Montebello City Council
April 27, 2022

ORDER NO. : 2676021408

EXHIBIT A
The land referred to is situated in the County of Los Angeles, City of Montebello, State of California, and is described as follows:

THAT PORTION OF LOT "B" OF MONTEBELLO, IN THE CITY OF MONTEBELLO, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 78 PAGE 19 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 102 OF SAID MONTEBELLO, THENCE SOUTH 75° 53' 40" EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 102, 300 00 FEET, THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 277 94 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO W. W. BLACK, BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 6621 PAGE 288 OF

DEEDS, THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE THEREOF, AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF WHITTIER AVENUE 102.68 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "B" BEING ALSO THE EASTERLY LINE OF POPLAR AVENUE, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 169 70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING:

DESCRIBED LINE BEGINNING AT SAID NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO SAID W. W. BLACK, THENCE NORTH 50° 22" 02" EAST 1 87 FEET, THENCE NORTH 56° 48' 03" EAST 45.04 FEET, THENCE NORTH 50° 37' 43" EAST 19710 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 102 DISTANT THEREON SOUTH 75° 53' 40" EAST 148.96 FEET FROM THE

INTERSECTION OF SAID SOUTHERLY LINE WITH THE EASTERLY LINE OF A STRIP OF LAND OF UNIFORM DEPTH OF 100 00 FEET, EXTENDING ALONG THE EAST LINE OF POPLAR

AVENUE FROM THE NORTH LINE OF WHITTIER AVENUE (NOW WHITTIER BOULEVARD) TO SAID LOT 102. AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 2720 PAGE 129 OF DEEDS.

EXCEPT ALL OIL, GAS, MINERALS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET OR MORE FROM THE SURFACE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND,

BUT WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO ENTER AND USE THE SURFACE OR THE SUBSURFACE LYING ABOVE A DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM THE SURFACE THEREOF. AS GRANTED TO FAR WEST OIL CO, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. BY DEED RECORDED AUGUST 16, 1971 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 3238.

OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMPANY
For Exceptions Shown or Referred to, See Attached

ORT 3158-A (Rev. 08/07/08)
101 North Brand Blvd., 14th Floor
Glendale, CA 91203
(818) 247-2917

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Logix Federal Credit Union
PO Box 4070
CASTAIC, CA 91310
Phone: (818) 565-2242
Fax: (818) 565-2490
Attention: KUMIKO YAMADA-YUGE
Property Address:

Our Order Number 2676021408-52
Customer Reference Magna & Magna, Inc
When Replying Please Contact:

Rolly Cruz
[email protected]
Ph: (818) 247-2917
Efax: (818) 484-2602
116 North Poplar Avenue, Montebello, CA 90640
In response to the above referenced application for a policy of title insurance, OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMPANY, as issuing Agent of Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, hereby reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a Policy or Policies of Title Insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an Exception below or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations of said policy forms.

The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage and Limitations on Covered Risks of said Policy or Policies are set forth in Exhibit I attached. The policy to be issued may contain an arbitration clause. When the Amount of Insurance is less than that set forth in the arbitration clause, all arbitrable matters shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. Limitations on Covered Risks applicable to the Homeowner’s Policy of Title Insurance which establish a Deductible Amount and a Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability for certain coverages are also set forth in Exhibit I. Copies of the Policy forms should be read. They are available from the office which issued this report.

Please read the exceptions shown or referred to below and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in Exhibit I of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters which are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy and should be carefully considered.

It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title and may not list all liens, defects, and encumbrances affecting title to the land.

This report (and any supplements or amendments hereto) is issued solely for the purpose of facilitating the issuance of a policy of title insurance and no liability is assumed hereby. If it is desired that liability be assumed prior to the issuance of a policy of title insurance, a Binder or Commitment should be requested.

Dated as of September 24, 2021, at 7:30 AM

OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMPANY
ORDER NO. 2676021408-52

ORT 3158-B
The form of policy of title insurance contemplated by this report is:

ALTA Loan Policy - 2006. A specific request should be made if another form or additional coverage is desired.

The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred or covered by this Report is:

Fee
Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in:

Magna & Magna, Inc., a California corporation
The land referred to in this Report is situated in the County of Los Angeles, City of Montebello, State of California, and is described as follows:

THAT PORTION OF LOT "B" OF MONTEBELLO, IN THE CITY OF MONTEBELLO, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 78 PAGE 19 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 102 OF SAID MONTEBELLO, THENCE SOUTH 75° 53' 40" EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 102, 300 00 FEET, THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 277 94 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO W. W. BLACK, BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 6621 PAGE 288 OF DEEDS, THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE THEREOF, AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF WHITTIER AVENUE 102.68 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "B" BEING ALSO THE EASTERLY LINE OF POPLAR AVENUE, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 169 70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING:

DESCRIBED LINE BEGINNING AT SAID NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO SAID W. W.

BLACK, THENCE NORTH 50° 22" 02" EAST 1 87 FEET, THENCE NORTH 56° 48' 03" EAST 45.04 FEET, THENCE NORTH 50° 37' 43" EAST 19710 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 102 DISTANT THEREON SOUTH 75° 53' 40" EAST 148.96 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID SOUTHERLY LINE WITH THE EASTERLY LINE OF A STRIP OF LAND OF UNIFORM DEPTH OF 100 00 FEET, EXTENDING ALONG THE EAST

LINE OF POPLAR AVENUE FROM THE NORTH LINE OF WHITTIER AVENUE (NOW WHITTIER BOULEVARD) TO SAID LOT 102. AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 2720 PAGE 129 OF DEEDS.

EXCEPT ALL OIL, GAS, MINERALS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 500

FEET OR MORE FROM THE SURFACE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND, BUT WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO ENTER AND USE THE SURFACE OR THE SUBSURFACE LYING ABOVE A DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM THE SURFACE THEREOF. AS GRANTED TO FAR WEST OIL CO, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. BY DEED RECORDED AUGUST 16, 1971 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 3238.

OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMPANY
ORDER NO. 2676021408-52

ORT 3158-B
At the date hereof exceptions to coverage in addition to the Exceptions and Exclusions in said policy form would be as follows:

1. Taxes and assessments, general and special, for the fiscal year 2021 - 2022, as follows:

Assessor's Parcel No : 6347-012-008
Code No. : 06330
1st Installment : $8,210.80 NOT Marked Paid
2nd Installment : $8,210.79 NOT Marked Paid
Land Value : $97,364.00
Imp. Value : $717,353.00

2. The lien of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to the provisions of Section 75, et seq., of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California.

3. Water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not shown by the public records.

4. An easement affecting that portion of said land and for the purposes stated herein and incidental purposes as provided in the following
Granted To : Francis M. Dyke and wife
For : pipes for conducting water for irrigation
Recorded : in Book 2720 of Deeds, Page 129
Affects : As described therein

5. The right to conduct water in pipes or ditches from the place of development to any reservoir or other lands owned by Kaspare Cohn, his heirs or assigns, as contained in the deed from Kaspare Cohn and wife, recorded in Book 2507, Page 98 of Deeds.

6. Covenants, conditions and restrictions, but omitting any covenants or restrictions if any, based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin unless and only to the extent that said covenant (A) is exempt under Chapter 42, Section 3607 of the United States code or (B) relates to handicap but does not discriminate against handicapped persons, in the instrument above mentioned.

OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMPANY
ORDER NO. 2676021408-52

ORT 3158-B
NOTE: “If this document contains any restriction based on race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, veteran or military status, genetic information, national origin, source of income as defined in subdivision (p) of Section 12955, or ancestry, that restriction violates state and federal fair housing laws and is void, and may be removed pursuant to Section 12956.2 of the Government Code. Lawful restrictions under state and federal law on the age of occupants in senior housing or housing for older persons shall not be construed as restrictions based on familial status.”

7. An easement affecting that portion of said land and for the purposes stated herein and incidental purposes as provided in the following
Granted To : The Standard Oil Company
For : transportation of all oil, petroleum, gas or water for the erection maintenance and operation of telegraph or telephone pole lines Recorded : in Book 6568 of Deeds, Page 107
Affects : As described therein
And recorded in Book 6557 of Deeds, Page 340 .

8. An easement affecting that portion of said land and for the purposes stated herein and incidental purposes as provided in the following
For : waterline
Recorded : April 1, 1974 in Official Records As Instrument No. 4296 Affects : As described therein

9. An easement affecting that portion of said land and for the purposes stated herein and incidental purposes as provided in the following
Granted To : Standard Oil Company of California, a Corporation and Standard Gasoline Company, a Corporation
For : pipe lines
Recorded : May 23, 1962 in Book D-1624 of Official Records, Page 757 As Instrument No. 4832
Affects : As described therein

OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMPANY
ORDER NO. 2676021408-52

ORT 3158-B

10. An easement affecting that portion of said land and for the purposes stated herein and incidental purposes as provided in the following
Granted To : Joseph A. Magna and Hedy A. Magna
For : waterline
Recorded : December 29, 1987 in Official Records As Instrument No. 87- 2043659
Affects : As described therein

11. An unrecorded lease upon the terms, covenants, and conditions contained or referred to therein,
Lessor : Magna & Magna Incorporated
Lessee : Web Service Company, Inc.

Disclosed by : Memorandum of Lease
Recorded : February 28, 2000 in Official Records As Instrument No. 00-0292848 NOTE: The present ownership of said leasehold or leaseholds and other matters affecting the interest of the lessee or lessees are not shown herein.

12. Deed of Trust to secure an indebtedness of the amount stated below and any other amounts payable under the terms thereof,
Amount : $2,000,000.00
Trustor/Borrower : Magna & Magna, Inc., a California corporation Trustee : First Mortgage Solutions
Beneficiary/Lender : KeyPoint Credit Union
Dated : June 5, 2020
Recorded : June 12, 2020 in Official Records As Instrument No. 20200644152
Loan No. : 528207380
In Connection therewith, said trustors executed an Assignment of Rents, Dated : June 5, 2020
Recorded : June 12, 2020 in Official Records As Instrument No. 20200644153

OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMPANY
ORDER NO. 2676021408-52

ORT 3158-B
Covenants, conditions and restrictions contained in an instrument, which instrument is additional security for said deed of trust.

Entitled : Hazardous Substances Certificate and Indemnity Agreement Executed By : Magna & Magna, Inc., a California corporation, Joseph A.

MAGNA Living trust, DTD 01-13-15 and KeyPoint Credit Union Recorded : June 12, 2020 in Official Records As Instrument No. 20200644154
Upon the recordation of a full reconveyance of said deed of trust, the covenants, conditions and restrictions will have no further force or effect.

13. Any unrecorded and subsisting leases.

Satisfactory evidence furnished to this Company:
(a) as to the due formation and continued existence of Magna & Magna, Inc., a California corporation as a legal entity under the laws of California; and

14. (b) documents from its board of directors authorizing this transaction and specifying the officers to execute on behalf of the corporation.

15. The requirement that this Company be provided with an opportunity to inspect the land (the Company reserves the right to make additional exceptions and/or requirements upon completion of its inspection).

16. Underwriting approval is required prior to our acceptance of instructions, recording of instruments and issuance of a title insurance policy or other product. If the application is approved, this report may be amended; additional exceptions from coverage may be shown, and additional conditions or requirements may be made.
-------------------- Informational Notes ------------------- A. The applicable rate(s) for the policy(s) being offered by this report or commitment appears to be section(s) 4.2.

OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMPANY
ORDER NO. 2676021408-52

ORT 3158-B
The above numbered report (including any supplements or amendments thereto) is hereby modified and/or supplemented to reflect the following additional items relating to the issuance of an American Land Title Association loan form policy:

NONE
NOTE: Our investigation has been completed and there is located on said land a multi-family residence known as 116 North Poplar Avenue, City of Montebello, California.

The ALTA loan policy, when issued, will contain the CLTA 100 Endorsement and 116 series Endorsement.

Unless shown elsewhere in the body of this report, there appear of record no transfers or agreements to transfer the land described herein within the last three years prior to the date hereof, except as follows:

B.

NONE

Exhibit I
AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE (06/17/06)

EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE
The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of:

1. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to
(i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land;
(ii) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land; or
(iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6.

2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8.

3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy;
(c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 13, or 14); or
(e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage.

4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business laws of the state where the Land is situated.

5. Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law.

6. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors’ rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or
(b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 13(b) of this policy.

7. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Records. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11(b).

The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage:

EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE

SCHEDULE B - PART I
Except as provided in Schedule B - Part II, this policy does not insure against loss or damage, and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys’ fees, or expenses that arise by reason of:

1. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records.

2. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land.

3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records.

4. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records.

5. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records.

6. Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material unless such lien is shown by the Public Records at Date of Policy.

FACTS WHAT DOES OLD REPUBLIC TITLE
DO WITH YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION?
Why?
Financial companies choose how they share your personal information. Federal law gives consumers the right to limit some but not all sharing. Federal law also requires us t o tell you how we collect, share, and protect your personal information. Please read this notice carefully to understand what we do.

What?
The types of personal information we collect and share depend on the product or service you have with us. This information can include:
• Social Security number and employment information
• Mortgage rates and payments and account balances
• Checking account information and wire transfer instructions When you are no longer our customer, we continue to share your information as described in this notice.

How?
All financial companies need to share customers’ personal information to run their everyday business. In the section below, we list the reasons financial companies can share their customers’ personal information; the re asons Old Republic Title chooses to share; and whether you can limit this sharing.

Reasons we can share your personal information
Does Old
Republic Title
share?
Can you limit this
sharing?
For our everyday business purposes — such as to process your transactions, maintain your account(s), or respond to court orders and legal investigations, or report to credit bureaus
Yes No
For our marketing purposes —
to offer our products and services to you No We don’t share For joint marketing with other financial companies No We don’t share For our affiliates’ everyday business purposes —
information about your transactions and experiences Yes No For our affiliates’ everyday business purposes —
information about your creditworthiness No We don’t share For our affiliates to market to you No We don’t share
For non-affiliates to market to you No We don’t share
Go to www.oldrepublictitle.com (Contact Us)

Who we are
Who is providing this notice? Companies with an Old Republic Title name and other affiliates. Please see below for a list of affiliates.

What we do
How does Old Republic Title
protect my personal
information?
To protect your personal information from unauthorized access and use, we use se curity measures that comply with federal law. These measures include computer safeguards and secured files and buildings. For more information, visit https://www.oldrepublictitle.com/privacy-policy
How does Old Republic Title
collect my personal information?
We collect your personal information, for example, when you:
• Give us your contact information or show your driver’s license • Show your government-issued ID or provide your mortgage information • Make a wire transfer
We also collect your personal informati on from others, such as credit bureaus, affiliates, or other companies.

Why can’t I limit all sharing? Federal law gives you the right to limit only:
• Sharingfor affiliates’everydaybusinesspurposes- information aboutyour creditworthiness
• Affiliates from using your information to market toyou • Sharing for non-affiliates to market toyou
State laws and individual companies may give you additional rights to limit sharing. See the State Privacy Rights section location at https://www.oldrepublictitle.com/privacy- policy for your rights under state law.

Definitions
Affiliates Companies related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and nonfinancial companies.
• Our affiliates in clude companies with an Old Republic Title name, and financial companies such as Attorneys’ Title Fund Services, LLC, Lex Terrae National Title Services, Inc., Mississippi Valley Title Services Company, and The Title Company of North Carolina.

Non-affiliates Companies not related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and non - financial companies.
• Old Republic Title does not share with non-affiliates so they can market to you Joint marketing A formal agreement between non-affiliated financial companies that together market financial products or services to you.
• Old Republic Title doesn’t jointlymarket.

Affiliates Who May be Delivering This Notice
American First Title
& Trust Company
American Guaranty
Title Insurance
Company
Attorneys' Title Fund
Services, LLC
Compass Abstract, Inc. eRecording Partners
Network, LLC
Genesis Abstract, LLC Guardian Consumer
Services, Inc.
iMarc, Inc. Kansas City
Management Group,
LLC
L.T. Service Corp.

Lenders Inspection
Company
Lex Terrae National
Title Services, Inc.

Lex Terrae, Ltd. Mississippi Valley Title
Services Company
National Title Agent's
Services Company
Old Republic Branch
Information Services,
Inc.

Old Republic
Diversified Services,
Inc.

Old Republic Escrow
of Vancouver, Inc.

Old Republic Exchange
Company
Old Republic National
Ancillary Services, Inc.

Old Republic
National Commercial
Title Services, Inc.

Old Republic Title
and Escrow of
Hawaii, Ltd.

Old Republic National
Title Insurance
Company
Old Republic Title
Company
Old Republic Title
Companies, Inc.

Old Republic Title
Company of Conroe
Old Republic Title
Company of Indiana
Old Republic Title
Company of Nevada
Old Republic Title
Company of Oklahoma
Old Republic Title
Company of Oregon
Old Republic Title
Company of St. Louis
Old Republic Title
Company of
Tennessee
Old Republic Title
Information Concepts
Old Republic Title
Insurance Agency, Inc.

Old Republic Title, Ltd.

RamQuest Software,
Inc.

Republic Abstract &
Settlement, LLC
Sentry Abstract
Company
Surety Title Agency,
Inc.

The Title Company of
North Carolina
Trident Land Transfer
Company, LLC
2 Updated: January 1, 2020
Privacy Notice for California Consumers
This Privacy Notice for California Consumers supplements the information contained in the Master Privacy Notice for Old Republic Title and applies to consumers that reside in the State of California.

The terms used in this Privacy Notice have the same meaning as the terms defined in the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”).

What Personal Information We Collect
In accordance with the CCPA, personal information is information that identifies, relates to, describes, is capable of being associated with, or could reasonably be linked, directly or indirectly, with a particular consumer or household. Personal information does not include:

Information outside the scope of the CCPA such as:
• Health or medical information covered by the Health Insurance Portability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA). • Personal Information covered by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the California Financial Information Privacy Act (FIPA), and the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act of 1994,
• Publicly available information that is available from federal, state, or local government records, and
• De-identified or aggregated consumer information.

Please see the chart below to learn what categories of personal information we may have collected about California consumers within the preceding twelve months, the sources of and business purposes for that collection and the third parties with whom the information is shared, if any.

Category Examples Collected Sources Business Purpose for Collection
Categories of
Third Parties
with Whom
Information
is Shared
Identifiers Real name, alias,
postal address,
unique personal
identifier, online
identifier, Internet
protocol address,
email address,
account name, social
security number,
driver’s license
number, passport
number or other
similar identifiers
Yes Consumers,
Lenders,
Brokers,
Attorneys,
Real Estate
Agents, and
Title Agents
associated
with the
transaction
Underwriting or
providing other
products or
services,
responding to
policyholder/consu
mer claims,
inquiries or
complaints,
detecting security
incidents,
protecting against
malicious,
Service
providers
associated
with the
transaction for
a business
purpose
2 deceptive,
fraudulent, or
illegal activity.

Other audit or
operational
purposes.

Personal
information
described in
California
Customer
Records
statute (Cal.

Civ. Code §
1798.80(e))
Name, signature,
social security
number, physical
characteristics or
description, address,
telephone number,
passport number,
driver’s license or
state identification
card number,
insurance policy
number, education,
employment,
employment history,
bank account
number, credit card
number, debit card
number, or any other
financial information,
medical information,
or health insurance
information.
“Personal
information” does
not include publicly
available information
that is lawfully made
available to the
general public from
federal, state, or local
government records.

Yes Consumers,
Lenders,
Brokers,
Attorneys,
Real Estate
Agents, and
Title Agents
associated
with the
transaction
Underwriting or
providing other
products or
services,
responding to
policyholder/consu
mer claims,
inquiries or
complaints,
detecting security
incidents,
protecting against
malicious,
deceptive,
fraudulent, or
illegal activity.

Other audit or
operational
purposes.

Service
providers
associated
with the
transaction for
a business
purpose
Characteristics
of protected
classifications
under
California or
federal law
Age (40 years or
older), race, color,
ancestry, national
origin, citizenship,
religions or creed,
marital status,
medical condition,
physical or mental
disability, sex
(including gender,
gender identity,
gender expression,
pregnancy or
childbirth and related
Yes Consumers,
Lenders,
Brokers,
Attorneys,
Real Estate
Agents, and
Title Agents
associated
with the
transaction
Underwriting or
providing other
products or
services,
responding to
policyholder/consu
mer claims,
inquiries or
complaints. Other
audit or
operational
purposes.

Service
providers
associated
with the
transaction for
a business
purpose
2 medical conditions),
sexual orientation,
veteran or military
status, or genetic
information
(including familial
genetic information).

Internet or
other
electronic
network
activity
Browsing history,
search history,
information about a
consumer’s
interaction with a
website, application,
or advertisement.

Yes Consumers,
Lenders,
Brokers,
Attorneys,
Real Estate
Agents, and
Title Agents
associated
with the
transaction
To provide access
to certain online
services. To
understand the
interests of visitors
to our online
services, to
support certain
features of our
site, for navigation
and to display
certain features
more effectively.

Detecting security
incidents,
protecting against
malicious,
deceptive,
fraudulent, or
illegal activity.

Other audit or
operational
purposes.

Not Disclosed
Geolocation
data
Geographic tracking
data, physical
location and
movements
Yes Consumers,
Lenders,
Brokers,
Attorneys,
Real Estate
Agents, and
Title Agents
associated
with the
transaction
To provide access
to certain online
services. To
understand the
interests of visitors
to our online
services, to
support certain
features of our
site, for navigation
and to display
certain features
more effectively.

Other audit or
operational
purposes.

Not Disclosed
2 What Personal Information We Share and Why We Share It The CCPA requires us to tell you what categories of personal information we “sell” or “disclose.” We do not sell and will not sell your personal information as that term is commonly understood. We also do not sell and will not sell your personal information, including the personal information of persons under 16 years of age, as that term is defined by the CCPA. When it is necessary for a business purpose, we share or disclose your personal information with a service provider, and we enter a contract with the service provider that limits how the information may be used and requires the service provider to protect the confidentiality of the information.

In the preceding twelve months, we have disclosed the following categories of personal information for the following business purposes. Where the personal information is shared with third parties, as that term is defined in the CCPA, the category of the third party is indicated.

Category Examples Business Purpose for
Disclosure
Categories of
Third Parties
with Whom
Information is
Shared
Identifiers Real name, alias, postal address,
unique personal identifier, online
identifier, internet protocol address,
email address, account name, social
security number, driver’s license
number, passport number or other
similar identifiers
Underwriting or providing other
products or services, responding
to policyholder/consumer claims,
inquiries or complaints, detecting
security incidents, protecting
against malicious, deceptive,
fraudulent, or illegal activity.

Other audit or operational
purposes.

Service
providers
associated with
the transaction
for a business
purpose
Personal
information
described in
California
Customer
Records
statute (Cal.

Civ. Code §
1798.80(e))
Name, signature, social security
number, physical characteristics or
description, address, telephone
number, passport number, driver’s
license or state identification card
number, insurance policy number,
education, employment, employment
history, bank account number, credit
card number, debit card number, or
any other financial information,
medical information, or health
insurance information. “Personal
information” does not include publicly
available information that is lawfully
made available to the general public
from federal, state, or local
government records.

Underwriting or providing other
products or services, responding
to policyholder/consumer claims,
inquiries or complaints, detecting
security incidents, protecting
against malicious, deceptive,
fraudulent, or illegal activity.

Other audit or operational
purposes.

Service
providers
associated with
the transaction
for a business
purpose
2 Characteristics
of protected
classifications
under
California or
federal law
Age (40 years or older), race, color,
ancestry, national origin, citizenship,
religions or creed, marital status,
medical condition, physical or mental
disability, sex (including gender,
gender identity, gender expression,
pregnancy or childbirth and related
medical conditions), sexual
orientation, veteran or military status,
or genetic information (including
familial genetic information).

Underwriting or providing other
products or services, responding
to policyholder/consumer claims,
inquiries or complaints. Other
audit or operational purposes.

Service
providers
associated with
the transaction
for a business
purpose
Internet or
other
electronic
network
activity
Browsing history, search history,
information about a consumer’s
interaction with a website, application,
or advertisement.

To provide access to certain
online services. To understand
the interests of visitors to our
online services, to support
certain features of our site, for
navigation and to display certain
features more effectively.

Detecting security incidents,
protecting against malicious,
deceptive, fraudulent, or illegal
activity. Other audit or
operational purposes.

Not Disclosed
Geolocation
data
Geographic tracking data, physical
location and movements
To provide access to certain
online services. To understand
the interests of visitors to our
online services, to support
certain features of our site, for
navigation and to display certain
features more effectively. Other
audit or operational purposes.

Not Disclosed
We may also transfer to a third party the personal information of a consumer as an asset that is part of a merger, acquisition, bankruptcy, or other transaction in which the third party assumes control of all or part of the business.

Your Rights and Choices
The CCPA provides California consumers with certain rights regarding their personal information. This chart describes those rights and certain limitations to those rights.

Right What This Means
Notice At or before the time your personal information is collected, you will be given written notice of the categories of personal information to be collected and the purposes for which the categories of personal information will be used.

Access At your verifiable request, but no more than twice in a twelve month period, we shall disclose to you: 1) the categories of personal information we have collected about you, 2) the 2 categories of sources for the personal information we collected about you, 3) our business and commercial purpose for collecting or selling your personal information, 4) the categories of third parties with whom we share your personal information, 5) The specific pieces of information we have collected about you, 6) the categories of personal information disclosed for a business purpose, and
7) If we sold personal information, the categories of personal information sold and the categories of third parties to whom it was sold.

Deletion You have the right to request that we delete any of your personal information that we collected from you, subject to certain exceptions. Once we receive and verify your request, we will delete (and direct our service providers to delete) your personal information from our records unless an exception applies. We may deny your request if retention of the information is necessary for us or our service providers to:
• Complete the transaction for which we collected the personal information, provide a good or service that you requested, take actions reasonably anticipated within the context of our ongoing business relationship with you, or otherwise perform our contract with you.
• Detect security incidents, protect against malicious, deceptive, fraudulent, or illegal activity, or prosecute those responsible for such activities. • Debug products to identify and repair errors that impair existing intended functionality.
• Exercise free speech, ensure the right of another consumer to exercise their free speech rights, or exercise another right provided for by law. • Comply with the California Electronic Communications Privacy Act (Cal. Penal Code §1546 et seq.)
• Engage in public or peer reviewed scientific, historical, or statistical research in the public interest that adheres to all other applicable ethics and privacy laws, when the information’s deletion may likely render impossible or seriously impair the research’s achievement, if you previously provided informed consent. • Enable solely internal uses that are reasonably aligned with consumer expectations based on your relationship with us.
• Comply with a legal obligation.
• Make other internal and lawful uses of that information that are compatible with the context in which you provided it.
• Or if it is the type of personal information that falls outside the scope of the CCPA, (HIPAA, CIMA, GLBA, or publicly available information)
Opt-Out of Sale
Opt-In to Sale
With some limitations, you may direct a business that sells personal information to third parties not to sell the personal information to these third parties.

A business may not sell the personal information of persons less than sixteen years of age without their affirmative consent, and in the case of those less than thirteen years of age, the consent must come from a parent.

Non-Discrimination We will not discriminate against you for exercising your rights under the CCPA. Unless otherwise permitted by the CCPA we will not:
• Deny you goods or service
• Charge you different prices or rates for goods or services, including through granting discounts or other benefits, or imposing penalties
• Provide a different level or quality of goods or services • Suggest that you will receive a different price or rate for goods or services or a different level or quality of goods or services
2 To Exercise Your Rights
To Opt-out of the Sale of Your Personal Information
The CCPA gives consumers the right to direct a business that sells personal information about the consumer to third parties not to sell the consumer’s personal information. We do not sell and will not sell your personal information as that term is commonly understood. We also do not sell and will not sell your personal information, as that term is defined by the CCPA.

To Request Access to or Deletion of Your Personal Information To exercise your access or deletion rights described above, please submit a verifiable consumer request to us by either: Calling us at 1-855-557-8437 or contacting us through our website CCPA Consumer Request.

Only you or your representative that you authorize to act on your behalf (Authorized Agent) can make a verifiable consumer request for your personal information. You may also make a request for your minor child. The verifiable request must provide enough information that allows us to reasonably verify you are the person about whom we collected personal information. We cannot respond to your request or provide you with personal information if we cannot verify your identity or authority to make the request and to confirm the personal information relates to you.

We work to respond to a verifiable consumer request within 45 days of its receipt. If we require additional time, we will inform you of the extension period (up to an additional 45 days), and the reason for the extension in writing. If you have an account with us, we will deliver our response to that account. If you do not have an account with us, we will deliver our response by mail or electronically, depending on your preference. The response we provide will also explain any reasons why we cannot comply with a request.

You may only make a consumer request for access twice within a twelve-month period.

Any disclosures we provide will apply to the twelve-month period preceding the consumer request’s receipt.

Contact Us
If you have any questions regarding our Privacy Notice or practices, please contact us via phone at 1- 855-557-8437 or send your written request to: [email protected], or Old Republic Title c/o CCPA Consumer Request Group, 275 Battery Street, Suite1500, San Francisco, CA 94111-3334.

Appendix I - Personnel Profile
EDI CONSULTANTS, INC.

Brian Tang, EIT Sr. Project Manager

SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE

Brian Tang is a Senior Project Manager at EDI Consultants, Inc. (EDI) in Torrance, California. Mr. Tang has more than 6 year of experience in project s involving due diligence environmental site assessments, property co ndition assessments, data management, Geograph ic Inf ormation Systems (GIS), subsurface investigations of soil and groundwater contamination, environmental and geotechnical engineering projects for high profile clients throughou t the nation.

At EDI, Mr. Tang manages a team performing Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments , Property Condition Assessments, and other environmental risk assessments for major U.S. banks and lending institutions throughout the nation. In addition, he prepares and reviews technical documents for Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments.

Mr. Tang is an Environmental Professional who possesses suffic ient specific education, training, and expe rience necessary to exercise professional judgment to develop opinions and conclusions regarding conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases on, at, in, or to a p roperty, sufficient to meet the objectives and performance factors.

As an Environmental Professional, Mr. Tang must hold a curre nt Profe ssional Engi neer’s or Professional Geologist’s license or registration from a state, tribe, or U.S. territory (or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) and have the equivalent of three (3) years of full-time relevant experience; or (ii) be licensed or c ertified by the federal government, a state, tribe, or U.S. territory (or the Commonwealth of Puert o Rico) to perform environm ental inquiries and have the equivalent of three (3) years of full-time relevant experience; or (iii) have a Baccalaureate or higher degr ee from an accredited institution of hi gher education in a discipline of engineering or science a nd the equivalent of five (5) years of full-time relevant experience; or (iv) have the equivalent of ten (10) years of full-time relevant experience.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE

Phase I & Phase II Environmental Site Assessments, Nationwide Project Manager of Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments for industrial and commercial real estate as well as multifamily dwellings for major U.S. banks and lending institutions throughout the nation. Conducted subsurface investigations of soil, groundwater and soil vapor contamination to assess and determine the need for further investigation and/or remediation as well as underground storage tank removals, cleanup and coordination with local and State governmental agencies for closure of same.

Property Condition Assessments, Nationwide
Project manager for more than 100 property condition assessments (PCAs) for a wide range of clients throughout the western United States. PCAs provide reliable and detailed information on the building's operating systems, overall design and architectural features, and any signs of material physical deterioration or functional obsolescence tha t could detract from the building's potential to generate income. In addition, he has examined the impact of local zoning regulations, building codes, and any special hazards that may affect the income stability of the property .

EDUCATION

B.S. Environmental Engineering, University of California, Irvine, 2013

Undergraduate Experience

Well Water Treatment
The purpose of this project is to design two shallow ground water wells for the City of Corona to reduce the demand on the Colorado River by 3,600 acre-ft per year. The project includes the design of an 11,500 ft pipeline to transport the raw well water as well as a treatment facility to treat for turbidity, nitrates, and perchlorates.

EDI CONSULTANTS, INC.

Brian Tang, EIT Sr. Project Manager

Site Planning Report
The goal of this project is to complete a Site Planning Report incompliance of the City of Irvine General Plan for the development of a 1,200 acre planning area centered on a transportation theme of alternative fuels. The planning area is composed of 3,200 dwelling units, a shopping center, a high school, recreational parks and open space to support a population of about 13,000 residents.

PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS/CERTIFICATIONS

Environmental Professional
Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologist – Certified Engineer-in-Training (EIT)

EDI CONSULTANTS, INC.

Darrin Domingo, MBA, REPA, CHMM Principal __________________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE
Darrin Domingo is the Principal and founder of EDI Consultants, Inc. (EDI) in Torrance, California. Mr.

Domingo has more than 27 years of experience in projects involving due diligence environmental site assessments, property condition assessments, data management and database design, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), cost engineering, subsurface investigations of soil and groundwater contamination, and environmental and geotechnical engineering projects including civil and remediation design.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Various Clients, Phase I, Phase II Environmental Site Assessments, Nationwide. Project manager for more than 5,000 combined Phase I, Phase II environmental site assessments for industrial and commercial real estate as well as multifamily dwellings for major U.S. banks and lending institutions throughout the nation. Conducted subsurface investigations of soil, soil gas and groundwater contamination to assess and determine the need for further investigation and/or remediation as well as underground storage tank removals, cleanup and coordination with local and State governmental agencies for closure of same.

Various Clients, Property Condition Assessments, Nationwide. Project manager for more than 100 property condition assessments (PCAs) for a wide range of clients throughout the western United States. PCAs provide reliable and detailed information on the building's operating systems, overall design and architectural features, and any signs of material physical deterioration or functional obsolescence that could detract from the building's potential to generate income. In addition, he has examined the impact of local zoning regulations, building codes, and any special hazards that may affect the income stability of the property.

SWDiv CLEAN, Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS), El Toro MCAS, California GIS and database administrator for the Environmental Baseline Survey of over 1000 structures at El Toro MCAS. Prepared comprehensive maps of the MCAS El Toro in a Geographic Information System (GIS), by combining information gathered during the site evaluation with existing and planned information. The GIS was developed in ArcView for GIS analysis and the preparation of maps; and Microsoft Access for the storage and analysis of attribute data. Attribute data was collected in the field via a customized Palm Pilot interface.

Responsible for application development of the Palm Pilot EBS Form for data acquisition in the field and seamless downloading of information into the database. Attribute data encompassed site information including pertinent environmental, land use, and watershed data. Also, field sketches and digital photo notes were entered into the Palm Pilot and converted to bitmap images within the database for retrieval of same. Responsible for uploading and management of all data for queries, analyses, and either output for use in the GIS maps; or Report Tables within the EBS.

SWDiv CLEAN, Naval Environmental Data Transfer Standard (NEDTS), El Toro MCAS, California. GIS and database administrator for groundwater, soil and vapor analytical data. Developed the Navy Environmental Data Transfer Standard (NEDTS) database and Data Management Plan (DMP) for the Southwest Division Comprehensive Long-Term Environmental Action Navy, El Toro Marine Corps Air Station. The NEDTS provides an open, platform independent standard that permits the Navy to describe information to be captured and delivered electronically without imposing any hardware or software requirements on the contracting community. This application automates day-to-day activities of integrating electronic data deliverables (EDD) from analytical laboratories and presenting the information in customized forms and reports. The application is developed utilizing MS Access as the data repository. ESRI's ArcView GIS and Autodesk's Volo View technology are integrated with the database to provide dynamic maps of on-site monitoring wells. A customized switchboard interface allows for automated retrieval of as-built drawings, charts, reports, and GIS views.

Lockheed Martin Corporation, Metadata Reference System, Redlands, California. Lead technical and database administrator for the Metadata Reference System for the Redlands site. Developed records management plan for administration of office-wide project data and records management system for efficient gathering, storage, and retrieval of all related electronic and hardcopy data.

EDI CONSULTANTS, INC.

Darrin Domingo, MBA, REPA, CHMM Principal __________________________________________________________________________ SWDiv RAC, Naval Environmental Data Transfer Standard (NEDTS), Yermo and Nebo Marine Corp Logistics Bases, Barstow, California. Database design and management of the Navy's Southwest Division Remedial Action Contract (SWDiv RAC) databases for both Yermo and Nebo MCLBs. Developed and implemented NEDTS in a client/server architecture (Access 2000/SQL Server) for integration of data into ArcView GIS for mapping and spatial analysis of various subsurface contaminants. Used ESRI's Spatial Analyst and ModelBuilder extensions to map and analyze areas of contaminant influence, delineate plume extents, and generate contours.

New Cure, Inc., OII Landfill MIS/GIS System, Monterey Park, California. GIS Analyst and Database Administrator working in a design-build capacity to facilitate implementation of a remedial cap design for an EPA Superfund site. Provided AutoCAD and LDD civil/remediation design, hazardous waste management via programming and development of the management information system (MIS) using MS Access and the GIS for associated landfill hazardous materials and gases integrating ESRI's ArcView. Conducted environmental modeling and statistical and trend analysis of methane migration via ESRI's ArcView Spatial Analyst and 3D Analyst extensions. In coordination with the landfill gas consultant, designed and implemented the Well Adjustment Decision Tree programmed in Access for automated well adjustments in the field. Created automated data transfer procedure from GEM 2000 units into Access for analyzing gas composition and calculating flow. Trained staff technicians on effective use of the MIS/GIS System, Well Adjustment Decision Tree, as well as data collection and importing procedures.

Owner, Kyoto Plaza, Gardena, California. Operated and maintained soil vapor extraction system at Kyoto Plaza. Collected air (vapor) samples and conducted evaluation of vacuum, influent/effluent data. Developed MS Access data repository, which included but were not limited to integration of historical vapor extraction data into a standardized relational database design. Responsible for data management and modeling.

Southern California Gas Company, PAH Removal and Geotechnical Investigation, Hanford, California.

Supervised and managed the removal of PAH-impacted soil, including subsurface investigation, sampling, and recompaction of fill soil. Ensured and designed proper grading of site utilizing Autodesk's Survey.

Home Savings of America, UST Removal and Upgrade, Irwindale, California. Supervised the removal and replacement of underground storage tanks, clarifiers, and hydraulic lifts at the corporate headquarters of Home Savings of America in Irwindale, CA. Also, performed subsurface investigation and confirmation sampling to achieve closure within the required Los Angeles County and state regulations.

Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Geotechnical Oversight for Red Line Segment 2 and 3, Los Angeles/Hollywood, California. Geotechnical engineer responsible for subsurface investigation and construction monitoring of geological conditions via geological/geotechnical mapping at the tunnel face.

Performed geotechnical engineering analysis of settlement data in cooperation with land survey teams and staff geologists/geotechs at the tunnel face during tunnel excavation along Hollywood and Vermont Boulevards.

Performed laboratory testing and interpretation of soils, field observation, fill testing, geotechnical engineering analysis including slope stability analysis, utilization of AutoCAD for grading and drainage plans, hydrologic analysis, and geotechnical report preparation.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Advanced Public Transportation Systems Group, Los Angeles, California. Provided computer mapping and analysis of traffic data via MapInfo GIS. Created maps using MapInfo in support of various transportation tasks and updated traffic data in the APTS data repository built in MS Access. Assisted in the project management of the Smart Traveler Kiosk Project and the I- 110 Vanpool Support Program.

EDI CONSULTANTS, INC.

Darrin Domingo, MBA, REPA, CHMM Principal __________________________________________________________________________

EDUCATION
MBA, Business Administration (emphasis in GIS), University of Redlands, California, 2001 BS, Geography - Ecosystems & Environmental Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, 1993

PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
Registered Environmental Property Assessor, No. 64277
Certified Hazardous Materials Manager (CHMM), No. 11546 Asbestos Inspector, California, IBFA-370-98
Alliance of Hazardous Materials Professionals (AHMP)
Environmental Bankers Association

SPECIAL TRAINING
OSHA 40-hour Hazardous Waste Operations Training
OSHA 8-hour Hazardous Waste Operations Annual Refresher Training OSHA 8-hour Hazardous Waste Operations Site Supervisor Training GIS Management Certificate of Completion, ESRI International User Conference Environmental Modeling Using Spatial Analyst, Certificate of Completion, ESRI International User Conference Advanced ArcView Certificate of Completion, ESRI
Database Development and Conversion, URISA Annual Conference and Exposition RACER (Remedial Action Cost Engineering & Requirements System) APPENDIX C.1
LK Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.,
Geotechnical Investigation Report,
Proposed 4-Story Apartment Building
Over 2-Level Subterranean Parking Garage,
APN's 6347-011-013 & -019 and 3647-012-008,
116-136 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
October 2, 2020.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
[This Page Intentionally Left Blank]

LK Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.
10120 National Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90034
Engineer: 626.328.4346; Geologist: 310.866.8977

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
PROPOSED 4-STORY APARTMENT BUILDING
OVER 2-LEVEL SUBTERRANEAN PARKING GARAGE
APN’S 6347-011-013 & -019 AND 3647-012-008
116 - 136 N. POPLAR AVENUE

MONTEBELLO, CALIFORNIA

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

FOR

Magna & Magna, Inc.
1520 Washington Boulevard, #100
Montebello, CA 90640

Attn: Mr. Mark D. Magna, President

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

Magna & Magna, Inc.
1520 Washington Boulevard, #100
Montebello, CA 90640

Attn: Mr. Mark D. Magna, President

Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
Proposed 4-Story Apartment Building Over 2-Level Subterranean Parking Garage
APN’s 6347-011-013 & -019 and 6347-012-008
116 - 136 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California

Dear Mr. Magna,

Pursuant to your request, LK Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. has completed a geotechnical investigation and prepared this report for the subject proposed development at the site. The primary objective of this investigation was to provide our best estimate of the geotechnical factors that pertain to the gross stability of the proposed improvement and to evaluate alternatives for a foundation system for the proposed structures.

The report includes a description and an evaluation of the soil materials and provides soils engineering recommendations for construction of the proposed improvement. This report is intended for submittal to the appropriate governmental autho rities that control the issuance of necessary permits.

Based on our findings, the proposed project is geotechnically f easible, provided that the recommendations in this report are incorporated into the design and are implemented during construction of the project.

If you have any questions regarding the information contained i n this report, please feel free to call this office.

Sincerely,
LK GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, INC.

Sean Lin, G.E. 2921
Principal Engineer

SL:mk

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

1.  SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................ 1

1.1.  LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................... 1

1.2.  FIELD EXPLORATION ............................................................................................................... 1

1.3.  GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING ............................................................................. 1

1.4.  ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND REPORT PREPARATION .................................................... 1

2.  PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DESCRIPTION ........................... 1

2.1.  PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................... 1

2.2.  SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................... 2

3.  SITE GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................................. 2

3.1.  REGIONAL GEOLOGY .............................................................................................................. 2

3.2.  SUBSURFACE EARTH MATERIALS ........................................................................................ 2

3.2.1.  Artificial Fill (Af) ................................................................................................................ 2

3.2.2.  Older Alluvium (Qae) ...................................................................................................... 2

3.3.  GROUNDWATER ........................................................................................................................ 3

4.  GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION ................................. 3

4.1.  SEISMIC HAZARD ZONES EVALUATION ............................................................................... 3

4.1.1.  Earthquake Fault Zone .................................................................................................. 3

4.1.2.  Soil Liquefaction Potential ............................................................................................ 4

4.2.  CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS .................................................................................. 4

5.  GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS .......................... 5

5.1.  GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW ................................................................................................... 5

5.2.  EXPANSIVE SOIL EVALUATION .............................................................................................. 6

5.3.  COLLAPSIBLE SOIL EVALUATION ......................................................................................... 6

5.4.  CORROSIVE SOIL EVALUATION ............................................................................................. 6

5.5.  STORMWATER INFILTRATION EVALUATION ........................................................................ 7

5.6.  SITE PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK ................................................................................ 7

5.6.1.  Over-Excavation and Subgrade Preparation .......................................................... 8

5.6.2.  Compaction ....................................................................................................................... 8

5.6.3.  Shrinkage/Bulking Due to Compaction ..................................................................... 8

5.6.4.  Excavation Characteristics ........................................................................................... 9

5.6.5.  Weather Related Grading Considerations ............................................................... 9

5.7.  TEMPORARY EXCAVATION ..................................................................................................... 9

5.8.  TEMPORARY SHORING .......................................................................................................... 10

5.9.  CONVENTIONAL FOOTINGS FOR BUILDING ....................................................................... 14

5.10.  CONVENTIONAL FOOTINGS FOR ANCILLARY STRUCTURES .......................................... 15

5.11.  FLOOR SLAB-ON-GRADE ...................................................................................................... 15

5.12.  MOISTURE RETARDER ........................................................................................................... 16

5.13.  RETAINING WALLS ................................................................................................................. 16

5.14.  HARDSCAPE ............................................................................................................................ 17

5.15.  PAVEMENT ............................................................................................................................... 17

5.16.  DRAINAGE PROTECTION ....................................................................................................... 18

5.17.  PRE-CONSTRUCTION SURVEY ............................................................................................. 18 October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707
iii

6.  SECTION 111 STATEMENT ....................................................................... 18

7.  GENERAL INFORMATION ......................................................................... 19

8.  LIMITATIONS .............................................................................................. 21

9.  REFERENCES............................................................................................. 24

List of Plates
Plate 1 – Site Plan and Geotechnical Exploration Map
Plate 2 – Regional Geologic Map
Plate 3 – Seismic Hazard Zones Map
Plate 4 – Historically Highest Groundwater Map

Plate CS-1 – Geologic Cross Section A-A’
Plate CS-2 – Geologic Cross Section B-B’
List of Appendices
Appendix A – Field Exploration
Appendix B – Laboratory Testing
Appendix C – Engineering Calculations and Details

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

1. SCOPE OF WORK
To prepare this report, we have performed the tasks described in the following subsections:

1.1. Literature Review
We reviewed geological literature including geologic maps, topographic maps and aerial photographs relevant to the subject site in preparation of this report. A list of literature reviewed is presented in the “References” section of this report.

1.2. Field Exploration
We performed a field exploration consisting of logging of five (5) exploratory soil borings on July 23, 2020. The exploration was performed using an 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger drill rig and hand tools. The borings were advanced to a maximum depth of approximately 61 feet below the existing grade. The approximate locations of the geotechnical exploration are shown on Plate 1. Detailed descriptions of the soils encountered during drilling are presented in Appendix A – Field Exploration.

1.3. Geotechnical Laboratory Testing
Representative soil samples collected from our field exploration were delivered to the E.G.L., Inc. (EGL) of Arcadia, California for testing, and to evaluate relevant engineering properties. The detailed laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B – Laboratory Testing. Based on our review of the laboratory data, LKGE concurs with and accept the laboratory testing results performed by E.G.L., Inc.

1.4. Engineering Analysis and Report Preparation
We compiled all geological and geotechnical data obtained from literature review, field exploration and laboratory test results, and then prepared this report to present our findings and the geotechnical recommendations, including seismic considerations, grading, foundations, foundation setback, retaining walls, floor slabs, temporary excavations, and drainage.

2. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DESCRIPTION

2.1. Proposed Development
It is our understanding that the proposed project consists of removing the existing structures and constructing a 140-unit, 4-story apartment building over 2-level subterranean parking garage. The proposed basement finish grade is approximately 22 feet below the existing street grade. The proposed building is shown on Plate 1 – Site Plan and Geotechnical Exploration Map and Plate CS-1 – Proposed Building Sections.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

2.2. Site Description
The project site is located at 116 – 136 N. Poplar Avenue, in the City of Montebello, California. The site is bounded by Poplar Avenue on the west, a 2-story motel on the south, single family house to the north, and a retaining wall to the east.

The site consists of three lots: 116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue. The structures at site consists of a 2- to 3-story apartment complex and parking lot (116 N. Poplar), and 1- to 2- story multi-family dwellings (128 and 136 N. Poplar), retaining wall, landscape and mature trees. The eastern property line rear portion
The site exhibits elevation relief of approximately 15 feet across the site. The rear parking lot of 116 and 128 N. Poplar Avenue is supported by an existing 12- to 15-feet retaining wall along eastern property line. Drainage across the site is by uncontrolled sheet flow to the adjacent sidewalks and drainage course, as well as by infiltration within unpaved area.

3. SITE GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1. Regional Geology
According to the Geologic Map of the El Monte and Baldwin Park Quadrangle (Dibblee and Ehrenspeck, 1999), the project the site is underlain by Older Alluvium (geologic map symbol Qae). This material composes primarily sandy silt to silty sand. A portion of the geologic map is reproduced as Plate 2 – Regional Geologic Map.

3.2. Subsurface Earth Materials
Based on our field exploration, the earth materials observed at the site consist of artificial fill and older alluvium.

3.2.1. Artificial Fill (Af)
Artificial fill consisting of red brown to dark brown sandy clay, clayey sand and silty sand with man-made debris was encountered in our exploratory borings. The observed maximum thickness of the artificial fill was on the order of 15- to 16-feet in our borings B- 1 and B-2 where appears to be the backfill placed behind the existing perimeter retaining walls to create level parking lot. We anticipate the artificial fill depths may vary across the site. This material is considered unsuitable for foundation or slab support or for receiving new compacted fill.

3.2.2. Older Alluvium (Qae)
Older Alluvium consisting of orange brown to brown sandy clay to clayey sand/ silty sand and gravelly silty sand was encountered in our exploratory borings at the site. Older alluvium was observed to be medium stiff to very stiff and dry to moist. The undisturbed older alluvium is considered suitable for foundation or slab support for the proposed structures and/or for support of new compacted fill, provided that our recommendations are followed and integrated into the improvement plans.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

3.3. Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered within our exploratory boring to a maximum depth of 61 feet below existing grade. According to the State of California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report of the El Monte Quadrangle, the site is located within an area with historically highest groundwater level reportedly at approximately between 20- and 50-feet below ground surface (Plate 4). It appears the 20-feet historical groundwater contour line is based on the ground elevation along Rio Hondo channel, which is approximately 30 feet below the Poplar Avenue. Therefore, the groundwater level appears to be well below the level of the proposed structures. It should be noted that local fluctuations in groundwater levels may occur due to seasonal variations in rainfall, irrigation and water line leaks.

4. GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION

4.1. Seismic Hazard Zones Evaluation
The southern California region is seismically active and commonly experiences strong ground shaking resulting from earthquakes along active faults. Ground shaking resulting from a moderate to major earthquake (Magnitude 6.0 or greater) can be expected during the lifespan of the existing and/or proposed structures. Property owners and the general public should be aware that any structure or slope in the southern California region could be subject to significant damage as a result of a moderate or major earthquake. The hazards associated with seismic activity in the vicinity of the site are discussed and evaluated in the following sections.

4.1.1. Earthquake Fault Zone
The State of California established the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act in 1972 which went into effect in 1973. The purpose of this Act is to prohibit the construction of most structures for human occupancy across the traces of active faults and to mitigate the hazard of fault rupture. An "active fault" is defined by the State Mining and Geology Board as one which had surface displacement within the Holocene era (+/- 11,000 years) and is well defined at the surface. The term “sufficiently active” has been used if there is evidence of Holocene surface displacement along one or more of its segments or branches.

The Act was renamed the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act in 1975 and then Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act in 1994. The original designation “Special Studies Zones” has been renamed “Earthquake Fault Zones”. Under the Act, the State Geologist is required to delineate Earthquake Fault Zones (EFZ) along active faults in California. Development within these zones must include geologic investigations demonstrating that the sites are not threatened by surface displacement from future faulting. The California Geologic Survey (CGS) is required to delineate active faults, compile maps of EFZs and submit such Official Maps to the public and continually review and revise EFZs based on new geologic and seismic data. EFZ boundaries on early maps were positioned about 660 feet (200 meters) away from the fault traces to accommodate imprecise locations of the faults and possible existence of active branches. The policy since 1997 is to position the EFZ boundaries about 500 feet (150 October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

meters) away from major active faults and about 200 to 300 feet (60 to 90 meters) away from well defined, minor faults.

Based on our review of California Geological Survey 2018 seismic hazard zones map (Plate 3), the site is not located within an Earthquake Fault Zone. The closest known fault is the Elsinore Fault which is mapped about 2.5 miles east of the site.

4.1.2. Soil Liquefaction Potential
Soil liquefaction occurs when the pore pressures generated within a soil mass approach the effective overburden pressure. Liquefaction of soils may be caused by cyclic loading such as that imposed by ground shaking during earthquakes. The increase in pore pressure results in a loss of strength, and the soil then can undergo both horizontal and vertical movements, depending on the site conditions. Other phenomena associated with soil liquefaction include sand boils, ground oscillation, and loss of foundation bearing capacity. Liquefaction is generally known to occur in loose, saturated, relatively clean, fine-grained cohesionless soils at depths shallower than approximately 50 feet. Factors to consider in the evaluation of soil liquefaction potential include groundwater conditions, soil type, grain size distribution, relative density, degree of saturation, and both the intensity and duration of ground motion.

Based on our review of California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zones Map (Plate 3), the site is not located within a potential liquefaction hazard zone. Based on dense older alluvium and lack of shallow groundwater, the soil liquefaction potential at the site is considered low. Consequently seismically-induced settlement is negligible.

4.2. CBC Seismic Design Parameters
The future structures should be designed by the structural engineer in accordance with the applicable seismic building code. Based on our geotechnical investigation, the subject site is classified as Site Class D in accordance with the 2019 California Building Code that refers to the ASCE 7-16.

Per Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16, structures shall be designed for the seismic response coefficient C
s determined by Eq. (12.8-2) for values of T ≤ 1.5 Ts and taken as equal to 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either Eq. (12.8-3) for TL ≥ T > 1.5 Ts or Eq. (12.8-4) for T > TL, where
T = the fundamental period of the building
T
s = SD1/SDS
TL = long-period transition period
The design spectral response acceleration parameters presented on the following table generated by the Applied Technology Council (ATC) website, may be utilized for seismic design:

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

Site location (latitude, longitude): (34.0090, -118.0992) Spectral Period, T
(second)
MCER ground
motion (g)
Site-modified
Spectral acceleration (g)
Seismic design
acceleration (g)

0.2 Ss = 1.881 F a = 1.0 S MS = 1.881 SDS = 1.254

1.0 S1 = 0.671 F v = 1.7 S M1 = 1.140 SD1 = 0.760
Site modified peak ground acceleration PGAM = 0.893 g
Long-period transition period TL = 8 second
Seismic Design Category = D
If seismic response coefficient Cs recommended above is not applicable for structural design, our office can perform a site-specific ground motion hazard analysis upon the project structural engineer’s request.

Present building codes and construction practices, and the recommendations presented in this report, are intended to minimize structural damage to buildings and prevent loss of life as a result of a moderate or a major earthquake. They are not intended to totally prevent damage to structures, graded slopes and natural hillsides due to moderate or major earthquakes. While it may be possible to design structures and graded slopes to withstand strong ground motion, the construction costs associated with such designs are usually prohibitive, and the design restrictions may be severely limiting. Earthquake insurance is often the only economically feasible form of protection for your property against major earthquake damage. Damage to sidewalks, steps, decks, patios and similar exterior improvements can be expected as these are not normally controlled by the building code.

5. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Geotechnical Overview
Based on the findings of our investigation, the site is considered to be suitable from a soils engineering standpoint for construction of the proposed structures, provided the recommendations included herein are followed and integrated into the building and/or grading plans.

The following is a list of geotechnical considerations for this project:
 Up to 16-feet-thick undocumented artificial fill was encounter ed in the eastern portion of the site. The bottom of fill is situated at elevation of 184 feet approximately based on our borings. This material is not suitable for foundation support. We recommend all existing fill be removed and recompacted. Because the undocumented fill depths are various across the site. We recommend that the proposed building be supported entirely on a uniform compacted fill blanket per our recommendations presented in “Site Preparation and Earthwork” section.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

 Temporary shoring will be required along the property lines where space constraint is present. The recommendations are presented in “Temporary Shoring” section.  Based on our review of laboratory testing results, the on-site soil has “low” expansive potential. Our recommendations have been incorporated the expansive soil mitigation.
 On-site near surface soil is considered “corrosive” to ferrous metal based on the laboratory testing results.

Our geotechnical engineering analyses performed for this report were based on the preliminary information provided to us. If the design substantially changes, then our geotechnical engineering recommendations would be subject to revision based on our evaluation of the changes.

5.2. Expansive Soil Evaluation
Expansive soils are characterized by their ability to undergo significant volume changes (shrink or swell) due to variations in moisture content. Changes in soil moisture content can result from rainfall, landscape irrigation, utility leakage, roof drainage, perched groundwater, drought, or other factors, and may cause unacceptable settlement or heave of structures, concrete slabs supported on-grade, or pavements supported over these materials.

Depending on the extent and location below finished subgrade, these soils could have a detrimental effect on the proposed construction.

Based on our review of laboratory testing results, the on-site near surface soil has “medium” expansive potential. Our recommendations have been incorporated the expansive soil mitigation.

5.3. Collapsible Soil Evaluation
Based on our review of the laboratory testing results, the on-site near surface soil has “slightly” collapsible potential. Our recommendations have been incorporated the mitigation for collapsible soil.

5.4. Corrosive Soil Evaluation
The potential for the near-surface on-site materials to corrode buried steel and concrete improvements was evaluated preliminarily. In accordance with the Caltrans Corrosive Guidelines, corrosive soil is defined as the soil has a pH less than 5.5, or chloride concentration greater than 500 ppm, or sulfate concentration in soils greater than 2,000 ppm, or minimum resistivity less than 1,000 ohm-centimeters. Laboratory testing was performed to evaluate pH and electrical resistivity, as well as chloride and sulfate contents.

These laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B.

Based on our review of laboratory test results, the followings are our findings:
 The potential for chloride attack of reinforcing steel in conc rete structures and pipes in contact with on-site soil is negligible.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

 The potential for sulfate attack on concrete in contact with t he on-site soil is negligible in accordance with ACI 318, Table 4.3.1. As a minimum, we recommend that Type I or II cement and a water-cement ratio of no greater than 0.5 be used on the project.
 Based on soil resistivity results, the on-site soil is considerred corrosive to buried ferrous metals. In general, conventional corrosion protection measures for metal in contact with soil may include the following:
o Underground steel utilities should be given a high-quality pro tective coating such as 40 mil extruded polyethylene, 20 mil plastic tape over primer per AWWA Standard C209, or hot applied coal tar enamel or tape per AWWA Standard C203.
o All underground steel should be electrically insulated from ab ove ground steel, dissimilar metals, and cement-mortar or concrete coated steel. o Underground steel pipe should be bonded for electrical continu ity if rubber- gasketed, mechanical, grooved-end, or other non-conductive type joints are used. In addition, cathode protection is recommended for underground steel utilities.

If special corrosion protection is required for certain performance criteria determined by the project designer, a corrosion specialist should be consulted regarding suitable types of piping and appropriate protection for underground metal conduits.

5.5. Stormwater Infiltration Evaluation
The proposed building covers essentially the entire property. It is our opinion that it is very difficult to design an efficient “infiltration-type” stormwater treatment system with appropriate foundation setback at the site. In addition, infiltration of stormwater at the site may change groundwater level and increase the potential of soil liquefaction hazard that ultimately impacts foundation stability. On this basis, it is our opinion that it is not suitable to use the “infiltration-type” stormwater treatment system for LID design at the site. We recommend that an alternative system (i.e. filtration-type bio-planter, etc.) be evaluated by the project civil engineer.

5.6. Site Preparation and Earthwork
Prior to construction/grading, the area of the proposed development should be clear of any loose surficial soils, vegetation and/or man-made debris. Demolition debris and other unsuitable materials should be stripped and removed from the site. Water lines or other old utility lines or installations to be abandoned should be removed or crushed in place. Holes resulting from removal of buried obstructions which extend below finished site grades should be backfilled with compacted soils.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

5.6.1. Over-Excavation and Subgrade Preparation
The proposed subterranean garage floor elevation is expected to be approximately 22 feet below Poplar Avenue. Artificial fill and older alluvium are expected to be exposed at the proposed garage floor elevation. To create a uniform foundation support, we recommend over-excavate at least 5 feet below the proposed finish grade, or 3 feet below footings, or to the depth of undocumented fill, whichever is deeper. The lateral extent of the over-excavation should be at least 5 feet beyond the building line (where space permits) or equidistant to the thickness of fill below footing, whichever is greater.

For any light-weight ancillary structures (i.e. property line fence walls, canopies, trash enclosure, etc.), we recommend over-excavate at least 1 foot below the proposed footing bottom, or to the depth of undocumented fill, whichever is deeper. The lateral extent of the over-excavation should be equidistant to the thickness of fill below footing (where space permits).

For on-grade pavement and hardscape (patios, steps, walkways, etc.), we recommend over-excavate at least 1 foot below the subgrade, or to the depth of undocumented fill, whichever is deeper, and then recompact to 90% relative compaction.

Any excavated bottoms for footings or to receive new compacted fill should be inspected and approved by a representative from LKGE. prior to compaction work. Deeper excavations may be required in areas where soft, saturated, or unsuitable materials, for example, tree root balls or undocumented fill are encountered.

5.6.2. Compaction
On-site materials are considered to be suitable for compaction, provided that all deleterious materials and oversized rocks (larger than 6-inches in size) are removed from the site prior to compaction.

All new compacted fill should be supported on firm native soil and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by the current ASTM D1557 and at about 2 percent above optimum moisture content. Fill should be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 8 inches in loose thickness, and then compacted by mechanical methods, using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple wheel pneumatic tired rollers, or other appropriate compacting rollers.

It may be necessary to import soils to the site to be used as compacted fill. Imported materials should be a sandy type of material and approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to transporting to the job site. The sandy material should not have an Expansion Index exceeding 20 and should not contain rocks larger than 6-inches in size.

5.6.3. Shrinkage/Bulking Due to Compaction
Based on our review of the in-situ soil density data, preliminary volumetric shrinkage on the order of 10 to 15 percent as a result of compaction of onsite soil may be assumed.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

5.6.4. Excavation Characteristics
The earth materials underlying the site should be generally excavatable with heavy-duty earthwork equipment in good working condition. Some gravels, cobbles and man-made debris should be anticipated within the fill soils. Local caved-in conditions should be anticipated in the sandy soil during temporary excavation.

5.6.5. Weather Related Grading Considerations
When rain is forecasted, we recommend all critical excavated bottoms, footings or trenches be covered with plastic sheeting to minimize subgrade soil saturation, and for the ease of removal of water.

Fill soil that has been spread and awaits compaction shall be properly compacted prior to rains. These fills, once compacted, shall have the surface sloped to drain to an area (temporary catch basin/detention basin) where water can be removed.

Temporary drainage devices should be installed to collect and transfer excess water to the street in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond anywhere on the site, and especially not against any foundation or retaining wall.

Drainage should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over any descending slope.

Once the earthwork is ready to resume after rainfall, the excavations and/or compaction conditions should be observed by this firm. Any soils saturated by the rain shall be removed and air-dried/mixed with dry materials for proper compaction. We will recommend additional mitigation measures based on the actual site conditions, if needed.

5.7. Temporary Excavation
Based on the proposed subterranean garage floor and over-excavation & recompaction, the height of temporary excavation is expected to be up to 27 feet. Where the space constraint is present, temporary shoring will be required and the recommendations are presented in “Temporary Shoring” section.

For other general temporary excavations, the maximum recommended height of unsurcharged, temporary vertical excavations in the earth materials at the site is 5 feet.

Excavations above this height should be trimmed to a 1:1 (H:V) ratio where the space is available. Surcharge loads, including construction vehicles and materials, should not be placed within five (5) feet of the unsupported excavation edge. Some sloughing of cohesionless sandy materials encountered at the site should be expected.

Excavations shall not remove the lateral support from a public way, from an adjacent property or from an existing structure. Where space for sloped excavations is not available, slot-cut or temporary shoring (trench box) may be utilized.

Surfaces exposed in slope excavations should be kept moist but not saturated to minimize raveling and sloughing during construction. Adequate provisions should be made to protect the slopes from erosion during periods of rainfall. Water should not be allowed to pond on October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

the top of the excavation or to flow towards it. All excavations should be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation.

All excavations shall be made in accordance with the regulations of the State of California, Division of Occupational Safety and Health, (Cal/OSHA). These recommended temporary excavation slopes do not preclude local raveling and sloughing. Provided our recommendations are followed, the resulting temporary excavations are anticipated to be safe from a geotechnical standpoint for the proposed construction operations and should not expose workers to hazards due to cave-ins, provided that geologic conditions exposed by the excavations are as anticipated.

Confined or trench excavations (i.e. retaining walls or utility trench excavations) should be made in accordance with the regulations of the State of California, Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA). We recommend that confined excavations should be shored using hydraulic shoring, screw jacks or timber shoring, as determined by the project engineer.

All temporary excavations at the site should be observed and monitored by our representative to verify soil conditions so that any necessary modifications can be made based on variations of soil encountered at the site. Surcharged temporary excavations and shoring should be continuously observed by our representative. If adverse conditions are encountered during excavations, additional recommendations will be provided.

It is recommended that a pre-excavation site meeting be attended by the grading contractor, the soils engineer and an agency representative to discuss methods and sequence of excavation.

5.8. Temporary Shoring
Based on the proposed subterranean garage floor and foundation elevations, the height of temporary excavation is expected to be up to 27 feet. Due to the space constrains of property lines, temporary shoring will be required.

In general, for excavations less than 15 feet in height, a cantilevered shoring system may be used. For excavations greater than 15 feet in height, a restrained (i.e. tied-back or braced) shoring system may be used. All shoring systems shall have lagging to support the cut face between soldier piles.

Shoring shall be designed by a California licensed engineer experienced in the design and construction of shoring under similar conditions. Once the final excavation and shoring plans are complete, the plans and the design should be reviewed by LKGE for conformance with the design intent and recommendations.
 Lateral Earth Pressures
The cantilevered or restrained shoring walls should be designed using the lateral earth pressure presented in the attached Plate SW-1 and the following table:

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

Shoring Type Lateral Earth Pressure* Pressure Distribution Cantilevered Shoring 36H psf Triangular Distribution
Restrained Shoring
(Tied-back/Braced Shoring) 23H psf Trapezoidal Distribution (see Plate SW-1)
* H = wall height
 Surcharge Loads
Any surcharge (live, including traffic, or dead load) located within a 1:1 plane projected upward from the base of the shored excavation, including adjacent structures, should be added to the lateral earth pressures. The lateral contribution of a uniform surcharge load located immediately behind the temporary shoring may be calculated by multiplying the vertical surcharge pressure by 0.30. Lateral load contributions of surcharges located at a distance behind the shored wall may be provided once the load configurations and layouts are known. As a minimum, a 240 psf vertical uniform surcharge is recommended to account for nominal construction and/or traffic loads. More detailed lateral pressure and loading information can be provided, if needed, for specific loading scenarios as recognized through the design process.
 Soldier Piles for Shoring
Soldier piles should be at least 18-inch in diameter and should be designed for an allowable passive resistance of 300 pcf (equivalent fluid weight). The passive resistance value can be doubled If pile spacing is greater than 2.5D on center where D is the diameter of the drilled shaft for the soldier piles. The downward axial capacity of soldier pile can be designed for an allowable skin friction of 400 psf. The upper 1.5D should be neglected when calculating the axial capacity below the excavated level. Structural concrete should be used for the soldier piles below the excavation, sand-cement slurry may be used above the excavation where lagging will be installed.

Drilling of the soldier pile shafts can be accomplished using conventional drilling equipment.

In the event of soil caving, it may be necessary to use casing and/or drilling mud to permit the installation of the soldier piles. Drilled holes for soldier piles should not be left open overnight. Concrete for piles should be placed immediately after the drilling of the hole is complete.

The concrete should be pumped to the bottom of the drilled shaft using a tremie. Once concrete pumping is initiated, the bottom of the tremie should remain below the surface of the concrete to prevent contamination of the concrete by soil inclusions. If steel casing is used, the casing should be removed as the concrete is placed.

Due to the proximity of the excavation to existing improvements, some means of monitoring the performance of the shoring system is recommended. Monitoring should consist of periodic surveying of lateral and vertical locations at the tops of all soldier piles. We will be pleased to discuss this further with the design consultants and the contractor when the October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

design of the shoring system has been finalized. Also, we should review the shoring plans and calculations to evaluate whether our recommendations have been incorporated into the design.
 Lagging
Continuous treated timber lagging should be used between the soldier piles. The lagging can be designed for the recommended lateral earth pressure but limited to a maximum of 400 psf with consideration of soil arching. If treated timber is used, the lagging may remain in place. To develop the full lateral resistance, provisions should be taken to assure firm contact between the soldier piles and the soils; for this, we recommend that at least 1.5-sack sand-cement slurry fill be used behind the lagging.
 Tie-back Anchors
For design of the tieback anchors, it may be assumed that the active wedge adjacent to the shoring is defined by a plane drawn at 35 degrees from the vertical through the bottom of the excavation. These anchors should extend to a minimum of 20 feet beyond the potential active wedge and to a greater length as necessary to develop the desired capacities. Only the frictional resistance developed beyond the assumed active wedge should be included in the tie-back design. Tie-back anchors may be installed at angles of 15 to 40 degrees below a horizontal plane.

For the design of pressure-grouted anchors, the grout-to-ground bond strength of 2,500 psf along the bonded zone may be used. The capacity of the anchors should be determined by testing of the initial anchors as presented in “Tie-back Anchor Testing” Section.

The anchors should be filled with concrete/grout by pumping from the tip out. To minimize caving, we suggest that the portion of the anchor shaft within the active wedge be backfilled with sand-cement slurry. The sand-cement mixture should fill the portion of the tieback anchor tightly and should be flush with the face of the shoring when finished.

After tie-back anchor is no longer needed to support the excavation, stress should be carefully released and shoring system including tieback may be able to be left in place.

Installation Guidelines

1. Tie-back installation shall be performed during continuous observation by LK Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. to confirm that the recommended earth materia ls are penetrated, that the dimensions of the installed anchors are at least as large a s that indicated on the shoring plan, and that anchor installation has been performed as specified. The Contractor shall provide access and necessary facilities, including lighting, at their expense, to accommodate observations.

2. All anchors shall be installed at the specified locations, t o the required depth, and at the specified angle of inclination. A tolerance of 3
o will be permitted on the required angle of
inclination.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

3. After drilling, all holes shall be cleaned of loose soils. Concrete shall be placed by pumping from the tip of the anchor to the active wedge. Concrete placement shall begin within four hours after completion of drilling. The portion of the anchor within the active wedge shall be backfilled with sand-cement slurry after the anchor has been tested as specified below. However, if excessive caving occurs, the active wedge portion of the excavation can be filled with slurry as the casing is pulled. A zone of soft soil shall (in this case) be placed between the anchor and slurry (before testing).

4. If a hollow-stem auger or casing is used due to caving, conc rete shall be placed by pumping as the auger or casing is withdrawn while always maintaining a head of concrete inside the casing or auger.

5. Concrete placement shall be continuous without interruption, and at such a rate that fresh concrete will not be deposited on concrete hardened sufficiently to form seams and planes of weakness.

6. Any anchor deemed by the Owner or Geotechnical Consultant to be defective shall be replaced with substitute anchor(s) as directed by the Owner or Shoring Designer. The cost of installation of such substitute anchors shall be borne by the Contractor. Costs associated with analysis and design of substitute anchor(s) shall also be borne by the Contractor.
 Tie-back Anchor Testing
As an initial guideline, tie-back anchor testing should include 150% and 200% load tests.

We recommend all anchors be check-tested to at least 150% of the designed working load in accordance with the following procedures:
a. Test load anchors to 150% of the design-working load, incrementally noting loads, tendon extensions and soldier pile deflections. Hold load for 15 minutes. After pulling slack, the anchor movement shall not exceed 0.10 inch during the 15-minute load period. If the deflection is acceptable, reduce load to 100% of the design load and lock off.
b. Where an anchor shows excessive movement for additional 15-m inute intervals, the load should be reduced until the rate of movement is 0.10 inch per 15 minutes or less. The load at which acceptable movement is attained should be divided by 1.5 to establish the working load of the anchor and additional measures taken to carry the required load.

Geotechnical Consultant shall designate at least 5% of all proposed anchors for 200% load tests. Additional anchor steel reinforcement will likely be required for the 200 percent load test anchors and should be appropriately considered prior to anchor installation. Half of the 200% Test Anchors shall be tested for 30 minutes. The remaining Test Anchors shall be tested for a 24-hour period. Test anchors shall be tested in the following procedures:
a. For the 30-minute test anchors, incrementally load the ancho rs to 200% of the design- working load noting loads, tendon/bar extensions and soldier pile deflections. Hold load for 30 minutes. Anchor movement shall not exceed 0.3 inch during the 30-minute load October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

period. If the deflection is acceptable, reduce load to design load and lock off; otherwise, reduce the test load by 50% and repeat this step. b. For 24-hour test anchors, incrementally load to 200% and hold for 24 hours; check load after 24 hours. If a pre-stress loss of 8% or less is recorded, restore load to 100% of working load and lock off. If loss of pre-stress exceeds 8%, restore load to 150% of working load and hold for an additional 24 hours. Check load after second 24-hour hold and, if loss of pre-stress is less than 8%; restore to 100% and lock off as before. c. Where an anchor shows a continuous loss of pre-stress during a subsequent 24-hour period, the test load shall continue to be reduced by 50% until loss of pre-stress is negligible. Then the test load shall be divided by 1.5 to establish the working load of that anchor and additional measures taken to carry the required shoring load.

Please note that any anchor pulled more than 12 inches shall not be used. Immediately after testing, the active wedge portion of tieback excavations should be filled with slurry.  Deflections
Certain amount of deflection of a shored embankment will occur. For design of shoring, the maximum deflection shall not exceed ½ inch at the top of the shored embankment where a structure is within 1:1 (H:V) plane projected up from the base of the temporary excavation and for a maximum lateral deflection of 1 inch provided there are no structures within a 1:1 (H:V) plane projected up from the base of temporary excavation.

If greater deflection occurs during construction, additional bracing/anchoring may be necessary to minimize settlement and loss of support of adjacent buildings, streets and/or utilities in adjacent streets and alleys. If desired to reduce the deflection, a greater active pressure could be used in the shoring design.

5.9. Conventional Footings for Building
Conventional footings can be used for support of the proposed structures, provided footings are founded on compacted fill. The reinforcement of footings shall be designed by the project structural engineer.

Continuous footings should be at least 18 inches in width and at least 24 inches deep from the lowest adjacent grade founded on compacted fill, and may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf.

Square footings should be at least 24 inches in width and at least 24 inches deep from the lowest adjacent grade founded on compacted fill, and may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf.

The allowable bearing capacity can increase 350 psf for each additional foot of width, and 450 psf for each additional foot of depth to a maximum allowable capacity of 6,000 psf.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

The bearing pressure given is for the total of dead and frequently applied live loads and may be increased by one-third for short duration loading which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces.

The estimated static settlement is expected to be less than ¾ inch with differential settlement estimated to be less than ¼ inch within a span of 30 feet. Settlement of the proposed foundation system is expected to occur on initial load application.

Resistance to lateral loading may be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure within alluvium. An allowable coefficient of friction of 0.3 may be used with the dead load forces. Passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 300 pcf with a maximum earth pressure of 4,500 psf.

When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one-third.

5.10. Conventional Footings for Ancillary Structures
For light-weight ancillary structures (e.g. fence walls, trash enclosures, planter walls, etc.), conventional shallow footings can be used, provided that footings are placed on compacted fill per our “Site Preparation and Earthwork” recommendations.

For the design of spread footings for other light-weight structures, we recommend the bottom of square or continuous footings be founded at least 12 inches below the proposed ground surface. A minimum footing width of 18 inches is recommended for square footings and 12 inches for continuous footings. The allowable bearing value for footings with above minimum sizes is 1,500 psf for dead plus live load. Based on the allowable net bearing pressures presented above, static settlement is anticipated to be less than ½ inch.

Differential settlement is expected to be up to one-half of the total settlement over a 30-foot span. Most of the static settlement at the project site is expected to occur immediately after the application of the load.

Resistance to lateral loading may be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure. An allowable coefficient of friction of 0.3 may be used with the dead load forces. Passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 300 pcf with a maximum earth pressure of 4,500 psf. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one- third.

5.11. Floor Slab-on-Grade
Concrete slab-on-grade may be used for the proposed building and should be supported on compacted fill, per the “Site Preparation and Earthwork” recommendations.

Concrete slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and should be reinforced with a minimum of #4 rebar spaced not exceeding 16 inches on center, each way. The project structural engineer should design the reinforcement of slab based on the design performance criteria.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

5.12. Moisture Retarder
Slabs to be covered with flooring should be protected by an acceptable plastic vapor retarder/barrier (minimum 10 mil thickness) placed on the firm subgrade. If moisture vapor transmission is a concern to the facility owner, an expert should be consulted to provide additional recommendations for the design and construction of slabs in moisture sensitive flooring areas.

5.13. Retaining Walls
The proposed retaining walls should be designed using the lateral earth pressure in accordance with the attached Plate RW-1 and the following table. Retaining walls greater than 6 feet in height should be designed considering the incremental seismic earth pressures.

Backslope of Retained Material
Horizontal to Vertical
Active
Equivalent Fluid Weight
(pcf)
At-Rest
Equivalent Fluid Weight
(pcf)
Level 43 60
The subterranean basement slab and retaining walls should have adequate waterproofing to prevent wall staining and water infiltration within the basement.

In addition to lateral earth pressures recommended above, any proposed retaining walls should be designed to resist the surcharge imposed by adjacent structures, proposed structures, footings, and/or by adjacent traffic surcharge.

The lateral pressure due to adjacent vertical uniformly distributed loads may be considered lateral pressure equal to 33 percent (Ka = 0.33) of the vertical uniformly distributed loads for the active condition. The lateral pressure due to adjacent vertical uniformly distributed loads may be considered lateral pressure equal to 50 percent (Ko = 0.50) of the vertical uniformly distributed loads for the at-rest condition.

All walls should be effectively waterproofed, provided with an adequate subdrainage system, and backfilled in accordance with the attached “retaining wall backfill and subdrain details” (Plate RWD-1).

Where shoring not allowing standard subdrain outside the wall, the rock pockets may be utilized. The pockets should be a minimum of 12 inches in length, width and depth behind the wood lagging, and be spaced no more than 8 feet on center. The rock pockets shall drain through the wall via a solid pipe to approved non-erosive drainage devices.

The subdrainage system, including outlet locations, should be clearly shown on the building and/or grading plans. The contractor is responsible to ensure that all subdrain outlets are constructed per plan. While all backfill should be compacted to the required density, care should be taken when working close to new walls to prevent excessive lateral pressure.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

Retaining wall waterproofing in preventing moisture intrusion is beyond our scope of work and not the responsibility of LK Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. We recommend you retain a waterproofing expert to provide waterproofing details, application methods or effectiveness and installations per the project design requirements (if applicable).

5.14. Hardscape
Patios, steps, walkways, etc. are not normally subject to building code requirements for structural support. In order to reduce the potential for distress due to potential settlement, the hardscape should be supported by compacted fill per our “Site Preparation and Earthwork” recommendations. Hardscape slabs reinforcement and control joints should be designed by the structural engineer or architect based on the design performance criteria.

5.15. Pavement
Prior to placing pavement structural section, the subgrade shall be prepared in accordance with the recommendations in “Site Preparation and Earthwork” section.

A flexible pavement section consisting of 3 inches of asphalt concrete over 4 inches of base material should be used. A flexible pavement section consisting of 4 inches of concrete over 6 inches of base material should be used for service lanes (truck and loading area), if applicable. The base material should be crushed aggregate base.

As an alternative, a rigid pavement section consisting of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) can be used. The traffic loading is expected to be primarily light vehicles.

Recommendations for the rigid concrete pavement design is provided herein on the following table.

Concrete Thickness 5 inches
90 Percent Compacted Subgrade 12 inches
Contraction Joint Spacing 10 ft.

Depth of Joint 1 inch
Compressive Strength of Concrete @ 28 days 3500 psi
Modulus of Rupture of Concrete @ 28 days 550 psi
Concrete slabs should be separated from other structures or fixed objects within or abutting the paved area by isolation joints. This serves to offset the effects of the differential horizontal and vertical movements of the structures which may fracture the concrete slab.

When isolation joints are located where wheel and other loads are applied, the pavement edge at the joint should be thickened by 20 percent or two inches, whichever is greater.

A joint filler should be applied to any new isolated joints within the concrete slab. The joint filler should extend through the slab thickness and should be recessed below the pavement surface so that the joint can be sealed with joint sealant material. The types of joint filler materials recommended include bituminous mastic, bituminous impregnated cellulose or October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

cork, sponge rubber, or resin-bound cork. Joint filler materials should be installed in accordance with the recommendations of the manufacturer.

5.16. Drainage Protection
All pad and roof drainage should be collected and transferred to the street or an approved area in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond on the pad or against any foundation or retaining wall.

We recommend a minimum 5 percent slope away from the building foundations for a horizontal distance of 3 feet be established for any landscape areas immediately adjacent to the building foundations. In addition, we recommend a minimum 2 percent slope away from the building foundations be established for any impervious surfaces immediately adjacent to the building foundations for a minimum horizontal distance of 10 feet. Lastly, we recommend the installation of roof gutters and downspouts which deposit water into a buried drain system be installed instead of discharging surface water into planter areas adjacent to structures.

It is the responsibility of the contractor and ultimately the developer and/or property owner to insure that all drainage devices are installed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans, our recommendations, and the requirements of all applicable municipal agencies. This includes installation and maintenance of all subdrain outlets and surface drainage devices.

It is recommended that watering be limited or stop altogether during the rainy season when little irrigation is required. Over-saturation of the ground can cause major subsurface damage. Maintaining a proper drainage system will minimize the shrink/swell potential of sub-soils.

5.17. Pre-Construction Survey
We recommend that the client’s representative prepare a pre-construction survey prior to site development. The pre-construction survey should document existing site conditions and performance of offsite structures (i.e. property line block walls and fences) prior to construction (where applicable). If adverse conditions are encountered during excavations, additional recommendations may be necessary.

6. SECTION 111 STATEMENT
It is the finding of this firm that the proposed structures will be safe and that they will not be affected by any hazard from landslide, liquefaction, lateral sp reading, slope instability, flood hazard, tsunamis, seiches, settlement or slippage and the compl eted work will not adversely affect adjacent property, in compliance with the Los Angeles Co unty code, provided that our recommendations are followed.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

7. GENERAL INFORMATION
Accuracy of Provided Drawings
LK Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. (LKGE) investigation, analysi s, findings and/or recommendations of a site, with respect to the proposed improvements, are often dependent on several factors or information provided to LKGE by the client and/or the client’s representative(s).

Provided information or Drawings may include topographic surveys, architectural drawings, engineering plans and/or grading plans. It is LKGE’s assumption that the provided Drawings, to be utilized as part of our investigation, accurately depict top ographic conditions, existing and/or proposed structures and grades, property lines, easements, etc. It should be understood that LKGE’s use of the provided Drawings does not mean or confirm th at the provided Drawings are accurate. If revisions are made to the site Drawings, these do cuments should be submitted to LKGE as soon as possible. Additional exploration, analysis and/or revised recommendations may be necessary depending upon our review of the revised Drawings, etc.

Environmentally Hazardous or Non-Hazardous Materials
It should be clearly understood that environmental geologic ser vices are not within the scope of this study. Environmental geologic services may include the de tection of hazardous or non- hazardous materials, wastes or substances existing on the site from research of available records, exploratory methods, sampling, laboratory analysis, etc. or the recommended treatment and/or disposal of these materials, wastes or substances. If hazardous or non-hazardous materials, wastes or substances are revealed by supplementary investigations or studies or are encountered during construction or grading operations, appropriate environmental investigation(s) and analysis may be required. In this case, mitigation and/or treatment of hazardous or non- hazardous materials, wastes or substances may be necessary. It should be understood that the property owner and potential future property owner(s) shall acknowledge and/or indemnify that LKGE has neither created or contributed to the creation or existence of any hazardous or non- hazardous materials, wastes or substances or otherwise dangerous conditions at the site. All site generated hazardous or non-hazardous materials, wastes or substances are the possession and responsibility of the property owner and potential future property owner(s).

Plan Review
This report is based on the development plans provided to our office. We recommend that the client’s representative(s) provide a complete set of the construction, building and/or grading plans to our office for review and/or approval, prior to initiation of construction. Any change in the scope of the project, from that addressed herein, may require additional geotechnical services by LKGE.

Formal plans should be reviewed and approved by LKGE, prior to initiation of construction. The appropriate government reviewing agency may require that the building and/or grading plans be signed by a licensed geotechnical engineer and/or a licensed engineering geologist, prior to initiation of construction. The plan review fees will be bille d in accordance with our current fee schedule.

Government Reviewing Agency and Additional Geotechnical Services October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

This report is intended for submittal to the appropriate governmental authorities that control the issuance of necessary permits. The client or client’s represen tative should submit the geotechnical reports to the appropriate government reviewing ag ency, unless specific arrangements are made with this office. It should be noted that the government reviewing agency has various fees for reviewing geotechnical reports, the fees for which are not included within our scope of work. If applicable, the report submittal fees will be billed in accordance with our current fee schedule. All geotechnical and/or engineering geologic aspects of the proposed development are subject to review and approval by the government reviewing agency. It should be understood that the government reviewing agency may approve or deny any portion of the proposed development, which may require additional geotechnical services by this office. Additional geotechnical services may include review responses, supplementa l letters, plan review and signature, construction observations, meetings, etc. The fees for generating additional reports, letters, exploration, analysis, etc. will be billed on a time and material basis, per our previously approved work acknowledgment or a pre-determined, agreed fee.

Site Observations during Construction
The appropriate government reviewing agency or building department requires that the geotechnical consultant of record provide site observations during grading and construction. The purpose of the site inspections is to verify site geotechnical and/or engineering geologic conditions and conformance with the intensions of the recommendations addressed herein. Although certain geotechnical and/or engineering geologic observations may not be required by the building department, the more site inspections typically reduce the risk for future problems. It is the client’s or the client’s representative(s) responsibility to contact the appropriate building department or building official regarding approval for all required inspectio ns. Following is a general list of inspections required by this firm.
a) Pre-grade meetings
b) Foundation excavations for all structures (residence, retai ning walls, pools, etc.) c) Temporary excavations/shoring
d) Bottom excavations for primary and/or secondary structural fills e) Keyway excavations
f) Compaction testing for primary and secondary structural fills g) Compaction testing for retaining wall backfill and utility trenches h) Subdrains for retaining walls, swimming pools or ponds It is recommended that all foundation excavations be approved by this firm prior to placing forms, steel reinforcement and/or concrete. Any fill which is placed at the site should be tested for compaction, especially if used for engineering purposes. All c ut-slopes and temporary excavations should be observed by a representative of this firm . Should the observation reveal any unforeseen hazard, appropriate action will be recommended.

Representatives of LKGE will observe work in progress, perform tests on soil, and observe excavations and trenches. Excavation bottom observations shoul d be requested before the placement of subdrains or compacted fill. The approved plans a nd permits should be on the job site and available for review by this office. The site inspections during construction will be billed on a time and material basis in accordance with our current fee schedule.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

It is advised that the client contact LKGE at least 1 week in advance of commencing constructing and/or grading to allow for contractual agreements for geotechn ical services during the construction phases of your project. Please advise this office at least 48 hours prior to any required verification or approval.

Construction Site Maintenance
It is the responsibility of the contractor to maintain a safe construction site and for the safe operation of all equipment. When excavations exist on the site, the areas should be secured by placing appropriate coverings, fencing, warning signs, etc. Al l excavations should be properly covered and secured. Excavation stock piles or spoil piles sho uld either be removed from the site or be property compacted, in accordance with recommendations presented herein. Fill temporarily stock-piled on the site should be placed in stable or approved areas and away from slopes, excavations or improvements. Earth materials generated from grading should not be disposed of along slopes or other unapproved locations. Workers should not be allowed to enter any un-shored excavations over 5-feet in depth, or depth specif ied herein. Water should not be allowed to saturate open footing trenches. Temporary erosion control measures and proper drainage control should be followed, especially during the rainy season.

It should be understood that the project contractor or others shall supervise and direct the work and they shall be solely responsible for all construction means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures, and shall be solely and completely responsible for conditions of the job site, including safety of all persons and property during the performance of the work.

Periodic or continuous observation by LKGE is not intended to include verification of dimensions or review of the adequacy of the contractor's safety measures in, on, or near the construction site.

Final As-built Reports
During or upon completion of the project or grading, the appropriate government reviewing agency or building department often requires interim or final as-built geotechnical reports prepared by this firm to document that foundations and/or fill placement were conducted per the recommendations addressed herein and/or the approved building and/or grading plans. Interim or final geotechnical reports are often required for placement of primary or secondar y structural fill, retaining wall backfill, slope repairs, pile observations, etc. The interim or final geotechnical reports will be billed on a time and material basis, in accordance with our current fee schedule.

8. LIMITATIONS
This report has been compiled for the exclusive use of the addr essee(s) of the report, and their authorized representatives. It shall not be transferred to, or used by, a third party, to another project or applied to any other project on this site, other than as described herein, without the written consent and/or thorough review by this firm.

This report and the exploration are subject to the following conditions. Please read this section carefully, it limits our liability.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

This report is based on the development plans provided to our office. In the event that any significant changes (from those discussed herein) in the design and/or location of the proposed structure(s) are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report may not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed by LKGE and the conclusions and recommendations are modified and/or approved by this firm after such review.

The conclusions and recommendations contained herein are based on the findings and observations made at the test pit, trench and/or boring locations. While no great variations in fill, soil and/or bedrock conditions are anticipated, if conditions a re encountered during construction which appears to differ from those disclosed herein, this firm should be notified immediately, so as to consider the need for modifications or revised geotechnical recommendations. Compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations dur ing construction requires our review during construction which pertains to the specific recommendations contained herein.

The subsurface conditions, excavations, characteristics and geo logic structure described herein and shown on the enclosed cross-section(s) have been projected from individual test pits, trenches and/or borings placed on the subject property. The subsurface conditions and excavation characteristics, and geologic structure shown should in no way be construed to reflect any variations which may occur between or away from these explo ratory excavations. The projection of geologic data is based on available information a nd experience and should not be considered exact.

It should be noted that fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur at the site due to variations in rainfall, temperature, irrigation, water line leaks, sewage disposal and/or other factors not evident at the time of measurements reported herein. LKGE assumes no responsibility for groundwater variations which may occur across the site. High groundwater levels can be extremely hazardous and saturation of earth materials can cause subsidence, settlement and/or slippage at the site.

The intent of this report is to advise our client and/or client’s representative(s) on soils and engineering geologic conditions at the site with respect to the proposed improvements.

Implementation of the advice presented in the Recommendations Section of this report is intended to reduce the risk associated with the proposed project and should not be construed to imply total performance of the project. It should be understood that geotechnical consulting and the contents of this report are not perfect. Any errors or omissions noted by any party reviewing this report, and/or any other geotechnical aspect of this project, should be reported to this firm as soon as possible.

Geotechnical engineering is characterized by uncertainty or is described as an inexact science or art. The conclusions and recommendations presented herein are partly based on; 1) the evaluation of technical data gathered by this firm, 2) standard of practice, 3) experience, and, 4) professional judgment. The conclusions and recommendations pre sented herein should be considered advice. Other geotechnical consultants could arrive at different conclusions and recommendations. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted practice.

No warranties, either expressed or implied, are made as to the professional advice provided under the terms of the agreement and included in this report.

It should be understood that LKGE’s services are limited to the disciplines of soils engineering and/or engineering geology. While LKGE may refer various professionals or outside services, October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

working in associated disciplines, to their client’s or client’ s representatives, LKGE is not responsible for the performance of work by third parties, which may include, but are not limited to, surveyors, civil or structural engineers, architects, contractors, etc. It should be clearly understood that LKGE is not a licensed surveyor, architect, civ il or structural engineer or contractor. LKGE’s periodic or continuous inspection(s) of geotechnical work on an LKGE project shall not relieve third party professionals of their responsibility to perform their work in accordance with the applicable and/or approved geotechnical reports, plans, specifications, safety requirements, etc. It should be understood that LKGE’s periodi c or continuous inspection(s) of geotechnical work on an LKGE project does not imply that LKGE i s observing, verifying and/or approving all site work. LKGE will only make site inspections, per our approved work authorization agreement(s) and/or related to the appropriate geotechnical field services provided by LKGE and will not relieve others of their professional responsibilities.

Should the project be delayed beyond the period of one year after the date of this report, the site should be observed and the report reviewed to consider possible changed conditions.

This report is issued with the understanding that it is the res ponsibility of the owner, or his representative, to assure that the information and recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the designers and builders for the project.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

9. REFERENCES

California Division of Mines and Geology, 1998, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the El Monte

7.5 Minute Quadrangles, Los Angeles County, California, SHZ Report 024, 45 pp.

California Geological Survey, 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117A, 108 pp.

California Geological Survey, 1999, Seismic Hazard Zones, El Monte Quadrangle, California, Scale 1"=2,000', Released March 25.

Dibblee, T.W. and Ehrenspeck, H.E., 1999, Geologic Map of the E l Monte and Baldwin Park Quadrangle, Dibblee Geological Foundation Map #DF-69, Scale 1”=2,000’.

State of California, California Geological Survey, 2007, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthq uake Fault Zones Maps, Special Publication 42, Interim Revision 2007, 48 p.

Southern California Earthquake Center, 1999, Recommended Procedures For Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitig ating Liquefaction in California, 70 pages.

Southern California Earthquake Center, 2002, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Landslide Hazards in California, 132 pages.

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

PLATES

Poplar Avenue
LEGEND:

Plan Prepared For:

Site Address:

Legal Description:

Date Of Survey:

Area:

Bench Mark:Danielson Surveying
Mark R. Danielson, PLS 7882
Job No. 0000-0000

TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY
Scale: 1" = 40'

PRELIMINARY

GARAGESINGLE FAMILY

SINGLE FAMILY SINGLE FAMILY

SINGLE FAMILY

SINGLE FAMILY

SINGLE FAMILY

APARTMENT BUILDING

APARTMENT BUILDING

APARTMENT BUILDING

APARTMENT BUILDING
2 STORY
2 STORY

EXISTING EXISTING

EXISTING

EXISTING

EXISTING

EXISTINGEXISTING

EXISTING

EXISTING

EXISTING
61 116, 128, 136 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
Regional Geologic Map
Plate 2Project 20-0707August 2020
Reference: Dibblee, 1999, Geologic Map of the El Monte and Baldwin Park Quadrangle.

SCALE
SITE
116, 128, 136 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
Seismic Hazard Zones Map
Plate 3Project 20-0707August 2020
CGS, 2017, Earthquake Fault Zones of the El Monte Quadrangle.

Reference: CGS, 1999, Seismic Hazard Zones of the El Monte Quadrangle.

SITE

116, 128, 136 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
Historically Highest Groundwater Map
Plate 3Project 20-0707August 2020
Reference: CGS ,1998, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the El Monte 7.5-Minute Quadrangle.

SITE

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

Appendix A
Field Exploration
We performed a field exploration consisting of logging of five (5) exploratory soil borings on July 23, 2020. The exploration was performed using an 8-inch d iameter hollow-stem auger drill rig and hand tools. The borings were advanced to a maximum depth of approximately 61 feet below existing grade. The approximate locations of our geotechnical exploration borings are shown on Plate 1.

The Boring Log is presented on Plates A-1 through A-5. The Bor ing Logs describe the earth materials encountered, samples obtained, and show the field and laboratory tests performed.

The borings were logged by an engineer or geologist using the Unified Soil Classification System. Drive and bulk samples of representative earth materia ls were obtained from the borings and delivered to the geotechnical laboratory for testing.

A California modified sampler was used to obtain drive samples of the soil encountered. This sampler consists of a 3-inch outside diameter (O.D.), 2.4-inch inside diameter (I.D.) split barrel shaft that was driven a total of 6-inches into the soil at the bottom of the boring. The soil was retained in brass rings for laboratory testing. Additional soil from each drive remaining in the cutting shoe was usually discarded after visually classifying the soil.

In addition, a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler was used to obtain drive samples of soil encountered. SPT sampler consists of a 2-inch O.D., 1.4-in ch I.D. split barrel shaft that is advanced into the soil at the bottom of the drilled hole a tota l of 18 inches. Soil samples obtained by the SPT were retained in plastic bags.

Upon completion of the geologic and geotechnical logging, the borings were backfilled with soil from the cuttings.

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
15 19
25 45
13 14
5 6
7 10
14 Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.
* Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings and patched with asphalt at surface.

A-1a
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :
25 SC No recovery
20 CL/SC Sandy CLAY to Clayey SAND; orange brown; medium stiff; dry 15 6.4 98.9 CL Older Alluvium (Qae)
Sandy CLAY; orange brown; stiff; dry
10 10.6 122.8 SC Clayey SAND; red to dark brown; stiff; damp; few glass/asphalt debris 5 10.2 115.5 CL Sandy CLAY; red to dark brown; stiff; damp DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Surface: 2" AC over 18"AB /concrete debris
0 Artificial Fill (Af)
CL/SM Sandy CLAY to Silty SAND; red brown; loose to medium dense; dampC R GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered Automatic Trip / Eri = 81% SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
199+/- 8 inches Charlies Soil Sampling
Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hollow Stem Auguer 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
116 - 136 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0707 B-1

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
6 9
12 8
10 14
18 23
28 11
15 18
50/5"
18 50/6"
Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.
* Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings and patched with asphalt at surface.

A-1b
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :
55 SM/GM Silty SAND with GRAVEL; light brown; dense; dry 50 SM/GM Silty SAND with GRAVEL; light brown; dense; dry 45 ML Sandy SILT; light brown; stiff; dry; few CLAY FC
(59.1%)
(67.4%)
40 ML Sandy SILT; light brown; very stiff; dry; few CLAY 35 ML Sandy SILT; light brown; stiff; dry; few CLAY FC
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Continued…
30 SM Silty SAND; light brown; medium dense; dry FC
(14.3%)
GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered Automatic Trip / Eri = 81% SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
199+/- 8 inches Charlies Soil Sampling
Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hollow Stem Auguer 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
116 - 136 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0707 B-1

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
25 50/5"
Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.
* Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings and patched with asphalt at surface.

A-1c
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :
80 75
70 65
SM/GM Silty SAND with GRAVEL; light brown; dense; dry
Total Depth = 61 feet
60 DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Continued…
55 GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered Automatic Trip / Eri = 81% SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
200+/- 8 inches Charlies Soil Sampling
Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hollow Stem Auguer 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
116 - 136 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0707 B-1

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
5 6
7 8
1 1
2 4
7 4
4 6
Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.

Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hollow Stem Auguer 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
116 - 136 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0707 B-2
GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered Automatic Trip / Eri = 81% SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
200+/- 8 inches Charlies Soil Sampling
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Surface: 5" AC / no base
0 Artificial Fill (Af)
SM Silty SAND; red brown; loose to medium dense; damp
5 12.7 115.1 SM Silty SAND; red brown; loose to medium dense; damp C 10 11.5 104.8 SM Silty SAND; red brown; loose to medium dense; damp; few CLAY 15 SC/CL Clayey SAND to Sandy CLAY; red brown; loose; moist Older Alluvium (Qae)
Sandy CLAY; brown; medium stiff; damp
20 9.7 108.8 CL/SC Sandy CLAY to Clayey SAND; brown to orange brown; medium stiff; damp C 25 CL Sandy CLAY; orange brown; medium stiff; damp
* Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings and patched with asphalt at surface.

A-2a
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
16 25
Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.

Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hollow Stem Auguer 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
116 - 136 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0707 B-2
GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered Automatic Trip / Eri = 81% SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
200+/- 8 inches Charlies Soil Sampling
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Continued…
25 30

14.3 96.1 SM Silty SAND; brown; dense; damp; fine SAND DS Total Depth = 31 feet
35 40
45 50
* Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings and patched with asphalt at surface.

A-2b
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.

Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hand Tools 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
116 - 136 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0707 B-3
GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered N/A SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
213+/- 5 inches JG
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Surface: grass lawn
0 Older Alluvium (Qae)
Sandy CLAY; brown to orange brown; stiff; dry

8.9 105.1 Sandy CLAY; brown to orange brown; stiff; dry 5 8.9 108.8 Sandy CLAY; brown to orange brown; stiff; dry DS 10 Total Depth = 10 feet
15 20
25 * Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings
A-3
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.

Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hand Tools 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
116 - 136 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0707 B-4
GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered N/A SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
204+/- 5 inches JG
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Surface: 3" concrete pavement
0 Artificial Fill (Af)
Sandy CLAY; brown; stiff; dry
Older Alluvium (Qae)
5 10.7 123.2 CL/SC Sandy CLAY to Clayey SAND; orange brown; stiff; dry 10 7.7 124.8 CL/SM Sandy CLAY to Silty SAND; brown; stiff; dry C 15 Total Depth = 15 feet
20 25
* Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings
A-4
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.

Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hand Tools 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
116 - 136 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0707 B-5
GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered N/A SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
210+/- 5 inches JG
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Surface: grass lawn
0 Older Alluvium (Qae)
Sandy CLAY; orange brown; stiff; dry; upper 1 ft disturbed 5 7.8 107.9 Sandy CLAY; brown to orange brown; stiff; dry 10 Total Depth = 10 feet
15 20
25 * Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings
A-5
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

Appendix B
Laboratory Testing
Representative soil samples collected from our field exploration were delivered to the EGL, Inc. of Arcadia, California for testing, and to evaluate relevant engineering properties. Based on our review of the laboratory data, LKGE concurs with and accept the laboratory testing results performed by EGL, Inc.

Laboratory Moisture Content and Density Tests
The moisture content and dry densities of selected driven sampl es obtained from the exploratory borings were evaluated in general accordance with t he latest version of ASTM D 2937. The results are shown on the attached EGL report.

Sieve Analysis – Passing #200 Sieve
Soil fine content analysis utilizing #200 sieves was performed on representative soil sample(s) per the ASTM C136/C117 Method. The test results are presented in the attached EGL report.

Direct Shear Test
Direct shear testing was conducted on representative soil samples to determine their shear strength in accordance with the ASTM D3080. The sample was saturated under normal load before testing. For each test, three samples were placed, one at a time, into the test apparatus and subjected to a range of normal loads appropriate for the anticipated conditions. The samples were then sheared at a constant shear rate of 0.01-inches per minute. Shear deformation was recorded until a maximum of about 0.3 inches of horizontal displacement was achieved. Ultimate shear strengths for each sample were selected from the shear stress- displacement data. Based on the test data, the stress generally becomes constant beyond 0.2 inch of displacement and it is our opinion that the samples were sheared to its ultimate strength status. The shear strength parameters are presented in the following table and on the attached EGL report.

Sample
Location
Depth
(ft.)
Soil
Type Soil Description
Ultimate Strength Parameters
Cohesion
(psf)
Friction Angle
(degrees)
B-2 30 Qae Silty SAND 156 30
B-3 6 Qae Sandy CLAY 195 28
Consolidation Test
Consolidation testing was performed on representative soil samp les under consolidated drained conditions per the ASTM D2435 Method. Axial loads were carried to a maximum of 8,000 psf. To hasten consolidation, investigate the collapsibility potential and similar possible adverse field conditions, water was added to an axial load of 2,000 psf. Compressibility of the soils within the zone of significant stress was investigated an d the results are provided on the attached EGL report. The collapse/swell potential is tabulated below:

October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

Sample
Location
Depth
(ft.)
Soil
Type Soil Description
Percent of
Collapse (-)/
Swell (+)
Collapse
Index
B-2 5 Af Lean CLAY -0.2 Slightly
B-2 20 Qae Lean CLAY/Clayey SAND -0.2 Slightly
B-4 10 Qae Lean CLAY/Clayey SAND -0.1 None
Corrosivity Tests
Soil pH and resistivity tests were performed on a representativ e soil sample in general accordance with the latest version of California Test Method 643. The chloride content of the selected sample was evaluated in general accordance with the latest version of California Test Method 422. The sulfate content of the selected samples was evaluated in general accordance with the latest version of California Test Method 417. The tes t results are presented in the attached EGL report.

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
PROJECT NAME: 116 Poplar Avenue, Montebello EGLAB JOB NO.: 20-122-035 PROJECT NO.: 20-0707 CLIENT: LK Geotechnical
DATE: 8/4/2020 SUMMARIZED BY: JT
MOISTURE DRY %PASSING
CONTENT DENSITY #200

BORING SAMPLE DEPTH ASTM ASTM ASTM
NO. NO. (ft) D2216 D2937 D1140
(%) (PCF) (%)

B-1 N/A 5.0 10.2 115.5
B-1 N/A 10.0 10.6 122.8
B-1 N/A 15.0 6.4 98.9
B-1 N/A 30.0 14.3
B-1 N/A 35.0 67.4
B-1 N/A 45.0 59.1
B-2 N/A 5.0 12.7 115.1
B-2 N/A 10.0 11.5 104.8
B-2 N/A 20.0 9.7 108.8
B-2 N/A 30.0 14.3 96.1
B-3 N/A 3.0 8.9 105.1
B-3 N/A 6.0 8.9 108.8
B-3 N/A 10.0 11.3 100.5
B-4 N/A 5.0 10.7 123.2
B-4 N/A 10.0 7.7 124.8
B-5 N/A 5.0 7.8 107.9
gd S
(pcf) (%)
1000 94.3 93
2000 94.8 93
4000 96.6 92
08/20 (ASTM D3080) Figure

14.3 27.1 EGLAB Project No.: , California20-122-035

14.3 26.8
DIRECT SHEAR14.3 25.4
Normal
Stress (psf)
Initial
Moisture (%)
Final
Moisture (%)
Client: LK Geotechnical
Project No.: 20-0707
156 30
Project Name:

EGLAB, INC.
116 Poplar Avenue, Montebello
Cohesion
(PSF)
Friction
Angle
B-2 N/A 30.0 Ring SM 436 31
Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) Sample
Type
Soil
Type Symbol
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

SHEAR STRESS (PSF)

NORMAL PRESSURE (PSF)
Peak Ultimate
gd S
(pcf) (%)
1000 116.1 100
2000 116.8 100
4000 118.9 100
Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) Sample
Type
Soil
Type Symbol Cohesion
(PSF)
Friction
Angle
B-1 N/A 5.0 Ring CL 336 28
178 28
Project Name:

EGLAB, INC.
129 Poplar Avenue, Montebello
DIRECT SHEAR10.4 17.5
Normal
Stress (psf)
Initial
Moisture (%)
Final
Moisture (%)
Client: LK Geotechnical
Project No.: 20-0708
08/20 (ASTM D3080) Figure

10.4 19.1 EGLAB Project No.: , California20-122-036

10.4 18.3
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

SHEAR STRESS (PSF)

NORMAL PRESSURE (PSF)
Peak Ultimate

6.0 B-3
195
116
20-0707
20-122-035

8.9 8.9

8.9 20.2
330
106.1 93

17.8 18.7
109.0 92
112.1 96
Project Name:
116 Poplar Avenue, Montebello
Client: LK Geotechnical
Project No.: 20-0707
EGLAB Project No.: 20-122-035
08/20 Figure
Symbol Boring
No.

Sample
No.

Depth
(Ft.)
Soil
Type
Init. Moisture
Content (%)
B-2 N/A 5.0 CL 12.7
EGLAB, INC.

CONSOLIDATION
(ASTM D2435)
Init. Dry
Density (PCF)
Init. Void
Ratio
115.7 0.456
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 0.1 1 10 100
DEFORMATION (%)

COMPRESSIVE STRESS (KSF)

SATURATED
Project Name:
116 Poplar Avenue, Montebello
Client: LK Geotechnical
Project No.: 20-0707
EGLAB Project No.: 20-122-035
08/20 Figure
EGLAB, INC.

CONSOLIDATION
(ASTM D2435)
Init. Dry
Density (PCF)
Init. Void
Ratio
110.1 0.530B-2 N/A 20.0 CL/SC 9.7
Symbol Boring
No.

Sample
No.

Depth
(Ft.)
Soil
Type
Init. Moisture
Content (%)
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 0.1 1 10 100
DEFORMATION (%)

COMPRESSIVE STRESS (KSF)

SATURATED
Project Name:
116 Poplar Avenue, Montebello
Client: LK Geotechnical
Project No.: 20-0707
EGLAB Project No.: 20-122-035
08/20 Figure
EGLAB, INC.

CONSOLIDATION
(ASTM D2435)
Init. Dry
Density (PCF)
Init. Void
Ratio
125.3 0.344B-4 N/A 10.0 SC 7.7
Symbol Boring
No.

Sample
No.

Depth
(Ft.)
Soil
Type
Init. Moisture
Content (%)
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 0.1 1 10 100
DEFORMATION (%)

COMPRESSIVE STRESS (KSF)

SATURATED

SUMMARY OF CORROSION TEST RESULTS
PROJECT NAME: 116 Poplar Avenue, Montebello EGLAB JOB NO.: 20-122-035 PROJECT NO.: 20-0707 CLIENT: LK Geotechnical
DATE: Summarized By: JT
Chloride Sulfate Minimum
pH Content Content Resistivity
BORING DEPTH CalTrans CalTrans CalTrans CalTrans
NO. 643 422 417 643
(ft) (ppm) (% by weight) (ohm-cm)

B-1 0-10.0 8.09 370 0.030 990
8/4/2020
SAMPLE
NO.

N/A
October 2, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0707

Appendix C
Engineering Calculations and Design Details

List of Plates
Plate No. Plate Name
SW-1 Earth Pressures for Shoring
RW-1 Earth Pressures for Retaining Wall
RWD-1 Typical Retaining Wall Backfill & Subdrain Detail

Earth Pressure Analyses: General Limit Equilibrium (GLE) - Trial Wedge Method Shoring Wall Parameters
Height of wall, H = 27.0 feet
Angle of back slope,  = 0.0 degrees
Soil Parameters
Unit weight,  = 120.0 pcf
Condition
Shear
Strength
Used
Cohesion
C (psf)
Friction angle
 (deg)
Factor of
Safety, F.S.

Design
Cohesion
Cd (psf)
Design Friction
angle
d (deg)
Static Ultimate 195.0 28.0 1.20 162.5 23.9
Failure plane
angle (deg)
Assumed
tension crack
(ft)
Failure plane
length (ft)
Weight of soil
wedge (lb/ft)
Active
Force ,PA
(lb/ft)
Active
EFWA
(pcf)
42 0.0 40.4 48578.2 9572.9 26.3
44 0.0 38.9 45294.1 10428.2 28.6
46 0.0 37.5 42239.2 11134.8 30.5
48 0.0 36.3 39383.7 11705.7 32.1
50 0.0 35.2 36702.2 12150.9 33.3
52 0.0 34.3 34173.4 12477.8 34.2
54 0.0 33.4 31779.0 12692.0 34.8
56 0.0 32.6 29503.0 12796.9 35.1
58 0.0 31.8 27331.8 12794.2 35.1
60 0.0 31.2 25253.3 12683.8 34.8
62 0.0 30.6 23257.0 12463.9 34.2
64 0.0 30.0 21333.4 12131.0 33.3
66 0.0 29.6 19474.3 11679.6 32.0
68 0.0 29.1 17672.1 11102.0 30.5
70 0.0 28.7 15920.1 10388.1 28.5
72 0.0 28.4 14212.0 9524.9 26.1
36 23
DATE: Oct. 2020 PROJECT# 20-0707 PLATE
Cantilevered Shoring Tie-back/Braced Shoring

EARTH PRESSURES FOR SHORING
116-136 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
SW-1
H
x H (psf)0.3 q
q
H
x H (psf)0.3 q
q

0.2H

0.6H

0.2H
Earth Pressure Analyses: General Limit Equilibrium (GLE) - Trial Wedge Method Retaining Wall Parameters Ground Motion Parameters
Height of wall, H = 22.0 feet PGAM = 0.89 g
Angle of back slope,  = 0.0 degrees kh = PGAM/3 = 0.30 Soil Parameters
Unit weight,  = 120.0
Condition
Shear
Strength
Used
Cohesion
C (psf)
Friction angle
 (deg)
Factor of
Safety, F.S.

Design
Cohesion
Cd (psf)
Design Friction
angle
d (deg)
Static Ultimate 195.0 28.0 1.50 130.0 19.5
Seismic Ultimate 195.0 28.0 1.00 195.0 28.0
Failure plane
angle (deg)
Assumed
tension crack
(ft)
Failure plane
length (ft)
Weight of soil
wedge (lb/ft)
Active
Force ,PA
(lb/ft)
Active
EFWA
(pcf)
Failure plane
angle (deg)
Total Seismic
Force, PE
(lb/ft)
Total Seismic
EFWE
(pcf)
40 0.0 34.2 34608.5 8450.5 34.9 40 11633.6 48.1
42 0.0 32.9 32252.2 8987.5 37.1 42 11807.6 48.8
44 0.0 31.7 30071.8 9429.2 39.0 44 11901.8 49.2
46 0.0 30.6 28043.6 9784.3 40.4 46 11922.9 49.3
48 0.0 29.6 26147.7 10059.6 41.6 48 11876.1 49.1
50 0.0 28.7 24367.5 10259.9 42.4 50 11765.5 48.6
52 0.0 27.9 22688.5 10388.9 42.9 52 11593.5 47.9
54 0.0 27.2 21098.8 10448.8 43.2 54 11361.7 46.9
56 0.0 26.5 19587.7 10440.6 43.1 56 11070.9 45.7
58 0.0 25.9 18146.2 10364.2 42.8 58 10720.7 44.3
60 0.0 25.4 16766.3 10218.3 42.2 60 10309.9 42.6
62 0.0 24.9 15440.8 10000.2 41.3 62 9836.5 40.6
64 0.0 24.5 14163.8 9706.3 40.1 64 9297.4 38.4
66 0.0 24.1 12929.4 9330.9 38.6 66 8688.5 35.9
68 0.0 23.7 11732.9 8867.1 36.6 68 8004.6 33.1
70 0.0 23.4 10569.7 8305.7 34.3 70 7239.1 29.9
For seismic design, use Total Seismic Pressure EFW = 56.0 Static, EFWA 43 pcf Static, EFW0 60 pcf
Increm. Seismic, EFWAE 13 pcf Increm. Seismic, EFW0E 0 pcf Total Seismic, EFWA+EFWAE 56 pcf Total Seismic, EFW0+EFW0E 60 pcf 43 13 60 0
DATE: Oct. 2020 PROJECT# 20-0707 PLATE
Active Condition At-Rest Condition

STATIC INCREMENTAL SEISMIC STATIC INCREMENTAL SEISMIC

EARTH PRESSURE ANALYSES
116-136 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
RW-1
x H (psf) x H (psf)
H
x H (psf)0.33 q
q
H
x H (psf)0.50 q
q

APPENDIX C.2
LK Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.,
Geotechnical Investigation Report,
Proposed 3-Story Apartment Building
APN's 6346-020-012 & -013,
129 & 133 N. Poplar Avenue,
Montebello, California
August 20, 2020.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
[This Page Intentionally Left Blank]

LK Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.
10120 National Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90034
Engineer: 626.328.4346; Geologist: 310.866.8977

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
PROPOSED 3-STORY APARTMENT BUILDING
APN 6346-020-012 & -013
129 & 133 N. POPLAR AVENUE

MONTEBELLO, CALIFORNIA

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

FOR

Magna & Magna, Inc.
1520 Washington Boulevard, #100
Montebello, CA 90640

Attn: Mr. Mark D. Magna, President

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

Magna & Magna, Inc.
1520 Washington Boulevard, #100
Montebello, CA 90640

Attn: Mr. Mark D. Magna, President

Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
Proposed 3-Story Apartment Building
APN 6346-020-012 & -013
129 & 133 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California

Dear Mr. Magna,

Pursuant to your request, LK Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. has completed a geotechnical investigation and prepared this report for the proposed improvements at the subject site. The primary objective of this investigation was t o provide our best estimate of the geotechnical factors that pertain to the gross stability of the proposed improvements and to evaluate alternatives for a foundation system for the proposed structures.

The report includes a description and an evaluation of the soil materials and provides soils engineering recommendations for construction of the proposed improvements. This report is intended for submittal to the appropriate governmental autho rities that control the issuance of necessary permits.

Based on our findings, the proposed project is geotechnically f easible, provided that the recommendations in this report are incorporated into the design and are implemented during construction of the project.

If you have any questions regarding the information contained i n this report, please feel free to call this office.

Sincerely,
LK GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, INC.

Sean Lin, G.E. 2921
Principal Engineer

SL:mk

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

1.  SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................ 1

1.1.  LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................... 1

1.2.  FIELD EXPLORATION ............................................................................................................... 1

1.3.  FIELD PERCOLATION TESTING .............................................................................................. 1

1.4.  GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING ............................................................................. 1

1.5.  ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND REPORT PREPARATION .................................................... 1

2.  PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DESCRIPTION ........................... 1

2.1.  PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................... 1

2.2.  SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................... 2

3.  SITE GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................................. 2

3.1.  REGIONAL GEOLOGY .............................................................................................................. 2

3.2.  SUBSURFACE EARTH MATERIALS ........................................................................................ 2

3.2.1.  Older Alluvium (Qae) ...................................................................................................... 2

3.3.  GROUNDWATER ........................................................................................................................ 2

4.  GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION ................................. 3

4.1.  SEISMIC HAZARD ZONES EVALUATION ............................................................................... 3

4.1.1.  Earthquake Fault Zone .................................................................................................. 3

4.1.2.  Soil Liquefaction Potential ............................................................................................ 4

4.2.  CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS .................................................................................. 4

5.  GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS .......................... 5

5.1.  GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW ................................................................................................... 5

5.2.  EXPANSIVE SOIL EVALUATION .............................................................................................. 6

5.3.  COLLAPSIBLE SOIL EVALUATION ......................................................................................... 6

5.4.  CORROSIVE SOIL EVALUATION ............................................................................................. 6

5.5.  STORMWATER INFILTRATION EVALUATION ........................................................................ 7

5.6.  SITE PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK ................................................................................ 8

5.6.1.  Over-Excavation and Subgrade Preparation .......................................................... 8

5.6.2.  Compaction ....................................................................................................................... 9

5.6.3.  Shrinkage/Bulking Due to Compaction ..................................................................... 9

5.6.4.  Excavation Characteristics ........................................................................................... 9

5.7.  TEMPORARY EXCAVATION ..................................................................................................... 9

5.8.  CONVENTIONAL FOOTINGS .................................................................................................. 10

5.9.  CONVENTIONAL FOOTINGS FOR ANCILLARY STRUCTURES .......................................... 11

5.10.  SLAB-ON-GRADE ................................................................................................................... 11

5.11.  MOISTURE RETARDER ........................................................................................................... 11

5.12.  HARDSCAPE ............................................................................................................................ 12

5.13.  PAVEMENT ............................................................................................................................... 12

5.14.  DRAINAGE PROTECTION ....................................................................................................... 13

5.15.  PRE-CONSTRUCTION SURVEY ............................................................................................. 13

6.  SECTION 111 STATEMENT ....................................................................... 13

7.  GENERAL INFORMATION ......................................................................... 14 August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708
iii

8.  LIMITATIONS .............................................................................................. 16

9.  REFERENCES............................................................................................. 19

List of Plates
Plate 1 – Site Plan and Geotechnical Exploration Map
Plate 2 – Regional Geologic Map
Plate 3 – Seismic Hazard Zones Map
Plate 4 – Historically Highest Groundwater Map
List of Appendices
Appendix A – Field Exploration
Appendix B – Laboratory Testing

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

1. SCOPE OF WORK
To prepare this report, we have performed the tasks described in the following subsections:

1.1. Literature Review
We reviewed geological literature including geologic maps, topographic maps and aerial photographs relevant to the subject site in preparation of this report. A list of literature reviewed is presented in the “References” section of this report.

1.2. Field Exploration
We performed field exploration consisting of logging of three (3) exploratory soil borings on July 23, 2020. The exploration was performed using hollow-stem auger drill rig and hand labor. The borings were advanced to a maximum depth of approximately 21 feet below the existing grade. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Plate 1. Detailed descriptions of the soils encountered during drilling are presented in Appendix A – Field Exploration.

1.3. Field Percolation Testing
We performed a percolation testing by using one of the exploratory borings to determine the infiltration rate of on-site soil. Detailed testing data is presented in Appendix A – Field Exploration.

1.4. Geotechnical Laboratory Testing
Representative soil samples collected from our field exploration were delivered to the EGL, Inc. (EGL) of Arcadia, California for testing, and to evaluate relevant engineering properties.

The detailed laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B – Laboratory Testing.

Based on our review of the laboratory data, LKGE concurs with and accept the laboratory testing results performed by EGL, Inc.

1.5. Engineering Analysis and Report Preparation
We compiled all geological and geotechnical data obtained from literature review, field exploration and laboratory test results, and then prepared this report to present our findings and the geotechnical recommendations, including seismic considerations, grading, foundations, foundation setback, retaining walls, floor slabs, temporary excavations, and drainage.

2. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DESCRIPTION

2.1. Proposed Development
It is our understanding that the proposed project consists of removing the existing structures and then constructing a 16-unit, 3-Story apartment building. The new structure comprises of August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

2-level of residential dwelling unit over at-grade parking. No subterranean basement is proposed. The proposed structure is shown on Plate 1 – Site Plan and Geotechnical Exploration Map.

2.2. Site Description
The project site is located at 129 & 133 N. Poplar Avenue in the City of Montebello, California. The site is bounded by N. Poplar Avenue to the east, 2-story apartment to the south, 1-story single-family house to the north, and an alley to the west.

The site is currently occupied by two, 1-story single-family houses and a detached garages, landscape, and mature trees.

The site is essentially level. The regional topographic gradient is approximately 0.5 percent toward the south. Drainage across the site is by uncontrolled sheet flow to the adjacent sidewalks, alley and drainage course, as well as by infiltration within unpaved areas.

3. SITE GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1. Regional Geology
According to the Geologic Map of the El Monte and Baldwin Park Quadrangle (Dibblee and Ehrenspeck, 1999), the project the site is underlain by Older Alluvium (geologic map symbol Qae). This material composes primarily sandy silt to silty sand. A portion of the geologic map is reproduced as Plate 2 – Regional Geologic Map.

3.2. Subsurface Earth Materials
Based on our field exploration, the earth materials observed at the site consist of older alluvium.

3.2.1. Older Alluvium (Qae)
Older alluvium consisting of brown to orange brown sandy clay to clayey sand/ silty sand was encountered in our exploratory borings at the site. Older alluvium was observed to be medium stiff to very stiff and dry to moist. The upper 18 inches of the older alluvium is considered disturbed and not suitable for foundation support. The undisturbed older alluvium is considered suitable for foundation or slab support for the proposed structures and/or for support of new compacted fill, provided that our recommendations are followed and integrated into the improvement plans.

3.3. Groundwater
No groundwater was observed on the site or in our exploratory borings to a maximum depth of 21.5 feet below existing grade. According to the State of California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report of the El Monte Quadrangle, the site is located within an area with historically highest groundwater level reportedly at approximately between 20- and 50-feet below ground surface (Plate 4). It appears the 20-feet historical groundwater contour line is below the August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

ground elevation along Rio Hondo channel which is approximately 30 feet below the Poplar Avenue. Therefore, the groundwater level appears to be well below the level of the proposed structures. It should be noted that local fluctuations in groundwater levels may occur due to seasonal variations in rainfall, irrigation and water line leaks.

4. GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION

4.1. Seismic Hazard Zones Evaluation
The southern California region is seismically active and commonly experiences strong ground shaking resulting from earthquakes along active faults. Ground shaking resulting from a moderate to major earthquake (Magnitude 6.0 or greater) can be expected during the lifespan of the existing and/or proposed structures. Property owners and the general public should be aware that any structure or slope in the southern California region could be subject to significant damage as a result of a moderate or major earthquake. The hazards associated with seismic activity in the vicinity of the site are discussed and evaluated in the following sections.

4.1.1. Earthquake Fault Zone
The State of California established the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act in 1972 which went into effect in 1973. The purpose of this Act is to prohibit the construction of most structures for human occupancy across the traces of active faults and to mitigate the hazard of fault rupture. An "active fault" is defined by the State Mining and Geology Board as one which had surface displacement within the Holocene era (+/- 11,000 years) and is well defined at the surface. The term “sufficiently active” has been used if there is evidence of Holocene surface displacement along one or more of its segments or branches.

The Act was renamed the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act in 1975 and then Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act in 1994. The original designation “Special Studies Zones” has been renamed “Earthquake Fault Zones”. Under the Act, the State Geologist is required to delineate Earthquake Fault Zones (EFZ) along active faults in California. Development within these zones must include geologic investigations demonstrating that the sites are not threatened by surface displacement from future faulting. The California Geologic Survey (CGS) is required to delineate active faults, compile maps of EFZs and submit such Official Maps to the public and continually review and revise EFZs based on new geologic and seismic data. EFZ boundaries on early maps were positioned about 660 feet (200 meters) away from the fault traces to accommodate imprecise locations of the faults and possible existence of active branches. The policy since 1997 is to position the EFZ boundaries about 500 feet (150 meters) away from major active faults and about 200 to 300 feet (60 to 90 meters) away from well defined, minor faults.

Based on our review of California Geological Survey 2018 seismic hazard zones map (Plate 3), the site is not located within an Earthquake Fault Zone. The closest known fault is the Elsinore Fault which is mapped about 2.5 miles east of the site.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

4.1.2. Soil Liquefaction Potential
Soil liquefaction occurs when the pore pressures generated within a soil mass approach the effective overburden pressure. Liquefaction of soils may be caused by cyclic loading such as that imposed by ground shaking during earthquakes. The increase in pore pressure results in a loss of strength, and the soil then can undergo both horizontal and vertical movements, depending on the site conditions. Other phenomena associated with soil liquefaction include sand boils, ground oscillation, and loss of foundation bearing capacity. Liquefaction is generally known to occur in loose, saturated, relatively clean, fine-grained cohesionless soils at depths shallower than approximately 50 feet. Factors to consider in the evaluation of soil liquefaction potential include groundwater conditions, soil type, grain size distribution, relative density, degree of saturation, and both the intensity and duration of ground motion.

Based on our review of California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zones Map (Plate 3), the site is not located within a potential liquefaction hazard zone. The soil liquefaction potential at the site is considered low. Consequently seismically-induced settlement is negligible.

4.2. CBC Seismic Design Parameters
The future structures should be designed by the structural engineer in accordance with the applicable seismic building code. Based on our geotechnical investigation, the subject site is classified as Site Class D in accordance with the 2019 California Building Code that refers to the ASCE 7-16.

Per Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16, structures shall be designed for the seismic response coefficient C
s determined by Eq. (12.8-2) for values of T ≤ 1.5 Ts and taken as equal to 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either Eq. (12.8-3) for TL ≥ T > 1.5 Ts or Eq.

37.5 (12.8-4) for T > TL, where
T = the fundamental period of the building
Ts = SD1/SDS
TL = long-period transition period
The design spectral response acceleration parameters presented on the following table generated by the Applied Technology Council (ATC) website, may be utilized for seismic design:

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

Site location (latitude, longitude): (34.0095, -118.0996) Spectral Period, T
(second)
MCER ground
motion (g)
Site-modified
Spectral acceleration (g)
Seismic design
acceleration (g)

0.2 Ss = 1.882 F a = 1.0 S MS = 1.882 SDS = 1.254

1.0 S1 = 0.674 F v = 1.7 S M1 = 1.146 SD1 = 0.764
Site modified peak ground acceleration PGAM = 0.893 g
Long-period transition period TL = 8 second
Seismic Design Category = D
If seismic response coefficient Cs recommended above is not applicable for structural design, our office can perform a site-specific ground motion hazard analysis upon the project structural engineer’s request.

Present building codes and construction practices, and the recommendations presented in this report, are intended to minimize structural damage to buildings and prevent loss of life as a result of a moderate or a major earthquake. They are not intended to totally prevent damage to structures, graded slopes and natural hillsides due to moderate or major earthquakes. While it may be possible to design structures and graded slopes to withstand strong ground motion, the construction costs associated with such designs are usually prohibitive, and the design restrictions may be severely limiting. Earthquake insurance is often the only economically feasible form of protection for your property against major earthquake damage. Damage to sidewalks, steps, decks, patios and similar exterior improvements can be expected as these are not normally controlled by the building code.

5. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Geotechnical Overview
Based on the findings of our investigation, the site is considered to be suitable from a soils engineering standpoint for construction of the proposed structures, provided the recommendations included herein are followed and integrated into the building and/or grading plans.

The following is a list of geotechnical considerations for this project:
 Surficial disturbed/loose soils were encountered at various lo cations within the property. We recommend that the proposed buildings be supported on a uniform compacted fill blanket per our recommendations presented in “Site Preparation and Earthwork” section.
 The near surface soil has “Low” expansive potential. Our reco mmendations have been incorporated the mitigation for expansive soil.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

 The near surface soil has “slightly” collapsible potential. O ur recommendations have been incorporated the mitigation for collapsible soil.
 On-site near surface soil is not considered as “corrosive soil ” based on the laboratory testing results.

Our geotechnical engineering analyses performed for this report were based on the preliminary information provided to us. If the design substantially changes, then our geotechnical engineering recommendations would be subject to revision based on our evaluation of the changes.

5.2. Expansive Soil Evaluation
Expansive soils are characterized by their ability to undergo significant volume changes (shrink or swell) due to variations in moisture content. Changes in soil moisture content can result from rainfall, landscape irrigation, utility leakage, roof drainage, perched groundwater, drought, or other factors, and may cause unacceptable settlement or heave of structures, concrete slabs supported on-grade, or pavements supported over these materials.

Depending on the extent and location below finished subgrade, these soils could have a detrimental effect on the proposed construction.

Based on our review of laboratory testing results, the near surface soil has “Low” expansive potential. Our recommendations have been incorporated the mitigation for expansive soil.

5.3. Collapsible Soil Evaluation
Based on our review of the laboratory testing results, the on-site near surface soil has “slightly” collapsible potential. Our recommendations have been incorporated the mitigation for collapsible soil.

5.4. Corrosive Soil Evaluation
The potential for the near-surface on-site materials to corrode buried steel and concrete improvements was evaluated preliminarily. In accordance with the Caltrans Corrosive Guidelines, corrosive soil is defined as the soil has a pH less than 5.5, or chloride concentration greater than 500 ppm, or sulfate concentration in soils greater than 2,000 ppm, or minimum resistivity less than 1,000 ohm-centimeters. Laboratory testing was performed to evaluate pH and electrical resistivity, as well as chloride and sulfate contents.

These laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B.

Based on our review of laboratory test results, the followings are our findings:
 The potential for chloride attack of reinforcing steel in conc rete structures and pipes in contact with on-site soil is negligible.
 The potential for sulfate attack on concrete in contact with t he on-site soil is negligible in accordance with ACI 318, Table 4.3.1. As a minimum, we recommend that Type I or II cement and a water-cement ratio of no greater than 0.5 be used on the project.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

 Based on soil resistivity results, the on-site soil is not con siderred corrosive to buried ferrous metals. In general, conventional corrosion protection measures for metal in contact with soil may include the following:
o Underground steel utilities should be given a high-quality pro tective coating such as 40 mil extruded polyethylene, 20 mil plastic tape over primer per AWWA Standard C209, or hot applied coal tar enamel or tape per AWWA Standard C203.
o All underground steel should be electrically insulated from ab ove ground steel, dissimilar metals, and cement-mortar or concrete coated steel. o Underground steel pipe should be bonded for electrical continu ity if rubber- gasketed, mechanical, grooved-end, or other non-conductive type joints are used. In addition, cathode protection is recommended for underground steel utilities.

If special corrosion protection is required for certain performance criteria determined by the project designer, a corrosion specialist should be consulted regarding suitable types of piping and appropriate protection for underground metal conduits.

5.5. Stormwater Infiltration Evaluation
Percolation testing was performed using the falling head boring test method in accordance with the Los Angeles County “Guidelines. The water level was measured to the nearest tenth of a foot and converted to inches in the calculation. The infiltration rate is shown in the table below and the raw data is attached in Appendix A.

Soil Infiltration Rate
Boring
No.

Total Depth
of Boring (ft)
Depth of
Testing Zone (ft)
Soil Description
of Testing Zone
Infiltration Rate
(inch/hour)
B-1 20 15 – 20 Sandy Silt 0.72
The project Civil Engineer should review the raw data of percolation test to determine infiltration rate for design of the proposed infiltration system. The proposed infiltration system should comply with the following setbacks in accordance with Los Angeles County guideline.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

Stormwater Infiltration Facility Setback Requirements
Setback from Distance
Property lines and public right of way 5 feet
Any foundation 15 feet or within 1:1 plane drawn up from the bottom of foundation, whichever is greater
Face of any slope H/2 or 5 feet minimum (H is height of slope) Water well used for drinking water 100 feet

5.6. Site Preparation and Earthwork
Prior to construction/grading, the area of the proposed development should be clear of any loose surficial soils, vegetation and/or man-made debris. Demolition debris and other unsuitable materials should be stripped and removed from the site. Water lines or other old utility lines or installations to be abandoned should be removed or crushed in place. Holes resulting from removal of buried obstructions which extend below finished site grades should be backfilled with compacted soils.

5.6.1. Over-Excavation and Subgrade Preparation
For building foundation support, we recommend over-excavate at least 3 foot below the proposed footing bottom, or 5 feet below the existing grade, or to the depth of undocumented fill, whichever is deeper. The lateral extent of the over-excavation should be at least 5 feet beyond the building line (where space permits) or equidistant to the thickness of fill below footing, whichever is greater.

For any ancillary structures (i.e. fence walls, canopies, trash enclosure, etc.), we recommend over-excavate at least 1 foot below the proposed footing bottom, or to the depth of undocumented fill, whichever is deeper. The lateral extent of the over- excavation should be equidistant to the thickness of fill below footing (where space permits).

For hardscape (patios, steps, walkways, etc.), we recommend scarify 12 inches below the subgrade, or to the depth of undocumented fill, whichever is deeper, and then recompact to 90% relative compaction.

For pavement, we recommend scarify at least 12 inches below the subgrade, or to the depth of undocumented fill, whichever is deeper, and then recompact to 95% relative compaction.

Any excavated bottoms for footings or to receive new compacted fill should be inspected and approved by a representative from LKGE. prior to compaction work. Deeper excavations may be required in areas where soft, saturated, or unsuitable materials, for example, tree root balls or undocumented fill are encountered.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

5.6.2. Compaction
On-site materials are considered to be suitable for compaction, provided that all deleterious materials are removed from the site prior to compaction.

All new compacted fill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by the current ASTM D1557 and at about 2 percent above optimum moisture content. Fill should be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 8 inches in loose thickness, and then compacted by mechanical methods, using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple wheel pneumatic tired rollers, or other appropriate compacting rollers.

It may be necessary to import soils to the site to be used as compacted fill. Imported materials should be a sandy type of material and approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to transporting to the job site. The sandy material should not have an Expansion Index which exceeds 20 and should not contain rocks larger than 8-inches maximum size.

5.6.3. Shrinkage/Bulking Due to Compaction
Based on our review of the in-situ soil density data, preliminary volumetric shrinkage on the order of 10 to 15 percent as a result of compaction of onsite soil may be assumed.

5.6.4. Excavation Characteristics
The earth materials underlying the site should be generally excavatable with heavy-duty earthwork equipment in good working condition. Some gravels and man-made debris should be anticipated within the fill soils. Caved-in conditions should be anticipated in the sandy soil during temporary excavation.

5.7. Temporary Excavation
The maximum recommended height of unsurcharged, temporary vertical excavations in the earth materials at the site is 5 feet. Excavations above this height should be trimmed to a 1:1 (H:V) ratio where the space is available. Surcharge loads, including construction vehicles and materials, should not be placed within five (5) feet of the unsupported excavation edge.

Excavations shall not remove the lateral support from a public way, from an adjacent property or from an existing structure. Where proper temporary vertical excavations are not feasible due to space constraints, slot-cut or temporary shoring may be utilized. Temporary excavation may be proceeded with the “A-B-C” slot cut method with a maximum 8-foot slot width to a maximum height of 8 feet (Plate SC-1). The excavated slots should not be left open overnight and should be backfilled on the same day it was excavated before the next set of slots are excavated.

Temporary shoring consisting of “trench box” system may be used for surcharged footing or trench excavations (if applicable). It is the contractor’s responsibility to provide sufficient shoring during construction.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

Surfaces exposed in slope excavations should be kept moist but not saturated to minimize raveling and sloughing during construction. Adequate provisions should be made to protect the slopes from erosion during periods of rainfall. Water should not be allowed to pond on the top of the excavation or to flow towards it. All excavations should be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation.

All excavations shall be made in accordance with the regulations of the State of California, Division of Occupational Safety and Health, (Cal/OSHA). These recommended temporary excavation slopes do not preclude local raveling and sloughing. Provided our recommendations are followed, the resulting temporary excavations are anticipated to be safe from a geotechnical standpoint for the proposed construction operations and should not expose workers to hazards due to cave-ins, provided that geologic conditions exposed by the excavations are as anticipated.

Confined or trench excavations (i.e. retaining walls or utility trench excavations) should be made in accordance with the regulations of the State of California, Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA). We recommend that confined excavations should be shored using hydraulic shoring, screw jacks or timber shoring, as determined by the project engineer.

All temporary excavations at the site should be observed and monitored by our representative to verify soil conditions so that any necessary modifications can be made based on variations of soil encountered at the site. Surcharged temporary excavations and shoring should be continuously observed by our representative. If adverse conditions are encountered during excavations, additional recommendations will be provided.

It is recommended that a pre-excavation site meeting be attended by the grading contractor, the soils engineer and an agency representative to discuss methods and sequence of excavation.

5.8. Conventional Footings
Conventional footings can be used for support of the proposed structures, provided footings are founded on compacted fill. The reinforcement of footings shall be designed by the project structural engineer.

Continuous footings should be at least 18 inches in width and at least 24 inches deep founded on compacted fill, and may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf.

Square footings should be at least 24 inches in width and at least 24 inches deep founded on compacted fill, and may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf.

The allowable bearing capacity can increase 300 psf for each additional foot of width, and 450 psf for each additional foot of depth to a maximum allowable capacity of 4,500 psf.

The bearing pressure given is for the total of dead and frequently applied live loads and may be increased by one-third for short duration loading which incl udes the effects of wind or seismic forces.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

The estimated static settlement is expected to be less than ½ inch with differential settlement estimated to be less than ¼ inch within a span of 30 feet. Set tlement of the proposed foundation system supported in dense sand is expected to occur on initial load application.

Resistance to lateral loading may be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure within compacted fill. An allowable coefficient of friction of

0.3 may be used with the dead load forces. Passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 300 pcf with a maximum earth pressure of 4,500 psf.

When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one-third.

5.9. Conventional Footings for Ancillary Structures
For light-weight ancillary structures (e.g. fence walls, trash enclosures, planter walls, etc.), conventional shallow footings can be used, provided that footings are placed on compacted fill per our “Site Preparation and Earthwork” recommendations.

For the design of spread footings for other light-weight structures, we recommend the bottom of square or continuous footings be founded at least 12 inches below the proposed ground surface. A minimum footing width of 18 inches is recommended for square footings and 12 inches for continuous footings. The allowable bearing value for footings with above minimum sizes is 1,500 psf for dead plus live load. Based on the allowable net bearing pressures presented above, static settlement is anticipated to be less than ½ inch.

Differential settlement is expected to be up to one-half of the total settlement over a 30-foot span. Most of the static settlement at the project site is expected to occur immediately after the application of the load.

Resistance to lateral loading may be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure. An allowable coefficient of friction of 0.3 may be used with the dead load forces. Passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 300 pcf with a maximum earth pressure of 4,500 psf. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one- third.

5.10. Slab-On-Grade
Concrete slab-on-grade may be used for the proposed building and should be supported on compacted fill, per the “Site Preparation and Earthwork” recommendations.

Concrete slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and should be reinforced with a minimum of #4 rebar spaced not exceeding 16 inches on center, each way. The project structural engineer should design the reinforcement of slab based on the design performance criteria.

5.11. Moisture Retarder
Slabs to be covered with flooring should be protected by an acceptable plastic vapor retarder/barrier (minimum 10 mil thickness) placed on the firm subgrade. If moisture vapor transmission is a concern to the facility owner, an expert should be consulted to provide August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

additional recommendations for the design and construction of slabs in moisture sensitive flooring areas.

5.12. Hardscape
Patios, steps, walkways, etc. are not normally subject to building code requirements for structural support. In order to reduce the potential for distress due to potential settlement, the hardscape should be supported by compacted fill, and it may be desirable to provide additional steel and concrete thickness determined by the project structural engineer. At a minimum, hardscape slab should be reinforced with a minimum of #4 rebar spaced at a maximum distance of 16 inches on center, each way. It should be noted that hardscape constructed to the preceding specification may be subject to distress over time. Periodic maintenance or replacement may be necessary.

5.13. Pavement
Prior to placing pavement structural section, the subgrade shall be prepared in accordance with the recommendations in “Site Preparation and Earthwork” section.

A flexible pavement section consisting of 3 inches of asphalt concrete over 4 inches of base material should be used. A flexible pavement section consisting of 4 inches of concrete over 6 inches of base material should be used for service lanes (truck and loading area), if applicable. The base material should be crushed aggregate base.

As an alternative, a rigid pavement section consisting of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) can be used. The traffic loading is expected to be primarily light vehicles.

Recommendations for the rigid concrete pavement design is provided herein on the following table.

Concrete Thickness 5 inches
95 Percent Compacted Subgrade 12 inches
Contraction Joint Spacing 10 ft.

Depth of Joint 1 inch
Compressive Strength of Concrete @ 28 days 3500 psi
Modulus of Rupture of Concrete @ 28 days 550 psi
Concrete slabs should be separated from other structures or fixed objects within or abutting the paved area by isolation joints. This serves to offset the effects of the differential horizontal and vertical movements of the structures which may fracture the concrete slab.

When isolation joints are located where wheel and other loads are applied, the pavement edge at the joint should be thickened by 20 percent or two inches, whichever is greater.

A joint filler should be applied to any new isolated joints within the concrete slab. The joint filler should extend through the slab thickness and should be recessed below the pavement surface so that the joint can be sealed with joint sealant material. The types of joint filler August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

materials recommended include bituminous mastic, bituminous impregnated cellulose or cork, sponge rubber, or resin-bound cork. Joint filler materials should be installed in accordance with the recommendations of the manufacturer.

5.14. Drainage Protection
All pad and roof drainage should be collected and transferred to the street or an approved area in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond on the pad or against any foundation or retaining wall.

We recommend a minimum 5 percent slope away from the building foundations for a horizontal distance of 3 feet be established for any landscape areas immediately adjacent to the building foundations. In addition, we recommend a minimum 2 percent slope away from the building foundations be established for any impervious surfaces immediately adjacent to the building foundations for a minimum horizontal distance of 10 feet. Lastly, we recommend the installation of roof gutters and downspouts which deposit water into a buried drain system be installed instead of discharging surface water into planter areas adjacent to structures.

It is the responsibility of the contractor and ultimately the developer and/or property owner to ensure that all drainage devices are installed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans, our recommendations, and the requirements of all applicable municipal agencies. This includes installation and maintenance of all subdrain outlets and surface drainage devices.

It is recommended that watering be limited or stop altogether during the rainy season when little irrigation is required. Over-saturation of the ground can cause major subsurface damage. Maintaining a proper drainage system will minimize the shrink/swell potential of sub-soils.

5.15. Pre-Construction Survey
We recommend that the client’s representative prepare a pre-construction survey prior to site development. The pre-construction survey should document existing site conditions and performance of offsite structures (i.e. property line block walls and fences) prior to construction (where applicable). If adverse conditions are encountered during excavations, additional recommendations may be necessary.

6. SECTION 111 STATEMENT
It is the finding of this firm that the proposed structures will be safe and that they will not be affected by any hazard from landslide, liquefaction, lateral sp reading, slope instability, flood hazard, tsunamis, seiches, settlement or slippage and the compl eted work will not adversely affect adjacent property, in compliance with the Los Angeles Co unty code, provided that our recommendations are followed.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

7. GENERAL INFORMATION
Accuracy of Provided Drawings
LK Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. (LKGE) investigation, analysi s, findings and/or recommendations of a site, with respect to the proposed improvements, are often dependent on several factors or information provided to LKGE by the client and/or the client’s representative(s).

Provided information or Drawings may include topographic surveys, architectural drawings, engineering plans and/or grading plans. It is LKGE’s assumption that the provided Drawings, to be utilized as part of our investigation, accurately depict top ographic conditions, existing and/or proposed structures and grades, property lines, easements, etc. It should be understood that LKGE’s use of the provided Drawings does not mean or confirm th at the provided Drawings are accurate. If revisions are made to the site Drawings, these do cuments should be submitted to LKGE as soon as possible. Additional exploration, analysis and/or revised recommendations may be necessary depending upon our review of the revised Drawings, etc.

Environmentally Hazardous or Non-Hazardous Materials
It should be clearly understood that environmental geologic ser vices are not within the scope of this study. Environmental geologic services may include the de tection of hazardous or non- hazardous materials, wastes or substances existing on the site from research of available records, exploratory methods, sampling, laboratory analysis, etc. or the recommended treatment and/or disposal of these materials, wastes or substances. If hazardous or non-hazardous materials, wastes or substances are revealed by supplementary investigations or studies or are encountered during construction or grading operations, appropriate environmental investigation(s) and analysis may be required. In this case, mitigation and/or treatment of hazardous or non- hazardous materials, wastes or substances may be necessary. It should be understood that the property owner and potential future property owner(s) shall acknowledge and/or indemnify that LKGE has neither created or contributed to the creation or existence of any hazardous or non- hazardous materials, wastes or substances or otherwise dangerous conditions at the site. All site generated hazardous or non-hazardous materials, wastes or substances are the possession and responsibility of the property owner and potential future property owner(s).

Plan Review
This report is based on the development plans provided to our office. We recommend that the client’s representative(s) provide a complete set of the construction, building and/or grading plans to our office for review and/or approval, prior to initiation of construction. Any change in the scope of the project, from that addressed herein, may require additional geotechnical services by LKGE.

Formal plans should be reviewed and approved by LKGE, prior to initiation of construction. The appropriate government reviewing agency may require that the building and/or grading plans be signed by a licensed geotechnical engineer and/or a licensed engineering geologist, prior to initiation of construction. The plan review fees will be bille d in accordance with our current fee schedule.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

Government Reviewing Agency and Additional Geotechnical Services This report is intended for submittal to the appropriate governmental authorities that control the issuance of necessary permits. The client or client’s represen tative should submit the geotechnical reports to the appropriate government reviewing ag ency, unless specific arrangements are made with this office. It should be noted that the government reviewing agency has various fees for reviewing geotechnical reports, the fees for which are not included within our scope of work. If applicable, the report submittal fees will be billed in accordance with our current fee schedule. All geotechnical and/or engineering geologic aspects of the proposed development are subject to review and approval by the government reviewing agency. It should be understood that the government reviewing agency may approve or deny any portion of the proposed development, which may require additional geotechnical services by this office. Additional geotechnical services may include review responses, supplementa l letters, plan review and signature, construction observations, meetings, etc. The fees for generating additional reports, letters, exploration, analysis, etc. will be billed on a time and material basis, per our previously approved work acknowledgment or a pre-determined, agreed fee.

Site Observations during Construction
The appropriate government reviewing agency or building department requires that the geotechnical consultant of record provide site observations during grading and construction. The purpose of the site inspections is to verify site geotechnical and/or engineering geologic conditions and conformance with the intensions of the recommendations addressed herein. Although certain geotechnical and/or engineering geologic observations may not be required by the building department, the more site inspections typically reduce the risk for future problems. It is the client’s or the client’s representative(s) responsibility to contact the appropriate building department or building official regarding approval for all required inspectio ns. Following is a general list of inspections required by this firm.
a) Pre-grade meetings
b) Foundation excavations for all structures (residence, retai ning walls, pools, etc.) c) Temporary excavations/shoring
d) Bottom excavations for primary and/or secondary structural fills e) Keyway excavations
f) Compaction testing for primary and secondary structural fills g) Compaction testing for retaining wall backfill and utility trenches h) Subdrains for retaining walls, swimming pools or ponds It is recommended that all foundation excavations be approved by this firm prior to placing forms, steel reinforcement and/or concrete. Any fill which is placed at the site should be tested for compaction, especially if used for engineering purposes. All c ut-slopes and temporary excavations should be observed by a representative of this firm . Should the observation reveal any unforeseen hazard, appropriate action will be recommended.

Representatives of LKGE will observe work in progress, perform tests on soil, and observe excavations and trenches. Excavation bottom observations shoul d be requested before the placement of subdrains or compacted fill. The approved plans a nd permits should be on the job August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

site and available for review by this office. The site inspections during construction will be billed on a time and material basis in accordance with our current fee schedule.

It is advised that the client contact LKGE at least 1 week in advance of commencing constructing and/or grading to allow for contractual agreements for geotechn ical services during the construction phases of your project. Please advise this office at least 48 hours prior to any required verification or approval.

Construction Site Maintenance
It is the responsibility of the contractor to maintain a safe construction site and for the safe operation of all equipment. When excavations exist on the site, the areas should be secured by placing appropriate coverings, fencing, warning signs, etc. Al l excavations should be properly covered and secured. Excavation stock piles or spoil piles sho uld either be removed from the site or be property compacted, in accordance with recommendations presented herein. Fill temporarily stock-piled on the site should be placed in stable or approved areas and away from slopes, excavations or improvements. Earth materials generated from grading should not be disposed of along slopes or other unapproved locations. Workers should not be allowed to enter any un-shored excavations over 5-feet in depth, or depth specif ied herein. Water should not be allowed to saturate open footing trenches. Temporary erosion control measures and proper drainage control should be followed, especially during the rainy season.

It should be understood that the project contractor or others shall supervise and direct the work and they shall be solely responsible for all construction means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures, and shall be solely and completely responsible for conditions of the job site, including safety of all persons and property during the performance of the work.

Periodic or continuous observation by LKGE is not intended to include verification of dimensions or review of the adequacy of the contractor's safety measures in, on, or near the construction site.

Final As-Built Reports
During or upon completion of the project or grading, the appropriate government reviewing agency or building department often requires interim or final as-built geotechnical reports prepared by this firm to document that foundations and/or fill placement were conducted per the recommendations addressed herein and/or the approved building and/or grading plans. Interim or final geotechnical reports are often required for placement of primary or secondar y structural fill, retaining wall backfill, slope repairs, pile observations, etc. The interim or final geotechnical reports will be billed on a time and material basis, in accordance with our current fee schedule.

8. LIMITATIONS
This report has been compiled for the exclusive use of the addr essee(s) of the report, and their authorized representatives. It shall not be transferred to, or used by, a third party, to another project or applied to any other project on this site, other than as described herein, without the written consent and/or thorough review by this firm.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

This report and the exploration are subject to the following conditions. Please read this section carefully, it limits our liability.

This report is based on the development plans provided to our office. In the event that any significant changes (from those discussed herein) in the design and/or location of the proposed structure(s) are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report may not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed by LKGE and the conclusions and recommendations are modified and/or approved by this firm after such review.

The conclusions and recommendations contained herein are based on the findings and observations made at the test pit, trench and/or boring locations. While no great variations in fill, soil and/or bedrock conditions are anticipated, if conditions a re encountered during construction which appears to differ from those disclosed herein, this firm should be notified immediately, so as to consider the need for modifications or revised geotechnical recommendations. Compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations dur ing construction requires our review during construction which pertains to the specific recommendations contained herein.

The subsurface conditions, excavations, characteristics and geo logic structure described herein and shown on the enclosed cross-section(s) have been projected from individual test pits, trenches and/or borings placed on the subject property. The subsurface conditions and excavation characteristics, and geologic structure shown should in no way be construed to reflect any variations which may occur between or away from these explo ratory excavations. The projection of geologic data is based on available information a nd experience and should not be considered exact.

It should be noted that fluctuations in the level of the ground-water may occur at the site due to variations in rainfall, temperature, irrigation, water line leaks, sewage disposal and/or other factors not evident at the time of measurements reported herein. LKGE assumes no responsibility for groundwater variations which may occur across the site. High groundwater levels can be extremely hazardous and saturation of earth materials can cause subsidence, settlement and/or slippage at the site.

The intent of this report is to advise our client and/or client’s representative(s) on soils and engineering geologic conditions at the site with respect to the proposed improvements.

Implementation of the advice presented in the Recommendations Section of this report is intended to reduce the risk associated with the proposed project and should not be construed to imply total performance of the project. It should be understood that geotechnical consulting and the contents of this report are not perfect. Any errors or omissions noted by any party reviewing this report, and/or any other geotechnical aspect of this project, should be reported to this firm as soon as possible.

Geotechnical engineering is characterized by uncertainty or is described as an inexact science or art. The conclusions and recommendations presented herein are partly based on; 1) the evaluation of technical data gathered by this firm, 2) standard of practice, 3) experience, and, 4) professional judgment. The conclusions and recommendations pre sented herein should be considered advice. Other geotechnical consultants could arrive at different conclusions and recommendations. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted practice.

No warranties, either expressed or implied, are made as to the professional advice provided under the terms of the agreement and included in this report.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

It should be understood that LKGE’s services are limited to the disciplines of soils engineering and/or engineering geology. While LKGE may refer various professionals or outside services, working in associated disciplines, to their client’s or client’ s representatives, LKGE is not responsible for the performance of work by third parties, which may include, but are not limited to, surveyors, civil or structural engineers, architects, contractors, etc. It should be clearly understood that LKGE is not a licensed surveyor, architect, civ il or structural engineer or contractor. LKGE’s periodic or continuous inspection(s) of geotechnical work on an LKGE project shall not relieve third party professionals of their responsibility to perform their work in accordance with the applicable and/or approved geotechnical reports, plans, specifications, safety requirements, etc. It should be understood that LKGE’s periodi c or continuous inspection(s) of geotechnical work on an LKGE project does not imply that LKGE i s observing, verifying and/or approving all site work. LKGE will only make site inspections, per our approved work authorization agreement(s) and/or related to the appropriate geotechnical field services provided by LKGE and will not relieve others of their professional responsibilities.

Should the project be delayed beyond the period of one year after the date of this report, the site should be observed and the report reviewed to consider possible changed conditions.

This report is issued with the understanding that it is the res ponsibility of the owner, or his representative, to assure that the information and recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the designers and builders for the project.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

9. REFERENCES

California Division of Mines and Geology, 1998, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the El Monte

7.5 Minute Quadrangles, Los Angeles County, California, SHZ Report 024, 45 pp.

California Geological Survey, 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117A, 108 pp.

California Geological Survey, 1999, Seismic Hazard Zones, El Monte Quadrangle, California, Scale 1"=2,000', Released March 25.

Dibblee, T.W. and Ehrenspeck, H.E., 1999, Geologic Map of the E l Monte and Baldwin Park Quadrangle, Dibblee Geological Foundation Map #DF-69, Scale 1”=2,000’.

State of California, California Geological Survey, 2007, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthq uake Fault Zones Maps, Special Publication 42, Interim Revision 2007, 48 p.

Southern California Earthquake Center, 1999, Recommended Procedures For Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitig ating Liquefaction in California, 70 pages.

Southern California Earthquake Center, 2002, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Landslide Hazards in California, 132 pages.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

PLATES

Scale: 1” = 20’
02 0 40
129, 133 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
Site Plan
& Geotechnical Exploration Map
Plate 1Project 20-0708August 2020

EXPLANATION
B-1 Boring Location
N
B-2
B-1
B-3
--- POPLAR AVENUE ---
Proposed At-Grade 4-Story Apartment
Building
129-133 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
Regional Geologic Map
Plate 2Project 20-0708August 2020
Reference: Dibblee, 1999, Geologic Map of the El Monte and Baldwin Park Quadrangle.

SCALE
SITE
129-133 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
Seismic Hazard Zones Map
Plate 3Project 20-0708August 2020
CGS, 2017, Earthquake Fault Zones of the El Monte Quadrangle.

Reference: CGS, 1999, Seismic Hazard Zones of the El Monte Quadrangle.

SITE

129-133 Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
Historically Highest Groundwater Map
Plate 3Project 20-0708August 2020
Reference: CGS ,1998, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the El Monte 7.5-Minute Quadrangle.

SITE
August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

Appendix A
Field Exploration
We performed a field exploration consisting of logging of three (3) exploratory soil borings on July 23, 2020. The exploration was performed using hand labor. The borings were advanced to a maximum depth of approximately 21 feet below the existing grade. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Plate 1.

The Boring Logs are presented on Plates A-1 through A-3. The Boring Logs describe the earth materials encountered, samples obtained, and show the field and laboratory tests performed. The borings were logged by an engineer or geologist using the Unified Soil Classification System. Drive and bulk samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the borings and delivered to the geotechnical laboratory for testing.

A California modified sampler was used to obtain drive samples of the soil encountered. This sampler consists of a 3-inch outside diameter (O.D.), 2.4-inch inside diameter (I.D.) split barrel shaft that was driven a total of 6-inches into the soil at the bottom of the boring. The soil was retained in brass rings for laboratory testing. Additional soil from each drive remaining in the cutting shoe was usually discarded after visually classifying the soil.

Upon completion of the geologic and geotechnical logging, the borings were backfilled with soil derived from the cuttings.

Percolation Testing
Percolation testing was performed using the falling head boring test method in accordance with the Los Angeles County “Guidelines for Geotechnical Investigation and Reporting Low Impact Development Stormwater Infiltration” dated June 30, 2017. The water level was measured to the nearest tenth of a foot and converted to inches in the calc ulation. The infiltration rate is shown in the table below and the raw data is attached.

Soil Infiltration Rate
Boring
No.

Total Depth
of Boring (ft)
Depth of
Testing Zone (ft)
Soil Description
of Testing Zone
Infiltration Rate
(inch/hour)
B-1 20 15 – 20 Sandy Silt 0.72

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
26 35
9 16
10 17
22 50
Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.
* Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings
A-1
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :
25 20

13.9 101.0 CL Sandy CLAY; red brown to gray brown; stiff damp; dry; more sand Total depth = 21 ft
15 16.3 109.4 CL Sandy CLAY; red brown; stiff damp; dry; porous C
10 16.2 109.9 CL/ML Sandy CLAY to Sandy SILT; red brown; stiff damp; dry; riotleks 5 10.4 117.5 CL Sandy CLAY; orange brown; stiff; dry DS DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Surface: grass lawn
0 Older Alluvium (Qae) EI, CR
CL Sandy CLAY; orange brown; stiff; dry
GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered Automatic Trip / Eri = 81% SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
N/A 8 inches Charlies Soil Sampling
Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hollow Stem Auguer 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
129 - 133 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0708 B-1

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.

Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hand tool 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
129 - 133 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0708 B-2
GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered N/A SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
N/A 5 inches JG
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Surface: grass lawn
0 Older Alluvium (Qae)
CL/ML Sandy CLAY to Sandy SILT; orange brown; stiff; dry 5 12.0 114.9 CL/ML Sandy CLAY to Sandy SILT; orange brown; stiff; dry

13.3 97.1 CL/ML Sandy CLAY to Sandy SILT; orange brown; stiff; dry 10 Total depth = 10 ft
15 20
25 * Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings
A-2
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :

MOISTURE
(%)

DRY UNIT WT
(pcf)
USCS
Bulk Sample
Cal. Mod. Sample
SPT Sample
Groundwater Level
PLATE NO.
* Borehole was backfilled with soil cuttings
A-3
LEGEND ACRONYM : FC: fine content; PA: particle size analysis; DS: direct shear; C: consolidation; PI: Atterberg limits; EI: expansive index; CR: corrosivity; CP: compaction curve; R: R-value NOTES :
25 20
15 Total depth = 10 ft
10 10.5 104.2 CL/ML Sandy CLAY to Sandy SILT; orange brown; stiff; dry C
5 13.1 107.7 CL/ML Sandy CLAY to Sandy SILT; orange brown; medium stiff; dry Older Alluvium (Qae)
CL Sandy CLAY; orange brown; medium stiff; dry
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWS PER 6"

DESCRIPTION

LAB TEST
Surface: grass lawn
0 GROUNDWATER DEPTH (ft) HAMMER TYPE & EFFICIENCY LOGGED BY Not Encountered N/A SL
SURFACE ELEVATIOIN (ft) BOREHOLE DIAMETER DRILLER
N/A 5 inches JG
Monetebello, CA DRILLING METHOD DATE DRILLED
Hand tool 7/23/2020

BORING LOG
PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT NO. HOLE ID
129 - 133 N. Poplar Avenue 20-0708 B-3

BORING PERCOLATION TESTING DATA
Reference: Los Angeles County (2014, 2017). Guidelines For Design, Investigation, and Reporting LID Stormwater Infiltration, GS200.1 & GS200.2 Project No.: 20-0708
Project Name: 129-133 N. Poplar Ave., Montebello, CA
Boring No.: B-1
Diameter of Boring (D): 8.0 inches
Depth of Boring (db): 20.0 feet = 240 inches
Diameter of Perc. Pipe : 3.0 inches
Length of Pipe (dp) : 20.0 feet = 240 inches
Perforated Section Depth: 15-20 feet

PRE-SOAK
Date: 7/23/2020
Start Time: 7:45 AM
Elapsed Time: 30.00 minutes
Water Remaining: yes

DETERMINE READING TIME INTERVAL REDUCTION FACTORS
Date: 7/23/2020 Boring method: RF t = 2 (default)
Start Time: 8:15 AM Site variability, number of tests: RF v = 1.00 (1 ~ 3) Elapsed Time: 30.00 minutes Long-term siltation, maintenance: RF s = 1.00 (1 ~ 3) Water Remaining: yes Total Reduction Factor: RF = RF t x RF v x RF s PERCOLATION TEST Test Date: 7/23/2020 Test Performer: SL Calculated by: SL Reading
Number Initial Time Final Time Elapsed
Time
Initial depth to
water surface
Final depth
to water
surface
Initial
height of
water
column
Drop of
water
column
Water
column
area factor
Raw
Percolation
Rate
Total
Reduction
Factor
Design
Infiltration
Rate
T i T f T dwi dwf di d RF k= k i / RF
(min) (inches) (inches) (inches) (inches) (inch/hr)
1 8:45 AM 9:15 AM 30 199.2 205.2 40.8 6.0 10.5 1.15 2.0 0.57 2 9:15 AM 9:45 AM 30 205.2 211.2 34.8 6.0 9.0 1.34 2.0 0.67 3 9:45 AM 10:15 AM 30 211.2 216.6 28.8 5.4 7.5 1.44 2.0 0.72 4 10:15 AM 10:45 AM 30 216.6 221.2 23.4 4.6 6.3 1.45 2.0 0.73 5 10:45 AM 11:15 AM 30 221.4 225.1 18.6 3.7 5.2 1.43 2.0 0.72 6 11:15 AM 11:45 AM 30 225.1 228.2 14.9 3.1 4.3 1.44 2.0 0.72 Recommended Design Infiltration Rate (inch/hr) = 0.72
Reference: Los Angeles County (2014, 2017). Guidelines For Design, Investigation, and Reporting LID Stormwater Infiltration, GS200.1 & GS200.2 (2*d i -
 d)/D
k i = d/CF/
T (inch/hr)
August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

Appendix B
Laboratory Testing
Representative soil samples collected from our field exploration were delivered to the EGL, Inc. of Arcadia, California for testing, and to evaluate relevant engineering properties. Based on our review of the laboratory data, LKGE concurs with and accept the laboratory testing results performed by EGL, Inc.

Laboratory Moisture Content and Density Tests
The moisture content and dry densities of selected driven sampl es obtained from the exploratory borings were evaluated in general accordance with t he latest version of ASTM D 2937. The results are shown on the attached EGL report.

Direct Shear Test
Direct shear testing was conducted on representative soil samples to determine their shear strength in accordance with the ASTM D3080. The sample was saturated under normal load before testing. For each test, three samples were placed, one at a time, into the test apparatus and subjected to a range of normal loads appropriate for the anticipated conditions. The samples were then sheared at a constant shear rate of 0.01-inches per minute. Shear deformation was recorded until a maximum of about 0.3 inches of horizontal displacement was achieved. Ultimate shear strengths for each sample were selected from the shear stress-displacement data. Based on the test data, the stress generally becomes constant beyond 0.2 inch of displacement and it is our opinion that the samples were sheared to its ultimate strength status. The shear strength parameters are shown in the following table and on the attached EGL report.

Sample
Location
Depth
(ft.)
Soil
Type Soil Description
Ultimate Strength Parameters
Cohesion
(psf)
Friction Angle
(degrees)
B-1 5 Qae Sandy CLAY 178 28
Consolidation Test
Consolidation testing was performed on representative soil samp les under consolidated drained conditions per the ASTM D2435 Method. Axial loads were carried to a maximum of 8,000 psf. To hasten consolidation, investigate the collapsibility potential and similar possible adverse field conditions, water was added to an axial load of 2,000 psf. Compressibility of the soils within the zone of significant stress was investigated an d the results are provided on the attached EGL report. The collapse/swell potential is tabulated below:

Sample
Location
Depth
(ft.)
Soil
Type Soil Description
Percent of
Collapse (-)/
Swell (+)
Collapse
Index
B-1 10 Qae Sandy CLAY/Sandy SILT 0 None
B-3 3 Qae Sandy CLAY/Sandy SILT -1.4 Slightly

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

Expansion Index Test
Expansion Index testing was performed on representative soil sample(s) per the ASTM D4829 Method. The soil was molded to a 4-inch diameter, 1-inch thick specimen under a specified compactive energy at approximately 50 percent saturation, and then loaded with 144 psf equivalent surcharge under inundated condition. Readings of volumetric swell were taken for a period of 24 hours. The test results are presented in the attached AGI report.

Sample
Location
Depth
(ft.)
Soil
Type Soil Description Expansion
Index
Expansion
Potential
B-1 0 – 5 Qae Sandy CLAY/Sandy SILT 30 Low
Corrosivity Tests
Soil pH and resistivity tests were performed on a representativ e soil sample in general accordance with the latest version of California Test Method 643. The chloride content of the selected sample was evaluated in general accordance with the latest version of California Test Method 422. The sulfate content of the selected samples was evaluated in general accordance with the latest version of California Test Method 417. The tes t results are presented in the attached EGL report.

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
PROJECT NAME: 129 Poplar Avenue, Montebello EGLAB JOB NO.: 20-122-036 PROJECT NO.: 20-0708 CLIENT: LK Geotechnical
DATE: 8/4/2020 SUMMARIZED BY: JT
DRY

MOISTURE DENSITY

BORING SAMPLE DEPTH CONTENT ASTM
NO. NO. (ft) ASTM D2216 D2937
(%) (PCF)

B-1 N/A 5.0 10.4 117.5
B-1 N/A 10.0 16.2 109.9
B-1 N/A 15.0 16.3 109.4
B-1 N/A 20.0 13.9 101.0
B-2 N/A 5.0 12.0 114.9
B-2 N/A 8.0 13.3 97.1
B-3 N/A 3.0 13.1 107.7
B-3 N/A 6.0 10.5 104.2
gd S
(pcf) (%)
1000 116.1 100
2000 116.8 100
4000 118.9 100
Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) Sample
Type
Soil
Type Symbol Cohesion
(PSF)
Friction
Angle
B-1 N/A 5.0 Ring CL 336 28
178 28
Project Name:

EGLAB, INC.
129 Poplar Avenue, Montebello
DIRECT SHEAR10.4 17.5
Normal
Stress (psf)
Initial
Moisture (%)
Final
Moisture (%)
Client: LK Geotechnical
Project No.: 20-0708
08/20 (ASTM D3080) Figure

10.4 19.1 EGLAB Project No.: , California20-122-036

10.4 18.3
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

SHEAR STRESS (PSF)

NORMAL PRESSURE (PSF)
Peak Ultimate
Project Name:
129 Poplar Avenue, Montebello
Client: LK Geotechnical
Project No.: 20-0708
EGLAB Project No.: 20-122-036
08/20 Figure
EGLAB, INC.

CONSOLIDATION
(ASTM D2435)
Init. Dry
Density (PCF)
Init. Void
Ratio
110.1 0.530B-1 N/A 10.0 CL-ML 16.2
Symbol Boring
No.

Sample
No.

Depth
(Ft.)
Soil
Type
Init. Moisture
Content (%)
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 0.1 1 10 100
DEFORMATION (%)

COMPRESSIVE STRESS (KSF)

SATURATED
Project Name:
129 Poplar Avenue, Montebello
Client: LK Geotechnical
Project No.: 20-0708
EGLAB Project No.: 20-122-036
08/20 Figure
Symbol Boring
No.

Sample
No.

Depth
(Ft.)
Soil
Type
Init. Moisture
Content (%)
B-3 N/A 3.0 CL 13.1
EGLAB, INC.

CONSOLIDATION
(ASTM D2435)
Init. Dry
Density (PCF)
Init. Void
Ratio
107.9 0.562
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 0.1 1 10 100
DEFORMATION (%)

COMPRESSIVE STRESS (KSF)

SATURATED

SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS
PROJECT NAME: 129 Poplar Avenue, Montebello EGLAB JOB No.: 20-122-036 PROJECT No.: 20-0708 CLIENT: LK Geotechnical
DATE: 8/4/2020 SUMMARIZED BY: JT
Chloride Sulfate Minimum
pH Content Content Resistivity Expansion
Boring Depth CalTrans CalTrans CalTrans CalTrans Index
No. (ft) 643 422 417 643 ASTM
(ppm) (% by weight) (ohm-cm) D 4829
B-1 0-5.0 7.81 255 0.005 3,800 30N/A
Sample
No.

August 20, 2020
LKGE Project No. 20-0708

Appendix C
Engineering Calculations and Design Details

List of Plates
Plate No. Plate Name
SC-1 Slot Cut Analysis

Slot Cut Dimensions
Slot Cut Height, H = 8.0 ft
Slot Cut Width, B = 8.0 ft
Surcharge, q = 1.0 kips/ft
Soil Parameters
Unit weight of soil,  = 125.0 pcf
Cohesion, C = 178.0 psf
Friction angle,  = 28.0 degrees
Generalized Limit Equilibrium Analysis
Potential sliding plane angle, L= 59.0 degrees
Potential sliding plane length, L = 9.3 ft
Depth of centroid, d = 2.7 ft
Unit Driving Force Calculations
Area of sliding, A = 19.2 ft2
Weight of soil, W = 2.4 kips/ft
Driving force, FD = 2.9 kips/ft
Unit Resistant Force Calculations
Resistance on sliding plane, RB = 2.6 kips/ft
Resistance on side walls, RW = 0.272 ksf
Factor of Safety Calulations
F.S. = (RB*B+2*A*RW)/(FD*B) = 1.3 >1.25 O.K.

DATE: August 2020 PROJECT # 20-0708 PLATE

SLOT CUT ANALYSIS
129-133 N. Poplar Avenue
Montebello, California
SC-1
B

SLOT CUT
H
LL
Centroid

CROSS SECTION

SLOT CUT SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM

APPENDIX D
ZC Sustainability,
116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue &
129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue
CEQA SCPE Energy & Water
Efficiency Compliance Memo
January 10, 2022.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
[This Page Intentionally Left Blank]

116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue CEQA SCPE Energy & Water Efficiency Compliance Memo
January 10, 2022

116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue CEQA SCPE Energy & Water Efficiency Compliance Memo

www. zc-sustainability.com Page 1 of 9

1. Executive Summary
The purpose of this memo is to describe how the 116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N.

Poplar Avenue project (Project), located in Montebello, CA 90640, will meet the Sustainable Communities Project CEQA Exemption (SCPE) criteria regarding energy and water efficiency (Public Resources Code Section 21155.1(a)(8)).

The
Project consists of two residential buildings:
· 116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue consists of 140 dwelling units in a four-story building over two floors of subterranean parking.
· 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue consists of 16 dwelling units in a three-story building.

The Subsection (a) (8) requirements for Energy Efficiency and Water Usage Reduction are as follows:

The buildings in the transit priority project are 15 percent more energy efficient than required by Chapter 6 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations and the buildings and landscaping are designed to achieve 25 percent less water usage than the average household use in the region.

Results Summary
The Proposed Designs, utilizing the energy efficiency and water usage reduction strategies discussed in this memo, comply with both requirements. The analysis
results are as follows:

· Energy Efficiency
· 116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue: 15.8%
more energy efficient than Title 24-2019, Part

6. · 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue: 15.2% more
energy efficient than Title 24-2019, Part 6.

· Water Usage
o 116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue: 50.0% less
water usage than the Metropolitan Water
District (MWD) baseline.
o 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue: 56.5% less
water usage than the Metropolitan Water
District (MWD) baseline.

116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue
Energy model rendering

129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue
Energy model rendering

116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue CEQA SCPE Energy & Water Efficiency Compliance Memo

www. zc-sustainability.com Page 2 of 9

2. Energy Efficiency
Both Project buildings utilized the Title 24-2019 Part 6 Whole Building Performance Approach to show compliance with the energy efficiency requirement.
116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue is subject to the High-Rise Residential Title 24-2019 Energy Code, while 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue is subject to the Low-Rise Residential Title 24-2019 Energy Code. As such, two separate energy models have been developed, using Title 24-2019 approved software, which is CBECC-Com for High-Rise Residential buildings (four-stories and above) and CBECC-Res for Low-Rise Residential buildings (up to three stories).

Since the project is currently in the entitlement review stage, all building features have not been fully designed. Assumptions based on experience with similar projects in this climate zone have been used when actual design information was not yet available.

Note: This analysis and the listed design features will be used to inform the final design. Any modification of the listed design features impacting energy efficiency will be analyzed to ensure the required 15% threshold is met.

Energy Efficiency Measures
The following Proposed Energy Efficiency Measures contribute to the reported energy savings:
· High-performance Low-e windows with very low Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) and U-value. · Overhangs & balconies shading the glazed patio doors below. · Wood framed walls with R-21 batt insulation.
· Wood framed roof with R-38 batt insulation.
· Cool Roof Rating Council (CRRC) certified high-reflectance cool roof. · Central water heating system with condensing natural gas water heaters. · High-efficiency HVAC systems serving residential units and common spaces. · A Photovoltaic (PV) system will further reduce energy use. · Reduced Lighting wattage from LED fixtures throughout the buildings, including Common Spaces and Amenities, with Daylight and Motion Sensor controls. · Low-flow fixtures: although energy savings from low-flow fixtures are not captured in the Title 24 energy analysis, this strategy significantly reduces the hot water usage and associated heating energy requirements.

The preliminary Title 24-2019 Reports, showing the Percentage Better than Standard (i.e. the Title 24-2019 Baseline Design), are shown on the next page.
116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue CEQA SCPE Energy & Water Efficiency Compliance Memo

www. zc-sustainability.com Page 3 of 9
Title 24-2019 Energy Performance Results
Following are the energy performance summary results from the Title 24-2019 Reports. · 116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue, Title 24-2019 Compliance Results

The Title 24-2019 TDV Energy Use reduction is from 49.23 (Title 24 Standard Design) to 41.43 (Proposed Design). The Proposed Design is 15.8% more energy efficient than Title 24-2019, Part 6. · 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue, Title 24-2019 Compliance Results

The Title 24-2019 TDV Energy Use reduction is from 80.82 (Title 24 Standard Design) to 68.52 (Proposed Design). The Proposed Design is 15.2% more energy efficient than Title 24-2019, Part 6.

A. GENERAL INFORMATION
1 Project Location (city) Montebello 8 Standards Version Compliance2019 2 CA Zip Code 90640 9 Compliance Software (version) CBECC-Com 2019.2.0 3 Climate Zone 9 10 Weather File LOS-ANGELES-DOWNTOWN_722874_CZ2010.epw 4 Total Conditioned Floor Area in Scope 146,856 ft2 11 Building Orientation (deg) (N) 16 deg 5 Total Unconditioned Floor Area 136,090 ft2 12 Permitted Scope of Work NewComplete 6 Total # of Stories (Habitable Above Grade) 4 13 Building Type(s) High-Rise Residential 7 Total # of dwelling units 140 14 Gas Type NaturalGas

C1. COMPLIANCE RESULTS FOR PERFORMANCE COMPONENTS (Annual TDV Energy Use, kBtu/ft 2-yr)

COMPLIES
Energy Component Standard Design (TDV) Proposed Design (TDV) Compliance Margin (TDV)1 Space Heating 3.66 3.49 0.17
Space Cooling 15.62 13.15 2.47
Indoor Fans 9.34 5.90 3.44
Heat Rejection -- -- --
Pumps & Misc. 0.00 -- --
Domestic Hot Water 20.05 18.53 1.52
Indoor Lighting 0.56 0.36 0.20
ENERGY STANDARDS COMPLIANCE TOTAL 49.23 41.43 7.80 (15.8%) 1 Notes: The number in parenthesis following the Compliance Margin in column 4. represents the Percent Better than Standard.

GENERAL INFORMATION
01 Project Name Montebello 16-Unit - Low-Rise
02 Run Title Bldg Department Submittal
03 Project Location 129 & 133 N. Poplar Ave
04 City Montebello 05 Standards Version 2019
06 Zip code 90640 07 Software Version CBECC-Res 2019.2.0 08 Climate Zone 9 09 Front Orientation (deg/ Cardinal) 285 10 Building Type Multifamily 11 Number of Dwelling Units 16 12 Project Scope NewConstruction 13 Number of Bedrooms 30 14 Addition Cond. Floor Area (ft2) 0 15 Number of Stories 2 16 Existing Cond. Floor Area (ft2) n/a 17 Fenestration Average U-factor 0.3 18 Total Cond. Floor Area (ft2) 16908 19 Glazing Percentage (%) 12.16% 20 ADU Bedroom Count n/a 21 ADU Conditioned Floor Area n/a 22 Is Natural Gas Available? Yes

ENERGY USE SUMMARY
Energy Use (kTDV/ft2-yr) Standard Design Proposed Design Compliance Margin Percent Improvement Space Heating 3.83 4.39 -0.56 -14.6
Space Cooling 33.08 19.94 13.14 39.7
IAQ Ventilation 4.11 4.11 0 0
Water Heating 39.8 40.08 -0.28 -0.7
Self Utilization/Flexibility Credit n/a 0 0 n/a
Compliance Energy Total 80.82 68.52 12.3 15.2

116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue CEQA SCPE Energy & Water Efficiency Compliance Memo

www. zc-sustainability.com Page 4 of 9

3. Water Usage
The Subsection (a) (8) water efficiency requirement is that each project must achieve a 25 percent water use reduction from the regional average household water use.

For residential and mixed-use, residential/commercial buildings, the baseline is the average regional water use in Gallons Per Capita Per Day of 120 gallons as stated in the Metropolitan Water District Water Tomorrow Annual Report to the California State Legislature, Covering Fiscal Year 2019/20 (p. 28). The report is available at:
http://www.mwdh2o.com/WWAMaterials%20Provided%20to%20WaterDM/3.1_1.2_Regional_Progress_R eport.pdf#search=3%2E1%5F1%2E2%5FRegional%5FProgress%5FReport This is multiplied by 3.3, the assumed residential occupancy based on the most recent census data for households in the City of Montebello, to determine the average daily water use per residential unit.

The projected water use utilizes the flow rates are as follows. Other elements are calculated using accepted industry practice. The Title 24 CALGreen-permitted maximum fixture flow rates are as follows:

1. Showerheads: 1.8 GPM (gallons per minute, as required by CALGreen)

2. Lavatory faucets: 1.2 GPM (as required by CALGreen)

3. Kitchen faucets: 1.5 GPM (as required by CALGreen)

4. Tank water closets (toilets): 1.28 GPF (gallons per flush; as required by CALGreen)

5. Commercial clothes washers: Energy Star certified, 3.5 IWF (Integrated Water Factor)

6. Dishwashers: Energy Star certified, 3.5 GPC (Gallons per Cycle)

Projected Water Savings
The Water Use Analyses for this project, included in Appendix B, calculates both the baseline and projected water use, followed by the percentage savings. The projected water use for both 116, 128 and 136 N. Popular Avenue, and 129 and 133 N. Popular Avenue, is overall more efficient than required by Title 24, Part 11, CALGreen, which includes water efficiency measures to reduce water use. The specified water efficiency measures listed above would sufficiently reduce water use so that no additional water reduction measures would be necessary.

The water use reduction is as follows:
· For 116, 128 and 136 N. Popular Avenue, from 396.0 (baseline per unit) to 172.0 gpd (projected per unit). The projected water use savings is 50.0%.
· For 129 and 133 N. Popular Avenue, from 396.0 (baseline per unit) to 172.0 gpd (projected per unit). The projected water use savings is 56.5%.
116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue CEQA SCPE Energy & Water Efficiency Compliance Memo

www. zc-sustainability.com Page 5 of 9
Appendix A: Energy Analysis Design Features
The following table lists the building’s design features and assumptions used in the energy analysis. These assumptions are based on the Current Design and on experience with similar projects in this climate zone when design information was not available at the time of this memo.

Feature
116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar
Avenue 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue
Project Description
Location Montebello, CA 90640
CA Climate Zone CZ-9
Number of units 140 Units 16 Units
Stories above grade 4 3
Covered Parking 2 floors of subterranean parking 1 floor of ground floor parking Energy Code Title 24–2019, Part 6
Compliance Path Whole Building Performance Approach
Software CBECC-Com 2019.2.0 SP1 CBECC-Res 2019.2.0
Envelope
Exterior Walls Wood framed, 2x6, 16” OC + R-21 batt
Underground floor/slab Uninsulated Slab on Grade
Floor above Parking Uninsulated Concrete Slab
Exterior Raised Floors N/A
Floors between conditioned
spaces1 Wood framed, 16” OC, + R-19 batt insulation
Top Roof Wood framed, 16” OC, + R-38 batt insulation
Cool Roof (Top Roof) CRRC certified, 3-yr aged Reflectance = 0.70 & Emittance = 0.75 Roof Deck Wood framed, 16” OC + R-38 batt insulation
Doors Solid Wood Door, U = 0.50
Windows
Residential units Dual pane, Low-e, in Vinyl Frame, U = 0.28 & SHGC = 0.20 (NFRC Rated Values)
Gym, Office, Lobby Dual pane, Low-e, in non-thermally broken metal frame U = 0.47 & SHGC = 0.22 (NFRC Rated Values)
116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue CEQA SCPE Energy & Water Efficiency Compliance Memo

www. zc-sustainability.com Page 6 of 9
Ventilation
Residential Units1 Continuously operating (bathroom) supply and exhaust fans, Outside Air (OSA) cfm per Title 24 requirements
Other Spaces HVAC provides OSA, cfm per Title 24
Unconditioned
occupied/transition spaces Exhaust fans provide OSA, cfm per Title 24 1 Note that HVAC is not allowed to supply outside air in residential units HVAC Residential Units
System Type Split System Heat-Pumps Split System Heat-Pumps Cooling Efficiency 16 SEER 16 SEER
Heating Efficiency 8.5 HSPF 8.5 HSPF
Supply fan Constant Volume Constant Volume
Supply fan power 0.5” External Static Pressure 0.5” External Static Pressure Filters MERV-13 MERV-13
Duct Location In ceiling (within the conditioned envelope) HVAC Corridors
System Type Ventilation Only Ventilation Only
HVAC Gym & Office
System Type Split System Heat-Pumps Split System Heat-Pumps Cooling Efficiency 16 SEER 16 SEER
Heating Efficiency 8.5 HSPF 8.5 HSPF
Supply fan Constant Volume
Supply fan power 0.5” External Static Pressure (ESP)
Capacities Per ASHRAE Fundamentals: 25% heating and 15% cooling oversized Controls Occupancy Sensor Control in required spaces
Service Water Heating
System Type Central Water Heating System Central Water Heating System Water Heater type Natural Gas Water Heaters Natural Gas Water Heaters Heating Efficiency 0.95 Efficiency 0.95 Efficiency
Hot water loop control Timer & temperature Timer & temperature 116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue CEQA SCPE Energy & Water Efficiency Compliance Memo

www. zc-sustainability.com Page 7 of 9
Solar Hot Water No Solar Hot Water included
Indoor Lighting
Residential Units1 High Efficacy Fixtures (LED)
Common Spaces
Average ~30% Lighting Power Density (LPD, W/sf) savings compared to Title 24-2019 Prescriptive allowances per occupancy type Controls Title 24 Mandatory Daylight and Occupancy Sensor controls Renewable Energy
Photovoltaic (PV) No PV included 40 kW DC PV, per Title 24-2019 HERS Field Verifications
Quality Insulation (QII) NA Yes
Dwelling unit leakage Yes Yes
Verified SEER / HSPF NA Yes
Duct Leakage Testing No Yes
Ducts in conditioned space No Yes
Hot water piping insulation NA Yes

116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue CEQA SCPE Energy & Water Efficiency Compliance Memo

www. zc-sustainability.com Page 8 of 9
Appendix B: Water Usage Analysis

Fixture Type Occupants = Gallons
Per Day
Showerheads residential 1.8 x 8 x 1 x 462 = 6,652.8
Lavatory faucets residential 1.2 x 0.25 x 5 x 462 = 693.0 Kitchen faucets 1.5 x 4 x 1 x 462 = 2,772.0
Tank water closets (M) 1.28 x 1 x 5 x 231 = 1,478.4
Tank water closets (F) 1.28 x 1 x 5 x 231 = 1,478.4
Clotheswashers (gal/person-day) 2 15.1 462 = 6,976.2
Dishwashers (gal/person-day) 3 0.7 462 = 323.4
Potable Water Irrigation (gpd (gallons per day)) 4 = 420.5 Pool Loss5 = 529.5
Total Daily Baseline Water Use (BWU) in Gallons Per Day = 21,786.6 Average Water Use per Household per Day = 21,786.6 gpd/140 units = 155.7 317.1
Water Use per Unit per Day (inc. appliances & landscape) 155.7 Percent Reduction from MWD Baseline 50.0
Assumptions

5. Pool/spa surface total 448 SF (385 SF pool + 63 SF spa). Avg 0.25 inch/0.021 ft loss per day, or 55.8 gallons to be made up per day.

4. Landscaping potable water use calculated using LEED v4 Outdoor Water Use Reduction Calculator v02. Assumes efficient irrigation system and drought tolerant plants. Estimated landscape area is 6,072 SF.

1. Flow rates are the maximum allowed under Title 24, Part 11, CALGreen 116, 128 and 136 N. Popular Avenue, Montebello
Water Use Analysis
Flow Rate
1 (gpm or gpf)
Duration
(min or #
flush)
Daily
Uses
Current Water Use per Multi-Family Household (MWD 2019/20 Water Tomorrow Annual Report) Gallons Per Capita Per Day = 120 x 3.3 occupants/unit per 2020 US Census Residential Water Use
140 residential units x 3.3 occupants/unit (per 2020 US Census) = 462 occupants.

3. Dishwashers assumed in each unit (baseline per Homes v4, 0.7 gal per person per day, 6.5 GPC). High efficiency dishwashers can be 4 GPC, therefore 61% of baseline, or 0.43 gal per person per day.

2. Clothes Washer in each unit (baseline per Homes v4, 15.1 gal per person per day, WF=9.5). High efficiency WF=3.2, therefore 33.6% of baseline, or 5.08 gal per person per day. 116, 128 and 136 N. Poplar Avenue & 129 and 133 N. Poplar Avenue CEQA SCPE Energy & Water Efficiency Compliance Memo

www. zc-sustainability.com Page 9 of 9

Fixture Type Occupants = Gallons
Per Day
Showerheads residential 1.8 x 8 x 1 x 53 = 763.2
Lavatory faucets residential 1.2 x 0.25 x 5 x 53 = 79.5 Kitchen faucets 1.5 x 4 x 1 x 53 = 318.0
Tank water closets (M) 1.28 x 1 x 5 x 17 = 108.8
Tank water closets (F) 1.28 x 1 x 5 x 17 = 108.8
Clotheswashers (gal/person-day) 2 15.1 53 = 800.3
Dishwashers (gal/person-day) 3 0.7 53 = 37.1
Potable Water Irrigation (gpd (gallons per day)) 4 = 73.3 Total Daily Baseline Water Use (BWU) in Gallons Per Day = 2,751.4 Average Water Use per Household per Day = 2,751.4 gpd/16 units = 172.0 396.0
Water Use per Unit per Day (inc. appliances & landscape) 172.0 Percent Reduction from MWD Baseline 56.5
Assumptions

4. Landscaping potable water use calculated using LEED v4 Outdoor Water Use Reduction Calculator v02. Assumes efficient irrigation system and drought tolerant plants. Estimated landscape area is 840 SF.

1. Flow rates are the maximum allowed under Title 24, Part 11, CALGreen 129 and 133 N. Popular Avenue, Montebello
Water Use Analysis
Flow Rate
1 (gpm or gpf)
Duration
(min or #
flush)
Daily
Uses
Current Water Use per Multi-Family Household (MWD 2019/20 Water Tomorrow Annual Report) Gallons Per Capita Per Day = 120 x 3.3 occupants/unit per 2020 US Census Residential Water Use
16 residential units x 3.3 occupants/unit (per 2020 US Census) = 53 occupants.

3. Dishwashers assumed in each unit (baseline per Homes v4, 0.7 gal per person per day, 6.5 GPC). High efficiency dishwashers can be 4 GPC, therefore 61% of baseline, or 0.43 gal per person per day.

2. Clothes Washer in each unit (baseline per Homes v4, 15.1 gal per person per day, WF=9.5). High efficiency WF=3.2, therefore 33.6% of baseline, or 5.08 gal per person per day.

APPENDIX E
Southern California Edison,
Service Area Fact Sheet
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
[This Page Intentionally Left Blank]
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON’S

SERVICE AREA
Southern California Edison is one of the nation’s largest electric utilities, providing electric service to approximately 15 million people through 5 million customer accounts.

SCE’s service area includes portions of 15 counties and hundreds of cities and communities in a 50,000-square-mile service area within Central, Coastal and Southern California.

For more information, visit sce.com
Updated: 4/25/2019

INCORPORATED CITIES AND

COUNTIES SERVED BY SCE

COUNTIES
Fresno Kern Madera Riverside Tuolumne
Imperial Kings Mono San Bernardino Tulare
Inyo Los Angeles Orange Santa Barbara Ventura
CITIES
Adelanto Commerce Hesperia Lynwood Porterville Tehachapi Agoura Hills Compton Hidden Hills Malibu Rancho Cucamonga Temecula Alhambra Corona Highland Mammoth Lakes Rancho Mirage Temple City Aliso Viejo Costa Mesa Huntington Beach Manhattan Beach Rancho Palos Verdes Thousand Oaks Apple Valley Covina Huntington Park Maywood Rancho Santa Margarita Torrance Arcadia Cudahy Indian Wells McFarland Redlands Tulare
Artesia Culver City Industry Menifee Redondo Beach Tustin Avalon Cypress Inglewood Mission Viejo Rialto Twentynine Palms Baldwin Park Delano Irvine Monrovia Ridgecrest Upland
Barstow Desert Hot Springs Irwindale Montclair Rolling Hills Ventura Be
aumont Diamond Bar Jurupa Valley Montebello Rolling Hills Estates Victorville Bell Downey La Canada Flintridge Monterey Park Rosemead Villa Park Bell Gardens Duarte La Habra Moorpark San Bernardino Visalia Be
llflower Eastvale La Habra Heights Moreno Valley San Dimas Walnut Beverly Hills El Monte La Mirada Murrieta San Fernando West Covina Bishop El Segundo La Palma Newport Beach San Gabriel West Hollywood Blythe Exeter La Puente Norco San Jacinto Westlake Village Bradbury Farmersville La Verne Norwalk San Marino Westminster Brea Fillmore Laguna Beach Ojai Santa Ana Whittier
Buena Park Fontana Laguna Hills Ontario Santa Barbara Wildomar Calabasas Fountain Valley Laguna Niguel Orange Santa Clarita Woodlake (Three Rivers) California City Fullerton Laguna Woods Oxnard Santa Fe Springs Ventura Ca limesa Garden Grove Lake Elsinore Palm Desert Santa Monica Yorba Linda Camarillo Gardena Lake Forest Palm Springs Santa Paula Yucaipa Canyon Lake Glendora Lakewood Palmdale Seal Beach Yucca Valley Carpinteria Goleta Lancaster Palos Verdes Estates Sierra Madre Carson Grand Terrace Lawndale Paramount Signal Hill
Cathedral City Hanford Lindsay Perris Simi Valley
Cerritos Hawaiian Gardens Loma Linda Pico Rivera South El Monte Chino Hawthorne Lomita Placentia South Gate
Chino Hills Hemet Long Beach Pomona South Pasadena
Claremont Hermosa Beach Los Alamitos Port Hueneme Stanton Updated: 4/25/2019

FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED TRIBES
IN SCE’S SERVICE AREA

FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED TRIBES
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians Benton Paiute Tribe San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Bishop Paiute Tribe Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians
Bridgeport Paiute Indian Colony Tule River Indian Tribe Chemehuevi Indian Tribe Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians Colorado River Indian Tribes
Death Valley Timbisha Shoshone Tribe
Morongo Band of Mission Indians

OTHER COMMUNITIES
In addition, SCE serves the majority of unincorporated communities and census-designated places within its service area.

Updated: 4/25/2019

ATTACHMENT D

ITEM #____
CITY

OF MONTEBELLO
CITY

COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorabl
e Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Re
né Bobadilla, P.E., City Manager
BY: Lupita
Ibarra, Director of Transportation

SUBJECT
: Adopt Resolution No. 22-22 Authorizing The City’s Submission Of Two (2) Applications t o The Federal Transit Administration to Receive Funding to Purchase Zero- Emission Buses Under t he Low Or No Emission Grant Program and The Grants for Buses and Bus Facilities Program
DATE: A
pril 27, 2022
RECOMMENDATIONS:

It is
recommended that the City Council:
1) Adopt
Resolution No. 22-22 authorizing the City’s submission of an application to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to receive funding to purchase zero- emission buses under two (2) grant programs: (i) the Low or No Emission Grant Program (“Low-No Program”), in the amount of $13,526,438, and (ii) the Grants for Buses and Bus Facilities Program (“Bus and Bus Facilities Program”); in the amount of $13,526,438 (collectively, hereinafter the “Grants”); and 2) Take such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

FISCAL IMPACT
The
City of Montebello (City) will submit two (2) separate applications in accordance with the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) guidelines (see Attachment “A”) , each in the amount of $13,526,438 (the total amount includes a required non-Federal match amount of $1,946,250), for funds under the FTA’s Low-No Program and the Bus and Bus Facilities Program.

If a proj
ect submitted for consideration under both programs is selected for funding, the FTA will exercise its discretion to determine under which program the project will receive an award. This funding will assist with the purchase of up to ten (10) hydrogen fu el cell 18 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT – MEETING OF APRIL 27, 2022 Adopt Resolution No. 22-22 Authorizing The City’s Submission Of Two (2) Applications to The Federal Transit Administration to Receive Funding to Purchase Zero-Emission Buses Under t he Low Or No Emission Grant Program and The Grants for Buses and Bus Facilities Program

electric buses (FCEBs ). All future procurement processes required for FCEBs will be presented to the City Council for review and approval as necessary. In addition, budget appropriations will be presented to the City Council at the appropriate time, ensuring funding is made available for the approved purchases.

BACKGROUND

On March 4, 2022, the FTA posted a combined NOFO announcing the opportunity for transit agencies to apply for approximately $1.1 billion in funds under the Low-No Program and approximately $372 million in funds under the Buses and Bus Facilities Program for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022. These programs provide the FTA an opportunity to award grants through a competitive process to transit agencies for l ow- or zero- emission projects, including the purchase or lease of low - or zero-emission buses and related equipment that use advanced technologies for transit-related operations.

On October 27, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 21- 80 approving Montebello Bus Lines’ (MBL) Zero Emission Bus (ZEB) Rollout Plan (see Attachment “B”) to serve as a blueprint for how MBL plans to achieve a complete transition to zero- emissions technologies by 2040. Furthermore, the ZEB Rollout Plan provides information on strategies necessary to address MBL’s current bus fleet composition, future bus purchases, facilities and infrastructure modifications, and potential funding sources. In accordance with the ZEB Rollout Plan, MBL identified FTA’s Low-No Program and the Bus and Bus Facilities Program as additional funding opportunit ies to assist with purchasing up to ten (10) FCEBs.

The City is eligible to apply for the Grants in accordance with S ection 5307 of Title 49, U.S. Code. If awarded, this funding will assist MBL in aligning with the City’s commitment to invest in the innovative, cutting -edge technology required to further reduce its carbon footprint and support the sustainable electrification of transportation.

SUMMARY

Staff recommends that the City Co uncil adopt Resolution No. 22- 22 (Attachment “C”) authorizing the City’s submission of two (2) separate applications to the FTA to receive funding to purchase zero-emission buses under: (i) the Low-No Program and the Buses and (ii) the Bus Facilities Program; and take such additional, related, action that may be desirable.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Attachment A – Federal Register Vol. 87 No. 43 Notice of Funding Opportunity B. Attachment B – Resolution No. 21-80 approving MBL’s ZEB Rollout Plan C. Attachment C – Resolution No. 22-22

ATTACHMENT A
12528 Federal Register/Vol. 87, No. 43/Friday, March 4, 2022/Notices without change to https:/1
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please
see the Privacy Act heading in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document for Privacy Act
information related to any submitted
comments or materials.

Docket: For access to the docket to
read the proposed FRA Guidance,
background documents, or comments
received, go to http://
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kevin MacWhorter, Attorney Advisor,
Office of the Chief Counsel, telephone:
(202) 641-8727, email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1976,
pursuant to the Railroad Revitalization
and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (4R
Act), representatives of the railroads and
their employees agreed on "[flair and
equitable arrangements" to protect
employees impacted by certain projects
financed by the Federal Government.

The Secretary of Labor adopted these
protections in a letter to the Secretary of
Transportation dated July 6, 1976. FRA
has placed a copy of this letter and the
accompanying protections in the docket
for this guidance. In general, these
protections provided that a railroad
employee who is adversely affected by
a project receiving certain financing
from the Federal Government was
entitled to receive a displacement
allowance, and/or a dismissal
allowance, among other benefits.

Many of FRA's current discretionary
grant programs, including the
Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and
Safety Improvements Program and the
Federal-State Partnership for State of
Good Repair Program, are subject to the
grant conditions described
in section
22905(c) of title 49, U.S.C. As relevant
here, section 22905(c)(2)(B). requires
grant applicants, for any grant for a
project that uses rights-of-way owned by
a railroad, to agree to comply with "the
protective arrangements that are
equivalent to the protective
arrangements established under" the 4R
Act. While this requirement is a
condition of many FRA grants, it is not
often applicable (as FRA's grants do not
typically cause an adverse impact to
railroad employees). With that said,
FRA developed the FRA Guidance to
assist grantees and to facilitate
compliance with these important
protections. Once final, FRA intends to
include the FRA Guidance as an
appendix to all new grant and
cooperative agreements subject to
section 22905(c)(2)(B), and grantees will
be required to ensure the inclusion of
the FRA Guidance, as applicable, in all
contracts for the FRA-funded project.

Costs incurred to comply with the FRA
Guidance and in a manner consistent
with 2 CFR part 200 are eligible for
reimbursement under the applicable
grant.

Section 22905(c)(2)(B) specifically
requires protective arrangements
"equivalent" to those established under
the 4R Act. As such, in the FRA
Guidance,
FRA did not deviate from the
protections adopted by the Secretary of
Labor in 1976. The FRA Guidance only
seeks to clarify the protections and to
ensure grant applicants understand
them. FRA did not create new, or
remove existing, protections. As noted,
FRA has included a copy of the
Secretary of Labor's letter and the
accompanying protections in the docket
to facilitate review of the FRA
Guidance.

The FRA Guidance describes both
procedural and substantive protections.

The substantive protections include
dismissal and displacement allowances
and moving assistance, among other
items included in the original 4R Act
protections. The procedural protections
include opportunities for employees (or
their representatives) to engage in
negotiations with respect to application
of the protections.

Privacy Act
FRA may solicit comments from the
public to better inform its guidance
process. FRA posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal
information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ ALL-
14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy. In order to
facilitate comment tracking and
response, we encourage commenters to
provide their name, or the name of their
organization; however, submission of
names is completely optional. Whether
or not commenters identify themselves,
all timely comments will be fully
considered. If you wish to provide
comments containing proprietary or
confidential information, please contact
the agency for alternate submission
instructions.

Allison Ishihara Fultz,
Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2022--04530 Filed 3-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 491D-06-P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
FY 2022 Competitive Funding
Opportunity: Low or No Emission
Grant Program and the Grants for
Buses and Bus Facilities Competitive
Program
AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration
(FT A), Department of Transportation
(DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Funding Opportunity
(NOFO).

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) announces the
opportunity to apply for approximately
$1.1 billion in competitive grants under
the fiscal year (FY) 2022 Low or No
Emission Grant Program (Low-No
Program) (Federal Assistance Listing:

20.526) and approximately $372 million
in FY 2022 funds under the Grants for
Buses and Bus Facilities Program (Buses
and Bus Facilities Program) (Federal
Assistance Listing 20.526), subject to
availability of appropriated funding.

DATES: Complete proposals must be
submitted electronically through the
GRANTS.GOV "APPLY" function by
11:59 p.m. Eastern time on May 31,
2022. Prospective applicants should
initiate the process by registering on the
GRANTS.GOV website promptly to
ensure completion of the application
process before the submission deadline.

ADDRESSES: Instructions for applying
can be found on FTA's website at
https :/ /www.transit.dot.gov/howtoapply
and in the "FIND" module of
GRANTS.GOV. The funding
opportunity ID is FTA-2022-001-TPM­
LWNO for Low-No applications and
FTA-2022-002-TPM-BUSC for Buses
and Bus Facilities applications. Please
note, if an application is choosing to
apply to both programs, the applicant
must submit a GRANTS.GOV package to
each opportunity ID. Mail and fax
submissions will not be accepted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information concerning this
notice, please contact the Low-No/Bus
grant program staff via
email at
[email protected], or call Amy
Volz at 202-366-7484.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As
required by Federal public
transportation law, Low or No Emission
Grant Program funds will be awarded
competitively for the purchase or lease
of low or no emission vehicles that use
advanced technologies for transit
revenue operations, including related
equipment or facilities. As required by
Federal public transportation law, Buses
and Bus Facilities Program funds will be
Federal Register/Vol. 87, No. 43/Friday, March 4, 2022/Notices 12529 awarded competitively to assist in the
financing of capital projects to replace,
rehabilitate, purchase or lease buses and
related equipment, and to rehabilitate,
purchase, construct or lease bus-related
facilities. Zero-emission projects will
include costs for workforce
development, unless the applicant
certifies funds are not needed. In
general, projects may include costs
incidental to the acquisition of buses or
to the construction of facilities, such as
the costs of related workforce
development and training activities, and
project administration expenses. As
these two programs have overlapping
eligibilities and must be implemented
on the same timeline as required by
changes made by the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law (enacted as the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act),
FTA is publishing this joint NOFO. Per
Federal public transportation law, FTA
will award grants for these programs
within 75 days after the date this
solicitation expires from funds available
for award at that time. FTA may extend
the application deadline, and may
award additional funding that is made
available to the pr"ograms prior to the
announcement of project selections. If
during FY2022, additional funding is
made available for these programs after
announcement of project selections,
FTA may make additional awards under
a separate NOFO.

Table of Contents
A. Program Description
B. Federal Award Information
C. Eligibility Information
D. Application and Submission Information
E. Application Review Information
F. Federal Award Administration
Information
G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts
H. Other Information
A. Program Description
This is a combined NOFO and
announces the availability of FY 2022
funding for both the Low-No and the
Buses and Bus Facilities Program.

Federal public transportation law (49
U.S.C. 5339(c)) authorizes FTA to award
grants for low or no emission bus
projects through a competitive process,
as described in this notice. The Low-No
Program provides funding to State
(including territories and Washington
DC), local governmental authorities, and
tribal governments for the purchase or
lease of zero-emission and low-emission
transit buses, including acquisition,
construction, and leasing of required
supporting facilities such as recharging,
refueling, and maintenance facilities.

Federal public transportation law (49
U.S.C. 5339(b)) authorizes FTA to award
grants for the Buses and Bus Facilities
Program through a competitive process,
as described in this notice. Grants under
this program are for capital projects to
replace, rehabilitate, purchase, or lease
buses and related equipment, or to
rehabilitate, purchase, construct, or
lease bus-related facilities.

These programs support FTA's
priorities and objectives through
investments that (1) renew our transit
systems; (2) reduce greenhouse gas
emissions from public transportation,
(3) advance racial equity, (4) maintain
and create good-paying jobs with a free
and fair choice to join a union, and (5)
connect communities. These programs
also support the President's Building a
Better America initiative to mobilize
American ingenuity to build a modern
infrastructure and an equitable, clean
energy future. In addition, this NOFO
will advance the goals of the President's
January 20, 2021, Executive Order
14008, Tackling the Climate Crisis at
Home and Abroad and Executive Order
13985, Advancing Racial Equity and
Support for Underserved Communities
Through the Federal Government.

B. Federal Award Information
Federal public transportation law (49
U.S.C. 5338(a)(2)(N)) authorizes
$71,561,189 in FY 2022 for the Low-No
Program. The 2021 Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law (BIL) (enacted as the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act,
Pub. L. 117-58) appropriated an
additional $1,029,000,000 for FY 2022
grants, for a total of $1,100,561,189 for
grants under the Low-No program,
subject to the availability of FY 2022
appropriated funding. Additional funds
made available prior to project selection
may be allocated to eligible projects. If
during FY2022, additional funding is
made available for this program after
announcement of project selections,
FTA may issue another NOFO and make
additional awards.

As required by Federal public
transportation law (49 U.S.C.
5339(c)(5)), a minimum of 25 percent of
the amount awarded under the Low-No
Program will be awarded to low
emission projects other than zero
emission vehicles and related facilities.

In FY 2021, the program received
applications for 187 projects requesting
a total of $917 million. Forty-nine
projects were funded at a total of $182
million.

Federal public transportation law (49
U.S.C. 5338(a)(2)(N)) authorizes
$375,696,244 in FY 2022 funds for the
Buses and Bus Facilities Program. After
the oversight takedown of $3,354,431,
FTA is announcing the availability of
$372,341,813 for the Buses and Bus
Facilities Program through this notice,
subject to availability of FY 2022
appropriated funding. Additional funds
made available prior to project selection
may be allocated to eligible projects. If
during FY2022, additional funding is
made available for this program after
announcement of project selections,
FT A may make additional awards under
a separate NOFO.

As required by Federal public
transportation law at 49 U.S.C.
5339(b)(5), a minimum of 15 percent of
the amount awarded under the Buses
and Bus Facilities Program will be
awarded to projects located in rural
areas. As required by 49 U.S.C.
5339(b)(8), no single grant recipient will
be awarded more than 10 percent of the
amount made available. In FY 2020, the
program received applications for 282
projects requesting a total of $1.8
billion. Ninety-six projects were funded
at a total of $464 million.

An applicant may submit a low or no
emissions project to both the Buses and
Bus Facilities Program and the Low-No
Program, or submit the project only to
the Low-No Program or only to the
Buses and Bus Facilities Program. If a
project submitted for consideration
under both programs is selected for
funding, FTA will exercise its discretion
to determine under which program the
project will receive an award. Please
note if submitting to both programs, a
separate application package must be
submitted to each opportunity ID for the
respective program listed on
GRANTS.GOV.

FTA may cap the amount a single
recipient or State may receive as part of
the selection process for either program.

FT A will grant pre-award authority to
incur costs for selected projects
beginning on the date FY 2022 project
selections are announced on FTA's
website. Funds are available for
obligation for three fiscal years after the
fiscal year in which the competitive
awards are announced. Funds are
available only for eligible costs incurred
after announcement of project
selections. FTA intends to fund as many
meritorious projects as possible.

C. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants
Eligible applicants for the Low or No
Emission Program include designated
recipients, States (including territories
and Washington DC), local
governmental authorities, and Indian
tribes. Proposals for funding projects in
rural (non-urbanized) areas, defined as
an area encompassing a population of
less than 50,000 people that has not
been designated in the most recent
decennial census as an "urbanized area"
12530 Federal Register/Vol. 87, No. 43 /Friday, March 4, 2022 /Notices by the Secretary of Commerce may be
submitted as part of a consolidated State
proposal. To be considered eligible,
applicants must be able to demonstrate
the requisite legal, financial, and
technical capabilities to receive and
administer Federal funds under this
program. Assistance on this requirement
is available from FT A's Regional
Offices.

Eligible applicants for the Buses and
Bus Facilities Program include
designated recipients that allocate funds
to fixed route bus operators, States
(including territories and Washington
DC) or local governmental entities that
operate fixed route bus service, and
Indian tribes. Eligible subrecipients
include all otherwise eligible applicants
and also private nonprofit organizations
engaged in public transportation.

Except for projects proposed by
Indian tribes, all proposals for projects
in rural (non-urbanized) areas must be
submitted by a State, either individually
or as a part of a statewide application.

States and other eligible applicants also
may submit consolidated proposals for
projects in urbanized areas. The
submission of a statewide or
consolidated urbanized area application
does not preclude any other eligible
recipients in an urbanized area or in a
State from also submitting a separate
application. Proposals may contain
projects to be implemented by the
recipient or its subrecipients.

As permitted under Federal public
transportation law (49 U.S.C.
5339(b)(10), (c)(B)), an applicant
proposing a low or no emission project
under both the Buses and Bus Facilities
Program and the Low-No Program, or an
applicant proposing only a low or no
emission project under the Low-No
program, may include partnerships with
other entities that intend to participate
in the implementation of the project,
including, but not limited to, specific
vehicle manufacturers, equipment
vendors, owners or operators of related
facilities, or project consultants. If an
application that involves such a
partnership is selected for funding, the
project will be deemed to satisfy the
requirement for a competitive
procurement under 49 U.S.C. 5325(a) for
the named entities. Applicants are
advised that any changes to the
proposed partnership will require FTA
written approval, must be consistent
with the scope of the approved project,
and may necessitate a competitive
procurement.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching
The maximum Federal share for
projects that involve leasing or
acquiring transit buses (including clean
fuel or alternative fuel vehicles) for
purposes of complying with or
maintaining compliance with the Clean
Air Act (CAA) or the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 is 85
percent of the net project cost.

The maximum Federal share for the
cost of acquiring, installing, or
constructing vehicle-related equipment
or facilities (including clean fuel or
alternative fuel vehicle-related
equipment or facilities) for purposes of
complying with or maintaining
compliance with the CAA or ADA is 90
percent of the net project cost of such
equipment or facilities that are
attributable to compliance with the CAA
or ADA. The award recipient must
itemize the cost of specific, discrete,
vehicle-related equipment associated
with compliance with the CAA to be
eligible for the maximum 90 percent
Federal share for these costs.

The Federal share of the cost of other
projects shall not exceed 80 percent.

Eligible sources of match include the
following: Cash from non-Government
sources other than revenues from
providing public transportation
services; revenues derived from-the sale
of advertising and concessions; amounts
received under a service agreement with
a State or local social service agency or
private social service organization;
revenues generated from value capture
financing mechanisms; funds from an
undistributed cash surplus; replacement
or depreciation cash fund or reserve;
new capital; or in-kind contributions.

Transportation development credits or
in-kind match may be used for local
match if identified and documented in
the application.

3. Eligible Projects
Under the Low-No Program (49 U.S.C.
5339(c)), eligible projects include
projects or programs of projects in an
eligible area for: (1) Purchasing or
leasing low or no emission buses; (2)
acquiring low or no emission buses with
a leased power source; (3) constructing
or leasing facilities and related
equipment for low or no emission buses;
(4) constructing new public
transportation facilities to accommodate
low or no emission buses; or (5)
rehabilitating or improving existing
public transportation facilities to
accommodate low or no emission buses
(49 U.S.C. 5339(c)(l)(B)). As required by
Federal public transportation law (49
U.S.C. 5339(c)(5)), FTA will consider
only eligible projects relating to the
acquisition or leasing of low or no
emission buses or bus facilities that
make greater reductions in energy
consumption and harmful emissions
than comparable standard buses or other
low or no emission buses. A single
application may include both vehicle
and facility components, along with
associated equipment and workforce
development plans.

A low or no emission bus is defined
as a passenger vehicle used to provide
public transportation that sufficiently
reduces energy consumption or harmful
emissions, including direct carbon
emissions, when compared to a
standard vehicle. The statutory
definition includes zero emission transit
buses, which are defined as buses that
produce no direct carbon emissions and
no particulate matter emissions under
any and all possible operational modes
and conditions. Examples of zero
emission bus technologies include, but
are not limited to, hydrogen fuel-cell
buses, battery-electric buses, and rubber
tire trolley buses powered by overhead
catenaries. All new transit bus models
must successfully complete FT A bus
testing for production transit buses
pursuant to FTA's Bus Testing
regulation (49 CFR part 665) in order to
be procured with funds awarded under
the Low-No Program. All transit
vehicles must be- procured from certified
transit vehicle manufacturers in
accordance with the Disadvantaged
Business Enterprise (DBE) regulations
(49 CFR part 26). The development or
deployment of prototype vehicles is not
eligible for funding under the Low-No
Program.

Eligible projects for the Buses and Bus
Facilities Program include capital
projects to replace, rehabilitate,
purchase, or lease buses, vans, or related
equipment; or to rehabilitate, purchase,
construct, or lease bus-related facilities
regardless of propulsion type or
emissions. A single application may
include both vehicle and facility
components, along with associated
equipment and workforce development
activities.

Recipients are permitted to use up to

0.5 percent of their requested grant
award for workforce development
activities eligible under Federal public
transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5314(b)),
including on-the-job training, labor­
management partnership training, and
registered apprenticeships, and an
additional 0.5 percent for costs
associated with training at the National
Transit Institute.

For applicants proposing projects
related to zero-emission vehicles for
either program, 5 percent of the
requested Federal award must be used
for workforce development to retrain the
existing workforce and develop the
workforce of the future, including
registered apprenticeships and other
joint labor-management training
Federal Register/Vol. 87, No. 43/Friday, March 4, 2022/Notices 12531 programs, as outlined in the applicant's
Zero-Emission Transition Plan (see
Section E(l)(c) of this notice), unless the
applicant certifies via the application
that less funding is needed to carry out
the Plan. Applicants must identify the
proposed use of funds for these
activities in the project proposal and
identify them separately in the project
budget. These amounts are additional,
not a take-down, from other eligible
project expenses. For example, if the
total capital costs of the vehicles and
equipment was $95,000, an additional
$5,000 should be included in the budget
for these expenses for a total project cost
of $100,000. Applicants are encouraged
to discuss training needs with their
workforce and to develop training plans
in collaboration with unions and other
workforce representatives, as well as
with workforce boards, community
colleges, and other workforce
organizations. Applicants that propose
not to use the full five percent available
must include an explanation as to why
the funds are not needed. Absent an
explanation, a zero-emission application
that does not include 5 percent of its
project budget for workforce
development will be deemed ineligible.

If a single project proposal involves
multiple public transportation
providers, such as when an agency
acquires vehicles that will be operated
by another agency, the proposal must
include a detailed statement regarding
the role of each public transportation
provider in the implementation of the
project.

D. Application and Submission
Information

1. Address To Request Application
Package
Applications must be submitted
electronically through GRANTS.GOV.

General information for accessing and
submitting applications through
GRANTS.GOV can be found at
www.fta.dot.gov/howtoapply along with
specific instructions for the forms and
attachments required for submission.

Mail or fax submissions of completed
proposals will not be accepted. A
complete proposal submission for each
program consists of two forms: The SF-
424 Application for Federal Assistance
(available at GRANTS.GOV) and the
supplemental form for the FY 2022
Low-No and Buses and Bus Facilities
Programs (downloaded from
GRANTS.GOV or the FTA website at
https ://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/
grants/lowno). The same supplemental
form will be used to apply to either
program or both programs. However,
please note that if an applicant is
applying to both programs they must
submit the materials through each of the
GRANTS.GOV opportunity !D's listed
for each program. Failure to submit the
information as requested can delay
review or disqualify the application.

2. Content and Form of Application
Submission
a. Proposal Submission
A complete proposal submission for
each program consists of two forms: (1)
The SF-424 Application for Federal
Assistance; and (2) the supplemental
form for the FY 2022 Low-No and Buses
and Bus Facilities Programs. The
supplemental form and any supporting
documents must be attached to the
"Attachments" section of the SF-424.

The application must include responses
to all sections of the SF-424
Application for Federal Assistance and
the supplemental form, unless indicated
as optional. The information on the
supplemental form will be used to
determine applicant and project
eligibility for the program, and to
evaluate the proposal against the
selection criteria described in part E of
this notice.

FTA will accept only one
supplemental form per SF-424
submission. FTA encourages States and
other applicants to consider submitting
a single supplemental form that
includes multiple activities to be
evaluated as a consolidated proposal. If
a State or other applicant chooses to
submit separate proposals for individual
consideration by FT A, each proposal
must be submitted using a separate SF-
424 and supplemental form.

Applicants may attach additional
supporting information to the SF-424
submission, including but not limited to
letters of support, project budgets, fleet
status reports, or excerpts from relevant
planning documents. Applicants for
zero-emission projects must attach the
fleet transition plan. Any supporting
documentation must be described and
referenced by file name in the
appropriate response section of the
supplemental form, or it may not be
reviewed.

Information such as applicant name,
Federal amount requested, local match
amount, description of areas served, etc.
may be requested in varying degrees of
detail on both the SF-424 and
supplemental form. Applicants must fill
in all fields unless stated otherwise on
the forms. If information is copied into
the supplemental form from another
source, applicants should verify that
pasted text is fully captured on the
supplemental form and has not been
truncated by the character limits built
into the form. Applicants should use
both the "Check Package for Errors" and
the "Validate Form" validation buttons
on both forms to check all required
fields on the forms, and ensure that the
Federal and local amounts specified are
consistent. Applicants should enter
their information in the supplemental
form (fillable PDF) that is made
available on FTA's website or through
the GRANTS.GOV application package,
and should attach this to the application
in its original format. Applicants should
not use scanned versions of the form,
"print" the form to PDF, convert or
create a version using another text
editor, etc.
b. Application Content
The SF-424 Application for Federal
Assistance and the supplemental form
will prompt applicants for the required
information, including:
i. Applicant name
ii. Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data
Universal Numbering System
(DUNS) number
iii. Key contact information (including
contact name, address, email
address, and phone)
iv. Congressional district(s) where
project will take place
v. Project information (including title,
an executive summary, and type)
vi. A detailed description of the need for
the project
vii. A detailed description on how the
project will support either
Program's objectives
viii. Evidence that the project is
consistent with local and regional
planning documents
ix. Evidence that the applicant can
provide the local cost share
x. A description of the technical, legal,
and financial capacity of the
applicant
xi. A detailed project budget
xii. An explanation of the scalability of
the project
xiii. Details on the local matching funds
xiv. A detailed project timeline

3. Unique Entity Identifier and System
for Award Management (SAM)
Each applicant is required to: (1) Be
registered in SAM before submitting an
application; (2) provide a valid unique
entity identifier in its application; and
(3) continue to maintain an active SAM
registration with current information at
all times during which the applicant has
an active Federal award or an
application or plan under consideration
by FTA. These requirements do not
apply if the applicant has an exemption
approved by FTA pursuant to 2 CFR

25.llO(c), or is otherwise excepted from
registration requirements. FT A may not
12532 Federal Register/Vol. 87, No. 43 /Friday, March 4, 2022 /Notices make an award until the applicant has
complied with all applicable unique
entity identifier and SAM requirements.

If an applicant has not fully complied
with the requirements by the time FTA
is ready to make an award, FTA may
determine that the applicant is not
qualified to receive an award and use
that determination as a basis for making
a Federal award to another applicant.

All applicants must provide a unique
entity identifier provided by SAM.

Registration in SAM may take as little
as 3-5 business days, but since there
could be unexpected steps or delays (for
example, if there is a need to obtain an
Employer Identification Number), FTA
recommends allowing ample time, up to
several weeks, for completion of all
steps. For additional information on
obtaining a unique entity identifier,
please visit www.sam.gov.

4. Submission Dates and Times
Project proposals must be submitted
electronically through GRANTS.GOV by
11:59 p.m. Eastern time on May 31,
2022. GRANTS.GOV attaches a time
stamp to each application at the time of
submission. Proposals submitted after
the deadline will only be considered
under extraordinary circumstances not
under the applicant's control. Mail and
fax submissions will not be accepted.

Within 48 hours after submitting an
electronic application, the applicant
should receive an email message from
GRANTS.GOV with confirmation of
successful transmission to
GRANTS.GOV. If a notice of failed
validation or incomplete materials is
received, the applicant must address the
reason for the failed validation, as
described in the email notice, and
resubmit before the submission
deadline. If making a resubmission for
any reason, include all original
attachments regardless of which
attachments were updated and check
the box on the supplemental form
indicating this is a resubmission.

FTA urges applicants to submit
applications at least 72 hours prior to
the due date to allow time to receive the
validation messages and to correct any
problems that may have caused a
rejection notification. GRANTS.GOV
scheduled maintenance and outage
times are announced on the
GRANTS.GOV website. Deadlines will
not be extended due to scheduled
website maintenance.

Applicants are encouraged to begin
the process of registration on the
GRANTS.GOV site well in advance of
the submission deadline. Registration is
a multi-step process, which may take
several weeks to complete before an
application can be submitted. Registered
applicants may still be required to take
steps to keep their registrations up to
date before submissions can be made
successfully. For example, (1)
registration in SAM is renewed
annually, and (2) persons making
submissions on behalf of the Authorized
Organization Representative (AOR)
must be authorized in GRANTS.GOV by
the AOR to make submissions.

5. Funding Restrictions
Funds under this NOFO cannot be
used to reimburse applicants for
otherwise eligible expenses incurred
prior to FT A award of a grant agreement
until FT A has issued pre-award
authority for selected projects. FTA will
issue pre-award authority to incur costs
for selected projects beginning on the
date that project selections are
announced. FT A does not provide pre­
award authority for competitive funds
until projects are selected, and even
then, there are Federal requirements
that must be met before costs are
incurred. FT A will issue specific
guidance to awardees regarding pre­
award authority at the time of selection.

For more information about FTA's ·
policy on pre-award authority, please
see the most recent Apportionment
Notice on FTA's website. Refer to
Section C.3., Eligible Projects, for
information on activities that are
allowable in this grant program.

Allowable direct and indirect expenses
must be consistent with the
Governmentwide Uniform
Administrative Requirements and Cost
Principles (2 CFR part 200) and FTA
Circular 5010. lE. Funds may not be
used to support or oppose union
organizing.

6. Other Submission Requirements
All applications must be submitted
via the GRANTS.GOV website. FTA
does not accept applications on paper,
by fax machine, email, or other means.

For information on application
submission requirements, please see
Section D.1. of this notice, Address to
Request Application.

E. Application Review Information

1. Criteria
Projects will be evaluated primarily
on the responses provided in the
supplemental form. Additional
information may be provided to support
the responses; however, any additional
documentation must be directly
referenced on the supplemental form,
including the file name where the
additional information can be found.

FTA will evaluate proposals based on
the criteria described in this notice.

Applicants are encouraged to identify
scaled funding options in case
insufficient funding is available to fund
a project at the full requested amount.

If an applicant indicates that a project
is scalable, the applicant must provide
an appropriate minimum funding
amount that will fund an eligible project
that achieves the objectives of the
program and meets all relevant program
requirements. The applicant must
provide a clear explanation of how the
project budget would be affected by a
reduced award. FTA may award a lesser
amount regardless of whether a scalable
option is provided.

If an applicant is proposing to deploy
autonomous vehicles or other
innovative motor vehicle technology,
the application should demonstrate that
all vehicles will comply with applicable
safety requirements, including those
administered by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
and Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA). Specifically,
the application should show that
vehicles acquired for the proposed
project will comply with applicable
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
(FMVSS) and Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSR). If the
vehicles may not comply, the
application should either (1) show that
the vehicles and their proposed
operations are within the scope of an
exemption or waiver that has already
been granted by NHTSA, FMCSA, or
both agencies or (2) directly address
whether the project will require
exemptions or waivers from the FMVSS,
FMCSR, or any other regulation and, if
the project will require exemptions or
waivers, present a plan for obtaining
them. FTA will also consider the extent
to which the application presents a plan
to address workforce impacts of
autonomous vehicles or other
innovative motor vehicle technology.
a. Demonstration of Need
Since the purpose of these programs
is to fund vehicles and facilities,
applications will be evaluated based on
the quality and extent to which they
demonstrate how the proposed project
will address an unmet need for capital
investment in vehicles and/or
supporting facilities. For example, an
applicant may demonstrate that it
requires additional or improved
charging or maintenance facilities for
low or no emission vehicles, that it
intends to replace existing vehicles that
have exceeded their minimum useful
life, or that it requires additional
vehicles to meet current ridership
demands or expand services to better
connect underserved communities.

Federal Register/Vol. 87, No. 43/Friday, March 4, 2022/Notices 12533 FTA will consider an applicant's
responses to the following criteria when
assessing the need for capital
investment underlying the proposed
project:

For bus projects (replacement or
expansion): For replacement requests,
applicants must provide information on
the age, condition, and performance of
the vehicles to be replaced by the
proposed project. Vehicles to be
replaced must have met their minimum
useful life at the time of project
completion. For service expansion
requests, applicants must provide
information on the proposed service
expansion and the benefits for transit
riders and the community from the new
service. For all vehicle projects, the
proposal must address whether the
project conforms to FTA's spare ratio
guidelines. Vehicles funded under these
programs are not exempt from FTA's
standard spare ratio requirements,
which apply to and are calculated based
on the agency's entire fleet. Applicants
that are introducing zero emission
vehicles into their fleet may consider
including vehicles that have already met
their minimum useful life in a
contingency fleet, which is not included
in the spare ratio calculation.

Additionally, applicants who may need
to exceed the spare ratio for a temporary
period are encouraged to work with
their FT A Regional Office to determine
what flexibilities may be afforded to
them and include reference to that in
their application.

For bus facility and equipment
projects (replacement, rehabilitation, or
expansion): For replacement requests,
applicants must provide information on
the age and condition of the asset to be
rehabilitated or replaced relative to its
minimum useful life. For expansion
requests, applicants must provide
information on the proposed expansion
and the reason that transit riders and the
community need the expansion.
b. Demonstration of Benefits
i. Low or No Emissions Program
Applicants to the Low-No Program
must demonstrate how the proposed
project will support the statutory
requirements of the Low-No Program
(See 49 U.S.C. 5339(c)(5)(A)). In
particular, FTA will consider the quality
and extent to which applications
demonstrate how the proposed project
will: (1) Reduce Energy Consumption;
(2) Reduce Harmful Emissions; and (3)
Reduce Direct Carbon Emissions.

Reduce Energy Consumption:

Applicants must describe how the
proposed project will reduce energy
consumption. FTA will evaluate
applications based on the degree to
which the proposed technology reduces
energy consumption as compared to
comparable standard vehicle propulsion
technologies.

Reduce Harmful Emissions:

Applicants must demonstrate how the
proposed vehicles or facility will reduce
the emission of particulates that create
local air pollution, which leads to local
environmental health concerns, smog,
and unhealthy ozone concentrations.

FT A will evaluate the rate of particulate
emissions by the proposed vehicles or
vehicles to be supported by the
proposed facility, compared to the
emissions from the vehicles that will be
replaced or moved to the contingency
fleet as a result of the proposed project,
as well as comparable standard buses.

Reduce Direct Carbon Emissions:

Applicants should demonstrate how the
proposed vehicles or facility will reduce
emissions of greenhouse gases from
transit vehicle operations. FTA will
evaluate the rate of direct carbon
emissions by the proposed vehicles or
vehicles to be supported by the
proposed facility, compared to the
emissions from the vehicles that will be
replaced or moved to the contingency
fleet as a result of the proposed project,
as well as comparable standard buses.
ii. Grants for Buses and Bus Facilities
Program
Applicants to the Buses and Bus
Facilities Program will be evaluated
based on how well they describe how
the proposed project will improve the
condition of, or otherwise modernize,
the transit system; improve the
reliability of transit service for its riders;
improve the resilience of transit
facilities, enhance access and mobility
within the service area, particularly for
low-income or underserved
communities; and expand accessibility
for people with disabilities.

System Condition: FTA will evaluate
the potential for replacement projects to
improve the condition of the transit
system by repairing or replacing assets
that are in poor condition or have
surpassed their minimum or intended
useful life benchmarks. Applicants may
describe the benefits of reducing
breakdowns and service interruptions,
mitigating safety risks, increasing
service performance, improving
resilience, and/or reducing the cost of
maintaining outdated vehicles, facilities
and equipment.

Enhanced Access and Mobility: FTA
will evaluate the potential for expansion
projects to improve access and mobility
for the transit riding public, particularly
for low-income and underserved
communities and people with
disabilities, including improved
headways, creation of new
transportation choices, or eliminating
gaps in the current route network.

Proposed benefits should be based on
documented ridership demand, based
on indicators like area population
density, employment served, and
existing and planned affordable housing
in the corridor, and be well-described or
documented through a study or route
planning proposal.

Applicants that intend to apply to
both programs must submit information
that addresses the requirements of both
programs as described above.
c. Planning and Local or Regional
Prioritization
Applicants must demonstrate how the
proposed project is consistent with local
and regional long-range planning
documents and local government
priorities. FTA will evaluate
applications based on the quality and
extent to which they assess whether the
project is consistent with the transit
priorities identified in the long-range
plan for all proposals; contingency or
illustrative projects included in that
plan; or the locally developed human
services public transportation
coordinated plan. Applicants may
submit copies of the relevant pages of
such plans to support their application.

FT A will consider how the project will
support regional goals and applicants
may submit support letters from local
and regional planning organizations
attesting to the consistency of the
proposed project with these plans.

Evidence of additional local or
regional prioritization may include
letters of support for the project from
local government officials, public
agencies, and non-profit or private
sector supporters.

Applicants may also address how the
proposed project will impact overall
system performance, asset management
performance, or specific performance
measures tracked and monitored by the
applying entity to demonstrate how the
proposed project will address local and
regional planning priorities.

For applications related to zero­
emission vehicles under either the Low­
No or Buses and Bus Facilities
programs, applicants are required by
law (49 U.S.C. 5339(c)(3)(D)) to submit
a Zero-Emission Fleet Transition Plan.

This plan must be a separate document
from other local or regional planning
documents and must: (1) Demonstrate a
long-term fleet management plan with a
strategy for how the applicant intends to
use the current application and future
acquisitions; (2) address the availability
of current and future resources to meet
12534 Federal Register/Vol. 87, No. 43 /Friday, March 4, 2022 /Notices costs for the transition and
implementation; (3) consider policy and
legislation impacting relevant
technologies; (4) include an evaluation
of existing and future facilities and their
relationship to the technology
transition; (5) describe the partnership
of the applicant with the utility or
alternative fuel provider; and (6)
examine the impact of the transition on
the applicant's current workforce by
identifying skill gaps, training needs,
and retraining needs of the existing
workers of the applicant to operate and
maintain zero emission vehicles and
related infrastructure and avoid the
displacement of the existing workforce.

FTA intends to continue to develop
technical assistance resources to assist
transit agencies in developing fleet
transition plans. As a first step, FTA has
worked with the Transit Workforce
Center to develop a template that transit
agencies may use related to the
workforce section of the fleet transition
plan. That template will be available at:
https:/lwww.transit.dot.gov/funding/
grantsllowno. For agencies with smaller
fleets, a fleet transition plan need not be
complex and should be tailored as
applicable, but it still must address all
six elements. For applications from
State departments of transportation, the
state may either provide a fleet
transition plan that covers some or all
of the subrecipients, attach individual
plans developed by the subrecipients, or
a combination of both. FT A will rate a
zero-emission project higher than other
zero-emission projects if the applicant is
able to demonstrate how the proposed
project and fleet transition plan support
the conversion of the agency's overall
fleet to zero emissions.
d. Local Financial Commitment
Applicants must identify the source of
the local cost share and describe
whether such funds are currently
available for the project or will need to
be secured if the project is selected for
funding. FTA will consider the
availability of the local cost share as
evidence of local financial commitment
to the project. Applicants should submit
evidence of the availability of funds for
the project; for example, by including a
board resolution, letter of support from
the State, a budget document
highlighting the line item or section
committing funds to the proposed
project, or other documentation of the
source of local funds. FTA will
favorably view an applicant that
proposes to use grant funds only for the
incremental cost of new technologies
over the cost of replacing vehicles with
standard propulsion technologies.
e. Project Implementation Strategy
FT A will rate projects higher if grant
funds can be obligated within 12
months of selection and the project can
be implemented within a reasonable
time frame. In assessing when funds can
be obligated, FTA will consider whether
the project qualifies for a Categorical
Exclusion (CE), or whether the required
environmental work has been initiated
or completed for projects that require an
Environmental Assessment (EA) or
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). As such,
applicants should submit information
describing the project's anticipated path
and timeline through the environmental
review process for all proposals. The
proposal must state when grant funds
can be obligated and indicate the
timeframe under which the
Metropolitan Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) and
Statewide Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP) can be amended to
include the proposed project.

In assessing whether the proposed
implementation plans are reasonable
and complete, FTA will review the
proposed project implementation plan,
including all necessary project
milestones and the overall project
timeline. For projects that will require
formal coordination, approvals, or
permits from other agencies or project
partners, the applicant must
demonstrate coordination with these
organizations and their support for the
project, such as through letters of
support.

Applicants that have identified a
cooperative procurement strategy listed
in Section 3019 of the Fixing America's
Surface Transportation Act (49 U.S.C.
5325), are encouraged to describe the
method chosen as part of their
implementation plans and how such a
cooperative procurement will reduce
costs.

For proposals that involve a
partnership with a manufacturer,
vendor, consultant, or other third party,
applicants must identify by name any
project partners, including, but not
limited to, other transit agencies, bus
manufacturers, owners or operators of
related facilities, or any expert
consultants. Such partnerships are
permitted under Federal public
transportation law (49 U.S.C.
5339(b)(10), (c)(8)) only for applicants
proposing a low or no emission project
under both the Buses and Bus Facilities
Program and the Low-No Program, or for
applicants proposing only a low or no
emission project under the Low-No
program. FT A will evaluate the
experience and capacity of the named
project partners to successfully
implement the proposed project based
on the partners' experience and
qualifications. Applicants are advised to
submit information on the partners'
qualifications and experience as a part
of the application. Entities to be
involved in the project that are not
named in the application must be
selected through ordinary procurement
processes.
f. Technical, Legal, and Financial
Capacity
Applicants must demonstrate that
they have the technical, legal, and
financial capacity to undertake the
project.

FT A will review relevant oversight
assessments and records to determine
whether there are any outsta nding legal,
technical, or financial issues with the
applicant that would affect the outcome
of the proposed project. Applicants with
outstanding legal, technical, or financial
compliance issues from an FT A
compliance review or Federal Transit
grant-related Single Audit finding must
explain how corrective actions taken
will mitigate negative impacts on the
proposed project.

2. Review and Selection Process
A technical evaluation committee will
evaluate proposals based on the
published evaluation criteria. FTA may
request additional information from
applicants, if necessary. Based on the
review of the technical evaluation
committee, the FTA Administrator will
determine the final selection of projects
for program funding. In determining the
allocation of program funds, FTA may
consider geographic diversity, diversity
in the size of the transit systems
receiving funding, and the applicant's
receipt of other competitive awards.

FTA may also consider capping the
amount a single applicant may receive.

After applying the above criteria, and
in support of Executive Order 14008,
Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and
Abroad, and Executive Order 14052,
Implementation of the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act, FTA will give
priority to additional considerations.

In further support of Executive Order
14008, FTA will give priority
consideration to applications under the
Buses and Bus Facilities Program that
are expected to create significant
community benefits relating to the
environment, including those projects
that incorporate low or no emission
technology or specific elements to
address greenhouse gas emissions and
climate change impacts. FT A
encourages applicants to demonstrate
Federal Register/Vol. 87, No. 43/Friday, March 4, 2022/Notices 12535 whether they have considered climate
change and environmental justice in
terms of the transportation planning
process or anticipated design
components with outcomes that address
climate change (e.g., resilience or
adaptation measures). The application
should describe what specific climate
change or environmental justice
activities have been incorporated,
including whether a project supports a
Climate Action Plan, whether an
equitable development plan has been
prepared, and whether tools such as
EPA's EJSCREEN at: https:/1
www.epa.gov/ejscreen or DOT's
Historically Disadvantaged Community
tool at Transportation Disadvantaged
Census Tracts (arcgis.com) have been
applied in project planning. Applicants
could also address how a project is
related to housing or land use reforms
to increase density to reduce climate
impacts. The application should also
describe specific and direct ways the
project will mitigate or reduce climate
change impacts including any
components that reduce emissions,
promote energy efficiency, incorporate
electrification or low emission or zero
emission vehicle infrastructure, increase
resiliency, recycle or redevelop existing
infrastructure, or if located in a
floodplain be constructed or upgraded
consistent with the Federal Flood Risk
Management Standard, to the extent
consistent with current law.

FTA also will give priority
consideration to applications that
advance racial equity in two areas: (1)
Planning and policies related to racial
equity and overcoming barriers to
opportunity; and (2) project investments
that either proactively address racial
equity and barriers to opportunity,
including automobile dependence as a
form of barrier, or redress prior
inequities and barriers to opportunity.

Applicants could also address how a
project is related to housing or land use
reforms to address historic barriers to
opportunity. This objective has the
potential to enhance environmental
stewardship and community
partnerships, and reflects Executive
Order 13985, Advancing Racial Equity
and Support for Underserved
Communities Through the Federal
Government. FTA encourages the
applicant to include sufficient
information to evaluate how the
applicant will advance racial equity and
address barriers to opportunity. The
applicant should describe any
transportation plans or policies related
to equity and barriers to opportunity
they are implementing or have
implemented in relation to the proposed
project, along with the specific project
investment details necessary for FTA to
evaluate if the investments are being
made either proactively to advance
racial equity and address barriers to
opportunity or redress prior inequities
and barriers to opportunity. All project
investment costs for the project that are
related to racial equity and barriers to
opportunity should be summarized.

Applicants for facility projects should
also describe whether and how project
delivery and implementation create
good-paying jobs with the free and fair
choice to join a union to the greatest
extent possible, the use of demonstrated
strong labor standards, practices and
policies (including for direct employees,
contractors, and sub-contractors);
distribution of workplace rights notices;
the use of local and economic hiring
provisions; registered apprenticeships;
or other similar standards or practices;
or, for facility projects over $35 million,
the use of Project Labor Agreements.

Applicants should describe how
planned methods of project delivery and
implementation (for example, use of
Project Labor Agreements and/or local
and economic hiring provisions, and
training and placement programs for
underrepresented workers) provides
opportunities for all workers, including
workers underrepresented in
construction jobs to be trained and
placed in good-paying jobs directly
related to the project. FT A will give
priority consideration to projects that
create good paying jobs with the free
and fair choice to join a union and these
strong labor protections.

Amongst zero-emission applications,
FT A will give priority consideration to
zero-emission applicants that in the
development of the workforce section of
the fleet transition plan have consulted
with workforce representatives AND
identify the use of at least one of the
following in their plan (1) use of labor­
management partnerships for training;
(2) use of registered apprenticeship
training to support skilling of
incumbent and entry-level workers with
focus on using registered apprenticeship
to advance Black, Hispanic, Asian
American Native Hawaiian and Pacific
Islanders, tribal, women, and other
groups facing systemic barriers to
employment that may be
underrepresented in the current
workforce, especially in higher-paying
jobs; or (3) identification of how
reskilling workers for new fleets
advances broader strategy to retain,
retrain and recruit employees into good
paying jobs, with the choice to join a
union and equitable access to training
and support that helps workers to stay
retained in jobs.

In support of Executive Order 14008,
DOT has been developing a geographic
definition of Historically Disadvantaged
Communities as part of its
implementation of the Justice40
Initiative. Consistent with OMB's
Interim Guidance for the Justice40
Initiative, Historically Disadvantaged
Communities include (a) certain
qualifying census tracts, (b) any Tribal
land, or (cl any territory or possession
of the United States. DOT is providing
a mapping tool to assist applicants in
identifying whether a project is located
in a Historically Disadvantaged
Community Transportation
Disadvantaged Census Tracts
(arcgis.com). Use of this map tool is
optional; applicants may provide an
image of the map tool outputs, or
alternatively, consistent with OMB's
Interim Guidance, applicants can
supply quantitative, demographic data
of their ridership demonstrating the
percentage of their ridership that meets
the criteria described in Executive Order
14008 for disadvantage. Examples of
Historically Disadvantaged
Communities that an applicant could
address using geographic or
demographic information include low
income, high and/or persistent poverty,
high unemployment and
underemployment, racial and ethnic
residential segregation, linguistic
isolation, or high housing cost burden
and substandard housing. Additionally,
in support of the Justice40 Initiative, the
applicant also should provide evidence
of strategies that the applicant has used
in the planning process to seek out and
consider the needs of those historically
disadvantaged and underserved by
existing transportation systems. For
technical assistance using the mapping
tool, please contact [email protected].

Due to funding limitations, projects
that are selected for funding may receive
less than the amount originally
requested, even if an application did not
present a scaled project option. In those
cases, applicants must be able to
demonstrate that the proposed projects
are still viable and can be completed
with the amount awarded.

3. Integrity and Performance Review
Prior to making an award with a total
amount of Federal share greater than the
simplified acquisition threshold
(currently $10,000), FTA is required to
review and consider any information
about the applicant that is in the Federal
A wardee Performance and Integrity
Information Systems (F APIIS) accessible
through SAM. An applicant may review
and comment on information about
itself that a Federal awarding agency
previously entered. FT A will consider
12536 Federal Register/Vol. 87, No. 43/Friday, March 4, 2022/Notices any comments by the applicant, in
addition to the other information in
F APIIS, in making a judgment about the
applicant's integrity, business ethics,
and record of performance under
Federal awards when completing the
review of risk posed by applicants as
described in 2 CFR 200.206.

F. Federal Award Administration
Information

1. Federal Award Notices
FT A will announce the final project
selections on the FT A website. Selectees
should contact their FT A Regional
Offices for additional information
regarding allocations for projects. At the
time the project selections are
announced, FTA will extend pre-award
authority for the selected projects (see
Section D.5 of this notice for more
information). There is no blanket pre­
award authority for these projects before
announcement.

2. Administrative and National Policy
Requirements
a. Grant Requirements
If selected, awardees will apply for a
grant through FTA's Transit Award
Management System (TrAMS).

Recipients of funding in urban areas are
subject to the grant requirements of the
Urbanized Area Formula Grants
program (49 U.S.C. 5307), including
those of FT A Circular "Urbanized Area
Formula Program: Program Guidance
and Application Instructions"
(FTA.C.9030.lE). Recipients of funding
in rural areas are subject to the grant
requirements of the Formula Grants for
Rural Areas Program (49 U.S.C. 5311),
including those of FTA Circular
"Formula Grants for Rural Areas:

Program Guidance and Application
Instructions" (FTA.C.9040.lG). All
recipients must accept the FTA Master
Agreement and follow FT A Circular
"Award Management Requirements"
(FTA.C.5010.lE) and the labor
protections required by Federal public
transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5333(b)).

Technical assistance regarding these
requirements is available from each FTA
regional office.

By submitting a grant application, the
applicant assures that it will comply
with all applicable Federal statutes,
regulations, executive orders, directives,
FT A circulars and other Federal
administrative requirements in carrying
out any project supported by the FTA
grant, including the Davis-Bacon Act (40
U.S.C. 3141-3144, and 3146-3148) as
supplemented by Department of Labor
regulations (29 CFR part 5, "Labor
Standards Provisions Applicable to
Contracts Covering Federally Financed
and Assisted Construction''). Further,
the applicant acknowledges that it is
under a continuing obligation to comply
with the terms and conditions of the
grant agreement issued for its project
with FT A. The applicant understands
that Federal laws, regulations, policies,
and administrative practices might be
modified from time to time and may
affect the implementation of the project.

The applicant agrees that the most
recent Federal requirements will apply
to the project, unless FTA issues a
written determination otherwise. The
applicant must submit the Certifications
and Assurances before receiving a grant
if it does not have current certifications
on file.

Applicants for the Buses and Bus
Facilities Program are encouraged to
utilize the innovative procurement
practices found in Section 3019 of the
Fixing America's Surface Transportation
Act (49 U.S.C. 5325). Please see details
at https :/ lwww.transit.dot.gov/funding/
grants/innovative-procurement-l easing­
fact-sheet-section-3019. If selected for
funding, any project that purchases
fewer than five buses through a
standalone procurement must provide a·
written explanation why the tools
authorized under Section 3019 were not
utilized.

As authorized by Section 25019 of the
BIL, applicants are encouraged to
implement a local or other geographical
or economic hiring preference relating
to the use of labor for construction of a
project funded by the grant, including
prehire agreements, subject to any
applicable State and local laws, policies,
and procedures.
b. Buy America and Domestic
Preferences for Infrastructure Projects
All capital procurements must
comply with FT A's Buy America
requirements (49 U.S.C. 5323(j)), which
require that all iron, steel, and
manufactured products be produced in
the United States, and imposes
minimum domestic content and final
assembly requirements for rolling stock.

The cost of rolling stock components
and subcomponents produced in the
United States must be more than 70
percent of the cost of all components,
and final assembly of rolling stock must
occur in the United States. Any
proposal that will require a waiver must
identify the items for which a waiver
will be sought in the application.

Applicants should not proceed with the
expectation that waivers will be granted.
c. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise
Recipients of planning, capital, or
operating assistance that will award
prime contracts (excluding transit
vehicle purchases), the cumulative total
of which exceeds $250,000 in FTA
funds in a Federal fiscal year, must
comply with the Disadvantaged
Business Enterprise (DBE) program
regulations (49 CFR part 26).

To be eligible to bid on any FTA­
assisted vehicle procurement, entities
that manufacture transit vehicles or
perform post-production alterations or
retrofitting must be certified Transit
Vehicle Manufacturers (TVM). If a
vehicle remanufacturer is responding to
a solicitation for new or remanufactured
vehicles with a vehicle to which the
remanufacturer has provided post­
production alterations or retro-fitting
(e.g., replacing major components such
as engine to provide a "like new"
vehicle), the vehicle remanufacturer
must be a certified TVM.

The TVM rule requires that, prior to
bidding on any FTA-assisted vehicle
procurement, manufacturers of transit
vehicles submit a DBE Program plan
and annual goal methodology to FTA.

FTA then will issue a TVM concurrence
and certification letter. Grant recipients
must verify each manufacturer's TVM
status before accepting its bid. A list of
compliant, certified TVMs is posted on
FTA's website at www.transit.dot.gov/
TVM. Recipients should contact FTA
before accepting a bid from a
manufacturer not on this list. In lieu of
using a certified TVM, a recipient may
establish project-specific DBE goals for
its vehicle procurement. FT A will
provide additional guidance as grants
are awarded. For more information on
DBE requirements, please contact
Monica McCall um, FTA Office of Civil
Rights, 206-220-7519,
[email protected].
d. Planning
FTA encourages applicants to notify
the appropriate State Departments of
Transportation and Metropolitan
Planning Organizations (MPOs) in areas
likely to be served by the project funds
made available under this program.

Selected projects must be incorporated
into the long-range plans and
transportation improvement programs of
States and metropolitan areas before
they are eligible for FTA funding.

3. Reporting
Post-award reporting requirements
include the electronic submission of
Federal Financial Reports and Milestone
Progress Reports in FT A's electronic
grants management system. Recipients
of funds made available through this
NOFO are also required to regularly
submit data to the National Transit
Database. Recipients should include any
goals, targets, and indicators referenced
Federal Register/Vol. 87, No. 43 /Friday, March 4, 2022/Notices 12537 in their applications in the Executive
Summary of the Tr AMS application.

FT A is committed to making
evidence-based decisions guided by the
best available science and data. In
accordance with the Foundations for
Evidence-based Policymaking Act of
2018 (Evidence Act), FTA may use
information submitted in discretionary
funding applications; information in
FTA's Transit Award Management
System (TrAMS), including grant
applications, Milestone Progress Reports
(MPRs), Federal Financial Reports
(FFRs); transit service, ridership and
operational data submitted in FTA's
National Transit Database;
documentation and results of FT A
oversight reviews, including triennial
and state management reviews; and
other publicly available sources of data
to build evidence to support policy,
budget, operational, regulatory, and
management processes and decisions
affecting FT A's grant programs.

As part of completing the annual
certifications and assurances required of
FTA grant recipients, a successful
applicant must report on the suspension
or debarment status of itself and its
principals. If the award recipient's
active grants, cooperative agreements,
and procurement contracts from all
Federal awarding agencies exceeds
$10,000,000 for any period of time
during the period of performance of an
award made pursuant to this Notice, the
recipient must comply with the
Recipient Integrity and Performance
Matters reporting requirements
described in Appendix XII to 2 CFR part
200.

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts
For further information concerning
this notice, please contact the Low-No/
Bus grant program staff via email at
[email protected], or call Amy
Volz, by phone at 202-366-7484. A
TDD is available for individuals who are
deaf or hard of hearing at 800-877-
8339. In addition, FTA will post
answers to questions and requests for
clarifications on FTA's website at
https://www.transit.dot.gov. To ensure
applicants receive accurate information
about eligibility or the program,
applicants are encouraged to contact
FTA with questions directly, rather than
through intermediaries or third parties.

For issues with GRANTS.GOV, please
contact GRANTS.GOV by phone at 1-
800-518-4726 or by email at support@
grants.gov. Contact information for
FTA's regional offices can be found on
FTA's website at www.fta.dot.gov.

H. Other Information
User-friendly information and
resources regarding DOT's discretionary
grant programs relevant to rural
applicants can be found on the Rural
Opportunities to Use Transportation for
Economic Success (ROUTES) website at
www.transportation.gov/rural.

This program is not subject to
Executive Order 12372,
"Intergovernmental Review of Federal
Programs."
Nuria I. Fernandez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022-04621 Filed 3-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-57-P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Maritime Administration
Notice of Funding Opportunity for
America's Marine Highway Projects
AGENCY: Maritime Administration,
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of funding opportunity.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the
availability of funding for grants and
establishes selection criteria and
application requirements for the
America's Marine Highway Program
("AMHP"). The purpose of this program
is to make grants available to previously
designated Marine Highway Projects
that support the development and
expansion of documented vessels or
port and landside infrastructure. The
U.S. Department of Transportation
("DOT" or "Department") also seeks
eligible grant projects that will
strengthen American supply chains. The
Department will award Marine Highway
Grants to implement projects or
components of projects previously
designated by the Secretary of
Transportation ("Secretary") under the
AMHP. Only Marine Highway Projects
the Secretary designates before the
Notice of Funding Opportunity
("NOFO") closing date are eligible for
funding as described in this notice.

DATES: Grant applications must be
received by the Maritime
Administration ("MARAD") by 5:00
p.m. E.D.T. on April 29, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Grant applications must be
submitted electronically using
Grants .gov (https://www.grants.gov).

Please be aware that you must complete
the Grants .gov registration process
before submitting your application and
that the registration process usually
takes 2 to 4 weeks to complete.

Applicants are strongly encouraged to
make submissions in advance of the
deadline.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred
Jones, Office of Ports & Waterways
Planning, Room W21-311, Maritime
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590,
phone 202-366-1123, or email
[email protected]. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339
to contact the above individual during
business hours. The FIRS is available
twenty-four hours a day, seven days a
week, to leave a message or question
with the above individual. You will
receive a reply during regular business
hours.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each
section of this notice contains
information and instructions relevant to
the Marine Highway Grants application
process. All applicants should read this
notice in its entirety so that they have
the information they need to submit
eligible and competitive applications.

Applications received after the deadline
will not be considered except in the
case of unforeseen technical difficulties
as outlined below in Section D.6.

Table of Contents
A. Program Description
B. Federal Award Information
C. Eligibility Information
D. Application and Submission Information
E. Application Review Information
F. Federal Award Administration
Information
G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts
A. Program Description
The Secretary, in accordance with 46
U.S.C. 55601, established a marine
highway transportation grant program to
implement projects or components of
designated Marine Highway Projects
that provide a coordinated and capable
alternative to landside transportation or
that promote marine highway
transportation. The primary goal of the
AMHP is to expand the use of the
nation's navigable waters to relieve
landside congestion, reduce air
emissions, and generate other public
benefits by increasing the efficiency of
the surface transportation system, and
Marine Highway Grants will be awarded
to further this purpose.

The Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act (Pub. L. 117-58, November 15,
2021) ("Bipartisan Infrastructure Law"
or "BIL") appropriated $25,000,000 to
be awarded by the Department for
Marine Highway Grants. The grant
funds currently available are for projects
related to vessels documented under 46
RESOLUTION NO. 21- 80

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MONTEBELLO APPOVING MONTEBELLO BUS LINES' ZERO­

EMISSION BUS ROLLOUT PLAN

RECITALS
WHEREAS, in December 2018, the Innovative Clean Transit (ICT} regulation was adopted by the State of California, requiring all public transit agencies to gradually transition to a one hundred (100) percent ZEB fleet; and WHEREAS, the ICT regulation aligns with other State policies, including, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Program (SB 375), which creates initiatives for increased development of transit-oriented communities, better-connected transportation, and active transportation; and
WHEREAS, the ICT regulation also requires each transit agency to submit a complete Rollout Plan, approved by its governing body, to the California Air Resources Board (CARS) showing how it plans to achieve a full transition to zero-emission technologies by 2040; and
WHEREAS, the City of Montebello (the "City"), as a transit bus owner by and through Montebello Bus Lines (the "Transportation Department") provides transportation services to residents of Montebello and neighboring cities; and WHEREAS, Montebello Bus Lines will submit the Zero Emission Bus Rollout Plan (Rollout Plan) to CARS on behalf of the City for review and approval.

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEBELLO HEREBY RESOLVES, FINDS, AND DECLARES AS FOLLOWS:

APPROVES MONTEBELLO BUS LINES ZERO-EMISSION BUS ROLLOUT PLAN; AND SECTION 1: Approvals and Ce�ifications.

1. The Transportation Department is approved to submit the Rollout Plan to CARS on behalf of the City of Montebello by and through the Montebello Bus Lines.

I ,- ;_;. i ��

2. Monteb�ll¢�_,E(u� ·ur,ies .(MBL) Zero Emissions Bus Rollout Plan has met the{ l·- >· -, , following� ·r�uirements in accordance with ICT regulation by specifically I "''�1 .. .. .....
addres�iog_:
t ::.. �
- \

ATTACHMENT B
RESOLUTION NO. 21-80