.0 7.376 45.291 100.000

% < 4 phi = 98.686 % > 1 phi = 0.166 % gravel = 0.000 % sand = 1.314 % silt = 41.153 % clay = 57.533

Sample Statistics

Median Mean Dispersion Skewness phi microns phi microns

8.615 2.55 8.774 2.28 2.619 0.061

5th percentile = 5.248 16th percentile = 6.155 50th percentile = 8.615 84th percentile = 11.393 95th percentile = .

*** 84th percentile extrapolated *** *** 95th percentile not reached ***

MEC Analytical Systems, Inc.

2433 Impala Dr.

Carlsbad, CA 92008

Attachment 1 Page 9 August 18, 2009

Contact person: Brian Riley Date of analysis: 17Mar04 Date of report: 24Mar04 Analysis method: Sieve/pipette (Plumb, 1981) Sample Identification: SED 4 Total sample weight: 15.623 grams

-------- Size ------ Weight Cumulative Microns Phi grams Percent Percent

2000.000 -1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000

1414.214 -0.5 0.004 0.026 0.026

1000.000 0.0 0.014 0.090 0.115

707.107 0.5 0.007 0.045 0.160

500.000 1.0 0.009 0.058 0.218

353.553 1.5 0.011 0.070 0.288

250.000 2.0 0.009 0.058 0.346

176.777 2.5 0.015 0.096 0.442

125.000 3.0 0.024 0.154 0.595

88.388 3.5 0.046 0.294 0.890

62.500 4.0 0.090 0.576 1.466

31.250 5.0 0.509 3.258 4.724

15.625 6.0 1.612 10.318 15.042

7.812 7.0 2.248 14.391 29.433

3.906 8.0 1.782 11.404 40.837

1.953 9.0 1.654 10.590 51.427 < 1.953 > 9.0 7.588 48.573 100.000

% < 4 phi = 98.534 % > 1 phi = 0.160 % gravel = 0.000 % sand = 1.466 % silt = 39.372 % clay = 59.163

Sample Statistics

Median Mean Dispersion Skewness phi microns phi microns

8.865 2.14 . * . .

5th percentile = 5.027 16th percentile = 6.067 50th percentile = 8.865 84th percentile = .

95th percentile = .

*** 84th percentile not reached *** *** 84th percentile extrapolated *** *** 95th percentile not reached ***

MEC Analytical Systems, Inc.

2433 Impala Dr.

Carlsbad, CA 92008

Attachment 1 Page 10 August 18, 2009

Contact person: Brian Riley Date of analysis: 17Mar04 Date of report: 24Mar04 Analysis method: Sieve/pipette (Plumb, 1981) Sample Identification: SED 5 Total sample weight: 16.410 grams

-------- Size ------ Weight Cumulative Microns Phi grams Percent Percent

2000.000 -1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000

1414.214 -0.5 0.003 0.018 0.018

1000.000 0.0 0.021 0.128 0.146

707.107 0.5 0.008 0.049 0.195

500.000 1.0 0.005 0.030 0.225

353.553 1.5 0.006 0.037 0.262

250.000 2.0 0.010 0.061 0.323

176.777 2.5 0.015 0.091 0.414

125.000 3.0 0.036 0.219 0.634

88.388 3.5 0.093 0.567 1.200

62.500 4.0 0.268 1.633 2.834

31.250 5.0 0.679 4.136 6.970

15.625 6.0 2.036 12.408 19.378

7.812 7.0 2.121 12.925 32.303

3.906 8.0 2.121 12.925 45.227

1.953 9.0 2.079 12.666 57.894 < 1.953 > 9.0 6.910 42.106 100.000

% < 4 phi = 97.166 % > 1 phi = 0.195 % gravel = 0.000 % sand = 2.834 % silt = 42.394 % clay = 54.773

Sample Statistics

Median Mean Dispersion Skewness phi microns phi microns

8.377 3.01 8.394 2.97 2.667 0.007

5th percentile = 4.524 16th percentile = 5.728 50th percentile = 8.377 84th percentile = 11.061 95th percentile = .

*** 84th percentile extrapolated *** *** 95th percentile not reached ***

MEC Analytical Systems, Inc.

2433 Impala Dr.

Carlsbad, CA 92008

Attachment 1 Page 11 August 18, 2009

Contact person: Brian Riley Date of analysis: 17Mar04 Date of report: 24Mar04 Analysis method: Sieve/pipette (Plumb, 1981) Sample Identification: SED 6 Total sample weight: 29.519 grams

-------- Size ------ Weight Cumulative Microns Phi grams Percent Percent

2000.000 -1.0 1.118 3.787 3.787

1414.214 -0.5 0.709 2.402 6.189

1000.000 0.0 0.741 2.510 8.699

707.107 0.5 1.256 4.255 12.954

500.000 1.0 1.803 6.108 19.062

353.553 1.5 2.397 8.120 27.182

250.000 2.0 2.751 9.319 36.502

176.777 2.5 2.368 8.022 44.524

125.000 3.0 2.685 9.096 53.620

88.388 3.5 2.780 9.418 63.037

62.500 4.0 2.513 8.513 71.550

31.250 5.0 2.530 8.570 80.120

15.625 6.0 1.866 6.322 86.442

7.812 7.0 0.746 2.529 88.971

3.906 8.0 0.415 1.405 90.375

1.953 9.0 0.373 1.264 91.640 < 1.953 > 9.0 2.468 8.360 100.000

% < 4 phi = 28.450 % > 1 phi = 12.954 % gravel = 3.787 % sand = 67.763 % silt = 18.825 % clay = 9.625

Sample Statistics

Median Mean Dispersion Skewness phi microns phi microns

2.801 143.48 3.182 110.22 2.432 0.156

5th percentile = -0.748 16th percentile = 0.749 50th percentile = 2.801 84th percentile = 5.614 95th percentile = .

*** 95th percentile not reached ***

MEC Analytical Systems, Inc.

2433 Impala Dr.

Carlsbad, CA 92008

Attachment 1 Page 12 August 18, 2009

Contact person: Brian Riley Date of analysis: 17Mar04 Date of report: 24Mar04 Analysis method: Sieve/pipette (Plumb, 1981) Sample Identification: SED 7 Total sample weight: 20.929 grams

-------- Size ------ Weight Cumulative Microns Phi grams Percent Percent

2000.000 -1.0 0.030 0.143 0.143

1414.214 -0.5 0.002 0.010 0.153

1000.000 0.0 0.009 0.043 0.196

707.107 0.5 0.015 0.072 0.268

500.000 1.0 0.024 0.115 0.382

353.553 1.5 0.049 0.234 0.616

250.000 2.0 0.019 0.091 0.707

176.777 2.5 0.034 0.162 0.870

125.000 3.0 0.076 0.363 1.233

88.388 3.5 0.123 0.588 1.820

62.500 4.0 0.248 1.185 3.005

31.250 5.0 1.783 8.520 11.526

15.625 6.0 3.774 18.031 29.557

7.812 7.0 3.110 14.861 44.418

3.906 8.0 3.318 15.852 60.270

1.953 9.0 1.825 8.718 68.988 < 1.953 > 9.0 6.490 31.012 100.000

% < 4 phi = 96.995 % > 1 phi = 0.268 % gravel = 0.143 % sand = 2.862 % silt = 57.264 % clay = 39.730

Sample Statistics

Median Mean Dispersion Skewness phi microns phi microns

7.352 6.12 7.775 4.56 2.527 0.167

5th percentile = 4.234 16th percentile = 5.248 50th percentile = 7.352 84th percentile = 10.303 95th percentile = .

*** 84th percentile extrapolated *** *** 95th percentile not reached ***

MEC Analytical Systems, Inc.

2433 Impala Dr.

Carlsbad, CA 92008

Attachment 1 Page 13 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 14 August 18, 2009

2004 Hydrometer Test Results

A hydrometer test is typically used to identify the distribution of fine-grained soils, silts, and clays in a soil sample. “The basis for this test is Stoke’s law for falling spheres in a viscous fluid in which the terminal velocity of fall depends on the grain diameter and the densities of the grains in suspension and of the fluid” (Holtz and Kovacs, 1981).

The hydrometer test is performed by placing about 50 g (dry weight) of sediment into a 1 liter sedimentation cylinder. A deflocculant is then added to the solution to aid in deflocculation, or separation of fine particles, as well as to keep the particles in suspension. The deflocculant used on the samples was 125 cc of 4% solution of sodium-hexameta-phosphate

The sample is then intensely agitated, and hydrometer measurements are read at intervals of 2, 5, 15, 30, 60, 120, 250, 480, and 1,440 minutes. The percentage of the total sample remaining in suspension is then calculated from equations specific to each type of hydrometer.

Because of the large size of the sample, and the 24-hour testing period, the hydrometer test is suitable for size classification of suspended sediments at high concentrations (greater than 30,000 mg/L) (Morris and Fan, 1998).

Samples collected from Cores # 3 and #7 were chosen for hydrometer testing because of the larger percentage of fines sediments present. The fine clay fraction of the material to be dredged will remain in suspension the longest. The hydrometer test results determined the distribution of coarse silts to medium clays with particle diameters between 0.038 mm and 0.001 mm respectively. The hydrometer test results showed that after 24 hours, approximately 38 percent of particles with a diameter less than 0.001 mm remained in suspension. The percent of particles in suspension after 24 hours is not reflective of conditions that will occur in the field, as a deflocculant agent will not be used, thereby allowing particles to flocculate, or cluster, and settle at increased rates.

Attachment 1 Page 15 August 18, 2009

ASTM D 422

Project Name: Tested By: BCC Date: 4/7/2004

Custody No.: Data Input By: BCC Date: 4/8/2004

Boring No.: --- Checked By: PRC Date: 4/9/2004

Sample No.: SED-3 Depth (ft.): --- Sample Description:

Classification: CL Liquid Limit: Gravel: 0 % Weight of Moisture Content After Hydrometer

Plastic Limit: Sand: 2 % Sample of Air-Dry Soils retained

Plasticity Index: N/A Fines: 98 % Passing #4 Passing # 10 on #200 sieve

2.70 161.1 199.9

0.99 198.6 0.8

312.8 0.0 149.9 0.0

149.9 2.7

162.9 161.1 48.7 0.8

Cumulative Cumulative Wt.

Wt.of Dry Soil % Passing of Dry Soil

Retained (g) Retained (g)

3" 100.0 No. 10 0.0 100.0 99.9

1½" 100.0 No. 20 0.1 99.8 99.7

3/4" 100.0 No. 40 0.2 99.6 99.5

3/8" 100.0 No. 60 0.3 99.4 99.3

No. 4 0.0 100.0 No. 100 0.5 99.0 98.9

No. 10 0.2 99.9 No. 200 0.8 98.4 98.3

Pan Pan

50.0 48.7

Elapsed Water Composite Actual Soil Particle

Time Temperature Correction Hydrometer Diameter

(min) °C 152 H Readings (mm)

4/7/2004 12:00 0 20.0 5.0

12:01 1 20.0 5.0 52.0 95.4 0.038

12:02 2 20.0 5.0 49.0 89.4 0.027

12:05 5 20.0 5.0 46.0 83.3 0.018

12:15 15 20.0 5.0 43.0 77.2 0.011

12:30 30 20.0 5.0 40.0 71.1 0.008

13:00 60 20.0 5.0 37.0 65.0 0.006

14:00 120 21.0 5.0 33.0 56.9 0.004

16:10 250 21.0 5.0 30.0 50.8 0.003

20:00 480 21.0 5.0 27.0 44.7 0.002

4/8/2004 12:00 1440 21.0 5.0 23.0 36.6 0.001

Rev. 01-03

Percent Passing

Wt. of Dry Soil (g)Wt. of Air-Dry Soil (g)

Sieve Size Sieve Size

Deflocculant 125 cc of 4% Solution Hydrometer

Date Time

Coarse Sieve Sieve after Hydrometer & Wet Sieve

% Total Sample% Passing

Dry Wt. of Soil (g)

Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)

Weight of Container (g)

Moisture Content (%)

Weight of Dry Soil (g)

Correction for Specific Gravity

Wt.of Air-Dry Soil + Cont. (g)

Wt. of Container (g)

PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS

MEC / LAKE O'NEILL

Specific Gravity (Gs) (assumed) Wt.of Air-Dry Soil + Cont.(g)

CL, BLACK LEAN CLAY

1_multipart_xF8FF_3_HYDRO SED-3

Attachment 1 Page 16 August 18, 2009

ASTM D 422

Project Name: Tested By: BCC Date: 4/7/2004

Custody No.: Data Input By: BCC Date: 4/8/2004

Boring No.: --- Checked By: PRC Date: 4/9/2004

Sample No.: SED-5 Depth (ft.): --- Sample Description:

Classification: CL Liquid Limit: Gravel: 0 % Weight of Moisture Content After Hydrometer

Plastic Limit: Sand: 2 % Sample of Air-Dry Soils retained

Plasticity Index: N/A Fines: 98 % Passing #4 Passing # 10 on #200 sieve

2.70 178.3 196.0

0.99 194.8 1.1

326.7 0.0 146.0 0.0

146.0 2.5

180.7 178.3 48.8 1.1

Cumulative Cumulative Wt.

Wt.of Dry Soil % Passing of Dry Soil

Retained (g) Retained (g)

3" 100.0 No. 10 0.0 100.0 99.9

1½" 100.0 No. 20 0.0 100.0 99.9

3/4" 100.0 No. 40 0.1 99.8 99.7

3/8" 100.0 No. 60 0.1 99.8 99.7

No. 4 0.0 100.0 No. 100 0.3 99.4 99.3

No. 10 0.1 99.9 No. 200 1.1 97.7 97.6

Pan Pan

50.0 48.8

Elapsed Water Composite Actual Soil Particle

Time Temperature Correction Hydrometer Diameter

(min) °C 152 H Readings (mm)

4/7/2004 12:07 0 20.0 5.0

12:08 1 20.0 5.0 51.0 93.2 0.038

12:09 2 20.0 5.0 49.0 89.2 0.027

12:12 5 20.0 5.0 46.0 83.1 0.018

12:22 15 20.0 5.0 43.0 77.0 0.011

12:37 30 20.0 5.0 40.0 70.9 0.008

13:07 60 20.0 5.0 36.0 62.8 0.006

14:07 120 21.0 5.0 32.0 54.7 0.004

16:17 250 21.0 5.0 29.5 49.7 0.003

20:07 480 21.0 5.0 27.0 44.6 0.002

4/8/2004 12:07 1440 21.0 5.0 24.0 38.5 0.001

Rev. 01-03

PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS

MEC / LAKE O'NEILL

Specific Gravity (Gs) (assumed) Wt.of Air-Dry Soil + Cont.(g)

CL, BLACK LEAN CLAY

Dry Wt. of Soil (g)

Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)

Weight of Container (g)

Moisture Content (%)

Weight of Dry Soil (g)

Correction for Specific Gravity

Wt.of Air-Dry Soil + Cont. (g)

Wt. of Container (g)

Coarse Sieve Sieve after Hydrometer & Wet Sieve

% Total Sample% Passing

Percent Passing

Wt. of Dry Soil (g)Wt. of Air-Dry Soil (g)

Sieve Size Sieve Size

Deflocculant 125 cc of 4% Solution Hydrometer

Date Time

1_multipart_xF8FF_4_HYDRO SED-5

Attachment 1 Page 17 August 18, 2009

OTHER TESTS: A:

B:

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:

R -V al ue pH O nl y

LABORATORY ASSIGNMENT SCHEDULE SAN DIEGO

PROJECT NAME:

R es is tiv ity C or ro si on

S ui te pH , R es is tiv ity

C hl or id e , S ul fa te

O th er

O th er

H yd ro m et er

S ie ve

W as h

Rev. 2-04

REMARKSA

tte rb er g Li m its

M ax im um

D en si ty

MEC / LAKE O'NEILL-STETSON

M oi st ur e

D en si ty

M oi st ur e on ly

Si ev e A na ly si s

SOIL TYPE

D ire ct S he ar

: S lo w

R es id ua l - S pe c.

L oa d

R em ol de d D ire ct

S he ar to

Ex pa ns io n In de x

Sa nd

E qu iv al en t

Ti m e R at e

/ S pe ci al

L oa d

Su lfa te C on te nt

Tr ia xi al

S he ar : U

U , C

D , C

U

C on so lid at io n

H yd ro C ol la ps e

In un da tio n

ML/CLSED-3

SED-5

CUSTODY NUMBER: 8943

SAMPLED BY:

HOLE NO.

CLIENT

DATE SAMPLED: 3/11/2004, 3/12/2004

PROJECT MANAGER: BRIAN RILEY

PRIORITY: FRI., 4/9/2004

SAMPLE TYPE

(RING, BULK, SPT)

SAMPLE

NO. DEPTH

ML/CL

SPT

SPT

Attachment 1 Page 18 August 18, 2009

March 2004 Metals Analysis

Metals analysis was conducted on sediment from Core #1. This sample was chosen due to its proximity to a June 2003 EnviroMatrix sample that showed a selenium concentration above the STLC. The metals analysis results for Core #1 is shown in Table 1-3. Given that most of the water supply for Lake O'Neill comes from the Santa Margarita River and enters the Lake near the location of Core #1, the ambient concentrations for the River sediments are also shown in Table 1-3 for comparison.

The results indicate that the sediments in the southwest corner of the Lake do not have significant levels of selenium. The contractor may want to perform a WET test on the sediments prior to construction for confirmation or if deemed necessary.

TABLE 1-3

METALS ANALYSIS, MARCH 2004

TTLC

Limit** Core #1 STLC

Limit* Core #1 Substance

SMR

Sediment

95%* mg/kg mg/kg mg/L mg/L Antimony 8.8 500 14 15 < 1 Barium 262 10,000 16.3 100 3.51 Beryllium 1.5 75 < 1 0.75 < 0.1 Cadmium 1.6 100 3.73 1 < 1 Chromium 33 2,500 22.3 5 < 1 Cobalt 13.3 8,000 1.79 80 < 1 Copper 26.8 2,500 12 25 < 1 Lead 29.1 1,000 <10.0 5 < 1 Molybdenum 7.36 3,500 <5.0 350 < 1 Nickel 22.5 2,000 5.27 20 < 1 Vanadium 69.4 2,400 68.2 24 < 1 Zinc 111 5,000 54.8 250 < 1

EP

A

Silicon -- -- -- -- < 1 Arsenic 4.6 500 1.85 5 .056 Selenium 0.8 100 <1.0 1 < 0.1 Silver 1.36 500 .917 5 < 0.01 Thallium 1.4 700 <0.500 7 < 0.05 EP

A

Mercury 0.08 20 0.05 0.2 <0.001

*Background 95th Percentile (0-5ft) Santa Margarita River Sediments obtained from Camp Pendleton –

SWDIV, 1997

** TTLC, STLC, and TCLP obtained from Title 22 §66261.24. Characteristic of Toxicity. (http://www.calregs.com)

Attachment 1 Page 19 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 20 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 21 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 22 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 23 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 24 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 25 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 26 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 27 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 28 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 29 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 30 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 31 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 32 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 33 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 34 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 35 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 36 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 37 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 38 August 18, 2009

2004 Fish Toxicity Test

A water sample was collected two-feet above the lakebed surface, near the center of the Lake, and sent to a laboratory for analysis. This water sample is representative of the water column nearest to the material proposed for removal. A fish toxicity test (EPA Method 821-R- 02-012) was performed using this sample. The purpose of this test was to determine if the sediments planned for removal would have a toxic effect on fish. The Lake O’Neill water did not provide a toxic effect on larval Fathead Minnows during a 96-hour exposure period.

Survival in 100% effluent water was 100% after 96 hours. The metals test, in addition to fish toxicity testing, was used to determine whether the material to be removed is classified as a hazardous material. Based on the above referenced test results, none of the material to be removed are classified as hazardous or contaminated.

Complete results and chain-of-custody form from the 2004 fish toxicity analysis conducted by MEC Analytical Systems, Inc. are provided below. The samples tested were obtained on March 12, 2004 and the test ran from March 12 through March 16, 2004.

Attachment 1 Page 39 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 40 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 41 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 42 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 43 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 44 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 45 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 46 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 47 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 48 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 49 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 50 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 51 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 52 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 53 August 18, 2009

2003 ENVIROMATRIX METALS & WATER ANALYSES

Metals Analysis

Four sediment samples were collected from Lake O'Neill (Figure 1-1) on June 23, 2003 and analyzed for metals, nitrogen, and phosphorous (EnviroMatrix, 2003). The metals were analyzed by EPA Method 6000/7000 Series Methods for TTLC, STLC, and TCLP. No metals tested exceeded the allowable TTLC or federal TCLP. However, selenium exceeded the STLC at a concentration of 9.91 mg/L with a STLC of 1 mg/L. Some of the surrounding watershed is composed of older alluvium with fluvial and marine origin. These eroded sediments may be the source of the selenium. Table 1-4 summarizes the June 2003 metals analysis.

The complete results analysis are copied from the original results supplied by AC/S Environmental Security, Camp Pendleton (Wilson, 2003) and provided following Table 1-4. A sample locations map is followed by the complete laboratory analyses and chain-of-custody form for the EnviroMatrix Analyses and the subcontracted Chlorophyll analyses.

Attachment 1 Page 54 August 18, 2009

TABLE 1-4

LAKE O’NEILL METALS ANALYSIS, JUNE 2003 (ENVIROMATRIX)

Solid (mg/kg) STLC (CA) - Leachate (mg/L) TCLP (Federal) - Leachate (mg/L) Core Samples 6/23/03 Core Samples 6/23/03 Core Samples 6/23/03

TTLC

Limit* S1E S1W S2 S3 STLC

Limit* S1E S1W S2 S3 TCLP Limit* S1E S1W S2 S3 Substance mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L Antimony 500 <10 <10 <10 <10 15 <1 <1 <1 <1 -- -- -- -- -- Barium 10000 117 95 124 110 100 3.31 1.48 4.03 2.32 100 <1 <1 1.32 <1 Beryllium 75 <1 <1 <1 <1 0.75 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 -- -- -- -- -- Cadmium 100 <1 <1 <1 <1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 Chromium 2500 15.4 10.6 15.9 10.8 5 2.27 <1 <1 <1 5 <1 <1 <1 <1 Cobalt 8000 <1 <1 2.56 <1 80 <1 <1 <1 <1 -- -- -- -- -- Copper 2500 14.4 5.62 15.4 12.1 25 2.2 <1 <1 <1 -- -- -- -- -- Lead 1000 <10 <10 <10 <10 5 <1 <1 <1 <1 5 <1 <1 <1 <1 Molybdenum 3500 <5 <5 <5 <5 350 1.52 <1 <1 <1 -- -- -- -- -- Nickel 2000 10.6 6.26 10.1 7.63 20 <1 <1 <1 <1 -- -- -- -- -- Vanadium 2400 60.3 41.1 66.6 61.1 24 1.26 <1 1.41 1.08 -- -- -- -- -- Zinc 5000 38.7 28.4 33.4 31.3 250 <1 <1 <1 <1 -- -- -- -- --

M E

T A

L S

E

PA

Silicon -- 802 872 828 964 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Arsenic 500 3.36 0.67 1.88 1.35 5 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 5 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Selenium 100 <1 <1 <1 <1 1 9.91 <0.1 0.3 <0.1 1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Silver 500 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 5 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 5 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

M E

T A

L S

E

PA

Thallium 700 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 7 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 -- -- -- -- --

Data Compiled from EnviroMatrix Analytical Results July 2003 obtained from Camp Pendleton

* TTLC, STLC, and TCLP obtained from Title 22 §66261.24. Characteristic of Toxicity. (http://www.calregs.com)

Attachment 1 Page 55 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 56 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 57 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 58 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 59 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 60 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 61 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 62 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 63 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 64 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 65 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 66 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 67 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 68 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 69 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 70 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 71 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 72 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 73 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 74 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 75 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 76 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 77 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 78 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 79 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 80 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 81 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 82 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 83 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 84 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 85 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 86 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 87 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 88 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 89 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 90 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 91 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 92 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 93 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 94 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 95 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 96 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 97 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 98 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 99 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 100 August 18, 2009

2003 SOLAR BEE WATER & SLUDGE ANALYSES

This includes the 2003 Solar Bee water and sludge analyses. The June 2003 installation report is followed by an August 2003 service report. These reports were obtained from Walt Wilson, Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base, AC/S Environmental

Security, on October 30, 2003 (Wilson, 2003.) Among others, these reports include measurements of Dissolved Oxygen, Secchi depth, and slurry thickness.

Attachment 1 Page 101 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 102 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 103 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 104 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 105 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 106 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 107 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 108 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 109 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 110 August 18, 2009

1988 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION & CHEMICAL ANALYSES

Sediment Analysis

Two composite sediment samples were made from ten locations within Lake O'Neill to characterize dredging sediments in 1988 (Wagner Pacific, 1988). The samples were tested for 17 CAM metals, including selenium. The testing at that time showed no concentrations of metals in exceedence of allowable TTLC; and only Vanadium slightly above the STLC limit (concentrations of 25.7 and 26.3 mg/kg with a STLC of 24 mg/kg).

The lake sediments were also analyzed for organic compounds (EPA Methods 8240 and 8270) in 1988 and demonstrated no contamination of concern. Prior to December 1983, sewage effluent from the Fallbrook sewage treatment plant was discharged into the Fallbrook Creek Drainage. After 1983, Fallbrook used a pipeline to the ocean for its sewage effluent (NRO/MCBCP, 1988). The 1988 results are important as they demonstrate that the Fallbrook sewage pipeline project resulted in improved water quality.

The complete results copied from the “Geotechnical Investigation Report Increased Water Storage Capacity Lake O’Neill – Project 825” prepared for Wagner Pacific Inc. by Schaefer Dixon Associates in 1988 are provided below (Schaefer, 1988.)

The grain size distribution results are reported in a table followed by the chemical analyses results and chain-of-custody form.

Attachment 1 Page 111 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 112 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 113 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 114 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 115 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 116 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 117 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 118 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 119 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 120 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 121 August 18, 2009

Attachment 1 Page 122 August 18, 2009

ATTACHMENT 2

RECHARGE POND SEDIMENT SAMPLING & ANALYSIS

SEDIMENT SAMPLING

Sediment samples were collected at eight locations in the Upper Ysidora Basin and sent to a laboratory for analysis in order to characterize the sediment type and quality. Samples were analyzed for grain size distribution using American Standard Testing Methods (ASTM) D422 and D4464M and specific gravity by ASTM D854 to characterize the engineering quality for levee construction, as well as to estimate the economic value of the materials. In addition, sample composites were sealed in brass tubes and analyzed for regulated hazardous materials: metals (EPA Method 3010B / 6020), semi-volatile organics (EPA Method 8270C), and volatile organics (EPA Method 6260) to verify the quality of the material. Figure 2-1 shows the approximate locations of the seven sediment sample sites (P1-P7) and the one river sample site (RVR).

Samples were collected using a hand auger near the center of each existing recharge pond and at two locations south of Pond 4 in the location of proposed Ponds 6 and 7. Though a geo-probe rig was on hand for direct push coring, none of the sites were accessible due to the steep slopes of the levees, softness of the soils, and the potential for getting the truck stuck. Three of the sample locations (P4, P6, and P7) required the addition of water to prevent the hole from caving in during sampling activities. In addition to the samples collected with the hand auger, the RVR sample was collected, to a depth of 1 foot of saturated sediment, behind the sheet pile weir in the Santa Margarita River near the diversion head gate structure. The river was flowing at the time of sampling and sandy sediment had accumulated behind the weir. All work was supervised by a Registered Geologist.

There was some ponding of water near the edges at Ponds 1, 2 and 3. Desiccated clay chips were visible at the surface of Ponds 1, 2, and 3; though the cracks in the clay showed more sandy material just beneath the surface. A dry algal mat was observed on the surface above a thin clay veneer at Pond 3. Pond 4 was vegetated with grasses, some small brush, and a large tree. The area south of the existing ponds, where samples P6 and P7 were collected, was also vegetated with grasses, small brush, and trees. Grass covered

Lake O'Neill Dredging and Recharge Ponds Rehabilitation W912PL-09-B-0005

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 1 August 18, 2009 remnants of old levees were evident at the P6 and P7 sample sites. Groundwater was not encountered at any of the sampled depths.

SIEVE ANALYSIS

Sieve analysis identifies the grain sizes present in a soil sample as well as the grain size distribution. The size of a soil particle has an effect on the engineering behavior of the soil as well as the type of beneficial reuse for the material once it is removed. Grain sizes with an equivalent particle diameter between 0.074 mm and 5 mm are classified according to the U.S. Standard sieve number, which is related to a specific grain size as determined by the standard sieve test.

The results of the grain size analysis for samples from three intervals, within the top five feet, at each of the five existing percolation basins and at four intervals, within the top ten feet, at two locations south of the existing ponds are summarized in Table 2-1.

The distribution of the pond and river sediments shows the varying percentages of gravel, sand, silt, and clay at the eight locations sampled. The percentage of fine grained material, consisting of silt and clay, ranges from less than 1% of the sample at the river and at a depth of four to five feet beneath Pond 4, to about 53% of the sample at the surface of Pond 1. Generally, the fine particles were found near the surface while the coarser material was deeper. The top four feet sampled near the P7 location showed a larger fraction (about 11%) of silt than was present in most of the other samples, except for the surface of Pond 1. About 79% of the 24 samples were classified as ‘medium sand’ based on their grain size distribution, and 17% was characterized as ‘fine sand’.

One sample from the top 1.5 feet of Pond 5 was classified as ‘coarse sand’. The grain size characteristics were used to estimate the type of material that will be available for levee construction and to determine value for the available material mix.

METALS AND CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

Composite samples were made in the field, sealed in brass tubes with Teflon caps, and put on ice for transit to the laboratory. The two composite samples for metals analysis (EPA 6010B and 6020) consisted of 15 samples from P1 through P5 collected in the existing recharge ponds and six samples (top five feet) from P6 and P7 collected in the area south of the ponds. The one composite sample for volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds (EPA Methods 8260B and 8270C) consisted of all 24 samples from the pond area and the river bed. The composites were made by combining approximately equal portions of all samples collected from different depths and locations, and mixing

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 2 August 18, 2009 the sediments before compacting the sediments into the brass tubes. Multiple brass tubes were prepared for each composite sample.

The analytical results for metals analysis of the composite samples are summarized in Table 2-2.. There were no detections of any metals above the threshold limit. There was no detection of any organic compound within the composite samples.

The sediments were determined to be of good quality and there is no limitation set on the use of this material based on the chemical analysis.

The detailed laboratory analysis and grain size distribution graphs for each of the 24 samples and for each of the composite samples and quality assurance datasheets are included following Tables 2-1 and 2-2.

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 3 August 18, 2009

TABLE 2-1

UPPER YSIDORA SEDIMENT GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS, JULY 2004

Particle Size Distribution (weight percent)

Sand Sample

(Location and depth)

Mean Grain Size

(mm, descry(2)) Gravel

Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay

% Fines (Silt & Clay)

P1 0.0-1.0 0.023 FS 0.00 0.00 27.46 19.25 25.72 27.58 53.29

P1 1.5-2.5 0.672 MS 0.46 8.57 69.55 18.96 (1) (1) 2.46

P1 2.5-5.0 0.747 MS 2.34 14.60 67.33 14.63 (1) (1) 1.09

P2 0.0-1.5 0.377 MS 0.22 3.52 39.39 53.60 (1) (1) 3.27

P2 2.0-3.5 0.616 MS 2.68 13.46 51.31 30.79 (1) (1) 1.76

P2 4.0-5.0 0.817 MS 3.99 20.87 55.71 18.35 (1) (1) 1.08

P3 0.0-1.5 0.325 FS 1.38 2.28 33.70 57.90 (1) (1) 4.74

P3 2.5-3.5 0.585 MS 2.44 11.67 50.93 32.25 (1) (1) 2.70

P3 4.0-5.0 0.693 MS 4.94 16.28 53.62 23.24 (1) (1) 1.92

P4 0.0-1.5 0.585 MS 3.43 6.83 58.44 29.83 (1) (1) 1.48

P4 1.5-3.0 0.476 MS 2.38 6.31 47.26 40.87 (1) (1) 3.17

P4 4.0-5.0 2.095 MS 1.20 53.52 22.77 21.83 (1) (1) 0.68

P5 0.0-1.5 4.788 CS 51.13 5.12 24.57 17.53 (1) (1) 1.64

P5 2.0-3.5 0.443 MS 6.88 3.18 42.70 45.30 (1) (1) 1.94

P5 4.0-5.0 0.530 MS 2.37 8.14 50.93 37.16 (1) (1) 1.40

P6 1.0-1.5 0.646 MS 0.50 12.98 56.48 28.07 (1) (1) 1.97

P6 2.5-4.0 0.369 MS 0.26 6.12 37.16 54.09 (1) (1) 2.36

P6 4.5-5.0 0.708 MS 0.32 4.91 72.85 20.56 (1) (1) 1.35

P6 9.0-10.0 0.873 MS 9.96 20.14 43.81 24.33 (1) (1) 1.76

P7 0.0-1.5 0.244 FS 0.00 0.00 28.43 58.68 10.95 1.94 12.89

P7 2.5-4.0 0.328 FS 0.00 0.00 40.11 47.07 11.20 1.62 12.82

P7 4.0-5.0 0.582 MS 20.27 7.74 33.62 35.42 (1) (1) 2.94

P7 9.0-10.0 0.952 MS 14.28 20.14 40.61 22.18 (1) (1) 2.79

RVR 0.859 MS 0.05 6.68 87.96 4.94 (1) (1) 0.36

(1) The coarser samples were run on the dry sieve (ASTM D422M) which does not breakdown silt/clay fractions because of the screen sizes, 1" to 400 mesh, (gravel to silt/clay). The finer samples were run using the laser method (ASTM D4464M), 2mm to <1 micron (medium sand through clay fractions).

(2) Descriptions: FS: fine sand; MS: medium sand; CS coarse sand.

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 5 August 18, 2009

TABLE 2-2

METALS AND CHEMICALS ANALYSIS

Parameter Reporting Limit mg/kg

TTLC

mg/kg1

Santa Margarita River Sediments2

Ponds 1-5 Composite mg/kg

Ponds 6-7 Composite mg/kg Antimony 0.750 500 8.8 <0.750 <0.750 Barium 0.5 10,000 262 61.7 47.2 Beryllium 0.250 75 1.5 <0.250 <0.250 Cadmium 0.500 100 1.6 <0.500 <0.500 Chromium 0.25 2,500 33 4.40 5.08 Cobalt 0.25 8,000 13.3 2.63 3.05 Copper 0.50 2,500 26.8 3.03 2.89 Lead 0.500 1,000 29.1 0.719 0.53 Molybdenum 0.250 3,500 7.36 <0.250 <0.250 Nickel 0.25 2,000 22.5 1.90 2.22 Vanadium 0.2 2,400 69.4 13.5 14.9

Metals

EPA 6010

Zinc 1.0 5,000 111 11.8 13.3 Arsenic 0.020 500 4.6 0.0752 0.154 Selenium 0.0500 100 0.8 <0.0500 <0.0500 Silver 0.010 500 1.36 0.0616 0.312

Metals EPA

Thallium 0.0100 700 1.4 0.0768 0.0899 1 Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) from Title 22 §66261.24 Characteristics of Toxicity (www.calregs.com) 2 Background 95th Percentile (0-5 ft) Santa Margarita River Sediments (from MCBCP - Original source

SWDIV, 1997)

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 6 August 18, 2009

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 7 August 18, 2009

PTS Laboratories Stetson Engineers PTS File No: 34428

SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SOILS BY PYCNOMETER

PROJECT NAME: Upper Ysidora Sediment Sampling

PROJECT NO: 2045-02

MASS OF SPECIFIC SPECIFIC

TEMPERATURE MASS OF MASS OF PYCNOMETER, GRAVITY GRAVITY

SAMPLE DEPTH, TEMP. CORRECTION PYCNOMETER OVEN DRY OVEN DRY SOIL AT AT

ID. ft. °C FACTOR AND WATER, g SOIL, g AND WATER, g TEMPERATURE 20°C

P1+P2+P3+P4+P5 Mix 5' 27.0 0.9965 71.8090 18.8996 83.7748 2.73 2.72

P6+P7 Mixed 27.0 0.9965 72.7099 20.6843 85.7913 2.72 2.71

RVR 0-1.0 27.0 0.9965 73.8515 19.6864 86.2545 2.70 2.69

(METHODOLOGY: ASTM D854)

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 8 August 18, 2009

PTS Laboratories, Inc. Stetson Engineers

PROJECT NAME: Upper Ysidora Sediment Sampling

PROJECT NO: 2045-02

Median Particle Size Distribution, wt. percent Silt Mean Grain Size Grain Size Sand Size &

Sample ID Depth, ft. Description (1) mm Gravel Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay Clay

P1_0-1.0 0.0-1.0 Fine sand 0.023 0.00 0.00 27.46 19.25 25.72 27.58 53.29

P1_1.5-2.5 1.5-2.5 Medium sand 0.672 0.46 8.57 69.55 18.96 (2) (2) 2.46

P1_2.5-5.0 2.5-5.0 Medium sand 0.747 2.34 14.60 67.33 14.63 (2) (2) 1.09

P2_0-1.5 0-1.5 Medium sand 0.377 0.22 3.52 39.39 53.60 (2) (2) 3.27

P2_2.0-3.5 2.0-3.5 Medium sand 0.616 2.68 13.46 51.31 30.79 (2) (2) 1.76

P2_4.0-5.0 4.0-5.0 Medium sand 0.817 3.99 20.87 55.71 18.35 (2) (2) 1.08

P3_0-1.5 0-1.5 Fine sand 0.325 1.38 2.28 33.70 57.90 (2) (2) 4.74

P3_2.5-3.5 2.5-3.5 Medium sand 0.585 2.44 11.67 50.93 32.25 (2) (2) 2.70

P3_4.0-5.0 4.0-5.0 Medium sand 0.693 4.94 16.28 53.62 23.24 (2) (2) 1.92

P6_1.0-1.5 1.0-1.5 Medium sand 0.646 0.50 12.98 56.48 28.07 (2) (2) 1.97

P6_2.5-4.0 2.5-4.0 Medium sand 0.369 0.26 6.12 37.16 54.09 (2) (2) 2.36

P6_4.5-5.0 4.5-5.0 Medium sand 0.708 0.32 4.91 72.85 20.56 (2) (2) 1.35

P6_9.0-10.0 9.0-10.0 Medium sand 0.873 9.96 20.14 43.81 24.33 (2) (2) 1.76

P7_0.0-1.5 0.0-1.5 Fine sand 0.244 0.00 0.00 28.43 58.68 10.95 1.94 12.89

P7_2.5-4.0 2.5-4.0 Fine sand 0.328 0.00 0.00 40.11 47.07 11.20 1.62 12.82

PARTICLE SIZE SUMMARY

(METHODOLOGY: ASTM D422/D4464M)

(1) Based on Mean from Trask

(2) Dry sieve data does not differentiate silt/clay fractions

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 9 August 18, 2009

PTS Laboratories, Inc. Stetson Engineers

PROJECT NAME: Upper Ysidora Sediment Sampling

PROJECT NO: 2045-02

Median Particle Size Distribution, wt. percent Silt Mean Grain Size Grain Size Sand Size &

Sample ID Depth, ft. Description (1) mm Gravel Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay Clay

PARTICLE SIZE SUMMARY

(METHODOLOGY: ASTM D422/D4464M)

P7_4.0-5.0 4.0-5.0 Medium sand 0.582 20.27 7.74 33.62 35.42 (2) (2) 2.94

P7_9.0-10.0 9.0-10.0 Medium sand 0.952 14.28 20.14 40.61 22.18 (2) (2) 2.79

P4_0-1.5 0-1.5 Medium sand 0.585 3.43 6.83 58.44 29.83 (2) (2) 1.48

P4_1.5-3.0 1.5-3.0 Medium sand 0.476 2.38 6.31 47.26 40.87 (2) (2) 3.17

P4_4.0-5.0 4.0-5.0 Medium sand 2.095 1.20 53.52 22.77 21.83 (2) (2) 0.68

P5_0-1.5 0-1.5 Coarse sand 4.788 51.13 5.12 24.57 17.53 (2) (2) 1.64

P5_2.0-3.5 2.0-3.5 Medium sand 0.443 6.88 3.18 42.70 45.30 (2) (2) 1.94

P5_4.0-5.0 4.0-5.0 Medium sand 0.530 2.37 8.14 50.93 37.16 (2) (2) 1.40

RVR 0-1.0 Medium sand 0.859 0.05 6.68 87.96 4.94 (2) (2) 0.36

(1) Based on Mean from Trask

(2) Dry sieve data does not differentiate silt/clay fractions

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 10 August 18, 2009

PTS Laboratories, Inc. Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D4464M

Client: Stetson Engineers PTS File No: 34428 Project: Upper Ysidora Sediment Sampling Sample ID: P1_0-1.0 Project No: 2045-02 Depth, ft: 0.0-1.0

Sample Increment Cumulative Cumulative Weight Percent greater than Opening Phi of U.S. Weight, Weight, Weight, Weight Phi Particle Size

Inches Millimeters Screen No. grams percent percent percent Value Inches Millimeters

0.2500 6.351 -2.67 1/4 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 -0.12 0.0426 1.083

0.1873 4.757 -2.25 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 0.13 0.0360 0.915

0.1324 3.364 -1.75 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 16 0.42 0.0295 0.748

0.0787 2.000 -1.00 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 25 1.03 0.0193 0.490

0.0468 1.189 -0.25 16 2.23 2.23 2.23 40 2.70 0.0060 0.153

0.0331 0.841 0.25 20 10.30 10.29 12.52 50 5.41 0.0009 0.023

0.0278 0.707 0.50 25 5.17 5.17 17.69 60 6.57 0.0004 0.011

0.0234 0.595 0.75 30 3.93 3.93 21.62 75 7.89 0.0002 0.004

0.0197 0.500 1.00 35 3.05 3.05 24.67 84 8.74 0.0001 0.002

0.0166 0.420 1.25 40 2.79 2.79 27.46 90 9.43 0.0001 0.001

0.0139 0.354 1.50 45 2.03 2.03 29.49 95 10.14 0.0000 0.001

0.0117 0.297 1.75 50 2.14 2.14 31.62

0.0098 0.250 2.00 60 1.70 1.70 33.32 Measure Trask Inman Folk-Ward

0.0083 0.210 2.25 70 2.18 2.18 35.50 Median, phi 5.41 5.41 5.41

0.0070 0.177 2.50 80 2.50 2.50 38.00 Median, in. 0.0009 0.0009 0.0009

0.0059 0.149 2.75 100 2.44 2.44 40.44 Median, mm 0.023 0.023 0.023

0.0049 0.125 3.00 120 2.33 2.33 42.77

0.0041 0.105 3.25 140 2.09 2.09 44.86 Mean, phi 2.02 4.58 4.86

0.0035 0.088 3.50 170 1.36 1.36 46.22 Mean, in. 0.0097 0.0016 0.0014

0.0029 0.074 3.75 200 0.49 0.49 46.71 Mean, mm 0.247 0.042 0.034

0.0025 0.063 4.00 230 0.06 0.06 46.76

0.0021 0.053 4.25 270 0.01 0.01 46.78 Sorting 10.776 4.162 3.634

0.00174 0.0442 4.50 325 0.13 0.13 46.91 Skewness 1.937 -0.200 -0.139

0.00146 0.0372 4.75 400 0.39 0.39 47.30 Kurtosis 0.266 0.232 0.613

0.00123 0.0313 5.00 450 0.70 0.70 48.00 Grain Size Description Fine sand

0.000986 0.0250 5.32 500 1.40 1.40 49.40 (ASTM-USCS Scale) (based on Mean from Trask)

0.000790 0.0201 5.64 635 2.08 2.08 51.47

0.000615 0.0156 6.00 2.93 2.93 54.40 Description Retained Weight

0.000435 0.0110 6.50 4.82 4.82 59.22 on Sieve # Percent

0.000308 0.00781 7.00 5.52 5.52 64.74 Gravel 4 0.00

0.000197 0.00500 7.65 7.69 7.69 72.42 Coarse Sand 10 0.00

0.000077 0.00195 9.00 14.30 14.29 86.72 Medium Sand 40 27.46

0.000038 0.000977 10.00 7.59 7.59 94.30 Fine Sand 200 19.25

0.000019 0.000488 11.00 5.12 5.12 99.42 Silt >0.005 mm 25.72

0.000015 0.000375 11.38 0.58 0.58 100.00 Clay <0.005 mm 27.58 TOTALS 100.10 100.00 100.00 Total 100

© PTS Laboratories, Inc. Phone: (562) 907-3607 Fax: (562) 907-3610

6.

3.

1.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

Particle Size, mm

R et ai ne d W t., C um ul at iv e

W t., ClaySilt medium

Sand Size crs fine

Grv

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 11 August 18, 2009

PTS Laboratories, Inc. Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D422M

Project: Upper Ysidora Sediment Sampling Sample ID: P1_1.5-2.5 Project No: 2045-02 Depth, ft: 1.5-2.5

U.S. Sample Incremental Cumulative Cumulative Weight Percent greater than Opening Phi of Sieve Weight Weight, Weight, Weight Phi Particle Size

Inches Millimeters Screen No. grams percent percent percent Value Inches Millimeters

0.9844 25.002 -4.64 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 -1.40 0.1040 2.642

0.4922 12.501 -3.64 1/2 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 -0.91 0.0742 1.885

0.3740 9.500 -3.25 3/8 0.00 0.00 0.00 16 -0.44 0.0536 1.360

0.2500 6.351 -2.67 1/4 0.83 0.16 0.16 25 -0.06 0.0411 1.043

0.1873 4.757 -2.25 4 1.48 0.29 0.46 40 0.34 0.0311 0.791

0.1324 3.364 -1.75 6 5.25 1.04 1.50 50 0.57 0.0265 0.672

0.0787 2.000 -1.00 10 37.97 7.53 9.03 60 0.78 0.0229 0.582

0.0557 1.414 -0.50 14 28.50 5.65 14.69 75 1.14 0.0179 0.454

0.0394 1.000 0.00 18 59.22 11.75 26.43 84 1.47 0.0142 0.362

0.0278 0.707 0.50 25 101.10 20.06 46.49 90 1.84 0.0110 0.279

0.0197 0.500 1.00 35 121.14 24.03 70.52 95 2.44 0.0072 0.184

0.0166 0.420 1.25 40 40.64 8.06 78.58

0.0139 0.354 1.50 45 31.49 6.25 84.83 Measure Trask Inman Folk-Ward

0.0098 0.250 2.00 60 38.18 7.57 92.40 Median, phi 0.57 0.57 0.57

0.0070 0.177 2.50 80 14.71 2.92 95.32 Median, in. 0.0265 0.0265 0.0265

0.0049 0.125 3.00 120 7.97 1.58 96.90 Median, mm 0.672 0.672 0.672

0.0029 0.074 3.75 200 3.21 0.64 97.54

0.0021 0.053 4.25 270 5.16 1.02 98.56 Mean, phi 0.42 0.51 0.53

0.0015 0.037 4.75 400 2.51 0.50 99.06 Mean, in. 0.0295 0.0276 0.0272

PAN 4.73 0.94 100.00 Mean, mm 0.749 0.702 0.692

Sorting 1.516 0.955 1.060 Skewness 1.024 -0.065 -0.046 Kurtosis 0.183 1.013 1.314

Grain Size Description Medium sand (ASTM-USCS Scale) (based on Mean from Trask)

Description Retained Weight on Sieve # Percent

Gravel 4 0.46 Coarse Sand 10 8.57 Medium Sand 40 69.55

Fine Sand 200 18.96 Silt/Clay <200 2.46

TOTALS 504.09 100.00 100.00 Total 100 © PTS Laboratories, Inc. Phone: (562) 907-3607 Fax: (562) 907-3610

1/

3/

1/ 4 4 6 10 14 18 25 35 40 45 60 80 12

PA

N

Sieve Size

R et ai ne d W ei gh t, C um ul at iv e

W ei gh t, Silt/Claymedium Sand coarse fineGravel

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 12 August 18, 2009

Project: Upper Ysidora Sediment Sampling Sample ID: P1_2.5-5.0 Project No: 2045-02 Depth, ft: 2.5-5.0

U.S. Sample Incremental Cumulative Cumulative Weight Percent greater than Opening Phi of Sieve Weight Weight, Weight, Weight Phi Particle Size

Inches Millimeters Screen No. grams percent percent percent Value Inches Millimeters

0.9844 25.002 -4.64 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 -1.75 0.1322 3.357

0.4922 12.501 -3.64 1/2 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 -1.43 0.1064 2.703

0.3740 9.500 -3.25 3/8 0.00 0.00 0.00 16 -1.06 0.0820 2.083

0.2500 6.351 -2.67 1/4 3.66 0.98 0.98 25 -0.40 0.0521 1.324

0.1873 4.757 -2.25 4 5.10 1.36 2.34 40 0.15 0.0356 0.904

0.1324 3.364 -1.75 6 9.78 2.61 4.96 50 0.42 0.0294 0.747

0.0787 2.000 -1.00 10 44.84 11.99 16.94 60 0.65 0.0251 0.638

0.0557 1.414 -0.50 14 21.60 5.77 22.71 75 0.96 0.0202 0.514

0.0394 1.000 0.00 18 44.75 11.96 34.68 84 1.24 0.0167 0.423

0.0278 0.707 0.50 25 68.10…