The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1901 & 1919 N Fairview St - Soils ReportGEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT PROPOSED CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL AND GROUP HOME 1901 AND 1919 NORTH FAIRVIEW STREET SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA Prepared For: GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, INC. 385 Second Street Laguna Beach, California Project No. 603284-001 December 2, 2011 Leighton Consulting, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUPCOMPANY SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton Consulting, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY December 2, 2011 Project No. 603284-001 To:Griffin Structures 385 Second Street Laguna Beach, California 92651 Attention:Mr. Deryl Robinson, Vice President Griffin Structures Subjed:Geotechnical Exploration Report Proposed Charter High School and Group Home 1901 and 1919 North Fairview Street Santa Ana, California Per your request, Leighton Consulting, Inc. has performed geotechnical exploration for a proposed charter high school and group home at 1901 and 1919 North Fairview Street in the City of Santa Ana, California. The purpose of this study was to characterize subsurface conditions, evaluate geologic/seismic hazards impacting the site, and develop recommendations for design and construction of the project. The results of our exploration indicate that the project is deemed feasible from a geotechnical perspective. Our findings, conclusions, and recommendations are presented in the attached report. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further service, please contad us at your convenience. Respectfully submitted,45:M LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC.| 00 < No. 2620 04/140â‚¬- 0-0-<-'gp'eariTrwRCfB C...11-_ /14 Joe Roe, CEG 2456 2Zie Carl C. Kik--GE-J620 Project Geologist GERnFIED jf Vice President ENGINEERING I i JAR/CCK/Ir *GEOLOGIS00* Distribution: (3) Addressee 17781 Cowan I Irvine, CA 92614-6009 949 253.9836 i Fax 949 250 1114 I wvm.leightongroup.corn 603284-001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Paae 1.0 INTRODUCTION. 1.1 Site Location and Description 1.2 Purpose and Scope 2.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 2.1 Regional Geology and Tectonics... 2.2 Site-Specific Geology 2.2.1 Undocumented Artificial Fill: (Afu) 2.2.2 Quaternary Fluvial Deposits (Qyf) 2.3 Geologic Structure 2.4 Groundwater 3.0 GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARDS 3.1 Faulting and Seismicity 3.1.1 Surface Rupture 11 3.1.2 Historical Seismicity 11 3.1.3 Seismicity 12 3.2 Secondary Seismic Hazards 3.2.1 Liquefaction 3.2.2 Seismically-Induced Settlement 3.2.3 Surface Manifestation of Liquefaction 3.2.4 Lateral Spreading or Flow Failure 3.2.5 Seismically-Induced Landslides 3.2.6 Seiches and Tsunamis 3.2.7 Ground Lurching 3.3 Flooding Hazards 3.4 Expansive Soils 3.5 Corrosive Soils 4.0 CONCLUSIONS 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Paae 5.1 Earthwork and Grading 19 5.1.1 Site Preparation 19 5.1.2 General Grading Recommendations 20 5.1.3 Pipe Bedding 20 5.1.4 Trench Backfill 21 5.1.5 Corrosion Protection Measures 21 5.2 Shallow Foundations 22 5.2.1 Minimum Embedment and Width 22 5.2.2 Bearing Value 22 5.2.3 Settlement 22 5.2.4 Lateral Resistance ...23 5.3 Slabs-on-Grade 23 5.4 Lateral Earth Pressures 24 5.5 Seismic Design Parameters 25 5.6 Field Percolation Test Results 27 5.7 Pavement. 28 5.7.1 Aggregate Base Course 28 5.7.2 Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) 28 5.7.3 Rigid Pavement 29 5.7.4 Interlocking Pavers 30 5.8 Temporary Excavation and Shoring Design..31 5.9 Additional Geotechnical Services 31 6.0 LIMITATIONS 33 ATTACHMENTS Tables Table 1 - Groundwater Measurements Table 2 - Seismic Parameters for Nearby Active Faults Table 3 - Corrosivity Test Results Table 4 - Lateral Earth Pressures Table 5A - 2010 CBC Seismic Design Parameters (Mapped Values for Upper Envelope of Site Class D and E) Table 5B - 2010 CBC Seismic Design Parameters (Site-Specific Procedure) Page 8 Page 10 Page 21 Page 24 Page 26 Page 27 -11- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Table 6 - Percolation Test Rates Table 7 - Pavement Sections Table 8 - JPCP Section without Lateral Support Table 9 - Interlocking Pavers for Pedestrian Table 10- Interlocking Pavers for Vehicular Traffic Figures Figure 1 - Site Location Map Figure 2A - Boring Location Map Figure 28 - Boring Figure 3 - Regional Geology Map Figure 4 - Generalized Geotechnical Cross Section A-A' Figure 5 - Generalized Geotechnical Cross Section B-B' Figure 6 - Regional Fault Map Figure 7 - Historical Seismicity Map Figure 8 - Seismic Hazard Map Figure 9 - Flood Hazard Map Appendices Appendix A - References Appendix B - Field Exploration and Percolation Testing Appendix C - Laboratory Data Appendix D - Seismic Hazard Analysis Appendix E - Liquefaction Analysis Appendix F - Earthwork Grading Guide Specifications Appendix G - ASFE Statement -111- SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 Paae Page 27 Page 29 Page 29 Page 30 Page 30 Rear of Text Rear of Text Rear of Text Rear of Text Rear of Text Rear of Text Rear of Text Rear of Text Rear of Text Leighton 603284-001 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Site Location and Description The approximately 7.1-acre site is located at 1901 and 1919 North Fairview Street in the City of Santa Ana, California (latitude 33.76184Â° and longitude - 117.90095Â°). The site and immediate vicinity are shown on Figure 1, Site Location Map. The site is currently occupied by vacant buildings, which are to be demolished to accommodate the proposed development. Topographically, the site is generally level with sheet flow drainage over paved surfaces from north to south and into the storm drain system, which empties into the concrete-lined Santa Ana River channel and levee located approximately 200 feet south and east of the site. Riverview Golf Course, located several hundred feet northeast of the 17th Street overcrossing, is located along both sides of the Santa Ana River. The river channel is unlined along this section which allows irrigation water and seasonal runoff to percolate into the subsurface. The surrounding areas consist of residential buildings to the south, east, and west; and a mixed-use commercial building to the north. According to the ALTA Survey prepared by Thienes Engineering, the ground surface at the site ranges from approximately Elevation (El.) +101 feet mean sea level (msl) in the northern portion to El. +99.5 feet msI in the southern portion. The existing northerly building is rectangular in shape, three-stories in height, and has approximately 38,250 square feet of total floor area. This building is reportedly a steel frame structure with wood framed floors and roof supported on shallow spread footings. The existing southerly building is a 42,600-square-foot, single-story concrete tilt- up structure supported on spread footings. 1.2 Purpose and Scope The purpose of this study was to conduct a geotechnical exploration program in general accordance with the California Building Code (CBC). We evaluated geologic/seismic hazards that may impact the site. Site soils and groundwater 4 -1- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 conditions were characterized to develop recommendations for foundations, paving, and earthwork. The tasks completed as part of this study are described below in more detail. Task 1 - Document Review As part of our study, we reviewed readily available geotechnical documents and maps that are pertinent to the subject site. The documents reviewed are referenced in Appendix A. Task 2 - Subsurface Exploration Our field exploration was performed on September 30 and October 3, 2011 and consisted of nine hollow-stem auger borings (designated B-1 through B-9 ) drilled to a maximum depth of 51 M feet below existing ground surface (bgs) and six Cone Penetration Test (CPT) soundings (designated CPT-1 through CPT-6) advanced to depths ranging from 75 to 100 feet bgs. The CPT soundings were performed to aid in the characterization of subsurface materials and to measure shear wave velocities. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on Figure 2, Boring and Cross Section Location Map. The borings were logged by a certified engineering geologist from our staff. The earth materials encountered were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Geologic contacts and stratigraphic boundaries, where encountered, are indicated on the logs. The logs of the borings and CPT soundings are presented in Appendix B. Prior to conducting the subsurface explorations, a reconnaissance of the site was carried out by Leighton Consulting, Inc. (Leighton) personnel. The locations of proposed explorations were marked on the ground surface and Underground Service Alert (USA) contacted to provide clearance for any underground utility lines. Leighton encountered no underground utilities during the explorations. Leighton personnel obtained relatively undisturbed ring samples and Standard Penetration Test (SPT) samples for geotechnical laboratory observation and testing. The samples were obtained at the depths indicated on the boring logs. The relatively undisturbed ring samples were obtained by driving a Modified California Split-Spoon Sampler (ModCal) into the bottom of the boring as it was -2- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 being incrementally advanced. The ModCal sampler has an outside diameter (OD) of 3.0 inches and is lined with 12 1-inch-high by 2.41-inch inside diameter (ID) sampling rings and one 6-inch-high by 2.41-inch ID barrel. Six rings were chosen from the twelve containing the relatively undisturbed sample and were placed in PVC containers, labeled and transported to our geotechnical laboratory. The SPT samples were obtained by driving a Standard Penetration Test sampler into the bottom of the boring as it was being incrementally advanced. The SPTs were performed in general accordance with ASTM D1586. The sampler did not include a liner. Samples of the materials obtained from the SPT sampler were placed in plastic bags, labeled, and transported to our laboratory. Both the ModCal and SPT samplers were generally driven a total of 18 inches unless practical refusal was encountered, or other conditions precluded driving the sampler farther. The number of blows under a 30-inch drop of the 140-pound automatic hammer to achieve a 6-inch penetration was recorded. The blow counts provide a measure of the density or consistency of the soils. The number of blows to achieve each 6 inches of penetration is indicated on the boring logs. The borings were logged by a certified engineering geologist, who also coordinated drilling operations and collected the soil samples.Visual observations were made of the materials at each sampling depths. The earth materials were classified visually, in general accordance with the Unified Classification System (USCS). Stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between predominant types of materials. Stratification may contain differing materials, with transitions generally occurring gradually. Task 3 - Field Percolation Tests Two borings designated for field percolation testing, B-8 PERC-1 and B-9 PERC- 2 (Appendix B), were converted to test wells upon completion of drilling and sampling activities. The wells were then soaked overnight prior to percolation testing. The details of percolation testing performed in the field are as follows: â€¢ Boring B-8 PERC-1 and B-9 PERC-2 were drilled to depths of approximately 10 and 5 feet below existing grade, respectively (Figure 2). A 2-inch diameter Schedule 40 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) section of 0.020-inch slotted pipe was installed to the bottom of the borings. A filter pack consisting of %-inch clean, -3- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 crushed rock was installed in the annulus from the bottom of the boring to the adjacent ground surface; the crushed gravel was installed to prevent caving of the loose, unconsolidated sands. â€¢ A 55-gallon steel drum was fitted with a valve near the bottom of the drum and a measuring device was installed inside the drum. Once filled with water, the drum and measuring system was calibrated by measuring the amount of time it took to fill a 5-gallon bucket from the valve. The decline of water in the drum was measured in hundredths of inch increments during the tests and the measurements were converted to gallons. â€¢ Each in-situ field permeability test was performed by filling the test well and maintaining a constant elevation in the well. The water level was maintained at this level by allowing water from the 55-gallon steel drum to drain directly into the well from the valve. Flow of the water into the well and the water level was maintained using a gate valve. Flow/drum volume measurements were taken at two to five minute intervals. The field data collected and the calculated percolation rate for each well are presented in Appendix B. Task 4 - Laboratory Testing Geotechnical laboratory testing was performed on selected soil samples obtained during our field exploration. The geotechnical laboratory testing program was designed toward a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the physical and engineering characteristics of the onsite soils underlying the project site. The program consisted of testing selected representative specimens, prepared from representative samples, of the earth materials to obtain the following properties and characteristics: â€¢ Soil classification (ASTM D2488); â€¢ In-situ moisture content and dry density (ASTM D2216, D2937); â€¢ Compaction (ASTM D1557); â€¢ Expansion Index (ASTM D4829); â€¢ Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318) â€¢ Direct Shear (ASTM D3080); â€¢ Consolidation (ASTM D2435); 4 Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 â€¢ Collapse (ASTM D4546); and â€¢ Soluble sulfate, soluble chloride, pH and minimum resistivity (CTM 417 Part 11, CTM 422, and CTM 532/643). The results of the in-situ moisture and density testing are provided on the boring logs in Appendix B. The remaining laboratory tests are presented in Appendix C. Task 5 - Geologic/Seismic Hazards Evaluation We have performed a geologic/seismic hazards evaluation to define the geologic environment and evaluate geologic-seismic hazards that may impact the site. Using available data, we have developed information on the general geologic conditions beneath the project and the locations of nearby active and potentially active faults. The study addresses the potential for primary earthquake hazards (ground shaking and surface rupture) and secondary earthquake hazards (liquefaction, seismic settlement, seiches, earthquake-induced landsliding, and lurching) impacting the site. We have also addressed the hazards of landsliding and flooding at the site. Task 6 - Ground Motion Study We have performed a site-specific ground motion study in accordance with the requirements of the 2010 California Building Code. A Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) and Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis (DSHA) were performed to evaluate the risk of future earthquake ground motions at the project site. Task 7 - Engineering Analysis and Reports The results of our subsurface explorations, laboratory testing, geologic/seismic hazards, site-specific ground motion study, and engineering analyses are summarized in the following sections. Geotechnical recommendations for design and construction are presented in Section 5.0. It should be noted that the recommendations contained in this report are subject to the limitations presented in Section 6.0. An information sheet prepared by ASFE (the Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in the Geosciences) is also included as Appendix G. We recommend that all individuals using this report read the limitations along with the attached ASFE document. -5- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 2.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 2.1 Regional Geology and Tectonics The subject site is located in the Downey Plain within the southeastern margin of the Los Angeles Basin. The Basin is a large structural depression within the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province of California. In general, the Downey Plain is bordered by the Coyote and Peralta hills on the north, the Santa Ana Mountains and Tustin Plain to the east, the Pacific Ocean to the south, and Los Angeles County to the west. Several broadly warped coastal mesas represent uplifted areas along the Newport-Inglewood structural zone. These mesas are separated by erosional gaps which were created by historic routes of the Santa Ana River. The site lies near the lower reaches of the Santa Ana River. This lower alluvial fan reach is a low-gradient, broad sandy fan that merges with marine deposits near the coast. Differentiation of deposits of the alluvial fan, now largely covered by asphalt and concrete, is based in part on the soil map of Eckmann and others (1919). The surface distribution of Holocene sediments, as recorded in early editions of regional soil survey maps (Eckmann and others, 1919) suggests that the Santa Ana River has recently wandered back and forth across the Downey Plain from Alamitos Bay to Newport Bay. Historical accounts and documents further support the process of widespread sheet flooding as the dominant depositional process associated with the Santa Ana River prior to the construction of Prado Dam in 1941 (California Department of Water Resources, 1959). 2.2 Site-Specific Geology The Quaternary age fluvial soils that cover the floor of the Downey Plain are composed primarily of unconsolidated recent floodplain and channel deposits consisting predominately of sands derived from within the watersheds that drain the surrounding mountains and hills with finer clays and silts deposited over the broad floodplain of the Santa Ana River (Figure 3, Regional Geology Map). Brief descriptions of these units, as observed on the site, are presented below. 6- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 2.2.1 Undocumented Artificial Fill: (Afu) Artificial fill of varying thickness likely blankets most of the site. Within the borings excavated as part of this exploration, we encountered fill depths ranging from 3 to 5 feet bgs. The fill soils consisted of stiff, fine grained, dry to moist, sandy silt to medium dense, fine to coarse grained, dry to moist sand to silty sand. Localized deeper fill should be expected in the areas around the existing buildings and in the area of previous underground storage tanks (Athanor Environmental Services, Inc., 2011). 2.2.2 Quaternarv Fluvial Deposits (Qvf) The Quaternary age fluvial soils encountered onsite consist predominately of sands of the Santa Ana river drainage. The predominant near-surface material encountered was a brown to light yellow brown, thinly bedded to massive, loose to medium dense, dry to moist, fine to coarse sand with varying proportions of silt with sub-rounded to well-rounded gravel. Locally soft to stiff, thinly bedded to laminated, brown to olive brown, moist to wet sandy clayey silts to fat lean clays were also encountered. 2.3 Geologic Structure Geologic structure of fluvial and floodplain soils is anticipated to be generally thickly bedded to massive; however, it can be interpreted that cross-stratification, channel trough cross-stratification, transverse bar-tabular cross-stratification, thin bedding and laminated sedimentary structures can exist at depth. These sedimentary features are characteristic of aquitards and contain potential to perch groundwater. Our interpretation of subsurface stratigraphy is presented on Figures 4 and 5, Generalized Geotechnical Cross Sections A-A' and B-B', respectively. 2.4 Groundwater Perched groundwater was encountered in borings B-1 and B-6 at approximately 25 feet bgs within thinly bedded silty strata. Groundwater was encountered in all borings at depths between 32 and 40 feet bgs with the exception of the shallow borings, B-8 and B-9, drilled to depths of 5 and 10 feet bgs. The following table lists the borings, depth to perched groundwater as encountered during drilling, 7- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 and the measured depth to groundwater upon completion of drilling. Depths and elevations should be considered approximate. TABLE 1: GROUNDWATER MEASUREMENTS Boring Depth to Depth to G.W.Approximate Boring Elevation Perched G.W.(ft.)G.W. Elevation (ft.)(ft.)(ft.) B-1 100.0 25.5 33.4 66.6 B-2 101.0 N/E 34.9 66.1 B-3 99.5 N/E 33.2 66.3 B-4 99.5 N/E 32.0 67.5 8-5 101.0 N/E 41.6 59.4 8-6 100.0 25.5 B-7 110.5 25.0 B-8 101.0 N/E B-9 100.5 N/E N/E= Not Encountered According to the California Geological Survey (1997), historical high groundwater elevations below the site are as shallow as 15 feet bgs. -4,20 -8- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 3.0 GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARDS These hazards include surface faulting, ground lurching, seismic shaking, landslides, liquefaction, seismically-induced settlement, lateral spreading, seismically-induced landslides, flooding, expansive soils, and corrosive soils. The following sections discuss these hazards and their potential impact at the project site. 3.1 Faultinq and Seismicity In general, the primary potential seismic hazards for sites in the region include strong ground shaking and surface fault rupture. Our discussion of faults potentially impacting the site is prefaced with a discussion of California legislation and state policies concerning the classification and land-use criteria associated with faults. By definition of the California Geological Survey (CGS), an active fault is a fault that has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years). The state geologist has defined a potentially active fault as any fault considered to have been active during Quaternary time (last 1,800,000 years). This definition is used in delineating Earthquake Fault Zones (EFZ) as mandated by the AIquist-Priolo Earthquake Faulting Zones Act of 1972 and as most recently revised in 2007 (Hart, 2007). The intent of this act is to ensure that unwise urban development and certain habitable structures do not occur across the traces of active faults. Based on our review, the site is not located within an EFZ, (CGS, 2007). A Regional Fault Map (Figure 6) is attached to show the proximity of the site to major regional faults. Regional faults within approximately 100 kilometers of the site that are considered capable of producing significant seismic shaking are summarized in Table 2 below. The slip rates and maximum magnitude events are based on the statewide probabilistic seismic hazard assessment and the subsequent update report (CGS, 2003). -9- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 Table 2: Seismic Parameters for Nearby Active Faults Closest Distance Maximum Average from Fault to Site SlipFaultGeometryMoment Miles Kilometers Magnitude (mm/yr) Rate Elysian Park Thrust Reverse Thrust 8.6 13.9 6.7 1.5 Newport-Inglewood Whittier Newport-Inglewood (offshore) Chino Central Avenue Right Lateral Strike Slip Right Lateral Strike Slip Right Lateral Strike Slip Right Reverse 8.6 13.9 6.9 1.0 119 19.1 6.8 2.7 12.0 19.3 6.9 1.5 16.5 26.5 6.7 1.0 San Jose Sierra Madre Left Lateral Strike Slip Reverse 19.7 31.7 6.5 2.0 28.0 45.0 6.8 7.0 Cucamonga Thrust Fault Hollywood-Santa Left Lateral- Monica Reverse 28.4 45.7 7.0 9.5 31.8 51.1 6.4 1.0 San Jacinto- San Bernardino Malibu Coast Right Lateral,39.3 63.3 6.7 12.0 Strike Slip Reverse 41.0 66.0 6.7 0.3 San Jacinto (San Jacinto valley) San Andreas (San Bernardino) San Andreas (Southern) San Gabriel Rose Canyon Elsinore (Julian) Right Lateral Strike Slip Right Lateral Strike Slip Right Lateral, Strike Slip Right Lateral Strike Slip Right Lateral Strike Slip Right Lateral Strike Slip 42.1 67.7 6.9 12.0 43.3 69.7 7.4 24.0 43.3 69.7 6.7 24.0 44.2 71.1 7.0 5.0 51.6 83.0 6.9 1.1 57.5 92.6 6.8 5.0 -10- Fault Class (CGS, 2003) B B B B B B A A B A B A A A A B B Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 3.1.1 Sudace Rupture Our review of geologic literature pertaining to the site and general vicinity indicates that there are no known active faults on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (CGS, 2007). The nearest known active-zoned fault is the Newport Inglewood (L.A. Basin) fault zone (NIFZ). The NIFZ is an active northwest-trending, approximately 2- to 4-mile-wide belt of anticlinal folds and faults disrupting early Holocene to Late Pleistocene age and older deposits (Barrows, 1974). There is abundant seismic evidence that the zone is tectonically active; thus, the surrounding metropolitan area is subject to certain seismic risks. At least five earthquakes of magnitude 4.9 or larger have been associated with the NIFZ since 1920 (Barrows, 1974). Due to the lack of known active faults on the site, the potential for surface rupture at the site is considered low. 3.1.2 Historical Seismicitv Although Southern California has been seismically active during the past 200 years, written accounts of only the strongest shocks survive the early part of this period. Early descriptions of earthquakes are rarely specific enough to allow an association with any particular fault zone. It is also not possible to precisely locate epicenters of earthquakes which have occurred prior to the twentieth century. A search of historical earthquakes was performed using the computer program EQ Search (Blake, 2000) for the time period between 1800 and 1999. Within that time frame, 1,002 earthquakes were found within a 62- kilometer (100-mile) radius of the Site. Of these earthquakes, the closest epicentral location was 2.6 miles (4.2 kilometers) north of the site and occurred on May 22, 1902 (Appendix D, Seismic Hazard Analysis). The causative fault is unknown; however, it registered a 4.3 moment magnitude (Mw) and induced recorded peak ground acceleration (PGA) of 0.131 g. The largest recorded PGA at the site is estimated to be 0.210g from a magnitude 6.3 earthquake referred to as the Long Beach earthquake that shook the coastal region on March 11,1933. Reported damage from the Long Beach earthquake represents the most dramatic example of the consequences of disregarding seismic hazards associated with the NIFZ. 0 - 11- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 Many lessons learned about the response of certain types of structures to a seismic event from the 1933 earthquake resulted in the formulation of building codes and the regulation of building practices (Barrows, 1974). Recorded seismicity is shown in relation to the project site on Figure 7, Historical Seismicity Map. 3.1.3 Seismicitv The site is located within a seismically active region, as is all of Southern California. We have performed a site-specific evaluation of the peak ground accelerations associated with the event having a 2 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years and the maximum magnitude event on the controlling fault system.For these probabilistic and deterministic analyses, we utilized the earthquake ground motion estimation software developed by RISK Engineering (EZ-FRISK 7.23). Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) relationships of Boore-Atkinson (2008), Campbell-Bozorgnia (2007), and Chiou-Youngs (2007) were considered in the analysis along with an average shear wave velocity for the upper 100 feet (Vs30) of 250 m/s and a depth to rock with a shear wave velocity of 2,500 m/s (Z2.5) of 3 km. Based on our site-specific ground motion evaluation, the results of the analyses suggest that the site- specific design Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration (PHGA) is approximately 0.38g based on the site-specific Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) PHGA of 0.57g. The ground motions were determined using the site-specific criteria per the 2010 CBC. Details and results of our analysis are included in Appendix D. 3.2 Secondary Seismic Hazards In general, secondary seismic hazards for sites in the region could include soil liquefaction, seismically-induced settlement, lateral spreading, landsliding, seiches and tsunamis.These potential secondary seismic hazards are discussed below. 3.2.1 Liquefaction Liquefaction and dynamic settlement of soils can be caused by strong ground motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose, saturated granular soils are most susceptible to liquefaction. 12 - # Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 According to the State of California Seismic Hazards Zones Map for the Anaheim 7.5 Minute Series Quadrangle, the site ji located within an area of liquefaction hazard (Figure 8, Seismic Hazards Map). As previously reported, groundwater was encountered in most of our borings (Section 2.4) drilled to a maximum depth of 51 M feet bgs. The historic high groundwater level is reported as approximately 15 feet bgs (CGS, 21997). A site-specific liquefaction analysis was performed to evaluate the liquefaction potential at the site. The soil profiles obtained from the hollow-stem auger borings are based on samples taken at five-foot intervals and correlate well with the soil profiles obtained from the six CPT soundings which were logged continuously; the CPT soundings provide a better resolution of data than the hollow-stem auger borings. Therefore, the soil profiles from the CPT soundings were used in our analyses. In addition, the historically high groundwater was assumed in the soil profile. The ground motion parameters used for the analysis were the site-specific design PHGA of 0.38g and the modal magnitude of 6.7 determined from disaggregation of site-specific ground motion. The analyses were performed using the computer program CLiq Version 1.5.1.16 (Geologismiki, 2006). Our analyses are generally based on the procedures outlined in Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigation Seismic Hazards in California (Special Publication 117)published by the CGS and Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in California published by the Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC). The site is generally classified as having low risk of liquefaction based on the liquefaction potential index (lwasaki et al., 1978).Liquefaction potential index (LPI) combines depth, thickness, and factor of safety of liquefiable material inferred from a cone penetrometer test (CPT) sounding into a single parameter. The LPI ranges from 1 to 2.5. LPI values lower than 5 are deemed low risk. The potential for liquefaction are the site is generally confined within thin layers at depths ranging from about 20 to 50 feet bgs. The results of our liquefaction analyses are included in Appendix E. 13- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 3.2.2 Seismicallv-Induced Settlement Seismically-induced settlement consists of dry dynamic settlement (above groundwater) and liquefaction-induced settlement (below groundwater). These settlements occur primarily within loose to medium dense sandy soil due to reduction in volume during, and shortly after, an earthquake event. Our analysis is presented in Appendix E. The seismically-induced settlement resulting from the design event is estimated to be in the order of 1 to 2 inches. Differential settlement is estimated to be approximately M inch over 100 feet. 3.2.3 Surface Manifestation of Liquefaction Surface manifestation of liquefaction would include the formation of sand/gravel boils and ground cracking. As discussed above, the site is generally classified as having low risk of liquefaction based on LPI. Accordingly, the potential for surface manifestations, such as sand boils or bearing capacity failure of shallow foundations, is considered low. 3.2.4 Lateral Spreading or Flow Failure For lateral spreading or fiow failure to occur, a continuous, laterally unconstrained liquefiable zone must be free to move along gently sloping ground toward an unconfined area. The site is relatively flat. Although the Santa Ana river channel and levee are located approximately 200 feet south and east of the site, the river channel depth is generally shallower than the soil layers at the site deemed susceptible to liquefaction. Accordingly, the potential for lateral spreading is deemed low. 3.2.5 Seismically-Induced Landslides According to the State of California Seismic Hazards Zones Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle, the site is not located in an area potentially susceptible to earthquake induced landslides. Based our experience and the gently sloping topographic character of the site, the potential for seismically-induced slope instability is considered low. -14- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 3.2.6 Seiches and Tsunamis Tsunamis are long wavelength seismic sea waves (long compared to the ocean depth) generated by sudden movements of the ocean bottom during submarine earthquakes, landslides, or volcanic activity. A seiche is an oscillation (wave) of a body of water in an enclosed or semi-enclosed basin that varies in period, depending on the physical dimensions of the basin, from a few minutes to several hours, and in height from several inches to several feet. A seiche is caused chiefly by local changes in atmospheric pressure, aided by winds, tidal currents, and occasionally earthquakes. Based on the site elevation (approximately 99 to 101 feet msl) and inland location of the site (approximately 10 miles from Pacific Ocean), the potential for damage due to either a tsunami or seiche is low. 3.2.7 Ground Lurchinq Ground lurching is defined as movement of low density soil materials on a bluff, steep slope, or embankment due to earthquake shaking. Since there are no significant slopes at the site, it is our opinion that the potential for ground lurching as a result of nearby or distant seismic events is low. 3.3 Flooding Hazards According to a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate map (FEMA, 2008), the site is located within a flood zone. In addition, based on our review of dam inundation and topographic maps, the site is located within a dam inundation area from the Prado Dam. Flood zones located in the site vicinity are shown on Figure 9, Flood Hazard Map. 3.4 Expansive Soils Based on our geotechnical exploration, the near surface soils are generally granular with localized sandy silt to clay layers. Two near surface bulk soil samples (B-1 and B-4) were tested for expansion potential. The results indicate that the near surface soils have low expansion potential. 15- Leighton , SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 3.5 Corrosive Soils Corrosive soils are characterized by their ability to degrade concrete and corrode ferrous materials in contact with water or soil.In particular, concrete is susceptible to corrosion when it is in contact with soil or water that contains high concentrations of soluble sulfates which can result in chemical deterioration of the concrete. For ferrous metals, electrical resistivity of the soil can affect corrosion. Based on the results of the corrosion testing, the site soils are deemed corrosive to moderately corrosive to ferrous metals based on a minimum soil resistivity (saturated) of 3089 and 8000 ohm-cm. Sulfate attack potential for concrete in contact with site soils is deemed negligible based on a sulfate content of 44 and 89 parts per million (ppm). Chloride exposure is deemed low based on a chloride content of 43 and 62 ppm. Test results are presented in Appendix C. 16- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 4.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion that the project is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The geologic/seismic hazards impacting the site can be mitigated with proper design and construction. The following factors should be considered: â€¢ The site is mantled by undocumented artificial fill, which is underlain by Quaternary age fluvial and floodplain deposits consisting predominately of silts, clays and sands. â€¢ Subsurface materials at the site include unconsolidated sands, which are subject to collapse in shallow trench-like exposures. The surficial stability of excavations will be dependent upon the composition and cohesive characteristics of the material exposed in the cut. â€¢ Evidence for active faulting was not encountered during our field exploration. Our review of the geologic literature (Appendix A) indicates there are no known active faults on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. Accordingly, the potential for surface rupture at the site is considered low. â€¢ The main seismic hazard that may impact the site is ground shaking. The nearest known active Type A fault, located 28 miles (45 kilometers) from the site, is the Sierra Madre fault, which is capable of producing a 7.0 Mw event along the mountain front. The nearest active-zoned Type B fault, located 8.6 miles (13.9 kilometers) from the site, is the NIFZ, capable of producing a 6.9 Mw earthquake. â€¢ Liquefaction-induced settlement is expected to take place in relatively thin layers at depths generally greater 20 feet bgs. As such, surface manifestation of liquefaction is deemed unlikely. Seismically-induced settlement at is expected to be between 1 to 2 inches. Seismically-induced differential settlement is expected to be about M inch over a horizontal distance of 100 feet. â€¢ Perched and regional groundwater were encountered during the exploration at depths between 25 and 40 feet bgs. Groundwater is not expected to impact construction. â€¢ Based on the results of our site exploration and laboratory testing, near surface expansive soils are not likely to be encountered at the site. -17-4 Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 Based on the results of our laboratory testing, site soils are corrosive to moderately corrosive to ferrous metals. Sulfate attack potential for concrete is deemed negligible. The proposed structures may be supported on shallow spread footings with floor slabs supported on grade. -18- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The proposed new buildings and structures may be supported on spread-type shallow foundation systems established in engineered fill or undisturbed natural soils. The following preliminary geotechnical recommendations have been developed based on the engineering properties of the onsite soils and their anticipated behavior during and after construction. Leighton should review the grading plans, shoring plans, foundation plans, and specifications when they are available to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and incorporated. 5.1 Earthwork and Grading All earthwork and grading should be performed in accordance with the following recommendations and Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications presented in Appendix F. 5.1.1 Site Preparation Prior to construction, the area of proposed new buildings and structures including site walls, e.g. retaining and freestanding walls, should be cleared of any vegetation and demolition trash and debris.These materials should be removed from the site. Any underground obstructions onsite should be removed. The foundations for the existing buildings to be demolished should be located and removed. Efforts should be made to locate any existing utility lines to be removed or rerouted where interfering with the proposed construction. Any resulting cavities should be properly backfilled and compacted. After the site is cleared, the soils should be carefully observed for the removal of all unsuitable deposits. All undocumented fill should be excavated from below proposed buildings, retaining walls, and concrete slabs on grade. All existing fill, including backfill placed after US removal, is considered undocumented fill until certification documentation becomes available. Existing fill may be left in place below planned asphalt concrete (AC) pavement if the associated risk of increased maintenance is deemed acceptable. All areas with existing fill left in place should be proof-rolled with heavy construction equipment to identify soft/loose zones for removal and recompaction. 19- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 5.1.2 General Grading Recommendations The proposed new buildings and structure including site walls, e.g. retaining and freestanding walls, may be supported on conventional shallow foundation systems established on engineered fill or undisturbed natural soils. The existing fill should be removed and replaced as engineered fill. The removal of existing soil should extend horizontally at least the depth of excavation. For cost estimating purposes, it may be assumed that existing fill at the site extends roughly 5 feet bgs, except at former UST locations. After completion of the overexcavation and prior to fill placement, the exposed soils should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1557-10. The onsite soils, less any deleterious material or organic matter, can be used in required fills. Cobbles larger than 6 inches in largest diameter should not be used in the fill. Crushed asphalt concrete can be pulverized to particles no larger than an inch in largest dimension, and mixed with site soils to be place as compacted fill, if approved by the City of Santa Ana. Any required import material should consist of relatively non- expansive soils with an Expansion Index (El) less than 20. The imported materials should contain sufficient fines (binder material) so as to be relatively impermeable and result in a stable subgrade when compacted. All proposed import materials should be approved by the geotechnical engineer of record prior to being placed at the site. 5.1.3 Pipe Beddinq Any proposed pipe should be placed on properly placed bedding materials. Pipe bedding should extend to a depth in accordance to the pipe manufacturer's specification. The pipe bedding should extend to at least 12 inches over the top of the pipeline. The bedding material may consist of compacted free-draining sand, gravel, or crushed rock. Pipe bedding material should have a Sand Equivalent (SE) of at least 30. 20- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 5.1.4 Trench Backfill Trench excavations above pipe bedding may be backfilled with onsite soils under the observation of the geotechnical consultant. All fill soils should be placed in loose lifts, moisture conditioned as required and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1 557-10. Lift thickness will be dependent on the equipment used as suggested in the latest edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). The fill soils should extend to the bottom of the aggregate base for new pavement, or to finished grade. 5.1.5 Corrosion Protection Measures The chemical analysis test results for the onsite soils from our geotechnical exploration are included in Appendix C of this report. The test results are also summarized in the table below. TABLE 3: CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS Test Parameter Test Results General Classification of B-1 B-4 Hazard Water-Soluble Sulfate in Soil (ppm) Water-Soluble Chloride in Soil (ppm) Negligible sulfate 89 44 exposure to buried concrete Non-corrosive to buried 62 43 concrete (per Caltrans Specifications) pH 7.45 7.30 Mildly Alkaline Corrosive to moderately Minimum Resistivity corrosive to buried 3,100 8,000 (saturated, ohm-cm)ferrous pipes (per ASTM1) ASTM STP 1013 titled Effect of Soil Characteristics on Corrosion (February, 1989) The results of the resistivity test indicate that the soil is corrosive to moderately corrosive to buried ferrous metals. Based on the measured water-soluble sulfate from the soil sample, concrete in contact with the soil is expected to have negligible exposure to sulfate attack per ACI 318-08. 21 - Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 The sample tested for water-soluble chloride content indicates a low potential for corrosion of steel in concrete due to the chloride content of the soil. 5.2 Shallow Foundations Spread footings may be established in engineered fill or undisturbed natural soils. 5.2.1 Minimum Embedment and Width Footings should have a minimum embedment of 18 inches and have a minimum width of 18 inches. 5.2.2 Bearing Value Footings established on engineered fill or undisturbed natural soils may be designed to impose an average bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). A one third increase in the bearing value for short duration loading, such as wind or seismic forces may be used. The ultimate bearing capacity can be taken as 9,000 psf. This value does not incorporate a factor of safety and may only be used for an ultimate bearing capacity check with appropriate factored loads. A one-third increase in the allowable bearing may be used for wind or seismic loading. The recommended bearing value is a net value, and the weight of concrete in the footings can be taken as 50 pounds per cubic foot (pcf); the weight of soil backfill can be neglected when determining the downward loads. 5.2.3 Settlement The estimated total settlement of the structures supported on spread footings as recommended above is less than M inch. The differential settlement between adjacent columns is estimated to be less than 1/1 inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet. -22- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 5.2.4 Lateral Resistance Lateral loads can be resisted by soil friction and by the passive resistance of the soils. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 can be used between the footings and the floor slab and the supporting soils. The passive resistance of undisturbed natural soils or engineered fill soils can be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid with a density of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). A one-third increase in the passive value can be used for wind or seismic loads. The friction resistance and the passive resistance of the soils can be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. 5.3 Slabs-on-Grade Concrete slabs may be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pci provided the subgrade is prepared as described in Section 5.1. From a geotechnical standpoint, we recommend slab-on-grade be a minimum 5 inches thick with No. 3 rebar placed at the center of the slab at 24 inches on center in each direction. The structural engineer should design the actual thickness and reinforcement based on anticipated loading conditions.Where moisture- sensitive floor coverings or equipment is planned, the slabs should be protected by a minimum 1 0-mil-thick vapor barrier between the slab and subgrade. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 can be used between the floor slab and the vapor barrier. Minor cracking of concrete after curing due to drying and shrinkage is normal and should be expected; however, concrete is often aggravated by a high water/cement ration, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal aggregate size, and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry, and/or windy weather conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can also be expected. The use of low-slump concrete or low water/cement ratios can reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking. Additionally, our experience indicates that the use of reinforcement in slabs and foundations can generally reduce the potential for concrete cracking. To reduce the potential for excessive cracking, concrete slabs-on-grade should be provided with construction or weakened plane joints at frequent intervals. Joints should be laid out to form approximately square panels. -23- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 5.4 Lateral Earth Pressures Recommended lateral earth pressures are provided as equivalent fluid unit weights, in psf/ft. or pcf., for retaining walls in drained conditions using onsite sandy soils as backfill. These values do not contain an appreciable factor of safety, so the structural engineer should apply the applicable factors of safety and/or load factors during design. TABLE 4: LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES Condition Equivalent Fluid Unit Weight with Granular Backfill (psf/ft.) Level Backfill,Level Backfill, Static Condition Seismic Increment Active 40 ps#ft 20 psf At-Rest 65 psf 20 psf Passive 300 -- Coefficient of Friction 0.35 -- Walls that are free to rotate or deflect may be designed using active earth pressure. For the basement walls or walls that are fixed against rotation, the at- rest pressure should be used. The seismic increment of earth pressure should be distributed as an inverted triangular distribution and the dynamic thrust should be applied at a height of 0.6H above the base of the wall. Care should be taken to provide appropriate drainage so as no water is allowed to remain behind the retaining wall for any significant length of time. Retaining structures should be provided with a drainage system, as illustrated on Figure F- 1, Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail, to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. In addition to the recommended earth pressures, walls below grade adjacent to existing structures or streets and areas of traffic should be designed to accommodate surcharge loads. For traffic surcharge, a uniform lateral pressure of 100 pounds per square foot acting as a result of an assumed 300 pounds per square foot surcharge behind the wall due to normal traffic; the traffic surcharge load may be neglected provided a minimum of 10 foot clearance between the wall and the traffic is maintained. We will provide surcharge loading from - 24 - Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 adjacent foundations after reviewing details of the planned basement walls in relation to existing foundations. Backfills for retaining walls should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). During construction of retaining walls, the backcut should be made in accordance with the requirements of Cal/OSHA Construction Safety Orders.Relatively light construction equipment should be used to backfill retaining walls. We also recommend using at-rest pressures for design of walls supporting settlement- sensitive structures. Earth pressures used in the design of the walls should be indicated on the retaining wall plans. All retaining wall designs and plans should be reviewed by the project geotechnical consultant to confirm that the appropriate soil parameters are used. 5.5 Seismic Design Parameters Seismic design values based on the mapped acceleration parameters and the site-specific procedure per the 2010 CBC (based on ASCE/SEI 7-05) were developed. Due to the liquefaction hazard at the site, the site type is classified as "F", which would typically trigger a site-response analysis. However, based on our discussions with the project structural engineer, the proposed buildings are deemed short-period structures with fundamental periods of about 0.5 second or less. Accordingly, the exception under Section 20.3.1 was used to develop site-specific seismic parameters. The justification for the short period exemption is that during an earthquake, the soil profile will respond differently before and after the onset of liquefaction. Ground motions may be considerably higher for short-period structures before the onset of liquefaction. Before the onset of liquefaction, ground motions will be characteristic of the behavior modeled by Site Classes for non-liquefied soils. For non-liquefied soils, it is expected that the short period spectral accelerations will be relatively high. After the onset of liquefaction, the soil will become much softer and result in a reduction of the short period ground motions and spectral accelerations. The longer period spectral response, however, may increase dramatically in terms of greater displacements. This approach is believed to be conservative for determining the design base shear for short period (T<0.5 -25- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 second) structures.It would be conservative to determine the seismic coefficients based on an upper envelope of both Site Class D and E response spectra. Seismic coefficients based on mapped values and based on the site-specific procedure are presented in the tables below. Seismic response spectra are presented in Appendix D. TABLE 5A: 2010 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS (MAPPED VALUES FOR UPPER ENVELOPE OF SITE CLASS D AND E) Categorization/Coefficient Design Value Site Latitude â€¢33.76184N â€¢ Site Longitude â€¢-117.90095W â€¢ Site Class â€¢F â€¢ Mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, Ss â€¢ Mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, Si â€¢ Short Period (0.2 sec) Site Coefficient, Fa â€¢ Long Period (1.0 sec) Site Coefficient, Fv â€¢ Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SMS â€¢ Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, SM1 â€¢ Design spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SDS â€¢ Design spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, Soi â€¢ 1.39 â€¢ 0.50 â€¢ 1.0 2.4 â€¢ 1.39 1.19 â€¢ 0.93 0.79 - 26 - Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 TABLE 5B: 2010 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS (SITE-SPECIFIC PROCEDURE) Categorization/Coefficient Design Value Site Latitude 33.76184N Site Longitude -117.90095W Site Class F Short Period (0.2 sec) Site Coefficient, Fa 0.89 Long Period (1.0 sec) Site Coefficient, Fv 2.18 Adjusted (5% damped) spectral response acceleration 1.23parameter at short period, SMS Adjusted (5% damped) spectral response acceleration 0.95parameter at a period of 1 sec, SM1 Design (5% damped) spectral response acceleration 0.82parameter at short period, SDS Design (5% damped) spectral response acceleration 0.63 parameter at a period of 1 sec, S[)1 5.6 Field Percolation Test Results Immediately after logging and sampling, Borings 8-8 and B-9 with depths of 10 and 5 feet, respectively, were converted to wells for field percolation tests. The average percolation rates of soils at the tested locations are summarized in the table below. TABLE 6: PERCOLATION TEST RATES Boring Depth of Depth of Test Number Hole (feet)Zone (feet) Flow Rate inch/min gallons/day B-8 10 5 -10 0.05 50 B-9 5 0-5 0.005 5 Detailed results of the percolation test results are provided in Appendix B. The civil engineer should incorporate any applicable correction factors to the design -27- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 of infiltration devices. In addition, these rates may change following rough grading of the site. 5.7 Pavement To provide support for paving of the proposed pedestrian access and vehicular driveways and parking spaces, the subgrade soils should be prepared as recommended in Section 5.1, Earthwork and Grading. The preparation of the paving area subgrade should be performed immediately prior to placement of the base course. Proper drainage of the paved areas should be provided since this will reduce moisture infiltration into the subgrade and increase the life of the paving. 5.7.1 Aqqregate Base Course The base course for hot mix asphalt (HMA) concrete paving should meet the specifications for Class 2 Aggregate Base as defined in Section 26 of the latest edition of the State of California Department of Transportation Standard and Specifications. Alternatively, the base course could meet the specifications for untreated base as defined in Section 200-2 of the latest edition of Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). Crushed Miscellaneous Base (CMB) may be used for the base course provided the geotechnical consultant evaluates and tests it before delivery to the site. 5.7.2 Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) The required HMA concrete paving and base thicknesses will depend on the expected wheel loads and volume of traffic (Traffic Index or TI). Assuming that the paving subgrade will consist of engineered fill with an R-value of at least 30 compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1557-10, the minimum recommended paving thicknesses are presented in the following table based on the design procedures outlined in Chapter 630 of the Highway Design Manual (HDM). - 28 - Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 TABLE 7: HMA PAVEMENT SECTIONS Traffic Index HMA Base Course (TI) (in) (inches) 4 3 4 5 3 6 6 4 6 7 4 10 8 5 12 Representative samples of the actual subgrade materials should be obtained and tested for R-Value following rough grading of the pavement subgrade to confirm the pavement design sections. 5.7.3 Rigid Pavement Preliminary rigid pavement sections are based on Chapter 620 of the Highway Design Manual (HDM) for jointed plain concrete pavement (JPCP). Assuming that the paving subgrade will consist of Type 11 soil subgrade with an R-value between 10 and 40 per Chapter 620 of the HDM and compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1 557-10, the preliminary design sections of rigid jointed plain concrete pavement (JPCP) without lateral supports are presented in the following table. Details of the JPCP pavement sections should follow the recommendations outlined in Chapter 620 of the HDM. TABLE 8: JPCP SECTION WITHOUT LATERAL SUPPORT Traffic Index (TI) JPCP Base Course Cir'O (inches) TI 5 9 9.0 12 9.5 < TI < 10 9.6 12 -29-4 Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 Representative samples of the actual subgrade materials should be obtained and tested for R-Value following rough grading of the pavement subgrade to confirm the pavement design sections. Concrete sidewalks should be at least 4 inches and constructed per City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency standards. Where crossing driveways, sidewalk pavement should be the minimum JPCP thickness with aggregate base course. 5.7.4 Interlockinq Pavers Based on the guidelines of the Interlocking Paver Institute (ICPI Tech Spec No. 4, Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute Revised November 2010), the minimum pedestrian and vehicular pavements planned for construction using Interlocking concrete pavers by Ackerstone and/or Orco Block Products are as follows: TABLE 9: INTERLOCKING CONCRETE PAVERS FOR PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC Interlocking Pavers Sand Bedding Base Course (mm)(inches)(inches) 60 1 4 TABLE 10: INTERLOCKING CONCRETE PAVERS FOR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC Traffic Index (TI)Interlocking Sand Bedding Base Course Pavers (mm)(inches)(inches) TI fE8 8 < TI < 9 80 1 4 80 1 6 -30- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 The above section assumes Category 3 subgrade with good drainage characteristics and an R-value of at least 30 compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1557-10. Representative samples of the actual subgrade materials should be obtained and tested for R-Value following rough grading of the pavement subgrade to confirm the pavement design sections. 5.8 Temporarv Excavation and Shorinq Design All temporary excavations, including utility trenches, retaining wall excavations and foundation excavations should be performed in accordance with project plans, specifications, and all OSHA requirements. Excavations 5 feet or deeper should be laid back or shored in accordance with OSHA requirements before personnel are allowed to enter. No surcharge loads should be permitted within a horizontal distance equal to the height of cut or 5 feet, whichever is greater from the top of the cut, unless the cut is shored appropriately. Excavations that extend below an imaginary plane inclined at 45 degrees below the edge of any adjacent existing site foundation should be properly shored to maintain support of the adjacent structure. Typical cantilever shoring should be designed based on the active fluid pressure presented in Section 5.5. If excavations are braced at the top and at specific design intervals, the active pressure may then be approximated by a rectangular soil pressure distribution with the pressure per foot of width equal to 25H, where H is equal to the depth of the excavation being shored. During construction, the soil conditions should be regularly evaluated to verify that conditions are as anticipated. The contractor should be responsible for providing the "competent person" required by OSHA, standards to evaluate soil conditions.Close coordination between the competent person and the geotechnical engineer should be maintained to facilitate construction while providing safe excavations. 5.9 Additional Geotechnical Services The geotechnical recommendations presented in this report are based on subsurface conditions as interpreted from limited subsurface explorations and 31- Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 limited laboratory testing. Our conclusions and recommendations presented in this report should be reviewed and verified by Leighton during site construction and revised accordingly if exposed geotechnical conditions vary from our preliminary findings and interpretations. The recommendations presented in this report are only valid if Leighton verifies the site conditions during construction. Geotechnical observation and testing should be provided during the following activities: â€¢ Grading and excavation of the site; â€¢ Overexcavation and compaction; â€¢ Compaction of all fill materials; â€¢ Shoring system installation; â€¢ Excavation and installation of foundations; â€¢ After excavation of all slabs and footings and prior to placement of steel or concrete to confirm the slabs and footings are founded in firm, compacted fill; â€¢ Utility trench backfilling and compaction; â€¢ Pavement subgrade preparation and base course compaction; and â€¢ When any conditions are encountered that varies significantly from the conditions described in this report. Leighton should review the grading and foundation plans and specifications, when available, to comment on the geotechnical aspects. Our recommendations should be revised, as necessary, based on future plans and incorporated into the final design plans and specifications. - 32 -40 Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 6.0 LIMITATIONS The geologic analyses presented in this geologic exploration and seismic hazard evaluation report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care exercised by geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions presented in this report. Please also note that our evaluation was limited to assessment of the geologic and seismic aspects of the site, and did not include evaluation of structural issues, environmental concerns or the presence of hazardous materials. Our conclusions, recommendations and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site conditions, engineering characteristics of the site soils and our review of the referenced geologic literature and reports. If geologic conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified and additional recommendations, if warranted, will be provided upon request. 33 - Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 re i L;['. { :r.J 4Â¢?7'-19\1/9, ..3, lt. :,M . - 1 hapman AveÂ»*kE4/3 -446 .jIr /' .1 1 - 4 - --Â·*,9 12.4 ...1......, Mi-4,3-J ..1., gIN '0â‚¬ 1 iF f 9 -13.. v --:'=*t 'V.1/'U : 1 -&.0â€ž9,-W-4=y=+01 1 ".0 f â€¢90â€¢ 414'ele,:0h i :1' e ' - Sch *M :31' 1.3. ''%.11* ' 12.*Al?.-2-1_.'..nug#-dm:*#7,'AL _. ---- i--- 1 - Cl iÂ»-S. 41 i -F;Tner..9.*.1,JJ-lir -42Â·I R=tfi i #2 4/.099.-:SPAÂ· 7: Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·'_11 * .1 .... +1- Â§ ./ C}Mi,M S#itiage SCI 4- . 11 /M.ch Sch ' 111 1 f"% 7.1 4:-I % .412 P 5 - :=:m'*.g ' ... 2-=.4$ 4. %.IF 9 1Westminster Ave :Gardei 1: fj 6 IL i i Â· liu Approximate 0. Site Boundary ..t ./Pripel&& SM: 1 16:,=. 5 .6-,..c ...0 4,6 ,a 1 Ar.*Â·Â· 1 *tjf w:Â£1*T ' ./0 5 :-2 -f, i' N .:If .' i: : ' Garde- G,câ€¢e ' - . â€¢Bl. -cf' Mu,Â·0:341 Go 1 Ce.,ie '. .. M.Â·2&.2.- r. 31\ f ..4 V .- 1 # j Kl 'ho,0 ' 4 ..Â· i<W'Z?. 117/ :o,0 t. 331, . . - . Cpu:-â€¢ â€¢ 1 1 L..4.4 '0 : 4,000 Wplt10 'Â»L,=ta â€¢' 34 k . 1 ...1 $r M ,16 Project 603284-001 Eng/Geol: CK/JAR Scale 1"= 2,000 'Date November 2011 Base Map ESRI Resource Center 2010 Thematic Info Leighton Author (btran) SITE LOCATION MAP The Academy 17th Street and Fairview Santa Ana, California Figure 1 Map Saved as V O 'afbng\603284001\GIS,of 2011-10-13\Figure' mx d on 10"3/2011 3 48 40 PM SL Rved 2019.01.21 = 4 â€¢â€¢J N 0 2.000 Feet STIREET ce FAIRVIEW STA 1-B 0 J 8-4 0 80 120 sc 1 FEET 1 r.., 0'6*#*i# a.imols' 1A w ay..1-4 .- 2.7. ! '. .f , -Â·lA .,8 Â£ 1. <CPI-4>V R 0 - PROJECT BOUNDARY 0 P.Â·Â· ron ..t 52'. il .L LEGEND 8-9 e APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PERCOLATION TEST BORINGS SHOWN WITH TOTAL DEPTH (T.D.) 8 -70 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HOLLOW t .I:. ' 4 - FOIST/6='STEM AUGER BORING SHOWING TOTAL i. ,1 P . 0 4 1 1.14'r .i: . 4.â‚¬DEPTH (T.D.) DEPTH TO PERCHED GROUNDWATER IF APPLICABLE, AND MEASURED DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER (G.W.)--- ' 1,4 66 UPON COMPLETION OF DRILLING.11. B-*1 ''i ' fl.t. ;I .â€¢ Â·4 , . r.,0 Â· lt. 1..CPT-6 1: L Â» 'Ie APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF CO,IE1 1%/ 14%PENETRATION TEST (C.P.T.) SHOWN WITH TOTAL- DEPTH (T.D.) 3 x Â·Â·1 Â· 9-5: .* "' 3 *Â· ' 1 1 1... - 72*.49â€¢1.. I *Â· 1' E) 4CFTÂ·5 ,N.: TA,e 1 ' 9 . 9 ., 4 HUCKLEBEARY AOAD B B' LOCATION OF GEOTECHNICAL CROSS L - - _ J SECTION BORING AND CROSS SECTION FIGURE 2A LOCATION MAP TnÂ·â‚¬ MEADEWv 17â„¢ STREET AND) FAmVIEW. SANTA ANA CALIFORNK Prof 803284-001 Eng/Geol: CK/JAR 1=. Scale: 1=60'Date. 11/11 Le{gytort -.=1-.-11 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 111 r> .. . FAIRVIEW STREET -- PROJECT BOUNDARY f 1- B ljQ . . +1111-Fl *11'll.*1 1.tik' 1 1%11...Et'.1.= IN.:001 e r'<u >'i. i p E j .11 1 4 0 60 120 1 SCALE FEET i /.b. fl Â· 4 ' Cal J 123 44. I. I lit: , >2.1 ., ./Fle,-/-: 4,441- 1 9..1/ 1.1-1, BLDG A i L .Fy'-2i 1-,] i . 7 4 .f; M .2 r -13 DG'D' 4 L 1 ii* jit# fl 14/%/, LEGEND 9-9 s O ?15' 5.Ee 7.Â·Â·*. ' 'Â¢wierlÂ»rrm i 4Â¥:*79" ' 1 /: El4.1,0 j ' t#W? 01<k'v * APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PERCOLATION TEST BORINGS SHOWN WITH TOTAL DEPTH (T.D.) -.444. .e StÂ¥*rÂ·,Â· r-E * :4-2..f#i. 2- -Â· tm .3*4.Â·44 'Â·* 3- G 8-7 1.1. T.0.3Â»'47 Â»INÂ»40 I.W.*15' BLDG 'H: A>FeR<*Alpt Â· P*L 2 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HOLLOW STEM AUGER BORING SHOWING TOTAL DEPTH (T.D.) DEPTH TO PERCHED GROUNDWATER IF APPLICABLE, AND MEASURED DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER (G.W.) UPON COMPLETION OF DRILLING. /D. Ma' 4Â·AS J .?) 06: I ..7 6= %:CP i Â·Â·Â· 6 $2# I ./.$ 3 "21 rl APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF CONE BLDG 'F'PENETRATION TEST (C P.T.)F.i, Y le.rts,- 1 SHOWN WITH TOTAL DEPTH (T.D.) "â‚¬14*Y V-0 -1 ' 1 f B B' LOCATION OF GEOTECHNICAL CROSS J sEcTiON 8-7. .m..' 1- 1- -- L B' 111 1 11 1 14*41, , 4-_I r 154' 4I idl.j!_6 4T I .i * + BORING AND CROSS SECTION LOCATION MAP THE ACADEMY 17TH STREET AND FAIRVIEW SANTA ANA CALIFORNIA Proj. 8032&4-001 Eng/Geol. CKUAR FIGURE 2B Scale: 1-=60'Date: 11/11 SLRvcd 2019.01.21 BLDG 31 Qyf Qyf Qyf Qyf Qyf k LEGEND 4 Qyf Young alluvial-fan deposits Qya Young axial-channel deposts QW Very young wash deposits Qyf Qyf 60 Qyf Approximate Site Location 0 1 1 Feet Qyf Qyf Qyf Qyf 4%1 Qyf N 2 000 4.000 Ay Project 603284-001 Eng/Geol CK/JAR ScaleÂ· 1"= 2.000 'Date November. 2011 Base Map ESRI Resource Center 2010 Geology data USGS 2006 Geologic map of the San Bernard,no and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles California Version 1 0 Open File Report 2006-1217 REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP The Academy 17th Street and Fairview Santa Ana, California Qyf Figure 3 5.3.-3 a: : Diafting\6(3284\00Â· G S c 20Â·- -D -3:-iau el -ne z' Â·- 2'23-- U ZG P/ SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Qyf 8-4 Proj. 1 55 CPT-4- Proj. 1 40' A Afu .-1 --- =Â£=b B-9 Proj. 1 138' TI66' ?- Proposed Building C Family Units 3-Story Intersection Proposed Building 8 B-B' Administration Library 2-Story B-1 B-7 Proj. 1 98' Existing Proposed Proj. 1 300'Grade B-8 +2-3 Feet Grades Prol. 1 211' -CPI-3 Proj. 1 303' - -1.4 .-1-7 ---- Â«11 / Proposed Building A Classroom 3-Story 8-5 Proj. 1 50'A' - CPT-2 - Proj. 1 35' 7- - -7- -=-100 T.D.tl.5' Qyf 80 -- 80 --160 - S.p. 30, 2011 ? \. K X:\,-t -M. 4,0.T.D.30'-I 4--24*<J .\ S.P. 30,2011 7 T n 10 9 421%1Â»I 211 1- -0 -60 L 's. 1 : T.D.50' 1 - 1T.D.5 1.5' ; : 1 4040 -- -- - - - ...1 1 1 T.D.75' . T.D.75' : N T.D.75'. -20 20 - m- 1 1 1 LEGEND Afu ARTIFICIAL FILL UNDOCUMENTED SAND MIX (SP TO SP-SM)Qyf SANDY SILT (MO -? ? SILTY SAND (SM) 7 Y 7 b SANDY Slim CLAY (CO SILT CLAY TO CLAY (CL-CH) Quaternary Young Alluvial Fan Deposits GEOLOGIC CONTACT, DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE, QUERRIED WHERE UNCERTAIN APPROXIMATE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION, QUERIED WHERE UNCERTAIN DEPTH TO MEASURED GROUNDWATER SURFACE APPROXIMATE ELEVATION OF PERCHED GROUNDWATER AS ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING Proj: 603284-001 Scale:Horizontal 1-=60 Vertical 1"=20' Eng/Geol: CK/JAR Date: 11/11 GENERALIZED GEOTECHNICAL CROSS SECTION A-A' THE ACADEMY 1901-1919 N. FAIRVIEW STREET SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 4 CÂ»lf- 8, BQT Ch...... .Er==28-00F 2011Â·10*FIGUREÂ·*6.....11 /41â„¢P..d ./.- SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Proposed Building Proposed Building B Gymnasium Administration Library 8-6 Intersection 2-Story Proj. 1 149'A-A' 8-2 B - B-1 CPT-2 CPT-1 Proj. 1 22' Proj. 1 20' Proj. 1 155'Proj. 1 58' 111, .- i G B-8 ij. 13! CPT-6 Proj. 1 192' B' It - I.il -'.- I -Il -1 - - -'llf--r - - -- roposed Grades 2-3 Fee 7 100 -Af.w_?- --_L--- -----100 -- 7 T.D. 11.5 15 TE.7 80 - ..Â».Qyf 16\Â»x-,-ty -803 1-\6 2 3 Â¥ T.D.30' -?X :PY 60 - - -60 LEGEND T.D. 31.5 40 - 20 - T.D.51.5' - 40ELEVA Â¢A313 T.D.75'T.D.75' - 20 KIN<j Afl Qyf -0 SAND MIX (SP TO SP-SM) SANDY SILT (IAL) SILTY SAND (SM) SANDY SILTY CLAY (CO SILT CLAY TO CLAY (CL-CH) ARTIFICIAL FILL UNDOCUMENTED Quaternary Young Alluvial Fan Deposits 0- T.D. 100' 7- -7- GEOLOGIC CONTACT, DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE, QUERRIED WHERE UNCERTAIN 7 17 APPROXIMATE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION, QUERIED WHERE UNCERTAIN 1 DEPTH TO MEASURED GROUNDWATER SURFACE APPROXIMATE ELEVATION OF PERCHED GROUNDWATER AS ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING Proj: 603284-001 Eng/Geol: CKWAR Scale:Holzontal 1 -=60 Date: 11/11 Vertical 1 '=20' *-... 10...all .FT IN,00.-CO,/* 2011 ,/I'GURB+8 ...(11Â·3CM 1 3:420,M,9 ./.I I. GENERALIZED GEOTECHNICAL CROSS SECTION B-B' THE ACADEMY 1901-1919 N. FAIRVIEW STREET SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 5 4* 0Chtf SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 % 4'23? 6. S tt: 3; n .3:17 "...i 14 ..7.3 * Â·P -Â·f r t. Â· 1% 1/1 -1 jFEFB. * tri-Yorb0Â·Â·Â·. I ':4 : .. * .4*t" >tf'Z F't r Â·f: i,14 t *1 1-- X/.2*,12,>12t 2 %:A. A ATÂ·i Â»:.C .s.- re *,k ': Â·< Â§>-p- M' 9 '.:*.1:> 4,Â£,t,Â£.r,Gman.,e Â·Â· ...,1 *1 41/ e *tz,1,VL a -* 1 > '>07Lre>Pjaceritiagi ?trf,4...;CO'.Â» .L'972.8uena< "re i : -.44-4 6$*--n J 1 2 Â¥=11 ta I Ound-ddl- : /Â¥Unâ€¢Ue-1413 *== *lqi#.,1/1-.-Im %.M:-:Il - =a Â«5 a r. n e Â· i<**Ek 0 ,Â¢,444*,4 *..- 4 Â· 33; "'>t....4:4{<tr, Ebi:t :.'.-.Â«41 â„¢j' :.2112 4:4 nt 3% * .. . 3- Â¥-lf #4: i t/panowma )1'ights?1/./ ,:I.. :Â·0./.-42*=44.> . .::...0- .4,0 I. .6 . ,â‚¬ 10 .>Q, ... wy-. + 79,42 7 .42=ELL124 0 9 f 11 2.mslin ) ,1 2 insteti '5 > -71#1"0.-â€ž.-'Â»J .Â» > Foothills' R.< ' 6* +Uy/6 1.2 Â·.Â· Â·. /*'a Z 1.A y â‚¬. ..2 6# 'Ii 3 ' '- u.4.&# .#*r,>.041 4 'g 192./*,s?Mal*.#./ * I/ I ' 92 1 iA R:Â·Â¥Â·Â·Â·:'1%Â· 7 '8*84*49 + /%,0 0#:.1 2 ; 4- .*4#2% -+ aÂ«. 41.C.Â· Â·.M' I. I. I . #: U her..ve C V. .. 4Â·luetin *Ck. ka 0 Golde.iweR St EDI 7Â·i E Fl IEFEF.t , {Di,O Quarternary and Younger Fault g Prequaternary Faults Alquist Priolo Fault Zone .. -7. 4 Project: 603284-001 Eng/Geol CK/JAR REGIONAL FAULT MAP Figure 6 Scale: 1"=2 miles Date November. 2011 The Academy Base Map Bing Aerial Imagery from Esr, Resource Center 2011 17th Street and Fairview Thematic Info Jennings and Bryant CGS Fault Activity Map. 2010 Alquist-Pnolo Fault Zones Map, CGS 2001 Santa Ana, CaliforniaAuthor (btran) Sa.ed as V Dratnaâ‚¬0325402-Â·GIS.o' 22Â·- -2 226:Â·â‚¬ â€¢r*z- -2-222Â·- 2 3-44 2.' SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 D 3C Milf 60 /3.<>itÂ·3% M, Lelicaster 1. b .laturd .... Clarita 9..dfil 0 8 1{enal}!â‚¬-3- 0 . â€¢. U fit'141â€¢â€¢Â®L t LoiLos A?,geles *4&2(1* POIT)01*3 '64* %t '.0 0 0 0. River bid(*di iance e Â«â€¢A 1461141 'crt- M A Lona Beach *4' ' E- CPI 1.1 tpirr d AICI * Approximate -Site Location ' ' 1.1 Oce;anside Cdt I j E s c O nu 5 L: o . 0 1- 0 - .,i $'*/ 0 0 .34{k" . 0.San Die'go * 0 0 . C i Ilild Vista Tijuana <Legend * Historic Seismicity (since 1769) â€¢ 4.0 - 5.0 â€¢ * 5.0-6.0 .. 6.0 -7.0 â€¢ D0 0 0 7.0- 8.25 Eng Project- 603284-001 Eng/Geol CK/JAR Scale 1"=30 miles Date November. 2011 Base Map Esn Resource Center 2011 Thematic Info Earthquake data obtained from United States Geological Survey's National Earthquake Information Center Author MAM HISTORICAL SEISMICITY MAP The Academy 17th Street and Fairview Santa Ana, California Map Saved as V \Diafting\603284\001\GIS\of 2011-10Â·13\Figure7 mxd on 10/13/2011 4 05 00 PM SL Rved 2019.01.21 N 395 e e * (1:31'iffl.L <Â©91*&4*** 2 PLAT: NOM TRIANGLE . Legend 1; Liquefaction Susceptibility Zone V Catela Ave *7 :.1 A:-Ne I \,1 Â£ D: 94 4 041# b, 0 8 6 I. Â· 42* 5 ld(i.im r1 ., *C W , 4&33".4 20 n n 4. r4 4.2 n i.:4. PLAZA j. I. * / 4 14!t + $ : 4 it. â‚¬ 5...:..4% 1 1 4 1 2-121 ,e, 7, LA Vele Ave , 1.4 - 22 r tÂ·thst/:/ L G.-I' Pa -y t . I r r:<Tl4%Santa ,Â·n- W ty'iM 54 -0 E . hit! Approximate v 44 AN -Site Location 2 3Coileqe Z; NORTH d %9- i CE Uh N Ar 0(0 4. )0 8.000 W. W=Warne. Ave 6 War rÂ« Ave1 1 91 1.0.., 1 Â·e, AveFeet Project 603284-001 Eng/Geol CK/JAR Scale. 1"= 4.000 feet Date November, 2011 Base Map Bing Street Map from Esn Resource Center 2011 Thematic Info Southern California SHZP GIS Data Deparlment of Conservation 2011 Author (btran) SEISMIC HAZARDS MAP The Academy 17th Street and Fairview Santa Ana, California Figure 8 >.1.9,3 3. v 5,1 aft nalâ‚¬:3284 201\GIS\of 2: A 7 i.feâ€ž m. 11 1. 7(.11 -1 Â·1 2: AM SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 09 44.. NUY A , :*i./.* &* .lin 1- I '&,2 'lu 1 .. '1. Id , 2Â« / ii-_ i 1.1.. 19///i â€ž4*Mi j a K. 44 1 1.7 y....VRAÂ¥f r a .rr: Â»â€¢.,- 30 2 4-t M ttl â€¢.1 1 9 . . 1 â€¢flt' . - 244. i= 57Â» , ..1 .,43 1 1 .JI2,4. 3 Ni &41 ' .6 -4 6. e U i 1 Â·Â· 3.67.':7. 91*' P... ',214. 71'lfÂ¥# I frf.I Approximate Nâ€¢- ! i-I2O0.-Â»tâ‚¬ Site Boundary 13 i.;).4 &1 46444 r . /. *- ?iÂ«*..Ii I4 Â· I.ts.1 7 4 4 L._,4 gâ€¢t- 24* - 1.-C 1.13 I 7 3 * 44 %t /1, *lr - h - .. 4 rI....3 & t:. i $5:..r.,-Â· I -- f. 4 .-1- b Jâ€ž ar1-:. 1/: I : - Â¥...iri U jâ€¢râ€¢n.,4 1. 610- I .... . N -6,66644 11/Niab . .::*,**: .- Legend %3 Z -'.1:500 Year Flood Plain 0 3,000 6,000 iiI. 1 1 1 1 100 Year Flood Plain Feet .6-1 #%5 Project 603284-001 Eng/Geol. CK/JAR FLOOD HAZARD MAP Figure 9 3,000 1 Date: November, 2011 The Academy 17th Street and Fairview Base Map ESRI Resource Center 2010 Thematic Info FEMA. 2010 Author (btran)Santa Ana, California Scale 1"= Mar Saved as V \Drafting\603284\001\GIS\of 2011-10-13\Figuie9 m.d on 10,13/2011 4 28 15 PM SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 APPENDIX A SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 APPENDIXA References Athanor Environmental Services Inc., 2011, Environmental Site Assessment Soil and Groundwater Investigation 1 901-1919 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, California, 92706, dated June 7, 2011. American Concrete Institute, 2008, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-08) and Commentary, January 2008. American Concrete Institute, 2008, Design of Slabs-on-Ground, ACI 360R-06, Third Printing, January 2008. Barrows, A.G., 1974, A review of the Geology and Earthquake History of the Newport Inglewood Structural Zone, Southern California: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 88-14. Blake, T.F., 2000, EQSEARCH, Computer Program for Windows Version 4.0. Boore, D.M. and Atkinson, G.M., 2007, Boore-Atkinson NGA Ground Motion Relations for the Geometric Mean Horizontal Component of Peak and Spectral Ground Motion Parameters, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, PEER Report 2007/01. Bryant, W.A., and Hart E.W., 2007, Special Publication 42, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, AIquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zone Maps, Interim Revision 2007. California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Division 1, Chapter 13, Subchapter 1, Section 14010. California Building Standards Commission (CBSC), 2010 California Building Code, Based on 2006 International Building Code. California Department of Transportation, 2008, Highway Design Manual, Flexible Pavement, Chapter 630, July 1, 2008. California Geological Survey (CGS) formally California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1978, Summary Report: fault Evaluation Program, 1977 Area-Los Angeles Basin region; Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and, Ventura Counties, California, DMG Open File Report 78-10 ,19968, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, OFR 96-08. . A-1 Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 APPENDIX A References , 1997, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Anaheim and Newport Beach 7.5 Minute Quadrangles, Orange County, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 003, Revised 2001. , 1998a, Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada, to be used with the 1997 Uniform Building Code, International Conference of Building Officials, dated February 1998. , 1998b, State of California Seismic Hazard Zone Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle, Revised Official Map, April 15, 1998. , 2000, CD-ROM containing digital images of Official Maps of AIquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones that affect the Southern Region, CDMG CD 2000-003 2000. , 2003, Seismic Shaking Hazards in California, Based on the USGS/CGS Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Assessment (PSHA) Model, 2002 (revised April 2003),CGS website,http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/rghm/pshamap/ pshamain.html. , 2007, Checklist for the Review of Engineering Geology and Seismology Reports for California Public Schools, Hospitals, and Essential Services Buildings - Note 48, dated October 2007. , 2008, Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California. Campbell, K.W. and Bozorgnia, Y., 2007, Campbell-Bozorgnia NGA Ground Motion Relations for the Geometric Mean Horizontal Component of Peak and Spectral Ground Motion Parameters, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, PEER Report 2007/02, dated May 2007. Chiou, B.S.J. and Youngs, R.R., 2007, Chiou and Youngs PEER-NGA Empirical Ground Motion Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Acceleration and Pseudo-Spectral Acceleration for Spectral Periods of 0.01 to 10 Seconds, Interim Report for USGS Review, dated June 14, 2006 (Revised Editorially July 10, 2006). A-2 Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 APPENDIX A References Eckmann E.C., Strahorn, A.C., Holmes, L.C., and Guernsey, J.E., 1919, Soils Map of the Anaheim area, California: United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Soils, in cooperation with University of California, Agricultural Experiment Station, scale: 1:62,500 FEMA, 2008, web site (https:Uhazards.fema.gov/femaportal/wps/portal/). Geologismiki (2006), CLiq v. 1.5.1.16, Software for Liquefaction Evaluation. Interlocking Concrete Paver Institute, 2010, ICPI Tech Spec No. 4, Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute, Revised November 2010. Iwasaki, T., Tatsuoka, F., Tokida, K., and Yasuda, S. (1978), "A practical method for assessing soil liquefaction potential based on case studies at various sites in Japan,"Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. on Microzonation, San Francisco, 885-896. Jennings, C.W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas; California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map 6, Scale 1:750,000. Orange County Public Works, 2010, On-site Sewage Guidelines. RISK Engineering, Inc., 2007, EZ-FRISK Version 7.23. Ziony, J.I., and Yerkes, R.F., 1985, Evaluating Earthquake and Surface-Faulting Potential 1[1 Ziony, ed., 1985, Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles Region - An Earth - Science Perspective: U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 1360, pp. 43-91. A-3 Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 APPENDIX B SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-1 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR a, U 100- 0 95- 5- 90- 10 85- 15- 80- 20 75<725 O 0 0 5 4Z u,9 0E. 2 O 4 42 0- Clo J 2-1 v E BE 8& E * - 2 Pg 0,5 02 0C Ui-:Â·SOIL DESCRIPTION 96 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at 66 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other 35 locations and may change with time. The description is a In- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. N S SM BB-1 105 2 ML 7 9 R2 3 97 SP 4 5 Undocumented Artificial Fill (Aful: 3-inches AC over SIL I Y SAND (SM), subgrade aâ‚¬phalt, distressed and fatigued, widely spaced alligator cracking, line-grained, dry -------------------------- uaternanÂ· young fluvial deposits (Ovn: SANDY SILI (ML), still, light brown, dry, rootlets and weak calcium carbonate along 1-2 nim voids SAND (SP), loose, light yellow' brown, dry, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, poorly graded, unconsolidated R3 1 5 102 1 9 I0 SAND with Gravel (SP), medium dense. light yellow, brown, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand, fine rounded gravel, well graded, unconsolidated S-1 2 12 CL-ML dry, becomes oxidized CLAYEY SILT with SAND (CL-ML), soft, olive brown, very moist, fine-grained sand R4 5 l'ijl'l'1111, 96 27 ML CL 27 SMS-2 \/ 2 3 5 SANDY SILT (ML), firm, olive brown, very moist, fine-grained sand SILTY CLAY (CL), soft, mottled dark reddish gray, very moist, micacious CL-ML CLAYEY SILT to SANDY CLAY (CL-ML), soft, light brown, fine-grained sand with thin bed of fine-grained, wet silly sand to 26 ft.. becomes silly clay, perched groundwater, LL = 26; PL = 21 M = 5 sltip TYPES: BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLE GRAB SAMPLE RING SAMPLE SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE TUBE SAMPLE B C G R S T TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS i CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR SA El EXPANSION INDEX SE 1 HYDROMETER SG ID MAXIMUM DENSITY UC 'P POCKET PENETROMETER rV R VALUE SIEVE ANALYSIS SAND EQUIVALENT SPECIFIC GRAVITY UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH DS, El, MD CN, CR DS AL *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand.alone document. ***Page 1 of 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-1 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLCDrilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR D 0 70 65 6[ 5( 4! lead 0 N i- 30 R5 ;- 35 "llit S3 1- 40 R6 S4 )- 50 i- 55- Attitudes Rimnle No 032 ,6-7 SOIL DESCRIPTION t.= 0 - - 08 % ; 2-9 G This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at-2 0 a .118 56 the time ofsampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at otherB 6 2 8% 55 locationsand maychange withtime. Thedescriptionisa simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 2 94 29 CL-ML 3 5 24 ML Pe CLAYEY SILT to SILTY CLAY (CL-ML), firm, dark gray clay to oxidized orange brown silt, very moist, thinly bedded to laminated SANDY SILT (ML), soft, dark gray, fine-grained sand, wet 4 105 8 I6 SP-SM SAND with SILT (SP-SM), medium dense, mottled light gray to reddish brown, wet, fine-grained sand 5 23 6 I 3 102 23 6 6 SP SAND (SP), medium dense, medium gray to black, wet, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, poorly graded, unconsolidated, poor recovery SP-SM SAND with SILT(SP-SM), medium dense, grayish brown, wet, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, poorly graded, unconsolidated, heaving sands, poor recovery - Total Depth = 51.5 ft. bgs Perched groundwater encountered at 25.5 ft. bgs Groundwater table measured at 33.4 ft. bgs upon completion of drilling Boring backfilled with soil cuttings and capped with AC cold patch upon completion SM,-PJÂ¢TYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDATION 1 CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION 1 CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S VID MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER M R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH DS *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ***Page 2 of 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 &-Ir {BM El â‚¬2 E i -12 /1 o E cow - 3-1 5 6 C 0 2 0 N S 8-2 26 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at 93 14 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other &90 '55 locations and may change with time. The description is a 0 (n- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 0 I.Er ... 100- - Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Afu): SP-SM 2.5-inches AC over SANDY GRAVEL (GP), becomes SAND with SILT, dry, loose, fine-grained sand, trace coarse-grained sand and fine-grained gravel. BB-1 5-Â· Rl 5 93 2 SP 195- 6 SC 11)Ill-il, R2 4 100 2 SP 7 10 10 : :3 SP 390- 4 Quaternarv voune fluvial deposits (Ovf):SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, dry, fine-grained sand, some silt, poorly graded, unconsolidated CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, dark brown, moist, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand SAND (SP), medium dense, dark brown, slighly moist, fine-grained sand, T z irly graded, unconsolidatedal SAND (SP), loose, dry, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand 102 2 SP 885- 80 75 SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, slightly moist, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand,trace fine-grained rounded gravel, poorly graded, unconsolidated S-2 0 24 CL 25 91 31 CH CLAY (CL), soft, reddish brown, very moist, trace silt, micaceous FAT CLAY (CH), soft, mottled dark blackish gray to oxidized orange brown, very moist with fine gravel sized sandy angular concretions, some root traces SAMPLE TYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS 1 CN CONSOLIDATION 1 CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S AD MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER V R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ... This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ***Page SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Type of Tests GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR N S l0 11111'il li 4,Ph. Attitudes 'ON eldules &1 m .* ..32 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0-C U) C J UN/) % 2 %11 3 C Ed This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at 2- o a .12 24 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other I I 2 2 8 '65 locations and may change with time. The description is a 2 O o tn- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. S-3 \/ 2 27 CL SILTY CLAY with SAND (CL), firm, gray to orange brown, veryA 2 moist, very fine-grained sand 3 93 3I ML 6 6 2 28 ML 3 3 3 28 SM 5 5 R5 SANDY SILT (ML), firm, medium gray, very moist, fine-grained,65- -micaceous R 40 11 11 11 S4 V 60- 45- S5 y 55- 50 S6 V 50- 55- 45- CLAYEY SILT (MH), firm, gray to orange brown, micaceous, very moist SILTY SAND (SM), wet, fine-grained, encountered groundwater during drilling SILTY SAND (SM), with thinly bedded SILT, orange brown to gray, wet, fine-grained sand, gradational 1 31 MH-CL CLAYEY SILT (MH), wet, darksray, overlies CLAY (CL), firm 3 dark gray, moist, moderately plastic, trace silt 3 Total Depth =51.5 ft. bgs Groundwater encountered at 40.5 ft. bgs during drilling Groundwater measured at 34.9 ft. upon completion of drilling Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion ofdrilling and capped with AC cold patch SAMPLETYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION 1 CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S ,'ID MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER W R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ..*Page 2 of 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR 0 5 0 Z ,..C2. v a.0 1 2 *2 2-1 2 0 0- E I.= CO 0 2 N S D 0 0 95- 5- 90- 10 85- 15- 80- 20 75- 25- 70- Feet U) C- 0 0 O a. r 0 -C !22 0C SOIL DESCRIPTION 26 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at Eu; the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other '38 locations and may change with time. The description is a ur- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Afu):SM 4-inches AC over SIL I Y SAND (SM), subgrade, brown, moist fine-grained, micaceous ----------------------------------------- ML Ouaternan' voung fluvial deposits (Ovil: SANDY SILT (ML), light brown, dry, very fine-grained sand, micacious Rl 1 5 105 3 SM 9 I0 S-1 3 3 SP 4 5 SILTY SAND (SM), medium dense, light brown, dry, very fine-grained sand, trace fine sub rounded gravel, poorly graded, unconsolidated, trace rootlets SAND (SP), loose, light brown, dry, fine-grained, poorly graded R2 5 100 3 SP 1 8 S-2 \/ 3 3 5 4 SAND (SP), medium dense, slightly moist, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand, well graded, unconsolidated trace fine gravel, loose R3 3 102 25 CL 8 S-3 0 32 0 M1 SILTY Lean CLAY (CL), stiff, mottled reddish brown to gray around open voids 1-3 mm, moist with trace coarse sand to fine gravel sized concretions dark reddish brown, very moiSt, LL=38; PL=22: PI=16 SANDY SILT (ML), soft, olive brown, very moist, very fine-grained sand, micaceous SAMPIITYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS 1 CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S AD MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER RV R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH CN CN AL *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. .*.Page 1 of 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR 0 30 650- 35 60- 40 55- 45 50- 50 45- 55- 40- 0 26 5 2 25 zil SOIL DESCRIPTION 12 0 22 :m ic As This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at0- 2- a o .=S '-4 thetimeof sampting. Subsurface conditions may differatother O 5 8 g .65 /ocations and may change with time. The descnption is a - simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 65 R4 3 113 18 SC 9 I4 CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, mottled olive brown to gray, moist, fine-grained, some micaceous silt 0 28 SP-SM SAND with SILT (SP-SM), loose, dark grey, wet, fine-grained 0 sand, encountered groundwater %CL R5 1 7 106 21 SP becomes SANDY SILTY CLAY (CL), olive brown, very fine-grained, very moist, micaceous SAND (SP), medium dense, dark gran wet, fine-grained tomedium-grained sand, poorly graded, flowing sand S-5 \/ 3 31 SM 6 7 S-6 0 33 CL 3 SILTY SAND (SM), medium dense, irayish brown, wet, fine-grained sand, trace coarse-grained sand CLAY (CL), soft: olive brown to gray, very moist, moderately plastic, trace silt Total Depth =51.5 ft bgs Groundwater encountered at 35 ft. bgs durini drilling Measured at 33.2 ft bgs upon completion 01 drillip;Boring backfilled with soil cuttings and capped witn AC cold patch upon completion SAMPEE TYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS i CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S MO MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER rV R VALUE A SlEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ...Page 2 of 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-4 Project No.603284-001 Project Orangewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR 0 0 6 0Z tii Ke E 0 *0 eu Z 2 325 0 -m Iâ‚¬= 0 C- a,u 0 a eK 39 E3 0C =0 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0. 2 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at 66 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other B:5 locations and may change with time. The description is a n- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 5- 90- 10 85- 65 20 0/ N S BB-1 S-1 6 SM 3 "4NNI!6 Ill 5 CL I0 I 5 SP 0-Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Aful: SP 5.5-inches AC over SAND (SP), subgrade, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, dry, lightbrown SM Quaternary voung fluvial deposits (Ovfl: SIL I Y SAND (SM), light brown, dry, line-grained sand, trace fine 95-rounded gravel loose, light brown, dry, fine-grained sand, poorly graded, unconsolidated SANDY CLAY (CL), dark olive brown, moist SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, dry, fine-grained sand, poorly graded, unconsolidated SAND (SP), loose, fine-grained to medium-grained sand 15-R3 1 4 95 27 SP SAND with GRAVEL (SP), medium dense, light brown, slightly 7 moist, fine-grained to medium-Brained sand with fine rounded1 1 gravel, poorly graded, unconsolidated 80- CLAY (CH), soft, reddish brown, moist, moderately plastic, trace Silt 75- S-2 \/ 2 3 SP 3 3 S-3 \/ 0 32 Cl- 25- Silty SAND (SM), loose, olive gray to orange brown, veD' moist, trace very fine-grained sand, and rootlets, thin beds ot wet, fine-grained clayey sand with concretions, gradational changes R4 6 101 SM 5FE?333 4 4 70- 30 SAMPLETYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING AL ATTERBERG LIMITS CN CONSOLIDATION CO COLLAPSE CR CORROSION CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DS DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S H HYDROMETER S MD MAXIMUM DENSITY U PP POCKET PENETROMETER RV R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH El, MD CR CN Page 1 0.*. This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ... SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-4 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR 41' 0 -Â®32 Ui->SOIL DESCRIPTION , : Â£.r "U) ' %11 3 c Rd This Soil Description applies only to alocation of the exploration at- O 0. 98 Zu; the time ofsampling. Subsurface conditions may differat other t 2 Â§90 -05 locations and may change withtime. Thedescriptionisa 2 O o ur- simplification of the actual conditions encountered Transitions between soil types may be gradual. U N S 30- S-4 V 0 .1.11 0 H U 7 - 35 R5 3 3 3 in Attitudes ON aldules SM018 24 CH FAT CLAY (CH) soft, with thin beds ofoxidized fine-grained sand to sandy sm, orange brown, very moist SP-SM SAND with SILT (SP-SM), loose, grayish brown, wet, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, poorly graded, poor recovery, micaceous, groundwater encountered 60 S-5 \/ 3 6 9 S-6 4 9 22 SP SAND (SP), medium dense, grayish brown, wet, fine-grained, poorly graded 55- 45- 50- 50- 45- 55- 40- 21 SM SILTY SAND (SM), medium dense, wet, fine-grained, unconsolidated Unable to sample, 10 ft. of flowing sand into auger, terminated boring due to heave - Total Depth = 50 ft. bgs Drilling terminated due to sand heave from 50 ft. bgs Groundwater measured at 32 ft. bgs Boring backfilled with soil cuttings and capped with AC cold patch upon completion SAMPLE TYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS i CN CONSOLIDATION 1 CO COLLAPSE 1 CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL 1 )S DIRECTSHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S AD MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER RV R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ..*Page 2 of 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-5 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR 6 52ogiz Â£n 0 .0Et: 2 0 i H StCUM Clo J 0 0 0 E 00 , fo Â£ C 0 2 0 N S 2* E2 OC =,9 Ui-:Â·SOIL DESCRIPTION GS %1Â·35loessacmdppltinogn aessudoanyetoanmonnmfythdlooeo at '-0.Â£ locations and may change with time. The description is a (n- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 0 OV.IC SP-SM Artificial Fill: Undocumented fAfui: 2 5 inches AC over 5 inches ol SANDY GRAVEL (GP), brown, fine-grained to medium-grained sand matrix, fine rounded gravel SAND with SILT (SP-SM), brown, moist, fine-grained, poorly /-L _04*d----------------------- Quaternan' Young fluvial deposits (Ovil: SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, slightly moist, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand with trace fine rounded qp gravel, well graded, unconsolidated luu- BB- 1 RI 4 116 3 195- 10 R2 6 lll 3 8 10 10- S-1 \/ 2 2 390- 4 fine-grained to medium-grained, poorly graded loose, fine-grained to coarse-grained, moderately well graded 15-R) 1 4 99 3 885- 13 SP-SM SAND with SILT (SP-SM), medium dense, light brown, dry, fine-grained, micaceous S-2 \/ 0 3I CH 80-0 LEAN CLAY (CL), soft, reddish olive brown, very moist, LL = 48, PL = 22, PI = 26 25 "41111116 R# 1 3 95 30 CH 575- 9 ML LEAN CLAY (CL), soft. mottled orange brown to grayish brown with fine gravel sized sand concretions, becomes: SANDY SILT (ML), firm, reddish brown, wet, fine-grained, micaceous, encountered perched groundwater 30 SAMPLE TYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S AD MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER ZV R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH AL, CN *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ***Page 1 c SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-5 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR U Z u,= I ..r U)(0 6 52 032 4,SOIL DESCRIPTION E-20 v 0 % U C.- 32 26 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration atDEM 2 E RE & b Eu; the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other O 5 2 g Es /ocations and may change w#h time. The descnption is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. .65 -O 0- S-3 \/ 0 29 CL 070- N Nlih 35 R5 1 2 90 33 MH 365- 5 S-4 \/ 2 27 ML 360-3 45 S-5 \/ 0 27 SIV 355-5 50- S-6 2 31 l'ill'111!150-CL 3 55- 45- SILTY CLAY (CL), soft, mottled gray brown to orange brown, very moist CLAYEY SILT (MH), soft, greenish gray, wet, micaceous with unlined pores (voids) 1 -2 mm, trace rootlets SANDY SILT (ML), soft, grayish brown, wet, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, encountered groundwater SILTY SAND (SM), soft, olive brown, wet, fine-grained, micaceous CLAY (CL), soft, dark gray, trace silt and shells Total Depth =51.5 ft. bgs Groundwater encountered at 40 ft. bgs during drilling Groundwater measured at 41.6 ft. bgs upon completion of drilling Boring backfilled with soil cuttings and capped with AC cold patch upon completion ofdrilling and logging SAMPLITYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDATION 1 CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S VD MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER M R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH & .** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. .**Page 2 of 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Claw.*i,Â·,n GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-6 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR 5- 0 100- 0 95- 5- 90- 10- 85- 15- 80- 20- 75725- â€¢,32 SOIL DESCRIPTION C.r u,0 CO 3 M 96 | 3 c Rd This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at1 2- a a .Els 1-4 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other 2 2 g '65 /ocations and may change with time. The description is a - simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 65 N S BB-1 SP-S R 1 2 101 2 SP 6 9 R2 4 101 2 9 l0 Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Afuj: 2.5 inches ofasphall over 7 inches ol SANDY GRAVEL (GP), fine-grained to medium-grained sandy matrix, fine rounded gravel, overlies SAND with SILT (SP-SM), brown, moist, line-grained, trace clay -------------i---------------- QuaternanÂ· Young nuvial deposits (0,Â·f): SAND (SP), medium dense, brown. slightly moist, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand, well graded, unconsolidated fine-grained to medium-grained, trace fine sub angular, siliceous gravel R3 1 4 95 3 7 8 fine-grained to coarse grained sand 3 4 3 3 CL 94 28 CH SILTY CLAY (CL), soft, reddish brown to olive brown, minor oxide development along poorly developed soil faces -4 li#/1 .- li il 'S-2 V 2 31 R5 3 94 28 CL 4 5 thinly bedded silty clay and fine-grained silty sand CLAY (CH), dark brown to orange brown, very moist, unlined pores (voids) 1 -2 mm in size, moderately plastic ML SANDY SILT (ML), firm, olive brown, wet, fine-grained, micaceous, perched groundwater encountered @25 5' SILTY CLAY (CL), stiff, olive brown to gray, very nioist, moderately plastic S-PI TYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL i )S DIRECT SHEAR S 21 EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S MD MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER RV R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a standÂ·alone document. .*.Page SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-6 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR 0 DLL LL N S 70- 30 65- 35- 60- 40- 55- 45- 50- 50- 45- 55- Graphic sap,11!UV ON aldules SOIL DESCRIPTION ..C U,C . M 2 %13 ad This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at 0 0 -54 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at otherE'f 2 :; /ocations and may change with time. The description is a 0 (n- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. Total Depth = 30 ft. bgs Perched broundwater encountered at 25 5' Boring backfilled with soil cuttings and capped with AC cold patch upon completion of drilling and logging S-Pt|TYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S MD MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER rV R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH S & ..* This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ***Page 2 of 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-7 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR U Z z u,= ViEa vlE a.O 08 EJo E Ince e * M igfo N S 11 .82 0C SOIL DESCRIPTION .U) 26 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at SA the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other '35 locations and may change with time. The description is a ur- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 100. MIE= SM S-1 2 9 SIV 1 Rl 6 105 2 SP 11 I4 Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Aful: 2 5-inches AC over 3-inches SANDY GRAVEL (GP), fine-grained to coarse-grained sandv matrix, fine rounded gravel, overlies SILTY SAND (SM), dark brown, moist, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand, trace fine gravel 95-1 Quaternan' voune iiIOial deposits((M)7 biLl Y SAND (SM), loose, light brown, slighly moist, fine-grained, micaceous SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, dry, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, trace coarse-grained sand and fine gravel, poorly graded, unconsolidated, some silt 10- 90-S-2 2 4 4 4 15- 99 385- I 0 I 2 loose medium dense, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand, fine gravel, "'eli graded, unconsohdated 20 S-3 1/ 0 31 CH804120 V- 25- 3 94 28 SP75-RJ 5 CL 9 S-4 W 0 28 CL 0 FAT CLAY (CH), soft, gray to orange brown, very moist, moderately plastic, trace fine-grained sand SAND (SP), coarse-grained, wet, encountered Perched Groundwater @29 CLAY with SAND (CL), stiff, mottled olive brown to orange brown, moist with coarse-grained sand to fine gravel sized concretions SILTY CLAY (CL), soft, very moist, moderately plastic SAMP[ITYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR SA El EXPANSION INDEX SE 1 HYDROMETER SG AD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC 'P POCKET PENETROMETER RV R VALUE SIEVE ANALYSIS SAND EQUIVALENT SPECIFIC GRAVITY UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ***Page 1 of 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Elevation DS GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-7 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR E- D 0 N S 30- 70- 35- 65- 40- 60- 45- 55- 50- 50- 55- 45- Feet Attitudes ON eldules U) 0, -32 ,6-7 SOIL DESCRIPTION Â£8.= b 2 -r .CD k u c.- R c ad This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at05 & 23 hu; thetimeofsampling. Subsurface conditions may differatother mt 2. Â§90 -55 locations and may change with time. The description is a 2 0 0 0- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. Total Depth = 30 ft. bgs Perched groundwater encountered at 25 ft. bgs during drilling Boring backfilled with soil cuttings and capped with AC cold patch upon completion of drilling and logging SAMPLETYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL 1 )S DIRECT SHEAR S 21 EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S AD MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER IV R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ...Page 2 of 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-8 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR ai 1% 1 0 0, Z f.â€¢C 2 *2 eu &0- 0 E mâ‚¬= N S 0 C- 8& e 2K 22 OC =O Ui-7 SOIL DESCRIPTION 00 Rd This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at 16 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other 35 locations and may change with time. The description is a 8- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 0 100- 0 ML R1 8 105 3 SM 12 Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Afuj: 3-inches AC over SANDY SIL I (ML), dark brown, moist, fine-grained SILTY SAND (SM), medium dense, brown, fine-grained, 5-R2 1 2 108 I 3 395-3 _ _ micaceous 0Wiernary voune fluvial deposits (Ovf):SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand, dry, moderately well graded SP-SM SAND with SILT (SP-SM), loose, light gray brown, fine-grained, micaceous R) 1 4 98 2 SP 10 SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, dry, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand with trace fine rounded gravel, well graded, unconsolidated -90- 15- 85- 20- 80- 25- 75- in- Total Depth =11.5 ft. bgs Installed 2-inch diameter .020 slotted PVC easing, backfilled annulus with all purpose washed ASTM C-33 graded, angular gravel Saturated boring upon completion ofdrilling Well removed and boring backfilled on October 4,2011 SAMPIft'TYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS 1 CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR SA 7 EXPANSION INDEX SE 1 HYDROMETER SG AD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC 'P POCKET PENETROMETER M R VALUE SIEVE ANALYSIS SAND EQUIVALENT SPECIFIC GRAVITY UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ... This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ***Page 1 0 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-9 Project No.603284-001 Project Oranqewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Location 1901 and 1919 Fairview Street (see Geotechnical Map, Figure 2) Date Drilled 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR O Z m.c0= 91 Eg E 11 Jf O 5 E Ats Ul C- N O O a. eal Â£2 0C =O SOIL DESCRIPTION 00 26 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at -t,6 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other 55 locations and may change with time. The description is a D- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual, 0 100- N S RI 5 98 9 ML 8 9 Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Afu): 7 4-inches AC over 4-inches SANDY GRAVEL (GP), fine-grained 1 - 1 - to Â£9Ess-grained sandimatrix, fine, rounded-25'El- - - _ J -------- @2': SANDY SILT (ML), stiff, light brown, moist, fine-grained, micaceous 5- 96 I095-SP 6 9 10- 90- 15- 85- 20- 80- 25- 75- Ouaternan' Young fluvial deposits (Ovn: (051: SAND (SP), loose, light brown, dry, fine-Brained to coarse-grained sand, moderately wei[ gradea, unconsolidated - Total Depth = 6.5 ft. bgs Installed 2-inch diameter .020 slotted PVC casing, backfilled annulus with all purpose washed ASTM C-33 graded, angular gravel Saturated Boring upon completion of drilling and logging Well removed and boring backfilled on October 4,2011 SAMPIITYPES: B BULK SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE TYPE OF TESTS: -200 % FINES PASSING [ AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDATION I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 1 HYDROMETER S VD MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER ZV R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ***Page 1 0 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Elevation R'.2 GREGG DRILLING & TESTING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGA'nON SERVICES September 23, 2011 Leighton Attn: Carl Kim Subject CFT Site Investigation The Academy Project Laguna Beach, California GREGG Project Number: 11-615SH Dear Mr. Kim: The following report presents the results of GREGG Drilling & Testing's Cone Penetration Test investigation for the above referenced site. The following testing services were performed: 1 L 1 Cone Penetration Tests (CFTU) 8 2 Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPD) Â® 3 Seismic Cone Penetration Tests (SCPTU) 4 UVOST Laser Induced Fluorescence (uvosr) U 5 Groundwater Sampling (GWS) 0 6 Soil Sampling (ss) 7 Vapor Sampling CVS) O 8 Pressuremeter Testing (PMT) D 9 Vane Shear Testing (VST) 10 Dilatometer Testing (DMT) C] A list of reference papers providing additional background on the specific tests conducted is provided in the bibliography following the text of the report If you would like a copy of any of these publications or should you have any questions or comments regarding the contents of this report, please do not hesitate to contad our office at (562) 427-6899. Sincerely, Peter Robertson Technical Director, Gregg Drilling & Testing, Inc. 2726 Walnut Aveâ€¢ Signal Hill, California 90755 â€¢ (562) 427-6899 â€¢ FAX (562) 427-3314 OTHER OFFICES: SAN FRANCISCO â€¢ HOUSTON wmv.go:Er.drillion=m SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 R.aa GREGG DRILLING & TESTING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL INVEST[GATION SERVICES Cone Penetration Test Sounding Summary -Table 1- CFT Sounding Date Termination Depth Depth of Groundwater Depth of Soil Samples Depth of Pore Pressure Identification (Feet)Samples (Feet)(Feet)Dissipatlon Tests (Feet) 9/22/11 100 - - 9/22/11 75 9/22/11 75 9/22/11 75 - 9/22/11 75 - - - 9/22/11 75 - - 75.1 2726 Walnut Ave â€¢ St:oil Hilt, California 90755 â€¢ (562) 427-6899 â€¢ FAX (562) 427-3314 OrHERâ‚¬Â»rECE-b: SAN FRANCISCO â€¢ HOUSTON sk,Y.i,Mi,Bilin,Â£21 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 4.22 GREGG DRILLING & TESTING, INC. GEOTECILNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION SERVICES Bibliography Lunne, T.,Robertson, P.K. and Powell, J.J.M., tone Pene#ation Testing in Geotechnical Practice E & FN Spon. ISBN 0 419 23750,1997 Roberston, P.K., -Soil Classification using the Cone Penetration TestÂ», Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 27, 1990 pp. 151-158. Mayne. P.W.. 'NHI (2002) Manual on Subsurface Investigations: Geotechnical Site Characterization", available through mace.Gatech.edul-qeosvs/Faculty/Mavne/papers/index.html, Section 5.3, pp. 107-112. Robertson, P.K., R.G. Campanella, D. Gillespie and A. Rice, 'Seismic CPT to Measure In-Situ Shear Wave Velocity' Journal of Geotechnical Engineering ASCE, Vol. 112, No. 8, 1986 pp. 791-803. Robertson, P.K., Sully, J., Woeller, D.J., Lunne, T., Powell, J.J.M., and Gillespie, D.J., Guidelines for Estimating Consolidation Parameters in Soils from Piezocone Tests", Canadian Geotechnlcal Journal, Vol. 29, No. 4, August 1992, pp. 539-550. Robertson, P.K., T. Lunne and J.J.M. Powell, 'Geo-Environmental Application of Penetration Testing', Geotechnical Site Characterization, Robertson & Mayne (editors), 1998 Balkema, Rotterdam. ISBN 90 5410 939 4 pp 3547. Campanella, R.G. and I. Weemees, 'Development and Use of An Electrical Resistivity Cone for Groundwater Contamination Studies-, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 27 No. 5,1990 pp. 557-567. DeGroot, D.J. and A.J. Lutenegger, 'Reliability of Soil Gas Sampling and Characterization Techniques", International Site Characterization Conference - Atlanta, 1998. Woeller, D.J., P.K. Robertson, T.J. Boyd and Dave Thomas, "Detection of Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon Contaminants Using the UVIF-CPV, 534 Canadian Geotechnical Conference Montreal, QC October pp. 733-739,2000. Zemo, DA., TA Delfino, J.D. Gallinatti, VA. Baker and L.R. Hilpert, 'Field Comparison of Analytical Results from Discrete-Depth Groundwater Samplers' BAT EnviroProbe and QED HydroPunch, Sixth national Outdoor Action Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada Proceedings, 1992, pp 299-312. Copies of ASTM Standards are available through www.astm.org 2726 Walnut Ave â€¢ Signal Hill, California 90755 â€¢ (562) 427-6899 â€¢ FAX (562) 427-3314 OTHER OFFICES: SAN FRANCISCO â€¢ HOUSTON WWW.trnmt<Irillioil=m SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 j REGG Cone Penetration Testing Procedure (CPT) Gregg Drilling carries out all Cone Penetration Tests (CPT) using an integrated electronic cone system, Figure CPL The soundings were conducted using a 20 ton capacity cone with a tip area of 15 cm2 and a friction sleeve area of 225 cm: The cone is designed with an equal end area friction sleeve and a tip end area ratio of 0.80. The cone takes measurements of cone bearing (qc), sleeve friction (fs) and /-- penetration pore water pressure (le) at 5- cm intervals during penetration to provide B--Soil seal a nearly continuous log. CPT data 4 - - Electric cable for signal transrni,sion . reduction and interpretation is performed - Water seal in real time facilitating on-site decision / making.The above mentioned ,- -Friction load cell parameters are stored on disk for further â€¢-Friction steeve analysis and reference. All CPT soundings are performed in accordance â€¢- - -Inclinometer (1. & ly) with revised (2007) ASTM standards (D u 5778-07). The cone also contains a porous filter element located directly behind the cone tip (u). It consists of porous plastic and is 5.Omm thick. The filter element is used to obtain penetration pore pressure as the cone is advanced as well as Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPDT's) during appropriate pauses in penetration. It should be noted that prior to penetration, the element is fully saturated with oil under vacuum pressure to ensure accurate and fast dissipation. - - Tip load cell 1 w - Water seal B -- Soil feal LEâ‚¬Pore pres;ure tfaniducer Flitef - Corie Tip The cone has the following accuracy: 1 tsf for qc, 0.02 tsf for 4 and 0.5 psi for U2Â· In soft clays, a lower capacity cone should be used for improved accuracy. Figure CPT When the soundings are complete, the test holes are grouted. The grouting procedures generally consist of pushing a hollow tremie pipe with a "knock out" plug to the termination depth of the CPT hole. Grout is then pumped under pressure as the tremie pipe is pulled from the hole. Disruption or further contamination to the site is therefore minimized. SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Â§REGG l Cone Penetration Test Data & Interpretation The Cone Penetration Test (CPT) data collected from your site are presented in graphical form in the attached report. The plots include interpreted Soil Behavior Type (SBT) based on the charts described by Robertson (1990). Typical plots display SBT based on the non- normalized charts of Robertson et al (1986). For CPT soundings extending greater than 50 feet, we recommend the use of the normalized charts of Robertson (1990) which can be displayed as SBTn, upon request. The report also includes spreadsheet output of computer calculations of basic interpretation in terms of SBT and SBTn and various geotechnical parameters using current published correlations based on the comprehensive review by Lunne, Robertson and Powell (1997), as well as recent updates by Professor Robertson. The interpretations are presented only as a guide for geotechnical use and should be carefully reviewed. Gregg Drilling & Testing Inc. do not warranty the correctness or the applicability of any of the geotechnical parameters interpreted by the software and do not assume any liability for any use of the results in any design or review. The user should be fully aware of the techniques and limitations of any method used in the software. Some interpretation methods require input of the groundwater level to calculate vertical effective stress. An estimate of the in-situ groundwater level has been made based on the field observations and/or CPT results, but should be verified by the user. A summary of locations and depths is available in Table 1. Note that all penetration depths referenced in the data are with respect to the existing ground surface. Note that it is not always possible to clearly identify a soil type based solely on qt, fs, and Ub In these situations, experience, judgment, and an assessment of the pore pressure dissipation data should be used to infer the correct soil behavior type. 10nn (After Robertson, 1990), 1 ' El/- 10 1 01 1 1( Zone Normailzed Soil Behavior Type 1 m sensitive fine grained 2 /organic material 3 1 clay to silty clay 4 m clayey silt to silty clay 5 silty sand to sandy silt 6 = clean sands to silty sands 7 gravelly sand to sand 8 very stiff sand to clayey sand 9 very stiff fine grained Normalized Friction Ratio (Fr) Figure SBTn SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Gregg CFT interpretation Software 1.1.. 2007 - Cone Penetration Test (CPT) Interpretation Gregg has recently updated their CPT interpretation and plotting software (2007). The software takes the CPT data and performs basic interpretation in terms of soil behavior type (SBT) and various geotechnical parameters using current published empirical correlations based on the comprehensive review by Lunne, Robertson and Powell (1997). The interpretation is presented in tabular format using MS Excel. The interpretations are presented only as a guide for geotechnical use and should be carefully reviewed. Gregg does not warranty the correctness or the applicability of any of the geotechnical parameters interpreted by the software and does not assume any liability for any use of the results in any design or review. The user should be fully aware of the techniques and limitations ofany method used in the software. The following provides a summary of the methods used for the interpretation. Many of the empirical correlations to estimate geotechnical parameters have constants that have a range of values depending on soil type, geologic origin and other factors. The software uses 'default' values that have been selected to provide, in general, conservatively low estimates of the various geotechnical parameters. Input: 1 Units for display (Imperial or metric) (atm. pressure, pa = 0.96 tsf or 0.1 MPa) 2 Depth interval to average results,( ft or m). Data are collected at either 0.02 or 0.05m and can be averaged every 1,3 or 5 intervals. 3 Elevation of ground surface (ft or m) 4 Depth to water table, zw (ft or m) - input required 5 Net area ratio for cone, a (default to 0.80) 6 Relative Density constant, Cc)r (default to 350) 7 Young's modulus number for sands, a (default to 5) 8 Small strain shear modulus number a. for sands, So (default to 180 for SBTn 5,6,7) b. for clays, Co (default to 50 for SBA 1,2,3 &4) 9 Undrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkt (default to 15) 10 Over Consolidation ratio number, kocr (default to 0.3) 11 Unit weight of water, (default to yw = 62.4 lb/fP or 9.81 kN/mb Column 1 Depth, z, (m) - CPT data is collected in meters 2 Depth (ft) 3 Cone resistance, qc (tsf or MPa) 4 Sleeve friction, fs (tsf or MPa) 5 Penetration pore pressure, u (psi or MPa), measured behind the cone (i.e. UD 6 Other - any additional data, if collected, e.g. electrical resistivity or UVIF 7 Total cone resistance, qt (tsfor MPa)qt = qc + u (1-a) Gregg Page I of4 8./28/2007 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Gregg Cfr Interpretation Software 1.1., 2007 8 Friction Ratio, Rf (%)Rf = (fs/qb x 100% 9 Soil Behavior Type (non-normalized), SBT see note 10 Unit weight, y (pcf or kN/rni)based on SBT, see note 11 Total overburden stress, cv (tsf)Cvo =y Z 12 Insitu pore pressure, uo (tsf)110 -Yw (z-Zw) 13 E ffective overburden stress, aU (tsf)4 = avo - Uo 14 Nonnalized cone resistance, Qu Qtr= (q, - avo) / C'vo 15 Normalized friction ratio, Fr (94)Fr =fs / (qi - avo) x 10090 16 Normalized Pore Pressure ratio, Bq Bq =u- Uo/ ((11 - avo) 17 Soil Behavior Type (normalized), SBTn see note 18 SBTo Index, Ic see note 19 Normalized Cone resistance, Qin Crl varies with [c) see note 20 Estimated permeability, ks (cm/sec or ft/sec) see note 21 Equivalent SPT No, blows/ft see note 22 Equivalent SPT (Nt)60 blows/ft see note 23 Estimated Relative Density, Dr, (%)see note 24 Estimated Friction Angle, f, (degrees)see note 25 Estimated Young's modulus, Es Osf)see note 26 Estimated small strain Shear modulus, Go (tsf) see note 27 Estimated Undrained shear strength, su (tsf)see note 28 Estimated Undrained strength ratio SU/Gv' 29 Estimated Over Consolidation ratio, OCR see note Notes: 1 Soil Behavior Type (non-nonnalized), SBT Lunne et al. (1997) listed below 2 Unit weight, 7 either constant at 11.9 pcfor based on Non-normalized SBT (Lunne et al., 1997 and table below) 3 Soil Behavior Type (Normalized), SBTn Lunne et at. (1997) 4 SBTn index, Ic Ic= ((3.47 - log Qi,)2 + Clog Pr + 1 -22)2)0.5 5 Normalized (Jone.resistance, Qtn (n varies with Ic) Qu, = ((qi - avo)/pa) (pa/(a'vo)n and recalculate Ic, then iterate: When Ic< 1.64,n = 0.5 (clean sand) When Ic> 3.30,n = 1.0 (clays) When 1.64 < Ic < 3.30,n= (Ic- 1.64)0.3 + 0.5 Iterate until the change in n, An < 0.01 Gregg Page 2 of 4 8./28/2007 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Gregg Clrr Interpretation Software 1. I., 2007 6 Estimated permeability, ksm (based on Normalized SBA) (Lunne et al., 1997 and table below) 7 Equivalent SPT N60, blows/ft Lunne el aL (1997) NÂ® 4.6 3 8 Equivalent SPT (N t)60 blows/ft (Ni)60 = N. CN, , 0.5where CN = (pahy Vo) 9 Relative Density, Dr, (%)D'=Qm/CDr Only SBTn 5.6.7&8 Show 'N/A'in zones 1,2,3,4 & 9 10 Friction Angle, Â¢4 (degrees) Only SBTn 5,6,7&8 1 [ C c)tan 0' = -I logl 3-- 1 + 0.292.68L C G vo j Show'N/A' in zones 1,2,3,4&9 11 Young's modulus, Es Es=aqi Only SBTâ€ž 5,6,7&8 Show 'N/A ' in zones 1.2,3,4 &9 12 Small strain shear modulus, Go 1 1/3a. Go = So (qi a vo pa)For SBTâ€ž 5,6,7 b. Go =Co qt For SBT, 1. 2. 3& 4 Show 'N/A' in zones 8&9 13 Undrained shear strength, su Only SBA 1,2,3,4&9 sU= (qt- Ovo)/Nkt Show 'N/A' in zones 5,6,7&8 14 Over Consolidation ratio, OCR OCR = kocr Qi' Only SBTâ€ž .,2,3,4&9 Show 'N/A ' in zones 5,6,7 &8 SBT Zones SBTo Zones The following updated and simplified SBT descriptions have been used in the software: 1 sensitive fine grained 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic soil 2 organic soil 3 clay 3 clay 4 clay & silty clay 4 clay & silty clay 5 clay & silty clay 6 sandy silt & clayey silt 7 silty sand & sandy silt 5 silty sand & sandy silt 8 sand & silty sand 6 sand & silty sand 9 sand 10 sand 7 sand Gregg Page 3 of 4 8./28/2007 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Gregg CPT Interpretation Software 1.1.,.2007 11 very dense/stiff soil*8 very dense/stiff soil* 12 very dense/stiff soil*9 very dense/stiff soil* *heavily overconsolidated and/or cemented Track when soils fall with zones of same description and print' that description (i.e. if soils fall only within SBT zones 4 & 5, print 'clays & silly clays') Estimated Permeability (see Lunne et al., 1997) SBTn Permeability (ft/sec)On/sec) 3x 10.8 tx 10-8 3x 10-'1 x 10-7 1 x 10-9 3x 10-" 3x 104 tx 10-0 3x 10-6 1 x 104 3x 10-4 1 X I -4 31 104 tx 10-2 3x 104 Ix 10: 1 X 10'8 3x 10-9 Estimated Unit Weight (see Lunne et al., 1997) SBT Approximate Unit Weight (lb/ft?) (kN/mb 1 111.4 17.5 2 79.6 12.5 3 Ill.4 17.5 4 It 4.6 18.0 5 114.6 18.0 6 114.6 18.0 7 117.8 18.5 8 120.9 19.0 9 124.1 19.5 10 127.3 20.0 11 130.5 20.5 12 120.9 19.0 Gregg Page 4 of 4 8./28/2007 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 @REGG Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPDT) Porn Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPDT's) conducted at various intervals measured hydrostatic water pressures and determined the approximate depth of the ground water table. A PPDT is conducted when the cone is halted at specific intervals determined by the field representative. The variation of the penetration pore pressure (u) with time is measured behind the tip of the cone and recorded by a computer system. Pore pressure dissipation data can be interpreted to provide estimates of: â€¢ Equilibrium piezometric pressure â€¢ Phreatic Surface â€¢ In situ horizontal coefficient of consolidation (ct,) â€¢ In situ horizontal coefficient of permeability (4) In order to correctly interpret ..In.......0*.llc.v the equilibrium plezometric C-- pressure and/or the phreatic surface, the pore pressure *............... must be monitored until such time as there is no variation in pore pressure with time, Figure PPDT.This time is commonly referred to as boo,fim,; the point at which 100% of the . I./-10*â€¢-4â‚¬*Caâ€¢!,Uexcess pore pressure has -----pore pressure (u) dissipated.measured here U 0 Gound surloce U - Water Table 0 Dcone - Depth or Cone Dwater - Depth to Water T*bio 0 ttrne A complete reference on pore Hwater - Head of Water pressure dissipation tests is Water Table Calculation presented by Robertson et al. 1992.Dwater = D cone - Hwater where Hwater = Ue (depth units) A summary of the pore pressure dissipation tests is summarized in Table 1. Useful Conversion Factors:1031 = 0.704m = 2.31 feet (water) 1tsf = 0.958 bar = 13.9 psi im = 3.28 feet Figure PPDT SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Sounding: CPT-6 Tlne Reading GREGG DRILLING & TESTING Deptrl:75.131007 0 11.2375 Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECT 5 11.40725 Pore Pressure Disslpation Test Engineer: J.PFLUEGER 10 11.61095 15 11.54881 20 12.15417 25 12.45973 12.76529 13.03689 13.27455 13,47825 13.01408 13.91961 13.78381 14.02147 10 70 14.08937 75 14,12332 BO 14.15727 85 14.19122 90 14.19122 95 14.19122 100 14.15727 6 105 14.12332 110 14.12332 115 14.02147 4 120 13.98752 125 13.95358 130 13.88566 2 135 13.78381 140 13.74888 145 13,64801 150 13.58011 0 155 13.47825 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 160 13.4443 165 13.34245 nme (seconds)170 13 2406 175 13,20865 180 13,10479 185 13 03689 190 12 93504 195 12.88714 200 12.76529 205 12.69738 210 12.59553 215 12.52763 220 12.45973 225 12.42578 230 12.28998 235 12.22207 240 12.12022 245 12.05232 250 11.98442 255 11.91652 260 11 84861 265 11.74876 270 11.67886 275 11,61096 280 11.54308 285 11.50911 290 11.4412 295 11.3733 300 11.3054 305 11.2375 310 11.1696 315 11.1017 320 11.0338 325 10.96589 330 10.93194 335 10.83009 340 10.79814 345 10.69429 350 10.65034 355 10.59244 360 10.55848 365 10.49058 370 10.45683 375 10.38873 380 10.32083 385 10.28688 390 1021898 395 10.15107 400 10.11712 405 10.04922 4.22 16 14 12 imilwig:058 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Pore Pressure (psf) DAKOTA TECHNOLOGIES UVIST LOG REFERENCE 2008-12-12 hain Plot: Signal (total fluorescence) versus depth where signal is relative to the Reference Emitter (RE). The total area of the waveform is divided by the total area of the Reference Emitter yielding the %RE. This %RE scales with the NAPL fluorescence. The fill color is based on relative contribution of each channel's area to the total waveform area (see callout waveform). The channel- to-color relationship and corresponding wavelengths are given in the upper right corner of the main plot. Callouts : Waveforms from selected depths or 00- 14 Ng!:11 (%REI 350 400 450 500 ("'01' *12=2222ulng ;0.0. . - waveform for that 5 depth. 2.2 Â· 4.65â€¢Note A W Callouts Conductivity Plot : The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soil can be logged simultaneously with the UVOST data. EC often provides insight into the stratigraphy. Note the drop in EC from 10 - 13 ft, indicating a shift from consolidated to unconsolidated stratigraphy. This -04.-correlates with the observed NAPL distribution. 5 l The four peaks are due 1 to fluorescence at four wavelengths and referred to as "channels". Each channel is assigned a 1.3 â€¢RE 25 9- li color. too- 1 80 80Â· to.O f :20 Â£ ./ b.. -1 C.. â‚¬ Rate Plot : 3 The rate of probet 2/, advancement. - 0.8in (2cm) per second is U preferred. ..i Various NAPLs will ) have a unique - waveform "fingerprinr 72.9 *RE due to the relative amplitude of the four ' 1 channels and/or broadening of one or 20 more channels. f bily 1 33.2 A noticeable decrease in the rate of advancement may be indicative of difficult probing conditions (gravel, angular sands, etc.) such as that seen here at -5 ft. Basic waveform statistics and any operator notes are given below the callout. f 100 14 0 -00>1 Nde C 16 0 g 18.0 1 Note B lilli WRE {/ 4.21 {i 1 39 3,2 1 0 20 â€¢0 .- 60 Sample Data 2401 $ Notice that this log was terminated arbitrarily, not due to "refusal", which would have been indicated by a sudden rate drop at final depth. 1 -1 05 10 UVOST By Dakota * w.- L/out/*â€¢0M com 51/Lamuds/Daium.An/depth. Fargo, NO , - , 44 54430700 N; W!34414 .2403 R DAKOTA Ctâ€¢entf Job:Longâ€¢tude / Fnt :Me* 8191}et ABCConeut*Ang ... 09847.753700 W/31) 10%8Eg11231, .8, 01".4.Ina Opet'tor i Unal *Elevalion Date & hme *St Gicineln UVOOTIOOD 782,5 h 2001.11-12 11:39 EST Info Box: - Contains pertinent log f info including name andlocation. Note A: Time is along the x axis. No scale is given, but it is a consistent 320ns wide. The y axis is in mV and directly corresponds to the amount oflight striking the photodetector. Note B: These two waveforms are clearly different. The first is weathered diesel from the log itself while the second is the Reference Emitter (a blend of NAPLs) always taken before each log for calibration. SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Note C: Callouts can be a single depth (see 3rd callout) or a range (see 4th callout). The range is noted on the depth axis by a bold line. When the callout is a range, the average and standard deviation in %RE is given below the callout. Waveform Signal Calculation Reference Emitter Example gil 4820 21.7 + CH2 8108 36.6 + v E iÂ» 6249 28.2 + CHA Ietal manan! gIll 2984 _ 22161 Area (pVs)4923 13.5 - 100% Percent RE 22.3 + CH2 5743 25.9 + CH3 4166 18.8 + CHA Intal 1735 16587 7.8 = 75% Data Files Raw data file. Header is ASCII format and contains information stored when the file was initially *.lif. raw.bin written (e.g. date, total depth, max signal, gps, etc., and any information entered by the operator). All raw waveforms are appended to the bottom of the file in a binary format. *.lif.pit Stores the plot scheme history (e.g. callout depths) for associated Raw file. Transfer along with the Raw file in order to recall previous plots. *.lif.jpg A jpg image of the OST log including the main signal vs. depth plot. callouts, information, etc. Data export of a single Raw file. ASCII tab delimited format. No string header is provided for the columns (to make importing into other programs easier). Each row is a unique depth reading. The*.lif.dat.txt columns are: Depth, Total Signal (%RE), Chl %, Ch2%, Ch3%, Ch4%, Rate, Conductivity Depth, Conductivity Signal, Hammer Rate. Summing channels 1 to 4 yields the Total Signal. A summary file for a number of Raw files. ASCII tab delimited format. The file contains a string *.lif.sum.txt header. The summary includes one row for each Raw file and contains information for each fileincluding: the file name, gps coordinates, max depth, max signal, and depth at which the max signal occured. An activity log generated automatically located in the OST application directory in the 'log' subfolder. Each OST unit the computer operates will generate a separate log file per month. A log file contains*.lif.log.txt much of the header information contained within each separate Raw ftle, including: date, total depth, max signal, etc. Common Waveforms (highly dependent on soil, weathering, etc.) Diesel Gas Kerosene Motor Oil SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 .tEGG Waveforms for Sounding CPT-1 "/4/187'iMMilifipff#V'Ms Time (ms) .0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 350.0 4 1 <A4 ; A /I;*is,< 80 wis IE IO'6I0E P]/4115 120 *iREGI Test Dept (Feet) G Shear Wave Velocity Calculations m ......1 THE ACADEMY PROJECT "1 CPT-1 Geophone Offset:0.66 Feet Source Offset:1.67 Feet 09/22/11 Geophone Depth (Feet) Waveform Ihcremental Characteristic Incremental Interval Interval Ray Path Distance Arrival Time Time Interval Velocity Depth (Feet)(Feet)(ms)(ms)(FUSec)(Feet) 40.03 39.37 39.40 39.40 59.2000 50.03 49.37 49.40 10.00 73.2000 14.0000 714.2 44.37 60.04 59.38 59.40 10.00 92.0000 18.8000 532.0 54.38 70.05 69.39 69.41 10.00 99.6000 7.6000 1316.2 64.38 80.38 79.72 79.74 10.33 114.6000 15.0000 688.8 74.55 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-1 Date: 9/22/2011 07:42 qt (tsn fs Osf)Rf (%)Noo (blows/ft)SBT 0 500 0 10 0 10 0 100 0 12 l I1I1IIII1 It1llllll 11])11 II11111 llI1Illlllllit HAND AUGa 60 HAND AUGER 23 HAND AUGâ‚¬ -1 - - .......... . 44Â¥Â·4Â·14%440 Ch, 1 Â§11, Caf C:Ily & S,tty ci;f 70- 90- 2,-:>Â· 14 1 :Syâ€¢y Q -IL- Z ==:17 illill 123- *- Ill 2 Z & - I 1 1! 1-1I1It1I1II 1,Â¥4 Illillitillit Max. Depth: 100 066 (ft) Avg Interval. 0.328 (fl) SBT Soil BehaviorType (Robertson 1990) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Depth (ft) 0 09 0Â¥ 0E 20 10 LEIGHTON 0 0 1 1 10- HAND AUGER Rf' 111 Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-1 Date: 9/22/2011 07:42 qt (ts n fs Osf) [%)VsÂ«Usec) 500 0 10 0 10 ? lllllll 111111111 11 lili llilllll -- SBT 1500 0 12 1 111111111!litillilliliL HARD A.}GER HAND ALIGâ‚¬L + - - - - h 20-71 30- 50 60 El 90 HMID AUSER ClaÂ¥ 1 1â€¢â€¢, Ca, - 2-ae lllllllll!- 34*4 5.9 CÂ·Dy DAV.Cay & 6,4 -4 - U :Uy & 6,4 cia, OF#**<ememb 11" =F Illitil ll!ll1Il 1 . 3.,4 *,a & dia,â€¢3 â€¢,t - - 0 - - 1. - t./. 5,â€¢C 100 ;i i i 1 1 Â·Â·,cr-r- t- 1' 11,1 itittilitili,ititi Max Depth: 100 066 (ft) Avg. Interval: 0.328 (ft) SBT Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON ts Osf) 500 0 lll Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-1 Date: 9/22/2011 07:42 (It (tsf) 0 psi)Rf (96 10 -15 200 0 SBT 10 0 12 Illllll1l 111111111 1 lilli Illllllit l1lllllllll[llll!il!lll HAND AUGG HAND AUGER 60 HAND AUGER -HAND Allag - -- * Z 5,4 - Cia, & 14 94 277@ =***mms 3T lay i *,4 :af - I --- I -- 00.==10 - - 5,9 5 n & 01*,*5 5,4 - --- *- - .MI-I ..i -Ill.I':,:I.0â€¢*490-*8/*- 90 1/Illilll r -1 - 33-C - llllll t1llIllllllltiilllllill Max. Depth: 100.066 (ft) Avg. Interval. 0.328 (fl) SBT Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Depth (ft) Ut N 0 LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-2 Date: 9/22/2011 09:25 O (tsf)fs (ts 0 Rf (96 Noo (blows/tt) 500 0 10 0 10 0 I1lt1ltl lllllllll 1 111111 llllllll -- 1 20 -2 111111111 11 SBT 100 0 12 lllllllllllllllllllllll ... HAND AUGER HAND AUSâ‚¬HAND AUG - - -.../. 3- 1 - -- s.,a - S..4 .-93$%* Say 1 3,4 2.3 g 50 - 60 --'h 6 v' - lllllllll 1- - Cmy & My Nt - 4 i==* 01 5 ty Of llllIilll lltllllll + 16./mi lllllll!!lllllllllillli Max. Depth: 75.131 (ft) Avg. Interval: 0 328 (ft) SBT Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 g g 0 0 0 Ii@ LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-2 Date: 9/22/2011 09:25 qt (tsf) 0 0 10-- 500 0 fs Osf)u (psi) 10 -15 Rf("SBT 200 0 10 0 12 1111111-ill'11111 lll!lllll 1 111111 It-9 111'1111'll- ...I - - HAND AUGER HANS AUGER HAND AUGER 4 HAND AUGIG r i illillill 3 L r svc Ear< 04) & 1,4 :41% Z r -*---* - â€ž4 AU.X - +U illlllll IUU C}a,â€¢ & 211;Y (32 lll - *-6569*@** - -- 1 - 1 1 lilli Illllll1i llilllllll!liIlllllllll Max Depth. 75131 (ft) Avg Interval. 0 328 (ft) S8T Soil 8ehavior Type (Robertson 1990) SL Rved 2019.01.21 Depth (ft) 06 08 0L 09 Â·09 40 30 20 llllIllllIlil!illlllllllIII1llllllIII1iIllIIl1III LEIGHTON Rf Ill Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT.3 Date: 9/22/2011 11:04 0 (ts o fs (ts n (%)NGO (blows/ft)SBT 0 500 0 10 0 10 0 100 0 12 III1lll11 111111111 11 1111 Ill]lllll I!111!ill!1|1111111111L HAND AJOa HAND AUGER HAPID AUGER HAND AUGER -- - Sa,C Ser>: & i : saâ€¢:c Say a .4, Z.* 60 70 80- 90- 100 t 11 illillill 1 1*111- 1. 1 , - C My & mit, clay _ 2,2 24 -- Illlllil lllllllll I tlllllltlllllllllllllll Max. Depth 75.131 (ft) Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft) SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 15190) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Depth (ft) C. 0 li LEIGHTON 0 0 20 lil Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-3 Date: 9/22/2011 11:04 qi (ts n fs Osf)psi)Rf ('6 SBT 500 0 10 -15 200 0 10 0 12 1 1 11I111I 111111111 1 lilli llllllll llllllIllllllIIlIII!l1" - 1 1 HAND AUGI-HAND AUHA HAND AUGER HAND AUGG - 24 Sana & S':l ia,4 --- MI --/ Cay a "y "f -L 60-1- 4 80- 90 - 100 llllillil 3- I - - til r- 1. C* 1 1,4/ :21 Illl'llt 11111'llt 1 lilli lllllllllllIllIlllÂ¢lll Max. Depth. 75131(ft) Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft) SBT Soil Behavior Type (Robenson 1990) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Depth (ft) li LEIGHTON 0 0 10- HAND AUdgi Rf 111 Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT.4 Date: 9/22/201112:08 qi (ts f)fs (tsf) (%)Nao (blows/ft)SBT 500 0 10 0 10 0 100 0 12 1il1ll/1llIll1ll ll 1lll 1llllll lllllllllIiilIllIllIIIL - HAND AUS 4 1I1I1IIII HAND At,}S HAND AUGâ‚¬ Ear: 20 30 - -- - 4 - .111 - beky;5594:24Â¥S* - 4.- .... 60 lilli r L IllllII 1,11111-,- Clay 80- 90- . A-lllilllIl -' 1 1 1 1 11 1111111111!111111111111 Max. Depth: 75.787 (ft) Avg. IntervaL 0.328 (ft) SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Depth (ft) M GREGG LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: JPFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-4 Date: 9/22/2011 12:08 qi (tsf)fs (tsf)u (psi)Rf (%)SBT 0 500 0 10 -15 200 0 10 0 12 1 1 0 111111111 1 11111111--1111'illl lllIII1!I iII1llll1llil/I1l1lllll - - - - - 2 HAND AUGER HAND AUGER HAND AUGER HAND *008 13 - : 20 30 lllllll lllllllll Sarz Cm 60 Depth (ft) .......... lllll!1I1 CGy 70 80- 90 - AA %&:>38*MM*28*288 111II1I11 llllllllIIlllllllllllll luu Max. Depth. 75.787 (ft) Avg. Interval 0.328 (ft) SBT. Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GREGG LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-5 Date: 9/22/201111:30 O (ts n fs Osf)Rf ('Noo (blows/ft) 0 500 0 10 0 10 0 0 1 It I f t 1 1 1 1 111111111 lllllllll lilililli till SBT 100 0 12 1IllllllllIlllllllllIll HAND ALIB-t HAND AUGG 20-I 30 - Z HAND AUGQ HAND AUGâ‚¬ - - Sanc 1 Cay & Bily =4 2-wr- I1tliIItI 70 80- 90 - 11!111'll100 Depth (ft) 4 i Cul &$45:42 mt 2 81 1 0,4. :17 C tile,C 4 -- Illllll!1 lilli ttlllllltllIlllllliilll Max. Depth 75-295 (ft) Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft) SBT- Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON U( 11I Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-5 Date: 9/22/201111:30 qt (tsn fs (ts n psi)Rf('SBT 0 500 0 10 -15 200 0 10 0 12 0 -111111111 111111111- 1 lilli 111111111-U""11'lilli'- -- HAND AUGER HAND AUSER HAND AUGER HAND AUGER 20 30 - lljllll lllllllII VVU V 40 50 60 70 80- 90 - Y 100 141 1141 Depth fit) Sar: Cmy &14':,3, b,50$<1Â»â€¢*Â¢'Â·,â€¢4'0Â»X ICI I Z llllllll1 Zi Cay & Siny C.ar 4 44' * S 1, :43 - 4-46â€¢,4 :4 llllllll l!!!llllllll!l Illillillitillittillill Max. Depth: 75.295 (ft) Avg. Interval 0 328 (ft)SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 SBT. Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) Illllllll!lllllllllllll!lllllllllllllllllllllllll LEIGHTON Rf Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-6 Date: 9/22/2011 10:09 qi Â«st)fs Â«sn (%)N,0 (blows/ft) 0 500 0 10 0 10 0 0 111111111 llllllIll 1 1 !lll Illllll11 SBT 100 0 12 'lIIl1lllllll!II1!Illlll HAND AUG HAND Al)Ga HAND AUSER 10- < MON,e@a - 9 -7 -Sarc r I ZE :.249*#Sm- 604* Depth (ft)2 1- 70=9Â» 80- 90- lllllllll Via, S - I -- - 1 - luu I!lllll ill'llill 11111 t 111 lllllllllllllllllllllll Max. Depth: 75.131 (ft) Avg Interval: 0328 (ft)SBT. Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 GREGG LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-6 Date: 9/22/201110:09 0 (ts,)fs Osf)u (psi)Rf (96)SBT 500 0 10 -15 200 0 10 0 12 Iltllll lllllll1I 111111111 1 lilli llIIIIIIIlIllIIIlIIlIll 0 0 1 1 10- HAND AUSEA HAND AUGÂ·ER HAND AUGe 111 HAND AUS- - -t - 1 - + - -San, -1 -3 -I-* --1- . :. i ..#* - 1 - 1 - 1 - -sarc -t --1 1111111 6%IMII****0*8 - I k. 1 :- - 11 t -, 9.*4- . e,â€ž Depth (ft) ill ik?,Â§Â§ - - 1;51 111 - -2- - -4 - - luu lllll1ll lllllllll lll1ll Illllllll lllllllllllllllllllltll Max. Depth: 15.131 (ft) Avg. Interval. 0 328 (ft) SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 APPENDIX C SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LeightonAP ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 Project Name:The Academy Tested By: F. Tabibkhoei Date:10/11/11 Project No.:603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/21/11 Boring No.:B-3 Depth (ft.):20.0 Sample No.:R-3 Sample Type:Drive Soil Identification: Brown lean clay (CL) Sample Diameter (in.):2.416 Sample Thickness (in.):1.000 Weight of Sample + ring (g):195.70 Weight of Ring (g):43.78 Height after consol. (in.):0.9259 Before Test Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g):230.34 Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g):192.36 Weight of Container (g):38.78 Initial Moisture Content (%)24.7 Initial Dry Density (pcf)101.2 Initial Saturation (%):100 Initial Vertical Reading (in.)0.1158 After Test Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g):230.10 Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g):196.78 Weight of Container (g):38.10 Final Moisture Content (%)29.00 Final Dry Density (pcf):103.1 Final Saturation (%):123 Final Vertical Reading (in.)0.1899 Specific Gravity (assumed):2.70 Water Density (pcf):62.43 0.680 0.660 0.640 N\\a 0.620 0.600 / Inundate with 0.580 Tap water , \ 0.560 0.540 CA 0520 0.500 0.480 . 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. Pressure, p (ksf) Pressure Final Apparent Load Deformation (p) Reading Thickness Compliance % of Sample (ksf)(in.)(in.) (%)Thickness Void Ratio Corrected Time Readings @ 4.3 ksf Deforma- tion (%)Elapsed Square Dial Rdgs.Date Time Root of Time (min)Time (in.) 0.10 0.1195 0.9963 0.00 0.37 0.659 0.37 10/17/11 9:01:00 0.0 0.54 0.1315 0.9843 0.00 1.57 0.639 1.57 10/17/11 9:01:06 0.1 0.3 0.1481 1.09 0.1412 0.9746 0.00 2.54 0.623 2.54 10/17/11 9:01:15 0.2 0.5 0.1487 1.09 0.1393 0.9766 0.00 2.35 0.626 2.35 10/17/11 9:01:30 0.5 0.7 0.1494 2.17 0.1450 0.9708 0,00 2.92 0.617 2.92 10/17/11 9:02:00 1.0 1.0 0.1501 4.30 0.1594 0.9564 0.00 4.36 0.593 4.36 10/17/11 9:03:00 2.0 1.4 0.1512 8.70 0.1848 0.9310 0.00 6.90 0.551 6.90 10/17/11 9:05:00 4.0 2.0 0.1526 17.40 0.2165 0.8993 0.00 10.07 0.498 10.07 10/17/11 9:09:00 8.0 2.8 0.1541 4.30 0.2093 0.9065 0.00 9.35 0.510 9.35 10/17/11 9:16:00 15.0 3.9 0.1553 1.09 0.1965 0.9193 0.00 8.07 0.531 8.07 10/17/11 9:31:00 30.0 5.5 0.1563 0.54 0.1899 0.9259 0.00 7.41 0.542 7.41 10/17/11 10:01:00 60.0 1 7 0.1571 10/17/11 11:01:00 120.0 11.0 0.1577 10/17/11 13:01:00 240.0 15.5 0.1583 10/17/11 17:01:00 480.0 21.9 0.1588 10/18/11 9:01:00 1440.0 37.9 0.1594 SL Kvcd 2019.02.21 CN B-3. R-3 @ 20 Time Readings @ 4.3 ksf 0.1460 0.1480 0.1500 0.1520 0.1540 0.1560 0.1580 0 1600 0.00 0.1460 0 1480 0.1500 0 1520 01540 01560 0.1580 0.1600 , 000 0 100 00.0 000.0 0000.C 100 20 0 30 0 40 0 Log of Time (min.)Square Root of Time (min. 19 2.00 X 1 4.00 Inundate with 32 Tap water C 2 6.00 \ \ \ 8.00 - \ \ 10 00 -6 12.00 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Pressure, p (ksf) Boring Sample Depth No.No.(ft.) B-3 R-3 20 Moisture Content (%) Initial Final 24.7 29.0 Dry Density (pcf)Void Ratio Initial Final Initial Final 101.2 103.1 0.665 0.542 Degree of Saturation (%) Initial Final 100 100 Soil Identification:Brown lean clay (CL) Project No.:603284-001 ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION< Leighton PROPERTIES of SOILS The Academy ASTM D 2435 10-11 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LeightonE- ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 Project Name:The Academy Tested By: F. Tabibkhoei Date:10/11/11 Project No.:603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:B-4 Depth (ft.): 25.0 Sample No.:R-4 Sample Type:Drive Soil Identification: Gray silty sand (SM) Sample Diameter (in.):2.416 Sample Thickness (in.):1.000 Weight of Sample + ring (g):193.26 Weight of Ring (g): Height after consol. (in.): Before Test Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): Wt. of Dr, Sample+Cont. (g): Weight of Container (g): Initial Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Initial Saturation (%): Initial Vertical Reading (in.) I After Test Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g): 2 Weight of Container (g): Final Moisture Content (%) Final Dry Density (pcf): Final Saturation (%): Final Vertical Reading (in.) Specific Gravity (assumed):2.70 Water Density (pcf):62.43 0.610 0.600 Inundate with Tap water , 100. Pressure, p (ksf) 38.98 ).9695 0.590 168.25 144.82 0.580 39.43 0 22.2 104.9 0.570 99 0.2197 0.560 227.85 !00.46 U.UJU 39.26 22.41 0.540 104.8 99 ).2502 0.530 0.10 1.00 10.00 Pressure Final Apparent Load Deformation (p) Reading Thickness Compliance % of Sample (ksf)(in.)(in.) (%)Thickness Void Ratio Corrected Time Readings @ 4.3 ksf Deforma- Elapsed Square Dial RdgsWon (%)Date Time Root of Time (min)Time (in.) 0.10 0.2205 0.9992 0.00 0.08 0.606 0.08 10/14/11 7:12:00 0.0 0.54 0.2259 0.9938 0.00 0.62 0.597 0.62 10/14/11 7:12:06 0.1 0.3 0.2388 1.09 0.2293 0.9904 0.00 0.96 0.592 0.96 10/14/11 7:12:15 0.2 0.5 0.2391 2.17 0.2335 0.9862 0.00 1.38 0.585 1.38 10/14/11 7:12:30 0.5 0.7 0.2393 2.17 0.2354 0.9843 0.00 1.57 0.582 1.57 10/14/11 7:13:00 1.0 1.0 0.2395 4.30 0.2416 0.9782 0.00 2.18 0.572 2.18 10/14/11 7:14:00 2.0 1.4 0.2396 8.70 0.2488 0.9709 0.00 2.91 0.560 2.91 10/14/11 7:16:00 4.0 2.0 0.2398 17.40 0.2599 0.9599 0.00 4.02 0.543 4.02 10/14/11 7:20:00 8.0 2.8 0.2399 4.30 0.2556 0.9641 0.00 3.59 0.549 3.59 10/14/11 7:27:00 15.0 3.9 0.2401 1.09 0.2519 0.9678 0.00 3.22 0.555 3.22 10/14/11 7:42:00 30.0 5.5 0.2402 0.54 0.2502 0.9695 0.00 3.05 0.558 3.05 10/14/11 8:12:00 60.0 7.7 0.2404 10/14/11 9:12:00 120.0 11.0 0.2406 10/14/11 11:12:00 240.0 15.5 0.2408 10/14/11 15:12:00 480.0 21.9 0.2409 _ 10/15/11 11:40:00 1708.0 41.3 0.2413 10/16/11 7:12:00 2880.0 53.7 0.2415 10/17/11 9:10:00 4438.0 66.6 0.2416 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 CN BA, R-4 @ 25 Time Readings @ 4.31<sf 0 2385 0.2385 0 2390 02390 0 2395 0 2395 0.2400 02400 0.2405 02405 0 2410 02410 0.2415 0 2415 0.2420 02420 0.1 1.0 100 1000 1000,0 10000.0 00 100 20.0 30.0 40.0 500 600 70 0 Log of Time (min.)Square Root of Time (min.19 0.00 0.50 -**Inundate with Tap water . 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50'eformation (%)\ \ 3.00 350 4.50 1.00 10 4.00 -\\1 0.01 0.10 .00 100.00 Pressure, p (ksf) Boring Sample Depth No.No.(ft.) B-4 R-4 25 Moisture Content (%) Initial Final 22.2 22.4 Dry Density (pcf)Void Ratio Initial Final Initial Final 104.9 104.8 0.607 0.558 Degree of Saturation (%) Initial Final 99 99 Soil Identification:Gray silty sand (SM) Project No.:603284-001 ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION. . Leighton PROPERTIES of SOILS The Academy ASTM D 2435 10-11 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LeightonCP TESTS for SULFATE CONTENT CHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS Project Name:The Academy Tested By :V. Juliano Date: 10/12/11 Project No. :603284-001 Data Input By:J. Ward Date: 10/20/11 Boring No.B-1 B-4 Sample No.BB-1 BB-1 Sample Depth (ft)0-5 0-5 11' ' 1 Soil Identification:Light brown (SM)Brown (SM) Wet Weight of Soil + Container (g)158.00 192.20 Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g)155.20 184.40 Weight of Container (g)58.70 76.30 Moisture Content (%)2.90 7.22 Weight of Soaked Soil (g)100.10 100.30 SULFATE CONTENT, DOT California Test 417, Part II Beaker No. 11 14 Crucible No. 27 28 Furnace Temperature (Â°C) |830 830 Time In / Time Out |8:00/8:45 8:00/8:45 Duration of Combustion (min) 45 45 Wt. of Crucible + Residue (g)17.6461 21.1455 Wt. of Crucible (g) ,17.6440 21.1445 Wt. of Residue (g) (A) 0.0021 0.0010 PPM of Sulfate (A) x 41150 1 86.42 41.15 PPM of Sulfate, Dry Weight Basis 89 44 CHLORIDE CONTENT, DOT California Test 422 mi of Chloride Soln. For Titration (B) | 30 30 mi of AgNO3 Soln. Used in Titration (C) 0.8 0.6 PPM of Chloride (C -0.2) * 100 * 30 / B 60 40 PPM of Chloride, Dry Wt. Basis i 62 43 pH TEST, DOT California Test 532/643 pH Value '7.45 7.30 Temperature Â°C I 21.9 21.8 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST DOT CA TEST 532 / 643 Project Name:The Academy Tested By :V. Juliano Date: 10/17/11 Project No. :603284-001 Data Input By: J. Ward Date: 10/20/11 Boring No.:B-1 Depth (ft.) :0-5 Sample No. :BB-1 Soil Identification:*Light brown (SM) *California Test 643 requires soil spedmens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials. Specimen No. 1 2 3 4 5 Water Added (mi) (Wa) 20 30 40 50 Adjusted Moisture Content (MC) 18.73 26.65 34.56 42.48 Resistance Soil Reading Resistivity (ohm)(ohm-cm) 3300 3300 3200 3200 3100 3100 3300 3300 Moisture Content (%) (MCi) 2.90 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)158.00 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)155.20 Wt. of Container (g) 58.70 Container No. Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt)130.00 Box Constant 1.000 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 Min. Resistivity Moisture Content Sulfate Content Chloride Content Soil pH (ohm-cm) (%)(ppm)(ppm) pH Temp. (Â°C) DOT CA Test 532 / 643 DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422 DOT CA Test 532 / 643 3098 33.9 89 62 7.45 21.9 3350 3300 3250 9 \ 3200 O \ \ \ E 3150 .g \ \ 05 3100 1 i i 0 00 3050 3000 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 Moisture Content (%) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton'2 SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST DOT CA TEST 532 / 643 Projed Name:The Academy Tested By :V. Juliano Date: 10/17/11 Project No. :603284-001 Data Input By: J. Ward Date: 10/20/11 Boring No.:B-4 Depth (ft.) :0-5 Sample No. :BB-1 Soil Identification:*Brown (SM) 'California Test 643 requires soil spedmens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials. Specimen No. 1 2 3 4 5 Water Added (mi) (Wa) 10 20 30 40 Adjusted Moisture Content (MC) 15.46 23.71 31.96 40.20 Resistance Soil Reading Resistivity (ohm)(ohm-cm) 12000 12000 8800 8800 8000 8000 9400 9400 Moisture Content (%) (MCi) | 7.22 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 1 192.20 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) <184.40 Wt. of Container (g) | 76.30 Container No. Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt)1 130.00 Box Constant 1.000 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 Min. Resistivity Moisture Content (ohm-cm) (%) DOT CA Test 532 / 643 Sulfate Content (Ppm) DOT CA Test 417 Part II Chloride Content Soil pH (ppm) pH Temp. (Â°C) DOT CA Test DOT CA Test 422 532 / 643 r -- r 8000 30.8 44 43 7.30 21.8 13000 12000 + f \ El 1000 Y E .C 0 -10000 \ \5 0 / g 9000 CE - I- i00 i -- OUUU 7000 15.0 20.0 25.0 -0 i i i 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 Moisture Content (%) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton42- DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 Project Name: The Academy Tested By:F. Tabibkhoei Date:10/20/11 Project No.:603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/21/11 Boring No.: &El Sample Type: 90% Remold Sample No.: BB-1 Depth (ft.): Qz Soil Identification:Light brown silly sand (SM) Sample Diameter(in):2.415 2.415 2.415 Sample Thickness(in.):1.000 1.000 1.000 Weight of Sample + ring(gm):192.59 192.60 191.66 Weight of Ring(gm):43.94 43.95 43.01 Before Shearing Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):206.88 206.88 206.88 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):193.66 193.66 193.66 Weight of Container(gm):38.13 38.13 38.13 Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial 0.0000 0.2682 0.2559 Vertical Rdg.(in): Final -0.0022 0.2783 0.2711 Alter Shearing Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):177.60 176.29 176.42 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):155.21 154.59 155.34 Weight of Container(gm):21.15 20.90 21.12 Specific Gravity (Assumed):2.70 2.70 2.70 Water Density(pcf):62.43 62.43 62.43 Note: Final moisture contents were determined using a microwave oven SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 DS 8-1,88-1 @ 0-5 3.00 2.50 U) 1.50 1.00 1 ......................................................... 0.50 0.001Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â· Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â· 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) 3.00 2.50 a 2.00 1.50 U) . 4 1.00 . 0.50 : 8 0.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 Normal Stress (ksf) Boring No.B-1 Normal Stress (kip/ftz)0.500 2.000 4.000 Sample No.BB-1 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2)O 0.393 /1.116 A 2.496 Depth (ft) 0-5 Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)0 0.321 Â¤1.103 6 2.493 Samole Tvoe:Deformation Rate (in./min.)0.0050 0.0050 0.0050 90% Remold Soil Identification: Light brown silty sand (SM) Initial Sample Height (in.)1.000 1.000 1.000 Diameter (in.)2.415 2.415 2.415 Initial Moisture Content (%)8.50 8.50 8.50 Dry Density (pcf)113.9 113.9 113.9 Saturation (%)47.9 47.9 47.9 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.)0.9978 0.9899 0.9848 Final Moisture Content (%)16.7 16.2 15.7 < Leighton Project No.:603284-001 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS The Academy Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 10-11 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 DS 8-1, 88-1 @ 0-5 Leighton42 DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 Project Name: The Academy Tested By:F. Tabibkhoei Project No.:603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Boring No.: &El Sample Type: Drive Sample No.: &:3 Depth (ft.): 10.0 Soil Identification:Light brown poorly-graded sand with silt (SP-SM) Sample Diameter(in):2.415 2.415 Sample Thickness(in.):1.000 1.000 Weight of Sample + ring(gm):174.46 176.05 Weight of Ring(gm):41.88 43.04 Betore Shearing Date:10/11/11 Date:10/20/11 2.415 1.000 178.12 42.98 Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):250.13 250.13 250.13 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):248.12 248.12 248.12 Weight of Container(gm):38.70 38.70 38.70 Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial 0.0000 0.2673 0.2485 Vertical Rdg.(in): Final -0.0057 0.2818 0.2615 Atter Shearing Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):193.05 188.77 188.02 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):164.85 162.03 163.67 Weight of Container(gm):38.80 39.16 39.09 Specific Gravity (Assumed):2.70 2.70 2.70 Water Density(pcf):62.43 62.43 62.43 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 DS 8-1, R-3 @ 10 4.00 3.00 g 2.00 U) . co . 1.00 0.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) 4.00 A 3.00 a 2.00 0 .M - .0 -Â£ 0 .. 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 Normal Stress (ksf) Boring No.B-1 Normal Stress (kip/ft2)1.000 2.000 4.000 Sample No.R-3 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2)O 0.824 I 1.628 A 3.398 Depth (ft) 10 Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)O 0.710 Â¤1.320 6 2.663 Deformation Rate (in./min.)0.0050 0.0050 0.0050Sample Tvoe: Drive Soil Identification: Light brown poorly-graded sand with silt (SP-SM) Initial Sample Height (in.)1.000 1.000 1.000 Diameter (in.)2.415 2.415 2.415 Initial Moisture Content (%)0.96 0.96 0.96 Dry Density (pcf)109.2 109.6 111.3 Saturation (%)4.8 4.8 5.0 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.)0.9943 0.9855 0.9870 Final Moisture Content (%)22.4 21.8 19.5 < Leighton Project No.:603284-001 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS The Academy Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 10-11 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 DS 8-1, R-3 @ 10 Leighton DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 Project Name: The Academy Tested By:F. Tabibkhoei Date:10/11/11 Project No.:603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.: 8-1 Sample Type: Drive Sample No.: R-5 Depth (ft.): 30.0 Soil Identification:Dark qravish brown lean clay (CL) Sample Diameter(in):2.415 2.415 2.415 Sample Thickness(in.):1.000 1.000 1.000 Weight of Sample + ring(gm):189.27 189.87 192.81 Weight of Ring(gm):42.75 43.75 43.97 Betore Shearing Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):183.98 183.98 183.98 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm)151.08 151.08 151.08 Weight of Container(gm):37.79 37.79 37.79 Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial N/A N/A N/A Vertical Rdg.(in): Final N/A N/A N/A Atter Shearing Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):178.52 176.06 174.55 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):150.36 150.71 149.94 Weight of Container(gm):38.50 39.30 36.68 Specific Gravity (Assumed):2.70 2.70 2.70 Water Density(pcf):62.43 62.43 62.43 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 DS B-1, R-5 @30 6.00 5.00 2-- $-7 S 4.00 2. U) un g 3.00 ro 2 2.00 r-1.00 0.00 71 ... ...... ......... .......... 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) 6.00 5.00 . S 4.00 ..- U) - (,0 - 2 3.00 . 0 . N .2 2.00. 80 - 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 Normal Stress (ksf) Boring No.B-1 Normal Stress (kip/f/2)3.000 6.000 9.000 Sample No. R-5 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft 2)O 1.943 I 3.647 A 5.332 Depth (ft)30 Shear Stress @ End of Test (1<sf)0 1.801 0 3.559 6 4.785 Deformation Rate (in./min.)0.0050 0.0050 0.0050Sample Tvoe: Drive Soil Identification: Dark grayish brown lean clay (CL) Initial Sample Height (in.)1.000 1.000 1.000 Diameter (in.)2.415 2.415 2.415 Initial Moisture Content (%)29.04 29.04 29.04 Dry Density (pcf)94.4 94.2 95.9 Saturation (%)99.9 99.3 103.6 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.)N/A N/A N/A Final Moisture Content (%)25.2 22.8 21.7 Leighton Project No.:603284-001 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS The Academy Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 10-11 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 DS 8-1, R-5 @ 30 Leightonr DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 Projed Name: The Academv Tested By:F. Tabibkhoei Date:10/11/11 Project No.:603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.: &:Z Sample Type: Drive Sample No.: R-1 Depth (ft.): LQ Soil Identification:Light brown silty sand (SM1 Sample Diameter(in):2.415 2.415 2.415 Sample Thickness(in.):1.000 1.000 1.000 Weight of Sample + ring(gm):167.83 171.58 175.10 Weight of Ring(gm):41.25 42.65 43.25 Betore Shearing Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):204.35 204.35 204.35 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):200.46 200.46 200.46 Weight of Container(gm):38.62 38.62 38.62 Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial 0.0000 0.2471 0.2414 Vertical Rdg.(in): Final -0.0125 0.2623 0.2618 Atter Shearing Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm):180.39 177.10 147.29 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm):156.27 152.13 125.70 Weight of Container(gm):39.53 38.10 38.87 Specific Gravity (Assumed):2.70 2.70 2.70 Water Density(pcf):62.43 62.43 62.43 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 DS 8-7. R-1 @ 7 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00Shear Stress (ksf) 0.00 1 0 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Shear Stress (ksf) liD 0.1 0.2 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) a 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 Normal Stress (ksf) Boring No.B-7 Normal Stress (kip/fti)1.500 3.000 6.000 Sample No.R-1 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ftz) /1.166 I 2.289 A 4.602 Depth (ft) 7 Shear Stress @ End of Test (1<sf)0 0.927 0 1.880 6 3.685 Deformation Rate (in./min.)0.0050 0.0050 0.0050Sample Type: Drive Soil Identification: Light brown silty sand (SM) Initial Sample Height (in.)1.000 1.000 1.000 Diameter (in.)2.415 2.415 2.415 Initial Moisture Content (%)2.40 2.40 2.40 Dry Density (pcf)102.8 104.7 107.1 Saturation (Â°/o)10.1 10.6 11.3 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.)0.9875 0.9848 0.9796 Final Moisture Content (%)20.7 21.9 24.9 < Leighton Project No.:603284-001 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS The Academy Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 10-11 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 DS 8-7, R-1 @ 7 Leighton EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS ASTM D 4829 Project Name:The Academy Tested By:S. Felter Date:10/18/11 Project No. :603284-001 Checked By: J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:B-1 Depth (ft.)0-5 Sample No. :BB-1 Soil Identification:Ught brown silty sand (SM) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 1000.00 Wt. of Container No. (g) O.00 Dry Wt. of Soil (g) 1000.00 Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 0.00 Percent Passing # 4 100.00 MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test Spedmen Diameter (in.)4.01 4.01 Specimen Height (in.)1.0000 1.0020 Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold (g)607.60 435.45 Wt. of Mold (g) 191.90 0.00 Specific Gravity (Assumed)2.70 2.70 Container No. O 0 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)831.00 627.35 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)765.90 575.07 Wt. of Container (g) 0.00 191.90 Moisture Content (%)8.50 13.64 Wet Density (pdf)125.4 131.1 Dry Density (PCD 115.6 115.3 Void Ratio 0.459 0.461 Total Porosity 0.314 0.316 Pore Volume (CC)65.1 65.5 Degree of Saturation (Â°/o) [ S meas]50.0 79.8 SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h Date Ti me Pressure (psi)Elapsed Time Dial Readings (min.)(in.) 10/18/11 11:00 1.0 0 0.1100 10/18/11 11:10 1.0 10 0.1100 Add Distilled Water to the Specimen 10/18/11 13:21 1.0 131 0.1130 10/19/11 6:11 1.0 1141 0.1120 10/19/11 6:51 1.0 1181 0.1120 Expansion Index (EI meas) = ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton2 EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS ASTM D 4829 Project Name:The Academy Tested By:S. Felter Date:10/18/11 Projed No. :603284-001 Checked By: J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:B-4 Depth (ft.)0-5 Sample No. :BB-1 Soil Identification:Brown silty sand (SM) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 1000.00 Wt. of Container No. (g) O.00 Dry Wt. of Soil (g) 1000.00 Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 0.00 Percent Passing # 4 100.00 MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test Specimen Diameter (in.)4.01 4.01 Specimen Height (in.)1.0000 1.0025 Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold (g)618.80 433.42 Wt. of Mold (g) 205.20 0.00 Specific Gravity (Assumed)2.70 2.70 Container No. O 0 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)835.60 638.62 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)771.60 587.10 Wt. of Container (g) 0.00 205.20 Moisture Content (%)8.29 13.49 Wet Density (PCD 124.8 130.4 Dry Density (pcO 115.2 114.9 Void Ratio 0.463 0.467 Total Porosity 0.317 0.318 Pore Volume (CC)65.5 66.1 Degree of Saturation (%) [ S meas]48.3 78.0 SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h Elapsed Time Dial Readings Date Time Pressure (psi)(min.)(in.) 10/18/11 11:23 1.0 0 0.0570 10/18/11 11:33 1.0 10 0.0570 Add Distilled Water to the Specimen 10/18/11 13:20 1.0 107 0.0600 10/19/11 6:10 1.0 1117 0.0595 10/19/11 6:50 1.0 1157 0.0595 Expansion Index (EI meas) = ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 3 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LeightonK7 MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Project Name:The Academy Tested By :G. Berdy Date:10/18/11 Projed No.:603284-001 Input By :J. Ward Date:10/1Wll Boring No.:B-1 Depth (ft.)0-5 Sample No. :BB-1 Soil Identification: Light brown silty sand (SM) Preparation Method: Moist Mechanical Ram L-3 Dry L-1 Manual Ram Mold Volume (ft3)0.03340 Ram Weight = 10 tb.; Drop = 18 in. TEST NO. 1 2 3 4 5 Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g)3822.0 3918.0 3966.0 3910.0 Weight of Mold (g) 1880.0 1880.0 1880.0 1880.0 Net Weight of Soil (g) 1942.0 2038.0 2086.0 2030.0 Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)484.70 513.60 531.90 488.90 Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)465.60 483.40 489.80 442.20 Weight of Container (g) 51.10 50.90 50.10 52.80 Moisture Content (%)4.61 6.98 9.57 11.99 Wet Density (pco 128.2 134.5 137.7 134.0 Dry Density (pco 122.5 125.7 125.7 119.6 Maximum Dry Density (pcf)126.5 Optimum Moisture Content (%) 130.0 125.0 120.0 115.0 110.0 PROCEDURE USED .1 --SP. GR.=: -- SP. GR.=Â® Procedure A .-SP. GR.=: Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) May be used if +#4 is 20% or less Procedure B Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter LayerÂ·s : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is 20% or less El Procedure C Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 min) Sievi Mold : 6 in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six) Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +14 in. is <30% Particle-Size Distribution: Dry Density (pcf 6 8.5 265 2 70 275 GR:SA:Fl Atterberg Limits:0.0 5.0 100 15.0 LL,PL, Pl Moisture Content (%) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 MX 8-1.88-1 @ 0-5 S Leighton MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Projed Name:The Academy Tested By :G. Berdy Date:10/20/11 Project No.:603284-001 Input By :J. Ward Date:10/21/11 Boring No.:Bat Depth (ft.)0-5 Sample No. :BB-1 Soil Identification: Brown silty sand (SM) Preparation Method: Moist X Mechanical Ram 1 1 Dry 1 1 Manual Ram Mold Volume (fta)0.03340 Ram Weight = 10 It).; Drop = 18 in. TESTNO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g)3836.0 3902.0 3959.0 3902.0 Weight of Mold (g) 1880.0 1880.0 1880.0 1880.0 Net Weight of Soil (g) 1956.0 2022.0 2079.0 2022.0 Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)485.70 526.20 497.20 500.10 Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g)463.70 492.40 456.40 449.70 Weight of Container (g) 51.10 51.10 51.00 51.60 Moisture Content (%)5.33 7.66 10.06 12.66 Wet Density (PCD 129.1 133.5 137.2 133.5 Dry Density (pco 122.6 124.0 124.7 118.5 Maximum Dry Density (pcf)125.0 Optimum Moisture Content (%)9.5 PROCEDURE USED 130.0 Â® Procedure A --SP. GR L-A - SP. GR. 1.4-5.- SPGR Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter 1-ayers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) May be used if +#4 is 20% or less Procedure B 125.0 115.0 110.0 Dry D, Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve _.0.- Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter b Layers : 5 (Five) S Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) 2 = 120.0Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is Z 20% or less m Procedure C Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve Mold : 6 in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six) Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +34 in. is <30% = 2.65 = 2.70 = 2.75 GR:SA:FI Atterberg Limits:0.0 5.0 100 LL,PL,PI Moisture Content (%) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 15.0 Particle-Size Distribution: MXB-4, 88-1 @ 0-5 0 Leighton ATTERBERG LIMITS 7 ASTM D 4318 Project Name:The Academy Tested By:V. Juliano Date:10/17/11 Project No. :603284-001 Input By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:B-1 Checked By:J. Ward Sample No.:S-2 Depth (ft.)25.0 Soil Identification: Olive brown silty, clayey sand (SC-SM) TEST PLASTIC UMIT LIQUID UMIT NO. 1 1 22 1 1 1 2 6C 5C 4C 3C 2( 1( 3 4 15 25.81 22.63 11.07 27.51 l Number of Blows [N] 27 21 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)19.23 9.00 26.70 27.57 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)17.83 7.64 23.54 24.08 Wt. of Container (g) 11.21 1.28 11.45 11.03 Moisture Content (%) [Wn]21.15 1.38 26.14 26.74 Liquid Limit 26 For dassification of fine- grained soils and fine- Plastic Limit 21 ' - grained fraction of coarse- grained soils CH or OH /Plasticity Index 5 "A- Line Classification CL-ML Z CL or OL ,PI at "A" - Une = 0.73(LL-20)4.38 i# ) ('0 One - Point Liquid Umit Calculabon , 0.121 l LL =Wn(N/25) CLÂ·li ML or OL MH or OH 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 le PROCEDURES USED Liquid Limit (LL) 28 E-1 Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet Ff-1 Dry Preparation Multipoint - Dry 27 \ \ C \0Ex-l Procedure A Multipoint Test 3 26 \ E-1 Procedure B One-point Test 25 10 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90IO Number of Blows SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton ATTERBERG LIMITS A5TM D 4318 Project Name:The Academy Tested By:V. Juliano Date:10/18/11 Project No. :603284-001 Input By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:B-3 Checked By:J. Ward Sample No.:S-3 Depth (ft.)25.0 Soil Identification: Olive brown lean clay (CL) TEST PLASTIC UMIT UQUID LIMIT NOÂ· 1 2 1 2 3 4 Number of Blows [N] 28 21 15 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)19.28 19.36 21.44 21.82 23.44 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)17.89 17.88 18.64 18.85 19.83 Wt. of Container (g) 11.46 11.03 11.22 11.28 11.07 Moisture Content (%) [Wn]21.62 21.61 37.74 39.23 41.21 60 Liquid Limit 38 Plastic Limit 22 50 Plasticity Index 16 r 40 Classification CL 5 For dassificatton of fine- grained soils and fine-1 grained fraction of coarse- grained soils CH or OH / // "A" Line 30 - 0 CL or OL /PI at "A" - Une = 0.73(LL-20)13.14 %20 One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation 10 -0.121 MH or OH LL =Wn(N/25)CLÂ· 1 ML or OL1/1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1C PROCEDURES USED Liquid Limit (LL) 42 F7 Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet 41 Dry Preparation \Multipoint - Dry '2 40 il Procedure A Multipoint Test \ 39 \ \ \Fl Procedure B \38 X One-point Test 4 \ \ 37 10 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90IO Number of Blows SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton1:12 ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D 4318 Project Name:The Academy Tested By:V. Juliano Date:10/18/11 Project No. :603284-001 Input By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:B-5 Checked By:J. Ward Sample No.:S-2 Depth (ft.)20.0 Soil Identification: Ught brown lean clay (CL) TEST PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID UMIT NO. 1 1 22 19. 18. 11. 22. 60 50 - 40 - 30 - 20 - 10 - 0 3 4 16 23.51 19.41 11.14 49.58 l Number of Blows [N] 30 22 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)18.15 61 23.78 24.25 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)16.90 09 19.77 20.01 Wt. of Container (g) 11.10 20 11.27 11.26 Moisture Content (%) [Wn]21.55 06 47.18 48.46 Liquid Limit 48 For dassification of fine- grained soils and fine- Plastic Limit 22 grained fraction of coarse- grained soils Plasticity Index 26 -CH or OH 9, "A" Line Classification CL Z PI at "A" - Une = 0.73(LL-20)20.44 E One - Point Liquid Umit Calculation \ "Â» a &/- 0.121 MH or OH LL =Wn(N/25) /CL.Wl ML or OL 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1C PROCEDURES USED Liquid Limit (LL) 50 Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet 49 Dry Preparation \ Multipoint - Dry E Â· p \ \g 48 \IX7 Procedure A u \Multipoint Test 3 g X. 473 Procedure B One-point Test , 46 10 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90IO Number of Blows SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 r- Leighton One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement Potential of Cohesive Soils (.ASTM D 4546) Project Name:The Academy Tested By:F. Tai),bkhoei Date:10/11/11 Project No.: .603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:B-1 Sample Type:Drive Sample No.:R-1 Depth (ft.)5.0 Sample Description:Light brown silty sand (SM), roots noted Initial Dry Density (pcf): Initial Moisture (%): Initial Length (in.): Initial Dial Reading: Diameter(in): 108.2 Final Dry Density (pcf):110.1 2.29 Final Moisture (%) :20.6 1.0000 Initial Void ratio:0.5577 0.1268 Specific Gravity(assumed):2.70 2.416 Initial Saturation (%)11.1 Pressure (p)Final Reading (ksf) (in) Swell(+)Apparent Load Settlement (-)Thickness Compliance 0/o of Sample(in) (%)Thickness Corrected Void Ratio Deformation (%) 0.100 0.1272 0.9996 0.00 1 -0.04 0.5571 -0.04 1.090 0.1349 0.9919 0.00 I -0.81 0.5451 -0.81 H2O 0.1443 0.9825 0.00 -1.75 0.5304 -1.75 Percent Swell (+) / Settlement (-) After Inundation =-0.95 Void Ratio - Log Pressure Curve 0.5600 0.5550 0.5500 0.5450 0.5400 0.5350 0.5300 0.5250 0.010 0.100 Inundate with Tap water , 1 . 1.000 10.000 Log Pressure (ksf) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Swe# or Collapse 8-1, R-1 @ 5 Leighton One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement Potential of Cohesive Soils (.ASTM D 4546) Project Name:The Academy Tested By:F Tai):bkhoei Date:10/12/11 Project No.:603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:8-3 Sample Type:Drive Sample No.:R-1 Depth (ft.)5.0 Sample Description:Light brown silty sand (SM) Initial Dry Density (pcf): Initial Moisture (%): Initial Length (in.): Initial Dial Reading: Diameter(in): 101.9 Final Dry Density (pcf):103.5 2.55 Final Moisture (%) :19.6 1.0000 Initial Void ratio:0.6541 0.1045 Specific Gravity(assumed):2.70 2.416 Initial Saturation (%)10.5 Pressure (p)Final Reading Cksf) (in) Apparent Load Thickness Compliance (in) (%) Swell (+) Settlement (-) % of Sample Thickness Corrected Void Ratio Deformation (%) 0.100 0.1052 0.9993 0.00 -0.07 0.6530 -0.07 1.090 0.1159 0.9886 0.00 -1.14 0.6353 -1.14 H2O 0.1199 0.9846 0.00 -1.54 0.6287 -1.54 Percent Swell (+) / Settlement (-) After Inundation =-0.40 Void Ratio - Log Pressure Curve 0.6550 0.6500 0.6450 Inundate with Tap water - 0.6400 / 0.6350 0.6300 0.6250 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 Log Pressure (ksf) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Swell or Conapse B-3, R-1 @ 5 Leighton42 One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement Potential of Cohesive Soils (.ASTM D 4546) Project Name:The Academy Tested By:F. Tabibkhoei Date:10/12/11 Project No.:603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:B-5 Sample Type:Drive Sample No.:R-4 Depth (ft.)25.0 Sample Description:Olive brown lean clay (CL) Initial Dry Density (pcf): Initial Moisture (%): Initial Length (in.): Initial Dial Reading: Diameter(in): 95.5 Final Dry Density (pcf):98.5 30.38 Final Moisture (%) :27.1 1.0000 Initial Void ratio:0.7646 0.1386 Specific Gravity(assumed):2.70 2.416 Initial Saturation (%)107.3 Pressure (p)Final Reading (ksf) (in) Apparent Load Thickness Compliance (in) (%) Swell(+) Settlement (-) % of Sample Thickness Corrected Void Ratio Deformation (%) 0.100 0.1411 0.9975 0.00 -0.25 0.7602 -0.25 1.090 0.1621 0.9765 0.00 ..2.35 0.7231 -2.35 H2O 0.1692 0.9694 0.00 |-3.06 0.7106 -3.06 Percent Swell (+) / Settlement (-) After Inundation =-0.73 Void Ratio - Log Pressure Curve. 0.7700 0.7600 0.7500 0.7400 A 71AA ild Ratio Inundate with Tap water S W. ' JUL' 0.7200 0.7100 0.7000 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 Log Pressure (ksf) SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Swell or Collapse 8-5. R-4 @ 25 APPENDIX D SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 APPENDIX D Site-Specific Ground Motion Studv Background Leighton performed a site-specific ground motion study in accordance with the requirements of the 2010 California Building Code. A Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) and Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis (DSHA) were performed concurrently to evaluate the likelihood of future earthquake ground motions at the project site. The PSHA and DSHA incorporate the average results of three different Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) relationships by Boore and Atkinson (2008), Campbell and Bozorgnia (2008) and Chiou and Youngs (2007). The site coordinates used in this analysis are N 33.76184Â° and W 117.90095Â°. The site is classified as Site Class F based on potential for liquefaction of the onsite soils. Shear wave velocity was measured using cone penetration test from the subsurface explorations performed by Leighton. Design Criteria The level of earthquake ground motion criteria considered for the PSHA corresponds to the probabilistic maximum considered earthquake (MCE), defined as an earthquake event having a 2 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years, using the spectral response acceleration 5 percent damped of the ground motion. This event is approximately equivalent to the 2,475-year average return period earthquake. The level of earthquake ground motion criteria considered for the DSHA corresponds to the deterministic MCE, defined as the 150 percent of the largest median 5 percent damped spectral response acceleration of the ground motion at each spectral period of all sources analyzed. The deterministic MCE was checked against the lower limit stipulated in Figure 21.1-1 of ASCE/SEI 7-05. Methodology The 2010 CBC requires the procedures of Chapter 21,Site-Specific Ground Motion Procedures for Seismic Design, of the Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCBSEI 7-05)published by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) be used to determine the site-specific seismic design parameters when performing a site-specific ground motion study. We first perform a PSHA and DSHA, then determine the code-specified seismic design parameters, then process them in D-1 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 accordance with Chapter 21 to determine the appropriate site-specific seismic design parameters for the project. Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) A PSHA is a mathematical process based on probability and statistics that is used to estimate the mean number of events per year in which the level of some ground parameter, Z (peak ground acceleration and/or spectral acceleration in the investigation), exceeds a specified value z at the project site. This means number of events per year, also referred to as "annual frequency of exceedance," is designated as "v(Zzz)." The inverse of this number is called the "average return period" (ARP), which is expressed in terms of years. Having the annual frequency of exceedance of a certain level of acceleration, v(ZZz), the probability of exceeding that level, Pr(ZE:z), within any time period of interest, t, is then obtained assuming a Poisson Distribution as follows: Pr(Z Z z) = 1- e-v(Ziz).t (D-1) This procedure was originally proposed by Cornell (1968), which has been significantly improved during the recent years and is described in more details by National Research Council (1988) and Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (1989). PSHA procedures require the specification of probability functions to describe the uncertainty in both the time and location of future earthquake occurrences and the uncertainty in the ground motion level that will be produced at the site. The basic key elements of a PSHA are: Defining the location, geometry, and characteristics of earthquake sources relative to the site; . Specifying an earthquake recurrence relationship for various magnitudes on each source up to the maximum magnitude; Selecting appropriate attenuation relationships, which relate the variation of the earthquake ground motion parameter with earthquake distance, directivity, magnitude, site geology, and subsurface characterization; and Determining the probability of exceedance of peak ground accelerations and/or response spectral levels (i.e., seismic hazards) utilizing the above input parameters. D-2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 The frequencies of exceedance of different values of peak ground and spectral accelerations at the site were calculated by combining the following probability functions: The annual frequency of earthquakes of various magnitudes on a fault obtained from the fault recurrence relationships; Given an earthquake of a certain magnitude on a certain fault, the probability distribution of the location of the earthquake on the fault was obtained using the selected rupture area versus magnitude relationship and assuming equal likelihood of rupture along the length and some prescribed probabilities along the depth of the fault; and Given an earthquake of a certain magnitude occurring at a certain distance from the site, the probability distribution of ground motion at the site was obtained from the selected attenuation relationships. The above process is repeated a sufficient number of times to cover all the sources, then summed to obtain the total seismic hazard at the site. This process results in a relationship between ground motion level and the probability of being exceeded. The computer program EZ-FRISK Version 7.60 Build 001 (Risk Engineering, Inc., 2011) for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis was utilized to perform the PSHA. Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis (DSHA) The DSHA consists of a four-step process (Reiter, 1990): Defining the location, geometry, and characteristics of earthquake sources relative to the site; . Determination of the site-to-source distance for each earthquake source defined relative to the site; . Selection of the controlling earthquake relative to the site as defined by some ground motion parameter. The controlling earthquake is defined by the seismic scenario based on the above two steps that produces the largest magnitude of the ground motion parameter being used; and Using the controlling earthquake, the ground motion at the site is obtained from the selected attenuation relationships. D-3 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 The computer program EZ-FRISK incorporated the DHSA computation when performing the PSHA in the section above. Code-Specified Seismic Design Parameters The seismic design parameters were computed as determined by Chapter 1613A of the 2010 CBC for Site Class D and E. These values are used to process the site-specific design response spectrum to ensure the design response spectrum and MCE response spectrum meets minimum requirements. The Java program Seismic Hazard Curves, Response Parameters and Design Parameters Version 5.1.0 published by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) was used to determine the code-specified seismic design parameters.The following tables provide the code-based parameters determined from the program: 2010 CBC Based Seismic Design Parameters (Mapped Values) Categorization/Coefficient Design Value Site Latitude 33.76184N Site Longitude -117.90095W Site Class D Mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SS Mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, Si Short Period (0.2 sec) Site Coefficient, Fa Long Period (1.0 sec) Site Coefficient, Fv Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SMS Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 Sec, SMi Design spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SDS Design spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, Sol 1.39 0.50 1.0 1.5 1.39 0.74 0.93 0.50 D-4 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 2010 CBC Based Seismic Design Parameters (Mapped Values) Categorization/Coefficient Design Value Site Latitude 33.76184N Site Longitude -117.90095W Site Class E Mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SS Mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, Si Short Period (0.2 sec) Site Coefficient, Fa Long Period (1.0 sec) Site Coefficient, Fv Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SMS Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, SM1 Design spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SDS Design spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, SD1 1.39 0.50 0.9 2.4 1.25 1.19 0.83 0.79 Attenuation Relationships Attenuation relationships describe the relation of ground motion levels with earthquake magnitude and distance (distance between the site and seismic source), site geology, and subsurface characterization. These relationships can be used to describe the variation of peak ground and response spectral acceleration with earthquake magnitude and distance, and to also incorporate the local geological conditions and near-source effects. Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) relationships by Boore and Atkinson (2008), Campbell and Bozorgnia (2008) and Chiou and Youngs (2007) were used in our analyses. So (Soil) soil profile was considered for this site based on the shear wave velocity profile in the upper 30 meters (VS30). These attenuation relationships are based on the geometric mean of the horizontal components. The versions of the attenuation relationships adjust the geometric mean to the maximum direction of ground motion represented by a 5 percent damped acceleration response spectrum using FEMA P-750 2009 NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions Table C21.2-1. The selected attenuation relationships also provide an implied measure of the near-field effects on ground motions. All three relationships include additional aleatory uncertainty in the hazard calculation and truncation of residuals at three sigma as described in the USGS open File Report (OFR) 2008-1128 (Petersen et al, 2008). D-5 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 Design Peak Ground Acceleration Plots and tables resulting from the analyses are provided at the rear of this appendix. The contributions of the above mentioned attenuation relationships were averaged to determine both the probabilistic total shaking hazard and the deterministic total shaking hazard for a soil site as shown in this appendix. These parameters, along with the values determined by code, were used to develop the design peak ground acceleration (PGA). Based on our site-specific ground motion evaluation, the design PGA for the site was determined to be 0.429; the MCE PGA for the site was determined to be 0.57g. Site-Specific Response Spectra The site-specific and design response spectra for MCE and DE were determined using the above methodology in accordance with the 2010 CBC. Digitized values for all spectra are provided graphically, Figures D-1 and D-2, and in the following tabular format. Site Specific Response Spectrum Values for Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) Period, T Spectral Acceleration (seconds)SaM ( 0.03 (PGA)0.57 0.05 0.70 0.10 1.00 0.11 1.02 0.20 1.23 0.30 1.24 0.40 1.17 0.50 1.11 0.54 1.08 0.60 1.03 1.00 0.76 2.00 0.43 3.00 0.28 4.00 0.20 D-6 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 Site Specific Response Spectrum Values for Design Earthquake (DE) Period, T Spectral Acceleration (seconds)aD (9 0.03 (PGA)0.42 0.05 0.50 0.10 0.71 0.11 0.74 0.20 0.82 0.30 0.83 0.40 0.78 0.50 0.74 0.54 0.74 0.60 0.69 1.00 0.63 2.00 0.32 3.00 0.21 4.00 0.16 D-7 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 100 080 0.60 0.40 .. 020 000 - Site D - Site Specific Response Spedrum X)050 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 350 4.0 ( 00 Period, T (sec) Site Specific Response Spectrum for Maximum Considered Earthquake, MCE (2% Probability of Exceedance in 50 years) Project Name: The Academy Santa Ana, CA' 2*f Leighton Spectrum for MCE Site Specific Response Project No.: 603284-001 Date: November 2011 Figure D-1 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 1.40 1.20 - Site D - Site Specific Design Response Spectrum 080 Site E - ASCE 7-05 Standard Response Spectrum 80% - - Upper Envelope Design Response Spectrum 0.60 040 - 020 0.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 150 200 2.50 300 3.50 400 Period, T (sec) Site Specific Response Spectrum for Design Earthquake, DE Leighton Project Name: The Academy Site Specific Response Santa Ana, CA Spectrum for Design Project No.: 603284-001 Earthquake, DE Date: November 2011 Figure D-2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 1.00 ..SH vs-250 - Seismic Hazard Analysis ] Probabllistic -_SSâ€¢ v:-250 - Seismic Hazard Analy,11 3 Probabill stic probabillitic Spectra results for EZ-FRISK 7.60 lulld 001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Calpbell-lozorgria (200*) IGA USGS 2001 Col L, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-voungs (2007) 16â€¢ USGS ZOO)1 ANNUAL FREQUENCY OF EXCEEDANCE: 4.0412-004 nfll PERIOO: 2474.9 ILITY OF EXCEEDENCE: 2.0% IN SO.O YEARS lu- 1: Spectral Period colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: Mean Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) Nli uses 2001 colum 4: Acceleration (O) for Campbell.lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Col-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) wiâ€¢ USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 S 0 5.734e-001 6.125/-001 5.034e-001 5 900â‚¬-001 0.0,7.04â€¢e-001 7.376,-001 61/12-001 7.33â€¢e.001 0.1 1.C...+000 1.057/+000 9.374e-001 9.961/-001 0.2 1.2340+000 1.325/+000 1.1le+000 1.222,+000 0.3 1.242e+000 1 355e+000 1 124..000 1.224'â€¢000 0â€¢1.1671â€¢000 1.25*e+000 1.07&2.000 1.lieâ€¢000 0.5 1.1060400 1.119/.000 1.046/+000 1.0682+000 0.6 10:le.000 1.100e+000 5.701/-001 9.19$/-001 0.7 9.554/-001 1.034:â€¢000 9.06â€¢e-001 1.107(.001 0.1 1 1.2-001 9.503e-001 1.4 Gle-001 :445.-001 0.'8.136e-001 1.563/-001 7.185e.001 7.86*-001 1 7.56!e-001 7 14â€¢e-001 7 â€¢290-001 7.372e-001 2 4.26;e-001 4.464,-001 4.357e-001 3.904'-001 3 2.77/e-001 2.970,-001 2.8340-001 2 4$12-001 4 2.016â‚¬-001 2.10Ge-001 2.ille-001 171le-001 1 2 3 4 5 4 533e-001 4.953.-001 3 9750-001 4.5522-001 0.05 5.41*e-001 5.13$/-001 4.52*e-001 5.627,-001 0.1 7 *le-001 1.33]e-001 7.4302-001 7.76le-001 0.2 1.0062+000 1.06/eâ€¢000 9.307e-001 9.576.-001 0.3 100 31+000 1.01;eâ€¢000 .0662-001 9 Re-001 0.4 9.2762-001 1.011Â¢+000 1.â€¢72,-Col 9.0*4e-001 0.$1.66]e-001 5.â€¢71/-001 1.1352-001 8.240e-001 0.6 7.9221-001 .637.-001 7.4 *le-001 7.512/-001 0.7 7 375e-001 8.03]e-001 7.013e-001 6 527'-001 0.1 6.823e-001 7.3-001 6.50Ge-001 6.377,-Col 05 6.231Â¢-001 6 Me-001 6.027e-001 5.9022-001 1 5 775,-001 6.105e-001 5.Â§32-001 5.500/.001 2 3 191/-001 3.3&-001 3.25â€¢e-001 2.167.-001 3 2.0612-001 2 22â€¢e-001 2.104-001 1.7*Se-001 4 1.82,-001 1.546,-001 1.540,-001 1.233/+001 ANNUAL FREQUENCY OF EXCEEDANCE: 2 107 e.003 RETURN PERIOD .74 6 PROWILITY OF E*CEEDENCE: 10.0% IN 50.0 YEARS Colu-11Â· Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: Mean colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA uSGS 200: Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- S: Acceleration (g) for CaBbell-lozorgita (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Chlow-Â¥luigi (2007) N USGS ZOOS ANNUAL FREQUENCY OF EXCE.ANCE: 1 02.-003 RETuRN pERIOD: 974.1 1 2 3 4 5 PROIABILITY OF EXCEEDENCE: 5.01 IN 50.0 Â¥EUS KI 3.670,-001 4.077,-001 3.222)+001 3.60$,-001 Colu- 1 Spectral Period 0.05 4 4â€¢Ge-001 4.796Â¢-001 4 014'.001 4.413*-001 Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: Ran 0.1 6.37Se-001 6.104'+001 6 0]Se.001 6.270.-001 coll- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore-Atkinson (2001) M.A uses 2001 0.2 1.1312-001 8.717/+001 7.617e-001 8.022(-001 Page 1 Page 2 0.3 0.4 0.5 06 07 0.8 0.' 1 2 3 4 -_SS* vs-250 - Selwic Hazard Analysis 3 Probabilistic 8.0972-001 1.8:Ze-001 7.427e-001 7.905e.001 7.4/e-001 1.1lle-001 6.908.-001 7.292/-001 7.00Â§â‚¬-001 7.647,-001 6.5682-001 6.57â€¢e-001 6.344â‚¬-001 7 011/-001 5 9*30-001 5.926Â¢-001 5.160,-001 6.â€¢lle-001 5.36&.001 5.424e-001 5.406â‚¬-001 5.9220-001 5.We-001 5.014e-001 4.976â‚¬-001 5.370e-001 4./Ole-001 4.620,-001 I.$90.-001 4.536/-001 4.4*le-001 4.215â‚¬-Col 2.473e-001 2.67â€¢e-001 2 Me-001 2.190â‚¬-001 1.5 59/-001 1.712e-001 1.5 M-001 1.3â€¢le-001 1.12Ge-001 1.203e-001 1.lile-001 9.475(-002 Page 3 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_Ssâ€¢ 1-250 Deterninistic Spectra Resulti uilng Largest A=plitudes of Ground Motion Attenuation Equations 1,tude units: Acceleration (g) Fractlle. 0.5 Period Ilitude Magnit 4.707,-001 7.00 0.05 5.474,-001 7.00 0.1 7.1050-001 7.00 0.2 9.3;Ze-001 7.00 0.3 9.90-001 7.00 04 5.561/-001 7.00 0.$9.593/-001 7.00 06 1.900.-001 7 00 0.7 1.32*e.001 7.00 0.1 7.700e-001 7.00 0.9 7.043e-001 7.00 1 6.442-001 7.00 2 3.172e-001 7.00 3 1 We-001 7 00 4 1.35Ze-001 7.00 Largest Amplitudes of Ground Motior USCS 2001 *litude Unit.: ACCeleration (g) Fractile: 0.5 Period *41 i tude -gri, 4.71Oe-001 7.00 0.0$S.754e-001 7.00 0.1 7.9972+001 7.00 S . U . . . . . . 11 - U - seliic Hazard Arnal,111 3 Deter,inistic U-FRISK 7.60 1uild 001 Consideing All Sources Calculated using de Closeit Region D,stance (k/) 5 00 USGS 200' Callfornla 5 00 USGS 2001 Call fornia 5 00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2001 california 5.00 UMS 200Â§ california â€¢ 5.00 USCS ZOOS California & 00 ISIS 200* California 5 00 USGS 2008 california â€¢ 5.00 USGS ZOOS california â€¢ 5.00 USGS 2001 California â€¢ 5.00 usls 2001 Call forria 5.00 USGS 200/ California â€¢ 3 00 uils 2001 california 5 00 USGS 2001 california Considering sources calculated with loore de Closest Region Dlitance(kn) â€¢ S.00 USGS 2001 California â€¢ 5.00 ISGS 2001 california 5.00 USGS 2001 Callfornia Page l eighted lan of controlling source California Crldded California Gridded california Gridded California Griddid California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded California Gridded Callforria Gridded Cal i fornia Grldded California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded Califorria Gridded Atkwuon (2008) IGI *trolling Source California Gridded California Gridded California Crldded -_SSA vs,250 - 0.2 1.1141+000 7.00 - 0.3 1.196e+000 7.00- 0.4 1.115 e+000 7.00 - 0.5 1.11Oe+000 7.00 - 0.6 1.012e+000 7.00 - 07 9 364,-001 7 00 - 0.1 1.466/-001 7.00 - 0.5 7.50:e-001 7.00 - 1 6.7le-001 7.00- 2 3.3â€¢Oe-001 7.00- 3 2.039e-001 7.00 â€¢â€¢ 4 1.43le-001 7.00 - 4IA;tudes of Ground Motions C Amplitude Units: Acceleration (g) Fractile: 0.5 Period A-plltude Magnitude PGA 4.104(-001 7.00 - 0.0,4.5*le-001 7.00 - 0.1 5.6*-001 7.00 - 0.2 7.215e+001 7.00- 0.3 7.1--001 7.00 - 0.4 1.15*e -001 7.00 - 0.5 1.357 e-001 7.00 - 0.6 7.12Se-001 7.00 - 0.7 7.40le-001 7.00 - 0.1 6.Â§27e-001 7.00- 0.9 6 â€¢2 le-001 7.00- 1 6.001,-001 7.00 - 2 3 14#e-001 7.00 - 3 1.16#e-001 7.00 - 4 1.361/-001 7.00 I. bell Seliâ€¢ic Hazard AnalÂ¥$11 3 Deterministic 5.00 USGS 2001 California $.00 uses 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2008 california 5.00 USGS 200* california 5.00 Usls 2008 California 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5 00 USGS 2001 California Â§ 00 USGS 200: California 5.00 USGS 2001 california $.00 USGS 2001 California $.00 USGS 2001 California onsidering sources calculated with Camp Illicit Region Distance(km) 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 200* California 5 00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 ISIS 2001 California 5.00 -5 2001 california 5 00 USGS 2001 California $ 00 USGS ZOO: California $ 00 USGS 200: California $.00 usli 2001 California 5.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 .SGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 200/ C.liforria $.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 ISIS 200* California Page 2 california Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded C.Illfornla Gridded california Gridded california Gridded California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded california Gridded -lozorgnia (200.) controling sour-ce Callfornia Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Grudded California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded California Gridded Call fornia Gridded california Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded Cilifornla Griddled vi=2%0 57:rl i tude. Uplitude Units -_SSA vs-250 - Selâ€ž,c Hazard Anily:i; 3 Deterministlc of Ground letion: Considering sources Calculated with chiou Acceleration (g) Â·Youngs (2007) NGA -_SSâ€¢A colu- 1: spectral Period Coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for Colu- 3 Acceleration (g) for Colu- â€¢ Â· Acceleratlon (g) for colu- $: Acceleration (g) for - Sel,mic Mizard Analysts 3 Deterministic Weighted Iean of Attenuation Equations loore-Atkinson (2001) 9 USGS 2001 Ca,obell-*ozorgnia (2001) IGA USGS 2001 Chiou-Young, (2007) NGâ€¢ ISIS 2001 Fractile: 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 Period Ilitude â€¢GA 5.326e-001 0.05 6.1]Ze-001 01 7 676,-001 0.2 9.633'-001 0.3 1.00*e Â·000 0.4 9.83Ge-001 03 8.311/-001 06 1.7&2.-001 0.7 1.21*e-001 0.8 7.70*e.001 0.9 7.200e-001 1 6.701/-001 2 3.286/-001 3 1.936,-001 4 1.2;le-001 lugnitude 7.00 - 7.00 " 7.00 - 7.00- 7.00- 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00- 7.00- 7.00 - 7.00- 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - Closest Region 0,1.ance(k.) 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5 00 USGS 200/ Dlifornia 5.00 USGS ZOO)/ California 5.00 usls 200* Call fornia 5 00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 200* california 5.00 ./5 200/ california 5 00 USGS 2001 Cali fornia 5 00 USGS 2001 al, fornia $ 00 USGS 200* Call fornia 5.00 USGS 200Â§ California 5.00 USGS 200/ California $.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 UMS ZOOS california controlling source California Gridded California Gridded California Gndded California Gridded California Gridid California Gridded Cal, fornia Gridded California Gridded california Gri dded Californla Gridded Callfornia Gridded california Gridded california Gridded Call fornia Gridded Cah fornia Gridded M 1.653/-002 0 05 1.772e-002 0.1 2 348e-002 0.2 3.*R-002 0.3 4.555.+002 0.4 4.â€¢05,-002 0.$4.15*e-002 06 3.760e-002 0.7 3.440.-002 01 3.140e-002 0.,2.857,-002 1 2.622.-002 2 1.23/2-002 3 7.291.-003 4 4.9672-003 1.527e-002 1.6072-002 2.1258.002 3. ASe-002 4.733â‚¬-002 4.658.-002 4.53 le-002 4.145e-002 3.84 5.-002 3.55le-002 3.28-002 3.03le-002 1.555/-002 1.997'-003 6.20*e-003 2.1*le-002 2.422e-002 3 144-002 4.730e-002 5.40Ge-002 4.9732-002 4.53*e-002 3.972e-002 3.530/-002 3.l;le-002 2.756/-002 2.507,-002 1.09le-002 6.5 Be-003 4.700,-003 1.2;le-002 1.2*k-002 1.775Â®-002 3 0/e-002 3 5370-002 3. me-002 3.404e-002 3.1Gle-002 2."Ge-002 2.71Oe-002 2.51Oe-002 2.3212.002 1.12*e-002 6.332,-003 3.95â€¢e-003 Largest amplitudes of Ground Motions for ach source Source. Irawley Gridded. strike Slip Region: USGS 200* California Allosest Distance: 173.99 Ici litude unlts: Acceleration (9) /Magn, rude: 6.50 - Frictile: 0.10 â€¢age 3 Source: Brawley Gridded.Normal Region: USGS 200* california Closest 01;unce: 173 95 Ici AE:plitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude 6 50 MI Fractile: 0 50 Column 1: spectral â€¢erlod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colo- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2008) Na Usls 200* Coh- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CAmpbell-lozorgria (2005) I,GA USGS 2001 Page 4 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_ssâ€¢ vs-250 - 5,1,ic Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlow-Â¥oung 2 3 1. te-002 1.1*Se-002 1.477(-002 127 le-002 1.Me-002 1.73%-002 3 42$e-002 3.159/-002 4 0532-002 3 501/-002 3.914e-002 3 64"-002 3.703/-002 3 750,-002 3.299â‚¬-002 3 269/-002 2.9131-002 2.911/-002 2.69*-002 2.Â§08.-002 0.,2.44Oe-002 2.347&002 1 2.22;e-002 2.1350-002 2 1.0â€¢le-002 1.020,-002 3 5.042-003 5.573/-003 4 4.124/-003 4.066,5-003 Source IB E*tensional Gridded, Char. Nor./1 Region usGS 2001 california Closest Distance: 5.11 ki Aq,litude units: acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral period Colw- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted ME Colu- 3: Acceleranon (g) for: loore-Atktr Colucn â€¢: Acceleration (g) for ca,obell-li Colu- $: Acceleratlon (g) for Chiou-Younf 2 3 8 3.6372-001 3 72*-001 Hazard Analy'11 3 Deter-inlitic i (2007) NGA USGS 2001 i nwati N. 001) GA US 1 0.0, 0.1 0.2 03 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 1.5405-002 2 1//-002 2.863'-002 4.69/-002 5.4252-002 4.jile-002 ..541.-002 3 9102-002 3.555/-002 3.112,-002 2.lue -002 2.510e-002 10'le-002 6.1640-003 4.700.-003 ,an of Atte ison (2001) izargnia (2 13 (2007) N 4 3.14le-001 5.735/-003 1.002.-002 1.3*Se-002 2.3112-002 2.125 e-002 2.9lle-002 2 110â€¢-002 2.B'e-002 2.413e-002 2.32;e-002 2.173.-002 2.029e-002 1.Olle-002 $.708.-003 3.GOGe-003 or Equations USÂ·65 2008 NGA USGS 2001 a 2001 5 4.040â‚¬-001 -_ISA v-250 - Sel.ic 0.05 4.336,-001 4.572Â¢-001 0.1 5.935e-001 6.71:e-001 0.2 1.033.-001 9.440â‚¬-001 0.3 8.270-001 5.49â€¢e-001 0.4 8.207.-001 9.5lle-001 0.5 7.1062-001 8.792/-001 0.6 7.040â‚¬-001 7.$zoe-001 0.7 6 4437-001 6.5900-001 0.1 5 512e-001 5.104.-001 0.5 5.427e-001 5.121.-001 1 $.017e-001 4 590.-001 2 2.6640.001 2.20Oe-001 3 1.6148-001 1.28/-001 4 1.1382-001 9.37 le-002 Source: Imp E*tensanal Gridded, Char, Strike Region: USGS 200Â§ california Closest Distance: 5.11 k. Alitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractlle: 0Â·;0 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Coluin 2: Accoleration (g) for. weighted I Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for oore-Atktr Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for. Campbell-li Colur- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Â¥c*,n, 1 2 3 PGA 4.246:-001 4.â€¢25.-001 0.05 4.996e-001 5.361*-001 0.1 6 6240-001 7.ille-001 0.2 1 6612-001 1.0&0â‚¬+000 0.3 1 me-001 1.073,+000 Hazard Analy,1, 3 Deter=inlitic nuatl NGA 001) 11 GA Ul 3 6Â§3'-001 4.86:e-001 1.75.-001 7.1532-001 7 17Â§e-001 7 130.-001 6.;Gle-001 6.115e-001 5.68*e-001 5.2 Ile-Col 4.54 le-001 2.167â‚¬-001 1.145e-001 1.3SZe-001 Slip Â·an of Atte lon (2001) izorgnia a IS (2007) N 4 3.405e-001 3 Me-001 5.043.-001 6.432.-001 6.754.-001 4 743e-001 6.219/-001 7.Ele-001 8.113/-001 7.me-001 7 â€¢95e-001 7.0/le-001 6.626*-001 6.244e-001 5.172.-001 $.Slie-Col 2.827e-001 1.72*e-001 1 124e-001 on Equatlon, ISIS 2008 NGA USGS 200 GS 200. 4.9062-001 5.6122-001 7.212e-001 9.07 le-001 0.431'-001 14Â§11 3 Deler-inis.c nuati n, 001)00: 1 GA US -_SM vi-250 - seismic 0.1 9550-001 1.013,+000 0;1.5222.001 1006e+000 0.6 7.83*e-001 5.0 le-001 0.7 7.211 2-001 8.32Se-001 0.1 6.7440-001 7 5/2-001 0.9 6.222(-001 G.*Sie.001 1 5.77*e.001 6.26]e-001 2 3.117e+001 3.242e-001 3 1.515/-001 1.9*Oe-001 4 1.330e-001 1 IZe.001 Source: Ij E,tensional Gridded. GR. Nor'al Region: USGS 2001 Ilifornia Closest Mitance: 5 32 km Nelitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractlle. 0.$0 Coh= 1: Spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted - Colw- 3: Acceleration (g) for. loore-Atkir Colum 4: Acceleration (O) for Cambell-Ic Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for. Chlot-noun:; 2 3 3.$2 le-001 3.47le-001 4.115/.001 4 217/-001 5.7602 -001 6 27/e-001 7.123e-001 1.522'-001 1.0&-001 1.516-001 7.971'-001 1.9*Se-001 7.57*e-001 1.310e-001 6,13Ge.001 7.10*e-001 6 2562-001 6.221,-001 1 0.0$ 01 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0-7 â€¢age 5 Hazard An' 6.17"-001 6.me-001 G. 362e-001 5.53/-001 5 Me-001 5.lee-001 4.*47e-001 2.15*e-001 1.llS,-001 1 3Â§2e.001 an of "re ion (2001) zorgnia 0 S (2007) N 3.10$0-001 3.654/-001 â€¢ ille.001 6.72:e-001 7.094.001 7.096Â¢-001 7.033e-001 6.4620-001 6.01Ge-001 Page 7 9.1%22-001 1.6262-001 1.0/le-001 7.563,-001 7 05â€¢e-001 6.*le-001 6.224â‚¬-001 3.25Ze-001 1.91$/-001 1.245/-001 on Equatio USGS 2001 NGâ€¢ USGS 2 Gs 2001 3.98*e.001 4.6/4.-001 6.153Â®-001 7.111.-001 8.ove-001 7.131/-001 7.390e-001 6.53Ge-001 6.52 3/-001 alylls 3 Deteministic rlati .. 1(1â€¢ 001)001 GA US -_SSâ€¢ vs=210 - Selsâ€¢li 0.1 5.7â€¢le-001 5.â€¢lle-001 0.5 5.272e-001 4.1 Sle-001 1 4.175/-001 4.345,-001 2 2.51Â£-001 2.OVe-001 3 1.569â‚¬-001 1.201,-001 4 1 107e-001 1.lle-002 SourCeÂ· I Eitensional Gridded. GR. strike ! Region: USGS 2001 California Closest 91*tance: 5.32 km Azplitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7 00 - FractileÂ· 0.50 colum 1: Spectral Perlod cokin 2: Acceleration (g) for: -ighted M Cole/1 3: Accelerition (g) for: moore-Atkil ColuMn â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: Cambell-1, Colu- 5 Acceleration (g) for: Chicu-Yount 1 2 3 M 4.11Oe-001 4.11Se-001 0.05 4.12 le-001 4.545*-001 0.1 6.427.-001 7.120e-001 0.2 1.â€¢371-001 5 926'-001 0.3 8.740.-001 1 Olie+000 0.4 1.652e-001 1.0232+000 0.5 8.269e-001 9.508.-001 06 7.602e.001 ..3e-001 0.7 7.OR-001 7.17Ze-001 0.8 6.537.-001 7.16Â§e -001 0,6.033e-001 6.415e-001 1 5.60]e-001 5.92'e.001 2 3 023e-001 3.075/-001 Page 6 :Malard An 5.593,-001 5.1908-001 4.Im-001 2.810.-001 1.*lk-001 1.32$0-001 ;lip 9 of â€¢tte â€žon (2001) /zorgnia (2 p (2007) M 4 3.367.-00] 3.me-001 5.02]e-001 6.40Ge-001 6.7412-001 6.105/-001 6.7'le-001 6 28'-001 $ 1$12-001 5 437-001 5.0:le-001 4.763e-001 2.802â‚¬-001 â€¢age 1 6.14]e-001 5.77â€¢e-001 5./25/-001 2.172â‚¬-001 1.694/-001 1.102e-001 on Equatio USGS 2001 NGA 'SGS 2 Gs 2001 5 4.843/-001 5.613e-001 7.13Se-001 8.980.-001 9.324/-001 9.036e-001 1.507e-001 7.953e-001 7.4.-001 6 9:Oe-001 6.534e-001 6. IlSe-001 3.19 le-001 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 ..SSA 4-250 - Setimic Hazard Analy,i, 3 Deter,inlitic 3 1.8572-001 1.Ille-001 1.Ilk-001 1.87*e-001 -_SM v$=250 Selimic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter=intitic 4 1.290e-001 1.324,-001 Mojave Shear Gridded Region. usls 2001 California closest 'litance 111.12 ki Allitude Mits ACCeleration (0) Magnitude 7.60 - FractileÂ· 0.$0 Colui# 1 Spectral Period coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Ati colum â€¢: Acceleration (g) forÂ· clivbell Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-0 1 2 3 9 6.9052-002 7 10-002 0.05 7.6218-002 1.1*Ge-002 0.1 9.533/-002 9.1$*-002 0.2 1.3*le-001 1.247e-001 O.3 1.5 lle.001 1.3Gâ€¢e-001 0.4 1.46le-001 1.37Se-001 0.5 1 â€¢12/-001 1.365*-001 0.6 1322e-001 1.300e-001 0.7 1.247e-001 1.2/le-001 0.8 1.17le-001 1 1*Ze-001 0.9 1.054)-001 1.10Se-001 1 1 ONe-001 1.Olle-001 2 5.ille-002 6.1512-002 3 3.121.-002 4 me-002 4 2 712e-002 3.0652-002 1.325Â¢-001 1.22le-001 -an of Attenuation Equations inion (200*) 1 USGS 200* lozorgnia (2008) NGA USGS ZOOS ing, (2007) NU ISIS 2001 4 5 5.735 e-002 7.319.-002 6.4178-002 :2lle-002 1.147e-002 1.17%-001 1.202e-001 1.712e.001 1 379/-001 1.750e-001 1.30;e-001 1.6916-001 1.313(-001 1.$54e-001 1.21/-001 1.416(-001 1 1"e.001 1.29*e-001 1.1322-001 1.199â‚¬-001 1.0612-001 1 11 le-001 1.002e-001 1.033e-001 5.9--002 5.30â€¢e-002 3.5712-002 3.154,-002 2.9:le-002 2.0.5.-002 Page Â§ Source. San Gorgornio Shear Gridded Region: USGS 2008 California Clojest Distance: 55.63 ki A,plitude Units: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.60 - Fractile: 0.$0 Coh- 1. Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for Col-, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colum $: Acceleration (g) for: 1 2 3 9 1.23&-001 1 â€¢37'-001 0.05 1.4022-001 1.5lle-001 0.1 1.17*e.001 1.96Se-001 0.2 2 45Ze-001 2.*Se-001 0.3 2.$2 le-001 2.421,-001 0.4 2.373e-001 2.83/-001 0.5 2.245/-001 2 2452-001 06 2.07â€¢e+001 2 10Oe-001 0.7 1.937/-001 1.912e-001 0.8 1.103/-001 1."Se-001 0.9 1 sUe-001 1.7078-Dll 1 1.562e-001 1 515â‚¬-001 2 1.730.-002 9 010.-002 3 5.750e-002 6.46/-002 4 4.091,-002 4.559,-002 source: 'lackwater Region: USGS 200Â§ California closest 01:tanceÂ· 160.25 6, weighted *an of Attercation Equations *core-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 CalÂ©bell.lozorgria (200*) 16â€¢ USGS 2001 Chiou-voings (2007) NGA ISIS 2001 . 9.1392-002 1052e-001 1.â€¢//-001 1.9*0/-001 2 1$0â‚¬-001 2.022e-001 2.02â€¢e-001 1.90Se-001 1 llc-001 1.7191-001 1.61;e-001 1.52le-001 9.2812-002 6.lpe-002 4.627,-002 Page 10 1.346â‚¬-001 1.5752-001 2.249e-001 3.oole-001 2.9132-001 2 7440-001 2.46]e-001 2.214.-001 2.Olle-001 1.We-001 1.661-001 1.56*e-001 7.*29(:-002 4.61*e-002 3 047/-002 ..Sl vs.250 - seismic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter,inlitic litude Kits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: 0.$0 Coh- 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted â€¢ean of Atter*litlon Equationâ€¢ colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore.Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS ZOOS col=m 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-mozorgnia (2001) NGA ISGS 2001 colt- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-voung, (2007) NGA ISGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 MA 2.715,-002 2 881.-002 3.29le-002 2.112*-002 0.05 2.9*4.-002 2.99le-002 3.642e-002 2.32 le-002 0.1 3 :Â§2 e-002 3.7 lle-002 4.$9Ge-002 3.275e-002 0.2 6 08/-002 5.SUe-002 6.930e-002 S.34%-002 0.3 7.093e-002 7.14*e-002 1.0652-002 6.065:-002 0.4 7.029e-002 7 â€¢B,e-002 7.54Se +002 6.05Ze-002 0.5 6.13*e-002 7 495.-002 7.2911-002 5 72*e-002 0.6 6.360e-002 7.053/-002 G.Use-002 $142.-002 0.7 5.S66e-002 6.700â‚¬-002 6.212/-002 4.Â§151-002 0.1 5 566/-002 6.31â€¢e-002 3 7lle-002 4.Bile-002 0.9 5.1612.002 5.510/-002 5 2/le.002 4.374e-002 1 4.125e-002 5.5701 -002 4.112Â®-002 â€¢lok-002 2 2 606e-002 3.09Ze-002 2.4/3/-002 2.24â€¢e-002 3 1.6281-002 1.923/-002 1.573e-002 1.3 182-002 4 1.160.-002 1.3177-002 1.1Â§6.-002 9.370/-003 source: lurnt Mt' Region: USGS ZOOS California closest 01*unce: 13; 09 ki Aiflitude units: Acceleration (g) agnitude: 6 80 - -Fractile: 0.50 colu=, 1: Spectral Period Page 11 -_Ss,A vs-2$0 - seiwic Hazard Analy,11 3 Dieter-inlitic Colur- 2: Acceleration (g) for. weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 coluin â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: cambell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA Uscs 2008 colui, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 â€¢Gâ€¢ 2.563.002 3 â€¢71,-002 3.27*e-002 2 140â‚¬-002 0.0,3.1Sle-002 3 .6.-002 3.*Ve-002 2.33â€¢e-002 0.1 4.25Oe-002 4.51;e-002 4.12 je-002 3.3â€¢le-002 0.2 6.724e-002 7.121(-003 7.1le-002 5.21*e-002 0.3 7.55#e.OK)2 8 /70-002 1.034.-002 5.697/-002 04 7.32 k-002 9.Olie-002 7.423,-002 5.532,-002 0.5 6.919-002 8.675e-002 6 540e-002 5.130e-002 O.G 6.256/-002 7.160,-002 6.198,-002 â€¢.710,-002 0.7 5.73â€¢e-002 7.232,-002 5.632/-002 â€¢.339,-002 01 5 Me-002 6 652/-002 5.092e-002 4.015e-002 0.9 4.806,-002 6 11"-002 â€¢.579/-002 3.726.-002 1 4.433e-002 5./0/-002 4.165Â®-002 3.465.-002 2 2.218/-002 2.Ille-002 1.57*-002 1.790.-002 3 1.314e-002 1.G4le-002 1.2 lie-002 1074e-002 4 9.335e-003 1 206/-002 1.132e-003 7 11â€¢e-003 source: CalleD-ildalgo Region: usGS 200Â§ California Closeit Di,tance: 161.23 ki }litude Mits: Acceleration (g) Iugnitude: 7.40 - Fractlle: 0.50 Colw- 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attemition Equations column 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) 1,Â«1â€¢ ISIS 200* colum 4: Acceleration (g) for cabell-mozorgnia (2008) NGA USGs 2001 Colu:,1 5: Acceleration (g) for Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 "ge 12 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SSâ€¢ v-2$0 - selimic Mazard Analy,11 3 oeter,inlitic -_Ssâ€¢ v:-250 - Seismic Hazard Analy,13 3 Detertristic 01 7.506.-002 6/3le-002 1 027e-002 1 oGle-002 1 0.05 01 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 2 3 4 5 3.39le-002 3.413e-002 3.157e-002 2.We-002 3.6$0â‚¬-002 3.607e-002 4.244e-002 3.09ae-002 4.6571-002 4 3468-002 5.25le-002 4.372,-002 7.12â€¢e-002 6 305'.002 7.96]e-002 7.103e-002 8.323e-002 7.$24â‚¬-002 9 401.-002 8 036.-002 0.300.-002 7.9132-002 1 1#e.002 1.02 le-002 1.202 e-002 1.154/-002 8 /9.-002 7.602Â®-002 7.75De-002 7.162.-002 1 311,-002 7.10Â§e-002 7.315e-002 7.62]e-002 7 ./1 le .002 6.64*-002 0.8 6.57â€¢e-002 7.296â‚¬-002 7.3&42-002 6.243e-002 0.9 6.5â€¢le-002 6 507.-002 6..$'-002 5.lee-002 1 6.167e-002 6 &77e-002 G.357Â¢-002 5.527e-002 2 3.52â€¢e-002 3.1131-002 3.554,-002 3 096.-002 3 2.300.-002 2.6162-002 2 337e-002 1.946(-002 4 1.641/-002 1.15*-002 1.7398-002 1.32*e-002 Source: Channel lslands Thrust Region USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 12S.19 kÂ» A-pl,tude Units: Acceleranon (g) Magrntude: 7.30 - FractileÂ· 0.$0 Colum 1Â· Spectral Period Colu- 2 Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colo- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CaBbell-lozorÂ·gnia (2008) NGA USGS ZOOS Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chiou-voung, (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 â€¢GA Â§.2e-002 4.966,-002 5.7121-002 5.175e-002 0.05 5.744/-002 5.220e-002 6.32$2-002 5.61*-002 02 11212-001 5 â€¢93.-002 1 19.-001 1.21â€¢e-001 0.3 1.27le-001 1.130Â¢-001 1.313e.001 1.300e-001 0.4 1 221.-001 1.130e-001 1.30â€¢e-001 1.250.-001 0.5 1.lile-001 1.126-001 1.213/.001 1.152,-001 0.6 1.1(Se-001 1.06%-001 1.154&001 1.053â‚¬-001 0.7 1.037e-001 1.022e-001 1 123e-001 9 656.-002 0.1 9.Â§19.-002 .557,-002 1.04 le-001 1.132/-002 0.5 1.124,-002 8.760.-002 9.513,-002 8. liSe-002 1 1 1493-002 810"-002 I 775e-002 7.56â€¢e-002 2 3.7Fie-002 3.1667-002 4.116e-002 3.369.-002 3 2.2/Ge.002 2.4022-002 2.419,-002 1.916'-002 4 1.;57.-002 1.626*+002 1.753.-002 1.2;Ze+002 Source: Clamihell-Sawpit Region: ..s ZOOS cal,fornia Closest Ditance: 47.12 ki Alitude Units Acceleration (g) Ignitude: 6.70 - Fractlle 0.50 Colvin 1: Spectral Perlod Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenwation Equations coluin 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore.Atkinion (2001) 1Â«1 Usls 2001 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca*bell-lozorgnia (2008) 1,KG usls 200* Coh- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Young, (2007) 1,6, usls 2001 1 2 3 â€¢ 5 MA 5.371Â®-002 1.22le-001 1.096.-002 7.80*e-002 0 05 1.064e-001 1.2911-001 9.599,-002 9.34;e-002 01 1.513e-001 1 75*e-001 1.39le-001 1 313/-001 0.2 2.13*-001 2.6541-001 1.00.-001 1.824/.001 0.3 2.165Â¢-001 2.812,-001 1.920'-001 1.762e-001 0.4 1.9658-001 2.$7Oe-001 1.74*-001 1.$751-001 Page 13 Page 14 -_isa vs-250 - Selimic Hazard Analysts 3 Deterministic 0.5 1.77$e-001 2.345e-001 1.593,-001 1.317e-001 0.6 1.559e-001 2.057e-001 1.355*-001 1.225,-001 0.7 1.354/-001 1.Ule-001 1.24*-001 1.05;e-001 0.1 1./le-001 1.63Ge-001 1.117Â¢-001 9.164.-002 0.9 1.113e-001 1.44;e-001 1.003e-001 1.212-002 1 100â€¢e-001 1.292/-OK)l 9.104.-002 8.104'-002 2 4 2750-002 5.164.-002 4.294.-002 3 37"-002 3 2.4Zle-002 2 737e-002 2.64(e-002 1.906,-002 1.6621-002 1.43Â®-002 1.90*-002 1.231/-002 source: Cleghorn Region: USGS 2001 Californla Closest 'litance 73.15 km aelitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.80 - Fractlle 0.50 Colu= 1: Spectral â€¢eriod Colu=1 2 Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Altenuation Equations Colum 3 Acceleration (g) for: Ioore-Atkinion (2001) NGA USGS 2001 colum 4 Acceleration (g) for: calbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA usls 2001 Colum $: Accelerat,on (g) for: Chiou-Y-ngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 200Â§ 2 3 4 5 6.3#-002 1.692.+002 5.700.-002 4.7*Ze-002 7.0558-002 5.07le-002 6.62]e-002 5.515.-002 5.Â§17.-002 1.19Ge.001 9.23 le-002 1.2572-002 1.â€¢27,-001 1.ille-001 1 291/-001 1.139Â¢.001 1 46/-001 1.196/-001 1.37le-001 1.132e-001 1 36Â§e-001 1.110e-001 1.255/-001 1032/-001 1.2482-001 1.We-001 1 lee-001 5 1*Ze.002 1.104/-001 1.4632-001 1.02*e-001 1.lile-002 9.93le-002 1.312e-001 9.282e-002 7.310,-002 1.977/-002 1.11]e-001 1.312e-002 6.714/.002 Page 15 0 05 0.1 0.2 03 0.4 0; 06 07 0' -_SSA 1250 + Sel$mil Hazard Analyis 3 Deterministic 0,1.137.-002 1072e-001 7 ;50e-002 6.144e-002 1 7.444/-002 9 805/-002 6.Vie-002 5.649.-002 2 3.601,-002 4.740e+002 3.2#-002 2.7/4/-002 3 2.117e-002 2.67]e-002 2.04 le-002 1.63*e-002 4 1 49.-002 1.936/-002 1.4/1/-002 1.077e-002 source: Coronado mank Region: USGS 200* California Closest Dlitance: 13.62 ki Amplitude Uniti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.40- F,actile: 0.50 Col-71: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore-Atkinion (200*) NGA Wils 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for Carpbell-lozorgria (2001) NGA USGS 2008 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for Chlou-Youngs (2007) NCI Uils 2001 1 2 3 / 5 M 1.13le-001 1.43*e-001 9.21/e.002 1033e-001 0.0$1.219e-001 1.570/-001 1.070â‚¬-001 1227â‚¬-001 0.1 1.75$e-001 1 9Sle-001 1.4742-001 1.7.e-001 0.2 2.324.-001 2.5256-001 2.04/e-001 2.397,-001 03 2.367,-001 2 571/-001 2 1//-001 2 3631-001 04 2.217e-001 2/71/-001 2 0230-001 2.15*e-001 0 5 2.079e-001 2.3272-001 1.983/.001 1.52*-001 0.6 1.902e-001 2.13;e-001 1.13Se-001 1.732{-001 0.7 1.7Gle-001 1.5151-001 1 72;e-001 1.573e-001 08 1.629e-001 1.1331-001 1.612e-001 1.442e-001 0.5 1.503/-001 1.610â‚¬-001 1.$0Oe-001 1.3290-001 1 1.157/-001 1.;Sle-001 1.406â‚¬-001 1.23Ze-001 2 7.652,-002 1.417.-002 ..01$e-002 6.315,-002 3 4.57 le-002 $.71Oe-002 5.2102-002 3.9242.002 Page 16 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SSâ€¢ v-250 - seismic 4 3.556,-002 â€¢.0*Oe-002 Irce: Cucamong. glon: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: â€¢3.43 ki Alitude *Is: ACCeleration (g) Magnitude: 6.70 - Fractile: 0.50 Coh-1 1: Spectral â€¢erlod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted N Colum 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkir Colwin 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caipbell-Ic Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Â¥own, 1 2 3 PGA 1.004e-001 1.29le-001 0.05 1.144e-001 1.]7*e-001 0.1 1.632/-001 1.17 le-001 0.2 2.2 2.-001 2.Kk-001 0.3 2.30e -001 2.565.-001 0.'2.os;e-001 2.71le-001 05 1.Elle-001 2.47 le-001 06 1.660â‚¬-001 2.167/-001 07 1.448-001 1.S]Se-001 0.1.327.-001 1.723e-001 09 1.185/-001 1.52le-001 1 1.06Se-001 1.3602-001 2 4.560,-002 5.43le-002 3 2./Se-002 2.17/1-002 4 1.772/+002 1.*3*-002 Hazard Analy,11 3 Deter,inlitic ruiti n. 1 - 001)001 1 GIA US 3.930e-002 an of Atte $or, (2001) zorgria (2 $ (2007) N 4 8 611.-002 1.033e-001 1.51â€¢e-001 2.045e-001 2.054.001 1.167 e-001 1.70]e-001 1.490.-001 1.33 le-001 1.193e-001 1.07 le-001 9.73Oe-002 4.602,-002 2.130.-002 2.0442-002 Page 17 2.157,-002 on Equatio USGS 2001 119 USGS 2 Gs 2001 5 1.50*-002 1.02le-001 1.510e-001 1.97/e-001 1 507.-001 1.707â‚¬-001 1.495'-001 1.324â€¢-001 1.lile-001 1.06$0-001 9.64 le-002 8.7;le-002 3.647e-002 2.0$7e-002 1 336/-002 ..ic luzard Anilysts 3 Deterninistic Mean of Attenuation Equations kinton (200/) 9 USGS 2001 *ozorgnia (2008) he .... 2008 Ing. (2007) NGâ€¢ U.GS 200: -_SS.â€¢ vs-250 - seli source: Earthquake valley Region: USGS 200* California Closest 01:tance: 138.04 km A,elitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.10 - Fractile 0.50 coh=, 1 Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weightec Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: Ioore-A, Colu=, 4: Acceleration (g) for: aipbell Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-n 1 2 3 M 2.98Â¢-002 3.Me-002 0.05 3.06]e-002 3.36le-002 01 4 073e-002 4.330e-002 0.2 6.470.-002 7.4362-002 0.3 7.30%-002 1.567.-002 0â€¢7.OVe-002 ..664.-002 0.;6.715e-002 1.364e-002 0.6 6.013,-002 7.$54e-002 0.7 5.582,-002 6.95Se-002 0.1 3.1112-002 6.447.-002 0.9 4.686.-002 5.932e-002 1 4 32"-002 5 '06.-002 2 2.17Oe-002 2.1156-002 3 1.2171-002 1.GOSe-002 4 9.152â‚¬-003 1 177e-002 source: Elysian Park (,mper) Region U.G. 200. California Closemt Distance: 31.82 lo *plitude units: Accele,ation (g) 3 20"-002 3 Me-002 4.69*e-002 6.SSSe-002 7.156/-002 7.26le-002 6.7912-002 6.06Ge-002 5.&14-002 4.St;e-002 4.4/4/-002 4.07*e-002 1.9362-002 1.196.-002 1.672,-003 Page 11 2 056:-002 2.2342-002 3.1516-002 1.016e-002 5.506.-002 5.366e-002 4."le-002 4.5.le-002 4.2332-002 3.'210-002 3./le-002 3.390,-002 1.7/e-002 1.051,-002 7.olle-003 -_SSA Â¥$-250 - Se 1$ic Hazard Analy,i, 3 Deteriinlitic -_SSA M.250 - Sei-ic Hazard Analy,ls 3 DeterÂ·minnitlc lugnitude: 6.70 -Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore.Atkinson (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 FraCtile: 0.50 Colo- 4: Acceleration (g) for Calbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colurn 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGAUSGS 2001 Colw- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted Mean of Attenwation Equation: Colw- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore-â€¢tktnion (2001) IGI USCS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: cazbell-lozorgria (2001) NGA USGS 2001 9 2.#Ge-002 2.776,-002 2.905.-002 1.71â€¢e-002 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 0.05 2.652e-002 2.152,-002 3 2Gle-002 1.*4â€¢e-002 0.1 3.5310-002 3.707e-002 4 2162-002 2 6Zle-002 1 2 3 4 5 0.2 5.67*e.002 6.508.-002 6.3352-002 4 .1922-002 M 1.234e-001 1.316,-001 1.22 le-001 1.09$/-001 0.3 6.46*-002 7.$52Â¢-002 7.155.-002 4.662e-002 0.05 1.41Oe-001 1.416e-001 1.433/-001 1.31le-001 0.4 6 264.-002 7.615.-002 G.51/2-002 4.580,-002 0.1 2.Olk-001 2.Olle-001 2.095e-001 1.914,-001 0.5 5 5120-002 7.3â€¢32-002 6.1162-002 4.27le-002 0.2 2.7532-001 3.067Â¢-001 2.*33e-001 2.479(-001 0.6 5.342e-002 6.65Ge-002 5.424e-002 3.Se-002 0.3 2 1052-001 3.176e-001 2.855,-001 2 313,-001 0.7 4.190â‚¬-002 6.126/-002 4.900e-002 3.644,-002 0.4 2 552e-001 2.507e-001 2.62Oe-001 2 130e-001 0.1 4.473.-002 5 635e-002 4.406â‚¬-002 3.37le-002 o.s 2.307e-001 2.64/-001 2.403,-001 1.161*-001 0.9 4.01;e-002 3.1778-002 3.542,-002 3.13;e-002 0.6 2 025-001 2 323/-001 2.109,-001 1.646e-001 1 3.7620-002 4 79h-002 3.56le-002 2.820,-002 0.7 1.8118-001 2.079â‚¬-001 1.Ine.001 1.46"-001 2 1.*Ue-002 2 436/.002 1.6461-002 1.506*-002 0.8 1.617,-001 1 /1/2.001 1.me-001 1.317Â®-001 3 1.097'-002 1 312/-002 1.00#-002 5.00â€¢e-003 05 1.44 le-001 1.631â‚¬+001 1.50â€¢e-001 1 1182-001 4 7.739e-003 1.00le-002 7 2712-003 5.9351-003 1 1.2971-001 1.4;le.001 1 357e-001 1.07;e-001 2 5.23Ze-002 5.115â‚¬-002 $Ple-002 4.326e-002 3 2.15$/-002 3.0:Ge-002 3.115e-002 2.36;e-002 4 1.9420-002 2 072.-002 2 2452-002 1.50Ge-002 Source Gravel Hill,-Harper Lk Region USGS 2001 California Closest Dlsunce: 112.14 km 41,tude Uniti: ACceleration (g) Source: Eureka Peak lugnitude. 7 10 - Region: USGS 200Â§ California Fractile: O.50 Closest 01!unce: 14â€¢.63 ki Colu- 1: Spectral Period Ullitude uniti: Acceleration (g)colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted lean of Attemation Equations gnitude: 6.70 -Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore-Atkinson (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 .iractile: O.50 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca-pbell-lozorgnia (200*) 1,9 usls 2001 Colum 1 spectral Period ColuMn 5: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lan of Attenuation Equations Page 19 Page 20 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 07 0I 0.1 -_Ss, 9-2%0 - Se 1-ic Hazard Anily,1 1 3 oeterÂ·1'1"Ic -_SM vi.2$0 - sets,lc Hazard Analysis 3 Deter=intitic 2 3 4 5 0.2 1 11Oe-001 1.132/-001 1.0702-001 1 127e-001 3 01/-002 3.22 le-002 3.242.+002 3.3â€¢Se-002 4.21;e-002 â€¢.16*-002 6.574*-002 6.617,-002 7.57*-002 7.79*e-002 7 â€¢727-002 ..04.-002 7.2311-002 ..0&1.-002 6.712e-002 7.5â€¢Ze-002 6.21le-002 7.137e-002 5.1;Oe-002 6.706e.002 S-424 e-002 6.2621-002 5,062/-002 ;.1*h-002 2.718e-002 3.243e-002 3 1.69*e-002 2.014e-002 4 1.20 /-002 1.4522-002 Source: Helendale- So Lockhart Region: USGS 2008 California Closest Distance: 115 62 km *plitude units. Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 Cohin 1: Spectral period Coli- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighte( Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-A, colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: carbell Colu- 3 Acceleration (g) for Chiou.Â¥c 1 2 3 0 3 3712-002 6 3910.002 0.05 5 510/-002 6.804.-002 0.1 7 725/-002 1.333/-002 1. f.lati n$ :ktr .. IC 001)00* 'un,GA US 3.443e-002 3.ine-002 â€¢.Ble-002 7 212/.002 1.42'e-002 7.175.-002 7.602e-002 6.96$e.002 6.461.-002 5.9&3e-002 5.4362-002 5.0lle-002 2.587.-002 1.635e-002 1.20â€¢e-002 tan of Atte i.on (2001) izorgnia (2 li (2007) N 4 5 052.-002 $ 66.-002 7 25*-002 Page 21 2.3112-002 2.557e-002 3.626:-002 $ 122.-002 6.514-002 6.4432-002 6.06le-002 5.629,-002 5.237e.002 4.150.-002 4 574.-002 4.217e-002 2.32;e-002 1.435.-002 9.67*-003 on Equal 10 USGS ZOOS NGA USGS 2 cs 2008 5 4.6532-002 5.260e-002 7 5Â§5/-002 1 I.nuati :kil 9 IC 00â€¢) .ng GA US 0.3 1 220.-001 1.241.-001 04 1.11le-001 1.255/-001 0.5 1.13Se-001 1.2362-001 0.6 1.060e-001 1.162e-001 0.7 5 5;Ze-002 1.103e-001 0.1 5.305,-002 1.037e-001 0.5 8.660e-002 5.671.-002 1 8.1lle-002 5.051â‚¬-002 2 4.5237-002 5.1510-002 3 2.93*-002 3.45 le-002 4 2.056,+002 2.44*e-002 source: Hollywood Region: usls 200: california Cloiest Distance: 50 02 13 AÂ®litude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.70 - FractileÂ· 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weightee Colu- 3: Acceleranon (g) for: loore-At Colu-1 4: Acc/teration (g) fw: Cabell Colu- S: Acceleration (g) for. Chicu-Yc 1 2 3 9 1 703/-002 1.1740.001 0.05 9.162e-002 1.250e-001 0.1 1.391/-001 1.6Ve-001 0.2 1.%47.001 2 &17.-001 0.3 1.9501-001 2.50le-001 0.4 1.786.-001 2.333e-001 0.5 1.60.-001 2.10Â§e-001 1.220e-001 1147e-001 1.13;e-001 1.06le-001 1.002'-001 S.371.-002 1.701.-002 1 137.-002 4.554.-002 2.990/-002 2.226e-002 an of Atte ison (200*) izorigniâ€¢ (2 I (2007) I 7.6*4.-002 9.092e-002 1.319Â¢-001 1.79/e-001 1.*27e-001 1.6Gle.001 1.$17â‚¬-001 Page 22 1.1/1/-001 1.136e-001 1.044e-001 9.5512-002 1./06'-002 8.1Â§6e-002 7.602e-002 7.10Oe-002 3.824/-002 2.37Ge-002 1.616e -002 On Equations ISIS 2001 NGA VSGS ZOOS GS 2001 5 6 ..-002 7.996e-002 1.11*e-001 1.575/-001 1.52]e-001 1.36â€¢e-001 1.1*le-001 0.6 -_ssâ€¢ v,â€¢250 - seis,ic Mazard Analy,i, 3 Deterministic 1.407,-001 1.133e-001 1.3212-001 1.05*-001 1 -_Ss.A vi-250 - Seimc Hazard Analy,11 3 Deter=inistic 6.55â€¢e-002 1.68-002 5.804.-002 5.163'-002 07 1.2&4-001 1.127e-001 0.8 1.126Â¢-001 1.45Ge-001 0.5 1.015e-001 1.310e-001 1 5 242.-002 1 1/e-001 2 4.362e-002 5.612e-002 3 2.538e-002 3.124.002 â€¢ 1.77â€¢e-002 2.21;e-002 Source: Moher. A l Region: USGS 2001 California Close,t Di.Unce 91.11 ki uplitude units: Acceleration (01) Magnitude 6.80 - Fractile: 0.50 Coluâ€žn 1: Spectral â€¢erlod Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighte' Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Al Colu- â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: cambell lilian 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiow-Â¥i 2 3 5.20le-002 6.7$Â§e-002 5.71le-002 6.972 e-002 7.127,-002 5.1426-002 1 110â‚¬-001 1 491/-001 1 270â‚¬-001 1 65//-001 1.18-001 1.$7 le-001 1.096e-001 1.475e-001 9.719.-002 1.31Se-001 1.17*e-002 1.20Oe-001 1.022(-002 1.0*Oe-001 7.211,5-002 9.63 k.002 1./nwati :kin NGA -/0 008) 8 Ing GA US 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1.ltle-001 1.064Â¢-001 9.550Â¢-002 1 670,-002 4.082,-002 2.$0*e-002 1.*lle-002 an of Atte son (2001) zorgnia (2 $ (2007) N 4.7 Zle-002 5.432e-002 7.410,-002 1060e-001 1 14.-001 1.05le-001 5.763,-002 8.673.-002 7. 7.-002 7.013â‚¬-002 6.37Ge-002 Page 23 9.47Â§e-002 1.$65,-002 7.793,-002 7 131e.002 3.392,-002 1.5110+002 1.21/-002 or Equation, .. 2001 NGâ€¢ USGS 200 0 200* 5 4.11*e-002 4.729.-002 6.930â‚¬-002 917Se-002 1005e-001 9.31 le-002 8.367e-002 7.Â§08.-002 6.702,-002 6.tle-002 5.6461-002 Page 24 2 2.172/-002 38-002 3 1 64 le-002 1./5/-002 4 1.1362-002 1 342e-002 Source: Johnim valley (No) Region: USGS 200Â§ California closest Distance: 140.61 ki u:plitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6 90 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu-11: Spectral Per,od Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted I con- 3: Accelerition (g) for: moore-Atk colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: cambell-I Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chico-Â¥c*,1 1 2 3 // 2.9*4/-002 3.35Se-002 0 05 3 191/-002 3.4572-002 0.1 4.21Se-002 4.4060-002 0.2 6 633.-002 7.3â€¢Ge-002 0.3 7.523e-002 1.4,5.-002 04 7 33 le-002 1.6462.002 0;6 /le-002 1.4142-002 O.G 6.372e-002 7,711/-002 0.7 5.1Ue-002 7.162,-002 0.1 5.420e-002 6 636â‚¬-002 0.9 4.Slle-002 6 1312-002 1 4.613/-002 $.713e-002 2 2.365e-002 2.91*e-002 3 1.427e-002 1.75â€¢e-002 4 1.0152.002 1.27/0-002 2.7 66.-002 2.23Ge-002 1.70]e-002 1 277,-002 1.2312-002 1 357/-003 ean of Atte.ation Equations inson (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 lozorgnia (200) NGâ€¢ USGS 200 igi (2007) NGâ€¢ ISIS 2001 4 $ 3 320,-002 2.212e-002 3.71Ge-002 2.4001.002 4./lk-002 3.â€¢2â€¢e-002 7.156e-002 5.397e-002 S.133,-002 5.9402-002 7.544e-002 5 10â€¢e-002 7.127e-002 5 â€¢1Oe-002 6.419*-002 4.9168-002 5.176Â¢-002 4.610e-002 5.34â€¢e-002 4.28Oe-002 ..130.-002 3.983/-002 4 â€¢13/-002 3.715e.002 2 155/-002 1.953/-002 1 3420-002 1.186â‚¬-002 0 77:e-003 7.9100-003 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_55Â·â€¢ vi-250 - se "Ale: anders on: usls 2001 California -'Closest Disince: 143.39 ki uolltude Unit.: Acceleration (g) Magnitude 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1 Spectral Period colu=, 2 Acceleration (g) for. weight Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca=pbe colt- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou 1 2 3 PGA 4.02*e-002 4.347e-002 o.os ..30/+002 4.GOGe-002 0.1 5.62*-002 5.512.-002 0.2 1.4040-002 7.me-002 0.3 S.,0.-002 5.11le-002 0.4 9 455/-002 9 43/-002 0.5 5.255,-002 5.537.-002 0.6 1.70Â©e-002 9.1030-002 0.7 1.237/-002 1.75Â£-002 0.1 7.74Se-002 1.3191-002 0.5 7.2â€¢Ge-002 7.*3Ze-002 1 6.8141-002 7.420e-002 2 3.*Ne-002 4.307e-002 3 2.5112-002 2.1 5,-002 4 1.791/-002 2.052 e-002 source: Le,-00-lockhart-Old woian Springs 1-ic Hazard Analy.li ] Deter,int ed Nan of Attenuation Equations Atkinson (2001) 9 USGS 2001 11-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 â€¢.244e-002 . 702.-002 5.892.-002 1. 5.-002 103Ze-001 9 7352-002 9.66%-002 9 061,-002 8.ille-002 8.03$e-002 7.45le-002 6.965/-002 3.9197-002 2.5â€¢Se -002 1.197/-002 Page 25 stic 3.492e-002 3.79ge-002 5.4130-002 1.413.-002 5.335 e-002 9.146Â®-002 1 &63/-002 7.3$,-002 7.37-002 6.193.-002 6.4&5e-002 6.0$*e-002 3.340e-002 2.090/-002 1./Be-002 -_55* v:-250 - seliaic HuzarÂ·d Analy,11 3 Deterministic Region: USGS 2001 Cal'fornla Closeit Distance. 133.06 Icm Allitude units: Acceleration (g) Magn,tude: 7.50 - Fractile 0.50 colu- 1: Spectral â€¢eriod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: w!eighted Mean of Attenuatlon Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambell-lozorgnia (2008) NGA USGS ZOO)1 Colum & Acceleration (g) for Chiou-voing: (2007) NG' USGS 200, 1 2 3 4 5 4 4 77]e-002 5.31â€¢e-002 4.74$e-002 4.259/-002 0.05 $.21le-002 5.673e-002 5.26%-002 4.61*-002 0.1 6.71Se-002 6.133e-002 6.Glle-002 6.713.-002 0.2 8.7:Se -002 9.1e-002 9.le-002 1.02Â§e-001 0.3 1.102e-001 1.04]e-001 1.14%-001 1.115e-001 0.4 1 OVe-001 1.077,-001 1.08-001 1.08-001 0.5 1.051.-001 1.0102-001 1.011/-001 1.0062-001 06 .96]e.002 1.033e-001 1.027(-001 9.290e-002 07 5 ....002 9./3e-002 5.7*Ge-002 1.617e-002 0.1 l 503e-002 9.4/0.-002 9.215.-002 /03Se-002 0.9 8.33*e-002 1.90/6-002 1.59le-002 7 5153-002 1 7 Ne-002 1.441'-002 1.06*e-002 7.047e-002 2 4.504/+002 â€¢95â€¢e-002 4.677e-002 3 880,-002 3 2.973e-002 3.417/-002 3.00e-002 2.â€¢32e-002 4 2.122e-002 2.41Oe-002 2.25â€¢e-002 1.662e-002 Source: Mission Ridge-Arroyo Parida-Santa Ana Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Oistance: 131.25 km Alitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: G.90 - Page 26 R Hazard Analy *an of Atteru. (inson (2001) C lozorgria (200. iation Equations 6â€¢ ISIS 2008 -_SI iN - Sens, Fractile. 0.50 Colu=,1 Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for. welghted Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Boore.Att Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca,xpbellÂ· Colvin 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-vot 1 2 3 9 3.119-002 3.462,-002 0.05 3.3512-002 3.5â€¢le+002 0.1 4.444e-002 4 533.-002 0.2 7 04/-002 7 765/.002 0.3 1.12.le-002 5.420â‚¬-002 0.4 7.*Se-002 9.373e-002 0.5 7.45;e-002 9.193/-002 0.6 6.8612-002 1.497.-002 0.7 6.30e-002 7.950e-002 0.1 5.127/.002 7.312/-002 0.9 5.3062 -002 6.6262-002 1 ../Gle-002 6 067.-002 2 2 247,-002 2 HOe-002 3 1.31Se-002 1;02e.002 4 9.11Se-003 1.03*e-002 Source: North Ch,nnel Region: InGS 200/ California closeit Dlitance: 153.41 km *litude Kits: ACCeleration (g) Magnitude: 6.10 - AFractileÂ· 0.50 olu=, 1: Spectral Irlod /Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted Colu- 3. Acceleration (g) for loore-At ings (2007) NGA 4 3.3742-002 3.71*-002 4.907e-002 7.2/Ze-002 8 260,-002 7.655â‚¬-002 7.23â€¢e-002 6.Slie-002 5.Nle-002 5.42 le-002 4.900/-002 4.4772-002 2.1862-002 1361e-002 5 9150-003 lean of Atter, kinion (2001) â€¢ Page 27 11* 3 Determinlitic tion Equations A /64$ 2001 ) KLâ€¢ ISIS 2001 UMS 2001 5 2.506.-002 2.72*e-002 3.192&002 6.09&-002 6.64.-002 6.;lk-002 6.05*e-002 5.$73e-002 $.137e-002 4.7â€¢Se-002 â€¢.352/-002 4.061/-002 1.865/-002 1.033e-002 7 241.-003 Mazard Analysis 3 Deter=inistic zorgnia (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 I (2007) INGâ€¢ USGS 2001 nuati 1/. 001)001 1 GA t.1-5 -_SM vs-250 - Sellii c Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-lo Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Young 1 2 3 %* 2.10Â§,-002 2 623.-002 0.0;3.004e-002 2.66;e-002 01 3 954e-002 3.424e-002 02 6.â€¢lle-002 6.23$e-002 0.3 7 &3Ge-002 7.700-002 0.4 7.3161-002 7.H48-002 0.5 6.995/-002 7 7420-002 0.6 6.3912-002 7 16Oe-002 0.7 5.904.-002 6.702e-002 0.1 5.357e-002 6.167e-002 09 4.887,-002 $.$5le-002 1 4.4620-002 5.1232-002 2 1 52/-002 2.2--002 3 1 0781-002 1.232/-002 4 7 4/1-003 1.we-003 Source: North Frontal (East) Region: USGS 2001 alifornia closest ristance: 111.05 km Amplitude tmits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 coh- 1: spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: wighted / Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkir Colu- 4: Acceleranon (g) for: Cazbell-er colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chlou-Youn, 1 2 3 3.75Se-002 4.2lle-002 5.423/-002 1.13â€¢e-002 5.325,-002 1.66;e-002 1.1362-002 7.28*e-002 6,6408-002 5.577e-002 5.322Â®-002 â€¢ 7912-002 1 /â€¢e-002 1.093e -002 7.9311-003 an of Atte son (200.1 izor-grlia (2 is (2007) A . .ge 21 5 2 005e-002 2.136e+002 3.014e-002 4.18 le-002 5.490e-002 5.439,-002 5 108e-002 4 725'-002 4.37Oe-002 4.047e-002 3.746e-002 3.4 65(-002 1.575e-002 9.0930-003 5.964'-003 on Equatie uscs 2001 ,â‚¬.â€¢ USGS 2 cs 2001 5 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SM v:-250 - selimlc Hazard Analysis 3 Deter,Inlitic -_!SA v250 - scitic Ward Analy$11 3 Deterministic 4.556e-002 5.519/-002 4.330e-002 3.Ille-002 4.97â€¢e-002 3.7242-002 4.90.-002 4 293.-002 6.669â‚¬-002 7 309.-002 6.â€¢7Se-002 6.222â‚¬-002 1.0072-001 1.157/-001 9 4412-002 S.19$e-002 1 11Ge-001 1.333e-001 1.052/-001 9.64 le-002 1.06le-001 1.2/e-001 9.7â€¢/e-002 5.12*e-002 1.002Â¢-001 1.241Â¢+001 9.2632-002 1 3338-002 9.133e-002 1.145,-001 1.31]e -002 7.56/-002 1.422.-002 1.064/-001 7.70â€¢e-002 6.916'-002 7.71le-002 9.7302.002 7.04 le-002 6.352,-002 7.Olle-002 1.lise-002 G.40Oe-002 5.1452-002 6.425.-002 1.0164-002 5.177Â¢-002 5.318-002 2.576e-002 3.$35e-002 2.S;se-002 2.434,-002 3 1.76$e-002 2 01&-002 1.1,Ge-002 1.â€¢22,-002 4 1.221.-002 1 3&'e.002 1 Me-002 9.44$0-003 Source: North Frontal (West) Region: USGS 2001 California Closest oiltance .&4 k. All,litude unin: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Framle: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted -an Of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-lozorgnia (2008) Nli USGS 2008 Colum 5: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chiou.voungs (2007) NGI ISIS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 7.04.-002 1.50(e.002 5.9650-002 6 2802-002 0.0$7.131,-002 9.408,+002 6.82Ge-002 7.25%-002 0.1 1.0%*-001 1.193e-001 9.142e-002 1.06le-001 0.2 1.502e-001 1.705e-001 1.3090-001 1.417e-001 0.05 01 0.2 0.3 0.. 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.60.-001 1.119.-001 1.4322-001 1.506/-001 0.4 1.509,-001 1 80Ze-001 1.33le-001 1 355 e-001 0.5 1.42 Ze-001 1723e-001 1.21;e-001 1 25'e-Dll 0.1 1.299e-001 1.515/-001 1 177e-001 1 133,-001 0.7 120le-001 1.4782-001 1054/.001 1.030e-001 0.1 1.102e-001 1.353<-001 1.010â‚¬-001 9.432e-002 0.9 1.00;e-001 1.22Oe-001 9.217e-002 1.660*-002 1 9.232,-002 1.112â‚¬-001 1.612Â¢-002 7.965/-002 2 4.411,-002 S.001.-002 4.617e-002 3.607.-002 3 2.6Ve-002 3.014e-002 2.953/-002 2.124,-002 4 1.1/3/-002 2.049.-002 2.17le-002 1.42 le-002 Source: Northri dge Region: USGS 200* California Closest 011.ance: 71.16 k. Azlitude Units: ACCeleration (g) Magr,tude: 6.90 - Fractile: 0 50 colu- 1: spectral Period Colur- 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted -an of Atter*lation Equations Colt- 3: Acceleration (g) for. loore-Atkinson (2001) IGI USGS 2001 Colu- 4 Â· Acceleration (g) for: Carbill-lozorgria (2001) NG, USGS 2001 Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Young, (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 20)01 1 2 3 4 5 K.â€¢ 1.5752.002 9 103e-002 7.*;le-002 1 370/-002 0 05 9.5/e-002 9 Mle-002 9.006.-002 9 7152-002 0.1 1.316e-001 1.30".001 1.24 le-001 1.40Ze-001 0.2 1.185/-001 2.00â€¢e-001 1.756Â¢-001 1.*SGe-001 0.3 1.5711-001 2.1632-001 1.177e-001 1.1722-001 0.4 1.82le-001 2.02*-001 1.73â€¢e-001 1.7032-001 0.;1.674{:-001 18/7/-001 1.62*e-001 1.507â‚¬-001 0.6 1.493,-001 1.6*Ze.001 1.457e-001 1.334â‚¬.001 â€¢age 29 Page 30 0.7 -_ss,A v:-250 - Se,11â‚¬ Hazard Analyst: 3 Deter-inlitic 1.3512-001 1.514,-001 1.3272-001 1 1530-001 -_SS* vI-250 - Seisitc Mazard Analysis 3 Deter-inlitic 2 2.613.-002 3.06$e.002 2.555,-002 2.lili-002 0.1 1.21*e-001 1.310,-001 1 19De-001 1 07â€¢e-001 0.'1.0922-001 1.225,-001 1.07Â§â‚¬-001 5.706â‚¬ -002 1 9.Ile-002 1.10*e-001 5.767,-002 8.795â‚¬-002 2 4.082.-002 4.640.-002 4.132e-002 3.475e-002 3 2 245/-002 2. $ We-002 2.3â€¢2e-002 1.143e-002 4 1.53*e-002 1.75*e-002 1.702e-002 1.1;Se-002 source: oak Ridge (offshore) Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 130.10 ki -plitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnltude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 Col,- 1: Spectral Perlod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -in of Atter*lation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2008) NGA USGS 2001 colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Calbell-lozorgria (2001) pu Usls 2008 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) MiA ISIS 2001 2 3 4 5 3.63*e-002 4.125e-002 3.75 le-002 3.03*e.002 3.937/.002 4.260,-002 4.211.-002 3.340e-002 5.2217.002 5.403e-002 5.46*e-002 4 792.-002 1.0522-002 1.127/.002 1.0*Se-002 7 36Ze-002 9.217e-002 1.05/e-001 .15â€¢e-002 7.955/-002 1.177e-002 1.044e-001 1.507.002 7.*e-002 1.â€¢820-002 1.023e-001 1.105Â®-002 7.Me-002 7 7//-002 9.490â‚¬-002 7.]SOe-002 6.51*e-002 7 223,-002 8.Kie-002 6 767.-002 5.99*e-002 6.We-002 1.201,-002 6,11*e-002 5.539,-002 6.063.-002 7.4.,e-002 5.62]e-002 5.12Oe-002 5.5732-002 6.82$e-002 5.1 8-002 4.73]e-002 1 0.05 01 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 3 1.55Ge-002 1.7568 -002 1.630,-002 1.203/-002 4 1.01$,-002 1.207e.002 1.1922-002 1.5Â§0â‚¬-003 Source: Oak Ridge Conshore) Reglon: USGS 200Â§ California Closest DistanceÂ· 100.43 Ici Aq,litude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: O.50 Col,-71: Spectral Period Colo- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean Of Atteruation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2008) Na ISIS ZOOS Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: caq,bell-mozorignia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Young, (2007) NGA Usls 200* 1 2 3 4 3 M 6 46â‚¬-002 7.242.002 6 7412.002 5.470e-002 0.05 7.14Oe-002 7.626/-002 7.$700 -002 6.22â€¢e-002 0.1 9.515e-002 5 603.-002 S.1â€¢e-002 '.021.-002 02 1.3132-001 1402e-001 1.44*e-001 1.30Oe-001 0.3 1.51Ge-001 1.515*-001 1.622e-001 1.34le-001 0.4 1.4364-001 1.532â‚¬+001 1.515.-001 1.2571-001 0.$1.36*e-001 1 4/Oe-001 1.475*-001 1 142e-001 0.6 1.2 341-001 1.37 le-001 1.337e-001 1.03â€¢e-001 0.7 1.1 Be-00 1 1.2'Se-001 1.265e-001 9.42â€¢e-002 0.1 1.071â‚¬-001 1.113e-001 1.165&001 S.645.-002 0.9 9 753,-002 1.07le-001 1.060/-001 7.9$0,-002 1 1 55"-002 9.7952-002 9 746/-002 7.320e-002 2 4.073e-002 4 45/2-002 4 4560-002 3.3030-002 3 2 400â‚¬-002 2 686/.002 2.515.-002 1.925,-002 4 1.ille-002 1 12ie-002 1.906â‚¬-002 1 2:Oe-002 Page 31 Page 32 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Sets,ic luzard Analysts 3 Deterninlitic hted *an of Attenuation Equation, e-Atkinson (2001) IGI USGS 200* bell-lozorgnia (200*) NU ISIS 2001 u-Youngs (2007) 9 USGS 2001 -_SSâ€¢ Vt-2;0 - Source: oak Ridge connected ion: LES 2001 california ./.sest Distance: ..4â€¢ k litude Units: Acceleration (g) Magn,tude: 7.40 - Fractlle 0.&0 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleratlan (g) for: weig Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loor Colu- 4: Acceleralon (g) for: CAB Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Ch o 1 2 3 9 7.135e-002 Ilile-002 0 05 7.1#Ze-002 1.716e-002 0.1 1044e-001 1.07*e.001 02 1.4lle.001 1.475e-001 0.3 1.62le-001 1.665 e-001 0.4 1.54 le-001 1.6lk-001 0.5 1.4711-001 1.$75/-001 0.6 1 3732-001 1.4 ne.001 0.7 1.2 lie-001 1.41*-001 0.1 1.1Ne-001 1.305Â¢-001 0.5 1.0'Ge-001 1.152.-001 1 1.013e-001 1.096â‚¬-001 2 4.91*+002 5.199,-002 3 3.02*+002 3.31 le-002 4 2.1182-002 2 233e-002 Source: Palos verde, Region: USGS 200/ california 4 6.7â€¢ Se-002 7.57*-002 5.136/-002 1.436e-001 1.61*e-001 1.52]e-001 1.50}ie-001 1.*07â‚¬-001 1.121/-001 1.2350-001 1.14'e-001 1.06$2-001 $.492'-002 3.37$'-002 2.507e-002 â€¢age 33 6.472/-002 7.3*le-002 1.0*ge-001 1.53?e-001 1 5*02-001 1.44-001 1.350e-001 1.22"-001 1.12 le-001 1.0311-001 9.511,-002 1.71Ze-002 4.057e-002 2.403e-002 1.614e-002 -_sli vs-250 - se,$=ic Hazard Arily,is 3 Deterinistic closest Distance: 2'.16 k. Allitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Frictile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) forÂ· weighted lean of Attemation Equations col-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) MDI USGS 2001 Colt- â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: caNbell-lozorgnia (2001) 16 usGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-voungs (2007) Ili USGS 2008 1 2 3 â€¢ 5 1.631(-001 1.909e-001 1.377e-001 1.GOGe-001 0 05 1 15: e-001 2.119{:-001 1.62le-001 1.931(-001 0.1 2 64 le-001 2.7950-001 2 344e-001 2 7.e-001 0.2 3.444e-001 3 5930-001 3 129e-001 3.6051-001 0.3 3.432.-001 3.59le-001 3.lile-001 3.$35:-001 0.4 3.203e-001 3.43*e-001 2.545e-001 3.227,-001 0.$2.980/-001 3.lile-001 2.153e-001 2.190.-001 0.6 2.707e-001 2.905/-001 2 6171+Col 2.$98e-001 0.7 2.492.-001 2 610/-001 2 4338-001 2.363e-001 0.1 2. Me-001 2 â€¢54-001 2.262e-001 2.167e-001 0.9 2.110e-001 2.232e-001 2.10Oe-001 1.95*-001 1 1.956â‚¬-001 2.050e-001 1...e-001 1.lee-001 2 1.0;k-001 1.057e-001 1.124e-001 5.575,-002 3 6.102.-002 7.233,-002 7.305 +002 5.lit-002 4 4 1$1/-002 5.200â‚¬.002 5.4 lle.002 3.56le-002 Source: Pales verde, cor,nected Region: usls 2001 california Cloiest Di'Unce: 29.16 km Alitude wits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.70 - Fractlle: 0.$0 Page 34 -_SS,A Â¥$-250 - Sel:ic Hazard Analy,1, 3 Deter-ristic Col,-1 1: Spectral "riod -_SM vs-250 - Setsmic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter,inlitic Colo- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chlou-Youngs (2007) pÂ«=â€¢ USLS 2001 Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attemation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2008) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: 0*bell-mozorgr,la (2001) NGA ISGS 2008 Colu- 5 Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 â€¢ 5 9 1.*Gle.001 2.133,-001 1.$16/-001 1."ie-001 0.05 2.175e+001 2.â€¢1â€¢e-001 1.772e.001 2 3312-001 0.1 2 96*e-001 3.10Oe-001 2.485.-001 3.320/-001 02 3 76]e-001 3.623e-001 3 343e-001 4.324e-001 03 3 81/-001 3.ille-001 3.441,-001 4.300e-001 04 3.55â€¢e-001 3.51-001 3.2&-001 3.5:Oe-001 05 3.417e-001 3.352,-001 3.2910-001 3.6077-001 0.6 3.110e-001 3.142e-001 3.12 le-001 3.277e-001 0.7 2.918.-001 2 9758-001 2.913Â¢-Col 3.006â‚¬-001 0.1 2.795.-001 2 7612-001 2.IAOe-001 2.77/.001 0.9 2.*ove-001 2 $31/-001 2.6532-001 2.5 We-001 1 2.441(-001 2 14.-001 2.56Se-001 2.4055-001 2 1.440*-001 1.37â€¢e.001 1.*Sle-001 1 2Â§42-001 3 5.1220-002 1.02Ge-001 1 112,-001 1 0522-002 â€¢ 7.10le-002 7.3 Ile-002 //3e-002 5.5302-002 source: Pinto Rn Region: USGS 2008 Cahfornla Closest Distance: 113.72 ki Ullitude units Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 k Colu- 1: Spectral Period lum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations / colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) g usGS 2008 Colum â€¢: Acceleration (g) forÂ· calpbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA Usls 2008 1 2 3 4 5 M $.15/e-002 6 2082-002 4 175â‚¬-002 4.3110-002 0.0,5.We-002 6.574'+002 5.â€¢lae-002 4.52Ge-002 0.1 7.4.Se-002 1.134-002 7.0151-002 7.124e-002 0.2 1.Ole-001 1.13*e.001 1.042e-001 1.OSSe-001 0.3 1.18le-001 1.252/.001 1.18(e-001 111le-001 0.4 1 140/.001 1.2377-001 1.1052-001 l OWe-001 0.5 1.052 e-001 1.22$e-001 1.012.-001 5.700/-002 0.6 101Oe-001 114le-001 1003e-001 -Sh-002 0.7 9.4351-002 107â€¢e-001 5.â€¢13e-002 1.140-002 0.1 1.71]e-002 1.005e-001 :7560-002 7.$4â€¢e-002 05 1.14;e-002 5 342/-002 1.0:Ze-002 7.012,-002 1 7.605/-002 1.752{5-002 7.524,-002 6.53e-002 2 4.154-002 4.Ule-002 4.1291-002 3.417Â¢-002 3 2.65-002 3.150/-002 2.8/+002 2.155,-002 4 1.195/-002 2.251/-002 1.Â§75/-002 1.460e-002 Source: Pligah-lullion Min-Ie:quite Lk Region: ISIS ZOOS California Closest 01*unce: 169.41 k= Alitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.30 w Fractile: 0.50 Colu-, 1: Spectral Period Con- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equation; Colu- 3Â· Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atk,nion (2001) NGA ISIS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Ca,obell-lozorgnia (200*) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 2 93Ze-002 2.173/.002 3.5032-002 2 4202-002 Page 35 Page 36 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SM v:-250 - S,imili Hazard Analy,1, 3 Deterministic 0.0,3.1â€¢Oe-002 3.01$e-002 3.lit-002 2.554/-002 0.1 ..00.-002 3 6612.002 4 7612-002 3.517/-002 0.2 6.2548-002 S.573.-002 7.249e-002 5..1.-002 3 le.002 6.755.-002 1./le-002 6.11*-002 We-002 7.207e-002 1.0.2-002 6.16*e-002 .295Â¢-002 7.367e+002 7.970}e-002 6 5.7.-002 0.6 6.114.-002 7.010.-002 7.431Â¢-002 6.141.-002 0.7 6.537e-002 6.*ie-002 7.004e-002 5.760,-002 0.1 6.16le-002 6.5412-002 6.525/-002 5.416â‚¬-002 0.5 ;767e-002 6.1He-002 6.0182-002 5.09*e-002 1 5 â€¢212-002 5.81Ze-002 5.59*e-002 4.10â€¢e-002 2 3.05l-002 3.4312-002 3.05Se-002 2.651/-002 1.970.-002 2.2$4e-002 1.%*-002 1.6*le-002 4 1.405e-002 1.606.-002 1.4$91-002 1 149.-002 Source: Pitas Nint (lov,er)-1-talve Region: usss 200* california Closest Distance: 152 36 13 41itude units: Accelerattor (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 Coh- 1: spectral Period Col,-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted lan of Atter-tion Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA ISIS 2001 Col,-1 4: Acceleration (g) for: C.,ivbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA IMS 2008 Cok- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (2007) Ne.A USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 â€¢GA 3 75*e-002 3.600.-002 4.42â€¢e-002 3.2GOe-002 0.0$4 04.-002 3.770,-002 4.87â€¢e-002 3.50Ge-002 0.1 5.215Â¢-002 4.GOSe-002 6.09]e-002 â€¢./Gle-002 0.2 1.046.-002 7.0â€¢Se-002 9.201*-002 7.91*e-002 0.3 9.4.1.-002 1.73]e-002 1.071.-001 1 13]e-002 Page 37 0.3 7 0.4 7 0.5 7 -_SSâ€¢ vs-250 - Se 0..S.275,-002 1--002 0.5 5.109.-002 5.1121-002 06 1 569/-002 1.76Oe-002 0.7 8.115e-002 8.473,-002 0.8 7.58;e-002 7.9505-002 0.9 7.0062-002 7.376e-002 1 6.Slle-002 6.167e-002 2 3 193/-002 3 3412-002 3 1 557/-002 2.Olle-002 4 1.370.-002 1.â€¢lle-002 Source: Pitas Point (LMr. West) Region USGS 2001 California Closest Di,tance 173.11 h Melitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude 7.30 - Frictile: 0.,0 Colvin 1: Spectral Period Colu=, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weight Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore- Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for Campbe Colu- 5: Accelerition (g) for: Chiou- 2 3 K:â€¢ 3.3092-002 2.70Ze-002 0.05 3.52le-002 2.1212-002 0.1 4.416e-002 3.427e-002 02 7.0990-002 5 411.-002 0.3 1.54;e-002 6.571.-002 0.4 1.â€¢9â€¢e-002 7.327e-002 0.5 1.4232-002 7.591/-002 0.6 7.9732-002 7.315/.002 0.7 7.5le-002 7.21Â§2.002 lilli Hazard Analy,11 3 Deter,iniltic ed /â„¢lati Atkir 9 11-Ic 001) 1 Youn,CA US 1.0172-001 1.00Ze-001 5 336/-002 1.754.-002 1.16*e-002 7.495.-002 6.9402-002 3 401-002 2 13â€¢e-002 1.$1Ze-002 â€¢an of Atte 1*on (2001) izargnia (2 1, (2007) N 4.479/-002 4.1*Oe-002 6.007.-002 5.lile-002 1.035â‚¬-001 1.036(-001 1.me-001 9.57Oe-002 9.0332-002 Page 38 1.735-002 1.21/-002 7.63 le+002 7.09;e-002 6.612(-002 6.16le-002 5.737e-002 2 755e-002 1.651/-002 1.11ae-002 On Equations USGS 2001 NGA USGS ZOO 03 2001 2.7â€¢7e-002 2.Ilk-002 â€¢.024e-002 6.ele-002 7.713e-002 7.713.-002 7.43le-002 6.965/-002 6.517e-002 liC HaZard Analysis 3 Deterministic-_SSA vs-250 - Selu 01 7 1132-002 6.860.-002 0.'6 377e-002 6.37â€¢e-002 1 6.11*e-002 5.565/-002 2 2.946.-002 2.97Oe-002 3 1.776,-002 1.1512-002 4 1.ZIll-002 1.2.e-002 Source Pita. Point (upper) Region. UMS 2001 California Closest Distance: 166.40 km Amlitude Unit$: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - Fraidle: 0.50 Colo- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: Ioore-Atl Colucr, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Calbell Colu=: 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-vol 2 3 2.672â‚¬-002 2.330,-002 2.ille-002 2.376e-002 3.702,-002 3.013e-002 6.027e-002 5.42Oe-002 7.15le-002 6.927.-002 7.052*-002 7.Mle-002 6.12Ze-002 7.124e-002 6.29*e-002 6.6:le-002 5.86.-002 6.339â‚¬-002 $ /02.-002 $89(e-002 4.519e-002 5.375,-002 4.51â€¢e-002 4.560,-002 2.OOIl-002 2.261/-002 1 0.0; 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0l 0.8 1 1 377.-002 7.65 le-002 7.056,-002 3 2910-002 1.932{:-002 1.43le-002 Mean of Atterulat (inion (2001) NGâ€¢ Â·lozorgnia (2008) ings (2007) IGI U 4 3.72*e-002 4.105.-002 5.20*e-002 7.110.-002 9.160.-002 1.5â€¢98-002 1.ilSe-002 7 331(-002 6 7370.002 6102e-002 $ â€¢Gle-002 4 54.-002 2.0591-002 page 39 6.10Ze-002 1.707.-002 5.32Se-002 2.577e-002 1.538.-002 1.0322-002 On Equations uSGS 2001 9 "GS 200 GS 2001 5 1.9;Se-002 2.0G0e-002 2.1:4e-002 4.782.-002 5.44'+002 5.&01/-002 Â§.22â€¢e-002 4 861.-002 4.527/-002 4.214e-002 3.0178-002 3.636e-002 1.6164-002 -_ssâ€¢ vi-250 - Seinic 3 1.140.-002 1.270e-002 4 7.929â‚¬-003 1 lote-003 Source Pita' Point Connected Region USGS 200/ call fornia Cloiest Di,tance: 131.21 ki Â£*litude Units: Acceleration (g) lugnltude 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu=, 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2 Acceleration (g) for: weighted N Colu- 3 Acceleration (g) for: moore-/tkir Col""1 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca//bell./c Cohin $: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chlou-Young 1 2 3 -â€¢ 4.890/-002 4.ille-002 0 05 5.31le-002 5.060,-002 0.1 6.919.-002 6.230e-002 0.2 1.03*e-001 9.226e-002 0.3 1.186/-001 1.102e-001 0.4 1.149â‚¬-001 1.10Se-001 0.5 1.11Ge-001 1 103e-001 0.6 1.042e-001 1.04*e-001 0.7 5.107e-002 1.004â‚¬-001 0.1 5 114.-002 9.3512-002 05 1 3731-002 8.61â€¢e-002 1 7 74â€¢e-002 7.3742-002 2 3.65Ze-002 3.812.-002 3 2.154/-002 2.3&-002 4 1 532e-002 1.6042-002 Hazard Analyâ€¢11 3 Deterministic nuati I. 1 00:)00: 1 GA US 1 1610-002 1 507.-003 an of Atte son (2001) zorgnia (2 S (2007) N . 5.637/-002 6.23Â§e-002 7.S01.-002 1.1*le.001 1 36Â§â‚¬-001 1 211.-001 1 267/-001 1.175e-001 1 11Oe-001 1.02*e-001 9.40Oe-002 1.674e-002 4.066e-002 2.390,-002 1.7712-002 â€¢age â€¢0 9 11.-003 6.472.-003 on Equatlo USGS ZOos NGA USGS 2 GS 200* S 4.21*e-002 4.63 le-002 6.626/-002 1.Olle-001 1.09le-001 1 055/-001 9 7762-002 1.512.-002 1.2131-002 7.Gle-002 7.105e-002 6.5*5,-002 3.07Se-002 1.123/-002 1.22le-002 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SSâ€¢ vs-251 Source: Pleito Region: UsGS ZOOS california rlosest Olitance: 149 74 km litude unlt. Acceleration (g /Jugn, rude: 7.10 - Frictlle. 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for Colu- 3: Acceleration (9) for: Colum 4: Acceleration W for: Col- 5: Acceleration (g) for: 1 2 3 M 3.lae-002 3.33*e-002 0.05 3.â€¢lle-002 3.4551-002 0.1 4.4611-002 4.31â€¢e-002 0.2 7.00:e-002 7.030e-002 0.3 1. Me-002 1.614.-002 0.4 1.013/-002 8.8078-002 0 5 7 777.-002 8.82â€¢e-002 06 7 232e-002 8.335.-002 0.7 6.711â‚¬-002 7.043,-002 0.1 6.2&-002 7.4072-002 0.,5.7lle-002 6.78-002 1 5.3470-002 6.26*e-002 2 2.5900-002 2.92/-002 3 1.$70.-002 1.721/-002 4 1.09Ge-002 1.lik-002 source: -ente Hills Region. Usls 200: California close$t Distance: 19.11 b 0 - selimic Hazard Arily:11 3 Deter-nistic â€¢eighted Ran of Attenuation Equations loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA Cabell-lozorgnia (2001)00. Chiou-Yc*,ngs (2007) NGâ€¢ ul 4 3.â€¢Sle-002 3.8171-002 4.941'-002 7.407Â¢-002 / 557e-002 7.995â‚¬-002 7.71Ge-002 7.06/e-002 6.562,-002 6.03Se-002 5.5140-002 5.Ne-002 2.62â€¢e-002 1.66le-002 1.220e-002 Page â€¢1 USGS 2001 NGâ€¢ USGS 2 Gs 200* 5 2.70Oe-002 2.901'+002 4.1271-002 6.$16.-002 7.33 le .002 7.234e-002 6.75le-002 6.2936-002 5.13le-002 5.42le-002 5.047.-002 4.615â‚¬-002 2.22oe-002 1.322e-002 1.lee-003 -_SSâ€¢ vt-250 - Sellmic Hazard Analy,1* 3 Deter=Inistic Implitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.10 - Fractile 0.50 Colum 1. Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore-Atkinion (2001) IGA USGS 2001 ColuiÂ·, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Campbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA uils 200* Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 9 2.41Oe-001 2 20â€¢e-001 2.257e-001 2.770/-001 0.0,2.712e-001 2.1/-001 2.612/.001 3.27le-001 0.1 3 *71e-001 3.3571-001 3.7lle-001 4.474e-001 0.2 5.1031-001 4.6652-001 4.967e-001 5.67]e-001 0.3 5.170e-001 4.156.-001 4.9851-001 5.625.-001 0.4 4.150.-001 4.606-001 4 732e-001 5.213e-001 0.5 4.522e-001 4.21.-001 4.$631-001 4.711/-001 0.6 4 1012-001 3 8122-001 4.154,-001 4.26*e-001 0.7 3.76$e-001 3.57 le-001 3.136e.001 3.Ille-001 0.8 3.437/-001 3.223Â¢-001 3.5&-001 3.S$9,-001 0.9 3.120e-001 2.863,5-001 3.23â€¢e-001 3.262/-001 1 2.153/-001 2.$75,-001 2.591.-001 2 /22-001 2 1 2/5/-001 1.127/-001 1 â€¢3le-001 1.290/-001 3 7.43le-002 6.655e-002 1 3171-002 7.211e.002 4 3.119,-002 â€¢.565,-002 6.13*e-002 4 654.-002 Source .ente Hills (Coyote Hills) Region: USGS ZOOS California cloidi DisunceÂ· 12.64 6 *litude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.SO - FraCtile: 0.$0 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Page 42 -_SS* vs-2&0 - Sel"lc Hazard Analyst, 3 Deter-nlitic Colu- 2 Acceleration (g) for: weighted lean of Atter-tion Equations -_SM vs-250 - Seismic Hazard Analysis 3 Dete,inistic Colum 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colii, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Campbell-lozorgalâ€¢ (20)01) NG.â€¢ USGS 2001 Colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ ISIS 2001 1 2 3 â€¢ 5 K.â€¢ 2.7*4e-001 2.4â€¢le-001 2.1064-001 3.105,-001 0.05 3.217e-001 2.739/-001 3.235,-001 3.67.-001 0.1 4.44,-001 3.*44/+001 â€¢.63 k -00 1 4.576â‚¬-001 0.2 5.9â€¢Se-001 ;.5 7le-001 5 9*32.001 6.293(-001 03 6 033,-001 5.114 e-001 5.-e-001 6.290e-001 04 $7250-001 S.531â‚¬-001 5.noe-001 5.873/-001 0.5 5.336,-001 5.126/-001 5.$272-001 5.35$e+001 0.6 4.117,-001 4.$93/-001 4.913<.001 4.176/-001 0.7 4.40.-001 4.116e-001 4.$&-001 4.4652-001 0.8 4.012e-001 3.75le-001 4.173e-001 4.105e-001 0.9 3.63Ge-001 3.331,-001 3.104.-001 3.774Â®-001 1 3.32 le-001 2.9*-001 3.Wle-001 3.472/-001 2 1.478,-001 1.262(-001 1.64 Se-001 1.521/.001 3 1.4050-002 7.051.-002 9.494.-002 1.661(-002 4 5.763/-002 4.USE-002 G.4/+002 5.620.-002 Source Puente Hills (LA) Reglon USGS 2001 California Closeit Distance: 31.09 ki Molitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractlle O.SO Colu-,1 Spectral Period A Colum 2 Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations 12 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) =:A USGS 2001 Colu=, 4: Acceleration (g) for: cabell-lozorgnia (2001) 16â€¢ USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 Page 43 1 2 3 â€¢Gâ€¢ 1.61Se-001 1.717e-001 0 05 1.16*.001 1.167/-001 0.1 2.623,-001 2.51]e-001 0.2 3.5â€¢Ze-001 3.513.-001 0.3 3.574-001 3.73le-001 0.4 3.302e-001 3.416,-001 0.5 3 042e-001 3.22*e-001 0.6 2.726,-001 2.1.e-001 07 .â€¢7'e.001 2.635e-001 08 2.245e-001 2.37Ze-001 0.9 2.023e-001 2 10;e-001 1 1.//0/-001 1 'Re-001 2 1.0112-002 1.033/-002 3 4.5Ve-002 4 593.-002 4 3.175e-002 3.133â‚¬-002 Source: Puente Hilli (Santa Fe Springs) Region: USGS 2001 california Closest Distance: 21.17 kâ€¢ Amplitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.70 - Fractile: 0 50 colu- 1: Spectral â€¢eriod Col# 2: AÂ«eleration (g) for. welght Column 3: Acceleration (g) for loore- Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for campbe Colum & Acceleration (O) for: Chiou- 1 2 3 O 1 1/De-001 1.8 Ze-001 0.0;2 177e-001 2.037e-001 1.570e-001 1.Â§30e-001 2 652e.001 3.560,+001 3.602/-001 3.355e-001 3.177,-001 2.858.-001 2.613e-001 2.310/-001 2.1512-001 1.Â§712-001 1.543/+002 5.18.002 3.77.'+002 4 1.90/e-00] 2.23*e-001 Page 44 1.570â‚¬-001 1.182â‚¬-001 2.70â€¢e-001 3.â€¢IZe-001 3.313â‚¬-001 3.06â€¢e-001 2.721/-001 2.426e-001 2.116*-001 1.42-001 1.*07e-001 1.64*-001 7.05*e-002 4.003e-002 2.Â§14,-002 5 1.17*e-001 2.25Ge-001 ed -an of Attenuition Equations Atkinion (2001) '*. USG' 2008 11-lozorgnia (2001) NGA usls 2008 #% (2007) NGA USGS 2001 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SM vs-250 - sels, 3.12]e-001 2.836Â¢-001 â€¢.2110-001 â€¢.1526-001 4.lile-001 4.305-001 3.15Â£-001 3.9150-001 3.501â‚¬-001 3.64*e-001 3.090e-001 3.212e-001 2.77]e.001 2.me-001 2 4/72-001 2 Mle-001 2 225/-001 2 267,-001 2.009,-001 2.02*e-001 1.2782 -002 1.137,-002 4.54*e-002 4.32/e-002 3.0e-002 2."42-002 Source: Ray-,nd Region: USGS 2001 Cali fornia Closest Disunce: 44.13 km Alltude units: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 6.80 - Fractile: O.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Colo- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-4 Colo- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cajbell Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-M 1 2 3 M 101-001 1.3350-001 0.0;1.lke-001 1.41$0-001 0.1 1.673&001 1.905:-001 0.2 2.3$10-001 2."le.001 0.3 2.37le-001 3.021.-001 0.4 2 174e-001 2 :0/-001 ilc Hazard Ar,84 a G 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 O.G 0.7 0.1 0.1 1 2 ] 3.33le-001 â€¢.372e-001 4.303/-001 4.00oe-001 3.69le-001 3.2â€¢Se-001 2.91.-001 2 6108.001 2 3//-001 2.111,-001 8 96:e-002 5.060e-002 3.*5Oe-002 Mean of Attenu kinson (2001) N -lozorgnia (200 ings (2007) r.9 4 8..â€¢e-002 1.04*e-001 1.525.-001 2 066/-001 2 0/2-001 1 905/-001 Page 45 111 3 -terallistic 3.203e-001 4.070(-001 3.943(-001 3.$671-001 3.163/-001 2,113/-001 2 525/-001 2 2//-001 2.07Oe-001 1.111/-001 7.729.-002 4.2 ;Ge.002 2.71;e-002 tion Equations A ugs 2001 ) 100 USCS 2001 USCS 2001 5 1.9912-002 1.07*e-001 1.550.-001 2 0812-001 2 01&-001 1 112'-001 ilc Hazard Analy,1-_SSâ€¢ .1-250 - Sels, 0.5 1.57;e-001 2.573/-001 0.6 1.74]e-001 2.2&-001 0.7 1.566(,-001 2.040e-001 0.8 1.40Ge-001 1.Ilie-001 0.9 1.260,-001 1.6095-001 1 1.14Oe-001 1442e-001 2 4.9576-002 $ille-002 3 2.Ile-002 3.1362-002 4 1.96/-002 2.144e-002 kource: Red â€¢ountain Region: USGS ZOOS Cilifornia Closest Oi,tance: 144.29 ki Amplitude Unlt' Acceleration (g) lugnitudeÂ· 7 40 - Fractile: 0 50 Colum 1: Spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted colin 3: Acceleration (g) for: 'core-ATI colurn 4: Acceleration (g) for: calb,01 Col,- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Ya 1 2 3 9 4.09*e-002 .267.-002 0.05 4.437e-002 4 50Oe-002 0.1 5.732e-002 5.461,5-002 0.2 1.661/-002 7.Â§70.-002 0.3 1.00$e-001 9.72Se-002 0.4 9.KE-002 9.92*-002 0.5 5.6*Oe-002 1.009e-001 0.6 5 1330-002 5 73â€¢e-002 0.7 1.6712-002 9 /41,-002 01 1.132e-002 ./20.-002 1.75Ge.001 1.54*e-001 1.393e-001 1.255,-001 1.133,-001 1.03â€¢e-001 $.Olle-002 3.12 le-002 2.264/.002 man of Attencat kinson (200Â§) NGâ€¢ Â·lozorgnia (2001) ung, (2007) â€¢GA u 4 4.223e-OOZ 4.677e-002 5.1 562-002 1.796e-002 1.027e-001 3.6/82.002 S.Glle-002 9 019,-002 1 Â§42.-002 7 995,-002 â€¢age 46 1 3 Deter,inistic 1.5%Â¢-001 1.413'-001 1 265 e-001 1.143e-001 1.0370-001 9.4312-002 3.953/-002 2 273e-002 1 .8.-002 on Equations USGS 2001 NGA USGS 2001 0 2008 3.80â€¢e-002 4.1342-002 5.180.-002 5.211/-002 1.015e-001 #.55.-002 9.330e-002 8.645â‚¬-002 1.0&-002 7.477e-002 -_SM vs-250 - Selimic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter,inistic 0.9 7.$42e-002 1.24,e-002 7.418.-002 6.96*e-002 4 -_SS* v,-250 - Selimic HazarÂ·d Analy:11 3 Deter,inlitÂ·Ic 1.51]e-002 1.9320-002 1.500e-002 1.10*e-002 1 7.034(-002 7.6* 3.-002 2 3.611/-002 3.742-002 3 2.217.-002 2.427e-002 4 1.603.-002 1.Be-002 source: Rose Canyon Reglon: USGS 200/ Callfornla Closest Distance: 13 77 km All,litude Uniti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude 6 90 - FractileÂ· 0 50 Colum 1 spectral Period Colu- 2Â· Acceleration (g) for: Welght Colu- 3- Acceleration (g) for: loore- Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: calbe colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou- 2 3 5.835Â¢-002 7.767.-002 6.450,-002 1.113,-002 1.114-002 1.055,-001 1 2.e-001 1.604'-001 1.342e-001 1.67le-001 1.26*-001 1.619,-001 1.-e.001 1.507â‚¬-001 1040,-001 1.34 le-001 9.43Ze-002 1.21&/-001 1.5102-002 1.104/-001 7.Ilse-002 1.005/-001 7.1:Oe-002 9.244.-002 3.42-002 4.5912.002 2.1342-002 2.6721-002 ed lean of Attenuation Equations Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 11-lozorgnia (2008) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 Voungs (2007) 16â€¢ USGS 2001 1 0 05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 06 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 6.93]e-002 3.901,-002 2 537e-002 1 lile.002 4 5.272Â®-002 6 0750-002 1.3032-002 1 1*Ze-001 1.2721.001 1.17Oe-001 1.0960-001 9.802.-002 1.9212-002 1.057.-002 7.329Â¢-002 6.703e-002 3 300e-002 2.05h-002 page â€¢7 6.4,7.-002 3.139+002 1.157,-002 1 287/-002 5 4.44,-002 5 16le-002 7.518/-002 1.067,-001 1.07Ge-001 9.91*-002 1.81*e-002 7.972e-002 7.222e-002 6.59*-002 6.061Â¢-002 5 553e-002 2 7/e-002 1.Glle-002 source: san cayetano Reguor: USGS 2001 California Closest 01.tance 10Â§.12 km *litude units: acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - FraCtile: 0.$0 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colurn 2: Acceleration (g) for: weight Col-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore- Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambe Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chuou. 1 2 3 F 5.23le-002 6.233,-002 0.05 5.7]le-002 6.5â€¢0.-002 01 7.Â§27e-002 1.198/-002 02 1.1222.001 1.215e-001 0.3 1.242e-001 1.3 le-001 04 1 185/-001 1.3646-001 0.5 1.130e-001 1.33Oe-001 0.6 1.04 le-001 1.235,-001 0.7 9.693e-002 1.16Â§e-001 0.1 8.46Â®-002 1.077Â®-001 0.9 8.190.-002 9.775.-002 1 7.55le-002 8.571â‚¬-002 2 3.6501-002 4.12Oe-002 3 2.237/-002 2.44,-002 4 1.5622-002 1.6*le-002 ed Mean of Attenuation Equation, Atkinion (2001) ,19 Usls 2001 11-lozorgnia (200*) NGA USGS 200 Â¥oungs (2007) NGA USGS 200/ 4 5 4.113,-002 4. 1.-002 S.437.-002 5.237e-002 7.059/-002 7 1*3e-002 1.0312-001 1 113,-001 1.165e-001 1.161/-001 1.016/-001 1.103e-001 1.052Â®-001 1.00:e-001 9.676,-002 9.17Ge-002 5.012.-002 1.4031-002 1.332.-002 7.737e-002 7.653/-002 7.1312-002 7.092e-002 6.59le-002 3.715/-002 3.044e-002 2.4 2 le-002 1 805'-002 1.7172-002 1.2112.002 Page 41 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_/SA vi-2$0 - Seismic Hazard Analy'ls 3 Deter-nlitic Source: San Gabriel Region: ISIS 200Â§ California closeit Distince: 71.01 km litude Mits: Acceleration (g) gnt We 7.30 - ./.ractile: 0.50 colum 1. Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore-Atkinion (200*) IGI ISIS ZOOS coluln 4 Acceleration (g) for: Cacpbell-lozorÂ·gria (2001) NU USIS 2001 col# 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-voung. (2007) NGâ€¢ uSGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 KI B. 577e-002 1115â‚¬-001 7.14â€¢e-002 7.â€¢OZe-002 0 05 S.63%e-002 1.2012-001 1.2244002 1.GR-002 0.1 1.30le-001 1.520.-001 1.112e-001 1.27le-001 0.2 1 771e-001 2 01â€¢e-001 1.57;e.001 1.74â€¢e-001 0.3 1.140e-001 2 07*e-001 1.70le-001 1.740e-001 0.4 1.73 le-001 2.0092-001 1.me-001 1.5952-001 0 5,1.624:-001 1.ile.001 1.$41Â®-001 1.434,-001 0.6 1.4*le-001 1.733e-001 1.42le-001 1.Zle-001 0.7 1.361/-001 1.6060-001 1.327Â¢-001 117le-001 0.;1.263e-001 1.4*le-001 1.233,-001 107â€¢e-001 0.5 1.16â€¢e-001 1 360,-001 1.1401.001 9.9070-002 1 1.080,-001 1 26Oe-001 1.062e-001 9.180)e-002 2 5.102.-002 6.77le-002 $.Ille-002 4.7â€¢le-002 3 3.707e-002 4.401.-002 3.107e-002 2 907e-002 â€¢ 2.64"-002 3.lâ€¢le.002 2.821.-002 1 %3e-002 -_ssâ€¢ 1250 - Setsâ€¢ic Hazard Analy,1, 3 Deterâ€¢inistic Magnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted *an of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3 Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NG* usls 2001 Coluin 4: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Calbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-voungs (2007) NGA ISIS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 Ps* 3.54â€¢e-001 2.950e-001 3.5/e-001 4.094-001 0.05 4.01#-001 3.3*le-001 4.0;Ze-001 4.800,-001 0.1 5.491*-001 4 79Â§/-001 5 4022-001 6 275.-001 02 7.2&-001 6.7:le-001 6.530e-001 7./431-001 0.3 7.541â‚¬-001 7.236,-001 7.227e-001 1.1;Se-001 0.4 7 34 le-001 6.947e-001 7.2$0e-001 7.825 1-001 0.5 7.0198-001 6.45$0-001 7 255e-001 7.308â‚¬-001 0.6 6.â€¢13.-001 5.923,-Col 6.7361-001 6.79Ze-001 0.7 6.04;e-001 ;475.-001 6.32$e-001 6.330e-001 0.8 5.58-001 4.959e-001 5 Dole.001 5.907e-001 0.9 5 125/-001 4.404e-001 5.471â‚¬-Col 5.50le-001 1 4 73Oe-001 3.Nle-001 5.113e-001 5.116/-001 2 2.27Se-001 1.769e-001 2 6$90-001 2.4092-001 3 1.34ge-001 1.06]e-001 1.572/-001 1.4112.001 4 9.351(-002 7.2260-002 1.150,-001 9.321/-002 Source. San Jose source: San Joaquin Hilll Region: USGS 2001 allfornia Illicit Ii'unce: 7.11 k= ullitude Uniti. Acceleration (g) Region: USGS MOB california closest Distance: 30 92 km flitude tmlts: Acceleration (g) Magnhude: 6.70 - FriCttle: 0.$0 Colum 1: Spectral eriod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted war, of Attenuation Equations â€¢age 4,Page 50 -_ssâ€¢ v:-2$0 - setsâ€¢ic ),azard Analy.1 3 Deter-inistic ._Sy v.250 - Seismic Hazard Analy,i; 3 DeterÂ·minliticColi,1 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkwlion (200*) 9 USGS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 11-lozorgnia (2001) IA USGS ZOO)Â§ oungs (2007) Nu USGS 2001 :ed Me inuation Equations Atkir ,NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 11-Ic '001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2008 YIn,9 usls 2001 colwin 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabe Colu=Â· 5: Acceleration (g) forÂ· chnou- 1 2 3 M 1.276e-001 1.$7Ze-001 0.05 1.477e-001 1.71le-001 0.1 2.12le-001 2 349â‚¬-001 0.2 2.153Â¢-001 3.40Â§(-001 0.3 2 116/-001 3.329,-001 0.4 2 1112-001 3.12Oe-001 0.;2.32Oe-001 211/-001 0.6 2.029/-001 2.450/-001 0.7 1.1002-001 2.17le-001 0.8 1.6251-001 1.Ille-001 0,1.466/-001 1.75le-001 1 1.33Ge-001 1.$92,-001 2 6.342e-002 7.4:Ge-002 3 3.70Â§,-002 4.17/1.002 â€¢ 2.57*-002 2.544.-002 source. Santa Cruz Island Region: ISIS 2001 Callforma Closest Distance: 127.15 Irm plitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude 7.20 - Fractile: 0.50 colu- 1: Spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weigh, A Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: laureÂ· olu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca,Oh /Colin 5: Acceleration (g) forÂ· chiouÂ· 1.156/-001 1.3158-001 2.072e-001 2.7â€¢Ze-001 2 691.-001 2.4511-001 2.235/-001 1.9/e-001 1.7412.001 1.562e-001 1.405â‚¬-001 1.279e-001 6.1297-002 3.77le-002 2.721/.002 Â·an of Atti lion (2001: izorgrul C 1. (2007) 1 Page 51 5 1.10le-001 1 33]e-001 1.We-001 2.53]e-001 2.4292-001 2.17 le-001 1.9070-001 1.61*-001 1.50Se-001 1 365/-001 1.242e-001 1.136/-001 5.410e-002 3.162 e-002 2 065'+002 1.nuati n. ki, - 00.)00. CA ul m 4.144-002 4.7Sle-002 0.05 4.ille-002 5.03*e-002 0.1 5.917e-002 6.260â‚¬.002 0.2 1.1351-002 9.243/+002 0.3 5.158/-002 1.042e-001 0â€¢9.$13e-002 1.0512-001 0;9.20*e-002 1.037,-001 0.6 1.511,-002 '.663.-002 0.7 7.5452-002 5 101.-002 01 7.390e-002 1.517e-002 0,6. 7.-002 7Â·,24 e-oe 1 6.]Ve-002 7.4210-002 2 3.447e-002 â€¢0/le-002 3 2.177e-002 2 59]e-002 â€¢ 1.80+002 1.15*+002 SourceÂ· Santa Rosi Island Region usls 2008 California closest DIstance: 117.14 ki Amplitude Units: Accelerition (g) Magnitude: 6.90 1- Fractile: 0.50 Coh,- 1: Spectral â€¢er lod colu,11 2 Acceleration (g) for: weightee coluin 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-At col.-1 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell Colo- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Ye 1 2 3 M 1.183.-002 1 767e-002 0.05 1 592/.002 1.8/e-002 0.1 2 $64.-002 2.274,-002 4.212/-002 4.716.-002 6.05;e-002 1.9740-002 1.024-001 9.576.-002 9.302e-002 1.Â§70e-002 7 9567-002 7 397,-002 6.7Sle-002 6.29le-002 3.34*-002 2.142e-002 1 3102-002 Ban of Atte tion (2001) izorgnia (2 p (2007) I 2.560e-002 2.114Â¢.002 3.535e+002 Page 52 3.â€¢23Â®-002 3 7110-002 5.4/1-002 1.21*e-002 1.915/-002 1 5938-002 7.9501-002 7.30le-002 6 7392-002 6.256/-002 5.12Ge-002 5.4â€¢le-002 2.9lle-002 1 7950-002 1.213.-002 on Equatio USGS 2001 9 USGS 2 .Gs 2001 5 1.323e-002 1.3&12-002 1 Ille-002 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SSâ€¢ 9$-250 - Selsâ€¢ic luzard Analy$11 3 Oeteminlitic 4.25le-002 4.112e-002 5.31Ge-002 3.27$e-002 5.136.-002 5.1e- 002 6.320.-002 3.Kne-002 5.1$3e.002 5 539,-002 5.197/-002 4 02â€¢e-002 5.0302-002 5.60Oe-002 $.602.-002 3.819e-002 4.66Se-002 5.2 4e-002 5.067.-002 3.676.-002 4 37le-002 â€¢996'-002 4.654/-002 3 462/.002 4.069.-002 4.707e-002 4 239â‚¬-002 3.262&002 3.71*.002 4.406.-002 3.1301-002 3.07le-002 3.514e-002 4.15]e-002 3.497,-002 2.153/-002 1.156Â¢-002 2.2742.002 1.702e-002 1.553/-002 1 13Oe-002 1.34*-002 1 060,-002 9.802.-003 1 05 le-003 9.162e-003 7.72Oe-003 6.Wle-003 Source Santa Susana. alt 1 Region: USGS 2001 Callfornia cloilit DisunceÂ· 13.13 ki Al,}litude Units: Acceleration (g) -gnitude: 6.00 - FraCtile: 0.50 colu- 1: spectral Period Colu-, 2 Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colum 3 Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA ISIS 2008 coh- 4. Acceleration (g) for: Culbell-mozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2008 Colt- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Young, (20)07) NO:A USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 0 6.Olle-002 7.756.-002 5.30*e-002 4. 7.-002 0 05 6.6/le-002 0.10/e-002 6.11le-002 5.720e-002 0.1 9 loSe-002 1.05/e-001 1 36.-002 8.3538-002 0.2 1.34 le-001 1.656,-001 1.190,+001 1.1770-001 03 1.430e-001 1.124,-001 1.280/-001 1.lile-001 0.4 1.332,-001 1.724e-001 1.177e-001 1.05le-001 0.5 1 234,-001 1.62Oe-001 1 1032-001 9.807,-002 â€¢age 53 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 3 ._SM vs-250 - Seismic Hazard Arnaly,i; 3 Deterministic O.G 1.107e-001 1.455e-001 9.163,-002 1.79le-002 0.7 1.007e-001 1 330â‚¬-001 S.5752-002 7.950e-002 0.1 9.130e-002 1.200e-001 1.1472-002 7.240e-002 0.5 1.237e-002 1.072e-001 7.373e-002 6.615/-002 1 7.â€¢Ve-002 5.19]e-002 G.7442-002 6.05$e-002 2 3.35Ge-002 4.0952-002 3 32le-002 2.65le-002 3 1.95Ge-002 2.2e-002 2.072.-002 1.53 le-002 4 1.3.e-002 1.555,-002 1.$0Se-002 1.01Oe-002 Source Santa YneZ (Mt) Region. USGS 2001 Calfornia clomt Distance: 126.31 k, Amplitude Uniti AcCeleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0 50 Colum 1: spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted Mear of Attenuation Equations colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore.Atkinion (2008) 1Â«1â€¢ USGS ZOOS colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Carlpbell-lozorÂ·gria (2008) NIA USGS 2001 Colwin 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlow.voungs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 KA 4.23*e-002 4 552e-002 4.266.-002 3.496.-002 0 05 4.Glle-002 3.2018-002 â€¢779,-002 3.871,-002 0.1 6.08-002 6.468.-002 6 147 e-002 5.569,-002 0.2 9.027e-002 9.51Se-002 9.OVe-002 1.466'-002 0.3 1.00Se-001 1.0&-001 1.037e-001 5,0*Ze.002 0.4 9,753/-002 1 013/-001 9.04/-002 *73*e-002 0.5 5.362/-002 1 060e-001 5.415/-002 1.074-002 0.6 8..6.-002 9.*SSe.002 8.672 e.002 7.408.+002 0.7 1.067 e-002 9.276e-002 1.091.-002 6 1330-002 0.1 7.495.-002 1.673e-002 7.4â€¢e-002 6 340.-002 0.9 6.546Â®-002 1 064.-002 G.171/-002 5 501.-002 Page 5â€¢ ..SM vs-250 - Se*$mic Hazard Anily,11 3 Deternintitic -_SM vi-250 - Seisic Hazard Analy,li 3 Deterministic ed â€¢e Atkl 11-10 1 Young 1 6.477,-002 7.555/-002 2 3.4*De-002 4.1/32-002 3 2 202e-002 2.Â§3le-002 4 1 5682-002 1.115,-002 source: santa Â¥nez (west) Region: USGS 2001 California Cloiest 01,tance: 179.06 ki Allitude tmits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0 50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weight colu- 3 Acceleration (g) for: loore- Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cipbe Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou- 2 3 2.17Se-002 2.105e-002 2.315/-002 2.16Se-002 2.Vie-002 2.706*-002 4.15 le-002 4 652.-002 5.791/.002 5.Me-002 5.79/-002 6.13Ze-002 5.6632-002 6.197'-002 5.272e-002 5.ilie-002 â€¢.54*e-002 5.56â€¢e-002 4 6170-002 5.253â‚¬-002 4.215e-002 4.52â€¢e-002 4.003e-002 4.64.-002 2.144e-002 2.575/-002 1.323/-002 1.565.-002 ' 425.-003 1 137e-002 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 3 6.316â‚¬-002 5.$09,5-002 3.38*e-002 2.54le-002 2.164-002 11100-002 1.5552-002 12ZZe-002 an of Attenuation Equation, don (200*) NGA VSGS ZOOS izorgnia (2001) igi USGS 200 is (2007) .. USGS 2001 5 2.123,-002 1.609.-002 3.107e-002 1.672 e-002 3."51.002 2.33le-002 5.927e-002 3.9730-002 6.952/-002 4.657e-002 6.500e-002 4.75 le-002 6.230e-002 4.561/-002 5.67*e-002 â€¢.254/-002 5.247 e-002 4.03â€¢e.002 4.80.-002 3 7-e-002 4.363e-002 3.;le-002 4.003e-002 3.355.-002 2.005e-002 1 152 e-002 1.25Se-002 1 144e-002 5.207Â®-003 7.7032-003 Page 55 Source: Santa vrez connected Region: ISIS ZOOS California Closeit DistanceÂ· 126.73 6 Molitude unitiÂ· Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.40 - Fractile. O 50 Colu- 1: Spectral â€¢ericd Colu-, 2: acceleration (g) for: weight. colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Al Colum â€¢ Acceleration (O) for. CaN,bell Colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-vi 1 2 3 4.7%*-002 5.$12e-002 0.0;5.2â€¢Ze-002 5.137{-002 0.1 6.115,-002 7.1â€¢2e-002 0.2 5.53*e-002 9.1432-002 0.3 1 10*e-001 1.105/-001 0.4 1.0/le-001 1.128e-001 0.5 1.04*e-001 1.117e-001 0.6 9.791/-002 1.05*-001 0.7 9.225e-002 1.007e-001 0.1 1.*Ge -002 '.510.-002 0.9 1 0612-002 1.905&-002 1 7.562e-002 1 39*-002 2 4.2312-002 4.7980-002 3 2.755/+002 3.2 lle-002 â€¢ 1.9*â€¢e-002 2.212,-002 source: Sierra ludre I ./an of Attenuation Equations kinion (2001) u USGS 200/ Bozorgnia (2001) NG* USGS 2001 Ings (2007) NGA USGS 2001 4 700â‚¬-002 5.244e-002 6.65;e-002 9.115.-002 1 131/-001 1072e-001 1.062/-001 '.53.-002 9.400â‚¬-002 1.79*e-002 1 161.-002 7.639-002 4.300e-002 2.795e-002 2.075e-002 Page 56 4.175â‚¬-002 â€¢.626e-002 6.641.-002 1.001,-001 1.012Â¢-001 1.0â€¢Ze-001 9.650e-002 1 173,-002 8 20â€¢e-002 7.62Se-002 7.117e-002 6.660(:-002 3.ille.002 2.25le-002 1.5317-002 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SSA Ii-2$0 - Sel-ic HazarÂ·d Anily,1,3 Determinlitic Region. ISIS ZOOS California Closest Di,unce: 41.90 ki Uohtude Uniti Acceleration (g) gnitude. 7 20 - IK'lle: 0.50 lolu- 1Â· Spectral period Coli- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuatlon Equations Colu- 3: Acceleratlon (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caipbill-lozorgnia (2001) NGA ISIS 2001 ColLin 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlow+Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ usls 2001 1 2 3 4 5 PGA 1.2712-001 1 55/0-001 1043e-001 1 2356.001 0 05 1.4 He-001 1.6502-001 1.227'.001 1 477e.001 0.1 2.0362-001 2.213e-001 1.744e-001 2.1511-001 0.2 2 730,-001 3.023e-001 2.37'e-001 2.122/-001 0.3 2.7W-001 3 1542-001 2.â€¢3:e-001 2.757.-001 04 2.512/-001 2 91'e-001 2.25:e-001 2 504/.001 0.5 2.397e-001 2.796e-001 2.166e-001 2.230e-001 0.6 2.17 le-001 2.5462-001 1.9732-001 1.Ne-001 0.7 1.9931-001 2.353e-001 1.1232-001 1.10]e-001 0.8 1.12Oe-001 2.134e-001 1.683,-001 1.643 e-001 0.9 1.653/-001 1.906e-001 1.$52,-001 1 503/.001 1 1.51â€¢e-001 1.722e-001 1.4437.001 1 371/.001 2 7.227/-002 7.634-002 7.*972-002 6 151/-002 3 4.4352.002 4.121/-002 5.074e-002 3.60/e-002 3 1023.002 3.1;Oe.002 3.744e-002 2.4lle-002 source: Sierra Â»adre (San Ferrundo) Region: USGS 200* cal, forn la Closest Distance: 67.94 km Alitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.70 I, â€¢age 57 -_SSA /$-2$ Fractile: 0 50 Colu- 1: Spectril Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Colum 3 acceleration (g) for: Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for 1 2 3 m 6. Gâ€¢Oe-002 1 12 0.05 7.412.-002 ,Â·24 0.1 1.037e-001 1.23 0.2 1.516e-001 1.96 0.3 1 571e.001 2.10 0.4 1 /43/-001 1.93 0.5 1.3132-001 1.71 0.6 1.159e-001 1.57 0.7 1.040(-001 1.41 0..5 323.-002 1.2/ 0.9 8.33*e-002 1.11 1 7.531/-002 100 2 3.214-002 4.03 3 1.1232-002 2.14 4 1 2$12-002 1.45 Source: Sierra Madre Connected Region USGS ZOOS California Closest Olitance. 41 Â§0 ki Alitude UnitsÂ· Acceleration (, lugnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0 50 Coh- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleranon (g) for: Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: 0 - selliic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter,inistic weighted lean of Attenuation Equations loore.Atkinson (2008) NGA USGS 2001 Cabell-lozorÂ·gnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Chlou-Youngs (2007) NGA ISIS 2001 le-002 7e.002 Ge-001 0.-001 3e-001 6,-001 le-001 le-001 Ze-001 ,Oe-001 5e+001 Ile-001 Ile-002 13.-002 ,le-002 1) Weighted I nuati loore-Atkli M USGS ZOOS $.850â‚¬-002 6.136e-002 9.654,5+002 1.344-001 1.406,-001 1 ZIZe-001 1.174e-001 1.Olle-001 9.23*e-002 1.2*le-002 7.423e+002 6.73 le-002 3.1â€¢42-002 1.929/-002 1.393/-002 :an of Attâ‚¬ 'son (200,1 .age %1 5.24le-002 G.1;2Â¢-002 9.093e-002 1.242/-001 1.2261-001 1.11Ze-001 9.8522-002 8.7â€¢7e-002 7..6.-002 7 094-002 6.43*-002 5.1&5e-002 2.467.-002 1.396,-002 5 080.-003 on Equations -_SSâ€¢ vs-2$0 - Sel Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CANt>el Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: ChlowÂ» 1 2 3 9 1.331Â¢+001 1.Â§05.-001 0.01 1.$27/-001 175 le-001 01 2.112e-001 2.276.-001 0.2 2.Ilie-001 3.03Oe-001 0.3 2.1.3.-001 3.212e-001 0.4 2.670,-001 3.00:e-001 0.5 2 â€¢92.-001 2.1332-001 0.6 2.27 le-001 2.60le-001 07 2.OR-001 2/10:-001 0.1 1.92 Ze-001 2.20â€¢e-001 0.9 1.7;le.001 1.973/-001 1 1.609e-001 1.71*e-001 2 7.1546-002 8.0&-002 3 4.1962-002 5.0$32-002 4 3.â€¢34-002 3.442.-002 Source: 511.Santa Rola Region: UMS 200Â§ california Closnt Disunce: 94.17 ki Al,litude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - Fractile: O.50 Col-1 1: Spectral â€¢enod Colum 2 Acceleration (g) for: welghte Colum 3 Acceleration (g) for: Boore-A . Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: c///bel olum $: Accelerat,on (g) for: Chiou-i smic Hazard Anily,11 3 Deterainistic 1-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2008 oungs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 1 ins 001 1.075e-001 1 2Gle.001 1 7lle.001 2.4212-001 2.5012-001 2.33 le-001 2.2;le-001 2.074e-001 1.930â‚¬.001 1.792,-001 1.6617-001 1.552e-001 1.7â€¢4e-002 5.66*e-002 4.201Â¢-002 d /,an of Attenuat tkinion (2001) pil 1-1.zorgnia (2001) oungs (2007) NGA L . Page 59 1.31â€¢e-001 1.569/-001 2.2788-001 2.990/-001 2.9311-001 2.670,-001 2.3lle-001 2.13*e-001 1.937,-001 1.76Se-001 1.621/-001 1.48*e-001 6.720e-002 3.56#+002 2.661,-002 on Equatlc USGS 2001 NGA USGS 2 IS 2008 S Hazard Analy.1 nuati 001) CA US -_SM vs.250 - Sel-ic â€¢Gâ€¢ 5.110e-002 6.57 le-002 0.05 5.616,-002 6.13 le-002 0.1 7 624/-002 .. 5.-002 0.2 1.127/.001 1.369â‚¬-001 0.3 1.19*-001 1.455.-001 0.4 1.13le-001 1 â€¢Zle-001 0;1.Me-001 1 333e-001 06 '.40*-002 1 192/-001 0.7 1.5612.002 1.085e-001 0.1 7.10 le-002 9.195.-002 0.9 7.117e-002 9.0331-002 1 6.547/-002 1.32.-002 2 3 257â‚¬-002 â€¢177e-002 3 1.5472-002 2 â€¢3le-002 4 1.379,-002 1 76le-002 source: so Emerson-Copper â€¢rtn Region: USGS 200* California closeit Di,unceÂ· 151 57 km Amplltude units: Accelerition (O) lugnitude. 7 10 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Me Colo- 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Arkir colu- â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: ca*,bell-li colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youn, 1 2 3 9 3.033,-002 3.2478-002 0 05 3 262e-002 3.37â€¢e-002 0.1 .241.-002 4.203e-002 0.2 6.610Â®-002 6 66$'-002 4Â· 724.+002 5.401.-002 7 3010.002 1 0502-001 1.14le-001 1.05â€¢e-001 9.1912-002 1 1612-002 8 075.-002 7.332,-002 6.63â€¢e-002 6.065e-002 2.97%-002 1.*le.002 1.33]e.002 an of Atte ison (200Â§) izorgnia (2 13 (2007) h 4 3.4551-002 3.83le-002 4.87Oe-002 7.308.-002 Page 60 1 3 Deter,1.1.tic 4.me-002 4.605e-002 6 722,-002 5 632,-002 9.157e-002 9.171/-002 1.267e-002 7.4â€¢le-002 6. 86/-002 6.183.-002 $.61;e-002 5.25Oe-002 2.614,-002 1.$5le-002 1.023e-002 on Equations USGS 2008 9 USGS 2001 cs ZOoS 5 2 3Â§Ge-002 2 574/-002 3 652/-002 5 157/-002 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SSA .1-250 - Selli 7.615e.002 7.146.-002 7.5050-002 8.139â‚¬-002 7.267.-002 8 092,-002 6 731.-002 7.5711-002 G.3041-002 7.lee-002 5.ille-002 6.73;e-002 5.4â€¢3e-002 6.217,-002 5.07Se-002 5.912e-002 2.72;e-002 3 Me-002 1.7012-002 2.02le-002 1.212e-002 1.457(:-002 Source: 50 Sierra â€¢evada Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 170.77 km Amlitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magrlture: 7.50 - Fractlle: O 50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Ati Colu- â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell Coluin Â§: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-v, 1 2 3 M 2.741/-002 2.4.e-002 0.05 2.963.-002 2.613.-002 0.1 3.11]e-002 3.301,-002 0.2 6.10Se-002 ..765â‚¬-002 0.3 7 216â‚¬-002 ;.737.-002 0.4 7.32Oe-002 6.1760-002 0.5 7.34*e-002 6.42*-001 06 6.937/.002 5.0770.002 alc Hazard â€¢naly,11 3 Deter-nistic G . 1 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 07 0.1 0.9 1 3 1.4$]e-002 7.'04.-002 7.6232-002 6.91.-002 6.417.-002 5.971/-002 5.â€¢Sle-002 102/.002 2 tle-002 1.64â€¢e-002 1.20*e-002 Mean of Attenu (inion (2001) h Â·lozorgnia (200 ing i (2007) NGâ€¢ 3.4 He-002 3.107.-002 4.7;le-002 7 910(-002 9.54+02 9.OR-002 9.0972-002 1.61$,5-002 Page 61 6 5472-002 6.47 le-002 6.085e-002 5.6$0â‚¬-002 5.25$e-002 4.906.-002 4 51%-002 4.30le-002 2.3315.002 1.431/-002 9.702,-003 till Equation, A uses 2001 ) I. US<IS 200 USGS 2001 2.2700-002 2.399â‚¬-002 3.310,5-002 5.64"-002 6.57*.002 6.730,-002 6.52Ge-002 6.2198-002 -_.B v-250 - seismic 0.7 6.$19.-002 5.627e-002 0.1 6.21*e-002 5.27 le-002 0.'5.13*-002 â€¢.Slie-002 1 5.454/-002 4.ille-002 2 3.1*le-002 2.61]e-002 3 2.05â€¢e-002 1.710e-002 4 1.â€¢'.-002 1.273e-002 Source. ventura-Pita. Point Region. USGS 2001 California Cloiest Distance: 131.21 h Aq,litude Uniti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 w Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Me Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for loore-Atkir Colu= 4: Acce'eration (g) for Cal:pbell-Ic CON- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-voun, 1 2 3 M 4.Olle+002 â€¢.043e-002 0.05 4.340,-002 4 173/-002 0.1 5.734e-002 5.290e-002 0.2 1.Ille-002 ..664/-002 0.3 1.013e-001 1.037e-001 0.4 5.741,-002 1.02'e-001 0.5 9 31â€¢e-002 1.00*-001 0.6 1 &47e-002 9.3702-002 0.7 7.926(-002 1.757.-002 0.1 7.275e-002 1.1 lle-002 0.'6.6132-002 7.362e-002 1 6.059,-002 6.75 le-002 Hazard Anily,11 3 Deter,inistic nuati INGA I Col) 1 GA US 8.227.-002 7.7;Ze-002 7.22le-002 6.777.-002 3 507'-002 2.562e-002 1.91;e-002 an of Atte i.on (2001) zorgnia (2 i. (2007) I 4..1.-002 5.355e-002 6.977,-002 1.037.-001 1.1*le+001 1.102,-001 1052e-001 5 &5*e-002 1.11Ze-002 1.021.-002 7.219,-002 6.$7Oe-002 Page 62 91â€¢e-002 $ 630/-002 S.3$]e-002 5.017.-002 2.9712-002 1.115.-002 1.207/-002 on Equation, USGS 2001 NGA USGS 200 GS 2001 5 3.14*e-002 3.44/5.002 4.533e-002 7./2/-002 1.19/e-002 7.920e-002 7.326,-002 6.712e-002 6.Noe-002 -&-002 5.257/-002 â€¢.155.-002 -_SSâ€¢ vi-250 - Mimic Mazard Analysis 3 Deter,inistic 2 2.01.-002 3.0]Ge-002 2.12*e-002 2.212e-002 -_Sli v-250 - Sels-ic Hazard Analysis 3 oeteriinistic 3 1.5â€¢98-002 1.739e-002 1.61*e-002 1.21.-002 4 1.0712-002 1.19.-002 1.Me-002 1.537,-003 Source: verdugo Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Disunce: 47 23 ki 41tude uniti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.K) - Fractile: 0 50 Colu- 1: Spectral Perlod Coluin 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted an of Attenuarlon Equat,ons Colu- 3 Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2008 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: C,Bbell-lozorÂ·grna (2001) NGA LISGS ZOOS column $: Acceleration (g) for: Chlow-Voungs (2007) NGA usls 2001 2 3 4 5 1.02*e-001 1.32Oe-001 8.62â‚¬e-002 9.0160-002 1.16Ge-001 1.402e-001 1.01*e-001 1.071.-001 1.640,-001 1.16De-001 1.46'e-001 1.5*le-001 2.290/.001 2.780.-001 1.9567-001 2.095 e-001 2.33le-001 2.,2 le-001 2.03*e-001 2.034e-001 2.137,-001 2.713,-001 1.lile-001 1.132/-001 1.9538-001 2.503.-001 1.73*e-001 1611/-001 1.73Ge-001 2.225e-001 1.54*-001 1 â€¢370-001 1.56*e-001 2.01 je-001 1.4010-001 1.2908-001 1.4 lle-001 1.80/e-001 1 27.-001 1.168/.001 1.27Ze-001 1.60le-001 1.152#-001 1.062/-001 1.154/-001 1.438.-001 1.056e-001 9.6:Ze-002 5.13]e-002 5.964.-002 5.27Ge-002 4.16(e.002 2.95Â¢e-002 3.255,-002 3.30Oe-002 2.38-002 2.07Ge-002 2.2&22-002 2.40â€¢e-002 1.572/-002 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 09 1 2 3 source: white wolf Region: USGS 200* Cillforn li Clomt Disunce: 170 25 km A*litude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20- Fractlle: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (O) for: weighted *an of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3Â· Acceleration (O) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) Nu UMS 2001 Colu- 4 Acceleranon (g) for: Calpbell-lozorgria (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) Mci usGS 200* 1 2 3 4 $ 2 7-003 2 6/01-002 3.305/-002 2.399.-002 0 05 2 Ize-002 2.7*2e-002 3.Â§37e-002 2.52*e-002 0.1 3"/-002 3.41*e-002 .531.-002 3.545/-002 0.2 ,110e-002 5.5632-002 6 1:Oe.002 5.ille-002 0.3 7.33le-002 7.1230-002 1.100,+002 6.77le-002 0.4 7.21*e-002 7.415e-002 7.616/-002 6.126.-002 o.s 7.lile-002 7.607e-002 7 â€¢362-002 6.507e-002 0.6 6.767Â¢-002 7.327 e-002 6.17*e-002 6.057,-002 0.7 6.414,-002 7.0572-002 6.440,-002 5.705/-002 0.1 6.003.-002 6.703/-002 5.56;e-002 5.342e-002 0.9 $.$,Se-002 6.1972-002 5.473â‚¬-002 4.996/-002 1 5.170/-002 5.777e-002 5.0612-002 4.6662-002 2 2.51$2.002 2 107/-00 2 2.617e-002 2.272e-002 3 1.5982-002 1.7097-002 1.716e -002 1.3Ue-002 4 1.11*e-002 1.lee-002 1.266.-002 5.232/-003 source: ali fornia Gri dded Region: usls 2001 California Page 63 page 6â€¢ SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_siA vi-250 - Sel-ic Mazard Anily, 1, 3 Deter-lnlitic Closest Distance: 5.00 km plitude Uniti: Acceleration (O) Magnitude: 7 00 - -ractileÂ· 0.50 lum 1: Spectral Perlod VEolum 2: Acceleranon (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equation, Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2008) NGA USGS 2008 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C-pbell-mozorgnia (2001) NGA VISCS 2001 Colu=7 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) kil USGS 200* 1 2 3 4 5 4.707e-001 4.710/-001 4.104â‚¬-001 5.326e-001 0.05 3.474/-001 3.7/2-001 â€¢.;Ve-001 6.132/-001 0.1 7.105.-001 7.9978+001 5.659'-001 7.676.-001 0.2 9.35Ze-001 lillie/000 7 2*Se.001 5 6332-001 0.3 5 980.-001 1.1961+000 7.19%-001 1.0010+000 0.4 9 Ile-001 1.115.+000 1.191â‚¬-001 5.836(-001 05 9.193/-001 1.1101+000 1.357.-001 9.3112-001 0.6 8.90)Oe-001 1.012e+000 7.125,-001 1.7;le-001 0.7 1.3288-001 5.36â€¢e-001 7 â€¢Ole-001 1 211.-001 0.1 7.70Oe-001 1.466â‚¬-001 6 5270.001 7 70/2-001 0.9 7.043e+001 7.508.-001 6.â€¢2 le.001 7 20Oe-001 1 6 4//-001 6.7â€¢le-001 G.oole-001 6 701.-001 2 3 172/-001 3.3â€¢0/.001 3.1492-001 3.21Ge-001 3 1.542-001 2.0&-001 1.*65â‚¬-001 1.93*e-001 4 1.3522-001 1.4310-001 1.36*e-001 1.2le-001 Source: Arucapu-Ou- Region: USGS ZOO' California Closest Distance: 66.62 ki Allitude Uniti: Acceleration (g) Magni tide. 7 20 - Fractile. 0 50 Page B -_SM vi-250 - Sel=le Coluin 1: Spectral Perlod Col,-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Me Cok- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkin Colum â€¢: Acceleratlon (g) for: Ca,obell.10 Coluln $ Acceleration (g) for Chiou-va,ng 1 2 3 9 5.Gne-002 1.132e-001 0.05 1.017/.001 1.207(-001 0.1 1 â€¢/0,-001 1.54/e-001 0.2 2.05Â§/-001 2.167e-001 0.3 2.165e-001 2.34Oe-001 0.4 2.01*+001 2.2052-001 0.$1.150,+001 2.084{:-001 0.6 1.719â‚¬-001 1.90*-001 0.7 1.5/8/001 1.766e-001 0.1 1.44Se-001 1.605(-001 0.5 1.314.-001 1.44$0-001 1 1.203,-001 1.312e-001 2 5.â€¢2.-002 5.Hle-002 3 3 2000-002 3.5207-002 4 2 2312-002 2 3'/-002 Source: Chino Region: USGS 200* California Closest 01,tance: 22.52 ki Illitude Units Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.10 - Fractile: 0.%0 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (9) for: weighted I Colurn 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkii Coluln 4: Acceleration (0) for: cazbell-li ward Analysis 3 Deterministic an of Attenuati, lori (2001) NU I zorgnia (200/) 1 (2007) NGâ€¢ u. inuati NGA USGS 2001 001) NGA USGS 2001 9.305.-002 1.062,-001 1.444e-001 2.0450-001 2.20 je-001 2 059.-001 1.9912-001 1.125/-001 1.696.-001 1.$60,3-001 1423,-001 1.310,+001 6.0721-002 3.54*e-002 2.Glle-002 an of Atte ison (2001) izer-gria G â€¢age 66 On Equations USGS 2008 NGA USCS ZOO 05 2008 $ 1 4.-002 9.92.-002 1.44*e-001 1.5656-001 1.9*-001 1.7e-001 1.5.2-001 1.427e-001 1 291'-001 1 176/-001 1.07Ge-001 9.162e-002 4.3Goe-002 2.531Â®-002 1.675e-002 on Equations -_SSâ€¢ v;-250 - Selsitc Maard Analysis 3 Determinlitic Colvin 5: Acceleration (g) for Chiou.Â¥c*Ings (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 0 1.6742-001 1.9168-001 1.$3*e-001 1.58*-001 0.0;1.960)e-001 2 10Â§â‚¬-001 1,13Â®-001 1.927e-001 0.1 2.136e-001 2.53*-Col 2 777e-001 2.7952-001 0.2 3.7952-001 4.201â‚¬-001 3 6200.001 3 564,-001 0.3 3.67&-001 4.09;e-001 3.$13,-001 3 4278.001 0.4 3.3932-001 3.SOSe-001 3.2.2-001 3 0711-001 0.5 3.06Oe-001 3.5;4,-001 2.95 le-001 2.71;e-001 0.6 2.615e-001 3.114e-001 2.jile-001 2.4112-001 0.7 2.40Oe-001 2.7152.001 2.304e-001 2.16Ge-001 0.2.160,-001 2.502 e-001 2.070,-001 1.963,-001 0.,1.9$32-001 2.253,+001 1.16*e-001 1.7.e-001 1 1.7122-001 2.052â‚¬-001 1.704e-001 1.631.-001 2 1.577.-002 5.".e-002 1.2'le-002 7.7;le-002 3 4.9750.002 5 $782-002 5.010e-002 4.â€¢4Se-002 4 3.450/-002 3.9:le-002 3.5632-002 2.177 e-002 source: Ellinore Region USGS 2001 California Closest Distance 11 19 13 Awlitude Units: acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.85 - FraCtile: 0.SO Coll-1 1: Spectral Period Colum 2 Acceleration (g) for. weighted Mean of Attenumon Equations Colu- 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA uSGS 2008 colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: clipbell.lozorÂ·gnia (2008) NGA ISIS ZOOS Acolu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-vc*,ng, (2007) NGA USGS 2008 12 3 4 5 pal 2.491(-001 2.62Ge-001 2.056e.001 2.790/-001 Page 67 -_SM v:-250 - Selimic Mazard Analy,1, 3 Deterministic 0 05 2 517/-001 3.03le-001 2.403e-001 3.311/-001 0.1 3 9664-001 3.552-001 3.3761-001 4.567.-001 0.2 4.57.-001 4.$65â‚¬-001 4.44]e-001 $.Sok-001 0.3 5.Olle-001 4 713e-001 4.53]e-001 5.Ile-001 0.4 4.142/-001 4.5lle-001 4.831-001 5.65$e-001 0.5 4.65*e-001 4.211.-001 â€¢477e-001 5.217Â¢-001 0.6 4.38*e-001 4.0;Ge-001 4.302,-001 4.10:e-001 0.7 4.165(:-001 3.17â€¢e-001 4.1582-001 4.463e-001 0.1 3.929â‚¬-001 3.61*e.001 4.00â€¢e-001 4.16Ge-001 0.9 3.61]e-001 3.301(+001 3.ille-001 3.lgle-001 1 3 â€¢72e-001 3 05*-001 3.70]e-001 3.657e-001 2 2 152e-001 1 867,-001 2.55le-001 2.037e-001 3 1.50*-001 1.477e-001 1.74e-001 1.29le-001 4 1.0972-001 1.077e-001 1.327e-001 1.86Â§e-002 Source: Garlock Region: USGS 2008 Californli Closest Distance: 146 54 km Illitude unitsÂ· Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.72 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1 Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (9) for: weighted lean of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3 Acceleration (g) for: loore-Arkinion (2001) IGA ISCS ZOOS Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: CM*bell-lozorgnia (2001) IKGA USGS 2001 Colurn 5. Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Voungs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 KGA 4 *4-002 $0232-002 4.93/-002 4.5*-002 0 05 $272.-002 ;â€¢231-002 5.418/.002 4.97;e-002 0.1 6.6&-002 6.356*-002 6.630,-002 7.06Oe-002 0.2 9 721/-002 1.0712-002 1003e-001 1.107e-001 0.3 1117e-001 9 3671-002 1.1932-001 1.223e-001 Page G. SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 1 Hazard Analy'i I nuati : 001) Gâ€¢ Ul -_SSA V.-230 - Seismic 1.111/.001 9.9031-002 1.10Ge-001 1.01Se-001 1.055,-001 5 997e-002 1.01/1-001 9.13Â§e-002 9.705e-002 9.5132-002 9.174,-002 5.07 le-002 1.7lle-002 8.6532-002 5 24â€¢e-002 5.407e-002 3.$61.-002 3.96$e-002 2.$50e-002 2.761.-002 source Malibu Coast Region:"5 2001 California Closest .stance. ..75 k. Iolitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0 50 Colum 1: Spectral Period column 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted M Colun, 3: Acceleration (g) for Boore-Atkil colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca*bell-li Colt-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-lourM 1 2 3 â€¢CA 1.0122-002 1.07$e-001 0 05 1.9132-002 1.139e-001 0.1 1.2311-001 14//0-001 0.2 1.73â€¢e-001 2.13Oe-001 03 1.765'-001 2.17le-001 0.4 1.&41.-001 2.074e.001 0.5 1.517e-001 1.Ille-001 0.6 1 356/-001 1.708/-001 07 123le-001 1.54*e-001 0.4 0; 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Z 1.13*e-001 1.167â‚¬-001 1.124e.001 1.0*le-001 1.03Se-001 9.ale-002 9 219/-002 5 731/-002 3.1331-002 2.19]e-002 :an of Am on (200Â§) izorgnia (2 Iâ€¢ (2007) N 4 6.153,-002 7.S74e-002 1.109e-001 1 $$le-001 1.636/-001 1.50â‚¬e-001 1420/-001 1 2770.001 1 1670.001 Page 65 3 3 Deter-Inistic 1.204-001 1.132e-001 1.053e-001 9.12.-002 9.2152-002 1 /le-002 1.152e-002 4.59]e-002 2.9061-002 1.9'Ge-002 on Equations USCS 2001 NGA USGS 2001 5 200/ 6 436/-002 7.51/-002 1.12Oe-001 1.Ble-001 1.501,-001 1.3658-001 1.21â€¢e-001 1.0/k-001 9 710/-002 Hazard Analy.1 r,U,ti /1/ 00:) Gia U. -_SS* vs-250 - selimic 01 1.12le-001 1.406e-001 0.9 10ZZe-001 1.27*e-001 1 5.398.-002 1.174e-001 2 4.733/-002 5.192/-002 3 2.1/0.-002 3.$1;e-002 4 2.043e-002 2.$320-002 Source: Newport -Ingle-od Region: USGS 2001 California ciosest Distance: 12 74 k. Mviltude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.50 - Fractlle: 0.$0 Coh- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted - Colual 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkir Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca.q:bell-14 Colo- 5 Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Young 1 2 3 IA 2.7582-001 2.7lie-001 0.05 3.232e-001 3.1$5â‚¬-001 0.1 4.44*e-001 I.29le-001 0.2 5.616e-001 ;45/e-001 03 5.769,-001 ;5427-001 0.4 5.5215-001 5.337e-001 0.$5.252e+001 4.Â§.e-001 0.6 4.8762-001 4.610,-001 0.7 4.57Oe-001 â€¢.315/-001 0.1 4.269'-001 3.57&'-001 0.9 3.9721-001 3.61le-001 1 3.7198-001 3.314e-001 2 2.113/-001 1.18*e-001 108,-001 9.69Se-002 1.91/-002 4 545.-002 2.Ree-002 2.0'Se-002 an of Atte iSom (200Â© izorgria (2 il (2007) N 4 2.424e-001 2.1492-001 4.031,-001 $ Me-001 5 22â€¢e-001 5.031â‚¬-001 5.042e-001 4.727e-001 4.476.-001 4 237,-001 4.Cole-001 3.813,-001 2.43$'-001 Page 70 1 3 leteminiltic 1.916/-002 1.177e-002 7.537e-002 3.7622-002 2.25*e-002 1.504e-002 of'I Equations USGS 2001 NGâ€¢ USGS 2008 45 2001 5 3.10â€¢e-001 3.6:Se-001 5.021/-001 6.4402-001 6.53h-001 6.195,-001 5.730*-001 5.292/-Col 4. Slk-001 4.554Â®+001 4 'Sle-001 4.0312-001 2.22Ge-001 ..ISA vs-250 + Set-ic HazarÂ·d Analy,11 3 Deter-inistic 3 1.451Â¢-001 1.3â€¢Se-001 1.62*e-001 1.399*-001 ssâ€¢ v-250 sel-ic Hazard Analy,i, 3 Deter-nlitic 4 1.050e-001 5 10]e.002 source. southern San Andre- Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance 69.65 km A,elitude Uniti: Acceleration (g) Magn,tude: 1.20 - Frawle: 0.50 coh- 1: Spectral Period colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weight Colo- 3 Acceleration (g) for: moore- Colu-1 4 Acceleration (g) for: Cupbe colu- 3. Acceleration (g) for chiou- 2 3 1.33Ge-001 1 &120-001 1.526,-001 1.7541-001 1.9/-001 2.10Ge-001 2.412,-001 2.134e-001 2.630â‚¬-001 2.240e-001 2.53 le-001 2 230â‚¬-001 2.â€¢93.-001 2 22â€¢e-001 2.396/-001 2.lsle-001 2.316/-001 2.162e-001 2.217e-001 2.01Ze-001 2.1040-001 1.963/-001 2 006,-001 1.16: e-001 1 2le-001 1.217â‚¬.001 9.4â€¢le-002 1.030â‚¬-001 I .Se-002 7.1*le-002 ed *an of Attenuation Equations Atkinion (2001) NG,â€¢ USGS 2001 11-lozorgnia (2008) NGA ISIS 2001 Yngs (2007) NGA ISIS 2001 1 0.05 01 0.2 0.3 0.4 o.s 0.6 0.7 0a 0.9 2 1.215'-001 4 1.026e-001 1 154.-001 1.47 le-001 2.11le-001 2.3972-001 2.309â€¢-001 2.â€¢Re-001 2.442e-001 2.427,-001 2.3&-001 2.30;e-001 2.2.1.-001 1.6152.001 1.130e-001 1.705,-002 â€¢age 71 9.54*e-002 5 1.400Â®-001 1.630e-001 2.33le-001 3 15]e-001 3.25â€¢e-001 3.055e-001 2.75â€¢e-001 2.tie-001 2.357e-001 2.lile-001 2.044e-001 1.915'-001 1.0622-001 6.740.-002 4.64'-002 source: San acir,to Reglon. USGS 200* california Closest Disunce: 65.11 ki Alitude Units: Acceleration (g) Iugnitude: 7.81 - Fractlle: 0.50 Coluâ€¢,7 1Â· Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted i colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore.Atk colu/1 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca*bell-1 Cologn 5. Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Vall 1 2 3 1.210e-001 1.411/-001 0.05 1.31Oe-001 1.6$0e-001 01 1.Ille-001 1.1 9/-001 02 2.336e-001 2.22Â§2-001 03 2.4â€¢le-001 2.311Â®-001 0.4 2,324,-Col 2.26/-001 0.5 2.245e-001 2.21Oe-001 0.6 2.116e-001 2.115e-001 0.7 2.Olle-001 2.037,-001 0.1 l.im-001 1.92*-001 0.,1.7*Ze-001 1.79*e-001 1 1.Ute-001 1.6112-001 2 1.016â‚¬-001 1.02Ge-001 3 7 073e-002 7.9lle.002 4 5.095.-002 5.580&002 Source: Santa -Mica Region: usls 2001 California Closest Distance: 52.36 km ear of Attenuation Equation, Inion (2001) NGA USGS 200* lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 200 Ws (2007) NGA USGS 2001 4 5 9.â€¢Ve-002 1.202e-001 1.010e-001 1 .05.-001 1.416,-001 2.03$e-001 2.015e-001 2.76*e-001 2.2272-001 2.785/-001 2 111/-001 2.517 e-001 2 11le-001 2.34â€¢e-001 2.106(-001 2.12*e-001 2.045e-001 1.550/-001 1.96Ge-001 1.80]e-001 1.173.-001 1.674-001 1 754,-001 1.562e-001 1 1712-001 1.446e-002 1.011/-002 5 299/-002 6.015e-002 3 63/-002 Page 72 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 ..SSA v,-250 + seismic Hazard Analysts 3 Deterninistic Alitude Units. Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 kolwin 1: Spectral Period 11 2: Acceleration (g) for. weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Folum 3. Acceleration (g) for: 10Â©re-Atkinion (2001) 1,1 USGS 2001 coh- 4: Acceleration (g) for: calbell-lozor-gria (2001) pil, usc:5 2001 Colucn S: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou.Â¥c*Ings (2007) NGâ€¢ ISIS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 M 1.263Â¢-001 1.453e-001 1.142e-001 1.154/-001 0.05 1.435.-001 1.5112-001 1.3102-001 1.*1Se-001 0.1 1.554â‚¬-001 2.017e-001 1.7.e-001 2.052/-001 02 2.621/-001 2.632e-001 2.50â€¢e-001 2.72*e-001 0.3 2.727e-001 2.1171-001 2.67Oe-001 2 692/.001 0.4 2.54 le-001 2.6&22-001 2.50%-001 2.â€¢fle-001 0,2.39*e-001 2.52 le-001 2 46.-001 2.20]e-001 0.6 2.2030-001 2.336*-001 2.2961.001 1 97/e-001 0.7 2.MIC-Col 2.190e-001 2.160e-001 1.79â€¢e-001 0.8 1.81/-001 2 Cole-001 2.012e-001 1.63Â§,-001 0.9 1.723e-001 1.*OGe-001 1.16(e-001 150]e-001 1 1.5162-001 1./3/-001 1.733.-001 1.31le-001 2 7 Wle-002 7.61Be-002 1.15â€¢e-002 6.235,-002 3 4.6421-002 4.8/0.-002 5 373e-002 3.67 k-002 4 3.257e-002 3.313e+002 3.9951-002 2 46(e-002 Page 73 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_ssâ€¢ vi-110 - Selsâ€¢ic Hazard Analy,1, 1 â€¢rÂ·obabillstic -_SSâ€¢ vi-110 - Sels,ic Hazard Analy:11 1 Probabilistic â€¢robabilistic Spectra results for EZ-FRISK 7.60 luild 001 colu-1 4: Acceleration (g) for: calbell-lozorgria (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (20)07) NGâ€¢ uSGS 2008 ANNUAL FIEQUeÂ«Ir OF EXCEEDâ€¢,CE: 4.041/-004 RN PERIOD: 2474 5 ABILITY OF EXCEEDENCE: 2.0% Iâ€¢ 50.0 YE 611 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) forÂ· lean colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Al colu- 4. acceleration (g) for: Ca/obell Colucn 5. Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Yi 1 2 3 0 5.--001 6.52Oe-001 0.05 6.712e-001 7.554/-001 0.1 9.390,-001 1.07â€¢eâ€¢000 02 1.18/â€¢000 1.3111+000 0.3 1.2/32+000 1.4742+000 0.4 1 113/400 1.372/+000 0$1.15 leâ€¢000 1.334eâ€¢000 0.6 1.0 97/â€¢000 1.245e+000 07 1.053,+000 1.1*Ze+000 01 1.002'+000 1.10Geâ€¢000 0.,5.2/e-001 1.024e+000 1 1 650â‚¬-001 5.4128.001 2 5.3140-001 $.47â€¢0-001 3 3.Hle-001 3.699.-001 4 2.5542-001 2.627e-001 ARS kinson (2001) 9 USGS 2001 lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS ZOOS Ings (2007) NG.â€¢ ISIS ZOOS 4.*Gle-001 1 4$â€¢e-001 7 990/-001 1.Olleâ€¢000 1.042e+000 1.023eâ€¢000 1.039400 9 9:Ze.001 9 570.-001 9.157/-001 1.700.-001 8.3336-001 5.374,-001 3.713e-001 2.771/-001 5.3112.001 6.343,-001 1.430e-001 1 0610+000 1.019â‚¬â€¢000 1.05*.000 1017,400 9.635Â®-001 9.126â‚¬-001 1.654/-001 1.Ne.001 7.530.-001 5.040,-001 3.313/-001 2.337e-001 ARS kinion (ZOOS) N.' USGS 2001 -lozorgnia (200*) NGA USGS 2001 Ings (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 1 2 PGA 4.62*-001 $.366.-001 0.05 5 3151-001 6.2112-001 01 7.560.-001 1.786/-001 0.2 5.149.-001 1 133e+000 0.3 1.025/+000 1.19Se+000 0.4 9.77:e-001 1.127,+000 0.;9.47;e-001 1.095â‚¬+000 0.6 1.134+001 1 035/+000 0.7 1.3$50-001 9.133/-001 0.1 7 132â‚¬-001 9.02]e-001 0.5 7.2 13/-001 1.165.-001 1 6.120e-001 7 51/-001 2 4 093e-001 4.275/-001 3 2.674'-001 2.115,-001 4 1.S]le-001 2 Olle-001 ANNUAL FREQUENCY OF EXCEEDANCE: 2. 107e-003 RETURN PERIODÂ· 474 6 PROIABILITY OF ExCEEDENCE: 10*Orâ€¢ IN 50 0 i colu-, 1: /pectral Period colum 2: Acceleration (0) for: -an Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore.Ai Colwin 4: Acceleration (g) for: Carbell Colw- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou.Yc 3 7627.001 4.436,-001 6.52;e-001 1.261/+001 1 556,-001 8.24Â§/-001 S.236Â¢-001 7.12*e-001 7 53'e-001 7.203,-001 6.1192.001 6.â€¢791+001 4.192e-001 2.7563-001 2.063Â®-001 5 4.23le-001 5.013.-001 6.$02-001 1 177e-001 9.03le-001 1.615/-001 1.0540-001 7.60 le-001 7.1lle-001 G.â€¢00.-001 6.415 e-001 6.0:le-001 3.lue.001 2.40#-001 1 67/e-001 ANNUAL FREQUENCY OF EXCEEDANCE: 1026â‚¬-003 RETURN PERIOD: 974,1 1 2 3 4 5 PROWILITY OF EXCEEDENCEÂ· 5.0% IN 50.0 YEANS 3.831/-001 4.$27e-001 3 123e-001 3.4391-001 coh- 1: spectral â€¢eriod 0.05 4.4Â§2e-001 5.215e-001 3.6./.001 4.1$72.001 colu- 2. Acceleration (g) for: lean 0.1 6.2;Ze-001 7.315Â®-001 $.425-001 5.7371-001 coluln 3 Acceleration (g) for loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA ISIS ZOOS 0.2 1.106-001 9.3/1-001 7.020e-001 7 â€¢76/-001 Page 1 Page 2 ..Ssâ€¢ vt=180 - Seismic Hazard Analysis 1 Protabllistic 03 1.4:le-001 1.022eâ€¢000 7.225e-001 7.55le-001 0.4 1.0012-001 9 53*-001 6.9142-Col 7.190*-001 0.5 7 74/-001 9.237e.001 6.136e-001 6.616.-001 0.6 7 25oe-001 8.3321-001 6 â€¢19/-001 6.11Ge-001 07 6.850(,-001 1.024:-001 6.12Oe-001 5.775.-001 0.1 6.36]e-001 7.426/-001 5.100.-001 3.4412.001 0.9 5.lile-001 6.747e-001 5.466â‚¬-001 $.137e-001 1 5./7/0-001 6.156e-001 5 1982-001 4.860.-001 2 3.2010-001 3.415,-001 3.24*e-001 2.1;22-001 3 2.07*e-001 2 Zose-001 2.126e-001 112Se-001 4 1.49'-001 1.$36e-001 1550e-001 1.26le-001 Page 3 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Mirministic Spectra Re$ulti using ElÂ· Largest Ar,plltudes of Ground <tlons C, Attenuation Equadons litude units: Acceleration (g) Fractile: 0.5 â€¢eriod -plitude Magnitude 3 6162-001 7.00 - 0.05 4.032e-001 7 00 - 0.1 5.055/-001 7.00 - 02 7 0110-001 7.00 - 0.3 7.61Oe-001 7.00 - 0.4 7.75Oe-001 7.00- 0.5 7.705e-001 7.00 - 0.6 7.36*e-001 7.00 - 0.7 7.07*e-001 7.00- 0.1 6.7368-001 7.00- 09 6 341â‚¬-001 7.00 - 1 6.00/e-001 7 00 - 2 3.5$1/-001 7.00 - 3 2.2802-001 7.00 - 4 1.ule-001 7.00 - @eis,ic Hazard Analy:is 1 DeterÂ·Inlitic FRISK 7.60 lulld 001 midering *11 Sources calculated using i Closest Region Distance (11) S.00 USGS 2008 California 5.00 USGS ZOOS california $.00 Usls 2001 California 5.00 USGS 200* California 5.00 USGS ZOO)Â§ California 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 .SGS 200: C.11 fornia $.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 USGS 200* California 5 00 USGS 2001 Callfornia 5.00 USGS 2001 Callfornia 5.00 uils 200: California 5.00 USGS 2001 California 1 00 USGS 2001 Call fornia 5.00 USGS ZOOS California Iighted *an of Ccr,trolling Source California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded Califomil Gridded california Gridded california Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded -_SSA VS-180 0.2 1.Â§332-001 7 00- 0.3 5.16/-001 7.00 - 0.4 1.966.-001 7.00 - 0.5 1.405,-001 7.00 ./ 0.6 7.65â€¢e-001 700 - 0.7 7 07 le-001 7.00 - 0.1 6.4â€¢Ze-001 7.00 - 09 5.7976+001 7 00 14/ 1 5 275/-001 7.00 - 2 2.Elle-001 7.00- 1.79*e-001 7.00 - 4 1.301/+001 7 00 - UI&Us'1SUrude, of Ground -tion, I Allitude Units: Acceleration (g) Maile: 0.5 Period Alitude Magnitud, M 3.Hle-001 7.00 - 0.05 3.7032-001 7.00 - 0.1 4.31:e-001 7 00- 0.2 5.4252-001 7.00 - cridded. Char. Nor-1 Selic Hazard Analysis 1 Deteralnlitlc ;.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 USGS 2001 Call fornia 5.00 ./.200. california 5.00 usGS 2001 california 5.00 ISIS 2001 Call fornla 5.00 usls 200* California 5.00 USGS 200/ Cal' forria 5.00 .SGS 20)01 california $.00 usGS 200/ california 5.00 U565 2008 California 5.00 USGS 200/ Call fornia $.00 usGS 200* california :onsidering Source, Calculated with Caipb 5 Closest Region Distance(km) 5.00 usls 200* California 5.00 USGS 2001 Califorru 5.00 USGS ZOOS Callfornia $.11 USGS 2001 California California Gridded california Gridded California Gridded Call fornia Gridded CAl IfornIa Gridded california Gridded california Gridded california Gridded California Gridded california Gridded california Gridded California Gridded 11-lozorignia (200') controlling source california Gridded California Gridded california Gridded I# Extensiorul 57Ar"des of Ground -tion. Considering sources calculated with AE,Altude units: Acceleration (g) Fractile: 0.5 Period Amplitude Magnitude Closest Region Dlitance(km) 9 3 0/e-001 7.00 -5.00 ./.200/ California 0 05 3.562,-001 700 -5.00 USGS 2001 California 0.1 5.21â€¢e.001 7.00-5.00 UMS 2001 Cal,fornia Page 1 loore-Atkinson (2001) * controll'ng source California Gridded Call fornia Gridded California Gridded 0.3 6.013e-001 7.00 0.4 6.53]e-001 7.00 0.5 6./630-001 7.00 0.6 610.-001 7.00 07 6.6*le-001 7 00 0.8 6.444.001 7.00 0.9 6.lile.001 7.00 1 5.937e+001 7 00 2 3 *Re-001 7.00 3 2.447â‚¬-001 7.00 5.00 usls 200/ california - 5.00 usls 100: california 5.00 usls 200Â§ Callfornia 5.00 usGS 2001 california 5.00 USGS 200; California 5.00 USGS 2008 C,lifornia 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5 00 USGS 2001 California - 5.00 USGS 2001 california - $.00 us<Gs 2001 california â€¢age 2 California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded california Griddled California Gridded california Gridded california Gridded California Gridded -_SM viâ€¢110 - Se limic Mazard Analysil 1 Deterministic 4 1.790e-001 7.00 -5.00 USGS ZOO' California california Gridded ge;&'plitudes of Ground lotions Considering Sources calculated with Chlou-Younes (2007) NGâ€¢ Alitude units: Acceleration (g) ..SM vs.110 - Selimic MazarÂ·d Analy:11 1 Deterministic Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equationi Colu-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Coluin 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caipbell-lozorgnia (2008) NGâ€¢ usls 2001 coh-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (2007) 19 USGS 2001 Midle:05 1 2 3 4 5 Period Amplitude 4.42le-001 0.05 4 1/.-001 0.1 5.7*le-001 0.2 7.052â‚¬+001 0.3 7.$77e-001 0.4 7.75:e-001 0.5 7.746e-001 0.6 7 640â‚¬-001 07 7 4/1/-001 0.8 7.30Oe-001 0.9 7.065{:-001 1 6.Ille-001 2 4.213e-001 3 2 5%/-001 4 1.705e-001 Magnitude 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00- 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00- 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00- 7.00 - 7.00./ 7 00 - Clole.t Region Di stance(k/) 5.00 ISIS 2001 Cal,fornia 5.00 65 2008 California 1 00 USGS 2001 California Â§ 00 USGS 2001 Call fornia 5.00 ISIS 200Â§ California 5.00 USGS 2001 Cal'forma 5.00 usGS 2001 california 5.00 USGS 2008 Cal ' &mla 5.00 USGS 2001 Call forria 5.00 USGS 200/ Caltfornia 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2001 California $00 uSGS 200/ California 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 Uses 2008 California =trolling sourâ‚¬e California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded california Gridded california Gridded cal i fornia Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded call fornia Gridded california Gridded California Gridded california Gridded California Grldded 9 1.*Sle-002 0.05 2.0;le-002 0.1 2.703/-002 02 4 522.-002 0.3 5.57*e-002 0.4 5.508.-002 0.5 5.3â€¢le-002 0.6 â€¢.9102+002 0.7 4.55 le-002 01 4 1*Se-002 0.5 3./15/-002 1 3.514,-002 2 1.711.-002 3 5.982,+003 â€¢ 6.787.-003 2.02Ge-002 2.1032-002 2.692e-002 4.745e-002 6197e-002 6.2*le-002 6.376,-002 5.9311-002 5.591/-002 5.191/-002 4.7612-002 4.407,-002 2.2309-002 1.2137-002 1 79â€¢e-003 2.39*e-002 2.6242-002 3.317/-002 3 2332-002 6.250â‚¬-002 5.me-002 5.437e-002 4.134.-002 4.371.-002 3.530e-002 3.$0le-002 3.157e-002 1.421*-002 1.553,-003 6.153e-003 1.42Se- 002 1 44/e-002 2 032/-002 3.590e-002 4.217/-002 4.401.-002 4 221.-002 3.057'-002 3.6*Ge -002 3.433e-002 3.1964 -002 2.97le-002 1.â€¢gle-002 8.5242-003 3.413e-003 urgest Allplitudes of Ground Motion: for Each Source: Ira,ley Gridded. Strike Slip Region: USGS 200/ Callforn- flosest Distance: 173.99 ki litude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude : 6.50 - Fractile: 0.$0 Source source: Irawley Gridded.Normal Region: USGS 200: california closest DistanceÂ· 173.55 km A,plitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.50 - Frictile: 0.$0 col,-11: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted =ear, of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) IGI USGS 2001 Coluln â€¢. Acceleration (g) for: Calbell-lozorgnia (2008) 10 USGS 2001 Page 3 .age. SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SSA V-11( col-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: c 2 3 1.61Oe-002 1.574 1.712e-002 1.66Â· 2.295e-002 2.20 3.591.-002 3.54; 4 947,-002 $.11 4.810.-002 $.ll' 4.74 le-002 $.271 4.Zile-002 ..61 3.920e-002 4.23 0.1 3 561-002 3 81 0,3.2350.002 3.42 1 2.9571-002 3.10 2 1.410e-002 1.46I 3 1 074.-003 7 94 4 5 60 le-003 5 764 SourceÂ·Imp E*tension.al Gridded. C Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Cnitance: 5.11 ki Implitude Uniti: Acceleration (9 Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 colu-, 1: spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- 5. Acceleration (g) for: 1 2 3 3 042,-001 2 725'-001 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 05 0.1 0.1 ) - seismic Hazard Anal/11 1 Deterdnlitic M.-Â¥oungs (2007) NGâ€¢ ISIS 2008 ie-002 le-002 'e-002 re+002 Se-002 Ie-002 le-002 le-002 k-002 2e-002 le-002 5e-002 Ie-002 ie-003 De-003 har. Nor-l Weighted I nuati .. loore-Atkir 0 Cpbell-Ic 001)00. chiou-voun,GA US 2.13/8-002 2.344e-002 3.Ne-002 5.210â‚¬-002 6.217e-002 5.164.-002 5.4608+002 4.153.-002 4.3928-002 3.542,-002 3.51Oe-002 3.1642-002 1.â€¢2 le-002 8 593,-003 6.153/-003 :an of Atte ison (2001) izorgnia (2 15 (2007) N 4 2.856â‚¬-001 1 1151-002 1.129â‚¬-002 1.51<e-002 2.137,-002 3.'37.-002 3.592e-002 3.Â§03â‚¬-002 3.327e-002 3.137e-002 2.9$3/-002 2 773e-002 2.600,-002 1.340â‚¬-002 7.ine-003 â€¢ me-003 On Equatio USGS 200/ NGâ€¢ 'SCS 2 & 2001 5 3.5â€¢Ge-001 -_Ss,A v,-110 - SeÂ·,-Ic Hazard Anuly,1, 1 0/ter,inistic 0.05 3.â€¢35e-001 3.lale-001 3.14 le-001 3.99;e-001 01 4.6102-001 /.1512-001 3.'30e-001 $.0410-001 0.2 6.526.-001 7 1512-001 5.425.-001 6.254e-001 0.3 6.17â€¢e-001 7 me-001 6 055e-001 6 6672.001 0.4 6.956*-Col 7.164e-001 6.2152-001 6.7131-001 0;6.119.-001 7.32le-001 6.513/-001 6.62/e-001 06 6.323,-001 6.272e-001 6.222e-001 6.474,-001 0.7 5.93Ze-001 $.$03,-001 5.98-001 6.30Ge-001 0.8 5. me-001 4.1*2/-001 5.725 e-001 6.140,-001 0.9 5.2Â§3.-001 4.36$e-001 5.446â‚¬-001 5.546Â¢+001 1 4.970â‚¬-001 3.9$0e-001 5.209.-001 5.752.-001 2 3.135/-001 2.013e-001 3.632e-001 3.760e-001 3 1.510.-001 1 2022-001 2.420e-001 2.317e-001 4 1.404.-001 9 1712-002 1.7711-001 1.5242.001 source. M Extensional Gridded. char, St/ke Slip Region: USGS 200* California Closest Oistance: 5.11 6 Alitude units: Acceleration Co) Magnitude: 7.00 1- Fractile: 0.,0 colum 1: Spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colu,n 3: Acceleration (g) for loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA ISIS 2001 coluMn 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA ISIS 2008 Colum 5: Acceleration (g) forÂ· chiou-Young: (2007) NGA uSGS 2001 1 2 3 . 5 ki 3.393,-001 2.912e-001 3.05â€¢e-001 4.1432-001 0 05 3.77le-001 3.424e-001 3.304e-001 ...5.-001 0.1 4.Ul/-001 5.106-001 3.595'-001 5.557/-001 0.2 6 71*e.001 8.2Rle-001 5 03Ge-001 6.122,-001 0.3 7 093,-001 1.356/-001 $60Oe-001 7.213e-001 page 5 -_SH vs-110 - Seisdc Hazard a 0.4 7.216e-001 1.313.+001 5.Vle-001 0.5 7.017/-001 7 801/-001 6.12le-001 0.6 6 706/.001 7 03/.001 5./9le-001 07 6.3168-001 6 â€¢530-001 5.69*e-001 01 6.0 llc-001 5.51*e-001 5.4750-001 0.5 5.7 &3e-001 5.4252-001 5 2312.001 1 5.475,-001 5.019,-001 ;0212-001 2 3.5241-001 2.7//.001 3.612e-001 3 2.257/-001 1.712â‚¬-001 2.420,-001 1.SHe-001 1.295/-001 1.77le-001 source: 1,0 Exten,ional Gridded. GR. Normal Region: USGS 2001 California Closest DistanceÂ· 5.32 lo A-plitude Units: Acceleration (g) -grn tide: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 colu=, 1: spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for. weighted Mean of Atte Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkln= (200*) Colum â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: ClÂ«,bell- Colum 5 Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) N 2 3 4 2.9Ve-001 2.623e-001 2.12le-001 3.37le-001 3.Olle-001 3.115(-001 4.5]le-001 4.6*le-001 3 923e-001 6.4238-001 7.5552-001 5 415â‚¬-001 6.772.-001 7.671,-001 6.028Â®-001 6.Hie-001 7 631,-001 6.2412-001 6.7101-001 7.12/-001 6.4â€¢le-001 6.221,-001 6.113e-001 6.141-001 5.134.-001 5.36:e-001 5.901.-001 Page 7 lozororia (2008) NGA USGS 2001 0 05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0â€¢ 0.5 0.1 0.7 $ 1 Deterinlitic 7.354e-001 7.3332-001 7.1172-001 7 007e-001 6.12le-001 6 602e-001 6.364,-001 4.170.-001 2.$6*e-001 1.6*le-001 on Equations USGS 2001 Gs 2001 5 3.5090-001 3.557/-001 $.00;I-001 6.254,-001 6.617e-001 1.85/-001 6.5$52-001 6.â€¢00'-001 6.227Â®-001 page 6 -_SsA vs-110 - Se,$-c Hazard Analy,11 1 DeterÂ·inistic 0.1 S. 4 Ble-001 4.76]e-001 5.645.-001 6.057e-001 0.'5.162.-001 4.25/e-001 5 367,-001 5 162,-001 1 4.113.-001 3.1 Ze-001 ;130/-001 5 6670-001 2 3.07le-001 1.05e-001 3 Re-001 3 690/-001 3 1 lk-001 1.161â‚¬-001 2.372e-001 2.272e-001 4 1.373e-001 8.9132-002 1.7352-001 1.4/8-001 sourceÂ· Im Extenlional Gridded. GR. Strike Ap Region usls 2001 california cloiest Distance: 5.32 k, AE:plitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - FraCtile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (200*) NGâ€¢ USG5 2001 colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: caiptell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USCS 2008 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Young: (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 M 3.33]e-001 2.*Ne-001 3.025,-001 4.101.-001 0 05 3.69/e-001 3.273e-001 3.277e-001 4.544/+Col 0.1 4.113.-001 4.927e-001 3 590/-001 3.521,-001 0.2 6.609,-001 1.Olle-001 5.03]e-001 6.kle-001 03 6.me-001 1.1530-001 5.57*e-001 7.233e-001 0â€¢7 10le-001 1.1â€¢32-001 5 1290-001 7.332e-001 0.5 6.57;e-001 7 Hie-001 6.06 Se-001 7.2600-001 0.6 6.597,5-001 6.86Oe-001 5.1252-001 7.1072-001 0.7 6.280e-001 6.2e-OK)1 5.62*e-001 6.921/-001 0.1 5.96*e-001 5.773e-001 5.4010-001 6.73le-001 0.9 5.Me-001 5.291/-001 5.157e-001 6.510â‚¬.001 1 5.378.-001 4.195/-001 4.177-001 6 291/-001 2 3.â€¢We-001 2.715,-001 3.S43e-001 4.093/.001 Page 1 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_ssâ€¢ vs-180 - Sel-ic Hazard Analy,11 1 Determinllili 3 2.207/-001 1.73le-001 2.372e-001 2.5 lle-001 _SS' V./180 Seli,ic Mazard Analy:i, 1 Deterministic ed le â€¢tkin 11-10 8 Young 4 1.54e-001 1.25/-001 Source: â€¢ojave Shear Gridded Region: USGS 200* California Closest Distance: 111.12 ki ABiltude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.60 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral â€¢ericd Coluin 2 Acceleration (g) for: weight Colum 3: Acceleration (g) forÂ· loore. Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for. Ca*be Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou- 1 2 3 PGA 1.041/-002 9."le-002 0.05 1.717.-002 1.063e-001 0.1 1,117/.001 1.240,-001 0.2 1.5.e-001 1.$3le-001 0.3 1 772e-001 1.775/-001 04 1 7547-001 1.ille.001 0.5 1.744.-001 1.507â‚¬-001 06 1.6622-001 1 //1/-001 0.7 1.5522-001 1 BODe-001 0.1 1.509,-001 1.71;e-001 0.,1.â€¢16e-001 1.60;e-001 1 1.337e-001 1.513/-001 2 7.85Ge-002 1.114.-002 3 5.207.-002 6 110.-002 4 3.6*4'-002 4.319/-002 1 735e-001 1 6542-001 an of Attenuation Equations m (2001) O USGS 2001 Zorgnia (2001) NGA USGS ZOO 1 (2007) NGâ€¢ ISIS ZOOS 4 5 6.1â€¢Ze-002 7.Â§1le-002 6.699.-002 8 12Ge-002 1.402.-002 1.273e-001 1.275/-001 1.Sm-001 1.53;e-001 2.00Ge-001 1480/-001 1.933/-001 1.52*-001 1.756'+001 1 â€¢ae-001 1 6512-001 1.â€¢Ne-001 1 537,-001 1.377e-001 1.â€¢34-001 1.3010-001 1.342â‚¬-001 1.237e-001 1.260e-001 7.784.-002 6.97le-002 5 195â‚¬-002 ,2â€¢Ze-002 3.903,-002 2 /31e-002 â€¢age 9 ed Ian of Attenuatii Atkinion (2001) ZA I 11-lozorgnla (2008) i Youngâ€¢ (2007) 16â€¢ US, Source: San Gorgornio shear Gridded Region: USGS 2001 California Illicit Distance 0.63 km A#litude UnitsÂ· Acceleration (g) lugnitude. 7.60 - Fractlle: 0.50 Colu- 1. Spectral Period column 2: Acceleration (g) for: weight coh-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore. Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Calbe Colui, 5: Acciteration (g) for: Chlou- 1 2 3 9 1.329/-001 1.SIGe-001 0.05 1.4/Se-001 1.7722-001 0.1 1.9520-001 2.17â€¢e-001 02 2..5.-001 2.650e-001 03 2.7622-001 2.*44.-001 0.4 2.662e-001 2.11$,-001 0.5 2.591/-001 2.7*Ze-001 0.6 2.â€¢39Â¢-001 2.63â€¢e-001 07 2.31 le-001 2.' 5.-001 01 2.177e-001 2.36Oe-001 0.9 2.035e-001 2.lile-001 1 1.91;e-001 2.032Â¢-001 2 1.1320-001 1.170.-001 3 7 542e-002 1.351(-002 4 5.379,-002 5 950.-002 Source: Ilachuter Region: usGS 200* California Closest On.unce: 160.25 km 9.5â€¢Se-002 1062/-001 1.40â€¢e-001 2.02*e-001 2.30/e-001 2.220e-001 2.2lze-001 2.1991-001 2.1322-001 2.043.-001 1.939â‚¬-001 1.1$le-001 1.201Â®-001 1.065.-002 6 051.-002 Page 10 on Equations USGS 2001 9 USGS 200 Gs 2001 5 1.31Ge-001 1.55le-001 2.2791.001 3 Ole-001 3.135,-001 2.95le-001 2.70*-001 2 43e-001 2 2911-001 2 13Oe-001 1.916/-001 1.1/le-001 1.025,-001 6.207e-002 4 130.-002 -_ss* vs-110 - Seismic Hazard Analy,1$ 1 oeter,inistic AÂ®litude Unin: ACCelerat,On (g) Magnitude: 7.10 - maile 0.50 Colum 1 spectral Period colu- 2Â· Acceleration (g) for: weighted lan of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore.Atkinson (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Car@bell-*ozorgnia (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 Cok-, 5: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chiou-Â¥c*,ngs (2007) NGA USGS ZOOB 1 2 3 4 $ 3.Ne-002 3.822e-002 3.50,-002 2.â€¢7le-002 005 3 â€¢We-002 3.,5.-002 3.195,-002 2.590â‚¬-002 0.1 4.43$0-002 4.701.-002 4.1122-002 3.Me-002 02 7.07Ze-002 7.37/.002 7 56Ge-002 6.27â€¢e-002 03 1.60:e-002 5.3511-002 9 2152-002 7.2â€¢Se-002 04 1.73le-002 1.009â‚¬-001 8.766,-002 7.334-002 0.3 1.7312-002 1.05%/-001 â€¢.Â§53Â®-002 7.014e-002 0.6 1.2Â§5*-002 1.01Oe-001 8.066â‚¬-002 6.5952-002 0.7 7 /7/-002 9.742/-002 7.60le-002 6 197e.002 0.1 7.37le-002 9.230e-002 7.067e-002 5 1361-002 0.9 6.17Oe-002 1.615.-002 6.4,$'-002 5.500â‚¬-002 1 6.43*e-002 1.100â‚¬.002 6.023e-002 5.191/-002 2 3.549/-002 4.I52â‚¬-002 3.230e-002 2.966/-002 3 2.223e-002 2.742e-002 2.059e-002 1.We-002 4 1.Sile-002 1.5/0-002 1 &13e.002 1 270'-002 source: surnt Irtn Region UES 200; California Closest 01*Unce: 135.09 ki litude Uniti: Accelerat,on (g) gnl tude 6 80 - Frictile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral â€¢eriod Page 11 -_sSA vs-180 - Sel-ic Hazard Anitylls 1 DeterÂ·inistic Coli- 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2008) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: caigbill-lozorgnia (2001) KA USGS 2001 Colum 5Â· Acceleration (g) for: chlow-Youngs (2007) PÂ«li usc;s 2001 1 2 3 4 5 9 3.53$e-002 4.604.-002 3.576/-002 2.424Â¢-002 0.05 3.734e-002 4.6$50-002 3.545.-002 2.60â€¢e-002 0.1 4.50*e-002 5 801.-002 5.127e-002 3 me-002 0.2 7.155/-002 0 6518-002 7.750e-002 6 12/-002 03 9.23%-002 1.17 le-001 9.1*le-002 6.123'-002 0.4 9.1 GGe-002 1.215,-001 8.62 le-002 6.723e-002 0.5 1.917/-002 1.Ute-001 1.238.-002 6.305e-002 0.6 :152.-002 1.1262-001 7.475.-002 5.13le-002 0.7 7 60/e-002 1.0%2e-001 6.19]e-002 5.4168-002 0.1 7.020,-002 5.72â€¢e-002 6.293,-002 5 0432-002 0.'6 43.-002 8.513/-002 5.69*e-002 4.70$'-002 1 3.553,5-002 8 2462-002 5.213e-002 4 39*-002 2 3.033e-002 4.15*e-002 2.57le-002 2.368.-002 3 1.7976-002 2.350e-002 1.596e-002 1.446e-002 4 1.276,-002 1.70/6-002 1.1$*-002 9.Glle-003 Source: Cal,co-Hidalgo Region: USGS 2001 California closest Distance: 161.23 Ici Wlitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.40 - Fract,le. 0.50 Colu=, 1: Spectral Period Coluin 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2008) NGA USGs 2001 Colur- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CM,bell-lozorgnia (2001) p# USGS ZOOS Colum 5: acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NG USGS 2008 Page 12 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_Sy viallo - Se 2 3 3.9--002 4.$27e-002 4.22$e-002 4 722e-002 5.325/-002 $106.-002 8.22â€¢e-002 7.710,-002 1.00le-001 9.1;le-002 1.022e-001 1.076Â¢-001 1.03*e-001 1.1472-001 9.9745-002 1.126,-001 9.62]e-002 1.10*e-001 0.1 9.1621-002 1.06Ge-001 0.9 8.623e-002 1.007(-001 1 1.1$7e-002 5.S65.-002 2 4.71]e.002 $591.-002 3 3.13Ge-002 3.7]le-002 4 2.233:-002 2.62Ge-002 sourceÂ· Channel Ziland, Thruit RegionÂ· USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 125.19 km plitude Units: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.30 * Fractile: 0.,0 Colu-11: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for weight coh- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore colu- â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: c///I Colu- 5. Acceleration (g) for: Chiou- 1 2 3 9 6.13Ge-002 6.5Ve-002 0.05 6.5.0.-002 6.133 e-002 1 0.05 01 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 1-ic Hazard Analysis 1 Deter-inistic ed i nuati .1 Atkil ./ 11-'00*)001 Youm (10* U! 4.lne-002 â€¢ S 17e-002 5,40.-002 8.636,+002 1.06'e-001 1.027e-001 1045/.001 5.9.e-002 9.606.-002 9.0922-002 1.48*e-002 7 9122+002 4 673/-002 3.05*-002 2.27le-002 :an of Atte .an (2001) Norgnia (2 p (2007) i . 6. IlSe-002 6.604*-002 page 13 3.267e-002 3 436.-002 4.92*e-002 1.256e-002 9.50Ze-002 9.609/-002 9 20â€¢e-002 1.677e-002 1.171,-002 7.71/-002 7.310â‚¬-002 6.52;e-002 4.01.-002 2.Â§185-002 1.10 le-002 or Equatio USGS 2001 * -15 2 2001 5.7038-002 6.1lle-002 -_SS.A vs-110 - Se 1-ic Hazard Analyst, 1 Deter,inlitic 0.1 1.4â€¢Oe-002 1.147e-002 8.21*-002 8.*Sk-002 0.2 1.272e-001 1.17le-001 1.27le-001 1.375.-001 03 1 505,-001 1.479Â®-001 1.540e-001 1.49&-001 0.4 1 /*Re-001 1.523e-001 1.*80â‚¬-001 1.â€¢6Oe-001 0.5 1.â€¢BOe-001 1.155/-001 1.4Sle.001 1.363e.001 0.6 1.40le-001 1.53le-001 1.414e-001 1.259/-001 0.7 1.335e-001 1.417e-001 1.3;le-001 1.16Ge-001 0.1 1.24le-001 1.397e-001 1 266e-001 1.013/-001 09 1 150â‚¬-001 1277,-001 1.lile-001 1.007â‚¬-001 1 10/6/-001 1179â‚¬-001 1 0.e-001 9 363.-002 2 5.119/-002 5.&612-002 5.lie-002 4.444.-002 3 3.057/-002 3.4250-002 3.167e-002 2.57*e-002 â€¢ 2.116e-002 2.30â€¢e-002 2.3472-002 1.657e-002 source: Clamihell-sawpit Region: USGS 200* California Closest DistanceÂ· 47.12 k, Alitude Units Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6 70 - Fractile: 0.$0 Colu- 1: Spectral â€¢eriod Colurn 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 200; Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: caipbell-lozorgita (2001) NG* USGS 2001 Colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA UMS ZOO)* 1 2 3 4 5 M 1.06Ze-001 1.493/-001 1.523e-002 1.41Ze-002 0.05 1.17;e-001 1.35*-001 5.7 gle.00 2 9.11]e-002 0.1 1.647Â¢-001 2.063,-001 1.403e-001 1 /7;e-001 0.2 2.3707-001 3.1;le-001 1.960/-001 2 00Oe-001 0.3 2.507e-001 3.â€¢61,-001 2.OR-001 1.977e-001 0.4 2.330e-001 3.243,-001 1.936/-001 1.109.-001 Page 14 -_SSâ€¢ v:-110 - seismic Hazard Arlily:11 1 Deterministic 0.5 2.16*e-001 3.0722-001 1.11â€¢e-001 1 61/e-001 06 1.93Ge-001 2.737e-001 1.620e-001 1.*Sle-001 07 1.75Ge-001 2.4/e-001 1.473e-001 1.312e-001 0.1.583/-001 2 215.-001 1.337e-001 1.192-001 0.9 1.42*-001 1./7/-001 1 Ne-001 1.092.-001 1 1.2177-001 1.75Oe-001 1.110â‚¬-001 1.000â‚¬-001 2 5.671/-002 6.992.-002 5.56â€¢e-002 â€¢.â€¢We-002 3 3.23*e-002 3.653/-002 3.456,-002 2 $6/e-002 4 2.21De-002 2.412.-002 2.â€¢gh-002 1.67/e-002 SourceÂ· Cleghorn Reglon USGS 200Â§ California Closest Distance: 73.1 $ U *Itude uniti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6./0 * Fractile: 0.30 Colwin 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) forÂ· loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS ZOOS Coluzn â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: caipbell-mozorignia (2001) pÂ«GA t.,SCS 2001 colum 5. Acceleration (g) for: chlou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ usls 2001 2 3 4 5 7.Â§72.-002 1.132,-001 6 106.-002 5.28*e-002 1.21;e-002 1.1651-001 6.517e-002 6.0/0.-002 1.117e-001 1.4;Oe-001 .523e-002 9.09:e-002 1..Oe-001 2.24*e-001 1.377e-001 1.295/-001 1763/-001 2.4â€¢le-001 1.527e-001 1.31$e-001 1 613/-001 2 4056-001 1424e-001 122 le-001 1.516/-001 2.305 e-001 1.35le-001 1.101â‚¬-001 1.42â€¢e-001 2.OGle-001 1.219,-001 9.532e-002 1.Zle-001 1 ille-001 1.11*e-001 9.03*e-002 1.113/-001 1.70le-001 1.02Oe-001 1.28*e-002 â€¢age 15 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 04 0.5 0.6 0.7 01 -_Ss* v.180 - sel:ic HazarÂ·d Analy,1, 1 oeter,inistic 0.9 1.076e-001 1537e-001 9.269(-002 7 63Se-002 1 9.167e-002 1.40]e-001 1.4 .e-002 7.073e-002 2 4.lile-002 6.73 le-002 4.2*32-002 3.6;Oe-002 3 2.179.-002 3.765 e-002 2.673*-002 2.2010.002 4 2 037e-002 2 7110-002 1.9398-002 1.460(-002 source: coronado lark Region: Uils 2001 california Closest OlitanceÂ· 53.62 km Aq,litude Units: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.40 - FriCti le: O.,O Colu- l: Spectral Pened Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2008) NKI Usis 2001 Colum 4 Acceleration (g) for: Carnbell-1/zorgn a (200/) NGA US+5 2001 Colum $: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Young: (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 KGâ€¢ 1.233e-001 1.'472-001 9.627,-002 1091â‚¬-001 0.05 1.37Oe-001 1 7&9e-001 1.010/-001 1.27Oe-001 0.1 1.8Â·44/.001 2.20$2.001 1.460â‚¬-001 1.We-001 0.2 2.41Se-001 2.1322.001 2.0e-001 2.5*-001 0.3 2.634/-001 3.010e-001 2.3260-001 2.567e-001 0.4 2 523/-001 2.954,-001 2.219e-001 2.355,-001 0.5 2 432e-001 2./le-001 2.235e-001 2.lie-001 0.6 2.26Â£-001 2.677e-001 2.117*-001 1 9930-001 0.7 2.125e-001 2.51Se-001 2.022.-001 1 134-001 0.8 1.915e-001 2.33*e-001 1.915Â¢-001 1.702e-001 0.9 1.144/-001 2.1â€¢62-001 1.100e-001 1.51/e-001 1 1.725.-001 1.917*-001 1.703e-001 1.41".001 2 9.925(-002 1.053,-001 1.047e-001 1.37*e.002 3 6 515/-002 7.369,-002 6.91Â£+002 5.2752-002 Page 16 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SS* vs.180 - Seismic luzard Analysis 1 Oeter-inistic -_ssi vs-110 - selimic lutard Analysis 1 Deter,Inlitic 4 4.674(-002 5.2772-002 rce: CUC-% Region: USG; 2001 01,fornia Closest Olitance: 43.43 km A,olitude Uniti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.70 - Fractile 0.;0 Colum 1. Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weightee Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore.Al colo- â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: cabell colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Â¥i 1 2 3 M 1.1242-001 1.MOe-001 0.05 1.247e-001 1.622,-001 0.1 1.7551-001 2.151/-001 0.2 2.51â€¢e-001 3.25â€¢e-001 0.3 2.645,-001 3.$97e-001 0.4 2.436.-001 3.3Â§7e.001 0.5 2.Zlie-001 3.11$e-001 0.6 2.039/-001 2.835/-001 0.7 1.ille-001 2.569Â¢-001 0.1 1.661/-001 2.256,5-001 0.#1.497.-001 2.026Â¢-001 1 1 357e-001 1.lUe-001 2 6.00&.-002 7.24/.002 3 3.416'-002 3.Ine-002 4 2.3.2-002 2 57/-002 1./rlatl :kin NGâ€¢ ..0 008) 1 .Ing GA US $.14$e-002 an of Atte Ior (2001) zorgnia (2 $ (2007) N 4 9.101.-002 1.047/.001 1.505.-001 2 095,-001 2.21Se-001 2.05/-001 1.929.-001 1.723e-001 1.566Â¢-001 1.422e-001 1.2*-001 1.112,-001 ; 55/â‚¬.002 3.70$1-002 2.6762.002 Page 17 3.Gole-002 on Equations US(15 2008 Pe USCS 200 GS ZOOS 5 3.1lle-002 1.073e-001 1.59*e-001 2.1522-001 2 124.-001 1.lie-001 1.7380-001 1.Mle-001 1.41Oe-001 1.2*e-001 1.174Â¢-001 1.07Ge-001 4.1072-002 2.767e-002 1 alle-002 Source: E,Irthquake valley Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 138.04 km zolitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.10 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu=, 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (O) for: weighte Colu- 3Â· Acceleration (g) for: moore., Colu- 4. Acceleration (g) for: caÂ®bel column %: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-1 1 2 3 4 3.3&-002 â€¢.356.-002 0 05 3 512.-002 â€¢.â€¢0Oe-002 0.1 4.70le-002 5.485/-002 0.2 7.55/e-002 5.17*e-002 0.3 1.933e-002 1.12 le-001 0.4 1 113/-002 1 16*e-001 0.5 8.657.-002 1 1772-001 06 7.96/-002 1.01*e-001 0.7 7.40Â§'-002 1.01*e-001 0.1 6./39e-002 9.423e-002 0.9 6.27*e-002 1.647e-002 1 5.1062-002 1.007.-002 2 2.9/Ge-002 4.053e-002 3 1.76le-002 2 293e-002 4 1 251/-002 1 6/e-002 Source: Ely,ian Park (upper) Region: u"s 200: califorria Closest Distance: 38.82 k, Wtude Units: Acceleration (g) d -an of Attenua tkinion (2008) NG 1-lozorgria (2001 1 oungs (2007) NGâ€¢ 3.457e-002 3.1Â§3e-002 4.997,-002 7.606e-002 1.-e-002 1.43*e-002 1 0662-002 7 325,-002 6.75 k -002 6.18-002 S.Wle-002 5.106,-002 2.; 19e-002 1.$65e-002 1.13;e-002 'age 18 tion Equations A UMS 2001 ) NGâ€¢ US(15 200 USGS 2001 2.33 le-002 2.4.e-002 3.622e-002 5.154e-002 6.6010-002 6.52/-002 6.137,-002 5.65/e-002 5.2Ve-002 4.921/-002 4 60le-002 4 305.-002 2 327e-002 1.4/e.002 9.50-0-003 -_SM vs-180 - Sel-lc Hiazard Aruly,11 1 DeterÂ·minlitic -_SSâ€¢ vi-110 - Sell,Ic Hazard Analy,1,1 Deter,inistic Magnitude: 6.70 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted *an of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore.Atkinscn (2001) NG' USGS 2001 Cok- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca*,bell-mozorgnia (2001) NOI USGS ZOOS colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chlou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ Uils 2008 1 2 3 4 5 M 1.33*e-001 1.613,-001 1.249/-001 11$0â‚¬.001 0.05 1.4*45-001 1.69*-001 1.406*-001 1.350â‚¬-001 0.1 2 017/.001 2.274,-001 2.00'e-001 1 57*e-001 02 2 56Ze-001 3.475 & 001 2.7/6.-001 2.625,-001 0.3 3 106e-001 3.76*-001 2 965.-001 2.58-001 0.4 2.We-001 3.525e-001 2.79le-001 2.3Gle-001 0$2.Gle-001 3.3272-001 2 6370.001 2.12Ze-001 0.6 2.410.-001 2.95.-001 2.30*-001 1.903*-001 0.7 2.11*e-001 2 6*le-001 2 lee-001 1.720â‚¬-001 0.1 1.975/-001 2.3Sbe-001 1.963/-001 1.566e-001 0.9 1.772e-001 2.11$e-001 1.7712-001 1.42h-001 1 1.605,-001 1.Be-001 1.615e-001 1.30:e-001 2 6.1112.002 7.5Ve-002 7.165/-002 5.69.-002 3 3.763,-002 4.030e-002 4.07*e-002 3.1*le-002 4 2 565.-002 2.709e-002 2.044(-002 2.042e-002 source: Eureka Peak Region: us" 200/ california closest Distance: 144.Â§3 k. *litude Uniti: Acceleration (9) gni tide. 6 70 - ..racille: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colo- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Roore-Atkinion (2008) 16â€¢ USGS ZOOS Colu- 4Â· Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA ISGS 2001 Colu- 5: Accelerat ion (g) for. Chlou-Youngs (2007) NGA ISIS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 IGA 2.93*e-002 3.68]e-002 3.1/32-002 1 5401.002 0.05 3.1012.002 3.73/e-002 3.$0$,3-002 2 06.-002 0.1 4 07.-002 .696â‚¬-002 ..5$4.-002 2.St.-002 0.2 6.,Ce-002 8.031/-002 6.*ile-002 4.54 7.-002 0.3 7.520e-002 9.53Se-002 1.20/8-002 5.Glie-002 04 7.15 le-002 1.027e-001 7 61/.002 5.557/-002 0.5 7.634/-002 1.033e-001 7.212/.002 5 215.-002 0.6 7.004.-002 9.534(-002 6.56â€¢e-002 .914.-002 0.7 6.456â‚¬-002 1.904-002 6.Olk-002 4 569â‚¬.002 0.1 5.9152-002 1.236â‚¬-002 5.4;Be-002 4 260â‚¬.002 0.9 5.480,-002 7.5478-002 4.915.-002 3.577 e.00 2 1 5.0$12.002 1.57.-002 4.47$0-002 3.7201-002 2 2.5â€¢le-002 3.508.-002 2.1â€¢Ze-002 1 9948-002 3 1.5010-002 1 /le-002 1.31Se-002 1.212e-002 4 1 05le-002 1.417e-002 5.521/-003 1.0451-003 Source. Gravel Hills-Harper Lk Region: UES 2001 California Closest Distance: 1%2.14 13 Amplitude units. Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.10 - Fractile. 0.50 Colu- 1: spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted *an of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2008 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cal:pbell-lozorÂ·gnia (2008) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou.Â¥ing, (2007) NGA USGS ZOOS colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenwation Equations Page "â€¢age 20 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SSA vs.180 - sCI 2 3 3.572,-002 4.273e-002 3.772e-002 4.3132-002 4.Ule-002 5.2*le-002 7.63 le -002 1.16;e-002 9.1;Ge-002 1.02 le-001 9.210Â¢-002 1.05le-001 9.2â€¢Be-002 1.133,-001 8.7112-002 1.010(3-001 1.2Gle-002 1.03.-001 0.1 7.753.-002 9./02.-002 0.9 7 210e-002 5.12/e-002 1 6 74*e-002 1.564,-002 2 3.70]e-002 4.Â§70e-002 3 2.316/-002 2.172e-002 4 1.642-002 2.057e-002 Sow rce:Helendale-So Lockhart Region: Usls 2001 california closeit Oisunce: 115.62 10 A,plitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 colu=11: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleranon (g) for: weight Cole-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: 'core- colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for Caipbe Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou- 2 3 M 6.36;e-002 1.4630.002 0.05 6.16le-002 1.Ile-002 01 8.129*+002 1054e-001 1 0.0$ 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 imic Hazard Analysis 1 Determirli 4 $ 3.7;Ze-002 2.6/Ze-002 4.016â‚¬-002 2.Ilie-002 5.14â€¢e-002 4.105â‚¬-002 7.935e-002 6.Ilk-002 9.612e-002 7 767e-002 9.136â‚¬-002 7.7.2-002 9.Olle-002 7.40Ge-002 1.3542-002 6.937'-002 7.90Ge-002 6.â€¢99,-002 7.350.-002 6.106-002 6 7%72-002 5.745.-002 6 266,-002 5.414/-002 3.365/-002 3.073e-002 2.146/-002 1.9]De-002 1.577e-002 1 312e-002 ed *an of Attenuation Equations Atkinson (ZOOS) NIA USGS 2001 11-10/orgnia (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 Youngs (2007) NGI USGS 2001 4 $.4 31.-002 5.9$6e-002 7.547,-002 â€¢age 21 Itlc 5 5 -lle-002 5.7362-002 1 400.-002 -_SSâ€¢ vs-180 - Seismic Hazard Analy,11 1 Determinlitic 02 1.274,-001 1.355e-001 1.144e-001 1.212&001 0.3 1.4GOe-001 1 632/-001 1.3612-001 1.3702-001 0.'1.447â‚¬-001 1.69*-001 1.31Oe-001 1.33$e-001 0;1.436Â¢-001 1.737e-001 1.327e-001 1.2â€¢le-001 0.6 1.3;le-001 166Ze-001 1.2632.001 1.150e-001 0.7 1 29â€¢e-001 1.60le-001 1.21 le-001 1 OBe-001 0.1 1.219â‚¬-001 1.513Â¢-001 1.14Ge-001 9.991.-002 0.5 1.13Se-001 1.40&-001 1.071,-001 r 9.361/-002 1 1.070â‚¬-001 1 3212-001 1.0090-001 1.112,-002 2 6 DIe-002 7.401.-002 5.5611.002 Â§.035e-002 3 4.00*e-002 4.915e-002 3.914e-002 3.1Ke-002 4 2.IN/-002 3 4642-002 2.914/-002 2.190,-002 Source: Holly-Od Region: Usls 2001 California Closest Distance: 50.02 ki Illitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.70 - Fractlle 0.50 Colu=, 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colum 3Â· Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) ICâ€¢ USGS ZOOI Colum 4 Acceleration (O) for campbell-lozorgrvia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu-, 5. Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) 16â€¢ ISIS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 0 # 5650-002 1.452e-001 1.114/+002 7 275/-002 0.05 1.10Ze-001 1.520e-001 9.31 k.002 1.5412-002 0.1 1.Hle-001 2 00le-001 1.329e-001 1.2*le-001 0.2 2.1931-001 2.966>e-001 1 864â‚¬-001 1.745e-001 0.3 2.27Ge-001 3.105,-001 1.992e+001 1.7310-001 0.4 2.135/-001 2.971Â¢-001 1.1;Oe-001 1.5130-001 0.5 1.98(e-001 2.75Ze-001 1.733e-001 1.414e-001 Page 22 -_SM vs-110 - Sellmic Hazard An/ly,15 1 Oeterinistic 0.Â§1.760e-001 2.4,/-001 1.5â€¢le-001 1.26*e-001 07 1 590â‚¬-001 2.21*e-001 1 â€¢07,-001 1.145e-001 0.8 1.43*-001 1.9952-001 1 2770-001 1.045Â®-001 0.'1.303(-001 1.7Sle-001 1.1572-001 9.593e-002 1 1.152,-001 163 le-001 1.05Se-001 1.//Se-002 2 1 102-002 7.664-002 5.290,-002 4,474,-002 3 3.400.-002 4.251Â¢-002 3 22'e-002 2.6650-002 4 2.37*e-002 3.00*e-002 2.37 le-002 1.75â€¢e-002 source Moher. alt 1 Region: USGS 200Â§ california closest M.unce: 51.11 ki Aplitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.10 - FraCtile: 0.50 colu=n 1: Spectral Period colu- 2. Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equation, colu-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore.Atkinion (2001) IA us(15 2001 Coh- 4: Acceleration (g) for: caq,bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS ZOO: colum 5: Acceleration (g) for. Chiou-Youngs (2007) IM VIGS 2001 2 3 4 5 6.206Â®-002 8.534.-002 5.102e-002 4. I le-002 6.66*-002 9.09*e-002 5.73Oe-002 $.179e-002 1.9532-002 1.1550-001 7Â·734e-002 7.695.-002 1.369'-001 1 137/-001 1.131.-001 113le-001 1 &43e-001 2.167i-001 1 2190-001 1175e-001 1.47;e-001 2.114e-001 1 204e-001 1.107Â®-001 1.407e-001 2.07Oe-001 1.145e-001 1.00le-001 1.278.-001 1.1838-001 1.035e-001 9.1â€¢Ge -002 1 17Se-001 1.734-001 9.50â€¢e-002 8.346,-002 1 0695-001 1.$74e-001 :672e-002 7.659Â®-002 9.636,-002 1.400e-001 7 8/-002 7.042e-002 Page 23 1 0.0, 0.1 02 03 0.4 0.5 0./ 0.7 0.1 0.9 ._ss' v,=180 - Sei-ic Hazard Analysis 1 Deter,inistic 1 8.7670-002 1.26le-001 7.201.-002 6.41â€¢e-002 2 3.9142-002 5.153.-002 3.554.-002 2.956.-002 3 2.231,-002 2.767.-002 2 2/3-002 1.7lle-002 4 1.547e-002 1.197â‚¬-002 1 Glle-002 1.133e-002 Source: Johnson valley (No) Region: USGS 2001 california closest Distance: 1â€¢0.61 k. -plitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - Fractile: O.50 Colu=11 Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attemation Equation, colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA usls 2001 Colo- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Calbell-lozorgnia (200*) NGA US<13 2008 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chlou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ usGS 2000 1 2 3 4 3 3.527(-002 .46.-002 3 Wle-002 2.504e-002 0.05 3 726,-002 4.52;e-002 3 977.-002 2 67.-002 0.1 â€¢159*-002 5 Wle-002 5.115e-002 3.8*le-002 02 7.735:-002 .065e-002 7.*loe-002 6.3&-002 0.3 9.lUe-002 1.1122-001 9.2 ne +002 7.105e-002 0.4 9.15]e-002 1166â‚¬-001 8.757e-002 7.044.-002 0.5 1.S7le-002 1 1.e-001 8.4572-002 6.63;e-002 0.6 1 3202-002 1.105e-001 7.7-e-002 6.170)e-002 0.7 7.7122-002 1.041/-001 7.1*Se-002 5.744e-002 0.7.22]e-002 9.695/-002 6 603.-002 5.3662-002 0.9 6.656/-002 1 931.-002 6.00/.002 5.02 le-002 1 6.175â‚¬-002 1.301.-002 5.$22e-002 4.70*e-002 2 3.23Oe-002 4.302e-002 2.:031-002 2.$&4,-002 3 1.951,-002 2.502e-002 1.757:-002 1.5967-002 4 1.317Â¢.002 1110e-002 1 280/-002 1.072e-002 'age 24 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_ssâ€¢ v,-180 - Sel-,c Hazard Analy:11 1 Determ,nist,c Ce: LNersO.usGS 2001 california Clciest Distance. 1â€¢3.35 km Ul,litude units ACCeleration (g) Magnitude 7 40 - Fractile: 0.50 colum 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted *an of Attemation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (9) for: moore-Atkinson (2008) INGâ€¢ uses 2001 colurn 4: Acceleration (g) for Cabell.lozorgnia (2001) NGA usls 2001 colu=, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-voungs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 PGA 4.75Ge-002 5 767e-002 4.5Ve-002 3.806.-002 0.05 5.0612-002 6 0300-002 4.985Â®-002 4 190e-002 0.1 6.441,-002 7.072e-002 6.1:Ge-002 6.064.-002 0.2 9.615,-002 5.730e-002 5.5â€¢Se-002 9.792-002 0.3 1.1 52/-001 1.194/-001 1 1670-001 1.056.-001 04 1 1631.001 1.279e-001 1.120e-001 1 0*le-001 0.$1.170,-001 1.342/-001 1.13*e-001 1.03le-001 0.6 1.111&001 1.304e.001 1.015.-001 9..le-002 0.7 1.073e-001 1.273e-001 10432-001 9.034.-002 0.1 1.011/-001 1.2162-001 5.16*-002 1.500e-002 0.8 9.34*-002 1.1â€¢Ze-001 9.218(-002 8.Olle-002 1 9.010,-002 1.079/-001 1.672e-002 7.$6*-002 2 5.2340-002 6.203e-002 5.054/-002 4.40*-002 3 3.42$2-002 4.12*e-002 3 337e-002 2.Ille-002 4 2.4/le-002 2.9072-002 2.â€¢Pe-002 1.ble-002 Source: Lern,ood-Lockhart-Old woian Springs Page 2; -_SSA Vs=110 - Sel-IC Matard Analysis 1 Deterainlitic Region: usls Zool California Close,1 01 sur,ie: 133.06 Icm Iolitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude 7 SO - FractileÂ· O 50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore+Atkinm (2001) NGâ€¢ usls 2001 Colu- 4. Acceleration (g) for: Camptell-lozorgnia (2001) IGA US,Gs 2001 coluEn $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Â¥oung, (2007) NG, ISIS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 9 5.634-002 7 0455-002 5.120,-002 4.7322-002 0.0,6.040.-002 7.â€¢27,-002 S.$57e-002 5.137e-002 0.1 7.6730-002 1.6572-002 6.1--002 7.4Â§32-002 0.2 1.12â€¢e-001 1 135e-001 1.060e-001 1.17Ge-001 0.3 1.31*e-001 1 366â‚¬-001 1.2932.001 1.256,-001 0.4 1.324&001 1.452,-001 1.2â€¢4e-001 1.27;e-001 05 1.332e-001 1.519/-001 1 27Se-001 1.20le-001 0.6 1.27;e-001 1.47ge-001 1.226/-001 1.120e-001 0.7 1.226â‚¬-001 1.4462-001 1.lihe-001 1.04;e-001 0.1 1.1658.001 1.383/-001 1.12*-001 9.13;e-002 0.5 1.OS;,-001 1 29.-001 1.060Â¢-001 9.266-002 1 1.035/-001 1 2212-001 1.002â‚¬-001 1.7...002 2 6.10.-002 7.134/-002 6.077e-002 5.112 e-002 3 4.0Â§4.-002 4.1722-002 â€¢.01*e -002 3.27 le-002 4 2.190/-002 3.414e-002 3.004e-002 2.252,-003 source: 1,1.1- Ridge-Arroyo /arida-Santa Ana Region: usGS 200Â§ California closest Distance: 131.25 km Implitude u,lts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - â€¢age 26 ...Ss,A vs-110 - sel-IC Mazard Analy:11 1 Deter,inistic -_SSâ€¢ vi180 - Seismic Hazard Arialy,15 1 DeterIn#$tic lean of Atter-ation Equation: kinion (2008) 9 ISIS 2001 Dozorgnia (2008) ./. ISIS ZOOS K,ng. (2007) NC USGS 200. d-mation Equtions tktr NIA ./.5 2001 Fractile: 0.50 Col-, 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for weightec Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore.At colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambell ColuMn $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Â¥c 1 2 3 9 3.700e-002 4.5*le-002 0.05 3 Ele.002 4.*45â‚¬-002 0.1 5.117,-002 5.7â€¢31-002 0.2 1.217,-002 5.5*Ze-002 0.3 9.90.-002 1233e-001 0.4 5.79+-002 1.26â€¢e-001 0.5 9.*oe -002 1.2.e-001 06 8.5Gie-002 1.217e-001 0.7 1.41Oe-002 1 156.e.001 0.8 7.773.-002 1.069e-001 0.9 7.052.-002 9.655/-002 1 6.5200-002 1.123,-002 2 3.062/.002 3.17"-002 3 1.79*e-002 2 142e-002 4 1.25le-002 1.472Â®-002 source: North Channel Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 153 â€¢1 k. Alitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.80 - Iractile: 0 ;0olu= 1: spectral Period Col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: wighte Coll-: 3: Acceleration (g) for loore.A 3.671/-002 4.043e-002 5.2012-002 7.942*-002 '.429.-002 1.187'-002 0.510.-002 7.15;e-002 7.291,-002 6.696,-002 6.054.-002 $.601.-002 2. Ile-002 1.7*Ze-002 1.29*e-002 m of Atti .On (200/ Page 27 2.12*-002 3.03Ze-002 4.â€¢00e-002 7.12;e-002 7.'62,-002 7.171/-002 7.4032-002 6.170e-002 6.375,-002 HR-002 5.522/-002 5.135e-002 2.â€¢612.002 1.47 le-002 Â§.12â€¢e-003 WNW (2001) 9 USGS 2001 ings (2007) NGâ€¢ USCS 2001 :nuati ins kir INGA '00:)!00. .In,IGA U! colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca*bell Colu- 5. Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Â¥0 1 2 3 M 3.29,-002 3 â€¢*Ce-002 0.0$3.453/-002 3.411/-002 0.1 4.49Ge-002 4.3312-002 0.2 7.420e-002 7.6942-002 0.3 9.1287-002 1020â‚¬-001 0.4 9.068.-002 1.05*e-001 0.5 1.929e-002 1.0900-001 0.6 1.250.-002 1.026â‚¬-001 0.7 7.7Gâ€¢e-002 5 745/-002 0.7.152/-002 Â§.01â€¢e-002 05 6.454e-002 1.15 le-002 1 5.5462-002 7.45Oe-002 2 2./28-002 3.253e-002 3 147le-002 1.757e-002 4 1.02 le-002 1216e-002 Source: North Frontal (East) Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Oistince: 111.05 Ici A*litude Uniti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Frawle: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2 Â· Acceleration (g) for: weightec colu- 3 Acceleration (g) for: moore-At Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for Cambell Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Yc 1 2 3 . 4.1210-002 4.4Pe-002 5.7260-002 1 127.-002 1.0G0e-001 1.001Â®-001 9.61*e.002 S. 75*-002 1.09Â§â‚¬-002 7.362e-002 6.602e-002 5.Sne-002 2 521.-002 1 431.-002 1.03*e-002 M of Atti Tion (200*J izorgnia G IS (2007) 1 4 Page 21 2.274e-002 2,3178-002 3.â€¢258-002 $.740.-002 6.51]e-002 6.614,-002 6.275â€¢-002 5.157e-002 5.453.-002 5.0*Ze-002 4.73Oe-002 â€¢ 3Sle-002 2.015e-002 1.2240-002 1.084.-003 On Equatic USGS 2001 NGA USGS. 45 2001 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SSâ€¢ vt-180 - Seliall Hazard Analy,1 1 Deterainistic S.422.-002 7.320Â¢-002 4.6*le-002 4.2'le-002 5.iDle-002 7.4530.002 5.155/-002 â€¢717,-002 7.663.-002 9.2'52-002 6 79le-002 6.93*e-002 1.168.-001 1.â€¢27,-001 1.01Â§e-001 1.057e-001 1.355e-001 1.745.-001 1.lne-001 1.130*-001 1.317e-001 1.745e-001 1.1Zle-001 1.017e-001 1.2130-001 1.7;Ge-001 1.090â‚¬-001 1.004,-001 11*le-001 1 64Oe-001 1.003â‚¬-001 9.217e-002 111le+001 1.Sile-001 9.35:e-002 1.4'Ze-002 0,1.02$e-001 1.423e-001 1.643.-002 7.155.-002 0.'9.33 Se-002 1.2810-001 7.814â‚¬-002 7.2.le-002 1 1.574/-002 1.166Â®-001 7.31â€¢e-002 6.75 le-002 2 4.0517-002 '.0.0.-002 3.ldje-002 3.217e-002 3 2.406e-002 2.177.-002 2.42%-002 1.913,-002 4 1.672.-002 1.961,-002 1.7742-002 1 28.-002 Source: North Frontal (west) Region usGS 2001 california Closest Distance: M.54 ki Aiviltude Units: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.20- Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Perlod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lean of Atter,uation Equations Colu=n 3: Acceleration (g) for: Boore-Atkinson (200*) NGA ISIS 2001 colu. 4: Acceleration (0) for: C-Bbell-*ozorgria (2001) NGA USGS 2001 colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 200* 1 2 3 4 1 1.266e-002 1.157e-001 6.37*e-002 6.1$4e-002 0.05 1.9:Ge-002 1.20Se.001 7 110e-002 7.797e-002 0.1 1.152.-001 1 4*3e.001 5 â€¢02/-002 1.152â‚¬-001 0.2 1 70le-001 2 0.'-001 1 3Be-001 1.660(:-001 Page 29 -_Ssâ€¢ vs-110 - Sel:,ic Hazard Analysis 1 Deteraini,tic 07 1721e-001 2.172e-001 1.Wle-001 1.42le-001 0.8 1.565,-001 1.964/-001 1.43le-001 1 254/-001 0.9 1.410e-001 1.7â€¢Ge-001 1 30Ze-001 11/le-001 1 1.282/-001 1.5712-001 1 1Â§2,-001 1.0/le-001 2 5 492,-002 6.53*-002 5.354e-002 4.513,-002 3 3.043e-002 3.$13.-002 3.067e-002 2.480.-002 4 2.075.-002 2.444e-002 2.2212-002 1 566/.002 Source: oak Ridge (offshore) Region: ISIS 2008 California Closest Disunce: 130.10 Ici Alitude Units: Acceleration (0) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile. 0.50 Colu- 1 Spectral Period Colu-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colvin 3: Acceleration (g) for. loore-Atkinson (2001) INGâ€¢ USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca*bell-lozorgnia (2008) NGA USGS 2001 Colurn &: Acceleration (g) for: chlou-Â¥(*Ing: (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 4.32 le-002 5.472e-002 4.Olle-002 3.41]e-002 4.5172-002 5.577e-002 4.417(-002 3.69;e-002 6 003e-002 6.*44 e-002 5.7762-002 5.311/-002 9 406â‚¬-002 1.019â‚¬-001 0.775e-002 1.$46,-002 1 12 le-001 1 310/-001 1.041â‚¬-001 9.410e-002 1.105â€¢-001 1.4010.001 9.136/-002 9 22]e-002 1.Olle-001 1.440e-001 9.5*Ze-002 1 632,-002 1.014e-001 1.3$91-001 1.1312-002 7 91/-002 9.536/-002 1.Me.001 l 254 e-002 7.â€¢07,-002 8.135.-002 1.1Ne-001 7 62;e-002 6 81*e-002 1.07*-002 1.015.-001 6.577e-002 6.407.-002 7.4â€¢3e-002 9.52Â§,5-002 6.444/-002 5.9&..002 Page 31 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0â€¢ 0.5 0./ 0.7 1 0.05 0.1 02 0.3 0.4 0.$ 0.6 0.7 0I 05 Â·_SSâ€¢ 9.180 - Seilâ€¢ic Mazard Analy'ts 1 Deter-inistic 0.3 1 5122-001 2.434,-001 1.590â‚¬-001 1.713e-001 0.4 1.137e-001 2.3&-001 1.$07,-001 1.616-001 0.5 1.7*le-001 2.3*le-001 1.4502-001 1.47#e-001 0.6 1 86/-001 2.22Se-001 1.391/-001 1.3491-001 0.7 1 &532-001 2.llc-Col 1.313,-001 1.239e-001 0.8 1.437e.001 1940e-001 1.227e-001 1145e-001 0.9 1.314e-001 1 74;e-001 1.137e-001 106le-001 1 1.21le-001 1.5112-001 1.062e-001 9.137/-002 2 5 5452-002 7.looe-002 5.9538-002 4.755e-002 3 3.654/-002 4.2310-002 3.8662-002 2.157/-002 4 2.5â€¢le-002 2 me-002 2./Sle-002 1 926/-002 Source: Northrldge Region: usls 200: california Closeit Distance: 71.16 " A,elitude units: Acceleration (g) lugnitudeÂ· 6.90 - FractileÂ· 0 50 column 1: spectral Perlod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Ran of Attertuation Equations colwin 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-â€¢tkinion (2001) Nu usls 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca,Â©bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-voungs (2007) IGA usls 2001 1 2 3 4 5 PGA 9.13$,-002 1.2250-001 8.21.-002 1.97$(-002 0.0,1.07Oe-001 1.263/-001 9.20;e-002 1.025e-001 0.1 1.450/-001 1 605â‚¬-001 1.24Se-001 1.4938-001 0.2 2.105,-001 2.42Ge-001 1.1170-001 2 07Oe-001 0.3 2.]Cle-001 2.7712-001 2 043'-001 2.089,-001 0.'2.17*e-001 2.6690-001 1 92:e-001 1.93le-001 0.5 2.065e-001 2.590e-001 1.1$7,-001 1.746'-001 0.6 1. Be-001 2.3538-001 1 696â‚¬-001 1.570e-001 page 30 -_SSA vt.110 - Sels,ic Hazard Analy,11 1 Determnistic 2 3.5&72-002 â€¢â€¢13e-002 3.37â€¢e-002 2.113e-002 3 2.12 le-002 2.503e-002 2.134e-002 1.727e-002 4 1 47Â§â‚¬-002 1.710,-002 1.5612.002 1.159e-002 Soum: Oak Ridge Conshore) Region. USGS 200Â§ California Closeit Distance: 100.43 I- *Mlitude units: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.20 -, Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1Â· Spectral Period Colum 2 Acceleration (g) for: Weighted -an of Attenuation Equation$ Colu/1 3 Acceleration (g) for: looreatkinion (2001) â€¢GA USGS 2001 colu-1 4: Acceleration (g) for CaÂ»Â©bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA uls 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Ch,ou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 S PGâ€¢ 7.580,-002 S.Â§60.-002 7.1672-002 6.01Ze-002 0.05 1 162,-002 9.923/-002 7.125/-002 6.731/-002 0.1 1.070(.001 1.210e-001 101Oe-001 9.50le-002 0.2 1.56*-001 1.7240-001 1.517e-001 1.465e-001 0.3 1.7572-001 2.0661-001 1.71Ge-001 1.5358-001 0.4 1.743&001 2.056e-001 1.707e-001 1.461.-001 0.5 1.70*e-001 2 073e-001 1.6"e-001 1 351/-001 0.6 1.5957-001 1.554,-001 1.554e-001 1.23 1/-001 0.7 1.1031-001 1.15;e-001 1.Sllc-001 1.140/-001 01 1.3/2-001 1.719e-001 1 â€¢07,-001 1.0Â§5/-001 05 1.274e-001 1.55]e-001 1.292/-001 9 776,-002 1 1.174e-001 1 â€¢17â‚¬-001 1.197e-001 9 073Â£-002 2 5.ille-002 6.393,5-002 5.7/1/-002 4.35/e-002 3 3.26Se-OK)2 3.115/-002 3.390/-002 2.550e-002 4 2.26.-002 2.$7*e-002 2.455.-002 1.735e-002 Page 32 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_/SA vill Jource: Oak Ridge Connected '*01 Callforniato$eit 01*tance: ..44 km Amlitude units. Acceleration (g KagnitudeÂ· 7.40 - Fractile: 0 50 Colu- 1: Spectral â€¢erlod Colu- 2: Acceleration (9) for: Colu- 3: Acceleration (9) for: Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: 1 2 3 M 1.314,-002 1.072e-001 0 05 9.003.-002 1.125:-001 0.1 1.17 le-001 1.3$0â‚¬-001 0.2 1.6721-001 1 80&2-001 0.3 1.9100-001 2.15"-001 0.4 1.Kle-001 2.1/e-001 0.5 1 137'-001 2.1572-001 06 1.735e-001 2 10/-001 07 1.6;le-001 2 026â‚¬-001 0.0 1.$440-001 1.130e-Col 0.5 1.423,-001 1.717e-001 1 1.32le-001 1.57Ge-001 2 G.627e-002 7.413.-002 3 â€¢ 11Oe-002 4.67*-002 2.*Be-002 3.138e-002 Source Palam verdem Region USGS 2001 California 0 - selimic Hazard Analysts 1 Deter-"ind weighted *an of Attenuation Equations loore-Atkinson (200*) O USGS ZOOS Ca,obell.lozorgnla (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 Chlou-Youngs (2007) IGI USGS 2001 7.17le-002 7.833e-002 1.002e-001 1 505e.001 1 712/-001 171le-001 1.734e-001 1.6526-001 1.586<-001 1 â€¢Sle-001 1 35".001 1.3082-001 7.124e-002 4.41*e-002 3.282e-002 Page 33 Stic 7.0;21-002 7.52 k -002 1.1610-001 1.706/-001 1 780/-001 171Oe-001 1.575e-001 1.4$10-001 1.34le-001 1.24#-001 1 155â‚¬-001 1010.-001 5.34/e-002 3.23Â£-002 2.11*e-002 -_Ss.A vs-180 - Se imic Hazard Analy,13 1 oeterInistic Closest Disunce: 2*.16 k, ABlitude Units: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.30 - maile: 0.50 Colo- 1: Spectral â€¢eriod Colum 2: Acceleration (g) forÂ· weighted war, of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA uSGS 2001 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: C.urbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) 16â€¢ USGS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 PGA 1.643e-001 1 913'-001 1.393e-001 1.623/-001 0.05 1./7/-001 2.06le-001 1.57$â‚¬-001 1.Â§05/-001 0.1 2.5;Se-001 2.72 le-001 2.21Oe-001 2.7332-001 0.2 3 4351-001 3.Glie-001 3.023,-001 3.557e-001 0.3 3.34*e-001 3.107Â¢-001 3.2288-001 3 605â‚¬-001 0.'3.31$'-001 3.-e-001 3.0:h-001 3. We-001 0.5 3.236e-001 3.,15.-001 3.015,-001 3.10Â§e -001 0.6 2 995/-001 3.227e-001 2.501.-001 2.157/-001 07 2 800,-001 3 002e-001 2.75â€¢e-001 2.645,-001 0.1 2.612e-001 2 7Gie-001 2.GOZe-001 2.467,-001 0.9 2.421/-001 2.526e-001 2.4400-001 2.3012.001 1 2 272e-001 2.330e-001 2.319Â¢-001 2.16e.001 2 1 32Se-001 1.27Ge-001 1.44*-001 125le-001 3 1.651.-002 8.5232-002 9 564,-002 7 1:Ge-002 4 6.21Ge-002 6.15le-002 7.0/1/-002 5.3682-002 source: â€¢alos verdes Connected Region: USGS 200: Cal,fornla Cloiest Distance: 29.*6 km Iplitude Units: Acceleration (O) lugnitude: 7.70 - Fractile: O.50 Page 34 -_SM v$-180 - seismic Hazard Analy,i, 1 Deterministic Colum 1. Spectral period Colu- 2. Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colum 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca,bell-lozorÂ·gr,la (2008) NGA USGS ZOOS Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiow-Youngs (2007) Ne Usls 2001 1 2 3 â€¢ 5 FCA 1.82#-001 2.02:e-001 1.5 lh.001 1.93Oe-001 0 0$2.0/e-001 2.22 le-001 1.6951+001 2.247,-001 0.1 2.711/-001 2.172e-001 2.31le-001 3.160,-001 0.2 3.63'e-001 3.5 90/-001 3.1752-001 4.14'e-001 0.3 3.112e-001 3.741,-001 3.â€¢le-001 4.21:e-001 0â€¢3.6742-001 3 632e-001 3.374e-001 4.017e-001 0.5 3.5931.001 3.515,-001 3 flie-001 3.7lfe-001 0.6 3.4lle-001 3.32/e-001 3 /1/2-001 3 4172.001 0.7 3 26Oe-001 3.1740-001 3.34Oe-001 3.265e-001 0.1 3.0951-001 2.9732-001 3.235e-001 3.076.-001 0.9 2.519.-001 2.74le-001 3.11le-001 2.905/-001 1 2.769/-001 2.5412-001 3.005e-001 2.753,-001 2 1.7822-001 1 5372-001 2.12.-001 1.6/31-001 3 1.23Ge-001 1.16Ge-001 1456e-001 1.0172-001 4 1.955.-002 1.51â€¢e-002 1.097e-001 7.â€¢55.-002 Source: Pinto Mtn Region usGS 2001 Californli Closest Distance: 113 72 ki Al,Ahude Units: Accele,ation (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 I l: Spectral'Periodolum 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted Iean of Attenuation Equation: Colu-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS ZOO: Colu=, 4: Acceleration (g) for: CAE@bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2008 â€¢age 35 -_59 v-180 - Sel-1 colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: chlow.'rcw 1 2 3 M G llie-002 1.22$e-002 0.05 6.517/+002 1.5952-002 01 1.527e-002 1 029â‚¬-001 0.2 1.242/-001 1 /04/-001 0.3 1.4112-001 1.637e-001 0.4 1.â€¢02â‚¬-001 1.6,3.-001 0.$1.313e-001 1.72le-001 0.6 1.30Oe-001 1.632/.001 07 1.23le-001 1.561â‚¬-001 0.1.liSe-001 1.467â‚¬-001 0.8 1.075e-001 1.360,-001 1 1 0061-001 1.27le-001 2 5.645,-002 6.973/-002 3 3 625/-002 4.500'-002 4 2.513,-002 3.1*le-002 Source: Pisgah-lull ion Mtn-lesquite Lk Region: USGS 200* California closest Distance: 169.41 ki -litude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2Â· Acceleration (g) for: weighted I Colum 3 Acceleration (g) for loore-Atk Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for ca-bell Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-You 1 2 3 M 3.4532.002 3 812,-002 ic Hazard Analysis 1 Deterministic 91 (2007) NCRâ€¢ USGS 2008 4 5 5.25'e-002 4.870,-002 & 775.-002 5 3*Ge-002 7.3*Ge -002 7.90Ze-002 1.116â‚¬-001 1.205e-001 1.32*e-001 1.252*-001 1.24.-001 1.24 le-001 1.2672-001 1160/-001 1 196/.001 1.07Oe-001 1.1301-001 9.521.-002 1.Olle-001 Â§.26â€¢e-002 9.96le-002 1.6722-002 9.33 6.-002 1.1432-002 5 365/-002 4 591-002 3 4*le-002 2.1982-002 2 &850-002 1.979â‚¬-002 Mean of Attenuation Equations inson (2008) MUSGS 2001 lozorgria (2008) IGA USGS 2008 Mos (2007) NGA USGS 2001 4 5 3./150-002 2.734e-002 Page 36 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_ssi vs-110 - Sels-c Hazard Arnalysis 1 Determinlitic 3.63$7-002 3.-le-002 4.112Â®-002 2 Ple-002 4.5*4/-002 â€¢.63*e+002 5.053e.002 4.012,-002 7.240,-002 6.876â‚¬-002 7.155/-002 6.-le-002 1.91Ze-002 8./4//-002 9.77 le-002 :117.-002 9.123/-002 9 7 lle-002 5.30.-002 1 213/-002 9.28-002 1.037Â®-001 9.442,-002 7.97;e-002 8.Â§7Se-002 1.01â€¢e-001 1.9,2,-002 7.5â€¢le-002 1.3/Ge-002 9.955(,-002 1.5 m.002 7.124e-002 0.8 1.11:e-002 9.560/-002 1.0,3.-002 6 7412.002 0.,7.624,-002 5 0152.002 7.47*e-002 6.31Â©e-002 1 7.199,-002 8.&5â€¢e-002 6.99*e-002 6.046,-002 2 4 156/-002 4..0.-002 3.9732-002 3.5&5e-002 3 2.6/e-002 3.21â€¢e-002 2.5772.002 2.270/-002 4 1.91$'-002 2.276Â¢-002 1.510.-002 1.jile-002 Source: Pital Point (Lo-er)-lentalve RegionÂ· ISIS ZOOI Callfornia elicit 01,tance. 12.36 kÂ» Aaolitude in its Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.$0 coluin 1: Spectral â€¢erlod colu- 2: acceleration (g) for weighted Mean of Amution Equition, Colu- 3Â· Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 200* Colum 4. Acceleration (g) for: cabell-mozorgria (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Young, (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 0 4.40Oe-002 4.77$e-002 4.71;e-002 3 6558.002 0.0,4.650.-002 4.9352-002 5.1$7e-002 3.876,-002 0.1 5.924/-002 ;.131.-002 6.384e-002 5.573,-002 0.2 5.246&002 1.6932-002 9.910e-002 9.162e-002 0.3 1.132Â®-001 1.143,-001 1217,-001 1.040.-001 Page 37 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 05 0.1 0.7 -_53â€¢ vs-110 - sellâ€¢ic Hazard Analysis 1 Deterilnistic 0.4 1.131/-001 1.208.-001 1.16*e-001 1.042e-001 0.5 1.145â‚¬-001 1.282/-001 1.lne-001 9.910,-002 0.6 1.091-001 1.255/-001 1.117e-001 9.2/91-002 0.7 1.055 -001 1.232e-001 1.0671+001 1.70Ze-002 0.1 9.541/-002 1.1612-001 1002â‚¬-001 1.167Â¢-002 0.9 9.218e-002 1.075.-001 9.262e-002 7.6;9.-002 1 1.554/-002 5.917,-002 1.6332-002 7.lai-002 2 4.325e-002 4.Ele-002 4.523.-002 3.63:e-002 3 2.664.-002 2.576e-002 2.7-/-002 2.22Ze-002 4 1 Ale.002 2.002e-002 2.Olle-002 1.SOSe-002 source: â€¢ita. Point (Lo-er. Weit) Region: USGS 2001 california Closest 01.tance 173.11 Icm Allitude units Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 colu= 1: spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA uSGS ZOOS colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for. Campbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA usls 2001 colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-voungs (2007) NGA ISGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 4 3.Oe-002 3.5 Ue-002 4.AZe-002 3.05â€¢e-002 0.05 ..018.-002 3.6530-002 5.16le-002 3.202.-002 0.1 5 055â‚¬-002 4.342e-002 6.290.-002 4.$â€¢Se-002 0.2 1.123/-002 6. 6*Ge-002 9.151.-002 7.754,-002 0.3 1.021Â¢-001 9.13;e-002 1.235,+001 9.13Â§e -002 0.4 1.037e.001 9.8:Oe-002 1.190e-001 5 344/-002 0.5 105;e-001 1.06*e-001 1.ZOIe-001 9.0060-002 0.6 1011/-001 1.0511-001 1.144&001 1.$13!-002 0.7 9.12;e-002 1.04%+001 1.05Ge-001 1.022e-002 Page 31 -_ISA vs-180 - Sels-C Hazard Analysis 1 Deterministic 0..Â§.217e-002 1.00]e-001 1.02;e-001 7 562'.002 0.9 8.620(:-002 9.29Ze-002 9.45.-002 7.115/-002 1 1.047e-002 1.Glle-002 1.77$8-002 6.6* Se-002 2 3.9*Ge-002 4.277e-002 4.277e-002 3.40â€¢e-002 3 2 â€¢161-002 2.64 le-002 2.529.-002 2.06Se-002 4 1.615e-002 1.712,-002 1 17"-002 1 399'-002 source: litas Point (upper) Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 166.40 km Allitude units: Acceleration W Magnitude: 6.90 - Fractile: 0.$0 Colum 1: Spectral Period coluin 2 Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Atterwation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA usls 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca,pbell-lozorgnia (2008) IN USGS 2001 Colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ WSGS ZOOS 2 3 4 5 3.122e-002 3.051/-002 4.0532-002 2 223e-002 3.263e-002 3.110â‚¬-002 4.374,-002 2.304/.002 4.200e-002 3.1172.002 $.504&002 3.27Se-002 6.957e.002 6 6/le-002 1.5;le-002 5.62;e-002 1 6.2-002 9.0631-002 1.0422-001 6.57*e-002 1.7/e-002 9.57 le-002 9./Ve-002 6.69.-002 1.61Oe-002 1.00]e-001 "//.002 6 â€¢17e-002 1.144e-002 9.57Se-002 8.825/-002 6.02*e-002 7.654.-002 5.2 lie +002 1.219â‚¬-002 $.64â€¢e-002 7.131*-002 1.6ok -002 7.$201-002 5.Me-002 6.5 192-002 7.8422-002 6.777e-002 4.040e-002 $.999â‚¬-002 7.2132-002 6174e-002 â€¢.610.-002 2 72 le-002 3.25$Â¢+002 2 6770-002 2 232 e-002 Page 39 Stic 5 4.616/-002 5.013 e-002 7.37Oe-002 1.1570-001 1.270e-001 1.245â‚¬.001 1 16*e-001 1.Ne-001 1.00*e-001 9.4102-002 1.712*-002 1 195,-002 4.064.-002 2.4530-002 1.6550-002 ismic lizard Analyws 1 Deter,ini 1 52"-002 1.32 le-002 1.114e-002 1773e-003 ed -an of Attenuation Equationi Atkinson (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2008 11-'ozorg'll (2001) 11- USG' 2001 Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS ZOOS 1 0.0% 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0$ 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 -_ISA 1-110 - Se 3 1.55â€¢e-002 1.8112-002 4 1.0805-002 1.24:e-002 source: pitas Point Connected Region: usls 2001 california closest Distance: 131 21 Ici Molitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7 30 - Fraitile: 0.50 colum 1: Spectral Period Col,- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weight Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Boore- colum 4: Acceleration (g) for Cambe colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou 1 2 3 l/ 5.705/-002 6.3 :Se-002 0.05 6.07 6-002 6.62$'-002 0.1 7.807e-002 7.152{3-002 0.2 1 113,-001 1.131,-001 0.3 1.412e-001 1.4432-001 0.4 1.3851-001 1.4191-001 0,1.39*e-001 1.5532-001 0.6 1.32*e-001 1.Me-001 0.7 1.26*e-001 1.460,-001 0.1 1 181/-001 1.373e-001 0.9 109$-001 1.256e-001 1 1.017e-001 1160/-001 2 4.544-002 ;â€¢190-002 3 2.916,-002 3.37*e-002 4 2.0122-002 2.272e-002 6.041Â®-002 6.517/.002 8.15*e-002 1.2&42-001 1.5228-001 1 462e-001 1.4742-001 1.397,-001 1.33Ge-001 1.25le-001 1.153Â£-001 1.07Ze-001 5.275â‚¬-002 3.1281-002 2.31*e-002 Page 40 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_ssâ€¢ vs-110 - seismic Hazard Analysis 1 Deterministic Source: Ileito n: USGS 2001 Callfornia iest Distance: 149.74 ki litude Units: Acceleration (g) IMagnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: O.50 Colu'. 1: Spectral â€¢eriod Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attef-tion Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (O) for: loore-Atkinson (200*) MIA usss 2001 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: carbell-/ozorgnia (2001) NGA usls 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-voung, (2007) Noi uses 200; 1 2 3 4 5 KGA 3.760â‚¬-002 4.4212-002 3.110â‚¬-002 3.043e-002 0.0,3.9691-002 4.52â€¢e-002 4.1;Ze-002 3.23[e-002 0.1 5.120.-002 5.â€¢SSe-002 3.2362.002 .65'e-002 0.2 1 139'-002 1.67e.002 10Â§7.-002 7 6768-002 0.3 9.543/-002 1.137e-001 9.75$'-002 1.706e-002 0.4 9...-002 1.1812-001 9.270e-002 1.705.-002 0.5 5..0.-002 1.2â€¢Ze-001 5.1â€¢le.002 8.262,-002 0.6 9.352/-002 1.154/-001 1 5141-002 7 723/-002 0.7 1.52:e-002 1.155/-001 1 0112-002 7 217e-002 0.1 1 3450-002 1.013e.001 7.454/-002 6.7551-002 0.9 7.6:Ge-002 9.817e+002 6.*We-002 6.3182-002 1 7.125/-002 9.1152-002 6.35;e-002 5.906/-002 2 3.52Oe-002 4.2121-002 3.4132-002 2.936.-002 3 2.139e-002 2.46]e-002 2.17$Â¢-002 1.77*e-002 4 1.4gle-002 1.67;e-002 1.597e-002 1.20le-002 source: Puente Hilli Region: USGS ZOOS Califorrna Closest Distance: 19.11 k- Page â€¢1 --.Begio -_SSâ€¢ vs-110 - seismic Hazard Analyill 1 DeterÂ·,vinistic 41 itude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnltude: 7.10 - Fractile 0.$0 Colu- 1: spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for. loore-Atkinson (2001) NG* IMS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambell-lozorgrna (2001) Nli USGS 2001 Coli- 5 Acceleration (g) for: allow-Â¥*ng; (2007) )41/ USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 KA 2.273e-001 2.064e-001 2.157e-001 2.595e-Col 0.05 2.$2Oe-001 2.223e-001 2.357Â¢-001 2.575.-001 0.1 3.443e-001 3.0662-001 3.27*e-001 3 917/-001 0.2 4.66*e-001 4 57 le-001 4.3$12-001 5.06:e.001 0.3 4.905.-001 4.519e-001 4.6318-001 5.16Â§2-001 04 â€¢.7Zle-001 4.6672-001 4 $350-001 4.95&-001 0.5 4 5452-001 4.43*e-001 4.542,-001 ,65â€¢e-001 0.6 4.222/-001 4.0541-001 4.266+001 4 347e-001 0.7 3.9;Ge-001 3 Me-001 4.045.-001 4.06le-001 0.8 3.Vie-001 3.412,-001 3.803/-001 3.Ille-001 0.9 3.39Ze-001 3.048.-001 3. me-001 3.577e-001 1 3 1$0,-001 2.7;Ge.001 3.341/-001 3.3$2e-001 2 1.Â§18/-001 1.2467.001 1.8312.001 1 67e-001 3 9.40Oe-002 7 533/-002 1.me-001 5 687.-002 4 6.51*e-002 5.21le-002 1.035.-002 6.307e-002 Source: Puente Hilli (Coyote H1110 Region USGS 200* California Closest Di,tance: 12.64 km A,elitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude. 6.90 - Fractlle: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period page 42 -_59 v:-110 - Sel.lc Hazard Analysis 1 Deter,inlitic Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lean of Attemation Equations Colu- 3: acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2008) NGâ€¢ uill 2001 Colu/11 4. Acceleration (g) for: Ca,Â©bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 3001 Colu- 5 Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NG, Usls ZOOS 1 PGA 0.05 -_Ss,A v,-110 - Sel,Iic Mazard Analy,13 1 Deterministic 2 3 4 5 1 6562-001 1.Ele-001 1.56*e-001 1 5911-001 1 8401-001 1.152-001 1.7432-001 1 863,-001 1 2 3 0 2.5452.001 2.1712-001 0.05 2 lEe.001 2 355e-001 0.1 3.134'-Col 3.355/-001 02 5.232,-001 5.292/-001 0.3 5.492/-001 5.632/-001 04 5.347/-001 5.319.-001 0.5 5.1â€¢le-001 5.090e-001 0.6 4.770/-001 4.5/0 -001 0.7 4.45*-001 â€¢.210e-001 0.1 4.lue-001 3.lose-001 0.'3 127/-001 3.3960-001 1 3.5562-001 3.061.-001 2 1 806/-001 1.34â€¢e-001 3 1.05*e-001 7.61/-002 4 7.310/-002 5.Zile-002 Sourâ‚¬e: luente Hills (LA) Region: IMS ZOOS california Closest Distance: 31.05 6 Allitude units: Acceleration (0) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile. 0.50 Colu- 1. Spectral Period u- 2: Acceleration (g) for welghtelum 3: Acceleratlon (g) for: Boore-' Coluin 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambel Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Â¥ 4 5 2,591/.001 2.15le-001 2.110/-001 3.270,+001 3 136/-001 ,31Ze-001 4."22.001 5 442e-001 5.254-001 5.$91â‚¬-001 5.2321-001 5.42Oe-001 5.216e-001 5.lâ€¢Oe -001 4.172e-001 4.25/-001 4.59#-001 4.56*-001 4.3110-001 4.3158-001 4.019*-001 4.065â‚¬-001 3.77â€¢e-001 3.12:e-001 2 091,-Col 1 9...001 1.243e-001 1.163/-001 9.02 Se-002 7.61Ge-002 d *an of Attem/non Equations tkinion (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS ZOOS 1-'ozorgria (2001) N[A usGS 200' oungs :i:51, NGA USGS 2001 0.1 2.Wle-001 2.564(-001 0.2 3.553e-001 3 Ale-001 0.3 3.730,-001 4.10#-001 04 3.5272-001 3.1912-001 05 3.34Se-001 3.701.-001 06 3 057,-001 3.363/-001 0.7 2.826,-001 3.OVe-001 0.1 2 //-001 2 100,-001 0.9 2.36le-001 2 493/-001 1 2.167/-001 2 24Â§e-001 2 1.01.-001 5.7&-002 3 5.91â€¢e-002 $.$95.-002 4 4.1122-002 3.Hle-002 Source: Puente Hills (Santa Fe springs) Region ISIS ZOOI Callfornla Closest Distance: 21.17 ka Aiplitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude 6.70 - Fractile: O.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted i Colu- 3: Accileration (g) for: loore-Ark Colum 4. Acceleration (g) for. ambell-I Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youi 1 2 3 0 1.870,-001 1.We-001 0.05 2.018.-001 2.012e-001 2.452e-001 2.667.-001 3.366/-001 3.4952.001 3.602e-001 3.4112.001 3.451/-001 3.2401-001 3.37$e-001 2.9$3e-001 3.116â‚¬-001 2.Hle-001 2.91]e-001 2.â€¢Ue-001 2.70Oe-001 2 271/-001 2.4/4/-001 2.10$e-001 2.3052.001 1.-Se.001 1.151/-001 S.241.-002 6.762e-002 5.382,-002 4 946.-002 3.5â€¢3e-002 kan of Attenuation Equations Inson (2001) NGA usGS 2001 lozorgili (2001) NGA USGS 2001 igs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 4 5 1.164,-001 1.863,-001 2.074e-001 2.17Se-001 Page 44 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 1 -_SS* vs-180 - selsilc Mazard Analysis 1 Deterilnlitlc 2.Me-001 2.79*e-001 2.Sale-001 3.069.-001 4.05]e-001 4.340,-001 3.9122-001 3.9;le-001 4.232,-001 4.605e-001 4.1$0,-001 3 540/-001 3.Re-001 4.3242-001 3.Vie.001 3 675,-001 3.73*-001 4.062e-001 3.7Â§:e-001 3.356e-001 3.37le-001 3.61;e-001 3.437e-001 3.0*-001 3.07Se-001 3.27;e-001 3.15*e-001 2.105,-001 2 1022-001 2.933{:-001 2.119e-001 2.5//-001 2.53*e-001 2.600e-001 2.630e-001 2.3130-001 1 2.31*e-001 2.334/-001 2.4 lge-001 2.200Â®-001 2 1.04Oe-001 5.572,-002 1.150â‚¬-001 1.012â‚¬-001 3 5.832*-002 5.15 le-002 6.624-002 5.72 le-002 4 3./75.-002 3.464.-002 4.779,-002 3.613.-002 Source. Raymond Region: USGS 200/ Californla Closest Distance: 44.13 kn Wlitude uniti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.80 - FractlleÂ· 0.$0 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for weighted lan Of Attenwatlon Equation, Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) NGâ€¢ usls ZOOS Colw- 4: Acceleration (g) for Cailbell-lozorgnia (2008) NGA USGS ZOOS Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for. Chiou.Â¥wngs (2007) INGâ€¢ ISIS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 M 1 1563-001 1.5lle-001 9.26le-002 5.5921-002 0.05 1.27le-001 1.643.-001 1.08-001 1.1211-001 0.1 1.787/-001 2.170.-001 1.517e-001 1.67;e-001 0.2 2.Sile-001 3.320.-001 2.11]e-001 2.257e-001 0.3 2.707e-001 3.63*e-001 2.2â€¢Se-001 2.233,-001 0.'2 5]Ze-001 3.449:+001 2.05*e-001 2.0$0,-001 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.9 -_ssâ€¢ v,-180 - seismic luzard Analysis 1 Deteriinistic 0.5 2.361/-001 3.27Se-001 1.91;e-001 1.HOe-001 0.6 2.12Â§e-001 2.934/-001 1.7812-001 1.6551-001 0.7 1.93Ge-001 2.6711-001 1.637e-001 1.5012-001 0.;1.7544001 2.395 e-001 1.495â‚¬-001 1.372e-001 0.5 1.$10,-001 2.118/+001 1.36]e-001 1.257/-001 1 1.436e-001 1. 8le-001 1.255(3-001 1.15;e-001 2 6.5000-002 7.727e-002 6.5142-002 5.260/-002 3 3 7610-002 4.1â€¢le-002 4.0:Se-002 3.0We-002 4 2 603e-002 2.132 e+002 2.94.-002 2.0151-002 Source: Red Mountain Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 144.2, k. Amplitude units: Acceleration (g) f Magnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 Coll" 1: spectral period Coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colui: 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (200:) 109 usls 2001 Colu-, 4. Acceleration (g) for: Calbell-lozorgnia (2008) KA USGS 2008 Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Young: (2007) NW USGS 2001 1 2 3 / S M 4.126*-002 5.660(,-002 4.574e-002 4.243e-002 0.05 5.133,-002 5.192/-002 4.95 k -00 2 4.54*e-002 0.1 G.546e-002 6.9112-002 6.150e-002 6.570e-002 0.2 9 576,-002 9.134/-002 5.4970.002 1.060e-001 0.3 1207e-001 1.2740.001 1 162/-001 1.1170-001 0.4 1.211/-001 1.33%.001 1.115e-001 1.180.-001 05 1.2242.001 1 /20/-001 1.132e-001 1 111/-001 0.6 1.1740-001 1.3'/-001 1.080e-001 104/2-001 0.7 1.130/-001 1.373e-001 1.03&-001 5 750.-002 0.8 1.061.-001 1.304e-001 9.826.-002 9.11/-002 Page 45 -_SM Â¥$-110 - Sel,mic Hazard Analysis 1 Determinlitic 0.5 9.531*-002 1.202e-001 9.17*e-002 1.617.-002 1 9.296.-002 1.117e-001 1.63â€¢e-002 8.Olle-002 2 4.Ilk-002 5.463,-002 5.07le-002 4.1â€¢Ze-002 3 3.11le-002 3.460Â¢3-002 3.322e-002 2.$$]e-002 4 2.177(-002 2.314e-002 2.47Ze-002 1.744e-002 Source: Rose Canyon Region: ISGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 83.77 ki 41,tude Kits: Acceleranon (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - maile 0.50 Colurn 1 Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lean of Attenuation Equations Colum 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CalÂ©bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGâ€¢ USIS ZOOS Colurn 5: Acceleration (g) for. Chiou-Â¥oungs (2007) Nli USGS 2008 2 3 4 5 6.04 le-002 1021/-001 5.667,-002 4.950e-002 7.;07e-002 1.05Ze-001 6.372e-002 5.633,-002 1.00*e-001 1.325e-001 1 610,-002 1.3938-002 1.4lle-001 1.567,-001 1.2G0e+001 1.217/-001 1.619*-001 2 182/-001 1 4230-001 1.2532-001 1.Â§58Â¢-001 2.167Â®-001 1.333e-001 1.175e-001 1.413,-001 2.104â‚¬-001 1.27Se-001 1.06*e-001 1.346/-001 1.905e-001 1.lue-001 9.6138-002 1.231/-001 1.752e-001 1.07Ge-001 :*Sle-002 1.134/-001 1.600e-001 9.17*-002 8.1511-002 1.036â‚¬-001 1.453(-001 S.Olle-002 7. Sioe -002 9 54.-002 1.33]e-001 1.2&-002 7.00$'-002 4 8501-002 6 574/.002 4.2/61.002 3.650/-002 2.910.-002 3 7*50-002 2.6 5/.002 2.241.-002 P.ge 47 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.Â§ 0./ 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 -_SSA VS.110 -Sci-1 4 2 06Ze-002 2.72 le-002 Source: San Cayet/no Region: USGS 200* California Closes' Distance: 109.12 km AEÂ®litude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude 7 20 - Fractile 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Perlod colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: mghted i Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore.Atk' Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) forÂ· caipbell-t Colum 5: Acceleration (O) for: chiou-Â¥oux 2 3 9 6 191/-002 1.257e-002 0.05 6.664.-002 1.550e-002 0.1 1.7210-002 1.037/-001 0.2 1. 83/-001 1.49*e-001 03 1.496/-001 1 1217-001 0â€¢1.4G0e-001 1.13le-001 0;1.435e-001 1.165e-001 0.6 1.344e-001 1.772e-001 0.7 1.2651-001 1.Ne-001 0.8 1.180â‚¬-001 1.572e-001 0.'1.013,-001 1.424/.001 1 1.00le-001 1.303e-001 2 4.95"-002 5.927e-002 3 3.04Ge-002 3.539e-002 4 2.12â€¢e-002 2 391/-002 Page 46 ic Hazard Analy,11 1 Deter,inistic 1.5632-002 1.5 Ze-002 ean of Atterliatlon Equations Inion (2001) NGA ISIS 2001 lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 igs (2007) IDA USGS 2001 4 5 5.15le-002 5.1â€¢le-002 5.72#-002 5.7132-002 7.402e-002 1.3112-002 1.113e-001 1.26/e-001 1.30Â§1-001 1 350e-001 1.2â€¢le-001 1 2991-001 1.233e-001 1 203e-001 1.11*e-001 1 107e-001 1.051'.001 1.022e-001 1.0201-001 9.49le-002 5.435,-002 1./210-002 1 1032-002 ..205,-002 4.ille-002 4.017e-002 3.17Oe-002 2.42*e-002 2 3351-002 1.6413-002 Page 41 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_ssi v-1*0 - Sel-ic Hazard Inalysts 1 Deterainistic ...ssi vsâ€¢180 - Sel-ic Hazard Analy,1, 1 Oeter,inlitic Source: San Gabriel Region. USGS Zool California closest Distance 7101 ki litude Units. Accelera"on (g) 7.30 - Fractile. 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equitions colu-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: laure-Atkinson (2008) NGA USCS ZOOS colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: caztell-lozorgnia (200Â§) NGâ€¢ USGS 2008 Coluin 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) MIA uses 2001 1 2 3 4 5 â€¢GA S.:6Oe-002 1.401â‚¬-001 7.5732-002 1.oole-002 0.05 1.0/Ze-001 1..75.-001 1.46Â§'-002 9 2138-002 01 1.â€¢39,-001 1.8248-001 1 12.-001 1.36â€¢e-001 0.2 1.915/-001 2.3&-001 1.643,-001 1.92Oe-001 0.3 2.142e-001 2.6045-001 1.16Â§2-001 1 5$50-001 0.4 2.0632-001 2.*e-001 1.773e-001 1.1301-001 0.5 1.95Ze-001 2.537'-001 1.769,-001 1.661.-001 0.6 1.A7/-001 2 366'-001 1. 8 e-001 1.52oe-001 07 173Oe-001 2.213e-001 1 510/-001 1.397e-001 0.8 1.ille-001 2.0%3,-001 1.416e-001 1.254e-001 0.9 1.4510-001 1.We-001 1.3*Ge-001 1.20Se-001 1 1.390e-001 1.742e-001 1.302,-001 1.124-001 2 7 73*e-002 9.332.-002 7.636.-002 6 24$/-002 3 4.57Â§â‚¬-002 6.044.-002 4.5131-002 3.909/-002 4 3.82.-002 4.30le-002 3.693.-002 2.660.-002 Source San Joaquin Hills Region: usls 200Â§ california Cloilit Distance: 7.15 k. A,plitude Miti: Acceleration (g) â€¢ige â€¢S Magnitude: 7.10 - Fradle: 0.50 ColuMn 1: Spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleratton (g) for: weighted lean of Attenwation Equations Colu-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) IP USGS 2001 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cazpbell-Worgnia (2001) NGA ISIS 2001 Collaul 5 Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chiou-Â¥oungs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 M 3.060,-001 2 .07.-001 3 116/.001 3.587 e-001 0.05 3.3â€¢7Â¢+001 2.8%-001 3.360e-001 .032.-001 0.1 4 3131.001 3.ille-001 4.2Zle-001 ;One-001 0.2 5 510,-001 6.0757-001 5.3398-001 6.3150-001 0.3 6.352Â£-001 6.$41/-001 5.152e-001 6.655,-001 0.4 6.33Â£-001 6.2*Se-001 6.07le-001 G.6522-001 0.$6.2/le-001 5 5600-001 6.34*-001 6.$0Ze-001 0.6 $96$/-001 5.â€¢61,-001 6.13*e-001 6.297/-001 0.7 5.70Se-001 5.071/-001 3.We-001 G.07%-001 0.1 5 â€¢OGe-001 â€¢.6211-001 1.735(-001 5.1e-Col 0.9 5.07*e.001 4.14]e-001 $.'66â‚¬-001 5.Â§25,-001 1 4.752e-001 3.757e-001 5.23$e-001 5.3151-001 2 2 741â‚¬-001 1.761/-001 3.355/-001 3 105e-001 3 1.61Oe-001 1.0*le-001 2.05le-001 1.154/-001 4 1.176.-001 7.574e-002 1.$06e-001 1.264e-001 source: san Jose Region usls 2008 california Claim Distance: 30.92 km Ambrude unitâ€¢: Acceleration (g) Magnitude 6.70 - Fractile 0.50 colu- 1. Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (O) for: weighted Mear of Attenuation Equations page 50 ...SM vs-110 - Se,wic Hazard Analysis 1 Deter,inlitic -_SS* vsâ€¢110 - selimic Hazard Analy,11 1 DeterÂ·minlitic Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for. loore-Atkinson (2001) NGâ€¢ UMS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 ozorgria (200/) NGA USGS 200/ ings (2007) NGA USGS ZOOI trk,/tion Equations kir ,NI USGS 200/ '001) NGA 'SGS 2001 G USGS 2001 colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: calbell Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Â¥01 1 2 3 u 1.]We-001 1 72Ge-001 0.05 1.52â€¢e-001 1.834.-001 0.1 2.172e-001 2.49/-001 0.2 3.03]e-001 3.705/-001 03 3.073e-001 3.77$e-001 0.4 2.8*Oe-001 3.1030.001 0.5 2.662.-001 3.3;Se-001 0.6 2.36'e-Col 2.557e-001 07 2 142e-001 2.G;Ge-001 0.8 1."le-001 2.350.-001 0.9 1.76*e-001 2.1%32-001 1 1.622/-001 1.56le-001 2 1.12Ze-002 5 33.-002 3 4 1122-002 $.23Se-002 4 3 360.-002 3.710e-002 Source: Santa Cruz Island Region: USGS ZOOS california closest Distance: 127 15 ki A,olitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractl le: 0.50 Colu- 1: spectral Period colu-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weightee oluin 3 Acceleration (g) for: loore-Ai olu- 4 Acceleration (g) for: ca,Â©bell Colw- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Ye 4 1.1*le-001 1.36#-001 2.00Oe-001 2.716/-001 2.114.-001 2.628,+001 2.â€¢67/-001 2. Me-001 2.005e-001 1.Ine-001 1 "Ze-001 1.;2*e-001 7.9170-002 4.94Â§e-002 3.57Ze-002 B of Att, i.on (200.] .orgnia (; P (2007) , Page $1 5 1.1;Ge-001 1.370/-001 2 023e-001 2.674.-001 2.629,-001 2 4012-001 2.161â‚¬-001 1.-40-001 1.766e-001 1 611/-001 1.4.Se-001 1.371/-001 7.109.-002 4 2$20-002 2 79--002 ed I Trult'n. Atkil NGA 11-/00.)001 voun,GA U 8 4 920,-002 6.36;e-002 0 05 5.25$'-002 6.595,-002 0.1 6.79]e-002 7.930e-002 0.2 1.0222-001 1.14le-001 0.3 1 191,-001 1.364/-001 0.4 1.115/-001 1.427e-001 0.5 1.172e.001 1.460/-001 0.6 1.100,-001 1.384/-001 0.7 1.04 le-001 1 323e-001 0.1 9 760.-002 1.24Se-001 0.5 9.Olle-002 1.1550-001 1 1.4.-002 1.0*Oe-001 2 4 691.-002 5.177/-002 3 2.5722-002 3.63:e-002 4 2.115,-002 2.63le-002 source: Sania Rosa Island Region: USGS ZOOS california clomeit Olitance: 187.14 ki A,elitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Coll- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weight colum 3: Acceleration (g) for Roore- colu-, 4: Acceleration (g) for: cambe colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou- 1 2 3 0 2.22 le-002 2.344/-002 0.05 2 3082-002 2.362e-002 0.1 2.Sile-002 2.1*le-002 â€¢.563,-002 5.000e-002 6.363.-002 9.691/-002 1.159'-001 1.102(-001 1.0951-001 1.027e-001 9.7202-002 5 0.7.-002 8.403e-002 7.839-002 4.354.-002 2.104/+002 2.06.-002 Ban of Atte tion (2001) izorÂ·gria (2 P (2007) N . 2.101,5002 3.036e-002 3 790.-002 Page 52 3 1327-002 4.17 le-002 6.0:le-002 9.5742-002 1.045.-001 1.026e-001 9.605.-002 1 90/-002 1 Q.e-002 7.744e-002 7.2--002 6.12 le-002 3 liae-002 2 4151-002 1.*5.-002 ion Equatio 'SGS 2001 NGA USGS 2 * 2001 1 $10,-002 1.527e-002 2.152e-002 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_ss,A vs-110 - selic Hazard Analy,1, 1 Dete,inistÂ·Ic 4.963'.002 5 07â€¢e-002 5.932.-003 3.113,+002 G.261,-002 6.71.-002 7 2778.002 4 721.-002 6.4332-002 7.469,-002 6.854.-002 4.534.-002 6.462.-002 7.Ille-002 6.00e-002 4.116e-002 6.0922-002 7.54le-002 6.1â€¢le-002 4.5Ve-002 5.778:-002 7 265/-002 5.7252-002 4.347e-002 5.4208-002 6.881â‚¬-002 5.263/-002 4.117e-002 5.034.-002 6.423e-002 4 785.-002 3.1952-002 4 707/-002 6.040e-002 4.394.-002 3.6*Ge -002 2.533/-002 3.274,5-002 2.21Ge-002 2 1090-002 1.Â§43e-002 1.92 k-002 1.317,-002 1 319/-002 1.09*-002 1.397/-002 1.Olle-002 8.907.-003 source: santa susana. alt l Region: USGS 200* California Clojest Distance: 13 13 11 A,plitude Mits. Aceleration (g) IMagnitude 6.50 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Pericd Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for. weighted *an of Attenuation Equitions Colum 3 Acceleration (g) for Boore-Atkinlion (2001) NGA ISIS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caq,bell-lozorgnia (2001) N<A USGS 2001 Colu- $ Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chico.Youngs (2007) NG,A USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 Pe 7.136Â¢-002 1.02â€¢e-001 5.70]e-002 5.462,-002 0.05 7.713Â¢-002 1.05 le-001 6.â€¢ 15 e-002 6.21Ge-002 0.1 1.03*-001 1.326,-001 8.674.-002 9.23*-002 0.2 1.545 e-001 2.030e-001 1 265'.001 1 3351-001 0.3 1.725e-001 2.370e-001 14310-001 1 374e-001 0.4 1.646â‚¬-001 2.307e-001 1.341,-001 1 211-001 0.5 1.57]e-001 2.26(e-001 1.216-001 1.172e-001 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0G 0.7 0.1 0.9 2 -_SSA vs.110 - Seismic HazarÂ·d Analysis 1 Determinintic 0.6 1.434/-001 2.067,-001 1.172,-001 1.0632-001 0.7 1.323e-001 1.516â‚¬-001 1.013&001 9.700â‚¬-002 0.1 1.208.-001 1.73*-001 9.S37,-002 1.505â‚¬-002 0.5 1.0520-001 1.$50e-001 9 0'.-002 1 201,-002 1 9.96]e-002 1.39le-001 1 349/-002 7 562e-002 2 4.556+002 5.1 le-002 4.3121-002 3. $022-002 3 2 660/-002 3.207/-002 2.712e-002 2.060e-002 4 1.Me-002 2.10/-002 1.576Â¢-002 1.365,-002 SourCe: Santa vne: (*t) Region: USGS 200* californli Closest Ii,unce: 126.31 ki *htude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0.$0 colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleratton (g) for: wetghted lean of Attenuation Equition, Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2008) NGA USGS 2001 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Campbell-lozorgria (2001) NG,A USGS 2001 Column 5: Acceleration (O) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) MCI ISIS 2001 1 2 3 â€¢ 5 PGA 5.033/-002 6.56Se-002 4.61*-002 3.lle-002 0.0,5.380e-002 6.*091-002 5.065e-002 .267.-002 0.1 6.9G0e-002 1.195/-002 6 4,2.-002 6 234,-002 0.2 1.044â‚¬-001 1.175e-001 5117.-002 5 7710-002 0.3 1.2132.001 1.3*-001 1.172e-001 1.06*e-001 0.4 1.2062-001 1.4602+001 1.115Â®-001 1.0/Ze-001 0.5 1 191/-001 1.491,-001 1.10le-001 9.7â€¢72-002 0.6 1.118/-001 1.412e-001 1.0]Se-001 9.029,-002 0.7 1.057/-001 1.34Se-001 9.832Â¢-002 1.395e-002 0.1 9.90â€¢e-002 1.26*e.001 9.191Â¢-002 7.144,-002 0.9 5.201/-002 1.176/.001 1.50(e-002 7.34*-002 Page %3 -_SM vs-110 - Set,Iic Hazard Analysts 1 Deter,inlitic 1 8.Â§05/-002 1.09*-001 7.926,-002 6.903Â£-002 2 4.7$00-002 ;me-002 4.404.-002 3.1828-002 3 3.007.-002 3 7520-002 2.133.-002 2.4358-002 4 2.131/-002 2 670,-002 2 0.'-002 1.657e-002 Source: Santa vnez (west) Region: 55 200; California Closest Distance: 17'.06 k. A,plitude units. Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - FraCtle: 0.50 coh- 1: Spectral Period Colum 2. Acceleration (g) for weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acce jeration (g) for: Boore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 colu- â€¢: Accelerat,on (g) for. Cabell-lozorgraa (2001) ,/1* USGS 20)01 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiow-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 2.'72.-002 2.75Ze-002 3.0*le-002 1.832e-002 2.me-002 2.13 le .002 3./3/-002 1.175/-002 3.41:e-002 3.42*e-002 â€¢.1661-002 2.659/-002 5.647.-002 5.7/le-002 6.507,-002 4.693e-002 7.04.-002 7 54//-002 7.982,-002 5.6107-002 7.217e-002 1.26*e-002 7.5*le-002 5.10le-002 7.2572-002 8.72 le-002 7.â€¢2â€¢e-002 5.625e- 002 6.16le-002 1.374.-002 6 87...002 5.3362-002 6.525e-002 1.090.-002 6 44 le-002 5.045.-002 6 13&0-002 7.6712-002 5.95#-002 4.772e+002 5 7117-002 7.171,-002 5.443â‚¬-002 4.51 le-002 5.350.-002 6.7392-002 5.0232-002 4 267.-002 2.923/-002 3.701/-002 2.60*-002 2.45le-002 1. 80Ge-002 2.232e-002 1.Glle-002 1.540*-002 1.217/-002 1.610e-002 1.205Â¢-002 1.04â€¢e-002 page 55 1 10eter,inistic 5 4.64 le-002 5.070Â¢-002 7.3Dle-002 1.134-001 1.260e-001 1.23 le-001 1.1;4Â¢-001 1.07'e-001 9.953,-002 Â§.364.-002 1.797.-002 1.287,-002 â€¢ 768/-002 3.027e-002 2 076â‚¬-002 ed *an of Attenuation Equations Atkinson (ZOOS) IGA ISIS ZOOI 11-lozorgnia (2001) 19 ISIS 2001 Youngs (2007) NGA ISIS 2001 1 0.0, 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 09 1 2 3 -_SSâ€¢ v-180 - seinic Source: Santa Â¥nez Connected Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 126.73 Ici Alhtude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.401- Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2 Acceleration (g) for: weight colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: 'core- Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Calpbe Colu- 5: Acceleration {g) for: Chiou 1 2 3 â€¢Gâ€¢ 5.675e-002 7.3111-002 0.05 6.0*.002 7.667/-002 0.1 7.797e-002 9.0470-002 0.2 1.143e-001 1.215e-001 0.3 1 329e-001 1 .4.-001 0.4 1.327e-001 1.521/.Col 0.5 1 32â€¢e-001 1.572,-001 0.6 1.257/-001 1.$13e-001 0.7 1.20le-001 1.4 Me-001 01 1 135/-001 1 390/-001 0.1.062e-001 1.291,-001 1 9.99le-002 1.221,-001 2 5.733:-002 6.90*-002 3 3.75*e-002 4.ine-002 4 2.6772-002 3.233/-002 Source: Sierra Madre Page 54 Mazird An 4 5.073,-002 5.533/-002 6.945.-002 1.06Ze-001 1.Zile-001 1.22*e-001 1.24 Se-001 1.1*Ge -001 1.13*-001 1.077e-001 1.0072-001 5.â€¢77.-002 5.587/-002 3 6$5â‚¬-002 2 7222-002 â€¢age 5, SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_ss/ vs-180 - Sci= ic lizard Analy,11 1 Deter,lnlitic -_ss.A vs-180 - INmic Hazard Analysis 1 Oeterainistic Region: USGS 200; California close.t Distince: 41 /0 kâ€¢ A*litude Units: Acceleration (g) gnitude: 7.20 - mile: 0.50 Colu- 1: spectral â€¢encd Colu-1 2Â· Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinson (2008) INGâ€¢ USGS 2005 Col,- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Culbell-lozorgn a (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2008 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 9 1.38-001 1.Ille-001 1.0102-001 1.21]e-001 0.05 1.&15e-001 1.820/-001 1.224/-001 1.50Ze-001 0.1 2.085,-001 2.358.-001 1.705Â¢-001 2.192e-001 0.2 2.173e-001 3.304e-001 2 31'.001 2.93]e-001 0.3 3 0,0.-001 3.635,-001 2.5/7.001 2.9326-001 0.4 2.179/.001 3.461*-001 2.441.-001 2.7272-001 0.5 2.7412.001 3 346â‚¬-001 2.41â€¢e-001 2.483.-001 0.G 2.$32e-001 3.01;e-001 2.2â€¢le-001 2.2 Ze.001 0.7 2.355e-001 2.11]e-001 2.1lle-001 2.076e-001 0.8 2.177e-001 2.630*-001 1 9131-001 1.91%-001 09 1 993/.001 2.35 k -001 1.842-001 1.777e-001 1 1 llc-001 2.130e-001 1.735e-001 1650e-001 2 9.21)e-002 5.5;le-002 1.One.001 1.07]e-002 3 5.770e-002 $114(-002 6.6432-002 4.15 k-002 4 4.050/.002 3 9*le-002 4.'02.-002 3.26*e-002 Source: Sierra ludre (san Fernando) Region USGS 2001 California Closeit Dlstance: 67.54 ki uelitude unit.Â· Acceleration (g) Magnitude. 6 70 - Page 57 â€¢ractlle: 0.50 coluln 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: colu=1 3: Acceleration (g) for: Coh- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: 1 2 3 M 7.*3*e-002 1.14 0 05 1.549(-002 1 11 01 1 17*.001 1.53 0.2 1.7391-001 2.31 0.3 1.197e-001 2.71 0.4 1.777,-001 2.51 0.5 1.6610-001 2.4â‚¬ 0.6 1.495/-001 2 23 0.7 1.36le-001 2.01 0.8 1 225/-001 1.Ic 0.9 1.102e.001 1.5! 1 9.S771.002 1.4i 2 4.3568-002 5.7; 3 2.473e-002 3 0, 4 1.65$'-002 2.0 source: Sierra Kadre Connected Region: USGS 2001 california Closest Distance: 41.90 km Iolitude units: Acceleration (i =agnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0 50 Colim 1: Spectral â€¢eriod Colum 2 Acceleration (g) for Colum 3. Acceleration (0) for: weighted man of Attenuation Equations core-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS ZOOB carnbell-lozorgria (2001) 1,9 ISIS ZOOS Chiou-Youngs (2007) 1Â«1â€¢ USGS 2001 Se-001 $'-001 7,-001 le.001 Ze-001 Se-001 Ae-001 Oe-001 LGe-001 ).-001 Ile-001 loe-001 'le-002 Lie-002 le-002 weighted .:nuati loore-Atkir ,NGA USGS 200/ 4 6.261/.002 7.12/2-002 9.543.-002 1.427e-001 1.$64'+001 1.â€¢ile-001 1.363(-001 1.21Se-001 1.110(-001 1.006â‚¬-001 9.05*e-002 1 301/-002 4 0112-002 2.525/+002 1.124/+002 8 of Atti "1:1#tx] 5.772/-002 6.663e-002 5 965â‚¬-002 1.404*-001 1.4162-001 1.3Me-001 1.177e-001 1.0;le-001 ..57.-002 1.73$1-002 7.98*e-002 7.322/-002 3.259â‚¬.002 1.171/-002 1.231/-002 ton Equilon' ill Hazard Analy.1 lozorgria (2008) I ings (2007) NGâ€¢ 5 -_s- v-110 - Selsâ€¢ Colw- 4: Acceleration (g) for: calbell colu- 5Â· Acceleraion (g) for: Chlou-Ycl 1 2 3 9 1.404e-001 1.7â€¢5 e.001 0.0;1 1662.001 1.sHe+001 0.1 2.144e-001 2.39]e-001 0.2 2.930e-001 3.280'-001 0.3 3.117e-001 3.616/-001 0â€¢2.550<-001 3.447e-001 0.5 2.13le-001 3.3412-001 0.6 2.62$/-001 3.112e-001 07 2 â€¢$0-001 2.925,-001 0.2 210.-001 2.6*le-001 0.5 2.0,$'-001 2.404.-001 1 1.939'+001 2.1:Ze-001 2 1.005e-001 100]e-001 3 6.350e-002 6 29Se-002 4.472.-002 4.31 le-002 source. Slii-90 Rou Region: USGS 200/ california Closeit Dlstance: 94.17 b illitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.90 â€¢â€¢ Fractile: 0.50 colu- 1: spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleratlon (g) for: Weighted colu- 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-At colu,n â€¢ Acceleraton (g) for: Cumbell lum 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Yo 1.11le-001 1.25â€¢e-001 1.735e-001 2 425.-001 2 646â‚¬-001 2.51*-001 2.510e-001 2.351/-001 2 2362-001 2.1071-001 1.974,-001 1.163/-001 1.130e-001 7.421(+002 5.4951-002 Mean of Attenuat kinion (2005) 9 -lozorglia (2008) ungs (2007) NGâ€¢ U 4 page 59 $ 1 Deter,inistiC M USGI 2001 GS 2008 5 1.357â‚¬-001 1.5 lie-001 2.304.-001 3.0:le-001 3.0&-001 2.ine-001 2.633e-001 2.407e-001 2.21'e-001 2.033/-001 1 506/.001 1.773e-001 1.1122-002 5.333e-002 3 60)Ge-002 ion Equattons USGS 2001 M USGS 200/ I. 2008 ily:i 1*,litl 001) GA url -_SM Vi.180 - Seismic Hazard An, 9 6.0950-002 1.6Ae-002 $.0,8.-002 0.0,6.$6Oe-002 1.92/2-002 5.704.-002 0.1 1.760.-002 1 115/-001 7.62le-002 0.2 1.30*e-001 1 61Ge-001 1.127.-001 0.3 1.44*-001 1.906e-001 1.217Â®-001 0.4 1.40/2-001 1.912 e-001 1 207e-001 0.5 1.343e-001 1.07Â£-001 1.16)e-001 0.6 1.22]e-001 1.70â€¢e-001 1057e-001 0.7 1.12le-001 1.574e-001 5.7812-002 0.1 1.036â‚¬-001 1.443e-001 8.978.-002 0.5 9.47le-002 1.31â€¢e-001 1.1/3/.002 1 1.734.-002 1.208,-001 7.533e-002 2 4.â€¢43e-002 6.004.-002 3.Ille-002 3 2 66Oe-002 3.4612.002 2.4]Ze-002 4 1.U)/-002 2.â€¢Ke-002 1.772e-002 source so lierson-Copper Itn Region: USGS 2001 california closest Di,unce: 151.57 13 u,litude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: O.50 colum 1. spectral Period Coh,11 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Atte Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Arkirion (2001) Colw- â€¢: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Cabell-lozorgnia (2 colu-1 5Â· Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chiou-Ywng, (2007) N 1 2 3 4 9 3.553e-002 4.307,-002 3.764-002 0.05 3 795,-002 4.41*e-002 â€¢.100,-002 0.1 4.87â€¢e-002 5.3252-002 $.1630-002 0.2 7.6/0/-002 1.224.-002 7.96]e-002 Page 60 1 1 Deterministic 4 4,1.-002 $.047e-002 7.473e-002 1.105,-001 1 1540-001 1.09le-001 9.969(,-002 9.01-002 1.304.-002 7 6$7.-002 7.0&-002 6.51.-002 3 453.-002 2.01.-0/2 1.387e-002 ion Equation: USGS 2001 NGA USGS 2001 -5 2001 2.7012-002 2.1677-002 4.13â€¢e-002 6.1532-002 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 ...SM vs-180 - Setidc Hazard An,ly,1,1 Deterministic 5 23/2-002 1.027e-001 5.642,+002 7.80 5.-002 9.320e-002 1.097.-001 9.1641-002 7..23.-002 Un-002 1.13*e-001 9.037.-002 7.435e-002 1.7452-002 1.0*Se-001 1.4 lle -002 6 IZe-002 1 2912-002 1.042e-001 7.52#e-002 6.521/-002 7.7:le-002 5.144.-002 7.37 le-002 6.126e-002 7.235e-002 9.166/-002 6.77Ge-002 5.762,-002 6.77le-002 1.5912-002 6.2/4/-002 3.â€¢30.-002 3 714 e-002 4.687,-002 3.375/+002 3.Olle-002 3 2.323e-002 2 8*Ze-002 2 1SZe-002 1.535,-002 4 1.653/-002 2.064.-002 1. $ llc-002 1.31$e-002 source: So Sterra Nevada Reglor: usls 200* california Clomeit Distance: 170.77 Ici Amplltude urnts: Acceleration (0) MagnitudeÂ· 7.50 - Fraldle: O 50 Colu- 1: Spectral Perlod colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinson (2001) NGA VSGS ZOOS Colim 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-10/orgnia (2001) NGA USGS ZOOS colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for Chiou-Â¥oungs (2007) 1,6â€¢ USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 9 3 21e-002 3.295e-002 3.7791-002 2.56*e-002 0.0;3,41*e-002 3 5130-002 4.06*e-002 2.67$e+002 0.1 4.352Â¢-002 4.lik-002 5.0430-002 3.13]e-002 0.2 7.04*.002 5.115.-002 8.618,-002 6.616,-002 0.3 S.745.-002 7.51le-002 1 015.-001 7.83*e-002 0.4 8.9*Ze-002 8 321.-002 1.0502-001 8.1231-002 0.Â§9.256/-002 9.0351-002 1.Olle-001 7.S;Ze-002 0.6 1.160e-002 1.562,-002 1.03*e-001 7.636/-002 Page 61 ...SM vs.1*0 - sellic Hazard Analy; 11 1 Oeter,inistic 2 3.6568-002 4.371/-002 3.67le+002 2.52â€¢e-002 3 2 11 le-002 2.4/0/+002 2.11*e-002 1 73;e.002 â€¢ 1 â€¢We-002 1.654/-002 1.549/-002 1.157e-002 source: verdugo Region: USGS 2001 California closest Distance: 47.23 ki *Ilitude Uniti: ACCelerition (g) lugnitude. 6 I - Fractile: 0.50 Colu-, 1: Spectral â€¢eriod colurm 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attemation Equations Colo- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA ISIS ZOOS colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for Cambell-lozorÂ·gnla (2001) 16â€¢ USGS 20)01 Colum 5: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chiou-Youngs (2007) 16â€¢ USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 1.146/.001 1.571,-001 9.0464-002 9.617.-002 1.266/-001 1.6370-001 1.033e-001 1.12*e.001 1.757e-001 2.131/-001 1.459/-001 1.GNe-001 2.50)le-001 3.1542-001 2.046e-001 2.264 e-001 2 657,-001 3.5222-001 2.200â‚¬-001 2.24*-001 2.â€¢928-001 3.3472.001 2.06Oe-001 2.0&+001 2 34&/-001 3 2028.001 1.56Se-001 1.164,-001 2.115/-001 2 8//-001 1.71Se-001 1.6112-001 1.54Â£-001 2 64*-001 1.64%-001 1.521/-001 1.7670-001 2.31*-001 1.515e-001 1.400e-001 1.557,-001 2.116e-001 1.3182-001 1 216â‚¬-001 1 456â‚¬-001 1.90le-001 1.213Â®-001 1.1/e-001 6.740â‚¬-002 7.910e-002 6 :32e-002 5.47*e-002 3.9661-002 4 365/-002 4 320â‚¬-002 3.213e-002 2.753(-002 2.9*le-002 3.14 le-002 2.13le-002 Page 63 0.3 0.' 0.$ 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 2 1 0 05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 5 O.G 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 Z -_SSA vi.110 - Sel-ic Hazard Analysis 1 Deterministic 0.7 8 ;lie-002 :1*le-002 1.005.-001 7.3012.002 01 ..050.-002 7.704.-002 5 565â‚¬-002 6.997e-002 0.9 7.610e-002 7.165.-002 8.575/-002 6 615.-002 1 7 1932-002 6.714e-002 1.474.-002 6.392,-002 2 4 253,-002 3 7632-002 5.0:Ze-002 3.92 le-002 3 2.77*e-002 2.4310-002 3.35â€¢.-002 2.54le-002 4 2.023.-002 1.1042-002 2.$07e-002 1.755,-002 source: venturaa-â€¢tras â€¢oint Region: USGS 200* California Cloint Distance: 131.21 Ici Iolitude unnts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Coluln 2 Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Coluin 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caq,bell-lozorgnia (2001) CA USGS ZOOS con- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Â¥oungs (2007) IGA usGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 M 4.706â‚¬-002 5.362Â¢-002 ;226.-002 3.$28,-002 0.05 4.Ble.002 5.4 lie-002 5.687/-002 3.81â€¢e-002 0.1 6 50*-002 6.702.-002 7.2727-002 $.Â§42e-002 0.2 102Oe-001 1.Oble-001 1.11le-001 8.79le-002 03 1 2 lle-001 1.35*e-001 1.3272-001 9.6:5e-002 0.4 1.19Be-001 1 317e-001 1.lEe-001 9.454.-002 0.5 1.110e-001 1.42le-001 1.232.-001 1.1130-002 0.6 1.101,-001 1.342/-001 1.13Se-001 1 2162-002 0.7 1.036/-001 1 2792-001 1.06Ge-001 7.612Â¢-002 0.8 5.5*-002 1 1160-001 9. me-002 7.072e-002 0.5 8.735Â¢-002 1.073e-001 1 19ge-002 6.572,-002 1 8.027.-002 9.ille-002 :Me-002 6.1018-002 â€¢age 62 -_SS,A 0-180 - Set-ic Hazard Analy:,1 1 leterministic Source White Wolf Region. usGS 200: california Closest Di,unce: 170.Zi km Amlitude =ltsÂ· ACCeleration (g) Magnitude 7 20 -â€¢ Fractile: 0 50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lan of Attenuation Equitlon: Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) forÂ· loore-Atkin:on (2001) NGA ISGS 2001 colum 4: Acceleration (g) for Ca,obell-lozorgnia (2001) IGI USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 3.2*-002 3 55$e-002 3.605.-002 2.7112.002 0 05 3.4$0e-002 3.6â€¢Ze-002 3 1532-002 2 116,-002 0.1 4.316/-002 4.33 le-002 4.113.-002 .015,-002 0.2 7.017,-002 6.164-002 7.5100-002 G We-002 0.3 8.8*Oe-002 9.325e-002 9.253/-002 1.062e-002 0â€¢9.02$e-002 9.59*-002 1..2.-002 1.23â€¢e-002 0.5 9.153,-002 1071,-001 1.124(-002 7.9302-002 0.6 1.76Ze-002 1045â‚¬-001 1.299.-002 7.492/.002 0.7 1.41Se.002 1.03Ze-001 7.175/-002 7.059â‚¬-002 0.1 7.540e-002 S.757e-002 7.37 le-002 6.652e-002 0.'7 36/el002 9.034( -002 6.Rose-002 6.257e-002 1 6 1742-002 1 402'-002 6.3â€¢2e-002 5.177/-002 2 3.51â€¢e-002 4 042,-002 3.495,-002 3.004.-002 3 2.lne-002 2.â€¢361-002 2.246â‚¬-002 1.. le-002 4 1.$1Se-002 1.Gâ€¢Se-002 1 657e-002 1.2 Sle-002 Source: Qllfornia Gri dded Region: USGS 2001 California page 64 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SS,i vs.180 - Sel-ic Mizard Anily,1, 1 Deter-inlitic Close.t ...nce. $.00 k. Allitude Units: Acceleration (g) -- Magnitude: 7.00- actile: 0 50luin 1 Spectral â€¢erlod colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colum 4: Acceleration (O) for. Cabell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA ISIS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 & 9 3.6862-001 3.0:Ze-001 3.$6le-001 4..21.+001 0.05 4.03Â£-001 3.562e-001 3.703e-001 .."Se-001 0.1 5.03$,5-001 5.214e-001 4.311/-001 5.711,-001 0.2 7.01*e-001 1.633/-001 5.367/-001 7.052.-001 0.3 7.610e-001 5 lile-001 6.0/je-001 7.5772.001 0.4 7.75Oe-001 1.96Ge-001 6.533Â¢-001 7.752e-001 0.5 7.70Se-001 1,40;e-001 6.963e-001 7.746e-001 0.6 7.3616-001 7.654 e-001 6.8091+001 7.G40â‚¬-001 07 7 07:e-001 7.07 le-001 6 6*le-001 7.4*le-001 01 6.736,-001 6.44?e-001 6.464,-001 7.300,-001 0.5 6.34*e-001 5.797.-001 6.l:le-001 7 065e-001 1 6.00/e-001 5.275e-001 5.9 37 e-001 6.Ille-001 2 3.558Â¢-001 2.Ille-001 3.952,-001 4.213e-001 3 2.2*Oe-001 1.798/-001 2.447/.001 2.Â§9.-001 4 1.Ele-001 1.3018-001 1.750.-001 1.705e-001 Source Anicapa-DC- Region: ./. 2008 California Cloiest Di,unce: 66.62 ki Amplitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0.50 Page 65 -_SSA vs.180 - selsic Hazard Arulysis 1 Deter-inlitic Colu-, 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuition Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) 1,1* USGS ZOOS Colu- 4 Acceleration (g) for Carbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 5 Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NOI USGS ZOOI 1 2 3 4 5 9 1.OVe-001 1.414e-001 5 711.-002 9.063e-002 0 05 1 19.-001 1.4lle-001 107le-001 10/.-001 0.1 1 606e-001 1.lile-001 1 â€¢25/-001 1 &387-001 0.2 2.2628-001 2.56*-001 2.010/-001 2.138/-001 0.3 2.41$'-001 2 525.-001 2.313/-001 2.16*e-001 0.4 2.36Se-001 2.825â‚¬-001 2.257Â¢-001 2.02le-001 0.$2.2Ve-001 2.7*le-001 2.2â€¢Ze-001 1.131.+001 0.6 2 111/-001 2.5/e-001 2 100,-001 1.67 le-001 0.7 1.9*le-001 2.42le-001 1.917Â®-001 1.5298-001 0.8 1.825/-001 2.224e-001 1.853â‚¬-001 1.405.-001 0.9 1.66*e-001 1.We-001 1.707.-001 1.302 e-001 1 1 5332.001 1.*Ole-001 1 586e-001 1 205e-001 2 7 213,-002 1.0â€¢le-002 7 1552-002 $.74Oe-002 3 4.2152-002 4.117e.002 4.6432-002 3.4/2-002 4 2.930e-002 3.26Â§e-002 3.421Â¢-002 2.276,-002 Source: Chlno Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Dlitance: 22.52 km Alitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.80 - Frictile 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Arkinson (2001) NGâ€¢ Usis 2001 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: c**bell-mozorgria (2001) 1,9 USGS ZOOS Page 66 1.nic Hazard Analysis 1 Deter,ini Â¥oung' (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 4 5 1.540,-001 1.60le-001 1 7/07-001 1.902'-001 2.57Ge-001 2.742(-001 3.43â€¢e-001 3.56le-001 3.52Ge-001 3.51*e.001 3.3212.001 3 252'-001 3 14â€¢e.001 2./4/-001 2 822,-001 2.677.-001 2.575e-001 2.44/2-001 2.3545-001 2 256e-001 2.135Â¢-001 2 0162-001 1.9901-001 1.5372-001 1.06le-001 1.0150-001 G.555,-002 &.975.-002 â€¢ 664.-002 3.19%-002 ed lean of Attenuation Equations Atkinson (200*) 16â€¢ uses 2001 11-lozoronia (2001) IGI USGS 2001 Mt (2007) 9 USGS 2001 -_SM vs-180 - Se Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for Chiou- 1 2 3 9 1.683Â®-001 1.516e-001 0.0,1 5.e-001 2 054,-001 0.1 2.72;e-001 2.*Sle-001 0.2 3.769e-001 4.312e-001 0.3 3.793.-001 4.33Ge-001 0.4 3.579/-001 4.17*e-001 0.5 3.320Â¢-001 3.502/-001 06 2 56.-001 3.â€¢$30-001 0.7 2.6952-001 3.115e-001 0.*2.457e-001 2.11;e-001 0.5 2.245e-001 2.547e-001 1 2.00*-001 2.32*e-001 2 1.069/-001 1.14â€¢e-001 3 6.31le-002 6.56*-002 4 /.400/-002 â€¢.7â€¢2/-002 Source: Els,nore Region: USGS 2001 California Clomeit Di'Unce: 11 19 k, A*litude units. Acceleration (g) Magnitude 7.1; - Fractile: 0 50 Colum 1Â· Spectral Period Colo- 2 Acceleration (g) for: Weight Col-1 3Â· Acceleration (g) for: loore- Colu- 4. Acceleration (g) for: CAIbe lu- S: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou- 1 2 3 M 2.2:Se-001 2.26â€¢e-001 4 1.95le-001 Page 67 stic 5 2.Glâ€¢e-001 -_SSâ€¢ vi-110 - Selimic H,zard Anily,15 1 Deterainistic 0.0$2.57/.001 2 513e-001 2.20le-001 3.00Â§Â£-001 0.1 3.457.-001 3 342,-001 2.910(:-001 4.04.-001 0.2 4.4790-001 4 443e-001 3.912(-001 5.21Ze-001 0.3 4.716/-001 4.515/-001 4.302e-001 5.400e+001 0.4 4.604.-001 4.376e-001 4.262e-001 5.2718-001 0.5 4.567/-001 4.12]e-001 â€¢.5420-001 S.037,-001 0.6 ,â€¢06â‚¬-001 3.S30e-001 ,â€¢96/-001 â€¢79le-001 07 4 266/-001 3 7742.001 4 .51.-001 4 $67â‚¬-001 0.8 4.10Oe-001 3.S46e-001 4.313â‚¬-001 4.37Oe-001 0.9 3.910,5-001 3.270,-001 4.2*Oe-001 4.18le-001 1 3.74/e-001 3.042e-001 4.11/e-001 4.00*-001 2 2.6138-001 1.537.-001 3.26*e-001 2.633e-001 3 1.1641-001 1.$722-001 2.2/9/-001 1.732e-001 4 1.369,-001 1.16*e-001 1737,-001 1.ZOZe-001 Source. Carlock RegionÂ· usis 2001 California Clojeit Dlitance: 146.Sl ki A,olitude unitsÂ· Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.72 - Frawle: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Atteâ„¢Jation EquationS Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore.Atkinion (2001) NO:/ USGS ZOOS Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for CalÂ©bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 coluMn 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlow-Â¥oungs (2007) NGA uls 2001 1 2 3 4 5 PGâ€¢ 5.6*Ze-002 6 662/-002 5.312e-002 $.073.-002 o.os 6.0*Oe-002 7.095,-002 5.70]e-002 5.437e-002 0.1 7.$96.-002 :0522-002 5.904( -002 7.1336+002 0.2 1.11le-001 9.96.-002 1.074e-001 1.260,-001 0.3 1.32*e -001 1.22Ge-001 1.339,-001 1.4132-001 â€¢age 61 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_SSA v,-110 - Sel-ic Hazard Arily511 1 DeterÂ·inistic 1.34Se-001 1.335&001 1.302Â¢-001 1.40Se-001 1.310/-001 1 434e-001 1.3662-001 1.340e-001 1.3432.001 1.432/-001 1.339e-001 1.260â‚¬-001 1.31le-001 1.â€¢30e-001 1.3162-001 1.116â‚¬-001 1.16Oe-001 1.391â‚¬.001 1.27Oe-001 1.120,-001 1.196e-001 1.32/e-001 1.20-001 1.060Â®-001 1.14 le-001 1.264.-001 1.152,-001 1.00"-001 7.092e-002 7.7/Ge-002 7.445e-002 6.045e-002 4.160Â¢-002 5.6Â§4e-002 5.01/e-002 3.5070.002 3.4681-002 3.911,-002 3.7.e-002 2 705/-002 Source: Malitu Coast Region USGS 2001 California dosest Distance: 64.79 Ici AE:plitude '.it. Acceleration (g) lugnitu[leÂ· 7.00 - Fractile: 0 50 Colum 1 Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equation: Colu-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore.Atkinion (2008) NGA usls 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca,pbell.lozorgnia (2001) NGA Wils 20)01 Colum $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Yings (2007) FIM USGS 200* 1 2 3 4 5 â€¢Gâ€¢ 5.290e-002 1.357e-001 7.2.0.-002 7.01$e-002 0.05 1.017e-001 1.416e-001 8.232.+002 8.12*e-002 0.1 1.375,-001 1.79;e-001 1.1290-001 1.213e-001 0.2 1.554.-001 2.545e-001 1.623,-001 1. 8 e-001 0.3 2.012.-001 2.73*e-001 1.75Se-001 1.70*e-001 0.4 1.916/-001 2.68/-001 1.6.e-001 1.513/-001 0.5 1.113'-001 2 515,-001 1.63â€¢e-001 1430e-001 0.6 1.710e-001 2 340/.001 14Â§le-001 1 293e-001 0.7 1.5742-001 2 151e-001 1 392/-001 1 110.-001 page 69 -_SSâ€¢ vt-110 - Sel-ic Mazard Analy// 1 Determinlitic 3 1.1070-001 1 41'e-001 2 12/.001 187le-001 4 1.3112-001 1 04/e-001 1.391/-001 1.291.001 0.' 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.1 1 2 *_SSA vs-180 - Selsmic Hazard Analysis 1 Deter,iritic 0.8 1.â€¢45e-001 1.'64.-001 1 2*Ge-001 1.ON-001 0.9 1.323e-001 1.71]e-001 1.lile-001 1.004e-001 1 1221,-001 1.635.-001 1095e-001 9.33 le-002 2 6 342/-002 :17/-002 5.".-002 4.9$.-002 3 3.179/-002 4 153/-002 3.74/-002 3 0]Ze-002 4 2.831-002 3.â€¢lk-002 2.7â€¢Ze-002 2.03/e-002 Source. Newport - Ingl e-Od Region uscs 2008 California Closest Distance: 12.74 ki UE,litude unitsÂ· Acceleration (g) lugnitwdle: 7.50 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: spectral period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) 16â€¢ usis ZOOS Colu= 4. Acceleration (g) for: Cazbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA WSGS 2001 Colin $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Â¥oungs (2007) IGI ISIS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 NA 2.490â‚¬-001 2.31*e-001 2.2940+001 2.15*e-001 0.05 2.793e-001 2.562e-001 2.Sâ€¢Oe-001 3.27*e-001 01 3 710,-001 3.52.-001 3 4442.001 4.340e-001 0.2 4.990e-001 5.07*-001 4.415/-001 5.527e-001 03 5.219/-001 5.19*-001 ,767/-001 5.7â€¢â€¢e-001 0â€¢5.116Â¢-001 5.0,62-001 4 744e-001 5.637/-001 05 5.022'-001 4.753/.001 4 5312-001 3.4 lie -001 06 4.780'+001 4.313/-001 4.713.-001 5.175e-001 0.7 4.5761.001 4.122e-001 4.655e-001 4.9$02-001 0.1 4.360,-001 3.822Â¢-001 4.51Oe-001 4.74*-001 0.9 4.135e-001 3.502&001 4.351,-001 4.55le-001 1 3.MOe-001 3.23*e-001 4.21]e.001 4.365/-001 2 2.636e-001 1.92*e-001 3.101,-001 2.873e-001 â€¢age 70 -_SSâ€¢ v,-110 - Seismic HazarÂ·d Analy,11 1 Determintitic Source: San Jacinto Source Southern An Andreas Region USGS ZOOS California Cloiestolitance: il; km A*litude Units: Acceleranon (g) Magnitude: 1.20 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu=11: Spectral Perlod Coh- 2: Acceleranon (g) for: weight Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for. loore- colu- 4: Acceleralon (g) for. Ca,obe colu- 5: Acceleration (g) forÂ· chiou- 2 3 141Oe-001 1 732e-001 1.57Oe-001 1 916/-001 2.00Ge-001 2.2212-001 2.56*e-001 2 432,-001 2.IR+001 2.64â€¢e-001 2.77Oe-001 2.80-001 2.104/-001 2 6/e -001 2.747&001 2.63;e-001 2.6512-001 2.63le-001 2.61Se-001 2.Slle-001 2.50â€¢e-001 2.407e-001 2 4071-001 2.2172-001 1.6631-001 1.515e-001 1 22Â§7-001 1.21*-001 8 5157-002 9.04/-002 ed fan of Atter*,iti Atkinion (2008) M 11-eozorglia (2008) i I Youngs (2007) u US 1 0.0& 01 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0., 0.7 0.1 0.9 2 4 1.063Â¢-001 1.153Â¢-001 1.44oe-001 2.130e-001 2.5420-001 2.50:e-001 2 747/-001 2.7*Se-001 2.822e-001 2 8060-001 2.749.-001 2.69*e-001 2.Olk-001 1.479-001 1.14Oe-001 Page 71 On Equations 55 2001 4 USGS ZOO GS 2001 5 1.436.-001 1.6412+001 2.3$0e-001 3.255e-001 3.3711.001 3 232/.001 3 02le-001 2 116e-001 2 0â‚¬-001 2 â€¢918-001 2.356,-001 2.23 k -001 1.31*-001 9.055.-002 6.300e-002 Region: USGS ZOOS cal, fornia Closest Distance: 65.18 kn Amlitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.81 - FraC'lle: 0.;0 Colu- 1- Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA UKS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for Cabell-lozorgnia (2001) IGA USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) IN USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 PGA 1.3040-001 1.673,-001 9.81.-002 1.252/-001 0.0;1.45Oe-001 1.1228-001 101le-001 1.4401-001 01 1.88*e-001 2.171.-001 1 391/-001 2.Olle-001 02 2.4672-001 2 547e.001 2 045.-001 2.18/-001 0.3 2.6726-001 2.noe-001 2.3*Ze-001 2.95le-001 0.4 2.60le-001 2.715'-001 2.317,-001 2.*OSe-001 05 2.582e-001 2.70Oe-001 2 .52.-001 2.554.-001 0.6 2.478'+001 2.61*e-001 2.42Oe-001 2.397Â®-001 07 2.3ile.001 2 $512-001 2.312,-001 2.225â‚¬-001 0..2.213e-001 2.420 -001 2.33le-001 2.015â€¢-001 0.'2.15/e-001 2.2Â§7e-001 2.24 55-001 1.8/-001 1 2.052e-001 2.132e-001 2.17Oe-001 1 15/e-001 2 1 312e-001 1.30*e-001 1.524/-001 1 10/-001 3 9 2401-002 1.Olle-001 1.04'e-001 7.12 le-002 4 6.6.2.-002 7.155e-002 7.967:-002 4.923.-002 Source: santa lenita Region: USGS 2001 California cloiest Distance: 52.36 ki Page 72 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 -_ssâ€¢ vi-180 - selimic Hazard Analysis 1 Deter,inistic AZJitude uniti: Acceleration (0) Magni tude: 7.40 1- Fraille: 0.30 lum 1: Spectral Period11=1 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colum 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) FGA USGS 200* Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA usls 2001 Colum $: Acceleration (g) for: Ch,ou-voungs (2007) NG, usls 200* 1 2 3 4 5 9 1.35*e-001 1.656*-001 1.174e-001 1.24;e.001 0.05 1.50le-001 1 762e-001 1.295,-001 1.446.-001 01 2 0118-001 2 216/.001 1.7/e-001 2.103e-001 02 2 75:e-001 2 54.-001 2.41$,-001 2.â€¢;le-001 03 2.516.-001 3.217e-001 2.7Ve-001 2.173e-001 0.4 2.64*-001 3.1;le-001 2.6//-001 2 me.001 0.$2. Me-001 3.llc.001 2 729/-001 2.â€¢571-001 06 2.586â‚¬-001 2 9162-001 2.&9.-001 2.246e-001 0.7 2 44 le-001 2.765.-001 2.48*-001 2,067(+001 0.1 Z.273e-001 2.55Oe-001 2.355e-001 1.515,+001 0.'2.092.-001 2.256,-001 2.20le-001 1.77*e-001 1 1.939e-001 2.090/.001 2 073.-001 1.65â€¢e-001 2 9 1010-002 9.777/.002 1 1442-001 1.11:e-002 3 6 0*Ze-002 6 276,-002 7.03â€¢e-002 4.93*e-002 4 4.2*Oe-002 4.272e-002 S.235.-002 3.33â€¢e-002 Page 73 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 PSH Deaggregation on NEHRP D soil c The Academy_Pro 1 17.901Â° W, 33.762 N. Peak Horiz. Ground Accel.>=0.5733 g Ann. Excee(lance Rate .404E-03. Mean Return Time 2475 years Mean (R.M.Ec,) 18.2 km. 6.61. 1.49 go Modal (R.M.go) = 17.2 km, 7.00. 1.56 (froni peak R.M bin) Modal (R,M,E*) = 16.8 km, 7.01,1 to 2 sigma (from peak R,M,E bin) <2>Binning: DeltaR 10. kiii. deltaM-0.2. Deltae= 1.0 rO> [\1 Tc> <23- X\Ob Â»t>,44. Prob. SA, PGA <median(R,M) 2 4,<-2 1 -2<Eo<-1 >median 94/, eÂ»0/99 922 - 0.5 <Eo< 1 doIm -1 <En <-0.5 1 < go <2 , 41 -0.5 < go<0 2< 20<3 200910 UPDATE O/Ile 0 CPO <. 7;i2 2011 Oct 19 01:43:11 Distance (R), magnitude (M), epsilon (Eo,E) deaggregation f IriROncE' 561[9'M. 21 m/s top 30 m. USGS CGHT PSHA2008 UPDATE Bins with It 0.05% contrib. omitted 0 USGS Response Spectra (mapped) conterminous 48 States 2003 NEHRP Seismic Design Provisions Latitude = 33.76184 Longitude = -117.90094999999998 Spectral Response Accelerations Ss and Sl ss and sl = Mapped Spectral Acceleration Values Site Class B -Fa = 1.0 ,Fv = 1.0 Data are based on a 0.01 deg grid spacing Period Sa (sec) (g) 0.2 1.389 (Ss, Site Class B) 1.0 0.495 (Sl, Site Class B) Conterminous 48 States 2003 NEHRP Seismic Design Provisions Latitude = 33.76184 Longitude = -117.90094999999998 Spectral Response Accelerations SMs and SM1 SMS = Fa x Ss and SM1 = Fv x Sl Site Class D -Fa = 1.0 ,Fv = 1.505 Period Sa (sec) (g) 0.2 1.389 (SMS, Site Class D) 1.0 0.745 (SM1, Site Class D) Conterminous 48 States 2003 NEHRP Seismic Design Provisions Latitude = 33.76184 Longitude = -117.90094999999998 Design Spectral Response Accelerations SDS and SD1 SDs = 2/3 x SMs and SD1 = 2/3 x SM1 Site Class D -Fa = 1.0 ,Fv = 1.505 period (sec) 0.2 0.926 (SDs, Site Class D) 1.0 0.497 (SD1, Site Class D) Page 1 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 USGS Response Spectra Site E (mapped) ) Conterminous 48 States 2003 NEHRP Seismic Design Provisions Latitude = 33.76184 Longitude = -117.90094999999998 Spectral Response Accelerations Ss and Sl Ss and sl = Mapped Spectral Acceleration Values Site Class B - Fa = 1.0 ,Fv = 1.0 Data are based on a 0.01 deg grid spacing Period Sa (sec) (g) 0.2 1.389 (Ss, Site Class B) 1.0 0.495 (Sl, Site Class B) Conterminous 48 States 2003 NEHRP Seismic Design Provisions Latitude = 33.76184 Longitude = -117.90094999999998 Spectral Response Accelerations SMs and SMl SMs = Fa x Ss and SM1 = Fv x Sl Site Class E -Fa = 0.9 ,Fv = 2.4 Period sa (sec)(g) 0.2 1.250 (SMs, Site Class E) 1.0 1.188 (SM1, Site Class E) Conterminous 48 States 2003 NEHRP Seismic Design Provisions Latitude = 33.76184 Longitude = -117.90094999999998 Design Spectral Response Accelerations SDs and SD1 SDs = 2/3 x SMs and SD1 = 2/3 x SM1 Site Class E -Fa = 0.9 ,Fv = 2.4 period Sa (sec)(g) Page 1 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 USGS Response Spectra Site E (mapped) 0.833 (SDs, Site Class E) 0.792 (Sol, Site Class E) Page 2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 APPENDIX E SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 603284-001 APPENDIX E Liquefaction Analysis Methodology Leighton evaluated the liquefaction potential at the site using data obtained from Cone Penetration Testing (CPTs), CPT-1 through CPT-6, advanced to approximately 100 feet below existing ground surface (bgs). The analyses were performed using the computer program CLiq Version 1.5.1.16 (Geologismiki, 2006). Our analyses are generally based on the procedures outlined in Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigation Seismic Hazards in California (Special Publication 117A)published by the California Geological Survey and Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in California published by the Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC). Groundwater was encountered at depth of 25.5 feet below existing ground surface during our geotechnical exploration. According to the California Division of Mines and Geology 1997 Seismic Hazards Zone Report for the Anaheim and Newport Beach Quadrangle, Open File Report 03, historical high groundwater elevations at the site are as shallow as 15 feet below ground surface (bgs). We have performed analyses using historic high groundwater level of 15 feet bgs. Discussion of Results The site is located within an area of liquefaction according to the State of California Seismic Hazards Zones Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle. Our analyses indicate that the site is generally classified as having low risk of liquefaction based on the liquefaction potential index (lwasaki et al., 1978). Liquefaction potential index (LPI) combines depth, thickness, and factor of safety of liquefiable material inferred from a cone penetrometer test (CPT) sounding into a single parameter. The LPI ranges from 1 to 2.5. LPI values lower than 5 are deemed low risk. The potential for liquefaction are the site is generally confined within thin layers at depths ranging from about 20 to 50 feet bgs. The results of our liquefaction analyses are included in Appendix E, Liquefaction Analysis. The seismically-induced settlement resulting from the design event is estimated to be in the order of 1 to 2 inches. Differential settlement is estimated to be approximately M inch over 100 feet. The results of our analyses are presented at the end of this appendix. E-1 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 â‚¬Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com Project title : The Academy - Orangewood Children's Foundation Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA Overall Liquefaction Potential Index report 17.00 16.50 16.00 15.50 15.00 14.50-- 14.00- 13.50- 13.00- 12,50- 12.00- 11,50- 11.00- 10.50- 10.00- 9.50- 9.00- 8.50- 8.00- 7.50- 7.00- 6.50- 6.00- 5,50- 5.00- 4.50- LPI color scheme Very high risk [3 High risk Il Low risk Basic statistics Total CPT number: 6 100.00% low risk 0.00% high risk 0.00% very high risk 4.00-- 3.50-z 3.00--2.399 2.1462.50Â·-riÂ¥71 2.00--1.608 CE=1 1,131 1.50- 1.OOT 0.50Â·- 0.00 1 1 - 1 1 - rv-IrÂ·,.0 CPTU name CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software Prolect file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com Project title : The Academy - Orangewood Children's Foundation Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA Overall vertical settlements report 2.20 2.10- 2.00-CE*1 1.90- 1.80-1 1.718I 1.70- 1.60-11.5231 1.50- 2 1.40- ri.3671 0 1.30- C al) E 1.20- - 1.10- rY.157 ri-371 78 1.00- U â‚¬ 0.90- ali) - > 0.80- 0.70- 0.60- 0.50- 0.40- 0.30- 0.20- 0.10- 0.00-- 1 A 6 1 1 m T A6 6 Ln Ae k CPTU name CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 TABLE OF CONTENTS CPT-1 results Summary data report 1 Transition layer aglorithm summary report 7 Vertical settlements summary report 8 CPT-2 results Summary data report 9 Transition layer aglorithm summary report 15 Vertical settlements summary report 16 CPT-3 results Summary data report 17 Transition layer aglorithm summary report 23 Vertical settlements summary report 24 CPT-4 results Summary data report 25 Transition layer aglorithm summart report 31 Vertical settlements summary report 32 CPT-5 results Summary data report 33 Transition layer aglorithm summary report 39 Vertical settlements summary report 40 CPT-6 results Summary data report 41 Transition layer aglonthm summary report 47 Vertical settlements summary report 48 Cbq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/U2011, 1:24:28 PM Project file: P:\Leighton Consulbng\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com Project title : The Academy - Orangewood Children's CPT file : CPT-1 [nput parameters and analysis data Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA Analysis method: -ines correction method: 'oints to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw Deak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 G.WIT. (in-situ)30.00 ft G.W.T. (earthq.):15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.0, Fill weight:10[ Trans. detect. applied: Yes 1% applied: No Clay like behavior 0 It applied:Sands only 1.00 It)/R3 Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Cone rARi?MAÂ¥&R Frict igrk'B89?jGER SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot FIU 10-10-10-5- 15-15-15-10- 20-20-20-15- 25-25-25-20-20 30-30-30-25- 35-35-35-30- 35-40-40-40- 40-40 45-45-45- 45-f 45 50-50-50- 50-50 55-55-55- 55-55 60-60-60- 60-60 65-65-65- 65-65 70-70-70- 70-70 75-75-75- 75-75 80-80-80-80-80 & 85-85-85-447 85-85 90-90-90-90-90 95-95-95-95-95 100 inn inn 1 nn 0 2 Depth (ft) 1 / 1.U luu 111'11'111'Tl LUU i ' I 1 I 1 -WW 1 11 1 1 Â¢1 11 00 400 02468101 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf)Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR & CSR Factor of safety Mw==71/2, sigma =1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.6- '''''''''''''''1,000 1 1,11 Liquefaction i 7 \ 8 0.5- 0.4- 0.3- 0.2- 0.1- 0 11,1,111,1,1,1,111,1,111 0 20 40 60 80 100 12[ Qtn,cs 100: 4 LiÂ·14 e 4 4* - 1 14 C 1 02 1 1/lili 4 i-T-1-11 1- ).1 10 Norrrelized friction ratio (%) No Liquefaction . 0 160 180 200 Zone A, Cyck hquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2 Cyclic liquefacton andi strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry Zone B Liquefacton and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely check cyclic softening Zone C Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity brittleness,sensitivity strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:17 PM 1 Project file: P: \Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-1 CPT basic interpretation plots SBT Plot Soil Behaviour TypeCone resigheuGER Friction 40%AUGER Pore prel*WR AlJGER - 10- 15-110- 15- 10-10- 15-15- 5-stlysard&s*UhAUGE 2 20-20-20- 25-25- 30->30-30-30- 35-35-1 35- 40-40- 1 40- 45-45- :45- â‚¬ 50- (50-b 50-5 50- c 55- 1 60- 55- 60- 1 60- 10-SaIl&9'tysand 91'sall &saÂ·*sllt Clay&Â§14,day20aa, 0425Sltysand &sa*silt aa,&sittyda Y 30 Clay&siltydaY Sltysald &saldyslit 35 a.&siltyday aay Sllysald &ser*mit 40-sUnMAysilt 45- Â· Â·9*M:-914sznd &sarlysilt Sed&siltysaÂ·Â£1 50-Clay&siltyda, 65- tL_65- 70-70- 75- 90- 0 100 200 300 400 500 qt (tsf) 80- 85- 65- 70- 75- 1 75- 80-80- 95- 100 1 2 55-Gay&,Itydâ„¢ 60- ......aay -:& 31Â¥sarl&Sal*Silt 65-aay&s,Ityda, Sitysi&se*stlt 70-Sard&Bltysald Sltys,11&sal*s,lt SltysaII&senclÂ¢S,It 75-SltysaÂ·111 &sal*silt Serd 80-aa,&siltydal aay&slltydaY85- 85- 1% 85-SBrd&sillyserld aa&sltyday 90-.0===-2 90-SEnd&slltysand - - *a&: "Sltysald & serldymit Sgld 95-*&slitysard -1-1 1 1 1 1 1 1,1.1 1 1 . 12 2 1,100- ,J ' T-4Â·*,6,11 1 t2 3 4 C 1 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Ic(SMT)SBT (Robertson et al. 1986) 75- 80- 85- 90-90- 95- 100- 0 2 4 6 8 10 Rf (Â°/o) 95- 100- 50 100 150 u (psi) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER Fines correction method:NCEER Points to test:Based Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.001 (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft (1998)Average results interval: 3 on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes t Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 tb/fti Transition detect. applied:Yes 1% applied:No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty []7. Gravely sand to sand 2. Organic material Â¤5. Silty sand to sandy silt m 8. Very stiff sand to 3. Clay to sity clay []6. Clean sand to silty sand Â¤ 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:17 PM 2 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPU CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER 5-HAND AUGE 4 5-5 HAND AUGE R 10-10- 15-15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- - 45- 45-k.- Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average results interval: Points to test:Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Unit weight calculation: Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill: Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height: Â£ 50- 55- 55- 60- 65- 70- -70- 75- 1.-==.75- Depth (ft 80- 0D 95- 100 1 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn 10- 10 SEr[|&SiltySE,-Id 15- 15 Sillyserd &saridysilt Gay&,Ityday 20-20 aay aay 25- 25 Sltysarl&saldysilt Clay&sillydal, 30-30-aay Clay&siltyday Oay&siltydaY 35-aay Clay&siltyday 40-aay aay&siltyday n 45-45-SllysaÂ·Id &saricksit â‚¬ Sand & mityserd aay aa,&sittyday Sillysard&salÂ»It aay aay&siltyday Siltysand&ser,*sit Gay&slityday Clay&slltydaÂ¥ Clay,&siltyday 314gld&saIlysilt aay aa,&siltyday Sltysard &sandÂ¥Â§11 Clay&,Ityday aay SErld & Silt/sall Clay&,INday SE.31&siltysald 1 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Bq Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] SBTn legend3 Transition detect. applied:Yes 2.60 Ko applied:No 1. Sensitive fine grained Â¤ 4. Clayey mit to silty []7. Gravely sand to sand Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material E 5. Slity sand to sandy silt [] 8. Very stiff sand to Yes Limit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay []6. Clean sandi to silty sand D 9. Very stiff fine grained 35 40- 6 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 2 75- 80-80- 85- 90- 85- 90- 95- 100 0 2 4 6 8 10 -0 Fr (Â°/o) HAND AUGE-R 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- 90- 95- 100 lillill,I 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1 2 3 4 Depth (ft)(U) 4*ac]50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 95- 00- 1 1 0 2 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:17 PM 3 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-1 Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) Total cone resistance SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance 5- 10- 15- 20- HAND AUGER 10-5-HAND AUGE-1 5-HAND AUGER 5-HAND AUGER 15- 20- '9- fl 2 3 4 (U) 41(laci 10-10-10- 15-15-15- M- 25-20 30-!Â»35- 40- 45- 50- 50-1 55- 60- Depth (ft) 25- 2530- 30 35--2 T 25- 30- 35- 40- , 45-- 45-45- 50- i t 50- 55- i -55- 65- 70- 70- An- 7 fin- 65- 75- 80-80- 1 85- L 85- 80- 80 85 90- C-*-' lili./90- C 90- C 90-.........1. 70- 75- 80- 85- 90- 95-...====EEZELL 95- 30- 40-40- Â£ 50- 55- 60- 65- 70-70- 75- 95-95-95- 00 100 Il,Ill,Ill,Ill,Ill,100 i 0 50 100 150 200 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 50 100 Qtn Kc Qtn,cs 100 i i i ri i 100 i,i 1 i , 100 200 300 400 500 1 150 200 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 I b/ftj Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes Points to test:Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 1% applied: No Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill:Yes Limit depth applied:Yes Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height:3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:17 PM 4 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-1 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FIU 5- 10- 15- 20- FS Plot Uquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 2- i 4- 6- 10 FIL 8- 15 10- 12- 20 14- 25 16- 18- 30 20- 35 22- 24- 40 26- 45 r-. 28- 5 30- 50 232- 34- 55 36- 60 38- 40- 65 42- 70 44- 46- 75 48- 80 50- 52- 85 54- 90 56- 58- 95 60- 100, ,62- 0 0,5 1 1.5 2 Depth (ft) 20- 0.2 0.4 0.6 0- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- FILE 10- 15- 25- 25- 30- 30- 35-.../-t 35- 1 -2 ID l lac 40-40- 40- 45- ,.,45- Â£ 50-50- i * 50- 55- -55- -55- 60- 1 60-60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- 90- 95- 100 i 0 CRR &CSR Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998) Points to test:Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude Mw 6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft 65-65- 70-70- 75-75- 80-80- 85-85- 90-90- 95-95- r 1 100-i 100 5 10 15 20 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft LPI Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft 3 Transition detect applied:Yes 1% applied:No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 It Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy El Very likely to liquefy El Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likely Il Unlike to liquefy 51 Almost certain it will not liquefy Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Very high risk Â¤ High risk Â¤ Low risk CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:17 PM 5 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 CPT name: Cfr-1This software is licensed to: Carl Kim Check for strength loss plots (Olsen & Stark (2002)) Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistanct SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v 5-HAND AUGE:1 5-HAND AUGER 5-5--- ....--MAND..AUGit 10-10- 15-15- 10- 15- 20- 25- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30-1.30- 35- 20- ,i-Mn.- 1Â» 25- 30-30- 35- 40- 35- * 40--*40-40-4... /.='PI - 45- 45- ,- 45-45- 1 41 I.50-Â£ 50-Â£ 50- 55-55- 60-60- 65-65 70-70- 75-75- 50- 60- 65- 55- 60- 65-7EE=WIF 70- 75- r80 80- 80- 80 85-tzz 85- 90- 95-95- 100 100 50 100 150 200 250 Qtn 85-85- Â·Â· -'. ...V......10..t.... 2===== 90-90-'*00%0*m#% )123 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 6 50- 55-8 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- 90- 95- 100 I .I â€¢ I'l 50 150 200 1 2 3 4 95-95- -Peak Su rat:o Il,I.Ill,I ll, 100 I 100 45678910 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0,4 0.5 Kc Qtn, cs Ic (Robertson 1990)SU/Sig'V Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes Points to test:Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 1% applied: No Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill:Yes Limit depth applied:Yes Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height:3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:17 PM 6 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-1 TRANSITION LAYER DETECTION ALGORITHM REPORT Summary Details & Plots Short description The software will delete data when the cone is in transition from either clay to sand or vise-versa. To do this the software requires a range of Ic values over which the transition will be defined (typically somewhere between 1.80 < Ic < 3.0) and a rate of change of Ic. Transitions typically occur when the rate of change of Ic is fast (i.e. delta Ic is small). The SBTn P|ot below, displays in red the detected transition layers based on the parameters listed below the graphs. SBTn Index Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 6 50- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- 90- 95- 100 :F 4 ;rait (U) 41daa 5-HANDAUGER 10- Send &slitysard 15- Sltysed &saÂ·dysilt aa,&slityday20Gay aay 25 aay&*day Gay Gay&slltyday Clay&siltyday aav aaÂ¥&sityday aay aay&stltyday Sltysi &sal*silt 33Â·11&siltys,d 1. 45- 50- 55 60- aay aay&Â§14,daY Clay&siltyd aay (24&slityday Slt,gÂ·11&saÂ·Idys,lt aa,&siltyday aaY&slityday CIaÂ¥&siltyday 3114'saÂ·d & saÂ·*silt aay Clay&siltyday Sll/gld & saÂ·Idysilt Clay &slltyday aay SErd&slltysand aaâ€ž&stltyday &rld&slityserd 1 100-1--r-Â·.Â·rÂ·,Â·1 .1,1,1,1.1. 1911Â¥qf'Tâ‚¬4;11'911 1 1.1.,1 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) 65- 70- 75- 90- 95- Transition layer algorithm properties Ic minimum check value:1.70 Ic maximum check value:3.00 Ic change ratio value:0.0250 Minimum number of points in layer: 4 General statistics Total points in CPT file:610 Total points excluded:119 Exclusion percentage:19.51Â°/0 Number of layers detected: 22 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:17 PM 7 Project file: P: \Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-1 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resistqi'MR,AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strain plot Vertical settlements 0- 0-> 10-10-5 15-15-10 20-20-15 4 25-20 30-25 3035-35- 35 40-40- 40 45-45- 45 E 50-â‚¬ 50- E Â£ 50 55-55- 55 60-60- 60 65-65- 65 70-70- 70 75-75-75 80-80 85-85 90-90 95-95 100 5- 5- 10-1 10- 15- 15- 20-20- 25-25- T.=1 30 30- - 35-35- 40-40- 2 45-- 45- 50-t 50- 55- -55- 60-60- 65-65- 70-70- 75-75- 80-80- 85-85- 90-90- 95-95- 100- 11,1,1,1,11 100-i1 1 :100 i i i i-, i ,---r--rFl,4 100.--,9 1 111 0 100 200 300 400 500 1 2 3 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0123456 0 0.5 1 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety Volumentric strain (%)Settlement (in) Abbreviations qt: Total cone resistance (cone resistance qc corrected for pore water effects) Ic: Soil Behaviour Type Index FS:Calculated Factor of Safety against liquefaction Volumentric strain: Post-liquefaction volumentric strain CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:17 PM 8 Prolect file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 FI 1.5 Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com : Project title : The Academy - Orangewood Children's CPT file : CPT- 2 Input parameters and analysis data Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA Analysts method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 G.W.T. (in-situ):30.00 A G.W.T. (ear-thq.):15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.0 Fill weight:10[ Trans. detect. applied: Yes Kc applied:NO Clay like behavior Oft applied:Sands only 1.00 It/#3 Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft cone rÂ¥8}R'0258ER FrictiO#AIMtJG E R SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot UFILL 10-10-10-5-5 15-15-15-10-10 20-20-20-15-15 20-20 25-25-25- 30-30-30-25-25 30-30 35-35-35- 35-35 r 40-40-40- 40-40 45-45-45- ii 45-45 50-50-50- . 50-50 55-55-55- ... 55-55 4Â· 60-60-60-Â·: s 60-60 65-65-65-65-65 70-70-70-70 7f751 0 1.1111.- _11111*uaa-ml-- , --7-- .- .I.I.1.1. . ....I....1-I-r.-I-1 . lilli .-1 1111,111 100 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf)Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR & CSR Factor of safety Mw=71/2, sigma =l atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.6- '''''''''''''''1,000 Liquefaction 0.5- i 0.4- 0.3- 0.2- 0.1- I c..I,rÂ·. n , In ,![ n 1 100= B 10. -Â©24.1 - 1-1 1 X 1 111111 0 1,11,11'11,11'lili,11,1,1111 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 14 Qtn,cs 1 iii 'lll,i 0.1 1 10 Normalized friction ratio (%) No Liquefaction - IO 160 180 200 Zone A, Cyclic liquefact,on likely depending on s,ze and duration of cyclic loading Zone A- Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry Zone B LIquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely check cyclic softening Zone C Cyclic I,quefactlon and strength I O5S possible depending on soil plasticity brittleness/sensitivity strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:19 PM 9 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 1 lilli i 7 j This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-2 CPT basic interpretation plots Cone resisl;469 AuGER Friction 11$ AUGER Pore presN&5 AlJGER SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type 10- 1 12- 12- ' 14- 16- 18- 20- 22-22- 24- 26- 28- 30-30-i 32-32-1 34-1 36-36- t 238- r 40- 8- 10- 12- 14- HAND AUGE R 10 Sard &siltysard16- â€¢16-21.Imi 18- 20- 22- 24- A- 30- L ::iia*6 Sllysmi&saldys,It SErd &slltysard aay&siltyday Gay&slityday Gay&siltyday, 11111 lilli,11111 11 aa,&511Â§,day Sltysaid & grl,Silt Sgrl &siltysald C 42- 8 44- 63- 42- 44- -42- 17 [142- 44-44- 46- 46- 48- 48- 50- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 52-52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62- 64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 11- 4>72- 74- 11 100 150 200 2 4 6 8 10 52- 54- 56- t 58- 60- AO- 1U 42- 48- 50-. .eÂ·:th:: 52- aÂ£v a* aay Clay&sittyday aav aa,&slltyday Clab,&stltyday aay Slt/serÂ·13 & ssnyglt Sen:1& siltysall aay&91tyday Sard&siltysend Sllysard & sa*sllt aa,&slltyday aay aay 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 50 UL 64- 66- t 68- 1 70- aay aay&siltyday Sitysad&saÂ·dysilt Sltysard &sencysilt E-- m# 222 -Clay&siltyday 72- 74- 1 1 1 1 20 40 60 80 2 u (psi)Ic(SET) Sillys,d & sadys,lt SEn:1&siltysand I I | Im,i4mity,y' 1 1 4 024681012141618 qt (tsf)Rf (%)SBT (Robertson et al. 1986) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER Fines correction method:NCEER Points to test:Based Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.001 (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft (1998)Average results interval: 3 on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes 1 Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes 1% applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained Â¤ 4. Clayey silt to silly I] 7. Gravely sand to sand 2. Organic material Â¤5. Silty sand to sandy silt [3 8. Very stiff sand to 3. Clay to silty clay Q 6. Clean sand to sity sand Il 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:19 PM 10 Project file: P:\Lelghton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 8-2 410- 612- 814- 12 18- 14 20-16 22-18 24-20 26-22 28-24 30- :26 32-28 34-30 36-32 238- 540-31 At. 58- 60- 62- 64- This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-2 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 2- 2- 2- 4-4-4- HAND AUGER HAND AUGER HANDAUGER b- 8- 10- 12- 14- 0 8- 10- 12- 14- 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- HAND AUGER Sand&slityserld 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 234- t 36- -C E. 38- 40- 42 44 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average results interval: Points to test:Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: Earthquake magnitude M.6.70 Unit weight calculation: Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill: Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height: 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- f 68- 70- 72-72- 74-74- 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn SitySE,13&Sardys,lt14- 20-*t 16--Send &sultysall 22-t:S:b 18-!-.11,10 aay&siltyday 24-....#l/20- aw 26-22 - aay&gltyday 30- 914/sard &saldys,lt - SErd &s,Itysad 32-aN 34- - Cayhltyday 36- ;8 C 38-â‚¬ as, Â£ 40- c E Clay&stltyday 8 Sltysend & serÂ·Idysit46/ 44- .-*Clay&slityday 41-aay&slityday SErd &stltysald 48-aay&sillyday-64 r 50- *:::Â· -Smld &siltysenl Clay&slityday52- 54-4.- 56- :/:/ 58-aay 60- 62- 64-aay&,Ityday 914send & serldyglt 66- 68- t Gay 70-aay&slltyday 72-Clay&sllÂ¥d* 74-Sltysard &saÂ·Idysilt 11,I,111,11 I111I 1 1 2 3 4 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft)SBTn legend3 Transition detect. applied:Yes 2.60 1% applied:NO 1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty []7. Gravely sand to sand Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material Â¤5. Silty sand to sandy silt [] 8. Very stiff sand to Yes Limit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silly clay C] 6. Clean sand to stlty sand 01 9. Very stiff fine grained 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 10- f 16- 18- 20-20- 22-22- 24- 26- 28- 30-30- 32-32- 234- b 36- 38 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Bq 29 26- 28 30- 32 34- 36 38 40- 42-. 44- 46- 2 4 6 8 10 Fr (%) 48- 62 64- 70- /2- 74-. 0 2 CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:19 PM 11 Pro]ect file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-2 Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) Total cone resistance SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance 2- 4- HAND AUGER 2â‚¬ 2- 2%8- 4-4-4- 10- i HAND AUGER HAND AUGER Â£_MANDAUGE R b-12- 8-14- 10-16- 12- 18- 14- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- b-0 8- 10-10- 12-12- 14- L______14- 0- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- cg'-16- 18-18- 20- f 20-20- 22- 1 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 30- 32- 134- t 36- Â£. 38- 3 40- 42- 44- tÂ·W'P 2 3 4 (U) 41(jaCI 34- 36- 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- Depth (ft) 28-28-28- 30-30-30- 32-32-32 34-34-34- 36-36-36- 38-38- 40-CZE 7-40-(U) 41dac] 42-42-42- 44-44-44- 46-46-46-46- 48-50-48-48- C-48- 50- F-52- 52- 54- 54- i 56- 56- r 58- 60- 60- l 62- 64- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72-72 -7.- 50- 52- l 52- 54- 56- 2 56- 58- 60- 60- 62- fCA-A4- 66- 68- 7n- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- -7 n- 72-72- 74- 0 50 100 1' Qtn,cs 72- 74- 50 200 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Kc /4-.."."i=--'-... /6-1 74- 1 1 1 1 1 ..r..lilli 50 100 150 200 1 0 50 100 1! 50 200 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990)Qtn Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 30.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 I b/ft] Transition detect. applied:Yes 1% applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:19 PM 12 Project file. P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-2 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Uquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 74- 2- 4JH.3 4- 6 6- 8 8- 10- 14-4 12- 16-14- 16- Mtr FI 2- 4- 2- 4-1 26-26 28-28 30-30 32-32 26- 28- 30- 32- 2 34-E Miefgm/-w Â· 34- i 1 34- b 36- -36-â‚¬,L:.'â€¢ .' '' i. ,Â·'4â€ž =1 5 30- *. 38--â‚¬,t19 " 'i ' ;6-32- i:: ....$:14+ FIUFIU 18- 20- 22- 24-4 26-: 10- i 12- Â£ 14- 16- k 18- i 20-, 22-: 24-2 26-1 i* 28- ! 30-2 32-| 6- 8- 10- 12- 11,/""&.14- 16- 18- 20- 22-22 74 24- -TO 50-50- 52-52- CEMN 0 5 Z ZE -{E - #14 5 36- 38- 1 4 * 38- 40- 40- 42-1 42- 44-44- 46-46- al-Â· 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62-67- 64-64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- 10 15 20 0 0.2 0,4 0.6 0.8 1 CRR & CSR Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998) Points to test:Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude Mw 6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft LPI Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] Transition detect. applied:Yes 1% applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy El Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likely [El Unlike to liquefy E] Almost certain it will not liquefy 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Very high risk 13 High risk C| Low risk CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:19 PM 13 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Ca iw U 34- 42- 44- 36- 46-1 38- 48-40 50-50 42 52-52 44 54-54 56-56 46 58-581,48 60-50 62-52 64-54 66- 68-56 70-58 72-72-4 60 74-74-L i 1 1,111111111 62 1--r - T 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-2 Check for strength loss plots (Olsen & Stark (2002)) Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v 2- 4- HAND AUGER 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 4- :i HAND AUGER 6- 8- : 10- 14- 16- C_ 18- 20- 22- 24- 26-26- 28- 30- 2- 2- 4-4- 6- 6- 8- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 10- 12- 14- lb- 18- 20- 22- lA- 26- 28- 30- HAND AUGE JÂ£ Depth (ft)34-1 2 34-5 36- 1 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50-50- 52-52- 54-54- 56-56- 26- 28- 30- 32-32- 34-34- - 36-36- 38-38- 40-40- 42-42- 44- 46- 48- <L 50- 52- 54- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- f 68- 70- 72-72- 74-74- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- /U 72- 74- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20-r 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 50 100 150 200 1 2 3 4 Depth (ft)04) 4]dao 66- 68- 70- 72- r.. . ''Â» - Peak Su rat:o 74- Â·Â·1--r 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Qtn Kc Qtn,cs Ic (Robertson 1990)Su/Sig'v Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 30.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 'Wft] Transition detect. applied:Yes Ko applied: No Clay hke behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:19 PM 14 Prolect file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-2 TRANSITION LAYER DETECTION ALGORITHM REPORT Summary Details & Plots Short description The software will delete data when the cone is in transition from either clay to sand or vise-versa. To do this the software requires a range of Ic values over which the transition will be defined (typically somewhere between 1.80 < Ic < 3.0) and a rate of change of Ic. Transitions typically occur when the rate of change of Ic is fast (i.e. delta Ic is small). The SBTn P|ot below, displays in red the detected transition layers based on the parameters listed below the graphs. SBTn Index Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 r 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 *-. 34 b 36 * 38 g 40 42 41 46 48 5C 52 54 5â‚¬ 5E 6C 6: 6Â¢ 6E 7( 7. 2 3 4 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- (11) 4 Idea HAND AUGER Si &siltysall Sltysa'[1&saÂ·*sllt SaÂ·Id & siltysarld Clay&sm,day aay Clay&gltydaÂ¥ Siltysard &saÂ·*silt SEnd & S,14 sall a# aa,&sillyday aay Clay&siltyday Siltygld&Sal*SIt Clay&siltyday Clay&sllvday Sand & sillysend Clay&siltyday SEnd &siltyserd Clay&,Ityday 11,11I1 0123 Ic (Robertson 1990) Transition layer algorithm properties Ic minimum check value:1.70 Ic maximum check value:3.00 Ic change ratio value:0.0250 Minimum number of points in layer: 4 aw 019,&silly day Sltygl[1&sari*sit aay aay&sillyday Cla&gltyday 3 Itysard & salcy silt 1111111 11 11,1 11 11111111,1111 1 5 6 7 8 9101112131415161718 SBTn (Robertson 1990) General statistics Total points in CPT file:458 Total points excluded:117 Exclusion percentage:25.55% Number of layers detected: 22 CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:19 PM 15 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-2 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resistlOSE AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strain plot Vertical settlements 8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16- 16- 18- 20- 22- i 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 1 34- 36- 2 38- r 40- 0-FIU 2-2- 4-4- 6-6- 8-8- 10-10- 12--4 14-14- 16- â€¢ 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24-. 76-26- 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 1 34 536 =wa 38 g 40 r 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 2 3 4 0 0.5 1 1. 28-28- 30-30- 32-32- 1 34- Â© 4-5 36- - 34- 36- LL 42-u 42- 8 44-44- 46-46- 48-48- U 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 1 60- 62- 64- 66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- -C 6.38- 42- t -:=:1*1= 44-- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 38- 0 g 40- 42- 44-46- - 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74-74-74- il,,,,1 1 11 1 1 lili' 1 ' 0 50 100 150 200 5 2 0123456 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety Volumentric strain (%)Settlement (in) Abbreviations qi: Total cone resistance (cone resistance qr corrected for pore water effects) L: Soil Behaviour Type Index FS:Calculated Factor of Safety against liquefaction Volumentric strain: Post-liquefaction volumentric strain CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24.19 PM 16 Prolect file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com r "11.,1 %4*482iy .*y,2/barMÂ·/I- >-Â·' ... ........ Project title : The Academy - Orangewood Children's CPT file : CPT-3 Input parameters and analysis data Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 G.W.T. (in-situ):30.00 ft G.W.T. (earthq.)15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.0 Fill weight:10[ Trans. detect. applied: Yes K, applied:No Clay like behavior Oft applied:Sands only 1.00 Ibm]Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Cone rFiat'268 E R Frictio#AiGER SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- (U) 41(jacl FIU 10-5-5 15-10-10 20-15-15 25--20-20 30-25-25 30-30 35- 35-35 40- 40-40 45- 45-45 50- 50-50 55- 55-55 60- . 60-60 65- .65-65 70-70-70 75--r,--Â¥ ,-75- ,75 5 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- f 45- 50- 70-1 50 100 150 0 2 4 1.5 2 qt (tsf)Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR & CSR Factor of safety Mw=71/2, sigma'=l atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 06- ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '1,000 Liquefaction It/'111 7 0.5- 0.4- 0.3- 0.2- 0.1- 1VtÂ· 100= 10: 1 1.1 1 N lili lili 1 Ililli 10 Norr,alized friction ratio (%) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 11 Qtn,cs No Liquefaction - 0 160 180 200 Zone A, Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2 Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry Zone B Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely check cyclic softening Zone C Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity brittleness/sensitivity strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:20 PM 17 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-3 CPT basic interpretation plots Cone resislOEÂ¥AUGER Friction RRAMb AUGER Pore pres,0&% AUGER SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 28- CCEZZ 2- qt (tsf) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.) Fines correction method:NCEER(1998)Average results interval: Points to test:Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: Earthquake magnitude Mw 6.70 Unit weight calculation: Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill: Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height: 8- 10- 12- 14- 16-47 8- 10- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 2 4 6 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 30- 32- 36- 238- = 40- 0-42-0-42- 44-44- 46-46- 48-48- 50-50- 52- 54- f 54- 56- 58- 3 58- 60- <60- 62- f 62- 64- 66- 68- 68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- 0 50 100 150 1 allysand&sMÂ¢%PAUSE 2 SaÂ·d &stltysend Silt,sard&ser*sit aay&slltyday aay aay& sillyday aay A. Gay Sltysad & saÂ·*silt Clay&Â§14,day aaÂ¥&sillyday Send &slltysEni aay aay&gltyday aay&,Ityday Day&siltyday Sltyserd&s=*sat Clay&Â§14,day Sltygld &ser*sllt Sltysall &saÂ·dysilt Serd &s,Itysend Sard &sillyserd Clay&stltyday 311/sad &sendysllt Clay&siltyday Sluserd & sal*silt 1,111111111,11 0102030405060708090 2 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 u (psi) ) SE (Robertson et al. 1986) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft]SBT legend3 Transition detect. applied:Yes 2.60 No 1. Sensitive fine grained El 4. Clayey silt to silty []7. Gravely sand to sand1% applied: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material Â¤5. Silty sand to sandy silt E 8. Very stiff sand toYesLimit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay [3 6. Clean sand to silty sand El 9. Very stiff fine grained 12- l 12- 14- 14- 16- 16- 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 28-28- in- 20- 22- 24- 26- 30- 32- 34- 36- 238- r 40- JU-: 32-1 32- 34-1 34- 36- 2 38-1 238- 1 24- 28- r 40- 0-42- 8 8 44- 46- 48- fi 48- 50- 1 1 50- 52- 54- 1 54- t 56- cl 56- f P * 40- 42- 44- f 1 2 4 6 8 10 Rf (%) 4 58-58- 60-60- 62-62- 64-64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74- 71''ii, 2 Ic(SET 34- 36- 50- 52- 54- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 0 2 a k .ful 4 CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:20 PM 18 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rved 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-3 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 2- 2- 2- 4- 6- 8- 4- 4 HAND AUGER HAND AUGER 10- 10- 12- 2 12- 14- /14- 16- 0 00 8- 10- HAND AUGE R 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 1- 30- 32- 34- 36- 2 38-r 40- 8 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- HAND AUGER 10- 12- 14- 16- Serd &siltysend 18- 20- 18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 28- 2 4 6 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18 20- 22 24- 26- Sltysend & serdystlt 22-ZU 4-/5.-aw 28-24- 26- 28- 30-30-30- 32-32-32- 2 34-34- _34- :536-36- E. 38-38- 40-40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 28- 83 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 2 34- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 914sard &serldysllt aay Clay&slltyday Sid &slltys/ld aa,&slltyday Serd &sl|tysald aay Clay&silÂ¥day Clay&,14,day Sltysald & satlysilt Si&siltysi 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 1 .li aay 54-56- 56-58- . c |Clay,&slityday 58-58- 60-60- 62- D 62- 64-64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74 0 2 4 6 8 10 Fr (%) aay 70- 72- 74- 11 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn 48- 58 66 70 72- 74- *42Â»*44 0 2 aay&sillyday- 1 03 11,111,1 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1 2 3 4 5681012141618 Bq Ic (Robertson 1990)SErn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER Fines correction method:NCEER Points to test:Based ( Earthquake magnitude M.6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 f (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft (1998)Average results interval: 3 jn Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes t Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] Transition detect. applied:Yes Ka applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Umit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay E] 4. Clayey sit to silty Â¤7. Gravely sand to sand / 5. Silty sand to sandy silt El 8. Very stiff sand to [] 6. Clean sand to silty sand Â¤ 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:20 PM 19 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-3 Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) Total cone resistance SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 2 38- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 1 2 3 A f 2- 2- 1 4-4- HAND AUGER 6-HAND AUGER 8- 10- 12- 14- HAND AUGER 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 2- 4- 6- 2- 4- : HAND AUGE 2 6' 16- 20- 22- 24- 26-L 18- 20- 22- 24- 30- 32- 34- 26- 28- 30- 32- C 34- 36- <7 5 36- 8- 10- 12- 14- r 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- f C 34- Cl 34- t 36-36- .C -C 40--I=E 38- L w 38- a 42- a g 40-=Rial -3 40-g 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- CA- (11) 4 12 38- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 42- 44- 46- 48- rA 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- JU JU 52- f 52- 54- {54- 56- 58- p 58- 60- 1 60- 62- 64- ?64- 66- 68- 68- 70-70- 72- L 72- 74- 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 71- 50 100 qt (tsf) 58- 60- 62- 6 7 8 9 10 0 50 100 Qtn,cs -T-- ,,-r'FET- 150 )12345 10 200 Ic (Robertson 1990) Ke Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (Insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 30.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 Ibm] Transition detect. applied:Yes 1% applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:20 PM 20 Project file: PALmghton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-3 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- FS Plot Uquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0FIU t 2 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 14 12- 16 18 16-l 20 22 18- 24 20- 26 22- . 28 J 24- 30 26- 32 34 36 30- 38 E.32- 40 42 36- 44 38-46 48 40- 50 42- 52 54 56 46- ' 58 48- 60 50- 62 52- 64 54- 66 68 56- 70 58- 72 74 AD- Depth (ft) 2-2- 4- 4- 6-6- 8-8- 10-10- 12- +12- 14-*14- 16- *16- FIll 30- 32- 2 34- I 36- 42- 44- 18-1O 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 28- 0 28- 30-30- 32-32- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 0. 2 34- 2 34- tb 36-t 36- ./ E 38-E. 38- 40- 40- 42-42- 44-44- 46--%0 46- 48-48- 50-50- 52-;:52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62-62- 64-64- 66-66- 68-Â·68- 70.70- 72-72- 74-74- 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 W.- -, -0 7-r Â·-Â·-1 i ' 2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.5 1 0 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in)Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998) Points to test:Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] Transition detect. applied:Yes Kc applied:No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy El Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likely Â¤ Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy LPI color scheme Very high risk [] High risk Il low risk CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24.20 PM 21 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-3 Check for strength loss plots (Olsen & Stark (2002)) Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v 1- \2- :2- 2-: 4-4- ; 4-4- HAND AUGER HANDAUGER 6-HAND Av5&3 8- 10- 12- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 0 0 8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16-16- 18- 20- 22-<22- 24- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 2 39 b 36- 00 38- 3 40- 34- CE- 34- 36- -5 3 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 30- 32- 34- 36- Â¢f 38- 14- 16- 20- 22- - 24- 26- 28- 30- 32-...6-....yÂ»-M ..W. 34- 36- ..c 40- 38-tl 38-a 42- 40- 44- 42- 44-46-44- 46-48-46- 48-50-48- 50-52-50- 52-54-52- 54-56-54- 56-56-58- 58-58-60- 60-60- 62- 62-62- 64- 64-64- 66- 66-66- 68-68-68- 70-70-70- 72-72-72- 74-74-74- 6 7 8 9 10 0 50 100 150 200 2 3 4 0 0. Depth 42- 44- 46- 48- rn- 411111. 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- -"CE JU r 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64-}64- 66- 68- 70-70- 72- 74- 50 100 150 Qtn .... r - Peak 6,1 rat,0 1 1 -r.MET-3 lili 012345 1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Ke Qtn, cs Ic (Robertson 1990)Su/Sig'v Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 30.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 'wn 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes Ko applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:20 PM 22 Prolect file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-3 TRANSITION LAYER DETECTION ALGORITHM REPORT Summary Details & Plots Short description The software will delete data when the cone is in transition from either clay to sand or vise-versa. To do this the software requires a range of Ic values over which the transition will be defined (typically somewhere between 1,80 < Ic < 3.0) and a rate of change of Ic. Transitions typically occur when the rate of change of Ic is fast (i.e. delta Ic is small). The SBTn P|ot below, displays in red the detected transition layers based on the parameters listed below the graphs. SBTn Index Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- (IJ) 4]daa *r A 4 2 3 4 A / (U) 403(] 2 4 6 8- 10- 12- 14- 16 18 20 22 24 26- ,n- HANDAUGER Si&siltysald Sltysald & sal*silt aay LO 30 32 SItysand&sal*silt aaw Clay&sittyday 34-S,Â·d&siltysal:1 aay 'U-'Clay,&siltyday Slt/Sald& SEn*Sllt aay Clay&sillyday 46-â€ž(...Mi*4 am,&sillyday 48-Sltysald&saldysilt 50-- Senj &siltyserd aay Gay&siltyday aaw Clay,&sittyday 1 11 1 I 1 1 1I 1 I 1 1 111t11111I 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) Transition layer algorithm properties Ic minimum check value:1,70 Ic maximum check value:3.00 Ic change ratio value:0.0250 Minimum number of points in layer: 4 General statistics Total points in CPT file:458 Total points excluded: 64 Exclusion percentage:13.97% Number of layers detected: 13 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:20 PM 23 Project file: P: \Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 52 54 56- 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-3 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resistaq*,AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strain plot Vertical settlements 8- 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16-16- 18- 20- 1 20- 22- 1 22- 24- 26- 28- -28- 30- 32- 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 F 26 28 30 32 2 34 536 E. 38 2 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 2 3 4 0 0.5 0-0-- 2-2- 4-4- 6-6- 8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 3 14- 16- 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 34- 36- r 38- 2 38- -c 40-Â£ 40- ....1-'-/..11111Â·Ill'/"./ 28 28- 8 30-30- 32-32- 2 34-2 34- t 36-t 36- , 9/ 44- 46- 48- 50- 150 6.38- â€žZ 3 40- 44-42- 46-44- 48- .. 46-C 50-48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 58- 60- 60- 62-62- 64-64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- 1 1 1,5 2 0 Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety 52-52- 54-54- 56- L 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 1 1 0 50 100 qt (tsf) FI ./ tl 38- 2 40- 42- 44- 46--4- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 0.5 Volumentric strain (%)Settlement (in) Abbreviations qt: Total cone resistance (cone resistance 4 corrected for pore water effects) Ir: Soil Behaviour Type Index FS:Calculated Factor of Safety against liquefaction Volumentric strain: Post-liquefaction volumentric strain CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011,1:24:20 PM 24 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com I. . Project title : The Academy - Orangewood Children's CPT file : CPT-4 Input parameters and analysis data Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER(1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 G.W.T. (in-situ):30.00 n G.W.T. (earthq.):15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.0 Fill weight:10[ Trans. detect. applied: Yes Ko applied: No Clay like behavior Oft applied:Sands only ).00 Ib/fV Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Cone ri*85'EER FrictioF&'tAGER ASBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot FILL 10-5- 15-10- 20- 25-20-20 25-25 30-: 30-30 35- 35-35 40-. 40-40 45- 50- 45-45 50-50 55- 55-55 60- 60-60 65-65-65 70-70-70 75-75-75 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 10 25- 30-0 30- 351- r 40-1 u 451 50-1 -: 404 55-1 60- 65 704 75- JUl 554 60- 654 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 0 50 100 150 2 qt (tsf)Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR & CSR Factor of safety Mw=71/2, sigma =1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0,6- '''''''''1:I1I1 1,000 ''''' Liquefaction 7 8 0.5- 0.4- 0.3- 0.2- 0.1- --22.-2(i ,9 100= 2* 14 5 1 10.4 C 1 1 1 11 lili 1 11 lili 0.1 1 10 0 11,111,11,1111,1111111111111 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 14 Qtn,cs Norrralized friction ratio (Â°/o) No Liquefaction - IO 160 180 200 Zone Al Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2 Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry Zone B Liquefacton and post-eanhquake strength loss unlikely check cycl,c softering Zone C Cyclic hquefachon and strength loss possible depending ort soil plasticity brittleness/sensitivity strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CFT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:22 PM 25 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-4 CPT basic interpretation plots Cone resiS4881*AUGER Friction R.Alfb AUGER Pore presAN&%AUGER SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type 6- 8- 10- 12- 12- 14- <14- 16- 8- 10- 12- 14- 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 28-28- 30-30- 32-32- 74- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 18- 28 -*IlllI J. 2 38- i c 40- r (U) 4*la 36- 38-238- 40-Z 40- 0. 42- 34- 36- 2 38- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 8-2- 10-4-HAND AUGER CkÂ¥&sittyday12- I :'8- .... Siltys,rd&sa-*silt 14-.hy 10- ID-12-SmÂ·d & slity SEnd 18-18_ 16- te== 14- 20- 16- 22- ........Sltâ„¢nci & g[Iyglt aay&gltyday 24-aay 26-Crgar,c sal 28-aay 30-Clay&siliyday 32- asaÂ·d&sallysilt i 34 036- c 40- '.,111,â‚¬ 5 1 42-__-,;radj'ii/"I"/I 0- 44- 46- - F 44-mbi 48-46- 48- L 44- 46- 48-48- 50-50- 52- 54- 54- 56-56- 58- 0 58-58-t 60-60- 62- <62-62- 64- 64-64-t 66- 68- 40- 42- 52- 54- 56-, 58- 60 62 64- *- aay aay&gltyday SllySEnd & Sal*Silt aa aw aay&siltyday Clay&slltyday Clay&siltyday 91:| & silly grld Sltysald & smdysilt S,11 &siltysand aa,&S114/day aay Clay&slityday aay 00 Clay&sillyday 68-Sltysald & sa*s,It aay 70-aay 72-aay aay&siltyday74-I ' ' | id 4Â£'INE;rd' , i ,1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 qt (tsf)Ic(SBT)SM (Robertson et al. 1986) 70- 72- 74- 0 50 100 70-70- 72-72 74-74- 150 0 2 4 6 8 10 Rf (%) 1 0 20 40 60 u (psi) 68- 70- Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER Fines correction method:NCEER Points to test:Based c Earthquake magnitude M.:6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 f (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft (1998)Average results interval: 3 )n Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes t Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft' Transition detect. applied:Yes K, applied:No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained [] 4. Clayey silt to silty 0 7. Gravely sand to sand 2. Organic material D 5, Silty sand to sandy silt 13 8. Very stiff sand to 3. Clay to silty clay 0 6. Clean sand to silly sand El 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:22 PM 26 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood .cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-4 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 2- 2 4- HAND AUGER 4 2- 4- HAND AUGER HAND AUGER 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28-28- 30-30- 32-32- 34-34- 20- 22- 24- 26- I. 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- in- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 2 38- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 8- 10- j 10- 12- 12- 14- 2- : 4-HAND AUGE k 6- et:m@*92:amy&slltyday 8- 10- 12-Serd &siltysend 14- 16-LU 8 .i18- 22-18- 16- -lA- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- n 34- 40- 42- 44- AC- ZU 22 24 26 28 J -T 36- 38 40 42 44- 46- 48- Sltys,d & saldy Silt aay&,Ityday aay aay aay aaâ€ž&sillyday SltysEnd &saÂ·Idystlt aay Clay&sillylay t 36-36-Sltysard &serlclysilt Â£38-38- -' __12 E aay n 0-42--m======-* 8 Ogancsalg 40- 40- 44--1 aay&siltyday42-42- 46-aay44-44- 46- 48-Sllyserld & gÂ·ldysilt so-.. i.*44 SaÂ·d & siltysar48-_._......7//Ill'll'll 50- -- -52-50-1,/.......Clal&sltyday 7- ./.--1-I Sd&siltysall 90 'U 48-48- CA- 52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62-62- 64-64- 66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- 1, 1 1,1111 00 150 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 tn Fr (%)Bq 52- 54- 56- 58- aay 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 50 1 Q 52- 64 Crger,c sal Ogencsal aay SIt/sencl & sa*glt< -- a*&dgdâ„¢ aay Clay&914day Clay&slltyday 1I111I1I 1111,11 I, 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Ic (Robertson 1990)SETn (Robertson 1990) 70- 72 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER Fines correction method:NCEER Points to test:Based ( Earthquake magnitude &:6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 f (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft (1998)Average results interval: 3 in Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes t Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] Transition detect. applied:Yes It applied:No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained Â¤ 4. Clayey slit to glty Â¤7. Gravely sand to sand 2. Organic material Â¤5. Silty sand to sandy siIt El 8. Very stiff sand to 3. Clay to silty clay []6. Clean sand to silty sand Â¤ 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefac'tion Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:22 PM 27 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-4 Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) Total cone resistance SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance 12- 8- 14- 10- 16- 12- 18-14- 20- 22- 16- 18- 24-20- 26-22- ' /0 6 36- - 40-Â£ 38- /42- * 44-42- 46-44 48-46 50-48 52-50 54-52- 56-54- 58-56- 58-60- 60- 62- 62- 64- 64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 2- 2-2 -R- 4-10-4- /1- HAND AUGER HAND AUGER HAND AUGER HAND AUGER 6--bi 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 0- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24-')28- ---3-24-24- 26-30- 28-32- 28---=.4-,-- 30- 34- 1:- 32-32- n 34- 36- . 34- - ---34-.-I 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- tb, 36- * 38- 42- 44- nonth (ft t 36- E 38- 42- 46- 48- 50- 52- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- <Z- 54- 11 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- <6.- 68- 70- 72- 74- -T-111111 50 100 150 200 0123 Qtn 36- E 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- -1 10 0 50 10 68- 70- 72- /,1 - 74- - - 74- -=?=-17"'*i':1':'' 50 100 150 1 2 3 4 ( 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 150 200 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990) Kc Qtn,cs Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 30.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results Interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft' Transition detect applied:Yes 1% applied:No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:22 PM 28 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-4 Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Uquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FIU. 41151 FIU 2- 4-4- 6-6- 8- 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16- 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 28- 4 28- 30-30- 32-F 32- - 34- - 34-e 34- 0 36-2536- -C 5 38- : 6 38- 40-3 40- 6. 'E 32-C . a 340 42-, 42- 36-44-44- 38-46- -46- 40- 48- 48- 52- 52- 50-50- 42- : : - 44-54-54- 56-56- 48-58-4 58- 60-60-50- 62-62- 52-64-64- 54-66-66- 56-68-68- 70-70-58- 72-72-60- 74Â«74- 62-76-i ,,111' ' 76 ),4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in)Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998) Points to test:Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude Mw 6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2-60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft) Transition detect. applied:Yes 1% applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefacton and no liquefaction are equally likely El Unlike to liquefy Ml Almost certain it will not ]Iquefy LPI color scheme Very high risk Â¤ High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:22 PM 29 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 CRR plol 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 0- FIU 2-2- 4-4- 6- 6- 8- 10-8- 12 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 36- 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 0.2 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT--4 Check for strength loss plots (Olsen & Stark (2002)) Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v 2- : '2- 4- 4- HAND AUGER 2- 2- 4- HANDAUGER ._ 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- HANDAUGER b- 8-8- 10-10- 12-12-12- 14-14-14- 16-16- 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 0 001 1 20- u 24-24-24- 26-26- 28-28- 30-30- 32-32- e 34- -34- b 36-36- Â£38-38- g 40-40- LE- 24- 26- 9Z 44- 46- --73 46- 48-48- 50- Cl- 26- 28-28- .1 ....".....%.Il' 30-30- 32-32- ,- 34-34- 2536-36- * 38-38- - 3 40-40--*-*#Eli,Ti 42-42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 44- - --CZI JÂ£ 54- 56-56- 58- 60-1 60- 62- 64- K- 46- M 48- 50- 52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58-..1.11-=:= 60-60- DO-.U 68- 70- 72- 74- lilli -1-1 50 80 100 120 140 0 1 Qtn 68- 70- 72- 74- 20 40 4 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 2 38- Z 40-93 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 50 100 150 200 2 4 (11) 4idaa 62- --62- - 64-64- -- 66-66- 68- 68- 70-70- 72-72- -Prak b:J relt!0 *G-0* ..74-74- < , 11,1,1,1 2345678910 0 0.1 0,2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Kc Qtn, cs Ic (Robertson 1990)Su/Sig'v Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 I b/ft] Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average results Interval: 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes Points to test:Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 1% applied:NO Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill:Yes Limit depth applied:Yes Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height:3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:22 PM 30 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CFT name: CPT-4 TRANSITION LAYER DETECTION ALGORITHM REPORT Summary Details & Plots Short description The software will delete data when the cone is in transition from either clay to sand or vise-versa. To do this the software requires a range of Ic values over which the transition will be defined (typically somewhere between 1.80 < Ic < 3.0) and a rate of change of Ic. Transitions typically occur when the rate of change of Ic is fast (i.e. delta Ic is small). The SBTn plot below, displays in red the detected transition layers based on the parameters listed below the graphs. SBTn Index Norm. Soil Behaviour Type i 1 2 4 (U) 4]d*] 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 238- E- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 2- 4- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18-; HAND AUGER a24&gliyday SaÂ·[1&siltysend 914'SaÂ·[1&sa*silt aa,&siltyday aay aay aay Clay&siltyday Sltysald &serldy gil aay aay&Â§*daY Siltysald&sendys,lt aay Ogaic sal aay&sillyday 44-=.L aay 46-Slty sald & sallysilt 48- :Send&sllÂ»End 50-*,Clay&siltyda Sgrd & sillygld 36- 38 40 52- 54 56 58 60 62- 64- 66- 70- 72- 74- 0123 Ic (Robertson 1990) Transition layer algorithm properties Ic minimum check value:1.70 Ic maximum check value:3.00 Ic change ratio value:0.0250 Minimum number of points in layer: 4 aay C]Â¥gaic sal Ogalc sal Oger,c sal aay Sltysarl &sa'*sllt %%5&Â»xeoc aay&sillyday aay aay&siltyday aa,&61Â¥day 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12131415161718 SBTrn (Robertson 1990) General statistics Total points in CPT file:462 Total points excluded: 94 Exclusion percentage:20.35% Number of layers detected: 17 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:22 PM 31 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-4 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resistafifD AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strain plot Vertical settlements 8-81 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16-16-41.1 18-18- 20- 22- 2 22- 24- 1 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 32- 0- 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- U-FIU 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12-* 14- I 16- 0 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 28- 6 J. 36- 238- :.. ......1 -'.1.-1 rl- C 40- 40- 042- 34- b 36 46-46- 48-48- 30- 32- n 34- 36-4 38- 40- 42- Â£ 38- 42- 44- 41dacl 50- 52- .â€ž,- 50- 52-..1 I 44- 46-1.B----0 48- 50- 54- 56- 58- 60- 1 60- 62- 62- 64- 64- 66- Â£0-CO- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- r 72- 74- 76- ii,i, 1 1.5 2 0 1 2 52- 54- 56- 58- 1.4 0.6 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- lili 1 1 76-i '1 11-T-r i , L 3456 0 0,2 C 3.8 1 Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety Volumentric strain (%)Settlement (in) UO UO 70- 70- 72-72- 74-74- 0 50 100 150 qt (tsf) 0- 2- 4- 6- 8- 14- 16- 18- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 23 36- Â£ 38- 240- 42- 44-Â· 46- 48- 50- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 76 1 7 3 4 0 0.5 Abbreviations qi: Total cone resistance (cone resistance qc corrected for pore water effects) L: Soil Behaviour Type Index FS:Calculated Factor of Safety against liquefaction Volumentric strain: Post-liquefaction volumentric strain CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:22 PM 32 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood _cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com .'" 3,92%*S 34*t.4#Â»t :/ 9.&AmNW-mWWMA./.mt** rerwerlenfr,FlatE * 8%%43/'lli . 14*am#44*2>,*4... ='t: tÂ·:Â·Â·Â· Project title : The Academy - Orangewood Children's CPT file : CPT-5 Input parameters and analysis data Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 G.W.T. (in-situ):30.00 ft G.W.T. (earthq.)15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.0 Fill weight:10[ Trans. detect. applied: Yes Ko applied: No Clay like behavior Oft applied:Sands only 1.00 Ib/ft3 Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Cone rÂ¥NhtF268ER Frictio#AltJGER SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- (U) 41daa 10- 15- 1 15- 20- 254 25- 30 30- 354 35- AA- Â· 45- 50- 55-Â·Â· 604 60 - ,9. 65-2 70-70- 75 lili 1 1 1 1 1 0 50 100 150 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf)Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR & CSR Factor of safety Mw=71/2, sigma -1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.6- 11'11'1''''''''1,000 1 lili Liquefaction 1 111111 7 8 0.5- 0.4- 0.3- > L 0.2- 0.1- 91 100= 4 / ) 373+ 4 r C X 11 1 10 1- 0 1,11,1,1,â€¢lili,11,1111,11,11 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1z Qtn,cs Normalized friction ratio (%) No Liquefaction - 10 160 180 200 Zone A, Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2 Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry Zone B Liquefaction and post-earÂ·thquake strength loss unlikely check cyclic softening Zone C Cyclic hquefactlon and strength loss possible depending on soil plast,city bnttleness/sens,tivity strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:23 PM 33 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 UFIU 5-5 10-10 15-15 20-20 25-25 30-30 35- 40-40 45-45 50-50 55-55 60-60 65-65 70-70 7C-75 J :A f J This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-5 CPT basic interpretation plots Cone resislf}MAUGER Friction R,Ailb AUGER ,Pore pres'AN&5 AlJGER SBT Plot 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 8- 10- 12- 12- <12- 14- 14- 16- L-->16- 16- 18-18- 20-20- 11-22- L 22- 24-24- 26- b 26- 28-28- 9n- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- Soil Behaviour Type HANDAUGER Sard&siltysand 28 qt (tsf)Rf (%) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average results interval: Points to test:Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Unit weight calculation: Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill: Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height: L 14- 16- 24- :49 4.01.Sttygld & sandysilt Clay&sillyday Clay&siltyday aay&slltyday aay&slltyday JU Sltyserld &sendys,lt aay&slltyday 32- aay&sityday 34-Sltysard &saldys,It 36- Day&&*day2 38-Sltysend &saÂ·clysllt i -36- ...1,8%%a*&slltyday.0 40- aay&slltyday0-42- 2 Sltygid &salcys,It 44-.-0 Sltysald &sendysilt 46-Siltysard &salcysilt 48-Sad&siltygld Bitysend &sarlys,lt Sltysalcl & saldys,lt Clay&Â§14day Clay&siINday aay Clay&siltyday Clay&914,day aay&stllyday aay aa,&siltyday 68-am 42 aay - aay&slltydayaay&=1Â¥day 74- SErd &gltysarl - 1 -/7-v.Â·i , i.i .Sil'6773#M'c'11 1, 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Ic(SBT)SET (Robertson et al. 1986) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft]SBT legend3 Transition detect. applied:Yes 2.60 K. applied:No 1. Sensitive fine grained El 4. Clayey Silt to slity Â¤7. Gravely sand to sand Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material Â¤5. Silty sand to sandy silt El 8. Very stiff sand to Yes Limjt depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay Â¤6, Clean sand to silty sand m 9. Very stiff fine grained ju-JU-: 32-32- 34-34-1 36-36- \ f 38-2 38-EF 38- 1 .c 40--c 40-Â£ 40- 1 0-42-0-42-a 42- 1 8 44-44-44- 46-46-46- 48-48-48- 1 50-50-50- 1 52-52-52- 1 54-54-54- 1 56-56-56- 58-58-58- 60-60-60- 62-62-62- 64-64-64- 66-66-66-l 68-68-68- 70-70-70- 7-)-77- 28-. 30- Â·S 32- 8 14- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52-.. 62- 64- 66- 74- 0 50 100 150 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 77- 74-74- 0 20 40 60 80 u (psi) CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefa(lion Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:23 PM 34 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood .cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT-5 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 2- 2- ' i 2- 4-1 HAND AUGER 3-HAND AUGERHAND AUGE.1 -- b- 8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16-16- 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 28-28- 30-30- IL .L 234- 5 36- b'b 36- Â£ 38- 2>.C E. 38- 42-- -'3, 44- 46- T-1r-- lili 0246 Fr (%) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (elthq.) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average results interval: Points to test:Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Unit weight calculation: Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill: Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height: 8- 10-EL:14 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 11'Ir 1 2 3 4 Depth (ft) 2- 4- 6- HANDAUGE 2 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn 8- 10- Sand &slityser[112- 14- 16-314'send &sar*sllt 18---4.13 Gay&,Ityday 20-aa,&slityday22-Gay aay&slltyday24- 04 1 aay&slityday Day&siltyday aay&slltyday 30--"--""*22 aay - aay 32-SErd &gltyserl 34- <*37....aay&s,Ityday 36- -0 36-Clay,&silgday . 38- i S. 38.-=Siltysand &01*sit al; 40- " =Siltysad &saridysllt aay 42- Send&slltysard Sltysard & saldyglt Sitysend & sendys,lt al..Siltysand & gldyglt Clay&slihyday aay Clay&slltyday Sltysarl &sendysllt 74-SaIl &s,Itysand 1 1 1 11 1, 1,1, 11 1 11,111,1, 1 1111111 8 10 -0.2 0 0,2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Bq Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft 3 SBTn legend3 Transition detect. applied:Yes 2.60 Ku applied: No 1. Sensitive fine grained E 4. Clayey silt to silty []7. Gravely sand to sand Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material Il 5. Slity sand to sandy silt E] 8. Very stiff sand to Yes Limit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay 03 6. Clean sand to silty sand El 9. Very stiff fine grained Â£ 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 44- 46- 48- 52 54 70- 72- CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011,1:24:23 PM 35 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT-5 Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) Total cone resistance SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance 2- 4- HAND AUGER 8-1 410- 612- 8 14- 16- 442 10 12 18 2- 4- HAND AUGER HAND AUGER 2- 4- HAND AUGER 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 20 14- 1.- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 34- 36- 38- 40-(U) 4]d E g 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 9/ 44- g 40- 42- 46-44- 48-46- 50-48- 52-50- 54-52- 56-54- 56-58- 58- 60- 60- 62- 62- 64-64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- 2 3 4 28- 32- -741:5% 2830-30- 32-32-1r-32- 34-34-34- 34- 36-tÂ· 36-36-36- 4= 38-38-38-1Â£ )- 2 40_ --=#-8 42- .,- 44- 46- 48- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 50 100 150 200 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990) 66- 68- 70- 72- 74-6 50 100 150 200 Qtn 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 50 100 Qtn,cs 2 3 10 Kc 1 1 150 200 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu) NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 30.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 |b/ft) Transition detect. applied:Yes Ko applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:23 PM 36 Prolect file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 lU 22- 24- 18 20 26-22 28-24 30-26 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-5 Liquefaction analysis overall plots g E CRR plot 0FIU 2-2 4-4 6-6 8-8 10-10 12-12 14-14 16-16 18-18 20-20 22-22 24-24 26-26 28-28 30-30 32-32 34- FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0--FII 11 FIUÂ· 2-3 2- 4-4- 6-i 6-. 8-11 8- 10-10- 4 12- 1' 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 36-t 2-PI 1 4- 6- 8- 10- tl12- 14-: 16- MmÂ®@p n-18- 20- 22- 24- 26-I 111 28- ' Ilh,j9 36 34- 36- 6-32-*38- JI 2 34- r 421Et.42- 36-44-rmied--44- 38- i lili 46- 40-48- 50- 42- 52- 38- 40- 42- 44 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 2 34- 5 36- * 38- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- :11Â®m 44-till 54-1 54- 46-56-56- 48-58- :58- 54-2 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 02- - 11 1 i IT 1 1-7- i ,-1 1 i till 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in)Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998) Points to test:Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fiil:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] Transition detect. applied:Yes Ko applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy 0 Very likely to liquefy El Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likely [] Unlike to liquefy I Almost certain it will not liquefy LPI color scheme Very high risk EZI High risk Â¤ Low risk CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:23 PM 37 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 601,50- -60- Â·60- 62-62- 52-64-64- 54- 1 66-66-66- 56-68-68- 58-70-70- 60-72-72- 74-74- This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-5 Check for strength loss plots (Olsen & Stark (2002)) Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18-4 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- e 34- < b 36- *38- 3 40_ 4-4-10- HAND AUGER HAND AUGE 2 6-12- 8-8-14- 10-10-16- 12-12- 18- 14-14- 20- 16-16- 22-18-18- 20-20-24- 22-22-26- 24-24-28- 26-26-30- 28-28-32- 30-30-34- 32-32-36- 34- 34-ce 38- 5 36-b 36- r 40-â‚¬ 38- 40- 42- 0 42- 44-42- 46-44-44- 46-46-48- 48-48-50- 50-50-52- 52-52-54- 54-12-54-56- 56-56-58- 58-58-60- 60-60-62- 62-62- 64-64- 66- 64- 66-66- 68- 68-68- 70-70-70-1 72-72-72- 74-74-74- A#vvv VV v v & 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 4-E .......... HAND AUGER 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24-â‚¬,m,yw,0, 26-.,$%*-.-& 28-..'*5**= 30- 32- 2 34- - 5 36- 1 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- r- 48-.'.1"1. 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 627 64-1 58- 60- 62- 64- 66-3 68- 70- 2 72- C 74- 66- 2 68- 70- 1 - Peak Su rat:o 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 Su/Sig'v v y iii 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 50 100 150 200 1 2 3 4 .5 Qtn Kc Qtn, cs Ic (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 I b/ft] Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes Points to test:Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 1% applied: No Earthquake magnitude Mw 6.70 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill:Yes Limit depth applied:Yes Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height:3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:23 PM 38 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-5 TRANSITION LAYER DETECTION ALGORITHM REPORT Summary Details & Plots Short description The software will delete data when the cone is in transition from either clay to sand or vise-versa. To do this the software requires a range of Ic values over which the transition will be defined (typically somewhere between 1.80 < Ic < 3.0) and a rate of change of Ic. Transitions typically occur when the rate of change of Ic is fast (i.e. delta Ic is small). The SBTn P|ot below, displays n red the detected transition layers based on the parameters listed below the graphs. SBTn Index Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 8- 14- 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 22- 24- 26- 28 30- 32- WV V 10-HAND AUGER 12- 16-Sand &slltysard 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 238-tb # --c 40-â€¢Â·Â·442_29 Â£ a 42- S 44-.-I 46- 48- 34- 36-=T=== 38- - 46- 48- 50- 40- 42- 44- 50- 52- 54-52 56-54 5658- 60- 62- 64- 66-66 68-.68 70-:70 72-72- Sltyst &smdysilt aay&slltyday aay&glt,day aay aa,&siltyday Clay&gityday Clay,&sillyday Clay&S,14,da aw aay Sard & sillysald Gay&$11'day Clay,&sillyday Slty SErd&Sal*Silt S Itysard &sa*silt Sald&slltysard Slt,sard&=*Silt Sltysand &sa*sit Sltysancl & sa*sit Gay,&slltyday aay aay&stltyday Sltysall & san*silt 74- .-'aLL -7""m 74-&nci & siltysald 1111, I 1 i11 1i 1 I 111I 1I 111 I1I 11 111 I 11 1 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) Transition layer algorithm properties Ic minimum check value:1.70 Ic maximum check value:3.00 Ic change ratio value:0.0250 Minimum number of points in layer: 4 General statistics Total points in CPT file:459 Total points excluded: 74 Exclusion percentage:16.12% Number of layers detected: 14 CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:23 PM 39 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-5 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resistafm)AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strain plot Vertical settlements 0- 8-8-2- 10-10-4- 12-12-6- 8-14-14- 10- 16-16- 18-946 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 32-4*21.32-g;;;' M An-f- 48- *t 1111- 8 ... 1 34- 36- 238- 0-0--FIU 2-2- 4-4- 6- E8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 14 14- 16-16- 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26= 28-28- 30-30- 42-0 42- 8 44-44- 46-46- 48-48- 50-50- 52-52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62-62- 64-64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74- 4 74- 0 50 100 150 200 qt (tsf) 32 -r' 34- t 36- Â£ 38-7-,- 40- 42 44- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 0.5 2 6422,5 36-0 C 5.38- 3 40_ * t3 46-0 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72 72-72-*.- I. - SI'll 74- 74- r-r-r- - i i , i ;Ef, i , I i 11'11 1 2 3 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0123456( 1.5 Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety Volumentric strain (%)Settlement (in) Abbreviations qt: Total cone resistance (cone resistance qc corrected for pore water effects) Ir: Soil Behaviour Type Index FS:Calculated Factor of Safety against liquefaction Volumentric strain: Post-liquefaction volumentric strain CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:23 PM 40 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood _cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 12- 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 2 34 5 36 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com 3-*RT17 Â©4124,1 1< 1. MCICIFFY.*r:ly INTIZY[ 999'99,?Â·=*.4 4=.1. i roject title : The Academy - Orangewood Children's EPT file : CPT-6 [nput parameters and analysis data Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA Inalysis method: ines correction method: )oints to test: Earthquake magnitude M. )eak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 G.W.T. (in-situ):30.00 ft G.W.T. (earthq.)15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.0 Fill weight:10[ Trans. detect. applied: Yes Ko applied:No Clay like behavior Oft applied:Sands only 1.00 lb/ft3 Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Cone r*MIM'FEER Frictio#A'WjRJ GER SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot FILL 10-10-10-5- 15-15-15-10-10 20-20-20-:15-15-1 25-25-25-20- 25-2530-30-30- 30-30 35-35-35- 35-, 35 40-40-40- 40-40 45-454 45-Â· 45-45 50-50- 50-50 55-55-55- 55 60-60-60- 60-60 65-65-65-Â·65-65 70-70-70-70-70 75--7[-7[--7C-75 0 100 Depth (ft) =711 4%4iZZ 1.5 1 ,/ 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 .I - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1, rr-1 ./ 11111 200 300 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0,4 0.6 0 0.5 1 2 qt (tsf)Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR & CSR Factor of safety Mw=71/2, sigma =l atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.6- 11'111'11'1111'1.000 Liquefaction 0.5- 0.4- 0.3- 0.2- 0.1- 1 lilli 9 100= 4 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 11 Qtn,cs 1 a=/-1- 11 0.1 11. , , , i, i,i 1 10 Norrnalized friction ratio (%) No Liquefaction - 0 160 180 200 Zone Al Cyclic liquefact,on likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2 Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry Zone B Liquefaction and post-earÂ·thquake strength loss unlikely check cyclic softening Zone C Cyclic Oquefact,on and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity bittleness/sensitivity strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLIq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on 11/2/2011,1:24:25 PM 41 Project file: P: \Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 2 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-6 CPT basic interpretation plots Cone resisl85Â¥AUGER Friction R.Alib AUGER Pore presAk'&%AlJGER SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type 8-8- 10-10- 12- *>12- 14-14- 16 18 20- 22-f 22 24- 24 26-1 26- 28- 30- HANDAUGER Serd &siltysend 26 31Â§,sald & saldysilt aev 32- 34-L 34- 36- 2 38- <238- .c 40- 0 42- 44-44- 52- 52- 54- 1,54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 72- 74- 0 100 10- 121 14- 1 141 16- 16- 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 28-28- 30- 32- 34-9 34- 36- 38- 8 iF 38- c 40- c 42- 8 44- 46- t)46- 48- 50- Depth (ft) Clay&slliyday Clay&sllyday 90 .U 48-48- 50-50- aa,/ Clay&dlyday 1%- (lay&slltyday S lt,gld & saldys,lt kid &s'Ityst Sltys2nj & Serdysilt 52- 54- 56- CO- 52- 54- 56- 58- t 60- t 62- Sed&siltygld Sltygd & sardysiIt aay aaÂ¥&slltydaÂ¥ JO 60- 62- 64- 66- 68-1 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- lilli 2 4 6 8 10 Rf (%) 70-4 t 72- 74- 0 20 40 60 80 u (psi) 1-wmt 2- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- b 36- 4Â¢ i 40- 42- 44- 'Mi 46 48- 50-7 B r 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- Ak 70- 72- 3 4 aay aay&sillyday 64-Serd &slltysall 66- aay 68- -. Clay 70-aay 72-Sard&s,ItysaÂ·d 74-9rri 1 1 .1 1-1--1 Ill-r 11,1,11 1 1111111 200 300 C [ 2 4681012141618 qt (tsf)Ic(SET)SBT (Robertson et al. 1986) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCE Fines correction method:NCE Points to test:Bag Earthquake magnitude Mw 6.7( Peak ground acceleration:0.35 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.( ER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft ER (1998)Average results interval: 3 f on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 ) Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT 1 Use fill:Yes )0 ft Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] Transition detect. applied:Yes Ko applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay [] 4. Clayey sit to silty Â¤7. Gravely sand to sand Il 5. Sllty sand to sandy sllt [] 8. Very stiff sand to El 6. Clean sand to silty sand Â¤ 9. Very stif fine grained CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011,1:24:25 PM 42 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 CPT name: CPT-6 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) i. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 2Â· 4- HAND AUGER HAND AUGER b-0 8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16-16- 18-18- 20- 22-i 22- 24- 24- 26- Sarl &siltysard Sltysed & sa*silt aay 28 097&sllwaW28- - 28- 32-ClaÂ¥&9'tyday 30-34-32 Gay32-32-36- 34-2 34-d 38-t 1 - 36-.--7 aay&slityday 36-t 36- - .c 40- 38-E. 38-aayCl 42- 40-8 40- 8 - - 73 04&glyday 44- aay&,ItydayClay&,14(lay 46-44-==I Clay&sillyday 46-48-1 46-Siltygld & sallysilt"Vill 48-Siltygld &01*Silt 48-50--.1....Siltygld & smdysilt 50- 52- 1/ 50-Clay&Â§14,day aay52-54-, aay&gllyda54- 56- 56 -1/1/////56- 58 0-gatcsal 58-58-aay60j60-aay62. I- '-filil"&,Ep 2-illilll62- 64-1 Clay&slltyday 64- --.-64-Siltysand & sa'llysilt 44- 46- 48-48- Fn- 52- 54- 56- 58-1 58- 60-60- 62- 64- 66- 68- <68- 70- 72- 74-74- 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn 8-2 4-410- HAND AUGER 6- HAND AUGER 612- 8-814-4 10-10 16- 12-12 18- 14-14 20-16-16 22-18-18 20-244 20 22-26-22 24-28-24 26-30-26 66-UV 66 0 2 68-68 GEN68- 70-70-Ogalic sal 72-72-72 Se,-11 &Siltysend 74-74- -M111111 1,11111,11 i I ' 1 ' 1 1 Sld 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 6 8 10 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1 2 3 4 4681012141618 Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCE Fines correction method:NCE Points to test:Bas< Earthquake magnitude Mâ€ž6,7( Peak ground acceleration:0.3E Depth to water table (insitu): 30.( ER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft ER (1998)Average results interval: 3 pcl on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 ) Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes )0 ft Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] Transition detect. applied:Yes 1% applied:No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft SBTnlegend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay [1 4. Clayey silt to slity Â¤7. Gravely sand to sand Il 5. Silty sand to sandy silt El 8. Very stiff sand to E] 6. Clean sand to silly sand 0 9. Very stiff fine grained 5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:25 PM 43 3: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-6 Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) Total cone resistance SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance 2- 2- 2-2-R-4 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 10-4-4-4- HAND AUGER HANDAUGE f HAND AUGER _HAND AUGE Z 6-6- 6 14- 16- 18- 20-f 22-F 24-[ 26-L 28- 30-. 32-| v 36- E 38- 1 2 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52-54-I 56- 62 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74-11,1,1, lili 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 1 2 3 4 0 50 100 150 200 (2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 50 100 150 200 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990)Qtn Kc Qtn, cs Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.38 30.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 'b/ft] Transition detect. applied:Yes Ko applied:No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011,1:24:25 PM 44 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 lz- 8-8-8- 14- 10-10-10- 16- 12-12-12- 18-14-14-14- 20-16-16- :16- 22-18-18- 24-1 20-20-20- 26-1 22-22-22- 28-24-24-24- 30-26-26-26- 32-28-28-28- 30-30-30- 34- 32-32- 36-' 2 384 234-2 34- t 36-b 36-'--'36- c 40- a 421 8 40- 40- 44-3 42-42- 46-44-44- 48-46-46- 50-48-48-48- 50-52-50-50- 54-52-52-52- 54-54-54- 56- 56-56-56- 581 58-58-58- 60' 60-60-60- 62- 62-62-62- 64-64-64-64- 66-66-66- 68-1 r 66- 68-68- 704 70-70-70- 721 72-72- 744 74-74- 72- 74- 1 T '-1 1 , - 1.....1 1 1 1 1 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-6 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12-14- 16- 1 18-3 20- 22- 24- 26-Â· 281 30-Â· 4 FIIE 2- 4- 6- FIU: 0 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- r- 32 t C 0 FIU 2 2- 4 4- 6 6- 8 8- 10 2--4 11 12 10- 14 12- 16 14- 18 16- 20 18-22 4 ILl 24 20- 26 22- 28 24- 30 26- 32 36- 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- .4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 A ZO 234-34- Â· 2 34 v 30- n4- 36-t33 36- 38- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 0.2 0 34- :5 36- 38--6.Ju 40-42- fi 42- 44-. *j 44- 46-;46- 48-48- 50-50- 52- Â·52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62-62- 64-64- 66.66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- 0 0.5 1 1.5 3 40- i - 40 -- - - 14.. %40 CRR & CSR Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998) Points to test:Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.00 ft LPI Fill weight:100.00 tb/f:t3 Transition detect. applied:Yes 1% applied:No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy m Very likely to liquefy El Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likely Il Unlike to liquefy [] Almost certain it will not liquefy 0 Displacernent (in) LPI color scheme Very high risk Cl High nsk Il Low risk CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:25 PM 45 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-6 Check for strength loss plots (Olsen & Stark (2002)) Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v 2 2- 8- 4-4- i 4-10- HAND AUGER HAND AUGER 2- 4- , HAND AUGE R 0-U 12- 8-8-14- 10-10-16- 12-12- 18- 14-14- 20- 16-16- 22-18-18- f 24- b- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 22- 24- 261 26- 28->28- 30- 32-}32- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 12 34-1 tb 36- â‚¬ 38- g 40- 42- 234- 5 36- EL 38- 40- 32-36- â€¢2-32- C 34-34- Â¢â‚¬ 38- 38 5 36- -36- Â£ 40- EL 38-0 42- 3 40- â€¢ 40- 44-42-4,%.Â»V> 42- 52- 5046-44-44- *Il'....,FAI'*........ 46-48-46- 48-50- â€¢ 48- 50- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- E 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 48- 52-1 581 74- 50 100 150 200 Qtn 52-54- 54-56- qA- V 58- I0 60- 60-62- UL 64- 64- 66- 66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn,cs 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66-'===ZII68- 70-/U- 72- 72- -- -Peak b:j rat:o *96=, I11,I11111III11 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 OJ) 4 ld*] 74-74- ,1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0.,0.2 0.3 0,4 0.5 Kc Ic (Robertson 1990)SU/Sig'V Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 Iwft) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes Points to test:Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 It applied:NO Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.70 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Clay like behavior appl,ed:Sands only Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill:Yes Limit depth applied:Yes Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height:3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:25 PM 46 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-6 TRANSITION LAYER DETECTION ALGORITHM REPORT Summary Details & Plots Short description The software will delete data when the cone is in transition from either clay to sand or vise-versa. To do this the software requires a range of Ic values over which the transition will be defined (typically somewhere between 1.80 < Ic < 3.0) and a rate of change of Ic. Transitions typically occur when the rate of change of Ic is fast (i.e. delta Ic is small). The SBTn P|ot below, displays in red the detected transition layers based on the parameters listed below the graphs. SBTn Index Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 2 3 4 (U) 41daa 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 2 38- c 40- a 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 24- 28- HAND AUGER Sgrl & siltysad SltysEnc!&saÂ·*s,It aay Clay&siltyday - aay&siltyday 30- 32- 34- 36- aaÂ¥ aa&siltyday 38 40 42-:: 44- 46- 48- rn- JU 52 54 56 58 60 62 64- 66 681. 72- 74- 012 Ic (Robertson 1990) Transition layer algorithm properties Ic minimum check value:1.70 Ic maximum check value:3.00 Ic change ratio value:0.0250 Minimum number of points in layer: 4 Oay Clay&gllyday Gay&914day 319serd&ser*slit Claâ€ž&siltyda, SltysEnd&ser*sit Sltysald&$211*silt Siltys2rd&sal*silt aay&sillydaY a# aay&,Ityday 0-gale sal aay aay aaÂ¥&siltyday SllysaÂ·13&sal*silt aay Ogaric sal SEnd&slitysard 11111.111111 15**7jl 1111111111111, 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415161718 SET-n (Robertson 1990) General statistics Total points in CPT file:458 Total points excluded: 62 Exclusion percentage:13.54Â°/0 Number of layers detected: 11 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:25 PM 47 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-6 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resista AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strain plot Vertical settlements 0 8-2 10-4 12-6 8 10 16- 12 18- 14 20-16 22-18 24-20 26-22 28-24 30-26 32-28 34-30 3236- 38-t,36 40- 42-g 40 44-42 46-44 48-46 50-48 52-50 54-52 5456- 58- 56 58 60- 60 62-62 64-64 66-*r 66 68-68 70-70 72-72 74-74 Depth (ft) 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 2 38- Â£ 40- 0- 42- 0-0- 2-2- 4-4- 6-5 6- 8-8- 10-10- 12- 14- 16-16-4 18-â€¢-18- a FI 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 48- 50- 2.-*....7....#-m....... 134- t> 36- *38- g 40- 42- 44- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 09- 70- 74- 46 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 0 32- 1 34- 536- * r â‚¬ 38- 40- 42- r-r- 44- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 3 4 5 6 0 0.50 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 1 2 3 4 0 0.5 1 15 2 0 1 2 1 1.5 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety Volumentric strain (%)Settlement (in) Abbreviations qt: Total cone resistance (cone resistance q, corrected for pore water effects) L: Soil Behaviour Type Index FS:Calculated Factor of Safety against liquefaction Volumentric strain: Post-liquefaction volumentric strain CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefadion Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011,1:24:25 PM 48 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Procedure for the evaluation of soil liquefaction resistance, NCEER (1998) Calculation of soil resistance against liquefaction is performed according to the Robertson & Wride (1998) procedure. The procedure used in the software, slightly differs from the one originally published in NCEER-97-0022 (Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefadion Resistance of Soils). The revised procedure is presented below in the form of a flowchartl: qc: tip resistance, f, : sleeve friction 6,.w er,.0' : in-situ vertical total and effective stress units : all in kPa initial stress exponcnÂ¢' :n= 1.0 and calculate Q, F. and Ic if 4 5 1.64. n = 0.5 if 1.64 < Ic < 3.30. n = (4-1.64)0.3 + 0.5 ific 2 3.30, n = 1.0 iterate until the change in n. An < 0.01 if am' > 300 kfa. let n= 1.0 for all soils "updated from Robenson and Wride (1998) C F1 C.0' J. (n F=100ft 100 (qc - a,o ) /c = VI[3.47 - log Q)2 + 0.22 + log F)2 J V if Ic S ] Â·64. Kc = 1.0 if 1.64 < ic < 2.60. Kc = -O,403 17 + 5.581 12 -21.63 42 + 33.75 10 - 17.88 if Ic 2 2.60. evaluate using other criteria; likely nonliquefiable if F> 1% BUT, if 1.64 < 4 < 2.36 8231 F < 0.5%, set Kc = 1.0 Cqr]N)Â£, = KCQ . CRE-1,5 = 93Â· C9,Â·1â€¢.')c, + 0.08. if 50 5 (qc,N)Â©5 < 1601000 CRR7.5= 0.833 - <fic],%Â·)Â£-t -1 + 0.05, if (clciN)es < 50L 1000 j ifle 2 2.60, evalu'ate using Other criteria; likely nonliquifiable if F > 1% 1 "Estimating liquefadion-induced ground settlerrents from (PT for level ground", G Zhang, P. IC Robertson, and R.W. I. Brachnen CUq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT- Uquefaction Assessment Software 49 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Procedure for the evaluation of soil liquefaction resistance (all soils) - Robertson (2010) Calculation of soil resistance against liquefadion is performed according to the Robertson & Wride (1998) procedure. This procedure used in the software, slightly differs from the one originally published in NCEER-97-0022 (Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils). The revised procedure is presented below in the form of a flowcharti: CPT qi. 4. avo, o'vo, pa = 1 atm all same units as p. Initial stress exponent: n = 1.0; Calculate On. Fr. Ic n =0.381(4) + 0.05 Zk PO , -0.15 n 51.0 Iterate until change in 4 An 5 0.01 . C -121 .0 [(0 - a.)1 L p. 1. EN F; = (q: -1 )â€¢100 lic 5 2.50 t).47 - log(L); + (1.22 + loglt )2 r f 2.50<Ic< 2.70 h (Ie 2 2.70 1 Lf 4 5 1.64, Kc = 1.0 v When 1.64 < 4 S 2.60 Kc = 5.5843 - 0.403 12 - 21.63 Ic.2 4- 33.756 - 17.88) K If 1.64 < 4 < 2.36 AND Fr 40.596. set Kc = 1.0 c =6*10-3(46.16 Qtu.cs =Kc 'Qun â€¢ 1 CRR 7-3 = 93 -ize-1 + 0.08 1000 ]CRR,3 -0.054Â£,NK,2 - 50EO 5160 1 P. IC Robertson, 2009. "PerfornÂ·nnce based earthquake design usi ng the CFT", Keynote Lecture, Internati onal Conference ort Performance-based Design in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering - from case history to practice, IS-Tokyo, June 2009 CUq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Uquefaction Assessment Software 50 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Procedure for the evaluation of soil liquefaction resistance (sandy soils) - Moss et al. (2006) â‚¬PT ch, fs, 4 < 4 < 4 cut-off Initial estimate using raw tip measurements, friction ratio. Calculate qu. Repeat undl an acceptable convergence tolerance is achieved. 'f 2 c=f 1. %- 'C C . q P a C Â¥ 'Clt, l=(q 'qt 1.045 qt, i + qu 6. 110 Â·Rf + t).001Â· Rf+cÂ·1+ 0.850 -Rf- 0,848 Â· Inklw )-0.002 Â·Inc -20.923 +1.632 -0CRR = exp 7.177 Cuq v. 1.5.1.16- CFT Liquefaction Assessment Software SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 gir Procedure for the evaluation of liquefaction-induced lateral spreading displacements - Site investigation with SPT or SPT data with content or CPT data Design eanhquake I - Moment magnitude of earthquake (Mâ€ž) and peak surface acceleration (amaV Ground geometry V Geometric parameters for each of different zones in level (or gently sloping) ground with (or without) a free face Â¥ Liquefaction potential analysis to calculate FS, (Nikocs or 4 + (qcIN)cs Zones with three major Zones with - geometric parameters or more than (using the NCEER SPT-less - free face height (H).three major CPT-based method (Youd et al.the distance to a free face geometric 2001))(L), or/and slope (S)parameters If (Ni )rocs < 14 or (qcix)cs< 70 eval uate potential of flow liquefaction W Calculation of the lateral displacement index L/H or/and Evaluation of (using Figure I and Equation [3]) S lateral displacements4 +based on other Estimated lateral displacement, LD approaches and For gently sloping ground without a free face.engineering LD = (S + 0.20) Â· LDI (for 0.2% <S< 3.5%)judgment For level ground with a free face, LD= 6Â·(1./H)-" Â· LDI (for 5<UH<40) 1 Flow chart illustrating nÂ·Bjor steps in estirrating liquefadion-induced lateral spreading displacements using the proposed approach 60 0,-40% l So9* 60% 20 80%10 1 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 f Zmas LDI= 1 7maxdz i Jo 1 Equation [3] 2.0 Factor of safety, FS 1 Figure 1 1 Â·Estirrating liquefaction-induced ground settlenents from CFT for level ground", G Zhang, P. IC Robertson, and R.W. I. Brachnan CUq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT Uquefaction Assessment Sohare 52 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Procedure for the estimation of seismic induced settlements in dry sands Avemge shear stress. T. =CSR' Â· cuo' = 0.63 32<% g C.0.1 Estimate small shear strain modulus. Go Go -0,0188' -10035I.-15811 (qt - 6.) Estimate shear stmin amplitude, 7 (based on Pradel (1998)) y=1 + aÂ·ebR 1+4 Â· RÂ·100 N R= t Go (Note Â·cm andG o same units) a - 0 0389 1 0, C pa + 0.124 b = 6400 loul 1 Pal Estimate volumetric strain in 15 cycles â‚¬,01(15) -7 END600 1-130 [ 20 ] Qws 04 1)608 = r83Â· |1 -1-I 1 461 Volumetric stmin in design earthquake 10.43 I [NCvol = 40*15) liT 217Nc = @4 - 4 4 Seismic settlement, s GWT s = 2 Â· fI.01 Â·dz Robertson, P.K. and Usheng, S., 2010, "Estimation of seismic compression in dry soils using the CFT" FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON RECENT ADVANCES IN GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND SOIL DYNAMICS, Symposium in honor of professor I. M. Idriss, San Diego, CA CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 -CPT Uquefaction Assessment Software 53 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI) calculation procedure Calculation of the Uquefaction Potential Index (LPI) is used to interpret the liquefaction assessment calculations in terms of severity over depth. The calculation procedure is based on the methology developed by Iwasaki (1982) and is adopted by AFPS. To estimate the severity of liquefaction extent at a given site, LPI is calculated based on the following equation: 20 LPI = [(10 -0,5z)><Fi><dz where: FL =1- F.S. when F.S. less than 1 FL = O when F.S. greater than 1 z depth of measurment in meters Values of LPI range between zero (0) when no test point is characterized as liquefiable and 100 when all points are characterized as susceptible to liquefaction. Iwasaki proposed four (4) discrete categories based on the numeric value of LPI: â€¢ LPI = O Liquefaction risk is very low â€¢ 0 < LPI <= 5 : Liquefaction risk is low â€¢ 5 < LPI <= 15 : Liquefaction risk is high â€¢ LPI > 15 :Liquefaction risk is very high 00 1.0 2.0 0 0 0 P 5 5 E 10' i 15 - 20 20 Depth +14 10 1 zir, 3 Graphical presentation of the LPI calculation procedure CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT Liquefaction Assessment Software 54 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 References â€¢ Lunne, T., Robertson, P.K., and Powell, J.J.M 1997. Cone penetration testing in geotechnical practice, E & FN Spon Routledge, 352 p, ISBN 0-7514-0393-8. â€¢ Boulanger, R.W. and Idriss, I. M., 2007. Evaluation of Cyclic Softening in Silts and Clays. ASCE Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering June, Vol. 133, No. 6 pp 641-652 â€¢ Robertson, P. K. and Cabal, K.L., 2007, Guide to Cone Penetration Testing for Geotechnical Engineering. Available at no cost at http://www.geologismiki.gr/ â€¢ Robertson, P.K. 1990. Soil classification using the cone penetration test. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 27 (1), 151-8. â€¢ Robertson, P.K. and Wride, C.E., 1998. Cyclic Liquefaction and its Evaluation based on the CPT Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 1998, Vol. 35, August. â€¢ Youd, T. L., Idriss, I.M., Andrus, R.D., Arango, I., Castro, G., Christian, J.T., DoblY, R., Finn, W.D.L., Harder, L. F., Hynes, M.E., Ishihara, K., Koester, J., Liao, S., Marcuson III, W.F., Martin, G.R., Mitchell, J.K., Moriwaki, Y., Power, M.S., Robertson, P.K., Seed, R., and Stokoe, K.H., Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, October, pp 817-833 â€¢ Zhang, G., Robertson. P.K., Brachman, R., 2002, Estimating Liquefaction Induced Ground Settlements from the CPT, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39: pp 1168-1180 â€¢ Zhang, G., Robertson. P.K., Brachman, R., 2004, Estimating Liquefaction Induced Lateral Displacements using the SPT and CPT, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 8, 861-871 â€¢ Pradel, D., 1998, Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 124, No. 4, 364-368 â€¢ Iwasaki, T., 1986, Soil liquefaction studies in Japan: state-of-the-art, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2-70 â€¢ P.K. Robertson, 2009, Interpretation of Cone Penetration Tests - a unified approach., Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 46, No. 11, pp 1337-1355 â€¢ P.K. Robertson, 2009. "Performance based earthquake design using the CPT", Keynote Lecture, International Conference on Performance-based Design in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering - from case history to practice, IS-Tokyo, June 2009 â€¢ Robertson, P.K. and Lisheng, S., 2010, "Estimation of seismic compression in dry soils using the CPT" FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON RECENT ADVANCES IN GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND SOIL DYNAMICS,Symposium in honor of professor I. M. Mriss, SAN diego, CA â€¢ R. E. S. Moss, R. B. Seed, R. E. Kayen, J. P. Stewart, A. Der Kiureghian, K. 0. Cetin, CPT-Based Probabilistic and Deterministic Assessment of In Situ Seismic Soil Liquefaction Potential, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 132, CUq v. 1.5.1.16- CPT Uquefaction Assessment Software 55 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 APPENDIX F SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 APPENDIX F LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING Table of Contents Section Paae 1.0 GENERAL F-1 1.1 Intent F-1 1.2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record F-1 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor F-2 2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED F-2 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing F-2 2.2 Processing F-3 2.3 Overexcavation F-3 2.4 Benching F-3 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas F-3 3.0 FILL MATERIAL F-4 3.1 General F-4 3.2 Oversize F-4 3.3 Import F-4 4.0 -FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION F-4 4.1 Fill Layers F-4 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning F-5 4.3 Compaction of Fill F-5 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes F-5 4.5 Compaction Testing F-5 4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing F-5 4.7 Compaction Test Locations F-6 5.0 SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION F-6 6.0 EXCAVATION F-6 7.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS F-6 7.1 Safety F-6 7.2 Bedding & Backfill F-7 7.3 Lift Thickness F-7 7.4 Observation and Testing F-7 F-i3030.495 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING Table of Contents (Cont'd) Standard Details A - Keying and Benching B - Oversize Rock Disposal C - Canyon Subdrains D - Buttress or Replacement Fill Subdrains E - Transition Lot Fills and Side Hill Fills Rear of Text Rear of Text Rear of Text Rear of Text Rear of Text 3030.495 F-ii SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications 1.0 General 1.1 Intent These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s).In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). 1.2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The Geotechnical Consultants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading. Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the "work plan" prepared by the Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing. During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include natural ground after it has been cleared for receiving fill but before fill is placed, bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, all key bottoms, and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained level of compaction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. F-1 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the plans and specifications. The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. 2.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic materials (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 5 percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. F-2 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. 2.2 Processing Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. 2.3 Overexcavation In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. 2.4 Benching Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5: 1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant F-3 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Spedfications prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. 3.0 Fill Material 3.1 General Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. 3.2 Oversize Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials, and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction. 3.3 Import If importing offill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section 3.1. The potential import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that its suitability can be determined and appropriate tests performed. 4.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 4.1 Fill Layers Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. F-4 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Spedfications 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method D 1557-91). 4.3 Compaction of Fill After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method DI 557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method D 1 557-91. 4.5 Compaction Testing Field-tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). 4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils embankment. In addition, as a guideline, at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are not met. F-5 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Spedfications 4.7 Compaction Test Locations The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established SO that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided. 5.0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys. 6.0 Excavation Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading.Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.0 Trench Backfills 7.1 Safetv The Contractor shall follow all OSHA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. F-6 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Spedfications 7.2 Bedding and Backfill All bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be performed in accordance with the applicable provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SID>30). The bedding shall be placed to I foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minimum of 90 percent of relative compaction from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. The Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. 7.3 Lift Thickness Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method. 7.4 Observation and Testing The jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. F-7 SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Rl.L SLOPE PROJECTED PLANE 1:1 -,22:===--P-0-PAQ-TWR:R:2- 45==555555=8#gissggp--2-(HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL) N MAXIMUM FROM TOE -============---,==------- ,- ---0--0-0---- - OF SLOPE TO :3833*333*293,0 APPROVED GROUND -0---------74----4ja---------- 1 REMOVE EXISTING - i . UNSUITABLE GROUND SURFACE N MATERIAL_0.4ge@**EN BEE-H.' I-GFI F=i.===A - A. ====A J BENCH HEIGHT-1 1 kR;g5900*0000092 (4 FEET TYPICAL)1Â£-5-2%-NE:SE=31 2 FEET MIN. - |,15 FEET MIN.- | L KEY I DEPTH OWEST 3ENCH (KEY) 1,-Seitt:A -*6552Â¥-MAÂ©*9\ ALL-OVER-CUT SLOPE EXISTING GROUND SURFACE 1- .Aamras. /ke:------flUr-------------------- .... Eeee>>202---21 -I--I-' I.. Ai BENCH 1-BENCH HEIGHT 1. .1 (4 FEET TYPICAL) 4/11 ,15 FEET MIN., | | ' LOWEST '--REMOVE / 2 FEET-J BENCH UNSUITABLE -..44 MIN. KEY (KEY)MATERIAL DEPTH L-CUT FACE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT TO ALLOW VIEWING / OF GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS f! A- EXISTING-CUT FACE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR CUT-OVER-FLL SLOF TO FILL PLACEMENT PROJECTED PLANE-3 1 TO 1 MAXIMUM FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPROVED GROUND GROUND F:t-it-:424iA OVERBUILD AND - -7--SgRXZ;2# \ TRIM BACK DESIGN SLOPE LBENCH HEIGHT (4 FEET TYPICAL) REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL | ]5 FEET MINk|BENCHING SHALL BE DONE WHEN SLOPE'S 2 FEET MIN:-1 LOWEST 'ANGLE IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 5:1. KEY BENCH MINIMUM BENCH HEIGHT SHAU BE 4 FEET DEPTH (KEY)AND MINIMUM ALL WIDTH SHAU BE 9 FEET. KEYING AND BENCHING GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPEaFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS A Leighton SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 - FINISH GRADE SLOPE FACE -3 MPL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _4' MIN. _ -te= 15 MIN. 1 11 11 11 COMPACTED FELL-UU.----TL7_72 -- ----- I------ I- ---- ______WINDROWL ___ JETTED OR FLOODED - - APPROVED SOIL 0 Overstze rod Is larger than 8 Inches in largest dimension. â€¢ BadÂ¢lll with approved soil Jetted or flooded In place to fill allthe volds. â€¢ Do not bury rock within 10 feet of finish grade. â€¢ Windrow of buried rodc shall be parallel to the finished slope faoe. SECTION A-A' PROFILE ALONG WINDROW ------------------8-*P-------------- 1---------21 =-==-------------- JETTED OR FLOODED APPROVED SOIL OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS B Leighton SL Rved 2019.01.21 rd IZy C At 11 P:or,ftlng\:zmotatesâ„¢ta[&Wver-fod#*AMB moo) NATURAL GROUND ------------ COMPACTED FIU ------------ U TYPICAL BENCHING - ------------REMOVE XSÂ© \33Â·3=>L=5 \<* UNSUrrABLE MATERIAL \--9 m.<4126(1 -SUBDRAIN (See Altemates A and B) SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A PERFORATED PIPE SURROUNDED WITH FILTER MATERIAL FILTER MATERIAL (9FT '/FT) FILTER MATERIAL. FILTER MATERIAL SHALL BE aASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL PER STATE OF CALIFORNIA STANDARD SPECIFICATION, OR APPROVED ALTERNATE aASS 2 GRADING AS FOLLOWS: Steve Size Pe,tent Passt,g SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A-1 PERFORATED PIPE 6- 0 MIN. No.200 O-3 SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A-2 SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE B DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINAL 3/4" GRAVEL WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC- =-4 12" MIN. OVERLAP FaTER FABRIC (KIWI 140N OR AppiCIED E[NIV,lam FILTER FABRIC 0 MIN. &â€¢CXFILL (MIRAFI 140NC OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) FWi*6'GUDE 3/4" MAX GRAVEL OR ALTERNATE B-2ALTERNATE B-1 APPROVED EQUIVALENT (9FT3/FT) 2 PERFORATED PIPE IS OFTIONAL PER GOVERNING AGENCTS REQUIREMENTS - 15 MIN. MON-PERFORATED 69 EN. I '44*D!.-1.Â» A EN. - PERFOUTED 3// OPEN GADED GRAVEL 6'0 MIN.OR Mi]IPS],fED E*ITâ„¢Brt CANYON SUBDRAIN GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPEOFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS C SL Rved 2019.01.21 Leighton 1-luu 3/4'90-10[ 3/r 40-10[ No. 4 25-40 No. 8 18-33 No. 30 5-15 iiA9* P:Dr,ftlng*nolatâ€¢AdetaiMcnifuldratraw,â€¢g moo) 15' MIN. 1 . . , I I . OUTLET PIPES 44 NON-PERFORATED PIPE, 100'MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY 30' MAX. O.C. VERTICALLY / 19\ / 1 ir- ,. ./ i\\ ,. BACKCUT f J BENCHING 4:21\ i X \/- /11 Iliff.---4-1 /1 -- 2% MIN. -Lgj 2% MIN. -/-1 1 I-15' MIN. KEY DEFTH I KEY WIDTH 2' MIN. SUBDMIN ALTERNATE B /MIN. 12'OVERLAP FROM THETOP SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A POSrrIVE SEAL SHOULD BE PROVIDED AT THE JOINT OUTLET PIPE (NON-PERFORATED) Y FILTER FABRIC - RAF40 OR EQUIVALEND CALTMNS CASS 2 FILTER MATERIAL (3FT,3/FT) . OUTLET PIPE (NONÂ·-PERFORATED) 6% /37 W MIN.3/4' ROCK OFT?/Fr) - WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC TCONNECTION FROM COLLECTION PIPE TO OUTLET PIPE â€¢ SUBDRAIN INSTAUATION - Subdraln collector pipe shall be Installed with perforadons down or, unless otherwise designated by the geotechnical consultant. Outlet pipes shall be non-perforated pipe. The subdrain pipe shall have at least 8 perforations uniformly spaced per foot Perforation shall be 1/4" to 1/2" If drilled holes are used. All subdraln pipes shall have a gradient at least 2% towards the outlet. SUBDRAIN PIPE - Subdrain pipe shall be ASTM D2751, ASTM D1527 (Schedule 40) or SDR 23.5 ABS pipe or ASTM D3034 (Schedule 40) or SDR 23.5 PVC pipe. All outlet pipe shall be placed in a trench and, after fill is placed above it, rodded to verify integrity. BUTTRESS OR REPLACEMENT FILL SUBDRAINS GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS D 21 Leighton SL Rved 2019.01.21 P:DreftN\tE**\detaih\butbmi-revl-Wb.dwg (7/00) CUT-FIU TRANSnION LOT OVEREXCAVATION REMOVE .-I UNSUITABLE m --- GROUND L- x* -/ - -1.A.**326*k*NOdkNÂ¢k>SX94 4' MIN.'466, - - -COMPACTED FILL- - - ---'2 ----- - - - -_-I_13-i.IT-I-I-I-I->Int) 'C<iLY lety II--- tz=ZZZ== LE,E\=-il,Il'...OVERED(CAVATE AND REOOMPACT \ TYPICAL ---77-1 ;257/BENCHING UNWEAâ„¢ERED BEDROCK OR MATERIAL APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT-'\\5Â»45 SIDE HILL FILL FOR CUT PAD NATURAL GROUND r BENCHING 1 RESTRICTED USE AREA .... OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT (REPLACEMENT FILL) / FINISHED (lIT PAD '<Â»1NNOk\0'0\Lk\M, OVERBURDEN 3X --OR UNSUITABLE MATERIAL )AD OVEREXCAVATION AND RE)OMPACTION SHALL BE PERFORMED IF SEIFIED BY THE GEOTED{NICAL CONSULTANT 296 IN- - ILL- -,ir-/w,-u- wa. i r,U- rwrh ..Wl..... . . WHEN REQUIRED EY GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT G Mâ„¢ 2' MIN. KEY DEPTH -UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR MATERIAL APPROVED BY THE GEOTEO{NICAL CONSULTANT TRANSITION LOT FILLS AND SIDE HILL FILLS GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPEGFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS E Leighton SL Rvid 2019.01.21 P:Dr,krattrinolateswetaibwarofUllsÂ£Â»,M (7/00) APPENDIX G SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 Gootochnical Engineering ReBopt Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help. Geotechnical Services Are Pertormell for Specitic Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services lo meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotedinical engineering study conducted lor a civil engi- neer may not fullill the needs of a consln,clion contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geolechnical engineering study is unique, each geolechnical engineering report is unique. prepared SO/*lor the client. No one except you should rely on your geolechnical engineering report wilhout first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared il. And no one -notevenyou -should apply the report lor any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read tile Full Report Serious problems have occurred because Ihose relying on a geotechnical engineeting report did nol read it all. Do not fely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elemenls only. A Geoteclmical Engineering Report Is Based on A Unique Set ol Project-Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number ol unique, project-specific lac- mrs when establishing the scope ola study. Typical lactors include: the clienis goals, objeclives, and risk management preferences: the general nature of Ihe stiucture involved, its size, and configuration: the location 01 the structure on the site; and olher planned or existing site improvemenls, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless We geotechnical engineer who conducted tile study specifically indicates oth- efwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: â€¢ not prepared for you, â€¢ not prepared for your projecl, â€¢ not prepared for the specific site explored, or â€¢ completed before importanl project changes were made. Typical changes thal can efode the reliability ol an existing geotechnical engineering report include those mat affect: â€¢ the lunclion of the proposed strudure, as when it's changed from a parking garage to an oilice building, or Irom a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, â€¢ elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure, â€¢ composition of the design team, or â€¢ project ownership. As a general rule, ahes inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes-even minor ones-and request an assessmenl 01 thsif impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems thal occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. Subsurface Con[Ntions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineer- ing moortwhose adequacy may have been affected by: tile passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site, or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater Iluclua- lions. AtÂ»gys contacl the geolechnical engineer before applying the report lo delermine il il is still reliable. A minor amounl 01 additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. Most Geotechnical Fintlings Are Professional Opinions Site exploration idenlifies subsurlace conditions only al those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engi- neers review lield and laboratory data and then apply meir protessional judgmenl to render an opinion about subsurlace conditions throughout tile site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ-sometimes significantly-- from those indicated in your report Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide construction observation is Ihe most ellective melhod of managing tile risks associated wilh unanticipated conditions. A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final Do nol overrely on the constiuction recommendations included in your report. Rose recommendgtions am not /inal. because geotechnical engi- neers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geolechnical engineers can linalize their recommendations only by observing aaual SL Rvcd 2019.01.21 subsuitace conditions revealed during construction.The geolechnical engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility of liability toi the report's recommendations H thal engineer does not perform construction observation. A Geotechnical Englneering Report Is Subject to Misinterpretation Other design team members' misinterprelation ol geolechnical engineeling repofts has resulled in coslly problems. Lower mal risk by having your geo- technical engineer cooler with appropriate members of the design learn aller submitting tile report. Also retain your geolechnical engineer lo review perti- nent elements 01 the design team's plans and specifications. Contfactors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce Ihal risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation. Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs Geolechnical engineers prepare linal boring and testing logs based upon theit interpretation 01 field logs and laboralory dala. To preven! errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should never be redrawn lor inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. Give Contractors a Complete Report anti Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable loi unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what Ihey provide for bid preparation. To help prevenl costly problems, give con- tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that teller, advise contractors thal the report was not prepared 101 purposes of bid development and that the report'S accuracy is limited: encourage Ihem to conler wilh the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest lee may be required) and/or to conduct additional sludy to obtain the specitic types of information Ihey need or prefer. A prebid confeience can also be valuable.Be sure contrac- tog have su#icient time lo perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give contractors the best infommtion available to you, while requiring them to at leasl share some 01 the financial responsibilities stemming [fom unanticipated condilions. Reall Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clienls, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disci- plines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations thal have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk 01 such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled *limilations' many 01 these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsi- bilities begin and end, to help others recognize meir own responsibilities and risks.Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond lully and frankly. Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenviron- menM/study ditler significantly from those used to perlorm a geolechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineeiing report does not usually relale any geoenvironmental lindings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g,, about tile likelihood 01 encountering underground storage tanks or regulated conlaminants. Unantic08/ed environmental prob/ems have led to numefous project /al/ums. If you have not yel obtained your own geoen- vironmental information, ask your geolechnical consultant lor risk man- agemen\ guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepafed lor someone else. Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts ot mom from growing on indoor surlaces. To be enective, all such strategies should be devised lor the e,wress purpose of mold prevention, integrated into a com- prehensive plan, and executed with diligenl oversight by a prolessional mold prevenlion consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moislure can lead to the development ol severe mold inlestalions, 3 num- ber 01 mold prevention strategies locus on keeping building surlaces dry. While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of the geotechnical engineering study whose findings are conveyed in this report,tile geolechnical engineer in charge 01 this project is not a mold prevention consultant; none of the se,Wces per- formed in connection with the geotechnical engineer's study were designed or conducted for the purpose 01 mold preven- lion. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold from growing in or on the structure involved. Rely, on Your ASFE-Member Geotectinclal Engineer for Adftional Assistance Membership in ASFE/THE BEST PEOPLE ON Eumi exposes geotechnical engineers lo a wide array 01 risk management lechniques Nt can be 01 genuine benefit for everyone involved with a conslruction project. Conler with your ASFE-member geotechnical engineer lor more information. ASFE TNE 81:1 Flopil 01 18111 8811 Colesville Road/Suite 9106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017 e-mill: inio@aste.org mA/.aste.org Copyright 2004 by ASFE. Inc. Duplication, reproduction. or copying of this document in whole of in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with ASFFS specific wriMen permission. Excerpting, Quoting, or otherwise extracting wording hom this documem is permitted only with the express written permission 01 ASFE, and ody lor purposes ot scholarly research or book tevievv. Only members ol ASFE may use mis documem as a complement to or as an element 01, geotectknical engineering report. Any other lirm, individual. or other entig that so uses this document withou! being an ASFE member could be commiting negligent m intentional (traudulem) misrepresentation liGER06085.OMAP SL Rvcd 2019.01.21