HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit D08-389 - SEGMENT 1 - KING COUNTY - BOW LAKE RETAINING WALLSD08-389
Bow Lake Retaining Walls
18800 Orillia Road South
Due to the file size, this record has been broken down into 4 segments for
easier download. Click on the following links to review the permit
segments:
Segment 1 - King County — Bow Lake Retaining Walls D08-389
Segment 2 - King County — Bow Lake Retaining Walls D08-389
Segment 3 - King County — Bow Lake Retaining Walls D08-389
Segment 4 - Plans - King County — Bow Lake Retaining Walls D08-389
BOW LAKE
RETAINING WALLS
18800 ORILLIA RD S
D08-389
CitAif Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206-431-3670
Fax: 206-431-3665
Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
Parcel No.: 3523049037
Address: 18800 ORILLIA RD S TUKW
Suite No:
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
Permit Number: D08-389
Issue Date: 01/27/2009
Permit Expires On: 07/26/2009
Tenant:
Name: BOW LAKE TRANSFER RETAINING WALLS
Address: 18800 ORILLIA RD S , TUKWILA WA
Owner:
Name: KING COUNTY
Address: 500 K C ADMIN BLDG , SEATTLE WA 98104
Phone:
Contact Person:
Name: TOM CREEGAN
Address: 201 S JACKSON ST SUITE 701 , SEATTLE WA 98104
Phone: 206-263-6476
Contractor:
Name: GARY MERLINO CONST CO INC
Address: 9125 10TH AVE S , SEATTLE WA 98108
Phone: (206)762-9125
Contractor License No: GARYMCC150MW
Expiration Date: 02/14/2009
DESCRIPTION OF WORK:
CONSTRUCT SIX RETAINING WALLS LABELED WALL A THROUGH WALL F. WALLS A, C AND D ARE SOLDIER PILE
RETAINING WALLS. WALS B AND F ARE CONCRETE GRAVITY RETAINING WALLS. WALL E ISA MECHANICALLY
STABILIZED EARTH (MSE) RETAINING WALL.
Value of Construction:
Type of Fire Protection:
Type of Construction:
1, 700, 000.00
Fees Collected: $16,422.00
International Building Code Edition: 2006
Occupancy per IBC:
**continued on next page**
doc: IBC -10/06
D08-389 Printed: 01-27-2009
City de Tukwila �1
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206-431-3670
Fax: 206-431-3665
Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
Permit Number: D08-389
Issue Date: 01/27/2009
Permit Expires On: 07/26/2009
Public Works Activities:
Channelization / Striping: N
Curb Cut / Access / Sidewalk / CSS: N
Fire Loop Hydrant:
Flood Control Zone:
Hauling:
Land Altering:
Landscape Irrigation:
Moving Oversize Load:
N
N
Number: 0 Size (Inches): 0
Start Time:
Volumes: Cut 0 c.y.
End Time:
Fill 0 c.y.
Start Time: End Time:
Sanitary Side Sewer:
Sewer Main Extension: Private: Public:
Storm Drainage:
Street Use: Profit: N Non -Profit: N
Water Main Extension: Private: Public:
Water Meter:
Permit Center Authorized Signature:
N
Date:
I hereby certify that I have read and = ed this permit and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of law and ordinances
governing this work will be complied , whether specified herein or not.
The granting of this permit •,'oes not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state or local laws regulating
constructs r the i - o��� nce of work. I am authorized to sign and obtain this development permit.
Signature / / Date: / d 7/09
Print Name: C 1 HUH, I�
This permit shall become null and void if the work is not commenced within 180 days from the date of issuance, or if the work is suspended
or abandoned for a period of 180 days from the last inspection.
doc: IBC -10/06
D08-389 Printed: 01-27-2009
•
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206-431-3670
Fax: 206-431-3665
Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
PERMIT CONDITIONS
Parcel No.: 3523049037 Permit Number: D08-389
Address: 18800 ORILLIA RD S TUKW Status: ISSUED
Suite No: Applied Date: 08/04/2008
Tenant: BOW LAKE TRANSFER RETAINING WALLS Issue Date: 01/27/2009
1: ***BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS***
2: No changes shall be made to the approved plans unless approved by the design professional in responsible charge and the
Building Official.
3: All permits, inspection records, and approved plans shall be at the job site and available to the inspectors prior to
start of any construction. These documents shall be maintained and made available until final inspection approval is
granted.
4: The special inspections and verifications for concrete construction shall be required.
5: The special inspections for steel elements of buildings and structures shall be required. All welding shall be done by
a Washington Association of Building Official Certified welder.
6: The special inspection of bolts to be installed in concrete prior to and during placement of concrete.
7: When special inspection is required, either the owner or the registered design professional in responsible charge,
shall employ a special inspection agency and notify the Building Official of the appointment prior to the first
building inspection. The special inspector shall furnish inspection reports to the Building Official in a timely manner.
8: A final report documenting required special inspections and correction of any discrepancies noted in the inspections
shall be submitted to the Building Official. The final inspection report shall be prepared by the approved special
inspection agency and shall be submitted to the Building Official prior to and as a condition of final inspection
approval.
9: Subgrade preparation including drainage, excavation, compaction, and fill requirements shall conform strictly with the
recommendations given in the soils report. Special inspection is required.
10: All construction shall be done in conformance with the approved plans and the requirements of the International
Building Code or International Residential Code, International Mechanical Code, Washington State Energy Code.
11: Notify the City of Tukwila Building Division prior to placing any concrete. This procedure is in addition to any
requirements for special inspection.
12: All wood to remain in placed concrete shall be treated wood.
13: Remove all demolition rubble and loose miscellaneous material from lot or parcel of ground, properly cap the sanitary
sewer connections, and properly fill or otherwise protect all basements, cellars, septic tanks, wells, and other
excavations. Final inspection approval will be determined by the building inspector based on satisfactory completion of
this requirement.
14: VALIDITY OF PERMIT: The issuance or granting of a permit shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of,
any violation of any of the provisions of the building code or of any other ordinances of the City of Tukwila. Permits
presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the code or other ordinances of the City of Tukwila
shall not be valid. The issuance of a permit based on construction documents and other data shall not prevent the
Building Official from requiring the correction of errors in the construction documents and other data.
doc: Cond-10/06
D08-389 Printed: 01-27-2009
• It
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206-431-3670
Fax: 206-431-3665
Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
15: All electrical work shall be inspected and approved under a separate permit issued by the City of Tukwila Building
Department (206-431-3670).
**continued on next page**
doc: Cond-10/06
D08-389 Printed: 01-27-2009
•
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206-431-3670
Fax: 206-431-3665
Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
I hereby certify that I have read these conditions and will comply with them as outlined. All provisions of law and ordinances governing
this work will be complied with, whether specified herein or not.
The granting of this permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provision of any other work or local laws regulating
construction or the performancof work.
Signature:
Print Name: Co Y\ )40M 1' H flet
Date:
doc: Cond-10/06
D08-389 Printed: 01-27-2009
CITY OF TUKWILA
Community Development Department
Public Works Department
Permit Center
6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100
Tukwila, WA 98188
hup://www.ci.wkwila.iva.us
Building Permit No. 0," g' 3947
Mechanical Permit No.
Plumbing/Gas Permit No.
Public Works Permit No.
Project No.
(For office use only)
Applications and plans must be complete in order to be accepted for plan review.
Applications will not be accepted through the mail or by fax.
**Please Print**
SITE LOCATION
King Co Assessor's Tax No.: 3523049037
Site Address: 18800 Orillia Road South, Tukwila, WA
Tenant Name: Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer Station
Suite Number:
Floor:
New Tenant: ❑ Yes ❑X ..No
Property Owners Name: King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks - Solid Waste Division
Mailing Address: 201 South Jackson St, Suite 701
Seattle
WA
98104
City
State
Zip
CONTACT PERSON — who do we contact when your permit is ready to be issued
Name: Tom Creegan - KC DNRP-SWD
Mailing Address: 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 701
E -Mail Address: Tom.Creegan@kingcounty.gov
Day Telephone: (206) 263-6476
Seattle WA
98104
City
State
Zip
Fax Number:
GENERAL CONTRACTOR INFORMATION —
(Contractor Information for Mechanical (pg 4) for Plumbing and Gas Piping (pg 5))
Company Name:
Mailing Address:
City
Contact Person: Day Telephone:
E -Mail Address: Fax Number:
Contractor Registration Number: Expiration Date:
State
Zip
ARCHITECT OF RECORD — All plans must be wet stamped by Architect of Record
Company Name:
Mailing Address:
City State Zip
Contact Person: Day Telephone:
E -Mail Address: Fax Number:
ENGINEER OF RECORD — All plans must be wet stamped by Engineer of Record
Company Name: R. W. Beck, Inc.
Mailing Address: 1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2500
Contact Person: Karl Hufnagel
Seattle
WA
98154
E -Mail Address: khufnagel@rwbeck.com
Q:Wpplications\Forms-Applications On Line' -2006 - Permit Application.doc
Revised: 9-2006
bh
City State
Day Telephone: (206) 695-4700
Fax Number: (206) 695-4701
Zip
Page 1 of 6
• •
BUILDING PERMIT INFORMATION - 206-431-3670
Valuation of Project (contractor's bid price): $ 1,700,000 Existing Building Valuation: $
Scope of Work (please provide detailed information): Construct six retaining walls labeled Wall A through Wall F. Walls A, C and
D are soldier pile retaining walls. Walls B and F are concrete gravity retaining walls. Wall E is a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining wall.
Will there be new rack storage? ❑ Yes
❑.. No If yes, a separate permit and plan submittal will be required.
Provide All Building Areas in Square Footage Below
PLANNING DIVISION:
Single family building footprint (area of the foundation of all structures, plus any decks over 18 inches and overhangs greater than 18 inches)
*For an Accessory dwelling, provide the following:
Lot Area (sq ft): Floor area of principal dwelling: Floor area of accessory dwelling:
*Provide documentation that shows that the principal owner lives in one of the dwellings as his or her primary residence.
Number of Parking Stalls Provided: Standard: Compact: Handicap:
Will there be a change in use? ❑ Yes 0 No If "yes", explain:
FIRE PROTECTION/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:
0 Sprinklers 0 Automatic Fire Alarm 0 None ❑ Other (specify)
Will there be storage or use of flammable, combustible or hazardous materials in the building? ❑ Yes ❑ No
If `yes', attach list of materials and storage locations on a separate 8-1/2"x 11 " paper including quantities and Material Safety Data Sheets.
SEPTIC SYSTEM
0 On-site Septic System — For on-site septic system, provide 2 copies of a current septic design approved by King County Health
Department.
Q.Wpplicanons\Fonns-Applications On L,ne\3-200b - Permit Applicanon.doc
Revised: 9-2006
bh
Page 2 of 6
Existing
Interior Remodel
Addition to
Existing
Structure
New
Type of
Construction per
IBC
Type of
Occupancy per
IBC
Ist Floor
rd Floor
3`d Floor
Floors thru
Basement
Accessory Structure*
Attached Garage
Detached Garage
Attached Carport
Detached Carport
Covered Deck
Uncovered Deck
PLANNING DIVISION:
Single family building footprint (area of the foundation of all structures, plus any decks over 18 inches and overhangs greater than 18 inches)
*For an Accessory dwelling, provide the following:
Lot Area (sq ft): Floor area of principal dwelling: Floor area of accessory dwelling:
*Provide documentation that shows that the principal owner lives in one of the dwellings as his or her primary residence.
Number of Parking Stalls Provided: Standard: Compact: Handicap:
Will there be a change in use? ❑ Yes 0 No If "yes", explain:
FIRE PROTECTION/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:
0 Sprinklers 0 Automatic Fire Alarm 0 None ❑ Other (specify)
Will there be storage or use of flammable, combustible or hazardous materials in the building? ❑ Yes ❑ No
If `yes', attach list of materials and storage locations on a separate 8-1/2"x 11 " paper including quantities and Material Safety Data Sheets.
SEPTIC SYSTEM
0 On-site Septic System — For on-site septic system, provide 2 copies of a current septic design approved by King County Health
Department.
Q.Wpplicanons\Fonns-Applications On L,ne\3-200b - Permit Applicanon.doc
Revised: 9-2006
bh
Page 2 of 6
PUBLIC WORKS PERMIT INFORMATION - 206-433-0179
Scope of Work (please provide detailed information):
Cala before you Dig: 1-800-424-5555
Please refer to Public Works Bulletin #1 for fees and estimate sheet.
Water District
❑ ...Tukwila 0... Water District #125
0 ...Water Availability Provided
Sewer District
❑ ...Tukwila
❑ ...Sewer Use Certificate
❑ .. Highline
❑...ValVue ❑ .. Renton
0...Sewer Availability Provided
0 .. Renton
0 .. Seattle
Septic System:
❑ On-site Septic System — For on-site septic system, provide 2 copies of a current septic design approved by King County Health Department.
Submitted with Application (mark boxes which apply):
❑X ...Civil Plans (Maximum Paper Size —22" x 34")
❑ ...Technical Information Report (Storm Drainage)
0 ...Bond ❑ .. Insurance ❑ .. Easement(s)
Proposed Activities (mark boxes that apply):
0 ...Right-of-way Use - Nonprofit for less than 72 hours
❑ ...Right-of-way Use - No Disturbance
❑ ...Construction/Excavation/Fill - Right-of-way
Non Right-of-way D
❑ ...Total Cut
❑ ...Total Fill
cubic yards
cubic yards
x❑ .. Geotechnical Report
0 .. Maintenance Agreement(s)
❑...Traffic Impact Analysis
❑ ...Hold Hannless — (SAO)
❑ ...Hold Harmless — (ROW)
❑ .. Right-of-way Use - Profit for less than 72 hours
❑ .. Right-of-way Use — Potential Disturbance
❑ .. Work in Flood Zone
❑ .. Storm Drainage
❑ ...Sanitary Side Sewer 0 .. Abandon Septic Tank ❑ .. Grease Interceptor
❑ ...Cap or Remove Utilities ❑ .. Curb Cut 0 .. Channelization
❑ ...Frontage Improvements ❑ .. Pavement Cut 0 .. Trench Excavation
0 ...Traffic Control 0 .. Looped Fire Line ❑ .. Utility Undergrounding
❑ ...Backflow Prevention -Fire Protection
Irrigation
Domestic Water
0 ...Permanent Water Meter Size...
❑ ...Temporary Water Meter Size ..
❑ ...Water Only Meter Size
❑ ...Sewer Main Extension Public
❑ ...Water Main Extension Public
WO #
WO #
WO # ❑...Deduct Water Meter Size
Private
Private (for King County Public Facility)
FINANCE INFORMATION
Fire Line Size at Property Line Number of Public Fire Hydrant(s)
0 ...Water 0 ...Sewer 0 ...Sewage Treatment
Monthly Service Billing to:
Name: Day Telephone:
Mailing Address:
Water Meter Refund/Billing:
Name:
Mailing Address:
City
State Zip
Day Telephone:
City
State Zip
Q: WpplicationsWorms-Applications On Line'3-2006 - Permit Application. doc
Revised: 9-2006
bh
Page 3 of 6
MECHANICAL PERMIT INFORMATION - 206-431-3670
MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR INFORMATION
Company Name:
Mailing Address:
City State Zip
Contact Person: Day Telephone:
E -Mail Address: Fax Number:
Contractor Registration Number: Expiration Date:
Valuation of Mechanical work (contractor's bid price): $
Scope of Work (please provide detailed information):
Use: Residential: New .... ❑ Replacement .... ❑
Commercial: New .... ❑ Replacement .... ❑
Fuel Type: Electric ❑ Gas....❑ Other:
Indicate type of mechanical work being installed and the quantity below:
Unit Type:
Qty
Unit Type:
Qty
Unit Type:
Qty
Boiler/Compressor:
Qty
Furnace<100K BTU
Air Handling Unit >10,000
CFM
Fire Damper
0-3 HP/100,000 BTU
Furnace>100K BTU
Evaporator Cooler
Diffuser
3-15 HP/500,000 BTU
Floor Fumace
Ventilation Fan Connected
to Single Duct
Thermostat
15-30 HP/1,000,000 BTU
Suspended/Wall/Floor
Mounted Heater
Ventilation System
Wood/Gas Stove
30-50 HP/1,750,000 BTU
Appliance Vent
Hood and Duct
Emergency
Generator
50+ HP/1,750,000 BTU
Repair or Addition to
Heat/Refrig/Cooling
System
Incinerator - Domestic
Other Mechanical
Equipment
Air Handling Unit
<10,000 CFM
Incinerator— Comm/1nd
Q:\Applications Forms -Applications On Line \3-2006 - Permit Application.doc
Revised: 9-2006
bh
Page 4 of 6
PLUMBING AND GAS PIPING PERMIT INFORMATION - 206-431-3670
PLUMBING AND GAS PIPING CONTRACTOR INFORMATION
Company Name:
Mailing Address:
City State Zip
Contact Person: Day Telephone:
E -Mail Address: Fax Number:
Contractor Registration Number: Expiration Date:
Valuation of Plumbing work (contractor's bid price): $
Valuation of Gas Piping work (contractor's bid price): $
Scope of Work (please provide detailed information):
Building Use (per Int'I Building Code):
Occupancy (per Int'l Building Code):
Utility Purveyor: Water: Sewer:
Indicate type of plumbing fixtures and/or gas piping outlets being installed and the quantity below:
Fixture Type:
Qty
Fixture Type:
Qty
Fixture Type:
Qty
Fixture Type:
Qty
Bathtub or combination
bath/shower
Drinking fountain or water
cooler (per head)
Wash fountain
Gas piping outlets
Bidet
Food -waste grinder,
commercial
Receptor, indirect
waste
Clothes washer, domestic
Floor drain
Sinks
Dental unit, cuspidor
Shower, single head trap
Urinals
Dishwasher, domtstic,
with independent drain
Lavatory
Water Closet
Building sewer or trailer
park sewer
Rain water system — per
drain (inside building)
Water heater and/or
vent
Additional medical gas
inlets/outlets — six or more
Industrial waste
pretreatment interceptor,
including its trap and vent,
except for kitchen type
grease interceptors
Repair or alteration of water
piping and/or water treating
equipment
Repair or alteration
of drainage or vent
piping
Medical gas piping system
serving one to five
inlets/outlets for specific gas
Q:Applications Worms -Applications On Line'3-2006- Permit Application.doc
Revised: 9-2006
bh
Page 5 of 6
PERMIT APPLICATION NOTES — Applicable to all permits in this application
Value of Construction — In all cases, a value of construction amount should be entered by the applicant. This figure will be reviewed and is subject
to possible revision by the Permit Center to comply with current fee schedules.
Expiration of Plan Review — Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation.
Building and Mechanical Permit
The Building Official may grant one or more extensions of time for additional periods not exceeding 90 days each. The extension shall be
requested in writing and justifiable cause demonstrated. Section 105.3.2 International Building Code (current edition).
Plumbing Permit
The Building Official may grant one extension of time for an additional period not exceeding 180 days. The extension shall be requested
in writing and justifiable cause demonstrated. Section 103.4.3 Uniform Plumbing Code (current edition).
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE UNDER
PENALTY OF PERJURY BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, AND I AM AUTHORIZED TO APPLY FOR THIS PERMIT.
BUILDINGOWER OR AUITHORIZED AGENT:
Signature: lAk ,IP-12-17
Print Name: TO, - \ CR.E
Date:
Day Telephone: 6t/
Mailing Address: 2s 517 S it k-1 o‘ 5
City
IvA q g(oL(
State Zip
Date Application Accepted: 9
Date Application Expires:
--0 8 �- o q
Staff Initialsli
t ,/?
Q:\Applicanons\Fonns-Applmanons On Line\ -2006 - Permit Apphcanon.doc
Revised: 9-2006
bh
Page 6 of 6
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206-431-3670
Fax: 206-431-3665
Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
RECEIPT
Parcel No.: 3523049037 Permit Number: D08-389
Address: 18800 ORILLIA RD S TURIN Status: APPROVED
Suite No: Applied Date: 08/04/2008
Applicant: BOW LAKE TRANSFER RETAINING WALLS Issue Date:
Receipt No.: R08-03601
Initials: LAW
User ID: 1632
Payment Amount: $9,954.50
Payment Date: 10/24/2008 08:43 AM
Balance: $0.00
Payee: KING COUNTY
TRANSACTION LIST:
Type Method Descriptio Amount
Payment Check 175967 9,954.50
ACCOUNT ITEM LIST:
Description
Account Code Current Pmts
BUILDING - NONRES 000/322.100
STATE BUILDING SURCHARGE 000/386.904
9,950.00
4.50
Total: $9,954.50
rinr.: RenAint-OR
Printpri: 10-74-7008
• •
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206-431-3670
Fax: 206-431-3665
Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
RECEIPT
Parcel No.: 3523049037 Permit Number: D08-389
Address: 18800 ORILLIA RD S TUKW Status: PENDING
Suite No: Applied Date: 08/04/2008
Applicant: BOW LAKE TRANSFER RETAINING WALLS Issue Date:
Receipt No.: R08-02839
Payment Amount: $6,467.50
Initials: VIER Payment Date: 08/04/2008 04:06 PM
User ID: 1655 Balance: $9,954.50
Payee: KING COUNTY
TRANSACTION LIST:
Type Method Descriptio Amount
Payment Check 117747 6,467.50
ACCOUNT ITEM LIST:
Description
Account Code Current Pmts
PLAN CHECK - NONRES
000/345.830 6,467.50
Total: $6,467.50
5683 08/05 07.10 TOTAL 6467.50
doc: Receipt -06 Printed: 08-04-2008
4
INSPECTION RECORD
Retain a copy with permit
INSPECTION NO. PERMIT NO.
CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION
6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-3670
603 -3,9c7
Project:
60e4/ 1.4 kE- 42'/A, v. 4,.9
Type of Inspection:
/i /-, ,4./,q
/
Address:
/.85O0,5)U D,)/LLA RDA
Date Called:
_
Special Instructions:
Date Wanted:
7— Z !— i L�
m.,
..11m.,
m.
Requester:
I/C 114Pci
Phone No:
.
Approved per applicable codes. El Corrections required prior to approval.
COMMENTS:
SV tv . k@Caw 4. t --(e• 1 1�,,., A- 1 F
4/0►4,. y[\ 4C'
a�4..J - z --J 0
p 7
/
14 (.VA pF0 '7\ /eC( 6- 1 0 - t ti
I/C 114Pci
t- zy-(-- 4a-4 - 1 u
.
P , . •
_ter—, I
._.._ _
1 hi!i
specto :
LNA��
Date:
-1(J
00 REINSPECTION FEE REQUIED. Prior to inspection, fee must be
d at 6300 Southcent r Blvd., Syte 100. Call to schedule reinspection.
Re ipt No.:
Date:
INSPECTION NO.
CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION
6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-3670
INSPECTION RECORD
Retain a copy with permit
PERMIT NO.
gject: DteJ
Type of Inspection:
Sn Q_G. 6O^ aa -e
Address:
ffao Q 0,2: ((,i-
40
Date Called:
A.
Special Instructions:
ie.era.:". fo u (r� �( f
/
h F. --
Date Wanted: ''-___a.r'it..
3 -1--/0 -` p.m.
Requester:
non:
co _224
22 _2ri40
Approved per applicable codes. ❑ Corrections required prior to approval.
COMMENTS:
She e: h L 4,3
'°e/\
Date:
_5-co
.00 REINSPECTION FEE REQUI ED. Pr or to inspection, fee must be
d at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., S to 100: all to schedule reinspection.
Re pt No.:
Date:
INSPECTION NO.
INSPECTION RECORD
Retain a copy with permit
8 6g-381
PERMIT NO.
CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION r g-
6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)1-3670
Project v
Type of Inspection
f
Address:
t X00 OR LLA- /
Date Call :
Specia Instructions:
go., A4
Date Wanted:
` .m.
Requester:
Phone No:
'2,,e Co -Z2b-81-4a
0 Approved per applicable codes. ❑ Corrections required prior to approval. 3
COMMENTS:
S,00k,a l njsrb-I act 104 K.
I pec ' r•
1
Date•
—z2 -tic
$ •J 0 REINSPECTION EE REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be
at 6300 Southcent r Blvd., Suite 100. Call to schedule reinspection.
Recei No.:
Date:
INSPECTION RECORD
ib -3
Retain a copy with permit Ca
INSP CTION NO. PERMIT NO.
65'
CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION ‘42_
6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-3670
Procirgow LA ke
Type of Inspection:
S 1 ( 0040 reit-,
Ad ess:
I88600R1LLA e1
Date Called:
Special Instructions:
Date Wanted:
a.m.
Requester:
Phone No:
ao(- Z e-g7Lj L
Approved per applicable codes. Corrections required prior to approval.
4•
COMMENTS:
L,/ A iN /74/Nf, J"3
C
nspector
0.:
Dave: 3
NSPECTION FEE REpUID. Prior to inspection, fee must be
00 Southcenter Blvd Sui a 100. Call to schedule reinspection.
Date:
INSP ION NO.
CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION
6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA 98188
INSPECTION RECORD
Retain a copy with permit
PERMIT NO.
14—
(206)431-367
Projw
4l46v- L4 E-
Type of Inspection- \
.S PF /n / - (iPt/ri/El'
Address:
ic960O oma/' c. /1 R6
Date Called:
Special Instructipns: _
.
,
Date ted:
ze- e5
a m.
p.m.
Requester:
.2}
Phone No:
a20C- 6-e? VO
0 Approved per applicable codes.
Corrections required prior to approval.
--
COMMENTS: •
9,44/
74//4 l?fJ•..-5�.�..A7%."145,9,44/1.
t/ • 1 h il„,/,, (40‘..1/17 / s1 i 6
R,(/, t(4J ' 4 /?T/d/i. 'l .
.2}
4
nspector: / Dat,
4s44
$ • +.OI REINSPECTION FE REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be
i - t 6300 Southcenter vd., Suite 100. Call to schedule reinspection.
Re pt No.:
Date:
deEsSarseateVIA
lk
IN5PPCTION NO.
INSPECTION RECORD
Retain a copy with permit
CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION
6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-3670
Project:
ROj' LAS
Type of Inspection:
cs L -0Ve7te
Address:
Address,,:
/� O!2 /LL /,q
,P_o
Date Called:
Special Instructions:
0,353,-5=0
/?,-i../. < b' (./' tig>0d - Qrparr— 6c7
Date W nted:
e -- /3 - 65
fa m:
p.m.
Requester:
Phone No:
Qv6 -g2y0
ElApproved per applicable codes.
Corrections required prior to approval.
COMMENTS:
,vor// etc/ A' / v:peel , 9 / 1 A .cs2•009%i J --t / /4,1
/?f- s/ --r / "A// /3
/?,-i../. < b' (./' tig>0d - Qrparr— 6c7
If/ ---/J
._./
/!/J Ma 6,4 y"5 Nv if,,o Tv ,J A %.
,
I spectr:
/'°"1,1
Dat �j
.00 REINSPECTION FEE REQUIR . Prior to inspection, fee must be
aid at 6300 Southcenter Bl d., Su' a 100. Call to schedule reinspection.
Receipt No.:
Date:
INSPECTION NO.
CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION
6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-3
TL-
INSPECTION RECORD i Retain a copy with permit od g -3 i
PERMIT NO.
Pro'ect:
.K A t,J Ll Q ITAN I,J
Type of Inspection:
S' SDP
GviA CJE
Address: r Rio
ig100 ox.-
Called:
Special Instructions:
Date Wanted:
a.m.
Requester:
Phone No:
'IA -
22 (0rVQ -40
❑ Approved per applicable codes. LJ Corrections required prior to approval.
COMMENTS:
10 Sp 4-? D A - "Ite_
Inspe(-----.'..)
c
tt,t Art
Date: n
)
REQ�7IRE . Prior
p $60.00 REINSPECTION FEE to inspection, fee must be
paid at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100. Call to schedule reinspection.
Receipt No.:
Date:
INSPECTION NO.
INSPECTION RECORD
Retain a copy with permit
PERMIT NO.
CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION r-
6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-367
oect:
P4064.).‘40e.
4 w 14' 7701aS/✓'
Type of Inspection:
4t-- (
.
\
Address:
/88e°Co D ANwfil %j'
Date Called:
_S er. sy / /7u -s �/��/J•,r_S /t1),1,.5! .6 r
/
Special Instructions:
%A
Date Wanted:
7_, 2/—c)9
, pl
r
a.m.'
p.m.
Requester:
--.-\ . N.
Phone No:
Ci46�.226-
19.7e
'Approved per applicable codes. Corrections required prior to approval.
COMMENTS:
--- e / t & 1.-1. p01 f D /1. * 14k
Syr"( '144 / /Vs NIS .1.11" /LS1
?
,,((Ai/
1/)P (iii/.� ;Jo((2; /3„..1-/,'
` "i 4F/ /� Kl..4.;
->/t/�evl d .� '2c9 �7 .Ai /t, 1 Af f
_S er. sy / /7u -s �/��/J•,r_S /t1),1,.5! .6 r
/
/l , rue, (/1/13/ "}"IN. /t/S Ar'i. r (`�ftdf
J
1
, ." -, 7 •
, pl
r
,moi/r.4l ,p���
r�/t-c% 9 7() 6, --/y.
c.
--.-\ . N.
Inspe
.00 REINSPECTION FEE R
Id at 6300 Southcenter Blv
-eipt No.:
Date:
7- Qa /- c�
UIRE9/Prior to inspection, fee rfiust be
Suite 100. Call to schedule reinspection.
Date:
411
MAYES TESTING ENGINEERS, INC.
July 22, 2010
City of Tukwila
Building Department
6200 South Center Blvd
Tukwila, WA 98188-8188
Attention: Building Official
Re: King County Bow Lake Transfer Station
18800 Orillia Road
Tukwila, WA
Project No. L09404
Gentlemen,
Final Letter - REVISED
Permit No. D09-235 (Sewer water vault)
D09-124 (Storm water vault)
D08-389 (Stud welding and
pile splices)
Seattle Office
20225 Cedar Valley Road
Suite 110
Lynnwood. WA 98036
ph 425.7429360
fax 425.745.1737
Tacoma Office
10029S. Tacoma Way
Sub E2
Tacoma, WA 98499
ph7'3584.3720
fax 253.584.3707
Portland Office
7911 NE 33rd Drive
Suite 190
Portland OR 97211
ph 503281.7515
fax 503281.7579
This is to inform you that registered special inspections have been completed for this project as per
our reports, copies of which have been sent to you.
Special inspection was provided for:
• Welding Inspection
To the best of our knowledge, all work inspected was either performed in accordance with, or
corrected to conform to, the city approved drawings, or engineer approved changes.
We trust that this provides you with the information which you require. Should you have any
questions give us a call.
Sincerely,
Mayes Testing Engineers, Inc.
Mf
Robert Glenn
Senior Project Manager
King County
Road Services Division
Materials Laboratory
Department of Transportation
RSD -TR -0100
155 Monroe Avenue Northeast, Building D
Renton, WA 98056-4199
www.metrokc.gov/roads
June 24, 2010
City of Tukwila Building Department
6300 Southcenter BLVD
Tukwila, WA 98188
Attention: James Dunaway, Building Inspector
Re: Summary of Special Inspections
Building Permit No. D08-389
Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer Station — Site Preparation
Tukwila, Washington
Dear Mr. Dunaway:
The King County Materials Laboratory (KCML) respectfully submits this letter as our
summary of special inspections and materials testing for the referenced project.
KCML performed special inspections beginning July 28, 2009 and continuing through
June 22, 2010. Reports of our inspections and corresponding testing were
previously submitted. KCML performed special inspections and testing for the
following:
1) Installation of Reinforcing Steel
2) Concrete Placement
3) Shotcrete Application
4) Compressive Strength of Concrete
5) Verification of Soil Compaction
KCML utilized the services of a private testing laboratory registered with the
Washington Association of Building Officials, A.A.R. Testing Laboratory Inc., to
substitute on a few occasions, to perform shotcrete application inspection. No
deficiencies were noted and all work was found to be in conformance with the
approved plans in the reports provided by A.A.R. Testing Laboratory.
It is our opinion that the construction activities inspected and materials tested by
KCML were in general conformance with the approved plans, specifications and
changes authorized by the Design Engineer. If you have any questions or require
further clarification, please contact our office (206) 296-7709.
Final Summary of Special Inspections Page 2 of 2
Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer Station — Site Preparation
Respectfully submitted,
Alan D. Corwin, P.E.
King County Materials Engineer/WABO Technical Director
cc: KPFF Consulting Engineers Attn: CK Humphreys
King County DNRP Attn: Tom Creegan
Inspector(s) listed below have met all registration requirements for the types of work identified.
Registered Special Inspector
MORRISON, LONNY J.
MOSER, EDWARD L.
MUIR, ROBERT L.
MUNDY, MARTIN D.
MYERS, JASON M.
MYERS, PAUL J.
NAILL, GEORGE R.
NEJATI, MEHRDAD
NEWMAN, DENNIS P.
NEYMAN, JOSHUA T.
NYGARD, LARRY A.
O'CONNOR, RYAN T.
O'MALLEY, SCOTT M.
OLDFIELD, KENNETH
OLIVER, FRANK J.
OLSON, JASON C.
OPGENORTH, JOHN N.
OTTO, ROBERT L.
OVERSTREET, CHRIS L.
PACHECO, STEVE G.
PADUA, ERNIE O.
PANOV, KRASIMIR P.
PARNEL, BRANDON M.
PAYSENO, JUDI I.
PAYSENO, JR., JERRY L.
PERKINSON, ARTHUR T.
PETERS, JONATHAN W.
PFAFF, TARA E.
PINK, JONATHAN J.
PITZEN, ARNIE J.
PONCE, JAKE J.
POPE, JUSTIN M.
POWLISON, MARK R.
Inspector Tvoe of Work
RC I PC I SC I SM I 1 1 1 LFI IPA
1 1 1 1 1 IPII
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PI
RCI I SC I 1 1 I LW I PA
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PI
RC I PC I SC I SM I FP I LW I PA
RCI 1 I SM I SS FPI 1
RCIPCISCISMI
RC 1 PC 1 SC 1 SM 1 SS FP 1 LF PA
RCI 1 1 PA
RCI ISMI
1 PI
RC 1 PC 1 SC 1 SM 1 LF PA
RC 1
RC I PC I PA
1 1 1 1 1 PA
RC1PCISC1SM1 ISSBISW1 1 1 PA
RC 1 PC 1 SC 1 SM 1 FP 1 1 1 1 PA
1 1 1 1 1 IPI
1 1 1 I SSB I SW I 1 1
RCIPCI ISMI 1 1 1 1 1
RC 1 PC SC1SMI LF PA
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PA
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PI
RC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PA
1 1 1 ISS 1 1 1 PA
RCI 1 1 I SSB I SW 11 1 PA
RCI I SCI 1 1 1
RC 1 1 SC 1 SM 1 1 1 1 FP LF 1 PA
RCIPCISCISMISSI 1 IFP IPA
1 1 1 1 1 IPA
RC 1 PC 1 SC 1 SM 1 I SSB I SW 1 FP 1 PA
1 1 1 1 1 IFP LF
b0g-3g7
Inspector Registration
Card Expires
01 JAN 2010
01 JAN 2010
01 APR 2010
01 APR 2010
01 OCT 2009
01 JUL 2010
01 JUL 2010
01 APR 2010
01 APR 2010
01 APR 2010
01 JUL 2010
01 JAN 2010
01 JUL 2010
01 JAN 2010
01 JUL 2010
01 OCT 2009
01 JAN 2010
01 OCT 2009
01 OCT 2009
01 JUL 2010
01 OCT 2009
01 APR 2010
01 OCT 2009
01 JUL 2010
01 APR 2010
01 APR 2010
01 APR 2010
01 JUL 2010
01 JAN 2010
01 JUL 2009
01 OCT 2009
01 JAN 2010
01 JAN 2010
""Pending Report date: 08/11/09
FILE CPY
PPr°rnit r�ae
r
City of Tukwila
Public Works Permit Package
Retaining Walls
Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer
Station Expansion Project
August 4, 2008
D
CITY OFETUKWILA
AUG - 4 2008
PERMIT CENTER
DO831
Section 4
SPECIFICATIONS
tiw
SECTION 02070
GEOSYNTHETICS
PART 1 — GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A. Section includes:
1. Geotextile for material separation and soil reinforcement.
2. Geotextile drainage mat for drainage at structures.
3. Geogrid for soil reinforcement.
4. Geomembrane for pond lining.
1.02 RELATED SECTIONS
1. Section 02300 — Earthwork.
2. Section 02370 — Erosion and Sedimentation Controls.
1.03 REFERENCES
A. Comply with the requirements of Section 01095 — Reference Standards and
as listed herein. The following is a list of standards referenced in this
Section.
1. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D751 — Standard
Test Methods for Coated Fabrics.
2. ASTM D792 — Standard Test Methods for Density and Specific Gravity
(Relative Density) of Plastics by Displacement.
3. ASTM D882 — Test Method for Tensile Properties of Thin Plastic
Sheeting.
4. ASTM D1004 — Standard Test Method for Tear Resistance (Graves Tear)
of Plastic Film and Sheeting.
5. ASTM D1621 — Standard Test Method for Compressive Properties of
Rigid Cellular Plastics.
6. ASTM D 1790 — Standard Test Method for Brittleness Temperature of
Plastic Sheeting by Impact.
7. ASTM D4355 — Standard Test Method for Deterioration of Geotextiles by
Exposure to Light, Moisture and Heat in a Xenon Arc Type Apparatus.
8. ASTM D4491 — Standard Test Methods for Water Permeability of
Geotextiles by Permittivity.
9. ASTM D4533 — Standard Test Method for Trapezoidal Tearing Strength
of Geotextiles.
10. ASTM D4632 — Standard Test Method for Grab Breaking Load and
Elongation of Geotextiles.
11. ASTM D4716 — Standard Test Method for Determining the (In -plane)
Flow Rate per Unit Width and Hydraulic Transmissivity of a Geosynthetic
Using a Constant Head.
C00272C08 §02070 —1/9
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 GEOSYNTHETICS
1
12. ASTM D4751 — Standard Test Method for Determining Apparent Opening
Size of a Geotextile.
13. ASTM D5261 — Standard Test Method for Measuring Mass per Unit Area
of Geotextiles.
14. ASTM D5199 — Standard Test Method for Measuring the Nominal
Thickness of Geosynthetics.
15. ASTM D6241 — Standard Test Method for Static Puncture Strength of
Geotextiles and Geotextile-Related Products Using a 50 -mm Probe.
16. Geosynthetics Research Institute (GRI)-GG4 — Determination of the
Long -Term Design Strength of Geogrids.
17. Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) Geomembrane Institute (PGI) 1104
Specification Revision 1.
18. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Qualified
Products List, Appendix D — Geosynthetic Retaining Walls.
1.04 SUBMITTALS
A. General: Submit the following in accordance with Section 00700 — General
Terms and Conditions, Article 4.4 — Submittals, and Section 01330 —
Submittal Procedures.
B. Manufacturer's material specifications, product literature, and material sample
not less than six (6) inches square, including accessory items and fasteners.
C. Submit Manufacturer's source quality control test results and written
certification that the material meets the requirements of this Section, prior to
shipping materials to the Project Site.
D. Manufacturer's instructions for storage, handling, installation, seaming, and
repair of proposed materials.
1.05 DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND HANDLING
A. Deliver, store, and protect geosynthetics in accordance with Section 01600 —
Product Requirements.
B. Supply geotextiles, geotextile drainage mat, and geogrid in rolls wrapped in
impermeable and opaque protective covers. Mark or tag each roll with the
following information:
1. Manufacturer's name.
2. Product identification.
3. Lot number.
4. Roll dimensions.
C. Supply geomembrane in panels, accordion folded on pallets, wrapped in
impermeable and opaque protective covers. Mark or tag each panel with the
following information:
1. Manufacturer's name.
2. Product identification.
C00272C08 §02070 — 2/9
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 GEOSYNTHETICS
8
3. Lot number.
4. Panel Number.
5. Panel dimensions.
D. During shipment and storage, protect geosynthetics from ultraviolet Tight
exposure, precipitation or other inundation, mud, dirt, dust, puncture, cutting,
or other damaging or deleterious conditions.
E. Handle materials in such a manner as to ensure they are not damaged in any
way.
F. The materials shall be stored above the ground surface and beneath a roof or
other protective covering.
G. Immediately repair any damaged protective covering.
PART 2 — PRODUCTS
2.01 GEOTEXTILES
A. Type A shall be a woven geotextile for separation and soil reinforcement
B. Type B shall be a non -woven geotextile for underground drainage.
C. Geotextiles shall be pervious sheets of polymeric fabric consisting of at least
ninety-five (95) percent by weight of polyolefins and polyesters.
D. Geotextiles shall be composed of continuous staple fibers that retain their
relative position with respect to each other.
E. Geotextiles properties shall conform to the minimum average roll values
(MARV) in Table 1.
Table 1
Geotextile Requirements
Property
Unit
Type A
Type B
Test Method
Apparent
Opening Size
U.S. Sieve
#40 max
#40 max
ASTM D4751
Water
Permittivity
sec -i
0.1 min
0.5 min
ASTM D4491
Grab Strength
Ib
315
160
ASTM D4632
Tear Strength
Ib
112
50
ASTM D4533
Puncture
Resistance
Ib
620
310
ASTM D6241
UV Resistance
(500 hours)
% Strength
Retained
50
50
ASTM D4355
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02070 — 3/9
GEOSYNTHETICS
1
2.02 GEOTEXTILE DRAINAGE MAT
A. Geotextile drainage mat, or geocomposite, shall consist of a high-density
polyethylene (HDPE) core drainage net with a geotextile filter bonded to one
side.
B. Geotextile drainage mat properties shall conform to the minimum average roll
values (MARV) in Table 2.
Table
Geotextile Drainage
2
Mat Requirements
Property
Unit j
Requirement
Test Method
Geotextile Properties
Apparent Opening
Size
U.S. Sieve
#60 max
ASTM D4751
Water Permittivity
sec"'
0.4 min
ASTM D4491
Grab Strength
Ib
100
ASTM D4632
Core Properties
Width Thickness
in
0.4
ASTM D5199
Compressive
Strength at Yield
psi
100
ASTM D1621
In Plane Flow Rate
Gradient = 0.1,
Pressure = 5.5 psi
Gradient = 1.0,
Pressure = 14.5 psi
gal/min/ft
5.0
15.0
ASTM D4716
C. Manufacturers:
1. Mirafi G100W or
2. Approved Equal.
2.03 GEOGRID
A. Geogrid shall consist of a regular network integrally connected polymer
tensile elements with an aperture geometry sufficient to permit mechanical
interlock with the surrounding backfill. The long chain polymers in the tensile
elements of the geogrid, not including coatings, shall consist of at least
ninety-five (95) percent by weight of polyolefins and polyesters.
B. Geogrid properties in the direction of maximum Toad carrying capacity shall
conform to the minimum average roll values (MARV) in Table 3.
C00272C08 §02070 — 4/9
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 GEOSYNTHETICS
Table 3
Geogrid Requirements
Property
Unit
Maximum Retaining Wall Height
5 Feet
10 Feet
15 Feet
20 Feet
Long Term
Tensile
Strength
Ib/ft
1,000
1,700
2,400
3,200
C. Acceptable products shall be products meeting the requirements of Table 3,
above, as documented in the WSDOT Qualified Products List, Appendix D -
Geosynthetic Retaining Walls.
2.04 GEOMEMBRANE
A. Geomembrane shall consist of a PVC geomembrane, 20 mils thick. All PVC
geomembrane shall be from the same Manufacturer, Fabricator, and lot.
B. Geomembrane shall conform to the requirements of PGI 1104 and in
particular shall have the minimum properties shown in Table 4.
Table 4
PVC Geomembrane Requirements
Property
Unit
Requirement
Test Method
Thickness
mil
20±1.5
ASTM D5199
Specific Gravity
g/cc
1.2
ASTM D792
Tensile Strength
at Break
Ib/in
48
ASTM D882
(Method A)
Elongation at
Break
%
360
ASTM D882
(Method A)
Tear Strength
Ib
6
ASTM D1004
Hydrostatic
Resistance
psi
68
ASTM D751
(Procedure A)
Low Temperature
Impact
Degrees F
-15
ASTM D1790
C. Welding solvent shall be in accordance with Manufacturer's
recommendations.
2.05 SOURCE QUALITY CONTROL
A. By Manufacturer:
1. Test geotextiles, geotextile drainage mat, and geogrid at a minimum,
once per lot or once per every one -hundred -thousand (100,000) square
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02070 — 5/9
GEOSYNTHETICS
*
feet (which ever results in the greater number of tests) to verify that the
geosynthetics meets the material specifications stated herein.
2. Test geomembrane at a minimum, once per lot or once per every ten -
thousand (10,000) pounds (which ever results in the greater number of
tests) to verify that the geosynthetics meets the material specifications
stated herein
B. Reject rolls or Panels from which samples do not satisfy this Section.
PART 3 — EXECUTION
3.01 PREPARATION
A. Prepare surfaces to receive geosynthetics to ensure they are free of
irregularities, protrusions, loose soil, and abrupt changes.
B. Inspect the prepared surfaces to receive geosynthetics to ascertain suitability
for installation in compliance with the Manufacturer's written installation
instructions and warranty.
C. Inspect geosynthetics for defects such as rips, holes, deterioration, or other
damage. Any material found defective shall be rejected.
D. Remove sharp stones or other objects from prepared surface that may
damage the geosynthetics.
E. Remove soft areas of Subgrade. Backfill under the provisions of Section
02300 — Earthwork.
F. Regrade as required to eliminate ruts in the Subgrade.
3.02 INSTALLATION
A. Install geotextile associated with temporary erosion and sedimentation control
(TESC) in accordance with the requirements of Section 02370— Erosion and
Sedimentation Controls.
B. Geotextile Installation:
1. Place geotextile at locations as shown on the Drawings.
a. Actual extent of placement required for Geotextile — Type A will be
determined in the field by the Project Representative. Refer to Bid
Item 7.
2. Roll out geotextile in a manner to keep the geotextile in sufficient tension
to preclude folds and wrinkles.
3. Temporarily anchor edges using sandbags as necessary to keep material
in place until first lift of material is placed.
4. On slopes greater than five (5) horizontal to one (1) vertical, place
geotextile with the long dimension perpendicular to the slope.
5. Overlap panels a minimum twenty-four (24) inches or in accordance with
the Manufacturer's recommended minimum lap distance, whichever is
greater.
C00272C08 §02070 — 6/9
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 GEOSYNTHETICS
t
6. Survey extent of Geotextile — Type A in accordance with Paragraph
1.04.F of Section 01432 — Surveying.
7. Place the first lift of material by end -dumping and spreading with low
ground pressure tracked or rubber -tired equipment.
a. The minimum lift thickness for the first lift shall be twelve (12) inches.
b. Equipment shall not operate over geotextile with less than twelve (12)
inches of cover.
C. Geotextile Drainage Mat Installation:
1. Place geotextile drainage mat against retaining walls as shown on the
Drawings fully lapping the foundation and/or underdrain.
2. Install geotextile drainage mat in accordance with Manufacturer's written
installation recommendations and instructions.
3. For application to concrete wall, place geotextile drainage mat against
retaining wall with contact adhesive or double sided tape sufficient to hold
in place while soil is being placed.
a. The core shall be in contact with the wall, with the geotextile between
the core and soil to be placed.
4. For application to wall timber lagging, place geotextile drainage mat
against lagging with staples or tacks sufficient to hold in place while
concrete wall is being poured.
a. The geotextile shall be in contact with the laggings, with the core
between the geotextile and concrete.
b. A plastic sheet shall be used to separate the core from the concrete
pour to prevent intrusion of concrete into the geotextile drainage mat.
5. Lap sections of geotextile drainage mat by overlapping dimples of the
upper panel onto the dimples the dimples of the lower panel a minimum
of two (2) inches.
6. Seal the geotextile with liquid adhesive or duct tape.
7. Seal all exposed edges from soil infiltration with pieces of geotextile.
8. Geotextile drainage mat damaged during installation or soil placement
shall be cut out and replaced with a new piece providing overlap on all
sides.
9. Place Fill, Backfill, or concrete within two (2) weeks of material
installation. Geotextile drainage mat shall not remain exposed for a
prolonged period to minimize material deterioration.
D. Geogrid Installation:
1. Place geogrid at the locations and to the lines and grades as shown on
the Drawings.
2. Install geogrid in accordance with Manufacturer's written installation
recommendations and instructions.
C00272C08 §02070 — 7/9
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 GEOSYNTHETICS
*
3. Geogrid shall be placed with the machine direction (long dimension) down
slope.
4. Geogrid shall be installed smooth and free of tension, stress, folds,
wrinkles, or creases.
5. Geogrid shall be connected/spliced as required by the manufacturer's
recommendations.
6. Place the first lift of material by end -dumping and spreading with low
ground pressure tracked or rubber -tired equipment.
a. The minimum lift thickness for the first lift shall be twelve (12) inches.
b. Equipment shall not operate over geogrid with less than twelve (12)
inches of cover.
E. Geomembrane Installation:
1. Place geomembrane at the locations and to the lines and grades as
shown on the Drawings
2. Install geomembrane in accordance with Manufacturer's written
installation recommendations and instructions.
3. Reposition geomembranes after deployment to remove wrinkles.
4. Each pond or pretreatment cell shall utilize a continuous/seamless panel
of geomembrane.
5. All exposed geomembrane shall be weighted against wind uplift with
sandbags or equivalent as required to maintain it in the correct location.
3.03 REPAIR
A. Geotextile:
1. Repair holes or tears in the geotextile immediately per the Manufacturer's
instructions.
2. At a minimum, repair by overlaying an additional geotextile layer,
providing a two (2) foot minimum overlap from the damaged area.
B. Geotextile Drainage Mat:
1. Replace damaged portion in accordance with the Manufacturer's
instructions.
2. At a minimum:
a. Remove damaged core material;
b. Replace damaged core material with core material, meeting the
requirements of this Section, creating a flush surface with the existing
core material; and
c. Repair geotextile in accordance with Paragraph 3.03.A.
C. Geogrid:
1. Remove damaged geogrid and replace with geogrid meeting the
requirements of this Section.
C00272C08 §02070 — 8/9
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 GEOSYNTHETICS
2. Replace damaged portion in accordance with the Manufacturer's
instructions.
D. Geomembrane:
1. Remove damaged geomembrane and replace with geomembrane
meeting the requirements of this Section.
2. Repair Subgrade in accordance with Paragraph 3.01 of this Section.
3. Cut a patch of intact geomembrane that extends at least six (6) inches
beyond the edge of the damaged area in all directions.
4. Clean and dry the repair seam area and patch with a solvent weld, in
place, as described below.
a. Seaming shall not be performed when ambient temperatures are
below forty (40) degrees F or above one hundred (100) degrees F as
measured six (6) inches above the surface of the geomembrane, or
outside the temperature limits recommended by the geomembrane
Manufacturer or Fabricator, whichever is more stringent.
b. Solvent Welding: Seam in accordance with the Manufacturer's and
Fabricator's recommendations to form a continuous and uniform seam
free of gaps or any other discontinuities. The solvent welded area
shall be a minimum of two (2) inches wide at all locations. The
surfaces shall be pressed together and rolled so that the adhesive is
forced toward the leading edge.
c. Wrinkles, fishmouths, and other imperfections in the seam shall be
removed or repaired.
3.04 PROTECTION
A. Place subsequent Fill and Backfill materials and install adjacent materials to
ensure:
1. No damage to the geosynthetics.
2. Minimal slippage of the geosynthetics on underlying layers.
3. No excess tensile stresses in the geosynthetics.
END OF SECTION 02070
C00272C08 §02070 — 9/9
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 GEOSYNTHETICS
M
SECTION 02300
EARTHWORK
PART 1 — GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A. Section Includes:
1. Excavation and grading.
2. Fill, backfill, and compaction.
3. Haul and disposal of materials.
1.02 RELATED SECTIONS:
A. Section 02130 — Removal of Hazardous Materials and Dangerous Waste.
B. Section 02230 — Site Clearing.
C. Section 02250 — Trench Safety Systems.
D. Section 02370 — Erosion and Sedimentation Controls.
E. Section 02910 — Landscaping.
1.03 REFERENCES
A. Comply with the requirements of Section 01095 — Reference Standards and
as listed herein. The following is a list of standards referenced in this
Section:
1. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) TP 61 — Determining the Percentage of Fracture in Course
Aggregate.
2. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) C94 — Standard
Specification for Ready -Mixed Concrete.
3. ASTM C150 — Standard Specification for Portland Cement.
4. ASTM C618 — Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or
Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use in Concrete.
5. ASTM D75 — Standard Practice for Sampling Aggregates.
6. ASTM D422 — Standard Test Method for Particle -Size Analysis of Soils.
7. ASTM D 1557 — Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction
Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort.
8. ASTM D 2487 — Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for
Engineering Purposes (Unified Soils Classification System).
9. ASTM D6938 — Standard Test Method for In -Place Density and Water
Content of Soil and Soil -Aggregate by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth).
10. Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Section 46.61.655 Dropping Load,
Other Materials — Covering.
11. RCW Chapter 70.93 Waste Reduction, Recycling, Model Litter Control
Act.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 —1/27
EARTHWORK
1.04 DEFINITIONS
A. Backfill: Suitable soil used to artificially raise previously excavated grades.
B. Bum Fill: Bumt Refuse mixed with soil.
C. Compaction: Application of controlled forces on soils to achieve a prescribed
soil density.
D. Daily Cover: As defined in Section 01500 - Temporary Facilities and
Controls.
E. Dangerous Waste: Dangerous Waste: As defined in Section 01350 - Health
and Safety.
F. Earthwork: Construction operations involving excavation, material
classification, processing, hauling, placement ,compaction, disposal, and all
other work activities required in this Section.
G. Earthwork Plan: Written narrative describing the Contractor's proposed
means, methods, and sequencing of the Earthwork operations.
1. The Earthworks Plan shall include the requirements of the Environmental
Protection Plan (EPP).
H. Embankment: Excavated native glacial material suitable for reuse on-site
including any required processing to remove over size material.
I. Environmental Protection Plan: Owner developed plan as defined in Section
01500 - Temporary Facilities and Controls) which is located in Appendix D of
these Specifications.
J. Excavation: Removal of material.
K. Export Material: Material being removed from the Project Site.
L. Fill: Suitable soil used to raise grades.
M. Final Grade: Project Site elevations required at the end of construction as
indicated on the Drawings.
N. Grading: Redistribution of soils, primarily through the use of motorized
construction equipment such as bulldozers, scrapers, graders, loaders and
the like, as well as hand work, to create the finished surface elevations and
grades indicated on the Drawings.
O. Hazardous Material:
1. As defined in Section 00700 - General Terms and Conditions and to
include the definition contained in Section 01350 - Health and Safety,
which also applies.
2. Hazardous Material excludes Refuse or Burn Fill.
P. Import Material: Off-site source material brought into the Project Site by the
Contractor.
Q. Leachate: Contaminated water, whether surface or ground, that has come in
contact with Refuse or Burn Fill.
R. Neat Line:
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 - 2/27
EARTHWORK
1. The extent of the required mass excavation the Contractor is required to
provide in the Contract Price.
2. The mass excavation limits indicated on the Drawings.
S. Non -Native High Fines Content Fill Material: Excavated, non -contaminated,
non-native glacial deposits, high fines content, soil material requiring export
from the Project Site.
1. Non -Native High Fines Content Fill Material is defined in the Geotechnical
Reports indentified in the Available Information as "WSDOT Fill."
T. Over -excavation: Removal of material outside the Neat Line indicated on the
Drawings.
U. Processing: Crushing, screening, washing, blending, removing deleterious
material, amending and supplementing soil materials as necessary to
produce materials meeting the requirements of the Specifications.
V. Proof -rolling: The act of traversing a suitably heavy piece of equipment
across a proposed sub -base for the purpose of identifying any areas which
yield and therefore are deemed unsuitable soils.
W. Refuse: As defined in putrescible and nonputrescible solid and semisolid
wastes including, but not limited to garbage, rubbish, ashes, industrial
wastes, commercial waste, swill, sewage sludge, demolition and construction
wastes, abandoned vehicles or parts thereof, discarded commodities and
recyclable materials.
X. Rock: Material in beds, ledges, unstratified masses, conglomerate deposits,
and boulders larger than three-fourths (3/4) cubic yard in volume, that when
tested exceed a standard penetration resistance of one hundred (100) blows
to penetrate two (2) inches in accordance with ASTM D 1586.
Y. Sub -base: Fill/Backfill material placed and compacted over subgrade and
under roadways as part of road construction.
Z: Subgrade: The undisturbed earth or the compacted soil layer defined on the
Drawings as the final grade or upon which Fill, Backfill, structural foundations,
or pavement materials are subsequently placed, or the exposed soil layer at
the bottom of excavation areas.
AA. Suitable Material:
1. Import Material and/or material excavated on-site determined by the
Project Representative to be appropriate for use as Fill and/or Backfill.
2. Soil materials complying with ASTM D 2487, Soil Classification Groups
GW, GP, GM, SW, SP, and SM; AND free from rocks larger than twelve
(12) inches, debris, waste, frozen matter, vegetation, refuse, and other
deleterious matter.
BB.Unsuitable Material:
1. Materials obtained from on-site excavation not meeting the specified
requirements of Embankment or other specified materials, or which yield
excessively and unpredictably under load, whether vertical or horizontal.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 — 3/27
EARTHWORK
2. Unsuitable Material may include unstable soils, boulders, rocks,
construction debris, metal, organic materials, high silt or clay content
materials, concrete rubble, woody debris.
3. Unsuitable Material may include Suitable Material that is unconsolidated,
or loose, or that contains excess moisture which has no immediate
effective remedy.
1.05 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
A. The work of this section will not be measured, except for those items of work
covered under Bid Item No. 3 through Bid Item No. 6, and Bid Item No. 9, and
will be included in Bid Item No. 1.
B. Estimated quantities for Bid Item No. 3 through Bid Item No. 6 and Bid Item
No. 9:
1. Neat Line volume: The required mass excavation.
a. The Neat Line volume is the difference between the original ground
elevations indicated on the Owner -provided survey and the Neat Line
excavation limit shown on the Drawings.
1. The Neat Line is provided for the convenience of the
Contractor in determining the approximate quantity of
Excavation; it does not represent the full extent of Excavation
on the Project.
2. The Neat Line volume includes Embankment, Non -Native High
Fines Content Fill Material, Burn Fill, and Refuse.
i. Embankment volume is estimated at sixty thousand
(60,000) cubic yards measured by the in-place volume
method.
ii. Non -Native High Fines Content Fill Material is estimated at
one hundred sixty-five thousand (165,000) tons based on
the in-place volume method.
iii. Burn Fill is estimated at one hundred thirty-one thousand
(131,000) tons based on the in-place volume method.
iv. Refuse is estimated at eleven thousand (11,000) tons
based on the in-place volume method.
v. Gravel borrow is estimated at four thousand (4,000) tons
which includes fifteen (15) inches compacted thickness
under roadways constructed over an assumed area of
Bum Fill and Non -Native High Fines Content Material and
backfill for replacement of refuse and/or unsuitable
subgrade
2. Material type quantities are based on the difference between the original
ground elevations indicated on the Owner -provided survey and the Neat
Line excavation limit in the Drawings, and the geotechnical information
described in Section 01100 - Summary of Work.
a. The material quantities for Refuse, Burn Fill, Non -Native High Fines
Content Fill Material, and Embankment within the Neat Line were
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 — 4/27
EARTHWORK
calculated based on the assumed limits of the geotechnical
information.
b. The indicated material quantities are generalized and are provided to
indicate scale of magnitude; actual excavation quantities may vary
depending upon true material extents and Contractor means and
methods.
3. As material is excavated within the Neat Line, it shall be classified by the
Project Representative for segregation by the Contractor in accordance
with this Section.
4. The Contractor shall use all appropriate means and equipment necessary
to perform the Work; shall employ equipment such as heavy excavating
and demolishing equipment, thumb attachments, hydraulic breakers, and
shear attachments of sufficient size; and shall use appropriate techniques
to perform such Work.
5. Excavation and Hauling of Materials Within the Neat Line:
a. Any and all material, including but not limited to general excavated
material, refuse, construction debris, concrete materials, burned
materials, paper materials, plastics, household appliances, furniture,
clothing, textiles, wood products, yard waste, automobiles, tires,
wiring and electrical materials, sheet metal, wire rope and fence wire,
metal items, rubber materials, bicycles, auto parts, rock, cobble,
oversize material and similar difficult to handle materials, within the
volumes of the Neat Line excavation are the responsibility of the
Contractor and no additional costs shall be assessed against the
Owner for such work, EXCEPT:
1. Material(s) that cannot be broken apart into manageable
pieces and handled with an excavator fitted with a minimum
five (5) cubic yard bucket with thumb attachment, hydraulic
ram breaker attachment, and hydraulic shear attachment.
2. Quantities required to be excavated as directed by the Project
Representative beyond the Neat Line indicated on the
Drawings.
6. Excavation and Hauling of Materials Outside the Neat Line:
a. Any and all material, including but not limited to general excavated
material, refuse, construction debris, concrete materials, burned
materials, paper materials, plastics, household appliances, furniture,
clothing, textiles, wood products, yard waste, automobiles, tires,
wiring and electrical materials, sheet metal, wire rope and fence wire,
metal items, rubber materials, bicycles, auto parts, rock, cobble,
oversize material and similar difficult to handle materials, that are
excavated by the Contractor at its option beyond the Neat Line
excavation are the responsibility of the Contractor in accordance with
its own means and methods, and no additional costs shall be
assessed against the Owner for such Work.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 — 5/27
EARTHWORK
7. No adjustments other than for approved Changes shall be made in the
payment, even though actual quantities may deviate from the indicated
estimated quantity.
8. Refer to Section 01432 - Surveying for information about how the
Contractor is required to accept or propose modification to the Owner -
provided survey.
9. Changes in the Excavation volume are limited to the following:
a. Resulting from the Contractor electing to correct the Owner -provided
survey in accordance with Section 01432 - Surveying, in the event
the Owner -provided survey is in error, AND
b. For Over -excavation authorized by the Project Representative.
C. Payment:
1. Payment for Work of this Section shall be in accordance with
requirements of Section 01200 - Payment Procedures and as indicated in
this Section.
2. Payment for the work of this section covered in Bid Item No. 1 will be
based on the estimated percent of the work complete during the period
covered by the payment request.
3. Payment for the work of this section covered in Bid Item No. 3 through
Bid Item No. 6 and Bid Item No. 9 will be made as follows:
a. Estimate each month the volume in cubic yards of Embankment
relocated from within the volume of the Neat Line excavation to the
East Slope Fill Area in accordance with the requirements of this
Section. Upon completion of the East Slope Fill Area Embankment
placement, a final calculation of Embankment material placed,
corrected for any settlement, will be made and a reconciliation will be
made for the quantity of Embankment to be finally paid under Bid Item
No. 3.
b. Tally each month the weight in tons of Refuse, Burn Fill, and Non -
Native High Fines Content Fill Material exported from the Project Site
and gravel borrow related to Bid Item No. 9 imported to the Project
Site.
c. Payment shall be in accordance with Section 00700 - General Terms
and Conditions, and compensated on the calculated unit price
quantities times the corresponding unit prices.
d. Payment for authorized over -excavation, if any, shall be on the basis
of volumes and/or tons of type of material removed in the current
month times the applicable unit price from Bid Item Nos. 3 through 6,
as determined by the Project Representative in consultation with the
Contractor.
D. Excavation, Fill, and Backfill:
1. Establish the required final elevations and grades shown on the
Drawings.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 - 6/27
EARTHWORK
4'
41.
a. Excavate and export Refuse, Burn Fill, and Non -Native High Fines
Content Fill Material.
b. Relocate excavated Embankment to the East Slope Fill Area. It is
recognized that the final elevations and grades of the East Slope Fill
Area will be dependent on the volume of available, suitable
Embankment material within the Neat Line.
c. Fill and Backfill using Import Material and Embankment for structures
and utilities.
2. Subgrade preparation (proof -rolling and compaction) shall be applied in
all areas.
3. Over -excavation and replacement of unsuitable soils when directed by
Project Representative.
E. Disposition of Excavation Materials:
1. The Work requires a continuous classification and quality control testing
process by the Project Representative to determine disposition of
Excavation materials to appropriate use as one of the following:
a. Embankment;
b. Non -Native High Fines Content Fill Material;
c. Refuse;
d. Burn Fill;
e. Construction, Demolition and Landclearing debris (CDL) in
accordance with Section 01741 — Construction Waste Management;
or
f. Hazardous Material In accordance with Section 02130 — Removal of
Hazardous Materials and Dangerous Waste and Section 01350 —
Health and Safety.
2. Cooperate with the Project Representative to assist and coordinate
continuous material classification (observation/monitoring) processes
performed by the Project Representative.
a. Classification is required throughout the course of the Contractor's
Earthwork excavation operations.
b. Classification by the Project Representative will include inspection for
visual and odor indications of material type and field sampling and
testing.
c. The Project Representative will utilize classification processes, and
will staff the Project Site in order to minimize delay to the Contractor's
Earthwork excavation operations. Contractor should expect some
occasional delay or slowdown of excavation work when material types
in the active excavation area(s) change. Where feasible Contractor
should plan to have multiple excavation areas in progress or available
so that operations can be shifted between areas when questions arise
and are resolved by the Project Representative regarding the
classification of materials encountered.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 — 7/27
EARTHWORK
d. If the classification process identifies potentially Hazardous Materials
or Dangerous Waste, the suspect material shall be separated and
tested by the Project Representative.
e. Delays or slowdown of excavation operations due to material
classification processes shall not be cause for adjustment in Contract
Time or in Contract Price.
F. Hauling Requirements:
1. Disposition:
a. Refuse and Burn Fill (non -CDL and non -Hazardous Material) shall be
disposed of at the Cedar Hills Regional Landfill (CHRL).
b. Non -Native High Fines Content Fill Material may be disposed of at
CHRL, or at another location as determined by the Contractor and
acceptable to the Project Representative.
c. CDL and Hazardous Material shall be disposed of at an appropriate
regulated disposal facility as determined by the Contractor and
acceptable to the Project Representative.
d. Embankment shall be relocated to the East Slope Fill Area as
indicated on the Drawings.
e. Proper handling, storage, hauling, transport, safety, and management
of Earthwork materials associated with the Project are solely the
responsibility of the Contractor.
1. Contractor shall utilize Toad covers and or secure loads in
accordance with the requirements of RCW 46.61.655 and
RCW 70.93.097.
2. Tipping Fees:
a. Tipping fees for disposal at the CHRL operated by the Solid Waste
Division of the Department of Natural Resources and Parks, King
County, Washington are waived for purposes of Excavation
associated with this Project.
b. Do not commingle material types being exported from the Project Site
with any other material types or materials from another project, site, or
source.
c. Comply with Project Representative's instructions for weighing,
measuring and assessing vehicle trips into and out of the CHRL.
d. Provide certified truck scales, at locations identified by the Contractor
and acceptable to the Project Representative, with sizes sufficient to
accommodate the vehicles utilized by the Contractor.
1. Truck scales will not be allowed at the CHRL. Contractor is
required to locate a truck scale for materials hauled to the
CHRL at another location accessible by and acceptable to the
Project Representative.
e. Provide and continuously track tare weights of vehicles, and correlate
with truck registrations.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 - 8/27
EARTHWORK
•
f.
3. Export of Non -Hazardous Materials:
a. Acceptable Vehicles: Truck and pup, side dump, slide box, and other
ordinary and customary soils hauling equipment.
4. Export of Hazardous Materials:
a. In accordance with the Federal and State requirements and the
requirements of Section 02130 — Removal of Hazardous Materials
and Dangerous Waste.
5. Export of Dangerous Waste:
a. In accordance with the Federal and State requirements and the
requirements of Section 02130 — Removal of Hazardous Materials
and Dangerous Waste.
1.06 SUBMITTALS
A. General: Submit the following in accordance with Section 00700 — General
Terms and Conditions, Article 4.4 — Submittals, and Section 01330 —
Submittal Procedures:
1. Earthwork Plan:
a. Within fourteen (14) calendar days of the First Notice to Proceed,
submit a minimum five (5) page (eight and one-half (8.5) by eleven
(11) inch paper size) narrative describing the Contractor's proposed
means, methods, and sequencing of the earthwork operations. The
prescribed page count does not include drawings, diagrams, or tables.
b. Drawings and diagrams shall be included which, at a minimum,
depict:
1. Progression of work areas;
2. Stockpile areas;
3. Vehicle access;
4. Typical Toad out configuration (excavators, conveyors, trucks,
etc.);
5. Relation to other Project Site work (retaining wall construction,
surface water vault installation, paving, utilities installation,
etc.); and
6. Surface water management.
7. Location and certification of truck scales.
8. Identification of potential off-site disposal sites other than
CH RL.
9. Proposed disposal facilities for CDL, Hazardous Materials, and
Dangerous Waste.
2. Supplier information.
a. Name of Imported Material suppliers.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 - 9/27
EARTHWORK
4
b. Imported Material certificate of conformance with the Specifications
for each source of material.
c. Quantity of Imported Material from each source of material.
d. Data sheets demonstrating that each source of Imported Material
complies with the requirements of the Specifications.
e. Source Quality Control Information: Provide in accordance with
requirements of this Section; see Part 2 — Products and Section
01430 — Quality Assurance and Control.
f. Samples of proposed Imported Materials of sufficient size to allow for
Project Representative confirmation testing of materials.
3. Certified waybills, delivery tickets and bilis of lading: in accordance with
provisions of this Section.
1.07 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. Perform Work in accordance with Section 01430 — Quality Assurance and
Control.
B. Testing and Inspections:
1. The Contractor shall provide testing and inspections for Source Quality
Control for materials proposed for incorporation into the Work, in
accordance with the requirements of this Section.
a. Allow sufficient, reasonable time in work schedule for Owner's testing
service to sample, test, and provide test results of source material for
verification and Field Quality Assurance.
2. Field Quality Assurance at the Project Site will be provided by the Owner
which shall include a qualified soils testing and inspection service during
earthwork operations.
a. Field Quality Assurance testing will be the primary source of
information for Owner and Contractor verification that Contractor is
meeting all design requirements.
b. Allow Owner testing service to sample materials and perform field
tests of placed materials.
c. Allow sufficient, reasonable time in work schedule for results of
Owner's testing services to be reported before proceeding on with
subsequent work.
C. Pre -excavation Conference:
1. Attendees: Coordinate the meeting time and date with the following
individuals, with a minimum five (5) calendar days prior notice of
conference:
a. Contractor: Project manager, field engineer, superintendent;
b. Subcontractor: Management, and supervisory personnel, including
truck driver supervisor;
c. Project Representative;
C00272C08 §02300 —10/27
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 EARTHWORK
d. NE Representative;
e. Construction Manager;
f. Owner's Testing and Inspection Service; and
g. City of Tukwila: Construction Compliance Officer.
2. Agenda:
a. Detailed discussion of Earthwork Plan, having been previously
reviewed and commented on by the Owner.
b. Screening procedures that will be employed by the Project
Representative for identifying, the various on-site material types,
including documentation.
c. Adverse Weather Operations: Wet weather, freezing weather
operations.
d. Grading Control: Survey, staking, and datum review.
e. Public Protection: Street cleaning; noise, odor, and dust mitigation.
f. Coordination with ongoing facility operations.
g. Roadway, and Traffic Management: Flagging, and site access control
measures in accordance with the Owner -provided Traffic
Management Plan indicated on the Drawings.
h. Schedule review for earthwork activities.
i. Coordination of disposal operations at the CHRL.
1.08 DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND HANDLING
A. Obtain permits and licenses required by authorities having jurisdiction for the
legal transport of all material to and from the Project Site.
B. Documentation: Provide certified waybills, delivery tickets and bills of lading
as follows:
1. Export Material: Provide bills of lading demonstrating the legal transfer of
ownership of Export Material departing the Project Site.
a. EXCEPTION: Export Material destined for the CHRL does not require
bills of lading.
2. Import Material: Provide certified waybills and delivery tickets.
3. Provide certified waybills, delivery tickets and bills of lading paperwork to
the Project Representative on a daily basis,
4. Documentation shall contain the following information, complete and
accurately recorded:
a. Date and the time that the material entered or departed the Project
Site.
b. Driver identification.
c. Vehicle identification, configuration, tare weight.
d. Material classification.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 —11 /27
EARTHWORK
e. Material weight in tons to the nearest one-hundredth (1/100) of a ton
(20 pounds).
1.09 PROJECT CONDITIONS
A. Protect survey monuments as described in Section 01432 — Surveying.
PART 2 — PRODUCTS
2.01 MATERIALS
A. Controlled Density Fill (CDF):
1. Materials:
a. Portland Cement: ASTM C 150, Type I or Type II.
b. Fine Aggregate, Class 1 or 2, that is uniform in quality and
substantially free from wood, roots, bark, and other deleterious
material, and shall meet the gradation requirements in Table 1, below.
Table 1
Fine Aaareaate Gradation Requirements
Sieve Size
Class 1
Percent Passing by
Weight
Class 2
Percent Passing by
Weight
3/8 Inch Square
100
100
U.S. No. 4
95 —100
95 —100
U.S. No. 8
68 — 86
Per manufacturer's recommendations
U.S. No. 16
47 — 65
45 — 80
U.S. No. 30
27 — 42
U.S. No. 50
9 — 20
10 — 30
U.S. No. 100
0-7
2-10
U.S. No. 200
0 — 2.5
0 — 2.5
c. Fly Ash: ASTM C 618, Type F.
d. Water: Free of any deleterious material, meeting the requirements of
ASTM C 94
2. Proportioning:
a. Proportioning shall be per Table 2, below.
Table 2
CDF Mixture
Item
Requirement
Portland Cement
50 pounds
Fine Aggregate, Class 1 or 2
3,300 pounds
Fly Ash
300 pounds
Water
300 pounds max.
Air Entrainment Admixture
Per manufacturer's recommendations
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 —12/27
EARTHWORK
4
B. Crushed Surfacing: Crushed surfacing shall be manufactured from ledge
rock, talus, or gravel.
1. The material shall be uniform in quality and substantially free from wood,
roots, bark, and other deleterious material, and shall meet the quality test
requirements in Table 3, below.
Table 3
Crushed Surfacing Quality Test Requirements
Item
Requirement
Los Angeles Wear, 500 Rev.
35% max.
Degradation Factor - Base Course
25 min.
Degradation Factor - Top Course
15 min.
2. Crushed surfacing shall meet the requirements of Table 4, below, for
quality and gradation.
Table 4
Crushed Surfacing Gradation ReQuirements
Sieve Size
Crushed Surfacing Base
Course (CSBC)
Percent Passing by
Weight
Crushed Surfacing Top
Course (CSTC)
Percent Passing by
Weight
1-1/4 Inch Square
100
1 Inch Square
80 -100
3/4 Inch Square
100
5/8 Inch Square
50 - 80
1/2 Inch Square
80 - 100
U.S. No. 4
25 - 45
46 - 66
U.S. No. 40
2 - 18
8 - 24
U.S. No. 200
7.5 max.
10.0 max.
% Fracture
75 min.
75 min.
Sand Equivalent
40 min.
40 min.
3. The fracture requirement shall be at least one (1) fractured face and shall
apply to the combined aggregate retained on the U.S. No. 4 sieve in
accordance with the field operating procedures for AASHTO TP 61.
4. The portion of crushed surfacing retained on a U.S. No. 4 sieve shall not
contain more than fifteen -hundredths (0.15) percent wood waste.
C. Embankment: Embankment shall be native glacial material, free from
Unsuitable Materials and shall have a maximum particle size of twelve (12)
inches in any direction.
1. Suitability of on-site excavated material or other materials to be used as
Embankment shall be as determined by the Project Representative in
accordance with the requirements of this Section.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 -13/27
EARTHWORK
2. Non -Native High Fines Fill Material is not suitable for use as
Embankment.
D. Gravel Backfill for Drains:
1. Gravel backfill for drains shall conform to the gradation requirements of
Table 5, below.
2. Alkali silica reactivity testing is not required for gravel backfill for drains.
Table 5
Gravel Backfill for Drains Gradation Requirements
Sieve Size
Percent Passing by Weight
1 Inch Square
100
3/4 Inch Square
80 — 100
3/8 Inch Square
10 — 40
U.S. No. 4
0 — 4
U.S. No. 200
0 — 2
E. Gravel Backfill for Foundations or Crushed Rock: Where standard details for
manholes and catch basins indicate use of gravel backfill for foundations or
crushed rock, pipe bedding shall be used in accordance with Paragraph
2.01H.
F. Gravel Borrow:
1. Gravel borrow shall be a granular material, essentially free from various
types of wood waste and other deleterious materials.
2. Gravel borrow shall conform to the gradation requirements of Table 6,
below.
Table 6
Gravel Borrow Gradation Requirements
Sieve Size
Percent Passing by Weight
4 Inch Square
100
2 Inch Square
75 —100
U.S. No. 4
50 — 80
U.S. No. 40
30.0 max.
U.S. No. 200
5.0 max.
Sand Equivalent
50 min.
G. Lightweight Backfill:
1. Lightweight backfill may consist of:
a. Bottom Ash: Bottom ash shall be a material resulting from the coal
burning process used to create electricity. Bottom ash is dark grey,
porous, and predominantly sand minus material with unit weights
ranging from 45 to 75 pcf;
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 —14/27
EARTHWORK
A
b. Volcanic Glass: Volcanic glass shall be a Tight weight volcanic glass
fill which is three quarters (3/4) inch minus material that achieves unit
weights ranging from 45 to 60 pcf at 23 percent moisture content;
c. Recycled Glass: Recycled glass may be used as fill with a unit weight
ranging from 70 to 120 pcf.
H. Pipe Bedding:
1. Pipe bedding shall be free from various types of wood waste or other
deleterious materials.
2. Pipe bedding outside of areas to receive pavement shall consist of
crushed, processed, or naturally occurring granular material. The
material shall meet the grading and quality requirements of Table 7,
below.
Table 7
Pipe Bedding (Non -Paved Areas) Gradation Requirements
Sieve Size
Percent Passing by Weight
1-1/2 Inch Square
100
1 Inch Square
75 — 100
5/8 Inch Square
50 — 100
U.S. No. 4
20 — 80
U.S. No. 40
3 — 24
U.S. No. 200
10.0 max.
Sand Equivalent
35 min.
3. Pipe bedding in areas to receive pavement shall consist of pea gravel.
Pea gravel for pipe zone bedding shall consist of screened, rounded sand
or gravel. It shall have such characteristics of size and shape that it will
compact readily and shall meet the gradation requirements in Table 8,
below.
Table 8
Pipe Bedding (Paved Areas) Grading Requirements
Sieve Size
Percent Passing by Weight
3/4 Inch Square
100
3/8 Inch Square
80
—100
U.S. No. 8
0
—10
U.S. No. 200
3.0 max.
4. On-site excavated granular material free from wood waste, organic
material, and other deleterious materials, not otherwise conforming to
Table 7 may be used for pipe bedding for rigid pipes outside of areas to
receive pavement, provided the granular material has a maximum
dimension of one and one-half (1.5) inches and subject to written
acceptance of the Project Representative in advance.
I. Quarry Spalls:
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 —15/27
EARTHWORK
1. Quarry Spalls shall consist of broken stone or broken concrete rubble and
shall be free from segregation, seams, cracks, and other defects.
2. Quarry SpaIls shall meet the grading requirements in Table 9, below.
Table 9
Quarry Spalls Grading Requirements
Sieve Size
Percent Passing by Weight
8 Inch Square
100
3 Inch Square
40 max.
3/4 Inch Square
10 max.
J. Sand: Sand shall conform to the gradation requirements of Table 10, below.
Table 10
Sand Gradation Requirements
Sieve Size
Percent Passing by Weight
1/2 Inch Square
90
- 100
U.S. No. 4
57
- 100
U.S. No. 10
40
-100
U.S. No. 50
3
- 30
U.S. No. 100
0 - 4
U.S. No. 200
0 - 3.0
K. Topsoil: Topsoil shall be in accordance with Section 02910 - Landscaping.
2.02 SOURCE QUALITY CONTROL
A. The Contractor shall develop, manage, implement, adjust and continuously
monitor quality control at the source of materials to be incorporated into the
Work of this Project.
B. The Contractor shall insure, by means of testing and inspections, that the
materials delivered to the Project Site comply with the gradations and
material specifications indicated in this Section.
1. Sampling of the material source shall be performed by the Contractor in
accordance with ASTM D75.
2. The following materials shall be sampled and tested for gradation per
ASTM D422 at a minimum of one (1) per source.
a. CSBC.
b. CSTC.
c. Gravel backfill for drains.
d. Pipe bedding (pea gravel)
3. Gravel borrow shall be sampled and tested for gradation per ASTM D422
at a minimum of one (1) per source, or one (1) per four -thousand (4,000)
cubic yards from one (1) source.
C00272C08 §02300 —16/27
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 EARTHWORK
}
4. Do not unload material at the Project Site that has not been determined in
advance by the Project Representative to be Suitable Material in
accordance with the requirements of this Section.
C. Employ a qualified testing and inspection service to provide the necessary
quality control testing at the source.
1. The Contractor's testing and inspections subcontractor shall not be the
same as any firm employed by the Owner in the capacity of performing
testing and inspections for this Project.
D. The Contractor's testing and inspections shall be conducted in accordance
with the standards and methods identified in this Section.
E. Submit source quality control testing and inspection paperwork to the Project
Representative not Tess than 48 hours in advance of earliest proposed
delivery.
1. Gradation Analysis: Show conformance of proposed material to the
requirements of this Section.
2. Samples:
a. Samples shall be representative of the source pit.
b. Provide a one-half (0.5) cubic foot clear polyethylene bag of each
material proposed for use in accordance with the requirements of this
Section.
3. Renewal Procedure:
a. Utilize the following renewal procedure for Import Material previously
determined to be Suitable Material:
b. In order to employ this renewal procedure, the following conditions
shall be met:
1. Proposed Import Materials shall be from the exact same
source and pit vicinity that have been previously determined to
be suitable by the Project Representative in consultation with
the Owners testing and inspection service; AND
2. No prior rejections of material from that source and pit vicinity
shall have occurred.
c. Gradation Analysis: Show conformance of proposed material to the
requirements of this Section.
d. Samples:
1. Samples shall be representative of the source pit.
2. Provide renewal samples only when directed to do so by the
Project Representative.
C00272C08 §02300 —17/27
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 EARTHWORK
PART 3 — EXECUTION
3.01 PREPARATION
A. Prior to the beginning of construction, verify all lines, limits, grades, and
survey controls. Provide grade control in accordance with Section 01432 —
Surveying.
B. Locate existing utilities and provide protection where necessary.
C. Shoring shall be provided as required in Section 02250 — Trench Safety
Systems.
D. Clearing and grubbing shall be provided in accordance with Section 02230 —
Site Clearing.
E. All excavation is unclassified and includes excavation to elevations indicated,
regardless of character of materials and obstructions encountered.
F. Unauthorized excavation, as well as remedial work directed by Project
Representative, shall be at Contractor's expense. Backfill and compact
unauthorized excavation as specified for authorized excavations, unless
otherwise directed by Project Representative.
G. Excavated material not otherwise classified by Project Representative as
Refuse, Burn Fill or Non -Native High Fines Content Fill Material, may contain
oversize material and debris unsuitable for placement as Embankment.
Contractor should expect that some processing (screening, sifting, sorting,
etc.) of excavated material may be required to remove these unsuitable
elements. Unsuitable elements removed from excavation materials shall be
hauled off-site and disposed of by Contractor at its own expense.
H. Protect excavations from surface water run-on and erosion.
3.02 CONSTRUCTION
A. Excavation:
1. Should the Contractor excavate beyond the Neat Line without prior
permission from the Project Representative, Contractor shall replace such
excavation with Suitable Materials, in a satisfactory manner and
condition, without additional cost to the Owner.
2. The Project Representative shall have complete control over utilization of
all excavated material and shall be the final authority in determining the
suitability of excavated material to be used as Embankment, backfill,
placed in permanent stockpile, or hauled off-site.
3. Excavation of every description, classification, and of whatever
substances encountered within the Neat Line shall be performed to the
lines and grades indicated on the Drawings.
4. Excavation into Refuse and Burn Fill shall be required. Contractor shall
take appropriate health and safety measures in accordance with Section
01350 — Health and Safety to protect all personnel from the hazards
associated with excavation in a landfill.
5. Contractor shall transport and place suitable excavated materials in the fill
areas or in stockpiles within the limits of the work to the dimensions
C00272C08 §02300 —18/27
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 EARTHWORK
shown on the Drawings and as directed by the Project Representative.
Excavated material that qualifies as Non -Native High Fines Content Fill
Material, Refuse, Burn Fill, CDL, Hazardous Material, or is in excess to
the available space for Embankment, east of the existing facility, shall be
disposed of off-site by the Contractor, unless directed otherwise by the
Project Representative.
6. Contractor shall perform excavation in a manner which minimizes the
mixing of material types that require different handling and disposal
criteria.
7. During the process of excavation, the Contractor shall maintain the
Project Site in such condition that it shall be drained at all times and
install temporary drains and drainage ditches to intercept or direct surface
water which may adversely affect the condition of the Work.
8. Conditions of excessive moisture may require that the Contractor
temporarily suspend operations until drying weather permits use of the
material or the materials are drained or aerated to optimum moisture
content.
a. Embankment is weather sensitive and will be more difficult to
excavate, Toad, haul, and place during wet weather.
b. Contractor shall �rQibe 'entitled toadditionaleorn ensat�orna fog -the
suSpeRslo�nAWD k„associatedtwe 0sslYA. 9.1*- re Pint o;ts �-
9. Excavation of Unsuitable Materials: In cases where Unsuitable Material
such as mud, muck, or highly organic material is encountered within the
limits of the work, the Project Representative may direct the subgrade to
be excavated below the Neat Line shown on the Drawings and replaced
with suitable material. Excavation and replacement with Suitable
Materials shall only be performed where directed in writing by the Project
Representative.
10. Excavated slopes shall not exceed:
a. One (1) horizontal to one (1) vertical for excavation within Refuse and
native glacial deposits;
b. One and three-quarters (1.75) horizontal to one (1) vertical for
excavation within Burn Fill; and
c. One and one-half (1.5) horizontal to one (1) vertical for excavation
within Non -Native High Fines Content Material.
B. Export Material Excavation, Haul, and Disposal:
1. During excavation, the Project Representative shall determine type of
material being excavated. Contractor shall be responsible for excavation,
haul, and disposal of Refuse, Burn Fill, Non -Native High Fines Content
Fill Material, and potentially Hazardous Materials encountered. Material
handling shall be controlled per the Public Health Seattle and King
County (PHSKC) Requirements Concerning Excavation/Construction at
Closed Landfills and the approved Environmental Protection Plan for the
Project.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 —19/27
EARTHWORK
2. Refuse and Bum Fill shall be disposed of at CHRL at the active face of
the landfill. Disposal process shall be coordinated with the Project
Representative, so as to not interfere with landfill operations or other
CHRL contractor activity. Refuse and Bum Fill shall be disposed of as
landfill daily cover or as landfill refuse, at the direction of landfill
operations staff.
3. Potentially Hazardous Material shall include material that may have been
contaminated with petroleum products and other chemicals in quantity or
character not typical of Refuse or Burn Fill. Indications may include
staining, coloration, odor, and chemical storage drums. Potentially
Hazardous Material shall be identified by the Project Representative and
stockpiled on-site at a location designated by the Project Representative
or otherwise contained per the direction of the Project Representative.
Potentially Hazardous Material shall be tested by the Project
Representative to determine a suitable disposal process. Final disposal
locations for potentially Hazardous Material shall be appropriately
permitted facilities.
4. Any material identified by the Project Representative as Hazardous
Material or Dangerous Waste shall be handled in accordance with state
and federal requirements and Section 02130 — Removal of Hazardous
Materials and Dangerous Waste.
5. Limit exposed Refuse and Bum Fill to an area that can be covered with
daily or permanent cover at the end of each working day. Daily Cover
shall be applied in accordance with Section 01500 — Temporary Facilities
and Controls.
6. Refuse, Bum Fill, and potentially Hazardous Material hauling equipment
shall be thoroughly cleaned prior to that equipment being used to haul a
different material type. Hauling equipment type shall ensure no Toss of
material or leachate during loading and transport.
7. Existing Fill and surplus Embankment may be hauled to and disposed of
at CHRL, or at an alternative facility as acceptable to the Project
Representative.
a. If disposed of at CHRL, this material shall be disposed of at locations
as directed by the landfill operations staff.
8. Material not meeting the CHRL disposal criteria shall be hauled to an
approved off-site waste disposal site, secured by the Contractor, and
shall be disposed of in such a manner as to meet the requirements of
state, county, and municipal regulations regarding health, safety, and
public welfare.
C. Over -excavation:
1. Over -excavation below the Neat Line elevations indicated on the
Drawings shall be with the approval of the Project Representative.
2. Over -excavated material shall be replaced with gravel borrow,
Embankment, quarry spalls and/or Geotextile — Type A, at the direction of
the Project Representative, placed as specified herein.
000272008 §02300 — 20/27
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 EARTHWORK
3. Over -excavation to prepare subgrade shall not exceed two (feet) in road
sections and eighteen (18) inches in utility trenches, unless directed
otherwise by the Project Representative.
D. Fill:
1. Subgrade Preparation:
a. Clear, grub and strip areas to received Fill as specified in Section
02230 — Site Clearing.
b. Bench existing slope areas that are to receive Fill as shown on the
Drawings.
c. Proof -roll surface with minimum ten (10) ton roller equipment, or other
equipment approved by the Project Representative to detect soft
areas.
1. Where equipment access constraints exist, subgrade probing
may be employed to detect soft areas, subject to approval by
the Project Representative.
d. Over -excavate and Backfill soft areas with compacted Embankment
or gravel borrow. Backfill material shall be as directed by the Project
Representative.
e. Compact Subgrade as specified in Article 3.05.
f. The Project Representative shall approve Subgrade prior to filling.
2. Placement of Fills:
a. Place Fill at the locations and to the lines and grades indicated on the
Drawings using specified materials.
b. Fill material shall not be placed over wet, frozen, or unsuitable
Subgrade.
c. Place Fill in continuous horizontal layers, not exceeding eight (8) inch
loose thickness between compaction cycles. Thinner lifts may be
required to achieve compaction requirements.
d. Moisture condition and compact materials to achieve the requirements
of this Section. Fill material moisture content shall be maintained
within three (3) percent of the optimum moisture content.
e. Compaction within five (5) feet of structures shall be performed with
hand operated equipment.
f. The required number of passes should be determined in the field by
means of tests on small experimental embankments. It shall be a
minimum of 6 passes of the roller.
Fill slopes shall be over constructed and trimmed to final grade.
g.
E. Stockpile:
1. Contractor may create temporary stockpile areas on the Project Site at
locations designated by the Contractor and approved by the Project
Representative to facilitate Contractor's work sequence.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 — 21/27
EARTHWORK
2. Locate temporary stockpile areas so as not to interfere with the surface
water drainage system.
3. Stockpiles shall not exceed twelve (12) feet in height, or have side slopes
steeper than one (1) horizontal to one (1) vertical, and shall be protected
from erosion using specified temporary erosion and sediment control
measures specified in Section 02370 — Erosion and Sedimentation
Controls.
4. Clear, grub and strip stockpile areas as specified in Section 02230 — Site
Clearing.
5. Spread stockpiled soil in loose lifts not exceeding twelve (12) inches thick
and compacted to the density specified in Article 3.05.
6. Different material types shall be segregated into different stockpiles to
prevent cross contamination.
F. Surface Water Vault Earthwork:
1. Excavate to provide Subgrade at the elevations and grades shown on the
Drawings.
2. Prepare Subgrade per Paragraph 3.02.D.
3. Place crushed surfacing top course (CSTC) layers over finished
Subgrade and compact as specified hereafter.
G. Grading:
1. Grading shall produce uniform grades or slopes between spot elevations
or contours shown on the Drawings. Blend graded areas into existing
surfaces.
2. Surfaces shall be proof -rolled with a fully loaded (ten (10) cubic yard
minimum) dump truck, ten (10 ton) roller, or probing as conditions dictate.
Proof -rolling shall be employed to check the Subgrade condition for
identification of soft/unstable and Unsuitable Material areas by the Project
Representative. Subgrade preparation shall be done with the Subgrade in
a suitable moisture condition that shall not create unnecessary Subgrade
softening or stability problems.
3. As directed by the Project Representative, provide additional compaction
or remove unsuitable Subgrade materials and replace with gravel borrow,
Embankment, quarry spalls, and/or Geotextile — Type A.
4. Repair of any damage to Subgrade caused by Contractor's construction
operations shall be the responsibility of the Contractor.
a. Such damage includes deforming, rutting, softening or otherwise
destabilizing the Subgrade caused by hauling vehicles or other
operations, failure to maintain TESC measures, or failure to construct
and maintain temporary drainage system features.
b. Contractor shall regrade, or otherwise repair damaged Subgrade
areas to the satisfaction of the Project Representative.
1. Such repair may include removal and replacement of Unstable
Material, or placement of Geotextile — Type A.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 — 22/27
EARTHWORK
5. Moisture condition and compact Subgrade to the specified density with
heavy compactor equipment.
6. Within five (5) feet of structures, compact by hand operated vibratory
equipment.
7. Subgrade that is damaged or becomes unstable due to Contractor's
continued use of haul equipment shall be repaired at Contractor's
expense.
H. Structural Earthwork:
1. Excavate to the depths shown on the Drawings for structural components
of work such as gravity retaining walls.
2. It is Contractor's responsibility to coordinate and provide excavation
support as required to perform the work accounting for existing structures
and other work.
3. Extend excavations laterally a minimum of two (2) feet from walls and
footings, at base level, to allow clearance for observation and formwork.
4. Proof -roll Subgrade under foundation and slab areas with a fully loaded
dump (ten (10) cubic yard minimum) truck, space and access permitting,
to locate unsuitable Subgrade materials. Probing of confined subgrade
areas may be employed to detect soft spots and unsuitable materials, as
approved by the Project Representative.
5. As directed by the Project Representative, remove unsuitable foundation
materials and replace with compacted gravel borrow.
6. Foundation materials allowed to become unsuitable by Contractor
construction operations shall be repaired at Contractor's expense in a
method agreed to by the Project Representative.
7. All foundation surfaces shall be approved by the Project Representative
prior to placing reinforcement.
8. Backfill materials around structures shall be gravel borrow.
9. Prior to backfilling, remove forms and clean excavation of trash and
debris.
10. Do not place backfill until structure and other buried work has been
observed and approved by the Project Representative.
11. If concrete is installed, do not backfill until concrete has reached a
compressive strength of three thousand (3,000) psi.
12. Place moisture conditioned backfill in horizontal lifts not exceeding eight
(8) inch loose lifts. Compact to specified density. Raise Backfill evenly
around structures.
13. Within five (5) feet of earth retaining structures, use hand operated
vibratory compactors. Do not use heavy equipment or hydraulic hoepacs
within this distance. It may be necessary to reduce lift depths in this area
to meet compaction requirements.
I. Utility Trenching and Backfill
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 — 23/27
EARTHWORK
1. Perform trench excavation by open cut.
2. Sawcut and remove asphalt pavement and treated base as required.
3. In areas which allow reuse of native material for backfill, temporarily
stockpile material in an orderly manner a safe distance (at least equal to
the trench depth) from the trench.
a. Materials that shall not be used for Backfill shall be classified by the
Project Representative and handled accordingly by the Contractor.
4. Comply with regulatory requirements for trench safety as specified in
Section 02250 — Trench Safety Systems.
5. Excavate the bottom of the trench to the lines and grades shown on the
Drawings with allowance for pipe thickness and bedding.
a. Minimum trench widths for pipes for surface water drainage, water,
and wastewater shall be as follows:
1. For pipes 15 inches and under, trench width = I.D. +
30 inches. Pipe centered in trench.
2. For pipes 18 inches and over, trench width = (1.5 x I.D.) +
18 inches. Pipe centered in trench.
6. Remove rocks and cobbles larger than three (3) inches in maximum
dimension from the trench bottom.
7. Where in the opinion of the Project Representative, the undisturbed
condition of the trench bottom is not adequate for support of the utility,
stabilize the trench bottom as directed. Stabilization may consist of
removal and replacement of Unsuitable Material and/or placement of
Geotextile — Type A. Payment shall not be made for inadequate
foundation conditions that are caused by Contractor's failure to provide
adequate protection for trench foundations.
a. Trench bottoms scarified by excavation process shall be compacted
to minimum density requirements of this Section.
8. Place bedding on approved trench bottom to a depth shown on the
Drawings.
a. Place bedding before pipe or conduit is installed.
b. Spread bedding so that the pipe is uniformly supported along the
barrel. This includes digging for support of pipe bells.
c. Do not use blocking to adjust the pipe to grade.
9. Compact bedding to specified density.
10. After pipe or conduit has been properly laid and inspected, place and
compact bedding around pipe to springline. Bring lifts up together on
both sides of pipe or conduit and work the initial backfill under the
haunches by means of a shovel, haunch tool, vibration, or other approved
method.
a. Incorporate landfill gas migration stops as shown on the Drawings.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 — 24/27
EARTHWORK
11. Continue placing bedding to a depth over the pipe shown on the
Drawings. Place in lifts not exceeding eight (8) inches loose depth.
Compact with hand held vibratory compactors to the specified density.
12. Subsequent backfill shall be specified material as shown on the
Drawings. Place in a maximum of eight (8) inch loose lifts and compact
to the specified density. Use hand held vibratory compactors for depths
less than two (2) feet clear over the pipe.
13. Gravel borrow, meeting this specification and with the approval of the
Project Representative, may be substituted for backfill over pipe in
particular locations.
14. On-site excavated materials may be used as backfill over pipe with the
approval of the Project Representative. On-site materials to be used as
backfill over pipe shall not have any pieces greater than 4 -inches across
and no wood or wood waste, organic material, or other deleterious
material.
15. Lightweight backfill shall be used as backfill in trenches excavated
through Refuse. The lightweight backfill material type shall be selected
based on the material density characteristics. Lightweight backfill used
shall have an approximate density equal to the localized excavated trench
material. Excavated trench material may vary due to the ratio of soil and
refuse from the excavation.
16. Manholes and Catch Basins
a. Manholes, catch basins, and inlets shall be constructed on a
compacted or undisturbed level foundation.
b. During insertion of the tongue or spigot, the units shall be partially
supported to minimize unequal lateral pressure on the gasket and to
maintain concentricity until the gasket is properly positioned.
c. Bedding shall be pipe bedding. A minimum of six (6) inches of
compacted bedding shall be placed below the structure. Bedding
shall extend a minimum twelve (12) inches above the vertical outside
edge of the structure base.
d. Backfill shall be gravel borrow, installed in accordance with Paragraph
3.02H of this Section.
J. Disposal of Excess Soil and Waste Materials:
1. All excess soil and waste material shall be disposed of off-site at
approved disposal sites.
3.03 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL
A. The Project Representative shall perform quality control testing and
inspections as necessary to ensure that quality requirements are met.
B. Testing shall include compaction density testing of compacted Subgrade, Fill
and Backfill in accordance with ASTM 6938 to ensure compliance with the
compaction densities specified herein.
C. Contractor may independently perform field inspection and testing as a check
of the quality of the work.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 — 25/27
EARTHWORK
D. If field tests indicate work does not meet the specified compaction
requirement, remove and replace or recompact.
E. Frequency of field compaction tests: Owner shall perform field tests as
necessary to assure compliance with this Section and not Tess frequently than
indicated in Table 13, below.
1. Coordination and scheduling for testing shall be arranged at the Weekly
Construction Meeting.
Table 13
Minimum Frequency of Compaction Testing
Material/Location
Test Frequency
Notes
Embankment
One test every 10,000
square feet per lift
One test per 100 feet for
narrow (50 feet or less)
strips
Trench Subgrade
One test every 100 feet
At least one test for shorter
trenches
Trench Bedding/Backfill
One test every 100 feet per
every second lift
At least one test per every
second lift for shorter
trenches
Subgrade for Structures
One test every 5,000
square feet per lift
At least one test per lift for
smaller structures
Fill/Backfill for Structures
One test every 2,500
square feet per lift
Narrow backfill areas
behind walls at every
20 lineal feet per every third
lift
Subgrade for Roadways
One test every 100 feet
One additional test in poor
subgrade areas
Subbase and Base
Courses for Roadways
One test every 100 feet per
lift
At least one test per lift for
shorter roadways
Gravel Borrow
One test every 50 feet of
wall length per geogrid lift
At least one test per
geogrid lift for shorter wall
lengths
3.04 PROTECTION
A. Protect existing and new structures, utilities, pavements, and other facilities
from damage caused by compaction, settlement, lateral movement,
undermining, washout, and other hazards created by Earthwork operations.
3.05 COMPACTION SCHEDULE
A. Earthwork material compaction shall meet the following criteria. All
compaction densities are based on maximum density as determined by
ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor).
B. Subgrade of Over -excavation areas: Proof -roll areas; ninety (90) percent
compaction.
C. Subgrade:
1. Ninety (90) percent for Embankment fill areas and landscape areas.
C00272C08
§02300 — 26/27
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 EARTHWORK
2. Ninety-two (92) percent for utility trench.
3. Ninety-five (95) percent for areas to receive pavement or structures
including vaults.
D. Embankment: Ninety (90) percent.
E. Gravel borrow: Ninety-five (95) percent.
F. Crushed Surfacing Base Course and Top Course: Ninety-five (95) percent.
G. Utility Trench and Surface Water Vault bedding and Backfill: Ninety-two (92)
percent.
END OF SECTION 02300
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§02300 — 27/27
EARTHWORK
SECTION 02465
SOLDIER PILES
PART 1 — GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A. Section Includes:
1. Soldier Piles for Walls A, C, and D.
2. Drilling, Steel Piles, Backfill Concrete, Lagging and Tie -Backs.
1.02 RELATED SECTIONS
A. Section 02070 — Geosynthetics.
B. Section 03300 — Cast -in -Place Concrete.
C. Section 03310 — Shotcrete.
1.03 REFERENCES
A. Comply with the requirements of Section 01095 — Reference Standards and
as listed herein. The following is a list of standards referenced in this
Section.
1. American Welding Society (AWS):
a. AWS D1.4 (2005; Errata 2005) Structural Welding Code - Reinforcing
Steel.
2. American Society for Testing and Materials International (ASTM):
a. ASTM A 36 Standard Specification for Carbon Structural Steel
b. ASTM A 53/A 53M (2006a) Standard Specification for Pipe, Steel,
Black and Hot -Dipped, Zinc -Coated, Welded and Seamless.
c. ASTM A 108 (2007) Standard Specification for Steel Bar, Carbon and
Alloy, Cold -Finished
d. ASTM A 123 (2001) Standard Specification for Zinc (Hot -Dip
Galvanized) Coatings on Iron and Steel Products
e. ASTM A 321 (2001) Standard Specification for Steel Bars, Carbon,
Quenched and Tempered (Withdrawn 2007)
f. ASTM A 500 Standard Specification (2007) Standard Specification for
Cold -Formed Welded and Seamless Carbon Steel Structural Tubing
in Rounds and Shapes
ASTM A 563 (2004) Standard Specification for Carbon and Alloy Steel
Nuts
g.
h. ASTM A 572 (2002) Standard Specification for High -Strength Low -
Alloy Columbium -Vanadium Structural Steel
i. ASTM A 615/A 615M (2007) Standard Specification for Deformed and
Plain Carbon -Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement.
J.
ASTM A 675/A 675M (2003e1) Standard Specification for Steel Bars,
Carbon, Hot -Wrought, Special Quality, Mechanical Properties.
C00272C08 §02465 —1/7
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 SOLDIER PILES
3. American Wood Preservers' Association (AWPA):
a. U-1 (2007) Use Category System: User Specification for Treated
Wood.
b. T-1 (2007) Use Category System: Processing and Treatment
Standard.
4. Steel Structures Painting Council (SSPC):
a. SSPC Surface Preparation Standard.
1.04 SUBMITTALS
A. General: Submit the following in accordance with Section 00700 — General
Terms and Conditions, Article 4.4 — Submittals, and Section 01330 —
Submittal Procedures:
B. Concrete mix for piles: See Section 03300 — Cast -in -Place Concrete for
Concrete Mix submittal requirements.
C. Fabrication drawings for steel piles.
D. Fabrication and material details for tie -backs.
E. Timber lagging information.
F. Coating system information.
G. Shaft Installation Plan describing the Contractor's equipment, methods and
procedures for placing the soldier piles including tremie methods and any
special provisions that will be used when encountering obstructions, caving
soils, ground water or other conditions that might affect the Work.
1.05 DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND HANDLING
A. Comply with Section 01600 — Product Requirements.
B. Structural steel, metal fabrications and timber lagging shall be stored off the
ground on platforms, skids, or other supports.
1.06 PROJECT CONDITIONS
A. See Section 01100 — Summary of Work for reference to Geotechnical
Information as Available Information about subgrade conditions.
B. Site conditions as reported in the Geotechnical Information indicate that
caving of drill holes is likely to occur. Therefore, Contractor shall use
construction methods to prevent caving, such as casing the holes or filling the
holes with chemical drilling mud.
C. Site conditions as reported in the Geotechnical Information indicate that
ground water will likely be encountered. Contractor shall use tremie methods
for pile backfill concrete.
PART 2 — PRODUCTS
2.01 MATERIALS
A. Structural Steel for Piles:
1. ASTM A 572, Grade 50 or ASTM A992.
C00272C08 §02465 — 217
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 SOLDIER PILES
B. Bars and Plates:
1. ASTM A 36.
C. Concrete:
1. Lean Concrete as described in Section 03300 - Cast -in -Place Concrete.
D. Steel Pipe:
1. ASTM A 53, Grade B or ASTM A 500, Grade B or C.
E. Lagging:
1. Hem -fir #1 or better, rough sawn.
a. Refer to Section 01800 — Sustainable Construction for requirement for
use of certified wood for timber lagging.
2. Preservative treated, Pressure treated:
a. AWPA Use Category UC4B per AWPA U-1.
b. Retention per AWPA T-1
1) ACZA: 0.40 pcf.
2) CCA Type A or Type C: 0.40 pcf.
F. Sand (to fill void behind Lagging):
1. Fine aggregate for concrete, see Section 03300 — Cast -in -Place
Concrete.
G. Tie -back Rods:
1. ASTM A 321, Grade 70 or ASTM A 615, Grade 60.
2. Nuts, ASTM A 563, Heavy Hex
H. Headed Studs:
1. ASTM A 108
2. Manufacturers:
a. Nelson,
b. Midwest Fasteners, Inc, or
c. Approved Equal.
I. Coating for Piling:
1. As specified in Paragraph 2.03 of this Section.
2.02 FABRICATION
A. All fabrication shall be performed in the shop.
B. Welding shall comply with AWS Code for procedures, appearance and quality
of welds.
C. Shear connectors (headed studs): Prepare steel surfaces as recommended
by manufacturer of shear connectors. Weld shear connectors using automatic
welding equipment recommended by the shear connector manufacturer.
C00272C08 §02465 — 3/7
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 SOLDIER PILES
D. All holes for tie -back anchors shall be shop drilled.
2.03 SHOP COATING
A. Soldier piles shall be shop coated following fabrication with the following
surface preparation and coating materials.
1. Surface preparation: SSPC SP6 Commercial Blast Cleaning.
2. Primer: Zinc Rich Urethane, Tnemec Series 90-97 or approved equal,
applied at 2.5 to 3.5 mils DFT.
3. Finish Coat: High Solids Epoxy, Tnemec Series 141 PotaPox 80 or
approved equal, applied at 10 to 12 mils DFT.
B. Tie -back rods shall be hot dip galvanized in accordance with ASTM A 123,
coating grade 100.
C. Coatings damaged during delivery and handling shall be repaired prior to
installation using procedures and materials recommended by the coating
manufacturer.
PART 3 — EXECUTION
3.01 SHAFT EXCAVATION
A. Shafts shall be excavated to the required depth as shown in the Drawings.
The minimum diameter of the shaft shall be as shown in the Drawings.
B. The excavation shall be completed in a continuous operation using
equipment capable of excavating through the type of material expected to be
encountered, as identified in the Appendix C of the Specifications.
C. The Contractor may use temporary telescoping casing to construct the shafts.
D. If the shaft excavation is stopped, the shaft shall be secured by installation of
a safety cover.
E. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to ensure the safety of the shaft and
surrounding soil and the stability of the sidewalls.
F. A temporary casing, slurry, or other methods specified in the Shaft Installation
Plan, as reviewed and commented on by the Project Representative, shall be
used if necessary to ensure such safety and stability.
G. Where caving in conditions are encountered, no further excavation will be
allowed until the Contractor has implemented the method to prevent ground
caving as submitted in accordance with the Shaft Installation Plan and as
approved by the Project Representative.
H. No more than two (2) inches of loose or disturbed material, for solider piles
with permanent ground anchors (tie -backs), nor more than twelve (12) inches
of loose or disturbed material, for solider piles without permanent ground
anchors, shall be present at the bottom of the shaft just prior to beginning
concrete placement.
I. The excavation shaft shall be inspected by the Project Representative prior to
proceeding with construction.
C00272C08 §02465 — 4/7
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 SOLDIER PILES
J. Obstructions: When obstructions are encountered, the Contractor shall
promptly notify the Project Representative.
1. An obstruction is defined as a specific object (including, but not limited to,
boulders, logs, and man made objects) encountered during the shaft
excavation operation that prevents or hinders the advance of the shaft
excavation.
2. When efforts to advance past the obstruction to the design shaft tip
elevation result in the rate of advance of the shaft drilling equipment being
significantly reduced relative to the rate of advance for the prior shaft
excavation, then the Contractor shall attempt drill through, or if that fails,
remove the obstruction.
3. The methods of drilling through and removal of such obstructions and the
continuation of excavation shall be as proposed by the Contractor and
reviewed by the Project Representative.
4. If the Contractor is unable to drill through, and then is unable to remove
the obstruction, two piles will be installed, one on either side of the
obstruction.
a. The locations of the two replacement piles shall be reviewed and
approved by the Project Representative.
K. Excavation of shafts shall not commence until a minimum of twelve (12)
hours after the shaft backfill for adjacent shafts has been placed.
L. The temporary casings for the shafts shall be removed.
1. A minimum five (5) foot head of concrete shall be maintained to balance
the soil and water pressure at the bottom of the casing.
2. The casing shall be smooth.
3.02 INSTALLING SOLDIER PILES
A. Soldier piles shall be full length with no field splices.
B. The prefabricated steel soldier piles shall be lowered into the drilled shafts
and secured in position.
3.03 BACKFILLING SHAFT
A. The excavated shaft shall be backfilled with lean concrete as shown in the
Drawings.
B. Placement of the shaft backfill shall commence immediately after completing
the shaft excavation and receiving the Project Representative's approval of
the excavation and placing of the pile.
C. Lean concrete as specified in Section 03300 — Cast -in -Place Concrete shall
be placed in one continuous operation to the elevation shown in the
Drawings. Vibration of shaft backfill is not required.
D. If water is not present, the shaft backfill shall be deposited by a method that
prevents segregation of aggregates.
C00272C08 §02465 — 5/7
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 SOLDIER PILES
1. The shaft backfill shall be placed such that the free-fall is vertical down
the shaft without hitting the sides of the solider pile or the excavated
shaft.
2. The Contractor's method for depositing the shaft backfill shall be
reviewed by the Project Representative prior to the placement of the shaft
backfill.
E. If water is present, the shaft backfill shall be deposited by tremie methods
reviewed by the Project Representative prior to placement of the shaft
backfill.
3.04 TOLERANCES
A. Soldier piles shall be installed to within one (1) inch of the designed horizontal
alignment.
B. Soldier piles shall be plumb to within one-half (1/2) of one (1) percent.
C. Top of steel soldier piles shall be cut off to within one (1) inch of designed
elevation.
3.05 INSTALLING TIMBER LAGGING
A. The excavation and removal of lean concrete for the lagging installation shall
proceed in advance of the lagging.
B. The bottom of the excavation shall be not more than three feet below the
bottom level of the timber lagging already installed.
1. For sections of wall in excavation, the lagging shall be installed from the
top of the pile proceeding downward.
C. The timber lagging shall make direct contact with the soil.
1. Fill voids with sand.
D. Where timber lagging and backfill are above the existing or excavated ground
line, the lagging and backfill shall be placed concurrently.
3.06 INSTALLING TIE-ROD ANCHORS
A. Backfill soldier pile wall no higher than the maximum elevation above the tie-
rod indicated on the Drawings. This allows the tie-rod to be placed in a trench
if preferred by the Contractor.
B. Excavate for tie-rod and anchor wall.
C. After anchor wall has reached a minimum strength of three thousand (3,000)
psi, backfill anchor wall to elevation of tie-rod and slightly tighten anchor rod
nuts to the torque indicated on the Drawings. Monitor anchor wall for
movement. If any movement occurs discontinue tightening.
D. Coat exposed nut and threads of tie-rod at anchor wall end with two (2) coats
of galvanizing repair paint, five (5) mils each coat.
E. Backfill anchor wall to final grade but keep any backfill a minimum ten (10)
feet from soil side of soldier pile.
F. Tighten soldier pile end of tie-rod to the torque indicated on the Drawings.
G. Complete backfill to final grade.
C00272C08 §02465 — 6/7
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 SOLDIER PILES
3.07 CONCRETE FACING
A. Refer to Section 03300 - Cast -in -Place Concrete and Section 03310 -
Shotcrete for concrete facing work.
END OF SECTION 02465
C00272C08 §02465 - 7/7
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 SOLDIER PILES
SECTION 03300
CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
PART 1 — GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A. Section includes the following:
1. Specifies cast -in-place (CIP) concrete, including formwork, reinforcing,
mix design, placement procedures, and finishes.
2. Non -shrink grout.
1.02 RELATED SECTIONS
A. Section 03310 — Shotcrete.
1.03 SUBMITTALS
A. General: Submit the following in accordance with Section 00700 — General
Terms and Conditions, Article 4.4 — Submittals, and Section 01330 —
Submittal Procedures:
1. Product data for proprietary materials and items, including reinforcement
and forming accessories, admixtures, patching compounds, joint systems,
curing, sealing and hardening compounds, and others as requested by
Project Representative.
2. Shop drawings for reinforcement shall be prepared for fabrication,
bending, and placement of concrete reinforcement. Comply with ACI SP
66 (04), "ACI Detailing Manual," showing bar schedules, stirrup spacing,
diagrams of bent bars, and arrangement of concrete reinforcement.
Include special reinforcement required for openings through concrete
structures.
3. Shop drawings for formwork for specific finished concrete surfaces.
Show form construction including jointing, special form joint or reveals,
location and pattern of form tie placement, and other items that affect
exposed concrete visually.
a. Submit drawings showing formwork for all above grade exterior final
surfaces.
b. Project Representative's review of formwork drawings is for general
architectural applications and features only. Design of formwork for
structural stability and efficiency is Contractor's responsibility.
4. Samples of materials as requested by Project Representative, including
names, sources, and descriptions, as follows:
a. Normal weight aggregates.
5. Laboratory test reports for concrete materials and mix design tests and
for aggregate alkali -silica reactivity quality assurance.
C00272C08 §03300 —1/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
1.04 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. Codes and Standards: Comply with provisions of specified codes,
specifications, and standards, except where more stringent requirements are
shown or specified.
B. Contractor's Concrete Source Testing Service: Engage a testing laboratory
acceptable to Project Representative to perform material evaluation tests and
to design concrete mixes.
C. Field Testing: Materials and installed Work may require testing and retesting
at any time during progress of Work. Initial tests shall be performed by the
Owner. Retesting of rejected materials for installed Work, shall be done by
the Owner at Contractor's expense and will be deducted from Progress
Payment.
1. The Contractor shall assist and provide incidental facilities and labor as
may be necessary for obtaining test samples.
1.05 REFERENCES
A. Comply with the requirements of Section 01095 - Reference Standards and
as listed herein. The following is a list of standards referenced in this
Section.
B. American Concrete Institute (ACI):
1. ACI SP 66 (04), "ACI Detailing Manual,"
2. ACI 117, Standard Specifications for Tolerances for Concrete
Construction and Materials.
3. ACI 211, Standard Practices for Selecting Proportions for Normal,
Heavyweight, and Mass Concrete.
4. ACI 301, Specifications for Structural Concrete.
5. ACI 304, Recommended Practice for Measuring, Mixing, Transporting,
and Placing Concrete.
6. ACI 305, Hot Weather Concreting.
7. ACI 306, Cold Weather Concreting.
8. ACI 308, Standard Practice for Curing Concrete.
9. ACI 309R, Guide for Consolidation of Concrete.
10. ACI 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete.
11. ACI 347R, Guide to Formwork for Concrete.
12. ACI 544.1 R, State of the Art Report of Fiber Reinforced Concrete.
C. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):
1. ASTM A 36, Standard Specification for Carbon Structural Steel.
2. ASTM A 615, Specification for Deformed and Plain Billet -Steel Bars for
Concrete Reinforcement.
3. ASTM A 767, Specification for Zinc -Coated (Galvanized) Steel Bars for
Concrete Reinforcement.
C00272C08 §03300 - 2/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
4. ASTM C 31, Practice for Making and Curing Concrete Test Specimens in
the Field.
5. ASTM C 33, Specification for Concrete Aggregates.
6. ASTM C 39, Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical
Concrete Specimens.
7. ASTM C 42, Test Method for Obtaining and Testing Drilled Cores and
Sawed Beams of Concrete.
8. ASTM C 94, Specification for Ready -Mixed Concrete.
9. ASTM C 131, Standard Test Method for Resistance to Degradation of
Small -Size Coarse Aggregate by Abrasion and Impact in the Los Angeles
Machine
10. ASTM C 143, Test Method for Slump of Hydraulic -Cement Concrete.
11. ASTM C 150, Specification for Portland Cement.
12. ASTM C 171, Specification for Sheet Materials for Curing Concrete.
13. ASTM C 172, Practice for Sampling Freshly Mixed Concrete.
14. ASTM C 173, Test Method for Air Content of Freshly Mixed Concrete by
the Volumetric Method.
15. ASTM C 231, Test Method for Air Content of Freshly Mixed Concrete by
the Pressure Method.
16. ASTM C 260, Specification for Air -Entraining Admixtures for Concrete.
17. ASTM C 289, Test Method for Potential Alkali -Silica Reactivity of
Aggregates (chemical method).
18. ASTM C 309, Specification for Liquid Membrane -Forming Compounds for
Curing Concrete.
19. ASTM C 494, Standard Specification for Chemical Admixtures for
Concrete
20. ASTM C 618, Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural
Pozzolan for Use as a Mineral Admixture in Portland Cement Concrete.
21. ASTM C 881, Specification for Epoxy -Resin -Base Bonding Systems for
Concrete.
22. ASTM C 989, Standard Specification for Ground Granulated Blast -
Furnace Slag for Use in Concrete and Mortars
23. ASTM C 1107, Standard Specification for Packaged Dry, Hydraulic -
Cement Grout (Nonshrink)
24. ASTM C 1116, Specification for Fiber -Reinforced Concrete and
Shotcrete.
25. ASTM D 1751, Standard Specification for Preformed Expansion Joint
Filler for Concrete Paving and Structural Construction (Nonextruding and
Resilient Bituminous Types)
C00272C08 §03300 — 3/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
26. ASTM D 1752, Standard Specification for Preformed Sponge Rubber
Cork and Recycled PVC Expansion Joint Fillers for Concrete Paving and
Structural Construction
27. ASTM E 1155, Standard Test Method for Determining FF Floor Flatness
and FL Floor Levelness Numbers.
D. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO):
1. AASHTO M 182, Burlap Cloth Made from Jute or Kenaf.
E. Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute (CRSI) :
1. CRSI "Manual of Standard Practice."
F. National Institute of Standards and Technology
1. Voluntary Product Standard PS -1 Structural Plywood
PART 2 — PRODUCTS
2.01 FORM MATERIALS
A. Forms for Exposed Concrete: Plywood, metal, metal -framed plywood faced,
or other acceptable panel -type materials, to provide continuous, straight,
smooth, exposed surfaces. Furnish in largest practicable sizes to minimize
number of joints.
1 Use overlaid plywood complying with U.S. Product Standard PS -1 "A -C or
B -B High Density Overlaid Concrete Form," Class I for exterior surfaces
of Transfer Building CIP walls on Column Lines 1, and for exposed face
of all exterior retaining walls.
2. Use plywood complying with U.S. Product Standard PS -1 "B -B (Concrete
Form) Plywood," Class I, Exterior Grade or better, mill -oiled and edge -
sealed, with each piece bearing legible inspection trademark, or overlaid
plywood on other exposed finish concrete.
B. Forms for Unexposed Concrete: Plywood, lumber, metal, or other acceptable
material. Provide lumber dressed on at least two (2) edges and one side for
tight fit.
C. Form Coatings: Provide commercial formulation form -coating compounds
suitable for potable water use with a maximum VOC of 350 mg/L that will not
bond with, stain, or adversely affect concrete surfaces and will not impair
subsequent treatments of concrete surfaces. Do not use diesel as a concrete
form release agent.
D. Form Ties: Factory -fabricated, adjustable -length, removable or snap -off metal
form ties, designed to prevent form deflection and to prevent spalling
concrete upon removal. Provide units that will leave no metal closer than one
and one-half (1-1/2) inches to exposed surface.
1. Provide ties that, when removed, will leave holes not larger than 1 -inch
diameter in concrete surface.
C00272C08 §03300 - 4/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
2.02 REINFORCING MATERIALS
A. Reinforcing Bars: ASTM A 615, Grade 60, deformed, unless noted otherwise.
B. Smooth Dowel Bars: ASTM A 36, hot dip galvanized in accordance with
ASTM A 767.
C. Supports for Reinforcement: Bolsters, chairs, spacers, and other devices for
spacing, supporting, and fastening reinforcing bars and welded wire fabric in
place. Use wire -bar -type supports complying with CRSI specifications.
1. For slabs -on -grade, use supports with sand plates or horizontal runners
where base material will not support chair legs.
2. For exposed -to -view concrete surfaces, where legs of supports are in
contact with forms, provide supports with legs that are plastic protected
(CRSI, Class 1) or stainless steel protected (CRSI, Class 2).
2.03 CONCRETE MATERIALS
A. Portland Cement: ASTM C 150, Type I or Type II.
1. Use one brand of cement throughout Project unless otherwise acceptable
to Project Representative.
B. Fly Ash: ASTM C 618, Type F.
C. Blast Furnace Slag: ASTM C 989.
D. Normal Weight Aggregates: shall meet the requirements of ASTM C 33 and
as herein specified. Provide aggregates from a single source for exposed
concrete.
1. Maximum amount of deleterious substances: particles of specific gravity
less than 1.95 shall be two (2) percent for coarse aggregate and one (1)
percent for fine aggregate.
2. In addition, aggregate shall test innocuous for potential reactivity in
accordance with ASTM C 289.
3. All aggregate shall be of natural smooth rounded stone tested for
abrasion per ASTM C 131 for a maximum loss not to exceed 35 percent
after 500 revolutions.
4. Course aggregate gradation shall conform to ASTM C 33 and as
indicated in mix design requirements below. Use maximum size course
aggregate practical or noted.
E. Water: Free of any deleterious material, meeting the requirements of ASTM
C 94.
F. Admixtures, General: Calcium chloride or any admixtures containing chloride
ions shall not be used.
G. Air -Entraining Admixture: ASTM C 260, certified by manufacturer to be
compatible with other required admixtures.
1. Available Products: Subject to compliance with requirements, products
that may be incorporated in the Work include, but are not limited to, the
following:
C00272C08 §03300 — 5/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
a. "Air-Tite," Cormix.
b. "Air -Mix" or "Perma-Air," Euclid Chemical Co.
c. "Darex AEA" or "Daravair," W.R. Grace & Co.
d. "MB -VR" or "Micro -Air," Master Builders, Inc.
e. "Sealtight AEA," W.R. Meadows, Inc.
f. "Sika AER," Sika Corp.
g. Or Approved Equal.
H. Water -Reducing Admixture: ASTM C 494, Type A.
1. Available Products: Subject to compliance with requirements, products
that may be incorporated in the Work include, but are not limited to, the
following:
a. "Chemtard," ChemMasters Corp.
b. "PSI N," Cormix.
c. "Eucon WR -75," Euclid Chemical Co.
d. "WRDA," W.R. Grace & Co.
e. "Pozzolith Normal" or "Polyheed," Master Builders, Inc.
f. "Prokrete-N," Prokrete Industries.
g. "Plastocrete 161," Sika Corp.
h. Or Approved Equal.
I. High -Range Water -Reducing Admixture (Super Plasticizer): ASTM C 494,
Type F, or Type G.
1. Available Products: Subject to compliance with requirements, products
that may be incorporated in the Work include, but are not limited to, the
following:
a. "Super P," Anti -Hydro Co., Inc.
b. "PSI Super," Cormix.
c. "Eucon 37," Euclid Chemical Co.
d. "WRDA 19" or "Daracem," W.R. Grace & Co.
e. "Rheobuild," Master Builders, Inc.
f. "PSP," Prokrete Industries.
g. "Sikament 300," Sika Corp.
h. Or Approved Equal.
J. Water -Reducing, Accelerating Admixture: ASTM C 494, Type E.
1. Available Products: Subject to compliance with requirements, products
that may be incorporated in the Work include, but are not limited to, the
following:
a. "Q -Set," Conspec Marketing & Manufacturing Co.
C00272C08 §03300 — 6121
BLRTS - rev. 08/0412008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
b. "Gilco Accelerator," Cormix.
c. "Accelguard 80," Euclid Chemical Co.
d. "Daraset," W.R. Grace & Co.
e. "Pozzutec 20," Master Builders, Inc.
f. Or Approved Equal.
K. Water -Reducing, Retarding Admixture: ASTM C 494, Type D.
1. Available Products: Subject to compliance with requirements, products
that may be incorporated in the Work include, but are not limited to, the
following:
a. "PSI -R Plus," Cormix.
b. "Eucon Retarder 75," Euclid Chemical Co.
c. "Daratard-17," W.R. Grace & Co.
d. "Pozzolith R," Master Builders, Inc.
e. "Protard," Prokrete Industries.
f. "Plastiment," Sika Corporation.
g. Or Approved Equal.
2.04 RELATED MATERIALS
A. Absorptive Cover: Burlap cloth made from jute or kenaf, weighing
approximately 9 oz. per sq. yd., complying with AASHTO M 182, Class 2.
B. Moisture -Retaining Cover: One of the following, complying with ASTM C 171.
1. Waterproof paper.
2. Polyethylene film.
3. Polyethylene -coated burlap.
C. Water -Based Acrylic Membrane Cure/Seal/Dustproofer Compound: ASTM C
309, Type I, Class B containing 25% solids.
1. Available Products: Subject to compliance with requirements, products
that may be incorporated in the Work include, but are not limited to, the
following:
a. "General Purpose Cure & Seal (J-20)," Dayton Superior Corp.
b. "Spartan Coat VOC," The Burke Co.
c. "Cure & Seal VOC," Conspec.
d. Or Approved Equal.
D. Evaporation Control: Monomolecular film -forming compound applied to
exposed concrete slab surfaces for temporary protection from rapid moisture
loss.
1. Available Products: Subject to compliance with requirements, products
that may be incorporated in the Work include, but are not limited to, the
following:
C00272C08 §03300 — 7/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
a. "Aquafilm," Ardex, Inc.
b. "Eucobar," Euclid Chemical Co.
c. "E -Con," L&M Construction Chemicals, Inc.
d. "Confilm," Master Builders, Inc.
e. "Sure Film (J-74)," Dayton Superior Corp.
f. Or Approved Equal.
E. Bonding Compound: Polyvinyl acetate or acrylic base.
1. Available Products: Subject to compliance with requirements, products
that may be incorporated in the Work include, but are not limited to, the
following:
a. Polyvinyl Acetate (Interior Only):
1. "Superior Concrete Bonder (J-41)," Dayton Superior Corp.
2. "Euco Weld," Euclid Chemical Co.
3. "Everweld," L&M Construction Chemicals, Inc.
4. "PVA Bonder," The Burke Co.
5. Or Approved Equal.
b. Acrylic or Styrene Butadiene:
1. "Acrylic Bondcrete," The Burke Co.
2. "Strongbond," Conspec Marketing and Mfg. Co.
3. "Day -Chem Ad Bond," Dayton Superior Corp.
4. "SBR Latex," Euclid Chemical Co.
5. "Daraweld C," W.R. Grace & Co.
6. "Hornweld," A.C. Horn, Inc.
7. "Everbond," L & M Construction Chemicals, Inc.
8. "Acryl-Set," Master Builders Inc.
9. "Intralok," W.R. Meadows, Inc.
10. "Sonocrete," Sonneborn-Rexnord.
11. "Stonlock LB2," Stonhard, Inc.
12. Or Approved Equal.
F. Epoxy Adhesive: ASTM C 881, two -component material suitable for use on
dry or damp surfaces. Provide material "Type," "Grade," and "Class" to suit
Project requirements.
1. Available Products: Subject to compliance with requirements, products
that may be incorporated in the Work include, but are not limited to, the
following:
a. "BurkEpoxy M.V.," The Burke Co.
C00272C08 §03300 — 8/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
b. "Spec -Bond 100," Conspec Marketing and Mfg. Co.
c. "Euco Epoxy System #452 or #620," Euclid Chemical Co.
d. "Epobond 511," L&M Construction Chemicals, Inc.
e. "Concresive Liquid LPL," Master Builders, Inc.
f. "Sikadur 32 Hi -Mod," Sika Corp.
g. "Resi-Bond (J-58)," Dayton Superior Corp.
h. Or Approved Equal.
G. Isolation Material: Sponge Rubber Joint Filler, ASTM D 1752, Type 1.
H. Joint Filler for concrete sidewalks and exterior paving: Preformed asphalt
saturated fiberboard complying with ASTM D 1751: Asphalt saturated
fiberboard.
2.05 NON -SHRINK GROUT
A. Non -shrink, non-metallic grout. Premixed factory packaged, nonstaining,
noncorrosive, nongaseous cement grout complying with ASTM C 1107.
Provide grout specifically recommended by manufacturer for application.
B. Products, subject to compliance with requirements:
1. "Masterflow 928," Master Builders.
2. "Five Star Grout," Five Star Products.
3. Or Approved Equal.
2.06 PROPORTIONING AND DESIGN OF MIXES, GENERAL
A. Prepare design mixes for each type and strength of concrete by either
laboratory trial batch or field experience methods as specified in ACI 301. If
trial batch method used, use an independent testing facility acceptable to
Project Representative for preparing and reporting proposed mix designs.
The testing facility shall not be the same as used for field quality control
testing.
1. Minimum fly ash or blast furnace slag content shall be fifteen (15)
percent, maximum thirty-five (35) percent of cement content by weight.
B. The maximum size for concrete aggregate is defined as the smallest
standard sieve opening through which the entire amount of the aggregate is
permitted to pass.
C. Submit written reports to Project Representative of each proposed mix for
each class of concrete within sixty (60) calendar days from the First Notice to
Proceed.
D. Adjustment to Concrete Mixes: Mix design adjustments may be requested by
Contractor when characteristics of materials, job conditions, weather, test
results, or other circumstances warrant, as accepted by Project
Representative. Laboratory test data for revised mix design and strength
results must be submitted to and accepted by Project Representative before
using in Work.
C00272C08 §03300 — 9/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
2.07 PROJECT CONCRETE MIXES
A. Design mixes to provide normal weight concrete with the following properties,
as indicated on drawings and schedules:
1. Class 3000A: Minimum compressive strength at 28 days, 3000 psi.
Maximum water/cementitious material ratio, 0.45. Air entrained, 4% to
6%. Minimum total cement content, 360 pounds per cubic yard of
concrete. Minimum total cementitious content, 450 pounds per cubic yard
of concrete.
2. Class 3000B: Minimum compressive strength at 28 days, 3000 psi.
Maximum water/cementitious material ratio, 0.50. Air entrained, 4% to
6%.
3. Class 4000: Minimum compressive strength at 28 days, 4,000 psi.
Maximum water/cementitious material ratio, 0.38. Maximum size coarse
aggregate, 1 inch or greater. Air entrained, 4% to 6%. Minimum cement
content, 450 pounds per cubic yard of concrete. Minimum total
cementitious content, 550 pounds per cubic yard of concrete.
4. Lean Concrete (cementitious/fine aggregate flowable mix): Minimum 28
day compressive strength, 600 psi, Minimum cement content, 150 Ib/cy.
Minimum cementitious material content, 200 lb/cy. Maximum
water/cementitious material content, 2.0. Air entrainment, none. Designed
for tremie placement when placing in water.
2.08 CONCRETE TEMPERATURE
A. The temperature of the concrete at the time it is placed for Class 4000 and
3000A shall not be more than 80 degrees F, nor Tess than 50 degrees F,
regardless of the ambient temperature. Class 3000B shall have a maximum
temperature of 90 degrees F.
2.09 ADMIXTURES
A. Use water -reducing admixture or high -range water -reducing admixture
(Superplasticizer) in concrete as required for placement and workability.
B. Use nonchloride-accelerating admixture in concrete slabs placed at ambient
temperatures below 40 degrees F.
C. All concrete shall contain an air entraining admixture conforming to ASTM C
260. The final concrete shall contain not less than 4 percent nor more than 6
percent entrained air by volume except that concrete slabs that are to receive
shake -on emery hardener shall have between 2 and 3 percent entrained air.
D. Use admixtures for water reduction and set control in strict compliance with
manufacturer's directions.
E. Slump Limits: Proportion and design mixes to result in concrete slump at
point of placement as follows:
1. Slabs, footings, and sloping surfaces: Not more than 3 inches.
2. Concrete containing HRWR admixture (Superplasticizer): Not more than
8 inches after addition of HRWR to site -verified 2 -inch to 3 -inch slump
concrete.
C00272C08 §03300 —10/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
3. Other concrete: Not more than 4 inches.
2.10 CONCRETE MIXING
A. Use ready -mix concrete.
B. Provide batch ticket for each batch discharged and used in Work, indicating
project identification name and number, date, mix type, mix time, quantity,
and amount of water introduced.
C. Ready -Mix Concrete: Comply with requirements of ASTM C 94, and as
specified.
1. When air temperature is between 85 degrees F and 90 degrees F, reduce
mixing and delivery time from 1-1/2 hours to 75 minutes, and when air
temperature is above 90 degrees F, reduce mixing and delivery time to 60
minutes.
PART 3 — EXECUTION
3.01 GENERAL
A. Coordinate the installation of joint materials and vapor retarders with
placement of forms and reinforcing steel.
B. Dispose of rejected or excess concrete off-site, at no additional expense to
Owner. On-site temporary storage may be an option subject to advanced
Project Representative approval of a designated site designed to meet water
quality requirements, and provided all dumped concrete is removed from
Project Site and the site is cleaned up by Contractor prior to Substantial
Completion.
C. Wash concrete mix truck off-site.
3.02 TOLERANCES
A. Comply with Sections 2, 3 and 4 of ACI 117 and as herein specified.
3.03 FORMS
A. General: Design, erect, support, brace, and maintain formwork to support
vertical and lateral, static and dynamic loads that might be applied until
concrete structure can support such loads. Design and construct formwork
for the structural Toads of the concrete and so concrete members and
structures are of correct size, shape, alignment, elevation, position and meets
final concrete tolerances. Maintain formwork construction tolerances
complying with ACI 347.
B. Construct forms to sizes, shapes, lines, and dimensions shown and to obtain
accurate alignment, location, grades, level, and plumb work in finished
structures. Provide for openings, offsets, sinkages, keyways, recesses,
chamfers, inserts, and other features required in Work. Use selected
materials to obtain required finishes. Solidly butt joints and provide backup at
joints to prevent leakage of cement paste. Align tie holes on a vertical and
horizontal grid. Submit layout of proposed grid alignment for all concrete
surfaces that will be exposed in the completed construction to Project
Representative for approval before starting Work.
C00272C08 §03300 —11121
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
C. Fabricate forms for easy removal without hammering or prying against
concrete surfaces. Provide crush plates or wrecking plates where stripping
may damage cast concrete surfaces. Provide top forms for inclined surfaces
where slope is too steep to place concrete with bottom forms only. Kerf wood
inserts for forming keyways, reglets, recesses, and the like, for easy removal.
D. Provide temporary openings where interior area of formwork is inaccessible
for cleanout, for inspection before concrete placement, and for placement of
concrete. Securely brace temporary openings and set tightly to forms to
prevent loss of concrete mortar. Locate temporary openings in forms at
inconspicuous locations.
E. Chamfer all exposed comers and edges, unless otherwise directed, using
wood, metal, PVC, or rubber chamfer strips fabricated to produce uniform
smooth lines and tight edge joints. Use 3/4 -inch chamfer where not
otherwise indicated.
F. Forms for Slabs: Set edge forms, bulkheads, and intermediate screed strips
for slabs to obtain required elevations and contours in finished surfaces.
Provide and secure units to support screed strips using strike -off templates or
compacting -type screeds.
G. Provide a 1/8 -inch tooled edge radius on the exposed edge of slabs.
H. Provisions for Other Trades: Provide openings in concrete formwork to
accommodate work of other trades. Determine size and location of openings,
recesses, and chases from trades providing such items. Accurately place
and securely support items built into forms.
I. Cleaning and Tightening: Thoroughly clean forms and adjacent surfaces to
receive concrete. Remove chips, wood, sawdust, dirt, or other debris just
before concrete is placed. Retighten forms and bracing before concrete
placement as required to prevent mortar leaks and maintain proper
alignment.
3.04 PLACING REINFORCEMENT
A. General: Comply with Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute's recommended
practice for "Placing Reinforcing Bars," for details and methods of
reinforcement placement and supports and as herein specified.
1. Avoiding cutting or puncturing vapor retarder during reinforcement
placement and concreting operations.
B. Clean reinforcement of loose rust and mill scale, earth, ice, and other
materials that reduce or destroy bond with concrete.
C. Accurately position, support, and secure reinforcement against displacement.
Locate and support reinforcing by metal chairs, runners, bolsters, spacers,
and hangers, as approved by Project Representative.
D. Place reinforcement to obtain not less than the minimum concrete cover
required. Arrange, space, and securely tie bars and bar supports to hold
reinforcement in position during concrete placement operations. Set wire ties
so ends are directed into concrete, not toward exposed concrete surfaces.
C00272C08 §03300 —12/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
3.05 JOINTS
A. Construction Joints:
1. Locate and install construction joints as indicated or, if not indicated,
locate so as not to impair strength and appearance of the structure, as
acceptable to Project Representative.
2. Provide keyways at least one and one-half (1-1/2) inches deep or as
shown in construction joints in walls and slabs and between walls and
footings where shown on the drawings.
3. Construction joints shall be roughened to a minimum amplitude of 1/4 -
inch. This may be accomplished by forming or finishing the concrete to
this roughness, or creating the roughened surface by abrasive or water
blasting, or by mechanical means (chipping hammer). If abrasive or
water blasting is used, this shall be done while the concrete is "green."
generally approximately 24 hours following placement.
4. All construction joints shall be completely clean when covered with fresh
concrete. Cleaning shall consist of removal of Iaitance, loose or defective
concrete, coatings, curing compound, and other foreign material.
Cleaning shall consist of water blasting at pressures not less than 4,000
psi. If water blasting is done prior to form installation, provide means and
methods to perform final cleaning of surface prior to placing concrete. If
necessary, leave windows in wall forms to access surfaces for cleaning.
5. Use bonding agent on existing concrete surfaces that will be joined with
fresh concrete.
B. Isolation Joints in Slabs -on -Ground: Construct isolation joints in slabs -on -
grade at points of contact between slabs -on -grade and vertical surfaces, such
as walls, column pedestals, grade beams, and elsewhere as indicated.
Securely install specified isolation material prior to concrete placement.
C. Contraction (Control) Joints: Construct contraction joints at locations
indicated on the drawings.
1. For slabs on grade, contraction joints may be saw cut. Cuts shall be
made as soon as possible after slab finishing as may be safely done
without dislodging aggregate.
3.06 INSTALLATION OF EMBEDDED ITEMS
A. General: Set and build into work anchorage devices and other embedded
items required for other work that is attached to or supported by cast -in-place
concrete. Use setting drawings, diagrams, templates, instructions, and
directions provided by suppliers of items to be attached thereto.
3.07 PREPARATION OF FORM SURFACES
A. General: Coat contact surfaces of forms with specified and approved,
nonresidual, low-VOC, form -coating compound before reinforcement is
placed.
B. Do not allow excess form -coating material to accumulate in forms or to come
into contact with in-place concrete surfaces against which fresh concrete will
be placed. Apply in compliance with manufacturer's instructions.
C00272C08 §03300 —13/21
BLRTS - rev. 0810412008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
C. Coat steel forms with a nonstaining, rust -preventative material. Rust -stained
steel formwork is not acceptable.
3.08 CONCRETE PLACEMENT
A. Inspection: Before placing concrete, inspect and complete formwork
installation, reinforcing steel, and items to be embedded or cast in. Notify
other crafts to permit installation of their work; cooperate and coordinate with
other trades in setting such work so as not to impact Project Schedule.
B. Notification and Sign -off:
1. Notify Project Representative not less than forty-eight (48) hours in
advance of each concrete pour.
2. Project Representative will inspect and sign -off on formwork, rebar
placement, inserts, blockouts, penetrations, and other elements related to
the Work. Project Representative's inspection and sign -off does not
relieve the Contractor for correctness of the Work.
C. General: Comply with ACI 304, "Recommended Practice for Measuring,
Mixing, Transporting, and Placing Concrete," and as herein specified.
D. Deposit concrete continuously or in layers of such thickness that no concrete
will be placed on concrete that has hardened sufficiently to cause the
formation of seams or planes of weakness. If a section cannot be placed
continuously, provide construction joints as herein specified or as approved
by the Owner. Deposit concrete to avoid segregation at its final location.
E. Placing Concrete in Forms: Deposit concrete in forms in horizontal layers not
deeper than 24 inches and in a manner to avoid inclined construction joints.
Where placement consists of several layers, place each layer while preceding
layer is still plastic to avoid cold joints.
1. Consolidate placed concrete by mechanical vibrating equipment
supplemented by hand -spading, rodding, or tamping. Use equipment and
procedures for consolidation of concrete in accordance with
recommendations in ACI 309R.
2. Do not use vibrators to transport concrete inside forms. Insert and
withdraw vibrators vertically at uniformly spaced locations not farther than
visible effectiveness of machine. Place vibrators to rapidly penetrate
placed layer and at least 6 inches into preceding layer. Do not insert
vibrators into lower layers of concrete that have begun to set. At each
insertion limit duration of vibration to time necessary to consolidate
concrete and complete embedment of reinforcement and other embedded
items without causing segregation of mix.
F. Placing Concrete Slabs: Deposit and consolidate concrete slabs in a
continuous operation, within limits of construction joints, until the placing of a
panel or section is completed.
1. Consolidate concrete during placing operations so that concrete is
thoroughly worked around reinforcement and other embedded items and
into corners.
C00272C08 §03300 -14121
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
2. Bring slab surfaces to correct level with straightedge and strike off. Use
bull floats or darbies to smooth surface, free of humps or hollows. Do not
disturb slab surfaces prior to beginning finishing operations.
3. Maintain reinforcing in proper position during concrete placement.
G. Cold -Weather Placing: Comply with provisions of ACI 306 and as follows.
Protect concrete work from physical damage or reduced strength that could
be caused by frost, freezing actions, or low temperatures.
1. When air temperature has fallen to or is expected to fall below 40 degrees
F, uniformly heat water and aggregates before mixing to obtain minimum
specified concrete mixture temperature at point of placement.
a. Do not use frozen materials or materials containing ice or snow. Do
not place concrete on frozen subgrade or on subgrade containing
frozen materials.
b. Do not use calcium chloride, salt, and other materials containing
antifreeze agents or chemical accelerators unless otherwise accepted
in mix designs.
H. Hot -Weather Placing: When hot weather conditions exist that would seriously
impair quality and strength of concrete, place concrete in compliance with
ACI 305 and as herein specified.
1 Cool ingredients before mixing to maintain required concrete temperature
at point of placement. Mixing water may be chilled, or chopped ice may
be used to control temperature provided water equivalent of ice is
calculated to total amount of mixing water. Use of liquid nitrogen to cool
concrete is Contractor's option.
2. Cover reinforcing steel with water -soaked burlap if it becomes too hot, so
that steel temperature will not exceed the ambient air temperature
immediately before embedment in concrete.
3. Fog spray forms, reinforcing steel, and subgrade just before concrete is
placed.
4. Use water -reducing retarding admixture when required by high
temperatures, low humidity, or other adverse placing conditions, when
acceptable to Project Representative.
3.09 FINISH OF FORMED SURFACES
A. Rough Form Finish: For formed concrete surfaces not exposed to view in the
finish work or concealed by other construction. This is the concrete surface
having texture imparted by form -facing material used, with tie holes and
defective areas repaired and patched and fins and other projections
exceeding 1/4 inch in height rubbed down or chipped off.
B. Smooth Form Finish: For formed concrete surfaces exposed to view or to be
covered with a coating material applied directly to concrete, or a covering
material applied directly to concrete, such as waterproofing, dampproofing,
painting, or other similar system. This is an as -cast concrete surface
obtained with selected form -facing material, arranged in an orderly and
symmetrical manner with a minimum of seams. Repair and patch defective
areas with fins and other projections completely removed and smoothed.
C00272C08 §03300 —15/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
C. Smooth Rubbed Finish: Provide smooth rubbed finish to scheduled concrete
surfaces, which have received smooth form finish treatment, not later than
one day after form removal.
1. Moisten concrete surfaces and rub with carborundum brick or other
abrasive until a uniform color and texture is produced. Do not apply
cement grout other than that created by the rubbing process.
D. Related Unformed Surfaces: At tops of walls, horizontal offsets, and similar
unformed surfaces occurring adjacent to formed surfaces, strike -off smooth
and finish with a texture matching adjacent formed surfaces. Continue final
surface treatment of formed surfaces uniformly across adjacent unformed
surfaces unless otherwise indicated.
3.10 MONOLITHIC SLAB FINISHES
A. Float Finish: Apply float finish to monolithic slab surfaces to receive trowel
finish and other finishes as herein specified.
1. After screeding, consolidating, and leveling concrete slabs, do not work
surface until ready for floating. Begin floating, using float blades or float
shoes only, when surface water has disappeared, when concrete has
stiffened sufficiently to permit operation of power -driven floats, or both.
Consolidate surface with power -driven floats or by hand -floating if area is
small or inaccessible to power units. Check and level surface plane to
tolerances of FF 20 - FL15 per ACI 117. Cut down high spots and fill low
spots. Uniformly slope surfaces to drains. Immediately after leveling,
refloat surface to a uniform, smooth, granular texture.
B. Trowel Finish: Except where otherwise noted, apply trowel finish to monolithic
slab surfaces to be exposed to view, and slab surfaces to be covered with
resilient flooring.
1. After floating, begin first trowel finish operation using a power -driven
trowel. Begin final troweling when surface produces a ringing sound as
trowel is moved over surface. Consolidate concrete surface by final
hand -troweling operation, free of trowel marks, uniform in texture and
appearance, and with surface leveled to tolerances of FF20 - FL15.
Grind smooth surface defects that would telegraph through applied floor
covering system.
C. Trowel and Nonslip Broom Finish: Apply trowel and nonslip broom finish to
scheduled surfaces.
1. Immediately after trowel finishing, as specified, slightly roughen concrete
surface by brooming with fiber -bristle broom perpendicular to main
vehicle and foot traffic route and with the slope on sloped floors in the
Transfer Building. Coordinate required final finish with Project
Representative before application. Prepare a control sample area and
obtain Project Representative's approval.
D. Float and Nonslip Broom Finish: Apply nonslip broom finish to scheduled
surfaces.
1. Immediately after float finishing, slightly roughen concrete surface by
brooming with fiber -bristle broom perpendicular to main foot and vehicle
C00272C08 §03300 —16/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
traffic route. Coordinate required final finish with Project Representative
before application. Prepare a control sample area and obtain Project
Representative's approval.
3.11 CONCRETE CURING AND PROTECTION
A. General: Protect freshly placed concrete from premature drying and
excessive cold or hot temperatures. In hot, dry, and windy weather, protect
concrete from rapid moisture Toss before and during finishing operations with
an evaporation -control material. Apply in accordance with manufacturer's
instructions after screeding and bull floating, but before power floating and
troweling.
B. Start initial curing as soon as free water has disappeared from concrete
surface after placing and finishing. Weather permitting, keep continuously
moist for not less than 7 days.
C. Curing Methods: Perform curing of concrete by curing and sealing compound,
by moist curing, by moisture -retaining cover curing, and by combinations
thereof, as herein specified.
1. Provide moisture curing by following methods.
a. Keep concrete surface continuously wet by covering with water.
b. Use continuous water -fog spray.
c. Cover concrete surface with specified absorptive cover, thoroughly
saturate cover with water, and keep continuously wet. Place
absorptive cover to provide coverage of concrete surfaces and edges,
with 4 -inch lap over adjacent absorptive covers.
2. Provide moisture -cover curing as follows:
a. Cover concrete surfaces with moisture -retaining cover for curing
concrete, placed in widest practicable width with sides and ends
lapped at least 3 inches and sealed by waterproof tape or adhesive.
Immediately repair any holes or tears during curing period using cover
material and waterproof tape.
D. Curing Formed Surfaces: Cure formed concrete surfaces, including underside
of beams, supported slabs, and other similar surfaces, by moist curing with
forms in place for full curing period or until forms are removed. If forms are
removed, continue curing by methods specified above, as applicable.
E. Curing Unformed Surfaces: Cure unformed surfaces, such as slabs, floor
topping, and other flat surfaces, by application of appropriate curing method.
3.12 REMOVAL OF FORMS
A. General: Formwork not supporting weight of concrete, such as sides of walls,
columns, pilasters and similar parts of the work, may be removed after
cumulatively curing at not less than 50 degrees F for 24 hours after placing
concrete, provided concrete is sufficiently hard to not be damaged by form -
removal operations, and provided curing and protection operations are
maintained.
B. Shoring and formwork supporting weight of concrete, such as soffits, slabs,
and other structural elements, may not be removed in Tess than 14 days and
C00272C08 §03300 —17/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
until concrete has attained at least 75 percent of design minimum
compressive strength at 28 days. Determine potential compressive strength
of in-place concrete by testing field -cured specimens representative of
concrete location or members.
C. Form -facing material may be removed 4 days after placement only if shores
and other vertical supports have been arranged to permit removal of form -
facing material without loosening or disturbing shores and supports.
3.13 REUSE OF FORMS
A. Clean and repair surfaces of forms to be reused in Work. Split, frayed,
delaminated, or otherwise damaged form -facing material will not be
acceptable for exposed surfaces. Apply new form -coating compound as
specified for new formwork.
B. When forms are extended for successive concrete placement, thoroughly
clean surfaces, remove fins and Iaitance, and tighten forms to close joints.
Align and secure joint to avoid offsets. Do not use "patched" forms for
exposed concrete surfaces except as acceptable to Project Representative.
3.14 MISCELLANEOUS CONCRETE ITEMS
A. Filling In: Fill in holes and openings left in concrete structures for passage of
work by other trades, unless otherwise shown or directed, after work of other
trades is in place. Mix, place, and cure concrete as herein specified, to blend
with in-place construction. Provide other miscellaneous concrete filling
shown or required to complete Work.
3.15 CONCRETE SURFACE REPAIRS
A. Patching Defective Areas: Repair and patch defective areas with cement
mortar immediately after removal of forms, when acceptable to Project
Representative.
1. Cut out honeycomb, rock pockets, voids over 1/4 inch in any dimension,
and holes left by tie rods and bolts, down to solid concrete but in no case
to a depth of less than 1 inch. Make edges of cuts perpendicular to the
concrete surface. Thoroughly clean, dampen with water, and brush -coat
the area to be patched with specified bonding agent. Place patching
mortar before bonding compound has dried.
2. For exposed -to -view surfaces, blend white Portland cement and standard
Portland cement so that, when dry, patching mortar will match color
surrounding. Provide test areas at inconspicuous location to verify
mixture and color match before proceeding with patching. Compact
mortar in place and strike -off slightly higher than surrounding surface.
B. Repair of Formed Surfaces: Remove and replace concrete having defective
surfaces if defects cannot be repaired to satisfaction of Project
Representative. Surface defects, as such, include color and texture
irregularities, cracks, spalls, air bubbles, honeycomb, rock pockets, fins and
other projections on surface, and stains and other discolorations that cannot
be removed by cleaning. For non -exposed surfaces, flush out form tie holes,
fill with dry -pack mortar, or precast cement cone plugs secured in place with
bonding agent. For exposed surfaces, specified to receive a Smooth Form
C00272C08 §03300 —18121
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
Finish, a Smooth Rubbed Finish or a Brush Abrasive Blast Finish, plug and
neatly grout form tie holes to within 3/8 inch of the finished surface.
1. Repair concealed formed surfaces, where possible, that contain defects
that affect the durability of concrete. If defects cannot be repaired,
remove and replace concrete.
C. Repair of Unformed Surfaces: Test unformed surfaces, such as monolithic
slabs, for smoothness and verify surface plane to tolerances specified for
each surface and finish. Correct low and high areas as herein specified.
Test unformed surfaces sloped to drain for trueness of slope and smoothness
by using a template having required slope.
1. Repair finished unformed surfaces that contain defects that affect
durability of concrete. Surface defects, as such, include crazing and
cracks in excess of 0.01 inch wide or that penetrate to reinforcement or
completely through nonreinforced sections regardless of width, spalling,
popouts, honeycomb, rock pockets, and other objectionable conditions.
2. Correct high areas in unformed surfaces by grinding after concrete has
cured at least 14 days.
3. Correct low areas in unformed surfaces during or immediately after
completion of surface finishing operations by cutting out low areas and
replacing with patching compound. Finish repaired areas to blend into
adjacent concrete. Proprietary underlayment compounds may be used
when acceptable to Project Representative.
4. Repair defective areas, except random cracks and single holes not
exceeding 1 inch in diameter, by cutting out and replacing with fresh
concrete. Remove defective areas to sound concrete with clean, square
cuts and expose reinforcing steel with at least 3/4 -inch clearance all
around. Dampen concrete surfaces in contact with patching concrete and
apply bonding compound. Mix patching concrete of same materials to
provide concrete of same type or class as original concrete. Place,
compact, and finish to blend with adjacent finished concrete. Cure in
same manner as adjacent concrete.
D. Perform structural repairs with prior approval of Project Representative for
method and procedure, using specified epoxy adhesive and mortar.
E. Repair methods not specified above may be used, subject to acceptance of
Project Representative.
3.16 QUALITY CONTROL TESTING DURING CONSTRUCTION
A. General: The Owner will provide testing laboratory services to perform tests.
B. Sampling and testing for quality control during placement of concrete may
include the following, as directed by Project Representative.
C. Sampling Fresh Concrete: ASTM C 172, except modified for slump to comply
with ASTM C 94.
1. Slump: ASTM C 143; one test at point of final discharge for each day's
pour and one for every 25 cy thereafter, of each type of concrete;
additional tests when concrete consistency seems to have changed.
C00272C08 §03300 —19/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
2. Air Content: ASTM C 173, volumetric method for lightweight or normal
weight concrete; ASTM C 231 pressure method for normal weight
concrete; one for each day's pour and one for every 25 cy thereafter, of
each type of air -entrained concrete.
3. Concrete Temperature: Test hourly when air temperature is 40 degrees F
and below, when 80 degrees F and above, and each time a set of
compression test specimens is made.
4. Compression Test Specimen: ASTM C 31; one set of four standard
cylinders for each compressive strength test, unless otherwise directed.
Mold and store cylinders for laboratory -cured test specimens except when
field -cure test specimens are required.
5. Compressive Strength Tests: ASTM C 39; one set for each day's pour
exceeding 5 cubic yards plus additional sets for each 50 cubic yards more
than the first 25 cubic yards of each concrete class placed in any one
day; one specimen tested at seven days, two specimens tested at 28
days, and one specimen retained in reserve for later testing if required.
a. When frequency of testing will provide fewer than five strength tests
for a given class of concrete, conduct testing from at least five
randomly selected batches or from each batch if fewer than five are
used.
b. When total quantity of a given class of concrete is Tess than 50 cubic
yards, Project Representative may waive strength test if adequate
evidence of satisfactory strength is provided.
c. When strength of field -cured cylinders is less than 85 percent of
companion laboratory -cured cylinders, evaluate current operations
and provide corrective procedures for protecting and curing the in-
place concrete.
d. Strength level of concrete will be considered satisfactory if averages
of sets of three consecutive strength test results equal or exceed
specified compressive strength, and no individual strength test result
falls below specified compressive strength by more than 300 psi.
D. Test results will be reported in writing to Contractor within 24 hours after
tests. Reports of compressive strength tests shall contain the project
identification name and number, date of concrete placement, name of
concrete testing service, concrete type and class, location of concrete batch
in structure, design compressive strength at 28 days, concrete mix
proportions and materials, compressive breaking strength, and type of break
for both 7 -day tests and 28 -day tests.
E. Nondestructive Testing: Impact hammer, sonoscope, or other nondestructive
device may be permitted but shall not be used as the sole basis for
acceptance or rejection.
F. Additional Tests: The testing service will make additional tests of in-place
concrete when test results indicate specified concrete strengths and other
characteristics have not been attained in the structure, as directed by Project
Representative. Testing service may conduct tests to determine adequacy of
concrete by cored cylinders complying with ASTM C 42, or by other methods
C00272C08 §03300 - 20/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
as directed. Contractor shall pay for such tests when and if unacceptable
concrete is verified.
3.17 CONCRETE MIX SCHEDULE
A. Concrete mixes if not called out on the Drawings shall be as follows.
B. Class 3000A:
1. Gravity wall section of wall A.
2. Piping encasement at water quality treatment vault.
3. Anchor and thrust blocks for water, storm water and sanitary sewer.
C. Class 3000B:
1. Backfill concrete for fence posts, bollards, or similar.
D. Class 4000:
1. Structural concrete, including retaining wall B footings and stem wall, and
wall A, C, D, and F concrete that is not placed as shotcrete.
E. Lean Concrete:
1. Soldier pile backfill concrete.
3.18 CONCRETE FINISH SCHEDULE
A. Finishes if not called out on the Drawings shall be as follows.
B. Formed Finish:
1. Rough Form Finish: all formed concrete surfaces not exposed to view in
the finish work and not having drain mat placed against it. Exposed to
view surfaces are those surfaces that are not hidden by backfill or by
other permanent construction cover such as shotcrete, wall coverings,
suspended ceiling, or similar covering
2. Smooth Form Finish: All exposed surfaces of walls A, C, and D that do
not receive a shotcrete or sculpted finish, or surfaces not exposed to view
but to have drain mat placed against surface.
3. Smooth Rubbed Finish: All exposed surfaces of wall B and F.
C. Slab Finishes:
1. Float Finish: All footing slabs.
2. Float and Nonslip Light Broom Finish: Top of walls and horizontal slabs
with top surface of slab exposed in final construction.
END OF SECTION 03300
C00272C08 §03300 — 21/21
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008 CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE
‘.-
SECTION 03310
SHOTCRETE
PART 1 — GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A. Section includes:
1. Shotcrete for soldier pile retaining walls (walls A, C and D) and
mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining wall (wall E) facing.
a. Granite rock appearance sculpted finish where required on the
Drawings.
b. Test panels to evaluate sculpted finish appearance and quality of
shotcrete placement.
1.02 RELATED SECTIONS
A. Section 03300 — Cast -in -Place Concrete.
1.03 REFERENCES
A. Comply with the requirements of Section 01095 — Reference Standards and
as listed herein. The following is a list of standards referenced in this
Section.
B. ACI INTERNATIONAL (ACI)
1. ACI 506.3R (1991) Guide to Certification of Shotcrete Nozzlemen
C. ASTM INTERNATIONAL (ASTM)
1. ASTM C 33 (2007) Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates
2. ASTM C 1140 (2003a) Standard Practice for Preparing and Testing
Specimens from Shotcrete Test Panels
3. ASTM C 1141 (2006) Standard Specification for Admixtures for Shotcrete
4. ASTM C 171 (2003) Standard Specification for Sheet Materials for Curing
Concrete
5. ASTM C 231 (2008) Standard Test Method for Air Content of Freshly
Mixed Concrete by the Pressure Method
6. ATSM C 309 (2007.) Standard Specification for Liquid Membrane -Forming
Compounds for Curing Concrete
7. ASTM C 42/C 42M (2004) Standard Test Method for Obtaining and
Testing Drilled Cores and Sawed Beams of Concrete
8. ASTM C 685/C 685M (2007) Concrete Made by Volumetric Batching and
Continuous Mixing
9. ASTM C 881/C 881 M (2002) Standard Specification for Epoxy -Resin -
Base Bonding Systems for Concrete
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 —1/11
SHOTCRETE
1.04 SUBMITTALS
A. General: submit the following in accordance with Section 00700 — General
Terms and Conditions, Article 4.4 — Submittals, and Section 01330 —
Submittal Procedures:
B. See Section 03300 — Cast -in -Place Concrete for concrete mix submittal
requirements.
C. Preconstruction Test Panels:
1. Cores and sawed concrete beams shall be taken from test panels and
tested by the Owner.
D. Qualifications:
1. Qualifications of each nozzleman shall be certified.
. 2. List of sculpted wall projects and photographs.
E. Manufacturers product literature, including but not limited to:
1. Paint and stain.
1.05 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. Shotcrete contractor/applicator shall have a minimum of two (2) years
experience in sculpting shotcrete walls and done a minimum of one (1) wall
similar to the texture specified. Projects and photos of sculpted walls shall be
submitted for review.
B. Field Testing: Materials and installed Work may require testing and retesting
at any time during progress of Work. Initial tests shall be performed by the
Owner. Retesting of rejected materials for installed Work, shall be done by
the Owner at Contractor's expense and will be deducted from Progress
Payment.
1. The Contractor shall assist and provide incidental facilities and labor as
may be necessary for obtaining test samples.
2. Contractor shall install a minimum of three sacrificial reinforcement
locations. Sacrificial reinforcement shall consist of two 3 -foot long #5 bars
placed in a cross at the same depth as the permanent reinforcement.
Locate sacrificial reinforcement as directed by the Owner.
1.06 PROJECT CONDITIONS
•
A. Shotcrete methods shall be used for placing concrete wall facings on soldier
pile walls A and D, MSE wall E, with the option of using either cast -in-place
concrete or shotcrete on wall C and the gravity wall section of wall A.
B. Walls A and D shall receive a sculpted rock appearance finish where
indicated on the Drawings.
1.07 EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE
A. Acceptance of the shotcrete by the Project Representative will be based on
compressive strength and consolidation results obtained from cores, meeting
finish appearance requirements, and construction tolerances.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 - 2/11
SHOTCRETE
4
1.08 QUALIFICATIONS
A. The Contractor shall submit a resume for each nozzleman certifying that each
has not less than one (1) year's experience for the particular type of shotcrete
to be applied. The resume shall include company name, address, and
telephone number, name of supervisor, and detailed description of work
performed. All nozzlemen shall be certified in accordance with ACI 506.3R.
Qualifications of additional nozzlemen throughout the job shall be similarly
submitted for approval.
1.09 PRECONSTRUCTION TEST PANELS
A. A test panel, minimum dimension five (5) foot by five (5) foot, shall be made
by each application crew using the equipment, materials, mixture proportions,
and procedures for each mixture being considered, and for each shooting
position to be encountered in the job. The same reinforcement as in the
structure shall be provided in at least one-half of the panel to test for proper
embedment of reinforcing steel. The test panels shall be fabricated to the
same thickness as the structure. A minimum of five three (3) inch diameter
cores from each panel shall be taken for testing for compressive strength in
accordance with ASTM C 1140 and proper consolidation. The compressive
strength of the cores shall meet the requirements specified in paragraph 3.01
1.1.
1.10 PRECONSTRUCTION MOCKUP PANEL (SCULPTED FINISH)
A. A test panel, minimum dimension ten (10) foot by ten (10) foot, consisting of
full depth core wall and sculpted, shall be made prior to any sculpted finish
work. The same procedures that will be used to produce the project walls
shall be used to construct the test panel including construction of the core
wall.
B. The test panel will be evaluated by the Project Representative for acceptance
of appearance, bond of sculpted finish to core wall, sculpted finish depth, and
assurance of core wall continuity (sculpted finish notches not extending into
core wall) and soundness.
PART 2 - PRODUCTS
2.01 MATERIALS
A. See Section 03300 - Cast -in -Place Concrete for additional concrete and
reinforcement material requirements.
B. Aggregate Materials:
1. Aggregates shall conform to ASTM C 33 and Specification Section 03300
- Cast -in -Place Concrete with the combined grading of coarse and fine
aggregates conforming to one of the following grading.
SIEVE SIZE
PERCENT BY MASS PASSING INDIVIDUAL SIEVES
GRADING GRADING GRADING
NO. 1 NO. 2 NO. 3
(3/4in.) — 100
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 - 3/11
SHOTCRETE
(1/2 in.) — 100 80-95
(3/8 in.) 100 90-100 70-90
(No. 4) 95-100 75-85 50-70
(No. 8) 80-100 50-70 35-55
(No. 16) 50-85 35-55 20-40
(No. 30) 25-60 20-35 10-30
(No. 50) 10-30 8-20 5-17
(No. 100) 2-10 2-10 2-10
C. Shotcrete Mix Design:
1. Minimum compressive strength at twenty-eight (28) days of four thousand
(4,000) psi.
2. Maximum water/cementitious material ratio thirty -eight -hundredths (0.38).
3. Air entrained four (4) to six (6) percent.
4. Minimum cement content four hundred fifty (450) pounds per cubic yard
of concrete.
5. Minimum total cementitious content five hundred fifty (550) pounds per
cubic yard of concrete.
6. Maximum cement content seven hundred five (705) pounds per cubic
yard.
7. For purpose of shotcrete placement, minimum fly ash or blast furnace
slag content fifteen (15) percent of cement content by weight.
D. Curing Materials:
1. Curing materials shall meet the following requirements.
2. Impervious Sheet Materials: ASTM C 171, type optional except
polyethylene film, if used, shall be white opaque.
3. Membrane -Forming Curing Compound: ASTM C 309, Type 1-D or
Type 2.
E. Reinforcement:
1. See Specification Section 03300 – Cast -in -Place Concrete.
F. Paint and/or Stain:
1. Exterior type, premium grade paint and/or stain as determined by
Contractor's shotcrete applicator.
PART 3 – EXECUTION
3.01 PRODUCTION OF SHOTCRETE
A. The shotcrete shall be produced by wet -mix process.
B. Wet Mix Process:
1. Batching and Mixing:
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 - 4/11
SHOTCRETE
e
a. Batching and mixing shall be accomplished in accordance with the
applicable provisions of ASTM C 94. If volumetric batching and mixing
are used, the materials shall be batched and mixed in accordance
with the applicable provisions of ASTM C 685. The mixing equipment
shall be capable of thoroughly mixing the specified materials in
sufficient quantity to maintain continuous placing. Ready -mix
shotcrete complying with ASTM C 94 may be used.
2. Delivery Equipment:
a. The equipment shall be capable of delivering the premixed materials
accurately, uniformly, and continuously through the delivery hose.
Recommendations of the equipment manufacturer shall be followed
on the type and size of nozzle to be used and on cleaning, inspection,
and maintenance of the equipment.
3. Air Content:
a. Air -entraining admixture shall be used in such proportion that the air
content of the shotcrete prior to gunning shall be five (5) plus or minus
(±) one (1) percent as determined by ASTM C 231.
4. Air Supply:
a. Provide a supply of clean, dry air adequate for maintaining sufficient
nozzle velocity for all parts of the Work and, if required, for
simultaneous operation of a suitable blowpipe for clearing away
rebound.
C. Preparation of Surfaces:
1. Existing Concrete:
a. All unsound and loose materials shall be removed by sandblasting,
grinding, or high-pressure water jets before applying shotcrete.
b. Any area to be repaired shall be chipped off or scarified to remove
offsets which would cause an abrupt change in thickness without
suitable reinforcement.
c. Edges shall be tapered to leave no square shoulders at the perimeter
of a cavity.
d. The surface shall be dampened but without visible free water.
2. Timber Lagging and Piles:
a. Timber lagging shall be set firmly in place and any void backfilled prior
to shotcreting.
b. Any heavy soils attached to face of lagging shall be removed. Piles
shall be clean and free of loose rust or foreign matter to prevent the
bond of the shotcrete (except for painted surfaces).
c. Lagging shall be dampened prior to shotcrete placement.
3. Shotcrete:
a. When a layer of shotcrete is to be covered by a succeeding layer at a
later time, it shall first be allowed to develop its initial set. Then all
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 - 5111
SHOTCRETE
Iaitance, loose material, and rebound shall be removed by brooming
or scraping. Hardened Iaitance set shall be removed by sandblasting
and the surface thoroughly cleaned.
4. Construction Joints:
a. Construction joints shall be located and detailed as shown on the
Drawings. The entire joint shall be. thoroughly cleaned and wetted
prior to the application of additional shotcrete.
D. Placement of Shotcrete:
1. General:
a. Shotcrete shall be placed using suitable delivery equipment and
procedures. The area to which shotcrete is to be applied shall be
clean and free of rebound or overspray.
2. The entire thickness of walls shall be placed with no construction joints,
including the depth of sculpted finish. The sculpted finish depth may be
placed following placement of the structural core wall, but on the same
day.
3. A means of assuring or checking the proper thickness of wall is placed
shall be used. This may include wires offset from the wall face or probes
used during shotcrete placement.
4. Placement Techniques:
a. Placement Control:
1. Thickness, method of support, air pressure, and water content
of shotcrete shall be controlled to preclude sagging or
sloughing off. Shotcreting shall be discontinued or suitable
means shall be provided to screen the nozzle stream if wind or
air currents cause separation of the nozzle stream during
placement.
b. Corner:
1. Horizontal and vertical corners and any area where rebound
cannot escape or be blown free shall be filled first.
5. Placement Around Reinforcement:
a. The nozzle shall be held at such distance and angle to place material
behind reinforcement before any material is allowed to accumulate on
the face of the reinforcement. Shotcrete shall not be placed through
more than one layer of reinforcing steel rods or mesh in one
application unless demonstrated by preconstruction tests that steel is
properly encased.
6. Placement Precautions: The following precautions shall be taken during
placement:
a. Placement shall be stopped if drying or stiffening of the mixture takes
place at any time prior to delivery to the nozzle.
b. Rebound or previously expended material shall not be used in the
shotcrete mixture.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 - 6/11
SHOTCRETE
E. Repair of Defects:
1. Defects:
a. Defective areas larger than forty-eight (48) square inches or two (2)
inches deep shall be removed and replaced with fresh shotcrete.
These defects include honeycombing, lamination, dry patches, voids,
or sand pockets. Defective areas shall be removed in accordance with
the procedures described in paragraph 3.01 C.1.and replaced with
fresh shotcrete.
b. Defective areas Tess than forty-eight (48) square inches or two (2)
inches deep shall be repaired.
c. Repairs:
1. All repairs shall be made within one (1) week of the time the
deficiency is discovered. All unacceptable materials shall be
removed and repaired by the procedures described in the
following two paragraphs. Voids and holes left by the removal
of tie rods in all permanently exposed surfaces not to be
backfilled and in surfaces to be exposed to water shall be
reamed and completely filled with dry -patching mortar as
specified below.
d. Minor Patching:
1. Minor patching may be accomplished with a dry -pack mixture,
or with materials as approved by the Project Representative.
Patches that exceed one-tenth (0.1) cubic foot in volume shall
receive a brush coat of approved epoxy resin meeting ASTM
C 881/C 881M, Type II, as a prime coat. Care shall be taken
not to spill epoxy or overcoat the repair surface so that the
epoxy runs or is squeezed out onto the surface which will
remain exposed to view. Epoxy resin shall be used in strict
conformance with manufacturer's recommendations with
special attention paid to pot life, safety, and thin film tack time.
2. Core Holes:
a. Core holes shall not be repaired with shotcrete. Instead, they shall be
filled solid with a dry -pack mixture after being cleaned and thoroughly
dampened.
F. Finishing:
1. Float and Trowel Finish:
a. Final surface finish shall be provided using either wood or rubber float
and steel trowel creating a smooth consistent wall surface.
2. Sculpted Finish:
a. Final surface finish shall be carved, shaped, painted and stained to
provide a natural looking appearance of a granite rock ledge. The
appearance shall be similar to that shown in Photos 1 and 2 in this
Section. The surface depth for carving shall be no greater than
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 — 7/11
SHOTCRETE
indicated on the Drawings to preserve the structural capacity of the
wall.
Photo 1. Final surface finish with appearance of granite rock ledge.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 - 8/11
SHOTCRETE
Photo 2. Final surface finish with appearance of granite rock ledge.
3. Finish Tolerances:
a. For non -sculpted surfaces, final surface finish shall meet the
tolerances of cast -in-place concrete described in Section 03300 —
Cast -in -Place Concrete.
G. Curing and Protection:
1. Initial Curing:
Immediately after finishing, shotcrete shall be kept continuously moist for
at least three (3) days. One of the following materials or methods shall be
used:
a. Ponding or continuous sprinkling.
b. Absorptive mat or fabric, sand, or other covering kept continuously
wet.
c. Curing Compounds. On natural gun or flash finishes, use the
coverage application requirement of one hundred (100) square
feet/gallon or twice the manufacturer's requirement, whichever is less.
Curing compounds shall not be used on any surfaces against which
additional shotcrete or other cementitious finishing materials are to be
bonded unless positive measures, such as sandblasting, are taken to
completely remove curing compounds prior to the application of such
additional materials.
2. Final Curing:
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 - 9/11
SHOTCRETE
Additional curing shall be provided immediately following the initial curing
and before the shotcrete has dried. One of the following materials or
methods shall be used:
a. Continue the method used in initial curing.
b. Application of impervious sheet material conforming to ASTM C 171.
3. Formed Surface:
a. If forms are to be removed during curing period, one of the curing
materials or methods listed in the paragraph 3.01 G.1 shall be used
immediately. Such curing shall be continued for the remainder of the
curing period.
4. Duration of Curing:
a. Curing shall be continued for the first seven (7) days after shotcreting.
5. Temperature Considerations:
a. No shotcrete shall be applied when the concrete surface or air in
contact with the concrete surface is below forty (40) degrees F.
H. Painting and Staining:
1. Apply paints and stains to clean surfaces in accordance with coating
manufacturer's recommendations.
I. Owner's Field Tests:
1. Contractor shall allow Owner to take 4 -inch test cores of the completed
wall to verify actual wall conditions. Tests may be made for the purpose of
strength tests or consolidation. Contractor shall repair any core holes
placed in the final wall.
2. Strength Testing: Test specimens shall be initially cured on-site, then
shall be transported to the Owner's accredited testing laboratory within
forty-eight (48) hours of scheduled testing time.
a. Test Panel:
1. One test panel shall be made for every fifty (50) cubic yards of
shotcrete placed but not Tess than one per each shift during
which any shotcrete is placed. Panels shall have minimum
dimensions of eighteen (18) by eighteen (18) by four (4)
inches and shall be gunned in the same positions as the work
represented during the course of the work by the Contractor's
regular nozzleman. Panels shall be field cured in the same
manner as in the job. Three inch diameter cores shall be
drilled from each panel at least forty (40) hours prior to testing
and tested in accordance with ASTM C 1140.
b. Test Cores:
1. Test cores shall be drilled from the structure at least forty (40)
hours prior to testing and tested in accordance with ASTM C
1140. A set of three cores shall be taken not less than once
each shift that shotcrete is placed nor less than once for each
fifty (50) cubic yards of shotcrete placed through the nozzle.
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 —10111
SHOTCRETE
The diameter of core specimens shall be 4" nominal as
recommended in accordance with ASTM C 42.
c. Compressive Strength:
1. The compressive strength of the shotcrete shall be determined
from the average of three (3) cores obtained from a test panel
representing a specific volume of shotcrete and tested on the
seventh (7th) day after panel fabrication.
3. Consolidation
a. One core shall be taken from the test panel through a cross of
reinforcement and observed for consolidation around the
reinforcement. Contractor shall accurately locate reinforcement for
locating hole location.
4. Thickness:
a. The minimum shotcrete thickness shall be as shown in the drawings.
The unhardened shotcrete shall be checked for thickness using a
probe by the nozzleman or laborer at the time of placement. These
thickness checks shall be at fifteen (15) minute intervals and all low or
thin areas shall be corrected by applying additional shotcrete.
5. Mixture Proportions:
a. Record and check mixture proportions at least once per shift for weigh
batching. Record and check mixture proportions as recommended by
ASTM C 685 at least once per shift for volumetric batching and
continuous mixing plants.
6. Notification and Sign -off:
a. Notify Project Representative not less than forty-eight (48) hours in
advance of each shotcrete application.
1. Project Representative will inspect and sign -off on substrate
conditions, rebar, and other elements related to the Work.
Project Representative's inspection and sign -off does not
relieve the Contractor for correctness of the Work
7. Air Content:
a. Air content tests shall be conducted on wet -mix shotcrete according to
ASTM C 231 with a frequency of not Tess than once each shift nor
less than once for each fifty (50) cubic yards of shotcrete placed
through the nozzle. Tests shall be conducted on samples taken as the
wet shotcrete mixture is placed in the delivery equipment.
END OF SECTION 03310
C00272C08
BLRTS - rev. 08/04/2008
§03310 —11/11
SHOTCRETE
City of Tukwila
Public Works Permit Package
Section 6
Geotechnical Reports
Geotechnical Deport P‘3:4
Slope Stability
Geotechnical Report Slope Pipelines
REVIEWED FOR
CODE COMPLIANCE
APPROVED
OCT 2 0 200
Of Tukwila
UILDINC DIVISION
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWILA
AUG - 4 ZuU8
PERMIT CENTER
08 JAI
FINAL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Dow Lake Recycling & Transfer Station
King County Solid Waste Division
Tukwila, Washington
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
Prepared for
R.W. Deck
June 27, 2008
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
• Geotechnical Engineering
• .Hydrogeol ogy
• Geoenvironmental Services
• Inspection & Testing
GEOSCIENCES INC.
ptechnicnl 0 Payment Enginecring • llydrogeology •( coenriromnenlal • Inspection er Testing
June 27, 2008.
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
R.W. Beck
1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2500
Seattle, WA 98154-1004
Attention: Mr. Karl Hufnagel, P.E.
SUBJECT:
Dear Sir:
FINAL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer Station
Tukwila, Washington
As requested, HWA GeoSciences Inc. (HWA) has completed a design level
geotechnical engineering study for redevelopment of the Bow Lake Recycling and
Transfer Station. Results of our investigation and geotechnical recommendations
pertinent to the proposed improvements are provided in the accompanying final
geotechnical report. This report incorporates responses to comments received from
R.W. Beck, King County SWD, and the City of Tukwila on the draft reports dated
May 21 and November 29, 2007.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project.
Sincerely,
TIWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
ti • tr(7'°(
Sa H. Hong, P.E.
Principal
BWT:SHH:bwt
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 GENERAL 1
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
1.3 SCOPE OF SERVICES AND AUTHORIZATION 3
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION 4
2.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION 4
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING 4
3.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS 5
3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION 5
3.1.1 King County Parcel 5
3.1.2 WSDOT Parcel 6
3.2 GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 8
3.3 SITE HISTORY 8
3.4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 9
3.4.1 Fill Soil 9
3.4.2 Fill with Refuse 10
3.4.3 Refuse 10
3.4.4 Burn Fill 10
3.4.5 Glacial Deposits 11
3.5 GROUND WATER 11
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12
4.1 GENERAL 12
4.2 SEISMICITY 13
4.3 SEISMIC DESIGN 14
4.4 REFUSE SETTLEMENT 15
4.4.1 Compressibility of Refuse 15
4.4.2 Primacy Settlement 16
4.4.3 Secondary Settlement 17
4.4.4 Bio -degradation Settlement 17
4.5 PRELOAD CONSIDERATIONS 17
4.5.1 Preloading Time Required 18
4.5.2 Preload Monitoring 18
4.5.3 Estimated Refuse Settlement under Fills without Preload
Treatment 20
4.5.4 Proposed Improvements Built on Refuse Area with Preload
Treatment 21
4.5.5 Existing Utilities in the Refuse Area Impacted by the Added
Fill 21
4.5.6 New Road Fill East of the Transfer Trailer Yard 21
4.6 RETAINING WALL ALONG I-5 (WALL A) 22
2003-008 FR.doc i IIWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
4.7 . RETAINING WALLS ALONG THE NORTH PERIMETER ROAD (WALL C
ANDD) 24
4.8 RETAINING WALL WEST OF TRANSFER TRAILER YARD 24
4.8.1 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Walls 24
4.8.2 Soldier Pile Retaining Wall Options 27
4.9 REFUSE SETTLEMENT NEAR THE, TRANSFER TRAILER YARD WALL 28
4.10 EXISTING FOUNDATIONS 29
4.11 SOUTH SCALE FACILITY 29
4.12 NORTH SCALE FACILITY 30
4.13 FUTURE PROCESSING FACILITY 30
4.14 NEW TRANSFER / TSO BUILDING 30
4.14.1 Foundations 30
4.14.2 Concrete Retaining Walls 32
4.14.3 Lateral Earth Pressures Acting on Yielding Concrete
Retaining Walls 33
4.14.4 Lateral Earth Pressures Acting on Restrained (unyielding)
Concrete Retaining Walls 34
4.14.5 Passive Earth Pressures 35
4.14.6 Base Friction Under Foundations 35
4.14.7 Compaction of Wall Backfill 36
4.14.8 Allowable Bearing Pressures for Retaining Wall with
Shallow Foundation 36
4.15 MAINTENANCE BUILDING 37
4.16 STORMWATER DETENTION VAULTS AND WASTEWATER HOLDING
TANK 37
4.17 EARTH WORK AT THE EXISTING TRANSFER STATION 38
4.18 OVER -EXCAVATION OF REFUSE OR UNSUITABLE SOILS 38
4.18.1 Geotechnical Considerations and Temporary Cut Slopes 38
4.18.2 Environmental Considerations 39
4.19 EARTHWORK AND COMPACTION 39
4.19.1 Reuse of On -Site Materials 39
4.19.2 Import Structural Fill 40
4.19.3 Compaction 40
4.20 PILE FOUNDATIONS 41
4.21 PAVEMENT SUPPORT 41
4.21.1 Pavement Subgrade Preparation 41
4.21.2 Pavement Section Design 42
4.22 SLOPE STABILITY AND CRITICAL AREA REQUIREMENTS 44
4.22.1 King County Parcel 44
4.22.2 WSDOT Parcel 44
4.23 SOIL CORROSIVENESS 45
4.24 PIPE BEDDING AND TRENCH BACKFILL 45
2003-008 FR.doc ii HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
4.24.1 Pipe Support Through Refuse Areas 45
4.24.2 Pipe Support Through Non -Refuse Areas 46
4.26 GAS VENTING FOR ALL BUILDINGS AND VAULTS 47
5.0 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS 47
6.0 REFERENCES 50
LIST OF FIGURES (FOLLOWING TEXT)
Figure 1
Figure 2A
Figure 2B
Figure 2C
Figures 3A -- 3K
Figure 4
Figures 5A — 51
APPENDICES
Vicinity Map
Site and Exploration Plan
Site and Slope Topography
Pre -load and Overexcavation Plan
Cross Sections A -A' through K -K'
Refuse Settlement Calculations
Retaining Wall Diagrams
Appendix A: Field Investigation
Figure A-1
Figures A-2 to A-38
Figures A-39 to A-49
Legend of Terms and Symbols on Exploration Logs
Logs of Boreholes B-201 through B-237
Logs of Test Pits TP -1 through TP -11
Appendix B: Laboratory Investigation
Figures B-1 to B-2 Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index
Figures B-3 to B-20 Particle -Size Analysis
Appendix C: Logs from Previous Geotechnical Investigations
2003-008 FR.doc 111 HWA GsoScTEIicEs INC.
FINAL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY SOLID WASTE DIVISION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
This report presents the results of a geotechnical engineering investigation performed by HWA
GeoSciences Inc. (HWA) for the proposed redevelopment of the Bow Lake Recycling and
Transfer Station in Tukwila, Washington. Per the 2006 Facility Master Plan Update (FMP),
King County Solid Waste Division (SWD) plans to construct a new transfer building on property
to be acquired from WSDOT, lying immediately north of the existing transfer station (hereafter
referred to as the WSDOT parcel), demolish the existing station, and also construct scale
facilities, a maintenance building, roadways, and trailer parking. The existing transfer station
will remain in operation during a phased construction.
The project location is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Existing and proposed features,
topography, and exploration locations are shown on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2A.
Topography of the slopes on and bordering the site down to the Duwamish Valley floor is shown
on Figure 2B.
The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions in areas of proposed
improvements and provide geotechnical recommendations for design and construction.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Our understanding of the project is based on preliminary designs as developed for the 2006 FMP,
the 20 percent Basis of Design Report (BODR), discussions with the project team, our
involvement since 1986 for remedial measures to the existing building, and since 1993 for master
planning.
The existing transfer station, built in 1977, will be replaced with a new facility that will serve a
number of purposes, including preparation for waste export following closure of Cedar Hills
Regional Landfill. The preliminary design calls for a three -phased construction approach, in
order to maintain transfer station operations at all times.
Key preliminary design elevations were 265 feet for the tipping floor and roadways to it, and
245 feet for the compactor pit floor, maintenance building, and trailer parking area. These
preliminary design elevations have been raised approximately 3 %2 feet to correspond to the
NAVD88 datum used in the new survey by Duane Hartman & Associates (DHA). The latter
datum is 3.53 feet higher than the NGVD29 datum of the previous survey utilized for FMP
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
preliminary design. Proposed design elevations will, however, likely be adjusted further during
fmal design.
New facilities will be constructed in three phases, as follows:
1) Site preparation, with major site grading and wall construction. Contaminated soils will
be exported from the site for disposal. Particular elements will include the following:
• An underground stormwater detention vault, and stormwater and sewer pipelines
down the east slope (see Slope Pipelines report, HWA, June 2008a);
• A permanent access road parallel to Interstate 5, with removal of contaminated soils
and construction of an 1,100 -foot long retaining wall;
• A retaining wall for the northeastern portion of the perimeter road;
• Subgrade preparation and placement of base course for proposed pavements and
building slabs;
• Placement of fill on the east slope (see Slope Stability Report, HWA, June 2008b).
2) Construction of a new 68,000 square foot Transfer / TSO (Transfer Station Operators)
Building and North Scale Facility on the WSDOT parcel. Particular elements include the
following:
• New transfer building, to be constructed on perimeter column footings with a slab -on -
grade floor. Retaining walls approximately 20 feet high will be constructed for the
refuse compactor pit and yard waste pit at the south end of the building (see
Figure 2A);
• North scale facility, with two scales, and a retaining wall separating it from the
perimeter road;
• A fueling station;
• Associated access drives and parking areas, including temporary trailer parking west
of the new transfer facility.
3) Demolition of the existing 33,000 square foot transfer shed, scales, and roadways,
following start of operations in the new transfer building. New features will include the
following:
• 2,500 square foot equipment maintenance building, with a 20 -foot high retaining wall
to support an adjacent roadway;
2003-008 FR.doc 2 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2.008
IOWA Project No. 2003-008
• South scale facility, with three scales; expandable to four;
• Trailer parking, with a 385 -foot long retaining wall up to 15 feet high with 2H:1V
backfill slope along the western side;
• An underground sanitary sewer detention vault within the transfer trailer yard;
• An additional fueling facility;
• Access drives and a paved area for pay recycling and yard waste tipping, supported on
new fill west of the trailer parking retaining wall;
• An east perimeter road, to be partly supported on new fill; and
• A future facilities area, for possible collection of household hazardous waste (HHW)
or other uses, to be supported mostly on new fill.
• Construction of new parking stalls west of the new transfer building.
1.3 SCOPE OF SERVICES AND AUTHORIZATION
A preliminary scope of services and cost estimate for the geotechnical and environmental
investigation was submitted to Karl Hufnagel, of R.W. Beck, on August 24, 2006. Subsequent
revisions to scope and budget, based on updates to project understanding, were made on
September 26 and December 8, 2006, and January 3 and 26, 2007. Written authorization to
proceed was given in an email on January 23, 2007, by Karl Hufnagel, for the scope defined in
Amendment No. 3, Phase 2A, Exhibit A Scope of Work, dated February 19, 2007. The design
review and specification writing scope was set aside for Amendment No. 5. The need for out -of -
scope work for the subsurface exploration program (additional cost for drilling at night, and
additional boreholes) was identified and proposed costs were submitted February 16, 2007. This
additional scope was verbally approved by Karl Hufnagel and, subsequently, included in
Amendment No. 4, dated March 2, 2007.
Our scope of work for this project includes a combined geotechnical and environmental
subsurface exploration program; performing analytical laboratory tests; performing geotechnical
laboratory tests and engineering analyses; and preparing draft and final geotechnical reports.
Environmental analyses performed under this scope of work were reported separately, as follows:
• Phase 1 & II Environmental Site Assessment, WSDOT Property, September 17, 2007.
• Environmental Site Investigation, Bow Lake Processing / Transfer Station, July 9, 2007.
2003-008 FR.doc
3 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008_
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Supplemental geotechnical investigations were conducted for the Slope Pipelines (HWA, June
2008a) and for design of Wall E at the toe of the refuse slope as part of the Slope Stability report
(HWA, June 2008b).
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
2.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION
The fieldwork consisted of geologic reconnaissance of the site (King County parcel and WSDOT
parcel) and adjacent slopes, and a subsurface exploration program that included 37 borings
(designated B-201 through B-237) and 11 test pits (designated TP -1 through TP -11). The
surveyed exploration locations are plotted on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2A. These
subsurface explorations were performed to obtain both geotechnical and environmental data;
particularly, regarding the character and extent of fill and refuse on the site. Geotechnical data
obtained in previous investigations (see Appendix C) since 1965 in the vicinity of the existing
transfer station were utilized in planning our subsurface investigation, as well as for developing
geotechnical recommendations in this report.
Borehole drilling was conducted with four different drill rigs, by three subcontracted drilling
companies, from February 12 through March 6, 2007. Drilling equipment was selected based on
site access conditions, and included a truck -mounted drill rig, a large track -mounted drill rig, a
small track -mounted drill rig, and a hand -portable drill rig. The boreholes were advanced to
depths ranging from 10'/2 to 711/2 feet below the existing ground surface. Standpipe piezometers
were installed in five of the boreholes. The test pits were excavated on February 21 through 23,
2007, with a large trackhoe to depths of up to 26 feet below ground surface. Each of the
explorations was advanced under full-time HWA supervision, and was logged by an
envirorunental or engineering geologist. During the field investigation, soil samples were
classified in the field and pertinent information, including sample depths, stratigraphy, soil
engineering characteristics, and ground water occurrence was recorded.
HWA collected a composite soil sample from each soil boring and each test pit for
environmental analytical testing. Soil samples selected for composite analyses were collected
from the top soil -refuse interface, and throughout visibly refuse -contaminated soil to the bottom
of the soil -refuse interface. Representative soil samples were obtained from the explorations and
taken to our laboratory for further examination and geotechnical testing. All samples were field -
screened using a photo ionization detector (PID). Field exploration methods are described in
detail and logs of the explorations are presented in Appendix A.
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were conducted on selected samples obtained from the explorations to
characterize relevant engineering and index properties of the soils encountered. Laboratory tests
included in-situ moisture content, grain size distribution, pH and resistivity, and Atterberg
2003-008 FR.doc 4 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA .Project No. 2003-008
Limits. The tests were conducted in general accordance with appropriate American Society of
Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards. The test results and a discussion of laboratory test
methodology are presented in Appendix B, or displayed on the exploration logs in Appendix A,
as appropriate.
3.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS
3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION
The existing Bow Lake Transfer Station is located on the site of a closed landfill, adjacent to the
east side of I-5, north of the South 188th Street interchange (see Figure I). The WSDOT parcel is
located immediately north of thc existing transfer station. The project site, consisting of both
properties, is situated near the top of the west slope above the Duwamish River Valley. The
topography of the general site area has been extensively modified by previous landfill operations,
construction of I-5, and subsequent stockpiling of fill on the WSDOT parcel (see Section 3.3,
Site History).
3.1.1 King County Parcel
The King County property ranges in elevation from 290 feet, at the top of the slope on the I-5
(west) side, to 140 feet on the Duwamish River Valley (east) side. The portion of the site
containing the transfer station ranges in elevation from approximately 245 to 265 feet (see
Figure 2A). The transfer station site is relatively flat, with access roads and ramps for the
delivery and removal of solid waste. East of the existing transfer station, the ground slopes from
11/214:1V to 314:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical) within the former landfill, and is presently vegetated
with blackberry brambles and scattered deciduous trees. A 20- to 25 -foot high cut at the slope
toe, on the downslope La Pianta property to the east, is retained by an ecology block gravity wall.
Elevations of the eastern slope vary from approximately 245 to 255 feet at the transfer station
perimeter road, down to 80 feet at the southeastern property corner. Along most of the southern
property line, the slope is traversed in an easterly direction by a 50 -foot wide bench, which then
traverses northeast and northward along contour and gently slopes to a 100 -foot, or so, wide cut
bench at the northeastern property corner. A narrow dirt access road (grown over) descends the
slope from the north (crossing the La Pianta property from the WSDOT parcel) to the wide bench
area at the northeast corner.
The slopes above the bench and old road are covered with blackberries, and the surficial soil
consists of brown silty sand, with some scattered refuse, consisting of old bottles, tin cans, and
other metal and glass debris, on the ground surface. Slope gradients were observed to vary from
approximately 10 to 100 percent along short distances down the slope, indicative of modified
land. Historical aerial photos indicate this site was the main area of landfilling. The slope below
the wide bench is more consistent, with gradients ranging from 30 to 45 percent. Scattered trees
2003-008 FR.doc 5 HWA GEOSCJENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
present in this lower slope consist of 8- to 12 -inch maples, 12- to 18 -inch cottonwoods, and 6- to
8 -inch alders, the latter of which most are dead. The lower trunks of the trees are bent or
pistol -butt shaped, indicative of soil creep.
The toe of the slope east of the King County parcel, on the La Pianta property, consists of a
25 -foot or so high cut slope at about a 1/2H:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical) inclination. This steep cut
is buttressed by an Ecology Block wall, four -blocks high and backfilled with sand and gravel, at
the edge of a paved lay -down yard on the Green River valley floor. The soils exposed at the top
of the cut appear to be glacially over -consolidated silty sand with gravel.
Two 12 -inch storm drain pipelines are visible on the landfill slope: a corrugated plastic pipe
along the upslope edge of the southern property line bench; and a 12 -inch concrete -to -corrugated
metal pipe, located due east of the north end of the existing transfer building. In late October
2006, we observed no water flow at the culvert outlets on the slope, despite heavy rainfalls.
However, according to site utility plans and visual observations, stormwater is discharged to the
top of the fill slope, to the southeast of the transfer building. Surface expressions of past
stormwater discharge consisted of fresh green grass, remains of wet -soil plants not seen
elsewhere on the slope, and soft ground underfoot. No surface water was, however, observed.
The slopes south and east of the King County parcel, on the La Pianta property, were modified by
surface mining of sand and gravel as shown in a 1969 aerial photo and confirmed by our recent
observations. Escarpments between terraces were approximately 15 to 20 feet high, with the
terraces on the order of 30 to 50 feet wide. Second -growth deciduous trees up to approximately
18 inches in diameter were observed on the cut benches and escarpments.
3.1.2 WSDOT Parcel
The WSDOT parcel is dominated by two ages and types of soil stockpiles (one on top of the
other); a steep ravine to the north with an east -flowing stream; and a complex east -facing slope
descending to the valley floor. The dimensions of the top of the stockpile are about 300 feet by
220 feet. A small roadway provides access from 1-5 to the mostly -flattened top of the stockpile,
existing at an elevation of approximately 308 feet. A small additional mounded stockpile
reaches an elevation of 317 feet. This upper fill stockpile is covered with generally young
vegetation consisting of grass, Scots Broom, and emergent Himalayan Blackberry.
The upper fill stockpile is setback from the crest of the lower fill stockpile along the eastern and
southern sides. The lower stockpile is densely vegetated with a continuous blackberry thicket
along the southern and southeastern sides, transitioning to wooded with mature maples along the
northeastern and northern sides. The side slopes of the WSDOT stockpile on the north side are
inclined at about 20 percent in the upper half and about 30 percent in the lower half. The eastern
slope of the WSDOT stockpile varies in inclination between gradients of 20 to 100 percent with
the shallowest slope occurring on a bench at the base of the most recent fill stockpile,
approximately 20 feet lower than the top of the stockpile. The southern slope is similar to the
2003-008 FR.doc 6 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
eastern as it descends toward the transfer station property. No evidence of recent fill instability
was observed, even along the slope crests where sloughing typically occurs in uncompacted fills.
However, erosional rilling, up to 2 feet deep and 5 feet wide, was observed along the northern
lower slope of the WSDOT stockpile.
The stockpile is set back from the natural slopes to the north and east, and there is a gently -
sloping bench at the toe of the fill leading to the steeper natural slopes. The surficial soils along
the bench are gravelly and very dense. This bench ranges from 20 to 50 feet wide along the north
side and a minimum of 100 feet on the east side, and is inclined at approximately 20 percent.
The natural ravine slope to the north descends at gradients of approximately 55 to 60 percent in
the upper portion, steepening to 75 to 80 percent for the remainder of the slope to the ravine
bottom. Contours on the north side of the ravine show a similar gradient. Side ravines are
locally steeper near the crest of the main ravine. The side ravine approximately 45 feet north of
borehole B-237 is inclined at about 200 percent (%2H:1 V) in the upper 20 feet or so (see
Figure 2A). The slope soils consist of loose sand (colluvium) over very dense, clean, sand. The
slope surface was probed with a 3 -foot Iong, 1/2 -inch diameter, steel rod. The loose sand was
observed to be as little as '/2- to 1 -foot thick in the erosional side ravine, and 21/2 feet to more than
3 feet thick along most of the slope. Many of the trees on the ravine slope have straight trunks
indicating that slope creep is minimal. However, we observed evidence of at least two recent
shallow slides in the 15- to 20 -foot high escarpment, near the ravine head (west end), by a culvert
outlet that evidently drains stormwater from I-5. The outfall is likely causing erosion that is
contributing to retreat of the escarpment.
Ground water seepage was observed at the western end of the ravine in very dense sand, at about
100 feet east of the head and a few feet above the stream, and at the heads of two side ravines
approximately 100 feet higher than the stream. The presence and location of the main ravine and
side ravines can be attributed primarily to progressive slope retreat caused by ground water
seepage.
The eastern slope of the WSDOT parcel consists of the soil stockpile in the upper approximately
65 feet. The east property line fence is at or within 10 feet of the stockpile toe. Eastward from
the toe, is the gently -sloped bench, contiguous with the bench on the north side of the stockpile,
inclined at approximately 20 percent and just over 100 feet in width. The outer edge of the bench
forms the crest of the steep natural slope, inclined at approximately 85 percent in the upper
40 feet or so, then slopes more gently into a bowl -shaped area, with a second bowl down slope
from it. Such bowls are a typical geomorphic expression of landsliding. The slope beneath the
second bowl consists of a shallow ravine down to the Green River Valley, with a small stream
fed by ground water seepage on the slope. The upper bowl was vegetated with blackberry
brambles, an indicator of ground disturbance (such as by land clearing or grading activities, or by
sliding). Another small ravine is present to the north.
2003-008 CR.doc 7 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
3.2 GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
The geology of the Puget Sound region includes a thick sequence of over -consolidated glacial
and unconsolidated non -glacial soils overlying bedrock. Glacial deposits were formed by ice
originating in the mountains of British Columbia (Cordilleran Ice Sheet) and from alpine glaciers
which descended from the Olympic and Cascade Mountains. These ice sheets invaded the Puget
Lowland at least four times during the early to late Pleistocene Epoch (approximately 150,000 to
10,000 years before present). The southern extent of these glacial advances was near Olympia,
Washington. During periods between these glacial advances and after the last glaciation,
portions of the Puget Lowland filled with alluvial sediments deposited by rivers draining the
western slopes of the Cascades and the eastern slopes of the Olympics. The most recent glacial
advance, the Fraser Glaciation, included the Vashon Stade, during which the Puget Lobe of the
Cordilleran Ice Sheet advanced and retreated through the Puget Sound Basin. Existing
topography, surficial geology and hydrogeology in the project area were heavily influenced by
the advance and retreat of the Vashon Ice Sheet.
Surficial geological information for the site area was obtained partly from the published
geological map; "Geologic Map of the Des Moines Quadrangle, King County, Washington."
(Waldron, 1962). This map indicates that the plateau west of the site, upon which Sea -Tac
International Airport, and the cities of SeaTac, Burien, and Des Moines lie, is predominantly
mantled by Vashon till. This material was deposited as a discontinuous mantle of ground
moraine beneath glacial ice on the eroded surface of older deposits. Soils defined as Vashon till
consist of an unsorted, heterogeneous, mass of silt, gravel, and sand in varied proportions. The
till is of high density/strength due to glacial over -consolidation, and typically has low
permeability.
The surficial geology of the slope forming the side of the river valley, which includes the subject
site, is mapped as kame-terrace deposits. This material consists of stratified sand and gravel that
was deposited by meltwater streams flowing from receding glacial ice, and was deposited against
or close to the ice as Ice -Contact Stratified Drift. Inclusions of till are common, typically
discontinuous and of limited thickness. In the past, these kame-terrace deposits were frequently
mined for sand and gravel.
3.3 SITE HISTORY
Based on a report entitled Abandoned Landfill Study in King County, produced by Public Health
Seattle -King County (PHSKC) in 1985, the subject property was used as a landfill from 1943 to
the late 1950's when construction of 1-5 began (PHSKC, 1985). According to the report, the
Bow Lake Landfill was the largest in the county during the 1950's. An incinerator was installed
in 1955 and was used for a short time before being shut down. Interpretations of site history
from aerial photographs are included in the Phase I and I1 assessment of the WSDOT parcel
(HWA, 2007). Old newspapers retrieved from one of our explorations (TP -10) had dates which
indicated Landfilling continued until at least 1961. Construction of I-5 displaced a portion of the
2003-008 FR.doc 8 HWA GEOSC1ENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
landfill, and material consisting of burned refuse and soil was stockpiled eastward onto the
WSDOT parcel (evidently obtained by the highway department for this purpose). The original
transfer station was constructed in 1961, but was closed down by the Washington Department of
Labor and Industries in 1970.
The current transfer station was built in 1978 and continues to serve the area around Tukwila,
Washington. The existing transfer building was constructed above refuse, and is supported on
driven timber piles, but has suffered distress from settlement due to some of the supporting piles
encountering refusal in fill above deeper refuse (Hong Consulting Engineers, 1986, 1987, and
1988). Settlement of paved areas supported above refuse has also occurred, as is normal for
landfill materials.
Placement of the upper fill stockpile on the WSDOT site began sometime after BH -1 was drilled
by HWA in February 1994, and ended in 2002 based on air photos and our site knowledge.
3.4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The current and previous soil investigations at the project site have encountered five general
material types: Fill soil, Fill with Refuse, Refuse, Burn Fill, and Glacial Deposits, as summarized
in the following sub -sections. Most of the developed portion of the site contains surficial fill
soil, evidently placed as a cap over the refuse for construction of the existing transfer station.
The stockpile area of the WSDOT parcel typically consists of fill soil over burn fill. However, in
the southeastern portion of the WSDOT parcel, an unburned refuse zone was encountered
beneath the burn fill in two of the explorations.
The extent of the particular types of fill, as interpreted from the current and previous
explorations, is delineated on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2A. Ten geologic
cross-sections through the project site, presented in Figures 3A through 3K, are based on the
current and previous exploration logs, the recent topographic survey by DHA, and our ground
surface observations. The first five cross-sections are the same designations and locations as
developed for the 1993 Hong West report, with F -F' extended onto the WSDOT parcel.
However, cross-section C -C' has been omitted, as it constituted a short portion of section A -A'.
It is to be noted that, due to the interpretive nature of cross-sections, only the exploration logs
should be relied upon for subsurface detail at particular locations.
On the exploration logs, soil layers containing compressible unburned refuse are indicated with a
cross -hatched pattern, as noted in the left-hand column for soil symbols. A similar hatching on
the cross-sections also indicates the presence of compressible refuse.
3.4.1 Fill Soil
3.4.1.1 Fill on Existing Transfer Station Property
2003-008 FR.doc 9 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008 . .
HWA Project No. 2003-008
A fill cap over refuse was encountered beneath pavement and lawn areas. This soil consisted of
sand with variable silt content (Unified Soil Classification SP to SM), and was generally about
5 feet thick, but varied from 0 to approximately 10 feet. The fill was thicker in portions of the
existing transfer station site; up to nearly 30 feet thick adjacent to the transfer shed.
3.4.1.2 Fill on WSDOT Property
On the WSDOT site, the upper 20 to 35 feet or so of the stockpile ("WSDOT Fill") is thought to
have been placed during construction of recent road projects. The upper five to eight feet of the
flat portion of the stockpile consisted of drier granular soil cap; e.g. loose to medium dense,
brown, fine to medium, sand with gravel and silt. Below the granular cap layer, the next 15 to .
20 feet consisted of clay and plastic and non -plastic silt. Some road construction debris was
observed in the recent test pits. This silt and clay has a high moisture content, close to the plastic
limits for these materials, and are moisture sensitive. Therefore, they are difficult to handle and
generally inadequate as fill material (see Section 4.19)
3.4.2 Fill with Refuse
A stratified mixture of silty sand fill and municipal solid waste (MSW) was present beneath the
surface fill in many areas of the existing transfer station site. The refuse content observed in
recent explorations was approximately 10 to 50 percent by volume. This layer varied from
approximately 10 to 20 feet thick in the recent explorations.
Fill with burned and non -burned refuse was encountered adjacent to I-5 along the western portion
of the King County parcel. High lead levels were detected in samples from borehole B-202,
strong creosote odors were detected in test pit TP -7, and a strong diesel or gasoline odor was
noted in test pit TP -8.
3.4.3 Refuse
Unburned refuse (municipal solid waste) was encountered in most of the explorations on the
existing transfer station site, and in two explorations in the southeast portion of the WSDOT site.
In recent explorations, it was observed to consist of household waste with glass and bottles, tin
cans, assorted metal, plastic, porcelain, newspaper, etc. Deposits containing soil fill with greater
than 50 percent refuse by volume were logged as Refuse. The type and labeling of food and
beverage packaging, as well as a 1961 date on a newspaper, indicated the refuse dates from the
late 1950's to early 1960's. The refuse thickness generally varied from approximately 10 to
30 feet, and extended to depths of approximately 15 to 40 feet below the existing ground surface.
3.4.4 Burn Fill
This fill consisted of reddish -brown and blackish -brown, gravelly, silty sand (Unified Soil
Classification SM) with variable amounts (typically about 10 to 30 percent by volume) of glass,
metal, porcelain, brick, slag, burned wood, and some plastic. Based on our review of stereo -pairs
2003-008 FR.doc
10 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
of historical aerial photos, this material was displaced by I-5 •construction and stockpiled on the
WSDOT parcel. The burn fill is exposed at the ground surface of the lower WSDOT stockpile,
and was observed in the recent and previous boreholes to range in thickness from approximately
10 to 30 feet, thickening to the east and south before tapering down to the stockpile toe. Burn fill
along the southeastern portion of the old stockpile was observed overlapping early 1960's refuse
in two explorations (borehole B-229 and test pit TP -11). Burn Fill -like material was also
encountered in test pits TP -7 and TP -8 along the west side of the transfer station property.
3.4.5 Glacial Deposits
Each of the borings was advanced into native glacial soils, generally consisting of massive to
stratified clean sand (Unified Soil Classification of SP), and silty sand or sandy silt (Unified Soil
Classification of SM to ML), of variable density ranging from medium dense to very dense. The
stratified character, varied texture, and variable density are consistent with an ice -marginal
origin; i.e., kame-terrace deposits at the edge of an ice -filled valley during glacial retreat.
Although classified in general as kame-terrace deposits, the glacial deposits are interpreted on the
exploration logs as particular depositional facies; e.g. outwash, till, and ice -contact stratified •
drift.
Native glacial soils were encountered at the ground surface in explorations along the base of the
western slope, the north end of the King County property, and the western portion of the
WSDOT parcel. Very dense, clean to silty sand was observed in a few soil exposures within the
steep ravine on the north side of the WSDOT parcel, and in cuts in the slope on the property
down slope from the WSDOT parcel.
3.5 GROUND WATER
Ground water was observed in some of the explorations along the western side of the site, in the
vicinity of the proposed retaining wall for the north access road. Perched ground water was
observed in 1111 exposed in test pits TP -7 and TP -8. Perched ground water was observed in test
pit TP -6 on silt seams within outwash sand, and ground water was observed in boreholes B-202
and B-203 during drilling. Standpipe piezometers were installed in boreholes B-202, B-203, and
B-204 along the proposed access road retaining wall adjoining I-5. Ground water was also
encountered in boreholes B-206 and B-209 during drilling, and piezometers were also installed.
Subsequent water level measurements in the piezometers are indicated in Table 1.
Of the two piezometers installed by HWA in 2003, BH -4 had about 1 -foot of ground water, at a
depth of 32.2 feet, and BH -3 was dry to a depth of 30 feet. Follow-up measurements obtained
Novernber 4, 2004, indicated BH -3 was dry and BH -4 had Y2 -inch of water on the probe tip,
possibly due to condensation collecting from the well casing.
2003-008 FR.doc 1 1 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Table 1 - Ground Water Levels, March 9, 2007
ll
WeV-'
4'°' ,:
t Gro.,,y'fppndi
Elevation_
g:Depth to •
Ground Water -Elevation
', '(feet)g'
rGro�uridWater- ;
(te ty
, _:(feet} .,..
BH -3
280
DRY to 30
Deeper than 250
BH -4
290
32.22
258
B-202
290.35
20.26
270.09
B-203
290.46
DRY to 51.5
Deeper than 249
B7204
282.46
DRY to 50.5
Deeper than 251
B-206
250.04
22.68
227.36
B-209
222.34
33.72
188.62
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 GENERAL
Our investigations have included the existing transfer station site on King County property and
the WSDOT site, which King County is in the process of acquiring. There are two distinctive
characteristics between these two sites: the existing transfer station site contains municipal refuse
which is very compressible in many places, and the WSDOT site contains burnt refuse which is
predominantly soil, and is less compressible than the municipal refuse fills. The upper recent fill
on the WSDOT site contains large inclusions of construction debris like concrete chunks, wood
and steel beams. Also, the WSDOT fill contains a 15 to 20 -foot thickness of wet clay and silt,
which is highly moisture sensitive. This material will be difficult to handle for use as structural
fill or preload fill, and should not be used for fill on slopes. It would be best to waste this
material from the site. Existing granular fill in the upper 5 to 10 feet of the WSDOT site may,
however, be reused as general fill, under the right moisture conditions.
All of these fill materials are underlain by dense native glacial deposits, generally consisting of
clean to silty sand.
To assist in development of an understanding of the site subsurface conditions, and the design of
the proposed facility, we have attempted to delineate the extent of soil fill, refuse, and glacial
deposits such as outwash sand beneath the site. Accordingly, extensive geotechnical cross-
sections were developed throughout the site. However, despite many exploration test holes, the
boundaries of refuse and fill layers delineated on the Site and Exploration Plan (Figure 2A) and
the cross-sections should be considered approximate, as conditions in modified ground typically
vary considerably within short distances both horizontally and vertically. The cross-sections
suggest that the refuse layers are found practically in all areas of the existing King County
transfer station site, and the southeast portion of the WSDOT site. Any future site filling above
2003-008 FR.doc
12
HWA GEOSC1ENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
the present ground level in areas underlain by refuse will result in significant total and
differential settlement, which will necessitate periodic long-term maintenance to any facility
supported on such fill, particularly for pavement surfaces and any drainage structures.
The design and construction of all site facilities should take into account these uncertainties, and
the associated costs for long-term maintenance should be included for the future operations of the
facilities. Long-term field settlement monitoring stations should be established during
construction such that the maintenance of structures in the future can be scheduled and orderly
operations can be ensured.
The WSDOT site is surcharged with the recent and 1960's stock piling of fill up to 48 feet above
the proposed tipping floor EL 270 feet. In the stockpile area, foundations can be designed based
on the preloading or surcharge effect provided by the stockpiled material. However, any area
surcharged by less than 10 feet within the building footprint should be preloaded further by
moving soils from higher ground to the area in need, such that the building loads can be
supported on spread footings. Alternatively, such foundations may be proportioned on the basis
of a reduced allowable bearing pressure.
4.2 SEISMICITY
As most public buildings are designed based on International Building Code (IBC) requirements,
adequate seismic risk assessment should be incorporated into the structural design.
The Puget Sound area is known to be seismically active, as evidenced by recent significant
seismic events including the 1949 Olympia (magnitude 7.2), the 1965 Seattle (magnitude 6.5),
and the 2001 Nisqually (magnitude 6.8) Earthquakes. The seismic hazard in the area comes from
three main sources: (1) subduction zone (interplate), (2) Benioff zone (intraslab), and (3) shallow
crustal earthquakes.
Subduction zone earthquakes occur locally when the interface bond between the North American
Tectonic Plate and the subducting Juan de Fuca Plate ruptures. In contrast to similar geologic
regimes having subducting plates, such as Alaska or Chile, no earthquakes have been recorded in
the Pacific Northwest from thrust fault deformation between plates. However, seismologists
believe that the local subduction zone has created great interplate earthquakes (Magnitude > 8) in
the past, and is likely to produce earthquakes with magnitudes up to 9. Significant ground
accelerations would occur at the site in the event of a large subduction zone earthquake;
however, the long distance to the rupture area would reduce the intensity of shaking.
Notwithstanding, the duration of the shaking could last several minutes.
Benioff zone or intraslab events occur due to tensional rupture within the subducting Juan de
Fuca Plate at depths of 28 to 38 miles. This is the source of the largest historical local
earthquakes - 1949 Olympia, 1965 Seattle, and 2001 Nisqually. This source has the potential for
events with magnitudes of approximately 7.5. Shaking from a Benioff zone event could be
significant at the site.
2003-008 FR.doc 13 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Shallow crustal earthquakes occur on shallow faults due to tectonic stresses. Minor
(magnitude 2) events occur frequently in the Puget Sound region on shallow faults. The Puget
Sound area is underlain by several shallow faults. The most notable fault, capable of producing a
strong event in the area, is the Seattle Fault, which is an east -west trending zone of thrust or
reverse faults that strikes roughly through downtown Seattle. Recent research indicates that these
faults are capable of producing events with magnitudes of 6.5 to 7, which could cause severe
damage in the Seattle area. The project site is estimated to be located within 5 miles of the
Seattle Fault Zone.
4.3 SEISMIC DESIGN
At the present time, seismic design in King County follows the 2003 IBC. The IBC requires
structures be designed for the inertial forces induced by a "Maximum Considered Earthquake"
(MCE) event, which corresponds to an earthquake event with a 2 percent probability of
exceedance (PE) in 50 years (approximately 2,500 -year return period). The IBC accounts for the
effects of site-specific subsurface ground conditions on the response of structures in terms of site
classes. Site classes are defined by the average density and stiffness of the soil profile underlying
the site. The IBC Site Class can be correlated to the average standard penetration resistance
(Nsvr) in the upper 100 feet of the soil profile. Based on our characterization of the subsurface
conditions at the project site, IBC Site Class D applies to the majority of the site. However, areas
of glacial deposits such as along the proposed I-5 retaining wall are Site Class C.
For this solid waste facility, which receives municipal refuse, but not hazardous materials, it may
be appropriate to design the retaining walls for a 10% PE 50 -year event (approximately 475 -year
return period). Earthquake pressures based on the 2,500 -year return period maximum considered
earthquake approximately double those calculated for the 475 -year return period. Table 2
provides the parameters needed for use with the 2003 IBC design procedures for four earthquake
levels, which were based on data from the United States Geologic Survey Hazard Mapping
Project (2002).
Table 2 — Probabilistic Ground Acceleration Parameters per USGS
Probability of
Exceedance
Return Period
Peak Ground
Acceleration
(PGA)
0.2 sec Spectral
Response
Acceleration
1.0 sec Spectral
Response
Acceleration
50% in 75 years
108 year
0.16
0.36
0.11
10% in 50 years
475 year
0.32
0.72
0.24
2% in 50 years
2,475 year
0.61
1.38
0.47
1% in 50 years
4,975 year
0.76
1.73
0.61
2003-008 FR.doc
14
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
4.4 REFUSE SETTLEMENT
The King County parcel is extensively underlain by refuse which was deposited during prior
landfill operations. The extent of the landfill stretches from the western boundary along 1-5 to
the eastern slopes of the site. The WSDOT parcel also contains refuse in the southeastern
portion. If any structures or fills are supported on the refuse, significant post construction
settlement should be expected and, consequently, could induce various levels of damage
associated with cracking and deformation to the structures. To reduce potentially severe damage
to improvements over compressible materials, ordinarily, sites such as this are treated either by
over -excavation of refuse and replacement with structural fill, or by preloading with a large
surcharge fill to preconsolidate the refuse.
The purpose of preloading compressible deposits is to generate levels of primary settlement that
will sufficiently exceed the level of combined primary and most, if not all, of the design -life
secondary settlement that would be developed solely by any new site grading fill and structures.
Typically, future settlements will be markedly reduced, and will take the form of long-term
secondary compression effects and, in the case of refuse, biodegradation settlement.
4.4.1 Compressibility of Refuse
The compressibility of refuse or MSW depends on several factors including:
• Age and composition of the refuse;
• Nature and amount of daily cover soil;
• How the refuse and daily cover were placed;
• Leachate (ground water) level within the refuse;
• Moisture content and temperature of the refuse; and
• Amount of landfill gas.
Researchers describe landfill settlement as three phases: immediate, instant, and delayed
compression. Immediate compression occurs at the moment the load is applied. Instant
compression is analogous to consolidation settlement in mineral soils, but for refuse this takes
place rapidly; hence, the terminology "instant". The combined immediate and instant
compression is also termed primary settlement. In our experience on other preloaded landfill
sites, the primary settlement typically occurs within about 10 days of completion of fill
placement, and comprises most (about two-thirds) of the total settlement induced by the preload.
Delayed compression includes: a) plastic creep; b) raveling (break-down)of refuse materials; and
c) decomposition/biodegradation, and occurs over long time periods (i.e. many months to years).
Delayed compression is also termed secondary settlement. The purpose of the preload is to
generate settlements that exceed the combined primary and most of the design -life secondary
settlement that would be developed by the new facilities.
Because of the inherent variability of refuse, differential settlement is impossible to predict with
a high degree of certainty on landfrlIs. For natural (mineral) soils, observations show that
differential settlement is a fraction, typically less than 50 percent of the total settlement.
2003-008 FR.doc
15
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Observed case histories of landfill preloadingl have indicated differential settlements up to 50 to
100 percent of the total estimated settlement (typically large). Accordingly, for highly variable
deposits such as landfill refuse, it is conservative to assume that differential settlement could
equal total settlement. Differential settlements are also influenced by non -geotechnical factors
such as the uniformity and rate of application of the loading. When considering differential
settlement, it is necessary to also consider the distance between points of maximum and
minimum settlement.
Using a conventional consolidation theory approach, the landfill settlement is normally
calculated in a very approximate way and needs to be verified in the field by physical
measurements at settlement monitoring stations. Settlement estimates are discussed further in
the following report sections.
4.4.2 Primary Settlement
The primary settlement of the refuse can be estimated as:
Sr=HCCeLog((cr'vo + do)/ Eva
• Sr is the primary settlement of the refuse.
• 11 is the original refuse layer thickness.
• CCe is the coefficient ofprimary consolidation. Based on our local experience, CCe
ranges from 0.17 to 0.23. Since this value is highly variable from one landfill to
another, for design purposes, we recommend 0.23 for this project. However, it
should be used with great care and with comprehensive field monitoring performed
for verification.
• cr.„ is the original vertical effective stress at the midpoint in the refuse layer.
• Au is the increase in the original vertical effective stress at the midpoint in the
layer.
Three such case histories that we have referenced are: 1) 41' Street Overcrossing Project in Everett, Washington, a
new roadway embankment on the closed Everett Landfill; 2) Preload Monitoring at Greenhouse and West Truck
Scales area in Tacoma, Washington; and 3) the Pacific Reach Business Park, in Vancouver, B.C., a series of office
buildings constructed over the reclaimed Leeder Landfill. These preloaded landfill sites were monitored with
settlement plates.
2003-008 FR.doc
16 HWA GEOSCIENCES 1NC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
4.4.3 .Secondary Settlement
The secondary settlement can be estimated using the following equation:
AH= Cae log At H
• AH is the long-term or secondary settlement.
• Cae is the coefficient of the secondary consolidation. Based on our experience
locally in Puget Sound, Cae ranges from 0.024 to 0.030. This value is highly
variable from one landfill to another. At the project site, we recommend 0.030 for
design purposes. However, it should be used with great care and a comprehensive
field monitoring performed for verification.
• At is the time over which the long-term settlement occurs in years (the design life of
the facility).
• H is the initial thickness of the compressible layer.
4.4.4 Bio -degradation Settlement
Bio -degradation of organic matter within the refuse results in long-term settlements that cannot
be mitigated by preloading. The rate of biodegradation settlement is very difficult to predict,
because it is sensitive to the nature of the waste stream, which is variable in composition and
distribution in the landfill mass. Moreover, the age of the landfill also has an influence on the
biodegradation rates; older refuse materials, having already experienced substantial
biodegradation, exhibit reduced degradation rates. For other landfill reclamation projects, we
have used average biodegradation settlement rates of 0.2 to 0.4 percent of refuse thickness per
year as design estimates. Little quantitative data, however, is available to corroborate the
appropriateness of this estimate, and lesser or greater settlement due to biodegradation should be
considered possible. Notwithstanding, some short-term survey monitoring information on
another preloaded landfill site with which we are familiar (Pacific Reach, Vancouver, B.C.),
suggests that this is a reasonable range of values to use for estimating such settlement.
4.5 PRELOAD CONSIDERATIONS
Any structures built in an area underlain by refuse without proper preload treatment will settle
significantly for an extended period of time. This settlement will damage any structures built on
the refuse as well as the connecting underground utilities. To reduce the settlement damage to
structures on the compressible refuse, it is necessary to surcharge the area with weight greater
than the foundation load of the structures and any permanent site grading in excess of existing
conditions.
2003-008 FR.doc
17
HWA GGOSCIBNCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
For the trailer parking area, our experience suggests that this can be accomplished by designing a
preload thickness at least 10 + S feet higher than the proposed final grade, where S is the
estimated settlement of the design grade plus preload. For this site, S is estimated to be 2 feet
where the refuse is about 15 feet in thickness and will be less, accordingly, for the thinner refuse
deposits.
For the trailer parking retaining wall, if a gravity type wall is to be built on the existing ground,
we recommend a preload fill of 15 + S feet above finished grade; S is the estimated settlement of
the design grade plus preload. For this site, S is estimated to be 2 feet where the refuse is about
15 feet in thickness and will be less, accordingly, for the thinner refuse deposits. After the
preload period is deemed to be sufficiently complete, the surcharge will be removed to final
grades, prior to construction of the facility, resulting in a pre -consolidation effect in the
underlying compressible deposits.
For the backfill and recycle area behind the trailer parking wall, the preload fill thickness should
be 10 + S feet above the proposed finished grade, with estimated S=2 feet. The estimated
preload fill will be approximately 30,000 cubic yards.
At the trailer pad area, the preload thickness will average about 10 + S feet above the proposed
finished grade, where estimated S=2 feet. We estimate approximately 64,000 cubic yards of fill
will be required to construct this preload.
The recommended preload treatment area is displayed on Figure 2C. When the refuse area
outlined on Figure 2C is preloaded with 10 feet plus 2 feet of material, the preload fill volume
will be approximately 100,000 cubic yards.
4.5.1 Preloading Time Required
The time required to place the fill will vary depending on the equipment and personnel assigned
to the job. Assuming an average fill placement rate of 1,000 cubic yards per day, we estimate
that preload construction will take approximately three months time, assuming continuous
placement operations. Based on our preloading experience on other landfills, we anticipate a
preload duration period of the order of 3 to 6 months (following completion of filling) will be
required. We recommend that the settlement monitoring stations be installed and monitored for
timing the necessary preload duration.
4.5.2 Preload Monitoring
Time -settlement monitoring of preload treatment of any site is essential to allow assessment of
the effectiveness and progression of the procedure. We recommend settlement monitoring
stations be installed at multiple locations within the preloaded footprint. The makeup and details
of the monitoring stations, as discussed in the following, may range from conventional surface
plates, for monitoring of total settlement, to deep installations that will allow measurement of
settlements in discrete layers.
2003-008 FR.doc
18
HWA GEOSCIENCES 1NC.
June 27, 2008.:
HWA Project No. 2003-008.
Conventional Settlement Plates: These typically consist of a 2 -foot square plywood or steel
plate with a 2- or 3 -inch pipe flange bolted to the center, and 2- or 3 -inch steel riser pipe threaded
into the flange. Most commonly, the riser pipe segments are prefabricated to 5 foot lengths with
standard external couplers used to join the successive segments. The settlement plates are
typically placed prior to any site filling over a prepared thin sand pad to provide for a level
surface and allow good contact with the ground surface. The elevation of the top of the pipe and
the adjacent ground surface are surveyed. Site filling is then undertaken with care exercised
during placement of fill around the riser pipes. As the top of the fill approaches the top of the
pipe, another section of pipe can be added. However, the elevation of the top of the pipe must be
recorded immediately before and immediately after the extension is placed, to maintain
continuity of the elevation data and accurate assessment of the riser pipe height at any given time.
Settlement plates should be surveyed to indicate the initial elevations of the top of the plate, top
of riser pipe, and ground level adjoining the plate riser to the nearest 0.01 foot accuracy,
employing a benchmark not influenced by the existing landfill nor by future site filling
operations. During the course of fill placement, the settlement monitoring plates should be
surveyed not less than once weekly, and on each occasion a riser pipe is added. On days when
fill is being placed within 50 feet of a settlement plate(s), the settlement plate(s) should be
surveyed daily. On conclusion of the preload placement, the survey frequency may be reduced to
biweekly for the following 2 months, and monthly thereafter.
To provide for a good understanding of preload effects, the total number of plates should be
determined on the basis of one at each grid point in a 100 -foot grid over the refuse area. For this
project, we estimate that you would need approximately 20 plates for the recommended preload
area. All settlement plate riser pipes should be protected with 6 inch stand pipes capped with
survey monument covers to enable long-term monitoring, where practicable after preload
removal.
Deep Settlement Monitoring Instruments: Deep settlement monitoring instruments may be
constructed of 3 -inch diameter corrugated ABS pipe with magnetic rings (strip magnets cut to
length and wrapped around the pipe) attached at approximately 3 -foot or other convenient
intervals to permit measurement of settlement in discrete zones at depth. The flexible corrugated
ABS pipe is inserted around the outside of an interior 2 -inch diameter PVC pipe with flush
threaded connections. This assembly is inserted in a borehole and the annular space between the
borehole and the corrugated pipe is backfilled with a low -strength grout designed to deform (i.e.,
settle) with the surrounding soil. The flexible corrugated pipe, in turn, will compress with the
surrounding low -strength grout. A magnetic sensor probe lowered into the interior PVC pipe
will allow measurement of relative positions of the magnetic rings over time, and will permit
determination of the magnitude and rate of settlement with depth. The elevation of the top of the
casing is surveyed and the elevations of the magnetic rings can be determined periodically, as for
the conventional surface settlement plates.
2003-008 FR.doc
19
HWA GEOSCIENCI3S 1NC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Before fills are placed over these instruments, they can be extended upward so that the top of the
casing is always above grade. The contractor must be careful so as not to get soil or debris into
the casing during this process.
A sufficient number of settlement plates should be used in conjunction with several deep
settlement gages. We recommend two deep settlement gauges at the recycle areas where the fill
depth is anticipated to be deep. Protective surface covers should be installed on these deep
settlement monitoring stations to permit long-term monitoring capability.
The contractor must be very careful so as not to damage the instrumentation when placing fill or
otherwise operating equipment in their proximity.
We recommend HWA be retained to review preload design and evaluate the settlement plate
locations and data as it is acquired. It is our experience that municipal solid waste settles quickly
when loaded. However, a preload period of not less than 3 months (following completion of
filling) should be anticipated. Moreover, in some locations, a substantial thickness of refuse may
be present, and a reduced preload surcharge thickness to refuse thickness ratio may be operative
for these locations. Such a condition could result in a greater time period being required to effect
the degree of settlement considered desirable, prior to preload surcharge removal.
4.5.3 Estimated Refuse Settlement under Fills without Preload Treatment
Using available published compressibility parameters for landfill refuse, as well as recently
acquired data from a preload -monitoring program at the Everett Landfill, we have estimated
potential settlements that might be anticipated for fills placed over refuse materials at this site.
For our estimate, we have assumed fill heights of 10 feet and 15 feet, above a 15 feet refuse
layer, and have determined that this will generate estimated settlements of 3.5 feet and 3.9 feet,
respectively. These settlement estimates include the primary, secondary and biodegradation
settlement components. At this site, the existing west entrance access road will be filled up to
EL 270 feet from the current approximate ground level at EL 250 feet, and will also cause similar
settlements over the years in the absence of preload treatment.
Figure 4, Refuse Settlement Calculations, provides more detailed settlement estimate results for
various refuse thickness and new fill heights. These settlement estimates should be adopted with
caution rather than taking them as absolute values, because errors associated with academic
exercises such as this can come with large margins of 50 to 100 percent. The calculated
settlements are only intended to demonstrate to the facility designers, the owner and contractors
that the potential long-term settlements for the site are very large (i.e., feet rather than inches).
All fill areas should be monitored with settlement plates whenever fill is added for grading
purposes, even though the fill may not be intended for preload treatment.
2003-008 FR.doc 20 HWA GEOSC[ENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
4.5.4 Proposed Improvements Built on Refuse Area with Preload Treatment
When a refuse area is loaded with new fill, the additional load will compress the refuse and any
utilities embedded in or supported above the refuse will experience a change in grades. In some
cases, pipeline gradients may become reversed and hydraulic flow can be interrupted by the
excessive settlement, or pipe joints may get separated from tension effects associated with
sagging.
Structures built above refuse may also settle severely and display tilting and cracking of the
walls, floors and foundations. Pavements or slabs built above refuse often experience abrupt
bumps or depressions ("bird baths") in their surfaces. Drainage manholes or vaults that may be
supported on firm ground or piles below the refuse can protrude in the middle of pavements or
graded areas as the rest of the area settles. Periodic leveling of such facilities is required.
To alleviate or reduce the problems described above, we recommend 10 feet of preload plus
2 feet of additional fill to compensate for the anticipated settlement. The anticipated settlement
under this load can be estimated from Figure 4 with two sample calculations. We recommend a
minimum 6" differential settlement be adopted for all utility pipes in the areas where the
preloaded treatment (12 feet) is applied.
4.5.5 Existing Utilities in the Refuse Area Impacted by the Added Fill
The existing transfer station site is underlain by drainage and sanitary sewers. The drainage
system will undoubtedly be impacted (caused to settle) by any added fill in the areas that are
underlain by refuse. If large deflections form in the pipes of the collection system due to
differential settlement, hydraulic gradients of the drainage system may be disrupted. All existing
utilities under proposed fill areas should be reconstructed as the existing utilities will likely be
damaged due to anticipated settlements. Preferably, reconstruction should be preceded by
appropriate preloading along pipe corridors. Alternatively, reconstruction of the utilities should
be delayed as long as possible after site grading has been performed, to permit as much
settlement to occur as possible in response to the fill prior to utility construction, to reduce
settlement effects.
4.5.6 New Road Fill East of the Transfer Trailer Yard
The new east perimeter road will be extended easterly as shown on the site plan, Figure 2A. The
maximum proposed road fill height in the area ranges from a few feet to 23 feet where Future
Facilities (e.g. Household Hazardous Waste) are planned. At the proposed Future Facilities area,
boring 13-209 encountered 31 feet of refuse.
The existing east access road area is underlain by extensive amounts of refuse, with up to 40 feet
in thickness encountered in some borings. Any road embankment fill added to the existing
refuse will cause settlement, which could reach as much as 1/3 the height of the added fill over
the long -terns. To reduce post -construction settlements, the new road areas should be preloaded.
2003-008 FR.doc
21 HWA GEOSCTENCES INC.
June. 27, 2008.
HWA Project No. 2003-008
The preload should remain in place for an extended period of time. The total preload height
should be at least one times the total height of the final fill. However, it is impractical, in some
cases, to apply preload equivalent to total height of the final fill, due to its location at the crest of
the slope. Therefore, we recommend that the same preload height (12 feet) be used as for the
general site preloading.
To contain the fill from spilling down the slope, we understand a toe wall (Wall E) will be
constructed along the toe of the existing refuse slope. The toe containment wall and the fill
should be constructed concurrently to ensure that materials are properly placed, compacted and
contained. Recommendations for design and construction of Wall E are provided separately, in
the Final Slope Stability Report, Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer Station (HWA, June
2008b).All preloaded areas should be monitored in accordance with Section 4.5.2 of this report.
When the preload is removed, the final slope should be trimmed to a maximum gradient of
2H:1 V, with the edge of road constructed with a minimum setback of 10 -feet from the crest of
the slope. The finished slope surface should be hydroseeded and/or otherwise vegetated to limit
erosion due to runoff.
4.6 RETAINING WALL ALONG 1-5 (WALL A)
The west perimeter road will be constructed along a proposed retained cut parallel to I-5. After
excavation of the higher ground along I-5, to approximately the existing highway road grade, the
required retaining wall height is anticipated to vary from approximately 12 feet at the south end,
15 feet along most of the wall, and gradually drop to 13 feet at the north end.
Our test borings and test pits conducted in the area revealed that much of the proposed wall and
roadway along the King County parcel is underlain by fill with refuse for the upper 7 feet. High
levels of lead were detected in one borehole (B-202), and high levels of hydrocarbons were
detected in two test pits (TP -7 and TP -8). However, the extent of the refuse is not presently
clearly defined. Based on our explorations, the fill with refuse extends below the top of the
proposed wall in some locations.
Although a soil nail wall would be the most economical wall type in native ground conditions, it
is not feasible to install soil nails into refuse. Rather, the cut along the highway can be supported
by building either a cast -in-place concrete retaining wall, a soldier pile wall with or without
tiebacks, or MSE gravity wall. MSE walls can be built economically at this location if an
excavation easement is obtained. Any walls requiring excavation or drilling into WSDOT
property would require an easement from the agency. Alternatively, a cantilever soldier pile wall
can be erected readily without the need for an easement and is considered the best alternative for
this location,
Detailed design parameters for a cantilever soldier pile wall along I-5 are shown on Figure 5A,
Earth Pressure Diagram. Since the wall will be parallel to and in proximity to the freeway,
loading conditions on the wall, as might be envisioned by WSDOT for future freeway widening,
2003-008 FR.doc
22 IIWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
should be included in active earth pressure calculations. The minimum recommended
embedment depths of the soldier piles should be 1.5 times the height of the wall.
The WSDOT geotechnical design manual (GDM) stipulates that all critical transportation
structures shall be designed based on a seismic event with a risk level of 2 percent Probability of
Exceedance (PE) in 50 years. Accordingly, this condition requires that the peak ground
acceleration (PGA) at the Bow Lake site be taken as 0.61g, which is very high. Non-critical
structures, however, shall be designed based on 10 percent PE in 50 years. In our opinion, the
proposed cut wall is considered a non-critical structure in regards to both the transfer station and
the I-5 roadway. Therefore, it is our opinion that the wall along I-5 at this site should be
designed for a PGA of 1/2 of 0.32g, which is the maximum bedrock acceleration for this site
with a 10 percent PE in 50 years. With reference to the WSDOT GDM, Table 6-3, the site
amplification factor for the bedrock PGA should be taken as 1, since dense glacial deposits
should be considered as Site Class C.
As the foundation soil below the excavation level consists of dense glacial deposits (generally
outwash sand), the factor of safety for global slope instability below the base of the wall is much
higher than the required minimum static value of 1.5.
The vertical bearing capacity at the tip of the piles will be much larger than the vertical load
imposed by the retaining wall system. Therefore, the load bearing capacity of the soldier piles
comprising the wall is not an issue at this wall location, provided that the piles are installed
properly.
Drill holes (shafts) that are commonly employed for setting of the soldier piles are expected to
experience caving since the area is underlain by outwash sand that may, in part, be below the
localized ground water table. The drilled shafts or holes which will receive the soldier piles
should, therefore, be either cased or filled with chemical drilling mud to prevent sloughing or
caving. Concrete pours should be tremied after a soldier pile is lowered into the hole.
Southern portions of the wall along I-5 will encounter ground water within the excavation for the
roadway. The wall should, therefore, be constructed with a drainage composite mat between
soldier piles to relieve any seepage pressures behind it. The seepage generated from perched
water as we observed in TP -6 should be collected at the base of the entire I-5 wall by installing a
gravel trench with drain outlets off to the east. We found no ground water along the north end
despite the fact that the subsurface soil is mainly outwash deposits, which should conduct the
seepage water as good as the south end. We suspect that the wet area might have formed or been
contributed to from the I-5 storm drainage discharge system.
Although wall drainage is recommended, parts of the proposed access road subgrade at the toe of
the wall are expected to be wet, and should be improved by placing sufficient amounts of clean
crushed rock over a woven geotextile to act as a soil separator. At least 18 inches of crushed
rock should be placed to accommodate any drainage seeping out from the toe of the wall. The
2003-008 FRdoc
23
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008,
HWA Project No. 2003-008
new roadway subgrade should be sloped away from the entire I-5 wall. Transverse gravel
trenches perpendicular to the road direction, at every 50 feet on center, should also be installed
and tied to an east shoulder trench. Contaminated water needs to be discharged to the sanitary
sewer system for treatment. Alternatively, to avoid the sanitary sewer connections, we
recommend that all refuse behind the proposed wall be dug out to expose clean soils.
4.7 RETAINING WALLS ALONG THE NORTH PERIMETER ROAD (WALL C AND D)
Embankment fills will be required along the north perimeter road where the existing fill slopes
are as steep as 1H:IV; e.g. on the WSDOT parcel. The WSDOT parcel area is mostly underlain
by burn fill over native glacial soils. Our slope stability analyses indicate that any new road fill
built on the burn fill slope will be unstable and that a retaining structure is needed to support the
proposed road fill safely. These retaining walls could be built as a gravity wall on geopiers
(Figure 5B); however, the geopier installation would cause much disturbance to the slopes in this
area. Therefore, we recommend that soldier pile walls, as shown on Figure 5C, be built to retain
the access road fill with minor disturbance to the slopes.
4.8 RETAINING WALL WEST OF TRANSFER TRAILER YARD
Considerable refuse exists under the proposed retaining wall location west of the trailer parking
area, especially in the southern half where the refuse was found to depths of between 20 and
25 feet. In addition, the refuse thickness varies significantly over the length of the wall. The
current ground is at approximate EL 247 feet and the proposed trailer parking will be at EL 248
to 250 feet. The wall will retain up to 20 feet of backfill to support an access driveway, bus
parking and recycle yard at EL 266 feet. The 20 feet of backfill placed over refuse presents
considerable engineering challenges due to the anticipated large induced settlements, as
discussed in Section 4.4. The total settlement is calculated to be 4 feet in 50 years although the
actual magnitude would be expected to be somewhat less. Our experience suggests that the
actual settlement would likely vary from about 1 to 3 feet. Preloading the entire area would
reduce the post construction settlement down to a manageable level; likely good enough to build
gravity walls. The preload thickness should be at least 10 feet plus anticipated settlement
(2 feet). The preload should be left in place 3 to 6 months depending upon the actual measured
field performance. The preload purpose is to realize at least the primary consolidation settlement
under the weight of the preload prior to removal for wall construction.
4.8.1 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Walls
MSE retaining walls are often a cost-effective method for support of fill embankments.
However, design of such a wall system must be based on refuse conditions and applicable
geotechnical parameters. Pre -cast concrete members (panels or blocks) are widely used as facing
elements. Principal advantages of MSE walls include relatively low unit cost and tolerance of
relatively large differential settlements. Aesthetics, however, are somewhat compromised by
2003-008 FR.doc
24
EWA GEOSC1ENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
visual evidence of differential settlement effects being readily apparent, and this should be taken
into consideration with respect to wall selection decisions.
Reinforced soil retaining walls consist of alternating layers of backfill soil and reinforcing
material with facing elements. Commonly used reinforcing elements include steel strips and
various geosynthetic products such as geogrid and geotextile sheets. The vertical spacing of the
reinforcing elements is typically on the order of 1 to 3 feet, depending on the reinforcing material
specified, block or facing dimensions, and other parameters.
If geosynthetic products are selected, long-term creep characteristics and other strength reduction
effects should be taken into consideration in product selection. We recommend the design
parameters summarized in Table 3 be used in design of MSE walls. The values shown in Table 3
assume the backfill soil and the retained soil are compacted in accordance with applicable
portions of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2006).
Table 3. Recommended Design Parameters for MSE Walls
Soil Properties
Backfill Soil
Retained Soil
Foundation Bearing Soil
Gravel
Borrow'
Gravel
Backfill for
Walls2
Gravel
Borrows
Compacted
Fill3
Dense
Outwash
Unit Weight
(pcf)
135
135
135
135
138
Friction Angle
(degrees)
36
38
36
36
38
Cohesion
(Psf)
0
0
0
0
0
Allowable Bearing4
Pressure (psf)
3,000
3,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
I WSDOT 9-03.14.
2 WSDOT 9-03.12(2).
3 Medium dense weathered glacial till or properly compacted structural fill.
4 For transient loading, the allowable bearing pressure should be increased by one-third.
MSE walls should be designed for a minimum factor of safety of 1.5 with respect to sliding and
pullout of reinforcing elements and 2.0 against over -turning. Global slope stability of the wall
system should provide for a minitnum static factor of safety of 1.5. The seismic global stability
factor of safety should be at least 1.1. If proprietary wall systems are used, the wall supplier is
responsible to design the wall for adequate internal stability. However, we recommend that
proprietary wall system designs be reviewed by a qualified geotechnical engineer, to verify that
2003-008 FR.doc
25
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No, 2003-008
valid assumptions were made relative to material properties and other factors. The wall
construction should be supervised by a geotechnical engineer.
If the walls will be subjected to the influence of surcharge loading (for example, traffic loading)
within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the wall, the walls should be designed for the
additional horizontal pressure using an appropriate design method. A common practice is to
assume a surcharge loading equivalent to 2 feet of additional fill to simulate traffic loading; we
consider this method appropriate for typical situations. Where large surcharge loads such as
from heavy trucks, cranes, or other construction equipment are anticipated in close proximity to
the retaining walls, the walls should also be designed to accommodate the additional lateral
pressures resulting from these concentrated loads.
4.8.1.1 MSE Wall on Geogrid Foundation after Total Removal of Refuse
For this condition, the refuse encountered under the areas of the retaining wall should be totally
removed to expose glacial outwash. Then, structural fill (per the recommendations in Section
4.19) should be placed with a geogrid (Miragrid 7T; Tensar UX 1100HS; or equivalent, having a
long-term tensile strength of at least 1,000 lbs/ft) layer at every 24 inches vertically, with the final
layer at 2 feet below the ground surface. The reason for using geogrid for the structural fill is to
limit the widths of the excavation such that the refuse disposal can be reduced. We estimate that
the width of the bottom geogrid foundation base, as shown on Figure 5D, should be a minimum
40 feet.
The geogrid-reinforced MSE wall with concrete block facing can be constructed on the top of the
geogrid foundation fill. The geogrid should be installed at every 12 inches below the top of the
wall. Settlement of this wall should be very minimal; however, the area underlain by the refuse
will settle and create random surface irregularities. The geogrid for the wall should have a
minimum long-term tensile strength of 2,000 lbs/ft. Miragrid 8XT, Tensar UX1500HS, or
equivalent product listed on the WSDOT Qualified Product List (QPL) should be used.
This option provides stable support for the upper areas although the cost for refuse removal is
somewhat high. Differential settlement between the wall backfill and the area underlain by
refuse will be visible during the lifetime of the structure. We did not encounter ground water in
our test borings in the vicinity of the proposed wall, although the contractor should always
provide sump pumps for such a potential occurrence.
4.8.1.2 MSE Wall on Geopiers
As an alternative to over -excavation and refuse fill replacement, the wall foundation area can be
treated with compacted aggregate columns; proprietarily named Geopiers. The aggregate
columns can be installed by drilling out refuse, then filling and compacting aggregate into the
open holes, as schematically illustrated in Figure 5E.
2003-008 FR.doc
26
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Our conceptual design of Geopier treatment indicates that 400 columns up to 25 feet in depth
will be required under the gravity wall. The depths of the piers will vary from one location to
another and the payment should be contracted on a per foot installation basis regardless of the
volume of aggregate used in the holes. The actual drill hole diameter will be approximately
30 inches and the actual compacted column diameters will be enlarged depending on the
compressibility of the refuse. MSE walls with Lock -Blocks or Keystone modular units can be
built on the columns. However, the rock columns should be capped with a 5 -foot thick granular
mat prior to building a gravity wall to provide for suitable load transfer to the columns. One
drawback to the system is that when the refuse around the Geopier columns settles, the columns
will tend to deform, but settlements that might accompany such deformations will be to a much
lesser degree than compared to the situation with walls built on untreated refuse. The conceptual
design details are shown on Figure 5E.
4.8.2 Soldier Pile Retaining Wall Options
4.8.2.1 Soldier Pile Retaining Wall with Deadman Anchors
One classical solution for retaining wall construction is to build a soldier pile wall with deadman
anchors to support up to a 20 -foot height of backfill. The design earth pressure diagram for this
system is presented in Figure 5F.
The area to receive the wall system should be filled with soil up to proposed design level above
the wall plus a few feet to allow for the expected short-term settlements. The fill should be in
place at least 3 months so that the refuse in the proposed trailer parking area consolidates at the
proposed toe of the wall. Then, soldier piles can be constructed by drilling methods through the
fill and refuse, followed by excavation down to the trailer parking level. Timber lagging should
be installed between the soldier piles, which should be spaced at 6 to 8 feet on center, as the
excavation proceeds. The temporary timber lagging should be designed using one-half the
design lateral earth pressure, as calculated in Figure 5F. One extra board should be extended
below the excavation side or at the ground line.
The tie -rods between soldier piles and deadman anchors will be vulnerable to long-term backfill
settlement behind the wall. The anchor rod is often made of a high strength steel with a high
carbon content, which makes the rods brittle. This type of steel can easily break due to bending
and stress -corrosion effects. Rod connections at the pile face should, therefore, be protected with
slotted polystyrene blocks (geofoam) to allow fill settlement around each rod without building up
excessive stress on the rod. The slotted blocks will enclose the rods, but will still allow the rods
to move within the slot as the fill settles. The block heights should be 2 feet when area is
preloaded. The rods should be protected from corrosion.
2003-008 FR.doc
27
HWA GEOSCLENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
4.8.2.2 Independent Geogrid Wall Behind the Soldier Piles
The deadman anchor system can be entirely eliminated if a geogrid wall, as illustrated in
Figure 5G, is built behind the soldier pile wall and the geogrid independently supports the fill,
such that the long-term settlement will also occur independently behind the wall. The soldier
pile wall face provides protection to the geogrid-faced wall standing behind. A potential problem
of this independent wall configuration is that the wall might lean against the soldier pile wall and
apply lateral load should it tilt due to differential settlement of the refuse.
4.8.2.3 Independent Geofoam Backfill Behind the Soldier Piles
Another option is to build the wall with geofoam, as illustrated by Figure 5H, by stacking blocks
immediately behind the soldier pile wall to reduce the backfill weight on the refuse. In this case,
the soldier pile wall also acts as facing to the geofoam and also provides stability to the geofoam
wall in the event of earthquake or other temporary lateral movements. The top of the geofoam
should be covered with a membrane to protect the blocks from accidental fuel spill, and should
be covered with a granular mat to support pavement or landscape fill.
4.9 REFUSE SETTLEMENT NEAR THE TRANSFER TRAILER YARD WALL
Based on our review of available geotechnical information, the proposed transfer trailer yard is
underlain by up to about 15 feet of landfill refuse, over dense glacial deposits. Current
development plans call for the transfer trailer yard to be built at EL 248 to 250 feet and the
recycling yards, access drive and bus parking at EL 266 feet and 270 feet, respectively. Due to
backfill placement of up to 20 feet in height, significant settlement is anticipated if the recycling
area is not treated with a preload. As discussed above, the load exerted by the backfill will
generate significant settlement at the bus parking and recycling yard. The backfill load at the top
of the fill supported by the retaining wall will settle up to 3 feet or so over the next 50 years and
the anticipated settlements will not be uniform along the wall.
The transfer trailer yard, 20 feet lower than the top of the retained fill, will settle without
additional fill due to long-term secondary settlement and biodegradation effects. The ground will
settle concurrently as the 20 -foot thick backfill settles by compression of the refuse. The range of
these settlement estimates will vary, because of varying thickness of the refuse layer or layers and
the inconsistent characteristics of MSW, but it will be at least 1/3 of the backfill settlement, or an
estimated 0.5 to 1 foot near the wall, and will diminish away from the wall gradually. If it is not
treated with preload, the area will be affected gradually by differential settlements which could
cause cracks in concrete trailer landing pads or pavements, and even alter surface drainage on the
parking lot.
2003-008 FR.doc 28 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
To minimize the expected settlement, the entire area should be preloaded with 12 feet of fill.
The fill should be left there at least 3 months and should be monitored in accordance with
Section 4.5.2 of this report.
4.10 EXISTING FOUNDATIONS
Walls at the existing transfer station are mostly supported on spread footings. In some places,
however, they are supported on timber piles. The east tipping area slabs settled about 12 inches
and were repaired structurally in the mid -1980's to rectify settlement problems. HWA conducted
a settlement investigation at the southeast column vicinity and reported that the timber
foundation piles were driven into the compacted fill above the refuse, but had not penetrated into
the native glacial deposits below. Accordingly, steel piles were installed to underpin the
damaged structures by drilling through the dense fill to gain support on the competent native
deposits below. Existing foundation concrete and pile locations should be identified and should
be noted in the plans such that the known objects can be removed for the upper 7 feet during new
construction. Trailer parking pads constructed over the existing foundations without near -surface
foundation removal will suffer from acute differential settlements over the life time of the new
facility.
4.11 SOUTH SCALE FACILITY
The fill and refuse thicknesses in the south scale area varied in the explorations from zero at the
west end to about 18 feet at the northeast. The south scale facility will be built at EL 268 feet by
adding up to about 12 feet of fill. Preloading for the new foundations is not recommended at this
location due to scale sensitivity to settlement, as the refuse thicknesses vary significantly from
east to west. However, preloading outside of the scale facility is recommended to reduce the
differential settlement that would otherwise occur in the surrounding area.
Since the greatest depth to bottom of refuse is 18 feet, we anticipate that total replacement with
structural fill may be feasible by digging out portions of the scale facility site. The excavation
should expose the native glacial outwash as deep as approximately EL 239 feet at the east, and
only a couple of feet at the west edge of the existing perimeter road. The excavation depth and
bearing conditions of the base should be inspected by a geotechnical engineer at the time of
excavation. The contractor should excavate the bottom flat or in benches such that fill can be
placed in horizontal lifts with no significant inclination. The side slopes should be a maximum
of 1.5 H:1 V and the footprint of the excavated hole should be extended beyond the edge of the
scale facility by a distance equivalent to the depth of the excavation. As indicated by current and
previous explorations, and as depicted on Figure 3B, the refuse — glacial soil contact is relatively
flat eastward from the proposed scale facility. We anticipate that there will be no significant
ground water during the excavation, although contractors should always be prepared to pump out
potential surface water accumulation or any perched ground water seepage into the excavation;
though the latter was not discovered by our explorations. The placement of structural fill over
the sloped excavation sidewalls will cause settlement of the underlying refuse, and result in
2003-008 FR.doc 29 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008.
HWA Project No. 2003-008
differential settlement of pavement and utilities near the scale facility. This could be mitigated
somewhat by preloading the adjoining areas, per the recommendations in Sections 4.4 and 4.5.
The scale facility foundation should be designed based on an allowable bearing capacity of
4,000 psf for a suitably prepared structural fill supported on native glacial deposits. Under this
design loading, the estimated total settlement will be approximately 1/2 inch. Differential
settlement will be approximately 1/4 inch.
4.12 NORTH SCALE FACILITY
Current elevations at the proposed north scale location range from approximately 282 to 300 feet
and the facility will be built at EL 270 feet. Therefore the subgrade soil at proposed grades has
been surcharged in the past by at least 13 feet of overburden pressure, or 1,500 psf. Conventional
spread footings can, therefore, be used to support the structures in the area by using an allowable
bearing pressure of 1,500 psf for design.
The scale facility area should be over -excavated by another two feet from the foundation level
and backfilled with granular structural fill to provide a suitable foundation working surface. Any
soft or yielding materials exposed in the over -excavation should be additionally dug out before
backfilling with structural fill conforming to the requirements of Section 4.19 of this report.
4.13 FUTURE PROCESSING FACILITY
The proposed Future Processing Facility (such as for Household Hazardous Waste) is located in a
steeply sloping area underlain by extensive refuse (31 feet at borehole B-209) and would require
up to 23 feet of fill to match the grade (EL 248 feet) of the adjacent perimeter road. Driven steel
piles should be used in the area to support the facility per Section 4.20 of this report. Structures
to be located within the Future Processing Facility area may need batter piles to counteract
possible lateral shifting of refuse on the slope. When detailed plans and locations are known,
additional borings may be necessary to define thick refuse deposits on sloping ground.
4.14 NEW TRANSFER / TSO BUILDING
4.14.1 Foundations
Based on the new topographic survey plan by DHA, soil at the proposed footprint elevations for
the new Transfer / Transfer Station Operator (TSO) Building has received surcharge loads
ranging from about 13 to 59 feet of fill due to the stockpiling undertaken in this area in the past
by WSDOT. Therefore, the foundation soils have been preloaded such that conventional spread
footings can be used to support the building. Based on proposed floor elevations of 248 feet for
the compactor pit and yard waste bay, 270 feet for the commercial tipping floor, and 273 feet for
the self -haul tipping floor, foundations will be placed either on native glacial material or on burn
fill. For example, at BH -3 (HWA, 2003), burn fill about 8 feet thick will remain after excavation
2003-008 FR.doc
30
HWA GEOSCTENCES INC.
June 27, 2008.
HWA Project No. 2003-008
to the final design grade, increasing to about 20 feet thick in the vicinity of B-230. The allowable
bearing pressures of footings should be determined based on the effective preloading applied by
the thickness of fill removed. Where the detailed survey and building location reveal that some
areas were not preloaded, or not to a sufficient degree, these portions of the building should be
supported either by piles or structural fill built on the competent native soils. Alternatively, the
area should be preloaded additionally by adding a minimum of 15 feet of surcharge fill to remain
in place and be monitored at least 3 to 6 months.
All foundation areas including floor slabs should be over -excavated by 2 feet and then replaced
by clean structural fill to provide a good working pad that will not deteriorate during wet weather
and site conditions.
Foundations on Native Glacial Materials: Structures located on medium dense to dense native
glacial materials should be founded on shallow pad and strip footings designed for allowable
bearing pressures of 5,000 psf, subject to minimum dimensions of 3 feet and 1.5 feet for pad and
strip footings, respectively. External footings should be placed at least 1.5 feet below final
adjoining ground surface for frost protection.
Foundations on Burn Fill Material where at least 13 feet of Fill is to be Removed: Structures
located on burn fill, where at least 10 feet of overlying fill (preload) is to be removed, may be
founded on shallow pad and strip footings. The footings should be supported on a 2 -foot thick
pad of compacted structural fill placed over the excavated burn fill surface. The footings should
be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf, subject to minimum dimensions of
3 feet and 1.5 feet for pad and strip footings, respectively. External footings should be placed at
least 1.5 feet below final ground for frost protection.
We understand that the east wall of the new Transfer / TSO Building will be founded at a level at
least 20 feet below that of the current ground elevations along this wall. Accordingly, if that
much surcharge is removed from the burn fill underlying the east wall alignment, footings
supporting the wall and/or columns along this line may be designed for an allowable bearing
pressure of 3,000 psf.
Foundations on Burn Fill Material where less than 10 feet of Fill is to be Removed: Based on
the survey plan furnished to us, there are no areas of the transfer building that support existing
fill less than 10 feet thick. If such areas exist, however, foundation preparation would consist of
excavation and replacement of burn fill with structural fill, or supporting the building on piles.
The yard waste bay area and the entire south east comer area need total replacement, due to the
presence of compressible refuse beneath burn fill. Based on the depth of refuse encountered in
borehole B-229, the total depth of over -excavation is expected to be on the order of 14.5 feet
below the floor level; e.g. to EL 234 feet. This over -excavation should be conducted under a
geotechnical engineer's supervision during construction.
2003-008 FR.doc
31
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Because the boundaries of different subsurface conditions beneath the footprint of the
Transfer/ TSO Building, as described above, are not well defined from our investigation, we
recommend that consideration be given to designing the foundations for the westerly portion
of the building to be supported on native glacial soils. This may entail extending foundation
excavationsto greater depths progressively to the east. The eastern portion foundations
should be designed to be supported on burn fall at a reduced bearing pressure. Because it is
normally undesirable to support structures on different foundation systems or on the same
system designed to different pressures, it is recommended that the foundations be proportioned
and Laid out in such a fashion that a structural joint or similar structural discontinuity can be
incorporated in the building to isolate the parts that are supported differently. Doing so will
reduce diferential settlement effects.
Differential settlement of footings designed to similar conditions as recommended above is not
expected to exceed 1 -inch over 90 feet.
4.14.2 Concrete Retaining Walls
Retaining walls which can move laterally or rotate sufficiently to develop minimum active and/or
maximum passive earth pressures are referred to as yielding walls. The dynamic lateral earth
pressures acting on yielding walls are typically estimated by a pseudostatic procedure known as
the Mononobe-Okabe (M -O) method. In a M -O analysis, pseudostatic accelerations are
integrated into the Coulomb earth pressure equations. Based on USGS Seismic Hazard Maps,
we recommend the peak ground acceleration (PGA) of 0.32 g should be used for the project site,
consistent with an earthquake event with a 10 percent PE in 50 years. Pseudostatic coefficient kh
used for the calculation of lateral earth pressures should be taken as one-half of the PGA, or
0.16g for yielding wall conditions.
Retaining walls such as the pit walls braced at both the top and bottom do not move sufficiently
to mobilize the shear strength of the backfill. These walls are referred to as unyielding walls or
rigid walls. The increase in dynamic lateral earth pressure acting on an unyielding wall can be
estimated by Wood's method with the equation:
APeq =yH 2kh /g,
where k1, is one times PGA (i.e. 0.32g), based on Wood's research. The parameter y is the unit
weight of the retained soils. The recommended pseudostatic coefficient kh used for unyielding
walls varies significantly between many agencies and geotechnical engineers. By comparison,
the WSDOT GDM uses kl, =1.5 PGA, and the AASHTO manual recommends one times PGA.
In our opinion, the proposed walls will be somewhat less rigid than the theoretical perfectly rigid
case and, therefore, we recommend pseudostatic coefficient kh used for the calculation of lateral
earth pressures should be taken as one-half of the PGA.
For both yielding and unyielding walls, that are not provided with positive drainage systems at
their base, the water pressure should be added for the wall design. We estimate an approximate
2003-008 FR.doc
32
HWA GEOSCIENCES 1NC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
dynamic water pressure acting on any walls during an earthquake will equal the static water
pressure times 1.5. Note, however, that all walls designed for this project should include a
drainage system to prevent water build-up behind the wall, and exclude any hydrodynamic
effects. Hence, this design requirement should only be applied to the retention tanks and other
similar structures where wall drainage is not feasible.
4.14.3 Lateral Earth Pressures Acting on Yielding Concrete Retaining Walls
We consider cantilever walls generally the most feasible type of retaining walls for the proposed
Transfer / TSO Building. The lateral earth pressures against these retaining walls depend upon
the inclination of the back -slope, degree of wall restraint, type of backfill, method of backfill
placement, degree of backfill compaction, drainage provisions, and magnitude and location of
any surcharge loads. When retaining walls are unrestrained, or free to rotate at the top, the active
earth pressure should be used in design.
Design parameters are provided in Table 4, and include parameters for sloping grades at the top
of the wall, and the presence of dense, compacted, granular fill behind the wall. The design
parameters presented in the table are based on the assumption that open cut excavations will be
used to facilitate construction of the concrete retaining walls. As such, the design lateral pressure
is highly dependent on the characteristics of the backfill material, and less on the in-situ soil
conditions. The active lateral earth pressures recommended in the table were determined
assuming a backfill material with a friction angle of 36 degrees, zero cohesion, and a unit weight
of 135 pcf.
Table 4. Yielding Retaining Wall Design Lateral Earth Pressures Using the
Mononobe-Okabe Seismic Approach
Loading Conditions
Without Ground Water
Equivalent Fluid Density for Active
Earth Pressures
(Earthquake Condition)
Equivalent Fluid Density
for Passive Earth
Pressures
(Earthquake Condition)
Level
Backslope
Ascending
Backslope
(211:1V)
Level at Toe
Static loading
Dense Granular
Compacted Backfill'
+
Earthquake Loading2
35 pcf
+
(6.5H) (psf)
50 pcf
+
(24H) (psi
350 pcf
(10 percent reduction)
Notes:
2003-008 FR.doc
33
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008.
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Resultant force for static loading is applied at 0,33*H
2 Resultant force for earthquake loading is applied at 0.5*H
For area surcharge loads, we recommend adding a lateral earth pressure equal to 0.26 times the
uniform load for static and 0.13 times the uniform load for dynamic loading conditions. Point or
small area loads should be evaluated individually and can be converted into an equivalent
uniform loading. Live loads are normally ignored in seismic analyses for wall design.
4.14,4 Lateral Earth Pressures Acting on Restrained (unyielding) Concrete Retaining
Walls
Buried walls of structures such as the stormwater and sanitary sewer vaults, or walls where the top
is restrained from moving, should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pounds per
cubic foot (pcf) above the design ground water elevation and 90 pcf below the design ground
water elevation. For earthquake loading conditions, the uniform lateral pressure should be added
to the static pressure as shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Equivalent Fluid Density for Design of Unyielding Walls Using Wood's Seismic
Approach, but Converted to a Uniform Load for Simplicity of Structural Calculations
Loading Conditions
Without Ground Water
Equivalent Fluid Density for At
Rest Earth Pressures
(Earthquake Condition)
Equivalent Fluid Density for
Passive Earth Pressures
(Earthquake Condition)
Static Loading, Dense
Granular Compacted
Backfills
+
Earthquake Loading
55 pcf
+
(20H) (psf)
350 pcf
(10 percent reduction)
Static Loading for
Surcharge
+
Earthquake Loading 2
0.41 *Surcharge
+
0.16*Surcharge loading
Notes:
Resultant force for static loading is applied at 0.33H
2003-008 FR.doc
2 Resultant force for earthquake loading is applied at 0.5H
34
NWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No, 2003-008
The above recommendations regarding at -rest earth pressures assume the backfill behind the
subsurface walls will consist of properly compacted structural fill, a horizontal ground surface
adjacent to the structure, and no adjacent surcharge loads. If the below -grade structures or walls
will be subjected to the influence of surcharge loading within a horizontal distance equal to or
less than the height of the walls, the walls should be designed for the additional horizontal
pressure. Point or small area loads should be evaluated individually and can be converted into an
equivalent uniform loading. Live loads are normally ignored for the seismic analyses for the wall
design.
The values given above assume that the backfill around the wall structure consists of compacted
structural fill and that the foundations extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade.
4.14.5 Passive Earth Pressures
The passive pressure at the toe of any retaining walls should not be considered in evaluating
resistance to lateral loading unless the backfill at the toe of the wall is carefully placed and
adequately compacted or confined by floor slabs or pavement. If the designer is unsure whether
the soil will be densely compacted, it is best to ignore the passive resistance provided by soils at
the toe.
Where the toe of the wall is cast directly against undisturbed glacial soils or properly compacted
fill materials, lateral loads may be evaluated in design using passive pressures, based on the
equivalent fluid density values tabulated in Tables 4 and 5. The passive earth pressure values
listed in each table incorporate a factor of safety of approximately 1.5. .
Passive earth pressures in backfill should be estimated using an equivalent fluid pressure of
350 pcf above the design water table and 180 pcf (includes hydrostatic fluid pressure) below the
design water table. For the earthquake loading condition, the passive earth pressure should be
reduced by 10 percent.
A horizontal distance of B should be maintained between the outside edge of the retaining wall
footing and its nearest approach to any slope face, where B is the wall footing width or 7 feet,
whichever is greater.
4.14.6 Base Friction Under Foundations
A sliding coefficient of 0.42 may be used for determining friction at the base of footings. An
appropriate factor of safety of at least 1.5 and 1.1 for static and seismic loading conditions,
respectively, should be used to compute sliding resistance. Base friction should not be
considered beneath pile supported structures.
2003-008 FR.doc 35 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
4.14.7 Compaction of Wall Backfin
Only small hand operated equipment should be used within 3 feet of the wall. Compaction of the
wall backfill should be conducted using a small mechanical roller with a drum diameter no
greater than 1.5 feet. Each lift should be no greater than 6 inches in compacted thickness, and
should be level and uniform. All backfill materials should be free draining granular fill.
4.14.8 Allowable Bearing Pressures for Retaining Wall with Shallow Foundation
For use in design of concrete footings for support of retaining walls, an allowable bearing
pressure of 4,000 psf is recommended for spread footings bearing on compacted structural fill
placed on the native ground, as indicated in Table 6. For wall foundations bearing directly on
dense, undisturbed, glacial materials, an allowable bearing pressure of 5,000 psf may be utilized.
If the foundation influence area is underlain by burn fill that has been preloaded with at least
10 feet thickness of soil surcharge, an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf should be used.
Table 6. Allowable Bearing Capacities
Foundation Soil Conditions
(With no refuse below any
footings)
Allowable Bearing
Pressure (PSF)
With FS=3
Min. footing widths
1.5' strip or
3'sq. footings.
For seismic loading,
increase by 1/3
Potential Area of Application
10 feet minimum preloading
at WSDOT site with 15 inch
over -excavation for working
pad over geotextile
1,500
New Transfer / TSO Building, or
other areas with 10 feet minimum
preloading
10 feet minimum preloading
at WSDOT site with 15 inch
over -excavation for working
pad over geotextile
1,500
North Scale Facility
Structural fill on native
glacial deposits
4,000
South Scale Facility
Maintenance Bldg.
Retention Vault
Glacial Deposits
5,000
Along 1-5,
West side of New Transfer
Building
2003-008 FR.doc
36
HWA GEOSC1ENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Site preparation for foundations should begin with excavation of all unsuitable materials below
foundation levels. Foundation excavations should be inspected by a geotechnical engineer to
determine if the depth of excavation and base preparation is sufficient. Pockets of unsuitable
materials such as soft burn fill or refuse may be present, and should be over -excavated entirely
and replaced with structural fill.
For foundation areas within the WSDOT site, we recommend over -excavation of existing burn
fill by an additional 15 inch from the foundation base level and backfilling with crushed rock
underlain by geotextile to provide a suitable working pad and reduce the swelling and
recompression effects of any inclusions of unburned refuse below. Any compressible refuse
exposed should be dug out and replaced with structural fill under a geotechnical engineer's
supervision. All loose or soft areas that exhibit yielding should be replaced with structural fill
materials, and compacted to a dense and unyielding condition.
4.15 MAINTENANCE BUILDING
Since MSW was found in boring B-229 at the northwest corner, and farther east at test pit TP -11,
we anticipate that refuse underlies approximately half of the proposed building footprint. We
recommend that total refuse replacement be conducted by digging out the refuse and replacing
with structural fill in accordance with Sections 4.18 and 4.19 of this report. We expect the total
replacement will be a minimum of 13 feet below the finish grade at EL 248.5 feet. The
Maintenance Building foundation should be designed based on an allowable bearing capacity of
4,000 psf on structural fill as prepared per Section 4.19.
4.16 STORMWATER DETENTION VAULTS AND WASTEWATER HOLDING TANK
Two stormwater detention vaults will be constructed at about EL 235 feet, which is 13.5 feet
below the proposed finished grade, in the trailer maneuvering area. Refuse was found at the
foundation level (see test pit TP -11 and Figure 3G), and needs to be dug out and replaced with
structural fill in accordance with removal of unsuitable materials as described in Sections 4.18
and 4.19. The excavation should expose the native glacial outwash, encountered at EL 221 feet
in test pit TP -11 just east of the proposed east end of the vault. No ground water seepage was
noted in test pit TP -11, though perched ground water was encountered at EL 252 feet in borehole
B-234. The walls should be designed on the basis of the lateral earth pressures provided in
Table 4 of Section 4.14.4 of this report.
Refuse around the stormwater detention vault will settle, whereas, the vault itself supported on
native soil and structural fill will settle very little. If the structure is covered, a surficial bump
will be generated above the structure over the years, and will need to be leveled periodically.
The wastewater holding tank will be constructed within the transfer trailer yard, within and above
compressible refuse. Preloading of this area would reduce differential and total settlement of
refuse beneath the tank and sanitary sewer pipelines.
2003-008 FR.doc
37
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
4.17 EARTH WORK AT THE EXISTING TRANSFER STATION
We anticipate that all existing transfer station structures will be demolished to accommodate the
new trailer parking area and other facilities. All existing foundations for these structures, where
future differential settlement effects would be objectionable, should be removed in the upper
7 feet below proposed final subgrade. This process is necessary to reduce the anticipated
differential settlement which would occur between yielding ground and non -yielding
foundations, and which would result in surficial bumps in the trailer parking area.
It appears that the dump pit at the center of the existing building and the bottom portions of the
trailer loading ramp are not underlain by refuse, based on previous borings. This area also has
the potential of generating surficial bumps or differential settlements with surrounding refuse
areas. It is rather difficult to mitigate these differential settlements because the locations of the
refuse boundaries are not well defined. Preloading the entire area will reduce the differential
settlement effects and the height of surficial bumps during service life of the facility.
4.18 OVER -EXCAVATION OF REFUSE OR UNSUITABLE SOILS
4.18.1 Geotechnical Considerations and Temporary Cut Slopes
The total replacement of refuse requires separation of the clean soils situated above the refuse so
that disposal volumes can be minimized. The excavation bottoms should be inspected by a
geotechnical engineer at the time of excavation. The limit of all excavations should be extended
laterally at base level to distances equivalent to the depth of the excavation for the replacement
fill. Following removal of the refuse or fill, the excavated areas should be backfilled with
structural fill as specified in Section 4.19.
Temporary excavation side slopes should be inclined in compliance with the regulations outlined
in Chapter 296-155 WAC, Safety Standards for Construction Work, Part N, Excavation,
Trenching, and Shoring. Per the soil classifications outlined in Appendix A, of WAC
296-155-66401, we consider that the characteristics of the deposits on site are such that the
appropriate temporary slope requirements are as follows:
• Refuse - 1 H:1 V
• Burn fill - 1.5H: 1V
• WSDOT fill - 1.5H: 1V
• Glacial Deposits - 1H: 1 V
However, the stability of excavation slopes can be detrimentally influenced by ground water
seepage and precipitation runoff. Accordingly, the contractors should be prepared to protect
slopes from these adverse effects and/or flatten them as necessary to maintain stable and safe
2003-008 rR.doc
38 HWA GEOSCrENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
conditions for workmen. If slopes cannot be flattened sufficiently to provide for stable
conditions, the contractor should provide suitably designed shoring for slope support.
4.18.2 Environmental Considerations
Based on the findings of this study, soils and waste excavated for site improvements are likely to
contain elevated concentrations of TPH, VOCs, and metals. The recommendations presented in
Section 8.0 of the Environmental Site Investigation (HWA, July 2007) should be followed in
design and construction.
4.19 EARTHWORK AND COMPACTION
The surface area to receive fill should be densified as much as possible by compacting with a
heavy roller and, where placed on slopes, the slope surface requires benching and proof rolling
prior to receiving any fill. When slopes are gentle, a wide bench cut with a bulldozer will be
sufficient, but where the slopes are steep much narrower benches will need to be cut by using
small equipment. Compaction should be made in horizontal lifts with no visible inclination.
Except within narrow confines, fill should be compacted with self-propelled heavy rollers.
4.19.1 Reuse of On -Site Materials
WSDOT Parcel Granular Fill -- This material is relatively dry (moist), and should be able to be
compacted to around 90 percent of Modified Proctor maximum dry density. It can be used for
the eastern slope road fill, in parking areas, and as preload fill.
WSDOT Clay & Silt Fill -- This fill is about 5 to 10 feet below the present surface (top of fill
stockpile), and was from 15 to 20 feet thick in our borings. This material has a high moisture
content and will be difficult to dry out for use as structural fill in wet weather or in wet site
conditions. This material, if placed as fill on the slope, would be prone to sliding. The wet soil
would make earthwork difficult and messy, and, therefore, a likely source of construction claims.
Accordingly, we recommend that it not be reused as fill, and be hauled off site.
Burn Fill -- This material has an adequate content of granular materials, the moisture content
appears to be suitable, and should be able to be compacted properly. However, due to the
petroleum and heavy metal contamination, it is our understanding that any excavated soil of this
nature needs to be hauled to a landfill.
Glacial Soils (outwash) -- The native soils throughout the site consist of clean sand to silty sand
or sandy silt. They are suitable for use as structural fill under mass grading situations where a
large compactor can be used. The moisture should be conditioned to be the optimum for the
adequate compaction.
2003-008 FR.doc
39 HWA GEOSCIENCES 1NC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. `2003-008
4.19.2 .Import Structural Fill
Import. structural fill should be used to raise site grades, placed directly under structures for
support, or used as backfill for below -grade structures such as vaults, catch basins or pipes. For
mass grading, on-site glacial soils can also be used. Imported structural fill should consist of
clean, non -plastic, free -draining, sand and gravel free from organic matter or other deleterious
materials. Such materials should contain particles of less than 4 inches maximum dimension,
with less than 5 percent fines, which are non -plastic. Suggested gradation limits for structural fill
material is as follows:
Sieve Size Percent Passing
4" square 100
2" square 75-100
U.S. No. 4 50-80
U.S. No. 40 30 max.
U.S. No. 200 5 max. (3/4" fraction, non -plastic)
4.19.3 Compaction
Structural fill should be placed in loose, horizontal, lifts of not more than 8 inches in compacted
thickness and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined using
test method ASTM D 1557 (Modified Proctor). For pavement areas and utility trenches,
structural fill more than 2 feet below subgrade should be compacted to at least 90 percent. At the
time of placement, the moisture content of structural fill should be at or near optimum. The
procedures required to achieve the specified minimum relative compaction depends on the size
and type of compaction equipment, the number of passes, thickness of the layer being compacted,
and the soil moisture -density properties.
When the first fill is placed in a given area, and/or anytime the fill material changes, the area
should be considered a test section. The test section should be used to establish fill placement
and compaction procedures required to achieve proper compaction. The geotechnical consultant
should observe placement and compaction of the test section to assist in establishing an
appropriate compaction procedure. Once a placement and compaction procedure is established,
the contractor's operations should be monitored and periodic density tests performed to verify
that proper compaction is being achieved.
Backfill compaction in any confined areas such as trenches, behind retaining walls, or within
excavated confines should be performed on each layer no greater than 6 to 8 inches in thickness,
depending upon the types of equipment employed.
2003-008 FR.doc
40
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
4.20. PILE FOUNDATIONS
Pile foundations can be used to penetrate refuse or loose uncontrolled fill and to transmit
structural loads down to dense glacial deposits. Piles can be used wherever the preload or spread
footing options become impractical.
Except in some circumstances for retaining wall soldier pile elements, driven piles are the
preferred alternative to drilled, because the auger operations will bring up refuse to the surface
and create safety and disposal issues. In addition, grout filling for auger cast piles could
encounter conditions that would result in a large cement grout volume take and produce greater
down drag forces on the piles than for uniform steel sections.
Steel H -piles can be used to support structures in lieu of preloading or spread footings.
Allowable bearing capacities are listed in Table 7 for the various H -pile sizes.
Table 7. Pile Capacities
HP Pile Sections
(inches)
Allowable Pile Capacities
(Tons)
8
50
10
70
12
100
14
130
• The pile capacities snake allowance for the down drag forces from consolidation of the refuse around the
piles.
• All piles should be driven to refusal by using a driving hammer with an energy of at least 36,000 foot
pounds.
• The estimated pile lengths vary from 15 feet at the east side and 50 feet at the west side of the site area. The
refuse depths may vary significantly over very short distances, which would result in significant pile length
variations.
• To account for the variable pile lengths required, we recommend that, before ordering the production piles,
six test piles should be driven in one given area to test pile penetration and determine production pile
lengths accordingly.
• The variations should be plotted and interpreted by a geotechnical engineer for the final material order. Pile
section thicknesses should be heavy duty t 0.4", or better, to provide potential corrosion allowance. One
sixteenth of an inch (0.0625") should be added to the pile wall thickness for corrosion provisions.
4.21 PAVEMENT SUPPORT
4.21.1 Pavement Subgrade Preparation
The native glacial materials will provide a suitable subgrade for roads, but, in areas of the
existing WSDOT fill/Burn fill, the road structure should be supported on at least 15 inches of
CSBC placed on geotextile over the existing fill.
2003-008 FR.doc 41 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
For paved areas lying within the limits of the preload area, the exposed subgrade material should
consist of gravel borrow comprising the site grading or preload till, and subgrade preparation
should be non -problematic. However, if yielding areas are encountered especially in WSDOT
fill and refuse areas, they should be sub -excavated and replaced with additional compacted
structural fill until unyielding condition established when proof rolling with a fully loaded dump
truck. This requirement may prove to be difficult to comply with due to the fact that the existing
fill thicknesses over the refuse under the pavement areas are not well defined from our
explorations. However, areas that do not meet the fill thickness requirements over refuse may
suffer premature failure of the pavement structure, and other special measures may need to be
adopted.
• When subgrade exposed is yielding due to spongy and wet conditions in WSDOT fill or
burn fill areas, the soft materials should be removed and replaced up to 40 inches with
structural fill material supported on woven separation -grade geotextile possessing a
minimum grab tensile strength of 315 pounds.
• In areas where the subgrade is soft and yielding in refuse areas, the depth of structural fill
should be increased to at least 48 inches and supported on geotextile as stated above.
• For paved areas lying outside of the preload limits, subgrade preparation should begin
with the removal of any vegetation and topsoil. If fill is required to raise pavement
subgrade levels, we recommend it meet the gradation requirements for structural fill as
provided in Section 4.19 of this report.
• The subgrade should then be compacted to at least 95 percent of its Modified Proctor
maximum dry density, and proof rolled.
• If soft, wet, or yielding areas are identified during the proof -rolling operation, they should
be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the geotechnical engineer and a King County
Solid Waste Division engineer. This is because over -excavation and replacement may
not be suitable where the subgrade in question is part of the landfill cover system or
WSDOT fill.
4.21.2 Pavement Section Design
The design thickness of the overlying pavement and surfacing layers is dependent on design
traffic and road performance requirements.
Based on estimated trip generation data provided in the 2006 FMP and the project SEPA
Checklist (King County, 2006), an average of 1,200 customer vehicle trips per day and 46
transfer trailer trips per day (30 tons each) and 46 empty trailers per day will occur by the year
2030. We understand that an estimated 29 percent of the customer traffic will comprise
commercial trucks, including garbage packer trucks and roll -off trucks. Pavements in the
2003-008 FR.doc 42
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Transfer Trailer Yard and trailer maneuvering area will also need to accommodate reach -stacker
forklifts, for maneuvering and stacking intermodal containers.
For a 20 -year design life, and an assumed 5 percent annual traffic growth rate, the design traffic
loading amounts to less than 4,600,000 ESALs (equivalent 18 -kip single axle loads), which we
have assumed for design purposes. For our pavement section design, we also assumed a
subgrade resilient modulus of 12,000 psi (or a CBR of about 8), for sandy landfill cover soil.
Where the pavement subgrade transitions from either native glacial deposits or structural fill to
landfill cover soil, or from a preloaded area to a non -preloaded area, a geogrid-reinforced sub-
base layer may help reduce pavement distress due to potential differential settlements.
In summary, the following pavement sections are recommended:
WSDOT Fill or Burn Fill
4" HMA over 4" ATB over 15" CSBC over Geotextile
Spongy and wet areas need to be removed and replaced with structural fill materials up to 40"
Refuse area
4" HMA over 4" ATB over 9" CSBC over 48" Gravel Borrow over Geotextile
Native Glacial Deposits
4" HMA over 4" ATB over 9" CSBC
The following is recommended for light vehicle and bus parking:
3" HMA over 4" ATB over 8" CSBC
The following is recommended for building footprints:
WSDOT Fill or Burn Fill
15" CSBC over Geotextile
Competent Native Soils
9" CSBC
HMA = Hot mixed asphalt concrete
HMA may be installed in two lifts (2 inch overlay + 2 inch 1 -IMA)
ATB = Asphalt Treated Base for construction traffic
CSBC= Crushed Surfacing Base Course
Geotextile= Woven geotextile with a min. grab strength 315 lbs
2003-008 FR.doc 43 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Based on the climate in Western Washington and WSDOT recommendations, the HMA mix
should be made of Superpave Performance Grade binder PG 64-22.
4.22 SLOPE STABILITY AND CRITICAL AREA REQUIREMENTS
The slopes on the eastern and southern sides of the King County Parcel were observed to be
Class 2 and 3 per the City of Tukwila Municipal Code sensitive areas designation
(TMC 18.45.120 A.). The northern and eastern sides of the WSDOT Parcel were observed to be
Class 2, 3, and 4. The slopes also are mapped by the City as an erosion hazard area. The
following subsections present general observations and conclusions regarding the slopes.
Detailed slope stability analyses are presented in a separate report (Final Slope Stability Report,
HWA, June 2008b).
4.22.1 King County Parcel
No evidence of recent deep-seated sliding is evident on these slopes, and none has been
documented in the past 20 years of our experience with the site. We did not observe any signs of
erosion on the slopes. Some past surficial soil creep is evident on a portion of the lower slopes
within the property. The cut at the slope toe (on La Pianta property) does not show evidence of
sliding, and the existing buttress wall appears to have supported the toe for many years. Though
not anticipated, any future sliding below the King County property should not affect the proposed
development.
Redevelopment of the existing transfer station will result in placement of additional fill over
refuse along the east perimeter road at the crest of the landfill slope. The refuse slope will,
therefore, be further consolidated by this fill and will remain stable assuming the
recommendations in this report are followed in design and construction, particularly Sections 4.5
and 4.19. Buried refuse has a high shear strength with large deformations due to its interlayered
and fibrous nature and, therefore, is not prone to slope failure.
Proper temporary erosion and sedimentation control practices wilt need to be implemented
during construction in order to prevent concentration of stormwater runoff onto the slopes. We
understand that stormwater will be piped eastward to an appropriate discharge point on the Green
River Valley floor, and the sanitary sewer will be piped along the same route to connect to an
existing sewer at the valley floor. Results of a supplemental geotechnical investigation for the
slope pipelines are presented in a separate report (1-1WA, 2008a).
4.22.2 WSDOT Parcel
No evidence of deep-seated sliding is evident on these slopes; only surficial soil creep and
isolated shallow sliding. Such shallow slope movement will occur periodically over time as the
underlying very dense sand mechanically weathers. Most of this movement will occur in the
steep lower portions of the slopes, and along side ravines, in relation to where ground water
seepage occurs. The natural processes of soil creep and skin sliding will continue whether or not
2003-008 FR.doc 44 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
the redevelopment takes place. However, present runoff to the slopes that could contribute to
creep and shallow sliding will be reduced by the capture of stormwater and re -direction from
proposed impervious surfaces.
The proposed removal of approximately 40 to 60 feet of the existing fill stockpile from the
WSDOT parcel will eliminate long-term issues of erosion and slope stability for the fill portion
of these slopes. Stormwater runoff to the remaining fill and bench slopes will be significantly
reduced by capture and tight -lining of stormwater from graded areas during construction, and
over the long-term from proposed impervious surfaces (roofs and pavements). The fill removal
on the WSDOT parcel will also result in a net reduction of load at the top of the slopes. This fill
removal will generally improve overall global (deep-seated) stability of the natural slopes below,
though the lack of evidence for deep-seated sliding indicates it is not necessary to this end.
We recommend a minimum horizontal setback of 40 feet from the crest of steep slopes, with
inclinations of 40 percent or greater, to proposed site features such as new fill, retaining walls,
and foundations. The preliminary design layout as shown on Figure 2A incorporates this
recommendation. We recommend the road be supported with a soldier pile wall along the
section with the minimum buffer in order to protect the road from unprecedented deeper sliding
or a faster rate of creep and erosion than presently anticipated.
4.23 SOIL CORROSIVENESS
The resistivity results presented in Appendix B provide an indicator of the potential for soil
corrosion of buried steel. Non -corrosive soils typically have a resistivity in excess of
5,000 ohm -cm, and potentially corrosive soils have a resistivity of less than 2,000 ohm -cm. Soils
with resistivities below 5,000 ohm -cm should be subjected to more detailed chemical testing to
evaluate their potential for corrosion. The results show the resistivity of the burn fill is usually
lower than the underlying glacial materials and, therefore, is more corrosive. The resistivity of
fill with refuse was found to be significantly lower than that of the glacial soils.
We consider that all buried steel within refuse, burn fill, and the upper portion of native glacial
deposits (beneath refuse or burn fill) should be designed assuming corrosive conditions.
4.24 PIPE BEDDING AND TRENCH BACKFILL
4.24.1 Pipe Support Through Refuse Areas
Pipe support for this project is subject to significant challenges due to on-going long-term
settlement of existing refuse, as well as the new settlement that may occur after site grading takes
place for the new facility. Also, the differential settlement between pipe sections supported on
firm ground and on refuse will subject pipes to potentially large bending and/or shear stresses
over the life time of this facility. These pipes should be designed to accommodate potential
future maintenance; i.e., locate the pipes where future excavation can be facilitated. Pipe
2003-008 FR.doc
45
1-I WA GEOSCIENCF.S INC.
;Tune 27, :2008..
HWA,Project No. 2003-008
connections to structures supported on stable ground and then extended into the refuse area will
be highly. vulnerable to settlement and induced stress damages. Flexible and slip joints should be
used to accommodate differential settlement effects, where practicable. Traditional pipe bedding
and backfill consisting of graded sand and gravel will increase load on the compressible refuse;
light weight backfill such as coal burn bottom ash, shredded tires, or wood chips will somewhat
reduce the settlement but not totally.
Coal burn bottom ash, which is light weight and a byproduct from coal-fired power generation,
can be used for the trench backfill for pipe crossings in refuse areas. Bottom ash comes in
granular form and compacts like sand. The typical compacted unit weight is approximately 80
pcf. Alternatively, recycled glass (cullet) can be used, which has a unit weight of about 90 pcf,
and is similar to the refuse unit weight of 90 pcf. Volcanic ash from recent eruptions (e.g.
Mt. St. Helens) can also be used.
In general, we recommend that new pipelines be routed to avoid refuse areas as much as possible.
In the event that re-routing of a pipeline is not possible, the area underlain by extensive refuse
should be removed from beneath the pipeline route to a depth of 2 feet below the bedding and
then replaced with a properly compacted light weight fill.
In some cases, over -excavation to remove all refuse from beneath the proposed pipeline may be
necessary and the trench width should extend to either side of the pipe a distance equal to the
depth of over -excavation beneath the pipe invert.
4.24.2 Pipe Support Through Non -Refuse Areas
Conventional pipe bedding and backfill can be used in areas where refuse is not present. Should
unsuitable soils be encountered, they should be over -excavated and replaced with clean sand or
crushed rock. Normal bedding should provide a firm, uniform, cradle for support of the pipe.
We recommend that the pipe be bedded in clean coarse sand such as traction sand or fine
concrete aggregate. Except on steep slopes, we suggest that material meeting the following
gradation limits be used for pipe bedding.
Sieve Size Percent Passing
3/8" square 100
U.S. No. 4 95-100
U.S. No. 8 68-86
U.S. No. 16 47-65
U.S. No. 30 20-32
U.S. No. 50 9-20
U.S. No. 100 0-7 (non -plastic)
2003-008 FR.doc
46
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
U.S. No. 200 0-2.5 (non -plastic)
Pipe bedding material should be used as trench backfill to at least 12 inches over the top of the
pipe, for the full width of the trench.
Wherever soft/yielding conditions occur in the bottom of the pipe trench, the soft or disturbed
soils should be removed and replaced with pipe bedding material. In wet conditions, 1 -1/4 -inch
minus crushed rock may be used to backfill the over -excavated portion of the trench and as pipe
bedding material. Gradation limits for the crushed rock should conform to the following:
Sieve Size Percent Passing
1 1/4" square 100
1" square 80-100
5/8" square 50-80
U.S. No. 4 25-45
U.S. No. 40 3-18
U.S. No. 200 7.5 max.(3/4-inch fraction; non -plastic)
All trench backfill around and over the pipe should be placed in 6 -inch (maximum) thick lifts
and each lift should be compacted to a dense and unyielding condition.
On slopes greater than 4H:1 V, check dams should be provided every 100 feet or so to prevent
conduction of seepage through trench bedding.
Where a trench box is used, we recommend that pipe restraint in the form of a cable and winch
system be used inside the pipe so that pipe already laid is kept in compression as the trench box
is advanced.
4.26 GAS VENTING FOR ALL BUILDINGS AND VAULTS
All buildings and vaults should be provided with landfill gas venting systems below the slabs or
floors. All footing and retaining wall drains should also be vented, along with any other below -
slab duct work, to prevent landfill gas entrapment under structures. Depending upon applicable
building code requirements, either passive or active gas venting systems may be employed.
5.0 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS
We have prepared this report for R.W. Beck, the King County Solid Waste Division, and their
agents for use in design and construction of a portion of this project. This report should be
provided in its entirety to prospective contractors for bidding and estimating purposes; however,
the conclusions and interpretations presented in this report should not be construed as our
2003-008 FR.doc
47
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
warranty of the subsurface conditions. Experience has shown that soil and ground water
conditions can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between
explorations and may not be detected by a geotechnical study of this scope and nature. If, during
future site operations, subsurface conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those
described herein, HWA should be notified for review of the recommendations of this report, and
revision of such if necessary.
We recommend HWA be retained to review the plans and specifications to verify that our
recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as intended. Sufficient geotechnical
monitoring, testing, and consultation should be provided by HWA during construction to confirm
the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide
recommendations for design changes should conditions revealed during construction differ from
those anticipated, and to verify that the geotechnical aspects of construction comply with the
contract plans and specifications.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, HWA executed these services in
accordance with generally accepted professional principles and practices in the fields of
geotechnical engineering and engineering geology in the area at the time the report was prepared.
No warranty, express or implied, is made.
HWA does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the
contractor's operations, and cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own
on the site. As such, the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor
should notify the owner if any of the recommended actions presented herein are considered
unsafe.
2003-008 FR.doc
48
O.O
HWA GEOSCIENCES fNC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No, 2003-008
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project. Should you have
any questions or comments, or if we may be of further service, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
BRADLEY W G THURBER 1
Brad W. Thurber, L.E.G.
Engineering Geologist
BWT:SHH:bwt
2003-008 FR.doc
49
tEXPIRE8 // 20 D
Sa H. Hong, P.E.
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008.
HWA Project No. 2003-008
6.0 REFERENCES
Hong West & Associates, November 1993, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Bow Lake Transfer
Station Improvements, Facilities Master Plan, King County, Washington, prepared for R.W.
Beck and Associates.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., January 2004, Draft Geotechnical Evaluation Report, WSDOT
Property, Bow Lake Transfer Station / Recycling Facility, King County, Washington, prepared
for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., September 2007, Phase 1 & II Environmental Site Assessment, WSDOT
Property, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., July 2007, Environmental Site Investigation, Bow Lake Processing/
Transfer Station, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., June 2008a, Final Geotechnical Report, Slope Pipelines, Bow Lake
Recycling and Transfer Station, Tukwila, Washington, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., June 2008b, Final Slope Stability Report, Bow Lake Recycling and
Transfer Station, Tukwila, Washington, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
King County SWD, 2006, SEPA Environmental Checklist, 2006 Facility Master Plan Update,
Bow Lake Transfer/Recycling Station.
R.W. Beck, February 2007, 2006 Facility Master Plan Update, Bow Lake Transfer /Recycling
Station.
Waldron, H.H., 1962, Geology of the Des Moines Quadrangle, Washington, U.S. Geological
Survey Quadrangle Map GQ -158.
Aerial photographs of the site and the surrounding area, 1936, 1946, 1948, 1958, 1960, 1965,
1969, 1974, 1977, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000, 2002, and 2004 obtained from Aero -Metric and
King County SWD.
References from 1993 report:
ABAM Consulting Engineers, January 1986, Bow Lake Transfer Station, Engineering Report,
Investigation of Concrete Distress, prepared for King County Solid Waste Division.
ABAM Consulting Engineers, April 1986, Bow Lake Transfer Station, Development of
Alternatives for Repair of Pit and Southeast Corner, prepared for King County Solid Waste
Division.
2003-008 FR.doc
50
I IWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008
Darnes & Moore, May 1965, Report of Soils Investigation, Bow Lake Transfer Station Site, King
County, Washington, prepared for Johnston -Campanella & Co.
Golder Associates, April 1992, Final Report, Results of Phase I — Geotechnical Site
Investigation, Proposed Water Main Relocation Project, Bow Lake Transfer Station, prepared for
King County Solid Waste Division.
Hong Consulting Engineers, January 1986, Bow Lake Transfer Station Foundation Settlement
Investigation, prepared for ABAM Consulting Engineers.
Hong Consulting Engineers, April 1986, Subsurface Soil Investigation for Underpinning at the
Bow Lake Transfer Station, King County, Washington, prepared for ABAM Consulting
Engineers.
Hong Consulting Engineers, November 1987, Bow Lake Transfer Station Underpinning Project,
Report of Subsurface Investigations and Piling Inspection, King County, Washington, prepared
for ABAM Consulting Engineers.
Hong Consulting Engineers, December 1988, Geotechnical Soil Investigation, Bow Lake
Transfer Station Improvement Project, King County, Washington, prepared for R.W. Beck and
Associates.
Hong West & Associates, December 1992, Geotechnical Investigation, 1-5 HOV Lane Widening,
Fife to Tukwila Interchange, King and Pierce Counties, Washington, prepared for WSDOT /
ALPHA Engineering Group, Inc.
King County, 1990, Sensitive Areas Map Folio, King County, Washington, King County
Department of Parks, Planning and Resources.
Shannon & Wilson, February 1976, Soil Engineering, Proposed Bow Lake Transfer Station,
King County, Washington, prepared for King County Dept. of Community and Environmental
Development, Architecture Division.
Shannon & Wilson, January 1977, Soil Engineering, Proposed Bow Lake Transfer Station, King
County, Washington, (Revision of February 1976 report), prepared for King County Dept. of
Community and Environmental Development, Architecture Division.
2003-008 FR.doc 51 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
f
•
\.52), • \
•
•
•
- •.20\4:
..•
1.50,R,Adp
B"
A'
- 5
B-237 *
TP -11 -$1.
BH -5
BH -1 -(1)-
G-3 $
HCE-5-6-
HCE-1 03$
HCE-4A
SW -1 074 -
DM -5 -Eli,
• =4 2 6 ei
- _
\ N..
.,,,42.,•-:-......__...............
'''''4''T:::::1••••-'141...S,ki7,... - '..------'-.-----
11.1■14-••••-..,_ '' v
—•••••••, .._.k=•• '-`'.
_. • ' ---..•:-1, - ' -.,:§s0!,'41-471!..3at•evqk. N...."
.'...:
. 7:-:•.-....'- : :!
,.......- --
-
G"
B-2
'141.1.110
LEGEND
BOREHOLE DESIGNATION AND
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
TEST Prr DESIGNATION AND
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
HWA BORING (2003)
(BH -2 THRU BH -5)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
HONG WEST BORING (1994)
(BH -1)
E.
•.•:•>;. 0.•
• •
• :1
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
GOLDER ASSOCIATES TEST PIT (1992)
(TR -1 THRU TR5)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF GOLDER
ASSOCIATES HAND AUGER BORING (1992)
(HA -1 THRU HA -3)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HONG
CONSULTING ENGINEERS BORING (1988)
(1111-1 THRU 131-4-5)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HONG
CONSULTING ENGINEERS BORING (1987)
(BH -101 THRU BH -10)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HONG
CONSULTING ENGINEERS BORING (1986)
(911-1 THRU BH -4)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SHANNON &
WILSON BORING (1976)
(B-101 THRU 8-107)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF DAMES &
MOORE BORING (1965)
(B-1 THRU B-5)
‘„,.. BASE MAP PROVIDED BY: R.W.BECK dated 4/7108
Q NdOcUktEN-IS MW st
L
i
WALL C
;
- - -
- - - - • • ••
•
WAL
4:imez`
„
eM!!m61
0 50 100 150
SCALE IN FEET
I.1. 1'144111 "/ :•• 1
-OS 1240UVIVOI 8OVILAKE-64-30-08211,0
,-•
_.-
'_-7-,-.----_ _ ,-.:_,-,.: ,----,- ..,---7,. --'--------,----',--.:., 1 9 C -. -, =-',-7-----=----• ''',-----'••• '
---..,z,-..:::--:._ .. , . ...,.., 12-•__•_-_' _, --Z-----_--7-;---_ ,..:-'":-.
---,--,,---- '--,---- - - -, - 1,-,- ---.-•-aCre - riZi, --''.-•;-- ," t...",:"-.7.----.-1.,,:,
. •
. . • -
• -
••• 90
•
KE,Y1 - APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF FILL SOILS
WSDOT FILL
FILL WITH REFUSE
BURN FILL
REFUSE
PROPOSED RETAINING VALLS
nOURE
HWAGEOSCIF.NCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
SITE AND
EXPLORATION
PLAN
DRAWN or EEK
CHECKED BY .BL
2A
DATE PROJECT NO.
06.27.08
2003-008-21
REV 04 EFK 0429.08
\St...,
BASE MAP PROVIDED BY DUANE HARTMAN ASSOC.O5/09/07
0.
100'
200'
400'
1'=200'
S: \2003 PROJECTS\2003-O0B-21 BOW LAKE 'TRANSFER STATION\CAD\2003-008 11100 WA 2003-008 T11 OO.0WG
YID
HW&GEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE
RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
SITE & SLOPE
TOPOGRAPHY
DRAWN BY EFK
CHECK BY BT
FIGURE No•
2B
PROJECT NO..
DATE 2003-008-21
10.26.07 TASK 1100
3
ilANRAA?P
260
G..
c.
LEGEND
B-237 BOREHOLE DESIGNATION AND
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
TP -1 1 Ili TEST PIT DESIGNATION AND
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
BH -5
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
HWA BORING (2003)
(BH -2 THRU BH -5)
BH -1 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
HONG WEST BORING (1994)
(BH -1)
G-5*
G-3 $
HCE-54-
HCE-103$
HCE=4A
SW -1 07
DM-5
/ PZ \ Zan,
. �. �_8=20.4 '�.%
— 4 �ORrHACCES
Q
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
GOLDER ASSOCIATES TEST PIT (1992)
(TP -1 THRU TP5)
}
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF GOLDER :••I�
ASSOCIATES HAND AUGER BORING (1992)
(HA -1 THRU HA -3)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HONG
CONSULTING ENGINEERS BORING (1988)
(BH -1 THRU BH -5)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HONG
CONSULTING ENGINEERS BORING (1987)..
(BH -101 THRU BH -103)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HONG
CONSULTING ENGINEERS BORING (1986)
(BH -1 THRU BH -4)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SHANNON &
WILSON BORING (1976)
(6-101 THRU B-107)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF DAMES &
MOORE BORING (1965)
(B-1 THRU B5)
BASE MAP PROVIDED BY: RW.BECK dated 417108
Iu
•
IP ••.i '' 1 r f. ri'ra. ,i • ..r_ ,, 1 . . IVO ^ n'l
0 50 100 150
SCALE IN FEET
HWAGEOSCIENNCES INC,
KEY.
- APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF FILL SOILS
VSDDT FILL
FILL WITH REFUSE
- -• — BURN FILL
REFUSE •
® PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS
• :i PROPOSED PRE -LOAD
PROPOSED OVER -EXCAVATION AREAS
flit 7/7 -
BOW LAKE
RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON.
PRE -LOAD AND
OVER -EXCAVATION
PLAN
DRAWN BY EEK.
CHECKED BY 'IL
FIGURE NO.
2C
DATE,
06.27.08
PROJECT. NO.
2003-008-21
REV 03 EFK 0828/07
w
LL
z
H
ELEVATION
3 1 0
3 O O —.
i i I
290 —
2 8 0
270 -
2 6 O
6-210:(OFFSST 25'
EAST ACCESS ROAD
PAVEMENT
2S0 -----
240
230
2"'20
200
190
180
y
MIN
Min
.C20)_
.04
1MTH • C• 4)
REFUSE
v1J el" VA;i
AVAVA1 047.1
WWWWWeAV 7MY
•
MMI
MIMES e o
FILL • • • .
REFUSE �_•
FILL
170 -
160
1 S 0
140
130
120
110
100
r
ese
oes
004:
I►�,A► AvAv
rw�v • -
• -FILL -
11
08
s,._-
AAVVA
v,:
20-
20
I
1
GLACIAL
i
DEPOSITS
(29) -
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
\DOCUMENTS AND SETT)NGS\T)NKKINNEY.HWA\DESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A-EDWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
•
FILL
WSDOT FILL
OevAva
REFUSE
BURN FILL
1
MATCHLINE 3A-2
LEGEND
0
(V
m
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWSIFOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29
50/3"
35
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
--�__ INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
HWAGEOSCIENCFS INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
A -A'
DRAWN ay EEK.
HE BY BL
INE N0.
3A-1
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT No.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/X/XX
EXISTING BUILDING
1
l. -VE 3N11HOlVIN
L
. C9
A'
EXISTING
GROUND SURFACE
WEST 111 i .1-1. !EFLIS
ACCESS i
/ L. ROAD I—
th• - L --
DEPC SITS . i
..—. .... —. — — —II
(70
(56
(41
6 7 kb. . : 7 • , _ . • - • _
07 ....Y.. ammo. A.
16 I YAVAT4 WAVA1PA_ 1EF•
A 15
._,..h.. • TA. 74
v if if V h: V TAY AT& !AM
• A 1
r
STORAGE /
54
FJU
101
loa
PIT • • 7
3
47
FIL.LWffH —(
.. . — .
(58
(44
C74
(48
(50)
—Z300
— 9 0
. • ....................
319X7
2 0
2 7 0
2 ISe 0
0
2 2 0
2 1 0
2 Q0
1 9 0
1 19:0
1 7 0
1 ISa a
o
1 .4- 0
1 Z3 0
1 0
110
100
2 0
.........
1
GLACIAL
DEPC)SITS
LEGEND
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
co
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20-1 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29)
2.
50/3"
35
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
rePivAl
Ly.Aver•
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
VOCUMEN15 AND SETI1NGSNTINKKINNEYHWAVESICTOP \130WEAKE 0-1)7-08 T24(10 \ BOW LAKE )(SEC A-EDWG
.1
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=30'
. . .
ELEVATION
la um
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
A—A'
=am BY EEK
CHECICED Of BL
FIGURE NO.
3A-2
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS XJXJXX
W
L_
z
H
ELEVATION
B
3 1 O
-I
3 O O -
•
B-'209 (OFFSET 12' S)
r
•
6-;210 (OFFSET 73' N)
B'
CV
C )
1 -
LL
LL
0
F --
1-
u..
-
LL
LL
0
06"8
M
M
1-
W
C/)
Li.
LL
0
290 -
21St 0
2 7 O
2 6 O
250
240
230
220
2 1 0
200
190
1 8
170
1
150
140
130
1 2 0
110
y F
EAST :ACCESS .�
EIL
_!-
■M
CO
�_- -- yes
20-
`I s , ;r,���v'iV�isvvev I FILLwITK REFUS
sos 1 it Alt triliAt4A4A+Alt il i kt% LiA+
_.��essvwvwvwv�w�wvwvwvwvwVATAVATATAv pkv
_ ' P2 Ail! TAVAVAI', ,Te REFUSE VAVAVl..�vt► w, ATA A.a
•.•w�wo�vwv�vwv,� ►v,►v►vwvwvwv�ti-w®wv VAVAVAVAVAVA A
...:.�sdvwvwvAVAV vl�wv.1�Aa&VAC �vwvavAVA21rwvwvwvwVA /wvwv v ��
OAVATwvwvwvwvwvwvl VAVA7 VAVAewvevdvwMvwvw. V .. .
s
s
s
Aso
so"
s
I
•0'
s
s
I
REFUSE
17110/010/4/07 Ire 1/ V
29-
_AVAVAVAVAYAI%TAW
AVAVAVAVAVAVAO
vv0v�►vv�_. -
DEPDSITS
34
50/4'
50/4'
50/5'
55/6'
4v4P
TAW War
25=
80_
32
83/5' -
37
35
-
J
50/3'
IV
77 ='3/4/86
GLACIAL
r
i
100 -
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
CAD -MOMENTS AAD SETTINGSVINXKINNEY.HWANDESIMPNBOWLAXE 04-07-08 T2400\B0Wl. ARE XSEC A-E.DWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=30'
r&•ip•
.44•i
WOO
❖A•.
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
85 j -
W
z
7.1
Q
2
LEGEND
O
N
co
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWSlFOOT)
20-1 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29
50/3"
NONSTANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
_ .4 INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
35
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
gal
H AGBVJC F.NCFS INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
B -B'
DRAWN BY EEK FIGURE NO.
QIECKED BY BL
3B-1
DATE
06.27.08
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/X/XX
0
1
1
Z
m
•
OO
r
LLI LL
B -I 23 (OFFSET 39' S)
= Drs -3 (OFFSET 33' N)
Dy -2 (OFFSET 26' N)
TP -10 (OFFSET 28' N).
Z Z
N
N
UJ F
UJ W
Li- u.
LLL
0
d �
N
CO
TF! -9 (OFFSET 27' S)
:: EXISTING: BUILDING
PROPOSED RETAINING• WALL
ego v00
...10P4.woo _. m — f
EXISTING
GROUND
SURFACE
ROAD
WEST: ACCESS
IN011001=1.11m,@ @I•1011
FILL
I
W II ,4;"" 29 -4032
6
• e
I.\ 9
28i\x
15
40
35 (5A)
U ,OM
.r W., :
52 31
W ( 38 (I40)
p (95)
35 i I 341
-? FILL W
a2)
0)
(40
s�)
C95)
GLACIAL
♦
TM RE t
ViTIVilar
AVAVAll
w.
FUSE
4
N
I-
LLI
0)
LL
10 Lt -
0
N
N
B"
! °D PROPOSED
RETAINING .WALL
I 1 � I
310
300
I z90
80
70
60
2�0
2 4 O
230
220
210
00
190
1180
170
160
1
140
130
180
35
35
55
50
ATM
GLACIAL
DEPOSITS
5016'
50)5=
50/6'1•••
1
50/6.'
GLACIAL. •
DEPOSITS
........
.I.
GLACIAL 25
40
DEPOSITS
55
50
DEPOSITS
LEGEND
0
m
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29
SL
50/3"
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
?- INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
35 -B SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
i
.uo.•
vu..:
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances
on site.
\--C: \DOCUMENTS AND SETTINZ:S\11NKKINNEY.HWA\DESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A-E.DWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
110
100
a iWAGEOScI!NCFS INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
B -B'
DRAWN BY EEK
0HEacm BY BL
F --
LJ
Li
L_
z
ELEVATI❑N
1
IRE N0.
3B-2
ATE
06.27.08
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/X/XX
Intentionally Blank
IT I
Li La'
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
FIGURE NO
3C
PROJECT NO
2003-008
Ld
Ld
LL
z
1 1
ELEVATION
310
300 -
290 -
280 -
240
230
220
210
200
190 -
180 -
1 7 0
160
1
140 —
130
120
110
100
D
I
ICU
ISI 1
_ 1
1
Ilk
I
TRATacR-PARKING AREA
EAST
ACCESS
ROAD
'TRAILER
LOADING: PIT
EXIT • RAMP
12•
*tviv OA FILL
edev evdv7 AV A�� .
A�►v AVAVA .FAV.vA FAYAVlvAT --
AvvvAvovovAsAv�vA�t,r A►iv�vvvo
� v ' I'
51-
30-
7VA
REFUSE '
AfiVAS
,eeverevevAT
VAVAV VAV v
Ire. �•
35
1
6— ........ FIf L
.. �. ass •w �!\.
y. 7 ��.AYAt
.
it
vAgrA wvVAT VAIVAVvi_ __AVAVAl
GLACIAL
DEPOSITS
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINOVINKKINNEY.HWAVESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A-E.DWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
I......
liTAVAVA
.......
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
LEGEND
N
m
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29
i
5013"
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NONSTANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
?- 4 -?- INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
35
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
HWAGEOSCIfNCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
D -D'
DRAWN BY EEK,
cionozo or EL
FII*IRE ND.
3D-1.
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KIS X/X/XX
-OE N 11HOIVIA1
2
N
A
W
1—
U
W
Wiz
(Uo
P4wr
In-) I
No 1 ❑!
CLI GULL I
I . . .0 J
co
H
D'
PROPOSED
1
••• RETAINING " — —
WALL s
TRAILER
— — ._:.—.
LOADING* PIT
ENTRANCE
'40
45
s1
R:° MP �--'
FILL
REFUSE: i
EXISTING
•GRE UND�;�
H -SURFAC=E
f i
50/3•6'-
64-
0/6L
64-
54-
54-
19
19-
DEP❑SITS
WEST ACCESS
21-
ROAD
i
DEP❑SITS
i
LEGEND
O
fV
m
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29)
50/3"
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
?– INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
35
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
.......
.•...'
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
\DOCUMENTS AND SETBBNGS\TINKKINNEY.HWA\DESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A-E.DWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=30'
j
1
310
300
90
80
2.7 0
2'E.0
250
240
230
220
210
200
1 9 0
1
170
160
1 0
140
130
1 2 0
110
100
ELEVATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
D -D'
DRAWN BY EEK
CHECKED BY )3L
FIGURE NO.
3D-2
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KIS XIX/XX
E
LTJ
Lel
Li
z
H
ELEVATI❑N
310
300
90
2390
2 7 0
2 6 O
250
240
230
2 2 O
210
200
190
1390
1 7 O
160
1
140
130
120
110
100
11;7-
c=, O N
est co cc;
O '7O I I
• • SOUTH • I
• • • ACCESS-'
••••ROAD
1
(32Y.
1
YtlI,Yr" •+.......o=cCc.na s�IT-. .. I (08}--
- ice' ®• •i • — •—' aalmf. •
10.."'!".10 1 _ _ 1 i (50{
11 pAl 0 41, Y o . SAO/►VAVAY,1A,�iAVATAYAVkVAWAWA0 ; iIIYAV,�7,�7A Ai►w '�J .
. ghlAvAYATATA y y 04^ AvATA0AvA -REFUSE • A 'V �IAVAVA , . — w`�e�A�ATiI TAVAwA0• ,
�eeeee AAAA ,V - A .�.2��.��.�v.r �S3: 5'—LI �'tl00�60+ - •DRY• 1✓89/75
WM"
.AAA.fa_.ve• ! 1 37 (60a -
60f .50,
35 ._
EXISTING BUILDING
s 2
0 Li -
1
1
IMO
FILL
•
v' immema
(V
_..._...
• o ms
(4
s• w.
Z -
• 'FID'' S'
•REFU AA: _V45
•x
12-
53i
88-�
GLACIAL
DEPOSITS
50/3q
77
85
1•—•
2
GLACIAL
DEPOSITS
1
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact Tines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
C: \DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\11NKKINNEYHWA\DESKTOP\50WUKE IA -07-1)8 T OWTAKE XSEC A—EDWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=30'
L'Ann
OiYAVA
.,
•
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
1
LEGEND
0
N
m
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWSIFOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29
1.
50/3"
35
NONSTANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
E -E'
DRAWN BY EEK
E E.OKEO BY BL
FIGURE N0.
3E-1.
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT N0.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/X/XX
1
to
-§7
K.
0 ce
" ct
... .
tl, 0
NORTH TRAILER PARKING AREA
EXISTING
3 1 0
1— 300
n
2 9 0
TRAILER
GROUND
RI JRFAr.F
:"."-aibbrovi;—
• >.•
•
m. •
RI
l
• • GLACIAL'
LOADING PIT
EXITRAMP
1 NORTH I
AC.CESS
1 ROAD
- - •
: SORIVIrE . • I MEM.
iiVTAVIVAILVADAKI&V VAlkiALVA. Ammo.: - - •:....: *
• [ 1 Al AIM ,t11 VATAVAT VAS LI PLUM YAVATAYAVAVA YA,VAYA , AiAivAii.,,, •
A i O. FAVAVAT I YATATATATATAVATAITA 311 52 kVA • REFUSE! A , TATATATATAVAVAVA A, TATATAVATATAVATAVAV
A w , 1 v v v T ir TA /ATM ft WAVAVAVATAVAT T ' f V
_
NI I , A•
' s
ma...V.:111m ••• • *********
.....
60
DEPOSITp stv5-
37
GLACIAL
inn in a.
:wife • • •
▪ Vo."7-1,116-
DEPOSITS
LEGEND
ID
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS!FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29)
50/3"
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
a WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
35 SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
PAW
Wan,
,VA•AVA
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
D.ADCCUIVIENTS AND
1 • • 11 • ' .
TOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A-EDWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=30'
2 7 0
2 6 0
2 0
2 3c
2 2 0
2 1 0
2 00
1 9 0
3_ et 0
1. 7 0
1 6 0
1 0
1 -4- 0
1 3 0
1 2 0
1 1 0
100
E'
L
LL
Li
-
ELEVATION
HWAGEOSCIENCB INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
E -E'
DRAWN By EEK
CHECKW BY BL
FIGURE NO.
3E-2
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS XDUXX
LLJ
LL_
ELEVATION
310
300
2.9 0
280
270
60
2 O
40
30
zz0
2 1 0
200
190
180
170
160
1S0 —
F
C*)
N
Q
O �
0
CCc
i i T I
^••^�-� er�a.m mama o AMP no AM • ='U. -. . AMd toWsr.111Fro Amer. �-..
. 1 I oor s000erhroo"..7
— I- II .1
Ave....dA Av,MVV♦%mss s .ammr. .Aova
"ir V. vs" lab kirAY VA MVO' "TAM FAVAVAVA vvA_,_.�.�.��s�s�s�srs'_
ATIVAVAI r A gr"A k
- .: v V V V VAVA% FAVAVAVAV VAVAr.�.+.-'�9AV
GLACIAL
DEPC]SITS,
24
32
30.
48
37�
43
. Tl/e9/7.6. .
• • 31
o ..... -ov •
}4
/•
FI LL: WITH REFUSE
4
AA.A VA AAAA.
VAVAVPAVAVAVAV'
V.
lV
M
z
GLACIAL -
iitru�I T S
tv5
140
1 2 0
110 — 1
f
100
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
C: \DOCUMENTS AND SEIIINGSVINKKINNEY.HWA\DESKTOP\BOWLARE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A-EDWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
V9.q.
1~A!
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
LEGEND
0
N
20
(29)
50/3"
35
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
- INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
F -F'
DRAWN BY EEK
CHECKED or BL
DATE
06.27.08
FIGURE NO.
3F-1
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TAS K-2100
REV 00 KLS XJX/XX
i
I §'
-e.
-4:
7 0 LO
IW
U) CL CV
Cil
03
N
0
w
CO
1
1
. EY,IST.ING TRANSF.ERI3VILDING
•
•
nemann . c=a el=ame nosanna ammo . onamlm .
mmmmmm mmmmmm aim nannm •004
—a
mlant WWI MP 11•. n no
netnieen=sommso
-1
E I
z;m•
71
_
A AAA AAA
TA Al WAY PATAVAV WATATA.TA.
ATAVATATATATATAVA
• • mmm
FILL
MIN NI • an • •M • MI IM
Nia 1•116-0
FILL WITH 'REF
2
1 17
. 3
i 3
5
3, GLACIAL
io
SE
37
0/
22
, IYATAVAT
FAY
DEPOSITS
6
03.
10
FILL WITH REFUSE
71
4
94/
75 I--
;74
1/29/76
• FILL
mmmmmm ----------
PROPOSED MAINTENANCE
BUILDING
ism
• i •
•
31
51
FILL WITH REFUSE
GLACIAL
• *
.........
. • • • 1
• .• .• • •
• 4 • 4 • • •
. ' ! ' **I . : •1 r : . ' : ' : ' .1 . ' : ' •1 r : . . .1 ' 11 ' ti 1
16.;*•:‘• • ••••••,;+•• • * • ••••• • ;• :.
*.•.a*e•r•'‘•••••••4•••••fr •1
* 4.4.4...4 . V
/:3:*7.*:******••••'1..'*.;.*'•'•.11 .
..41!: a .*NrAT.../ ..1"...771.,
r 7-7N,/
20
DEPOSITS
LEGEND
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
00
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29
50/3"
35
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
avATAYA
fAvAve7
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
C: \DOCUMENTS AND SET1114CZNI1NKKINNEY.HWAVESKTOP \EKWVLAKE 04-07-05 -M4:10\20W LAKE XSEC A-E.DWG
• ....... •
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=30'
0' 15' 30 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=30'
MATCHLINE 3F-3
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
F -F'
DRAWN BY EEK
CHECKED sy
DATE
06.27.08
1
FIGURE NO.
3 F 2
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS XJX1XX
' ... .PROPOSI= "TRANSFERBUILDING
•
w
a,
ma
L_
`•-v••�•a:�:•� �•�.��j A•
•.• • :••v •f:.•;•4a.• •t: • '♦t�' ••'2f.'
:':':':':':':':;:6:;:':•:':':'a: BURFILL •' :
•
t•,• gars • . t *b... • •f t 1 f !! _—•
1 1
`:1YY• l'•:• '1'f'o I '''M. :J•• '1,1 •••a2.'_
y • •1
• t•.
.-.-.-.-. .- . _.•.i s em: :moi
L1J
LLI 270
1-1
310
G
G'
N
rn ..
M I f 0s
rti
I I
1 !I I
�.-5 !
In C (Y) 0
CL
00 1 I +
I
290 ,
2 2 O —� !
ELEVATIDN
Z_
J• •
260
2�0 —
40
220
210
. dpOo
PA k ATAT00WVOVOVOV4V V000 v�
50(5
1
••••• ..:VFtI IRN FII I• ..•.%•:••••••••••••.i...•••.•••
�:+: :;1:'�:f.' :' � :J'.• • •:I'•
.2�.
Viiiav• �•�t7t�3�s�lleYsa�!R��oia'.?1�.�����
P
(7 .
;'•'•'BURN FILL-
.•.•i� • •U .
REFI ISE ..
.• 4•\ -
1
PROPOSED:DETENTION VAULT
31
45
! ADVANCE OUTWASH
200-
190 — , . . • . .
120
17O
160 —
1S0
140
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
\DOCUMENTS AND SETi1I7GS\TINKKINNEY.HWA\DESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A—E.DN(G
1
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
.•.V...
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
LEGEND
O
N
m
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29)
50/3"
35
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
d ibYAG OSCIENCFS INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
G -G'
DRAWN BY EFK.
CHECKED BY BL
DATE
06.27.08
J
fGURE No.
3G-1
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV CO KLS IVX/XX
r
rn
z
00
n
N w:: PROPOSED TRANSFER BUILDING
- P4
z
n
z
12
WSDOT FILLL
.27 iii- :-
•
z
•
•
•
•I•.50/3'
• .''.'.1•'...
•
Adiar
41
•.t......•11)) •.50/3'.
DRY 319/07 i.'` •• .•'
-.id.
1
•
.r �r 50/6'
7....:7L:.7.:::-.-7,;5- } 4-';-.:;.7.:-.•.:4;.-...7;.:::-...r.:":;.:7.-H:.
WSDOT.FILL.:-
. • ..
•
imam nekli.IIPPUPW. IL
48
1
1
22
rl- 34Pts*w.472.
70
!a . M MO.
6.
4
/
•
/6'
• 50/4'
50/3'
50/6'
- 310
— 300
2 9 0
- 28O
2 7 O
260
77
GLACIAL
DEPOSITS
37
50
6-
- 2�0
- 2 -4-
2
2 3 O
- 20
10
200
- 1 9 0
GLACIAL
DEPOSITS
LEGEND
N
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N-VALUE-(BLOM/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29)
50/3"
35
2_
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
4 . INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE.
GLAC AL
DEPOSITS
IMAVAVA
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances
on site.
C. \DEMENTS AND
04-07-08 T2400\130W LAKE XSEC A-EDWG
.........
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
— 180
170
160
L
1
140
ELEVATIDN
I IWAGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
G -G'
DRAWN BY EEK,
CHECKED 9Y OL
DATE
06.27.08
J
FIGURE NO.
3G-2
PROJECT W.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/X/XX
H
LJ
LJ
LL_
I-1
ELEVATIDN
310
39.6487` N)
4.13
O
tiO
as v
1
I
v)
1
1
k0co
300 —
! I W _J
290 —
i f
80 I 1 IZ I �I
i 1 C . .0N 1 � :•, Sul
I W
-D1-1 l ;
1
PROPOSED TRANSFER BUILDING
.1 cK
270
220
1-1
�. •.•:. :.':•: �:�;: .•�•:•:: •:'i••:•. 'BURN F14L:.. . cn ..
16
t
•
GLACIAL
rrsit•:r7•••res '•v r 7.%.*•'rr.•r
•BURNAFILL ' ' ;•••
•
•y3�
j'l�� -raj I
�r jt --
Lt-.•-
I EE
ADVAN CE-OUTWASH
F
210
I I.
200 I ,
DEPOSITS
190
180
1 7 0
160
1 0
140
130
+ 1 '
{
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
C: \DOCUMENTS MID SET,INGS\ZINKKINNEY.HWA\DESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-0S-T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A—E.DWG
J
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
• 4.
•••
• •
r . .
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
LEGEND
0
co
1
1
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29)
50/3'
35
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
_-_-?-__ INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
MAGE0SCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
H -H'
DRAWN BY EEK
CHECKED BY BL
FIGURE NO
3H-1
DATE
06.27.08
20ECT NO.
03-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/XJXX
r
Z
4-4
CUo
L_ _ -I �`,.... _ • _ __1 __ _ ___ - _ __.:.:.7......-_-..7._..-
.::::-.:::::.:.1..-..__ :__
Z
(t)
0"
co
NCL
1- -
I - - -_ _
UVSDOTFILt___-__ _:-.-�_�_:-._-=-_.-._`'..r
=0'1'
:11=---_-=77-_-7:' --.-=--
---I..-,>--�
.�-1r-M-a- ..
. '-•--.-•--•7+77+7 �: ` r� .
gr
4
2•
r•
Z '
M
! L
•��.. . ...
..... .. ... ..:moi.
• iJ.t rriti'r'ii�s.•� ' ri.yilir•-v
•y,S1�jr 'f
GLACIAL
DEPOSITS
M
l!) 7
to � -u (11 ce
PL1..• <E- . as'
wZ T
V1'-'
0�
CL‹
01-
Irw
12ce
310
- 300
1
27
0
61
- 90
1
5C/6'
50/6'
5S/4'
/3' _
GLACIAL • -5c/6' 1 I
36 1
DEPOSITS
1
! I 1
h d/1
I 52 l
i I 1 r ! 1 '
�
I
1
LEGEND
0
N
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29)
.Q.
50/3"
35
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
•
INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
r.❖.•
OA•V•i
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
: \DOCUMENTS AND SETTIRGS\TINKKINNEY.HWA\DESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A-EDWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
B0
270
260
2�0
z40
30
zz0
10
00
1 9 0
1 B 0
170
160
1�0
140
r1.30
�1
LTJ
LL_
z
H
ELEVATION
HWAGGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
H -H'
DRAWN BY EEK
mom BY BL
FIGURE NO.
3H-2
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/X/XX
3 1 0
I
3
1
3
O"
w
w:
L
N
t0 i
1
u)
CD
1
Ii N ce !J
d <r
!.
13
0 •
Y`� 1
aro
P4 P4 — I P4 4
1
300 —
290
W 1as 0
W 70
260
ELEVATI❑N
240
• PROPOSE'D MAINTENANCE
BUILDING
Ai pi
Z 0
'..= 0 1 10
.....,
___
LAW 1 DD .„:
_._..
?:.••-__- -_-_- -._-_. = --.-
I _-_�'46
_-_-_-_-1NSDOTFItL •_=_-'--:.74.:-.:
-E _-'---_=_-=l_---.--I-
F--,-,----.........__•____•..-„,•.r......:ar.----. �; rte:
�� a` a-• �• .. ...a...........t..........
PROPOSED: TRANSFER BUILDING •
1 —
�
1
{
51
... � .•...1,.•
• �?�!.;-••;!.••<t
BURN FILL •::.'
moo—+!';="�aooaoo.F .•e400d'.?ev�.'oouoe:
s� ;+•
REFUSE zy�IG:
2 3 0 - AO/AWL OUIWASH ... 62
220
210
200
aV
M.
w•
.. -_.._.._h_.._..- ...._. �.._.. ..• 0•
6aw oSs,,�48Irr � :moo ►SSL.
c j
1
so ADVANCE OUTWASH
• •-•1
45
sl GLACIAL
DEPOSITS
501
51
190 —
180 —
170 —
1 6 0 —1
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances
on site.
BOWLAKE 0407-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A—E.DWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
FATALVAI
.•.
•
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
LEGEND
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
m
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29
50/3"
35
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
mum
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
I -I'
DRAWN or EEK
coECIcED BY BL
FIGURE N0.
31-1
DATE PROJECT NO.
06.27.08 2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/X/XX.
I'
w
t
—)
I
O
L _ ffy
Q
N i
C(?
-- ---- - =• 3
rn r:
vera.. s as •
iiia i% P e=
46
—1 .
ce
Pziv
---_-�..; VVSDQT.FILL . - ---- -- -------------- -
__ d. .... e ..a= --....-..-••.--'cam .. _.. _.. _.. _..
=.®.�� .®. �. 43— ova..aT�..
•e. —
�■..i.-. Mama:
3:
fir_
LEGEND
O
N
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20-1 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29)
50/3°
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
- -�_—_—?-__ INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
35
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
..V....
aYaMAYA
.......
3 1 0
— 300
- 290
280
DEPOSITS
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
C: \DOCUMENTS AND SET WEDS\T1NKKIANEY.HWA\DESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A—EDWG
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=30'
2 7 O
260
2�O
240
230
— 220
1 O
00
1 9 0
180
170
. I
. ...I.........
160
LLJ
LLJ
LL_
z
1-1
ELEVATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
DRAWN BY EEK
cuEcKED BY HL
MORE NO.
31-2
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/X/XX
310
300
2 9 O
2 8 0
W 270
LL
260
I-1 2 S O
240
230
220
210
200
190
180
170
160
1 0
140
ELEVATION
130
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
J
m
N �I ix
I 0_ LL 1 I
•PW .r i eL
ADVAIVCE OUTWASH
LEAD
yWyJ
OQ
o).
CONTAMINATED; . 1..2
DANGEROUS - dAS.TE : a
t { I I I woe
. poi`: vALWAIMIAVAVAVAsaseeeTO
....-�•+r.►. ANida66.W.4121,*".2111.*ATiAl
® Ya ® m
55
3/9/07
M. -
50/6'
s.^/5..
ADVANCE OUTWASH
50/6'.
5016'
I � I
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
C:\D INTENTS AND SETTINGS\TINKKINNEY.HWA\DESKTOP'SOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW WAKE )(SEC A-E.DWG
....s,AVA-
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
LEGEND
0
N
m
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWSIFOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29
50/3"
35
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED W PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
331
DRAWN Br EEK
CHECKED BY BL 3J-1
FIGURE N0.
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT 110.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X!XIXX
6-f£ 3NI1HOIVIN
C.)
in
1!) (U in
M o 0
v-5
r•-•0 CO (1J�I ce CU Et
00
a0 u)
F- v
1
(70
,(5
(4
(58
(44
74)
(482
(50)
ADVANCE OUTWA;SH
1
64
80-
5d7g '
52
54
60
ADVANCE 0UTWASH
• DRY 3/9/07
78
50/5'
] 72 DRY 31547
50/6'
1
LEGEND
0
m
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
201 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29
3Z
50/3"
35
NONSTANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILUNG
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
h.
....•..
OAVAin
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances on
site.
C: \DOCUMENTS ANDSETTIR s\ nNK WA\DESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A-E.DWG
MATCHLINE 3J-3
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15'
30'
60'
0' 15' 30'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
60'
HWAGEOSCIEN FS INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
3-3'
DRAWN BY EEK.
9Y BL
FIGURE NO.
3J-2
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/XIXX
Z -f£ 3NI1HOIVIN
Cr.
n
N
o
N O
EY1�I
1
=mom
• 50/6''•
,� 3 1 0
-F{-}- - 3 0 0
" - 290
2 9 0
50/6'
1 50/4'
50/3'
16
NI.7-I
50/6'
61
CLACIAL
i DEPOSITS
3
2 7 0
- 260
LEGEND
O
m
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29)
50/3"
35
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
\W•./
reiYAN
l
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits
and should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between
units are interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short
distances on site.
C:\DOCENTS AND SETTINCSNITNKKINNEY.FWA\T)ESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\B0W LAKE XSEC A-E.DWG
2S0
240
230
220
210
200
1 9 0
1 B 0
170
160
1
140
130
L,J
LIJ
LL_
z
H
ELEVATION
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
3-3,
DRAWN BY EEK
CHECKED BY BL
MORE NO.
3J-3
BATE PROJECT NO.
06.27.08 2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/XJXX
L1J
Li
ELEVATIDN
330
3 2 0
II
3 1 0
300 —
2 9 0
80
2 7 O
o
2so
2 4 O
230
2 2 O
2210
200
190
ver,
ao3
Na -
H_ Qui o6
7
.
• • PROPOSED
TRANSF=ER BUILDING•
--•--_ WSDOT FILL
FIL'L'S" f•. �.•"•t.•s
!
_-_-_-__4=
- - - =87
-_--=12-
�IItSDOT
NORTH SCALE
180 —
170 —
160 —
21 •:�1+:'t�4•:
ADVANCE OUTWASH I
LEGEND
O
m
BORING DESIGNATION
AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
N -VALUE - (BLOWSIFOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
(29)
5_
50/3"
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
NON-STANDARD PENETRATION
TEST RESISTANCE
?- -4 . INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
35
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=30'
0' 15' 30' 60'
0' 15' 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=30'
C:\DOCUMENTS AAD SETTINGSNTIFIKKINFIEY.FIWANDESKTOPNBOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400\BOW LAKE XSEC A-E.DWG
330
320
3 1 0
— 300
— 290
2 21 0
270
— 260
2�0
— 240
i
— 230
2 2 O
210
200
190
— 180
NOTE:
The subsurface conditions shown
are based on widely spaced borings
and test pits and should be
considered approximate. Further,
the contact lines shown between
units are interpretive in nature and
may vary laterally or vertically over
relatively short distances on site.
VA
OWNYA
FILL
WSDOT FILL
REFUSE
BURN FILL
— 170
1 6 0
LJ
LL
H
ELEVATIDN
HWAGFOScIENCFS INC
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
K -K'
DRAWN BY EEK
CHECKED BY BL
FIGURE 110.
DATE
06.27.08
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK -2100
REV 00 KLS X/XJXX
1'
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9...L.Ipcf)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Refuse Settlement Calculations under additional Toads caused by any added fill
such as structural
_ _-
(Transfer
fill
_._
Facility
1
= ._...._. _.
or preload
by SHH
•
...
Primary Settlement
Secondary
Biodegradation
Seltlentenl
__. _._
_...._
Cate* log
• -r
_
_ _........._.._.__
,y, + AO/
4 t* H
1
'Unit Wt.
120
( 120
93
138
__......._._._...._.._........__.._
0. ,,,, ) 'Bow Lake Processing
': t
1. 1
} -
i
Settlement
=Primary+Secondary+Biodegradation
Sp=HCMLog((0
AH-
1Bio S = H1111-002r50t.
...._
Newly Added
i _
Fill
Primary i
consol Secondaryatlon=
coeff. 1coeff.
j i
,----
Biodegrad
0.2
°/r.
Landfill Cover Soil
_»
_
1
j
w'
__.
=.
Refuse
Glacial De
L"...._.
1 0.2501 0.030
_...__ ___...._._..._._...._............... _
€ 1
. -
0.002;
1._._
osit
Primary
Consoi.
Long Term Period
0.3
g 501
.,,
...._...�
l
_
p......_........_....-.
Height of
Refuse
(ft)
Unit Wt.
(pct)
Land fill 1 Unit
cover WL
(ft) 1'• (Pct)
Added
Fill
Height (fel
Unit
WL
(Pct)
Overbur Stress due Primary
den to New Fill settlement
(psf) (psi) (ft)
Secondary
(ft)
Biodeg
radatio
n (ft)
Settle
ment
(ft)
17
18
19
20
21
5
931 51 120
10
120
832.50. 1200 0.485
0.301
0.476
1262
;, ;;1;0
ti i1 931! i5 t 120
yif. t 1p
;x,120
9i,1065100 It (200] NO!8i19
; !$1006:1.2
R4..0?953
162:384
15
93i Si 1201
10
10
120
120
1297.50 1200
1530.00, 1200
1
1.066
1.2571
0.9291 1.429
1.2491 1.905
i j
3.424
4.412
20
931 51 1201
1 I i
22
23
24
25
26
5
931 51 1201
_93i . • 51 1201
20
201;.
20
1 1
120 832.50.1 24001
120 .1065.001 24001
120 1297.501 24001
120 1530.00= 24001
1
0.736
i - 1281
1.706
0.2841 0.476
_ 0.5810..0:953
0.886 1.429
1.497
.-2:815
4.020
10
15
20
931 5.1
120120
10,....L.
931 51
1 1
2.049
1.197 1.905
i .
5.150
27
28
29
30
5
931 54 120
30
120 832.501 36001 0.908
120 1065.001. 3600 1.604
120 1297.501 3600 2.163
120 1530.001 36001 2.627
0.2731 0.476
0.5601 0.953
0.856 1.429
1.1581 1.905
1.657
3.116
4.448
5.690
10
931 51 120
30
30
15
931 51 120
20
931 51 1201 30
Example Calculation 1, See rows 18 and 23 In red and blue.
The refuse thickness is assumed to be 10'. See line 18 in red. The total settment under 10' new structural fill or 1200 psf will
be 2.384'.
To reduce the post construction settlement, 10' preload will be added. Now structural fill 10' plus preload 1020 ft or 2400 psf.
See row 23 in blue.
The primary consol settlement under structural fill + preload = 1.281' over three months, see row 23.
When the preload is taken off after primary consolidation, it will continuously settle under the new 10' structural fill.
Including biodegradation settlement, the total settlement under 10' structural fill is approximately 1.10' ( =2.384-1.281) over 50
years.
This landfill is more than 40 years old. If biogradation is assumed to be nearly zero, the total settlement is 1.43'
(=0.819+0.612+0).
By ignoring biodegradation, the pipes should be designed to tolerate 0.15' (=1.43-1.281).
If the bidegradation is not ignored, we recommend the pipes need to be designed to tolerate 1.10 ft. settlement over 50 years.
We recommend 6 inch differential settlement be adopted for designing buried structures to accomodate variable site
conditions anticipated.
Example Calculation 2, See rows 23 and 28 in blue and yellow.
The area will be loaded with 20' structural fill or 2400 psf over 10' refuse. See rows 23 and 28
Assuming 10 feet preload planned, row 28 represents the structural fill 20' and preload 10' or 3600 psf.
Total settlement under the structural load (2400 psf) during life time will be 2.815', row 23.
To reduce the settlement, preload 10' fill is assumed. Now the total height of the fill becomes 30' or 3600 psf as shown in row
28.
After three months, the primary settlement will be 1.604' under preload and structural fill, row 28.
After removal of preload, the 20 feet structural fill settles during the life time of the project 50 yrs.
By ignoring the biodegradation, the total settlement under 20' structural fill will be 1.86 (=1281+0.581+0)
After preloading, the net settlement during 50 years will be 0.25' (=1.86-1.604).
By not ignoring the biodegradation, the total settlement under 20' structural fill is 2.815'.
After preloading, the net settlement during 50 years will be 1.21' (=2.815-1.604).
We recommend approximately 6 inches of long term differential settlement after preloading.
2
rum
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
REFUSE SETTLEMENT CALCULATIONS
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
FIGURE NO.
4
PROJECT NO.
2003-008
I-5 CANTILEVER SOLDIER PILE WALL
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
I-5
E0=
6.5H
TRAFFIC
70 psf
H = 10' to 15'
;clAVX'<!.<c/XV..
EFW =230OVE.1Z3D
d=1.5H Minimum
{
2'
V
:V/.'C X<!/.K!/<1.
EFW= 35 OVER
PILE SPACING
Q
+
3—EFW —19 OVER ID
— D 1— PILE DIAMETER
Temporary tilnber lagging design pressure = 1/2 of EFW
EFW =Equivalent fluid unit weight pcf.
NOT TO SCALE
BIM
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM
DRAWN BY _EFTS
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER
FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CHECKED BY_
DATE
06.27.08
FIGURE NO.®
5/
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK 2100
C \DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\TINKKINNEY.HWA\DESKTOP\BOWLAKE
04-07-08 T2400\HWA EARTH PRESSURE.DWG
REV 00 ILS XJXDXX
EAST ACCESS ROAD
GE❑GRID 4-71
MSE WALL
GLACIAL
DEP❑SIT
BURN
FILL
GE❑PIERS
NOT TO SCALE
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
MSE WALL ON GEOPIERS
DRAWN H► _LEK
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER
FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CHECKED BY SL'L
FIGURE NO.
5B
DATE
05.04.07
PROJECT H0.
2003-008-21
TASK 2100
H:11PROJECTS12003 PRDJECTS12003-008-21 How Lake TraaeterSteliorkCADVrrva maeweILDWG
REV 00 KI.9 Krxwol
W
0
D
J
Z
O
J
J
w
J
H
0
W_
f=1
J
D
OL
J
U
Y"
N ¢'
E
b
Ino
[cl Id
a�w
0
E
II
cd y
n
H a
NCH❑R ROD
/
/
/
/
U
0
N
.-4
PILE DIAMETER
WALL DESIGN PARAMETERS
GLACIAL DEPOSIT
ezt
el
co
70
SAND
200
BURNFILL.
O
0
37
120
2
OD
SAND
CD
C•
BACKFILL
o
0
c.)n
0
37
0
=
m
SAND
Corvert to
Dist. Load
Cohesion, psf
W
LU
0
w
CI
e
Units wt., (pcf)
Actiee EFW, (pcf)
Passiee EFW, (pcf)
Traffic Toad (psf)
U
.u)
w
co
Soil model (REESE)
P -Y modulus, k
( pci)
NOT TO SCALE
EFW =Equivalent fluid unit weight.
"tel
m
g
EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM
w
Li.
0
z z
g
z
in
"J <
ce
UQ
Q �
w
D
J F-
0
lid
8
w
K
0 0
a
2
3
S
5
t—
Y
3
0
I
0
O
M
BPg
rz
rzn
0
vi
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
i
f
5'
H= 10' to 15'
RETAINING WALL AT TRAILER
PARKING
PROVIDE
SWALE -
ECOLOGY OR
LOCK BLOCKS
0.91-1----1
10
NDTEi
MINIMUM HATTER = 1/10
1.616111“KI actwn
x x
x x�
% X
x x
x x
xx xx COMPACTED
BACKFILL
% x = 36.
y=135pcf
x
1 REC"CLE g•
GE❑GRIDI LONG TERM
STRENGTH, 2000 to 2500 lbs/ft.
@ 12' TO 18' VERTICAL
SPACINGI 100% LATERAL COVERAGE
x
x
Ba
GE❑GRID1 LONG TERM
STRENGTH, 1000 lbs/ft.
@ 24' VERTICAL
SPACING) 100% LATERAL
COVERAGE
B1=8' MINIMUM OR 3dh1 WHICHEVER IS GREATER.
B2=2xB1+0.9H44 h1+yh1,
TRAILER PAD DESIGN IN FRONT OF THE WALL SHOULD
CONSIDER DIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT BETWEEN LIGHT WT.
BACKFILL, GEOGRID FOUNDATION AND REFUSE AREAS.
LIGHT WEIGHT BACKFILL= BOTTOM ASH WITH COMPACTED
DRY UNIT WEIGHT 80 pcf OR LESS.
TOTAL
REMOVAL OF REFUSE
NOT TO SCALE
FILL
REFUSE
TYPICAL MSE WALL SECTION
DRAWN or _ EK
HWAGEOSCIENCES ING BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER
FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 06.14.07
CHECKED BY _Sa
FIGURE NO.
5D
DATE
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK 2100
H:l1PROJECT8t2003 PROJECTSl2003-008-21 Brno Lake Transfer Station\CADlhwa mse wall. DWG
REV w MS XJXXX
RETAINING WALL AT TRAILER
PARKING
NATE!
MINIMUM BATTER = 1/10
H=10
GEOGRIDj LONG TERM
STRENGTH, 20001bs/ft.
@ 12' LIFT
GRANULAR
BACKFILL
5' T 15'
3'
rfa
OI
ET'
•
ar
LOCK BLOCK WALL
.iew
r
riO
e
yT
GEOPIERS
GLACIAL
DEPOSIT
NOT TO SCALE
HWAGEoSuENcEs INC
MSE WALL ON GEOPIERS SECTION
DRAWN BY _EEK
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER
FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CHECKED BY SH_
DATE
05.04.07
FIGURE NO.
5E
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK 2100
HM PROJECTS\2003 PROJECTS .2003-00&21 Bow Lake Transfer Station\CAD\hwa mse waJI.DWG
REV 00 KLa XIXIXX
SOLDIER PILE WALL WITH DEADMAN
h=5' 24H
I
3••5' 8
10' to 12'
: wide", • 2'
e• to s• Existing fill
f EFW =200 pcf Acting over 2D
REFUSE
EFW =80 pcf (Reduced due to
5' to 15' large deformation of refuse.)
Acting over 1D
.0' MIN
GLACIAL DEPOSIT
EFW =440 pcf
Acting over 3D
m
:9
A
nIforrl Load 5(,4.= 2/3h X 135
BUS PARKING AND
ACCESS RAMP
1
1---(Kne ■ 1144)
s
D
RECYCLE YARD
ANCHOR ROD
COMPACTED BACKFILL
y=135pcf 0='36°
EFW =48 or
convert to rectangular (24H)
Kae = 0.35
Acting over B' PILE spacing
Q(ae ■ 9,41
Existing f 111
y=110pcf 0=30° Kae 0.44
EFW•-48.Spcf Acting over 1D
(Kae ■ 1144J
-..- REFUSE
7=93 pcf 0=26 ° Kae = 0.51
EFW =47 pcf Acting over 1D
Q(ae 1
GLACIAL DEP❑SIT
y=140pcf ¢=42° Kae = 0.28
EFW =39 pcf Acting over 1D
MINIMUM DEPTH OF PENETRATION INT❑ GLACIAL DEPOSIT = 10'
Kae- C❑EFFICIENT OF LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE INCLUDING EARTI- QUAKE LOADING CONDITIONS.
EFW= EQUIVALENT FLUID UNIT WEIGHT, pcf
TEMPORARY TIMBER LAGGING DESIGN PRESSURE = 1/2 of EFW
LONG WALL AT TRAILER PARKING
NOT TO SCALE
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM
DRAWN BY FDS
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER
FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CHECKED BY alL
DATE
11.29.07
MIRE HO.
5F
PROJECT HO_
2003-008-21
TASK 2100
S:\2003 PROJECTS\2003-008-21 BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION\CAD\TASK 2100\HWA EARN PRESSURE.DWG
REV 00 Kl8 X)XDOC
1
LONG WALL AT TRAILER PARKING
SOLDIER PILE
WITH TIMBER
LAGGING
H= 10' TO 15'
GRANULAR FILL
r
. 12'
GE❑GRID WALL
T=2,000Ibs
2' TO 5' FILL
5' TO 15' REFUSE
GLACIAL DEPOSIT
SOLDIER PILE WALL FACING WITH
GEDGRID WALL IN THE BACK
NOT TO SCALE
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
GEOGRID WALL WITH SOLDIER PILE
DRAWN BY .SEK
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER
FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CHECKED BY SIS
FIGURE N0.
5G
DATE
05.04.07
PROJECT Ho.
2003-008-21
TASK 2100
S:\2003 PROJECTS\2003-008-21 BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION\CAD\TASK 2100\HWA EARN PRESSURE.DWO
REv 00 KLS wx0a
LONG WALL AT TRAILER PARKING
SOLDIER PILE
WITH TIMBER
LAGGING
FILL
20'
1 1 1 1 1 1
11 1 I I 1
1 I 1 I I 1
1 1 1 I 1 I
GRANULAR
FILL(2')
GEOFOAM
— BLOCKS
REFUSE
GLACIAL DEPOSIT
SOLDIER PILE WITH GEOFOAM WALL
NOT TO SCALE
GEOFOAM WALL
DRAWN or EFK
HW&GEOSQENCES INC. BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER
FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
S:\2003 PROJECTS\2003-008-21 BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION\CAD\TASK 2100\NWA EARTH PRESSURE.DWG
CHECKED BY SH
DATE
05.04.07
FIGURE NO.
5H
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK 2100
REV 00148AMAX
GE❑GRID REINFORCED GEOBAG WALL
TOE WALL, ON EAST SLOPE
SEEDS AND
PLANTS
x
1
x x x x
6
HEIGHT
VARIES
x x x x
x
EACH BAG STACKS ON SPIKES
APPROVED BY DESIGN ENGINEER,
MIN. 2 FEET
NOT TO SCALE
1
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
GEOBAG WALL
DRAWN BY _EEE
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER
FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CHECKED BY _H_
FIGURE NO.
51
DATE
05.04.07
PROJECT N0.
2003-008-21
TASK 2100
Hal PROJ ECTS12003 PR0JECTS12003-008-21 Bow Lake Transfer Station\CAD hwa mse walIDWG
REV 00 KLS xnvxx
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The subsurface exploration program consisted of 37 boreholes and 11 test pits. Drilling
equipment was selected based on site access conditions, and included a truck -mounted
drill rig, a large track -mounted drill rig, a small track -mounted drill rig, and a
hand -portable drill rig.
Proposed exploration locations were staked in the field by DHA Surveyors, per locations
chosen and plotted on the Master Plan survey by HWA and R.W. Beck. Upon
completion of each borehole and test pit, the actual locations were staked and
subsequently resurveyed by DHA, as many were moved to accommodate prevailing
access conditions. The exploration locations are shown on the Site and Exploration Plan,
Figure 2A.
Each of the explorations was completed under the full-time observation of an HWA
environmental or engineering geologist. HWA personnel recorded pertinent information
including soil sample depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, PID readings
from selected soil samples, and ground water occurrence as the explorations were
excavated. Soils were classified in general accordance with the classification system
described in Figure A-1, which also provides a key to the exploration log symbols. Soil
layers containing compressible, unburned, refuse are indicated with a cross -hatched
pattern in the left-hand column for soil symbols. The summary logs of boreholes are
presented on Figures A-2 through A-38, and logs of test pits on Figures A-39 through
A-49.
The stratigraphic contacts shown on the individual logs represent the approximate
boundaries between soil types. The actual transitions may be more gradual.
Under subcontract to HWA, Cascade Drilling, Inc. (CDI), of Woodinville, Washington,
drilled 27 soil borings in February 2007. In addition, under subcontract to HWA,
Environmental Drilling, Inc. (EDI), of Snohomish, Washington, drilled six borings in
February and March, 2007. Also under subcontract to HWA, CN Drilling (CND), of
Seattle, Washington, drilled four soil borings in March 2007. Test Pits were excavated
by King County Solid Waste Division (KCSWD) employees with a track -mounted
backhoe. I-IWA sampled soils to depths of up to 71.5 feet in the borings, and up to
26 feet in the test pits.
CDI employed both a truck -mounted and a track -mounted CME 75 drill rig, with
eight -inch outer diameter hollow stem augers, and utilized three-inch Dames & Moore
split -spoon sampling equipment to collect soil samples. A 300 -pound hammer with a
2003-008 FR.doc
A-1
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
30 -inch drop was used to drive the Dames & Moore sampler into the subsurface at
selected intervals. This test correlates approximately with the Standard Penetration Test.
Soil samples were then retrieved from the sampler.
EDI employed a track mounted Simco 4000 drill rig with six-inch outer diameter hollow
stem auger and a two-inch split spoon sampler to collect soil samples. A 140 -pound
hammer with a 30 -inch drop was used to drive the sampler into the subsurface (a
Standard Penetration Test). Soil samples were then retrieved frcm the sampler.
CND employed an Acker Soil Mechanic, hand portable, drill rig with four -inch outer
diameter hollow -stem auger and a two-inch split spoon sampling device to collect soil
samples. A 140 -pound hammer with a 30 -inch drop was used to drive the sampler into
the subsurface (a Standard Penetration Test). Soil samples were then retrieved from the
sampler.
HWA field staff collected soil samples generally every 2.5 feet in the upper ten feet of
each boring and then every five feet until boring completion.
The test pits were excavated by an KCSWD operator with a Hitachi 330 trackhoe rented
for this purpose. Grab samples were taken out of the bucket from locations where the
stratigraphy changed or at regular intervals. After termination of each test pit, they were
abandoned and backfilled with excavated material.
HWA collected a composite soil sample from each soil boring and each test pit for
environmental analytical testing. Soil samples selected for composite analyses were
collected from the top soil -refuse interface, throughout visibly refuse -contaminated soils,
to the bottom soil -refuse interface. All samples were field screened using a photo
ionization detector (PID). Environmental soil samples were placed in labeled
laboratory -provided sample containers using nitrile gloves and clean stainless steel
spoons. Samples were placed in a cooler and packed with "blue ice" for transport to the
laboratory under chain -of -custody protocol.
To prevent potential cross -contamination of samples, each of the drillers steam cleaned
their augers and drilling rods between each exploration. All other sampling equipment
was decontaminated prior to use with detergent solution, potable water, and deionized
water.
Investigation -derived waste included soil boring cuttings, decontamination water, and
disposable personal protective equipment (PPE). Soil boring cuttings were placed in
sealed drums, labeled appropriately, and stored on site pending laboratory analysis.
Disposable personal protective equipment (e.g., nitrile gloves) was discarded off-site as
ordinary solid waste. Decontamination water was placed in sealed drums, labeled
appropriately, and stored on site pending laboratory analysis.
2003-008 FR.doc
A-2 HWA GEOSC[ENCE•S INC.
On completion of five of the boreholes, a 2 -inch monitoring well, consisting of PVC pipe
with a machine -slotted lower ten foot section, was placed in the borehole. Sand filter
pack was placed to two feet above the slotted pipe section. The remainder was backfilled
with bentonite chips. Stand-up monuments were set at the surface, in ready -mix concrete,
to protect the monitoring wells.
2003-008 FR.doc
A-3
I -I WA GEOSCIENCES INC.
RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY VERSUS SPT N -VALUE TEST SYMBOLS
COHESIONLESS SOILS
COHESIVE SOILS
Density
N (blows/ft)
Approximate
Relative Density(%)
Consistency
N (blows/ft)
Approximate
Undrained Shear
Slrenglh (psf)
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
0 10 4
4 10 10
10 to 30
30 to 50
over 50
0 - 15
15 - 35
35 - 65
65 - 85
85 - 100
Very Solt
Soft
Medium Stiff
Stitt
Very Stiff
Hard
0 10 2
2 10 4
4 10 8
8 to 15
15 10 30
over 30
<250
250 - 500
500 - 1000
1000 - 2000
2000 - 4000
>4000
USCS SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP DESCRIPTIONS
Coarse
Grained
Sols
Moro than
50% Retained
on No.
200 Sieve
Size
Gravel and
Gravely Soils
More than
50% or Coarse
Fraction Retained
on No. 4 Sieve
Clean Gravel
(little or no fines)
0 l
• lik.
GW
Well -graded GRAVEL
V
0 l
0 c
,--.k--°
GP
Poorly -graded GRAVEL
Gravel with
Fines (appreciable
amount of fines)
..
o (� c
GM Silly
GRAVEL
a,A `}''
l
GC
Clayey GRAVEL
Sand andClean
Sandy Soils
50% or More
of Coarse
Fraction Passing
No. 4 Sieve
Sand•
(little or no fines)
••
SW
Well -graded SAND
,'
SP
Poorly -graded SAND
Sand with
Fines (appreciable
amount of fines)SC
SM
Silly SAND
�.
l/
Clayey SAND
Fine
Grained
Soils
50% or More
Passing
No. 200 Sieve
SizeOH
Sill
Liquid Limit
and
Clay Less Oran 50%
ML
SILT
j
CL
Lean CLAY
—
—
OL
Organic SILT/Organic CLAY
Sill
Liquid Limit
and 50% or More
r
p/
MH
Elastic SILT
CH
Fel CLAY
AA.
Organic SILT/Organic CLAY
Highly Organic Soils
r, r
PT
PEAT
COMPONENT DEFINITIONS
COMPONENT
Boulders
Cobbles
Gravel
Coarse gravel
Fine gravel
Sand
Coarse sand
Medium sand
Fine send
S01 and Cloy
SIZE RANGE
Larger than 12 in
3101012 in
3 In to No 4 (4.5mm)
3into3/4 in
3/4 in to No 4 (4.5mm)
No. 4 (4.6 mm) 10 No. 200 (0.074 mm)
No. 4 (4.5 mm) to No. 10 (2.0 mm)
No. 10 (2.0 mm) to No. 40 (0.42 mm)
No. 40 (0.42 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 min)
Smaller than No 200 (0.074mm)
%F Percent Fines
AL Alterberg Limits: PL = Plastic Limit
LL = Liquid Limit
CBR California Bearing Ratio
CN Consolidation
DD Dry Density (pci)
DS Direct Shear
GS Grain Size Distribution
K Permeability
MD MolslurelDensity Relationship (Proctor)
MR Resilient Modulus
PID Photo(onizat(on Device Reading
PP Pocket Penetrometer
Approx_ Compressive Strength (Isf)
SG Specific Gravity
TC Triaxial Compression
TV Torvane
Approx. Shear Strength (tsf)
UC Unconfined Compression
I
0
LI
A
SAMPLE TYPE SYMBOLS
2.0" OD Split Spoon (SPT)
(140 Ib. hammer with 30 in. drop)
Shelby Tube
3-114" OD Split Spoon with Brass Rings
Small Bag Sample
Large Bag (Bulk) Sample
Core Run
Non-standard Penetration Test
(3.0" OD split spoon)
GROUNDWATER SYMBOLS
Q Groundwater Level (measured at
time of drilling)
▪ Groundwater Level (measured in well or
open hole atter water level stabilized)
COMPONENT PROPORTIONS
PROPORTION RANGE
DESCRIPTIVE TERMS
< 5%
Clean
5
- 12%
Slightly (Clayey, Silly, Sandy)
12
- 30%
Clayey, Silty. Sandy, Gravelly
30
- 50%
Very (Clayey, Silty, Sandy, Gravelly)
Components are arranged in order of increasing quantities.
NOTES: Soil classifications presented on exploration logs are based on visual and laboratory observation.
Soil descriptions are presented in the following general order.
Density/consistency, color, modifier (if any) GROUP NAME, additions to group name (I! any), moisture
content. Proportion, gradation, and angularity of constituents, additional comments.
(GEOLOGIC INTERPRETATION)
Please refer to the discussion In the report text as well as the exploration logs for a more
complete description of subsurface conditions.
MOISTURE CONTENT
DRY
MOIST
WET
Absence o1 moisture, dusty.
dry to the touch.
Damp but no visibte water.
Vrsibte free water, usually
soil Is below water table.
MT
LEGEND OF TERMS AND
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY SYMBOLS USED ON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON EXPLORATION LOGS
PROJECTNO.: 2003-008 FIGURE: A-1
LEGEND 2003008.GPJ 11/29!07
(DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 280 3 feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Pian, Figure 2A
OAT E STARTED: 2/15/2007
,TATE COMPLETED: 2/1512007
_OGGED BY: J. Speck
5
10
15
20
25
DESCRIPTION
LU
w
m
z
J J
-
-
—
-
-
-•
-
_,
-
—
SM
Medium dense, yellow brown, silty, fine to coarse gravelly, tine
to medium SAND, moist with fine to coarse gravel. Gravel is
sub -angular to sub -rounded.
(FILL)
`?
L
FA
—
—
TA
V
7
•
SM
Medium dense, light yellow brown (with oxidation stains), silty,
fine to coarse gravely, fine to medium SAND, moist. Trace
organics (roots). Vague stratification of rust
layers -sub -horizontal angle.
•SM . 1P(STUFIB. P. NATIA) • •
Medium dense, light yellow brown (with oxidation stains), silty,
fine to medium SAND with fine to coarse gravel, moist. Gravel
Is sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Loose, yellow brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Sub -horizontal stratification (vague with darker colored sand
In < 1 m lamination).
(GLACIAL OUTWASH)
Medium dense, yellow brown to brown, silty, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Minor stratification, subhorizontal.
Grades very dense.
.
•
• -
. SP
SM
Very dense, olive gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND.
wet. No stratification noted.
30 —
35 —
40
Boring terminated at 26.5 feat.
Ground water observed at a depth of 22 feet below the
ground surface.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
No environmental sample collected from B-201,
S-1 8-7-7
OTHER TESTS
S-2 5-7-9 pH
S-3 13-11-7
S•4 4-4-5 GS
S-5 4-7-14
S-6 10-20-34
5-7 8-15-20 GS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only al the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
L
i5
Z
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
50
®: A
i
MP.
A
A•
i
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit Liquld Limit
Natural Water Content
100
o
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
121 BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
1 TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO., 2003-008
BORING:
B-209
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11!29107
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc. SURFACE ELEVATION:
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
290.35 t feet
DATE STARTED: 2/16/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/16/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
EL 15
UJ
o�
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40 —
O
m
2
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
w
F
w
a
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-1 3-4-4
OTHER TESTS
A S-2 4-5-7
S-3 5-11-14
I� S-4 8-14-24 GS
ZS-5 9-12-23
ZS-6 5-15-20
vi S-7 8-26-29
S-8 10-20-30
S-9 18-50/6" GS
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
re
W ~
2a
0
W =
vv))
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight. 30" drop)
Blows per foot
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
•
0
—5
—10
—15
—20
»-0-25
0
0 20 40 60
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit i-0-----1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
30
35
>•>41.— 40
80 100
gal BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-202
PAGE: 1 of 2
P20 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-3
SM
Loose, brown, silly, fine to coarse gravelly, fine to medium
SAND, moist.
-•;j;
ffILLL
:•:*
Loose, dark gray, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist. Refuse
Q•.:
90% by volume (20% comp. 80% non-compressible), e.g.
•:•:•
wood, clay, metal.
SM
Note: black staining and hydrocarbon odor in soil and
refuse. (REFUSE) I uttings: Black stained silly SAND and refuse.
Medium dense, gray (with rust mottling and black product
SM
1 staining), silty, fine to coarse gravelly. fine to medium /,
SAND, moist. _IF ILLI /
Dense, yellow-brown, slightly silty. line to coarse gravelly, fine
to medium SAND, moist.
(GLACIAL OUTWASH)
Dense, light brown, silty, fine to coarse gravelly, tine to
medium SAND, moist. Faint horizontal stratification noted by
SP
1 differential coloration in sand. ./-
• SM
Grades to yellow brown
Grades to wet. Faint (single) horizontal stratification noted by
rust coloration in sand at 20.5 feet below ground surface.
Ground water noted at 23.0 feet below ground surface.
Very dense, dark yellow-brown, slightly silty, fine to medium
SAND, wet.
Approximately 1 to 2 feet of heave.
w
F
w
a
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-1 3-4-4
OTHER TESTS
A S-2 4-5-7
S-3 5-11-14
I� S-4 8-14-24 GS
ZS-5 9-12-23
ZS-6 5-15-20
vi S-7 8-26-29
S-8 10-20-30
S-9 18-50/6" GS
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
re
W ~
2a
0
W =
vv))
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight. 30" drop)
Blows per foot
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
•
0
—5
—10
—15
—20
»-0-25
0
0 20 40 60
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit i-0-----1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
30
35
>•>41.— 40
80 100
gal BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-202
PAGE: 1 of 2
P20 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-3
(DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling. Inc. SURFACE ELEVATION:
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
290.35 f feet
DATE STARTED: 2/16/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/16/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
45 —
50 —
55 —
60 —
65
70 —
75 —
80 —
USCS SOIL CLASS
SP
SM
DESCRIPTION
Approximately 5 feel of heave.
Trace gravel in sample. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular
to sub -rounded.
Very dense, gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SANG, wet.
Approximately 5 feel of heave.
Trace organic material (wood) in sample.
Approximately 5 feet of heave.
Boring terminated at 51.5 feet.
Ground water observed 8123.0 feet below ground surface
during drilling. Ground water measured at 20.26 feet below
ground surface on 03/09/07.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm. hydrogen sullide=0
ppm. combustible gas 0% LEL.
Environmental sample B -202-C collected from samples S-1
through S-4.
2 -Inch PVC plezometer installed to 51.5 feet with 10 foot
slotted screen.
tY
W z
c°
z
Z h
w W w'C
d 0. CC "g
a'a Zo
a8
Es -10 5.50/5"
Es -11 50/6"
V S-12 50/6"
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
OTHER TESTS
W _U
�Qg"
0
1
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
• Blows per foot
x
a
W
10 20 30 40 50
0 2y- 40
0
0
»;
45
— 50
— 55
— 60
—65
—70
— 75
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1--0--1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
�® BORING:
', BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY 6-202
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON PAGE: 2 of 2
PROJECT NO: 2003-008
FIGURE:
80
A-3
J
PZO 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc. SURFACE ELEVATION: 290.46 ± feet
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan. Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/19/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/19/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
T
0. -
w
oma'
0
5
10
15
20
25
30 —
35 —
40
0
m
v)
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
a
J
L
Z
L
I1/
v
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-1 5-4-4
8-2 1-4-7
S-3 3-9-16
S-4 11-26-50/6
S-5 7-26.44
OTHER TESTS
S-6 10-20-36 GS
pH
S-7 20-15-26
S-8 17-22-38
S-9 10-20-24
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations,
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
w U (300 Ib. weight. 30- drop)
♦ Blows per foot
Ow
wU
CT. N 0 10 20 30 40 50
•
A'
•
A
A
»®
0
—5
—10
—15
— 20
—25
—30
—35
>}ab, 40
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1--0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
GMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCESINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-203
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A-4
PZO 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
•. SP
Loose, brown. silty, fine to medium SANG with gravel, moist
SM
Loose, dark brown, silly, fine to medium SAND with gravel.
moist. Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
(FILL)
Grades to medium dense and light yellow-brown. Some rust
mottling. Faint sub -horizontal stratification.
I
I ML
Medium dense, tight yellow-brown. slightly sandy SILT, moist.
•. SM
1 WEATHERED OUTWASHL /
•
Medium dense, yellow brown (rust mottling), silty, fine to
medium SAND, moist. Trove gravel, fine to coarse,
• SM
1 sub -angular to rounded- Faint sub -horizontal stratification. /-
(Coarse grained_parUn$s with rust staining_ J
Grades to very dense and dark yellow brown.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Cuttings: Yellow brown, silly SAND with gravel, moist.
Three to six inches of slightly sandy SILT with gravel in very
disturbed sub -horizontal laminations.
Cuttings: dark yellow brown silly SAND with gravel. moist.
Some sandy SILT inclusions.
Grades to olive gray. Trace coarse sand. No gravel noted.
Driller notes ground water at 23 feet below ground surface -
possible perched.
SP
Dense, yellow brown to olive gray, slightly silty, fine to medium
SM
SAND. moist. Faint stratification sub -horizontal to very high
angle.
Very dense, olive gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Gravel in discrete layer. 30' to 30.25'. Grovel is tine to
coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
Cuttings: yellow brown slightly silty SAND, moist.
Dense, olive gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
a
J
L
Z
L
I1/
v
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-1 5-4-4
8-2 1-4-7
S-3 3-9-16
S-4 11-26-50/6
S-5 7-26.44
OTHER TESTS
S-6 10-20-36 GS
pH
S-7 20-15-26
S-8 17-22-38
S-9 10-20-24
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations,
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
w U (300 Ib. weight. 30- drop)
♦ Blows per foot
Ow
wU
CT. N 0 10 20 30 40 50
•
A'
•
A
A
»®
0
—5
—10
—15
— 20
—25
—30
—35
>}ab, 40
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1--0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
GMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCESINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-203
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A-4
PZO 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc. SURFACE ELEVATION: 290.46 * feel
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 30015 Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/19/2007
DATE COMPLETED. 2119/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
45 —
50 —
55
60 —
65 —
70 —
75 —
80 --
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
Grades to very dense. Some rust staining from 40 to 40.25
feet below ground surface.
Faint sub -horizontal stratification.
Boring terminated at 51.5 feet.
Possible perched ground water observed al 23 feat during
drilling. No groundwater observed during measurement on
03/09/07.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
No environmental samples collected from boring.
2 -inch PVC plazometer installed to 51.5 feet with 10 foot
slotted screen.
z
S-10 10-24.50 ..I
S-11 10-20-28
VI S-12 10-20-30 GS
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarly be indicative of other times and/or locations.
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
10 20 30 40 50
>---40
A
r-45
50
—55
— 60
—6 5
—70
—75
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I—C1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Cuntent
80
GMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO. 2003-008
BORING:
B-203
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-4
PZO 2003008.GPJ 51/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc. SURFACE ELEVATION:
GRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck ng
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
282.46 t feet
DATE STARTED: 2/13/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/13/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
5
10
16
20
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
25-
30
5-
30
35 —
40
cc
w
W
m
a 2
2
R
7
L
L
S-1 15-27-37
S-2 12-38-42 GS
S-3 24-50/6'
S-4 10-20-32
5-5 15-22-32
S-6 21-28-32 GS
S-7 25-38-40
OTHER TESTS
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
w U (300 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
Q ♦ Blows per foot
NOw
=
a a)
0 10 20 30 40 50
D> •
»A
W0/
0
0
5
— 10
>>-- 15
n>A
»e
».
— 20
— 25
30
—35
»A-40
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I-60-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
UNBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-204
PAGE: 1 of 2
PZO 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-5
SP
Surface consists of grass and quarry spalls.
Cuttings consist of brown, fine to medium SAND, moist.
(WEATHERED DRIFT)
Dense. reddish -brown, fine to medium SAND, moist
SM
Very dense, light brown, silly gravelly SAND, moist.
(GLACIAL TILL)
Very dense, olive gray, silty gravelly SAND, moist. Some thin
laminations of fine to medium sand.
Very dense, brownish -gray, silty gravelly SAND, moist to very
moist.
SM
Very dense, light brown. silty, tine to coarse SAND, moist to
very moist.
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
SP
Very dense, light brownish -gray, fine to medium SAND, motsL
Trace silt.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
SP
SM
Very dense, light brownish -gray, slightly silty, fine SAND,
moist.
. SP
SM
Very dense, light brownish -gray, slightly silty, fine SAND,
moist. Some gravel below 36 feel.
b -/\
GP
o
N
)0
n
0
-
25-
30
5-
30
35 —
40
cc
w
W
m
a 2
2
R
7
L
L
S-1 15-27-37
S-2 12-38-42 GS
S-3 24-50/6'
S-4 10-20-32
5-5 15-22-32
S-6 21-28-32 GS
S-7 25-38-40
OTHER TESTS
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
w U (300 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
Q ♦ Blows per foot
NOw
=
a a)
0 10 20 30 40 50
D> •
»A
W0/
0
0
5
— 10
>>-- 15
n>A
»e
».
— 20
— 25
30
—35
»A-40
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I-60-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
UNBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-204
PAGE: 1 of 2
PZO 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-5
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Draling, Inc. SURFACE ELEVATION:
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
282.46 ± feet
DATE STARTED: 2/13/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/13/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
40--1 a v t
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
w
A
a Cy
}o e
SP
Very dense, brown to gray, sandy, fine to medium GRAVEL,
moist. Trace silt.
Very dense, 1ght brownish -gray, clean, fine SAND, with fine to
medium gravel, moist.
Very dense, light brownish -gray, dean fine SAND, with fine to
\medium gravel, moist. r
Boring terminated al 51.5 feet.
No ground water observed during drilling. No ground water
observed in piezometer during measurement on 03/09/07.
No gas readings collected at B-204.
No environmental sample collected from 8-204.
2 -Inch PVC piezometer Installed to 50 feet with 10 foot slotted
screen.
7
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-8 50/5"
S-9 18-32-40
OS -10 50/6"
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
OTHER TESTS
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
10 20 30 40
»,
45
›,-.10— 50
— 55
— 60
—65
—70
— 75
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I----0---1 Liquid Limil
Natural Water Content
80
Gall BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
1 TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
PZO 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
BORING:
B-204
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-5
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling. Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 281 * feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/13/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/13/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
Q v
0—
5-
10 --
15 15
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
40 —
O
to
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
v �
cc
Cs.
7
GP
SM
Cuttings consist of brown, sandy GRAVEL, moist from 0 to 2
feet.
• (FILL)
3til
c �c
�p D
GM
1
Cuttings consist of brown silty SAND from 2 feet to 5 feet.
Very dense, olive gray, gravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist.
(GLACIAL TILL)
Very dense, olive gray, gravelly, silty, fine to coarse SAND,
moist.
Hard, olive gray, silty, sandy, fine to coarse GRAVEL, moist
SP
• SM
Very dense, brown, medium SAND, moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Very dense, light brown, silty, medium to coarse SAND, moist.
`Vory dense, light brown, gravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND,
\moist.
Boring terminated at 25.5 feet
No ground water observed at lime of exploration.
No environmental sampling or monitoring performed.
SAMPLE TYPE
SAMPLE NUMBER
OTHER TESTS
VIS-1 24-50/6" GS
El S-2 50/6"
I%I S-3 25-50/4° GS
S-4 14-35-50/3°
01 S-5 50/6"
pH
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the spedfled location and on the dale indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
0
50 v
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-0—I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
Offl 1
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES ING TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-205
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE: A-6
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc. SURFACE ELEVATION:
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 300lb Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
250.04 t feet
DATE STARTED: 2/1312007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/13/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
2
am
o,
0—
5—
O
In
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
•
SM
Brown, silty incIto medium SAND, gravel, moist, leaf litter.
(FILL)
Very loose, rust -mottled brown, silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Trace organic refuse (< 5% by volume), burnt wood.
Loose, brown with traces of rust mottling, slightly silty, fine to
medium SAND, moist, roots and rooUets. No refuse.
(GLACIAL OUTWASH)
SM
SP
Loose, yellow brown, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. No stratification.
Medium dense, light yellow-brown to yellow brown, slightly
silty, fine to medium SAND, moist. No stratification. Rust
staining at 10.75 feet below ground surface, < 1 mm thick.
�'.
SM
Medium dense, light yellow brown, silty Lino to medium SAND,
moist. Some fine horizontal layers of rust at about 20.5 feet
below ground surface
Driller notes: Pounding on a rock.
Very dense, rust mottled, gray, silty fine to medium SAND,
wet.
2 -inch inclusion of diamict-like (till -like) sandy SILT with
ML
'Sfeyel.
Hard, gray, slightly fine sandy SILT, dry. Some fine to coarse
gravel, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Rough drill action below approx 28 feet.
10 —
15 —
20 —
25
30
35 —
40 —
Boring terminated at 31.5 feet.
Ground water observed at 25.0 feet below ground surface.
Gas readings. carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL
Environmental sample 8-206-C collected from samples S-1
through S-4.
2 -inch PVC piezometer installed to 31.5 feet with 10 toot
slotted screen.
uj
m
- J
L
Z
L
7
w
zUz
F
w coce
o
se.
S-1 1-2-1
S-2 1-3-4
S-3 3-4-5
S-4 2-5-5
OTHER TESTS
S-5 3-6-7 GS
S-6 4-6-0
S-7 50/5
S-8 8-36-38 GS
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarty be indicative of other times and/or locations.
or
F
tth 0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight. 30' drop)
A Blows per foot
8
10 20 30 40 50
0
•A
e♦
A
•♦
>
—5
— 10
—15
H20
25
— 30
— 35
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I--0-1 Liquid limit
Natural Water Content
40
BORING:
OWBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILIT`! B-206
HWAGEOSCIENCESINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON PAGE: 1 of 1
PROJECT ND.: 2003-008
FIGURE:
A-7
PZO 2003008.GPJ 11/29/57
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 300lbAutohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 238 A feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/12/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/12/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck & B. Thurber
w
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
mJ
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
w
m
a z
}
I- z
z
a a
35 —
40—
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
Boring terminated at 31.5 feet.
No ground water observed during drilling.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Environmental sample B -207-C collected from samples S-1
through S-6.
S-1 2-1-1
S-2 1-1-1
S-3 2-2-2
5-4
S-5 1-2-3
S-6 4-8-16
S-7 8-15-18
S-8 12-16-22
OTHER TESTS
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified Location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
♦ Blows per fool
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWA.GEOSCIENCESINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-207
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-8
BORING 2003000.GPJ 11/29/07
si r'.
•
Cuttings consist of loose, dark brown, silty, fine to medium
SAND, organics, moist.
V
r
I/L/,
7
7
/
/
_
7
-
^•0
-
-
—
_
-
-
-
tv•v�
Q�
ii
....•
V:
4 i
• •
•. i
4+
,.:
♦♦
044
1TQP�QLL /^
Very loose, rust -mottled yellow brown, silly, fine to medium
SAND, moist, trace scattered refuse.
(FILL WITH REFUSE)
Grades to dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, with plastic
debris.
Very loose, rust -red to brown, silty, fino to medium SAND,
moist. Refuse: glass, burnt wood, rubber (less than 10% by
volume)-
Color dark brown dark
-
-
-
_
••••• wdor.
::..
Q.4
irk:
...
�:•
.�`�
Di.
Oi�
••:•••
• ..
changes to - gray, with strong refuse ^
�
Very loose, gray sandy SILT, moist. More than 80% refuse
(80% compressible, 40% non-compressible).
Grades to dark gray. less than 10% refuse (100%
non-compressible).
Hard to drill.
-
-
ML
Very stiff, gray, fine sandy SILT, dry. No refuse, Some
stratification. 1-2 mm bedding, almost laminated.
(ICE -CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
-
-
-
ML
SM
Driller notes change in drilling action at 23 feet below the
ground surface.
Hard, gray, dilatant, non -plastic, fine sandy SILT to silty
SAND, dry to very moist. Coarse silty partings, sub -horizontal
angles.
35 —
40—
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
Boring terminated at 31.5 feet.
No ground water observed during drilling.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Environmental sample B -207-C collected from samples S-1
through S-6.
S-1 2-1-1
S-2 1-1-1
S-3 2-2-2
5-4
S-5 1-2-3
S-6 4-8-16
S-7 8-15-18
S-8 12-16-22
OTHER TESTS
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified Location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
♦ Blows per fool
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWA.GEOSCIENCESINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-207
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-8
BORING 2003000.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 227 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/13/2007
DATE COMPLETED; 2/13/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
x
w 8
0—
5-
10 —
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
40 —
USCS SOIL CLASS
SM
ML
ML
DESCRIPTION
Grass, loose, brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist, leaf
litter.
1T4P 0ffL
Loose, red -brown, silty tine to medium SAND, moist.
Refuse 30% by volume (10%comp. 90% non -comp.)
(REFUSE)
Perched water noted at 6.5 feet below ground surface.
Loose, gray, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist. Refuse 40 %
by volume (10% compressible, 90% non -comp.)
Cuttings wet.
Loose, olive -brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist. Refuse
50 % by volume (10 % compressible, 90% non -comp.)
Very soft, black to dark gray, slightly sandy, SILT, moist to
wot. Refuse 40% by volufnej100% non -comp.
Grades from very soft to stiff, olive gray to gray, slightly sandy
SILT, moist Sub -horizontal rust mottled, coarse grained
partings. Non -laminated or stratified.
(GLACIAL OUTWASH)
Hard, gray, slightly sandy SILT, moist. Non -laminated or
stratified.
7
Z
7
17
Boring terminated at 28.5 feet.
No ground water observed al during drilling.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Environmental sample B -208-C collected from samples 5-1
through S-5.
w
li
S-1 2-3-1
S-2 2-1-2
w
0
S-3 1-1-1 OC
S-4 2-1-1
S-5 0-0-1
S-6 3-6-9
S-7 8-14-22
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
♦ Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit t --Q—{ Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
Gal BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-208
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-9
BORING 200300e.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc. SURFACE ELEVATION: 222.34 t feet
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger. Simcoe 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 3/2/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 3/2/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0
0,
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
'� �"
Surface vegetated with blackberries, some trees.
"ii
Cuttings
- j
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc. SURFACE ELEVATION: 222.34 t feet
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger. Simcoe 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 3/2/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 3/2/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
c0.1
O
40
J
O
m
2
V)
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
45 —
50 —
55
60 —
65 —
70 —
75 —
80 —
No sample recovery.
Boring terminated al 40 feet.
Ground water observed at 30 feet during drilling. Ground
water measured at 33.72 feet below ground surface on
03/00/07.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=21 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL
Environmental sample B -209-C collected from samples S-1
through S-7.
2 -Inch PVC piezometer installed to 41,55 feet with 10 foot
slotted screen.
w
ce
ce U
m z
a D lb
rn
z 5 Wu
11 w
a....... O
26-50/4
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
W o
0A
06
-((1)
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per loot
1-1
0.
0 10 20 30 40 50 a
40
—45
—50
— 55
—60
—65
—70
— 75
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1--6-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80
BORING:
GMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY B-209
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON PAGE: 2 of 2
PROJECT NC.: 2003-008
FIGURE:
A-10
P20 2003000 GPJ 11/20/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore. 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 247 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
O
m
2
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
5-
10
15
20 —
25 —
30
35
40
w
0
11
Z
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-1 3-4-9
S-2 6-8-8
S-3 10-13-7
S-4 2-2-2
j/ S-5 5-18-10
Z
L
7
S-6 4-6-4
S-7 5.5-5
S-8 4-5-6
S-9 3-4-3
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specifled location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
0 20 40 60
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit i --®—I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80
Uffli BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-210
PAGE: 1 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-11
SM
Loose, brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
(FILL)
-44
i%
••••
•:*:
�
••it;
•:•:
���
4t646,
O0
•••
i�
:��
Q::
Medium dense, rust mottled, dark brown, silty, fine to medium
SAND with fine to coarse gravel, moist. Gravel - sub -angular
to angular. Recuse: 20% by volume, (10% compressible, 90%
non-compressible). Refuse includes. brick, wood and plastic.
(FILL with REFUSE)
Rough drilling noted at about 5 feet below the ground surface.
Becomes dark brown to black. Refuse: 20% by volume
(100% non-compressible). Includes brick and wood.
Cuttings: similar.
Medium dense, dark brown 10 black, silty, fine to medium
SAND with fine to coarse gravel, moist. Refuse: Less than
10% by volume, (100% non-compressible).
♦♦
���:
i*L0%
ii:
4t0i
*
••••
:•.•
a
����
:���
A%
•:•:
tO4
•:•:
•::
00
••%
*
iii:
���
•:•:
•:•:
���
:iii
.44
t ii
����
%�i
•
%%
Cuttings: similar. ,-
I Becomes loose. Refuse: 30% by volume (10% compressible, 1
non-compressible), Refuse Includes brick and wood. (
Medium dense, dark brown to black, silty, fine to medium
SAND with gravel, moist. Refuse: 90% by volume, (20%
compressible, 80% non-compressible). Includes plastic,
wood, metal, construction debris.
(REFUSE)
Cuttings : similar.
Medium dense, gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Traces of coarse rounded gravel. Refuse: 80% by
volume (30% compressible, 70% non-compressible). Refuse
includes rubber, wood, tile, metal.
Cuttings: 70 - 90% refuse (50% compressible, 50%
non-compressible).
Medium dense, dark gray, slily, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Refuse 50% by volume (50% compressible, 50%
non-compressible). Refuse includes plastic, wood, metal.
Medium dense, dark brown to black, silty, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Refuse 80% by volume, (40% compressible,
60% non-compressible). Refuse includes plastic, fabric, wood,
metal.
Dark gray silty SAND with refuse.
Loose, gray to brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Refuse 70% by volume, (40% compressible, 60%
non-compressible). [plastic, wood, metal)
Dark gray, silly SAND with refuse.
5-
10
15
20 —
25 —
30
35
40
w
0
11
Z
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-1 3-4-9
S-2 6-8-8
S-3 10-13-7
S-4 2-2-2
j/ S-5 5-18-10
Z
L
7
S-6 4-6-4
S-7 5.5-5
S-8 4-5-6
S-9 3-4-3
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specifled location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
0 20 40 60
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit i --®—I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80
Uffli BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-210
PAGE: 1 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-11
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Holk7w-Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 300lbAutohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 247 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
D.
40
45
DESCRIPTION
SP
Medium dense, gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. No refuse, possible product staining (black).
(GLACIAL OUTWASH)
50 —
55
60 —
65 —
70 —
75 —
80
ML
Hard, gray, fine sandy, SILT with gravel, moist
(GLACIAL TILL)
L
ML Hard, gray to right yellow brown, slightly sandy, non -stratified r
SILT, moist. Some coarse-grained partings with rust mottling - /�
\sub -horizontal
(GLACIAL DRIFTS
Boring terminated al 51.5 feet.
No ground water observed at B-210.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=D
ppm, combustbte gas 0% LEL.
Environmental sample B -210-C collected from samples S-1
through 5-10.
S-11 9-19-24
S-12 5-11-18
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only al the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
10
20 30
40
0 20 40 60
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-16-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80
100
BIM BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO. 2003-008
BORING 2003008,GPJ 11/29/07
BORING:
B-21 0
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-11
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 249 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan. Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
W
0--
5-
10
15
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
40 —
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
w
0.
w
a
Z
L
7
7
v
7
7
SAMPLE NUMBER
w
0
Z)3
ic
wCL
0.
S-1 4-5-7
S-2 3-3-3
S-3 5-7-3
S-4 1-4-3
S-5 3-3-4
S-6 2-2-2
S-7 3-3-4
S-8 3-3-3
S-9 8-12-13
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
1-
tij
te
50
O 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I --410--I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
0
— 5
—10
—15
— 20
— 25
— 30
— 35
100
40
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
LT
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-211
PAGE: 1 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE: A-12
SM
Grass, loose, brown, silty, fine to medium SAND. moist.
'•Sgattered•r@(use, (TOPSOIL)
SM
Medium dense, brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with fine to
•
coarse gravel, moist. Gravel is sub -angular to rounded, moist,
(FILL)
Loose, rust mottled, dark yellow brown to dark gray, silty, fine
to medium SAND with gravel, moist.
-tit;
Medium dense, dark gray to black, silty, fine to medium
•„��,
SAND, with gravel, moist. Refuse: 10% by volume (10%
•.,.�
compressible, 90% non-compressible). Slight hydrocarbon
odor.
SM
\ WILL WITH REFUSE) f
Loose, dark gray to black, silty, fine to medium SAND with
fine to coarse gravel. moist. Gravel is sub -angular to
•
sub -rounded.
(FILL)
i4;
Loose, dark gray, silty. fine to medium SAND, with fine to
i:*
caorse gravel. moist. Gravel is sub -angular to sub -rounded.
44
Refuse: 30% by volume (100% non-compressible). [glass)
"vi”,
_(FILL WITIJ REFUSES ./-
+.4,,��
Dark gray, silty sand with plastic. metal and glass refuse.
i+
(REFUSE)
::$
•••�
Loose, dark gray, silty, fine to medium SAND. Refuse: 80% by
t.�.• volume
(30% compressible, 70% non-compressible). Refuse
•:.:
includes, glass wood and metal.
»»i»
♦♦
i.0
••••
Refuse: 80% by volume (80% compressible, 20%
4
•
non-compressible). [wood, metal and plastic)
.
.i.
•
vi,
Refuse: 50% by volume (50% compressible, 50%
.4:
non-compressible).
•.i.
••i+
Dark gray silty sand with less refuse.
. SP
Medium dense, rust mottled, yellow brown to olive gray, silty,
fine to medium SAND, moist. Banded rust staining,
approximately 3 inches. sub -horizontal.
(GLACIAL OUTWASH)
w
0.
w
a
Z
L
7
7
v
7
7
SAMPLE NUMBER
w
0
Z)3
ic
wCL
0.
S-1 4-5-7
S-2 3-3-3
S-3 5-7-3
S-4 1-4-3
S-5 3-3-4
S-6 2-2-2
S-7 3-3-4
S-8 3-3-3
S-9 8-12-13
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
1-
tij
te
50
O 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I --410--I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
0
— 5
—10
—15
— 20
— 25
— 30
— 35
100
40
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
LT
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-211
PAGE: 1 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE: A-12
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 248 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2097
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
0.
w.p
40
gm
N
2
U
O
rn
N
DESCRIPTION
45 —
50 —
55 —
60 —
85 —
70 —
75 —
-1
80 —
Medium dense, light yellow brown to gray, slightly silty, fine to
medium SAND, moist,
Dense, light yeflow brown to gray, slightly silty, fine to medium
SAND. moist,
Boring terminated at 46.5 feet.
No ground water observed during drilling.
Gas readings: carbon mono>dde=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Environmental sample B -211-C collected from samples S-2
through S-9.
M w
w U
a.w w m
F u) z
z
w w ww
-J 0. K
W e.
S-10 7-8-13
7
VS-11 7-16-19
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only of the specified location and on tho date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit f ----41—I liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
Dal
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCESING
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-211
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-12
BORING 2003006.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 257 t feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
o-
w
t
0—
5-
10-
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
40 —
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
-.3 Inches of psph [t. . .... ....................
Medium dense, gray silty fine to medium SAND with gravel,
moist. (FILL)
Medium dense, dark gray to black, silty, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Refuse: 30 % by volume (50 % compressible,
50% non-cmpressible). Refuse includes wood, metal and
glass.
(FILL WITH REFUSE)
Loose, dark gray, silty fine to medium SAND, moist to wet
Refuse: 10-20% by volume (50% compressible, 50%
non-compressible). [wood, metal, glass]
Cuttings: similar
Medium dense, dark gray to black. silty, fine to medium
`SAND, moist. Refuse: 30 - 40% by volume (20% r
1{kT�! mpressible, 80% non-compressible). Refuse includes 1j
etel, fabrics and glass.
Loose, dark gray to black, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Refuse: 60% by volume (10% compressible, 90%
non-compressible). Refuse includes rubber, plastic and
metal.
(REFUSE)
Loose, dark gray to yellow brown, silty, fine 10 medium SAND,
moist. Refuse: 80% by volume (70% compressible, 30%
non-compressible). Recuse includes wood and metal.
Loose, dark gray, silty, tine to medium SAND, moist. Refuse:
90% by volume (50% compressible, 50% non-compressible).
Refuse includes wood, metal, plastic, paper and glass.
Cuttings: Dark gray to black silty SAND with refuse. Less
SP refuse noted.
Dense, light yellowish brown, silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Black staining in top 3 inches of sempter.
(GLACIAL OUTWASH)
Boring terminated at 31.5 feet.
No ground water observed during drilling.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Environmental sampte 8-212-C collected from samples S-2
through S-7.
QS-1 4-7-6
VIS-2 3-3-2
Q
L
7
v
S-3 4-6-7
S-4 2-3-3
S-5 3-3-3
S-6 3-3-5
S-7 8-16-17
OTHER TESTS
S-8 5-13-19 GS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 lb. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I--•1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
OMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-212
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-13
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 259 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/13/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/13/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
x
o
0
1
0
m
2
>-
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
5-
10-
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
40 —
inrP— •. 4 k>Fhes of asphalt...
. SM ....
Cuttings consist of silty, gravelly SANG, moist. Some refuse
SP ,including textile fragment and organics.
(FILL)
Medium dense, gray, Me to medium SAND, moist. No
refuse.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Dense, alternating light brown and gray, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Trace silt. 1 -inch thick native deposit of silty
SAND with evenly distributed charred organic fragments at 5
teal (possible volcanic deposit).
Dense, light brown, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Medium dense, gray, silty, fine SAND, moist. Trace horizontal
laminations.
Dense, gray to light brown alternating layers, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Trace sin.
Dense, gray, fine to medium SAND, moist. Trace silt.
Very dense, gray, fine to medium SAND, moist. Trace
horizontal laminations.
Boring terminated at 26.5 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Composite environmental sample, B -213-C, collected from
samples S-1 through S-7
7
7
I
Z
L
w
0
E w
wm
re
0 o
8-1 8-14-14
S-2 8-14-16
S-3 9-14-18
S-4 9-12-13 GS
S-5 9.15.16
S-8 16-18-18
S-7 15-28-33
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit F----4 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
ONI BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO: 2003-008
BORING:
B-213
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-14
BORING 2033008 GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 255 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/1312007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/13/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
w
0—
5-
10 —
15-
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
40 —
J
0
CO
›-
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
1,151T
GP
r. SP
itches of asghatt.
Cuttings consist of gray, sandy, fine to medium GRAVEL,
moist from 0.5 to 2 feet.
l ILLL
Medium dense, gray to brown, silty, fine to coarse SAND, with
gravel, moist.
Loose, gray, silty SAND, with gravel, moist Trace refuse
(plastic and brick fragments - 1% by volume)
(FILL WITH REFUSE)
Loose, grayish -brown with red and tan discoloration, silty
SAND, moist. Some refuse (plastic and brick fragments - 5 to
10% bLyolumeL
Very stiff, gray to black, REFUSE (plastic bags - 30% by
volume, paper - 30% by volume, charred organlcs and
organics - 20% by volume), with sand and silt, moist.
(REFUSE)
Very dense, gray, silty, fine to medium SAND, with gravel and
refuse (metal - 5% by volume, tire fragments - 5 percent by
volume, organics - 5% by volume), moist.
(FILL WITH REFUSE)
Very dense, gray, fine to medium SAND, moist. Trace silt.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Very dense, gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Some reddish grains In sand.
Very dense, gray, slightly silly, fine to medium SAND, moist.
SAMPLE TYPE
SAMPLE NUMBER
w
z
z
rn c
w -a
z
d
S-1 10-14-8
S-2 3-4-5
m S-3 2-2-3
S-4 2-9-20
OTHER TESTS
Ca S-5 14-25-30
S-6 22-27-30 GS
5-7 22-27-30
S-8 22-22-25
Boring terminated at 31.5 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Composite environmental sample, B -214-C, collected from
samples 3-1 through S-6.
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I--0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
GMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-214
PAGE: 1 of 1
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29707
FIGURE: A-15
DRIB LLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 308 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
o
0-
5
m
i
0)
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
10 —
15
20
25
30
35
40
w
w
}a
I- 2
111 LIJ
kL
Z
Z
S-1 14-20-22
OTHER TESTS
S-2 1-2-3 AL
S-3 2-3-4
S-4 2-3-3
VS-5 2-3-5
S-6 18-36-50
S-7 5-9-9
7
L
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 10 20 30 40
S0
A...
»;
O•
• a
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I ---11,--I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
g es
0
—5
—10
—15
— 20
— 25
30
— 35
40
831 BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO : 2003-008
BORING:
B-215
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A-16
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
GF
. SM
.ravel_Peging.gnd,quarrx spaliy•at the ,Agrfacre, • •. •
Gray, silty SAND, with gravel, moist
(WSDOT FILL)
Dense, dark gray, silty, fine to medium SAND with gravel,
moist. Trace refuse (brick fragments - 1% by volume,
- 3% by volume).
Medium stiff, oliva gray, lean CLAY with sand, moist. Trace
gravel and organics.
/organics
CL
SM
Loose, dark gray. silty SAND, with gravel, moist. Trace
organics.
ML
Medium stiff, dark gray. sandy SILT, with gravel, moist. Some
organics.
Medium stiff, dark gray, sandy SILT, with gravel, moist. Some
organics. Trace refuse (brick fragments - 1% by volume).
Some greenish coloration.
. SM
•
Very dense, brown to red with mottled coloration, silty SAND,
with gravel, moist. Abundant refuse (glass - 5 percent by
volume, brick - 5%, organics - 10%, off-white, unknown
material - 2%).
(BURN FILL)
Medium dense, reddish -brown, gray end black, silty SAND
with gravel, moist. Abundant refuse (glass - 5% by volume,
organics and charred organics - 5%, copper - 2%, brick and
off-white unknown material - 2%).
10 —
15
20
25
30
35
40
w
w
}a
I- 2
111 LIJ
kL
Z
Z
S-1 14-20-22
OTHER TESTS
S-2 1-2-3 AL
S-3 2-3-4
S-4 2-3-3
VS-5 2-3-5
S-6 18-36-50
S-7 5-9-9
7
L
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 10 20 30 40
S0
A...
»;
O•
• a
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I ---11,--I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
g es
0
—5
—10
—15
— 20
— 25
30
— 35
40
831 BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO : 2003-008
BORING:
B-215
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A-16
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 308 3 feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
T
Il
w°'
p E.
40
-J
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
45 —
50--
55 --
60 —
65 —
70 —
75 —
80 —
Medium dense, reddish -brown to dark gray, silty SAND with
gravel, molsL Abundant refuse (glass and ceramics - 5% by
volume, organics and charred organics - 5%).
Medium dense, dark brownish -gray, silty SAND with gravel,
meisL Abundant refuse (glass - 5% by volume, organics and
charred organics - 5%, unknown material - 2%).
SP
Dense, light grayish -brown, slightly silty, fine SAND, moist.
Trace horizontal laminations.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Very dense, light grayish -brown, fine SAND, moist. Trace
horizontal laminations.
Very dense, light grayish -brown, fine SAND, moist. Trace
slightly silty, horizontal laminations.
Very dense, light grayish -brown, fine SAND, moist. Trace
slightly silty horizontal laminations.
w
v
CI
43
z ,
1�r w w
o Jo a�
Z
w—
co c6 o-
S-8 5-7-8
/
L
Boring terminated at 66.5 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Composite environmental samples, B -215-C1, collected from
samples S-1 through S-5, and B -215-C2, collected from
samples S-5 through S-10.
OTHER TESTS
S-9 5-7-7 OC
S-10 10-20-22
S-11 12-25-25
S-12 13-22-28
S-13 16-25-29
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
a -
0 10 20 30 40 50
A
.Q
•0
9>0
•
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1--S-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
OMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-215
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-16
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11x29707
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon yr/Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 309 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
o
0
0
m
}
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
6-
10
15
20
25 —
30 —
35 —
40
W
w
F
z
J _1
7
7
7
/
7
OTHER TESTS
S-1 2-3-4 GS
S-2 2-1-2
S-3 3-4-5 AL
S-4 2-4-5
3-5 3-5-8
S-8 2-4-4
S-7 12-15-17
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
A Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
s
50
0
••'
et H
A
•A
4
—5
— 10
^15
20
— 25
—30
35
40
20 40 80 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-10--1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
Offl
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-216
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A-17
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
SM
Grass al surface. Cuttings consist of brown silty SAND,
moist.
Loose, dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, with gravel,
moist Trace organics.
(WSDOT FILL)
ML
Soft, brown to gray, sandy, plastic SILT, with gravel, moist
Some organics. Some discoloration.
Stiff, dark olive gray, sandy, plastic SILT, with gravel, moist.
Some organics.
•
SP
SM
Loose, to medium dense, fine to medium, slightly silty, SAND,
moist.
ML
Stiff, gray, sandy SILT, with gravel, moist. Trace organics.
Some discoloration.
SP
SM
Loose, gray, silty SAND, moist. Trace organics. Some
clumps of gray, plastic SILT, moist. Some gravel.
Dense, light brown, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Thin silty lamination at 35.5 feet.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
SP
SM
6-
10
15
20
25 —
30 —
35 —
40
W
w
F
z
J _1
7
7
7
/
7
OTHER TESTS
S-1 2-3-4 GS
S-2 2-1-2
S-3 3-4-5 AL
S-4 2-4-5
3-5 3-5-8
S-8 2-4-4
S-7 12-15-17
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
A Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
s
50
0
••'
et H
A
•A
4
—5
— 10
^15
20
— 25
—30
35
40
20 40 80 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-10--1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
Offl
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-216
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A-17
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 309 * feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
tit
40
O
0)
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
cc
w
W
w m
F
z
J J
45 —
50 —
55 —
60 —
65 —
70 —
75 —
80 —
Dense, Tight brown, silty, One to medium SAND, moist. Thin
silly Laminations at 40 feet and 40.5 feet.
Dense, light brown, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Dense, light grayish -brown, slightly silty, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Thin, silty, organic lamination at 50.5 feet.
Boring terminated at 51.5 feet.
No ground water observed al time of exploration.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Composite environmental samples, B -216-C, collected from
samples 6-1 through S-7.
Z
7
7
w
z
I- w
wCC
z W
Z
ao
S-8 10-21-25 GS
S-9 11-15-16
S-10 10-17-18
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily bo Indicative of other times and/or locations.
gCC
K
l7
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
W
50
40
45
—50
55
— 60
65
—70
— 75
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-4111--1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80
8211 BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEoSCIENCESINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-216
PAGE: 2 of 2
BORING 2003000.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-17
(DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 311 t feet
LOCATION: See Silo & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY; P. Pearson
5
10
15
20
26
30
35
40
0
2
>-
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
-
SM
Grass, blackberry bushes and gravel al surface.
(TOPSOIL)
Cuttings consist of brown, silty SAND, with gravel, moist.
Loose, olive brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, with gravel,
moist. Some Iron oxide staining.
(WSDOT FILL)
_ %0
CL
_ %//
- �
Soh, brown and gray to dark gray, sandy, lean CLAY with
gravel, moist. Some gravel. Trace organics and
-
discoloration.
—
Soft, dark olive gray, sandy, lean CLAY with gravel, moist.
_
-
Trace organics and discoloration.
_
✓
Soh, gray, sandy, sandy, lean CLAY with gravel, moist. Some
organics (rotten wood). 3 -inch thick, silty, line to medium
-/SAND
layer at 20.5 feet.
—
Cobble In sampler tlp surrounded by gray sandy CLAY, moist.
Some wood debris.
-
SM
Medium dense, bluish to greenish -gray, silty SAND, with
-
gravel, moist. Some organics and charred organics.
-
. SP
• SM
Dense, light grayish -brown, slightly silty, fine SAND, moist
-
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
w
ur
o.-
I-
tu til
7
w
0
a
s
wm
z o
F-
10O
S-1 2-2-4 GS
S-2 2-2-2
S-3 1-1-2 AL
8-4 1-2-2
S-5 4-4-5
AS-6 3-6-7
Z
S-7 10-18-18
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This lag of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or Iocattons.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 lb. weight, 30' drop)
A Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
50 w
L ..
0
4
•
0
20
40
60
80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit }--4)--•—t Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
0
5
— 10
—15
— 20
—25
— 30
— 35
100
49
ONBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCESINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-21 7
PAGE: 1 of 2
4
FIGURE: A-18
BORING 2003000.GPJ 1109/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 311 * feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/14/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/14/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
H^
w11.•-•0 g
40 —
45 —
50 —
55 —
60 —
65 —
70
75 —
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPE
Dense, light greyish -brown, slightly silty, fine SAND, moist.
Trace horizontal laminations.
Medium dense, light grayish -brown, slightly silty, fine SAND,
moist. 2 -Inch layer of pinkish -gray, silty, fine SAND, with
evenly distributed flecks of charred material at 46 feet
(possible volcanic deposit).
Very dense, light grayish -brown, slightly silty, fine SAND.
moist.
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-8 10-18-25
VS-9 5-6-8 GS
L
Boring terminated at 51,5 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Composite environmental samples, B -217-C, collected from
samples S-1 through S-7.
S-10 18-23-28
80 —
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 10
-®
20 30 40 50
0
40
—45
50
— 55
— 60
65
—70
20 40 60 BO 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I--0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
75
80
nal BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-217
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-18
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 244 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/15/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/15/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0
2
rn
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
DC
Lu W
m
F z
z
w
111
-
-
_
SM
Loose, brown to dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded. Organic soil - rootlets.
(FILL)
�j
J
-
_
_
7
_
7
7
7
_
••
-- *
- ••.*
- 0
Loose, brown to dark brown, silty, fine to medium SANG with
gravel, moist. Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded.
Refuse is <10% by volume. 100% compressible. [burnt
_ • i•"
••••
- ••,p
- 0::
•44.
•�•
- :•:•:
_ i%
••••••
-
•❖
����•••.
•••••
- •••�•
- •44
- •••••
_ i
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 244 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/15/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/15/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
�,
o�
40 —
45 —
50 —
55 —
60 —
65 —
70 —
75 —
80 —
O
t
2
>m
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
w
re
w U
a. 2 1 co
z co
J J r Cr
a—
13 o
Medium dense to dense, light yellow brown, slightly silty, fine
to medium SAND. moist.
1S-10 12-13-15
S-11 16-15-20
Boring terminated at 46.5 feet.
No ground water observed during drilling.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Composite environmental sample B -218-C collected from
samples S-1 through S-9.
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read In conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(3001b. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 BO 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1---110-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
817 BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-218
PAGE: 2 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-19
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 285 f feet
LOCATION: See Site d Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/20/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/20/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
of
0
gm
U
8
DESCRIPTION
5-
10-
0-
15-
15-
20
20 —
25 —
30
SM
ML
Grass on yellow brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded.
Medium dense, yellow brown, silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Trace gravel Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded.
Loose, grayish brown, silly, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Trace gravel. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded.
1 (U(SpOT FILIAL J
Soft, dark gray, sandy, clayey, SILT with gravel, moist. Gravel
is fine to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Medium stiff, olive gray, sandy, clayey, SILT, moist. Trace
Gay. Trace gravel. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular 10
sub -rounded.
SM
1
1 Last inch of sample: yellow brown, silty, fine to medium
tiSLND moist. Possible native.
Soft, dark gray, sandy, clayey SILT, moist. Trace gravel.
Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
Decomposing wood at bottom of sample.
Soft, dark gray, sandy, clayey SILT, moist. Trace gravel.
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Loose, olive brown, silly, fine to medium SAND, moist. Trace
gravel. Gravel Is line to coarse, sub -rounded to rounded.
Some water staining.
w
a
0.
a
a
L
7
Z
Z
z
35-
40
5-
40 —
SP
Dense, yellow brown, slightly silty, fine to coarse SANG, moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Boring terminated at 31.5 feel.
No ground water observed during drilling.
No environmental sample collected from B-219.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas in
the air a1 the time of exploration.
SAMPLE NUMBER
w
U
z
w5
ce
o
w
ce
5-1 7-7-6
5-2 2-4-5 GS
5-3 1-1-2
S-4 3-4-2 AL
S-5 1-1-2
8-6 2-2-2
S-7 2-2-3 GS
S-8 7-14-16
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
IL
ILj
iL
Lf15O
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
50
0
:a
A
•
0
A II
O 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit J ---I Liquid Limit
Natural Wator Content
—5
— 10
15
20
—25
— 30
— 35
100
40
8121 BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-219
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-20
BORING 2003000.CP./ 11/29(07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 308 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/19/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/19/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
-
-
=
-
-
SM
Grass on loose, brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist.
Medium dense, brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded.
(WSDOT FILL)
Loose, dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with gravel,-
moist. Some rust staining.
Loose, brown to dark gray, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Some rust staining.
�],
IrL/
fr/
/L
7
_
_
-
_
_notes
—
-
-
—
-
--
j
CL
Loose, dark gray, slightly sandy, lean CLAY, moist. Trace
gravel. Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Trace woad.
Medium dense, dark olive gray, sandy, lean CLAY wllh gravel,
moist. Trace wood.
Driller rough drilling.
Dense, dark gray, sandy, lean CLAY, moist. Trace gravel.
Gravel is coarse, sub -angular. Broken cobble in sampler.
Driller notes rough drilling.
Dense, dark gray, sandy, lean CLAY with gravel, moist.
Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded. Wood in
sample. Faint odor - decomposing wood/refuse. Broken
cobble In sample.
Driller notes rough drilling.
7
L
0
IE
-
-•
-
_ ML
SM
Medium dense, black, sandy SILT to silty SAND with gravel,
moist. Bum refuse is 70% by volume (brick, glass, asphalt).
(BURN FILL)
Very dense, red brown, silty, rine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Broken cobble in sample. Burn refuse is 30%
by volume (brick, glass).
/L
21
SM
SAMPLE NUMBER
w
0
gt
V) c
a
w -
OTHER TESTS
S-1 5-5-5
S-2 1-1-1 GS
S-3 1-1-1
S-4 3-4-4
S-5 5-5-10 AL
S-6 18-25-20
S-7 18-24-21
S-8 2-10-9
S-9 50/5"
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 10 20 30 40
50
A
•
0 : 4
eL
O
0
5
—10
—15
— 20
— 25
30
»®,-35
0— 2� 0 40 60
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-4)-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80 100
40
nall BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-220
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE: A-21
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 300Ib Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 308 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/18/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/19/2007
i-OGGED BY: J. Speck
w
o
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTIO N
CC
LU w
CC)
a
I- z
w w
J J
-
-
_
ML
Medium dense, dark brown to red brown, sandy SILT and
silty, fine to medium SAND with gravel, moist. Gravel is fine
10 coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Burn refuse Is 60% by volume (brick, glass, burn slag).
/
—
• . SM
Medium dense, silty, fine to coarse SAND with gravel, moist.
7
-
•
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
-
-
Burn refuse Is 70% by volume (brick, glass, wood, metal).
J
•
No recovery. Driller notes hammer may be pounding on a
cobble during sampling,
No recovery. Hammer bouncing off rock or wood.
a
o
-
' L",
"
No recovery. Driller notes probable mass being pushed In
front of auger during drilling. Subsequently broke through with
SP
r
,downhole hammer- /
SM
Dense, dark gray, slightly silty, One to medium SAND, moist.
-
:.
r'
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Dense, olive gray, sttghtty silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
/
Faint rust staining from 71.0 to 71,5.
75 —
Boring terminated al 71.5 feet,
No ground water observed during drilling.
Composite environmental sample, B -220-C, collected from
samples S-7 through S-14.
S-10 5-7-12
5-11 4-6-6
S-12 50/3"
S-13
OTHER TESTS
S-14 16-17-18
S-15 14-22-23 GS
S-16 13-20-31
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas in
the air at the time of exploration.
80 —
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily bo Indicative of other times and/or locations.
rr
IL
0
IX
f.D
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
0 10
20
♦
30 40
50 w g
40
•
•
n>A
•
—45
—50
—55
80
— 65
70
—75
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
60
DITIBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCESINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-220
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-21
BORING 200300a.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stam Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 30010 Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 306 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/20/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/2012007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
-
^
^
=. SM
•
Grass on loose. dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist.
Loose, brown to dark brown, silty. fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
sub -rounded. Some sandy silly lobes-
(WSDOT FILL)
-
-
-
-
-
ML
Soft, dark gray, sandy SILT with gravel, moist. Gravel is fine
to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded. Some wood.
Soft, dark gray, sandy SILT with gravel, moist. Some wood.
Soft, olive gray, sandy SILT with gravel, moist.
Loose, dark gray, slightly sandy SILT, moist. Trace gravel.
Loose, dark gray, sandy SILT to silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Trace gravel.
SM
Loose, dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Wood debris is 90% by volume.
^moist.
^
SM
Dense, red brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with gravel.
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Bum refuse is 80% by volume (glass, brick, wood).
(BURN FILL)
Medium dense, red brown, silty, fine 10 medium SAND with
_
SP
•
gravel, moist. Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
sub -rounded. Burn recuse is 60% by volume (glass, brick.
wood).
Medium dense grading to dense, light yellow brown, slightly
silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
7
7
7
7
I7
OTHER TESTS
S -1 3-5-3 GS
8-2 2-1-2
S-3 1-2-2
S-4 1-2-2 AL
S-5 1-2-3
S-6 2-2-3
S-7 3-3-4
S-8 26-50/8"
S-9 3-4-8
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
QQ:
cc
0
Standard Penetration Test
(300 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
0 Blows per foot
x
w °'
10 20 30 40 50
0
®♦
A
•
5
10
—15
—20
— 25
30
—35
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-4,-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
40
Gall BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-221
PAGE: 1 of 2
BORING 200300B.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-22
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 306 t feet
_OCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/20/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/20/2007
_OGGED BY: J. Speck
E.
40
45
50
55
60
o
co
2
›-
co
USC$ SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
W
m
a
z
J J
65 —
70 —
75 —
80 —
Boring terminated at 61.5 feet
No ground water observed during drilling.
Composite environmental sample, 8-221-C, collected from
samples S-6 through S-10.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas in
the air at the time of exploration.
OTHER TESTS
S-10 10.18-18 GS
5-11 5-20-28
S-12 20-31-50/6"
S-13 18-31-39
5-14 12-31-38 GS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
Standard Penetration Test
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
10 20 30 40
50
Y
.23
40
46
»L-50
.O
>>1k,— 55
>>v-60
—85
— 70
—75
BO
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I --4p--1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
IfBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-221
PAGE: 2 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-22
SM
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Dense, light yellow brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
/
_
Grades to very dense.
Z
_
A
-
7
65 —
70 —
75 —
80 —
Boring terminated at 61.5 feet
No ground water observed during drilling.
Composite environmental sample, 8-221-C, collected from
samples S-6 through S-10.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas in
the air at the time of exploration.
OTHER TESTS
S-10 10.18-18 GS
5-11 5-20-28
S-12 20-31-50/6"
S-13 18-31-39
5-14 12-31-38 GS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
Standard Penetration Test
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
10 20 30 40
50
Y
.23
40
46
»L-50
.O
>>1k,— 55
>>v-60
—85
— 70
—75
BO
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I --4p--1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
IfBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-221
PAGE: 2 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-22
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling. Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 302 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/20/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/20/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0
m
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPE
-
SM
Grass on dark brown, silty SAND with gravel, moist.
Medium dense, olive gray, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
sub -rounded.
/
_
( j
IL/
_./
I%i
/�
_
/
_
-
_
�
-
__
-
- .v
-
-
-
-
.
j
0
1,
I
Ofine
I
/
j
l
j
0
%
CL
pML
t LSDOTIILLL ,/
Loose, dark gray, sandy, silty CLAY. moist Trace gravel
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Loose, gray, sandy silty CLAY, moist. Trace gravel. Gravel is
to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Loose, dark gray, sandy, silty CLAY, moist. Trace gravel.
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded. Some
sandier sections (not stratified).
Loose, dark gray, sandy, silly CLAY with gravel, moist. Gravel
is fine to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
-
'.
SM
Very loose, dark gray, silly, fine to medium SAND with gravel,
moist. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
-
'.
SM
Dense, yellow brown to gray, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded,
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Medium dense, yellow brown, silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Faint sub -horizontal bedding, possible water staining.
Medium dense, yellow brown, silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Faint sub -horizontal bedding, possible water staining.
/Z
/
_
SAMPLE NUMBER
OTHER TESTS
S-1 3-6-5 GS
S-2 2-3-4
S-3 2-2-3 AL
S-4 1-2-4
S-5 1-2-4
S-6 1-1-1
S-7 10-50/6
S-8 10-22-38
S-9 6-8-9 GS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 10 20 30 40
50
• A
:A :
A 141
A
A
W N
0
0
5
10
—15
— 20
`»Ar -25
»A-30
A
—35
0 20 40 60
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1--40--{ Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80 100
40
ONBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-222
PAGE: 1 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/28107
FIGURE:
A-23
(DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 75 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: Dames and Moore, 3001b Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 302 t feel
_OCATION: Sae Site & Exptoration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/20/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/20/2007
..OGGED BY: J. Speck
40 —
45-
50-
55 ---
60 —
65 —
70 —
75 —
O
7 -
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTIO N
Medium dense, olive brown, silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist, Faint high -angle bedding. possible water staining.
7
Boring terminated at 41.5 feet.
No ground water observed during drilling.
No environmental sample collected from 8-222.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas in
the air at the time of exploration.
S-10 6.8.14
OTHER TESTS
80 —
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only al the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
0
z
7
Standard Penetration Test
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per fool
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1--0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
ILTBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-222
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-23
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon wl Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 256 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/24/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/24/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
5
10
15
20
25
30 —
35 —
40
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
W
U
Q
m5
W -o
act
w
0- -
m S-1 13-8-6
m S-2 6-6-7
L
S-3 4-6-6
S-4
OTHER TESTS
2-3-3 OC
pH
0 S-5 2-3-5
B 8-6 6-5-4
/
S-7 7-5-10 OC
pH
S-8 6-6-6
S-9 6-10-13 GS
S-10 8-13-15
S-11 12-15-16
7 S-12 10-13-15
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified Location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30•' drop)
♦ Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
50
0
A
•
•
A
•
•
•
A
A
• A
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit i--1—{ Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
—5
—10
—15
— 20
— 25
— 30
— 35
100
40
Uffl BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-223
PAGE: 1 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-24
SM
Grass at the surface.
Medium dense, dark brownish -gray. silly SAND, moist.
;����i!
:`Some
,.•
woodooddebti9Llbyvolu1ne)_—LILLL—_--
(to���
Medium stiff, dark gray, silty REFUSE, moist. Paper - 90% by
•••••
volume, glass - 2%.
..':.'.
SP
'. (REFLS.E)..... .. :.
Medium dense, dark gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND,
.:�
..i.
moist; • No refuse qr orgattics, obsetygd.
•.•.
Medium stiff, dark gray to black, sandy SILT, moist. Refuse:
%%
organics - 10% by volume, paper - 5%, glass - 5%. Slight
is
hydrocarbon -like odor.
••�•�
•0$
(FILL WITH REFUSE)
Medium stiff, dark gray, sandy SILT, moist. Refuse: organics
'•.; 19%. by yplume,•glapp - 5%.
•••
•*:
Medium dense, dark gray, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
•:•:
Refuse: metal - 2% by volume.
i
/DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc,
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck dg
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 256 t feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Ptan, Figure 2A
BATE STARTED: 2/24/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/24/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
0
40 —
45 —
50 —
55 —
60 —
65 —
70 —
0
as
5-
m
2
QU
DESCRIPTION
75 —
Dense, gray, slightly silty, fine SAND, moist.
Boring terminated at 41.5 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Composite environmental sample, B -223-C, collected from
samples 5.1 through S-9.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed a peak
detection of 2% of the LEL for combustible gas, and no
detections of carbon monoxide or hydrogen sulfide in the air
at the time of exploration.
L
W
1-
O
5-13 12-17-17 GS
80 —
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
rr Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight. 30" drop)
• Blows per foot
0
1
10
IL
19
0 20 40 60 60
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I--6-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
UMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-223
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-24
SC/RING 2003008.GPJ 1128/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger. CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 250 t feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/24/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/24/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
oow
0—
5-
10 —
15--
20-
25
0-
O
m
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
25 —
30 —
35 —
40 —
lim"NFT-\
D �^
0v(
o Qc
)o0
o0
Q �S
'o O
30(
ML
GP
4 Inches of asphalt.
Cuttings consist of brown, sandy GRAVEL with cobbles.
\Hard drilling. (FILL) /
SM
SP
Hard, light brownish -grey, sandy SILT, with gravel and
cobbles, moist. Slightly rust -mottled.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,(ICE -CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Very denso, light brownish -gray, silly, fine sandy GRAVEL,
moist. Some rust -mottling.
No recovery.
Medium dense, light olive brown, silty, fine SAND, moist.
Medium dense, light brownish -gray, slightly silty, fine SAND,
moist
(GLACIAL OUTWASH)
Medium dense, light grayish -brown, tine SAND, moist.
Boring terminated at 16.5 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
No environmental samples collected.
w
U
Z
—
w�
CL.
as
vi S-1 16-50/6
v
71
7
7
L
S-2 16-32-32
17-28-26
S-3 8-9-10
S-4 5-10-11
S-5 8-10-12
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
A Blows per foot
av
0 10 20 30 40 50 r,
0
•Ar5
»A
A
•
A
10
L.15
—20
25
— 30
— 35
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I-40-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
40
;a' BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-224
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-25
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Spilt Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 246 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/24/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/24/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
5-
10 —
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
DESCRIPTION
113.1:31,14
Inches of asphalt, r
Pv.SP
. Hard drilling near surface. Cuttings consist of sandy
•
•
•GRAVEL,_n)gist., (FILL),
Very dense, light grayish -brown to dark brown, slightly silly,
gravelly SAND, moist.
•
Dense, dark gray, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND, moist.
N.;
laoliktrnate1,1aJ pull blakJJpccf —
00
�•••
Very loose, grayish -brown, silty SAND, with gravel, moist.
•%%
Refuse: glass - 10% by volume, wood debris - 5%.
*to(FILL
WITH REFUSE)
•440
Very loose, grayish -brown, silty SAND, moist. Refuse:
•••-•
organics - 2% by volume, glass • 1%.
V::
No recovery.
%i
t t t-
Medium stiff, brownish -gray, sandy SILT, moist to wet.
. Refuse: wood debris - 60% by volume, glass - 2%. Slight
•d.
. hy.4 rPOn-liko 9dgr•
D.•.
t•o,
Loose, gray, silty, (Me to medium SAND, moist to wet.
Organics - 5 % by volume. Slight hydrocarbondike odor.
,i
4+44
%i
Loose, gray, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist Organics -
by volume, Slight hvdrocarbondtke odor. -
SP
.5% r
Dense, grayish brown, silty, fine SAND, moist. 1 -inch thick
lamination of silty SAND at 23 feet.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Dense, brownish -gray, silly, fine SANG, moist.
•
Dense, brownish -gray, fine SAND, moist. Trace silly
laminations.
Very dense, gray, fine SAND, moist,
40 —
Boring terminated at 38.5 feel.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
w
CC
0 _ IC
}a C4 LIt
yZ ..Zw w�Waaao 0
�
S-1 50/5
m S-2 10-20-2
A/ S-3 1-2-1
AS-4 1-2-1
3-4-4
Z S-5 2-3-3 OC
pH
m 5-6 5-5-4
Z S-7 5-3-3 OC
pH
v
S-8 14-21-25 GS
A/ S-9 15-20-20
v
v
S-10 15-20-25
S-11 15-28-25
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily bo indicative of other times and/or locations.
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
50
A
•
•
•
77;
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Llmll F • 1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
1-
aa,
or -
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
GMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-225
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A-26
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11129/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 246 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/24/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/24/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
40
45 —
50 —
55 —
60-
65
0-
65 —
70
75 —
80 —
O
c0
USCS SOUL CLASS
W
W
Z
W J
DESCRIPTION
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
Environmental sample, B -225-C, collected from samples S-1
through S.8.
w
U
W
w
a8
w
0
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or tocations.
S
Z
0
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
40
—46
— 50
— 55
—60
—65
— 70
—75
D 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1--.-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80
Onl 1
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCESINC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-225
PAGE: 2 of 2
BORING 2003000.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE:
A-26
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/Autohemmer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 247 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/24/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/24/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
2
0
-J
J 0
m co
a = >-•
0
DESCRIPTION
5-
10 —
15 —
20 —
25
30 —
35 —
40 —
1114!51 GP
0
Qc
SP
SM
0
GP
SP
SM
4 inches of asphalt.
Cuttings consist of sandy GRAVEL, moist to 2 feet.
• (FILL)
Medium dense, gray, slightly silty, fine SAND, moist.
(GLACIAL OUTWASH)
Dense, gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND, moist
V4fY:AB/149, 9!qY, slightlY.01Y, Rae .to Ineqitt!n.ANp, moist .•
OtgYeHy. tforA .@ !p. 9. (eBh ................... . .
Dense, olive gray, slightly silty, fine SAND, moist.
Dense, gray, slightly silty, fine SAND, moist. 1 -Inch silty Layer
at 18.5 feet.
Very dense, gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Boring terminated at 21.5 feet.
No ground water observed al time of exploration.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 0% LEL.
No environmental samples collected.
7
7
7
Q
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
I- (300 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
W = A Brows per foot
z
w
0
O '-0
8-1 8-12-12
S-2 12-15-16
8-3 10-25-26
8-4 12-18-20 GS
S-5 12-18-21
S-8 18-25-28
pH
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnlcal report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necossarity be indlcative of other times and/or locations.
0
10
20
30
40
Ev
50
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1--41---1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
GMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC,
BORING:
B-226
PAGE: 1 of 1
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008 FIGURE:
A-27
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, CME 85 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: California Split Spoon w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 246 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Ptan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/24/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/24/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
a. w
irUJ0
5-
10-
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
35
40
O
m
2
>-
USCS SOIL CLASS
SP
DESCRIPTION
\4 inches of asphalt,
Cuttings consist of brownish -gray, sandy GRAVEL, moist to
2 feet. IFILLL
Medium dense, dark brownish -gray, silty SAND, moist.
Refuse: wood debris - 10.15% by volume. Slight
hydrocarbon -like odor.
(FILL WITH REFUSE)
Medium dense, dark brownish -gray, silty SAND, with gravel
and refuse, moist. Refuse: glass - 1% by volume. paper - 5%,
wood - 3%, metal - 3%. Hydrocarbon -like odor.
Medium dense, dark brownish -gray, silty SAND with gravel.
Organics - 5% by volume. Trace glass and paper.
Hydrocarbon -like odor.
Medium dense, dark brown, silty SAND, with gravel, moist.
Refuse: wood/organics - 10% by volume, paper/unknown -
V0%. Hydrocarbon -like gaol...
Medium dense, dark brown, silty, sandy REFUSE: paper,
organics, unknown refuse - 50% by volume, moist.
(REFUSE)
Loose, dark brown, silty sandy REFUSE: paper - 60% by
volume, metal - 10%, moist. Slight hydrocarbon -like odor.
Medium dense, dark brown, silty, sandy REFUSE: paper -
30% by volume, moist.
No recovery - organics, paper, trace glass in sampler tip.
Medium dense, dark brown REFUSE: metal 80% by volume,
\moist. r
Very dense, tight grayish -brown, fine to medium SAND, moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
Dense, light grayish -brown, fine SAND, moist. Trace silty
laminations.
Boring terminated at 26.5 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Gas readings: carbon monoxide=0 ppm, hydrogen sulfide=0
ppm, combustible gas 4% LEL.
Environmental sample, B -227-C, collected from samples S-1
through S-10.
7
Q
v
OTHER TESTS
S-1 4-5-5
S-2 8-12-10
S-3 4-5-7 OC
121 S-4 20-4-4
S-5 6-7-7
Lal S-6 4-3-4 OC
m S-7 8-6-8
S-8 7-4-3
11 S-9 12-19-21
S-10
I% S-11 12-18-19
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or Locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
Non -Standard Penetration Resistance
(300 Ib, weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I--0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
MTBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
BORING:
B-227
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-28
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hotlow-Stem Auger, Acker limited access rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT wl Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 227 ± feel
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 3/5/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 3/5/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
0
J
co
2
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
6-
10
SM
Very loose, brown, orange and black, silty SAND, moist.
Trace gravel and organics. Thin charred layer at 1,5 feet.
(BURN FILL)
Loose, brown to gray, silty SAND, moist. Glass - 5% by
volume. Some charred organics.
Very loose, light to dark brown, silty SAND, moist. Organics -
20% by volume.
ML
Stift, light brown, gravelly, sandy, lean CLAY, moist. Trace
organics. Some rust mottling.
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
40 —
• .I • SM Very dense, light brown, silty SAND, with gravel, moist
1 fGLACIAL TILLI
Boring terminated at 10.6 feel due to refusal on dense native
soil.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Periodic gas monitoring showed a peak of carbon monoxide
at 139 ppm (due to exhaust from the acker rig) and 1% LEL of
combustible gas with no detections of hydrogen sulfide.
No environmental sample was collected due to insufficient
sample volume.
Ce
w
w
ur
ra
W z
J J
® 5-1
w
z
z
2
(0
Lk'
z g
as
1-1-1
OTHER TESTS
Ca S-2 3-3-2
® S-3 1-1-1 OC
S-4 4-4-12 AL
® 5-5 50/6
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only at the specilied location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1---1110--f Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
gal BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC,
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-228
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-29
BORING 2003009.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simco tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 269 t feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exptoration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/28/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/28/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
0
6
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
J
0
r
to
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPE
-
-
-
-
SM
Surface: Blackberry Vines. Dark brown, silty, fine to medium
SAND, moist.
Cuttings: Dark brown, silty SAND with gravel, moist.
Driller notes hard drilling at 5 feet.
Medium dense, dark brown to black, silty, fine to medium
SAND, with gravel, moist. Burn refuse 40% by volume (brick,
glass, wood).
_
(BURN FILL)
Cuttings: Dark brown, silty SAND with gravel, moist.
Driller notes hammer bouncing on debris during sampling.
Medium dense, dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
V
-
sub -rounded.
_
Bum refuse 30% by volume. (brick, glass, tile).
Faint hydrocarbon odor. Black staining in soils.
Medium dense, brown, silty, gravelly, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
E
-
Burn refuse 20% by volume (brick, glass).
-
Cuttings: Dark brown, silty SAND with gravel, moist.
-
Medium dense, red brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular l0
XI
-
rounded.
_
Burn refuse less than 10% by volume (brick, metal).
Driller notes hard drilling at 22 H bgs.
-
Cuttings: Dark to red brown, silty SAND with gravel, moist.
Visible contact in the sample at 25.75 fl hgs.
- •:•�•
Soft, black, sandy SILT, moist.
- •-•-•
Refuse: 50% by volume (20% compressible, 80%
_•%%
non-compressible: glass, plastic, wood).
t+,•0
-
(REFUSE)
)
*
Cuttings: Black, sandy, SILT, moist. Faint hydrocarbon odor.
— v.*
Some refuse.
_ �•�•
Refuse: 40% by volume (10% compressible, 90% metal,
..
plastic).
44.
• 1
Cuttings: Bleck, sandy, SILT, moist. Faint hydrocarbon odor.
•:•••
Some refuse.
. SP
Dense to very dense, dark gray, fine to medium SAND, moist.
-
Faint hydrocarbon odor. Black staining.
(GLACIAL OUTWASH)
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-1 6-7-9
S-2 20/8-20/3
OTHER TESTS
S-3 9-6-6 GS
pH
S-4 4-6-12
S-5 2-2-2
S-6 3-3-3
8-7 11-22-20
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1----0---1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
UNBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCESINC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-229
PAGE: 1 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
FIGURE: A-30
'DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simco tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT wl Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 269 t feet
_OCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Ptan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/28/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/28/2007
_OGGED BY; J. Speck
45 —
50 —
55 —
CO —
65 —
70 —
75 —
80 —
y
DESCRIPTION
Boring terminated at 41.5 leeL
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Environmental sample, B -229-C, collected from samples S-1
through S-7.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide or combustible gas, and no hydrogen
sulfide in the air at the time of exploration.
W m z Standard Penetration Test
co
0. 2!s (140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
F z rn G w♦ Blows per foot
d a w° 5 t
o • 0
� 0
VI S-8 12-27-35
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
10
20
30
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limil 1-0--1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
x
w
BORING:
GMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY B-229
HWAGEOSCIENCEsINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON PAGE: 2 of 2
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
FIGURE:
A-30
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/20/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simco 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 284 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan. Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/26/2007
DATE COMPLETED; 2/26/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
1-
a5
to
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
-J
0
m
(0
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
—
-
-
SM
•r
Surface: Loose, brown, silly SAND with gravel. moist,
branches, blackberry.
(BURN FILL)
Cuttings: same as surface.
Medium dense, brown, silly, fine to medium SAND with fine to
coarse gravel, moist. Gravel is sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Broken gravel, cobble In tip.
Medium dense, brown, slily, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Trace coarse gravel, sub -angular to sub -rounded.
Medium dense. dark gray to dark brown, silty, fine to medium
SAND. moist, trace fine gravel. Faint product odor and
staining.
Medium dense, brown to dark yellow brown, silty, fine to
medium SAND, with fine to coarse gravel, moist. Gravel is
sub -angular to sub -rounded. Burn refuse is 20% by volume
(glass, brick, concrete). Slight hydrocarbon -like odor.
Medium dense, dark gray to black, silty, fine to coarse
gravelly, fine to medium SAND, moist. Burn refuse is 80% by
volume (brick, glass, rubber, wood). Slight hydrocarbon -like
odor.
Very dense, dark brown, silty, fine gravelly, fine to medium
SAND, moist. 90% burn refuse (brick).
Driller notes refusal, flat object - no catch with auger bit.
Borehole moved 3 feet east, drilled down to 25 feet below
ground surface to continue.
Dense, red -brown to black, silty, fine to medium SAND with
fine to coarse gravel, moist. 80% burn refuse - brick, wood,
glass- Slight hydrocarbon -like odor.
Medium dense, dark brown to red, silty, fine to medium SAND
with fine to coarse gravel. 70% burn refuse (brick, wood,
glass)
Medium dense, dark gray. silty. fine to medium SAND with
Mine to coarse gravel. 40% construction debris (brick, glass).
-
SM
SM
1-2 inches of light yellow brown, silty. fine to medium SAND
with fine gravel. Gravel is sub -angular to rounded. No bum
refuse.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
SAMPLE TYPE
N
SAMPLE NUMBER
w
U
F0,
5 .5.
w ,e
Z
w -
o_ 33
OTHER TESTS
S-1 2-4-24 GS
VIS-2 8-50!6"
S-3 14-12-17
NS-4 5-13-14
S-5 10-11-13 GS
S-6 26-25-50/3"
S-7 22-23-15
NS-8 7-10-16 OC
NS-9 5-7-7
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
10
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
20
30
40
50
—40
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I—G—I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
gal 1
BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
BORING 2003008.GPJ 6/27108
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-230
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE: A-31
"DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simco 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT wl Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 284 f feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2128/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/28/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
x
UJ
40
45 —
50 —
55 —
60 —
65 —
70 —
75 —
80 —
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
Driller notes drilling smoothed out al about 37 feet below the
ground surface.
\Very dense, tight yellow brown, silty, fine SAND with fine to
coarse gravel, moist.
Boring terminated at 41.5 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Composite environmental sample, B -230-C, collected from
samples 5-3 to 5-10.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustibte gas in
the air at the time of exploration.
0' w
m z-.,
o
J Z w c l+l
a s M m W
a8 0
17-24.32
NS -10
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only al the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 ib. weight, 30" drop)
4 Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
DMI BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-230
PAGE: 2 of 2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 6/27108
FIGURE:
1
A-31
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simco 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 297 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/27/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/27/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
5
10
15
20
25
J
m
to
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
-
ML
• SM
Loose, brown, silty, sandy SILT with gravel. moist. Gravel is
fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
(WSDOT FILL)
Loose, dark grayish brown, sandy SILT with gravel, moist.
-
•
Loose, dark brown to olive gray, sandy SILT, moist. Trace
gravel. One inch of decomposing wood at 9.25 feet.
VI
SM
Medium dense, dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
sub -rounded.
N
_
Burn refuse 10% by volume (glass, burnt wood).
(BURN FILL)
Medium dense, dark gray to black, silty, fine to medium
-
SAND, moist. Trace gravel.
Burn refuse 30% by volume (glass, burnt wood).
-Faint
creosote odor. Black staining.
ML
Very stiff grading to hard, gray to olive gray, slightly sandy
VI
—
SILT with gravel, moist. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular
to rounded.
(ICE -CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
N
30 —
35 —
40 —
Boring terminated at 29.5 feet.
No ground water observed during drilling.
Composite environmental sample, B -231-C, collected from
samples 8-2 to S-6.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas in
the air at the time of exploration.
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-1 6-2-2
OTHER TESTS
S-2 6-6-4 GS
S-3 1-2-2
S-4 6-10-7
S-5 3-7-7
5-6 8-9-10
S-7 12-50/6"
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other limes and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
10
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
20
30
40
0
—5
—10
— 15
— 20
—25
30
—35
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-4--1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
40
nal BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
1
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-231
PAGE: 1 of 1
BORING 2003008.GPJ 6/27108
FIGURE:
A-32
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simco 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 297 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Pian, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/28/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/28/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
0--
5-
10 —
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
40 —
J
0
2
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
SM
4
ML
Medium dense, brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with
gravel, moist. Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded.
(WSDOT FILL)
Medium dense, olive gray to dark gray, sandy SILT, moist.
Trace gravel. Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded.
Medium dense, gray to dark gray, sandy SILT, moist. Trace
gravel and wood. Two 1 Inch pockets of silty, fine to medium
sand at 12.76 and 13.00 feet.
SM
SM
Medium dense, dark gray to black sandy SILT to silty, find to
medium SAND, moist. Some fine to coarse gravel.
Construction debris is less than 10% by volume (nail.
decomposing wood). Faint odor and black staining.
Medium dense, dark brown to black, silty, fine to medium
SAND with gravel, moist. Gravel Is fine to coarse,
sub -angular to rounded. Burn refuse 30% by volume (glass,
tile).
Slight odor and black staining.
(BURN FILL)
Driller notes rough drilling.
Medium dense, dark brown to black, silty, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Burn refuse 70% by volume (glass, wood).
Burn refuse 50% by volume (glass, wood).
SM
Medium dense, yellow brown to dark yellow brown, silty to
slightly silty, gno to medium SAND with gravel, moist. Gravel
Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
No gravel In cuttings.
No gravel in sample.
VIS-1 8-8-7
OTHER TESTS
NS-2 7-8-11 GS
MS-3 7-7-10
MS-4 4-5-8
Ei S-5 7-10-9
S-8 8.8.14
ElS-7 7-7-8
MS-8 8-8.13 GS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
end therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 20 40 80 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
BEI BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-232
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A-33
BORING 200300B.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simco 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 297 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 2/28/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 2/28/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
45 —
50 —
55 —
80 —
85 —
70 —
75-
80
5-
80 —
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
Boring terminated al 38.5 feet.
Perched ground water observed in boring at 10 feet below
ground surface. Water transient.
Composite environmental sample, B -232-C, collected from
samples S-5 lo S-8.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas in
the air at the time of exploration.
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
♦ Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
IMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-232
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-33
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simcoe 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 303 ± feel
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 3/1/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 3/1/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
5-
10 —
15 —
20 --
25
25 —
30 —
35
40 —
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
OTHER TESTS
S-1 2-1-3 AL
S-2 2-3-5
S-3 8-6.8 GS
S-4 7-13-14
S-5 5-10-12 GS
NS-8 5-4-4
S-7 7-12-19
NS-8 6-7-7
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
IL
IQ
3
z
Q
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
• Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limn 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
831 BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-233
PAGE: 1 of 2
BORING 7003008.GPJ 6/27108
FIGURE:
A-34
SM
Cuttings consist of brown, silly send, moist.
CL
Soft, gray, silly CLAY, moist. Some brown and dark gray
discoloration. Trace organics.
(WSDOT FILL)
Medium stiff, gray, sandy, silty CLAY, with gravel, moist.
Trace organics.
SM
Medlum dense, gray, silty SAND, with gravel, moist. Trace
organics.
SM
Dense, gray, sfty SAND, moist. Organics. 6.5 -inch thick
charred layer at 18.5 feet.
(BURN FILL)
Medium dense, brownish -gray to back, silty SAND, with
gravel, moist. 4 -inch thick charred layer at 22.5 feet. Mottled
discoloration. Some organics.
•
Medium dense, brown to gray to black, silty SAND and sandy
SILT, with gravel, moist. Charred organics - 10% by volume,
glass - 2%.
ML
Stiff, brownish -gray to black. sandy SILT, with gravel, moist.
Charred organics - 5% by volume, glass - 2%.
:. SM
Medium dense, brown, silty, fine SAND, with gravel, moist.
Wood waste, organics and charred organics - 15% by
volume.
OTHER TESTS
S-1 2-1-3 AL
S-2 2-3-5
S-3 8-6.8 GS
S-4 7-13-14
S-5 5-10-12 GS
NS-8 5-4-4
S-7 7-12-19
NS-8 6-7-7
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
IL
IQ
3
z
Q
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
• Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limn 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
831 BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-233
PAGE: 1 of 2
BORING 7003008.GPJ 6/27108
FIGURE:
A-34
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simcoe 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 303 t feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 3/1/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 3/1/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
x
,
ur
o�
40 —
45
50 —
55 —
60 —
65 —
70 —
75 —
80 —
0
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
Boring terminated at 49 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Environmental sample, 8-233-C, collected from samples S-1
to S-9.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas in
the air at the time of exploration.
w
0.
w
a.
SAMPLE NUMBER
OTHER TESTS
MS-9 7-9-11 GS
VI0-10 10-10-19
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
10
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
20
30
40
w W
50
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
— 75
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I—®—i Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80
MTBOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
BORING 2003008.GPJ 6/27/08
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-233
PAGE: 2 o1 2
FIGURE:
A-34
SM
Medium dense, light brown, silly, fine SAND. moist.
Laminations of at and medium to coarse sand. Trace
organics.
(WEATHERED DRIFT)
Medium dense, light brown, slightly stity, fine SAND, moist.
(GLACIAL OUTWASHI
• •
SP
Boring terminated at 49 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Environmental sample, 8-233-C, collected from samples S-1
to S-9.
Periodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas in
the air at the time of exploration.
w
0.
w
a.
SAMPLE NUMBER
OTHER TESTS
MS-9 7-9-11 GS
VI0-10 10-10-19
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
10
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
20
30
40
w W
50
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
— 75
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I—®—i Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80
MTBOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
BORING 2003008.GPJ 6/27/08
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-233
PAGE: 2 o1 2
FIGURE:
A-34
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simcoe 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATION: 278 3 feet
LOCATION: Sea Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 3/1/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 3/1/2007
LOGGED BY: P, Pearson
o�
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
O
2
cn
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
-
-
-
•
-silty
-
-
-
SM
Cuttings consist of brown silty SAND, mold.
Medium dense, brown, silty SAND with gravel, moist. Some
rust mottling. Organics - 10% by volume.
Medium dense, reddish -brown, silty, fine to medium SAND,
with gravel, moist. Some black orange and red discoloration.
Glass - 5% by volume. Trace organics.
(BURN FILL)
Medium dense, reddish -brown, silty SAND, with gravel, moist.
Glass - 5% try volume, charred organics - 1%.
Medium dense, brownish -gray to reddish -brown to dark gray,
SAND, with gravel, moist Glass - 5% by volume,
organics and charred organics - 1%.
Medium dense, dark brownish -gray, to reddish -brown, silty,
gravelly, SAND, moist. Glass - 10% by volume, organics -
10%.
Meidum dense, reddish -brown to brownish -gray, silty One to
medium SAND, with gravel, moist. Glass - 2% by votume,
charred organics - 2%.
Medium dense, reddish brown, silty SAND, with gravel, wet.
-g�Chafred
organics - 3% by volume, glass - 2%. f
-
Medium dense, dark gray, slightly silty, tine SAND, with
_gravel,
moist to wet
(WEATHERED DRIFT)
Medium dense, gray, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Some silty laminations.
:• SM
Dense, gray, silty, line SAND, moist. Some silly laminations.
-(GLACIAL
OUTWASH)
rF.
W
W
w
W
U
Ncu
-5
c
a2
® S-1 4-4-5
El S-2 4-7-9
VI8-3 8-8-12
14 S-4 7-8-10
VI S-5 14-12-15 GS
El S-8 5-5-8
14 8-7 4-5-8
8-8
S-9 11-9-13
MS -10 12-14-17 GS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 20 40 80 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
OM
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWWGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-234
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A-35
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11!29107
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: i ioflow-Stem Auger, Simcoe 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer
SURFACE ELEVATIOFk 278 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 3/1/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 3/1/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
2
f,
40 —
45 —
50 —
55 —
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
60 —
65 —
70 —
75 —
e0 —
C ense, gray, slily, rine SAND, moist.
P. aring terminated at 41 feet.
C round water observed at 25 feet.
E nvironmental sample, B -234-C, collected from samples S-1
8 rough S-8.
F eriodic gas monitoring near borehole showed no detections
ccarbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas in
ti a air at the time of exploration.
S-11 12-17-26
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnit;al report.
NOTE: This log of sut surface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
10
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30° drop)
♦ Blows per foot
20
30
40
w
50
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1---0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
40
— 45
— 50
— 55
— 60
— 65
— 70
—75
100
80
Erli BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSC.ENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-234
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A-35
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11129/07
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Grilling, Inc.
DRILLINGMETHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Acker limited access rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 240 3 feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Pian, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 3/5/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 3/5/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
O.
O
0—
5-
10 —
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
40 —
ML
SM
Loose, dark brown, sandy SILT, with organics, moist. Glass -
2% by volume.
(BURN FILL)
Medium dense, dark brown, silty SAND, with gravel, moist.
Some organics. Trace glass.
Medium dense, olive gray, silty SAND, with gravel, moist.
1 -inch thick organics layer at 8.25 feel,
SM
Dense, light yellowish brown, silty fine SAND, with gravel,
moist.
(ICE -CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Driller indicates hard drilling at 6.6 feel.
\Veru dense, brownish -ray, silty GRAVEL, with sand, moist.
r
Boring terminated at 10.5 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Gas monitor showed no detections of carbon monoxide,
hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas during exploration.
No environmental sample collected due to insufficient sampte
volume.
w
UEL 2
111
ao
F Z r c
ur w to
Z o
a �
® S-1 2-3-6
® S-2 3-7-10
M S-3 2-7-7 GS
pH
S-4 11-16-15 GS
® S-5 50/5"
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
` NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
cc
cc
cc
C9
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
UNBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCESINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO : 2003-008
BORING:
B-235
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-36
BORING 2003008. GPJ 11/20/07
/DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: follow -Stem Auger, Acker hand -portable dg
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATIOII: 243 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 3/5/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 3/5/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
a�
w
o�
0
5-
10 —
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
35 —
40 —
0
m
2
>-
m
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
w
0
w
a
•
SM
L rose. dark brown, silty SAND, moist. Some gravel and
o ganics. Glass - 3% by volume.
(BURN FILL)
D snse, reddish -brown, silty SAND, with gravel, moist. Trace
a genies.
D ansa to very dense, gray, brown and black, silty SAND with
gi avel, moist. Some refuse: glass - 5% by volume, organics -
5' ,o, other refuse - 5%.
�%
n
21
al
o �'
° €.
)o 0
oO (
GP
Vary dense, gray, sandy GRAVEL, with silt, moist. Some rust
11' attiing.
(ICE -CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
B wring location moved 10 Leel to east and 6 feet tower in
el svafion due to excessive angle of auger caused by
.01 ,struction. Resumed drilling.
H 1rd, brownish -gray, gravelly SILT, with sand, moist. Some
;1st mottling.
ML
B• e1ng terminated at 14 feet.
N ) ground water observed at time of exploration.
G is monitor showed a defection of carbon monoxide of 11
pt in (due to exhaust from the drill rig), and no detections of
h1 drogen sulfide or combustible gas during exploration.
N a environmental sample collected due to insufficient sample
vc lume.
SAMPLE NUMBER
OTHER TESTS
S-1 1-2-14
S-2 21-50/3
S-3 9-30-29 GS
pH
S-4 29-50/6
S-5 4-5-8 GS
S-6 2-15-24
S-7 50/5
For a prop( r understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnicAl report.
NOTE: This log of subs rrface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore r way not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
10 20
30 40
50
A
0
•♦
A
—5
— 10
15
—20
25
— 30
— 35
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
40
BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
HWAGEOSCIIiNCE$INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
800ING 2003008.GPJ 6/27/18
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-236
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-37
/DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Acker limited access rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 257 ± feel
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2A
DATE STARTED: 3!0/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 3/6/2007
LOGGED BY: P. Pearson
115
CL ww
o�
0
O
2
w
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
5-
10
SM
Loose, brownish -gray, silty SAND, with gravel, moist. Some
organics.
IBURN FILL)
Loose, brownish -gray, silty SAND, with gravel, moist.
Organics and wood debris - 25% by volume. Trace brick
fragments.
Medium dense, brown, silty SAND, with gravel, moist. Trace
organics and charred organics.
Medium dense, olive brown, rust -mottled, silty SAND with
gravel, moist. Organics - 5% by volume.
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
35
40 —
SM
r` GP
Very dense, light brownish -gray, silty SAND, with gravel,
moist.
(ICE -CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Very dense, light brownish -gray, silty GRAVEL, with sand,
\moist.
Boring terminated et 13.5 feet.
No ground water observed at time of exploration.
Gas monitor showed a detection of carbon monoxide of 41
ppm (likely due to exhaust from the drill rig), and no
detections of hydrogen sulfide or combustible gas during
exploration.
No environmental sample collected due 10 insufficient sample
volume.
o: w
Z
a � N�
N
J J CC
w m
zs
as
IXS-1 2-2-4
® S-2 2-4-2
® S-3 8-14-19
S-4 3-7-7 pH
S-5 7-20-32 GS
® 9-6 50-30-41
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations,
GROUNI)WA1I
0
—A
10
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
A Blows per foot
20
30
40
O
50
0
,A
A
•
A
A
•
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-41---1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
eal BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
' TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEoSCmas INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-237
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
l
A-38
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11/2&07
EXCAVATING EQUIPMENT: Hitachi 330 Trackhoe
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber & P. Pearson
SURFACE ELEVATION:
(lad) H1d30
SKETCH OF NORTH SIDE OF PIT
0
w
coU
2
co
� o
0
0
1i31VMONf10130
S1S31 83H1O
(%)1N31NO0
3Mf11siOIN
0
)
0
0
H38141f1N 31d1A1VS th
y
3dAl 31d W VS
DESCRIPTION
!,SV1O IIOS SOSf
10SAVS
V1
D!.
CD
Ua
N
tE
7 CI
opo
m
O O -
m 0)_
`o o c
O.0 CO
mt
CO co i.-
rE L U
0 a _c
o m m
m
w 13 OC C m N
D 0
3 0 V �w o
a
m C m
t
-m
N C t N o
p 7mm yooma
O) C
3
U vi L m C c9 O
N L
0 mw O C
m
a 112
..5.-i
O m
r 0 2. ma
O O) C m m
a U m Q O
)nt ( 3u) 5
tsii m �0.,>
N E N C U -
C c0 f6
O C O N U
V O -
o— > m m CO m
co c -0 C m L
a
W O 7 m m 0
m'0 CD C O U
mO )- fls.'O
F -2-o'2 m� C
C .-
LL (Li) V C
tii
i-
0
z
CD
Scattered lumber debris at 15.5 feet.
2
fn
0)
(lid) H1d30 0
) ) )
J
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
o
O
9
co
O
O
fV
PROJECT N
TPIT20 2003008.GPJ 5114107
DATE COMPLETED: 2121/07
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber & P. Pearson
0
O
76C1) ~ u.
ca
C
3
U R C
2
1-
z
w
a 0
7 Q
W
z
Z W
>0 OL
a
X) CO
u
EXCAVATION COMPANY:
Oaab) H1d30 o
SKETCH OF EAST SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feat)
0
N
0
2131VMONf O}!O
S1S31
2:131-1O
(%)1N31NO3
3anlsIow
10
1n
N
1
N38WnN 31dWVS N J)
3dA131drYVS Q Q Q
DESCRIPTION
-ssV1O 110S sosn
108WAS
e
m'O
• m
o
m V
W
01 U
rn
•
y a C
co C
10=0))
> , C
m
N
c)3
O
U Q
E
' 0 1)
m Z 0
Ern CO
2
(0
0
J • E
(A
a.
co .
o O)
m
O m
c 3
V
O
y 7 N
.11 m 0
11)
E
O
6 "O-
0
0 Q
0 al
3 m
0
O
>•..
m
J .m
a2
cO
2
Wel) 141d30 0
1 1 1
1 i I 1 1 1 1 1 1
o In 0
N
0a
C
7m
0�0
m
m
�o.
0)
o oCL CO
0LU
m
eta
-15
o�'m
C U.°
8_En 2 O
m m C 0
N p 0 0
.0 m.00
M • m• fC 0
$ O C
_°
O X cOi m
!clip m E
m a
co _c m
100 m O
C1
m 0
�o.0 >
C
C c
7 W 0
CO
88o—
m o) m
7 m • o cowo.c
O m C N
o. .3
OL O O
w
0
z
0
PAGE: 1 of 1
1-
U
LL
cr
W Z
u- O
Z (�
Z
(13L
Z
U3
W J
U
O
a1-
w
-J
0
CO
co
0
M
0
0
cV
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT20 2003008.GPJ 5/14/07
•
•
G
CII
r
•
IC
0
e
0
c
1
-
e
a
-
- /
1
N38WnN 31dWVS N J)
3dA131drYVS Q Q Q
DESCRIPTION
-ssV1O 110S sosn
108WAS
e
m'O
• m
o
m V
W
01 U
rn
•
y a C
co C
10=0))
> , C
m
N
c)3
O
U Q
E
' 0 1)
m Z 0
Ern CO
2
(0
0
J • E
(A
a.
co .
o O)
m
O m
c 3
V
O
y 7 N
.11 m 0
11)
E
O
6 "O-
0
0 Q
0 al
3 m
0
O
>•..
m
J .m
a2
cO
2
Wel) 141d30 0
1 1 1
1 i I 1 1 1 1 1 1
o In 0
N
0a
C
7m
0�0
m
m
�o.
0)
o oCL CO
0LU
m
eta
-15
o�'m
C U.°
8_En 2 O
m m C 0
N p 0 0
.0 m.00
M • m• fC 0
$ O C
_°
O X cOi m
!clip m E
m a
co _c m
100 m O
C1
m 0
�o.0 >
C
C c
7 W 0
CO
88o—
m o) m
7 m • o cowo.c
O m C N
o. .3
OL O O
w
0
z
0
PAGE: 1 of 1
1-
U
LL
cr
W Z
u- O
Z (�
Z
(13L
Z
U3
W J
U
O
a1-
w
-J
0
CO
co
0
M
0
0
cV
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT20 2003008.GPJ 5/14/07
N
0.
v t.
K
w ty
.6
w
co w
m F
y w
0.
0
0
w
1-
LOCATION:
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber & P. Pearson
(laa)) Hid3a a
SKETCH OF NORTH SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet)
0
0
0
1:131VM0Nnoao
SJS31 13H10
(%) J.N31NO3
3aniSi0%
8381AIfN 31dWVS
3du 31dIWS
DESCRIPTION
N.
0
N
OCo
z
} Z
Z
0. a 0
• 5
U • w > "SK10 110S SOSn
z 0
O z
w 108WAS
Q
X X D
w w to
0
0
N
to
O
to
O
to
Loose, brown, silly, fine to coarse gravelly, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Broken glass, 5% by volume.
(BURN FILL)
Medium dense, variegated brown, light brown,
reddish -brown, and dark gray, silty, gravelly, fine to
medium SAND, moist. 5 to 15% non-compressible refuse
by volume: glass, china, steel.
At approx. 6 feet becomes dark gray.
in
co
iI
.
' ,
/ L, \
.
r
•
to
O
to
O
to
Loose, brown, silly, fine to coarse gravelly, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Broken glass, 5% by volume.
(BURN FILL)
Medium dense, variegated brown, light brown,
reddish -brown, and dark gray, silty, gravelly, fine to
medium SAND, moist. 5 to 15% non-compressible refuse
by volume: glass, china, steel.
At approx. 6 feet becomes dark gray.
in
co
1
I i
I
i
l
i
I
)
i
t
f i
(laal) H1d30 0
o co
nm
o.0 0
Cwm
0
.
corn...
`0 0 '_
ca. ym
cot m
mI- �
m
t •E U
M 0. C
O m
7:3-
m 7::::
=
.0
.3 C
L 'O• O• -tp O O
O N C 9
t1 m O C
_ " tp
-I-
o
000E'
co
N m
3 Z7
= C m m
`-' m U t_
m m rcp L QO
w �'co O
▪ d O C m
CD
rnilcooi
.i.::-,
m
� C «.m C U f0V• mCc 3Qiamtp m• azamtm.�rnp OjaT"' O j rn mm0 yfl. tm m0-NmYUOOC mN W O -_ O. 0 0
F-- Z2 co m I c
O 0 .-
LL N U C
w
F-
0
Z
I
0
1—
co co
W
00 ▪ ~
0
J
PAGE: 1 of 1
>-
_!
U
IL
L.Lw Z
< C9
(L'Z
H -7--
0
0 co
Z <
U) Q
� J
• Y
CL.
J
0
m
a
CO
0
O
0
0
N
PROJECT NO
ul
0
0
N
DATE COMPLETED: 2/21/07
EXCAVATION COMPANY:
1-
Z
W
n O
0 <
w w
Z 11
Q
U j• CO
(Pal) H1d30
SKETCH OF WEST SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL D$STANCE (feet)
h
N
0
b
O
a3.LYMONnoao
SIS31 a3H1O
(%)
Sar 1StOV
a38WnN 31dWVS
3d1.131dINVS
Z
0
17-
0 0
co
O w
'SSV10 1IOS SOSn
108W.1S
0
0
N
0)
0
co
m
m
7
m
m
0
O
ID
c
y
>
F2 C0
0) E
dmf Q
Z
0<
cE E
E
0
m
C `0
O
U
dl
a m
0f
N
-o
O O
0 73• m
o?±
m
3(co)
0
.0 ...
Y O
•0
dmJ z
Z
v COa
EErcTiC
G
rn
E
m
W
c
• m
N 0
0)o
m 2
m
8 '0
o m
rn
m • o
m
0 l`
0, a
0 c.0
c •
•0'0
EE
•0 F
m J
m
m
CU
b
me
5
0
• e0
C N
La
J m
N m
m
v
mto
a
2 0
0)E
J
.7;5. —▪ I
dT
0
>c
C
L6
«O m'p
Amo
iq .—cc 0
a2
v0Ln
J
co
2 t
UT
0 co
E
z
g o
` • m
O OL
co • CO
to N m t CO
O�
0).0
o mm
io
0C • c
U 9
C 0
O O U
m .o 0
3 OAC o
m viw02
c,CD
•- • y w O
tn ' 0 m
m Or
O m x O 0
m`n D 00
m
-o m m C �
m o m r•- 0.
:? E0. 0cmo
N m 0 j
m w m o c CO m
-0 O • C O TU
mce•'0
E 012 - mD
Lc00 �c°oa
Nm c0 L0
TA C OL O
a)•-•-•
11)
F =� 0 as c
Li -
g 0
LL tll U C
w
0
z
Gaal) H1d30 0
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 s
1q 0 0)0
11
N
PAGE: 1 of 1
>-
u_ u_
Z
u' O
Z
C =
O v7
Z
C
J
o
cca
111 ~
J
0
CO
CeD
V
FZ
N
Q
W
Q
3
0
L
CO
0
0
M
0
0
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT25 2003008.GPJ 5114107
ti
. tlik
•,
n
,.....,
n
N
r-1
0
...
Q
Al
>
�I
.
i
0)
0
co
m
m
7
m
m
0
O
ID
c
y
>
F2 C0
0) E
dmf Q
Z
0<
cE E
E
0
m
C `0
O
U
dl
a m
0f
N
-o
O O
0 73• m
o?±
m
3(co)
0
.0 ...
Y O
•0
dmJ z
Z
v COa
EErcTiC
G
rn
E
m
W
c
• m
N 0
0)o
m 2
m
8 '0
o m
rn
m • o
m
0 l`
0, a
0 c.0
c •
•0'0
EE
•0 F
m J
m
m
CU
b
me
5
0
• e0
C N
La
J m
N m
m
v
mto
a
2 0
0)E
J
.7;5. —▪ I
dT
0
>c
C
L6
«O m'p
Amo
iq .—cc 0
a2
v0Ln
J
co
2 t
UT
0 co
E
z
g o
` • m
O OL
co • CO
to N m t CO
O�
0).0
o mm
io
0C • c
U 9
C 0
O O U
m .o 0
3 OAC o
m viw02
c,CD
•- • y w O
tn ' 0 m
m Or
O m x O 0
m`n D 00
m
-o m m C �
m o m r•- 0.
:? E0. 0cmo
N m 0 j
m w m o c CO m
-0 O • C O TU
mce•'0
E 012 - mD
Lc00 �c°oa
Nm c0 L0
TA C OL O
a)•-•-•
11)
F =� 0 as c
Li -
g 0
LL tll U C
w
0
z
Gaal) H1d30 0
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 s
1q 0 0)0
11
N
PAGE: 1 of 1
>-
u_ u_
Z
u' O
Z
C =
O v7
Z
C
J
o
cca
111 ~
J
0
CO
CeD
V
FZ
N
Q
W
Q
3
0
L
CO
0
0
M
0
0
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT25 2003008.GPJ 5114107
r
DATE COMPLETED:
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber & P. Pearson
SURFACE ELEVATION:
(3�3) H1d3O o
J L
SKETCH OF EAST SIDE OF PIT
a31VM0NnONO
S1S31 a3H1O
(%)1N31NOO
af 1SIOW
a38WnN 31dWVS
3dA131dWVS
DESCRIPTION
'!;SviZ 11OS SOSn
1O8WAS
Gaal) H1d30
D
N
t7 N v
0) co CD
O OC>
CD
0 'c
Dm
os o
n. trim
°`ot
m rn
ooc
d c O
mco L 0
w •E 0
0) Oa C
ca)
to
m co
O c 0 c
U co- O
U m c O
co O O 2
'c 0 Vc co C 6.
.2
yXa+c r 0• 0::
j« C�N m CO 0
O X
m
O
✓ C -'- m
m F-0 .
Q O
O 3 m 0
o c m o
▪ c • rn°�>
m C U«
m C O O
✓ nSi 0.
c -G:
O c O
1,m ` C
S. N N m
Q1A
"E 3 v -,56.2:,
Q w Q O m C%
m - O O QD. CDm
1- 11 cazoc
. 0 C «
O_C 0 0
U. a) Cl C
W
1-
0
Z
Loose, dark brown, silty, fine to coarse gravelly, fine to medium
...SAND, moist. •
(TQP$QI(..1 FILL) •
Medium dense, brown and reddish brown with lenses of dark gray,
silty, fine gravelly, fine to medium SAND, moist. With 10-20% refuse,
by volume, non-compressible: Glass (with some intact bottles), steel,
burn slag, brick, ceramic, wire, burnt wood. 4 -oz. glass Jar with
congealed white substance. White fiberglass(?) fibers around steel
tank.
(BURN FILL)
2f
1n
co
r
i
1
i
i
1
1
r
f
it
J
M
Q
a
L O
/ r LL
E
1-
W
1
I— ^ co
O ' - < o
a
o O
1 Q
J N
PROJECT NO.:
TP1115 2003008.GPJ 5/14/07
CV
m
L
a
0
o
�a "
0
0
z
0
Q
O
DATE COMPLETED:
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber & P. Pearson
EXCAVATING EQUIPMENT:
SURFACE ELEVATION:
(l1) 1-1d30 o
SKETCH OF EAST SIDE OF PIT
N
N
0
1131VMONnoao
SJS31 a3H1O
(%)1N31NO0
3aruSI0W
a381,4fN 31dWVS
3dA131dWVS
DESCRIPTION
'SSY1O -nos sOsn
108 WAS
0
N
T
J)
O
O
DIS
0
J)
O
Loose, dark brown, slightly silty, slightly gravelly, fine to
'•, medium SAND, moist. Scattered roots.•
(TOPSOIL) •
Medium dense, olive brown, silty, fine to coarse gravelly,
fine to medium SAND, moist. Scattered glass, <1% by
volume.
(FILL)
1 Medlum dense, rust -mottled gray and yellow brown, silty, 1'
tfine to coarse gravelly, fine to medium SAND, moist. I
1 )WEATHERED DRIFT)_ I
Dense, olive brown, silty, fine to medlum SAND, moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
At approx. 13 feet becomes clean, wet.
CO
i
rf
4
•
0'
_t
O
9
-
r 1 e
e.
c
_
i u
i
r
f _
_ P
T
J)
O
O
DIS
0
J)
O
Loose, dark brown, slightly silty, slightly gravelly, fine to
'•, medium SAND, moist. Scattered roots.•
(TOPSOIL) •
Medium dense, olive brown, silty, fine to coarse gravelly,
fine to medium SAND, moist. Scattered glass, <1% by
volume.
(FILL)
1 Medlum dense, rust -mottled gray and yellow brown, silty, 1'
tfine to coarse gravelly, fine to medium SAND, moist. I
1 )WEATHERED DRIFT)_ I
Dense, olive brown, silty, fine to medlum SAND, moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
At approx. 13 feet becomes clean, wet.
CO
(/)
D
al
t E
O O
0.00
3
Q)
o ▪ O.c
2 ca
O O C
a,,, a)
mL o
(0
1C. -0 U
o m
• •o cW O o c
O U 0 C 0
O
T
o vi• m NO
• -1:1t 0 c
y _ o c
W
>‚O ow— 0
a) .- m
is mm°E
E 3 maw
'xm `
o c - = a)
a3 y U L
0a r--ao
CDR c w
_ O C a7
C U -
U V -O C TO. W
RS 63 C 7 O
�-O 7 u) 0 Q C
C W , U N CO
• C O c = m
mQio� '0a
-53• `m mayai
a.= N U Oam C iiii
0 0 a)
..Za
-co
�.pe
▪ O C...
U -fes/ U C
di
1-
0 0
Z
(iea)
141d30 0
0
1 I I 1 1 1 1
0
N
a
N
1-
0
v/
w
I.L
0
0
J
PAGE: 1 of 1
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
w
0
0
O
0
(V
PROJECT NO
TPIT25 2003008.OPJ 5114/07
0
LL
0.
0
J
X o
X
W N
CO
LOCATION:
DATE COMPLETED:
0
r
1,5CO 0 W
g
O C
O
O w
C S
Z
2 Z
a O
0 <
W W
Z w
a a
X X 44 -re
w W CO
TION COMPANY:
acral) H1d30
O
N
SKETCH OF SOUTH SIDE OF PIT
W
0
CO
▪ o
-J
1-
Z
0
N
re
0
b
0
1:131VVMON110dO
SiS312i3H10
(%)1N3INO0
3anisiow
a38WfN 31dIWS
3dA131dNMS
DESCRIPTION
sono -nos sOsn
108WAS
0
0
0
ql
co
4)
O
d)0 o-
0
f%▪ )
O
Loose, yellow brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
(FILL)
Medium dense, reddish brown, slightly gravelly, silty, fine
to medium SAND with refuse, moist.
10 to 30% refuse by volume: steel (including wire and
metal straps) glass, ceramics, asphalt chunks; minor
plastic. Abundant burnt wood.
(FILL with REFUSE)
Becomes blackish -gray.
Becomes wet below 6 feet.
Strong creosote -like odor downwind from pit, when digging
from approximately 7 to 11 feet below ground surface.
Very dense, olive gray, slightly silty, fine to coarse
gravelly, fine to medium SAND, moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
ca ca
ca co
0
t
J'
i
r
to
•
P
e
a
1
v
s
if
0
o
o • a
1
o
.. D
ql
co
4)
O
d)0 o-
0
f%▪ )
O
Loose, yellow brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
(FILL)
Medium dense, reddish brown, slightly gravelly, silty, fine
to medium SAND with refuse, moist.
10 to 30% refuse by volume: steel (including wire and
metal straps) glass, ceramics, asphalt chunks; minor
plastic. Abundant burnt wood.
(FILL with REFUSE)
Becomes blackish -gray.
Becomes wet below 6 feet.
Strong creosote -like odor downwind from pit, when digging
from approximately 7 to 11 feet below ground surface.
Very dense, olive gray, slightly silty, fine to coarse
gravelly, fine to medium SAND, moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
ca ca
ca co
1 1 1 1 1 1 I) 1 1
1
i
1
Wel} HId3C1 0
0
0
.
11 w_m
w
m m
a ;)
•0 3
O
=
1=
0
0 0) 0)
C
0-L i
N ` 0
Jaz
)
1
0
N
m T
U (p
Wt E
Dm
o00
• m
oc
7 0)
O oc
C. 0 CO
• L •0
N~ m
f9
co • C
o mm
rt, to
C C m C
.0 .00
6-)Z500
.0 m .0 O
• O)C
V)m0)O
0 .cC •0
O C
0 03
t6
0
m X O m
m E
U
mL m 0)
• 3 • CO
• m
C 1-30)
• C [0 m
m�-0
0 6-
m 0 m
v5 ma
j 0 O T
m 0 c
O� C
fl0U
m
O0 U C
O.0 O O
LL m U C
w
0
z
H
0
W
H ^I
0 .
0
0
0
J
PAGE: 1 of 1
>-
1—
u_
-
1
W z
0�
co
Z
• Z
O coZ
W
o �
0-
1—
s H
BOW LAKE
0
LL
Co
0
co
0
0
CV
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT20 2003008.GPJ 5115/07
N
a
a 0
W N
4i N
m
W
m J
0
0 0
< w
8 O -H
(EXCAVATION COMPANY: King County SWD
EXCAVATING EQUIPMENT: Hitachi 330 Trackhoe
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber 8 P. Pearson
coco
N
SURFACE ELEVATION:
(3eeJ) Hid30 o
SKETCH OF SW SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet)
O
a
O
L0
0
2131W ONno8D
S1S312I3H10
(W1N31No3
38111_9101N
2i3e1AInN 31dwvs
3dh13ldWVS
DESCRIPTION
SSVi13-IOS s3sn
102 N) S
LC)
0
0
N
y
O
0 W Eo t
O m
o O
7
o r4 CO— m
L'o�c
os
0
O. co CO
CO W 0) L m
V .; n C
O 8
•
omm
o.m
C m
m Q C m C
L V V O
nj U m C 07
O yy
C > ca:
p O
V m m m O
.0 W 7 « „
O., o 0 O • m
= m O X U gl
O m am -0
0)i
m a0 r- ao
0 3 y ,-
m, • o
Ti .0o� U "O C c0 sq
m ▪ 3 of co c cm,
c0 -0C co `7 8 O c
C.,j LS 0) o O)
m cm V O a j -0 15...?`
00 co Q•=
ns23g o.myco
82 MO V 2'0 CO
w m ? n$ O D-17 -52 m
H0. o.oZ w o--0 C
OL pCO
LL co U C
w
I-
0
z
Loose to medium dense, olive brown, slightly silty,
gravelly, fine to medium SAND, moist. Lens of crushed
rock and asphalt/concrete debris at east end of pit.
(FILL)
Medium dense, dark brown and dark gray, silty, gravelly,
fine to medium SAND, moist. With trace glass, metal, and
clinker.
(FILL with REFUSE / BURN FILL)
Medium dense grading to dense, yellow brown grading to
olive brown, slightly gravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist.
With bed of reddish brown burn fill.
Strong odor of diesel/ gasoline noted from spoils.
•
N
v)
N
•
0
}il
•
.
.
..
I'
..
•
- 0
9
..
y
O
0 W Eo t
O m
o O
7
o r4 CO— m
L'o�c
os
0
O. co CO
CO W 0) L m
V .; n C
O 8
•
omm
o.m
C m
m Q C m C
L V V O
nj U m C 07
O yy
C > ca:
p O
V m m m O
.0 W 7 « „
O., o 0 O • m
= m O X U gl
O m am -0
0)i
m a0 r- ao
0 3 y ,-
m, • o
Ti .0o� U "O C c0 sq
m ▪ 3 of co c cm,
c0 -0C co `7 8 O c
C.,j LS 0) o O)
m cm V O a j -0 15...?`
00 co Q•=
ns23g o.myco
82 MO V 2'0 CO
w m ? n$ O D-17 -52 m
H0. o.oZ w o--0 C
OL pCO
LL co U C
w
I-
0
z
Loose to medium dense, olive brown, slightly silty,
gravelly, fine to medium SAND, moist. Lens of crushed
rock and asphalt/concrete debris at east end of pit.
(FILL)
Medium dense, dark brown and dark gray, silty, gravelly,
fine to medium SAND, moist. With trace glass, metal, and
clinker.
(FILL with REFUSE / BURN FILL)
Medium dense grading to dense, yellow brown grading to
olive brown, slightly gravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist.
With bed of reddish brown burn fill.
Strong odor of diesel/ gasoline noted from spoils.
Very dense, olive brown, slightly silty, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Scattered gravel.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
N
v)
N
cou
(aaJ) H1d30 °
'
0
r (
1 ' ' E
0
N
1
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
PAGE: 1 of 1
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
O
O
M
0
0
N
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT20 2003008.GPJ 5115107
N
LL
C
a
LOCATION: See Site & Explore
DATE COMPLETED: 2123!07
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber & P. Pearson
co
0
0
s
ID0
V
SS �
� o
e7
c c7
J
0
03
=CY
m
F
r Z
Z
a 4
U w
o z
a a
X X
LU w
SURFACE ELEVATION:
Gaal) H1d30 0 �,
I
SKETCH OF EAST SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet)
0
831VMON1101:1O
S1S3183H1O
(%)1N31NOO
3anlsIow
2i38wnN 31d1a1VS
3dA131dwVS
DESCRIPTION
>SV10 mos sOsn
1091NAS
O
U Na
y
c.9t E
7 0
0) 0 o
v N C Vl m
r 0 OL
`ooc
ca
N t7 x h
(1) p) W i- 0
t C0
o -o
. 0. C
_O m O
(O
L V
C— N
O o _c_.:: o
c
> OCD cWi
0 :0
x
m CO 0 CO 0
A L C a
O) 0)
7X O
U m 0 ,C10:.
'0 ®— rC
m Dm
Lm m C tiU
Lm
. CO0 OL Q_
0 �— yO
0)
0 m Dor
Q C 0
N N 0 j f6 V
N .- CO C >,32
0
ma) O0O—
E3 m m m
E -O
4 2 (O
co0
N 0 E.0LO U
co 0 o ID
7-, O)
I— ZZ c6=moo
LL. 0) o C
Loose, brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist.
•
(FILL) •
1Medium dense, grayish brown, silty, fine gravelly, fine to
medium SAND, moist.
. Medium dense, yellow brown, slightly silty, fine to medium
SAND, moist.
(WEATHERED DRIFT)•
Dense, gray, clean, fine to medium SAND with lenses of
silty sand, moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
2
cn
CL
CO Cf)
a
CO
(laal) H1d30
(0
0
I � I i 1 1 I
0) o
w
1-
0
Z
1
>-
1-
J
U
IL
w
LL
v7
z
1-
Z
,0,^7
vJ
w
U
0
0
w
J
0
m
PAGE: 1 of 1
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.:
TP1120 2003008.GPJ 5/15107
N
0
k
in
LOCATION:
DATE COMPLETED: 2/23/07
EXCAVATING EQUIPMENT: Hitachi 330 Trackhoe
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber & P. Pearson
SURFACE ELEVATION:
(la ) H1d30
SKETCH OF EAST SIDE OF PIT
N
1)
831WMON1102:19
S1S312i3H10
(%) 11431N00
3afu.SIOw
1138Wf1N 31dWVS
3d).1. 31dWVS
DESCRIPTION
'ssvlo llos sosn
108IN S
0
11)
0
N
In
N
f
Dense to very dense, gray, clean, fine to medium SAND,
moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
.O
tI
.
•.V•♦•♦♦V1 P••••reAre•
1 •g7 h�
5,p !
.
3
:-"/
Qt`�
f
9
.
0
N P)
• (
0 0
O
O
Loose, dark brown, organic, silty SAND, moist.
(TOPSOIL)
Loose, olive brown, gravelly, slightly silty, fine to medium
. SAND, moist. •
•
(FILL)
Medium dense, brownish gray and dark gray, silty, fine to
coarse gravelly, fine to medium SAND with scattered
refuse, moist.
Refuse 5 to 10% by volume: Glass, metal, some plastic.
(FILL with REFUSE)
Medium dense, gray, silty, fine to coarse gravelly, fine to
medium SAND moist.
Loose REFUSE: By volume approx. 40 to 60% paper,
cardboard; 25% glass bottles; 20% tin cans; <5% plastic
bags.
(REFUSE)
Loose to medium dense, gray, silty, fine to medium
SAND, moist, with 50% Refuse, in proportions as above.
(FILL with REFUSE)
� I
Dense to very dense, gray, clean, fine to medium SAND,
moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
N V
•.V•♦•♦♦V1 P••••reAre•
••••r•••
rrrr •
Haab) H1d30 0
1 i f El
1.0
I I
0
0
N
oa
tE
1-
[T_
CO O
L1.1
0
0 1—
0
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
PAGE: 1 of 1
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
U
z
V
W
V
vi
1:14.5
W
K
7
0
PROJECT NO.:
TP11-25 200300&GPJ 5/14/07
LL
B. Thurber & P. Pearson
LOGGED BY:
EXCAVATION COMPANY:
1-
z
a_ 0
a O
0 F
W
O J
Z1= LL1
> <
LL
X U)
W fq
(l�J) H1d3Q o )n
N
SKETCH OF NORTH SIDE OF PIT
N
z
z
1-
o0
O 0
0
N
O
a31VMQNflO2i0
SIS31 a3141.0
(%)1N31NOO
32iflLSIONI
21391LNf1N 31dNVS
3dA131d111VS
DESCRIPTION
SV -lo 1105 sosn
108INAS
(lk) Hid 30
10
0
N
10
N
O
p)
1n
O
O
(1)
Loose, dark brown, silty, gravelly, fine to medlum SAND,
moist. With 10% refuse: glass and metal. •
(TOPSOIL / BURN FILL) .•
Medium dense, reddish brown, silty, fine to coarse
gravelly, fine to medium SAND, molst. Refuse 10 to 15%
by volume: Glass, metal, ceramics (including electrical
Insulators), brick.
(BURN FILL)
Interbedded gray, silty SAND, moist, and black REFUSE
(approx. 50% by volume): Plastic bags, glass and plastic
bottles, partly decomposed lumber, paper. Petroluem
odor from test pit when in refuse. Decomposable refuse
2% or less, by volume.
(FILL with REFUSE)
Dense, gray, clean to slightly silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
1 1 1 1
) 1 L 1 1 1
i
. 1- '
a
♦•••• •���•• ••••.s•••
•���•
4���4��•�••����•
O
p)
1n
O
O
(1)
Loose, dark brown, silty, gravelly, fine to medlum SAND,
moist. With 10% refuse: glass and metal. •
(TOPSOIL / BURN FILL) .•
Medium dense, reddish brown, silty, fine to coarse
gravelly, fine to medium SAND, molst. Refuse 10 to 15%
by volume: Glass, metal, ceramics (including electrical
Insulators), brick.
(BURN FILL)
Interbedded gray, silty SAND, moist, and black REFUSE
(approx. 50% by volume): Plastic bags, glass and plastic
bottles, partly decomposed lumber, paper. Petroluem
odor from test pit when in refuse. Decomposable refuse
2% or less, by volume.
(FILL with REFUSE)
Dense, gray, clean to slightly silty, fine to medium SAND,
moist.
(ADVANCE OUTWASH)
aa
a
♦•••• •���•• ••••.s•••
•���•
4���4��•�••����•
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i i i) l
1
1)) I 1 I
I
I l
11)
0
10
(N1
ra
CO
oho
0o ma
E
o`0E
o_ (13
_• c
}
ui ac
omm
o ▪ c m c
O U O
CD CO C W
N00 0
CID D 0
me
• m co O
C'O
O c
O x V 0
m O O E
O om+
CL 4. U)
mL ��
Qo
3 o
• m
0).2 L j
C U.
'C C Q CO
10 C D
A_8o-
m N 1p
v5 ma
j W Q T
` m N
m
O m o. O
Doc
av"m
. c
▪ O c.
u_ f• 8 C
W
F
0
Z
PAGE: 1 of 2
>-
✓
J
U
LL
W Z
W O
�1-
Z
Z_
-
C9 0)
Z
wJ
0
W
J
0
rn
0
u.
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT25 2003008.GPJ 5!14107
LOCATION: See S
EXCAVATION COMPANY: King County SWD
DATE COMPLETED: 2/23/07
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber 8 P. Pearson
U
H d
0�
U
x
r
z
w
a 0
a >
(7 J
Z W
>
0 K
X co
(laal) H1d30 N C) M
l t 1 I ! 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 t t
SKETCH OF NORTH SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feel)
0
w
b
2131bMONflO8O
S1S31213H1O
(%)IN3INOO
321l1SIOIN
2138WfN 3ldLI S v�
3d l! 3ldWHS 0
DESCRIPTION
SSV131103 SOSfl
1O9 AS
(1a•V Hld3a
ted at 26 feet (uphill side).
E
H z z
0
O
to
m
X
m
rn
0
2
m
0 0
m
O
m
m
m
m
i 1 I I I I i 1 1 11 I 11 I I 11
O
10 O ti) 0
c) c) v v u)
U T
m
cm
o-
m
O 0 L
`o5 co -0
oc
,,
10 m
m F
(0
Cc
aem
To m
C 0 m c
C
U�
m00�
0 • C O
0)mmO
o m
T,
mm• v
m
oE
76 _23 mm
c 'r o D
s.0 no
-§
0
m
a)0L j
c U.
occom
U
fC -CCU
5. UO C
m 0) 0
'O C a) .o
2 n1
• m m CO
m w w
m 5V. c
0p
LL u5 UC
W
1-
0
z
LLL
vJ r�
a
Lt H
0
0
0
J
PAGE: 2 of 2
>-
.1—
cc .f—
cc
Z
1-1-0
Z
Z
/-
0 0)
Z
UJ J
X11.
1.11
J
0
CO
0
0
M
0
0
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT25 2003008.GPJ 5/14/07
.APPENDIX B
LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
Representative soil samples obtained from the boreholes and test pits were returned to HWA's
laborator✓ for further examination and testing. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil
samples to characterize relevant engineering properties of the on-site materials. The laboratory
testing program was performed in general accordance with appropriate ASTM Standards as
outlined below.
MOISTURE CONTENT (BY MASS): The moisture contents of selected soil samples were
determirn:d in general accordance with ASTM D 2216. The results are shown at the sampled
intervals 3n the appropriate summary logs in Appendix A.
LIQUID I .IMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT, AND PLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS (ATTERBERG LIMITS):
Selected .samples were tested using method ASTM D 4318, multi -point method. The results are
reported on the attached Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index reports, Figures B-1
through 1;-2.
PARTICL EI SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS: Selected samples were tested to determine the particle
distribution of material in general accordance with ASTM D422. The results are summarized on
the attached Grain Size Distribution reports, Figures B-3 through B-20, which also provide
informati 3n regarding the classification of the sample and the moisture content at the time of
testing.
2003-008 FR.•loc B-1 HWA GEOSCIJ NOES INC.
CORROSION POTENTIAL: An indication of corrosion potential of typical soils along the two force
main alignments was evaluated by measuring the pH and resistivity of a number of samples using
method WSDOT 417. The indicated pH and minimum resistivity of the samples are tabulated as
follows:
pH and Resistivity
Sample
Soil Type
pH
Minimum Resistivity
(ohm -cin)
i TP -7, S-4
Outwash
7.8
5,000
TP -8, S-2
Fill with Refuse
6.9
4,800
B-201, S-7
Outwash
6.2
27,000
B-203, S-6
Outwash
6.5
16,000
B-223, S-7
Fill with Refuse
5.6
2,500
B-225, S-6, 7
Fill with Refuse
6.8
2,200
B-226, S-4
Outwash
7.8
6,300
B-229, S-3
Fill with Refuse
7.6
1,600
B-235, S-3
Burn Fill
7.6
4,300
B-236, S-1, 2, 3
Burn Fill
7.7
3,500
B-237, S-4
Burn Fill
5.8
14,000
2003-0081R.doc
B-2
HWA GEOSCIENCES 1NC.
MOISTL RE CONTENT, ASH, AND ORGANIC MATTER: Selected samples were tested in general
accordance with method ASTM D 2974, using moisture content method 'A' (oven dried at
105°C) Ind ash content method 'C' (burned at 440°C). The test results are summarized below.
The rest Its are percent by weight of dry soil.
Moisture Content, Ash, and Organic Matter
S..mple
Soil Type
Moisture
Content (%)
Ash
Content
(%)
Organic Content
(%)
B-208, S-3
Refuse
21.1
5.3
5.3
B-239, S-4
Fill with Refuse
25.1
5.9
5.9
B-215, S-9
Burn Fill
18.5
8.3
8.35
B-223, S-4
Fill with Refuse
42.9
18.17
18.17
B-223, S-7
Fill with Refuse
19.9
3.70
3.70
B-225, S-5
Fill with Refuse
53.4
13.82
13.82
B-225, S-7
Fill with Refuse
14.2
2.53
2.53
B-2 27, S-3
Fill with Refuse
20.7
8.22
8.22
B-2 27, S-6
Refuse
55.2
40.0
40.0
B-2 28, S-3
Burn Fill
23.0
5.55
5.55
B-2 30, S-8
Burn Fill
14.3
3.60
3.60
B-2 33, S-5
Burn Fill
20.6
4.77
4.77
2003-008 I'R doe
B-3
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
00 0
'Ct M N
(Id) X3a11I A_LI3IISYld
0
T
0
o
0
0
CO
J
J
coo H
J
N
c
it
a_
a)
co
a)
I,
J
O
to
(0
'
N
CO
d
N
N
N
N
J
to
U
to
CO
0
0
U
N
N
N
CO
0
0
0
co
r
N
N
0
N
0
CLASSIFICATION
(CL) Olive gray, lean CLAY with sand
(ML) Dark olive gray, SILT with sand
(CL) Dark olive gray, lean CLAY with sand
(CL -ML) Olive gray, clayey SILT with sand
(CL) Olive gray, lean CLAY
(ML) Olive gray, SILT
DEPTH (ft)
O B-215 S-2 10.0 - 11.5
® B-216 S-3 15.0 - 16.5
B-217 S-3 15.0 - 16.5
O B-219 S-4 10.0 - 11.5
❑ B-220 S-5 15.0 - 16.5
A B-221 S-4 10.0 - 11.5
SAMPLE
SYMBOL
J
J
U
00 0
'Ct M N
(Id) X3a11I A_LI3IISYld
0
T
0
o
0
0
CO
J
J
coo H
J
N
c
it
a_
a)
co
a)
I,
J
O
to
(0
'
N
CO
d
N
N
N
N
J
to
O)
to
CO
0
_I
C)
N
N
N
CO
C)
0
co
r
N
N
N
N
0
CLASSIFICATION
(CL) Olive gray, lean CLAY with sand
(ML) Dark olive gray, SILT with sand
(CL) Dark olive gray, lean CLAY with sand
(CL -ML) Olive gray, clayey SILT with sand
(CL) Olive gray, lean CLAY
(ML) Olive gray, SILT
DEPTH (ft)
O B-215 S-2 10.0 - 11.5
® B-216 S-3 15.0 - 16.5
B-217 S-3 15.0 - 16.5
O B-219 S-4 10.0 - 11.5
❑ B-220 S-5 15.0 - 16.5
A B-221 S-4 10.0 - 11.5
SAMPLE
SYMBOL
o
Z pp
Q
_J
�—bco
cock 8
v- OO
X
W
[-
5z<
}o
f— O
UF_
J H W
aQ2
5 J
V
J
PROJECT MO.: 2003-008
HWAATTB 2003008.GPJ 11!29/07
0
0
0
4
c
J
0
0 0 0 0 0
4C) M N
(Id) XaaNI M JOIISVld
0
0
0
o
J
J
CO H
0
a
0
0
N
0
a)
c0
E
0)
a>
st
JO
d
N
`O
N.
0)
N
J
CO
Ib
CO
CO
N
N
J
N
N
N
Q
0
N
N
r
c
r
t7
CLASSIFICATION
(CL -ML) Gray, silty CLAY
(CL) Grayish brown, lean CLAY
(CL) Olive gray, lean CLAY
(ML) Dark olive gray, SILT
(CL -ML) Olive brown, silty CLAY
DEPTH (ft)
0
In
0
0)
0
T
In
M
4
.-
Q;
M
u9
I1)
In
an
O
I-
ti
N
N
0)
SAMPLE
v)
v
cp
co
th
fn
to
co
(I)
NN
(
v
v
N
N
N
N
=
CII
m
m
m
m
SYMBOL
0
®
41
0
❑
N
a _
O c
LCL( a
000
x�
w
�Z<
}o
I-—I—O
F_
• W
• w2
O a -
J
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
l
Q
U
1-
J
0
Z
Q
E
3
a)
2
G)
N
0
0
N
LL
4)
N
N
O
0
CD
t
C)
•
C) -
O
O
O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO OD T• CO O R M N
1HOI3M A8 2f3NH 1N3O2i3d
a
0
O
O
0
0
d
O
O
O
O
8
O
(16
O w
1-
wc
O G
J
-J
Z
w
_N
)
Z
o —
0
O
O
O
N
Co
a
L O O
r Otri
a
mo
CO
Lo to
CO 01 CO
m
O O
0 0
CO
N
J
a
J
J
0
2
N • N
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Brown, silty SAND
(SP -SM) Olive gray, poorly graded SAND with silt
(SM) Light brown, silty SAND with gravel
a
W
0
u0 (0 o
«i
N
0 0 0
o ui 0
✓ N
W
a
2
V t� V'
Cl) C/)
• N
O O 0
N N N
m m CO
J
0
m
}
O ® 1
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWkGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003006.GPJ 11/29/07
0
1-
-J
(7
—
J_
0
Z
co
m
iL
E
a)
C1
Co -
0 0
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
0
0
0
O_
0
1
O
N
N
•
O 00) (00 O (00 ( OV M N O 0
1HDI3M A8 d3NId 1N3M:13d
I0
0
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
U)
w
1-
w
2
J
Z
w
N
C
Z
Q
rr
0
cn
co
LL
N
co
(0 (0
O oo-
N
a
as
CO
00 N 10-
0) - 03
O o O
0 0 0
FS:
J
0
J
-J
U
2
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SP -SM) Gray, poorly graded SAND with silt
(SM) Olive gray, silty SAND
(SP -SM) Gray, poorly graded SAND with silt
4
a
w
0
w
J
0
O O N
• ch
N co co
O O O
N N N
m 0 m
-J
0
m
2
}
• ■ 4
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003000.GPJ 11/29/07
O
O
O
O)
O
co
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
M
1H013M A8 213NId 1N3Z2f3d
O
N
O
O
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
co
ii
O h M
0
N O N
C
M
co 0) v
u7 O O
0
me
0
o
0
N
0
0
J
J
0
2
Cr)
O
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Olive gray, silty SAND
(SP -SM) Gray, poorly graded SAND with silt
(SM) Brownish gray, silty SAND with gravel
u0 (0 o
M t0
d
W
0
W
J
a
CO
N (0
cr) cr)
v ,n
0 0 0
N (;•1 (;•1
m m m
0
m
2
›-
co
® ® e
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
0
O
0
0
0
in0
0
0
0
O
O
Lc>
0
O
O
- —0 -r--------.--'
--
—
O
IN
f.
)--
- o
0
O
O
O)
O
co
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
M
1H013M A8 213NId 1N3Z2f3d
O
N
O
O
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
co
ii
O h M
0
N O N
C
M
co 0) v
u7 O O
0
me
0
o
0
N
0
0
J
J
0
2
Cr)
O
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Olive gray, silty SAND
(SP -SM) Gray, poorly graded SAND with silt
(SM) Brownish gray, silty SAND with gravel
u0 (0 o
M t0
d
W
0
W
J
a
CO
N (0
cr) cr)
v ,n
0 0 0
N (;•1 (;•1
m m m
0
m
2
›-
co
® ® e
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
1-
-J 1—
J
w
U.
E
0
2
0
0 m
0
U
0
Li
0
cu0
0
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
O
O
0
0
n
0
----___--
MINIM
INN
—.—�.r—r�r�—r�1_—
��====== ��/=i=
rAll
11111 1
Mire """14����
0
0
0
O
0
0
O
0
CO_
_ (0
0
-'---,----_
O Q> CO • (0 ( C) N O O
1HJI3M A8 U3N1d 1N3Z2J3d
O
C e
V N O
N N (('0
c
U o1,0
CO CO 0
0) C N
o
m 0 co
o
a
J
a
J
J
0
2
0 r
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(GM) Olive gray, silty GRAVEL with sand
(SM) Brown, silty SAND
(ML) Gray, sandy SILT
H
a
0
w
o u, (0
(0 (0
0 0 0
Lci Lai
0
w
a
c0
(0 (0 cn
0LC) CO CO
0 0
CO CO LII
• ■ 1
V)
CD N
N
< 0
Q J ~
N 0 c4
(j)Q
Cj? u
JOO
_U H
}— W
CL 2
LL
>
J
U
u-
Lu • z
co O
• U'
0 <
Z
C
Ti
_
o
O
Q
W
J
0
co
uJ
0
co
0
c�3
0
0
N
PROJECT NO
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29107
0
Z
Q
a)
c
LL
E
0
2
a)
cu
0
U
a)
i
m
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
1D
• t
(4
0
0
O
0
O
0
0
n
co
O
t0
0
1H0I3M A8 213NIJ 1N3O1:13d
O
N
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
0
0
0
O
O
0
0
(D
c
co
LL
CO v
Cp c
07 N CD
O CO ▪ CO
0)
mo
O 0
0 0 0
a
J
a
- J
J
0
o v o
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SP -SM) Light yellowish brown, poorly graded SAND with silt
(SM) Gray, silty SAND
(SP -SM) Light yellowish brown, poorly graded SAND with silt
F
1-
d
W
0
ia (0
o O O
O O O
W
J
a
N M .
N N N
0 03 m
J
0
m
3-
}
03
• III .4
J
>-
H
J_
U
Q
L1..
W Z
Lt p
CO 0
Crt
C� <
Z
_
Y
W
O
ti
w
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003000.GPJ 11/29/07
---------
cc
6/
-
a
-
r
-
0
0
O
0
O
0
0
n
co
O
t0
0
1H0I3M A8 213NIJ 1N3O1:13d
O
N
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
0
0
0
O
O
0
0
(D
c
co
LL
CO v
Cp c
07 N CD
O CO ▪ CO
0)
mo
O 0
0 0 0
a
J
a
- J
J
0
o v o
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SP -SM) Light yellowish brown, poorly graded SAND with silt
(SM) Gray, silty SAND
(SP -SM) Light yellowish brown, poorly graded SAND with silt
F
1-
d
W
0
ia (0
o O O
O O O
W
J
a
N M .
N N N
0 03 m
J
0
m
3-
}
03
• III .4
J
>-
H
J_
U
Q
L1..
W Z
Lt p
CO 0
Crt
C� <
Z
_
Y
W
O
ti
w
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003000.GPJ 11/29/07
i
Q
J
U
_J
C
N
c
ii
E
a)
2
0
U
J
w
0
LL
co
co
cis
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
0
CO
0
0
0
��—
N
•
O
O
0f
O
CO
O
n
O
CD
O
O
O
C7
1HOI3M AEI b3NId IN30 13d
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
0
0
N
0
0
N
f
w
1-
w
2
J
J
Z
LIJ
_N
Z
Q
U
CO c 0
CO w M
c
CO 0
N
n n o
Co CO CV
Q W (0
0
c`'o in
c�
-J
O.
J
-J
0
6,
N
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Dark brown, silty SAND with gravel
(SM) Light yellowish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Olive brown, silty SAND with gravel
a
uJ
'n o u0
cd v m
0 O O
t0 O (0
W
J
a
co
m m n
N • N N
CO CO m
J
0
>
m
O ® 4
J
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
4
PROJECT N
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11129/07
1-
2 1--
2
a)
U
J
W
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
<)
k
041
0
O) CO N CO ( V (0 N O O
1H0I3M A8 H3NIA 1NJO�13d
0
0
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
•
0
O
O
0
0
Cn
CL'
W
1-
-J J
z
L1.1
N_
C
z_
O O O
'C3
�
e
h
W r CO
0
0 0 L
0
J
a
J
J
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Light grayish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Grayish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Olive brown, silty SAND
a
W
O
0 0
co �? (0
CO N
0 0 0
(xi tri
V
W
J
0
W N h
CO CO CO
h O) O)
N
CO m m
-J
0
}
® ® i
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
c
m
CO
0
0
M
0
0
N
PROJECT NO.
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 1t/29/07
}
0
1-
J
CO
O
z
w
LL
E
2
w
43-
0
U
m
lL
—J
W
cr
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
Cl
N
o_
q
O
qek
0
0
0
a -
Ln
M
N
....iiiiidir
MEW
O
O
co r- O
O
Q
O
1HOI3M 13NId 1N3MLI3d
O
O
0
O
NCO
C
No
0,
N M
1.0
K ON) 0
To
co
> 0
0
N O CO
a
-J
a
J
J
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Dark brown, silty SAND with gravel
(SP -SM) 011ve gray, poorly graded SAND with silt
(SM) Dark grayish brown, silty SAND with gravel
F
a
uJ
cri
O tO a
0 0 (n
�n �n N
CO
L1.1
-J
a
CO
10
0 CO
0 0
N
Z•71
m CO m
J
0
m
r
® ® 1
0)
N
>- N
J
Q Q
Q
NO)
VJ
V3 W
III 00
0
1— W
tY 2
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
(—J
0
z
Q
E
•0
0)
0)
0
0
J
w
0
m
0)
0)
0
0
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
0
0
0 -
=k
0
• r
8k
•r
,t
i
c�
fV
O
6)
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
IHOI3M A8 ?J3NId 1N3O2=13d
N
O
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
0
O
0
0
0
O
u)
O
0
0
"Zr
• O
N
C o-
No
0)
(0 0) N
CO CO CD
0)
>o
0
0 o N
O 0 M
0
a
-J
J
0
O
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL• ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Olive gray, silty SAND
(SM) Olive gray, silty SAND
(SM) Olive gray, silty SAND
H
0
W
0
Lo. u�
O
✓ t0 V
0 0 u)
O O N
v co
W
-J
a
co
0 •
rn rn [4
N
N N N
N N N
m CO m
0
0)
(1(13-
s ■ 1
• N
} N
_J
< 0
Q J
N p (/)
�Q
JOO
0 1-
1— w
Et 2Q
0
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 200300aGPJ 11!29!07
0
0
Z
E
0
0
U
J
`W
0
0
LL
0
N
ca
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
N
0
v
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
to c/)
2
J
-J
Z
W
N
Z
0
T
O
O
O
O
0
1H9I3M A8 213N1J 1N3Od3d
O
O
0
O
O
0
Oi
• kg o
M s rn
l0
0
• 111CO• LO 0
CO 0
m
0 0 0
0 0 0
a
J
0-
-J J
J
0
2
CO N
N
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Olive brown, silty SAND
(SM) Olive gray, silty SAND
(SP -SM) Gray, poorly graded SAND with silt
2
0.
a
W
%J) O 10
• N
O In O
O N O
C N
W
J
a
(NI CO CO
N N N
N N N
CO co co
J
0
0
r
o ■ t
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
N
CO
w
0
LL
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29107
0
1—
J
(7
0
Z
Q
m
LL
E
om
w
ca0
U
m
LL
m
co
0
0
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
D
N
D
D
Ct
D
u
at
D
it
0
h
rt
O O O O
a) CO N- CO
O
O
O
l)
1H0I3M A8 213NId 1N832i2d
0
O
O
11)
a
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
O
CO
o �
W
H
w
_
o 2
J
cJ
z
w
N
z
1.0
O
0
I0
h
a)o
0)
mo
0
o op a?
co O M
ET.
a
-J
J
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Grayish brown, silty SAND
(SP -SM) Olive gray, poorly graded SAND with silt
(SM) Brown, silty SAND with gravel
0
a
w
w
J
a
ao v e'
u) co u)
'0 CO 0)
N N N
N N N
CO m
J
0
Of)
r
0 I
Cly N
}' N
J
<
Q 2
N0�
co
u_ 0
Jo0
U I—
I— W
0
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
M
r
CD
w
c
Q
LL
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
F-
0 0
U
J
w
m
LL
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
I,
O
0)
CO
0
0
a
0
a
0
a
1H0I3M A 13NI31N332:i3d
0
N
0
0
O
0
0
0
O
0
0
0
O
O
0
0)
O Er
w
F".
_w
a 2
J
J
z
w
C
Z
a —
Q
CC
0
0
LL
C6.)
cc)0 GO
) N
No
C 0
h r)
C") t-
N
(7)
a
J
0-
-J J
0
0 m
- N
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Brown, silty SAND with gravel
(SM) Brown, silty SAND with gravel
(ML) Dark grayish brown, sandy SILT
F
a
U]
0
L11
J
a
10 N
O 0
a
N N • N
CO CO CO
J
0
0
>-
O ® d
U3
C/7 N
• N
<
Q J 2
NOu)
vQ
LL 0
WOO
U_
H WWC
LL G
a
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
w
a
u-
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
U
0
Z
0
C
li
E
0
0
h
0
U
J
`w
0
IL
0
f0
0
0
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
=t
•r-47IF
ft
cD
O
0)
O
O
O
O
CO
O
O
0
O
M
1HOI3M A8 JBNIJ 1N9O2J8d
0
N
O
O
o)Cr
w
1-
w
2
J
J _
z
w
N
U)
Z
O
CC
u)
O
0
v m
0 rte')
N o
0) CO 7
0
>
CN. O
0 0
N
a
J
a
J
J
0
0 CO CO
N •-
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(ML) Dark olive gray, sandy SILT
(SM) Yellowish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Gray, silty SAND with gravel
r
a
w
w
J
a
N C M
CO CO CO
N N CO
CO CO M
N N N
CO CO CO
J
0
m
r
® ® 4
J
N
J N
<
Q J 2
N0rv^CO
J Q
o
JOO
U_
I— W
cc 2
0.
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003000.GPJ 11/29/07
U
0
Z
c
c
LL
E
cu
V-
as
0
U
J
w
0
Li:
co
0
miU
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
N
O
o_
O
0
O
O
O
O
co
O
n
(OD
O
O
c)
11-1018M A8 HHN1J 1N30e13d
O
N
O
O
co
0
O
w
1-
_w
2
J
J_
z
w
NJ
tO Z
0
to
O
O
to
M
0
O
m
N
O
0
N
�e
N d N
N I` til
to n v
m
0
to 0 °0
•
a
J
a
J
— J
0
NV
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Olive brown, silty SAND with gravel (4.8% organics)
(SM) Light brown, silty SAND
(SM) Brown, silty SAND with gravel
s
a
O
0 Co to
✓ v co
N `7
O (0 o
CV N 0
N V
a
2
19 T to
co in co
CO') M M
N N N
m CO m
—J
0
m
2
>-
• s 4
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
(0
CO
w
a
LL
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
>-
J
0
0
z
0)
a)
C
LL
E
2
J
w
a)
LL
a)
co
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
7
• r -
k
:t
(V
O
d)
O
CO
O
O
O
O
O
LO
O
1H9I3M .l8 d3NId 1N3OH3d
O
N
O
O
0
O
0
0
O Ct
w
1-
2
J
J_
z_
w
N_
C
M z
0
O
O
LO
Co
LL
O
(o▪ ) - M O
• Cl* N
U
C
(O 0
0) V M
03 0 CD
V
O iD N
EE
• tD
J
Q
J
J
U
ii
rnLO
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Gray, silty SAND
(SM) Olive gray, silty SAND with gravel
(SM) Light yellowish brown, silty SAND with gravel
`n • en
M (O O)
O O to
ai
tri r�
M
W
-J
• LO 00 0) M
N N N
m
J
0
m
r
cn
® ® i
J
V)
• N
>-
<
< 0
aJ2
N 0 co
Q
L• O 0
1— CWC
(Y G
LL
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
0
CO
0
O
Mz
0
0
N
PROJECT NO.
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29107
J
0
—J
0
z
m
IL
E
0
m
2
CD
CO
0
U
m
c
ii
0
i
0
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
O
0
o
o_
O
0-
O
O
0
O
O
O
0
0
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
—r
<3-
•
r
O
O O '00 10 ba
0 O CO
O
t7
1HJI3M A8 2:13NId IN332J3d
O
N
O
O
O
u,
0
1)
w
1-
w
2
J
z_
w
N
U)
z_
0
N N 0
N O
v v
'L7
COCCZ,*
Ca
r•-• to
st tooo
<7
TP
m
m 0
To:
-J
a
J
J
U
CCD N
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Dark brown, silty SAND with gravel
(SM) Brown, silty SAND
(SM) Olive brown, silty SAND
1-
6
0
a
0
0
LO
CO
0
vi
J
a
co
co cn v
d) v) u)
co co r
c7 co ch
N N
m fD m
0
r
0)
• ® 4
yJ
C N
›- N
J
<
N°<
<
(I)
CT) (I)
W 0 0
—J
U_
I— W
IDC 2
^Q
LL
J
u_
L0
L
F—
z (}
z
=
0 <
z �?
(0
w
U
a
w
0
co
0
0
M
0
0
PROJECT NO.
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/28/07
J
U
r
J_
C
a)
LL
E
3
m
12
ca
0
U
-J
w
Q
ce
0
lL
a)
CO
f6
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
CI
-
1HJl3M A9 IJNId 1N33J3d
0
0
0
O
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
u)
O
1—
w
o -
J
J
Z
w
N
`D Z
O Q
0
0
4)
CO 03 n
ui N O
-o
co c- or- co
m
>
0
�n 0
0
a
— J
Et.
J
J
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Grayish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Reddish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Brown, silty SAND
1—
a_ Fa
0
GJ
0_
M O CD
U) CO CO
COCOCD
M CO 1')
N N N
CO m m
0
m
>
® ® 41
1
&
a)
w
0
1
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
1
OH
-
O O O
O CO W
0 O O O O 0
f)
N. c0 IcT en, N
0 0
1HJl3M A9 IJNId 1N33J3d
0
0
0
O
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
u)
O
1—
w
o -
J
J
Z
w
N
`D Z
O Q
0
0
4)
CO 03 n
ui N O
-o
co c- or- co
m
>
0
�n 0
0
a
— J
Et.
J
J
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Grayish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Reddish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Brown, silty SAND
1—
a_ Fa
0
GJ
0_
M O CD
U) CO CO
COCOCD
M CO 1')
N N N
CO m m
0
m
>
® ® 41
1
&
a)
w
0
1
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
Q
0
J
0
0
Z
(1)
E
m
2
m
Vl
0
b
U
J
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
M
O
N`
0
0
m-
0
0
`
(V
J
_ 0
O
O
0)
O
CO
O
O
c0
O
V
O
1H9I3M A8 233N131N3OH d
O
N
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
O
0
0
0
O
0
0
O
O
d
0
0
U./
1—
W
2
J
z_
W
N
Z
ce
10 0 0
• O O
▪ CO 0
o
c c a
N
d
w o\`
0
CO n r -
a
a
J
J
0
2
CO 0) cn
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Reddish brown, silty SAND wtih gravel
(SM) Light olive brown, silty SAND wtih gravel
(ML) Grayish brown, sandy SILT
0
a
w
0
0
(0 c0
0 0 0
N O ui
W
a.J
0
N 1n c•1
co to
• ® t
>-
:3 J
U
Q
LLQ
I-
z 0
z
ft. _
cn
f0 Q
W
Q
a• 1-
w
0
J
C0
(�W
rO
m
w
0
co
0
C)
0
N
PROJECT N
Q
0
0
z
Q
E
m
2
J
W
Q
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
13
<i
13
c)
k
C)
qc-
O
O
CO
O
ti
co
O
O
O
V
M
1H013M AS :13N131N3O213d
O
N
O
O
ua
0
0
O
0
0
0,
0
0
0
O
O
co
O Et
Lw
r
w
o 2
J
J_
z
w
N
O i° Z
a
0
O
O
O
0)
N
2e.
o
Lt.
CO 0 N
N N
Go
0)
LO
X0,0)
m
o
f� U) N
G) a0
N M r
ET.
J
Q.
J
J
0
N
O)
N
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL -ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Grayish brown, silty SAND with gravel
(GM) Grayish brown, silty GRAVEL with sand
(SM) Olive brown, silty SAND
a
W
0
O O V)
0) r M
1O O 10
N O N
W
J
CO CO CO
N CO V
V V V
N N N
CO m CO
0
m
}
0 ® 41
CO
�
J
<
QJ2
Npcco
vl
uo
woo
U
1— W
(Y 2
I_
>1-
J
U
Q
LL
W Z
LL O
CO
Z (�
Z
co
0 <
r
N
m
w
0
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
›-
-J J
z
0
LL
E
0
y
0
U
LL
0
N
0
0
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
0
O
0
0
0
a
CO
M
._
c)
CV
0 0)
0
0
co
0
O
co
0
O
O
1HOI3M A8 2:18NId 1N2O2:12d
N
O
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
0
O
w
1-
_cwc
O G
J
z
w
N
0 z
O —
O
0
0)
o
LL
N N 1:
00
a
COoCO
,
CO CO CO
N V
0)
0
o 0 0
D. O O
a
J
a.
-J
J
0
2
N
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(ML) Yellowish brown, SILT with sand
(ML) Light yellowish brown, SILT with sand
(ML) Yellowish brown, sandy SILT
a
w
0
w
a
(0 "?
U3 CO CO
0 t0 CO
C.14 N N
CO m CO
m
0)
O ® 4
(1) N
%" N
J
Q Q
Q J 2
N (i)
co a
WOO
U_ I-
F— UJ
CC 2
a
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CN
N
w
re
0
LL
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11129107
filF
- - ---
-
-
g
IF
Y
L
i
.
T
. ----
r--T--t—r1.
........ , .
0 0)
0
0
co
0
O
co
0
O
O
1HOI3M A8 2:18NId 1N2O2:12d
N
O
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
0
O
w
1-
_cwc
O G
J
z
w
N
0 z
O —
O
0
0)
o
LL
N N 1:
00
a
COoCO
,
CO CO CO
N V
0)
0
o 0 0
D. O O
a
J
a.
-J
J
0
2
N
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(ML) Yellowish brown, SILT with sand
(ML) Light yellowish brown, SILT with sand
(ML) Yellowish brown, sandy SILT
a
w
0
w
a
(0 "?
U3 CO CO
0 t0 CO
C.14 N N
CO m CO
m
0)
O ® 4
(1) N
%" N
J
Q Q
Q J 2
N (i)
co a
WOO
U_ I-
F— UJ
CC 2
a
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CN
N
w
re
0
LL
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11129107
}
J
U
1-
J
0
Z
E
0
m
0
U)
0
0
L.
N
N
N
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
3:
c0
-
4
C
4
c1
O
m
O
CO
0
0
CO
O
0)
O
R
O
M
INDIA/1A A9 2:I3NI3 1N3O2iLd
O
N
O
O
u)
0
0
0
0
0
d
10
O
0
0
O
0
uy CO
0 a
O
w
1—
w
d 2
J
J
Z
W
N
iA Z
o
0
0)
0
w
O O
c. C N
mo
ch 0 u>
0 0)
m
o0
• 0
ai 0
a
J
0-
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL -ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Dark brown, silty SAND
(SM) Yellowish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Dark yellowish brown, silty SAND with gravel
S
H
a
w
0
o ID d
ri 0) r
LO 1.0 0
N 1� O
w
J
a
u,
N C N
U) U) d)
I,. n
. V'
N N
CO CO
0
m
r
J
CO
N
N
< Q
Q ._J
2
Nl0!
LLv0)
/
00
U_
�- w
0
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
CO
N
m
w
7_
co
0
0
0
0
N
PROJECT NO.
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
U
LL
co
0
0
J
w
m
LL
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
0
o_
to o_
0
O
O
O
0)
O
CO
O
O
c0
O
O
O
0
1HJ13M A8 2i3Nld 1N3T213d
O
0
0
tO
0
O
0
O
0
to
O
0
0
1.L
w
1-
_w
0 2
J
J_
2
Z
w
N_
)
Lr'
o Z —
Q
0
O
o) 0)
O n
• (( N
Lo
a
ao
o
N O
O V O
0
0 0 0
O N N
0
J
a
J
J
U
0
0
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Olive brown, silty SAND
(SM) Light yellowish brown, silty SAND with gravel
(SM) Dark brown, silty SAND with gravel(1.9 % organics)
b
w
0
a o
ca `0 ai
N N
0 0 O
Lc) of ai
N N
J
a
IL? O
0 a) V)
N c7 M
z i r
CO CO CO
0
r
m
O ® v
(7) (Ni
>- N
—J
Q
Q J
L11 t0 <
two
wp0
J =
�- w
c
0_
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11129/07
0
Z
E
a>
2
a>
H
(6
O
U
N
LL
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
G
C
c.
c
c_
c
44
c
c
T
(n
0
CO
0
o
co
0
0
0
0
M
1HOI3M AS ?:13N131N39 13d
0
N
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
(n
O
O
0
0
0
O
0
0
W
w
J
.J
z
W
N
Z_
rn
coN
0 sT
CO I CO
mo
0
O) (0
Lri
✓ N
J
J
J
0
(0 0 v
N r r
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Black, silty SAND with gravel(3.5% organics)
(SM) Dark brown, silty SAND with gravel
(SM) Olive brown, silty SAND
2
a
w
0
w
J
a
▪ U7 M
co (0 co
M V
= s =
m m m
O ® e
J
N
m
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
0
H
J
z
Q
E
2
a)
ca
0
0
-J
w
0
m
LL
a)
L
03
0
0
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
0
0
4-
-4.
-
i) -
0
0
0
a1
0
CO
0
n
0
0
0
m
0
v
0
IHOIBM A8 b3NkI 1N33233d
0
N
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
0
O
O
to
O
O
0
0
O
0
Cr
W
H
w
J
J
Z_
w
N
qZ_
LL
0
N
C
LL
ti ti ti
.- '• 0 (N
C a
�0 0
Ca
M a7 1-
Y7 W to
(0 N V
40
o
o 03 CO
O co co.;
J
a
J
J
0
6
CO
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Grayish brown, silty SAND
(ML) Gray, sandy SILT with gravel
(SM) Brown, silty SAND with gravel
F
2
1—
a_ a
W
0
(.1 a1
0 0 0
(0 co 0
N �
uJ
J
a
V) CO ca
(0 v L
CO 1-- I—
J
0
m
• ■ o
CO
(7)
} N
Z 0
Q
��
�Q
CO LL O
JOD
U_ H
H W
CC 20
HVAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003009.GPJ 11/29/07
0
1--
J_
C
0
Z
Q
m
c
IL
E
m
2
N
07
O
U
J
w
Q
0
f6
O
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
c'
c •
c _
CC
c
cs
•
•a
Ir "
CO
0
ti
IHOI3M A8 2f3NId 1N30H3d
N
0
0
0
0
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
w
O
w
1^
O 2
J
- J
Z
W
N_
C
Q
0
0
co
C
LL
N
N
N N
a
o
0)
• 0
rn in v
0
mo
N N
N N
a
a
J
J
0
2
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL -ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SP -SM) Dark brown, poorly graded SAND with silt
(SM) Olive gray, silty SAND with gravel
(SM) Olive brown, silty SAND with gravel
a
ui
0
Ll.l
J
Q
co
M V V
co co co
CO r CO
Li d d
I- L- F-
J
0
CO
r
co
• ®
1
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
r --
ti; lil
0
LL
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/29/07
U
z
0
c
I.�
E
0)
N
0
0
U
mCD
0
0
0
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
N
o_
0
O
0
CO
0
0
O
0
0
0
O
1HOI3M A8 U3NId 1N3Za3d
0
0
O
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
m
Co
LL
c
0
ai
CO
0
0
a
-J
0-
-J J
0
c
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SP -SM) Yellowish brown, poorly graded SAND with silt
Q
w
0
w
-J
a
N
0)
m
2
r
0
C/)
V) N
}NI -
Q 0
rn_N O U)
Q
W
Jp0
U H
F- W
CC 20
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
co
N
w
cc
0
0
O
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 2003008.GPJ 11/28107
APPENDIX C
LOGS FROM PREVIOUS
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
DAMES & MoouE (1.965)
ELEVATION IN FEET
255
250
245
240
235
17.0%-103
230
13.7% -103
225
220
ELEVATION IN FEET
250
245
240
235
230
30
■
100/4'
100/2"
16.8%• 99
225
16
■
140
■
82
•
80
•
40
■
32
■
10
40
BORING B -I
ELEVATION 2511 -
SP
50
95
74%-99 ■
220
NOTES:
SP
SP
BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND (FILL)
(MODERATELY LOOSE)
MISCELLANEOUS GARBAGE
} OEBRIS OBSTRUCTIONS
GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SANG (FILL)
(MODERATELY LOOSE)
GARBAGE
J
J
r
GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND (COMPACT)
BORING COMPLETED 3-5-65
NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED
BORING B-2
ELEVATION 250.5
SP
SP
SP
SP
BROWN SANO WITH OCCASIONAL
GRAVEL 8 GARBAGE (FILL)
(MOOERATELY LOOSE)
MISCELLANEOUS GARBAGE
BROWN SAND WITH GARBAGE (FILL) J
(M00ERATELY LOOSE)
MISCELLANEOUS GARBAGE
GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WTTH
OCCASIONAL GARBAGE ( FILL
MODERATELY LOOSE)
GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SA.YD (COMPACT)
WATER LEVEL, 3.8.65
BORING COMPLETED 3.8.65
1. TH :SE BORINGS WERE MAGE BY OAMES 8 MOCRE IN
1965 A5 PART OF A PREVIOUS FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION
FOIL THE PROPOSED BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION.
2. EL:VATIONS REFER TO WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT
OF HIGHWAYS OATUM.
Jr
ELEVATION IN FEET
250
245
240
235
230
192 %' 104
15.9 % -108
225
220
16.4°4-99
215
210
78
■
50
58
■
60
■
58
■
140
■
95
BORING B-3
ELEVATION 248±
GP
SP
LEGEND:
GRAY, SANDY GRAVEL w/OCC.
ORGANIC MATTER 8 GARBAGE
(FILL) (MODERATELY LOOSE)
MISCELLANEOUS GARBAGE
WITH OCCASIONAL SANOY
GRAVEL
1
GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND
(MODERATELY COMPACT)
GRAOES TO COMPACT
OCRING COMPLETED 3.8.65
NO GROJNO WATER ENCOUNTERED
BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE SAMPLER ONE FOO:
uOISTURE rwEIGw 22601.8S., STROKE 224 INCHES.
CONTENT? 95
192%-I04 ■ INO:CATES DEPTH AT WHICH UNDISTURBED
J..
SAMPLE WS EXTRACTED.
DRY O INDICATES SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO
DENSITY RECOVERY.
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
LOG OF BORINGS
B-1, B-2 & B-3
FEBRUARY, 1976 W-2974-01
:NANKIN i WILSON. INC.
ctat(CM11cal. COIUUIrANts
ELEVATION IN FEET
260
255
250
245
240
235
230
225
220
215
2t0
NOTES:
BORING 8-4
ELEVATION 258 2
32
•
B
■
5
•
50
70
r
65
■
60
■
60
m
GP
SP
GM
SP
12 ASPHALTIC PAVEMENT
GRAVEL WITH BROWN -GRAY SANG
ANO OCCASIONAL GARBAGE (FILL)
(MODERATELY COMPACT)
BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM SANO
AITH GRAVEL (FILL)
( MODERATELY LOOSE )
GRADES TO COMPACT
PARTIALLY OECOMPOSED GARBAGE
WITH SANG (SOFT)
BLACK, SILTY, SANDY GRAVEL ( FILL)
(COMPACT)
PARTIALLY OEOOMPOSED GARBAGE
(SOFT)
GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SANG
(COMPACT)
BORING COMPLETED 3-22-65
NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED
ELEVATION IN FEET
I. THESE BORINGS WERE MADE BY DAMES B MOORE IN
1965 AS PART Of A PREVIOUS FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION
FOR THE PROPOSED BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION -
2. ELEVATIONS REFER TO WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT
OF HIGHWAYS DATUM.
3, REFER TO FIG. A-8 FOR LEGEND.
260
255
250
245
240
235
230
225
220
215
26
■
11
25
■
46
46
•
90
■
100
BORING B-5
ELEVATION 258±
GP
SP
SP
ASPHALTIC PAVEMENT
GROWN- GRAY,SANOY GRAVEL
(MODERATELY LOOSE TO
MODERATELY COMPACT
GRAY -BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM
SAND ( FILL)
MODERATELY LOOSE)
•
GRADES MORE COMPACT
GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH
OCCASIONAL GRAVEL (COMPACT)
BORING COMPLETED 3-23.67
NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
L.OG OF BORINGS
B-4 8( B-5
FEBRUARY, 1976 W -2974-0I
SHANNON L WILSON. INC. •
i(OTtCHN1CAI CONIUITANTI
SHANNON & VVIL_,SON (19%G)
H
SOIL DESCRIPTIC?l
Surtaci Elevation: APPROX. 265 FT.
- W
= 4
O.
- "
_
zq
�; W
p
STANOARO PENETRATION RESISTANCE
(140 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
A Blows per loot
0 20 40 S'
MEDIUM DENSE, GRAY, MOIST, SLIGHTLY SILTY
TO `.,ILTY, GRAVELLY, FINE TO MEDIUM
SAND,(FILL)
0
I I
5 2 I•.
4
I
5 1
6I
7I
8
24
I
SLOTTED 4'4" PVC DURING
(T li
1/x/741
DRILLING
r.)I4 1/29/76 0
(P 0 0cfi
I
I
••: _ . .
.i
I
MEDIUM DENSE, GRAY, MOIST, SLIGHTLY SILTY,
FINE TO MEDIUM SANG
DEN 3E TO VERY DENSE, GRAY-BROWN TO
GRA", MOIST TO WET, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY
SILTY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND
.:.: ' ®'•
. ' . .•
:: ::.. ::: 63—
,: j90—.
'
. .... . • .. 99--
9---24 •..... :.: 94-"
BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 1/12/76
.........
... ....
Liam)
I 2' 0.0. split spoon Sample
II 3' 0.0. thin—wall sample
* Sample lot recovered
Atterberg Limits:
�-►-Liquid limit
--Natural water content
---Plastic limit
Impervious seal
.2 later level
Piezometer tip
P Sample pushed
USC Unified Soil Classification
NOTE: The stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries
between soil types and the transition may be gradual.
20 40
e s later content
6C
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
LOG OF BORING
8-101
FEBRUARY,1976 W-2974-0:
SMaMeoe l NILSON. INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
,,.
a
SOIL DESCRIPTICN
Surface Elevation: APPROX. 244 FT.
= W
x 4
>s
-• N
zW _
a _
c� •--
"p
STAHOAAO PENETRATION RESISTANCE
(140 Ib. weight. 30' drop)
A Blows per foot
r
0 20 40 6,.-
-1
--\BLACK TOP ROAD SURFACING `"
0.3
0
MEDIUM DENSE, GRAY, SANDY GRAVEL;(F1LL)r
1.5
1 I
MEDIUM DENSE, GRAY, MOIST, LAYERED, SLIGHTLY
SILTY TO SILTY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND;WITH
I I
5
: ..
-SCATTERED GARBAGE FRAGMENTS ( FILL) r
2 I
5•
• .
3I
10
:
:::
'
GARBAGE:MIXED WITH SOME LOOSE,
4
I
GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND:INTERVALS
CONTAINS A FEW THIN SAND LAYERS
( FILL)
5
15
• :
—
20
•
. �-
8
9
I
I
25
::::;:.
= •
—
..::
::
Io
28
0
ccz
--
LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, DARK GRAY, MOIST
III
ur.0
.
TO WET, SLIGHTLY SILTY TO SILTY, FINE TO
12
1
30
MEDIUM SAND;WITH TRACES OF GARBAGE
,'
FRAGMENTS ( FILL)
13
z i
jJ
na
.
36 �I
35
HARD, GRAY BROWN TO GRAY, MOIST TO
WET, NON -PLASTIC TO CLAYEY SILT;
15 I
..:. '
:
GENERALLY NONPLASTIC
•
16 T
1.0
40
45
: LIEVEtI 0WOUE
°FULLING
i .
!
DISTURBANC:
18 I
191
1 50
I ::
... 105-'
LEGEND 0 20 40 6:.
12' 0.0. split spoon sample s
II 3' 0.0. thin-wall sample
• Sample not recovered
Atterberg limits:
Liquid lima
1\4‘,,,,,......
Impervious seal ®stater content
2 tater level
PROPOSED
Piezometer tip BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
P Sample pushed
-I
i - LOG OF BORING
USC Unified Salt Classification
watts content
B-102
Plastic hart
FEBRUARY, 1976 W-2974-01
U?T!. T._ :,. ,: SRiilOM t lIUUCM. IOC.
between soil types and gradual. Sri.IOF2
ry r
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
Ca
...,MO
SOIL DESCRIPTICN
W
z►-
a K
c) Iv'
201
21 I
54
xae
u X. o.
0
50
55
STAH0AR0 PENETRATION RESISTt!CE
(t t0 Ib. ',clot, 30"
® Blows per foot
0 20 4Q
.. . ; • ®
drop)
c
91--
118--
SAME AS ABOVE
BDTTOM OF BORING
CDMPLETED 1/13/76
.
1
•
1
LEGEt3
1 2. 0.0. split spoon sample
I[3' 0.0. thin-wall sample
• Sample lot recovered
Atterberg limits:
-+-lipuid licit
-- Haturat water content
— Plastic trait
impervious seal
.2 Tater level
11
Pletometer tip
P Sample pushed
USC Unified Sail Classification
NOTE: The stratification lines represent the approtimate boundaries
between soil types and the transition may be gradual.
20 40
® b rater content
6(
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
LOG OF BORING
B-(02
FEBRUARY, 1976 W-2974-01
SIeANNON L NItION, INC.
SHT. 2 OF 2 GEOTECHNICAL consA.TANTS
'
SOIL DESCRIPTIG4
Surface Elevation: APPROX. 247 FT.
— W
a
'^
GROUND
WATER
DEPTH. It.
STANOAAO PENETRATION RESISTANCE
(140 Ib. weight. 30' drop)
A Blows per foot '
O 20 40
LOOSE, GRAY -BROWN TO GRAY, MOIST TO
WET, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY, FINE TO
MEDIUM SAND.W1TH LAYERS OF GARBAGE;
0
1
2I
3I
4I
12
5I
6 I
7I
8I
22
9I
10
II
121
14
ISI39
I•
I
1
17-27:70-31-7-0-374PVC
A w w 1 /29/76 ro
0 cr 0 cn to 0 oft 0
........, . ;..
.. i ..... '
. : j ::168.7—
— '
OCCASIONAL METAL FRAGMENTS ( FILL)
:.
::..
•
•- - -- •.—• -
MEDIUM DENSE, GRAY -BROWN TO GRAY, MOIST
TO WET, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY, FINE TO
. MEDIUM SAND
...... . '
::..:
DENSE, GRAY -BROWN TO GRAY, MOIST, CLEAN,
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND;
OCCASIONALLY SLIGHTLY SILTY
•
i•
:::e::::i .
I..
...
BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 1/12/76
LEGEND
I 2' 0.0. split spoon sample
II 3' 0.0. thin -.all sample
• Sample not recovered
Atterberg limits:
Impervious seal
2 Tater level
Pietometer tip
N!!
LiQuid limit Sample pushed
Natural water content USC Unilied Sail Classification
Plastic limit
NOTE: The stratification lints represent the approaimate boundaries
between soil types and tht transition may be gradual.
20 40
0S tater content
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATfOP
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
LOG OF BORING
B-103
FEBRUARY, 1976 W -2974-C
SHANNON t tIISON. Ile.
GCOTCCHNiCAI CONSULTANTS
12' 0.0. split spoon sample
I[3' 0.0. thin-wall sample
s Sample i,ot recovered
Atterberg Limits:
I. -.-Liquid limit
---Natural water content
---Plastic limit
Impervious seal
Q tater level
Piezometer tip
P Sample pushed
USC Unrlied Soit Classification
NOTE: The ;tratit.reation lines represent the approximate boundaries
betu en soil types and the transition may be gradual.
0
20 40
4) Rater content
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
LOG OF BORING
B -I04
FEBRUARY, 1976 W-2974-01
SMAKNON t MESON• IE.
GEOTECHNICAL COHSULTAtvs
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SurferElevation: APPROX. 246 FT,
—
=
s.
"'
r,
W
a
xi
"'
—Qc —
g r
w d
I-3 r;
STANOARO PENETRATION AESISTAi.CE
(140 Ib. weight. 30- drop,)
® Blows:per loot
20 40 F
L00:3E, GRAY, MOIST, SILTY GRAVELLY FINE TO
MED UM SAND:WITH•SCATTERED CONCRETE
RUBBLE AND LAYERS OF GARBAGE ( FILL)
0
5
15
39
I I
2I
T
3 1
4 1
5I
644
I
7 I
I
1O I
11 T
1•
121
13I
14 I
15I
NO WATER OBSERVED DURING DRILLING
A W W N
.
--.
.
_.. .------
' '
L00. E TO MEDIUM DENSE, GRAY TO BROWN,
MOIST, CLEAN TO SILTY, FINE TO MEDIUM
SAN(i•WITH SCATTERED LAYERS OF GARBAGE
•
(TO ,ABOUT 1 FT. THICK) INCLUDING BROKEN
GLASS ( FILL)
-- -- --
41
MEDIUM DENSE, GRAY, MOIST, CLEAN, FINE
TO MEDIUM SAND;WITH SCATTERED SILTY
LAMINATIONS
.:..
'239
DENSE TO VERY DENSE, GRAY, MOIST, CLEAN,
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND•WITH SCATTERED
SILTY LAMINATIONS
..
...
lot --
.::
:
:I.:..
:.....
BC TTOM OF BORING
CCMPLETED 1/12/76
• i
:::
12' 0.0. split spoon sample
I[3' 0.0. thin-wall sample
s Sample i,ot recovered
Atterberg Limits:
I. -.-Liquid limit
---Natural water content
---Plastic limit
Impervious seal
Q tater level
Piezometer tip
P Sample pushed
USC Unrlied Soit Classification
NOTE: The ;tratit.reation lines represent the approximate boundaries
betu en soil types and the transition may be gradual.
0
20 40
4) Rater content
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
LOG OF BORING
B -I04
FEBRUARY, 1976 W-2974-01
SMAKNON t MESON• IE.
GEOTECHNICAL COHSULTAtvs
12' 0.0. split spoon sample
11.0.0. thin—wall sample
Sample not recore:ed
Atterberg limits:
liquid limit
Natural water content
Plastic limit
Impervious seal
_2later level
Pieaameter tip
P Sample pushed
USC Unified Soil Classification
NOTE: The stratification lines represent the approatmate boundaries
between sett types and the transition may be gradual.
0 20 40
® S later content
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
LOG OF BORING
8-105
FEBRUARY, 1976 W-2974-01
Slalom t vitae. 1st.
GEOTEC„NtCAL CONSVITANTS
OESRIPTIV
Surface Elevation: APPROX.250 FT.
y
W
'^tz
ZW W
aim
0
ST H0A0 PENETRATION
40 lb. EKESOIL
t30dropj
® 8Io, per too
6 20 1 40 i
LOOSE, GRAY, MOIST, SILTY SAND • ( FILL i
I
Is
24
49
1 I
2 I
3 I
6 I
7 1
9I
II I
12
I
13I
14
ISI
161
17 I
181
191
NO WATER OBSERVED DURING DRILLING I
4r d A W W N N --
q Ls o 0, 0 us u5 O ca 0
. ....
-A . :
—117_a -
R_ � - -.
- .
I::. 1
•! '
' :::
/—
LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, GRAY TO BROWN,
MOIST, SLIGHTLY SILTY, FINE TO MEDIUM
SAND•WITH LAYERS OF GARBAGE AND A
i
LAYER OF SILTY, SANDY GRAVEL NEAR 16 FT.
DEPTH
• •
---
MEDIUM DENSE, GRAY, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY
SILTY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND
'-
DENSE TO VERY DENSE, GRAY -BROWN TO
GRAY, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY, FINE TO
MEDIUM SAND•WITH A MEDIUM DENSE LAYER
. ' .: ..
NEAR 39 FT. DEPTH
.
:: ®
-•;•::
•
• I ...
•
I
... ..
::
...
::
:: •
..........
79 -
.
84=
BOTTOM OF BORING COMPLETED 1/9/76
12' 0.0. split spoon sample
11.0.0. thin—wall sample
Sample not recore:ed
Atterberg limits:
liquid limit
Natural water content
Plastic limit
Impervious seal
_2later level
Pieaameter tip
P Sample pushed
USC Unified Soil Classification
NOTE: The stratification lines represent the approatmate boundaries
between sett types and the transition may be gradual.
0 20 40
® S later content
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
LOG OF BORING
8-105
FEBRUARY, 1976 W-2974-01
Slalom t vitae. 1st.
GEOTEC„NtCAL CONSVITANTS
.,
SOIL OESCRIPTICN
Surface Elevation: APPROX. 249 FT.
— w occ
A
�-
D. •d
"'
—'
c M •x
c, a
0
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE
(140 Ib. weight. 30' drop)
® Blows per toot
0 20 40 F
VERY LOOSE TO LOOSE, GRAY, MOIST, SLIGHTLYI
SILTY TO SILTY, FINE $AND;WITH LAYERS OF
GARBtGE TO 2 FT. THICK AND GRAVEL IN
SOME LAYERS
0
1 I
2I
a I
12
5
17
EI
9
1°
11
12I
13
14
15
39
1
I
I.....
I
I
I
I
URING
I/21/76 d SLOTTED Sia" PVC DRILLING'4
1/29/760 I w 0 v 0 U o
cr O
—
- ....
: : ....
' 1 ' ' ' ' ' '
, ' ' ' '
—�_�__.
:
® !
.:
.
MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, GRAY, MOIST,CLEAN
TO SLIGHTLY SILTY, FINE SAND
.. I
VERY DENSE, GRAY TO DARK GRAY, MOIST
TO WET, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY, FINE
SANC;WITH A FEW LAMINATIONS OF SILT
• i
i
I: :.�_,
•
94/1 r--
76-
: ®
A
93—
•
BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED I/ /76
LEGEND
12' 0.0. split spoon sample
II 3' 0.0. thin-wall sample
• Sample rat recovered
Atterberg limits:
1+liquid limit
---Natural water content
--- Plastic limit
Impervious seal
,Q later level
Piezometer tip
P Sample pushed
USC Unified Soil Classification
NOTE: The Aratitication lines represent the epprosimate boundaries
between soil types and the transition may be gradual.
0 20 40
ID S tater Content
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATr/
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
LOG OF BORING
B-106
FEBRUARY, 1976 W -2974-O
Dummy 1 NILSON. INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
i
SOIL DESCR IPT ICN
Surface Elevation: APPROX. 244 FT.
-- W
_ d
7w
in
GROUND
WATER
DEPTH, 11.
STANDARD PENETRATION MISTAKE
(140 ib, weight. 30' drop)
® Blows per loot
0 20 I 40 F
BLACKTOP DRIVE SURFACING (SEVERAL LAYERS)
0
1.5
1
2I
3
5I
15
7
8l
101
111
121
31,5
.
I
1
wry
SLOTTED 3/4" PVC DRY !/2!/7S, 1/29/76
U O (A O 0
'. 4 . ; 1
: . - •
MEDIUM DENSE, GRAY, MOIST, CLEAN TO SLIGH-
TLY SILTY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND;W/TRACES
OF GARBAGE FRAGMENTS
....
GARBAGE; MIXED WITH SOME SILTY SAND
•
DENSE TO VERY DENSE, GRAY, MOIST, CLEAN
TO SLIGHTLY SILTY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND.
•
,:`::
WITH A FEW GRAVELLY LENSES
e
BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED I/I3/75
LEGEND
I 2' 0.0. split spoon sample
II 3' 0.0. thio—malt sample
• Sample not recovered
Atterbert limits:
�� 1 - Liquidlimit
Natural
l nter content
Plastic bait
Impervious seal
Q tater levet
Piezometer lip
Sample pushed
USC Unified Soil Classification
NOIE: The stratification linos represent the approiimate boundaries
between soil types and the transition may be gradual.
0
20 40
®f tater content
6C
PROPOSED
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON
LOG OF BORING
B -I07
FEBRUARY, 1976 W -2974-0i
SNiesON t IILSON, INC.
GCOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
HONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS (1986)
BOREHOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
W
J
4
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °/°
SPT RESISTANCE A
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
1
2
4 -
- 6 -
- 8
- 10 -
- 12-
14
- 16 -
_ 18
20 `"
- 22
-- 24 -
- 26 -
-- 28 -
- 30 -
- 32 -
?" Concrete slab, reinforced
" void
-„2" - 3" gravel levelling /=
Compacted, gray, fine SAND (FILL)X
trace silt
Fit on rock, slight
difficulties of augering
Clean, some coarse sand
- 4" piece of wood
B
X
-x
garbage; tin metal , cloth, glass,
some silt and sand, rotten paper
-x
No recovery
Medium dense to dense
gray, fine SAND, clean
(NATIVE SAND)
B
No Groundwater
Brass Ring
Samples
HI- ROCK •
Figur
PROJECT
Bow Lake Transfer Station
King Co.) Washington
DATE 3-3-86
LOGGED 8Y SH
ELEVATION 2501'
DEPTH 44'
HOLE NO.
BH - 1
SHEET
1 of 2
BOREHOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)SPT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
ku
a
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °/°
RESISTANCE Aa
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
.
- -..
. _
.
4
1
.--36 —
Gray, fine to medium SAND —X,
1.- 38—
Z
— 40 —
,
2.5 ring
samples
•
A
— 42 —
—
Y.
A
— 44
END OF HOLE
— —
—
,
-
— ,
r —
_
.-.
,
—
_
— —
—
1
-
DATE 3-3-86
HOLE NO.
PROJECT
Bow Lake Transfer Station
LOGGED BY SH
BH - 1
Figure 2A
King Co.}Washington
ELEVATION 250 ±
SHEET
DEPTH 44'
2 of 2
BOREHOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
W
n.
N
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE
SPT
10 20
CONTENT °/°
RESISTANCE d
30 40 50 60 70
12" concrete slab
—2 ~
No settlement under slab /-
�\ 2" gravel base /
(fill)
- 4 --
- 6 -
- 8 -
--10
- 12 -
- 14 -
- 16-
Compacted,
clean
Trace
Slightly
1" piece
3/4"
gray, fine SAND
of pea -gravel --,g
silty �
-"Z
of wood
�
III
6
piece of wood
11111111
- 18-
Loose to medium dense, gray
�(
!�
No ground
tai,,,,"
silty fine sand with gravel,
mostly inorganic soil
water
-- 20-
smell, messy
Ll
11111111
GAR BAGE
-22 -
wood
11,1",
- 24
dense, grayto gown,
Mediumm
fine to medium SAND, clean
P�,"„
-X
(NATIVE SAND)
111111111
- 28-
-X
111111111
- 30 _
I
,
3„",
- 32
Figure
3
PROJECT
Bow Lake Transfer Station
DATE 3-3-86
HOLE N0.
BH - 2
LOGGED 9T SH
King Co., Washington
ELEVATION 25(1±
SHEET
1 of 2
DEPTH 39'
BOREHOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °h
SPT RESISTANCE •
10 20 30 40 50 6070
—36 —
�- 38 --
40--
Same as above
END OF HOLE
Figure 3A
PROJECT
Bow Lake Transfer Station
King Co., Washington
DATE 3-3-85
LOGGED 8Y SS_
ELEVATION 250 -
DEPTH 39'
HOLE N0.
BH - 2
SHEET
2 of 2
BOREHOLE LOG
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
a
4
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °/°
SPT RESISTANCE
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
4
Asphalt concrete pavement
,..'
— 2 —
—
— 4 —
—
Loose, gray, fine SAND, moist;
— 6 _
with brick fragments, cloth and —2
tin metal
_ 8 —
—
— 10 —
Loose, gray, fine SAND with
gravel , wet
"J��
—12--
IIIIIIIN
— 14—
—16—
—
GARBAGE d paper
Mastic wire, sod, p p _:K
111/111/
111111
— 18—
" 20-
0""
-—
2211111111
p— 24 --
r-- 26 —
L" thick newspaper —IZ
L" thick gray, fine sand
Gray fine sand with glass
''ragment, newspaper —1K
(lass, newspaper
Auger grinding on hard materi a1 *
! ,
11111111
IpIIIuIuI
,,,,,pi'
-- 28—
— 30 —
END OF HOLE
_
** Auger hit hard material at
26.5' and met refusal,
boring prematurally terminated
111111
11111
'
,
PROJECT
DATE 3-3-86
HOLE NO.
Bow Lake Transfer Station
LOGGED Erf SH
BH 3
-
Figura 4
King Co., Washington
ELEVATION 249±
SHEET
DEPTH 26.5'
1 of 1
BOREHOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
LAI
1
a
a
4
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT %
SPT RESISTANCE
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
- . 2 -
4 -
-- 6
- 8 --
►-- 10
12 -
- 14 -
- 16 -
18 -'
20 --
22 -
-- 24
-- 26 -,
-- 28 -
- 30 -
- 32
asphalt concrete
GARBAGE
No samples taken
This is relocated hole due to
premature termination of BH -3
Ht. 26.5'.
New hole was drilled 3' north
of BH -3 -
Small rubble hampered drilling
for 10 minutes. Finally penetrated
Dense, gray, fine SAND with
gravel
Figur
Dense, silty fine SAND with
broken cobble (till like)
e 5
R
difficult to
drill due to c
1
blue
ate
PROJECT
Bow Lake Transfer Station
King Co., Washington
DATE 3-3-86
LOGGED 9Y SH
E
LEVATION L.49±.
DEPTH 59'
HO
BH
LE
-4
NO
SHEET
1 01 2
83/6'
BOREHOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION13.
J
a
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °/,
SPT RESISTANCE a
Io 20 30 so 50 so 70
--36 -
-
41
- 38 -,()else,
gray, fine to medium SAND, --4
clean, moist
/�
- 40 --
-
_42-
-
Native sand
2" organic seam
•
-- 44
aminated volcanic ash ,,,:K
SILT
- 46 -
VEry dense, gray gravelly
(till)
drilling due
- 48 48 -
D•fficulty of _VAl
to cobble.
Q
5.7-@24 hrs
506/3
— 50 -
El. /9kt -
S
w
- 52 -
VQry hard, gray clayey SILT
laminated silt
57\
Eo
v--54
L)
1\
- 56
-
58 _
-"X85v
—
- 60-
End of hole
PROJECT
DATE 3-3-86
HOLE NO.
Bow Lake Transfer Station
LOGGED BY SH
BH -4
Figure `.�A
King Co., Washington
ELEVATION 249}
SHEET
DEPTH 59'
2 of 2
1
-
HONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS (1987)
DEPTH
(feet)
;;0IL DESCRIPTION
j
a
0
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °/0 0
SPT RESISTANCE A
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Y —,
—v
U a
L
J ,)
(tw 0 f )
/,
AK
I° —
imetic:bmoeZrwR
') ..�G -
5 � � rt,.� i» ..6.14
12
S-7
D x.d. ) ' Sc
(� —
c.Qea,1i .�
.20 —
aa
DIAL4.- 6.4- ,— .j —
S ) c..6.4.m.,1
_
•6
30 -
-
.
— ;%
MOLE No.
,PROJECT �� .,DATE
r
Bekto hal.'-e 77041 �> �G
LOGGED BY -rill•
R H - 1 0 1
Flq,,trLELEVATION
aya
����
DEPTH o2 00'
SMELT
1
of aZ
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
GROUND
a WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °4
SPT RESISTANCE A
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
�3a
�3y
amae-
Sao
irna
6.,
CSC',
s'a.„e 4-J
Z
Ff9 w�� 2J9'
PROJEC
1 0.4
011
DATE —/ 7
LOGGED BY . /✓n.
ELEVATION a yo
DEPTH o2 pv° S
HOLE N0.
3H- 10r
SHEET
of �/
SOIL DESCRIPTION
J
O.
X
a
N
1 t_ 3.
PROD C T
1�
,t7 d -u0' L driAt�YLQ�
fir'
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °/°
SPT RESISTANCE S
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
DATE
LOGGED BY �!/4
ELEVATION .2z1/°
DEPTH ,2o1
HOLE HO
BH -IQ
SHEET
rot
DEPTH
(feat)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
J
a
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °/°
SPT RESISTANCE A
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
�. 3.g _
_3q
-36
anull-
,fc, D.fo1,d,J -k� ,�iv,,ryrt,,
, / t -71)
-3$- G-Akv-ei, /ire/o-e;);t
-90-
J
e.
OJECT
DATE g --15'S77
LOGGED BY -rim
ELEVATION aqC)
DEPTH 02 b i
KOLE N0.
SHEET
of
DEPTH
:OIL DESCRIPTION
a.
a
of
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °h '••
SPT RESISTANCE 41(feet)
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
PI4t4t, ;I
.
a -
Sa G, , M
-t1-
l�,
,.,
D, , Ste,
- _
Szetm.,,n,
-1g-
-20 -
-22, -
,p, , , sem , .
c,Qia,tiv, ..1
.
•
-ab
2?
-•
--
- 30 -
-3a-
PROJEC�J
DATE 9-/ - $%
HOLE/NO.
! � ��^`�� �
�tU (-fie --/- SltaZeA,
LOGGED BY 17114.
15I / - t 03
(/
fi?tAyL
a
ELEVATION i0
y
pp N,
E?t'rl
DEPTH A00.5-
!SHEET
1 ods
of
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
tt GROUND
a WATER
N CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °/°
• SPT RESISTANCE
1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-34
-38
D.124146) Aittp
Fte, S . reta@#) /Nf,
ibs,,tazirot
&mote )
�0 -
F�yLArG. yR
DATE ?"/587
LOGGED BY 1701.
ELEVATION a y 0
DEPTH 0 O.
HO
a
LE
k0
03
SHEET
A of a
HONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS (1.988)
PROJECT #88110
BORE HOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
W
J
2
4
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT •/.
SPT RESISTANCE A
10 20 30 40 50 60 TO
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
2" asphalt, 6" crushed rock
Dense gray, fine to medium SAND:
some silt; trace gravel; damp;
SW (Fill)
Loose to medium dense, gray, fine
to nedium SAND and REFUSE: some
silt; trace gravel; paper, plastic,
metol, fiberous waste; moist
(Solid Waste Fill)
Dense, Bray, silty fine SAND:
lam-nated; damp; non -plastic;
SP/HL
(Glacial Outwash)
Figure 2
END OF HOLE
PROJECT
Trans. Stn.'Improvements
Bow Lake Trans. Stn.
Seattle, WA.
No water
encountered
during drilling
DATE 10-14-88
LOGGED BY SHE
ELEVATION 243'
DEPTH 24'
HOLE N0.
BH -1
SHEET
1 of 1
HONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
PROJECT #88110
BORE HOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
a
a
N
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
T
MOISTURE CONTENT •/.
SPT RESISTANCE
10 20 30 40 50 60 TO
" asphalt, brown, sandy GRAVEL
(Fill)
Loose to medium dense, gray to
dark gray, REFUSE and silty fine
— 10 SAND: damp; paper, metal, nylon,
cloth, fiberous waste, glass
12 (Solid Waste Fill)
—
-- 14
— 16
—18
Dense to very dense, silty fine
—20 to medium SAND: damp; laminated
occasional gravel; NP,SP
—22 (Glacial Outwash)
�24
"26
—28
— 30
OMR
END OF HOLE
50/ E"
Figure 3
PROJECT
Trans, Stn. Improvements
Bow Lake Trans. Stn
Seattle, WA.
DATE 10-24-88
LOGGED 9r SHE
ELEVATION 243'
DEPTH ?9'
HOLE NO.
BH -2
SKEET
1 of 1
HONE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
PROJECT #88110
BORE HOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
tl
a.
N CONDITION
GROUND
WATER
MOISTURE CONTENT •/.
SPT RESISTANCE
10 20 30 40 90 60 70
Rip -rap quarry spa .
•
2
. Medium dense, brown, silty fine -
SANG: moist; some gravel; NP,SP
(Fill)
4-�
Loose to medium dense, dark brown,5(
REFLSE and sandy gravelly SILT;
6_
moist
(Solid Waste Fill)
8- -4:J.K111111
10- `1
11111111
12- Loose to medium dense, gray, -a
iisy fine SAND: sme gravel;
moist to wet at base
®
I111111
14 - (Fill)
16- --1
18-- - •
20-�
22 - -
2
x1111111
PTAI11III
11111111
11111111
1111101
24-
ulI1II1
26 -1 Medium dense, h rown and gray,
REFISE and silty fine SAND:
28 - SOME gravel ; glass, fi ber, �
platic; mSist tW wee
(Solid Waste Fill) -
30 -
32 - -
34 •
•
IEIII1II
11
1
Hilil
,
,
1
t
PROJECT
DATE 10-24-88
HOLE N0.
Trans. Stn. Improvements
LOGGED HY SHE
BH -3
Figure 4
Bow Lake Trans. Stn.
ELEVATION 246'
SHEET
Seattle, WA.
DEPTH 49�
1 of 2
HONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
PROJECT #88110
BORE HOLE LOG
DEPTH
(ieet}
v
SOIL DESCRIPTION
I SAMPLE I
-
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT '/• 61)
SPT RESISTANCE A
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
•
• 36—
—
38—,
—
40—
42—
—
A
44—
1
46—
—
Dense, gray, silty fine SAND:
laminated; moist; SP
,
48
(Glacial Outwash) —X
•
,
.
50--
—
END OF HOLE
—
-l
PROJECT
DATE 10-24-88
HOLE NO.
Trans. Stn. Improvements
LOGGED 8Y SHE
BH -3
Figure 4A
Bow Lake Trans. Stn.ELEVATION
246`
SHEET
Seattle, WA. •
DEPTH 49'
2 0r 2
HONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
PROJECT #88110
BORE HOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
a
N
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT °/.
SPT RESISTANCE A
►o 20 30 40 50 60 70
3" asphalt, 6" sandy gravel /'
-- 2
4(Fill)
Very dense, brown, sandy fine
GRAVEL: moist GW
-
. -Z
Dense, brown, silty fine SAND:
at top; moist to
111111
1111
r 6
\-•
gral,elly
satLrated; SP
(Fill)
10
Loose to medium dense, brown
.-
to tray, REFUSE and sandy SILT:
moist; glass, metal, fiber, brick
(Solid Waste Fill)
-- 12
-- 14
- lfi
- 18
20
_
-Z.
-111
-
-1111101
--
�i',,,,,
Z .
I//111111
,'
Uh111
III
r- 22
•
11111111
- 24
-- 28
r-• 30
-�
11111111
'
iaii111
1111111
-- 32
14
Med-um dense, gray, SILT: moist;
gravel layers; peaty organics at -
top: plastic
(Fill)
,
111111
r
PROJECT
DATE 10-24-88
HOLE NO.
Trans. Stn. Improvements
LOGGED BY SHE
BH -4
Figure 5
Bow Lake Trans. Stn.
ELEVATION 244'
SHEET
Seattle, WA.•
DEPTH 39 '
1 2
or
HONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
PROJECT #88110
BORE HOLE LOG
DEPTH
(tee
SOIL DESCRIPTION
t
a
4 CONDITION
GROUND
WATER
MOISTURE CONTENT %41
SPT RESISTANCE A
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
MIIIIIIIMIElle
1111P
ii
-36
Dense, brown, silty, fine SAND:
laminated with silt laminates
SP-ML�„
II
,�
"
38
(Glacial Outwash)
III
ri
40
END OF HOLE
11111111111111
X1
11111111
11111111
III
III
•
11111111
111
11111111
111
X11111
PROJECT
DATE 10-24-88
HOLE N0.
LOGGED BY SHE
Trans. Stn. Improvements
BH -4
Figure 5A
Bow Lake Trans. Stn.
ELEVATION 244
SKEET
Seattle, WA.
DEPTH 39'2
of 2
HONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
PROJECT #88110
BORE HOLE LOG
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT 1.
SPT RESISTANCE
10 20 30 400 6070 5
Dark brown, sandy gravelly SILT
(Fill)
..t
-
- 2 —
Medium dense, dark gray to gray,
4silty fine SAND: slightly plastic
'at
tip, SP; refuse, wood, glass,
etc.; moist
... 6 - (Fill)
-2
'.
-Lg
- 10
Loos! to dense, brown to gray
- 12 - REFU;E: mucky, saturated in -
10-25-88*
pian•?s; glass, plastic, etc.
- 14 - (Solid Waste Fill)
0845
2---16
-- 16- -.:K
-2--
- 18 - _z
-20 - ..1
.
-22 -I -
-
•
10-25-88*
0915
"--24
26 -1
Medium dense to dense, gray, silty
-28 - fine SAND: saturated with refuse
��
-
glas!, wood, cloth, plastic;
garbage odor
-30 - (Solid Waste Fill) -
Very dense, gray, mottled,
_32 _ gravelly SILT: moderately plastic;_
2. irterbed of fine to medium
34 sand. (Ti 11 Z
PROJECT
DATE 10-25-88
.
HOLE NO.
Trans. Stn. Improvements
LOGGED fly SHE
BH_5
Figure 6
Bow Lake Trans. Stn.
ELEVATION 245
Seattle, WA.
44'
SHEET
DEPTH
1 of 2
HONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
PROJECT #88110
BORE HOLE LOG
t
DEPTH
(feet)
SOIL DESCRIPTION
W
a
i
4
0
GROUND
WATER
CONDITION
MOISTURE CONTENT •1.
SPT RESISTANCE
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
•
--.
— -36—
38
-- 40
• —.42
—�
Very dense, gray, mottled,
gravelly SILT: moderately plastic;
2" interbed of fine to medium —
sand
(Till)
50/5"
A
•
55/6"
,a
—44
—46 --
-- —
—
•
—
*Perched water tables penetrated
while drilling —
•
Figure 6A
PROJECT
Trans. Stn. Improvements
DATE 10-25-88
HOLE NO.
BH -5
LOGGED BY SHE
Bow Lake Trans. Stn.
ELEVATION 245'
SHEET
2 01 2
Seattle, WA.DEPTH
44'
HONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
GOLDER ASSOCIATES (1992)
SUMMARY TEST PIT LOGS
TP -1 10 FT SW OF FIRE HYDRANT - 2/19/92
0.0 - 3.5 ft.
3.5 - 7.0 ft.
Compact, olive brown, coarse to fine SAND and coarse to fine GRAVEL,
some Clayey Silt, little Cobbles, SM (SOIL FILL).
Loose, gray SAND and..GRAVEL mixed with Refuse - rags, plastic and
wood debris, SM (SOIL FILL).
Sample at 1.0 feet.
Side-walls caving at six feet.
1.5 -inch metal water -line encountered at 7.0 ft. Water -line did not show
any signs of damage.
Test pit terminated at 7.0 ft.
TP -2 55,=T SW OF FIRE HYDRANT - 2/19/92
0.0 - 8.0 ft. Loose, brown, Silty coarse to fine SAND and GRAVEL mixed with Refuse -
primarily wood debris consisting of tree roots, limbs and logs. Occasional plastic
and paper debris, SM (SOIL FILL).
8.0 - 11.5 ft. Compact, gray, fine to coarse SAND, some Gravel, trace Silt (NATIVE OUTWASH
SAND).
4 -inch thick asphalt slabs encountered near surface (0.5 ft)
Test pit terminated at 11.5 ft.
TP -3 SOUTH OF EMPLOYEE PARKING LOT - 2/19/92
0.0 - 2.0 ft. Loose, brown, Silty coarse to fine SAND, some fine Gravel, SM -SP (SOIL FILL).
2.0 - 8.0 ft. Loose, dark gray, Silty SAND, some medium to fine Gravel mixed with Refuse -
wood, plastic and paper debris (REFUSE FILL).
8.0 - 13.5 ft Loose REFUSE - paper, cans, glass bottles etc. Very little soil mixed with the refuse
(REFUSE FILL).
13.5 - 15.0 ft. Loose, dark gray, Silty coarse to fine SAND, little Gravel, occasional glass and
plastic fragments, mixed with pockets of clean, gray, medium to fine SAND
(BOTTOM OF REFUSE FILL).
TP -4 NORTH OF EMPLOYEE PARKING LOT - 2/19/92
0.0 - 3.0 ft. Loose, brown to grayish olive green, coarse to fine SAND, little to some coarse to
fine Gravel, trace to some Silt, SM (SOIL FILL).
3.0 - 6.0 ft. Very dense, dark gray, Silty SAND and GRAVEL with occasional glass, metal and
plastic fragments. Soil is very difficult to excavate with a backhoe (REFUSE FILL).
6.0 - 13 ft. Loose, dark gray, Silty, medium to fine SAND mixed with Refuse - abundant metal
cans, glass, plastic and paper debris (REFUSE FILL). Refuse appears to be
supported in a soil matrix.
13.0 - 15.0 ft. Compact to dense, gray, medium to fine SAND (NATIVE OUTWASH SAND)
Sample at 2.0 feet
Slight water seepage at 3.0 ft.
Moderate water seepage and minor caving at 13.0 ft. •
Test pit terminated at 15.0 ft.
TP -5 WEST EDGE OF SITE - 2/19/92
0.0 - 3.0 ft. Loose, brown, Silty coarse to fine SAND, trace Gravel. Occasional glass fragments
(SOIL FILL).
3.0 - 5.0 ft. Dense, gray to olive brown, medium to fine SAND, SP (NATIVE OUTWASH
SAND).
Sample at 4.0 feet.
Test pit terminated at 5.0 ft.
SUMMARY HAND -AUGER LOGS
HA -1 NORTHWEST CORNER OF SITE - 2/19/92
0.0 - 2.5 ft. Loose, brown, coarse to fine SAND, little Silt, little Gravel, SM (SOIL FILL).
2.5 - 4.5. ft. Dense, brownish -gray, coarse to fine SAND, little to fine Gravel, SP (NATIVE
OUTWASH SANDS).
Gravel prevents further advancement of auger at 4.5 ft.
Hand auger hole terminated at 4.5 ft.
HA -2 50 FEET WEST OF THE GATE VALVE - 3/9/92
0.0 - 2.0 ft. Loose, brown, Silty, coarse to fine SAND, little medium to fine Gravel, SM (SOIL
FILL).
Obstructions (cobbles?) prevent further advancement of auger beyond 2.0 feet.
Three separate attempts were made.
HA -3 WEST OF THE ACCESS ROAD - 3/9/92
0.0 - 1.5 ft. Compact, brown, coarse to fine SAND, trace Silt, SP (SOIL FILL).
1.5 - 3.) ft. Compact, gray, coarse to fine SAND, SP (NATIVE OUTWASH SAND). Soil is
becoming wet at 2.0 feet.
Hand -auger hole terminated at 3.0 ft.
HONG WEST & ASSOCIATES (1994)
HOUG WEST & ASSOCIATES, INC.
DRILLING COMPANY:
DRILLING METHOD:
SAMPLING METHOD:
BORING LOG
TOTAL DEPTH: Feet
SURFACE ELEVATION: Feet
MEASURING POINT EL.: Feet
N—VALUE (b(ows/ft)
u
W
z
8
O
0
SOIL CLASS. (USCS)
DESCRIPTION
Poorly Graded Sand with Silt
Poorly Graded Sand with Slit and Gravel
Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel
• DISTURBED (SPT) Sample Location
Sample with recorded blows per foot
obtained using a spat spoon sampler and
the Standard Penetration Test (SPT).
• Moist. Cont. It
1 Pen. Resistance
(b)ows/foot)
0 20 40 80 80
NOTE: This log of subsurface Conditions apples only at the Specified location and on the data indicated.
PROJECT: BOW LAKE TRANSFER STA. BORING: LEGEND
LO.IATION: King County. Washington
DATE COMPLETED:
LO3GED BY:
PROJECT NUMBER: 93112-2
PAGE: 1 OF I
Figure 2
HONG WEST & ASSOCIATES, INC.. BORING LOG
DRILLING COMPANY: Pacific Testing Laboratories
DRILLING METHOD: 4—inch I.D. CFHS Auger
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
TOTAL DEPTH: 44.0 Feet
SURFACE ELEVATION: *273 Feet
MEASURING POINT EL.: Feet
W _
d
y r u
iu
tn aim
LL W
X —1 ¢ i
LL X 0
p N 0. —
0-
5—
(0-
15-
20-
25-
N—VALUE (blows/111
11-10-10 20
11-12-50/2'
8-9-0 21
17-10-10 20
20-25-20 51
HOIST. CONT. (%)
- DESCRIPTION
'o.o:c
C :tea.
:o.0:C
o ;c�
:o. • o:c
'tock
D„;Q
:o•p:c
:oo:c
;o•o:c
coact
• o • o:C
o.p;c
Loose to medium dense. brown, gravelly SAND:
moist. Contains glass, slag, concrete and brick
fragments.
—Obstruction at 2 feet. Pulled auger and moved 2
feet east.
0,1.;
S
• ;cc
k�r'P
Obstructions between 3.5 and 8.5 teet. Refusal.
Pulled auger and moved east 2 feet.
(ALL)
Artifically high blow count.
Soil is dark gray below ct0 feet with higher
.percent of fine gravel. Cobbles 0 10.5 feet.
Medium dense, gray, poorly graded fine to meoium
SAND with silt and gravel: moist. Numerous pieces
of glass. Also wire, ashes. wood and a nail.
(FILL)
Soil is similar but color varies from light to darty
gray: slightly higher gravel content.
Obstruction 0 20 feet.
Soil sample is brown.
Gravelly from 24.5 to 28.0 feet.
• Hoist. Coni (X)
A Per Resistance
(blows/toot)
0 20 40 80 S0
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated,
PROJECT: BOW LAKE TRANSFER STA_ BORING: BH -1
LOCATION: North WSDOT Fill Area
DATE COMPLETED: 02/21/94
LOGGED BY: Rod Faubion
PROJECT NUMBER: 93112-2
PAGE: 1 OF 2
Figure 3
5-
5---
30-
2
30-
35-
35-
X
40-
45-
50-
N—VALUE (blow sill)
20-50/6-
5-0-15
20-50/6"5-0-15 24
5-15-15 30
15-22-45 67
10-10-10 20
MOIST. CONT. (X)
HONG WEST & ASSOCIATES , INC .
BORING LOG
SOIL CLASS. (USCS)
DESCRIPTION
At 28 feet. sampler bounces: wood in shoe of
sampler. Artificaily high blow count.
Medium dense, gray, poorly graded. fine to medium
SAND with silt and gravel:,molst. Few large
(*Sl -inch) roots in upper part of sample.
TP.1"MCL- t 4P4M-r)
Sand with scattered 1" beds of silty sand.
Becomes dense to very dense.
Becomes medium dense.
Bottom of Boring at 44.0 feet.
SPT samples taken with free falling
140 Ib. hemmer dropping 30 inches.
L
• Moist. Cont. (XI
1 Pen. Resistance
(Matas/foot)
0 20 40 80 80
PROJECT: BOW LAKE TRANSFER STA_ BORING: BH -1
LOCATION: North WSDOT Fill Area
DAT E COMPLETED: 02/21/94
LOG 3ED BY: Rod Faubion
PROJECT NUMBER: 93112-2'
PAGE: 2 OF 2
Figure 4
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. (2003)
DRILLING COMPAtIY: Holocene Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 279.00 ± feel
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger. Mobile 8-61 truck rig
SAMPLING METHC D: SPT w/ Autohammer
LOCATION: See Si e & Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 10/9/2003
DATE COMPLETED: 10/9/2003
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
2
a-
o
0--
5-
10 —
15
20 —
25 —
30 —
0
m
>
rn
USOS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
111
GM
�
Medium dense, olive -brown, silty, sandy. tine to coarse
GRAVEL, moist.
(RECENT FILL)
SM
Cuttings: orange -brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, dry.
Medium dense, rust- and gray -mottled light brown, silly,
gravelly, fine to medium SAND, damp.
(WEATHERED TILL)
GM
Gravelly drill action, 7 to 15 feet.
oc,
•
•
Very dense, olive -brown, silty, fine to coarse sandy, fine to
coarse GRAVEL, moist to wet.
a
1`
(TILL)
o
•
0
l
c
•
SM
Dense, olive -brown, silty, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND.
moist; with approx. 2 -inch stratified sand bed at 16 feet.
(ICE -CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Dense, olive -brown, silty to clean, fine gravelly, fine to
medium SAND, moist. Stratified.
SP
Dense, light olive -brown to gray, clean. fine to medium
SAND, damp.
Dense, light gray, clean, fine to medium SAND, damp to
moist.
SAMPLE TYPE
SAMPLE NUMBER
V S-1 5-7-10
S-2 30-50/2"
OTHER TESTS
1/I S-3 8-17-25 GS
J�I pHIR
L V S-4 10-17-21
/ S-5 10-21-25 GS
pH/R
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploraticn log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechn cal report.
NOTE: This log of st bsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefor may not necessarily be indicative of other limes and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per fool
10 20 30 40
a v
W m
50 o
0
A
A
--5
10
15
—20
— 25
® A
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I—® --t Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
30
DIS,
1 SOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
® FMP UPDATE AND IMPLEMENTATION
HWAGEOSC[ENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
BH -2
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A2
BORING 2003008.GPJ 111104
/DRILLING COMPANY: Holocene Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 279.00 ± feet DATE STARTED: 10/9/2003
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Mobile B-61 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE COMPLETED: 10/9/2003
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
tip
tu
30
0
m
2
}
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPE
35 —
40 —
45 —
50 —
55 —
60 —
Dense, light gray, clean to slightly silly, fine lo medium
SAND. moist. Minor silty sand lenses, 1-5 mm thick.
Dense, light gray, clean, fine to medium SAND, damp.
Appears massive.•
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-6 10-18-19
S-7 14-24-26
Very dense, light gray, clean, fine to medium SAND, damp. \/ S-8 12-27-39
With lenses of slightly silty sand, 3-5 mm thick.
Borehole terminated al 41.5 feet.
No ground water seepage encountered during drilling.
Borehole abandoned with bentonite chips.
OTHER TESTS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may nol necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight. 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1 ® 1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
U123BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
FMP UPDATE AND IMPLEMENTATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.• 2003-008
BORING:
BH -2
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A2
BORING 2003009.GPJ 1l9/04
(DRILLING COMPAI• Y: Holocene Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 275.00 ± feet
DRILLING METHOC: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simcoe 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
LOCATION: See St e & Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 10/10/2003
DATE COMPLETED: 10/10/2003
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
o.
O
0--
5-
10 —
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
0
m
2
a -
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
o
o
3.
GM
6�
( 1
Cuttings: Light gray, silty, sandy GRAVEL, dry.
) 11c
C
Medium dense, light yellow-brown, silly, sandy, fine to
o(
coarse GRAVEL, dry.
o
+(
(RECENT FILL)
'
U
‘-
3
J
k GM
Glass In cuttings at 7 feet.
,1`
Gravelly drill action. to 19.5 feel.
.
o
C
(
�°
Very dense, stratified dark brown, yellow-brown,
gray -brown, and reddish -brown (2-3 inch layers), silty,
sandy, rine to coarse GRAVEL. moist. Glass fragments
C
(clear) at 9 feel, In 2 inch layer of abundant glass; one piece
r
of plastic sheeting.
a
(OLDER FILL with REFUSE)
6 -inch long, 1/2 -inch metal pipe in cuttings from approx. 10
(
feet.
3o
Drove rock; blow counts overstated.
3
C
(
Dense, dark brown, silty, sandy, fine to coarse GRAVEL,
wet. Trace broken glass and partly decomposed, blackened
o
wood. Peaty odor.
C
1.;
0
(
Medium dense, reddish -dark brown, silly, sandy, tine to
o ,c
coarse GRAVEL, wet. With a 1/2 -inch black cinder.
•'
C
Fast, smooth drill action from 19.5 to 35 feet.
3 0
o
ar
(
t
crl
a
o r
(
Medium dense, dark brown -gray, silty, sandy, fine GRAVEL,
wet. One piece of packing tape.
SM
Loose, dark brown, silty, fine gravelly, line to coarse SAND,
wet, over rust -mottled brown and gray grading to blue -gray,
silty fine to medium SAND, wet. Trace broken glass, hard
SAMPLE TYPE
SAMPLE NUMBER
w
U
z—
F ty
w c
eco
z
aD
OTHER TESTS
S-1 6.10-11 GS
XS-2 21-27-30
S-3 50/5"
S•4
8-7-7
V S-5 4-5-6 pH/R
Xi S-6 2-4-5 GS
pH/R
OC
For a pro )er understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploratic n log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechn cal report.
NOTE: This log of si rbsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
A Blows per fool
40
A
0
0
A
F__
50
0
—5
—10
— 15
— 20
— 25
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (To)
Plastic Limit I -0--I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
30
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
al'� FMP UPDATE AND IMPLEMENTATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
BH -3
PAGE: 1 of 2
FIGURE:
A3
P2O 2003008.GPJ 1/9/0,
/DRILLING COMPANY: Holocene Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 275.00 t feel
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simcoo 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 10/10/2003
DATE COMPLETED: 10/1012003
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
o=
w w
r.-..-
30
:30 —
35
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
plastic, partly decomposed wood.
Loose to medium dense, stratified gray, dark brown, and
blackish -brown, silty, fine gravelly, fine to medium SAND,
wet. Trace broken glass and mostly decomposed paper
fiber in lower 6 Inches, partly decomposed wood.
40 —
45 —
50 —
55 —
60 —
SP
Minor gravelly drill action below 35 feel.
Slough on top of sample: Blackish -brown soil as above,
with 1/2 -Inch thick layer of plastic bags.
Dense, gray, clean, fine to medium SAND, moist.
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Very dense, gray, clean, fine to medium SAND, moist.
Massive.
Borehole terminated al 44.5 feet.
Minor ground water seepage encountered between 13 and
35 feet.
Piezometer installed to 30 feet (1 -inch schedule 40 PVC).
SAMPLE TYPE
SAMPLE NUMBER
OTHER TESTS
S-7 2-2-8 GS
OC
AS-8 7-20-21
)1 S-9 20-31-46
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the dale indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
LF
N
Standard Penetration Test
(140 ib. weight, 30" drop)
s Blows per fool
a2
10 20 30 40 50 0
0
G
A
30
— 35
— 40
—45
--50
— 55
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
60
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
FMP UPDATE AND IMPLEMENTATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO :
BORING:
BH -3
PAGE: 2 of 2
2003-008 FIGURE; A3
PZO 2003008 GPJ 1/9/01
"'DRILLING COMPANY: Holocene Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 286.00 ± feet
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Simcoe 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METI-lC D: SPT w/ Cathead
LOCATION: See S :e & Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 10/9/2003
DATE COMPLETED: 10/10/2003
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
2
0'
o=
0
5-
10 —
15-
20 —
25 —
30 —
J
O
r
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
3
0
)c
l GM
o
Cuttings and drill action: Loose, brown, silty, sandy, fine to
coarse GRAVEL, moist. Gravel subrounded.
GM
LRECENT FILJ -- ,-
U
At 2 feet cutUngs become dark brown.
4
C
Drill action generally gravelly, from 2 to 33 feet.
U
t
Dense, gray -brown, silty, fine to medium sandy, line to
coarse GRAVEL, moist. Trace wood fibers.
)c..,
(OLDER FILL with REFUSE)
Hard, gravelly drill action al 3-3.5 and 6-6.5 feel.
0
o 41
o
Dense, dark brown to blackish -brown, with minor light
.
C
brown, organic, silly, fine to medium sandy, fine to coarse
)
(
GRAVEL, moist. Mild peaty odor.
5
t.
Hard, gravelly drill action at 10 to 11 feel.
41
)'
(
Medium dense, stratified blackish -brown to dark gray, silty,
o Gr
sandy, fine to coarse GRAVEL, moist. Partly decomposed
)c'
C
wood fragments in 1 -inch layer at 14 feet.
o
(
).
,••
t
Medium dense, reddish brown and gray -brown grading to
o
(
blackish -brown, silty, sandy, fine to coarse GRAVEL, moist.
Mild peaty odor. Trace broken glass, brick, and plastic
`
sheeting in blackish -brown portion (18.5-19.5 feet). 2 -inch
o
LI'C
(
thick partly decomposed wood.
c
o
'
Medium dense, stratified blackish -brown, blue -gray, and
)d,
op.
(
brown, organic, silty, sandy, fine to coarse GRAVEL, moist
grading to wet. Trace broken glass and porcelain.
)cam
C
3I-
I
01,1'
L
C
;I—
(
Medium dense, dark brown with some blackish -brown. silty,
a Li,-
sandy. fine GRAVEL, wet. Trace broken glass, brick
)(4,
(
fragments. partly decomposed wood fragments.
For a pro )er understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploratic n log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechn cal report.
NOTE: This log of si ibsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefor a may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
♦ Blows per foot
S
o�
10 20 30 40 50
A
A
0 e
0
0
a
A
A
A
0
5
10
15
— 20
— 25
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1 0 1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
30
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
FMP UPDATE AND IMPLEMENTATION
HWA.GEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
BORING:
BH -4
PAGE: 1 of 2
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008 FIGURE: A4
P2O 2003008.GPJ 1/010r
DRILLING COMPANY: Holocene Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 286.00 ± feet
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Slmcoe 4000 tracked rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 1019/2003
DATE COMPLETED: 10/10/2003
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
x
0.
UJ
30
35
40
45
O
00
i
7-
(1)
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
w
J
a
U)
c(\C
-3C.(
o5c
- w
-
o
C
.. (
do
Medium dense, dark brown, silty, gravelly SAND, wet.
Trace glass fragments, including melted amber and green
glass; trace partly decomposed wood fragments.
SM
Loose, light gray and olive -brown, very slay, rine to medium
-
SAND, moist. Rootlets al 39 feel. Massive appearance.
(WEATHERED DRIFT /COLLUVIUM)
SP
-
Medium dense, yellow-brown, clean, tine to medium SAND,
damp to moist. 3 lenses of rust -brown, slightly silty sand.
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
-
Medium dense. light gray, clean, fine to medium SAND,
moist. Stratified. with 3-5 mm lenses of slightly silty sand.
50 —
55 —
60 —
Borehole terminated at 49.5 feet.
Minor ground water seepage encountered between 25 and
35 feel.
Piezometer installed to 33 feet (1 -Inch schedule 40 PVC).
SAMPLE NUMBER
OTHER TESTS
W IU_ 1-
Q
0
0
S-9 7-12-11
S-10 7-11-16
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times andlor locations.
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per loot
10 20 30
40 50 0v
— 30
tat
0
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
— 35
— 40
— 45
— 50
— 55
60
100
1 BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
® FMP UPDATE AND IMPLEMENTATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.
2003-008
BORING:
BH -4
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE A4
P20 2003008.GPJ 119/04
(DRILLING COMPANY: Holocene Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 279.00 ± feet
DRILLING METHO): Hollow -Stem Auger, Moblie B-61 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT wl Autohammer
LOCATION: See S to & Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 10/912003
DATE COMPLETED: 10/9/2003
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
SM
6 Inches sawdust (next to small pile) over quarry spall over
loose to medium dense, olive -brown, silty SAND, damp.
(RECENT FILL)
SP
SM
5 —
10 —
15 —
20 —
25 —
30 —
Medium dense, olive -brown, clean to slightly silly, fine to
medium SAND, moist.
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Medium dense, light olive -brown, clean, fine to medium
SAND, moist. Minor silty sand lenses, 1-10 mm thick.
Medium dense, light olive -brown, slightly silly, fine to
medium SAND, moist.
Very dense, light gray, clean, fine 10 medium SAND, damp.
Dense, light gray, clean, fine to medium SAND, dry to damp.
Stratified, 1- to 8 -inch thick beds.
SAMPLE TYPE
SAMPLE NUMBER
S - 'I 5-7-9
S-2 8-13-14
OTHER TESTS
S-3 8-13-14 GS
pH/R
S-4 14-26-35
yi S-5 15-15-18 GS
pH/R
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploraticn log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechn cal report.
NOTE: This log of si bsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the dale indicated
and therefor : may not necessarily be indicative of other limes and/or locations.
CK
rF
5
O
a
C7
0
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A BIOws per fool
10
20
30
40
20 40 60
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
80
100
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
FMP UPDATE AND IMPLEMENTATION
HWAGEOSC[ENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.:
BORING 2003008.GPJ 11)/04
BORING:
BH -5
PAGE: 1 of 2
2003-008 FIGURE: A5
DRILLING COMPANY: Holocene Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 279.00 ± feet
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Moblie 13-61 truck rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan. Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 10/9/2003
DATE COMPLETED: 10/9/2003
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
2
o�
30
1
0
>
rn
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPE
35 —
40 —
45 —
50 —
55 —
Medium dense, light gray, clean, fine to medium SAND,
damp. Massive.
Dense, light gray, clean, fine to medium SAND, damp.
Stratified, beds 1- to 6 -Inches thick, with 4 mm silly sand
lens.
Very dense, light gray, clean, fine to medium SAND, dry 10
damp. Massive.
Borehole terminated at 41.5 feet.
No ground water seepage encountered during drilling.
Borehole abandoned with bentonite chips.
SAMPLE NUMBER
s-6
uJ
U
z—
H
CO L
rn0
w
a�
z
w—
• .o
8-12-15
S-7 9-16-20
S-8 15-26-26
LY
OTHER TESTS
60
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the dale Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other limes and/or locations.
0.�
°
0
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30' drop)
A Blows per foot
10
20
30
40
50
a 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I--e—I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
30
— 35
— 40
— 45
—50
— 55
100
60
BOW LAKE TRANSFER STATION
FMP UPDATE AND IMPLEMENTATION
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
BH -5
PAGE: 2 of 2
FIGURE:
A5
BORING 2003008.GPJ 1/5104
FINAL SLOPE STABILITY REPORT
Bow Lake Recycling & Transfer Station
King County Solid Waste Division
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
Prepared for
R.W. Beck
June 27, 2008
HWA GEoSCIENCEs INC.
• (rcotc•<•!rrric<rl 1 i irrccrirrt;
• 1!y<lro colo,
• Ge;ocrtviriirrrrrerrt<rl 5crvirc5
• lrtspectiorr l� tint
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
c,eotechniiat _ CStt,' :enr Iff tnc tint, •It}ftp h • i„ „�.;f„i,flu ,t�,j
',i �,. 1'C I'f tt _ ti'tt t41
June 27, 2008
1-1.WA Project No. 2003-008-21
R.W. Beck
1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2500
Seattle, WA 98154-1004
Attention: M.r. Karl Hufnagel, P.E.
SUB.. ECT:
Dear Sir:
FINAL SLOPE STABILITY REPORT
Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer Station
King County, Washington
As re quested, HWA GeoScien.ces Inc. (HWA) has completed an investigation and the
resul:s are presented in this report. We conducted the following investigation and
geote clinical analyses:
® Wall E subgrade conditions and Wall E design
® The stability of .fill to he placed on the existing east slope, over thick refuse
deposits
O Slope stability on the north slope
O Slope stability in the vicinity of Wall C, along the north perimeter access road
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project, and
request that you provide further review commentary on this report draft so that any issues
may be addressed in the final report.
Sincerely,
HWA GEOSCIL:NCE;S INC.
Sa H. Hong, P.E.
Princ; pal
BWT::>HH:bwi
19730 - 64th Avenue W.
Suite 200
Lynnwood, WA 98036.5957
Tel: 425.774.0106
Fax: 425.774.2714
www.hwageo.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 GENERAL 1
1.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES AND AUTHORIZATION 1
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION 2
2.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION 2
3.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS 2
3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION 2
3.2 GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 3
3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3
3.4 GROUND WATER 4
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5
4.1 GENERAL 5
4.2. STABILITY OF THE EASTERN AND SOUTHERN SLOPES 6
4.2.1. Stability of Proposed Permanent Fill Over Refuse Slope and
Wall E 6
4.2.2 Stability of Proposed Temporary Fill Slopes 8
4.2.3 Slope Fill Placement 9
4.3 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES ALONG NORTH PERIMETER ROAD 9
4.3.1. Stability of North Slope .9
4.3.2. Stability of Wall C on Northeastern Slope 13
4.4 WALL E DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 14
4.5 FILL SOIL HANDLING AND DISPOSAL 17
4.5.1 Construction Issues 17
4.5.2 Health and Safety 18
5.0 ('ONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS 18
6.0 F.EFERENCES 21
LIST OE FIGURES (FOLLOWING TEXT)
Figure 1
Figur, 2A
Figur; 2B
Figur(;s 3A — 3L
Figures 4A — 4H-6
Figur; 41— 4J
Figur(; 5A -5B
Figur(; 6
Figur; 7
Vicinity Map
Site and Exploration Plan, Wall E Fill Slope
Site and Exploration Plan, North Slope
Slope Stability Analyses, Wall E Fill Slope
Slope Stability Analyses, North Slope
Slope Stability Analyses, Wall C, Northeastern Slope
Global Slope Stability Analysis in Vicinity of MSE Wall
Geogrid Wall
Benching Detail
2003-001 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc 1 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Field Investigation
Figure A-1 Legend of Terms and Symbols on Exploration Logs
Figures A-2 to A-10 Logs of Test Pits TP -12 through TP -19
Appendix B: WSDOT Qualified Products List
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc ii HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
FINAL SLOPE STABILITY REPORT
BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY SOLID WASTE DIVISION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
Per if e 2006 Facility Master Plan Update (FMP), King County Solid Waste Division
(SWI►) plans to construct a new transfer building on property to be acquired from
WSDDT, lying immediately north of the existing transfer station; demolish the existing
statio 1; and also construct scale facilities, a maintenance building, roadways, and trailer
parking. Geotechnical investigation findings and design recommendations for the new
facilities have been reported on previously by HWA GeoSciences Inc. (HWA) in a draft
repot dated November 29, 2007.
This ieport presents the results of a supplemental geotechnical engineering investigation
performed by HWA for the design and construction of Wall E, and to quantitatively
evaluate stability of the refuse slopes (east and south) with proposed fill, the north slope,
and soldier pile wall slopes east of the north access road. Wall E is a proposed retaining
wall t 3 retain the toe of proposed fill over the easterly to southerly refuse slope of the
existi;lg transfer station.
We understand that Wall E will vary in height up to 20 feet. It will be constructed as an
MSE wall, consisting of structural fill reinforced with horizontal layers of geogrid, and
faced with shotcrete.
The project location is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Existing and proposed
features, topography, and exploration locations are shown on the Site and Exploration
Plan, Figures 2A and 2B.
1.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES AND AUTHORIZATION
A sco De of services and cost estimate for this supplemental geotechnical investigation
was submitted to Mr. Karl Hufnagel, of R.W. Beck, on March 19, 2008. Following his
feedback, a revised version was submitted on April I, 2008, and subsequently, verbal
authorization to proceed was given by Mr. Hufnagel.
In ger eral, our scope of work for this project included a geotechnical subsurface
exploration program; performing slope stability analyses; performing engineering
analy: es for MSE wall design; and preparing draft and final supplemental geotechnical
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
reports. The results of this supplemental report will be incorporated into the final project
geotechnical report.
We proposed an exploration program that consisted of backhoe test pits to determine the
physical properties of soils along the proposed Wall E alignment, including the presence
and thickness of refuse and depth to dense native soils. The purpose of this exploration
was to determine the refuse thickness such that the refuse profile on the slopes could be
reasonably delineated for slope stability analyses. Additionally; it was aimed at
evaluation of foundation bearing conditions and provision of geotechnical parameters for
design and construction of the proposed Wall E.
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
2.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION
The fieldwork consisted of a subsurface exploration program that included nine test pits
(designated TP -12 through TP -19). The approximate exploration locations are plotted on
Figure 2A. Each of the explorations was advanced under full-time HWA supervision,
and was logged by an engineering geologist. During the field ir.vestigation, soil samples
were classified in the field and pertinent information, including sample depths,
stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, and ground water occurrence was recorded.
Representative soil samples were obtained from the explorations and taken to our
laboratory for further examination. Field exploration methods are described in detail and
logs of the explorations are presented in Appendix A.
3.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS
3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION
The existing Bow Lake Transfer Station is located on the site of a closed landfill,
adjacent to the east side of I-5, north of the South 188th Street Interchange (see Figure 1).
The topography of the general site area has been extensively madifred by previous
landfill operations, construction of I-5, and historical sand and gravel mining activities.
Topographic relief is on the order of 235 feet from the existing east access road down to
the valley bottom. Detailed slope descriptions are provided in the November 29, 2007,
draft geotechnical report for the Recycling and Transfer Station, and in the January 17,
2008, draft geotechnical report for the slope pipelines.
The proposed Wall E alignment is situated east and south of the existing facility, on a cut
bench along the toe of the existing refuse slope (See Figures 2A, Site and Exploration
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc 2 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June :'.7, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
Plan). Elevations at the proposed wall toe vary from 163 feet at the southeast corner to
203 fret at the west end and 178 feet at the north end.
3.2 GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Surfic ial geological information for the site area was obtained partly from the published
map; `Geologic Map of the Des Moines Quadrangle, King County, Washington."
(Walc'ron, 1962). This map indicates that the plateau west of the site, upon which
Sea -T ac International Airport, and the cities of SeaTac, Burien, and Des Moines lie, is
predominantly mantled by Vashon till, deposited during the most recent Pleistocene
glaciation. This material was deposited as a discontinuous mantle of ground moraine
beneath advancing glacial ice on the eroded surface of older deposits. Soils defined as
Vashon till consist of an unsorted and heterogeneous mass of silt, gravel, and sand in
varying proportions. The till is of high density/strength due to glacial over -consolidation,
and typically has low permeability.
The s .wficial geology of the slope forming the side of the Duwamish River Valley, which
induces the subject site, is mapped as kame-terrace deposits. This material consists of
stratified sand and gravel that was deposited by meltwater streams flowing from receding
glacia 1 ice, and was deposited against or close to the ice as Ice -Contact Stratified Drift.
Inclu: ions of till are common, typically discontinuous, and of limited thickness. Locally,
these kame-terrace deposits were frequently mined for sand and gravel.
3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The c arrent subsurface investigation encountered dense glacial soils at depths of 1 to
4 feet consisting of weathered drift, topsoil, and/or fill or refuse. Specific soil types are
described in general terms in the following sub -sections.
Geolcgic cross-sections through the project site are based on the current and previous
explo -ation logs, the updated topographic survey by DHA, and our ground surface
observations. Due to the interpretive nature of cross-sections, only the exploration logs
should be relied upon for subsurface detail at their particular locations.
On th exploration logs, soil layers containing refuse are indicated with a cross -hatched
pattern, as noted in the left-hand column for soil symbols. A similar hatching on the
cross-sections also indicates the presence of compressible refuse.
Fill — Minor thicknesses (11/2 to 4 feet) of loose silty sand fill were encountered in a few
of the test pits, lying over or mixed with topsoil, or mixed with refuse.
Refuse — Test pit TP -15a encountered approximately 3 feet of decomposed refuse at the
proposed Wall E toe, increasing upslope to 7 feet thick at about 15 feet horizontally from
2003-00.• Slope Stability & Wall E.doc 3 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
the proposed wall toe. The refuse was mixed with silty sand, which had oxidized, and
included glass bottles, tin cans, plastic bags, metal debris, and hard plastics. No
decomposable material remained. Test pit TP -15b was excavated east (down slope from)
the old access road, in case it would be advantageous to shift Wall E and the proposed
access road out of the refuse. No refuse was encountered in TP -15b. At test pit TP -19,
scattered non -decomposable refuse was encountered within the 11/2 feet of fill at the
surface.
Topsoil — One to two feet of surficial topsoil, or topsoil buried beneath fill and/or refuse,
was encountered in each of the test pits. The topsoil was generally loose and highly
organic, with variable root content.
Weathered Drift — Medium dense to dense, gravelly, silty sand derived from mechanical
and chemical weathering of the underlying till was encountered in each of the test pits.
Typically grading to the underlying Vashon Till, its thickness varied from about 6 inches
(in an old road cut at TP -12) to two feet.
Outwash — Dense, clean to slightly silty, gravelly sand was encountered in test pits TP -
17 and TP -18 along the east -west leg of proposed Wall E. This material appeared to be
an ice -contact outwash, and is transitional to the Till beneath it, and to the Till
encountered in test pit TP -16.
Vashon Till — Dense to very dense glacial till was encountered at depth in each of the
test pits. This unit was observed to consist of a compact, unsorted and non -stratified,
mixture of silt, sand, and gravel with scattered cobbles. Vashon till was also encountered
at a shallow depth previously in borehole B-241, at the proposed northern end of Wall E.
3.4 GROUND WATER
Ground water was observed in a few of the test pits along the Wall E alignment,
generally perched on top of the Vashon till. Perched ground water was observed in
previous explorations on the facility site. Ground water is present in piezometers
installed in borehole BH -209, near the top of the slope.
Along the north slope (large ravine), minor ground water seepage was observed a few
feet above the stream.
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc 4 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 1_7, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 GENERAL
Subglade conditions along the proposed alignment of Wall E are suitable for construction
of an MSE retaining wall. The refuse tapers out at or above the toe of the slope at the old
cut rcad, such that refuse will be encountered along only a short segment (50 to 70 feet)
of the wall footprint, in the vicinity of test pit TP -15a. Alternatively, the wall alignment
could be shifted east at that section in order to avoid excavating and disposing of refuse.
Along the northern perimeter road, north and east of the future north scale facility,
cantil over soldier pile retaining walls are proposed. The proposed retaining walls lie
adjac ;nt to the north and north-eastern slopes. Design parameters of the cantilever
soldit r pile retaining wall are presented in our Revised Draft Geotechnical report dated
Novenber 29, 2007 (Section 4.7 and Figure 5C).
In sec tion 4.2 and 4.3 of this supplemental geotechnical report, we present slope stability
analytes of the eastern Wall E area, and the northern and north-eastern Wall C area
slope;. The slope stability analyses were conducted in accordance with Section 4.1,
Slope Stability, of the City of Tukwila's Bulletin B4 Geotechnical Report Guidelines.
Our slope stability analyses are based on the Janbu simplified limit equilibrium method
utilizing the Slide 5.0 Version 5.032 program (Rocscience Inc.). We performed both
static and pseudo -static analyses. Based on a Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) of 0.32g
for this site, representing a 1:475 year return period earthquake, the horizontal seismic
coefficient (kh) utilized to perform the pseudo -static slope stability analyses was taken as
0.16 (i.e., PGA/2). According to Section 2 Design requirements of the City of Tukwila
Bulle:in B4 Geotechnical Report Guidelines, the minimum design factors of safety of
slope:; should not be less than those presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Minimum Design Factors for Safety of Slopes
Loading Condition Temporary Slope Permanent Slope*
Static
Seismic (Dynamic)
1.25 1.40
1.05 1.10
* Perm.inent slopes whose failure will not impact buildings or other structures uninhabited by humans
Our quantitative slope stability analyses of the subject slopes indicate low probability of
slidin g, as discussed in the following sections of this report. Therefore, the proposed
structures (Wall C and E) can be constructed as planned, along with the intended
temporary and permanent fill placements, provided the engineering recommendations
presented herein and in the final report are adhered to.
2003-00 i Slope Stability & Wall E.doc 5 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
4.2. STABILITY OF THE EASTERN AND SOUTHERN SLOPES
4.2.1. Stability of Proposed Permanent Fill Over Refuse Slope and Wall E
The landfill slope, east and south of the existing transfer station. has an inclination in the
order of 2H:1 V to 3H:1 V (Horizontal: Vertical), with locally steeper and shallower
portions. The additional geotechnical field explorations conducted recently for this phase
of our study allows us to delineate a reasonable geotechnical profile on the west slope at
Wall E location. Our slope stability analyses are based on the Cross-sections 1-1', 2-2',
3-3' and 4-4', whose locations are shown on Figure 2A. Subsuiface geologic information
was obtained from HWA borings B-207 through B-210 and B-241 conducted in February
and March 2007, and test pits TP -12 through TP -19 conducted for the current study (See
HWA's Final Geotechnical Report - Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer Station, King
County Solid Waste Division, Tukwila, Washington dated June 27, 2008).
Based on the results of our subsurface investigations, the landfill slope east and south of
the proposed perimeter road and Future Facilities Area consists of up to 40 feet of refuse
with variable amounts of fill soil mixed in. These materials are underlain by
consolidated glacial deposits. The refuse tapers out at or above the toe of the slope at the
old cut road, such that refuse will be encountered along only a short segment (50 to 70
feet) of the wall footprint excavation, in the vicinity of test pit IP -15a. Alternatively, the
wall could be shifted east at that section in order to avoid excavating and disposing of
refuse. In either case, native subgrade conditions along the proposed alignment of Wall
E are suitable for construction of an MSE retaining wall.
The construction of the new perimeter road and Future Facilities Area requires additional
fill, from 2 to 27 feet thick, on top of the refuse slope. To achieve the proposed grade
elevations with the additional fill, and to reduce post -construction settlements, the top of
the slope will be preloaded for an extended period of time. In our stability analyses, we
envisioned utilizing a 10 -foot thick preload consisting of the same construction fill soils
as the new slope grading fill to be placed above the existing refuse. Table 2 shows unit
weight and shear strength parameters of the anthropogenic (man-made) and natural soil
deposits considered in the slope stability calculations. We also set the new fill soil
strength parameters assuming that new fill will be placed after removing the existing
vegetation, and notch bench -cuts made to key the fill into the hill, to develop the assumed
soil strength at the contact zone (see Section 4.2.3 for fill placement recommendations).
For construction traffic support on the exposed refuse, a geogrici layer may need to be
installed, which will in turn help to develop the assumed soil strength parameters.
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc 6 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA, Project No. 2008-003-21
Table 2: Material Properties
Material Type Unit Weight (pcf) 4 (degrees) c (psf)
Prelo id 130 34 100
New Fill 130 34 100
Old F ill 120 32 0
Fill with Refuse 105 28 500
Refu: e 95 26 500
Glacial Deposits 135 40 200
The r.,sults of our slope stability analyses are summarized in Table 3 and computer
printouts are presented in Figures 3A through 3H.
Table 3: Summary of Permanent Fill Slope Stability Analyses
lope Location
Static Factor of
Safety (FS)
Seismic Factor of
Safety (FS)
Figure Numbers
Profile 1-1'
Profile 2-2'
Profile 3-3'
Profile 4-4'
1.94
2.22
2.15
2.13
1.32
1.43
1.41
1.13
Figures 3A and 3B
Figures 3C and 3D
Figures 3E and 3F
Figures 3G and 3H
In view of the results indicated in Table 3, our slope stability calculations indicate that
the pi oposed fill slope supported over the landfill slope meets the criteria outlined in the
City of Tukwila geotechnical report guidelines for permanent slopes.
To dc termine if a reduction in the strength parameters of the glacial deposits underlying
the refuse could, in fact, lead to conditions wherein the slopes might not have a sufficient
level Df stability, we have performed a parametric sensitivity analysis for slope
Profile 1-1' under seismic design loading conditions for this site. Our results are
displayed on Figure 3H-1. From this figure, it is readily apparent that the minimum soil
strength combination of internal friction angle (phi or (1)) and cohesion (c) can fall
anywaere on the line shown in the figure. That is, the minimum friction angle required
for a ;ohesion value of zero (0) is of the order of 29 degrees to satisfy a minimum
seismic safety factor of 1.1. On the other extreme, for a cohesion value of 600 psf, the
minirium required friction angle is 18 degrees. Clearly, though we employed a friction
value of 40 degrees in combination with a cohesion value of 200 psf for the glacial
depot its, which we deemed appropriate for glacial deposits ranging from glacial till to
outwash and ice -contact stratified drift, it seems fairly evident that the glacial deposits
2003-003 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc 7 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
actually require a much lower level of operational strength before they would govern the
stability of this slope. The same may be claimed for slope Profiles 2-2' through 4-4',
which are of reduced gradient and inherently more stable for comparable material
properties.
4.2.2 Stability of Proposed Temporary Fill Slopes
Based on the 90% submittal drawings for initial site preparation, entitled Bow Lake
Processing/Transfer Facility — Site Preparation Contract; Page C'25, Sheet Number 23 —
Site Grading Plan, we understand that the County is planning on temporarily stock -piling
cut fill from slopes along I-5 onto the refuse slope east of the east perimeter road. The
fill will be placed on the refuse slope upwards (west) from Wall E, up to a maximum
inclination of 2H:1 V and as high as elevation 270 feet, then sloping down at
approximately 20 degrees to the existing east access road.
HWA analyzed the stability of the temporary stockpile on top of the existing refuse slope.
For our analyses, the proposed temporary stockpile grade elevations were simulated on
top of existing grades, based on Profiles 2-2' and 3-3', previously discussed in
Section 4.2.1. The material properties assumed in the previous section (Table 2) were
also used for the temporary fill slope analyses. The results are summarized in Table 4
and computer printouts are depicted in Figures 3I through 3L.
Table 4: Summary of Temporary Fill Slope Stability Analyses
Slope Location
Static Factor
of Safety (FS)
Seismic Factor
of Safety (FS)
Figure Numbers
Profile 2-2'
Profile 3-3'
1.49
1.48
1.05
1.05
Figures 3I and 3J
Figures 3K and 3L
Based on the results of slope stability analyses, it is our opinion that the proposed
temporary stockpiling on the refuse slopes is safe, provided that the stockpiling is
conducted during dry season or; otherwise, clean sand and gravel materials must be used
if the construction occurs during wet season. The WSDOT stock pile materials cannot be
used during wet season because they possess too much fines in the soil matrix. In
addition some portions of WSDOT materials in place are currently extremely wet and
plastic. Therefore, they are not suitable as fill material in this slope even during dry
season. The stock -pile also should be compacted to 90 % optimum density, based on
Modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557) test procedures, to satisfy the stability of the slope in
the area.
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc 8 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWP. Project No. 2008-003-21
4.2.3 Slope Fill Placement
The r roposed fill over the existing refuse fill slope should be constructed carefully. The
existing vegetation, mostly blackberry brambles, should be removed completely. Fill
placement will follow construction of Wall E (see Section 4.4). We understand the fill
will consist of native soils cut from near I-5 for the access road, and from other areas.
This :naterial is anticipated to be an outwash sand (kame terrace deposits) with variable
silt content ranging from approximately 10 to 30 percent. It is moisture sensitive and,
there: ore, needs to be placed during dry weather and site conditions. Some part of
WSDOT fill is wet and plastic and can not be placed on the slope. The fill should be
place1 in horizontal lifts, for which the existing slope should be benched into as fill
placement progresses up the slope. The existing surface of the slope consists of sandy fill
mixed with non -decomposable refuse. The new fill should be placed in horizontal lifts,
not e;:ceeding 10 inches in loose thickness, and compacted with a vibratory drum roller
to 90% of Modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557) density. Over -filling and trimming back at
the fi 1 edge will be necessary to achieve the degree of compaction recommended herein
withi i the slope face materials. It will not be otherwise possible to attain the
recommended degree of compaction in the slope face by attempting to tamp the loose
face i naterial with a hoe pack or similar methodology. The resulting slope should be
protea;ted from erosion with best management practices, which may include hydroseeding
and use of erosion control matting, as appropriate. We understand the temporary fill
slope will be protected with plastic sheeting for at least several months until soil is
removed for use as preload on the existing transfer station site.
4.3 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES ALONG NORTH PERIMETER ROAD
4.3.1. Stability of North Slope
Along the proposed north perimeter road, soldier pile retaining walls are proposed to
conta in road fill embankment and to permanently deal with slope stability concerns of the
north .,rn slopes. This portion of the WSDOT property, including the North Scale facility
and Transfer/TSO building, is covered with approximately 20-30 feet of recent WSDOT
fill, v hich in turn is underlain by burn fill. The burn fill was evidently displaced and
stock )iled on the WSDOT property during initial construction of I-5. From recent and
previous investigations, the thickness of the burn fill was observed to range from about
10 to 30 feet. The explorations further revealed that the fill materials are underlain by
consc lidated ice -contact stratified drift and advance outwash deposits. These deposits
consi ;t of predominantly medium dense (at the top) to very dense sandy gravel with silt,
silty :and, and hard sandy silt.
The r.iedium dense granular material encountered in our borings (B-232 and B-233) is a
zone )f the glacial deposits in these profile areas that directly underlie the burn fill soils.
The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N -values suggest that the zone is likely
2003-003 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc 9 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
representative of the formerly weathered portion of the in situ native glacial soils and is
of the order of 3 to 5 feet thick. This is a common occurrence locally and tends to
represent the surficial layer of most local slopes including, in our view, the natural slopes
at the north end of this site. These slopes are generally vegetated and presently stable,
with the exception of an observed localized older surficial failure in advance outwash soil
to the north of our borehole B-231, which is presently standing near vertically in the
failed interval and suggests a high level of apparent cohesion in the intact soils; more
likely a combination of friction and cohesion that allows the slope to remain standing in
such a steep configuration.
In the vicinity of the proposed retaining wall locations, a significant portion of the fill
stockpile (WSDOT fill and burn fill) is planned to be removed/unloaded approximately
to about elevation 270 feet. Currently, we have not detected any signs of slope instability
in the area indicating that, despite the adverse slope surcharging created by the high
WSDOT stock piling, the slope has remained stable.
Our slope stability analyses are based on Cross-sections (Profiles) 5-5'and 6-6', whose
locations are shown on Figure 2B. The analyses were performed based on the most
current proposed grades, which means that load currently imposed on the slope will, in
fact, be reduced. Table 5 shows unit weight and shear strength parameters assumed in
our slope stability analyses. Material properties were assumed based on results of
previous and recent subsurface investigations, field observations and our experience with
similar materials encountered in the Pacific Northwest. These parameters are considered
to be realistic for the materials under consideration. However, it is to be noted that the
shear strength parameters used for the slope stability analyses are somewhat higher than
the various wall design soil strength parameters, such that the internal wall design will be
somewhat conservative relative to global stability considerations. That is, the global
stability levels determined by our analyses will provide for the least factors of safety in
respect to long-term wall stability.
Table 5: Material Properties
Material Type Unit Weight (pcf) (degrees) c (psf)
New Fill
Burn Fill
Glacial Deposits
130
120
135
34
32
45
100
0
600
Our previous exploratory borings in the WSDOT stockpile, which were drilled to depths
of about 50 feet, did not encounter ground water during drilling. However, our slope
reconnaissance efforts conducted in May and October 2006 alor..g the northern slope in
the vicinity of Cross-section 6-6' revealed minor ground water seepage emanating out of
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
10
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
the slope at about elevations 178 and 125 feet. Based on the absence of ground water in
nine :-ecent and previous borings, and minor seepage observed on the northern natural
slopes during our field reconnaissance trips, we have developed two ground water
mode Is for slope stability analyses of the northern slopes, as follows:
Mod A #1 — Based on the minor seepage observed on the North Slope, Model #1 assumes
perch ed ground water on two discrete 6 foot thick, approximately horizontal, layers
existing below elevations 125 and 178 feet. These layers are assumed to exhibit the same
shear strength properties as the surrounding soils. In the vicinity of Profile 5-5', where
ground water seepage was not observed on the slope, we assumed a conservative scenario
of ground water occurrence day -lighting at the toe of slope (see Figures 4A and 4B).
This nodel is believed to most realistically represent the existing slope conditions at that
locat:on. For Profile 6-6', the ground water surface was taken to be coincident with the
top o the upper perching layer, as indicated on Figures 4E and 4F.
Model #2 — Although ground water was not detected in our borings in the vicinity of the
proposed retaining wall along the northern perimeter road, Model #2 assumes the worst
case i improbable) scenario, assuming saturated slope below about elevation 240 feet at
the south end. The ground water phreatic surface is then modeled to run approximately
paral el to slope towards the north end, as depicted on Figures 4C , 4D, 4G and 4H.
The results of our static and seismic slope stability analyses are summarized in Table 6,
and computer printouts are presented in Figures 4A through 4H.
Table 6: Summary of North Slope Stability Analyses
Slope Model Static Seismic Factor Figure Numbers
Lo;.ation Factor of of Safety (FS)
Safety (FS)
Profile 5-5' Model #1
Model #2
Profile 6-6' Model #1
Model #2
2.00
1.59
1.92
1.53
1.51
1.16
1.42
1.11
Figures 4A and 4B
Figures 4C and 4D
Figures 4E and 4F
Figures 4G and 4H
Our static and seismic slope stability calculations, for the subject northern slopes with
existing slope conditions (Model #1), show a least factor of safety FS = 1.92 and
FS = 1.42, respectively. Hence, our calculations indicate that the subject slopes satisfy
the criteria outlined in the City's guidelines.
We a so analyzed a slope model •(Model #2), which simulates the worst case scenario
with sigh ground water conditions near the ground surface. This is contrary to findings
2003-0(8 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
11
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
of dry conditions in nine previous and recent exploratory borings. in the vicinity of the
proposed soldier pile retaining wall, but is presented more for academic interest.
Moreover, the proposed development will cover a majority of the WSDOT site with
impervious surfaces, resulting in even less infiltration feeding the local ground water
table. Nevertheless, our slope stability analyses with these unlikely high ground water
conditions in the subject slopes (Model # 2), resulted in a least static and seismic factor
of safety FS = 1.53 and FS = 1.11, respectively, as shown in Table 6. Therefore, even
under this conservative ground water assumption, stability cond'tions are satisfactory to
the City's criteria.
Notwithstanding the stability results obtained for deep-seated failure conditions, to gain
an appreciation of the probable or operationally realistic strength conditions in the glacial
deposits which would be of lowest strength (i.e. the weathered slope zone described
earlier in this section), we commonly employ an infinite slope analysis approach for the
surficial layer resting on the stronger unweathered native materials. Our observations for
the slopes in this area of the site suggests general stability of the surficial soils prevailed
not only under static conditions, but under the loading effects of the recent
(February 28, 2001) Nisqually Earthquake. Based on published records, we perceive that
the peak ground acceleration (PGA) at this site was of the order of 0.16g during this
event. In keeping with standard practice, therefore, we selected a horizontal acceleration
factor of 50% of the PGA and applied it in our infinite slope analysis. The natural slope
gradient on Profile 5-5' is approximately 1.2H: 1V and we analyzed a weathered zone
thickness of 5 feet (1.5 m) with no ground water pressures. We assumed that the
weathered slope material would have a minimal apparent cohesion value of
approximately 200 psf (10 kPa), largely attributable to the presence of the root systems of
trees and ground cover presently existing on these slopes. This :_s consistent with the
findings of a number of researchers that have studied this effect. For these conditions,
and a starting friction angle of 37 degrees, which we consider to be well within the realm
of realism for the weathered glacial deposits of the area, we determined that the factor of
safety was of the order of 1.36 during the Nisqually event (Figure 4H-1 and 4H-2). A
parametric sensitivity analysis for this condition indicates that the friction angle could
have been as low as 28 degrees and failure would not have occurred for the slope
gradient analyzed and the cohesion considered operable in this slope through vegetation
cover (Figure 4H-2). To carry this analysis one step further, we also considered the
design level earthquake (1 in 475 year event) which would prov:.de a PGA of 0.32g at
this site. Our analyses, presented on Figures 4H-3 and 41-1-4, indicate that the friction
angle would have to be at least 32 degrees to provide for the minimum factor of safety of
1.1. We believe that these parameters are the probable range of minimum operational
values that presently exist in the weathered zone of this slope and that the cohesion and
friction values in the underlying intact soils are probably significantly higher.
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
12
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HW!. Project No. 2008-003-21
To do termine the parametric sensitivity of the stability (factor of safety) related to a
deep- seated failure in this slope, we also performed sensitivity analyses on shear strength
parameters of the glacial deposits for both slope Profiles 5-5' and 6-6'. Figures 4H-5 and
4H-6 provide our results for only the seismic slope loading condition and for the
Model #1 ground water condition, which we believe to be the most realistic for this site.
Thest; figures show that the City -required factor of safety of 1.1 can be achieved for a
friction value of 40 degrees and a cohesion value ranging from about 280 to 320 psf for
Profi es 5-5' and 6-6', respectively. Though these soil strength parameters are
signi: icantly lower than the values assumed for the glacial deposits in our stability
analyses (see Table 5) and which yielded factors of safety that indicated adequate
stability conditions (see Table 6), they are well within the realm of realistic values for the
soil materials existing below the weathered zone, in our view. Hence, we conclude that
suffic ient stability conditions will be present within the existing slopes, consistent with
City requirements, even if the strength conditions are actually lower than assumed, and
deep-seated instability is unlikely, either as a consequence of the development, or as a
natur rl occurrence that might have an impact on the development.
Based on our analyses with the existing data, we conclude that any deep-seated slope
failure in the northern slopes is unlikely. In addition, a minimum setback of 40 feet from
the ci est of steep slopes with inclinations of 40 percent or more is recommended for the
prop( sed access road construction. This will additionally minimize the risk of potential
future road failure due to possible faster rate of creep and long-term slope degradation
than currently anticipated. However, with time, shallow skin slides and erosion effects
may be expected to occur in the upper weathered and colluvial soft/loose deposits.
Then fore, HWA recommends periodic monitoring of the slopes for any shallow slope
failures and surface erosion, with the view to implementation of appropriate maintenance
meas .ares, especially after extended periods of rainfall and possible severe seismic events.
4.3.2. Stability of Wall C on Northeastern Slope
Based on the maximum proposed soldier pile wall height above existing grade, along the
north ern perimeter road (See 90 % submittal drawings; Sheet Number S 410), additional
slope stability analysis was performed at the proposed highest wall face, which is
apprc ximately 17 feet at soldier pile C37. Our slope stability analysis was based on
Cros-section 7-7', whose location is as shown on Figure 2B. Subsurface information for
the analysis was obtained from HWA exploratory borings B-230 and B-236 conducted in
Febn ary and March 2007.
In ou - slope stability analyses, the same material properties as for the northern slopes in
Section 4.3.1. were assumed for the burn fill and the new fill. The new fill will be placed
to support the proposed perimeter road. For the underlying glacial deposits, we assumed:
unit weight = 135 pcf, internal friction angle = 36 degrees and c = 0 psf. These
2003-0(8 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
13
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
parameters are considered conservative values, which were also utilized in earth pressure
computations for the cantilever -soldier pile wall (See Figure 5C. in HWA's Revised
Draft Geotechnical report dated November 29, 2007).
Our exploratory borings did not encounter ground water during drilling. However,
potential wet season slope stability conditions were assumed so that conservatism
dictates the analyses. Results are summarized in Table 7. Computer printouts are
provided in Figures 4I and 4J.
Table 7: Summary of Northeastern Slope Stability Analyses
Slope Location Static Factor of Seismic Factor Figure Numbers
Safety (FS) of Safety (FS)
Profile 7-7' 1.49
1.11 Figures 4I and 4J
Our slope stability calculations indicate that the proposed slope/wall design meets the
criteria outlined in the City's requirements. We recommend the soldier piles should be
embedded a minimum of 12.5 feet into very dense glacial deposits to ensure the stability
conditions (factors of safety) calculated.
4.4 WALL E DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
As indicated previously, in order to facilitate the increased fill heights on the east and
south refuse slopes, mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls are proposed to ensure
global and local stability. Current (90%) plans indicate the wall will range up to 20 feet
tall. To check on stability of various wall heights, we analyzed :four typical wall sections
with exposed heights of 5, 10, 15, and 20 feet above proposed finished grade. Our
analyses followed the procedures outlined by FHWA-NHI-00-043, Mechanically
Stabilized Earth Wall and Reinforced Soil Slopes Design & Construction Guidelines.
We looked at the internal and external stability in both the static and pseudo -static case,
with the pseudo -static case corresponding to a 0.32g PGA seismic event. Tables 8 and 9
outline the soil and design properties used for our wall calculations. We used an internal
factor of safety of 1.5 and 1.1 for static and pseudo -static design conditions, respectively.
We also used an external factor of safety of 3.0 against overturning, sliding and bearing
capacity. Lastly, global slope stability of the wall system was analyzed using the SLIDE
slope stability analysis program based on profile 1-1' (see location on Figure 2A). Our
global stability analyses resulted m minimum factors of safety FS = 1.92 and 1.38 for
static and seismic loading cases, respectively. Computer printouts of global slope
stability analyses are presented in Figures 5A and 5B.
Table 8: Soil Properties (External Stability)
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
14
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
Material Type Unit Weight (pcf)
4 (degrees) C (psf)
Structural Fill
Glacial Deposits
130
135
34
40
100
200
Table 9: Wall Design Properties (Internal Stability)
Material Type Allowable Bearing Active- Active -plus- Passive -
Capacity (psf) EFP* Seismic-EFP (pcf) EFP** (pcf)
(pcf)
Structural Fill 3000 43 86 250
Glacial Deposits 4000 30 41 300
Note: * EFP — equivalent fluid pressure design methodology.
** Upper two feet should be neglected in passive earth pressure calculations.
The recommended wall consists of a wrapped -face, geogrid-reinforced, section with a
shotcrete facing. Figure 6 shows a typical cross-section of our recommended design and
provides key notes for its construction. Figure 7 provides a sketch of the slope benching
recommended to be performed to receive the various lifts of fill soil, commencing from
the wall and working up slope.
A County representative should be onsite to provide full-time monitoring of the wall
construction. This will ensure that the design criteria are being met, and to provide the
ability to identify potential issues for the design team in the event that unexpected
subsurface conditions are encountered.
Construction of the fill wall should proceed in accordance with the following guidelines:
• Prepare wall site by removing all deleterious materials within the wall base limits,
equivalent to the wall height, to expose medium dense soils and by excavating a
keyway, level front to back, to a minimum of 2 feet into native non-organic soil.
The exposed foundation subgrade should then be compacted and evaluated by the
geotechnical engineer. Any yielding material should be removed and replaced
with compacted structural fill or crushed rock pad.
• Directly behind the first lift of material, a 4 -inch slotted pipe shall be installed to
provide adequate drainage of the backfill.
• The geogrid should be placed on a 1.5 -foot maximum vertical spacing. Geogrid
that is suitable for wall construction should be listed on the WSDOT Qualified
Products List (QPL). Table 10 provides height, width, and geogrid property
recommendations.
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
15
HWA GEOSC.IENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
Table 10: Design Recommendations for Different Wall Heights
Wall
Face Height Width Tap
(ft) * (ft) (ft) (lbs/ft)
Geogrid Recommendations**
5
10
7 7 1000
12 12 1700
15 17 17 2400
20 22 22 3200
Miragrid 3XT, Tensar UX100MSE
Miragrid 8XT, Mirifi HS1150
Mirifi HS 400, Tensar
UX l 500MSE
Miragrid 18XT, Tensar
UX 1600MSE
* Note: Height includes two -foot deep key.
** Note: Found in WSDOT Qualified Products List, Appendix 13
• The geogrid must be placed with the strong axis oriented perpendicular to the
wall face. A 6 -inch overlap should be achieved for adjacent lengths of geogrid.
• A minimum tail or return length of 3 feet should be achieved for each layer of
geogrid.
• A 4 -foot section of non -woven geotextile shall be placed in the wrap section to
ensure material is not lost through the openings of geogrid. A low -strength,
non -woven, soil separation grade geotextile may be used for this purpose.
• Backfill should consist of a 4 -inch minus gravel with 100% passing 4" -square;
75-100% passing 2" -square; 50-80% passing No. 4 Sieve; 30% max passing
No. 40 Sieve; and no more than 7% fines content.
• The backfill should be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 8 inches and must be
compacted to 95% of Modified Proctor; Test Method ASTM D-1557.
• Care should be taken in order to properly compact the wrapped section.
• The MSE wall shall be constructed with a batter of at least 6V:1H.
• L-shaped pieces of #5 rebar measuring 6 -inches by 36 -inches shall be inserted
into the wall on a 3 -foot by 3 -foot staggered grid pattern, from which welded wire
mesh will be attached. The rebar shall be constructed in place (i.e. it should be
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
16
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
laid upon the geogrid and covered with compacted backfill), with the 6 inch bent
section protruding 2 inches from the face of the wall for hanging wire mesh.
Driving the rebar into place after construction shall not be permitted to prevent
potential damage to the geogrid.
• A 4 inch thick cover of shotcrete shall be applied to the wall to ensure adequate
protection of the geogrid. Along the top of the wall, a curb shall be constructed in
the plastic shotcrete to direct the flow of runoff to a suitable discharge location or
conduit.
• Weep holes shall be installed along the base of the shotcrete face every 5 feet to
ensure there is no build up of water behind the facing. This may be performed by
insertion of a PVC or ABS pipe segment through the wire mesh and in contact
with the geogrid reinforcement, prior to shotcreting. The exterior opening should
be temporarily covered with plastic sheeting that may be subsequently removed to
prevent clogging of the weep hole with shotcrete.
4.5 FILL SOIL HANDLING AND DISPOSAL
4.5.1 Construction Issues
Construction bid documents (plans and specifications) should include all analytical
results and provisions for contaminated soil and waste handling, treatment/disposal, and
health and safety requirements.
During soils excavation and handling, soils, including drill cuttings, should be field
screened and observed for significant staining or odors. Prior to export, stockpiled soils
should be sampled for characterization and handling, as required by the disposal facility.
If excavated materials are disposed off-site (e.g., not at Cedar Hills Regional Landfill),
property owners at the receiving site should be notified of the results of this study and
any additional testing information available at that time. Criteria for unrestricted use of
soils may be lower than some cleanup levels. Soils with contaminant concentrations
above detection limits, but below cleanup levels, should not be used as fill near surface or
ground water.
The contractor should be required to notify the Engineer or Owner's representative of
suspected contaminated materials, with provisions in the specifications for assisting the
Engineer with excavations for testing, segregating and stockpiling materials,
sedimentation and erosion control, dust control, decontamination, and standby time or
provisions for delays due to testing. The contractor should be required to submit waste
characterization, waste management, spill prevention/control, and health and safety plans
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
17 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
which address these issues. HWA recommends testing for any contractor unit rate pay
items (e.g., contaminated soil disposal) be conducted by the Owner's representative.
4.5.2 Health and Safety
HWA recommends that appropriate health and safety measures be taken during
excavation in areas where refuse, contaminated soils, ground water, or vapors may be
present. These measures may include, but are not limited to, preparation of a site specific
health and safety plan, air monitoring, site control/access, protective and decontamination
measures, worker training, certification, and medical monitoring. We recommend an
industrial hygienist or health and safety specialist be consulted to determine the
applicability of these requirements. Construction specifications should include all
available analytical results including this and other available reports.
5.0 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS
We have prepared this report for R.W. Beck, King County Solid Waste Division, and
their agents for use in design and construction of a portion of this project. This report
should be provided in its entirety to prospective contractors for bidding and estimating
purposes; however, the conclusions and interpretations presented in this report should not
be construed as our warranty of actual subsurface conditions on site. Experience has
shown that soil and ground water conditions can vary significantly over small distances.
Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations and may not be detected by a
geotechnical study of this scope and nature. If, during future site operations, subsurface
conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those described herein, HWA
should be notified for review of the recommendations of this report, and revision of such
if necessary.
We recommend HWA be retained to review the plans and specifications to verify that our
recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as intended. Sufficient
geotechnical monitoring, testing, and consultation should be provided during
construction to confirm the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by
the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should conditions
revealed during construction differ from those anticipated, and to verify that the
geotechnical aspects of construction comply with the contract plans and specifications.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, HWA executed these services in
accordance with generally accepted professional principles and practices in the fields of
geotechnical engineering and engineering geology in the area at the time the report was
prepared. No warranty, express or implied, is made.
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
18
HWA GEOSCIENCES 1NC.
lag I*0
46044. meashia
Essomir , -"greatrigiviikanamiddaskid
km/
29plwilwrogrfftpusts6
121
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
BWT:TAT:SHH:bwt
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
20
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWI. Project No. 2008-003-21
6.0 REFERENCES
Hong West & Associates, November 1993, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Bow Lake
Tran: 'fer Station Improvements, Facilities Master Plan, King County, Washington,
prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWI. GeoSciences Inc., January 2004, Draft Geotechnical Evaluation Report, WSDOT
Property, Bow Lake Transfer Station /Recycling Facility, King County, Washington,
prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWI. GeoSciences Inc., September 2007, Phase 1 & II Environmental Site Assessment,
WSD 9T Property, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWI. GeoSciences Inc., November 2007, Revised Draft Geotechnical Report, Bow Lake
Tran: fer Station /Recycling Facility, King County, Washington, prepared for R.W. Beck
and Associates.
HWI. GeoSciences Inc., July 2007, Environmental Site Investigation, Bow Lake
Processing/ Transfer Station, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWI. GeoSciences Inc., January 2008, Draft Geotechnical Report, Slope Pipelines, Bow
Lake Processing/Transfer Facility, Tukwila, Washington, prepared for R.W. Beck and
Asso.iates.
R.W. Beck, February 2007, 2006 Facility Master Plan Update, Botta' Lake Transfer /
Recycling Station.
Waldron, H.H., 1962, Geology of the Des Moines Quadrangle, Washington, U.S.
Geological Survey Quadrangle Map GQ -158.
References from 1993 Report:
ABAM Consulting Engineers, January 1986, Bow Lake Transfer Station, Engineering
Repo -4 Investigation of Concrete Distress, prepared for King County Solid Waste
Division.
ABAM Consulting Engineers, April 1986, Bow Lake Transfer Station, Development of
Alter.iatives for Repair of Pit and Southeast Corner, prepared for King County Solid
Wast Division.
Dams & Moore, May 1965, Report of Soils Investigation, Bow Lake Transfer Station
Site, 'ding County, Washington, prepared for Johnston -Campanella & Co.
2003-0( 8 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
21
NWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2008-003-21
Golder Associates, April 1992, Final Report, Results of Phase 1 - Geotechnical Site
Investigation, Proposed Water Main Relocation Project, Bow Lake Transfer Station,
prepared for King County Solid Waste Division.
Hong Consulting Engineers, January 1986, Bow Lake Transfer Station Foundation
Settlement Investigation, prepared for ABAM Consulting Engineers.
Hong Consulting Engineers, April 1986, Subsurface Soil Investigation for Underpinning
at the Bow Lake Transfer Station, King County, Washington, prepared for ABAM
Consulting Engineers.
Hong Consulting Engineers, November 1987, Bow Lake Transfer Station Underpinning
Project, Report of Subsurface Investigations and Piling Inspection, King County,
Washington, prepared for ABAM Consulting Engineers.
Hong Consulting Engineers, December 1988, Geotechnical Soil. Investigation, Bow Lake
Transfer Station Improvement Project, King County, Washington, prepared for R.W.
Beck and Associates.
Hong West & Associates, December 1992, Geotechnical Investigation, 1-5 HOV Lane
Widening, Fife to Tukwila Interchange, King and Pierce Counties, Washington, prepared
for WSDOT / ALPHA Engineering Group, Inc.
King County, 1990, Sensitive Areas Map Folio, King County, Washington, King County
Department of Parks, Planning and Resources.
Shannon & Wilson, February 1976, Soil Engineering, Proposed Bow Lake Transfer
Station, King County, Washington, prepared for King County Dept. of Community and
Environmental Development, Architecture Division.
Shannon & Wilson, January 1977, Soil Engineering, Proposed Bow Lake Transfer
Station, King County, Washington, (Revision of February 1976 report), prepared for King
County Dept. of Community and Environmental Development, Architecture Division.
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
22
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
(
NOW TO'SCALE
DM; HWAGEOSCENCES INC
VICINITY MAP
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
FIGURE NO.
PROJECT NO.
2003-008
T-2400
o�==\
�.
^c-
LEGEND
TP -19
BH -1
4 4'
BASE MAP PROVIDED BY
\
011\ _ r
\�\ l rn . •-•-•:-.\`••\ J
•
<-1
s.
Mi
r � ,
• /.-„•"\----:•‘
•
20�
•
200
� f i• •i�r r•` //'"�'''^ _` 180 \ \ '
• l 7lr• t
1s0••
•"�—� ^ —_ 190 /. ' �� — 1
0� '
•
eie
m- ap , r( ;,: �—_
`• 'sod= - ��• `$ J •1 1((Ir '• o,
rfr._
PROPOSED WALL E DESIGNATION AND APPROXIMATE
LOCATION
TEST PIT DESIGNATION AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
•
\'=-��; 1 a .•�
- •,fin+ . "�•
1� �. _ \ 1 •//. I
r�Y:•
"
\� _�.•.;:..,i,�r.. /,iil
140
1301 ial.� — • ,\
▪ 120 ��� : `_
•
� jam.•_,_.-:,,,rz_;�- 1 �---. �,. �. �' •\' . ^.- ; � ,� ,� .
1 '• \� w• ill.11�!" /:;
3
BOREHOLE DESIGNATION AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
CROSS SECTION DESIGNATION AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
C: \DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\TINKKINNEY.NWA\DESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08\HWA 2003-008 T300.DWG
v
0'
50'
100'
200'
SHEET SIZE 11X 17 SCALE: 1'=100'
HWAGEOSc1.C1 INC
50'
100'
300'
SHEET SIZE 22X34 SCALE: 1'=50'
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWLA, WASHINGTON
,1.
rr4//••%
SITE AND
EXPLORATION
PLAN
DRAWN BY ERC
CHECK BY BT
DATE
04-22-08
FIGURE NO.
2A
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK 2400
LEGEND
TP -1
BH -1
7 7'
47 =hart
BASE MAP PROVIDED BY
C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\TINKKINNEY.HWA DESKTOP\BOWLAKE 04-07-08\HWA 2003-008 T300.DWG
TEST PIT DESIGNATION AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
BOREHOLE DESIGNATION AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
CROSS SECTION DESIGNATION AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
100' 200'
SHEET SIZE 11X 17 SCALE: 1'=100'
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
0'
50'
100'
300'
SHEET SIZE 22X34 SCALE: 1'=50'
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
SITE AND
EXPLORATION
PLAN
DRAWN BY EFK
CHECK BY BT
DATE
04-22-08
FIGURE NO.
2B
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK 2400
ON1 SflN3IDSO3D VMH
v
0
r
m
rn
c- m
v
F• r
D z
DD
z
=v
z-4
— �z
0
zT
m
0
0
z
STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 1-1'
--100. 1 .150. . . .
2 ,300 ; e: '..
.O 0 0 3 w •o= g go T • o 0m. I ID T • o 7 c ° C'sm,3
—.m m ^'m m ^!m m .m -
^.m m Q ID �E o
o05= 5co5= 5co5= 5c. a aCO5, s• coor'n
=oma =omfa =omd =o mm =om°1. to
P. o P. — rn
T �
m P. r La at m ca [T » = ca -' v. m ca — - � v -o a) x= coi Ts
Ts
C1
.0. -0 =� N'a m N'a alst 0) 8� 0)D pv nC ‹
O� p ON•� mv:, A-Nw a Ate Q n CO
CD *,13 m W m CT
=m m m o�4
CO Cla 0 cQ C0 • Cal C ca • 4) t8 CO - +i s)
iii O m m o m m m=
coCD O- a -
N co to co co co —i
E3
N p c
`m m .V
CO 1
C
6W
J
'DNI S1DN3IDSOID VMI -I
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 1-1'
CO
100 150 • 200 250 300
.-. 1 : .
•
0
. O = D) 7. p .3 . O 7. O O m . O .7-« m 7. O .7-. m m C m O
ii.
CD
O m— O m— O m— O• m— O CD I7
G7 �R s� �3 s� SZ �R� r cm
co N to U1 m to (O31 _ co meq. m cQ — .3i 0 -o N .Z7 j
m p�cmi ® Oy ?? o— g. • m g —g m Opo Q. 0"o
A N .a m N Uj s
Lt) -0 p �l 41'a 8 m n n c,
O_p D1Els � mom_ AV_ A _Q m• n
O- 0 O. • O. O' • 0. O. Q 53 C 3 2,
C.0 () 0 CO • co L&) C CQ W CO Ct) �' Eu- 9)
m y N m CO CD m .mom-« m 3
CD m m m m m Q Q
m N m m N N= —I
01
O 7
N CO
0 m
7 '.
a) ▪ ▪ C/3
0)
P o.
▪ 7
0- )
OM SDNEDS03D VMH
Ea
0
r
rn
crn
Xn
n
Fr
CD
3,
61z
=v
z -4
0D
O
z
zv'
m
m
N
a
0
z
STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 2-2'
07
IJ
0
0
0
w
0
O
100
•
•
. 200
•
:moi .
-noCK ToCX ToCN m (QCs TOCK TOCK i o w0
g-0=2) R030) - 0 O 0) 0 7 0) -` 0 7 0) =0=c0 000 x
,=g w.== gy m -3.:m �.gw� a=..� nm p
=ogo =og _ =o0v =o„v =ogm amm F
go = = ci m =m O hm Z �� ,a ami m m
m N -! v m rJ, r► m m m rt= m O. G s. -F.....2 m �--'t O m N
m O�c) m Omc m o- m.„ -T m o_ m Dpo O N
W CO O (n N 0 0 N N= O W 'i) - O W 01 no .eC
� -O CT — �'a Q1 1g a CN .- N , O — A g O _ 52„,„ N ti
00 5v 0 w g'5,1): m % CD
o m �235
�m
ICI W 0 m m W C m W m m W — 0)
Fel CO m co CO m m m m
a 0
cDm m m m m 0 n0.
N N N N N N N
0)
3
N
m
co
m
O
7
0
0)
ti
rn
-n
0)
n
CD
0
J
OM SDNDDSOIJ VMIH
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 2-2'
N
100 200 300 900 :.
1 . . . . . . . . 1 . . 1 . . . I . . . . t . . . . I . . . . 'I
TACE 'VAC'S TIACE TIAL$ ACE TIACE mmiEwm0 7 m �- 0 7 0) p- o O o) m O o a)=0=0 1 O o m m C m o ;0
n=—.....
3 ma=gym?= m f?= m �a m m mS`a O
U.
owl= ow`<'= ow -d= owe ow<= 3 o TI
o o m v o 0:.-...
m m o o m o� o w gw o o m m m o m of � m Q�r'
:$ 0 �� �� �3 �� �R?O SR= z ...E.-co,
'3 3 r.K w m m
to NJ -0 1Q trm o'nr= to or.E o >r{m 10 >...m °13=X1'7"
m o> n m D CU Cu -cooly) ID c) --.g ID . >-n ID o>* 919-2,E, o_ a m N
G� twh �� m m -c CT oa,S N -m"• O = w.00= "'▪ -00c7, OA m
10 w 0 10 IQ w C 10 W 10 I0 w
m w m m a) m m m
coco co co
co In • co co co 0 m
91'0 :(ieiuozlaoH) lu
0,
O-
0
0
0
0
m
1
'SNI S3DNDDSO10VMH
co
CO
r
rn
-Im
C C)
C
az
aD
(1)z
=v
z -1
�z
O
z -n
-n
m
co
0
z
,C -C 31IdO2Jd - SISAIHNY A111I8V1S 3dOlS OIIVIS
co
. 100 200 300 .400 ?�?•
. 1 . . . . 1 . . . . 1 . . . i . . 1 . . I . . . 'I . 0-2%
o-
0
0-
-
0—
0—
O
o-
a
O
0—
0-
0
:
o= m :0:07o 3 :Owo=m a0om i3m oCmom
:3 � ::C:
=s W as m—m O.A5* O
3N CD C mN m O N 91 3 0 O tO CD n D
>>,.O 733xi �riTI 3830 �3•2 ��'v M agi0.1
mm
NrrN O U1rrm O CT.. = o ortC. O r.r O .. 'O O O ,
FR o�c, 0 omc m o� m m o- m �� a«5? am w
AOW v NOUN NOO WN N� �O W� W OW O n C)C,2
O� U— CO 15
Crm m� U N~ O
.t. 10 O_ AV O Q ~
CO 0 N N— N— N—% C7
0. -.am n-• n-• n a n� n� o
m C o co W m m m m c m m O
0:40
Q W O to E.m co to co to co m
m co m m coN m m m m
co -' 0 m 0 0 0 m n a
co N co co N co co —I
vig
O
N
m
F.D.CO
O
0
m
J
OM SDN3IDS03DUM1-I 1 min
03
0
X
rn
c "1
C)
Fr
DZ
SCO
DD
yz
v
Z
O >
�D
Oz
Z -n
m
co
0
z
,£-£ 31I3OZld - SISK1VNV JILI1I8VIS 3dOlS 3IWSI3S
co
•
100 150 :200 250 + 300 .•350
0
0 0-
0
0-
0
Tog -TIOCK ToCE "(QCs Toc -ACK COME -0
O. O 3 N O 3 N O. O 7 O) O 7 9) �-0)-0W m c m
n-,-.-..
3 m 0 C m 3 .T m 3 m .o-. 3' w m gt 3 m v, 0
O a0 Q O N Q O N = O N = O C = O fA 1 -. 0 T
o om°� =oma' o0— =omm 5omv =0 �,mQ�r
S 0 lQ (:i SRS/1:1 S R O T 3 lfl 'z 7 IQ r -) m m
lQ pO rr 0) 10 th M CA r. = IQ O :" Q O „' m O - rr m m 7 X1 t.
m O—e-f m Oapc�. m0 • m: aT m Ogg m O� Q osm
p O W Ol 15 cr)NOcny NOO"' wN N= co a�)T ca WO nCQ15 LA CT
n -aC o.- o.- Cr CD cr op . 0 M. -a 4.- Q�aQ om ; --
m a m m �� m 3 m m aElpto
O co 0 O O w e O w O w to W• nv
FS �_ m m m m m m a
CD m m m m m
co o on o0 o an m —I
X v
4 y.
o m
3
v w
o m
O o
- o
CO
0
0 4
a).
O
m
0
0
0
c'
0)
n
m
V
0
m
'DNI S3JN3IDS03D YMH
0
r
m
�rn
cr"
n
Fr
az
aD
(1,z
=v
z-1
�a
oz
z�
rn
N
-i
D
0
z
STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 4-4'
'ON 103fOad
'ON 3anOH
o'
0-
o
O-
100 150 • ,:200 - .260 :300 ,
mocK -nocK mocK -nc-cKK rcnKao
7. 0 7 =- 0 7 p) 7. O= 0 '� 0 a) 0 0 C a O
n•
7- n 7- -. a m- _ • a 7- _ ^' , $
- m m - a) m m m m m m Q p) z-
5
3 0.x2,- = o -a�- 5 o,�• = a.. a) -s. c m Qv
7 7 7 7 T.
s0 3 -T Z _m-�- 0) m m
co N co U1 — cn - c m , -►5, O „ v 7 TI
W $rn m _,4c m pw- (7.- 8 m m •. P. C CD
W n) O (�,� W �1 w O321:• oC -‹
A13 EA0 co
— N° U7 3 CO co
AT O _ A� N
m m
tQm ET,
-0 m Cm m (0 W 0 CO We - CO • W co W _;a
CO m m
m m m 7
co m m m m O.. 0 -
CO CO CO CO CO -i
N
3
CO
m
0
0
0
0
A
LO
0 0
x
65
as
a'
,m 0
co N
C O
[6
H N co co co N
m m m m r m
C m C 0) m co m co m
to !t i m (Ti m (T) oD 7 (T) oD 0 (*) CO
CO a m� v O. 77
-
�t�t� r f3R O.m - ace) so n� �— n0
cr a)0 0 m� a �� m $ ..o m $' B m 0 8 ui
CD m 4..; std c ›-b0 - . 0) Z -C LL. - c 0s�' c
in CD I— J a a�
V •C .0 'N p •C N p 'N p'C N O
reO 0 7 m N N C O - N co •C N C O .0 N OOLL. C •C
0- CD n 2` MDeiLLLL
. MnO_ MDULL. gD
-o
m
0
- 0
0
-o
_00
- o
1
-o
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 4-4'
Z
_0
F-
a
W
V- Z
NO
ZI-
a0
• Z
1 _
Z N
as
Z• a
J
>'Y
V�
W �
W
J
0
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
ea
Profile 1-1' - Required Glacial Deposit Shear Strength Parameters Under Seismic Loading - FS = 1.1
—Shear Strength Curve
I
O CO CO 1` to 1.7 Cof N r O co
M N N N N N N N N N N
(saal6ep) iyd
0
O
ti
O
0
0
0
0
vn
O
0
v
0
0
co)
0
O
N
0
O
r
O
00 h CD It)
qr-
r
M
d
co
LL
Cohesion c (psf)
C
0
CD
U7
CD w
a N
O C
m
O F"- m m to to m
�`-o m m m m m .- o
i C
o io LL. Cr) o (T) o > R) o� a) o Cr) a�
a U ` m - m m B m co m O. m
C O }-, -O -0 -O C -O m a
m Ell 1-0 N� N 0) 'n (0 CO NO
I- a,U v 0 am = y m 8 0.(N m 0.(v q o.. -o•
CV m CO .- Co m 0- ro $- p m 0 0)p m 'v 0 ui
__ w .
NIX n � m .c co 0 C c X co- of m ..... 0)
�6 L (y rn
0,• oC mmoc Om 1m • ',I,
O
LL J 0
co m m.� O zm� 'C O3 :47.-2
*g; �-m 0AC
Cr 0 O 0 O C O 'C m C 0 •C 2O C o •m'O O •C
O. 03COJ MnOli MDOu. DOU. �nOu. 2nOi
-o
N
-0o
.N
0
-Io
_O
O
008 09z
1.00Z 091; 001:
b
_to
-O
-0
1
-(V
PF
LL
STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 2-2'
Z
0
r
LQ
r
Cl)
46
W
U.Z
U) 0
Z I-
1 Z
Z <
Q
0 0
Z Q
J
�Y
V
W �
W
J
0
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
1
i1i1O (� y ▪ m m - o_• a= o
N m m� Li 3
E' m 'L� a.m o m ��g m ��8 of
-o. w
n m y _ 0c, •• p 0) _ ,n a) m 4[1 co ry m
m- ' F.. C Q 0 ti. m o+c °.mac
JYH ..mo ••moQ ..Fao< ..mo m0�
O d. CO C lE C c0 C f6 C f6 C
u_ J o E .0 5 co O 5 N O '0 5j 0 O 'C N O N O
O O N O 0) co0 0
co co d O) N
IX o o m O C O •i O co .2 CO C O • O C O .0 O C O .`
amcnm MDOLL MDU<L MDOu. MDOu. MDUli
O
0
a-
-o
io
-o
•
• • , • • • •. • ' ., . • 0 • ,1 _ • • • • ' • •_!
004 .
0
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 2-2'
PROJECT NO.
z
0
H
H
re
W
44- z
y0
ZI-
<0
=
C=
z
as
m3
z
J
0?y
U
W F„
W
0
co
O
9
M
O
0
N
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
o
C!1 `m
0
= c
11_ t`
• -o-0 d m m m m - m
• c y = d m to m m y m
Q �w u- m = m d m M m Q= CO
0 — O —
~ y,Cl1 c� o M = co1-0(L7 r aN N • COV 03 M a0
co m �'� a-�o m �� ui r� m ,moo ▪ -0 ti�-oo ai
A
Ce 0 m t6 � 1--' La°i .. O To
0 -0 .. 0 IL -a'i .. O CC of .. c 0 sal .. c
WY c d c d c d c 4 c d
m-�o'm •o c m m o c To m o c R m c � d o c
LL J O O '>_ 5..N 0 5 .y O 'i 5. C 0 �j To)
O 0 0
O to a) a). y.'r m w. o. m m.
CC o m p 03-6—E)--2- O c 0 'c O c o 'i O C O 'i O C O 'a=
0_03M-.1 r2 D O L i 2 D V L L M D O u. M D v L L M D U L L
' 09Z • '004. ' 094 ' 004
0
z
w
K
LL
z
1-
0
a
STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 3-3'
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
0
A
0
- 1O
N
-o
0
-w
0
- o
- $
-o
C CD
0 0
is ;A
a"
o `m c
o
co ro N
C O
LL rz
iEi v W W to co co co
'O� m m N m m r W
C
o m,r'•m tics m Cr) m nM rn rn OC) oD
Q- a)— 0 = m = m m E m m m 0. 0
c Q �' 42 _� o .o day II .o ®v - v m v
H U' (j o(T7 d(7 = N� L QN y al
0M QpV
0 7� a— 0 _m LL_,_ Q m — 0 ® > 0) o m . U o m
io _ Qp
co) ix G O W.CO� QzO C Lt('► m m- 47 comL hl m
Y�J I—S•• ..�C<L ..mac ....�C Ur. 54
V m o W O 01 O m 0 G) O
l0 'O • W G (O C fQ C 03 C 2 C
fA O 'C W O 'C W O 'C to O . W O
o 3� W -�'.0 U �rt V m �L - W_" L U m. s
ce O m 01 m C o •G m C o .0 m C 0 •= co C o .` co C o 'C
aoo2cn MDoLL. MJULL. MDOU- MDC�LL. 2D011_
0
-b
DOE 091. 00I.
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 3-3'
PROJECT NO.
Z
0
co
ce
W
u Z
(00
Z I-^
g
Z • N
Q Q
Z• ¢
J J
?§
>Y
U�
W
W
J
0
m
CO
0
M
0
0
J
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
- 8
N
0
-to
G
- o
_o
m
—o
_o
• OOS '
•
OSZ
00Z
'4
m
Ow
g o
U
ce
0
a
STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 5-5'
z
0
Q
F
0)
o:
W
W0
Z
W
Z
0
zN
Q a
z• <
J J
U ?y
} Y
W
ec
W
J
0
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
Off. ...... .... --' /
1 . .
-m
O
-O
10
-O
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 5-5'
Z
O
1-
y
re
W
u- Z
NO
Z-
< 0
?
Z • N
Qa
Z • Q
J J
?§
>•
• D
W
re
W
0
CO
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
1
•
N
0
- 0
'-G
STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 5-5'
z
0
1-
W
w Z
coo
Z F-
• Z
0 =
ZN
as
Z
J _
?§
>"
Wre
W
-J
0
GD
Y
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
CO
0
as
0
N
0
co
O
co 7
—
•0 m
a7
7 E_ O .1 0. V
maQ � a)
L.
•
O
N
0
-o
0
m
- O
I . .11 1.• . . .
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 5-5'
Z
0
r
r
NNN
1.1.
W
LL Z
Z(1)
Z
i -CC =
• N
Z
Q
Z • Q
J J
-
>Y
U �
W
cc
W
J
0
m
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
0
O
w
m
c
I!
F- m m - m
J CD
C 10a .o m m 'o) G1
O oL= 135 0_ 7 -O S 'fl m0. 'O
v .E = N e�
, ,,mtQ 0 C. c) Nm iit� D(Tl mM av
i.om0m•- E' a-8.2 c5. -§m
ca CC R 0- .,-.• - co s 0 a' 5 -a a'
Jm F- •a' c O' <
co .O' m CO � m 0� � .� O O � m 0 0
V_ J o U C •_ `� .N o �j m o .� o
o - .2 -F. m m m *4.-.. m
CC O m 7 p O C O •— m 'C O 'c m 0 O
ammUoJ mDOu_ mDOu_ mDOu_
•
0
-o
m
-O
"1O
STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 6-6'
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
13
1
m
0
0 0
x
0
c
m0
yN
C O
co
vcoa)N
co U) N
C C 0• 2 `) ') m
OOc0-7EF -0 ▪ a a CD CL _a ▪ a
>,6
. Uv U Nm if( CO 4-
(/).v
t!� a, o -a E' a ai •- O d '5 ,- p m
(tb� m 0_o 0 p C fm co m fo .FC 0 0)
1 % 'a U E _f0 y0 •2 CO l0 j •N o f0 ° .2 c
OJ_ .w CD CD () �• LI�Fjj=s 0 CO co
II 6 m 7 W O C O •C O C O •C O C O 'C
aao2coco MDUu- MDOu_ XDOu..
b
.m
'o
M
N
0
_o
e
-o
_m
-g
--8
09V- 008
• osa .. _•c4z•.. . ...: o;r.• •• clot
.09.
SELSMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 6-6'
Z
0
ce
N
W
LL Z
N0
Z�...
Q U)
• Z
C3 _
ZCO
Q Q
Z• a
J J
U?�
>' Y
s
WF
OC
W
J
0
co
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
fi
O
-0
CO
O
0
-O
N
_8.
c
0
iii
00
c
co
WF— W co N to
J oa m m . o
m m m CO
W as 't W (T) m Cr) rn 0 cn 0)
O .0 E o E v E v m� a
y cl _ to
?• U••� 6 b jr., 9j r- m if- m Q_ c+.) m m Q_ v
19 a' cc lg.-.� 7tp 0) cot O) co.. (meq �)
Uj 03 of < Z al c (..
W .. '0) O .. O O c .. '0) O Q
(L J O '- c • (0 o 00 5 N o '0 5 to o
0 t 0) 'o 0) 0) ._ co _ 01 o _ 0)
Cr O m 7 p ciao.— — m c 0 •C O C O '%
am2cn.i M DOLL 2nc�u_ MDUu.
- o
•
_'0
-o
•
-0
:t.
..�h, .. +y• I•• ' 1• • 1�.. • 1 � .,. ..
... • . UOZ•. ` 091':_ .. ,.00I 09 `
1.
STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 6-6'
z
O
F
W
LLz
N0
g
I-- Z
C1
Z N
Q
0
Z
J J
V
>-
U
W �
W
J
0
m
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
Ira
r
0
0
(D
C
O O
.7s
-co
w O
y N
C 'C
co =
co
as m m m
a) C o m o m
W (6 w i ,� co a] a) O m T.
D 0 aaT, -0 a a m.0 a
O. i o N — 00 ‘14-' o -`win
�, UU �a,-Cr) n mm Qv
m-0.c"�m U r o mID ai a E o
7 p ) ma) 8 0
)(ate aQco... =pC' C
Lu m 33) < a) .6
ct
Y
LL J O V E = 5 0) o (a 5 (A o W (A o
0 -c s2 w m" "El
o a) °1 «.t U
M O m 7 mS. . O •C 75 C -8.9- i% C 0 -`
O_ co M u3 cn M D 0 LL M D 0 u_ M D U u.
O
M
r 0
LCB
N
-o
-o
'D
-$
-D
1,L .. 1 • . 1 1. • i _ 1 • • ) . (.•. ,,,, 1 , •
OSE '-• • O00e:.09Z '. • 1OCL , 1
FIGURE NO.
.4 Td
PROJECT NO.
o
0
0
M
0
0
N
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 6-6'
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
tna
Bow Lake Recycling/Transfer Station - Profile 5-5'
PROJECT:
INPUT VALUES (input highlighted numbers only)
(Uses latter unless it is zero)
N
a)
O 0)
> c6
_
co
CO • CO
O
4—
4—
0.
m
0
X
a)
0
II
O
U
11 O U L
Nco
c
a) V
o a)
L a)
• C .0
c6
C O to
U)
co co cO (1)
E ▪ E 0 D
O
ti
O
a)
m
c N C
c6 c6 a
a) 60.
0. e_
o mE 22�
v a_
a) a) 03
t3) 0 O) 9- 0
C 4 C O O Y +.
0 C 0 -- 0 e
a) (1) a) .0.c O
O a )
CCI)
v) 1— v) 0 0 Cn I-
0
0
Soil/rock cohesion (c)
g, (use 2/3 of peak acceleration).
Horizontal acceleration
Minimum desired F.S.
Bow Lake Recycling/Transfer Station - Profile 5-5'
CALCULATED VALUES (do not touch these values)
as
Y Y
OD 00
r O 10
M r
(O
0)
0)
(C)
(o
r�i ll'
Factor of Safety
COMPARE THE CALCULATED FACTOR OF SAFETY WITH THESE PUBLISHED SOLUTIONS:
A. Solutions for c'=0, but including earthquake and phi':
CO 03
n (~O
O O
Factor of safety -dry slope
B. Solutions for c' and phi' and u, but no earthquake:
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
V V (O10ON 0I-�NMu-O00
v- e- .- N N NN N M M M (MM
N
M m00)res( MVV MN000 1
Vel10 ONV(OcONV(Or
r r e- CV (V c4 c4 (V e7 P') f')(MM
CD
cm in v ma (0 r -r- 0) n n 0) 0)
v(1tnl�w M(nnrn 0/ u) }q�
r r r r NNNNNMM(o M V/
• N NN 00) h ul MO)
✓ M(n 1s W 01 al N OD ONC u)
r r r r N N N N N M M M M
ca C MV (O 0DONV (VO 03 CD r -
0t(0)
r r r r N N N N N M M M M
M N 0) T3 aD O N C0) 1- n 010 N (N4
r r r r N N N N N N M M M
00 14) N0(01-0) 03 U) N00M
MN V(4) N 6) Mt0(0000 M
c4 c4 (VN (V(') (')M
C9 N Miff n ONION 7 (NO 0) ow Or N
NN NN N N M (')
u
IR (O O (O 01) O 00 (n N 0) (O N h N 1-
0)4') N 0) O n (O O (V M (() n co O r
NN(V NNNMM
Oma 03 01 C3 r -
CD
0 M T- el (A CO OD O - (') V (0 00 0co co an CD 0) 0
7: N N N N N N Nu.
1
O
�M�r-We-01 Onco0(ON CO CV
O
0 N N N N N N M
LL
CO .- N co K)_ 1- 0) O N (~') (f) COO000 OC)
•
CV N • N(V C • V (V
N r In 0 (O . 1- N D N CO 0 C 1-
MrNC(()1-(00 •(')• V• (0100
•
N N N N N N N
• 0) N h NP N 1- N (0 O V 1-0
01ON00(O(0030)1-N V tl m OD
N N N N N
MOCD N co CD 01 Nr CO 0CDON '0' ts 01
V m10
V V V (V
(C(N N
N O) u l 00 u1 0) V 00 N u) 00 C O
(O NOrM[f(nh(OOrN V 11)00
0 N N N N N N
Factor of safety
NOS N vtu) csi (0 n OMD 0 Or NCC0'0 U
N N N (VN
NU) 10 NN(O r MN u)ti V
r r NNN MM (')
S
0
w
(s
N
0
A
a• �
d
a�
O w
yU
U
0 a3
•80
� X
CO
C Cr
t
iF o
• c
4� as
O ▪ co 9-
L �
v
O c
t' � �N
�—
11. E (�
0. CO
c c
0 O cu
U) . U
� w
c.O ▪ c £ 3
Q
Bow Lake Recycling/Transfer Station - Profile 5-5'
INPUT VALUES (input highlighted numbers only)
(Uses latter unless it is zero)
O
4.
a
w
U
X
O
_ U
O II U
w
• N
c
C
• �-' ) (a
mcoCaa)
N 2 U
a) G) i
EEoi,
4)
..
c0a) c .E
ca .oas o.
a) co c. .�
O
O. a) O ._
N • U Q
a) a) cv
O O t3) a3 4- O
c..- c O O Y++
co c co .-� .- 0 c
�a) -c-c2a)
a a) a a s . c
onso CAI—w 5
CA 00 0)I -
Soil/rock cohesion (c)
cn
E E
Y Y
g, (use 2/3 of peak acceleration).
Horizontal acceleration
Minimum desired F.S.
Bow Lake Recycling/Transfer Station - Profile 5-5'
0
w
0
or
a
CALCULATED VALUES (do not touch these values)
CO CO
as
Y Y
O O 00
M O (D
0
Factor of Safety
0)
E
E
CCy
E
m 0
-
(0
CO
2 E
O) H
O N
LL E
Qa)
c
Zv
h
„
O 0.
O 3
— 3
19 11
O G
r
O
COMPARE THE CALCULATED FACTOR OF SAFETY WITH THESE PUBLISHED SOLUTIONS:
A. Solutions for c'=0, but including earthquake and phi':
0 0
Factor of safety -dry slope
0
O
a
(0
T
h.m
CO'-
CACO (D
O
O CO
U
ILS
B. Solutions for c' and phi' and u, but no earthquake:
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
st N V CAP V' r►- N (0 O M C0 CO
0 n O)- N NT 10 OD 6)O
N N N N N N N M
M N 0D OD M O (O r CD O MCO 03 CD
V N01 0)ONM (C) (O n OO
(V (V (V fV (V CV (V C7
N CA CO N CA u) (00 st
nr DCO 0D
0000
OCOrM
N N N N N N N N
r f` M CD CC) r (O O T7 OD O N Tr CC)
sf r co Tr CO 00 a) r N O (O 1` co
NNN CV (V
O 0 O (O r CDT (O CA N 7t CU (0 f^D CO
¢f s- 0, Tr(O h CA OrM
N (V N (V CV • N (V
CA MIS NO N N- 0st (0000
M r Na On 00O NMCO CD I•
(V (VNNNcVN
00r0CAnrCON(D0)' ('4Tr NC Tr
Mr N M COcc! O CO O NM Q (O(0
(V (V (V (V N (V
eDON(0C0mnOfOu)N0) V (00
N N N N N N
11
m(O ti OM r- r nr h CA O r N NN
O) M O N M Tr (O n 00 O) T- N co Tr CD
C N N N N N
C
O
(O 0 h r IT h O N stC0 C0 (0 co C[)
U M 0 r MNT(O 1`O O) O r N 0) Tr
LL
N N N N N
O
O () Otf2r Nv (ON OOr NMM
G N N N N N
LL
CO O rN M u) O 000) n O r N 0)
CVN CVN
M (A CD 0 N M 7 C0O O^ 003 CA O 0 0) N
O N N N N
✓ 00 0D O N M 0 (D CO (D CD C0 of N
MCA ONM 7(O (0 10 WOrN
O N N N
0CD C) v(0(00 n 0030)00r-
0)
O N N N
N CA It It (O O n N OOn (OCO Mr
N op! rN(hIT(0(pI�CO Or
O CV (V
r
Factor of safety
Slope xH:1V
O M N ( M4(0 M NO ( (0
NCA O n-NMQ COIs 03 CD CDC)
co N
T C0 (0 C0 N CO 0 C0 M C0 C0 C0 Tr
C4 N N 1` N 0 1-
r r N N M M
L
•
E
ca
es
a
4.0CO
CO
U)
r
m.7-
u o
0
O•
CI. a►
CD =
CI .v
S
'IS J
l0
E
m CD
N
aL
a
cc 1:1
J
W
0
0
2
eA
eA
0
a
Shear Strength Curve
O
O
O
O
CD
O
O
O
O
M
O
O
O
O
0 CD
Itl et
a 4 dO a M M M CI el eel co)
(saalBap)iyd
Cohesion c (psf)
0
E
L
a
m
L r
m 'I-
C ��
O m
d 0
'a
la
to 0
'V
CO
'S to
m
'.� N
NN� �
1V
C
J
w
0
2
tC
0
L
a
Shear Strength Curve
tOA 4t ttO 440 to 4tO 'd' 'Cr rt e q a 'et Col e': M M M M CO CO M M
(seai6ap) iyd
O
O
O
0
an
O
0
O
O
M
0
0
N
0
0
0
Cohesion c (psf)
1
0
4-
N
C
a)
i-
-0
a)C
6)
C_
U
U
a)
Cc co 0 O N
a) m r m
a) a) m a) •—y d
Y 0 a) (n O) 0 2 O)
J a c`a a) = a) Q. a)
._ U a)=p co� = (-4 Cil (D
m a ci U r iz *( ) a CO j.L Ry Cr) N (*'1
.. -0 a) •� a poo ai E ' Q. co ai '° n ai
co O a .r O Q) ' O a) 7 .. •O
Vco_ .. O
O
f
' w
llUMeO UmmT:71.�2 m O a) o
CD O •Cn O -`2N O
O ,mL ‘i 'p a) a) a)•
" L V m '— a) CDdU L
ii Oco p . a) C O •C a) C LC •C aC O
'c
a.O cn-J MM DO(f_ MOURN D 0 U-
0
z
w
_U'
LL
PROJECT NO.
o
0
M
O
N
STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 7-7'
Z
0
La
r
N
W
11. Z
(1)0
Z H,
C9
Z�
as
0
Z Q
J J
V
U�
W F.
W
Y
0
CO
J
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
fi
CD
0
tD
O
03
a) C
c 0
O N
>s O
CD =
fX co cN ,n C
co
-O ® N
m Nmm(N
U • COJ Qm0
E O m N ..
.a d a▪ OQ Qm N
bOmLLCoo,yNNM�m 0U G m
iZ0_ cu '•- a Q> Oas>,1` m 0 O2tC ma CSD COs7
Ag-'1.0Jd..9 <
_ m O�Q . m O.2)C) O
L _ O U Es •O N O •C 5. N O ._ CO O
Qmt•6 m m m— CD m •.�y d .=
COm .pp
CO .Y R O O •L O c O •i
aaMcncn XMDc3u_ MDUlix D0IL
_g
-3
_$
b
-19
Luz
Nir
C7
LL
PROJECT NO.
03
O
O
N
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 7-7'
z
cc
W
�z
Z(1)
zI-
< 0
_Cez
zQ
a�
0
z<
J J
}Y
V�
W
cc
W
Y
J
0
CO
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
.•:.• .�.. �.. ,. J:r, a ��.u�•!. . •. i4 b . ..,... • • I • _ , r • C
lbZ�' �Y 0 ?i _''{: 0ZZ. ::O�Zf'}.."... `• 00 . 1 061:._' OSl .
z
0
H
1—
re re
w
wz
yO
2F_
G =
z
as
zQ
J
w
re
w
—J
0
co
0
9
co
0
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - PROFILE 1-1'
z
0
1-
et
W
LL Z
No
ZgCD
I-
=
Z m
ZQ
J
W
W
J
0
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
GEDGRID
REINFORCING
ELEMENT
GE❑TEXTILE
3' WRAP
SEE NOTE 1
3'-0' #5 REBAR
( SEE NOTE 5)
SH❑TCRETE
FACING
WELDED
WIRE MESH
4°
SEE NOTE 2
FOR OVERLAP
NOTES:
D
TRUCTURAL FILL
MATERIAL
1. A NON WOVEN 8oz/YD2 GEOTEXTILE MA":❑GRID
USED. :INFDRCING
2. A GEOGRID OVER LAP OF A 6" MINIMUM"EMENTS
GEOGRID SHOULD BE SEWED TOGETHEI
3. A DISTANCE OF 2H OR A MINIMUM DISTAI
USED.
4. 1" DIAMETER WEEP HOLE AT 5FT O.C. Al
WALL.
5. REBAR STUBS AT 3' X 3' PATTERN.
NOT TD SCALE
"ION
C \DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\TINKKINNEY.HWA\pESKTOP\DOWLAKE 04-C
GEOGRID WALL
DRAWN BY fa
CHECK BY DB
DATE
04.23.08
FIGURE NO.
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
TASK 2400
FINISHED SLOPE INCLINATION
X
MAXIMUM TEMPORARY FILL SLOPE INCLINATION
LIJ
Z
OCC
O O Cn
D
M
w
D M
w 3
CC M w
__IO Q O
Z O M U Z
W J Z W Z
Xmti gmw
WH Nja
O a Z T U Ow
cnw
0 0
=oZ WOZ
2
ZOV_I-(Q
®agZv3w
N❑T T❑ SCALE
[FOR ILLUSTRATION ONLY; NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION]
J
0
U
W
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The subsurface exploration program consisted of nine test pits, excavated by a KCSWD
operator with a Cat 325CL trackhoe rented for this purpose. Test pit locations were
chosen in the field based on staking of the proposed Wall E face by DHA Surveyors.
The approximate exploration locations are shown on the Site and Exploration Plan,
Figure 2A.
Each of the explorations was completed under the full-time observation of an HWA
engineering geologist. HWA personnel recorded pertinent information including soil
sample depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, and ground water
occurrence as the explorations were excavated. Grab samples were taken out of the test
pit sidewalls, or the trackhoe bucket, from locations where the stratigraphy changed or at
regular depth intervals. After termination of each test pit, they were abandoned and
backfilled with excavated material.
Soils were classified in general accordance with the classification system described in
Figure A-1, which also provides a key to the exploration log symbols. Where applicable,
soil layers containing compressible, unburned, refuse are indicated with a cross -hatched
pattern in the left-hand column for soil symbols. The summary logs of test pits are
presented on Figures A-2 through A-10.
The stratigraphic contacts shown on the individual logs represent the approximate
boundaries between soil types. The actual transitions may be more gradual.
2003-008 Slope Stability & Wall E.doc
A-1
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY VERSUS SPT N -VALUE TEST SYMBOLS
COHESIONLESS SOILS
COHESIVE SOILS
Density
N (blows/rt)
Approximate
Relative Density(%)
Consistency
N (blows/ft)
Approximate
Undrained Shear
Strength (psf)
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
0 to 4
4 to 10
10 to 30
30 to 50
over 50
N g g N O
m m w
Very SOA
Soft
Medium Stiff
Stiff
Very Stiff
Hard
0 to 2
2 to 4
4 to 8
8 to 15
15 t0 30
over 30
<250
250 - 500
500 - 1000
1000 - 2000
2000 - 4000
>4000
USCS SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP DESCRIPTIONS
Coarse
Grained
Soils
More than
50% Retained
on No.
200 Sieve
Size
Gravel and
Gravelly Soils
More than
50% 0l Coarse
Fraction Retained
on No 4 Steve
Clean Gravel
(little or no fines)
•gilT—
• ®•
GW
Well -graded GRAVEL
0 V l
o Rc
GP
Poorly -graded GRAVEL
Gravel with
Fines (appreciable
amount 01 fines)
p •-. k
o Qc
GM
Silty GRAVEL
l,I 1
GC
Clayey GRAVEL.
Sand and
Sandy Soils
50% or More
of Coarse
Fraction Passing
No.4 Sieve
Clean Sand
(little or no fines)
•'
SW
Well -graded SAND
•:
SP
Poorly -graded SAND
Sand with
Fines (appreciable
amount of fines)
_
'' :'.; •
• .
SM
Silty SAND
$C
Clayey SAND
Fine
Grained
Soils
50% or More
Passing
No. 200 Sieve
Size
Silt
Liquid Limit/
and
Leas than 5014
Clay
ML
SILT
CL
Lean CLAY
OL
Organic SILT/Organic CLAY
Silt
Liquid Limit
and
50% or More
Clay
jj
MH
Elastic SILT
/i
�!
CH
Fat CLAY
A A 4
OH
Organic SILT/Organic CLAY
Highly Organic Soils
Sr r/
—
r ,r r
PT
PEAT
COMPONENT DEFINITIONS
COMPONENT
SIZE RANGE
Boulders
Larger than 12 in
Cobbles
3 in to 12 in
Gravel
3 in to No 4 (4.5mm)
Coarse gravel
3 Into 3/4 in
Fine gravel
3/4 in to Nu 4 (4.5mm)
Sand
No. 4 (4.5 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 mm)
Coarse sand
No 4 (4 5 mm) to No. 10 (2.0 mm)
Medium sand
No. 10 (2.0 mm) to No. 40 (0.42 mm)
Fine sand
No. 40 (0.42 mm) t0 No. 200 (0.074 mm)
Silt and Clay
Smaller than No. 200 (0.074mm)
%F Percent Fines
AL Atterberg Limits: PL = Plastic Limit
LL = Liquid Limit
CBR California Bearing Ratio
CN Consolidation
DD Dry Density (pcf)
DS Direct Shear
GS Grain Size Distribution
K Permeability
MD MoisturelDenstty Relationship (Proctor)
MR Resilient Modulus
PID Photoionizatlon Device Reading
PP Pocket Penetrometer
Approx. Compressive Strength (tsf)
SG Specific Gravity
TC Triaxial Compression
TV Torvane
Approx. Shear Strength (tsf)
UC Unconfined Compression
I
H
0
u1
L
SAMPLE TYPE SYMBOLS
2.0" OD Split Spoon (SPT)
(140 Ib. hammer with 30 in. drop)
Shelby Tube
3-1/4" OD Split Spoon with Brass Rings
Small Bag Sample
Large Bag (Bulk) Sample
Core Run
Non-standard Penetration Test
(3.0" OD split spoon)
GROUNDWATER SYMBOLS
V Groundwater Level (measured at
time of ddlling)
Groundwater Level (measured in well or
open hole after water level stabilized)
COMPONENT PROPORTIONS
PROPORTION RANGE
DESCRIPTIVE TERMS
< 5%
Clean
5
- 12%
Slightly (Clayey, Silty. Sandy)
12
- 30%
Clayey, Silty, Sandy, Gravelly
30
- 50%
Very (Clayey, Silty, Sandy, Gravelly)
Components are arranged In order of increasing quantities.
NOTES: Soil classifications presented on exploration logs are based on visual and aboratory observation.
Soil descriptions are presented In the following general order:
Density/consistency, color, modifier (if any) GROUP NAME, additions to group name (If any), moisture
content Proportion, gradation, and angularity of constituents, additional comments.
(GEOLOGIC INTERPRETATION)
Please refer to the discussion in the report text as well as the exploration logs for a more
complete description of subsurface conditions.
MOISTURE CONTENT
DRY
MOIST
WET
Absence of moisture, dusty,
dry to the touch.
Damp but no visible water.
Visible free water, usually
soil is below water table.
eZI BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
HWAGEoSCIENCEs INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
LEGEND OF TERMS AND
SYMBOLS USED ON
EXPLORATION LOGS
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
LEGEND 2003008.GPJ 4/30/08
FIGURE:
A-1
LOCATION:
DATE COMPLETED: 4/7/08
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
(lael) 41d3O
SKETCH OF NORTH SIDE OF PIT
T-
M
CD
0)
LO
P
e
O
2131VMONnO2iO
S1S31 1:13HLO
(%)IN31NO3
3Hn1SiOW
138WfN 31d1A1V2
3dkL 31dWVS
DESCRIPTION
SSVlO llos S3sn
108PI.A.S
13a) 11.1430
N
N N
O
O
0
C
c
3
c
6
ya
.2-
0
01
O
Q
0
m
3 0
E
E
0
• w �
0
00
co K
co w
3 1-
O Q
` Wy
Y
a
0
3 E
m Q
0 QS
c.
(VASHON TILL)
2
co
co
1 I
0.1 CC)
m co
E
7m
oao
C m
O 0 t
as --
_Ooc
a y CO
X
L
m }' m
co
y 8.2
C omni
U V
8C m c
tt-
0 c
N p O 0
t
al 0) m o`
m
O c' u00
m E
CD
re c m
3 `�)0
m
c W U
2'c c`a
0 V O
Q) N m
a5 o
7M Gid
'2 to W g
O-0 CDO
W OC C
LL C 0 0
w
1-
0
z
PAGE: 1 of 1
z
0
1---
_z
O7
J
1—
0
a
0
r3
0
0
N
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT15 2003008.6PJ 4/29/08
DATE COMPLETED
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
0
0
L
U
co r LL
C U
3 nNi I[
U @
c U
Y H
j: Z
2 W
a a
U W
0 z
U U
w w
SURFACE ELEVATION:
(Wal) 1-11d30
SKETCH OF SOUTH SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet)
N
co
m
O
2l31VM0N102fO
S1S31a3H10
(%)IN31NOO
32ln1SI OW
CO
rn
``rN•% 1
II
13awnM31dWVS CO CO
2 c0
3du 31dtWS n V O
DESCRIPTION
SSV10110S SOSn
109WAS
en
m
0)
Si
U
0
0
c•
m c
• m
c.
N O
O c
0 3
-es
c
m
N 0
0. 0.
m
m
v m
m m
m
C
E
3
w • co
H 2 Z
H1d30 0
1 I 1 I '
c7 (0 W N
>.
U 0
tE
m
oa0
C m
0 0-C
0 O c
0.y m
m.
to
Lr U
nC
0mm
7:0
0
O C m C
U U O
CDio
C:1
0Ly07tyOmm-17":02
C
X OOU
—Od
• mE
v,L0OCp
tc
-L
C N
U .0
LL a
3 y o
m
cm§ L j
C U _.:5
c 0 co
• 'F -E•
15 0 O C
m y m
U C m9
3 0 • O_ _`
@-c=
m
0. m y y
.000m
t7-0.00
cm �v C
O1• t 0
LUl 00 C
I-
1-
0
z
1-
1—
C/)
-
1—
W
H _'
0 H
O
0
- J
BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
PAGE: 1 of 1
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
M
W
z
LL
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT15 2003008.GPJ 4129/08
0
3
0]
LL
0
c
.8
0
0
X 0
W
W O
fi
Q
0
0
` m
Ii
1
U it
CO
M '0
0
z
0. 0
W
zw
> 10
<
U re1
X
U)
EXCAVATION COMPANY: King County SWD
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
(332;) N1d30 0
L
SKETCH OF SOUTH SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet)
0,
0
0,
0
2i31VMONfO
SLS3J.2131-1O
(%)JN31NO0
321fLLSIOW
83.WnN 3ldINVS
3dA131dWVS
DESCRIPTION
ssvio -los sosn
-OBWAS
c,)
CD
CI
•
I
•0
.t
•
0
Q
OO
3
cia
E
0
E
2
0
-O
ma
O
02
0
0,
0
3
0
0
0
J
m
?0 0 at
d 0
3 0
0 a`
0 0 0
D >
❑ OO
O C m
V M J E 0 0
0 J S 0
E H E
o0Z
)
o c m o m
N E
0 ..„.0
m C
0 m� .0 0 •
a 3 °
Z❑ m
EmV]
0 z L O E
>Q v 2
r0 01 0 0 0
E m m E
. a 0 o
1119 c
Q0
Z
cc
m 0
c
L
(lo ) N1d30 0
C ) cc 0)
I I
C
0J
n� LL
I.L
CLu
uJ /'�
L L I L
O I-
0
-J
BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
PAGE: 1 of 1
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
Co
0
0
c0)
O
0
CN
PROJECT NO.,
LOCATION:
DATE COMPLETED: 4/8/08
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
0
0
-c
� m
h _ LL
7 J
c it
• C4 •ctU
m
c U
} z
z
a a
o a
U W
O z
X • X
W
SURFACE ELEVATION:
(Pal) Hld3O 0
SKETCH OF SW SIDE OF PIT
U a
z
fn
0
z
0
CO0
0
2131VMON110:10
SIS31
243H1O
(%)1N31NOO
38f 1SIOW
?J38WnN 31dWVS
3d.U.31dWVS
z
0
a_
U
w
w
sSVi3 IIOS SOSn
1OSLNAS
CO ITCN1 CO
•
:,
A 1.
✓Y
• Q r
`` D:.
\ ' \i. i
mac
X11
14.
o
0
rf.
•
•
0
z
E
m SAND, moist.
O
o
m c
� m
m c
0=
O
C
ose, light olive b
0
z
Q
co E
E 0
_- z
m h
E
2 E
m
c m J
4.
ow
m J 0 0
>. J F
• " TO
m = W
0 wE.
> U m
- C
mm
o O
C C .i
.0 A8
Z
o v o
m N N r m m
m
co
J__
T
m
olive brown, gr
(VASHON TILL)
co
y
7
(lae!) H1d3O 0
1
C.) CO a) N u7
U 03
tE
oQ)
o00
00E• 0
80
A. N @
U .0 -10
10
yr
m
0 U
(0 nC
o m m
▪ T,
C U
O C N C
Utt O
m CO c
c6
0 0 0 U
U b
CO 4, • CO 0
m
.D: C�
eOj>w O C
- 0744
X UO m
N
2 m 0
W
- 0
tO� CL
0) O
mo=0
C U.
-0 C N V
C C
▪ U C
m CO m
aS also
j Das d>-
mmmc`a
°O- C N>
nooU
(0
tLLO 8
w
r
0
z
z
0
11-
41)
1-
w
LL
z
1-
F
0
_z
J
U
}
U
w
c
w
J
0
m
PAGE: 1 of 1
z
0
1-
0
2
Q
J_
Y
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT15 2003008.GPJ 4/29/08
OA
(Pei) H1d30
SKETCH OF SOUTH SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet)
N
as
0
a3 VMaNfOb
S1S31 a31 -11O
(%)1N31NOO
3anlsiOW
8381A11fN 31dWVS
3dA13ldWVS
DESCRIPTION
sstno ins s3sn
1O9WAS
CO
rn
.
r �
�J
fl
O
'
•
C
0
(FILL & TOPSOIL)
5
o�
T
CJ
.4 P
0
.53 E
0 m
3
3 ❑
o
E
i v
a m
m
c
m �
O /
co
co
09) 1-11d3Q O
1
4') (O co
Z
_O
1-
W Z
Li- O
CO I—
Z C7
Q
_Z
-'rX
r
<
z
O
DATE COMPLETED: 4/8108
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
m
O
E`6
Y
co
�
J
Ut°
c U
z
w
a_
a
0
w
0
Q
X
EXCAVATION COMPANY:
SURFACE ELEVATION:
fo1) H1d30
I
SKETCH OF WEST SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet)
m
m
c7
0
2131VMONnollo
SJS3LJ3H10
(%).LN31NOo
3an1SIOW
Q1
(‘I
� Q
0
•
a �
0 ' o
a
0
1 �
o�
\0
o
O
.i
CrN.
. L
iJ r
/yy
1138 31dWVS d)co
3dkL31d1AVS 0 0
DESCRIPTION
'SSV10 110S sosn
108 WAS
c z
0D
E
E
2 E
m
C j
LL
T J N
▪ o «
> y m «
8
O a 0
d H m
"E c c
O 3 m
G O N
o a °o
c
3 0
2
.0 >m C
Y ` g
O b <
O N N N
0 g O
°
E E
T z
13 0
Qo
W
T W
t �
Lv Q
c_
O
0
0
E
N
803
to
0
t0 co
(O03
(loos) H1430
0
0)
U N
C5 Em
0)
o. 0
m
c 133
-0t
00�
0 c
a03o
m -m
0 1—
C
m
U 9 •
OCOCC
U C- O
0 O C @
0 O O
CD -o
0 O) CO 0
-0 C C
Nu_ O C
O rdf0
O.N
to:
4) m O E
p, m
m w o
c
0 O
3 0
m
▪ C t0 m
mC0•.0
▪ 0 o
0 °J m
•O C N.0
C-0 QT
Q._
0 E
N
O_0 C cb m
CL
W 0 c C
o c
o 0 0
Ll_ 0 V C
ui
0
z
ti
Z
0
1-
(0
fr
w
Li- O
Z O
Q
Z_
h" 2
06
Q
Z_
J <
o
U Y
W �
F --
W
Q
J
0
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT15 2003008.GPJ 4/28/08
LOCATION:
EXCAVATION COMPANY: King County SWD
DATE COMPLETED: 4/8108
LOGGED BY: 8. Thurber
00
.0
E ▪ m
m
J
U i+
0 CO
0
w
2
0.
7
f3
17-7
W
Z
W
SURFACE ELEVATION:
(lamb) 1-11430
SKETCH OF WEST SIDE OF PIT
0
?131VMONfOaO
S1S31 a3Hlo
(%)INaJNOO
3an1S10W
a38Wf1N 3ldWVS
3dA131dMS
DESCRIPTION
SSH10 11OS SOSR
1Oe1NAS
1 O
0 a •
a)
CNC
10
E
v
E
0
m
a O
i N
a
O
0 1-
c
c
s
0
c
0 0
2
m
U
ro co
0°7
J E
E
0
(0
1-
m
E p
0 0
W
w
w
» w
3 3
0
.0
0
a0
0
0
O
m
di
0
J �
0
i
m
m
a F3
co
O
0
m
w ro
`v 3
c�' o
a E
E-
t
O
m3
a vs
E
(VASHON TILL)
co
h
0.
(0
0
m
00
m
a 0
m
°D
O m
m
c 3
"CE
`0 8
S. I z0
(lamb) 1-11d30 O
C")
m
l
0)
7 f
N 00
0
03 • E
7 m
C) 0 0
m
°o.c
• CO -0
0 0 c
O. 0 0
mem
▪ r•O
N C: C
0•m_m
O
U'7
8_C0
@ 0 0 0
tm-OO
N m m
-0t c
co ~O 0 C
O
m O E
a :-
0)
R _
cDL UL
et—
3
— a 0
Co
c
�o>
C C CO
.)
O7
"E. v
ti V O C
mor.m a
a 0.
m co l4
nm�U)
a�p0
L•
0L O cO
tH V
i-
0
z
c
BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.
EXCAVATION COMPANY: King County SWD
DATE COMPLETED: 4/8/08
LOGGED BY: B. Thurber
0
0
g
J
U-
4, i1
CI W
0 T
Z
w
a O
• i
0
2
1 • Q
0 CC• LL
W • o)
(e) H1d30
SKETCH OF EAST SIDE OF PIT
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet)
w
CI
O
a31b'nnONnoa9
21231 a3H10
(%)1N31NOJ
3an1S10W
1:1311wnN 31dIWS
3du 31dWHS
DESCRIPTION
•sstno -nos sosn
109 NAS
L / t
ch m rn
t
0
Q
0
n
A..
Q
9
0
•
I)
t
0
00
E
O
Q
E
m
o • 3
o co0
0.
i, O
coo 1.0: o
• o
ami
O AI
fn
0
E
O
E
0
0
c
co
T
0
0
0
0
a
0
>3
0)
(VASHON TILL)
>,
caE
3 m
0J 0
—gym
0 0.Z
0
0 0
co -c,
0. N 0
m
L. 0 U
o v
C do
O
vmm .0UU CD -0LJ Lm WOCO
S 0 a y m CO 0
Tes-O L L C 'O
O. yw O G
(Pal) H1d30 p
r
BOW LAKE RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION
PAGE: 1 of 1
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
co
O
O
O
0
N
O
2
H
U
w
a
cc
a
TPIT15 2003008.GPJ 4/29/08
co
m
0
LL
0
a
0
m
0
w
0coh
m
LOCATION:
GATE COMPLETED: 4/8/08
LOGGED BY:
SURFACE ELEVATION:
(laed) H1d30
SKETCH OF EAST SIDE OF PIT
w Oi
Q
0
N
0
3J MMGNnoa�
21231 a31-110
(%)1N31NO3
3aniSroW
11321,11f1N 31dWVS
3dA131dW'iS
DESCRIPTION
ssv131ros sosn
108WAS
CD
m
1.0
th
c
z W
EW
-
m0
E m ei
o -
.e
m m
§,
> j
0
6.E
113 m V =
ED
m .0
O ` �
C e N
O • W
Oti en
'0 as a
m c E
Tfi
a Q �
O N O
3 E v
O
c J
z0
y0)
a
E0
m 0
E _W
O K
m
>.
'a 'onQ
d 3
w m
O p
E
0
a 0
0 o >
o
8 s0
J S
E § Q
0 g 0 E
E E E
o �
mc g
9
3 =
_ r 'm m
N r > C
07 K >
>0 m 'y
a 0 0 f.
W 0 ,
3 w 0 m
0 x 'o g
3 d
C ` 2
T ▪ v .f...'
.. a
co
✓ c 3 0
w o
C •1m t m m
E o o
E E a E m
a0go v _
-0 z c z �!�
z0 00Q1,> E
0)
(la!) 141d30 0
(VASHON TILL)
0
i
m
m 0
G 3
O 0
3
0 0
• O
0,
ma
0
2 m
m m
C
o
`• 0 u
.1" '2
cn co
03
7 m
0o0
7 m
= 0.00
0 0 c
Q. 0 m
0• -
• is
- c ac
o
_ro
0 C m C
UL O
0 0
00 o
'a 0 'a O —
dl 0 CCO O
AL C O
o a 0
O X t
ED 0 G
7 -0 :7
C .°2 m
-C m
a. O
`o0
m
o O� m
C
C 7 W
;o 'a-- v
H O o C
m 8 N m
'0 T
m m w
OC
o_� o
0 D00
LLo N U C
ui
1-
O
z
PAGE: 1 of 1
z
0
F-
07
L11 Z
IL 0
E-
Z 0
2
‚zi
Q
J
Wre
0
LL
PROJECT NO.:
TPIT18 2003008.GPJ 4129108
APPENDIX B
WSDOT QUALIFIED PRODUCTS LIST
Revised March 2007
G.EQSYNTHETIC RETAINING WALL
Classes 1 and 2 Non-aggressive Environments
Note 1: May be used for Class 1 and 2 walls and slopes in non-aggressive environments. Acceptability of the product for a specific
contract bid item requires that the approved long-term geosynthetic strength as listed in Table 1 below meet or exceed the required long-
term strength specified in the contract. The ultimate tensile strength listed in Table 1 is to be used for lot specific acceptance once the
product arrives at the project site. (See Acceptance Code 1010)
Table 1. Long-term and ultimate strengths of geosynthetic products qualified for use in
Classes 1 and 2 walls and reinforced slope -
s, nonaggressive environments
Product
Ref. No.
Tui,
(Ib/ft)
Test Procedure
for Tull
'Long -Term Tensile Strength,
Tn1 (lb/ft)
Miragrid 3XT, Machine Direction
1993-921
3000
ASTM D6637
1300
Miragrid 5XT, Machine Direction
1993-921
3520
ASTM D6637
1250
Miragrid 7XT, Machine Direction
1993-921
4020
ASTM D6637
1430
Miragrid 8XT, Machine Direction
1993-921
5840
ASTM D6637
2070
Miragrid IOXT, Machine Direction
1993-921
7900
ASTM D6637
2800
Miragrid 18XT, Machine Direction
1993-921
9360
ASTM D6637
3600
Miragrid 20XT, Machine Direction
1993-921
12400
ASTM D6637
4780
Miragrid 22XT, Machine Direction
1993-921
17800
ASTM 06637
6830
Miragrid 24XT, Machine Direction
1993-921
25400
ASTM 06637
9760
Tensar UXI400SB Machine Direction
1994-038
3700
ASTM D6637
987
Tensar UX1500SB Machine Direction
1994-038
6300
ASTM D6637
1580
Tensar UX1600SB Machine Direction
1994-038
7540
ASTM D6637
2100
Tensar UXI 10070 (HS), Machine Direction
2005-087
3970
ASTM D6637
1260
Tensar UX140070 (HS), Machine Direction
2005-087
4800
ASTM D6637
1530
Tensar UX150070 (HS), Machine Direction
2005-087
7810
ASTM D6637
2530
Tensar UX 160070 (HS), Machine Direction
2005-087
9870
ASTM D6637
3190
Tensar UX 170070 (HS), Machine Direction
2005-087
11990
ASTM D6637
3880
Tensar UX1 IOOMSE, Machine Direction
2005-087
3970
ASTM D6637
1260
Tensar UX I 400MSE, Machine Direction
2005-087
4800
ASTM D6637
1530
Tensar UX1500MSE, Machine Direction
2005-087
7810
ASTM D6637
2530
Tensar UX I 600MSE, Machine Direction
2005-087
9870
ASTM D6637
3190
Tensar UX 1 700MSE, Machine Direction
2005-087
11990
ASTM D6637
3880
Tensar BX1100, Machine Direction
1994-038
850
ASTM D6637
113
Tensar BXI 100, X -Machine Direction
1994-038
1300
ASTM D6637
175
Tensar BXl 120, Machine Direction
1994-038
850
ASTM D6637
113
Tensar BXl 120, X -Machine Direction
1994-038
1300
ASTM D6637
175
Tensar BXI200, Machine Direction
1994-038
1200
ASTM D6637
168
Tensar BX1200, X -Machine Direction
1994-038
1970
ASTM D6637
274
Raugrid 2/2-20, Machine Direction
1999-042
1310
ASTM D6637
548
Raugrid 2/3-30, Machine Direction
1999-042
1420
ASTM D6637
589
Raugrid 3/2-15, Machine Direction
1999-042
2510
ASTM D6637
1050
Raugrid 3/3-20, Machine Direction
1999-042
2250
ASTM D6637
939
Raugrid 4/2-15, Machine Direction
1999-042
2920
ASTM D6637
1220
Raugrid 6/3-15, Machine Direction
1999-042
3990
ASTM D6637
1670
Raugrid 6/6-15, Machine Direction
1999-042
4010
ASTM D6637
1670
Raugrid 8/3-20, Machine Direction
1999-042
5380
ASTM D6637
2240
Raugrid 10/3-20, Machine Direction
1999-042
6650
ASTM D6637
2770
Stratagrid 100, Machine Direction
1999-030
1200
ASTM D6637
500
Stratagrid 100, X -Machine Direction
1999-030
699
ASTM D6637
295
Stratagrid 200, Machine Direction
r
1999-030
2720
ASTM D6637
1 130
,i is determined at a design hfe of 75 years.
B-1
T,,
is determined at a design life of 75 years.
Revised March 2007
GEOSYNTHETIC RETAINING WALL
Classes 1 and 2 Non-aggressive Environments
Note 1: May be used for Class 1 and 2 walls and slopes in non-aggressive environments. Acceptability of the product for a specific
contract bid item requires that the approved long-term geosynthetic strength as listed in Table 1 below meet or exceed the required long-
term strength specified in the contract. The ultimate tensile strength listed in Table 1 is to be used for lot specific acceptance once the
product arrives at the project site. (See Acceptance Code 1010)
Table 1. Long-term and ultimate strengths of geosynthetic products qualified for use in
Classes 1 and 2 walls and reinforced slopes, non-aggressive environments
Product
Ref: No.
T„,,
(Ib/ft)
Test Procedure
for T„,,
'Long -Term Tensile Strength,
'I'm(lb/ft)
Stratagrid 200, X -Machine Direction
1999-030
1600
ASTM D6637
665
Stratagrid 300, Machine Direction
1999-030
3000
ASTM D6637
1250
Stratagrid 300, X -Machine Direction
1999-030
1000
ASTM D6637
418
Stratagrid 500, Machine Direction
1999-030
4600
ASTM D6637
1920
Stratagrid 500, X -Machine Direction
1999-030
1800
ASTM D6637
747
Stratagrid 550, Machine Direction
1999-030
6240
ASTM D6637
2600
Stratagrid 550, X -Machine Direction
1999-030
1800
ASTM D6637
747
Stratagrid 600, Machine Direction
1999-030
7400
ASTM D6637
3080
Stratagrid 600, X -Machine Direction
1999-030
1800
ASTM D6637
747
Amoco 2044, Machine Direction
1999-051
4800
ASTMD4595
569
Amoco 2044, X -Machine Direction
1999-051
4800
ASTMD4595
980
SF35, Machine Direction
2000-058
3060
ASTM 06637
1220
SF55, Machine Direction
2000-058
4200
ASTM D6637
1750
SF80, Machine Direction
2000-058
5950
ASTM D6637
2480
SFI 10, Machine Direction
2000-058
10200
ASTM D6637
4250
ParaGrid 30/15 Machine Direction
2001-063
2060
ASTM D6637
1000
ParaGrid 50/15 Machine Direction
2001-063
4110
ASTM D6637
1670
ParaGrid 80/15 Machine Direction
2001-063
5480
ASTM D6637
2670
ParaGrid 100/15 Machine Direction
2001-063
6850
ASTM D6637
3340
ParaGrid 150/15 Machine Direction
2001-063
10300
ASTM D6637
5020
ParaGrid 200/15 Machine Direction
2001-063
13700
ASTM D6637
6690
Fortrac 20/13-20 Machine Direction
2002-073
1500
ASTM D6637
713
Fortrac 20/13-20 X -Machine Direction
2002-073
713
ASTM D6637
343
Fortrac 35/20-20 Machine Direction
2002-073
2400
ASTM D6637
I200
Fortrac 35/20-20 X -Machine Direction
2002-073
1380
ASTM D6637
692
Fortrac 55/30-20 Machine Direction
2002-073
3710
ASTM D6637
1860
Fortrac 55/30-20 X -Machine Direction
2002-073
1900
ASTM D6637
952
Fortrac 80/30-20 Machine Direction
2002-073
5380
ASTM 06637
2690
Fortrac 80/30-20 X -Machine Direction
2002-073
1920
ASTM D6637
959
Fortrac 110/30-20 Machine Direction
2002-073
7410
ASTM D6637
3710
Fortrac 110/30-20 X-Machinc Direction
2002-073
1870
ASTM D6637
939
Simpaforce 20/20-20, Machine Direction
2006-006
1310
ASTM D6637
548
Simpaforce 30/30-20, Machine Direction
2006-006
2250
ASTM D6637
939
Simpaforce 40/20-15, Machine Direction
2006-006
2920
ASTM D6637
1220
Simpaforce 60/30-15, Machine Direction
2006-006
3990
ASTM D6637
1670
Simpaforce 80/30-20, Machine Direction
2006-006
5380
ASTM D6637
2240
Simpaforce 100/30-20, Machine Direction
2006-006
6650
ASTM D6637
2770
B-2
Revised March 2007
GEOSYNTHETIC RETAINING WALL
Class 2 Non-aggressive Environments
Note 2: May be used for Class 2 walls and slopes in non-aggressive environments. Acceptability of the product for a specific
contract bid item requires that the approved Tong -term geosynthetic strength as listed in Table 2 below meet or exceed the
required long-term strength specified in the contract. The ultimate tensile strength listed in Table 2 is to be used for lot
specific acceptance once the product arrives at the project site. (See Acceptance Code 1010)
Table 2. Long-term and ultimate strengths of geosynthetic products qualified for use in
Class 2 walls and reinforced slopes, non-aggressive environments.
Product
Ref. No.
T„i,
(lb/ft)
Test Procedure
for To,
'Long -Term Tensile Strength,
To (Ib/ft)
Mirafi HP565 - Machine Direction
1993-920
4200
ASTM D4595
600
Mirafi HP565 - Cross Machine Direction
1993-920
4500
ASTM D4595
643
Mirafi I-IP570 - Machine Direction
1993-920
4800
ASTM D4595
685
Mirafi HP570 - Cross Machine Direction
1993-920
4800
ASTM D4595
685
Mirafi 1-15400 - Machine Direction
1993-920
4800
685
Cross -Machine Direction
4800
ASTMD4595
685
Mirafi HS600 Machine Direction
1993-920
7190
1030
Cross -Machine Direction
5400
ASTMD4595
774
Mirafi HS800 Machine Direction
1993-920
595
1370
Cross -Machine Direction
6600
ASTMD4595
946
Mirafi HS1150 Machine Direction
1993-920
13800
1970
Cross -Machine Direction
7190
ASTMD4595
1030
Mirafi HS1400 Machine Direction
1993-920
16800
2400
Cross -Machine Direction
6690
ASTMD4595
1000
Mirafi HS1715 Machine Direction
1993-920
20600
294
Cross -Machine Direction
7190
ASTMD4595
103
Mirafi HS2400 Machine Direction
1993-920
28800
411
Cross -Machine Direction
7190
ASTMD4595
103
Mirafi 1-1S3000 Machine Direction
1993-920
36000
514
Cross -Machine Direction
10800
ASTMD4595
155
Mirafi HS3600 Machine Direction
1993-920
43200
ASTMD4595
6170
GEOTEX Style 4x4 Machine Direction
1994-036
4800
ASTM D4595
685
GEOTEX Style 4x4 Cross Machine Direction
1994-036
4800
ASTM D4595
685
GEOTEX Style 4x6 Machine Direction
1994-036
4800
ASTM D4595
685
GEOTEX Style 4x6 Cross Machine Direction
1994-036
7190
ASTM D4595
1030
,� is determined at a design life of 75 years.
FINAL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Slope Pipelines
Bow Lake Recycling & Transfer Station
King County Solid Waste Division
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
Prepared for
R.W. Beck
June 27, 2008
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
• t;eoreclrnical Engineering
• f!y(1rogeotog y
• Geoerrvirnrnnentrrl Services
• Inspection 'luting
nirri
Li
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
(.it(.+lAlf Alt(l c> 15trt+++r+rt l:r;•in+•+r irr,t • ilydroycrldar • t;r0.•rnrnnttrrrrnl,ri • 1
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
R.W. Beck
1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2500
Seattle, WA 98154-1004
Attention: Mr. Karl .Hufnagel, P.E.
SUBJECT: FINAL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
SLOPE PIPELINES
Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer Station
Tukwila, Washington
Dear Sir:
j+Prlirrrt i' 7e51;ng
As requested, HWA GeoSciences Inc. (HWA) has completed an investigation to assess
potential slope stability issues for design and construction of stormwater and sanitary
sewer pipelines from the proposed Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer Station, down the
east slope to the Duwamish Valley floor. We understand that the pipelines will be
constructed of HDPE pipe, laid on or above the ground surface, and anchored to the
slope. The proposed route of the pipelines was determined in part based on geologic
reconnaissance of the slopes in 2006, as part of the project SEPA checklist, and an April
2007 reconnaissance by members of the project team.
This final report incorporates feedback from the project team on our December 11, 2007
draft report, and addresses review comments from the City of Tukwila on the second draft
dated January 17, 2008. We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services
on this project.
Sincerely,
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
Sa -I. Hong, P.E.
Principal
B WT: SHH: bwt
19730 - 64th Avenue W.
Suite 200
Lynnwood, WA 98036.5957
Td: 425.774.0106
Fax: 425.774.2714
www.hwageo.com
:7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 GENERAL 1
1.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES AND AUTHORIZATION 1
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION 2
2.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION 2
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING 2
3.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS 3
3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION 3
3.2 GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 3
3.3 SITE HISTORY 4
3.4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4
3.4.1 Fill Soil 5
3.4.2 Fill with Refuse 5
3.4.3 Refuse 5
3.4.4 Glacial Deposits 5
3.5 SLOPE CONDITIONS 6
3.6 GROUND WATER 7
3.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 7
3.7.1 Analytical Results 8
3.7.2 Summary 10
3.7.3 Dangerous Waste 11
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11
4.1 GENERAL 11
4.2 PIPE SUPPORT IN REFUSE AREAS 12
4.3 PIPE SUPPORT IN NON -REFUSE AREAS 12
4.3.1 Spread Footings 12
4.3.2 Shallow Auger Piles 13
4.3.3 Pin -Piles 13
4.4 SLOPE REGRADING 15
4.5 BUTTRESS FILL AT THE TOE OF STEEP SLOPES 15
4.6 FILL SOIL HANDLING AND DISPOSAL 15
4.6.1 Construction Issues 15
4.6.2 Health and Safety 16
5.0 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS 16
6.0 REFERENCES 19
LIST OF FIGURES (FOLLOWING TEXT)
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figures 3A -3C
Vicinity Map
Site and Exploration Plan
Cross Section A -A'
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Field Investigation
Figure A-1 Legend of Terms and Symbols on Exploration Logs
Figures A-2 to A-11 Logs of Boreholes B-238 through B-247
Appendix B: Laboratory Investigation
Figure B-1 Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index
Figures B-2 — B-6 Particle -Size Analyses
Appendix C: Analytical Laboratory Data and COC
FINAL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
SLOPE PIPELINES
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
KING COUNTY SOLID WASTE DIVISION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
This report presents the results of a geotechnical engineering investigation performed by
HWA GeoSciences Inc. (HWA) for the proposed design and construction of stormwater
and sanitary sewer pipelines from the proposed Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer
Station, down the east slope to the valley floor. Per the 2006 Facility Master Plan Update
(FMP), King County Solid Waste Division (SWD) plans to construct a new transfer
building on property to be acquired from WSDOT, lying immediately north of the
existing transfer station; demolish the existing station; and also construct scale facilities,
a maintenance building, roadways, and trailer parking.
We understand that one of the pipelines, a stormwater sewer, will likely consist of HDPE
pipe and be laid on the ground and anchored at necessary intervals. The other pipe, a
sanitary sewer, would also be of HDPE, and would either be placed in a trench and
backfilled, or also laid on the ground surface.
The project location is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Existing and proposed
features, topography, and exploration locations are shown on the Site and Exploration
Plan, Figure 2.
The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions along the
proposed pipelines route and provide geotechnical recommendations for design and
construction.
1.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES AND AUTHORIZATION
A scope of services and cost estimate for the geotechnical and environmental
investigation was submitted to Karl Hufnagel, of R.W. Beck, on May 29, 2007. Verbal
authorization to proceed was given by Karl Hufnagel in August, 2007.
Our scope of work for this project included a combined geotechnical and environmental
subsurface exploration program; performing analytical laboratory tests; performing
geotechnical laboratory tests and engineering analyses; and preparing draft and final
geotechnical reports.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
We proposed an exploration program that consisted of drilling to determine the physical
properties of soils along the alignment, including the extent and thickness of refuse,
thickness of colluvium, and depth to dense native soils. The explorations were performed
in order to evaluate slope stability and provide geotechnical parameters for design and
construction.
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
2.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION
The fieldwork consisted of geologic reconnaissance of the site and adjacent slopes, and a
subsurface exploration program that included 10 borings (designated B-238 through B-
247). The surveyed exploration locations are plotted on the Site and Exploration Plan,
Figure 2. These subsurface explorations were performed to obtain both geotechnical and
environmental data, particularly regarding the character of fill and refuse on the site.
Geotechnical data obtained in previous investigations (see Appendix C) since 1965 in the
vicinity of the existing transfer station were utilized in planning our subsurface
investigation, as well as for developing geotechnical recommendations m this report.
HWA retained CN Drilling, a Washington -licensed drilling subcontractor, for this portion
of the work. The borehole drilling was conducted from September 25 through September
27, 2007. Hand -portable drilling equipment was selected based on site access conditions.
The boreholes were advanced to depths ranging from 5.5 to 20.5 feet below the existing
ground surface levels at the exploration locations. Each of the explorations was
advanced under full-time HWA supervision, and was logged by an environmental
geologist. During the field investigation, soil samples were classified in the field and
pertinent information, including sample depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering
characteristics, and ground water occurrence was recorded.
HWA collected a composite soil sample from each soil boring located within landfill
refuse for environmental analytical testing. Soil samples selected for composite analyses
were collected from the top soil -refuse interface, and throughout visibly refuse -
contaminated soil to the bottom of the soil -refuse interface. Representative soil samples
were also obtained from the explorations and taken to our laboratory for further
examination and geotechnical testing. All samples were field screened using a
photoionization detector (PID). Field exploration methods are described in detail and
logs of the explorations are presented in Appendix A.
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were conducted on selected samples obtained from the explorations to
characterize relevant engineering and index properties of the soils encountered.
2003-008_slope pipelines FR.doc 2 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
Laboratory tests included natural moisture content, grain size distribution, pH and
resistivity, and Atterberg Limits. The tests were conducted in general accordance with
appropriate American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards. The test
results and a discussion of laboratory test methodology are presented in Appendix B, or
displayed on the exploration logs in Appendix A, as appropriate. Composite samples for
environmental analytical testing were taken to Analytical Resources, Inc. in Tukwila.
The results are summarized in Table 1 in Section 3.7.1, and laboratory reports are
attached in Appendix C.
3.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS
3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION
The existing Bow Lake Transfer Station is located on the site of a closed landfill,
adjacent to the east side of I-5, north of the South 188th Street Interchange (see Figure 1).
The project site, consisting of the pipeline alignment, is situated east of the existing
facility on the west slope of the Duwamish River Valley. The topography of the general
site area has been extensively modified by previous landfill operations, construction of I-
5, and historical sand and gravel mining activities. Topographic relief is on the order of
235 feet from the existing east access road down to the valley bottom. Descriptions of
the slope conditions are presented in Section 3.5.
3.2 GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Surficial geological information for the site area was obtained partly from the published
map; "Geologic Map of the Des Moines Quadrangle, King County, Washington."
(Waldron, 1962). This map indicates that the plateau west of the site, upon which Sea -
Tac International Airport, and the cities of SeaTac, Burien, and Des Moines lie, is
predominantly mantled by Vashon till, deposited during the most recent Pleistocene
glaciation. This material was deposited as a discontinuous mantle of ground moraine
beneath advancing glacial ice on the eroded surface of older deposits. Soils defined as
Vashon till consist of an unsorted and heterogeneous mass of silt, gravel, and sand in
varying proportions. The till is of high density/strength due to glacial over -consolidation,
and typically has low permeability.
The surficial geology of the slope forming the side of the Duwamish River Valley, which
includes the subject site, is mapped as kame-terrace deposits. This material consists of
stratified sand and gravel that was deposited by meltwater streams flowing from receding
glacial ice, and was deposited against or close to the ice as Ice -Contact Stratified Drift.
Inclusions of till are common, typically discontinuous, and of limited thickness. Locally,
these kame-terrace deposits were frequently mined for sand and gravel.
2003-008_slopc_pipelines FR.doc
3 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
3.3 SITE HISTORY
Based on a report entitled Abandoned Landfill Study in King County, produced by Public
Health Seattle -King County (PHSKC) in 1985, the facility property was used as a landfill
from 1943 to the late 1950's when construction of 1-5 began (PHSKC, 1985). According
to the report, the Bow Lake Landfill was the largest in the county during the 1950's. An
incinerator was installed in 1955 and was used for a short time before being shut down.
Interpretations of site history from aerial photographs are included in the Phase I and II
assessment of the WSDOT parcel (HWA, 2007). Old newspapers retrieved from a
previous exploration had dates which indicated landfilling continued until at least 1961.
Construction of I-5 displaced a portion of the landfill, and material consisting of burned
refuse and soil was stockpiled eastward. The original transfer station was constructed in
1961, but was closed down by the Washington Department of Labor and Industries in
1970.
The current transfer station was built in 1978 and continues to serve the area around
Tukwila, Washington. The existing transfer building was constructed above refuse, and
is supported on driven timber piles. However, it has suffered distress from settlement
due to some of the supporting piles encountering refusal in fill above deeper refuse
(Hong Consulting Engineers, 1986, 1987, and 1988). Settlement of paved areas
supported above refuse has also occurred, as is normal for landfill materials.
3.4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The current soil investigation encountered three general material types: Fill soil, Fill with
Refuse, and Glacial Deposits, as summarized in the following sub -sections. Boreholes
drilled previously above the top of the slope encountered up to 30 feet of refuse (HWA,
2008a). Most of the developed portion of the site contains surficial fill soil, evidently
placed as a cap over the refuse for construction of the existing transfer station.
Geologic cross-sections through the project site, presented in Figures 3A through 3C, are
based on the current and previous exploration logs, the recent topographic survey by
DHA, and our ground surface observations. It is to be noted that, due to the interpretive
nature of cross-sections, only the exploration logs should be relied upon for subsurface
detail at particular locations.
On the exploration logs, soil layers containing refuse are indicated with a cross -hatched
pattern, as noted in the left-hand column for soil symbols. A similar hatching on the
cross-sections also indicates the presence of compressible refuse.
2003-008_slopepipelines FR.doc
4 HWA GEOSC[ENCEs INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
3.4.1 Fill Soil
Sand with variable silt content (Unified Soil Classification SP to SM), approximately 10
feet thick, was encountered beneath pavement and lawn areas during previous
investigations (HWA, 2007). The fill was thicker in portions of the transfer station site;
up to nearly 30 feet thick beneath the transfer shed.
3.4.2 Fill with Refuse
A stratified mixture of silty sand fill and municipal solid waste (MSW) was present
beneath the surface fill in boreholes B-238, B-239, and B-240. The refuse content
observed in explorations was approximately 10 to 20 percent by volume, and was mostly
non -decomposable (metal, glass, brick, porcelain, plastic, etc.). This layer varied from
approximately 5 to 20.5 feet thick in the three boreholes.
3.4.3 Refuse
Unburned refuse (municipal solid waste) with little or no soil fill was encountered in
three previous explorations just above the top of the slope (BH -211, HCE-4, and BH -
218; see Figure 2). It was observed to consist of household waste with glass and bottles,
tin cans, assorted metal, plastic, porcelain, newspaper, etc. Deposits containing soil fill
with greater than 50 percent refuse by volume were logged as Refuse. The refuse dates
from the late 1950's to early 1960's, based on observations during our explorations for
the main Recycling and Transfer Station investigation. The refuse thickness in these
borings varied from approximately 20 to 30 feet and extended to depths of approximately
about 35 feet below the existing ground surface.
3.4.4 Glacial Deposits
With the exception of boring B-238, each of the borings was advanced into native glacial
soils, generally consisting of massive to stratified clean sand (Unified Soil Classification
of SP), and silty sand or sandy silt (Unified Soil Classification of SM to ML), of variable
density ranging from medium dense to very dense. The stratified character, varied
texture, and variable density are consistent with an ice -marginal origin; i.e., kame-terrace
deposits at the edge of an ice -filled valley during glacial retreat. Although classified in
general as kame-terrace deposits, the glacial deposits are interpreted on the exploration
logs as particular depositional facies; e.g. ice -contact stratified drift in most of the
borings, and glaciolacustrine silt encountered only in borehole B-247.
Native glacial soils were encountered at the ground surface in all explorations east of and
including B-241.
2003-008_slope_pipelines FR.doc
5
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
3.5 SLOPE CONDITIONS
Elevations of the eastern slope vary from approximately 245 feet, at the existing Bow
Lake Transfer Station perimeter road, to 28 feet at the golf driving range on the valley
floor. The slope is differentiated geomorphically and geologically into two distinct areas:
the former landfill, and cut benches with steep head cuts from 1960's surface mining (as
indicated in historical aerial photos) below the landfill to the valley floor. Slope
inclinations along the alignment vary from 30 to 200 percent, over slope distances greater
than 10 feet, and up to 550 percent (80 degrees) over a few feet. The slopes are judged to
be Class 2 and 3 per the City of Tukwila Environmentally Sensitive Areas designation
(TMC 18.45.120 A). These slopes also are mapped by the City as an erosion hazard area.
We performed slope stability analyses of the refuse slope (HWA, 2008b), and we
concluded that the slope is in a stable condition and will remain so with the proposed
placement of fill.
Landfill
Geotechnical explorations (HWA, 1993 and 2007) indicated fill and refuse depths up to
45 feet at the crest of the slope. The former landfill, with a soil fill cover, extends down
the slope to about elevation 160 feet as indicated by historical aerial photos (HWA,
1993). Explorations indicated that refuse diminishes downslope and ends above an old
road which is at elevation 176 feet along the proposed alignment (however, scattered
refuse on the ground surface was also observed along the alignment from about
elevations 76 to 40 feet). Refuse scattered on the ground surface, consisted of glass,
metal, and porcelain items scattered over loose, brown, silty sand. The ground surface
probed loosely to a depth of 3 feet, with a 1/2 -inch diameter, 3 -foot long, steel T -handled
probe. The explorations encountered soil mixed with up to 20 percent (by volume)
refuse, with native soil below the refuse consisting of very dense silty sand (ice -contact
stratified drift). The refuse observed in the samples was non -decomposable, except for
some burnt wood and paper in borehole B-238.
The slope inclination varies from about 30 to 75 percent, with the steepest portion less
than 15 feet high at 75 percent. From the crest of the slope, adjacent to the transfer
station perimeter road, the slope is inclined at 40 percent along the upper 20 feet of
elevation. It is vegetated with cut grass above the perimeter fence (upper 10 feet or so of
elevation), then with blackberries and grape vines. Below this to the old road, the slope
varies locally in a somewhat hummocky manner, and is forested with big .leaf maples
(12" diameter at breast height, or more), native brush, and some blackberries.
Soil creep during early growth of some of the trees was evident, and ground settlement
due to decomposition of refuse is assumed. The maples appear generally vertical, with a
few bent down slope in the lower approximately 15 feet of the trunks. No evidence of
recent deep-seated sliding is evident on this portion of the slope.
2003-008_slope pipelines FR.doc
6
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
Benched Slope
The surface -mined portion of the slope has distinct benches and cut slopes, as though no
reclamation occurred after mining. Even so, the majority of it has become reforested
with deciduous trees and native brush. The exceptions are the largest bench (approx. 80
to 100 feet wide) below the landfill, and a raveling cut with a 5 to 15 foot soil exposure
along the middle large bench, about 80 feet west of the pipelines alignment (where the
alignment traverses north along the bench). Slope inclinations vary along the alignment
from approximately 60 to 200 percent along cut slopes, with the benches grading at 0 to
about 10 percent. Soils encountered in the boreholes consisted of dense to very dense
clean sand and silty sand (Unified Soil Classification SP to SM). The raveled cut noted
above consisted of very dense, silty, sandy gravel. This material was stratified with
deformed bedding and till -like lenses, indicative of an ice -contact origin. An exposure at
about 10 feet above the lowest bench consisted of very dense, clean to silty, fine sand,
which appeared to be advance outwash. No ground water was encountered, nor was
seepage observed on the ground surface.
No evidence of recent deep-seated sliding is evident on this portion of the slope.
Raveling was observed as noted above, and soil creep on some of the cut slopes was
evident, as indicated by bent tree trunks and accumulation of soil in the past (now
vegetated) at the toes of cuts. Also, two deep rills up to 6 feet deep were observed, just
north of the alignment above the middle large bench, and one rill of about the same depth
was observed on the alignment descending to the lowest bench. No runoff was observed,
nor evidence of fresh soil erosion, within or upslope from the rills. We conclude that the
rills were eroded after surface mining concluded, and erosion has ceased or diminished
due to reforestation.
3.6 GROUND WATER
No ground water was observed during advancement of the explorations along the
pipeline alignment. Perched ground water was observed in previous explorations on the
facility site.
3.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
In addition to geotechnical sampling, we field screened soil samples for the potential
presence of petroleum hydrocarbons or other contamination in geotechnical borings
where apparent fill or refuse was observed.
Field screening of soil for the presence of volatile organic vapors was conducted using a
Mini -Rae PGM 75 photoionization detector (PID). Visual indications of fill and refuse,
or other potential contamination and odor were also noted. Although the PID is not
capable of quantifying or identifying specific organic compounds, this instrument is
2003-008_slopej,ipelines FR.doc
7
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
capable of measuring relative concentrations of a variety of organic vapors with
ionization potentials less than the energy of the ultraviolet source (in this case, 10.6 eV).
The PID is useful for providing qualitative information with respect to the presence and
relative concentration of organic vapors.
The PID was calibrated with 100 parts per million isobutylene standard at the beginning
of the day. Fifty to 100 milliliters of soil from a discrete depth were placed in a plastic
bag, sealed, and permitted to sit at least 10 minutes prior to analyzing the vapor in the
sample bag. The bag was then perforated by the PID sample tip to obtain the reading.
Samples were screened with the PID when sufficient sample volume was available.
Exact depths of field PID sample screening and concentration values were recorded on
the boring logs.
Elevated PID readings were not detected in any soil samples collected from the borings.
HWA collected environmental soil samples from the selected depths within the borings
(described below), and placed them in labeled, laboratory -supplied, precleaned, 4 -oz.
sample jars. Samples were placed in a cooler with blue ice for transport to the laboratory
under standard chain -of -custody protocols.
Based on field screening and observations, HWA selected composite samples from
boreholes B-238 and B-239 for laboratory analysis. Soils collected between ground
surface and 18 feet bgs were collected for a composite sample from boring B-238, and
soils from ground surface to nine feet bgs were collected from boring B-239. These
sample intervals corresponded with soils containing debris and refuse (glass, plastic,
paper, building materials, etc.). Trace refuse was also noted between ground surface and
five feet bgs in boring B-240, but no environmental sampling was conducted on soil
samples collected from that boring. Figure 2 shows the sampling locations.
3.7.1 Analytical Results
Soil analytical results are summarized in Table 1. Fill soils encountered at the subject
property were found to contain petroleum hydrocarbons and metals. Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) was performed in order to assess off site
disposal options for excess or unsuitable soil. TCLP is a procedure in which a leached
extract of the sample is analyzed, and is used to determine the tested material's
Hazardous Waste (known as "Dangerous Waste" in Washington State) classification
status, for regulatory compliance and disposal purposes. The total metals analyses
measure all of the selected metal in the sample (via a strong acid digestion) whereas the
TCLP analysis measures only the metals that are leachable under a weak acidic solution,
intended to simulate natural conditions. Because the TCLP procedure involves a sample
dilution factor of 20, there is a minimum concentration in soil that could theoretically
2003-008_slope pipelines FR.doc
8
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
result in a TCLP concentration exceeding the Dangerous Waste Criterion for each analyte
(assuming 100% of the analyte was leachable). These Dangerous Waste screening levels
are shown in Table 1. Of the metals detected, only lead exceeded the screening levels, in
two samples. HWA selected the sample with the highest lead concentration for TCLP
analysis.
TABLE 1
SOIL ANALYTICAL DATA
(all results in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) except as noted)
Mg/kg — milligrams per kilogram
pg/kg — micrograms per kilogram
< - not detected at listed reporting limit
Bold — Analyte Detected
1- Dangerous Waste screening levels shown for total metals results (i.e., 20 x TCLP criteria) (in
italics), and Dangerous Waste limit shown for TCLP results, Chapter 173-303 WAC, shown for
reference only.
2 — Sample exceeded Dangerous Waste screening levels and was re -analyzed by TCLP
methods.
2003-008_slope_pipelines FR.doc 9 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
Sample
- •: ;�...
B-238
- ' .
'I' ,
•• B-239 .
••• .•, ..
Dangerous
• '. ,•.•-
• Waste. ,:
Composite
Range (feet)
0-18
0-9
TPH — HCID
Gasoline Range
>20
<20
Diesel Range
<50
<50
Lube Oil Range
<100
<100
TPH-Gx
Gasoline
16
Metals, Total
Arsenic
<10
30
100
Barium
136
245
2000
Cadmium
1.4
5
20
Chromium
49
75
100
Lead
345
12702
100
Mercury
0.13
0.10
Selenium
<10
<30
Silver
2.4
<2
Metals, TCLP
Lead (mg/L)
0.9
5.0
VOAs (pg/kg)
Benzene
<30
Toluene
<30
Ethylbenzene
<30
Total Xylenes
<60
Mg/kg — milligrams per kilogram
pg/kg — micrograms per kilogram
< - not detected at listed reporting limit
Bold — Analyte Detected
1- Dangerous Waste screening levels shown for total metals results (i.e., 20 x TCLP criteria) (in
italics), and Dangerous Waste limit shown for TCLP results, Chapter 173-303 WAC, shown for
reference only.
2 — Sample exceeded Dangerous Waste screening levels and was re -analyzed by TCLP
methods.
2003-008_slope_pipelines FR.doc 9 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
3.7.2 Summary
Organics
Composite soil sample B-238 contained detectable concentrations of gasoline -range
petroleum hydrocarbons by the semi -quantitative HCID screening method. Quantitation
of the sample by the NWTPH-Gx analytical method indicated a low concentration of
gasoline -range petroleum hydrocarbons (16 mg/kg). Based on laboratory chromatogram
analysis, the result did not match a gasoline pattern.
The sample was also analyzed for aromatic hydrocarbons. The aromatic hydrocarbons
(benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes) were not detected in the sample.
This sample was collected in fill soils. The soils contained fill and landfill wastes (glass,
plastic), which may have included petroleum products, which might contribute to the
detection of petroleum.
Metals
Composite samples B-238 and B-239 contained some RCRA metals (see Table
1).Because sample B-239 contained the highest lead concentration, HWA requested
TCLP analysis for lead in the sample in order to assess off-site disposal options for soils
with regard to Dangerous Waste regulations. Lead was detected at 0.9 mg/L; below the
Dangerous Waste criterion of 5 mg/L by the TCLP method in the B-239 sample. These
samples were collected from fill soils observed between ground surface and nine feet bgs.
By deduction, B-238 does not exceed Dangerous Waste criteria.
Other selected analytes were either not detected, or the analyte concentrations were
below cleanup levels.
Summary
Our environmental soil sample locations were selected at borings along the proposed
pipeline route where fill soils or refuse were encountered. Elevated petroleum
hydrocarbon and metals concentrations were detected in one or both of the borings (B-
238, B-239) in apparent fill material near the top of the slope on the east portion of the
subject property. Fill was also observed in shallow soils in boring B-240, but
environmental sampling was not conducted at that location. Borings located downhill of
boring B-240 did not encounter obvious fill or refuse, and laboratory analyses were not
performed on soil samples from these borings.
Due to the compositing of all samples, higher or lower concentrations of detected
analytes likely exist in discrete areas.
2003-008_slope pipelines FR.doc
10
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
Ground water was not sampled as part of this investigation, as it was not encountered
during exploration.
3.7.3 Dangerous Waste
Laboratory analytical data were compared to Dangerous Waste criteria in order to assess
off site disposal options for excess or unsuitable soil. "Dangerous wastes" means those
solid wastes designated in WAC 173-303-070 through 173-303-100 as dangerous, or
extremely hazardous or mixed waste and requiring special handling, treatment, and
disposal under those regulations.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 GENERAL
Slope stability assessment along the pipeline alignment indicates no signs of either
incipient or on—going slides, and it is our view that the proposed pipelines can be
installed as planned when the engineering recommendations as presented herein are
adhered to. Steep gradient cuts are present along the lower slope as shown on Figure 2.
These cuts should be regraded to flatten their slopes to 1.5H:1 V for laying the proposed
pipes.
HDPE pipes are planned at the top of the hill and will traverse a 30 -foot plus thick refuse
layer to the lower elevation where the refuse thins out. The rest of the alignment, on
dense glacial soils, can be constructed of either steel or HDPE pipes. A pile foundation
option for support of the pipes in the refuse area is not feasible, as the piles will be
subject to considerable down drag and lateral loading, and the driving of these piles in
this terrain will also be costly. As an option to rigidly supporting the pipelines, we
recommend the pipes and manholes be floated in the refuse with due consideration being
given to the anticipated settlements.
Once the pipes are out of refuse, they can be laid on the ground. The pipes' anchor block
foundations should be installed to tie -down or secure the pipes in native soils at the
transition positions. In general, the core of the slope is stable with the exception that the
surface is loosened due to plant root systems, surface drainage and weathering effects.
The pipe foundations should be installed below the weathered zone, which ranges in
depth up to 5 feet. The pipe anchor block or foundation locations should be examined
individually to determine the adequacy of the existing soils for bearing and lateral
loading capacity. Anchor blocks should be installed by pouring conventional concrete
blocks, or constructing augered piles or driven micro- piles to serve as restraint elements.
Helical screw piles or anchors may also be feasible as anchorage elements provided that
2003-008_slope pipelines FR.doc
11
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
they can be installed in the dense native soils comprising the slopes along the lower
sections of the pipeline alignments.
4.2 PIPE SUPPORT IN REFUSE AREAS
At the top of the hill, the refuse deposit below the pipe alignment is very thick and it is
considered impractical to excavate the refuse and replace it with competent granular
materials. As an alternative, we recommend the pipes be supported on the refuse and,
where trenched, be backfilled with light weight materials such as coal burn bottom ash,
hogsfuel, or shredded tires. If the area is to be preloaded (e.g. for construction of the new
perimeter road), pipe installation should be delayed as much as possible to allow
settlements to occur and reduce future deformations. The manholes can also be floated in
the refuse. Since the manholes and connecting pipes may settle differentially with
respect to each other, some provisions should be made for this condition and the potential
stresses that may be induced at the pipe -manhole connections. One method is to fabricate
the pipe connections to the manholes with slip joints in the pipe segments. This will
allow the buried pipes to slip in and out of the manholes (sleeves) and compensate
somewhat for the tension induced by differential settlement of the pipes in the refuse.
The pipe slip joints should be configured to accommodate at least a two—foot pull out.
An alternative would be to provide a prefabricated flexible coupler system on the pipes
entering and leaving each of the manholes. These manufactured units are likely to be
more expensive, but may be more suitable for reduction of bending and shear stresses
that may be induced at the manhole connections. Finally, sufficient pipe grades should
be provided in the pipelines to allow for differential settlements and sags to develop
without resulting in grade reversals and traps forming in the lines.
4.3 PIPE SUPPORT IN NON -REFUSE AREAS
The flexible pipes can ideally be laid on the ground surface, on slopes steeper than
2H:1 V, after shallow trimming and filling of shallow depressions with crushed rock. On
flatter terrain, the onsite soils can be used to level the ground surface. The pipes should
be anchored at a maximum of 50 -foot intervals horizontally using either spread footings
or pin -piles for the anchor supports. The steel pipes can be supported on either pin -piles
or conventional spread footings. Screw piles/anchors may also be feasible for
support/restraint elements, as discussed above.
4.3.1 Spread Footings
Spread footings can be used to support the proposed pipes along the alignment, with an
allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 psf appropriate for design of footings on native
glacial soils. The depth of the footings should be at least 3 feet to place the bearing
surface on non -weathered soils below the slope profile. Footings should be rectangular
2003-008_slopepipehnes FR.doc
12 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
in shape and cast with long axis oriented down slope (i.e. parallel to the slope dip or fall
line). We recommend the footings be dug for concrete pours without formwork for good
contact between concrete and the native soils so as to minimize backfilling and
compaction. Sloughed soil should be cleaned out before the concrete pour. Formwork
may be permitted in some cases, but the backfill should be thoroughly compacted to
ensure proper load transfer to the slope soils.
The passive resistance for cast -in-place concrete blocks should be taken as 300 pcf with a
factor of safety of 1.5 recommended. However, the passive resistance for the upper 2
feet should be ignored to allow for potential slope creep and soil erosion effects. We
recommend the allowable base friction between concrete and the foundation soil be taken
as 0.4 for determination of design sliding resistance.
We recommend that the footing foundation excavation bases be tilted towards the uphill
by 30 percent from horizontal such that foundation heels gain support deeper into the hill.
Since the foundation concrete should be poured without formwork, for optimum
development of bearing and passive pressure, the concrete pour should be made
immediately rather than allowing the passage of time and soil relaxation effects to take
place. We recommend no more than 12 -hours between initial footing excavation and
concreting.
In some areas the footing excavations may accumulate perched water, which should be
pumped out prior to the concrete pour. Minor seepage can be removed with the
excavator bucket for immediate pours. In some cases, shoring may be necessary.
However, in most cases, seepage can be displaced by the concrete pour, and the sidewalls
should remain vertical and stable, if the concrete is poured immediately after excavation.
4.3.2 Shallow Auger Piles
Shallow auger piles may be utilized for pile support/restraint in natural soil areas of the
slope. A 10 -inch diameter pile with minimum 8 -foot depth can be designed for 10,000
pounds of vertical allowable capacity with a factor of safety two. The lateral pile
capacities can be calculated by using L -pile design parameters presented in the
subsequent section of this report.
4.3.3 Pin -Piles
Pin -piles, comprising small diameter, heavy -walled, steel pipes driven with hydraulic
hammers attached to a backhoe or bobcat, can be used to anchor or support either steel or
HDPE pipes on slope. Alternatively, hand -operated pneumatically -powered jack
hammers may be employed to drive the smaller pin pile sizes. This option minimizes the
disturbance to the hill, although lateral capacities are very low compared to conventional
concrete spread footings or auger pile types. The allowable vertical pile capacities for
2003-008_slope pipelines FR.doc
13
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
several alternative pipe sizes are provided in Table 2 below. The actual pile capacity
should be determined by the hydraulic jack hammer weight or driving energy at practical
driving refusal for each of the respective pile sizes, which can be normally measured in
terms of driving time seconds per inch. The tabulated driving criteria vary among
contractors and their documented field test results. Prior to the project initiation, driving
criteria associated with hammer properties/characteristics should be submitted to the
engineer for approval. At each foundation location, a minimum of two pin -piles are
recommended to provide H frame type of restraint construction. Where large lateral load
restraint is required, extra piles and/or battered pile arrangement may be necessary. The
battered pile capacities should be reduced graphically using force polygon diagrams. A
minimum batter 4V:1H is recommended.
TABLE 2
PIN- PILES DRIVING CRITERIA/ALLOWABLE CAPACITIES
Pipe Sizes
(inches)
Hydraulic Breaker
Hammer sizes (lbs)
Refusal Criteria
(<1 -inch pen./X sec.)
Allowable Pile
Capacities
(in kips with FS =4)
2
400
14
3
3
650
15
5
4
1100
10
10
6
2000
15
15
Pipes should be driven until the refusal criteria are met to establish their load capacity.
For estimating purposes, all pile lengths should be 20 feet minimum length on
commencement of driving. If the refusal criteria are not met within the initial pile section,
extra lengths may be added with butt -welded connections. No mechanical couplers are
allowed unless approved by the geotechnical engineer of record, since most couplers are
compression fitting types which are not designed to carry lateral loads. When on the
slopes are greater than 1 V:4H, a minimum 4 -inch diameter pipe should be used.
Lateral capacities of piles can be calculated by using the computer software L -pile,
employing the soil parameters presented in Table 3 below. The soil parameters for
analyses were chosen conservatively so that loose spots on the slopes can be accounted
for in general. At most locations, the actual parameters will be a lot higher than what is
shown on the table. We did not observe liquefiable soils along the pipe alignment, and
this is not a factor in the analyses.
2003-008slope_pipelines FR.doc
14
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
TABLE 3 - L -PILE DESIGN PARAMETERS
Soil Layer
Depth, ft.
L -pile Soil
Type
kh, pci
y',pcf
Friction Angle
0-3
sand
5.0
125
30°
3-10
sand
60
125
30°
10 or more
sand
120
130
350
4.4 SLOPE REGRADING
Existing steep cut slopes which are presently standing nearly vertically, as noted on the
slope profiles, should be graded for pipe installation, as follows:
• 1.5H:1 V for the native glacially -consolidated dense soil slopes; and
• 2H:1 V for all other slopes consisting of other soil types.
The exposed slopes should be covered with either crushed rock or jute netting, with
hydroseeding and/or planting to reduce erosion potential.
4.5 BUTTRESS FILL AT THE TOE OF STEEP SLOPES
Some steep slopes can be regraded by building up buttress fill at the slope toes. The
buttress fill should be built with imported crushed rock or gravel borrow, or with granular
site soils with near optimum moisture contents. The slope buttress fills should be
hydroseeded, as necessary.
4.6 FILL SOIL HANDLING AND DISPOSAL
4.6.1 Construction Issues
Construction bid documents (plans and specifications) should include all analytical
results and provisions for contaminated soil and waste handling, treatment/disposal, and
health and safety requirements.
During soils excavation and handling, soils, including drill cuttings, should be field
screened and observed for significant staining or odors. Prior to export, stockpiled soils
should be sampled for characterization and handling, as required by the disposal facility.
If excavated materials are disposed off-site (e.g., not at Cedar Hills Regional Landfill),
property owners at the receiving site should be notified of the results of this study and
any additional testing information available at that time. Criteria for unrestricted use of
soils may be lower than some cleanup levels. Soils with contaminant concentrations
2003-008_slope pipelines FR.doc
15
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
above detection limits but below cleanup levels should not be used as fill near surface or
ground water.
The contractor should be required to notify the Engineer or Owner's representative of
suspected contaminated materials, with provisions in the specifications for assisting the
Engineer with excavations for testing, segregating and stockpiling materials,
sedimentation and erosion control, dust control, decontamination, and standby time or
provisions for delays due to testing. The contractor should be required to submit waste
characterization, waste management, spill prevention/control, and health and safety plans
which address these issues. HWA recommends testing for any contractor unit rate pay
items (e.g., contaminated soil disposal) be conducted by the Owner's representative.
4.6.2 Health and Safety
HWA recommends that appropriate health and safety measures be taken during
excavation in areas where refuse, contaminated soils, ground water, or vapors may be
present. These measures may include, but are not limited to, preparation of a site specific
health and safety plan, air monitoring, site control/access, protective and decontamination
measures, worker training, certification, and medical monitoring. We recommend an
industrial hygienist or health and safety specialist be consulted to determine the
applicability of these requirements. Construction specifications should include all
available analytical results including this and other available reports.
5.0 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS
We have prepared this report for R.W. Beck, the King County Solid Waste Division, and
their agents for use in design and construction of a portion of this project. This report
should be provided in its entirety to prospective contractors for bidding and estimating
purposes; however, the conclusions and interpretations presented m this report should not
be construed as our warranty of actual subsurface conditions on site. Experience has
shown that soil and ground water conditions can vary significantly over small distances.
Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations and may not be detected by a
geotechnical study of this scope and nature. If, during future site operations, subsurface
conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those described herein, HWA
should be notified for review of the recommendations of this report, and revision of such
if necessary.
We recommend HWA be retained to review the plans and specifications to verify that our
recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as intended. Sufficient
geotechnical monitoring, testing, and consultation should be provided by HWA during
construction to confirm the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by
the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should conditions
2003-008_slope pipelines FR.doc
16
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
revealed during construction differ from those anticipated, and to verify that the
geotechnical aspects of construction comply with the contract plans and specifications.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, HWA executed these services in
accordance with generally accepted professional principles and practices in the fields of
geotechnical engineering and engineering geology in the area at the time the report was
prepared. No warranty, express or implied, is made.
HWA does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the
contractor's operations, and cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than
our own on the site. As such, the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor.
The contractor should notify the owner if any of the recommended actions presented
herein are considered unsafe.
2003-008_slope_pipelines FR.doc
17
0.0
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project. Should
you have any questions or comments, or if we may be of further service, please do not
hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
BRADLEY W t . THURBER
Brad W. Thurber, L.E.G.
Engineering Geologist
Sa H. Hong, P.E.
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
BWT:JMS:SHH:bwt
2003-008_slope pipelines FR
18
JEFFREY MACK SPECK
Jeffrey M. Speck, L.G.
Environmental Geologist
HWA GEOSC1ENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
6.0 REFERENCES
Hong West & Associates, November 1993, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Bow Lake
Transfer Station Improvements, Facilities Master Plan, King County, Washington,
prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., January 2004, Draft Geotechnical Evaluation Report, WSDOT
Property, Bow Lake Transfer Station / Recycling Facility, King County, Washington,
prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., September 2007, Phase I & II Environmental Site Assessment,
WSDOT Property, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., July 2007, Environmental Site Investigation, Bow Lake
Processing/ Transfer Station, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., October 2007, Technical Memorandum, Geotechnical Issues for
Slope Pipelines, King County, Washington, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
R.W. Beck, February 2007, 2006 Facility Master Plan Update, Bow Lake Transfer /
Recycling Station.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., June 2008, Final Geotechnical Report, Bow Lake Recycling and
Transfer Station, Tukwila, Washington, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
HWA GeoSciences Inc., June 2008, Final Slope Stability Report, Bow Lake Recycling
and Transfer Station, Tukwila, Washington, prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates.
Waldron, H.H., 1962, Geology of the Des Moines Quadrangle, Washington, U.S.
Geological Survey Quadrangle Map GQ -158.
References from 1993 Report:
ABAM Consulting Engineers, January 1986, Bow Lake Transfer Station, Engineering
Report, Investigation of Concrete Distress, prepared for King County Solid Waste
Division.
ABAM Consulting Engineers, April 1986, Bow Lake Transfer Station, Development of
Alternatives for Repair of Pit and Southeast Corner, prepared for King County Solid
Waste Division.
Dames & Moore, May 1965, Report of Soils Investigation, Bow Lake Transfer Station
Site, King County, Washington, prepared for Johnston -Campanella & Co.
2003-008_slope pipelines FR.doc
19
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
June 27, 2008
HWA Project No. 2003-008-21
Golder Associates, April 1992, Final Report, Results of Phase I — Geotechnical Site
Investigation, Proposed Water Main Relocation Project, Bow Lake Transfer Station,
prepared for King County Solid Waste Division.
Hong Consulting Engineers, January 1986, Bow Lake Transfer Station Foundation
Settlement Investigation, prepared for ABAM Consulting Engineers.
Hong Consulting Engineers, April 1986, Subsurface Soil Investigation for Underpinning
at the Bow Lake Transfer Station, King County, Washington, prepared for ABAM
Consulting Engineers.
Hong Consulting Engineers, November 1987, Bow Lake Transfer Station Underpinning
Project, Report of Subsurface Investigations and Piling Inspection, King County,
Washington, prepared for ABAM Consulting Engineers.
Hong Consulting Engineers, December 1988, Geotechnical Soil Investigation, Bow Lake
Transfer Station Improvement Project, King County, Washington, prepared for R.W.
Beck and Associates.
Hong West & Associates, December 1992, Geotechnical Investigation, 1-5 HOV Lane
Widening, Fife to Tukwila Interchange, King and Pierce Counties, Washington, prepared
for WSDOT / ALPHA Engineering Group, Inc.
King County, 1990, Sensitive Areas Map Folio, King County, Washington, King County
Department of Parks, Planning and Resources.
Shannon & Wilson, February 1976, Soil Engineering, Proposed Bow Lake Transfer
Station, King County, Washington, prepared for King County Dept. of Community and
Environmental Development, Architecture Division.
Shannon & Wilson, January 1977, Soil Engineering, Proposed Bow Lake Transfer
Station, King County, Washington, (Revision of February 1976 report), prepared for King
County Dept. of Community and Environmental Development, Architecture Division.
2003-008_siopejipelines FR.doc
20
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
}�NA20poeong® 2006 -Eu hholes
I1
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
KOT T:O SOAIRE
VICINITY MAP
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
FIGURE NO.
1
PROJECT NO.
2003-008
11
B-24
t6
v. •
(f)
1\.1111 \ \ \'‘V
" '
/((
/ /
11 /
.•
[
..---'1
'-'
\-- i'
—IC,,,,,...,,,, i
\-------.
;
/ • .,---'-
\
\ \ 7
.4"
LEGEND
BOREHOLE DESIGNATION AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION
BASE' MAP PROVIDED BY: R. W.B ECK -dated 4/7/08'
CC\DDCOMENTS AND SETTiNGSVINKRIANEY.FIWAVESKTOP VOWLAKE 04-07-08 T2400 \ HWK 2003-008-72300.DWG,
25'
50'
100''
11111,111 11•111=1
SCALE: 1"=50''
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
SLOPE PIPELINES
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
SITE AND
EXPLORATION
PLAN
DRAWN, ay EEK
maCIED Frf, BT
O62708
FIGURE! NO.
2
PROJECTPCO:
2003-008-211
T-2300)
REV/00)EFKI/X/XXS
H
W
W
L
z
H
Z
H
Q
W
J
W
280
270 —
260
250 —
240
230 —
220
210 —
200
190
180
170
160
150
u
z
FILL
`/ ''`/,IilakAAAAAA gt11/ir A
AWL VATAVAVANNWAYA
BAANRE FUSE:TA�A��
ovi'�----.►�AvA�A�►ovAAAAAAA
VAAAAAAAA� ISTAVAVAVAVAA AVAVATA\Iw Av kw lir Iv wok AM Y
AAAAAAAAA�AAAAA�
w
'z
0)
H
w
LL
0
M
N
03
30
_.\:
FILL .WITH
REFUSE
GLACIAL DEPOSITS
C
14
-07
B-2 9: (OFFSET 7' :isk)
W
z
280
— 270
260
— 250
240
AAAAAIYA,
FAVI .:
I2 WA MVAVATAVAVAMMY, 7ilyeriat.i.50/5' MIlr.
31
42 •
40
. 62
y
140 —
130 —
120 —
110 —
100
LEGEND
ti
N
EXPLORATION DESIGNATION
AND SITE PLAN SYMBOL
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
20 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
50/3
7- - INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
35
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
50/6'. . .
50/6'
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further. the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally cr vertically over relatively short distances
ori site.
Jum
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=20'
0' 10' 20' 40'
0' 10' 20' 40'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=20'
230
220
210
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
— 130
120
— 110
100
z
H
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
SLOPE PIPELINES
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
A -A'
DRAWN BY EEK
CFIEgKT BY BL
DATE
11.07.07
FIGURE NO.
3A
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
T-2300
220
210
200
190
180
W 170
160
Z
Z
El
H
1
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances
on site.
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=20'
220
210
200
190
180
170
W
IW
160 LL
150
140
130
Z
Z
LH
120
W
1
W
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
SLOPE PIPELINES
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
A -A'
DRAWN BY EEK
CHECKED BY BL
DATE
11.07.07
FUME ND.
3B
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
T-2300
z.....
z
•
- o •:::::
N.
.....
:(OFFSET 12' 1
..... ...
:::
•
....,.....
-
50/4'-
70/4'kl-
m
to
Fn
. . . . .
U
•
GLACIAL
DEPOSITS
•::::
. :::: ..
HL.
`,/
/
:.
z
SII : . : : :
: .. : . ..
_ LEGEND
•50/6'
. . . . . . .
. . 50/6'.
.
L
-
o
•:. •: •:
. .. . .
:: :::::
• _
-
20
-
m EXPLORATION DESIGNATION
SITE PLAN SYMBOL•
4
N -VALUE . (BLOWS/FOOT)
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
• . • • . - • •
::::: :::
• . . • . . . •
. • . C
• • • • •
1 L.L
U.V I U M.
::
. • • •
..... ...
allAND
N
.,
.
50/3"
--?---
a WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
----?..-- INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
50/6'ti
50/4'• •
-
•
-
35
SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
i HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=20'
0' 10' 2O' 40'
`.:.::.
-
n' in' 7n' An'
The subsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, the contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances
on site.
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=20'
220
210
200
190
180
170
W
IW
160 LL
150
140
130
Z
Z
LH
120
W
1
W
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
SLOPE PIPELINES
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
A -A'
DRAWN BY EEK
CHECKED BY BL
DATE
11.07.07
FUME ND.
3B
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
T-2300
160
150 —
140
130 —
120
W 110 -
W
LL 100
Z
H
90 —
80
Z
❑ 70
H
• 60
50
W
J 40
30
20 —
10 —
0
GLA
LEGEND
N
m
20
EXPLORATION DESIGNATION
AND SITE PLAN SYMBOL
N -VALUE - (BLOWS/FOOT)
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
WATER LEVEL AT TIME OF DRILLING
WATER LEVEL MEASURED IN PIEZOMETER
ON THE DATE INDICATED.
50/3"
?- -?. INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT
35 SAND PACK AND SCREEN INTERVAL
BOTTOM OF BORING
CIAL DEPO
The surjsurface conditions shown are based on widely spaced borings and test pits and
should be considered approximate. Further, ;he contact lines shown between units are
interpretive in nature and may vary laterally or vertically over relatively short distances
on site.
SITS
1—
c
U-
O
m
qo
34
39
57
68
75
CULLUVIU
GLACID--
ACUSTR
DgPOSIT:
INE
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "=20'
0' 10' 20' 40'
0' 10' 20' 40'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1 "=20'
DITCH
150
150
140
130
120
110
100 LL
90
80
Z
H
Z
70 ❑
H
60
50
40
W
30
20
10
0
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
SLOPE PIPELINES
BOW LAKE RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
CROSS SECTION
A -A'
DRAWN BY EEK.
CHECKED BY BL
DATE
11.07.07
FIGURE
3C
PROJECT NO.
2003-008-21
T-2300
J
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The subsurface exploration program consisted of 10 boreholes. Under subcontract to
HWA, CN Drilling (CND), of Seattle, Washington, drilled the borings in September
2007. Drilling equipment was selected based on site access conditions, which resulted in
use of a hand -portable drill equipment. CND employed an Acker Soil Mechanic, hand
portable, drill rig with four -inch outer diameter hollow -stem auger and a two-inch split
spoon sampling device to collect soil samples. A 140 -pound hammer with a 30 -inch drop
was used to drive the sampler into the subsurface (a Standard Penetration Test). HWA
field staff collected soil samples generally every 2.5 feet in each boring as was possible.
HWA sampled soils to depths of up to 20.5 feet in the borings.
Proposed exploration locations were staked in the field by DHA Surveyors, per locations
chosen and plotted on the Master Plan survey by HWA and R.W. Beck. Upon
completion of each borehole, the actual locations were staked and subsequently
resurveyed by DHA, as many were moved to accommodate prevailing access constraints.
The actual exploration locations are shown on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2.
Each of the explorations was completed under the full-time observation of an HWA
environmental or engineering geologist. HWA personnel recorded pertinent information
including soil sample depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, PID readings
from selected soil samples, and ground water occurrence as the explorations were
excavated. Soils were classified in general accordance with the classification system
described in Figure A-1, which also provides a key to the exploration log symbols.
Where applicable, soil layers containing compressible, unburned, refuse are indicated
with a cross -hatched pattern in the left-hand column for soil symbols. The summary logs
of boreholes are presented on Figures A-2 through A-11.
The stratigraphic contacts shown on the individual logs represent the approximate
boundaries between soil types. The actual transitions may be more gradual.
HWA collected a composite soil sample from each soil boring with evidence of refuse
(municipal solid waste) for environmental analytical testing. Soil samples selected for
composite analyses were collected from the top soil -refuse interface, throughout visibly
refuse -contaminated soils, to the bottom soil -refuse interface. All samples were field
screened using a photo ionization detector (PID). Environmental soil samples were
placed in labeled laboratory -provided sample containers using nitrile gloves and clean
stainless steel spoons. Samples were placed in a cooler and packed with "blue ice" for
transport to the laboratory under chain -of -custody protocol.
2003-008_slope_pipelines FR.doc
A-1
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY VERSUS SPT N -VALUE TEST SYMBOLS
COHESIONLESS SOILS
COHESIVE SOILS
Density
N (blows/It)
Approximate
Relative Dansily(%)
Consistency
N (blows/ft)
Approximate
Undralned Shear
Strength (psq
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
0 to 4
4 to 10
10 to 30
30 to 50
over 50
0 - 15
15 - 35
35 - 65
65 - 85
85 - 100
Vory Soft
Soft
Medium Stiff
Sldr
Very Stiff
Hard
0 to 2
2 to 4
4 to 8
8 to 15
15 to 30
over 30
<250
250 - 600
500 • 1000
1000 - 2000
2000 - 4000
>400D
USCS SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP DESCRIPTIONS
Coarse
Grained
Soils
More than
50% Retained
on No.
200 Sieve
Size
Gravel and
Gravely Soils
More than
50% of Coarse
Fraction Retained
on No 4 Sieve
Clean Gravel
(tittle or no fines)
eNF 1
•®`'
GW
Well -graded GRAVEL
ov l
a Qc
GP
Poorly -graded GRAVEL
Gravel with
Fines (appreciable
amount of fines)
o c
GM
Silty GRAVEL
l
GC
Clayey GRAVEL
Sand and
Sandy Soils
60% or More
of Coarse
Fraction Passing
No. 4 Sieve
Clean Sand
(tittle or no fines)
:•
SW
Well -graded SAND
'
SP
Poorly -graded SAND
Sand with
Fines (appreciable
amount of fines)
SM
Silly SAND
��
%�}
SC
Cla SAND
Clayey
Fine
Grained
Solis
5O% or More
Passingand
No, 200 Sieve
Size
Sill
Liquid Limit
and
Clay Less than 50%//�
ML
SILT
/�
CL
Lean CLAY
OL
Organic SILT/Organic CLAY
Silt
Liquid Limit
Clay50% or More
MH
Elastic SILT
j
CH
Fat CLAY
OH
Organic SILT/Organic CLAY
Highly Organic Soils
�P�
p ,v
PT
PEAT
COMPONENT DEFINITIONS
COMPONENT
SIZE RANGE
Boulders
Larger than 12 in
Cobbles
3 into 12 In
Gravel
3 in to No 4 (4.5mm)
Coarse gravel
3 in to 3/4 In
Fine gravel
3/4 In 10 No 4 (4.5mm)
Sand
No. 4 (4.5 mm) 10 No. 200 (0.074 mm)
Coarse sand
No. 4 (4.5 mm) to No. 10 (2.0 rnm)
Medium sand
No. 10 (2.0 mm) to No. 40 (0.42 mm)
Fine sand
No. 40 (0.42 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 mm)
Sill and Clay
Smaller than No. 200 (0.074mm)
%F Percent Fines
AL Atterberg Limits: PL = Plastic Limit
LL = Liquid Limit
CBR California Bearing Ratio
CN Consolidation
DD Dry Density (pcf)
DS Direct Shear
GS Grain Size Distribution
K Permeability
MD MofstureiDensily Relationship (Proctor)
MR Resilient Modulus
PID Photo(on(zation Device Reading
PP Pocket Penetrometer
Approx. Compressive Strength (tsf)
SG Specific Gravity
TC Triaxial Compression
TV Torvane
Approx. Shear Strength (tsf)
UC Unconfined Compression
I
Ij
0
0
21
SAMPLE TYPE SYMBOLS
2.0" OD Split Spoon (SPT)
(140 Ib. hammer with 30 In. drop)
Shelby Tube
3.1/4" OD Split Spoon with Brass Rings
Small Bag Sample
Large Bag (Bulk) Sample
Core Run
Non-standard Penetration Test
(3.0" OD split spoon)
GROUNDWATER SYMBOLS
V. Groundwater Level (measured a1
time of drilling)
Groundwater Level (measured In well or
open hole after water level stabilized)
COMPONENT PROPORTIONS
PROPORTION RANGE
DESCRIPTIVE TERMS
< 5%
5 - 12%
12 - 30%
30.50%
Clean
Slightly (Clayey, Silly, Sandy)
Clayey, Silly, Sandy, Gravelly
Very (Clayey, Silty, Sandy, Gravelly)
Components are arranged In order of increasing quantities.
NOTES: Solt classifications presented on exploration logs are based on visual and aboratory observation.
Soil descriptions are presented in the following general order:
Density/consistency, color, modifier (lf any) GROUP NAME, additions to group name (i1 any), moisture
content Proportion, gradation, and angularity of constituents, additional comments.
(GEOLOGIC INTERPRETATION)
Please refer to the discussion in the report text as well as the exploration logs for a more
complete description of subsurface conditions.
MOISTURE CONTENT
DRY
MOIST
WET
Absence of moisture, dusty,
dry to the touch.
Damp but no visible water.
Visible free water, usually
soil Is below water table.
LEGEND OF TERMS AND
DE1 BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY SYMBOLS USED ON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON EXPLORATION LOGS
LEGEND 2003008.GPJ 11/14/07
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008 FIGURE:
A-1
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Acker hand -portable rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 221 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 8/25/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 8/25/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
F0.
0
5
10
15
20
USCS Sal_ CLASS
DESCRIPTION
— •�•.••
����•
- •••••i
044.44:
- 44
♦♦••••/
- 44444
•4.44
����,
_ 4 ,•Id
44,
4;4;!
•-- %%i
V"II,
_ 4•••••
- 444:4:
44.4:
•%%
•4444
•444:
4444i
_ 44.
•:•:•:
4444i
,4
44•
_ .4444:
4..
4:4.44
4444:
4444:
41
_ cervi
•444 0.'.S
_ 44444
•44444'4:
4
— 4444:
:i
4444#
- •444:
4444:
44444
- 444:
•444:
♦4
+�O
Loose, yellow brown, fine SAND, dry. Some organic material
noted (rootlets).
(FILL WITH REFUSE)
Oxidized soil and metal noted at 3.25 ft bgs. Refuse fess than h
5% of sample.
Loose, yellow brown to red brown, silty, fine SAND, dry.
Refuse: less than 5% [100% non-compressibtaj (burnt wood,
glass). Oxidized soil noted al 6.40 to 6.50 feet below ground
surface (fl bgs).
Refuse: 20% (100% non-compressible) (glass, brick, metal)-
Note trace recovery. (fine sand, wet, with broken glass) CO
Medium dense, red to red -brown, fine SAND, dry.
Cuttings: plastic, paper, brick in fine sane matrix.
No recovery.
Very dense, black and red, burn slag, dry. Note very simBarVj
•
••4.4�
- 44.4•••
•••:4:
4:•:i
- 444:4:
appearance to bum slag from WSDOT site. Drillers note very _
( difficult drilling. Al 20.511 bgs, drilling auger stops and will not 1
(start natal. 1 `-
Drill became lodged in burn slag. ��g4�
25 —
Boring terminated at 20.5 feel below ground surface.
No ground water observed during time of exploration
Composite environmental sample collected from sample. No
PID readings above background levels noted during field
screening of samples.
S-1 1-1-2
S-2 4-6-8
OTHER TESTS
S-3 4-3-2 GS
S-4 1-3-5
S-5 2-2-3
S-6 6-5-5 GS
S-7 8-4-3
S-8 10-50/3.5
S-9 15-50/3
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other limes and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
10
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30- drop)
A Blows per foot
20
30
40
50
•
A
A
•
»,
»0
0 20 40 60
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I--40-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
BO
0-
w
0
—5
—10
15
— 20
100
25
MI BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCESINC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-238
PAGE: 1 of 1
BORING 200300a GPJ 12/11107
FIGURE: A-2
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling. Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Acker hand -portable rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 202 # feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 9/25/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 9/25/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
Z
0S
5
10
15
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPE
• •�•
_ Q:::!
••1•j
_ 444
4,4 ••••••
_
_ .:4
••••:4
000
000
— ♦••♦••
�����
���:��
_ 4.:.
��i
— 4.4
_ •:•:*!
WI
•:+
(FILL
i
,
Six inches of medium dense. Tight red brown, fine SAND over
6 inches of dark red brown, fine SAND, dry. Note trace refuse
(glass. plastic).
WITH REFUSE)
Loose, red brown, One SAND, dry. Refuse is less than 10%
by volume (100% non-compressible) (brick, glass).
Loose, red brown, fine SAND. dry. Refuse is less than 10% by
volume(100% non-compressible) (glass,
P ) porcelain).
Loose, red brown. fine SAND, dry. Refuse Is less than 5% by
volume (100% non-compressible) (glass).
N
m—
El
. SM
Approximately 1 to 2 inches. light yellow brown, fine SAND
in tip of sampler. (ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
_
Very dense, light yellow brown, sandy SILT to silly SAND.
dry. Trace gravel and coarse sand. Gravel is fine to coarse,
sub -angular to rounded.
-
Driller notes hard drilling (rig chatter) at approximately 12.0
feet below ground surface.
-
Dense, light yellow brown, silty SAND, moist.
t f
Dense, yellow brown, silty SAND, moist. Note some rust
mottling from 15.25 to 15.5 and from 16.0 to 16.26 feet below
ground surface.
20 —
25 —
Boring terminated at 16.5 feet below ground surface.
No ground water observed during time of exploration.
Composite environmental sample collected from sample. No
PID readings above background levels noted during field
screening of samples.
SAMPLE NUMBER
S-1 1-5-5
S-2 1-2-2
S-3 2-2-3
OTHER TESTS
S-4 2-4-2
S-5 6-20-50/5
S-6 9-15-16 GS
S-1 11-18-24
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and an the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
10
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Btows per foot
20
30
40
n.
50
A
A
•
A
»L
OD
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1---0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
0
5
10
15
20
25
ONBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-239
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-3
BORING 2003008.GPJ 12/11/07
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger. Acker hand -portable rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 192 3 feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 9/25/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 9/25/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
111
Cl
0
5
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
10 —
15 —
20 —
25 —
44
Loose, light to dark red brown, fine slightly silty SAND, dry.
Trace refuse (glass). Note abundant organic material
(rootlets).
(FILL WITH REFUSE)
Loose. red. silty. line SAND, dry. Note trace refuse (glass).
a
w
a
a
SAMPLE NUMBER
® S-1
w
0
a
zi c
Lu ;e
z
aD
1-2-3
OTHER TESTS
® S-2 1-1-3 GS
ML
SM
ML
SM
Medium dense, light yellow brown. fine silty SAND to sandy
SILT, dry. Note trace organic material (rootlets).
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Dense, light yellow brown. slightly sandy SILT with gravel. _
1 moist. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded. Note 1
1faint oxidation mottling_
Very dense, tight yellow brown, sandy SILT to silty SAND with
gravel, moist. gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded. Note faint oxidation mottling.
Driller notes tough drilling - very slow advancing.
R
Boring terminated at 11.5 feet below ground surface at refusal
in very dense sill.
No ground water observed during time of exploration.
S-3 5-9-12
S-4 15-21-27
5-5 26-29-33 GS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
10
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
20 30 40 50
• A
w
0
—5
»1v-10
—15
— 20
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-41)-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
25
GITBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC.
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING 2003008.GPJ 12/11/07
BORING:
B-240
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-4
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hallow -Stem Auger, Acker hand -portable rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 178 f feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 9/25/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 9/26/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
0
i
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
5-
10 —
15 —
20 —
25 —
ML
Dense, light yellow brown, sandy SILT, dry. Note trace gravel.
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Drllers note very tough drilling. Slow advancing
Very dense, yellow brown, sandy SILT with gravel, moist.
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded. Till -like.
SAMPLE NUMBER
U
w
�tu
w ._
W
z
w_
a8
® S-2 31-50/6
OTHER TESTS
Very dense, yellow brown, sandy SILT with gravel, moist. M S-3 29-50/6 GS
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub-angutar to rounded. Trace rust
\mottling at 6.25 to 5.35 feet below ground surface. Till -like. f
Boring terminated at 6.0 feet below ground surface at refusal
in very dense silt.
No ground water observed during lime of exploration.
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
I-
I-
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
»A
»,
0
5
—10
—15
—20
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I ---®--j Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
25
ONBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-241
PAGE: 1 of 1
BORING 2003006.GPJ 12111(07
FIGURE:
A-5
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Acker hand -portable rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 144 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 9/26/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 9/28/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
a 15
ow
0
USCS SOfL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
uJ
w
0-
5—
10 —
15 —
20 —,
25 —
SM
Very dense, dark yellow brown, silty SAND with gravel, moist.
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Very dense, dark yellow brown, silty SANG with gravel, moist.
Gravel is rine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
No recovery.
Boring terminated at 8.0 feet below ground surface at refusal
in very dense silt.
No ground water observed during time of exploration.
SAMPLE NUMBER
w
U
Q r'
v)-6
co 5
t2 a)
z
we
a.
OTHER TESTS
S-1 50/8
VIS-2 33-36-50/4 GS
S-3 50/4
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only al the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight. 30" drop)
A Blows per fool
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
Dal BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-242
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-6
BORING 2003008.GPJ 12/11/07
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling. Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Acker hand -portable rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 142 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site & Exploration Plan. Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 9/26/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 0/26/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
z
LU
ott
0
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
5-
10
15 —
20 —
25 —
ML
Very dense, yellow brown, sandy SILT with gravel, moist.
Gravel is fine to coarse. sub -angular to rounded.
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Driller notes hard drilling. very slow advancing.
No recovery.
Driller notes continued hard drilling.
Boring terminated at 5.5 feet below ground surface at refusal
in very dense slit.
No ground water observed during time of exploration.
OTHER TESTS
S-1 5-25-50/3 GS
S-2 5013
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1-0-1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
gITBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
BORING 2003008.GPJ 12/11/07
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-243
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-7
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Acker hand -portable rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 113 i feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 9/26/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 9/26/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
CL
w m
o�
0-
5
10 —
15 —
20 —
0
CO
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
ML
SM
SM
ML
SM
Medium dense, light brown, sandy SILT, dry. Trace gravel.
Gravel Is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded. Some
organic material (rootlets).
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
Driier notes hard drilling_
Very dense, light yellow brown, silty SAND with gravel, dry.
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded. Note faint
lamination of light and dark materials (less than 2 mm) from
3.25 to 3.50 feet below ground surface. Note coarser grained
partings.
Very dense, yellow brown, sandy SILT with gravel, dry.
Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
Very dense, yellow brown, sandy SILT with gravel, moist
(driller added water). Gravel is line to coarse, sub -angular to
rounded. Trace rust mottling.
Boring terminated at 8.5 feet below ground surface at refusal
in very dense silt.
No ground water observed during time of exploration.
rz
2
}a ? -5
r Z N C
J Ill
w m
a�
rAS-1 7-6-6
OTHER TESTS
S-2 24-31-31 GS
S-3 21.50/8
14 5-4 41-50/6
25 —
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the dale indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
♦ Blows per foot
w S
10 20 30 40 50
A 0
•
»A
> >
5
— 10
— 15
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I--0--1 Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
20
25
OMBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-244
PAGE: 1 o1 1
FIGURE:
A-8
BORING 2003008.GPJ 12/11/07
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Acker hand -portable rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 81 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 9/26/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 9/2712007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
0. w
0
5-
10 —
15-
20 —
25 —
J
gO
USGS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
w
0
w
a
Boring terminated at 6.5 feet below ground surface at refusal
in very dense silt.
No ground water observed during time of exploration.
SAMPLE NUMBER
w
U
Z
V
Er) g
W
zSCO
w p
S-1 8-20-22
5-2 23-50/6
OTHER TESTS
S-3 27-39-50/4 GS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
10
Standard Penetration Test
(1401b. weight, 30' drop)
A Blows per foot
20
30
40
x
a,
50
0
A--
•
...
5
—10
15
— 20
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I—•—I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
25
ONBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-245
PAGE: 1 of 1
BORING 2003008.GPJ 12/11/07
FIGURE:
A-9
ML
Dense, light brown to brown, sandy SILT with gravel, dry.
Some organic material (rootlets). Gravel is fine to coarse,
sub -angular to rounded.
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
ny
Very dense, yellow brown, sandy SILT with gravel, dry.
SM
;Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.-:
..... .......
ML
:?.inch lens of fine to medium. sOty SANG. , , .
Very dense, yellow brown. SILT with sand, dry.
Driller notes hard drilling, very slow advancing.
x
Boring terminated at 6.5 feet below ground surface at refusal
in very dense silt.
No ground water observed during time of exploration.
SAMPLE NUMBER
w
U
Z
V
Er) g
W
zSCO
w p
S-1 8-20-22
5-2 23-50/6
OTHER TESTS
S-3 27-39-50/4 GS
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
0
10
Standard Penetration Test
(1401b. weight, 30' drop)
A Blows per foot
20
30
40
x
a,
50
0
A--
•
...
5
—10
15
— 20
0 20 40 60 80
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I—•—I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
100
25
ONBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-245
PAGE: 1 of 1
BORING 2003008.GPJ 12/11/07
FIGURE:
A-9
DRILLING COMPANY: CN Dolling. Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Acker hand -portable rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SP7 w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 78 t feel
LOCATION; See Site & Exploration Plan. Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 9/27/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 9/27/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
a m
0
5
10
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
_
ML
Medium dense, light brown to brown, sandy SILT with gravel,
dry. Gravel is fine to coarse, sub -angular to rounded.
Abundant organic material (rootlets) in top 4 Inches.
(ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT)
t r
(Ly`
•
ML
Dense, light yellow brown, sandy SILT to silty fine SAND, dry.•
SM
_�
Note coarse grained partings. Note laminations of less than 1
mm from 3.0 to 3.5, oxidized red).
ML
Dense, light brown, sandy SILT, dry.
SM
Grades to very dense. Faint oxidation laminations and coarse
grained partings throughout.
ML
Very dense, fight yellow brown, sandy SILT to silty SAND, dry.
SM
15 —
20 —
Boring terminated at 14.0 test below ground surface at refusal
in very dense silt.
No ground water observed during time of exploration.
5-1 6-7.14
OTHER TESTS
S-2 10-13-21 GS
S-3 10-18-20
S-4 16-28-29
S-5 15-22-46 GS
S-6 17-34-41
25 —
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This tog of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight, 30" drop)
A Blows per toot
0 10 20 30 40
48
50
0
A
»A
•
—5
»A-10
A
20 40 80 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit I -4---------j Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
15
20
25
ONBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-246
PAGE: 1 of 1
BORING 2003008.GPJ 12111/07
FIGURE:
A-10
DRILLING pOMPANY: CN Drilling. Inc.
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -Stem Auger, Acker hand -portable rig
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Cathead
SURFACE ELEVATION: 38 ± feet
LOCATION: See Site 8 Exploration Plan, Figure 2
DATE STARTED: 9/27/2007
DATE COMPLETED: 9/27/2007
LOGGED BY: J. Speck
x
CL
o�
0—
5 —
10
5-
10 —
15 —
20 —
J
0
m
2
r
USCS SOIL CLASS
DESCRIPTION
Boring terminated at 16.5 feel below ground surface at refusal
in very dense silt.
No ground water observed during lime of exploration.
W
a
W
0-
SAMPLE NUMBER
NS-1 5-11-12
OTHER TESTS
® S-2 2-3-6 GS
NS-3 2-2-1
N8-4 4-6-8 GS
NS-5 9-18-30
{N/ S-6 18-32-45 AL
NS-7 12-50/6
25 —
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the dale indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or Locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight. 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 10 20 30
A
wo
�'
40 50
0
A
•
0-1
»A
>r.
5
—10
15
— 20
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1 ® -I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
25
MTBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-247
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-11
BORING 2003008.GPJ 12/11/07
SM
Medium dense, gray to dark brown, silty, fine to medium
SAND to sandy SILT, moist. Note trace gravel. Gravel is fine
to coarse, sub -angular to sub -rounded. Abundant organic
material (rootlets) in top 3 inches below ground surface.
(FILL)
Loose, dark gray, silty, fine SAND, weL
—r
PT
Loose, dark brown, PEAT.
J
r
(BURIED TOPSOIL)
14
SM
Loose, dark brown, silty. fine SAND, wet.
(COLLUVIUM)
Loose. yellow brown, silly, fine SAND. wet. Less silt than
above.
SM
Medium dense, yellow brown, silty. fine to medium SAND,
wet.
SM
Medium dense, yellow brown, silty, fine SAND, wet.
Dense, yellow brown, silty, fine SAND, moist.
ML
Hard, blue gray. SILT, moist. Non -plastic.
(GLACIOLACUSTRINE)
Hammer became lodged in silt. Driller needed to over -drill to
pull sample from hole.
Boring terminated at 16.5 feel below ground surface at refusal
in very dense silt.
No ground water observed during lime of exploration.
W
a
W
0-
SAMPLE NUMBER
NS-1 5-11-12
OTHER TESTS
® S-2 2-3-6 GS
NS-3 2-2-1
N8-4 4-6-8 GS
NS-5 9-18-30
{N/ S-6 18-32-45 AL
NS-7 12-50/6
25 —
For a proper understanding of the nature of subsurface conditions, this
exploration log should be read in conjunction with the text of the
geotechnical report.
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the dale indicated
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or Locations.
GROUNDWATER
Standard Penetration Test
(140 Ib. weight. 30" drop)
A Blows per foot
0 10 20 30
A
wo
�'
40 50
0
A
•
0-1
»A
>r.
5
—10
15
— 20
20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit 1 ® -I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
25
MTBOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
HWAGEOSCIENCES INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
BORING:
B-247
PAGE: 1 of 1
FIGURE:
A-11
BORING 2003008.GPJ 12/11/07
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
Representative soil samples obtained from the boreholes were returned to HWA's laboratory for
further examination and testing. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples to
characterize relevant engineering properties of the on-site materials. The laboratory testing
program was performed in general accordance with appropriate ASTM Standards as outlined
below.
MOISTURE CONTENT (BY MASS): The moisture contents of selected soil samples were
determined in general accordance with ASTM D 2216. The results are shown at the sampled
intervals on the appropriate summary logs in Appendix A.
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT, AND PLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS (ATTERBERG LIMITS):
Selected samples were tested using method ASTM D 4318, multi -point method. The results are
reported on the attached Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index reports, Figure B-1.
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS: Selected samples were tested to determine the particle
distribution of material in general accordance with ASTM D422. The results are summarized on
the attached Grain Size Distribution reports, Figures B-2 through B-6, which also provide
information regarding the classification of the sample and the moisture content at the time of
testing.
2003-008_slopepipelines FR.doc
B-1
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
0
v
J
J
U
0 0 0 0
COLOc7
0
N
(Id) X34NI kl_1OIISV 1d
0
0
0
J
J
co H
2
J
0
D
o
0
N
0
c
c
0
E
EL
co
N
J
J
N
.4-
0 0
M
0
CLASSIFICATION
(ML) Dark olive gray, SILT
DEPTH (ft)
0
v
N
SAMPLE
T
co
n
Nr
N
m
SYMBOL,
0
0
Z m
Q �
03 w
LL
X
QW
0(~n
J Z <
›0
t— O
2UI__
J H W
• u)2
5 J
0-
• LL
J
i
1-
J
U
w
w z
Li-
u) 1-
z
Q z
O <
z
(75
w
U 5
O
w
J
0
CO
V
z
c/)
pre V
W
ena V
cn
wO
C,7
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAATTB 2003008.GPJ 12/11/07
1-
J_
)
0
Z
U)
a)
c
11
E
a)
2
O
0
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
0
O
4t0
•
N
T
rt
O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0
O) CO I- CD U) Q C) N
IHOI3M A8 ?13NH 1N30U3d
0
0
0
0
O
0
d
z)
O
0
0
O
O
L
O
0
u)
co
Lt.
r, co 1 --
eq
--a ai
-D
N of
O m O
4)
( 0
.
EE
J
a
J
J
U
CO 0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM 02487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Grayish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Reddish brown, silty SAND
(SM) Brown, silty SAND
S
a
W
0
(0 o
0
o Ln '0
N N
J
a
CO CO CO
N N CO
CO CO m
0
0
r
0)
0 ® A
N
% N
J
<
Q (/)
W O &)
N to Q
woo
U 1.-
17
W
Cr
�1Q
cL
1—
U
LL
W Z
LL
cn z ~
ct
O <
Z ?�
<
W J_
O �
C
Q
}—
LU W
5
0
CD
N
CO
CC
CC
0
4
PROJECT NO.: 2003-008
HWAGRSZ 200300a.GPJ 12/11107
0
Z
Q
E
0
0
U
J
w
Q
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
O
O
O
0
0
-
4t
'
1
(V
C7
0
0
0
0
0
O
CD
0)
0
0
M
1H013/1/1A9 213N1d 1N9313d
0
N
0
O
0)
0
0
0
O
O
O
0)
O
0
O
O
0
0
0
0
0) 0 0
co co
M O
V
cp o
CO
GO M Q
N M
Ui M M
a)
o
0o r- n
M c) O
J
a
J
J
0
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Reddish brown, silty SAND wtih gravel
(SM) Light olive brown, silty SAND wtih gravel
(ML) Grayish brown, sandy SILT
2
F-
0 0
W
JN 1 M
CO CO CO
co
0 0
v v v
N fV •
N
m CO CO
0
00
• e 4
U)
(7) N
} N
J
Q p
Q
W
NO0Q
8 LL
JOO
U_ 1—
i= W
CC 20
)-
Li_ LL
w
LL
U)
Z
Q
1--
Z
w
U
0
a
w
Q
J
O
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
r)
w
a
0
CO
0
0
(4)
0
0
N
0
2
F
U
W
0
O
d
>-
J
U
Z
co
E
m
0
U
m
iz
m
0
O
U.S STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
N
0
0
u
a
O
O
0
• CO 0) 0 Q C) n0
1HJIRM h8 20NId 1N3Delad
0
0
d
0
0
0
U)
O
0
0
0
H
Co
ii
Cr? 0 N
co Lri
N cc')
0)
co an m
vCe) 00)
To
n 0 N
N ea0)
J
a
1
-J
0
O
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Grayish brown, silty SAND with gravel
(GM) Grayish brown, silty GRAVEL with sand
(SM) Olive brown, silty SAND
a
w
0
co d La
ri ri
1n o 0)
N O N
W
-J
N .- N
CO CO CO
�
.
N N N
m m m
• e 41
CO
0 N
Jwt
< ❑
Q J 2
N 0
rr^^ CO <
LL ❑
J00
U_
W
n.
>-
J
U
Q
LL
Q'
w Z
LL 0
< Z
F— 2
CO
C� <
Z
<-
11.1 w0
0�
c
CL 1.
w
Q
J
0
co
0
O
0
N
0
z
✓
w
0
a
co
N
to
Q
J
U
0
Z
Q
E
m
N
a3
0
O
U
c
ii
J
w
Q
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
co 0
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 O) CO O C M N
1H9I3M A8 U3NI31N3O2d3d
0
0
0
O
0
0
0,
O
0
0
‘5.
Q)
O l{.-
y
r
w
1—
_wwc
O G
J
J_
Z
w
N_
C
▪ Z
o —
Q
(0
0
0
0
u ,
co
0 0
ii
N N N
ch
CO CO 0)
(0 O CD
(N/ -Cr
0
mo
0
o o o
0 0 0
a
-J
a
J
J
U
N
co
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(ML) Yellowish brown, SILT with sand
(ML) Light yellowish brown, SILT with sand
(ML) Yellowish brown, sandy SILT
a
W
0
u,
uO o
(0 v
o tf) O
to N O
W
J
0
0) N 0)
cb ch
0 CO CO
V' v v
N N N
0
m
r
• Ill 4
›-
_J
< ❑
Q Cn
J_
111
N O (n
N U)Q
LL ❑
JOO
_U
H W
a
BOW LAKE PROCESSING/TRANSFER FACILITY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
U
CO
0
CO
0
0
0
0
N
PROJECT NO.
0
m
s
0
0
z
0)
m
iZ
E
m
O
0
J
w
0
m
ii
i
0
U
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
0
0
0
*-
0
0
W
c)
W
v._
c)
r
O
O
O
O
O
n
0
to
O
O
e
0
1H9I3M A8 J NId 1N3O2:13d
O
O
O
tO
0
0
O
0
0
0
0
to
O
0
O
O
0
m
co
li
co 0
ca ai
c) Q
a
C
me
0)
CO o
m
0
0
ai O
a
J
a
J
J
0
I- o
tO
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name
(SM) Dark brown, silty SAND
(SM) Yellowish brown, silty SAND
a
ui
0
W
C.
2
0)
• C
V) V)
n
a v
N
m m
0
m
2
}
0)
• IN
(Ni
>- N
J
<
Q
N 0
tp 0 Q
W
di00
H W
a_
J_
U
LL
>-
w• Z
IJ -
CD I --
• Z
I-- _
C7 <
0 (11
w
O 2-
0 w
J
Cr?
0
co
0
O
c�7
O
O
N
0
Z
0
U
3
a
APPENDIX C
ANALYTICAL LABORATORY DATA AND COC
ei Analytical Resources, Incorporated
4Analytical Chemists and Consultants
11 October 2007
Vance Atkins
HWA Geosciences
19730 64th Ave. W
Suite 200
Lynnwood, WA 98036
RE: Client Project: 2003-008, Bow Lake Transfer Station
ARI Job No: LR46
' Dear Vance:
Please find enclosed the original chain of custody. record and the final results for the
samples from the . project referenced above. " Two soil samples were received. on
September 28, 2007. The sampleswere received intact and there were no discrepancies
• • in the paperwork. The samples were analyzed for NWTPH-HCID, NWTPH-G/BETX and
total metals as requested.
These analyses proceeded without incident of note.
A copy of these reports and all raw data will- be, kept of tile. at ARI. If you have any
questionsor require additional information, please contact me at .your convenience.
Sincerely,
ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.
Mark D. Harris
Project Manager
206/695-6210
<markh@arilabs.com>
Enclosures
cc: file LR46
MDH/mdh
461.1 South. 134th Place,. Suite 100.• Tukwila. WA 98168 • 206:69540200 • 206495..6201 fax
0
ti
8Q
6
X836
L ¢o
EA (90ta
2
N
ANALYSIS REQUESTED
4nd
(yd) -7c)/16
ri L,w -Y772,1
x .pM#V
x4 •-bib w
n hi.1-41itl
PHONE: 414:114-,
PHONE: 479.10- olds
di
2 U
s 3 N
0 00
W U W V
0
W . 0.
H
0. V) N fa
W
F
J
a
•
1
i
c2`
a
141.1
rh'
4
I
x
'41:
k
.1---.
LU
F
1,,
a
ir'
o
LU
CI
1(
%�
Ct
COMPANY
,
Q
•
SIGNATURE
Av
ro
xs4,
PRINT NAME
Relinquished by:
Received
Relinquished by:
A,
z
0:
a -.
, ..,
,*
,t titi-'I,:
N M
� N
DISTRIBUTION: WHITE - Return to HWA; YELLOW - Retain by Lab; PINK - Retain by Sampler
ARI Data Reporting Qualifiers
Effective 11/22/04
Inorganic Data
U Indicates that the target analyte was not detected at the reported concentration
Duplicate RPD is not within established control limits
B Reported value Is Tess than the CRDL but 2 the Reporting Limit
N Matrix Spike recovery not within established control limits
NA Not Applicable, analyte not spiked
H The natural concentration of the spiked element is so much greater than the concentration
spiked that an accurate determination of spike recovery is not possible
L Analyte concentration is 55 times the Reporting Limit and the replicate control limit defaults
to ±1 RL instead of the normal 20% RPD
Organic Data
U Indicates that the target analyte was not detected at the reported concentration
Flagged value is not within established control limits
B Analyte detected in an associated Method Blank at a concentration greater than one-half of
ARI's Reporting Limit or 5% of the regulatory limit or 5% of the analyte concentration in the
sample.
J Estimated concentration when the value is Tess than ARI's established reporting limits
D The spiked compound was not detected due to sample extract dilution
NR Spiked compound recovery is not reported due to chromatographic interference
E Estimated concentration calculated for an analyte response above the valid instrument
calibration range. A dilution is required to obtain an accurate quantification of the analyte.
S Indicates an analyte response that has saturated the detector. The calculated concentration is
not valid; a dilution is required to obtain valid quantification of the analyte
NA The flagged analyte was not analyzed for
NS The flagged analyte was not spiked into the sample
M Estimated value for an analyte detected and confirmed by an analyst but with low spectral
match parameters. This flag is used only for GC -MS analyses
N The analysis indicates the presence of an analyte for which there Is presumptive evidence to
make a "tentative identification"
Y The analyte reporting limit is raised due to a positive chromatographic interference. The
compound is not detected above the raised limit but may be present at or below the limit
C The analyte was positively identified on only one of two chromatographic columns.
Chromatographic interference prevented a positive Identification on the second column
P The analyte was detected on both chromatographic columns but the quantified values differ
by >_40% RPD with no obvious chromatographic interference
ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
BETX by Method SW8021BMod Sample ID: MB -100807
METHOD BLANK
Page 1 of 1
Lab Sample ID: MB -100807
LIMS ID: 07-20589
Matrix: Soil
Data Release Authorized: /f
Reported: 10/11/07 !/�'
Date Analyzed: 10/08/07 12:39
Instrument/Analyst: PID1/PKC
CAS Number Analyte
ANALYTICAL
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
QC Report No: LR46-HWA GeoSciences, Inc.
Project: Bow Lake Transfer Station
Event: 2003-008
Date Sampled: NA
Date Received: NA
Purge Volume: 5.0 mL
Sample Amount: 100 mg -dry -wt
RL Result
71-43-2
108-88-3
100-41-4
95-47-6
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
m,p-Xylene
o -Xylene
Gasoline Range Hydrocarbons
BETX Surrogate Recovery
25
25
25
50
25
5.0
Trifluorotoluene
Bromobenzene
93.1%
93.8%
Gasoline Surrogate Recovery
Trifluorotoluene
Bromobenzene
97.4%
95.2%
BETX values reported in µg/kg (ppb)
Gasoline values reported in mg/kg (ppm)
< 25 U
< 25 U
< 25 U
< 50 U
< 25 U
GAS ID
< 5.0 U ---
GAS: Indicates the presence of gasoline or weathered gasoline.
GRO: Positive result that does not match an identifiable gasoline pattern.
FORK I
ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
BETX by Method SW8021BMod Sample ID: B-238
SAMPLE
Page 1 of 1
Lab Sample ID: LR46A
LIMS ID: 07-20589
Matrix: Soil
Data Release Authorized: %0
Reported: 10/11/07 �r
Date Analyzed: 10/08/07 16:08
Instrument/Analyst: PID1/PKC
CAS Number Analyte
ANALYTICAL
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
QC Report No: LR46-HWA GeoSciences, Inc.
Project: Bow Lake Transfer Station
Event: 2003-008
Date Sampled: 09/27/07
Date Received: 09/28/07
Purge Volume: 5.0 mL
Sample Amount: 84 mg -dry -wt
Percent Moisture: 7.0%
RL Result
71-43-2 Benzene 30 < 30 U
108-88-3 Toluene 30 < 30 U
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 30 < 30 U
m,p-Xylene 60 < 60 U
95-47-6 o -Xylene 30 < 30 U
GAS ID
Gasoline Range Hydrocarbons 6.0 16 GRO
BETX Surrogate Recovery
Trifluorotoluene 100%
Bromobenzene 102%
Gasoline Surrogate Recovery
Trifluorotoluene 108%
Bromobenzene 111%
BETX values reported in Ag/kg (ppb)
Gasoline values reported in mg/kg (ppm)
GAS: Indicates the presence of gasoline or weathered gasoline.
GRO: Positive result that does not match an identifiable gasoline pattern.
FORM I
ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
TPHG by Method NWTPHG
Page 1 of 1
Lab Sample ID: LCS-100807
LIMS ID: 07-20589
Matrix: Soil
Data Release Authorized:
Reported: 10/11/07
Date Analyzed LCS: 10/08/07 11:41
LCSD: 10/08/07 12:10
Instrument/Analyst LCS: PID1/PKC
LCSD: PID1/PKC
Analyte
ANALYTICAL
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
Sample ID: LCS-100807
LAE CONTROL SAMPLE
QC Report No:
Project:
Event:
Date Sampled:
Date Received:
LR46-HWA GeoSciences, Inc.
Bow Lake Transfer Station
2003-008
NA
NA
Purge Volume: 5.0 mL
Sample Amount LCS: 100 mg -dry -wt
LCSD: 100 mg -dry -wt
Spike LCS Spike LCSD
LCS Added-LCS Recovery LCSD Added-LCSD Recovery RPD
Gasoline Range Hydrocarbons
RPD calculated using sample
45.0
50.0 90.0%
Reported in mg/kg (ppm)
concentrations per SW846.
TPHG Surrogate Recovery
44.9 50.0 89.8% 0.2%
Trifluorotoluene
Bromobenzene
FORM III
LCS LCSD
107% 110%
104% 105%
ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
BETX by Method SW8021BMod
Page 1 of 1
Lab Sample ID: LCS-100807
LIMB ID: 07-20589
Matrix: Soil
Data Release Authorized:
Reported: 10/11/07
Date Analyzed LCS: 10/08/07 11:41
LCSD: 10/08/07 12:10
Instrument/Analyst LCS: PID1/PKC
LCSD: PID1/PKC
ANALYTICAL
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
Sample ID: LCS-100807
LAB CONTROL SAMPLE
QC Report No: LR46-HWA GeoSciences, Inc.
Project: Bow Lake Transfer Station
Event: 2003-008
Date Sampled: NA
Date Received: NA
Purge Volume: 5.0 mL
Sample Amount LCS: 100 mg -dry -wt
LCSD: 100 mg -dry -wt
Spike LCS Spike LCSD
Analyte LCS Added-LCS Recovery LCSD Added-LCSD Recovery RPD
Benzene 321 375 85.6% 334 375 89.1 4.0%
Toluene 2460 2790 88.2% 2540 2790 91.0% 3.2%
Ethylbenzene 648 665 97.4% 660 665 99.2% 1.8%
m,p-Xylene 2440 2640 92.4% 2490 2640 94.3% 2.0%
o-Xy1ene 987 1050 94.0% 1010 1050 96.2% 2.3%
Reported in Ag/kg (ppb)
RPD calculated using sample concentrations per SW846.
BETX Surrogate Recovery
Trifluorotoluene
Bromobenzene
FORM III
LCS LCSD
100% 104%
98.0% 101%
Analytical Resources Inc.
BETX/Gas Quantitation Report
Data file 1: /chem3/pidl.i/1008.b/1008.0006_d
Data file 2: /chem3/pidl.i/1008.b/1008b.0006.d
Method: /chem3/pidl.i/1008.b/PIDB.m
Instrument: pidl.i
Gas Ical Date: 28 -SEP -07
BETX Ical Date: 30 -AUG -2007
RT
8.887
16.235
FID Surrogates
Shift Height Area
0.004 15394 100659
0.004 11871 45132
PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (FID)
Range Total Area*
WAGas (Tol-C12)
80158 (2MP-TMB)
AKGas (nC6-nC10)
NWGas (Tol-Nap)
31623
38112
32310
34875
1003
ARI ID: MB100807S1
Client ID:
Injection Date: 08 -OCT -2007 12:39
Matrix: WATER
Dilution Factor: 1.000
%Rec Compound
97.4
95.2
Amount"
0.026
0.016
0.018
0.028
* Surrogate areas are subtracted from Total Area
TFT(Surr)
BB (Surr)
(11.025-18.402)
(5.023-16.838)
(5.576-15.999)
(11.025-19.552)
v cc cQ v Q vvmaa q. vQmQvvvQq g q q Q c qq q gg4qqvqv qv0 Qvm vm �vm a m v as v v v g c c aQ q v vQv
RT
8.884
16.235
RT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
PID Surrogates
Shift Response %Rec
0.010 33823 93.1
0.005 83195 93.8
AROMATICS (PID)
Shift Response Amount
Compound
TFT(Surr)
BB(Surr)
Compound
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
M/P-Xylene
O -Xylene
MTBE
A Indicates Peak Area was used for quantitation instead of Height
N Indicates peak peak was manually integrated
Y (x10^4)
N FF` I N N
W A ▪ • fSl Oti -t W O
-2-Methalpentane (6.027)
-nC7 (7.945)
T
- nC8 (10.568)
-Toluene (11,030)
- nC9 <13.567>
- nC10-Deoane (16.004)
- 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene (16.842)
-no11 (17,398)
nC12-Dodeoane <18.396)
- nC13 <19.216>
-Naphthalene (19,546)
TFT(Surr) (8,887)
-BB(Surr) (16.235)
F•
Y (x1O^4)
O O Y Y Y Y Y N CO N N N 0404 W W W 41 A A A A 1r CA •(i1 •fA CO ON 0% T T ON V V V V V OD 00 00 00
0, OD O N A 01 m O N A T OD O N A Q• 00 O N A T OD O N A T W O N A T OD O N A 01 OD O N A T
-TFT(Surr) (8.884)
BB(Surr) (16.236)
d - cp� N
C a D ct ti
0.
C T M
3. a 00 m
-1 Q
z 1
rn ao
ij
0 0 R
N N W •
V
H
b O
O
CO
as
8
W
•
1
it
Analytical Resources Inc.
BETX/Gas Quantitation Report
Data file 1:/chem3/pidl.1/1008.b/1008.0004.d
Data file 2: /chem3/pidl.i/1008.b/1008b.0004.d
Method: /chem3/pidl.i/1008.b/PIDB.m
Instrument: pidl.i
Gas Ical Date: 28 -SEP -07
BETX Ical Date: 30 -AUG -2007
RT
8.8- 82
16.230
ARI ID: LCS100807S1
Client ID:
Injection Date: 08 -OCT -2007 11:41
Matrix: WATER
Dilution Factor: 1.000
=======0=000=00...--0 =CCCCoOo0c0oaGO0aa
FID Surrogates
Shift Height
0.000
-0.001
Area
16279 110856
11836 49245
PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (FID)
Range Total Area*
WAGas (Tol-C12)
80152 (2MP-TMB)
AKGas (nC6-nC10)
NWGas (Tol-Nap)
1088904
2231119
1609848
1135264
%Rec Compound
107.3
103.9
Amount -
0.899
0.910
0.907
0.899
* Surrogate areas are subtracted from Total Area
RT Shift
8.- 880
16.230
TFT(Surr)
BB(Surr)
(11.025-18.402)
(5.023-16.838)
(5.576-15.999)
(11.025-19.552)
00=0000 0 _ 001=
PID Surrogates
Response %Rec
0.006 36519 100.5
0.001 86929 98.0
AROMATICS (PID)
Compound
TFT(Surr)
BB(Surr)
RT Shift Response Amount Compound
8.- 032 0.005 15073 6.421 Benzene
11.023 0.005 115987 49.136 Toluene
14.032 0.004 24141 12.952 Ethylbenzene
14.209 0.007 103875 48.790 M/P-Xylene
15.043 0.002 46557 19.738 O -Xylene
5.336 0.007 87668 105.151 MTBE
A Indicates Peak Area was used for quantitation instead of Height
N Indicates peak peak was manually integrated
•
5'
Y (x10^4)
1-4 F. F. F. )NAm NNN N NN ) W 4.1 43 int P
;V 4.1 151 tf% 00 tiD 0 t- O0 tO 0 tp. OSI OP V OD
2-Hethylpentane (5.019>
• c.-__
-6C6 (5.573)
nC8 (10.563)
-TFT(Surr) (8.882)
-nC9 (13.567)
Toluene (11.025)
a•
1-•
-nC10-Deoane (15.998>
(16.230)
m-
-nC12-Docleoane (18.388)
-nC13 (19.240)
-Naphthalene (19.540)
1,2,4 -Trimethylbenzene (16.837)
2
0
8
T
Y (x10'5) '
0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0
co- -Benzene (8.032)
-TFT(Surr> (8.880)
KBE (ff.336)
4., Ethlbenzene (14.032>
0 -Xylene (18043>
I
Toluene (11.023);
0
8
4%.
14/P -Xylene (1.4.209)
•••
1.•
8
8
-B3(Suer) (1.6.3o)
w
•
•0
0
8
-co
01ID
Analytical Resources Inc.
BETX/Gas Quantitation Report
Data file 1: /chem3/pidl.i/1008.b/1008.0005.d
Data file 2: /chem3/pidl.i/1008.b/1008b.0005.d
Method: /chem3/pidl.i/1008.b/PIDB.m
Instrument: pidl.i
Gas Ical Date: 28 -SEP -07
BETX Ical Date: 30 -AUG -2007
RT Shift
8.885 0.002
16.233 0.002 -
FID Surrogates
Height Area
16901 113958
12594 49727
PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (FID)
Range Total Area*
WAGas (Tol-C12)
8015E (2MP-TME)
AKGas (nC6-nC10)
NWGas (Tol-Nap)
1085850
2228978
1599352
1133869
ARI ID: LCSD100807S1
Client ID:
Injection Date: 08 -OCT -2007 12:10
Matrix: WATER
Dilution Factor: 1.000
%Rec Compound
110.3
104.9
Amount'
0.897
0.909
0.901
0.898
* Surrogate areas are subtracted from Total Area
RT Shift
8.883
16.233
PID Surrogates
Response %Rec
0.008 37882 104.3
0.003 89735 101.2
AROMATICS (PID)
TFT(Surr)
BB(Surr)
(11.025-18.402)
(5.023-16.838)
(5.576-15.999)
(11.025-19.552)
Compound
TFT(Surr)
BB(Surr)
RT Shift Response Amount Compound
8.034 0.007 15679 6.679 Benzene
11.026 0.008 119836 50.767 Toluene
14.035 0.007 24601 13.199 Ethylbenzene
14.212 0.010 106129 49.849 M/P-Xylene
15.046 0.005 47846 20.284 O -Xylene
5.338 0.009 89610 107.480 MTBE
A Indicates Peak Area was used for quantitation instead of Height
N Indicates peak peak was manually integrated
s
Y (x10^4)
N W Y r F+ r H N r N N N N N N N N N N W W W W W W W W W W A .6 .p A
N W A Ol T V W 47 0 µ N W A 01 ON V CO w o r N W A cn V CO O N N W
-2-Methylpentane (5.021)
-nC6 (5.575)
.1`
-nC7 (7.784)
°D- --
•
y TFT(Surr) (8.885)
•r�
o'
L
— -nC8 (10.866)
Toluene (11.029)
-nC9 (13.568)
- nC10-Deoane (16.000)
.233)
•
-noil (17.361)
"-_---nC12-Dodeoane (18.387)
-nC13 (19.239)
- Naphthalene (19.539)
Trinebhylbenzene (16.840)
N.
QQ�
0
w
•a
o e .-+ p g.N
-
5 3
o
W es
g giv
N V r •
0 N•
H r N
b
a
•
o-
✓