D1712508 TAC Mtng 2 Materials_06122018South Y Feasibility Study of Remedial Alternatives (D1712508) 1
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Roster
17W006
X:\Projects\General\17W006_So Y FS\TAC\D1712508 TAC Roster_final _06112018.docx
6/11/2018
AGENCY Member, Title Roles/Responsibilities Email Phone # SAG
Member
SWRCB-
DOFA
Tricia Carter,
Water Resource
Control
Engineer, Grant
Manager
Responsible for
management and
performance of the
Agreement.
Tricia.Carter@Water
boards.ca.gov
(916) 319-
8259
STPUD Ivo Bergsohn,
PG, CHG, Project
Director
Responsible for the
overall management of
the administrative and
technical elements of the
Agreement.
ibergsohn@stpud.dst
.ca.us
(530) 543-
6204
X
SWRCB-
DDW
Salvador
Turrubiartes, PE,
Associate
Sanitary
Engineer
Responsible for review of
Technical Work Plans and
Technical Reports. Assist
in resolving technical
issues associated with
project implementation in
accordance with the
MOU.
Salvador.Turrubiartes
@waterboards.ca.go
v
(916) 552-
9998
LRWQCB Brian Grey, PG
Engineering
Geologist
Responsible for review of
Technical Work Plans and
Technical Reports. Assist
in resolving technical
issues associated with
project implementation in
accordance with the
MOU.
brian.grey@waterbo
ards.ca.gov
(530) 542-
5421
CSLT Jason Burke,
Stormwater
Program
Coordinator
Responsible for review of
Technical Work Plans and
Technical Reports. Assist
in resolving technical
issues associated with
project implementation.
jburke@cityofslt.us
(530) 542-
6038
X
South Y Feasibility Study of Remedial Alternatives (D1712508) 2
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Roster
17W006
X:\Projects\General\17W006_So Y FS\TAC\D1712508 TAC Roster_final _06112018.docx
6/11/2018
AGENCY Member, Title Roles/Responsibilities Email Phone # SAG
Member
LBWC Jennifer Lukins,
Assistant
General
Manager
Responsible for review of
Technical Work Plans and
Technical Reports. Assist
in resolving technical
issues associated with
project implementation.
Jennifer@lukinswate
r.com
(530) 541-
2606
X
TKWC Rick Robillard,
PE, Water
Company
Manager
Responsible for review of
Technical Work Plans and
Technical Reports. Assist
in resolving technical
issues associated with
project implementation.
rrobillard@tahoekey
spoa.org
(530) 542-
6451
X
SWRCB -
DOFA
Robert Reeves,
Program
Manager for
Grant Program
(TAC Alternate)
Assist the Grant Manager
and serve as an Alternate
for T. Carter on the TAC.
Robert.Reeves@wat
erboards.ca.gov
(916) 319-
8254
SWRCB-
DDW
Ali Rezvani,
Sacramento
District Engineer
(TAC Alternate)
Assist the SWRCB-DDW
Sanitary Engineer and
serve as an Alternate for
S. Turrubiartes on the
TAC.
Ali.Rezvani@waterbo
ards.ca.gov
(916) 445-
5285
TKPOA Kirk Wooldridge,
General
Manager (TAC
Alternate)
Assist the TKPOA Water
Company Manager and
serve as an Alternate for
R. Robillard on the TAC.
kwooldridge@tahoek
eyspoa.org
(530) 542-
6444 x224
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) YELLOWISH BROWNOVERALL, TR. SCATTERED SUBROUNDED COARSE
GRAINED SAND, ~50% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND,~50% FINE GRAINED SAND, LOOSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) VERY DARK GRAYISHBROWN OVERALL, TR. COARSE GRAINED SAND,
~80-90% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~10% SILT, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) DARK YELLOWISHBROWN OVERALL, TR. FINE GRAVEL, ~10-15%
COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~50% MEDIUM GRAINEDSAND, ~40% FINE GRAINED SAND
WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW) DARKYELLOWISH BROWN OVERALL, TR. FINE GRAVEL,TR. COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~40% MEDIUM
GRAINED SAND, ~40% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~10-15%SILT, VERY DENSE
WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) GRAYISHBROWN OVERALL, TR. COBBLES, ~10%SUBROUNDED GRAVEL TO 1-INCH, ~10% COARSE
GRAINED SAND, ~60% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~10%SILT, VERY DENSE AND COHESIVE
19 FT. COLOR INCLUDES PALE BROWN
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) PALE BROWN TOLIGHT YELLOWISH BROWN, ~100% FINE GRAINED
SAND, VERY DENSE
20.5 - 21 FT. SOME COARSE GRAINED SAND AND
MEDIUM GRAINED SAND
SANDY SILT (ML) LBG AND YELLOWISH BROWN,
~25-50% FINE GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICA,~50% SILT, VERY STIFF, NO PLASTICITY
25 FT. UP TO ~50% FINE GRAINED SAND
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) YELLOWISH BROWNOVERALL, BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 33-35
FT. AND 35-37 FT.: 1.4 - 9.6% FINE GRAVEL, 10.5 -17.1% COARSE GRAINED SAND, 62.0 - 43.3% MEDIUMGRAINED SAND, 20.5-22.9% FINE GRAINED SAND,
5.6-7.1% SILT, DENSE, WET, APPEARANCE OFHIGHLY WEATHERED GRANITIC CLASTS TO COBBLE
SIZE, POSS. WEATHERED IN PLACE
EW-124-24.5
EW-125/25.5
EW-133-35
10YR5/4
10YR3/2
10YR4/6
10YR5/2
10YR6/3
10YR6/3
10YR6/4
10YR 6/2
10YR 5/8
10YR5/4
221721192713485391217133650
PID = 0.9 PPM
Bentonite-CementGrout
PID = 0.5 PPM
PID = 0 PPM
24.5-25.5 ft.K=1.14E-04
33-35 ft.
K=1.38E-03
Zone Test 1PCE: 30.7 ug/lToluene 0.9 ug/l
SP
SP
SW
SW
SW
SP
ML
SW
HAND AUGER
3
8
0.8
1.5
1.5
0.5
0.5
6
BORING LOCATION
DRILLING COMPANY
DRILLING METHOD(S)
ISOLATION CASING
BLANK CASING
SLOTTED CASING
SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK
SEAL
GROUT
WELL COMPLETION
T. Hatch
7" core with 8" Casing
n/a
ELEVATION AND DATUM
DATE STARTED
Cascade Drilling
Sonic - TS 150
8-in. Sonic Drive Casing (Temp.)
4-in. SCH 40 PVC (Temp.)
4-in. SS CWW 0.050 in. slot (Temp.)
n/a
n/a
3-5% Bentonite Cement
Boring Name EW-1 DRAFT
n/a
M. McLeod
Sonic core; Standard
Pen. Test
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
LOGGED BY
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
130
STATIC WATER ELEVATION
150.0 ft. bgs
SAMPLING METHODS
Project Number 1770027.00
953 Eloise St., South Lake Tahoe
FT.
FT.
FT.
FT.
FT.
FT.
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
DRILLER
DRILL BIT(S) SIZE
STAND PIPE FT.
Project Name South Tahoe PUD
TOTAL DEPTH
DATE COMPLETED
SURFACE HOUSING
4/30/18 5/5/18
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
1 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES BACKFILL DETAILS
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/1/185
10
15
20
25
30
35
Handout 3a1
WELL GRADED SAND CONT'D
SANDY SILT (ML) YELLOWISH BROWN OVERALL,MIXED LAYERS OF SAND WITH SILT, AND SMALLAMOUNT OF CLAY; SAND IS MAINLY FINE WITH
STREAKS OF 10YR 5/8 OXIDATION, SOFT, NOPLASTICITY
GRADES TO ALTERNATING LAYERS OF SILTYSAND AND POORLY GRADED SAND (SM) SAND ISMAINLY ~90% FINE GRAINED SAND, WITH ~10% SILT,
LOOSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) LIGHT YELLOWISHBROWN OVERALL, ~70-80% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND,
~20-30% FINE GRAINED SAND, DENSE, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) YELLOWISH BROWN
OVERALL, ~10% SUBROUNDED COARSE GRAINEDSAND, ~30% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~60% MEDIUMGRAINED SAND, DENSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) YELLOWISH BROWNOVERALL, BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 44-46
FT. AND 46-48 FT.: 0.2-0.1% FINE GRAVEL, 3.7-3.6%COARSE GRAINED SAND, 37% MEDIUM GRAINEDSAND, 50.9-24.0% FINE GRAINED SAND, 8.1-10.3%
SILT, VERY DENSE, WET
50 FT. COLOR CHANGES SLIGHTLY, MATERIAL
BECOMES DENSER
54 FT. THIN SUBHORIZONTAL LAYER OF
FINE-GRAINED SILTY SAND
55.5 FT. SOME MEDIUM GRAINED FELDSPAR GRAINS
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) LIGHT YELLOWISH
BROWN OVERALL, TR. SUBROUNDED COARSEGRAINED SAND, ~10-20% MEDIUM GRAINED SANDQUARTZ AND FELDSPAR, ~70-80% FINE GRAINED
SAND INCLUDING MICA, DENSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) YELLOWISH BROWN
OVERALL, BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 64-66FT.: 1.2% COARSE GRAINED SAND, 30.7% MEDIUMGRAINED SAND, 61.8% FINE GRAINED SAND, 6.3%
SILT, MASSIVE, DENSE, WET
EW-135-37
EW-138.5-39EW-139-39.5
EW-144-46
EW-146-48
EW-164-66
10YR5/4
10YR 6/4
10YR5/4
10YR4/4
10YR6/4
10YR5/4
1189496121718171721
2948502018311250
35-37 ft.:K=4.12E-04
38.5-39 ft.K=3.5E-08
39-39.5 ft.K=8.33E-05
PID = 0.5 PPMPID = 0.7 PPM
44-46 ft.K=1.82E-06
PID = 0.6 PPM
46-48 ft.
K=1.06E-05
Zone Test 2
Benzene 112 ug/l
Ethyl Benzene:4.2 ug/lStyrene 0.6 ug/l
PCE 66 ug/lTCE 2.8 ug/l Toluene 18 ug/l
Xylenes (Tot.) 0.9 ug/lPID = 0.6 PPM
PID = 1.2 PPM
Zone Test 3PCE: 1.5 ug/lZone Test 3
PCE: 1.5 ug/l64-66 ft.K=5.78E-05
PID = 2.0 PPM
PID = 0.9 PPM
Bentonite-CementGrout
PID = 0.3 PPM
SW
ML
SM
SP
SW
SP
SW
SP
1.5
0.8
0.5
1
7.1
2
1.5
1.5
0
11.5
9.4
Project Name South Tahoe PUD Project Number 1770027.00 Boring Name EW-1 DRAFT
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
2 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES BACKFILL DETAILS
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/1/1840
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
SILTY SAND (SM) PALE BROWN WITHSUBHORIZONTAL YELLOWISH BROWN BANDING,
~60-80% FINE GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICAS,~20-40% SILT, DENSE, NO PLASTICITY, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) PALE BROWN
OVERALL, <10% SUBROUNDED COARSE GRAINEDSAND, ~30-40% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~50% FINE
GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICA, MASSIVE, DENSE,WET
SANDY SILT (ML) PALE BROWN WITH
SUBHORIZONTAL AND CURVED YELLOWISH BROWNBANDING, FINE GRAINED SAND VARIES FROM
~20-50%, SILT VARIES ~80-50%, VERY STIFF, NO TOLOW PLASTICITY, WET
SILTY SAND (SM) BROWN TO YELLOWISH BROWN
WITH BANDS OF STRONG BROWN AND STREAKS OFVERY DARK GRAYISH BROWN, ~90% FINE GRAINEDSAND, ~10-20% SILT, DENSE, WET
SILT TO SANDY SILT (ML) BROWN OVERALL WITHTHIN SUBHORIZONTAL STREAKS OF YELLOWISH
BROWN, UP TO ~50% FINE GRAINED SANDINCLUDING MICA, WITH SAND DECREASING FROM94 TO 96 FT., SOME THIN SUBHORIZONTAL SANDY
LAYERS PRESENT
CLAY TO SILTY CLAY (CL) DARK GRAYISH BROWN
OVERALL, VERY STIFF, LOW PLASTICITY, HIGHTOUGHNESS, LOW TO SLOW DILANTANCY
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 10YR 5/8 YELLOWISH
BROWN TO 2.5Y N4/0 DARK GRAY
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) DARK GRAY, GRAY,
GRADING TO LIGHT YELLOWISH BROWN, ~5% FINEGRAVEL, INCLUDING SUBROUNDED CLASTS ANDGRANITIC CLASTS WEATHERING IN PLACE, ~5%
COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~30-40% MEDIUM GRAINEDSAND, ~30% FINE GRAINED SAND
WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) DARKGRAYISH BROWN OVERALL, ~10% GRAVEL TO
1-INCH, UP TO ~20% COARSE GRAINED SAND,~20-30% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~30% FINEGRAINED SAND, VERY DENSE, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) DARK GRAY OVERALL,BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 122-127 FT.:
3.6% FINE GRAVEL, 25.1% COARSE GRAINED SAND,37.0% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, 24.0% FINE GRAINEDSAND, 7.6% SILT, DENSE, MASSIVE, WET
EW-196-98
EW-1122-124
10YR 6/3
10YR 5/8
10YR 6/310YR 5/47.5YR 4/6
10YR 4/310YR 5/8
10YR4/2
**
2.5YN4/0
10YR8/1
10YR6/4
10YR4/2
2.5YN4/0
293639
253550/0.4Corefrom90-100 ft.
3850
PID = 1.1 PPM
PID = 1.0 PPM
96-98 ft.
K=2.86E-07
Bentonite-CementGrout
PID = 0.3 PPM
PID = 0.3 PPM
Zone Test 5PCE: <0.5 ug/lTCE: 0.6 ug/l
122-124 ft. K=7.42E-05
SM
SW
ML
SM
ML
CL
SP
SW
SW
SW
1
1.5
0.4
8
0.4
4.2
9
Project Name South Tahoe PUD Project Number 1770027.00 Boring Name EW-1 DRAFT
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
3 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES BACKFILL DETAILS
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/1/1885
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
WELL GRADED SAND CONT'D
COMPLEX ZONE OF MIXED AND DEFORMED
LAYERS OF SILT AND WELL GRADED SAND (ML)SILTY LAYERS COLOR INCUDES YELLOWISHBROWN (10YR 5/8), GRAY (2.5Y N5), OLIVE GRAY
(2.5Y N4-5Y 5/1); WELL GRADED SAND LAYERSTYPICALLY 2.5Y N8, SILTY LAYERS ARE TYPICALLYUP TO ~50% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~50% SILT, VERY
STIFF, NO PLASTICITY, WET, ALTERNATING LAYERSARE ~1-2 INCHES THICK AND CURVED ANDDEFORMED; DARK GRAY CLASTS ARE POSSIBLE
ORGANIC MATTER
SILTY SAND TO POORLY GRADED SAND (SM-SP)
PINK FROM 130 - 131 FT, DARK GRAY BELOW, ~50%MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~50% FINE GRAINED SANDTO 134 FT., GRADING TO ~80% FINE GRAINED SAND
~10-20% SILT
SILTY SAND (SM) PINK AND GRAY, ~60-80% FINE
GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICAS, ~20-40% SILT,VERY DENSE AND COHESIVE, NO PLASTICITY
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) GRAY OVERALL, TR.COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~100% FINE GRAINEDSAND, ~10%? SILT, FAINT SUBHORIZONTAL
LAYERING
SILTY SAND TO SANDY SILT (SM-ML) PINK AND
GRAY, ~40-60% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~40-60% SILT,VERY STIFF, NO PLASTICITYNOTES
1. ALL CONTACTS APPROXIMATE
2. BGS: BELOW GROUND SURFACE
3. COLOR DESIGNATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MUNSELL SOIL COLOR CHARTS(KOLLMORGEN INSTRUMENTS CORPORATION, 1990)
4. PID = PHOTOIONIZATION DETECTOR HEADSPACE READING
5. PPM = PARTS PER MILLION
6. SOIL CLASSIFIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM, ASTM
D-2488-93
7. ZONE TEST 1: SCREEN 31-36 FT. BGS; CASING TO 27 FT. BGS
8. ZONE TEST 2: SCREEN 41 FT. - 51 FT. BGS; CASING TO 38 FT. BGS
9. ZONE TEST 3: SCREEN 59.5 FT. - 69.5 FT. BGS; CASING TO 58 FT. BGS
10. ZONE TEST 5: SCREEN 120 FT. - 125 FT. BGS; CASING TO 117 FT. BGS
11. ZONE TEST COMPONENTS INCLUDE 4-INCH SCH40 PVC BLANK CASING AND 4-INCHSTAINLESS STEEL CONTINUOUS WIRE WOUND WELL SCREEN WITH 0.050-INCH OPENINGS.FILTER SAND WAS CEMEX #4/12 SAND.
12. K = PERMEABILITY IN CENTIMETERS/SECOND
EW-1150
2.5YN4/0
**
5Y5/1
5YR 7/3
10YR6/1
5YR 7/310YR 6/1
Bentonite-Cement
Grout
Slough
150 ft.
K=3.64E-06
SW
ML
SM-SP
SM
SP
SM-ML
8
18.4
Project Name South Tahoe PUD Project Number 1770027.00 Boring Name EW-1 DRAFT
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
4 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES BACKFILL DETAILS
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/1/18130
135
140
145
150
@A@A@A @A@A
&(
@A@A
&(
@A@A
!>MW-4A15-25 FTPCE: 1.5TCE: <0.5
MW-4B35-50 FTPCE: 64TCE: 2.3
MW-7C70-80 FTPCE: 3.4TCE: <0.5
MW-7D120-140 FTPCE: 14TCE: <0.5
MW-10B35-50 FTPCE: <0.5TCE: <0.5
MW-10C65-80 FTPCE: <0.5TCE: <0.5
EW-4D120-140 FTPCE: <0.5TCE: <0.5
MW-4C59-79 FTPCE: 2.7TCE: <0.5
Boring (May 2018)30-35 FT PCE: 30.7 TCE: 0.841-51 FT PCE: 66 TCE: 2.860-70 FT PCE: 1.5 TCE: <0.5119-124 FT PCE: <0.5 TCE: 0.6
Tahoe Keys Well #2
Tahoe Keys Well #1
Lukins Brothers Well No.5
Lukins Brothers Well No.4
Lukins Brothers Well No.2
Tata #3Tata #2 Tata #1
Clement Well
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community05001,000 1,500250Feet $Document Path: C:\Users\AliceRobinson\Documents\ArcGIS\Packages\Fig 1-4_PDI Geology_final_8FF0B27E-4DD3-437C-909B-87BB913DB093\v105\Fig 1-4_PDI WorkPlan_FINAL.mxdLegend
Public WaterSystem Well
$1 Active
$1 Standby
$1 Inactive
PDI Well
&(Private Well
!>Soil Boring (May 2018)
@A Monitoring Well (SampledMay 2018)
South "Y" Plume (2016Extent, approximate)
All TCE/PCE results in micrograms per liter.
Handout 3a2
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1$1$1
$1
Tahoe Keys Well #3
Tahoe Keys Well #2
Tahoe Keys Well #1
Lukins Brothers Well No.5
Lukins Brothers Well No.4
Lukins Brothers Well No.2
Lukins Brothers Well No.1
J6
J6J6
J6J6
5E5E
5E5E
J5
J5
J5
J5 J4
J4
J4J4
J3
J3
J2 J1
J1J1
J1
TENTENTENTENROG
ROGROG
KM2KM2
KM2KM2KM1
DUN2
DUN1
LTB4
LTB4LTB4
LTB4
TATATATA
TATATATA
CL-1CL-1
MW-9BMW-9AMW-9C
HMW-4HMW-3
LBWC#5
LBWC#1
LBWC #4
LW-MW-5SLW-MW-1S
TKWC #1/45
TKWC #1/45
LBWC #2/126
TKWC #2/250
TKWC #3/125
TKWC #3/125
TKWC #2/250
LBWC #4 / 70-75
Rockwater / 65-70Rockwater / 65-70
TV School/110-115
LBWC #4 / 125-130
LBWC #2 / 145-150
Content may not reflect National Geographic's current map policy.
Sources: National Geographic, Esri, DeLorme, HERE, UNEP-WCMC,
USGS, NASA, ESA, METI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA, increment P Corp.
0 500 1,000 1,500250Feet
$
3/2018
Document Path: X:\Projects\General\17W006_So Y FS\PDI\Workplan\PDI GIS Files\PDI GIS Files_FINAL\Fig 1-9_PDI 2017 PCE_final_031618.mxdLegend
South "Y" Plume (2016 Extent, approximate)
Water System
South Tahoe PUD
Lukins Brothers WC
Tahoe Keys WC
Public Water System Well
$1 Active
$1 Standby
$1 Inactive
$1 Destroyed
2017 PCE (ug/L)
<0.5 ug/L
>0.5 - 5 ug/L
>5 - 50 ug/L
>50 - 100 ug/L
> 100 ug/L
EKI, 2017 GW Inv. PCE (ug/L)
<0.5 ug/L
0.5 - 5.0 ug/L
>5 - 50 ug/L
>50 - 100 ug/L
>100 - 500 ug/L
>500 ug/L
Project Site (potential)
895 Eloise (AKA 903 Eloise)
953 Eloise
Handout 3a3
South Y PCE Grant 2016-2017
Water Quality Data
Page 1
X:\Projects\General\17W006_So Y FS\PDI\Field Investigation\Sampling & Analysis\STPUD Lab\VOCs\Results - PCE Study 2018.xls 6/8/2018
Depth Temp EC D.O.Turb PCE cis-1,2-DCE TCE MTBE TPH-DRO TDS Chloride NO3-N SO4SourceDateID#ft C pH uS/cm mg/L NTU ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
Phase I 30-35'05/01/2018 AG61161 26.2 11.0 5.08 522 3.23 26 30.7 <0.5 0.8 <0.2 <0.5 328 123 1.08 6.90
Phase I 41-51'05/02/2018 AG61175 37.9 11.9 5.03 558 2.38 26 66 <0.5 2.8 <0.2 <0.5 430 149 1.36 6.43
Phase I 60-70'05/03/2018 AG61192 63.2 12.6 5.17 381 8.38 54 1.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2 <0.5 278 87.8 0.456 3.91
Phase I 119-124'05/05/2018 AG61207 25.3 16.0 7.42 228 2.04 299 <0.5 <0.5 0.6 <0.2 <0.5 154 25.1 0.109 8.45
MW-4A 05/02/2018 AG61178 1.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2
MW-4B 05/02/2018 AG61179 64 0.8 2.3 <0.2
MW-4C 05/02/2018 AG61180 2.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2
MW-7C 05/02/2018 AG61181 3.4 0.6 <0.5 <0.2
MW-7D 05/02/2018 AG61182 14 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2
MW-10B 05/02/2018 AG61183 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2
MW-10C 05/02/2018 AG61184 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2
EW-4D 05/02/2018 AG61185 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2
Handout 3a4
South Y PCE Grant 2016-2017
Water Quality Data
Page 2
X:\Projects\General\17W006_So Y FS\PDI\Field Investigation\Sampling & Analysis\STPUD Lab\VOCs\Results - PCE Study 2018.xls 6/8/2018
Source Date
Phase I 30-35'05/01/2018
Phase I 41-51'05/02/2018
Phase I 60-70'05/03/2018
Phase I 119-124'05/05/2018
MW-4A 05/02/2018
MW-4B 05/02/2018
MW-4C 05/02/2018
MW-7C 05/02/2018
MW-7D 05/02/2018
MW-10B 05/02/2018
MW-10C 05/02/2018
EW-4D 05/02/2018
<------------Alkalinity--------------->
HCO3 CO3 OH Total Al As Cd Cr Cu Mn Se U Zn Boron Ca Fe Mg K Na
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L pCi/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
46.1 0 0 46.1 <20 <1 <0.5 <1 2.21 134 <5 111 <0.05 38.6 0.05 8.83 1.80 36.8
54.9 0 0 54.9 3000 1.34 <0.5 2.98 7.54 104 <5 71.6 <0.05 52.7 2.81 13.4 2.16 34.8
46.4 0 0 46.4 <20 <1 <0.5 <1 <2 35.1 <5 32.1 <0.05 31.6 0.08 7.15 1.44 25.2
69.1 1.98 0 71.1 90 3.28 <0.5 <1 <2 121 <5 <20 <0.05 12.0 0.11 4.83 2.14 25.5
Handout 3a5
X:\Projects\General\17W006_So Y FS\PDI\GW Levels\So Y GWLevels.xlsx 6/8/2018
SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
SOUTH Y FEASIBILITY STUDY
VERTICAL GRADIENT ESTIMATES
MW-4A MP 6255.85
MW-4A Screen bottom- 25 6230.85
MW-4B MP 6256.02
MW-4B Screen bottom-50 6206.02
MW-4C MP 6256.32
MW-4C Screen bottom-79 6177.32
24.83
28.70
53.53
B - A C - B C - A
WL_Date DTW WL_ELEV DTW WL_ELEV DTW WL_ELEV Ivert Ivert Ivert
01/17/18 6.39 6249.46 11.08 6244.94 13.86 6242.46 -0.18 -0.09 -0.13
04/30/18 4.88 6250.97 9.33 6246.69 12.13 6244.19 -0.17 -0.09 -0.13
05/02/18 5.00 6250.85 9.44 6246.58 12.27 6244.05 -0.17 -0.09 -0.13
MW-4A MW-4CMW-4B
MW-4A - MW-4B: Vertical
Separation (dl)
MW-4B - MW-4C: Vertical
Separation (dl)
MW-4A - MW-4C: Vertical
Separation (dl)
Handout 3a6
X:\Projects\General\17W006_So Y FS\PDI\GW Levels\So Y GWLevels.xlsx 6/8/2018
SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
SOUTH Y FEASIBILITY STUDY
VERTICAL GRADIENT ESTIMATES
MW-10A MP 6261.41
MW-10A Screen bottom- 25 6236.41
MW-10B MP 6261.22
MW-10B Screen bottom-50 6211.22
MW-10C MP 6261.31
MW-10C Screen bottom-80 6181.31
25.19
29.91
55.10
B - A C - B C - A
WL_Date DTW WL_ELEV DTW WL_ELEV DTW WL_ELEV Ivert Ivert Ivert
10/23/17 15.57 6240.28 18.65 6237.37 23.90 6232.42 -0.12 -0.17 -0.14
05/02/18 12.77 6243.08 16.54 6239.48 21.71 6234.61 -0.14 -0.16 -0.15
MW-10A - MW-10B:
Vertical Separation (dl)
MW-10B - MW-10C:
Vertical Separation (dl)
MW-10A - MW-10C:
Vertical Separation (dl)
MW-10A MW-10B MW-10C
X:\Projects\General\17W006_So Y FS\PDI\GW Levels\So Y GWLevels.xlsx 6/8/2018
SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
SOUTH Y FEASIBILITY STUDY
VERTICAL GRADIENT ESTIMATES
MW-7C MP 6251.12
MW-7C Screen bottom- 80 6171.12
MW-7D MP 6251.25
MW-7D Screen bottom-140 6111.25
59.87
D - C
WL_Date DTW WL_ELEV DTW WL_ELEV DTW WL_ELEV Ivert
05/02/18 15.57 6240.28 18.65 6237.37 -0.05
MW7C - MW7D: Vertical
Separation (dl)
MW-7C MW-7D
Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.Laboratory TestingSouth Tahoe Public Utility DistrictCME Project No. 2199Moisture Density ResultsASTM D7263GLA Project No. AS18.1024Sample Dry Density, pcf Moisture Content, % EW1 24’‐24.5’ 119.1 11.7 EW1 38.5’‐39’ 109.2 18.9 EW1 39.0’‐39.5’ 110.2 16.3 EW1 96’‐98’ 79.9 27.9 EW1 150’ 115.0 16.3 EW1 33’‐35’ 87.4 10.4 EW1 35’‐37’ 78.2 8.4 EW1 44’‐46’ 92.9 20.4 EW1 46’‐48’ 83.1 17.3 EW1 64’‐66’79.017.4EW1 122’‐124’ 104.4 15.5 Handout 4a1
Client:Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
Project:STPUD Lab Testing, Proj.No.2199
Project No.:AS18.1024.00
Sample No:EW1 33'-35'
USCS Classification:N/A
Moisture
Condition Settlement, % Dry Density, pcf
% of Standard
Proctor
Hydraulic
Gradient
Hydraulic Conductivity,
cm/sec
Initial -------- 87.4 N/A -------- --------
Loaded 3.7%89.1 N/A 0.16 1.38E-03
Dry Dens.,
pcf
Moist.
%
Initial Moisture Content, %10.4
Final Moisture Content, %14.9
Sandcone Density Test
N/A N/A
FIXED WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
1.E-03
1.E-02
1.E-01
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/secTime, Hours
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
USBR 5600‐89
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Lab Testing
CME Proj. No. 2199
Note: Sample was loaded to 2,800 psf
Client:Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
Project:STPUD Lab Testing, Proj.No.2199
Project No.:AS18.1024.00
Sample No:EW1 35'-37'
USCS Classification:N/A
Moisture
Condition Settlement, % Dry Density, pcf
% of Standard
Proctor
Hydraulic
Gradient
Hydraulic Conductivity,
cm/sec
Initial -------- 78.2 N/A -------- --------
Loaded 6.9%84.0 N/A 0.16 4.12E-04
Dry Dens.,
pcf
Moist.
%
Initial Moisture Content, %8.4
Final Moisture Content, %20.7
Sandcone Density Test
N/A N/A
FIXED WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
1.E-03
1.E-02
1.E-01
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/secTime, Hours
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
USBR 5600‐89
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Lab Testing
CME Proj. No. 2199
Note: Sample was loaded to 2,800 psf
Client:Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
Project:STPUD Lab Testing, Proj.No.2199
Project No.:AS18.1024.00
Sample No:EW-1 44' - 46'
USCS Classification:N/A
Moisture
Condition Settlement, % Dry Density, pcf
% of Standard
Proctor
Hydraulic
Gradient
Hydraulic Conductivity,
cm/sec
Initial -------- 92.9 N/A -------- --------
Loaded 5.6%98.4 N/A 1.48 1.82E-06
Dry Dens.,
pcf
Moist.
%
Initial Moisture Content, %20.4
Final Moisture Content, %28.4
Sandcone Density Test
N/A N/A
FIXED WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS
1.E-07
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
1.E-03
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/secTime, Hours
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
USBR 5600‐89
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Lab Testing
CME Proj. No. 2199
Note: Sample was loaded to 3,400 psf
Client:Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
Project:STPUD Lab Testing, Proj.No.2199
Project No.:AS18.1024.00
Sample No:EW1 46'-48'
USCS Classification:N/A
Moisture
Condition Settlement, % Dry Density, pcf
% of Standard
Proctor
Hydraulic
Gradient
Hydraulic Conductivity,
cm/sec
Initial -------- 83.1 N/A -------- --------
Loaded 6.3%88.7 N/A 0.16 1.06E-05
Dry Dens.,
pcf
Moist.
%
Initial Moisture Content, %17.3
Final Moisture Content, %18.4
Sandcone Density Test
N/A N/A
FIXED WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS
1.E-07
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
1.E-03
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/secTime, Hours
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
USBR 5600‐89
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Lab Testing
CME Proj. No. 2199
Note: Sample was loaded to 3,400 psf
Client:Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
Project:STPUD Lab Testing, Proj.No.2199
Project No.:AS18.1024.00
Sample No:EW-1, 46'-48' (2nd trial)
USCS Classification:N/A
Moisture
Condition Settlement, % Dry Density, pcf
% of Standard
Proctor
Hydraulic
Gradient
Hydraulic Conductivity,
cm/sec
Initial -------- 83.1 N/A -------- --------
Loaded 8.1%90.5 N/A 2.61 4.59E-06
Dry Dens.,
pcf
Moist.
%
Initial Moisture Content, %17.3
Final Moisture Content, %16.0
Sandcone Density Test
N/A N/A
FIXED WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS
1.E-07
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
1.E-03
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/secTime, Hours
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
USBR 5600‐89
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Lab Testing
CME Proj. No. 2199
Note: Sample was loaded to 3,400 psf
Client:Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
Project:STPUD Lab Testing, Proj.No.2199
Project No.:AS18.1024.00
Sample No:EW-1 64' - 66'
USCS Classification:N/A
Moisture
Condition Settlement, % Dry Density, pcf
% of Standard
Proctor
Hydraulic
Gradient
Hydraulic Conductivity,
cm/sec
Initial -------- 79.0 N/A -------- --------
Loaded 5.0%83.2 N/A 1.26 5.78E-05
Dry Dens.,
pcf
Moist.
%
Initial Moisture Content, %17.4
Final Moisture Content, %20.7
Sandcone Density Test
N/A N/A
FIXED WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
1.E-03
1.E-02
1.E-01
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/secTime, Hours
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
USBR 5600‐89
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Lab Testing
CME Proj. No. 2199
Note: Sample was loaded to 4,500 psf
Client:Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
Project:STPUD Lab Testing, Proj.No.2199
Project No.:AS18.1024.00
Sample No:EW-1, 122'-124'
USCS Classification:N/A
Moisture
Condition Settlement, % Dry Density, pcf
% of Standard
Proctor
Hydraulic
Gradient
Hydraulic Conductivity,
cm/sec
Initial -------- 104.4 N/A -------- --------
Loaded 9.4%115.2 N/A 2.32 7.42E-05
Dry Dens.,
pcf
Moist.
%
Initial Moisture Content, %15.5
Final Moisture Content, %19.3
Sandcone Density Test
N/A N/A
FIXED WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
1.E-03
1.E-02
1.E-01
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/secTime, Hours
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
USBR 5600‐89
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Lab Testing
CME Proj. No. 2199
Note: Sample was loaded to 9,900 psf
Client:
Project:
Project No.:
Sample No:
Date:
Initial Final
water Specific Gravity1 6.35 6.35
68 2.65 7.112 7.193
0.76712 1 - Assumed 12.30 16.78
0.031416 119.26 114.66
12 84 101
Initial Hydraulic Gradient 15.03
Final Hydraulic Gradient 6.79
Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/sec
South Tahoe Public Utility District Lab Testing
FLEX WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS - ASTM D 5084
Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
SPECIMEN DATA
RESULTS
Effective Consolidation Stress, psi
AS18.1024
EW-1 24.'-24.5', 25'-25.5' combined
2 - Final saturation value is
considered approximate.
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
1.14E-04
Saturation2
Area of Headwater Tube, cm2
Area of Tailwater Tube, cm2
Back-pressure, psi
Permeant
5/17/2018
Dry Density, pcf
Moisture, %
Diameter,cm
Length, cm
1.000E-07
1.000E-06
1.000E-05
1.000E-04
1.000E-03
1.000E-02
0246810Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec)Time (sec)
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
FLEX WALL HYDRAULIC
CONDUCTIVITY
ASTM D 5084
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Laboratory Testing
CME Proj.No. 2199
Note: ASTM D5084 is valid for hydraulic conductivities
of 1.0 E‐05 cm/s and slower. Multiple trials were
conducted to estimate the result presented.
Client:
Project:
Project No.:
Sample No:
Date:
Initial Final
water Specific Gravity1 6.35 6.347
59 2.65 7.112 7.112
0.76712 1 - Assumed 18.90 17.60
0.031416 108.61 110.15
21 96 93
Initial Hydraulic Gradient 17.3
Final Hydraulic Gradient 10.71
Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/sec
South Tahoe Public Utility District Lab Testing
FLEX WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS - ASTM D 5084
Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
SPECIMEN DATA
RESULTS
Effective Consolidation Stress, psi
AS18.1024
EW-1 38.5' - 39.0'
2 - Final saturation value is
considered approximate.
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
3.50E-08
Saturation2
Area of Headwater Tube, cm2
Area of Tailwater Tube, cm2
Back-pressure, psi
Permeant
5/17/2018
Dry Density, pcf
Moisture, %
Diameter,cm
Length, cm
1.000E-09
1.000E-08
1.000E-07
1.000E-06
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec)Time (sec)
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
FLEX WALL HYDRAULIC
CONDUCTIVITY
ASTM D 5084
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Laboratory Testing
CME Proj.No. 2199
Client:
Project:
Project No.:
Sample No:
Date:
Initial Final
water Specific Gravity1 6.35 6.343
59 2.65 7.112 7.112
0.76712 1 - Assumed 15.80 23.50
0.031416 109.94 107.98
21 83 117
Initial Hydraulic Gradient 17.3
Final Hydraulic Gradient 1.65
Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/sec
South Tahoe Public Utility District Lab Testing
FLEX WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS - ASTM D 5084
Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
SPECIMEN DATA
RESULTS
Effective Consolidation Stress, psi
AS18.1024
EW-1 39.0'-39.5'
2 - Final saturation value is
considered approximate.
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
8.33E-05
Saturation2
Area of Headwater Tube, cm2
Area of Tailwater Tube, cm2
Back-pressure, psi
Permeant
5/17/2018
Dry Density, pcf
Moisture, %
Diameter,cm
Length, cm
1.000E-07
1.000E-06
1.000E-05
1.000E-04
1.000E-03
1.000E-02
024681012Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec)Time (sec)
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
FLEX WALL HYDRAULIC
CONDUCTIVITY
ASTM D 5084
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Laboratory Testing
CME Proj.No. 2199
Note: ASTM D5084 is valid for hydraulic conductivities
of 1.0 E‐05 cm/s and slower. Multiple trials were
conducted to estimate the result presented.
Client:
Project:
Project No.:
Sample No:
Date:
Initial Final
water Specific Gravity1 7.62 7.46
40 2.65 7.112 7.28
0.76712 1 - Assumed 27.90 33.21
0.031416 79.85 79.34
40 69 81
Initial Hydraulic Gradient 12.53
Final Hydraulic Gradient 1.72
Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/sec
South Tahoe Public Utility District Lab Testing
FLEX WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS - ASTM D 5084
Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
SPECIMEN DATA
RESULTS
Effective Consolidation Stress, psi
AS18.1024
EW1 96'-98'
2 - Final saturation value is
considered approximate.
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
2.86E-07
Saturation2
Area of Headwater Tube, cm2
Area of Tailwater Tube, cm2
Back-pressure, psi
Permeant
5/14/2018
Dry Density, pcf
Moisture, %
Diameter,cm
Length, cm
1.000E-08
1.000E-07
1.000E-06
1.000E-05
1.000E-04
0 1000 2000 3000Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec)Time (sec)
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
FLEX WALL HYDRAULIC
CONDUCTIVITY
ASTM D 5084
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Laboratory Testing
CME Proj.No. 2199
Client:
Project:
Project No.:
Sample No:
Date:
Initial Final
water Specific Gravity1 7.62 7.488
30 2.65 7.112 7.409
0.76712 1 - Assumed 16.30 17.53
0.031416 115.37 109.68
50 100 91
Initial Hydraulic Gradient 13.38
Final Hydraulic Gradient 1.37
Hydraulic Conductivity, cm/sec
Area of Tailwater Tube, cm2
Back-pressure, psi
Permeant
5/14/2018
Dry Density, pcf
Moisture, %
Diameter,cm
Length, cm
AS18.1024
EW1 150'
2 - Final saturation value is
considered approximate.
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
3.64E-06
Saturation2
Area of Headwater Tube, cm2
South Tahoe Public Utility District Lab Testing
FLEX WALL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS - ASTM D 5084
Construction Materials Engineers, Inc.
SPECIMEN DATA
RESULTS
Effective Consolidation Stress, psi
1.000E-07
1.000E-06
1.000E-05
1.000E-04
1.000E-03
0 50 100 150 200 250 300Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec)Time (sec)
Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Time
FLEX WALL HYDRAULIC
CONDUCTIVITY
ASTM D 5084
Construction Materials
Engineers, Inc.
STPUD Laboratory Testing
CME Proj.No. 2199
Handout 4a2
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) YELLOWISH BROWNOVERALL, TR. SCATTERED SUBROUNDED COARSE
GRAINED SAND, ~50% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND,~50% FINE GRAINED SAND, LOOSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) VERY DARK GRAYISHBROWN OVERALL, TR. COARSE GRAINED SAND,
~80-90% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~10% SILT, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) DARK YELLOWISHBROWN OVERALL, TR. FINE GRAVEL, ~10-15%
COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~50% MEDIUM GRAINEDSAND, ~40% FINE GRAINED SAND
WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW) DARKYELLOWISH BROWN OVERALL, TR. FINE GRAVEL,TR. COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~40% MEDIUM
GRAINED SAND, ~40% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~10-15%SILT, VERY DENSE
WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) GRAYISHBROWN OVERALL, TR. COBBLES, ~10%SUBROUNDED GRAVEL TO 1-INCH, ~10% COARSE
GRAINED SAND, ~60% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~10%SILT, VERY DENSE AND COHESIVE
19 FT. COLOR INCLUDES PALE BROWN
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) PALE BROWN TOLIGHT YELLOWISH BROWN, ~100% FINE GRAINED
SAND, VERY DENSE
20.5 - 21 FT. SOME COARSE GRAINED SAND AND
MEDIUM GRAINED SAND
SANDY SILT (ML) LBG AND YELLOWISH BROWN,
~25-50% FINE GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICA,~50% SILT, VERY STIFF, NO PLASTICITY
25 FT. UP TO ~50% FINE GRAINED SAND
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) YELLOWISH BROWNOVERALL, BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 33-35
FT. AND 35-37 FT.: 1.4 - 9.6% FINE GRAVEL, 10.5 -17.1% COARSE GRAINED SAND, 62.0 - 43.3% MEDIUMGRAINED SAND, 20.5-22.9% FINE GRAINED SAND,
5.6-7.1% SILT, DENSE, WET, APPEARANCE OFHIGHLY WEATHERED GRANITIC CLASTS TO COBBLE
SIZE, POSS. WEATHERED IN PLACE
10YR5/4
10YR3/2
10YR4/6
10YR5/2
10YR6/3
10YR6/3
10YR6/4
10YR 6/2
10YR 5/8
10YR5/4
Grout Seal
Bentonite Seal
Gravel Pack
28 ft.
Zone Test 1PCE: 30.7 ug/lToluene 0.9 ug/l
Louvered Screen
SP
SP
SW
SW
SW
SP
ML
SW
BORING LOCATION
DRILLING COMPANY
DRILLING METHOD(S)
ISOLATION CASING
BLANK CASING
SLOTTED CASING
SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK
SEAL
GROUT
WELL COMPLETION
n/a
ELEVATION AND DATUM
DATE STARTED
Cascade Drilling
Sonic - TS 150
Sonic Drive Casing (Temp.)
6-in. SCH 80 PVC
6-in. Stainless Steel 0.050-inch Louvered
SRI #6
3/8-in. Bentonite Chips
Neat Cement Grout
Well Name EW-1 Option 1 - One Well
3
n/a
+2
See
26
23
3
LOGGED BY
n/a
See Notes
Notes
64
26
23
STATIC WATER ELEVATION
150.0 ft. bgs
SAMPLING METHODS
Project Number 1770027.00
953 Eloise St., South Lake Tahoe
FT.
FT.
FT.
FT.
FT.
FT.
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
DRILLER
DRILL BIT(S) SIZE
STAND PIPE FT.
Project Name South Tahoe PUD
TOTAL DEPTH
DATE COMPLETED
SURFACE HOUSING
X
Well cap
Stand pipe
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
1 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES WELL CONSTRUCTION
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/5/185
10
15
20
25
30
35
Handout 4a3
WELL GRADED SAND CONT'D
SANDY SILT (ML) YELLOWISH BROWN OVERALL,MIXED LAYERS OF SAND WITH SILT, AND SMALLAMOUNT OF CLAY; SAND IS MAINLY FINE WITH
STREAKS OF 10YR 5/8 OXIDATION, SOFT, NOPLASTICITY
GRADES TO ALTERNATING LAYERS OF SILTYSAND AND POORLY GRADED SAND (SM) SAND ISMAINLY ~90% FINE GRAINED SAND, WITH ~10% SILT,
LOOSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) LIGHT YELLOWISHBROWN OVERALL, ~70-80% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND,
~20-30% FINE GRAINED SAND, DENSE, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) YELLOWISH BROWN
OVERALL, ~10% SUBROUNDED COARSE GRAINEDSAND, ~30% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~60% MEDIUMGRAINED SAND, DENSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) YELLOWISH BROWNOVERALL, BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 44-46
FT. AND 46-48 FT.: 0.2-0.1% FINE GRAVEL, 3.7-3.6%COARSE GRAINED SAND, 37% MEDIUM GRAINEDSAND, 50.9-24.0% FINE GRAINED SAND, 8.1-10.3%
SILT, VERY DENSE, WET
50 FT. COLOR CHANGES SLIGHTLY, MATERIAL
BECOMES DENSER
54 FT. THIN SUBHORIZONTAL LAYER OF
FINE-GRAINED SILTY SAND
55.5 FT. SOME MEDIUM GRAINED FELDSPAR GRAINS
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) LIGHT YELLOWISH
BROWN OVERALL, TR. SUBROUNDED COARSEGRAINED SAND, ~10-20% MEDIUM GRAINED SANDQUARTZ AND FELDSPAR, ~70-80% FINE GRAINED
SAND INCLUDING MICA, DENSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) YELLOWISH BROWN
OVERALL, BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 64-66FT.: 1.2% COARSE GRAINED SAND, 30.7% MEDIUMGRAINED SAND, 61.8% FINE GRAINED SAND, 6.3%
SILT, MASSIVE, DENSE, WET
10YR5/4
10YR 6/4
10YR5/4
10YR4/4
10YR6/4
10YR5/4
38 ft.
44 ft.
Zone Test 2Benzene
112 ug/lEthyl Benzene:
4.2 ug/lStyrene 0.6 ug/lPCE 66 ug/l
TCE 2.8 ug/l Toluene 18 ug/l Xylenes (Tot.)
0.9 ug/l
Gravel Pack
59 ft.
Sump
Zone Test 3PCE: 1.5 ug/l
Not Drilled
SW
ML
SM
SP
SW
SP
SW
SP
Project Name South Tahoe PUD Project Number 1770027.00 Well NameEW-1 Option 1 - One Well
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
2 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES WELL CONSTRUCTION
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/5/1840
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
SILTY SAND (SM) PALE BROWN WITHSUBHORIZONTAL YELLOWISH BROWN BANDING,
~60-80% FINE GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICAS,~20-40% SILT, DENSE, NO PLASTICITY, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) PALE BROWN
OVERALL, <10% SUBROUNDED COARSE GRAINEDSAND, ~30-40% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~50% FINE
GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICA, MASSIVE, DENSE,WET
SANDY SILT (ML) PALE BROWN WITH
SUBHORIZONTAL AND CURVED YELLOWISH BROWNBANDING, FINE GRAINED SAND VARIES FROM
~20-50%, SILT VARIES ~80-50%, VERY STIFF, NO TOLOW PLASTICITY, WET
SILTY SAND (SM) BROWN TO YELLOWISH BROWN
WITH BANDS OF STRONG BROWN AND STREAKS OFVERY DARK GRAYISH BROWN, ~90% FINE GRAINEDSAND, ~10-20% SILT, DENSE, WET
SILT TO SANDY SILT (ML) BROWN OVERALL WITHTHIN SUBHORIZONTAL STREAKS OF YELLOWISH
BROWN, UP TO ~50% FINE GRAINED SANDINCLUDING MICA, WITH SAND DECREASING FROM94 TO 96 FT., SOME THIN SUBHORIZONTAL SANDY
LAYERS PRESENT
CLAY TO SILTY CLAY (CL) DARK GRAYISH BROWN
OVERALL, VERY STIFF, LOW PLASTICITY, HIGHTOUGHNESS, LOW TO SLOW DILANTANCY
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 10YR 5/8 YELLOWISH
BROWN TO 2.5Y N4/0 DARK GRAY
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) DARK GRAY, GRAY,
GRADING TO LIGHT YELLOWISH BROWN, ~5% FINEGRAVEL, INCLUDING SUBROUNDED CLASTS ANDGRANITIC CLASTS WEATHERING IN PLACE, ~5%
COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~30-40% MEDIUM GRAINEDSAND, ~30% FINE GRAINED SAND
WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) DARKGRAYISH BROWN OVERALL, ~10% GRAVEL TO
1-INCH, UP TO ~20% COARSE GRAINED SAND,~20-30% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~30% FINEGRAINED SAND, VERY DENSE, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) DARK GRAY OVERALL,BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 122-127 FT.:
3.6% FINE GRAVEL, 25.1% COARSE GRAINED SAND,37.0% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, 24.0% FINE GRAINEDSAND, 7.6% SILT, DENSE, MASSIVE, WET
10YR 6/3
10YR 5/8
10YR 6/310YR 5/47.5YR 4/6
10YR 4/310YR 5/8
10YR4/2
**
2.5YN4/0
10YR8/1
10YR6/4
10YR4/2
2.5YN4/0
Not Drilled
Zone Test 5PCE: <0.5 ug/l
TCE: 0.6 ug/l
SM
SW
ML
SM
ML
CL
SP
SW
SW
SW
Project Name South Tahoe PUD Project Number 1770027.00 Well NameEW-1 Option 1 - One Well
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
3 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES WELL CONSTRUCTION
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/5/1885
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
WELL GRADED SAND CONT'D
COMPLEX ZONE OF MIXED AND DEFORMED
LAYERS OF SILT AND WELL GRADED SAND (ML)SILTY LAYERS COLOR INCUDES YELLOWISHBROWN (10YR 5/8), GRAY (2.5Y N5), OLIVE GRAY
(2.5Y N4-5Y 5/1); WELL GRADED SAND LAYERSTYPICALLY 2.5Y N8, SILTY LAYERS ARE TYPICALLYUP TO ~50% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~50% SILT, VERY
STIFF, NO PLASTICITY, WET, ALTERNATING LAYERSARE ~1-2 INCHES THICK AND CURVED ANDDEFORMED; DARK GRAY CLASTS ARE POSSIBLE
ORGANIC MATTER
SILTY SAND TO POORLY GRADED SAND (SM-SP)
PINK FROM 130 - 131 FT, DARK GRAY BELOW, ~50%MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~50% FINE GRAINED SANDTO 134 FT., GRADING TO ~80% FINE GRAINED SAND
~10-20% SILT
SILTY SAND (SM) PINK AND GRAY, ~60-80% FINE
GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICAS, ~20-40% SILT,VERY DENSE AND COHESIVE, NO PLASTICITY
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) GRAY OVERALL, TR.COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~100% FINE GRAINEDSAND, ~10%? SILT, FAINT SUBHORIZONTAL
LAYERING
SILTY SAND TO SANDY SILT (SM-ML) PINK AND
GRAY, ~40-60% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~40-60% SILT,VERY STIFF, NO PLASTICITY
2.5YN4/0
**
5Y5/1
5YR 7/3
10YR6/1
5YR 7/310YR 6/1
Not Drilled
SW
ML
SM-SP
SM
SP
SM-ML
Project Name South Tahoe PUD Project Number 1770027.00 Well NameEW-1 Option 1 - One Well
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
4 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES WELL CONSTRUCTION
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/5/18130
135
140
145
150
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) YELLOWISH BROWNOVERALL, TR. SCATTERED SUBROUNDED COARSE
GRAINED SAND, ~50% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND,~50% FINE GRAINED SAND, LOOSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) VERY DARK GRAYISHBROWN OVERALL, TR. COARSE GRAINED SAND,
~80-90% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~10% SILT, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) DARK YELLOWISHBROWN OVERALL, TR. FINE GRAVEL, ~10-15%
COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~50% MEDIUM GRAINEDSAND, ~40% FINE GRAINED SAND
WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW) DARKYELLOWISH BROWN OVERALL, TR. FINE GRAVEL,TR. COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~40% MEDIUM
GRAINED SAND, ~40% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~10-15%SILT, VERY DENSE
WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) GRAYISHBROWN OVERALL, TR. COBBLES, ~10%SUBROUNDED GRAVEL TO 1-INCH, ~10% COARSE
GRAINED SAND, ~60% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~10%SILT, VERY DENSE AND COHESIVE
19 FT. COLOR INCLUDES PALE BROWN
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) PALE BROWN TOLIGHT YELLOWISH BROWN, ~100% FINE GRAINED
SAND, VERY DENSE
20.5 - 21 FT. SOME COARSE GRAINED SAND AND
MEDIUM GRAINED SAND
SANDY SILT (ML) LBG AND YELLOWISH BROWN,
~25-50% FINE GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICA,~50% SILT, VERY STIFF, NO PLASTICITY
25 FT. UP TO ~50% FINE GRAINED SAND
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) YELLOWISH BROWNOVERALL, BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 33-35
FT. AND 35-37 FT.: 1.4 - 9.6% FINE GRAVEL, 10.5 -17.1% COARSE GRAINED SAND, 62.0 - 43.3% MEDIUMGRAINED SAND, 20.5-22.9% FINE GRAINED SAND,
5.6-7.1% SILT, DENSE, WET, APPEARANCE OFHIGHLY WEATHERED GRANITIC CLASTS TO COBBLE
SIZE, POSS. WEATHERED IN PLACE
10YR5/4
10YR3/2
10YR4/6
10YR5/2
10YR6/3
10YR6/3
10YR6/4
10YR 6/2
10YR 5/8
10YR5/4
Shallow wellborehole shown
on left. Deep well
borehole shownon right.
Cement Grout
Seal
23 ft.
Bentonite Seal
25.5 ft.
Filter Pack
27.5 ft.
Zone Test 131-36 ft.PCE: 30.7 ug/l
Toluene 0.9 ug/l
SP
SP
SW
SW
SW
SP
ML
SW
BORING LOCATION
DRILLING COMPANY
DRILLING METHOD(S)
ISOLATION CASING
BLANK CASING
SLOTTED CASING
SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK
SEAL
GROUT
WELL COMPLETION
n/a
ELEVATION AND DATUM
DATE STARTED
Cascade Drilling
Sonic - TS 150
Sonic Drive Casing (Temp.)
6-in. SCH 80 PVC - Two boreholes
6-in. Stainless Steel 0.050-inch Louvered
SRI #6
3/8-in. Bentonite Chips
Neat Cement Grout
Boring Name EW-1 Two Wells-Two Boreholes
n/a
n/a
+2-27.5
27.5-35
25.5-38
23-25.5
0-23
LOGGED BY
n/a
+2-44
44-59
41-64
38.5-41
0-38.5
STATIC WATER ELEVATION
150.0 ft. bgs
SAMPLING METHODS
Project Number 1770027.00
953 Eloise St., South Lake Tahoe
FT.
FT.
FT.
FT.
FT.
FT.
TO
TO
TO
TO
FROM
FROM
FROM
FROM
DRILLER
DRILL BIT(S) SIZE
STAND PIPE FT.
Project Name South Tahoe PUD
TOTAL DEPTH
DATE COMPLETED
SURFACE HOUSING
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
1 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES BACKFILL DETAILS
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/5/185
10
15
20
25
30
35
Handout 4a4
WELL GRADED SAND CONT'D
SANDY SILT (ML) YELLOWISH BROWN OVERALL,MIXED LAYERS OF SAND WITH SILT, AND SMALLAMOUNT OF CLAY; SAND IS MAINLY FINE WITH
STREAKS OF 10YR 5/8 OXIDATION, SOFT, NOPLASTICITY
GRADES TO ALTERNATING LAYERS OF SILTYSAND AND POORLY GRADED SAND (SM) SAND ISMAINLY ~90% FINE GRAINED SAND, WITH ~10% SILT,
LOOSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) LIGHT YELLOWISHBROWN OVERALL, ~70-80% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND,
~20-30% FINE GRAINED SAND, DENSE, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) YELLOWISH BROWN
OVERALL, ~10% SUBROUNDED COARSE GRAINEDSAND, ~30% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~60% MEDIUMGRAINED SAND, DENSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) YELLOWISH BROWNOVERALL, BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 44-46
FT. AND 46-48 FT.: 0.2-0.1% FINE GRAVEL, 3.7-3.6%COARSE GRAINED SAND, 37% MEDIUM GRAINEDSAND, 50.9-24.0% FINE GRAINED SAND, 8.1-10.3%
SILT, VERY DENSE, WET
50 FT. COLOR CHANGES SLIGHTLY, MATERIAL
BECOMES DENSER
54 FT. THIN SUBHORIZONTAL LAYER OF
FINE-GRAINED SILTY SAND
55.5 FT. SOME MEDIUM GRAINED FELDSPAR GRAINS
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) LIGHT YELLOWISH
BROWN OVERALL, TR. SUBROUNDED COARSEGRAINED SAND, ~10-20% MEDIUM GRAINED SANDQUARTZ AND FELDSPAR, ~70-80% FINE GRAINED
SAND INCLUDING MICA, DENSE, WET
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) YELLOWISH BROWN
OVERALL, BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 64-66FT.: 1.2% COARSE GRAINED SAND, 30.7% MEDIUMGRAINED SAND, 61.8% FINE GRAINED SAND, 6.3%
SILT, MASSIVE, DENSE, WET
10YR5/4
10YR 6/4
10YR5/4
10YR4/4
10YR6/4
10YR5/4
35 ft.
38 ft.38.5 ft.
Bentonite Seal
41.0 ft.
Filter Pack
44 ft.
Zone Test 240-50 ft.
Benzene 112 ug/l
Ethyl Benzene:4.2 ug/lStyrene 0.6 ug/l
PCE 66 ug/lTCE 2.8 ug/l Toluene 18 ug/l
Xylenes (Tot.) 0.9 ug/l
Filter Pack
59 ft.
64 ft.
Zone Test 3PCE: 1.5 ug/l
Not Drilled
SW
ML
SM
SP
SW
SP
SW
SP
Project Name South Tahoe PUD Project Number 1770027.00 Boring NameEW-1 Two Wells-Two Boreholes
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
2 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES BACKFILL DETAILS
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/5/1840
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
SILTY SAND (SM) PALE BROWN WITHSUBHORIZONTAL YELLOWISH BROWN BANDING,
~60-80% FINE GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICAS,~20-40% SILT, DENSE, NO PLASTICITY, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) PALE BROWN
OVERALL, <10% SUBROUNDED COARSE GRAINEDSAND, ~30-40% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~50% FINE
GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICA, MASSIVE, DENSE,WET
SANDY SILT (ML) PALE BROWN WITH
SUBHORIZONTAL AND CURVED YELLOWISH BROWNBANDING, FINE GRAINED SAND VARIES FROM
~20-50%, SILT VARIES ~80-50%, VERY STIFF, NO TOLOW PLASTICITY, WET
SILTY SAND (SM) BROWN TO YELLOWISH BROWN
WITH BANDS OF STRONG BROWN AND STREAKS OFVERY DARK GRAYISH BROWN, ~90% FINE GRAINEDSAND, ~10-20% SILT, DENSE, WET
SILT TO SANDY SILT (ML) BROWN OVERALL WITHTHIN SUBHORIZONTAL STREAKS OF YELLOWISH
BROWN, UP TO ~50% FINE GRAINED SANDINCLUDING MICA, WITH SAND DECREASING FROM94 TO 96 FT., SOME THIN SUBHORIZONTAL SANDY
LAYERS PRESENT
CLAY TO SILTY CLAY (CL) DARK GRAYISH BROWN
OVERALL, VERY STIFF, LOW PLASTICITY, HIGHTOUGHNESS, LOW TO SLOW DILANTANCY
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 10YR 5/8 YELLOWISH
BROWN TO 2.5Y N4/0 DARK GRAY
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) DARK GRAY, GRAY,
GRADING TO LIGHT YELLOWISH BROWN, ~5% FINEGRAVEL, INCLUDING SUBROUNDED CLASTS ANDGRANITIC CLASTS WEATHERING IN PLACE, ~5%
COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~30-40% MEDIUM GRAINEDSAND, ~30% FINE GRAINED SAND
WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) DARKGRAYISH BROWN OVERALL, ~10% GRAVEL TO
1-INCH, UP TO ~20% COARSE GRAINED SAND,~20-30% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~30% FINEGRAINED SAND, VERY DENSE, WET
WELL GRADED SAND (SW) DARK GRAY OVERALL,BASED UPON GRADATION TESTS AT 122-127 FT.:
3.6% FINE GRAVEL, 25.1% COARSE GRAINED SAND,37.0% MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, 24.0% FINE GRAINEDSAND, 7.6% SILT, DENSE, MASSIVE, WET
10YR 6/3
10YR 5/8
10YR 6/310YR 5/47.5YR 4/6
10YR 4/310YR 5/8
10YR4/2
**
2.5YN4/0
10YR8/1
10YR6/4
10YR4/2
2.5YN4/0
Not Drilled
Zone Test 5119-124 ft.
PCE: <0.5 ug/lTCE: 0.6 ug/l
SM
SW
ML
SM
ML
CL
SP
SW
SW
SW
Project Name South Tahoe PUD Project Number 1770027.00 Boring NameEW-1 Two Wells-Two Boreholes
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
3 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES BACKFILL DETAILS
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/5/1885
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
WELL GRADED SAND CONT'D
COMPLEX ZONE OF MIXED AND DEFORMED
LAYERS OF SILT AND WELL GRADED SAND (ML)SILTY LAYERS COLOR INCUDES YELLOWISHBROWN (10YR 5/8), GRAY (2.5Y N5), OLIVE GRAY
(2.5Y N4-5Y 5/1); WELL GRADED SAND LAYERSTYPICALLY 2.5Y N8, SILTY LAYERS ARE TYPICALLYUP TO ~50% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~50% SILT, VERY
STIFF, NO PLASTICITY, WET, ALTERNATING LAYERSARE ~1-2 INCHES THICK AND CURVED ANDDEFORMED; DARK GRAY CLASTS ARE POSSIBLE
ORGANIC MATTER
SILTY SAND TO POORLY GRADED SAND (SM-SP)
PINK FROM 130 - 131 FT, DARK GRAY BELOW, ~50%MEDIUM GRAINED SAND, ~50% FINE GRAINED SANDTO 134 FT., GRADING TO ~80% FINE GRAINED SAND
~10-20% SILT
SILTY SAND (SM) PINK AND GRAY, ~60-80% FINE
GRAINED SAND INCLUDING MICAS, ~20-40% SILT,VERY DENSE AND COHESIVE, NO PLASTICITY
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) GRAY OVERALL, TR.COARSE GRAINED SAND, ~100% FINE GRAINEDSAND, ~10%? SILT, FAINT SUBHORIZONTAL
LAYERING
SILTY SAND TO SANDY SILT (SM-ML) PINK AND
GRAY, ~40-60% FINE GRAINED SAND, ~40-60% SILT,VERY STIFF, NO PLASTICITY
2.5YN4/0
**
5Y5/1
5YR 7/3
10YR6/1
5YR 7/310YR 6/1
Not Drilled
SW
ML
SM-SP
SM
SP
SM-ML
Project Name South Tahoe PUD Project Number 1770027.00 Boring NameEW-1 Two Wells-Two Boreholes
Boring & Well Construction Log
F-40.1
(6-87) (3-88) (8-90)
Penetr.Resist.Blows/6"
DrillDepth(Feet)
USCSLog Lithology Color SAMPLE DESCRIPTION and DRILLING REMARKSRecovery
(Feet)
4 4OFSHEET
Type& No.
SAMPLES BACKFILL DETAILS
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
BORING & WELL CONSTRUCTION 1770027.00.GPJ KENNEDY JENKS.GDT 6/5/18130
135
140
145
150
SOUTH Y PCE MODEL
INTERIM RESULTS
Greg Pohll, Susie Rybarski, & Rosemary CarrollApril 5, 2017
Excerpt of pdf for 6/12/18 TAC
Mtg
Outline
Modeling Objectives
Historical Context
Regional/Local Models
Modeling Approach
Results
No Action Scenario
Next Steps
Modeling Objectives
Develop a flow and PCE transport model of
the South Y Area
The model will be used to help optimize the
design of the remediation system
Once complete the model will be released to
interested stakeholders for additional analysis
Modeling Approach
Regional models
GSFLOW
MODFLOW
Local model
MODFLOW
MT3D
Regional
vs.
Local Models
Local PCE
Model
10 m
100 m
Refined at 10 m
around estimated
plume extent.
4 model layers
Layer 1 = 40 m thick
Layer 2 = 40 m thick
Layer 3 = 80 m thick
Layer 4 ~ 125 m thick
(bottom elev. 1600 m)
Production Wells vs. Model Layer
WELL
WATER
SYSTEM SOURCE CAPACITY (GPM)STATUS Perforated Interval (ft bgs)Water-Bearing ZonePCEMODEL LAYER
Clement Well STPUD 180 Inactive, Treated 80 -120 TKZ5 X 1
Julie Well STPUD Destroyed 65 - 100; 115-125 TKZ5, TKZ4 X 1
South Y Center Well STPUD Destroyed 40' between 190 - 260 TKZ3 X 2
Tata Well #4 STPUD Destroyed 85 - 125 TKZ5, TKZ4 X 1
Industrial Well #2 STPUD Abandoned, Observation Well 40-92; 97 -107; 110- 190 TKZ5, TKZ4, SLTZ3 X 2
Tata Well #1 STPUD Abandoned, not destroyed 36 -105; 167 - 223 TKZ5, TKZ4, SLTZ3 1-2
Tata Well #2 STPUD Abandoned, Observation Well 73 - 193 TKZ4, SLTZ3 1-2
Tata Well #3 STPUD Abandoned, Observation Well 55 - 75; 200 -220 TKZ5, SLTZ3 1-2
LBWC Well #1 LBWC 720 Active Untreated 132 - 182 TKZ4 2
LBWC Well #2 LBWC 290 Offline, Impaired 132 - 156 TKZ4 X 2
LBWC Well #3 LBWC Destroyed 70 -80 TKZ5 X 1
LBWC Well #4 LBWC Abandoned, not destroyed 43 - 63; 68 - 78; 105 -115 TKZ5, TKZ4 X 1
LBWC Well #5 LBWC 720 Offline, Impaired 141-180 TKZ4 X 2
TKWC #1 TKWC 1,000 Active Untreated 125 - 312 TKZ4 X 1-3
TKWC #2 TKWC 1,800 Active Treated (GAC capacity 550 gpm)138 - 188; 348 - 414; 426 - 480 TKZ4, TKZ2, TKZ1 X 2-3
TKWC #3 TKWC 1,750 Active Untreated 175 - 300 TKZ4, TKZ3 X 2-3
Tahoe Valley Elementary LTUSD Inactive 86 - 146 TKZ5 (?)X 1-2
Rockwater Apartments SCWS Abandoned, not destroyed 70 - 99 TKZ5 X 1
Simulated Time Periods
Transient historical
1971 –2016
Transient predictive
2017 –2066
Time Steps
MODFLOW –1 year
MT3D -adaptive
Inflows and Outflows
Inflows
Recharge
Up-Gradient flow
Outflows
Streams
Lake Tahoe
Wells
Specified Head
Boundary Conditions
Extracted from
regional
groundwater
flow model
Legend
Flow direction
Groundwater level (m)
Hydraulic Parameters
Water levels from shallow, middle,
and deep zones indicate a
downward gradient near LTLW
Plume contours show vertical
migration does not occur until
further downgradient
A’
A
From Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2016
Hydraulic Parameters
Low K clay lens
approximately
interpolated from
USA Gas cross-
sections
Simulated as zone of
low vertical
conductivity between
layers 1 and 2
Extent of simulated clay lens shown in red
PCE Sources
Simulated Source
PCE trapped in
vadose zone
pore space
Water level rises,
reaching PCE
PCE is mobilized
in groundwater
Observed vs. Simulated
PCE Concentrations
South Y Feasibility Study Handout 5b Revised 6/11/18 \\sac2\job\2017\1770027.00_south tahoe pud‐south y feasiblity study\09‐reports\9.09‐reports\task q.1‐q.2. outreach (formerly task f)\tac\061218-mtg\handouts\5b_table-edits_task c-modeling-from_fs_scope.docx Report Title, Project Name | Page B‐ 1 Table 1: Potential Modeling Scenarios F&T MODEL ELEMENTS SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 SOURCE AREA TBD TBD TBD Single Source, No Action X X X X X TBD TBD TBD Multiple Source, No Action X TBD TBD TBD Single Source, Clean-Up (CAO R6T-2016-PROP) X X X X TBD TBD TBD Multiple Source, Clean-Up (In-situ Remediation) X TBD TBD TBD Biodegradation analysis X TBD TBD TBD EXTRACTION WELLS TBD TBD TBD Shallow well at 953 Eloise site – 5- 10 gpm X X TBD TBD TBD 883/903 Eloise Ave well X X TBD TBD TBD Rockwater Apartment Well X X TBD TBD TBD Optimal Well Configuration (TBD by Modeling Analysis) X X X X X X X X X X X GROUNDWATER PRODUCTION (GPM) TBD TBD TBD Clement Well (180) X X X X X X X X X X TBD TBD TBD LBWC#1 (720) X X X X X X X X X X X X TBD TBD TBD LBWC #4 (200) - Replacement Well X TBD TBD TBD LBWC #4 (400)- Replacement Well X TBD TBD TBD LBWC #4 (800)- Replacement Well X X TBD TBD TBD LBWC #5 (750) - Treatment X X X X X TBD TBD TBD TKWC #1 (1,000) X X X X X X X TBD TBD TBD TKWC #1 (550) X X X X X TBD TBD TBD TKWC #2 (550) X X X X X X X TBD TBD TBD TKWC #2 (1,800) - Treatment X X X X X TBD TBD TBD
South Y Feasibility Study Handout 5b Revised 6/11/18 \\sac2\job\2017\1770027.00_south tahoe pud‐south y feasiblity study\09‐reports\9.09‐reports\task q.1‐q.2. outreach (formerly task f)\tac\061218-mtg\handouts\5b_table-edits_task c-modeling-from_fs_scope.docx Report Title, Project Name | Page B‐ 2 F&T MODEL ELEMENTS SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 TKWC #3 (1,750) X X X X X X X X X X X X TBD TBD TBD Alternate TKWC Well locations/configurations DISCHARGE TBD TBD TBD Sewer Discharge (200 GPM Limited) X X X TBD TBD TBD Treated Water System Reuse X X X X X TBD TBD TBD Injection X X X TBD TBD TBD
Handout 7a Table 1: DRAFT Remedial Action Objectives – SOUTH Y PCE Contamination Response South Tahoe PUD, Feasibility Study Addressing PCE in Groundwater Page 1 of 1 \\sac2\job\2017\1770027.00_south tahoe pud-south y feasiblity study\09-reports\9.09-reports\task q.1-q.2. outreach (formerly task f)\tac\061218-mtg\handouts\7a_draftrao-table-rev_053018.doc Line No General EPA Remedial Action Objectives South Y Specific Remedial Action Objectives Comments Source: Per EPA Document 540/R-96/023: Objectives applicable for all sites with contaminated groundwater include the following: 1 Prevent exposure to contaminated ground water, above acceptable risk levels. Allow additional groundwater production without treatment 2 Prevent or minimize further migration of the contaminant plume (plume containment). Design and implement remedies without increasing existing volume of groundwater impacted by HVOCs (plume containment) 3 Prevent or minimize further migration of contaminants from source materials to ground water (source control). Concentration reduction to < 50 ppb at drinking water wells, mass removal forproposed remedial measure?To avoid 97-005 4 Return ground waters to their expected beneficial uses wherever practicable (aquifer restoration). Not applicable for South Y study Source: Per EPA Document 540/G-88/003: Remedial Action Objectives for contaminated groundwater sites should address the following: 5 Cleanup Level Assist in overall objective of supplying water without detectable HVOCs to customers Comply with regulatory agency requirements and directives regarding HVOCs in groundwater RAO that aims to reduce contaminant mass to reduce the cleanup burden (eg reduce well head treatment duration) for downgradient receptors required to cleanup water to MCLs for distribution and consumption – maybe this amounts to some level of concentration reduction, but still greater than MCLs.6 Area of Attainment Address groundwater within specified area and depth interval (needs assistance to articulate/define) This is addressed above and likely to include the area of the plume between the source zone and the downgradient extent of the plume7 Restoration Time Frame Need some sort of time criteria – are water agencies able to continue remediation indefinitely? RAO that acknowledges STPUD’s/Water Agency’s efforts as interim and will be maintained until such time that source control has been implemented by the RPs and groundwater concentrations have declined to influent levels that are equal to or less than the proposed cleanup level above)Other South Y Specific Objectives Preserve ability to recover HVOC response costs from responsible parties and/or state grant funding in the future Preference for beneficial use of any extracted groundwater resource (i.e. not disposal to sanitary sewer or storm drain) Reduce costs (capital or long-term O&M) for groundwater remedial wellhead treatment to retail customers Perform community outreach and information activities regarding HVOCs in groundwater Notes: (a) STPUD is responsible for management of the groundwater basin. Other water supply entities are the water retailers. (b) Other parties have been named as responding parties to a Cleanup and Abatement Order issued by the Water Board. (c) HVOCs = halogenated volatile organic compounds including tetrachloroethene (PCE) and its degradation products.
1
WORKING DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – [MONTH] [DAY], 2018
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
REGARDING TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
WITH THE
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD,
[REGION] REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, AND
[Grantee]
I. The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the [Grantee],
State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board), and the
[Region/Location] Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board) is
to identify the forum and processes for discussion and resolution of issues related
to monitoring, planning, modeling, remedial investigation, feasibility studies, design,
construction, and operation of any [Grantee] projects that are currently funded or
may in the future be funded by the State Water Board under Proposition 1 (Cal.
Water Code §§79700 et seq.) for the prevention or cleanup of groundwater
contamination in the [Location] Basin (Project or Projects), and to ensure those
Projects support and do not negatively impact nearby third-party cleanup efforts.
II. The State Water Board and Regional Water Board enter into this MOU
under the authorities of California Water Code section13225, subsections
(a), (b), and (j). [Grantee] enters into this MOU under the authority of [XXX].
III. The Parties to this MOU recognize that the implementation of the Project(s)
may involve complex technical issues regarding prevention and/or cleanup
of contamination in groundwater. The implementation of this MOU will be
primarily through a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) that will provide a
forum for discussion and resolution of technical issues associated with the
implementation of the Project(s). The TAC will be made up of technical staff
from the State Water Board’s Division of Financial Assistance (DFA), from
the State Water Board’s Division of Drinking Water (DDW), and from the
Regional Water Board, and representatives of [Grantee]. The TAC may also
include representatives of other State or federal regulatory agencies that are
not Parties to this MOU, such as the Department of Toxic Substances
Control and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Technical issues
not resolved by the TAC will be forwarded to a Steering Committee
consisting of executive level staff of the Parties for resolution. The Steering
Committee will include [title of DFA person], [title of DDW person], [title of
RB person], and [title of Grantee person] or their respective designees. The
Steering Committee will also address non-technical issues as needed.
IV. The Parties to this MOU share the same goal: prevention and/or cleanup of
contamination in groundwater in the most timely and cost effective manner
feasible, in compliance with applicable state, federal, and local laws.
V. The Parties recognize the need to proceed expeditiously with the Project(s) and
without interruption or undue delay to Project schedules. TAC members commit to
2
WORKING DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – [MONTH] [DAY], 2018
providing technical review comments to [Grantee] and the DFA grant manager
within three weeks of receipt of the deliverable subject to TAC review, unless the
funding agreement specifies otherwise or an alternative review period is mutually
agreed upon by the Parties.
VI. The State Water Board through DFA, as the funding authority, retains decision-
making authority regarding whether [Grantee] has met the deliverables and other
requirements of the Grant Agreement. The Parties recognize that the Project(s)
must be consistent with and support the State Water Board’s and Regional Water
Board’s regulatory programs and be consistent with applicable laws and
regulations, including State Water Board Resolution 92-49, State Water Board
Resolution 68-16, and applicable plans and policies of the State and Regional
Water Boards.
VII. [Grantee] recognizes that the State Water Board and Regional Water Board have
an interest in receiving information from and communicating with [Grantee]
regarding investigation, planning, design, construction, and operation of the
Project(s), as applicable, to ensure that the Project(s) will be effective and will not
adversely affect other nearby remediation projects.
VIII. For any implementation Project(s), [Grantee] will coordinate with the TAC to
evaluate cleanup progress and demonstrate whether or not the Project(s) is
successful in achieving prevention and/or cleanup of contamination in
groundwater. Such evaluation and demonstration will include development of a
monitoring plan with monitoring frequencies and locations aimed at evaluating
changes to the extent of the plume and contaminant concentrations (Monitoring
Plan). The State Water Board shall approve the Monitoring Plan.
a. Where feasible and consistent with this purpose, the Monitoring Plan may
incorporate existing monitoring locations and/or frequencies that are used
to meet other regulatory or operational requirements, including but not
limited to locations listed in the DDW 97- 005 or drinking water permit
requirements.
b. As part of the Monitoring Plan development, the TAC will consider and
identify appropriate methods for the ongoing evaluation of groundwater
quality data in comparison to assumptions used in Project design to
proactively identify trends that would affect Project operations.
IX. Proposition 1 grant agreements for implementation Projects may require
[Grantee] to submit Operational Reports after commencement of
operation. The State Water Board may provide [Grantee] Operational
Reports to the TAC and the TAC may provide technical insight and
comments in writing to the State Water Board and [Grantee] regarding the
Operational Reports. [Grantee] agrees to communicate with the TAC
regarding the technical insight and comments it may provide in response
to [Grantee] Operational Reports during the 5 years, or longer, such
reports are provided.
3
WORKING DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – [MONTH] [DAY], 2018
X. [Grantee] will be responsible for coordinating the logistics of TAC meetings as
follows:
a. Schedule and hold quarterly TAC meetings following submittal of quarterly
progress reports. Meeting frequency may be modified as mutually agreed
by [Grantee] and the State Water Board.
b. Prepare agendas and action items and communicate them to TAC
members.
c. Arrange audio visual equipment, phone conference lines, web-based
meetings, and other meeting logistics, as needed.
d. Should additional meetings be deemed necessary by the State Water
Board, meetings will be scheduled at the earliest mutually convenient
time and place.
XI. The State Water Board recognizes that [Grantee] may be entitled to cost recovery
from various third parties. Nothing in this MOU is meant, in any way, to alter or
change those rights that may exist. Any costs recovered must be used consistent
with the requirements of Proposition 1.
XII. Reservation of Rights: Each Party to this MOU shall be solely responsible and
liable in connection with its actions associated with its responsibilities under this
MOU. For purposes of this MOU, the relationship of the Parties is that of
independent entities and not as agents of each other or as joint venturers or
partners. The Parties shall maintain sole and exclusive control over their personnel,
agents, consultants, and operations. Nothing in this MOU alters the statutory or
regulatory authority of [Grantee], the State Water Board, or Regional Water Board,
or any other provision of law, nor shall anything in this MOU limit [Grantee] or the
State and Regional Water Boards’ legal authority or responsibilities.
XIII. Third Parties: Nothing in this MOU is intended to create duties or obligations to or
rights in third parties to this MOU or affect the legal liability of the Parties to this
MOU.
XIV. AMENDMENTS AND TERMINATION
a. In entering into this MOU, it is the intention of the Parties that this MOU
shall not be construed to be an enforceable contract or agreement, but is,
rather, a statement of principles.
b. This MOU shall remain in effect until all components have been fully
implemented or until [DATE], whichever occurs sooner.
4
WORKING DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – [MONTH] [DAY], 2018
c. This MOU may be amended with the mutual written approval of all Parties
or their successors.
d. Any Party to this MOU, or its successor agency, may withdraw from the
MOU by giving 30-days advanced written notice to the other Parties, in
which case, the MOU is no longer effective.
e. Governing Law: This MOU is governed by, interpreted under, and
construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of
California.
f. Authorized signatures: The Parties hereby represent and warrant that
their respective signatory to this MOU is duly authorized to execute and
bind the agency for which he or she signs.
g. Severability: If any provision of this MOU shall be determined by any court
to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this
MOU shall not be affected and this MOU shall be construed as if the invalid,
illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained in this MOU.
h. Execution: This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts,
each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed
Agreement by one party to the other may be made by facsimile or electronic
PDF transmission.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties to this MOU have caused this MOU to be
executed on their behalf as of the date specified below, respectively, as follows:
FOR THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD:
Dated: _____________, 2018 Name of ED
Executive Director
State Water Resources Control Board
______________________________
Name of ED
FOR THE [Name of Region/Location] REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD:
Dated: _____________, 2018 [First Name] [Last Name]
Executive Officer
[Name of Region/Location] Regional Water Quality
Control Board
______________________________
[First Name] [Last Name]
5
WORKING DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – [MONTH] [DAY], 2018
FOR THE [GRANTEE]
Dated: __________, 2018 Name
Title
Agency
_____________________
[Name of person above]
ID Task NameDuration StartFinish Predecessors Resource Names1Proposition 1 GWGP Program488 daysWed 6/15/16Sun 4/29/182FS Planning Grant Pre-Application40 daysWed 6/15/16Tue 8/9/163SWRCB Invitation Letter1 dayThu 10/6/16Thu 10/6/164FS Planning Grant Full Proposal80 daysThu 8/4/16Wed 11/23/165Preliminary Award1 dayThu 3/30/17Thu 3/30/176Board Meeting - Authorizing Resolution1 dayThu 5/18/17Thu 5/18/177Negotiate Grant Agreement201 daysFri 5/19/17Fri 2/23/1868Final Agreement46 daysMon 2/26/18Sun 4/29/1879RFP/Consultant Selection100 daysFri 3/31/17Thu 8/17/1710Develop Request for Proposal (RFP)40 daysFri 3/31/17Thu 5/25/17511RFP Solicitation35 daysTue 5/30/17Mon 7/17/1710FS+2 days12Last Day for Consultant Questions1 day?Wed 7/5/17Wed 7/5/1711FS-9 days13Proposal Due Date1 day?Mon 7/17/17Mon 7/17/1711FS-1 day14Technical Proposal Review Meeting1 dayTue 8/1/17Tue 8/1/1713FS+10 days15Technical Proposal Review Scores Due to District1 dayMon 8/7/17Mon 8/7/1714FS+3 days16Staff Recommendation1 dayWed 8/9/17Wed 8/9/1715FS+1 day17Board Meeting - Project Award1 dayThu 8/17/17Thu 8/17/1716FS+2 days18(A.1) Task A - Grant Administration257 daysMon 1/1/18Tue 12/25/1819(A.1.1) Technical/Admin Services240 daysMon 4/30/18Fri 3/29/19820(A.1.2) GM Notifications240 days?Mon 4/30/18Fri 3/29/19821(A.1.3) Detailed Project Schedule75 daysMon 2/26/18Fri 6/8/1822Final Agreement Schedule (Section A-6)35 daysMon 2/26/18Fri 4/13/18723Schedule Update 140 daysMon 4/16/18Fri 6/8/182224(A.1.4) Site Visits1 day?Tue 6/12/18Tue 6/12/1825Periodic Site Visit 1 (953 Eloise Avenue)1 dayTue 6/12/18Tue 6/12/1826Final Site Visit (953 Eloise Avenue)27(A.1.5) Photo Monitoring195 days?Tue 10/17/17Mon 7/16/1828Pre- Implementation140 daysTue 10/17/17Sat 4/28/1829During55 daysMon 4/30/18Fri 7/13/1811130Post Implementation1 day?Mon 7/16/18Mon 7/16/182931A-5 Reporting230 daysFri 3/30/18Thu 2/14/1932(G.1) Grant Progress Report (GPRs)230 daysFri 3/30/18Thu 2/14/1933GPR 1 - 2018 Q150 daysFri 3/30/18Thu 6/7/18834GPR 2 - 2018 Q233 daysFri 6/29/18Tue 8/14/1835GPR 3 - 2018 Q334 daysFri 9/28/18Wed 11/14/1836GPR 4 - 2018 Q435 daysFri 12/28/18Thu 2/14/19372017/2018 Ann. Progress Summary34 daysMon 10/1/18Thu 11/15/1838Task B - Project Management and Coordination300 daysWed 11/1/17Tue 12/25/1839Project Invoicing (KJC internal)360 daysTue 8/15/17Mon 12/31/1853Task C - Submit GPS and Monitoring Plan (MP) and Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MRP)109 daysWed 11/1/17Mon 4/2/1854(A.2.1) Global Positioning System (GPS) Information30 daysTue 6/26/18Mon 8/6/1855(A.2.1) Complete GPS Survey30 daysTue 6/26/18Mon 8/6/18127FS-2 days56(A.2.2) Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MRP)103 daysWed 11/1/17Fri 3/23/1895SS57(A.2.2.2) Task D - Prepare Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)103 daysWed 11/1/17Fri 3/23/1858(A.2.3) Task E - Upload Data to GeoTracker/GAMA system in EDF90 daysMon 5/21/18Fri 9/21/1812159(A.3) Task F - Permitting for Field Work91 days?Tue 1/30/18Tue 6/5/1860CEQA NOE1 dayMon 3/5/18Mon 3/5/1861EDC Well Construction Permit2 daysWed 4/18/18Thu 4/19/1862CSLT Road Closure/Obstruction in ROW Permit7 daysTue 4/17/18Wed 4/25/1863(A.3.1) Site Access Agreements63 days?Tue 1/30/18Thu 4/26/1864Negotiate Agreements63 days?Tue 1/30/18Thu 4/26/1865Liberty Utilities (930 Eloise) - Negotiate19 daysTue 1/30/18Fri 2/23/1866CSLT (953 Eloise) - Negotiate19 daysTue 1/30/18Fri 2/23/1867District Board Approval - Access Agreeements1 day?Thu 3/1/18Thu 3/1/1868Execute Site Access Agreements41 daysThu 3/1/18Thu 4/26/1869Liberty Utilities (930 Eloise) - Execute3 daysThu 3/1/18Mon 3/5/1870CSLT (953 Eloise) - Execute41 daysThu 3/1/18Thu 4/26/1871(A.3.1) List of Approvals, Entitlements or Permits91 daysTue 1/30/18Tue 6/5/1863SS10/63/305/184/297/57/178/176/78/1411/142/1411/153/16/5EBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprTaskSplitMilestoneSummaryProject SummaryExternal TasksExternal MilestoneInactive TaskInactive MilestoneInactive SummaryManual TaskDuration-onlyManual Summary RollupManual SummaryStart-onlyFinish-onlyDeadlineProgressSouth Tahoe PUDSouth Y Feasibility Study SchedulePage 1Project: South Y Feasibility Study Date: Tue 6/5/18Handout 9a
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors Resource Names72(A.4) Task G - Establish TAC, Kickoff Meeting and up to 3 TAC Meetings 203 daysWed 11/1/17Fri 8/10/1873(A.4.1) Subtask G.1: Establish TAC62 daysWed 11/1/17Thu 1/25/1874(A.4.1) TAC Member List30 daysThu 1/25/18Wed 3/7/1875SS75(A.4.2) TAC Meeting 1: Kick-Off1 dayThu 1/25/18Thu 1/25/1876(A.4.3) Subtask G.2: TAC Meetings88 days?Tue 6/12/18Thu 10/11/1877(A.4.3) TAC Meeting 21 dayTue 6/12/18Tue 6/12/1878(A.4.3) TAC Meeting 31 day?Wed 7/18/18Wed 7/18/1879(A.4.3) TAC Meeting 41 day?Thu 10/11/18Thu 10/11/1880(A.5) Subtask Q.1 -Stakeholders Advisory Group (SAG)209 daysFri 12/15/17Wed 10/3/1881(A.5.1) Establish SAG1 dayFri 12/15/17Fri 12/15/1782(A.5.1) List of SAG Members90 daysMon 12/18/17Fri 4/20/188183(A.5.2) SAG Meetings209 daysFri 12/15/17Wed 10/3/1884(A.5.2) So Y SAG Meeting 11 dayFri 12/15/17Fri 12/15/1785(A.5.2) So Y SAG Meeting 21 dayThu 1/25/18Thu 1/25/1886(A.5.2) So Y SAG Meeting 31 dayTue 6/12/18Tue 6/12/1887(A.5.2) So Y SAG Meeting 41 dayWed 10/3/18Wed 10/3/1888(A.5.2.1) SAG Meeting Schedule40 daysMon 4/23/18Fri 6/15/188289(A.5.2.2) SAG Meeting Materials150 daysMon 12/18/17Fri 7/13/188490(A.6) Task H - MOU Preparation149 daysTue 11/14/17Fri 6/8/1891Review MOU Template52 daysTue 11/14/17Wed 1/24/1892Review Updated MOU3 daysWed 5/23/18Fri 5/25/189193(A.6.1) Execute MOU10 daysMon 5/28/18Fri 6/8/189294(B.7) Task I - Prepare Pre-Design Investigation Workplan113 daysWed 11/1/17Fri 4/6/1895Develop Workplan (incl. Sampling, Analysis and Monitoring Plan, QAPP)60 daysWed 11/1/17Tue 1/23/1896(B.7.1) Deliver draft Workplan to TAC for review1 dayWed 1/24/18Wed 1/24/1897Complete Draft Final Workplan (incl. TAC Comments)42 daysThu 1/25/18Fri 3/23/189698Complete Final Workplan9 daysMon 3/26/18Thu 4/5/189799(B.7.2) Upload Final Workplan to FAAST1 dayFri 4/6/18Fri 4/6/1898100(A.8) Task J - Conduct Pre-Design Investigation and Prepare Report107 daysFri 12/1/17Mon 4/30/18101Contract with Driller and Pumper20 daysWed 1/10/18Tue 2/6/18102SubContractor Site Walk6 daysFri 3/30/18Fri 4/6/18103Cascade Drilling - Site Walk1 dayFri 3/30/18Fri 3/30/18104Carson Pump - Site Walk1 dayFri 4/6/18Fri 4/6/18105Subcontractor Quotes124 daysTue 10/17/17Fri 4/6/18106Carson Pump Quote124 daysTue 10/17/17Fri 4/6/18107Pure Effect Quote114 daysMon 10/30/17Thu 4/5/18108District Board Approval - Subcontractor Quotes1 day?Thu 4/19/18Thu 4/19/18109(A.8.1) Test Well Drilling Program - I32 daysTue 4/17/18Wed 5/30/18110Stake Test Hole Location (Underground Clearance)1 dayTue 4/17/18Tue 4/17/18111Mobilization I - Cascade Drilling1 daySun 4/29/18Sun 4/29/18112Test Hole Drilling & Formation Testing5 daysMon 4/30/18Fri 5/4/18111,125113DeMobilization I - Cascade Drilling1 daySat 5/5/18Sat 5/5/18112114Soil Testing Analyses (CME)20 daysThu 5/3/18Wed 5/30/18112115(A.8.1) Water Treatment System - I6 days?Sat 4/28/18Mon 5/7/18116Carson Pump Mobilization I1 dayMon 4/30/18Mon 4/30/18111117Filter System Delivery - (Pure Effect)1 daySat 4/28/18Sat 4/28/18111118Carson Pump Demobilization I1 day?Mon 5/7/18Mon 5/7/18113119(A.8.1.3) Base Line Sampling (Blaine Tech)15 daysMon 4/30/18Fri 5/18/18120Groundwater Sampling2 daysMon 4/30/18Tue 5/1/18111,125121Analytical Lab Analyses - I10 daysMon 5/7/18Fri 5/18/18112122(A.8.1) Test Well Drilling Program - II38 daysThu 5/10/18Mon 7/2/18123Test Well Design20 daysThu 5/10/18Wed 6/6/18114124Test Well Order & Fabrication10 daysThu 6/7/18Wed 6/20/18123125Mobilization II - Cascade Drilling1 daySun 6/24/18Sun 6/24/18126Carson Pump Mobilization II1 dayMon 6/25/18Mon 6/25/18127Test Well Construction & Development4 daysMon 6/25/18Thu 6/28/18125128DeMobilization II - Cascade Drilling1 dayMon 7/2/18Mon 7/2/18127FS+1 day1/246/81/244/63/304/64/194/174/296/66/246/25EBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprTaskSplitMilestoneSummaryProject SummaryExternal TasksExternal MilestoneInactive TaskInactive MilestoneInactive SummaryManual TaskDuration-onlyManual Summary RollupManual SummaryStart-onlyFinish-onlyDeadlineProgressSouth Tahoe PUDSouth Y Feasibility Study SchedulePage 2Project: South Y Feasibility Study Date: Tue 6/5/18
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors Resource Names129(A.8.1.2) Aquifer Testing Program15 days?Mon 7/9/18Fri 7/27/181308-Hour Step Test1 day?Mon 7/9/18Mon 7/9/1813172 - Hour Constant Rate Test3 daysTue 7/10/18Thu 7/12/18130132LGAC Waste Characterization Sampling1 day?Fri 7/13/18Fri 7/13/18131133Analytical Lab Analyses - II10 daysMon 7/16/18Fri 7/27/18132134Carson Pump Demobilization II1 day?Mon 7/16/18Mon 7/16/18131FS+1 day135Filter System Demobilization - II1 day?Mon 7/16/18Mon 7/16/18132136Reporting60 daysThu 5/17/18Wed 8/8/18137(A.8.1.1) Well Completion Report10 daysWed 6/27/18Tue 7/10/18128138(A.8.2) Pre-Design Investigation Report60 daysThu 5/17/18Wed 8/8/18139Data Compilation, Review and Analysis42 daysThu 5/17/18Fri 7/13/18121140Report Writing21 daysWed 7/11/18Wed 8/8/18137141(B.9) Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment (BHHRA) - NEW63 days?Mon 4/23/18Wed 7/18/18142(B.9.1) Prepare BHHRA Report45 days?Mon 4/23/18Fri 6/22/18145143(B.9.1) TAC Review15 daysMon 6/25/18Fri 7/13/18142144(B.9.1) Finalize BHHRA Report3 daysMon 7/16/18Wed 7/18/18143145(B.10) Task K - Feasibility Study Workplan83.5 daysThu 3/1/18Tue 6/26/188146(B.10.1) Prepare FS Workplan30 daysMon 4/30/18Fri 6/8/188147(B.10.1) TAC Review15 daysMon 6/11/18Fri 6/29/18146148(B.10.1) Finalize FS Workplan3 daysMon 7/2/18Wed 7/4/18147149(B.11) Task L.1-L.3 - Groundwater/Contaminant Transport Modeling (Formerly Task C)406 daysThu 10/20/16Thu 5/10/18150(B.11.1) Subtask L.2: Develop Fate & Transport Model (DRI)356 daysThu 10/20/16Thu 3/1/18151(B.11.1) Define Remedial Alternative Scenarios15 daysMon 6/4/18Fri 6/22/18152(B.11.1) Subtask L.3.:Modeling Analysis -Pumping/PCE Containment Scenarios (DRI)21 daysMon 6/25/18Mon 7/23/18151153(B.11.2) Prepare draft F&T Modeling Report (by DRI)28 daysTue 7/24/18Thu 8/30/18152154(B.11.2) TAC Review15 daysFri 8/31/18Thu 9/20/18153155(B.11.3) Finalize F&T Modeling Report (DRI)10 daysMon 9/3/18Fri 9/14/18154156Seven Springs/Fox So Y GW Investigation62 days?Fri 5/12/17Mon 8/7/17162TKPOA Phase 1 Facilities Design416 daysWed 5/24/17Wed 12/26/18170(B.12) Task M.1-M.10 - Feasibility Study (Formerly Task D)170 daysMon 4/2/18Fri 11/23/18152SS171SubTask M.1 - Data Review10 daysFri 6/15/18Thu 6/28/18146FS+4 days172SubTask M.1 - Kick-Off Meeting1 dayFri 6/29/18Fri 6/29/18171173Subtask M.2 - Screen Modeled Alternatives for Engineering Evaluation20 daysThu 7/5/18Wed 8/1/18152SS174Subtask M.3: Define Infrastructure Needs (3 Alternatives)20 daysThu 8/2/18Wed 8/29/18173175Subtask M.4 - Develop Life Cycle Cost Estimates (3 Alternatives)17 daysThu 8/2/18Fri 8/24/18174SS176Subtask M.5 - Develop Environmental Analysis Checklists (3 Alternatives)20 daysThu 8/2/18Wed 8/29/18174SS177Subtask M.6 - Select and Develop Recommended Alternative20 daysThu 8/30/18Wed 9/26/18176178SubTask M.7 - Implementation Plan for Recommended Alternative: Financial and Governance Plan (including drafting of report section)20 daysThu 9/27/18Wed 10/24/18177179(B.12.2) Subtask M.8 - Prepare Draft Report30 daysThu 10/25/18Wed 12/5/18178180(B.12.2) Subtask M.8 - TAC Review15 daysThu 12/6/18Wed 12/26/18179181(B.12.2) Subtask M.9 - Prepare Final Report20 daysThu 12/27/18Wed 1/23/19180182Subtask M.10 - Project Management, Monthly Conference Calls, and QA/QC155 daysFri 6/15/18Thu 1/17/19171SS183Task M.11 - As-Directed Services190 daysFri 6/29/18Thu 3/21/19172SS184(B.13) Task N - Prepare Interim Remedial Action Plan (Based on FS Implementation Plan)29 daysMon 8/13/18Thu 9/20/18178185(B.13.1) Prepare draft I- RAP29 daysThu 12/27/18Tue 2/5/19180186(B.13.2) I-RAP Review20 daysWed 2/6/19Tue 3/5/19185187(B.13.3) Finalize I-RAP10 daysWed 3/6/19Tue 3/19/19186188(B.14) Task O - Prepare Environmental Compliance for I- RAP18 daysWed 3/6/19Fri 3/29/19185189(B.14.1.1) Prepare draft CEQA IS Checklist10 daysWed 3/6/19Tue 3/19/19186190(B.14.1.1) Prepare draft TRPA Env. Checklist10 daysWed 3/6/19Tue 3/19/19186191(B.14.1.1) Agency Review5 daysWed 3/20/19Tue 3/26/19190192(B.14.1.2) Finalize IS Checklist3 daysWed 3/27/19Fri 3/29/191917/167/167/47/239/146/298/11/23EBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprTaskSplitMilestoneSummaryProject SummaryExternal TasksExternal MilestoneInactive TaskInactive MilestoneInactive SummaryManual TaskDuration-onlyManual Summary RollupManual SummaryStart-onlyFinish-onlyDeadlineProgressSouth Tahoe PUDSouth Y Feasibility Study SchedulePage 3Project: South Y Feasibility Study Date: Tue 6/5/18
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors Resource Names193Task P - District Monitoring to Support Feasibility Study (Formerly Task E)156 daysThu 12/1/16Thu 7/6/17194(B.15) Task Q - Public Outreach (Formerly Task F)272 daysWed 1/10/18Thu 1/24/19195(B.15.1) Develop Outreach Materials268 daysWed 1/10/18Fri 1/18/19196(B.15.2) Subtask Q.2 - DAC Outreach (3 Workshops)252 daysWed 2/7/18Thu 1/24/19197Public Workshop 11 dayWed 2/7/18Wed 2/7/18198Public Workshop 21 dayTue 7/31/18Tue 7/31/18199Public Workshop 31 dayThu 1/24/19Thu 1/24/19181EBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBMEBberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptembOctoberNovembeDecembeJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprTaskSplitMilestoneSummaryProject SummaryExternal TasksExternal MilestoneInactive TaskInactive MilestoneInactive SummaryManual TaskDuration-onlyManual Summary RollupManual SummaryStart-onlyFinish-onlyDeadlineProgressSouth Tahoe PUDSouth Y Feasibility Study SchedulePage 4Project: South Y Feasibility Study Date: Tue 6/5/18