9a. Technical Studies — Anaheim City Council, July 23, 2024 (part 1 of 25)

Exhibit A
Addendum to FEIR No. 331 Technical Studies
DEV 2020-00204
Preliminary Soils Report
Preliminary Drainage Report
Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan
Biological Resources Study
Traffic Impact Analysis
VMT Memo
Parking Demand Analysis
Phase I ESA
Water Study
Cultural Resources Study
Orange County Cemetery District
June 12, 2023

FINAL PRELIMINARY REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL

STUDIES AND REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY GRADING
PLAN FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2022-160,

GYPSUM CANYON CEMETERY SITE, CITY OF

ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and
Review of Preliminary Grading Plan for
Tentative Parcel Map 2022-160,
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site,
City of Anaheim, California
Prepared For

ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
June 12, 2023
GMU Project No. 20-108-03
1/23/2024, 4:27:51 PM
ANAH-TECH2022-01449
Victor Aguirre

TRANSMITTAL

ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
25751 Trabuco Road
Lake Forest, CA 92630
DATE: June 12, 2023
PROJECT: 20-108-03
ATTENTION: Mr. Tim Deutsch

SUBJECT: Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading Plan for Tentative Parcel Map 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, California DISTRIBUTION:

Addressee: electronic copy
RJM Design Group
Attn: Ms. Tamara McClory (electronic copy)
Mr. Larry Ryan (electronic copy)
Mr. Craig Sensenbach (electronic copy)
Huitt-Zollars, Inc.

Attn: Mr. Carl Taylor (electronic copy)
LSA
Attn: Ms. Deborah Pracilio (electronic copy)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Description Page
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 1 PURPOSE................................................................................................................................................. 1 SCOPE...................................................................................................................................................... 1 LOCATION.............................................................................................................................................. 2 SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................... 2 SITE GEOMORPHOLOGY .................................................................................................................... 2 SITE CONDITIONS AND EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS................................................................... 2 SITE HISTORY ....................................................................................................................................... 3 PLANNED GRADING ................................................................................................................................ 4 FUTURE PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS............................................................................................... 4 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS...................................................................................................... 5 GENERAL ............................................................................................................................................... 5 RECENT INVESTIGATION (GMU)...................................................................................................... 5 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS............................................................................................................. 5 LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM..................................................................................................... 6 RECENT LABORATORY TESTING..................................................................................................... 6 PREVIOUS LABORATORY TESTING................................................................................................. 6 HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTO REVIEW ................................................................................................. 7 GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS .............................................................................................................. 8 REGIONAL GEOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 8 GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS................................................................................................................... 8 Artificial Fill (Qaf)............................................................................................................................... 8 Landslide Debris (Qls1, Qls2, Qls3, and Qls4).................................................................................... 9 Alluvial Deposits (Qal and Qoal)....................................................................................................... 10 Slopewash Deposits (Qsw)................................................................................................................. 10 Vaqueros and Sespe Formation, Undifferentiated (Tvs).................................................................... 11 Santiago Formation (Tsa)................................................................................................................... 11 ANCIENT LANDSLIDES ..................................................................................................................... 11 GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE ................................................................................................................... 14 GROUNDWATER................................................................................................................................. 14 High Groundwater Analysis............................................................................................................... 14 Impact on Grading.............................................................................................................................. 15 EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS................................................................................................. 15 Rippability.......................................................................................................................................... 15 Oversized Materials............................................................................................................................ 15 SOIL AND ROCK MOISTURE CONDITIONS................................................................................... 16 Wet Soils............................................................................................................................................ 16 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ANALYSES AND FINDINGS....................................................... 17 SEISMIC HAZARDS............................................................................................................................. 17 Seismicity........................................................................................................................................... 17 Seismic Design Parameters................................................................................................................ 17 Liquefaction ....................................................................................................................................... 18 Earthquake-Induced Settlement ......................................................................................................... 20 Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 ii GMU Project 20-108-03
Lateral Spreading ............................................................................................................................... 21 SLOPE STABILITY .............................................................................................................................. 22 Overview............................................................................................................................................ 22 Cross Sections and Analytical Methods............................................................................................. 23 Groundwater....................................................................................................................................... 24 Shear Strength Model......................................................................................................................... 24 Slope Stability Results ....................................................................................................................... 26 Lateral Spreading and Seismic Deformation Analysis....................................................................... 27 Surficial Stability of Fill and Cut Slopes............................................................................................ 29 STATIC SETTLEMENT ....................................................................................................................... 29 SETTLEMENT SUMMARY................................................................................................................. 30 SOIL EXPANSION AND CORROSION .............................................................................................. 31 INFILTRATION CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................... 32 CONCLUSIONS......................................................................................................................................... 32 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................ 35 SITE PREPARATION AND REMEDIAL GRADING......................................................................... 35 General ............................................................................................................................................... 35 Clearing .............................................................................................................................................. 35 Remedial Grading .............................................................................................................................. 35 Ancient Landslide Mitigation............................................................................................................. 36 Removals............................................................................................................................................ 36 Keyways............................................................................................................................................. 38 Over-Excavation................................................................................................................................. 39 Daylight Cuts ..................................................................................................................................... 41 Temporary Excavations...................................................................................................................... 41 Processing .......................................................................................................................................... 41 FILL MATERIAL AND PLACEMENT................................................................................................ 42 Suitability ........................................................................................................................................... 42 Compaction Standard and Methodology............................................................................................ 42 Fill Slope Compaction........................................................................................................................ 43 Use of Oversize Rock or Broken Concrete ........................................................................................ 43 SUBDRAINS ......................................................................................................................................... 44 General ............................................................................................................................................... 44 Canyon Bottom Subdrains ................................................................................................................. 44 Keyway and Buttress Backdrains and Outlets ................................................................................... 44 SETTLEMENT MONITORING............................................................................................................ 45 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BRIDGE ASSESSMENT........................................................... 46 FUTURE UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS........................................................... 46 OPEN TRENCH EXCAVATIONS ....................................................................................................... 47 General ............................................................................................................................................... 47 Temporary Trench Excavations......................................................................................................... 47 STORM DRAIN CONSTRUCTION..................................................................................................... 47 General ............................................................................................................................................... 47 Pipe Bedding (Bedding and Shading)................................................................................................ 48 Trench Backfill................................................................................................................................... 48 CONCRETE........................................................................................................................................... 49 SURFACE DRAINAGE, EROSION CONTROL, AND SLOPE LANDSCAPING ............................ 49 Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 iii GMU Project 20-108-03
FUTURE MAINTENANCE, DRAINAGE, AND EROSION CONTROL........................................... 49 GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION AND TESTING DURING CONSTRUCTION......................... 49 FUTURE INVESTIGATION, ANALYSES, AND REPORTS............................................................. 50 LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 50 CLOSURE .................................................................................................................................................. 51 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................... 52 PLATES
PLATE 1 LOCATION MAP
PLATE 2.1 GEOTECHNICAL MAP
PLATE 2.2 SEISMIC HAZARD MAP
PLATES 3.1 -3.3 GEOTECHNICAL CROSS SECTIONS
PLATE 4 TYPICAL BENCHING AND KEYWAY
PLATE 5 TYPICAL CANYON OR KEYWAY BACKDRAIN
PLATE 6 TYPICAL BUTTRESS OR STABILIZATION FILL
PLATE 7 TYPICAL BACKDRAIN TYPE SUBDRAIN
PLATE 8 SUBDRAIN OUTLET DETAIL
PLATE 9 NEAR SURFACE SETTLEMENT MONITORING POINT

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION PROCEDURE AND LOGS
APPENDIX A-1 RECENT INVESTIGATION BY GMU GEOTECHNICAL
APPENDIX A-2 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS BY GMU GEOTECHNICAL APPENDIX A-3 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS BY OTHERS

APPENDIX B GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS APPENDIX B-1 RECENT LABORATORY DATA BY GMU GEOTECHNICAL APPENDIX B-2 PREVIOUS LABORATORY DATA BY GMU GEOTECHNICAL APPENDIX B-3 PREVIOUS LABORATORY DATA BY OTHERS

APPENDIX C LIQUEFACTION ANALYSES
APPENDIX C-1 LIQUIFACTION ANALYSES ON ALL RELEVANT CPT’s APPENDIX C-2 SELECT DRILL HOLES AND CPT’S FOR LATERAL SPREADING ANALYSIS

APPENDIX D SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS
APPENDIX D-1 DESIGN SHEAR STRENGTHS
APPENDIX D-2 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES

APPENDIX E LATERAL SPREADING AND SEISMIC DEFORMATION ANALYSES APPENDIX E-1 Ky ANALYSES FOR SEISMIC DEFORMATION ANALYSES APPENDIX E-2 SEISMIC DEFORMATION ANALYSES

INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE
This Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading Plan for Tentative Parcel Map 2022-160 is prepared for Orange County Cemetery District’s Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Project. The purpose of this report is to document the geotechnical studies performed to date and our review of the reference (1) preliminary grading plan. This final report incorporates our responses to City of Anaheim’s (City) review comments (references (3) and (4)) and therefore supersedes our previous reference (2) report. The reference (5) City review sheet conditionally approves our reference (2) report and reference (3) and (4) responses.

SCOPE
To date, GMU’s studies have included the following:

1. Compiled and reviewed available geotechnical data, including published geologic maps, seismic hazard maps, aerial photographs, and subsurface data from previous geotechnical investigations in the area. Various stages of subsurface exploration have occurred at the site since 1989.

2. Performed recent additional geologic mapping, subsurface exploration, and laboratory testing for Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site in support of the current land planning and earthwork design effort.

3. Prepared geotechnical maps and cross sections based on available geotechnical data.

4. Conducted geotechnical analyses to evaluate the planned mass grading, which focused on liquefaction, slope stability, lateral spreading, settlement, and remedial grading.

5. Performed preliminary analysis with respect to the future Gypsum Canyon bridge foundation design.

6. Prepared this report that summarizes the results of our geotechnical studies as well as previous studies conducted by others for Gypsum Canyon, and documents our review of the preliminary grading shown on the reference (1) plan.

LOCATION
Orange County Cemetery District’s planned Gypsum Canyon Cemetery is located south of California State Route 91 and east of California Highway 241 (Eastern Transportation Corridor) within the City of Anaheim, California. A Location Map showing the project site is included as Plate 1.

SITE DESCRIPTION
The planned Gypsum Canyon Cemetery site is currently a vacant parcel of land in the northeast region of Orange County. The parcel of land is approximately 291 acres in size located east of Gypsum Canyon. The western region of the site is comprised of the major north-trending Gypsum Canyon drainage with a smaller westerly trending tributary canyon in the southern region of the site. The site is bounded to the east and south by undeveloped land.

SITE GEOMORPHOLOGY
The subject site’s geomorphology generally entails gradually sloping topography from east to west (Plate 2.1 – Geotechnical Map). The north-trending Gypsum Canyon drainage in the western region of the site is the lowest elevation of the site which drains north into the Santa Ana River.

The site topography gradually ascends from Gypsum Canyon drainage in the western region and California State Route 91 in the northern region towards the southeast. The northern region of the site ascends towards an easterly trending appendage ridgeline in the central/eastern region of the site. This appendage ridgeline ascends towards the eastern project limits (towards the main northerly ridgeline) and provides the highest elevations within the site. North of this easterly trending ridgeline, the topography displays a bowl-like shape as it descends to the north; south of this easterly trending ridgeline, the topography descends to an unnatural plateau at the base of several tributary drainages. The southwestern region of the site ascends toward this plateau. The plateau gradually descends to the southern project limits.

SITE CONDITIONS AND EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS
The majority of the site consists of vacant undeveloped land; however, there are existing improvements located within the project limits. A segment of the Questar natural gas pipeline transects the southern region of the site. The pipeline is 16 inches in diameter and has a general east to west alignment. The current easement for the pipeline is 50 feet wide. This segment of the Questar pipeline will need to be relocated prior to grading in the southern portion of the site.

SITE HISTORY
Starting in the 1950’s, the site was used as a source of sand and gravel that was extracted by surface mining operations by Robertson’s Ready Mix. Approximately 40 years after the surface mine was established, the southeasterly area of the site was used as an asphalt batch plant by All American Asphalt Company. These companies operated under an extraction license agreement with The Irvine Company. This license agreement was terminated in 2004.

Surface mining and batch plant operations significantly altered the natural topography. Prior to the surface mining operations, the site consisted of a series north-northwesterly trending ridgelines.

These ridgelines previously reached elevations of 900 to 940 feet above mean sea level (msl; USGS, 1954). Today, the area of this previous topographic high has an approximate elevation of 600 to 640 feet above msl, indicating a 300-foot vertical reduction. Topographic reduction of a lesser scale occurred throughout portions of the site.

In 2002, a large landslide was activated in the northeast region of the site during mining operations.

Portions of the landslide were removed and replaced with observed, but untested, fill to stabilize further movement of the landslide mass. Portions of the landslide mass were left in-place. Between 2004 and 2009, additional grading occurred at the site placing artificial fill within mining pits and restoring the site to either a level or gently sloping topography. Current elevations across the site range from approximately 400 feet msl in the northwest region of the site to approximately 850 feet above msl in the eastern region of the site.

After site reclamation, Irvine Community Development Company (ICDC) planned a large residential development called Mountain Park which was to include development of the previous mining site. Development plans for Mountain Park were terminated and the land was dedicated to the County of Orange for open space in 2014. Current plans are to use the open space as public and veterans’ cemetery sites.

PLANNED GRADING
The preliminary grading shown on the reference (1) plan shows mass grading the existing vacant parcel of land in order to create two large, contoured pad areas for cemetery development. We understand the lower pad will be for a public cemetery for Orange County, while the upper pad will serve as a California Veteran’s (Cal-Vet) cemetery site.

The proposed preliminary grading has been provided to GMU by Huitt-Zollars, Inc., and a composite of this plan was utilized as the base map for our Geotechnical Map included as Plate 2.1.

In general, the preliminary grading creates the following:
• Two large contour pads (i.e., lower and upper sites) separated by a 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) north-northeasterly trending slope with a maximum height of 175 feet. The majority of the upper pad will be divided into 2 levels by a 2:1 north to northeasterly trending slope with a maximum height of 19 feet. The mass graded pads surface drain from 1% to 7% with all pads ultimately draining to the south towards the perimeter access road where future storm drain improvements will be located.
• A site access road along the southwesterly and southerly perimeter of the site adjacent to the Gypsum Canyon drainage.
• A secondary access road in the south-central portion of the project site. • Bridge abutments for the future bridge that spans the Gypsum Canyon drainage to connect Gypsum Canyon Road to the planned site access road.

The maximum depth of design cut and fill are about 147 feet and 102 feet, respectively. The highest 2:1 cut slope is about 200 feet as shown on Cross Section 3-3’ (Plates 2.1 and 3.1). The highest fill slope is about 182 feet as shown on Cross Section 3-3’ (Plates 2.1 and 3.1).

FUTURE PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
Based on the reference (8) overall site plan by RJM Design Group, most of the lower site (i.e., public cemetery) will be developed as a park-like setting consisting of softscape with minor areas of hardscape and roads, monument structures, crypt burial structures, a maintenance building, an administration building, and supporting utilities. Design recommendations for these lower site structures and improvements are not a part of this report and will be provided at a later date. Currently there is no site development plan for the future Cal-Vet 100-acre upper pad site.

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS

GENERAL
GMU conducted geologic field mapping to supplement and refine previous investigations conducted at the site. Subsurface exploration completed to date has consisted of hollow stem auger drill holes, bucket auger drill holes, rock core drill holes, dual rotary drill holes, Cone Penetration Test (CPT) soundings, and backhoe/excavator test pits. The Geotechnical Map (Plate 2.1) illustrates geologic contacts and shows locations of all pertinent borings and test pits performed to date within and immediately adjacent to the subject area.

Portions of the site are located within zones of required investigation for liquefaction as indicated on the Seismic Hazard Zone Map for the Black Star Quadrangle (CDMG, 2001). The proposed site grading is overlain on the Seismic Hazard Map on Plate 2.2. Subsurface exploration and studies have been performed in accordance with the guidelines outlined by California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG).

RECENT INVESTIGATION (GMU)
GMU’s recent investigations (GMU Project Nos. 20-108-01 and 20-108-03) were focused on collecting data for geotechnical design in support of grading plans for the planned Gypsum Canyon Cemetery and bridge. Our recent investigations consisted of 5 drill holes, completed using a hollow stem auger drill rig and bucket auger drill rig, and 15 new test pits completed using a backhoe.

Each of the borings and test pits were sampled and logged either by, or under the supervision of, a Certified Engineering Geologist (CEG). Boring and test pit locations are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 2.1) and the logs are contained in Appendix A-1.

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS
Numerous site investigations have been performed at the site since 1989: GeoSoils, Inc. (GSI) in 1989, 1990, and 2003; CHJ, Inc. in 2003; and Leighton Consulting Group (LCG) in 2006 and 2019. Overall, the field investigations consisted of the following:
• 53 bucket auger borings
• 35 hollow-stem borings
• 22 CPT’s
• 5 rock cores
• 4 core borings
• 46 test pits
• 5 seismic refraction lines, 1 refraction microtremor (ReMi) profile, and 2 electrical resistivity (Sting) lines
Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 6 GMU Project 20-108-03
Investigation locations performed by others are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 2.1), and boring logs, test pit logs, and seismic refraction data are included in Appendix A-2.

LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM
Laboratory test results (recent and previous) are presented in Appendix B of this report. Recent test results by GMU are presented in Appendix B-1.

RECENT LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory testing was performed by GMU on bulk and undisturbed samples collected during our field investigations. Testing was performed on soil and bedrock samples, and included the following tests:
• Moisture and density
• Maximum density
• Sieve and hydrometer
• Atterberg limits
• Expansion index
• Corrosion (pH, resistivity, chlorides, soluble, sulfates) • Direct shear tests

PREVIOUS LABORATORY TESTING
GMU also compiled pertinent laboratory testing data from previous investigations by others previously listed. Compiled previous laboratory tests include:
• Moisture and density
• Maximum density
• Sieve and hydrometer
• Atterberg limits
• Expansion index
• Corrosion (pH, resistivity, chlorides, soluble, sulfates) • Direct shear tests
• Consolidated undrained triaxial shear tests
• Consolidation
• Swell/Settlement
• Sand equivalent
• Unconfined compressive strength

HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTO REVIEW
An aerial photo review was performed for the site in order to assess historical land use and geological features. GMU analyzed available stereo-paired air photos and online historic aerial photographs (historicaerials.com) spanning from the 1930’s through 2018.

The aerial photos revealed the site remained natural until the mid-1950’s. By 1959, sand mining began in the western region of the site by Robertson’s Ready Mix. In 1959, surface mining is occurring in the southern portion of the western region. Belt feeders have been constructed in the central portion of the western region and settling ponds have been excavated in the southern portion of the western region. Between 1963 and 1972, the mining operation expands toward the eastern region of the site. By 1980, the sand mining operation occupies a majority of the site with a majority of the excavation occurring in the northern portion of the site. By 1992, the southern region of the site becomes occupied by an asphalt batch plant. Between 1992 and 2002, mining operations greatly alters the topography of the northern region of the site. In 2002, a large landslide is activated in the northeast region of the site during mining operations. Both mining and asphalt operations cease in 2004, and by 2005, all site structures appear to have been removed from the site. By 2009, site grading restores the site to gently sloping topography and the parcel remains vacant to present day with only minor dirt road alterations.

Table 1. Aerial Photo References
Date Flight # Negative #
12-12-1952 3K 87-88 (E)
12-12-1952 3K 24-25 (W)
3-28-1959 261-6-24 189-190-191 (W)
3-28-1959 261-7-25 13 (E)
3-30-1967 2 114-115 (E)
3-30-1967 2 74-75 (W)
1-30-1970 60-4 102-103-104
10-29-1973 132-10 3-4-5
1-13-1975 157-11 5-6-7
1-24-1977 181-11 6-7
12-13-1978 203-11 6-7-8
12-13-1978 203-12 8-10-11
2-25-1980 80033 31-32-33
1-31-1981 211-11 4-5-6
4-2-1983 218-11 8-9
12-30-1986 F 109-110-111 (E)
1-9-1987 F 22-228 (W)
1-13-1989 Y, LINDA-1 3-4-5
Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 8 GMU Project 20-108-03
Date Flight # Negative #
6-12-1990 C84-14 23-24-25
6-9-1993 C93-15 114-115-116
2-29-1995 C103-33 231-232-233
10-16-1997 C118-33 144-145-146-147
2-23-1999 C133-33 229-230-231

GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS

REGIONAL GEOLOGY
The project is located within the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province of California. The Peninsular Ranges Province is characterized by northwest-trending ranges and valleys sub-parallel to faults branching from the San Andreas. More specifically, the site resides within the northern extent of the Santa Ana Mountains on the western side of the Elsinore Fault Zone. The Santa Ana Mountains are underlain by pre-Cretaceous metasedimentary and metavolcanic rock and Cretaceous plutonic rocks. These rocks are overlain by Tertiary sedimentary rocks comprised of sandstones, siltstones, claystones, and conglomerates with localized volcanic units. No active faults have been mapped within the subject site. The site is not within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.

GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS
The soil and rock materials underlying the site are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 2.1), and the predominant geologic formations are described below.

Artificial Fill (Qaf)
Artificial fill was encountered throughout the project site and is associated with the previous mining operations, grading associated with stabilizing the man-induced landslide that occurred in 2002, and land reclamation that occurred at the site after mining operations were ceased. These fills are expected to be variable in depth across the site and range from less than 5 feet deep to upwards of 120 feet. The deepest fills are located in the southeastern portion of the site in the vicinity of an old drainage course and overlie alluvium.

Where encountered, the artificial fill consists of clay and silt from washing operations, clayey sands, and silty sands with varying amounts of gravels, cobbles, and boulders. The artificial fill materials generally range from medium dense to very dense and have variable moisture contents ranging from dry to locally saturated. Man-made debris (concrete wash-out deposits, rebar, metal and concrete piping, etc.) were also observed during subsurface investigations. Blow counts, Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 9 GMU Project 20-108-03
in-situ densities, and consolidation testing indicate that the fills have been significantly densified during placement. Zones of saturation were observed during previous investigations. The boring and test pit logs in Appendices A-1 and A-2 contain detailed descriptions of the artificial fill.

Based on observations made during our recent exploration, review of previous exploration logs by others, and laboratory test results, we consider the underlying artificial fill materials to be left in-place suitable for support of the planned grading and cemetery development (provided the recommendations contained in this report are followed) for the following reasons:
• In-situ densities and blow counts of the existing fills below a general depth of 10 feet indicate these fill materials have been densified during placement and are adequate to support the planned grading and cemetery development.
• Consolidation testing data (contained in Appendix B) indicates the existing fill has a low potential of settlement with regards to hydro-collapse. • Moisture contents of the fill materials below an approximate depth of 10 feet are generally near or above optimum moisture content, which supports the low hydro-collapse potential. • No concentration of trash, organic matter, or decomposable debris was observed.

However, there is a potential for consolidation settlement of the existing fill in areas where significant loading of new fill over thick deposits of the existing fill and/or alluvium will occur.

Therefore, where these conditions occur, settlement monitoring will be required as discussed in the “Recommendations” section of this report (Page 35).

Landslide Debris (Qls1, Qls2, Qls3, and Qls4)
Both recent landslide materials (Qls1) and ancient landslide materials (Qls2, Qls3, and Qls4) are mapped within or adjacent to the site as shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 2.1). Ancient landslide materials Qls2 and Qls3 are both located east of and adjacent to the subject site. Ancient landslide materials Qls4 are located well beyond the project limits on the western side of Gypsum Canyon. Where observed, the ancient landslide materials are derived from the Vaqueros and Sespe Formation, undifferentiated, and are composed of clayey silts and sands.

The recent landslide materials (Qls1) activated in late 2002 during mining operations is located within the northeast region of the site. The recent landslide materials (Qls1) are also derived from the Vaqueros and Sespe Formation, undifferentiated. Where observed, these materials are composed of sandy silts and sandy clays and are generally reddish brown, dry to damp, and soft to very dense. At times, these materials have been observed to contain perched groundwater. Buttress keyways with back/sub-drainage will be required to provide adequate safety factors and cut off perched groundwater flow.

Alluvial Deposits (Qal and Qoal)
Surficial alluvium and older alluvium are discussed together due to the gradational nature of the geologic contacts between these units. These soil materials are present within Gypsum Canyon and associated tributary canyons and reside below the proposed bridge and embankment alignment. The older alluvium is present at higher elevations and is above the active channel of Gypsum Canyon. Alluvium ranging in thickness from a few feet to greater than 75 feet is present within and adjacent to the westerly and southwesterly portion of the site. Older alluvium materials predominantly reside below artificial fill materials within the western and southern regions of the site.

The alluvial deposits are typically comprised of mixtures of sand, silty sand, clayey sand, gravelly sand, sandy gravel, and clays with various amounts of cobbles and boulders. These materials can be generally characterized as gray to brown, dry to wet, and medium dense to very dense with some loose soils near the ground surface. The alluvial soils have been deposited by a large watershed that has the potential for high flow volumes/rates, and contain cobbles and boulders that are comprised of very hard rock materials (granitic and volcanic rocks) that have been transported from higher in the watershed. The cobbles and boulders will be encountered during earthwork operations and possibly bridge construction.

Portions of the alluvial soils near Gypsum Canyon are located within a zone of required investigation for liquefaction, as indicated on the Seismic Hazard Zone Map for the Black Star Canyon Quadrangle (CDMG, 2001). Potential liquefaction is discussed in more detail in a subsequent section of this report.

Based on the nature of the majority of the alluvial soil materials to be left in-place and consolidation testing data (contained within Appendix B), which indicates the underlying alluvial soils have a low potential of settlement with regards to hydro-collapse, we consider the alluvial soils underlying new fill areas to be suitable to support the planned grading and cemetery development, provided the recommendations contained in this report are followed. However, as previously discussed, consolidation settlement of the existing fill in areas where significant loading of new fill over thick deposits of the existing fill and/or alluvium will require settlement monitoring as discussed in the “Recommendations” section of this report (Page 35).

Slopewash Deposits (Qsw)
Slopewash deposits (Qsw) are typically found on the flanks of hillsides and within the bottom of smaller ravines. These grade into the alluvial sediments found near the larger tributary canyons and Gypsum Canyon.

The natural slopes within the subject site are typically covered with a 2- to 3-foot-thick mantle of slopewash/colluvium materials. These materials were observed to be typically porous, with desiccation cracks and gypsum stringers. Slopewash materials are generally considered unsuitable for support of the proposed grading as they are potentially highly expansive and compressible.

Therefore, variable depth removals will be required in the slopewash prior to fill placement.

Vaqueros and Sespe Formation, Undifferentiated (Tvs)
Undifferentiated Vaqueros and Sespe Formation bedrock underlies the subject site. This bedrock formation primarily consists of moderately to well-cemented, poorly bedded to massive, fine- to coarse-grained sandstone and clayey sandstone. The sandstone is locally interbedded with claystone, siltstone, and basal conglomerate. These materials are typically dry to moist and moderately hard to very hard with various amounts of cobbles and boulders. Excavations within the conglomerate beds and hard sandstone beds are expected to generate oversize materials (i.e., greater than 12 inches in diameter) that require special handling during excavation and fill placement.

Santiago Formation (Tsa)
Santiago Formation bedrock is mapped northeast adjacent to the subject site. This bedrock formation primarily consists of moderately cemented, poorly bedded to massive, fine- to mediumgrained sandstone. The sandstone is locally interbedded with coarse sandstone and lesser amounts of sandy siltstone, siltstone, rarer clayey siltstone with a basal conglomerate. These materials are typically damp (i.e., below optimum moisture content) and moderately hard to hard.

ANCIENT LANDSLIDES
The previous section of this report discusses the presence of recent (Qls1) and ancient (Qls2, Qls3, and Qls4) landslide materials which are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 2.1). CHJ (2003) interpreted the recent landslide mass (Qls1) as a reactivation of a larger ancient landslide which encompasses a majority of the subject site. To address this interpretation of the underlying geology of the site, we conducted an extensive review of the available site data which is summarized below:

Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 12 GMU Project 20-108-03
Aerial photograph review was conducted on photographs spanning from the 1930’s through 2018 with a focus on the aerial photograph captured in 1952. Our conclusion of the aerial photograph analysis is that there is no surficial indication of a larger ancient landslide that encompasses the site. Our aerial photograph analysis conclusion is based on the following:
• Geomorphologic characteristics in the 1952 aerial photograph in the southern/central region of the project limits display characteristics that do resemble an ancient landslide crest, however, the feature lacks true crest and saddle characteristics. • Ridgelines within suggested landslide debris zone north of the crest-like feature exhibit similar elevations to the ridgeline south of the crest-like feature. If the feature was an ancient landslide, the debris zone would likely display lower elevations rather than elevations near what would be the headscarp area.
• The suggested landslide debris zone north (down dip) of the crest-like feature does not display hummocky characteristics typical of a large landslide mass. • The steeply incised erosional features within the suggested landslide mass north (down dip) of the crest-like feature suggest the material to be very hard/resistant which is typically not characteristic of landslide debris derived from the Vaqueros-Sespe Formation. GMU’s experience with landslide debris derived from the Vaqueros-Sespe Formation is that these materials are highly fractured and broken up with the absence of steeply incised drainages.

Subsequent to CHJ’s 2003 report, site investigations were conducted by Leighton and Associates, Inc. (2006), Leighton Consulting, Inc. (2019), and GMU (2022). These more recent and thorough investigations acquired additional data and did not observe evidence that would indicate the recent landslide (Qls1) was a reactivation of a larger ancient landslide. In addition, CHJ’s boring B-1 drilled to a depth of 270 feet did not indicate that a deep ancient landslide was present.

A thorough review of CHJ’s (2003) report, interpretations, and conclusions was conducted. Our thoughts on CHJ’s report are summarized below:
• CHJ’s investigation included surface logging of spoils which were produced while drilling with an Ingersoll-Rand TH-100 dual wall reverse circulation drill rig with a

5.5-inch tricone bit and a Texoma 900 drill rig with a 24-inch flight auger. These are not effective drilling methods to identify landside characteristics. • CHJ’s geologic map, cross sections, and boring logs characterize all material encountered as Vaqueros-Sespe Formation without distinguishing recent or ancient landslide debris.

Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 13 GMU Project 20-108-03
• CHJ’s geologic map provides an attitude for bedding, and the location of the attitude on their map suggests the information was collected within the area they interpret to be an ancient landslide mass. However, the orientation is consistent with the bedding orientation that was observed below and outside the failure surface throughout the site. • CHJ’s boring logs call out depth of the recent slide plane and depth of a suspected slide plane without describing geologic observations or data used in interpreting the feature. • CHJ’s slope inclinometer exhibit displays a single plot between the dates of 11/27/02 and 12/6/02, The text suggests this inclinometer data was used to identify the rupture surface for the adjacent boring logs (B-2, B-3, B-4). We do not disagree with the depth of the recent rupture surface as indicated by the slope inclinometer at B-1, however, we do not believe there is substantial evidence to project this surface along apparent dip to intersect borings B-2, B-3, and B-4. Leighton and Associates, Inc. (2006) conducted a boring (HS-14) near CHJ’s B-2 and did not identify recent or ancient landslide debris. • CHJ describes “previously sheared clays” and the sheared/disturbed character of the Vaqueros-Sespe Formation within the text of the report; however, they do not provide evidence or documentation of observations to support this characterization.

Specifically, none of the CHJ boring logs state that “previously sheared clays” were observed. Also, the drilling methods used by CHJ would not provide evidence to indicate whether the clays had been previously sheared.

CHJ (2003) characterized the active landslide mass conditions at the time of their investigation as the following: “the landslide had broken into several separate slide masses moving semiindependently in different directions and at different rates.” CHJ assumed “the possibility that the slide may be occurring along various slip surfaces within a relatively thick shear zone.” This is just an assumption and possibility posed by CHJ. We do not believe a pre-existing thick shear zone existed, but rather that the slide initially failed along a lower strength claystone bed (red bed) of the Vaqueros-Sespe Formation near the toe that was undermined by mining operations at the site.

After this initial failure, masses or blocks upslope began failing obliquely to dip, filling in space created by the initial failure. This scenario represents a progressive failure along adversely oriented and unsupported claystone beds. We believe this explains why the rupture surface that we observed is along dip near the toe and oblique to dip closer to the crest. This would also explain CHJ’s observation of various masses moving semi-independently at different rates within the landslide mass.

In conclusion, our detailed analyses of all the data indicate that a large deep-seated landslide does not exist below the site. However, at the City Reviewer’s request, bedrock was modeled to reflect the possibility of an ancient landslide beneath the site until additional exploration can be conducted. Our shear strength modeling is discussed in the “Geotechnical Engineering Analyses and Findings” section of this report (Page 17).

GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE
Regional geologic structure near the site is predominately controlled by faulting and uplift during regional mountain building processes. The site is characterized by a mostly homoclinal sequence of generally westerly dipping strata within the Vaqueros and Sespe Formation. The Vaqueros and Sespe Formation is predominantly massive, with strata bounded by poorly to well-defined changes in rock type (i.e., sandstone vs. claystone). Clay seam and/or landslide rupture surfaces observed generally trend parallel to bedding. As shown on our Geotechnical Sections (Plates 3.1 through

3.3), planned cut slopes in the eastern region of the site will contain adversely dipping sandstone and siltstone beds. Localized folding and faulting of strata is present on the eastern margin of the site that is associated with the mapped shear zone shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 2.1).

GROUNDWATER
In previous investigations, surface water was observed within the detention basins located across the site, perched groundwater was encountered within borings and test pits across the site, and groundwater was encountered in the borings within the Gypsum Canyon drainage. Groundwater, when encountered within the Gypsum Canyon drainage, varied in depth over the years (1989- 2022) from approximately 19 to 70 feet below ground surface (bgs).

During our recent investigation, groundwater was only encountered within DH-4, which is located east adjacent to the Gypsum Canyon drainage near the proposed bridge eastern abutment. At the time of our investigation, groundwater was at 44 feet bgs. Variations in perched groundwater and groundwater depths between previous and recent investigations indicate that groundwater elevation is seasonally controlled and highly variable. Groundwater within the subject area may be higher during wetter than normal winters as controlled by the Gypsum Canyon watershed and discussed in the following “High Groundwater Analysis” section. Inversely, groundwater elevation may be lower (on the order of tens of feet) during drier years.

High Groundwater Analysis
Historic high groundwater within the Gypsum Canyon drainage, as shown on the referenced Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Black Star Canyon Quadrangle (CDMG, 2001), is at 40 feet bgs. As static groundwater was encountered in previous investigations at depths ranging from 19 to 70 feet bgs over a 30-year timeframe (i.e., from 1989 to 2021), high groundwater for the purpose of our liquefaction and lateral spreading analysis was conservatively assumed to be at the shallowest groundwater elevation encountered during previous investigations, or at a groundwater elevation of 40 feet bgs, whichever was shallower, within and near the Gypsum Canyon drainage.

A hypothetical 10-foot rise in groundwater was also used to evaluate the influence a potential significant rise in groundwater (i.e., due to future landscaping water, etc.) would have on earthquake-induced settlement. However, we do not believe that this extremely conservative rise Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 15 GMU Project 20-108-03
in groundwater is possible due to the geomorphologic characteristics of the site. Groundwater base level within Gypsum Canyon is controlled by the Santa Ana River. Water introduced to the site would drain to the Santa Ana River prior to contributing to an increased influx in the water table.

Impact on Grading
Perched groundwater should be expected to be encountered during remedial grading and mass excavation grading within portions of the site (i.e., central-eastern region of upper pad and southerly-westerly area of lower pad). Dewatering, top-loading, and/or handling of wet soils may be needed in order to complete the remedial and design grading within these areas. The need for dewatering, top-loading, and/or handling of wet soils will be dependent on the time of year grading will be performed, climatic changes, and contractor logistics.

Our preliminary design for the bridge foundation will consist of spread footings with a structural slab approach. Therefore, it is not expected that groundwater will be encountered in the western region of the site, adjacent to the Gypsum Canyon drainage, during future bridge construction.

However, if deep foundations are constructed for the bridge, then dewatering measures will be required.

EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS
Rippability
Design cuts for the subject mass grading are proposed up to 147 feet deep from existing surface within bedrock of the Vaqueros/Sespe Formation. GMU’s drilling in the Vaqueros/Sespe Formation with an EZ-Bore bucket auger drill rig was slow but successful to depths of about 100 feet within the planned grading area. In previous studies, seismic refraction studies and drilling to depths up to 170 feet using an EZ-Bore bucket auger or equivalent drill rig were performed. The information and data collected at the site during both ours and previous explorations indicate the bedrock materials are rippable. However, the deeper bedrock cuts (i.e., greater than 40 feet) and/or shallower cuts in conglomerate or sandstone bedrock materials are anticipated to be moderately hard to very hard and therefore require heavy ripping with a D10 dozer or equivalent. In addition, oversize rock materials should be expected when heavy ripping in bedrock materials is required.

Oversized Materials
Existing Artificial Fill: Excavations within the artificial fill materials are expected to encounter oversize hard rock materials (i.e., cobbles and boulders of possibly greater than 18 inches in diameter derived from the conglomeratic beds of the Vaqueros/Sespe Formation during the previous mining operations). In addition, asphalt and concrete pieces, some possibly greater than 24 inches in dimension, which were generated from previous concrete and asphalt plants at the site, may also be encountered. These oversized materials will make excavation within the existing Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 16 GMU Project 20-108-03
artificial fill more difficult and is expected to require special handling for removal and placement in the fill (i.e., use of a rock bucket, rock rake, rock trucks, etc.).

Bedrock: Cuts in the Vaqueros/Sespe Formation bedrock materials (i.e., conglomerate, siltstone, and claystone) are expected to generate oversize rock fragments. Hard boulders of greater than 12 inches in diameter are expected within the conglomerate beds. Oversize rock within the siltstone and claystone rock materials is expected but may be able to be broken down prior to placement within engineered fill.

All oversized rock materials may be broken down to less than 12 inches in diameter or placed in the fill as discussed in our “Recommendations” section of this report (Page 35).

SOIL AND ROCK MOISTURE CONDITIONS
Observation of the on-site soils, in addition to the moisture and density data included in Appendix B, indicate that the soils that will be encountered during grading have variable moisture contents. Soil materials derived from the Vaqueros/Sespe Formation and shallow slopewash/alluvial soils are often below optimum moisture content. Wetting and thorough mixing/blending will therefore be required during grading to achieve proper moisture and compaction requirements. Wet soils in the artificial fill and landslide debris materials discussed above may require drying to reach the necessary compaction. The required amount of wetting, drying, and/or mixing/blending is also dependent on seasonal precipitation, time of year that grading is performed, and the contractor’s grading logistics.

Wet Soils
As discussed above, remedial grading will include removal and recompaction of some locally saturated soils throughout the site. In addition, deeper cuts in the central/easterly area may encounter perched groundwater.

Although dewatering is not anticipated (except possibly during foundation construction for the future Gypsum Canyon Bridge), portions of the existing artificial fill and alluvial soils could potentially be well above optimum moisture content (i.e., at or near saturation) depending on the season when grading occurs (i.e., grading during the winter/rainy season). Grading in these wet soils will require increased effort by the grading contractor in order to effectively load the material into earthmoving equipment and dry the soils to compactable moisture ranges prior to placement as engineered fill. Top loading of wet soils may be required depending on the time of year grading occurs and contractor’s excavation means and methods.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ANALYSES AND FINDINGS

SEISMIC HAZARDS
Seismicity
The site is not within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no active faults are known to exist within the site. However, localized folding and faulting of strata is present on the eastern margin of the site that is associated with the mapped shear zone shown on the Geotechnical Map – Plate 2.1, and the site is located in the seismically active region of southern California. The Elsinore Fault zone is adjacent to the eastern margin of the site and the Chino Fault zone is located about 4 miles from the site.

Seismic Design Parameters
For the proposed bridge and roadway analysis, a site-specific probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) was performed utilizing Caltrans ARS Online program (version 3.0.2) to evaluate the likelihood of various ground motion levels at the site as reflected in peak horizontal ground acceleration (PHGA) and acceleration response spectra (ARS).

Coordinates of N33.8643oand W117.7095o were utilized for evaluation of the ARS. An average shear-wave velocity for the upper 100 feet (VS30) was estimated to be 237 m/s near the proposed bridge and roadway for the alluvial deposits over bedrock based on the shear wave velocity measurements at CPT-4A, CPT-9, CPT-15, B-35 (GSI 1998), and DH-4 (GMU 2021).

The results of the hazard de-aggregation indicated that the total hazard for the Design Earthquake, as defined by Caltrans, was primarily dominated by earthquakes with a mean magnitude of 6.6 with an approximate distance of 9 miles. PGHA of 0.64g with a magnitude of 6.6 was used in our liquefaction and lateral spreading analyses for the bridge and proposed western roadway.

Table 2 (next page) provides the Caltrans design acceleration response spectra for designing the proposed bridge and roadway structures.

0.1 1.06

0.2 1.45

0.3 1.62

0.5 1.57

0.75 1.40

1.0 1.27

2.0 0.65

3.0 0.41

4.0 0.28

5.0 0.20
Seismic design coefficients based on ASCE 7-16 and 2022 CBC will be provided in a future design report for design of future proposed buildings and associated cemetery site improvements.

Liquefaction
Soil liquefaction results from loss of strength during cyclic loading, such as imposed by earthquakes. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are loose to moderately dense, saturated granular soils with poor drainage, such as silty sands or sands and gravels capped by or containing seams of impermeable sediment or non-plastic fine-grained soils. Liquefaction evaluation procedures are presented by Youd and Idriss, et al. (1997 and 2001) and Idriss and Boulanger (2008).

When seismic ground shaking occurs, the soil is subjected to cyclic shear stresses that can cause increased pore-water pressure that induces liquefaction. Liquefaction can cause softening and deformation. In loose granular soils, softening can also be accompanied by a loss of shear strength that may lead to large shear deformations or even flow failure under moderate to high shear stresses, such as beneath a foundation or sloping ground (NCEER/NSF, 1998 Workshop).

Loose granular soil can also settle (i.e., become more consolidated) during liquefaction and as pore pressures dissipate following an earthquake. Very limited field data is available on this subject, however, in some cases, settlement on the order of 2 to 3 percent of the thickness of the liquefied zone has been measured.

Based on review of California Geological Survey’s Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Black Star Canyon Quadrangle (CDMG, 2001), the site is partially underlain by and adjacent to zones requiring investigation for liquefaction potential in the Gypsum Canyon drainage areas located along the westerly and southwesterly edges of the development (as shown on Plate 2.2). The saturated alluvial deposits in these canyon areas are potentially liquefiable based on soil type, Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 19 GMU Project 20-108-03
groundwater elevation, and regional seismicity. Therefore, a site-specific liquefaction analyses was performed to evaluate the liquefaction potential and its effects on the proposed bridge and roadway along the westerly and southwesterly edge conditions.

Our liquefaction evaluation was performed on all available CPT’s performed in the western and southwestern alluvial areas to determine the most critical sections for lateral spreading analysis along the proposed bridge and roadway. CLiq, v.3.3.3.2, software and Robertson (2009) methodology were used for the liquefaction evaluation of CPT data. Then drill holes and CPT’s along the critical cross sections were analyzed further to determine the layers of the potentially liquefiable soils and their assigned liquefied shear strengths. Youd et al. (2001) methodology was used to evaluate liquefaction resistance of soils based on drill hole data (i.e., SPT data). The following locations were analyzed:

Table 3. Liquefaction Evaluation
Cross Section
No. Analyzed Drill Holes and CPTs Condition
N/A
CPT-2, CPT-2A, CPT-3, CPT-4A,
CPT-5, CPT-6, CPT-7, CPT-8, CPT-9,
CPT-10, CPT-11, CPT-12, CPT-13,
CPT-14, CPT-15, CPT-16, CPT-16A,
CPT-17, CPT-18, CPT-19 (L&A 2006)
All available CPTs within
Gypsum Canyon drainage
7-7’ DH-4 (GMU 2021), B-36 (GSI 1998) Proposed bridge area Liquefaction analyses were performed using the estimated historic high groundwater depth below ground surface and a hypothetical 10-foot rise in groundwater as discussed previously in the “Groundwater” section of this report (Page 14).

Our analyses confirmed there is liquefaction potential for the alluvium to be left in-place along the western and southwestern edges of the proposed development. Consequently, the potential for earthquake-induced settlement and lateral spreading at the proposed bridge location was analyzed, as discussed in the “Earthquake-Induced Settlement” and “Lateral Spreading” sections of this report (Pages 20 & 21). Earthquake-induced settlements and lateral spreading were not evaluated for the northwestern and southwestern portion of the site (i.e., western edge of the site that is north and south of the proposed bridge location) since there are no planned improvements near the slopes that are required to remain serviceable after a seismic event. This is further explained in the “Lateral Spreading” section of this report (Page 21).

Results of our liquefaction analysis are provided in Appendix C. The residual shear strength of liquefiable soils and strain softening of the fine-grained alluvial deposits to be left in-place below the high groundwater table that were determined from our liquefaction analysis are utilized further in our stability analyses.

Some potentially liquefiable layer(s) will be left in-place after the proposed remedial grading at the proposed bridge location and below the development in the southwestern portion of the site.

The estimated earthquake-induced settlements with consideration of the proposed remedial grading and fill placement are summarized in the following table.

Table 4. Earthquake-Induced Settlements
CPT or
Boring
No.

Corrected (“depthweighting” factor)
Earthquake-Induced
Settlement (in)
Uncorrected EarthquakeInduced Settlement (in)
Condition
Highest
Encountered
Groundwater
Groundwater
10ft Higher
than Highest
Encountered
Groundwater**
Highest
Encountered
Groundwater
Groundwater
10ft Higher
than Highest
Encountered
Groundwater**
CPT-4A 1.19 1.19 3.54 4.28 Within limits of proposed
roadway
DH-4
(GMU
2021)

0.42 6.78 0.62 7.22
Within limits of proposed
bridge
CPT-17* 0.33 0.33 0.76 1.91
Near the proposed bridge
abutment and adjacent
access road tie-in. 15 feet
of remedial grading
required for reported
seismic settlement.
*Boring/CPT did not penetrate through the entire alluvial layer into bedrock (i.e., settlement calculation at this location is likely higher than shown in table).
**A hypothetical 10-foot rise in groundwater was used to evaluate the influence a significant rise in groundwater would have on earthquake-induced settlement. However, we do not believe this extremely conservative rise in groundwater is possible due to the geomorphologic characteristics of the site as discussed in the “High Groundwater Analysis” section of this report (Page 14).

For development pad areas that are underlain by new fill over existing fill and/or bedrock/landslide debris (i.e., beneath most of the development pad areas and below all proposed building locations), the total and differential earthquake-induced settlements are expected to be less than 1-inch and ½-inch, respectively. The only exception would be the southwestern edge of the lower pad where some saturated alluvium may still be left in-place. In these areas, earthquake settlements may be on the order of those determined at the bridge location.

Results of our earthquake-induced settlement analyses are provided in Appendix C. It should be noted that the majority of the CPTs are within the Gypsum Canyon drainage and are outside the proposed development limits. Therefore, calculated seismic vertical settlements for CPTs outside the proposed development limits contained in Appendix C are not applicable to the proposed development; however, data within Appendix C was used for lateral spreading analyses applicable to the project.

Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading typically occurs as a form of horizontal displacement of relatively flat-lying alluvial material toward an open or “free” face such as an open body of water, channel, or excavation. In soils, this movement is generally due to slippage along a weak plane, and may often be associated with liquefaction. As cracks develop within the weakened material, blocks of soil displace laterally towards the open face. Cracking and lateral movement may gradually propagate away from the face as blocks continue to break free. Generally, failure in this mode is analytically unpredictable, because it is difficult to determine where the first tension crack will occur.

Lateral spreading of the proposed slopes at the location of the proposed bridge was evaluated for Cross Sections 7-7’ in the following “Slope Stability” section (Page 22), and our lateral spreading analyses are included in Appendix E. As summarized in the following section, the analyses indicate a lateral spreading deformation of 5.5 inches. Lateral spreading was not evaluated for the northwestern portion of the site near Section 8-8’ and the southwestern portion of the site near Cross Sections 11-11’, 12-12’, and 13-13’ (i.e., western edge of the site that is north and south of the proposed bridge location) since there are no planned improvements near the slopes that are required to remain serviceable after a seismic event.

To avoid ground remediation along the southwestern edge of the property due to potential lateral spreading, a secondary access road is to be constructed outside the underlying alluvial soils as indicated on Plate 2.1 – Geotechnical Map. This secondary access road will ensure that if future deformation were to occur along the proposed access road during a seismic event, secondary access Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 22 GMU Project 20-108-03
to and from the site will be provided. The proposed secondary access road will extend from the proposed bridge to the upper pad. The proposed bridge foundation will be designed for lateral spreading as discussed in the following “Slope Stability” section below.

Lateral spreading down the thalweg of the creek was not analyzed due to the following characteristics of the creek suggesting that large continuous lateral movements are unlikely to occur:
• Narrow width of the creek;
• Sinuous nature of the creek;
• Groundwater variability (as discussed in the “Groundwater” section of this report,

Page 14 ends

• Variable geologic characteristics of the soil deposits that are interfingered and laterally discontinuous since they were deposited in a fluvial environment with sand bars, gravel bars, over bank deposits, etc. Therefore, there is a lack of continuous liquefiable layers.

SLOPE STABILITY
Overview
The planned slope grading is shown on the Geotechnical Map – Plate 2.1.

Fill and cut slopes are proposed at a 2:1 inclination within the eastern portion of the project to develop the upper pad, as represented by Cross Sections 1-1’, 3-3’, and 5-5’ (Plates 3.1 and 3.2).

The highest fill slope is represented by Cross Sections 1-1’ and 3-3’, and the highest cut slope is represented by Cross Section 3-3’. Cross Section 5-5’ was analyzed to determine the required remedial grading to achieve adequate factors of safety for the planned fill slopes in the southwestern portion of the site.

The stability of these fill slopes is influenced by the existing artificial fills to be left in-place and the geologic structure of the bedrock (i.e., out-of-slope bedding). The stability of the cut slopes is influenced by the geologic structure of the bedrock (i.e., out-of-slope bedding). The known landslide planes as well as the clay red beds in the bedrock that may be potential weaker surfaces were modeled in our slope stability analyses. The analysis of the eastern cut slope was constrained to the western portion of the slope due to the location of the mapped fault which crosscuts the regional structure and likely disrupts bedding from being continuous across the fault plane. Our analysis of the available data indicates that remedial grading will be required to achieve adequate factors of safety for these planned fills and cut slopes. The recommended remedial grading is discussed in the “Recommendations” section of this report (Page 35).

For evaluation, Cross Sections 7-7’ and 12’-12’ were analyzed for static, pseudo-static, and postearthquake stability to determine the required remedial grading to achieve adequate factors of safety for these planned fill slopes. Cross Section 7-7’ was also analyzed to evaluate lateral stability and seismic deformations due to cyclic mobility of the proposed bridge abutments since the bridge must remain serviceable after a seismic event.

The anticipated range of lateral spreading ranges from 0.5 to 5.5 inches at the proposed bridge area (provided the remedial grading recommendations contained in this report are followed), as shown in Table 7 of this report (Page 28). Final lateral spreading analysis will be provided in a subsequent report (i.e., Bridge Foundation Design Report) that addresses site-specific planned improvements based on the geotechnical conditions following grading.

Quantitative stability analyses for static and seismic conditions are discussed in detail below and provided in Appendices D and E.

Cross Sections and Analytical Methods
For the slopes discussed above, the general approach for evaluating the gross stability of slopes against sliding was to:

1. Select cross-sections and material strength which would likely represent the most critical portions of the slope;

2. Estimate appropriate material strengths for static and earthquake conditions;

3. Calculate the factors of safety for static conditions;

4. Evaluate seismic performance using pseudo-static analyses. The horizontal ground acceleration coefficient used in our pseudo-static analyses is based on 15 centimeters of deformation for a 10% chance of exceedance in 50 years earthquake event in accordance with CGS Special Publication 117A (i.e., 0.18g) as requested by the City. It should be noted that the standard of practice in the County and most Cities in Orange County is the use of a 0.15g seismic coefficient.

5. Evaluate seismic deformations of the bridge under liquefied soil conditions;

6. Adjust the remedial grading and setback requirements to obtain the desirable results.

Slope stability calculations were performed using the computer software Slope/W 2020 by Geo-Slope International Ltd. This formulation assumes that plane strain conditions exist in the direction perpendicular to the cross-section.

Morgenstern-Price method, which satisfies all conditions of equilibrium, was used to find the factor of safety against sliding (FSsl).

To evaluate the effects of the potentially liquefiable layers on slope stability, layers of the potentially liquefiable soils were assigned liquefied shear strengths from our liquefaction analyses contained within Appendix C. Due to the thinness of the liquefiable layers and the difficulties when numerically modeling many thin layers, the designated liquefiable layers are generally modeled much thicker than the estimated liquefiable thicknesses.

Groundwater
The estimated historic high groundwater depth below ground surface for the purpose of our slope stability and lateral spreading analysis on the western edge of the development (i.e., where groundwater is present) was conservatively assumed to be at the shallowest groundwater depth below existing ground surface encountered during previous investigations or at a groundwater depth of 40 feet bgs (i.e., the reported historic high groundwater), whichever was shallower, as previously described in the “High Groundwater Analysis” section of this report (Page 14).

Shear Strength Model
The shear strengths used for our stability analyses are based on the available laboratory data from previous investigations by others and our recent investigations (contained in Appendix B) in addition to our experience with similar geologic materials in nearby areas. The following table presents the design shear strengths used in GMU’s analyses.

Table 5. GMU Design Shear Strength Parameters
Materials
Static Condition
(Ultimate Strength)
Seismic Condition
(Peak Strength) Liquefied
Phi Condition
(degrees)
Cohesion
(psf)
Phi
(degrees)
Cohesion
(psf)
Engineered Fill (Qafc) 28 475 30 460 Not Applicable
Existing Artificial Fill (Qaf) 20 200 23 250 Not Applicable Alluvium (Qal) 32 200 36 300 Sr/σ’v=0.1
Landslide Debris (Qls1) 16 0 16 0 Not Applicable
Vaqueros/Sespe Formation,
Across Bedding (Tvs) 30 325 38 850 Not Applicable
Vaqueros/Sespe Formation,
Along Bedding (Tvs) 16 0 16 0 Not Applicable
Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 25 GMU Project 20-108-03
The following sections describe the adopted design shear strengths presented in the table above and used in our slope stability analysis.

Engineered Fill (Qafc): The design strength for new engineered fill is based on direct shear test results on remolded samples of existing artificial fill compacted to 90% relative compaction per ASTM D1557. These samples were extracted from the existing artificial fill materials during our recent subsurface investigation and Leighton’s previous investigations.

The figures included in Appendix D-1 present the combined results of the direct shear tests with our adopted linear regression based on the line of best fit through the data. Ultimate shear strengths were used in our analysis for static conditions and peak shear strengths were used in our analysis for seismic conditions.

Existing Artificial Fill (Qaf): Although the existing artificial fill materials do not significantly influence the stability analyses, conservative shear strength parameters were assumed to complete the model based on our experience with similar materials in nearby areas. Ultimate shear strengths were used in our analysis for static conditions and peak shear strengths were used in our analysis for seismic conditions.

Alluvium (Qal): The design strength for alluvium is based on direct shear test results on undisturbed samples collected from our recent subsurface investigation and Leighton’s previous investigations. The figures included in Appendix D-1 present the combined results of the direct shear tests with our adopted linear regression based on the line of best fit through the data. Ultimate shear strengths were used in our analysis for static conditions and peak shear strengths were used in our analysis for seismic conditions.

Landslide Debris (Qls1): The design strength for landslide debris was assumed to be the same as the along bedding strength of the bedrock as a conservative approach. Refer to the “Vaqueros/Sespe Formation, Along Bedding (Tvs)” section below for a detailed description of the strength model. Residual shear strengths were used in our analysis for static and seismic conditions.

Vaqueros/Sespe Formation, Across Bedding (Tvs): The design strength for Vaqueros/Sespe Formation across bedding is based on direct shear test results on undisturbed samples collected from our recent subsurface investigation and Leighton’s previous investigations.

Vaqueros/Sespe Formation, Along Bedding (Tvs): The design strength for Vaqueros/Sespe Formation along bedding is based on direct shear test results on undisturbed samples and Stark residual strength envelopes (Stark and Idries, 2021) on bag samples within the red clay beds collected from our recent subsurface investigation, Leighton’s previous investigations Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 26 GMU Project 20-108-03
(Leighton 2019), and CHJ’s previous investigation (CHJ 2003). The figure included in Appendix D-1 presents the combined results of the direct shear tests with our adopted linear regression based on the lower bound of the Stark correlation data. Residual shear strengths were used in our analysis for along bedding for static and seismic conditions.

Slope Stability Results
GMU’s slope stability analyses are included in Appendix D-2, and a summary of results for the slope stability analyses is provided below.

Table 6. Slope Stability Summary
Cross
Section
Number
Condition Search
Type
Min. Safety
Factor (Static)
Min. Safety
Factor
(Pseudo-static)
Min. Safety
Factor*
(Liquefied
Condition)
1-1’ Upper Pad
Fill Slope
General (Entry and Exit) 1.8 1.1 N/A
Translational (Block) 1.6 1.1 N/A
3-3’ Upper Pad
Fill Slope
General (Entry and Exit) 1.8 1.1 N/A
Translational (Block) 1.5 1.1 N/A
3-3’ Upper Pad
Cut Slope
General (Entry and Exit) 1.5 1.3 N/A
Translational (Block) 1.5 1.1 N/A
5-5’ Upper Pad
Fill Slope
General (Entry and Exit) 1.6 1.1 N/A
Translational (Block) 1.6 1.1 N/A
7-7’
Bridge
Centerline
Fill Slope
General (Entry and Exit) 2.9 2.2 2.9
Translational (Block) 2.9 2.2 2.9
12-12’
Western
Roadway
Fill Slope
General (Entry and Exit) 2.0 1.5 2.0
Translational (Block) 2.1 1.5 2.0
*
A safety factor of 1.3 was considered adequate for lateral spreading (Martin and Lew, 1999) Based on the slope stability analyses summarized above, the planned slopes for the upper pad, bridge abutments, and western roadway are considered to be grossly stable after the planned remedial grading. Furthermore, the analyses showed that the bridge abutment and western roadway slopes are stable under post-earthquake liquefied conditions. Keyway dimensions are shown on Plate 2.1 – Geotechnical Map and Plates 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 – Geotechnical Sections Lateral displacements during a seismic event are described in the following section.

Liquefiable layers below a depth of two times the height of the proposed slopes (i.e., zmax = 2H where “H” is the maximum height of the slope) for the proposed bridge abutments (i.e., at Sections 7-7’) were considered to be sufficiently constrained against lateral movements. This is due to the depth of remedial grading in comparison to the proposed slope height (e.g., the abutment slope height at Section 7-7’ is 20 feet and the proposed remedial grading will extend 15 feet below the creek bottom) and the depth to the liquefiable layers at these locations being in excess of 40 feet below the creek bottom. In addition, the post-earthquake safety factor (i.e., modeling liquefiable layers with no inertial forces) for Cross Section 7-7’ is significantly above 1.3 (i.e., SF=2.7) and therefore the soil cover above the liquefiable layer is competent to buttress the channel against lateral spread as defined by Martin and Lew (1999) (i.e., the slopes are stable under the liquefied condition). These potentially liquefiable layers will have a negligible contribution to lateral movements at the ground surface (Chu et al. 2006).

However, given this is a preliminary evaluation of the proposed bridge location, we have provided lateral spreading analysis with and without the 2H limitation factor to demonstrate the range of lateral spreading possible for the proposed bridge location. Lateral spreading at the bridge will be further evaluated as a part of the Bridge Foundation Design Report.

Lateral displacements were estimated by averaging deformations determined from two different methods using the residual strength of the liquefiable soils:

1. Bray & Macedo’s (2019) updated simplified procedure for estimating earthquake-induced deviatoric slope displacement values with a 50-percent probability of exceedance (“D2” value in the calculation sheets)

2. Rathje & Antonakos (2011) sliding displacement models and the maximum velocity of the seismic coefficient time history (“kmax, kvelmax” value in the calculation sheets) The yield coefficient (ky) for these procedures was determined by analyzing the selected cross sections for a safety factor of unity (1.0) under the specified seismic loading as summarized in the following table and presented in Appendix E-1.

The following table summarizes the results of the seismic deformation analyses as presented in Appendix E-2.

Table 8. Seismic Displacement Analyses Summary
Cross Section
Number Condition
Average Displacement*
(inches)
2H Depth
Correction
Without 2H
Depth
Correction
Without 2H Depth
Correction and 10ft
Higher Groundwater
2H Depth
Correction at
Bridge Abutment
7-7’ Bridge Centerline 0.5 5.0 5.5 1.25
* The average slide surface height was estimated using procedures recommended by Bray and Macedo (2021). ** A hypothetical 10-foot rise in groundwater was used to evaluate the influence a significant rise in groundwater would have on earthquake-induced settlement. However, we do not believe this extremely conservative rise in groundwater is possible due to the geomorphologic characteristics of the site as discussed in the High Groundwater Analysis section of this report (Page 14).

Our analyses indicate that approximately 0.5 to 5.5 inches of lateral displacement due to cyclic mobility may occur at the bridge abutments during a 975-year return period earthquake (i.e., in accordance with Caltrans guidelines). Therefore, it is anticipated that the bridge foundation system will need to accommodate lateral spreading magnitudes in the aforementioned range such that the bridge remains serviceable. Based on our preliminary analyses, our preliminary design concept for the bridge foundation system will consist of spread footings with a structural approach slab. The spread footings will account for scouring of the creek and we will be in communication with the structural engineer during the design. Detailed analysis and recommendations will be provided in our future Bridge Foundation Design Report.

Our lateral spreading and seismic deformation analyses are included in Appendix E of this report.

It should be noted that the shear strength of the slope’s engineered fill soils will degrade over time depending on landscaping cover, irrigation, maintenance, timely landscaping repairs, etc.

Consequently, minor surficial slumps may occur in the future if landscaping, irrigation, and maintenance are not properly designed, implemented, or maintained.

It should also be noted that the daylight cut at the northeasterly portion of the site is expected to be grossly stable. However, due to the presence of topsoil and colluvium, surficial stability may have safety factors of less than 1.5. Remedial grading to mitigate surficial instability would likely require grading outside the project limits; therefore, we recommend a geotechnical setback be established for this area. The setback will need to be based on geologic conditions exposed following design grading.

STATIC SETTLEMENT
Consolidation potential is considered negligible for the Vaqueros/Sespe Formation bedrock materials. Slopewash materials (Qsw) below the planned fills will be removed and replaced during remedial grading. Settlement as a result of the planned grading will therefore be controlled by two components: (1) settlement of underlying existing fill materials (Qaf), landslide debris (Qls1), and/or alluvium (Qal); and (2) settlement of new engineered fill.

The existing artificial fill consists of mostly clayey sands and silty sands with varying amounts of gravels, cobbles, and boulders, and generally range from medium dense to very dense. Due to the amount of time that the existing fill materials have been in-place, it is expected that primary settlement of the fill materials at the site has essentially occurred. Consolidation testing data, in-situ densities, and moisture content/saturation percentages indicate that settlement related to the inundation with water (i.e., hydro-collapse settlement) is anticipated to be low for the existing fills (i.e., hydro-consolidation potential is generally less than 1 percent). Therefore, future settlements within the site will primarily be controlled by settlement of the new fills and compression of the existing fills and/or landslide debris/alluvium in areas where significant loading of new fill over Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 30 GMU Project 20-108-03
thick deposits of the existing fill and/or landslide debris/alluvium are present (i.e., inducing primary settlement of the existing materials).

The magnitude of post-grading settlement of engineered fill will be based on the thickness of new fill over the thickness of the existing artificial fill and/or landslide debris/alluvial soils. The engineered fill will be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 92% per ASTM D1557 (latest edition) with above-optimum moisture content. The compaction efforts will generally result in a degree of saturation of 60% to 70% creating an over-consolidated unsaturated soil matrix.

Therefore, the engineered fill will generally experience rather quick and minor deformation under the induced stresses. To determine the completion of primary settlement, we recommend installing representative settlement monuments in fill areas where new engineered fills of greater than 30 feet are over existing artificial fill and/or landslide debris/alluvial soils. Preliminary locations of settlement monuments are shown on Plate 2.1. These locations are subject to refinement during grading based on actual remedial grading and final fill depths.

Based on the settlement evaluation discussed above and following completion of primary settlement as determined via settlement monitoring, we expect that differential long-term settlements from all sources will result in special foundation designs for buildings and sensitive improvements. It is expected that structures underlain at depth by existing fill and/or landslide debris or alluvium will need to be supported with post-tensioned mat slabs, non-pre-stressed mat slabs, shallow pile supported foundation systems, or other similar foundation types to take into account the amount of differential long-term settlement that may occur.

For preliminary planning purposes, we anticipate 1-inch of differential long-term settlement over a horizontal distance of about 20 feet for structures comprised of new fill over existing fill and/or landslide debris/alluvium. For the proposed bridge, we anticipate approximately 1-inch of total long-term static settlement. Final settlement analysis will be provided in a subsequent document that addresses site-specific planned improvements based on geotechnical conditions following grading. This future settlement analysis will take into account data collected from settlement monitoring that will be performed as part of grading.

SETTLEMENT SUMMARY
For the bridge abutments, final settlement estimates will be determined in the Bridge Foundation Design Report. For the development pads, the final settlement estimates will be developed in a future Rough Grade Plan Review Report and confirmed during grading and settlement monitoring.

Preliminarily, the following summarizes our preliminary estimates:
• Bridge Abutments
o Static: 1-inch of total long-term settlement
o Seismic: ranges from 0.4 to 7.2 inches

SOIL EXPANSION AND CORROSION
The majority of on-site soils have a low to medium expansion potential based on the following:
(1) preliminary laboratory testing contained in Appendix B, (2) the presence of predominantly sandy soils with localized zones of clayey soils, and (3) our experience with testing of similar soil/ bedrock materials generated from excavations within the Sespe/Vaqueros Formation. Following mass grading, the engineered fills are expected to contain a mixture of the onsite soils. Therefore, the soils at or near finish grade are anticipated to have a medium expansion potential.

Consequently, the shallow soils within the site have a potential for expansion, and special design considerations will be required for design of the proposed improvements. Test results are provided in Appendix B.

Based on the preliminary laboratory testing with respect to corrosion (i.e., contained in Appendix B) and our experience with similar materials generated from excavations within the Vaqueros/ Sespe Formation, the on-site soils are anticipated to be characterized as follows:
• Moderately to severely corrosive to ferrous metals
• Negligible to moderate sulfate exposure to concrete per the ACI 318 Table 19.3.1.1 • Moderate chloride exposure to concrete reinforcement
These are considered preliminary findings, and additional site-specific testing should be performed at finish pad grades for future improvements (i.e., buildings, structures, monuments, walls, etc.) to evaluate near-surface soil expansion and corrosion after grading is complete and prior to precise grade design and construction.

INFILTRATION CONDITIONS
Upon completion of grading, the site will be underlain by at least 12 feet of engineered fill over previously placed artificial fill, alluvium, and/or landslide debris, or by at least 8 feet in areas underlain by bedrock materials, provided the recommendations contained in subsequent sections of this report are followed. Due to the variation of the characteristics of the soil and rock materials underlying the site (i.e., materials ranging from gravely sands to silty clays) infiltration of storm water into the subgrade materials may have an adverse impact on adjacent slopes and/or improvements. Therefore, infiltration into the subsurface materials at the site is not recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

1. Based on the results of our geotechnical study, review of previous studies within the site, and our review of the reference (1) preliminary grading for TPM 2022-160, it is our opinion that the mass grading for the Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site is feasible for cemetery development, assuming that the recommendations in this report are followed and that the grading will be performed in accordance with all applicable grading codes and ordinances.

2. The limits of the project study area are currently underlain by topsoil, artificial fill, alluvium, landslide debris, and bedrock of the Vaqueros/Sespe and Santiago Formations.

3. Artificial fill consists of clay and silt, clayey sands, and silty sands with varying amounts of gravels, cobbles, and boulders. The artificial fill materials generally range from medium dense to very dense and have variable moisture contents ranging from dry to locally saturated. Man-made debris (concrete wash-out deposits, rebar, metal and concrete piping, etc.) will also be present within the artificial fill.

4. All topsoil and slopewash at the site will require full removal and re-compaction during remedial grading. The artificial fill, alluvium, and landslide debris at the site will require partial depth remedial grading to remove the uppermost portions of the artificial fill and unsuitable alluvial soils. The unstable portions of the existing landslide debris will be removed during keyway and over-excavation remedial grading. The materials exposed below the remedial grading discussed above are considered suitable for support of fill.

5. Based on observations made during our recent exploration, review of previous exploration logs by others, and laboratory testing, we consider the artificial fill materials to be left in-place following the removal of the upper 7 feet and deep processing (i.e., materials below a depth of 10 feet) to be suitable for support of the planned grading and cemetery development. However, there is a potential for consolidation settlement of the existing fill in areas where significant loading of new fill over thick deposits of the existing fill and/or Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 33 GMU Project 20-108-03
alluvium are present. Therefore, where these conditions occur, settlement monitoring will be required as discussed in the “Recommendations” section of this report (Page 35).

6. Additional removal in portions of design fill areas will be required to provide for a minimum of at least 12 feet of new engineered fill for a minimum of 5 feet of new engineered fill under future double crypt burial sites. Additional removals under future structures may be needed and should be evaluated based on future plans showing proposed improvements.

7. Cut areas exposing artificial fill will require over-excavation to provide for a minimum fill thickness of 12 feet within the upper and lower pads to allow for a minimum of 5 feet of new engineered fill under future double crypt burial sites. Additional over-excavation under future structures may be needed and should be evaluated based on future plans showing proposed improvements.

8. Cut areas exposing bedrock will require over-excavation to provide for a minimum fill thickness of 8 feet within the upper and lower pads to allow for a minimum of 1-foot of new engineered fill under future double crypt burial sites.

9. Removal and over-excavation bottoms exposing artificial fill materials require ripping in two directions (i.e., cross-ripping), extensive watering to provide deep wetting (i.e., flooding), and wheel rolling with heavy rubber-tired grading equipment (i.e., 657 scrapers, 966 loaders, etc.), and verification test pits prior to placement of fill materials.

10. The underlying soil and rock materials can be excavated using conventional grading and trenching equipment. The existing artificial fill materials which are present throughout the site are expected to contain cobbles, boulders, and concrete fragments which may require special handling. The bedrock materials are dense to very dense but are expected to be rippable with moderate to heavy ripping effort. Hard, oversize rock materials generated from the bedrock excavations are expected to be encountered.

11. Static settlement as a result of the planned grading will be controlled by two components:
(1) settlement of underlying existing fill materials (Qaf), landslide debris (Qls1), and/or alluvium (Qal); and (2) settlement of new engineered fill. For preliminary planning purposes, in areas where new fill will be underlain by existing artificial fill, alluvium, and/or landslide debris, differential long-term settlements are anticipated to be approximately 1-inch differential over a horizontal distance of about 20 feet. Final settlement analysis will be provided in a subsequent document that addresses site-specific planned improvements based on geotechnical conditions following grading.

12. The anticipated range of earthquake-induced settlement ranges from 0.4 to 7.2 inches at the proposed bridge area (provided the remedial grading recommendations contained in this report are followed). Final settlement analysis will be provided in a subsequent Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 34 GMU Project 20-108-03
document (i.e., Bridge Foundation Design Report) that addresses site-specific planned improvements based on geotechnical conditions following grading.

13. Future buildings (i.e., administration building and maintenance building) and other structures constructed in areas supported by new fill over existing fill, alluvium, and/or landslide debris will require enhanced foundation systems (i.e., rationally designed) that incorporate future settlement and expansion (i.e., post-tension mat slabs, non-pre-stressed mat slab, shallow pile supported foundation systems or other similar foundation types) to take into account the amount of differential long-term settlement that may occur.

14. The planned fill and fill over cut slope that separates the lower pad from the upper pad, as illustrated by Sections 1-1’, 2-2’, 3-3’, 4-4’, 5-5’, 6-6’, 14-14’, and 15-15’, requires a buttress keyway. The large cut slope at the far easterly edge of the upper pad, as illustrated by Section 3-3’, requires a buttress keyway. All other cut slopes on the project require minimal stabilization fills. Fill slopes that daylight to existing ground will require toe-ofslope removals. The proposed slopes impacting the site will be grossly and surficially stable provided that the recommendations in this report are implemented.

Groundwater is present at the site in three forms: (1) seepage within isolated zones of existing artificial fill, within sandy zones of alluvium, at contacts between geologic units, or at structural discontinuities (i.e., faults, joints or shears); (2) perched groundwater at the base of artificial fill (i.e., perched on the landslide or bedrock contact); and, (3) unconfined groundwater within saturated alluvium along the southern and western portions of the site (i.e., adjacent to Gypsum Canyon). Groundwater, as seepage or perched, is expected to be encountered in sandy zones of the existing artificial fill and alluvial materials, where contacts between geologic units are encountered, and along geologic discontinuities (i.e., faults, joints, and shears). Unconfined groundwater is not expected to be encountered at the project unless deep foundations are designed to construct the proposed Gypsum Canyon Bridge.

15. Portions of the alluvial soils in the southerly canyon area (i.e., Gypsum Canyon) are susceptible to liquefaction under the design earthquake event.

16. The design fill slope supporting the southerly access road is susceptible to lateral spreading during a seismic event. Conducting ground improvements to mitigate deformation along the southern extent of the access road is not a viable option for the proposed project.

Therefore, a secondary access road is to be constructed outside the underlying alluvial soils as indicated on our Plate 2.1 – Geotechnical Map. A secondary access road will ensure that if future deformation were to occur along the proposed access road during a seismic event, secondary access to and from the site will be provided.

17. Our primary design for the planned entry bridge abutments will consist of spread footings with a structural slab approach. The spread footings will account for scouring of the creek.

Detailed analysis and recommendations will be provided in our future Bridge Foundation Design Report.

18. The on-site soil and rock materials are anticipated to be characterized by medium expansion potential, moderate to high corrosion potential for ferrous metals, negligible to moderate sulfate exposure to concrete, and moderate chloride exposure to concrete reinforcement.

GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

SITE PREPARATION AND REMEDIAL GRADING
General
All site preparation and grading should be performed in accordance with City of Anaheim grading requirements and the recommendations presented in this report. Corrective grading recommendations are provided with the understanding that a majority of the site will be developed as a cemetery site (i.e., park-like setting) with minor structural improvements.

Clearing
All construction debris and significant organic materials such as trees, weeds, brush, or other decomposable materials should be removed from areas to be graded.

Remedial Grading
The planned remedial grading at the site has been prepared for cemetery development that will mostly consist of park-like settings. The following recommendations for removals and overexcavation were developed assuming any portion of the upper and lower pad areas can be used to support a crypt burial site. The depth of the removals and over-excavation assumes a 7-foot double crypt section to be supported by at least 5 feet of engineered fill in areas underlain by existing fill and/or alluvium.

The remedial grading will generally consist of: (1) removal of low-density, compressible, and/or unsuitable soil materials, (2) excavation of keyways at toes of slopes, and (3) over-excavation to create the minimum blanket fill thicknesses recommended for the project. These conventional corrective grading procedures will serve to stabilize designed slopes and mitigate excessive future settlement.

Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 36 GMU Project 20-108-03
Ancient Landslide Mitigation
Three smaller ancient landslides (Qls2, Qls3, and Qls4) are located along the perimeter of the project site and their adverse impacts to the project and our recommendations for mitigation are discussed below:
• Qls2 extends within the project limits on the eastern side of the site. It is likely that the bedrock in this area is failing along steep joint patterns and there may not be a continuous failure surface. However, the upper portion of the mapped landslide will be removed down to bedrock and a shear key will be constructed as shown on Sections A-A’ and B-B’ (Plate 3.3). The shear key is expected to be excavated as part of the ramp down to the keyway shown by Section 1-1’. The approximate location of this shear key is shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 2.1).
• Qls3 is located upstream from design grade at the southwestern project limit. If Qls3 were to fail, it could potentially impact the drainage adjacent to the project. Future grading plans will need to show a drainage system and debris basin where the design fill toes out into the existing canyon to mitigate possible sheet flows and mud flows that may propagate towards the site. It is our opinion that movement of Qls3 will not adversely impact design grading provided an adequate drainage system is designed to contain the potential debris flow materials. Future grading reports will present a cross section through this area once drainage improvements are designed.
• Qls4 will not have adverse impacts on the project site as it is located west of the Gypsum Canyon drainage, and if it were to fail, it would fail into the drainage and not reach nor impact the project limits.

Removals
The geologic units underlying the site will require minimum removals as follows:
• Topsoil:
o Complete removal and recompaction
• Existing artificial fill, alluvium, colluvium, and landslide debris:
o The upper 7 feet of existing fills and surficial deposits, where observed, were typically unsuitable for support of the planned improvements. Below 10 feet, these materials generally became more dense and moist. Following the recommended minimum removal depth of 7 feet and processing of the removal bottoms as discussed in the processing section below, the materials underlying the planned fills are considered suitable for support of the planned grading and subsequent improvements.

Due to the scale of the Geotechnical Sections included in this report (i.e., 1” = 100’), the removals discussed above are not shown on the cross-sections. Geotechnical Sections in future grading reports with a larger scale (i.e., 1” = 40’) will present the depths and limits of remedial grading.

Benching should be performed as additional fill is placed against slopes that are 5:1 or steeper. See Plate 4 – Typical Benching and Keyway, for a general detail of toe-of-slope keyway and subsequent benching.

Removals should be completed in a manner which limits the steepness of removal bottoms and backcuts and therefore limits the differential fill thickness. The maximum slope gradient during removals should be no steeper than 1:1 (horizontal:vertical).

It should be noted that the recommendations provided herein are approximations based on our subsurface exploration and knowledge of the on-site geology. Actual removals may vary in configuration and volume based on observations of geologic materials and conditions encountered during grading. The bottom of all remedial grading removals should be observed by a GMU representative to verify the suitability of in-place soils prior to fill placement. General remedial grading recommendations are outlined below.

Existing Perimeter Berm Slope and Planned Fill Slopes:
• The existing perimeter berm slope along the westerly and southwesterly portion of the site will require a 15-foot-wide by 5-foot-deep keyway and stabilization fill to provide surficial stability and to facilitate long-term maintenance and landscaping. o The keyway bottom should be tilted into slope a minimum of 1%. o The fill slope should maintain a minimum width of 15 feet. o Benching should be performed as fill is placed against slopes that are 5:1 or steeper.

See Plate 4 – Typical Benching and Keyway, for a general detail of toe-of-slope keyway and subsequent benching.
• The new access road along the southwesterly portion of the site adjacent to Gypsum Canyon, the fill slopes descending from the lower pad to the northwestern and northern canyons, and the fill slope at the northerly end of the site that ascends from the lower pad to the upper pad, will require keyways and buttress/stabilization fills. o The dimensions of the keyways are as follows:
 Access Road Slope: 20 feet wide by 15 feet deep (Sections 5-5’, 6-6’, 7-7’, 9-9’, 11-11’, 12-12’, 13-13’, and 15-15’)
 Slope Descending from Lower Pad: 15 to 20 feet wide by 5 to 15 feet deep (See Sections 2-2’, 3-3’, 4-4’, 8-8’, and 14-14’)
 Slope Ascending to Upper Pad: 120 to 135 feet wide by 50 to 60 feet deep (See Sections 1-1’, 2-2’, and 3-3’)
 Shear Key: 30 feet wide by 15 to 30 feet deep (See Sections 16-16’ and 17- 17’)
o The keyways should be tilted into slope a minimum of 1%. o Benching should be performed as fill is placed against slopes that are 5:1 or steeper.

See Plate 4 – Typical Benching and Keyway, for a general detail of toe-of-slope keyway and subsequent benching.
o Backcuts should not be steeper than what is shown on the appropriate cross-section unless approved by the project geologist.

The keyways for the existing perimeter berm and planned fill slopes should be constructed as shown on the Cross-Sections included on Plates 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 – Geotechnical Sections. The location and approximate dimensions of the keyways are shown on Plate 2.1 – Geotechnical Map and Plates 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 – Cross Sections.

The keyway dimensions should be constructed as shown on the Cross Sections (Plates 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3). Keyway locations and dimensions are illustrated on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 2.1).

Over-Excavation
Design cut areas in both the lower and upper pad areas should be over-excavated to provide for engineered fill to support cemetery improvements (i.e., crypt burial sites) in areas where existing artificial fill or alluvium is exposed to allow for easier excavation for crypt burial sites in potentially hard bedrock materials:
• The over-excavation recommendations below are applicable to the lower and upper pads and are based on the use of double crypts for future burial sites. o Minimum 12 feet where existing artificial fill or alluvium is exposed at the bottom of the over-excavation.
o Minimum of 8 feet where bedrock is exposed at the bottom of the over-excavation. • We understand that the site development for the public cemetery site (i.e., lower pad) will likely be approved prior to grading of the site. Therefore, it is expected that future grading plans will show pads and subgrades for the improvements shown on the site plan and the following over-excavation recommendations would be considered applicable to public cemetery site improvements:

Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 40 GMU Project 20-108-03
o Crypt Burial Areas:
 Minimum 12 feet where existing artificial fill or alluvium is exposed at bottom of over-excavation.
 Minimum of 8 feet where bedrock is exposed at the bottom of the overexcavation. o Improvements w/Foundations (i.e., buildings, cemetery structures, monuments, walls, etc.):
 Minimum 12 feet where existing artificial fill is exposed at bottom of overexcavation to provide for at least 10 feet of new engineered fill below future improvement foundations (i.e., assume 2-foot-thick foundation system).  Minimum of 5 feet where bedrock is exposed at the bottom of the overexcavation to provide for at least 3 feet of engineered fill below future improvements foundations (i.e., assume 2-foot-deep foundations).  Deeper over-excavations in bedrock may be required to provide for a maximum fill transition of 3:1 (i.e., maximum fill of 21 feet, then overexcavation depth shall be at least 7 feet). o Roadways:
 Minimum 5 feet below subgrade where existing artificial fill materials are exposed at the bottom of the over-excavation.
 Minimum of 3 feet below subgrade where bedrock materials are exposed at the bottom of the over-excavation.
 Where fill thicknesses are greater than 20 feet, the over-excavation should be deepened to provide a maximum 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) transition below the street.
o Utilities:
 Minimum 3 feet below lowest utility pipe zone where existing artificial fill is exposed at bottom of over-excavation.
 Minimum of 1 foot below lowest utility pipe zone where bedrock is exposed at the bottom of the over-excavation. o Hardscape:
 Minimum 5 feet below subgrade where existing artificial fill materials are exposed at the bottom of the over-excavation.
 Minimum of 2 feet below subgrade where bedrock materials are exposed at the bottom of the over-excavation.
o Landscape:
 Minimum 5 feet below subgrade where existing artificial fill materials are exposed at the bottom of the over-excavation.
 Minimum of 2 feet below subgrade where bedrock materials are exposed at the bottom of the over-excavation.

Daylight Cuts
The daylight cut at the northeasterly portion of the site is expected to be grossly stable. However, due to the presence of topsoil and colluvium, surficial stability may have safety factors of less than 1.5. Remedial grading to mitigate surficial instability would likely require grading outside the project limits; therefore, we recommend a geotechnical setback be established for this area. The setback should be based on geologic conditions exposed following design grading.

Temporary Excavations
During grading of the site, the contractor should conform to all applicable occupational and health standards, rules, regulations, and orders established by the State of California and the Federal Government, including shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions as required.

Temporary excavations during grading, including but not limited to remedial grading excavation for backcuts and frontcuts, may expose unstable soil and rock materials due to adverse geologic conditions (i.e., geologic structure, seepage, etc.). Therefore, it is essential that all temporary excavations be mapped by GMU’s engineering geologist during grading in order to evaluate if changes to remedial grading excavations are required. In addition, it is critical that the contractor adhere to the remedial grading recommendations to help minimize the potential for temporary slope failures. All concerned parties should recognize that there is the potential for failure of the temporary construction cut slopes. We recommend that keyways and temporary excavations be excavated and backfilled as expeditiously as practical to lessen that possibility.

Processing
Following remedial grading, the remedial excavation bottoms exposing materials shown below should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and compacted as follows:
o Existing Artificial Fill Materials:
 Remedial bottoms should be processed as follows: (1) deep ripping of the upper 24 inches minimum in 2 directions (i.e., cross-ripping), (2) extensive watering (i.e., flooding) for deep wetting, (3) wheel rolling with heavy rubber tired grading equipment (i.e., 657 scrapers, 966 loaders, rock trucks etc.), and (4) excavate test pits (i.e., at least 3 feet deep) to visually inspect and test the processed materials prior to placement of new fill materials.

The need for additional scarification and watering should be reviewed by a GMU field representative during construction and confirmed or modified as necessary.

FILL MATERIAL AND PLACEMENT
Suitability
All on-site soil and bedrock materials are suitable for use as compacted fill if care is taken to remove the following:
• Organic and decomposable debris
• Oversize rock materials (oversized rock limitations are described below) • Man-made trash and debris
If any imported soils are used, these soils should be tested to conform to the physical and chemical characteristics of the on-site soils and the soil characteristics described herein.

Compaction Standard and Methodology
All soil material used as compacted fill or material processed in-place, should be moistened or dried or blended as necessary to at least 2% over optimum moisture content. Where highly granular soils are encountered in fills, deviations to this moisture criterion may be considered on a case-bycase basis based on field conditions and review/acceptance by GMU. Materials should not be placed below their optimum moisture content.

All fill soils shall be placed at minimum 92% relative compaction (ASTM D1557) and should be densified in accordance with City of Anaheim grading requirements. All engineered fill shall be Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 43 GMU Project 20-108-03
placed in lifts not exceeding 6 to 8 inches in loose thickness, and thoroughly compacted to meet the criteria indicated above.

Fill Slope Compaction
Fill slope compaction shall meet the relative compaction criteria specified above, and can be achieved via either of the following two methods:

1. Fill slopes are overfilled 3 feet horizontally with full compaction to the edge of the fill, then trimmed back to expose firm, dense fill.

2. Fill slopes are “backrolled” during fill placement, and then subsequently compacted to the specified density using cable-lowered sheepsfoot and grid rollers. “Track walking” is an allowable means for finishing slopes after compaction via one of the two methods described above. However, track walking is not an allowable means of compacting fill slope surfaces.

Use of Oversize Rock or Broken Concrete
It is expected that an abundance of rock materials and concrete fragments greater than 12 inches in diameter will be generated during the subject grading, particularly from removals and cuts within the artificial fill and cuts within the conglomerate bedrock materials. These oversize hard materials may be placed in limited quantities within the larger, deeper fills if placed in accordance with the following procedures. Concrete pieces greater than 12 inches in diameter should be broken down to pieces less than 12 inches.

Shallow Fills at 0 to 12 Feet Below Finish Grade
• All rock in excess of 12 inches in diameter shall not be utilized within the proposed shallow fills at 0 to 12 feet below finish grade.
• Oversized rock will need to be separated and removed off site or disposed within larger, deeper fills in accordance with the procedures outlined below under “Deep Fills Greater Than 12 Feet Deep”.

Deep Fills Greater Than 12 Feet Deep
There is no upper limit on rock size in general fills deeper than 12 feet. However, rocks greater than 12 inches in diameter should be placed as follows:
• Non-nested and distributed throughout the fill at a distance that compaction can be achieved within the soil matrix.
• Not to be used within 12 feet horizontal from a slope face (i.e., equipment width).

SUBDRAINS
General
The construction of subdrains is recommended when free moisture is encountered during remedial grading or as a precautionary measure wherever the potential of future subsurface moisture may create possible problems with respect to slope stability or saturation of subgrade soils. All subdrains should outlet so as not to significantly affect slope stability.

Canyon Bottom Subdrains
Subdrains should be installed within fill areas located within the slope upper pad area at the lowest possible elevations following removals. The low end of the subdrains should tie into buttress keyway drains at the lowest possible elevation. The drains should then extend uphill either within the existing artificial fill or along an existing fill-bedrock contact, if exposed.

The subdrains should consist of 6-inch-diameter perforated plastic pipe installed in a 3-foot-wide by 3-foot-deep trench. The pipe should be bedded and the trench backfilled using at least 9 cubic feet of permeable filter material per lineal foot of pipe. The estimated locations of where canyon bottom subdrains are anticipated to be placed will be provided in a subsequent report. The actual location of all subdrains should be determined in the field based on conditions exposed during grading.

Keyway and Buttress Backdrains and Outlets
Keyway Bottom and Backdrain Systems Placed Below Toe Grade: Wherever possible, keyway drains should be constructed at or near the bottom of the recommended keyways. The keyway bottom backdrain systems should be installed at the lowest possible elevation where the system can still drain to a feasible outlet location. Keyway bottom drains and subsequent backdrains constructed below the design toe of slope should consist of 6-inch-diameter perforated plastic pipe embedded in 9 cubic feet of filter material per lineal foot of pipe. The keyway and backdrains shall be installed at the contact between the backcut and engineered fill. The recommended configuration of the subdrain and the specification for the pipe and the filter material are illustrated on Plate 5 – Typical Canyon or Keyway Bottom Type Subdrain. Final drain configurations should be determined by a GMU representative during grading based on the conditions exposed. The perforated collector drains should have a minimum gradient of 2% towards the outlet locations.

Keyway Backdrain Systems Placed Above Toe Grade: In addition to keyway bottom and backdrains placed below toe grade, all backdrain systems placed above toe grade should be constructed at the rear of the recommended buttresses. These backdrain systems should consist of 4-inch-diameter perforated plastic pipe embedded in 4 cubic feet of filter material per lineal foot of pipe. The backdrains shall be installed in a “V” cut or shallow backhoe trench at the contact between the backcut and engineered fill. The drains should be constructed in areas of observed seepage or where seepage may occur in the future. The backdrains should be placed approximately every 20 to 30 vertical feet based on field conditions, with a maximum vertical spacing of 30 feet (see Plate 6 – Typical Buttress or Stabilization Fill). Final drain configurations should be determined by a GMU representative during grading based on the conditions exposed. The perforated collector drains should have a minimum gradient of 2% toward the outlet pipe locations.

Standards and details illustrating the configuration of the backdrains are shown on Plate 7 – Typical Backdrain Type Subdrain.

The outlet pipe should consist of non-perforated plastic pipe connected with a “T” to the collector pipe and installed in shallow, narrow backhoe trenches excavated through the fill and sloping at a minimum gradient of 1% toward the slope face or as specified by the geotechnical consultant. The outlet trenches should be backfilled with select native soil that is free of any fragments of hard material. The outlets should be constructed at intervals of about 150 feet and at each end of the collector system where possible and practical, or as specified by the project geotechnical consultant based on conditions exposed during grading. Where practical, outlet pipes should extend into either a canyon bottom subdrain or permanent structure such as a gunite terrace drain or storm drain. Outlets exiting a slope face, which cannot be tied to an existing subdrain or permanent structure, should be outletted utilizing the devices shown on Plate 8 – Typical Subdrain Outlet Detail.

SETTLEMENT MONITORING
Representative settlement monitoring should be performed to evaluate settlement of areas where new engineered fill is placed on various thicknesses of existing artificial fill, alluvial soils, and landslide debris. This monitoring should be performed using near-surface settlement monuments at the completion of mass grading. The approximate locations of settlement monuments are shown on the Geotechnical Map – Plate 2.1.

The pipe should be installed in a 6-foot-deep drilled hole. The lower 2 feet of the pipe should be embedded in concrete or slurry used to backfill the bottom of the hole. The upper 4 feet of the holes should be backfilled with self-compacting pea gravel. A detail illustrating a typical recommended near surface monument is included as Plate 9 – Near Surface Settlement Monitoring Point.

The settlement monitoring points should be surveyed for changes in elevation by the project surveyor on a bi-weekly or monthly basis following the completion of grading until it has been determined that primary settlement is complete.

PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL BRIDGE ASSESSMENT

As previously discussed, the future entry bridge will be needed to access the site. Given that the bridge is anticipated to be a steel and wood pre-fabricated structure, loads at the abutments are anticipated to be a fraction of a reinforced concrete bridge and thus static settlements are not anticipated to be significant. In addition, based on the underlying alluvial characteristics, the future bridge is not anticipated to be subject to significant long-term settlements. However, seismic settlements on the order of 0.5 to 5.5 inches will need to be accommodated in the bridge design.

Based on our slope stability and lateral spreading analyses for the proposed bridge abutments (i.e., Cross Section 7-7’) contained in the “Slope Stability” section of this report (Page 22), the planned Gypsum Canyon bridge abutments are stable under static, pseudo-static, and postearthquake conditions provided the remedial grading recommendations contained in this report are followed. However, lateral spreading magnitudes on the order of 0.4 to 7.2 inches will likely need to be incorporated into the design.

Based on the above, bridge abutment foundations founded on either shallow spread footings or short piles as opposed to deep piles are anticipated to be adequate. A future Bridge Foundation Design Report will need to be prepared for the project once more information about the bridge is available (i.e., type, structural loading, etc.).

FUTURE UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
The reference (1) Grading Plan for Tentative Parcel Map 2022-160 reviewed for this report does not currently include construction of future underground drainage (i.e., storm drain) improvements. However, it is our understanding that storm drains plans are being developed and underground improvements will be constructed as part of the project. Therefore, the following recommendations are considered applicable to their construction.

OPEN TRENCH EXCAVATIONS
General
The contractor should conform to all applicable occupational and health standards, rules, regulations, and orders established by the County of Orange, State of California, and the Federal Government.

Temporary Trench Excavations
Excavations during construction should be made in such a manner that trench/slope failure and/or excessive ground movement will not occur, and such that all existing utilities and improvements are protected. The short-term stability of excavations depends on many factors, including slope angle, engineering characteristics of the materials, height of excavation, and length of time the excavation remains unsupported and exposed to equipment vibrations, traffic surcharges, rainfall, and desiccation.

Where spacing permits, and provided that adjacent facilities are adequately supported, open cuts can be made in accordance with Cal OSHA regulations based on the soil and rock types exposed during construction. Surcharge from vehicle loads or material stockpiles should be kept away from the top of temporary excavations a horizontal distance equal to one-half the depth of the excavation. Surface drainage should be controlled along the top of temporary excavations to preclude wetting of soils and erosion of excavation faces. Even with the implementation of the above recommendations, surficial sloughing of soils or raveling of gravels, cobbles, and boulders may still occur, and workmen should be adequately protected from such sloughing and raveling.

The above recommendations are presented as guidelines only and are minimum requirements.

Temporary trench excavation, construction, maintenance, and safety are the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should retain a qualified and experienced registered engineer to design any shoring systems in accordance with Cal-OSHA criteria. Furthermore, the excavation should be constructed in accordance with Cal-OSHA regulations and guidelines.

STORM DRAIN CONSTRUCTION
General
The storm drain sections installed using open trench excavations will be backfilled with both select bedding materials beneath and around the pipes and compacted soil above the pipe bedding.

Recommendations for the types of the materials to be used and the proper placement of these materials are provided in the following sections.

Based on our subsurface exploration, some of the onsite granular soils that will be excavated during grading may meet the recommendations for pipe bedding materials. However, this will require selective separation of the onsite soils followed by testing to confirm that they meet the project specifications. If this selective separation and testing is not performed, then onsite soils should not be used as bedding and all of the pipe bedding materials will need to be imported to the site.

Granular pipe bedding material having a sand equivalent of 30 or greater should be properly placed in thicknesses not exceeding 3 feet, and then sufficiently jetted in-place. The top of the jetted sand should be tamped with hand-operated compaction equipment prior to the placement of trench backfill. With proper techniques, jetting is not expected to have an adverse impact on existing site soils.

Care should also be taken in design and construction to ensure that pipe bedding and backfill materials do not become submerged or exposed to drainage or runoff, which could cause piping conditions and associated subsurface voids.

Trench Backfill
Onsite soils are suitable for trench backfill above the pipe bedding zone if care is taken to remove all significant organic and other decomposable debris and any rock materials larger than 6 inches in maximum diameter, and moisture condition the soil materials as necessary. No rock greater than 6 inches in maximum diameter should be utilized in the trench backfills.

Imported soils are not anticipated for backfill since the on-site soils are suitable. However, if imported soils are used, the soils should consist of clean materials with physical and chemical characteristics similar to those described herein for on-site soils. Any imported soils to be used as backfill should be evaluated and approved by GMU prior to placement.

Soils to be used as trench backfill should be moistened, dried, or blended as necessary to achieve a minimum of 2% over optimum moisture content for compaction, placed in loose lifts no greater than 12 inches thick, and then mechanically compacted/densified to at least 92% relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. Sand-cement slurry is also an acceptable means of backfill.

CONCRETE
Concrete improvements are anticipated for storm drain and drainage structures. Based on a negligible to moderate sulfate exposure to concrete, concrete for the project should be based on Table 201-1.1.3 of the current Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction.

SURFACE DRAINAGE, EROSION CONTROL, AND SLOPE LANDSCAPING The on-site soils are susceptible to erosion when subjected to concentrated runoff, and when not protected by erosion control and landscaping. Surface drainage and erosion control should be carefully controlled during and after grading to prevent ponding adjacent to, and runoff onto, the proposed graded areas and slope areas. In particular, care should be taken to maintain surface drainage facilities and prevent concentrated runoff over graded soil areas. The plans for erosion control, landscaping, and planting should be prepared by a qualified professional experienced in utilizing plant materials for long-term reduction of erosion hazards. Design of grading and drainage improvements, erosion control, and landscaping/planting is outside the purview of GMU.

FUTURE MAINTENANCE, DRAINAGE, AND EROSION CONTROL
Future performance and resistance to erosion are dependent on at least three primary factors:
drainage control, erosion control, and landscape/vegetation coverage. Future maintenance and control of drainage, in addition to erosion and sediment control, will be required to maintain the function and performance of the planned grading and drainage improvements. Specifically, maintenance will be needed on storm drains, terrace drains, inlets, basins, and other drainage improvements. In addition, erosion and sediment control is critical for the planned slopes and graded areas. The graded areas should be adequately protected from erosion at all times to prevent the channeling of runoff, rilling, and other erosion that could compromise surficial slope stability.

An erosion and sediment control plan should be developed and maintained to protect the surficial integrity of slopes and graded areas.

GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION AND TESTING DURING CONSTRUCTION Geotechnical observation and testing should be performed by GMU during the following stages of construction:
• During all phases of grading including clearing, remedial grading, scarification, ground preparation, moisture conditioning, and placement and compaction of all fill materials • During storm drain structure and trench backfill
• During subgrade preparation for all drainage structures • When any unusual conditions are encountered.

FUTURE INVESTIGATION, ANALYSES, AND REPORTS
The following future investigation, analyses, and reports are anticipated:
• Rough Grading Plan Review Report
o This report may include additional subsurface investigation and analyses to further refine remedial grading
• Bridge Foundation Design Report
o The Bridge Foundation Design Report will contain additional subsurface investigation, laboratory testing, and analyses to support the design of a foundation system for the final bridge structure.

LIMITATIONS
All parties reviewing or utilizing this report should recognize that the findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented represent the results of our professional geological and geotechnical engineering efforts and judgments. Due to the inexact nature of the state of the art of these professions and the possible occurrence of undetected variables in subsurface conditions, we cannot guarantee that the conditions actually encountered during grading and site construction will be identical to those observed, sampled, and interpreted during our study, or that there are no unknown subsurface conditions which could have an adverse effect on the use of the property. We have exercised a degree of care comparable to the standard of practice presently maintained by other professionals in the fields of geotechnical engineering and engineering geology, and believe that our findings present a reasonably representative description of geotechnical conditions and their probable influence on the grading and use of the property.

Our conclusions and recommendations are based on the assumption that our firm will act as the geotechnical engineer of record during construction and grading of the project to observe the actual conditions exposed, to verify our design concepts and the grading contractor’s general compliance with the project geotechnical specifications, and to provide our revised conclusions and recommendations should subsurface conditions differ significantly from those used as the basis for our conclusions and recommendations presented in this report. Since our conclusions and recommendations are based on a limited amount of current and previous geotechnical exploration and analysis, all parties should recognize the need for possible revisions to our conclusions and recommendations during construction of the project.

CLOSURE
We are pleased to present the results of our geotechnical review of preliminary grading plans for this project. The Plates and Appendices that complete this report are listed in the Table of Contents.

If you have any questions concerning our findings, please call and we will be glad to discuss them with you.

Respectfully submitted,
Dustin Williams, MSc, PG, CEG 2759
Project Engineering Geologist
Ashley A. Varni, M.Sc., PE 89576
Project Engineer
Alan B. Mutchnick, PG, CEG 1789
Associate Engineering Geologist
Gregory Silver, M.Sc., PE, GE 2336
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
/20-108-03 (6-12-2023)_OCCD_Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Tentative Parcel

REFERENCES
Site-Specific References
1) Preliminary Grading Plan for Tentative Parcel Map 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery, Orange County Cemetery District, City of Anaheim, CA., prepared by Huitt-Zollars, Inc., dated May 9, 2023 (Job No. R31454.01).
2) Our “Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading Plan for Tentative Parcel Map 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site City of Anaheim, California,” dated August 29, 2022 (GMU Project No. 20-108-03).
3) Our “Response to City of Anaheim Geotechnical Overview Report Review Comments – dated November 11, 2022, Pertaining to Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading Plan for Tentative Parcel Map 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, California dated August 29, 2022,” dated February 24, 2023 (GMU Project No. 20-108-03). 4) Response 2 Our “Second Response to City of Anaheim Geotechnical Engineering Review Sheet – dated March 17, 2023, Plan Check #TECH2022-01449, Pertaining to Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading Plan for Tentative Parcel Map 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, California dated August 29, 2022,” dated April 7, 2023 (GMU Project No. 20-108-03). 5) City of Anaheim Department of Public Works, Re: Geotechnical Study Gypsum Canyon Cemetery District, 118 E. Gypsum Canyon Road, TECH2022-01449 – Third Review (Conditional Approval), dated May 2, 2023
6) Leighton Consulting Group, Inc. “Geotechnical Engineering Site Feasibility Study, Proposed Gypsum Canyon Cemetery, State Route 91 and Gypsum Canyon Road, Anaheim, California,” dated October 8, 2019.
7) City of Anaheim, “Engineering Division Comments on Proposed Cemetery Site on County Park Property at Gypsum Canyon Road and Santa Ana Canyon Road, Memorandum,” dated February 13, 2020.
8) Overall Site Plan, Sheet L-1.02, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Development Application, Orange County Cemetery District, City of Anaheim, CA, prepared by RJM Design Group, dated August 29, 2022 (Their Job No. 605-15).
9) RJM Design Group, “Refined Conceptual Site Plan – Grading, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Development, County of Orange, California,” April 28, 2020. 10) RJM Design Group, “Conceptual Site Plan – Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Development, County of Orange, California,” dated September 19, 2019.
11) CHJ, “Slope Stability Investigation Robertson’s Star Plant Gypsum Canyon Anaheim, California, Prepared for Roberston’s Ready Mix,” dated February 14, 2003 (Their Job No. 021006-3).

CDMG, 2001, Seismic Hazard Zones, Black Star Canyon 7.5-minute Quadrangle Official Map, Orange County, California: Seismic Hazard Zone Report 2000-012.

CDMG, 2008, “Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California,” CGS Special Publication 117A.

Chu, D.B., Stewart, J.P., Youd, T.L., and Chule, B.L., 2006, Liquefaction-induced lateral spreading in nearfault regions during the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan earthquake, J. Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Eng., ASCE 132(12), 1549–565.

CLiq, v.3.3.3.2, 2021, Software for Liquefaction Potential Evaluation using Cone Penetration Tests and Standard Penetration Tests, Prepared by GeoLogismiki Geotechnical Software.

Idriss, I.M. and Boulanger, R.W., 2008, Soil Liquefaction during Earthquakes, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute,” MNO-12.

Ishihara, K. and Yoshimine, M. “Evaluation of settlements in sand deposits following liquefaction during earthquakes”, Soils and Foundations, 1992, 32, 173-88.

Martin, G.R. and Lew, M., Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California, Organized through the Southern California Earthquake Center, University of Southern California, 63 pgs.

P.K. Robertson, 2009, Interpretation of Cone Penetration Tests - a unified approach., Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 46, No. 11, pp 1337-1355.

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.

Pradel, D., 1998, Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 124, No. 4, pgs. 364-368.

Rathje, E.M., and Antonakos, G., 2011, “A Unified Model for Predicting Earthquake-Induced Sliding Displacements of Rigid and Flexible Slopes,” Engineering Geology, 122, pp. 51-60.

Skempton, A.W., 1986, Standard Penetration Test Procedures and the effects in Sands of Overburden Pressure, Relative Density, Particle Size, Ageing, and Overconsolidation, Geotechnique, Volume 36, No. 3, September 1, 1986.

Slope/W, 2020, Software for Slope Stability Analysis, Prepared by Geo-Slope International Ltd.

Tokimatsu, K. and Seed, H.B., 1987, Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 113, No. 8, pgs. 861-878.

U.S. Geologic Survey, 1954, “Geologic Map of the Northern Santa Ana Mountains, Orange and Riverside Counties, California,” 1:24,000.

U.S. Geologic Survey, 1949, “Black Star Canyon Quadrangle, California, 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic),” 1:24,000.

Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M., et al. (1997), Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Technical Report NCEER - 97-0022, January 5, 6, 1996.

Youd, T.L., Idriss, I.M., et al. (2001), Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, ASCE Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, No. 10, October 2001.

Zhang, G., Robertson. P.K., Brachman, R., 2002, Estimating Liquefaction Induced Ground Settlements from the CPT, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39: pp 1168-1180. 0 3000'
Date:

Project No.:

Plate
Location Map
20-108-03
JUNE 12, 2023
1 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY

ORANGE COUNTY

ANAHEIM

YORBA LINDA
CA-241 SR
CA-91 SR

PROJECT SITE

GYPSUM CANYON VA CEMETERY
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2022-016

ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA

E STANA ANA CANYON RD

LA PALMA AVE

CANYON RD
GYPSUM

SANTA ANA RIVER

S WEIR CANYON RD

S SERRANO AVE

ENGINEERS&GEOLOGISTS
620
630
635
640
645
615
620
625
630
635
640
645
635
640
645
650
650
655
655
630
635
640
645
645
650
650
655
655
660
660
500
505
510
515
600
605
610
615
620
625
440
445
450
455
460
465
470
475
480
485
490
495
470
475
480
485
490
490
490
495
500
505
510 515 520 525
525
525
530
535
540
545
550
555
560
565
570
575
580
585
590
595
600
605
610
15 465
470
475
480
485
490
495
500
505
510
515
520
525
530
535
535
535
540
545
550
555
560
565
570
575
575
575
580
585
590
595
600
605
610
615
620
625
630
635
640
645
615
620
625
635
640
645
616
617
618
619
621
622
623
624
634
636
637
638
639
641
642
643
644
646
647
648
649
450
450
450
450
455
455
455
455
455
460
460
460
460
465
465
465
465
470
470
470
470
475
475
475
475
480
480
480
480
485
485
485
490
490
495
495
500
500
415
420
425
430
435
411
412
413
414
416
417
418
419
421
422
423
424
426
427
428
429
431
432
433
434
436
437
438
439
450
455
460
465
470
475
451
452
453
454
456457
458
459
461
462
463
464
466
467
468
469
471
472
473
474
476
660
665
670
670
670
675
675
675
680
680
680
685
685685
690
690
690
695
700 705 710
715
715
715
720
725
730
735
740
745
750
755
755
755
760
765
770
775
780 785
790
795
800
800
800
805
810
815
820
820820
820 820
825
830
KEYWAY 5'Dx15'W
5'Dx15'W
KEYWAY
15'Dx20'W
KEYWAY
KEYWAY 15'Dx20'W
KEYWAY 15'Dx20'W
KEYWAY 5'Dx15'W

TRANSITION
12'Dx50'W
TRANS
15'Dx30'W

TRANSITION
KEYWAY 40'Dx120'W
KEYWAY

TRANSITION
12'Dx50'W

TRANSITION
KEYWAY 50'Dx120'W
KEYWAY 60'Dx135'W
KEYWAY 50'Dx120'W
KEYWAY 50'Dx120'W
15'Dx30'W
KEYWAY
30'Dx30'W

TRANSITION
16 17
16'
17'
STL-2
STL-1
LINE 6
LINE 4
LINE 5
SL-1
SL-2 ReMi-1
1'
1 4
4'
5'
5 6
6'
3'
3 2
2'
8 9
8'
9'
7 7'
10'
10 11
11'
12'
12 13'
13 14
14'
15' 15
15 Qsw Tvs
Qsw
Qsw
Qal
Qal
Qal
Qsw
Qsw
Qsw
Qsw
Qsw
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
Qls3
Tsa
Qls2
Tsa
Tsa
Qal
Qal
F
F
F
F
SHEAR
ZONE
F
SHEAR
ZONE
Qal
Qls4
Tvs
Qaf
Qal
Qsw
Tvs
Qaf
Qafc
Tvs
Tvs
Qaf
Tvs
Qaf
Qal
Qls1
Qaf
Qls1
Qaf
Qal
Qaf
Tvs
Qal
Qaf
?
?
Tvs
Qaf
Tvs
Qaf
Qaf
Tvs
Qaf
Tvs
Qaf
Qal
Qaf
Qal
Qaf
Qal
Qaf
Tvs
GW @ 55'
Qal @ 24-55'
Qaf @ 0 - 24'
(GSI 2003)
QB-1
TD = 55'
QB-9
(GSI 2003)
Qaf @ 0-35'
TD = 61'
Qal @ 35-61'
GW @ 18'
Qal @ 39-54'
Qaf @ 0-39'
(GSI 2003)
QB-8
TD = 54'
QB-2
(GSI 2003)
Qaf @ 0-25'
TD = 28'
Tvs @ 25-28'
Tvs @ 50-56'
Qal @ 38-50'
Qaf @ 0-38'
(GSI 2003)
QB-3
TD = 56'
Tvs @ 103-105'
Qal @ 95-103'
Qaf @ 0-95'
(GSI 2003)
QB-5
TD = 105'
QB-11
(GSI 2003)
Qaf @ 0-25'
TD = 30'
Tvs @ 25-30'
QB-7
(GSI 2003)
Qaf @ 0-49'
TD = 53'
Tvs @ 49-53'
Tvs @ 81.5-84'
Qal @ 67-81.5'
Qaf @ 0-67'
(GSI 2003)
QB-6
GW @ 50'
TD @ 84'
Tvs @ 100-101'
Qal @ 81-100'
Qaf @ 0-81'
(GSI 2003)
QB-10
TD = 101'
HS-2
(L&A 2006)
Qal @ 0-48'
TD = 48'
GW @ 45'-48'
CPT-7
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 41
TD = 49'
CPT-13
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 27'
TD = 29'
HS-3
(L&A 2006)
Qal @ 0-25'
TD = 36.5'
Tvs @ 25'-36.5'
CPT-18
(L&A 2006)
TD = 21.8'
CPT-8
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 42'
TD = 50.3'
GW @ 27.3
Tvs @ 50'-56.5'
Qal @ 0-50'
(L&A 2006)
HS-4
TD = 56.5'
CPT-19
(L&A 2006)
TD = 55.6'
GW @ 25'
Tvs @ 50-56.5'
Qal @ 0-50'
(L&A 2006)
HS-1
TD = 56.5'
CPT-6
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 37.5'
TD = 42'
@ 80' CONGLOMERATE
Qal @ 3-80'
Qaf @ 0-3'
(L&A 2006)
HS-17
TD = 99'
CPT-11
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 26-30'
TD = 38'
CPT-12
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 22-26'
TD = 62'
GW @ 26.4'
Qal @ 4-55'
Qaf @ 0-4'
(L&A 2006)
HS-18
TD = 55'
HS-19
(L&A 2006)
Qal @ 0-56'
TD = 56'
GW @ 39.6'
CPT-14
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 28'
TD = 36'
RC-3
(L&A 2006)
Qal @ 0-50'
TD = 50'
T-9
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 17'
TD = 18'
Tvs @ 17'
Tvs @ 23'
Qcol @ 12-23'
Qaf @ 0-12'
(L&A 2006)
T-10
TD = 23'
T-29
(L&A 2006)
Qcol @ 0 - 22'
TD = 22'
T-21
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 19'
TD = 19'
Tvs @ 40 - 50.5' CONGLOMERATE
Qal @ 26 - 40'
Qaf @ 0-26'
(L&A 2006)
HS-15
TD = 50.5'
GW @ 30'
Tvs @ 75-85'
Qal @ 0-75'
(GSI 1989)
B-36
TD = 85'
CPT-17A
(L&A 2006)
TD = 1.3'
GW @ 23.8'
Qal @ 6'-62' REFUSAL
Qaf @ 0-6'
(L&A 2006)
HS-9
TD = 62'
CPT-17
(L&A 2006)
TD = 38.2'
CPT-4
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 25'
TD = 25'
CPT-4A
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 23'
TD = 60'
Tvs @ 64'-75'
Qal @ 9'-64'
Qaf @ 0'-9'
(GSI 1989)
B-35
GW @ 34'
TD = 75'
T-27
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 17'
TD = 22'
Qoal @ 17 - 22'
CPT-5
(L&A 2006)
TD = 43.6'
CPT-16A
(L&A 2006)
TD = 16.8'
CPT-16
(L&A 2006)
TD = 16.9'
Tvs @ 55.5'-74'
Qal @ 8'-55.5'
Qaf @ 0-8'
(L&A 2006)
HS-7
GW @ 31'
TD = 74'
CPT-3
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 20'
TD = 50.2'
GW @ 42'
Qal @ 5-44'
Qaf @ 0-5'
(GSI 1989A)
DH-19
T-46 TD = 44'
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 20'
TD = 24'
Qal @ 20 - 24'
CPT-15
(L&A 2006)
TD = 65.7'
CPT-2A
(L&A 2006)
TD = 26.5'
GW @ 37'
Qal @ 19-41'
Qaf @ 0-19'
(L&A 2006)
BA-6
TD = 41'
CPT-2
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 23'
TD = 35.3'
GW @ 38.3'
Qal @ 18'-70'
Qaf @ 0-18'
(L&A 2006)
HS-6
TD = 70'
TP-33
(GSI 1989)
TD = 10'
CPT-9
(L&A 2006)
GW @ 31'
TD = 56.8'
T-38
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 -12'
TD = 17'
Qal @ 12 - 17'
DH-16
(GSI 1989A)
Qaf @ 0-7'
TD = 31'
Qal @ 7-31'
GW @ 74'
Tvs @ 84-95'
Qal @ 0-84'
(GSI 1989)
B-34
TP-22
TP-34
(GSI 1989)
TD = 12'
HS-16
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 35'
TD = 45.5'
Tvs @ 35'
T-8
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 9'
TD = 10'
Tvs @ 9'
DH-21
(GSI 1989A)
Qaf @ 0-27'
TD = 28.5'
Qal @ 27-28.5'
GW @ 44'
Qal @ 22-47'
Qaf @ 0-22'
(L&A 2006)
BA-4
TD = 47'
DH-17
(GSI 1989A)
Qaf @ 0-20'
TD = 37'
Qal @ 20-37'
TP-30
(GSI 1989)
TD = 6'
T-34
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 4'
TD = 22'
Qal @ 4 - 22'
TP-31
(GSI 1989)
TD = 9'
T-26
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 24'
TD = 24'
T-19
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 24'
TD = 24'
T-14
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-22'
TD = 22'
SEEPAGE @ 5'
T-11
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 18'
TD = 18'
T-12
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-10'
TD = 11'
Tvs @ 10'
T-7
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-11'
TD = 12'
Tvs @ 11'
T-6
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-24'
TD = 24'
Tvs @ 24'
T-31
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 16'
TD = 20'
Tvs @ 16'
SEEPAGE @ 14'
Tvs @ 21'
Qaf @ 0-21'
(L&A 2006)
T-15
TD = 22'
T-13
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-22'
TD = 22'
SEEPAGE @ 15'
T-5
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-11.5'
TD = 12'
Tvs @ 11.5'
RC-4
(L&A 2006)
Qal @ 0 - 105'
TD = 105'
DH-15
(GSI 1989A)
Qaf @ 0-22'
Qal @ 22-33'
TP-21
(GSI 1989)
TD = 5.5'
T-37
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 23'
TD = 23'
Tvs @ 50'
Qal @10-50'
Qaf @ 0-10'
(L&A 2019)
2019-E
TD = 56.5'
T-44
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 22'
TD = 22'
Tvs @27-30'
Qal @ 25-27'
Qaf @ 0-25'
(GSI 1989A)
DH-20
TD = 30'
T-36
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 25'
TD = 25'
BA-19
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-17'
TD 30'
Tvs @ 17-30' TP-29
(GSI 1989)
TD = 7.5'
Tvs @ 57'
Qal @ 40-57'
Qaf @ 0-40'
(L&A 2019)
2019-K
TD = 65.7'
T-35
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 22'
TD = 24'
Qal @ 22 - 24'
T-43
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 23'
TD = 23'
BA-5
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-70'
TD = 70'
SEEPAGE @ 45'
Tvs @ 25'
Qal @ 15-25'
Qaf @ 0-15'
(L&A 2019)
2019-L
TD = 31.5'
T-18
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 24'
TD = 24'
T-20
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 23'
TD = 23'
T-22
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-19'
TD = 24'
Tvs @ 19'
T-23
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-22'
TD = 22'
T-24
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-7'
TD = 9'
Tsa @ 7'
T-25
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-4'
TD = 5'
Tvs @ 4'
T-4
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-11'
TD = 12'
Tvs @ 11'
T-2
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-2'
TD = 4'
Tvs @ 2'
T-3
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-14'
TD = 15'
Tvs @ 14'
T-1
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-5'
TD = 5'
Tvs @ 5'
Tvs @ 52-60'
Qal @ 48-52'
Qaf @ 0-48'
(L&A 2006)
BA-1
TD = 60'
Tvs @ 78-81'
Qal @ 72-78'
Qaf @ 0-72'
(GSI 1989A)
DH-12
TD = 81'
2019-D
(L&A 2019)
Qaf @ 0-70'
TD = 97'
Qal @ 70'
T-45
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 22'
TD = 22'
DH-10
(GSI 1989A)
Qaf @ 0-18'
TD = 25'
Tvs @ 18-25'
TP-20
(GSI 1989)
TD = 7.5';
TP-19
(GSI 1989)
TD = 7.5'
T-41
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 22'
TD = 22'
BA-3
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-20'
TD = 50'
Tvs @ 20-50'
T-42
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 22'
TD = 22'
TP-28
(GSI 1989)
TD = 7.5'
TP-27
(GSI 1989)
Qaf @ 0 - 9'
TD = 11'
Qal @ 9 - 11'
T-16
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 24'
TD = 24'
T-17
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 23'
TD = 23'
DH-11
(GSI 1989A)
Qaf @ 0-10'
TD = 15'
Qal @ 10-15' TP-26
(GSI 1989)
TD = 8'
T-33
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 24'
TD = 25'
Tvs @ 24'
T-32
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 6'
TD = 11'
Tvs @ 6'
Tvs @ 56-76.5'
Qal @ 55 - 56'
Qaf @ 0-55'
(L&A 2006)
HS-14
TD 76.5'
GW @ 52'
Tvs @ 92'-106'
Qls @ 0-92'
(CHJ 2003)
B-2
TD = 156'
2019-M
(L&A 2019)
Qaf @ 0 - 70'
TD = 86'
Qls @ 70 - 86'
HS-13
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-53.5'
TD = 53.5
SEEPAGE @ 15'
Tvs @ 15'
Qaf @ 0-15'
(L&A 2019)
2019-BA-1
TD = 55'
HS-12
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-28'
TD = 28'
T-30
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-2'
TD = 5'
Tvs @ 2'
RC-5
(L&A 2006)
Qal @ 0-50'
TD = 50'
2019-A
(L&A 2019)
Qaf @ 0-25'
TD = 31'
Tvs @ 25'
2019-C
(L&A 2019)
Qaf @ 0-60'
TD = 111.5'
Qal @ 60'
DH-22
(GSI 1989A)
Qaf @ 0-105'
TD = 107'
Qal @ 105-107'
Tvs @ 33-40'
Qsw @ 27-33'
Qaf @ 0-27'
(GSI 1989A)
DH-5
TD = 40'
DH-7
(GSI 1989A)
Qaf @ 0-60'
TD = 62'
Tvs @ 60-62'
Tvs @ 50'
Qal @ 30 - 50'
Qaf @ 0-30'
(L&A 2019)
2019-F
TD = 61.5'
TP-17
(GSI 1989)
TD = 9.5'
Tvs @ 65'
Qal @ 55-65'
Qaf @ 0-55'
(L&A 2019)
2019-G
GW @ 54'
TD = 70.8'
DH-9
(GSI 1989A)
Qaf @ 0-29'
TD = 32'
Tvs @ 29-32'
2019-H
(L&A 2019)
Qaf @ 0-50'
TD = 55.7'
Tvs @ 50'
T-40
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 22'
TD = 22'
GW @ 7.8'
Tvs @ 28-42'
Qaf @ 0-28'
(L&A 2006)
BA-17
TD = 42'
BA-18
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-26'
TD = 40'
Tvs @ 26-40'
T-39
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 23'
TD = 23'
BA-16
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0-28'
TD = 40'
Tvs @ 28-40'
TP-8
(GSI 1989)
TD = 8.5'
Tvs @ 11-21'
Qal @ 10-11'
Qaf @ 0-10'
(GSI 1989A)
DH-8
TD = 21'
TP-10
(GSI 1989)
TD = 7'
TP-9
(GSI 1989)
TD = 10'
Tvs @ 75-77'
Qal @ 54-75'
Qaf @ 0-54'
(GSI 1989A)
DH-3
TD = 77'
Tvs @ 70'
Qal @ 30-70'
Qaf @ 0-30'
(L&A 2019)
2019-I
TD = 75.5'
Tvs @ 50-56'
Qal @ 40-50'
Qaf @ 0-40'
(GSI 1989A)
DH-2
TD = 56'
Tvs @ 50'
Qal @ 40-50'
Qaf @ 0-40'
(L&A 2019)
2019-J
TD = 65.2'
TP-1
(GSI 1989)
TD = 12' TP-2
(GSI 1989)
TD = 11'
DH-4
(GSI 1989A)
Qaf @ 0-40'
TD = 46'
Tvs @ 40-46'
Tvs @ 50'
Qal @ 45-50'
Qaf @ 0-45'
(L&A 2019)
2019-B
TD = 55.5'
TP-3
(GSI 1989)
TD = 9'
Tvs @ 24'
Qls @ 10 - 24'
Qaf @ 0 - 10'
(L&A 2006)
RC-1
TD = 200'
B-4
(CHJ 2003)
Qls @ 0-75'
TD = 100'
Tvs @ 75-100'
GW @ 62'
Tvs @ 88-270'
Qls @ 0-88'
(CHJ 2003)
B-1
TD = 270
BA-12
(L&A 2006)
Qls @ 0-4'
TD = 170'
Tvs @ 4-170'
Tvs @ 34.5'
Qls @ 22-34.5'
Qaf @ 0-22'
(L&A 2006)
RC-2
TD = 202'
GW @ 38'
Tvs @ 48'
Qaf @ 0-48'
(L&A 2019)
2019-BA-3
TD = 77'
GW @ 43'
Tvs @ 58'
Qaf @ 0-58'
(L&A 2019)
2019-BA-2
TD = 60'
TP-7
(GSI 1989)
TD = 11'
Tvs @ 26-31'
Qal @ 21-26'
Qaf @ 0-21'
(GSI 1989A)
DH-6
TD = 31'
TP-12
(GSI 1989)
TD = 9'
TP-11
(GSI 1989)
TD = 8'
B-3
(CHJ 2003)
Qls @ 0-65'
TD = 100'
Tvs @ 65-75'
BA-9
(L&A 2006)
Tvs @ 0-101'
TD = 101'
BA-15
(L&A 2006)
Qls @ 0-15.5'
TD = 100'
Tvs @ 15.5'
BA-14
(L&A 2006)
Qls @ 0-32.5'
TD = 99'
Tvs @ 32.5'
BA-10
(L&A 2006)
Tvs @ 0-102'
TD = 102'
BA-13
(L&A 2006)
Tvs @ 0-108'
TD = 108'
TP-4
(GSI 1989)
TD = 9'
Tvs @ 38-41'
Qal @ 31-38'
Qaf @ 0-31'
(GSI 1989A)
DH-1
TD = 41'
TP-13
(GSI 1989)
TD = 7.5'
TP-14
(GSI 1989)
TD = 9'
TP-15
(GSI 1989)
TD = 8.5'
TP-6
(GSI 1989)
TD = 8.5'
TP-5
(GSI 1989)
TD = 12.5'
BA-11
(L&A 2006)
Tsa @ 2'
TD = 106'
GW @ 27'
Qal @ 3-30'
Qaf @ 0-3'
(GSI 1989A)
DH-18
TD = 30'
TP-35
(GSI 1989)
TD = 9'
Qcol @ 15 - 53'
Qal @ 2.5 - 15'
Qaf @ 0 - 2.5'
(L&A 2006)
HS-8
Tvs @ 53'
GW @ 36.7'
TD = 53'
T-28
(L&A 2006)
Qaf @ 0 - 6'
TD = 14'
Qal @ 6 - 14'
HS-3A
(L&A 2006)
Qal @ 0-22'
TD = 27.5
Tvs @ 22'-27.5'
TP-32
(GSI 1989)
Qaf @ 0 - 6'
TD = 6'
TP-18
(GSI 1989)
TD = 9'
DH-1
(20-108-01)
Qaf @ 0 - 50'
TD = 50'
TP-2
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 13'
TD = 13'
TP-1
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 4.5'
TD = 7.5'
Qoal @ 4.5'
GW @ 44.3'
Qal @ 10'
Qaf @ 0 - 10'
(20-108-03)
DH-4
TD = 80'
TP-7
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 3'
TD = 13'
Qoal @ 3 - 13'
TP-15
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 1.5'
TD = 10'
Qoal @ 1.5'
TP-6
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 1.5'
TD = 1.5'
TP-14
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 10'
TD = 10'
TP-5
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 5.5'
TD = 5.5'
TP-3
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 7'
TD = 7'
TP-4
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 9'
TD = 9'
TP-8
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 5'
TD = 5'
TP-9
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 10'
TD = 10'
TP-10
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 9'
TD = 9'
TP-11
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 8.5'
TD = 8.5'
DH-3
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 31'
TD = 83'
Tvs @ 31'
TP-13
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0 - 10'
TD = 10'
TP-12
(20-108-03)
Qaf @ 0-8'
TD = 8'
Tvs @ 31'
Qls @ 16'
Qaf @ 0 - 16'
(20-108-03)
DH-2
TD = 100'
Tvs @ 35.5'
Qls @ 22'
Qaf @ 0-22'
(20-108-03)
DH-1
TD = 100'
BA-14
(L&A 2006)
(L&A 2006)
BA-15
(L&A 2006)
BA-9
(L&A 2006)
BA-10
(L&A 2006)
BA-13
(L&A 2006)
BA-12
(L&A 2006)
BA-11
51 80.5'
52 71.2'
54 69'
20 64.8'
15 46'
32 43.6'
18 39.8'
35 38.5'
33 33.4'
47 28'
57 20.4'
33 88.5'
31 87.8'
30 80.3'
28 15.5'
22 10.5'
50 64'
18 58.5'
17 15

35.8'
40 29'
17 27.2'
18 24.8'
25 18.4'
44 57
74'
20 70.8'
18 69.5'
33 65.2'
13 64.6'
22 52.6'
21 21
51 26.7'
13 21.5'
18 19'
15 14'
30 13.8'
26 8.6'
20 43
159'
39 150'
14 150'
10 146'
13 24
101'
5 92'
16 87'
4 14
12 79'
10 57'
13 62
26 29'
82 10'
11 4'
50 104'
68 100'
19 90.4'
19 88.8'
11 82'
23 79'
27 74'
17 67.5'
18 54.7'
22 50.4'
17 47'
18 46.1'
60 43'
8 41'
14 38.8'
20 29'
54 21.8'
40 17.6'
49 15.8'
50 15.1'
18 7.7'
67 55'
15 34
28 21'
26 28
15'
30 12'
29 33
6'
(20-108-03)
DH-1
24 74'
22 62'
19 42'
18 36'
18 35.5'
84 30'
54 28'
70 26'
(20-108-03)
DH-2
(20-108-03)
DH-3
20 64'
21 53'
10 34'
13 31'
35-45
25'
52 21'
45 21'
13 16'
64 15'
21 69'
C
71' 28
C
20 75'
C
62 71'
10 44'
78 39'
26 34'
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F

32.5'
28 17

55.3'
51'
18 75.4'

75.4'
21 46.3'

40.9'

82.1'
20 77.5'

17.5'

9.8'
85 9'

25.1'

25.8'

85.3'
5 48.9'

82.4'

85.7'
161.5'
143.6'
125.6'
F
2019-BA-1
(L&A 2019)
72 31' F
83 34'
F
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM

SECONDARY ACCESS
ROAD
S

ECONDARY

ACCESS ROAD
S
E
CO
N
DA
RY
ACC
ES
S
ROAD
Date:

Project No.:

Plate

GEOTECHNICAL MAP
20-108-03
JUNE 12, 2023

2.1 GEOTECHNICAL LEGEND
Qaf
Qsw
Qal
Qls1
Qls2
Qls3
Tvs
Tsa

UNDOCUMENTED FILL

SLOPEWASH

ALLUVIUM

RECENT LANDSLIDE (CIRCLED WHERE BURIED)

ANCIENT LANDSLIDE

VAQUEROS - SESPE FORMATION (CIRCLED WHERE BURIED)

SANTIAGO FORMATION
18 7.7'

TYPICAL BEDDING ATTITUDE, DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE

TYPICAL JOINT ATTITUDE, DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE

TYPICAL SHEAR ATTITUDE, DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE

TYPICAL CLAY SEAM ATTITUDE, DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE
11 4'
51 80'
40 17.6'
14 38.8'

GEOLOGIC CONTACT

BURIED GEOLOGIC CONTACT

FAULT SHEAR ZONE

BURIED FAULT SHEAR ZONE

TYPICAL LANDSLIDE RUPTURE SURFACE ATTITUDE,
DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE.

F
F
9 9'

GEOTECHNICAL SECTION
DH
(20-108-03) APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BUCKET AUGER DRILL HOLE BY GMU GEOTECHNICAL, INC.; PROJECT NO. 20-108-03.

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BUCKET AUGER DRILL HOLE
BY GMU GEOTECHNICAL, INC.; PROJECT NO. 20-108-01

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BUCKET AUGER DRILL HOLE
BY LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, 2019.

DH
(20-108-01)
2019-BA-3
(L&A 2019)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BUCKET AUGER DRILL HOLE
BY LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, 2006.

BA-19
(L&A 2006)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BUCKET AUGER DRILL HOLE
BY CHJ, 2003.

B-4
(CHJ 2003)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BUCKET AUGER DRILL HOLE
BY GEOSOILS INC., 2003.

QB-11
(GSI 2003)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BUCKET AUGER DRILL HOLE
BY GEOSOILS INC., 1989.

B-36
(GSI 1989)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BUCKET AUGER DRILL HOLE
BY GEOSOILS INC., 1989A.

DH-22
(GSI 1989A)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HOLLOW STEM AUGER DRILL HOLE
BY LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC., 2019.
2019-M
(L&A 2019)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HOLLOW STEM AUGER DRILL HOLE
BY LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, 2006.

HS-19
(L&A 2006)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ROCK CORE DRILL HOLE
BY LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, 2006.

RC-5
(L&A 2006)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF CONE PENETROMETER TEST
BY LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, 2006.

CPT-19
(L&A 2006)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PIT
BY GMU GEOTECHNICAL, INC.; PROJEC NO. 20-108-03.

TP-15
(20-108-03)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PIT
BY LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, 2006.

T-46
(L&A 21006)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PIT
BY GEOSOILS INC., 1989.

TP-35
(GSI 1989)
SL-2

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF STING LINE
BY SOUTHWEST GEOPHYSICS, 2006.

STL-2

GAS PIPELINE

TYPICAL FAULT ATTITUDE, DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE
40 17.6'
F
(REMi-1)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SEISMIC LINE
BY EARTH TECHNOLOGY CORP., 1984.

LINE 6

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SEISMIC (AND REFRACTION
MICROTREMOR) LINE BY SOUTHWEST GEOPHYSICS, 2006.

PROPOSED KEYWAYS
SM

PROPOSED SETTLEMENT MONUMENT
FUTURE

GAS PIPELINE

EASEMENT
Qls4 ANCIENT LANDSLIDE
0 100' 200'

PROPERTY LINE

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF

SECONDARY ACCESS ROAD

ENGINEERS&GEOLOGISTS
0 600'
Date:

Project No.:

Plate
Seismic Hazard Map
20-108-03
JUNE 12, 2023

2.2 CA-91 SR

GYPSUM CANYON RD

E SANTA ANA CANYON RD

YORBA LINDA

ANAHEIM

SANTA ANA RIVER
LEGEND

LIQUEFACTION

EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED LANDSLIDES

AREAS WHERE HISTORIC OCCURRENCE

OF LIQUEFACTION, OR LOCAL

GEOLOGICAL, GEOTECHNICAL AND

GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS INDICATE A

POTENTIAL FOR PERMANENT GROUND

DISPLACEMENTS SUCH THAT MITIGATION

AS DEFINED IN PUBLIC RESOURCE CODE
SECTION 2693(c) WOULD BE REQUIRED.

AREAS WHERE PREVIOUS OCCURRENCE

OF LANDSLIDE MOVEMENT, OR LOCAL

TOPOGRAPHIC, GEOLOGICAL,

GEOTECH-NICAL AND SUBSURFACE

WATER CONDITIONS INDICATE A

POTENTIAL FOR PERMANENT GROUND

DIPLACEMENTS SUCH THAT

MITIGATIONS AS DEFINED IN PUBLIC
RESOURCES CODE SECTION 2693(c)

WOULD BE REQUIRED

ENGINEERS&GEOLOGISTS
Qaf
Qaf
Qaf Qls1
Tvs
Qls1
Tvs

PROPOSED GRADING

EXISTING GRADE
TD 28'
HS-12
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 61'

CROSS SECTION
2 - 2'
TD 10'
TP-9
(20-108-03)
Proj. 100'
TD 60'
2019 BA-2
(L&A 2019)
Proj. 78'

CROSS SECTION
3 - 3'
TD 200'
RC-1
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 51'
Qaf

CROSS SECTION
5 - 5'
TD 11'
TP-2
(GSI 1989)
Proj. -40'

CROSS SECTION
4 - 4'
TD 84'
QB-6
(GSI 2003)
Proj. -40'

CROSS SECTION
6 - 6'
TD 8'
TP-12
(20-108-03)
Proj. -42'
TD 40'
BA-16
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 64'
TD 23'
T-39
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -43'

GAS PIPELINE

EASEMENT

C GAS PIPE L
TD 70.8'
2019-G
(L&A 2019)
Proj. -57'
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
Qaf
Tvs
Qaf
Qls1
Tvs
Qaf

CROSS SECTION
1 - 1'

BEND IN

SECTION
?
?
?
?

DEVELOPMENT

BOUNDARY

DEVELOPMENT

BOUNDARY

DEVELOPMENT

BOUNDARY
TD 12'
T-4
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 106'
LOWER
AREA
UPPER
AREA
TD 5'
T-25
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 95'
TD 55'
2019-BA-1
(L&A 2019)
Proj. 86'
TD 53.5'
HS-13
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 99'
TD 86.5'
2019-M
(L&A 2019)
Proj. 246'
TD 60'
2019-BA-2
(L&A 2019)
Proj. -13'
TD 77'
2019-BA-3
(L&A 2019)
Proj. -19'
TD 202'
RC-2
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -252'
TD 170'
BA-12
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -58'
TD 108'
BA-13
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -43'
F
?
TD 106'
BA-11
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -20'
(L&A 2006)
BA-12
(L&A 2006)
BA-11
20 161.5'
43 159'
39 150'
14 150'
10 146'
13 143.6'
24 101'
5 92'
16 87'
4 85.7'
14 82.4'
12 79'
10 57'
13 48.9'
62 26 125.6'
29'
82 10'
11 4'
5 85.3'
67 55'
15 25.8'
34 25.1'
28 21'
26 17.5'
28 15'
30 12'
29 9.8'
33 6'
3 3'
RS
S
F
S
S
F
CS
CS
F
F
Qaf
Tvs
Qcol
Qaf
Qaf
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
Qaf
Qaf
Tvs
Qaf
Tvs
Qal
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
? ?
3 3'
TD 23'
T-10
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -1'

CROSS SECTION
5 - 5'

CROSS SECTION
1 - 1'
TD 18'
T-11
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 32'
TD 22'
T-14
(L&A 2006)
TD 22'
T-15
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 111'
TD 22'
T-23
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -32'
TD 25'
T-33
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -91'
TD 56'
DH-2
(GSI 1989A)
TD 75.5'
2019-I
(L&A 2019)
LOWER
AREA

MID/UPPER
AREA

DEVELOPMENT

BOUNDARY

DEVELOPMENT

BOUNDARY

CROSS SECTION
1 - 1'
TD 5'
TP-8
(20-108-03)
Proj. 97'
TD 5'
T-30
(L&A 2006))
Proj. 6'
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
TD 26' Tvs
HS-12
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -120'
DH-1
(20-108-03)
Proj. 59'
TD 102'
BA-10
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 37'
(L&A 2006)
BA-10
44 82.1'
57 74'
20 70.8'
18 69.5'
33 65.2'
13 64.6'
22 52.6'
21 46.3'
21 40.9'
51 26.7'
13 21.5'
18 19'
15 14'
30 13.8'
26 8.6'
2 2'
J

PROPOSED GRADING J J

EXISTING GRADE
F
?
Tsa
Tvs
DH-2
(20-108-03)
Proj. -16'
(20-108-03)
DH-1
24 74'
22 62'
19 42'
18 36'
18 35.5'
84 30'
54 28'
70 26'
TD 100'
2 2'
S
S
S
S
TD 5.5'
TP-5
(20-108-03)
Proj. -12'
DH-1
(20-108-01)
Proj. 167'
TD 7.5'
TP-1
(20-108-03)
Proj. -53'
DH-3
(20-108-03)
Proj. -46'
TD 9'
TP-10
(20-108-03)
Proj. -203'
TD 100'
S
S
(20-108-03)
DH-2
20 64'
21 53'
10 34'
13 31'
35-45
25'
52 21'
45 21'
13 16'
64 15'
1 1'
S
S
S
S
(20-108-03)
DH-3
21 69'
C
71' 28
C
20 75'
C
62 71'
10 44'
78 39'
26 34'
TD 83'
4 4'
J
C
C
S
C
TD 30'
DH-18
(GSI 1989A)
Proj. -63'
TD 50.5'
HS-15
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -123'
TD 19'
T-21
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -74'

PROPOSED GRADING

EXISTING GRADE
LINE 4
(ETC 1984)
TD 85'
B-36
(GSI 1989)
Proj. 55'
TD 80'
DH-4
(20-108-03)
Proj. 12'
LINE 6
(ETC 1984)
WASH

18.8'

EXISTING GRADE

PROPOSED
GRADE
Qal
Tvs
Tvs
Qls1
Qaf
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
Qaf Qaf
Qal Qal
TD 56'
QB-3
(GSI 2003)
Proj. 30'
Tvs
Qsw
Qaf
Qls1
Qaf
Qal
Qaf
RC-4
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 35'
TD 100'
Qal
Qaf
Qls
Qaf
Tvs
Tsa
Qls1
Tvs
20 77.5'
F
F
85 9'
F
F
Qal TD 50'
Tvs
Tvs
Qal
Qaf
Qls1
TD 12'
TP-1
(GSI 1989)
Proj. 30'
Tvs
Qal
Qaf

SECTION
5 - 5'
CROSS
KEYWAY
60'Dx135'W
3:1
KEYWAY
55'Dx120'W
3:1
KEYWAY
50'Dx120'W
KEYWAY
40'Dx120'W
2:1
3:1
KEYWAY
50'Dx120'W
KEYWAY
15'Dx20'W
3:1
KEYWAY
15'Dx20'W
2:1
KEYWAY 15'Dx20'W
1:1
KEYWAY
15'Dx20'W

PROPOSED GRADING

EXISTING GRADE

PROPOSED GRADING

EXISTING GRADE
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
? ?
?
?
?
?
TD 270'
B-1
(CHJ 2003)
Proj. -290'
?

SECTION
10 - 10'
CROSS
Tvs ?
?
?
?
?
?
300
400
500
600
700
300
400
500
600
700
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 786
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000 3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 3548 400
500
600
700
800
900
400
500
600
700
800
900
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2627 400
500
600
700
800
900
400
500
600
700
800
900
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000 3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 300
400
500
600
700
800
300
400
500
600
700
800
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000 3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 3600 3700 3800 3900 3935 300
400
500
600
700
300
400
500
600
700
100 200 300 400 500 550

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
300.0'
20-108-03
1 - 1'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
300.0'
20-108-03
2 - 2'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
3 - 3'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
4 - 4'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
G - G'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'
1 1'
2 3 3'
4 4'
8 8'
N 13° W
N 65° W
N 64° W
N 67° W
N 77° E
N 81° W
7 7'

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
7 - 7'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'
N 62° E
2'
?
?
?
?
S
J
?
?
?
?
3500 3500
?
?
TD 50'
RC-5
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 60'
B-3
(CHJ 2003)
Proj. ~200'
TD 100'
DH-1
(20-108-03)
Proj. ~385'
TD 100'

CROSS SECTION
16 - 16'
0 100' 200' Date:

Project No.:

Plate
Geotechnical Sections
1-1' thru 4-4', 7-7' & 8-8'
20-108-03
JUNE 12, 2023

3.1 ENGINEERS&GEOLOGISTS
Qal
Tvs
Tvs
Qaf
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
Qaf
Qaf
?
?
TD 65.7'
CPT-15
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 157'
TD 35.3'
CPT-2
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 93'
TD 47'
BA-4
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 43'
TD 37'
DH-17
(GSI 1989A)
Proj. 21'
TD 25'
T-36
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -62'
TD 30'
DH-20
(GSI 1989A)
Proj. -128'
TD 50'
BA-3
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -33'
TD 21'
T-42
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -15'
TD 42'
BA-17
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -60'
TD 55.7'
2019-H
(L&A 2019)
Proj. 5'
TD 75.5'
2019-I
(L&A 2019)
Proj. 45'

CROSS SECTION
1 - 1'
Qal
Qaf
LOWER
AREA

MID/UPPER
AREA
Tvs
Qal Tvs
Qaf
Tvs
Qaf
Tvs
Tvs
Qaf
Tvs
TD 42' Tvs
CPT-6
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -43'
TD 85'
B-36
(GSI 1989)
Proj. 204'
TD 25'
CPT-4
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 70'
TD 24'
T-22
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 126'
TD 25'
T-33
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 15'
?
?
?
?
?

CROSS SECTION
4 - 4'

CROSS SECTION
1 - 1'
LOWER
AREA

MID/UPPER
AREA
DH-3
(20-108-03)
Proj. 80'
TD 10'
TP-15
(20-108-03)
Proj. 22' TD 10'
TP-13
(20-108-03)
Proj. 42'
TD 8'
TP-12
(20-108-03)
Proj. 40'
TD 80'
DH-4
(20-108-03)
Proj. 146'
TD 83'
(20-108-03)
DH-3
21 69'
C
71' 28
C
20 75'
C
62 71'
10 44'
78 39'
26 34' 5 5'
J
S
C
C
C
TD 55'
QB-1
(GSI 2003)
TD 41'
BA-6
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -114'
TD 13'
TP-7
(20-108-03)
Proj. 114'
TD 22'
T-34
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -121'

PROPOSED
GRADE

EXISTING
GRADE
Tvs
Qaf
Qaf
Qal

CROSS SECTION
10 - 10'

CROSS SECTION
7 - 7'
TD 28'
QB-2
(GSI 2003)
Proj. 105'
TD 41'
DH-1
(GSI 1989A)
TP-33
(GSI 1989)
Proj. 15'
TD 10'
Tvs
TD 40'
BA-16
(L&A 2006)
TD 21'
DH-8
(GIS 1989A)
Tvs
Tvs
Qaf
Qal
Qal
Qaf
?

BEND IN

SECTION
Tvs
Tvs
Qal Qal
TD 99'
HS-17
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 40'
TD 85'
B-36
(GSI 1989)
Proj. 63'
TD 80'
DH-4
(20-108-03)
Proj. 80'

EXISTING
GRADE
LINE 6
(ETC 1984)
CROSS

SECTION
5 - 5'

PROPOSED
GRADE
TD 30'
DH-18
(GSI 1989A)
Proj. 28'
? ?
Tvs
Qal
Tvs
Qaf
TD 9'
TP-31
(GSI 1989)
Proj. 40'
Qal
TD 74'
HS-7
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 50'
TD 12'
TP-34
(GSI 1989)
Proj. 27'
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
Qal
Qaf
TD 6'
TP-30
(GSI 1989)
TD 26.5'
CPT-2A
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 25'
TD 65.7'
CPT-15
(L&A 2006)
TD 70'
HS-6
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -27'
Qls
?
TD 31.5'
2019-L
(L&A 2019)
Proj. 50'
TD 24'
T-18
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 20'
Tvs
Qal
Qaf
Qaf
Qal
Tvs
TD 65.7'
2019-K
(L&A 2019)
Proj. 85'
TD 7.5'
TP-29
(GSI 1989)
Proj. 30'
TD 37'
DH-17
(GSI 1989A)
Proj. 50'
TD 10'
TP-15
(20-108-03)
Proj. 58'
TD 47'
BA-4
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 15'
TD 31'
DH-16
(GSI 1989A)
Proj. 72'
TD 17'
T-38
(L&A 2006)
TD 56.8'
CPT-9
(L&A 2006)
CROSS

SECTION
6 - 6'

PROPOSED
GRADE

EXISTING
GRADE

PROPOSED
GRADE

EXISTING
GRADE

PROPOSED
GRADE

PROPOSED
GRADE
Qls
HS-6
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 121'
TD 70'

CROSS SECTION
12 - 12'
TD 36.5'
HS-3
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -15'
TD 50.8' TD 53'
HS-8
(L&A 2006)
Proj. 20'
TD 75'
B-35
(GSI 1989)
Proj. -65'
TD 6'
TP-32
(GSI 1989)
Proj. 50'
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
CROSS

SECTION
5 - 5'
?
Qal

EXISTING
GRADE

PROPOSED
GRADE
Qaf Qaf
?

CROSS SECTION
13 - 13'
TD 11'
T-32
(L&A 2006)
Qaf
TP-8 Proj. 30'
(GIS 1989)
TD 8.5'
STL-1
(SWG, 2006)
2:1
KEYWAY
15'Dx20'W
KEYWAY
50'Dx120'W
2:1
KEYWAY
15'Dx20'W
KEYWAY
50'Dx120'W
KEYWAY
15'Dx20'W
2:1 KEYWAY
15'Dx20'W
2:1
KEYWAY
15'Dx20'W
2:1
KEYWAY
15'Dx20'W
2:1
?
?
TD 24'
T-26
(L&A 2006)
Proj. ~140'
? TD 20'
T-31
(L&A 2006)
Proj. ~180'
? TD 25'
T-20
(L&A 2006)
Proj. ~90'
?
?
?
CROSS

SECTION
7 - 7'
? ?
?
?
?
?
?
CROSS

SECTION
1 - 1'
KEYWAY
5'Dx15'W
2:1
TD 45.5'
HS-16
(L&A 2006)
TD 12'
T-7
(L&A 2006)
Proj. ~ 21'
KEYWAY
50'Dx120'W
2:1
TD 156'
B-2
(CHJ 2003)
Proj. ~ 28'
TD 100'
B-4
(CHJ 2003)
Proj. ~ 48'
TD 100'
DH-2
(20-108-03)
Proj. ~ 10'
TD 200'
RC-1
(L&A 2006)
Proj. ~ 46'
TD 41'
DH-1
(GSI 1989A)
Proj. ~ 86'
KEYWAY
15'Dx30'W
TD 12.5'
TP-5
(GSI 1989)
Proj. ~ 33'
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs

PROPOSED GRADE

EXISTING GRADE

EXISTING GRADE
(20-108-03)
DH-2
20 64'
21 53'
10 34'
13 31'
35-45
25'
52 21'
45 21'
13 16'
64 15'
14 14'
S
S
S
S
S
?
Qal
Qaf TD 9'
T-24
(L&A 2006)
Proj. ~ 140'
?
TD 9'
TP-4
(20-108-03)
Proj. ~ 160'
?
?
Qaf
Qaf
?
HS-14
(L&A 2006)
Proj. ~ 165'
TD 76.5'
Qls1
Qls1
Tvs
Qaf
Qal
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000 3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 3600 3700 3800 3900 4000 4084 300
400
500
600
700
300
400
500
600
700
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 12001220
300
400
500
600
700
300
400
500
600
700
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 13001321 300
400
500
600
700
300
400
500
600
700
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1340 300
400
500
600
300
400
500
600
100 200 300 400 500 523
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000 3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 3600 3700 3800 3897 300
400
500
600
700
800
900
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 2996 300
400
500
600
700
300
400
500
600
700
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1249

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
5 - 5'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
6 - 6'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
SCALE: 1'' = 100'
5 5'
6 6'
9 9'
N 88° W
N 102° E
N 46° E
10 10'
N 18° W N 2° W

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
10 - 10'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'
H - H'
11 DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
11 - 11'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'
11'

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
12 - 12'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'
12 12'
N 48° E N 52° E
13 13'

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
13 - 13'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'
N 69° E

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
14 - 14'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'
14 14'
N 67° W
?
?
?
?
?
? ?
?
?
? ? ?
?
? ?
?
?
?
?
??
?
0 100' 200' Date:

Project No.:

Plate
Geotechnical Sections
5-5', 6-6', 9-9' thru 14-14'
20-108-03
JUNE 12, 2023

3.2 ENGINEERS&GEOLOGISTS
400
500
600
700
800
900
400
500
600
700
800
900
100 200 300 400 494
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 804

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
16 - 16'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
300.0'
20-108-03
17 - 17'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'
16 16'
17 17'
N 22° E
N 30° E
CROSS

SECTION
2 - 2' (20-108-03)
DH-1
24 74'
22 62'
19 42'
18 36'
18 35.5'
84 30'
54 28'
70 26'
16'
16 TD 100'
DH-1
(20-108-03)
Proj. ~ 176'
S
S
S
S
S
TD 99'
BA-14
(L&A 2006)
Proj. ~ 10'
Tvs
Tvs
BA-14
(L&A 2006)
51 80.5'
52 71.2'
54 69'
20 64.8'
15 46'
32 43.6'
18 39.8'
35 38.5'
33 33.4'
47 28'
57 20.4'
F
F

32.5'
28 TD 100'
DH-1
(20-108-03)
Proj. ~ 3'
TD 100'
BA-15
(L&A 2006)
Proj. ~ 20'
(20-108-03)
DH-1
24 74'
22 62'
19 42'
18 36'
18 35.5'
84 30'
54 28'
70 26'
(L&A 2006)
BA-15
33 88.5'
31 87.8'
30 80.3'
28 15.5'
22 10.5'

PROPOSED GRADE

EXISTING
GRADE

PROPOSED
GRADE

EXISTING
GRADE
16'
16 17'
17 17'
17 Tvs
F
Tvs
F
F
RS
CS
CS
J
J
J
S
S
S
S
S
RS
CS
CS
Qaf
Qls1 Tvs Qls2
?
?
Qsw
2:1
30'Dx30'W
KEYWAY
Qls1
Qaf
Qls2
Tvs
15'Dx30'W
KEYWAY ?
?
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000 3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 3566

DATUM ELEV
GROUP

SECTION
200.0'
20-108-03
15 - 15'
SCALE: 1'' = 100'
15 15'
N 83° E

EXISTING GRADE

PROPOSED GRADE

PROPOSED GRADE
?
?
?
?
?
?
Qaf
Qal Tvs
Tvs
Qal
Qaf
Qaf
Qal Tvs
Qaf
Qal
Tvs
Tvs
Tvs
TD 55'
QB-1
(GSI 2003)
Proj. -10'
TD 41'
BA-6
(L&A 2006)
Proj. -30'
TD 54'
QB-8
(GSI 2003)
Proj. -65'
TD 65.7'
2019-K
(L&A 2019)
Proj. ~100'
TD 70'
BA-5
(L&A 2006)
Proj. ~50'
TD 77'
DH-3
(GSI 1989A)
Proj. ~20'
TD 84'
QB-6
(GSI 2003)
Proj. ~25'
TD 56'
DH-2
(GSI 1989A)
TD 75.5'
2019-1
(L&A 2019)
Proj. ~100'
QB-2
(GSI 2003)
Proj. ~50'
3:1

PROPOSED REMEDIAL GRADE

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPOSED BACK DRAINS
0 100' 200'

ENGINEERS&GEOLOGISTS
Date:

Project No.:

Plate
Geotechnical Section
15 - 15' thru 17 - 17'
20-108-03
JUNE 12, 2023

3.3 4
Grade of Tributary Drainage Courses
After Removal of Low-Density Alluvium
9 Cubic Feet of Rock
Wrapped in Filter Fabric
(See Note 1)
4 or 6-Inch Perforated Pipe
(Perforations Towards Bottom)
6-Inches
3 Feet
3 Feet

TYPICAL CANYON OR KEYWAY BOTTOM DETAIL
Notes:

1. Rock to be clean 3/4-inch hard rock approved by GMU. Alternate rock sizes may be approved by GMU on a case by case basis. Filter fabric as a minimum should meet the requirements of Mirafi 140N and should be approved by GMU.

2. Pipe to Meet Minimum Requirements of PVC Schedule 40 Pipe (ATSM D1785).

3. All dimensions and locations are approximate.

4. Drawing is not to scale.

Plate
5 P24 - 6/3/2004

TYPICAL BUTTRESS OR STABILIZATION FILL
15 Feet Minimum
Notes:

1. All Buttress or Stabilization Dimensions to be Determined by Geotechnical Engineer/Geologist.

2. Backdrains to be Located in Field by Geotechnical Engineer/Geologist

3. Drawing not to Scale.
*Local modifications may be required to be made
by the Engineering Geolgist in the field.

Planned Grade
*Outlets to be Spaced at
150 Foot Intervals Maximum
(Outlets to be Constructed Per
Subdrain Outlet Detail)
15 Feet Minimum
*30 Feet Max
4-Inch Diameter
Non-Perforated Outlet Pipe
(See Typical Backdrain Type Subdrain)
Heel Drain
Outlet to Stormdrain, Canyon Bottom
Subdrain, or Other Permanent Facility;
or Outlet to Daylight
P25-11/13/03
Plate
6 7
8 Drawing Not to Scale.

NEAR SURFACE SETTLEMENT

MONITORING POINT
P3-1/1/2002
PVC Pipe
PVC Cap
Finish Grade
Concrete or Slurry
4 1
/
2 "
6 Feet
Backfill With Pea Gravel
1" Diameter Metal Pipe
Plate
9 APPENDIX A
Geotechnical Exploration Procedures and Logs
Mr. Tim Deutsch, ORANGE COUNTY CEMETERY DISTRICT
Final Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Preliminary Grading for TPM 2022-160, Gypsum Canyon Cemetery Site, City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California June 12, 2023 A-1 GMU Project 20-108-03

APPENDIX A

GMU GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION PROCEDURES AND LOGS
Our exploration at the subject site consisted of four (4) drill holes, and 15 test pits. The estimated locations of the explorations are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 2.1). Our drill holes were logged by a Certified Engineering Geologist, Staff Geologist, or Staff Engineer. California Modified, Standard Penetration Testing (SPT), and bulk samples of the excavated soils were collected. “Undisturbed” California Modified samples were taken using a 3.0-inch outside diameter thin-walled drive sampler or a 3.25-inch outside diameter thick-walled drive sampler, both lined with a 2.416-inch diameter brass sample sleeve 6 inches in length. Standard penetration testing (SPT) was performed with an unlined 2.0-inch outside diameter split spoon sampler. Blow counts recorded during sampling from the drive sampler and SPTs are shown on the drill hole and test pit logs. The logs of each drill hole and test pit are contained in this Appendix A-1, and the Legend to Logs is presented as Plates A-1 and A-2. Furthermore, an additional exploration log performed by GMU is contained in the following Appendix A-2, and exploration logs performed by others are contained in the following Appendix A-3.

The geologic and engineering field descriptions and classifications that appear on these logs are prepared according to Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation standards. Major soil classifications are prepared according to the Unified Soil Classification System as modified by ASTM Standard No. 2487. Since the descriptions and classifications that appear on the Log of Borings and Test Pits are intended to be that which most accurately describe a given interval of a boring or test pit (frequently an interval of several feet), discrepancies do occur in the Unified Soil Classification System nomenclature between that interval and a particular sample in that interval.

For example, an 8-foot-thick interval in a log may be identified as silty sand (SM) while one sample taken within the interval may have individually been identified as sandy silt (ML). This discrepancy is frequently allowed to remain to emphasize the occurrence of local textural variations in the interval.

APPENDIX A-1
Recent Investigation by GMU Geotechnical
116
16 4/12" 13
SANDY SILT (ML); reddish brown, damp,
medium dense, fine- to coarse-grained
sand, some gravel, trace cobbles
SANDY SILT (ML); reddish brown, damp,
medium dense to dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, trace gravel
SANDY SILT (ML); reddish brown, damp,
medium dense to dense, fine- to
coarse-medium sand, trace gravel
ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Subangular gravel up to 1-inch in diameter,
abundance less than 5%, subangular
cobble up to 8-inches, abundance less than
1%, few roots and rootlets up to 1/4-inch in
diameter
Sandbag fabric
Lens of gray fine-grained silty sand
Micaceous, sandy silt becomes blocky
Abundance of gravel decreases to less
than 3%
Pockets of yellow and gray fine-grained
sand
Claystone fragments within sandy silt fill,
subangular gravel up to 1/4-inch in
diameter, abundance less than 1%
Subangular gravel up to 1-inch in diameter,
abundance continues to be less than 1%
Remarks

SAMPLE DATA

ADDITIONALTESTS

ORIENTATION
DATA

GRAPHIC LOG
4/28/22

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
EZ Bore 645.0
RA/JP
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Open drive sampler with 6-inch
sleeve, bulk
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feet
100.0 feet
30 Date(s)
Drilled
Driving Method
and Drop
Dave's Drilling

TEST DATA
Sampling
Method(s)
Drilling
Contractor
NA []
Logged
By DW
Drilling
Method
Diameter(s)
of Hole, inches
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Seepage pockets at a depth of 37ft extending to 39ft, 100ft sample not taken due to a weld break on drill rig
Drill Rig
Type
SAMPLENUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf Checked
By
Drill Hole
Backfill
Kelly
Native
Total Depth
of Drill Hole Bucket Auger
640
635
630
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 1 of 5
5 10
15 Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-1 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-1
5 10
15 DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 8/25/22
115
116
15 16
20 14
S: N85°E, 70°SE
S: N85°W,
54°NE
S: N85°W,
84°SW
S: N10°W,
18°SW
S: N10°W,
18°SW
B: N24°E,
19°SW
3/12"
6/12"
15/12
CLAYEY SILT (ML); reddish brown,
damp, medium dense to dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand
CLAYEY SILT (ML); reddish brown,
damp, medium dense to dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand
SANDY SILT (ML); reddish brown, damp,
dense to very dense, fine- to
coarse-medium sand, trace gravel
SANDY CLAY (CL); reddish brown, damp,
dense to very dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand
SANDY SILTSTONE; dark brown mottled
red, dry to damp, moderately hard to hard,
fine- to medium grained sand
SANDY SILTSTONE; dark brown mottled
red, dry to damp, very hard, fine- to
medium grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry
to damp, hard to very hard, fine- to
medium-grained sand
Mica abundance less than 3%, claystone
fragments
Blips of green fine-grained sand
LANDSLIDE DEBRIS (Qls)
Poorly defined contact with landslide
deposits, slight increase in density
Shear plane
Lens of gray fine-grained sand, mica
abundance less than 5%
Several shears with similar orientations
Block of sandstone with sheared lower
contact
Shear plane
Slight increase in moisture, zone of fat wet
clay extending down to 35ft, small bag
sample taken
Expansion surfaces within claystone
Possible rupture surface, highly irregular
clay seam approximately 1-inch thick
VAQUEROS SESPE FORMATION (Tvs)
Massive sandy siltstone, moderately
weathered, hard to pick
Drilling slowed, slight increase in silt
abundance, slight decrease in moisture
Zone of wet claystone pockets extending
down to 39ft, perched groundwater
seepage less than 1 gallon per minute
Massive, homogenous, no discernible
bedding, very hard to pick
Subhorizontal, slightly undulating contact
with silty sandstone bed
Increase in fine- to coarse-grained sand
abundance, decrease in silt abundance
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
620
615
610
605
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 2 of 5
25 30
35 40
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-1 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-1
25 30
35 40
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 8/25/22
119
127
127
123
124
9 9
8 10
8 8
8 B: N25°E,
22°NW
7/6"
10/8"
15/8"
16/10"
20/10"
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry
to damp, hard to very hard, fine- to
coarse-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry
to damp, hard to very hard, fine- to
coarse-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to coarse-grained sand,
trace cobble
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to coarse-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to coarse-grained sand,
trace gravel
Massive, no discernible bedding,
moderately cemented
Fining downward sequence
Siltstone clast up to 2-inches in diameter,
slightly oxidized sand grains
Subround cobble up to 8-inches in diameter
Massive, no discernible bedding,
moderately cemented, slight decrease in
moisture, mica abundance less than 5%
Faint discontinuous healed fractures
Subhorizontal continuous bed consisting of
quartzite and granitic fragments, subround
gravel, siltstone clasts up to 2-inches in
diameter
Subround gravel up to 1-inch in diameter,
abundance less than 3%, trace granitic
clasts up to 4-inches in diameter,
abundance less than 3%, subround
cobbles up to 6-inches in diameter,
abundance less than 1%, slightly oxidized
sand grains
Rig chatter
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
595
590
585
580
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 3 of 5
50 55
60 65
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-1 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-1
50 55
60 65
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 8/25/22
124
126
114
124
9 10
13 11
11 B: N15°E,
24°NW
20/10"
20/10"
30/6"
30/6"
30/8"
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to coarse-grained sand
SANDY SILTSTONE; brown mottled
yellowish brown, damp, very hard, fine- to
medium-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry
to damp, very hard, fine- to
coarse-grained sand
Several subvertical continuous healed
fractures infilled with clay, extending down
to 78.7ft
Subhorizontal continuous bed consisting of
subround gravel up to 3-inches in diameter,
quartzite and granitic clasts up to 3-inches
in diameter
Disturbed sample, ring was crushed within
sampler
Nearly horizontal continuous bed
approximately 4-inches thick, consisting of
soft wet clay, high plasticity, no fractures,
small bag sample taken
Increase in silt abundance, very hard to
pick
Slight increase in moisture
Massive, moderately to well cemented, no
discernible bedding
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
570
565
560
555
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 4 of 5
75 80
85 90
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-1 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-1
75 80
85 90
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 8/25/22
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry 30/10" 9 124
to damp, very hard, fine- to
coarse-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry
to damp, very hard, fine- to
coarse-grained sand
Total Depth = 100ft
Perched Groundwater = 37ft - 39ft
No Caving
Slight decrease in moisture, massive,
moderately to well cemented, no discernible
bedding
Kelly bar broke, sample at 100ft not taken
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
545
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 5 of 5
100
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-1 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-1
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 8/25/22
7 S: N85°W,
64°SW
S: N08°E, 13°SE
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC);
brown, damp, medium dense to dense,
fine- to coarse-grained sand, abundant
gravel, some cobbles, few boulders
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC);
brown, damp, medium dense to dense,
fine- to coarse-grained sand, abundant
gravel, numerous cobbles, few boulders
SANDY SILT (ML); reddish brown, damp,
soft to dense, fine- to medium-grained
sand
ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Subround to subangular gravel up to
2-inches in diameter, abundance less than
20%, subround to subangular cobbles up to
12-inches in diameter, abundance less than
10%, subround boulders up to 24-inches in
diameter, abundance less than 5%
Free water
Increase in moisture
Ped faces are saturated
Slight increase in abundances (gravel less
than 25%, cobbles less than 15%, boulders
less than 8%)
Highly sheared zone extending to 15.7ft,
free water on western wall, one continuous
shear, various randomly oriented shears
LANDSLIDE DEBRIS (Qls)
Possible failure surface, heavy shearing
with an approximately 1-inch thick seam of
fat clay
Several discontinuous wavy shears
generally dipping in the same direction
4/29/22

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
EZ Bore 636.0
RA/DW
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Open drive sampler with 6-inch
sleeve, bulk
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feet
100.0 feet
30 Date(s)
Drilled
Driving Method
and Drop
Dave's Drilling
Remarks

SAMPLE DATA

ADDITIONALTESTS

ORIENTATION
DATA

GRAPHIC LOG

TEST DATA
Sampling
Method(s)
Drilling
Contractor
Logged
By
Drilling
Method
Diameter(s)
of Hole, inches
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Drill Rig
Type
SAMPLENUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf Checked
By
Drill Hole
Backfill
Kelly
Native
Total Depth
of Drill Hole Bucket Auger
635
630
625
620
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 1 of 5
5 10
15 Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-2 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-2
5 10
15 DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
11 10
S: N10°W,
45°NE S:

N88°W, 52°NE
S: N85°W, 35° to
45° W
S: N15°W,
13°SW
B: N24°W,
10°SW
12/8" 123
SILTY CLAY (CL); reddish brown, dry,
medium dense to dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand
SANDY SILTSTONE; reddish brown,
damp, moderately hard to hard, fine- to
medium-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; reddish brown, dry
to damp, moderately hard to hard, fine- to
medium-grained sand
SANDY SILTSTONE; reddish brown,
damp, moderately hard to hard, fine- to
medium-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish white, dry,
hard, fine- to coarse-grained sand
Fracturing and shearing continues, two
dominant shears
Becomes slighty fractured, wavy sand blips
Slight increase in clay abundance, zone of
heavy shearing extending to 26.5ft
Shearing continues
Possible rupture surface, with an irregular
wet clay seam approximately 2-inches thick
VAQUEROS SESPE FORMATION (Tvs)
Massive sandy siltstone, hard to pick, blips
of gray fine-grained sand
Moderately defined gradational contact with
fine silty sandstone, bed is approximately

1.5ft thick
Drilling slowed
Moderately defined gradational contact with
sandy siltstone
Pockets of yellow fine-grained sand
Moderately defined gradational contact with
fine silty sandstone, massive, hard to pick,
no discernible bedding
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
615
610
605
600
595
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 2 of 5
25 30
35 40
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-2 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-2
25 30
35 40
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
8 7
7 6
7 7
B: N32°E,
21°NW
B: N18°E,
20°NW
125
122
114
112
111
12/8"
15/6"
20/6"
20/6"
25/6"
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
hard, fine- to coarse-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
hard, fine- to medium-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to medium-grained sand,
some coarse-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to medium-grained sand,
some coarse-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to medium-grained sand,
some coarse-grained sand
Moderately to well cemented, mica
abundance less than 5%
Massive, slight decrease in coarse-grained
sand abundance, fining downward
sequence
Subhorizonal continuous bed, consisting of
granitic and quartzite clasts, subangular
gravel up to 3-inches in diameter, siltstone
clasts up to 2-inches in diameter
Subhorizonal continuous bed, consisting of
granitic and quartzite clasts, subangular
gravel up to 3-inches in diameter, siltstone
clasts up to 2-inches in diameter
Massive, well cemented, mica abundance
less than 3%
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
590
585
580
575
570
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 3 of 5
50 55
60 65
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-2 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-2
50 55
60 65
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
7 8
10 8
8 113
122
108
110
115
25/6"
26/6"
35/5"
40/5"
35/5"
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to coarse-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to coarse-grained sand
SANDY SILTSTONE; reddish brown, dry,
very hard, fine- to medium-grained sand
SANDY SILTSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to medium-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, few fine- to medium-grained
sand, numerous coarse-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to medium-grained sand
Massive, no discernible bedding, well
cemented
Few granitic clasts up to 5-inches in
diameter
Highly scoured irregular contact with sandy
siltstone, large scour on southeastern wall
Moderately defined gradational contact with
sandy siltstone, very hard to pick, hard
drilling, subangular gravel up to 1/2-inch in
diameter, abundance less than 5%
Continuous shear, see no movement
Decrease in coarse-grained sand
abundance, increase in fine- to
medium-grained sand abundance
Subhorizontal, undulating, irregular contact
with fine silty sandstone
Becomes dominantly coarse-grained sand
Subvertical joints continue to 100ft
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
565
560
555
550
545
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 4 of 5
75 80
85 90
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-2 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-2
75 80
85 90
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry, 50/5" 7 114
very hard, fine- to medium-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE; grayish green, dry,
very hard, fine- to medium-grained sand
Total Depth = 100ft
No Groundwater
No Caving
Massive, no discernible bedding, well
cemented, mica abundance less than 5%
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
540
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 5 of 5
100
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-2 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-2
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
8 SANDY CLAY (CL): reddish brown, damp,
stiff to very stiff, fine- to medium-grained
sand
SILTY SAND (SM): light yellowish brown,
damp, dense, medium-grained sand
SANDY SILT/SANDY CLAY (ML/CL):
reddish brown, damp to moist, stiff,
medium-grained sand
SILTY SAND (SM): light brown, damp to
moist, medium-to coarse-grained sand
SANDY CLAY/SANDY SILT (CL/ML): red
brown, damp, stiff, medium-grained sand
SILTY SAND (SM): light brown, damp,
medium dense, medium-grained sand
Becomes moist
SANDY CLAY (CL): reddish brown, moist,
stiff, medium-grained sand
Artificial Fill (Qaf)
Subrounded gravels and cobbles, rootlets
Cobbles, some boulders
End of rootlets
Subrounded cobbles and small boulders
Gravels
Asphalt clasts in fill
5/2/22

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
EZ Bore 628.0
JMP
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Open drive sampler with 6-inch
sleeve, bulk
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feet

83.0 feet
30 Date(s)
Drilled
Driving Method
and Drop
Dave's Drilling
Remarks

SAMPLE DATA

ADDITIONALTESTS

ORIENTATION
DATA

GRAPHIC LOG

TEST DATA
Sampling
Method(s)
Drilling
Contractor
NA []
Logged
By DW
Drilling
Method
Diameter(s)
of Hole, inches
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Drill Rig
Type
SAMPLENUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf Checked
By
Drill Hole
Backfill
Kelly
Native
Total Depth
of Drill Hole Bucket Auger
625
620
615
610
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 1 of 4
5 10
15 Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-3 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-3
5 10
15 DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
9 10
11 B: N17°E,
26°NW
J: N10°W, 78°NE
B: N45°E,
10°NW approx.
123
130
2 15
SILTY SAND (SM): light yellowish brown,
moist, medium dense, medium-grained
sand, some gravel
SANDY CLAY (CL): brown, moist, stiff,
medium-grained sand, some gravel
SANDY CLAY (CL): dark brown, moist,
firm to stiff, medium-grained sand, few
cobble
SILTSTONE: dark reddish brown, damp
to moist, moderately hard
SANDSTONE: light brown to yellowish
brown, moist, moderately hard, fine-to
medium-grained sand
SANDSTONE: light brown, moist,
moderately hard, medium-to
coarse-grained sand
Subrounded cobbles
Undifferenciated Vaqueros Sespe
Formation (Tvs)
Minor black organic staining, root castings
and some roots
Becomes fresher, minor shearing on joints
and bedding, fractured bedding
Massive, some iron oxide staining, some
black organic staining
Black organic staining on joint
Massive, fine grained sandstone rip up
clasts
4500
3700
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
605
600
595
590
585
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 2 of 4
25 30
35 40
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-3 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-3
25 30
35 40
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
9 C: N47°E,
21°NW
20/6" 126
SANDSTONE: light brown, moist,
moderately hard, medium-to
coarse-grained sand, few gravel
Some gravel and cobble
SILTSTONE: mottled dark reddish brown
and dark grey, moist, moderately hard to
Massive, angular gravel
Subrounded to angular cobbles
Iron oxide staining on contact, slightly
undulatory contact
2500
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
580
575
570
565
560
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 3 of 4
50 55
60 65
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-3 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-3
50 55
60 65
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
14 15
10 8
F: N65°E,
62°NW
C: N60°W,
28°NE
C: N78°W,
20°NE
117
127
15 25/7"
hard
SANDSTONE: light yellowish brown,
damp to moist, moderately hard,
medium-grained sand
SILTSTONE: dark reddish brown, damp,
moderately hard to hard
SANDSTONE: light bluish grey, damp,
moderately hard, medium-grained sand,
some gravel
SANDSTONE: light brown, damp, hard,
medium-grained sand, some cobble
Total Depth = 83 ft.

No Groundwater
No Caving
Siltstone sheared along fault
Crude irregular contact
Undulatory contact
Massive
Became very hard drilling, switched to
auger with rock teeth
Subrounded cobbles
2500
1000
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
555
550
545
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 4 of 4
75 80
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-3 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-3
75 80
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
3 1
3 110
112
109
15 26
50/5"
11 11
18 17
19 21
7 11
10 SILTY SAND to POORLY-GRADED
SAND (SM-SP); light brown, damp,
medium dense to dense, fine- to
coarse-grained sand, numerous gravel,
few cobbles, trace boulders
Becomes very dense
Numerous gravel
SILTY SAND to POORLY-GRADED
SAND (SM-SP); light brown, damp,
medium dense, fine- to coarse-grained
sand, numerous gravel, few cobbles
Becomes dense, mostly coarse-grained
sand, few fine- to medium-grained sand
UNDOCUMENTED FILL (Qafu)
Moderate to heavy rig chatter moved south
2 ft due to 1.5 ft boulder, gravel is angular
to subangular up to 2" in diameter
Concrete fragment in tip of sampler
Gravel is subround to subangular up to 2"
in diameter
ALLUVIUM (Qal) Moderate rig chatter
5/16/2022

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
GT-16 407.0
RC
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
California Modified Sampler with
6-inch sleeve/SPT
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feet

80.0 feet
8 Date(s)
Drilled
Driving Method
and Drop
2R Drilling
Remarks

SAMPLE DATA

ADDITIONALTESTS

ORIENTATION
DATA

GRAPHIC LOG

TEST DATA
Sampling
Method(s)
Drilling
Contractor

44.3 [362.7]
Logged
By DW
Drilling
Method
Diameter(s)
of Hole, inches
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Drill Rig
Type
SAMPLENUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf Checked
By
Drill Hole
Backfill
140 lb hammer, 30" drop
Native
Total Depth
of Drill Hole Hollow Stem Auger
405
400
395
390
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 1 of 4
5 10
15 Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-4 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-4
5 10
15 DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
4 3
3 3
6 107
85 101
102
4 8
19 8
10 14
13 36
50/5"
12 15
14 16
23 22
7 15
19 17
21 27
12 28
39 16
14 39
6 12
15 SILTY SAND to POORLY-GRADED
SAND (SM-SP); light brown, damp,
medium dense, mostly coarse-grained
sand, few fine- to medium-grained sand,
few to some gravel
Becomes very dense
Becomes medium dense
GRAVELLY SAND (GW-SW); light brown,
dense, damp to moist, fine- to
coarse-grained sand, numerous gravel
SILTY SAND to POORLY-GRADED
SAND (SM-SP); light brown, damp,
dense, fine- to coarse-grained sand,
some gravel
Mostly coarse-grained sand, few fine- to
medium-grained sand, some fine gravel
Becomes very dense
Becomes dense
SILTY SAND (SM); brown, moist, dense,
fine-grained sand
Becomes medium dense, moist to
saturated
ALLUVIUM (Qal)
Light to moderate rig chatter, gravel is
subround to subangular average size
approximately 2"
Little to no rig chatter
Rock fragment in tip of sampler
1" lense of silty sand, brown, moist,
fine-grained sand
Light rig chatter
Angular gravel in tip of sampler up to 2" in
diameter
Groundwater encountered
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
385
380
375
370
365
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 2 of 4
25 30
35 40
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-4 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-4
25 30
35 40
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
18 11
14 12
107
124
122
124
9 14
6 3
4 16
17 33
26 1
4 6
4 7
8 10
4 5
6 8
28 1
3 5
5 6
8 5
6 8
SILTY SAND to POORLY-GRADED
SAND (SM-SP); brown, moist to
saturated, medium dense, fine- to
coarse-grained sand, trace gravel
CLAYEY SAND (SC); brown, moist to
saturated, fine-grained sand, no gravel
SILTY SAND (SM); brown, saturated,
medium dense, fine- to coarse grained
sand
SILTY SAND to POORLY-GRADED
SAND (SM-SP); light brown, saturated,
dense, mostly coarse-grained sand, few
fine- to medium grained sand
Becomes loose, fine- to coarse-grained
sand
Becomes medium dense, some gravel
SILTY SAND (SM); light brown, saturated,
loose, fine-grained sand
SILTY SAND to POORLY-GRADED
SAND (SM-SP); light brown, saturated,
loose to medium dense, fine- to
coarse-grained sand
SILTY SAND (SM); brown, saturated,
loose, fine-grained sand
Becomes medium dense
SILTY SAND to POORLY-GRADED
SAND (SM-SP); brown, saturated,
medium dense, fine- to coarse-grained
sand
ALLUVIUM (Qal)
Angular gravel in tip up to 2" in diameter
Subangular gravel up to 1" in diameter
Some orange staining, some grayish brown
and orange mottle
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
360
355
350
345
340
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 3 of 4
50 55
60 65
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-4 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-4
50 55
60 65
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
13 10
11 118
121
114
11 50/6"
32 44
50/3"
50/5"
50/1"
50/1"
SILTY SAND to POORLY-GRADED
SAND (SM-SP); yellowish brown,
saturated, very dense, fine- to
coarse-grained sand, some gravel and
cobbles
SILTY GRAVEL (GM); gray, saturated,
very dense, trace fine-grained sand
SILTY SANDSTONE (SM); gray, damp,
moderately hard, fine- to coarse-grained
sand
Total Depth: 80 ft
Groundwater at 44 ft 4 in
ALLUVIUM(Qal)
Bedrock fragments in sampler tip
rig grinding, slow drilling
Some light rig chatter, some rock
fragments, pink and blue coloring

UNDIFFERENCIATED VAQUEROS
SESPE FORMATION (Tvs), highly
weathered
Smooth, hard slow drilling, refusal
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
335
330
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 4 of 4
75 80
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Log of Drill Hole DH-4 Project Number: 20-108-03
Drill Hole DH-4
75 80
DH_REV3 20-108-03.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
119
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM-GM); brown
to brownish yellow with gray, dry to damp,
medium dense, fine- to medium-grained
sand, some coarse-grained sand
Few cobbles, trace boulders
CLAYEY SAND (SC); yellowish brown, damp,
medium dense, fine-grained sand, few gravel
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM-GM);
yellowish brown, damp, dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some coarse-grained
sand, some cobble
Total Depth: 7.5 ft
No Groundwater
No Caving
10 12
5 4
ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Numerous rootlets and roots up to 0.5"
diameter, angular to subround gravel about
20-30%, porous 1' fragments/blocks of
fine-grained silty sandstone up to 1' in
diameter
Subangular to subround cobbles average
size about 2-3", subround boulders up to 24"
Rootlets and roots continue
Abundance of fine-grained silty sandstone
fragments/blocks increase, slight increase in
density, rubber strip
OLDER ALLUVIUM (Qoal)
Very hard digging due to density and rock
abundance
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/26/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 8 ft; Depth: 7.5 ft
Open drive sampler with 6-inch sleeve, bulk
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 7.5 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
2 4
6 Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 1 of 1
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
2 4
6 Log of Test Pit TP- 1
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
106
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM-GM);
grayish yellow, dry, medium dense to dense,
fine- to coarse-grained sand
GRAVELLY SAND with SILT (SM-GM);
grayish light brown, damp, dense, fine- to
coarse-grained sand, few cobbles
SILTY CLAY with SAND (CL); yellowish
brown, damp to moist, firm, fine-grained
sand, few gravel
Becomes moist and stiff
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL to GRAVELLY
SAND (SM-GM); medium brown with light
reddish brown, damp, medium dense, fine- to
coarse-grained sand, few cobbles
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM-GM);
yellowish brown, damp, dense, fine- to
coarse-grained sand, some cobble, trace
boulders
16 18
ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Numerous rootlets, some silty sandstone
fragments
Very hard digging and high abundance of
concrete and asphalt fragments, both up to

1.5 ft in diameter
Well defined contact with homogeneous silty
clay
Subangular to subround cobble average size
4" to 5" in diameter
Subangular to subround cobbles, subround
boulders up to 18" in diameter
Pockets of silty clay
Concrete fragment
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/26/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 8 ft; Depth: 13 ft
Open drive sampler with 6-inch sleeve, bulk
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 13.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
2 4
6 8
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 1 of 2
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
2 4
6 8
Log of Test Pit TP- 2
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM-GM);
yellowish brown, damp, dense, fine- to
coarse-grained sand, some cobble, trace
boulders
CLAYEY SAND (SC); yellowish brown, damp
to moist, medium denes, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some coarse-grained
sand, numerous gravel, some cobble
Total Depth: 13 ft
No groundwater
No caving
ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Wood fragments
Asphalt fragment about 10.25" in diameter

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
12 Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 2 of 2
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
12 Log of Test Pit TP- 2
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
GRAVELLY SILTY SAND with CLAY (SM);
grayish yellow, damp, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some coarse-grained
sand, some cobbles
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC-GC); light
brown to yellowish brown, damp to moist,
medium dense, fine- to medium-grained
sand, some coarse-grained sand, few
cobbles
Trace boulders
Increased moisture
Becomes dense
GRAVELLY SAND (SW); light gray, damp,
dense, fine- to coarse-grained sand,
numerous cobbles
Total Depth: 7 ft
No Groundwater
No Caving
7 ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Numerous rootlets, angular to subround
gravel, subangular to subround cobble
Rope fragment
Round boulders up to 18" in diameter
Sampler bouncing, hard slow digging due to
density and rock abundance, angular to
subround cobble
Stopped due to hard digging
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/26/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 10 ft; Depth: 7 ft
Open drive sampler with 6-inch sleeve, bulk
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 7.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
2 4
6 Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 1 of 1
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
2 4
6 Log of Test Pit TP- 3
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM); yellowish
brown, dry, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some coarse-grained
sand, numerous cobbles
GRAVELLY to CLAYEY SAND (SC); medium
brown, damp, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some coarse-grained
sand, numerous cobbles, trace boulders
Becomes damp to moist
Becomes medium dense to dense
Becomes damp to moist
Becomes moist, few boulders
Total Depth: 9 ft
No Groundwater
No Caving
ARTIFICIAL FILL(Qaf)
Some rootlets, angular to subround gravel,
subangular to subround cobbles
Subround boulder approximately 20" in
diameter
Hard digging due to rock abundance
Shoe lace
No sampling due to rock abundance
Increased boulder abundance, slight
decrease in gravel and cobble abundance
Rocky digging
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/26/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 10 ft; Depth: 9 ft
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 9.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
2 4
6 8
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 1 of 1
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
2 4
6 8
Log of Test Pit TP- 4
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
SILTY SAND to SANDY SILT with GRAVEL
(SM-ML); brownish yellow, dry, medium
dense, fine- to medium-grained sand
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM-GM); yellow
and gray, dry medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand
GRAVELLY SILTY SAND (GM); grayish
yellow, dry to damp, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some coarse-grained
sand, few cobbles
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC-GC);
brown, yellowish brown, and gray, damp to
moist, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand,few coarse-grained
sand, few cobbles
GRAVELLY SAND (GM); gray, damp,
medium dense to dense, fine- to
coarse-grained sand, some to numerous
cobble, few boulders
Becomes dense
Total Depth: 5.5 ft
No Groundwater
No Caving
5 ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Numerous rootlets, angular to subround
gravel up to 2" in diameter
Few concrete fragments up to 8" in
diameter, subangular to subround cobble
Rocky hard digging
Increase in rock abundance
Subround boulders up to 20" in diameter
About 30-40% hard rock, very hard digging
due to density and rock abundance
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/26/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 10 ft; Depth: 5.5 ft
Bulk
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 5.5 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 1 of 1
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Log of Test Pit TP- 6
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
121
SILTY CLAY with SAND (CL); light brown,
damp, stiff, fine- to medium-grained sand, few
coarse-grained sand, some gravel
SILTY SAND with CLAY (SM); yellowish
brown, damp, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some coarse-grained
sand, some gravel
Becomes brown, decreased clay abundance,
decreased coarse-grained sand abundance,
trace cobbles, loose to medium dense
7 9
8 ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Few rootlets, subangular to subround gravel
average size > 1" in diameter, pinhole
porosity
Copper wire
OLDER ALLUVIUM (Qoal)
No porosity, coarse gravel abundance
decreases
Easy digging, very homogeneous from 3 ft
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/26/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 13 ft; Depth: 13 ft
Open drive sampler with 6-inch sleeve, bulk
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 13.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
2 4
6 8
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 1 of 2
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
2 4
6 8
Log of Test Pit TP- 7
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
SILTY SAND (SM); brown, damp, medium
dense, fine- to medium-grained sand, few
gravel and cobbles
Becomes yellowish brown numerous gravel
Total Depth: 13 ft
No Groundwater
No Caving
OLDER ALLUVIUM (Qoal)

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

Gravelly to cobbly sand
Total Depth: 5 ft
No Groundwater
No Caving
5 ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Some rootlets, angular to round gravel,
subangular to subround cobble average size
about 4"-5" in diameter, subround to round
boulders up to 20" in diameter, pinhole
porosity
Well defined contacts with color change
Clayey sand with pockets and lenses of silty
sand, no porosity observed
Hard digging due to rock abundance
Very hard digging, refusal due to rock
abundance
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/27/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 10 ft; Depth: 5 ft
Bulk
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 5.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
2 4
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 1 of 1
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
2 4
Log of Test Pit TP- 8
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
109
SILTY SAND with CLAY (SM); yellow to
yellowish brown, damp, loose, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some gravel, trace
cobble
SANDY CLAY (CL); brownish red, damp, firm
to stiff, fine- to medium-grained sand, some
gravel
SILTY SAND (SM); yellow, damp, medium
dense, fine- to medium grained sand, some
gravel, few cobble
SANDY CLAY (CL); red, damp to moist, stiff,
fine- to medium-grained sand
SILTY SAND (SM); yellowish with some red,
damp, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, few gravel and trace
cobbles, some clay
Clay lifts are damp to moist
Becomes medium dense to dense
10 11
ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Numerous rootlets, angular to round gravel,
subangular to round cobble
Moderately defined lifts of silty sand and
sandy clay
Reduced abundance of gravel and cobbles,
silty sandstone fragments up to 6" in
diameter, thin lifts of red sandy clay
Thin lifts of red sandy clay
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/27/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 9 ft; Depth: 9 ft
Open drive sampler with 6-inch sleeve, bulk
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 9.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 2 of 2
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Log of Test Pit TP- 9
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
117
SILTY SAND to CLAYEY SAND (SM-SC);
dark yellowish brown, damp, medium dense,
fine- to medium-grained sand, some
coarse-grained sand, numerous gravel, few
cobble
CLAYEY SAND (SC); dark yellowish brown,
damp to moist, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some coarse-grained
sand, numerous gravel, some cobble
Trace boulders
Becomes brown to reddish brown, moist,
medium dense to dense,
Becomes moist to very moist
Total Depth: 9 ft
No Groundwater
No Caving
10 11
ARTFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Few rootlets, angular to round gravel,
subangular to subround cobble, pinhole
porosity
Round boulders up to 14" in diameter,
pockets of red clay
Slight reduction in gravel and cobble
abundance
Pockets of red clay
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/27/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 8 ft; Depth: 10 ft
Open drive sampler with 6-inch sleeve, bulk
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 10.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
2 4
6 8
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 1 of 1
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
2 4
6 8
Log of Test Pit TP-10
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
SILTY SAND (SM); brownish yellow, dry,
loose, fine- to medium-grained sand, few
gravel, some clay
SILTY SAND with CLAY (SM); yellowish
brown, damp, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some coarse-grained
sand, numerous gravel, some cobble
Trace boulders
Decreased clay abundance
Increased cobble abundance, medium dense
to dense
CLAYEY SAND (SC); yellowish brown, damp
to moist, medium dense, fine- to medium
grained sand, some coarse-grained sand,
numerous gravel, some cobble
Becomes moist, medium dense to dense
Total Depth: 8.5 ft
No Groundwater
No Caving
ARTFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Some rootlets, angular to round gravels,
lenses of red clay
Subangular to subround cobble
Rootlets continue, pockets of red clay
Rootlets continue, round boulder about 12"
in diameter
Hard digging due to rock abundance
Boulder up to 18" in diameter
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/27/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 9 ft; Depth: 8.5 ft
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 8.5 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
2 4
6 8
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 1 of 1
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
2 4
6 8
Log of Test Pit TP-11
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
117
GRAVELLY SAND with SILT (SM); grayish
yellow, dry to damp, dense to very dense,
fine- to medium grained sand
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC); yellowish
brown, moist, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, some coarse-grained
sand
SILTY SAND (SM); yellow, damp, medium
dense, fine- to medium-grained sand, few
gravel, minor clay
Total Depth: 8 ft
No Groundwater
No Caving
7 7
ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Base-like characteristics, angular to
subround gravel
Approximately 3" lenses of slightly reduced
gravel
Asphalt concrete about 3" thick
Pockets of sandy clay, olive, moist
Fairly homogeneous small pockets of olive
clay, fragments of silty sandstone
No digging past 8ft due to the density of the
base-like material above
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/27/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 7 ft; Depth: 8 ft
Open drive sampler with 6-inch sleeve, bulk
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 8.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

Numerous gravel, some cobble, few boulders
SILTY SAND (SM); yellowish brown, damp,
medium dense, fine- to medium-grained
sand, numerous gravel, some cobble, few
boulders, minor clay
Becomes damp to moist
Slight increase in density
ARTFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Some rootlets subangular to subround
gravel
Silty sandstone fragments, round cobbles, <
5" in diametr, round boulder about 14" in
diameter, moderately defined lifts
Few rootlets
Increased gravel and cobble abundance,
boulder approximately 24" in diameter
Minor caving 1-7 ft
Hard digging due to rock abundance and
increased density
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/27/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 10 ft; Depth: 10 ft
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 10.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 2 of 2
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Log of Test Pit TP-13
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
110
SANDY GRAVEL with SILT (GW); gray, dry,
loose, fine- to medium-grained sand, fine to
medium gravel
SILTY SAND with CLAY (SM); yellowish
brown, damp, medium dense, fine- to
medium-grained sand, numerous gravel, few
cobble
Becomes damp to moist
Becomes medium dense to dense
Becomes damp
Increased gravel and cobble abundance
6 4
ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Some rootlets, angular to subround gravel
Slight decrease in gravel abundance
Partial recovery
Trace siltstone fragments
Hard digging due to rock abundance and
depth
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/27/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 8 ft; Depth: 10 ft
Open drive sampler with 6-inch sleeve, bulk
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 10.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 2 of 2
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Log of Test Pit TP-14
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
103
SANDY SILT (ML); light olive, dry, firm,
fine-grained sand, some gravel
SILTY SAND (SM); reddish brown, damp,
medium dense, fine- to medium-grained
sand, few gravel
SILTY SAND (SM); medium brown and
yellowish brown, damp, medium dense, fineto medium-grained sand, few gravel Some gravel, few cobble, trace boulders
Fine- to coarse-grained sand
Increased fine gravel abundance
6 ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf)
Numerous rootlets, 0.5"-3" thick gravel lens,
subangular to subround gravel
OLDER ALLUVIUM (Qoal)
Faint wavy beds, pinhole porosity, thin wavy
lenses of sand, faint soil structure
Round gravel, subround to round cobbles
and boulders up to 14" in diameter, partially
developed ped faces around clasts, no
porosity observed, minor caving
Trace roots <0.25" in diameter
Lenses with increased coarse-grained sand
abundance, fine- to coarse-grained sand
Very homogeneous from 2 ft bgs
Logged
By
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Excavation
Contractor
Sampling
Method(s)
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
Remarks
4/27/2022
Excavation
Equipment
Total Depth
of Test Pit Backhoe
Test Pit
Dimensions Width: 2.5 ft; Length: 10 ft; Depth: 10 ft
Open drive sampler with 6-inch sleeve
Date(s)
Excavated DW CheckedBy
JES 10.0 feet
N/A

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

TEST DATA
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetSOIL SYMBOLSAMPLE

ADDITIONAL
TESTS
DEPTH, feetDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUMDENSITY, pcf
Project: RJM-Veterans Cemetary Supplemental Investigations Project Number: 20-108-03 Sheet 2 of 2
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Log of Test Pit TP-15
TP_REV1 20-108-03.GPJ GM&U.GDT 6/7/22
APPENDIX A-2
Previous Investigations by GMU Geotechnical
20-108-01
20 3
50/3"
WELL-GRADED GRAVEL (GW); light
brown, dry to damp, dense, fine-grained
sand, numerous cobble
SILTY GRAVEL to SILTY SAND with
GRAVEL (GM-SM); light brown, damp,
dense, fine-grained sand, numerous
gravel

ARTIFICIAL FILL
11/24/21

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
MOISTURECONTENT, %

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
CME 75 455.0
RC
Approx. Surface
Elevation, ft MSL
California Modified Sampler
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feet

50.0 feet
8 Date(s)
Drilled
Driving Method
and Drop
2R Drilling
Remarks

SAMPLE DATA

ADDITIONALTESTS

ORIENTATION
DATA

GRAPHIC LOG

TEST DATA
Sampling
Method(s)
Drilling
Contractor
N/A []
Logged
By
Drilling
Method
Diameter(s)
of Hole, inches
Groundwater Depth
[Elevation], feet
Drill Rig
Type
SAMPLENUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcf Checked
By
Drill Hole
Backfill
140 lb hammer, 30" drop
Native
Total Depth
of Drill Hole Hollow Stem Auger
450
445
440
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 1 of 3
5 10
15 Project: RJM - Veterans Cemetery Flagpole Log of Drill Hole DH-1 Project Number: 20-108-01
Drill Hole DH-1
5 10
15 DH_REV3 20-108-01.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
3 3
2 1
50/2"
50/4"
50/4"
50/5"
SILTY GRAVEL to SILTY SAND with
GRAVEL (GM-SM); light brown, damp,
dense, fine-grained sand, numerous
gravel
Continues to be ARTIFICIAL FILL
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
430
425
420
415
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 2 of 3
25 30
35 40
Project: RJM - Veterans Cemetery Flagpole Log of Drill Hole DH-1 Project Number: 20-108-01
Drill Hole DH-1
25 30
35 40
DH_REV3 20-108-01.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
3 50/2"
50/1"
50/1"
SILTY GRAVEL to SILTY SAND with
GRAVEL (GM-SM); light brown, damp,
dense, fine-grained sand, numerous
gravel
Total Depth: 50 ft 1in
No groundwater
No Caving
Continues to be ARTIFICIAL FILL
Possible weathered bedrock at 48ft
SAMPLEDRY UNITWEIGHT, pcfADDITIONALTESTS

ENGINEERING

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION

ORIENTATION
DATA

GEOLOGICAL

CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION
ELEVATION, feetDEPTH, feetGRAPHIC LOGNUMBEROF BLOWS / 6"DRIVINGWEIGHT, lbsMOISTURECONTENT, %

SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
405
Project Location: Gypsum Canyon, Anaheim Hills
Sheet 3 of 3
50 Project: RJM - Veterans Cemetery Flagpole Log of Drill Hole DH-1 Project Number: 20-108-01
Drill Hole DH-1
DH_REV3 20-108-01.GPJ GMULAB.GPJ 6/7/22
APPENDIX A-3
Previous Investigations by Others
Leighton Consulting, Inc.
2019

"

#$%
&'()*+,
-+
./!!+,*+,
)0!-/0
-+
1
01

!0--!+

)0
!)-!/

"

#$%
&'()+!0 /*+,
)1+0-)0
-+1
01

+1+

)0

+,
,
)!0--!0!-)0

! !
"
$&%2%
&'(,0-3 !)
./!!+,*+,
)
14-+
1+0-)0!-/0
-++

)!0--!!/)0

!-+
*
! !

"
$&%2%
&'()/!!+,*+,
),-)/!+,4!-00-/)
!//0
-++

)!0--!0
!-+
!
!13
0!!/-

"
$&%2%
&'()/!!+,*+,
)/1+0-)!//0
-+
1
01

),0-3!10
-0+
+0
-+
1
01

/!/)0

! !

"

&'(
5'2) /)1+0-)3
0!-/0

-+0

/0!-)-!/)!+,-+1+
-1
--0+
)+60
07

4+0
--3+ 3+-

&
'

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
: :
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&5;
&56
&7;
&76
&6;
&66
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

; "
!0 3- /*+,
)3

14)0!-/0

-+0

/
0!-)-!/)4++!/1
-

"<7
.1

1
1 #= $">

$"

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
: :
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;8;
;86
;?;
;?6
;@;
;@6
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

;

/*3

"

#$%
&'()*+,
-++
*+,
)
14)0

)
+10!-

"

#$%
&'()
./!!+,*+,
)1+0-)!//0
-+
1
01

+1+

)+10
*
!
!
"

#$%
&'()/!!+,*+,
)
14-+1+0-)0!-/0
-+
1
01

!/)0
*
!
!

"

#$%
&'()*+,
-++
*+,
)1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/)0!-/0
-+1
01

)-
!/,0-30
*
! !
"

#$%
&'()*+,
-++
*+,
)1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/)0!-/0
-+1
01

!/

"
$&%2%
#$%
&'()*+,
-++
*+,
)1+0-)
!+,4!-00-/)0!-/0
-+1
01

!0--!+

)
-!/
(
&

&
'(

&
'

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
: :
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678#
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&<6
&5;
&56
&7;
&76
&6;
&66
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

;
;

"
$&%2%
&'(,0-3 !1+--!
/-+*+,
)1+0-)
!+,-+1+
-4!-00-/)0!-/0
-++

"
$&%2%
&'()/!!+,*+,
)/1+0-)!//0
-+
+

)0
!
;"
!//
&'()
03*+,
-++
*+,
)/
1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)1
01-++

)/0
!
:

0

:
;
"
!//
&'()
. /-+*!03 /)/1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/)!//0
-+1
01

)-
+60
-0+

"

&'(
5'2)!0 3-*+,
-+*+,
)3
)1+0-)0!-/0

)-!/)4++!/1
-
0*!

";;/;
.1

1
1 #= $">

$"

1
'
$5#

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
: :
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678#
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&66
;8;
;86
;?;
;?6
;@;
;@6
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

;

;

/*3

"

#$%
&'()!0 3-*+,
-+!0 3-/!!+,*+,
)!0 3-!/
1+0-)0!-/0
-+1
01

!0--!-++1+

)
-!/)0

! !)1+--!
,30-

/

"
1+0-
"
$&%2%
&'()!0 3-*+,
),-)!//0
-+1
01

+1+

)0

! !
+
-

43
+

,-

"
$&%2%
&'()!0 3-*+,
-++
*+,
)/1+0-)
!//0
-+1
01

+1+

"
$&%2%
&'()*+,
-+
./!!+,03*+,
)1+0-)
!//0
-+1
01

)0
!/
+
-
-*!+,)3++
-0
!//+0!

"

#$%
&'()/!!+,*+,
)
14-+1+0-)0!-/0
-+
+

)-!/)0
!
'

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +;
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678+
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&56
&7;
&76
&6;
&66
;8;
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

;
;

"

#$%
&'()
./!!+,*+,
)1+0-)0
-++

)+10!-)-!/)0

! !)1+--!
,30-
*!.

/

"

#$%
&'()*+,
-+/!!+,*+,
)
14)0!-/0
-+
+

)-!/
;
"
$&%2%
&'()/!!+,*+,
)1+0-)!//0
-+
1
01

+1+

"

#$%
&'() /)0!-/0
-+1
01

!0--!+

)-0
!,0-3!10
-0+
+0

/0!-,0-3
!/)1+--!
+
*+,

"
$&%2%
&'()!0 3-*+,
-+!0 3-/!!+,*+,
)/
1+0-)!//0
-+1
01

!0--!+

)0

!
5

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +;
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678+
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;86
;?;
;?6
;@;
;@6
;&;
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

;

;

;

$
$
$
$:$
$
$

;
;
:

0

:
"
$&%)*+,
-+ /)1+0-)1+
-4!-00-/)!0--!0

)!10
-

$
$&%)4!+!0/1+0-)+10
!
1
-
"
$&%) /-+*! /)1+0-)1+
-4!-00-/)!0--!
0

)0!-/!/)1+--!
+
*+,

"

#$%$&%) /)/1+0-)1+
-4!-00-/
"
$&% /

*+,
)/1+0-)1+
-4!-00-/)
+60
07

"
$
$&%+!0*+,
/1+0-
6
'
6

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +;
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678+
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;&6
;;;
;;6
;A;
;A6
;<;
&6
&;
@6
@;
?6
?;
86 ;

;;

;

;

$
$

"
$&%)1+--!
/-+*+,
)/1+0-)1+
-
4!-00-/)4+--/+60
0 -0+
)

"
$
$&%)1+--!
/-+*+,
-+!0 3-*+,
)1+0-)
1+
-4!-00-/
"

#$%
&'()*+,

/*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0
-+
+

)-0
! 1
-)
3! 1
-

!/-3+ 3+-

"

#$%
&'() /*+,
),-)0!-/0
-+1
01

)-!/)*+

!13
0!!/
-
!44+601-!/:-+=
:0
30

01
0+
)1+--!
/

*+,

"
$&%)!0 3-*+,
-+!0 3-
*+,
),-)0

/!/
=
"

#$%
&'() /),-)0!-/0
-+1
01

)
-!/

"777/;

765

1
1 #= $">

$"

1
6

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 ;+;
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678+
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;<6
;5;
;56
;7;
;76
;6;
86 8;
766
76;
776
77;
756

;

!
/*3

"
$&%2%
&'()+
*+,
)
14)0

)0

*
!-+
! !

"
$&%2%
&'()+
*+,
)
14)!+,-+1+
-
4!-00-/)0

)0
*
! !
"

#$%$&%2%
&'()
./!!+,*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0

-+1
01

0
!

"
$&%2%
&'()/!!+,*+,
1+0-)0

"

#$%
&'() /)1+0-)0!-/0
-+1
01

!0--!
+

)0
*
! !)+60
07

"
$&%2%
&'()
./!!+,*+,
)1+0-)!//0
-+
1
01

+1+

)-0
*
!
!

&
'
5

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +;

"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678

)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;?6
;@;
;@6
;&;
;&6
;;;
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

;
;

"

#$%
&'()*+,
-+
./!!+,*+,
)1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/)0
-+1
01

+1+

)-
!/)+10
*
! !

"
$&%2%
&'(!0-+!0*+,
1+0-

0

0

;"

#$%
&'()
./!!+, /

*+,
)
14-+1+0-)
0!-/0
-+1
01

+1+

-!/
;
"

#$%$&%2%
&'()!0 3-+!0*+,
)1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/

"
$&%2%
&'()!0 3-*+,
)
14)0
-++

)
+1!/

!)+. 1
-

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +;

"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678

)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;;6
;A;
;A6
;<;
;<6
;5;
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

;

"

#$%
&'()
./!!+,*+,
)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)
0!-/0
-+1
01

+1+

)-!/)/
0
*
!

! !

"
$&%2%
&'()!0 3-*+,
-++
*+,
)1+0-)
!//0
-+1
01

)0

*
!-+
! !
:

0

:
"
$&%)1+--!
/-+*+,
)1+0-)!+,-+1+
-
4!-00-/)-0!-/

)!10
-

"

#$%
&'()1+--!
+
*+,
-+ /)
14)0!-/
0
-+1
01

+1+

)*
! !
"
$&%2%
&'()*+,
-+
.

03*+,
)1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/)!//0
-+1
01

"
$&%)

03*+,
)1+0-)1
014!-00-/)0!-/

)
-0

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +;

"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678

)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;56
;7;
;76
;6;
;66
A8;
&6
&;
@6
@;
?6
?;
86

;

$

"
$&%)

03*+,
)1+0-)1
014!-00-/
"
0

0 )
+1+1
-
+,
,
)*
+.
4+0*!/- -

"8@
.1

1
1 #= $">

$"

1

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 ;+;

"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678

)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

A86
A?;
A?6
A@;
A@6
A&;
86 8;
766
76;
776
77;
756

;

;

;

=
=

$
$
9

=;
=

!
/*3

"

#$%
&'(,0-3 !)*+,
)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)0

-+1
01

!0--!+

)0
!
"
$&%2%
&'(,0-3 !)*+,
)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)
!//0
-+1
01

!0--!+

)0
!

"

&'(%$&%)/!!+,*+,
-++
*+,
)/1+0-)
!+,4!-00-/)0

/!/)

+!0 /*+,

+
*+,
!/)1+0-)0
-+1
01

)*+1
!//
&'(-"
:

0

:
"
$&%
/!!+,*+,
)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)0

/!/

"
$
$&%)/1+0-)!+,-+1+
-4!-00-/
"
>-$&%)+
*+,
)/1+0-)1+
--+30 3
4!-00-/

"

#$%
&'()/!!+,*+,
)1+0-)1+
-4!-00-/)
0

/0!-)+1!/
2#(

&
6?
&$
6?

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +

"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678!
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;;6
;A;
;A6
;<;
;<6
;5;
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

83

;

;

;

=;
9
$
$
$

;
;

=
"
>-$&%)/!!+,*+,
)1+0-)0

/!/

"

#$)!0 3-*+,
-++
*+,
)
14-+1+0-),0-3
+10

;"
$&%)*+,
-+!0 3-+
*+,
)1+0-)1+
-
4!-00-/)0!-/!/,0-3 /!/1
;
"
$
$&%)*+,
-+

03*+,
)1+0-)0
-+
1
01

"

&'(
5'2)!0 3-/!!+,*+,
)3
)1+0-)0!-/0
-+
1
01

)4++!/1
-

"
8++14!+/!+ 30
1+-+14!

";&/;
.1

1
1 #= $">

$"

1
&$
6?

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +

"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678!
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;56
;7;
;76
;6;
;66
A8;
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6
;

;

;

;

=
;=

=
=;

!

/*3

"
$&%2%
&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)!//0
-+
1
01

!0--!+

)0

! !

"

#$%
&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0
-++

)-!/)0

! !
"

#$%
&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)0

)-!/

"
$&%2%
&'()*+,
-++
*+,
)
14-+1+0-)
!//0
-+1
01

+1+

"
$&%2%
&'()+
*+,
)/1+0--+,-)0
-+
1
01

)0
!)1+--!
/

*!.,0-3

03-0
0
"
$&%2%
&'()*+,
)1+0-)0
-+1
01

+1+

)-!/

!
5
5

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678

)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&<6
&5;
&56
&7;
&76
&6;
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

;

83

;

=
=
$
$
$
$:$

;
;

=;
;=

:

0

:
"
$&%) /)1+0-)-0

)0!-/!/

"
$
$&%)*+,
)1+0-)0!-/!/)0
!
1
-)1+--!
+
*+,

;"
$
$&%)*+,
)1+0-)0!-/!/)-0

)!0--!
+
*+,
1+--!0

;
"

#$%$&%)!0 3-+!0*+,
)-0)/1+0-

"

&'(
5'2) /)
14)3
)0!-/0

)-
!/)0*!)1+
-1
--0+

6?
&$
'

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678

)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&66
;8;
;86
;?;
;?6
;@;
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

"

#$
5'2)+!0*+,
)3
)0

)1+
-
1
--0+
)+60
-0+
-3+ 3+-

"&7/;
.1

1
1 #= $">

$"

1

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678

)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;@6
;&;
;&6
;;;
;;6
;A;
&6
&;
@6
@;
?6
?;
86

;

=;
=

=
=

!
/*3

"

#$%
&'()+
*+,
)!0 3-!/
14)0!-/0
-+
1
01

!0--!+

)0

! !
1
-

"

#$%
&'()*+,
)
14)0!/0
-+1
01

!0--!
+

)0

! !
"

#$%
&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)0

)+60
07

! 1
-

"

#$%
&'()+!0 /*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0
-++

)-!/)0
!
"

#$%
&'() /)
14)0!-/0
-++

)-
!/

"
$&%2%
&'() /-+*!03 /)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)
!//0
-++

)-0
!
5
5

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&<6
&5;
&56
&7;
&76
&6;
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

;

;

;

=
=

;
;

=
=
"

&'()+
03*+,
)1+0-)0
-++

)+1
!/

"
+4
$&%2%
&'()*!03
/)1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/)!//0
-++

)0
!=+--+1

&'()+
03*+,
)1+0-)0
-++

)+1
!/=
;
"
$&%2%
&'()*+,
-++
*+,
)/1+0-)
!//0
-++

)

/0!-/0
-++

"
@-)43
+

,-
+
-

:

0

"

#$%
&'()
. /*+,
-+*!.)/1+0--+,-)
0!-/0
-+1
01

)!0--!!/)*!.1++
0
1--
5
5
$5#

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&66
;8;
;86
;?;
;?6
;@;
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

;
;

;

"
$&%-+$&%2%
&'()
. /),-)!+,4!-00-/)
!//0
-+1
01

--+4)0
-+1
01

/!/
-*+--+1

"

&'(
5'2)/!!+,*+,
-++
*+,
)3
),-)
!//0
-+1
01

)!/1)4++!/1
-

"

&'(
5'2)/!!+,*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0

-+0

/0!-

"@6/?

;A
#= $">

$"

1

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;@6
;&;
;&6
;;;
;;6
;A;
&6
&;
@6
@;
?6
?;
86 ;

;

;

=
=

"

#$%
&'()*+,
)
14)0
-+1
01

+1
+

)0

! !

*+.
*
+.
1
-

"
$&%2%
&'()*+,
-+
./!!+,*+,
)
14)!//
0
-+1
01

+1+

)-0
!
"
$&%2%
&'()1+0-

"

#$%$&%2%
&'()*+,
/)1+0-)0!-/0
-+
1
01

!0--!+

)0

! !)-
!/
"

#$%
&'() /)1+0-)0!-/0
-+1
01

)-
!/

"

#$%
&'()*+,
)
14)0
-++

)-
!/
5
5

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
;"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678

)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&A6
&<;
&<6
&5;
&56
&7;
&76
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

;

;

;
;

"

&'(%
#$)
.*+,
-+ /*+,
)/1+0-)0

/0!-,0-3!/)

$&%2%
&'() /*+,
)/
1+0-)0
-+1
01

"
$&%2%
&'()
./!!+,*+,
)!//0
-++

,0-31
:1
! 1
-A
0-B)

&'(%
$&%) /*+,
)1+0-)0
-+1
01

;"
$&%2%
&'()*+,
-++
*+,
)1+0-)!//
0

)!0 3-+
*+,
*
+. 1
-
;
"
+4
$&%2%
&'()!0 3- /-+,30-)1+0-=+--+1

$&%)*!03 /)1+0-)0!-/!/,0-3+
*+,

"

#$
5'2)
.
*+,
!10
-
)3
)1+0-

"
@!!1
-
)13
0!!/-
+. 1
-

";;/@
.1

1
1 #= $">

$"

1

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
;"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678

)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&76
&6;
&66
;8;
;86
;?;
;?6
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

;

;
;

=
=

!
/*3

"

#$%
&'()!0 3-*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0

+

*+,
0
-+1
01

/!/

"
$&%)*+,
-++
*+,
)1+0-)!+,-+1+
-
4!-00-/)0

/!/
"
$&%2%
&'()+!0*+,
)1+0-)0
-+1
01

+1+

"
$&%2%
&'()!0 3-+
*+,
)0!-/0
-++

)-!/)0

! !
"

#$%
&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0
-+1
01

,0-3!10
-0+
+ /-++
*+,
0

/!/

"
$
$&%,0-3

)

03*+,
)1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/)0
-+1
01

!0--!+

(

&
5(

&
5

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
;"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
: :
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678'
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&A;
&A6
&<;
&<6
&5;
&56
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6
;

;

=
=

;
;

=
:

0

:
"

#$%
&'()+

03*+,
)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)
0!-/0

"

#$%$&%2%
&'()+

03*+,
)1+0-)0

)0

! ! 1
-)

03!/!10
-0+

;"

#$%$&%2%
&'()+

03*+,
)1+0-)0

;
"

#$%$&%2%
&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/)0!-/0
-+1
01

)!/!/

"
$&%2%
&'()
.+
*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0
-+
1
01

,0-30
-+1
01!//0!-/1)-
13
0!!/-
0

! !

"
2
+
-
+

"
,-)0
*
!-+*+

!
5
5

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
;"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
: :
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678'
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&7;
&76
&6;
&66
;8;
;86
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

"
$&%2%
&'()+
*+,
),-)!+,4!-00-/)0

*
! !

13
0!!/-
!

"
$&%2%
&'()!0 3-*+,
),-)0!-/0
-++

)0

! !

!13
0!!/-

!

"

#$
5'2) /)3
)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)1+
-
1
--0+

"

#$
5'2)
. /)/3
)
+60
07

"@;/;

;<
#= $">

$"

1

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
;"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
: :
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678'
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;?;
;?6
;@;
;@6
;&;
;&6
&6
&;
@6
@;
?6
?;
86

;

$
$
$

"
$&%)+
*+,
-+ /03*+,
)1+0-)0!-/!/)
+10

"
$
$&%)*+,

/)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/0

/!/)0
*+

!)1+--!

"
+10
-+1
01

)/!0--!-+
+ !

"
$&%2%
&'() /)1+0-)0
-++

)0

! !
"
$&%)

03*+,
)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)0!-/!/

"

#$%
&'()*!03

*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0
-+
1
01

+1+

)-!/)0

!
!*
+. 1
-
&$
(
&
&$
(
&

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
;"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
: :
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678B
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&A6
&<;
&<6
&5;
&56
&7;
&76
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

;
;

"

#$%
&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0
-++

)-!/
"
3

0!!0

"
0!-/0
-+1
01

)-!/
:

0

:
;"
$&%2%
&'()+
*+,
)/1+0-)0
-+
1
01

+1+

)0

!*
+.

! 1
-
;
"
$&%)

03*+,
)1+0-)!+,-+1+
-4!-00-/)
0

! !

"

&'(
5'2)!0 3-+
*+,
)3
)1+0-)0!-/0

)+
*+,
!//0
-+1
01

1)
4++!/1
-
)0*!

"

&'(
5'2)+
*+,
)3
)1+0-)0!-/0

)
4++!/1
-

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
;"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
: :
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678B
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&76
&6;
&66
;8;
;86
;?;
;?6
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6
;

"

&'(
5'2)+
*+,
)1+0-)0!-/0

)4++!/
1
-

"&;/5
.1

1
1 #= $">

$"

1

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
;"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
: :
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678B
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;?6
;@;
;@6
;&;
;&6
;;;
;;6
&6
&;
@6
@;
?6
?;
86

;

!++!//:0!-/

"
$&%2%
&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)0

)*
! !

"
$&%2%
&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)/
0

)0
*
! !
"

!13
0!!/-
!

"
$&%2%
&'()1+--!
+
*+,
-+!0 3-*+,
)
1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)0

)0
*
! !
"

#$%
&'()*+,
)1+0-)/0
-+0

)0

*
! !)*+.
*
+. 1
-

"

#$%
&'(,0-3 !)*+,
)!0 3-!/1+0-)0

)
0
-+1
01
!13
0!!/-
!

*
! !

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
; "
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
:
:
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678*
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

A86
A?;
A?6
A@;
A@6
A&;
A&6
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

;

8 8
<8

8 8

;
;

"

#$)+
*+,
)1+0-)/0

)
!
13
0!!/-
!

"

#$%
&'()+
*+,
)!0 3-!/1+0-)0
-+/
0

)0
!*+

*
!+1

! !-3-,13
0!!/-

:

0

:
;"

&'()!0 3-*+,
-++
*+,
)1+0-)0

)0

-+1
01 !*
!-+*+

13
0!!/
-
!
;
"

&'()!0 3-*+,
)1+0-)0

)0
*+

*
! !
;"
&--14-
14!0
-+-/-+*.-3+ 3+.0

!=
-44
+

0!!

+,
-+
-=

"

#$%
&'(-+
&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)0

)
0
*+

!)1+-++
14!1/*
!+ 3

"

&'(,0-3
&'(
5'2 1
-)1+-)0

)
!0 3-+
*+,
)0
!
!-+*
!)
13
0!!/-
),!!0

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
; "
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
:
:
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678*
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

A&6
A;;
A;6
AA;
AA6
A<;
A<6
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

;

"

&'(
5'2)!0 3-+
*+,
)3
)1+0-)0

)
1+
-1
--0+
)0*!

"

&'(
5'2) /)1+0-)0

),!!1
-
)
00!

"&;/@
.1

1
1 #= $">

$"

1

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
; "
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
:
:
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678*
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

A<6
A5;
A56
A7;
A76
A6;
A66
&6
&;
@6
@;
?6
?;
86

;

;

=
$
$
$

8 $

;=

0!-/

,0-3 !

"

&'(%$&%)1+--!
*+,
/!!+,*+,

+

*+,
)1+0-)/!+,4!-00-/)/0
-+0

)+1
0
!

"

&'(%$&%)1+--!

03*+,

/!!+,*+,
)
!0 3-!/1+0--+1+0-)0

)0
*
!

!
:

0

:

"

&'()+
*+,
)1+0-)0

)+10
!
"
$&%)

03*+,
)1+0-)1+
-4!-00-/)3+
+
-0
*
+. 1
-

"
$&%
5'2)

03*+,
)3
)1+0-)1+
-
4!-00-/)!10
-

(

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
;"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
:
:
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678)
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

A7;
A76
A6;
A66
<8;
<86
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

; "
$&%
5'2)

03*+,
)3
)1+0-)1+
-
4!-00-/),!!1
-

"<7/;
.1

1
1 #= $">

$"

1

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +
;"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
:
:
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678)
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

<?;
<?6
<@;
<@6
<&;
<&6
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

;

;

:$
<8
$

+1 !

1- )
C

"
$&%2%
&'()*+,
)1+0-)0

)0

!
13
0!!/-
!)1+--!

/)!/0

3+)+**!00*!-

"
'++/)--0
+
0-
+$&%2%
&'()

03
*+,
)1+0-)0

)+**!/ !
"
$&%2%
&'()

03*+,
-+!0 3-*+,
)1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/)0

)
! !13
0!!/-

!)!/!10
-0+

"
$&%2%
&'()

03*+,
)1+0-)0

)0

! !13
0!!/-

"
$&%-+$&%2%
&'()1+--!
+
*+,

03*+,
)1+0-)0

)/0
!
;"
<0

--!0
,30!
0!!0
*+.
!0
+0!
--0

"

&'(%$&%)+
*+,
)1+0-)0

)0

! !13
0!!/-
*
! !)

03!/!/)*
+. 1
-

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +

"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&;;
&;6
&A;
&A6
&<;
&<6
6 ;
76 7;
56 5;
<6

;

$
$
$
$
<8

;
;

"

&'(%$&%)

03*+,
-++
*+,
)/
1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)1+--!
/*+,
+

!/

"

&'(%$&%)

03*+,

+
*+,
)1+0-)
!+,4!-00-/)0

)/0
-+0
!
!-+
*
!)4:07
!/
+
!)+0!44
0-*

;"

&'(%$&%)+
*+,
-+

03*+,
)1+0-)!+,
4!-00-/)0

)0
!*
!

13
0!!/
-

! !

"

&'(%$&%)+
*+,
)!0 3-!/1+0-)!+,4!-00-/)
0

)0
!*
!

13
0!!/-

! !

"
<0

--!0
,30!
0!!0

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +

"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

&5;
&56
&7;
&76
&6;
&66
<6
<;
A6
A;
;6
;;
&6

;

;

$
$
C!

C!

"

&'(%$&%)+
*+,
)1+0-)0

)0

!

*
! !)!+,1
--0+
)
!/0

3+

"
$&%)
.

03*+,
-+ /03
)1+0-)!+,-+
1+
-4!-00-/)-+60
-0+
)
031+--!0

:

0)
C

: C

"
$&%
5'2)
.

03*+,
)1+0-)!+,-+1+
-
4!-00-/)!+,1
--0+
)!10
-

"
$&%)+
*+,
-+*+,
)1+0--+,-)!+,4!-00-/)
-
*
+.,0-30
14!)4+0*!!

!0
1-0!

"
4+0*!!

!0
1-0!

"?&
.1

1
1 #= $">

$"

1

"
# $
!

%&'
"
8 +

"
#()*%)!
+,-!%)!
-#%)!
-'. %)!
%)'%,,.%)!
(#!%)!
#
+

-

9+!!+,
-1& :;!*:&-+311:
(+4 + /
::
,')
!+-'%',.
#0

1+/
%2
%2./

8!-<+-3
0!4
51-/(0-0-:</41
/+

%)!3%!
-0
0(0!!0

+

4
!,!+
.'+)#,-'. ), 5678
)11#0

(//+//
)1
0
"

)

0

0
.

3%!,
!
566
)
+.
+,
+-
+(
4
'.!%'.
!-#!- )''
+,.,)'
',.
+,))%!
+,--,',.
(.
-'.!
-'9')

%%
-

'-!+
!-
!9%.',.'.
!9

3 -,!!-
9'(
!.'3
%,+*!%!.!-,!!-
-)(!

!

(+
'!!.)3'
.
!:(')!.
%!+'
'+ -'3
(.+,.
'.!
+,%-!'!-!.

;8;
;86
;?;
;?6
;@;
;@6
&6
&;
@6
@;
?6
?;
86

!"#!$$" $% &" '!(
%%"
)
$&'%
*$"!(!*+$"'&,+
$," !!
$,&% %-& $
+ %,+(

!.!
""'"
,.,
! ""'
!
&
&(!-"

($! .$!$
'&.

" %+$",
/+$"$"!(!*
+$"!0! ""(

.$&'.$,
" (

& %+

1+
-."

2 %,+)!, (

*$$! '"!(!*+$"'"
+ !$!$(*

"
)$

3
(+ %,+)!, $(

*.$!$
'"
+ !$!$(*
"
)$

2 %,+$! )
$&

4
( "",&(-
$+5$&
)$ )
"
!-!!.$&
.'!$

"
+4!
1
$
'
!&(" $
*+$") !$
- 6
'

( !!
$,&% %)$,!%
.!
"

!

"#

78
8299#

%
%
!!&('!($+ %,+
$! :(

*
&%)!, (

*.$!$
+

1$-"
&%
&%(

!'
+$"'%
+4'-

)! '
;!*. + & %

6 67989) %#()!, (

*'
+
"" '

%'-

)! '%
*',&$1%5 %'+ %,+(

& %'
.$&
&"".

%<.+%
+
.!
*"$&
&%
!!
$,&% %-& .$))! .!
""$-
&% "
&%=,

5
'

$,&%

$)"
%&)$$+$-$!
-
"$

)

;&%
!!&(

678
8299# !!
$,&% %
&% ".
&%
=,

5 .$))! "&+

1$-)!, :(
&"
&%'+ %,+

%'"!(!*. + & %'-

)!

&%"&.) %%&(.$&
.

>
*" 4
( 7$))! &
+4!
$
2'
$ %

&
' #

%(
)

' #

*+,(

?
( $-

3@
-
.
*
'
!/'
*
'
&
*
'
,0&
*
'

*
,"
*//0
*
'
"- '
*
'

!
&

"
A -->,!!
,.; ,(

'@

#
'

# '

!)"!)$&>$! B
$4
!

1 33

/,
%'
!,*",/0

2
% !1
*3
*301
?!

$ .&.
!2
4 877 +
*"
.
*4",+7
&*$&

6

% (

*
'"4*'

!
$*

!5
&'/"'!$0,!
/,0&
/&6789

8
2
%
%

A>:A

-1
1!1
1

"2"

&
(

%2%
2
0

"4*'/"'
"

677

!0
!/
!
!-
5,0'
*

,0&
""' '&
,,"

!/0
/
,%",/0
!/

*
'
!//
,/0
-0%,0'%",:,

',
$
%
**

%,'!"
$'
':*0
,/0,0%':
$4%/'"'
:,-%'0
,"4
*/!.'"*'0'"/'"'

-'

&
-!

,''0
4 ,

0%';-,
'0"

*'!,,!&,"4
-0!/0,0'%!/*'

,'
"'0&"$
<9=
<97
<>=
<>7
<?=
<?7
7 =
87 8=
67 6=
@7

C
D
9
C
9
@
9

!&("
&%$,"% $-),.; .$&"" &!*

!! !&(" .$&%

*-
,!" &
$! '(4!
&

. "'&$(
,( '
)$ +
&-
,!C
D: 9

4!*%44&(-
,!
%&..;4!
".-

.!
*(
,( &
"$! #+&$
&$
+
!$--" $-4 ))! .!
""
&$
)! #C
9:@
9

!! !&(" .$&%

*-
,!" 1$! '(4!
&

. "'&$(
,( '
)$ +
&-
,!

@78
8299&
*.$,
" (

& %.!
* *"
&%
+

1'

)! .!
".$!$
"$-
%'* !!$'(
&
&%)!, '
% &" +$%

!*. + & %' '-

)!

3%
!!&(

"!$"

4!*%44&(-
,!
%&..;4!
".-

.!
*(
,( 1"$! #+&$
&$
+
!$--" $-4 ))! .!
""
&$
)! #

789#%
*'

%'&!*) %% %'!$.
!
)
&%"&%

;(
&$
%%"
*.$

" $.$

"
(

& %+

1

378
8299#D !!
$,&% %(
&.$))! .!
""'
"!(!*. + & %+

1'+
"" '"
,.,
! ""

.$&&, "
"
)$ '!$.
!&.!
*) %"4!
&

)$,&%

"'"
&%"$& &
) %"

7989#+ %,+

%'
%$!((
&'
%
+4'".

;(
&
%'%

;
%
*$! '
=,

5
&%& $&(
&.$))! .!
""'.!
*"$& :;
$!&
-

(+ &"
44 $1+
!*<.+&%
+
0'&%"&.!*&
) %%&('-

)!
$
! 4-

$,&%

4
( -

.;-!!
&$& ? !! "/
- 0

!!
!&("/$ - 0
&$& 4 !! "/
- 0

!!
!&("/

- 0
$&$! $(( %$
-

$ %

&
' #

%(
)

' #

*+,(

?
( $-

3@
-
.
*
'
!/'
*
'
&
*
'
,0&
*
'

*
,"
*//0
*
'
"- '
*
'

!
&

"
A -->,!!
,.; ,(

'@

#
'

# '

!)"!)$&>$! B
$4
!

1 33

/,
%'
!,*",/0

2
% !1
*3
*301
?!

$ .&.
!2
4 877 +
*"
.
*4",+7
&*$&

6

% (

*
'"4*'

!
$*

!5
&'/"'!$0,!
/,0&
/&6789

8
2
%
%

A>:A

-1
1!1
1

"2"

&
(

%2%
2
0

"4*'/"'
"

677

!0
!/
!
!-
5,0'
*

,0&
""' '&
,,"

!/0
/
,%",/0
!/

*
'
!//
,/0
-0%,0'%",:,

',
$
%
**

%,'!"
$'
':*0
,/0,0%':
$4%/'"'
:,-%'0
,"4
*/!.'"*'0'"/'"'

-'

&
-!

,''0
4 ,

0%';-,
'0"

*'!,,!&,"4
-0!/0,0'%!/*'

,'
"'0&"$
<+=
<+7
<==
<=7
<<=
<<7
@7
@=
<7
<=
=7
==
+7

!#!(
%%")
$&'%
*$"!(!*
+$"'
$,&% %.!
""'!$$" $+ %,+% &"

" %+$",
/"!(!*+$"0

!-$-)
.;
% "4 7'+$"'-
+

)$,!%
.!
"&!-$-+ %,+* !!$"
&%*+

1

$.
)
$&".;*7!
*#"!(!*+$"'!

(
.$))! .!
""

3B$4$-
%) %-!!!-' "4 7 !!
$,&% %

!"'"$-$-
+'+$"'-
+'+$"'

6%
*

".

%!$.
!
$$"')!, (

*.!
*"$&

.$))! "&.!
*+

1'%
*$"!(!*+$"'! ""(

3"
+
%) %+

!'&.

" &+$",

-!!.$&
.79:D')$$+$-
%) %-!!/$4$-
$!%
+&
!&(-!!0

! &" $-$.
)
$&.!
* *"
&%'+$"

)$,!%
.!
"+4 % "%
!!&('.$
)

!
+4!$* %79:D

.$
)

! +4!$* %+,!4! + "$)

; !!
$,&% %
)$,!%
.!
""'
*+$"'".;*'"!(!*4!
".'

( 7$))! :)$,!%
.!
"

@"
+ $.
)
$&.$!$
'! "" !!
$,&% %)$,!%

+4 %+ &"
&
)$ '&.

" %+$",
/+$"$
*
+$"0'"$-'!$$" '"
,.,
! ""'
$,&% %.$))! "
&%
)$,!%
.!
""

3.$
)

! +4!$* %$)

;,4)$,!%
.!
"
2''

$ %

&
' #

%(
)

' #

*+,(

?
( $-

-
.
*
'
!/'
*
'
&
*
'
,0&
*
'

*
,"
*//0
*
'
"- '
*
'

!
&

"
A -->,!!
,.; ,(
$&>$! B
$4
!

/,
%'
!,*",/0

2
% !1
*3
*301
?!

$ .&.
!2
4 877 +
*"
.
*4",+7
&*$&

6

% (

*
'"4*'

!
$*

!5
&'/"'!$0,!
/,0&
/&6789

6
2
%
%

A>:A?

-1
1!1
1

"2"

&
(

%2%
2
0

"4*'/"'
"

677

!0
!/
!
!-
5,0'
*

,0&
""' '&
,,"

!/0
/
,%",/0
!/

*
'
!//
,/0
-0%,0'%",:,

',
$
%
**

%,'!"
$'
':*0
,/0,0%':
$4%/'"'
:,-%'0
,"4
*/!.'"*'0'"/'"'

-'

&
-!

,''0
4 ,

0%';-,
'0"

*'!,,!&,"4
-0!/0,0'%!/*'

,'
"'0&"$
+<7
+@=
+@7
+6=
+67
+8=
7 =
87 8=
67 6=
@7

6.$
)

! +4!$* %$)

;,4)$,!%
.!
"

.$
)

! +4!$* %$)

;,4)$,!%
.!
"

.$
)

! +4!$* %$)

;,4)$,!%
.!
"

3$4$-.
&(5$& /!

1 &,&%
+& %0'

" % & "":+$",
'
*+$"'&.

" %.!
*
.$& &'".;*'4!
".'&,+
$," !!
$,&% %
.$))! ":)$,!%
"

$,&%

.$
)

! +4!$* %$)

;,4)$,!%
.!
"' $

*+$"'
*.$

" (

& %
7$))! ":$,!%
"'+&$
.!
*)&%
'".;*

"
+
"
)$

!"#%

;)
$&'
*.$

"
(

& %' !!
$,&% %
&% "..!
""' '$%$
! ""'&
)
$&! &" "

@"!(.$!$
.
&( $!($.
)
$&

3 % &. $-)!
.;
"
&(
"/4$"")!

&"!$.
%
.
+)
":-

.
, "0'.!
"""+
!!
&"5 ), !!
$,&% %'
+
"" '$1%5
$&+$
% &
&
)$

(.!
*.$& &'
*+$"$ '"!!!$.
!!

( !!

$,&% %.$))! .!
""4
" &'"
&%
-
. "'

(
$,&%

'.$
)

! +4!$* %$)

;,4)$,!%

.!
"

'
*';-'/
/",/0
-

"#

@789#!(& $&)!, '".

% !!
$,&% %
4 ))! "'%
*'+ %,+

%'&!*) %% %'
$&"
& %
-

.,
4

&'
* &
) %"'

$ %

&
' #

%(
)

' #

*+,(

?
( $-

-
.
*
'
!/'
*
'
&
*
'
,0&
*
'

*
,"
*//0
*
'
"- '
*
'

!
&

"
A -->,!!
,.; ,(
$&>$! B
$4
!

/,
%'
!,*",/0

2
% !1
*3
*301
?!

$ .&.
!2
4 877 +
*"
.
*4",+7
&*$&

6

% (

*
'"4*'

!
$*

!5
&'/"'!$0,!
/,0&
/&6789

6
2
%
%

A>:A?

-1
1!1
1

"2"

&
(

%2%
2
0

"4*'/"'
"

677

!0
!/
!
!-
5,0'
*

,0&
""' '&
,,"

!/0
/
,%",/0
!/

*
'
!//
,/0
-0%,0'%",:,

',
$
%
**

%,'!"
$'
':*0
,/0,0%':
$4%/'"'
:,-%'0
,"4
*/!.'"*'0'"/'"'

-'

&
-!

,''0
4 ,

0%';-,
'0"

*'!,,!&,"4
-0!/0,0'%!/*'

,'
"'0&"$
+87
+7=
+77
=9=
=97
=>=
@7
@=
<7
<=
=7
==
+7

3789#+ %,+$%

;
%)
$&'+ %,+

%'
+
"" '+.
. $,"'%
*'4!
".')!, +$!&(
$
! 4
-

$,&%

-
7 &(

-

.;-!!.$&"""$- &$& ? !! "/

- 0#%
!!
!&("/
$

- 0#) &$& 4 !! "/
- 0'
&%%
!!
!&("/

- 06
$&$! $(( %$

- ',&"
- ) !$%, $.
&(
$ %

&
' #

%(
)

' #

*+,(

?
(
$-

-
.
*
'
!/'
*
'
&
*
'
,0&
*
'

*
,"
*//0
*
'
"- '
*
'

!
&

"
A -->,!!
,.; ,(
$&>$! B
$4
!

/,
%'
!,*",/0

2
% !1
*3
*301
?!

$ .&.
!2
4 877 +
*"
.
*4",+7
&*$&

6

% (

*
'"4*'

!
$*

!5
&'/"'!$0,!
/,0&
/&6789

6
2
%
%

A>:A?

-1
1!1
1

"2"

&
(

%2%
2
0

"4*'/"'
"

677

!0
!/
!
!-
5,0'
*

,0&
""' '&
,,"

!/0
/
,%",/0
!/

*
'
!//
,/0
-0%,0'%",:,

',
$
%
**

%,'!"
$'
':*0
,/0,0%':
$4%/'"'
:,-%'0
,"4
*/!.'"*'0'"/'"'

-'

&
-!

,''0
4 ,

0%';-,
'0"

*'!,,!&,"4
-0!/0,0'%!/*'

,'
"'0&"$
=>7
=?=
=?7
=+=
=+7
===
+7
+=
?7
?=
>7
>=
97

!":7$))! "#+ %,+)
$&'%
*'
"
,.,
! ""'!$$"

!":7$))! "#$.
)
$&+

1
.!
*)&%
'+$"'".;*',"&(.
$)

&%
$.;4.;$
+
&,
!!* 1

.)$,!%
-
$+"%
!!'

!#+$"$
*+$"' !!

$,&% %.!
""

!#! ""(

.$&'* !!$"$$.

)
$&+

1'
*.$

" (

& %'+$"

7/&"
+4! "$ 0'
%%")
$&'+$"'

6(& $,".$))! &"$
2''

$ %

&
' #

%(
)

' #

*+,(

?
( $-

-
.
*
'
!/'
*
'
&
*
'
,0&
*
'

*
,"
*//0
*
'
"- '
*
'

!
&

"
A -->,!!
,.; ,(
$&>$! B
$4
!

1
3

/,
%'
!,*",/0

2
% !1
*3
*301
?!

$ .&.
!2
4 877 +
*"
.
*4",+7
&*$&

6

% (

*
'"4*'

!
$*

!5
&'/"'!$0,!
/,0&
/&6789

@

2
%
%

-1
1!1
1

"2"

&
(

%2%
2
0

"4*'/"'
"

677

!0
!/
!
!-
5,0'
*

,0&
""' '&
,,"

!/0
/
,%",/0
!/

*
'
!//
,/0
-0%,0'%",:,

',
$
%
**

%,'!"
$'
':*0
,/0,0%':
$4%/'"'
:,-%'0
,"4
*/!.'"*'0'"/'"'

-'

&
-!

,''0
4 ,

0%';-,
'0"

*'!,,!&,"4
-0!/0,0'%!/*'

,'
"'0&"$
+?7
++=
++7
+==
+=7
+<=
+<7
7 =
87 8=
67 6=
@7

)

" %+$",
/+$"$
*+$"0

)$,!%
.!
"

#* !!$'
*+$"'
*.$

" (

& %'
&(,!

(

& %'&%"&.!
+&
$-%

;
$
(
&."E'!$.
!!*
+

1'$
(
&."
&(
"&
.
!4

&("

!
&%7!
*#%

;)
$&'-& (

& %'
*
+$"$ '".

%4 ))! "'"$-'!$.
!$! +$!&('
!$.
!.$))! ":4 ))! "

$,&%

/
+4!
"$ " 0

!#
)!
.;$%

;)
$&' '
*.$

" (

& %'+&$
.!
*:"!'
.!
"
&%"
$&.$
%'

$,&%

" 4
(

7!
*
&%? ))! "#+ %,+* !!$)
$&'
$1%5 %' '4!
".'"$-:!$$" '.;
$&.$
&($&.!
""
/
&%"0'&%"&.!*!
+&
%'
!
&
&(* !!$'$! ')
$&'
)!
.;' !
+&

7!
* *#4

"
*
$&.$
&("$&.!
""'
'!$.
!)!, .!
*"$& .!
""

" %.$))! ":4 ))! "'&.

" %.!
*-

.$&

!()!, :
%.!
*"$& .!
""'4$"")! (!*

%
-$
+
$&'&%"&.!*&!*) %% %'"$-'4
! * !!$$$!
)
$&

'
*';-'/
/",/0-

@789#+ %,+
%'(!*

%'"$-

3789#

%'+
"" '%
*'+.
. $,"'
&%"&.)!, (

*+$!&(

789:89#
%'

%'%
*'+
"" $
&%"&.!*&!*) %% %'".

%!()!, (

*.!
*"$&
4 ))! .!
""&+

1

!$.
!!*"$-

2'

$ %

&
' #

%(
)

' #

*+,(

?
( $-

-
.
*
'
!/'
*
'
&
*
'
,0&
*
'

*
,"
*//0
*
'
"- '
*
'

!
&

"
A -->,!!
,.; ,(
$&>$! B
$4
!

1
3

/,
%'
!,*",/0

2
% !1
*3
*301
?!

$ .&.
!2
4 877 +
*"
.
*4",+7
&*$&

6

% (

*
'"4*'

!
$*

!5
&'/"'!$0,!
/,0&
/&6789

@

2
%
%

-1
1!1
1

"2"

&
(

%2%
2
0

"4*'/"'
"

677

!0
!/
!
!-
5,0'
*

,0&
""' '&
,,"

!/0
/
,%",/0
!/

*
'
!//
,/0
-0%,0'%",:,

',
$
%
**

%,'!"
$'
':*0
,/0,0%':
$4%/'"'
:,-%'0
,"4
*/!.'"*'0'"/'"'

-'

&
-!

,''0
4 ,

0%';-,
'0"

*'!,,!&,"4
-0!/0,0'%!/*'

,'
"'0&"$
+<7
+@=
+@7
+6=
+67
+8=
+87
@7
@=
<7
<=
=7
==
+7
@
@

@
@)
@

789# &..;
+$!% %
%.!
*) %
.$&

"&(
!
&
&(

%"!*.!
*"$& ) %"'"$-'
%
*'4$!" %'4!
".'4$!" %4!
&

) %%&(.$&
."

%
) %"
)$
&%) !$/ .$&.),.$,!%

..$++$%
+$

. &+$ + &0'
*&&%"&.
) %%&(

# &..;
+$!% %
%.!
*) %'"$-'%
*'4$!" %'
4!
".'4$!" %4!
&

) %%&(.$&
."

%
) %"

)$
&%) !$/ .$&.),.$,!%
..$++$%
+$

. &+$ + &0'
*&&%"&.) %%&(

.$+4 &
%789

789#.$+4 &'

%$+ %,+

%'+ %,+

%'+
"" $&%"&.!*&) %% %'%
*'!$.
! .$&.
!!*
4$!" %
&%%".$&&,$,") %%&(4!
& "

%
%
!!&('

%
-$
+
$&.$+4 &.*
$
! 4-

$,&%

@-
$4$-.
&(5$&

@-
$&$! $((&($$
&(
$,"%, $.
&(&"
,

%-!!
+

!6$$+$-$! &-!! %- $-.
%+

!
) -$
)
.;-!!&(

.;-!!.$&"""$- &$& ? !! "/3
- 0#%
!!
!&("/
$3- 0#) &$& 4 !! "/
- 0'
&%%
!!
!&("/

- 06
'

$ %

&
' #

%(
)

' #

*+,(

?
(
$-

-
.
*
'
!/'
*
'
&
*
'
,0&
*
'

*
,"
*//0
*
'
"- '
*
'

!
&

"
A -->,!!
,.; ,(
$&>$! B
$4
!

1
3

/,
%'
!,*",/0

2
% !1
*3
*301
?!

$ .&.
!2
4 877 +
*"
.
*4",+7
&*$&

6

% (

*
'"4*'

!
$*

!5
&'/"'!$0,!
/,0&
/&6789

@

2
%
%

-1
1!1
1

"2"

&
(

%2%
2
0

"4*'/"'
"

677

!0
!/
!
!-
5,0'
*

,0&
""' '&
,,"

!/0
/
,%",/0
!/

*
'
!//
,/0
-0%,0'%",:,

',
$
%
**

%,'!"
$'
':*0
,/0,0%':
$4%/'"'
:,-%'0
,"4
*/!.'"*'0'"/'"'

-'

&
-!

,''0
4 ,

0%';-,
'0"

*'!,,!&,"4
-0!/0,0'%!/*'

,'
"'0&"$
+87
+7=
+77
=9=
=97
=>=
=>7
+7
+=
?7
?=
>7
>=
97 Leighton and Associates, Inc.
2006

!"
"

#$ !%

"

# !&&&'()*# +

,$ !

.#
/#
/,

%"0"

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
+

/0

#
'
+*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !

1, !

1 !+

2$ !

23 !

"
"

$ !"
"

, !

456678+
&---

1 ! 678

&-

9 ! 678

-

/1
.,
/2
/
.1

"
"

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
+

/0

#
'
+*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

($ ! 678

-

6 &!($

.+-

/( " $

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
+

/0

#
'
+*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

456B

!456B

#$ !456B

#1
!" +
-

#3 !"
"

&
-

,$ !

678&
-

.#
/#
.,
/,

"
"
"
#

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
+2,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ ! 678&

13 !456678+
--

2$ !- 678- %
+456678+
--

2( !6:5B&.2

29 !+ 678-

$ ! 678&

6 &!$

.+-

/1
/2
.1
.2
/
"
"0
5 5
:5
"
,,
$
2$

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
+2,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

456B

!"
"

#$ !"
"

#1 !456B

,$ !456B

,, !

"
"

.#
/#
.,
/,
.1
"
"

"
#
"

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
*+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !"
"

2$ !"
"
-

:&29
-

6 &!29
%
22
.+-

/1
/2
"
"
9 2

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
*+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

456B

!"
"

-

9 !:5B8B4560456B:5B

50:5

-0

#$ !456B:5B

50:5

-
&

# !:5B

50:5

-
&

#9 !"
"

&&'()
+

,$ !456B:5B

50:5

-&

,( !:456B 0 B456

0 5

-
:
-
&

.#
/#
.,
/,
.1
"

50:5

50:5

0 5
"
"

;

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
+

/0

#
'
+2,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !456B

+0

-

1 !

2$ !"
"

&+-+

456B

21 !456B:5B
:5

-&

2 !"
"

A
&2

29 !456B:5B0:5B8B456
:50
5

-&

$ !:5B8B456

5

-&

&+-&

3 !:5B8B456

5

-
&

/1
/2
.2
.
/
.(

"
:5
"

5 5
,
"
"

;

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
+

/0

#
'
+2,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

($ !:5B8B456

5

-
-

((
!%/E855B
%"0"

9$ !"

6 &!9$
A
&2
.+-

/(
/9

5 "
"
#

;

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
+

/0

#
'
+2,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

456B

+

-

7

!456B

#$ !456B

#; !

"
"

-

,$ !4 B4560"

50"

-
B456
+

--

,( !"
"
+

-

.#
/#
/,
.,

50"
"
,
#

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
*+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !"
"

-

-

19 !

2$ !"
"
+

:&2#
-

6 &!2#
%
19
.+-

/1
/2
"
"
2

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
*+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

$ !

456678+
----+

-

2 2 ! 678

'-

#$ ! 678

-

#3
2 !#02)+:5B

&+

,$ ! 678

,2
3 !'< 678

-

,9
, !#02)+:5B

&

,; !&

678
+
456678+#0#()

#3
2 !.
(?
,

,2
3 !.
($?
#3

,9
, !
:.
(8
#9

,; !.
.#
.,
/#
/,
.1
##
,$

-/.1
?

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4
&&+
456678
&---+

,;
3 ! 678
&

1 3 !:456678

--
,)++#0,)+'<
678

13 3 !%'< 678

2$ ! 678

&

1 !%

678
&&'()+

&
-

3 !% 678

-

3 !&
678

;
!%+ 678

&
,$8
2$

1 3 !.
,8
#

# !%
*#8
#9

1 !.
#$8
#9

3 !.
?*8
#3
/1
/2
.2
1 ,9

-/.1
?

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

-

(2 !:G

9$ ! 678

&

9 2 !&
:4566780:5B678

+-&&',)
++456678

9( !:4566780

--+-

9;
! 678
--+&
--

3$
( ! 6780

-

3(
3 !% 678

&&'#,)+-

39 3 !% 678

&

(2 !C
8$

9 2 !
:.
?#3
1$*2$?
,#
/
/(
/9
.(
.9
/3
.3
3$0()
($
$
3

-/.1
?

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

;$ ! 678

&

;( !
0 678

#$$ ! 678
&

-

6 &!#$#
5;3

.+-

/;
/#$
($
3$0()

-/.1
?

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

%
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
*

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

$ !
&

, !

678
"

-

-

:

3 ( !4566780

+
-

&&'#-+

;
( ! 678
"

-
-

#1
3 !7'<-#0,)+

#2 !7'<

678-=#0,)--
#;

#; !3)+456678

5 +

,#
!456678

5
0
+

-

:-

,#
3 !% 678
"

-
-

,2
2 !>*#03)

,(
9 !>*-

3 ( !:
;?,(

#1
3 !.
?1$

#2 !.
,?
#

#; !.
2?#3

,#
!.
?#1

,(
9 !
>
1$?
#
.#
/#
/,
/1

"
"
"

#9
#(

-./
7

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
,,,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ ! 678
"

-*
&-

1#
9 ! 678
"

13 !:<

0
&
#$)<'

2$
; !7'<

2(
1 !7'<

23 ! 678
-

,
( ! 678

'<

-

1 9 !% 678
"

-

! 678
"

2$
; !.
#(?
,#

2(
1 !.
#9?
,#

,
( !.
#1?
,,
/2
/
/(
"
"
"
#
#3
#;

-./
7

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
,,,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

(2
, !456678

(2
( !%+ 678
"

-

((
!456678

5

'<

(3
!%456678

5 +,)

(;
!:456678

5 +

-#0,#)+&-
%
456678
+

(;
( !456678

5
-

-
'

9$
( !% 678
"

9$
3 !7'<

9# ! 678
"

-

-

92 !>*

'

99 !7'<

93 !-

3$ ! 678
"

3,
# !>*-#03*#0,)

32 !>

(2
( !:
,9?
#1

(
, !.
#$?
11

((
!.
#;?
,2

(;
!:
#2?
#3

9$
3 !.
1(?
,$

92 !>
1$8
9

99 !.
#$?
,$

3,
# !
>
$?
22
/9
.,
.2
/3
/;
/#$

5 5
:5
:5
"
"
20()
($
($
(03)

-./
7

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
,,,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

; ! 678
"

&

-

#$#
!456678

5 +

#$, ! 678
"

-

6 &@#$,
5!#$#
%

.+-

/##
/#,
"
"
1$
$

-./
7

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

%
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
,,,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
*

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

-!
&

, !
'

678

0

::71-

2 !
6

!4*
#0#(#03)+'<-

#2 *#2
; !A<

#2
!456678

5 &
'<
456B
:5B
:5

#3 !%- 678
456678

5

&+0
'
+--

,$ !456678

5

0
-
>7,'
-

,$
; !#0,)+

,
# !#02)+

,
3 !:-
>+#0#(*#03)+

:5B
.
-456678

7--#*,)

,9
1 !%456678

5

-
'--

,3 !456678

5 &#3)

( !.
,$?
11

; !C
3$8
3

;
3 !.
#3?
,;

#, !.
#?
1$

# !.
?,3

#9
!.
#$?
,(

,# !:
,?
,3

,
# !
:.
$3?
12

,
3 !
>
28
#
.#
/#
/,
.,

5 5
(
9

-0.1

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
,2,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !456678

5

--'

2$ !456678

5 0

&---

'::71
:
'

2 !:--<

29 ! D-456678' 456

(
3 !%
+456678

; !>'

!
>
#?
(9
/1
/2
/
.1
/(

5 5

5 #9
9 #

-0.1

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
,2,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

($ !:456678+--
--
0

(2 !456678

5
'+

9$ !()+<-456678

:
&#0#()+*<

3 1 !:+ 678

&
-
:+'<-

3 1 !.
#$8
$
/9
.2
/3
/;

5 5

5 5
#3
,$
9$0#$)

-0.1

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
,2,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

;$ ! 678

00

- 0

;3 !4

#$$ ! 678

-+- '-

+

6 &@#$(
5#$,
%

.
+-

/#$
.
/##

,1
2

-0.1

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

%
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
,2,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
*

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

$ !
()
)

456678

5 +
-

, !%
:5B678

2 !

678

&
--

!%456678

5 ++
-

3 !%+ 678

#$ !%456678

5 +
-

>#$ -

# ! -

#9
9 !%456678

5 &

,# !% 678
"
&

-

,1 !

,; !3)
-

2 !/
$8
##

#$ !>
#$8
3,

,; !>
#8
/#
/,
.#
/1
:5

5 5
,
;
#,

0-./
8

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

+
,

/0

#
'
3+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

11 !:
0-

1 !4

2$ !%
678
"

&&'#
-+

22 !&&'#$)

29 !&&'#2)+ 678
"

23 ; !:
&456678

5
456678
+-

1 , !%456678

5 &

2 !456678-

23 ; !:
,8
#1

9 !.
28
#$
/2
.,
/
/(
.1
/9
"
"
"

5 5

5 #1
,$
,3
2$

0-./
8

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

+
,

/0

#
'
3+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

(# ! 678
"
&

-

(, !- 678
"

(1 !+ 678

(3 ! 678
"
&

-

9# !%
678
"

-

3,
2 !

3 9 !3)+

678
"

3(
( !- -

9; !.
#$8
#,

3,
2 !.
1(8
#2

3 9 !.
#82

39 !.
1$8
#(
/3
/;
/#$

5 "
"
,9
$
23

0-./
8

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

+
,

/0

#
'
3+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

;, !:
456678

-
-

;1 !%+ 678
"

;2 !%456678

-
&

;( !%+ 678
"
&

#$# !456678

5 1)+

##2 ! 678
"
#,*#2)

##( !:

##9 !. 678
"

-

;, !:
2$8
=

#$# !:
1(8
,2
/##
/#,
/#1
"
"

5 (1
0()

0-./
8

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

%
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

+
,

/0

#
'
3+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
*

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

#,
( !?-

#1#
1 !&&', + 678
"
&

#11 !

#2
9 !. 678
"
&

-

#29
9 !. 678
"

-

#2; !.%
678
"

#,
( !>
1#?
(,

#21
( !
.
,#8
#1

#2( !.
($8
#$
/#2
/#
/#(
"
"
"
90()
2(

0-./
8

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

+
,

/0

#
'
3+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
3 5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

#$ !E--#0,)

-

## !%

#9 !%
678
"

#; !#03)-

#(#
!.0

-
678
"

#$ !.
#98
#2

#$ !>
,;?
1;

#; !>
,$8
21

#(#
!
:
128
,$
/#9
/#3
"
"
$02)
$0()

0-./
8

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

+
,

/0

#
'
3+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
,

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

$ !

456678

5 +
--
-
+

(
( !% 678

-
:

3 !: 678
"

-

-

#
# !
--#
#

#
3 !#03
--#
3 #9
( !
--

#3
( !#03*#0,--

,$ !% 678
"

-

,#
3!-*-

,2 ! 678
"

,; !E'<+
.

678

9 9 !.
,$?
#3

#
# !>
,#?
$

#
3 !>
(?
2;

#9
( !>
($?
2$

,#
3 !>
##?
2

,; !.
2#8
.#
/#
.,
.9
/,

5 "
"
:5
"
#,
3

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4
-

1#
!% 678
"

1 !&&'()+

13 3 !:

678+
456678
#*#
)+
7'<

:
-

&

456678
+-

2# !- 678

21 !=#03&-
F-'2
+-
> 678

+
-

2 , !'<0
678

2(
# !7'<

2(
, !%+ 678
"

-

29 !#03456678 '<

$
2 !
'<
&

2 9 !'<

3 !% 678
"

-

13 3 !
:.
##8
#2

2# !.
?3

21 !>
#?
($

2(
# !.
,;8
#3

29 !.
2$8
#9

$
2 !.
,8
,,

2 9 !.
,$8
#3
/1
.3
/2
.1
/
"
:5

5 5
"
#9
#3
#;

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

(, !&&'3#$+

(9
!'

(3 ! 678
"

0

(; ! 678
"

-

9$ !&&'(

92 !7'< 678

-

9; !-

9; !%
678
"

9;
9 !%+ 678
"
-

3, ! '<-

3,
9 !% 678
"

-

33 3 !-
678
456678

(9
!.
38#9

92 !.
118
,9

9; !>
28
,1

3, !.
*##?

33 3 !
:
/(
/9
/3
.2
.
.;
"
"
%
"

5 5
1 2
1

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

3; !%+
456678

1)
+-456678

3;
; !%+456678

5 +-

;$
3 !% 678
"

;# ! 678
"

-

;
3 !8
680

456678

;9
1 !.456678

5 +

;3
9 !:456678

;;
!:+456678+

#$$ !:
678
"

-
'<-

'

-

#$2 !>&1*2+<

4566780 678

0
--
-0
.
-:456678+

6 &@#$3
5#$(
%

.+-

,#8
#;

;$
2 !.
1$8
#;

#$$ !>
,9?
(3

#$2 !
>
9$?
$
/;
.(
/#$
"

5 5
11 ,

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

%
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
*

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

$ !
()
)

:456678
-+

--

1*1
! 678

-

#$ ! 678

&
-

,$ ! 678

&
-

,$
2 !>

,2
1 !>'

,9
!1)+ 678
-
&

&

,3 !:&-&&'#)

,$
2 !>
1,8
9

,3 !>
#$?
29
.#
.,
/#
/,
"
"
"
"
#(
#;

-/.1
:

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ ! 678

&
-

1, !()+0-<

#0#()

1,
!5&--<+

=#0#()
0

&-

1,
!

11 2 !#0,)*#)+:5B*

13 !#2)+ 678*
-

1;
3 !()+ 678&

2$
2*2$
! 678*&

-

21 ( !()

22 !+ 678

-

2 ( ! 678*
-

23 ! 678-

$ ! 678*&

-

1,
!
/
13?
,3
,?
,3

11 2 !
:.
2$?
11

13 !.
29?
1

1;
3 !.
$?
#3

21 ( !.
8*?
1,?

2( !.
($?
#
/1
/2
.1
.2
/
"
"
"
"
"
,(
$
1

-/.1
:

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

($ ! 678*&

-

(# ! 678

&

-

(1
, !+* 678

(2
3 !:456678+*&
--

&&'#)+

(2
; !:5B6780:456678+

&--
--
&&'9)+

(
! 678*-

((
9 !:456678+

--

&&'()+

(9
, ! 678+*-&&';) +

(3 !++
456678

(; !:G

9$ !:456678+
&
--

9#
, !:G

9,
*91
, *<*0+

4566780 678

'--

92 ! 678*

3$ ! 678*&

-

3$
!:G

(2
3 !
:.
2$*(?
#3*,2

(; !C
2$?
2

9#
,!C
11?
,

3$
!C
,?
#
/(
.
/9
.(
/3
"
"
"
"
"
(1
($
($

-/.1
:

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

;$ ! 678*&

-*

;; ! 678*

6 &!;;
5;9

.+-

/;
/#$
"
"
1 $03)

-/.1
:

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

%
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
*

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

$ !
()
)

678

&
-

#$

3 !

#$
!:
&
*#02)+

## !:4566780:5B678+

&--
&-
-

#2 !0<

#
!/&--
&-

,$ !456678+
&--

,# !
678&&

-

,, !
678

-

,( !

*
678

#$
!.
,?
,,?

#
!
/
,,?
,3
.#
/#
.,
.;
/,
.1
.2
"
"
:50
5 :50
5 5
"
"
2 ;

-/.1
;

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ ! 678*&

-

13 !: 0:5B*-

2$ ! 678*&

-

2$
1 !&
:4566780:5B678
*&
--&&'()+

$ ! 678*&

-

# !:5B&
/1
.
/2
.(
/
"
"*:
"

5 "
1$
,1
,

-/.1
;

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

($ ! 678*

-

9$ ! 678*

-

3$ ! 678*

-

3$
1 !:
:5B*
&&',)+

3# !456678+
&--
--

3,
!&
678*&

-

39 3 !#*,)+456*
--

33 !:5B6780456678+
&

--

'

33 !#0#(*#03)+:5B
&

3$
1 !.
,$*1$8
1$

39 3 !
:.
#$*,$8
1#
/(
/9
/3
.9
.3
"
"
"

5H:5

5H:5
2$
$
($

-/.1
;

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

;$ !:456678+
&--

;,
2 !
678*

-

#$$ ! 678*

6 &!#$$
5;9

.+-

33 !
:.
1?
11
/;
/#$

5H:5
"
,
$0#$)

-/.1
;

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

%
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*
*

/0

#
'
3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
*

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

%

%"0"

&

( !%/E855B
%"0"

:

#$ !%/E855B
"0%"

# !: B%/E85
%"

#9 !7&
.

#;
!+&

,$

,$ !%/E855B
%"0"

,, !8-&&'()+

,3 !

456678+
--
-

.#
/#
/,
.,
%"0"
%"0"
%"0"

5 1
;

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
++,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !456678+
&---

11 ! 678

&

-

2$ ! 678

&

-

6 &!2$

.+-

/1
.1
/2

5 "
"
#
2$

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
++,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

%/E855B
%"0"

!%/E855B
%"0"

9 3 !"

#$ !%/E855B
%"0"

# !:5B8B 0 B:5B

---
-

,$ !456B 0 B456

--0
-

,2 !%/E855B
%"0"

,3 !

678

.#
/#
.,
/,
%"0"
%"0"
:0:5

5
"
"

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
"
"
"
"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . ,+(

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
++,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ ! 678

11 !456678+

---

1( ! 678

-

2$ ! 678

-

6 &!2,
%
9
3 .+-

/1
.1
.2
/2
"

5 "
"
,2
#

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"
"
%
%
$
$
#

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . ,+(

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
++,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

%/E855B
%"0"

&

!%/E855B
%"0"

#$ !%/E855B
%"0"

#( !%/E855B

,$ !456B
-

,( !

+456678
678

&&
+

.#
/#
/,
%"0"
%"0"

"
#

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
++,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ ! 678
-
%
456678+
--&

1 ! 678

&

-

1; ! 678

&

-

2$ ! 678

&

-

6 &!2$

.+-

/1
.1
/2
"0
5 "
"
#3
#3

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
++,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

456B

+

-

7

!%

"

#$ !%

"

-

#9 !

678

-

,$ ! 678

,9 ! 678
-

.#
/#
.,
/,
"%
"%
"
"
,
##

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
*+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ ! 678

&

6 &!1$

.+-

/1 " #3

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
)
*# .

"
"," "

%

*

/0

#
'
*+,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4
HS-1 to HS-3
Boring logs not available

$ !

456B +
&-
-

9 !456B +
&
-
'

#,
!456B +
-

#9
!456B +
-
-

,, !

B456678

---

,9
! B456678
--
--
-

6 &@,9

%

.
+-

.#
/#
/,
/1
/2
/

0 5

0 5

3 #
,$
#9
(
3 #1
,,
1$
$
#$
#
13 *
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5

/0

#
'
,3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4
HS-4
Boring log not available

:5B
:5

&
-&
>

-

-

#$ !

:

-

# !

#3 !

%

%"

&

,$ !%

%"

&

, !"
"

&

:
-

.#
#
/#
.,
,
/,
1
:5

5
%"
"
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5 +

/0

#
'
+3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !
+

1 !"
"

:
-

13 1 !%

2$ !"
"

:
-

2 !:
:
+

-
-

$ !4560

0 5
+

!:5B0:
:50:
+

-

2
/1

(
.1
9
"
"
:

0 5

0 5
:50:
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5 +

/0

#
'
+3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

($ !456

5

-
>

( !

9$ !
-
&&"6:

6. &!9$
.5(
%
13
1 .+-

3
;

5 5
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5 +

/0

#
'
+3,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

&
> -

:

, !

&
>
-

:

&
:

:

3 !

#$ !&

&&'1)

::5B0:456
:50
5

&--

# !:5B0:456
:50
5
&
--

#(
!"
"
+

,$ !"
"

: -
-

, !"
"

.#
#
,
/#
.,
1
/,
2

5
:50
5 :50
5 "
"
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5 +

/0

#
'
+,,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !"
"

1# !%

1 !"
"

:
>

2$ !"
"

:

2 !"
"

:

$ !"
"

!*)+,

678
+

>

:--

678

/1

/2
(
9
3
"
"
"
"
"
"
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5 +

/0

#
'
+,,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

($ ! 678+
-

>

( !456678+
&

>

9$ !456678+

&

>

6. &!92
.59$
%
1#
.+-

;
#$
##
"

5 5
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5 +

/0

#
'
+,,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

$ !

%/E85
"0%"
&
-

,
!

%/E85
"0%"

&
-

! %/E85
"0%"

-

#$ !
"
&

-

# !
&

:5B:
:0:5

-

-

,$ !
"

-
-

, !
"

-
-

*#
/*#
*,
/*,
*1
/*1
"
"
"
:
"
"

(
(
9 3
9 9
#2
#(
2 (
3 ,
,
2 2
9 #1
*
44

0

>

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5

/0

#
'
*5,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !
"

-
-

1, !

1 !
"0%"
&

1(
9 !%
8

2$ !
"0%"
&

2 !
:
&

$ !
:
&

1 !*)+,

::%/E85:7..58

6 &!1
%
81(
9 .+-.
:
*2
/*2
*
/*
*(
/*(
"
"
"
"0:
"0:
6

3 #$
#$
,1
,1
;
3 ##
1 ##
#3

3 ;
$0#)
*
44

0

>

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5

/0

#
'
*5,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

&

>

, !

&
>

A-
1
-&

#$ -

( !

#$ !"
"

&

# !"
"

-

,$ !"
"

,1
9 !%

, !%

%"

:

.#
#
,
/#
.,
1
/,
2

5
"
"
"
"
%"
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5 +

/0

#
'
+,,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !"
"

>

-

1 !"
"

:

2$ !"
"

2 !"
"

$ !"
"

/1

/2
(
9
"
"
"
"
"
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5 +

/0

#
'
+,,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

($ !:-,-&

&&
.+A*9

678+
-

(, !A-&

6. &!(,
.5($
%
,1
9 .+-

3 "
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

"
"
#
#
$
$
%

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5 +

/0

#
'
+,,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"
+

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

$ !

%

"0%"
+

!%

"0%"

0+

#$ !
+&

&&' ?
-&

# !%

"0%"
+

-

,$ !"
"
+

, !A-
#$

,3 !A4-
&

&

/#
.#
/,
%"
%"
"
,$
,
1$
1#
$0()
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5

/0

#
'
*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4
6 &!,3
%
8
.+-.
:
*
44

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5

/0

#
'
*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

$ !

%
456
"0

!:
:

&-

# !%

&

-

, !%

-
/*#
/*,
/*1
:
"
"
#$
#(
#;
$0()
,
21 $0#)
*
44

0

9

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5

/0

#
'
*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1 !%

-

2 !

&

$ !

&

6 &!1

/- ":.
%
8
.+-.
:
/*2
/*
/*(
"
"
"
,#
$0)
$0#)
$01)
*
44

0

9

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

!
!

"

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5

/0

#
'
*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

$ !

%

"0%"
&
&
-

!%

"0%"
&
&
-

#$ !
&&'#$ 8- &-<-

# !%/E85:7..58
%"

,$ !:5B
:
+

, !%/E85:7..58
%"

/*#
.*#
/*,
.*,
/*1
"
"
"0%"
:
"0%"
#3
21 #2
##
$02
)
,$
$0)
*
44

0

:

!
"

"

"

"%
& %'

&

(#)*

'

)*
+

'
#
$$
%&'

,

,
"

"
-

#+.

#$+

$ .

# . (

(
+)
*# .

"
"," "

%

5 +

/0

#
'
*,

11

2+

"

2+
3

4
*# .

*

"

5
$

3-)
4 +6

(

3
'4

1$ !%/E85
%?

1 !&
&
&&
&-

2 !6
2

%
:7..58
-
'<

2(
!

%/E85 &

-

( !*)+

: 678&

-

/*2
.*1
/*
/*(

Anaheim City CouncilJuly 23, 2024

Anaheim City Council
July 23, 2024