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 FAI RVIEW 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 1901 '9 ' 9 -1\I Â· FE,rvieob Streef- 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 Subject: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 geologidseismic 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 contact us at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. Q*â‚¬- Joe Roe, CEG 2456 Project Geologist JAR/CCK/Ir #P JOE A A ROE / No, 2466 MUI CERTIFIED -411 1 ENGINEERING #1* GEOLOGIST 0 C./932- 4% Carl C. Kim, GE 2620 Vice President Distribution: (3) Addressee 17781 Cowan I Irvine, CA 92614-6009 949.253.9836 I Fax 949.250.1114 I www. leightongroup.com 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 2.2 2.3 2.4 Regional Geology and Tectonics Site-Specific Geology 2.2.1 Undocumented Artificial Fill: (Afu) 2.2.2 Quaternary Fluvial Deposits (Qyf) Geologic Structure Groundwater 3.0 4.0 5.0 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 Hazardq 3.4 Expansive Soils 3.5 Corrosive Soils CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS Leighton Section 5.1 5.2 603284-001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Paae 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 Measurpq 21 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 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 2B - 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 603284-001 Page 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 - iii - V 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 -1- Leighton 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% 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 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 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 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 - GeologidSeismic 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 603284-001 2.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 2.1 Regional Geoloqv 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 Geoloqv 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 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 silly 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 (Qvfj The Quatemary 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 8-6 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 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 But 99.5 N/E 32.0 67.5 B-5 101.0 N/E 41.6 59.4 B-6 100.0 25.5 - - B-7 110.5 25.0 - - B-8 101.0 N/E - - B-9 100.5 NE - - 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. -8- V Leighton 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 Faulting and Seismicitv 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 potentiallv 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 603284-001 Table 2: Seismic Parameters for Nearby Active Faults Closest Distance Maximum Average from Fault to Site SlipFautGeometryMoment Miles Kilometers Magnitude Rate (mm/yr) Elysian Park Thrust Reverse Thrust 8.6 13.9 6.7 1.5 B Newport-Inglewood Whittier Newport-Inglewood (offshore) Chino Central Avenue Right Lateral 8.6 13.9 6.9 1.0 BStrike Slip Right Lateral 11,9 19.1 6.8 2.7 BStrike Slip Right Lateral 12.0 19.3 6.9 1.5 BStrike Slip Right 16.5 26.5 6.7 1.0 BReverse San Jose Sierra Madre Left Lateral Strike Slip Reverse 19.7 31.7 6.5 2.0 B 28.0 45.0 6.8 7.0 A Cucamonga Thrust Fault Hollywood-Santa Left Lateral- Monica Reverse 28.4 45.7 7.0 9.5 A 31.8 51.1 6.4 1.0 B San Jacinto- San Bemardino Malibu Coast Right Lateral,39.3 63.3 6.7 12.0 A Strike Slip Reverse 41.0 66.0 6.7 0.3 B San Jacinto (San Jacinto valley) San Andreas (San Bemardino) 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 A 43.3 69.7 7.4 24.0 A 43.3 69.7 6.7 24.0 A 44.2 71.1 7.0 5.0 A 51.6 83.0 6.9 1.1 B 57.5 92.6 6.8 5.0 B -10- V Leighton 603284-001 3.1.1 Surface 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. -11- Leighton 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 Secondarv 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 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 pf 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 603284-001 3.2.2 Seismically-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 7 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 flow 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 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 Lurchina 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 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 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 16 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- Leighton 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 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 Gradina 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 sofUloose zones for removal and recompaction. -19- Leighton 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 Bedding Any proposed pipe should be placed on properly placed bedding materials. Pipe bedding should extend to a depth in accordance to the pipe manufacturefs 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 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 1557-10. 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 B-1 B-4 General Classification of 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 ASTM 1) ASTM STP 1013 titled Ellect of So# 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 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. 1 SUIDLE lâ‚¬ DEAE P 5.2.2 Bearing Value Footings established on engineered fill or undisturbed natural soils may bedesigned to impose an average bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per BeD Ps-.- square foot (psf). A one third increase in the bearing value for short + 73 14Oaut 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 1/6 inch. The differential settlement between adjacent columns is estimated to be less than 14 inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet. -22- Leighton 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 -15 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 S" S l,4 thick with No. 3 rebar placed at the center of the slab at 24 inches on center in w/* 322471 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 10-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 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 Active At-Rest Passive Coefficient of Friction Equivalent Fluid Unit Weight with Granular Backfill (psf/ft.) Level Backfill,Level Backfill, Static Condition Seismic Increment 40 psf/ft 20 psf 65 psf 20 psf 300 - 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 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 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 , 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, SM, â€¢ Design spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SOS 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 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, F 0.89 Long Period (1.0 sec) Site Coefficient, Fv 2.18 Adjusted (5% damped) spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SMS Adjusted (5% damped) spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, SM1 Design (5% damped) spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SOS Design (5% damped) spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, Sol 1.23 0.95 0.82 0.63 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 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 Agaregate 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 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 1557-10, 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 (in) (inches) TIE 9 9.5 < TI < 10 9.0 12 9.6 12 -29- Leighton 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 Interlocking 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 < 8 8 < TI < 9 80 1 4 80 1 6 -30- Leighton .................. 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 Temporary 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 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- Leighton 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 111pman,ke J /9-<:Iâ‚¬ â€¢&,6 1 -i>. 7-2.t--NN-'7-1 \ 9 - I hil-11...:Fae=NI â‚¬11 t>*22127- -, .t I '06 - Irdin n 0--e (i:1 Palm H O det- 2.>f 1 if ..4' tv) -6 1- Garden GrovJEiltd.'*' â€¢ â€¢ '3:t : - 1 -2 4,43 40 'i h 11 .(422 42 I' '7-rr ./.11 11 41%7FC 4 0 -7--Sch Approximate P- Site Boundar, westminster Ave. 1*52*'_Et ./.1 -17th:St N 0 2,000 XE.4 A 4/1 Â£=7 =1 1/ Gaden Gre-1 -239Â§Â«/ 1 A . â€¢ir,Â©0.1 Go Â¥ Co-Uti' a '10 / . *fR..0 L.,3 ' 0.2.k r-. 94;/;..4. F.!. Cou,w i - \1 4106 71. . 7 -- -9 -- 07&111&,11/i,C --i-- 4 u L i!Irc 4,UUU -1 . 1 1 - -9 1 8 et'--Ill--1./.I--*-+ Project: 603284-001 Eng/Geol CK/JAR SITE LOCATION MAP Scale: 1"= 2,000 ' Date: November 2011 The Academy Base Map. ESRI Resource Center. 2010 17th Street and Fairview Thmatic Info. Leighton AuthorÂ· (btran)Santa Ana, California Man Saved as V \Drafting&03284\001\GIS\Of_2011-10-13#r:,gurel mxd orâ€¢ 1013/2011 3.48.40 PM 1 Figure 1 Leighton 1 ; 1 t _S_TREET FAIRVIEW __ -sâ„¢m)STIR - -.he-1 -T--+ - -- - - . f 1 1 ..r .C. 6//u - < 2. - -- 1 +I...... ---I -- & ../4* 41., ; Â«1 Iria351i El 4. 4 E 4 1 -af, '3 A.fl'.LL./..LE.....3.' 11'I- -i je 1 -.... ---4 --A -' I 9 4 4.5,..6,0. â‚¬' ,2 .'1332 -:'-,1Â».er,---.-/FLA)-35:If--E;IN 2 j,Â·-rb,7.Ly -4/ ...rmh=Â¥X 3Â¥,L.414., -â‚¬1 0 ; 44'â‚¬1 41.m# 3. .2 â‚¬ ils/7 i, 1 --1:frAM-1 '4't ,0 80 120 V K. re Flk-/Ilic46*0 2-1 " 14_*.3 - 9 u.(.5 f r m --SCALE FEEr 1 8 2 -#7 4 4/ * 96--9 1 - -2 3.8 r +-FÂ¥ CPT-27=223 4-Â»4 4 *T.0,10 a 1 41-Sd -0 **3 71.- ..11 Ion 1,1. 4-449 4 1- -gix 6* NE1*22 .O 8, 9 -PROJECT BOUNDARY4 16 1H-- H- 2 <0 0 4 4: At A-1 4 i # 12.2.r i,Â»44'*U:4. ZYI 4 4 A L 8-4 IJ 1 2, <,1-1 '31 i 1+ m 8 0 C 73 a] HNG HEI 4=al/S 33, .1 t-e i LEGEND : 8-9 L __222 . 1 i-9 tho, 1 1*:1 'I>PU 1 u cvT- i I , .: â€¢ 0 i 1-1.--ir . A-0 APPROXIMATE LOCAnON OF PERCOLATION TEST BORINGS * SHOWN WIâ„¢ TOTAL DEPTH (T.D.)2.. d. ''97 2-4....0 i S t t G A .t l 1/ 8-2 Ce APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HOLLOW 92 + el 00,0 01./:W STEM AUGER BORING SHOWING TOTAL DEPTH (T.D.) DEPTH TO PERCHED92 GROUNDWATER IF APPLICABLE, AND t'. ,.-MEASURED DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER (G.W.) UPON COMPLETION OF DRIUING.4 i-4-4 --4--,2* ' *v 3* &4 L.-4. .rf Z 1% t 1, i k14, 2. , , ''3 -7 3 -VIE -34Â¢-- -* 1- i--n. 9/ i-*2 -=71Â« 1 '%:. i., i ':34 , +4 + 8-7 10/ .6 *CPT--3 r1 :4 Te,Je V V TAM , 3 1Â»-1 4 -.AR L. -4194 - - --- ---41-- -- ! HUCKLEBERRY puag e ROAD \-/1/1/0, 7 i 10 N 1 1i . 040 i pr,+ 3-3 P 4* . 4. U.U.5. i 5 %, .,fÂ»-110 149 0 :--Y f v cFT-54*TAN' 14. *%, _ _X-__A 9Â¥ t.t 4222# f lf-, 9 g-4/ 2 f ./. %3Ki % @ CPT-6 8-5* r B fit_T-627*<fft A 3, APPROXIMATE LOCAMON OF CONE PENETRATION TEST (C.P.T.) SHOWN WIâ„¢ TOTAL DEPTH (T.D.) B' LOCAMON OF GEOTECHNICAL CROSS I.---J SECION BORING AND CROSS SECTION FIGURE 2A LOCATION MAP THE ACADEMY 17TH STREET AND FAIIMEW, SANTAAMACALIFORNIA Prot 803284001 Eng/Geol: CK/JAR Scale: 1"=60 Date: 11/11 Leighton FAIRVIEW-STREET- ---11 Ill- PROJECT BOUNDARY r-8 1 1 1 l 0 00 120 SCALE FEEr LEGEND B-9 T.O.r PEÂ»C Z APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PERCOLATION TEST BORINGS SHOWN WIâ„¢ TOTAL DEPTH (T.D.) 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. CP;;-6 T.D.75' APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF CONE PENETRATION TEST (C.P.T.) SHOWN WIâ„¢ TOTAL DEPTH (T.D.) B B' LOCATION OF GEOTECHNICAL CROSS L - - - J SECTION BORING AND CROSS SECTION LOCATION MAP THE ACADEMY 17TH STREET AND FAIRVIEW, SANTA ANA CALIFORNIA FIGURE 2B Proj: 603284-001 Eng/Geol: CK/JAR Scale: 1"=60 Date: 11/11 Leighton 1 1 r 7 1ummummulmillumimmlilimmuumnma --1 T.0.ILYUNTS)(CiASSROOMS) 2.,. . 1-= -1 r -01. 1 1,1 0 â‚¬ I BLDG'D' 2 r i, (FAMILY LWTS) C f 1_ECHANICAL L L BL 11(ADIUING SlrPORD BLDG'H' (CLASSROOMS --% * 14-1-BLDG 'G' a B-8 te -/Th PHASE 2) (GYMNASIUM - PHASE 2)MERC 1 BLDG'F' (FAMLY UNITS) Two Slory 3 1 \ 11\I -Il Il Ill Ill CT tl 112 L - * r Qyf 11,14 /1,Â· 1-14 1 J r.irt LEGEND i Qyf Young alluvial-fan deposits Qya Young axial-channel deposits QW Very young wash deposits 4<j Qyf 162 It t"\ Qyf . 1.3 J t 7 1 111 V Qyf if T : (.... j R t. 2452 Y 1 Qyf '7.1.1 . .At -lili , Qyf i ' 'Aer r 1 >1 i.- i L0 Approximate Site Location h Qyf 11.0 -" -- ..y,rT.r- / / ., 3 Qyf. 7, . i ..r. a. 1 k ./. - .- ... i râ€¢ . ANTA ANA tÂ· //- i Qyf 9 ,- 4 1 T I 7 .1 2 1 \. TA 'Wrt.3. 0 2,000 4,000 7 7-.4Feet 45 Project: 603284-001 Eng/Geol. CK/JAR REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP Scale: 1"= 2,000 'Date: November, 2011 The Academy Base Map ESRI Resource Center, 2010 17th Street and FairviewGeology data, USGS, 2006, Geologic map of the San Bemardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California, Version 1 0, Open File Repor't 2006-1217 Santa Ana, California 4. igure 3 eighton % N Map Saved as V \Drafting\603284\001\GIS\of_2011-10-13\Figure) Tnxd on 11/2/2011 1 10.09 PM 100 80 60 40 20 (1333) NOI.LVA313 B-4 Proj. 1 55' CPT-4- proJ. 1 40' A B-g - ProJ. 2 138' U I --4- Af Proposed Building C / Proposed Building AFamily Units 3-Story Intersection Classroom 3-StoryProposed Building B B-B' Administration Ubrary 2-Story B-1 B-6 8-7 A' Prdj. 1 300' - Prob 1 212' I I-CP'I-31 1 Prol. 1 303' - 100 -mall .. r Proj. 1 98'Yrol. 1 DU Existing Proposed Grade Gradâ‚¬ls 1 -CPT-12848+2-3 feet ProiÂ· 1335' L____3._-L_ T.D.6' 34 F:FD 4ttifs' T.D.5 Â£655' Sap. 30, 201 1 Qyf I T.DIT.5' .D.30' ? .........Â£ 4 - 80 - 60 3-2 3* 9 2=1 Â·Â·Â· 7 ?1Sep. 30. 2011 I 7 T nlrn' T.D.75' T.631.50 1llllllllli --401111111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T.D.75' - - - I 111 -20 lili lili lili lili 1 1 1 1 1 1 LEGEND Afu ARTIFICIAL FIU UNDOCUMENTED SAND MIX (SP TO SP-SM) Qyf Quaternary Young Alluvial Fan Deposits SANDY SILT (ML) -?- -?-GEOLOGIC CONTACT, DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE, QUERRIED WHERE UNCERTAIN SILTY SAND (SM)7 I 7 APPROXIMATE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION, QUERIED WHERE UNCERTAINSANDY SILTY CLAY (CL) I DEPTH TO MEASURED GROUNDWATER SURFACE SILT CLAY TO CLAY (CL-CH) 2 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION OF PERCHED GROUNDWATER AS ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING Proj: 603284-001 Eng/Geol: CK/JAR Scale:Hortmntal 1 -=60'Date: 11/11Vertical 1-=20 [k-dly: EaT Châ€¢-18): BUr Vt,DRAmOlom,mF_mn-10409#191-440,4M4811141:4,MO PtadÂ»=t- GENERAL ZED GEOTECHNICAL CROSS SECTION A-A' THE ACADEMY 1901-1919 N. FAIRVIEW STREET SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 4 LeIghton Proposed Building G Proposed Building B Gymnasium Administration Library B-6 Intersection 2-Story -Proj. 1 149'A-A'CPT-6 Proj. 1 192' B B-2 Prol. 1 22 100 - B P roj. -? ?- tr 1 -z 1 20'Pr. 1 155' 1 111 111 1-trfU-'-22.t Url-1 Proj. 1 58' 1 I -8-8 1 1 Prol. 1 i35' 1 1 1 1 -t----- -- tosed ides i Fee B' 1 1 1 U - 100 Prop Gra +2-2 It ?1 27:t YP. T.D. 11.5' 80 - 80//1/5//imUÂ¥1111111AIVM CA _Itmlmill ____f_ WW Z 40 T.D.51.5' 3----- 1T.D.5'1.5' 1 1 1-----4----- 1 -- -60 LEGEND LL 1 Z 1 0 4 SAND MIX (SP TO SP-SM)14 6. 4> L'1-- -J W rIT SANDY SILT (WL) SILTY SAND (SM) SANDY SILTY CLAY (CL) SILT CLAY TO CLAY (CL-CH) ARTIFICIAL FILL UNDOCUMENTED Quaternary Young Alluvial Fan Deposits W I.U./3 20 Afl Qyf 0 -I -- 1 -L - -=.-- -Ii -Ill-- ----i i1 1 T.D.100' Ill 11 111 11 1 1 1 1 1 Ill 11 1 1 1 1 0 ? I? 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 Eng/Geol: CK/JAR Scale:Hortzontal 1'=60'Date: 11/11Vertical 1 =20' Din/By: BOT Ch,dfey:EOT Â¥0WT,Omm,COnOU,11-1049*81011:5440-111-111,209 F-dkE- GENERAL ZED GEOTECHNICAL CROSS SECTION B.B' THE ACADEMY 1901-1919 N. FAIRVIEW STREET SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 5 Leighton la 9 -c 2 r v . 66 E Chapman Ag %*ba -4--W (242.Aer*,ealtillzE F.ullgrtoo_- Buenh Park 79+rr-4-4 r 4. =1.1/ 1,&1- i -,4,1 4 -:92:knc'T W C*angetho,pe Ave 3, /CUnS&*OR,k* I /. 16,7.23=h-L ==+ Riverside 4 1,7 E :3 -Â»S 24. Milesla Pairru Ave'â€¢ERwadae Crefent AK .hz:'L i NON Rans'W Uncoin Ave - *1-12 Cer.0 V,na r iâ€¢:U;ghts+ #532 3WURd i Rd 1, . -0 Rd Taft Abe Ch -I enttos Awe . - ; 1 .7 ' G Villa Park3-1 -1-6,4Stanton Katella Ave -*.---1.-cw Katen@Ave - 795 10 i i 11-i u..nge,â€¢ooa Ave A i1 Liiij.)P(a . 1 z IM*3.7 -z=-5 - - 4 I. Ye J 3 9.Â¢: , 3 & : -I,Â· - - Abe drange . f-6.E Chaprn.,Ave U./ 4 .0 i- S 5 1 Panor. mal'eightsardiN Groe'leiJn- =.==*#>2 ... 4 4.-- 1 1 =:Mff= 1 1 - - Garden Grove Fwy I =42#An - Justin s 4 WolmimliERIGI FoothillsWestminster - ..., ./ I h c1 1,EllaEÂ£111*1/1 ' . - b * 7 < 1 / - / i .1 21ST 94-1/ .2 1-801;ah,6 Fp-Midway rity -rolitlli--- SS . Cl e Val *â€¢V UOUJI S Western uo,U'15 itern Ave,PA18 40.0 1 E Yorb N -Placentia h Atwo 0 1 2 N K,@eme,Vale N Rose Â£4 ineir,J r, 1 Tjh Aw. Z 15 11*,lugploD 39 I 5 1Â·U 1 Sknta -Ana tÂ« -1-Li,- - I ' 1- . I.- Â· ?U Tustin 'Â® 4 Warne) Ave Â·--4- ----6-4. K<'22- -3..-4.--Â».0; --Â·44%Fo-untai., : ij,-,Fper f C .. - .Ignolia St S , VAlley ' i -fit:jivrjaJ; S 8 ..- 2Â©Id Ave Ellis *92.-0-*â€¢..4*ef, â€¢' , â€¢UE 6 ader St Â¢ 1 0 S Ma,r ,>lut'tingfe och * U Cd.wns Ave 65 2 ,- - Airt osta Mesa Legend m I .W - , (4 Quarternary and Younger Fault Prequaternary Faultsâ‚¬ e :Â· li Â£9p | Alquist Priolo Fault Zone ./<' Cot 93.4m . A 'inta A Fairview Pack - Orr O- P Câ€¢r6J. ark Station Tustin i :il-Â·4 e 'L t. Project: 603284-001 Eng/Geol: CK/JAR Scale:1"=2 miles Date: November, 2011 Base Map Bing Aerial Imagery from Esri Resource Center, 2011 Thematic InfoÂ· Jennings and Bryant, CGS Fault Act,vity Map. 2010 Aiqu,st-Prolo Fault Zones Map, CGS, 2001 Author (btran) REGIONAL FAULT MAP The Academy 17th Street and Fairview Santa Ana, California Figure 6 Leighton Map Saved as VÂ·\Draning\603284\001\GIS\of_2011 -10-13\Figure6 mxd on 10/1 3/2011 3:3744 PM kI N ,UK-.ieÂ·la -, *ountains Plute 0 -* ,nra.r, 30 #14 Drest Death V.nli", 395 ... %Gran,te A.awau Vourta.ns Uountams 0 Vo ave De<â‚¬Â·ft ,Bake 40060 lenacnap,Cal,forrwa C 4 ... .1 ah ...1 Miles ... :*Er-!ap .p.4{O,Ove g Vountams ,Ect'wards â€ž"t.1 U.T â€¢I 9. a,aet .tour Â· *Avâ‚¬,1.c 0 / efness Lancaster - C . 0,0 .1 Â» 0lo; Padres Nationa i,,"est 'J1 I ,SJacj8 ' Ivictorville2,0.0,7,1,5 -spalmdale Acetanto, 1 Mc :* ./ I Â£* 0 . . 4. â€¢ ita Hesperu Applo Â¥alle . _ ''01 0 1 tentura Simi Valley, ,+Utional Foree eLi:i San Berna1 , 00 0 0 814 0 N.On.=.i'.- P . CMari Thousand C Findale' / â€¢. SaneriS,pinp Â¥uci . 0, .T.1 .... ._ _..or&â€¢'c"1.. .ift Los . Â· T-' â€¢, Lts Aâ€¢geles -AB#bi.s /9mo. ,%,4Rc0i,ds4,.... 0 - t - Riversid@ . â€¢.Tgrrance.0.tlierton'iAn*eim Pef /15 . Long Bea21, 0' Fir'L a Cathed.al City :n*" â€¢ 'Â¥/ leinet ' ... 'S' aita Ala o ..h- .. .F77 - La Quinta Coach, j,0,Â·Hltah Approximate .Coac heile Site Location Â·efr,c .,:il'.1 3.r ////Santa Cl_p, 136 ValicÂ¥ Nat,Ofilt coreg 0 .. .#Gult of Sants Oceanside Vista Escondido .0 -. 0 Coto!.re Carlsbad Â· .non,tas . L . cen,e .....Wtfiefrtu, -L .agu -id / Â» 44 3 Santee Uounta. 0 5.. b.ian Die'90 0 .Â· . . CIA Vista , Tijuana-_I=iate..Ak__1107r Legend . Clar 1 )05: P *,1,Â·95 29,58 , Avalon Historic Seismicity (since 1769) . f; â€¢ 4.0 - 5.0 0 5.0-6.0 0 6.0-7.0 70-825 Ensenada- Project: 603284-001 Eng/Geol: CK/JAR Scale: 1 " =30 miles Date: November, 2011 Base Map Esri Resource Center, 2011 Thematic Info. Earthquake data obtained from United States Geological Survey's National Earthquake Informatlon Center Author MAM HISTORICAL SEISMICITY MAP The Academy 17th Street and Fairview Santa Ana, California rigure 7 Leighton Map Saved as V Ofa mng\603284\001\GIS\of_2011-10-13\Figure7.mxd on 10/13/2011 4 05 00 PM Disney li California vIA Legend Yle"* PLATINUM . -Adventute Liquefaction Susceptibility ZoneTRIANGLE.,W Katelle = 1 J W CoNIn, *we 4 . 'k li Ange I Stadi - U ORANGE Chapmar, A. 0 PLAZA THE BL W-#)11 Weia V 221-de fo 22 CENT b ku Santa W 1/1" St H 54 1931 Site Location College j HARBOR Cirta An a CENT BRISTOLWAJET. HENINGER M PARK E N W *ge, A.e 3 4,000 8,000 Feet At r;Id...0 Ci 5 Fi,v.w St Project: 603284-001 Eng/Geol: CK/JAR Scale: 1"= 4,000 feet Date: November, 2011 Base MapÂ· Bing Street Map from Esri Resource Center, 2011 Thematic Info: Southern California SHZP GIS Data, Department of Conservation, 2011 Author. (btran) SEISMIC HAZARDS MAP The Academy 17th Street and Fairview Santa Ana, California Figure 8 Leighton Map Saved as V \Draning\603284\001\GIS\of_2011-10-13\F*reamud on 11/12011 11:11:20 AM k i 14; B 1 â‚¬114 :1 /1,1,7- i ' A 142 ..- s...- 19("=r_.2 la. 4* , 1 . L- .' :rm,irke- J -1= mj-Lt*-'-r. t a:tyjd ..L . ..f.. =--7.11. f . 51 . - I r.tn 11- . 1.l . CM .f.â‚¬113' 41 N 0 3,000 6,000 Feet Project: 603284-001 Eng/Geol. CK/JAR Scale: 1"= 3,000 ' Date: November, 2011 Base Map ESRI Resource Center, 2010 Thematic Info. FEMA, 2010 Author (btran) Illy, r 14lt 1 ' 1111: 1 . I 1 6 1 . - 0--- - .- I V I. , --1 F ! 71 1 'r r , f L t. 2 . 4 0 J2' 7/ Approximate ' K\ Site Boundary ,11.6 w ./64 - --79 . I -1 - I 7 10. i /ZIZ. Legend 21- - 500 Year Flood Plain u%=rl,Â» f 100 Year Flood Plain FLOOD HAZARD MAP Figure 9 The Academy 17th Street and Fairview Santa Ana, California 1 i.. 1 1 1 â€¢, raM 2. d . 0 eighton Map Saved as VÂ·\Drafting\603284\001\GIS\of_2011-10-13\Figure9 mid on 10/13/2011 4.28.15 PM .1 I 1 1 A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 603284-001 APPENDIX A References Athanor Environmental Services Inc., 2011, Environmental Site Assessment Soil and Groundwater Investigation 1901-1919 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 Bemardino, and, Ventura Counties, California, DMG Open File Report 78-10 ,1996a, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, OFR 96-08. A-1 Leighton 603284-001 APPENDIXA 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/rghrn/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 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://hazards.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 in 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 1 1 1 1 1 1 B 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-1 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 100' Sampled By JR C Z 4,32 0-MUS 10 2 091 an SOIL DESCRIPTION iII Str SJ B W- E tu 0 N S This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at '14 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other 5=5 locations and may change with time. The description is a 0- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 100- 0 .... SM Undocumented Artificial Fill (Aful: 3-inches AC over SIL 1 Y SAND (SM), subgrade gphalt, distressedand fatigued, widely spaced alligator cracking, nne-grained, dry 90- 10 BB-1 Rl 4 105 2 ML 7 9 R2 3 97 SP 4 5 95- 5-Quaternarv Young fluvial deposits (Ovf):SANDY SIL 1 (ML), still, 1!Bht brown, dry, rootlets and weakcalcium carbonate along 1-2 mm voids SAND (SP), loose, light yellow brown, dry, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, poorly graded, unconsolidated 102 SAND with Gravel (SID, medium dense light yellow brown,fine-grained to coarse-grained sand, Ane rounded gravel, well graded, unconsolidated S-1 V 2 12 2 CL-ML 85- 15- dry, becomes oxidized CLAYEY SILT with SAND (CL-ML), soft, olive brown, very moist, fine-grained sand 80- 20 96 27 ML CL 27 SM R4 5 6 55555% 6!1111111. yf S-2 23 5 SANDY SILT (ML), firm, olive brown, very moist, fine-grained sand SILTY CLAY (CL), soft, mottled dark reddish gray, very moist, micacious 752 25 CL-ML CLAYEY SILT to SANDY CLAY (CL-ML), soft, light brown, fine-grained sand with thin bed ot fine-grained, wet silty sand to 26 ft., becomes silty clay, perched groundwater, LL = 26; PL = 21; PI=5 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 CN CONSOLIDAnON 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 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 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-1 Project No.603284-001 Project Orangewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Locauon 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 U 0 Zation SOIL DESCRIPTION m 5 N S )- 30 R5 - 35 S3 40 R6 50 R7 R:amr, This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at Â·16 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other 53 locations and may change with time. The description is a A- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. CL-MI-. CLAYEY SILT to SILTY CLAY (CL-ML), firm, dark.gray clay to oxidized orange brown silt, very moist, thinly bedded to laminated 65 0t 2 94 29 3 5 24 ML SANDY SILT (ML), soft, dark gray, fine-grained sand, wet 60 SP-SM SAND with SILT (SP-SM), medium dense, mottled light gray to reddish brown, wet, fine-grained sand 55- 45 S4 SP SAND (SP), medium dense, medium gray to black, wet, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, poorly graded, unconsolidated, poor recovery 50 4 105 22 8 I6 5 23 6 13 7 102 23 6 6 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 - 45- 55- 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 backfilted with soil cuttings and capped with AC cold patch upon completion lkPN'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 CN CONSOLIDAnON 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 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 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 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) C Ci 0 U Z Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR SOIL DESCRIPTION E Eco LU N S Ala This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at Â£8 02 thetimeof sampling. Subsurfaceconditions may differatother 90 0 j locations and may change with time. The description is a0 (n- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soi! types may be gradual. 0 100- 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 sandand fine-grained gravel. BB-1 R 1 5 93 2 SP 95-7 6 SC R2 4 100 2 SP 7 I0 -----------------*Inti;Ary young ii[Nial denosits (Ovn: SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, dry, fine-grained sand, some si[t, 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-gramed sand, poorly graded, unconsolidated 10 : S-l 2 3 SP 90-3 4 15- R-3 5 102 2 SP 85-8 SAND (SP), loose, dry, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, slightly moist, fine-gramed to coarse-grained sand, trace fine-grained rounded gravel, poorly graded, unconsolidated 20 S-2 0 24 CL 80- CLAY (CL), soft, reddish brown, very moist, trace silt, micaceous 25 R4 9I 31 CH 75- 3 5 FAT CLAY (CH), soft, mottled dark blackish gray to oxidized orange brown, very moist with fine gravel sized sandy angular concretions, some root traces SAMPEETYPES: 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 CONSOLIDAnON I CO COLLAPSE 1 CR CORROSION F CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL F )S DIRECT SMEAR SA El EXPANSION INDEX SE 4 HYDROMETER SG AD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC 'P POCKET PENETROMETER IV 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 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 Project No.603284-001 Project Orangewood 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) C 0 0 Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR SOIL DESCRIPTION C O= 6 R 22 E E-0C Ul 0 N S This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at NA the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other 55 locations and may change with time. The description is a 'n- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 40 I lili 45 I A S-3 \,1 2 27 CL 2 2 SILTY CLAY with SAND (CL), firm, gray to orange brown, very moist, very fine-grained sand R5 1 3 93 31 ML 6 6 SANDY SILT (ML), firm, medium gray, very moist, fine-grained, micaceous S4 \/ 2 28 ML 60 3 3 S5 1 3 28 SM 55 5 5 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 3 3 31 MH-CL CLAYEY SILT (MH), wet, dark gray, overlies CLAY (CL), firm dark gray, moist, moderately plastic, trace silt 55- 45- 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 of drilling and capped with AC cold patch SAM'PLE'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 CN CONSOLIDAION 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 0 ...This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ...Page 2 of 2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Project No Project 603284-001 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) C 0 U Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR SOIL DESCRIPTION O= 5 3. 22 E E-0C 0 N S This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at diA the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other 35 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 Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Afu): SM 4-inches AC over SILTY SAND (SM), subgrade, brown, moist, fine-grained, micaceous 95- --------1----------------------- MI- Ouaternary voung fluvial deposits (Ovil: SANDY SIL 1 (ML), light brown, dry, very fine-grained sand, micacious RI 5 105 3 SM 9 10 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 (SID, loose, light brown, dry, fine-grained, poorly graded 90- 10 R2 5 100 3 SP 7 8 SAND (SP), medium dense, slightly moist, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand, well graded, unconsolidated S-2 V 3 3 5 4 S-3 0 32 0 ML 85 15- trace fine gravel, loose 80- 20 V,i,;,i SILTY Lean CLAY (CL), stiff, mottled reddish brown to gray gravel sized concretions around open voids 1 -3 nun, moist with trace coarse sand to fine 75- 25- dark reddish brown, very moist, LL=38; PL=22, PI=16 SANDY SILT (ML), soft, olive brown, very moist, very fine-grained sand, micaceous 70- 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 CN CONSOLIDAMON 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 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 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Project No Project 603284-001 Orangewood 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) U Z E .cgi 2Â°on Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR SOIL DESCRIPTION 0= N S 26 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration atÂ·- Eu; the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other2 0 '5:5 locationsandmaychange withtime. Thedescription isao tn- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. R4 1 3 113 18 SC 9 I4 CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, mottled olive brown to gray, moist, fine-grained, some micaceous silt 6% 35 S-4 \/ 0 0 7 60- 28 SP-SM SAND with SILT (SP-SM), loose, dark grey, wet, fine-grained sand, encountered groundwater CL becomes SANDY SILTY CLAY (CL), olive brown, very fine-grained, very moist, micaceous 4U R5 1 7 106 2I SP SAND (SP), medium dense, dark gray, wet, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, Poorly graded, flowing sand S-5 3 31 SM 6 7 3 55- 45- SILTY SAND (SM), medium dense, grayish brown, wet, fine-grained sand, trace coarse-grained sand 50- 50 ** -S-6 V 0 33 CL CLAY (CL), soft, olive brown to gray, very moist, moderately 4 2 plastic, trace silt 45- 55- Total Depth = 5 1.5 ft. bgs Groundwater encountered at 35 ft bgs.duri,0 drilling Measured at 33.2 ft. bgs upon completion ot drilling Boring backfilled with soil cuttings and capped with AC cold patch upon completion 40- 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 I AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDAMON 1 CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION 1 CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL f )S DIRECT SHEAR SA El EXPANSION INDEX SE 1 HYDROMETER SG ID MAXIMUM DENSITY UC 'P POCKET PENETROMETER IV R VALUE SIEVE ANALYSIS SAND EQUIVALENT SPECIFIC GRAVITY UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH 0 a. " ' This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ...Page 2 of 2 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) C 0 U ZEW â‚¬W 5 8 E E- 239 Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR SOIL DESCRIPTION 0= 2521 E Ecom 26 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at. W u; the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other2 0 5=5 locations and may change with time. The description is an tn- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual.N S 0- SP BB-1 Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Aful: 5.5-inches AC over SAND (SP), subgrade, fine-grained to medium-grained sand, dry, lightbrown SM uaternarry young fluvial deposits (Ovn:SI L 1 Y SAN D (SM), l ight brown, dry, line-grained sand, trace fine rounded gravel95- S-1 V i 6 SM 2 3 loose, light brown, dry, fine-grained sand, poorly graded, unconsolidated 90- 10 qilillill Ill 5 CL I0 !5 SP S-2 y 2 3 SP 3 3 R3 4 95 27 SP 7 S-3 V 0 32 CE SANDY CLAY (CL), dark olive brown, moist SAND (SID, medium dense, light brown, dry, fine-grained sand, poorly graded, unconsolidated SAND (SP), loose, fine-grained to medium-grained sand 85- 15- SAND with GRAVEL (SP), medium dense, light brown, slightly moist, fine-grained to medium-rained sand with fine roundedgravel, poorly graded, unconsolidated 80- 20 CLAY (CH), soft, reddish brown, moist, moderately plastic, trace Silt 75- 25 70- SAMPLE R4 6 101 22 SM 4 4 Silty SAND (Ski), loose, olive gray to orange brown veg moist,trace very fine-grained sand, and rootlets, thin beds ot wet fine-grained clayey sand with concretions, gradational changes 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 CONSOLIDAMON I CO COLLAPSE I CR CORROSION 1 CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL F )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 4 HYDROMETER S ,'ID MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER 7V R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH El, MD, CR CN ... This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. " 'Page 1 of 2 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) C Z .=13 Date Drilled 9-30-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR SOIL DESCRIPTION 0,0 N S Elev:md This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at02 0.4 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ atother 90 â‚¬ locations and may change with time. The description is ao ur- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 4 "S-4 91 0 24 CH 1.1.1 0 2 FAT CLAY (CH) soft, with thin beds ofoxidized fine-grained sand to sandy silt, orange brown, very moist 65g R5 1 3 3 3 40 S-5 y 36 8 9 45 S-6 V 4 9 50 55- 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- 22 SP SAND (SID, medium dense, grayish brown, wet, fine-grained, poorly graded 55 21 SM SILTY SAND (SM), medium dense, wet, fine-grained, unconsolidated Unable to sample, 10 ft. o f 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 40- SAMPCE 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 CONSOLIDAnON 1 CO COLLAPSE 11 CR CORROSION F CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL F )S DIRECT SHEAR S El EXPANSION INDEX S 4 HYDROMETER S hD MAXIMUM DENSITY U 'P POCKET PENETROMETER W R VALUE A SIEVE ANALYSIS E SAND EQUIVALENT G SPECIFIC GRAVITY C UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH 0 ...This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ...Page 2 of 2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-5 Project No.603284-001 Project Orangewood 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 CU, O Z E E E O a m N S 40ul 9 Jed Â®3=: 4 -- - C .&22 0C 8,9 (6-7 SOIL DESCRIPTION ad This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at166 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other '5:5 locations and may change with time. The description is a In- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 0 SP-SM Artificial Fill: Undocumented fAfu):2.5 mches AC over 5 inches ot SANDY GRAVEL (GP), brown, fine-grained to medium-grained sand matrix, fine rounded gravel SAND with SILT (SP-SM), brown, moist, fine-grained, poorly -- -1 -gIaÂ®t ----------Quaternarfyoung-hu,*ili@osits-RAn: SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, slightly moist, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand with trace fine rounded qp gravel, well graded, unconsolidated EVU- BB-1 RI 4 116 3 95-7 I 0 R2 6 III 3 8 10 S-1 g 2 2 90-3 4 fine-grained to medium-grained, poorly graded loose, fine-grained to coarse-grained, moderately well graded R3 1 4 99 3 8 13 15- 85- SP-SM SAND with SILT (SP-SM), medium dense, light brown, dry,fine-grained, micaceous 20- S-2 V 0 3]CH 80-0 2 LEAN CLAY (CL) soft reddish olive brown, very moist, LL = 48,PL = 22, PI = 26 ' -"llillilil.25 R4 1 3 95 30 CH 75-5 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 SAMPI 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 CN CONSOLIDAnON 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 AL, CN ...This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. " 'Page 1 of 2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-5 Project No Project 603284-001 Orangewood 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 5 2 U c Â®.0 2-1 E "toElevatioi 2E 02 0C =0 SOIL DESCRIPTION 003 26 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at 1 4 the timeofsampling. Subsurface conditions may differatother %: locations and may change with time. The description is a - - simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. U w- 30 70- 0 29 CL 2 SILTY CLAY (CL), soft, mottled gray brown to orange brown, very moist R5 2 90 33 MH 65-3 5 2 40 S-4 1/ 2 27 ML 60-3 3 45- S-5 1/ 0 27 SM 55-3 5 S-6 \/ 2 3150- -%933 2 CL 3 55- 45- CLAYEY SILT (MI-i), 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 S[LTY 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 drillinB Groundwater measured at 41.6 ft. bgs upon completion ofdrilling Boring backfilled with soil cuttings and capped with AC cold patch upon completion ofdrilling and logging SAMPLIE 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 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 sisal,o ed*i ... This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ...Page 2 of 2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-6 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 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR W U Z 00 Â®U 00. N S Elevation Ala 2E 22 0C 52.: ui-7 SOIL DESCRIPTION inM ad This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at 24 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other '53 locations and may change with time. The description is a M- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 100- 0 6â€¢v N t Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Afu): 2.5 inches of asphalt over 7 inches ot SANDY GRAVEL (GP), fine-grained to medium-grained sandy matrix, fine rounded gravel, overlies SAND with SILT (SP-SM), brown, moist, M nne-grained, trace clayBB-!SP-S Rl * 2 101 2 SP 6 9 R2 4 101 2 9 I0 ---------------------------- Ouaternarv young fluvial deposits (Ovn: SAND (SID, 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 90- 10- R3 4 95 3 7 8 fine-grained to coarse grained sand S-1 V 3 4 CL R4 1 2 94 28 CH 85- 15- SILTY CLAY (CL), soft, reddish brown to olive brown, minor oxide development along poorly developed soil faces en. 10 11]111'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 S-2 2 3I 3 ML 4 R5 3 94 28 CL 4 5 74- 29- SANDY SILT (ML), firm, olive brown, wet, fine-grained, micaceous, perched groundwater encountered @25.5' SILTY CLAY (CL), stiff, olive brown to gray, very moist, moderately plastic Sl&-PIM TYPES: .1,11111, 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 CONSOLIDAMON CO COLLAPSE CR CORROSION CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DS DIRECT SHEAR SA El EXPANSION INDEX SE H HYDROMETER SG MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC PP POCKET PENETROMETER RV R VALUE SIEVE ANALYSIS SAND EQUIVALENT SPECIFIC GRAVITY UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH 0 0 a ...This log is a part of a repon by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. " 'Page 1 of 2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-6 Project No.603284-001 Project Orangewood 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 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 100' Sampled By JR 2 1 C- 0 a, u N S Elevation Depth Graphic &â‚¬ E2 0C SOIL DESCRIPTION Rd This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at 216 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other '5:5 locations and may change with time. The description is a Ur- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. Total Depth = 30 ft. bgs Perched Groundwater encountered at 25.5' Boring backfilled with soil cuttings and capped with AC cold patch upon completion of drilling and logging 60- 40- 55- 45- 50- 50- 45- 55- S-PITYPES: 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 I AL ATTERBERG LIMITS I CN CONSOLIDAMON I CO COLLAPSE f CR CORROSION I CU UNDRAINED TRIA)UAL I )S DIRECT SHEAR SA El EXPANSION INDEX SE 4 HYDROMETER SG VID MAXIMUM DENSITY UC 'P POCKET PENETROMETER qV R VALUE SIEVE ANALYSIS SAND EQUIVALENT SPECIFIC GRAVITY UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH 0 ... This log is a part of a repon by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. " 'Page 2 of 2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-7 Project No.603284-001 Project Orangewood 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 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR g @, Z E me N S Elevatioi 311 12 0C JR Ui-:Â·SOIL DESCRIPTION Ed This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at 166 the time of sampling, Subsurface conditions may differ at other '3=5 locations and may change with time. The description is a M- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 0 === SM 5 Â· 95-S-1 V 2 9 SM 2 Artificial Filli Undocumented (Afu): 2.5-inches Al over 3-inches SANDY GRAVEL (GP), fine-grained to coarse-grained sandy matrix, fine rounded gravel, overlies SILTY SAND (SM), dark brown, moist, fine-grained to coarse-grained sand, trace fine gravel Rl 1 6 105 2 SP 1 1 I4 -----*rnternarv young fluvial deposits (OViii-SILTY SAND (SM), loose, light brown, sIighly moist, fine-gramed, micaceous SAND (SID, 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 V 2 4 4 4 15- 85-7 99 3 10 12 loose medium dense fine-grained to coarse-grained sand, fine gravel,well graded, unconsolidated 20 80-S-3 \/ 0 31 CH 0 2 25- 75-R3 1 3 94 28 SP 5 CL 9 FAT CLAY (CH), soft, gray to orange brown, very moist, moderately plastic, trace fine-grained sand SAND (SID, coarse-grained, wet, encountered Perched Groundwater @25' CLAY with SAND (CL), stiff, mottled olive brown to orange brown, moist with coarse-grained sand to fine gravel sized concretions SAMPLE S-4 U 0 28 CL 0 2 SILTY CLAY (CL), soft, very moist, moderately plastic 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 CN CONSOLIDAMON CO COLLAPSE CR CORROSION CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DS DIRECT SHEAR SA El EXPANSION INDEX SE H HYDROMETER SG MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC PP POCKET PENETROMETER RV R VALUE SIEVE ANALYSIS SAND EQUIVALENT SPECIFIC GRAVITY UNCONANED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH â‚¬D DS ...This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ...Page 1 of 2 ...........1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-7 Project No.603284-001 Project Orangewood Real Property, LLC Drilling Co.Martini Drilling Corporation Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auqer - 140Ib - Autohammer - 30" Drop Locauon 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 @' mat Vi-7 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 N S 1=4101Elev Depth Graphic ;epn:1!uv N elduies 40ul 9 Jed suaa X.la0 34 .w C E2 OC oni f<; This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at '16 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other '5:5 locations and may change with time. The description is a ur- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 30 70-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 ofdrilling and logging 40- 60- 45- 55 50- 50- 55- 45- 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 CONSOLIDAMON CO COLLAPSE CR CORROSION CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DS DIRECT SHEAR SA El EXPANSION INDEX SE H HYDROMETER SG MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC PP POCKET PENETROMETER RV R VALUE SIEVE ANALYSIS SAND EQUIVALENT SPECIFIC GRAVITY UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH 0 ...This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ...Page 2 of 2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-8 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 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR 9 81 2%3 2 2% CD W 0 N S Ele t on seprl:!UV iN eldules SMOIg SOIL DESCRIPTION 00 Rd This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at u-4 the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other -55 locations and may change with time. The description is a 0- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 0 100- ML Rl 1 8 105 3 SM ..m=Artificial Fill; Undocumented (Aful 3-inches AC over SANDY SIL I (ML), dark brown, moist, fine-grained SILTY SAND (SM), medium dense, brown, fine-grained, - _mjcaceous Quaternary young nuviaTWAWs-76-vo: SAND (SP), medium dense, light brown, line-grained to coarse-grained sand, dry, moderately well graded SP-SM SAND with SILT (SP-SM), loose, light gray brown, fine-grained, micaceous 0 / 2 108 I 3 95-3 3 10 SAND (SID, medium dense, light brown, drv, fine-grained tocoarse-grained sand with trace fine rounded gravel, well graded, unconsolidated - 15- 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, 201 1 20- 80 25- 75- SAMPL R3 4 98 2 SP 7 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 CN CONSOLIDAnON 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 " ' This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. " 'Page 1 0 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-9 Project No.603284-001 Project Orangewood 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) C Ci 0 0 Z Date Drilled 10-3-11 Logged By JR Hole Diameter 6" Ground Elevation 101' Sampled By JR 3 0U 0 E Etom a. O N S ui-SOIL DESCRIPTION BE 6 This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at Hu; the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other20 'BS locations andmay change with time Thedesctiptionis a0 (n- simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be gradual. 0 100- Rl 1 5 98 9 ML 8 9 Artificial Fill: Undocumented (Aful:7 4-mches AC over 4-inches SANDY GRAVEL (GP), fine-grained / \ - 19 EousE-grainid-talyly-makil [in& molmÂ®tgravEL ---J @2': SANDY S[LT (ML), stiff, light brown, moist, fine-grained, micaceous 5- 95-18 3 96 10 SP 6 9 10- 90- 15- 85- 20- 80- 25- 75- Ouaternarv voung fluvial deposits (Ovil: @5': SAND (SP), loose, light brown, dry, fine-6rained tocoarse-grained sand, moderately wei[ graded, unconsolidated - Total Depth = 6.5 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 of drilling and logging Well removed and boring backfilled on October 4,2011 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 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 ... This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. ...Page 1 0 GREGG GREGG DRILLING & TESTING, INC. GEOLECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL INVESnGATION SERVICES September B, 2011 Leighbon 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 D,ing & Testing's Cone Penetration Test inve;tigation for the above referenced site. The fo[lowwy testing se,vioes were performed: 4 1 1 Cone Penetration Tests (CPTU) 2 Ftre Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPD) 3 Seismic Corie Penetration Tests (sarru) 4 UVOST Laser Induced Ruoresoenoe (uvosT) 5 Grounchvater Sampling (GWS) 6 Soil Sampling (SS) 7 Vapor Sampling (VS) 8 Pressuremeter Testing (PMT) 9 Vane Shear Testing (VST) 10 Dilatometer Testing (DMT) Â¤ 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 contact our office at (562) 427-6899. Sirtoerely, 1 Peter Robertson Technical Director, Gregg Drilling & Testing, Inc. 2726 Walnut Ave â€¢ Signal Hill, California 90755 â€¢ (562) 4274899 â€¢ FAX (562) 427-3314 OTHER OFFICES: SAN FRANCISCO â€¢HOUSTON www.grejudrit|ing.com GREGG DRILLING & TESTING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND EMVIRO>NEXTAL INVESâ„¢;ATIONSERVICES Cone Penetratton Test Souncing Sumnlary -Table 1- Cyr Sounding Date Termination Depth Depth of Grotildwater De,th 0, Soil 52174,5 De,*h of Pore PressureWeiitificatia,1 (Feet)Samples (Feet)(Feet)Dsipation Tests (Feet) CPT-1 9/21/1 1 01-2 9/mll CPT -3 9/2Ull CPT-4 9/n/l 1 Or-5 9/mil 75.1 DIDIDIDID!Â§ 272* Watnot Ave â€¢ S40.1 164 C:liforal, 90755 â€¢(562) 4774099â€¢ FAX 064 421-3314 OTHER OFFICES, 3/LM FUANC!SCOâ€¢ HOU5mÂ», 2./IEZE,kinis,N GREGG GREGG DRILLING & TESTING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND ENV[RONMENTAL INVESTIGATION SERVICES Bibliography Lunne, T., Robertson, P.K and Powell, J.J.M., tone Penetration Testing in Geotedmical Practice' E & FN Spon. ISBN 0 419 23750, 1997 Roberston. P.K, 'Soil Classifcation using the Cone Penetration Tesr, Canacian Geotedmical Journal, Vol. 27, 1990 pp. 151-158. Mayne, P.W, 'NHI (2002) Manual on Subsurface Investigations: Geotechnical Site Characterization: available Olrough mAV.oemled,h+*csvsmacullv/Mavnelpagers/k,dellini Sedion 5.3, pp. 107-112 Robertson, PK, RG. Campanela, D. Gilespie and A Rrce, 'Seismic CPT to Measure InÂ·Sikt Shear Wave Vaocity", Journal d Geotechnical Engineen,g ASCE, Vol. 112, No. 8. 1986 pp. 791-803. Robertson, PK. Sldly, J., Woeller, D.J., Lunne, T., Pcnell, JIM, ar,d GRIespie. 01. 'Guidehs for Estknating Cons/idation Parameters in Soes from Piezocone Tests", Canacian Geotedmical Joun* Vol. 29, No. 4, August 1992, pit 539-560. Robertson, PK, T. Lunne and JIM. Powell, 'Geo-Environmental Applicatkn of Penetratkn Tes#ng-, Geotechrical Site Charaderiza@on, Robertson & Mayne (editors), 1998 Balkerna, Rotlerdarrk ISBN 90 5410 939 4 pp 3547. Campalella, R.G. and L Weemees, 'Development and Use 01 An ElecmcE, Resisivity Core lor Grouw#water Conlamination Studies, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Val. 27 No. 5,1990 pp. 557-567. DeGroot DJ. and A.J. Lutenegger, Reliability of Soil Gas Sampling and agacterizaion Techniques", International Site Characterizabon Conference - Atlanta, 1998. Woeller. D.J., P.K Robertson. TJ. Boyd and Dave Thomas. vetection of Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon Contaminants Using the UVIF-CFT, 9 Canadian Geotechnical Conference Montreal, QC October pp. 733-739,2000. Zemo, DA, TA. Deffino, J.D. Gallinattj, VA. Baker and L.R. Hilpert, Teld Comparison of Analybcal Results from Discrete-Depth Grou,dwater Samplers' BAT EnviroProbe and QED HydroPunch, Sixth nabonal Outdoor Action Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada Proceedings, 1992, pp 299-312. Copies of ASTM Standards are available through www. astm.org 3726 Walnut Ave â€¢ Signal Hill, California 90755 â€¢ (562) 427-6899 â€¢ FAX (562) 427-3314 OTHER OFFICES: SAN FRANCISCO â€¢HOUSTON www.gremdrilling.corn AREGG Cone Penetration Testing Procedure (CPT) Gregg Drilling carries out all Cone Penetration Tests (CPT) using an integrated electronic cone system, Figure CPI The soundings were conducted using a 20 ton capacity cone with a tip area of 15 cm2 and a friction sleeve area of 225 cmi 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 (4) and penetration pore water pressure 02) at 5- cm intervals during penetration to provide a nearly contmuous log. CPT data reduction and interpretation is performed in real time facilitating on-site decision making.The above mentioned parameters are stored or, disk for further analysis and reference.An CPT soundings are performed in accordance with revised (2007) ASTM standards (D 5778-07). =21 --- 1-1-0 -Wial B--- --Eleetcablefoi jignalt,anwnission *lf 1 ---hdâ‚¬fl â€¢ - Airld ilene1.1 - &,dh=12,01&41 The cone also contains a porous filter element located directly behind the cone tip (U2)Â· It consists of porous plastic and is 5.Omm thick- The filter element is used to obtain penelration pore pressure as the cone is advanced as well as Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPDT's) .1 during appropriate pauses in penetration.El=U It should be noted that prior to penetration, the element is fully saturated with oil under vacuum pressure to ensure accurate and fast dissipation. ;Wter leal Wid - Pt,re pressurevansducer 'Fiker -cone np 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. Rgure CPI- 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. AREGG Cone Penetration Test Data & Interpretation The Corie 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 *, 6, and u,Â· In these situations, experience, judgment, and an assessment of the pore pressure dissipation data should be used to infer the correct soil behavior type. 10- 1 0.1 1 10 (Alter Robertson, 1990) Zone Normailzed Soil Behavior Type 1 .sensitive fine grained 2 /organic material 3 1 clay to silty clay 4 m clayey sit to silty clay 5 â€¢silty sand to sandy silt 6 â€¢ clean sands to sitty sands 7 1 gravelly sand to sand 8 0 very stiff sand to clayey sand 9 very stiff fine grained Normalized Friction Raoo (Fr) Figure SBTn Gregg CPI- Interpretation Software 1.1.,2007 . Cone Penetration Test (CPI) Interpretation Gregg has recently updated their CPT interpretation and plotting software (2007). The software takes the CFT 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 pammeters 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 of any method used in the software. The following provides a summary of the methods used for the inte:pretation. 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 'defâ€¢nlt' 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) (atin pressure, pa = 0.96 ef or 0.1 MPa) 2 Depth interval to average results,( ft or m). Data are collected al either 0.02 or 0.05m and can be averaged every 1,3 or 5 intervals. 3 Elevation ofground surface (ft or m) 4 Depth to water table, z. (ft or m) - input required 5 Net area ratio for cone, a (default to 0.80) 6 Relative Densily constant, CD, (default to 350) 7 Young's modulus number for sands, a (default to 5) 8 Small strain shear modulus number a. for sands, SG (default to 180 for SBTo 5,6,7) b. for clays, Q (default to 50 for SBTn 1,2,3 & 4) 9 Undrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkl (default to 15) 10 Over Consolidation ratio number, kocr (default to 0.3) 11 Unit weight of water, (default to yw = 62.4 lb/ff or 9.81 kN/mb Column 1 Depth, I (m) - CM data is collected in meters 2 Depth ( ft) 3 Cone resistance, qc (tsf or M Pa) 4 Sleeve friction, fs (tsf or MI'a) 5 Penetration pre pressure, u (psi or MI'a), measured behind the cone (i.e. uz) 6 Other - any additional data, if collected, e.g. electrical resistivity or UVIF 7 Total cone resistance, qi (tsf or MPa)qi =qc +u (1 -a) Gregg Page 1 of4 8./28/2007 Gregg CPT Interpretation Software 1.1., 2007 8 Friction Ratio, Rf (%)Rr = (fAO x 100% 9 Soil Behavior Type (non-normalized), SBT see note 10 Unit weight, y (pcfor kN/mb based on SBT, see note 11 Total overburden stress, av (tsf)avo=yz 12 Insitu pore pressure, uo (tsf)uo=yw (z-Zw) 13 Effective overburden stress, a'vo (tsf)cy'vo = avo - uo 14 Normalized cone resistance, Qu Q,i= (qt - avo) / a'vo 15 Normalized friction ratio, Fr (%)Fr = fs/(qt - avo) x 100% 16 Normalized Pore Pressure ratio, Bq Bq= u -Uo/(qi- avo) 17 Soil Behavior Type (normalized), SBTn see note 18 SBTn Index, Ic see note 19 Normalized Cone resistance, Qtn (n varies with [c) see note 20 Estimated permeability, kgm (cm/sec or ft/sec) see note 21 Equivalent SPT N6O, blows/ft see note 22 Equivalent SPT (Ni)60 blows/ft see note 23 Estimated Relative Density, Dr, ('A)see note 24 Estimated Friction Angle, 44 (degrees)see note 25 Estimated Young's modulus, Es (tsf)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-normalized), SBT Lunne et at. (1997) listed below 2 Unit weight, y either constant at 119 pcfor based on Non-normalized SBT (Lunne et al., 1997 and table below) 3 Soil Behavior Type (Normalized), SBTn Lunne et al. (1997) 4 SBTn Index, Ic 4 = ((3.47 - log Qi,)2 + (log Fr + 1.22)2)05 5 Normalized Cone resistance, Qm (n varies with Ic) Qtn = Â«q, - ave)/pa) (pa/(a'vor and recalculate Ic, then iterate: When 4 < 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 of4 8./28/2007 Gregg CM Interpretation Software 1.1., 2007 6 Estimated permeability, 1(4BT (based on Normalized SBA) (Lunne et al., 1997 and table below) 7 Equivalent SPT N6O, blows/ft Lunne et al. (1997) (* ) = 8.5 1 -lk) 8 Equivalent SPT (DIt)Go blows/ft (Ni)60 = N60 CN, where CN = (pa/a'vo)0,5 9 Relative Density, Dr, (%) Only SBL 5.6.7&8 Dr2=Qm/CDr Show 'N/A' in zones 1,2,3,4&9 10 Friction Angle, 0% (degrees) Only SBL 5,6,7&8 tan *' = ili[log'99 + 0.29] Show'N/A' in zones 1,2,3,4&9 11 Young's modulus, Es Es= a qi Only SBTn 5,6.7&8 Show 'N/A ' in zones 1,2,3,4 &9 12 Small strain shear modulus, Go a. Go = So (q, a'vo pa)'/3 For SBT. 3,6,7 b. Go = Co qt For SBTn L 2,3& 4 Show 'N/A ' in zones 8 &9 13 Undrained shcar strength, su Only SBTn |,2,3,4&9 sU = (41 - avo) / Nkt Show 'N/A' in zones 5,6,7&8 14 Over Consolidation ratio, OCR OCR = kocr Qu Only SBTâ€ž 1.2.3.4 &9 Show ' N/A ' in zones 5,6,7&8 SBT Zones SBTn 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 & silly clay 5 clay & sitty clay 6 sandy silt & clayey silt 7 silty sand & sandy silt 5 silty sand & sandy silt 8 sand & silly sand 6 sand & silty sand 9 sand 10 sand 7 sand Gregg Page 3 of4 8./28/2007 Gregg CFT Interpretation Software 1.1., 2007 11 very dense/stiff soil* 8 very dense/stiffsoil* 12 very dense/stiffsoil* 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 fatl only within SBT zones 4 & 5, print 'clays & silly clays') Estimated Pet'meability (see Lunne et at., 1997) SBTn Permeability (fUsec)(rn/sec) 3x 104 1 X 10-8 3x 10-7 1 X 10# I x 104 3x 1040 3x 104 1 x 104 3x 10-6 1 X 1 06 3x 10-4 tx 10-4 3x 104 1 X 10-2 3x 10-6 IX 10-6 1 XI 0-8 3x 10-9 Estimated Unit Weight (see Lunne et al., 1997) SBT Approximate Unit Weight (lb/ft?) (kN/mb Ill.4 17.5 79.6 12.5 Ill.4 17.5 114.6 18.0 114.6 18.0 114.6 18.0 117.8 18.5 120.9 19.0 124.1 19.5 127.3 20.0 130.5 20.5 120.9 19.0 Gregg Page 4 of4 8./28/2007 REGG Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPDT) Pore 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 piezornetric pressure â€¢ Phreatic Surface â€¢ In situ horizontal coefficient of consolidation (c.) â€¢ In situ horizontal coefficient of permeability (4) In order to correctly interpret the equilibrium piezometric pressure and/or the phreatic surface, the pore pressure must be monitored until such bme as there is no variation in pore pressure with time, Figure PPDT. This time is commonly referred to as tioo, the point at which 100% of the excess pore pressure has dissipated. U 1 1 0-5181 U U mee-edhere U 4 -* A complete reference on pore pressure diss,pation tests is presented by Robertson et al. 1992. Doole -O.-0 COn.1 0 -//,*0.-- Dwili, -De# b Wa- Table 0 '6Illr - Mid Of Wil= Water Table C alcu-on Dwater = Dcone - Hwater where Hwater - Ue (depel units) A summary of the pore pressure dissipation tests is summarized in Table 1. Useful Conversion Feclors:lp= = 0 704rn = 231 leet (waler) 1W = 0.956 bar = 13.9 pei im = 3.25 feet Figure PPOT EGG GREGG DRILLING & TESTING Pore Pressure DIssipation Test nme (seconds Sounding. CPT-6 Time Reading DerÂ¢h 75 131007 0 112375 S,te.TME ACADEMY PROJECT 5 11 40725 Engineer J PFLUEGER 10 1161096 11.84861 12 15417 12 45973 12.76529 13.03689 13 27455 1347825 1361406 $ 378301 1391961 65 14 02147 14.08937 14 12332 1415727 14 19122 14.19122 14 19122 100 14 15727 105 14 12332 1 10 14 12332 115 1402147 120 13.98752 125 13.95356 130 1388586 135 13 78301 140 13 74986 Â·45 13 64801 '50 1358011 Â· 55 13 47825 40 491 160 13 4443 f85 '334245 1 TO 13 2406 175 1320665 '80 13 10479 185 13 C3689 190 12 93504 195 '2 26-71 4 200 12 76529 205 12 69738 2'0 12 59553 2â€¢5 '2 52763 220 12 45973 225 '2.42578 230 '2 28998 235 12 22207 240 12 12022 245 1205232 250 1198442 255 11 91652 260 1184861 265 11.74676 270 11.67886 275 11.61096 280 1154306 285 11 50ill 1 16 - 14 - 10 - 8Pr,moure (pâ€¢ 2 0. 0 50 10 11 4412 14 3733 1 â€¢ 3054 112375 11.1696 11.1017 %M**%E 320 11.0338 325 10.96589 330 10.93194 335 10 63009 340 10.79614 345 10.69429 350 10.68034 355 10.59244 360 10.55848 365 10.49058 370 10.45883 375 10.38873 380 10.32083 385 HO.28888 390 1021898 395 10.15107 400 10.11712 405 10 04922 DAKOTA TECHNOLOGIES UVOST LOG REFERENCE 2008-12-12 Main 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 depth ranges showing C.-1 0.0â€¢ M â€¢g-1 râ€¢â€¢16) .O . 4,0 - C-.-O -- .0 - the multi-wavelength waveform for that ' depth. n The four peaks are due to fluorescence at four waveleng#Is and referred to as "channels: Each channel is assigned a color. Note Al- 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 correlates with the observed NAPL distribution. .7 S.Rate Plot : The rate of probe ' advancement. - 0.Elin (2cm) per second is preferred. Various NAPLs will . have a unique waveform lingerprint- i1 1,1 12.S WEdue to the relative amplitude of the four channels and/or broadening of one or more channels. 'eo ..>1 Note C It b \ A noticeable decrease in the rate of advancement may be indicative of difncult 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 300. 4 WI 1,/ Notâ‚¬ t' =0, 20 6 G d 2- Notice that this log was terminated arbitrarily, not due to "refusal", which would have been indicated by a sudden 4 ,o rate drop at final depth. 9 Sample Data UVOST Ely Dahota U../0-F- 4/0/ 40 54130700N I 0098-44 2413* Info Box :DAKO-IA *fclo..Lon*de / Fk Ul"Vt 0â€ž477.70.W,30 71.vIE. 1123.Contains pertinent logE#eva-aliT,1,0 --"----""' St GomÂ»In #UVOIT1000 782, R -&11.,2,1*0*7'k info including name and i location. 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 of light striking the photodetector. Note B: These two waveforms are dearly 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. 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 CH1 4820 21.7 + C!12 8108 36.6 CH3 6249 28.2 + CtiA Igial Channel 2984 - 22161 Area (pVs) 13.5 100% Percent RE 212 LH3 5743 4166 25.9 18.8 CHA Igial 1735 16587 = 7.8 75% Data Files Raw data file. Header 5 ASCII format and contains informahon stored when the file was initially *.lif. raw.bin written (e.g date, total depth, max signal, gps, et, and any information entered by the operator). All raw waveforms are appended to the bottom of the file in a binary format *.IN.pit *.lif.jpg Stores ne plot scheme history (e.g. callout depths) for assoctated Raw file. Transfer along with the Raw file m order to recall previous plots. A jpg â€¢nage of the OST log induding the main signal vs. depth plot callouts. information, etc. Data export of a single Raw file. ASCII tab delimrted format No strng header 6 provided for the *.Ilf.dat.txt columns (to make importing into other programs easier). Each row is a unique depth reading. The 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 indudes one row for each Raw fle and contans information for each file induding: 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 applicabon directory in the log' subfolder. *.lif.log.txt Each OST unit the computer operates will generate a separate log file per month. A log file containsmuch of the header information contained within each separate Raw ftle, inclucing: date, total depth, max signal, etc. Common Waveforms (highly dependent on soil, weathering, etc.) /_Al L_ lL_ Diesel Gas Kerosene Motor Oil an= V 1 Waveforms for Sounding CPT-1 Time (ms) .0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 350.0 0 40 :60 4 00 120 GREGG Shear Wave Velocity Calculations THE ACADEMY PROJECT CPT-1 Geophone Offset:0.66 Feet Source Offset:1.67 Feet 09/22/11 Test Depth (Feet) Geophone Depth (Feet) Waveform Incremental Characteristic Incremental Interval Interval Ray Path Distance Arrival Time Time Interval Velocity Depth (Feet)(Feet)(ms)(ms)(FUSec)(Feet) 40.03 39.37 5003 49.37 60.04 59.38 70.05 69.39 80.38 79.72 39.40 39.40 59.2000 49.40 10.00 73.2000 14.0000 714.2 44.37 59.40 10.00 92.0000 18 8000 532.0 54.38 69.41 10.00 99.6000 7 6000 1316.2 64.38 79.74 10.33 114.6000 15.0000 688.8 74.55 i LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-1 Date: 9/22/2011 07:42 qt (ts n 4 Osf)Rf (96)N,0 (blows/ft)SBT500 0 10 0 10 0 100 0 121 1 1lllllll111111111 - -lllllll11 111111111 dillillillilitilill- - H#JO AIJaG HAND Auall -bu,In alii HAND AIJOG - lilli mIl20 30 40 50 60 Câ€¢, & lily CID, . Ci, & i,Ily cly 2 C.y &.,gy c.r - 90- - 5.9, 14 1 ."r lilli #...... -â‚¬ 1 1 1 1CI-4 -- Z 39 9-c lilli 'CE--1 1 IllI1,IIIIilltllllt,,ti SGT. Soil 80havior Type (Robertson 1990) I1I1I11ll1IIlIIIillIlI1IIl11I1I1I1IIIlI]Il1I1IlI1 RE[Â§Â§LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEnglneer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-1 Date: 9/22/2011 07:42 qt (tsr)fs (tsf)Rf (%)Vs(fl/sec)SBT500 0 10 0 10 0 1500 0 12 llll]11 111111111-111111111 111111111 llllll1lllllilllllllllll- 0 0 1 1 10- HAND ALJOG HAND AUi HAND AUGâ‚¬ A HAND AUGIEr - 1 30-k 60 11 i, 1 I '4 Cay ll!lllll Clay 1 * bâ€¢, Câ€¢, tÂ» 1,â€¢,y Ce - .Em"tz- 80 90 4.h lilli f 2 -2_ -- - - L IC - I -9.4, A & 9.'.r .,t - - I - 0 - - - ... --- ..0- - -- I - I Sarc lllllllll 1111111 IM 1III1IIIItI114.11111111 Max. Depth: 100.066 (ft) Avg. Interval 0.328 (ft)SBT Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) .11 ..1111.1,1.111,1,1,11,11,11,11'1111 | LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT.1 Date: 9/22/2011 07:42 qt (ts n fs Osf)u (psi)Rf(%)SBT500 0 10 -15 200 0 10 0 12 1111111 lllllllll 1111111IL -111111111 Illllllllllllllllll- I - - HANO AUOI- -HAND AUOIR HAND AUOIR 1 HAND AUGE - - -r-'7-1 , 94Â· Ch & 01Â¢, cmy Â¢47 1 I., c.. - Câ€¢y 1 84, c 0, Coy & 0,4 c Ia, 38=, ant o.,ly liM 1 1 1 -9=Er _Lpt ,/''LL Z lllIlll I 11111111 Z ""4 Sarc 1111111'llillilillitili SBT. Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) 0 0 Z 0 0h g (13) 4 :daa I1II/ll/11IIiI1/I1Illlllll IllIIIII1Ill LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-2 Date: 9/22/2011 09:25 q, (tsf)fs (ts O Rf (%)N,o (blowsm)SBT0 500 0 10 0 10 0 100 0 121 10-111111111-_1'11''Ill_ _11'111'11_111111111 Ulliiiniiihiiiiziiiii 10- I - -HAND AUOe HAND AUOER HAND AUGG -HAND AuoiK '. 6..1. - /7..: Sa" SAM 20 30 40 50 60 70 Clay & 1,[y elly C.y &.4 9,1 i C,y 1,2 Â¢4 52 ---2'. - 80- - - 4 - 90- Itlililll -- I - 100 lllllllll llIllllll llillllll llillllllllllllllIlllll Max. Depth: 75.131 (ft) Avg. Interval 0328 (ft)SBT. Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) GIl),DG ...... | LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEnglneer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-2 Date: 9/22/2011 09:25 0 Â«sf)fs (ts f)U (psi)Rf ('SBT500 0 10 -15 200 0 10 0 1211lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll1llllllllll1llllllll- -HAND AUGG HAND AUOI:MANO AUo,iKr HAND AUOG - - : San: ./ S.,4 - 30 40 50 g 60 70 :44 1111, B 3,9 1 1 ty :.f 27 I1llillll Illtlilli lilitllllll lilli Illill]llllllllllIIllI I - SBT Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) al Â° 0 g 0 00r 1 GREGG LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-3 Date: 9/2212011 11:04 qt (ts f)fs (ts O Rf(%)NGO (blows/ft)SBT0 500 0 10 0 10 0 100 0 120 illllllll 111111111 Il1llllll 111111111 U 111111111Illi-- - HAND AUGER 10- HAND AUGG HANO AUOM HAND AUGG C... -4 9.- SaN &,dy nrc 20 30 - 60 70 80- 90- 100 IIlllitll - -9 -1 14*1./Ct &.,g, c., -IllllllI1 Illllllll Il1Illlll lllll1lllllllllllIIlll Max. Depth 75.131 (ft) Avg. Interval. 0 328 (ft)SBT Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) ... ....... .... 9,-0 LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-3 Date: 9/22/2011 11:04 0 (ts f)fs Osf)u (psi)Rf (%)SBT0 500 0 10 -15 200 0 10 0 120 111111111 111111111 4''illl'll' _1 1111111 1-U 1IIIIIIIIII"I- HANO AUOI-*NO AUGER . HAND AUCIi -, 1't HNE) AUGâ‚¬ E- 10- 20 L 1111 lIllI 7.4 - 4 - -Sandi Dd, Sir: - J...---- - 30-F 24 & 1 4 :.f 60--- 70 - 80- 90- 100 lllllllll Depth (ft) lili 1 111 Lt*2/y & 'in, c.a, -lilli I lilli IlllllllllllllIllllIII Max. Depth. 75 131 (ft) Avg. Interval, 0.328 (ft)SBT Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) lilifi | LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-4 Date: 9/2m011 12:08 O (tst)fs Osf)Rf(%N,o (blows/ft)SBT500 0 10 0 10 0 100 0 12111Illll111111111Illlll1ll111111111llllllillllill1 -- - - HAND AL)01-HAND AUGâ‚¬2 - HAND AUGâ‚¬ I 'HAND AUGE- -- 2 - 92 M a 20 Sar: Ca, - - - 1. D . Â·1Â¥ -- lllllllll Clly 1 IIlllllll 80- 90- Illillilt 1llllllll -Ttinitilitlitilitilit Max. Depth: 75.787 (ft) Avg, Interval. 0.328 (ft)SBT Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) Depth (ft) CÂ» g W 0 0 0 0 0 0 f im I LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT.4 Date: 9/22/2011 12:08 0 (ts O fs (tsf)u (psi)Rf(%)SBT500 0 10 -15 200 0 10 0 12 111111111 111111111 IIIllllll lllllllll _2 IllillillillillillI - - - HAND AUM HAND AUGG HAND AUGG HAND AUGG -I 2 -- 22=Â»I - 2013- 40- 60 Depth (ft) 3 Eh -1 -0 -4 =Ii-- Ents lllllllli Il!llllil ltlll1 - 2,9 80- 90- lllllllll - Ill IlIllllllllllllllllll Max. Depth: 75.787 (ft) Avg. Interval. 0 328 (ft)SBT Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) 0 1 1111........ LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT.5 Date: 9/22/201111:30 0 0 1 1 10- $ O Osf)fs (ts D Rf (%)Neo (blows/ft)SBT500 0 10 0 10 0 100 0 12 lillill 111111111 llllllIll 111111111 lllllllll1IlllllllllllI--- HAND AUB HAND AUGG - HAND AUGI-HAND AUGER 11 San: -1, 2030 C.y limy C.y 50 60 70 f 80- 90- 100 Ilt Depth (fl) 111 70,4. Cti, 1 54 =.1 I =4 1 1 9 -/ 2 .1 & 1,1 Cf - -- - I - lillit IllIllill Illillill lllllllll IllllllIIlllllllllllll Max Depth: 75.295 (ft) Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) 11 ..... LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-5 Date: 9/22/2011 11:30 0 0 1 1 qi (tso fs (ts n u (psi)Rf(")S BT500 0 10 -15 200 0 10 0 12lllllll111111111111111111111111111lllllllllllllllllllllll- - - -HAND AUGâ‚¬HAND AUGg HAND AL)01- -MAND â€¢uoG Illlll llllllll1 Sarc 20 -i-tly 1 1 4 c 'r 50 g 0 60 70 80- 90- 100 Ill 111 ay 1 1,4 C Ay â€¢y A â€¢ 4 :â€¢r 4 6 9:4 JllllllII illlllill Illillillilillillill! Max Depth: 75.295 (ft) Avg. Interval 0 328 (ft)SBT. Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) GIl)vt:f: 1,1........1,111,1......111,1111,111,111111 | LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT.6 Date: 9/22/2011 10:09 qt (ts o fs Osf)Rf (%)NGO (blows/ft)SBT500 0 10 0 10 0 100 0 1211111111]1ll1l1ll 11111111 1- -111111111 11111111111|11111{1111!- --t-HAND AUGER 00 AUOER HANO AUGG NAND I-- r - Sara Sarc r 70 80- 90- 00 lIIllllll Z :1//T,2 - --Illll1lll Illllllll 111111111 llllliIlllllllllItlltl Max Depth 75131 (ft) Avg Interval 0.328 (ft)SBT. Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) Depth (ft) 0 0 09 09 0t 30 20 El 1 LEIGHTON Site: THE ACADEMY PROJECTEngineer: J.PFLUEGER Sounding: CPT-6 Date: 9/22/2011 10:09 0 (ts f)fs (tsf)U (psi)Rf (%)SBT500 0 10 -15 200 0 10 0 12 11111111 111111111 Illllllll 111111111 Illlllllllll1llllllllll-0 - I - - HAND AUGG HAND Auoil HAND AUOI- ,HAND AUOG Sar: Depth (ft) â€¢;k- Er> lllllllll lllllil C t.y ? Illllll l1lllllll 70 - 80-- 90- 1 1 - - Z - 6 /..L -4- - 1 I llllllllllIlllllllllI1 Max Depth: 75.131 (ft) Avg. Interval: 0.328 (ft)SBT. Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990) 0 0 -0, 30- 20- 111.. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C 1 1 1 1 1 1 Leighton ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 Project Name:The Academy Tested By: F. Tabibkhoei Date:10/11/11 Project No.:60328+001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/21/11 Boring No.:8-3 Depth (ft.): 20.0 Sample No.:R-3 Sample Type:Drive Soil Identification: Brown lean day (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):BO.34 Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g):192.36 Weight of Container (g):38.78 Initial Moisture Content (%)24.7 Initial Dry Density (pcf) Initial Saturation (%): Initial Vertical Reading (in.) After Test Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g): Weight of Container (g): Final Moisture Content (%) Final Dry Density (pcf): Final Saturation (%): Final Vertical Reading (in.) 1 Specific Gravity (assumed):.2.10 Water Density (pcf):62.43 0.680 0.660 4 0.640 0.620 0.600 Inundate with Tap water 100. Pressure, p (ksf) 101.2 100 0.1158 0.560 230.10 0.540 196.78 38.10 0.520 29.00 103.1 0.500 123 0.1899 0.480 . 0.10 1.00 6 10.00 Pressure (P) (ksO 0.10 0.54 Final Apparent Load Deformation Reading Thickness Compliance % of Sample (in.)(in.) (%)Thickness Corrected Time Readings @ 4.3 ksf Void Deforma- Ratio tion (%)Date Time Root of Dial Rdgs.Elapsed Square Time (min)Time (in.) 1.09 1.09 2.17 4.30 8.70 17.40 4.30 1.09 0.54 0.1195 0.9963 0.00 0.37 0.659 0.37 10/17/11 9:01:00 0.0 0.1315 0.9843 0.00 1.57 0.639 1.57 10/17/11 9:01:06 0.1 0.3 0.1481 0.1412 0.9746 0.00 2.54 0.623 2.54 10/17/11 9:01:15 0.2 0.5 0.1487 0.1393 0.9766 0.00 2.35 0.626 2.35 10/17/11 9:01:30 0.5 0.7 0.1494 0.1450 0.9708 0.00 2.92 0.617 2.92 10/17/11 9:02:00 1.0 1.0 0.1501 0.1594 0.9564 0.00 4.36 0.593 4.36 10/17/11 9:03:00 2.0 1.4 0.1512 0.1848 0.9310 0.00 6.90 0.551 6.90 10/17/11 9:05:00 4.0 2.0 0.1526 0.2165 0.8993 0.00 10.07 0.498 10.07 10/17/11 9:09:00 8.0 2.8 0.1541 0.2093 0.9065 0.00 9.35 0.510 9.35 10/17/11 9:16:00 15.0 3.9 0.1553 0.1965 0.9193 0.00 8.07 0.531 8.07 10/17/11 9:31:00 30.0 5.5 0.1563 0.1899 0.9259 0.00 7.41 0.542 7.41 10/17/11 10:01:00 60.0 13 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 CN 8-3, R-3 @ 20 0.1460 Time Readings @ 4.3 ksf 0.1460 0.1480 0.1480 E a 0.1500 0.1500 1 1 0.1520 0.1520 0.1540 0.1540 0.1560 01560 0.1580 0 580 0.1600 0.1600 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0 10000.0 00 100 20.0 30.0 40.0 Log of Time (min.)Square Root of Time 0'lin.'9 0-00 zoo .\ 1 ih \4.00 Inundate with 32 Tap water ,\ C - Â·0 6.00 16 . g 6 O 800 41 0 L 1 -4 10.00 -1 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 Soil Identification:Brown lean clay (CL) 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 (%) Inibal Final 100 100 Project No.:603284-001 ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION Leighton PROPERTIES of SOILS The Academy ASTM D 2435 10-11 1 Leighton ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 Project Name:The Academy Tested By: F. Tabibkhoei Date:10/11/11 Project No.:60328+001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:8-4 Depth (ft.): 25.0 Sample No.:R-4 Sample Type:Drive Soil Identification: Gray silty sand (SM) Sample Diameter (in.): Sample Thickness (in.): Weight of Sample + ring (g): Weight of Ring (g): Height after consol. (in.): Before Test Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g): Weight of Container (g): Initial Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Initial Saturation (%): Initial Vertical Reading (in.) After Test Wt. of Wet Sample+Cont. (g): Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g): Weight of Container (g): Final Moisture Content (%) Final Dry Density (pcf): Final Saturation (%): Final Vertical Reading (in.) Specific Gravity (assumed): Water Density (pcf): 0.610 2.416 1.000 193.26 0.600 38.98 0.9695 0.590 168.25 144.82 0.580 39.43 0 22.2 0Â£ 0 570 Inundate with Tap water , 100. Pressure, p (ksf) 1U9.9 99 0.2197 0.560 227.85 200.46 0.550 3916 22.41 0.540 104.8 99 01502 0.530 0.10 1.00 10.00 Void Draccure Final Apparent Load Deformation Reading Thickness Compliance % of Sample (in.)(in.) (%)Thickness (P) (ksf Void Ratio Corrected Time Readings @ 4.3 ksf Deforma- tion (%)Elapsed Square Date Time Root of Dial Rdgs. Time (min)Time (in.) 0.10 0.54 1.09 0.2205 0.9992 0.00 0.08 0.606 0.08 10/14/11 7:12:00 0.0 0.2259 0.9938 0.00 0.62 0.597 0.62 10/14/11 7:12:06 0.1 0.3 0.2388 0.2293 0.9904 0.00 0.96 0.592 0.96 10/14/11 7:12:15 0.2 0.5 0.2391 0.2335 0.9862 0.00 1.38 0.585 1.38 10/14/11 7:12:30 0.5 0.7 0.2393 0.2354 0.9843 0.00 1.57 0.582 1.57 10/14/11 7:13:00 1.0 1.0 0.2395 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 0.2519 0.9678 0.00 3.22 0.555 3.22 10/14/11 7:42:00 30.0 5.5 0.2402 0.2502 0.9695 0.00 3.05 0.558 3.05 10/14/11 8:12:00 60.0 13 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 1W15/11 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 2.17 2.17 4.30 1.09 0.54 CN 8-4. R-4 @ 25 0.2385 - Time Readings @ 4.3 ksf 02385 0.2390 11 -d t= 0.2395 0.2390 0.2395 0.2400 0.2400 0.2405 0.2405 0.2410 0.2410 0.2415 col 5 g 2 0.2420 0.1 1.0 0.00 0.2415 -.---0 0.2420 10.0 100.0 1000.0 10000.0 0.0 10.0 200 30.0 40.0 50.0 600 70.0 Log of Time (min.)Square Root of Time (min.19 n gn -0.Inundate with Tap water j1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 1.50 0.01 0.10 1.00 1 6 g (0 g : O: b 1 10.00 100.00 Pressure, p (ksf) Boring Sample Depth Moisture No.No.(ft.)Content (%) Initial Final B-4 R-4 25 22.2 22.4 Soil Identification:Gray silty sand (SM) Dry Density (pcf)Void Ratio Initjal Final Initial Final 104.9 104.8 0.607 0.558 Degree of Saturation (%) Initial Final 99 99 Project No.:603284-001 ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION* Leighton PROPERTIES of SOILS The Academy ASTM D 2435 10-11 1 Leighton TESTS for SULFATE CONTENT CHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS Project Name:The Academy Tested By :V. Juliano Date: 10/12/11 Project No. :60328+001 Data Input By:J. Ward Date: 10/20/11 Boring No.B-1 B-4 Sample No.BB-1 BB- 1 Soil Identification:Ught 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 Crudble No. 27 28 Furnace Temperature (Â°C)830 830 Time In / Time Out 8:OW8:45 8:0W8:45 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 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, Dr, Wt. Basis 62 43 pH TEST, DOT California Test 532/643 pH Value 7.45 7.30 Temperature Â°C 21.9 21.8 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 specimens 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. AdjustedWater .. . .Resistance Soil 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)BO.00 Box Constant 1.000 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 bpeamen Added (mi) Moisture No.Reading Resistivity (Wa) Content (ohm) (ohm-cm)(MC) 1 18.73 3300 3300 2 26.65 3200 3200 3 34.56 3100 3100 4 50 42.48 BOO 3300 5 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 3250 E Y f 3200 0 E 3150 .g a' DE 3100 0 (D 3050 3000 15.0 200 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 Moisture Content (%) < 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.:But Depth (ft.) :0-5 Sample No. :BB-1 Soil Identification:*Brown (SM) *California Test 643 requires soil specimens 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. Water Adjusted bpeamen Added (mi) Moisture No.Content (Wa)(MC) Resistance Soil Reading Resistivity (ohm)(ohm-cm) 1 10 15.46 12000 12000 2 20 23.71 8800 3 30 31.96 8000 8000 4 40 40.20 9100 9400 5 Moisture Content (%) (MCi)7.22 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)192.20 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)184.40 Wt. of Container (g) 76.30 Container No. Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt)BO.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 Chloride Content Soil pH (Ppm)pH Temp. (Â°C) DOT CA Test DOT CA Test 422 -Part II 8000 30.8 44 43 7.30 21.8 13000 12000 f E11000 E 0 -10000 2 g 9000 8000 \ \ i i ! / 7000 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 Moisture Content (%) Leighton 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.: B-1 Sample Type: 90% Remold Sample No.: BB-1 Depth (ft.): 0-5 Soil Identification:Ucht brown siltv 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 Atter 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 DS 8- 1, 88- 1 @ 0-5 3.00 2.50 U) 2 1.50 05 2 1.UU 0.50 0.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) 3.00 l 2.50 A 1 2.00 E 1.50 05 . m . 2 1.00 CO1 0.50 : 8 O.00 .... .... 0.00 0.50 100 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/fti)0.500 2.000 4.000 Sample No.BB-1 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2)0 0.393 /1.116 A 2.496 Depth (ft) 0-5 Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)0 0.321 Â¤1.103 4 2.493 Samnle Tvoe:Deformation Rate (in./min.)0.0050 0.0050 0.0050 Initial Sample Height (in.)1.000 1.000 1.00090% Remold Diameter (in.)2.415 2.415 2.415 Soil Identification:Initial Moisture Content (%)8.50 8.50 8.50 Light brown silty sand (SM)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 1 Project No.:603284-001 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS The AcademyConsolidated Drained - ASâ„¢ D 3080 10-11 DS 8- 1,88- 1 @ 0-5 Leighton DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Drained - ASâ„¢ D 3080 Project Name: The Academy Tested By:F. Tabibkhoei Project No.:603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Boring No.: 8-1 Sample Type: Drive Sample No.: R-3 Depth (ft.): 10.0 Soil Identification:Uaht brown Doorlviraded 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 Date:1Wll/11 Date:10/20/11 2.415 1.000 178.12 42.98 Before Shearing 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 Alter 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 DS 8-1, RJ @ 10 4.00 3.00 3 2.00 1.00 0.00 0 0.1 0.2 03 Horizontal Deformation (in.) 4.00 1 3.00 Â© U. 8 . 2 2.00 03 L . (0 0 - 1.00 8 O.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 Sample No. R-3 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2)0 0.824 I 1.628 Depth (ft)10 Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)0 0.710 O 1.320 Deformation Rate (in./min.)0.0050 0.0050Sample TvDe: 4.000 A 3.398 6 2.663 0.0050 Initial Sample Height (in.)1.000 1.000 1.000Drive Diameter (in.)2.415 2.415 2.415 Soil Identification:Initial Moisture Content (%)0.96 0.96 0.96 Light brown poorly-graded Dry Density (pcf)109.2 109.6 111.3 sand with silt (SP-SM)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 Project No.:603284-0011 . Leighton DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS The AcademyConsolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 10-11 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 aravish brown lean dav (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 ly/A NA Vertical Rdg.(in): Final N/A N/A N/A After 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 DS 8-1, R-5 @ 30 6.00 5.00 .C L.WW 1.00 0.00 . . 0 6.00 5.00 9 4.00 U) 2 3.00 05 2 2.00 1.00 0.00 4.00 2 3.00 u o nn 0.1 0.2 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) a 8 0.00 100 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/fe)3.000 6.000 9.000 Sample No. R-5 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2)0 1.943 1 3.647 A 5.332 Depth (ft)30 Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)O 1.801 Â¤3.559 A 4.785 Deformation Rate (in./min.)0.0050 0.0050 0.0050Sam[)le Tvoe: Initial Sample Height (in.)1.000 1.000 1.000Drive Diameter (in.)2.415 2.415 2.415 Soil Identification:Initial Moisture Content (%)29.04 29.04 29.04 Dark grayish brown lean clay Dry Density (pcf)94.4 94.2 95.9 (CL)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 Project No.:603284-001| Leighton DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS The AcademyConsolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 10-11 DS 8- 1, R-5 @ 30 1 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.: B-7 Sample Type: Drive Sample No.: R-1 Depth (ft.): LQ Soil Identification:Light brown silty 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):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 DS 8-7, R-1 @ 7 5.00 4.00 3.00 O An tir Stress (ksf) 1.00 0.00 5 0 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 100 0.00 0.00 1.( OSM) Ssens Jea,IS 0.1 0.2 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) a 0 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 (ldp/ft2)1.500 3.000 6.000 Sample No.R-1 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2) /1.166 I 2.289 A 4.602 Depth (ft) 7 Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf)0 0.927 0 1.880 &3.685 Deformation Rate (in./min.)0.0050 0.0050 0.0050Samole TYDe: Initial Sample Height (in.)1.000 1.000 1.000Drive Diameter (in.)2.415 2.415 2.415 Soil Identification:Initial Moisture Content (%)2.40 2.40 2.40 Light brown silty sand (SM)Dry Density (pcf)102.8 104.7 107.1 Saturation (%)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 Project No.:603284-001 1 . Leighton The Academy DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 1 DS B-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) 0.00 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 1.0020 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. 0 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 (PCD 125.4 131.1 Dry Density (Pcf)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 (%) [ 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 Time Pressure (psi)Elapsed Time Dial Readings (min.)(in.) 10/18/11 11:00 10/18/11 11:10 1.0 0 0.1100 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 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: 1 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. 0 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 (pcf)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 INUNDAT:ION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h Date Time Pressure (psi)Elapsed Time Dial Readings (min.)(in.) 10/18/11 11:23 10/18/11 11:33 1.0 0 0.0570 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 Leighton MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Project Name:The Academy Tested By :G. Berdy Date:10/18/11 Project No.:603284-001 Input By :J. Ward Date:10/19/11 Boring No.:B-1 Depth (ft.)0-5 Sample No. :BB-1 Soil Identification: Ught brown silty sand (SM) Preparation Method:X| Moist X Mechanical Ram1 1 Dry 1 1 Manual Ram Mold Volume (fti)0.03340 Ram Weight = 10 lb.; Drop = 18 in. TE5T- 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 (pdD 128.2 134.5 137.7 134.0 Dry Density (PCD 122.5 125.7 125.7 119.6 Maximum Dry Density (pcf)126.5 Optimum Moisture Content (%) PROCEDURE USED Procedure A 130.0 - .,1 - SP. GR..2.65 - SP. GR.=2.70 ..-SP. GR.= 2.75 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 m Procedure B Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is 420% or less Particle-Size Distribution: Â¤ Procedure C Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sievâ‚¬ Mold : 6 in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six) Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +44 in. is < 300/0 125.0 120.0 115.0 110.0 Dry Density (pcf) GR:SA:FI Atterberg Limits:0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 LL,PL,PI Moisture Content (%) MXB-1,88-1 @ 0-5 .. N 0 Leighton MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Project 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.:B-4 Depth (ft.)0-5 Sample No. :BB-1 Soil Identification: Brown silty sand (SM) Preparation Method: [*-|Moist Mechanical Ram L-J Dry L_1 Manual Ram Mold Volume (fti)0.03340 Ram Weight = 10 tb.; Drop = 18 in. TEST NO. 1 2 3 4 5 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 (pcD 122.6 124.0 124.7 118.5 Maximum Dry Density (pcf)125.0 Optimum Moisture Content (%) PROCEDURE USED 130.0 .1 -SP GR =,\Y -SP. GR.=:Il Procedure A -SP. GR.=: 6 1-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) diametef Layers : 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 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 +14 in. is <30% 125.0 120.0 115.0 110.0 Dry Density (pcf) Particle-Size Distribution: ::1 Atterberg Limits:0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 LL,PL,PI Moisture Content (%) 6 9.5 2.65 2.70 2.75 MX 8-4. 88-1 @ 0-5 0Z < Leighton ATTERBERG LIMITS 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, dayey sand (SC-SM) TEST PLASTIC UMIT UQUID UMIT NO.1 2 1 2 3 4 Number of Blows [N] 27 21 15 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)19.23 19.00 26.70 27.57 25.81 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)17.83 17.64 23.54 24.08 22.63 Wt. of Container (g) 11.21 11.28 11.45 11.03 11.07 Moisture Content (%) [Wn]21.15 21.38 26.14 26.74 27.51 60 Liquid Limit 26 Plastic Limit 21 50 Plasticity Index 5 2 40 Classification CL-ML Z For dassification of fine- grained soils and fine-1 grained fraction of coarse- grained soils CH or OH .. 1. Une 30 Â· PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20)4.38 *20 One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation 0.121 10 LL =Wn(N/25) 0 /7 MH or OH ML or OL 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1C PROCEDURES USED Liquid Limit (LL) 28 Il Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet X - Dry Preparation Multipoint - Dry 27 \ 3 i X | Procedure A Multipoint Test 2 E 26 \ Il Procedure B One-point Test \ 25 10 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 9010 Number of Blows 1--1 r--9 < Leighton 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-3 Checked By:J. Ward Sample No.:S-3 Depth (ft.)25.0 Soil Identification: Olive brown lean day (CO TEST PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT NO.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 i 40 Classification CL Z For dass,fication of fine- grained soils and fine grained fraction of coarse- / grained soils l CH or OH W Une 30 - W PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20)13.14 20 One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation 0.121 10 Â· Wn(N/25) 0 LL = / IP MH or OH I CUL /ML or OL 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1C PROCEDURES USED Liquid Limit (LL) 42 1 Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet 41 \ Dry Preparation \Multipoint - Dry -g 40 \ 01 Procedure A 0 & 39 \Multipoint Test \ \ \ Procedure B 38 \ One-point Test '0 37 10 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 9010 Number of Blows ril' r- Leighton ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D 4318 Project Name: The Academy Tested By:V. luliano Date:10/18/11 Project No. :60328+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 day (CL) TEST PLASTIC LIMIT UQUID LIMIT NO.1 2 1 2 3 4 19. 18. 11. 22. 60 50 - 40 - 30 - 20 - 10 - 0 Number of Blows [N] 30 22 16 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)18.15 61 23.78 24.25 23.51 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)16.90 09 19.77 20.01 19.41 Wt. of Container (g) 11.10 20 11.27 11.26 11.14 Moisture Content (%) [Wn]21.55 06 47.18 48.46 49.58 Liquid Limit 48 For dassification of fine- grained soils and fine-1 Plastic Limit 22 grained fraction of coarse- grained soils Plasticity Index 26 -CH or OH ,00/ a.- 1 A- Line Classification CL Z PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20)20.44 %Clor OL ' a. One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation 0.121 MH or OHWn(N/25) /ML or OL LL = 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1C PROCEDURES USED Liquid Limit (LL) r.n . \ Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet 49 \-7 Dry Preparation \ 2 \ Multipoint - Dry Z , \ 1 E 2 \ 0481 Procedure A (, \ \Multipoint Test 2 \ k 47 Procedure B k One-point Test 46 10 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 9010 Number of Blows r- r- Leighton One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement Potential of Cohesive Soils (ASTM D 4546) Project Name:The Academy Tested By:F. T-*hoe 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) Apparent Load Thickness Compliance (in) (%) Swell (+) Settlement (-) % of Sample Thickness Corrected Void Ratio Deformation (%) 0100 0.1272 0.9996 0.00 -0.04 0.5571 -0.04 1 090 0.1349 0.9919 0.00 -0.81 0.5451 -0.81 H20 0.1443 0.9825 0.00 -1.75 0.5304 -1.75 Percent Swell (+1 / Settlement (-) After Inundation =-0.95 Void Ratio - Log Pressure Curve 0.5600 0.5550 0.5500 0.5400 0.5350 0.5300 Inundate with Tap water 0 0.5450 0.5250 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 Log Pressure (ksf) Swell or Collapse B.1, R-1 @ 5 Leighton One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement Potential of Cohesive Soils (ASTM D 4546) Project Name:The Academy Tested By:p.â„¢=.- Date:10/12/11 Project No.:603284-001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:10/20/11 Boring No.:B-3 Sample Type:Drive Sample No.:R-1 Depth (ft.)5.0 Sample Description:Light brown silly 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 (kst)(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 H20 0.1199 0.9846 0.00 -1.54 0.6287 -154 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) Swell or Collapse B-3, R-1 Q 5 Leighton One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement Potential of Cohesive Soils (ASTM D 4546) Project Name:The Academy Tested By:F. Tab,bkhoei 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.:RA 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 0.7400 5 0.7300 0.7200 0.7100 0.7000 0.010 0.100 Inundate with _ Tap water - 1.000 10.000 Log Pressure (ksf) Swell or Collapse B-5, R-4 @ 25 /1 603284-001 APPENDIX D Site-Specific Ground Motion Study 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 1 17.90095Â°. 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 (ASCE/SEI 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 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(Zhz), the probability of exceeding that level, Pr(ZZz), 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 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 Analvsis (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 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 1.39period, SS Mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at a 0.50period of 1 sec, Si Short Period (0.2 sec) Site Coefficient, Fa 1.0 Long Period (1.0 sec) Site Coefficient, Fv 1.5 Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at short 1.39period, SMS Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at a 0.74period of 1 sec, SM1 Design spectral response acceleration parameter at short 0.93period, SDS Design spectral response acceleration parameter at a 0.50period of 1 sec, Soi D-4 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 1.39period, SS Mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at a 0.50period of 1 sec, Sl Short Period (0.2 sec) Site Coefficient, Fa 0.9 Long Period (1.0 sec) Site Coefficient, F 2.4 Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at short 1.25period, SMS Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at a 1.19period of 1 sec, SM1 Design spectral response acceleration parameter at short 0.83period, SDS Design spectral response acceleration parameter at a 0.79period of 1 sec, Soi 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. Sc (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 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 0.42g; 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 (9) 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 603284-001 Site Specific Response Spectrum Values for Design Earthquake (DE) Period, T Spectral Acceleration (seconds)SaD (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 1.00 0.80 060 0.40 020 0.00 -Site D - Site Specific Response Spectrum 050 100 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 401 00 < Leighton 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, CASite Specific Response Project No.: 603284-001Spectrum for MCE Date: November 2011 Figure D-1 Gnaft,al Mae-â€žna AMBal-,all.. Ca i.% 1.40 1.20 - Site D - Site Specific Design Response Spedrum 080 Site E - ASCE 7-05 Standard Response Spectrum 80% - -Upper Envelope Design Response Spectrum 0.60 040 . 0.20 0.00 - 0.00 0 SO 1.00,1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 < Leighton Period, T (sec) Site Specific Response Spectrum for Design Earthquake, DE 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 e. ,-1 1.00 -_Ssâ€¢ vs-250 - Seli,ic lulard Aruly: 13 3 Probabilistic --SSâ€¢ 9250 - Sel-ic Hazard Analy,11 3 â€¢robabllisticProbabilistic Spectra results for EZ-FRISK 7.10 lulld 001 Colum 4: Acceleration (9) for: CLL.4.11-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USCS 2000 Col-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Clic,-I-vout (2007) 1/1â€¢ USGS ZOOS ARS kinson, (2001)) NGâ€¢ uscs 200: -Sozor,lia (2001) IK.I USGS 2001 ung: (2007) 0 5$ 2008 A-LAL FREQUENCY OF DOCEEDANCE: 4.0412-004 RETURN PERIOO: 2474.9 PWIWILITY OF EXCEEDEMCE: 2.CZZ IN $O.0 VE Coh- 1: Spectral Period Col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: Men Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-At Coli- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Calbill Colt- $: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Yo 1 2 3 9 5.734/-001 6.12;e-001 7.04*e -001 7.37Ge-001 1.00â€¢e+000 1.057/+000 1.234Â®â€¢000 1.3/Se,000 1.242eâ€¢000 1,35&00 1.167,+000 1.ljk.000 1.106/+000 1.11*+000 1.0214+000 1.10Oe+000 9,594/-001 1.034,+000 0.151/-001 9.5032-001 1.136e-001 1 563e-001 7.565,-001 7.844-001 4.25;e-001 4.4642-001 2.777e-001 2 97--001 2.Olle-001 2.106.-001 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0. 0.9 5.0342-001 6.lue-001 9.374-001 1.140*+000 1.124/00 1.075â‚¬+000 1.04 6/.000 Wole-001 5.0â€¢Â¢e-001 1.4612-001 7.1850-001 7.â€¢25e-001 4 3;70-001 2.134'-001 2.Ille-001 5.0Oe-001 7.33â€¢e-001 /.%12-001 1.222â‚¬â€¢000 1.224Â®+000 1 15 leâ€¢000 1.060-000 S.nle-001 .107e-001 1.441,-001 7.lile-001 7.372â‚¬-001 3.04â€¢-001 2.458e-001 1.71le-001 Kil 4.533â‚¬-001 4.95]e-001 0.05 5.4Ue-001 5.13%-001 0.1 7.Me-001 1.3332-001 0.2 1.00*+000 1.0Â§7*â€¢000 0.3 1.005/+000 1.01;e +000 0.4 9.27Ge-001 1.Olleâ€¢000 0.5 1.6632-001 9.4 lk-001 0.6 7.9220-001 0.637*-001 0.7 7.37$/-001 1.03]e-001 0.0 Uk-001 7.3*le-001 0.,6.2384-001 6.65$,-Col 1 5.me-001 6.lose-001 2 3.151/-001 3.]Mi-001 3 2.06*e-001 2.224-001 4 1.412,-001 1.54*-001 AINUAL FREQUENCY OF EXCEEDANCE: 2.107*-003 RET-U*N PERIOD. 474.6 PROSAIILITY OF EXIEEDENCE: 10.0% IN 50.0 Y Colt- 1: Spectral Perlod colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Mean Cel L- 3: Acceleration (g) fur: icore-At colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C///bell Colu= 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Yo E*S kinion (2001) /KN USGS 2001 Oozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS ZOOS ungs (2007) .1. .... 2008 4 1.lne-001 4.92*e-001 7.430,-001 9.3070-001 9.OGGe -001 1.47Ze-001 1.11%,-001 7.411*-Col 7.01*-001 1.50*-001 1.02;e-001 5.650*-001 3.2540-001 2.lose-001 1...-OIl 4.$52'-001 5.627/-001 7.7*le-001 0.57le-001 9.172.-001 9.Olle-001 8.240â‚¬-001 7.Slle-001 G.Ule-001 6.377â‚¬-001 5.Soze-001 5.5001-001 2.8679-001 1.715/-001 1.2332-001 2 3 4 A-UAL FREQUENCY OF EXCEEDANCE: 1.026'-003 RETURN PERIOD: 974.1 PROnilILITÂ·Y OF DCCEEDENCE: 5.0% â„¢ 50.0 YEARS Colum 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: learn Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Boore-Atkinson (200*) I/li USGS 20011 1 2 3 4 5 3.17Oe-001 4.077e-001 3.222e-001 3.605/-001 0.05 4.446â‚¬-001 4.7--Col 4.014â‚¬-001 4.48]e-001 0.1 6.379e-001 6.104â‚¬-001 6.035,-001 6.270,-001 0.2 8.13le-001 0.717(-Col 7.617*-001 8.0222-001 page l Page 2 0.3 0.4 0.5 O.G 0.7 0.0 0.9 1 Z 3 -_Ssl vs-250 - Sel-lc Hazard Analysis 3 probibillitic 8.09/e-001 0.882/-001 7.427/-001 7.*09-001 7.412/-001 0.147e-001 6.9014 -001 7.Ne-001 7.006e-001 7.H7e-001 G. 5Gle-001 6.57â€¢e-001 1.34#e-001 7.01--001 Hile-001 5.â€¢26,-001 5.160â‚¬-001 6.4*le-001 5.$6--001 5.4242-001 S.406e-001 5.Nze-001 5.1*4,-001 5.Olle-001 4.97Ge-001 5.37Oe-001 4.1012-001 4.Gzoe-001 4.5//-001 4.9]Ge-001 4.4lle-001 4.21"-001 2.473e-001 2.674.-001 2.50*-001 2.190â‚¬-001 1.5/R-001 1.712e-001 1.554/-001 1.34le-001 1.1262-001 1.20]e-001 1.lile-001 5.4/Se-002 Page 3 ...... -_SSA vs-250 - Seis,lc Hazard Analy,11 3 CeterminlitlcDeterilristic Spectra Results using EZ-FRISK 7.60 luild 001 =sidering All sources calculated using Weighted lean ofLargest Azlitudes of Ground leticrl, c Attenuation Equations Illitude *ts: Acceleration (g) Fracttleo.j Perlod *litude Magnitude 4.707e-001 7.00 - 5.4742-001 7.00 - 7.105e-001 7.00 - 9.352/-001 7.00 - 9.S,0.-001 7.00- 9.961/-001 7.00 - 1.5e-001 7.00 - â€¢.*)Oe-001 7.00 - 1.32*-001 7.00 - 7 700.-001 7.00 - 7.043e-001 7.Col 6.4*e.001 7.00 - 3.172e-001 7.00 - 1./4/2/Xl 7.00- 1.352e+001 7.00 - Mr;:o:-li tudes of Ground .tions Q Amplitude Units: Accelentlon (g) Fractile: O.5 Period 41 itude lugnl tude 4.710e.001 7.00 - 5.7$42-001 7.00- 7.9971-001 7.00 - 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 04 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 0.05 0.1 Closest -glon 01 stance(Icm) 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5 00 USGS 200* Cllifornla 5.00 USGS 2001 California $.00 USGS 2008 California 5.00 USGS 200/ California 5.00 USGS 2001 california 5.00 USGS 200/ California 5.00 USGS 2008 California 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS ZOO)* California 5.00 USGS 200a californli 5.00 USGS 2001 california 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2000 California 1.00 USGS 200/ California midering Sources Calculated de Closest Region Distance(kÂ») Â·00 USGS 200/ California 5.00 ./.2001 California $.00 USGS 2001 California Page 1 Controlling Source 011 fornia Grldded California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded California Cridded California Gridded california Grldded callfornia Grldded call forr la Gridded california Gridded callfornla Grldded California Gridded California Cridded California Gridded California Gridded .-Atkinion (2002) Ill contro111 ng Sc*Irce California Gridded California Gridded Cillfornla Gridded -_SSi vi-250 - 0.2 1.114/.000 7.00 - 0.3 1.1%Â®+000 7.00 - 0.4 1.185-000 7.00- 0.5 1.110,+000 7.00- 0.6 1.0128+000 7.00 - 0.7 9.3645-001 7.00 - 0..1.46*-001 7.00 - 0.9 7.50*e-001 7.00 1- 1 6.74]e-001 7.00 - 2 3.340,-001 7.00 - 3 2.03--001 7.co - 4 1.43le-001 7.00 -, Largest Alitudes of Ground Btions C NGA USGS ZOOS Aaplitude Unlti: ACCeleration (g) Fractile: 0.5 Period <1 1 tude â€¢agni tude 9 4.1041-001 7.00- 0.05 4. ille-001 7.00- 01 5 /991-Col 7.00 - 0.2 7.lise-001 7.00- 0.3 7.19*-001 1.00 Â»I 0.4 0.15*e-001 7.00 - 0.5 1.357.-001 7.00 - 0.6 7.1252-001 7.00 - 0.7 7.4022-001 7.00 - 0.0 6.927,-001 7.00 - 0.9 6 421/-001 7.00 - 1 6.001.-001 7.00- 2 3.1491-001 7.00- 3 1.lae-001 7.00 - 4 1.lue-001 7.00 - sel-ic:zijxititi*45:nistlc 5.00 USGS 200Â§ Californla 5.00 USCS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2001 Cal 1 forr,1, 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2008 California $.00 USGS 200; Callfornii 5.00 USGS 200; Callfornla 5.00 USGS ZOOS california 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 uss; 200* California $.00 USGS ZOOS Callforn la onsidering Sources Calculated with Cabâ‚¬ Closest Region 01 'tance(k') 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 200: California 5.00 LISGS 2001 Call fornla 5.00 USGS 200. Call forr,la ;.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 /6/5 2001 California 5.00 USGS 200* Call fornla 5.00 USGS 200* California 5.00 USGS 200* California 5.00 USGS 2008 Cllifornia 5.00 USGS 2001 California S.00 USGS 200* California $.00 USGS ZOOS California 3.00 USCS 200* California ;.00 USGS 2001 California Page 2 California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded Cali fornia Cridded California Gridded California Gridded california Gridded California Grldded California Grldded California Gridded Callfornia Gridded California Gridded 11-lozorgnia (2008) Controlling source California Gridded California Crldded california Gr-Idded California Gridded Callfornia Gridded california Gridded California Gridded california Cridded california Cridded California Gridded California Gridded California Grldded cal fornl a Gridded Californla Gridded California Gridded 21Â£f**, -litude L.nits: -_SSi vs=250 - Sel-Ic Hazard Analysis 3 Deterministic of Ground leilani cor,ildering sources Calculated *th Chiou-rix.ngs (2007) 16â€¢ Acceleratlon (g) -_SS' ,$.2 Colu=1 1. Spectral -rlod col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Col-, 5: Acceleration (9) for: 50 - Seismic Mazard Muly,11 3 Oeterministic Weighted lan of Attenuation Equations loore-Atkir,1- (2008) 11â€¢ USCS 2001 Ca-bell....Orglia (200*) .G' USGS 2001 Chiou-Youngs (2007) I,GA USGS 2001 Fractile: 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 ABiltude Magnitude Closest Regi Controlling Scrce 9 1.65]e-002 1.527/-002 2.101,-OIl 1.25le-002 01:tance(Icm)0.05 1.772e-002 1.607/-OIl 2.42Ze-002 1.217â‚¬-002 5.326/-Col 7 00 -$.00 USGS ZOOS California California Gridded 0.1 2.34*e-002 2.12%e-002 3.1442-002 1.775e-002 6.132/-001 7.00 -$.00 USGS 2001 California California Gridded 0.2 3.16*e -002 3.//5/-002 4.73Oe-002 3.024e-002 7.6764-001 7.00 -5.00 USGS 20018 Call fornia California Gridded 0.3 4.55*-002 4.7332-002 5.40Ge-002 3.537/-002 9.6338-001 7.00 -$.00 USGS 200* California california Gridded 0.4 4.402-002 4.1,1.-002 4.S73e-002 3.5.e-002 1.00*e.000 7.00 -5.00 USGS 2001 California California Gridded 0.5 4.158'-Col 4.5]le-002 4.53/e-002 3.404.-002 9.13Ge -001 7.00 -5.00 USGS 2008 California californi, Gridded 0.6 3.76oe-002 4.14Se-002 3.97Ze-002 3.1,le-002 9.3112-001 7.00-5.00 USGS 2001 California California Crldded 0.7 3.440e-002 3..5.-002 3.550'-002 2..le-002 1.752/-001 7.00 -5.00 USGS 2001 Cilifornla california Cridded 0.3.140â‚¬-002 3.55le-002 3.157e-002 2.71Oe-002 1.21*e-001 7.00 -5.00 USGS 2001 Callfornia California Gridded 0.9 2.1570-002 3.26*-002 1.7%/-002 2.510,-002 7.70*e.001 7.00 -5.00 USGS 200* C. lifornla california Gridded 1 2.62Ze-002 3.0312.002 2.507.-002 2.32Be-002 7.20Oe-001 7.00-5.00 uils 2004 California Call forria Gridded 2 1.251(-002 1. Me-002 1.Mle-002 1.12;e-002 G.701â‚¬-001 7.00-5.00 US/5 2001 Callfornia California Gridded 3 7.29*-003 1.997.-003 6.5,4.-003 G. 332e -003 3.2*se-001 7.00-5.00 USGS 2002 California California Gridded 4 4.%71-003 6.Zok-003 4.700.-003 3.9-*-003 1.36,-001 7.00 -5.00 usls ZOOS Cilifornia california GrÂ·Idded 1.2Sh-001 7.00 -5.00 USGS 200. California California Gridded 0 03 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 4 Largest *#11 tudes of Ground -tions for Each Source =Irce: Iraâ€¢ley Gridded. Strike Slip Region: ISGS 2002 California Closest Distance: 173.H b *Bl itude mits: Acceleration (g) lagni tude : 1.50 - Fractile: 0.50 â€¢age 3 Salrce: irawley Gridded,Nornal Region: USGS 200* California Closist Dlitance: 173.99 b Molitude Utlts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.$0 - Fractile: 0.50 Colt- 1Â· Spectral Perlod Colu- 2: Accelention (g) for: weighted *an of Attenuation Equations Col-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) ,Â«GA USCS 2008 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cliptill-lozorgnla (2001) 16* usGS 2002 Page . -_Ssi vs-250 - Seismic Mizard Anily,13 3 0,ter,Inlitic -_SM vs-250 - Sel-IC Hazard Analy, 11 3 DeterministicColu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 20)01 0.05 4.]]Ge-001 4.5721-001 3."3â€¢-001 4.7431-001 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 2 3 1.We-002 1.1112-002 1.4772-002 1.27le-002 1.OW-002 1.7]Se-002 3.42Â§2-002 3.19Se-002 4.053e-002 3.gole-002 3.140-002 3..4.-002 3.703e-002 3.750/-002 3.29*-002 3.269e-002 2.9/3/-002 2.91_le-002 2.61*-002 2.60:e -002 2.440,-002 2.147.-002 2.22$e-002 2.135â‚¬-002 1.04 le-002 1.020,-002 5.54;e-003 5.5732-003 4.124e-003 4.066.-003 Scâ€¢irce: Ill Extensional Gridded. Char. Nor- Region: use 2002 California Closest olitance: 5.U ki A*litude Mits: Acceleration (g) lagnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 Coll-1: Spectral Perlod Col- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted I Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: IÂ©Ore-Atki colum â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: clbell-1 Coli=, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youn 2 3 3.1 3 le-001 3.72'e-001 0.5 0Â§ 0.7 0.1 0.5 1 Z 3 4 1 4 5 1.54*-002 S.73$5-003 2 15*e-002 1.002.-002 2.863,-002 1.3*Se-002 4.058-002 2.311/-002 5.â€¢23,-002 2.825.-002 4.987,-002 2.911.-002 4.542-002 2.110)e-002 3.'10,-002 2.Gne-002 3.555â‚¬-002 2.4/k-002 3.lize-002 2.32$(-002 2.79Se-002 2.173,-002 2.510.-002 2.02*-002 1.0912-002 1.Olle-002 6.lie-003 $.70/2-003 4.700,-003 3.Â§064-003 ean of Attenuation Equations rlan Cool) IGI uses 2001 ozorgrlia (2000) NG, USGS 2001 g. (2007) ... USGS 2001 4 5 3.14le-001 4.04Oe-001 ..9. 5 O.1 5.35Â®-001 6.71:e-001 0.2 1.03]e-001 9.440,-001 0.3 1.27*e-001 I.â€¢Me-001 0.4 1.207â‚¬-001 9.5112-001 0.5 7.106,-001 1.ale-001 O.G 7.040*-001 7.522-001 0.7 6.443'-001 6.590'-001 0.1 5.lk-001 5.104 0-001 0.9 5.4272-001 5.12*e-001 1 5.017,-001 4.5*/-001 2 2.664/-001 2.200,-001 3 1.614/-001 1.265e-001 4 1.13*e-001 9.37 le-002 Source: 1,0 Ertensional Gridded. Char. Reglcn: USGS 200: California Illicit 01'unce: $.U k. Alitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 col uin 1: spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) fur: weigh col- 3: Acceleration (g) fur: loore Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CRipb colt= 5: Acceleradon (g) for: Chlou 1 2 3 9 4.24Ge-001 4.42Â§,-001 0.05 4.Ge-001 5.36le-001 0.1 6.624'-001 7.617,5-001 0.2 1.Gue-001 1.050,â€¢000 0.3 0.9:Se-001 1.073Â®.000 4 lue -001 1.75/e-001 7.15]e-001 7.1764-001 7,1302-001 6.5612-001 1.115,-001 S.U.'-001 5.211/-001 4.-le-001 2.Ule-001 1.14--001 1.352,-001 4 3.4058-001 3. I 4-001 5.04]e-001 6.432/-001 6.79*e-001 Page I 6.21*-001 7.90le-001 1.113/-001 7.â„¢e-001 7./U/-001 7.04le-001 6.62*-001 G.244e-001 5.172â‚¬-001 5.5 lle-001 2.927/-001 1.72le-001 1.124e-001 4.**e-001 $.uze-001 7.212e-001 S.Olle-001 9.4312-001 Strike Slip ted-an of Attenuation Equations Atkinson (ZOOS) 1/li USGS 2001 eli-lozorgnia (2008) .. USGS ZOO)' -Youngs (2007) NGA USGS ZOOS -_SSâ€¢ vs-250 - Sels:ic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter,inistlc -_55â€¢ v-250 - selsâ€¢Ic Mazard Analy:11 3 oeterminlitic0.4 0.955â‚¬,-001 1.013eâ€¢000 6.879e-001 9.152*-001 0.8 5.741/-001 5.4Ve-001 5.593/-001 6.143e-001 Â·,uati ./ 1 n â€¢GA . m))00 ng : US 1 522/-001 1.006e+000 7.â€¢]le-001 9.0*le-001 7.2*le-001 1.319e-001 6.7442-001 7.$12e-001 6.222/+001 6.155.-001 5.77*e-001 1.263,-001 3.117e-001 3.2422-001 1.91$2-001 1.HOe-001 1.33Oe-001 1.]le-001 Source: IN Extensional Gridded. GR. Nor--1 Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance. 5.32 k. ABlitude mits: ACCeleration (g) mgr,itude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0 50 Colum 1: Spectral period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted Col- 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-Ark Collin 4: Acceleration (9) for: Carubill- Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-voy 2 3 3.52le-001 3.4712-001 4.1858-001 4.2lle-001 5.702-001 6.279e-001 7.8231-001 1.32 k -001 0.055,-<]01 1 -Ge-001 7.9712-001 0.91 Se-001 7Â·$7â€¢e-001 8.31*-001 6.13*e-001 7.lole-001 6.25Ge-001 6.22--001 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0., 1 2 3 4 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0., 0.7 G.812.-001 6.362'-001 5.95*-001 5.55%,-001 S.169â‚¬-001 4 We-001 2.158/-001 1.9e-001 1.38-001 an of Atte, e (2001) Izorgnl a (21 s (2007) I 3.105/-001 3.6$â€¢e-001 4.1/7.-001 6.72*e-001 7.054/-001 7.0%e-001 7.08-001 6.462Â®-001 6.016/-001 page 7 1.62Ge-001 1071,-001 7.5Gle-001 7 054.-001 6.6441-001 6.224e-001 3.28-001 1.919-001 1.24;e-001 or, Equatio, USGS 2001 9 USGS 21 GS 200/ 5 3.'Ue-001 4 6848-001 6.153,-001 7.1112-001 1.0*le-001 7.13le-001 7.390,-001 6.93*-001 1.52]e-Col 0.,$.2720-001 4.151/-001 1 4.175/-001 4.345e-001 2 2.Sne-001 2.017(-001 3 1.569e-001 1.201â‚¬-001 4 1.107*-001 1.91*e-002 Scurce: I* Exten,loful Gridded. GR. Str Region: USGS ZOOS California Clo:est Distance: 1.32 km Amplitude 011 ts: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 colum 1: spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weight Colu- 3: Acceleratlon (g) for: moor, Colu- 4: Acceleraticwl (g) for: c//obe Coll- 5: Acc,leratim (g) for: chiou- 1 2 3 El 4.1101-001 4.like-001 0.05 4.82le-001 4.lie-001 0.1 6.427/-001 7.120,-001 o.z 8.437/-001 Â·926,-001 0.3 1.74*-001 1.01Ge +000 0.4 1.Me-001 1.02}e+000 0.5 1.26--001 I. sole-001 0.6 7.602,-001 1.51;e-001 0.7 7.05*-001 7.172e-001 0.1 6.537e-001 7.16Se -001 0.5 6.0332-001 6.4:le-001 1 5.10/-001 5.12*-001 2 3.02]e-001 3.075,-001 ike 5 ed -nuati .. AtkiM 0 11-10 008)001 GA US 5.13*-001 4.15$e-001 2.*loe-001 1.1122-001 1.325/-001 ,lip an of "te lion (200.) zorgnia (2 s (2007) I 4 3.3Gk-001 3.Sose-001 5.0232-001 6.4OR-001 6.7412-001 6.10$e-001 6.7lle-001 6.20e-001 5.lile-001 5.4632-001 5.elle-001 4.76]e-001 2.10)Ze-001 lage 0 5.774Â®-001 5.â€¢25/-001 2.*ne-001 1.G94e-001 1.1022-001 or, Equatic, USGS 2001 NGA USGS 21 GS 2001 5 4.6438-001 S.Glle-001 7.13--001 8.9'Oe-001 9.324/-001 .03*e-001 1.507e-001 7.15]/-001 7.446<-001 6.910,-001 G. me-001 0.1lk-001 3.1/11-001 3 4 -_SS' v-250 - sel-1. Hazard ..ly,1. 3 Deter,1.1.tic -_SSâ€¢ vs.250 - Selsâ€¢lc Hazard â€¢rulysts 3 oete,-lnistic1.157/-001 1.Ull-001 1.81Ze-001 1.alle-001 1.290,-001 1.324e-001 Scurce: kj ave shear Cri ddled Region: USGS ZOOS California Clowlt Distance: 111.12 km A-plitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.60 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral â€¢criod colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for. -ighted Col- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Ati Cokin 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambill Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-vol 2 3 6.sose-002 7.593/-002 7.62*-002 0.1*Ge-002 5.'33'-002 .15Se-002 1.317â‚¬-001 1.247e-001 1.5 lle-001 1.364/-001 1.4*le-001 1.37le-001 1.412e-001 1.365/-001 1.322,=-001 1.30Oe-001 1.247e-001 1.247/-001 1.17le-001 1.112/-001 1.094/-001 1.10Se-001 1.021,-001 1.04*-001 5.*lse-002 6.15 k -002 3.021/-002 4.35*e-002 2.712e-002 3.065/-002 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 3 1.3255-001 1.221â‚¬-001 Mean of Attenuation Equations Arson (2008) NGâ€¢ USGS ZOOS lozorgn,la (2008) NGâ€¢ USGS 2002 'ng' (2007) FIC: USCS 2001 4 5 5.73$(-002 1.3*-002 G.417*-002 1.2*le-002 1.147&002 1.lae-001 1.202e-001 1.712e-001 1.379e-001 1.7*)e-001 1.]OSe-001 1.GNe-001 1.315e-001 1.$54-001 1.2â€¢le-001 1.41*e-001 1.1--001 1.29.e-001 1.132,-001 1.loe-001 1.06le-001 1.1lle-001 1.00Ze-001 1.0]k-001 5.Ge-002 5.304.-002 3.9712-002 3 19/-002 2.Slle-002 2.0/9/-002 Page ' Scum: San Corgornlo Shear Gridded Reglon: USGS 2001 California Closelt Oistalle: 59.,3 k. -lin*le units: Acceleration (g) 11â€¢gnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: 0.50 Coll- 1: Spectral krled Col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: Col-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: coluin $: Acceleration (g) for: 1 2 3 O 1.232e-001 1.437e-001 0.05 1.40Ze-001 1 581/-001 0.1 1.1782-001 1.969e-001 0.2 2.452â‚¬-001 2.365e-001 0.3 2.52le-001 2.42*e-001 0.4 2.37]e-001 2.]$]e-001 0.$2.24 5/-001 2.2â€¢k-001 0.6 2.07â€¢e-001 2.10Oe--001 0.7 1.537â‚¬-001 1 UZe-001 0.0 1.10]e-001 1.HE-001 0.5 1.672e-001 1.70;e-001 1 1.5/20-001 1.519e-001 2 1.73Oe-002 9.0*Oe-002 3 5.750.-002 6.40e-002 4 4.Mle-002 4.599â‚¬-002 Scrce : Ackwater Region: Usls 2(JOI California Closest Dlit.Ince: 160.2$ Ici -1 ghted -an of Attenuation Equations loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA U.GS 2001 Cambell-/O/orgnil (200.) I. USGS 2008 Chiou-voungs (2007) ICA USGS 2008 4 9.135e-002 1.052/-001 1.416â‚¬-001 1.IN-001 2.150â‚¬-001 2.022e-001 2.024e-001 1.Â§09â‚¬-001 1. Slk -001 1.7th-001 1.Glie-001 1.$2*e-001 9.2*le-002 6.1*42 -002 4.627e-002 Page 10 1.3462-001 1.575Â¢-001 2.249e-001 3.0012-001 2.,3.-001 2.74/-001 2.4*le-001 2.214-001 2.0110-001 1.We-001 1.06/-001 1.SU,-001 7.12Se-002 4.Glk-002 3.047e-002 -.SSâ€¢ v-250 - Seismic Mazard Anily,11 3 Oeter=inisticA,plitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: 0.50 Col-, 1: Spectral Period Coll-1 2: Acceleratic*, (g) for: *ighted Mein of Attentatim Equations Colion 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkin,on (2001) IK;A USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Carpbell-iozoronli (2008) icA usis 2001 Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 3 M 2.78-002 2.Uk-002 3.29le-002 2 1/e-002 2.9/4/-002 2.//le-002 3.Gee-002 2.321/-002 3.862e-002 3.716â‚¬-002 4.$%â€¢-002 3.27;e-002 6.0152-002 5.577*-002 G.'30.-002 5.34*-002 7.093.-002 7.14&-002 1.065.-002 6.065.-002 7.029:-002 7.4/,-002 7.54--002 6.05Ze-002 6..3.-002 7.494-002 7.2&-002 5.721,5-001 6.36*-002 7.0 53â‚¬-002 6.615.-002 5.342/-002 5.%.-002 6.700.-002 6.212e-002 4 9/5/-002 5.566,-002 6.3140-002 5.71*e-002 4.Gile-002 5.lble-002 3.910*-002 $.221Â®-002 4.374.-002 4.82*-002 5.570Â¢-002 ...12.-002 4.106â‚¬-002 2.GOGe-002 1.0522-002 2.413,-002 2.244/-002 1.62*-002 1.92 k -002 1.57]e-002 1.lue-002 1.160,-002 1.317/-002 1.15Ge-002 '.17.-003 Source: Surnt Nt' Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 1]S.09 I Aq,litude Uniti: Agceleration (g) Magnitude: G. 10 1 Fractile: 0.$0 colu-1 1: Spectral â€¢eriod Page 11 0 05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2.140,-002 2.334e-002 3.141.-002 5.2/k-002 5.*Ve-002 5.532.-002 5.130/-002 4.710,-002 4.339*-002 4.015e-002 3.726,-002 3.465.-002 1.7Â®e-002 1.07â€¢e-002 7.114*-003 2 -_SS' v-250 - Sell Col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: *ighte, Coli- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Ai col-: â€¢: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell Col,- S: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-w 1 2 3 9 1.963â‚¬-002 3.47le-002 o.os 3.191/-002 3.3566-002 0.1 4.2$02-002 4.51$.-002 0.2 6 724'-002 7.Ule -002 0.3 7.5590-002 1.547e+002 0.4 7.323â‚¬-002 9.Olle-002 05 G.1Se-002 1.67$4002 0.6 6.256e-002 7.160,-002 0.7 5.734(-002 7.232e-002 0.1 5.2;3/-002 6.65 Ze-002 0,4.lose-001 6.114/-002 1 4.433,-002 5.670e-002 2 2.21/e-002 2.Use-002 3 1 31â€¢e-002 1.Â§4*-002 4 9.335.-003 1.ZOGe-002 Sclirce: Callco-Hidalgo Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 161.23 b, *#litude miti: Acceleration (g) IMagnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 Col/,11: Spectral Pericd colo- 2: Accileration (g) for: weighted Col- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-At coll- 4: Acceleration (g) furÂ· Clivbell Col-1 $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Yo =Ic "izard Analysis 3 Deter,Inistic I Man of Attenuation Equations kinion (20)01) EA uSGS ZOOS -lozorgnia (200*) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 â€¢Ing, (2007) .GA USGS 2008 Ile luation Equations kin NGA USGS 2008 -Ba )01) Il USCS 2001 ung I USGS 200 3 27*e-002 3.6/45-002 4./25/-002 7.134 e-001 1.034e-002 7.42]e-002 6.Noe-002 G.lsk-002 5.63Ze-002 5.09Ze-002 4.57-002 4.16;e-002 1.571:-002 1.21-002 0.132,-003 an of Attl M (2001) Iorgnia (21 S (2007) M Page 11 1 -_SEA vi-250 - Sel-lc Hazard Analy,ls 3 Deter,inlitic 0.1 -_Su vs-250 - sels,Ic Hazard Aruly,15 3 Deter,inlitic 7.506Â¢-002 1.43le-002 1.027.-002 1.061.-002 0 -,uati 'S â€¢tkin ./. Il-/0 )01)m 'C*Jng :US' 2 3 K.â€¢ 3.39le-002 3.413(-002 3.6$(e-002 3.607.-002 4.6572-002 4 34â‚¬-002 7.124/-002 6.30'e-002 1.323,-002 7.524Â®-002 1.30Oe-002 7 "Be-002 1.202â‚¬-002 1.1540-002 7.75Se-002 7./62e-002 7.3/5/-002 7.623,-002 G.742-002 7.2'16.-002 6.$411-002 6.907.-002 6.167e-002 G.577e-002 3 524.-002 3.U]e-002 2.100.-002 2.616.-002 1.Hle-002 1.1548-002 Salrce: channel Islands Thrust Region: uSGS 200/ California Cloust Distince: 129.19 IM *11'ude *ts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0. $0 Colt- 1: Spectral period Colu,n Z: Acceleration (g) for: weight, Colt-, 3: Acceleration (g) for. Wore-i col.- 4: Acceleration (g) for: cambel Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Chioui 2 3 5.2He -002 4.-Ge-002 5.744e-002 5.2.ZOe-002 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.. 0.' 1 2 1 0.05 3.157.-002 4.2444-002 5.251,-002 7.96*-002 9.40*e-002 1.IMe-002 1.Mh-002 1.311,-002 7.Ule-002 7.3Me-002 Â§.SISe-002 G.lve-002 3.We-002 2.337/-002 1.739,-002 m of Atte, Son (2001) zorv,la at s (2007) I 5.712*-002 6.32$0-002 Page 13 2.904.-002 3.0--002 4.372e-002 7.10]e-002 1.03Ge-002 1.02 k -002 7.GOZe-002 7 .1062-002 G.*-002 6Â·24]e-002 5.86*-002 5.527e-002 3.0%e-002 1.lk-002 1.32Se-002 on Equatil USGS ZOoS 16â€¢ USGS N GS 2001 5. lne-002 5. Uic-002 ed ",uati .. tkin ./ Il-/O X).)001 roung GA US 0.2 1.12le-001 9.4534-002 0.3 1.27le-001 1.130e-001 0.4 1.228,-001 113Oe-001 0.5 1.lile-001 1.126/-001 0.6 1.105e-001 1.06ie-001 0.7 1.017/.001 1.022e-001 0.1 9.61%-002 9.557/-002 0.9 1.1242-002 0.7/Oe-002 1 1.149/-002 1.104/-002 2 3.7le-002 3. 16Ge-002 3 2.246/-002 2.402.-002 4 1.557e-002 1.Â§2Ge-002 Sa,rce: Cla,sh,11-siwpit Region: usls 2001 California Closest 011'Incl: 47.12 k. *Blitudi *ts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: G. 70 - Fractile: O.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Coll- 2: Acceleration (g) for: -lght, Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Ioore-, colt- 4: Acceleration (g) for: c-pbe col-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-' 1 2 3 M 9.37le-002 1.22 le-001 0.05 1.06â€¢e-001 1.29*e-001 0.1 1.513e-001 1.75*e-001 0.2 2.13e-001 2.04â‚¬-001 0.3 2.165/-001 2.112/-001 0.4 1.%5/-001 2.570,-001 1.1Sk-001 1.3*le-001 1.304/-001 1.213e-001 1.1*le-001 1.123,-001 1.0411-001 9.$13e-002 1.77*-002 4.1166-002 2.41*-002 1.753.-002 an of Atte, son (2001) zorgnia al s (1007) / 4 1Â·0%4-002 9.5'*-002 1.3Sk-001 1.900â‚¬-001 1.;20*-001 1.74Ge -001 â€¢lge 14 1.214,-001 1.300â‚¬-001 1.250e-001 1.152/-001 1.05]e-001 '.G,Ge-002 0.852e-002 1.1#-002 7.5642-002 3.36--002 1.91Ge-002 1.252,3-002 en EquaticÂ» USGS 100/ 1Â£,A USGS 21 CS 2001 5 7.80*e-002 '.34$/-002 1.3132-001 1 1242-001 1.7Â§2e-001 1.57--001 0.5 0.5 07 i.%A vs.250 - Sel-ic Hazird Analysis 3 Deterâ€¢lnlitlc -_SSI vs-250 - sel-ic lu:ard Aruly, 11 3 Deter-Inlitlc1.775,-001 2.3â€¢Se-001 1.5Ije-001 1.3:le-001 0.9 8.137e-002 1.072,-001 7.55Oe-002 6.144.-002 ed Y rulatl ./ â€¢tkin ./ 11-,0 )00)00. roung :US 1.Ble-001 2.0571-001 1.3542-001 1.Hle-001 1.24*e -001 1.636,-001 1.113e-001 1.445e-001 1.00â€¢e-001 1.292/-001 4.27--002 $.lfle.002 2.42:e-002 2.737e-002 1.Gee-002 1.llk-002 =Irce: Cleghorn Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Oistance: 73.1$ 6 Uplitude *ts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.80 - Fractill: 0.$0 Colu- 1: Spectral perlod Coly- 2. Acceleration (g) for: -ight, Cily,/ 3: Accileration (g) for: Wore-1 colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabe Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: chlou-' 1 2 3 G.]912-002 1.02.-002 7.0'Me-002 9.07le-002 S.olle-002 1.1*e-001 1.42/e-001 1.Mle-001 1.4.Ge-001 1.INe-001 1.38-001 1.010â‚¬-001 1.24*e-001 1.6646-001 1.10â€¢e-001 1.46]e-001 I]le-002 1.312â‚¬-001 1.977.-002 1.1*k-001 0.1 0.1 1 2 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 1.395Â¢-001 1.246,-001 1.117,-001 1.003/-001 9.104*-002 4.294â€¢-002 2.64Oe-002 1.901â‚¬-002 an of Atte son (2001) zor'gr,1. al s (2007) m 5.700,-002 6.62]e-CO02 9.23le-002 1.2--001 1.371â‚¬-001 1.2552-001 1.162/-001 1.02"-001 9.2Ze-002 8.3822-002 Page 15 1.225e-001 1.MS,-001 9.me-002 a. 921â‚¬-002 1.104/-002 3.379e-002 1.K)Ge-002 1.2312-002 on Equatic, USCS 2001 Â¤;A USGS 21 IS 200/ $ 4.712.-002 S.$'Se-002 0.257.-002 1.13ge-001 1.132e-001 1.032'-001 .liZe+002 1.ljle-002 7.310/-002 6.714â‚¬-002 ed N nuati ns Atkin ./ 11-go 00-)Col Â¥Ing GA US 1 7.444â‚¬-002 5.105â‚¬-002 2 3.601.-002 4.74Oe-002 3 2.117.-002 2.67]e-002 4 1.4912-002 1.362-002 Sc*.Irce : Coronado lank Region: USGS 200* California Closest Distance: 53.62 k= I*litulde Il,lts: Acceleration (g) 11:gri rude: 7.40 - Fractill: 0.50 Coltin 1: Spectral Period Col-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: weight Coluâ€¢, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore- Coll- 4: Acceleration (g) for: cupbe Col-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: chlou- 1 2 3 1.1]le-001 1.4]le-001 0.05 1.2*Se-001 1.57Oe-001 0.1 1.755,-001 1.-le-001 0.2 2.3242-001 2.520'-001 0.3 2.367/-001 2.571â‚¬-001 0.4 2.217e-001 2.47le-001 0.3 2.07--001 2.327,-001 O.G 1.9028-001 2.135/-001 0.7 1.761â‚¬-001 1.Ute-001 0..1.62*-001 1.833â‚¬-001 0.9 1.$03e-001 1.UCe-001 1 1.39le-001 1.5$4e-001 2 7.652.-002 1.487â‚¬-002 3 4.971/-002 5.71Oe-002 6.17*-002 3.2.Se-002 2.041.-002 1.4812-002 an Of "te 10,1 (200:) zorgnia (2 i (2007) I 4 9.21*e-002 1.070e-001 1.474/-001 2.04//-001 2.llc-Col 2.02]e-001 1.*Sk-001 1.13-001 1.72;e-001 1.ille-001 1.500*-001 1.4062-001 1.015.-002 5.280,-002 â€¢age 11 5. BSe -002 2.7Gle-002 1.6//-002 1.077e-002 or, Equatic USGS 2002 1101 USGS Z GS 2002 5 1.0332-001 1.227,-001 1.795/-001 2.We-001 2.36*-001 2.15--001 1.IZ+001 1.732e-001 1.573/-001 1442â‚¬-001 1.32Se-001 1.232â‚¬-001 6.315.-002 3.24,-002 4 -_ssA v,Â·250 - sel-ic Hazard A,uly:11 3 oeter,lnlitlc 3.555-002 4.oloe-002 3.30*-002 2.63/e-002 -_SSA vs-250 Sium: Earthquake Valley Seigic Hazard Arily:11 3 Deter-Inlitic srce: cucamÂ»gl Region: USGS 2001 California closest 01.tance: 43.43 Im Wlltude uniti: Acceleration (g) Mignitude: 6.70 w Fractile: 0.50 col'-, 1: spectral Perlcd Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Colum 3: ACielefation (g) for: Colt= â€¢: Acceleration (0) for: colu- $: Acceleration (g) For: 1 2 3 1.00â€¢e-001 1.2le-001 1.144e-001 1.37*e-001 1,632/-001 1.17le-001 2.me-001 2 132/-001 2.309e-001 2.% Se-001 2.095,-001 2.711â‚¬-001 1,891i-001 2.47le-001 1.6601-001 2.167.-001 1.4lle-001 1.NE-001 1.327e-001 1.723e-001 1 115,-001 1.$210-001 1.olk-001 1.3107-001 4.$60,-002 5.4312-002 2.51*-002 2.17%-002 1.77Ze-002 1.I]Ge -002 -lghted lean of Atteriation Equations loore-Atkinson (2000) NGâ€¢ LEGS ZOOI Cabel 1 -lazorgnla (2001) NGA ..5 2001 chicu-Yourgs (2007) 1/(/ USGS ZOOS 0 05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.0 0.1 2 4 1.Ule -002 1.03]e-001 1.ille-001 2 0452-001 2.0&4/-001 1.867/-001 1.703Â¢-001 1.49Oe-001 1.33 le-001 1.19]e -001 1.07le-001 9.73*-002 4.GOZe-002 2.130,-002 2.OIl -002 S 1.50*-002 1.021â‚¬-001 1.510e-001 1.9791-001 1.907/-001 1.707.-001 1.4i-001 1.32â€¢e-001 1.1Ce-001 1.065â‚¬-001 I.Mle-002 1.751â‚¬-002 3.647â‚¬-002 2.057.-002 1.336,-002 Page 17 Region: USGS 200* California Closest Distance: 138.04 kl A.Olltude wits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.10 - Fractile: O.50 colum 1: Spectral Period Coll- 2: ACCeleration (g) for: weighted m:an of Attenuation Equations colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) pili USGS 2001 colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: caÂ®bill-lozorgrila (2001) ,(A USGS 2001 Colum $: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS Zool 1 2 3 4 5 9 2./le-002 3.Zle-002 3.20â€¢e-002 2.05Ge -002 0.05 3.063,-002 3.36 le-002 3.55/-002 2.23â€¢e-002 01 4.073e-002 4.330.-002 4 658.-002 3.1&-002 0.2 6.4702-002 7.43*-002 6.95*-002 5.01*-002 0.3 7.30*-001 8.5672-002 7.1,Ge-002 5.506-002 0.4 7.OVe-002 1.Gtle-002 7.2Gle-002 5.36Ge-002 05 6.715e-002 1.364/-002 6.7915-002 4.sne-002 0.Â§6.013.-002 7.554/ -002 6.06Ge-002 4.51&-002 0.7 -12&002 1.-Se-002 5.5 lle-002 4.23]e-002 0..5.111:-002 6.447,-002 4.91.-002 3.921.-OK)2 0.9 4.61*e-002 5.932*-002 4.464/-002 3.641,-002 1 4.324/-002 5.5064-002 4.07*e-002 3.3 901-002 2 2.17Oe-002 2.*lie-002 1.9]Ge-002 1.75*e-002 3 1.2/70-002 1.60*-002 1.1Ne-002 1.0582-002 4 9.1522-003 1.Dle-002 ..672.-Co]7.015.-003 source: Elyllan Park (Upper) Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 31.I2 b Allitude units: Acceleration (g) Page li -_SM v-250 - sels-ic Hazard Ar,aly,11 3 Deter,inlitic -_SSâ€¢ vsÂ·Â·250 - Sel-ic Hazard Analysts 3 Deter,inisticlugnitude: 6.70 -colu- 3: Acceleration (9) for: loore-Atkinson (200*) PÂ«.â€¢ uscs 2001 Fractlle: 0.50 Coh- 4: Acceleration, (g) for: CA/N11-lozorgnia (2008) 1Â«4 USGS 2000 Col,-1 1: Spectral Period con- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou.Youngs (20)07) NÂ¢:a USGS 2001 Colo- 2: Acceleration (g) forÂ· weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Col-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) ICA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 Col-1 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca//*/11-lozorgnia (2008) NK.â€¢ USGS 200/9 2.466e-002 2.77Ge-002 2.SO--002 1.714e-002 Column S: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) IGA USGS 2000 0.05 2.65/-002 2.1$20-002 3.Zile-002 1.lve-002 0.1 3.531/-002 1.707.-002 4.26Â§e-002 2.62le-002 2 3 4 5 0.2 5.678.-002 G.;ose-002 G.33Se-002 4.1lle-002 1.2348-001 1.186#-001 1.22le-001 1.Mje-001 0.3 6.46--002 7.5922-002 1.155â‚¬-002 4.Gee-002 1.41Oe-001 1 .4 lic-CO 1 1.432,-001 1.3 llc-001 O.4 6.26â€¢e-002 7.Glie -002 6.59*e-002 4.5*Oe-002 2.012,-001 2.0272-001 2.095/-001 1.514Â®-001 0.5 5.912/-002 7.34]e-002 6.1.lie-002 4.27*e-002 2.793(-001 3.06/e-001 2.03*-Col 2.479,-001 0.6 $.342e-002 1.65,e-002 5.42â€¢e-002 3.M Se-002 2.105.-001 3.17Ge-Col 2.:She-001 2.383/-001 O.7 4.1//-002 6.12*-002 4.900/-002 3.644.-002 2.5522-001 2.07,3-001 2.62Oe-001 2.1]Oe-001 0.1 4.4732-002 5.635.-002 4.40*e-002 3.]A-002 2.307,-001 2.64*-001 2.403:-001 1.8681-001 0.9 4.085/-002 5.177e-002 3.042e-002 3.137,-002 2.02*e-001 2.323e-001 2.10,-001 1.*Ge -001 1 3.762e-002 4.7t/-002 3.5Ue -002 2.S20,-002 1.*lle-001 2.07Â§,-001 1.ilie-001 1.4--001 2 1.me-002 2.43Ge -002 1.Blk -002 1.506:-002 1.Glk-001 1./Se-001 1.GUe-001 1.317â‚¬-001 3 1.097/-002 1.3822-002 1.00/e-002 9.oole-003 1.44le-001 1.131/-001 1.504/-001 1.lue-001 4 7.73,e-003 1.00le-002 7.27/e-003 5.93.-003 1.297,-001 1.45*e-001 1.3572-001 1.07$0-001 5.232,-002 5.*lk-002 $.55 le-002 4.3262-002 2. 8;Se-002 3.016,-002 3.1-lie-002 2.365.-002 1.-Ze-002 2.072,-002 2.2*-002 1.506-002 Â»Irce: Gravel Mills-Harper Lk Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 152.14 ki Ivlitude wits: Acceleration (g) Source: Eureka Peak lugnitude: 7.10- Region: USGS 200/ California Fractile: O.50 closest Distance: 144.03 -Colu- 1: Spectral Period *litude Unit,= Acceleration (g)Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for. weighted Mean of Attenuation Equation, Magnitude: 6.70 -Coll- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA US<25 2001 Fractill: 0.50 ColiI, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-lozorgili (2008) 16â€¢ USGS 2001 Colo- 1: Spectral Period Coli- S: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-roungs (2007) NGA ISGS ZOOS col=, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Atte,Klation Equaticwls Page 1,Page 20 1 0 05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 O.G 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 ... 1 0.05 0.1 -_Ssâ€¢ 93-250 - Selimic Hazard â€¢ruly:11 3 Deter=inistic 2 3 4 5 0.2 -_SSâ€¢ vs-2$0 - sel-ic Hazard Analyâ€¢iâ€¢ 3 Deter,inlitic 1.110e-001 1.132e-001 1.07Oe-001 1.117â‚¬-001 3.01$/-002 3.22le-002 3.242e-002 3.3â€¢le-002 4.215e-002 4.169/-002 6.574/-002 6.6172-002 7.57Se-002 7.79*-002 7.4721-002 1.0-/-002 7.2314:-002 1.Osle-002 6.71Ze-002 7.$422-002 6.2/le-002 7.1371-002 5.850â‚¬-002 6.70*-002 '.424.-002 6.2620-002 5.062.-002 5.U'.-002 2.7lk-002 ].24 3,-002 1.696/-002 2.014,-002 1.2 Ck -002 1.4522-002 Source: Rlendale-so lockhart Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 115.62 ki A,plitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: Coluci 4: Acceleration (g) for: Col- 5: Acceleration (g) for: 2 3 5.37*e-002 6.3911-002 $.9101+002 6.104.-002 7.7206-002 1.333e-002 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.1 1 3 4 1 0.05 0.1 3.443.-002 3.1/Ze-002 4.151/-002 7.212*-002 1.426â‚¬-002 7.179.-002 7.602e-002 6.965,-002 1.46*e-002 5.'532-002 5.436.-002 5.One-002 2./7/-002 1.63*-002 1.2041-002 4 5.0522-002 5.6652-002 7.25/2-002 Page 21 2.3*le-002 2.557e-002 3.62*e-002 5.122 e-002 6.514/-002 G.443e-002 6.0/1.-002 5.Gae-002 5.23;e-002 4.lioe-002 4.574e-002 4.21;e-002 2.32$(-002 1.43$,-002 5.67*-003 5 4.693:-002 5.2/Ce-002 7.595e-002 weighted lan of Attenuatlon Equations Boore-Atking (ZOOS) u USGS 2008 Cibell-lozorv,1/ (2001) // USGS ZOO' Chico-Youngs (2007) â€žGA USGS 2001 03 1.220,-001 1.2482 -001 0.4 1.1812-001 1.25-001 0.5 1.13Se-001 1.23Ge-001 0.6 1.06Oe-001 1.162/001 0.7 9 952/-002 1.103e-001 0.1 ..305.-002 1.037e-001 0.9 1.660,-002 I.67*e-002 1 1.111/-002 9.osk-002 2 4.$230-002 5.1511-002 3 2.93Se-002 3.451(-002 4 2.056:-002 2.44*e-002 Source: 1Â«olly"od Region: USGS 2002 Cllifornia Illicit 01:tance: $0.02 k. Aiplltude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.70 - Frictlle: O.50 col,-, 1: spectral Perlod colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: wore-Ati Col/â€ž 4: Acceleration (g) for: casobell Colu-1 S. Acceleration (g) for: Chico-rot 1 2 3 PCA 1 703e-002 1.174,-001 0.05 5.Uze-002 1.250e-001 0.1 1.3 lk-001 1.Uk-001 0.2 1. We-001 2.517e-001 0.3 1.5$0â‚¬-001 2.Sole-001 0.4 1.7162-001 2.3]k-001 0.5 1.Gole -001 2.loie-001 1.22Oe-001 1.11/-001 1.1478-001 1.13Ge-001 1.135,-001 1.044/-001 1.Olle-001 9.5512 -002 1.00Ze-001 1.10*-002 9.37 k -002 -1.lge-002 1.70le-002 7.602.-002 1.137e-002 7.10Oe-002 4.554/-002 3.Â§24e-002 2.0.-002 2.37le-002 2.2261-002 1.61Ge-002 Mean of Attenuation Equations Kinlon (2001) NGA USGS ZooS Dozorgita (2002) 16* USGS 2002 Ing, (2007) 1Â«=A USGS 2001 4 5 7.68â€¢e-002 1.618,-002 '.0/2.-002 7.9%'-002 1.31Se-001 1.18*e -001 1.791-001 1.5752+001 1.82 le+001 1.52]e-001 1.Gile-001 1.3e-001 1.Â§17/-001 1.1912-001 Page 22 ...Ssi .1-250 - sets,Ic Hazard Analysis 3 Deterâ€¢Inistic O.G 1.407e-001 1.1332-001 1.32;e-001 1.0;Se-001 1.2le-001 1.627/-001 1.1Ve-Col 9.47/-002 1.1264-001 1.4564-001 1.0642-001 1.565.-002 1.01$e-001 1.3102-001 9.5Soe -002 7.753.-002 9.242e -002 1.192/-001 1.67(De-002 7.Dle-002 4.36 k +002 5.61Ze-002 4.0*Ze-002 3 392.-002 2.53 k +002 3.126:-002 2.Sole-002 1.1/13-002 4 1.774e-002 2.217.-002 1.*Ue-002 1.20â€¢e-002 Source: Hoher. alt l Region: usss ZOOS California Closest olitance: 91.11 ki Allitude Mits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.10 - Frictill: 0.$0 Column 1: Spectral Peried con-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Iian of Attenuition Equations cok- 3: Acceleration (g) for: ecore-Atkinson (2001) 10 USGS 200* Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C,*bell-eozorgnia (20)01) 1,CA USGS 20018 Col- 5: Acceleration (g) fur: Chiou-Â¥oungs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 5.2012-002 0.755-002 4.7212-002 4.11*e-002 5.711'-002 6.9723-002 5.4322-002 4.729!-002 7.127.-002 9.142/-002 7.4100-002 ..'30)e-001 1.lioe-001 1.4911-001 1.0*0.-001 9.Vie-002 1.2706-001 1.1Â£-001 1.145/-001 1.005e-001 1.11$e-001 1.Wle-001 1.05le-001 "Mle-002 1.09*e-001 1.47;e-001 9.7632-002 0.36;e-002 9.7*le-002 1.]lle-001 1.67]e-002 7.50:e-002 1.17--002 1.200,-001 7.S47(-002 6.7922-002 1.022â‚¬-002 1.0*Oe-001 7.0/3,-002 G.Me-002 7.2lk-002 9.6322-002 6.376â‚¬-002 5.446'-002 Page 23 0.7 0.1 0., 1 Z 3 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0. 0.1 -_SSâ€¢ v,-250 - Sel-ic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter-Inistic 1 6.554/-002 1.05â‚¬-002 5.'04.-002 5.163/-002 2 2.1722-002 3.Ilse-002 2.7*e-002 2.23Ge-002 3 1./412-002 1.5452-002 1.7032-002 1.2772-002 4 1.13Ge-002 1.342e-002 1.2]le-002 1.357.-003 Source: )ohnson valley (No) Reglon: USGS 200* California Closest DistanceÂ· 140.61 km A=plitude wits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - Fractile: 0.50 Col,-1 1: Spectral Period Col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Col-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (ZOO:) 1*1â€¢ usal 2001 colu= 4: Acceleration (g) for: CE*bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 20011 Colu- S: Acceleration (g) for: allou-Â¥oung, (2007) Nj USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 2.*GIl-002 3.35--002 3.320e-002 2.212e-002 0.05 3.1lle-002 3.457.-002 3.716â‚¬-002 2 â€¢0Oe-002 0.1 4 215/-002 4.40Ge-002 4.11Â§â‚¬-002 3.424â‚¬-002 0.2 6.63]e-002 7.342-002 7,15Ge-002 5.372-002 0.3 7.52]e-002 1.'Ke.002 1.1331-002 5.940,-002 0.4 7.331Â¢-002 1.*Ge-002 7.-e-002 5./04.-002 0.5 6.984,-002 1.414,-002 7.127e-002 S.410,-002 0.6 6.372*-002 7.7110-002 6.413*-002 4 516Â®-002 0.7 5 U]e-002 7.lize-002 5.Vie-002 4 61Oe-002 0..5.42Oe-001 G. 13Ge-002 5.344'-002 4.2*Ce-002 0.,4."le-002 6.1310-002 4./30*-002 3.S:le-002 1 4.Glk-002 j.7134-002 4.41]e-002 3.715â‚¬-002 2 2.365.-002 2. SUe-002 2.15 5/+002 1.953/-002 3 1.4271-002 1.7$4e-002 1.1427-002 1.1*Ge-002 4 1.01$e-002 1 27*e-002 9.77*e-003 7.Ille-003 â€¢ag, 24 42 925 Source Landers Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Msunce: 143 31 ki .plitude mits: Acceleration (9 Mugnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: O.50 colum 1. Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) forÂ· coli- 3. Acceleration (g) for: Colu- 4. Accelention (g) for: Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for- 2 3 FGA 4.028e-002 4.347(-002 4.36%-002 4 6064-002 5.Â§29:-002 5.$12.-002 1.404.-002 7.185.-002 9.5*-002 S.1.lk-002 9.45 Se-002 S.413.-002 9.255/-002 .537e-002 8.70Oe-002 9.1032-002 1.237e-002 /752e-002 7.741,-002 8.319e-002 7.24Ge-002 7.832e-002 G.Â§14/-002 7.42Oe-002 3.856.-002 4.307/-002 2.Slle-002 2.19%-002 1.Ale-002 2.052.-002 Source: Ler-od-Lockhart-ol d woman springs ,0 - Sets,ic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter#nistic 1) Mighted -an of Attenuation Equations oore-Atkinson (2000) Ne USGS 2001 Calptell-lozorgita (2008) IGI USGS 2002 Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA IMS 200Â§ 1 0.05 0.1 02 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 4 4 4.244e-002 4.702e-002 5.1921-002 1.84/-002 1.032e-001 5.735e-002 9.6635 -002 9.oGle-002 0 511/-002 1.0351-002 7.45le-002 6.96%-002 3.9195-002 2.549,-002 1.197e-002 'age 25 3.4Ne-002 3 7Ie-002 5.41]e-002 1.41]e-002 9.3353-002 9.1462-002 8.56]e -002 7.935,3-002 7.379e-002 6 193.-002 6.455/-002 6.05le-002 3.34Oe-002 2.0*'-002 1.425â‚¬-002 -_SSA /$-250 - Selgic Hazard Analysis 3 Deteridnistic Region: USGS ZOOS california Closest Distance: 133.06 kn Alelitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.50 - Fractile. 0.50 Colt- 1: Spectral period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lean of Attenuation Equations colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA usGS ZOOS Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cailil 1 -lozorgnia (2001) IA USGS ZOOS Coll- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) 4=A USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 Nâ€¢ 4.77]e-002 5.314e-002 4.745.-002 4.25Se-002 0.05 5.211/-002 5.Glk-002 5.26Se-002 4.Â§19,-002 0.1 6.7 lh-002 1.83]e-002 6.611/-002 6.71/-002 oz 9.785.-002 9.ll/-002 9.Ule-002 102"-001 0.3 1.102e-001 1.043â‚¬-001 1.14*-001 1.115/-001 0.4 1.012/-001 1077,-001 1.0*Ge-001 1.Olle-001 0.5 1.05*e-001 1.080)e-001 1.011,3-001 1.00Ge-001 0.6 9.glk-002 1.03]e -001 1.0272-001 S.290e-002 0.7 I.44e-002 9.943e-002 9.78.-002 1.617.-002 0.1 1.50.-002 .460,-002 9.2150-002 1.035e-002 09 133/e-002 1.90*-002 8.Ble-002 7.515â‚¬-002 1 7.152/-002 1.41/-002 106*e-002 7.047e-002 2 4.504e-002 4.954.-002 4 677e-002 3.1*Oe-002 3 2.97]e-002 3.417,-002 3.06/1-002 2.432e-002 4 2.122e-002 2.41Oe-002 2.We-002 1.642/-002 SourceÂ· Mission Ridge-Arroyo Parid,-sarita Anu Region. USGS ZOOS California Closest Olitance: 131.25 ki 41,tude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - Page 26 -_SM vs-250 - seijaic Hazard Analysis 3 Oeter,rinistic Fractile. 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Perled Colu- 2: Accelerition (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Col-1 3 Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2002) NGA USGS ZOOS Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CM,bell -eozorgnia (2008) Na USGS 2001 Colu- 5- Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) NG:I USGS 200* 2 3 4 3 3.114/-002 3.4Â§Ze-002 3.3742-002 2.506-002 3.351/-002 3.54*c-002 3.7//-001 2.7265-002 4.444e-002 4.533e-002 4.307e-002 3.192â‚¬:-002 7.04*e-002 7.7*Se-002 7.21Ze-002 G. osk-002 1.1212-002 5 42Oe-002 1.2//-002 Â§.684'-002 7.64/e-002 9.3732-002 7.659â‚¬-002 6.5132-002 7.4551-002 5 193/-002 7.234,-002 6.0Â§:e-002 6.16le-002 1.4972-002 6.514/-002 S.573.-002 6.3;Oe-002 7.95Oe-002 S.%12-002 5.137e-002 5.1272-002 7.31Ze-002 S.42le-002 4.74--002 5.306=-002 6.62Ge -002 4.500.-002 4.392,-002 4.1616-002 6.067e-002 4.477e-002 4.oGle-002 2.247e-002 2.GSCe-002 2.ll/.002 1.*653-002 1.31Se-002 1.5020-002 1.361/-002 1.09]e-002 9.105/-003 1.0]ge-002 9.915/-003 7.24*e-003 Source: Morth Channel Region: USGS 2001 california Closest Oistance: 133 40 kl Aq,litude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.80 M. Fractile: 0.50 colum 1: Spectral Period Coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted ian of Attenuation Equations Col-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) 1,9 uses 200* 1 0.05 0.] 0.2 0.3 04 05 0./ 07 01 0.9 1 2 3 -_59 vs-250 - Sel-ic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter,inlitic Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Campbell-lozorÂ·Unla (200*) li USGS ZOOI Colum 5- Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 PGâ€¢ 2.10*-002 2.62]e-002 3.79Se-002 2.00Se-002 0 05 3.004e-002 2.//Se-002 4.211/-002 2.136â‚¬-002 0.1 3.954,5-002 3.424e-002 5.423e-002 3.014e-002 0.2 6.417/+002 6.235/-002 1.DIe-002 4.8*le-002 0.3 7.536e-002 7.790e-002 9.32*-002 5.490â‚¬-002 0.4 7.31 Ge-002 7./4-002 1.95/-002 5.439/-002 0.5 G..Se-002 7.742e-002 1.1362-002 5.10*-002 0.6 6.39le-002 7.160,-002 7.2/le-002 4.725â‚¬-002 0.7 5 9041-002 6.7026-002 6 *40.-002 4 37Oe-002 0.1 5.3978-002 6.1671-002 5 /k-002 4.047/-002 0.9 4.1172-002 5.592-002 5 322e-002 3.74/-002 1 4.4622-002 S.123e-002 4.79/e-002 3.46$,3-002 2 1.52Ge-002 2.25Se-002 1/4-002 1.572-002 3 1.Olle-002 1.232e-002 1.0534-002 9.09]e-003 4 7.49/-003 8.564/-003 7.9312-003 5.96/e-003 Source: North Frc*,tal (East) Region: uses ZOOS California closest Distance: 111.0$ ki Allitude IN,lts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2- Acceleration (g) for: Weighted lan of Atteruation Equations Coll- 3: Acceleration (g) for. loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colo- 4: Acceleration (g) for: campbell-lozorgnia (2001) IGA usls 2001 Colw- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-voungs (2007) IGI USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 Page 27 Page 21 0.05 -_ISA vt-80 - set,c Hazard Aruly, 1,3 Oeter,inistic -_5$â€¢ v:-250 - Sel-ic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter,inistic4.55Ge-002 5.51Se-002 4.330.-002 3.Slh-002 0.3 1.GOSe-001 1.U9e-001 1.4324-001 1.$06,-001 1..tuati '$ kin ./ 10 )0. lung :US 4.Vâ€¢e-002 $.724.-002 6 669/-002 7.30*-002 1.007â‚¬-001 1.157*-001 1.11Ge-001 1.We-001 1.Cite-001 1.2*e-001 1.002/-001 1.2 4 k -001 9.13]e-002 1.14$e-001 1.422.-002 1.0*4/-001 7.71le-002 9.739,-002 7.One-002 1.7Ue-002 6.42$2-002 1.0 lk-002 2.764-002 3.53;e-002 1.76;e-002 2.Olle-002 1.22le-002 1.3842-002 source: North Frontal Oâ€¢â€¢t) Region: USGS ZOOS california Closest Diltance: M.$4 6 â€¢Nlitude mits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0 50 Coll-, 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weghteâ‚¬ Coh-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-At Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cuvbell Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-ve 1 2 3 PGA 7.04le-002 1.'00.-002 7.131/-002 9.4082-002 1.05Â§e-001 1.193,-001 1.502e-001 1.70Se-001 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 0.05 0.1 0.2 4.SOje-002 6.47$e-002 9.448(-002 1.052â‚¬-001 .74*e-002 '.263.-002 1.313.-002 7.704.-002 7.041.-002 6.400e-002 5.877e-002 2.93/9-002 1.15*e -002 1.35 je-002 an of Atte, son (200') Zor,lia (2{ S (2007) I 4 5.Se-002 6.126<-002 9.142e-002 1.30'le-001 Page 2, 4.293e-002 6.222.-002 9.1952-002 9.641â‚¬-002 9.12;e-002 1.333â‚¬-002 7.Â§6.-002 6.916-002 6.352,-002 5.*45/-002 5.313/-002 2.414,3-002 1.4222-002 5.4450-003 on Equatic, USGS 2001 NGA USGS M GS 2000 $ 6.200.-002 7.25--002 1.06le-001 1.417e-001 I - luati 1. :ktrl ./ ..0 = .ng .US 0.4 1.SOSâ‚¬-001 1.102 e -00 1 0.5 1.422,-001 1.723â‚¬-001 0.6 1.Zlie-001 1.03â‚¬-001 0.7 120le-001 1.47*e-001 0.1 1.102e-001 1.3532-001 0.9 1.00;e-001 1.220â‚¬-001 1 9.232/-002 1.112/-001 2 4.411Â®-002 5.00*-002 3 2.15/e-002 3.014*-002 4 1.U]c-002 2.04.-002 Salrce: Northridge Region: USGS 2001 Callfornia closest Distance: 71.16 5 Alplitude -its: Acceleration (g) IMagnitude: G.90 - FraCtile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Briod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weightec Col/3 3: Acceleration (g) for: Ioore-Al Coll- 4: Acceleration (g) for: cs*bell Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Blow-Â¥i 1 2 3 PGA . 575e-002 S.50%-002 0.05 9.55%-002 9.-le-002 0.1 1.31Ge-001 1.304â‚¬-001 0.2 1.11;e-001 2.004.-001 0.3 1.97 le-001 Z.16]e-001 0.4 1./2le-001 2.026,-001 0.5 1 67â€¢e-001 1.Ule-001 oIl 1.4Sk-001 1.617/-001 1. me-001 1 2*Se-001 1.177,-001 1.054/-001 1.01Oe-001 9.287e-002 1.612,-002 4.617*-002 2.05]e-002 2.17*-002 an of Atte son (2001) zorgnia (21 1 (2007) â€¢ . 7./Sle-002 5.0063-002 1./le-001 1.756e-001 1.177e-001 1.7342-001 1.Wk-001 1.457/-001 Page 30 1.3'5â‚¬-001 1.25*e-001 1.13]e-001 1.030â‚¬-001 '.432.-002 1.660.-002 7.965â‚¬-002 3.G07e-002 2.124â‚¬-002 1.42le-002 on Equatla USÂ£15 2001 fCA USGS 21 Is 2001 5 1.37Oe-002 9.712-002 1.402/-001 1.1%/-001 1.072e-001 1.703,-001 1.507e-001 1.3145-001 -_SEA v-2$0 - Scilâ€¢Ic Hazird Aruly,11 3 Deter,inistic -_SI vs=250 - Sel-Ic Hazard Aruly,11 3 Deterinistic0.7 1.35le-001 1.514/-001 1.327,-001 1.153e-001 2 Lilli-002 3.06"-002 2.;95/-002 2.1,10-002 0.1 0.1 1 . lilli IS :ki. ./ = Ing :1.13 1.21--001 1.3!Oe-001 1.0921-001 1.22e-001 9.Ule-002 1.10*e-001 4 0â€¢Ze-002 4.640â‚¬-002 2.24;e-002 2.562e-002 1.53le-002 1.75Ge -002 k*,rce: Nk Ridge (Offshore) Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Clitince: 130.10 ki ,litude Mits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude. 7.00 - Fractile: 0 $0 Col,in 1: Spectral â€¢erlod Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: -ighteâ‚¬ Coll=, 1: Acceleration (g) for: loore-At Colu- 4: Acceleration (9) for: 0,obell Colt-1 5. Acceleration (g) for: OIlou-Yc 2 3 3.1]le-002 4.125.-002 3.9372-002 4.2*Oe-002 5.22 le-002 $.403(-002 1.QUe-002 8.127(-002 9.217e-002 1.054,-001 1.177â‚¬-002 1.044/-001 1.4*Ze-002 1.023e-001 1.7168-002 9 4*-002 7.2232-002 8.104/-002 6.644.-002 1.205.-002 6.063.-002 7.44$â‚¬-002 5.573e-002 6.125/-002 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0l 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 1.199!-001 1.07Ge-001 9.767.-002 4.1320-002 2.342,5-002 1.702/-002 an Of Atte 'son (2001) izer,Dia (2 I (2007) â€¢ 4 3.75le-002 4.2114-002 5.468.-002 1.015/-002 5.1$40-002 1.507.-002 1.109-002 7.35*-002 6.767e-002 6.180â‚¬-002 5.623/-002 5.lee-002 "ge 31 1.07â€¢e-001 9.70*e-002 1.79.-002 3.475.-002 1..]e-002 1.15Se-002 on Equ,tio USGS 2000 NGA USGS 2 cs 2000 S 3.031/-002 3.342-002 4.792.-002 7.362,5-002 7.555.-002 7.Ule-002 7.10Se -002 6.5 lk-002 5.99*e-002 5.53.1-002 5.1201-002 4.7]30-002 3 1. $562-002 1.AGE-002 4 1.0152-002 1.207e-002 salrce: oak Rldge (on,hore) Region: ugs 2008 California Closest Distance: 100.43 ki Alitude fl: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0.,0 Colt-, l: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weight colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Iocre- Colu- 4: Acceleration W for: Cizbe coh- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou- 1 2 3 9 6.416,-001 7.24*-002 0.05 7 140e-002 7.62 6 -002 0.1 9.515.-002 ,603.-002 0.2 1.38]e-001 1402â‚¬-001 0.3 1.51Ge-001 1.585/-001 0.4 1.43Ge-001 1.532*-001 0.5 1.365-001 1.410,-001 0.1 1.254â‚¬-001 1.171/-001 0.'1.164,-001 1.2852-001 0..1.071/-001 1.113/-001 0.9 9.753/-00 2 1.07le-001 1 1.S54â‚¬-002 9.755.-002 2 4.073e-002 4.45Se-002 3 2.40Oe-002 2.6*Ge -002 4 1.671/-002 1.82Ge-002 ed N nuatl rl, Atkin ./ 11-/0 001)001 Young GA US 1.63Oe-002 1.1SZ,-002 an of Atte Son (ZOOS) lorgnll (2 is (2007) M 4 6.741,-002 7.570,-002 9.914/-002 1.44k-001 1.522/-001 1.5150-001 1.4751-001 1.35;e-001 1.265/-001 1.lise-001 1.060*-001 9.7/Ge-002 4.45Ge-002 2.51-002 1. EGe-002 Page 32 1.1/le-002 0.550*-003 0,1 Equ//10 USGS 2001 NGA USGS Z GS 2008 S 5.470â‚¬-002 6.224-002 9.02&-002 1.300e-001 1.34 le-001 1.257e-001 1.142e-001 1.03â€¢e-001 9.4240-002 1.64$/-002 7.910,-002 7.32Oe-002 3.30]e-002 1.USe-002 1.210â‚¬-002 -_SSA .1-250 - Source: oak RIdge C/rnected Region: uscs 2001 California Closest Distance: 51.44 ki Alitude *ti: Accelerâ€¢tion (g) lugnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weigl Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loor, Coll- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca* Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chic, 2 3 7.135.-002 1.18*e-002 7.192e-002 1.71*e-002 1.04â€¢e-001 1.07&-001 1.4/le-001 1.4751-001 1.621/-001 1.95/-001 1.$4 le-001 1.617/-001 1.47*e-001 1.57Se-001 1.3731-001 1.485/-001 1.Zlie-001 1.41Oe-001 1.1Ne-001 1.305â‚¬-001 1.09Se-001 1.1/2/-001 1.01]e-001 1.09*-001 4."Ge-002 5.199,-002 3.02Se-002 3.31le-002 2.1182-002 2.23]e-002 srce: â€¢alls vcr-el Region: USGS ZOOS california Sel-ic Mizard Anilysts 3 Deter,inlitic ,ted Ian of Attenuation Equations 0-Atkinson (2001) /1/ USGS 2008 Ill-lozor,Aa (2001) CA USCS 2001 i-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 4 4 6.745,5-002 7.;7*-002 S.136â‚¬-002 1.436e-001 l.ille-001 1.5232-001 1.Â§062-001 1.407e-001 1.32;e-001 1.23*-001 1.144,-001 1.0652-001 5.492e-002 3.37$e-002 2.507,3-002 ..ge 33 $ 6.4728-002 7.3*le-002 1.061-001 1.512/-001 1.SIOe-001 1.Ille-001 1.]SCe-001 1.22Ge-001 1.12le-001 1.03le-001 S.5112-002 1.782/-002 4.057e-002 2.403e-002 1.Be-002 -_SSâ€¢ vsÂ·Â·250 - Sels#c Hazard Analyâ€¢1* 3 Deterâ€¢Inistic Closest Oistancc: 2.16 6 Alitude Kiti: Acc,leration (g) Magni tude: 7.30 - Fr8ctl le: 0.50 Col- 1: Spectral Period Col,-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: *1ghted -an of Attenuation Equation, colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore.Atkins,i (2001) Ili uscs 2008 Colii, 4: Acceleratim (g) for: Cabell -Iozorgnla (2001) IGA uSGS 20011 Colu- 5: Acceleraticwl (g) for: Chlou-nour,i (2007) EA uSGS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 â€¢Gâ€¢ 1.63le-001 1.%*-001 1.377*-001 1. GOGe -001 0.05 1.HU/-001 2.11--001 1.627e-001 l.lne-001 0.1 2.Gâ€¢le-001 2./je-001 2.144/-001 2.7He-001 0.2 3.444e-001 3.593,-001 3.12*-001 3.10--001 0.3 3.432.-001 3.$*ge-001 3.16le-001 3.53$/-001 0.4 3.Zole-001 3.43 k -001 2.Se-001 3.227e-001 0.5 2.580/-001 3.lgle-001 2.1532-001 2.1%/-001 0.6 2.707e-001 2.905,-001 2.Glle-001 2.Slle-001 0.7 2.492/-001 2.Uoe-001 2.43 k -001 2.3634-001 0.1 2.2543-001 2.454e-001 2.262.-001 2.1/e-001 0.,2.noe-001 2.232e-001 2.10Oe-001 1.Se-001 1 1.99/-001 2.059-001 1.%6,-001 1.1$2e-001 2 1.0Sh-001 1.0/7/-001 1.124/-001 5.5752-002 3 6.802.-002 7.233â‚¬-002 7.3062-007 5.869-002 4 4.151.-002 5.200â‚¬-002 5.4142-002 3.Mle-002 5,1, rce: â€¢al oi verdes Connected Region: USGS ZOOS California Close:t 01*tance: 29.16 ki Awlitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.70 - Fractile. 0.50 â€¢age 34 -.52 v-250 - Seli Colt-11: Spectral Period Col- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighte, Col-1 3: Accelention (g) for: loore-Ai Coll- 4: Acceleration (g) for: c.a-,bell Coh- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-n 2 3 1.16*e-001 2.13]e-001 2.175e-001 2.41â€¢e-001 2.%12-001 3.10Oe-001 3.76le-001 3.G23e-001 3.*lle-001 3.647/-001 3.5-e-001 3.53:e -001 3.4172-001 3.352e-001 3.lile-001 3.142Â®-001 2 5822-001 2.9751-001 2.79/-001 2.7Ue-001 2.6042-001 2.53:e-001 2.Â«le-001 2.1411-001 1.440Â¢-001 1.374/401 5.822,-002 1.026+ -001 7.lole-002 7.3182 -002 SIrce: â€¢into I,tn Region: USGS ZOOS California clount Distance: 113.72 ki Alitude units: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Colu- 1: Acceleration (g) for: loore-At Colu. 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca.*bell 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.$ 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 3 *c Iuzard Analysis 3 Deterâ€¢Inlitic I lean of Attenuation Equations kinson (2001) LA USGS 2002 -lozorgnia (ZOOI) Mil USGS 200* â€¢Ings (2007) ./ USGS 200' k -tion Equations kin 16â€¢ USGS ZOOS )01) 16 USCS 2008 4 1.51Ge-001 1.772 e -001 2.4*Se-001 3.34]e-Col 3.44le-001 3.262,-001 3./le -001 3.121/-001 2.9/32-001 2.lâ€¢Oe-001 2.6934-001 2.$69,-001 1.65le-001 1.112/-001 1.3132-002 an of Atte 0 (200') forgnla (ZI Page 35 1.95Ge-001 2.Ble-001 3.32Oe-001 4.324e-001 4.30Oe-001 3.9:oe-001 3.6072-001 3.2772-001 3.006/-001 2.7790-Col 2.51--001 2.405e-001 1.ale-001 0.09Ze-002 5.530â‚¬-002 -_SSâ€¢ vs-250 - Sels,Ic Hazard Analy,1, 3 Deter,Inistic Colu- 5Â· Acceleratian (g) for: Cdc*,-Youl,gs (2007) 1/0/ ISIS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 9 5.15*e-002 6.20:e-002 4.87*-002 4.3Ue-002 0.05 5.662/-002 6.$741-002 5.4112-002 4.92*-002 0.1 7.44Se-002 1.1340-002 7.08*-002 7.12â€¢e-002 0.2 1.0/le-001 1.13*e-001 1.0422-001 1.OSSe-001 0.3 1.111/-001 1.212/-001 1.180*-001 1.11le-001 0.4 1.14Oe-001 1.257â‚¬-001 1.10$:-001 1.057e-001 0.5 1.092,-001 1.2252-001 1.082'-001 ..700â‚¬-002 0.6 1.01Oe-001 1.14 le-001 1.00]e-001 1.15/e-002 0.7 9.4352-002 1.0742-001 9.41]e-002 0.1/k-002 0.8 0.7/le-002 1.005e-001 1.7$64-002 7.544-002 0.9 8.145/-002 9.3â€¢Ze-002 1.08 le-002 7.012e-002 1 7.605'-002 1.752.-002 7.524/-002 6.5â„¢-002 2 4.1$â€¢e-002 4.Olle-002 4.12,3-002 3.487/-002 3 2.655'-002 3.15Se-002 2.8.-002 2.15 5/-002 4 1.195.-002 2.25le-002 1.97$e-002 1.460)e-002 scnirce: PUgah-lillian Itn--squite Lk Region: ISIS ZOOS California Closest 01*unce: 169.40 kâ€¢ A,plitude mits; Acceleration (g) â€¢agnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 Col,- 1: Spectral Period Coll- 2: Acceleration (g) for: wilghted -an of Attenuation Equations Colu= ]: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) IGA Iscs 2000 Coluin 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cnlbell-lozorgnia (200) NGA USGS 2001 Col,-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: allow-voungs (2007) NGA uscs ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 PGA 2.S]Ze-002 2.173e-002 3.503/-002 2.420,-002 Noe 36 0.0$ 0.1 0.2 0.3 -_32 v.250 - Sel-ic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter,inistic -.SSâ€¢ vs-250 - Seillic Hazard Analysis ] Detertinistic3.140â‚¬-002 3.015â‚¬-002 3.85Ce-Cal 2.55â€¢e-002 0.4 9.27,e-002 O.Ble-002 1.017e-001 1.731Â®-002 4.001.-002 3.6Gle-002 4.lue-002 3.5:72-002 6.2$â€¢e-002 5.5730-002 7.24Se-002 5.M le-002 7.38]e-002 6.75*-002 1.571â‚¬-002 6.1152-002 7.317/-002 7.207,-002 1.0*4.-002 1.16&-002 7.M.-002 7.367e-002 7.970/-002 6.547e-002 6.114,-002 7.0*Ce-002 7.4312-002 G.14le-002 6.537e-002 1.le-002 7 00â€¢e-002 5.760/-002 6. lili-002 6.14 le-002 G.525e-002 5.4lk-002 5.767.-002 6.1*le-002 G.Olk-002 5.05*e-002 5.42*e -002 5.U22-002 5.$31.-002 4.joie-002 3.05'e-002 1.431,-002 3 0$5.-002 2.69le-002 1.972-002 2.254/-002 1.'Gh-002 1.Glle-002 1.405/-002 1.60*-002 1.45Se-002 1.14Se-002 source: pital point (u-r)-=Dnulve Region: USGS ZOOS callfornil Closest Distance: 152.31 ki Alitude tmits: ACCeleration (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.$0 Col,-11: Spectral Period Colu- 2- Accileration (g) for: weighted man of Attenuation Equations Col-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caipbell.lozorgnia (2002) IDA USCI 2008 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) wlâ€¢ USGS 2008 2 3 4 5 3.7 Sk-002 /.Gooe-002 ..424.-002 3.260e-002 4.04/5-002 3.77Oe-002 4.87"-002 3.50Ge-002 5.21$2-OIl 4.60*e-002 6.OS]e-002 4.96 k -002 1.04*e-002 7.0/Se-002 S. 20le-002 7.Slic-002 9.Ale-002 1.733/-002 1.071,5-001 8.13 k-002 â€¢age 17 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0. 0.9 1 2 3 Weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations ecore -Atkins- (2001) IGA USCS 2001 C-bell-lozorgnia (20012) NIA USGS ZOOS Chiou-Your,gs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 1 0.0$ 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 5.10--002 9.lue -002 0.6 1.51-002 1.7Ke-002 0.7 1.1152-002 1.47]e-002 0.1 7.513/-002 7."Oe-002 0.9 7.00Ge-002 7.3 lie-00 2 1 6.511/-002 6.167.-002 2 3.1S]e-002 3.34*e-002 3 1.957/-002 2.017.-002 4 1.370â‚¬-002 1.413'-002 Sc*Irce: Pitam Point (Lc-r. Welt) Region: USGS 2008 california Closest Distance: 17].11 0 Mplitude mits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Fracti leÂ· 0.50 colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Colum 3: Acceleration (9) for: Coli- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colu-, 52 Acceleratli (g) for: 1 2 3 9 3.309â‚¬-002 2.702e-002 0.0$3.52*e-002 2.*21/-002 0.1 4.4/.-002 3.4 2 le-00 2 0.2 7.0Se-002 5.41*e -002 0.3 1.34Â§3-002 G.Wk-002 0.4 1.'Me-002 7.327e-002 0.5 1.4232-002 7.5512-002 0.1 7.9734-002 7.385/-002 0.7 7.5.5.-002 7.21*e-001 1.002/-001 9.3/Ge-002 1.754.-002 l.lue-002 7.4Ae-002 6.9400-002 3.410,-002 2.134e-002 1.512.-002 . 4.â€¢ae-002 4.880â‚¬-002 6.00/e-002 9.11*e-002 1.095/-001 1.0]Ge-001 1.025/-001 9.570e-002 9.03 k -002 Page 31 1.216,3-002 7.631,-002 7.095/-002 6.61Ze-002 6.161/-002 5.737e-002 2 755â‚¬-002 1.Gile-002 1.1lle-002 2 747,-002 2.1831-002 4.024â‚¬-002 6.012-002 7.713e-002 7.7*h-002 7.43le-002 6.%5.-002 6.$17-002 -_SSâ€¢ vs-250 - Sel-ic Hazard Anulysis 3 Deter,inistic -_Ssâ€¢ 7-250 - Sel-ic Hazard Analy'ls 3 Deterministic0..7.113/-002 6.160â‚¬-002 8.377.-002 6.102e-002 3 1.140/-002 1.25-002 1.16*e-002 9.81*-003 6.577,-002 G.]74*-002 6.1lk-002 5.%*-002 2.Ge-002 2..0.-002 1.77Ge-002 1.Kle-002 1.24le-002 1.25--002 Source: Pital Point (Upper) Region: USGS 200* California Closest Distance: 166.40 ki Amlitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - Fractile: 0.50 colu= 1: Spectral period coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weightec Coli- 3: Acceleration (g) forÂ· loore-At Col-, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambell colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-m 2 3 2.Â§7Ze-002 2.330.-002 2.//7/-002 2.37*-002 3.702,-002 3.01]e-002 6.027.-002 3.420/-002 7.19le-002 G.27â‚¬-002 7.052.-002 7.09*e-002 6.822e-002 7.1242.002 G.2e-002 6 Iic-002 5.*Gle -002 6.33*-002 5.402/-002 5./50/-002 4.lle-002 5.37le-002 4.514/-002 4.10Â»002 2.00Ze-002 2.261.-002 1..nuati ns :kir ./ ..C 001)00. .ng GA US 0.9 Z 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 7.6$12-002 7.0564-002 3.291,5-002 1.932/-002 1.431/-002 an of Atte 1.On (2001) zory,1/ (2 1. (2007) I 3.72//-002 4.10Se-002 5.20*-002 7.8/De -002 0.160.-002 1.5/Se -002 1.11*e.002 1.33*e-002 6.737e-002 G.102e-002 5.4Gle-002 4.945e-002 2.05/e-002 Page 3, 5.707e-002 $.32Se-002 2.;77e-002 1.53*-002 1.032,-002 or Equatio uscs 2001 NGA USGS 2 GS ZOoS 5 1.1506+002 2.06Oe-002 2./Me-002 4.711.-002 5.414(-002 5.50*e-002 5.224e-002 4.USe-002 4.527e-002 4.214e-002 3.917e-002 3.136/-002 1.6*Ge-002 4 7.929,-003 1 10*-003 Sairce: Pitas POint Cor,lected Reg#: Us/5 2001 California Closest Distance: 131.28 6, *litude Mitl: Acceleration (0) .gnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 Column 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (9) for: *ighteÂ¢ Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-At colu- 4: Acceleration (g) fur: Calbell colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-vo 1 2 3 4.noe-002 4. Ilk-002 o.os 5.311.-002 5.0Goe-002 0.1 6.91*-002 6.230)e-002 0.2 1.03*e-001 9.22%-002 0.3 1.1*Ge-001 1.102/-001 0.4 1.14$e-001 1.1010-001 0.5 1.1lk-001 1.10]e-001 0.6 1.042e-001 1.048(-001 0.7 9.807.-002 1.004â‚¬-001 0..9.1141-002 I.391'-002 0.5 0.37 k-002 0.614*-002 1 7.7440-002 7.VIe-002 2 3.652.-002 3.Ille-002 3 2.194/-002 2.36*-002 4 1.532.-002 1.GOIe-002 nuati /S .kin ./ -10 001)000 lung GA US 0.Â§072-003 an of "te ison (2008) zorgnia (2 s (2007) I 4 S.137.-002 6.23/-002 7.1012-002 1.1*le-001 1.36//401 1.28--001 1.267e-001 1.17--001 1.110,-001 1.0284-001 9.40(e-002 1.674.-002 4.0â‚¬Ge-002 2.390â‚¬-002 1.7712-002 Noe 40 6.472/-003 on Equ,tio USGS 2001 NGA ISIS 2 GS ZOOS 4 21Ge-002 4.63*e-002 6.62*-002 1.0112-001 1.01/-001 1.052-001 5.7760-002 1.512.-002 1.lUe-002 7.///402 7.105e-002 1.515/-002 3.07--002 1.Ille-002 1.22le-002 Ill ill" t./- -_SS' /$-25 source: Pletto Region: usGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 149.74 Icl A,elltude unin: Acceleration (g lugnitude: 7.10 - Fractl le: 0.50 Colt,il l: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: colu- ]: Acceleration (g) for: Colu= 4: Acceleration (9) for: Coli- 1: Acceleration (g) for: 2 3 3.17*-002 3.33*e-002 3.41;e-002 3.455/-002 4.4/le-002 4.314e-002 7.00*e-002 7.03Oe-002 1.1Ze-002 1.684â‚¬-002 1.Olk-002 1.107.-002 7 777,-002 8.824.-002 7.232.-002 1.335.-002 6.7*le-002 7.943e-002 G ZIe-002 7.407(:-002 $.7 lle-002 G.712e-002 5.347e-002 6.26*e-001 2.5,0,-002 2 525.-002 1.57Oe-002 1.7282-002 4 1.0%/-002 1.113*-002 Sa,rce: Puerte '111' Reglon: Mls 2001 california Closest Mitance: 19.11 ki I - Sel-1. Hazard Analy.1. 3 Oeterâ€¢Int.tic Weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Socre-Atkinson (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 2008 C.1-5,11 -lozorgnla (2002) "GA USGS 2001 Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ 0%3 2000 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 3 4 3.4'Se-002 3.U7e-002 4.Mle-002 7.407,-002 1.557,-002 7.9Me-002 7.7lk-002 7.067.-002 6.562*-002 6.039â‚¬-002 5.5141-002 5.0e-002 2.1242-002 1.Gile-002 1.22oe-002 Page 41 2.7001-002 2.90*e-002 4.127e-002 6.5;Ge-002 7.33$2-002 7.2140-002 6.791/-002 6.29]e-002 5.13*e -002 5.421/-002 5.0470-002 4.ine-002 2.22Oe-002 1.322,-002 1.162.-003 -_ESA v-250 - sel-Ic Hazard Inaly,13 3 Deter,trilitic litude Uniti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: 0.50 colu=, 1: Spectral Perlod Colu- 2: Acceleratio,I (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuarion Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2004) NGA uses 2001 Colu=, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caq,te'It-WorÂ·gnla (ZOOS) NGA USGS 200% Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (2007) Nli USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 9 2.410,-001 2.204e-001 2.257,-001 2.77Oe-001 0.05 2.712e-001 2.456,-001 2.61Ze-001 3.2715-001 0.1 3.17le-001 3.337,-001 3.711/-001 4.474â‚¬-001 0.2 5 103/-001 4.66 Se-00 1 4 17'-001 S.Â§73/-001 0.3 5.1701-001 4.:Ne-001 4...5.-001 $.62*-001 0.4 4.15oe-Col 4.GOGâ€¢-001 4.7322-001 5.213,-001 0.$4.3Zle-001 4.215/-001 4.Â§632-001 4.71*e -001 0.6 4.10le-001 3.UZe-001 4.154e-001 4.29/-001 0.7 3.765/-001 3.Wle-001 3.1]Ge-001 3.lk-001 0.1 3.437,-001 3.2230-001 3.52--001 3.5$*-001 0.9 3.120,-001 2.863(-001 3 2342-001 3.262,-001 1 2.153/-001 2.5750-001 2.99le-001 2.992,-001 2 1.21$0-001 1.127e-001 1.43*e-001 1.2Â®e-001 3 7â€¢31â‚¬-002 6.055-002 0 317(-002 7 Zlle-002 4 5.119e-002 4.555'-002 6 1382-002 4./.e-002 Source: Puente Hills (Coyote Hilll) Region: USGS 2001 California C#lest Distance: 12.64 k. Alitude t.,Ati: Acceleration (g) lugnitucle: 6.90 - Fractile: 0.50 Colt-, 1: Spectral Period page 42 -_SSA vs-250 - Sel:*11 Hazard Aruhysis 3 Oeter,inisticColu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted *an of Attenuition Equations Col= 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (ZOOS) IGA USGS 2008 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C///ill-lozor,lia (200/) Na./ USGS ZOO/ Colo- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NG, USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 2./M -001 2.44le-001 2.106/-001 3.105e-001 3.217e-001 2.73 le-00 1 3.2354-001 3.179e-001 4.â€¢le-001 3.VIe-001 4.6322-001 ...64-001 5.94*-001 5.57le-001 5.Nk-001 6.293/-001 G.033e-001 $.Ille-001 5.-2-001 6.290â‚¬-001 5.722-001 5.5312-001 $.770â‚¬-001 5.17]e-001 5.33â€¢e-001 5.12Ge-001 5.527e-001 5.355/-001 4.Ilk-001 4.Hk/01 4. Sne-001 4.176â‚¬-001 4 4060-001 4.1*Ge-001 4.56&-001 4.â€¢GS,-001 4.0122+001 3.7 58:-001 4.173e-001 4.105â‚¬-001 3.63ic-001 3.3]le-001 3.104â‚¬-Col 3.774/-001 3.32le-001 2. 'so,-001 3.jole-001 1.472/-001 1.478â‚¬-001 1.262/-001 1.645/-001 1.52Ic-001 8.405(-002 7.05*e-002 '.4.e-002 ..661.-002 5.7,3e -002 4.77Â§(-002 6.IMe-002 $.620.-002 Se--Ce: Puente Hill' (LA) Region: USGS 200 California Clciest olitince: 31.09 ki Allitude Mits: Acceleration (g) Magninde: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.10 Colum 1: Spectral Iriod Colo- 2: Acceleranon (9) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equitiorls Col-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (20)01) Ili USGS 2001 Colt- 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca//6/11-lozory,1/ (2001) ///A USGS 2002 Colt- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlow-Yourngs (2007) 16â€¢ USGS ZOOS Page 43 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.5 1 2 . --SSâ€¢ 9-250 - Sels,ic ouzird Arily,11 3 Oeterinistic 1 2 3 4 5 KA 1.Glh-001 1.717*-001 1.57Oe-001 1.570/-001 0.05 1.160â‚¬-001 1./67/-001 1.*le-001 1.ille-001 0.1 2.623/-001 2.Slk-001 2.652e-001 2.70â€¢e-001 0.2 3.$422-001 3.$13'-001 3.56oe-001 3.â€¢Ce-001 0.3 3.57â€¢e-001 3.73;e-001 3.602/-001 3.383/-001 0.4 3.302e-001 3.4*Ge -001 3.355/-001 3.0e-001 05 3.0428-001 3.2282-001 3.1772-001 2.72le-001 0.6 2.72Ge-001 2.85â€¢e-001 2.15 k -00 1 2.426,-001 0.7 2.47--001 2.63;e-001 2.613/-001 2.lue-001 0.1 2.24$e-001 2.3720-001 2 . 3804-001 1.584/-001 0.9 2 023â‚¬-001 2.105,-001 2.15--001 1.107e-001 1 1./40/-001 1.M/-001 1.5712-001 1.64--001 2 1.01le-002 S.0332-002 0.*432-002 7.0563-002 3 4..7.-002 4.,3.-002 $.1Â§52 -002 4.00]e-002 4 3.Ilse-002 3.133.-002 3.77-002 2.6140-002 S-rce: Puente Hills (Santa Fe Sprinos) Region: USGS 200: California Closest 'BunceÂ· 21.17 km Amplitude units: Acceleration (g) Magni tude: 6.70 - Fractile: 0.50 Colt- 1: Spectral Period Colu-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: â€¢eighted -an of Attertuation Ecuationâ€¢ Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) 11[A USGS 2008 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Car/bell-lozorgnia (2008) InA USGS 2005 Col-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: dilou-voungs (2007) wlâ€¢ USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 9 1.87*-001 1.152e-001 1.907(-001 1.07*e-001 o.os 2.177e-001 2.037e-001 2.23*e-001 2.2;Ge-001 Page 44 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 -_sil v,-250 - Selsilc Hazard Analysis 3 Oeter,inistic -_55â€¢ vy.250 - sels,Ic luzard Analy,is ] Deterenistic3.12]e-001 2.13'e-001 3.Ble-001 3.201-001 0.5 1.Vie-001 2.57}e-001 1.756i-001 1.5--001 4.2Ue-001 4.192/-001 4.1He-001 4.30*e-001 3.152e-001 3.Sne-001 3.$016001 3 64*-001 3.osoe-001 3.21Ze-001 2.7732-001 2.184â‚¬-001 2.417(-001 2. $lie-001 2.22/e-001 2.267/-001 2.00*-001 2.021/-001 1.27*e-002 1.137.-002 4.54*e-002 4.32/e-002 3.0e-002 2 114.-002 Source: Rar=nd â€¢egion: us[GS 2008 California Closest Mitince: 44.13 kl A*litudc wits: Acceleratim (g) Magnitude: 6.80 1 Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectril Brlcd Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted N Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: tore-Atkin Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-10 Col-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Young 2 3 1.0351-001 1.335/-001 1.lue-001 1.415 e -001 1.673,-001 1. ESe-001 2.351â€¢-001 2.ille-001 2.3712-001 3.02*-001 2.174â‚¬-001 2.10$'-001 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.. 1 2 3 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 4.372,-001 4.07oe-001 4 30]e-001 3.94]e-001 4.00Oe-001 3.567/-001 3.Ggle-001 3.lee-001 3.24%-001 2.113,3-001 2.91oe-001 2.5/e-001 2.Gloe-001 2.211/-001 2.11:e-001 2.07Oe-001 2.11*e-001 1.Ule-001 1.lue-002 7.721-002 5.010â‚¬-002 4.256.-002 3.150e-002 2.717/-002 an Of Attenuation Equations son (200) 1, us,s Zoot zory'll (2000) ... uSGS 2001 S (2007) IGI USGS ZoOS 4 5 0.-e-002 1.Ile-002 1.04Â®-001 1.0782-001 1.525e-001 1.$*]e-001 2.06*e-001 2.0Ue-001 2.0Ue-001 2.Olk-001 1 05'-001 1.112,-Col Page 45 0.6 1.7432-001 2.26*-001 0.7 1.511*-001 2 04oe-001 0.8 140Â§e-001 1.IlSe-001 0.5 1.260,-001 1.609e-001 1 1.140*-001 1.442e-001 2 4.957.-002 5.*46.-002 3 2.PH,-002 3.Die-002 4 1.31-001 2.144Â®-002 Source: Red ,Â«,unuln Region: usa ZOO; California closeit Distance: 144.29 ki -elltude -lts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 coh- 1: spectral Period col- 2: Accelerarlen (g) for: Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Col-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: 1 2 3 MA 4.0912-002 4.267e-002 0.0$4.4375-002 4.500e-002 01 5.732/-002 5.46le-002 0.2 1.66le-002 7.97Oe-002 0.3 1.005e-001 9.72Se-002 0.4 9.*Sh-002 9.920,-002 0.5 '.Uoe -002 1.0006-001 O.G 9.133e-002 1.73â€¢e-002 0.7 1.17le-002 9.44 le-002 0.1 8.13 k -002 1 92Oe-002 1.Mt-001 1.39]e-001 1.25;e-001 1.1]le-001 1.034-001 5.0312-002 3.12le-002 2.26â€¢e -002 4 4.22]e-002 4.677e-002 5.156.-002 1.7//-002 1.027,-001 '.GUe-002 .610,-002 9.019e-002 â€¢.542.-002 7.-*-002 ..9. 46 1.4131-001 1.265e-001 1.1438-001 1.037e-001 1.43le-002 3.993,3-002 2.27]e-002 1.â€¢Ue-002 S 3.1042-002 4.1342-002 5.UOe-002 9.21*e-002 1.0152-001 9.Se-002 9.330,-002 1.645.-002 1.02*e -002 7.477e-002 Weighted man of Attenuation Equations loore-Atkinion (2001) â€¢:A US= 2001 ca,Obell-lozorgnia (2001) IGI USIS 2001 Chlou-Young. (1007) ICA ISIS ZOOS -_SS* vs-250 - Set-ic Hazard Analy,11 3 oeter,inlitic ._ssi vs-2$0 - sets,ic Hazard Aruly:11 3 Deter,inlitic0.,7.342,-002 1.244/-002 7.4104-002 6.566.-002 4 1.513/-002 1.9322-002 1.SOOe-002 1.10*e-002 7.034.-002 7.Uk-Col 6.933*-002 6.â€¢lk-002 3.Ille-002 3.7.e-002 3.9015-002 3.1306-002 2.217.-002 2.427.-002 2.537,-002 1.197e-002 1.60]e-002 1.68-002 1./Ue-002 1.2/7/-002 Sc*,rce: Rose Canyon Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 13.77 ki litude Mits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.30 - Fractile: 0.50 Col,-1 1: Spectral Nriod con- 2: Acc,leratton (g) for: weighted eean of Atteriation Equations Coli- 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2000) 1Â«=A USGS 2008 Colum 4: Acceleration Co) for: Cagbell-lozor,la (2001) ./ USCS ZOOS Col,-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Â¥oungs (2007) 1/li USGS ZOOS 2 3 4 3 $.135*-002 7.767.-002 5.272e-002 4.464Â¢-002 1.4$0,-002 1.113e-002 6.075.-002 5.161/-002 1.814e-002 1.055e-001 1.303e-002 7.5124-002 1.Zle-001 1.Â®le-001 1 1*Ze-001 1.0.7.-001 1.342e-001 1.67--001 1.272e-001 1.0761-001 1.260,-001 1.619e-001 1.170â‚¬-001 -lle-002 1.164,-001 1.507â‚¬-001 1.095-001 1. :Ue -002 1.04Oe-001 1.341/-001 9.loze-002 7Â·97ze-002 '.432.-002 1.215â‚¬-001 8.92le-002 7.22Ze-002 1.510.-002 1.1Dle-001 8.0Â§7e-002 6.595,-002 7.11$,-002 1.005<-001 7.32#e-002 6.061(-002 7.180,-002 9.244(-002 G. 703e-002 5.503/-002 3.564,-002 4.59*e-002 3.300,-002 2.7150-002 2,13â€¢e-002 2.CZe-002 2.059.-002 1.G;le-002 Noe 47 1 2 3 4 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 Sa.Irce: san Caye.no Regicwl: USGS ZOO: California Closest Olitance: 109.12 ki *litude tmits: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0.50 Col-I 1: Spectral Peried Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: -Ighted -an of Attenuation Equations collin 3: Acceleratlon (g) for: .core-Attrinson (2001) ,Â«1â€¢ U.Gs 2001 Col=1 4: Acceleration (g) for: cliill-*ozorgnia (2008) IGI ISGS 2001 colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Young, (2007) ICA USGS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 9 5.231,-002 6.23}e-002 4.013*-002 4.*le-002 0.05 5.73*e-002 6.;40.-002 5.437&002 5.2370-002 0.1 7.627,-002 1.13:e-002 7.M--002 7.513,-002 0.2 1.112,-001 1.21$e-001 1.0]le-001 1.1134-001 0.3 1.242e-001 1.397/-001 1.165,-001 1.1650-001 0.4 1.1/5/-001 1.We-001 1.0*Ge-001 1.10]e-001 0.5 1.13Oe-001 1.3302-001 1.052,-001 1.00]Be-001 0.6 1.04 li-001 1.23--001 S.67*-002 9.176,-002 0.7 9.031-002 1166e-001 '.012.-002 1.40]e-002 0.1 1.Slk-002 1077e-001 1.332,-002 7.737e-002 0.'0.190,-002 9.77*-002 7.Â§53.-002 7.13*e-002 1 7.fle-002 8.97 le-002 7.092.-002 6.551/-002 2 3.GSOe-002 4.12Oe-002 3.715/-002 3.0442 -002 3 2.237e-002 2.44.-002 1.422*-002 1./05/-002 4 1.562/-002 1.Gne-002 1.787.-002 1.21le-002 Page 4. -__SS* vs.250 - Seiwic Mazard Mily,ls 3 Deter,InisticSource: San Gabriel Region: uls 2001 Callfornia Clomest Distance. 71.01 *I Am,plitude Mits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7 30- Fractile: 0.$0 Colt-I l: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenwation Equations Colt=, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) 1Â«=A USIS 2001 Cohen 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca-bell-lozorÂ·glia (2001) NIA USGS 2001 Colo=, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Young: (2007) NGA USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 1.57le-002 1.1lk-001 7 1Â«e-002 7.402e-002 9.635e-002 1.20le-001 0.22â€¢e-002 1.66*-002 1.30le-001 1.52Oe-001 1.112e-001 1.27le-001 1.77*e-001 2.014e-001 1.$7Se-001 1.744e-001 1.l4Oe-001 2.07-001 170le-001 1.740e-001 1.73le-001 2.009e-001 1.Sle-001 1.5--001 1.6242+001 1.me-001 1.Â§4le-001 1.414e-001 1.4*le-001 1.733e-001 1.421/-001 1.21*-001 1.368/-001 1.60le-001 1.327(-001 1.17le-001 1.Zile-001 1.4*le-001 1.233e-001 1.074e-001 1.We-001 1.3lle-001 1 14Oe-001 9.907.-002 1.0*Oe-001 1.2G0e-001 1.0Â§2/-001 9 180/-002 5.102,5-002 6.77 le-002 5 8/*-002 4.747e-002 3 707e-002 4 40*e-002 3.107.-002 2.*Ne-002 2 *4.-002 3.1478.002 2.12le-002 1."32-002 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0-4 05 0.1 0.7 0.1 0I 1 4 -_.SSA v-250 - Sei-ic Hazard Analysis 3 DeterministicMagil tude: 7.10 - Fractile: O.50 Col-11: spectral Period Coll-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted man of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS ZOOS Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambell-lozorgnia (2001) MiA USGS 2001 coll- S. Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chiou-Youngs (2007) IGI Uses 2002 1 2 3 4 5 M 3.544,-001 2 950e-001 3.59/-001 4 057e-001 0.05 4.0*Oe-001 3 3*le-001 4.052'-001 4 /000-001 0.1 5.451/-001 4.795/-001 5.402e-001 6.27 k-001 0.2 7.219/-001 6.71;e-001 6.30â‚¬-001 7.943e-001 0.3 7.54 le-001 7.236/-001 7.2272-001 1.1 59â‚¬-001 0.4 7.34le-001 6.547.-001 7.2502-001 7.1251-001 0.5 7.01*-001 6.4he-001 7.255/-001 7.30*e-001 0.6 6.41]e-001 5.Szje-001 6.736:-001 6.752e-001 0.7 6.045e-001 5.479,-001 6.325e-001 6.33Oe-001 0.0 5 51"-001 4.Se-Col 5.9012-001 5.%70-001 0.5 5.1258-001 4.404e-001 5.4710-001 5.50le-001 1 4.7302-001 3.Slle-001 5.1132-001 5.1lle-001 2 2.279/-001 1.769/-001 2.65/1-001 2.405â‚¬-001 3 1.34$1-001 1.063â‚¬-001 1.572/+001 1.Ille-001 4 9.3511-002 7.22Ge-002 1.15Oe-001 9.32*e-002 Source: San Jose Source: San Joaquin /111' Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 7./9 4 Am,litude Units: Acceleration (g) Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 30.121- Melitude *tl: ACCeleratlon (g) Magnitude : 6.70 - Fractile. O.50 Coll- 1: Spectral Perlod Coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted man of Attenuation Equations page .5 â€¢â€¢ge 50 -_Ss. ve.250 - Selgic HazarÂ·d Analysis 3 oeter,inistic -_SSA Â¥5,250 - Sel=ic Hazard Analysis 3 Deter-inliticColum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA USGS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 lozor,lia (2002) NGA USGS ZOOS ings (2007) IGI USGS 2001 - luation Equations k-in'IGI USGS ZOOS ..0 )01) ... ISIS 2001 ung : USGS 2000 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: C,bell Col-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-vi 2 3 K.â€¢ 127Ge-001 1 572e-001 1.4772-001 1.71le-001 2.12/9-001 2.34le-001 2.193â‚¬-001 3.40;e-001 2.116e-001 3.32*-001 2 5110-001 3.120e-001 2.32Oe-001 2.Ilk-001 2.0292-001 2.450(-001 1.10*-001 2.177e-001 1.125/-Col 1.04/-001 1.466:-001 1.751/-001 1.336e-001 1.55Ze-001 6 342.-002 7.4852-002 3.706/-002 4.Use-002 2.57e-002 2.944e-002 Scum: santa Cruz Iland Region: ulls ZOOS California Closest Dtitance: 127.15 k. Whtude ullts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0.50 colu- 1: Spectral Period col-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: tore-Ati Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: caÂ®bell Col,- 5: Acceleration (g) for: 0,100-vo, 1 0 05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 3 4 1.15Ge-001 1.315/-001 2.072/-001 2.742e-001 2.19le-001 2.451/-Col 2.235/-001 1.952,-001 1.7412-001 1.SIZE-001 1.405/-001 1.279e-001 6.12--002 3.77:e-002 2.7212-002 in of Atte, .on (200/) torv,la (2( 1 (2007) 1/ Page 51 1.1012-001 1.33]e-001 1.9640-001 2.53*-001 2.42*-001 2.17le-001 1.907e-001 1.GUe-001 1.50le-001 1.365/-001 1.24Ze-001 1.13Ge-001 5.410,-002 3.162.-002 2.065.-002 fuati .S :kin 0 40 001)008 < GA US Pal 4.14*e-002 4 79*e-002 0 05 4.51le-002 5.031/+002 0.1 5 17/-002 6.26*-002 0.2 0.13 4 -002 9.24]e-002 0.3 9.85&-002 1.042e+001 0.4 9.583/-002 1.05*e-001 0.5 9.20/e-002 1037â‚¬-001 06 1.511/-002 8.463,-002 0.7 7.945â‚¬-002 9.10le-002 0.0 7.390e-002 1 51le-002 0.9 6.647/-002 7.24,!-002 1 1.31/e-002 7.42--002 2 3.447.-002 4.0*le-002 3 2 177/-002 2.59]e-002 4 1.5$0e-002 1.IS*e-002 SC*Irce: santa Ros, Island Region: usss 200* californla Closest Distance: 187.14 ki qlitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.0 - FractileÂ· 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Perlod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loor,-At Colh,-, 4: Acceleratlon (g) for: C,Lbell col,-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: chi-vc 1 2 3 â€¢Gl 1.me-002 1.7672-002 0.05 1 Mle-002 1.104,-002 0.1 2.5Gle +002 2.274e-002 4.2122-002 4.7lle-002 G.057e -002 0.974e-002 1.024e-001 9.576,-002 S. 302/-002 1.$70â‚¬-002 7.991<-002 7.397â‚¬-002 6 791.-002 6.2910-002 3.14*-002 2.14Ze-002 1.5*Oe-002 an of Atte son (2001) zorignia (21 s (2007) I 4 2.SGOe-002 2.114.-002 3.5352-002 page 52 3 423e-002 3.711*-002 5.434e-002 1.2Ue-002 1.915â‚¬-002 I.593/-002 7.950â‚¬-002 7.30le-002 6.73+002 6.2562-002 5.12Â§.-002 5.44 le-002 2.me-002 1.795/-002 1.213e-002 on Equatio USGS 200. INGâ€¢ USGS 2 G. 2000 5 1.323e-002 1.35--002 1.Elle-002 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 -_ssâ€¢ v-250 - Sel -1. lulard Analy. 1. 3 Deter-Inistic -_SS' v/#50 - Sets=Ic Hazard ..4.1/ 3 leter-1/1/tic4.25*e-002 4.112,-002 5.3152-002 3.275e-002 0.6 1.107/-001 1.45;e-001 9.16,e-002 8.791/-002 1..tuati U :ki ./ -10 Â£1)m 1Ing : US 5.1362-002 3.1*4â€¢-002 5.1531-002 5.53*-002 5.030*-002 5. Gooe-002 4.66*-002 5.2Â£/e-002 4.3712-002 4.995-002 4.0692-002 4.707,-002 3.701-002 4.406â‚¬-002 3.5146-002 4.1$3.-002 1.8564-002 2.274-002 1.130,-002 1.34*-002 1.05 k-003 9.1622-003 SCUÂ·Ce: Santa Sulana. alt 1 Region: usgs 2001 California Clojest Distance: 03.13 0 Alitude Units: Acceleradon (g) Magnitude: 6.Â§0 - Fractile: 0.Â§0 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighte, Colâ€¢-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: oore-Ai Colt- 4: Acceleration (g) for. C.*Â©bill Coli= 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-m 2 3 6.01 I -00 2 7.7--002 6.6412-002 8.101,-002 9.10Se-002 1.057â‚¬-001 1.3â€¢le-001 1.69,-001 1.4]oe-001 1.124/-001 1.33Ze-001 1.724â€¢-001 1.2341-001 1.620/-001 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.' 1 4 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 6.32Oe-002 5.IVe-002 5.602.-002 5.0Gle-002 4.6--002 4.23//-002 3.830â‚¬-002 3.497,-002 1.702â‚¬-002 1.0G0e-002 7.720,-003 an of Atter son (2001) zor,Iia (2{ s (2007) il 4 5.30*e-002 6.11-le- 002 1.36:e -002 1.100-001 1.2800-001 1.177e-001 1.103*-001 Noe $3 3.032-002 4.024e-002 3.Ine-002 3.67Ge-002 3.4*Ze-002 3.Zee-002 3.07le-002 2.893,5-002 1.5&-002 9.1022-003 G.57le-003 on Equatic, USGS 2001 NGA USGS K Gs ZOOs Â§ 4.54le-002 5.720e-002 ..393.-002 1.1/e-001 1.18/e-001 1.094e-001 '.107.-002 ed w rluitl n. â€¢tk1r ./ Il-IC 00*)00. . /5 0.7 1.007e-001 1.330e-001 0.0 9.1100-002 1.20Oe-001 0.5 0.237.-002 1.072e-001 1 7.49;e-002 .6532-002 2 3.356/-002 4 095,-002 3 1./Ue-002 2.264&002 4 1.]Sle-002 1.155e-002 Sa.Irce: Santa mez (Lait) Reglon: ugs 2001 california Claiest Distance: 12Â§.31 ki A=plitude Kitl: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu-1 1: Spectral â€¢criod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weight, Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: goore-1 con- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C-pbe Colt- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Cliou-, 1 2 3 â€¢GA 4.23#-002 4. 5Ze-002 0.05 4.6lk-002 5.201,-002 O.1 6.0Gle-002 6.49'-002 0.2 9.027e-002 5.11%-002 0.3 1.005(-001 1.06*-001 0.4 9.7532-002 1.013e-001 0.5 5 3622-002 1.06Oe-001 O.G 1.64*-002 ..15*-002 0.7 1.06/e-002 9.27 k -001 0..7.499.-002 8.673e-002 0.9 6.. 62 -002 8.06*e-002 0.57$2-002 1.147,-002 7.37]e-002 1.7Â«e-002 3.321/-002 2.072.-002 1.$0Se.002 'an of Atte lion (2001) Izorgnia (21 1 (2007) I 4 4.266.-002 4.7791-002 G.147,-002 9.09 le-002 1.037e-001 9.694/-002 9.415/-002 1.672e-002 8.Mle-002 7.4â€¢le-002 0.1712-002 Age W 7.10â‚¬-002 7.24Oe-002 6.6150-002 1.055,-002 2.1512-002 1.531/-002 1.010,-002 ion Equatio USGS ZOOS NGA USGS 21 Â·GS ZOOS 5 3.4*-002 3./71/-002 $.563â‚¬-002 1.466Â¢-002 I.OCe-002 1.73*e-002 1.0741-002 7.40*e-002 6..33.-002 6.340â‚¬-002 $.Il/-002 1 Z 3 -_SSâ€¢ v-250 - Sel#c lazard AnAlysis 3 Deteroilistfc6.477.-002 7.555/-002 6.16*-002 5.50Â»e-002 -_SSâ€¢ ...250 Seigic Nzard Anily,13 3 Deterâ€¢inistic 3.4lle-002 4.141-002 3.388.-002 2.Mle-002 2.202.-002 2.6]le-002 2 14,-002 1.1101-002 1.56*e -002 1.US'-002 1.5--002 1.222e-002 Source: Inta Â¥nel Connected Region: USGS 2001 california Closest Distance: 126.73 k. Ag;Aitude Mits: Acceleration (g) Scx,rce: santa vnez (west) Region: USGS 2008 California Closest Oistance: 179.00 ki *litude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 1- Fractile: 0.50 Collin 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lean of Colu- ]: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2 colt=, 4: Aaeleration (g) for: Cumbell-01011 Coll-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (200 1 2 3 4 2.179â‚¬-002 2.105e-002 2.12 k 2.315.-002 2.liSe-002 3.107e 2.7*c-002 2.706,-002 3.1- 4.151Â®-002 4.652e-002 5.927e 5.7512-002 5.715.-002 6.952e S.;She-002 6.132,-002 6.500* $.663/-002 6.lle-002 6.230e 5.272e-002 5.54Â§e-002 5.67Ge 4.lk-002 5.564.-002 5.247e 4.Glk-002 $.2531-002 4.tose 4.215.-002 4.924.-002 4.36]e 4.00]e-002 4.64*e-002 4.003, 2.14â€¢e-002 2.575e-002 2.0/Se 1.323e-002 1.Â§15â€¢-002 1.25" 9.425.-003 1.1372-002 9.2072Â· Page weighted Ran of Attenuation Equations Boore-Atkinic,1 (ZOOS) 9 USGS 2000 Ca*bell-lozorg'll (2008) NGA USCS ZOOS Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0. 0.' 1 S 4.175,-002 4.62*-002 6.64*e-002 1.00*e-001 1.0:Ze-001 1.042e-001 9.6,0.-002 1.8732-002 1.2042-002 7.629.-002 7.1112-002 G./GO'-002 3.Glle-002 2.251/-002 1.531,-002 Attenuatlon Equatic,li 001) IKGA USÂ£5 2002 â€¢ (2001) NG' USGS 2001 7) PC. USGS 2001 S -002 1.60--002 -002 1.Gne-002 -002 2.331/+002 -002 3.07.-002 -002 4.6572-002 -002 4.Ale-002 -002 4.ille-002 -002 4.Me-002 -002 4.0342-002 002 3.754.-002 002 3.3 le -002 -002 3.35Se-002 002 1.15Ze-002 002 1.14â€¢e-002 003 7.70*-003 55 Magnit,de: 7.40 - Fracille: 0.30 coli 1: Spectral -Mod colu- 2: Acceleratior, (g) for: Col= 3: Acceleration (g) for: Coly- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: 1 2 3 M 4.7Ge-002 5.512e-002 0.05 5.242e-002 5.157e-002 0.1 6 815e-002 7.142e-002 0.2 9.93 k -002 .84]e-002 0.3 1.10.le-001 1.105/-001 0.4 1.011/-001 1 12*e-001 0.5 104//-001 1.117e-001 0.6 9.751,-002 1.056:-001 0.7 9.22;e-002 1.0072-001 0.1 1.Glk-002 S.51(le-002 0.9 1.0112-002 ..905.-002 1 7 . 5620-002 1.3564-002 2 4.23*e+002 4.79*e-002 3 2.755e-002 3.21*e-002 4 1.%42-002 2.212,-002 Scllrce: Sierra Maire . 4.700e-002 5.244,-002 6.45 k-002 9.Uk-002 1.13*c-001 1.072e-001 1.0â‚¬Ze-001 9.53.-002 S.400â€¢-002 1.7*-002 1.161/-002 7.6300-002 4.30oe-002 2.795.-002 2.07'e-002 Page SG -_ISA vsâ€¢â€¢250 - sel-Ic lutard wlyils 3 oeterÂ·ministicReglon: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 41.0 k= Asolitude Mits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7 20 - Fractile: 0.50 Colt- 1: spectral Wrlod Colt-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted mean of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleraticn (g) for: loor,-Atkinion (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Col-, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caipbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGâ€¢ Uils ZOOS Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Young, (2007) 1Â£â€¢ USGS 2008 1234S 1.27*e-001 1.5564-001 1.04*-001 1.235/-001 1.464/-001 1.00e-001 1.2272-001 1.477e-001 2.03Ge-001 2.21]e-001 1.744,-001 2.15le-001 2.739e-001 3.023,-001 2.374,-001 2.122.-001 2.796-001 1.11'-001 2.43*-001 2.757e-001 2.$:le-001 2.'.5.-001 2.25U-001 2.$0â€¢e-001 2.357.-001 2.79*e-001 2.1GGe-001 2.230â‚¬+001 2.1712-001 2.&4Ge.001 1.5732-001 1.934â‚¬-001 1.S930-001 2.3530-001 1.12]e-001 1./03/-001 1.120,-001 2.1141-001 1.Uk-001 1 Â§43e-001 1.65]e-Col 1.SOR-001 1.552*-001 1.503e-001 1.514e-001 1.722e-001 1.443,-001 1.37*e-001 7.227,-002 7.634/-002 7./7/-002 6 151.-002 4.435.-002 4 62le-002 5.074.-002 3.Gme -002 3.102/-002 3.150(-002 3.744.-002 2.41le-002 Salrce: Sierra Madre (San Fern/,Illo) Region: USGS 200/ California Closest 01:Unce: 67.14 6 Alitude u,les: Acceleraclon (g) Magni tude: 6.70 - page $7 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 05 0. 0.9 =Ic Hazard Analysts 3 Oeterenistic I 1/an of Attenuation Equations kinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 -lozorgril (2001) le U.GS 2000 ungs (2007) NGA USGS 200, % ,lation Equations kin'NGA USGS 2001 -_SSA V./250 - lili Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: spectral Period Colin 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighte, Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: wore-Al Colui, 4: Acceleration (g) for: cutbell Coli- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Vc 1 2 3 PGA 6.64(e-002 1.82*-002 0.05 7.412/-002 SÂ·247.-002 0.1 1.037e-001 1.236,-001 0.2 1.516e-001 1.%0,-001 0 3 1.57*e-001 2.103.-001 0.4 1.4434-001 1.936/-001 0.5 1.312401 1.701/-001 0.6 1.15Se-001 1.57le-001 0.7 1.04Oe-001 1.412,-001 0.0 9.3232-002 1.2Â§0'-001 0.5 8.33*e-002 1.11;e-001 1 7.531/-002 1.00le-001 2 3.21Â§e-002 4.03le-002 3 1.1231-002 2.14]e-002 4 1.251/-002 1.451/-002 Sc*Irce: sierra Madre Connected Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Olitince: 41.90 h Mlitude uilts: Acceleration (g) Magnit,/de : 7.30 - Frictile: 0.$0 011 1: spectral Perlod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Colu- 3: Acceleraticn (g) for: Boore-Ati 4 5.150â‚¬-002 G.Â§364-002 9.654-002 1.3472-001 1.4*-001 1.2:Ze-001 1.174e-001 1.0312-001 9.236,-002 8.2*le-002 7.423/-002 6.731/-002 3.144,-002 1/ae-002 1.39*-002 in of Atte, Im (200Â§) Page 5. 5.2418-002 6.152/-002 ..M.-002 1.242/-001 1.225-001 1.112e-001 S./52,5-002 0.7472-002 7.â€¢4â€¢e-002 7.09]e-002 G.43Ge-002 5./55/-002 2.467e-002 1.336 -002 9.010,5-003 -_8 vs.3 - Sels=IC Hazard Analysis 3 Deter-inliticColu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C.,bell-lazor,Ai (2001) ic. USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Cliou-Youngs (2007) IGA USGS ZOOI 2 3 4 5 1.33le-001 1.Ze-001 1.075*-001 1.314/-001 1.527e-001 1.751/-001 1.261*-Col 1.Sm-001 2 112e-001 2.276,-001 1.lili-001 2.27:e-001 2.81Ge-001 3.030â‚¬-001 2.42*e-Col 2.990â‚¬-001 2.Uke-001 3.212e-001 2.50:c-001 2.â€¢31â‚¬-001 2 670.-001 3.00*e-001 2.3]le-001 2.6/4-001 2.452/-001 2.Ile-001 2.25*e-001 2.me-001 2.2712-001 2.1012-001 2.074,-001 2.11*-001 2.095.-001 2.413(-001 1.93Oe-001 1.937/-001 1.Sne-001 2.20/e-001 1.7;Ze-001 1.lue -001 1.Mle-001 1.973/-001 1.6611-001 1.62le-001 1.10*-001 1.7884-001 1.552/-001 1.411/-001 7.1&4:-002 8.0â€¢Se-002 8.744.-002 6.72Oe-002 4.156.-002 $.0530-002 5.GUe-002 3.%7 e +002 3-434e-002 3.4428-002 4.20le-002 2./1.-002 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 -_ssâ€¢ vs-250 - sels,ic Iuzard Analysis 3 oeter,inistic 9 5.nOe-002 G.Wle-002 4.7240-002 4.0342-002 0.0$5.616,0002 6.837.-002 5.4Ok-002 4.GOSe-002 0.1 7.624,-002 8.*49*-002 7.30 le +00 2 6.722.-002 0.2 1.12;e-001 1.30â‚¬-001 1.050Â®-001 5.632e-002 0.3 1.19*e-001 1.45-001 1.144e-001 9.157.-002 04 1.13 le-001 1.42le-001 1.0541-001 S. 171.-002 0.5 1.05Oe-001 1.3330-001 9.192-002 8.267,-002 0.6 5.40--002 1.192,-001 8.861/-002 7.4â€¢le-002 O.7 8.$612-002 1.015,-001 1.07;e-002 .756.-002 0.8 7.10]e-002 5.1951-002 7.332e-002 6.1136-002 0.9 7.117e-002 9.03*-002 6.634/-002 5.USe-002 1 6. 9471-002 1.325.-002 6.OGS'-002 5.250,-002 2 3.217/-002 4.177e-002 2.97/e-002 2.Ille-002 3 1.Mh-002 2.4]le-002 1.158e-002 1 5512-002 4 1.3//-002 1.7Gle-002 1.35*-002 1.One-002 Scurce: So E,erÂ·:li-Copper â€¢tn Reglon: USGS 2002 California Cloust Oistancl: 151.57 ki Amlitude Wits: Accelerati- (g) Sarrce: St,1-santa Iosa Reglon: use; 2001 California Closelt Distance: 54./7 6 A,piltude Units: ACCeleration (g) Magnitude: 6.50 - Fractlle: 0.,0 col,=11: spectral Period coh-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Atteruition Equations colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loor,-Atkir,-I (2001) IGA USGS 200* Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca*bell-lozor,Ila (2001) IGâ€¢ USGS 2008 Coh- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) I:A USGS ZOOS 12345 Noe $9 lugnitude : 7.10 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colul. 2: Acceleration (g) for Coh- 3: Acceleration (g) for coh- 4: Acceleration (,) for colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for 1 2 9 3.033â‚¬-002 3 0.05 3.262,-002 1.1 0.1 4.241*-002 4.2 0.2 6.610'-002 ..1 Weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations 1/ore-Atkinson (2001) NGA US" 200/ Calibill-Izirgrlia (200*) 1Â«=A USGS 2001 Chiou-Yo:/Ms (2007) NGA uses 200/ 3 4 5 !47,-002 3.455/-002 2.3/"-002 174e-002 3 135â‚¬-002 2.5748-002 '03,-002 4.Woe-002 3.152.-002 4Se-002 7.30*e-002 5.157,8-002 .ge GO.... 0.3 0.4 0.5 06 -_SSA v,-250 - Selsile Hazard Analysis 3 Oeter,trilitic -_SM vs-250 - sel-Ic Hazard Analy:11 3 Deterâ€¢inlitic7.115.-002 7.846â€¢-002 1.4532-002 6.547(-002 0.7 6.51*-002 5.627e-002 1.227e-002 5.'4,-002 7 505 e-002 1.135â‚¬-002 7.267e-002 1.0922-002 6.7184-002 7.5712-002 6.30â€¢e-002 7.16*-002 5.Ille-002 6.7352-002 5.4432-002 G.217e-002 5.07Â§e-002 5.912/-002 2.727.-002 3.25%-002 1701e-002 2.02 le-002 1.212e-002 1.457/-002 Source: So Sierra Nevada Reglon: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 170.77 ki Illitude Mits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.50 - Fractlle: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Coh- 2. Acceleration (g) for: weight Colu- 3: Acceleption (g) for: loore- coluan 4. Acceleration (g) for: C//pbe Coh- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou- 1 2 3 2.741(-002 2.4lle-002 2.963,-002 2.Ule-002 3.113/-002 3.301/-002 6.10*-002 4.769/-002 7.2/6/-002 5.737â‚¬-002 7.1202-002 6.175-002 7.341Â¢-002 6.420,5-002 6"37/-002 5.9772-002 0.7 0.1 0., 1 . 7.'04.-002 7.625/-002 6.9--002 6.417â‚¬-002 5.971*-002 5.45le-002 5.02Ge -002 2.5952-002 1.644/-002 1.20:e-002 4 3.469e-002 3 107e-002 4.757/-002 7.*loe-002 9.546â‚¬-002 5.054,-002 9.057e-002 1.6151-002 page 61 6.471*-002 6.085.-002 5.650â‚¬-002 5.2$$1-002 4.90*-002 4..5.-002 4.3012-002 2.3]le-002 1.43*e-002 '.702.-003 5 2.27Oe-002 2.399e-002 3.3/0.-002 5.649,-002 6.574/-002 6.7301-002 6.52*e-002 6.21*-002 ed Mean of Attenuation Equations Atkinson (2200*) PGA USGS 2008 11-'ozorgnia (2008) 16* USGS ZOOS Young' (2007) NG* IMS 200. 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 O.G 0.1 G.21*e-002 5.2/le-002 0.'5.al(e-002 4.91;e-002 1 5.454(-002 4.617â‚¬-002 2 3.164/-002 2.613/-002 3 2.054.-002 1.71Oe-002 4 1.495e-002 1.27]e-002 Source: ver,tura-pital Point Region: USGS 2001 california cloust Ilstance: 131.21 bi A,elitude Ulits: ACCeleratlon (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.,0 Colu=, 1: Spectral Perlod Colu= 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Colu-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: Boore-Ail Colt- 4: Acceleration (g) fur: Campbell Colii, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-'rot 1 2 3 2 4.011â‚¬-002 4.043e-002 0 05 4.340,-002 4.173e-002 01 5.714/-002 5.2*-002 0.2 1.17le-002 1.66â€¢e-002 0.3 1.013/-001 1.037e-001 0.4 9 74le-002 1.02--001 0.5 9.314/-002 1.009/-001 0.6 1.Wk-002 S.Noe-002 0.7 7.92Ge-002 S.ale-002 0.8 7.275e-002 1.1lle-002 0.8 6.613â‚¬-002 7.362,-002 1 6.05Se-002 G.751,-002 7.7$2,3-002 5.630)e-002 7.22 le-002 5.353e-002 6.777.-002 $.017.-002 3.107e-002 2.SUE-002 2.562.-002 1.Uk-002 1.Slle-002 1.2Ve-002 *an of Attenuition Equatlms drlion (2008) NGA USCS 2001 lozorgrli (2001) /GA USCs 2008 ing: (2007) NDA USGS ZOOS 4 5 4.14*e-002 3.144.-002 5.399e-002 3.4/k/002 6.577.-002 4.333â‚¬-002 1037e-001 7.ille-002 1.1.Ile-001 1.11--002 1.102,-001 7.'20.-002 1.0$2(-001 7.32Ge-002 9 55&-002 6.7lze-002 1.:lze-002 6.170.-002 1.02 le-002 5.693/.002 7.21--002 $.257.-002 6.$70,-002 4.155.-002 Page 62 2 -_59 vs-250 - Sel-ic Hazard Analy,15 3 Oeter,Inlitic 2.65le-002 3.0]Ge-002 2.1Zle-002 2.212.-002 -_SSA '-2$0 Sel-ic Mazard Aruly:11 3 Deter,inlitic 1.540/+002 1.7]9e-002 1.Glne-002 1.2&-002 1.07*e-002 1.1562 -002 1.1/2-002 ..537.-003 source: vcrdugo Region: UES 200* california Closest Distance: 47.23 km Ilitode tilts: Acceleration (g) =gnitude: ..SO - Fractile: 0.50 Coll- 1: spectral Period Col-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lean of Attenuation Equations Colum, 3: Acceleratlon (g) for: tore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CAbe:11-lozorv,1/ (2000) lieâ€¢ USGS 2001 Colu=: 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Â·roungs (2007) 1,GA USGS 2008 2 3 4 5 1.02&-001 1.320e-001 1.62*-002 9.01*e-002 1.1-2-001 1.402e-001 1.01*e-001 1.0712-001 1.6402-001 1.16*-001 1.464/-001 1.51$-001 2.2Â®e-001 2.71)e-001 1.06*-001 2.osse-001 2.33le-001 2.92le-001 2.01:e-001 2.034â‚¬-001 2.137/-001 2.71]e-001 1.1670-001 1.13Ze-001 1.953,5-001 2.503e-001 1.7382-001 1.Glle-001 1.736/-001 2.22;e-001 1.$4Ge-001 1.437e-001 1.5684-001 2.015e-001 1.40le-001 1.2lle-001 1.4 tle-001 1.104/-001 1.27Oe-001 1.161,-001 1.272/-001 1.1012-001 1.152â‚¬-001 1.062.-001 1.15â€¢e-001 1.43Be-Col 1.05Ge-001 9.612.-002 5.1332-002 5.-e-002 5.2762-002 4.110â‚¬-002 2.9*le-002 3./lk-002 3.30Oe-002 2.3--002 2.0714-002 2.252e-002 2.404.-002 1.$7Ze-002 1 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.1 0.' 1 4 Source: -lite Wolf Regic,I: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 170.23 ki Alitude lintsÂ· Acceleration (g) lugni tude : 7.20 - Fractile: 0 50 Colum 1: Spectral Perlod Colu= 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lan of Attenuation Equations Col-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Arkinson (2001) NGA USGS 200* Colutn 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-lozorgnla (2001) NIA USGS 2001 Coll-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chico-Â¥â‚¬*Ings (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 9 2.7//-002 2.GIOe-002 3.305/-002 2.3-'-002 0.05 2.Ille-002 2.782.-002 3.637.-002 2.Wle-002 0.1 3.1]Ze-002 3./lk-002 4.5311-002 3 152-002 0.2 G.noe-002 5.5632-002 6.1/0â‚¬-002 5 Uk-002 0.3 7.3312-002 7.123e-002 1.10Oe-002 6.7712-002 0.4 7.216.-002 7.415â‚¬-002 7.Glk-002 1.02Ge -002 0.5 7.1/le-002 7.607&002 7.4312 -002 6.50/e-002 O.G 6.7672-002 7.327e-002 6.87*-002 6.OVe-002 0.7 G.414e-002 7.0571-002 6.44oe-002 5.70$e-002 0.8 6.003,-002 6.703,-002 5.%5.-002 5.142,-002 0.5 5.555â‚¬-002 1.lile-002 5.473,-002 ..9- -002 1 5.170/-002 5.777*-002 S.-le-002 4.6662-002 2 2.5./-002 2..7.-002 2.Ull-001 2.272*-002 1.55*e-002 1.70Se-002 1.716â‚¬-002 1.3682 -002 4 1.11*e-002 1.164,5-002 1.266.-002 9.232,-003 Source: california Gridded Region: USGS 20]01 California page 63 Page B -_SSA Â¥$-250 - Sels=ic Mazard Analysis 3 Deter,InisticClosest Distance: 5.00 ki Allitude vits: Accelerati- (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Maile: 0.50 colu=, 1: Spectral Rried colum Z: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted lean of AttenuatiI Equations Colt- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) IA ISIS ZOOS colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: calbell-lozor-viiâ€¢ (2001) 21 USGS Zoos con- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (1007) 9 USGS 2001 2 3 4 $ 707â‚¬-001 4.71Oe-001 4.1046-001 $.32*-001 5.474e-001 5.754e-001 4.5&-001 6.13Ze-00 1 7.105e-001 7.07.-001 5.69*-001 7.Â§76â‚¬-001 9.352/-001 1.114e+000 7.215â‚¬-001 â€¢.633â‚¬-001 NIC>e-001 1.1%Â®-000 7.*SS,-001 1.00*e+000 9.Ale-001 1.1Aeâ€¢000 1.1Ue-001 9 13ie-001 9.5Ue-001 1.110,+000 1.357/-001 L 31*e -001 1.K)Ce-001 1.012000 7.We-001 1.752,-001 1.3212-001 '.3642-001 7.4022-001 1Â·2184-001 7.700,-001 1.466e-001 6.92/e-001 7.70*e-001 7.04}e-001 7.50*-001 6.4212-001 7.20Ce-001 6.4lle-001 6.743e-001 6.0012-001 6.7014-001 3.lne-001 1.3402-001 3.14e-001 3 216â‚¬-001 1.Wk-001 2.03--001 1.#Se-001 1.5]Ge-001 1.Re-001 1.4]le-001 1.36*e-001 1.2$55-001 Source: Anâ€¢cap,-D.e Reolm: us:5 2001 California Closest Dlstance: 66.62 b Allitude I*lits: Accelerition (g) lugnl rude : 7.20 -9 Fractile: 0.50 Page 65 1 â€¢GA 4 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 4 --_Ss' /1-250 - se Col- 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: *ight CO,U- 3: ACCelefatiOn (91 for: Boore- Coh- 4: ACCeleration (g) for: CaTbe Col- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou- 1 2 3 PGA .59;e-002 1.132/-001 0.05 1.017/-001 1.207e-001 0.1 1.410â‚¬-001 1.$47e-001 0.2 2.0591-001 2.167e-001 0.3 2.115/-001 2.340.-001 0.4 2.016!-Col 2.zose-001 0.5 l.*SOâ‚¬-001 2.Olle-001 0.6 1.71--001 1.906/-001 0.7 1.515,-001 1.766,-001 0.1 1.Â«h-001 1.60/-001 0.9 1.314/-001 1.4455-001 1 1.20}e-001 1.31Ze-001 2 5.4261-002 5.H;e-002 3 1.2000-002 3.$20â‚¬-002 4 2.23le-002 2.354.-002 Saurce: Chino Reglern uscs 200: California Closest Oistance: 22.52 k. Azolitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.10 - Frictile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighti Colu= 3: ACCeleration (g) for: Ioore-i cell- 4: Acceleration (g) for: cuabe 1-Ic Nzard Analysis 3 Deterministic ed lean of Attenuation Equations Atkinson (2000) 16 USGS ZOOS 11-lazorgr,la (2001) NGâ€¢ LISGS 200* Youngs (2007) IGA USGS ZOOS ed le,-uation Equations â€¢tkin NGA USGS 2008 Il-/O.)01) NGA USGS ZoOS 9.305e-002 1.062e-001 1.444-001 2.045,-001 2.205e-001 2.05'e-001 1.01/-001 1.125(-001 1.GAI-001 1.5GOI-001 1.473<-001 1.310e-001 6.072e-002 3.54;e-002 2.Blk -002 M of Atte, Ion (200*) 'org/1/ al p.g. 64 S 1.45*e-002 9.920Â®-002 1.442-001 1.%52-001 1.950â‚¬-001 1.me-001 1.5Me-001 1.427e-001 1.291/-001 1.17*e -001 1.07*e-001 9.862.-002 4.3/e-002 2.53le-002 1.67--002 50 + Sels=ic Hazard Aruly:11 3 DeterÂ·,intidc Chiou-Youngs (2007) IDA USGS MOOS Lie-001 )se-001 16-001 )le-001 )5e-001 )52-001 ile -001 L4e-001 [Se-001 I2e-Col 32-001 ze-001 .-002 Be-002 k-002 1) weighted -,Uati ,S loore-Atkin ./ C.-,6.11-10 )01))0. ch lou-Young :US -_SSA VS-2 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: 2 1 1.67â€¢e-001 1.91 1.960â‚¬-001 2.E 2.136/-001 2.9, 3.795e-001 4.2( 3.67--001 4.05 3.]Sk-001 3.. 3.060â‚¬-001 3. 5 ! 2.615e-001 3.11 2.400e-001 2.71 2.16Oe-001 2.k 1.95*-001 2.2/ 1.782e-001 2.05 1.577e-002 9.. 4.9752-002 5.57 3.45Oe-002 3.â€ž Source: Elsinore Region: ugs 2000 California Closest 01'unclÂ· 11.89 k. uplitude t,Ilts: Acceleration (g lugni nde : 7.15 - Fractile: 0.50 Coll-, 1: Spectral Period coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Coh- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Colu-1 4: Acceleration (g) for: colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: 2 3 PGA 2.4le-001 2.1266-001 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 03 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 Z 3 1 1.538/-001 1.$42-001 2.777,-001 3.62Oe-001 3.51]e-001 3 225â‚¬-001 2.551â‚¬-001 2.Sale-001 2.30â€¢e-001 2.070e-001 1.BUe-001 1.704,-001 1.ale-002 S 01Oe-002 3.5631-002 an of Atte, son (2000) zor,lia (2{ S (2007) AK 4 2.056.-001 Page 67 1.510e-001 1.9272-001 2.795,-001 3.564.-001 3.427e-001 3.07*e-001 2.717e-001 2 41le-001 2.166â‚¬-001 1.See-001 1.71Se -001 1.63 k -001 7 7514-002 4.445/-002 2.877e-002 On Equatil USCI 2001 Ne. USGS M GS 2001 S 2.79Oe-001 -_SSâ€¢ 9.250 - Selsâ€¢ic 0.05 2.17â‚¬-001 3,031/-001 0.1 3.965 -001 3.955/-001 0.2 4.9732-001 4.5602-001 0.3 5.07*c-001 4.713e-001 0.4 4.Ille-001 4.517e-001 0.5 4.Gile-001 4.2111-001 O.G 4.31:e-001 4.051/-001 0.7 4.165*-001 3.Â§74 1-001 0.1 3.ile-001 3.Ille-001 0.5 3.Uk-001 3.3082-001 1 3.â€¢72e-001 3.0551-001 2 2.152*-001 1.167â‚¬-001 3 1.50*e-001 1.4771-001 4 1.0970-001 1.0771-001 Source: Garlock Reglon: 1645 2001 california Closest Mitance: 146.54 Ici Uplltude mits: Acceleration (g) 11â€¢gr,1 rude : 7.72 - Fracti le: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Perlod Colo- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted le Colu- 3: Accelirition (g) for: loori-Atkin colu- 4: Acceleratic,I (g) for: C.,bell-lo Col L-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: chlou-Young 1 2 3 PGâ€¢ 4.144'-002 5.023.-002 0.05 5.27Ze-002 5.423.-002 O.1 6.68 2.-002 6.3 5Ge-002 1 0.2 9.72k-002 1.07-002 0.3 1.117i-Col 9.367e-002 lutard mly:11 3 Deterdni,tlc 2 403/-001 3.3112-001 3.3762-001 4.56;e-001 4.443e-001 5.il/-001 4.53]e-001 5.987*-001 4.3532-001 5.65;e-001 4.477e-001 5.2170-001 4.3028-001 4.10:e-001 4.151/-001 4.4632-001 4.00â€¢e-001 4.1*/-001 3.Bile-001 3.891/-001 3.703â‚¬-001 3.657e-001 2.551/-001 2.0370-001 1.74*e-001 1.29le-001 1.327e-001 1.16*-002 ar of Attenuation Equations -1 (2008) NGA USGS 200/ torgr,11 (2001) El USGS 2008 I (2007) NGA IMS 200. 4 $ 4./30e -002 4.510â‚¬-002 5.41*e-002 4.97;e-002 6.63oe-002 7.0Â®e-002 1.00*-001 1.107e-001 1.lile-001 1.2232-001 lage â€ž 0.4 05 0.6 0.7 -_Ssâ€¢ v,-2$0 - sels,ic Hazard Anilysis 3 Deterministic -_su vs=250 - sel-ic Mazard Analyâ€¢11 3 Deterâ€¢inistic1.11le-001 '.903.-002 1.13*e-001 1.20â€¢e-001 0.0 1.lile-001 1.406e-001 1.065/-001 1. 16â‚¬-002 1.106â‚¬-001 1.Olli-001 1.167/-001 1.112,-001 1.05Se-001 '..7.-002 1 124â‚¬-001 1.053â‚¬-001 1.Olle-001 -]Ge-002 1.0112-001 '.12*-002 ..705.-002 .513e-002 1.039,-001 0.215/-002 9.17â€¢e-002 .0710-002 9 7â€¢ze-002 1.1$*e-002 1.7112-002 1.03â‚¬-002 1.2&-002 8.1522-001 5.244e-002 5.407e-002 5.731,-002 4."le-002 3.56*e-002 1.%5â‚¬-002 3.833.-002 2.Sole-002 2.5Â§01-002 2.76le-002 2..3.-002 1.9962-002 Source: -libu Coast Region: Usls 200; callfornil Closest Distance: 64.M ki Ielitl,de Miti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 MI Fractile: 0.50 Col,-, 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lean of Attenuation Equations Colu=, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loori-Atkinion (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Coluu, 4. Acceleration (g) for: calbell-lozorgnii (200:) FIGA ISIS ZOOS Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) 1,GA USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 9 1 012e.002 1.07Se-001 6.1532-002 6.436â‚¬-002 0.'/32-002 1.13/e-001 7.574.-002 7.5Ue-002 1235-001 1.4Ue-001 1.10--001 1.12Oe-001 1.734e-001 2.130.-001 1.5518-001 1.Wle-001 1.76*-001 2.171,-001 1.636â‚¬-001 1.$0le-001 1.64*e-001 2.074,-001 1.50Ge-001 1.3655-001 1.517e-001 1.9 lk -001 1.4ZOe-001 1.214e-001 1.3 lie-001 1.7012-001 1.277e-001 1.Clk-001 1.23le-001 1.Sâ€¢le-Col 1.lge-001 9.718-002 0.1 0.9 1 2 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.$ 0.1 0.7 0.9 1.022e-001 1.27le-001 S.6#-002 1.177/-002 1 '.]Ie-002 1.174 e-001 1.â€¢1*-002 7.5372-002 2 4.733/-002 5.nze-002 4.34 le-002 3.762,-002 3 2.Uoe-002 3. ilse -002 2.15/-002 2.25 k -002 4 2.04]e-002 2.532.-002 2.095.-002 1.$04,-002 Source: Newport-Ingle,ed Region. USGS ZOOS Callfornia Closest Oilunce: 12.74 ki Imlitude Mits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.50 - Fralilli: 0.50 Coll= 1: Spectral Perlod Coll- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Coll- 3: Acceleratlon (g) for: 1/ore-Atkinson (2008) *GA USGS 2001 Col,=, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Clitill-lozorgriti (2001) ICA USGS 2008 Colt- 5: Acceleration (g) forÂ· Chiou-Youngs (2007) /lA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 â€¢Gâ€¢ 2.75*+001 2.74%-001 2.42â€¢e-001 3.10â€¢e-001 0.05 3.232e-001 3.15Se-001 2.84De+001 3.6*Se-001 0.1 4 44-001 4.291.-001 4.03le-001 5.0Zle -001 0.2 5.US,-001 5.454e-001 5.202e-001 6.440*-001 0.]5.76*-001 5.542,-001 5.22â€¢e-001 6.53--001 0.4 5.521/-001 5.337/-001 5.0312-001 6.1Ke-001 0.5 5.252/-001 4.5/4/-001 $.042,-001 5.noe-001 O.G 4.176,-Col 4.610e-001 â€¢.727.-001 $.2ue-001 0.7 4.570,-001 4.315.-001 4.4762-001 4.51--001 0.0 4.26h-001 3.Vse-001 4.237,-001 4.Sle-001 0.9 3.9 72(,-001 3 611,-001 4.00:e-001 4.2/le-001 1 3.7 lk-001 3.314e-001 3./13e-001 4.0]le-001 2 2.1834-001 1.Uk-001 2.435e-001 2.22Ge-001 Page 6,â€¢agi 70 -_SSA vs-250 - seisili Hazard Analysis 3 Deterministic -_SSâ€¢ v,â€¢2$0 - Sel-ic Mazard Analy,ls 3 Deter,tristic3 1.45*e-001 1.34*-001 1.12Ge-001 1.39Se-001 nuatl ./ :kli ./ -. 001)00. .In,GA t.,5 4 1.050â‚¬-001 9.10 le-002 Source: Southern San Andreas Region: USGS ZOO* California Closest Distance: 69.65 ki *litude wits: Eceleration (9) Magnitude: 0.20 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu-1: Spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: fghte, Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loori-Ai colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: c,bell Colu- S: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-vc 2 3 1.336â‚¬-001 1.$82,5-001 1.52Ge-001 1.754/-001 1.%91-001 2.106,-001 2.402â‚¬-001 2.134e-001 2.63Oe-001 2.24Oe-001 2.5]le-Col 2.23Oe-001 2.49]e-001 2.22â€¢e-001 2.39Ge-001 2.1lle-001 2.316e-001 2.162(5-001 2.217e-001 2.012e-001 2.104e-001 1.Nje-001 2.006Â®+001 1.8622-001 1.29*e-001 1.217/-001 9.Â«Ge-002 1.030Â®-001 G..Se-002 7.1Me-002 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0., 0.1 0-7 0.1 0Â§ 1 3 1.202e-001 1.40Se-001 2.035e-001 2.76*e-001 2.785(:-001 2.We-001 2.344.-001 2.12*= -001 1.9$0â‚¬-001 1.10*-001 1.674e-001 1.See-001 1.44Ge-002 5.299 -002 3.63]e-002 1.21$0-001 A of Atte i.on (2001) Izorv,18 (2 IS (2007) â€¢ 4 1.0//401 1.1$â€¢e-001 1.472-001 2.1lk-001 2.3971-001 2.309â‚¬-001 2.4--001 2.4â€¢Ze-001 2.427'-001 2.3798-001 2.305e-001 2.24 le-001 1.615,-001 1.130e-*001 0.705/-002 page 71 .5412-002 lon Equatio USGS 2001 NGA USGS 2 S 2001 $ 1.400e-001 1.63Oe-001 2.Ble-001 3.1932-001 3.Zle-001 3.055e-001 2.7le-001 2.55fe-001 2.357,-001 2.191,5-001 2 04â€¢e-001 1.9151-001 1.06Ze-001 6.74*-002 4.64*e-002 Region: trsGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 52.36 b sc*Irce: san jacinto â€¢eglon: USGS 200* californli Cl.... 01'tance: 65.18 k. ABlitude units: Acceleration (g) lugni tucte: 7.U - Fractile: 0.50 Col-11: Spectral Perlod Cell-1 2. Acceleration (g) for: welghted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colt=, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2008) NGA USTS 2001 Coll- 4: Acceleratlon (g) for: Calbell-,ozorgnia (2001) ICA USGS 2001 Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (2007) IGA USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 1.210*-001 1.4 llc.001 o.os 1.]loe-001 1.650â‚¬-001 0.1 1.alle-001 1.09*-001 0.2 2.33/2-001 2.226,-001 0.3 2.4â€¢le-001 2.31_le-001 0.4 2.324â‚¬-001 2.267e-001 0.5 2.245/-001 2.210+-001 0.6 2.116e-001 2. use-001 0.7 2.Olle-001 2.037e-001 0.1 1.89*-001 1.92*e-001 0.'1.712/-001 1.79*e-001 1 1.611*-001 1.GUe-001 2 1.0160-001 1.02Ge-001 3 7 07]e-002 7.911*-002 4 $.09*e-002 $.510.-002 Scwrce: santa =oni ca 1.487Â®-002 1.01*-001 1.41Â§e-001 2.015,-001 2.227,-001 2.11*e-001 2.1*le-001 2.10Ge-001 2.045.-001 1.*Se.001 1.87]e -001 1.7948-001 1.17*e-001 1.011,-002 6.015.-002 Page 72 -_sIA vs.250 - Sels,1/ Hazard Analysis 3 DeterÂ·Inlitic litude units: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 colu- 1: spectral Period Coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted *an of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkin- (2008) Ncâ€¢ uscis ZOOS Coh- 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca,pbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Accelerailon (g) for: O,100-Youngs (2007) ICA USGS 200* 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 2 3 4 5 0.3 0.4 0.$ 0.6 07 0.8 0.' 1 2 4 1.26]e-001 1.45*-001 1.142e-001 1.1Me-001 1.435/-001 1.511/-001 1.310e-001 1.4152-001 1.55â€¢e-001 2.017/-001 1.75â€¢e-001 2.052e-001 2.6211-001 2.632e-001 2.$042-001 2.72:e-001 2.727e-001 2.117/-001 2.670,-001 2.6/2/-001 2.ille-001 2.65Ze-001 2.50%-001 2.46Ze-001 2.39*-001 2.521/-001 2.4 GSe -001 2.203e-001 2.20]e-001 2.3364-001 2.2964-001 1.Wle-001 2.Olle-001 2.130e-001 2.16Oe-001 1.73le-001 1.Uie-001 2.00$-001 2.012'-001 1.639e-001 1.7232-001 1.10*-001 1.*GOe-001 1.5038-001 1.$16Â®-001 1.64]e-001 1 7332-001 1.3*le-001 7.571/-002 7.61Se-002 8.154/-002 G.235,-002 4.64 2.-002 4.Ule-002 5.373e-002 3.67 k -002 3.2 5 ie-002 3.3132-002 3.-Se-002 2.â€¢GOe-002 Page 73 -_554 vi-1*0 - Selulc Hazard Analysis 1 â€¢robabilistic -_SSA vs-180 - Seli,ic Mazard Analisi, 1 ProbabilisticProbabilistic spectra results for El-fusK 7.60 Iulld 001 Con- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CE=pbell-lozorgr,18 (ZOOD) IKA USGS ZOOS Colu,n $: Acceleration (g) for: Chlow-voungs (2007) IGA USGS 2001 ARS kinion (200Â§) NGA USGI ZOO]l -Sozorâ€žia (2008) 9 Usss 1001 ungs (2007) NGA USIS 2001 Af-uu FIEQUENCr OF EXCEEDANCE: 4 04 le-004 RETURN PERIOD: 2474.9 MIABILITY OF EXCEEDENCE: 2.0% IN 50.0 YE Colu- 1: Spictral Period Col- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Mean Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-At Cok- 4: Acceleration (9) for. Ca,bell Coh- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Cliou-vo 1 2 3 5.69â€¢e-001 G./20,-001 6.712e-001 7.5-e-001 9.3902-001 1.0741â€¢000 1.11Se.000 1.3*le.000 1.24]e.000 1.474,+000 1.18]e.000 1.372eâ€¢000 1.15*â€¢000 1.334+000 1.OVe+000 1.2455+000 1.0$30+000 1.liZe.000 1.002'+000 1.10-+000 9.24h-001 1.024/00 1.Gsoe-001 1.412â‚¬-001 5.Ne-001 $.474â‚¬-001 3.Hle-001 3.6*-001 2.594/-001 2.627,-001 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 04 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.. 09 1 2 3 4.'Gle-001 5.454e+001 7.990â‚¬5-001 1.014Â®+000 1.042Â®+000 1.023.+000 1.030Â®.000 9.922e-001 9.570e+001 9.157e-001 0.700â‚¬-001 1.33]e-001 5.574e-001 3.713e-001 2.77le-001 5.31*i-001 6.343-001 1.430(-001 1.0Ue.000 1.01-â€¢000 1.05-+000 1.017(â€¢000 9.635,-001 9.12*-001 1.04/-001 1. Me-001 7.Soe-001 3.040e-001 3.38-001 2.337 e-001 Eâ€¢IS kins,n (2001) 16â€¢ US;5 2008 -lozorgnla (2001) MGA USGS 2001 ungs (2007) NG' uSGS 20)01 M 4.#-001 5.365-001 0.05 5.]le-001 6.21:c-001 0.1 7 5*oe-001 1 7:Ge-001 0.2 9.Mt -001 1.13*0000 0.3 1.02le-000 1.1//400 0.4 9.77Â£-001 1.127000 0.5 9.475/-001 1.0Seâ€¢000 0.6 0.83â€¢e-001 1.03;e,000 0.7 1.359â‚¬-001 5.0332-001 0.1 7.â€¢32,-001 9.02]e-001 0.9 7.213/-001 1.165â‚¬-001 1 6.820/-001 7.Slk-001 2 4.oue-001 4.275,-001 3 2.674/-001 2.*lk-001 4 1.937(-001 2.one-001 A-UAL FREQUENCY OF EXCEED#,CE: 2.1071-003 REr,N PERIOD: 474.6 PROIABILITY OF EXCEEDENCE: 10.(M IN 50.0 Â¥ Col,-1 1: Spectral Period Coh- 2: Acceleraticwl (g) fur: Mean Coli=n 3: Acceleration (g) for: Boori-At Colum 4: Accelerratic,I (g) for: C.*ell Col-, 5: Acceleration (9) for: Chiou-vo 3.76Ze-001 4.436,-001 6.529-001 1.26*e-001 1.86/-001 S.Zlse-001 1.235-001 7.12;e-001 7.53â€¢e-001 7.Zole-001 6.11--001 6.47-001 4.lZe-001 2.7564-001 2.0612-001 5 4.231/-001 5.0:30-001 6.501-001 1.877/-001 9.03 le-001 1.Glse-Col 1.09â€¢e-001 7.Gole-001 7.lile-001 G.*00*-001 G.4155-001 6.0*le-001 3.712e-001 2.4062-001 1.67le-001 A-RAâ€¢L FREQUENCY OF EXCEEI*ICE: 1.02*-003 RETURN PERIOD: 974.1 PROIASILITY OF EXCEEDENCE: 5.01 IN 50.0 YEARS Colum 1: Spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: -an Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-ArkÂ·Inson (2001) 1Â«LA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 3.13le-001 4.527,-001 3.123,-001 3.43*-001 0.05 4.4*Ze-001 5 215â‚¬-001 3.684(-001 4.157e-001 0.1 6.252e-001 7.315e-001 5.421*-001 5.737e-001 0.2 8.1063-001 9.5991-001 7.020.-001 7.47Ge-001 Page 1 â€¢ag' 2 -0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0Â§ 0.9 1 2 -_SSâ€¢ vill - Se 1$â€¢ic Hazard Analy:1 $ 1 Probabllistle0,4 13/-001 1.0/Zeâ€¢000 7 225.-001 7.551,-001 1.001,-001 1.53Se-001 G.Slle-001 7.lke-001 7.74Se-001 9.237â‚¬-001 6.1364-001 6.Glie-001 7.250/-001 1.532â‚¬-001 6.41%-001 G.lue-001 6.150â‚¬-001 8.024,-001 6.1201-001 $.779â‚¬-001 6.3638-001 7.4264-001 5.80(e-001 5.44le-001 5.167.-001 6.747.-001 5.4661-001 5.137 e-001 5.47:-001 6.1$63-001 S. 1le-001 4 â€¢Goe-001 3.20le-001 3.415â‚¬-001 3.24*e-001 2.852e-001 2.07e-001 2.20*-001 2.12Ge-001 1.125/-001 1.4$Se-001 1.5361-001 1.550,-001 1.261/-001 Page 3 -_SS' VI-1/0 - oeterminlitic Spectra Results using U LarÂ·gest Nolitudes of Gr.und -tions Â£ menwation Equations Allitude Uniti: Acceleration (9) Fractile: 0.5 Period -Olltude -9.1 tude 3.Wle-001 7.00 - 4.032,-001 7.00 - 3 095:-001 7.00 - 7.Olle-001 7.00- 7.610/-001 7.00 - 7.7Soe-001 7.00 - 7.70 le-001 7.00 - 7.368/-001 7.00- 7.07:e-001 7.00 - 6.73*-001 7.00 - 6.34le-001 7.00 - 6.00/e-001 7.00 - 3.55 k.001 7.00 - 2.2:Oe-001 7.00- 1.kle-OK]l 7.00 - Sel-Ic Hazard Analvils 1 Deterministic 1-NISK 7.60 luild 061 wildering All Source, Calculated using We' 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.. 0.9 1 Z Closest Region Distance(kn) 5.00 USGS 2001 Californii 5.00 USGS ZOOS california 5.00 USCS 2001 California 5.00 USCS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2001 California $.00 USGS 200* California S.00 ISIS ZOOI California 5.00 USGS 200/ California 5.00 WSCS 200; Callfornil 5.00 USGS 2002 California 500 USGS 200: California 5.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 USGS 2002 California 5.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 USGS ZOOB California Ighted man of Controlling Source California Gridded california Gridded California Gridded Call fornia Cridded Californla Grldded California Gridded Callforr,1 8 Cridded California Cridded california Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded Californl. Gridded California Grldded Call forni/ Crl dded -_SSA VS-110 - 02 1.633.-001 7.00 - 0.3 5.161-001 7.00 - 0.4 1.%65-001 7.00- 0.5 0.405e-001 7.00 1.1 0.6 7.6$â€¢e-001 7.00 - 07 7.0710-001 7.00 - 0.8 6.4422-001 7.00 - 0.,5.797e-001 7.00- 1 5.2752-001 7.00 - 2 2./11/-001 7.00 - 3 1.7912-001 7.00- 4 1.301*-001 7.00 - ZMUsâ€¢;tudes of Ground mtion, C A-lituell units: Acceleration (g) Maile: 0.5 Period Alitude Magnitude 3.56le-001 7.00 'I 0.05 3.7014-Col 7.00 - 0.1 4.3184-001 7.00- 0.2 5.425.-001 7.00.. Cridded. Our. lorâ€ž/1 Â£ Ill Sel utcdralnNO'Atit;N:nistic 5.00 .SGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS 2008 California 5 00 USCS 200* C,lifornla 5.00 USGS 200: California 5.00 teSGS ZOOS California 5.00 USGS 200: california 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 USCS ZOOS California 3.00 usls 200* California 5.00 USGS 2001 California mildering Sources Calculated with caIMI Clolest â€¢egiM 01 'unce(k') $.00 USGS 2001 c,mlifor,ia 5.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 ...200. california 5.11 USCS 2002 California California Gridded California Cridded california Gndded California Gridded California Gridded Callfornla Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded Cal 1 fornia Gridded California Gridded Bozorgnia (2000} Controlling source al ifornia Gridded california Gridded California Gridded Im Extensionul b::r,litudes of Ground -tion. Con.Idering Sources Calculated with loori Amplitude wits: Acceleration (g) Fractile: O.5 Period Illitude lugnl rude Clo,elt Region 01:unce(km) 3.0122-001 7.00-5.00 USGS 20)01 California 3.$G2e-001 7.00 -5.00 USGS 100Â§ callfor-/1/ 5.214e-001 7.00 -5.00 USGS 2001 callforrill â€¢age 1 0.05 0.1 ATI<inman (2001) 9 Controlilng Sa;rÂ·ce Call fornii Gridded California Gridded California Gridded 0.3 G.Clse-001 7.0 0.4 1.533Â¢-001 7.0 0.$6.%]e-001 7.01 0.6 1.10*-001 7.0{ 0.7 6.Glle-001 7.0( 0..6.4641-001 7.01 0.,G.lili-Col 7.0( 1 5.937e-001 7.0( 2 3.9522-001 7.0( 3 2.447e-001 7.0( 5.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 USGS 2001 California }- 5.00 USGS 2001 C,lifornia 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 USGS 200: California 5.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 USGS ZOOS california 5.00 usGS 2008 California 5.00 ISIS 200/ California lage 2 California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded Cilifornia Gridded california Gridded Call fornia Gridded california Gridded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded -.SM vs-180 - Sellile Hazard An/lylil 1 Deter,inistic 1.7ue-001 7.00 -5.00 .SCS 2001 -lifornia california Gridded t:gr:&,r1 tudes of Ground Motions Con,iderir, sources Calculated with Chiou-mungs (2007) CA A*litude units: Acceleration (9) -_SSâ€¢ v-180 - Selsâ€¢ic Hazard Aruly/11 1 DeterÂ·enistic Col-11: Spectral Perlod Col,- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted -an of Attertuatici Equatic,Ii Colu= 3: Acceleration (g) for: kori-Atkinson (2001) NIA USGS 2001 Coll- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CRI<.11-lozorgnia (2001) NGA usls 200* Col- $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NOA Usls ZOOS gractile: 0.5 1 2 3 4 Perlod 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 O.G 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 Z 4 Agplitude 4.42le-001 4.155.-001 5.7/le-001 7.0;Ze-001 7.577/-001 7.752e-001 7.746e-001 7.64oe-001 7.4*le-001 7.300,-001 7.065e-001 G.Ille-001 4.213e-001 2.5Ge-001 1.70$/-001 Mugn/tude 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00- 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.Col. 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - 7.00 - closest Region 01/unce(k/) 5.00 USCS 2001 Callfornii 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5 00 USGS ZOOS Cilifornla 5.00 USGS ZON California 5.00 USGS 200* California 5.00 USGS 2001 Callfornia 5.00 USGS 2001 California $.00 USGS 200: California 5.00 USGS ZOOS California 5.00 ...2008 Callfornla 5.00 USGS 2001 Callfornia 5.00 USGS 200% California 5.00 USGS 2001 California 5.00 ICS 200* California 5.00 USGS 2001 California controllinD source California Cridded California Gridded california Gridded California Gridded California Gridjed California Gridded California Grldded California Gridded California Gridded California Gridded call fornia Grldded California Gri dded California Gridded california Gridded call fornia Gridded PGA 1.55le-002 0.05 2.0582-002 0.1 2.703,-002 0.2 4.522,-002 0.3 5.578*-002 0.4 5.50*e-002 o.s 5.347e-002 0.6 4.9101 -002 0.7 4.Mle-002 0.1 4.185*-002 0.'3.Ilk-002 1 3.514â‚¬-002 2 1.7116-002 3 9.9822-003 4 6.717.-003 2.026,-002 2.10]e-002 2.152e-002 4.7â€¢;e-002 6.1.Ve-002 6.281,-002 G. 37Ge-002 5 93/7-002 5.591/-002 5.lile-002 4.761.-002 4 4072-002 2.23.5-002 1.21]e-002 1.7-c-003 2.39/1-002 2.6242-002 3.387/-002 5.23]e-002 6.250e-002 5.Â§35/-002 5.437e-002 4.134-002 4.37le-002 3.930.-002 3 Sole-002 3.157,-002 1.421/-002 1.59}e -003 6.15]e-CO] 1.42*-002 1.4414-002 2.032e-002 3.5,0.-002 4 217,-002 4.408.-002 4.22&-002 3.'57*-002 3. UGe-002 3.4332-002 1.196.-002 2.Sne-002 1.4ISe-002 8.5241-003 5.413+-003 urgest Amplitudes of Ground Motioils for Each Source Sa,rce: Irawley Gridded, strike slip Region: ISIS 2001 California Closest Olitance: 173.99 6 AlÂ®litude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.50 I Fractile: 0.50 â€¢age 3 Scum: Irawley Gridded.Nor-1 Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 173.I km Alitudi Ulltl: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: G.50 - Fracti le: 0.50 Col-: 1: spectral Period Coly- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: tore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2008 coh- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C,Lbell-lozorgnia (2008) 11=A uSGS ZOOS Page 4 -_5SA vt-110 - Setsâ€¢ic Hazard Analy,11 1 Deterilnistic Col,- SÂ· Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USCS 2001 2 3 4 5 1 Gl.Oe-002 1.57*-002 2.13*e-002 1.11 je-002 1.712e-002 1.664/-002 2.344â‚¬-002 1.12*-002 2.295(-002 2.20]e-002 3.054 e -002 1.515,-002 3.99*e-002 3.M;e-002 5.21Oe-002 2./37/-002 4.-7/-002 5.11*e-002 6.2 lk-00 2 3.437e-002 4.180.-002 5.104.-002 5.-e-002 3.5928-002 4.7472-002 S. 27*e -002 5.â€¢me-002 3.503.-002 4.Zile-002 4.Uk-002 4.153.-002 3.327(:-002 HMe -002 4.2320-002 ..352.-002 3.137e-002 3.56*-002 3.112.-002 3./22-002 2.953e-002 3.235'-002 3.42 le-002 3.51Oe-002 2.77]e-002 2.957,-002 3.10$2-002 3.4.-002 2.GOOe-002 1.410,-002 1.4Ue-002 1.421/-002 1.340,-002 8.074e-003 7.046,-003 0.5ne-003 7 Glle -00 1 5.fole-003 5.760/-003 6.1532-003 4.Ul'-003 Source: rg, Exter,$10,1/1 Gridded. Our. Mor-1 Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest M.Unce: S.11 b. Amplitude wilts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.$0 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Coll- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted un of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2008) Ili USGS ZOOS Colum, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cligbell-lazorgnia (2001) M IMS 200I Col-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chicu-Young, (2007) ICA USGS ZOOS 2 3 4 $ 3.042e-001 2.7251-001 2.156,-001 3.$41â€¢-001 Page 5 .ISA v*-180 - Set-Ic Hazard Analy;11 1 Deter,Inistic 7.216/-001 1.31.-001 $.Cle-001 7.Ne-001 7.0*7/-001 7..ole-001 6.12-001 7.Ble-001 6.70Ge-001 7.0&-Col 5.ille-001 7,1/7/-001 6.386-001 6.45]e-001 5.69/-001 7.0071-001 6.0712-001 $.91:e-001 S.475â‚¬-001 6.1212-001 5.753/-001 -5.425â‚¬-001 $231.-001 6.6021-001 5.4752-Col 5.Olse-001 $.Olle-001 6.184â€¢-001 3.Â§24,-001 2.79Oe-001 3.Glze-001 4.1701-001 2.257e-001 1.7121-001 2.420,-001 2.5Ue-001 1.SNe-001 1.295/-001 1.771/-001 1.687,-001 Source: â„¢, Extensional Gridded. GR, Normal Reglon: USGS ZOOE California closest Distance: 5.32 ki Illitude di: Acceleration (g) IMagnitude : 7.00 - Fracti le: 0.$0 Col-1 1: Spectral period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lean of Attenuation Equitions Colo- 3: ACCeleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NIA USGS ZOOS Colu,n 4: Acceleration (g) for: cbell-lazorgnla (2001) 111â€¢ USGS 1008 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-voungs (20)07) NGA USGS 2008 2 3 4 s 2.9872-001 2.62]e-001 2.Ille-001 3.50*-001 3 371â‚¬-001 3.04le-001 3.115e-001 3.957e-001 4.539/-001 4.Gue-001 3.92 k -001 5.005e-001 6.42}e-001 7.595e-001 5.4 lk-001 6.254(-001 6.772â‚¬-001 7.ele-001 6.02&-001 6.Ille-001 6 *45/-001 7.63*e-001 6.241,5-001 6.65%-001 6.710e-001 7.12*e-001 6.44*e-001 6.5$*-001 6.22le-001 6.113,-001 6.1490-001 6.â€¢00,-001 S.We-001 5.3612 -001 $.Sole-001 6.227e-001 Page 7 1 0.05 0.1 0Z 0.3 0.4 0. 0.6 0.7 0.8 0./ 1 Z 4 1 04 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 2 4 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 -_ssâ€¢ v/-1/0 - 21/dc Hazard Analy,11 1 Oeterâ€¢Inlitic 0.05 3.43Se-001 3.lile-001 3.14le-001 3.9952-001 0.1 4.6100-001 4.lsk-001 3.930,-001 5.04le-001 0.2 6.52*-001 7.85*e-001 5.425.-001 6.29â€¢e-001 0.3 6.174-001 7.19*-001 6.05$1-001 1.Gile-001 0.4 6.95 k -001 7.814.-001 G.21*-001 6.7154-001 0.5 6.81Se-001 7.32 le-001 6.Sue-001 6.624:-001 0 6 6.32%-001 G.272e-001 6.2228-001 6.474/-001 0.7 5.932!-001 5.50]e-001 $.*262-001 6.30*-001 0..5.5*Ze-001 4.UZe-001 5.725/-001 6.140,-001 0.9 5.25 k -001 4.3/52-001 5.44Ge-001 $..Ge-001 1 4.70e-001 3Â·1501-001 5.205,-001 5.752e-001 2 3.13$e-001 2.013,-001 3.632/-001 3.79/-001 3 1.9801-001 1.20 Ze -001 2.â€¢2Oe-001 2.317e-001 4 1.4040-001 0.17 le-002 1.7712-001 1.524/-001 Seâ€¢Irce: IN Extensionul Gridded. char. Strike slip Region: USGS 2001 California Closest 01:unci: 5.11 ki Mplitude *u: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 Col,-11: Spectral Period Col-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: -ighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colu= 3: Acceleration (g) for: Wore-Atkinson (2001) ,Â£â€¢ ISGS 2001 Colum â€¢: Accilerati. (g) For: C.1.94.11-lozorgnia (2000) NGA uscs ZOOS Col... 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngâ€¢ (2007) NGA USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 0 3.3932-Col 2.982/-001 3.05â€¢e-001 4.14]e-001 0.0$3.7712-001 3.424e-001 3.Kle -001 4.$15,-001 0.1 4.Uk-001 5.10Ge-001 3.me-001 5.537/-001 O.2 6.71645-001 8.2Ue-001 5.03*-Col 6.me-001 0.3 7.05]e-001 1. 3%e-001 $.Gooe-Col 7.21]e-001 lage G -_SSâ€¢ vs-110 - sei-ic Mizard Aulysis 1 Deterâ€¢inistic 0.1 5.'U/-001 4.7632-Col 5.645 e -001 6.057/-001 0.9 5.1620-001 4.2$*e-001 5.367e-001 5.162,-001 1 4.Uk-001 3.1$2,-001 5.130/-001 5.6671-001 2 3.one-001 1.ISh-001 3.5631-001 3.G//-001 3 1.53/e-001 1.168â‚¬-001 2.372e-001 2.272e-001 4 1.3732-001 1.913/-002 1.735,-001 1.4;45-001 Sc,Irce: I E*tenslonal Gridded. GR. Strike Slip Region: Usls 200: Callfornla Closest Distance: 5.32 kÂ» 411tudi mlts: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.,0 Col-, 1: Spectral Nried Coll-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted -an of Attenuatton Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (ZOOS) 1Â«1â€¢ USGS 2002 Coh- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caobill-lozorgnia (2008) NGA Usls 2001 Colt-: 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) IGI USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 PGA 3.33]e-001 2.172â‚¬-001 3.025e-001 4.1/le-001 0.05 3.69-001 3.273,-001 3.277/-001 4.544(-001 0.1 4.Ilk-001 4.927.-001 3.99oe-001 5.5Zle-001 0.2 6.GOSe-001 1.one-001 5.033,-001 1.7lie-001 0.3 6.Ille-001 1.15]e-001 5.57*C-001 7.233e-001 0.4 7.lole-001 1.14]e-001 $.12*-001 7.332/-001 0.$6.975â€¢-001 7.556/-001 6.04*-001 7.2GOI-001 0.6 6.5971-Col 6.16Oe-001 5.115'-Col 7.1072-001 0.7 6.2*-001 6.254â‚¬-001 5.12le-001 G.Ble-001 0.1 5.Wk-001 5.773,-001 5.4010-001 6.73le-001 0.9 5.1;3'-001 $.2ll,-001 5.157,-001 6 5101-001 1 5.37*e-001 4.IMSâ‚¬-001 4.Slk -001 6 2Sle-001 2 3.4502-001 2.715*-001 3.$430-001 4.034-001 ..ge. 4 -_SSâ€¢ vi.180 - sel-Ic Hazard Analy,13 1 Deter-inistic 2.207.-001 1.73le-001 2.37Ze-001 2.$112-001 -_SSA vs-110 - Sil-ic Hazard Artaly,13 1 Deter,Inistic luati .S :kli le 00* .In, .t.,5 1.54*-001 1.25*-001 Source: mjive shear Gridded Region: USGS ZOOI California Closest Distance: 111.12 ki Ajlitude Mits: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.60 - Fractilâ€¢: 0.50 Coll-, 1: Spectral Pericd Col-1 1: Accoleration (g) for: weighted Colo- 3: Acceleration (g) for: '00,1-At colt=, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Câ€¢*bell colum $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiau-Yo 2 3 0.041.-002 9.Ile-002 1.717/-002 1.01%-001 1.117*-001 1.24Oe-001 1.5*e-001 1.531/-001 1.772,-001 1.7752-001 1.71/-001 1./4/-001 1.744e-001 1.907/-001 1.662'-001 1.14--001 1.fle-001 1. 10Oe-001 1.50%-001 1.715e-001 1.4 lk-001 1.GOJe-001 1.337e-001 1 513/.001 7.151â‚¬-002 1.014(-002 5.207.-002 6.1*oe -002 3.68/e-002 4.31--002 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0. 0.9 1 2 1.735,-001 :an of Atte, .on (2001) izo rgn 1 a a IS (2007) / 4 6.14Ze-002 6.6*-002 1.40Ze-002 1.275/-001 1.535/-001 1.410,-001 1.52%-001 1.4790-001 1.43:e-001 1.377e-001 1.301/-001 1.237e-001 7.7-e-002 5.lne-002 3.Wk-002 1.6*-001 lon Equatiol USGS 2002 NGA USGS 21 45 2008 S 7.9184-002 1.82*-002 1.27]e-001 1.1Ue-001 2.00*e-001 1.5331-001 1.7*-001 1.65*e-Col 1.537/-001 1.48-001 1.342e-001 1.260e-001 G.9715-002 4.242e-002 2.1312-002 Se*Irce: San Gorgornlo shear Grldded Region: USGS ZOOI California Closest Distance: 55.63 ka AE:plitude units: Acceleration (g) lugni tude: 7.GO - Fractile: 0.50 Coh- 1: Spectral Period col-, 2: Acceliration (g) for: weightec colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Nore-Al Col-1 4: Acceleratic*, (g) for: Câ€ž*,11 Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Yo 1 2 3 -4 1.32Se-001 1.Glie-001 0.05 1.47Se-001 1.772,-001 0.1 1.952e-001 2.11â€¢e-001 0.2 2.5/3/-001 2.650Â®-001 0.3 2.762,-001 2.844,-001 04 Z. 6620 -001 2.115e-00 1 0.5 2.581*-001 2.7/2/-001 0.6 2.4302-001 2.134.-001 0.7 2.3131-001 2.51$,-Col 0.0 2.1771-001 2.360,-001 0.,2.035/-001 2.1*le-001 1 1.915/-001 2.0322-001 2 1.132/-001 1.17Oe-001 3 7.;4 Ze -002 0.351/-002 4 3.379,-002 5.550)e-002 srce: Ilack=ater Reglon: u.ls 200. California Closest olitance: 160.25 ki I .... of Attenuallon Equallons :kinson (2008) 16â€¢ USGS ZOOS -lotorgnia (2002) NGA USCS 2008 eng, (2007) 1,<1 us// 200/ 4 5.%4*-002 1.0Â§2/-001 1.4040-001 2.One-001 2.30*e-001 2.220'-001 2.212.-001 2.19'e.001 2.132,-001 2.04]e-001 1.93*-001 1.151,-001 1.20le-001 1 06*-002 6.0584-002 â€¢age 10 1.lue-001 1.5Sle-001 2.27ge-001 3.MOe-001 1.133,-001 2.9;le-001 2.709e-001 2.43/-001 2.2lle-001 2.130e-001 1.986â‚¬-001 1.*Gle-001 1.02Se-001 6.207.-002 4.1100-007 -_SSI vs-180 - Sel-ic Hazard Anatylls 1 oeterninistic Alltude *lti: ACCeleration (g) Magnitude: 7.10 - Fractill: 0.50 Col-, 1: Spectral â€¢criod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: -ighted -an of Attenuatim Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (9) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) /1/ uSGS 2001 Colo- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C-Bbell-lozor,lia (2001) 1,CA USGS 20018 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: 0,1--voune (2007) NGA USCS 20011 1 2 3 4 5 3.254.-002 3.122e-002 3.590.-002 2.4712-002 3.4614-002 3.915/-002 3. 1--001 2.590,-002 4.435/-002 4.70&-002 4..2.-002 3.7152-002 7.07:e-002 7.376â‚¬-002 7.Â§.e-002 6.27â€¢e-002 1 60*-002 9.3$*-002 9.213/-002 7.24--002 8.7312-002 1.00;e-001 1.7Â§6,-002 7.3142-002 1.738,-002 1.0555-001 1.Gne-002 7.014e-002 0.255(-002 1.01Oe-001 1.OGGe -002 G.5&-002 7.B470-002 9.7422-002 7.GOle-002 6.197.-002 7.37*e-002 5.23Oe-002 7.0Â§7.-002 5.136*-002 6.Â§70,-002 1.615*-002 6.4 95/-002 S.Â§0Oe-002 1 6.43*e-002 0.100,-002 6.0234-002 5.1911-002 3.$4'e-002 4.452,-002 3.230.-002 2.-6.-002 2.223â‚¬-002 2.7422-002 2.05%-002 1.167e-002 1.58]e-002 1.4/e-002 1.51]e-002 1.270,-002 source: lurnt Mtn Region: usis 2001 California Closest Distance: 135.09 6, Amplitude Mits: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 1.10- Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Page 11 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.1 0., 0.7 0.0 0.' 2 -_SSA v,-110 - Sli-ic MazarÂ·d Analy:11 1 Deter,inlitlc Colu- 2: Acceleration (9) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colt- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loorâ‚¬-Atkinson (2001) â€¢=A USGS ZOOS Coh- 4: Acceleration (g) for: cabill-Dozorgnia (200Â§) Icâ€¢ us<ls ZOOS Col-1 5: Acceleratlon (g) for: Chiou-Youngl (2007) IG USCS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 3.$331-002 4.604.-002 3.575â‚¬-002 2.42â€¢e-002 0.05 3.73â€¢e-002 4.65$/-002 3 -Se-002 2.GOâ€¢e-002 0.1 4.lk-002 $.10*e -002 5.127,-002 3.7.9.-002 0.2 7.855e-002 9.Bile-002 7.7/0/-002 6.1251-002 0.3 .239e- 002 1.17le-001 9.Ule-002 6.Â§23.-002 0.4 9.166e-002 1.215â‚¬-001 1.62 le-002 6.7232-002 0.5 1.9172-002 1.2 Zle-001 8.23*e-002 G.30.-002 0.6 8.192(:-002 1.12Â§/-001 7.4+1-001 5.13:e-002 0.7 7.Gok-002 1.0522-001 6.193â€¢-002 5.41*-002 0.0 7.02Oe-002 5.724/-002 6.293â‚¬-002 $.0434 -002 0.9 G.43*-002 1.9132-002 5.GS*-002 4.705.-002 1 5.95}e-002 1.24Ge-002 $.2134-002 4.]le-002 2 3.033/4/2 4.15*-002 2.571,-002 2.368/-002 3 1.7570-002 2.350.-002 1.59--002 1.44*-002 4 1.27Ge-002 1.70*e-002 1.lfk-002 9.GBe-003 scxirce: Callco-Hidalgo Region: USGS 2001 california Closest Distance: 161.23 b Illitude Klts: ACCeleration CO) lugnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: O.50 Col=; 1: Spectral Perlcd ColumÂ· 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted =an of Attenuation Equations Col-1 3: Acceleration (g) for: Wore-Atkinson (2008) IGI USCS 200% Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caobell-lazorgnia (2001) IGA USGS 200: colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: 0,100-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 Page 12 -_SM vl=110 - 1 2 3 PGA 3.954.-002 4.52724 4.225e-002 4.722e4 5.32;e-002 5.50*-0 1.22â€¢e-002 7.710â‚¬-01 1.0011-001 5.â€¢Sle-0 1.022e-001 1.0762-0( 1.03*-001 1.147e-0 9.974,-002 1.12Ge# 5 623.-002 1.10*e-Ot 9.162e-002 1.0665-0X 8.62]e-002 1.007.-I 1.157(-002 9.5652-(X 4.713/-002 5.5916-0X 3.13Ge-002 3.7316-0 2.235e-002 2.62*-0( Sc-rce: channel Islands Thrust â€¢egionÂ· USGS 2008 California Closest Oistance: 129.1 k= Amlitude units: Acceleration (g) egnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 Colt- 1: Spectral Period Coll- 2: Acceleration (g) for: *igh Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: caipb Coll- 5: Acceleration (g) fv: Chlou 2 3 6.136â‚¬-002 6.517e-002 6 540,-002 6.133'-002 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 04 0.5 0. 0. 1 2 4 Sel-ic Hazard Anilysts 1 Deter-Inistic 02 02 02 )2 ,2 '1 11 11 )1 11 )1 }2 }2 )2 )2 ted le tuart 11 -*kin NGA el 1-10 )01)m -Young :ts 1 o.os 4 4.1152-002 4.5172-002 5.540e-002 1.63Ge-002 1.00,-001 1.0272-001 1.04;e-001 9.me-002 '. 60*e -002 9.092,-002 1 4--002 7.lze-002 4.673/-002 3.05*-002 2.277e-002 an of Atte, ser (2001) Zor,lia (M $ (2007) M 4 G.lle-002 G.Go>42-002 â€¢age 13 3.267/-002 3.436â‚¬-002 4.92 k -002 1 256.-002 9.502.-002 9.Gose-002 9 204.-002 8 6772-002 1.17*e-002 7.72*-002 7.3102-002 6.Â§25.-002 4.0*Ge-002 2.6113-002 1.1(le-002 on Equatiol USGS 2001 16. USGS M GS 2001 5.703,5-002 6.lile-002 -_SSA vs-110 - seismic Hazard Anilysi, 1 Deter,inlitic 0.1 1.440e-002 1.147/-002 8.2/0/-002 1 192/-002 0.2 1.2722-001 1.17le-001 1271/-001 1.375e-001 0.3 1.$0Se-001 1.479/-001 1 540e-001 1.4964-001 0.4 1.4*k-001 1.52}e-001 1.410,-001 1.460(-001 05 1.4*Oe-001 1.515/-001 1.491/-001 1.363e-001 O.G 1.40le-Col 1.531/-001 1.414e-001 1.259e-001 0.7 1335e-001 1.4170-001 1.35le-001 1166â‚¬-001 0.0 1.2491-001 1.397/-Col 1.2*Ge-001 1.0/3/-001 0.5 1.15Oe-001 1.277e-001 1.167/-001 1.007e-001 1 1.OR-001 1.179,-001 1.Olle-001 9.36]e -002 2 5.Ilse-002 5.56*e-002 5.5442-002 4.444e-002 3 3.057e-002 3.4252-002 3.167e-002 2.57--002 4 2.11Ge-002 2.30â€¢e-002 2.347e-002 1.Glk-002 Source: Cla-hell-Sawplt Region: USGS 2008 California Closest Diltance: 47.12 13 Imlitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.70 - Fracille: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral #ricd Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted man of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinson (200*) 1Â«li usls 20)01 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caibell-eozorgnia (2008) NGA USGS 2001 Colum 5: Acceleratlon (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 9 1.0622-001 1.493e-001 1.523e.002 1.4122-002 0.05 1.175/-001 1.$55:-001 5.ale-002 9.8132-002 0.1 1.6470-001 2.013/-001 1.403,-001 1.475e-001 0.2 2.37Oe-001 3.15 le-001 1 %Ce-001 2.00Oe-001 0.3 2.507/-001 3.4Gle-001 2 084/-001 1.ne-001 0.4 2.3 101 -001 3.243e-001 1.936/-001 1.10*-001 Page 14 -_""$-180 - Sel"ic Hazard Anally/15 1 Deterenistic 2 1684-001 3.0722-001 1 814/-Col 1.61Se-001 1 5360-001 2 737e-001 1.G2Oe-001 1.4512-001 1.75*e-001 2.4*Ze-001 1.473e-001 131Ze-001 1.5*k-001 2.21--001 1.337e-001 1.195e-001 1.420â‚¬-001 1.957/-001 1.212,-001 1.0520-001 1.217e-001 1.750,-001 1.11Oe-001 1.000e-001 $.67le-002 6.9Ne-002 5.564/-002 4.457,-002 3.23*e-002 3 6934-002 3.45*e-002 2.56â€¢e-002 2.219e-002 2.4:Ze-002 2.4Me-002 1.67*e-002 source: Cleghorn Region: USGS 2001 california Closest Distance: 73.15 ki Alitude tilts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.10 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Coll- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cartell-lozorgnia (ZOOS) 82 uSGS ZOOS Colu- i: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) â€¢EA usli 2002 2 3 4 5 7.572e-002 1.132e-001 6.10Ge-002 5.21$-002 1.215/-002 1.1652-001 6.Ille-002 6.0:Oe-002 1 117e+001 1.4*-001 9.52/.002 9.05--002 1.MOe-001 2.24*e-001 1.377e-001 1.28-001 1.763e-001 2.447e-001 1.527e-001 1.315'-001 1.613e-001 2.405e-001 1.424e-001 1.2Zle-001 1.5*Se-001 2.305Â£-001 1.3$le-001 1.10le-001 1.42â€¢e-001 2.0612-001 1.219e-001 9.932.-002 1299e-001 1./7Ge-001 1.1lk-001 9.036e-002 1.1*le-001 1.70le-001 1.Noe-001 0.2182-002 Page 15 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 4 1 0.05 O.I 0.2 03 0.4 0.5 0Â§ 0.7 0., -_SSA vs-110 - Seillic HuarÂ·d Analysts 1 Oeter,inistic 0.5 1.076e-001 1.537(,-001 5.25%-002 7.G39e-002 1 S.*Gle-002 1.40]e-001 1.454.-002 7.07]e-002 2 4 Ille-002 6.73le-002 4.283/-002 3.6504-002 3 2/7--002 3.765/-002 2.67]e-002 2 201.-002 4 2.0]le--002 2.7lle-002 1.93%-002 1.48-002 Sc:Irce: Coronado lank RegionÂ· usa 2001 california Closest 01:tance: 53.62 k= Mplitude Kits: Acceleration (g) lugni tude : 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Sipecval Period Col,- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lan of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS ZOOS Col-, 4: Acceleration (g) for: c,bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 200* Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-voungs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 M 1.233/-001 1.6472-001 9 6272-002 1 Mle-001 0.05 1.37Oe-001 1.751,-001 1.0102-001 1.270e-001 0.1 1.644/-001 2.205/+001 1.460â‚¬-001 1.867'-001 0.2 2.489e-001 2.1]Ze-001 2.0*42-001 2.5â€¢k-001 03 2.G34e-001 3.01oe-001 2.3262-001 2.56;e-001 0.4 2.5230-001 2.//e-001 2.219e-001 2.395,3-001 0.5 2 432/-001 2.17*e-001 2.235(-001 2 lile-001 0.6 2.262/-001 2.677e-001 2.1lle-001 1 me-001 0.7 2.125e-001 2.Slle-001 2.022e-001 1.034e-001 0.8 1.9*Se-001 2.33*e-Col 1915e-001 1.702â‚¬-001 0.9 1.844e-001 2.146â‚¬-001 1.800â‚¬-001 1.587,+001 1 1.725/.001 1.Ule-001 1.7030-001 1.416e-001 2 9.925.-002 1.093/-001 1.047e-001 1.37le-002 3 6 5 lk-002 7.36*-002 1.912.-002 5.275e-002 Page 16 4 -_SSâ€¢ vi-180 - Selialc Hazard Anâ€¢ly,11 1 Deterâ€¢inistic -_SSâ€¢ 9-110 - Seismic Mizard Arulysis 1 DeterÂ·1nlitic ed/-uati .S tkir ./ 11-1,m))08 fourl, :US 4.674.-002 5.277,-002 sc*Irce: Cul.....â€¢ga Region: u.0 2002 Callfornia closest oliance: 43.â€¢3 1, A*litude Flts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.70 li Fractile: 0. $0 Colu= 1: Spictril Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weight Colt- 3: Acceleration (g) for: locre-, Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: I.- Col-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou- 2 3 1.12â€¢e-001 1.5SOe-001 1.247e-001 1.622,5-001 1.75;e-001 2 15*e-001 2.51â€¢e-001 3.294.-001 2.645/-001 3.5971-001 2Â·40*-001 3.367,-001 2.2Me-001 3.1151-001 1.0]h-001 2.13;e-001 1.84*-001 2.56*-001 1.6684-001 2.29*-001 1.4972-001 2.02Ge-001 1.357e-001 1.111.-001 6.005e-002 7.24*-002 3.436.-002 3.135e-002 2.35%-002 Z. 5712-002 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0. 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.. 0.9 1 2 5.145.-002 â€¢an of Atte I.On (2001) ize,v,1â€¢ (2! 1â€¢ (2007) / 4 9.10*e-002 1.0/7/-001 1.50*-001 2.055/-001 2.21$8-001 2.09,-001 1.Sa,-001 1.723e-001 1.5*e-001 1.422e-001 1.29Oe-001 1.182/-001 5.9591-002 3.705e-002 2.676,-002 3.60le-002 lon Equallo USGS 2001 * USCS 21 O 2008 5 9.111/-002 1.One-001 1.5lle-001 2.152e-001 2.124/-001 1.542,=-001 1.7312-001 1.5582-001 1.410,-001 1.2e-001 1.174-001 1.0762-001 4.107(-002 2.767.-002 1.Ille-002 Page 17 Source: Earthquake valley Region: usis ZOOS california Closest 01:unce: 138.04 0 Aipl itude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6,10 - Fractile: 0.50 Coll- 1- Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighteâ‚¬ Cal-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: More-Al Coll'. 4: ACCeleratl- (g) for: ca.pe,11 Colu- 1: Acceleratlon (g) for: Chlou-vc 1 2 3 9 3.395e-002 4.3564-002 0 05 3.5.2.-002 4.400,-002 0.1 4.70le-002 5.415â‚¬-002 0.2 7.5 $12-002 9.176e-002 0.3 1.S]3e-002 1.12le-001 0.4 1.U 32-002 1.161,-001 0.5 1.657/-002 1.177,-001 0.6 7.565.-002 1.OUI -001 0.7 7.405.-002 1.Olk-001 0.1 6.1]h-002 9.42]e-002 0.,6.276â‚¬-002 1.647e-002 1 5./Oie-002 1.00/e-002 2 2.%6,-002 4.053/-002 3 1.7612-002 2.2/]e-002 4 1.Zile-002 1.*7.-002 Source: Ely:lan Rrk (upper) Region: usGS ZOOS california Closest Distance: 31.12 km Amlitude Units: Acceleration (g) I -An of Attenuation Equations kinion (2001) IGA USGS ZOOS lazorgniâ€¢ (2001) 9 USGS ZOOS Ing. (2007) IGA USGS ZOOS S 2.331/-002 2.4944-002 3.622e-002 5.154.-002 6.601.-002 6.52*-002 6.1]le-002 S.652.-002 5.217â‚¬-002 4..2.-002 4.60le-002 4.30$'-002 2.327e-002 1.424.-002 9.50--003 3.â€¢Sle-002 3.153/-002 4.997â‚¬-002 7.6062 -002 1.'84.-002 8.43*e-002 ..066.-002 7.32$/-002 6.752,-002 6.16$â‚¬-002 5.5*le-002 5.10Ge-002 2.51--002 1.565*-002 1.13$*-002 Page 11 SSâ€¢ v,-180 - Sels=Ic Hizard Analysis 1 Oeterâ€¢inlitlc -_SM vi.110 - seillic HazlfÂ·d A.ruly,1, 1 oeter,inist:Ic Magnitude: 6.70 - Fractile: 0.50 coll'. 1: spectral ..rlo Coli- 2: Acceleration (g) for: *ighted -an of Attenuation Equations Coh- 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinion (2001) 11, USGS 2008 Coh- 4: Acceleration (g) for: culbell-lozorgrild (2002) 1Â«:A uSGS 2001 Coll= $: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 1.33:e-001 1.Glle-001 1.24*-001 1.1;Oe-001 1.4Ue-001 1.69*-001 1.406e-001 1.350e-001 2.0871-001 2.27"-001 2.00*-001 1.97&-001 2.%20-001 3.475/-001 2.7--001 2.6258-Col 3.10â‚¬,-001 3.71*l-001 2.%5/-001 2.5Ue-001 2.154.-001 3.5250-001 2.7*le-001 2.368â‚¬-001 2.695(5-001 3.327â‚¬-001 2.637,-001 1.122'-001 2.410,-001 2.Ale-001 2.369/-001 1.90]e-001 2.logi -001 2.Ule-001 2.16Â¢e-001 1.720â‚¬-001 1.575,-001 2.396,-001 1.96]e-001 1.i//-001 1.772,-001 2.115e-001 1.771â‚¬-001 1.42--001 1.605/-001 l.*Ue-Con 1.6154-001 1.30--001 6.1184-002 7.554,-002 7.165/-002 3.6%/-002 3.71]e-002 4.03(e-002 4.078*-002 3.1*le-002 2.56$/-002 2.70*-002 2.MI,-002 2.042,-002 Sc*.rrce: Eurek, Peak Region: ISGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 144.63 Ici ANlitude Unitl: Acceleration (g) lugnitule: 6.70 - Fractile: 0.50 Colt- 1: Spectral period Col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lein of Attenuation Equations Page 13 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.. 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.' 1 1.-*-002 2.0652-002 2.95/-002 4.547e-002 $.Glk -002 5.597*-002 5.2/5/-002 4."42-002 4..le-002 4.260,-002 3.977e-002 3.720e-002 1.Ne-002 1.212/-002 ..0â€¢h,-003 2 4 Col-, 3: Acceleratim (g) for: Coh-, 4: acceleration (g) for: col-, $: Acceleration (g) for: 1 2 3 2 2.83*e-002 3.U 0.05 3.101/-002 3.73 0.1 4.Olk-002 4 0 0.2 6.642.-002 1.03 0.3 7.520.-002 -3 0.4 7.*Sle-002 1.02 0.5 7.614.-002 1.03 0.6 7.00â€¢e-002 5.53 0.7 6.4 'Ge-002 ..0 0.0 5 USe-002 8.23 0.5 5.4.0.-002 7.54 1 5.05&-002 .97 2 2.54le-002 3.54 3 1.$01â‚¬-002 1./7 4 1.05*c-002 1.41 Soum: Gravel Hills-Harper Lk Region: Usls 200; california Clolest Distance: 152. 14 ki litude Initi: Acceleration (g Magnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: 0.$0 Coll-, 1: Spectral Period Colum Z: Acceleration (9) for: i colu-1 3: kceleration (g) for: I Cal-, 4: Acceleradon (g) for: I Col-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: I moore-Atkinson (2001) ,Â«.A USGS ZOOS C-,bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USCS 2001 Chicu-Your,gs (2007) '4â€¢ USCS 2001 3.-002 42-002 Ge-002 le-002 le-002 7e-001 3e-001 4e-002 7.-002 6,-002 7â‚¬-Coz De-002 12-002 le-002 7.-002 mighted -iuation Equations loore-Atkin NGA uses 2001 LLg*el 1 -10 )01) ... USGS 2001 j,1 c*.1 -young .USGS 2001 3.103â‚¬-002 3.$05e-002 4.5$4,-002 6 54*-002 0.20*-002 7.ine-002 7.2*Ze-002 1.5Â®'e-002 6.012,-002 5.45*-002 4.9155 -002 4.475/-002 2.142.-002 1.31h-002 5.52k-003 an of Atte, son (2001) torgal, (N i (2007) ,Â« â€¢age 20 1 0.05 0.1 80 - scismic *zard Analysis 1 Deter,inistic 3 73e-002 1]e-002 Ile-002 6$â‚¬-002 2 le-001 Ile-001 33e-001 toe-001 1*e-001 Re-002 182-002 We-002 'Oe-002 'ze-002 ;7e-002 D weighted -I./.1 . Boore-Atkin .A Calbell-10 01) ./ Chiou-Young .US -_554 v..1 2 3.572â‚¬-002 4.2 3.772/-002 4.3 4. llk-002 $.2 7.63*e-002 1.1 9.1912-002 1.0, 9.2*Oe-002 1.0 9.24*-002 1.1 1.71le-002 1.01 a.26le-002 1.0 7.73}e-002 ,.. 7.210e-002 9.L 1.741(-002 ..5( 3.7032-002 4.G; 2.31*e-002 2.1, 1.Ile-002 2.09 Source: Melendale-So Lockhart Region: USGS 200* California Closest Oistance: 11$.62 bi -Flitude unlts: Acceleration (9 Magnitude: 7.40 - Fractill: O.,0 Coh..1 1. Spectral Perlod Con- 2: Accelerâ€¢tion (g) for: Colucn 3: Acceleration (g) for: colu-1 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colu= 5: Acceleration (g) fur: 2 3 6.365/-002 1.463e-002 6./Gle-002 1.Elle-002 S.12Se-002 1.0;42-001 0.2 0.3 0.4 o.s 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.' 1 Z 4 1 0.05 0.1 3.7520-002 4.016,-002 5.144,-002 7.93Se-002 9.612/-002 9.13*e -002 S.011.-002 1.3le -002 7.Ge -002 7.3 502-002 6.7572-002 6.2664-002 3.365,-002 2.14Ge-002 1.5772-002 an of Atten lon (2008) zor'lia (20 s (2007) . 5.4315-002 5.55 k -002 7.$47.-002 Page 21 2.028-002 2. Ille -002 4.105e-002 6.113e -002 7.767.-002 7.7/Se-002 7.406-002 6.37,-002 6.49Se-002 6Â·10*-002 5.745e-002 5.414/-002 3.07]e-002 1 930,-002 1.]lle-002 on Equatler uSGS 2001 16â€¢ USGS 2< GS 2001 S 5.193/-002 3.736,-002 a. 400,-002 -_SSA v:-110 - Sel.i C Hazard Aruly:13 1 Deter,lrilitic 0.2 1.274e-001 1.395e-001 1.144-001 1.212,-001 0.3 1.46(e-001 1.632,-001 1.3Ue-001 1.371,-001 0.4 1.447e-001 1.6%*-001 1.310e-001 1,335/-001 0.5 1.43/-001 1.737e-001 1.327e-001 1.Zee-001 0.6 1.35/0-001 1.*22-001 1.263â‚¬-001 1.150e-001 0.7 1.294/-001 1.6012-001 1.211/-001 1.00,-001 0..1.21*-001 1.51]e-001 1.1â€¢Ge-001 9.991,5-002 0.,1.lm-001 1.40De-001 1.0712-001 9.3612-002 1 107Oe-001 1.321â‚¬-001 1.00*-001 8.112,-002 2 6.138/-002 7.4012-002 5.SUe-002 5.0306-002 3 4.00&-002 4.Ine-002 3.91â€¢e-002 3.1/5.-002 4 2.15*-002 3.464.-002 2.91â€¢e-002 2.1//-002 Sairce: Holly-od Region: USGS 2001 California Closel Distance: 50.02 ki Amlitude Utits: Accelerition (g) Magnitude: 6.70 . Fractile 0.50 Colu:,1 1: Spectral Perlod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: waighted -An of Attenuation Equatlis Colu- 3 Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinforl (2001) NGA ISIS 2001 Coh- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Clighell-lozorgrila (2001) 1/li USGS 2002 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-voungs (2007) NOI USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 PGA S.Nh-002 1.4$2e-001 1.1lle-002 7.27;e-002 0.05 1.102e-001 1.WOe-001 9.311,-002 8.j414-002 0.1 1.5]le-001 2.0012-001 1 /Se-001 1.281,-001 0.2 2.1Sle-001 2.%6-001 1.164/-001 1.74*-001 0.3 2.27Ge-001 3.105/-001 1.Ile-001 1.731/-001 0.4 2.135e-001 2.Slle-001 1.1$*-001 1.51]e-001 0.$1.9*0â‚¬-001 2.792.-001 1.733/-001 1.414â‚¬-001 Page 22 -_SSâ€¢ vs-180 - Setimic Hazard Analysis 1 Deter,inlitic 1.760,-001 2.464(-001 1.54*e-001 1.2664-001 1.5902-001 2.21*e-001 1.407e-001 1.145e-001 1.43*-001 1./Le-Col 1.277Â®-001 1.Me-001 1.303e-001 1794â‚¬-001 1.157,-001 9.;Sk-002 1.Re-001 1.6312-001 1.05*-001 1.84*-002 5.Â®0*+002 7./42-002 5.190.-002 4.474e-002 3.400,-002 4.2512-002 3 29.-002 2.665,-002 2.3781+002 3.Dose-002 2.371/-002 1.7&4,-002 *ne: Molier. alt l Region: USGS 2001 California Closemt Ollunce: 1.11 km Alitude Uniti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.10 1- Fractile: 0.$0 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Col,-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: -ighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colic/1 3: Acceleration (g) for: kori-Atkinson (2001) Nli USGS ZOOS Colu- 4: Acceleration (9) for: Ca,pbell-lozordnla (200*) 1Â«:a USGS 2001 Col- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) IGI USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 " 6.20*-002 ..934.-002 S.loze-002 4.5*le-002 6.64*-002 9.05*â‚¬-002 5.730â‚¬-002 5.lmi-002 1.99]e-002 1.155â‚¬-001 7.734â‚¬-002 7.1--002 1.3690-001 1.13/e-001 1.13*e-001 1.131/-001 1.$43e-001 2.167Â¢-001 1.2*Se-001 1.175/-001 1.475e-001 2.U4e-001 1.2041-001 1.107/-001 1.407â‚¬-001 2.07Oe-001 1.145/-001 1.00*e-001 1.2704-001 1.U]e-001 1.0352-001 9.14Ge-002 1 17Se-001 1.73%-001 5.$04/-002 1.34.-002 1.069e-001 1.574,-001 0.172.-002 7.65*e -002 9.636â‚¬-002 1.40Oe-001 7.Â§66e-002 7.0422-002 Page 23 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.' 1 Z 3 4 0.09 0.] 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0. -_SSA *110 - sels,Ic luzard Analy,im 1 Oeterililitic 1 0 767/-002 1.2112-001 7.20&-002 6.4e-002 2 3.14/-002 $.1931 -002 3.5Me-002 2.55Ge-002 3 2.23*e-002 2.7672-002 2.22--002 1.7lle-002 4 1.547!-002 1.1972-002 1.61le-002 1.1331-002 Source: Johnson valley (No) Reglon: USGS 2002 California Closest Distance: 140.61 km Mplitude Miti: Acceleration (g) lugnitude : 6.90 * Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted *an of Ati*nuation Equations Con- 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinson (200â€¢) Icâ€¢ ISIS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleratien (g) for: ca.vibeli-lozor,gnia (2001) IGI usls 2001 Col=, 5: Acceleration (g) for: O,lot.-v,ngs (2007) NGA 'SGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 3.$271-002 4.45*-002 3.ele-002 2.50â€¢e.002 0.05 3.72*-002 4.5258-002 3.977â€¢:-002 2.6712.002 0.1 4.//e-002 5.5*le-002 5.11Se-002 3.Uk-002 0.2 7.735,-002 9.065e-002 7.Â§10/-002 ..3292-002 0.3 9.172Â®-002 1.112e-001 '.2:De-002 7.105.-002 0..5.15]e-002 1.16Ge-001 0.757,-002 7.0.4.-002 0.5 1.97:e-002 1.114/-001 1.457e-002 6.637/-002 O.G 8.Noe-002 1.10Se-001 7.744e-002 6.17Oe-002 0.7 7.712e-002 1.0â€¢le-001 7.1//e-002 5.744e-002 0.7.223,-002 S.05,-002 6.6032-002 5.3--002 0.9 6.65Ge-002 1.93*e-002 6.00le-002 5.021.-002 1 1.17k-002 1.30*-002 $.522e-002 4.7012-002 2 3.noe-002 4.302.-002 2.103e-002 2.Se-002 3 1.lne-002 2.$02/-002 1.757e-002 1.596.-002 4 1.317/-002 1.810e-002 1.210.-002 1.07Ze-002 page 24 -_SM /1-180 - Sci Source: La*rs Region: USGS 2001 California Closest 01:unce: 143.39 ki Aâ€¢plitude units: Accelerati- (g) Magnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 Cell- 1: Spectral period Con-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weghtee Col-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-At Colu= 4: Acceleration (g) for: cabell Colum S: Acceleration (g) for: chicl,-7 1 2 3 4.75*-002 5.767/-002 $.06*e-001 6.03oe-002 6.4â€¢le-002 7.072e-002 .Gne-002 9.noe-002 1.152/-001 1,15â€¢e-001 1.113/-001 1.27Se-001 1.170e-Col 1.342,-001 1.11*e-001 1.304,-001 1.07]e-001 1.27]e-001 1.0112-001 1.216â‚¬-001 S. 54*-002 1.14Ze-001 9.01*-002 1 07Se-001 5.21â€¢e-002 6.20]e-002 3.425,3-002 4.12*e-002 2.44 le-002 2.$07.-002 Source: Lermood-Lockhart-<Ad vtÂ»in Springs imic Hazard Anilysi, 1 oeter,inlitic I Mear of Attenuation Equations kinson (2001) 1Â£.A USCS ZOOS -lozor,lia (2000) 16* USGS 1001 ungâ€¢ (2007) 16â€¢ 1.1565 200* 0.05 0.1 0.2 03 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.0 0., 1 2 3 4.5972-002 4.51;2-002 G.1Ue-002 '.54*e-002 1.1Â§7e-001 1.12Oe-001 1.111/-001 1.015(-001 1.043e-001 9.16*-002 9.21*e-002 8.6721-002 5.0.e-002 3.137e-002 2.4Ue-002 Page 25 3.-'-002 4.19Oe-002 6.064/-002 9.7*-002 1.0%,5-001 1.Olle-001 1.03le-001 .Wle-002 5.01â€¢e-002 8 500.-002 1.011'-002 7.566â‚¬-002 4.406.-002 2.Slle-002 1.le-002 9 Hazard Analy;11 1 Detertnistic Ban of Auenuation Equations 1.0. (2001) ... izorgnia (2001)001 ts (2007) NGA US 02" v-180 - sel -1 Region: Usis ZOOS California Closest Distance: 133.06 ki Uplitude Miti: Acceleration (9) IMagnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: 0.50 colu- 1: spectril Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: fghted I Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkli coll- 4: Acceleration (g) for: culbell-li Coh- 5: Acceleratlon (g) for: chiou-YourK 1 2 3 Eâ€¢ 5.614,-002 7.040,-002 0.05 ..04*-002 7.4Zle-002 0.1 7.673e-002 0.657,-002 0.2 1.1242-001 1.135,-001 0.3 1.Nk-001 1.16Ge-001 0.4 1.32â€¢e-001 1.452/-001 0.5 1.332,-001 1.51Se-001 0.6 1.27;e-001 1.47Se-001 0.7 1.22*-001 1.4464-001 0.0 1.165â‚¬-001 1.113/-001 0.,1.Mje-001 1.2SS,-001 1 1.035e-001 1.2212-001 2 6.10*e-002 7.134e-002 3 4.054.-002 4.172.-002 4 2.nOI-002 3.4141-002 Source: Irtision Ridgi-Arroyo â€¢add,-sarita Ani Region: USGS 200* California Closest Distance: 131.25 ki Aplitude units: Acceleritti (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - 4 5.12Oe-002 5.557e-002 6.85*-002 106Oe-001 1.253/-001 1.244/-001 1.275/.001 1.2261-001 1.llS/-001 1.12*e-001 1.WN-001 1.002e-001 6.077e-002 4.018.-002 3 004â‚¬-002 Page 2, USGS 2001 NGA USGS 2 0 2001 4.7]Ze-002 5.137e-002 7.46]e-002 1.17*e-001 1.2--001 1.27Se-001 1.20le-001 1.lke-001 1.047/-001 9.13*-002 5.2*Ge-002 8.749e-002 5.112e-002 3.27le-002 2.252.-002 *.SSâ€¢ v-180 - Selsili Hazard Analysis 1 Deter-Int:tic Fractile: 0.$0 Colu- 1: spectral Perlod Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Mighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colt=, 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinson (2001) Ili uscs 2004 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Clivtfll-OozorÂ·i,18 (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Your,gs (2007) IA USGS 2000 2 3 4 5 3.700â‚¬-002 4.552,-002 3.17*e-002 2.*Ne-002 3.%7.-002 4./Se-002 4.043.-002 3.032e-002 5.117/-002 $.743â‚¬-002 5.20*e -002 4.40Oe-002 1.217,-002 9.5822-002 7.-Ze-002 7.12Se-002 S 9022-002 1.233,-001 9.42*-002 7.*62.-002 9.7--002 1,264/-001 1.817â‚¬-002 7.17le-002 9.640*-002 1.Mle-001 0.510*-002 7.403e-002 0.51Â§2-002 1.217e-001 7.155e-002 G.170â‚¬-002 1.410â‚¬-002 1.1560-001 7.291*-002 6.37Se-002 7.773e-002 1.0*Se-Col 6.6.e -002 5.9]le-002 7.021-002 â€¢..Se-002 6.094.-002 5.522/-002 1.52oe-002 1.12]e-002 5.GOle-002 5.135a-002 3.012.-002 3.174.-002 2.-e-002 2 4//-002 1.7 Ile-002 2.1.Ze-002 1.7Ue-002 1.47le-002 1.28-002 1.472e-002 1.lue-002 9.â€¢2â€¢e-003 Source: North Channel Region: USCS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 133.41 h -litude -its: Acceleration (g) IMagnitude: 6.80 - Fractile: 0.50 col/â€ž 1: Spectral Period ColuMn 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted lean of Attenuation Equitions Colu- 3: Acceleration (O) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) Icâ€¢ uses ZOOI Page 27 1 0.0$ 0.1 02 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0. 0.9 1 3 4 -_ISA *110 - Sel-ic Hazard Analy,1, 1 DeternÂ·Inistic Colo- 4: Accelerattan (g) for: CLbell-lozorgnla (2008) ,â‚¬.A uSGS 2001 Col-I $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Younos (2007) IGI Usls 2001 1 2 3 4 5 9 3.2Me-002 3.410.-002 4.1182-002 2.27"-002 0.05 3.4$3.-002 3.4Ue-002 4.4Ue-002 2.317.-002 01 4.4'Ge-002 4.33*-002 5.72/e-002 3.4258-002 0.2 7.420.02 7.04.-002 1.127e/02 5.740â‚¬-002 0.3 9.1.Zle-002 1.0202-001 1.010,-001 1.51]e-002 0.4 9.0602-002 1.05--001 1.00le-001 6.614 -002 0.1 1.92*-002 1.0Â®e-001 5.lie-002 6.27e-002 0+G 1.2.0.-002 1.02Ge-001 8.75*+002 5.15;e-002 0.7 7.764.-002 1.7450-002 8.0%e-002 5.45]e-002 0.1 7.152,-002 'Â·014e-002 7.362e-002 5.012.-002 0,6.4-e-002 1 151/-002 6.602Â®+002 4.730/-002 1 5..Ge-002 7.45Oe-002 5.989e-002 4.39*e-002 2 2.622.-002 3.25%-002 2.52/-002 2.015,3-002 3 1.471/-002 1.757*-002 1.43le-002 1.224e-002 4 1.0Zle-002 1.21*e-002 1.03le-002 1.084.-003 Sairce: North Frontal (East) Region: USGS 200Â§ California Closest 01/unce: 111.05 ki Alitude Kits: Acceleration (g) Magni tude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 colt-, 1: spectral Period Coll- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted Mean of Attenuation Equatic*,5 Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkin,on (200*) IcA Usls 2001 Col- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca.0.11-lozorgnia (2002) NG. U.GS 2001 Coll- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) IGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 Page 2. 0.05 0.1 0.2 ._52 v-110 - Se 1-c Hazard Aruly:11 1 Dete-Inistic 5.422e-002 7.328-002 4.687e-002 4.25*-002 5.10 le-002 7.49]e-002 5.195/-002 4.717.-001 7.6/3/-002 9.2Sk-002 6.791Â®-002 6.S38,-002 1.1Ue-001 1.427e-001 1.019â‚¬-001 1.0Â§7e-001 1.355,-001 1.745/-001 1.1*le-001 1.13Oe-001 1.317e-001 1.745/-001 1.12le-001 1.Olle-001 1.283â‚¬-001 1.756/-001 1.090Â¢-001 1.00â€¢e-001 1.tile-001 1.6400-001 1.00]e-001 0 2170-002 1.Ule-001 1.Wle-001 5.35*e-002 1.4928-002 1.025e-001 1.423e-001 ..643.-002 7.8595-002 9.13"-002 1.201/-001 7.914-002 7.2:le-002 1.574.-002 1.lge-001 7.314,-002 6.7512-002 4.0512-002 5.OK)e-002 3.Ise-002 3.217,3-002 2.40*-002 2.27/-002 2.42--002 1.9132-002 1.672e-002 1.lle-002 1.774e-002 1.280.-002 5-rce: North Frontal (west) Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Dist,nce: M.54 km Alitude Unlti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period colo- 2: Acceleration (g) for: fghted Ian of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) NGA Usls 2001 colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: caipbill-lozorgili (2008) NGâ€¢ usvs 2008 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Young, (2007) NGA USGS ZOO)1 1 2 3 4 5 1.26Ge-002 1.157e-001 G.37;e-002 6.154.-002 1 986â‚¬-002 1.205e-001 7.11Oe-002 7.7972-002 1. Me-001 1.41]e-001 9.402/-001 1.15Ze-001 1.70*e-001 2.Cloe-001 1.315e-001 1.610*-001 â€¢age 29 -_SM vs-100 - Se i-le Hazard Anal,Â§11 1 Deter,inlitic 1.721/-001 2.172e-001 1.571,-001 1.421,-001 1.$65&001 1.-4/-001 1.41--001 1.254,-001 1.410,-001 1.741:-001 1.1020-001 1.1*le-001 1.2120-001 1.57le-001 1.12,-001 1.0/10-001 3.,2.-002 6.53--002 $.3/e-002 4.5132-002 3.04]e-002 3.51]e-002 3.067,-002 2.4Â®e-002 2.079â‚¬-002 2.44â€¢e-002 2.2214-002 1.56*-002 â„¢Irce: Nk Ridge (Offshore) Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 130 10 kn -litude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 coh- 1: spectral Period colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: *ighted -an of Attenuation Equations colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loori-Atkinson (2001) IGA IICI ZOO: Colu- 4: Acceleration (9) for: Ca.0.11-lozorv,18 (2002) 1Â«:A USGS 2001 Colin 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) â€¢GA USGS ZOOS 2 3 4 5 4.321,-002 5.472.-002 4.07*e-002 3.413e-002 4.$171-002 5.577e-002 ..417.-002 3.â€¢Ve-002 6.003.-002 6.Mle-002 5.77Ge-002 $.3Ue-002 9.40*-002 1.01--OK)1 1.7795-002 0.5464-002 1.121/-001 1.180,-001 1.04le-001 9.410â‚¬-002 1.105/-001 1.401,-001 5.035-002 .22]e-002 1.OVe-001 1.440â‚¬-001 9.512.-002 1.632.-002 1.014e-001 1.]Sh-001 0.03*-002 7.sne-002 9.535+002 1.29$/-001 1.2--002 7.407e-002 8.Ine-002 1.ll -001 7.625(-002 G Ule-002 1.07*-002 1.015/-001 6.977,-002 6.407e -002 7.44 k-002 9.9258-002 6.444â‚¬-002 HA-002 Noe 31 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.G 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.1 1 Z 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 o.i 0.7 0. 0 1 -_SSâ€¢ vs-110 - Sel-ic Hazard Analy:11 1 Determintitic 0.3 1.912,-001 2.434/-001 1.5SOe-001 1.713,-001 0.4 1.137,-001 2.319/-001 1.507e-001 1.Glle-001 0.5 1.71]e-001 2.311,-001 1.490,-001 1.479,-001 06 1.656*-001 2.Zlk-001 1.3512-001 1.1490-001 0.7 1.553,-001 2.10*e-001 1.313*-001 1.2]Se-001 0.8 1.437â‚¬-001 1.I40,-001 1.227e-001 1.14$e-001 0.9 1314e-001 1./5/-001 1.137,-001 1.0614-001 1 1.Zlle-001 1.Wk-001 1.012,-001 9.137,-002 2 5.906-002 7.100,-002 $..3e-002 4.753.-002 3 3.654/-002 4.23*e-002 3.Ule-002 2.157e-002 4 2.Sâ€¢k-002 2.86$'-002 2.15.-002 1.92Ge -002 S-rce: Northridge Region: USGS 2004 California Closest Distance: 71.16 ki A=plitude Units: Acceleration (g) IMagnitude: 6.90 - maile: 0.SO Col-, 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Cok= 3: Acceleration (g) for: 100-0-Atkintor, (2001) I/,4 ISCS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Campbell-lozorgnla (2001) Ici USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for. Cliou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 9 um-002 1.225,-001 1.210*-002 1.Vie-002 0 0%1.07Oe-001 1.263,-001 I.207.-002 1.025,-001 0.1 1.4$0e-001 1.60*-001 1.249,-001 1.4932-001 02 2.105e-001 2.42*-001 1.Ille-001 2.070/-001 0.3 2.30le-001 2.77le-001 2.043,-001 2.0--001 0.4 2.17*e-001 2.66e-001 1.Sm-001 1.S]81-001 0.5 2.065e-001 2,590â‚¬-001 1.15 le-001 1.740-001 O.G 1.me-001 2.35$e-001 1.6%â‚¬-001 1.570+-001 Page 30 -_SIA IBUO - iii-Ic Hazard Anily,11 1 Deter,Ir,litlc 2 3.35/e-002 4.413e-002 3.374â‚¬-002 2...3e-002 3 2.1212-002 2.503e-002 2.1345-002 1.727,-002 4 1.47Ge-002 1.710e-002 1.Slle-002 1.15Se-002 sclirce: oak Ridge (onshor,) Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 100.43 km *litude Unit.: Acceleration (g) ta,:1 rude : 7.20 - Fractile: 0 50 colu- 1: Spectral Period Cell- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colo- 3. Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinson (2001) NG.i USCS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: cabell-*ozorgnla (2008) IGA usls 2001 colurn 5: Acceleration (g) for: chicll-voung. (2007) IGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 PGâ€¢ 7.580â‚¬-002 '.560.-002 7.1Â§7e -002 6.012,-002 0.05 1.162,-002 9.923.-002 7.125â‚¬-002 6.73*-002 0.1 1.07Oe-001 1.210e-001 1.010)e-001 9.Ele-002 0.2 1.56*-001 1.724/-001 1.517â‚¬-001 1.4650-001 0.3 1.797/-001 2.06*-001 1.7160-001 1.53--001 0.4 1.7432 -001 2.Otie-001 1.7072-001 1.4Gle-001 0.5 1.70*-001 2.07]e -001 1 69*-001 1.351,-001 0.1.5Ie-001 1.954/-001 1.594/-001 1.23*e-001 0.7 1.5034-001 1.15*-001 1.51le-001 1.14Oe-001 0.1 1.3540-001 1.7 lk-001 1.40;e-001 1.055/-001 0.'1.274e-001 1.$$3,-Col 1.Me-001 S. 7765-002 1 1.174e-001 1.417*-001 1.19;e-001 9.073Â®-002 2 5.511/-002 6.3&-002 5.7lle-002 4.35*e-002 3 3.26$'-002 3.11$2-002 3.1,0.-002 2.5- -002 4 2.26*-002 2.57*e-002 2.4/k -002 1.7355-002 â€¢age 32 -_SS.A Vsall Saurce: Oak Ridge Connected Region: usGS 2001 c,lifornia Closest Distance: la.Â« ki -plitude Units: ACCeleration (g -gnitud,: 7.40 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Col-, 4: Acceleration (g) for: colu- 5: AÂ«eleration (g) for: 2 3 1.314-002 1.0720-001 9.0030-002 1.125e-001 1.1712-001 1.3$0e-001 1.672,-001 1.Â®Se-001 1.910'-001 2.15 Se -001 1.Â§59,-001 2.15*e-001 1.137e-001 2.1372-001 1 735/-001 2.10]e-001 1.6$12-001 2.02-001 1.544&001 1.*SO,-001 1.423/-001 1.717e-001 1.32le-001 1.57Ge-001 6.627e-002 7.41]e-002 4.110,-002 4.67*-002 2.1/Se-002 3.1382-002 Scwrce: Palls Verdes Region: usa 2001 California 10 - Sel-ic Mizard Analysis 1 Deter,in' 1) Ighted -ar of Atter,uation Equati{,11 ...re-'tkinion (2001) ..A USGS 2001 C....11-10'or,lia (2008) 1,1. US" 2008 Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 0.0$ 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0G 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 4 4 7.17le-002 7.133.-002 1.002â‚¬+001 1.5052-001 1.782/-001 1.7110-001 1.73*e-001 1.68-001 1.51Ge-001 1.497/-001 1.]Me-001 1.30*e-001 7.12â€¢e-002 4.411â‚¬-002 3.212,!-002 Page 33 i$t1C S 7.052e-002 7.921,-002 1.16le-001 1.70Â§/-001 1.7lle-001 1.71Oe-001 1.SW-001 1.4$le-001 1.Mle-001 1.246/-001 1.19-001 1.0001-001 5.34le-002 3.232e-002 2.1/le-002 --Ssl vsÂ·Â·180 - sel-ic Hazard Analysis 1 Oeteralnlitic Closest .1.tance: 2'.15 k. Aq,litude wits: Acceleration (g) Magnitide: 7.30 - Fractlle: 0.50 colu- 1: spectral Perlod Col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: fghted â€¢ean of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinson (2001) MIA uscs 2001 colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: clipbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGI ISIS 2001 Collin 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) INGâ€¢ uscs 2001 1 2 3 4 5 ZA 1.Hle-001 1.91]e-001 1.39]e-001 1.623/-001 0.05 1.7/-001 2.0Gle-001 1.575/-001 1.905/-001 0.1 2.555/-001 2.72le-001 2.noe-001 2.733/-001 0.2 3.435,-001 3.W 58-001 3.02]e-001 3.5/e-001 0.3 3.Wk-001 3.107,-001 3.22:e-001 3.60*-001 0.4 3.315/-001 3.6840-001 3.019,-001 1.3â€¢4â€¢-001 0.5 3.23Ge -001 3.$15â‚¬-001 3.015/-001 3.10--001 O.G 2.1952-001 3.227,3-001 2.* le-001 2.157Â®-001 0.7 2.10*-001 3.002e-001 2.754e-001 2.645'-Col 0.*2.612/-001 2.766â‚¬-001 2.102.-001 2.467(-001 0.9 2.42:c-001 2.526Â¢-001 2.4497-001 2.30*e-Col 1 2.272e-001 2.330.-001 2 31Â§/-001 2.16Se-001 2 1.325/-001 1.276/-001 1.44Se-001 1.25le-001 3 8.65&-002 8.$2]e-002 '.5e-002 7. l:Ge-002 4 6.21*-002 6.191*-002 7.CUe-002 5.36*-002 source: Palos verde. Connected Region: ISIS 2001 California Closest oistâ€¢nce: 2.16 11 Agplitide Miti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.70 - Fractile: 0.50 â€¢age M -_SSI vy,150 - Sel-ic lizard Analysis 1 Oeter,Inlitlc col/ill: Spectral Perlod Col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted lean of Attenuition Equitions Coll- 3: Acceleration (g) for: eoore-*tkinion (200/) /Gâ€¢ USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Accelentlon (g) for: Cabell-lozor,lia (2000) IGA usas 20011 Colum 1: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 2 3 4 $ 1./2/e-001 2.02--001 1.5 lk-001 1.9302-001 2.0$40-001 2.22le-001 1.Ine-001 2.Zlk-001 2.7/1/-001 2.872,-001 2.31le-001 3.'Goe-001 3 Glie-001 3.59oe-Col 3.Ilse-001 4.14le-001 3.lUe-001 3.74*e-001 3.469â‚¬-001 4.21*I-001 3.674/-001 3.632â‚¬-Col 3.17*e-(JO)1 4.0171-001 3.5Sk-001 3.5195-001 3.514/-001 3.745e-001 3.41le-001 3.32 k -Col 3.41--001 3 417,-001 3.260â€¢-001 3.174e-001 3.3401-001 3.265(-001 3.0/50-001 2.973/-001 3.23;e-001 3.07 k -001 2.91 '-Col 2.7â€¢le-001 3.11le-001 2.905/-001 2.76*-001 2.lk-001 3.oose-001 2.75 k -001 1.71Ze-001 1.537,-001 2.1.Zie -001 1.6132-001 1.236,-001 1.166e-001 1.4//-001 1.017,-001 1.Se-002 1.314/-002 1.057/-001 7.495,-002 source: pinto â€¢tn Region: USGS 2000 California Closest Distance: 113.72 ki Wlitude tnits: Acceleratim (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 coll- 1: spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: *ighted -an of Attenuation Equations colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2008) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambell-lozorgnia (2008) IGA uSGS 2001 Page ]S 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.. 0.9 1 2 -_sq vs-110 - selimic HazarÂ·d Analysis 1 Deter,inlitic Colo- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) 16â€¢ Usls 200; 1 2 1 4 5 M 6.11*e-002 1.225,-002 5.21*-002 4.170.-002 0.05 6.$â€¢7e-002 1.595,-002 5.77Se-002 i.3*Ge-002 0.1 1.527&002 1.02#e-001 7.3'Ge-002 7.'02.-002 0.2 1.242,-001 1.404Â¢-001 1.11Ge -001 1.205e-001 0.3 1.41Se-001 1.637(-001 1. 32Ge-001 1.2Ue-001 0.4 1.402,-001 1.6&-001 1.264/-001 1.24k -001 0.5 1.3Ele-001 1.721*-001 1.217e-001 1.160e-001 0.6 1.300,-001 1 632,-001 1.19*-001 1.070Â®-001 0.7 1.2]le-001 1.$6le-001 1.1]le-001 5.9214-002 0.1.15$e-001 1.4G71-001 1.071/-001 S.2*â€¢e-002 0.9 1.07;e-001 1.360,-001 5.9*le-002 0.672,-002 1 1.00Â§'-001 1.27 le-001 .3364-002 1.14]e-002 2 5.645/-002 6.973â‚¬-002 5.3652 -002 4.599e-002 3 3.Gae-002 4.Â§001-002 3.41--002 2.19*e-002 4 2.$83,-002 3.1171-002 2.51$e-002 1.979(-002 Scum: Pilgah-lullion â€¢un--squite Lk Regim: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 169.40 6 Alitude =ltS: ACceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Fractlle: 0.50 Coll- 1: Spectral Iricd Col=, 2: Acceleration (g) for: -ighted -an of Attenuation Equations Col-1 3: Acceleratlon (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) IGI IGS 2001 Col-, 4: Acceleration (g) for: CABbell-lozorgnla (1001) 1,GI uscs 2001 Coli- $: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-voungs (2007) NGA USCS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 O 3.453'-002 3.Ilze-002 3.Ilse-002 2.73â€¢e-002 Page 36 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 -_SSA Â¥1-180 - Sel-lc Hazard Analy,11 1 Deter,inistic 3.6355-002 3.We-002 4.112.-002 2..5.-002 4.51'e-002 4.63*e-002 5.05]e -002 4.062,-002 7.240,-002 6.176â‚¬-002 7.155â‚¬-002 6.5â€¢le-002 1.122-002 1.Mle-002 .7712-002 0.1lle-002 9.123/-002 9.71*e -002 9.369e-002 8.21]e-002 .162.-002 1.017,-001 9.442,-002 7.977/-002 1.17Se-002 1.014e-001 S.9 52e -002 7.We-002 1.54*-002 0.95;e-002 1.5$*e-002 7.124â‚¬-002 1 11*e-002 1.;GOe-002 1.053â‚¬-002 6.74 le-002 7.624e-002 .015*-002 7.4782-002 6.3,0.-002 7.1992-002 8 554/-002 6.99*e-002 0.04.2-002 4.1561-002 4..0.-002 3.573e-002 3.We-002 2.Uk-002 3.214,-002 2.5772-002 2.270,-002 4 1.915.-002 2.27Ge-002 1.Sme-002 1.5581-002 Source: â€¢lus Point (L/I/r)-1-talve Region: USGS 200* Callfornia Clowit Distance. 132.36 ki Agel ltude units: Acceleration (g) Kagni rude : 7.30 - Fractt le: O.50 Colum 1: Spectral Period Col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lan of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) //1/ usas 2001 Cohi=r, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-lozor,lia (2001) /li USGS 20011 Cohi, 5: Acceleration (g) for: OliN-Yotng, (2007) NGA USCS 2001 2 3 4 5 4.400â‚¬-002 4.77;e-002 4.70$2-002 3.5.-002 4.65Oe-002 4.535/-002 5.157/-002 3.17Ge-002 5.924/-002 $.13*e-002 6.3Me-002 5.573/-002 9.24*e-002 1.693/-002 9.91Oe-002 9. lee-002 1.132e-001 1.14]e-001 1.2176001 1.040,-001 Page 37 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0., 1 2 3 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 -_SSâ€¢ vs-110 - Sels,IC H.Izard Aruly,11 1 Deter,inistic 0.4 1.13*e-001 1.2082 -001 1.16*e-001 1.042,-001 0.5 1.149e-001 1.ZIZe-001 1.1lk-001 '.Sloe -002 0.6 1.OSSe-001 1.25;e-001 1.117,-001 9.2*De-002 0.7 1.055-001 1.232/-001 1.067e-001 8.702.-002 0.1 9.1 k -002 1.lue-001 1.0021-001 1.1671-002 0.,9.Zlk-002 1.075e-001 9.2*Ze-002 7.65ii-002 1 1.5*e-002 '.Mle-002 1.63}e-002 7.1735-002 2 4.325e-002 4.&212-002 4.523/.002 3.61*e-002 3 2.664.-001 2.VGe-002 2.754/-002 2.222,-002 4 1.lile-002 2.002e-002 2.071/-002 1.50'De-002 S,-rce: Pitam Point (t-r. west) Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 173.11 h A.Altude Klts: Acceleration (g) lugnitude : 7.30- Fractlle: 0. SO Col=I 1: Spectral Perlod Colimi 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted lean of Attenuation Equations Coll- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) ICA USGS 2008 coll- 4: Acceleration (g) for: c/1/bell.lozorgnia (2001) 1/li usls ZOOS Colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Â¥c-gs (2007) 1,1/ USGIS 200* 1 2 3 4 3 PGA 3 :40e-002 3.5lle-002 4.IIZe-002 3.094/-002 0.05 4.Olle-002 3.65]e-002 5.lile-002 3.20Ze-002 0.1 $.05%-002 4.342e-002 6.29--002 4.$45/-002 0.2 ..123.-002 6 6*Ge-002 5.Ble-002 7.79/e-002 0.3 1.021/-001 9.135'-002 1 235,-001 9.1364-002 0.4 1.037e-001 9. 8*Oe -002 11*le-001 S.344.-002 0.5 1.0582-001 1.0614-001 1.20le-001 9.006â‚¬-002 0.6 1.Olle-001 1.051/-001 1.lue-001 1.513'-002 0.7 Â§.125.-002 1 0/le-001 1.07%2-001 .022.-002 ..9. 3. -_Ssâ€¢ villo - selsâ€¢ic luzard Anilysts 1 Deter-inlitic 9.Zile-002 1.003/-001 1.027â‚¬-001 7.562.-002 I. 620e -002 5.2Ze-002 '.453Â®-002 7.115e-002 1.0470-002 8.Ule-002 8.77;i-002 ,Â·Use-002 3.9*Ge-002 4.277e-002 4.27;e-002 3.40â€¢e-002 2.â€¢lk-002 2...e-002 2.52*-002 2.069e-002 1.685e-002 1.7*Ze-002 1.1741-002 1.39.-002 Source: Pit,i point (Upper) Region: USGS 2008 california Closest Distance: 166.40 Ici Aiplitude WN: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: G.SO * Fractile: O.SO Colu:,1 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Atter-tion Equations Coll- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) 16* uSCS ZOOS Colti, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-lozorgill (200*) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: 0,10,0-Yiwigs (1007) 111â€¢ uscs 2001 2 3 4 1 3 122.-002 3.Mle-002 4.053â‚¬-002 2.22*-002 3.2Â§3e-002 3.1102-002 4.374'-002 2.30â€¢e-002 4.200e-002 3.1171-002 5.$04-002 3.27h-002 6.957/-002 G.Ule-002 1.$582 -002 5.Â§25.-002 1.Gale-002 9.06*-002 1.042e-001 1.37Ge-002 1.71*e-002 5.57le-002 ..U'e-002 G.GSGe-002 8.680â‚¬-002 1.003e-001 5. SMe-002 1.41/e-002 1.144/-002 5.579e-002 1.125.-002 G.02*-002 7.042-002 1.211â‚¬-002 1.219/-002 5.&44.-002 7.13*e-002 1.GOSe-002 7.52Oe-002 5.285,5-002 6.519,-002 7. 2.-001 6.777e-002 4.-Oe -002 5.99Se-002 7.21]e-002 G.174e-002 4.Gloe-002 2.72le-002 3.255â‚¬-002 2.6770-002 2.232e-002 Page 31 0.1 0.9 1 Z 3 4 1 â€¢GA 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0./ 07 0.1 0.9 1 -_SSâ€¢ mil 3 1.5$4.-002 1.11 4 1.08*-002 1.24 Source: Plus mint Connected â€¢eglon: USCI 200* callfornia Closest Distance: 131.21 0 Alitude mits: Acceleration (g lugnitudi: 7.30 - Fractile: 0.50 Coh-I l: Spectral Irlod Col,- 2: Acceleration (g) fur: Col-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: Cok- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: 1 2 3 L705&002 6.3*Se-002 0.05 6.075e-002 6.625.-002 0.1 7.1070-002 7.192.-002 0.2 1.103,5-001 1.13*e-001 0.3 1.412e-001 1.442-001 0.4 1.35*-001 1.4*Se-001 0.5 1.Mle-001 1.5$32-001 0.6 1.32--001 1.502.-001 07 1.26&-001 1.4G0e+001 0.1 1.1Ue-001 1.37]e-001 0.9 1.09/e-001 1.25Ge-001 1 1.017,-001 1.16Oe-001 2 4.Mle-002 ;.419.-002 3 2."Ge-002 3.3712+002 4 2.012/-002 2.272e-002 0 - Seis/Â·c Mazard An/1/$11 1 Oeteriristic le-002 le-002 weighted -nuati n. loore-Atkin ./ Cumbell-/O 001)00. Chiou-Young GA US 1.$2*-002 1.114e-002 an of Atte son (2001) zorgnia (2 s (2007) I 4 6.0411 -002 6.517/-002 1.15 k-002 1.254,-001 1.$222 -001 1.462/-001 1.474e-001 1.37e-001 1.335-001 1.251,-001 1.153â‚¬-001 1.One-001 5 27*-002 3.11*e-002 2.3112-002 Noe 40 1.3210-002 8.7732-003 on Equatto USGS 2008 NGA USGS 2 GS ZOOS 4.616â‚¬-002 5.01]e-002 7.Noe-002 1.1570-001 1.27Oe-001 1.24$e-001 1.lile-001 1.0*4â‚¬-001 1.001Â¢-001 0.410*-002 1.712.-002 1.1//-002 4.0.e-002 2.453,-002 1.655/-002 -_Ssâ€¢ vs-110 - silsâ€¢lc Hazard Analy,11 1 Deter,Inistic Source: pleito Region: Uics 2001 California Closest Distance: 149.74 u Alitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magni tude: 7.10 - Fractile: 0.50 Colt=11: Spectral Period Col,=1 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted *an of Attenuatler, EquationS Colt- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinion (2001) Mli us,GS 2008 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: C.lipbell-Sozor,Iia (2000) Mil USGS 2001 Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: alou-Youngs (2007) IGI USCS ZOOS 2 3 4 1 3.7600-002 4.42/e-002 3.81*-002 3.043.-002 3.,6.-002 4.5242-002 4.152/-002 3.230â‚¬-002 5.120.-002 5.41$â‚¬-002 5.236c-002 ..65*-002 1.1395-002 S. 675/ -002 8.067e-002 7.67*e-002 9./3e-002 1.137e-001 9.7 Sse-002 1.70*-002 9.550â€¢,-002 1.lili-001 S.Noe-002 1.70ie-002 9..Oe-002 1.242e-001 9.1/le-002 0.2#-002 9. Me-002 1. Be-001 8.514/-002 7.723/-002 1.92Â§e-002 1.155/-001 1.01*e-002 7.21;e-002 .345e-002 1.0132-001 7.4/2-002 6.75$/-002 7.686/-002 5.Uie-002 6.152e-002 6.3112 -002 7.12;e-002 9.115/-002 6.355Â£-002 5.90*-002 3.$20,-002 4.212,-002 3.41]e-002 2.536.-002 2.139,-002 2.4 63e -002 2.lne -002 1.77*e-002 1.491/-002 1.67$1-002 1. $ 97/-=2 1.20le-002 Sc*Irce: Puente Hills â€¢egic:*1: USGS ZOOS California Closest Oistance: 19.11 ki 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 07 0.1 0.9 1 2 -_SSâ€¢ vs-110 - Sel-ll luard knaly,il l Deterairistic Nvlitude Mits: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: 0.50 Colll 1: Spectral Period Coli- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) CA USGS 200* Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Catâ‚¬11-Bozorgnia (2000) 11.A ws.S 2001 Colt- 5: Acceleratli (g) for: allou-Young, (2007) IGA Usls 2001 1 2 3 4 5 m 2.27]e-001 2.064.-001 2.157,-001 2.ssse-001 0.0$2.520/-001 2.22 3/-001 2.357e-001 2.979'-001 0.1 3.443â‚¬-001 3.066/-001 3.2782-001 3.917,-001 0.2 4.Gui-001 4.570,-001 4.35 k-001 5.oWe-001 0.3 4.'15,3-001 4.91#e-001 4.63le-001 5.16*e-001 0.4 4.72le-001 4.667e -001 4.53/e-001 4./5/e-001 0.3 4.545,!-001 4.43.e-001 4.&420-001 4.6â€¢e-001 O.G 4.222e-001 4.0542-001 4.26*-001 4.347e-001 0.7 3./56.-001 3.75;e-001 4.045/-001 4.OUe-001 0.0 3.67*c-001 3.412,-Col 3.105/-001 3.117/-001 0.,3.392,-001 3.04/e-001 3.5528-001 3.577e-001 1 3.150/-001 2.756/-001 1.3412-001 3.352/+001 2 1.581/-001 1.246/-001 1.13*c-001 1.GW-001 3 9.40Oe-002 7.533â‚¬-002 1.09//-001 ,.6*71-002 4 6.51Ic-002 S.21le-002 ..035.-002 6.307.-002 source: Puente Mills (Coyote Hills) Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 12./ 13 Al,litude Lnits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: G.IO - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Perlod Page 41 --.Ssl vs=110 - selsâ€¢-ic luzard Anily,ll 1 oeter-inlitic Colu,n 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (ZOOS) IGA USGS ZOOS Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C,bell-lozorgnia (ZOOS) NGA USGS 2000 Colt- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chi--Your,gs (2007) INGâ€¢ ISIS 2001 2 3 4 5 2.&452-001 2.171,-001 2.59*e-Col 2.15*e -00 1 2.112/-001 2.355e-001 2.110e-001 3.270e-001 3.Be-001 3.3552-001 3.13Â§Â®-001 4.]12e-001 5.232e-001 5.292e-001 4.9â‚¬e-001 5.442e-001 5.492e-001 5.632/-001 5.2Sâ€¢e-001 5.5512-001 5 347/-001 5.3:Se-Col 5.2320-001 5.420*-001 5.14le-001 5.0Â»Oe-001 5.216-001 5.14Oe-001 4.77Oe-001 ...2.-001 4.1722-001 4./45,-001 4.41-001 4.21Oe-001 4.$9*e-001 4.56*-001 4144e-001 3.105'-001 4.31le-001 4.31$2-001 3.127*-001 3.3963-001 4.Olle-001 4.0651-001 3.55Ge-001 3.oue-001 3.774e-001 3.1282-001 1.10Ge-001 1.344/-001 2.Osle-001 1.13Â®-001 1.05&-001 7.6*Ge-002 1.243/-001 1.163/-001 7.3109-002 5.2915-002 9.025(-002 7.116,-002 Source: Puente Hills (LA) Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 31.M ki Allitude Units: Acceleration (9) lugni tude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.$0 Colo- 1: Spectral Perlod colu=, 2: Acceleration (g) for: mighted lean of Attenuation Equations colu= 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-ArkÂ·Inson (2001) IK=A USGS ZOOS Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: 0-bell-mozorgnli (2001) INGâ€¢ USGS 2001 Colum 5. Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-voungs (2007) N<A USGS 2001 Page 43 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.G 0.7 0.8 0.8 1 2 -_SSâ€¢ v-110 - seismic 1 2 3 1.656â‚¬-001 1.10--001 0.05 1./40/-001 1.91$e-001 0.1 2 561/-001 2.564/-001 0.2 3.553Â£-001 3.797â‚¬-001 0.3 3.730e-001 4.lose-001 0.4 1.527/-001 3.Wle-001 0.5 1.345,!-001 3.7012-001 0.6 3.037,-001 3.313/-001 0.7 2.IN-001 3.OWE-001 0..2.59]e-001 2.100,-001 0.,2.3 12-001 2.493.-001 1 2.1G7e-001 2.2â€¢Ge-001 2 1.01Ge-001 9.70Se-002 3 5.914,-002 5.599*-002 4 4.112e-002 3.7*-002 Sc*Irce: Puent' Hills (Santa Fe SpringÂ© Reglx: USGS 2001 California Closest Oiltance: 21.*7 ki ABlitude Mits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 1.70 - Fractile: O.SO Col/-11: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) fur: weight Col,= 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore- Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CaTbe Colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou- 1 2 3 M 1.170e-001 1.U2e-001 0.0Â§2.01:e-001 2.012,-001 Page 42 Hazard An 4 1.5Ue-001 1.743e-001 2.45 Ze-001 3.36Ge-001 3.Goze-001 3.4$12-001 3.375/-001 3.11Â§,-001 2.913/-001 2.70Oe-001 2.4e-001 2.30;e-001 1.151/-001 6.762.-002 4.946â‚¬-002 4 1.164,-001 2.074â‚¬-001 Page 44 1 10eter,inlitic 5 1.5912-001 1.lile-001 2.6670-001 3.495/-001 3.4*le-001 3.240e-001 2.95]e-001 2.69 le-001 2.46*e-001 2.27*e-001 2.1052-001 1.-le-001 9.24*e-002 5.3122-002 3.$43e-002 5 1.163â‚¬-001 2.17*-001 ed lean of Attenuation Equations Atkinson (2001) * U.Gs ZOOS 11-lozorgnia (2001) IGA USGS ZOOS Voungs (2007) NGA USCS 2001 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 -_SSA vs=180 - Seismic Hazard Analysis 1 Deterministic 2.949(-001 2.791/-001 2.Ile-001 3.069â‚¬-001 4.0932-001 4 340'-001 3.Te-001 3.951*-001 4.232e-001 4.105/-001 4.15Oe-001 3.940e-001 3 992e-001 4.324e-001 3.976/-001 3.675/-001 3.73%-001 4.062e-001 3.79$-001 3.35Ge-001 3.37le-001 3.615/-001 3.4372-001 3.06Oe-001 3.07e-001 3.27;e-001 3.15*e-001 2.*05/-001 2.1026-001 2.933e-001 2.Ille-001 2.5Me-001 2.53:e-001 2.600e-001 2.630,-001 2.313.-001 2.31:e-001 2.334e-001 2.4101-001 2.200e-001 104Oe-001 9.57 Ze-002 1.15Oe-001 1.012,-001 5.83 k -002 5.15 le-002 6.624e-002 5.721/-002 3.975e-002 3.443-002 4.779/-002 3.61]e-002 scrce: Raymond Reglon: USGS 2001 california Closest Distance: 44.13 km Wlitude units: Acceleration (9) MagnitudeÂ· 6.80 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2. Acceleration (g) for: Weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colu= 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Con- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C=pbell-lozorgnia (2008) NG* USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for. Chiou-voungs (2007) 1Â«1â€¢ USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 1.15Ge-001 1.5*le-001 .26le-002 9.5e-002 1.27*e-001 1.643e-001 1.Oee-001 1.12*e-001 1.7*le-001 2.170e-001 1.5171-001 1.675/-001 2.5632-001 3 320â‚¬-001 2113e-001 2 257e-001 2.707.-001 3.638/-001 2.24&-001 2.233e-001 2.532e-001 3.4492-001 2.09*e-001 2.0$05-001 Page 45 -_SSâ€¢ v-110 - Seismic Hazard Analyâ€¢11 1 Deter,lnlstic -3--002 1.202,-001 '.17;e-002 1 617/-002 9.2961-002 1.117e-001 1.634Â®-002 1.Oile-002 4.IZe-002 5.4//-002 5.071/-002 4.14Ze-002 3.11le-002 3.4G0e-002 3.32Ze-002 2.553e-002 2 177e-002 2.314,-002 2 472/-002 1.744e-002 Source: Rose Canyon Region: usls 2001 California cloâ€¢est Distance: 13.77 kâ€¢ Aplitude UnltS: ACCeleration (g) Magnitude: 6.90 - Fractile: 0.Â§0 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colt- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted lean of Attenuation Equatims Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) IGI USGS 2001 Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca,Bbell-lozorgila (2001) IKEA USGS 200Â§ Col,- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-voungs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 6.541/-002 1.021/-001 5.667/-002 4.95Oe-002 7.507e-002 1.OSZe-001 6.372e-002 5.63]e-002 1.00le-001 1.325/-001 1.â€¢loe-002 1.393,-002 1.411â‚¬-001 1.%7,-001 1.2602-001 1.217e-001 1.619-001 2.182/-001 1.423â‚¬-001 1 253e-001 1.55*e-001 2.167e-001 1.33]e-001 1.175e-001 1.413â‚¬-001 2.10â€¢e-001 1.Zlk-001 1.0612-001 1.34*-001 1.9(Se-001 1.165,3-001 9.6/k -002 1.2]le-001 1.752e-001 1.076e-001 1.1512-002 1.134/-001 1.10(e-001 9.17Se-002 1.15le-002 1.03Ge-001 1.453e-001 S.011.-002 7.540e-002 9.54Ge-002 1.333e-001 1.2e--002 7.005.-002 4.15Oe-002 6.574/-002 4 2--002 3.690/-002 2.910â‚¬-002 3.7/5/+002 2.695/-002 2.24&-002 Page 47 0.5 0i 0.7 0. 09 1 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.9 1 3 4 1 0.05 O.I 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 06 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2 -_SS,â€¢ v-110 - seis,ic Hazard Analy,ls 1 Deter-inlitic o.s 2.36*e-001 3.27h-001 1.Ilie-001 1.*Oe-001 0.6 2.126e-001 2.9342-001 1.7Ue-001 1.655â‚¬:-001 0.7 1.936e-001 2.67le-001 1 6370-001 150le-001 0.1 1.754/-001 2.31&-001 1.455â‚¬-001 1 37Ze-001 0.9 1.5 BOe -00 1 2.11:e-001 1.363/-001 1257/-001 1 1.4]Se-001 1.0&-001 1 2//-001 1.155e-001 2 G.SOOe-002 7.727e-002 6.514e-002 5.260Â»002 3 3.76le-002 4.14&+002 4.0/62 -002 3.057e-002 4 2.603'-002 2.832/-002 2.964.-002 2.01Se-002 Sc*Irce: Red <untain Region: USCS 2001 California Closest 01,tance: 144.25 kÂ» Alitude Ullts: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.40 - Fractile: 0. i0 Coll-, 1: Spectral Per-lod Colum 2: Acceleration (g) forÂ· weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colu-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 20)08 Colu- 4. Acceleration (g) for: Capbell-lozorgila (2001) NGA USGS 200Â§ colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA usGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 %â€¢ 4.126e-002 5 66Oe-002 4.574e-002 4.243/-002 0.05 5.13]e-002 5 me-002 4.95*-002 4 5400-Col 0.1 6.54*-002 Â§.9112-002 6.15Oe-002 6 570.-002 0.2 9.97Ge-002 9.1--002 9.4976-002 1.0G0e-001 0.3 1.207e-001 1.2742-001 1.162,3-001 1 187/-001 0.4 1.211,-001 1.3331-001 1.115e-001 1.181-001 0.5 1 224-001 1.420e-001 1.13Ze-001 1.11*e-001 0.6 1.174â‚¬-001 1 354e-001 1.010â‚¬-001 1.046:-001 0.7 1.13Oe-001 1373e-001 1.03*e -001 1.7902.002 0.1 1.0Gle-001 1.304/-001 9.126â‚¬-002 I.116e-001 â€¢age â€¢G -_ISA vs-180 - Sel-ic Hazard Analy,i, 1 Oeter,inistic 4 2.0â€¢Ze-002 2.72le-002 1.%32-002 1.$02e-002 Sairce: San Cayetarlo Region: 0,5 2008 california Closest oiltance: 10.12 kÂ» Alitude Mits: Acceleration (g) Magmtude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: spectral Period coli 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Ian of Attenuation Equations Colum 3: Acceleration (g) for: locre-Atkinson (2008) IG urSGS ZOOS Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Caq,bell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2008 Colu=, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou.Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 K.A 6.le-002 1.257/-002 5.lile-002 5.146â‚¬-002 0.05 6.6642-002 1.550*-002 5.72Â§â‚¬-002 5.713â‚¬-002 0.1 8.72le-002 1.037e-001 7.402e-002 1.3Ue-002 0.2 1.293/-001 1.49*e-001 11132-001 1.2672-001 0.3 1.496-001 1.Ck-001 1.3092-001 1.350e-001 04 1.4GOe-001 1.1313-001 1 243e-001 1.299â‚¬-001 0.5 1.435â‚¬-001 1.*6*-001 1.233e-001 1.20]e-001 O.G 1.344e-001 1.77Ze-001 1.154e+001 1107e-001 0.7 1.269e-001 1.694/-001 1.051/-001 1.0222-001 0.8 1.1*Oe-001 1.572e-001 1.020â‚¬-001 .49le-002 0.5 1.013/-001 1.4242-001 9.435/-002 8.12 le-002 1 1.00le-001 1.30]e-001 1.1032-002 1.205/-002 2 4.Ile-002 5.S27e-002 4. Slle-002 4.017.-002 3 3.04*-002 3.535,-002 3.170,-002 2.4282-002 4 2 124/-002 2.3le-002 2.335,-002 1.6â€¢le-002 Page 41 -_52 v,-110 - Sel-C Hazard Analy'ls 1 Deterâ€¢inistic =Irce: san Gabriel Region: USGS 200* california Closest Distance: 71.01 km I*litude wits: Acceleration (9) Magnitude: 7.30 I.0 Frictill: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Pericd Colurn 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lean of Attenuation Equations colo- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkin,zo,I (2001) ,Â£,A ISIS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cliptill-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2000 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) 1/1/ ISIS ZOOS 2 3 4 5 S.860â‚¬-002 1.40le-001 7 573/-002 1.001.-002 1.Olle-001 1.47*-001 1.466e-002 9.213/-002 1.43k-001 1 ille-001 1.12le-001 1.36â€¢e-001 1.915,-001 2.H//001 1.643/-001 1.92Oe-001 2.142Â¢-001 2.Â«Me-001 1.166*-001 1.95Â§e-001 2.063/-001 2.5*4.-001 1.773,-001 1.830â‚¬-001 1.Ze-001 2.537/-001 1.769e-001 1.66:e-001 1.7/-001 2.35*e-001 1.664/-001 1.520â‚¬-001 1.730e-001 2.213e-001 1.51Oe-001 1.397/-001 1,611/-001 2.0532-001 1.4*Se-001 1.294/-001 1.491/-001 1.U2e-001 1.3:Ge-001 1.205â‚¬-001 1.390â‚¬-001 1.742e-001 1.302e-001 1.126e-001 7.7312-002 '.]3Ze-002 7.G]Ge-002 6.245.-002 4.979e-002 6.044.-002 4.flle-002 3.S09,-002 3.We-002 4.301,-002 3.693.-002 2. 660â‚¬3 -002 Source: san Joaquin '111' Reglon: USGS 2001 California closest Distance: 7.â€¢9 6 wlitude units: Acceleration (g) Page 49 1 o.os 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0. 0.7 0.. 0., 1 2 3 -_SSâ€¢ 16 - Selsâ€¢Ic lutard Analy,11 1 Deter=inlitlc Magnitude: 7.10 - Fractlle: 0.50 col-, 1: Spectral Period col-, 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Coh- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) wl Usls 2001 Colo- 4: Acceleration (g) for: CAmbell-lozorgnia (2001) MiA USGS ZOOS Cell- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2001) NG, USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 PGA 3.0â‚¬oe-001 2.407.-001 3.1*Ge -001 3.517e-001 0.05 3.347,-001 2.650e-001 3.360e-001 4.032e-001 0.1 4.31]e-001 3.lk-001 4.Zm-Col 5.072.-001 0.2 5.510,-001 6.0752-001 5 33--001 6.3132-001 0.3 G.35Ze-001 G Ine-001 5.05Ze-001 6.65;e-001 0.4 6.339,-001 6.21*-001 G.Olle-001 G.6520-001 0.5 6.27le-001 5.Noe-001 6.149*-001 6.502/-001 0.6 5.96 Se-001 5.4*le-001 6.13:e-001 G.297(3-001 0.7 5.705e-001 5.07le-001 5.-e-001 6.079â‚¬-001 0.1 S.40Ge-001 4.6212-001 5.735/-001 5.8642-001 0.9 5.07*-001 4 143e-001 S.â€¢66/-001 5.625,-001 1 4./Ze-001 3.757e-001 5.235/-001 5.315/-001 2 2.74 le-001 1.761/-001 3.Me-001 3.10$e-001 3 1.UCe-001 1 0*le-001 2.05//-001 1.*le-001 4 1.17Ge-001 7.574/-002 1.Wic-001 1.2Me-001 scwrce: san Jose Region: USGS 2008 California Closest Distance: 30.12 k. ANlitude 0-: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6.70 - Fractile: O.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Perlod colo- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Ian of Attenuation Equations â€¢29* 50 -_ISA vi-110 - Selilic Hazard Analy,11 1 Deter,inlitic Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Arkinian (2001) 1Â«1/ USGS 2001 1 -_SSAA /$-110 - Sel-ic Hazard Analy// 1 Deterministic 2 3 4 5 ..orgnia (ZOOS) NGA USGS ZOO' â€¢Ing. (2007) 16â€¢ USGS 2000 A tuition Equations kin IGA USGS ZOOS 10Â· )01) 11[/ USGS 2001 A USGS 2008 colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: cabell colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: chiou-Â¥â‚¬ 1 2 3 1.357e-001 1.72Ge-001 1.524/-001 1.114,-001 2.172e-001 2.4'Ze-001 3.0332-001 3.70'e-001 3.073e-001 3.775/-001 2.Woe-001 3.Gole-001 2.662'-001 3.359â‚¬-001 2.]Sh-001 2.53 k .001 2.142/-001 2."Ge-001 1.94â€¢ e -001 2.]le-001 1.768,-001 2.15]e-001 1.622/-001 1.*le-001 1.1222-002 .3391-002 4.Ille-002 5.23*e-002 3.360.-002 3.710e-002 Sairce: Santa Cruz Island Region: usls 2001 California Closest 01*lance: 127.15 km Alitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Fractill: 0.10 Coll- 1: Spectral period Colum 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted colum }: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Ati Col-, 4: Acceleration (g) for: Calâ€žbell Col-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-vol 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 05 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 1 2 4 4 1.11*e-001 1.3682-001 2.00Oe-001 2.716â‚¬-001 2.Ille-001 2.62&-001 2.467,-001 2.205,-001 2.005e -001 1.125,-001 1.Re-001 1.52*e-001 7.517â‚¬-002 4.$46.-002 3.572e-002 an of Atter mon (2001) tor,11/ a< 1 (2007) IE Page 51 5 1.1Sie-001 1.370e-001 2.0232-001 2.679-001 2.62$e-001 2.401â‚¬-001 2.lile-001 1.Fie-001 1.7Â§6/-001 1.Glle-001 1.4*Se-001 1.37*e-001 7.10--002 4.2Â§2e-002 2 7y/-002 9 4.920e-002 6.365e-002 0.05 $.2&5â‚¬-001 6.Â§952-002 0.1 6.793*-002 7.;30â‚¬-002 0.2 1.022e-001 1.14le-001 O.3 1.1Sle-001 1.36â€¢e-001 0.4 1.liSe-001 1.427.-001 0.5 1.1722-001 1.46Oe-Col O.G 1.10Oe-001 1.384e-001 0.7 1.04le-001 1.323e-001 0.1 9.760,-002 1.245(-001 0.9 9.0712-002 1.15;e-001 1 1.416â‚¬-002 10*Oe-001 2 4.01'-002 S.â€¢77,-002 3 2.972/-002 3.6582-002 4 2.115e-002 2.631,-002 Scrce: Santa Row Island Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Oistance: 117.14 ki Wlitude unitl: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 6 vi. Fractile: 0.0 Colt-, 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-At Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: cambell Colum 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Yc 1 2 3 â€¢Gâ€¢ 2.2Zle-002 2.144â‚¬-002 0.05 2.30*e-002 2.36Ze-002 0.1 2.9412-002 2.Ule-002 ,uati . .kin NGA ..0 )08)00. K:ng : US 4.513,5-002 5.00Oe-002 6.3632-002 9.02-002 1.153*-001 1.102e-001 1.05$â‚¬-001 1.027e-001 9.720e-002 9.01;e-002 1.4032-002 7.135.-002 4.354(-002 2.104.-002 2.06/e-002 an of Ami son (2001) zorgnia (21 I (2007) I 4 2.101.-002 3.035-002 3.79Oe-002 Page 52 3./32/-002 4.17le-002 6.08.-002 9.57â€¢e-002 1.045/-001 1.0265-001 9.605.-002 0.05.-002 1.2e-002 7.744e-002 7.2 1--002 6.121.-002 3.8442-002 2.4152-002 1.645/-002 Or, Equatic, USGS 200. â€¢6â€¢ USGS 21 IS 2000 1.5101-002 1.527*-002 2.152e-002 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 -_SSA vs=180 - Sel-ic Mizard Arily,13 1 Oeter,inistic 4.963â‚¬-002 5.074e-002 5.932/-002 3.18]e-002 6.26le-002 6 71*+002 7.277e-002 4.72le-002 6.43]e-002 7.4ee-002 6.*Me-002 4 934.-002 6.462/-002 7.Ute-002 6.6902-002 4.1162-002 6 0921-002 7.Wle-002 G.14*e -002 4.517/-002 5 779.-002 7.265.-002 S.72$e-002 4.347e-002 5.42Oe-002 6.Ule-002 5.263(,-002 4 117e-002 5.034e-002 6.423.-002 4.7152-002 3.Me-002 4.707e-002 G.0400-002 4 354.-002 3.6/Ge-002 2.53]e-002 3.274.-002 2.216e+002 2.1098-001 1 543/-002 1.923e-002 1.3174-002 1.3152-002 1.099,-002 1 397e-002 1.Olle-002 1.*Ne-003 â„¢Irce: Santa Susana. alt 1 Region: ISGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 13.13 ki A*l itude imits. Acceleration (g) Magnitude: G E - Fractile: O.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colum ZÂ· Acceleration (g) forÂ· weighted far of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Coli= 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca,bell-lozorgnla (ZOOS) NGA USGS 2001 Colo- 5 Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 7.13Ge-002 1024e-001 5.70]e-002 5 462/-002 7.71]e-002 1.0Sle-001 G.415e-002 6.21Ge-002 1.03*e-Col 1.32Ge-001 1.6742-002 9.23*-002 1 &45e-001 2.030,-001 1.26--001 1.335e-001 1.725,-001 2.37(Â»001 1.431/-001 1.3740-001 1.64Ge-001 2.307e-001 1.3â€¢le-001 1.Zlge-001 1.5732-001 2.2Goe-001 1.2*Ge-001 1.172e-001 Page 53 -_SSA Â¥-110 - Sel-ic Hazard Arily,15 1 Deter,Inistic 1 8.605.-002 1.05*-001 7.9262-002 G.SOk-002 4.7SOe-002 5 %51-002 4.404e-002 3.112.-002 3 00/e-002 3.752/-002 2 1332-002 2.435e-002 2.130/-002 2.67/-002 2 08/1-002 1.657e-002 source: Santa Ynez (West) Region: USGS ZOOS California Closest Distance: 179.00 km Aâ€¢plitude wits: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7 00- Fractile: 0.50 Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: =ighted Mean of Attenwation Equations colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkin=, (2008) IGI USGS ZOOS colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: cambell-lozorgnia (20001 NIA USGS 2001 Col-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Â¥oungs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2008 1 2 3 4 S 2.57ze-002 2.752.-002 3 Mle-002 1.132/-002 2.6/48-002 2.135/-002 3.34]e-002 1.175/-002 3.41*e-002 3.4Zle-002 4.166e-002 2.65*-002 S.Â§47e-002 5 7412-002 6.507.-002 4.69*-001 7.04*-002 7.$4le-002 7.912,3-002 5.6101-002 7.21;e-002 1.26%-002 7,5:le-001 5.101/-002 7.257/-002 1.721,-002 7.424,-002 5.625(3-002 G.Ale-002 8.37â€¢e-002 6.174.-002 5.336.-002 6.525/-002 1.0Â§02-002 6.441/-002 5.045e-002 6.1351-002 7.Glle-002 5 956â‚¬-002 4.772e-002 5 7112-002 7.17*e-002 5.443e-002 4.5Ue-002 5.35(e-002 6.759,-002 5.0232-002 4.2672-002 2.923.-002 3.70--002 2.GoÂ»e-002 2.45le-002 1./066-002 2.232e-002 1 64*e-002 1.54Oe-002 1.287/-002 1.610e-002 1.20$2-002 1.044,-002 â€¢age SS 0i 0.7 0.1 0.9 2 3 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 2 3 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0., 2 3 -_SSâ€¢ vs-110 - Sel-ic Hazard Analysis 1 Deter,Inistic 06 1.434e-001 2 067e-001 1.172e-001 1013â‚¬-001 0.7 1.323e-001 1.9165-001 1.013/-001 9.700*-002 0.8 1.20*e-001 1.735,-001 9.537/-002 1.90*-002 0.9 1.0Â§2/-001 1.$$01-001 S.0Gle-002 8.20le-002 1 9 563,-002 1.3--001 1.349,-002 7.562e-002 2 4.5501-002 5.15$,-002 4.312/-002 3 502.-002 3 2.660'-002 3 207.-002 2 71Ze-002 2.060â‚¬-002 4 1.MSe-002 2.130,-002 1 Wie-002 1.365*-002 Source: Santa Ynez (East) Region: USGS 2001 Califomia Closest Distance: 126.31 k, Aplitude -1-: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 iy maile: 0.$0 Colum 1: Spectral Period Col-% 2: Acceleration (g) forÂ· weighted man of Attenuation Equations Colu- 3 Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Coh- 4. Acceleration (g) for: Cuobell-lozorgnia (2008) IK:A USGS 2008 Colt-, 5: Acceleratlon (g) for: chiou-Youngs (2007) //7/ uses 2001 1 2 3 4 5 9 5.03]e-002 6.56â€¢e-002 4.61--002 3.911/-002 0.05 S.310,-002 6.105â‚¬-002 5.0*Se-002 4.267,3-002 0.1 G.Goe-002 8.1954002 6.452/-002 6.214(-002 0.2 1.044e-001 1.175/-001 9.Ille-002 9.77le-002 0.3 1.213e-001 1.3le-001 1.172e-001 1.06*e-001 0.4 1.20â‚¬e-001 1460e-001 1.115e-001 1.042e-001 0 5 1 19le-001 1491/-001 1.10--001 9.747,-002 06 1.1112-001 1.412e-001 1 03--001 S.02Se -002 0.7 1.0572-001 1.14*-001 9.6321-002 8.39Â§e-002 0.1 9.904/-002 1.20-001 9.15le-002 7./44/-002 0.9 9 20le-002 1.Die-001 1.$00Â»002 7. 34*e-002 Page 54 -_SSâ€¢ v-110 - sels,Ic Hazard Anily,11 1 Deter-=Inistic Sc*Irce: Santa Ynez connected Region: USGS 2001 California Closest oistancâ€¢: 12Â§.73 ki Aq,litude mits. Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.40 - Fraitile: 0.50 Colu-11: Spectral Period Colum 2: Acceleration W for: weighted lan of Attenuatlon Equations colu- 3: Acceleraticn (g) for: Boore-Atki nson (2001) NGA USGS ZOOS Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: ca,obell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA LISCS 2001 colum 5Â· Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) Ili Usls 2001 1 2 3 4 5 9 5.675,5-002 7 3lle-002 5.073/-002 4.Wle-002 0.05 6.0*-002 7 617/-002 5.533/-002 5.07Oe-002 0.1 7.797e-002 9.047e-002 1.9492-002 7.3*e-002 0.2 1.143e-001 1.21Se-001 1.062/.001 1.1$4e-001 0.3 1.32*-001 1.Â«Ge-001 1.2:le-OK)1 1.260e-001 0.4 1.327e-001 1.52le-001 1.22:e-001 1.2]le-001 0.5 1.32â€¢e-001 1.572{5-001 1.244-001 1.154/-001 0.Â§1.257e-001 1.Â§13e-001 1.1*6â‚¬-001 1.072e-001 0.7 1.2012-001 1.4*e-001 1.13e-001 9.993/-002 0.1 1.135e-001 1.3*)e-001 1.077e-001 9.3642-002 0.9 1.062e-001 1.29*e-001 1.007e-001 1.7Ve-002 1 9.991/-002 1.22le-001 9.477,-002 1.2170-002 2 5.755/-002 ...Se-002 5 5172-002 4.7//e-002 3 3.751/-002 4 515.-002 3.65Se-002 3.027e-002 4 2.Glle-002 3.233,-002 2.72/-002 2.076e-002 Sairce: Sierra =adre page 56 -_SSI vs-1-00 - Sell,1/ Hazard Analy,1 1 1 Deter,inlitic Reglon: uSGS ZOOS California Closest 01*unce: 41.10 ki Amlitude Imiti: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20 - Maile: 0.50 Coh-7 1 Spectral Perlod colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Dean of Attenuation Equations Colt-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGâ€¢ usls 1001 colu- 4Â· Acceleration (g) for: C-bell-lozory,li (2001) NGâ€¢ ISCS ZOOS Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS ZOOS 123.5 9 1.]60,-001 1.7171-001 1.0*Oe-001 1.21]e-001 1.$15,-001 1.120e-001 1.22â€¢e-001 1.502,-001 2.015'-001 2.8/1-001 1.705â‚¬-001 2.192/-001 2./73*-001 3.30â€¢e-001 2.31}e-001 2.S33,5-001 3.0501-001 3.635/-001 2.512/-001 2.32,-001 2.17$e-001 3.461/-001 2.448/-001 2.727e-001 2.7â€¢le-001 3.34*e-001 2.414â‚¬-001 2.4/le-001 2.$32e -001 3.087e-001 2.20-001 2.2ee-001 2.35*-001 2.183e-001 2.117'-001 2.076-001 2.177e-001 2.610/-001 1.91]e-001 1.Ilk-001 1 We-001 2.353e-001 1.ille-001 1.777e-001 1.13*e-001 2.130e-001 1.73Se-001 1.650,-001 Une-002 0.55 k -002 1.02le-001 1.073,-002 5.77Oe-002 5.114.-002 6 ille-002 4.152/-002 4.050(-002 3 11.-002 4.Kne-002 3.26*e-002 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.0 1 2 -_SSâ€¢ v,-110 - Sel-Ic Hazard Analysis 1 Oeter,lnistic Fractile: 0.50 Colu=11: spectral Period Col-, 2: AÂ«eleratic,I (g) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equations Colu= 3: Accelerat lon (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2008) IKA USCS ZOOI Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambell-lozorgnia (2001) IGI uscs 2000 Colu- $: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou.voungs (2007) 1./ usvs 2001 1 2 3 4 5 9 7.83*e-002 1.14*e-001 G.2Â§le-002 5.772Â¢-002 0.05 1.54*-002 1.115 e -00 1 7.12*e-002 6.663e-002 0.1 1.17*-001 1.537e-001 9.$43/-002 -6.-002 0.2 1.739e-001 2.317Â®-001 1.427,-001 1.404e-001 03 1.197/-001 2.712e-001 1.564/-001 1.415â‚¬-001 0.4 1.777e-001 2.5696-001 1.452e-001 1 30*-001 0.5 1.GUe-001 2.4642-001 1.363/-001 1.1772-Â·001 0.6 1.495,-001 2.21Oe-001 1.21--001 1.05/e-001 0.7 1.]Gle-001 2.016e-001 1.11Oe-001 5.5712-002 0.1 1.22*-001 1.10*c-001 1.006e-001 8.735/-002 0.9 1.10 Ze-001 1.5We-001 9.OMe-002 7.Sue-002 1 /.977/-002 1.43Oe-001 1.30*e-002 7.322e-002 2 4.35Ge-002 5.77*e-002 4.0/le-002 3.2;Se-002 3 2.473*-002 3.01*-002 2.WSe-002 1.17*e-002 4 1.695.-002 2.0312-002 1./4/-002 1.2]le-002 Source: Sierra ludre Connected Source: Sierra Madre (San Fernando) Region: uSGS 2001 California Close't 01'unce: 67Â·,4 I Ag:plitude Mits: Accelerationl (g) lugnitude: 6.70 - -_SSA Vt-ll colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: col-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: 2 1 1.40â€¢e-001 1.7, 1.5664-001 1.19 2.144e-001 2.3/ 2.530.-001 3.21 3.117/-001 3.Â§1 2.Oe-001 3.44 2.Â§]le-001 3.. 2.Gle-001 3.11 2.45 k -001 2.Sl 2.210,-Col 2.61 2.05$/-001 2 â€¢C 1.9/*-001 2.11 1.005e-001 1.00 6.350,-002 6 25 4.4721-002 4.31 SourceÂ· $1,1-sanu lou Region: u=S 2008 Callfornli clolest Distance: *.07 kÂ» Nllitude Units: ACCeleration (g Magnitude: G.SO :Ii Fractlle: 0.50 Col-, 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Colu=, 3: Acceleration (g) for: Col-1 4: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- J: Aculeration (g) for: 1 2 3 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.1 0. 1 Noe 57 4 Page 59 10 - Sei-Ic Hazard Analysis 1 Deter,ird Cabell-lozor,lia (200*) '(I U.GS 2001 Chicu-Youngs (2007) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 1 4 5 I;e-001 1.11le-001 1.357e-001 ;k-Col 1.254â‚¬-001 1.5*Ge-001 0-001 1.735/-001 2.304-001 R -001 2.â€¢ne-001 3.0/le-001 .Ge-001 2.Gâ€¢Ge-001 3.01â€¢e-001 I7e-001 2.515/-001 2.113â‚¬-001 *-001 2.510e-001 2.13/-001 le-001 2.35 k-Â«01 2.407e-001 '5e-001 2.2]Ge-001 2.215'-001 Ile-001 2.107e-001 2.0530-001 Me-001 1.97â€¢e-001 1.%*-001 Ize-001 1.86]e-001 1.77]e-001 De-001 1.130e-001 1.'lle-002 15â‚¬-002 7.42le-OOZ 5.3332-002 le-002 5.4.e-002 3.6064-002 weighted -an of Attenuation Equitions loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA US:S 2001 C,bell-lozo,-7,1. (2001) I. USGS 200Â§ Chlou-voungs (2007) IGI USGS ZOOS Stlc S Region: usls 200Â§ California Closest Olitance: 41.90 kÂ» Illitude tmits: Acceleratier, (g) Magnitude: 7.30 - Frictile: 0.50 Col-1 1: Spectral Perlod colu= 2: Acc,leration (g) for: weighted man of Attenuation Equatic,In Col-2 3: Acceleration (g) for: Boore-Atkinsci (2008) wli USGS 2004 Page SS -_SSâ€¢ v-110 - Selsâ€¢ic Hazard Analy,15 1 Oeter,inlitic PGâ€¢ 6.095.-002 1.01.-002 5.09*e-002 4.491.-002 0.05 6.560(-002 1.52:e-002 5.704.-002 5.0470-002 0.1 8.760,-002 1.1lge-001 7.62 le-002 7.473e-002 0.2 1.30Ge-001 1.6*Ge-001 1.117/-001 1.105e-001 0.3 1.44h-001 1.90Ge-001 1.2/7/-001 1.154/-001 0.4 1.404e-001 1.SIZE-001 1.207e-001 1.09le-001 0.$1.3432-001 1.17Ze-001 1.16Oe-001 5.%/-002 O.G 1.223â‚¬-001 1.704e-001 1.0572-001 9.OUe -002 0.7 1.12le-001 1.574e-001 9 7818-002 1.3041-002 0.1 1.035-001 1.443/-001 1.57&-002 7.657e-002 0.9 9.4712-002 1.314/-001 0.183â‚¬-002 7.One-002 1 8.734.-002 1.20*e-001 7.533e-002 6.5.De-002 2 4.44]e-002 6.004.-002 3.171Â£-002 3.45]e-002 3 2.Gme-002 3.4Gle-002 2.432e-002 2 OVe-002 4 1.1030-002 2.4/"/002 1.772e-002 1.3e-002 Source: So Â£=rmon-Copper Mtn Region: USGS 2000 california Closest Distance: 151.57 kâ€¢ *Hlitude wits: Acceleration (g) .agnitude: 7.10 - Fractile: 0.$0 Colu- 1: spectral Period Col,- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted -in of Attenuation Equations Colt=, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NG usÂ£15 2001 Col,- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cligbell-lozorgnla (2001) 1.0. 115Â£=s 2001 Col,- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) Ic, USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 â€¢Gâ€¢ 3.593/-002 4.307e-002 3.76(e-002 2.70&-002 0.05 3.795/-002 4.41*e-002 4.100â‚¬-002 2.Bile-002 0.1 4.1742-002 5.32$,-002 5.16]e-002 4.134â‚¬-002 0.2 7.610.-002 0.224/-002 7.%32-002 6.15]e-002 Noe 60 0.3 04 0.5 0.6 -_SSA vs=110 - Sel :mic Hazard Anily,11 1 DeterÂ·inistic 9.239e-002 1.02/e-001 9.6422-002 7 105e-002 9 3200-002 1.097e-001 9.164/-002 7.123/-002 9.207.-002 1 13/e-001 9.037e-002 7.435e-002 1.74 58 +002 1.015e-001 0.4 lk-002 6.see-002 1.29le-002 1.042e-001 7.Â§2*-002 6.521/-002 7.711/-002 9..4.-002 7.37le-002 G.1262-002 7.235,-002 9.166e-002 6.776-002 5 762/-002 6.771.-002 1.59:e-002 6.2 e-002 5.430e-002 3.71â€¢e-002 4.U7e-002 3.37$5-002 3.0:le-002 2.323e-002 2.UZe+002 2.152e-002 1.935/-002 1.6$ k-002 2.064.-002 1 511/-002 1.315/-002 Source: so Sierra Nevada Region: USGS 2001 Callfornia closest Distance: 170 77 ki Alitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude - 7.50 - Fractile: O 50 Colu-7 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Mean of Attenuation Equations Colo- 3. Acceleration (g) for: loorÂ·e-Atkinson (2000) NGâ€¢ USGS 2001 colu=, 4: Acceleration (g) for: C-pbell-lozor.1. (20'08) P.. usls 200: Col- $ : Acceleration (g) fur: Chiou-Youngs (2007) MIN ISIS 2008 2 3 Is 3.214e-002 3.29Se-002 3.77Se-002 2.5Gle-002 3 Alle-002 3.513/-002 4.06*-002 2.67$e-002 4.352e-002 4.1122-002 5.04]e-002 3.133/-002 7.040â‚¬-002 5.U;e-002 1.61*e-002 6.616â‚¬-002 8.745/-002 7.5111-002 1.One+001 7.1//-002 1.9â€¢Ze-002 1.328e-002 1.0$0e-001 0.12]e-002 9.25Ge-002 5.0]Se-002 1.07*e-001 7.952/-002 1 16Oe-002 8.5622-002 1.0312-001 7.63/2-002 Page /1 -_SSA vs-1*0 - Seisilc Hazard Analyils 1 Deter,inlitic 3.65Ge-002 4.37 le-002 3.6712-002 2.924/-002 2111e-002 2.480â‚¬-002 2.11:e-002 1735â‚¬-002 0.7 0.1 09 1 2 1 0.0, 01 0.2 03 0.4 0.5 0.6 -_SS' vs-1/0 - Selsâ€¢ic lulard Analysis 1 Deterâ€¢inistic 0.7 0.515/-002 1 1/le-002 1.005,-001 7.30*e-002 0.1 1.090,-002 7.704e-002 9.569e-002 6.9573-002 0.9 7.610e-002 7.16$0-002 1.9752-002 6 619e-002 1 7.193e-002 6.714,-002 1.474/-002 6.392/-002 2 4.255/-002 3.763.-002 5.012,3-002 3.92le-002 3 2.778/-002 2.4314-002 3.3Â§â€¢e-002 2. 541e -002 4 2.02]e-002 1.1048-002 2.507e-002 1.759e-002 sIrce: ventura-â€¢Itas point: Region: ISIS 2001 California Close.t Distance: 131.21 6 Amlitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - FractileÂ· 0.50 roh- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Weighted Iean of Attenuation Equations Colu-, 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2008) 1Â«GA Usls zoo. Coll- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Campbell.lozorgnia (2008) ILâ€¢ USGS 2001 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Oliou-Youngs (2007) NOI USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 NA 4 706â‚¬-002 5.362e-002 5 22--002 3.52:e-002 0.05 4.9881-002 5 464.-002 5.6172-002 3 Ille-002 01 6.50*-002 6.702e-002 7.27Ze-002 5.542/-002 0.2 1.020,-001 1.06h-001 1.1lle-001 1.79le-002 0.3 1.21*c-001 1.35*e-001 1.327e-001 3.use-002 04 1.199e-001 1.317e-001 1.260'-001 9.4Me-002 0.5 1110/-001 1.42le-001 1.23Ze-001 S..3.-002 0.6 1.10le-001 1.342e-001 1.13*-001 8.21Ge-002 0.7 1.03Â§2-001 1.277-001 1.066/-001 7 612e-002 0.1 9.51oe-002 1.116-001 1.113/-002 7.072.-002 0,8.735e-002 1.07]e-001 1.1e-002 G.Size-002 1 1.0270-002 9.Ille-002 1.155â‚¬:-002 6.1012-002 Page /2 -_SSâ€¢ vs-110 - Seinic Hazard Anilysts 1 Deter,inistic 2 1..nuall $ :kir ./ I-ac 008) 01 )un, 2 1.15 1.467e-002 1.04/-002 Source ve/dugo legion. us,45 2001 California Closest Distance: 47.23 km Alitude units: Acceleration (g) lugIl tude: 6.90./ Fractile 0.50 col-, 1: Spectral Period coh- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighte, Colt- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Wore-Al colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: capbell Coll- 5: Acceleratlon (g) for: Chiou-YE 2 3 KA 1.14Ge-001 1.57le-001 1.26,Ge-001 1.637e.001 1.757e-001 2.1]le-001 2.Sole-001 3.1342-001 2.657e-001 3.522/-001 2.492e-001 3.347/-001 2.345/-001 3.202e-001 2.11*-001 2.Ine-001 1.5426+001 2.Â§4--001 1.767e-001 2.3169-001 1.597/-001 2.11Ge-001 1.45*e-001 1. 9(le-001 6.74Ce-002 7.91Oe-002 3.966/-002 4.362-002 2.7532-002 2.9*3.-002 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 04 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 2.71le-002 2.116e-002 4.015e-002 G. uie-002 1.062.-002 1.234â‚¬-002 7.130,-002 7 492e-002 7.0595-002 1.65/e-002 6.257e-002 5.177/-002 3.00â€¢e-002 1.le-002 1.2512-002 2 3 4 1 5451-002 â€¢an of Atte 'son (200') izorignia (2 iS (2007) N 4 9.046â‚¬-002 1.033,-001 1.4515-001 2.04*-001 2.20oe-001 2.040,-001 1.96--001 1.715,-001 1.ME-001 1.515e-001 1.381/-001 1.21]e-001 6.8]Ze-002 4.320(-002 3.1472-002 Page 63 1.157/-002 on Equation USGS 2001 *1* USGS B Cs 2001 S 9.617â‚¬-002 1 1216-001 1.672e-001 2.264/-001 2 2/Se-001 2 07Oe-001 1.*Gle-001 1.Ile-001 1.5211-001 1.400.-001 1.2--001 1.1Me-001 5.4714-002 3.213e-002 2.13le-002 Region: ISIS 2002 california Sairce: white wolf Region: USGS 200: c,lifornia Closest Oistance: 170.25 ki *Hrude units: Acceleration (g) lugnitude: 7.20 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1: spectral Period Colu:m 2: Acceleration (g) fur: Weighted -ar of Attenuation Equations Coll-; 3: Acceleration (g) for: More-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 01-1 4: Acceleration (g) for. Ca,bell-lozorgnia (ZOOS) lia usls ZOOS Cell- S. Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (2007) â€¢GA USGS 2001 1 2 3 9 3.2Â§0e-002 3.555/-002 0.0$3.45Oe-002 3.GAZe-002 0.1 4.31Ge-002 4.3312-002 0.2 7.017â‚¬-002 6.1642 -002 0.3 1.UCe-002 ..325.-002 0.4 9.025.-002 ..Se-002 0.5 9.15]e-002 1.07le-001 06 0.762e-002 1.04*-001 0.7 8.410'-002 1.032/01 0.1 7.54*-002 9 797.-002 0.9 7.367e-002 9.034.-002 1 6.1742-002 1.402.-002 2 3.514.-002 4.042e-002 3 2175e-002 2.43ie -002 4 1.51Se-002 1.6490-002 *rce: california Cridded 4 3.G051-002 3.*93/-002 4.113e-002 7.510,-002 9.253e-002 I.2e-002 1.1242-002 â€¢.2*-002 7./79/-002 7.37le-002 G /09.-002 6.342,-002 3.495.-002 2.2460-002 1.657e-002 Page 64 -_ss,A v,-110 - selirtc Hazard Analysis 1 Deter,inistic closest Distance: 5.00 ki A,plitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractile: 0.50 Coll-71: Spectral Perlod Colu- 2: ACCeleration (g) for: Weighted Ian of Attenuation Equations Col,-1 3. Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: caipbell-lozorgnia (20)01) NGA USGS 2001 Col-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) NGA USGS 2001 2 3 4 5 PGA 3.GaGe-001 3.Olle-001 3.561/-001 4.42le-001 4 032'-001 3.5622-001 3.70]e-001 4.855/-001 5.095/-001 5 214,-001 4.311/-001 5.7*le-001 7.01-001 1.633/-001 5.3672-001 7.05Ze-001 7.6102-001 9.169'-001 G.Olie-001 7.577e-001 7.750â‚¬-001 1.%*-001 6.533/-001 7.752e-001 7.705.-001 1.40;e-001 6.]e-001 7.746e-001 7 36*e-001 7.6$4/-001 6.IMe-001 7.64oe-001 7.07;e-Col 7.071,-001 6.Ule+001 7.411/-001 6.73*e-001 6.4422-001 6.464Â¢5+001 7.300e-001 6.34--001 5.79le-001 6.1110-001 7.065/-001 6.0012-001 5.275e-001 5.93?e-001 6 Ille-001 3.55*e-001 2.Ille-001 3.952e-001 4.213e-001 2.2*Oe-001 1.758/-001 2.447e-001 2.5%5-001 1.60le-001 1.30*-001 1.790Â®-001 1.705e-001 source: Inacap,-CÂ»Ine Region: usls 2001 California Closest Distance: 66.62 ki Nelitude Units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.20- Fractile: 0.SO Page 65 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 5 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 1 2 3 4 -_SSâ€¢ vs-110 - Seismic Hazard Andly: 11 1 Deterministic Colu- 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2. Acceleration (g) for: Weighted â€¢ean of Attenwation Equations Colu-, 3: Acceleration (g) forÂ· loore-Atkinion (2008) NGA USGS ZOOS Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: C-pbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS ZOOS Colu=n 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Youngs (2007) NUA USGS 2008 1 2 3 4 5 2 10Â§7e-001 1.414e-001 9.711â‚¬-002 9.0634-002 0.05 1.19Se -001 1.411/-001 1.07le-001 1.045/-001 0.1 1.GOGe-001 1.151/-001 1.429,-001 1.;3*e-001 0.2 2.262e-001 2.$6ie-001 2.0:Oe-001 2.13*e-001 0.3 2415/-001 2.925/-001 2.363'-001 2.ll/-001 0.4 2.36le-001 2.12*-001 2.257e-001 2.02le-001 0.5 2.217e-001 2 7lle-001 2.242e-001 1.13*e -001 O.G 2.11*e-001 2.5--001 2.10Oe-001 1.571/-001 0.7 1.gale-001 2.42le-001 1.9*le-001 1.52/e-001 0.1 1.120,-001 2.224e-001 1.153/-001 1.409e-001 0.9 1.66*e-001 1.9942-001 1.7071-001 1.302e-001 1 1.533e-001 1.10*e-001 1.515-001 1.ZO;e-001 2 7.21]e-002 â€¢.04 le -002 7.1595-002 5.740â‚¬-002 3 4 2*Se-002 4./178-002 4.6452+002 3.40â€¢e-002 4 2.9901-002 3.266,-002 3.â€¢2:e-002 2.27Ge-002 Source: Chino Region. USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 22.52 kâ€¢ Mplitude *n: Acceleration (g) .agnitude: 6.10 - Fractile: 0.50 Colum 1 Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: -ghted man of Attenuation Equations Colu= 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Arkinson (2008) NG usGS ZOOI Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for. Cavbell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2000 Page â€ž -_ISA vi-ll Col-, 5: Acceleration (g) for: 2 1 1.6&-001 1.11 1.905/-001 2.05 2.727e-001 2.14 3.7le-001 4.31 3 793'-001 4.31 3.575â‚¬-001 4.11 3.32Oe-001 3.* 2.90e-001 3.45 2.GSse-001 3.11 2.457{5-001 2.11 2.245e-001 2.54 2.0/5.-001 2.32 1.06%-001 114 1.3lk-002 ,51 4 400e-002 4.74 source: Ellinore Region: USGS 2001 California Closest Distance: 11.19 k) Alitude Units: Acceleration (g IMagnitude: 7.15- Fricti le: 0.50 Colu-11: Spectral Period Col-1 2: Acceleration (g) for: Colu= 3: Acceleration (g) for: Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Coll- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-Ic 1 2 3 PGA 2.Zne-001 2.26â€¢e-001 1 0.05 01 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 O.G 0-7 0.1 0.9 1 2 10 - Sci=ic Hazard Analyâ€¢ 15 1 Deter,Anistic Chiou-Youngs (2007) IGI USGS ZOOR lie-001 )4e-001 Fle-001 2e-001 IGe-001 '*-001 )2e -001 3e-001 Se-001 5e-001 I 7e-001 le-001 4e-001 6-002 Ze-002 weighted -lua ,/ Boore-Atkin .; ca-bell-la *01 m 4 1.$4Oe-001 1.76*-001 2.576-001 3.434/-001 3.52$-001 3.32le-001 3.Me-001 2.122e-001 2.57Se-001 2.354/-001 2.15Se-001 1.99Ce-001 1.06*e-001 6 55e-002 4.564â‚¬-002 an of Atter ion (20OI) zorgnia (2[ s (2007) I 4 1.991/-001 Page 67 1.GOle-001 1.902/-001 2.74Ze-001 3.5610-001 3 31:e-001 3 252,-001 2.94*-001 2.677e-001 2.44*-001 2.2$Ge-001 2.016/-001 1.S37e-001 1.015e-001 5.575/-002 3.10'-002 tion Equitiof A USGS 2008 ) IGA USGS M USGS 200. 5 2.Â§14e-001 .._SS, vs.180 - Seis,ic Hazard Analy;11 1 Deterministic 0.0$2.574&001 2.$13(,-001 2.201/-001 3.009e-001 0.1 3.457/-001 3.3422-001 2.UN-001 4.049,-001 0.2 4.479e-001 4.44*-001 3.9*Ze-001 5.212e-001 0.3 4.716â‚¬-001 4.5106-001 4.302e-001 5.400,-001 0.4 4.Rle-001 4.37Ge-001 4.262.-001 5.271/-001 0.$4 5Gle-001 4.123e-001 4.542,-001 5.037/-001 0.6 4 406e-001 3.93oe-001 4.496/-001 4.79le-001 0.7 4 2662-001 3.774e-001 4 4jle-001 4 567/-001 0.1 4 100e-001 3.â€¢Ge-001 4 31]e-001 4 37Oe-001 0.5 3.910â‚¬-001 3.27Oe-001 4 21Oe-001 4.lile-001 1 3.74Ge-001 3.04Ze-001 4.lne-001 4.0051-001 2 2.613e-001 1.937,5-001 3.26*e-001 2.133/-001 3 1.16â€¢e-001 1.572e-001 2.28*-001 1.732e-001 4 1.36%-001 l.lue-001 1.737e-001 1.202e-001 Source: Gailock Region: USGS ZOOS California closest Distance: 146.94 km A=plin,de units: Acceleratix (g) lugni tude: 7.72- Fractile: 0.50 Collin 1: Spectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: fghted lean of Attenuation Equation, Colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: Boore-Atkinson (2001) â€žGA usis 2001 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cambell-lozorgnia (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Col-1 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Young: (2007) ICA USGS ZOOS 1 2 3 4 5 M 5.UZe-002 6.92,-002 5.312e-002 5 073.-002 0.05 6.0'Oe-002 7.09*-002 5.703e -002 5.437e-002 0.1 7.59Ge-002 0.0522-002 6.904e-002 7./Be -002 0.2 1.11le-001 9 1--002 1.074e-001 1.260*-001 0.3 1.32/3-001 1.226,-001 1.33*-001 1.413e-001 Page u 0.4 0.5 0.6 0-1 -_SSâ€¢ vi.110 - sel,lc Hizard Arialysi: 1 Oeterminlitic 1.14*-001 1.3]Se-001 1.302*.001 1.40le-001 1.310,-001 1.434(:-001 1.3--001 1.14Oe-001 1.1432-001 1.432/-001 1.33Se-001 1.260e-001 1.31le-001 1.430e-001 1.3162-001 1.lue-001 1.26Oe-001 1.3910-001 1.270e-001 1.120e-001 1.19*-001 1.322e-001 1.20*e-001 1.050e-001 1.141,-001 1.264e-001 1.15Ze-001 1.00Ge-001 7.0922-002 7.786,-002 7.445e-002 0.04 k-002 1 4.*GO'-002 5.654/-002 5.01*e-002 3.907e-002 3.4Gle -002 3.Slle-002 3.7/2-002 2.705e-002 source: Malibu coalt Region: usis 2001 California Closest 01'unce: 64.71 k. Nvlltude Mits: ACCelerarion (g) Magnitude: 7.00 - Fractlle: 0. SO Colu= 1: Spectral Period Cell- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted man of Attenuation Equations Colo- 3: Acceleration (g) for: moore-Atkinson (2001) NGA USGS 2001 Cell-1 4: Acceleration (g) fur: Carbell-lozory,ia (2001) IcA usls 2001 Colt- 5: Acceleration (g) for: chlou-'roungs (2007) IK, U;Gs 200Â§ 1 2 3 4 5 9.2*-002 1.357â‚¬-001 7.210.-002 7.0152-002 1.017/-001 1.416e-001 0.232/-002 1.1212-002 1.37e-001 1.795/-001 1.12Se-001 1.213e-001 1.954/-001 2.545/-001 1.62]e-001 1.69â€¢e-001 2.0:Ze-001 2.73le-001 1.79--001 1.70*-001 1.916/-001 2 6/6/-001 1.690,-001 1.58]e-001 1.Ule-001 2.515,-001 1.634.-lot 1.43Oe-001 1.71Oe-001 2.3406-001 1.4--001 1.29]e-001 1.574e-001 Z.Ble-001 1.]92e-001 1.1/Oe-001 ..9. 69 -_SSâ€¢ vs.180 - Seliali Hazard Anilylls 1 Oeter,rinistic 3 1.107â‚¬-001 1.414e-001 2.1206-001 1.1713-001 4 1.311/-001 1.1/1-001 1.591/-001 1.2Me-001 sc*Irce: southern sari AMreas Region: USGS 2001 California Clo=St Distance: 69.Â§1 6, A:plitude units: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 1.20- Fractile: 0.50 Colt-7 1: Spectral Period Coll- 2: Acceleration (9) for: weighted -an of Attenuation Equation, coh- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkin-, (2001) NGâ€¢ USGS 200* Colum 4: Acceleration (g) for: Ca,bell-lozorgnla (2001) NGâ€¢ USCS ZOO)1 Coh- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) IGâ€¢ USGS 2008 2 3 4 5 1.41*-001 1732/-001 1.0634-001 1.43Ge -001 1.570â‚¬-001 1.9164-001 1.15]e-001 1.Glle-001 2.00*e-001 2.22*e-001 1.44Oe-001 2.3$0e-001 2.55*e-001 2 â€¢32,-001 2.Doe-001 3.255.-001 2 11Â§1-001 2.Gâ€¢â€¢e-001 2. I Ze-001 3.3712-001 2.Noe-001 2.134.-001 2.5Ole-001 3.232,-001 2.104/-001 2.64â€¢e-001 2.747.-001 3.02le-001 2.747,-001 2.13*-001 2.7Ue-001 2.Ille-001 2.GN-001 2.63le-001 2.122e-001 2.*40â€¢-001 2.615â‚¬-001 2.Wle-001 2.80Ge -001 2.4le-001 2.50â€¢e-001 2.407/+001 2.749/-001 2.35 Ge-001 2.407.-001 2.2 17(5-001 2.GS;e-001 2.237,3-001 1.663,-001 1 515â‚¬-001 2.01*-001 1386â‚¬-001 1.225/-001 1.ZESe-001 1.47h-001 9.055.-002 1.Slk-002 .049Â®-002 1.140,-001 6.30oe-002 Page 71 0.1 0, 1 2 0.0$ 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0. 0 1 4 -_sSA vs-180 - Sellolc Mizard Ar,ily,13 1 Deter-inistic 0..1.445,-001 1.*le-001 1.216e-001 1.0*Ge-001 0.9 1.323,-001 1.7*le-001 1.181*-001 1.004/-001 1 1221Â£-001 1.63Se-001 1.05$,-001 9.33le-002 2 1.3â€¢Ze-002 1.Vie-002 5.19;e-002 4.55*-002 3 3.17-002 4 55]e-002 3.74*-002 3.0372-002 4 2 753e-002 3.4790-002 2.742e-002 2.03:e-002 Scurce: Me=port-Ingle-cod Region: ICS 2001 california Closest Distance: 12.74 ki Alitude Units: Acceleration W Magnitude: 7.$0 - Fractile: O.SO Colu- 1: Spectral Period Coltin 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted lear of Atienuation Equations colu- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (2001) IKA USGS 2008 Colu- 4: Acceleration (g) for: captill-lozorgila (2001) NGA USGS 2008 Colu- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chlou-voungs (2007) pÂ«li USGS 2001 1 2 3 4 5 PGA 2.4*-001 2.31*e-001 2.2-2-001 2.ls--001 0.0$2.7Sk -001 2.562/-001 2.54(e-001 3.278e-001 0.1 3.780â‚¬-001 3.5552-001 3.444Â¢-001 4.34Oe-001 0.2 4./EV-001 5.07*e-001 4.4/5/-001 5.527e-001 0.3 $.219,-001 i.lhe -001 4.767e-001 5.744e-001 0.4 5.116â‚¬-001 5.04*-001 4.744e-001 5.637e-001 O.S $.0/Ze-001 4.75]e-001 4.93 k -00 1 5.416Â¢-001 0.6 4.7/2-001 4.313/-001 4.713.-001 5.17$/-001 0.7 4.576â‚¬-001 4.122e-001 4.655/-001 4.95Oe-001 0.0 4.360,-001 3.122,-001 4.510e-001 4.74*-21 0.9 4.135/-001 3.50Ze-001 4.Ate-001 4.551/-001 1 3.-0/-001 3.23*e-001 4.213/-001 4.369/-Col 2 2.636,-001 1.92*-001 3.lok-001 2.87]e-001 Page 70 -_SSâ€¢ vs-180 - Sel-ic Hazard Inaly.1. 1 Deter.1.1.ric Sc*Irce: san Jacinto Reglon: USGS 2001 California Closest olit.Ince: 65.11 ki 41 inde *u: Acceleration (g) Magnitude: 7.*1 - Fractile: 0.50 Col-1 1: 5/ectral Period Colu- 2: Acceleration (g) for: weighted Ian of Attenuation Equation, Colu=, 3: Acceleration (g) for: 10/re-Arkinsor, (2001) NGA USGS 2001 col- 4: Acceleration (g) for: Cabell-*ozorgnia (200*) NGA USGS 2001 Col=, 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) 1Â«:A USGS 2002 1 2 3 4 5 8 1.304*-001 1.1734-001 â€¢.Use-002 1.25&-001 0.0$1.4$0e-001 1.122/-001 1.0*k-001 1.44Oe-001 0.1 1.Ule -001 2.17*e-001 1.39*e-001 2.017,-001 0.2 2.467e-001 2.17/-001 2.04$,-001 2.1*Ge-001 0.3 2 672e-001 2.750*-001 2.312,-001 2.958/-001 0.4 2.Gole-001 2.7lh-001 2 317e-001 2 10"-001 0.5 2.5*Ze-001 2.700.-001 2 4320-001 2.me-001 0.6 2.47*-001 2.6104-001 2.4200-001 2.397e-001 0.7 2.3#le-001 2.5512-001 2.332e-001 2.229e-001 0..2.2132-001 2.42*-001 2.33le-001 2.0*ge-001 0.5 2.15 le-001 2.267e-001 2.245/-001 1 964/-001 1 2.052e-001 2.132â‚¬-001 2.17Oe-001 1.854 e -00 1 2 1.312/-001 1.30*e-001 1.524/-001 1.105,-Col 3 5.240/-002 1.Olle-001 1.0â€¢h-001 7.12le-002 4 G UZe-002 7.lise-CON 7.%7e-aol 4.9230-002 S,xirce: Santa ./.1 ca Region: USGS ZOOS california Closest Distance: 52.36 6 Page 72 -_SSA vsâ€¢â€¢180 - Seismic luzard Analy,11 1 oeterministic Aplitude mits: Acceleration (g) lagnitude 7.40 - Fractlle: 0.50 Col=1 1: Spectral perlod Col- 2: Acceleration (g) for: Ieighted Ian of Attenuition Equations Col,- 3: Acceleration (g) for: loore-Atkinson (200:) NCI USGS ZOOS Col,=, 4: Acceleration (g) for: C-pbell-lozor,nla (20)01) ,Â«:A USGS 2001 Colt- 5: Acceleration (g) for: Chiou-Youngs (2007) 0,G usls 2001 1 0.05 0.1 2 3 4 5 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.' 1 2 3 4 1.351/-001 1.65Â§=-001 1.174e-001 1.2451-001 1. gle-001 1.762,3-001 1.295â‚¬-001 1.446/-001 2.01//-001 2.216e-001 1.73â€¢e-001 2.10]e-001 2.7 Sk-001 2.04Ge-001 2.415/-001 2./;le-001 2.9:Ge-001 3.2170-001 2.797,-001 2.073/-001 2./4/e-001 3.15*e-001 2.0]e -001 2.Gue -001 2.763.-001 3.lole-001 2.7â„¢-001 2.4572-001 2.5*Ge-001 2.lie-001 2.5--001 2.24Ge-001 2.441/-001 2.765.-001 2.4*Se-001 2.067/-001 2.273/-001 2.550e-001 2 Me-001 1. We-001 2.0Sk-Col 2.2-e-001 2.Zole-001 1.7782-001 1.93Â§â‚¬-001 2.Moe-001 2.073e-001 1.GSâ€¢e-001 1.10)le-002 0.777/-002 1.144/-001 1.lue-002 6.0126-002 6.27*e.002 7.034.-002 4.Ijae-002 4.2,0.-002 4.272â‚¬-002 5.2]52-002 3.]142-002 Page 73 PSH Deaggregation on NEHRP D soil The Academy Pro 117.901Â° W, 33.762 N. Peak Horiz. Ground Accel.>=0.5733 g Ann. Exceedance Rate .404E-03. Mean Return Time 2475 years Mean (R,Mgo) 18.2 km, 6.61, 1.49 Modal (R,Mgo) = 17.2 km, 7.00, 1.56 (from peak R,M bin) Modal (R,M,Â£*) = 16.8 km, 7.01, 1 to 2 sigma (from peak R,M,Â£ bin)<1>Binning: DeltaR 10. km, deltaM=0.2, Deltaâ‚¬=1.02 > 2 ff 10 9 2 .Cb Prob.SA,PGA 0L*J\L <median(R,M) 1-2<80<-1 1 -1 < go <-0.5 1-0.5<80<0 >median â‚¬kt.... 0 <EO< 0.5 â‚¬81:b. -------%... 0.5 < go< 1 4,Â» 42 3 1 <Â£0<2 â‚¬22 N\ 2<80<3 200910 UPDATE <2,9 â‚¬9 Mil Â§011 Oct 19 01:43:11 I Distance (R), magnitude (M), epsilon (EO,E) deaggregation for a site on soil with average vs= 250. m/s top 30 m. USGS CGHT PSHA2008 UPDATE Bins with It 0.05% contrib. omitted 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 1.0 1.389 (Ss, Site Class B) 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 Sos and sol SDs = 2/3 x SMs and SD1 = 2/3 x SM1 Site Class D -Fa = 1.0 ,Fv = 1.505 Period sa (sec) (g) 0.2 0.926 (SDs, Site Class D) 1.0 0.497 (SD1, Site Class D) Page 1 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 1.0 1.389 (Ss, Site Class B) 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 E - Fa = 0.9 ,Fv = 2.4 Period Sa (sec)(g) 0.2 1.0 1.250 (SMs, Site Class E) 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 sol SDs = 2/3 x SMS and Sol = 2/3 x SMI Site Class E - Fa = 0.9 ,Fv = 2.4 Period ;(sec) Page 1 USGS Response Spectra Site E (mapped) 0.833 (SDs, Site Class E) 0.792 (SD1, Site Class E) Page 2 4E 603284-001 APPENDIX E Liquefaction Analvsis 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 Letghton Cundting Inc 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 - 13.50- 6.50.,6.00 5.50 C An- LPI value LPI color scheme Very high risk High risk Â¤ Low risk Basic statistics Total CPT number: 6 100.00% low risk 0.00% high risk 0.00% very high risk 4.50- 4.00 3.00- 2.50-Â·EiKI- 2.00- 1.5077 0.50- 0.00- T-10 EFO t-10OT-2- CPTU name CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT Liquefaction Assessment Software Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq n.99 rTIFI 9-LCD Le,ghton C,zawzing Inc Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http:Uwww.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- 1.90 1.80- - -[*il 1.70-- 1.60- 1.50-- 2 1.40- Â¥ 1.30- 0-J [IÂ¥3] 8 an--1- 1.20-I 1.571 1.10- - 1.00- 0.90- -- [Cial mim al) > 0.80- -43.1 br - k RE0.70- --- --I I ./ 1Â·"ra;.t.n. 0.60-fi14-1 4f Y 4 0.50- -- 0.40- --- 0.30- - 0.20- ---Â· 0.10- 0.00- - 27. -Z-ld) - E T 6 CPTU name CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT Liquefaction Assessment Software Project file: P: \Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood__cpt.clq .............. 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 summary 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 aglorithm summary report 47 Vertical settlements summary report 48 CUq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Uquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: lu2/2011, 1:24:28 PM Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com '94 LIOUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT 94: 7771'71- .1.Â«44 0, : The Academy - Orangewood Children's Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA NCEER (1998)G.W.T. (in-situ):30.00 ft Use fill:Yes Clay like behavior NCEER (1998)G.W.T. (earthq.)15.00 ft Fill height:3.00 ft applied:Sands onl Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight:100.00 lb/fU Limit depth applied: Yes 6.70 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Trans. detect. applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft 0.38 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Ko applied:No Fricti9lk#84ZGER SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0FIU 10-10-5- 4 5 15-15-10-V 10 -V 20-20-20- =t' "Â·Gmearthq15- 25-25-25- Â·Â·nÂ·20-20 30-30-25-25 35-35-30-30 40-40-35-35 45-45-45-7 40-40 6 50-50-45-50-r li 45 1 55-50-5055- 55-5560-60- 60-60 65-65- 65-65 70-70- 70-70 75-75- 75-75 80-80- 80-80 85-85- 85-85 90-90-90-90-90 95-95-95-95 100 1,1,1.,i 100- i,â€¢ r-i .,i.Iâ€¢,â€¢,i 100 100 1,1 0 200 400 0246810 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) 0.6- Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR & CSR Factor of safety 71/2, sigma'=l atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.5- 0.4- 0.3- 0.2- 0.1- 011'.11.11.111,1,1,1 0 20 40 60 80 00.0 - JUU_ 7 100= 10 4 1 1 lilli 0.1 1 10 Norrralized friction ratio (%) No Uquefaction . 111,111,1.1.11 11111.1 100 120 140 160 180 200 Qtn,cs Zone A 1 Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cydic loading Zone Ai Cydic 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 5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24: 17 PM 3: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq I........=.. This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-1 CPT basic interpretation plots Q,le resieAUGER Friction 1!Mb AU(SER Pore preâ„¢6 AUGER SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type 10-10-10- 15-15- 20-20- 25- 25-25- 30-30- 35-35- 40- <40-40- 45-45-45- 6 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- 95- 100 5- 10 15 20- 25 30 35 40- 45- 50- .....4 Â£ 50- 55 60 65-- 65 70- 75- 80-,9-Â·Â·1Â·- 80 85- 90- 95-95- pth (ft) 0 100 200 300 400 500 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: I' 974,#&#AN AUGER arld&s,14/smd Sitysall&sal*silt aay&siltyday aay aay Insltu 914=ld&Sen*Silt Cl&siltydaÂ¥ Clay&siltyde Sltysend &91*silt aay&siliyday aay 914,sal[1&ser*sit aaM&slitvday 9 Itys,d & san*silt Sltysard & sal* Silt Serld&91Â¥sand Clay&slityday aay&slivday aay Slt,SEr[1&san*sit aab,&sityday Sllysmi&san*silt SEnd&sitysind Sltysard&=*silt SitysEnd &saÂ·*sit Sllysad&sen*silt SErd Clay&,Ityday L-aay&914<laÂ¥ 32,11&Silt,Sa-11 Claly&siliyday Sed&Sillysend Sllys,d&sal*silt Sand Sarl&*saÂ·d SErd 19Â¥140".4 1 1 , i 10 12 14 16 18 Ic(SED SET (Robertson et al. 1986) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft3 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes SBT legend 2.60 Ko applied: No 1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty 0 7. Gravely sand to sandBased on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material 5. Silly sand to sandy sit 8. Very stiff sand toYesLimit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand El 9. Very stiff fine grained 6 50- Â£ 55- 60- 60- 65-65- 70-70- 75-75- 80-80- 85-85- go-go- 95-95- 100 100- 0 2 4 6 8 10 Rf (%) 50 100 15 u (psi) ivul""111,111111 0 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT 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 1 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim Cfr name: Cfr-1 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 5-:#Ill- - HAND AUGE Z 5- al| HAND AUGER 5- lil*NÂ¥ HAND AUGER 10--7 HAND AUGE 2 2 10- < 15- L==* 20- 30- 35- 40- ,-. 45- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 5- S# & sil 4 15- n 45- - 'U 75- . 80-85- 6 90- C=- 95- - 100 i , i , i , 1 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.) Fines correcbon 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: 55- 60- Â£ 65- 15-*: tysand 20- aay&siltyday250 $ Clay aay30-if * SINsend&sen*silt aaÂ¥&'ItydsÂ¥ 35-tf aay Clay&sillyday Clay&siliydaygsÂ· 40-76 aay aa,&siliyday 45-R-aay - 45- c j Clay&silb,day 50- 4 Sltysend &sal*silt 9,11&*send 55- * aay 60-Clay&siltyday Sltyserd&sari*silt aay Clay&sillydaÂ¥ Slt,slrd&sen*silt aay,&sitiydaw aa&siltyday Gay&siltyday Sltysand&sa*silt aay Clay&sil,div Sltysand&seÂ·*silt go- h-Clay&siltyday aay 95- w Sad&*send Clay&siltyday 4 94&siltysall 1007' Y ,i '9't/g'dis.94* 1 1 .2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1 : 8 10 12 14 16 18 Bq Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/fe 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes SBTn legend 2.60 Kc 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 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 8. Very stiff sand toYesLimit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand Il 9. Very stiff fine grained 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 20 25 50-Â£ 50- 55-ay 55- 65-65- 70-70- 75-75- 80-80- 85-85- 90-90- 95-95- 00 f 100 0 2 4 6 8 10 -0 Fr (%) (U) 41('aa 60- 75- 80- 1. 85- - : 40- - 45-| i 65 lit-it 1111111 2 3 4 0 2 4 â‚¬ CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT Liquefadion 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CFT name: CPT-1 Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) Total cone resistance SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance 10- 15- 20- 25- 35- 40- 45- / 50- 4 10- 15- 20- 25- r 30- 35- 40- HAND AUGER 10- Â·---1 :-.L.SUILI. .... HAND AUGER 5- Â·* HAND AUGER 5-.......1-1,HAND AUGER 15---t 20-16* 25-1 10- 15- 20- 25- 1/ 10- 15- 20- 25- 30-30- 35- 35- 40- - 40- 45- ...Â£2 n 45- ,.45- 6 Cl 55- - F 65- 75--- 70-Â» gerf75- 65-Â· 70- Â£ 50- 55- 60- 65- 80- 80- 90- C=--90- 2 95-95- 100 100-1 ' ' 100 , 50- i Â£ 50- 55- 55- 60- 65- 70-70- 75-75- 80- I 80- 85- Depth (ft 80- 85-6 90- cr-90- 95-95-95- 1 1 1 100 100 ,?b,1,i,1'I':'I'''I'100 , 1, -1-- I 200 300 400 500 1 2 3 4 0 50 100 150 200 012345678910 0 50 100 150 200 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990)Qtn Kc Qtn,cs Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/fe 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 Kt 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 n 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-1 CRR plot | FIU Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Uquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FIU 5- 5- 10- V 10- during earthq. 15-r----15- 20- 20- 25- 1 25- 30-30- 35- ] 35- 40-40- 2 45- 4- 50- j Â£ 50- 055-55- 60- j 60- 65- 1 65- 70-70- 75-75- 80-80- 85-85- 90-90- 95-95- 0 F I LI2-11 5 5- 6- 10 10- 8- 10-15 15- 12- 20 0 20-14- 16- 1 25 25- 30 30- 20-' 22-35 35- 24- 40 40- 26- 45 *9 45- w 30- E- 32-Â£ 50 Â£ 50- 55 55- 36- 6038-60- 40-65 65- 42- 44-70 70- 46- 75 75- 48- 50-80 80- 52- 85 85- 54- 56-90 90- 58- 95 60-95- 62--100 ,100 1 1.5 2 5 10 15 20 0 0.5 1 1.50.5 100 I â€¢ I , , i 1007 , 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 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 Fill wi Average results interval: 3 Trans Ic cut-off value:2.60 Ko ap Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Clay I Use fill:Yes Limit Fill height:3.00 ft Limit F.S. color scheme Bight:100.00 'Wft3 Almost certain it will liquefy mon detect. applied:Yes Very likely to liquefy LPI color scheme plied: No El Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likely Very high riskike behavior applied:Sands only High riskdepth applied:Yes Unlike to liquefy depth:50.00 ft Almost certain it will not liquefy 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 1 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-1 Check for strength loss plots (Olsen & Stark (2002)) Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistana SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v 10- 40- 45- 6 50- 55- 60- 65- 5- 4 HAND AUGER 5- -00tIl-- HAND AUGER 5- HAND AUGEF 10-10- 15- 20- 25-â‚¬ 15- 20- 25- 5- 10-10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 15- 20- 25- 1 - 30- 30- 40 45- 40- 11 45- 507 Â£ 50- 55- 60-60- 65-65- 70- 75- Depth (ft) 40- 2 45- 55- 60- 65- 35- 40- 45- r-- 50- - 55- 60- 65-T/,07.ell 75- 80- 85- 90-C=-90- 70- 75- 80- 70- 80- 85- 90 3//IMMI'*....I-..7 90-VIV 85-- 95-95- 95- 100 1 1 95- 100 10012 50 100 150 200 250 012345678910 0 50 100 150 200 1 Qtn Kc Qtn,cs 95-- Peak S u ratio - l.lq. Su ratio iÂ· i ii,i, i, i lOu i 1,1,1,1, 2 3 4 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 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 k value Ic cut-off value:2.60 Ko 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 Liquefadion 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 1 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 < 4 < 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 10- --Â· 15- - 35- 5- -HAND AUGER f e 50- 'Â·1 1 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 10- 15- Â»-1 80-- 73$ i90- -9Â· 2,Â£ ./bt>AS- 1 2 Serd&siltysand Sllysard&SET*SIt aay&siliyday aw aay Clay&sillydm aay aay Clay&si14daÂ¥ Clay&siluday aay CiaÂ¥&siliyday aaw CiaÂ¥&siINdEN Sltysand&sarlysilt SErd&sillysErd aaw aay&sili,day aa,&siltyday aaw Clay&siliyday Sltysard & san*silt aa,&Â§14day a.&siliyday Cla,&silt/day Sitysard &sa*sit aew aay&siliyday 314/sald&sa*sIt ClaÂ¥&siltyday aay Sar1 &siltysald aa,&siltyday Snl&Siltvsard 97926:1'Â¥111 11.1,1, ) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 SEA (Robertson 1990) General statistics Total points in CPT file:610 Total points excluded:119 Exclusion percentage:19.51% Number of layers detected: 22 3 4 0123456785 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT Uquefaction 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 55 60 85- 90- CPT name: CPT-1 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements cone resist,ag AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strainplot Vertical settlements 20--Af, ..11. 30- - - 40- 50-; - 55- 0- FILII 0- 5- 10- 15 20 25 30 1 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 , 4 0 0.5 1 15 Depth (ft) 5- r 10-i 15------9- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45--- 50- 55- OU- --/* 65-65- 60- 65- 75- 1- 70- 75- t 80- 85- 80- 1 85- 90- 95- 1001 ''' 1 2 95- 1 1-1,1111 1 200 300 400 3 2 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety 100- 0 0- 5- 10- 20- * 25- 30- 35- 40- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- 90- 95- '1,I,I 100-i 4 5 6 0 0.5 1 Depth (ft) 1,1 1 123 1.5 Volurnentric strain (%)Settlement (in) Total cone resistance (cone resistance qc corrected for poe water effects) Soil Behaviour Type Index Calculated Factor of Safety against liquefaction 1: Post-liquefaction volumentric strain CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT Liquefadion Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:17 PM 8 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq 1 Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http:Hwww.leightongroup.com ' i%8*2* LIOUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : The Academy - Orangewood Children's CPT file : CPT-2 Input parameters and analysis data Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA 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 n 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 ft applied:Sands only ).00 lb/ft]bmit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 n Cone rga 68g Frictio#At#tjGER SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 10-10- FIU 5-5- 15-10- 20-20-15-15- 25-25-20- 30-30-25-25- 30- 35-35- 30- 35-35- 40-40- 40-40- 45- / | 45- 4 t 45- 1 45- Â·31 - - 50-50- 55- 55-55- 60- 60-60- 65- 65-65- 70-70- 0 100 qt (tsf) M 0.6- 0.5 1 1.5 IL 75 ..1.:.. 757.'.u#u.,--/151 ../.75- 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 C 2 Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR & CSR Factor of safety w=71/2, sigma'=l atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential I..'I,..1.'. 0.5- g 0.4- 0.3- 0,2- 0.1- Ly.11/ ..1.2. r\CILIU JUU 7 8 9 100= 2 10 40% 2- 1 0.1 1 10 Nomalized friction ratio (%) 0 1 1,1,1 11.1,11, 1 1, 0 20 40 60 80 No Uquefaction . 1.1.I11.1.1.I1.111.1 100 120 140 160 180 200 Qtn,cs Zone Al. Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2 Cyclic Ilquefaction and strength loss hkely dependmg 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, bnttleness/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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-2 CPT basic interpretation plots Cone resisl;8!10AUGER Friction R#kifb AUGER Pore pres,N&%AUGFR SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type 8- 10- 12- 14- 12- < 22-22- 24- 26- f 30-30- Insltu 32-32- 34-34- 36- 2 38-2 38- c 40-& 40- 1 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 2- 4- 8 10 12 32- r 38- C__h (ft) a - 8 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: 42-0 42- 44-44- 46-46- 48-48- 50-50- 52-52- 54-54- DO- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 5 68- 70- 72-72- 74-74- 0 50 100 150 200 12- 14- 16- 18- 22 24 4 26 28 30 r M 32 34 36 2 38 Â£ 40 4 . a 42 44 48 50 52 ' .ct 54 56 58 2-60 62 66 68 I 70 72 74 80 1 2 3 4 Ic(SBT) (U) 4*0 a. HAND AUGER Sg'11 & sittyserd Sltysad&01*silt Sall&SiltySEnj 18 aay&'lvday 20 aay&,19day 22 Clay&sittyday 24-. 7.-â€ž2.0,Gay&siltyday Sitysald&ser*siIt Send&siltysand a* aay aaÂ¥ aeÂ¥&,1Â¥day aay Cl*&*day Clay&slityday aay Sitysard & sendysilt Sald&sityserd aay&siltyda48-imaimplk Sent&sillys,d SltyssÂ·d&sandysilt aay&911Â¥day aay aay aav aaÂ¥&sillyda, Sltysald & SendyNtt Sllys,d &0Â·*silt 66-Day&sillyday Slt/sEnd&saÂ·*Ntt Serd&silvsent '",'"", :YfallyÂ¥dj ,;, 0 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 u (psi)SHT (Robertson et al. 1986) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft-3 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes SBT legend 2.60 Ko applied: No 1. Sensitive fine grained 4, Clayey silt to silty 7. Gravely sand to sandBased on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Yes Limit depth applied:Yes 2. Organic material Â¤5. Silty sand to sandy mit 8. Very stiff sand to 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand Il 9. Very stiff fine grained Ri E- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 28 30 32 34 36 38 44-. 2 4 6 8 10 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 2 60 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:19 PM 10 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq 1 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- 4- t-& 6-zID AUGER - I HAND AUGER 2 34- 2 34- 12- < 20- 22- 8- 10- 12- 14- 28-28- 30-30- 32-32- 2- HAND AUGER 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26-28- 130- 32- 34- 36- 38- 40- 48-IT --111 g 2- 4- 6 8 10- 1214- 16 18- 20 22- 24-- 28 30- 32 2 34 5 36 38 40 42- 44 ... 46- 42- 42- 44- 46- -46- 48-48- 50- 52- {52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- Depth (f 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- HAND AUGE't ard&siltysEnd 314'Send&SEr*gil SErd&silt,SE,If aay&,Ilyday aay aay&=Myday 314013&0*Silt Sall&Siltysald aay aay&silwdaw aay aay&,ID,day SllysErd Asa,*silt aay&sim,day aaÂ¥&sil%,day Sard& silly sald Clay&siliydaÂ¥ Seâ€¢13&siltysard a.&sil,day aav 64-64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 50 100 150 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 Qtn Fr (0/0) 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- '". 4 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 287 1- r 30 Â·Â· 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 1 thi 1 . 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 1 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Bq 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60 62 64- 66- 68- 70- 71- 014&*day Sllyserd&sarlysit aay 74-=r.ZiAW= 1 Clay&gl&,day Cla,&siltyday Sltysald&01:lysilt 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCE Fines correction method:NCE Points to test:Bag Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.7( Peak ground acceleration:0.3E Depth to water table (insitu): 30.C ER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft ER (1998)Average results interval: 3 3d on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 ) Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT i Use fill:Yes )0 ft Fill height:3.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/fO Transition detect. applied:Yes Ko applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty 7. Gravely sand to sand 2. Organic material [3 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 8. Very stiff sand to 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand m 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefadion Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:19 PM 11 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood__cpt.clq 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 8 10 12 14 16 18 20-- 'Â· 22-1 4 , 26-- 2- 4- -Â·64 81Ii 6- = .HAND AUGER _HANDAUGER 2-2- 4-6- - HAND AUGER 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- Â£-1 26- 30- 32- 34-. 36- 2 38- c 40- a 42-)epth (ft) r *4 8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16-16- 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26- 28-I 30-1 32-1 2- ------HAND AUGE'k 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 44- 44-46- 46-48- 48-50- A. 2 " -M p 34- t' 36- -a 38- 3 40- 42- (14) 40* 26-26- C 28-28- 30-30- 32-32- c 34-34- 536-36- E.38-38- R 40-40- 42-42- aa- 52- 52- l 54- 54- 7 56-56- 58- 58- 60- 60- 1 62- 64-64- 44- , , 46- 12 46- 48- 50- 52- l 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- l 60- 62- 64- 64- 66- C 68- 70- 72-72- 74-74- 4 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn 46- 48-L 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 66- 68- 70- 66- 68- 70- 72-72- 74-74- 50 100 150 200 2 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 50 1003) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 150 200 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990) Kc Qtn,cs Input parameters and analysis data Analysts method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 Iwft) Fines correcbon 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 - CFT 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT- name: CPT-2 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FIL 4- 6- 8- 10- 12-14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 1- 30- 32- Â£ 34- '--36- 1 1 0 0.2 0. Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy El Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy 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 n 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 Ibm3 Transition detect. applied:Yes Ko applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft FIU 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Very high risk High risk Â¤ Low risk Cliq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefadion 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 2-FILL C 2- 4-L 6-4- 8-6-E 8-E10-10-8- 1C12. UP.21.12 10-nu ear'E-12 14-14 12-14 16-16 18-14-16 18 18 20-20 16- 20 22-22 18-22 24-24 20-24 26-26 22-26 28-28 24-28 30-30 30 32 32 32 2 34 28-2 345 36-5 36 - 530-b 36 Â£ 38 E.32-Â£38 40- 40 34- 42-42 42 44-36- 44 46-46 48-48 50-50 52-52 54-54 56-56 58-58 60-60 62-62 62 64-64 66-66 68-56-68 70-70 70 72-72 60-f 72 74- 1 7462- 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 MANC a 38- Â£g 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 4 0.6 0.8 1 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 26- 28 28- 3032-32- A 34- tb 36 .-,36- *L 38- 50 52 54 56 58 60 62- - -- 64- 66- 68- 70- 74- 2-8 4-10 6- 12 8- 14 10- 16 12- 14- 16- 18- -C- 20-"- i 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- -- 32- 34- 636-2 38- - S. 38- _c 40-fÂ» 40- 42-44- 44-46 - --,w 46- 48-50-Â» 50- 52- 56 1 58- 60- 60 62 62- - 6464- 66- 68-68 70-70 ,5 72-72 74-74 0 50 100 150 200 2 3 4 (U) indaa 4 2- 6-1UGER 6- HAND AUGER HAND AUGE6- 8- -- i 10- -- 12- 14- 16- 18- --N.-/920 22- 24- 8- 10-10- 12-12- 14 14- 16- 16- 20- - 26- 30- --1 - - 32- 34- 38-----/.*--Ii.-%- 9U-25 40- â‚¬â€ž----*40- 42-42-42 44 - 46-46- -F= 48--- C--48- -- 50- 50- 52- 54-------- - 56- > 2 -58- 60- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- ------- 54- 66- 68- 72- 74- 01234 0 Kc 62--737-Il 64- 66--#or- 68- 70- 72- 74- â€¢â€¢ - Peak Su ratio - Liq. S u ratio 11 1,20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Qtn 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 Ko 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 - CFT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:19 PM 14 Project file: P: \Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood__cpt.clq 1 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 < 4 < 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 deteded transition layers based on the parameters listed below the graphs. SBTn Index Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30-L 32- 34- 36- 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- i.'/1 ' 52-- 54- 56- 62-' 64- 68- L 3 ir66- 70- 72- 74- 1 Depth (ft) 2 4 6 8 10- 12- 14- 18- 20 22 24- Serd&Â§1Â¥sald 914,sad&serd,s Send&Â§11,sard HANDAUGER aa,&siltyday aay aaâ€ž&*dew Sltysand&ser,*silt SWId&SillySEnd aay aay&silwdrw aay * 38 42- 44- 46- 72- CIaÂ¥&Stit,day 914='d &SalÂ·*Sit aah,&sillyday Clay&sil,day Sald&sillysard aay&sinydaw Sard&jitysald 04&*day aay ClaÂ¥&simday Sitysard&ser*silt aay aay&,14,dav L aa,&sinyday /9-91Â¥sall &sa*sit 11 *i-,75.., 77'"",iÂ· 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '11 1111,11 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990)56Tn (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 CFT- file:458 Total points excluded:117 Exclusion percentage:25.55% Number of layers detected: 22 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefadion 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-2 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resistaIMA AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strain plot Vertical settlements 16-i- C<- 32- .. 34-:, ;4. 2 38- 4 40- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 0 0--FIllt 2-2- 4-4- 6- 8-8- 10-1 10- 12---12- 14-"I 14-Ning 16-1,:..-16-1 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 2 38- .c 40- 18-18- 20-20- 22-22- 1 24-r 26-26- , 28-28- 30-30- 32- 32- ,> 34- -El2 142-0 42 44-44 46-46 48-48 50-50 52-52 54-54 56-56 58 60 62 64 66 68-68 70-70 72-72 t t. 4 k 0- 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 c 34 5 36 * 38 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 0 0.5 1.5 2 1-1 997 74- 1 0 50 100 150 200 qt (tsf) 36- 38-.E 38- 0 40- 40- 42- 44- 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- 74-74- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Depth (fl 74 4- 71, 1 1 1 1 ' 1 1 1 1 ' I , , - 2 3 4 1 0,8 1 Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety volurrentric 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: 11/2/2011,1:24:19 PM 16 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq ..................1 Laghton Consulti,lg Inc Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http:Uwww.leightongroup.com LIOUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT -7â€ž'78107354, -. Ap . 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 0 ft applied:Sands only 1.00 lb/fe Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Cone r,&*268ER Frictio#A|tjRJGE R SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 10- 15- 10- 15- 20- 25- 20- 25-L 30-30- 35-35- Â£ 40_40- 0FIU 10 5-5 15 t- 10-V 10 20 Â»,ng earthq 15- L 15 A 25 j- 20-20 30 25-25 30-30 35 35 40 40-40 45 45 50 50-50 55 55-55 60 60-60 65 65 70 70-70 75 1- i ,, c , 1 75-75 2 50- 55-55- 60-60- 65- 70- 75- 0 50 100 150 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 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- ''1111'111,1,1,1 000 1 1 1111 11. 1 1 Liquefaction 0.5- 0.4- 0.3- j 0.2- 0.1- 1 lilli 7 I 9 100= %25 10 4 1 1 0.1 1 10 Nornalized friction ratio (%) No Uquefaction - 0 â€¢iâ€¢I111I111I,â€¢,Iâ€¢,1Iâ€¢11I1â€¢â€¢I1iâ€¢Iâ€¢â€¢1I11â€¢ 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Qtn,cs Zone A,: Cyclic liquefact,on likely depending on size 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 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT-3 CPT basic interpretation plots Cone resisAUGER Friction 110*b AUGER Pore presMI AUGER SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 3 20- 22- <22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 1 30- 32- 34- 10- 1 12- 14- 16- 1 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30 1 I nsitu 36- Â£ 38- L 2 38- -5 40-Â£ 40- 34- 36- 38- 44- 46- 48- 50- 44- -f 48- 50- 2 52-52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62-62- 64-64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- r- 0 50 100 150 .c 40- Cl 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 38- 40- Â· 42 46-4 58- t60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 2 4 6 8 10 qt (tsf)Rf (%) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average resula 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: 10- 12- ' 14- 16-' 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- g 38- Â£ 40- a 42- 44-44 46 48 50 'it'F 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 1 2 3 4 Ic(SET) (U) 40*] 2- 4- -, 91Â¥011&sM,Â§R AUGER SEnd&sittysall Sllysand &0*silt aaÂ¥&Siliyday aay C19,&silt,deÂ¥ Clâ„¢ 28-Gav Sllysprd & SEr*Silt aaj &siltyday Clay,&sit,da. - 34--Sild & siltysald aay Gay,&siltyday aay&sitÂ¥day aay&silyday Sitysm[1&sendysilt 01*&siltyday 31%,snl&sancysilt Sltysald&sen*silt Sa'Id & sillysa'Id 50 SE,13&sillysall 52 54 aa,&sillyday 56 314ser,01&0*silt 58 62 64 66 Clay&silvday 68 70 72 60i 74-Sltysald&saÂ·1*,sit 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 u (psi)SET (Robertson et al. 1986) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes SBT legend 2.60 Ko applied: No 1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty 7. Gravely sand to sandBased on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material 0 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 8. Very stiff sand toYesLimit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 1 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand 0 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT Liquefadion Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:20 PM 18Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq 1 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- All-6- I -----HAND AUGER 6- - _ HAND AUGER 6- HAND AUGER My=ht' - HAND AUGER 8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16-16- 24- 26- > 28- 34- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 30- 32- i, 34- 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: w 36- 42- 44- 46- 48-48- 50-50- 52- 54- t 54- 56- 58- 60;60- 62-62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- L 72- 74- 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn Sald&siltysend 31Â¥013&serl*sit aay SltysEr[ &sandysilt 30- aay32- a.&siltyday.. 34-Serd&*SErd ae aay&sillyday Send&siliysall aay Clay&sittyday Cla,&,Ityda Sitysencd &sarl*sit Send&siltysErd aay aay&siltyday aay Clay&slityday, / ' lpd 4 Cilh'E,dI,1, 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Ic (Robertson 1990)SHTn (Robertson 1990) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] 3 Transition detect. appl jed:Yes SBTn legend 2.60 Ko 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 mit 8. Very stiff sand toYesLimit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand 0 9. Very stiff fine grained 18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- DQ- v 36- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 8 2- 10 4- 12 14 8- 16 10- 18 12- 14- 20 16-: 22 24 26 28 30 32 28- 34 30- 36 32 * 38 â‚¬ 2 34- w 36--= 40 E- 42 g 40- 44 42- 46 44- 48 46- 50 '.48- 72 52 50- 54 52 56 58 60 6062 64 62 66 68 66 70 70-t 72 74 74 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 52- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 1I,I 2 4 6 8 10 42 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Fr (%)Bq L CLiq v.1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefadion 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 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 2- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 20- 22- 24- 26- 8 2- 10 4- 12 6- 14 8- 16 10- 12-18 14- 20 16- 22 18- 24 20- 26 22- 28 24- 30 26- 32 28- 34-30- 36-32- 2 38- Â£ 40 36- a 38-42 44 42- 46-44- 48 46- 50 48- 52-50- 54-52- 56-54- 58-56- 60-58- 60-62- 62- 64- 64- 66- r.66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- 2 3 4 0 2- 5 HAND AUGER HAND AUGER 6- lIi._ HAND AUGEQ -HANDAUGER 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 2- 28- 30- 32- 40- 20- 22- 24- 26- PR- 30- 32- 34- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 0 34- 44- 46- 5 36-tb 36- * 38-*38- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- - 50 100 150 42-42- 44-44- 46-46- 48-48- 50-50- 52- 54- qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990) 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 50 100 150 200 01234 Qtn 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 50 100 Kc Otn.r 1 1 150 200 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 Ko 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 Liquefadion Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:20 PM 20Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq 1 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT-3 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- CRR plot FILL Liquefaction analysis overall plots Uquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0- FIU2- 4- 6- 8- FS Plot 2- 4- 6- 8- V During earthq. lW 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- g - v 30- Â£C S.32- 36- 38 40 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62-, 34-1 34- 36- Eli- 46-a 46- 48-48- 50-50- 52-52- 54-54- 56-56- 58- 60- 62-62- 64-64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- 0 0, 0--FILI 2-2- 4-4- 6- -6- 8-8- 10-10- 12- 14- Â»14- 16-16- 18-18- 204 20- 22-22- 24-4 24- 26-26- 28- 303 30- 32-1 *32- 341 2 34- 42-42- y 5 10 15 20 LPI (U) 4*lacl 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 36=t 36- 38-;11 38- 40- 40- 42-42- 44-44- 46-10--46- 48-48- 50-50- 52-52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62-62- 644 64- 66-66- 68- 68- 704 70- 72- 72- 74-U 74- 2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0 0.5 1 0 CRR & CSR Factor of safety 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 Ibm] 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 I Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Il Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likety Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy LPI color scheme Very high risk High risk D 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT-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 2- 4- 11.--'Â·HANDAUGER .HANDAUGER6- 8-8- 10- 8- 10- 12-12-12- 14-14- 16-16- 10- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30-30- 32-32- i 34- 5 36- S. 38- 42 44- 46- 48- 50- 48- 50- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 12-3 14- Â» 16- 1} ) 18- 26 r 28 e 38 Â£: 40 62 50 100 150 200 1 3 4 (U) 41*0 2- 4-4-6- HAND AUGER 8- --- 10- 12- 14- 16-16- 18- 22 18- --- L In- --300 28 30 ZU- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30-7252132- 34- 36- ---lip-- 38- 40- 42 44-Ils 52- 54- 56- 58- 60 52-52- 54-54- 56- -56 58-58- 60-60- 62 - 64-64- 66-66- 68- 70-70- - 72- - 74- 10 150 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 n Kc 621 72- L 74- - 50 1( Qt 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62 64- 66- 68- 70- 72--Â· 74- 1 4 <f --- ..Peal - LIq. lilli 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 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-3 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 calculabon: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 - CFT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:20 PM 22 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood-cpt.clq 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 4 values over which the transition will be defined (typically somewhere between 1.80 < 4 < 3.0) and a rate of change of Ic. Transitions typically occur when the rate of change of Ic is fast (i.e. delta 4 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 2- 10-4- 12- 14- 16- 18- Â· --Send&304sard 20- 22-Sllysand &sarlysit 26- aay 30- 32-Stvsard &sa*sit 34- 36-aa,&*dey 2 38-&rid&siltysErd = 40-aa a 42- Clay&sillyday 44- 42 Sltysard &saÂ·*silt 46- r 44 aay 48-46-aar&*day aa,& siltyda, 50-48- A Sltyserd&sa*silt 52-Sat!&sltysmCI 54- 56-aay 58-Clay&914day 60- 62- 64- 66-aay t 74-aay&silt,day HAND AUGER Iii -7-I 'Illâ€¢ Ill 1 11 11 1 1 1 1 11 11 1 1 11 11./ i .1 .,) 1,-11 lili, 1 11 1 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990)Sarn (Robertson 1990) Transition layer algorithm properties 4 minimum check value:1.70 Ic maximum check value:3.00 4 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT-3 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resistqoffb AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strain plot Vertical settlements 0-- 0- 2-2- 4-4- 6- 8-8- 10-10- 12 14- 221 16- 18- 20 20- 22- 24 24- 30-26 26- Â£ 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- L 0-- 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- b FIU 30- 32-L 34- 36- 2 38- -c 40- 32-28Â· 30- 32--.j t 'Irt 234- t> 36- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60 - 62- 64- 66- 68- 72 70- 72- 74- 3 4 0 0.5 1.5 2 0 34- 36- 2 38- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 0 30- 32- 2 34- t 36- 38- g 40- -- 42- 44- 1 46--I2.0- OV- -Il-*I--48- 50- i 52- ' 54- -- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- -- 70- 72- 74- -rÂ·-1-9#-r-,9 .I.1.1,1,I,1 1 1 1 2 1234560 0.5 1 Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety Volurrentric strain (%)Settlerrent (in) a 42- 8 44- 46- 48- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 50 100 150 qt (tsf) 09 66- 68- 70- 72- 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: 11/2/2011,1:24:20 PM 24 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood__cpt.clq 1 Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404LetÂ®lon Cons-g Inc Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com LIOUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORTA ft 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 ft G.W.T. (earthq.):15.00 n Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value:2.60 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Use fill:Yes Fill height:3.01 Fill weight:10[ Trans. detect. applied: Yes 1% applied:No Clay like behavior Oft applied:Sands only ).00 lb/ft3 Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Cone rMihIPA'68ER Frictio#A|t)RJGER SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot ITII 0-- 10- 15- 20- 25- 5-5 10- V 10 15-15 20-20 25-25 30-30 35-35 40-40 45-45 50-50 55-55 60-60 65-65 70-70 75-75 2 10- 1 10 15- 1 15 30- i 35 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- (U) 1.Adec] 20-2( 25-2f 30-3C 35- r 3E 45- 50- 40 45 50 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 50 100 150 qt (tsO 2 55 60 70- 75- 0.< 65 70 75 1111I,1 1 1 1 1 1 1111111 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 02 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR & CSR Factor of safety M-=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential1..'1..'I... Uquefaction 0.5- 0.4- 0.3- 0.2- uuu.1 lilli 1 100= 4 10 4 C 1 2 1 lili 0.1 1 10 0.1 Normalized friction ratio (%) 0 20 40 60 80 No Uquefaction . 1.1.1111I.1.1..1 I1.1 100 120 140 160 180 200 Qtn,cs Zone A, Cydic hquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2 Cyclic liquefactlon and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry Zone 8: Liquefact,on and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cycl,c softening Zone C Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on sort plasticity, brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undralned strength and ground geometry CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:22 PM Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT--4 CPT basic interpretation plots Cone resisle AUGER Frictio n R,*|fb AuGER Pore pres,Ma AUGER SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type 8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 14- 16- -16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 36- 2 38- 38- F 40- C 1 40- Cl 1 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: 52-52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62-62- 64-64- AA-CC- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72 7 74- 8- 10- 12- . 14- 16- 18- .4 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- V 30- Insltu 32- 34-2 36-- 38-' Z 40-*9 Â·-Â· Â· LJ 44 i - 521 60 62 64 66 J. 68 - 70 72 74 0 20 40 60 1 2 3 4 u (psi)Ic(SED (U) 4]daa 2- 4- 8- 10 1-T 16 18 20 26 34 HAND AUGER'Clay&slltyday 31Â¥serd & ser*silt Sald&ditysad Slyserd & sal*silt aaÂ¥&sim,daâ€ž aw Oggic soil aay aa,&siltyda, Slly,End&-*Silt aav aa,&silgday Sllysald &saridysilt a29 aaw Clay&silÂ¥day Cl*&Sillyday aay&,14,da, Send&siltvsand 31Â¥SErd&=*silt52- -7 34//Serd&siltysErd Clay&*daÂ¥ aay Clay&silÂ¥day aay -- - -'tydzÂ¥ &sal*silt tydEN 't/*t 1 11 2 14 16 18 SET (Robertson et al. 1986) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 Ibm) 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes SBT legend 2.60 Ka applied: No 1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty Â¤7. Gravely sand to sand Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material Â¤5. Silty sand to sandy mit 8. Very stiff sand toYesLimit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay I 6. Clean sand to silty sand Il 9. Very stiff fine grained 24- 26- 28- 30- - 32- 34- 36- 238- n 42- 844- 46- 48-48- 50-50- 46- W VV 70- 70- 72-72- 74-74- 0 50 100 150 0 2 4 6 8 10 ulay//1 SltysEnd 70- aay aay aay aay&silÂ· 0246 8 10 1 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT Liquefadion 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT-4 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 2- 2- 2- 2- _ - HAND AUGER _ 44,-** HAND AUGER _ Â· HAND AUGER 4-4 /1/LE:. - HAND AUGER6- ; = Clay&siNday8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16-16- f 26- 30 32 34 36- 38- 40- 42- 44- Send&Sillysand 18- *5-18- 2 20--C20 24 26 30- 32- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- n 34- f 36- *38- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- Sitysend & sal*silt - 18-=h=Clay&sillyday aay 22-Illp aay 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 14- aay aaÂ¥&*day SitysEnd&gldysilt ,-. 34 tb 36-w 36- Â£ 38-*38- 2 40- 40- 42-C 42- JU bU- 52-52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 52 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- -,V - 48-Ii-/Flill.I 50 ""-- -- 52- # .... 70- 72- 74- 0 2 4 aay aay&silwday Sitysend&satdysilt aay Ogalic sal aaw&siltyday aw Sitysand &sal*silt Send&siltysant Clay&siliyday Sad&siltysacl aay 60-60- 62-62- 64-64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-r 74- 0 50 100 150 200 Qtn agat sal Ogalic scil aay Stlysend&saldysilt CIM&sillyday aw 11- -aa,&,Ilyday 74- h CiaÂ¥&silwd 1 1 1 1 1, 1 1111,1 1.1111I12 8 10 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 3 8 10 12 14 16 18 Bq Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990)Fr (%) 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20-, 22-Â» 4 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 . 52 54 i. i 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 1 2 3 4 Depth (ft)(U) l#decl Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.) Fines correction method:NCEER (1998)Average resulg 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: 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/fO SBTn legend3 Transition detect. applied:Yes 2.60 Ko applied: No 1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty Â¤7. Gravely sand to sand Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material |3 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 8. Very stiff sand toYesLimit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand Il 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011,1:24:22 PM 27 Project file: P: \Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood__cpt.clq This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CFT name: CFT-4 Total cone resistance Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance 10- 12- - 14- - 16- 18- 20- 22- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 1 A- 10 12 14 16 18- 2-2- 4- 6- -HANDAUGER /HAND AUGER 2- 4- 6-4*4. HAND AUGER 2- 4-8- .. HANDAUGE'R 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- LW 26-; 28- 44 Â· 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 24-1 26- 28- â€¢ 30- 1 32- , ZU-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26- -I----= 28- Â· 30-32- <32- 26- 28- 30- n 34- ' 50 #Z Z 40- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 36- 48- 50- 34- 36- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34-,-.34- Â£ 38- 8 40_ 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 4 6 36-w 36- 44-44- 46-46- 48-48- Â£ 38-L Â£ 38- 40- 42-42- 50- 52- 54- 56- 50- C=Z-52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- t 50 100 150 200 Qtn 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 74- , -7 0 50 10 77- - 2-1 1 1 1 1 1 -1--1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 lilli 11,-1-73 1111111 ,1,100 150 1 2 3 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -_0 150 200 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990) Ke Qtn, cs Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/le 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 Ko 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 28 Project file: P: \Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood__cpt.clq 1 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-4 CRR plot 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 14-1â€žng earthq 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 12- 04- 16- 18- 30- 52- 34- 56- 32- '6- 10- '2- 0 Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Uquefaction potential Vertical settlements e 34 36 Â£ 38 C a 40 0-FILL 0-- 2-2-2- 4-4-4- 6-6- 8-6- 8- 10-8- 10- 12 10- 14 12- 16 14-16-.1 18 18- 20 16- 20- 22 18-22- 24 20-24- 26 22-26- 28 24-28-1 . 30 30 32 32-4 34 n 28-- 34-4 36 W 30-6 36-1 < 38 * 38- 40 40- 42 42-1 44 36-44, 46 38- 48 40-48-' 50 50- 42-52 52- 54 44-54- 56 46-'56- 58 48-58- 60 60-50- 62 62- 64 52-64- 66 54-66- 68 56-68- 70 58-70-1 72 72- 60 74 74- 7G 62-76-i 4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 0 Depth (ft) Lateral displacements FIU 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- r 30- 32- FIU ,-.34- tâ‚¬ 36- Â£ 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- lilli Â£ U 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 F.S. color scheme Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 Ibm] 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 . Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy LPI color scheme El Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likely Very high risk Unlike to liquefy E High risk Almost certain it will not liquefy Â¤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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-4 Check for strength loss plots (Olsen & Stark (2002)) 1. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v 8- 10- -- 12- 14- 18- 20 22 Â£ 38-C_ 12 40_ 6 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- ---- 54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62- - --62- 64-64- 66- 8 2- 10 4- 12 14 8- 16 10 12-18 20 14- 16- 22 18- - - 24 20- 26 22- 28 24- 30 26- --Â· 32 28- 34 30- 36 32- 38 40 636- Â£38- 42 42- 46 44 48 46-50 431 .48- 50- 54 'r,3 -* - ; .....1.-52 56 54- 58 56- - 60 58- - 62 60- 64 62- 64- 66 66- 68 68- 70 70 72- - 74- )0 1 2 3 4 0 0 Depth (ft) 2- ',Illlld HAND AUGER _ 1 HAND AUGER HANDAIJGFp8- - 10- |- -- 12- 14- 16- 18- L--- 20- - 22- 24- ---C -- 26-Irr 28- -'----Ii 30- < 34- --., -*â‚¬- 36- Â£ 38- *..../. 40- - ---- - ---a;2mm 42-I../. R/=7- .,i- - i 46-48- - 50- 52- - --CCL_ 20- 22- 24- -- 28- 30- 32- C 34- 5 36- Â£ 38- g 40- 42- 46- 48- 50- 52- - 60- 62-C 66- 68- 72- 74- {)50 100 150 2t Qtn,cs - - - - 3- -ic 68- 70- -- - 72- ------- - 1-2 74- .--S111111-7-1 1 -:11 111,11 40 60 80 100 120 140 0123456 7 8 9 10 1 Qtn Kc Ic (Robertson 1990) - Peak Su ratio - uq. Su ratio 11 , 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 SU/Sig'V Input parameters and analysis data NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 Iwft3 NCEER (1998)Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 1% applied: No 6.70 Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 0.38 Use fill:Yes Limit depth applied:Yes 30.00 ft Fill height:3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 5.1.16 - CFT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:22 PM 30 3: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood__cpt.clq I This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT 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 4 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 4 is small). The SBA plot below, displays in red the deteded transition layers based on the parameters listed below the graphs. SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990) Transition layer algorithm properties Ic minimum check value:1.70 Ic maximum check value:3.00 4 change ratio value:0.0250 Minimum number of points in layer: 4 UU 68-68 70-70 72-72 74-74 1 2 3 4 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type AHAND AUGER aay&sliydav Sard&SINsand Sltysa-Ic[&sa*sit aay&siliyday aay aaÂ¥ aay aay&*d* Sitysm:1 &ser*silt aay a24&siltydaÂ¥ Sltysad &sa*silt aaY Ogalicscil aay&sillyday aay Sltyscrd &sal*silt SaÂ·11&sitysand Clay&siltyday Sand&sil4send aay Ogaic sal Ogarlic sal Oganic soil Gay Sttysard &sandysit am&,ityday aay Clay&siltyday Clay&siltyda, 111 11 ,1 11 1 1,1.111.1,11 5 E 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 SEn (Robertson 1990) General statistics Total points in CFT- file:462 Total points excluded: 94 Exclusion percentage:20.35% Number of layers detected: 17 8 2- 4- 6- 10- 22- 24- 28 34-30 36-32- 34-2 38-Â£ 36-6 Â£ 38 0- 42- 46- 42 44 48-464 50- 52-50 54-52-F 56-54- 56 58-60- 62- 60- 62- 64- 66- CC- 0 1 3 578 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 ................... This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-4 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resist*ME AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strain plot Vertical settlements 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 3 0- 8-Â·2- 10-4- 12-6- 14-8- 16-10- 18-12- 14- 20- 16- 22-18- 24-20- 26-22- 28-24- 30-26- 32-28- 34-30- 36-32- 38-1 34- t 36- 40-Â£ 38- 42- 44-42- 46-44- 48-46- 50-48- 52-50- 54-52- 56 54- 58 56- 60 58- 60- 62 62- 64 64- 66 66- 68 68- 70 70- 72 72- 74 74- 761 150 1 2 3 4 0 Depth (ft) i 7 0.5 0- 2- 4- -- 6- 8- 10- -- 12-Â·3=- 14--C 18- 20- 22- --- 24- 26- 28- 48- 50- 52- Depth (ft) 30- 32- 56- < 58- 60- 62- f 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 50 100 qt (tsf) 1 Â£ 38- - 42- -- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- - 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- - - 72- -Â· 74- 76- ,i,,,1 1.5 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 4]d<1 0--FIU 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12-1 14- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- < 38- 10- 12- 04- 18- 30- 52- 54- 56- 38- 30- 32- 34- 56- 58- 70- 72- 6111 11 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety Volurrentric strain (%)Settlerrent (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 - CFT 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 Laghton Consibng trac Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http:Uwww.leightongroup.com 1/lia/Nill/,0/R LIOUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT 4 #..ir*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 n 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:10C Trans. detect. applied: Yes 1% applied: No Clay like behavior 0 ft applied:Sands only 1.00 It)/W Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Cone r,pa-*9266ER Frictio,?A'AttjRJGER SBTn Plot 10-10- 15-15- 10- 15- 55- 20-20- 25-25- 30-30- 35-35- 40-40- 45-45- 50-50- 55-55- 60-60- 65-65- 70- 20- 25- 30- 40- 45- Depth (ft) 50- 60- 65- 70- 75- 2 3 6 1 1 75-- 70- , 757 11/1,1 I,1 CRR plot FS Plot 0FIU 5-5 10- V 10 15-15 20-20 25-25 1 30-30 35- 40-40 45-45 50-50 55-55 60-60 65-65 70-70 75- ,75 2 0 50 100 150 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 qt (tsf)Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR & CSR Factor of safety M.=71/2, sigma'=l atm base curve 0.6- ''''I''I'â€¢'1 - Liquefaction Summary of liquefaction potential 1.000. I ' '''ll lili 7 0.5- 0.4- 0.3- 1 0.2- \U-,1/ 9 100= 10 1 2 1 1 lilli 0.1 1 10 0.1- Nornelized friction ratio (%) 0 20 40 60 80 No Liquefaction . I,..1,.,1..,I,,,I.,. 100 120 140 160 180 200 Qtn, cs Zone A, Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A2 Cydic liquefactlon and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry Zone B Liquefaction and post-eanhquake strength loss unhkely, check cyclic softering Zone CÂ· Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plastic,ty, brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undra,ned strength and ground geometry CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT-5 CPT basic interpretation plots Cone resisf88*fALKSER Friction R#I#b AUGER Pore pres,3 AlIGFR SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 18- l 22- L 24- 26- 28- 30-1 ' 32-32- 34-34- 36-36- 2 38-2 38- I: 40-2 40- E-4 42 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- 74-74- 0 50 100 150 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 8 A. 2- 10 4- 12 6 14 8 16 10 18 20 16 22 18 24 26 28 30 Insitu 32 34 36 2 34-2 38 5 36- Â£ 40 * 38- 44 6 40- 46 i 46- 48- 50- 54 1 52 56 54 58 60 58 62 62 64 64 66 68 70 70 72 72- 74-///////// 20 40 60 80 2 3 4 0 2 4 34- 36- 38- 40- 1 42- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- Depth (ft) 72- 74- 0 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: ---HAND AUGEV 1 SNI&*d Sllysald&51,*silt aay&siliydaÂ¥ Cim&sillyday I Gay&sillyday Clew&sillyday Clay&sillyday 31Â§,sard&sal*silt aay&siltyda 914serd&sal*silt 31tysend&ser*silt aaÂ¥&si14,di Gay&sillyday aay&siltyday Slt/sald&sendysilt 91Â§/sald &01*silt 31Â§,sErd&sa*silt SGrd&siltysarf SlÂ»En:1& sal*silt Sllysend & ser*silt aay&silyday Clay&sit,day aay aew&*day Gay&siliydaw Clay&siltyday aay Clay&silÂ¥day aw Clay&,14,dew aaÂ¥&siltyday &rd & siltysEnd 1 1 1 19'VE.";M'04 1 1 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 u (psi)Ic(SBT)SEIT (Robertson et al. 1986) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft-3 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes SBTIegend 2.60 Ko 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 toYesLimit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand Il 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011,1:24:23 PM 34 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood__cpt.clq This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CFT name: CPT-5 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 2- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- HANDAUGER 2- 6- i HAND AUGER HANDAUGER A HAND AUGEk 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 2- 8- 0- 2- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 38- 32-32- --34-2 34- v 36-5 36- * 38- a, An- epth (ft)-SÂ¢Â·4* 0 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: 1 Peak ground acceleration:0.38 Use fill: ' Depth to water table (insitu): 30.00 ft Fill height: 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 42-42- 44- >44- 46- 48- 50- 52-52- 54-54- 56-56- 58-58- 60-60- 62-62- 64-64- 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72-72- 74-74- 1 50 100 150 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 -0.2 0 0.2 0. Qtn Fr (%)R 8-2 4 r 12- 14- i 16- I 1C 18-12 20-14 16 22- 18 24-4/4 20 26-22 28-24 30-26 32-28 34 .30 36 32 238 r- 34 5 36 c 40- E 42-â‚¬ 38 44- 40 42 46-44 48- -46 50-48 52- ae 50 54- t 52 56 54 58 -56 60 58 62 60 6264 , 64 66 66 68 68 70 70 72 72 74 74 1 2 3 4 1 Send&siltysard 1 ' Sitysard&0*silt Clay&,14/day aay&,INdeÂ¥ aay aay&sillyday am,&91Â¥da, aaÂ¥&Â§1%,day Clay&siltyda, aw aay Send&*SErd --- Gay&siltyday Clay&,1Â¥d* 314'sard&sal*silt -" 0,1 & sa*silt Sllysard&smlysilt 3&*sald 31Â¥sand&san*silt StÂ¥sald &saldysit Clay&siltycla, aay aay&sil,day Slt,sard&sen*silt Sad&sillysEncl 1, 1 I1I1I1i 1 I1I1I1I1 4 0.6 0.8 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) [5.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes SBTnlegend 1.60 Ka applied: No 1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty Â¤7. Gravely sand to sand3ased on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material Â¤5. Silty sand to sandy mit 8. Very stiff sand toCesLimit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand m 9, Very stiff fine grained aay CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefadion 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CFT name: CPT-5 Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) Total cone resistance SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance 2-8---2- | HAND AUGER 10---.Al.-HAND AUGER 6J 111 HAND AUGER )AUGER 8- 10- 12- 14- 14- Â·Â·- 16- 18- 16-ZU- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 2.-, 20- 22- 24- 26- 32- 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 2- 4- HANI6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- -- 2 30- 32- 34- E- k r 31-32- 2 34- 5 36- Â£ 38-pth (ft) g 40- 2'g 40- C..----- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 39- 4.9 Â£ 40-- 50- 52- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 50 w 36- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 42-42- 44- 46-44- 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- 74-74- 0 50 100 150 200 0123456 Qtn Kc 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 50 100 Qtn,cs 1UU 15U ZOO 1 2 3 4 7 8 9 10 150 200 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 Ib/fe 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 Ko 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 36 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CP'T-5 CRR plot Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Uquefaction potential Vertical settlements 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 38- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 30- 52- 54- 96- '8- 52- '4- )8- '0- '2- 0 0.2 0-FILL 2- 6-H 2- 4-4- 6- 8- 10-8- 1 12 10- 14 12- 16 14-4 18 16-20 22 18-2 24 20-2 26 22-2 28 224- 30 3 26-32 3 34 w 36 v 30- *38 *3 34-&4 42 4 44 36-4 46 38-4 48 40-4 50 542- 52 5 54 5 56 46-5 58 48-5 60 50- '6 62 652- 64 6 66 54-6 68 56-6 70 58-7 72 7 74 62-, 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 Lateral displacements V uring earthq. g a. 1 1 0.4 0.6 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 0 2 4 6 8 .0 .2 4 .6 8 52 '6 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6' 8 0 2 4 6 8Â· 0Â· 2Â· 4Â· 6Â· 8Â· 0 2Â· 4Â· 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/M Transition detect. applied:Yes 1<c applied: No Clay like behavior applied:Sands only Limit depth applied:Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft 32- 34- 36- 38- 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Il Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy FIU 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Very high risk High risk C| Low risk CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefadion 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 FIU 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 1__-LIli 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 0 0.5 1 1.5 (U) 41*1 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- HAND AUGER 2 4- 6- HAND AUGER 8 8- 10-- I 10- 12-12- 14 14- 16-16- - 8-2- 10-4- 6- 8- 10- - 12-18- 20-:. 14- 22-- 16- 18- --- 20- 22- 28-fti 1 24- 26- 32- n.28- 34-f-30- 32- 2 38 2 34-- 4 40 2-42 8 44 & 40- 42- - 46 44- 48 46- 50 48- 52 50-4 54 52- 56 54- - 58 56- 58-60 62 .60- -- 62- 64 :I 64- 66 66- 68 68- 70 70- -- 72 72- 74 74- 200 1 2 3 4 0 2- 4- 6- 1 HANDAUGEE 8- 1 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 12- 14- 16- 18- - -18- -- 20-ZU 22- 22 24-24- 26-26- 28-28- 30-30- 32-32- 34- - 14- 38- 40- gI *38- g 40- g 44- 46- 48- 50- 52 54-, r 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 36- - 38- 40- 42- - 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- --- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 56-1 56- 58 58-60 - --60- 62-/62- 64 1 64- 664 66- 68- 70- 72- /4- .. ..imi,irl C==/U 72- 74- 0 50 100 150 Qtn,cs I.1 Peak Su ratio 1=1.,,I,lillil Liq. Su ratio - 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Qtn 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 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 No$ applied: 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 - CFT Uquefaction 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 l This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CFT-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 plot below, displays in red the detected transition layers based on the parameters listed below the graphs. SBTn Index Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 8-2- 10- C#*;4- 612-Â·*i 12 14- 26- 20-li 28-. - 30- 32- 34- 38-2 34- 40- t. 36-= 6 38Â·-- 42-CL 44- 46- 48- 50- 46- &Â¥ * 48- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 3 72- 74- ' Depth (ft) HANDAUGER S.1&914send Sltysald &se,*silt aa,&siliyday am,&sm,day a* aay&silwday CIEV&siltyday Cliv&*day aay&siliyday aay aay Serd &sil/send aay&siltyda Clay&siliyday Sltysard &s,1*sit 31Â¥82*Il&Ser*Silt aay SErd&sillysand 31&,sa,3 &ser*silt Sllys,d &smslysilt Sltyserd &0*sit aa,f&silÂ¥day aay Clay&*day 914,sen:1 &sa*sit Sjv&sillys,11 ' ' ' r---i_n 1 , 1 1 1 I,I,1.1'1,1,1'1,1'I'I,l,1.I.1'I,1.I, 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990)SE;Tn (Robertson 1990) Transition layer algorithm properties Ic minimum check value:1.70 4 maximum check value:3.00 Ic change ratio value:0.0250 Minimum number of points in layer: 4 General statistics Total points in CFT file:459 Total points excluded: 74 Exclusion percentage:16.12% Number of layers deteded: 14 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Uquefadion Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:23 PM 39 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulbng\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq ................... CFT name: CPT-5 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resistai AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strain plot Vertical settlements 0- 8-2- 10-4- 12-6- 14-8- 16 .10- 18-12-- 14- 20- 16- 22-18- 24-20- 26-22- 28-24- 30-26- 32-28- 34-30- 36-32- 2 38-5 36- c 40- E. 42-â‚¬ 38- 2 40-44-42- 44- 46- 50-48- 52-50- 54-52- 56-54- 58-56- 58-60- 60- 62- 62- 64- 64- 66:66- 68-U 68- 70 70- 72 72- 74 74- 1 150 200 1 2 3 4 0 0-07' 2- 2- FIU 1-4-4- 6 1 6- 8- 8- 10 10-12 12-14-2=3_ 14- 16-16- 18-18- Â£W 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 2 38- z 40- 44- 46- C 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 0 50 100 qt (ts 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 234- 5 36- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 36-1 S. 38 I-*38- 40-a 40- 42 42- 44- 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- 74-74- 1.5 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 60.5 1 0 0.5 1 1.5 Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety Volumentric strain (%)Settlement (in) Total cone resistance (cone resistance qc corrected for pore water effects) Soil Behaviour Type Index Calculated Factor of Safety against liquefaction 1: Post-liquefaction volumentric strain 5.1.16 - CFT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:23 PM 40 2: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq 1 Le,ghton Consulting tic Leighton Consulting, Inc. 611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1404 Los Angeles, CA 90017 http://www.leightongroup.com 2*1*i 44 ,*0, LIOUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT .P..1 : The Academy - Orangewood Children's Location : 1901 North Fairview Street, Santa Ana, CA 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 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 1% applied: No Clay like behavior 0 ft applied:Sands only 1.00 |b/#3 Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft Cone ri8ER Frictio#AWNLGER SBTn Plot 10-10-10- 15-15- 20-20- -2 20- 25-1 25-25- 30-30- 35-35- 40- 45-45- 50-50- 55- J 55- Depth (ft) CRR plot FS Plot 0FIU 5- 10- V 10 Nnng eartha. 15-15- 20-20- 40-40- 15-45- 50-50- 55-55- 50-60- 55-65- 70-70- 75- ,75- 0 0.2 0.4 0.E 25-25- 30-30- 35-35- i 2 3 4 r... 60-60- 65-65- 70-70- 60- 65- 70- 75- )246810 75-, 0 100 200 qt (tsf) M 0.6- 1 0 75 300 0.5 1 1.5 2 Rf (%)Ic (Robertson 1990)CRR &CSR Factor of safety w=7i/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 11.,1.11 Uquefaction 0.5- 0.4- 0.3- 0.2- JUU_ 7 9 100= 5 10 - -_ 4 1 2 1 0.1 1 100.1 Norrrnlized friction ratio (%) 0 20 40 60 80 No Uquefaction 11.1I,. 11 111 I 1111 11 . 100 120 140 160 180 200 Qtn,cs Zone AlÂ· Cydic liquefact,on likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading Zone A, Cydic hquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometry Zone B. Liquefacbon and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening Zone C. Cydic liquefact,on and strength loss possible depending on so,1 plast,clty, brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry 5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:25 PM 41 2: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq ........... This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-6 Cone resisAUGER 8-8- 10-10- 12-12- 14-14- 16-16- CPT basic interpretation plots Friction R#AiR) AUGER Pore presMN&%ANGER 8- 10- 12- Soil Behaviour Type 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- Insltu 32- 34- 36- HAND AUGER 20- 22- 4 24- 26- 18- 20- 22-1 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- Â£ 38- < AC- SBT Plot 2 4 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 SErd&siltySEnd Sltysend & sar9siIt 48- 50-Ir 52- 54- 56- 28- 307 36- aiv 322 Gay&,14,day9..Clay&stityday 36-Â¢2 38-â‚¬ 38-7 40- Â£40- Â£40-91 42-Cl 42-a 42-4 44-44-44-"" 46-46-46-- 48-48- 50-50-50--t 52- 52- L- 52- f.Â·n 54-54-54- :Â·9 56- 48--- 8 1 56-56- CIO-58- 60- 62- 68- 70- f-- 72- 74- 0 100 aw Clay&silb,daâ€ž 014&*day Sltysald &sat*sit Sard&Silt,SEnd Sllysand & ser*silt Send&siltysEnd Sityserd &sEr*sit aay asy&sillyday A/-Â·U 60-aay 62- 64-64- 414 66-768-68-4 70- 72- 74- 0 20 40 60 80 1 u (psi) 64-01*&sillyday 66-Seld&siltyserd 68-aa, aay 70- 72-Gay 74-Send&Siltysand 1 1 1 1%71 11,1.11 200 300 ( 8 10 12 14 16 18 qt (tsf)Ic(SBT)SHT (Robertson et al. 1986) 2 4 6 8 10 Rf (%) 26- 28 b 36- 42- 44- 46- 48- 52 54 56- 58- 60- 62 64- 2 3 4 0 2 4 6 i .6 *..:-Lal Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCE Fines correction method:NCE Points to test:Bag Earthquake magnitude Mw:6.7( Peak ground acceleration:0.3E Depth to water table (insitu): 30.( ER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/ft] ER (1998)Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes 3d on Ic value Ic cut-off value:2.60 1% applied: No ) Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 1 Use fill:Yes Limit depth applied:Yes 30 ft Fill height 3.00 ft 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 sit 8. Very stiff sand to 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand 0 9. Very stiff fire grained 5.1.16 - CFT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:25 PM 42 3: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq 1 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CFT name: CPT-6 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 2-2- 4-6- Â·Â· HAND AUGER 8- 10- 12-12- 3 14- 16- 18- 2- 4- 6- HAND AUGER .HANDAUGER 11 HAND AUGER 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 28- 30- 32- 2 34- 536- E. 38- 2% 40- 42- 44- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 234- 2- 4- 6- 10- 124 14- 16- 18- 20-"...5. 1W 1U 48-48- 50- 42-# 52- 54- 56- B 56- 58- 60- 62- 64-64- 68- < 74- 0 5 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 20-,t 22-rt 24-4. k 28-1 30 tb324 34-7 36 - 2 38 .c 40- 0 42- 44- 46 48- 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 r 1 2 3 4 (U) 11:Idaclb 36- 38- E 40- 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- f 66-66- 68-68- 70-70- 72- r 72- 74- J 74- 1 0 100 150 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Qtn Fr (%)Bq 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: Sald&sitys,d Sltysald &s,Idysilt aay CiaÂ¥&sillyday Gay&sillyda, aay aay&sim,day aay Cla,&sit,daY aay&sil,day a.&sillyda aay&Â§1%,day 91Â¥sald 8,saÂ·*silt 48-Sltyserd&sanÂ®sit 31482113&91*Silt aay&,14,day aw Clay&sillyday Ogaic sal aay aay aa,&slityday Sllysend &serdysilt 66 70 Ogaic soil 72- 74-'Send&silt,send 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Ic (Robertson 1990)SBTn (Robertson 1990) 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 lb/M 3 Transition detect. applied:Yes SBTn legend 2.60 Kc applied: No 1. Sensitive fine grained 4. Clayey silt to silty 7. Gravely sand to sandBased on SBT Clay like behavior applied:Sands only 2. Organic material Â¤5. Silty sand to sandy silt 8. Very stiff sand toYesL.imit depth applied:Yes 3.00 ft Limit depth:50.00 ft 1 3. Clay to silty clay 6. Clean sand to silty sand 0 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 11/2/2011, 1:24:25 PM 43 Project file: P: \Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq 1 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- 6- 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- HAND AUGER 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- t 26- L_ 28- 30- 32- E. 38- 40- 42- 48- 50- 52- 54- 58- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72 74- 8---Â·-. .3 54*gai-2- to- - h ; - 1 4- ANDAUGER12-Uk- IC-- 43/ --6- 2- HANDAUGER HAND AUGEf 2- 4- 14- 16- 18- 20- 22-16- 20-24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 32- 36-Â£ 34-L 2 38- - 36- M 40- 40-0 42- 8 42-44- 44-46- 46-48- 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- 2 34-234- * 38- 42- 44- 36- 38- 40- 48-50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- h 42- 44- 46- 48- 50- 52- r 46- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 100 150 200 Qtn 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 09- 66- 68- <68- 70- 70- 72- 74- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 50 100 Kc Qtn,cs 0 )1234 1111111 .I,111,11I 11 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2 3 4 0 5 qt (tsf)150 200 Ic (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998)Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill weight:100.00 Ib/ft3 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<o applied: NoEarthquake 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, 1:24:25 PM 44Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq 1 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-6 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements0-FILL 2-2- 4-4- 6- 6-8- 10-8- 12 10- 14 arr.,0399 12- 16 18 20 16- 22 18- 24 20- 26 22- 28 24- 30 32 26- 234 28- 1 32- 40 42 44 36- 46 38- 48 40- 50 42- 1 52 44-54 56 46- 58 48- 60 50- 62 52- 64 66 54- 68 56- 70 58- 72 60- 74 62- 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 2- 4- 6- 8- 10- 12 VJipuring earthq. Â£*EL I 8 - 0.4 CRR & CSR Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:NCEER (1998) Fines correcbon 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 19 16- 18- 20- 22- 24- Z6- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 38- 10- 12- 14- 16- 18- 50- 52- i4- 56- 38- 60- 52- 56- 38- 70- 0 0.2 0--FIll 2-2- 4-4- 6-6- 8-8- 10-10- 121 12- 14- 16- 18- â€¢18- 20-20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 28-28- 30- 0 30- 32-r 32- Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthq.): 15.00 ft Fill w, Average results interval: 3 Trans Ic cut-off value:2.60 1% ap Unit weight calculation:Based on SBT Clay I Use fill:Yes Limit Fill height:3.00 ft Limit FIU 35. 2 2 34- 5 36- 0 LPI Settlement (in)Displacernent (in) F.S. color scheme Nght:100.00 'wft3 Almost certain it will liquefy ition detect. applied:Yes Very likely to liquefy LPI color scheme plied: No ike behavior applied:Sands only El Liquefaction and no liquefaction are equally likely Very high risk depth applied:Yes Unlike to liquefy High risk depth:50.00 ft Almost cer'tain it will not liquefy Â¤Low risk 38- 40- 42- 44- 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- 74-74- 0 0.5 1 1.5 CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT 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 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- 8- 12- 14- 16- 18- *44&.HAND AUGER _ |. HAND AUGER - -.-.9 7 ..... HAND AUGER 8- 12- . 14- â€¢ 16- / 18- L 22- 24- 26- 28- - 30- -- 32-'32- 34-0 34- - 36- b 36- *-' 38- 42- 44- - 46- 48-CL48- 50- 52-1 52- 54 54- 56 56- 58 5E- 60 60- 62- - 64 64- 66-66- 68-68- -- 72-- -r- - 74-74- , 50 100 150 200 012345 Qtn Kc 2-8-2- 4-10-:4- 6-6- 8- 14 8- 10-10-16-1Â· 12-12- 14-14- 16-16- 18-22- t- -'* 18- 20 20- 22-22- 24-24- 26-26- 32-28- 30- - -- -34-30- 32-32- 34-234- v 36-5 36- *38- 42- g 40- 42 46 ta,44 46- 48-48- 50-50- 52-52- 54- -54- 56- -58 56- 58- 60 58- 60-60-62 62-62- 6464-64- 66-66 66- 68-68 68- 70-C 70 70- 72-72 72- 74-74 74- 0 50 100 150 200 1 2 3 4 0 1 1 i - Peak Su ratio - 1 Iq. Sil ratio 1111 111 11 1 6 7 8 9 10 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 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 lb/ft3 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: 11/2/2011,1:24:25 PM 46 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq 1 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 plot below, displays in red the detected transition layers based on the parameters listed below the graphs. SBTn Index 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 8-2 10 4 12- ,6 14-Â· ,8 10 1218- 14 20- 16 22- 18 24-r 20 26-22 28-24 30-26 32-28 34-30 36-32 2 34238-b 36 Â£ 40-Â£ 38Â£Â·42 3) 40 44 1 42 46 44 48 4E 50 48 52 4 50 52 54 jot 5E 5E 6C 62 64 66- -,6E 68- j y.6E 70-Â·-7C 7 74 1 2 3 4 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER Send & sil,sand Sltysenl &saÂ·*silt aay am,&siliydew CIEÂ¥&sillyday aay Clay&siltyday aay CkÂ¥&*day aaY&siludm Sltysad &sendysilt am&Â§14daÂ¥ 31%/sen:1 &sarglt SltygII &sali'sit 314/sall &sandysilt Clay&gltydah aay am&siltyday Ogalicscil aay aay aay&siltyday Sityserd&sal*sit aay Ogaicsal Sail&Sitysardlilli 'Et,131 1,1,1,111.1,11 , 7 8 9101112131415161718 SSTn (Robertson 1990) General statistics Total points in CPT file:458 Total points excluded: 62 Exclusion percentage:13.54% Number of layers detected: 11 0123456 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 This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-6 Estimation of post-earthquake settlements Cone resistqOGE AUGER SBTn Plot FS Plot Strainplot Vertical settlements 8- 10- 12- 14- 16- i 10- 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 32- 34- 36- 0 42- 44- 0- 2- 4- r 6- 8- 10- FIll[ 18-- < 20- 22- 24- 26- 28- 30- 0 r- - - -- 32- p 34- 5 36- 46 0-0- 2-2- 4-4- 6- 14--8-8- 16-10-10- 18----12 12-' 1420 14- 16 22- 24-.- 18 20-26- py t.22- 24 24- 26 26- 28 28- 34- A 30 30- 32- Â© 34 2 34- k tb 36 b 36- 42- 38 *38- 2540 44- 46- 42 42- 44 44- 48-46 46-, 48 48- 50 50- 52 52- 54- 56 56- 58 58- 60- 62 62- 64- 66- 68- 70-70 70- 72-72 72- 2 74 74- Depth (ft) 48- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- -1 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 38- 40- 48- 50- 52- 54- 56- 58- 60- 62- 64- 66- 68- 70- 72- 74- 2 3 4 5 6 0 41dacl 1 10 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 - 2 3 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 qt (tsf)Ic (Robertson 1990)Factor of safety Volumentric strain (%)Settlerrent (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, 1:24:25 PM 48 Project file: P:\Leighton Consulting\603000\603284.001 Orangewood\Analyses\orangewood_cpt.clq 1 Procedure for the evaluation of soil liquefaction resistance, NCEER (1998) Calculation of soil resistance against liquefadion 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 Uquefaction Resistance of Soils). The revised procedure is presented below in the form of a flowchartl: qc: tip resistance, fs: sleeve friction G,v, 04 : in-situ vertical total and effective stress unils: all in kPa initial stress exponenta :n= 1.0 and calculate Q, R and Ic if Ic s 1.64. n = 0.5 if I.64 < [c < 3.30. n = 0,-1.64)0.3 + 0.5 if ic 2 3.30. n = 1.0 iterate until the change in n. An < 0.01 if am' > 300 kPa. let n = 1.0 for atl soils %pdated from Robertson and Wride f 1998)Cn =:[3]n F = L 100Q= Â·C 100 (qc - a,o) 4 = 3.47 -logQ)2 + (1.22+ logF)2 V if Ic 5 1.64. Kc = 1.0 if 1.64 <Ic< 2.60. Ig = -0.403 44 + 5.581 12 -21.63 1,2 + 33.75 4 - 17.88 if IC 2 2.60. evaluate using other criteria; likely nontiquefiable if F > 1% BUT, J 1.64 < 4 < 2.36 And F < 0.596, sc: Kc = 1 -0 C'cIN)= = KCQ . CRR7.5 =93Â·(grIN)Â£0 +0 08. if 50 5 (chIN)cs < 1601000 CRR7 5= 0-833 Â·| C'lcINc' .1.0.05, i f (qciN)cs < 50L looo if Ic 2 2.60. evaluate using other criteria; likely nonliquifiableif F > 1% NEstinating liquefaction-induced ground settl efrents from CPT- for level ground", G Zhang, P.K Robertson, and R.W, I. Brachnen Cliq v.1.5.1.16 -CPT Uquefaction Assessment Software 49 Procedure for the evaluation of soil liquefaction resistance (all soils) -Robertson (2010) Calculation of soil resistance against liquefaction 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 nowcharti: CPT qI, 4, avo, 0';, p. = I atm all same units as p. Initial stress exponent: n = 1.0; Calculate (k Fr, [c n = 0.381(4)+ 0.052--0.15lp.. n 5 1.0 Iterate until change in 4 An S 0.01 . .C c.=lt .L p.Iâ€¢C F, f. â€¢ 100 4 =b.47-togg* y +(22+log/:1):r < 2.50 <llc < 2.70 h (4 2 2.70 1 -Cj If Ic s 1.64, Kc = 1.0 â€¢ When 1.64 < Ic S 2.60 Ke = 5.58I2 - 0.403 44 - 21.63 42 + 33.75Ic - 17.88) K If 1.64 <4< 2.36 AND Fr < 0.594 set Kc = 1.0 e =6*1 04(47.-70 Qtn.cs = Kc â€¢Q= , 1 CRR 7-5 =93I- 1 + 0.08 1000]CRR;, = 0,053QMK. 4- 50 5 Qâ€ž, 5 160 1 P. K. Robertson, 2009. nPerformance based earthquake design using the CFT-, Keynote lecture, International Conference on Performance-based Design in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering - from case history to practice, IS-Tokyo, June 2009 Cliq v.1.5.1.16 - CFT Uquefaction Assessment Software 50 Procedure for the evaluation of soil liquefaction resistance (sandy soils) - Moss et al. (2006) CPT 9, fs, Ic i Ic < Ic cut-off- Irtitial estimate ustig raw tip measurements, friction ratio. Calculate Ch,1. Repeat until an acceptable convergence tolerance s achieved. ,f2 c=f Rf 1f 3 E â‚¬ C= q P a -r 0 Â¥ . i qt, 1 = Cq. Clt qtr Â·qu Â·0Â·110 -Rf)+ 6.001 Â·Rf)+CÂ·+O.850 Â·R f-O.848Â·hIw)-O.002..(C )-20.923 +1.632-0CRR = exp 7.177 CUq v.1.5.1.16 -CPT Uquefaction Assessment Software 1 11 - Procedure for the evaluation of liquefaction-induced lateral spreading displacements ' I Site investigation Design Ground with SPT or earthquake geometry SPT data with Moment magnitude Geometric parameters content ofearthquake (Mw)for each of different or CPT data and peak surface zones in level (or acceleration (arrox)gently sloping) ground with (or withouO a free face Â¥ k- Liquefaction potential analysis to calculate FS, 041)60cs Or 4 4 (*IN)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 W If (NIÂ»s < 14 or (qciNÂ»< 70 evaluate potential of now W Calculation of the lateral displacement index 1../H or/and (using Figure I and Equation [3]) S W . Estimated lateral displacement, LD For gently sloping ground without a free face, LD = (S + 0.20) Â· LDI (for 0.2% <S< 3.556) For level ground with a free face, LD =6Â· (UH)4: Â· LDI (for 5< IJH <40) W Evaluation of lateral displacements based on other approaches and engineering judgment liquefaction 1 Flow chart illustrating rrejor steps in estimating liquefadion-induced lateral spreading d splacerrents using the proposed approach 60 Z fzm0 50-LDI= 1 ax 40 1 SO56 20 - 80% 0 0.0 05 1.0 1.5 7 maA Jo 1 Equation [3] 2.0 Factor of safety, FS 1 Figure 1 NEstinating liquefaction-induced ground settlerrents from CPT for level ground", G Zhang, P. K Robertson, and R.W, I. Brachnen Cliq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Uquefaction Assessment Software 52 Procedure for the estimation of seismic induced settlements in dry sands Average shear stress, T. sw = CSR Â·40 = 0.65 g Estimate small shear stmin modulus, Go 0.0188 Â·0(035I.-168)|J - (qt- 0, ,Go = Estimate shear stinin amplitude, Â·/ (based on Pmdel (1998Â» 1+0Â£-ebR I Â·RÂ· 100 (%) G,- (Note r= andG o same imits) a =0.0389 -1 - b =64]0 (211 - + 0.124 Estimate volumetric stmin in 15 cycles 160:s -120 %01(15) = 7 [ 20 ] Qug I8.3 Â·11 - -1 04 1)604 = Volumetric stmin in design earthquake Evol I 00*15) liTI 2.17 045 Seismic settlement, s 2 Â· [Ivoi dz Robertson, P.K. and Usheng, 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. Idriss, San Diego, CA CUq v. 1.5.1.16 - CFT- Uquefaction Assessment Software 53 Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI) calculation procedure Calculation of the Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI) is used to interpret the liquefadion 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 = f (10-0,5z) x FE xd, where: FL=1-F.S. when F.S. less than 1 F, = 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 charaderized as liquenable 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 FL 1.0 2.0 0 1( 0 00 0 5-5- 10 -10Depth 2 (m) 7 Graphical presentation of the LPI calculation procedure CLiq v. 1.5.1.16 - CPT Uquefaction Assessment Software 54 15 -15 - 20 20 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 (11 151-8. â€¢ Robertson, P.K. and Wride, C.E., 1998. Cyclic Uquefaction 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., Dobry, 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,, Morlwaki, Y,, Power, M,S., Robertson, P,K., Seed, R., and Stokoe, K.H., Uquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshop on Evaluation of Uquefaction Resistance of Soils, ASCE, Journal of Geotechnlcal & Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, October, pp 817-833 â€¢ Zhang, G., Robertson. P.K., Brachman, R., 2002, Estimating Uquefaction 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 SFT and CFT, 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 Tesg- 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 Usheng, S., 2010, "Estimation of seismic compression in dry soils using the CPT" FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON RECENT ADVANCES IN GEOTECHNICADEARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND SOIL DYNAMICS,Symposium in honor of professor I. M. Idriss, 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 Determinisbc 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 1 F 1 APPENDIX F LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING Table of Contents Section 1.0 GENERAL 1.1 Intent 1.2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor 2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing 2.2 Processing 2.3 Overexcavation 2.4 Benching 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas 3.0 FILL MATERIAL 3.1 General 3.2 Oversize 3.3 Import 4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION 4.1 Fill Layers 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning 4.3 Compaction of Fill 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes 4.5 Compaction Testing 4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing 4.7 Compaction Test Locations 5.0 SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION 6.0 EXCAVATION 7.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS 7.1 Safety 7.2 Bedding & Backfill 7.3 Lift Thickness 7.4 Observation and Testing 3030.495 F-i mrn mmm -n -71 m m 71 -rl m 71 -n -77 -n 71 -Tl -rl -77 -T -n c,u,6,6,6,6,1 1 111 1 wwwWN N 42 - IrD 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 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3030.495 F-ij LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Spedfications 1.0 General 1.1 Intent These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading pian(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 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Spedfications 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 ofAreas 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 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Spedfications 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 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations ofprocessed 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 fi 11. 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 of fill 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 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 D1557-91). 4.3 Compaction ofFill 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 D 1557-91). 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 ofmaximum density per ASTM Test Method D1557-91. 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 filFbedrock 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 ifthese minimum standards are not met. F-5 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 Safety The Contractor shall follow all OSHA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. F-6 LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. General Earthwort 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 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 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 FLL SLOPE 'LANE 1:1 -- REMOVE UNSUITABI MATERIAL LBENCH HEIGHT (4 FEET TYPICAL) (HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL) MAXIMUM FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPROVEDGROUND EXISTING GROUND SURFACE - |,15 FEET MIN., |2 FEET MIN. 'LOWEST ' KEY BENCH DEPTH FLL-OVER-CUr SLOPE ACTED: E-> - (KEY) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE BENCH I (4 FEET TYPICAL) ,/2 FEET- --04 MIN. KE DEPTH |,15 FEET MIN., | ]' LOWESTBENCH Y (KEY) 4*--REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL CUT-OVER-Â·FLL SLOPE VVI FACE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT TO AUOW VIEWING // OF GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS t! AP EXISTING-UT FACE SHALL BE GROUND - 7 4/CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT PROJECTED PLANE- 1 TO 1 MAXIMUM N FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPROVED GROUND SURFACE */ r VERBUILD AND. UM BACK SIGN SLOPE-7%,IMPEll BENCH HEII (4 FEET TYPI REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL 1-135 FEET MIN, 1 2 FEET MIN=-' ' LOWEST ' KEY BENCH DEPTH (KEY) BENCHING SHALL BE DONE WHEN SLOPE'S ANGLE IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 5: 1. MINIMUM BENCH HEIGHT SHALL BE 4 FEET AND MINIMUM FILL WIDTH SHALL BE 9 FEET. KEYING AND BENCHING GENERAL EArrHWORK AND GRADING SPKIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS A Leighton -FINISH GRADE ----- MIN.- --- SLOPE FACE _---_VIX--=-__-_--V-------_ -24",mâ‚¬-Ln-Â¥E 16 MIN. _ COMPACTED AULTLTLTL71711' ----------- ----- - ---- -------- ---------- --- -- --OVE--7-E ------------------0-------- -.Il--- --.WINDROW. _ 21 JETTED OR FLOODED APPROVED SOIL 4 '7 0 Oversize rock is larger than 8 inches h largest dimension. â€¢ Backfil with approved soil jetted or flooded in place to fil all the voids. â€¢ Do not bury rock within 10 feetof finish grade. â€¢ Windrow of buried rock shall be parallel to the finished slope laoe. SECTION A-A' PROFILE ALONG WINDROW ---------- --- -- - --8 --P- ----____--___ JETTED OR FLOODED APPROVED SOIL OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS B Leighton NATURAL GROUND 123*M-pGIAL-- >DE-----Pcl->W TYPICAL BENCHING L-bl: REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL L- 4 - SUBDRAINr 1 (See Altemates A and B) SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A PERFORATED PIPE SURROUIWDED WITH FILTER MATERIAL FILTER MATEmAL (9FT Wr) FILTER MATERIAL FILTER MATERIAL SHALL BE CLASS 2 PERMEABLE M,JERIAL PER STATE OF CALIFURNIA STANDARD SPECIFICATION, OR APPROVED ALTERNATE. CLASS 2 GMDING AS FOUOWS: geâ€¢,e Uze Peromlt pa-*10 SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A-1 4MIN 4 PERFORATED MPE 6- 0 MIN. No. 200 SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A-2 SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE B DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINAL 3/4" GRAVEL WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC-r..."" 12" MIN. OVERLAP . FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI 140NC OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) --1'-' ALTERNATE B-1 3/4' MAX GRAVEL OR NOÂ»fERFORATED APPROVED ENNALENT ALTERNATE B-2 6'0 'CIM L (9FT3/m C PERFORATED PIPE IS OPTIONAL PER GOVERNING AGENCTS REQUIREMENTS 1 EILTER FRRIC {MmAFI l<ON OR 0 )04. Ma,m AppROMD ee[!VALS,T) PERFORATED 3/4- 0/94 GRADED GIUVE OR APPVOJED BNNMER ISHe GIADE r 1 T . CANYON SUBDRAIN GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPEOFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS C Leighton P:DIâ€¢fting\t-18*#dat*larmr*alns- 0/001 15' MIN. .. I . iN , 1 OUTLET PIPES 44 NON-PERFORATED PIPE, 100' MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY 30' MAX. O.C. VERTICALLY ,I /1 .1-- . -- 296MIN:___SX BACKCUT / / BENCHING - 'r-- a I. 4-J1'* If 296)UN. - I /3./0 /1 SUBDMIN ALTERNATE B 1 I.15' MIN. KEY DEPTH I KEY WIDTH 2' MIN. /MIN. 12" OVERLAP FROM THE TOP SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A POSrTIVE SEAL SHOULD BE PROVIDED AT THE JODIT OUTLET PIPE (NON-PERFORATED) FILTER FABRIC ..*0AjÂ° OR NUIVALEND CALTNS CLASS 2 FILTER MATERIAL OFT?/FT) OUTLET PIPE (NON-PBUORATED) \7-34 3/4' ROO< OFT.3/FT). WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC T-CONNECTION FROM COU-ECTION MPE TO OUTLET MI)E â€¢ SUBDRAIN IN5TAUATION - Subdraln collector pipe shall be Installed with perforations down or, unless otherwise designated by the geotechnical consultant Oudet pipes shall be non-perfonted pipe. The subdrain pipe shall have at least 8 perforations uniformly spaced per foot Petforation shall be 1/4" to 1/2" If drilled holes are used. All subdraln pipes shall have a gradient at least 296 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 Leighton P:or-o\templat\dâ€¢t,Mbuttre,Lripl-b.dwg moo) CUT-FILL TRANSnION LOT OVEREXCAVATION REMOVE UNSUITAELE -7 GROUND IM <-- / 'OVEREXCAVATE AtÂ«) RECOVECT # TYPICAL BENO{ING UNWEATHERED BEDROOC OR MATERIAL APPROVED BY THE GEOTEDI[ICAL CONSULTANT - SIDE HILL FILL FOR CUT PAD NATEIRAL GROUIO ---- RESTRICTED USEAREA r .... / / OVEREXCAVATE /O- FINISHED aIT PAD AND REDOWIT (REMACEMENT FILL),=--III-7--27 i<\NX\'0<\NOMA'J\Ir OVERBURDEN OR UNSUHABLE MATERIAL - - - -/1-2-->ej 1YPICA- BENCHII ' PAD OVERE)OCAVAT]ON AND REOOMPACTION SHALL BE PERFORMED IF SPECIFIED BY THE GEOTEGNICAL CONSULTANT 9' MIN. - SEE STANDARD DETAIL FOR SUBDRAINS WHEN REQUIRED BY ROTECHNICAL CONSUTANT - UNWEATHERED BEDROCX OR MATERIAL APPROVED BY THE GEOTEON[CAL CONSULTANT TRANSmON LOT FILLS AND SIDE HILL FILLS GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPEaFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS E Leighton P.f,Ing#70*#deabwe-odka,B 0/00) 1 1 1 1 1 G l 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Im,Iplant Inllpmati,n alloul Youp Geoloclinical Enginooping Report 1 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 Ape Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engi- neer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared sole/yfor the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it.And no one -notevenyou-should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific fac- tom when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: â€¢ not prepared for you, â€¢ not prepared for your project, â€¢ not prepared for the specific site explored, or â€¢ completed before important project changes were made. Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: â€¢ the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from 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, a/ways inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes-even minor ones-and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. Subsurface Conditions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the timethestudy wasperformed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineering reportwhose adequacy may have been affected by: the 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 fluctuations. A/ways contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional Opinions Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engi- neers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the 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 the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your report. Those recommendations are not #nal, because geotechnical engi- neers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform construction observation. A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to Misinterpretation Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geo- technical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review perti- nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation. Do Not Redraw tile Engineer's Logs Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should neverbe redrawn for 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 for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give con- tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, butpreface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contrac- tors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give contractors the best information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clients, 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 that have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations" many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsi- bilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks.Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenviron menta/study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contam\nants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures.If you have not yet obtained your own geoenvi- ronmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk manage- ment gu\dance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else. Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Moltl Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from growing on indoor surfaces. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose o\mold prevention, integrated into a com- prehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional mold prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moisture can lead to the development of severe mold infestations, a num- ber of mold prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces 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, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this project is not a mold prevention consultant,none of the services per- formed in connection with the geotechnical engineer's study were designed or conducted for the purpose of 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 Youp ASFE-Member Geotechnical Engineer for Additional Assistance Membership in ASFE/The Geoprofessional Business Association exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer with your ASFE-member geotechnical engineer for more information. ASFE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION THE GEOPROFESSIONAL 8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017 e-mail: info@aste.org www.asfe.org Copyright 2004 by ASFE, Inc. Duplication, reproduction, or copying ofthis document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited. except with ASFE's specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of ASFE, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of ASFE may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical engineering report Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being an ASFE member could be committing negligent or intentional (fraudulent) misrepresentation. lIGER01115.OMRP