Appdx-Oceanside_Final_Sampling_Report_2012.pdf

FINAL REPORT

Sampling and Analysis Results for the Oceanside Harbor Geotechnical and Environmental Investigation Project

Task Order No. 0002, USACE Contract No. W912PL-11-D-0015

Prepared for:

U. S Army Corps of Engineers

Los Angeles District Los Angeles, California

Prepared by:

DiazYourman – GeoPentech – Kinnetic Laboratories/ Joint Venture

1616 E. 17th Street Santa Ana, CA 92705

May 10, 2012

GeoPentech

DISTRIBUTION LIST

Mr. Jeffrey Devine, Technical Manager U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District Jeffrey.D.Devine@usace.army.mil

Mr. Christopher Diaz Geotechnical Manager Diaz Yourman & Associates chris@diazyourman.com

Mr. Scott John, Project Manager U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District ScottJohn@.usace.army.mil

Mr. Allen Yourman Joint Venture Project Manager Diaz Yourman Associates, Geopentech, and Kinnetic Laboratories Joint Venture Allen@diazyourman.com

Ms. Christina Arias San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board carias@waterboards.ca.gov

Mr. Ken Kronschnabl KLI Project Manager Kinnetic Laboratories, Inc.

kkronsch@kinneticlabs.com

Mr. Allan Ota United States Environmental Protection Agency- Region 9 ota.allan@epa.gov

Mr. Spencer Johnson Field Operations Manager Kinnetic Laboratories, Inc.

sjohnson@kinneticlabs.com

Mr. Dan Swenson U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Division daniel.p.swenson@usace.army.mil

Mr. Marty Stevenson KLI QA/QC Management Kinnetic Laboratories, Inc.

mstevens@kinneticlabs.com

Mr. Larry Simon Federal Consistency Coordinator Energy, Ocean Resources and Federal California Coastal Commission lsimon@coastal.ca.gov

Mr. Jon Toal Health and Safety Management Kinnetic Laboratories, Inc.

jtoal@kinneticlabs.com

Mr. Justin Zumbro Field Geotechnical Leader GeoPentech justin_zumbro@geopentech.com

Bob Stearns Client Services Director Calscience Environmental Laboratories, Inc.

BStearns@calscience.com

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

i

Task Order No.0002, USACE, Contract No. W912PL-11-D-0015

May, 10 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ v

1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

1.1 Background

1.2 Site Description

1.3 Purpose

1.4 Previous Oceanside Harbor Dredging

2.0 STUDY DESIGN

2.1 Oceanside Harbor Sediment Collection and Chemical Testing

2.2 Ocean City Beach, Pier View Way Beach, and Oceanside Nearshore Sampling

2.3 Geotechnical Samples and Testing

2.4 Oceanside Harbor Channel Testing and Evaluation Sequence

2.5 Physical Evaluation Guidelines

2.6 Chemical Evaluation Guidelines

3.0 FIELD SAMPLING PROTOCOLS

3.1 Vibracore Sampling Methods

3.2 Beach Transect and Nearshore Grab Samples

3.3 Detailed Soils Log

3.4 Documentation and Sample Custody

4.0 LABORATORY TESTING METHODS

4.1 Geotechnical Testing

4.2 Bulk Sediment Analyses

5.0 QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARY

5.1 Field Sampling Quality Management

5.2 Analytical Chemistry QA/QC

6.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

6 .1 Sediment Observations

6.2 Sediment Grain Size

6.3 Bulk Sediment Chemistry

7.0 REFERENCES CITED

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A - Data from the 2006-2007 Oceanside Harbor Sediment Sampling and Testing APPENDIX B - Core Photographs APPENDIX C – Soils Logs APPENDIX D – Analytical Laboratory Reports APPENDIX E – Field Data Log Sheets APPENDIX F – Quality Assurance/Quality Control Report APPENDIX G – Physical Analyses Data APPENDIX H – Beach Grain Size Compatibility Analyses ii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Dredge Area Composite Locations in Oceanside Harbor Table 2. Oceanside Harbor Dredging History since 2004 Table 3. Core Sampling Locations and Depths, Existing Mudline Elevations, and Project and Sampling

Elevations, Oceanside Harbor Table 4. Dates, Times and Locations for Each Sample Collected from Oceanside City and Oceanside Pier

Beaches and the Oceanside Nearshore Placement Area Table 5. Oceanside Harbor Sediment Screening Values for Selected Analytes Table 6. Analytical Methods and Quantitation Limits for Sediment Samples Table 7. Quality Control Summary for Field Sediment Sampling Table 8. Counts of QC records per Chemical Category Table 9. 2012 Oceanside Harbor Physical Data Above Overdredge Depth for Each Individual Core Table 10. Surface Physical Data for Oceanside City and Oceanside Pier Beaches and the Oceanside

Nearshore Placement Area Collected in 2012 Table 11. 2012 Oceanside Harbor Bulk Sediment Chemistry Results

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Location of Oceanside Harbor Figure 2. Aerial Photograph of Oceanside Harbor Figure 3. Oceanside Harbor Composite Areas and Sampling Locations Figure 4. Bathymetric Data and Final Sampling Locations for the Del Mar Channel (Area A) of

Oceanside Harbor Figure 5. Bathymetric Data and Final Sampling Locations for the Oceanside Channel (Area B) of

Oceanside Harbor Figure 6. Bathymetric Data and Final Sampling Locations for the Entrance Channel and Advanced

Maintenance Area (Area C) of Oceanside Harbor Figure 7. Oceanside City Beach and Pier View Avenue Beach Nearshore Placement Areas and Location of Sampling Transects and Final Sampling Locations Figure 8. Oceanside City Beach Sampling Transects and Final Sampling Locations, and Oceanside

Nearshore Placement Area and Final Sampling Locations iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

BHC Benzene Hexachloride ODMDS Ocean Dredge Material Disposal Site

BLK Method or Procedural Blank PAH Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon

BMP Best Management Practice PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl

BS Blank Spike PDS Post Digestion Spike

BSD Blank Spike Duplicate PDSD Post Digestion Spike Duplicate

CAD Confined Aquatic Disposal POLA Port of Los Angeles

CD Compact Disc PPB Parts Per Billion

CESPD Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division PPM Parts Per Million

CHHSL California Human Health screening Level PVC Polyvinyl Chloride

CV Coefficient of Variation RBC Risk-Based Concentration cy Cubic Yards RL Reporting Limit

CRM Certified Reference Material RPD Relative Percent Difference

DDD Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane RSLs Regional Screening Levels for Cleanup of Superfund Sites

DDE Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene SCOUP Sand Compatibility and Opportunistic Use Program

DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane

SC-

DMMT

Southern California Dredge Material Management Team

DGPS Differential Global Positioning Satellite SOPs Standard Operating Procedures

DUP Laboratory Replicates SP Solid Phase

ERL NOAA Effects Range Low SPP Suspended Particulate Phase

ERM NOAA Effects Range Medium SRM Standard Reference Material

GPS Global Positioning Satellite STLC Title 22 Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration

HHMSSL

Human Health Medium – Specific Screening Levels

SURR Surrogate Analysis

HDPE High-density Polyethylene SWQCB State Water Resources Control Board

ITM Inland Testing Manual TOC Total Organic Carbon

LCL Lower Control Limit TRPH Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons

LCS Laboratory Control Spike TTLC Title 22 Total Threshold Limit Concentration

LDPE Low-density Polyethylene UCL Upper Control Limit

LPC Limiting Permissible Concentration USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

LSD Least Significant Difference USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

MDL Method Detection Limit QA Quality Assurance

MLLW Mean Lower Low Water QC Quality Control

MS Matrix Spike QUAL Qualifier

MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate USCS Unified Soil Classification System

MSD Minimum Significant Difference WQC Water Quality Criteria

ND Not Detected iv v

Task Order No. 0002, USACE Contract No. W912PL-11-D-0015

May 10, 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Maintenance dredging is required for the Entrance Channel, the Del Mar Channel, and the Oceanside Channel of Oceanside Harbor in Oceanside, California in order to restore the channels to design depths.

The current volume of shoaled material is 494,000 cubic yards (cy) with a two-foot overdredge allowance. Like most years, most of the shoaling is concentrated in the Entrance Channel. Provided that physical and chemical properties of the sediments are suitable, the preferred project intent is to beneficially reuse the Oceanside Harbor dredge material for beach nourishment at the Ocean City Beach and Pier View Way beach placement areas, which are up and down coast of the Oceanside City Pier, or place the material at the Oceanside Nearshore Placement Area just offshore of Oceanside City Beach.

Vibracore sampling was carried to collect subsurface sediment data at thirty-five (35) locations throughout the three (3) main channel areas. The 35 core samples collected were combined into three (3) composite samples, one for each channel area. These composite samples were subjected to chemical testing. In addition, grain size and chemical archive samples were collected from each of the individual cores or from individual core strata if present.

For each composite area, the collections of actual subsamples for primary testing stopped at the two-foot overdredge depth for the Del Mar and Oceanside Channels and the three-foot advanced maintenance depth plus two-foot overdredge depth for the Entrance Channel and advanced maintenance areas.

Subsamples were combined with like subsamples in a composite area to form the three composite samples. Core subsamples for physical analyses and archiving represent the entire length of each core from the mudline to the overdredge depth unless distinct vertical stratification was present in a core. If distinct vertical stratification was present, then subsamples representing each distinct core stratum were analyzed or archived.

Bulk sediment testing on the composite samples was carried out to identify whether sediments may be suitable for beach nourishment by following testing requirements and procedures detailed in the Inland Testing Manual (ITM), (USEPA/USACE, 1998) with further guidance from Los Angeles District USACE guidelines (CESPL, undated). .

To assist in evaluating beach suitability, a series of surface grab samples were collected at the Oceanside City and Pier View Avenue Beaches and from the Oceanside Nearshore Placement Area. Samples were collected at eight elevations (+12, +6, 0, -6, -12, -18, -24, and -30 ft MLLW) along four transects set perpendicular to the shoreline at two locations up coast of the Oceanside City Pier and two locations down coast of the Pier. In addition, ten random grab samples were collected from the Nearshore Placement Area. All transect and nearshore placement area samples were tested for grain size distribution. These gradation data were compared with gradation data from the Oceanside Harbor samples by the Los Angeles District USACE to determine if the Harbor sediments are physically vi compatible with the sand and sediment from the Oceanside beaches and offshore of the beaches. The USACE report concluded that all of the sediment within the three dredge footprint areas (A, B and C) is compatible for placement at the three preselected placement sites based on the weighted average grain size composite curve of each footprint area as a whole. There were some areas of less compatible sediment (two locations in the Del Mar Channel and two locations in the Oceanside Channel) but the overall proportion of fines in the vicinity of the locations with finer grain sediment is approximately 6% for the Del Mar Channel and 12% for the Oceanside Channel.

Most chemical contaminants were not detected in the three composite samples. Of those detected, most concentrations were very low compared to ecological effects based screening values and human health screening values. Total DDT in the Oceanside Channel composite sample was the only contaminant in a sample above lower effects based screening levels. Arsenic, which is found naturally in California soils, was the only contaminant above human health screening values.

Low chemical contaminant concentrations, low organic carbon content, and the high percentage of sand in the Oceanside Harbor sediments should allow the sediments to be an ideal candidate for beach nourishment.

1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This report has been prepared on behalf of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District to describe results for the sampling and testing of sediments from Oceanside Harbor (Figure 1) identified for placement at three potential reuse areas. This work is being performed under Task Order No. 0002, USACE, Contract No. W912PL-11-D-0015.

1.1 Background

Maintenance dredging authorized under the 1944 Flood Control Act and the 1946 Rivers and Harbor Act is required for the Entrance Channel to Oceanside Harbor, the Del Mar Channel, and the Oceanside Chanel in Oceanside, California (Figures 1 and 2) in order to restore the channels to design depths. A geotechnical and environmental evaluation of sediment quality is required in order to support planning and permitting for dredging and reuse.

Based on a March 2011 hydrographic survey and past shoaling rates, the estimated volume of sediments to be dredged from the Oceanside Federal Navigation Channels is 494,000 cubic yards (cy) including overdredge allowance. Bathymetric data from April and September of 2011 are shown on Figures 3 through 6. The project intent is to beneficially reuse Oceanside Harbor dredge material for beach nourishment at the Ocean City Beach and Pier View Way beach placement areas or place the material in the Oceanside Nearshore Placement Area (Figures 7 and 8), provided that physical and chemical properties of the sediments are suitable for beach replenishment. Project elevations and dredge volumes of individual areas of Oceanside Harbor identified for dredging are provided in Table 1.

Table 1. Dredge Area Composite Locations in Oceanside Harbor.

Dredge/ Composite Area

Location Project

Elevation (ft, MLLW)

Project Elevation + Overdredge (ft, MLLW)

Approximate Dredge Volume

(Cubic Yards)

Dredge Volume with Allowable

Overdredge (Cubic Yards)

A Del Mar Channel

-20 -22 52,000 100,000

B Oceanside Channel

-20 -22 80,000 102,000

C

Channel Entrance and Advanced

Maintenance

-25 + 3 feet for advanced maintenance -30 270,000 292,000

Total Volume 494,000

Figure 1. Location of Oceanside Harbor

Figure 2. Aerial Photograph of Oceanside Harbor.

D el

M ar

C h an n

E tr an ce C h an

Oceanside Channel

Del Mar Basin

Figure 3. Oceanside Harbor Composite Areas and Sampling Locations.

Figure 4. Bathymetric Data and Final Sampling Locations for the Del Mar Channel (Area A) of Oceanside Harbor.

Figure 5. Bathymetric Data and Final Sampling Locations for the Oceanside Channel (Area B) of Oceanside Harbor.

Figure 6. Bathymetric Data and Final Sampling Locations for the Entrance Channel and Advanced Maintenance Area (Area C) of Oceanside Harbor.

Figure 7. Oceanside City Beach and Pier View Avenue Beach Nearshore Placement Areas and Location of Sampling Transects and Final Sampling Locations.

Trans. A

Trans. B Trans. A Trans. B

Pier View Way Beach Placement Area

Oceanside City Beach Placement Area

Figure 8. Oceanside City Beach Sampling Transects and Final Sampling Locations, and Oceanside Nearshore Placement Area and Final Sampling Locations.

Trans. C Trans. D

6 7

Oceanside City Beach Placement Area

Oceanside Nearshore Placement Area

1.2 Site Description

Oceanside Harbor is located 37 miles north of the City of San Diego and just to the north of the City of Oceanside and the mouth of the San Luis Rey River. The harbor was built in two sections. The southern wing houses a small fishing fleet and the northern wing is for recreational boaters. There are more than 900 permanent slips.

The Del Mar Boat Basin is located to the north of the Harbor and is connected to the entrance by the Del Mar Channel. It was first developed in 1942 shortly after Camp Pendleton was commissioned to support US Marine amphibious training missions.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers maintains the Entrance Channel, the Oceanside Channel and the Del Mar Channel. The Entrance Channel has an authorized dredge depth of –25 feet MLLW. The Oceanside Channel and the Del Mar Channel both have an authorized dredge depth of -20 feet MLLW. Advanced maintenance dredging has been authorized for the Entrance Channel and adjacent sand traps. The “Advances Maintenance” areas are designed to trap sediments deposited by along shore currents.

Allowable overdredge depth is two feet for all areas. An additional three feet has been allocated for the Entrance Channel Advanced Maintenance areas for a total of five feet.

1.3 Purpose

The purpose of this project was to sample and test sediments from within the proposed maintenance dredging areas in order to provide sediment quality data for evaluation of dredging and disposal/reuse options under guidance of Inland Testing Manual (USEPA/USACE, 1998). Sampling and testing was conducted according to an approved Sampling and Analysis Plan (DiazYourman, GeoPentech and Kinnetic Laboratories/ Joint Venture, 2012).

1.4 Previous Oceanside Harbor Dredging

Oceanside Harbor was formally dedicated in 1963. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has dredged every year since 2004. Volumes, methods, and placement sites for these dredging episodes are identified in Table 2.

Previous analytical testing data are available for the most recent environmental study conducted on six composite samples collected in February 2007 (Kinnetic Laboratories and Diaz-Yourman and Associates, 2007) and are provided in Appendix A. These data show that sediments from Oceanside Harbor had low levels of inorganic and organic contaminants. Mercury, silver, butyltins, phenols, and PCB compounds were not detected above reporting limits in any sample. All other metals were below NOAA effects-based screening levels for all samples. Oil and Grease and total recoverable hydrocarbons were detected in a few samples, but near or below reporting limits. Five composite samples containing 4,4’-DDE, thus total DDT, are the only samples with an organic contaminant that exceeded a NOAA lower effects-based screening value. The DDT compound 4,4’-DDE was detected at concentrations above the method detection limit, but below the reporting limit.

Table 2. Oceanside Harbor Dredging History since 2004.

Dredge Year Channel(s)

Dredged Vol. Removed (cubic yards)

Dredge Method Placement Location

Entrance 212,900 hydraulic cutterhead Oceanside Beach Oceanside 9,700

Entrance 262,000 hydraulic cutterhead Oceanside Beach Del Mar 3,000

Entrance 204,800 hydraulic cutterhead Oceanside Beach Oceanside 6,200 Del Mar 16,600

Entrance 122,000 hydraulic cutterhead Oceanside Beach Oceanside 7,000 Del Mar 58,000

2008 Entrance 240,000 hydraulic cutterhead Oceanside Beach 2009 Entrance 227,500 hydraulic cutterhead Oceanside Beach

Entrance 269,000 hydraulic cutterhead Oceanside Beach Oceanside 6,000

Del Mar

Entrance 166,000 hydraulic cutterhead Oceanside Beach Del Mar 13,100

2.0 STUDY DESIGN

The study design for this project covers data collection tasks for Oceanside Harbor sediment collection and testing and the beach and nearshore placement areas sampling and geotechnical testing. Evaluation guidelines are also discussed.

The main approach was to to sample dredge sediments to dredge depth plus overdredge, composite them by area, and subject the composites to chemical testing to determine if they are suitable for beach nourishment and nearshore placement. The approach also was to determine the physical properties of the sediments at each location and at different depths. Testing followed requirements and procedures detailed in the ITM (USEPA/USACE, 1998) with further guidance from Los Angeles District USACE guidelines (CESPL, undated). Acceptability guidelines published in these documents was used to evaluate the suitability of Oceanside Harbor maintenance-dredged sediments for beach nourishment and nearshore placement.

2.1 Oceanside Harbor Sediment Collection and Chemical Testing

Vibracore sampling was carried out to collect subsurface sediment data at sixteen (16) cores within the Del Mar Channel (Area A), eight (8) cores within the Oceanside Channel (Area B), and eleven (11) locations within the Entrance Channel to Oceanside Harbor (Area C). The number of cores chosen was to obtain detailed geotechnical information. Final sampling locations are shown on Figures 3 through 6.

Coordinates, approximate seafloor elevations, and target elevations for the vibracore sample locations depicted on Figures 3 through 6 and are listed in Table 3. Note that some vibracore locations may differ from the SAP target locations in order to target more shoaled areas. The prefix for all sampling locations is “OHVC11-#-##.”

A total of three (3) area composite samples, one for each channel area shown on Figure 3, was created and analyzed for bulk sediment chemistry. Since the 2007 results showed that sediments in Oceanside Harbor were physically and chemically similar, the number of composite areas for this testing round was reduced from six, the number used for the 2007 testing round, to three. Shoaled areas within the inner harbor channels come from material that permeates through the rocky breakwater and is thus sandy in nature. The 2007 testing results showed that DDT was the only contaminant that persisted throughout the harbor in concentrations slightly higher than the NOAA lower effects-based screening level. The sandy nature of the sediments and low overall contaminant levels previously found provides justification for a reduced number of composite samples.

Continuous samples from the mudline to project depths plus two feet for overdredge testing were collected from all Areas A and B locations and homogenized separately. Continuous samples from the mudline to project depths plus three feet for advanced maintenance dredging and an additional two feet for overdredge testing were collected from Area C and homogenized separately. For all composite areas, the collection of actual subsamples for primary testing stopped at the two-foot overdredge depth for Areas A and B and five-foot advanced maintenance dredging plus overdredge depth for Area C and were combined with like subsamples in a composite area for bulk sediment chemistry analyses.

In addition to composite sample formation, individual core subsamples were archived for potential future analysis should a better spatial distribution of particular contaminants detected in a composite sample need to be determined or if grain size characteristics of a particular core or area needs to be better defined.

Core subsamples for chemistry archiving included the entire length of core from the mudline to the overdredge depth, the top one or two feet finer grained material, and any other significant layer of fine material for a minimum of seventy (70) samples. Archived samples for chemical analyses are being stored frozen at Kinnetic Laboratories’ facility in Santa Cruz, CA. Core subsamples for geotechnical testing were from any geophysically different layer of material not already being analyzed for grain size distribution as described in Section 2.3.

2.2 Ocean City Beach, Pier View Way Beach, and Oceanside Nearshore Sampling

A series of surface grab samples were collected along transects at the USACE’s palcement sites at Ocean City Beach and Pier View Way beach placement areas, and random sampling was performed at the Oceanside Nearshore Area. The beach transect sampling consisted of collecting surface grab samples at eight elevations (+12, +6, 0, -6, -12, -18, -24 and -30 feet MLLW) along (2) two perpendicular transects for each of the two onshore sites for a total of four (4) transects and thirty-two (32) locations. For each beach nourishment area, the two transects were located approximately equidistance apart between the limits of each of the onshore sites as shown on Figure 7. For the Oceanside Nearshore Area (Figure 8), ten (10) random grab samples were collected throughout the placement area. Table 4 provides a summary of sample designations for the transects and nearshore samples.

2.3 Geotechnical Samples and Testing

A sufficient amount of sediment was collected from each location within Oceanside Harbor so that a representative amount of sediment was included in each geotechnical sample. At a minimum, two primary grain size samples were formed from each core. One sample represented the sediments from the mudline to the project overdredge depth, and the other sample represented material below the overdredge depth. The later sample data collected for geotechnical information is not included in this report. In addition, a sample was often collected of the finer grain material (“fluff layer”) located at the top of a core, and additional grain size samples were formed that represented strata of different grain size characteristics. All samples representing the mudline to the overdredge depth and all “fluff layer” samples underwent sieve analyses. Some of the finer-grained samples also underwent hydrometer and Atterberg Limits analyses. Decisions on which samples to analyze were made with input from the USACE Project Technical Manager.

Sieve analyses were also performed on each transect sample collected for the Oceanside City Beach and Oceanside Pier Beach reuse areas and on each of the 10 samples collected at the Oceanside Nearshore Area.

2.4 Oceanside Harbor Channel Testing and Evaluation Sequence

The testing and evaluation sequence for the Oceanside Harbor Channel composite samples are described in detail below and are outlined as follows:

1) Bulk sediment chemical analyses on each composite sample.

2) Grain size analyses on each core interval from the mudline to the overdredge depth plus from a select number of other core intervals.

3) Grain size compatibility analyses with the receiving beaches and offshore reuse areas to determine if the Harbor sediments are physically compatible with the receiving areas.

4) Analytical results were evaluated using the sediment quality guidelines consisting of Effects

Range Low (ERL) and Effects Range Medium (ERM) values developed by Long, et al. (1995) that correlate concentrations of selected contaminants with likelihood of adverse biological effects. Table 5 and the chemistry summary table list available ERL and ERM values. Please note that ERLs and ERMs have not been developed for all analytes.

5) Analytical results were also evaluated using the USEPA’s RSL (Regional Screening Levels) and the State of California’s CHHSL (California Human Health Screening Levels) for potential effects to humans. Table 5 and the chemistry summary table list the available RSL and CHHSL values.

Table 3. Core Sampling Locations and Depths, Existing Mudline Elevations, and Project and Sampling Elevations, Oceanside Harbor.

Composite

Area

Core Designation

Sampling Date

Sampling Time

Latitude North

Longitude West

Mudline (ft, MLLW)

Project Elevation

(ft, MLLW)

Core Length Recovery

(feet)

Target Sampling Elevation

(ft, MLLW)

Core Length

Sampled (ft)

Del Mar Channel

A OHVC11-A-1 2/17/12 1035 33 12’ 54.0” 117 24’ 7.4” -20.8 -20 13 -22 1.2

A OHVC11-A-2 2/17/12 1117 33 12’ 50.9” 117 24’ 9.1” -19.1 -20 13.6 -22 2.9

A OHVC11-A-3 2/17/12 0943 33 12’ 49.1” 117 24’ 12.5” -19.5 -20 10.4 -22 2.5

A OHVC11-A-4 2/17/12 0918 33 12’ 48.6” 117 24’ 16.1” -19.9 -20 9 -22 2.1

A OHVC11-A-5 2/17/12 0853 33 12’ 42.2” 117 24’ 18.4” -19.4 -20 11 -22 2.6

A OHVC11-A-6 2/17/12 0820 33 12’ 44.6” 117 24’ 16.8” -19.5 -20 8.4 -22 2.5

A OHVC11-A-7 2/17/12 0750 33 12’ 40.9” 117 24’ 16.1” -21 -20 7.9 -22 1.0

A OHVC11-A-8 2/17/12 1212 33 12’ 58.0” 117 24’ 18.5” -15 -20 14 -22 7.0

A OHVC11-A-9 2/16/12 1502 33 12’ 35.5” 117 24’ 17.1” -21 -20 8.2 -22 1.0

A OHVC11-A-10 2/16/12 1619 33 12’ 36.1” 117 24’ 13.9” -20.5 -20 12 -22 1.5

A OHVC11-A-11 2/16/12 1427 33 12’ 31.7” 117 24’ 14.7” -21.1 -20 12.2 -22 0.9

A OHVC11-A-12 2/16/12 1347 33 12’ 28.2” 117 24’ 12.0” -20.8 -20 9.1 -22 1.2

A OHVC11-A-13 2/16/12 1310 33 12’ 29.4” 117 24’ 8.8” -21.1 -20 7 -22 0.9

A OHVC11-A-14 2/16/12 1535 33 12’ 33.8” 117 24’ 14.2” -20.0 -20 12.2 -22 2.0

A OHVC11-A-15 2/16/12 1650 33 12’ 37.4” 117 24’ 15.8” -20.2 -20 11.8 -22 1.8

A OHVC11-A-16 2/17/12 1000 33 12’ 51.2” 117 24’ 12.2” -19.8 -20 10.7 -22 2.2

Oceanside Channel

B OHVC11-B-1 2/15/12 1430 33 12’ 28.9” 117 23’ 45.4” -21.0 -20 6.6 -22 1.0

B OHVC11-B-2 2/14/12 1540 33 12’ 29.6” 117 23’ 52.6” -20.2 -20 7.1 -22 1.8

B OHVC11-B-3 2/14/12 1515 33 12’ 26.8” 117 23’ 56.2” -19.2 -20 8.5 -22 2.5

B OHVC11-B-4 2/16/12 0750 33 12’ 30.1” 117 24’ 00.8” -19.4 -20 9.8 -22 2.6

B OHVC11-B-5 2/16/12 1040 33 12’ 28.2” 117 24’ 5.1” -18.6 -20 13.4 -22 3.4

B OHVC11-B-6 2/16/12 1141 33 12’ 26.0” 117 24’ 7.0” -20.4 -20 8.9 -22 1.6

B OHVC11-B-7 2/14/12 1605 33 12’ 30.6” 117 23’ 48.3” -20.2 -20 7.7 -22 1.8

B OHVC11-B-8 2/14/12 1444 33 12’ 28.1” 117 23’ 58.1” -20.3 -20 9.2 -22 1.7

Table 3. Core Sampling Locations and Depths, Existing Mudline Elevations, and Project and Sampling Elevations, Oceanside Harbor.

Composite

Area

Core Designation

Sampling Date

Sampling Time

Latitude North

Longitude West

Mudline (ft, MLLW)

Project Elevation

(ft, MLLW)

Core Length Recovery

(feet)

Target Sampling Elevation

(ft, MLLW)

Core Length

Sampled (ft)

Entrance Channel and Advanced Maintenance Area

C OHVC11-C-1 2/22/12 0945 33 12’ 17.1” 117 24’ 10.5” -16.4 -25 -16.5 -30* 14.6

C OHVC11-C-2 2/22/12 1100 33 12’ 18.0” 117 24’ 8.1” -15.5 -25 -19 -30* 14.5

C OHVC11-C-3 2/22/12 0835 33 12’ 14.0” 117 24’ 7.8” -21.1 -25 -13.4 -30* 8.9

C OHVC11-C-4 2/22/12 1200 33 12’ 13.6” 117 24’ 2.9” -20.1 -25 -13.3 -30* 9.9

C OHVC11-C-5 2/23/12 1105 33 12’ 15.8” 117 24’ 01.9” -16.5 -25 -18.3 -30* 13.5

C OHVC11-C-6 2/23/12 0957 33 12’ 18.0” 117 24’ 1.8” -13.0 -25 -18 -30* 17.0

C OHVC11-C-7 2/23/12 0820 33 12’ 21.9” 117 24’ 6.3” -17.3 -25 -19 -30* 12.7

C OHVC11-C-8 2/23/12 1200 33 12’ 24.1” 117 24’ 7.8” -20.4 -25 -16.5 -30* 9.6

C OHVC11-C-9 2/22/12 1500 33 12’ 24.7” 117 24’ 1.1” -23.1 -25 -12.5 -30* 6.9

C OHVC11-C-10 2/23/12 1350 33 12’ 25.9” 117 24’ 1.8” -23.7 -25 -14.4 -30* 6.3

C OHVC11-C-11 2/22/12 1330 33 12’ 21.2” 117 24’ 4.1” -18.6 -25 -13.8 -30* 11.4

* Includes two feet of overdredge + three feet of advanced maintenance dredging.

Table 4. Dates, Times and Locations for Each Sample Collected from Oceanside City and Oceanside Pier Beaches and the Oceanside Nearshore Placement Area.

Area Site

Designations Date Time

Sampling Elevations

(feet, MLLW)

Latitude North

Longitude West

Pier View Way Transect A

(Breakwater Way)

A+12 2/15/2012 10:38 AM +12 33 12.103 117 23.483

A+6 2/15/2012 10:37 AM +6 33 12.097 117 23.495

A0 2/14/2012 4:08 PM 0 33 12.509 117 23.805

A-6 2/22/2012 4:01 PM -6 33 12.045 117 23.571

A-12 2/23/2012 8:43 AM -12 33 12.002 117 23.624

A-18 2/22/2012 4:04 PM -18 33 11.993 117 23.686

A-24 2/22/2012 4:18 PM -24 33 11.922 117 23.774

A-30 2/22/2012 4:29 PM -30 33 11.840 117 23.913

Pier View Way Transect B (Surfrider

Way)

B+12 2/15/2012 11:11 AM +12 33 11.808 117 23.198

B+6 2/15/2012 11:08 AM +6 33 11.800 117 23.211

B0 2/15/2012 11:04 AM 0 33 11.784 117 23.241

B-6 2/22/2012 4:16 PM -6 33 11.766 117 23.266

B-12 2/23/2012 8:56 AM -12 33 11.731 117 23.334

B-18 2/22/2012 5:11 PM -18 33 11.757 117 23.435

B-24 2/22/2012 4:53 PM -24 33 11.697 117 23.440

B-30 2/22/2012 4:44 PM -30 33 11.619 117 23.567

Oceanside City Beach

Transect A (Ash Street)

C+12 2/15/2012 11:31 AM +12 33 11.443 117 22.886

C+6 2/15/2012 11:30 AM +6 33 11.440 117 22.890

C0 2/15/2012 11:26 AM 0 33 11.431 117 22.904

C-6 2/22/2012 4:30 PM -6 33 11.409 117 22.942

C-12 2/24/2012 10:05 AM -12 33 11.382 117 23.025

C-18 2/24/2012 9:55 AM -18 33 11.369 117 23.058

C-24 2/24/2012 10:17 AM -24 33 11.328 117 23.109

C-30 2/24/2012 10:31 AM -30 33 11.261 117 23.224

Oceanside City Beach

Transect B (Tyson Street)

D+12 2/15/2012 11:43 AM +12 33 11.262 117 22.720

D+6 2/15/2012 11:42 AM +6 33 11.259 117 22.726

D0 2/15/2012 11:38 AM 0 33 11.253 117 22.737

D-6 2/22/2012 4:47 PM -6 33 11.232 117 22.767

D12 2/23/2012 4:59 PM -12 33 11.197 117 22.849

D-18 2/23/2012 5:07 PM -18 33 11.184 117 22.893

D-24 2/23/2012 5:21 PM -24 33 11.158 117 22.931

D-30 2/24/2012 10:43 AM -30 33 11.068 117 23.042

Nearshore

ND-1 2/23/2012 2:21 PM -15 33 11.057 117 22.743

ND-2 2/23/2012 2:34 PM -24 33 10.998 117 22.793

ND-3 2/23/2012 2:44 PM -20 33 10.992 117 22.742

ND-4 2/23/2012 2:58 PM -16 33 10.988 117 22.692

ND-5 2/23/2012 3:17 PM -26 33 10.933 117 22.740

ND-6 2/23/2012 3:36 PM -15 33 10.915 117 22.647

ND-7 2/23/2012 3:49 PM -20 33 10.855 117 22.623

ND-8 2/23/2012 4:19 PM -27 33 10.897 117 22.757

ND-9 2/23/2012 4:32 PM -23 33 10.787 117 22.620

ND-10 2/23/2012 4:43 PM -16 33 10.827 117 22.558

Table 5. Oceanside Harbor Sediment Screening Values for Selected Analytes.

Analyte Name Units NOAA Screening1 Human RSLs2 Human CHHSLs3

Salt

ERL

Salt

ERM

Residential Industrial Residential Commercial/

Industrial Arsenic mg/kg 8.2 70 0.39 1.6 0.07 0.24 Cadmium mg/kg 1.2 9.6 70 800 1.7 7.5 Chromium mg/kg 81 370 100,000 1,000,000 Copper mg/kg 34 270 3,100 41,000 3,000 38,000 Lead mg/kg 46.7 218 400 800 150 3,500 Mercury mg/kg 0.15 0.71 10 43 18 180 Nickel mg/kg 20.9 51.6 1,500 20,000 1,600 16,000 Selenium mg/kg 390 5,100 380 4,800 Silver mg/kg 1 3.7 390 5,100 380 4,800 Zinc mg/kg 150 410 23,000 310,000 23,000 100,000 1-Methylnaphthalene µg/kg 22,000 99,000 2-Methylnaphthalene µg/kg 70 670 310,000 4,100,000 Acenaphthene µg/kg 16 500 3,400,000 33,000,000 Acenaphthylene µg/kg 44 640 Anthracene µg/kg 85.3 1100 17,000,000 170,000,000 Benzo (a) Anthracene µg/kg 261 1600 150 2100 Benzo (a) Pyrene µg/kg 430 1600 15 210 38 130 Benzo (b) Fluoranthene µg/kg 150 2100 Benzo (k) Fluoranthene µg/kg 1500 21,000 Biphenyl µg/kg Chrysene µg/kg 384 2800 15,000 210,000 Dibenz (a,h) Anthracene µg/kg 63.4 260 15 210 Fluoranthene µg/kg 600 5100 2,300,000 22,000,000 Fluorene µg/kg 19 540 2,300,000 22,000,000 Indeno (1,2,3-c,d) Pyrene µg/kg 150 2100 Naphthalene µg/kg 160 2100 3600 18,000 Phenanthrene µg/kg 240 1500 Pyrene µg/kg 665 2600 1,700,000 17,000,000 Total Low Weight PAHs µg/kg 552 3160 Total High Weight PAHs µg/kg 1700 9600 Total PAHs4 µg/kg 4022 44792 Benzyl butyl phthalate µg/kg 260,000 910,000 bis-(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate µg/kg 35,000 120,000 Diethyl phthalate µg/kg 49,000,000 490,000,000 Di-n-butyl phthalate µg/kg 6,100,000 62,000,000 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol µg/kg 44,000 160,000 2,4-Dichlorophenol µg/kg 180,000 1,800,000 2,4-Dimethylphenol µg/kg 1,200,000 12,000,000 2,4-Dinitrophenol µg/kg 120,000 1,200,000 2-Chlorophenol µg/kg 390,000 5,100,000 Bisphenol A µg/kg 3,100,000 31,000,000 Pentachlorophenol µg/kg 890 2,700 4,400 13,000 Phenol µg/kg 18,000,000 180,000,000 4,4'-DDD µg/kg 2 20 2,000 7,200 2,300 9,000 4,4'-DDE µg/kg 2.2 27 1,400 5,100 1,600 6,300 4,4'-DDT µg/kg 1 7 1,700 7,000 1,600 6,300 Total DDT µg/kg 1.58 46.1 Aldrin µg/kg 29 100 33 130 Chlordane µg/kg 1,600 6,500 430 1,700 Cis-nonachlor µg/kg DCPA (Dacthal) µg/kg 0.02 8 610,000 6,200,000

Table 5. Oceanside Harbor Sediment Screening Values for Selected Analytes.

Analyte Name Units NOAA Screening1 Human RSLs2 Human CHHSLs3

Salt

ERL

Salt

ERM

Residential Industrial Residential Commercial/

Industrial Dieldrin µg/kg 30 110 35 130 Endosulfan I µg/kg 370,000 3,700,000 Endrin µg/kg 180,000 1,800,000 21,000 230,000 Heptachlor µg/kg 110 380 130 520 Heptachlor Epoxide µg/kg 53 190 Methoxychlor µg/kg 310,000 3,100,000 340,000 3,800,000 Mirex µg/kg 27 96 31 120 Toxaphene µg/kg 440 1600 460 1,800 PCB077 µg/kg 34 110 PCB081 µg/kg 11 38 PCB105 µg/kg 110 380 PCB114 µg/kg 110 380 PCB118 µg/kg 110 380 PCB123 µg/kg 110 380 PCB126 µg/kg 0.034 0.11 PCB156 µg/kg 110 380 PCB157 µg/kg 110 380 PCB167 µg/kg 110 380 PCB169 µg/kg 0.11 0.38 PCB170 µg/kg 30 99 PCB180 µg/kg 300 990 PCB189 µg/kg 110 380 Total PCB Congeners µg/kg 22.7 180 89 300

1. Effects Range Low (ERL) and Effects Range Median (ERM) sediment quality objectives from Long et al. (1995).

2. Regional Screening Levels for Chemical Contaminants at Superfund Sites" (USEPA Region 9, 2010).

3. California Human Health Screening Levels for Soil (Cal/EPA, 2005).

2.5 Physical Evaluation Guidelines

The grain size compatibility analysis was based on the grain size compatibility between the dredge footprint and placement areas and was conducted according to Los Angeles District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Geotechnical Branch office guidelines. These guidelines are the same as the SCOUP (Sand Compatibility and Opportunistic Use Program).

If the grain size characteristics of each core are compatible with the grain size characteristics of the placement areas and contaminant levels are low compared to lower effects based screening levels and human health screening levels, then the composite sample sediments are suitable for beach nourishment and no further testing should be required. If elevated concentrations of contaminants exist, then further testing may be required by the Southern California Dredge Material Management Team (SC-DMMT).

2.6 Chemical Evaluation Guidelines

As mentioned above, to aid in the evaluation of sediment test data, chemical concentrations of contaminants found within the sediments were compared to sediment quality guidelines (Long et. al., 1995) developed by NOAA (Table 5). These guidelines can be used to screen sediments for contaminant concentrations that might cause biological effects and to identify sediments for further toxicity testing.

For any given contaminant, ERL guidelines represent the 10th percentile concentration value in the NOAA database that might be expected to cause adverse biological effects and ERM guidelines reflect the 50th percentile value in the database. Note that ERLs and ERMs will only be used as a screening tool.

They will not be used to determine suitability for beach replenishment.

As an additional measure of potential toxicity, the mean ERM quotient (ERMq) for the composite sample was calculated according to Long et al. (1998a) and Hyland et al. (1999). ERMq was calculated by dividing each contaminant concentration by its respective ERM value and then summing the results and dividing through by the number of contaminants as shown in the following equation:

ERM

entrationSampleConc

1tERMQuotien

In cases where concentrations of measured contaminants were below the method detection limit (MDL), a value of ½ the MDL was used for the ERMq calculations. For a general overall indication of toxicity, a quotient less than 0.1 is indicative of a low probability (<12%) of a highly toxic response to marine amphipods (Long et al., 1998b). If there are no ERL exceedances in a sample, there is less than a 10% probability of a highly toxic response to marine amphipods. The probability of a highly toxic response increases to 71% for quotients greater than 1.0.

If there are particularly elevated concentrations of chemical contaminants, then the dredge material may be assessed to whether or not it is suitable for human contact. To do so, the chemical results were compared to “Regional Screening Levels for Chemical Contaminants at Superfund Sites" (USEPA Region 9, 2010), formerly known as Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs). These screening levels (RSLs) were developed for Superfund/RCRA programs and are a consortium of EPA Region 9 PRGs, EPA Region 3 RBCs and EPA Region 6 HHMSSLs. RSLs are risk-based concentrations derived from standardized equations combining exposure information assumptions with EPA toxicity data. RSLs are considered by the EPA to be protective for humans (including sensitive groups) over a lifetime.

However, RSLs are not always applicable to a particular site and do not address non-human health endpoints, such as ecological impacts. The RSLs in Table 5 have been calculated without site-specific information. They are used for site "screening" and as initial cleanup goals. RSLs are not cleanup standards and were not applied as such. The RSL's primary role in site "screening" is to help identify areas, contaminants, and conditions that require further federal attention at a particular site, and is also useful in determining risks to human exposure at non-superfund sites. RSLs may be lower than the California Title 22 TTLC values, but often are much higher. Material with excessive RSL exceedances should be re-used as buried fill instead of topsoil provided it can be shown that the material will not leach contaminants at detrimental concentrations into groundwater and receiving waters.

Human health risks were also evaluated using CHHSLs. CHHSLs (Cal/EPA, 2005) are concentrations of 54 hazardous chemicals in soil or soil gas that are considered to be below thresholds for risks to human health. The CHHSLs were developed by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) on behalf of Cal/EPA. CHHSLs were developed using standard exposure assumptions and chemical toxicity values published by the USEPA and Cal/EPA. CHHSLs listed in Table 5 were developed separately for industrial/commercial settings and for residential settings.

3.0 FIELD SAMPLING PROTOCOLS

Vibracore sampling, grab sampling, decontamination, sample processing and documentation procedures are discussed in this section.

3.1 Vibracore Sampling Methods

Subsurface sediment samples were collected using an electric vibracore that can penetrate and obtain samples at the project sample elevations. The cores were taken to the target sampling elevations (project elevation plus two feet for overdredge testing in Areas A and B and project elevation plus five feet for overdredge and advanced maintenance dredge testing in Area C) or to the depth of refusal. The depth of refusal is defined as the depth at which the average rate of penetration was less than 0.1 feet/minute for a two (2) minute period. Where feasible, at sites where the depth of refusal was reached prior to the sample depth, additional attempts were made to reach the sample depth. At the conclusion of a successful vibracore, the core liner was removed and split open for inspection and sampling. Extrusion of the cores was not allowed. Core processing took place onshore.

Vibracore sampling was conducted from the 35-foot research vessel DW Hood and from a 16 ft x 12ft portable barge. These vessels are equipped with an A-frame or quadrapod and winches that are suitable for handling the coring equipment. A 17-foot Boston Whaler was used to position and anchor the barge and to anchor the DW Hood.

Positioning at the coring locations was accomplished using a Garmin 215D series differential GPS (DGPS) navigation system or equivalent, referenced to a local geodetic benchmark, resulting in positioning accuracies of 1 to 3 meters. The locations were recorded in Geographic coordinates (NAD

83) and then converted to State Plane Coordinates (CA Zone V, NAD 83) for mapping. Water depths were measured with a graduated lead line and corrected to mean lower low water. Tidal stage was determined using NOAA predicted tide tables. These tables were used to calculate the seafloor elevation/mudline.

All sampling sites were located within Federal Channel limits. Target locations provided in the SAP may have been moved to another spot in the general area if the shoaling was minimal and more significant shoaling could be represented in the composite sample. A few locations were also moved to avoid dangerous sea conditions.

Kinnetic Laboratories’ vibracore consists of a 4-inch diameter aluminum coring tube, a stainless steel cutting tip, and a stainless-steel core catcher. Inserted into the core tubes were food-grade clean polyethylene liners. The vibrating unit has two counter-rotating motors encased in a waterproof aluminum housing. A three-phase, 240-volt generator powered the motors. The vibracore head and tube were lowered overboard via the A-frame or quadrapod and winch. The unit was then vibrated until it reached the target sampling elevation or until the depth of refusal was reached.

When penetration of the vibracore was complete, power was shut off to the vibra-head, and the vibracore was brought aboard the vessel. A check valve located on top of the core tube helped reduce or prevent sediment loss during pull-out. The length of sediment recovered was noted by measuring down the interior of the core tube to the top of the sediment. The core tube was then detached from the vibra-head, and the core cutting tip and catcher were removed. Afterwards, the core liners were removed and sealed on both ends and then transported to a shore-side processing facility.

All sample contact surfaces were stainless steel, polyethylene or Teflon® coated. Compositing tools were stainless steel. Except for the liners, all contact surfaces of the sampling devices and the coring tubes were cleaned for each sampling area. The cleaning protocol consisted of a site water rinse, a Micro-90 soap wash, and then finished with deionized water rinses. The polyethylene core liners were new and of food grade quality.

After placement in a clean PVC core rack, core liners were split lengthwise to expose the recovered sediment. Once exposed, sediment that came in contact with the core liner was removed by scraping with a pre-cleaned stainless steel spoon. Each core was photographed, measured, and lithologically logged in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) as outlined in ASTM Standards D-2488 (2006) and D-2487 (2006). Additional sediment characteristics including likely sediment origin and other observations were also recorded. A geologist from GeoPentech did the lithologic logging along with collection of sample splits for geophysical testing.

Photographs were taken of each core (each photograph covered about maximum two-foot interval), and of sampling equipment and procedures. These pictures are provided in Appendix B in electronic format only (JPEG).

Following logging, vertical composites were then formed from each core and samples for grain size analyses were formed. Vertical composite samples represented the material from project depth to two feet below project depth for Areas A and B; and to five feet below project depth for Area C. An archived sample was formed from each vertical composite subsample unless distinct geologic stratification was observed. If distinct geologic stratification was observed, then a separate vertical composite of each core stratum were archived. Care was taken during sample processing to avoid contamination and to minimize the loss of sediment porewater. Vertical composite chemical subsamples were formed by combining and homogenizing a representative sample from each sampling interval and from each core stratum, as described in Section 2.0, in a pre-cleaned stainless steel or Teflon®-coated tray. A 0.5-liter portion of each vertical composite and core stratum was placed in a pre-cleaned and certified glass jar with a Teflon®-lined lid for archived material (Ziploc bags for geotechnical samples/archives). The individual core archives may be analyzed to identify potential hotspots or pockets of fine-grained material within a problematic composite area. The remaining portion of each vertical composite within each sampling interval identified for chemical composite sample formation was placed in another pre-cleaned tray for area compositing with other cores from the same sampling interval in the same composite area. All samples for grain size analyses were transferred to pre-labeled sample containers (sealed plastic bags) and stored appropriately until they were ultimately transferred to Diaz-Yourman for analysis.

Except for archival material, jars for chemical analyses were completely filled to minimize air bubbles being trapped in the sample container. A small amount of headspace was allowed for archived samples to prevent container breakage during freezing. For the preservation of all sediment composite samples, filled containers were placed on ice immediately following sampling and maintained at ±2 to 4°C until analyzed. Archived samples were placed on ice initially and then frozen as soon as possible. The sample containers were sealed to prevent any moisture loss and possible contamination.

3.2 Beach Transect and Nearshore Grab Samples

Beach transects were approximately perpendicular to the existing water line and offshore bathymetry.

Beach transect sampling consisted of collecting surface grab samples at even elevations between +12 and -30 ft MLLW (eight samples per transect) at the beach replenishment sites identified on Figures 3 and 4.

Two transects were sampled at each of the Oceanside City Beach and Pier locations for a total of four transacts. Beach transect locations were approximate and were slightly adjusted in the field to match existing conditions and landmarks. Each transect location was individually logged and analyzed for physical properties.

Ten random grab surface samples were collected in the nearshore temporary placement area shown on Figure 4. Each sample was individually logged and analyzed for grain size distribution.

Positioning at the sampling locations was accomplished using a DGPS navigation system. Water depths at intertidal and subtidal stations were measured with a graduated lead line and corrected to MLLW.

The top six inches of sand or sediment was collected at all sampling locations. The three highest locations along each beach transect were sampled on land using a hand held scoop. All other offshore stations were sampled from a 17-foot Boston Whaler using a Ponar Grab.

At each offshore station, the grab sampler was deployed, and upon retrieval the grab was visually inspected to ensure the sample was acceptable. A subsample of each grab was collected using a stainless steel spoon.

All samples for grain size analyses weere transferred to pre-labeled sample containers (sealed plastic bags) and stored appropriately until they were ultimately transferred to Diaz-Yourman for analysis.

3.3 Detailed Soils Log

A detailed soils log was prepared for each sampling location, including beach transects and nearshore sampling areas. These logs are included as Appendix C and contain the project name, hole or transect number or designation, date, time, location, water depth, estimated tide, mudline elevation, type and size of sampling device used, depth of penetration, length of recovery, name of person(s) taking samples, depths below mudline of samples, and a description and condition of the sediment.