GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT LOWER VALLEY LAGOON PHASE I AND II SAN JUAN COUNTY, NEW MEXICO. Submitted To:

Transcription

1 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT LOWER VALLEY LAGOON PHASE I AND II SAN JUAN COUNTY, NEW MEXICO Submitted To: Wade Chacon, P.E. Louisiana Boulevard NE, Suite 00 Albuquerque, New Mexico 0 Submitted By: GEOMAT Inc. Malta Avenue Farmington, New Mexico 0 December, GEOMAT Project -

2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. INTRODUCTION... PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION... SITE EXPLORATION... Field Exploration... Laboratory Testing... SITE CONDITIONS... GEOLOGICAL SETTING... SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS... Soil Conditions... Groundwater Conditions... Laboratory Test Result... OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS... LIFT STATION FOUNDATION... Lateral Earth Pressures... EARTHWORK... General Considerations... Excavation... Excavation Safety... Dewatering Pipe Foundation... Pipe Embedment... Backfill Compliance PAVEMENT REPAIRS... 0 GENERAL COMMENTS... APPENDIX A Site Plan Logs of Borings and Test Pits Unified Soil Classification APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results Laboratory Test Procedures

4 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT LOWER VALLEY LAGOON PHASE I AND II SAN JUAN COUNTY, NEW MEXICO GEOMAT PROJECT NO. - INTRODUCTION This report contains the results of our geotechnical engineering exploration for Phases I and II of the Lower Valley Lagoon Design and Decommissioning project in Kirtland, San Juan County, New Mexico, as shown on the Site Plan in Appendix A of this report. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations about: subsurface soil conditions groundwater conditions lift station foundations excavation conditions pipeline backfill The opinions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the results of field and laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and experience with similar soil conditions, structures, and our understanding of the proposed project as stated below. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We understand that Phase I of the project consists of the construction of a new sanitary lift station and approximately,00 lineal feet of forcemain pipeline. The proposed lift station will be located adjacent to an existing sewer lagoon near the south end of Road, approximately 0. mile south of Road 00 in Kirtland. We also understand the lift station will be either

5 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II precast or cast-in-place concrete, and the bottom of the structure is understood to be on the order of feet below existing grade. The forcemain will consist of approximately,00 lineal feet of -inch diameter PVC or HDPE pipe. From its connection to the new lift station, the forcemain will follow an alignment roughly 0 feet east, then north along a dirt access road for approximately 0. miles to Road 00, then east along Road 00 for approximately 0. mile to the existing Lift Station No.. We understand the bury depth of the forcemain will be approximately four feet. We understand that Phase II will consist of the construction of approximately,00 lineal feet of -inch diameter sewer collection lines and manholes on Roads,,,, and. The bury depth of the collection lines is understood to be approximately 0 feet. SITE EXPLORATION Our scope of services performed for this project included a site reconnaissance by a staff geologist, a subsurface exploration program, laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Field Exploration: Subsurface conditions at the proposed lift station were explored on July,, by excavating one exploratory test pit at the approximate location shown on the Site Plan in Appendix A. The test pit, designated TP-, was excavated using a Hyundai trackhoe with a -inch wide bucket. The test pit was terminated at a depth of approximately feet below existing ground surface (short of its planned depth of feet) due to severe caving of the pit walls. An additional attempt to explore the subsurface conditions at the lift station site was made on December, by drilling one exploratory boring at the location of test pit TP-. The boring, designated B-, was advanced with a CME- truck-mounted drill using continuousflight,.-inch O.D. solid-stem auger. The boring was terminated at a depth of approximately feet due to auger refusal on cobbles. Subsurface conditions along the alignments of the forcemain and collection lines were explored on December 0 and,, by drilling exploratory borings at the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan in Appendix A. Borings B- through B- were drilled along the alignments of the collection lines, and B- through B- along the alignment of the forcemain. The borings were advanced using a combination of.-inch O.D. solid-stem and.-inch O.D. hollow-stem augers.

6 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II The borings and test pit were continuously monitored by a geologist from our office who examined and classified the subsurface materials encountered, obtained representative samples, observed groundwater conditions, and maintained a continuous log of each boring/test pit. Soils were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described in Appendix A. Temporary piezometers were installed in each boring (with the exception of B-). Stabilized groundwater levels were measured in the piezometers on December,. The piezometers were removed and the boreholes backfilled with cuttings from the borings following the water level measurements. Laboratory Testing: Samples retrieved during the field exploration were transported to our laboratory for further evaluation. At that time, the field descriptions were confirmed or modified as necessary, and laboratory tests were performed to evaluate the index properties of the subsurface materials. SITE CONDITIONS The site of the proposed lift station is located roughly 0 feet north of an existing sewer lagoon. Road dead-ends in a vacant lot at the lift station site. The ground surface appeared to be relatively level, and was vegetated by a sparse to moderate growth of weeds and grasses at the time of our exploration. No evidence of prior structural development was noted at the lift station site, except for nearby underground sewer lines. The northern portion of the forcemain follows an east-west alignment along Road 00. The northern portion of the alignment is paved with asphalt concrete pavement. The southern portion follows a north-south alignment along a dirt access road, traversing the west side of several agricultural fields between Road 00 on the north and the San Juan River on the south. The ground surface appeared to be relatively level along both the paved and dirt roads, although the ground sloped away from the road along the southern (unpaved) section, suggesting that portions of the alignment may have been graded in the past by filling on the order of several feet. An irrigation pump station was located adjacent to the river at the southern end of the alignment. Buried utilities, including gas and water, are known to exist below the road surface along the alignments. The alignments of the sewer collection lines are located on residential streets west of the proposed forcemain. The streets were paved and appeared to be relatively level.

7 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II GEOLOGICAL SETTING The proposed project site is located in the north-central portion of the San Juan Basin. The San Juan Basin is described as a structural depression near the southeastern edge of the Colorado Plateau. Rocks in the San Juan Basin include thick sequences of marine, coastal, and terrestrial sediments deposited during late Paleozoic to early Tertiary time. In late Cretaceous and early Tertiary time, regional forces caused uplift of the Rocky Mountains to the north, along with subsidence of the San Juan Basin. Sediment derived from erosion of the mountains to the north continued to be deposited in the basin. These Tertiary sandstones, siltstones, and shales are the rocks presently exposed at the surface in the Four Corners area. The rocks are relatively undeformed and bedding is near-horizontal, except near the margins of the San Juan Basin, where uplift has deformed the rocks. An example of this deformation is the Hogback monocline near Fruitland. Ongoing erosion by wind and water has dissected these rocks into the mesas and washes that characterize the present landscape. Areas near the Animas, San Juan, and La Plata Rivers (including the project site) are characterized by alluvial river terrace deposits consisting of variable thicknesses of unconsolidated sand, gravel, cobbles, and boulders. These Quaternary alluvial deposits overlie the Tertiary shales and sandstones. The area in the vicinity of the project is generally considered tectonically stable. The nearest mapped active faults are roughly 0 miles to the southeast, north of Cuba, New Mexico. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Soil Conditions: As presented on the Boring and Test Pit Logs in Appendix A, we encountered generally finegrained soils to the depths explored along the alignment of the forcemain, with the exception of boring B-. At the location of B-, adjacent to the San Juan River, we encountered gravel and cobbles below the fine-grained surficial soils. The fine-grained soils were generally moist above the water table, and wet below the water table. Along the alignments of the collection system, comprising approximately the western half of the project area, we encountered fine-grained surficial soils overlying gravel and cobbles. The gravel/cobbles were encountered at depths ranging from approximately to feet below existing ground surface. At the location of the proposed lift station we encountered fine-grained surficial soils from the surface to a depth of approximately feet. Below the surficial soils, we encountered gravel and cobbles to the total depth explored. The soils encountered in borings B-, B-, and B- exhibited a strong odor that could indicate the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons or other organic compounds. GEOMAT did not attempt

8 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II to evaluate the source or cause of the odor because evaluation of environmental conditions was beyond our scope of services for this project. Groundwater Conditions: Groundwater was encountered in all of the borings except B- and B-. Although groundwater was not encountered in B- and B- to the depths explored, it is likely present at these locations at greater depths. In the remainder of the borings, the stabilized water levels, measured approximately one to two days after drilling, ranged from approximately. to. feet below existing ground surface. The groundwater level observed in test pit TP- was approximately feet below existing ground surface during excavation on July,. Groundwater elevations can fluctuate over time depending upon precipitation, irrigation, runoff/infiltration of surface water, and the level of water in the San Juan River. We do not have any information regarding the historical fluctuation of the groundwater level in this vicinity. Laboratory Test Results: Laboratory analyses of representative samples indicate the fine-grained soils have fines contents (silt- and/or clay-sized particles passing the U.S. No. 0 sieve) ranging from approximately to percent. indices of the soils ranged from non-plastic (NP) to. Results of all laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B. OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Construction of the proposed lift station and collection system is considered feasible based on the geotechnical conditions encountered and tested for this report. If there are any significant deviations from the assumed alignment or pipe invert elevations noted at the beginning of this report, the opinions and recommendations of this report should be reviewed and confirmed/modified as necessary to reflect the final planned design conditions. Due to the presence of groundwater at relatively shallow depths at the site of the lift station and along the majority of the alignment, along with the soil conditions encountered, we anticipate that sloping, shoring or bracing, and/or dewatering techniques will be required to excavate trenches to the required depths in many areas. Gravels and cobbles were encountered in some areas along the alignment. Excavations in these dense, coarse-grained soils could necessitate the use of heavy-duty equipment. Caving and sloughing of the gravelly soils should be expected, especially in areas where excavations extend below the water table.

9 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II All earthwork and pipe installation should be in accordance with New Mexico Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (NMSSPWC) Section 00. LIFT STATION FOUNDATION: The lift station could be supported directly on compacted native gravel/cobble soils. If necessary, a leveling course of flowable fill could be placed below the bottom of the structure to reduce the potential for damage from protruding cobbles. The lift station should be designed to resist the uplift and horizontal forces resulting from the groundwater table in the area. Total and differential settlements resulting from the assumed structural loads are estimated to be on the order of ½ inch or less. Lateral Earth Pressures: For soils above any free water surface - Recommended equivalent fluid pressures for unrestrained foundation elements are presented in the following table: Active: Granular soil backfill (on-site sand)... psf/ft Undisturbed subsoil...0 psf/ft Passive: Foundation walls...00 psf/ft Coefficient of base friction: The coefficient of base friction should be reduced to 0.0 when used in conjunction with passive pressure. Where the design includes restrained elements, the following equivalent fluid pressures are recommended: At rest: Granular soil backfill (on-site sand)... 0 psf/ft Undisturbed subsoil... 0 psf/ft Soils in Submerged Condition - Hydrostatic forces should be added to the following, as appropriate.

10 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II Active: Granular soil backfill (on-site sand)... psf/ft Undisturbed subsoil... psf/ft Passive: Foundation walls...0 psf/ft Coefficient of base friction:...0. The coefficient of base friction should be reduced to 0. when used in conjunction with passive pressure. Where the design includes restrained elements, the following equivalent fluid pressures are recommended: At rest: Undisturbed Soil... psf/ft Fill against the walls of the vault should be compacted to a minimum of 0 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D. Medium to high plasticity clay soils should not be used as backfill against the vault walls. Compaction of each lift adjacent to walls should be accomplished with hand-operated tampers or other lightweight compactors. Over compaction may cause excessive lateral earth pressures that could result in wall movement. EARTHWORK: General Considerations: The opinions contained in this report for the proposed construction are contingent upon compliance with recommendations presented in this section. The presence of underground utilities, including water, gas, and communication lines, should be expected along many portions of the alignment. Excavation: We present the following general comments regarding our opinion of the excavation conditions for the designers information with the understanding that they are opinions based on our boring data. Our borings were advanced using.-inch O.D. and/or.-inch O.D. continuous-flight auger, and the test pit was excavated with a Hyundai trackhoe. The relative ease or difficulty of excavation may be significantly different using other types of equipment and

11 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II techniques. More accurate information regarding the excavation conditions should be evaluated by contractors or other interested parties from test excavations using the equipment that will be used during construction. Based on our subsurface evaluation it appears that excavations in the sandy, clayey, and gravelly soils along the alignment will be possible using standard excavation equipment. Significant caving and sloughing was noted in our exploratory test pit, TP-. Excavations deeper than a few feet are likely to experience caving or sloughing, especially near the water table. Sloping, shoring, or bracing of excavation walls, along with dewatering techniques, are likely to be necessary to maintain safe, stable excavations. Excavation Safety: Construction of stable temporary excavations is the responsibility of the contractor. Temporary slopes and excavations should be designed and constructed in accordance with the Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration CFR Part, Subpart P, Occupational Safety and Health Standards Excavations ( OSHA Construction Standards for Excavations ). According to OSHA Construction Standards for Excavations, all excavations greater than four feet in depth must be sloped, shored, or braced. Spoils must be placed at least two feet from the edge of the excavation to reduce the potential for sidewall failure due to excessive lateral pressures. Other details regarding excavation safety, as described in Subpart P, shall be followed. Conditions affecting stability of slopes and excavations can change over time depending on variables such as weather, vibration or surcharges due to nearby equipment, etc. The contractor s designated Competent Person (as defined in subpart P) shall monitor and assess conditions affecting soil stability during construction. Dewatering: In areas where groundwater is encountered during excavation, dewatering may be required in order to facilitate the entry of personnel and/or equipment into the trench. Water should be removed from the excavation using pumps, well points, or similar techniques, and either contained or discharged to a lower point. According to New Mexico Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (NMSSPWC), the groundwater should be lowered to at least six inches below pipe grades before laying pipes in trenches.

12 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II Pipe Foundation: Pipes should be bedded on a stable subgrade which is free of water. Any areas where pumping soils or otherwise unstable subgrade conditions are encountered must be stabilized before laying pipe. If such conditions are encountered during construction, GEOMAT should be contacted to provide specific recommendations for stabilization. Pipe Embedment: As required in the NMSSPWC specifications, a minimum thickness of eight (.0) inches of embedment (bedding) material should be placed on top of the subgrade to support and protect the pipe. Once the pipe has been placed and aligned, shading material should be placed to a minimum of eight (.0) inches above the top of the pipe. Hand tamping or similar techniques should be employed to ensure that the bedding material completely supports the haunch of the pipe. Embedment material below the pipe should be compacted to a minimum density of percent of the ASTM D maximum dry density. To avoid damage to the pipe, mechanical compaction equipment should not be used over the pipe in the embedment zone. Embedment material should be a granular soil such as sand, silty/clayey sand, or fine-grained gravel. It should be free of coarse-grained gravel particles or cobbles. Silt, clay, or organic soils are not suitable for use as embedment material. Soils used for embedment should have a fines content (percentage of silt and/or clay-sized particles passing the U.S. No. 0 sieve) of less than 0 percent. Alternatively, flowable fill could be used as embedment material. The use of flowable fill could be appropriate in situations where placing personnel and/or compaction equipment in excavations is impractical due to closely-spaced adjacent utilities or unstable excavations. Backfill: Excavations should be backfilled to the planned finished grades using native or imported soils that are free of debris, rubble, frozen soil, organic material, or other deleterious material. Fill material should be free of cobbles or boulders greater than six inches in diameter. Additionally, backfill material should conform to any specifications provided by the pipe manufacturer. Backfill material should be compacted to a minimum of 0 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D. In areas where the final backfill is located under pavements or other structures, the upper two (.0) feet of backfill material should be compacted to percent

13 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II 0 of the D maximum dry density. Soils should be compacted at moisture contents near optimum. Material should be placed in horizontal lifts in thicknesses that permit compaction to the required densities with the equipment being used. The existing soils along the alignment are predominantly fine-grained, and as such, are expected to be moisture sensitive. The fine-grained native soils may pump or become unstable or unworkable at high water contents. Workability may be improved by scarifying and drying. Over-excavation of wet zones and replacement with granular materials may be necessary. Lightweight excavation equipment may be required to reduce pumping. Compliance: The recommendations in this report depend upon compliance with Earthwork recommendations. To assess compliance, observation and testing should be performed by GEOMAT. PAVEMENT REPAIRS: Existing bituminous pavement removed in connection with construction shall be cut with a saw or other suitable tool. Care shall be taken to assure that the edge of removed pavement does not vary from a straight line more than two inches for any given section of removed pavement. Patching of removed pavement shall conform to the following detail, as well as applicable NMSSPWC specifications. No edge of a pavement patch shall be in a wheel path; the edge shall be either between wheel paths or on the centerline of the road. If the outer edge of the paved surface is damaged, the

14 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II paving shall be replaced to between the wheel paths of the lane damaged. If the damage extends beyond the outer wheel, the paving shall be replaced to the centerline of the road. For trenching that will be within feet of the edge of the pavement, the backfill should be compacted to a density of not less than 0 percent of a maximum density, as determined by ASTM D. GENERAL COMMENTS It is recommended that GEOMAT be retained to provide a general review of final design plans and specifications in order to confirm that earthwork recommendations in this report have been interpreted and implemented. In the event that any changes of the proposed project are planned, the opinions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and the report modified or supplemented as necessary. GEOMAT should also be retained to provide services during the construction phase of the project. Construction testing, including field and laboratory evaluation of fill and/or backfill materials, should be performed to determine whether applicable project requirements have been met. The analyses and recommendations in this report are based in part upon data obtained from the field exploration. The nature and extent of variations beyond the location of test excavations may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it may be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report. Our professional services were performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical engineers practicing in this or similar localities at the same time. No warranty, express or implied, is intended or made. We prepared the report as an aid in design of the proposed project. This report is not a bidding document. Any contractor reviewing this report must draw his own conclusions regarding site conditions and specific construction equipment and techniques to be used on this project. This report is for the exclusive purpose of providing geotechnical engineering and/or testing information and recommendations. The scope of services for this project does not include, either specifically or by implication, any environmental assessment of the site or identification of contaminated or hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination, other studies should be undertaken. This report has also not addressed any geologic hazards that may exist on or near the site.

15 Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOMAT Project No. - Lower Valley Lagoon Phase I and II This report may be used only by the Client and only for the purposes stated, within a reasonable time from its issuance. Land use, site conditions (both on and off site), or other factors may change over time and additional work may be required with the passage of time. Any party, other than the Client, who wishes to use this report, shall notify GEOMAT in writing of such intended use. Based on the intended use of the report, GEOMAT may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report be issued. Non-compliance with any of these requirements, by the Client or anyone else, will release GEOMAT from any liability resulting from the use of this report by an unauthorized party.

16 Appendix A

17

18 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road 00 of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // SC CL GP 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " CLAYEY SAND, green-gray, fine-grained, moist, strong odor (possible hydrocarbon contamination?) wet SANDY LEAN CLAY, tan to brown, wet no odor observed below feet GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth feet

19 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // 0 CL GP 0 Asphalt concrete pavement /" Aggregate base course " SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, moist wet GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at. feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth. feet

20 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // 0 CL GP 0 Asphalt concrete pavement /" Aggregate base course " SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, damp to moist wet GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at 0 feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth 0 feet

21 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // SC GP 0 Asphalt concrete pavement /" Aggregate base course " CLAYEY SAND, brown, fine-grained, damp to moist moist GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at 0 feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth 0 feet

22 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: Approx..0 ft on // Remarks: Road 00 of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // 0 SC CL SC/CL GP 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " CLAYEY SAND, brown, fine-grained, moist green-gray, strong odor (possible hydrocarbon contamination?) LEAN CLAY, dark gray to black, moist strong odor (possible hydrocarbon contamination?) SANDY LEAN CLAY to CLAYEY SAND, tan to brown, fine-grained, wet GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at 0 feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth 0 feet

23 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // CL 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, moist wet Total Depth feet

24 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page of Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // SC CL GP 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " CLAYEY SAND with gravel, brown, fine-grained, damp Lean CLAY w/ sand, brown, damp to moist wet GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth feet

25 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: None Encountered Remarks: Road of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // NP SM CL GP 0 SILTY SAND, brown, fine-grained, damp LEAN CLAY, brown to gray, moist GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth feet

26 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // CL-ML GP 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " Silty, clayey SAND to Sandy silty CLAY, gray to black, moist, strong odor (possible hydrocarbon contamination?) tan to brown no odor observed below feet wet GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth feet

27 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B-0 Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // CL GP 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " LEAN CLAY, brown to gray, moist wet GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth feet

28 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // SC CL GP 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " CLAYEY SAND, brown, fine-grained, moist LEAN CLAY, brown, moist wet GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth feet

29 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // NP SM ML GP 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " SILTY SAND, brown, fine-grained, damp Sandy SILT, gray to brown, wet GRAVEL and cobbles Boring terminated at feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth feet

30 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road 00 of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // SM 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " SILTY SAND, brown, fine-grained, moist wet Total Depth 0 feet

31 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page of Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: State ROW GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // CL SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, moist trace gravel wet 0 Total Depth 0 feet

32 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page of Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: State ROW GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, damp moist CL wet 0 Total Depth 0 feet

33 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Solid Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: State ROW of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // CLAYEY GRAVEL with sand and cobbles, brown to gray, moist GC LEAN CLAY, brown to dark gray, moist to wet CL wet GP GRAVEL and cobbles 0 Boring terminated at 0 feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth 0 feet

34 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road 00 of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // SC 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " CLAYEY SAND, brown, fine-grained, moist moist to wet Total Depth 0 feet

35 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road 00 of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // SC 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " CLAYEY SAND, brown to gray, fine-grained, moist moist to wet Total Depth 0 feet

36 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: Approx.. ft on // Remarks: Road 00 of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // SC 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " CLAYEY SAND, brown, fine-grained, damp to moist moist to wet Total Depth 0 feet

37 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Solid Stem Auger Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: /0/ Groundwater Depth: None Encountered Remarks: Road 00 of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // NP SC GP SM 0 Asphalt concrete pavement " Aggregate base course " CLAYEY SAND, brown, fine-grained, moist GRAVEL with sand and cobbles, brown to gray, fine- to coarse-grained, moist SILTY SAND, brown, fine-grained, damp Total Depth 0 feet

38 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - CME- Drilling Method:." O.D. Hollow Stem Auger Sampling Method: N/A Borehole B- Page Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: Approx. ft during drilling Remarks: Drilled in Location of TP- of GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // GP 0 disturbed backfill soils from TP- GRAVEL with sand and cobbles, dense Boring terminated at feet due to auger refusal on cobbles Total Depth feet

39 Malta Avenue Farmington, NM 0 Tel (0) - Fax (0) - Project Number: - Hyundai Trackhoe Drilling Method: " Bucket Sampling Method: Grab Samples Borehole TP- Page of Date Drilled: // Groundwater Depth: Approx. ft during excavation Remarks: None GEOMAT -.GPJ GEOMAT.GDT // SM ML GP 0 SILTY SAND with gravel, brown, fine-grained, slightly damp occasional cobbles damp to moist significant caving below feet SILT, blue-gray, moist to wet GRAVEL with sand and cobbles, gray, fine- to coarse-grained, moist to wet wet slow progress below feet due to caving Test pit terminated at feet due to caving Final diameter of hole approx. feet Significant infiltration of groundwater below feet Total Depth feet

40 Coarse- Grained Soils More than 0% retained on No. 0 sieve UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Group Major Divisions Symbols Gravels 0% or more of coarse fraction retained on No. sieve Sands More than 0% of coarse fraction passes No. sieve Clean Gravels Gravels with Fines Clean Sands Sands with Fines GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC Typical Names Well-graded gravels and gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines Poorly graded gravels and gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures Well-graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no fines Poorly graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no fines Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures CONSISTENCY OR RELATIVE DENSITY CRITERIA Penetration Resistance, N (blows/ft.) Standard Penetration Test Density of Granular Soils Relative Density 0- Very Loose -0 Loose -0 Medium Dense -0 Dense >0 Very Dense Standard Penetration Test Density of Granular Soils Fine-Grained Soils 0% or more passes No. 0 sieve Silts and Clays Liquid Limit 0 or less Silts and Clays Liquid Limit greater than 0 ML CL OL MH CH Inorganic silts, very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands Penetration Resistance, N (blows/ft.) Consistency Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays < Very Soft <0. Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity Unconfined Compressive Strength (Tons/ft) - Soft Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous free sands or silts, elastic silts - Firm Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays - Stiff OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity -0 Very Stiff Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, mucic & other highly organic soils >0 Hard >.0 U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes " /" # #0 #0 #0 Unified Soil Cobbles Gravel Sand Classification coarse fine coarse medium fine Silt or Clay MOISTURE CONDITIONS MATERIAL QUANTITY OTHER SYMBOLS Dry Absence of moist, dusty, dry to the touch trace 0-% R Ring Sample Slightly Damp Below optimum moisture content for compaction few -0% S SPT Sample Moist Near optimum moisture content, will moisten the hand little 0-% B Bulk Sample Very Moist Above optimum moisture content some -% Ground Water Wet Visible free water, below water table mostly 0-00% BASIC LOG FORMAT: Group name, Group symbol, (grain size), color, moisture, consistency or relative density. Additional comments: odor, presence of roots, mica, gypsum, coarse particles, etc. EXAMPLE: SILTY SAND w/trace silt (SM-SP), Brown, loose to med. Dense, fine to medium grained, damp UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

41 Appendix B

42 LAB NO. BORING NO. SAMPLE DEPTH (ft) SIEVE ANALYSIS, CUMULATIVE PERCENT PASSING ATTERBERG LIMITS /" /" /" No. No. No. 0 No. No. 0 No. 0 No. 0 No. 00 No. 0 LL PL PI CLASSIFICATION B B B B B NLL NPL NP B- 00 B NLL NPL NP B B B NLL NPL NP Clayey SAND to Sandy Lean CLAY (SC-CL) Sandy Lean CLAY (CL) Sandy Lean CLAY (CL) Lean CLAY w/ sand (CL) Silty SAND (SM) Silty, clayey SAND (SC-SM) to Sandy silty CLAY (CL-ML) Sandy SILT (ML) Sandy Lean CLAY (CL) Clayey SAND (SC) Silty SAND (SM) Project Lower Valley Lagoon SUMMARY OF SOIL TESTS Job No. Location Date Drilled - San Juan County, New Mexico December 0-,

43 LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES Consolidation Tests: One-dimensional consolidation tests are performed using Floating-ring type consolidometers. The test samples are approximately. inches in diameter and.0 inch high and are usually obtained from test borings using the dynamically-driven ring samplers. Test procedures are generally as outlined in ASTM D. Loads are applied in several increments to the upper surface of the test specimen and the resulting deformations are recorded at selected time intervals for each increment. Samples are normally loaded in the in-situ moisture conditions to loads which approximate the stresses which will be experienced by the soils after the project is completed. Samples are usually then submerged to determine the effect of increased moisture contents on the soils. Each load increment is applied until compression/expansion of the sample is essentially complete (normally movements of less than inches/hour). Porous stones are placed on the top and bottom surfaces of the samples to facilitate introduction of the moisture. Expansion Tests: Tests are performed on either undisturbed or recompacted samples to evaluate the expansive potential of the soils. The test samples are approximately. inches in diameter and.0 inch high. Recompacted samples are typically remolded to densities and moisture contents that will simulate field compaction conditions. Surcharge loads normally simulate those which will be experienced by the soils in the field. Surcharge loads are maintained until the expansion is essentially complete. Atterberg Limits/Maximum Density/Optimum Tests: These tests are performed in accordance with the prescribed ASTM test procedures.