Appendices_W912PL-15-B-0015.pdf

Appendix A – Geotechnical Investigation, February 20th, 2014

Geotechnical Engineering Engineering Geology

Storm Water Management Construction Observation & Testing Services

1600 Willow Pass Court • Concord, CA 94520 • Tel 925.688.1001

Serving Northern and Central California, Sacramento, and Central Valley Regions www.sfandb.com

361-17.rpt

February 20, 2014

Mr. William Romzick Jacobs Engineering 1050 20th Street, Suite 200 Sacramento, CA 95811

Re: Geotechnical Investigation

Maintenance Yard Expansion, Riverside National Cemetery, Riverside, California SFB Project No.: 361-17

Mr. Romzick:

As requested, Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Company, Inc. has performed a geotechnical investigation for the Maintenance Yard Expansion project at Riverside National Cemetery in Riverside, California. The accompanying report presents the results of our field investigation, laboratory tests, and engineering analysis. The geotechnical conditions are discussed, and recommendations for the geotechnical engineering aspects of the project are presented. Conclusions and recommendations contained herein are based upon applicable standards of our profession at the time this report has been prepared. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely, Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Company, Inc.

Ken Ferrone President

TC/KCF:lc\encl.

Copies: Addressee (1 by email)

Geotechnical Engineering Engineering Geology

Storm Water Management Construction Observation & Testing Services

1600 Willow Pass Court • Concord, CA 94520 • Tel 925.688.1001

Serving Northern and Central California, Sacramento, and Central Valley Regions www.sfandb.com

361-17.rpt

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

MAINTENANCE YARD EXPANSION

RIVERSIDE NATIONAL CEMETERY

RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA

SFB PROJECT NO. 361-17

Prepared For:

Jacobs Engineering 1050 20th Street, Suite 200

Sacramento, California 95811

Prepared By:

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Company, Inc.

Taiming Chen, P.E., G.E. Kenneth C. Ferrone, P.E., G.E., C.E.G.

Civil/Geotechnical Engineer Civil/Geotechnical Engineer

Certified Engineering Geologist

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. i Maintenance Yard Expansion, 361-17.rpt

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK

3.0 SITE INVESTIGATION

3.1 Surface

3.2 Subsurface

3.3 Groundwater

3.4 Geology and Seismicity

3.5 Liquefaction & Lateral Spreading

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Earthwork

4.1.1 Clearing and Site Preparation

4.1.2 Subgrade Preparation

4.1.3 Fill Material

4.1.4 Compaction

4.1.5 Utility Trench Backfill

4.1.6 Exterior Flatwork

4.1.7 Construction during Wet Weather Conditions

4.1.8 Surface Drainage, Irrigation, and Landscaping

4.1.9 Future Maintenance

4.1.10 Additional Recommendations

4.2 Foundation Support

4.2.1 Conventional Spread Footings

4.2.2 Interior Slabs-on-Grade

4.2.3 Seismic Design Criteria

4.3 Concrete Pavements

5.0 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(Continued)

FIGURES

1 Site Plan

APPENDICES

A Field Investigation A-1

Figure A-1, Key to Exploratory Boring Logs Exploratory Boring Logs (SFB-1 through SFB-4)

B Laboratory Investigation B-1

C ASFE Guidelines C-1

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 1 of 17

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed maintenance yard expansion at Riverside National Cemetery in Riverside, California as shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the geotechnical conditions at the site and provide recommendations regarding the geotechnical engineering aspects of the project.

Based on the information indicated on the Site Plan, as well as information provided by Mr. Bill Romzick of Jacobs, it is our understanding that the project will consist of constructing a new storage/warehouse building of about 1,200 square feet to the south of the existing maintenance yard. In addition, new covered equipment structures and concrete pavement are also proposed at the existing unpaved yard area. Nominal grading is anticipated.

The conclusions and recommendations provided in this report are based upon the information presented above; Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Company, Inc. (SFB) should be consulted if any changes to the project occur to assess if the changes affect the validity of this report.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 2 of 17

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK

This investigation included the following scope of work:

Reviewing available published and unpublished geotechnical and geological literature relevant to the site;

Performing reconnaissance of the site and surrounding area;

Performing a subsurface exploration program, including drilling four exploratory borings to a maximum depth of about 40-1/2 feet;

Performing laboratory testing of samples retrieved from the borings;

Performing engineering analysis of the field and laboratory data; and

Preparing this report.

The data obtained and the analyses performed were for the purpose of providing geotechnical design and construction criteria for site earthwork, installation of underground utilities, drainage, building foundations, and pavements. Toxicity potential assessment of onsite materials or groundwater (including mold) was beyond our scope of work.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 3 of 17

3.0 SITE INVESTIGATION

Reconnaissance of the site and surrounding area was performed on January 31, 2014.

Subsurface exploration was performed using a truck-mounted drill rig equipped with 8-inch diameter, continuous flight, hollow stem augers. Four exploratory borings were drilled on January 31, 2014 to a maximum depth of about 40-1/2 feet. The approximate locations of SFB’s borings are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1. Logs of SFB’s borings and details regarding SFB’s field investigation are included in Appendix A. The results of SFB’s laboratory tests are discussed in Appendix B. It should be noted that changes in the surface and subsurface conditions can occur over time as a result of either natural processes or human activity and may affect the validity of the conclusions and recommendations in this report.

3.1 Surface

At the time of our investigation and as shown on Figure 1, the site was bounded by the existing concrete paved maintenance yard to the north, an existing warehouse to the northeast, an asphalt concrete paved parking lot to the east, and open space on the other sides. Approximately 4:1 (horizontal to vertical) slopes of about 5 to 10 feet high were located along the western and southern site boundaries and sloped downward toward the site. The site was generally level and had a plan area of about 1/3 of an acre with maximum dimensions of about 165 feet by 120 feet.

A small raised area of about one foot high was located at the northeastern corner of the site behind the existing warehouse.

The site was being used as an unpaved storage area and the surface was generally covered with gravels. Several boxes, a small building, a wooden shed, and various types of equipment were observed throughout the site. Large and small diameter trees were generally located on the slopes along the western and southern site boundaries.

According to the historical grading plans of the area, it is our understanding that cuts up to about 5 feet had been performed at the site during the original site grading to create the existing level pad and surrounding slopes.

3.2 Subsurface

The near-surface soil materials encountered in our exploratory borings below existing surface gravels generally consisted of dense to very dense silty and clayey sands with occasional very stiff sandy clays that extended to depths of about 11 to 22 feet. Below the surficial soils, completely weathered tonalite (very dense poor-graded sands with little to no fines) was encountered that extended to the maximum depth explored of about 40-1/2 feet. According to

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 4 of 17 the results of our laboratory testing, the near-surface sandy soils have a low plasticity and low expansion potential.

Detailed descriptions of the materials encountered in our exploratory borings are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A. Our attached boring logs and related information depict location specific subsurface conditions encountered during our field investigation. The approximate locations of our borings were determined using pacing or landmark references and should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used.

3.3 Groundwater

Groundwater was encountered by Boring SFB-1 at a depth of about 20 feet during drilling. No groundwater was encountered in the other borings to the maximum depth explored in these borings of about 20-1/2 feet. SFB’s borings were backfilled prior to leaving the site. It should be noted that our borings might not have been left open for a sufficient period of time to establish equilibrium ground water conditions. In addition, fluctuations in the ground water level could occur due to change in seasons, variations in rainfall, and other factors.

3.4 Geology and Seismicity

According to Morton, et al. (2001)1, the site is underlain by early Pleistocene alluvial fan deposits that have been described as mostly well-dissected, well-indurated, reddish brown sands derived chiefly from rocks of the southern California batholith. These sand deposits in the site area are underlain by Cretaceous Val Verde tonalite that has been described as weathered to grey, relatively homogenous, massive- to well-foliated, medium- to coarse-grained, hypautomorphic granular, biotite-hornblende tonalite.

The project site is located in the Riverside area that is considered one of the most seismically active regions in the United States. The approximate direction and distance from the site to nearby active faults are summarized in the table below2.

1Morton, Cox, Dawson, and O’Brien, 2001, Geologic Map of the Riverside East 7.5’ Quadrangle, Riverside County, California, USGS Open File Report 01-452.

2Information based on Jennings and Bryant, 2010, Fault Activity Map of California, CGS Geological Data Map No.6.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 5 of 17

Fault Name Approximate Distance to Fault (Miles) Direction to Fault

San Jacinto 9.0 Northeast

Casa Loma 10.3 Southwest

Elsinore 14.0 Southwest

Crafton Hills 14.6 Northeast

Banning 16.6 Northeast

San Gorgonio Pass 20.8 Northeast

San Andreas 18.2 Northeast

Cucamonga 22.0 Northwest

The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone as designated by the State of California3.

Earthquake intensities will vary throughout the Riverside area, depending upon numerous factors including the magnitude of earthquake, the distance of the site from the causative fault, and the type of materials underlying the site. The site will probably be subjected to at least one moderate to severe earthquake that will cause strong ground shaking.

According to the Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (NSHMP PSHA) interactive deaggregation model developed by U.S. Geological Survey (2008), the site has a 10% probability of exceeding a peak ground acceleration of about 0.5 g in 50 years (design basis ground motion based on stiff soil site condition; mean return time of 475 years). The actual ground surface acceleration might vary depending upon the local seismic characteristics of the underlying bedrock and the overlying unconsolidated soils.

3.5 Liquefaction

Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon primarily associated with saturated, cohesionless, soil layers located close to the ground surface. These soils lose strength during cyclic loading, such as imposed by earthquakes. During the loss of strength, the soil acquires mobility sufficient to

3Hart and Bryant, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, CDMG Special Publication 42, Interim Revision 2007.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 6 of 17 permit both horizontal and vertical movements. Soils that are most susceptible to liquefaction are clean, loose, uniformly graded, saturated, fine-grained sands that lie close to the ground surface. As of the date of this report, the liquefaction potential of the site has not been evaluated by the State of California4.

Based on our review of available literature and the results of exploratory borings, and field and laboratory testing by SFB, it is our opinion that the potential for ground surface damage at the site resulting from liquefaction is low due to the lack of saturated liquefiable soils at the site to a maximum depth explored of about 40-1/2 feet.

4Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, 1990.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 7 of 17

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

It is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed project from a geotechnical engineering standpoint. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report should be incorporated in the design and construction of the project to reduce soil or foundation related issues. The following are the primary geotechnical considerations for development of the site.

CORROSION POTENTIAL: Two onsite soil samples were tested for pH (ASTM D4972), chlorides (ASTM D4327), sulfates (ASTM D4327), resistivity at 100% saturation (ASTM G57), and Redox potential (ASTM D1498) for use in evaluating the potential for corrosion on concrete and buried metal such as utilities and reinforcing steel. The results of these tests are included in Appendix B. We recommend these test results be forwarded to your underground contractors, pipeline designers, and foundation designers and contractors.

ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Detailed drainage, earthwork, foundation, and pavement recommendations for use in design and construction of the project are presented below. We recommend SFB review the design and specifications to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design, plans, and specifications. We also recommend SFB be retained to provide consulting services and to perform construction observation and testing services during the construction phase of the project to observe and test the implementation of our recommendations, and to provide supplemental or revised recommendations in the event conditions different than those described in this report are encountered. We assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations if we do not review the plans and specifications and are not retained during construction.

4.1 Earthwork

4.1.1 Clearing and Site Preparation

Where improvements are proposed, we recommend the proposed area be cleared of all obstructions including any existing structures and their entire foundation systems, any existing utilities and pipelines and their associated backfill, designated trees and their associated entire root systems, and debris. Holes resulting from the removal of underground obstructions extending below the proposed finish grade should be cleared and backfilled with fill materials as specified in Section 4.1.3, Fill Material, and compacted to the requirements in Section 4.1.4, Compaction. Tree roots may extend to depths of about 3 to 4 feet.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 8 of 17

From a geotechnical standpoint, any existing trench backfill materials or concrete slabs that are removed can be used as new fill onsite provided debris is removed and it is broken up to meet the size requirement for fill material in Section 4.1.4, Fill Material. We recommend backfilling operations for any excavations be performed under the observation and testing of SFB.

4.1.2 Subgrade Preparation

After the completion of clearing, site preparation, soil exposed in areas to receive improvements (such as structural fill, building foundations, exterior flatwork, and pavements) should be scarified to a depth of about 12 inches, moisture conditioned to slightly over optimum water content, and compacted to the requirements for structural fill. If building pads or pavement subgrade are allowed to remain exposed to sun, wind or rain for an extended period of time, or are disturbed by borrowing animals, the exposed subgrade or pavement subgrade may need to be reconditioned (moisture conditioned and/or scarified and recompacted) prior to foundation or pavement construction. SFB should be consulted on the need for subgrade reconditioning when the subgrade is left exposed for extended periods of time.

4.1.3 Fill Material

From a geotechnical and mechanical standpoint, onsite soils having an organic content of less than 3 percent by volume can be used as fill. Fill should not contain rocks or lumps larger than 6 inches in greatest dimension with not more than 15 percent larger than 2.5 inches. If required, imported fill should have a plasticity index of 12 or less and have a significant amount of cohesive fines.

In addition to the mechanical properties specifications, all imported fill material should have a resistivity (100% saturated) no less than the resistivity for the onsite soils, a pH of between approximately 6.0 and 8.5, a total water soluble chloride concentration less than 300 ppm, and a total water soluble sulfate concentration less than 500 ppm. We recommend import samples be submitted for corrosion and geotechnical testing at least two weeks prior to being brought onsite.

4.1.4 Compaction

Within the upper 5 feet of the finished ground surface, we recommend structural fill be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction, and structural fill below a depth of 5 feet be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM D1557 (latest edition). We recommend the new fill be moisture conditioned to slightly over optimum water content. The upper 12 inches of subgrade soils beneath pavements should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Fill material should be spread and compacted in lifts not exceeding approximately 8 to 12 inches in uncompacted thickness.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 9 of 17

4.1.5 Utility Trench Backfill

Pipeline trenches should be backfilled with fill placed in lifts of approximately 8 inches in uncompacted thickness. Thicker lifts can be used provided the method of compaction is approved by SFB and the required minimum degree of compaction is achieved. Backfill should be placed by mechanical means only. Jetting is not permitted.

Onsite trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. Imported sand trench backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction and sufficient water is added during backfilling operations to prevent the soil from "bulking" during compaction. The upper 3 feet of trench backfill in foundation, slab, and pavement areas should be entirely compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. To reduce piping and settlement of overlying improvements, we recommend rock bedding and rock backfill (if used) be completely surrounded by a filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N (or equivalent); alternatively, filter fabric would not be necessary if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used in lieu of rock bedding and rock backfill.

Sand or gravel backfilled trench laterals that extend toward pavements, exterior slabs-on-grade, or under the building foundations, and are located below irrigated landscaped areas such as lawns or planting strips, should be plugged with onsite clays, low strength concrete, or sand/cement slurry. The plug for the trench lateral should be located below the edge of pavement or slabs, and under the perimeter of the foundation. The plug should be at least 24 inches thick, extend the entire width of the trench, and extend from the bottom of the trench to the top of the sand or gravel backfill.

4.1.6 Exterior Flatwork

We recommend that new exterior slabs be placed directly on the properly compacted subgrade.

Prior to placing concrete, subgrade soils should be moisture conditioned to increase their moisture content to slightly above laboratory optimum moisture (ASTM D1557).

Consideration should be given to reinforcing new exterior slabs with steel bars in lieu of wire mesh. To reduce potential crack formation, the installation of #3 bars spaced at approximately 24 inches on center in both directions should be considered. Score joints and expansion joints should be used to control cracking and allow for expansion and contraction of the concrete slabs.

We recommend appropriate flexible, relatively impermeable fillers be used at all cold/expansion joints. The installation of dowels at all expansion and cold joints will reduce differential slab movements; if used, the dowels should be at least 30 inches long and should be spaced at a maximum lateral spacing of 24 inches. Although exterior slabs that are adequately reinforced

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 10 of 17 will still crack, trip hazards requiring replacement of the slabs will be reduced if the slabs are properly reinforced.

4.1.7 Construction during Wet Weather Conditions

If construction proceeds during or shortly after wet weather conditions, the moisture content of the onsite soils could be significantly above optimum. Consequently, subgrade preparation, placement and/or reworking of onsite soil or fills as structural fill might not be possible.

Alternative wet weather construction recommendations can be provided by our representative in the field at the time of construction, if appropriate. All the drainage measures recommended in this report should be implemented and maintained during and after construction, especially during wet weather conditions.

4.1.8 Surface Drainage, Irrigation, and Landscaping

Ponding of surface water must not be allowed adjacent to foundations, at the top or bottom of slopes, and at the top or adjacent to retaining walls. Ponding of water should also not be allowed on the ground surface adjacent to or near exterior slabs, including driveways, walkways, and patios. Surface water should not be allowed to flow over the top of slopes, down slope faces, or over retaining walls.

We recommend positive surface gradients of at least 2 percent be provided adjacent to foundations to direct surface water away from the foundations and toward suitable discharge facilities. We recommend the surface drainage be designed in accordance with the latest edition of the California Building Code.

In order to reduce differential foundation movements, landscaping should be placed uniformly adjacent to the foundation and exterior slabs. We recommend trees be no closer to the structure or exterior slabs than half the mature height of the tree; in no case should tree roots be allowed to extend near or below the foundations or exterior slabs.

Landscaping drainage inlets and/or drainage swales should provided and maintained around the structures at all times that adequately collect irrigation and storm water and direct the water onto pavement or into storm water collection systems. Drainage inlets should be provided within enclosed planter areas and the collected water should be discharged onto pavement, into drainage swales, or into an enclosed storm drain system. The drainage inlets and associated swales should be designed and constructed so that the moisture content of the soils surrounding the foundations do not become elevated and no ponding of water occurs. The inlets should be kept free of debris and be lower in elevation than the adjacent ground surface.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 11 of 17

We recommend regular maintenance of the drainage systems be performed, including maintenance prior to rainstorms. The inspection should include checking drainage patterns to make sure they are performing properly, making sure drainage systems and inlets are functional and not clogged, and checking that erosion control measures are adequate for anticipated storm events. Immediate repairs should be performed if any of these measures appears to be inadequate.

Irrigation should be performed in a uniform, systematic manner as equally as possible on all sides of the foundations and exterior slabs to maintain moist soil conditions. Over-watering must be avoided. To reduce moisture changes in the natural soils and fills in landscaped areas, we recommend that drought resistant plants and low flow watering systems be used. All irrigation systems should be inspected for leakage regularly.

4.1.9 Future Maintenance

In order to reduce water created issues, we recommend regular maintenance of the site be performed, including maintenance prior to rainstorms. Maintenance should include the recompaction of loosened soils, collapsing and infilling holes with compacted soils or low strength sand/cement grout, removal and control of digging animals, modifying storm water drainage patterns to allow for sheet flow into drainage inlets or ditches rather than concentrated flow or ponding, removal of debris within drainage ditches and inlets, and immediately repairing any erosion or soil flow. The inspection should include checking drainage patterns, making sure drainage systems are functional and not clogged, and erosion control measures are adequate for anticipated storm events. Immediate repair should be performed if any of these measures appears to be inadequate. Temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control measures should be installed over any exposed soils immediately after repairs are made.

Differential movement of exterior slabs can occur over time as a result of numerous factors. We recommend the development owners perform inspections and maintenance of the slabs, including infilling significant cracks, providing fillers at slab offsets, and replacing slabs if severely damaged.

4.1.10 Additional Recommendations

We recommend the drainage, irrigation, landscaping, and maintenance recommendations provided in this report be forwarded to your designers and contractors.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 12 of 17

4.2 Foundation Support

4.2.1 Conventional Spread Footings

The proposed new storage/warehouse building and covered equipment structures can be supported on spreading footing foundations bearing in the onsite compacted fills. Footings should be at least 12 inches wide and should be founded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade. A continuous footing should be provided around the perimeter of the proposed buildings. Continuous footings should be designed with steel reinforcing, both top and bottom, to provide structural continuity and permit spanning of local irregularities.

New and existing footings should be evaluated using an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot due to dead loads, 3,750 pounds per square foot due to dead plus live loads, and 5,000 pounds per square foot for all loads, including wind or seismic. These allowable bearing pressures are net values; therefore, the weight of the footing can be neglected for design purposes.

Lateral load resistance can be developed by friction between the footing foundation bottom and the supporting subgrade. A friction coefficient of 0.35 is considered applicable. As an alternative, a passive resistance equal to an equivalent fluid weighing 350 pcf acting against the vertical face of the foundations can be used; however the upper 12 inches should be ignored in the passive resistance design. If foundations are poured neat against the subgrade, the friction and passive resistance can be used in combination.

At least 10 feet of soil cover must be provided between the face of the footings and the face of slopes, as measured horizontally. The portion of the footing located closer than 10 feet from the face of slopes should be ignored in both the vertical and lateral load design.

Where foundations are located adjacent to utility trenches, the foundation bearing surface should bear below an imaginary 1 horizontal to 1 vertical plane extending upward from the bottom edge of the adjacent utility trench. Alternatively, the foundation reinforcing could be increased to span the area defined above assuming no soil support is provided.

Wetting prior to construction of the foundations should close any visible cracks in the bottoms of the footing excavations. We recommend that we observe the footing excavations prior to placing reinforcing steel or concrete to check that footings are founded on appropriate material.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 13 of 17

4.2.2 Interior Slabs-on-Grade

We recommend that new interior slabs-on-grade (used in conjunction with new footing foundations) be at least 5 inches thick and be supported on properly prepared compacted fills.

The actual thickness of the slabs should be based upon the actual use and loading of the slabs.

Vehicular slabs should also be underlain by at least 6 inches of Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base.

All slabs should be reinforced with at least #4 bars on 18-inch centers, both ways; however, the actual reinforcing should be provided with the anticipated use and loading of the slab. In order to control concrete shrinkage cracking, the slabs should have deep score joints that are spaced at approximately 10-feet on center in both directions.

A vapor retarder must be placed between the subgrade and the bottom of new interior slabs-on-grade. We recommend the vapor retarder consist of a single layer of Stego Wrap Vapor Barrier 15 mil or equivalent provided the equivalent satisfies the following criteria: a permeance as tested before and after mandatory conditioning of less than 0.01 Perms and strength of Class A as determined by ASTM E 1745 (latest edition), and a thickness of at least 15 mils. Installation of the vapor retarder should conform to the latest edition of ASTM E 1643 (latest edition) and the manufacturers requirements, including all joints should be lapped at least 6 inches and sealed with Stego Tape or equal in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. Protrusions where pipes or conduit penetrate the membranes should be sealed with either one or a combination of Stego Tape, Stego Mastic, Stego Pipe Boots, or a product of equal quality as determined by the manufacturer’s instructions and ASTM E 1643. Care must be taken to protect the membrane from tears and punctures during construction.

We do not recommend placing sand or gravel over the membrane located below new interior slabs-on-grade. In addition, we recommend that 4 inches of ½ to ¾ inch drain rock be placed below the vapor retarder where interior slabs-on-grade are used, except where the slabs are underlain by the 6 inches of baserock. Prior to placement of the vapor retarder, the subgrade surfaces should be proof-rolled to provide a smooth, unyielding surface for slab support. The edges of the vapor retarder membrane should be draped over the interior side of the footing excavations and at least 12 inches below the pad grade prior to pouring the concrete. We recommend that the interior slabs-on-grade (other than the garage or vehicular slabs) be poured monolithically with the footings.

The edges of vehicular slabs should be structurally separated from surrounding foundations; a relatively impermeable and flexible filler such as Greenstreak Swellstop (3/8” x 3/4” size) or equivalent should be used in the joint between the garage or vehicular slabs and the footing foundation. If a garage door is used, both the driveway and garage or vehicular slabs should be connected to the perimeter footing below the garage door opening with dowels to reduce the potential for differential movements.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 14 of 17

Concrete slabs retain moisture and often take many months to dry; construction water added during the concrete pour further increases the curing time. If the slabs are not allowed to completely cure prior to constructing the super-structure, the concrete slabs will expel water vapor and the vapor will be trapped under impermeable flooring. The concrete mix design for the slabs should have a maximum water/cement ratio of 0.45; the actual water/cement ratio may need to be reduced if the concentration of soluble sulfates or chlorides in the supporting subgrade is detrimental to the concrete. The results of sulfate and chloride testing of onsite soil samples are included in Appendix B for reference. We recommend you consult with your concrete slab designers and concrete contractors regarding methods to reduce the potential for differential concrete curing.

4.2.3 Seismic Design Criteria

For seismic resistance design in accordance with 2012 International Building Code (IBC), we recommend the following seismic design values be used. The following parameters are calculated using the U.S. Seismic Design Map program (Version 3.1.0)5, and the 2012 IBC data set, and are based on the site being located at approximate latitude 33.882°N and longitude 117.282°W.

4.3 Concrete Pavements

We recommend that an R-value of 25 be used in concrete pavement designs. We recommend additional R-value tests be performed once the pavement subgrade is established to confirm the R-value used in the design.

Using American Concrete Pavement Association (ACPA) design procedures, the recommended subgrade R-value of 25, a Traffic Index of 7.0, a design life of 20 years, we recommend the concrete pavement consist of at least 6 inches of concrete having a modulus of rupture of at least 600 psi overlying 6 inches of Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base. We recommend all joints (both transverse and longitudinal) not exceed 10-feet on center in both directions. Consideration

5USGS Website, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/usdesign.php, Version 3.1.0, last updated 7/11/13.

2012 IBC SEISMIC PARAMETERS

Seismic Parameter Design Value Reference

Site Class D Section 1613.3.2 SS 1.5 Figure 1613.3.1(1) S1 0.6 Figure 1613.3.1(2) Fa 1.0 Table 1613.3.3(1) Fv 1.5 Table 1613.3.3(2)

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 15 of 17 should be given to dowel the joints with #8 bars. The dowels should be at least 18 inches long and should be spaced at approximately 12 inches on center.

Pavement subgrade should be prepared in accordance with our recommendations provided in our report in Section 4.1.3, Subgrade Preparation. Pavement baserock should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction per ASTM 1557.

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 16 of 17

5.0 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS

SFB is not responsible for the validity or accuracy of information, analyses, test results, or designs provided to SFB by others or prepared by others. The analysis, designs, opinions, and recommendations submitted in this report are based in part upon the data obtained from our field work and upon information provided by others. Site exploration and testing characterizes subsurface conditions only at the locations where the explorations or tests are performed; actual subsurface conditions between explorations or tests may be different than those described in this report. Variations of subsurface conditions from those analyzed or characterized in this report are not uncommon and may become evident during construction. In addition, changes in the condition of the site can occur over time as a result of either natural processes (such as earthquakes, flooding, or changes in ground water levels) or human activity (such as construction adjacent to the site, dumping of fill, or excavating). If changes to the site’s surface or subsurface conditions occur since the performance of the field work described in this report, or if differing subsurface conditions are encountered, we should be contacted immediately to evaluate the differing conditions to assess if the opinions, conclusions, and recommendations provided in this report are still applicable or should be amended.

We recommend SFB be retained to provide geotechnical services during design, reviews, earthwork operations, paving operations, and foundation installation to confirm and observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications and recommendations presented in this report. Our presence will also allow us to modify design if unanticipated subsurface conditions are encountered or if changes to the scope of the project, as defined in this report, are made.

This report is a design document that has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geological and geotechnical engineering practices for the exclusive use of Jacobs Engineering for specific application to the proposed Maintenance Yard Expansion project at Riverside National Cemetery in Riverside, California, and is intended to represent our design recommendations to Jacobs Engineering for specific application to the Maintenance Yard Expansion project. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are solely professional opinions. It is the responsibility of Jacobs Engineering to transmit the information and recommendations of this report to those designing and constructing the project. We will not be responsible for the misinterpretation of the information provided in this report. We recommend SFB be retained to review geological and geotechnical aspects of the construction calculations, specifications, and plans; we should also be retained to participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences to clarify the opinions, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report.

It should be understood that advancements in the practice of geotechnical engineering and engineering geology, or discovery of differing surface or subsurface conditions, may affect the

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. Page 17 of 17 validity of this report and are not uncommon. SFB strives to perform its services in a proper and professional manner with reasonable care and competence but we are not infallible. Geological engineering and geotechnical engineering are disciplines that are far less exact than other engineering disciplines; therefore we should be consulted if it is not completely understood what the limitations to using this report are.

In the event that there are any changes in the nature, design or location of the project, as described in this report, or if any future additions are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless we are contacted in writing, the project changes are reviewed by us, and the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are modified or verified in writing. The opinions, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the description of the project as presented in the introduction section of this report.

This report does not necessarily represent all of the information that has been communicated by us to Jacobs Engineering and their consultants during the course of this engagement and our rendering of professional services to Jacobs Engineering. Reliance on this report by parties other than those described above must be at their own risk unless we are first consulted as to the parties’ intended use of this report and only after we obtain the written consent of Jacobs Engineering to divulge information that may have been communicated to Jacobs Engineering.

We cannot accept consequences for use of segregated portions of this report.

Please refer to Appendix C for additional guidelines regarding use of this report.

FIGURE

APPENDIX A

Field Investigation

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. A-1

APPENDIX A

Field Investigation

Our field investigation for the proposed Maintenance Yard Expansion project at Riverside National Cemetery in Riverside, California, consisted of surface reconnaissance and a subsurface exploration program. Geotechnical reconnaissance of the site and surrounding area was performed on January 31, 2014. Subsurface exploration was performed using a truck-mounted drill rig equipped with 8-inch diameter, continuous flight, hollow stem augers. Four exploratory borings were drilled on January 31, 2014 to a maximum depth of about 40-1/2 feet. Our representative continuously logged the soils encountered in the borings in the field. The soils are described in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487).

The logs of the borings as well as a key for the classification of the soil (Figure A-1) are included as part of this appendix.

Representative samples were obtained from our exploratory boring at selected depths appropriate to the investigation. Relatively undisturbed samples were obtained using a 3-inch O.D. split barrel sampler with liners, and disturbed samples were obtained using the 2-inch O.D. split spoon sampler. All samples were transmitted to our offices for evaluation and appropriate testing. Both sampler types are indicated in the “Sampler” column of the boring logs as designated in Figure A-1.

Resistance blow counts were obtained in our boring with the samplers by dropping a 140-pound downhole hammer through a 30-inch free fall. The sampler was driven 18 inches and the number of blows were recorded for each 6 inches of penetration. The blows per foot recorded on the boring logs represent the accumulated number of converted blows that were required to drive the last 12 inches, or the number of inches indicated where hard resistance was encountered. The blow counts recorded on the boring logs have been converted to equivalent SPT field blowcounts, but have not been corrected for overburden, silt content, or other factors.

The attached boring logs and related information show our interpretation of the subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated, and it is not warranted that they are representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

A-1February 2014361-17

MAINTENANCE YARD EXPANSION

Riverside National Cemetery, CA

1600 Willow Pass Court Concord, CA 94523 Tel: 925-688-1001

Pitcher Barrel

Ground Water level initially encountered

Ground Water level at end of drilling

PI = Plasticity Index LL = Liquid Limit R = R-Value

GRAIN SIZES

Hard

And

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

0 - 2

CONSISTENCYRELATIVE DENSITY

Very Dense

0 - 4

LL < 50

ltr

Clays

LL > 50

Description

Highly Organic

OL

MH

Over 32

Loose

Silts and ClaysSands and Gravels Blows/Foot* Strength (tsf)**

Silts

GC

Shelby Tube

*Number of Blows for a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches, driving a 2-inch O.D. (1-3/8" I.D.) split spoon sampler.

**Unconfined compressive strength.

FIGURE NO.

SP

0 - 1/4

30 - 50

4 - 10

10 - 30

Coarse

3/4"

Soils

CH

SW

Modified California sampler (3" OD Split Barrel)

HQ Core

Standard Penetration sampler (2" OD Split Barrel)

SYMBOLS & NOTES

KEY TO EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS

Clayey sands, and-clay mixtures

CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS

Silts and

Clays

Sand

Fine Medium

Major Divisions

Sand And

Sandy Soils

Grained

Poorly-graded gravels or gravel sand mixture, little or no fines

Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures

Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures

Well-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines

Gravelly

Medium Dense

3"

Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays

Organic silts and organic silt-clays of low plasticity

Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine or silty soils, elastic silts

Organic clays of medium to high plasticity

Blows/Foot*

ML

CL

Fine

Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays

Soils

Soils

12"

U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE

Clays

Silts And

16 - 32

Soils ltr

1/4 - 1/2

Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity

Very Soft Soft Firm Stiff

Very Stiff

1/2 - 1 1 - 2

2 - 4 4 - 8

SM

Over 50

GW

GP

GM

Description

OH

PT

Major Divisions grfgrf

Gravel

Dense

Coarse

Poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines

Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures

40 10 4

2 - 4 Over 4

Peat and other highly organic soils

Gravel

SC

Very Loose

Well-graded gravels or gravel sand mixtures, little or no fines

Coarse Cobbles Boulders

8 - 16 trace some with

-y

<5% 5-15%

16-30% 31-49%

Constituent Percentage

Saturated Wet

Moist Damp Dry

Increasing Visual Moisture Content

California Sampler (2.5" OD Split Barrel)

PROJECT NO. DATE

K E

Y

-1

.G

P J

S T

E V

E N

S F

E R

R O

N E

B A

IL

E

Y .G

D T

2/

/1

GRAVELS.

SAND (SC/SM), yellowish brown, fine- to medium-grained, some coarse-grained, silty, some clay, trace gravel(fine, subangular), dry to damp.

Fine- to coarse-grained, with silt, some clay, trace gravel(fine, subangular), dry to damp.

With silt and clay, dry to damp.

CLAY (CL), brown, silty, sandy(fine- to medium-grained), damp.

SAND (SM/SC), brown, fine- to medium-grained, some coarse-grained, with to silty, some clay, moist.

SAND (SP), mottled gold black white, fine- to medium-grained, some coarse-grained, trace silt, damp (completely weathered tonalite).

SAND (SP-SM), mottled gold black white, fine- to medium-grained, some coarse-grained, some to with silt, moist (completely weathered tonalite).

3.8

3.3

3.6

30/5"

30/2"

60/6"

90/4" dense very dense very stiff medium dense very dense very dense

At 1.5':

Liquid Limit = 30 Plasticity Index = 8 Coarse Sand = 5% Medium Sand = 17% Fine Sand = 31% Silt = 38% Clay = 9%

At 21':

Liquid Limit = 26 Plasticity Index = 5 Coarse Sand = 7% Medium Sand = 26% Fine Sand = 28% Silt = 29% Clay = 10%

BORING DIAMETER 8-inch

DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION

EXPLORATORY BORING LOG

D E

P T

H (F

E E

T

DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS

BORING NO.

SFB-1

DRILL RIG CME 75 HSA LOGGED BY TC

DATE DRILLED 01/31/14

SURFACE ELEVATION ---

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER 20 feet

PROJECT NO. DATE

February 2014361-17

MAINTENANCE YARD EXPANSION

Riverside National Cemetery, CA

1600 Willow Pass Court Concord, CA 94523 Tel: 925-688-1001

E X

P

LO

R A

T O

R Y

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

-1

.G P

J S

T E

V E

N S

F E

R R

O N

E B

A

IL

E Y

.G

/1

U N

C

C O

M P

(K

S F

S A

M P

LE

R

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

D R

Y D

E N

S

IT

Y (P

C F

S P

T N

-V A

LU

E

CONSIST SOIL

TYPE

OTHER

TESTS

SAND (SP-SM), continued.

SAND (SP), mottled gold black white, fine- to coarse-grained, trace silt, moist (completely weathered tonalite).

Bottom of Boring = 40.5 feet Notes: Stratification is approximate, variations must be expected. Blowcounts converted to SPT N-values. See Report for additional details.

100/6"

100/6" very dense very dense

BORING DIAMETER 8-inch

DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION

EXPLORATORY BORING LOG

D E

P T

H (F

E E

T

DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS

BORING NO.

SFB-1

DRILL RIG CME 75 HSA LOGGED BY TC

DATE DRILLED 01/31/14

SURFACE ELEVATION ---

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER 20 feet

PROJECT NO. DATE

February 2014361-17

MAINTENANCE YARD EXPANSION

Riverside National Cemetery, CA

1600 Willow Pass Court Concord, CA 94523 Tel: 925-688-1001

E X

P

LO

R A

T O

R Y

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

-1

.G P

J S

T E

V E

N S

F E

R R

O N

E B

A

IL

E Y

.G

/1

U N

C

C O

M P

(K

S F

S A

M P

LE

R

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

D R

Y D

E N

S

IT

Y (P

C F

S P

T N

-V A

LU

E

CONSIST SOIL

TYPE

SAND (SC/SM), yellow brown, fine- to medium-grained, some coarse-grained, with silt and clay, trace gravel(fine, subangular), trace carbonates, dry to damp.

Lightly cemented at 5'.

Silty and clayey, at 10'.

SAND (SP), mottled black white, fine- to medium-grained, some coarse-grained, trace gravel(fine, subangular), trace silt, dry (completely weathered tonalite).

Fine- to coarse-grained, trace silt, dry.

Bottom of Boring = 20.5 feet Notes: Stratification is approximate, variations must be expected. Blowcounts converted to SPT N-values. See Report for additional details.

4.1

5.2

30/2"

50/6"

48/6"

30/6"

30/6"

30/6" very dense very dense

BORING DIAMETER 8-inch

DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION

EXPLORATORY BORING LOG

D E

P T

H (F

E E

T

DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS

BORING NO.

SFB-2

DRILL RIG CME 75 HSA LOGGED BY TC

DATE DRILLED 01/31/14

SURFACE ELEVATION ---

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER Not Encountered

PROJECT NO. DATE

February 2014361-17

MAINTENANCE YARD EXPANSION

Riverside National Cemetery, CA

1600 Willow Pass Court Concord, CA 94523 Tel: 925-688-1001

E X

P

LO

R A

T O

R Y

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

-1

.G P

J S

T E

V E

N S

F E

R R

O N

E B

A

IL

E Y

.G

/1

U N

C

C O

M P

(K

S F

S A

M P

LE

R

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

D R

Y D

E N

S

IT

Y (P

C F

S P

T N

-V A

LU

E

CONSIST SOIL

TYPE

SAND (SC/SM), yellowish brown, fine- to medium-grained, some coarse-grained, with silt and clay, dry to damp.

Bottom of Boring = 5.5 feet Notes: Stratification is approximate, variations must be expected. Blowcounts converted to SPT N-values. See Report for additional details.

630/6"

60/6"

30/6" very dense

BORING DIAMETER 8-inch

DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION

EXPLORATORY BORING LOG

D E

P T

H (F

E E

T

DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS

BORING NO.

SFB-3

DRILL RIG CME 75 HSA LOGGED BY TC

DATE DRILLED 01/31/14

SURFACE ELEVATION ---

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER Not Encountered

PROJECT NO. DATE

February 2014361-17

MAINTENANCE YARD EXPANSION

Riverside National Cemetery, CA

1600 Willow Pass Court Concord, CA 94523 Tel: 925-688-1001

E X

P

LO

R A

T O

R Y

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

-1

.G P

J S

T E

V E

N S

F E

R R

O N

E B

A

IL

E Y

.G

/1

U N

C

C O

M P

(K

S F

S A

M P

LE

R

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

D R

Y D

E N

S

IT

Y (P

C F

S P

T N

-V A

LU

E

CONSIST SOIL

TYPE

SAND (SC), yellowish brown, fine- to medium-grained, some coarse-grained, clayey, with silt, trace gravel(fine, subangular), dry to damp.

Bottom of Boring = 5.5 feet Notes: Stratification is approximate, variations must be expected. Blowcounts converted to SPT N-values. See Report for additional details.

7 8530/6"

50/6"

60/6" dense very dense

BORING DIAMETER 8-inch

DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION

EXPLORATORY BORING LOG

D E

P T

H (F

E E

T

DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS

BORING NO.

SFB-4

DRILL RIG CME 75 HSA LOGGED BY TC

DATE DRILLED 01/31/14

SURFACE ELEVATION ---

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER Not Encountered

PROJECT NO. DATE

February 2014361-17

MAINTENANCE YARD EXPANSION

Riverside National Cemetery, CA

1600 Willow Pass Court Concord, CA 94523 Tel: 925-688-1001

E X

P

LO

R A

T O

R Y

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

-1

.G P

J S

T E

V E

N S

F E

R R

O N

E B

A

IL

E Y

.G

/1

U N

C

C O

M P

(K

S F

S A

M P

LE

R

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

D R

Y D

E N

S

IT

Y (P

C F

S P

T N

-V A

LU

E

CONSIST SOIL

TYPE

APPENDIX B

Laboratory Investigation

Stevens, Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Co., Inc. B-1

APPENDIX B

Laboratory Investigation

Our laboratory testing program for the Maintenance Yard Expansion project at Riverside National Cemetery in Riverside, California was directed toward a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the physical and mechanical properties of the soils underlying the site.

The natural water content was determined on eights samples of the subsurface soils. The water contents are recorded on the boring logs at the appropriate sample depths.

Dr…