general geotechnical subsurface soils evaluation …€¦ · section 2.0 – general subsurface...

PREPARED FOR

CEA GROUP 4712 WOODROW BEAN, SUITE F

EL PASO, TEXAS 79924

GENERAL GEOTECHNICAL SUBSURFACE SOILS EVALUATION REPORT

FOR

EPW – SUNSET HEIGHTS WATER & SANITARY SEWER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM PHASE 18

PROJECT EL PASO, EL PASO COUNTY, TEXAS

CQC PROJECT NO. AGCQC19-014

CQC TESTING AND ENGINEERING, L.L.C. TBPE FIRM REGISTRATION NO. F-10632 4606 Titanic Ave. EL PASO, TEXAS 79904 PH.: (915-771-7766 FX.: (915) 771-7786

Local El Paso, Texas Firm

General Geotechnical Subsurface Soils Evaluation Report EPW – Sunset Heights Water & Sewer Replacement Phase 18 Project Upson Drive from Heights Avenue to Prospect Drive El Paso, El Paso County, Texas

CQC Project No. AGCQC19-014 CQC Testing and Engineering, L.L.C. May 21, 2019 TBPE Firm Registration No. F-10632 Page 1 of 23 (Final Issued Report Date: 8/27/19)

Report Table of Contents

Page No.

Section 1.0 – General Project Information 3 1.1 Site Geologic Considerations 3 1.2 Existing Site Topography and Vegetation 4 1.3 Seismic Considerations 5 Section 2.0 – General Subsurface Soils Evaluation 5 2.1 Laboratory Engineering Soil Classification Testing 7 2.2 Soil Moisture-Density Relationship Test Results 7 2.3 Soil California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Test Results 7 Section 3.0 – Encountered Subsurface Soil Conditions 8 3.1 Groundwater Depth Considerations 10 3.2 Subsurface Soil Considerations and Preparation 11 - Special Considerations

- Site Preparation 3.3 Drainage Considerations 13 Section 4.0 – Soil Bearing Capacity and Design Considerations 13 4.1 Water & Sewer Line Replacement Design Considerations 13 4.2 Earth and Vehicle Loads 13 Section 5.0 – Below Grade Lateral Earth Pressures 13 Section 6.0 – General Trench Safety Considerations 14 6.1 Trench Safety Considerations 15 Section 7.0 – Pipe Embedment and Backfill Considerations 16 7.1 Man Hole Structures Considerations 17 Section 8.0 - Pavement Improvement Recommendations 18

Section 9.0 – Additional Design and Construction Considerations 19

Section 10.0 – Project Specification Information 19 10.1 Fill Materials 19 10.2 Construction Materials Testing 22 Section 11.0 – Soils Evaluation Considerations and Limitations 22



List of Appendices

Appendix A Sheet No. General Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration Boring Location Aerial Plan A1-1

City of El Paso Flood Zone Aerial Plan A1-2

Vertical Exploration Boring Logs A2-A9

Particle Size Analysis Test Reports A10-A17

Summary of Field & Laboratory Test Results A18-A19

Moisture-Density Relationship Test Results A20-A23

California Bearing Ratio Test Results A24-A25

Subsurface Diagram Profile A26

Appendix B

Geotechnical Report Technical Reference Information B1

Soil Classification Chart B2

Geotechnical Report Soil Classification Reference Information B3

Appendix C

Selected Project Field Work Photographs C1



Section 1.0 – General Project Information

This general geotechnical subsurface soils evaluation report has been prepared for CEA Group

(Client) for the El Paso Water – Sunset Heights Water and Sanitary Sewer Replacement Program Phase

18 Project. The project consists of the design and installation of approximately 3,400 linear feet of an 8-

inch water and 24-inch sanitary sewer lines along Upson Drive from Heisig Avenue to Prospect Drive in

central El Paso, El Paso County, Texas. We understand that the pipeline invert depths for the water line

shall range from 5 to 7 feet and the sanitary sewer line depth shall be about 12 feet, below the existing

pavement surface elevations.

Our specific scope of services for this project consisted of generally evaluating the subsurface soil

conditions along the proposed new pipeline areas by collecting subsurface soils information, conducting

Standard Penetration Tests (SPT’s), and preparing soil related information with respect to the suitability of

the on-site soils, engineering soil classifications, bearing resistance, and potential construction use for

pipeline backfilling. Please note that an additional scope of work was requested by our Client to perfom

additional borings within the project area. The results of these additional exploratory borings are

represented as B-7 and B-8. Our additional scope of work was authorized in response to CQC’s proposal

no. AGCQC18-073-01 dated May 22, 2019.

The following sections of this report present our field evaluation methods, site soil-related

considerations, estimated allowable bearing capacity values, and guidance information with respect to site

preparation, structure embedment, soil backfilling, and trench safety considerations. Please note that the

entire report should be read for a thorough understanding of our evaluation, findings, and guideline

recommendations. CQC Testing and Engineering, L.L.C. (CQC) should be contacted through a written

statement if our stated understanding of the project is not correct and/or if the owner changes the proposed

water and sewer line areas for this project. Site and pipeline route changes may result in our information

and recommendations within this report to be invalid without further review and evaluation by CQC. This

is especially true for this project due to the very hard subsurface conditions encountered within the

exploration vertical borings completed for this project.

1.1 - Site Geologic Considerations

The Geologic Atlas of Texas (Van Horn-El Paso Sheet, Revised 1995) published by the Bureau of

Economic Geology at the University of Texas at Austin indicates that that the project site is located in an

area of Young Quaternary deposits near the foothills of the Franklin Mountains. These formations typically

consist of areas of colluvium and alluvium deposits of silt, sands, gravels, clays, caliche and gypsum. The



geologic atlas also indicates that “Lanoria Quartzite” formation outcroppings shall also be encountered

within the vicinity of the project area. The project area also contains exposed Andesite rock outcroppings

and shallow fractured bedrock formations. The deposition of the rock formations shall vary horizontally and

vertically along the project pipeline routes. Cross bedding with alluvium formations shall be expected. It is

also possible to encounter very hard cemented calcareous soil formations within the project area as well.

Excavations through the sandy and gravelly soil and fractured rock formations in the area shall

require relatively heavy equipment to perform excavation operations. The geologic map also indicates that

fault zones are located northwest of the general project areas. Section 3.0 of this report presents additional

excavation considerations, especially with respect to handling of rock excavations to reach the specified

pipeline invert depths.

Based on the City of El Paso floodplain maps, the project areas are located outside of the floodplain

area. This should be verified by the project civil engineer. The Flood Zone Map can be found in Sheet A1-

3 for ease of reference. Please note that the indicated flood plain paths on the exhibit may not represent

the exact flood plain path locations and shall vary. This shall be further evaluated with a topographic survey

and drainage analysis.

It has been reported that no significant ground movement caused by the existing faults has been

recorded for the past 50 years in the El Paso area. Although the local seismic observatory at the University

of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) has indicated that the frequency of recordable ground movements has

increased within the last few years.

Please note that our scope of work did not include the specific delineation of faults within the project

construction limits and/or the development of specific design recommendations over faults zones.

However, these services may be provided as an additional scope of work and service to our Client, if

required.

1.2 – Existing Site Topography and Vegetation

Based on general site observations, the areas within the project limits appear to exhibit varying

elevation changes. The pipeline route areas are paved with a flexible pavement structure and bounded by

single and two-story residential buildings. The University of Texas at El Paso Campus and Mundy Park

facility are in the vicinity of the project areas.

CQC was not provided any historical or current topographic survey plans, design plans,

construction reports or environmental reports for review from our Client. Therefore, CQC has no



knowledge if previous site excavations or fill were appropriately backfilled with suitable soils and tested for

compaction verification.

1.3 – Seismic Considerations

Based on our review of the current International Building Code and Site Classification for Seismic

Design Definitions in conjunction with our review of the geologic conditions in the area, it is our professional

opinion that a Site Class C may be considered for this project. Please note that a geologic atlas of the

area was used to supplement our analysis since our borings were performed to maximum depth of 15 feet

below the existing ground surface elevation and the building code considers the average soil properties in

the top 100 feet of the subject site. In the event that the owner and/or design representative is interested

in determining the building code Site Class with a higher degree of accuracy, additional tests beyond our

original requested scope of work shall be required.

Based on a Soil Site Class C, seismic ground motion values were determined based on a site

latitude coordinates and longitude coordinates at the general center area of the project limits are defined

in the table below. The seismic coefficients were generated through the USGS Seismic Hazard Design &

OSHPD Seismic Design Maps website. The values should be verified by the project structural engineer

prior to use in structural analysis. CQC should be informed if the reported values vary significantly.

Table 1 – Seismic Ground Motion Values

Borehole No. Latitude Longitude

(-) Period

(Seconds)

Spectral Accelerations

(g)

Site Coefficient

Fa

Site Coefficient

Fv

B-1 thru B-6 31.762362 106.499875 0.2 (Ss) 0.273 1.20 -

1.0 (S1) 0.121 - 1.693

Section 2.0 – General Subsurface Soils Evaluation

As requested by our Client, the subsurface soils along the proposed pipeline alignments were

evaluated by completing a total of eight (8) exploration vertical borings performed at the approximate

locations shown in the General Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration Boring Location Aerial Plan, Sheet

A1-1.

The borings were drilled with a rotary drilling rig (CME-75) and hollow stem auger drilling techniques

and were logged during our field operations by a member of our geotechnical engineering staff. Our boring

logs are presented in Sheets A-2 through A-9. In general, the borings were drilled from an auger refusal

depth of 7½ feet to a maximum depth of 15 feet, below the existing flexible pavement elevation. During



our drilling operations Standard Penetration Tests (SPT’s) were performed in general conformance with

ASTM D 1586. Soil samples were collected within a split-spoon sampler at discrete depth intervals and

were containerized and transported to our laboratory for further physical and classification testing. Our

laboratory engineering soil classification tests (i.e., moisture contents, sieve analysis, and Atterberg Limit

Tests) were performed in accordance with accepted ASTM test procedures D 2216, D 1140, D 2217,

D6913, and D 4318, respectively. In general, the results of our tests and estimated “N-Values” are

presented in our boring logs and Summary of Laboratory Engineering Soil Classification Test Results in

Sheets A18 and A19. At the completion of our subsurface exploration activities, the borings were backfilled

with soil cuttings, firmly compacted and patched with concrete at the ground surface.

The following table summarizes the completion depth of our borings, type of samples, and number

of collected samples at the time of our subsurface exploration activities.

Table 2 – Summary of Field Evaluation – Boring Depths & Samples Collected

Summary of Subsurface Exploration Evaluation

Borehole No. Approximate Termination

Depth (ft.)

No. Split-Spoon

Samples

No. Grab Samples

Observed

Groundwater Depth (ft.)

B-1 15 4 - NE

B-2 15 3 - NE

B-3* 12 6 - NE

B-4* 11½ 2 - NE

B-5 15 1 - NE

B-6 15 4 - NE

B-7* 13 ½ 6 - NE

B-8* 7 ½ 4 - NE

NE- Not encountered at the time of our drilling activities. Note *: Auger refusal experienced at this depth during field exploration activities.

Contractors interested in bidding the project shall perform their own tests to verify the types of

materials or review historical plans of the area to evaluate the excavation requirements prior to bidding the

project. The owner shall not incur additional costs for additional excavations or removal of encountered

variable unclassified soils, heavy equipment required to penetrate the encountered subsurface soil/rock

formations, buried materials or utilities.

Please note that the collected soil samples from our soils evaluation shall be stored for a period of

up to 60 days after the submittal of this report, if a longer period of storage is required by our client, CQC

should be informed in writing.



2.1 - Laboratory Engineering Soil Classification Testing

In the laboratory, selected soil samples were evaluated and visually classified by our geotechnical

engineering staff in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The

geotechnical engineering properties of the selected samples were evaluated by the following tests.

Table 3 – Summary of Performed Laboratory Engineering Classification Tests

Type of Test

Total Number Conducted

Soil Moisture Contents 19

Atterberg Limit Tests 17

Particle Size Analysis Tests 19

Moisture-Density Relationship Tests 4

California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Tests 2

Our selected particle size sieve analysis test results are reported in Appendix A, Sheets A10

through A17 in this report.

2.2 – Soil Moisture-Density Relationship Test Results

At the time of our drilling activities, four (4) bulk soil sample was obtained from the reported boring

locations for soil moisture-density relationship testing. The samples were collected during our drilling

activities from auger cuttings from approximately the ground surface to approximately 7 feet. The test

results are reported in Sheets A20 through A23. A summary of the results are presented in the table below.

Table 4 – Summary of Soil Moisture-Density Relationship Test Results

Borehole No.

Approx. Sample

Depth (ft)

ASTM D 1557,

Method Soil Classification

Plasticity Index

Opt. Dry

Density (pcf)

Opt. Moisture (%)

B-1 1 - 3 C SP-SM NP 137.6 5.2

B-3 1 - 3 C SM NP 137.6 5.2

B-5 5 – 7 C SC 21 142.2 5.6

B-6 1 - 5 B SC 10 134.7 6.5

2.3 – Soil California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Test Results

The results of two (2) California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test conducted on a collected samples from

boring locations B-1 and B-5 are presented in the table below and Sheets A24 and A25. The tests were

performed in general accordance with ASTM standard test method D 1883. Based on our CBR test results,



the soils at the sample location shall provide a relatively high level of support for the new replacement

pavement section along the removed pavements.

Table 5 – Summary of California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Test Results

Borehole No.

Sample Depth (ft)

Dry Density prior to Soaking

(pcf)

Dry Density

after Soaking

(pcf)

Swell % CBR at

0.1” Pen. CBR at

0.2” Pen. Support

Level

B-1 1 - 3 129.9 125.1 0.0667 63 60 High

B-5 5 – 7 136.6 131.5 0.2889 69 84 High

Section 3.0 – Encountered Subsurface Soil Conditions

Based on our soil classifications and laboratory tests, the subsurface soils encountered in our

exploration borings may be described by five (4) generalized soil and/or rock types. In order to gain access

to the subsurface soils at each boring location, we cored thru an existing 2 to 4 inches thick asphaltic

concrete pavement over 1 to 4 inches of apparent base course material. The logged depths of the reported

soil formation types are approximately delineated in our exploration vertical boring logs. Our boring logs

are presented in Appendix A of this report. Due to the geologic location of the site, it is possible for

variations in the types and depths of the soil formations to occur over relatively short distances, this is

specifically true of the potential geologic conditions that may be encountered along the water pipeline

route.

Table 6 – Summary of Subsurface Soil Classification & Strength

Type General

Description

Consistency (SPT Blow

Counts)

Moisture Content (%)

Atterberg Limits %Passing

No. 200 USCS

Classification Plastic Limit

Plasticity Index

I

Fine to Coarse Grained

Gravelly with clay lumps and

silt

Loose to Very Dense (8 to >50)

2.0 to 6.0 Non- Plastic 9 to 12 SP-SM

Remarks: These soils shall be susceptible to soil sloughing during excavations.

II

Fine to Coarse Grained,

Gravelly with clay lumps

Loose to Very Dense

(7 to 62) 5.0 to 7.0 Non-Plastic 14 to 42 SM

Remarks: These soils shall be susceptible to soil sloughing during excavations. Shall require heavy equipment to perform excavations through this formations.



III

Fine to Coarse Grained,

Gravelly with clay lumps

Medium Dense to Very Dense (11 to > 50)

5.0 to 16.0 27 to

59 9 to 36 20 to 32 SC

Remarks: This formation was encountered in borings B-4, B-5 and B-6, interbedded below Type I and II soils.

These soils shall be blended with suitable relatively non-plastic sands to meet the Select Fill Requirements. Blending and screening shall be required to reduce the plasticity of the native clayey soils and to remove particles greater than 1½ inches

IV

Well Graded or Silty, Fine,

Subangular with sand and clay

lumps

Loose to Very Dense

(8 to 82)

3.0 to 4.0

Non-Plastic

9 to 16

GM, GW-GM

Remarks: This formation was encountered in borings B-4 and B-5, interbedded below Type I and III soils. These formations shall require heavy equipment to perform excavations. Screening and/or blending of these formations shall be required to meet the Select backfill material specifications (i.e. Select Fill, Class II and Class III backfill soil materials.

V

Andesite or Rhyolite Rock

Very Dense to Hard (< 50)

-

Non-Plastic

-

Rock

Remarks: This formation was encountered in borings B-7 and B-8, interbedded below Type I and III soils.

These formations shall require review of the pipeline excavations section within this report.

We encountered auger refusal within the areas represented by borings B-2 and B-3 to depths

ranging from 11 ½ to 12 feet below existing pavement surface. We shall note that andesite rock deposits

are anticipated to be encountered at these depths. We also noted rock outcrops to the north of boring

location B-2. Andesite rock was encountered at approximately 6 ½ and 12 ½ feet in our supplemental

vertical borings B-7 and B-8. In addition auger refusal was experienced at 7 ½ and 13 ½ feet in B-7 and

B-8 borings.

A two-dimensional surface diagram of the borings is presented in Sheet A26 for general review of

the encountered subsurface soil and/or rock conditions. The boring surface diagram was developed for

the primary purpose of generally evaluating the potential subsurface soil/rock conditions that shall be

encountered within the project limits.

Pipeline Excavations

Bidding general contractors shall consider that rock excavation shall be required along the specified

water and sewer line excavations to meet the specified pipeline invert depths. The geotechnical boring logs

may be reviewed at the bidding contractor’s discretion for estimation of potential areas where rock formations

shall be encountered and means and methods to perform excavations. Contractor shall be responsible for

collecting additional subsurface date as deemed necessary.

fjmartinez

Highlight



Pipeline trenching and excavations shall require heavy equipment to penetrate the subsurface soils and

rock formations. Rock excavations shall require impact hammers in combination with chemical splitting

methods to break through the on-site cemented soils and rock formations. Chemical splitting materials

such as “DEXPAN” or similar approve materials shall be utilized to split or fracture rock at required locations

to allow breaking and separation of rock formations with impact hammers, as deemed necessary. The

selected excavation method by the contractor shall limit vibratory impacts to adjacent structures or private

property, site work and existing utility lines within the project limits and reasonable potential influence areas

beyond the project limits. A demonstration shall be performed for the Owner and Engineer for

documentation of the effectiveness of the selected method and potential impacts to existing structures.

Contractors shall consider that water seepage or perched water conditions shall be encountered

during pipeline excavations. The creation of temporary water collection sumps, pumping and storage of

water for appropriate disposal shall be required to complete excavations and pipeline installation.

Pipelines shall not bear directly on rock formations. Pipelines shall be placed on specified and

approved soil bedding materials and backfilled with specified approved compacted soil materials. It shall

be considered that excavated on-site soil materials shall require screening and blending with approved

Select Fill soil materials to meet the specified Select backfill soil material requirements.

The contractor shall be responsible for protecting, maintaining and repairs to impacted existing

structures and other conditions as specified under specifications Control of Work and contract general

conditions.

It should be noted that due to the gravelly nature of the subsurface soils and the standard size of

our sample containers, the collected samples may not represent the degree of larger size particles. As a

result, the USCS classification indicated above for soil/rock Types I through IV may vary and shall be

confirmed at the time of construction.

Bidding contractors shall anticipate that import of suitable backfill soil materials and/or screening of

the on-site gravelly soils shall be required to meet the specified backfill soil classification requirements for

the pipe embedment zone, pipe zone, and soil backfill above the pipe zone.

3.1 - Groundwater Depth Considerations

At the time of our drilling operations groundwater and/or water seepage was not observed or

encountered in our boring logs. Based on our geotechnical field experience in this area, the static

groundwater elevation is well below the anticipated maximum excavation depth of 12 feet for this project.

However, based on our past experience with projects near the foothills of the Franklin Mountains it is

fjmartinez

Highlight

fjmartinez

Highlight

fjmartinez

Highlight



possible to encounter shallower perched water zones and flowing water zones where relatively high

permeability soils overlay low permeability soils or after periods of significant precipitation. If water seepage

is encountered provisions may include the excavation of a temporary diversion pit to collect water seepage

at least 15 feet away from the pipeline alignment to allow construction to proceed. Collected water within

the excavation pit may be appropriately pumped out and re-directed as approved by the design engineer.

The portion of the pipeline exposed to water seepage may be installed in accordance with standard pipeline

installation below groundwater conditions, which should include wrapping the backfill trench with approved

geofabric and Class I bedding backfill materials. Other methods to bridge-over water seepage may also

include the installation of suitable Controlled Low Strength Materials (CLSM) or approved gravel rock. The

proposed CLSM or gravel rock should be approved by the engineer of record through a submittal process.

In any event, CQC should be immediately contacted to perform site observation of the noted conditions to

develop additional recommendations, if necessary. Workers shall be prohibited from working in

excavations where water has accumulated or is accumulating.

Our scope of work did not include the development of a dewatering plan or review of prepared

submittals by the general contractor, if required. CQC and our Client shall not be liable for observed

structural distress of adjacent structures within private properties along or within the project limits. It is the

general contractor’s responsibility to consider these potential conditions in the preparation of a dewatering

plan and the establishment of a contingency to address noted structural distress and/or issued claims, as

required.

3.2 - Subsurface Soil Considerations and Preparation

The following section presents specific conditions that we have observed during our evaluation that

should be considered by the owner, design team and contractors interested in bidding the project with

respect to earthwork estimates and operations.

Special Considerations

Site work and backfilling should be performed in accordance with the following sections of this report or as required by the project specifications and plans, whichever is more stringent.

When placing backfill within utility line trenches or during the installation of the new pipelines, backfill materials should be appropriately placed and compacted to mitigate potential settlements caused by uncontrolled backfill during construction. The contractor should adequately over-excavate areas and backfill pipeline trenches with approved Select backfill soils, or as required by the project plans and specifications. Select Backfill material specifications are presented in Section 10.0 of this report.



Bidding general contractors shall be responsible for conducting their own tests to verify the actual depths of the soil and/or rock formations and types within the project limits to perform earthwork. The owner shall not incur additional costs for variations in the soil/rock formations within the project limits and/or additional excavation requirements by the contractor. The boring logs in this report are intended for engineering design purposes. Bidding contractors may consider the information presented in this report at their own risk. If deemed necessary, bidding contractors shall perform additional borings and/or test pits for use and/or interpretation for earthwork estimates that comply with the project specifications prior to bidding.

Based on the encountered subsurface soil conditions and laboratory engineering soil classification test results, the soils encountered within the pipeline alignment should be considered Type “B” and “C” soils under current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations (Standard – 29 CFR-Part 1926.650, Subpart P- Excavations) pertaining to excavations. In excavations penetrating these soils, the non-permanent sloping and benching schemes specified for Type “B” and “C” soils under the OSHA regulations require that the excavation sidewalls be sloped no steeper than 1:1 (horizontal: vertical) for Type “B” soils and 1½:1 (horizontal: vertical) for Type “C” soils. Trenches or excavations 4 feet and deeper shall require the development of a trench safety plan to protect employees and the general public. Please note that it is the contractor’s responsibility to assign a “competent” person to perform daily inspections and required documentation in accordance with OSHA regulations. In addition, OSHA limits excavations to 20 feet when excavations utilize soil benching and sloping methods and braced/shored trench box (i.e., rated) shielded systems designed by a licensed professional engineer. Trench excavations utilizing sheet piling systems or un-braced temporary shielded systems per OSHA regulations shall be designed by a licensed professional engineer for any excavation depth in consideration to protect the health and safety of all workers and the public.

Based on our observations of the proposed water pipeline alignment locations and access considerations, we anticipate that the contractor may be required to use rated braced trench box systems to install the replacement pipeline. As a result, the contractor shall be responsible for preparing a trench safety plan prior to construction with applicable manufacturer’s trench box system specifications for submittal to the engineer for compliance with the project specifications. The trench safety plan shall be performed by a licensed professional engineer. In the event that braced sheet piling is utilized, the sheet piling design and specified depths shall be determined by a licensed professional engineer and submitted to the engineer for review and documentation for any depth in consideration. This report provides general trench safety considerations for the project under report Section 6.0.

Site Preparation

The existing soils at this site that will support compacted Select Backfill materials and the proposed water pipeline should be cleared of all vegetation, organic matter, construction/pavement debris and/or any foreign matter. The cleared subgrade should be thoroughly compacted in order to densify any weak and compressible zones. The finished subgrade should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density per ASTM D-1557 and maintained within ±3 percent of optimum moisture and/or as required by the project specifications, whichever is more stringent. Weak or compressible soil zones identified during fill operations should be reprocessed or over excavated, removed and replaced with specified compacted “Select Fill” to a minimum depth of 8 inches or as required to appropriately bridge over these soils, whichever is deeper. Subgrade preparation operations should be observed by a representative of CQC.



Suitable fill or backfill materials should be appropriately tested at standard frequencies as recommended in this report and/or as required by the project specifications, whichever is more stringent.

3.3 - Drainage Considerations

Drainage is an important key to the successful performance of any excavation and soil supported

structure. Positive surface drainage should be established prior to and be maintained during and after

construction to prevent water from ponding within or adjacent to the pipeline trenches. It is also possible

for sinkholes to be created if pipeline trenches are left open during periods of significant rainfall events

especially in sites that have significant vertical changes in elevation.

Section 4.0 – Soil Bearing Capacity and Design Considerations

4.1 – Water and Sewer Line Replacement Design Considerations

The encountered subsurface soils at the anticipated pipeline invert elevations shall provide an allowable

bearing capacity of at least 3,500 pounds per square foot (psf). The recommendations in the following sections

of this report should also be considered in the design of the pipeline, associated structures, pipeline embedment

and backfilling.

4.2 - Earth and Vehicle Loads

The pipe analysis and design should consider the vehicular traffic loads, earth backfill loads, pipe

laying methods, bending stresses, potential for settlement, and estimated pipe deflections. The following

soil related design parameters may be considered in the pipe design analysis. CQC should be contacted

if additional soil related information is required to supplement pipeline design and analysis.

Soil Related Design Parameters

-γs ≥ 145 pcf (Estimated Soil Total unit weight)

-Category 1 - Sandy & Gravelly Profile

- E’ = 1,000 psi (Presumptive Allowable Modulus of Soil Reaction for Sandy Gravels and Clean Sand Backfill Bedding Soils)

Section 5.0 – Below Grade Lateral Earth Pressures

The proposed below grade structures and pipelines will be subjected to vertical and lateral earth

pressures depending upon the type of backfill soil. The table below presents at-rest (Ko) pressure

coefficients for select backfill soils. The Ko pressures are recommended for cases where the structures



will experience little yield and for relatively long term buried structures. Select backfill soils should meet

the requirements of Select Backfill or as required by the project specifications, whichever is more stringent.

Table 7. Earth Pressure Coefficients

Ranges for Earth Pressure Coefficients

Soil Type

Estimated Total Unit

Weight Ranges

(pcf)

Presumptive Soil Angle of Internal Friction Ranges

(, deg)

Lateral Earth Pressure

Coefficients

Lateral Earth Pressure

Coefficients

Equivalent Fluid

Weight (pcf)

Equivalent Fluid

Weight (pcf)

At-Rest (K o) Active (K a) At-Rest (K o) Active (K a)

Structural Fill

145 - 148 39 - 42 0.37 – 0.33 0.22 – 0.20 54 - 48 32 – 30

Select Fill Soils (PI<12)

120 – 125 28 – 32 0.52 – 0.47 0.35 – 0.31 61 - 59 41 - 39

Silty or Clayey Sands

128 – 130 30 – 34 0.50 – 0.44 0.33 – 0.28 64 - 56 42 – 36

Silty or Well Graded Gravels

140 – 145 35 – 37 0.43 – 0.39 0.27 – 0.25 60 - 56 38 – 36

Poorly Graded Sands

125 – 128 29 – 32 0.51 – 0.47 0.35 – 0.31 64 – 60 44 – 40

The lateral pressure with depth may be estimated with the following equation;

Ps = KoƔs (H-Hw ) + Ko(Ɣs -Ɣw )Hw + ƔwHw + q Ko

Where: Ps = lateral earth pressure at calculated depth, psf Ko = At-rest lateral earth pressure coefficient (typically used for long-term cases)

Ɣs = Total wet unit weight of soil, pcf H = Depth of structure from ground surface to calculated depth, ft Hw = Positive vertical downward depth of water from reported highest depth.

Note when calculation depth is above reported water depth, then Hw term in equation is considered zero Ɣw = Unit weight of water, pcf

Where: q = Surcharge pressure, psf (typically only considered to 20 feet) light loads (i.e., pedestrians and soil stockpiles) – 50 psf,

moderate (i.e., light equipment) – 150 psf, heavy (i.e., heavy duty equipment) – 250 psf or more

Section 6.0 – General Trench Safety Considerations

The following report sections present general trench safety and trenchless horizontal boring

excavation considerations.



6.1 – Trench Safety Considerations

Trench excavations of more than 4 feet in depth and extending to a maximum depth of 20 feet may

be supported with shielded systems in accordance with OSHA regulations. Shielded systems, such as

trench boxes, should not be subjected to loads exceeding those which the system was designed to

withstand. Shields may be stacked, provided that they are installed in a manner to resist lateral

displacements or other hazardous movements of the shield in the event of sudden changes in lateral loads,

such as sidewall collapse, or impact from excavation equipment or any other potential force. Braced

Trench Box Systems may also be utilized for excavations extending from 20 to 25 feet, provided that they

are designed and rated for the specific excavation depths and soil materials.

Employees shall not be allowed in shielded trenches when shields are being installed, removed, or

moved vertically or horizontally. Employees should not be permitted in trenches that show possible loss

of soil from behind or below the bottom of the shield. Hard hats and warning vests or other highly visible

Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) should be worn by all employees.

Surface encumbrances, such as boulders and vegetation, located so as to create a hazard to

employees involved in excavation work or in the vicinity thereof at any time during operations, shall be

removed, properly supported or made safe before excavation begins. Existing underground utility lines

shall be located prior to performing excavations and protected during excavation construction. Excavations

should not undermine existing structures and should be at least 10 feet from the toe of any structure.

When mobile equipment is operated adjacent to an excavation, a warning system should be utilized

such as barricades, hand or mechanical signals, or stop logs.

Properly designed means of access and egress from excavations should be provided for

employees. Structural members used as ramps and/or runways over excavations 6 feet or more in depth

should be equipped with guardrails and should be uniform in thickness and supported properly to prevent

displacements. Stairways, ladders, ramps, or other safe means of egress shall be located in trench

excavations that are 4 feet in depth or more in depth so as to require no more than 25 feet of lateral travel

for employees.

A “competent person” shall inspect and document the excavation conditions trench systems and

equipment daily and notify the contractor's superintendent of any conditions which may adversely affect

the reliability and safety of the excavation. The excavations shall also be inspected after each rainstorm

or when any changes in conditions occur that can increase the possibility of a cave-in or slide. If evidence

of possible cave-ins or slides is apparent, all work in the excavation shall cease until the necessary



precautions for sloping or bracing have been taken to safeguard the employees and trench. Any loose soil

shall be scaled from the slope and removed from the excavation to protect workers against falling soil.

The atmosphere within a trench deeper than 4 feet shall be tested when there is a possibility of

oxygen deficiency (atmospheres containing less than 19.5 percent oxygen) or build-up of hazardous

gases. Ventilation should be provided to prevent flammable gas build-up to 20 percent of lower explosive

limit of the gas. In addition, testing should be conducted as often as necessary to ensure that the

atmosphere remains safe. Emergency rescue procedures and equipment should be readily available at all

times, especially where hazardous atmospheric conditions could exist or develop during work in an

excavation. Employees entering deep confined excavations should wear a safety harness with a lifeline

securely attached to the harness.

A health and safety plan and emergency rescue plan should be established and maintained by the

general contractor at all times during the project. In the event of an injury or emergency situation, it is

imperative to follow all guidelines as detailed in the most recent OSHA Standards for the Construction Industry

Manual, including completion of all necessary forms, accident procedures, and report documentation. After

rescue operations are implemented the accident area should be closed off and made safe until an OSHA

inspector visits the site and documents conditions after immediate notification. This emergency contact

information should be posted on the site at all times during excavation activities.

Excavations of earth material to a level not greater than 2 feet below the bottom of a shield may be

permitted, provided that the soil sidewalls are stable. Shields should extend to a minimum of 18 inches

above the top of the vertical side or crest of the excavation.

The trench box system should be used in accordance with the Manufacturer’s recommendations

in accordance with the requirements of a trench safety plan and current OSHA regulations. Excavation

safety systems for trenches shall be designed by a licensed professional engineer for all anticipated depths

for this project.

It shall be the contractor’s responsibility to document and record all daily excavation activities in

accordance with OSHA regulations. CQC and our Client shall have no liability for the selected means and

methods utilized by the contractor to perform excavations.

Section 7.0 – Pipe Embedment and Backfill Considerations

As indicated above, the following recommendations should be considered in the design of the pipeline

embedment and backfilling specifications.



Bidding contractors shall anticipate that import of suitable backfill soil materials and/or screening of

the on-site gravelly soils shall be required to meet the specified backfill soil requirements for the pipe

embedment zone, pipe zone, and backfill soils above the pipe zone. Additional pipeline excavation

comments and recommendations are presented in Section 3.0 of this report.

The pipeline backfill soil materials shall meet the specified requirements and/or the El Paso Water

(EPW) standard construction specifications for installation of water and sanitary sewer utility lines and

applicable structures. The following table presents general guidelines for backfill soil materials. Section

10.0 of this report presents backfill soil material specifications. Pipeline backfill soil materials shall also

meet the pipe manufacturer requirements.

Table 8 - Pipeline Backfill Material Guidelines

BACKFILL ZONE BACKFILL MATERIAL

TYPE

ASTM COMPACTION

REQUIREMENTS

Below Pipe Embedment Zone Class III or Select Fill 90% per ASTM D-1557

Embedment Pipe Zone Class I, II or as specified 90% per ASTM D-1557

Trench Backfill Above Pipe Zone Class III or Select Fill 90% per ASTM D-1557

Backfill Material from Finished

Surface to 36-inches Class III or Select Fill 95% per ASTM D-1557

Additional Requirements: 1) The moisture content of the backfill materials shall be maintained within ±3% of optimum

moisture content or as specified. Pipe zone backfill material shall be maintained within +/- 2 %

optimum moisture content.

2) The supporting subgrade soils at the cut excavation that shall support embedment backfill material and the

pipes should be stripped of all vegetation, organic matter, clay soil lumps, topsoil, construction/pavement debris

and/or any foreign matter.

3) In general, embedment soil materials and pipes should not be directly supported by soils classified as CH, CL,

MH, ML, OH, OL and PT under the USCS and on-site bedrock in all cases.

4) Please note that the pipe zone is typically defined as the area extending from the bottom of the trench to 12

inches above the top of the pipe and extending to the undisturbed trench walls on both sides of the pipe.

7.1 – Manhole Structures Considerations

Based on the understanding of the project, we anticipate that storm sewer improvements shall

include the installation of manholes. We recommend that manhole bases be supported by a minimum of

8 inches of compacted Structural Fill material, TXDOT Standard Specification 2014-Item 247, Type A,

Grade 3. The Structural Fill shall be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 6 inches to allow proper



consolidation of the backfill material. The Structural Fill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the

maximum dry density as per ASTM D 1557. The suitable subgrade soils that shall support the base coarse

material should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density per ASTM D 1557. The

moisture content of the subgrade soils shall be maintained within ± 3 percent of optimum moisture content

until permanently covered. Where shallow rock is encountered a layer of bedding sand shall be placed

above the rock material prior to placement of Structural Fill.

Section 8.0 – Pavement Replacement Considerations

We anticipate that the existing AC pavement section shall have to be replaced along pipeline open

cut trench area. We recommend that the new Asphaltic-Concrete (AC) material conform to a TXDOT -

Item 340, Type C material with a minimum of 1,500 pounds of Marshall Stability (75 blows, ASTM D 1559),

a flow between 0.08 inches and 0.16 inches, air voids between 3 to 4 ½ percent, and should be placed at

a target of 98 percent of laboratory Marshall value. The asphalt content for the mix should be determined

based on the Marshall Mix Design method. The bitumen material should be a performance grade material

such as a PG76-22. We recommend that the specified replacement pavement section consist of at least

2½ inches of Type C - AC material underlie by a minimum of 6 inches of crushed stone base course or a

minimum of 12 inches of approved CLSM . The CLSM may consist of a soil-cement stabilized backfill

material. The CLSM should exhibit a minimum compressive strength of 150 psi at 7 days. The CLSM

should be allowed to cure appropriately and equipment should not be allowed on the CLSM if the material

exhibits a permanent deformation greater than ¼ inch. The proposed CLSM should be submitted to the

engineer of record for review and approval through a submittal process. The proposed CLSM submittal

should also contain compressive strength data for review and consideration by the engineer of record.

If considered, the flexible base course shall meet the requirements of a TXDOT, Item 247, Type A,

Grade I-II flexible base course material and shall be moisture conditioned to ±2 percent of optimum

moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 100 percent of maximum density as determined by

ASTM D-1557 laboratory compaction procedure.

In general, the subgrade soils that shall support the replacement pavement section should be

moisture conditioned to ±3 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 95

percent of maximum density as determined by ASTM D-1557 laboratory compaction procedures.



Section 9.0 – Additional Design and Construction Considerations

In excavations adjacent to existing structures, precautions should be taken not to undermine or

damage existing structures, footings, and/or utility lines. Precautions should be taken to prevent distresses

to nearby existing structures.

As typically expected with construction activities and pipeline excavation projects, a degree of

vibratory impacts should be expected. This is especially true due to the shallow bedrock encountered

within the project area. Our scope of work did not include an assessment of the condition of private

structures or facilities adjacent to the pipeline project limits nor opinions or statements of potential impacts.

In accordance with the typical provisions of construction contracts the general contractor shall be

responsible for monitoring of existing structures. As required the general contractor shall develop a

vibration and ground settlement monitoring plan before, during the course of construction and after all

construction activities have been completed at the project site. The plan may include the set up of an array

of monitoring points near the pipeline alignment and at radial distances from construction activities to

monitor potential ground movements. It is recommended that the general contractor retain the services of

a licensed professional engineer or geologist to develop a monitoring plan and provide site monitoring

services as needed. It may be necessary for the contractor to establish a contingency plan for observed

movements of adjacent structures. The development of a settlement monitoring program was beyond our

scope of work; however we may meet with our Client and owner to further discuss this issue, as required.

The US Bureau of Mines, FHWA – “Geotechnical Instrumentation for Monitoring Field Performance”

manual and ASCE publications may be referenced to establish a monitoring plan and set maximum

vibration peak particle velocity and frequency thresholds to ensure that vibrations are maintained below

these limits during construction.

Section 10.0 – Project Specification Information

10.1 - Fill Materials

A. Select Fill soils shall consist of granular clayey, silty sands or sandy clayey, silty gravel mixtures,

free of clay lumps, deleterious materials, organic material, vegetation, cobbles or boulders over 3 inches

in nominal size. The Select Fill shall have a liquid limit less than 35 and a plasticity index of 12 or less.

The Select Fill shall also exhibit an optimum dry density of at least 120 pcf determined per ASTM D 1557.

Select Fill soils shall also meet the gradation requirements below.

fjmartinez

Highlight



Table 9. Select Fill Gradation Requirements

Sieve Size (square opening)

% Passing by Weight

3-inch 100

3/4-inch 75 – 100

No. 4 45 – 100

No. 200 5 – 45, +5%

Select Fill soils should classify as SP-SM, SM, SC, SC-SM, GM, GC, GC-GM, GP-GM, and GP-

GC in accordance with the USCS. It is not recommended that Select Fill consist of recycled concrete base

material or slag unless approved by the engineer of record.

B. Native Fill Soil shall consist of granular clayey, silty sands or sandy gravel mixtures, free of clay

lumps, deleterious materials, vegetation, organic material, cobbles or boulders over 3 inches in nominal

size. The Native Fill soils shall have a liquid limit less than 35 and a plasticity index less than 12 or less.

Native Fill soils shall meet the gradation requirements below.

Table 10. Native Fill Soil Gradation Requirements

Sieve Size (square opening)

% Passing by Weight

3-inch 100

3/4-inch 75 – 100

No. 4 45 – 100

No. 200 3 – 45

Native Fill soils classified in the following list according to the USCS may be considered satisfactory

for use: SM, SW, SC, SP-SM, SP-SC, SC-SM, GW, GP, GM, GC, GP-GM and GP-GC, provided that these

soils also meet the requirements above.

It is recommended that on-site soils classified as SP be blended with low-plasticity clayey sands or

as appropriate to mitigate potential soil sloughing during excavations in these types of soils and to create

a relatively stable blended soil material that exhibits adequate bearing capacity, as applicable. The blended

soils should meet the requirements of Native Fill above.

Soils classified as CH, CL, MH, ML, OH, OL and PT or a combinations of these under the USCS

classification and soils that exhibit a plasticity index greater than 12 are not considered suitable for use as

Native Fill and Select Fill soil materials, unless approved by the engineer.



The following soil backfill classifications are typically designated for pipeline backfill. It is

not recommended that slag be utilized for the backfill material unless approved by the engineer of record.

Class I, Class II, Class III, and Class IV materials may be defined as follows:

D. CLASS I material may be manufactured angular, well-graded, crushed stone per ASTM D-2321

with a maximum particle size of 1½ inches. The following materials shall be acceptable under this

class designation: ASTM D-448 – Stone Sizes 4, 46, 5, 56, 57, and 6. Pea Gravel and other

uniformly graded material are not acceptable under this class. A gradation of Class I material shall

be submitted by the Contractor to the Engineer for approval prior to use.

E. CLASS II material may be coarse sands and gravels per ASTM D-2487 with maximum particle

size of 1½ inches, including variously graded sands and gravels, containing less than 12 percent

fines (material passing the #200 sieve) generally granular and non-cohesive, either wet or dry. Soil

types GW, GP, SW and SP are included in this class. (i.e., typically required within pipe zone).

Proposed Class II material shall be submitted by the Contractor to the Engineer for evaluation and

approval prior to use.

F. CLASS III material may be fine sands, clayey sand mixtures, clayey gravel and sand mixtures,

suitable clean native sands and gravels. Class III materials shall also be free of clay lumps,

deleterious materials, cobbles or boulders over 3-inches in nominal size. Class III materials should

have a liquid limit less than 35 and a plasticity index less than or equal to 12 and exhibit an optimum

dry density of at least 115 pcf. Soils classified in the following list according to the USCS and ASTM

may be considered satisfactory for use as Class III backfill soil materials above the pipe zone as

approved by the project engineer of record: SM, SW, SC, SP-SM, SP-SC, SC-SM, GW, GP, GM,

GC, GP-GM and GP-GC. Proposed Class III material shall be submitted by the Contractor to the

Engineer for evaluation and approval prior to use.

G. CLASS IV and V material may be classified as CH, CL, MH, ML, OH, OL and PT under the

USCS. These soils shall not be used as backfill materials, unless approved by the engineer of

record. As indicated in this report the encountered Stratum I clays are consider Class IV soil

materials.



10.2 - Construction Materials Testing

We recommend that construction materials inspection and testing of site work, fill placement,

excavations, concrete placement, and all other applicable materials and structures be performed by CQC.

The contractor shall perform testing in accordance with the guidelines presented above and/or as required

by the project specifications, whichever is more stringent. The specification testing program should include

the following testing frequencies as a minimum:

1. At least one (1) Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil using Modified or Standard Effort (Proctor) for each type of material encountered or imported material to be used, according to ASTM D-1557 or as required by the project specifications. Additional soil samples for testing shall be requested by the General Contractor during the course of earthwork operations to ensure that the fill materials are maintained consistently within the specified requirements.

2. At least one (1) Soil Classification (Sieve Analysis and Atterberg Limits Test) for each type of material encountered or import material used, according to ASTM D 6913 and D-4318. Additional soil samples for testing shall be requested by the General Contractor during the course of earthwork operations to ensure that the fill materials are maintained consistently within the specified requirements.

3. A minimum of one (1) density test per 8-inch lift at 150 lineal feet spacings for pipe bedding and soil backfilling operations, according to ASTM D 6938 or D-1556.

4. Sampling and testing for quality assurance of placed concrete materials should be performed for the project. Concrete field testing shall include testing for temperature, slump and air content (if required). The design strength of the concrete mix shall be evaluated by collecting cylindrical concrete compression test specimens for lab curing and testing in accordance with applicable ASTM procedures. At least one set of four (4) 6-inch x 12-inch or five (5) 4-inch x 8-inch concrete cylinders should be collected for every 50 cubic yards or less of placed concrete or as directed by the project engineer. The concrete specimens should be tested at 7 days (1 cylinder) and 28 days (3 cylinders) for verification of the specified design compressive strength or as directed by the project specifications. The ACI guidelines for hot weather and cold weather concreting should be followed to mitigate the potential poor performance of the concrete materials during significant periods of high (above 95° F) and low (below 35° F) temperatures.

Section 11.0 – Soils Evaluation Considerations and Limitations

The analysis and recommendations in this report are based on the data obtained from a total of

eight (8) vertical borings performed at the approximate locations indicated on the attached General

Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration Boring Location Aerial Plans, Sheets A1-1 and A1-2. This report

may not reflect all the subsurface soil variations that may occur near and/or between the boring logs. The

nature and extent of the variations may not become evident until during the course of construction. This is

especially true with respect to the encountered shallow rock formations in some of the exploratory vertical

borings completed for this project.



If variations appear during construction, CQC should be contacted immediately, it may be

necessary to re-evaluate our information and/or recommendations provided within this report to be made

after performing on-site observations during the construction period and noting the characteristics of any

variations.

The scope of our soil evaluation did not include surveying services, ground water study, preparation

of engineering plans, slope stability analysis, sinkhole study and landslide study, delineation of buried

material or structures, specifications, cost estimates, an environmental assessment of the property's air,

soil, water, site fault delineation and evaluation, preparation of a dewatering plan, trench safety and/or

shoring plan, delineation of subsurface flowing water either on or adjacent to the pipeline limits, therefore

no opinions and/or conclusions are presented in this report. Our geotechnical scope of work for this site

did not include an environmental assessment or chemical testing and analysis of the subsurface soils.

D:\Dropbox\CQC Files\CQC Working Files\GEO\Reports\2019\19-014 EPW-Sunset Heights Water-Sewer (CEA)\07-Final Report Documents\19 014-Final Report.docx

Construction Materials TestingGeotechnical Engineering

Environmental Site AssessmentsForensic Analysis/Testing

APPENDIX A

“People Committed to Delivering Top-Quality Services Consistently”

Client: CEA Group

CQC Project No. AGCQC19-014

Scale: NTS Check by: JR

Date: 10/1/19 Sheet A1-1

Geotechnical General Subsurface Exploration Boring Location Aerial Plan

EPW – Sunset Heights Water and Sanitary Sewer Replacement Program Phase 18 Project Upson Dr. from Heisig Ave to Prospect St

El Paso, El Paso County, Texas

LEGEND

B-1: Exploration BoringNumber, ApproximateDepth and Location.

Note * Vertical boring locations are approximate. Note **: Auger refusal experienced at specified depth.

As per Client, Approximate

Location of Project Site.

B-1 (15’)* B-2 (15’)*

B-5 (15’)*B-4 (11 ½’)**

B-3 (12’)**

Prospect St.

B-6 (15’)*

Visible Rhyolite/Andesite Rock

Outcropping Formations Encountered Subsurface

Fractured Andesite/Rhyolite Rock Formations (see

boring logs)

Visible Rhyolite/Andesite Rock

Outcropping Formations

B-7 (15’)**

B-8 (7½’)**

Jose Arias

Line

Jose Arias

Line

Jose Arias

Line

Client: CEA Group

CQC Project No. AGCQC19-014

Scale: NTS Check by: JR

Date: 5/20/19 Sheet A1-2

City of El Paso - Flood Zone Aerial Plan

EPW – Subset Heights Water & Sanitary Sewer Replacement Program Phase 18 Project

Upson Drive from Heisig Ave. to Prospect St. El Paso, El Paso County, Texas

FLOOD ZONE

FLOOD ZONE

Approximate limits of the project site

FLOOD ZONE

SS1

SS2

SS3

SS4

SS5

SS6

12

9

15

NP

NP

NP

78

66

75

6.1

2.7

4.8

11-7-5(12)

3-7-6(13)

3-4-4(8)

5-5-8(13)

4-5-6(11)

17-30-26(56)

SP-SM

SP-SM

SM

Asphaltic Concrete Pavement - Approx. 4 in thick.Apparent Base Course Material - Approx. 3 in thick.SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Poorly Graded,Dark Brown to Tannish Brown, Medium Dense SlightlyMoist with clay lumps and silt.

- Light brown to tannish brown below approx. 2-1/2 feet.

- Loose at approx. 5 feet.

- Encountered loose sandy soils shall be susceptible tosoil sloughing and elastic settlement.

- Medium dense below approx. 7-1/2 feet.

- It should be anticipated that heavy equipment shall berequired to excavate the subsurface soils. Excavationsshall require equipment that may achieveadequate tooth penetration to split the subsurface soilsand allow penetration through the dense to hard sandygravel formations. In addition, please note thatdue to the gravelly nature of the subsurface soils and thestandard size of the Split Spoon Sampler, the collectedsamples may not represent the degree oflarger size particles.SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Silty, TannishBrown, Medium Dense, Slightly Moist.

- Very dense at approx. 13-1/2 feet.

NOTE: SS- Split Spoon SampleBottom of borehole at 15.0 feet.

NOTES Boring Location: See Attached Boring Location Plan, Sheet A1-1

LOGGED BY VA

DRILLING METHOD CME-75 w/ 4-1/4" ID HSA

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

CHECKED BY JLA

DATE STARTED 3/28/19

AT TIME OF DRILLING ---

AT END OF DRILLING ---

AFTER DRILLING ---

HOLE SIZE 9 inchesGROUND ELEVATION 3803 ft

DRILLING CONTRACTOR CQC

COMPLETED 3/28/19

DRILLED BY MN

DE

PT

H(f

t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

12.5

15.0

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SA

MP

LE T

YP

EN

UM

BE

R

% -

200

PI

(LL-

PL)

Sheet A2

% -

4

% M

oist

ure

Con

tent

BLO

WC

OU

NT

S(N

VA

LUE

)

US

CS

% - 200 20 40 60 80

16 32 48 64

PL LLMC

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40

Poc

ket P

en.

(tsf

)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

BORING NUMBER B-1

CLIENT CEA Group

PROJECT NUMBER AGCQC19-014

PROJECT NAME EPW - Sunset Heights Water & Sewer Project

PROJECT LOCATION Upson Drive, from Heisig Ave. to Prospect Dr.

CQ

C S

TA

ND

AR

D L

OG

W/ P

OC

KE

T P

EN

19-

014_

LOG

S.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

US

LA

B.G

DT

T

HE

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N P

RE

SE

NT

ED

SH

OU

LD N

OT

BE

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M T

HE

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L R

EP

OR

TCQC Testing and Engineering LLC - TBPE Firm No. F-106324606 Titanic AvenueEl Paso, Texas 79904Ph: (915) 771-7766Fx: (915) 771-7786

>>

SS1

SS2

SS3

SS4

SS5

SS6

9

29

23

NP

NP

NP

61

99

90

1.9

6.6

4.8

8-10-10(20)

36-47-50/4"

4-28-15(43)

10-6-7(13)

21-7-9(16)

14-10-50/6"

SP-SM

SM

SM

Asphaltic Concrete Pavement - Approx. 3 in thick.Apparent Base Course Material - Approx. 1 in thick.SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Poorly Graded,Dark Brown to Grayish Brown, Medium Dense, Dry withsilt.

- Hard at approx. 2-1/2 feet.

- Dense at approx. 5 feet.

SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Silty, LightBrown to Tannish Brown, Medium Dense, Slightly Moistwith gravel.

- It should be anticipated that heavy equipment shall berequired to excavate the subsurface soils and/or rockformations. Excavations shall require equipment that mayachieve adequate tooth penetration to split the subsurfaceformations and allow penetration through the dense tohard formations. In addition, please note that due to thenatural size of the subsurface formations and thestandard size of the Split Spoon Sampler, the collectedsamples may not represent the degree of larger sizeparticles.- Very dense and gravelly at approx. 13-1/2 feet.



LOGGED BY VA



CHECKED BY JLA




AFTER DRILLING ---



COMPLETED 3/28/19

DRILLED BY MN

DE

PT

H(f

t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

12.5

15.0

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SA

MP

LE T

YP

EN

UM

BE

R

% -

200

PI

(LL-

PL)

Sheet A3

% -

4

% M

oist

ure

Con

tent

BLO

WC

OU

NT

S(N

VA

LUE

)

US

CS

% - 200 20 40 60 80

16 32 48 64

PL LLMC

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40

Poc

ket P

en.

(tsf

)


BORING NUMBER B-2

CLIENT CEA Group




CQ

C S

TA

ND

AR

D L

OG

W/ P

OC

KE

T P

EN

19-

014_

LOG

S.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

US

LA

B.G

DT

T

HE

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N P

RE

SE

NT

ED

SH

OU

LD N

OT

BE

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M T

HE

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L R

EP

OR


>>

>>

SS1

SS2

SS3

SS4

SS5

17

29

19

NP

NP

NP

84

73

62

5.1

7.5

6.3

10-11-10(21)

3-3-4(7)

3-3-7(10)

7-5-6(11)

5-9-27(36)

SM

SM

SM

Asphaltic Concrete Pavement - Approx. 3 in thick.Apparent Base Course Material - Approx. 1 in thick.SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Silty, DarkBrown to Grayish Brown, Medium Dense Slightly Moist.

- Loose below approx. 2-1/2 feet.

- Encountered loose sandy soils shall be susceptible tosoil sloughing and elastic settlement.

- It should be anticipated that heavy equipment shall berequired to excavate the subsurface soils and/or rockformations. Excavations shall require equipment that mayachieve adequate tooth penetration to split the subsurfaceformations and allow penetration through the dense tohard formations. In addition, please note that due to thenatural size of the subsurface formations and thestandard size of the Split Spoon Sampler, the collectedsamples may not represent the degree of larger sizeparticles.- Medium dense with clay nodules at approx. 7-1/2 feet.

- Dense, yellowish brown to light brown at approx. 10 feet.- Apparemt Andesite (Ti) rock formation encounteredbelow approx. 10 feet.

- Auger refusal experienced at approx. 12 feet.



LOGGED BY VA



CHECKED BY JLA




AFTER DRILLING ---



COMPLETED 3/28/19

DRILLED BY MN

DE

PT

H(f

t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SA

MP

LE T

YP

EN

UM

BE

R

% -

200

PI

(LL-

PL)

Sheet A4

% -

4

% M

oist

ure

Con

tent

BLO

WC

OU

NT

S(N

VA

LUE

)

US

CS

% - 200 20 40 60 80

16 32 48 64

PL LLMC

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40

Poc

ket P

en.

(tsf

)


BORING NUMBER B-3

CLIENT CEA Group




CQ

C S

TA

ND

AR

D L

OG

W/ P

OC

KE

T P

EN

19-

014_

LOG

S.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

US

LA

B.G

DT

T

HE

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N P

RE

SE

NT

ED

SH

OU

LD N

OT

BE

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M T

HE

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L R

EP

OR


SS1

SS2

SS3

SS4

SS5

32

9

22

16

NP

14

79

38

69

10.2

3.0

5.2

8-12-8(20)

18-13-7(20)

5-4-4(8)

50/2"

30-50/1"

SC

GW-GM

SC

Asphaltic Concrete Pavement - Approx. 2 in thick.Apparent Base Course Material - Approx. 4 in thick.SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Clayey, DarkBrown to Grayish Brown, Medium Dense, Slightly Moist.

GRAVEL, Fine, Well Graded, Yellowish Brown to GrayishBrown, Subangular, Medium Dense, Slightly Moist withsand, clay lumps and silt.- It should be anticipated that heavy equipment shall berequired to excavate the subsurface soils and/or rockformations. Excavations shall require equipment that mayachieve adequate tooth penetration to split the subsurfaceformations and allow penetration through the dense tohard formations. In addition, please note that due to thenatural size of the subsurface formations and thestandard size of the Split Spoon Sampler, the collectedsamples may not represent the degree of larger sizeparticles.- Loose at approx. 5 feet.- Encountered loose sandy soils shall be susceptible tosoil sloughing and elastic settlement.

SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Clayey,Yellowish Brown to Light Brown, Hard, Slightly Moist toMoist with clay nodules.

- Apparent Andesite (Ti) rock formation encounteredbelow approx. 9-1/2 feet.

- Auger refusal experienced at approx. 11-1/2 feet.NOTE: SS- Split Spoon Sample

Bottom of borehole at 11.5 feet.


LOGGED BY VA



CHECKED BY JLA

DATE STARTED 4/4/19



AFTER DRILLING ---



COMPLETED 4/4/19

DRILLED BY MN

DE

PT

H(f

t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SA

MP

LE T

YP

EN

UM

BE

R

% -

200

PI

(LL-

PL)

Sheet A5

% -

4

% M

oist

ure

Con

tent

BLO

WC

OU

NT

S(N

VA

LUE

)

US

CS

% - 200 20 40 60 80

16 32 48 64

PL LLMC

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40

Poc

ket P

en.

(tsf

)


BORING NUMBER B-4

CLIENT CEA Group




CQ

C S

TA

ND

AR

D L

OG

W/ P

OC

KE

T P

EN

19-

014_

LOG

S.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

US

LA

B.G

DT

T

HE

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N P

RE

SE

NT

ED

SH

OU

LD N

OT

BE

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M T

HE

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L R

EP

OR


>>

>>

SS1

SS2

SS3

SS4

SS5

SS6

42

15

16

22

NP

36

85

58

70

92

7.5

3.9

3.6

15.9

15-30-50/5"

14-26-39(65)

23-50-32(82)

20-12-11(23)

8-4-12(16)

7-4-7(11)

SM

SC

Asphaltic Concrete Pavement - Approx. 2 in thick.Apparent Base Course Material - Approx. 4 in thick.SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Silty, WhittishBrown to Grayish Brown, Hard, Slightly Moist.

- It should be anticipated that heavy equipment shall berequired to excavate the subsurface soils and/or rockformations. Excavations shall require equipment that mayachieve adequate tooth penetration to split the subsurfaceformations and allow penetration through the dense tohard formations. In addition, please note that due to thenatural size of the subsurface formations and thestandard size of the Split Spoon Sampler, the collectedsamples may not represent the degree of larger sizeparticles.GRAVEL, Fine, Silty, Light Brown to Grayish Brown,Subangular, Very Dense, Slightly Moist with sand.- Hard at approx. 5 feet.

SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Clayey,Yellowish Brown to Grayish Brown, Medium Dense,Slightly Moist with clay lumps.



LOGGED BY VA



CHECKED BY JLA




AFTER DRILLING ---



COMPLETED 3/28/19

DRILLED BY MN

DE

PT

H(f

t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

12.5

15.0

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SA

MP

LE T

YP

EN

UM

BE

R

% -

200

PI

(LL-

PL)

Sheet A6

% -

4

% M

oist

ure

Con

tent

BLO

WC

OU

NT

S(N

VA

LUE

)

US

CS

% - 200 20 40 60 80

16 32 48 64

PL LLMC

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40

Poc

ket P

en.

(tsf

)


BORING NUMBER B-5

CLIENT CEA Group




CQ

C S

TA

ND

AR

D L

OG

W/ P

OC

KE

T P

EN

19-

014_

LOG

S.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

US

LA

B.G

DT

T

HE

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N P

RE

SE

NT

ED

SH

OU

LD N

OT

BE

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M T

HE

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L R

EP

OR


>>

>>

>>

SS1

SS2

SS3

SS4

SS5

SS6

20

14

22

9

NP

13

84

88

91

8.9

5.8

11.8

7-7-7(14)

5-16-32(48)

22-30-32(62)

16-50/5"

9-15-35(50)

15-20-25(45)

SC

SM

SC

Asphaltic Concrete Pavement - Approx. 3 in thick.Apparent Base Course Material - Approx. 2 in thick.SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Clayey, DarkBrown to Tannish Brown, Medium Dense, Slightly Moist.

- Dense at approx. 2-1/2 feet.

- It should be anticipated that heavy equipment shall berequired to excavate the subsurface soils and/or rockformations. Excavations shall require equipment that mayachieve adequate tooth penetration to split the subsurfaceformations and allow penetration through the dense tohard formations. In addition, please note that due to thenatural size of the subsurface formations and thestandard size of the Split Spoon Sampler, the collectedsamples may not represent the degree of larger sizeparticles.SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Silty, Grayish Brown toTannish Brown, Very Dense, Slightly Moist with gravel.

SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Clayey, Tannish Brown,Dense, Slightly Moist with gravel.



LOGGED BY VA



CHECKED BY JLA

DATE STARTED 4/3/19



AFTER DRILLING ---



COMPLETED 4/3/19

DRILLED BY MN

DE

PT

H(f

t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

12.5

15.0

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SA

MP

LE T

YP

EN

UM

BE

R

% -

200

PI

(LL-

PL)

Sheet A7

% -

4

% M

oist

ure

Con

tent

BLO

WC

OU

NT

S(N

VA

LUE

)

US

CS

% - 200 20 40 60 80

16 32 48 64

PL LLMC

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40

Poc

ket P

en.

(tsf

)


BORING NUMBER B-6

CLIENT CEA Group




CQ

C S

TA

ND

AR

D L

OG

W/ P

OC

KE

T P

EN

19-

014_

LOG

S.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

US

LA

B.G

DT

T

HE

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N P

RE

SE

NT

ED

SH

OU

LD N

OT

BE

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M T

HE

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L R

EP

OR


>>

>>

SS1

SS2

SS3

SS4

SS5

SS6

19

14

39

32

36

NP

NP

9

8

87

80

95

94

95

5.0

2.8

7.5

6.3

7.4

15-14-12(26)

5-16-40(56)

41-50/6"

40-50/3"

13-37-50/2"

50/3"

SM

SM

SC

SC

Asphaltic-Concrete Pavement: Approx. 4 in. thick.Apparent Base Course Material: Approx. 1 to 6 in. thick.

SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Silty, Light Brown toMulticolored, Medium Dense to Dense, Dry to SlightlyMoist with gravel.

- It should be anticipated that heavy equipment shall berequired to excavate the subsurface soils and/or rockformations. Excavations shall require equipment that mayachieve adequate tooth penetration to split the subsurfaceformations and allow penetration through the dense tohard formations. In addition, please note that due to thenatural size of the subsurface formations and thestandard size of the Split Spoon Sampler, the collectedsamples may not represent the degree of larger sizeparticles.SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Clayey, Light Brown toBrown, Very Dense to Hard, Slightly Moist withcalcareous material and traces of gravel.

- Hard andesite rock formation encountered belowapproximately 12-1/2 feet. Formation shall require impacthammer and/or chemical splitting methods to performexcavations. See comments in geotechnical engineeringreport.NOTE: SS - Aplit Spoon Sample- Auger refusal experienced at approximately 13-1/2 feet.



LOGGED BY VA



CHECKED BY JLA

DATE STARTED 8/5/19



AFTER DRILLING ---



COMPLETED 8/5/19

DRILLED BY MN

DE

PT

H(f

t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

12.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SA

MP

LE T

YP

EN

UM

BE

R

% -

200

PI

(LL-

PL)

Sheet A8

% -

4

% M

oist

ure

Con

tent

BLO

WC

OU

NT

S(N

VA

LUE

)

US

CS

% - 200 20 40 60 80

16 32 48 64

PL LLMC

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40

Poc

ket P

en.

(tsf

)


BORING NUMBER B-7

CLIENT CEA Group




CQ

C S

TA

ND

AR

D L

OG

W/ P

OC

KE

T P

EN

19-

014_

LOG

S.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

US

LA

B.G

DT

T

HE

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N P

RE

SE

NT

ED

SH

OU

LD N

OT

BE

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M T

HE

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L R

EP

OR


>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

SS1

SS2

SS3

SS4

15

13

NP

NP

47

43

8.2

11.9

9-12-26(38)

4-13-26(39)

7-18-20(38)

50/2"

GM

GM

Asphaltic-Concrete Pavement: Approx. 3 in. thick.

Apparent Base Course Material: Approx. 5 in. thick.

GRAVEL, Fine, Subangular, Sandy, Brown, Dense toHard, Slightly Moist with cobbles and silt.- It should be anticipated that heavy equipment shall berequired to excavate the subsurface soils and/or rockformations. Excavations shall require equipment that mayachieve adequate tooth penetration to split the subsurfaceformations and allow penetration through the dense tohard formations. In addition, please note that due to thenatural size of the subsurface formations and thestandard size of the Split Spoon Sampler, the collectedsamples may not represent the degree of larger sizeparticles.

- Hard Andesite rock formation encountered atapproximately 7-1/2 feet. Formation shall require impacthammer and/or chemical splitting material to perfomexcavations. See comments in geotechnical engineeringreport.NOTE: SS - Split Spoon Sample- Auger refusal experienced at approx. 7-1/2 feet.



LOGGED BY VA



CHECKED BY JLA

DATE STARTED 8/6/19



AFTER DRILLING ---



COMPLETED 8/6/19

DRILLED BY MN

DE

PT

H(f

t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SA

MP

LE T

YP

EN

UM

BE

R

% -

200

PI

(LL-

PL)

Sheet A9

% -

4

% M

oist

ure

Con

tent

BLO

WC

OU

NT

S(N

VA

LUE

)

US

CS

% - 200 20 40 60 80

16 32 48 64

PL LLMC

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40

Poc

ket P

en.

(tsf

)


BORING NUMBER B-8

CLIENT CEA Group




CQ

C S

TA

ND

AR

D L

OG

W/ P

OC

KE

T P

EN

19-

014_

LOG

S.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

US

LA

B.G

DT

T

HE

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N P

RE

SE

NT

ED

SH

OU

LD N

OT

BE

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M T

HE

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L R

EP

OR


>>

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

0.59

0.45

23.61

32.81

SAND

1403 4 20 406 60

%Silt %Clay

0.086

3 100

12.0

9.0

15.0

22.0

34.0

25.0

0.236

0.332

0.183

1.489

2.827

0.922

PI Cc CuLL PL

COBBLESGRAVEL

NP

NP

NP

NP

NP

NP

24 16 301 2006 101.5 8 143/4 3/8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

SOIL PARTICLE SIZEANALYSIS TESTS

Test Method: ASTM D6913

BOREHOLE DEPTH

POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT and GRAVEL(SP-SM)


SILTY SAND with GRAVEL(SM)

66.0

57.0

60.0

B-1

B-1

B-1

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

coarse fine

Classification

D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel

coarseSILT OR CLAY

finemedium

%Sand

501/2HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

BOREHOLE DEPTH

0.0 - 1.5

5.0 - 6.5

10.0 - 11.5

NP

NP

NP

19

37.5

19

0.0 - 1.5

5.0 - 6.5

10.0 - 11.5

B-1

B-1

B-1

CLIENT CEA Group




GR

AIN

SIZ

E 1

9-01

4_LO

GS

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D U

S L

AB

.GD

T

TH

E IN

FO

RM

AT

ION

PR

ES

EN

TE

D S

HO

ULD

NO

T B

E S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

TH

E G

EO

TE

CH

NIC

AL

RE

PO

RT

CQC Testing and Engineering LLC - TBPE Firm No. F-106324606 Titanic AvenueEl Paso, Texas 79904Ph: (915) 771-7766Fx: (915) 771-7786

Sheet A10

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

0.46 49.55

SAND

1403 4 20 406 60

%Silt %Clay

0.089

3 100

9.0

29.0

23.0

39.0

1.0

10.0

0.425

0.077

0.102

4.42

0.163

0.337

PI Cc CuLL PL

COBBLESGRAVEL

NP

NP

NP

NP

NP

NP

24 16 301 2006 101.5 8 143/4 3/8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT



BOREHOLE DEPTH


SILTY SAND(SM)

SILTY SAND(SM)

52.0

70.0

67.0

B-2

B-2

B-2


coarse fine

Classification


coarseSILT OR CLAY

finemedium

%Sand


BOREHOLE DEPTH

2.5 - 4.0

7.5 - 9.0

10.0 - 11.5

NP

NP

NP

25

9.5

19

2.5 - 4.0

7.5 - 9.0

10.0 - 11.5

B-2

B-2

B-2

CLIENT CEA Group




GR

AIN

SIZ

E 1

9-01

4_LO

GS

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D U

S L

AB

.GD

T

TH

E IN

FO

RM

AT

ION

PR

ES

EN

TE

D S

HO

ULD

NO

T B

E S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

TH

E G

EO

TE

CH

NIC

AL

RE

PO

RT


Sheet A11

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

SAND

1403 4 20 406 60

%Silt %Clay

3 100

17.0

29.0

19.0

16.0

27.0

38.0

0.167

0.079

0.268

0.6

0.402

4.158

PI Cc CuLL PL

COBBLESGRAVEL

NP

NP

NP

NP

NP

NP

24 16 301 2006 101.5 8 143/4 3/8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT



BOREHOLE DEPTH




67.0

44.0

43.0

B-3

B-3

B-3


coarse fine

Classification


coarseSILT OR CLAY

finemedium

%Sand


BOREHOLE DEPTH

0.0 - 1.5

7.5 - 9.0

10.0 - 11.5

NP

NP

NP

19

37.5

19

0.0 - 1.5

7.5 - 9.0

10.0 - 11.5

B-3

B-3

B-3

CLIENT CEA Group




GR

AIN

SIZ

E 1

9-01

4_LO

GS

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D U

S L

AB

.GD

T

TH

E IN

FO

RM

AT

ION

PR

ES

EN

TE

D S

HO

ULD

NO

T B

E S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

TH

E G

EO

TE

CH

NIC

AL

RE

PO

RT


Sheet A12

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

2.44 183.82

SAND

1403 4 20 406 60

%Silt %Clay

0.094

3 100

32.0

9.0

22.0

21.0

62.0

31.0

2

0.164

0.922

17.369

2.483

PI Cc CuLL PL

COBBLESGRAVEL

15

NP

15

16

NP

14

24 16 301 2006 101.5 8 143/4 3/8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT



BOREHOLE DEPTH

CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL(SC)

WELL-GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND(GW-GM)


47.0

29.0

47.0

B-4

B-4

B-4


coarse fine

Classification


coarseSILT OR CLAY

finemedium

%Sand


BOREHOLE DEPTH

0.0 - 0.2

2.5 - 2.7

7.5 - 7.7

31

NP

29

19

25

25

0.0 - 0.2

2.5 - 2.7

7.5 - 7.7

B-4

B-4

B-4

CLIENT CEA Group




GR

AIN

SIZ

E 1

9-01

4_LO

GS

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D U

S L

AB

.GD

T

TH

E IN

FO

RM

AT

ION

PR

ES

EN

TE

D S

HO

ULD

NO

T B

E S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

TH

E G

EO

TE

CH

NIC

AL

RE

PO

RT


Sheet A13

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

SAND

1403 4 20 406 60

%Silt %Clay

3 100

42.0

15.0

16.0

22.0

15.0

42.0

30.0

8.0

0.536

0.337

0.139

0.55

5.456

2.766

0.67

PI Cc CuLL PL

COBBLESGRAVEL

NP

23

NP

36

24 16 301 2006 101.5 8 143/4 3/8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT



BOREHOLE DEPTH


CLAYEY SAND(SC)

43.0

43.0

54.0

70.0

B-5

B-5

B-5

B-5


coarse fine

Classification


coarseSILT OR CLAY

finemedium

%Sand


BOREHOLE DEPTH

0.0 - 1.5

2.5 - 4.0

5.0 - 6.5

13.5 - 15.0

NP

59

25

25

25

19

0.0 - 1.5

2.5 - 4.0

5.0 - 6.5

13.5 - 15.0

B-5

B-5

B-5

B-5

CLIENT CEA Group




GR

AIN

SIZ

E 1

9-01

4_LO

GS

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D U

S L

AB

.GD

T

TH

E IN

FO

RM

AT

ION

PR

ES

EN

TE

D S

HO

ULD

NO

T B

E S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

TH

E G

EO

TE

CH

NIC

AL

RE

PO

RT


Sheet A14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

SAND

1403 4 20 406 60

%Silt %Clay

3 100

20.0

14.0

22.0

16.0

12.0

9.0

0.134

0.218

0.104

0.81

1.139

0.781

PI Cc CuLL PL

COBBLESGRAVEL

18

NP

20

9

NP

13

24 16 301 2006 101.5 8 143/4 3/8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT



BOREHOLE DEPTH


SILTY SAND(SM)

CLAYEY SAND(SC)

64.0

74.0

69.0

B-6

B-6

B-6


coarse fine

Classification


coarseSILT OR CLAY

finemedium

%Sand


BOREHOLE DEPTH

0.0 - 1.5

5.0 - 6.5

13.5 - 15.0

27

NP

33

19

25

19

0.0 - 1.5

5.0 - 6.5

13.5 - 15.0

B-6

B-6

B-6

CLIENT CEA Group




GR

AIN

SIZ

E 1

9-01

4_LO

GS

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D U

S L

AB

.GD

T

TH

E IN

FO

RM

AT

ION

PR

ES

EN

TE

D S

HO

ULD

NO

T B

E S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

TH

E G

EO

TE

CH

NIC

AL

RE

PO

RT


Sheet A15

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

BOREHOLE DEPTH Classification PL PI Cc Cu

25

24

9

8

19.0

14.0

39.0

32.0

36.0

GRAVEL SANDSILT OR CLAY

1403 4 20 406 603 10024 16 30

%Clay0.17

0.195

0.662

0.425

0.572

0.579

0.512

19

25

9.5

19

12.5

1 2006 101.5 8 143/4 3/8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT



B-7

B-7

B-7

B-7

B-7


LL

16

16

D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand13.0

8.0

5.0

6.0

5.0

fine coarse


B-7

B-7

B-7

B-7

B-7

CLAYEY SAND(SC)

CLAYEY SAND(SC)

0.8 - 2.0

2.5 - 3.7

5.0 - 6.2

7.5 - 8.7

10.0 - 11.2

BOREHOLE DEPTH D100 %Silt68.0

66.0

56.0

62.0

59.0

0.8 - 2.0

2.5 - 3.7

5.0 - 6.2

7.5 - 8.7

10.0 - 11.2

COBBLEScoarse medium fine

CLIENT CEA Group




GR

AIN

SIZ

E 1

9-01

4_LO

GS

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D U

S L

AB

.GD

T

TH

E IN

FO

RM

AT

ION

PR

ES

EN

TE

D S

HO

ULD

NO

T B

E S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

TH

E G

EO

TE

CH

NIC

AL

RE

PO

RT


Sheet A16

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

BOREHOLE DEPTH Classification PL PI Cc CuNP

NP

NP

NP

15.0

13.0

GRAVEL SANDSILT OR CLAY

1403 4 20 406 603 10024 16 30

%Clay0.3

0.6

10.897

13.977

25

25

1 2006 101.5 8 143/4 3/8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT



B-8

B-8


LLNP

NP

D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand53.0

38.0

fine coarse


B-8

B-8

SILTY GRAVEL with SAND(GM)

SILTY GRAVEL with SAND(GM)

2.5 - 4.0

5.0 - 6.5

BOREHOLE DEPTH D100 %Silt32.0

30.0

2.5 - 4.0

5.0 - 6.5

COBBLEScoarse medium fine

CLIENT CEA Group




GR

AIN

SIZ

E 1

9-01

4_LO

GS

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D U

S L

AB

.GD

T

TH

E IN

FO

RM

AT

ION

PR

ES

EN

TE

D S

HO

ULD

NO

T B

E S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

TH

E G

EO

TE

CH

NIC

AL

RE

PO

RT


Sheet A17

B-1 0.0- 1.5 12 6.1 NP NP NP 78 12 SP-SM

2.5- 4.0 135.0- 6.5 8 2.7 NP NP NP 66 9 SP-SM

7.5- 9.0 1310.0- 11.5 11 4.8 NP NP NP 75 15 SM

13.5- 15.0 56B-2 0.0- 1.5 20

2.5- 4.0 50 / 4" 1.9 NP NP NP 61 9 SP-SM

5.0- 6.5 437.5- 9.0 13 6.6 NP NP NP 99 29 SM

10.0- 11.5 16 4.8 NP NP NP 90 23 SM

13.5- 15.0 50 / 6"B-3 0.0- 1.5 21 5.1 NP NP NP 84 17 SM

2.5- 4.0 75.0- 6.5 107.5- 9.0 11 7.5 NP NP NP 73 29 SM

10.0- 11.5 36 6.3 NP NP NP 62 19 SM

B-4 0.0- 1.5 20 10.2 31 15 16 79 32 SC

2.5- 4.0 20 3.0 NP NP NP 38 9 GW-GM

5.0- 6.5 87.5- 9.0 50 / 2" 5.2 29 15 14 69 22 SC

10.0- 11.5 50 / 1"B-5 0.0- 1.5 50 / 5" 7.5 NP NP NP 85 42 SM

2.5- 4.0 65 3.9 58 15

5.0- 6.5 82 3.6 70 16

7.5- 9.0 2310.0- 11.5 1613.5- 15.0 11 15.9 59 23 36 92 22 SC

B-6 0.0- 1.5 14 8.9 27 18 9 84 20 SC

2.5- 4.0 485.0- 6.5 62 5.8 NP NP NP 88 14 SM

7.5- 9.0 50 / 5"10.0- 11.5 5013.5- 15.0 45 11.8 33 20 13 91 22 SC

LiquidLimit

PlasticLimit

PlasticityIndex

WaterContent

(%)Borehole % Passing

No. 200N - Value % Passing

No. 4

SUMMARY OF LABORATORYENGINEERING SOIL CLASSIFICATION TEST

RESULTS

Depth ClassificationPocket Pen.(tsf)

TotalUnit

Weight(pcf)

CLIENT CEA Group




LAB

SU

MM

AR

Y

19-0

14_L

OG

S.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

US

LA

B.G

DT

T

HE

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N P

RE

SE

NT

ED

SH

OU

LD N

OT

BE

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M T

HE

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L R

EP

OR


Sheet A18

B-7 0.8- 2.3 26 5.0 87 19

2.5- 4.0 56 2.8 80 14

5.0- 6.5 50 / 6" 7.5 25 16 9 95 39 SC

7.5- 9.0 50 / 3" 6.3 24 16 8 94 32 SC

10.0- 11.5 50 / 2" 7.4 95 36

12.0- 13.5 50 / 3"B-8 0.7- 2.2 38

2.5- 4.0 39 8.2 NP NP NP 47 15 GM

5.0- 6.5 38 11.9 NP NP NP 43 13 GM

6.5- 8.0 50 / 2"

LiquidLimit

PlasticLimit

PlasticityIndex

WaterContent

(%)Borehole % Passing

No. 200N - Value % Passing

No. 4

SUMMARY OF LABORATORYENGINEERING SOIL CLASSIFICATION TEST

RESULTS

Depth ClassificationPocket Pen.(tsf)

TotalUnit

Weight(pcf)

CLIENT CEA Group




LAB

SU

MM

AR

Y 1

9-01

4_L

OG

S.G

PJ

GIN

T S

TD

US

LA

B.G

DT

TH

E IN

FO

RM

AT

ION

PR

ES

EN

TE

D S

HO

ULD

NO

T B

E S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

TH

E G

EO

TE

CH

NIC

AL

RE

PO

RT


Sheet A19

Construction Materials Testing

Geotechnical Engineering

Environmental Site Assessments

Forensic Analysis/Testing

CQC Testing and Engineering, L.L.C.

TBPE Firm Registration No. F-10632

PROJECT NO.: AGCQC19-014

PROJECT NAME: General Geotechnical Subsurface Soils Evaluation

EPW - Sunset Heights Water & Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project


PROCTOR NO.: 1 SAMPLED BY: VA

SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION: SAMPLE DATE: 3/28/2019

SOIL SAMPLE APPROX. DEPTH: 1 to 3'

SOIL TYPE/DESCRIPTION:

Sieve Analysis Test Atterberg Limits Test

Test Method: ASTM D 6913 Test Method: ASTM D 4318

Sieve Size/No.Percent

Retained

Percent

PassingLimit Test

Index Test

Result

3" 0 100 LL -

2-1/2" 0 100 PL -

1-1/2" 1 99 PI NP

1" 5 95 NP-Non Plastic

3/4" 15 85 NS - Not Specified

1/2" 37 63

3/8" 42 58 Soil Classification: SP-SM

No. 4 49 51 Test Method:

No. 10 57 43

No. 40 72 28

No. 100 88 12

No. 200 92.4 7.6

NS- Not Specified

Moisture-Density Relationship TestTest Method: ASTM D 1557, Method "C"

Test Sample No.Moisture

Content (%)

Sample Dry

Density (pcf)

1 3.5 136.6

2 5.2 137.7

3 7.1 136.3

4 8.8 134.7

137.6

5.2

On Site Subsurface Soils / SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Poorly

Graded, Tannish Brown with silt

SAMPLE TEST RESULTS

SOIL MOISTURE - DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST RESULTS

SAMPLE INFORMATION

B-1

ASTM D 2487

Maximum Dry Density, pcf:

Optimum Moisture Content, %: 134.0

135.0

136.0

137.0

138.0

3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0

Soil

Dry

Density, pcf

Soil Moisture Content, %

Moisture - Density Curve

Sheet A20


















Retained

Percent

PassingLimit Test

Index Test

Result

3" 0 100 LL -

2-1/2" 0 100 PL -

1-1/2" 0 100 PI NP



1/2" 13 87

3/8" 15 85 Soil Classification: SM


No. 10 22 78

No. 40 31 69

No. 100 60 40

No. 200 71.4 28.6

NS- Not Specified



Content (%)

Sample Dry

Density (pcf)

1 4.9 124.9

2 6.4 131.2

3 8.4 129.5

4 10.3 124.2

137.6

5.2Optimum Moisture Content, %:


SAMPLE INFORMATION

B-3

On Site Subsurface Soils / SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Silty,

Brown to Grayish Brown

SAMPLE TEST RESULTS

ASTM D 2487


124.0

125.0

126.0

127.0

128.0

129.0

130.0

131.0

132.0

4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0

Soil

Dry

Density, pcf



Sheet A21


















Retained

Percent

PassingLimit Test

Index Test

Result

3" 0 100 LL 39

2-1/2" 0 100 PL 18

1-1/2" 0 100 PI 21



1/2" 28 72

3/8" 35 65 Soil Classification: SC


No. 10 59 41

No. 40 71 29

No. 100 76 24

No. 200 79.7 20.3

NS- Not Specified



Content (%)

Sample Dry

Density (pcf)

1 3.2 137.0

2 4.5 141.0

3 5.8 142.0

4 7.4 137.0

142.2



SAMPLE INFORMATION

B-5

On Site Subsurface Soils / SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Clayey,

Yellowish Brown to Grayish Brown with clay lumps

SAMPLE TEST RESULTS

ASTM D 2487


136.0

137.0

138.0

139.0

140.0

141.0

142.0

143.0

3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0

Soil

Dry

Density, pcf



Sheet A22


















Retained

Percent

PassingLimit Test

Index Test

Result

3" 0 100 LL 25

2-1/2" 0 100 PL 15

1-1/2" 0 100 PI 10



1/2" 3 97

3/8" 7 93 Soil Classification: SC


No. 10 25 75

No. 40 52 48

No. 100 68 32

No. 200 74.7 25.3

NS- Not Specified

Moisture-Density Relationship TestTest Method: ASTM D 1557, Method "B"


Content (%)

Sample Dry

Density (pcf)

1 3.1 126.5

2 5.2 132.6

3 6.6 134.6

4 8.6 129.6

134.7



SAMPLE INFORMATION

B-6

On Site Subsurface Soils / SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Clayey,

Dark Brown to Tannish Brown

SAMPLE TEST RESULTS

ASTM D 2487


125.0

126.0

127.0

128.0

129.0

130.0

131.0

132.0

133.0

134.0

135.0

3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0

Soil

Dry

Density, pcf



Sheet A23

4606 Titanic Avenue

El Paso, Texas 79904

Ph. (915) 771-7766

Fx. (915) 771-7786




PROJECT NAME: General Geotechnical Subsurface Soils EvaluationEPW - Sunset Heights Water & Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project




SOIL SAMPLE DEPTH: 1 to 3'


TEST SPECIMEN INFORMATION: SPECIMEN SWELL TEST INFORMATION:

Soil Sample Height, in. 4-1/2" Intial Swell Reading: 0.0740

Soil Sample Approx. Diameter, in. 6" Final Swell Reading: 0.0770

Sample Vertical Swell, % 0.0667

Soil Optimum Dry Density, pcf 137.6

Soil Optimum Moisture Content, % 5.2 Before Soaking After Soaking

Dry Density, pcf 129.9 125.1

CBR Test Data: Moisture, % 5.4 9.5

% Compaction 94.4 90.9

Stress Contact Area, in2

3.01

Sample Surcharge Load, lbs. 12.5 UNCORRECTED CALCULATED SOAKED CBR VALUES:

Soaking Period, hr's. 96

CBR @ 0.1" Penetration 63


PEN. Load, lbs. Stress, psi

0 0 0

0.01 95 32

0.02 286 95

0.03 621 206

0.04 862 286

0.05 1144 380

0.06 1329 442

0.07 1507 501

0.08 1631 542

0.09 1756 583

0.1 1898 631

0.15 2363 785

0.2 2738 910

Stress Versus Penetration Data

SOIL CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (CBR) TEST RESULTSASTM D - 1883

SAMPLE INFORMATION

B-1

On Site Subsurface Soils / SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Poorly Graded,

Tannish Brown with silt

0100200300400500600700800900

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

Ca

lcu

late

d T

est S

am

ple

C

on

tact S

tre

ss, p

si

Piston Penetration, in.

CBR TestStress - Penetration Test Data

Sheet A24

4606 Titanic Avenue

El Paso, Texas 79904

Ph. (915) 771-7766

Fx. (915) 771-7786




PROJECT NAME: General Geotechnical Subsurface Soils EvaluationEPW - Sunset Heights Water & Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project




SOIL SAMPLE DEPTH: 5 to 7'


TEST SPECIMEN INFORMATION: SPECIMEN SWELL TEST INFORMATION:

Soil Sample Height, in. 4-1/2" Intial Swell Reading: 0.2320

Soil Sample Approx. Diameter, in. 6" Final Swell Reading: 0.2450

Sample Vertical Swell, % 0.2889

Soil Optimum Dry Density, pcf 142.2

Soil Optimum Moisture Content, % 5.6 Before Soaking After Soaking

Dry Density, pcf 136.6 131.5

CBR Test Data: Moisture, % 5.5 9.5

% Compaction 96.1 92.5

Stress Contact Area, in2

3.01

Sample Surcharge Load, lbs. 12.5 UNCORRECTED CALCULATED SOAKED CBR VALUES:

Soaking Period, hr's. 96



PEN. Load, lbs. Stress, psi

0 0 0

0.01 57 19

0.02 191 63

0.03 410 136

0.04 650 216

0.05 910 302

0.06 1144 380

0.07 1373 456

0.08 1640 545

0.09 1851 615

0.1 2083 692

0.15 3105 1032

0.2 3803 1263

Stress Versus Penetration Data

SOIL CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (CBR) TEST RESULTSASTM D - 1883

SAMPLE INFORMATION

B-5

On Site Subsurface Soils / SAND, Fine to Coarse Grained, Gravelly, Clayey, Yellowish

Brown to Grayish Brown

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

Ca

lcu

late

d T

est S

am

ple

C

on

tact S

tre

ss, p

si

Piston Penetration, in.

CBR TestStress - Penetration Test Data

Sheet A25

3,775

3,780

3,785

3,790

3,795

3,800

3,805

3,810

3,815

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,5003,775

3,780

3,785

3,790

3,795

3,800

3,805

3,810

3,815

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500

11-7-5(12)

3-7-6(13)

3-4-4(8)

5-5-8(13)

4-5-6(11)

17-30-26(56)

6.1

2.7

4.8

78

66

75

12

9

15

NP

NP

NP

SP-SM

SP-SM

SM

8-10-10(20)

36-47-50/4"

4-28-15(43)

10-6-7(13)

21-7-9(16)

14-10-50/6"

1.9

6.6

4.8

61

99

90

9

29

23

NP

NP

NP

SP-SM

SM

SM

10-11-10(21)

3-3-4(7)

3-3-7(10)

7-5-6(11)

5-9-27(36)

5.1

7.5

6.3

84

73

62

17

29

19

NP

NP

NP

SM

SM

SM

8-12-8(20)

18-13-7(20)

5-4-4(8)

50/2"

30-50/1"

10.2

3.0

5.2

79

38

69

32

9

22

16

NP

14

SC

GW-GM

SC

15-30-50/5"

14-26-39(65)

23-50-32(82)

20-12-11(23)

8-4-12(16)

7-4-7(11)

7.5

3.9

3.6

15.9

85

58

70

92

42

15

16

22

NP

36

SM

SC

7-7-7(14)

5-16-32(48)

22-30-32(62)

16-50/5"

9-15-35(50)

15-20-25(45)

8.9

5.8

11.8

84

88

91

20

14

22

9

NP

13

SC

SM

SC

15-14-12(26)

5-16-40(56)

41-50/6"

40-50/3"

13-37-50/2"

50/3"

5.0

2.8

7.5

6.3

7.4

87

80

95

94

95

19

14

39

32

36

NP

NP

9

8

SM

SM

SC

SC

9-12-26(38)

4-13-26(39)

7-18-20(38)50/2"

8.2

11.9

47

43

15

13

NP

NP

GM

GM

CLIENT CEA Group


Ele

vatio

n (f

t)

Distance Along Baseline (ft)

SUBSURFACE PROFILE DIAGRAM



Asphalt USCS Clayey Gravel

USCS Silty Sand Bedrock

USCS Well-graded Gravelwith Silt USCS Silty Gravel

USCS Poorly-graded Sand with Silt

USCS Clayey Sand

Base Course

ST

RA

TIG

RA

PH

Y &

GW

- B

SIZ

E 1

9-01

4_LO

GS

.GP

J G

INT

ST

D U

S L

AB

.GD

T

TH

E IN

FO

RM

AT

ION

PR

ES

EN

TE

D S

HO

ULD

NO

T B

E S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

TH

E G

EO

TE

CH

NIC

AL

RE

PO

RT


B-1N Value %MC %4 %200 PI USCS








B-1

B-2

B-3

B-4

B-5B-6

B-7

B-8

SO I L S P R O F I L E A - A '

Sheet A26

Construction Materials TestingGeotechnical Engineering

Environmental Site AssessmentsForensic Analysis/Testing

APPENDIX B


Construction Materials Testing Geotechnical Engineering

Environmental Site Assessments Forensic Analysis /Testing

CQC Testing and Engineering, LLC. Sheet B1 TBPE Firm Registration No. F-10632

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT TECHNICAL REFERENCE INFORMATION

DEFINITION OF DESCRIPTIVE TERMS

DENSITY OF GRANULAR SOILS CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS SPT N Value Relative Density SPT N Value Consistency < 4 Very Loose < 2 Very Soft 4 – 10 Loose 2 – 4 Soft 11 – 30 Med. Dense 5 – 8 Medium Stiff 31 – 50 Dense 9 – 15 Stiff 50 – 80 Very Dense 16 – 50 Very Stiff > 80 Hard > 80 Very Hard

DEGREE OF PLASTICITY

Nonplastic – Has no cohesion; will not roll into a thread. Trace of Plasticity – Barely hold its shape when rolled into a thread. Low Plasticity – Has sufficient cohesion to form a thread but will quickly rupture when deformed. Med. Plasticity – Has considerable cohesion. Can be molded into a thread and will withstand considerable deformation without rupture. High Plasticity – Can be kneaded like dough without trace of rupture.

MOISTURE DESCRIPTIONS

GRANULAR SOILS COHESIVE SOILS

Dry No Apparent Moisture No Apparent Moisture Slightly Moist < Than 3% by Weight < Less Than Plastic Limit

Moist 3% to 9% by Weight Approximately Plastic Limit Very Moist > 9% by Weight > than PL but < than LL Wet Submerged or Saturated Submerged or Saturated

PLASTICITY Cohesion Plasticity Degree of TSF Index Plasticity 0-0.125 0-5 None 0.125-0.25 5-10 Low 0.25-0.5 10-20 Moderate 0.5-1.0 20-40 Plastic 1.0-2.0 > 40 Highly Plastic > 2.0

ABBREVIATIONS

V. – Very Fl. – Fairly Sl. – Slightly Med. – Medium Tr. – Trace < - Less Than > - Greater Than PL – Plastic Limit Mod. – Moderately




SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART




GEOTECHNICAL REPORT SOIL CLASSIFICATION REFERENCE INFORMATION

Cohesive Soil Classification Chart

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE 12” 3” ¾” 4 10 40 200

BOULDERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE

152 76.2 19.1 4.76 2.00 0.420 0.074 0.002

SOIL GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

Laboratory Test Methods: Moisture Content Tests: Moisture Contents are determined from representative portions of a soil sample. The samples initial weight is recorded and it is then dried to a constant weight. From this data the moisture content is calculated. Atterberg Limit Tests: Liquid Limit (LL), Plastic Limit (PL) and Shrinkage Limit (SL) tests are performed to aid in the classification of soils and to determine the plasticity and volume change characteristics of the materials. The Liquid Limit is the minimum moisture content at which a soil will flow as a heavy viscous fluid. The Plastic Limit is the minimum moisture content at which the soil behaves as a plastic material. The Shrinkage Limit is the moisture content below which no further volume change will take place with continued drying. The Plasticity Index (PI) is the numeric difference between the Liquid Limit and the Plastic Limit and indicates the range of moisture content over which a soil remains plastic. Grain Size Distribution Test (Particle Size Analysis, Sieve Analysis): The distribution of soils finer than the No. 200 sieve is determined by passing a representative soil sample through a standard set of nested sieves. The weight of material retained on each sieve is determined and the percentage passing (or retained) is calculated. For determination of the percentage of material finer than the No. 200 sieve, the specimen is first washed through the sieve. The distribution of the materials finer than the No. 200 is determined by use of the different size particles while suspended in water.

Construction Materials Testing Geotechnical Engineering Environmental Site Assessments Forensic Analysis/Testing

APPENDIX C



Environmental Site Assessments Forensic Analysis / Testing

CLIENT: CEA Group PROJECT NAME: EPW – Sunset Heights Water & Sanitary Sewer Replacement

Program Phase 18 Project El Paso, El Paso County, Texas

Project No.: AGCQC19-014 May 21, 2019 CQC Testing and Engineering, L.L.C. Sheet C1


PHOTO NO. 1: General view of pipeline alignment area looking south

and existing site conditions.

PHOTO NO. 2: General view of drilling activities at exploration vertical

boring B-1 location.

PHOTO NO. 3: General view of drilling activities at exploration vertical

boring B-5 location.

PHOTO NO. 4: General view of the gravelly subsurface soils formations.

“People Committed to Delivering Top-Quality Services Consistently” Local El Paso, Texas Firm